ABSTRACT
Background The converter stations of high-voltage direct current (HVDC) transmission lines generate special total electric fields. At present, few investigations have been conducted on total electric fields in the workplace of converter stations from an perspective of occupational health. Objective To understand the current situation of total electric field strength in the workplace of converter stations. Methods Using purposive sampling, a calibrated HDEM-1 direct current (DC) total electric field strength measurement system was used to measure the total electric fields of 12 converter stations serving 6 DC lines in Southeast and Southwest China according to the Measurement method for total electric field strength and ion current density of the converter stations and DC transmission lines (DL/T 1089—2008). The results were evaluated according to occupational exposure limits recommended by The limits of electromagnetic environment at ±800 kV UHV DC converter station (DL/T 275—2012), the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH), and the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP). Results A total of 615 check points were planned, the total electric field strength was 0.05-37.05 kV·m−1, and the median was 10.45 kV·m−1. The total electric field strength of 39 check points (6.3%) exceeded 25 kV·m−1 (the limits of ACGIH and ICNIRP), and the total electric field strength of 12 check points (2.0%) exceeded 30 kV·m−1 (the limit of DL/T 275—2012). There were statistically significant differences in the total electric field strength values and the proportions of exceeding 25 kV·m−1 between the neutral regions and the positive regions and between the neutral regions and the negative regions (P < 0.01). The proportion of total electric field strength exceeding 30 kV·m−1 in the negative regions was higher than that in the positive regions (P < 0.01). There were no significant differences in the total electric field strength of converter stations at different voltage levels and different altitudes (P > 0.05). There were no significant differences in the proportions of total electric field exceeding 25 kV·m−1 and exceeding 30 kV·m−1 in converter stations at different voltage levels and different altitudes (P > 0.05). Conclusion The total electric field in some workplace of converter stations exceeds selected limits. Converter station operators may be exposed to high-strength total electric field for a short time.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To analyze the current status of occupational exposure to power frequency electromagnetic field in converter stations. METHODS: Eight converter stations with voltage levels of ±500 kV and ±800 kV within normal operation were selected as the research subjects using the typical sampling method. Power frequency electric field and power frequency magnetic field strengths were measured and calculated according to the GBZ/T 189.3-2018 Measurement of Physical Agents in Workplace--Part 3: Electric Field and Magnetic Field between 1 Hz and 100 kHz. The GBZ 2.2-2007 Occupational Exposure Limits for Hazardous Factors in the Workplace--Part 2: Physical Factors were used to evaluate whether the power frequency electric field strength exceeds the regulatory limit(the occupational exposure limit of power frequency electric field in 8 hours workplace is 5.000 kV/m). Meanwhile, the test results were evaluated according to the short-term occupational exposure limit of 50 Hz electric field and magnetic field recommended by the International Committee on Nonionizing Radiation Protection in 2010 that are 10.000 kV/m and 1 000.00 μT. RESULTS: The power frequency electric field and magnetic field strengths of 582 working environment detection points were measured. The median and 0-100 th percentile of power frequency electric field and power frequency magnetic field strength were 4.342(0.001-12.003) kV/m and 5.51(0.10-186.90) μT, respectively.The exceeding standard rate of power frequency electric field strength in converter station workplaces was 37.8%(220/582), which concentrated in 500 kV alternating current filter area and 500 kV alternating current field area. Among them, 5 detection points had power frequency electric field strength exceeding 10.000 kV/m. The magnetic flux density of all the detection points did not exceed 1 000.00 μT. The power frequency electric field strength in ultra-high voltage region was higher than that in high voltage region(P<0.01). There was no significant difference in power frequency magnetic field strength(P>0.05). There was no significant difference in power frequency electric field and magnetic field between rectifier stations and inverter stations(P>0.05). The 8 hours time weighted average(TWA) value of power frequency electric field strength of 8 converter station operators was 1.044-2.335 kV/m, which did not exceed the occupational exposure limit. CONCLUSION: The converter station operators might be exposed to excessive power frequency electric fields for a short time, but the 8 hours TWA value of the power frequency electric field meets the requirements of standards, and the power frequency magnetic field exposure strength also meets the requirements of the relevant standards.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To analyze the characteristics of noise hazard in a nuclear power station. METHODS: The workplaces and working posts which exposed to occupational noise from two 1 000 MW power units in one nuclear power station in Guangdong Province was selected as study subjects using the convenience sampling method. Occupational health survey, noise measurement in the workplace and personal noise dosage measurement were used to monitor noise exposure, and to analyze the characteristics of occupational noise in the nuclear power station. RESULTS: The noise sources of the nuclear power plant were mainly distributed in the nuclear island, conventional island, and peripheral workshops. A total of 237 points of noise intensity were measured in the workplace. The intensity of noise ranged from 66.0 to 99.6 dB(A). The noise intensity in 62.4%(148/237) of points was equal or greater than 80.0 dB(A) and 34.2%(81/237) equal or greater than 85.0 dB(A). The percentage of detection points with noise intensity was equal or greater than 85.0 dB(A) from low to high were nuclear island, conventional island, and peripheral workshops with 22.0%, 37.5% and 53.8% respectively(P<0.01). The personal noise intensity of three positions including inspectors of operation department, preparation and main engine positions of mechanical department exceeded the occupational exposure limit(OEL), and the percentage of positions whose noise intensity exceeded the OEL was 9.7%(3/31). CONCLUSION: High-intensity noise sources of the nuclear power plant are widely distributed in the workshop areas of nuclear island, conventional island, and peripheral workshops. The noise level of some positions exceeded the standards of noise intensity. The prevention and control measures of noise hazards in posts with excessive noise should be strengthened.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the prevalence and risk factors of multi-site work-related musculoskeletal disorders(WMSDs) among workers in the industry of electronic equipment manufacturing. METHODS: A total of 815 workers in three factories of electronic equipment manufacturing in Guangdong Province were selected as study subjects by convenience sampling. The prevalence of multi-site WMSDs in the past year was investigated using Musculoskeletal Disorders Investigating Questionnaire and the influencing factors were analyzed. RESULTS: The total prevalence of WMSDs was 69.4%(566/815). The prevalence of multi-site WMSDs was 54.5%(444/815), and the prevalence of one-site WMSDs was 15.0%(122/815). Multiple logistic regression showed that female workers had higher prevalence of multi-site WMSDs than males [odds radio(OR) and 95% confidence interval(CI): 1.59(1.12-2.26), P<0.05]. The prevalence of multi-site WMSDs in left-handed workers was lower than that of right-handed workers [OR(95% CI): 0.42(0.19-0.91), P<0.05]. The longer service of current position and the more neck forward movement, the higher prevalence of multi-site WMSDs [OR(95% CI) were 1.33(1.09-1.63) and 1.62(1.23-2.15), P<0.01]. The workers who had long-time sitting at work, adopted uncomfortable working posture, could decide when to work on their own, kept head down for a long time, or often bending wrists up/down had higher prevalence of multi-site WMSDs [OR(95% CI) were 1.41(1.16-1.73), 1.82(1.40-2.38), 1.79(1.16-2.75), 1.92(1.38-2.69) and 1.60(1.14-2.24), respectively, P<0.01]. The workers who could take turns with colleagues to finish work or had enough rest time had lower prevalence of multi-site WMSDs [OR(95% CI): 0.57(0.41-0.78) and 0.67(0.48-0.92), P<0.05]. The workers who worked >10 h per day had lower prevalence of multi-site WMSDs than those who worked ≤8 h per day [OR(95% CI): 0.57(0.37-0.87), P<0.05]. CONCLUSION: Multi-site WMSDs were more common than one-site WMSDs among workers in the industry of electronic equipment manufacturing, and the prevalence of multi-site WMSDs was high. The risk factors include personal factors, work organization and adverse ergonomic factors.