LITERATURE REVIEW ON METAL WORKING FLUIDS AUTHOR: Deepak Yaduvanshi

ABSTRACT

This document focuses on that group of metalworking fluids known as metal removal fluids. Metalworking fluids/metal removal fluids are also called machining fluids, cutting fluids, and cutting oils. These fluids are those used in grinding, cutting, boring, drilling, and turning metal. Although metal removal fluids are a more specific term, these fluids are most often referred to by the generic term metalworking fluids. Metalworking fluids (MWFs) are generally classified into four types (straight, soluble, synthetic and semi synthetic) according to the amount and type of oil that they contain. They are extensively used to lubricate, cool the tool–workpiece interface and remove debris from the work surfaces of metal parts that are being drilled, ground, milled or turned in various metalworking operations such as cutting, grinding and metal-forming. There were two main objectives of this study. The first objective was to identify and describe, through an extensive literature review on Metal Working Fluids and its properties, exposure determinants of MWF aerosols as identified from comparisons of measurement data within a particular study. A second objective was to understand the ecological aspect of Metal Working Fluids .

INTRODUCTION

THE BASICS OF METALWORKING FLUIDS

Metal removal operations involve a wide variety of operations in which material is removed from a part to obtain the desired finished product. These operations include milling, drilling, reaming, tapping, grinding, broaching, honing and other mechanical processes that remove metal. In many instances, the operations are performed "wet" with metal removal fluids (MRF). These fluids may be known as coolants, cutting oils, machining fluids, machining oils, grinding fluids, or metalworking fluids. (In this document, they'll be called metal removal fluids.)

Industrial operations requiring the grinding, cutting, or boring of metal parts also require the use of metalworking fluids to meet productivity and quality requirements. Metalworking fluids (MWFs) have two primary functions: to cool and to lubricate.

All metal removal processes generate a tremendous amount of heat. This heat must be reduced in order to achieve productivity and part quality. The cooling effect provided by a metalworking fluid gives the cutting tool or grinding wheel a longer life and helps to prevent burning and smoking. At the point where the tool is in contact with the part, lubrication is necessary to reduce friction between the tool and the part, resulting in improved tool life and better finishes on the metal cut.

Metalworking fluids also provide corrosion protection for the newly machined part and machine tool. Water-miscible metalworking fluid formulations (those fluids that are meant to be diluted with water) include components that slow or prevent such corrosion. MWFs also help remove chips or swarf (an accumulation of fine metal and abrasive particles) from the cutting zone.

WHAT ARE THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF METALWORKING FLUIDS?

There are four major classes of metal-working fluids widely available: straight oil, soluable oil, semisynthetic, and synthetic. Many metalworking fluids, except the straight oils, are mixed with water for use. Each has additives such as surfactants, biocides, extreme pressure agents, anti-oxidants, and corrosion inhibitors to improve performance and increase fluid life (refer to Appendix 2 for a listing of typical additives).

Straight Oil: This type of metalworking fluid is made up mostly of mineral (petroleum) or vegetable oils. Petroleum oils used for these fluids today tend to be "severely solvent refined" or "severely hydrotreated" (refining processes which reduce cancer-causing substances called polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons [PAHs] present in crude oil). Other oils of animal, marine or synthetic origin can also be used singly or in combination with straight oils to increase the wetting action and lubricity.

Straight oils can be recognized by an oily appearance and viscous feel. These materials may contain chlorinated and sulfur additives. This product is not diluted with water before use. Straight-oil

metalworking fluids are generally used for processes that require lubrication rather than cooling. They perform best when used at slow cut speeds, high metal-to-metal contact or with older machines made specifically for use with straight oils. Straight-oil MWF systems may require fire protection.

Soluble Oil: Soluble oil is also called emulsifiable oil. It is made up of from 30 to 85 percent of severely refined lubricant base oil and emulsifiers to help disperse the oil in water. The fluid concentrate usually includes other additives to improve performance and lengthen the life of the fluid. Soluble oil products are supplied as concentrates that are diluted with water to obtain the working fluid. They may have colorants added.

Soluble oils in general provide good lubrication and are better at cooling than straight oils. Drawbacks in using soluble oils, however, are that they sometimes have poor corrosion control, are sometimes "dirty" (i.e., machine tool surfaces and nearby areas become covered with oil or difficult-to-remove product residues), may smoke (they may not cool as well as semisynthetics and synthetics), and may have poor mix stability or short sump life.

Semisynthetic: This type of metalworking fluid contains a lower amount of severely refined base oil, for example, 5-30 percent in the concentrate. Semi synthetics offer good lubrication, good heat reduction, good rust control, and have longer sump life and are cleaner than soluble oils. They are comprised of many of the same ingredients as soluble oils and contain a more complex emulsifier package.

Synthetic: These metalworking fluid formulations do not contain any petroleum oil. They contain detergent-like components to help "wet" the part and other additives to improve performance. Like the other classes of water-miscible fluids, synthetics are designed to be diluted with water.

Among the four types of fluids, synthetic metalworking fluids generally are the cleanest, offer the best heat reduction, have excellent rust control, and offer longer sump life. In addition, this type of metalworking fluid is transparent (allowing the operator to see the work) and are largely unaffected by hard water.

In this paper, straight oils are defined as being mineral or other oil-base solutions with no water. Soluble fluids are a combination of mineral oils and emulsifiers (30–85%) that are often sold as concentrates and diluted with water. Synthetic fluids are 70–90% water, with the remainder comprising organic chemicals and additives; they do not contain mineral oils. Semisynthetic fluids are similar to synthetic fluids, but also contain some mineral oils (5–30%). Water-miscible fluids include soluble, synthetic and semisynthetic fluids

There are a number of environmental concerns related to the disposal of metal removal fluids. But the first way to address these concerns is to reduce the amount of MRF that must be disposed of.

How can waste disposal be reduced?

Recycling of fluid can be an important part of waste reduction. It is necessary to consider the types of metal removal fluids that are to be recovered/ recycled since different types require different action plans.

From an environmental standpoint, the two main groups of metal removal fluids are water-dilutable fluids (soluble oils, semi synthetics, and synthetics) and straight oil removal fluids. There are different methods for extending the performance of these two main groups.

It’s important to remember that reclaimed or recycled MRF straight oils must be kept separate from other used or recycled oils in the shop. It is especially important that used engine oil does not contaminate the MRF straight oils, since it may contain cancer-causing contaminants from the combustion process in the engine.While waste disposal can be reduced, it cannot, of course, be completely eliminated.

What are the environmental issues related to metal removal fluids?

Environmental concerns can include the following:

disposal of used metal removal fluid treatment of waste water before discharge to the sewer system emission of volatile compounds to the environment emission of metal removal fluid particulate matter to the environment

Why are there environmental concerns about waste metal removal fluids?

Spent metal removal fluids typically contain high levels of oil and grease and dissolved (or soluble) organic compounds. Other oily wastes—such as soaps and detergents from parts washing, machine lubricants, floor mop water, and rust inhibitors—may also be present.

There are several different methods for disposing of spent metal removal fluids. Some of the more common methods are

contract hauling evaporation chemical treatment membrane separation biological treatment

While there are no hard and fast rules, the reasons for choosing one method over another are:

cost quality of water after a wastewater treatment process complexity of the wastewater treatment process local site conditions, i.e. local pollutant restrictions

HISTORY / BACKGROUNDRecent studies are not entirely consistent in documenting exposure-response relationships between MWF [metalworking fluid] aerosol exposures and respiratory symptoms and lung function effects (both acute and chronic), including clinically recognized asthma. Nevertheless, for each MWF class, frequent adverse respiratory effects have been clearly attributable to MWF aerosol concentrations in excess of approximately 0.5 mg/m3 (thoracic fraction) in most recent epidemiological studies, and to even lower aerosol concentrations in some of these studies.The possibility exists that short-term peak exposures are more important determinants of at least some of the airways disorders induced by MWF aerosols (e.g., asthma), but no epidemiological studies to date have assessed MWF aerosol exposures with respect to short-term peak exposures.

Despite an impressive amount of research recently carried out on the airways effects of exposure to MWF aerosol, the potential importance of various adverse acute airways effects attributed to MWF aerosol is not entirely clear.

Most studies of metalworking operations have focused on aerosol exposures. Only two papers were found that examined factors affecting dermal exposure. In the first study, a significant association was found between short cycle time and relative wet time, but machine type was not associated with dermal wetness .In the second study, an association existed between the number of workpieces handled and dermal exposure levels of workers using compressed air to clean workpieces .In addition, dermal

exposure levels of workers operating open machines were found to be significantly higher than those from closed machines.

A handout prepared by Stein provided some statistics on dermatitis and MWFs (Stein, 1998a-d). In 1991, the Department of Labor (DOL) noted that the highest incidence rates for skin disease included fabricated screw machine products with 33.3 cases per 10,000 full time equivalent workers (FTEs), and general industrial machinery with 22.0 per 10,000 FTEs (Stein, 1998a-d).

Information provided by the OSHA Office of Regulatory Analysis used BLS statistics for 1996 to estimate skin disease in SIC codes 33-37 (OSHA Office of Regulatory Analysis, 1998). In these industries, there were 14,300 recordable skin diseases and disorders, accounting for approximately 25% of all recordable skin diseases and disorders in private industry (OSHA Office of Regulatory Analysis, 1998). SIC codes 33-37 had an average rate of 18.3 recordable skin diseases and disorders per 10,000 FTEs, almost three times the average for all of private industry (OSHA Office of Regulatory Analysis, 1998). The transportation equipment industry (SIC 37) had the highest skin disease and disorder rate of any industry group using MWFs, 33.9 cases per 10,000 FTEs (OSHA Office of Regulatory Analysis, 1998). Each of the five industry groups in SIC 33-37 were at least 70% above the rate for all private industry (OSHA Office of Regulatory Analysis, 1998). More information on lost work days and economic costs of dermatitis based on the OSHA Office of Regulatory Analysis work is provided in Chapter Three.

An article by Sluhan (1997) cites the following causes of dermatitis from MWFs: alkalinity, acidity, solvents, metals, the use of straight MWFs, filthy MWFs, misapplication of biocides, handling equipment, concentration problems and misuse of protective creams. Sluhan also warns that the cause could be contamination from an external source or outside activities and not MWFs (Sluhan,1997). He provides examples of solutions that are similar to what has already been reported (Sluhan,1997).

An article by Itschner, 1996 was cited by Teitelbaum at the tenth meeting..

The UAW publication How to Prevent Skin Disease outlines causes of dermatitis and how management and workers can prevent these disorders (UAW, 1997). Adams provided a list in his handout of recent references on MWFs and dermatitis (Adams, 1997). Stein provided in his handout, a list of references, a glossary and information on the OSHA Standards Advisory Committee on Cutaneous Hazards and other early efforts by NIOSH and OSHA (Stein, 1998a-d). The two MWF Symposia Proceedings provide additional information and discussion (AAMA, 1996,1998).

FOLLOWING TABLE DESCRIBE THE COMPREHENSIVE LITERATURE REVIEW ON THE TOPIC

AUTHOR RESEARCH PURPOSE JOURNAL/INSTITUTION/YEAR

Manual Self-Assessment ProcedureFor MRF assesment

Organisation Resourse Counselors Washington DC

Manual Cutting fluid management for small maching operation

University of northern IOWA

Manual Pollution Prevention in Machining and Metal Fabrication

P. M. H O L M E S , Development of test for cutting fluids Thornton Research Centre,Chester

Professor Geoff Rowe at

Cheapest and most practical methodof reducing bacteria to a tolerable level in MRF by heat treatment, or pasteurization is discussed.

Birmingham University's Department ofMechanical Engineering

C. H. Li, B. H. Lu, Y. C. Ding& Q. Cai

Work presented in this paper aims at evaluating the grindability and surface integrity of the nickel base superalloy resulting from the application of cryogenic cooling.And showed Therefore, there arecritical needs to reduce the use of cutting fluid in grinding process, and cryogenic cooling grinding is a promising solution

School of Mechanical Engineering and Automation, Northeastern UniversityShenyang, China

Hui Wang &Rongdi Han

In this paper, the water vapor was applied on milling instead of cutting fluid for the aim of green milling Ti6Al4V. The effects of water vapor, oil emulsion and dry cutting on tool wear have been examined in milling of titanium alloy Ti6Al4V with carbide tools YG6, the wear morphology of rake and flank tool face was studied..

School of Mechatronics EngineeringHarbin Institute of TechnologyHarbin, China

Lori Abrams; Noah Seixas; Thomas Robins; Harriet Burge; Michael Muilenberg; Alfred Franzblau

This article describes an exposure assessment for a study of metalworking fluid aerosols and acute respiratory effects.

Bardin, J. A., Eisen, E. A., Tolbert, P. E., Hallock, M. F., Hammond, S. K., Woskie, S. R., Smith, T. J. and Monson, R. R.

Risk was examined for lifetime exposure to straight, soluble, and synthetic metalworking fluids, as used in specific machining or grinding operations, as well as for constituents of the fluids.

American Journal of Industrial Medicine(1997)

Bardin Ja, Gore Rj, Estimated in conditional logistic regression MEDLINE

Wegman Dh, Kriebel D, Woskie Sr, Eisen Ea

models for lifetime exposure to straight, soluble, and synthetic metalworking fluid and fluid components.

Geoffrey M. Calvert MD, MPH, &Elizabeth Ward PhD, &Teresa M. Schnorr PhD, &Lawrence J. Fine MD, DrPH

Epidemiologic studies that examined the association between MWF exposure and cancer.

American Journal of Industrial MedicineVolume 33, Issue 3, pages 282–292, March 1998

Authors: Jean Dasch & James

Deals with particle characterization from five of the processes that relate to machining, specifically, wet machining with water-based fluids from old and new technology processes, grinding with straight oils from old and new technology processes, and dry machining.

Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene, Volume 2, Issue 12 December 2005 , pages 609 - 625

Park D, Stewart PA, Coble JB.

An extensive literature review was conducted of studies with exposure measurements to metalworking fluids (MWFs).

National Institutes of Health, Rockville, Maryland

Eisen EA, Tolbert PE, Hallock MF, Monson RR, Smith TJ, Woskie SR

Risks associated with specific types of MF, as well as specific components of the fluids were evaluated.

MEDLINE

Ellen A. Eisen ScD &Christina A. Holcroft ScD, &Ian A. Greaves MD,

This report describes the reanalysis of a cross-sectional study of asthma in a large cohort of autoworkers with exposure to metalworking fluids (MWF).

American Journal of Industrial MedicineVolume 31, Issue 6, pages 671–677, June 1997

Eisen EA, Bardin J, Gore R, Woskie SR, Hallock MF, Monson RR.

To determine prostatic cancer and leukemia, at current levels of exposure to water-based metalworking fluids through experiments.

Department of Work Environment, University of Massachusetts, USA

Kyung-Hee Park', Jorge A Olortegui-Yumel & Shantanu

This paper presents our effort to understand the parameters in theMQL process in order to expand its effectiveness in cutting operations.

International Conference on Smart Manufacturing ApplicationApril. 9-11, 2008 in KINTEX, Gyeonggi-do, Korea

B. P. Bandyopadhyay , Kalyan R. Endapally

The study compares the performance of MQL to completely dry cutting for turning of 4I40 steel. The results show thatthere is a significant reduction of cutting force, as well as improvement in surface finish while machining with MQLcompared to dry cutting.

Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of North Dakota, Grand Forks,

Dr. Yaser Radi Study of the effect ofcoolant on surface roughness for various cutting conditions ona typical work material like aluminum. It has been observedthat a small amount of supply of coolant at the point of cutting,largely improves the surface finish.

Yanbu Industrial College, Yanbu, Saudi Arabia

O. Çakīr, A. Yardimeden, T. Ozben & E. Kilickap

In this study, the studies about cutting fluid application in machining processes have been evaluated. The selection criteria of cutting fluids have been examined. Suitable cutting fluids for various material machining processes have been determined according to cutting tool materials.

Journal of Achievements in Materialsand Manufacturing Engineering

LIU Yongjiang, WANG ZhaohuaLIU Yongjiang, WANG Ailing & Zhaohua

This paper mainly carries outthe experimental studies on the cooling and lubrication effectsof new environmental oil/water emulsion machining stainless steel (1Cr18Ni9Ti) on the C620-1 conventional lathe by changing cutting speeds and feed rates as well as adjusting spraying angles of the nozzle. The results show that oil/water emulsion cutting fluid can effectively lower cutting forces anddecrease values of the machined surface roughness by comparing to dry cutting and oil water emulsion.

laboratory for AMT of Shanxi, North University of China, Taiyuan 030051, China

T.S. Lee &C.F. How

This paper contributes to a better understanding of cutting process characteristics using organic and inorganic coolant.

201O 2nd International Conference on Mechanical and Electronics Engineering (ICMEE 2010)

catalogue Pollution prevention guide to using metal removal fluids in machining operations

United States Environmental Protection AgencyInstitute of Advanced Manufacturing Sciences

D. P. Adler, W. W-S Hii, D. J. Michalek, and J. W. Sutherland

This work summarizes the traditionalpurposes of cutting fluids and reports on recent analytical and experimental research to criticallyexamine these functions. To minimize or even eliminate the concerns associated with cuttingfluid usage, several recent and novel approaches have been proposed and are examined.

Department of Mechanical Engineering – Engineering MechanicsSustainable Futures InstituteMichigan Technological University

Donguk Park, Patrica A. An extensive literature reviewof published

Stewart And Joseph B. Coble

metalworking fluid (MWF) aerosol measurement datawas conducted to identify the major determinants that may affect exposure to aerosol fractions

Franklin E. Mirer and Robert Park

Mortality studies were conducted at two UAW-represented bearing plants. Standardized proportional mortality (SPMR) and mortality oddsratio (SMOR) methods were employed.

AMA Metalworking Fluids Symposium

Brenda Boutin and Tong-Man Ong

Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons(PAHs) and N-nitrosamines may stillcontaminate MWFs.

AMA Metalworking Fluids Symposium

Jerry P. Byers & CMFS Understanding the four basic categories of MWFs is recommendedbefore selecting the best fluid choice for a particular plant or operation.

T R I B O L O G Y & L U B R I C A T I O N T E C H N O L O G Y

Howard Cohen and Eugene M. White2

The purpose of this article is to explore various approaches that might be taken to result in a single or multiple limits for exposures to MWF and its components.

Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene, 3: 501–507

H. S. Abdalla . W. Baines . G. McIntyre & C. Slade

This paper introduces and describes the development and application of methodologies for the formulationof novel sustainable neat-oil metal removal fluids.

Int J Adv Manuf Technology….. 2007

Kyung-Hee Park', Jorge A Olortegui-Yumel & Shantanu

This paper presents our effort to understand the parameters in theMQL process in order to expand its effectiveness in cutting operations.

International Conference on Smart Manufacturing ApplicationApril. 9-11, 2008 in KINTEX, Gyeonggi-do, Korea

B. P. Bandyopadhyay , Kalyan R. Endapally

The study compares the performance of MQL to completely dry cutting for turning of 4I40 steel. The results show thatthere is a significant reduction of cutting force, as well as improvement in surface finish while machining with MQLcompared to dry cutting.

Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of North Dakota, Grand Forks,

Dr. Yaser Radi Study of the effect ofcoolant on surface roughness for various cutting conditions ona typical work material like aluminum. It has been observedthat a small amount of supply of coolant at the point of cutting,largely improves the surface finish.

Yanbu Industrial College, Yanbu, Saudi Arabia

O. Çakīr, A. Yardimeden, T. Ozben & E. Kilickap

In this study, the studies about cutting fluid application in machining processes have been evaluated. The selection criteria of cutting fluids have been examined. Suitable cutting fluids for various material machining processes have been determined according to cutting tool materials.

Journal of Achievements in Materialsand Manufacturing Engineering

LIU Yongjiang, WANG ZhaohuaLIU Yongjiang, WANG Ailing & Zhaohua

This paper mainly carries outthe experimental studies on the cooling and lubrication effectsof new environmental oil/water emulsion machining stainless steel (1Cr18Ni9Ti) on the C620-1 conventional lathe by changing cutting speeds and feed rates as well as adjusting spraying angles of the nozzle. The results show that oil/water emulsion cutting fluid can effectively lower cutting forces anddecrease values of the machined surface roughness by comparing to dry cutting and oil water emulsion.

laboratory for AMT of Shanxi, North University of China, Taiyuan 030051, China

Ian A. Greaves MD, &Ellen A. Eisen ScD, &Thomas J. Smith PhD,

Current exposures to straight and synthetic fluids were associated with current symptoms at three General Motors facilities Symptoms of usual cough, usual phlegm, wheezing, chest tightness, and breathlessness, as well as physician-diagnosed asthma, were evaluated by questionnaire

American Journal of Industrial MedicineVolume 32, Issue 5, pages 450–459, November 1997

Hallock MF, Smith TJ, Woskie SR, Hammond SK

Retrospective exposure assessment study in the automotive parts industry conducted in conjunction with a cancer mortality and respiratory morbidity study

Am J Ind Med. 1994.Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester

Hands D, Sheehan MJ, Wong B, Lick HB.

Comparison of metalworking fluid mist exposures from machining with different levels of machine enclosure.

Industrial Hygiene Department, Ford Motor Co., Dearborn, USA.Am Ind Hyg Assoc J. 1996.

Authors: Misty J. Hein; Martha A. Waters; Edwin van Wijngaarden; James A.

A database of benzene, toluene, and xylene measurements was compiled from an extensive literature review that contained information on several exposure determinants, including job type, operation, mechanism of release, process type, ventilation, temperature, distance from the source, quantity, and location.

Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene, Volume 5, Issue 1 January 2008

Michael J. Hodgson, &Anne Bracker, &Chin Yang P,

Lung disease in environments with water-based aerosols may be more common than usually recognized

American Journal of Industrial MedicineVolume 39, Issue 6, pages

Susan M. Kennedy, Moira Chan-Yeung, Kay Teschke, And Barbara Karlen

Early pulmonary responses to metalworking fluid exposurenew bronchial hyperresponsiveness (BHR)

Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., Volume 159, Number 1, January 1999, 87-93

Michalek DJ, Hii WW, Sun J, Gunter KL, & Sutherland JW.

The experiments in the paper revealed that spindle speed has a dominating effect on both mist mass concentration and aerodynamic particle size.

Department of Mechanical Engineering--Engineering Mechanics, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, Michigan, USA.

Park RM. Mortality was analyzed for an automotive engine foundry and machining complex, with process exposures derived from department assignments.

J Occup Environ Med. 2001

Park RM, Wegman DH, Silverstein MA, Maizlish NA, & Mirer FE.

Studies identify digestive cancer excesses among workers exposed to cutting fluids, abrasive dusts, and oil smoke. Standardized proportional mortality and mortality odds ratio studies were carried out for a ball bearing plant. Cause of death and work histories were obtained

Am J Ind Med. 1988;International Union, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America Detroit, Michigan.

Donald K. Milton, Joseph D. Brain, and Dianne D. Rees

Acute Effects of Metal Working Fluids in a Respiratory Inflammationmetal working fluids (MWF) to elicit lung injury and inflammation was studied

AMA Metalworking Fluids Symposium

Thomas Robins (A), Noah Seixas (B) Alfred Franzblau (A), Lori Abrams (A),Susan Minick (A), Harriet Burge (C) and M. Anthony Schork (A)

Our study was specifically designed to address the acute effect of machining fluid exposure onrespiratory health. Cross-shift and cross-week changes in pulmonary function and respiratory symptoms were the primary outcome measures.

AMA Metalworking Fluids Symposium

David Kriebel ,Susan R. Sama ,Susan R. Woskie , David C. Christiani & Ellen A. Eisen

The objective was to attempt toidentify likely causal agents of such effects from among the various components of maching fluids.

AMA Metalworking Fluids Symposium

Kenneth D. Rosenman & Mary Jo Reilly

Machining coolants are the second most common cause of occupational asthma

AMA Metalworking Fluids Symposium

reportedDavid J.P. Bassett determination of whether or not MWF

aerosolinduced cough, increased nasal secretions, and/or incidences of reflex bronchoconstriction are trulyacute adverse health effects

AMA Metalworking Fluids Symposium

Md. Abdul Hasib, Abdullah & Al-Faruk, Naseem Ahmed.

develop a mist application device to apply cutting fluid for turning operation of medium carbon steels. This experiment is to determining the tool wear and temperature rise during turning operation of medium carbon steel by high speed steel cutting tool at different depth of cuts and spindle speeds as well as cutting speeds.

International Journal of Mechanical & Mechatronics Engineering IJMME-IJENS Vol: 10 No: 04

Channarong Rungruang &Somkiat Tangjitsitcharoen

this paper presents the investigation of the machinability of ball-end milling process with the dry cuttingand the mist cutting for carbon steel on 5-axis CNC machining center. The relations of the surface roughness, the flank wear, and the cutting parameters, which are the spindle speed, the feed rate, and the depth of cut, are examined and analyzed

IEEE ONLINE

Department of Industrial EngineeringChulalongkorn UniversityBangkok, Thailand

Peter Giralto, Duan Maga, Victor Klekovkin

Paper is based on the ecological aspects of cutting fluids & minimization of the ecological impacts of cutting fluids

TnUAD, Slovakia ISTU, Izhevs, Russia

Manual This guide covers information on how to use documentsrelated to health and safety of metalworking and metal removalfluids.

ASTM International

Catalogue Metal Working Fluids Recommendation for Chronic Inhalation Studies

National Institute for OccupationalSafety and Health Cincinnati OH USA

Shane Y. Hong & Mark Broomer

Paper presents improved results by using an economical cryogenic cooling approach designed after studying the cryogenic properties of the stainless steel material.

Clean Products and Processes 2 (2000) Q Springer-Verlag 2000

Christopher M. Skisak An update on the regulatory status of base oils, and the methods currently available to screen and test and adverse human health effects

AMA Metalworking Fluids Symposium

John R. Bucher Carcinogenicity Studies of Metalworking Fluid Components

AMA Metalworking Fluids Symposium

Frederick J. Passman A Comparison of the Toxicological Properties of Common Metalworking Fluid Biocides

AMA Metalworking Fluids Symposium

Ann Ball and W. E. Lucke

Seventeen commercially available metalworking fluids (two synthetic emulsions, twosoluble oils, six semi–synthetics and seven synthetics) were tested for sensory irritation potential

AMA Metalworking Fluids Symposium

DiscussionThrough detailed literature study following aspects arise as areas of discussion:

ENGINEERING AND WORK PRACTICE CONTROLS

How Can Occupational Exposures Be Controlled? What Design Considerations and Operational Procedures Can Be Used to Control

Misting? How Can Isolation Be Used to Control Exposures? Should an Exhaust Ventilation System Be Installed to Control Mist? What Are the Types of Exhaust Hoods? Why Are Machine Tool Enclosures Necessary? What If Existing Equipment Lacks an Enclosure? Is It Necessary to Provide Make-up Air? What Factors Need to Be Considered When Exhaust Air is Recirculated? What Is The Function of a Mist Collector and How Should It Be Maintained? Where Can the Exhaust Air of the Mist Collector Be Discharged? What Work Practices Can Be Implemented to Reduce Employee Exposures? Personal Hygiene Barrier and Moisturizing Creams Housekeeping Periodic Inspection and Maintenance Use of Proper Procedures Supervision

Follow DCRDCR means Drain, Clean, and Recharge. The fluid in a system undergoes DCR when testing shows that the fluid has reached the point where making additions to the fluid is no longer effective, or when the level of bacteria or mold has become unmanageable.Periodic checks of the system on a regular basis are strongly recommended. The size of the system will indicate the frequency and type of testing.

add biocide pump out fluid remove chips, swarf fill with fresh water & sump cleaner circulate solution, spray on surfaces pump out cleaning solution fill with fresh water rinse all surfaces repeat rinsing as many times as needed change filters refill with fresh MRF

WHAT ARE THE SIGNS THAT A FLUID MAY NO LONGER BE SAFE TO USE?

There are many signs that a fluid has undergone changes and is no longer safe to use because of emerging health hazards. If one or more of the following changes occur, the fluid should be evaluated to see if it is safe for continued use or if it should be replaced.

* Low sump level. Check the sump level at the start of the shift. A low sump level (30% below the full mark) shows metalworking fluid loss or water evaporation (increasing the concentration of chemicals present in the MWF). Check the concentration! If too strong, add water to reach the propeconcentration. If the concentration is correct then fluid was lost due to dragout. You should add fluid at an appropriate dilution, or if prediluted fluid is not available, water and concentrate can be added. All systems should be monitored carefully and metalworking fluid additions should be made on a regular basis to maintain a constant working concentration. The correct concentration should be verified when finished.

* Abnormal fluid appearance. Determine if the fluid color looks normal. When in good condition many synthetic fluids are clear, semi-synthetics are often transparent to milky, and soluble oil usually looks milky white with no free oil layer. If the fluid turns gray or black, then bacteria are often present. If the

fluid picks up a yellow or brown tint then tramp oil may be present. Dye fading may indicate that a fluid is aging.

* Foul smell (rancidity). When fluids smell bad, it usually means that there is uncontrolled microbial growth. Although it may be possible to cover up the odor, it's best to address the cause because microorganisms present in the fluid can be aerosolized into the air as part of the mist. Exposure to microorganisms in the air may cause adverse health effects to exposed employees. If the fluid has a strong and "locker room" odor, it likely has biological growth and should be treated with biocide and evaluated. If need be, the fluid should then be discarded, the sump properly cleaned, and the fluid replaced.

* Floating matter on the fluid. If the fluid has floating chips, swarf, or mold growth, this is not normal. Try to remove as much as possible with a skimmer or have it pumped off. The level of dirt (total suspended solids) in the fluid is a measure of the efficiency of the filtering system. Periodic checks and maintenance of the filtration system and oil skimmer are necessary to assure that they are functioning as designed.

* Tramp oil floating on the surface. With water-diluted fluids, if the sump is completely covered with oil and the machinist cannot swish the oil out of the way for more than 5 to 8 seconds before the sump is covered again, there is too much tramp oil present. Skim or pump the surface oil to remove it. Tramp oil is one of the main causes of dermatitis. These oils are not developed with repeated skin contact in mind, and some components of these machine lubricants are highly irritating to the skin. Unemulsified (tramp) oils can be a significant carrier of metallic fines, which can be deposited on the skin and cause mechanical irritation. These fines, suspended by tramp oil, are a major cause of dermatitis.

* Excessive foam. A lot of foam may be caused by soft water with some products. The fluid may also be too highly concentrated, or it may be contaminated by cleaners, or there may be an imbalance in the fluid surfactants. Another possibility is that you could have an undersized system, excessive flow rates, or the fluid may not be at rest long enough to allow air to escape. In addition, the level of cutting fluid in the reservoir may be low, causing air to be drawn into the pump.

* Dirty machines or trenches. This could mean that the emulsion is becoming unstable, the cleaners in the fluid have been depleted, the contaminants are being deposited from the fluid, there is filter failure, or there is poor housekeeping.

* Employees have skin irritation. If employees have skin irritation, it could mean that the fluid has one or more of the following properties: too high a concentration, high alkalinity, metal contamination, an unstable emulsion, or contamination from workpiece coatings. Of course, skin irritation can also be due to causes not directly related to metalworking fluids, such as changes in the weather, poor personal hygiene, poor work habits, the use of harsh hand soaps, wearing contaminated clothing, or prolonged exposure to the fluid.

* Employees have respiratory irritation. Exposure to MWF aerosols can lead to complaints of irritation and tightness in the chest. Factors that can contribute to irritation could be the improper delivery of

fluid to the cutting zone; improper use of additives; a high coolant concentration; a heavy concentration of machines in a small area; inadequate or poorly designed enclosures and mist collectors; loss of microbial control; poor general ventilation of the shop; insufficient fresh air make-up rates; and high mist concentrations (even in the absence of machining operations) may be present in areas where coolant flumes make sharp turns.

Other problems that might be fluid-related and that should be investigated to see if the fluid is failing and may no longer be safe to use include:

* rust or corrosion of the machine tool or of the part produced;

* staining of the metal machined or ma chine tool;

* tool failure due to the loss of performance additives;

* growth of fungi that block fluid flow;

* change of fluid viscosity (thinner or thicker);

* accumulation of water at the bottom of the oil sump drain, in straight oils;

* dirt and grit suspended in the fluid; and

* failure at the workpiece-tool interface (for example, burning of a ground part due to excessive heat build-up).

WHEN SELECTING A FLUID, CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING:

Toxicity of the fluid components

The MWFs selected should be as non-irritating and non-sensitizing as possible. Avoid potentially carcinogenic components such as oils containing PAH's, chlorinated paraffins, alkanolamines, nitrites, and formaldehyde release biocides. The base oil used in petroleum-containing MWFs should be evaluated for potential carcinogenicity using ASTM Standard E 1687-98, Determining Carcinogenic Potential of Virgin Base Oils in Metalworking Fluids. Acute toxicity characteristics of metalworking fluids can be evaluated using information contained in ASTM Standard E 1302-00, Standard Guide for Acute Animal Toxicity Testing of Water-Miscible Metalworking Fluids. To minimize the potential for nitrosamine formation, nitrite-containing materials should not be added to MWFs containing ethanolamines (NIOSH 1998b).

If soluble oils or synthetic fluids are used, ASTM Standard E 1497-00, Standard Practice for Safe Use of Water-Miscible Metalworking Fluids should be consulted for safe-use guidelines, including product selection, storage, dispensing, and maintenance.

Most water-miscible metalworking fluids contain a chemical biocide that kills various microscopic organisms and protects the fluids from microbial degradation. To protect workers, make sure that the biocides used in your fluids and as sump-side additives are registered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for use as additives to metalworking fluids and are used in accordance with the conditions of registration. Biocide concentration should not exceed that needed to meet fluid specifications, since an excessive amount may cause employees to experience skin or respiratory irritation or sensitization.

Flammability of the fluid.

This is an important consideration for straight oils. You should consult OSHA standards, U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) regulations, local codes, the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), MSDS's, and specific handbooks for detailed information about flammability hazards.

Fluid Disposal

In order to protect your employees, as well as the public, from the potential safety and health problems that can occur during disposal operations, you should follow the manufacturer's instructions for disposal as well as relevant government regulations. Government regulations dictate where and how to dispose of metalworking fluids. Disposal requirements vary by the type of fluid. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), for instance, regulates emissions and disposal of substances under the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. In addition, some states may have disposal requirements that are stricter than the federal government requirements. Local publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) are likely to have their own discharge regulations which significantly affect what can be disposed of through a POTW.

The National Center for Manufacturing Sciences' Metalworking Fluids Optimization Guide (NCMS Guide) describes the important factors to consider when selecting metal removal fluids. The NCMS Guide also includes an example of a MWF selection process to assist you in making an appropriate selection.

REQUIRED AND RECOMMENDED EXPOSURE LIMITS

Currently two OSHA air contaminant permissible exposure limits apply to MWFs. They are 5 mg/m3 for an 8-hour time weighted average (TWA) for mineral oil mist, and 15 mg/m3 (8-hour TWA) for Particulates Not Otherwise Classified (PNOC) [applicable to all other metalworking fluids], 29 CFR 1910.1000. No other requirements exist.

In addition, there are other recommended exposure limits. In 1998, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) published a criteria document which recommended an exposure limit (REL) for MWF aerosols of 0.4 mg/m3 for thoracic particulate mass as a time-weighted average (TWA) concentration for up to 10 hours per day during a 40-hour work week. Because of the limited availability of thoracic samplers, measurement of total particulate mass is an acceptable substitute. The 0.4 mg/m3 concentration of thoracic particulate mass approximately corresponds to 0.5 mg/m3 for total particulate mass. The NIOSH REL is intended to prevent or greatly reduce respiratory disorders causally associated with MWF exposure. It is NIOSH's belief, that in most metal removal operations, it is technologically feasible to limit MWF aerosol exposures to 0.4 mg/m3 or less (NIOSH 1998b).

The American Conference of Governmental Hygienists (ACGIH) threshold limit value (TLV) for mineral oils is 5 mg/m3 for an 8-hour TWA, and 10 mg/m3 for a 15-minute short-term exposure limit (STEL).

In 1999, the OSHA Metalworking Fluids Standards Advisory Committee also recommended a new 8-hour time-weighted average permissible exposure limit (PEL) of 0.4 mg/m3 thoracic particulate (0.5 mg/m3 total particulate). The committee based the recommended PEL on studies of asthma and diminished lung function.

HEALTH EFFECTS

General

Metalworking fluids (MWFs) can cause adverse health effects through skin contact with contaminated materials, spray, or mist and through inhalation from breathing MWF mist or aerosol.

Skin and airborne exposures to MWFs have been implicated in health problems including irritation of the skin, lungs, eyes, nose and throat. Conditions such as dermatitis, acne, asthma, hypersensitivity pneumonitis, irritation of the upper respiratory tract, and a variety of cancers have been associated with exposure to MWFs (NIOSH 1998a). The severity of health problems is dependent on a variety of factors such as the kind of fluid, the degree and type of contamination, and the level and duration of the exposure.

Skin Disorders

Skin contact occurs when the worker dips his/her hands into the fluid or handles parts, tools, and equipment covered with fluid without the use of personal protective equipment, such as gloves and

aprons. Skin contact may also result from fluid splashing onto the employee from the machine if guarding is absent or inadequate.

Two types of skin disease associated with MWF exposure are contact dermatitis and acne.

Contact dermatitis is the most commonly reported skin disease associated with MWFs. People with contact dermatitis have itchy skin and a rash, often with cracks, redness, blisters, or raised bumps. The two kinds of contact dermatitis are irritant contact dermatitis and allergic contact dermatitis. In irritant contact dermatitis the rash is confined to the area in contact with the irritating substance. In allergic contact dermatitis the rash can spread beyond the area directly in contact with the irritant. Fourteen to 67 percent of workers exposed to MWFs are at risk for developing dermatitis (NIOSH 1998a). This high rate of dermatitis indicates susceptibility of many employees to the irritating or sensitizing nature of MWFs and their contaminants or additives. Once the skin is compromised, very small exposures, which previously did not have any effect, can cause an episode of dermatitis. It is important to try to prevent skin disease from developing and to treat it early because untreated dermatitis can lead to more serious complications (NIOSH 1998a).

In metalworking operations contact dermatitis may be caused by any of the following factors: clothing contaminated with MWF; poor personal hygiene (e.g., allowing MWF to remain in contact with skin by not washing after exposure); poor housekeeping practices; higher than recommended metalworking fluid concentrations; high alkalinity of in-use fluid which can remove natural skin oils; metal processing aids such as degreasers, cleaners, or rust inhibitors; metal shavings contained in the fluid which may abrade the skin; prolonged contact with the MWF; tramp oils (e.g., hydraulic fluids, gear or spindle oils, way lubes, grease); hand washing with abrasive soaps or with water that is excessively hot or cold; seasonal conditions (e.g., winter dryness); other contaminants (e.g., water in an oil based system).

People working with water based, synthetic, and semi synthetic MWFs are most at risk for developing contact dermatitis.

Straight oils are often associated with acne-like disorders characterized by pimples in areas of contact with the MWFs. Red bumps with yellow pustules may develop on the face, forearms, thighs, legs, and other body parts contacting oil-soaked clothing.

Respiratory Diseases

Inhalation of MWF mist or aerosol may cause irritation of the lungs, throat, and nose. In general, respiratory irritation involves some type of chemical interaction between the MWF and the human respiratory system. Irritation may affect one or more the following areas: nose, throat (pharynx, larynx), the various conducting airways or tubes of the lungs (trachea, bronchi, bronchioles), and the lung air sacks (alveoli) where the air passes from the lungs into the body. Exposure to MWF mist or aerosol may also aggravate the effects of existing lung disease.

Some of the symptoms reported include sore throat, red, watery, itchy eyes, runny nose, nosebleeds, cough, wheezing, increased phlegm production, shortness of breath, and other cold like symptoms. These symptoms may indicate a variety of respiratory conditions, including acute airway irritation, asthma (reversible airway obstruction), chronic bronchitis, chronically impaired lung function, and hypersensitivity pneumonitis (HP). When symptoms of respiratory irritation occur, in many cases it is unclear whether the disease was caused by specific fluid components, contamination of the in-use fluid, products of microbial growth or degradation, or a combination of factors.

Exposure to MWFs has been associated with asthma. In asthma, airways of the lung become inflamed, causing a reduction of the flow of air into and out of the lungs. During an asthmatic attack, the airways become swollen, go into spasms and fill with mucous, reducing airflow and producing shortness of breath and a wheezing sound. A variety of components, additives, and contaminants of MWFs can induce new-onset asthma, aggravate pre-existing asthma, and irritate the airways of non-asthmatic employees.

Chronic bronchitis is a condition involving inflammation of the main airways of the lungs that occurs over a long period of time. Chronic bronchitis is characterized by a chronic cough and by coughing up phlegm. The phlegm can interfere with air passage into and out of the lungs. This condition may also cause accelerated decline in lung function, which can ultimately result in heart and lung function damage.

Hypersensitivity pneumonitis (HP) is a serious lung disease. Recent outbreaks of HP have been associated with exposure to aerosols of synthetic, semi synthetic, and soluble oil MWFs. In particular, contaminants and additives in MWFs have been associated with outbreaks of HP (NIOSH 1998a). In the short term, HP is characterized by coughing, shortness of breath, and flu-like symptoms (fevers, chills, muscle aches, and fatigue). The chronic phase (following repeated exposures) is characterized by lung scarring associated with permanent lung disease.

Other factors, such as smoking, increase the possibility of respiratory diseases. Cigarette smoke may worsen the respiratory effects of MWF aerosols for all employees.

Cancer

A number of studies have found an association between working with MWF and a variety of cancers, including cancer of the rectum, pancreas, larynx, skin, scrotum, and bladder (NIOSH 1998a). Studies of MWF and cancer have relied on the health experiences of workers exposed decades earlier. This is because the effects of cancers associated with MWF may not become evident until many years after the exposure. Airborne concentrations of MWF were known to be much higher in the 1970s - 80s than those today. The composition of MWFs has also changed dramatically over the years. The fluids in use prior to 1985 may have contained nitrite, mildly refined petroleum oils, and other chemicals that were removed after 1985 for health concerns. Based on the substantial changes that have been made in the

metalworking industry over the last decades, the cancer risks have likely been reduced, but there is not enough data to prove this.

NIOSH-Recommended Respiratory Protection For Workers Exposed to Metalworking Fluid Aerosols*Concentration of MWF aerosol (mg/m3) Minimum respiratory protection

< 0.5 mg/m3 (1 x REL)~~ No respiratory protection required for healthy workers@

< 5.0 mg/m3 (10 x REL) Any air-purifying, half-mask respirator including a disposable respirator** , ++ equipped with any P- or R- series particulate filter (P95, P99, P100, R95,R99, or R100) number

< 12.5 mg/m3 (25 x REL) Any powered, air-purifying respirator equipped with hood or helmet and a HEPA filter##

Procedures for Draining, Cleaning, and Recharging Metalworking Fluid Delivery Systems

When DCR (Drain, Clean, and Recharge) is required, the following procedure, as recommended by the Organization Resources Counselors (ORC 1999), should be followed:

* First, a cleaner containing a biocide that will work effectively with the contaminated (fluid) should be added and circulated thoroughly. Then the old fluid must be pumped out and disposed of. Delivery lines should be drained if possible.

* All chips and swarf should be removed from flumes, trenches, lines and sumps. Covers and guards can be removed to give access to hidden areas for cleaning.

* The system is filled with fresh water and sump cleaner and agitated.

* This solution is circulated and sprayed at high pressure on all contaminated surfaces, especially machine tool surfaces that are not wetted by the normal flow of the circulating MWF. If a high-pressure spray cannot remove buildup, an attempt should be made to scrape it off manually.

* The cleaning solution is then pumped out and the system refilled with fresh water. The water is circulated thoroughly and rinsed off all surfaces. The rinse water should be dumped and the system refilled with fresh water, again circulating and thoroughly washing/rinsing down all appropriate equipment. This should be done as many times as necessary to ensure complete removal of the cleaning solution.

* The addition of a small amount of MWF concentrate to the rinse water may help to protect rapid rusting while the equipment is being rinsed.

* Change all filters in the MWF system. Wipe out the filter canister.

* Immediately after the last rinse has been pumped out, refill with fresh MWF, circulate the MWF, and wet those surfaces that may rust. Also run all machine axes through the full extent of their travel. This will lubricate all slide ways and bearing surfaces and remove fluid from the bearing packs.

* After the machine tool has been refilled, the MWF should be turned on and the fluid coming out of the coolant lines caught before it returns to the sump. Only after clean fluid can be seen coming out of the lines should the fluid be allowed to drain into the sump.

* This spent fluid should be disposed of and not returned to the machine sump. Wash-off hoses connected to the MWF system should also be drained to prevent contaminated fluid from returning to the system. A note should be made and left on the machine tool as to when the fluid was changed.

CONCLUSION

Literature review reveals in particular, grinding, was a significant factor affecting the total (Ross et al., 2004) and thoracic fractions (Woskie et al., 1994a; Ross et al., 2004). Average measurements from both grinding and machining operations followed the overall pattern of a decline over time. Determinants associated with metalworking operations include not simply machine type but also operational parameters related to fluid application rate, i.e. fluid velocity and flood versus through-tool application (Heitbrink et al., 2000a; Thornburg and Leith, 2000a; Dasch et al., 2002; Wang et al., 2005), pressure (Heitbrink et al., 2000b), machine-rotating speed (Heitbrink et al., 2000a; Thornburg and Leith, 2000b; Rosenthal and Yeagy, 2001; Wang et al., 2005), tool diameter and feed (Dasch et al., 2002), cut depth (Thornburg and Leith, 2000a; Dasch et al., 2002; Michalek et al., 2003) and tool wear (Dasch et al., 2002). Grinding and turning produces the largest particles, whereas hobbing results in the smallest (Piacitelli et al., 2001). Higher machining speeds generate higher emissions than lower speeds, in that mist generation increases as the square of the machine-rotating speed (Thornburg and Leith, 2000a). Because of the large variability among machine operation parameters, it was not feasible to quantify the relationship of these various parameters or to identify the most important in this analysis. In the future, metalworking operations, especially grinding operations, should be evaluated to ensure that exposure levels are controlled. Our analysis did not find operation to significantly affect respirable levels, although others reported this finding (Woskie et al., 1994b). More information is also needed on exposure levels associated with other types of machining.

The effect of fluid type on aerosol exposure levels is unclear. Differences in levels by fluid type reported in the engineering literature were not observed in the industrial hygiene literature, although total aerosol exposure levels from straight oils were generally higher than those of other fluid types. Woskie et al. (1994b) found that straight oil aerosol exposure levels were significantly higher than those from water-miscible fluids for not only large particles (>9.8 μm) but also for the respirable aerosol fraction level. Experimental studies have found straight oils resulted in higher aerosol levels (Dasch et al., 2002), but among the water-miscible fluids, the findings have again been inconsistent (Turchin and Byers, 2000). Higher aerosol levels may be generated from straight oils because they are 100% oil, as opposed to water-miscible fluids, which have far less oil and more water (Dasch et al., 2002). Because the water is lost to evaporation, these fluids produce smaller aerosols and may result in lower exposure levels (Dasch et al., 2005). Increasing the amount of water in the fluid, therefore, could provide a relatively

inexpensive way to reduce aerosol exposure levels. Straight oils also may be associated with high aerosol levels because these oils may be used more frequently in older machines that may be less likely to have exposure control measures. Other contributors to the inconsistent results may be other fluid components, contamination by other particles in the workplace, volatility (Dasch et al., 2005), age, temperature (Dasch et al., 2002) and tramp oil level (Turchin and Byers, 2000; White and Lucke, 2003).

REFERENCES:NIOSH Manual of Analyical Methods, 3rd ed., NMAM 5000, DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 84-100 (1984).

Unpublished data from Non-textile Cotton Study, NIOSH/DRDS/EIB.

NIOSH Criteria for a Recommended Standard...Occupational Exposure to Fibrous Glass, U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Publ. (NIOSH) 77-152, 119-142 (1977).

1993-1994 Threshold Limit Values and Biological Exposures indices, Appendix D, ACGIH, Cincinnati, OH (1993).

NIOSH Manual of Analytical Methods, 2nd ed., V.3. S349. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Publ. (NIOSH) 77-157-C (1977).

Documentation of the NIOSH Validation Tests, S262 and S349, U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Publ. (NIOSH) 77-185 (1977).

Bowman, J.D., D.L. Bartley, G.M. Breuer, L. J. Doemeny, and D.J. Murdock. Accuracy Criteria Recommended or the Certification of Gravimetric Coal Mine Dust Personal Samplers. NTIS Pub. No PB 85- 222446 (1984)

Breslin, J.A., S.J. Page, and R.A. Jankowski. Precision of Personal Sampling of Respirable Dust in Coal Mines, U.S. Bureau of Mines Report of Investigaions # 8740 (1983).

AAMA, Symposium Proceedings: The Industrial Metalworking Environment. Assessment and Control, Nov 13-16, Dearborn, MI (1996)

AAMA, Symposium Proceedings: The Industrial Metalworking Environment. Assessment and Control, Metalworking Fluids Symposium II, Sept. 15-18, 1997 Detroit, MI (1998)

Dasch J, Ang CC, Wei L, ,The influence of the base oil on misting in metal removal fluids. Lubr Eng 2001;57:14-9.

Dasch JM, Ang CC, Mood M, , Variables affecting mist generation from metal removal fluids. Lubr Eng 2002;58:10-7.

Dasch J, D'Arcy J, Gundrum A, Characterization of fine particles from machining in automotive plants. J Occup Environ Hyg 2005;2:609-25.

Heitbrink WA, D'Arcy JB, Yacher JM,Mist generation at a machining center. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 2000a;61:22-30.

Heitbrink WA, Yacher JM, Deye GJ, Mist control at a machining center, part 1: mist characterization. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 2000b;61:275-81.

Michalek DJ, Hii WW, Sun J, Experimental and analytical efforts to characterize cutting fluid mist formation and behavior in machining. Appl Occup Environ Hyg 2003;18:842-54.

Piacitelli GM, Sieber WK, O'Brien DM, Metalworking fluid exposures in small machine shops: an overview. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 2001;62:356-70.

Rosenthal FS, Yeagy BLCharacterization of metalworking fluid aerosols in bearing grinding operations. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 2001;62:379-82.

Ross AS, Teschke K, Brauer M, Determinants of exposure to metalworking fluid aerosol in small machine shops. Ann Occup Hyg 2004;48:383-91.

Turchin H, Byers JPEffect of oil contamination on metalworking fluid mist. Lubr Eng 2000;56:21-5.

Thornburg J, Leith D, Mist generation during metal machining. J Tribol 2000a;122:544-9.

Thornburg J, Leith D,Size distribution of mist generated during metal machining. Appl Occup Environ Hyg 2000b;15:618-28.

Wang HX, Reponen T, Li W, Aerosolization of fine particles increases due to microbial contamination of metalworking fluids. J Aerosol Sci 2005;36:721-34.

White EM, Lucke WE,Effects of fluid composition on mist composition. Appl Occup Environ Hyg 2003;18:838-41.

Woskie SR, Smith TJ, Hallock MF,Size-selective pulmonary dose indices for metal-working fluid aerosols in machining and grinding operations in the automobile manufacturing industry. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 1994a;55:20-9.

Woskie SR, Smith TJ, Hammond SK, Factors affecting worker exposures to metalworking fluids during automotive component manufacturing. Appl Occup Environ Hyg 1994b;9:612-21.

Woskie SR, Virji MA, Kriebel D, Exposure assessment for a field investigation of the acute respiratory effects of metalworking fluids. I. Summary of findings. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 1996;57:1154-62.

Sluhan, William, Itching for a Solution. Cutting Tool Engineering: December, 36-43 (1997).

Stein, Edward, Dermatitis Among Workers Exposed to Metalworking Fluids, Handout for Presentation to MWFSAC, July 1,1998, Denver, CO (1998a).

Stein, Edward, Attachments for Presentation Notes: Methods for Prevention and Control of Occupational Skin Disease, BNA 3/29/79 Denver, CO (1998b).

Stein, Edward, Attachments for Presentation Notes: NIOSH, Working with Cutting Fluids, HEW Pub. 74-124, 1971, Denver, CO (1998c).

Stein, E., Attachment for Presentation Notes: 1978 OSHA Cutaneous Hazards SAC, Denver, CO (1998d).

UAW, Key UAW Publications on Machining Fluids, 11/26/97, UAW, Detroit, MI (1997).

Teitelbaum, D. An Overview of Cancer and Carcinogenesis, Handout for Presentation to MWFSAC, 12/7/98, Washington, DC (1998).

Adams, Robed, Cutting Oils and the Skin, Handout of Presentation to MWFSAC, 12/97 Washington, DC (1997).

D. P. Adler, W. W-S Hii, D. J. Michalek, and J. W. Sutherland Examining the Role of Cutting Fluids in Machining and Efforts to Address Associated Environmental/Health Concerns, Michigan Technological University

O. Çakīr*, A. Yardimeden, T. Ozben, E. Kilickap, Selection of cutting fluids in machining processes, Journal of Achievements in Materials and Manufacturing Engineering volume 25 issue 2 december 2007

Md. Abdul Hasib, Abdullah Al-Faruk, Naseem Ahmed, Mist Application of Cutting Fluid, International Journal of Mechanical & Mechatronics Engineering IJMME-IJENS Vol: 10 No: 04

Handbook of cutting fluid management ", University of northern Publication, 2003.

Lowa Waste Reduction Center. “Cutting Fluid Management in Small Machine Shop Operations –Third Edition,” (Cedar Falls, Iowa: University of Northern Lowa, 2003), p.07. M.S. Islam. Tool Wear

Gressel, M.G. “Comparison of Mist Generation of Flood and Mist Application of Metal Working Fluids During Metal Cutting” University of Cincinnati, 2001.

Bienkowski, K. “Coolants & Lubricants – The Truth,” Manufacturing Engineering (March, 1993), 90-96.

S M Wu. ‘Tool –Life Testinh by Response Surface Methodology (Part I &II)’. Transactions of American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Journal of Engineering for industry, May 1964, p 105.

L M Hartmaan, et al. ‘Lubricating Oil Requirements for Oil Mist Systems.’ Journal of American Society of Lubrication Engineers, January 1972.

F Klocke and G Eisenblatter. ‘Dry Cutting.’ Annals of the CIRP, vol 46, no2, 1997, p519.

Howard Cohen1 and Eugene M. White,Metalworking Fluid Mist Occupational Exposure Limits: A Discussion of Alternative Methods, Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene, 3: 501–507, 2006

Peter Giraltoš, Dušan Maga, Victor Klekovkin ,Ecological aspects of cutting fluids &

Minimization of the ecological impacts of cutting fluids, kopes 2007 gigo@yhman.tnuni.sk

Pollution prevention guide to using metal removal fluids in machining operations

United States Environmental Protection Agency ,Cincinnati, OH 45268 http://www.iams.org

Mohammed T. Hayajneh, Montasser S. Tahat, Joachim Bluhm, "A study of the effects of machining parameters on the surface roughness in the end-milling process," Jordan Journal of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, vol. I, no. 1,2007, pp. 1-5.

R. Noorani, Y Farooque, T. Ioi, "Improving surface roughness of CNC milling machined aluminum samples due to process parameter variation," Proceedings of the ICEE & ICEER 2009 Seoul Korea, 23-28 August 2009.

M. Chiesa, J. Garg, Y.T. Kang, G. Chen, 'Thermal conductivity and viscosity of water-in-oil nanoemulsions," Physiochemical and Engineering Aspects 326, 2008, pp. 67-72.

Albert LAWAL, Matthew Sunday ABOLARIN, Benjamin Iyenagbe UGHEOKE, Emmanuel Ogo ONCHE, "Performance evaluation of cutting fluids developed from fixed oils," Leonardo Electronic Journal of Practices and Technologies, Issue 10, January-June 2007, pp. 137-144.

Dr. Mike S. Lou, Dr. Joseph C. Chen and Dr. Caleb M. Li, "Surface roughness prediction technique for CNC end-milling," Journal ofindustrial Technology, vol. 13, no.l, 1998.

Chen Ming, Sun Fanghong, Wang Haili, yuan Renwei, QuZhenghong, Zhang Shuqiao, "Experimental research on the dynamic characteristics of the cutting temperature in the process of high speed milling," Journal of Materials Processing Technology 138,2003, pp. 468-471.

Yahya Dogu, Ersan Asian, Necip Camuscu, "A numerical model to determine temperature distribution in orthogonal metal cutting," Journal of Material Processing Technology 171,2006, pp. 1-9.

N.A. Abukishim, P.T. Mativenga, M.A. Sheikh, "Heat generation and temperature prediction in metal cutting: A review and implications for high speed machiing, " International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 46, 2006, pp. 782-800.

Institute of Advanced Manufacturing Sciences, Waste Reduction and Technology Transfer: Shop Guide to Reduce the Waste of Metalworking Fluids, USA

[Minesota Technical Assistance Program: Prolonging machine coolant life, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.

AUTRET, R. – LIANG, S. Y. : Minimum Quantity Lubrication in Finish Hard Turning, George W. Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, 2003.

ČESÁNEK, J.- SOVA, F.: Možnosti minimalizace množství řezné kvapaliny při vrtání, In: Ekologie obrábění, I. časť, Strojírenská technologie – Knihovnička, 2000.

Gressel, M.G. “Comparison of Mist Generation of Flood and Mist Application of Metal Working Fluids During Metal Cutting” University of Cincinnati, 2001.

Bienkowski, K. “Coolants & Lubricants – The Truth,” Manufacturing Engineering (March, 1993), 90-96.

S M Wu. ‘Tool –Life Testinh by Response Surface Methodology (Part I &II)’. Transactions of American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Journal of Engineering for industry, May 1964, p 105.

D Keceloglu and A S Sorensen (Jr). ‘Comparative Effect of Land and Crater wear on Tool Life when Dry Cutting, Mist Cooling and Flood Cooling.’ Transactions of American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Journal of Engineering for Industry, February 1962. p49.

Khire M.Y. & Spate K D Some Studies of Mist Application Cutting Fluid on Cutting Operation. Journal of the Institution of Engineers (India). Volume 82, October 2001, page 87 to 93.

P N Rao and R P Aurora. ‘Some Effects on Mist Application Cutting Fluids in Machining Steel.’ Procedding of Eighth All-India Machine Tool Design and Research Conference, 1973.

H S Ramaiyangar, R Salmon, W B Rice. ‘Some Effects of Cutting Fluid on Chip Formation in Metal Cutting.’ Journal of Engineering for Industry, February 1963.

Md. Anwar Hossain. Improvement in Grinding Two Commonly Used Steels by MQL Cooling. Masters thesis. 2007. DUET, Gazipur-1700.

L M Hartmaan, et al. ‘Lubricating Oil Requirements for Oil Mist Systems.’ Journal of American Society of Lubrication Engineers, January 1972.

F Klocke and G Eisenblatter. ‘Dry Cutting.’Annals of the CIRP, vol 46, no2, 1997, p519.