As industries from aerospace to automotive and marine continue to rely on composite materials, a growing number of safety professionals and workers are asking the same question: are current workplace practices sufficient to guard against the combined chemical and particulate hazards that composites create? Composite production and repair bring together resin systems, curing agents and fibrous reinforcements—each with its own hazard profile. When these materials are processed together, the risks multiply. This article examines the exposures workers face, explores common shortcomings at worksites, outlines practical controls and training priorities, and highlights steps employers and employees can take now to reduce harm.

A complex mix: why composites pose multiple hazards

Composites are engineered materials made from two or more constituent elements. In many common applications the matrix — the polymeric resin that binds the structure — is paired with reinforcing fibres such as glass or carbon. The resin systems used in these operations can release vapours and aerosols during mixing, dispensing and curing. Additives and curing agents used to make resins harden introduce additional chemical hazards, and mechanical work on cured parts — cutting, grinding and sanding — generates high volumes of fine fibrous dust.

The result is a workplace in which a person can be exposed simultaneously to chemical vapours, liquid splashes, fine dust and sharp fibres. Each of these exposure types affects different body systems: vapours and aerosols primarily threaten the respiratory tract and eyes; liquid resins and additives can cause skin irritation and sensitisation; and fibrous dust can embed in skin or irritate airways. Because some health effects develop only after repeated exposure, the long-term consequences for a workforce can be serious and sometimes unexpected.

Immediate and long-term health effects to watch for

Short-term effects from inadequate control and poor practices are common and readily visible: redness or stinging in the eyes, coughing or throat irritation, headaches, and localized skin rashes where uncured resin contacts the body. These symptoms are a clear signal that controls are inadequate.

More concerning, however, are the longer-term or delayed effects. Repeated skin contact with certain resin components and hardeners can lead to allergic contact dermatitis; once sensitised, a worker may react to even tiny future exposures. Respiratory sensitisation can lead to occupational asthma, a chronic condition that may persist even after exposure stops. In rare cases, prolonged or intense exposures to certain reactive chemicals have been associated with systemic effects. Importantly, the development of sensitisation is highly individual: a worker who tolerates resin handling for months or years can suddenly develop severe reactions.

Workers who perform mechanical operations on cured composite parts may experience ongoing irritation from embedded fibres in the skin or from inhaling fine particles. Even when the fibres themselves are chemically inert, their physical presence in tissue and mucous membranes can cause persistent discomfort and inflammatory responses.

Common gaps observed at worksites

Inspections and workplace reviews repeatedly reveal a set of recurring issues that increase the risk of harm:

• Insufficient ventilation. Mixing, sanding and other high-exposure tasks are often performed without adequate local exhaust or general ventilation, allowing vapours and dust to accumulate in the breathing zone.

• Inappropriate or inconsistent PPE use. Workers may lack access to the right glove types, eye protection or respirators, or they may be given equipment but not trained on selection and maintenance.

• Poor housekeeping. Dry sweeping, inadequate waste handling and the accumulation of dust on surfaces allow contaminants to spread throughout a facility and reach break rooms or changing areas.

• Cross-contamination between work and clean areas. Workers can inadvertently carry fibres and resin residues on clothing into rest areas, exposing themselves and others.

• Incomplete hazard communication. Safety data sheets are sometimes missing, difficult to access, or not communicated in a way that workers can easily use in daily operations.

Each of these gaps is remediable with focused management attention and modest investment. Addressing them reduces exposure and generally improves productivity and morale.

Hierarchy of controls: what should be done first

Health and safety best practice follows a hierarchy of controls: elimination, substitution, engineering, administrative controls, and finally personal protective equipment (PPE). For composite operations, complete elimination of hazards is rarely feasible, but meaningful progress can be made at several levels:

• Substitution and process design. Where possible, choose formulations with lower volatility or reduced hazard profiles, or use pre-impregnated materials that limit the handling of liquid resins. Automate or semi-automate high-exposure steps to reduce direct human contact.

• Engineering controls. Local exhaust ventilation (LEV) at mixing stations, enclosed cutting and sanding cells, dust collectors on power tools and properly designed curing enclosures are among the most effective measures to lower airborne concentrations.

• Administrative measures. Scheduling hazardous operations during low-occupancy periods, establishing clear clean/dirty zones, restricting access to high-exposure areas, and rotating tasks to reduce individual exposure durations help manage risk.

• PPE as the last line of defense. When engineering and administrative measures cannot reduce exposure to acceptable levels, PPE must be selected and used correctly. However, PPE should not be the only control relied upon.

Selecting and using PPE correctly

PPE remains essential in composite workplaces, but its protective value depends on correct selection, use and maintenance. Key considerations include:

• Respiratory protection. For dust from fibre machining, particulate respirators or powered air-purifying respirators with appropriate filters are commonly used. Where organic vapours or aerosols from resins are present, combined particulate and organic-vapour cartridges, or supplied-air systems, may be necessary. Fit testing and a certified respiratory program improve protection.

• Hand protection. Glove selection must match the chemicals handled. Not all glove materials provide equal resistance to resin components and curing agents. Workers should know when to inspect and replace gloves and how to remove them to avoid skin contamination.

• Eye and face protection. Chemical splash goggles and face shields protect against liquid splashes and airborne particulates. Side protection and a tight seal reduce the chance of ocular exposure.

• Body protection. Coveralls made from fabrics that resist dust penetration and liquid penetration protect skin from fibres and splashes. Changing rooms and laundering protocols prevent contamination of personal clothing.

• Hearing protection. Many composite workshops have noisy equipment; earplugs or earmuffs protect hearing and help maintain concentration, reducing other risks.

Training on correct donning and doffing, inspection, storage and disposal of PPE is as important as providing the equipment itself. Without training, PPE can provide a false sense of security.

Practical on-the-floor measures that make a difference

Some changes are straightforward and produce immediate benefits:

• Install and maintain local exhaust ventilation at the source of dust and vapour generation. Even modest LEV systems, if well designed and maintained, can markedly reduce worker exposures.

• Adopt wet-cutting or low-dust machining technologies where feasible to minimize dust generation at source.

• Use appropriate vacuum systems for cleanup rather than dry sweeping. Vacuums fitted with high-efficiency filters prevent the re-release of fine particles.

• Designate separate break and changing areas and enforce rules that prevent contaminated clothing or PPE from entering clean zones.

• Provide accessible decontamination — sinks, showers and laundering services — so workers can remove contaminants promptly.

• Label and segregate reactive substances and ensure spill response kits are available and workers are trained to use them.

Such measures not only protect health but often reduce material waste and improve the quality of finished parts.

Training, reporting and medical surveillance

Prevention depends heavily on worker knowledge and prompt reporting. Training should cover material hazards, correct PPE use, emergency procedures and early symptom recognition. Employers should encourage reporting of any skin or respiratory symptoms and should respond quickly when reports arrive.

Medical surveillance is appropriate when exposures are significant or when substances handled have known sensitising potential. Baseline health checks and periodic follow-up can identify early signs of sensitisation or lung function decline. Where medical surveillance is implemented, results must be managed confidentially and used to adapt workplace controls as needed.

Data, documentation and the role of safety information

Every chemical in a workplace should be accompanied by an accessible safety information sheet that describes hazards and recommended controls. Employers should keep accurate inventories, ensure documentation is available in languages workers can understand, and make sure hazard communication is a living part of daily operations rather than a file in a cupboard.

Records of training, maintenance of ventilation systems, respirator fit tests and exposure monitoring help demonstrate that controls are working and provide a basis for continuous improvement.

Illustrative table: linking hazards to practical controls

(This table is illustrative; site-specific hazards and controls should be determined from product safety information and workplace risk assessments.)

The business case for prevention

Reducing exposure is not only a health imperative but also makes business sense. Fewer lost workdays, lower turnover, reduced workers’ compensation claims and fewer production defects are all measurable benefits of a safer workplace. Investments in ventilation, process improvements and training typically pay back through improved productivity and lower indirect costs associated with illness and disruption.

What workers should ask and expect

Employees can play an active role by asking informed questions and expecting transparent responses. Useful questions include:

• Where are the safety and hazard information sheets kept, and how am I trained on them?

• What ventilation and dust-collection controls are in place for my tasks?

• What respiratory protection is provided and how is fit testing handled?

• Which glove types are recommended for the chemicals I use, and when should they be replaced?

• How are spills handled and how can I access spill kits and wash facilities?

A workplace that welcomes these questions and provides clear answers is one where safety systems are more likely to function effectively.

Toward continuous improvement: monitoring and feedback loops

A robust safety program collects data, acts on findings and communicates improvements. Periodic observations, employee feedback, air monitoring where relevant, and routine checks of equipment keep systems calibrated to real-world conditions. When changes in materials, processes or staff occur, a fresh risk assessment ensures controls remain adequate.

Closing: shared responsibility, measurable action

Safety in composite workplaces depends on a layered approach: better process design, strong engineering controls, disciplined housekeeping, thoughtful administrative rules and correct PPE use. Employers must lead by providing equipment, training and a workplace culture that prioritises health. Workers must follow safe practices, report concerns and participate in training and monitoring programs. When both sides engage, risks from resins, curing agents and fibre dust can be managed effectively — reducing immediate irritations and preventing long-term sensitisation and illness.

The question of whether composite workplaces are doing enough is ultimately answered by action: consistent application of the hierarchy of controls, informed purchasing and process choices, and an organisational commitment to protect those who build and repair the materials that modern industry depends on.