Check out Safety Emporium for your N95, N99, and face shield needs.
Previous by Date:
Subject: [DCHAS-L] Support CHAS
Date: Monday, October 29, 2018 at 3:02:43 PM
Author: NEAL LANGERMAN <neal**At_Symbol_Here**CHEMICAL-SAFETY.COM>
|
Next by Date:
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] Lab Design
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2018 16:39:49 -0500
Author: Tom Slavin
|
From: Monona Rossol <0000030664c37427-dmarc-request**At_Symbol_Here**LISTS.PRINCETON.EDU>
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] Lab Design
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2018 16:18:10 -0400
Reply-To: ACS Division of Chemical Health and Safety <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**PRINCETON.EDU>
Message-ID: 166c17a01ce-1ec5-f98**At_Symbol_Here**webjas-vae192.srv.aolmail.net
In-Reply-To <017b01d46fb9$b6809520$2381bf60$**At_Symbol_Here**bellsouth.net>
Good point. What they do is deflagrate. And when this happens in a confined space, the increase in volume during the burn causes the explosion.. But deflagration itself can be a burn hazard to those near. Since starch and dye mixtures are used for some special effects, in training I show slides of the Taiwan pool party fire where these "Holi-like" powders in the air ignited in a venue that was open to the air (not confined) and over 500 people were hospitalized and 15 died from their burns.
I see chemistry demonstrations on the internet involving powders in the air, and I don't think they realize how easily this can get out of hand.
Aluminum has the added issue of being a very hot fire and water creates some hydrogen so the fire can be difficult to put out. Mix the aluminum powder with a little iron oxide and you can't put it out at all.
Betcha a nickle that if you are in a college, you can go into your theater and/or art department metal shops and see people cutting, grinding and polishing aluminum right along with iron and other metals and they are completely clueless about the fire issues. I even see these idiots cutting aluminum on a table saw that is connected to a dust collector full of wood and plastic dust. And some
Aluminum work belongs in its own separate shop with a special vacuum for cleanup that is approved for Group E dusts.
Monona Rossol, M.S., M.F.A., Industrial Hygienist
President: Arts, Crafts & Theater Safety, Inc.
Safety Officer: Local USA829, IATSE
Safety Consultant: SAG-AFTRA
181 Thompson St., #23
New York, NY 10012 212-777-0062
-----Original Message-----
From: Zack Mansdorf <mansdorfz**At_Symbol_Here**BELLSOUTH.NET>
To: DCHAS-L <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**PRINCETON.EDU>
Sent: Mon, Oct 29, 2018 3:45 pm
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] Lab Design
This makes for very interesting "learnings" as we used to say at AD Little.
One could certainly say that most of your chemicals stores that are flammable are also probably explosive (under the right conditions). Let me assure you that most all powders that are metallic or contain organics are potentially combustible dusts. The issue is not whether or not the dusts are combustible-the issue is how are they generated or used. Gunpowder if open to the air makes for a nice exciting flame but is not explosive unless contained.
As pointed out in another response, the question is "what is the likelihood of the powder being confined and provided with a minimum ignition energy at the minimum explosive concentration?" In the lab, this seems unlikely except for some very specialized situations such as a drying tower, etc. I can't imagine a chemical stores situation where this would be a problem (although maybe there are some weird situations where other factors are at play).
Combustible dusts do NOT explode with ignition. They explode with ignition and confinement. They explode when there is a confined dust cloud. I suggest you hire someone (CIH, CSP or Process Safety Engineer) with the experience and credentials to have a discussion with your facilities personnel and the local building code personnel.
Good luck.
Zack
S.Z. Mansdorf, PhD, CIH, CSP, QEP
Consultant in EHS and Sustainability
7184 Via Palomar
Boca Raton, FL 33433
561-212-7288
I have one interesting situation that we have recently experienced with laboratory chemicals (powdered aluminum, sulfur, and magnesium) being identified as combustible dusts. The building code designated for the space categorized as a non-H building. The building code states that in non-H spaces combustible dusts cannot be stored or used beyond quantities where an explosion risk exists if exposed to an ignition source. Interesting, the plans examiners are reviewing detailed chemical inventories by building code definitions and quantities.
We are currently working through the combustible dust situation and would also appreciate any insight to how others have documented a Hazardous Materials Management Plan for these situations or if others had to completely remove any type of combustible dust chemicals storage and use from these non-H spaces.
Marjorie
Marjorie Markopoulos, Ph.D., CBM, CCHO, RBP, CSP
Director
Department of Environmental Health and Safety
3640 Colonel Glenn Hwy | 047 Biological Sciences II
Dayton, OH 45435-0001
Phone: 937.775..2797 | Cell: 937.239.7936
Thanks everyone, and Ralph I had never seen that publication so thanks for posting the link.
Support staff is definitely included in the stakeholders, I just happened to only mention the audience that I would be talking to.. Actually, the link Ralph posted does a nice job listing different stakeholders.
I thought there might be some more stories or there like the flooring example. If anyone thinks of others, I'll be listening.
Kimi, do you keep the researchers involved in the design process after you have them fill it the form, or do you feel that one you are aware of the hazards that EH&S can shepherd the rest of the process through?
I would also add:
=B7 Rubber mats to prevent floor tile cracking when dispensing liquid nitrogen into dewars. Some researchers have a tendency to leave a dripping liquid nitrogen transfer hose nozzle touching the floor which creates floor cracks.
=B7 A snorkel exhaust system for researchers working with anesthetics during animal surgical procedures.
=B7 Ensure drench hoses do not get confused with eyewash stations as the water pressure and temperature differs .
All the best,
Luis.
Luis Samaniego, CSP
Sr Laboratory Safety Specialist
Northwestern University
Research - Safety
303 East Chicago Avenue
Ward B-106, W223
Chicago, IL 60611
(312)503-8300
Mary Beth:
Your initial list covers many of the major issues I=E2=80™ve seen. Another thing to account for is the placement of and safety implications of free-standing and benchtop equipment that is expected to be in the space. This is a factor when you have a definitive equipment list and are planning a space for a particular researcher, but also when you are designing a generic lab space for a specific research type with equipment that can be reasonably anticipated.
Examples include:
- Need for local exhaust for benchtop equipment such as furnaces, ovens, balances, vacuum pumps, flash chromatography, soldering stations, etc.
- Placement of chemical-storage cabinets and refrigerators (if they're near a door to the corridor, expect more odor complaints from neighbors)
- Deciding whether chemical cabinets should be vented
- Placement of liquid nitrogen tanks (these, as well as gas cylinders, are not always anticipated by designers or included in researcher equipment lists)
- Need for Hazardous-gas or low-oxygen alarms
- Amount and types of built-in chemical storage provided vs. designated locations for free-standing cabinets
- Clearance around electrical panels (don't place the electrical panel in prime real estate for equipment and storage)
When we know who's going in the space we have them fill-out a survey of their lab's hazards early in the design process. We can then communicate to the rest of the design team what impact these hazards may have on how the lab is built. This helps to uncover some of the needs that may have otherwise slipped under the radar until it becomes too late or unnecessarily expensive to re-design.
Best of luck to you!
Kimi Brown
(Kimi Bush)
Sr. Lab Safety Specialist
Environmental Health and Radiation Safety
University of Pennsylvania
3160 Chestnut St., Suite 400
Philadelphia, PA 19104-6287
Office: 215-746-6549
Voice/cell/text: 215-651-0557
fax: 215-898-0140
All,
I am trying to put together an activity related to laboratory design that involves looking at the flow of personnel, waste, samples, and reagents in laboratories in a science building. In the activity, participants (scientists, engineers, and other users of the facility) are provided a laboratory layout and are then asked to discuss its strengths and weaknesses from security, safety, and practical work flow perspectives. It helps illustrate that the building/laboratory design can simplify work flow protocols and that architects actually need our input.
I'm looking for specific design issues you all have seen related to chemistry laboratories (I have a good bio lab layout already). For those of you who recently have done remodels or new builds, are there issues you were able to design out? Or, for those of you who haven't had that opportunity, do you have a dream list of what you would design out (e.g. the recent floor drain conversation on the listserve)? Are there shared equipment spaces that are perfectly or imperfectly located, or are there labs using particular materials that could be better isolated?
A few topics I have skimmed from the listserve and elsewhere include:
1. Moving hazardous wastes from a top floor via an elevator
2. Materialreceiving and distribution
3. Conference room/admin offices/science office locations/break areas
4. Placement of safety showers/eye washes
5. Chemical storage
Any other ideas from the collective DCHAS brain would be greatly appreciated.
Sincerely,
Mary Beth
---
For more information about the DCHAS-L e-mail list, contact the Divisional membership chair at
membership**At_Symbol_Here**dchas.org
Follow us on Twitter **At_Symbol_Here**acsdchas
---
For more information about the DCHAS-L e-mail list, contact the Divisional membership chair at membership**At_Symbol_Here**dchas.org
Follow us on Twitter **At_Symbol_Here**acsdchas
Previous post | Top of Page | Next post