Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 08:14:45 -0400
Reply-To: DCHAS-L Discussion List <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST.UVM.EDU>
Sender: DCHAS-L Discussion List <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST.UVM.EDU>
From: "Jeskie, Kimberly B." <jeskiekb**At_Symbol_Here**ORNL.GOV>
Subject: Re: 4% hydrogen mixture
Comments: To: Todd Perkins
In-Reply-To: <bz4s1h00H3p6TY801z4ve7**At_Symbol_Here**>
Long story short, the reason I ask this question is that we have a long standing debate with our research community who feel strongly that they have chosen the 4% mixture because it gives them the reducing environment they need while limiting the hazard, that's why they use it.  The DOT classification is based on P-32 and the building codes (which is where the debate starts) generally site DOT as the go to place for deciding how to class materials for the quantities allowed inside buildings. That's where we keep coming up against a logistics nightmare. No one can agree on how to account for this mixture and most everyone agrees that using the full volume of a 4 % mixture just doesn't make common sense. 

One of our Fire Protection Engineers has suggested that the sources of information we use to make these decisions may be dated and an analysis may be the ticket to put this issue to bed. The P-23 pamphlet references Bureau of Mines Bulletin 503-1952 and much of the 503 date is based on simple, ad hoc tests on an apparatus dating back to the 1920s.  Some of the data is based on earlier work dating back to the 1870s and 1880s.  DOT references and accepts ASTM E-681 to classify flammability of gases. So...we're debating on whether or not to test the mixture under this newer standard, and it sure would be great if it has already been done.


Kimberly Begley Jeskie, MPH-OSHM
Operations Manager
Physical Sciences Directorate
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
(865) 574-4945

-----Original Message-----
From: DCHAS-L Discussion List [mailto:DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**] On Behalf Of Todd Perkins
Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2011 7:05 PM
To: DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST.UVM.EDU
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] 4% hydrogen mixture

Do you mean test the mixture for flammability per CGA publication P-23?  My understanding is that the data is based on experimental observation as well as calculation. I've never had reason to question the data. Have you observed something different?

Todd Perkins
Regional Safet Director
Airgas Mid America


- Sent from my mobile phone
On Sep 22, 2011 11:41 AM, Jeskie, Kimberly B. <jeskiekb**At_Symbol_Here**ORNL.GOV> wrote: 

Has anyone actually tested a 4% hydrogen/ 96% argon mixture using ASTM E-681, as opposed to just taking the P-23 data or the Bureau of Mines Bulletin 503-1952 at face value? Kim Kimberly Begley Jeskie, MPH-OSHMOperations ManagerPhysical Sciences DirectorateOak Ridge National Laboratory(865) 574-4945

Previous post   |  Top of Page   |   Next post

The content of this page reflects the personal opinion(s) of the author(s) only, not the American Chemical Society, ILPI, Safety Emporium, or any other party. Use of any information on this page is at the reader's own risk. Unauthorized reproduction of these materials is prohibited. Send questions/comments about the archive to
The maintenance and hosting of the DCHAS-L archive is provided through the generous support of Safety Emporium.