I support Peter's post 110% - we have found that even after proper installation and testing, if the flow controls are not properly maintained, work space loading constantly monitored and sash rollers replaced routinely, containment is lost.
Mary Ellen Scott
True as far as it goes, but being well designed is only the beginning. The
hood must be well and appropriately installed AND used properly by the lab
occupants. The best design and installation can be completely negated by
Peter Zavon, CIH
> -----Original Message-----
> From: DCHAS-L Discussion List
> [mailto:dchas-l**At_Symbol_Here**MED.CORNELL..EDU] On Behalf Of Ralph B Stuart
> Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 10:47 AM
> To: DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**MED.CORNELL.EDU
> Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] High performance hoods
> > Does anyone have experience with such hoods and have they
> found them to be acceptable for use with common solvents. Are
> there any downsides to their use?
> I have seen demonstrations of them that indicate that they
> work as well as more traditional hoods in terms of
> containment. Aerodynamically, there's nothing particularly
> magic about 100 fpm, so I believe that a well designed hood
> should be able to provide the same protection at 80 fpm and
> don't forsee any operational downsides. Some jurisdictions
> have regulators who need to be convinced of this, though.
> Maybe someone with more direct experience of the lower flow
> hoods knows of other challenges they present?
> - Ralph
> Ralph Stuart CIH
> Laboratory Ventilation Specialist
> Department of Environmental Health and Safety Cornell University
Previous post | Top of Page | Next post