From: "Stuart, Ralph" <Ralph.Stuart**At_Symbol_Here**KEENE.EDU>
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] Chemical Fume Hood Alarm Set Points
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 22:33:00 +0000
Reply-To: ACS Division of Chemical Health and Safety <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**Princeton.EDU>
Message-ID: BDDE976A-2398-4CF5-9070-4841BDB14989**At_Symbol_Here**keene.edu
In-Reply-To


> >I would like to get opinions on what you have local air flow monitors set to alarm at (high and low), if you differentiate at a system level and any considerations to make. We do not have occupancy sensors on our hoods, but some are setup to adjust a damper when there is a drop in air flow. The other are constant volume with no adjustments possible with dampers .
>
My experience in managing fume hood programs is in academic, where there is a diverse set of lab sciences and wide variation in the age and style of fume hoods serving the labs. In that setting, I would need further context to address your questions. Questions that arise in my mind include:
- How many hoods are we talking about?
- What kind of chemistry do they contain (research processes in small amounts; productions processes in larger amounts; other)?
- How frequently are they used for active chemistry?
- How quickly is a reported hood likely to be responded to?

The reason for these questions is that managing engineering precautions require significant user training and when developing a training program, the more specifically it relates to the equipment the user is working with the better. In my experience, understanding the significance of face velocity at the fume hoods is a level of detail that most chemists are unlikely to be engaged with. For example, if they report a hood in alarm and it disrupts their work because the hood is placed out of service, the effective training is not to call about a hood alarm.

With this in mind, I would be reluctant to set a single fume hood alarm protocol in a complex laboratory setting such as you hint at. If you are primarily interested in energy conservation as a reason to manage fume hood face velocities, my experience is that ‰??hibernating‰?? hoods that are not used on a regular basis is an important alternative to consider.

Let me know if you have any questions about this.

- Ralph

Ralph Stuart, CIH, CCHO
Environmental Safety Manager
Keene State College
603 358-2859

ralph.stuart**At_Symbol_Here**keene.edu

---
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



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 secretary@dchas.org.
The maintenance and hosting of the DCHAS-L archive is provided through the generous support of Safety Emporium.