DrummerJonny Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal...=1&SRETRY=0 yes, apparently :/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david.elsbury Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 Mind giving us a link that works? <_< Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrummerJonny Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 works for me <_< hmmm... http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin...453202/ABSTRACT that one work? e2a: just realised it isn't the full article I'm afraid, but the conclusion is shown, along with the adverse effects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unfathomable Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 I use a second hand magnum 800 (off ebay, £80) and a desk fan. regular DJ fluid (Jem) works fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
niclights Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 There are plenty of studies out there including some conducted long term on real productions. All those I have seen have concluded no adverse affects other than sore eyes and throat with daily high level exposure. This would, however, clear quite rapidly once the exposure was reduced or removed. So I would take that report above with a pinch of salt. It only says 'acute exposure'. What is 'acute'? How does this relate to average use in theatrical situations? Why does it not mention any other levels of exposure? Do you or anyone you know suffer from these symptoms even though you might have been using atmospherics for much longer term? Glycol is hygroscopic meaning it absorbs water, which is why you can get dry eyes/throat. But even this does require significant density. Mineral oil is less clear where the argument is focused on the breathing of small particles (much smaller than water/glycol). Although the product is perfectly safe, many say that the breathing of small particles of any sort is probably not a good idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unfathomable Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 I use a second hand magnum 800 (off ebay, £80) and a desk fan. regular DJ fluid (Jem) works fine. Figured I should add that it is the frequency setting I use to produce this, the fan is to aid dispersion and stop it looking like there is a stream of smoke. Hang time is around 10 mins in most venues so a regular low intensity blast maintains a reasonable haze for most events. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IJWesley Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 A quick check of our on-line chemical hazard database tells me that smoke fluid is considered a "NON-HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE. NON-DANGEROUS GOODS. According to the Criteria of NOHSC, and the ADG Code." in Australia. Of course, you should always ask for a copy of the Material Safety Data Sheet and read it carefully before using any chemical that you are uncertain about. In this case, perusal of said document tells me that the only thing I need to worry about is the possibility of skin and eye irritation, and that the first aid treatment is to wash the affected area with lots of water. Ian (whose real job includes OHS for a science research company) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
niclights Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 The problem with the MSDS is it only tells you about the fluid and how to handle it safely. It does not tell you anything about the product coming out of a smoke machine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.