Safety Officer here...HELIUM WARNING - Page 2 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

Lycoming-8 · #16 05-06-2011, 10:35 PM

That SF6 is sure expensive stuff, particularly the medical version!!!!

leathermang · #17 05-06-2011, 11:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eskimo

I don't know that one could safely assume that all gas sold as "balloon helium" contains 18-20% oxygen. If that IS the case, then I'd love to know when it happened - because I had never heard of it before reading your post.Have you called some of the big suppliers (e.g., Linde, Matheson, Airgas) to ask them what's in their "balloon helium"?

" before reading your post" --Eskimo

That is why I get paid the big bucks to be the Safety Officer....note the convenient inclusion of the phrase ' 20 percent oxygen' below.... probably just coincidence ....

From this url : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulfur_hexafluoride

""Physiological effects and precautions

Another effect is the gas's ability to alter vocal sound waves. The gas can be inhaled in a small, safe amount and cause the breather's voice to sound very deep. This is due to the gas's large molar mass. Unlike helium, which has a molar mass of about 4 grams/mol, SF6 has a molar mass of about 146 g/mol, and the velocity of sound through the gas is 0.44 times the speed of sound in air due to the large inertia of a SF6 molecule. For comparison, the molar mass of air, which is about 80% nitrogen and 20% oxygen, is approximately 30 g/mol. Inhalation of SF6 causes a lowering of the timbre, or frequency of the formants, of the vocal tract, by contrast with inhalation of helium, which raises it.[11] Other gases such as Freon or xenon have a similar effect, although xenon is generally not used for such demonstrations due to its high cost and anaesthetic properties.

It is possible to safely breathe heavy gases such as xenon or sulfur hexafluoride as long as they include a 20% mixture of oxygen. The lungs mix the gases very effectively and rapidly so that the heavy gases are purged along with the oxygen and do not accumulate at the bottom of the lungs.[12] There is, however, a danger associated with any heavy gas in large quantities: it may sit invisibly in a container, and if a person enters a container filled with an odorless, colorless gas, they may find themselves breathing it unknowingly...""

Eskimo · #18 05-07-2011, 08:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by leathermang

" before reading your post" --Eskimo

That is why I get paid the big bucks to be the Safety Officer....note the convenient inclusion of the phrase ' 20 percent oxygen' below.... probably just coincidence ....

From this url : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulfur_hexafluoride

""Physiological effects and precautions

Another effect is the gas's ability to alter vocal sound waves. The gas can be inhaled in a small, safe amount and cause the breather's voice to sound very deep. This is due to the gas's large molar mass. Unlike helium, which has a molar mass of about 4 grams/mol, SF6 has a molar mass of about 146 g/mol, and the velocity of sound through the gas is 0.44 times the speed of sound in air due to the large inertia of a SF6 molecule. For comparison, the molar mass of air, which is about 80% nitrogen and 20% oxygen, is approximately 30 g/mol. Inhalation of SF6 causes a lowering of the timbre, or frequency of the formants, of the vocal tract, by contrast with inhalation of helium, which raises it.[11] Other gases such as Freon or xenon have a similar effect, although xenon is generally not used for such demonstrations due to its high cost and anaesthetic properties.

It is possible to safely breathe heavy gases such as xenon or sulfur hexafluoride as long as they include a 20% mixture of oxygen. The lungs mix the gases very effectively and rapidly so that the heavy gases are purged along with the oxygen and do not accumulate at the bottom of the lungs.[12] There is, however, a danger associated with any heavy gas in large quantities: it may sit invisibly in a container, and if a person enters a container filled with an odorless, colorless gas, they may find themselves breathing it unknowingly...""

OK, let me get this straight...

1. You claim that "balloon helium" has 20% oxygen.

2. I question that assertion and ask for some evidence; it's a claim I've never seen before.

3. You tell me that you were testing the gullibility of members.

4. You quote a Wikipedia article that claims it's possible to safely breathe "heavy gases" if they include 20% oxygen in the mix. The reference is to a medical article comparing sulfur hexafluoride to helium - both with 21% oxygen - used as part of a CT imaging procedure.

Of course the 20-21% is not a coincidence. It's, uh, pretty darn close to the normal concentration of oxygen in the air we breathe! As Safety Officer, I'm sure you're already familiar with the definition of "oxygen deficient atmosphere" as being one in which the concentration of oxygen is less than 19.5%.

Back to the original claim: does "balloon helium" really have 20% oxygen in it? From all suppliers? From some suppliers?

leathermang · #19 05-07-2011, 01:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eskimo

OK, let me get this straight...

1. You claim that "balloon helium" has 20% oxygen.

2. I question that assertion and ask for some evidence; it's a claim I've never seen before.

3. You tell me that you were testing the gullibility of members.

4. You quote a Wikipedia article that claims it's possible to safely breathe "heavy gases" if they include 20% oxygen in the mix. The reference is to a medical article comparing sulfur hexafluoride to helium - both with 21% oxygen - used as part of a CT imaging procedure.

Of course the 20-21% is not a coincidence. It's, uh, pretty darn close to the normal concentration of oxygen in the air we breathe! As Safety Officer, I'm sure you're already familiar with the definition of "oxygen deficient atmosphere" as being one in which the concentration of oxygen is less than 19.5%.

Back to the original claim: does "balloon helium" really have 20% oxygen in it? From all suppliers? From some suppliers?

*****************************
I lied about being Safety Officer....someone on another thread asked me if I was now that...and I decided to ' go with it '...

I lied about posting this to check the gullibility of forum members....I already know which of them are gullible and tell those members exactly that regularly... You can probably guess which type of thread subject that occurs in if you read what I post about the most.

If you do not believe my assertion that it has 20 percent oxygen..why would you then believe some ' proof ' which I ( made up? ) to support that claim ?

I referenced sulfur hexafluoride because two members mentioned it in the thread. And it happened to mention the oxygen content....

This is where I got the information.....

http://weldingweb.com/showthread.php?t=28525&highlight=helium+balloon

These guys are very tough on information which is welding related physics statements which are not correct... no one attacked the concept and it has been there three years...

I did no further checking since it passed my initial ' shock proof built in crap detector ' reading.
****************************
#
N. Postman – Bull**** and the Art of Crap-Detection

Neil Postman’s classic essay Bull**** and the Art of Crap-Detection. Contains a handy taxonomy of forms of bull****, and some useful “laws” such as: Almost nothing is about what you think it is about–including you.”

I’ve copied it here in this post just to help ensure it remains easily available on the web.

“Bull**** and the Art of Crap-Detection”

by Neil Postman

(Delivered at the National Convention for the Teachers of English [NCTE], November 28, 1969, Washington, D.C.)

With a title like this, I think I ought to dispense with the rhetorical amenities and come straight to the point.

For those of you who do not know, it may be worth saying that the phrase, “crap-detecting,” originated with Ernest Hemingway who when asked if there were one quality needed, above all others, to be a good writer, replied, “Yes, a built-in, shock-proof, crap detector.”

As I see it, the best things schools can do for kids is to help them learn how to distinguish useful talk from bull****. I will ask only that you agree that every day in almost every way people are exposed to more bull**** than it is healthy for them to endure, and that if we can help them to recognize this fact, they might turn away from it and toward language that might do them some earthly good.

There are so many varieties of bull**** I couldn’t hope to mention but a few, and elaborate on even fewer. I will, therefore, select those varieties that have some transcendent significance.

Now, that last sentence is a perfectly good example of bull****, since I have no idea what the words “transcendent significance” might mean and neither do you. I needed something to end that sentence with and since I did not have any clear criteria by which to select my examples, I figured this was the place for some big-time words.

Pomposity:
Pomposity is not an especially venal form of bull****, although it is by no means harmless. There are plenty of people who are daily victimized by pomposity in that they are made to feel less worthy than they have a right to feel by people who use fancy titles, words, phrases, and sentences to obscure their own insufficiencies.

Fanaticism:
A much more malignant form of bull**** than pomposity is what some people call fanaticism. Now, there is one type of fanaticism of which I will say very little, because it is so vulgar and obvious — bigotry. But there are other forms of fanaticism that are not so obvious, and therefore perhaps more dangerous than bigotry

Eichmannism is a relatively new form of fanaticism, and perhaps it should be given its own special place among the great and near-great varieties of bull****. The essence of fanaticism is that it has almost no tolerance for any data that do not confirm its own point of view.

Eichmannism is especially dangerous because it is so utterly banal. Some of the nicest people turn out to be mini-Eichmanns. When Eichmann was in the dock in Jerusalem, he actually said that some of his best friends were Jews. And the horror of it is that he was probably telling the truth, for there is nothing personal about Eichmannism. It is the language of regulations, and includes such logical sentences as, “If we do it for one, we have to do it for all.” Can you imagine some wretched Jew pleading to have his children spared from the gas chamber? What could be more fair, more neutral, than for some administrator to reply, “If we do it for one, we have to do it for all.”

Inanity:
This is a form of talk which pays a large but, I would think, relatively harmless role in our personal lives. But with the development of the mass media, inanity has suddenly emerged as a major form of language in public matters. The invention of new and various kinds of communication has given a voice and an audience to many people whose opinions would otherwise not be solicited, and who, in fact, have little else but verbal excrement to contribute to public issues. Many of these people are entertainers. The press and air waves are filled with the featured and prime-time statements from people who are in no position to render informed judgments on what they are talking about and yet render them with elan and, above all, sincerity. Inanity, then, is ignorance presented in the cloak of sincerity.

Superstition:
Superstition is ignorance presented in the cloak of authority. A superstition is a belief, usually expressed in authoritative terms for which there is no factual or scientific basis. Like, for instance, that the country in which you live is a finer place, all things considered, than other countries. Or that the religion into which you were born confers upon you some special standing with the cosmos that is denied other people. I will refrain from commenting further on that, except to say that when I hear such talk my own crap-detector achieves unparalleled spasms of activity.

If teachers were to take an enthusiastic interest in what language is about, each teacher would have fairly serious problems to resolve. For instance, you can’t identify bull**** the way you identify phonemes. That is why I have called crap-detecting an art. Although subjects like semantics, rhetoric, or logic seem to provide techniques for crap-detecting, we are not dealing here, for the most part, with a technical problem.

Each person’s crap-detector is embedded in their value system; if you want to teach the art of crap-detecting, you must help students become aware of their values. After all, Vice President, Spiro Agnew, or his writers, know as much about semantics as anyone in this room. What he is lacking has very little to do with technique, and almost everything to do with values.

Now, I realize that what I just said sounds fairly pompous in itself, if not arrogant, but there is no escaping from saying what attitudes you value if you want to talk about crap-detecting.

In other words, bull**** is what you call language that treats people in ways you do not approve of.

So any teacher who is interested in crap-detecting must acknowledge that one man’s bull**** is another man’s catechism. Students should be taught to learn how to recognize bull****, including their own.

It seems to me one needs, first and foremost, to have a keen sense of the ridiculous. Maybe I mean to say, a sense of our impending death. About the only advantage that comes from our knowledge of the inevitability of death is that we know that whatever is happening is going to go away. Most of us try to put this thought out of our minds, but I am saying that it ought to be kept firmly there, so that we can fully appreciate how ridiculous most of our enthusiasms and even depressions are.

Reflections on one’s mortality curiously makes one come alive to the incredible amounts of inanity and fanaticism that surround us, much of which is inflicted on us by ourselves. Which brings me to the next point, best stated as Postman’s Third Law:

“At any given time, the chief source of bull**** with which you have to contend is yourself.”

The reason for this is explained in Postman’s Fourth Law, which is;

“Almost nothing is about what you think it is about–including you.”

With the possible exception of those human encounters that Fritz Peris calls “intimacy,” all human communications have deeply embedded and profound hidden agendas. Most of the conversation at the top can be assumed to be bull**** of one variety or another.

An idealist usually cannot acknowledge his own bull****, because it is in the nature of his “ism” that he must pretend it does not exist. In fact, I should say that anyone who is devoted to an “ism”–Fascism, Communism, Capital-ism–probably has a seriously defective crap-detector. This is especially true of those devoted to “patriotism.” Santha Rama Rau has called patriotism a squalid emotion. I agree. Mainly because I find it hard to escape the conclusion that those most enmeshed in it hear no bull**** whatever in its rhetoric, and as a consequence are extremely dangerous to other people. If you doubt this, I want to remind you that murder for murder, General Westmoreland makes Vito Genovese look like a Flower Child.

Another way of saying this is that all ideologies are saturated with bull****, and a wise man will observe Herbert Read’s advice: “Never trust any group larger than a squad.”

So you see, when it comes right down to it, crap-detection is something one does when he starts to become a certain type of person. Sensitivity to the phony uses of language requires, to some extent, knowledge of how to ask questions, how to validate answers, and certainly, how to assess meanings.

I said at the beginning that I thought there is nothing more important than for kids to learn how to identify fake communication. You, therefore, probably assume that I know something about now to achieve this. Well, I don’t. At least not very much. I know that our present curricula do not even touch on the matter. Neither do our present methods of training teachers. I am not even sure that classrooms and schools can be reformed enough so that critical and lively people can be nurtured there.

Nonetheless, I persist in believing that it is not beyond your profession to invent ways to educate youth along these lines. (Because) there is no more precious environment than our language environment. And even if you know you will be dead soon, that’s worth protecting.""

That was from:

http://criticalsnips.wordpress.com/2007/07/22/neil-postman-bull****-and-the-art-of-crap-detection/

So I think we are left with this question :

Do you , Eskimo , have access to the internet and Google where you could check out my assertion ? I will forfeit this month's Safety Officer's pay if it is wrong... OH, SO SORRY, I am not the Safety Officer.... keep forgetting....