[UVC SAFETY WARNING] What should I do about UVC?

[Andrea B.]

EDITOR'S NOTE 27 Feb 2023

I have returned to all UVC posts and placed a UVC safety prefix in the title

and copied the following UVC Safety suggestions at the beginning of the topic.

 

[UV SAFETY] UV-C Light Is Dangerous

 

NEVER look at a UV-C light.

NEVER let UV-C light hit your skin or eyes directly or by reflection.

UV-C light can cause:

• severe burns of the eyes and the skin, and
• DNA damage from broken chromosomes.

When working with UV-C illumination, you MUST:

• cover up completely, 
• wear head & eye protection, and
• have strong ventilation.

 

 

---

 

 

Can someone research and list what protection is required for anyone working with UVC?

 

 

---

 

 

There was some discussion about separating UVC topics into their own board. But the UVC references are so scattered that this probably cannot be done.

 

 

---

 

 

Given the dangers of playing with UVC, what should I do as the Admin/Editor/Owner??

• Post warnings every time UVC is mentioned?
• Forbid discussion of UVC and any UVC photographs?
• Start a UVC board for all future posts/discussions?

I have to think about the possibility that someone could get hurt playing with UVC and then blame this website. So these are serious questions.

 

 

---

 

 

 

Frankly, I never thought anybody would go there given the dangers. But it has happened more than once. So I'm worried.

 

[hr[

[Stefano]

Do you mean an entire new section when you refer to a new board?

 

Regarding the fact that someone could blame this website, you should make VERY clear that UVC is especially dangerous to play with. Just a few seconds of direct exposure to a 254 nm mercury bulb will lead to symptoms of radiation damage (this is actually radiation damage, even if it isn't "nuclear" in nature), not talking about long-term damage. I sincerely cannot answer your question adequately, it is too important and I don't have experience with UVC, as opposite to other members. This is just a very general idea. I would probably use the "you have been warned" idea.

[Andy Perrin]

I am in favor of a new section, because I'm quite interested in imaging there at some point. A new section would allow posting of warnings in a prominent place at the top, and enable us to have the very important discussion of how to do it safely. I personally don't plan to image in UVC UNTIL I have full set of safety procedures in place, including a means to isolate the light itself from anything except the specimen area, and a way to eliminate ozone or any other noxious gases. A method of testing the safety precautions is also needed. (How do we know they work???) I would also think automatic shut-off of any UV-C source after a prescribed maximum time should be built into the system.

 

In addition, I think we need to not discuss UVC in any OTHER part of the board. It should perhaps be a standard requirement to describe safety precautions used when posting any UVC photos here, so that it becomes the responsibility of the poster to make sure the audience knows about them, else the post will be deleted. We already have "formal" and "informal" areas of the board, so maybe this should be a "formal" area in a different sense.

 

Links I've found on safety:

https://www.klaran.com/is-uvc-safe

This one recommends:

Use UV goggles and/or full-face shields.

Cover any exposed skin using lab coats, nitrile gloves or other lab attire.

 

http://www.uvresources.com/blog/uv-c-lamps-staying-safe/

This one recommends:

Placing warning labels near all access panels or doors to a plenum containing UV lamps

Installing electrical disconnect devices on AHU lamp sections, so that the opening of any access point de-energizes the UV-C system.

Instructing service personnel to never look directly at UV-C without adequate eye protection. Installing a view port is the safest way to view the light, as it will block the UV-C bandwidth.

Making it a policy to never enter the plenum where UV-C lamps are active. If it is absolutely necessary, wear personal protective equipment including UV safety goggles, UV face shields, long-sleeved, tightly-woven clothing that covers much of the body and gloves.

[colinbm]

Yes to Andy's post above, certainly a separate section.

Perhaps a separate section with an added log-in & having a disclaimer & signed acceptance each time you enter.

Warnings of the deadly effects of UV & Ozone combined.

[Andy Perrin]

Perhaps a separate section with an added log-in & having a disclaimer & signed acceptance each time you enter.

Ok, I think that's overkill and a real headache for anyone who wants to participate (and probably technically difficult -- it would amount to having a separate board).

[dabateman]

Since I am mostly to blame, I will try to help out as best as possible. Andrea, PM me if you need help or want any changes.

 

My first thoughts reading your title was "Stay away, don't try this your self"

 

A login would be dangerous. People need to know its extremely dangerous. Just spend at least a minute to read all the people whom have blinded themselves buying germicidal bulbs off Amazon should be a prerequisite.

 

Hiding the danger makes it desirable. Its a danger and should not be jumped into with out through thought and precautions. You can't just wear socks, you need to protect every portion of your body you value.

 

Andy, I don't trust off timers. I still like a wired switch out side to know its off. You can buy extension cords with on off switches.

[Guest]

@Andrea: I don't think you can be held legally responsible for having info on this site relating to UVC. Such info is already available online an in other formats, and there is no stipulation to post warnings or educate any person on the potential hazards. Conversely, I commend and support your concern, and would estimate that a fair cautionary post be made available perhaps a sticky thread link from the home page. That's it. Once you make an effort to avail such information you've already done a good deed. It is up to individuals to properly take care of themselves, educate themselves, and if need be - resist the forces of Darwinian evolution.

[Andy Perrin]

dabateman: “Andy, I don't trust off timers. I still like a wired switch out side to know its off. You can buy extension cords with on off switches.”

 

I meant IN ADDITION TO other on off switches. As in, it’s a failsafe so that if something else doesn’t switch off, the timer will do it.

 

I will say, I’m probably not going to get to this for at least a year, so nobody rush on my account. I’m still working on my SWIR setup.

[OlDoinyo]

Separating the board would be an annoyance at best. I would not favor doing it. If we are concerned about safety, education and information are the best tools--there are excellent resources to which one might be pointed, both on this board and elsewhere. As for liability, people have posted accounts such as this online about their experimental exploits--but no one is calling for that to be expurgated nor otherwise wringing their hands about such matters.

[dabateman]

Separating the board would be an annoyance at best. I would not favor doing it. If we are concerned about safety, education and information are the best tools--there are excellent resources to which one might be pointed, both on this board and elsewhere. As for liability, people have posted accounts such as DELETED online about their experimental exploits--but no one is calling for that to be expurgated nor otherwise wringing their hands about such matters.

 

Their hands? What hands? After you make that stuff you will most likely loose most fingers and a hand. I think even the original authors lost fingers.

 

The original translation is funny though. "... a heavy colourless liquid with a peculiar taste and smell."

Can't believe someone tasted that stuff.

[Bill De Jager]

I think the best approach would be for all UV-C discussions to be on a separate subforum on this board, with:

• A warning sticky in the subforum regarding eye/skin/cancer dangers and appropriate protective measures
  
• A subforum description directing people to read the warning sticky first, and indicating that all further UV-C discussion should go to this subforum
  

The very recent UV-C threads could be moved to the new subforum since they involve photographs.

 

One problem is that merely mentioning danger may eventually attract the reckless and the careless. On the other hand, this forum is already in that situation. On yet another hand, chemist Derek Lowe's occasional online column Things I Won't Work With https://blogs.scienc...e_you_this_time discusses some pretty scary substances with apparently no problems over a number of years.

[OlDoinyo]

The problem I see with separating discussions that way is that botanical posts (for example) which just happen to contain short-wave images end up siloed off in some separate area, rather than indexed with the rest of such posts; this could make them harder to find, for no good reason I can see. Perhaps a tagging or flagging scheme would be a better answer.

[Andy Perrin]

Clark, the real problem is not with the final images, it’s with the procedure for taking them. So something like a flower photo, once made, could just be put with the usual things. But we should probably have a separate sub-forum for technical discussion of the process, which is where the danger is. I think we could separate the two without much difficulty, using links to maintain the discussion flow.

[JMC]

For anyone not convinced about how much UVC some of these lights can put out, I have something to share. I have a UVP light which takes 2 x 12" 8W fluorescent tubes. In the past I have used 365nm and 302nm tubes with this and it does indeed put out quite a lot of UV. Recently I bought a couple of 8W 254nm tubes. Not much money (I think they were about 10GBP delivered for the two of them), as I was just intrigued to see how much if any UVC they were producing.

 

I put them in the UVP light, and turned it on (facing away from me, and with me wearing UV safety glasses and long sleeved clothing) and measured the irradiance spectra from them a about 50cm distance,and this is what I got.

 

 

These things really need a big health warning, especially given how freely available they are. Huge amounts of UVC light and a very sharp peak.

[colinbm]

Thanks Jonathan

Did you notice any strange smell that may indicate ozone ?

[JMC]

Thinking about it now, no I didn't Colin, but I didn't have it on for long, and I must admit I wasn't really concentrating on that at the time.

[colinbm]

Ozone will kill you faster then UVC.....

[colinbm]

Mine smelt weird when I first turned it on, so I made a close fitting clear mylar / polyester film 5 thousands of an inch thin & it hasn't smelt like it again...?

[colinbm]

Ultraviolet light is usually defined as the range between 100 – 380 nm. UV light in the range from 160 – 240 nm will create ozone from oxygen. Ozone is created by the photolysis of the oxygen molecule (O2).

 

Ozone has a distinctive smell that humans can detect even in small concentrations — as few as 10 parts per billion. Here are some of the ways the smell of ozone is described: Metallic. Like a burning wire. Sort of....

 

How is Ozone Harmful? ... When inhaled, ozone can damage the lungs. Relatively low amounts can cause chest pain, coughing, shortness of breath and throat irritation. Ozone may also worsen chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma and compromise the ability of the body to fight respiratory infections.

[microbat52]

I think a UVC section ( same as there is one for IR) with a big health warning and a proceed at your own risk disclamer pinned at the top in all caps makes sense.

[dabateman]

From my tests you need safety glasses, oddly the orange uvex are better than the amber one, as there isn't much 380nm to leak.

Wear 100% cotton clothing and nothing polyester. So long sleeved 100% cotton shirt, and cotton jeans, slacks, dungarees ete.

Wear gloves, I like the purple or grey nitrile, but even a thick mesh 100% cotton glove can work.

Then wear a ski mask, the one I got on black Friday sale is great but now they are listed as polyester. So I don't know if the quality changed or if the grey dye that mine is made of is blocking all UV.

I like the indestructible shoes, where look stylish and steel toe and steel plated. But foot covering is up to you. At a minimum wear 100% black socks.

So thats what I use, ski mask, orange Uvex glasses, long sleeve shirt, jeans, socks, nitrile gloves.

 

I have almost finished making a quartz element for my Diana + square instax Fuji film camera. So will have 4 UVC capable cameras.

 

[colinbm]

For static subjects, you could place the subject, camera & lighting in a glass cabinet, like an empty fish tank, & place a glass top on when the light is turned on & operate the camera with a remote shutter.

[Andy Perrin]

Colin, I'm thinking of doing something like that in fact. Probably not with glass for safety reasons, but I may do acrylic and just replace it when it starts to break down.

[Stefano]

Andy, unless you want to see what's happening, can a cardboard box work? It may sound silly, but if your goal is to simply stop UVC light it will work very well. I don't know what are your plans though, maybe a see-through solution is important for you.

[Andy Perrin]

Stefano, it's hard to align things if you can't see from the side.