Hazards of working with HF acid
db5151
can do is say "just don't" than you might as well not even reply. If you
have any other serious advice, I am all ears.
The stuff I am THINKING about working with is "Whink" rust-stain remover,
sold in Kroger and other grocery stores for removing rust stains in white
porcelain sinks. It comes with warnings about possible burns (I will be
wearing a polyethethylene smock and gloves) and that the fumes are
hazardous, which makes me wonder just how safe it is. I *assume* that it is
dilute, and am probably going to try a drop of it on a piece of glass, to
see whether it etches or simply dissolves the glass. I am planning to do
this outside, in my back yard, downstream from a powerful fan I have for the
purpose of making sure that the wind does not shift on me. Any ideas or
advice? Like I said, I am THINKING of working with something purchased from
Kroger, so how dangerous can it be? Please. I need to know.
Thanking you in advance,
Dave
X-Ray
> Please, I know this stuff is NASTY, which is why I am asking. If all you
> can do is say "just don't" than you might as well not even reply. If you
> have any other serious advice, I am all ears.
>
> The stuff I am THINKING about working with is "Whink" rust-stain remover,
> sold in Kroger and other grocery stores for removing rust stains in white
Of course it's always good to be cautious - no doubt about it but:
Follow the instructions on the bottle. Don't get paranoid reading the
horror stories from the above posters ...
The stuff will surely be highly diluted ... so much that the danger
can be managed by an average citizen, with some mechanical skills,
ignorant to the chemicals involved which is just buying a rust-stain
remover from the grocery store ...
Of course if you won't apply common sense you're lost but I think your
mentioned precautions will already be more than you actually need.
Hmm, just my thinking ... but your health :-)
So if you really wanna take no risk just call a prefossional to do it
for you ;-)
--
Frank
"Life is a game. It has only _one_ rule:
DON'T DIE!" - F.S.
donald haarmann
[snip]
> Second have a syringe made up with a calcium carbonate solution, always
> in your pocket.
[snip]
--------
Strange place the antipodes! They have soluble calcium carbonate!!!
Here in North America calcium carbonate is not soluble in water or
much else!!
donald j haarmann
-----------------------
God does not play dice with
the universe.
A. Einstein
[Don't beleive that Hawking's fellow.]
Uncle Al
>
> "Andrew Tweddle" <sar...@alphalink.com.au
>
> [snip]
>
> > Second have a syringe made up with a calcium carbonate solution, always
> > in your pocket.
>
> [snip]
>
> --------
> Strange place the antipodes! They have soluble calcium carbonate!!!
>
> Here in North America calcium carbonate is not soluble in water or
> much else!!
It's calcium gluconate. HF burns require emergency medical attention
with a properly prepared medic. HF burns are multi-month nasty.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" The Net!
Ian Gilmore
the fingernails and the length of time to heal.
Make sure there is not even a pin prick in the gloves and have the
necessary cures close to hand. something in glycerol which escapes me
at the moment.
Ian
> Dave
Dr. N.R. Pallas
phorphoric acid which is also found in 'Navel Jelly', a well known
rust remover. Also note that a dose of the soft drink 'Coke', which
has a good lot of the stuff in it, also works well, but more slowly.
Yes, phosphoric acid can burn skin, but is hardly as dangerous as HF!!
I'm quite certain that HF is NOT a component. The main danger with HF
solutions(it is not a liquid, but a higly water soluble gas....~ 52%
by mass )is that it releases fluoride ions into the body which react
with the calcium of bone as well as mess with Ca channels producing
soluble CaFl and potentially death due to Ca depletion!
PLEASE, DO NOT ATTEMPT TO WORK WITH HF ANY PLACE EXCEPT A WELL
SUPERVISED PROFESSIONAL LAB!
Take off UrPants to reply
and hydrogen bonding capability of the ion. The F then forms insoluble
precipitates of calcium. Nerve cells, muscle cells, etc... don't function
without calium and the precipitate clogs capilaries.
If the HF is well diluted then it may stay with the solution and not cross the
lipid layers of tissues. I don't believe HF penetrates vaseline well. Calcium
Carbonate or bicarbonate would be good to keep around or even dust yourself
with. I think milk of magnesia might even work better.
There are safe ways to work with HF. Keep chemical shower (or hose) nearbye.
Pour carefully and plan so that if a spill or contamination occurs it doesn't
occur on your skin.
Take off UrPants to reply
>> in your pocket.
>--------
>Strange place the antipodes! They have soluble calcium carbonate!!!
I think that the correct solution is calcium gluconate.
Coyotedave
>
>You must understand the hazards. Read the MSDS.
>Be prepared to widow your wife. Have your life insurance up to date.
>
>Now this is what you do.
>Do not under any circumstances breath the fumes.
>the fumes get into your lungs and can cause pain lasting a good 6
>months.
>This happened to a friend of mine at a mine, he was and still is a very
>experienced analytic, mining Chemist who spent 15 years in the out back
>running labs. Not your usual fool.
>
>Second have a syringe made up with a calcium carbonate solution, always
>through the skin pumps its way through your blood stream, enters your
>bones and causes pain that will last 6 months by the way you will
>probably lose your fingers if dipped in the solution. You will not
>likely make it to hospital to survive, unless you take the
>aforementioned syringe and stick it into the injury site and press.
>If you are the sort of person who has a problem with self injection,
>this is not good.
>This antidote works by binding to the HF in preference to the Ca in your
>bones.
>No doubt others can add more to this.
>Secondly always work with someone else who can at least administer the
>first aid,
>by the way my ex used to be a Doctor and has worked on Industrial
>accidents that literally make me chuck up. Most Hospital Emergency
>Departments are run by first and second year Doctors who will probably
>not have any idea about your symptoms as you come through the door, Also
>carry the MSDS and treatment on your person so they can read it but if
>you are unconscious you have about 15 minutes survival time for
>treatment, this basically means very little hope.
>
>This stuff should never have been invented.
>
>Think up another way to do your process, if at all possible.
Wow, far out. Actually I always wondered waht is the most powerful acid around,
and I read somewhere that is wasn't HF but stuff called Perchloric acid. Anybody
have any information about Perchloric Acid?
Take off UrPants to reply
>with a properly prepared medic. HF burns are multi-month nasty.
Yeah, you know I much prefer phenol burns. I lost a toe nail that way and
didn't know it until I took of my shoe that night. (No sneakers in molecular
bio lab folks, too absorbant) Still, half square foot phenol burn will kill you
just as dead as HF will.
Chris Murray
> Dangerous is an understatement about handling HF.
>
> You must understand the hazards. Read the MSDS.
1.) Does the material contain HF?
2.) What concentration is it?
If it is there at, say, 0.1%, it is a whole different ball game to if it
is there at 50%. Given that it is likely to be a consumer product I doubt
that it contains much HF (if any).
[snip]
> Second have a syringe made up with a calcium carbonate solution, always
> in your pocket. When your spill this stuff on yourself it goes straight
No, don't do that. The solution used is calcium gluconate not carbonate.
It is not for self-administration by an untrained worker, it is for use by
medical personnel when you get to the hospital. If you inject too much it
can cause necrosis (ie you lose your fingers etc.) of the local area.
Depending on the severity of the burn you may not need calcium gluconate
injection - All exposures (or suspected exposures) require *immediate*
washing with water for 15 minutes or so followed by copius quantities of
calcium gluconate gel massaged in to the area. Hospital evaluation of the
person is recommended in any case. For mild exposures this may be all the
treatment that is needed.
Injections are usually only required if a dilute solution is spilled
without noticing (usually no pain until hours after exposure) or if a
concentrated solution (or AHF) is spilled.
> bones and causes pain that will last 6 months by the way you will
> probably lose your fingers if dipped in the solution.
That depends entirely on concentration and what first-aid you have to
hand.
> You will not likely make it to hospital to survive, unless you take the
> aforementioned syringe and stick it into the injury site and press.
> If you are the sort of person who has a problem with self injection,
> this is not good.
Utter crap. I am not aware of ANY treatment protocol that requires
self-injection of calcium GLUCONATE solution by the victim. Calcium
gluconate gel applied *to the skin* is very useful in limiting the effects
of exposure when used as a first-aid measure. Calcium gluconate solution
injected by an untrained person will likely do as much local damage as the
HF if you get the dose wrong.
> Secondly always work with someone else who can at least administer the
> first aid,
Common sense with any hazardous chemical, but a point worth making anyway.
> accidents that literally make me chuck up. Most Hospital Emergency
> Departments are run by first and second year Doctors who will probably
> not have any idea about your symptoms as you come through the door, Also
> carry the MSDS and treatment on your person so they can read it
Good advice. We keep a set of treatment information "ready to go" in the
lab.
>but if you are unconscious you have about 15 minutes survival time for
> treatment, this basically means very little hope.
Uh, the only way that would happen is if you were working with conc. HF/
AHF and inhaled it or suffered a huge exposure. It takes more than 15
minutes and treatment can be successful for major burns *if* appropriate
first-aid is applied on the scene (as above).
> This stuff should never have been invented.
Given that it is a hugely useful industral scale chemical on which almost
the entire fluorochemicals industry is based...
> Think up another way to do your process, if at all possible.
At least you finished well.
Note - the treatment procedure mentioned above is provided as an overview.
It should not be used as a guide for actual first-aid in the event of an
HF exposure.
If any treatment is required than a reputable source should be consulted
for a correct, accurate procedure. I take no responsibility for anyone
using the rough advice given above and getting injured as a result.
__________________________________________________________________________
Chris Murray AMRSC #
#
PhD student #
Organofluorine research group # The views expressed in this message
Department of Chemistry # are my own, and do not necessarily
University of Durham # reflect the views of the University.
South Road #
Durham DH1 3LE #
U.K. #
__________________________________________________________________________
Bill Overholt
need to make sure is find the actual composition of that rust cleaner. If
there is any HF at all in the chemical, which I doubt, it must be in minimal
concentrations , since you SHOULD have a permit when working with highly
concentrated HF.
I been working with 49% HF for 2 years now, and my best advice would be to
wear not only nitrile gloves but also a face shield, working in a well
ventilated area; also have a handy tube of calcium glutonate just in case...
have fun..
Oliver Miller
> can do is say "just don't" than you might as well not even reply. If you
> have any other serious advice, I am all ears.
>
> The stuff I am THINKING about working with is "Whink" rust-stain remover,
The MSDS for this is here http://www.whink.com/msds13.pdf I am not familiar
with the product but this looks like the right msds. It does not appear to
contain HF, I am worried though, that you are posting asking questions about
HF and how to concentrate sodium hypochlorite (see other thread). Judging
from these posts I would guess you have little formal chemistry training.
You are not planning on doing anything silly with these things are you?
Oliver
SNUMBER6
>There are safe ways to work with HF.
One should read the story of Moissan ... the discoverer of Fluorine ...who died
at an early age directly attributable to HF poisoning ... and his mentor Fremy
who doing the same research lived to a ripe old age ...
In the Village ....
I am not a number ... I am a free man !!!!
Michael Moroney
>First, the 'active' component in the rust remover is most likely
>phorphoric acid which is also found in 'Navel Jelly', a well known
>rust remover. Also note that a dose of the soft drink 'Coke', which
>has a good lot of the stuff in it, also works well, but more slowly.
>Yes, phosphoric acid can burn skin, but is hardly as dangerous as HF!!
>I'm quite certain that HF is NOT a component. The main danger with HF
>solutions(it is not a liquid, but a higly water soluble gas....~ 52%
>by mass )is that it releases fluoride ions into the body which react
>with the calcium of bone as well as mess with Ca channels producing
>soluble CaFl and potentially death due to Ca depletion!
I don't know about the brand being discussed here, but I will mention
that I *did* buy a rust remover product a couple of years ago that did
contain HF (1-2% I think). I treated it very carefully.
-Mike
Bruce Bowen
your skin and poisons you systemically.
-Bruce
Uncle Al <Uncl...@hate.spam.net> wrote in message news:<3CB4F816...@hate.spam.net>...
Repeating Decimal
Coyoteda...@newsguy.com wrote on 4/10/02 11:44 PM:
> Wow, far out. Actually I always wondered waht is the most powerful acid
> around,
> and I read somewhere that is wasn't HF but stuff called Perchloric acid.
> Anybody
> have any information about Perchloric Acid?
*Powerful* is a term that means almost nothing, especially in acids. It is
more of a term ysed by politicians and the like.
Bill
donald haarmann
> donald haarmann wrote:
> >
> > "Andrew Tweddle" <sar...@alphalink.com.au
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > > Second have a syringe made up with a calcium carbonate solution, always
> > > in your pocket.
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > --------
> > Strange place the antipodes! They have soluble calcium carbonate!!!
> >
> > Here in North America calcium carbonate is not soluble in water or
> > much else!!
>
> It's calcium gluconate. HF burns require emergency medical attention
> with a properly prepared medic. HF burns are multi-month nasty.
>
> --
> Uncle Al
-------
Yes I know. However,...... I couldn't resist!
Sorry.
I have seen a low percentage of HF as a component of brick/masonry cleaners.
Say ..... remember before plastics .... when HF came in wax bottles!
---------
-----------------
Case report
An atypical chemical burn
Laures C Huisman, Joep AW Teijink, Evert H Overbosch, Henri LF Brom
The Lancet 2001; 358: 1510
Department of Vascular Surgery, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein (J A W
Teijink MD), Department of Surgery (L C Huisman MD, H L F Brom MD); and
Department of Radiology (H E H Overbosch MD); Kennemer Gasthuis, 2035
RC Haarlem, Netherlands
Correspondence to: Dr Laurens C Huisman, (e-mail:chir...@kg.nl)
A 48-year-old male painter visited the emergency room, in May, 1999,
complaining of throbbing pain in the tip of his right index finger. He said that he
always wore gloves while working, had had no previous trauma, smoked 25
cigarettes per day and used no medication. On examination, the fingertip had a
blanched appearance, no capillary refill, and intact sensibility. We thought that he
had an arterial embolus and started acetylsalicylic acid. He returned the next day
complaining of increased pain. The fingertip had become black and necrotic, and
the proximal finger was swollen and erythematous. Femoral angiography showed
hyperaemia just proximal to the necrotic fingertip with no visible obstruction or
embolus (figure). The patient then recalled that the previous day he had used a
new cleaning fluid at his job. We called his employer who informed us that this
fluid contained hydrofluoric acid. We applied calcium gluconate gel to the finger,
repeating the application every 4 h for 3 days, until the pain ceased. His finger
healed cleanly and he had no complaints when last seen in October, 2000.
[Photo - Brachialarte riography showing hyperaemia of the index finger with an
ischaemic tip.]
Hydrofluoric acid is used in a variety of industries (production of plastics, metal
cleaning, electronics and chip manufacturing) and household products (rust
removers, aluminum brighteners, heavy duty cleansers).2 The incidence of HF
burns is surprisingly low, no more than 1000 cases a year are reported in the
United States.2 It causes severe burns and systemic effects, even when
superficially unimpressive. The detrimental effect of hydrofluoric acid will
continue for days subcutaneously if not treated adequately.2 Tissue damage is
caused by two separate mechanisms. First, the hydrogen ion causes a
superficial burn. Second, the fluoride ion penetrates deeper tissues, causing
liquefaction necrosis of soft tissue, bone decalcification, and intense pain. Onset
of symptoms depends on the concentration of the spilled hydrofluric acid.
Concentrations over 50% cause immediate pain and typical blanching of the
involved skin. A delay in symptoms of 1-6 h is seen with concentrations between
20-50%; concentrations of less than 20% can give a delay up to 24 h. In these
cases the skin shows a slight erythema or no injury at all.1
The characteristic symptoms of a hydrofluoric acid burn were described for the
first time in 1809 by Thenard and Gay-Lussac.3 Typical symptoms are blanching
of the affected skin surrounded by erythema and excruciating pain (out of
proportion to the burn). Destruction of deeper tissues is indicated by greyish
discolourment of the skin, blistering and subcutaneous deposits of insoluble
salts, frank necrosis and deep ulceration, with decalcification of underlying
bone.1,2 Treatment starts with removal of stained clothes and copious irrigation
with water. The next step is generous application of calcium gluconate gel
(2·5%), which must be repeated at least every 4 h. Relief of pain indicates
successful treatment and should be continued until the patient is pain-free for at
least 45 min. Application of calcium gluconate gel is the most simple and least
invasive treatment for hydrofluoric acid burns. However, if the pain does not
diminish or worsens during calcium gluconate gel therapy, alternatives are local
infiltration, intra-arterial calcium gluconate perfusion, or intravenous regional
perfusion with a calcium gluconate solution,1,4 and surgical excision in case of
frank necrosis or blisters.5 Systemic intoxication can occur with an affected area
of 160 cm2. Changes in levels of serum calcium, magnesium and fluoride levels
cause a prolonged Q-T interval, severe abdominal pain, nausea, and vomiting. A
missed diagnosis results in symptomatic progression, leading to amputation or
even death.
References
1 Kirkpatrick JJR, Enion DS, Burd DAR. Hydrofluoric acid burns: a review, Burns.
1995; 21 (7): 483-93.
2 Wilkes G, Michelson EA. Hydrofluoric acid burns. 2001 URL.
(http://www.emedicine.com/emerg/topic804.htm)
3 Thenard LJ, Gay-Lussac JL. Sur l'acide fluorique. Ann Chem Phys 1809; 69:
204.
4 Grudins A, Burns MJ, Aaron CK. Regional infusion of calcium gluconate for
hydrofluoric acid burns of the upper extremity. Ann Emerg Med 1997; 30
:(5) 604-07. [PubMed]
5 Tremel H, Brunier A, Weilemann LS. Flußsaureveratzungen, Vorkommen,
Haufigkeit sowie aktueller Stand der Therapie. Med Klin 1991; 86 :(2) 71-75
---------------------------------------
INDUSTRIAL CHEMICAL NEWS
July 1983
by David E. Beesinger, M.D., Director, Hermann Hospital Burn
Unit Assistant Professor of Surgery, University of Texas
Medical School, Houston, and Harold R. Mancusi-Ungaro, Jr.
M.D,, Assistant Professor of Surgery, University of Texas
Medical School.
As the need for industrial solvents ,an cleaning agents grows,
the incidence of chemical injuries escalates. It is estimated that
each year more than 60,000 patients in the United States
require professional care for injuries resulting from exposure to
chemicals. Hospitalization, skin grafting, and prolonged reha-
bilitation time may be needed to deal with the depth and extent
of these injuries. Loss of life or limbs and severe cosmetic
defects may even result.
Hydrofluoric acid is a particularly treacherous example of
such chemicals, causing extensive injury when skin contact
occurs. This acid is frequently used industrially for the etching
of glass and silicon chips, cleaning of machinery, and octane
production. Here's a case history for a typical injury and course
of treatment for exposure to hydrofluoric acid.
Case in point
A 59-year-old male was admitted to Hermann Hospital Burn
Unit, Houston, Texas, after having spilled approximately "one
cup" of hydrofluoric acid onto his left thigh. The worker was an
employee of a petrochemical plant in south Texas where the
acid was used for octane production.
The wound was irrigated at the plant with a solution of sodium
bicarbonate. The patient was then taken to a local hospital.
At that facility, the wound was further irrigated with water and
Zephiran solution, and dressed with an ointment containing
magnesium sulfate and magnesium hydroxide. Calcium
gluconate was injected into the fatty tissue beneath the wound.
The patient was then transferred to the Hermann Hospital Burn
Unit.
On arrival at the burn center, the wound of the left thigh was
initially estimated to be of second-degree depth. More calcium
gluconate was injected beneath the wound, copious irrigation
was performed, and the wound was covered with Silvadene
(silver sulfadliazine), an antimicrobial cream. to minimize
bacterial contamination. Because of the extreme pain caused
by the injury, narcotics were administered, and the patient was
observed.
Approximately 24 hours after injury, the wound was again
inspected and found to be full-thickness or third-degree in
depth. The patient was taken to the operating room where
upon incision, the injury was seen to extend not only through
all layers of the skin, but also deep into the fat beneath the
skin. Dead tissue was surgically removed all the way down to
the muscle of the thigh. Skin was then taken from the
opposite thigh and placed on the burn wound as a skin graft.
The patient's hospital course was then uneventful. He was
ready for discharge two weeks after his initial injury. The area
of skin grafting had matured to the point that the patient was
able to return to work two months after the injury.
Injury class
Chemical injuries are not burns per se. They do not destroy
tissue by heat contact, but instead cause injury by other
methods of tissue protein destruction. According to their
actions, chemicals capable of skin injury are classified as 1)
oxidizing agents, 2) corrosives, 3) salt formers or cation
binders, 4) desiccants or drying agents and 5) vesicans or
blister producers.
Hydrofluoric acid belongs to category three, acting to bind
calcium in whatever tissues are brought in contact with the
chemical. Since calcium is imperative for cellular life, its binding
or precipitation brings about cell death in a short period of time.
If the wound covers a large percentage of body surface area,
excessive amounts 4 calcium may be inactivated so that
inadequate amounts of the cation are available for normal body
organ functions. Specifically, heart function is diminished and
rhythm of the heart beat becomes abnormal.
Clincally, the action of hydrofluoric acid on skin is manifest in
several significant ways. The destruction of tissue is very rapid,
dictating that the wound be irrigated as soon as possible with
large volumes of water or a dilute solution of sodium
bicarbonate.
In addition, the appearance of the depth of the wound may be
deceiving, as demonstrated in `ihe case just presented.
Because of progressive tissue destruction, wounds that un!ially
appear to be superficial usually are much deeper after 24 to 48
hours. This progressive death of cells again dictates early
removal of the acid by irrigation and provides rationale for the
recommended sub cutaneous injection of calcium gluconate.
The substance binds the fluoride ion as calcium fluoride,
preventing tissue binding of calcium, and thus decreasing
cellular destruction and greatly decreasing pain.
Since hydrogen fluoride injuries are generally full-thickness or
third degree burns, the wound frequently requires surgical
therapy. If damage extends to muscle, tendons, and bone,
amputations of upper or lower extremities may be required. In
other cases, skin and subcutaneous tissue must be removed
and the resultant area covered with skin grafts.
If you are exposed to hydrofluoric acid in your work, you
should be aware of its capacity for injury, and take all
precautions to prevent accidents. You should also be well
versed in appropriate first aid, and be prepared to seek early
professional treatment.
donald j haarmann
------------------------
A student of gynecology through the picture
study method. And who is not an MD, however,
if you want to jump up on the table and put
your legs in the strips - I could play one!
Chris Murray
[snip]
> References
> 1 Kirkpatrick JJR, Enion DS, Burd DAR. Hydrofluoric acid burns: a review, Burns.
> 1995; 21 (7): 483-93.
>
> donald j haarmann
I've had that ref for a bit. They give references to a couple of cases
involving *rectal* HF burns. There are some things that you just _really_
don't want to know...
db5151
I have looked at a couple of sites on the web that describe the proceedure
for dealing with exposure to HF, and the MSDS, but found some egregious
contradictions, which is why I am still asking. I may not work with this
stuff, but I keep thinking "they sell it at the grocery store..."
I *think* that I understand approximately how dangerous this stuff might be,
which is why I am still not sure I want to do any type of work with it. I
really, really appreciate your frank response. I asked about HF a while
back, and was basically told to go away. All I want is to understand why
the question is so stupid. I don't claim to be a genius, and I do try to
observe and learn from other's mistakes. I understand that this may be the
most dangerous chemical I am ever likely to come into contact with, and I do
NOT want to do anything stupid; I really would rather not be one of the case
histories that gets printed up for future reference. If I do decide to work
with this stuff, I am definetely going to take every safety precaution I
can. I am trying to take this stuff very seriously. There have been those
who did not...
Let me ask you this: What I am wanting to do is dissolve the porcelain from
a permanent crown (artificial tooth), leaving the gold foundation completely
and thoroughly exposed. Do you have any other ideas as to how I might
accomplish this? I am open to suggestions, but I don't know of many things
that dissolve porcelain.
Oh, I forget to mention in my first post that if I do this, aside from the
acid smock and gloves, I will be wearing a full face shield of
polycarbonate.
Thanks again. Not sure what else to say right now.
Dave
Andrew Tweddle <sar...@alphalink.com.au> wrote in message
news:3CB497E6...@alphalink.com.au...
> Dangerous is an understatement about handling HF.
>
> You must understand the hazards. Read the MSDS.
> Be prepared to widow your wife. Have your life insurance up to date.
>
> Now this is what you do.
> Do not under any circumstances breath the fumes.
> the fumes get into your lungs and can cause pain lasting a good 6
> months.
> This happened to a friend of mine at a mine, he was and still is a very
> experienced analytic, mining Chemist who spent 15 years in the out back
> running labs. Not your usual fool.
>
> Second have a syringe made up with a calcium carbonate solution, always
> in your pocket. When your spill this stuff on yourself it goes straight
> through the skin pumps its way through your blood stream, enters your
> bones and causes pain that will last 6 months by the way you will
> probably lose your fingers if dipped in the solution. You will not
> likely make it to hospital to survive, unless you take the
> aforementioned syringe and stick it into the injury site and press.
> If you are the sort of person who has a problem with self injection,
> this is not good.
> This antidote works by binding to the HF in preference to the Ca in your
> bones.
> No doubt others can add more to this.
> Secondly always work with someone else who can at least administer the
> first aid,
> by the way my ex used to be a Doctor and has worked on Industrial
> accidents that literally make me chuck up. Most Hospital Emergency
> Departments are run by first and second year Doctors who will probably
> not have any idea about your symptoms as you come through the door, Also
> carry the MSDS and treatment on your person so they can read it but if
> you are unconscious you have about 15 minutes survival time for
> treatment, this basically means very little hope.
>
> This stuff should never have been invented.
>
db5151
> Australia I have no idea what is allowed in U.S.
Well, it *says* hydroflouric, on the label... Otherwise I would also expect
it to be something else.
Thanking you again,
Dave
db5151
for different experiments, and you are correct that I have little formal
chemistry training (highschool, over 20 years ago.) I am doing my best to be
careful though.
What I am wanting to do is remove the porcelain from a permanent crown
(artificial tooth), and then try to get a reaction out of the gold
foundation that was left behind in the first proceedure.
I hope this post gets through. Two others, from yesterday, apparently got
lost in the ether.
Dave
Oliver Miller <oam...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:a93v3a$7br$1...@pump1.york.ac.uk...
Perchloric Acid
Well I just had an interest in chemistry when I was younger, which led to taking
classes in Chemistry. But I remeber reading in a encyclopedia that this
Perchloric Acid was the strongest around. I barely remember the definitions of
an Acid and Base.. I know that they exist on opposite "Ph"
scales . The strtongest Base possibly being Cesium Hydroxide. But I was just
curious about Perchloric Acid .
Take off UrPants to reply
>
>One should read the story of Moissan ... the discoverer of Fluorine ...who
>died
>at an early age directly attributable to HF poisoning ... and his mentor
>Fremy
>who doing the same research lived to a ripe old age ...
>
>In the Village ....
>I am not a number ... I am a free man !!!!
>
In saying that there are safe ways to work with HF I did not mean to imply
that:
1) It was easy to be safe.
2) There were not many more ways to be unsafe than safe.
I am just saying with a lot of fore-thought, careful attention, and strict
protocols almost anything can be worked with safely.
I have worked with stuff that scared me more than HF. Phorbol Esters for one
and radiolabeled nucleotides for another. I didn't feel right dumping the
phorbol esters into the regular biohazard disposal so I wound up filling a
flask with chromic acid/sulfuric acid and using that to incinerate the solution
we added the phorbol esters to. Of course this was all done in a high flow hood
with a chemical scrubber.
Still, I had a freind in grad school that worked with something I would not
touch despite it being a powerful tool. Neurotropic herpes virus. You get one
virus partical in the wrong place and you can say good-bye to major parts of
you brain before your immune system fights it off (if it does).
Scary stuff! I have seen victims of it as well as their brains! The infection
is pure pain too. If follows sensory pathways up to your brain blowing apart
c-fibers and other pain neurons. I wouldn't wish that death upon anyone. Pain
killers like morphine are a joke. About the only thing you can do is keep the
person under general anesthesia. The only blessing that may be in it is that
the virus usually eventually destroys the persons memory.
Fortunately most people have a natural immunity to it thanks to the ubiquitous
herpes infections spread throughout homosapien fornicatus. Still I am NOT
willing to take the risk that I belong to the 90% or so of humans that are
largely resistant to the virus.
Face it chem guys. The bio-guys do deal with scarier stuff. I'd rather have a
jar of almost any chemical sitting on my lab bench than a jar of ebola.
Take off UrPants to reply
>around,
>and I read somewhere that is wasn't HF but stuff called Perchloric acid.
>Anybody
>have any information about Perchloric Acid?
Perchloric,or better yet periodic acid is very corrosive, but HF ha toxicity
that goes well beyond its acidity. More than anythink else it has the ability
to soak through skin even before the skin starts to burn, That is what makes it
so deadly.
So what is the strongest acid known? BF3? HCC+? Ah an alpha partical or other
naked nucleus! Are these things really still acids because don't they have to
form conjugate bonds with electron donors.
Well of the chemicals ordinary enough that they can actually be bottled in some
sense or another BF3 I think is a candidate for the strongest acid. I plead
ignorance on the question and look forward to being put in my place.
Take off UrPants to reply
>(artificial tooth), and then try to get a reaction out of the gold
>foundation that was left behind in the first proceedure.
I presume that this is no longer in a living mouth.
Take off UrPants to reply
>(artificial tooth), and then try to get a reaction out of the gold
>foundation that was left behind in the first proceedure.
Grave robbing? Have our soldiers been looting the dentician of the Afghani's?
Take off UrPants to reply
>a permanent crown (artificial tooth), leaving the gold foundation completely
>and thoroughly exposed. Do you have any other ideas as to how I might
>accomplish this? I am open to suggestions, but I don't know of many things
>that dissolve porcelain.
>
I am wondering, might some sodium flouride based glass etcher be safer perhaps?
I have no experience with glass etching so I just throw the idea out here for
others to comment on.
Aaron Hicks
Products Corporation. A list of their MSDS may be found at:
http://www.whink.com/page03c.htm
There they list at least one rust remover ("Rust Stain Remover")
as follows:
http://www.whink.com/msds14.pdf
If I read correctly, it contains 2.5-3% hydrogen fluoride (and,
therefore, hydrofluoric acid). Reading the "health hazards" section is
revealing.
I never liked using HF, but there are some applications for which
substitutes just don't work as well.
-AJHicks
Chandler, AZ
Martin Brown
"Dr. N.R. Pallas" wrote:
> First, the 'active' component in the rust remover is most likely
> phorphoric acid which is also found in 'Navel Jelly', a well known
> rust remover. Also note that a dose of the soft drink 'Coke', which
> has a good lot of the stuff in it, also works well, but more slowly.
> Yes, phosphoric acid can burn skin, but is hardly as dangerous as HF!!
Be careful. There are certainly places where the stuff is on sale as
greenhouse "glass cleaner".
I picked up a 5 litre container in a local Belgian hardware store
believing it to be "pink paraffin" until I read the label - 40% HF. I put
it down again a *lot* more carefully. Amazed that it was there!!!
COSH regulations here would in theory require a hazardous experiment
notice every time a cigarette is lit up inside a chemical works, but sale
of aggressive chemicals is quite common. Even the local supermarket has a
selection of strong mineral acids and organic solvents eating through its
shelves.
> I'm quite certain that HF is NOT a component. The main danger with HF
> solutions(it is not a liquid, but a higly water soluble gas....~ 52%
> by mass )is that it releases fluoride ions into the body which react
> with the calcium of bone as well as mess with Ca channels producing
> soluble CaFl and potentially death due to Ca depletion!
>
> PLEASE, DO NOT ATTEMPT TO WORK WITH HF ANY PLACE EXCEPT A WELL
> SUPERVISED PROFESSIONAL LAB!
Good advice. HF was (is?) also used as a welding flux for some types of
stainless steel. Failure to treat it with appropriate respect could lead
to horrendous injuries.
ISTR that the HF burns safety film is second only to the eye safety film
in terms of casualties inflicted on the viewing audience. Neither are
suitable for the squeamish and both should be mandatory viewing before
anyone handles HF. Even small mistakes with HF are severly punished.
It always leads to heated discussions on the analytical lists. You will
find various safety advice there, but handling it without adequate safety
showers and antidote available is just asking for trouble.
Regards,
Martin Brown
Oliver Miller
"Aaron Hicks" <ahi...@nyx.nyx.net> wrote in message
news:10185420...@irys.nyx.net...
> There they list at least one rust remover ("Rust Stain Remover")
> as follows:
> http://www.whink.com/msds14.pdf
>
> If I read correctly, it contains 2.5-3% hydrogen fluoride (and,
> therefore, hydrofluoric acid). Reading the "health hazards" section is
> revealing.
it would appear the link I posted was for another product, as I said I am
not familiar with this brand so I thank you for pointing out my error
> I never liked using HF, but there are some applications for which
> substitutes just don't work as well.
Agreed
Oliver
Oliver Miller
> No, I am not planning to do anything silly or stupid. The two chemicals
are
> for different experiments, and you are correct that I have little formal
> chemistry training (highschool, over 20 years ago.) I am doing my best to
be
> careful though.
>
Fair enough, I'm sure you have read the rest of the thread enough to realise
that HF is really nasty stuff, just make sure you are very careful
> What I am wanting to do is remove the porcelain from a permanent crown
> (artificial tooth), and then try to get a reaction out of the gold
> foundation that was left behind in the first proceedure.
Good luck. remember to remove the crown from your mouth first. ;-)
>
> I hope this post gets through. Two others, from yesterday, apparently got
> lost in the ether.
>
I see this one but no sign of the other two on my server
Oliver
SNUMBER6
>In saying that there are safe ways to work with HF I did not mean to imply
>that:
>
>1) It was easy to be safe.
>2) There were not many more ways to be unsafe than safe.
Exactly ... which is why a comparison of Moissan and Fremy is a valuable lesson
...
>Face it chem guys. The bio-guys do deal with scarier stuff. I'd rather have a
>jar of almost any chemical sitting on my lab bench than a jar of ebola.
Yeah ... one hardly is able to say, " Phew, what's that smell ... Ebola ...
let's get out of here before it causes damage ..."
Although at the same time ... my first Bio lesson ... with Cindy Sue in Junior
High in the closet ... was quite enjoyable ...
Cecil
Go to the page http://www.whink.com/page01-f.htm and click on the bottle.
Also, the correct MSDS is very clear: http://www.whink.com/page03-f.htm .
The stated level of HF is 2.5-3.0%. What do you think? Would you release a
product with 3% HF to the American public to misuse?
-----= Posted via Newsfeed.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeed.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== 90,000 Groups! - 17 Servers! - Unlimited Download! =-----
Coyotedave
micha...@aol.comUrPants says...
I've heard of some other stuff in chemistry that pretty damn frightening.
At the time I was taking a class in chemistry, there was a news story that came
out about a scientist that was working with some compound of Mercury. Despite
wearing protective equipment ( dealing with a very toxic substance). She got
some of the stuff under her gloves.
She died six months later, after a slow debilating illness, caused by the
Mercury. I thought mercury compunds were toxic, But apparently they can be
really toxic.
SNUMBER6
>She died six months later, after a slow debilating illness, caused by the
>Mercury. I thought mercury compunds were toxic, But apparently they can be
>really toxic.
Mad Hatter ... Mercury poisoning
Plumb Loco ... Lead poisoning
Known long time ago ...
VG
news:a971d...@drn.newsguy.com...
> I've heard of some other stuff in chemistry that pretty damn frightening.
> At the time I was taking a class in chemistry, there was a news story that
came
> out about a scientist that was working with some compound of Mercury.
Despite
> wearing protective equipment ( dealing with a very toxic substance). She
got
> some of the stuff under her gloves.
>
> She died six months later, after a slow debilating illness, caused by the
> Mercury. I thought mercury compunds were toxic, But apparently they can
be
> really toxic.
Time to quit lurking and post a little.
http://iubio.bio.indiana.edu/R43722-50067-/news/bionet/xtallography/9706.new
sm
A chemist died here (at UIUC) several years ago due to mercury poisoning.
-Victor
--
Carpe Noctem | gro...@uiuc.edu | groszko.net | AIM:vicgroszko
a-s
hammer and/or chisel, leaving gold more or less intact. Hammer technique,
while not without hazard, is unlikely to have lasting effect.
Chemistry cannot solve every problem.
alan
"Take off UrPants to reply" <micha...@aol.comUrPants> wrote in message
news:20020412030713...@mb-da.aol.com...
X-Ray
> May I humbly suggest that porcelain will yield to physical attack - eg
> hammer and/or chisel, leaving gold more or less intact. Hammer technique,
Hey, that's sci.chem here ... that's OT ;-)
Good idea ... sometimes it's hard to see the obvious -
but maybe he already thought about that and/or he wants to
remove leftover particles ... the two compunds could be
pretty nice into another ... there the Hammer method would
fail ... but it's surely the best start :-)
--
Frank
"About using clearnames: It's *one* thing to discuss about
something but it is *another* thing to enable every idiot
to create a personal profile about you by just doing a simple
INet search." - F.S.
db5151
that. I am not sure of what to do, but I am going to think on it for a
while. I am in no hurry, and if I get in a hurry I will NOT use HF. I
cannot afford any mistakes.
I need to take some classes anyway, and I may take a class in chemistry at
the local university. I understand that they have a good one.
Oh, and the permanent crown was removed from my mouth, in two pieces, about
a month ago. :)
In case anyone is wondering, I wrote a book which describes a test for gold
using stannous chloride, and then later sodium hypochlorite. What I am
trying to do is prove to myself that a test of this type, somewhat similar
to those I have read about, will actually do something to gold. Thus, the
desire to have the gold "thoroughly and completely exposed." And no, I
don't use any HF in the book. The HF is just something I thought of to rid
my sample of its porcelain coating.
Thanks again, to everyone.
Dave
Oliver Miller <oam...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:a96b86$oim$1...@pump1.york.ac.uk...
Repeating Decimal
reply at micha...@aol.comUrPants wrote on 4/11/02 11:58 PM:
The mere fact that the strongest most powerful acid is not known means that
the term powerful is virtually useless.
I can talk about a powerful one watt lamp or a weak 1000 watt lamp. The only
real meaning is in the number of watts, not English teacher adjectives.
Define *powerful* quantitatively, and we may have a go at it.
Bill
Repeating Decimal
nospam...@dircon.co.uk wrote on 4/12/02 3:48 PM:
> May I humbly suggest that porcelain will yield to physical attack - eg
> hammer and/or chisel, leaving gold more or less intact. Hammer technique,
> while not without hazard, is unlikely to have lasting effect.
> Chemistry cannot solve every problem.
This can serve as an example of why an earlier question on ranking acids
according to "strength" or "power" is virtually meaningless.
Hydrofluric acid will ultimately remove the porcelain while leaving the
gold, if it is pure enough untouched. Aqua regia will remove the gold while
leaving the porcelain intact.
So which is the stronger "acid"?
Bill
Boaz Ben-David
<snip>
> Let me ask you this: What I am wanting to do is dissolve the porcelain from
> a permanent crown (artificial tooth), leaving the gold foundation completely
> and thoroughly exposed. Do you have any other ideas as to how I might
> accomplish this? I am open to suggestions, but I don't know of many things
> that dissolve porcelain.
I find myself wondering.
Dental Porcilain is being sintered at about 1200C.
"Pure" Gold melts at 1064C.
How can it be that pure gold be the foundation of a crown
if the sintering action (1200-1250C) is _after_ the foundation is made
and is perfomed _onto_ that foundation (<1064c for pure gold) ?
It looks you have it wrong or present it wrong.
You have to have the foundation material deforms at highr T then
what covers it.
Boaz
db5151
and that the porcelain was fused to it. What does "fused to it" mean?
Sintering? And what might the .1% impurity be? I can ask...
Dave
Boaz Ben-David <bbd...@netvision.net.il> wrote in message
news:7d3e460e.02041...@posting.google.com...
plips...@aol.com
Here is the safety data sheet link - for those who don't know this virtually all products have to produce a safety data sheet available to the public upon request. I had requested this one because I was getting ready to order and I always do this with new products.
http://www.whink.com/cmssites/ws0811www.whink.com/uploads/Documents/SDS-Rust%20Stain%20Remover_Oct%202016.pdf
plips...@aol.com
http://www.whink.com/cmssites/ws0811www.whink.com/uploads/Documents/SDS-Rust%20Stain%20Remover_Oct%202016.pdf
plips...@aol.com
The product he is talking about is Whink Rust Stain Remover with only HF and the safety data sheet is http://www.whink.com/cmssites/ws0811www.whink.com/uploads/Documents/SDS-Rust%20Stain%20Remover_Oct%202016.pdf
This a dilute product. You would not want to mess with pure strength HF unless trained. You probably can't even buy without some sort of crendentials but I don't know for sure.
Whink has several different types of rust and stain removers but this is the only one with HF and for me the only one that works so well. Just follow directions - use gloves, put a pair of gloves and glasses on and get rid of that rust. Then lock it up where children or someone blind or with mental issues can't get to it.
dlzc
On Wednesday, April 19, 2017 at 3:32:23 PM UTC-7, plips...@aol.com wrote:
> Good gracious most of the chemicals we use...
Why are you responding to 15-year-old usenet threads? You aren't going to help the OP, for sure...
David A. Smith
Frank
tested their product but just based their SDS on that of the
concentrated material. I write a lot of SDS's for small suppliers
mixtures which have never been tested and just use the most hazardous
warnings on the pure materials. I did write one once for a material
that contained a trace of cyanide but did not label it toxic because the
concentration did not make it toxic enough to qualify as toxic under the
HAZCOM standard.
I knew a researcher working with pure HF that used no special
precautions when working with it in the hood. He said a drop would
evaporate fast enough to cause no harm to his skin.
I did a lot of work with liquid HF with BF3 catalyst. They were run in
our pressure lab and dumped into PE bottles. I'd open the bottles in
the hood, let them sit in the back and evaporate most of the HF and BF3
then work up the rest with bicarbonate wash. At the end of the project
I had to have all the frosted hood glass replaced.
Norm X
"Frank" <"frank "@frank.net> wrote in message
news:od8rmu$jos$1...@dont-email.me...
reacts with Ca2- to produce insoluble CaF2. Since Ca2- is important in
cellular ion transport, this is a systematic toxin. On the other hand HF is
a very good cleaner for some kinds of dirt. It etches glass because SiO2
reacts. So it would dissolve clays, K/Ca aluminum silicates
Frank
period of time with wet gloves leaking. Very bad.
Lot of experience with sulfuric acid. Unlike HCl and HF it does not
evaporates. We had techs with acid resistant clothing lose their cotton
underwear to drops of sulfuric getting through. Their supervisor wanted
acid resistant underwear but we said after that it would rest on the
skin. These guys needed water proof garments.
Martin Brown
> "Frank" <"frank "@frank.net> wrote in message
> news:od8rmu$jos$1...@dont-email.me...
>> On 4/19/2017 6:32 PM, plips...@aol.com wrote:
>>> Good gracious most of the chemicals we use to maintain our homes
>>> everyday are hazardous but most people aren't going around splashing it
>>> in their eyes, drinking it or breathing it. Think chlorine bleach.
>>>
>>> The product he is talking about is Whink Rust Stain Remover with only HF
>>> and the safety data sheet is
>>> http://www.whink.com/cmssites/ws0811www.whink.com/uploads/Documents/SDS-Rust%20Stain%20Remover_Oct%202016.pdf
>>>
>>> This a dilute product. You would not want to mess with pure strength HF
>>> unless trained. You probably can't even buy without some sort of
>>> crendentials but I don't know for sure.
>>>
>>> Whink has several different types of rust and stain removers but this is
>>> the only one with HF and for me the only one that works so well. Just
>>> follow directions - use gloves, put a pair of gloves and glasses on and
>>> get rid of that rust. Then lock it up where children or someone blind or
>>> with mental issues can't get to it.
>>
at any concentration. I won't work with the stuff unless there is a tube
of the notional antidote nearby. The wounds hurt too much.
In the USA particularly I would have thought that they would be sued to
blazes by all the people they maimed and injured.
I discovered in Belgium to my horror that 40% HF was sold to commercial
greenhouse owners as "Glass cleaner!". I once picked up what I thought
was an old brittle 10L plastic container of pink paraffin looked at the
label and put it down again in a dark corner very very carefully.
>> I did a lot of work with liquid HF with BF3 catalyst. They were run in
>> our pressure lab and dumped into PE bottles. I'd open the bottles in the
>> hood, let them sit in the back and evaporate most of the HF and BF3 then
>> work up the rest with bicarbonate wash. At the end of the project I had
>> to have all the frosted hood glass replaced.
>
> Even dilute HF spilled on the skin produces painful wounds. The F(minus)
> reacts with Ca2- to produce insoluble CaF2. Since Ca2- is important in
> cellular ion transport, this is a systematic toxin. On the other hand HF is
> a very good cleaner for some kinds of dirt. It etches glass because SiO2
> reacts. So it would dissolve clays, K/Ca aluminum silicates
ablation came along) and now replaced by slightly safer alternatives.
HF is infamous in the UK as one safety film for HF handling was
notorious for causing audience casualties itself. It shows the sorts of
real damage to flesh and bone that HF can do to people when mishandled.
It was usually the big macho stainless steel welders that passed out.
--
Regards,
Martin Brown
Peter Jason
cleaners. The 35% HF in water that is. The large 200L drum is
decanted into 25L drums (filled to only 20L) for easier handling. All
formulating is done in closed polythene tanks. Filling drums for
resale is done with plastic hoses in an area with a pronounced draft.
Only one person has the HF permission and there is no delegation.
For etching glass, the >60% acid is used.
Charles
wrote:
HF loves water too. So that stuff is especially wicked.
I had some experience with it. I found out the HF especially loves to
get under fingernails, where it produces excruciating pain. Took me
two weeks of reading, contemplating, planning and dithering before
turning the valve of the cylinder.
By that time I had several jugs of magnesium sulfate solution standing
around in case I was exposed to the HF. I used double gloves with the
inner ones wet with water so that any HF vapors that got through micro
cracks would at least be diluted with water.
The experiment went fine, there was no exposure.
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
emily....@gmail.com
Frank
> Is there any danger to touch areas or objects that could have possibly been exposed to HF after ample time has passed, allowing the HF to evaporate?
>