Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By John Lewis
A question for all you folks with a chemical background. We use a synthetic grinding oil called Sintogrind TTS. My assessment is that generally it is pretty safe according to the MSDS(no adverse reaction to skin or eye, easily biodegradable, burns at a higher temp' than other stuff we still use etc.), unless it is swallowed.
My understanding of the swallowing problem is that it will be vomited straight back up and could be inhaled in droplet form to coat the lungs and in extremis suffocate the individual.
Am I right in this or are there poisons at work as well?
The lads who use the machines have asked why it is classed as R65 and I would like to give them a correct answer. Lord knows it has taken 2 years to get them interested at all so I want to give them a good answer and keep their interest. Any info' would be a great help.
John
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Diane Thomason
Hi John
I was intrigued by this. I found a MSDS on the web which basically classified this stuff as non-hazardous and assigned no R or S phrases. So I can't see at all why it has R65 on it. As I understand it, it's a synthetic oil. The MSDS does say if it's ingested don't induce vomiting, this is often stated for corrosive substances but this one is not corrosive or irritant.
I think you may well be right in that the problem may be what happens if it's ingested, vomited up and then aspirated into the lungs. - oily fluids are not good for lungs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Chris Packham
John
I am a little concerned about the statement that there is no effect on the skin. My experience with all metalworking fluids is that they are defatting agents, particularly if they are of the water-mixed variety. As such repeated exposure over time will cause damage that can result in irritant contact dermatitis.
I see more skin problems with synthetic fluids than I do with the older type, petroleum based ones, possibly because many of the synthetics contain a higher level of emulsifier.
So my advice to a client would have to be: Consider this as a skin irritant and limit exposure accordingly. Also be concerned about high standards of personal hygiene. A skin health surveillance system (to comply with MS24) would almost certainly be needed.
Chris
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Rakesh Maharaj
John,
On occasion I have had reasons to question the validity of MSDS's and through investigation and comparison have been found a number of inaccuracies. With Diane's version being different to yours suggests that this may be one of those occasions.
Contact another supplier of the generic form of Sintogrind TTS which is clearly a trade name and ask for their version of the MSDS.
I hope this helps
Regards and best wishes
Rakesh
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Kate Graham
"The MSDS does say if it's ingested don't induce vomiting, this is often stated for corrosive substances but this one is not corrosive or irritant."
In fact this is stated for most things now - inducing vomiting is no longer considered a standard first aid treatment - so I wouldn't draw any conclusions from it.
Kate
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Dean Cross
I totally agree with Rakesh, in a previous job I found at least a third of all MSDSs to be inaccurate or classified incorrectly. I would try and contact the manufacturer to try and get some clarification.
R65 (May cause lung damage if swallowed) is generally assigned to hydrocarbons. If yours is a synthetic based one then it should not contain this fraction. I believe that R65 is only assigned to substances with very low viscositys, if it is too viscose then it cannot be aspirated back up into the lungs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Chris Packham
Since statements have been made on this thread about the accuracy of safety data sheets, it may be relevant that at their AGM in November last year the Chemical Hazard Communication Society announced the preliminary result of study into the accuracy of these documents. The result? Just 1.7% of all the SDSs examined were accurate in all respects!
Remember also that SDSs are for CHIP and not for COSHH. They generally only provide information on the product as supplied. This may not be relevant to assess hazards for the product when used. Section 6-1 of the Health and Safety at Work Act requires the supplier to provide information to allow the safe use of the product for the purpose for which it was supplied.
This requirement will be reinforced as REACH comes into force, since suppliers will be required to supply "exposure scenarios" covering hazards when a product is used.
Chris
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.