[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Some more info on eye protection
This is sort of a follow up to a thread we had going several weeks ago on
eye protection.
I found a really good optometrist here in Austin. He's from South
Africa, where there is a large glassblowing industry. We talked for
quite some time about UV, infra-red, open flames, absorption of various
glasses/plastics, etc.
Summarizing this conversation: he said that eye problems are VERY common
in all areas of glassblowing. He said that cataracts are several times
higher amoung people in hot glass industries than the general
population. Next to cataracts, he said he's seen outright retinal
"charring" from workers constantly exposed to open flames and hot glass.
He said the worst protection of all (next to none at all) would be plain
glass lenses. They let most all UV in (except some of UV-C) and nearly
all infra-red in. Plastics are better at UV absorption, with
polycarbonate being better than acrylic. Polycarbonate absorbs
practically all UV down to about 380nm. He felt that the highest danger
to the neon worker would be infra-red, and that very few materials absorb
it (while still admitting the visible spectrum).
Anyway, the reason I was there was to get a prescription for some glasses
my wife bought me for Christmas: some AUR 92 glasses, which are supposed
to be the current state of the art in glassblower specs. These were
reveiwed by the current Sign Business article. I should have them in
another couple of weeks, and I'll pass along how they are for neon.
In the mean time, I just received a pair of safety glasses from Lab Safety
Supply. They are Uvex "Low IR" glasses. The spec sheet I have says they
absorb 99% of UV down to 380nm, and 65% of IR from 780-1000nm. They have
80% visible-light transmission, and are a light yellowish-green (does that
compute?) in color. I had no problem reading the glass with them at all,
the 20% shade is hardly noticible. They have no sodium-flare reduction,
so they offer no improved visibility when working pyrex or soda glass.
But in leu of their absorption, I am convinced they are excellent
neon-working specs. They cost around 8 bucks - a bargain compared to the
175 my wife is dropping on AUR 92 prescription specs. The Low IR are not
available with a diopter-correction, so if you wear glasses you can't
really use them.
I'm looking forward to the AUR 92 spec. They supposedly have 75% visible
light transmission, which I hope will be okay. I have yet to get exact
absorption data on them.
-John Anderson