fibreglass health hazard

  • Thread starter Thread starter dobro
  • Start date Start date
dobro

dobro

Well-known member
I did a search on fibreglass as a health risk, and found that if you inhale the fibres, it can be carcinogenic. Okay, so I wear a mask while I'm cutting the stuff up. But my plan is not to make panel traps, but just stack the stuff up in the corners, covered in some kind of fabric.

So my question is: what kind of fabric ensures that the fibres stay inside the material and don't get into the air?
 
I hadn't heard that this had been resolved for sure - still, it's not pleasant, nor would I take the risk of "finding out the hard way" - most people use a fine weave cloth and wrap the fiberglas pieces if they will be exposed to handling/bumping; John Sayers has had good luck wrapping it with thin plastic, said it improves highs in the room while still absorbing problem frequencies. That would also do a good job of containment for the fibers.

In ductwork, there are a couple new products that have a coating which keeps things under control - I've not seen this material used for other purposes yet, but probably will (some of it's black, others yellow - the "goth" set might like the black... Steve
 
dobro said:
I did a search on fibreglass as a health risk, and found that if you inhale the fibres, it can be carcinogenic. Okay, so I wear a mask while I'm cutting the stuff up. But my plan is not to make panel traps, but just stack the stuff up in the corners, covered in some kind of fabric.

So my question is: what kind of fabric ensures that the fibres stay inside the material and don't get into the air?
Click to expand...


I worked with fibreglass, in the industry for 15 years, doing
everything from product purchasing and research ,raw fiber
manufacturing, mold making, production to installations of
everyone's favorite... the pink stuff in homes.
And although you will hear comments about it not being 100%
proved that the airborn/injested glass particles are cancer causing
agents, the industry silently accepts it as truth. The glass fibres
are actually barbs that get hooked into the lungs tissues, with
no possible way to extract them, becoming a permanant foreign
matter lodged in your system for life. (The domestic app. R-glass
is bad enough, but raw glass, resins & catylists used in industrial
apps are the real bad boys.)

Nuff Said. So like John Sayers has done, I would strongly
recommend always %100 sealing any fiberous material especially
glass, making it impossible for air to pass over it and moving free
particles. Seal it, seal it seal it. and always wear an appropriate
mask or respirator.

Have fun & be safe,
John @ The Generator
 
Re: Re: fibreglass health hazard

The Generator said:
the industry silently accepts it as truth.
Click to expand...

Not quite, John Mansville (one of many) does have their shipping containers pastered (in very large bold lettering) with cautions that fiberglass is a possible carcinogen.

So they accept it as a possible truth - and not all that quietly anymore.

Rod
 
Interesting information, especially since I just ordered two boxes of Owens Corning 703 panels to build Ethan Winer's absorbers and panel bass traps.

I plan to build shallow plywood boxes coverered with a mesh fabric to house the fiberglass. Do I also need to plan on wrapping the 703 panels in plastic?

Is this only an issue with the batted version of fiberglass and not the panels?
 
Re: Re: fibreglass health hazard

The Generator said:
I would strongly
recommend always %100 sealing any fiberous material especially
glass, making it impossible for air to pass over it and moving free
particles. Seal it, seal it seal it.
Click to expand...

That would pretty much defeat the purpose of using it as a sound absorber.

As long as you don't use it as a pad for nailing groupies or do any coke off of it you should be good for the next 20-30 yrs :D
 
"That would pretty much defeat the purpose of using it as a sound absorber."

Why? It's the density of the stuff that absorbs the frequencies, not the surfaces, right? Knightfly reports John Sayers as having wrapped the stuff in thin plastic. I thought Sayers knew something about room acoustics. :D
 
John does indeed know something about acoustics - his comments on the plastic wrapping were to the effect that it kept the sound brighter, and therefore required less EQ in the form of treble boost in order to sound natural.

What this means is that any absorption data you see on your particular fiberglas product is going to change, with less absorption in the higher frequency ranges. Lower frequencies would not be affected by this.

Since it's all too easy to "suck the highs" out of a room with absorption, I don't see many instances where wrapping absorbents with thin plastic would be a bad thing.

John told me he had used fairly heavy (for plastic sheeting, anyway) stuff for this - don't recall exactly, but probably around 4 mil or so. I think I had originally asked him if he'd tried this, but I was considering something more like the thin, 1 mil or so "painter's drop cloth" type of plastic instead.

I think the really thin stuff like that, if it would hold up, should make less high mid difference in a particular absorbent and only affect the "shimmer" range, and for the better in most cases.

If you're looking for more high absorption than that, then a tight weave cloth would be the best way to keep the extra high absorption and still protect against the loose fibers... Steve
 
http://www.secondnatureuk.com/sound.htm

Worth a look.
From their site;
"Wool is a natural fibre from a fully renewable resource consequently the life cycle of the product has an ideal energy balance.

Thermafleece is manufactured to a density of 25kg/m3 giving a K-value of 0.039 W/m.K "


I'm thinking of trying it, there must be an equivalent stateside.

Cheers
 
Knightfly, you get the 'most useful person to me in the homerecording field' award for all of 2003. Thanks for very much for your input about fibreglass/wrapping fibreglass - really, really useful. :)

Transputer: that stuff looks great to work with, and it's obviously safe as houses - I love that picture of the naked baby sitting on a fat sheet of the stuff. Did you see their spec for its density? They claim 25 kg/m3. I've got my hands on some 40 kg/m3 fibreglass, and there's stuff available that claims to be 48. Something to think about.
 
Last edited:
Transputer, everything about the "baa baa blankets" looks good, except for the density which is under ideal for sound isolation - one possible way around this would be to add one more layer of wallboard per side of the wall, or two layers on the outside (similar isolation, better acoustics in the room that way)

Dobro, always glad to help - I've been so frustrated with my first attempts at acoustic construction so many years ago that I've been doing what I can to help others avoid my original mistakes. So far it's been appreciated enough to be worth the effort.

Here's some of the research that supports the range of densities I've been mentioning - sorry they don't include the graphics mentioned in the text, for that you'd have to order the reprints, according to the site. Remember that this is in-wall performance -

http://www.usg.com/Design_Solutions/2_3_7_insulationperf.asp

Also note the comments on Music and Machinery isolation - this is where STC ratings don't mean much, because they don't consider below 125 hZ. That's also where the sheeps wool falls down, look at their charts - in all fairness though, their numbers would look a LOT better if they'd tested REAL sound walls instead of common house walls with/without insulation - it seems that they've taken the route most building material suppliers take, which is cater more to the masses than to us minority studio builders - otherwise there'd be more info on sound. I'm not badmouthing the little sheepies though, it's just good business sense to "play to the house" - and the general construction market is a much bigger "house" than we are.

If you're interested (and to keep the size of this individual post down) I can list some of the precautions I take when working with the fiberglas stuff... Steve
 
Gloves, goggles and a mouth/nose mask, plus do it outdoors?
 
Further to what steve said - Yes I add a layer of what we call "gardeners plastic". When I first used fibreglass back in the 70's we used felt as the cloth material which was pretty good at sealing in the fibres but in spite of that I found after a week of recording loud bands all the gear was covered with a fine dust... fibreglass. So cloth, even a tight weave like felt, won't seal it out.

When I added the plastic the acoustic changed - for the better IMO. The plastic in fact acts like a membrane absorber as well as a shield for the glass particles. It also , as steve mentioned, lifts the top end of the response which is an advantage IMO.

BTW a really cheap cover is to use black plastic @ $5.00/yd/m @ 12 ft wide then cover with Shade Cloth which is the plastic cloth used in shade houses in the garden sheds which is made out of some kind of synthetic as it survives outside in the rain. It is also cheap, comes in a range of colours and in rolls 12ft (3.6m) wide.

cheers
john
 
Shade cloth? LOL You sure it isn't called Shed Cloth?

That story about the felt and the dust is a bit scary.

Black plastic: 2mm? 3mm?
 
This thread probably validates why a lot of home studios get foamed to death, even though its not optimal unless you don't like high frequencies :D

Like several have said, fiberglass is considered by many to be a hazardous material, and at the very least it causes a lot of unpleasant itching, and the fibers are so small it can get anywhere. Just because the federal government doesn't mandate fiberglass manufacturers to put giant red warning labels on their products doesn't mean its good for you. Took some 60+ years to get "warning, the surgeon general...." on cigarette packs and we all know how that turned out.

Seal it up good, wear a mask and gloves while cutting, shaping and installing, cover it in thin plastic if you want it in a resonator or baffle, etc.

The slight tradeoff in frequency response will be well worth living a long time to complain about said tradeoff in frequency response :)
 
The black plastic won't be anywhere as thick as 2-3mm, more in the order of 2-6 mil, or .002 inch to .006 inch. - in mm, that would be .05-.15 mm.

The thicker you make it, the less absorption you'll get at higher frequencies - all you need is thick enough not to tear when you wrap the fiberglas, that will make the least amount of difference in absorption performance... Steve
 
It's not like you're sitting in front of a fan blowing shredded fiberglass at your gaping mouth all day long.............

Just cover with some cloth and don't body slam folks off your room treatments and everything will be just fine.

I bring up shit 100 times worse than this at work and get laughed at by stupid managers that don't have to deal with any of it themselves. This is so minor as to be not an issue, IMHO.

If you feel that strongly about it, I'd suggest using only a HEPA vacuum to clean your room. God only knows what molds and other shit you're stirring up in there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top