TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: chemical hoods. From:Marilynne Smith <mrsmith -at- CTS -dot- COM> Date:Mon, 1 Apr 1996 11:51:00 PST
At 06:07 PM 3/31/96 -0500, David Ibbetson wrote:
>1) We call them by different names. That was the original point. Another
>name I might use is "fume cabinet". Either way I would be looking under the
fume cabinet or fume hood is good. The important thing is that the user
understand the vitally important issues.
>2) I was playing with bunsen burners at school from the time I was 12 or 14.
>There was a master gas tap outside the junior physics lab. I don't remember
>it being used.
Bunsen burners are not dangerous if a person has been instructed in how to
operate it. My professor simply said to use it to do something, assuming
that all of us had at least basic common sense. He was in error.
In those days (1945-52) we handled mercury with our bare
I remember playing with mercury too, mostly from things like broken
thermometers. It's so beautiful and fascinating by its desire to maintain a
ball or puddle shape.
When I was around 16, I was shown the sample of radium, wrapped in
>lead foil, that was kept in the masters' room. As the labs dated back to
>before 1900 the sample was doubtless bought long before there were any
I worked at the Hanford Site in Washington State in the late 70s and early
80s. There were lots of stories told about what workers there did with
radioactivity when the site was first opened and the effects of exposure to
radioactive materials was not well understood by the common worker (probably
the scientist as well). The workers did their own experiments. Favorites
were exposing light bulbs to radiation and then using them in the house as a
low-cost form of light. Another was to expose glass and such to radiation
and use the resulting material as a curiosity. Naturally those things are
not done any longer.
I don't think I heard of "etnas" until after I came to
>"For forms of government let fools contest,
>Whate'er is best administered is best." -- Pope