Don’t take it personally?! Did you not say to Alex:-
You are answering this thread in a protective standpoint for your product. -
The fact you didn’t know that acrylonitrile was a make up of water fed poles is an indicator that you shouldn’t really be giving out health advise & advising which situations it is safe & isn’t.
Yes, I did. Where did I attack Alex? He didn’t know this fact & he is not a doctor. That is not attacking, that’s stating the facts from his answers.
Where does he say he didn’t know this fact? And where did he say he was a doctor? What ‘facts’ are you stating from his answers? They are not facts, they are your personal comments on his reply.
Lets’ move on & find a remedy.
Lets’ move on & find a remedy.
Can’t wait until Alex gets home so he can verify whether a ‘remedy’ is needed - although he probably won’t appreciate me posting!
I will ignore the ‘to-and-fro’ between my wife and you - although if the two of you spend too much more time conversing on chat-room forums I will be having words 
I will address some of the points raised above as health and safety is very important to me. All materials pose a risk to one degree or another and the important thing is to be aware of them and to intelligently manage the risks and decide which ones to worry about. All materials produce residue of one sort or another - from the ‘allegedly’ brain affecting aluminium dust from alloy poles to the splinters and resin dust from fibre-glass poles.
Let’s first of all address the issue raised in your post quoted above. At no time did I say that acrylonitrile was not present in some carbon fibre products. What I said was “Why would you think that there is acrylonitrile in these poles?”. Personally I do not currently know if the specific carbon fibre products used in our poles do or do not use this component as a monomer - not all carbon fibre products have this within. I was wondering whether you had any specific knowledge about the exact products that are used in our factory. I am now looking into whether our pre-preg resins contain this as knowledge is always useful. I have however examined very carefully the MSDS for all of the products used and the way these products act once ‘cured’ or inert – according to current knowledge none of these products in their manufactured state cause a known health issue.
Looking at the risks that acrylonitrile poses - These well-published risks are with regard to this chemical in its active liquid state. This product very rapidly becomes inert and loses the dangers that are associated with its handling and disposal when in liquid state. As to the risk that inert ‘inactive’ acrylonitrile poses there is no data. However as it can no longer be inhaled or ingested in the same way and is deemed safe for disposal, we can presume that the risks are on a completely different scale to the original chemical form and inherent risks which you have highlighted.
You say that I am answering from a protective standpoint – I would rather say that I am trying to answer from a ‘non-scaremongering viewpoint’ based on data that applies to components in different forms to that which data has been published.
If there is a risk (for which there is no published data or studies) of inhaling dust containing acrylonitrile in its inert form then we need to examine this risk compared to other risks we encounter. The chance of inhaling dust from a worn pole in standard use (assuming that the pole is made from a pre-preg cloth that does contain acrylonitrile) is very low as it would be have to free of all moisture (very rare on the insides of WFP) and even if completely dry it is practically very difficult to get close enough to a sufficient quantity of ‘said’ dust in order to inhale it. We would have to assume that in order to inhale this ‘said’ dust one would have to engage in activity that would be presumptive of an intention to inhale and would not be possible in standard behaviour. This puts the risk of un-intentional inhalation of such dust (if it indeed poses any risk) at a very, very low level and well below other risks encountered in the work place.
What other risks do we encounter in the window cleaning work environment that pose a greater risk? – i.e. a greater likelihood of inhaling/absorbing a substance that is known to be damaging.
The list can go on and no doubt there are many more documented damaging substances that we come in contact with whilst working. For all of us we need to examine the practical steps we can take to contain any known risks.
The above points are in response to the possible threat that chemically-inert, acrylonitrile containing substances may or may not pose when reduced to dust. The same reasoning holds true regarding ordinary carbon dust (dust that does not contain acrylonitrile as a monomer). All dust can be hazardous when inhaled, but the potential for inhaling this (unless in manufacture or modification) is very, very low and would have to be considered as negligible.
You mention that we need to work to make poles safer. Carbon Fibre and clever design has allowed the working day of window cleaners already to become far safer and window cleaner’s life expectancy has risen dramatically by switching to their use according to industry data. Adding a handle covering (we already have an insulating layer of Fibre Glass on all of our telescopic poles) would not really address any of your issues as the handle section is the one section that does not produce dust or residue.
We already provide practical user guidance for working with carbon fibre poles (as far as I know we are the only company to do so) and can be found on this link:
This guidance clearly states to regularly wash the pole out and to keep it free from grit. This helps prolong the life of the pole and will reduce and prevent the production of carbon dust. Indeed we have some very careful clients who wash their carbon poles at the end of each day and then dismantle and fully clean every month who have 4 year old carbon poles with virtually no wear - 95% of wear (and subsequent carbon residue production) is because of the presence of dirt and grit between the sections.
The other point that is clearly stated (any is repeated by me on a regular basis) is that users should wear gloves to protect their hands from carbon residue. I very strongly feel that, apart from carbon fibre residue, it is unhygienic to work without gloves. A commercial firm who carry out a full RAMS on water-fed pole window cleaning would always insist on the use gloves as part of mandatory PPE for all operators. I have been wearing work gloves at all times long before I started using pure carbon-fibre poles on a daily basis.
The above recommendations as stated in our user guide I feel offer good and sensible protection from what is already a minimal (if at all) risk.
As always a free interchange of knowledge, information and opinion with like-minded people is of great interest and why the internet has been of value in many ways.
As stated above the chance of inhaling this dust is practically very low. You can coat the outside of the section with product however this will, in practical terms, not last very long at all. A thin quick setting epoxy could be sprayed on the outside which would help reduce wear, however it would be very difficult to spray it on thin enough to prevent hindering the smooth operation of the pole. Also to get any lasting effect the inside of each section would also need to be sprayed and this would not be physically possible.
The best treatment, according to current material knowledge, would be to regularly clean the pole and occasionally dismantle all sections and after cleaning and drying to spray the section surface and inside each section with a dry-film spray PTFE (not a wet oil-based PTFE enriched lubricant). This will help to reduce the effects of dirt and grit on the carbon surface.
I was working with a carbon pole today and noticed at one point that it felt slightly scratchy - before continuing with the job I laid the pole out with each section partially extended and sprayed the hose up the inside of the pole to flush the dirt, grit and black residue out of the pole. Once done the pole felt like new again.
Hi Alex, I thought for a moment Mrs A was going to ask me outside She’s quite aggressive isn’t she!
“Karl - Why would you think that there is acrylonitrile in these poles?” This tells me that you didn’t know of it’s presence. I’m sure others would think the same.
Almost all polyacrylonitrile resins are copolymers made from mixtures of monomers with acrylonitrile as the main component because this is the main building block of c/f production. I’m pretty sure your Korean supplier Skyflex use it therefore it may be in more of your product than you think. Vinyl cyanide is usually in all resins, curing does not necessarily make them nonhazardous although breathing in the fumes at production process is obviously going to have a bigger effect than the solid cured version. It reacts with sunlight & with heat is released to the air.
“After this fabric is cured then the only way dust can be produced is if these sections are cut with a saw.” - Well obviously not if users are getting it on their hands.
“On the skin it poses no danger - other than discolouration.” C/f structures can pose health hazards of a similar scale to those caused by asbestos if the material is subjected to crash impact.
“For the end user of carbon fibre products there are of course none of these risks.” How can you be sure?
What worries me even more is the chafing or black specks that appear from use & how it can be stopped. An unwitting window cleaner may use a c/f pole, wipe his brow or face & we have a dangerous situation where pulmonary fibrosis could occur. If you want to call it scaremongering, so be it - but there is information on the internet & it does point in this direction. I applaud you for having a user guide but maybe it should contain info’ about chafing & getting it on the skin.
I’m wondering if it could be possible to stop the break down of c/f so that wouldn’t be an issue. As a user of carbon fiber poles, I for one would purchase a product that stopped the wear to produce dust on a permanent basis & not through ongoing maintenance.
I will do further research & keep you informed - I hope you do the same. Meanwhile I hope the popcorn eating forum will take note that the splinters & powder on their skin is not to be taken lightly.
Karl - she is protective but certainly not aggressive.
I still think that you are focusing on what is at best an ill-defined and nebulous risk and easily outweighed by other risks we encounter daily and are largely ignored by operators. All risks should be eliminated in an ideal world, but this can only be done when the exact risk and level of concern can be scientifically and specifically proven. Based on current knowledge of materials and their behaviour I feel confident that using carbon fibre products currently offers the best low-risk approach. Other materials will provide more immediate deterioration of body joints etc due to higher weights and aluminium products have far too many toxicology risks for most users.
With regard to your comment about my supplier - I do not source my carbon fibre material from Korea. I protect my production sources very closely and this is obviously working as whoever you have received this information from has been misinformed.
I agree that risks & the worse of evils have to be taken account. Saying that, I will follow up on what knowledge is out there & carry on advising window cleaners of the dangers of c/f & nanotechnology in general. When wfp became popular many said that the likeliness of electrocution was improbable, but here we are today sitting on at least 5 electrocutions, some of them fatal. If c/f fines do behave like asbestos as stated, then I’m sure your tune will change.
I’m slightly concerned that you waive this off as just another risk in our daily lives, but I will follow up on this.
The source is good - I even have a picture of the product sitting in your warehouse.
You mention nano-technology which is another area again and not one used in the majority of WFPs. I think that the X-Tel N-tech poles do contain nano-technology, but believe that no others do. Of course in the fishing industry nano-technology is gaining great popularity. I personally have never thought that the likelihood of electrocution was improbable and have always viewed it and treated it as a real and preventable danger. I am pleased to say that so far two of our clients have put the insulation on our poles to the test by hitting overhead high voltage lines and whilst the poles did not survive the users did not feel anything - try doing that with an aluminium pole!
I am not waiving anything off as ‘just’ another risk and have always looked into all products with great care. On this subject (as on several others in the past with previous communication between you and myself) we will agree to differ currently.
I will be contacting you privately with regard to the photo that you have. As this would appear to be an un-authorised photo taken on private property I will be looking into this with great interest. And again, regardless of what ‘packaging’ your sources have come across, we do not currently, or have ever, sourced any carbon fibre materials from Korea - not that I have anything against Korea! We currently use pre-preg carbon cloth from Japan and China.
A lot of c/f poles these days do use nano technology & from what I’ve read - even including the Pre-Preg itself. I would hope that you follow up this discussion with in depth study in to fibres/fines from c/f poles with as much vigor as you toot your insulation. From what you’ve written above, it seems you have decided that there is no possible chance that fines can cause pulmonary fibrosis & so by doing so I take it you have finished with the subject?
This is a highly educational thread yawl…
Great argument Karl and Alex, you both make very good points, I really like reading the debate, and you both are true gentlemen and respectful in your discussion here…
Oh Howdy Alex I’m Dangerous but you can call me Dange, Dave, “Son of Ettopre” , Lover to TSP !
Great thread, It’s good to see folks who can be respectful and friendly !
Dange
ive never so much as touched a WFP ,although i use a 10metre carbon rod with a Wagtail squeegee on the end sometimes. Out of interest, how is a carbon pole made? is it in a mould .id be interested to know whether its squeezed out like a tube of toothpaste and also whether its a very smelly process?
years ago i used to have friends working in a fibreglass mould factory making wind deflectors for trucks and on the afternoons the guy spraying the fibreglass was often singing at the top of his voice as he was high as a kite from the fumes ! (although he wore all the correct breathing apparatus )
Also as i walked through the big factory ,if it was a sunny day, i could see fine fibreglass dust glinting in the air like tiny stars , this was a modern technical factory , yet likely dangerous to work in .
Hi Karl
As you will know from my private email to you on this subject I do take such issues very seriously and have not ‘written off’ any risks. Having spent much time over the last 12 hours discussing this subject I have been in communication with the supplier and the factory of our carbon fibre materials. I am pleased to confirm that because the factory’s own care for health they do not use pre-preg which contains acrylonitrile as a monomer in any of their products (not just WF poles). The pre-preg that is used in our poles contains Bi- phenolic aldehyde A type epoxy resin which is very different. As you will already be aware acrylonitrile that is used in the production of the carbon fibres themselves do not remain present in the finished carbon product due to the oxidising and high temperature curing process. We also do not use any nano-technology in our carbon fibre poles.
I think that we can say that this draws a line under the discussion of this substance in Gardiner’s specific carbon products as it is not present - although it can remain a discussion for other potential carbon products from different factories. This is not dismissing any risks just showing that I do have concern for the health of myself and other users. It would be foolish to switch the risk of death from falling/electrocution to another more subtle risk.
With regard to the presence of any dust this should obviously not be inhaled - but as stated previously on this thread:
The chance of inhaling dust (which on our poles does not contain acrylonitrile) from a worn pole in standard use is very low as it would be have to free of all moisture (very rare on the insides of WFP) and even if completely dry it is practically very difficult to get close enough to a sufficient quantity of ‘said’ dust in order to inhale it. We would have to assume that in order to inhale this ‘said’ dust one would have to engage in activity that would be presumptive of an intention to inhale and would not be possible in standard behaviour. This puts the risk of un-intentional inhalation of such dust (if it indeed poses any risk) at a very, very low level and well below other risks encountered in the work place. The presence of black residue on users hands is not from dry dust, but rather from blackened water that has come out from the pole during use and stained the hand. This is easily reduced by flushing through the pole to remove grit and dirt that has caused this to occur.
The point that has been made several times now is that there are many possible risks and all of them need to be controlled where possible. The wearing of gloves whilst working in my mind is the single best thing that can be done not only to prevent unsightly hand discolouration but also to protect from unhygienic work environments.
Wow. This thread is disturbing
In what manner, John?
just hearing how differently Europeans argue from Americans.
They’re so… refined!
Phenol! Don’t get me started on that chemical - that’s one of the reasons I left ICI in the first place, the guy next to me died from it. However I’m willing to say that most of these chemicals after the curing process are fairly inert until heat is added to the equation. You just have to heat plastic or know someone who works in the epoxy/boat fixing field to know this. I am relieved you’ve found no known dangerous carcinogens in your poles - & I know you won’t release the data or pdf files because it a company secret - so we will have to take you on your word & your supplying company. My dealing with the Chinese hasn’t been too fruitful in the past though as I’ve found they will say anything to sell a product.
Not quite sure what you are saying here - Unless you are working on coal mine windows - the black residue has to come from the pole & not from external grit & dust as stated. You really have to ask what part of the pole is degrading to produce black water? And if you were wearing gloves it wouldn’t have stained your hands!
The dust particles/fines still worries me though & I will push forward with obtaining info’ on the dangers of handling c/f poles for users benefit. The epoxy you use has similar properties to “Bakerlite” - so I’m surprised there are any fines at all as reported in the first posting & what you stated here.
