Return-Path: Sender: "Marvin Kaye" To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sun, 03 Oct 2004 10:38:31 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from mail.indian-creek.net ([209.176.40.9] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.4) with ESMTP id 451124 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sun, 03 Oct 2004 10:05:33 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.176.40.9; envelope-from=toucan@78055.com Received: from [209.176.40.37] (*authenticated* [209.176.40.37] toucan@78055.com) by mail.indian-creek.net with ESMTP (IOA-IPAD 4.03i2/96) id 8967D00 for ; Sun, 03 Oct 2004 09:05:01 -0500 X-Original-Message-ID: <41600706.80606@78055.com> X-Original-Date: Sun, 03 Oct 2004 09:04:54 -0500 From: Jim Cameron User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.3 (Windows/20040803) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List Subject: MC vs. acetone Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit This discussion of acetone vs. methylene chloride (MC) has come up on the LML at various times over the years, and does not seem to be something with a definitive answer. Due to their chemical natures, however, MC is inherently superior to acetone as a degreaser, and has been used in various industries for that purpose for a long time. The EPA designation as a potential carcinogen warrants some care, but if you look closely, many of the things we come into contact with are in that same category. (Check the warnings about carcinogens in gasoline -- doesn't stop us from putting it in our cars a couple of times a week, right?) The main concern of their studies has been workers exposed on an occupational basis, i.e., more or less daily over a span of years. There is also some scientific question about the carryover of the typical animal assay to human exposure, but those arguments are too complex and ambiguous to bring up here. For me the point is that for occasional, low-level exposure, such as might be typical of an amateur builder, the risk is more or less nil. Choice of gloves is important, as MC will go right through most gloves, particularly the latex type we usually wear for doing layups. If you're really concerned, wear a respirator with activated charcoal canisters (obtainable from lots of places, like Grainger or McMaster-Carr). Keep the stuff well stoppered, and store it where the fumes are not vented into your shop area, in an outside shed, for example. Five-gallon drums are available at any industrial chemical supplier, and one five-gallon drum is probably plenty for one airplane project. Wiping technique is important, too: use a clean rag, change surfaces often, don't hold the rag against the container mouth, etc. Throw-away rags are probably a lot better than paper towels, which shed crud all over your layup, and may have binders and other contaminants. De-greasing seems to be a critical step in bond preparation, so why not use the best available means? (I can understand the Lancair factory shop switching from MC to acetone, as they do this every day, often on several planes at a time, and may not always have the most careful guests assisting them! They also have a liability situation to think about, I suppose.) Jim Cameron Legacy N121J