What is the difference between explosion proof and intrinsically safe equipment?
925438
Intrinsic Safety: This method of protection limits the energy passing into the hazardous area. The energy limitation is provided by the use of safety barriers which are mounted in the safe area. Because of the energy limitation, regardless of the fault in the hazardous area, sufficient energy cannot be released to ignite the explosive atmosphere.\n\nExplosion Proof: This is the most popular method of protection. When an explosive gas enters an enclosure containing electrical equipment an explosion could occur. With the enclosure properly installed, and the tight tolerance between the enclosure and the cover, the flame will cool sufficiently by the time it reaches the outside atmosphere.
873170
Ammunition is just that - bullets, powder, shell, fuses. Munitions is everything that goes with it - including the weapons and the tools to keep them in good repair.
1133512
ESD (Electric-Static Discharge) Workboots, explosion proof switch and power boxes with a positive pressure airflow to keep dust from entering. Absolutly no open contacts where a spark may occur should be out in the open.  make sure all pipes carring the powder are grounded so they will not build up a charge; better yet, ground anything metal to keep from building a charge.
798252
you must consider loads here as you'll have customers on the premises...\nfire safety, fire exits, extinguishers, fire alarms, smoke alarms etc\nhealth & safety risk assessment, electrical equipment serviced/checked regularly, trailing wires, safe equipment ie beds\nalso to consider is COSHH risk assessment for the chemical substances you'll be using, ie massage creams and products, and cleaning products\npossible manual handling risk, plus first aid is important\nnot to forget health and safety of staff, for example; working alone, or using equipment.\nThe following sites may help you...
276047
From looking around, I would believe it's a canadian classification for fireworks/explosives, but I can't seem to find a direct link to the canadian references.\n\nAh, found it.  Look at part 3b, and you'll see that 7.2.3 covers Single Use Standard E & F Motors
889953
Any non combustible material is fire resistant, take your choice it depends what you want to use it for. (Don't try to put a chip pan fire out with a house brick)LOL
803064
That is the sole reason safety. Hydrogen will explode and helium is a noble gas and is very stable.
705673
no jeremy you must be thinking of other radioactive elements. plutonium is safe enough to handle without any safety apparatus, though the thought of doing that sounds stupid.\n\nPu238 and 239 are alpha emitters , ie their radiation does not penetrate skin. a solid ball of plutonium poses no risk unless a brick is dropped onto it, in which case there is a surge of radiation emitted, and a very high risk of acute radiation poisoning. of course such a careless act will cause trouble with any kind of radioactive metal, not just Pu.\n\notherwise it would require you to inhale powdered plutonium to even give you an elevated risk of injury. thats right, since alpha particles cant penetrate your skin, you have to put plutonium in your gut to have it do damage to you.
846010
umm maybe not that mixture hehehe I would have to look in my cookbook\nbut yes, many many common household products can be used to make explosives and explosive devices
359525
Take a look at the pyrotechnics chapter of this side.\n\nhttp://www.vk2zay.net/\n\nCareful: it is neither simple nor without danger.
732933
Oxidising chemicals (of industrial strength) should not be stored next to oxidisable materials. These generally would be flammables such as organic solvents.\n\nCorrosive chemicals are not necessarily oxidisable.
444222
an explosion is an uncontrollable reaction.  So freezing it would make it controllable.  therefore...NO
903790
An explosion is an example.
250487
Conventional explosives usually are referring to explosives that delivery or blast radius is contained to delivering damage to a contained blast, or metal fragmentation, shrapnel, and the damage is really the weapon itself, example a soldier's hand grenade or a mine, or a torpedo, would be considered a conventional explosive.  TNT as well like in mines.  \nNon conventional explosives contain a blast radius but the payload maybe include more chemical or higher energy impact like , radiation, and is far more widespread.  A neutron bomb for instance keeps the buildings standing but the radiation/neutron damage is what kills the people. That is not a conventional weapon.  Some people might use the term conventional explosives in referring to explosives not used to kill people but more as tools like in mining or geological use.  Hope that helps.
130158
I have never heard of blasting adding a layer of protection. Aluminum Oxide by itself is a strong abrasive, its what they make sandpaper out of. If you are using it for blasting be very careful as it works very fast. I think whomever told you about "adding protection" means about the thin oxide layer formed on the outer skin of aluminum when it is exposed to Oxygen. This skin prevents corrosion as long as it is not exposed to galvanic reaction [this is why zinc plates are put onto aluminum boats and it also makes aluminum almost impossible to weld if not removed as the oxide melts at around 3400 degrees where as aluminum itself melts at around 1200. this means that the aluminum would melt and fall away before you were able to start added filler metal to it.
946059
I personally just purchased my first gun safe this past summer, and in shopping around and researching, I've found that gasket equipped, air-tight safes are not the way to go. First off, with a safe that is air-tight, most times there will be no mounting holes drilled into them so you can anchor them to the wall/floor. This means the only garuntee you have that the entire safe won't be stolen is the weight of the safe alone. \n\nAlso, on several of the safes I looked at, the door, due to the fact it contains all the locking mechanisms, weighs in at about twice as much as the rest of the safe. The door on the one I purchased, in fact, is so heavy that without anchoring it to the floor, when the door swings open, it tilts the rest of the safe forward (my floor is a bit uneven). \n\nWhen you have an airtight safe, unless you have some type of dehumidifier (chemical or electric), you're effectively locking moisture inside with the guns, which can ruin them much faster than by having a non-airtight safe, due to the moisture in the air settling and becoming stagnant. \n\nI would recommend you purchase a Sentry Fire Safe. It's the most cost effective route I came across, and what I ended up purchasing. Make sure whatever safe you buy is:\n\n- Fire-proof\n\n- Is a gun SAFE, not a gun CABINET (cabinets could be broken into by a determined 6 year old)\n\n- Has at least 4-locking points (one on each side of the door, however, two on each side is much, much better)\n\n- Has a dial, combination lock. (the ones with electric keypads, while more convienient, aren't as good. batteries are internal and can die, meaning a back up key has to be kept outside of the safe where anyone can access it, also, in a fire, the keypad melts, requiring a locksmith to open it, at a SUBSTANTIAL fee)\n\n- Even if only looking to secure at little as 4 guns, get a safe that can hold a number more. This leaves room for any other valuables you with to secure, future firearm purchases, and any ammunition/accessories that go with the gun.\n\n- Whatever type of safe you buy, make sure you get a dehumidifier for it. If you keep the air inside the safe dry, the safe and everything in it should last for, oh, just about forever.
946850
Most insects would not survive the actual explosion; the heat would just be too much. However certain insects, like cockroaches, are very resistant to radiation. They would survive the fall-out far better than more complex organisms.