|
literally repost everything from the old thread, just to thwart the guy who thinks we needed a new thread
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2015 02:42
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 17:48 |
|
|
Nierbo posted:orig thread link pleaser http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3633652 e. I think that's actually the second OSHA megathread though.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2015 20:44
|
|
|
Slugnoid posted:Rebars usuailly stuck together in big jungle gym frames before cement is poured over it. You only usually see the exposed sharp ends like in the movies when a buildings being pulled down This really isn't the case. I mean, yes, rebar is often used to form a grid, but it's also often exposed in upright positions. This sort of thing:  which is why they make these:  And it's OSHA required to use them now. e. SopWATh posted:EDIT: Those mushroom caps are bullshit, more for visual caution than any sort of protection. I guess they might keep you from tearing your jeans on a sharp end or something. Really? You'd rather fall on an exposed bar than one of those caps? I'm no expert but it looks to me like if someone trips and lands squarely on a cap, it'd save them from impalement.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2015 17:54
|
|
|
gently caress no I've been burned way too many times to just click on linked videos in this thread. I don't like watching videos of people getting killed, and since you motherfuckers cannot exercise any sort of control, I'm just not clicking videos any more unless it's completely clear that it's not death porn. e. OK, so yeah: that video shows that in one specific scenario, one specific brand of cap was ineffective. That hardly proves that all caps are ineffective in all scenarios at preventing or reducing injury. Leperflesh fucked around with this message at 18:03 on Jan 20, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2015 17:58
|
|
|
An Angry Bug posted:
I've never seen non-ridged rebar. The ridges give the concrete something to "grip" when dried: if it had no ridges, I imagine the rebar could just slide right out. In fact I think non-ridged rebar would just be... bar. As in, bar stock, just plain old steel bar.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2015 06:32
|
|
Oh god, and that pile is the ridged stuff. Every bit of length would get stuck into the wound like a horrible bleeding gasket.
|
Three-Phase posted:Aren't zip lines supposed to be at an angle less than 45 degrees? yes, and also you dont jump onto a zipline like that, you start out with your dangly thing taut. And yes, that was an interesting thread. They had already built this huge platform to run the zipline from, and were trying to figure out how to make it work and based on the postings of a few goons who knew what they were talking about, there just wasn't any possible way to use the platform and still have a safe line. At all.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2015 02:08
|
|
|
Tunicate posted:Empirically, no. Actually no. He asked "can", not "did." You have no idea if it was carrying as much fuel as possible when it began that trip.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2015 04:04
|
|
|
Ahahaha that would be perfect.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2015 04:07
|
|
|
Considering "spanglish dickluv", "spanish woonsocket" and "woon socket 1.0" all apparently posted some kind of spam or poo poo within the span of one minute, they're definitely multi-accounts at the very least.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2015 02:32
|
|
|
A bunch of oil refinery workers are on strike. Collectively they'll be shutting down about 10% of the US's gasoline production capacity. http://www.ibtimes.com/oil-refinery-strike-steelworkers-strike-against-big-oil-nine-plants-across-country-1803888 One of the key issues is excessively long working hours (like, 15+ days of 12+ hours a day straight) and safety conditions (there have been a slew of accidents lately, many involving injuries and a few fatalities). During the stoppage, managers are doing the jobs of the workers, which is obviously perfectly safe and not a problem at all, one assumes.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2015 23:14
|
|
|
OSHA regulations would have a lot more teeth if fines were just set as: for any violation, the minimum fine is 0.5% of the company's annual revenues (not profits, gross revenues) and the maximum fine is up to 50% of a company's annual revenues. Instead of fixed dollar amounts. So if you're a tiny small business and you have a power strip that should have been secured, you maybe pay a $500 fine. But if you're a huge multi-billion-dollar corporation, your fines start at a minimum of five million bucks and just go up a lot from there. Not those specific percentages necessarily, but you get what I mean. The money from fines should go towards compensating victims, research into safety practices and better PPE, or the general fund... not directly into OSHA's operating budget, because that's the fastest path to bullshit fines.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2015 02:30
|
|
|
Yeah that's genius, although there is a real risk of a chain breaking and whipping around or something, so I wouldn't want to stand next to it while he's doing that. e. I'm referring to the reverse-o-matic thing three posts up
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2015 20:19
|
|
|
It's all about force, acceleration, and mass. Compared to (say) a towing strap, a chain has a lot more mass, so when it breaks, for a given amount of energy, there's more mass to accelerate in some wild direction and therefore it goes slower. But a snapping chain given enough energy can absolutely whip around and cause injury. So can cable, rope, a towing strap, etc.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2015 01:39
|
|
|
Sham I Am posted:Notice how the ladder holding up the pick is on the inside? That's fine, except there is no ladder to climb up to actually get on the pick. That means dude had to climb up the ladder with the pick on it, then when he got to the top he had to reach back and over his head to grab the pick and swing himself up on to it like a rock climber with no ropes, just hanging free 30 feet in the air trying to scrabble up before gravity notices that he is only being held up by the death grip one hand has on the pick. ...or he climbed out the window?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2015 03:25
|
|
|
It's not making much sense to me either. The engine stands I've seen typically bolt to the front or back of the engine, they don't support it from underneath. The engine has engine mounts at various points which are used to attach it to the chassis of the car, and that's where it ought to be supported. I don't even see the parts on the floor for that, there's just some random box steel pieces, a wooden... crossbrace?... and a puddle of whatever is coming out of the engine, presumably, although it should have been drained before removal so who the gently caress knows what it is. e. For those of you unfamiliar with an engine: the top of the engine is at the bottom right of the photo.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2015 20:16
|
|
|
I'm gonna guess that the entire nozzle assembly broke off. Maybe because of the icy cold weather or maybe abuse or maybe just it was made badly.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2015 05:04
|
|
|
I loving love this photo. It's telling a whole story, isn't it. Like that famous (possibly apocryphal) bet someone supposedly once made to Hemmingway, that he couldn't tell a whole story in six words, to which he allegedly responded: Hemmingway possibly posted:For sale: baby shoes, never worn You just have to look at that chainsaw and let your imagination fill in the story.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2015 21:36
|
|
|
Dillbag posted:Wouldn't it have been safer inside the forklift cage? Unless the shelves were full of caustic chemicals, I guess. At least you have some protection over your head. Cage probably protects from crushing, but not from impalement or flying debris. Looks like the "cage" is just roll bars, rather than a mesh.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2015 23:55
|
|
|
wh... why do you put the bottle cap in your mouth? How does that even work. Do you open it with your teeth and then suck the cap into your mouth and then drink around the cap? WHY
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2015 07:11
|
|
|
Actually, when a debris flow begins, often it's just a few rocks or a slumping at the bottom of the flow, followed seconds later by a much larger flow. If you're alert for it you might see the beginnings of a flow ahead of you on the road, and come to a stop before you drive right into a major rockslide. Also it's a useful alert that there may be random rocks in the road, although that really should be "watch for rocks" instead of "watch for falling rocks".
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2015 01:26
|
|
|
Also, people in general used to just not give as much of a poo poo about whether or by how much products were safe. I mean, that was a real thing. The idea that the government has a role in keeping people safe from the poo poo they buy is a modern one, and even with the advent of things like the FDA, it was just generally accepted until relatively recently that you could go to the store and buy dangerous stuff and that was OK.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2015 20:15
|
|
|
When I was a kid I had a chemistry set. It was made and specifically marketed to kids. It contained small amounts of several substances that were significantly toxic enough to have little skull-and-crossbones icons on the labels. I don't remember what, exactly, any more, of course. And my mom supervised when we did some of the experiments in the kit. She wasn't an idiot. But they sold that thing at the toy store.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2015 21:23
|
|
|
Nah it had a lot of stuff like that, but a bit of googling suggests those old kits had stuff like ammonium nitrate, potassium permanganate, etc. It definitely had a little glass bottle with a wick to be used as an alcohol-burning bunsen burner, with a test-tube holder to position over it - which was apparently outlawed in like 1978? Apparently kits from the 1950s even had stuff like uranium dust and cyanide. Mine was probably bought around 1981 or 1982, but I suspect it was significantly older - my mom didn't have much money back then, and we shopped at thrift stores and stuff a lot. Or it might have come from a grandparent. I had a soldering iron when I was 8 or 9.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2015 22:34
|
|
|
The problem is, it's really quite difficult to bury that much stuff in such a way that someone looking at it a long time later can't figure out "hey someone buried something here." It's not necessarily cave people of the far future we're worried about, either. A culture with ~1800s technology would not necessarily know about or understand radiation, but could probably use a basic understanding of geology to recognize a burial site. We can't really know what knowledge would be retained and what would be lost, for people living in North America 50,000 years from now or whatever. Human civilization is only ~15,000 years old at best, so we can't even look at symbolism that has persisted for all of that time, and be sure we can use similar symbols now that will persist for three or four or five times as long. Pretty much the most we can do is assume that if you draw a figure of an animal on a cave wall, someone 100,000 years from now will probably recognize it as a drawing of an animal.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2015 22:03
|
|
|
Most nuclear waste is not spent fuel. It's carbon rods, it's containers and buckets and people's irradiated jumpsuits, hunks of concrete shielding. Everything that's been bombarded with neutrons and has become toxic horrible poo poo nobody wants to deal with. You can reprocess spent fuel in breeder reactors, but everything else?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2015 23:21
|
|
|
We are orbiting the Sun. In order to "drop" something into the sun, you have to generate enough delta-vee to escape earth's gravity, and then a whole shitfuck more delta-vee to slow down so that you can fall into the sun. You'd spend far more energy doing this then the nuclear fuel ever generated for you.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2015 17:06
|
|
|
Spookydonut posted:Energy is energy. Railguns aren't free to run. And neither is the space elevator. You don't get orbital velocity for free from an elevator: all it does is allow you to to use energy sent from the ground, instead of having to carry your own fuel. You still have to accelerate. The fact you don't have to lift your own fuel means you have a lot less mass to lift, so it is cheaper energywise in that respect. Of course, space elevators are magic bullshit technology, so if you can build one, you probably have magic bullshit technology to deal with your nuclear waste anyway.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2015 17:21
|
|
|
If you haven't seen it, this video is required viewing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLCF7vPanrY Most people are astonished to find out how many nuclear bombs have been set off. Before you watch, take a guess. ...this is also part of why people in America worried about the radiation that leaked from Fukushima are hilarious.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2015 18:53
|
|
|
SopWATh posted:I'm disputing your argument, but I think these are two different things. How many of those detonations were underground? A lot of them were underground, but enough were above-ground that radioactive material has been spread globally. Most of the tests prior to 1963 were above-ground. After that above-ground test-ban treaty, which France and China didn't sign, those two countries continued above-ground testing until '74 and '80, respectively. According to this article, quote:Altogether, 504 devices were exploded at 13 primary testing sites, yielding the equivalent explosive power of 440 megatons of TNT Here's another relevant quote: quote:In 1997, NCI conducted a detailed evaluation of dose to the thyroid glands of U.S. residents from I-131 in fallout from tests in Nevada. In a related activity, we evaluated the risks of thyroid cancer from that exposure and estimated that about 49,000 fallout-related cases might occur in the United States, almost all of them among persons who were under age 20 at some time during the period 1951-57, with 95-percent uncertainty limits of 11,300 and 212,000. The estimated risk may be compared with some 400,000 lifetime thyroid cancers expected in the same population in the absence of any fallout exposure. Accounting for thyroid exposure from global fallout, which was distributed fairly uniformly over the entire United States, might increase the estimated excess by 10 percent, from 49,000 to 54,000. Fallout-related risks for thyroid cancer are likely to exceed those for any other cancer simply because those risks are predominantly ascribable to the thyroid dose from internal radiation, which is unmatched in other organs. I-131 is only one of the radioactive isotopes - one of the shortest lived - that can cause cancers. Much longer-lived isotopes like strontium-90 and cesium-137 were globally dispersed by above-ground and (especially) upper-atmosphere testing. quote:A total of about 1,800 deaths from radiation-related leukemia might eventually occur in the United States because of external (1,100 deaths) and internal (650 deaths) radiation from NTS and global fallout. For perspective, this might be compared to about 1.5 million leukemia deaths expected eventually among the 1952 population of the United States. About 22,000 radiation-related cancers, half of them fatal, might eventually result from external exposure from NTS and global fallout, compared to the current lifetime cancer rate of 42 percent (corresponding to about 60 million of the 1952 population). By contrast: Fukushima didn't explode. It's leaked radiation into the air in the immediate vicinity of the reactor, and it's leaked radioactive isotopes into seawater, where it has been diluted. If you live in California, you are getting a higher dose of radiation from the Sierra Nevada then you are from Fukushima. By a lot. You get a massively higher dose every time you have a dental x-ray. The sun is irradiating all of us, right this second. Radiation can cause cancer, and the nuclear testing, statistically, probably killed, globally, hundreds of thousands of people from higher rates of cancer. By contrast, Fukushima by itself is likely to kill somewhere around zero Americans due to radiation leaked into the ocean and/or radioactive particles flying over on the wind. It's more dangerous to eat ocean fish due to the mercury levels than due to the radiation levels. You're at higher risk of getting cancer from eating charred red meat then you are from Fukushima fallout. The carcinogens in your household products you blithely use regularly are probably causing much higher rates of cancer than Fukushima. People just panic when they hear the word "radiation," it's the spooky invisible ghost that gives you cancer. We should be a lot more concerned about the poo poo we are smearing on our bodies and vaporizing in our homes daily and deliberately lacing our food with, instead.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2015 20:13
|
|
|
Ssthalar posted:Hah, jokes on you, I don't go outside! Whoops, radiation doesn't give a poo poo about your puny roof! If you want to get away from enough radiation to be able to detect neutrinos, you have to go several miles below the surface.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2015 22:14
|
|
|
Say Nothing posted:Word of advice, don't google for 'lathe accident'. The first image looks like someone dumped a sack of mince on a lathe. Mythbusters showed fairly comprehensively that you can drop a lit cigarette in a puddle of gasoline and it won't ignite. If it's a hot day and there's a lot of fuel vapor and it manages to be at exactly the right mix of air/fuel right when she's taking a drag, there's maybe a tiny chance of igniting it, but not really.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2015 03:41
|
|
|
FrankeeFrankFrank posted:Space Elevator question... what is this thing made of and how is it anchored? Here's my first guess... about a billion high tension cables... like what holds up suspension bridges but alot more of them. Does it end up being a "single" cable 50 feet in diameter? 50 yards in dia.? Then what kind of contraption climbs this thing? It's made of unobtanium, because we haven't invented anything yet that can handle the tension while being light enough. The "cable" actually ideally should taper. The design ideally puts the "center of gravity" of the cable at geosynchronous orbit, with a counterweight past the center to balance the weight of the cable that drops to earth. If you do that, it turns out the highest tension is right at the geostationary position. the tension drops off as you go down the cable. So, the strongest point would presumably be the thickest, right at gso. Speculations for materials include carbon and diamond nanotubes, but nobodys made them more than like an inch long or something, and they need to be tens of thousands of miles long instead. quote:How could it be on a floating platform? Or is the cable anchored in bedrock and tons of concrete and just the station is floating in the ocean? The bottom of the cable only needs to be anchored well enough to keep it from swaying around from the wind, assuming the whole thing is balanced well enough. Putting it over the ocean is kind of dumb though, you'd anchor it somewhere you can more easily generate power, load and unload cargo, and protect the whole thing from terrorists. quote:
Probably build it in space, and then somehow drop it into place without accidentally dropping the whole thing onto the surface and wasting billions while also causing a massive disaster area on the ground. You might be interested in reading the Mars books by Kim Stanley Robinson - Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars. They build a space elevator on Mars, called "the beanstalk," and a lot of the problems inherent with them are explored. A really big one is, what do you do to protect such an incredibly attractive target?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2015 04:57
|
|
|
Gromit posted:I would have thought, perhaps naively, that if you're filling your fuel tank then it probably contains a lot more vapour than fuel, and putting more liquid in it would be pushing vapour out at you. Is it lighter or heavier than air? Most nozzles have a vapor capture device for exactly this reason, because gasoline vapor is an environmental pollutant. Your tank also has a tube running to a charcoal-filled cannister specifically designed to capture vapor as the pressure in your tank changes, such as when it gets warmer. I don't know if it's lighter than air, but you have to hit what's called the stochiometric point, the correct dilution of gas with oxygen, before it burns explosively. I'm not saying smoking next to your car while you fill it up is a great idea; only that the hollywood impression of how explosive liquid gasoline is, and how easily cars blow up at the slightest provocation, is ridiculously inaccurate.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2015 07:46
|
|
|
Uh yeah alcohol vaproises very fast, that's why rubbing alcohol feels so cool on the skin, and it ignites very easily, way easier than gas, so yeah. Dont soak your upholstery in alcohol, folks.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2015 08:43
|
|
|
Gorilla Salad posted:Or they can just turn their car off like anyone who's not a loving idiot Most cars can play the radio with the key in the off position. There's no chance of a spark, though; this is a solid-state device powered by the car battery. Then again, there's no chance of an external spark from a goddamn cell phone, either.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2015 19:26
|
|
|
Tambaloneus posted:70,000km seems kind of a long way ... how far up does something actually need to go to be for a space elevator to be useful? How far up do most satellites orbit? 70k km is like 30% of the way to the moon. Geosynchronous orbit is a very high orbit. You can orbit the Earth at any point high enough that you can counter whatever atmospheric drag you are subjected to, but your orbital position will be different relative to a spot on the ground, from moment to moment. Most stuff we launch into space is into a Low Earth Orbit (LEO). Examples include the ISS, most satellites, everything the space shuttle ever did, etc. Communications satellites, GPS, weather satellites, and others are often placed into GEO in order to be located in a stable direction from any given point in the hemisphere that can see them, or to have a constant view of an area of the surface. A space elevator is presumed to need to be anchored to the ground at a specific spot, so its center of mass has to be at a stable position relative to the ground: a geosynchronous orbit is probably the only option.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2015 00:28
|
|
|
Bishop posted:Im not some badass navy seal or anything but for whatever reason I just don't panic underwater, and I've been diving almost 20 years now. The most freaked out I ever got was probably on a solo wreck dive. I was going to the engine room and had to remove some gear to get through a small rusted hole, then put it back on once inside. On my way out I realize i had jammed some bolt snaps and could not get the stuff off, effectively trapping me inside. I worked it out but I was about to start sawing at straps with my knife to get out of my rig Under what circumstances would you decide to go solo dive a wreck instead of going with a partner? I am assuming solo diving multiplies your risk by a whole lot.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2015 18:20
|
|
|
Ambrose Burnside posted:i dig the chains that are definitely there, but so tiny compared to the logs that theyre almost invisible at that resolution I dig the enormous contact patches he's getting on those tires. Assuming they're not actually flat, think about how much air pressure is in those things, and then look at how much they're squashing. I can't believe that's a designed/allowed load for that tractor/trailer combo.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2015 03:38
|
|
|
God loving dammit  this is the osha dot jay peg thread not the let's discuss mutilations and horrifying accidents thread
|
|
#
¿
May 13, 2015 21:13
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 17:48 |
|
|
ponzicar posted:What's the difference? This stuff is funny, we can go "oh LOL those crazy people, look how stupid and dangerous they're being" This makes me queasy and has nothing to do with dangerous workplace antics: surebet posted:Pain is weird sometimes, during one of my surgeries the local aesthetic wasn't correctly applied and I ended up making unholy sounds, kicking a poor nurse and passing out from the searing white pain. Strange thing is I didn't feel the first few cuts because a) this wasn't my first OR rodeo and b) I saw the anaesthetics being injected and felt the burning tingle of them being diffused IM. I guess my brain convinced itself that it couldn't be pain it was feeling in the first few seconds until the scalpel dug deep enough. Not to pick on surebet, because a bunch of people do this all the time in this thread. I mean, even the guy who had his arm ripped off in a machine, at least was workplace-injury related.
|
|
#
¿
May 13, 2015 21:24
|
|
