4 ms·

Fair point. The sub-classification gets into those weeds. For example: 1.1 being "mass explosion hazard", typically high-explosives. 1.4 being "fire or projec

by Arrath 5y ago

Fair point. The sub-classification gets into those weeds. For example: 1.1 being "mass explosion hazard", typically high-explosives. 1.4 being "fire or projection hazard", typically consumer fireworks, small arms ammunition. 1.5 is "may mass explode in fire", things like AN fertilizer (Beirut; West, Texas), many industrial blasting agents.

rob74 5y ago
Where would flour fit in in this classification? I assume it's less explosive than fertilizer, but flour dust suspended in air can also explode...
- Arrath 5y ago
  Well now, that is an interesting question. According to some research, combustible dust is not an explicit category under the GHS (United Nations Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals), let alone a sub-division of Class 1. I pulled up some Safety Data Sheets[1] for various flours and Combustible Dust is listed under "Hazards Not Otherwise Classified" in section 2, Hazard Identification. Likewise, section 5 (Fire-Fighting Measures) mentions the explosion hazard posed by dispersed dust. Per Chapter 2.1[2] of the GHS, the definitions of explosives is: "...a solid or liquid substance (or mixture of substances) which is in itself capable by chemical reaction of producing gas at such a temperature and pressure and at such a speed as to cause damage to the surroundings..." Which led me down a rabbit hole to see why Combustible Dust is listed as "Not Otherwise Classified", going through amendments to the CFR and some papers on working groups looking to add Combustible Dust to the GHS. Of note, page 16 of this[3] presentation. >"Argentina Intervention > Concern over the definition of "combustible dust" produced by flours, grains and cereals because of the trade implications that such an inclusion could produce > Dust originated from flours, grains and cereals should not be classified as "hazardous chemical substances" > Reasoning: >> Flours, grain and cereal dust are not a chemical substance >> Dust originated from flour, grain and cereal have no intrinsic explosive property >> Dust is not a dangerous substance in itself > Requested explicit exclusion from definition" Luckily saner minds prevailed, and we ended up with GHS Annex 11 which is why Combustible Dust is listed on the SDS I linked. But hey there we see, once again, economic interests trying to muddy up the waters when it comes to safety. But that is a whole different (and rant-y) tangent I could go off on, and I should probably get back to work. [1]http://s3.amazonaws.com/media.agricharts.com/sites/1846/Flour/SDS%20All%20Purpose%20Wheat%20Flour%20CO-EHS-1512-03.pdf http://s3.amazonaws.com/media.agricharts.com/sites/1846/Flou... [2]https://unece.org/DAM/trans/danger/publi/ghs/ghs_rev03/English/02e_part2.pdf https://unece.org/DAM/trans/danger/publi/ghs/ghs_rev03/Engli... [3]https://schc.memberclicks.net/assets/meetings/fall_2017/lantry-miller_powerpoint.pdf https://schc.memberclicks.net/assets/meetings/fall_2017/lant...

by Arrath 5y ago

rob74 5y ago

Where would flour fit in in this classification? I assume it's less explosive than fertilizer, but flour dust suspended in air can also explode...

Arrath 5y ago
Well now, that is an interesting question. According to some research, combustible dust is not an explicit category under the GHS (United Nations Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals), let alone a sub-division of Class 1. I pulled up some Safety Data Sheets[1] for various flours and Combustible Dust is listed under "Hazards Not Otherwise Classified" in section 2, Hazard Identification. Likewise, section 5 (Fire-Fighting Measures) mentions the explosion hazard posed by dispersed dust. Per Chapter 2.1[2] of the GHS, the definitions of explosives is: "...a solid or liquid substance (or mixture of substances) which is in itself capable by chemical reaction of producing gas at such a temperature and pressure and at such a speed as to cause damage to the surroundings..." Which led me down a rabbit hole to see why Combustible Dust is listed as "Not Otherwise Classified", going through amendments to the CFR and some papers on working groups looking to add Combustible Dust to the GHS. Of note, page 16 of this[3] presentation. >"Argentina Intervention > Concern over the definition of "combustible dust" produced by flours, grains and cereals because of the trade implications that such an inclusion could produce > Dust originated from flours, grains and cereals should not be classified as "hazardous chemical substances" > Reasoning: >> Flours, grain and cereal dust are not a chemical substance >> Dust originated from flour, grain and cereal have no intrinsic explosive property >> Dust is not a dangerous substance in itself > Requested explicit exclusion from definition" Luckily saner minds prevailed, and we ended up with GHS Annex 11 which is why Combustible Dust is listed on the SDS I linked. But hey there we see, once again, economic interests trying to muddy up the waters when it comes to safety. But that is a whole different (and rant-y) tangent I could go off on, and I should probably get back to work. [1]http://s3.amazonaws.com/media.agricharts.com/sites/1846/Flour/SDS%20All%20Purpose%20Wheat%20Flour%20CO-EHS-1512-03.pdf http://s3.amazonaws.com/media.agricharts.com/sites/1846/Flou... [2]https://unece.org/DAM/trans/danger/publi/ghs/ghs_rev03/English/02e_part2.pdf https://unece.org/DAM/trans/danger/publi/ghs/ghs_rev03/Engli... [3]https://schc.memberclicks.net/assets/meetings/fall_2017/lantry-miller_powerpoint.pdf https://schc.memberclicks.net/assets/meetings/fall_2017/lant...