+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Didymium glasses

  1. #1

    Default Didymium glasses

    I am needing information about didymium glasses vs. Shade 3.0 glasses that filter out UV and IR rays. I have been using the most common didymium safety glasses and one of the ear pieces broke off. I ordered UV and IR safety glasses. The problem is that they are too dark and I am unable to see what I'm doing. Any recommendations? I've read the safety article posted awhile back, but would still like further comments if possible.

    thanks.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    1,651

    Default

    IF you are using soft glass (soda lime) , the new glasses for soft glass work have ACE202 glass lenses..... Didymium glass is no longer made or available for glasses...

    You may want to go to this site: http://www.phillips-safety.com/

    And slide down the left hand side to "Glass Working Eyewear"...

    Generally the "Shade 3" and darker lenses are used with boro glass work where the glass temperatures are higher and UV and IR radiation is more intense... Also soda lime glass may emit some low levels of UV and IR but they are so low they are considered "safe" when you use a didymium or ACE 202 lens. You should be using at lest a ACE 202 type lenses.... IF nothing else it protects eye from any flying glass shards and it will eliminate the sodium flare usually found surrounding hot glass in a flame....

    Dale

  3. #3

    Default Didymium glasses

    Thank you, Dale. I began to think that the Ace 3's were too dark and were perhaps designed for boro. I sometimes use boro, so will keep for those times. But I will check out the ones you suggested. Again thanks. It helps if you can see what you're doing ....L

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Western Washington State
    Posts
    3,681

    Default

    I think Dale missed the main point of sodium filter glasses whether didymium or other material. These glasses are designed to allow the artist to see his work through the sodium flare and they are not designed to specifically protect against either IR or UV radiation in most cases. Most do protect against UV just because of the characteristics of the material but for IR protection you need additional specific filtering. UV radiation from heated glass is virtually negligible based on many measurements. For soft glass material in masses used for most bead work the IR radiation is not generally a major concern. The IR radiation goes up with the mass and temperature of heated glass so the IR from a gather of glass from a furnace is much greater than the IR from a 15 mm diameter heated bead.

    Laminated material that filters the sodium flare from soda-lime glass and provides a measure of IR protection is a good choice for most torch work. Working borosilicate glass requires more IR and visible light protection because of the higher temperatures and increased radiation from the heated mass of glass.

    Vince

  5. #5

    Default

    Thanks for your input, Vince. I have been doing lampwork a fairly long time and understand the need for filtering the soda flare. My husband bought be some safety glasses designed to be used by welders, and they DID NOT filter the soda flare, which made it virtually impossible to work with the torch. However, I realized after looking at Dale's response that I had a filter that was too strong for the materials I was using...specifically COE 104. I kept the others to use with boro and have since gotten a 2 filter which is perfect. I think my problem as been solved all the way around, but thanks so much for the additional information. It's always useful. L

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    105

    Default

    Don't mean to high jack, but mine were called aur92's. Is that still good? I think when I bought them, they were a bit better than didy's? (5 years ago)

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    1,651

    Default

    AUR92 is a brand model number.... The material in lenses should not change, they should be good....

    Dale

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    105

    Default

    Thanks Dale; I appreciate your quick response.

+ Reply to Thread

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

     

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts