fiberglass insulation made in 1930; Museum of insulation???

I was reading about insulations and found out that fiberglass was first mass produced in 1930. Is that correct or is that just a gross guess of the first mass produced fiberglass.
I was wondering if some museum keeps samples of all the mass produced house and building insulations as well as other mass produced building products.
I was avidly looking for some picture of what 1930 fiberglass looks like and could find none on the Internet. Anyone have a website that shows 1930 fiberglass?
Can someone who has 1930 fiberglass insulation describe in good word detail what this material now looks like? I am wondering if it is ball clumpy and very dark to black looking? I am wondering if it is not all uniform but has odd objects mixed into it.
Anyone out there ever seen old fiberglass insulation that was made circa 1930 give a description. Thanks in advance.
Archimedes Plutonium, a snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

  Quoted Text Here  
Use a bunsen burner Arch. Cellulose will burn, glass wool will fuse. Pragmatist - "Use a bigger hammer!"

And asbestos won't burn. If it is mixed, it will be hard to tell. Take a sample to a lab and spend the $15-25. Great piece of mind.

Henry Boyter wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

  Quoted Text Here  
I fully agree. I can't comment about the USA, but here in NZ, labs that offer an asbestos test facility are very careful to ensure the result is correct, and often forward mixed samples to a national occupational health lab for confirmation if any doubt exists. The definitive tests involve specialist microscopy skills.
  Quoted Text Here  
The danger with this approach is that you could have mixed insulation from several eras, and some asbestos could still be present. There have been several types of mineral fibre insulation used over the decades, and the only real test is to examine a representative sample from the area of concern for asbestos fibres.
Note that physical appearance is not a good guide, nor is burning ( which would identify flammable products, but here in NZ, some asbestos-based building insulation products were mixtures of flammables and minerals ).
  Quoted Text Here  
Given the huge liability issues with asbestos, I would think that labs offering asbestos identification would be very careful to ensure their testing was accurate.
If homeowners are doubtful about commercial labs, they can always contact their local occupational health authorities, they may have a register of accredited testing labs - possibly a little more expensive, but the piece of mind may justify their selection.
The first step should always be a risk assessment. If the insulation is in a sealed area that isn't exposed to draughts, is there any possibility of fibre generation that could be inhaled?. If the area is sealed and seldom disturbed, the removal cost may outweigh the health and peace of mind issues.
Bruce Hamilton

Labs have to be NELAP (federal) certified and state licensed. It is illegal for the lab to be part of a contracting company. The ONLY way to tell composition is with PLM or TEM microscopy. You can not do it yourself. I've been dealing with asbestos for over 15 years.
You can double ziplock bag it, put it in a padded enelope and mail it. Unless you are living in the middle of nowhere, there should be a lab close by. All major cities have several. Again, in most states, you have to have a lab report if you ever want to have it removed. If you need to mail it, I can suggest several labs in your area or nationally.

Henry Boyter wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
Okay, thanks Henry, I live in Vermillion, South Dakota which is in the south-east corner of South Dakota. The nearest big city is Sioux City, Iowa.

Henry Boyter wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
Thanks, it is about time I squared this problem away. I feel sad in regards that I was not able to resolve it myself with tests. For the material has mixed stuff inside it and so the "sensible thing" is to have the science lab give the answers.
Thanks

Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  

All of the things you mention can contain asbestos. I would not take samples of materials that are whole. You may do more damage than it is worth. Most things that are in good shape are only tested during renovation these days. If you are extremely curious, see if you can find a consultant in the area that will look at the material. I know you are sort of isolated. Call the local school district and find who they use (they have to have a consultant under AHERA in most cases). A good consultant can tell asbestos visually in many cases. My mother's house is covered in asbestos shingles. We just leave them alone. They aren't hurting a thing.
The results will have % of each type of asbestos. The sample is viewed under a wide field scope first to determine homogeneity of the sample and the suspicious areas are then tested by PLM under another scope. TEM just sees smaller fibers and is mainly used after removal in schools. PLM is the OSHA and EPA method of choice for bulk samples.
hb

Sun, 21 Sep 2003 20:32:35 GMT Henry Boyter wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
Univ of Iowa is very proficient at these testings because it was just last Friday, 19SEP that I mailed the package in to them and here on 26SEP I receive the test results. They described the insulation as "bulk homogenous brown insul."
I would have described it as more blackish than brownish but then I had only seen it in the shade.
Result of my attic insulation:
% by Area
<1 Cellulose 80 Glass <1 Synthetic fibers 20 Nonfibrous material
0 total asbestos
A great sigh of relief went out in my household today. I cannot tell you how much of a burden it is to think that a home may have a silent killer in it. And it really is not a home anymore when it does have asbestos rockwool. And one treats a house very differently thinking it has asbestos from a house that has no asbestos.
As for asbestos-linoleum floor tile, I am not concerned. As for asbestos-asphalt roof shingles, I eventually replace them with sheet metal roofing. As for asbestos flue pipe, I just paint them with a special coating that keeps it intact and whole.
What a nice day and relief of mind.
Archimedes Plutonium, a snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

Subject: Iowa Lab tests returned Re: Sure test of Fiberglass Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 16:21:59 -0500 From:
Reply-To: NOdtgEMAIL Organization: whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies Newsgroups: sci.materials, sci.chem
Sun, 21 Sep 2003 20:32:35 GMT Henry Boyter wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
Univ of Iowa is very proficient at these testings because it was just last Friday, 19SEP that I mailed the package in to them and here on 26SEP I receive the test results. They described the insulation as "bulk homogenous brown insul."
I would have described it as more blackish than brownish but then I had only seen it in the shade.
Result of my attic insulation:
% by Area
<1 Cellulose 80 Glass <1 Synthetic fibers 20 Nonfibrous material
0 total asbestos
A great sigh of relief went out in my household today. I cannot tell you how much of a burden it is to think that a home may have a silent killer in it. And it really is not a home anymore when it does have asbestos rockwool. And one treats a house very differently thinking it has asbestos from a house that has no asbestos.
As for asbestos-linoleum floor tile, I am not concerned. As for asbestos-asphalt roof shingles, I eventually replace them with sheet metal roofing. As for asbestos flue pipe, I just paint them with a special coating that keeps it intact and whole.
What a nice day and relief of mind.
Archimedes Plutonium, a snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

a snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com (Archimedes Plutonium) wrote in message
  Quoted Text Here  
I did the test a different way, at a price that was right for me.
I took a pinch of sample (floor tile in my case), held it in pliers, and put it in a blue propane jet for about a minute. At the end of this time, the residue was glowing bright green-blue. When cooled, long, easily-recognized needles of asbestos were left. Further burning did not affect them.
So my floor tile had asbestos in it, and the creeping monster sneaks up on us in our beds and murders our children. And steals their souls.
Bill Penrose

Subject: Re: Iowa Lab tests returned Re: Sure test of Fiberglass Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 02:47:03 -0500 From:
Reply-To: NOdtgEMAIL Organization: whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies Newsgroups: sci.materials, sci.chem
William Penrose wrote:
whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

Hate to burst your bubble, but the airborne from the linoleum would be greater than from the shingles due to the matrix and the degree of air dilution. Zippo to worry about unless you disturb them. Loose 5 pounds. Would do you more good than worrying in most cases. By the way, when you covered the old linoleum, you made the new linoleum ACBM since you can't remove the top layer without disturbing the old.

  Quoted Text Here  
Not the first time I have been wrong. I was basing the above on the frequency probability of asbestos becoming airborne and the likelihood of inhaling into the lungs.
Given a brand new roof of asphalt-asbestos shingles and a new linoleum-asbestos floor tile that the roof shingles would deteriorate much more rapidly than the floor tile. So that if a homeowner ever inhales asbestos fibers from a home which has roofing and flooring, which is the higher probability of source? My guess is that the inhaled asbestos came from the roof shingles.
I do not know whether the floor asbestos is a worse variety from the roofing which you call "matrix". But since much of that flooring is still in existence after 100 years where the roofing is gone after 15 years.
I would agree that inside broken up and dry and dusty flooring is a worse danger than outside deteriorated and dusty roofing for asbestos.
I don't know if vigorously and skidding and scraping of floor tile will make the asbestos free and airborne?
I do know that in roofing there is a cleaning up of leaves and sweeping and a bunch of junk collected in the gutters. But it is outdoors which alleviates the chances.
Archimedes Plutonium whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

Subject: Re: Sure test of Fiberglass Re: Hammering test for insulation to tell what it is Re: fiberglass insulation made in 1930; Museum of insulation??? Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 01:09:49 -0500 From:
Reply-To: NOdtgEMAIL Organization: whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies Newsgroups: sci.materials, sci.chem References: 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6
Henry Boyter wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
Hi Henry, well I mailed my first samples today of attic insulation and feel much better about the fact of receiving information as to its content whether it has or does not have asbestos. Knowing is worth alot.
Henry, I was wondering since most of the labs are PLM and only a few are TEM as to what the difference between these are? And whether one of those methods can analyze gas-flu-pipes for asbestos (don't know how I can get a sample off the pipes)? And whether one can test for asbestos in drywall sheets used near a woodstove. And whether one can test for asbestos in slate-type exterior siding? I would like to test all suspicious materials for asbestos content.
Wondering how the attic insulation news will come back? Will they give a percentage of asbestos if it contains any? Will they analyze the entire sample or just a few fibers? And if it has a mixed content, seems as though the only way to be thorough is to test the entire sample, but how is that possible if the test is under a microscope.
Just some musings on my part before the news returns.
Archimedes Plutonium, a snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
--- end of original post ---
I originally posted the above. I assumed something was being collated at Google as a reason for it not appearing on Google. Then I was informed that someone had written a virus in which the command execution is such that the Internet posts of Archimedes Plutonium appear on my local home ISP but that the posts never appear on Google or AOL or other ISPs.
Recently a Minnesota man was apprehended for the Microsoft Windows virus. I suppose he will spend some jail time for his actions. And the person who wrote a virus that censors AP's posts to the science newsgroups, equally, deserves jail time.
For a long time I had thought the reason many of my posts never appeared on Google or other ISP was due to overhaul or down-time or system maintenance. But now I am under the impression that those many posts never appeared because someone wrote a virus execution that prevents those posts from appearing.
Archimedes Plutonium, a snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

a snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com (Archimedes Plutonium) wrote:
Please cease your constant changing of posting address. Your drivel is still not welcome anywhere ... sorry :)
Bruce
-------------------------------------------------------------------- Oook ! NOTE remove the not_ from the address to reply. NO SPAM !

Asbestos is not one mineral it is in fact a crystaline property exibited by a number of crystaline minerals. The property which give rise to a sbestos is the presence of two easy cleavage planes at an angle in the crystal. This causes the crystal to split when crushed into fine fibres. The only way to identify whether or not a material is asbestos (more correctly an asbestiform mineral) is a detailed microscopic examination by a competent microscopist.
Bob Molony.
Ps if you send me a sample plus my fee I could do the job.

It is only illegal to send mercury above a certain quantity (several thermometers) and then you can do it with the proper paperwork. It does have to be ground shipped.