A poster here recently claimed that, regardless of welding helmet used,
welding causes eye damage.
Is that true?
Additionally, it was also claimed that the cheap (AKA fifty dollar HF
helmets) will allow more of this eye damage to occur than expensive helmets.
Is that true?
The reason for my concern is that if I am damaging my eyes every time I
weld, I will sell the box tomorrow and never do it again; going blind is not
worth the ability to weld.
Further, I am trusting my ability to see on a fifty dollar HF helmet, but if
it is unable to protect my eyes from damaging rays, that too will be gone (I
use safety glasses under the helmet, as the instructions which came with the
helmet instructed me to do).
So, aside from unsubstantiated claimes, what is the truth here regarding
welding and ocular damage?
Thanks for any insight into this,
Jon
My opinion is that if you use a welding mask, you will be all right.
This is not to say that the filter will block all uv, but it will
block enough that what remains is equivalent to being outside on a
cloudy day without sun glasses. And as far as I know the cheap
helments use the same types of materials as the expensive ones. So
the uv filtering pretty much the same. I think there is some
differences in that the more expensive helments probably have filters
that are more uniform in filtering the visable light.
Dan
Since I've been using a Harbor Freight helmet for a couple of years, I've
been following the "is a HF helmet any good" threads with interest. The
threads of the last couple of days has motivated me to do a little ferreting
myself, and I will report what I learned. Much of this has been mentioned
in various threads here before and I may only be verifying it. I am not
stating the following as unimpeachable; this is only what I've found out
after an hour or so of snooping around, and have I no vested opinion...
There are a couple of ANSI standards that seem worthwhile to consider. The
first is ANSI Z87.1-1989 and the second is ANSI Z87.1-2003. Here's a quote
talking about the change in standards in the market and why we should care
if we're looking at auto darkening helmets.
From a release in 2006: "Although it has taken several years, the American
National Standards Institute (ANSI) has approved the new "Occupational and
Educational Personal Eye and Face Protective Devices" standard- ANSI
Z87.1-2003.
There are several changes and minor alterations to the old standard (ANSI
Z87.1-1989) that went into effect in 1989 and were re-affirmed in 1998."
Also
"Optical Requirements
To clarify the transmittance ranges for special purpose lenses, Table 2-
Transmittance Requirements for Special-Purpose Lenses-has been added. Table
3, Switching Index Requirements for Automatic Darkening Welding Filter
Lenses, has been added to specify switching index times for Auto Darkening
Filters (ADFs)."
There are other changes in the ANSI standards, but the above paragraph seems
most on point. I could not find the text of the ANSI standards. I wanted
to find the tables mentioned to see if I could find out what the 2003
requirements are for switching since switching time seems to be regularly
mentioned at the HF site. I'm inferring from what I've read that there are
no 1989 standards for switching, but I could easily be wrong.
I then went to the Harbor Freight site, the Jackson/Huntsman site, and a
site with info on the Optrel helmets. HF, either on the page for a specific
helmet or in the manual for a helmet, state that the helmet(s) meets the
1989 standard. Jackson/Huntsman does not specifically mention if their
helmets meet any ANSI standard, although one blurb from a press release
states that one of their lenses meets the 1989 standards, and one of their
safety goggles meets the 2003 standards (probably for impact resistance).
The Optrel info says that the helmets meet the ANSI 1989 standards.
I spent some time looking for studies on eye damage and welding and while I
found some info (much of it from Australia oddly enough), none of it seems
to be directed at the differences between various auto darkening helmets or
even on the AD helmets generally other than to say that they are a "Good
Thing".
From what I've read UV and IR seems to have the potential to do the most
damage to the eyes, and both welding industry info and medical info say that
the unswitched lens of any auto darkening helmet protects the eyes fairly
completely from UV and IR rays. This technology is embedded in many
sunglasses, and is for the most part fool proof. It seems to me that
welding helmets in general provide equal protection if one believes what the
manufacturers state.
Protection against "flashing" is what the switching speed is all about, and
seems to be what the ANSI 2003 standards address. From the little time I've
spent looking at this it appears that most (all?) welding helmets meet the
1989 - and not the 2003 - standards for switching (which may mean no
standards at all since I can't find the ANSI 1989 text). I have not found a
helmet manufacturer that talks about meeting the 2003 standards for their
lens. This isn't a surprise given that the 2003 standards weren't adopted
until 2006. I am not saying that a 2003 compliant AD lens doesn't exist -
only that I couldn't find anything about it during my sojourn. If this is
true, we are left to determine how the switching speeds between the cheap
lenses and the upmarket lenses compare, and if this has any impact on the
relative safety of the lens/helmet. Once again, it seems to me that a main
concern regarding comparative safety is if one believes what the
manufacturer says.
Although I can see that if one does not trust the claims of the cheap helmet
manufacturers that the HF helmets and their ilk would seem risky. I came
away feeling like the cheap helmets are safe. While I am not a
five-day-a-week kind of welder, I have spent a number of six hour days
welding in my HF special, and have not experienced any eye fatigue beyond
what I've experienced using snootier (although non-auto darkening) helmets.
Having said that, I recently tried on some Jackson and Huntsman helmets at a
local welding store. While I wasn't impressed at all with the Jacksons, I
fell in love with the Huntsman 951; it was WAY more comfortable than my HF
helmet, enough so that I'm on the prowl for a 951 with some type of AD lens.
Maybe the reason the Jackson helmet wasn't comfortable was simply my head
shape. I can't wear Simpson motorsports helmets, but Bell helmets fit me
perfectly - go figure.
Anyhow, it's late and I've undoubtedly forgotten something, misstated some
vital piece of info, or didn't include some piece of logic, but there you
go. I'll be interested in any info someone else has.
Regards,
Peter
pgrey wrote:
Interesting article you wrote! Thanks!
A bit of nickpicking[tm] here:
The "classical" flashing happens, when you look into an arc unprotected.
That happened at the times when auto-helmets were out of existence.
Remember? "Good" old times?
With the auto-helmets, you don't get *that* flashing anymore (feels like
someone stuffed rockwool under your eye-lids*)) but you get just dizzy (?)
for some seconds. That doesn't make more harm than like looking into a
flash-light.
*)
Don't know whether it's available where you live, but I use(d) eye-drops
called "DuraUltra" when I got flashed (didn't happen anymore since long,
thanks to auto-helmet). They were really good.
And, to see what your helmet does, they all have stamped the ANSI-code they
conform to onto the darkening assembly. If not, throw it away. Furthermore,
I wouldn't trust a Chinese declaration of conformance.
Nick
--
***********************************
*** The lowcost DRO ***
Yes it is "dangerous", but that does not mean it is guaranteed harmful.
It has the potential to do immediate painful damage and long term low
impact damage, but you will not go blind from hobby welding, unless you
try arc welding with gas welding goggles, and keep doing it despite the
agony.
The short term damage is called a Flash Burn.
This happens if you view a welding arc at close range with no, or
little, protection.
You effectively sunburn you cornea.
If this occurs, your eyes will start to feel warm soon after and the
next day it will feel like you have crushed glass under your eyelids.
This is the outer layer of cornea skin cells sloughing off.
It is nearly impossible to get permanent eye damage from one case of
flash burn.
What causes long term eye damage is welding in an industrial setting
with multiple welders working in one area.
You will constantly be catching other people's welding arcs without your
hood down.
This constant low level exposure causes your rods and cones to slowly
deteriorate in the center of your vision.
This can reduce your night-vision and eventually makes your vision a bit
fuzzy in the center.
This is common in older ironworkers and boilermakers.
If you take a modern healthy approach to protecting your eyes then there
is little chance you will suffer permanent eye damage.
All LCD welding lenses have to pass the ANSI code for safety.
This means that even if the lens fails to operate, no harmful amount of
UV rays are allowed through the lens.
A cheap helmet can make your eyes sore because it doesn't react as fast
or as consistently as a quality lens, so your eyes will catch flashes of
bright light on each weld.
While this is unlikely to damage your eyes it can make them sore.
Never watch a welding arc without proper eye protection.
This is how I understood the differences. It's all reaction time. The rest
is bells and whistles. Always wear ANSI z-87.1 approved safety glasses,
and the flash burns will be kept to a minimum. Per Ernie's recco, I have
the Jackson NexGen auto lens in a Huntsman 951P Hood. Much lighter & more
comfortable. Easier on the neck.
[snip]
Ernie, thank you so much for your experienced and rational response. It is
good to know that what I had assumed based on my own "common sense" is
spot-on with the reality of the situation.
Thanks again,
Jon
I have no clue how dangerous it is. But I have opinions I will share with
you....
Plenty of welders have spent a life time welding and have not had serious
eye problems any worse that we all tend to get when we get old. If they
had, they government would be all over it increasing the safety
regulations. This occupation hasn't changed all that much in regards to
the damage an arc will do to your eyes in 50 years. If you plan to start
welding 8 hours a day and expect to keep this up for 40 years, it's
probably wise to buy the best you can afford, but if you only expect to
weld an hour a week, then the damage you will do in 50 years is equal to
what a full time welder does to his eyes in 10 months. If full time
welders have done it 10 years without noticing any eye problems, the odds
of a very part time welder having problems is very slim. I doubt the
difference between the quality of a HF helmet and a top of the line helmet
is going to make any difference.
In addition, the UV light, which is the most harmful to the eyes, is
blocked not by the electronics, but by the permanent UV filters built into
the lens. So for the basic UV protection, it's not a question of how fast
the electronics switch. Even if the battery is dead, you still get full UV
protection from any autodarkening helmet. And as far as I know, there is
nothing high cost about UV filters - so I think all the helmets have the
same basic UV protection.
In addition, if you have polycarbonate safety glasses, they alone provide a
very high level of UV protection. I believe the plastic face cover plates
that come with most auto darkening helmets are also polycarbonate. My
arc-one helmet has a polycarbonate face place both in front of, and behind
the autodarkening lens. Combine that with the UV/IR protection of the
lens itself, with the protection of my safety glasses, and I suspect the
total exposure I get from arc welding is an order of magnitude less than
what I would get out in the sun without sun glasses on.
I just did a lot of web searching to try and find some data on exactly how
much UV radiation welding gives off, but couldn't find any numbers.
However, welding will sunburn you faster than being in the sun (so I'm
told), but not a lot faster. So I'm guessing welding probably can't be
more than 5x the radiation the sun is putting out (and I suspect that's a
high number). Polycarbonate is said to reduce UV by something like 99.9%.
So it seems to me a single polycarbonate shield will reduce 5x welding
radiation to .005% of what unfiltered sunlight will do to your eyes.
The net result I believe is that any welding helmet - even the cheapest -
is going to reduce the UV radiation to a fraction of what you get from
normal sunlight.
If you are going to be a professional welder and spend a life time welding
(and working outside where you are getting lots of sun exposure when you
are not welding) then there's plenty of reason for taking lots of extra
precautions for both your eyes and your skin. But if you only weld part
time, I strongly suspect all welding helmets, even the cheapest ones from
HF, will protect you more than enough.
The largest danger I suspect in being around welding probably comes from
all the times you are near other people welding when you are wearing no
protection. 10 seconds of indirect exposure without protection I bet is
far worse for your eyes than an hour of exposure with a cheap welding
helmet on.
But, this is all pure speculation on my part. Don't trust your eyesight on
anything I've written. :)
That is quite rightly simple!
I had short term damage to the point of looking like I had colds in my
eyes and black spots for a few days.. the healing brought fluids in my
eyes,after a short blast involuntarily up close , there was even some
debris. (easy thing to do). Ate alot of veggies, its taken a month or
so.Back to normal. It seems looking at the sun without glasses is more
dangerous than welding with a mask on.
if it is sold as helmet for welding, the shades have to be correct-
illegal to sell otherwise.
long term looking at a computer monitor has got me more worried about long
term eyesight than anything.
Trust that helmet- the auto dims are better than ever.
The main point about auto-dark helmets is: Whether cheap or expensive,
if the autodark mechanism is dead, never turns on - you are _still_
protected from the UV/IR. You may get an uncomfortable overload of
visible light, but you will not get the damaging UV/IR causing an actual
burn. This is one reason that autodark helmets are "a good thing" - you
can leave your helmet down more, and reduce the odds of either getting
flashed by others, or flashing yourself as you frig around trying to get
the arc started in the right place and flip your helmet down. A
fixed-shade-filter helmet that's not over your eyes does exactly nothing.
i read all the replies thus far. i can just say this. you get what you pay
for. as example, the filters from 3M are multi-layered lcd panels with
static passive filters in between. the more layers the better the filtering.
as such they cost a lot.
even the visible wavelength of the arc can be damaging to the eye when the
intensity gets real high.
i had two HF helmets. listen to me, skip the HF helmets and get yourself one
of the Miller helmets (pick a helmet for what you do, hobbyist, daily
weldor, production weldor, etc). the HF manual says to uses safety glasses,
i believe here in the states thats a OSHA standard, and its good practice,
its another layer of eye protection. i like to use safety glasses with
yellow lenses (polarizing if possible). human eyes are most sensitive to
yellow bandwidth, so when you band-pass yellow the other crud is filtered
out. the result is your eyes see more clarity and definition of the work
piece.
That's the thing. You don't always get what you pay for. I'd be surprised
if anyone on this newsgroup believes that to be universally true. Take
generic drugs as an example. The manufacturers sell the drugs for what they
can while the patent is in force. After that one can get them cheaper. HF
may be able to sell their helmets for less even though they may use a good
(in terms of protection) filter by using cheaper helmet components, or by
committing to buy a number of helmets far greater than the number of helmets
to which a high dollar distributor would commit. I suspect both are true.
I'm not saying that a HF lens without question is as good as a Huntsman, but
that they might be. They seem to be meeting the same ANSI standards that
Jackson, Huntsman and Optrel meet.
Again, I'd be glad to see something that shows that a NexGen lens is better
for one's eyes than a HF lens. I just haven't seen anything that suggests
that; if anything what I've seen suggests they're all pretty much the same.
Peter
Lay the two helmets side by side. Inspect. Look at the ratcheting
mechanisms. Feel the difference in weight. Compare materials and
thicknesses.
I don't believe that the HF helmets are as good as a Huntsman, even if you
only use it one time a year.
Steve
I didn't say they were as good, but only that I haven't found anything
substantial that suggests that the HF helmets are any less safe for one's
eyes. The Huntsman is clearly "better"; as you said it has more substantial
parts and is more comfortable. As I said, I'm going to buy a Huntsman soon,
but not because I believe the lens in my HF helmet to be unsafe.
Peter
You will see the difference I am talking about in the Huntsman after you use
it for a day.
When I got an AD hood, I wondered why I didn't get one sooner. I have never
regretted getting one of the best, either.
Steve
I have the inexpensive Jackson AD hood (+/- $69), that I got from my
industrial welding supplier. I no longer work as a welder full time,
so I din't want to part with the money for a high end helmet.
I am completely tickled by the helmet, but I don't wear it every day
for the whole day. I just really like the accuracy of my starts,
afforded by the AD feature.
Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.