Help | Contact Us
NukeWorker.com
NukeWorker Menu OREX

Author Topic: OREX  (Read 54819 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

RT@OPG

  • Guest
OREX
« on: Jul 25, 2005, 08:34 »
I received a call from a salesman telling me that we should switch our protective equipment from reuasable (washables) to a single use product that is "disposable" becasue it disolves when you wash it - OREX.  Is anyone really using this stuff and is it cheap enought to use including the wash/disposal costs etc.  Can you help me with information on whether its a waste of time or not.  Any and all help appreciated. 

rabbit

  • Guest
Re: OREX
« Reply #1 on: Jul 25, 2005, 09:11 »
The only experiences I've had with them were at Quad Cities and Millstone.  They do dissolve in water (can be embarrassing for some who don't want to show their tushes! :-[), are lightweight, fairly good at blocking wind, but do not hold up to a whole 12 hour shift.  They tend to break down when used for extended periods of time.  Your best bet would be to contact these plants for their input.

Good luck in your quest for information!! ;D

Offline RRhoads

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 293
  • Total likes: 8
  • Karma: 334
  • Gender: Male
  • it was like like that when i got here!
Re: OREX
« Reply #2 on: Jul 25, 2005, 10:05 »
I have used them & the "other"(unitech) product...
Orex are Definitely a superior product...I've seen people walk into a "C" zone & bend down & blow out the unitechs.
Unitechs seem to be less breathable too.
Orex are cooler than Cotton PC's & way more comfy than the nylon PC's & those pseudo-cotton types!
The other big bennie is that they are not radioactive to begin with! That is the reason why Columbia used the Unitechs last outage.
Givem' a shot! ;)

Offline RDTroja

  • Site Heretic
  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3964
  • Total likes: 177
  • Karma: 4553
  • Gender: Male
  • I knew I got into IT for a reason!
Re: OREX
« Reply #3 on: Jul 26, 2005, 08:15 »
Lots of plants are using Orex and they do well if you are not doing a lot of 'rugged' work... and of course no welding. They do tend to wear out if you are doing hot work or getting wet, but the dissolving part doesn't start until you put them in 200 degree water. They create less solid waste, they are clean when you store and handle them before use, and they do a pretty good job of keeping people clean if you don't let them keep working when their PCs start to shred (and they will if the worker is doing a lot of climbing or things like hauling lead). Also, don't let people kneel down in wet or high contamination areas, but that holds for cotton, too.

I hated them when I first started using them (probably just on principal) but now I don't think they are so bad... especially when I consider that I am the only person that will ever wear them. When I see (and smell) some of the people that may have worn the cotton PCs I am about to put on, I think that Orex is a GREAT idea.
"I won't eat anything that has intelligent life, but I'd gladly eat a network executive or a politician."

                                  -Marty Feldman

"Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to understand that it bears a very close resemblance to the first."
                                  -Ronald Reagan

I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: 'O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous.' And God granted it.

                                  - Voltaire

Offline PWHoppe

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 820
  • Total likes: 1
  • Karma: 2024
  • Gender: Male
  • CONFIRMED!: The dumbest man on the planet
Re: OREX
« Reply #4 on: Jul 26, 2005, 11:20 »
I'm not a big fan of the OREX product. I have not used "cotten" PC's in a long, long time. The other brand (unitech) doesn't use cotten but rather uses a product they call "protech" or something like that. It is not cotten and I have never seen it tear out nor does it retain a smell that I have noticed. I also noted that the OREX has been touted to be able to be washed a lower temps and reused, as Roger noted they do not disolve until a higher temp is reached, not sure what that is, maybe 200 is correct? I found that when they were reused the shrinkage was extreme! I am not a fan of them and would not use them.

Just my opinion, I could be wrong.
« Last Edit: Jul 26, 2005, 01:30 by PWHoppe »
If a chicken and a half can lay an egg and a half in a day and a half, how many days will it take a grasshopper with a rubber foot to kick a hole in a tin can?

Forum rules..http://www.nukeworker.co

Offline RDTroja

  • Site Heretic
  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3964
  • Total likes: 177
  • Karma: 4553
  • Gender: Male
  • I knew I got into IT for a reason!
Re: OREX
« Reply #5 on: Jul 26, 2005, 03:02 »
I also noted that the OREX has been touted to be able to be washed a lower temps and reused ... I found that when they were reused the shrinkage was extreme! I am not a fan of them and would not use them.

If someone asked me to wear a pair of washed Orex coveralls they would need to visit their doctor to have the coveralls surgically removed from where I put them.
"I won't eat anything that has intelligent life, but I'd gladly eat a network executive or a politician."

                                  -Marty Feldman

"Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to understand that it bears a very close resemblance to the first."
                                  -Ronald Reagan

I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: 'O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous.' And God granted it.

                                  - Voltaire

Offline Already Gone

  • Curmudgeon At Large
  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1769
  • Total likes: 5
  • Karma: 3388
  • Gender: Male
  • Did I say that out loud?
Re: OREX
« Reply #6 on: Jul 26, 2005, 03:12 »
Unfortunately, Orex will not replace your reusables because it won't keep out Tritium.  The salesman is probably under the impression that you use the same cotton outer coveralls that we do.  They would make a good replacement for the tyvek suits.  BUT I caution you that they will never take the place of the Browns because perspiration degrades them rapidly.  If you tried to wear Orex under a plastic suit, you'd end up with nothing left but the zipper.  They make Orex scrubs too.  These tear easily, dissolve with the slightest bit of sweat, hold in body heat, and cannot be worn for any kind of Hot (spark or flame producing) Work.  Most people don't have this problem, but they give me a mild skin rash.
When I last worked at OPG, they were experimenting with cotton scrubs to replace the browns.  They were even letting the users wear them into Zone 1.  I don't know how far the experiment went, but remember that the Orex scrubs won't work inside plastic.
« Last Edit: Jul 26, 2005, 03:14 by Beer Court »
"To be content with little is hard; to be content with much, impossible." - Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach

Offline tonynuke

  • Light User
  • **
  • Posts: 39
  • Total likes: 0
  • Karma: 55
  • Gender: Male
  • I love NukeWorker.com!
Re: OREX
« Reply #7 on: Jul 26, 2005, 03:56 »
I like em better than getting contaminated by cottons that arent washed good enough.  You should just be prepared for a "blowout" every now and then with OREX, but if you can deal with that, they work alright depending on the temperatures and contamination levels.  Just like everything else in this business, in the right applications, they work well.  Seems like alot of commercial power plants are using more and more of them.

ageoldtech

  • Guest
Re: OREX
« Reply #8 on: Jul 26, 2005, 04:23 »
Most nuke sites don’t have a tritium problem. Orex also makes a fire retardant disposable. I’ve been using orex for about 8 years and have found them to be reliable for most applications. Only water gives us a problem, but as we know water gives everyone a problem. I’m ordering tons of them for the up coming SGR at Watts Bar. I’m also going to try the disposable shoe covers and gloves. At Oconee orex was just shipped off to be super compacted instead of dissolved. From the study I just completed the savings is justifiable.

shayne

  • Guest
Re: OREX
« Reply #9 on: Jul 26, 2005, 07:22 »
I don't mind them.  I usually only wear them when I have to wear doubles or going into a CA for a short period of time and not climbing around.  I have found that they do breath a little better than the cotton or the protech.  I still perfer the protect for everything else.  The silk feel make them feel cooler to me.

We also use the Orex scrubs that many wear around the plant.  I don't like the feel of them on the bare skin.  But they seem to be popular.
« Last Edit: Jul 26, 2005, 07:23 by Shayne »

Offline Duke Nuker

  • Senior Emergency Preparedness Specialist
  • Moderate User
  • ***
  • Posts: 110
  • Total likes: 1
  • Karma: 394
  • Gender: Male
  • Looking forward to early retirement.
Re: OREX
« Reply #10 on: Jul 27, 2005, 09:51 »
We use OREX here at Harris.  We have not had any problems with PC related contaminations since we switched.  You never know what your cottons were washed with.  We have not had any issues with sweat throughs.  Most work in containment during outage doesn't last all shift.  We find workers spend maybe 4 hours in a set.  I know all about the horror stories of 11 or 12 hours in the can, but that is not the norm here.  I will investigate the supercompactiing though, if it will save money.....
Pedal! Pedal! You can't see paradise if you don't keep pedaling.
Fowler

Offline Already Gone

  • Curmudgeon At Large
  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1769
  • Total likes: 5
  • Karma: 3388
  • Gender: Male
  • Did I say that out loud?
Re: OREX
« Reply #11 on: Jul 27, 2005, 02:14 »
Most nuke sites don’t have a tritium problem. Orex also makes a fire retardant disposable. I’ve been using orex for about 8 years and have found them to be reliable for most applications. Only water gives us a problem, but as we know water gives everyone a problem. I’m ordering tons of them for the up coming SGR at Watts Bar. I’m also going to try the disposable shoe covers and gloves. At Oconee orex was just shipped off to be super compacted instead of dissolved. From the study I just completed the savings is justifiable.

This is quite true, but the person asking the question works at a CANDU.  Tritium makes up about 50% of the WB dose at a CANDU.  Because of this, they do not use cotton outer PC's.  They use an air-fed plastic suit that is much heavier than our bubble suits.  They are laundered and reused.  In areas without Tritium, they just wear Tyvek over clothing.  The only reusable outer PC's they wear are the plastics.  For anyone wearing the plastics, or entering areas where they need double rubber, they have to wear plant-provided clothing (including socks and underwear) much like the way we use scrubs.  They throw away all the rubber goods.  So, the only "reusables" that can be replaced by Orex in this situation would be the "radiation area" garments which most workers wear as work clothes whether they are dressing out or not.  Since this includes socks and underwear, I think Orex would be a most uncomfortable replacement.
"To be content with little is hard; to be content with much, impossible." - Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach

raymcginnis

  • Guest
Re: OREX
« Reply #12 on: Jul 27, 2005, 11:51 »
I worked at St. Lucie years ago and there was a Turkey Point travelling technician that I worked with who told me about PCs that they used that dissolved.  I am pretty sure that he told me that they added hydrogen peroxide to the laundry and that caused the PCs to turn into gasses.  Does anyone know if this is the same product under discussion here?  Is my knowledge incorrect or worse yet, ancient?

I work at a very low level site (very close to finishing remediation).  We are using Tyveks.  If there is something better, that would be good to know.

ageoldtech

  • Guest
Re: OREX
« Reply #13 on: Jul 28, 2005, 06:46 »
Ray, I think this is the same product you heard about. The way it was explained to me is hydrogen peroxide is added to the mix and the only waste you generate is a bunch of zippers and the filter used to clean up the solution.

raymcginnis

  • Guest
Re: OREX
« Reply #14 on: Jul 28, 2005, 08:06 »
Ageold and all.  If Ageold is right, why would they deteriorate with body heat in the absence of hydrogen peoroxide?  The other posts don't mention hydrogen peroxide.  They only mention 200 degree water to dissolve them.  I understand the input about evaporation vs. super-compacting.  That would take a real money analyst to compare that (electricity for the compactor vs. electricity for the evaporator, plus cubic feet of waste generated).  I'd like to hear more input on this.

Offline Already Gone

  • Curmudgeon At Large
  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1769
  • Total likes: 5
  • Karma: 3388
  • Gender: Male
  • Did I say that out loud?
Re: OREX
« Reply #15 on: Jul 29, 2005, 12:11 »
Ray, They don't so much dissolve as they wear thin and tear rapidly when exposed to body heat and perspiration.  Personally, I can't stand to have Orex next to my skin.  The scrubs irritate my skin, but the coveralls when used as outer PC's are okay.  The fibers don't have a lot of tensile strength - just brushing against a rough surface can cause a kind of "velcro effect". 
Still, I'd rather wear a new pair of Orex coveralls than new Protech ones.  The Protech doesn't wick perspiration fast enough and makes you feel like you're wearing a plastic bag.  Tyvek holds heat in too, and it stinks like day-old mackerel.
Cotton is my fiber of choice, but you never know where they've been.  Even brand new ones can have hot particles in them from the laundry.
"To be content with little is hard; to be content with much, impossible." - Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach

raymcginnis

  • Guest
Re: OREX
« Reply #16 on: Jul 29, 2005, 08:18 »
Quote
Even brand new ones can have hot particles in them from the laundry.

Beercourt,  It seems like a huge compromise and weight of one PC against the other.  I assume the above statement meant new ones that have been washed once.  What would you recommend for a site that is almost finished?  Tyveks are cheaper for us than a laundry service.  I am pretty sure all of the hot particles are gone.  We are scabbling some hot stuff, but with super enginerring controls.  What about the old fasioned papers?  They tore sometimes but so do tyveks (so I hear).  The workers don't sit down here and the seat was the thing that tore out.  I haven't been in PCs for years now.  I have been doing engineering.  I don't know that I have even wore Tyveks.  I did wear Orex hoods in 2002 at St. Lucie.  That would not tell me anything about the complaints though.  I may look into the cost of a washer for cottens for our site again.  We would have to plumb in the outlet to our new evaporator system.  Worker comfort should pay for it though. 

Any further input from everyone about this post would be appreciated.

Thanks to all who replied to my reply.  It is all food for thought.

JnyMac

  • Guest
Re: OREX
« Reply #17 on: Jul 29, 2005, 09:54 »
Guys,

I was asked by John Steward and Jordan Johnston to work with them on OREX.  It started out as Microbasix.  We developed the processor for getting rid of the waste.  No plants wanted the processor so they are all shipping the waste out for processing.  I will tell you this I was impressed by the way this stuff works.  We would put 50lbs of the stuff in a tank, add hydrogen peroxide, and heat the water to 200 degrees.  Wait about 4 hours open it up and all that was on the screen was the metal and cotton product from manufacturing.  The chemical process broke it down to basically vinegar.  The OREX is made with PolyVinyl Alcohol.  The original process was to the filter out the Rad Material and send the liquid to be processed by microbes.  This was performed at the facility in Texas where we were performing R and D.  The water that the microbes produced actuallt tested better than the drinking water from the tap.  We wear them at Palo Verde and I think they perform great.

raymcginnis

  • Guest
Re: OREX
« Reply #18 on: Jul 29, 2005, 10:54 »
Quote
I will tell you this I was impressed by the way this stuff works.  We would put 50lbs of the stuff in a tank, add hydrogen peroxide, and heat the water to 200 degrees.

Jnymac, have you done a cost analysis yet?  We have not tried this product yet, but if you look through the posts, others have, and they think that super compacting may be cheaper than dissolving.  I don't think anyone has calculated down to the electricity costs.  How much electricity per PC does the disslover use.  How much electricity per PC does the super-compactor use?  As our site grows less radioactive and as our staff grows smaller, I get closer and closer to the cost reality.  I am involved in lots of meetings with the people in charge of the money.  I see there pain now.  If you have lots of money, then you can use new cool things that seem effective.  When you have a really limited budget, you have to look carefully about what you spend.  If something is easy, it is not necessarily the best way to go.  It may blow your budget. 

The whole point of all of the other posts are that yes, you may meet waste volume reduction goals for one metric, but it may make another's metric go overboard, such as liquid waste people.  How much does it cost per PC?  That is the ultimate question that I have not seen the answer to on this topic.  Nobody looks this deep unless they have to.  Nobody has had to answer this question yet.

Were you using Orex 1 or Orex 2?

Offline Already Gone

  • Curmudgeon At Large
  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1769
  • Total likes: 5
  • Karma: 3388
  • Gender: Male
  • Did I say that out loud?
Re: OREX
« Reply #19 on: Jul 30, 2005, 11:30 »
I assume the above statement meant new ones that have been washed once. 

Not to stray too far off topic here Ray, but new cotton PC's that are leased from a vendor are usually put through a rinse and spin cycle before being distributed.  To save money and time, some vendors used to do this in the same rinse and spin that was meant to clear the machines after a load of Hot Particle laundry.
Of course, every rental contract is different.  Some require sorting gloves, folding coveralls, stocking the goods on portable shelves... etc.  Some just require folding and bundling the coveralls.  Some require monitoring of the PC's, some don't.  Some facilities monitor incoming PC's at 100%, some do 10%.
I don't know if they are still using this shortcut, and I don't read a site's laundry contract before I dress out. Just to be safe, I never put a pair of brand new cotton PC's on if there are older ones available.  This is just one of the many problems you don't have to deal with when using disposable PC's.
« Last Edit: Jul 30, 2005, 11:33 by Beer Court »
"To be content with little is hard; to be content with much, impossible." - Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach

RAD-GHOST

  • Guest
Re: OREX
« Reply #20 on: Aug 01, 2005, 03:43 »
Now that's Funny! 

The Microbe treated water tastes better then the water from the tap?    :-X

I would have to say, that's taking an experiment to the limits!

50 lbs. of solid waste into a tank, add peroxide, heat to 200 degrees and Wa-La, the stuff disappears!  The stuff may be the thing of the future, but everybody stops short at the disolving process!  Where did the 50 pounds of material go and where is it finally recovered?

RG

JnyMac

  • Guest
Re: OREX
« Reply #21 on: Aug 01, 2005, 06:53 »
« Last Edit: Aug 01, 2005, 07:18 by JnyMac »

raymcginnis

  • Guest
Re: OREX
« Reply #22 on: Aug 01, 2005, 07:29 »
Rad-Ghost,

I have not read Jnymac's link yet.  I read that tonight or tommorrow and comment again.  It will answer your question more precisely than I can, but I do seem to remember that the person who told me about it said that the majority of the coveralls turned into harmless gasses (CO2) and water (H2O).  I guess some would complain about greenhouse effects from the CO2, but it is nothing compared to gass and coal fired plant contributions to that.

Offline JessJen

Re: OREX
« Reply #23 on: Aug 02, 2005, 02:49 »
I caution you that they will never take the place of the Browns because perspiration degrades them rapidly.  If you tried to wear Orex under a plastic suit, you'd end up with nothing left but the zipper.  They make Orex scrubs too.  These tear easily, dissolve with the slightest bit of sweat, hold in body heat, and cannot be worn for any kind of Hot (spark or flame producing) Work.  Most people don't have this problem, but they give me a mild skin rash.
When I last worked at OPG, they were experimenting with cotton scrubs to replace the browns.  They were even letting the users wear them into Zone 1.  I don't know how far the experiment went, but remember that the Orex scrubs won't work inside plastic.

Id have to disagree with you on the point that they degrade in plastics to that extent.  I've used the orex in some very sweaty, busy, nasty, and long jumps wearing one of those nifty plastic coated suits which barely breaths any more than anything else plastic and had no real problems with blowouts and actually find them more comfortable than your average cotton for outers.  Now as for the orex "scrubs" bah they can keep those...not reinforced enough for my liking.  Any real work takes place and theyre ripped...typically right in the behind.

raymcginnis

  • Guest
Re: OREX
« Reply #24 on: Aug 02, 2005, 11:23 »
Quote
Now as for the orex "scrubs" bah they can keep those...

Jess Jen,  I don't know the buzz words yet.  I read jnymac's Orex link today and then went to the products page.  They have a regular coverall and a deluxe.  The look the same except for the zipper looks more killer on the deluxe and there is a pocket with velcro seal and a place to hang a whirl pack.  Can you talk more about which ones are good and which ones tear?  What is a scrub and what is not a scrub in Orex terms?

Everyone seems to have either really good experiences with them or really bad experiences.  I think it may depend on who their purchasing agent is and what they ordered.

I know that they use them at Palo Verde.  If you work in the Radwaste buidling there, that is about as hot of sweat as you can get.  I can't imagine sweat getting up to 190, except there, but we always pulled people out before then.

Jess, if you could give me the part number for the ones that you like, I am going to ask Orex for samples and try them out for myself.

Offline Already Gone

  • Curmudgeon At Large
  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1769
  • Total likes: 5
  • Karma: 3388
  • Gender: Male
  • Did I say that out loud?
Re: OREX
« Reply #25 on: Aug 03, 2005, 12:20 »
Ray, the scrubs are the ones that are made to look like the hospital scrubs.  They are NOT comfortable and they wear rapidly.  They are meant to be a modesty garment, so they are not as durable as the coveralls.  Unfortunately, a lot of people wear them as work clothes outside contaminated areas.  IMHO, this is extremely wasteful - not just of materials but the manpower it takes to restock and dispose of them.  Then, there's the hygiene problem.  At shift change, you have to wade through a foot-deep pile of sweaty Orex scrubs in the locker room because everybody on site wore a pair and overflowed the bins.  It would be understandable if more than 10% of those people had actually entered a CA that day.
"To be content with little is hard; to be content with much, impossible." - Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach

ageoldtech

  • Guest
Re: OREX
« Reply #26 on: Aug 03, 2005, 02:37 »
Orex has some good products, but I’m in agreement with Jess Jen and Beer Court, the orex scrubs aren’t worth a nickel. For our SGR in fall of 2006 we will still be using cotton modesties. Some things just don’t need changing!

raymcginnis

  • Guest
Re: OREX
« Reply #27 on: Aug 04, 2005, 07:31 »
Thank you all for clearing this up (scrubs vs. coveralls and super coveralls.  I thought that the complainers were complaining about all OREX products. 

I guess most people send their used ones to Alabama or for holding in Pennsylvania for dissolving.  Did anyone buy or design their own dissolving system?  Now I see why some of the posters were talking about super-compacting vs dissolving of the good OREX PCs.  The shipping costs could be prohibitive for shipping C-Vans full of uncompacted waste for dissolving vs. just sending super-compacted waste directly to the waste site.  This study should be done.  I don't know if I have time to go that far.  Time will tell.  I will look at it some and repost if a light bulb lights up. 

Offline azkidd

  • RP Tech (Housemouse)
  • Moderate User
  • ***
  • Posts: 111
  • Total likes: 0
  • Karma: 135
  • Gender: Male
  • We Nationalize Banks!!
Re: OREX
« Reply #28 on: Aug 05, 2005, 12:11 »
Ray,
You need to contact Rich Bensen @ 601-437-2450.  He will give you a complete breakdown on cost benefits, for purchase, as well as disposal.  Entergy South is using OREX PC's, and Grand Gulf is also using OREX Scrubs.  Very beneficial.

Offline fueldryer

  • Heavy User
  • ****
  • Posts: 270
  • Total likes: 0
  • Karma: 981
  • Gender: Male
  • Call Before You Dig !
Re: OREX
« Reply #29 on: Aug 06, 2005, 09:37 »
We used the Orex pc's at Ft. Calhoun with great results.Disassembled the reactor with few if any contamination events.Even doing ICI flanges inside the shroud.I think the only place we didn't use them was in the lower cavity,(the water was about a foot deep).Didn't care for the hoods tho.
Call Before You Dig!

raymcginnis

  • Guest
Re: OREX
« Reply #30 on: Aug 07, 2005, 11:01 »
Quote
It would be understandable if more than 10% of those people had actually entered a CA that day.

Got it Beer Court.  It is interesting about the opinions of this product.  I used only the hoods before but everyone seems to not like the hoods.  They did not bother me.  Hmmmm!

I will spend more time on this and research it more.  The cost analysis and comfort level will be the bottom line.

My next step is to get a few samples for the Nuke Workers here on-site and to wear them myself and see what we all think.

I'll repost in a few weeks if I make that happen.  I'll also post my cost analysis, if I have time.

Offline Piggyback Beta

Re: OREX
« Reply #31 on: Aug 10, 2005, 10:08 »
All right, this subject finally made a long time reader post!  I have worn both ProTech and Orex.  I found the ProTech more comfortable as the material seemed to breath more than the Orex.  I prefer the Orex because of the single use and the lack of protective clothing PCE's.  After reading some of the posts, I have to question how well cotton provides protection against tritium vs the nonwoven Orex.  I did find probems with the "butt blowout" when wearing Orex but unless you are straddling a pipe it doesn't seem to be too much of problem.  I did find my safety glasses to steam up more when wearing the Orex.  But essentially no PCEs!  I did find it aggravating to find strange blue fibers stuck to the seat of the car!  My preference is the Orex scrubs, Orex PC's (reinforced if VERY rough work), and Protechs as the outer for doubles.  I too dislike the hoods, as the seemed to be too large and stayed in one position on your head.  When you turned your neck, you're looking at the side of the hood. 

Offline Already Gone

  • Curmudgeon At Large
  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1769
  • Total likes: 5
  • Karma: 3388
  • Gender: Male
  • Did I say that out loud?
Re: OREX
« Reply #32 on: Aug 10, 2005, 10:30 »
Nobody ever said that cotton protects against Tritium.  The original post was from a Canadian, who got a sales pitch from someone who doesn't know what he's talking about.  He told our Canadian friend that Orex could replace PC's.  That may be true here, but CANDU plants are cooled and moderated by heavy water.  Therefore their outer PC's are frequently super-heavy-duty reusable bubble suits.  They do wear cotton coveralls under the suits, but OREX coveralls would not work in this application.
In areas where there is no Tritium, they wear Tyvek as outer PC's.  Tyveks are also worn over the bubble suits where contamination is high (protects the bubble suit from having to be trashed).  Orex could be used in these applications, but it is an expensive switch for a country that has no rad waste disposal problem.
"To be content with little is hard; to be content with much, impossible." - Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach

Offline einsteinium

  • Very Lite User
  • *
  • Posts: 4
  • Total likes: 0
  • Karma: 1
  • Tell Recruiters to use NukeWorker.com
Re: OREX - Single-Use and Launderable
« Reply #33 on: Oct 05, 2005, 02:54 »
I'm a little late in my contribution to this discussion, but here's my two cents.

First off, good dialogue from some clearly astute folks. There seems to be no doubt as to the usefulness of single-use garments, at least for routine entries.

Based on opinions within the industry these days, the biggest justification for single-use is the minimization of PCEs. The mindset has become that because used launderable garments have fixed contamination, they are a suspect cause of PCEs. Indeed, I remember the hot particle issues that cropped up as a tech back in the 80s and PCs were a source for PCEs.

BUT, that was before sophisticated automated laundry monitoring was the norm. We had laundry techs frisking laundry with RM-14s, and we all know how useless that was. The fact is, any legitimate launderable program these days will preclude a PCE event from clothing. And despite the popularity of single-use products, there are plenty of launderable clothing programs around the country that have no problem whatsoever.

So what’s the real reason? Is it comfort? Convenience? Protection? Cost?

The results on comfort are mixed. Lots of people like PVA, papers, tri-lams etc., and lots of people don’t. One thing that isn’t often addressed is fit. I’ve never worn a single-use that didn’t pull in one place and end up way too loose in another. The fact is that $3.00 isn’t going to get you much in terms of tailoring or fit.

There’s no denying the convenience of single-use, especially in pulling used PCs out of a work area. They are definitely lighter. But sorting still has to happen as long as rubber items are used, so processing, etc. doesn’t really improve much.

Protection is a two-edged argument. Some folks will point to launderables as a PCE source and thus the basis for less protection. I refuted that above. But the real protection issue is textile barrier and garment strength. PVA does pretty well in particulate barrier for a single-use material (there’s good info at http://nuclearissuesforum.org/test_results.html ) but contentions by the manufacturer that it’s better than anything else are plainly false. To me, the big protection issue is strength, since a torn garment in the RCZ is a definite invitation for a serious PCE. The test link compares strength measures. Launderable garments prevail, but since OREX has held up pretty well for many facilities in routine use, it’s probably safe to say that it's adequate for light entries where wetness isn't a possibility.

Cost seems to be the big misnomer. All the single-use manufacturers imply that their garments are cheaper than launderable. But it’s goofy to think that launderable PCs that last 50 or more washes could be more expensive per use than a single use program. UniTech, the big offsite laundry service, says that the average 30,000 use outage is going to cost something like $75,000 more using OREX instead of launderable. This isn’t necessarily too much more money if the garments have identical features, but they don’t. In any case, there’s no reasonable debate on cost.

IMO, single use has a place in a typical utility RP program. But I’d never be totally comfortable covering a hot or arduous job with guys wearing single-use. It’s hard enough to keep their gloves off their faces without worrying about an elbow or crotch blowout.

ageoldtech

  • Guest
Re: OREX
« Reply #34 on: Oct 06, 2005, 11:30 »
Single use has some draw backs, but if your interested in reducing your PCE count there the way to go. Here at Watts Bar we contribute 36 percent of our PCE's to launderable garments.

Offline PWHoppe

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 820
  • Total likes: 1
  • Karma: 2024
  • Gender: Male
  • CONFIRMED!: The dumbest man on the planet
Re: OREX
« Reply #35 on: Oct 06, 2005, 01:02 »
Single use has some draw backs, but if your interested in reducing your PCE count there the way to go. Here at Watts Bar we contribute 36 percent of our PCE's to launderable garments.

Who does your laundry? That seems like an awfully large amount of PCE's to be coming from the laundry. It is sometimes easier to just blame the garment than to find the actual source of the contamination, whether it is poor worker practice, or poor controls. That is not to say it ISN'T the laundry but I have seen where the garment takes the hit instead of a more through and time consuming investigation.
If a chicken and a half can lay an egg and a half in a day and a half, how many days will it take a grasshopper with a rubber foot to kick a hole in a tin can?

Forum rules..http://www.nukeworker.co

alphadude

  • Guest
Re: OREX
« Reply #36 on: Oct 10, 2005, 11:27 »
36% seems rather high for PCs. On the other hand if that is only 2 or 3 during the year thats not to bad. Are they segregating properly? (no shoe covers in with cloth?) If detergents are used there should be little to no PCEs from washed clothing.
If only high temp water cleaning is used- good luck.  There are no secrets to washing PCs to rid them of contamination-hospitals have been doing it for years. -detergent (of some sort), hot water, appropriate cycles, and proper segregation and frisking. cotton comes cleaner than synthetics... etc.

Sweating does have its problems if the PCEs are from hot environment work. If thats the issue, then the frisking threshold for clean/reject needs to be lowered.

Jr8black3

  • Guest
Re: OREX
« Reply #37 on: Oct 10, 2005, 12:24 »
Work Practices, and training, Pat Hoppe touched on that. You cannot put inexperienced people in a bad area and expect a good outcome.

I just finished a job that the work conditions were horrible, working in nothing but papers with 200mr/hr gamma smears. We completed our project with zero percons. I chalk that up to good work practices.

ageoldtech

  • Guest
Re: OREX
« Reply #38 on: Oct 12, 2005, 10:42 »
36 percent is high, our limit on reuse is higher than the industry average, but with Orex we should reduce our PCE’s significantly.

Offline einsteinium

  • Very Lite User
  • *
  • Posts: 4
  • Total likes: 0
  • Karma: 1
  • Tell Recruiters to use NukeWorker.com
Re: OREX
« Reply #39 on: Oct 19, 2005, 12:26 »
I'm blown away that Jr8black3 believes sending people into a 200 mr/hr gamma smearable environment with papers is a good work practice. Unless they are tiptoeing through the area in slow motion, it's ludicrous to think that this is a risk-free PPE prescription.

The fact of the matter is that single-use manufacturing quality control is, at best, minimal. I see open seams and thin spots in these materials all the time. A garment failure in a highly contaminated environment could quickly result in a serious percon, to say nothing of a radiation area entry that has to be aborted and repeated.

Single-use has application for many types of entries, but certainly not the scenario described by Jr8black3. The reliability, strength, and economics of launderable PCs make them the only sensible choice for arduous, high hazard work.
« Last Edit: Oct 19, 2005, 12:34 by einsteinium »

Offline PWHoppe

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 820
  • Total likes: 1
  • Karma: 2024
  • Gender: Male
  • CONFIRMED!: The dumbest man on the planet
Re: OREX
« Reply #40 on: Oct 19, 2005, 03:11 »
I don't think that Jrblack3 was making the statement that the papers were a good work practice. I believe that he is commenting that even though they were working in conditions one would normally work in wearing launderable PC's by utilizing good work practices, his crew was able to avoid PCE's. I'm not trying to speak for him but that was what I got from his posting, and frankly I agree with him. While it is not desiriable to use single use garments for such high contamination levels the ability of the workers to avoid problems is a testament to their skill as radiation workers. This shows that sometimes it is who is doing the job not the equipment that makes the difference between success and failure. I know that if anyone could've pulled this off, Kevin could have.  ;)
If a chicken and a half can lay an egg and a half in a day and a half, how many days will it take a grasshopper with a rubber foot to kick a hole in a tin can?

Forum rules..http://www.nukeworker.co

Offline einsteinium

  • Very Lite User
  • *
  • Posts: 4
  • Total likes: 0
  • Karma: 1
  • Tell Recruiters to use NukeWorker.com
Re: OREX
« Reply #41 on: Oct 21, 2005, 03:30 »
Point taken, PWHoppe. I didn't intend to be abrasive in my post. But the premise of many posts in this thread for going to single-use has been the notion that launderable causes PCEs and should be replaced by a theoretically equivalent single-use program.

I challenge any claim that a legitimate laundry monitoring program could let garment PCE problems slip by. And I still contend that prescribing single-use for high contamination areas or for arduous work activities is risky, regardless of a worker's radiation worker skills.

It’s my opinion that the single-use vendors have propagated many of these misconceptions and presented their PPE as a panacea. I expect that economics and common sense will prevail in the long run.

Jr8black3

  • Guest
Re: OREX
« Reply #42 on: Oct 21, 2005, 07:22 »
Einsteinium,
1. We didn't have a choice, we had to wear what was provided
2.Without the great training and work experience provided to me by people like Pat Hoppe and many others over the years, there is no way it could have happened.
3.When I seen what they expected us to wear, I said WTF, you have to be kidding me
4.Thank god my comapany finally seen the light and pulled out after phase one.
5. We completed our part
6. I feel sorry for the sorry people that have to do Phase 2 in a 100-300 r/hr GA

Offline einsteinium

  • Very Lite User
  • *
  • Posts: 4
  • Total likes: 0
  • Karma: 1
  • Tell Recruiters to use NukeWorker.com
Re: OREX
« Reply #43 on: Oct 25, 2005, 05:59 »
Jr8black3:

I hear you brother. Phew! It astounds me that utility management will fall over themselves to avoid a 3k/dpm laundry PCE and let this kind of thing happen. I guess it keeps the geeks in corporate content with busy work, but misses any sort of attempt at common sense. Anyway, sorry I missed your original point.

Be careful out there.


ageoldtech

  • Guest
Re: OREX
« Reply #44 on: Oct 26, 2005, 08:48 »
100 to 300R/hr, where are you working at, Chernobyl?

Offline PWHoppe

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 820
  • Total likes: 1
  • Karma: 2024
  • Gender: Male
  • CONFIRMED!: The dumbest man on the planet
Re: OREX
« Reply #45 on: Oct 26, 2005, 11:12 »
I challenge any claim that a legitimate laundry monitoring program could let garment PCE problems slip by.

I too share this opinion and believe that while disposables have their place they in NO way are a subsitute for a good laundurable garment. Jr8black3 got forced into a situation that nobody should have to be in and made the best of it. I have seen this all too often with management trying to cut corners and the end result is usually bad. It only turns out ok when you have exceptional radiation workers. BTW I didn't think you were being abrasive, I felt you were expressing your disdain for the single use PPE fad that seems to running rampant in the industry which I happen to share. I will now leap from my soap box ;)
If a chicken and a half can lay an egg and a half in a day and a half, how many days will it take a grasshopper with a rubber foot to kick a hole in a tin can?

Forum rules..http://www.nukeworker.co

raymcginnis

  • Guest
Re: OREX
« Reply #46 on: Nov 10, 2005, 12:10 »
Holy cow, this topic is still going!  Wow!  I have been away for awhile.  We had a firestorm here:

http://www.raymcginnis.net/firephotos.aspx   

We still have not decided on Orex here.   I still hear comments from people who like them or dislike them through email or phone.  We still use Tyveks here.  Orex may be better, but it is hard to change things sometimes.

I like all of the opinions though.  We can't use reusables anymore.  We are really clean here now. The laundry comes back hotter than what we send them, all of the time, for 10 years.  We need disposables for our job.

Worker protection and comfort was my main goal in starting this thread.  Wow, have I learned a lot from all of these posts!  Thanks to all for sharing.

ageoldtech

  • Guest
Re: OREX
« Reply #47 on: Nov 15, 2005, 04:12 »
Uniteh has a craddle to grave product, full disposable PVA, gloves, shoe covers etc. for under $10 per dressout.
www.unitech.ws

Offline PWHoppe

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 820
  • Total likes: 1
  • Karma: 2024
  • Gender: Male
  • CONFIRMED!: The dumbest man on the planet
Re: OREX
« Reply #48 on: Nov 15, 2005, 07:47 »
Unitech has a cradle to grave product, full disposable PVA, gloves, shoe covers etc. for under $10 per dressout.
www.unitech.ws

These things provide GREAT bang for the buck ;)
« Last Edit: Nov 15, 2005, 07:48 by PWHoppe »
If a chicken and a half can lay an egg and a half in a day and a half, how many days will it take a grasshopper with a rubber foot to kick a hole in a tin can?

Forum rules..http://www.nukeworker.co

Offline Meltdown

  • Moderate User
  • ***
  • Posts: 142
  • Total likes: 0
  • Karma: 71
  • Gender: Male
  • Who are you who are so wise in the ways of science?             $upporting Member
Re: OREX
« Reply #49 on: Nov 28, 2007, 01:52 »
I know this is an old thread, but I was wondering if anyone else is having issues with workers devloping rashes attributed to Orex. ???
Meltdown

"I know that there is an eye that watches all of us. There is a judgment that weighs everything we do. And before this great force, which is greater than any government, I stand in awe and I kneel in respect." L. Cohen

Offline Rennhack

Re: OREX
« Reply #50 on: Nov 28, 2007, 03:07 »
Some of the craft people I worked with at Peach Bottom and TMI claimed to develope a rash from the OREX scrubs.  They got a doctors note, which allowed them to opt-out of the OREX requirement.

Offline UncaBuffalo

  • Mostly Retired
  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1702
  • Total likes: 15
  • Karma: 4594
  • Not All Who Wander Are Lost
Re: OREX
« Reply #51 on: Nov 28, 2007, 06:08 »
I know this is an old thread, but I was wondering if anyone else is having issues with workers devloping rashes attributed to Orex. ???

Surry had a supply of cloth modesties & PCs for people who got rashes from the OREX.
The days that I keep my gratitude higher than my expectations, I have really good days. -Ray Wylie Hubbard

Offline Dave Warren

  • Radiological Engineer
  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 2911
  • Total likes: 17
  • Karma: 1564
  • Gender: Male
  • Cubs vs. White Sox in the Series this year.
Re: OREX
« Reply #52 on: Nov 28, 2007, 06:29 »
I know this is an old thread, but I was wondering if anyone else is having issues with workers devloping rashes attributed to Orex. ???

I ordered them for all of our guys.
They were in the 90 degree heat, humidity, rain, you name it.
Not one of our guys ever had any problems with them.
This was over a 6 month period, and it was the disposable coveralls.

Joe Ferguson

  • Guest
Re: OREX
« Reply #53 on: Nov 28, 2007, 06:40 »
Yeah...........seems like every outage there are a couple (2-3) of workers that have a reaction to the OREX.  It's a small population of people and you can tell they really don't do well in them.  Most sites have a supply of cotton scrubs that HAVE to be worn by welders, so we just toss them a pair of those.

rotag 

Cathy

  • Guest
Re: OREX
« Reply #54 on: Nov 29, 2007, 12:07 »
I have worn white orex for a couple of years and had no problem. I put on a set of the green orex modesties and much to my surprise I had a nasty, fairly quick rash. Anyone else had the same problem? I still have no issue with the white, maybe it is the dye??? I have not tried the green modesties since then.

Offline JessJen

Re: OREX
« Reply #55 on: Nov 29, 2007, 01:20 »
I break out from them but then again I also break out from the laundered depending on what they wash them in.  Clear caladryl or benadryl spray is your best friend when this happens.  Those won't make you sleepy like popping a few benadryl can, and will help keep it from getting too bad  (not sure what one vendor used, but at one plant I ended up with blisters from repeated exposure to what ever they washed the PCs in)

 


NukeWorker ™ is a registered trademark of NukeWorker.com ™, LLC © 1996-2021 All rights reserved.
All material on this Web Site, including text, photographs, graphics, code and/or software, are protected by international copyright/trademark laws and treaties. Unauthorized use is not permitted. You may not modify, copy, reproduce, republish, upload, post, transmit or distribute, in any manner, the material on this web site or any portion of it. Doing so will result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the law.
Privacy Statement | Terms of Use | Code of Conduct | Spam Policy | Advertising Info | Contact Us | Forum Rules | Password Problem?