What's a good material for containing mercury?
It wants to be fireproof, so PVC and other plastics are no good.
If galvanised steel sheet is OK, that would be the easiest to fold.
Or aluminium. But I guess the mercury would react with most metals.
Fibre cement board maybe. Or just concrete.

On 5/7/2011 4:13 PM, Matty F wrote:
What's a good material for containing mercury?
It wants to be fireproof, so PVC and other plastics are no good.
If galvanised steel sheet is OK, that would be the easiest to fold.
Or aluminium. But I guess the mercury would react with most metals.
Fibre cement board maybe. Or just concrete.

Glass?

On 5/7/2011 4:13 PM, Matty F wrote:
What's a good material for containing mercury?
It wants to be fireproof, so PVC and other plastics are no good.
If galvanised steel sheet is OK, that would be the easiest to fold.
Or aluminium. But I guess the mercury would react with most metals.
Fibre cement board maybe. Or just concrete.

Or ceramic.

Gib Bogle wrote:
On 5/7/2011 4:13 PM, Matty F wrote:
What's a good material for containing mercury?
It wants to be fireproof, so PVC and other plastics are no good.
If galvanised steel sheet is OK, that would be the easiest to fold.
Or aluminium. But I guess the mercury would react with most metals.
Fibre cement board maybe. Or just concrete.

Or ceramic.

Internally glazed, or the mercury will soak in, giving you a problem
disposing of the container after use. Glass is the container of choice.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

On May 7, 4:39 pm, Gib Bogle wrote:
On 5/7/2011 4:13 PM, Matty F wrote:

What's a good material for containing mercury?
It wants to be fireproof, so PVC and other plastics are no good.
If galvanised steel sheet is OK, that would be the easiest to fold.
Or aluminium. But I guess the mercury would react with most metals.
Fibre cement board maybe. Or just concrete.

Glass?

10 square metres of glass? It might break!

On May 7, 5:04 pm, John Williamson
wrote:
Gib Bogle wrote:
On 5/7/2011 4:13 PM, Matty F wrote:
What's a good material for containing mercury?
It wants to be fireproof, so PVC and other plastics are no good.
If galvanised steel sheet is OK, that would be the easiest to fold.
Or aluminium. But I guess the mercury would react with most metals.
Fibre cement board maybe. Or just concrete.

Or ceramic.

Internally glazed, or the mercury will soak in, giving you a problem
disposing of the container after use. Glass is the container of choice.

It's in glass now. If the glass breaks, there has to be a container on
the floor too.

Matty F presented the following explanation :
On May 7, 5:04 pm, John Williamson
wrote:
Gib Bogle wrote:
On 5/7/2011 4:13 PM, Matty F wrote:
What's a good material for containing mercury?
It wants to be fireproof, so PVC and other plastics are no good.
If galvanised steel sheet is OK, that would be the easiest to fold.
Or aluminium. But I guess the mercury would react with most metals.
Fibre cement board maybe. Or just concrete.
Or ceramic.

Internally glazed, or the mercury will soak in, giving you a problem
disposing of the container after use. Glass is the container of choice.

It's in glass now. If the glass breaks, there has to be a container on
the floor too.

Stainless Steel?

--
Regards,
Harry (M1BYT) (L)
http://www.ukradioamateur.co.uk

On May 7, 6:04 pm, Harry Bloomfield
wrote:
Matty F presented the following explanation :



On May 7, 5:04 pm, John Williamson
wrote:
Gib Bogle wrote:
On 5/7/2011 4:13 PM, Matty F wrote:
What's a good material for containing mercury?
It wants to be fireproof, so PVC and other plastics are no good.
If galvanised steel sheet is OK, that would be the easiest to fold.
Or aluminium. But I guess the mercury would react with most metals.
Fibre cement board maybe. Or just concrete.
Or ceramic.

Internally glazed, or the mercury will soak in, giving you a problem
disposing of the container after use. Glass is the container of choice.

It's in glass now. If the glass breaks, there has to be a container on
the floor too.

Stainless Steel?

Maybe. The floor is concrete so a cheapskate like me would just pour a
concrete wall around the perimeter. Maybe paint the whole area with
epoxy paint.

On Fri, 6 May 2011 22:52:57 -0700 (PDT), Matty F wrote:

Glass?

10 square metres of glass? It might break!

How much mercury are we talking about? The stuff is damn heavy so
that needs to be taken into account. About 13.5 times heavier than
water and double that of iron.

It's funny stuff not sure it's reactive as such but lots of other
things dissolve into it and it has a high surface tension which
causes it to stick in tiny globules to even smooth looking surfaces.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Fri, 6 May 2011 21:13:17 -0700 (PDT), Matty F
wrote:

What's a good material for containing mercury?
It wants to be fireproof, so PVC and other plastics are no good.
If galvanised steel sheet is OK, that would be the easiest to fold.
Or aluminium. But I guess the mercury would react with most metals.
Fibre cement board maybe. Or just concrete.

A stone jar.

--
Frank Erskine

On May 7, 5:13*am, Matty F wrote:
What's a good material for containing mercury?
It wants to be fireproof, so PVC and other plastics are no good.
If galvanised steel sheet is OK, that would be the easiest to fold.
Or aluminium. But I guess the mercury would react with most metals.
Fibre cement board maybe. Or just concrete.

Glass. Mercury forms an almagam with many metals.

On May 7, 6:53 pm, "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:
On Fri, 6 May 2011 22:52:57 -0700 (PDT), Matty F wrote:
Glass?

10 square metres of glass? It might break!

How much mercury are we talking about? The stuff is damn heavy so
that needs to be taken into account. About 13.5 times heavier than
water and double that of iron.

Quite a few litres. The floor is very solid.

"Matty F" wrote in message
...
On May 7, 5:04 pm, John Williamson
wrote:
Gib Bogle wrote:
On 5/7/2011 4:13 PM, Matty F wrote:
What's a good material for containing mercury?
It wants to be fireproof, so PVC and other plastics are no good.
If galvanised steel sheet is OK, that would be the easiest to fold.
Or aluminium. But I guess the mercury would react with most metals.
Fibre cement board maybe. Or just concrete.

Or ceramic.

Internally glazed, or the mercury will soak in, giving you a problem
disposing of the container after use. Glass is the container of choice.

It's in glass now. If the glass breaks, there has to be a container on
the floor too.

If its just to contain it while you put it back then even a wooden trough
will do, just seal the joints with candle wax so it can't slip out.

A neater way would be vinyl flooring with an up stand around it.

On May 7, 7:31 pm, Chris Hogg wrote:
On Fri, 6 May 2011 21:13:17 -0700 (PDT), Matty F

wrote:
What's a good material for containing mercury?
It wants to be fireproof, so PVC and other plastics are no good.
If galvanised steel sheet is OK, that would be the easiest to fold.
Or aluminium. But I guess the mercury would react with most metals.
Fibre cement board maybe. Or just concrete.

Traditionally, iron flasks were used to hold mercury. Bit I'm puzzled
by some of your replies as to what the circumstances are. In the labs
where I used to work, mercury was kept in small plastic bottles; all
handling was done in a large plastic tray under a fume hood, and there
was strict health monitoring of the few designated operators. There
are H&S regulations on mercury handling, and presumably guidance on
storage and containers is available on-line.

The mercury is in sealed glass containers. If there is an earthquake
or a volcanic eruption or a madman with a sledge hammer, the glass
could break. It's all in a sealed locked room. The mercury if it got
loose could trickle under the walls.
It's not my problem but I like to think about all the possibilities.

On May 7, 7:36 pm, "dennis@home" wrote:
"Matty F" wrote in message

...



On May 7, 5:04 pm, John Williamson
wrote:
Gib Bogle wrote:
On 5/7/2011 4:13 PM, Matty F wrote:
What's a good material for containing mercury?
It wants to be fireproof, so PVC and other plastics are no good.
If galvanised steel sheet is OK, that would be the easiest to fold.
Or aluminium. But I guess the mercury would react with most metals.
Fibre cement board maybe. Or just concrete.

Or ceramic.

Internally glazed, or the mercury will soak in, giving you a problem
disposing of the container after use. Glass is the container of choice.

It's in glass now. If the glass breaks, there has to be a container on
the floor too.

If its just to contain it while you put it back then even a wooden trough
will do, just seal the joints with candle wax so it can't slip out.

A neater way would be vinyl flooring with an up stand around it.

Thank you. An excellent idea.
If any mercury leaks you can be sure the professionals will be dealing
with it.

The mercury is in sealed glass containers. If there is an earthquake
or a volcanic eruption or a madman with a sledge hammer, the glass
could break. It's all in a sealed locked room. The mercury if it got
loose could trickle under the walls.
It's not my problem but I like to think about all the possibilities.

I guess this contains mercury pretty well
http://tinyurl.com/yfwy2qt

BTW, do tell what the mercury you have is used for, as i'm sure we're all
intrigued, you either have a massive rectal thermometer (for ann widicome
perchance)
or i'm guessing it's something to do with the tramway... mercury rectifiers?
i'm guessing they are not power interupters like on the london
underground.... glass vials of mercury that complete the power circuit
placed before the small tunnels, to stop larger trains entering the wrong
tunnels (i.e a larger train's top corners goes through the vials, removing
power thus stopping the train getting squiched in the tunnel, never been
tripped but apparantly at least one train was diverted down the wrong track,
but stopped before the vials)

On May 7, 5:13*am, Matty F wrote:
What's a good material for containing mercury?
It wants to be fireproof, so PVC and other plastics are no good.
If galvanised steel sheet is OK, that would be the easiest to fold.
Or aluminium. But I guess the mercury would react with most metals.
Fibre cement board maybe. Or just concrete.

Steel should be good


NT

[Default] On Fri, 6 May 2011 22:52:57 -0700 (PDT), a certain
chimpanzee, Matty F , randomly hit the
keyboard and wrote:

On May 7, 4:39 pm, Gib Bogle wrote:
On 5/7/2011 4:13 PM, Matty F wrote:

What's a good material for containing mercury?

Glass?

10 square metres of glass? It might break!

10m^2 by what depth? 10m^2 is a measure of area NOT volume. What
volume do you have? And if you mean 10m^3, what the hell...?
--
Hugo Nebula
"If no-one on the internet wants a piece of this,
just how far from the pack have I strayed"?

On May 7, 8:30 pm, "Gazz" wrote:
The mercury is in sealed glass containers. If there is an earthquake
or a volcanic eruption or a madman with a sledge hammer, the glass
could break. It's all in a sealed locked room. The mercury if it got
loose could trickle under the walls.
It's not my problem but I like to think about all the possibilities.

I guess this contains mercury pretty well http://tinyurl.com/yfwy2qt

BTW, do tell what the mercury you have is used for, as i'm sure we're all
intrigued, you either have a massive rectal thermometer (for ann widicome
perchance)
or i'm guessing it's something to do with the tramway... mercury rectifiers?
i'm guessing they are not power interupters like on the london
underground.... glass vials of mercury that complete the power circuit
placed before the small tunnels, to stop larger trains entering the wrong
tunnels (i.e a larger train's top corners goes through the vials, removing
power thus stopping the train getting squiched in the tunnel, never been
tripped but apparantly at least one train was diverted down the wrong track,
but stopped before the vials)

Why didn't they just use a switch?

Imagine Chernobyl with rows of these, but without the radioactivity:
http://i55.tinypic.com/15pogtw.jpg

On May 7, 8:35 pm, Hugo Nebula abuse@localhost wrote:
[Default] On Fri, 6 May 2011 22:52:57 -0700 (PDT), a certain
chimpanzee, Matty F , randomly hit the

keyboard and wrote:
On May 7, 4:39 pm, Gib Bogle wrote:
On 5/7/2011 4:13 PM, Matty F wrote:

What's a good material for containing mercury?
Glass?

10 square metres of glass? It might break!

10m^2 by what depth? 10m^2 is a measure of area NOT volume. What
volume do you have? And if you mean 10m^3, what the hell...?

Say about five metres by two metres, and less than 1 mm high. But it
might splash over the side so I'd make the sides 100 mm high.

It's not my problem but I like to think about all the possibilities.

Is whoever owns the problem willing to ask Building Consent for advice,
or for a pointer to whoever in your region does administer the regs.
dealing with the storage of hazardous substances? I'm only asking as
it'd be sad to for the work to fail a likely inspection.
--
Robin
PM may be sent to rbw0{at}hotmail{dot}com

Matty F wrote:
What's a good material for containing mercury?
It wants to be fireproof, so PVC and other plastics are no good.
If galvanised steel sheet is OK, that would be the easiest to fold.
Or aluminium. But I guess the mercury would react with most metals.
Fibre cement board maybe. Or just concrete.

Glass. Or any reasonable metal, surely?

On May 7, 9:02 pm, "Robin" wrote:
It's not my problem but I like to think about all the possibilities.

Is whoever owns the problem willing to ask Building Consent for advice,
or for a pointer to whoever in your region does administer the regs.
dealing with the storage of hazardous substances? I'm only asking as
it'd be sad to for the work to fail a likely inspection.

The enforcement authority will be consulted before any work is done.
I think a row of bricks on the floor may be sufficient.

Matty F wrote:

It's not my problem but I like to think about all the possibilities.

It would really help if you gave all the facts instead of allowing them
to trickle out bit by bit like the mercury.

Matty F wrote:

Say about five metres by two metres, and less than 1 mm high. But it
might splash over the side so I'd make the sides 100 mm high.

Errm, have you got 'elf and safety advice about this? That surface of
mercury presents a significant risk of exposure to mercury vapour.

That much mercury should also be bunded, since you really, really don't
want to risk having it drop on the floor.

Matty F wrote:

Imagine Chernobyl with rows of these, but without the radioactivity:
http://i55.tinypic.com/15pogtw.jpg

When these were common they were operated without any form of secondary
containment.

I'd suggest that the best practical solution would be a GRP moulding
which is strong enough to hold the weight of mercury. Since you're
looking at a disaster the recovery of the mercury in good condition
seems to be secondary to containing it.

To survive an earthquake will require a combination of strength and
flexibility and a composite seems your best choice. Inevitably over time
any containment will become contaminated with dust, water and grease and
not much you can do about that.

I'd suggest that the containment should be buttressed since the walls
will have to support a lot of weight and you don't want them collapsing.
It may be sensible to make the tray as double skinned, ply or balsa
cored and with a very good interior gel coat finish.

If you're concerned about interaction between mercury and the material
use then you could make a small container and test that.

A sensible alternative would be polypropylene. There are many businesses
used to working in heat-welded polypropylene to make water tanks for
boats (for example) but I'm not sure that the welds would hold if the
container were full of mercury rather than water.


All plastics or composites will age and become brittle over time.
Usually such aging is accelerated by ozone which I would expect to be
present in any electrical installation of significant size/age.

On May 7, 8:42*am, Matty F wrote:

If any mercury leaks you can be sure the professionals will be dealing
with it.

Why? What makes you think "professionals" are any better? Mercury
spills aren't that hard to deal with, and require care and attention
to detail to get the last dark corners. Hazchem professionals are paid
a pittance to do it as quickly as possible. They're neither thorough
nor conscientious.

If you want to trap any spillage, mercury handling is sometimes done
over a bed of powdered yellow sulphur - the usual entrapment agent for
mercury.

As you seem to be looking at a large shallow tray of mercury with an
exposed surface, its not the spills I'd worry about but the vapour.

On May 7, 5:13*am, Matty F wrote:
What's a good material for containing mercury?

DC rectifiers for your trams? I regret to say I broke up many of
these when I was a kid - recycled mercury was my pocket money

I'd keep it in its rectifiers, mount the rectifiers in a good steel
cage and shock-mount the steel cage. If you can find the right '50s
manual on-line (it's out there, I've read it) there's some stuff on
this for US submarines. Use a spiral of wire rope, with clamping bars
on either side - a common military shockmount design and easy to home
manufacture.

Underneath you want a catch tank. This should be flexible against
earthquake, so something like a big builder's mortar mixing tray. I
don't think it needs to be fireproof, you can probably control the
risk of fire by putting the rectifiers in a concrete blockwork shed
with nothing in there to burn. If you have to though, just put a
further steel or smooth concrete tray beneath this (seal it first with
waterglass) and don't couple the concrete too firmly into the ground.

Keep powdered yellow sulphur (garden supplies) on hand for spill
cleanup.

On May 7, 5:13*am, Matty F wrote:
What's a good material for containing mercury?
It wants to be fireproof, so PVC and other plastics are no good.
If galvanised steel sheet is OK, that would be the easiest to fold.
Or aluminium. But I guess the mercury would react with most metals.
Fibre cement board maybe. Or just concrete.

Mercury doesn't react with iron but it will react with zinc - so
galvanised steel is out but steel should be OK. (It also doesn't react
with platinum but that might be a little too expensive).

Tony

"Matty F" wrote in message
...
What's a good material for containing mercury?
It wants to be fireproof, so PVC and other plastics are no good.
If galvanised steel sheet is OK, that would be the easiest to fold.
Or aluminium. But I guess the mercury would react with most metals.
Fibre cement board maybe. Or just concrete.


I have a few small bottles of Mercury form Victorian times .. all ornate
glass bottles. (old Doctors Surgery - closed for years)
Seems that glass would be the way if you need it fireproof.

"Matty F" wrote in message
...
On May 7, 8:35 pm, Hugo Nebula abuse@localhost wrote:
[Default] On Fri, 6 May 2011 22:52:57 -0700 (PDT), a certain
chimpanzee, Matty F , randomly hit the

keyboard and wrote:
On May 7, 4:39 pm, Gib Bogle wrote:
On 5/7/2011 4:13 PM, Matty F wrote:

What's a good material for containing mercury?
Glass?

10 square metres of glass? It might break!

10m^2 by what depth? 10m^2 is a measure of area NOT volume. What
volume do you have? And if you mean 10m^3, what the hell...?

Say about five metres by two metres, and less than 1 mm high. But it
might splash over the side so I'd make the sides 100 mm high.


Make a 'glass tank' toughened glass in a steel supported frame.

Design to take weight, plus it's fire proof.

In the labs
where I used to work, mercury was kept in small plastic bottles; all
handling was done in a large plastic tray under a fume hood, and there
was strict health monitoring of the few designated operators. There
are H&S regulations on mercury handling, and presumably guidance on
storage and containers is available on-line.




Makes it seem a bit different ... when we were in school we could dip a
penny in acid to clean it and then dip in Mercury to make it look silver.
Everyone was encouraged to press their fingers into Mercury to see how much
resistance there was compared to water.

Any spillages we had to collect using filter papers ... brushing mercury
drops onto to paper with our fingers !

I suppose a school of kids walking around with Mercury coated pennies would
now be an H&S issue.

In message , Rick Hughes
writes

In the labs
where I used to work, mercury was kept in small plastic bottles; all
handling was done in a large plastic tray under a fume hood, and there
was strict health monitoring of the few designated operators. There
are H&S regulations on mercury handling, and presumably guidance on
storage and containers is available on-line.




Makes it seem a bit different ... when we were in school we could dip a
penny in acid to clean it and then dip in Mercury to make it look
silver.
Everyone was encouraged to press their fingers into Mercury to see how
much resistance there was compared to water.

Any spillages we had to collect using filter papers ... brushing
mercury drops onto to paper with our fingers !

I suppose a school of kids walking around with Mercury coated pennies
would now be an H&S issue.

We did exactly the same. It's surprising we're not all jibbering idiots.
[Maybe some of us are!]
--
Ian

Rick Hughes wrote:
In the labs
where I used to work, mercury was kept in small plastic bottles; all
handling was done in a large plastic tray under a fume hood, and
there was strict health monitoring of the few designated operators.
There are H&S regulations on mercury handling, and presumably
guidance on storage and containers is available on-line.




Makes it seem a bit different ... when we were in school we could dip
a penny in acid to clean it and then dip in Mercury to make it look
silver. Everyone was encouraged to press their fingers into Mercury
to see how much resistance there was compared to water.

Any spillages we had to collect using filter papers ... brushing
mercury drops onto to paper with our fingers !

I suppose a school of kids walking around with Mercury coated pennies
would now be an H&S issue.

When I started reading this thread it brought back memories of secondary
school science lessons (1969 to 1974) where, being kids and not necessarily
being bothered about rules and regulations, we would pour the mercury into
our hands and just spend ages, pouring it from hand to hand, being amazed by
its feel and behaviour. Then, as the bell rang for the end of the lesson, it
was break time and off to the tuck shop for a handful of Jammie Dodgers -
held in and eaten from the same hands that, just minutes before, had held
the mercury - yet here we are, now aged 53, and none of us any worse for our
experiences :-)

On May 7, 9:45 pm, (Steve Firth) wrote:
Matty F wrote:
Imagine Chernobyl with rows of these, but without the radioactivity:
http://i55.tinypic.com/15pogtw.jpg

When these were common they were operated without any form of secondary
containment.

I'd suggest that the best practical solution would be a GRP moulding
which is strong enough to hold the weight of mercury. Since you're
looking at a disaster the recovery of the mercury in good condition
seems to be secondary to containing it.

At most there would be 1 mm of mercury on the concrete floor, so no
real weight problem. The mercury won't be re-used, just cleaned up by
someone who has the qualifications to do so. I'll be a long way away!

To survive an earthquake will require a combination of strength and
flexibility and a composite seems your best choice. Inevitably over time
any containment will become contaminated with dust, water and grease and
not much you can do about that.

I'd suggest that the containment should be buttressed since the walls
will have to support a lot of weight and you don't want them collapsing.
It may be sensible to make the tray as double skinned, ply or balsa
cored and with a very good interior gel coat finish.

If you're concerned about interaction between mercury and the material
use then you could make a small container and test that.

A sensible alternative would be polypropylene. There are many businesses
used to working in heat-welded polypropylene to make water tanks for
boats (for example) but I'm not sure that the welds would hold if the
container were full of mercury rather than water.

I didn't like the idea of a polypropylene tray as there is a fair bit
of heat and high voltage around.

All plastics or composites will age and become brittle over time.
Usually such aging is accelerated by ozone which I would expect to be
present in any electrical installation of significant size/age.

The mercury desn't want to soak into the concrete or the raised edge
around it. I was thinking of a two-pot paint or a vinyl liner.
Earthquakes and volcanic eruptions are very unlikely.
More likely is some kind of electrical failure that cracks the glass
container.

"Matty F" wrote in message
...
On May 7, 8:35 pm, Hugo Nebula abuse@localhost wrote:
[Default] On Fri, 6 May 2011 22:52:57 -0700 (PDT), a certain
chimpanzee, Matty F , randomly hit the


Say about five metres by two metres, and less than 1 mm high. But it
might splash over the side so I'd make the sides 100 mm high.

I don't think mercury will like being 1mm deep (high?). Because of its very
high surface tension it will tend to 'puddle' in deeper, smaller pools -
maybe 2 or 3mm deep.

Phil

"Andy Dingley" wrote in message
...
On May 7, 8:42 am, Matty F wrote:

If any mercury leaks you can be sure the professionals will be dealing
with it.

Why? What makes you think "professionals" are any better? Mercury
spills aren't that hard to deal with, and require care and attention
to detail to get the last dark corners. Hazchem professionals are paid
a pittance to do it as quickly as possible. They're neither thorough
nor conscientious.

If you want to trap any spillage, mercury handling is sometimes done
over a bed of powdered yellow sulphur - the usual entrapment agent for
mercury.

As you seem to be looking at a large shallow tray of mercury with an
exposed surface, its not the spills I'd worry about but the vapour.

Yes indeed, that's what I would be worrying about too. Agree about the
sulphur also.

On 07/05/11 10:50, Andy Dingley wrote:


Why? What makes you think "professionals" are any better? Mercury
spills aren't that hard to deal with, and require care and attention
to detail to get the last dark corners. Hazchem professionals are paid
a pittance to do it as quickly as possible. They're neither thorough
nor conscientious.

If you want to trap any spillage, mercury handling is sometimes done
over a bed of powdered yellow sulphur - the usual entrapment agent for
mercury.

As you seem to be looking at a large shallow tray of mercury with an
exposed surface, its not the spills I'd worry about but the vapour.

In industry I believe that the usual stuff for keeping mercury in is
cast iron. Definitely not aluminium which it will dissolve.

Personally I'd say that anyone who doesn't know what to keep mercury in
is unlikely to be a fit person to work with several square metres of
mercury. It's bloody toxic and will need a housing that's designed,
built and signed off by professionals. Anyone even considering a DIY
project using mercury should probably be certified themselves.



--
Bernard Peek

On 07/05/11 11:32, Rick Hughes wrote:

Makes it seem a bit different ... when we were in school we could dip a
penny in acid to clean it and then dip in Mercury to make it look silver.
Everyone was encouraged to press their fingers into Mercury to see how
much resistance there was compared to water.

Any spillages we had to collect using filter papers ... brushing mercury
drops onto to paper with our fingers !

I suppose a school of kids walking around with Mercury coated pennies
would now be an H&S issue.

Very definitely. When the safety rules changed my secondary school had
to take the lab floors up so that the room could be decontaminated.
Working with mercury is very much like working with asbestos.


--
Bernard Peek

In message
,
Matty F writes
On May 7, 9:45 pm, (Steve Firth) wrote:
Matty F wrote:
Imagine Chernobyl with rows of these, but without the radioactivity:
http://i55.tinypic.com/15pogtw.jpg

When these were common they were operated without any form of secondary
containment.

I'd suggest that the best practical solution would be a GRP moulding
which is strong enough to hold the weight of mercury. Since you're
looking at a disaster the recovery of the mercury in good condition
seems to be secondary to containing it.

At most there would be 1 mm of mercury on the concrete floor, so no
real weight problem. The mercury won't be re-used, just cleaned up by
someone who has the qualifications to do so. I'll be a long way away!

Would it make sense to include a sump in one corner


--
geoff