Safety question

[inkman996]

Here is a new one on me but hopefully someone here already dealt with this or has the knowledge.

We have an order for 6,000 t's navy with two color back/sleeve/pocket prints. This is for a major electrical manufacturing company. They are very tight with their business and safety controls. What they are concerned with is that the Plastisol is somehow an eelectrical issue for them. We have provided MSDS etc. They feel having a synthetic material on a cotton shirt brings in a safety issue. Their biggest concern is arc flash or an image actually being imprinted on their skin in case of fire or arc.

Anyone have any experience with this?

[Homer]

we ran into this with some HVAC guys, we could only embroider with cotton thread on cotton products - nothing screened. Can you discharge them?

[JBLUE]

Having worked for an Ambulance company for several years I have seen numerous flash burn victims from electrical accidents. That is the least of their worries. I have not seen anything anywhere that says plastisol is conductive to electricity. Now as far as the design getting burned onto their skin there is a possibility since the plastisol will in a way protect the skin in a flash better than the cotton. But in the case of a sustained burn after the sluffing of the burnt skin the design if it were to be there will fall off along with it. Sorry to be gross but it is what it is.

[inkman996]

They are stuck on the idea that whatever they wear has to be 100% non synthetic period. Embroidery is out because the thread has to be color fast and obviously insane to embroider the backs. Discharge is out they rejected the process because of the MSDS info etc. Their business is about clean technology and electrical conservation.

I think in the end they will finally figure out that Plastisol is the lesser of all evils.

[Homer]

not sure of the shirt color but dye-sub?

[mk162]

Can't they test for this sort of thing?

I mean, shouldn't they be able to tell if something will arc?  I know polyester clothing will, but can you test plastisol for static discharge?

[inkman996]

not sure of the shirt color but dye-sub?

Dye sub means poly

[whitewater]

how about recommend shirtless and you will "paint" the logo on them...no worries....

[JBLUE]

With mud. Paint might be too toxic. Although you might be screwed if they ask for the MSDS of the mud.

[tonypep]

For those who don't have time for my short story below there are fire retardant addities for plastisols that have been around for years. Required for infant toddler retail merch.
About ten years ago I was subpoenaed to testify at a hearing regarding a terrible accident. A thirteen year old girl was wearing her fathers XL resort tee (note: not intended to be worn by a child) made by us. She had just lit a brand new candle. She had reached over to sharpen her pencil and the shirt caught on fire.  She sufferred 3rd degree burns and spent a lot of time in the hospital. Well never mind that the only real part of the shirt left in the evidence bag was the printed part the lawyers were dead set on proving that we were somehow at fault. At the end of the day I was able to determine the print was waterbased and therefore not flammable. Nonetheless we took a $13,000 hit which our insurance company was absolutely jubilant about. (The candle company not so lucky.)
Point is cotton burns. So does plastisol. And yes plastisol when ignited can stick to the skin and cause further damage. So the only tro real options are fire retardent plastisols or waterbased inks. Final note if they are light shirts with colored ink they do not need to be discharged. You can leave out the additive and that would leave you with the most "organic" decoration.

[inkman996]

Thanks Tony you are a life saver!

I will call ink suppliers and see what I can get for additives, I think that will be sufficient for them.

I really think the arc flashing is over board as someone said even if an arc flash happened the plastisol will be the worst of their worries.

[Fresh Baked Printing]

I think the issue is that the plastisol print can act like a heat sink and absorb a bunch of heat in the print area, which could burn the skin under the print are or at least give the illusion that the print is indeed flammable when all it's doing is absorbing a disproportionate amount of heat and taking on a Napalm effect with all that heat retention.

Sometimes when I flash a print, I can touch the cotton part of the shirt but can burn myself when I touch the print itself. The printed area is probably less flammable than the surrounding cotton but the print absorbs and retains more heat than the surrounding cotton.

[Northland]

I would guess their concern is the requirement that all clothing be made of 100% natural fibers.
A Philly lawyer could argue that a plastisol imprinted garrment is no longer "100% natural fibers".

The intent, from an arc flash point of view, is natural fibers are less likely to support a flame.
Polyester will melt & actually trap the heat against the skin...  increasing the severity of the burn.

[inkman996]

I am going to go out on a limb here and say the tag is probably not 100% cotton correct?

Anyways I do not think flammability is really there concern,they seem to be concerned with arc flashing and possibly feel that Plastisol can be a better conduit than the cotton. This may be true but if you are actually in close enough proximity to an arc flash would plastisol have any actual influence? And if you did get hit with an arc flash would it really matter at that point what you are wearing since chances are you are going to be toast anyways?

[T Shirt1]

Sounds like a potential Mythbusters episode