[HN Gopher] How I got my laser eye injury
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       How I got my laser eye injury
        
       Author : omnibrain
       Score  : 583 points
       Date   : 2024-08-01 10:25 UTC (12 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.funraniumlabs.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.funraniumlabs.com)
        
       | RA2lover wrote:
       | I wonder what happened to literally everyone else present at this
       | situation. That's beyond "Yikes!" territory.
        
         | MeteorMarc wrote:
         | Yes, I also dislike the culture in which this can be called a
         | funny story. Such culture will cause more incidents. Worked in
         | a laser lab for 5 years without incident in a time when eye
         | safety goggles were not used for visible light.
        
           | ta988 wrote:
           | Sometimes a funny story is one that helps you remember about
           | safety.
        
             | ordu wrote:
             | Yeah, emotions are a positive factor for a memories
             | forming. Add some emotions to a fact, and it will be
             | remembered better and for longer. Some things are
             | remembered for life without any repetition, and mostly it
             | happens for things that trigger your emotions.
        
           | cqqxo4zV46cp wrote:
           | No. That only says something about you, not "the culture".
           | It's incredibly common to laugh at the absolute absurdity of
           | a situation. It doesn't mean that people are making light of
           | it. It doesn't mean that they don't grok how serious it is.
           | They just react differently to you.
        
             | MeteorMarc wrote:
             | I agree there is more to it than yes/no making a joke of an
             | incident. I associate it with a macho culture in which
             | people do not feel safe to speak up in case of unsafe
             | circumstances. Same for IT security.
        
           | bbarnett wrote:
           | If the Germans can joke about it, anyone can.
           | 
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJ_86lxP36I
        
             | tivert wrote:
             | This version of Forklift Driver Klaus is much clearer:
             | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJYOkZz6Dck
        
           | WarOnPrivacy wrote:
           | > in a time when eye safety goggles were not used for visible
           | light.
           | 
           | Also Yikes. Even with my low(ish) 1w-5w handhelds, it's self-
           | evident that eye protection is needed when the beam travels
           | less than a few yards.
        
       | zoky wrote:
       | I'm not saying it didn't happen as described, but this really
       | kinda reads like the "Bald eagle named Albert Einstein flew into
       | the classroom" copypasta...
        
         | relaxing wrote:
         | The sales guy set up the entire rig on his own? And no other
         | engineers in the lab stopped to ask what he was doing?
         | 
         | I know some places have poor safety culture, but this is a
         | "laser company". Basic laser safety should be drilled into them
         | from day 1 and every day after. When I worked in an optics lab,
         | we had interlocks on the doors that switched on with the power
         | supply running the experiment and a sign outside indicating
         | which wavelengths were operating.
        
           | ben_w wrote:
           | Mm.
           | 
           | Should be, isn't.
           | 
           | I've heard of one place that had a class IV laser mounted on
           | a robot arm in a public area, which turned itself off when
           | the arm happened to flail in exactly the right way to hit its
           | own emergency stop button.
        
           | ta988 wrote:
           | I have seen a drunk employee wrestling with a moving
           | industrial robotic arm trying to "fix it" after having
           | disabled the numerous safeties with screwdrivers. This was at
           | a major car manufacturer plant. Do not underestimate the
           | horrible situations people can put themselves in.
        
             | p_l wrote:
             | Sometimes you fight and curse the volkswagen-special VKRC
             | safety circuits.
             | 
             | And sometimes you think what kind of shenanigans might
             | happen and why it might be better to have complex safety
             | interlocks that mate with entire automation cell
             | controls...
        
             | hotsauceror wrote:
             | A relative of mine works with assembly-line robots at heavy
             | equipment manufacturers. He told me that while they were
             | calibrating a new robot that was used to move axles for
             | industrial mining dump trucks, a miscalculation caused the
             | robot to fling a 800 lb axle through the air like a
             | marching band baton.
        
               | aftbit wrote:
               | Now that I'd pay to see. If that happened where I worked,
               | I would be so tempted to run the program again with my
               | phone camera out. After telling everyone down-range to
               | get lost of course.
               | 
               | Now would I do it? No... definitely not, as long as the
               | demon on my right shoulder was being quiet that day.
        
           | rkachowski wrote:
           | It's pretty crazy that the sales guy was able to connect the
           | water cooling and power with enough hosing and cables to
           | bring it outside, as well as know how to operate the device
           | enough to activate it - but couldn't correctly point it _at
           | the ground_ and burn the paint off of the street without
           | melting through a car.
           | 
           | But forgetting that, what are the core safety issues
           | described? I get the direct exposure to unprotected eyes
           | damage, but there's discussion of infra red reflections
           | endangering nearby children + aircraft + casus belli with the
           | US army.
        
             | teractiveodular wrote:
             | The story says he did point it at the ground, but a) it was
             | reflecting off the reflective paint they were aiming at and
             | b) towards the end the laser was badly misaligned.
        
             | tpmoney wrote:
             | "Sales engineer" sounds like one of those positions that
             | would be regularly setting up demos for customers and have
             | access to the equipment and basic operating procedures.
             | 
             | "Could we use this to burn paint off the road" sounds
             | exactly like the sort of question a person doing a demo
             | might say "I don't see why not, let's try it" to.
             | 
             | While with deliberate thought about it, the fact that road
             | markings are retro-reflective is obvious, but it's not
             | something you would necessarily consider immediately, since
             | it's called "paint" and almost all paint you encounter in
             | the world is not retro-reflective.
             | 
             | For the rest of it, my reading of the story is multiple
             | things happened here:
             | 
             | 1) They initially aimed the IR laser at the paint on the
             | ground. The paint being retro-reflective the laser damaged
             | itself in about an half hour and stopped producing
             | consistent results, just occasional spots of results.
             | 
             | 2) The sales person rather than halting the demo to get
             | someone else to take a look at what was malfunctioning
             | continued to fire the laser after making various
             | adjustments not realizing that because the laser had been
             | damaged it was firing not at the ground anymore, but at the
             | car a few spaces away.
             | 
             | 3) They'd been messing with the laser after malfunctioning
             | since before the VP parked their car, so there's
             | possibility they were sending lasers in the direction of
             | the other building, so that's one issue which would have
             | been bad enough on its own but...
             | 
             | 4) At some point the VP parked their car in the path
             | between the laser and the building. As they continued to
             | mess with the malfunctioning laser, they burned through the
             | paint on the side of the car, exposing the bare metal
             | underneath.
             | 
             | 5) The bare metal is also highly reflective, but because
             | it's not retro-reflective the problem is now you had
             | completely uncontrolled reflections. The ones that went
             | backwards had nothing to stop them since there was only a
             | fence and field between the lot and the school. And the
             | ones that went up obviously also had nothing to stop them
             | since they were outside.
             | 
             | 6) Because of the unknown detections and quantity of
             | reflection, in addition to getting all the potentially
             | exposed employees and customers checked out, the company
             | would also have to make advisory calls (at a minimum) to
             | the school and the local airports and military
             | installations.
             | 
             | Whether those schools and planes were actually in danger or
             | not could not be said with certainty, but the point was
             | less "oh know we're terrorists now" and more "this was a
             | huge screw up, and I need to impress on you why it was
             | bigger than just breaking company property or not wearing
             | your safety gear"
        
               | petsfed wrote:
               | I think this is all a good illustration of why "Bob" was
               | (supposedly) fired at the end of the story.
               | 
               | A _good_ sales engineer knows a lot about the product
               | within its normal operating envelope, but _especially_
               | knows a lot about the boundaries of  "normal operation".
               | Bob's very first response to "can this thing do a thing
               | [that Bob should know is outside of its normal
               | operations]?" should have been to go ask the kind of
               | engineer who is involved in defining "normal". And either
               | the capability is investigated (and, if plausible,
               | eventually a "safe" demo is put together, and maybe the
               | definition of "normal" is expanded), or its revealed that
               | it won't work, and that's that. In either case, the rest
               | of the situation never happens, provided Bob is actually
               | good at the engineering side of "sales engineer".
        
             | relaxing wrote:
             | Not operating in a controlled environment, no curtains to
             | block stray reflections, not ensuring your optic path is
             | stable and clear of obstructions and reflective objects.
             | Doesn't sound like they had a beam block around for safety,
             | nor did they first use a lower power visible laser to
             | simulate beam path.
        
           | unkeptbarista wrote:
           | I find this basics of this story believable. I worked at a
           | place that manufactured IR lasers, and where the owner (the
           | "Doctor" as we called him) set up similiar impromptu
           | demonstrations that went awry. Thankfully no one was injured,
           | but some random piece of equipment was damaged by the
           | reflected beam.
        
           | protocolture wrote:
           | Sales Engineer = Knows enough to be dangerous.
           | 
           | Sometimes a good sales engineer can tell you all about then
           | undocumented feature you need to get something delivered.
        
           | somat wrote:
           | The guy was listed as a "sales engineer" which on first
           | glance is the worst sort of oxymoron, everybody knows
           | engineers make terrible salesmen[1]. But perhaps it could
           | work, just take your sleaziest engineer, put them through an
           | intensive indoctrination in chicanery and lies and you get a
           | salesman who almost knows what he is talking about.
           | 
           | 1. How do you know if the guy trying to sell you something is
           | the engineer. They will tell you in excruciating detail every
           | flaw and design mistake in the thing and how they should have
           | designed it better. Savor this moment, look past the terrible
           | sales pitch and buy from them, for you have been gifted that
           | elusive thing, the engineer.
        
             | neilv wrote:
             | My dad was such an engineer doing sales, of industrial
             | components. Grew up on a farm, engineering degree, very
             | honest type churchgoer and family man, and in his spare
             | time DIY projects like a classic engineer type. I'm sure
             | he'd know when something would or wouldn't work, and would
             | candidly tell the customer about any problems or risks. (In
             | this case, maybe honest as much as an engineer personally
             | bothered by design flaws.)
             | 
             | I've also seen a different kind of engineer in sales, where
             | they're paired long-term with salespeople. They sit in on
             | sales meetings as a technical expert, and also do things
             | like customizations and integrations. I suppose the
             | presence of the salesperson helps suppress the engineer's
             | inclination to start riffing on every flaw, but the pairing
             | retains the engineer ability to help the customer be
             | successful with the product.
        
               | somat wrote:
               | Yeah, I am a bit rough on sales, but it is critical to
               | doing business. And a good saleman is a wonderful find,
               | talking with someone who is knowledgeable and honest
               | about the product is great.
        
               | refulgentis wrote:
               | You're littering via middle school group stereotypes for
               | professions.
               | 
               | You're walking it back a bit by saying you're a bit rough
               | on sales, but what you actually wrote is engineers are
               | bad at sales.
               | 
               | Sales engineer is a well-populated role, and they do
               | their jobs as expected.
               | 
               | On average, an engineer will be worse at sales than a
               | "pure salesman", but that's simply specialization in
               | action. Can't get better at what you don't have an
               | opportunity to practice. We all can do pretty much
               | whatever we want if we put our minds to it.
        
             | RandomThoughts3 wrote:
             | Sales engineers are very common if you are selling complex
             | industrial products. At a certain point of complexity,
             | selling a product and designing its integration with the
             | customer kind of bridge. You need a deep understanding of
             | the product and process involved to be able to sell it.
        
           | elzbardico wrote:
           | With highly technical products usually you have at least two
           | guys working on a account:
           | 
           | The salesman, who deals with the business guys on the other
           | side, the folks who will actually sign the check. The sales
           | engineer, that deal with the guys who will actually use the
           | product, is able to understand their requirements and come up
           | with ways the product can fullfil those, provide Proofs of
           | Concept, demos and initial training for those guys on the
           | other side that will give the final ok to the business
           | people: 'this will work for us, you can sign the check if you
           | want"
        
         | mpalmer wrote:
         | Never let facts get in the way of a good story. The build-up is
         | great (VP's car, elementary school, military base) and the
         | punchline is funny, but it's just a bit too perfect ("and
         | what's above us?", cue clouds). Even the name Bob sounds like
         | it's been chosen for comedy.
         | 
         | It's clearly a mostly true story that's been refined and
         | polished over the years.
        
           | rob74 wrote:
           | It's entirely possible that "Bob" is a generic name (using
           | $SALES_GUY, like he uses $LASER_COMPANY and $FACILITY_GUY,
           | would have been too repetitive).
           | 
           | ...or the guy was really called Bob.
        
             | trelane wrote:
             | Also, the guy had enough happen to him. He doesn't need his
             | actual name put in the story. One might hope that in the
             | intervening 25 years he would have improved, especially
             | after such an expensive lesson.
        
           | foehrenwald wrote:
           | reads like a BOFH story
        
           | gadders wrote:
           | Yeah, I thought it sounded a bit too good to be true as
           | well...
        
           | cududa wrote:
           | Was curious so I looked it up - Jose Antonio Vargas
           | Elementary School is right by Moffet Field. The school also
           | abuts an industrial park that fits the description.
           | 
           | One of the current tenants there is Volvo Innovation Lab,
           | which I imagine does laser testing. I have no idea if
           | buildings need certain certifications for working with
           | lasers, so I mention that tidbit.
           | 
           | As well, that office park has 16 buildings in it, by my
           | count.
           | 
           | The pieces of this story very much so line up.
        
             | mpalmer wrote:
             | Yeah like I said I'm sure it's mostly true. I just don't
             | necessarily buy that he had a comedian's delivery on the
             | day in question
        
         | gus_massa wrote:
         | I worked for a few weeks in a class with a custom infrared ->
         | green laser. The teacher were very hard about glasses, how to
         | crouch looking away from the laser table, close the door and a
         | few more security measures. And later, I had a 5W (0.5W?) green
         | laser at 3 yards pointed at me [1] with some optical equipment
         | bolted to the table in the middle so there was (almost) no
         | possibility that it hit me.
         | 
         | The story sounds real.
         | 
         | [1] If all the bolted devices in the middle magically fall
         | down, the laser would have hit my belly, not my eyes. So it's
         | important to crouch looking away, just in case.
        
           | aj7 wrote:
           | Crouch? When training technicians, the first thing is, you
           | never ever bend your waist in the laser room, with lasers on.
           | Your head never enters the plane of the laser beams. You do
           | not put your ahead above the laser. You use a piece of copy
           | paper to earache for stray beams near the apparatus. You use
           | an IR viewer to (shock yourself as to how many there are to)
           | find 1064nm stray beams.
        
             | gus_massa wrote:
             | I agree. I'm not a native English speaker, so I may have
             | choose the wrong verb. Is "squatting" better?
             | 
             | And with that kind of care, like turn everything off and
             | still be very careful if you _have_ to pick something from
             | the floor.
        
           | amluto wrote:
           | > custom infrared -> green laser
           | 
           | Nd:YAG lasers always creep me out. I worked in a lab that had
           | an Nd:YAG with _two_ janky doublers: 1064 - > 532 -> 266 nm.
           | The output energy was supposed to be a few mJ (IIRC), but it
           | was basically zero. So the students operating it took off the
           | second doubler and fired it at a bookend. Nothing (well,
           | nothing visible). Took off the first doubler. After
           | investigation, the zapping sound was the paint vaporizing off
           | a computer at the other end of the lab, because the beam was
           | actually scooting just past the bookend. 1064 nm is almost
           | the worst wavelength you can work with. (Okay, 233nm is
           | probably worse, but the available energy with a setup like
           | this is much lower.)
           | 
           | I have a green laser pointer, and I made a point of buying a
           | _diode_ laser. It's a slightly different color than 532, its
           | battery life is better, but, critically, there is no way it
           | could malfunction or be sloppily constructed to leak infrared
           | light.
        
             | amluto wrote:
             | Replying to myself:
             | 
             | I just searched Amazon. There are plenty of green "diode"
             | lasers, 532nm, ~100mW, for very little money. I don't
             | believe that for a second -- those are surely crappy
             | frequency doubled Nd:YAG lasers, probably unfiltered (that
             | filter wouldn't be cheap, and it might fail anyway under
             | that ridiculous power level), and they will blind you when
             | some funny reflection of the, I dunno, 500mW of stray IR
             | light hits your eye.
             | 
             | Now that real name brand laser pointers are mostly gone, if
             | you actually want green, get a 515nm laser or something
             | along those lines. Stay away from 532nm!
        
               | entropie wrote:
               | I have a friend with multiple green and red lasers, some
               | from aliexpress.
               | 
               | Years ago when the hype wasnt really there he visited me
               | and wanted to show off. I have 3 dogs and I really like
               | this kind of tech but I forbid it to turn that thing on
               | near me, especially in my flat. Even if they are directed
               | away, the chance of unpredictable reflections is just too
               | high for a bit of fun.
        
             | cyberax wrote:
             | > (Okay, 233nm is probably worse, but the available energy
             | with a setup like this is much lower.)
             | 
             | How do you get 233nm lasers?!?
        
         | fsh wrote:
         | Yeah, the story contains some obvious bullshit. There is no way
         | in hell a flashlamp-pumped Nd:YAG laser could cut through a
         | piece of steel. With typical ~Hz repetition rate and ~J pulse
         | energy, the average power is only around 1 W. This is three to
         | five orders of magnitude lower than typical welding lasers.
         | This could burn some paint or engrave metal, but burning
         | through a wheel well and brake line is completely ridiculous.
        
           | mistercow wrote:
           | Maybe they meant the plastic wheel well liner? I don't know
           | if that makes sense, I'm just googling around looking at Jeep
           | Cherokee images.
        
           | actionfromafar wrote:
           | It's just there for flair. :)
        
           | xiphmont wrote:
           | He didn't claim it cut through steel, JGCs have polymer wheel
           | wells and brake lines like most modern cars.
        
         | neilv wrote:
         | As I read through it, it does sound like an apocryphal old
         | story, since too many of the details are too perfect setups for
         | the teller.
         | 
         | Then again, occasionally real life really does happen
         | unbelieveably, including when fudge-ups are involved.
         | 
         | Maybe what's most unbelieveable is that, to the extent the
         | story tells, the only known injured person was the laser safety
         | officer.
         | 
         | Presumably the safety person was partly in the loop on some
         | other injuries, but maybe they're NDA'd on that, yet not NDA'd
         | on mentioning the incident. Or, maybe an incident like that was
         | kept very quiet by a company, and injured people never knew how
         | they got injured.
         | 
         | Then there's this:
         | 
         | > _It has been brought to my attention that I have never
         | actually written this story down before, merely told it in
         | person to many students for valuable lessons and also for
         | laughs over cocktails._
         | 
         | Did they only give verbal reports and verbal
         | depositions/testimony? Never wrote up a report for internal use
         | or for professional publication?
         | 
         | "Laughs over cocktails" could mean finding humor in the
         | ridiculousness of disaster, and taking a battle scar in stride.
         | Could also be a hint that the entire story is a
         | fabricated/embellished/appropriated story, like people often
         | tell recreationally when drinking, and understood in that
         | context for what it is.
        
           | kragen wrote:
           | possibly his boss asked him to not write up the report
        
             | neilv wrote:
             | Yes, I don't want to speculate, but would hope that, for
             | whatever happened, the affected people were notified, and
             | all the appropriate safety officer processes were followed
             | up on.
             | 
             | Or, the story might have started a bit like when grandkids
             | ask grandpa how he got that arm injury, and instead of
             | telling the troubling story about shrapnel in the war, or
             | the car crash, he tongue in cheek tells a fantastic tall
             | tale of fishing, when along comes a bear who wanted to eat
             | his fish, chock full of lessons.
             | 
             | That could've been a goal with students: if one ran out of
             | real-world case studies to drive home laser safety
             | practices, a semi-plausible, if over-the-top, narrative of
             | how a not-unlikely cavalier mistake could become a
             | clusterfudge, with the story of course hitting all the
             | safety practices they were just told about.
             | 
             | There would normally be verbal cues as to the kind of
             | story, and there'd be the context of telling, both of which
             | are lost in blog posts.
        
           | tpmoney wrote:
           | > Did they only give verbal reports and verbal
           | depositions/testimony? Never wrote up a report for internal
           | use or for professional publication?
           | 
           | I read that line as being in the context of the authors blog.
           | As in "I've referenced this here before, and told the story
           | to people in person, but never written out the story here on
           | my blog." Not literally saying that this is the first time in
           | history any part of this story was committed to some form of
           | the written word.
        
       | paulluuk wrote:
       | This was a great read, thanks for sharing!
        
       | sethammons wrote:
       | That is a heck of a cocktail story. A bit more terrifying than I
       | expected. As the safety officer, I wonder what new policies they
       | put into place after this.
        
         | pja wrote:
         | "Do not let salesweasels anywhere near the bright shiny things"
         | hopefully.
        
       | rob74 wrote:
       | > _On closer inspection, we later leaned that the Quanta-Ray had
       | burnt through the wheel well and cut the brake line._
       | 
       | The I guess they were lucky that they weren't aiming in the
       | general direction of the fuel tank, or that the "experiment" was
       | stopped before burning through it?
        
       | dwighttk wrote:
       | Moral of the story is: make sure and tag the safety officer when
       | you're being stupid so _he_ can make sure and inform all of the
       | correct people.
        
       | aj7 wrote:
       | Just for giggles, who owned Spectra-Physics at the time?
        
       | igleria wrote:
       | how do people like Bob get a job in the first place?
        
         | myrmidon wrote:
         | - Familiar enough with product to set up customer demonstration
         | on his own with minimal help from enigneering
         | 
         | - Shows initiative by exploring novel applications with
         | customers
         | 
         | - Expertly alleviates doubts & hesitation in customers
         | 
         | :P
         | 
         | Honestly, apart from blatant disregard for safety culture, that
         | is not a bad salesperson at all.
         | 
         | Without additional info, I would honestly put the blame mostly
         | on the company, because instilling a certain respect for
         | dangerous products should be part of company culture and
         | employee training, you just can't expect fresh hires to come
         | with all the common sense baked in...
        
       | jmclnx wrote:
       | One thing I learnt, different glasses for different type lasers,
       | who knew :)
        
         | ta988 wrote:
         | That and different glasses depending on how you use that
         | laser... Because some lasers can do variable wavelength.
        
           | amluto wrote:
           | I've seen some references to the universal laser glasses:
           | Apple Vision Pro!
        
             | ta988 wrote:
             | No, the cameras would probably not survive laser exposure
             | beyond a cat toy pointer level power (and even then I
             | wouldn't bet long exposure of those).
        
               | amluto wrote:
               | That's fine. If I worked in a room with a laser and I
               | screwed up and hit my face, frying an Apple Vision Pro
               | seems like a pretty small price to pay. My _eyes_ will be
               | fine.
               | 
               | And the Apple Vision Pro works against tunable lasers,
               | lasers of unknown frequency, flashlamps, etc.
        
               | rtkwe wrote:
               | They'd still protect your little human eyes. If you
               | wanted to use them as safety glasses normally you'd want
               | their cameras to be easily replaceable but they would
               | function as safety goggles for short periods until the
               | camera caught a stray beam.
        
               | gabrielhidasy wrote:
               | Cameras are cheap, eyes are expensive.
               | 
               | Ok, the Vision pro cameras are probably very expensive
               | (mostly because I doubt you can just switch them with new
               | ones). Maybe put a bag over it and a Pi camera on the
               | outside? Can you live-stream to a Vision Pro?
        
           | cyberax wrote:
           | Dye lasers are the worst. You now have _two_ (or more)
           | wavelengths to shield against. Bonus points if one of them is
           | in IR.
           | 
           | That's probably how I got my eye damage - a small hole in the
           | retina of one eye.
        
         | hanniabu wrote:
         | Why can't there be glasses with the different types layered
         | together into one?
        
           | pjc50 wrote:
           | Then you can't see anything.
           | 
           | They're narrowband filters. A welding mask would be a
           | wideband filter, but is much harder to work with when it's
           | engaged.
        
           | fabian2k wrote:
           | Because if you want to cover all possible lasers you'll block
           | out the visible spectrum as well and won't see anything.
        
             | WarOnPrivacy wrote:
             | You can get some overlap tho. I have 520nm goggles that
             | tone down 465nm.
        
               | rtkwe wrote:
               | That's mostly because it's tough to get a perfect notch
               | filter in the visible spectrum but you'd never want to
               | use the 520nm with a 465nm unless it was low enough power
               | the fuzzy edge of the filter knocked it's power down
               | enough to be safe.
        
         | 0x138d5 wrote:
         | One of the professors in my uni lab had "universal laser
         | goggles".
         | 
         | They were regular goggles with a sheet of lead bent over them.
        
           | trelane wrote:
           | Niiice. Even attenuates those xray lasers!
        
       | DannyBee wrote:
       | So I laser weld, and beyond my own PPE, interlocks (gun won't
       | fire if it's not touching metal, etc), the most important part of
       | the whole setup is laser safety curtains.
       | 
       | Because it's a 2500 watt laser, if i didn't have laser safety
       | curtains , the relections/etc could very easily blind someone at
       | a fairly long distance.
       | 
       | The NOHD (nominal ocular hazard distance) is something like 10km
       | (2500 watt laser, 0.06mm spot size, divergence is very very
       | small). The actual hazard distance is shorter, but still, kinda
       | crazy.
       | 
       | (as for why i have a laser welder - i got it cheap and besides
       | the downsides above, it is very easy to weld ~anything without
       | much skill. A person who has never welded in their life can weld
       | sheet metal and have it come out basically perfect in 5 minutes)
        
         | RealityVoid wrote:
         | I'm dying of curiosity how cheap a cheap laser welder can be.
        
           | mdorazio wrote:
           | A quick search is showing me new machines in the $7k range.
           | You could probably pick up a used one for a few thousand
           | less. This is cheaper than I would have thought, honestly - a
           | decent full MIG rig is not exactly cheap.
        
             | DannyBee wrote:
             | They are coming down in price very quickly.
             | 
             | The materials cost is really not very high (no idea on the
             | laser itself, but the rest is easily <1k. Probably <500.).
             | The R&D cost was probably very high to start (but also
             | coming down).
        
           | supermatt wrote:
           | I don't have one yet so cant really advise on quality, but I
           | was recently looking and you can pick up a 2.5kW laser welder
           | from about $15k. They are slightly cheaper (around 12k) from
           | alibaba, but then you will be looking at import duties,
           | warranty complexities, etc
        
             | HeyLaughingBoy wrote:
             | Yeah, that's the problem with some of the more expensive
             | Alibaba/Aliexpress stuff. The list price is attractive, but
             | once you add in all the extras like duties, transportation
             | from the port of entry to your location, warranty
             | difficulty etc., there's not much price difference from
             | heading over to the local Kubota dealership.
             | 
             | Still, some of those little tracked tractors on TikTok are
             | interesting. If I could somehow raise enough money to start
             | importing them, I'm sure I could sell quite a few.
        
               | ensignavenger wrote:
               | A lot of folks find those little chineese tractors at
               | auctions in the US. There are folks who handle all the
               | import and then resell them. Can be a great deal but many
               | of them need some mods, like better cooling, to really
               | shine.
        
           | isoprophlex wrote:
           | There's a killer Neal Stephenson plotline in here somewhere.
           | Redneck protagonist zapping enemy drones with a modified
           | laser welder.
        
             | paranoidrobot wrote:
             | I had to look it up, because I thought that was what
             | "Reason" was in Snowcrash.
             | 
             | I was mistaken: Reason was a railgun.
        
               | rtkwe wrote:
               | The weird part of reason is it is also (in the family of)
               | a mini gun with it's multiple rotating barrels.
        
             | zokier wrote:
             | Oh yes: https://youtu.be/xNmbvaUzC8Q
             | 
             | This is why we can't have nice things
        
               | btbuildem wrote:
               | There's no way this stuff isn't giving the secret service
               | nightmares.
               | 
               | This guy set ablaze the inside of a vehicle through
               | closed windows from a significant distance.
        
               | dgacmu wrote:
               | It's rare to have such a clear illustration of the
               | difference between intelligence and wisdom.
        
             | trelane wrote:
             | Almost a different Funranium post:
             | https://www.funraniumlabs.com/2022/12/choose-your-own-
             | radiat...
        
             | HeyLaughingBoy wrote:
             | Hmmm.
             | 
             | I'm black, but my wife did anoint me to the position of
             | "honorary redneck" some time ago. Neighbor has stopped with
             | the drone overflights of my property, but still, you're
             | giving me ideas...
        
               | isoprophlex wrote:
               | Go get em cowboy!
        
               | rtkwe wrote:
               | Be careful as far as the FAA is concerned drones get the
               | same legal protection as a plane with people in them so
               | messing with them is legally hazardous.
        
               | HeyLaughingBoy wrote:
               | I know. Hence the laser: blind the camera first and they
               | can't prove that it didn't mysteriously drop out of the
               | sky as soon as it passed the property line.
        
             | bzax wrote:
             | I feel obliged to mention that this does feature
             | prominently in Kim Stanley Robinson's Red Mars trilogy. The
             | single most important piece of infrastructure on Mars is a
             | space elevator, but not everyone on the planet is happy
             | with how the owners of the space elevator are running
             | things.
        
           | DannyBee wrote:
           | So, to clarify - what i have is a very nice IPG lightweld
           | 1500 XR. They are normally not cheap (30k), and are _very_
           | nice and well thought out safety wise.
           | 
           | One of the fun parts when i lived in the bay area was that as
           | companies got acquired, they didn't know what to do with the
           | stuff they had before acquisition that isn't needed anymore,
           | and it either sits in a warehouse, or gets auctioned off (or
           | both!)
           | 
           | So for example, at one point, Google (after acquiring terra
           | bella and some other companies) had like 5 or 6 very nice 5
           | axis VMC's sitting around collecting dust. Each was worth
           | well over 250k. They already had plenty of VMC's in the
           | machine shop, etc, and didn't need these, and it was not
           | worth the trouble to sell them. At least back then.
           | 
           | In my case, I was able to get this welder for way less than
           | half price.
           | 
           | The lightweld's have come down in price over the years, and
           | that will keep happening.
           | 
           | They are pretty much the most expensive laser welders though,
           | you can easily get one for 10k these days.
           | 
           | The truth is, however, if you go cheaper than this, what
           | often what gets overlooked is safety. So some of them in the
           | lowest price range don't even require you touch the gun to
           | metal before letting you fire, etc.
           | 
           | All of them can weld the same, so if you go looking, look at
           | other things too.
           | 
           | THe other thing - one of the nice things about laser welding
           | is that it's improving very fast. So similar to fiber,
           | running multiple types of lasers or optics in the cable is
           | not particularly more difficult than running one. They just
           | add more fibers (it's not quite the only issue, but you get
           | the point).
           | 
           | Why does this matter? Because it means you can run another
           | laser or something to monitor the weld and adjust parameters
           | on the fly. Which lightweld and others are starting to do. So
           | if you are moving the gun too fast/slowly, or got the power
           | wrong or whatever, it will compensate automatically
           | 
           | This probably won't ever happen on mig/tig. The lasers are
           | heavily computer controlled already, this just adds a
           | feedback loop.
           | 
           | It also enables real time certification of a weld - see
           | https://www.ipgphotonics.com/products/laser-weld-measurement
           | for an example (this is a separate product, but you get the
           | idea)
           | 
           | In any case, my take would be - if you want to play with them
           | as a hobbyist, or have too much money, they are cool
           | Otherwise i'd wait ~5 years and what you get will probably be
           | 5-10x better for the same price.
        
             | mhb wrote:
             | VMC == Vertical Machining Center
             | 
             | PSWAATY == Please Say What the Acronyms Are. Thank You.
        
               | DannyBee wrote:
               | Usually i do, but there is one acronym in the entire 450
               | words, and it doesn't really matter to the point what the
               | thing was?
        
               | SkyPuncher wrote:
               | I agree with you.
               | 
               | It's also pretty easy to figure out what you're talking
               | about from context.
        
               | mhb wrote:
               | It's the second post in which he did this. And how should
               | anyone know whether it's important to know what it means
               | without knowing what it means?
        
               | digging wrote:
               | If the definition doesn't matter, better to use a more
               | generic term than a more specific/cryptic one.
        
               | mhb wrote:
               | OK. Thanks for the informative post. Don't want to
               | discourage you from more.
        
               | PoignardAzur wrote:
               | > _PSWAATY_
               | 
               | I'm keeping that one.
        
             | throw0101a wrote:
             | > _So some of them in the lowest price range don 't even
             | require you touch the gun to metal before letting you fire,
             | etc._
             | 
             | Are you able to attach them to the heads of sharks?
        
               | DannyBee wrote:
               | If you can get them to stay still long enough, maybe.
        
             | HeyLaughingBoy wrote:
             | > plenty of VMC's in the machine shop
             | 
             | So now I have to know why Google has a machine shop. Beyond
             | the obvious "why not?"
        
               | antoinealb wrote:
               | Google as a company manufactures hardware, it makes sense
               | to have a machine shop for prototypes.
        
               | psd1 wrote:
               | Google was founded by burners who want to take cool shit
               | to the desert.
        
               | krisoft wrote:
               | They make hardware prototypes. When you do that having
               | your own machine shop can lower the iteration time and
               | thus speed up the development.
               | 
               | Just from the top of my head: waymo develops their own
               | lidars, akamai obviously needed a ton of machining for
               | the kite, project loon probably had machined components.
               | And those are just the flashy examples we heard about
               | outside of the company. They can have ton of other
               | projects which didn't get to the point where we heard
               | about them but required hardware prototyping.
        
               | HeyLaughingBoy wrote:
               | Duh! Of course!
               | 
               | I think Google and I only think search/ads. I forgot
               | Alphabet has all that other stuff going on.
        
               | ethbr1 wrote:
               | So does Alphabet.
        
               | DannyBee wrote:
               | Lots of reasons. Prototyping consumer goods of various
               | sorts, etc.
        
               | throwup238 wrote:
               | IIRC it was started in earnest for Nexus phone prototypes
               | in the early 2010s.
        
           | abakker wrote:
           | https://www.everlastgenerators.com/catalog/laser-welders this
           | is probably the easiest one to buy from a reputable (non
           | alibaba) company. its $17k, so not "cheap", but hardly
           | expensive.
           | 
           | My gut says they'll be for sale at $2-5k within 2 years at
           | the rate things are going.
        
         | sph wrote:
         | NOHD = Nominal Ocular Hazard Distance
        
           | DannyBee wrote:
           | Yes. Sorry for not expanding it. I edited it to expand it.
           | 
           | For others:
           | 
           | The NOHD is really a nominal distance. It's just the distance
           | at which the beam falls below the maximum permissible
           | exposure.
           | 
           | The 50% eye hazard distance (ED50) is 31.6% of this number.
           | That is, if the NOHD is 100m, then at 31.6 meters you have a
           | 50% chance of causing a medically detectable change to the
           | eye. It's also worth noting - the beam power at this 31.6%
           | distance is 10x, not 3x, what it is at the NOHD.
           | 
           | For laser welding, the spot beam is small (60um) which is one
           | reason the NOHD distance is so high.
           | 
           | For reference, a laser pointer is like 1.5mm, so this is 25x
           | smaller.
           | 
           | It also doesn't help that the lasers used are all
           | ~1060-1070nm wavelength and so invisible as well :)
        
         | netsharc wrote:
         | Somehow your comment reminds me of Tech Ingredients grilling a
         | burger with laser:
         | 
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VmITd0dKAo
        
         | exe34 wrote:
         | > (as for why i have a laser welder - i got it cheap
         | 
         | that's how a lot of good stories start
        
           | dotancohen wrote:
           | You don't want to hear how I met the ex.
        
         | elif wrote:
         | Please provide some more details on your laser welder. Did you
         | import it from China? I want one so bad, but buying them in the
         | USA seems to be 4-5x retail cost in China.
        
           | rtkwe wrote:
           | Cheaper ones often skip safety features like interlocks to so
           | be careful.
        
           | yard2010 wrote:
           | I wouldn't get one from China, no matter what the price is.
           | Money can't buy eyesight, not in this case at least
        
         | tlb wrote:
         | Why don't welding/cutting lasers add more divergence with
         | built-in optics? Would it hurt performance? It seems like you
         | could add 1 mrad and it would hardly make a difference at the
         | usual working distance, but spread out to a meter over 1 km, so
         | you can't zap people across town.
        
           | queuebert wrote:
           | Whatever refracts the light will have to stand up to the beam
           | for long periods of time. Maybe it's a materials science
           | problem.
        
           | oh_my_goodness wrote:
           | If it's a 1-micron wavelength laser with a 60 micron radius
           | spot, the divergence can't be much less than about 5.7 mrad
           | half angle. What makes eye safety tricky is just that 2.5
           | million milliwatts is a lot of power. Even when you spread it
           | out some.
        
         | notelectronic wrote:
         | I get laser safety curtains, but what do you do for reflections
         | off the ceiling? Asking because our makerspace was recently
         | donated a fiber laser welding unit and we don't yet know best
         | practices for not blinding our membership short of building a
         | completely enclosed separate room for it with door interlocks.
        
           | DannyBee wrote:
           | Ideally you have an enclosed area with interlocks. All of the
           | laser welders support it (and it's the standard way). They
           | make and sell mobile ones that can be pushed around. See,
           | e.g., https://lasersafety.com/barriers/rigid-barriers/ for
           | some examples (I don't know these folks, they just have
           | helpful pictures/listings of kinds of things that exist)
           | 
           | If you can't do this, you do need to panel or curtain the
           | ceiling or use laser absorption coating or other things.
           | 
           | There are places that also just use reflection sensors that
           | detect reflection on the ceiling and trigger (again, machines
           | already support handling this). I have heard this works very
           | well but have no direct experience with it.
           | 
           | All that said, reflection off ceiling is more uncommon for
           | practical reasons (The angle at which you hold the gun to the
           | piece, the fact that ceiling directed angles often become
           | back reflection into the gun which it already detects, etc).
           | 
           | They already detect very high reflection as well.
           | 
           | For a makerspace, one of the issues you will have is that
           | people will likely want to try to weld copper and aluminum a
           | lot, both of which are highly IR reflective.
           | 
           | If you said "You can only weld steel and iron" you would
           | eliminate a very high percent of reflection in the first
           | place.
           | 
           | Here's a basic chart that looks right:
           | https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Tomasz-
           | Kurzynowski/publ...
           | 
           | For a 1064nm laser, you can see Al or Cu is going to reflect
           | a lot of the energy, while steel/iron are still off the graph
           | high in absorption
        
             | convolvatron wrote:
             | I tig. wear a helmet and have to buy argon every year. this
             | seems like a huge hassle in comparison. is there that big a
             | difference in quality and or range of processes that make
             | it worth it?
        
               | abakker wrote:
               | its the operator skill part when dealing with thin sheet
               | metal. It just works better / easier / faster for thin
               | stuff, where in TIG, that's the high-skill work that
               | everyone pays big bucks for.
               | 
               | Agree with the post above, though. The safety setup for
               | lasers is basically full isolation.
        
               | convolvatron wrote:
               | seems like its more cost effective to just stay on or
               | above 20ga unless you're really high volume or you really
               | need the weight savings
        
               | hinkley wrote:
               | I know one of the reasons we wanted pico-second and
               | shorter pulsed lasers is that they can cut material with
               | little to no damage of the neighboring material. There
               | was a demo that I read about when this was all brand
               | spanking new research, where they claimed that a laser
               | scalpel causes no heat damage to tissue outside of a
               | cell's breadth from the contact point.
        
               | cyberax wrote:
               | That's how LASIC and PRK work, after all!
        
           | bozhark wrote:
           | Separate room with interlocking doors
           | 
           | -coming from another hacker space
        
           | dheera wrote:
           | > completely enclosed separate room for it with door
           | interlocks
           | 
           | You absolutely, absolutely need this. Do not take chances.
           | "Real estate is expensive" is not an excuse for a blinding
           | hazard to members and visitors of your space.
           | 
           | I've worked with very high powered room-sized laser cutters
           | before and they should all have a full room enclosure.
        
           | cowthulhu wrote:
           | Are lasers typically able to reflect off of surfaces that
           | diffuse light (ie drywall)? I'm totally ignorant when it
           | comes to laser safety, apologies if this is a stupid question
           | .
        
             | meindnoch wrote:
             | Do you see a bright spot when aiming the laser at drywall?
             | If the answer is yes, then laser light is being reflected
             | into your eye.
             | 
             | Hope this helps!
        
             | johnmaguire wrote:
             | Surfaces may produce diffuse or direct reflections (or more
             | commonly, a mixture of both) for any light source. If you
             | can see it, it's being reflected.
        
               | dreamcompiler wrote:
               | And even if you can't see it. You won't see a spot from
               | an IR laser while it's burning the hell out of your
               | retina. Which is why many (but not all) IR lasers co-
               | produce a visible spot so you can see where the dangerous
               | beam is.
        
         | hinkley wrote:
         | I had a friend, "Kevin" who got picked as a lab assistant for a
         | guy making one of the first violet, and IIRC, picosecond
         | lasers. It's frickin' laser beams so of course I had to ask way
         | too many questions. They probably should have been using
         | curtains but if they were he never said, and I'm sure laser
         | safety has evolved with the wattage and commercialization,
         | whereas this was a static benchtop system.
         | 
         | There were lots of mirrors and prisms and they has to calculate
         | refraction off of them and stick carbon blocks everywhere that
         | light transmission was less than 100% efficient so that no
         | light could escape the system except via the target.
        
         | BonoboIO wrote:
         | 10km ... damn. And the biggest problem is, the danger is
         | invisible.
        
         | ziofill wrote:
         | What are the curtains made of? I'm surprised 2500W on 0.06mm
         | don't just go through like there's no curtains
        
       | yobid20 wrote:
       | The laser should've been mounted on a shark.
        
         | steve1977 wrote:
         | "Sharknado 8 - Now They Have Lasers!"
        
           | inetknght wrote:
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INFavIUmhcE
        
       | steve1977 wrote:
       | "Are you declaring war on the United States, Bob?"
       | 
       | This almost made me spill my tea...
        
         | delichon wrote:
         | A few years ago I worked in a high rise in an office with a
         | window facing Moffet Airfield. I worried about crashing
         | experimental planes but never thought to worry about being
         | blinded by a stray laser beam. Maybe I'm not paranoid enough.
        
           | tgsovlerkhgsel wrote:
           | I remember reading a story of someone photographing a
           | military helicopter (I think), only to find out that the crew
           | apparently considered it funny to point some laser based
           | system (likely a range finder or designator) at the
           | photographer, burning the camera sensor to the point of
           | damage being clearly visible on the sensor itself (not just
           | the pictures).
        
       | dmd wrote:
       | I'm not _entirely_ sure, but I suspect my Hole In My Eye[0] came
       | from being 30 years old (I 'm 46 now) and saying "look, this
       | laser pointer is so low power, I can shine it in my eye to no ill
       | effect!".
       | 
       | [0] https://dmd.3e.org/a-hole-in-my-eye/
        
         | dghughes wrote:
         | At a casino where I was a slot tech we used fiber optics that
         | went into a fiber converter module and then RJ-45.
         | 
         | Often I would look at the ends of the fiber connectors to see
         | if they were lit or if the light looked odd.
         | 
         | They were quite low in power but I'm surprised at myself that I
         | didn't think of the risk.
         | 
         | edit: optics not options
        
           | justin66 wrote:
           | Some scientists used to look at the beam emitter to adjust
           | the aim of old particle accelerators. The story I heard was
           | that some of them eventually developed cataracts as a result.
           | Come to think of it, with today's medical technology that's a
           | lot less awful than punching holes into your retina with a
           | laser, but I think the result back then was eventually
           | blindness.
        
             | dekhn wrote:
             | I met a scientist who looked into a particle accelerator;
             | it was intention, part of a self-experiment to establish
             | whether high energy particles can cause scintillations in
             | the eye. In his case he very carefully calculated how to
             | get a safe dosage.
             | 
             | On the other hand there's
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatoli_Bugorski
        
           | wildzzz wrote:
           | Patch fiber is usually using Class 1 or Class 1M lasers which
           | are entirely safe to look at. Also the light spreads out very
           | rapidly at the end of an unterminated fiber because there's
           | no lens to focus it. So don't hold it directly up against
           | your eye but like a foot away is fine. The lasers are less
           | focused (i.e. cheaper) and the multi-mode fiber is wide so it
           | spreads out very quickly. You can't actually see the IR
           | light, the red light you see is just sidebands of the signal.
           | 
           | Fiber used for long hauls is much more powerful but uses a
           | wavelength that the human eye is very good at blocking (so
           | your eye dissipates more of the energy but what does get
           | through could damage your retina). There are systems that
           | will decrease the power if the link is lost (cut or
           | unplugged) to protect eyes. The light will still dissipate in
           | free space (because there's no lens) so you should be safe
           | from a distance. Single-mode fiber uses a more focused laser
           | and more narrow fiber so it will spread less over a free
           | space distance so don't get too close.
           | 
           | Always better to just use a light meter (or a phone camera)
           | if you're unsure but also just holding the end of the fiber
           | against some paper or your palm may reflect enough of the
           | visible light to let you know the fiber is live.
        
             | foobarian wrote:
             | Just in case, always use the same eye to look into these
             | things.
        
               | jaggederest wrote:
               | "Do not look into laser with remaining eye"
        
             | leoqa wrote:
             | As an intern moving data centers the old networking guy
             | told me to look into them; I used my right eye and now my
             | eye is 20/40 a decade later whereas my left eye is still
             | 20/20. I did hold it up to my eye because it was hard to
             | see..
        
         | NotYourLawyer wrote:
         | "Low power" lasers are sometimes wildly more powerful than they
         | claim to be. I guess what do you expect when you buy a Chinese
         | laser pointer on Amazon for 5 bucks.
        
           | anonymousiam wrote:
           | Nd:YAG lasers such as the one in the article use an IR
           | exciter into a crystal to achieve frequency doubling or
           | tripling. Much of the energy from the fundamental exciter
           | makes it past the crystal, so without good filtering, a
           | "safe" class 2 or 3R laser can still produce blinding (but
           | invisible) light. Lots of the cheap lasers don't have good
           | filtering, so be careful what you buy.
        
             | NotYourLawyer wrote:
             | Oh yeah, that's a real problem for cheap green lasers. IR
             | diode laser, doubling crystal, and no IR filter is a good
             | way to go blind.
        
             | Lramseyer wrote:
             | Don't forget that the power rating of a laser pointer
             | (unlike literally every other type of light you buy) is the
             | output power, not the input power! More importantly, it's
             | the output power of only the green laser!
             | 
             | The 1064nm exciter laser is pumped by an 808nm pump laser,
             | and based on what I know about how inefficient lasers are,
             | I can guarantee that those beams are way more powerful than
             | the output beam! If those leak because the manufacturer
             | cheaped out on filters, those lasers mat not visible, but
             | they are still dangerous!
        
         | madjam002 wrote:
         | One of the things I hate most in tourist hotspots these days
         | are the people selling high powered laser pointers, normally
         | selling them to kids, and they are shining it at their faces,
         | in the faces of others, and at the neighbours.
         | 
         | I swear they never used to be so commonplace.
         | 
         | Having worked nightclub lighting a long time ago I have a deep
         | appreciation for laser safety haha
        
           | pflenker wrote:
           | When I was ~12 years old one boy pinned me down and another
           | one shone a laser pointer in my eye just for fun. Needless to
           | say, this has been my ,,bad eye" ever since (I'm 39 now)
        
             | scottlamb wrote:
             | That's terrible, and I'm guessing they faced little if any
             | consequences for it. I'm mad thinking about this, even
             | though I wasn't involved and it was 27 years ago.
             | 
             | I would like to think that people would know today that
             | laser pointers are weapons so this wouldn't happen, and
             | that if it did happen, the schools' zero tolerance policies
             | (the ones that you hear about used to stupidly expel
             | someone for bringing a butter knife to eat their lunch
             | with) would kick in, as school bullies literally damaging
             | your body for life is completely unacceptable.
        
           | leptons wrote:
           | A friend of mine gave me a high power blue laser pointer, and
           | it was fun for a night but I gave it back to him because I
           | recognized that it was just too dangerous. One slip, one
           | stray reflection, and I'd damage my eyesight or go blind.
           | It's just too dangerous, and I'm a very careful person who
           | takes precautions - I can't imagine kids with laser pointers
           | are going to be able to see very well when they are older.
        
       | protocolture wrote:
       | You could have just said "Sales Guy"
        
       | inetknght wrote:
       | What a wonderful story about why we can't have nice things.
       | Hopefully nobody else outside of the story was hurt.
       | 
       | Lasers are fun. Like all fun things, they demand respect.
        
       | JansjoFromIkea wrote:
       | Lasers absolutely terrify me now; I impulse bought a 2w lasercube
       | in 2020 for next to nothing (circa $200) and once I started
       | reading up on it I was pretty appalled how easy it was to buy.
       | 
       | This was a fairly expensive RRP laser with some level of
       | protection and stuff around it, the fact you could buy pens
       | capable of pretty significant damage on ebay for way less where
       | people wouldn't even grasp just how dangerous the thing is.
       | 
       | So I've got a laser I'm afraid to play with until I can make a
       | safe environment for it and I'm even more afraid to sell on to
       | anyone...
       | 
       | Feel like there's going to be some atrocity and some big time
       | laser panic in the future.
        
         | CamperBob2 wrote:
         | Why not just wear the appropriate goggles? You don't have to be
         | afraid, you just have to be careful.
         | 
         | Of course, being careful means considering the possible
         | presence of subharmonics, and buying your goggles from
         | legitimate suppliers rather than unpronounceable Chinese brands
         | on Amazon or eBay.
        
       | davecahill wrote:
       | Blame Free Retrospective challenge
        
       | 77soccer wrote:
       | Very interesting
        
       | DannyBee wrote:
       | So while trying to answer another comment on cost, i ran into
       | this:
       | 
       | https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S09240...
       | and
       | https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00303...
       | 
       | I had thought, reading the article, that maybe this was a
       | relatively new idea, and they were at least trying something
       | relatively new in an insane way.
       | 
       | But no, the latter is from 1999 (so when this event occurred),
       | and there were earlier papers they cite.
       | 
       | Using lasers to do paint stripping of coatings from roadways was
       | well studied even then, and all the risks/rewards carefully laid
       | out.
       | 
       | Not that i expect the sales engineer to have read that, but
       | still.
        
         | csours wrote:
         | > "oxygen shroud-gas"
         | 
         | Do they call it MOG instead of MIG? Although it's Chlorinated
         | Rubber, not metal, so maybe it's CROG.
        
       | NathanielBaking wrote:
       | Safety guys always ruin the fun. I was in the Marine Corps and
       | every time we got to test some new piece of gear the safety
       | officer was like "No, you can't live fire it off the flight deck
       | of the ship" or "No, not here, that village is down wind of the
       | dust you will kick up when it goes off." No, that has a kill
       | distance of 6 miles, you have to fire it into a hill." Blah,
       | blah, blah.
       | 
       | So after I got out I joined the National Guard.
        
         | talldayo wrote:
         | It's all fun and games until you walk in front of a live AESA
         | radar and sterilize yourself.
        
           | khorne wrote:
           | Save $300 on a vasectomy.
        
             | peepee1982 wrote:
             | They're about twice as much where _I_ live!
        
               | shaftway wrote:
               | Most US insurance will cover this at 100% even if you
               | haven't met your deductible. Something about how babies
               | cost more than a 3 digit outpatient procedure....
        
             | ryneandal wrote:
             | Mine was $750 :(
        
           | onemoresoop wrote:
           | I'm guessing there are other adverse effects beside
           | sterilizing.
        
           | SXX wrote:
           | Is it scientifically proven though? If it that powerful
           | wouldn't it cook your brain as well?
        
         | archgoon wrote:
         | > that village is down wind of the dust you will kick up when
         | it goes off.
         | 
         | I'm always happy to hear that there are people saying these
         | sorts of things in the military. I'm sorry it wasn't fun at the
         | time, but the Safety Officer really was looking out for you.
         | You really don't want to be the unexpected cautionary tale,
         | like Bob.
        
         | RandomThoughts3 wrote:
         | I may or may not be aware of hull damage being caused or not
         | caused by a rifle being fired from the flight deck of a ship.
         | My point being, your safety officer had a point.
        
           | trelane wrote:
           | I think they know that. I read their comment as sarcastic.
        
             | jprete wrote:
             | It's really, really close though. The kill distance of six
             | miles is what tips me over the edge of reading it as
             | sarcasm.
        
               | trelane wrote:
               | Really? To me, it is a very clear instance. Amongst my
               | cohort, saying "The safety officer won't let us do
               | anything fun" is going to generally always be sarcastic,
               | unless the point is that some rules seem excessively and
               | obviously pointless, which these aren't. It's more a
               | backhanded way of saying "thank goodness the safety
               | office stopped us / those boneheads from doing something
               | that would have been incredibly stupid."
        
               | nocman wrote:
               | It depends totally on how you read it. In this case, my
               | first thought after reading that was "play stupid games,
               | win stupid prizes". There are plenty of people
               | (especially on the internet) who actually _do_ think that
               | way -- by which I mean people that are serious when they
               | respond with  "you guys ruin all the fun" to others who
               | bring up genuine concerns that will most likely have
               | wide-sweeping ramifications.
        
               | trelane wrote:
               | > There are plenty of people (especially on the internet)
               | who actually do think that way
               | 
               | Sure. That's why these safety officers exist. I think
               | some other funranium posts state.that (paraphrased)
               | "safety rules are written in blood."
               | 
               | That said, I suspect folks like that would tend to phrase
               | the rule in a way to diminish the implied
               | impact/likelihood, rather than enhance it or state as-is,
               | as (afaict) the original did.
        
           | dctoedt wrote:
           | > _hull damage being caused or not caused by a rifle being
           | fired from the flight deck of a ship_
           | 
           | How did _that_ happen? Our MarDet would occasionally do live-
           | fire training off the flight deck (CVN-65); they naturally
           | pointed their weapons _away_ from the ship ....
           | 
           | Or are you talking about hitting the hull of a different
           | ship, e.g., one of the tin cans in plane guard, or alongside
           | during an UNREP? Seems like that would ... get noticed by a
           | lot of folks.
        
             | RandomThoughts3 wrote:
             | Hypothetically, someone could have left a guest (like say
             | an engineer from the shipyard doing sea acceptance testing)
             | fire a rifle and an unlucky wave reflection might have
             | bounced a round back towards the bow.
        
               | rtkwe wrote:
               | Wow what an incredibly unfortunate hypothetical
               | situation. 1 in a million ricochet that one.
        
               | edm0nd wrote:
               | Seabees doing seabee things.
        
         | ooterness wrote:
         | I am reminded of the "Sir Isaac Newton is the deadliest son of
         | a bitch in space" speech from Mass Effect 2.
         | 
         | https://youtu.be/hLpgxry542M?feature=shared
        
           | elzbardico wrote:
           | Compton is a bitch for astronauts too.
        
         | gumby wrote:
         | > I was in the Marine Corps and every time we got to test some
         | new piece of gear the safety officer was like "No, you can't
         | live fire...
         | 
         | I thought the whole point of the Marines was to cause maximal
         | amounts of damage. Are you implying there is a constraint on
         | that?
         | 
         | But now I understand why the marines hate the navy: I had a
         | buddy who'd been in the navy and he said they kept the kids
         | busy by cleaning and painting everything but frequently they'd
         | let 'em blow off steam by tossing cardboard boxes and stuff off
         | the end the flight deck and shooting at them with the 50 cal
         | machine guns.
         | 
         | We were good friends, attended MIT together, but if I thought
         | the Navy would take many people like him I'd doubt their
         | ability to fight a war. He was only in the navy because it
         | would pay for school and AFAIK he managed to avoid getting
         | _any_ rank advancement at all. MIT requires, or used to, a lot
         | of all nighters and he once said  "I'm probably only sane with
         | these all nighters because I did so much extra sleeping in the
         | navy"
        
           | afterburner wrote:
           | > I thought the whole point of the Marines was to cause
           | maximal amounts of damage.
           | 
           | I thought their point was to expose _themselves_ to maximal
           | amounts of damage.
        
             | NoMoreNicksLeft wrote:
             | > I thought their point was to expose themselves to maximal
             | amounts of damage.
             | 
             | I hate to be pedantic, but technically the whole point is
             | to expose the enemy to maximal amounts of damage. Whoever
             | that is. Anything else is incidental.
        
           | robertlagrant wrote:
           | > But now I understand why the marines hate the navy: I had a
           | buddy who'd been in the navy and he said they kept the kids
           | busy by cleaning and painting everything but frequently
           | they'd let 'em blow off steam by tossing cardboard boxes and
           | stuff off the end the flight deck and shooting at them with
           | the 50 cal machine guns.
           | 
           | If anything this should be why the taxpayer doesn't like the
           | navy.
        
       | jnwatson wrote:
       | Rule number 1 of laser safety is "do not look into beam with
       | remaining eye".
        
         | altruios wrote:
         | I think that's rule number two. Right after "don't look at the
         | laser".
        
           | dietr1ch wrote:
           | then the third rule must be, "now you can do whatever the
           | fuck you want" written in Braille.
        
         | Szpadel wrote:
         | the other saying I know is: "you can see laser only twice in
         | your life, once with your eye and second time with the
         | remaining one"
        
       | kevinmchugh wrote:
       | One of the lessons you can take from this is that people think in
       | the tools they know even when there's better, simpler tools
       | available.
       | 
       | It wouldn't be hard to get some asphalt into the lab, but if you
       | don't know how to pour asphalt...or swing a hammer, you're gonna
       | haul the tool you know to the asphalt
        
       | gtmitchell wrote:
       | That brings back memories. One of my first research projects in
       | school was doing sketchy things with a Quanta-Ray Nd:YAG laser. I
       | remember the distinct 'tack-tack-tack' sound of the Q-switching
       | at 10 Hz which I used to create a laser-induced plasma right
       | around eye level.
       | 
       | Fortunately I had the proper goggles on but was always terrified
       | of catching a stray reflection and blinding myself. Now we live
       | in a world of dirt-cheap high-powered diode lasers, and when I
       | see all the stupid things YouTubers do with them with almost no
       | discussion of proper eye safety, I wince.
        
       | N_A_T_E wrote:
       | I worked in a laser lab for a few months early in my career.
       | After the safety training I fear lasers getting near my eyes in
       | situations most people don't care about. I even look away from
       | barcode scanners at grocery stores. Sometimes I wonder about
       | lidar being shot in all directions from those self-driving cars
       | around SF.
        
         | Miraste wrote:
         | There's been at least one sketchy self driving startup that
         | drove their LiDAR hard enough they burnt holes in journalists'
         | camera sensors at CES.
         | 
         | https://arstechnica.com/cars/2019/01/man-says-ces-lidars-las...
        
           | neilv wrote:
           | I'd wondered about the eye safety of LIDAR on prototype
           | autonomous vehicles, but then thought "surely anything at all
           | unsafe to eyes wouldn't be allowed on public streets."
           | 
           | Now I'm reminded of all the unregulated recklessness in some
           | technical topics that I do understand, and realizing it's
           | silly to assume.
        
         | sersi wrote:
         | Should I be concerned about the lidar in my dreame robot vacuum
         | (L10s ultra) and my 3 years old whose head is closer to the
         | ground than me?
         | 
         | I never thought about it before but you'r comment worries me.
        
         | kqr wrote:
         | Wait, are barcode scanners lasers? I've always thought of them
         | as red lamps because their cone spreads out so widely quickly.
        
           | rtkwe wrote:
           | It's a scanning dot moving fast enough to appear as a cone.
        
             | hinkley wrote:
             | The stationary ones used to have a spinning mirror with a
             | laser pointed at it. You used to be able to look in the
             | machine and see it. Dunno how they do it now for the
             | handheld scanners. Smaller mirror or some other trick like
             | piezo?
        
               | rtkwe wrote:
               | Hand scanners for a while have been able to use just LEDs
               | to illuminate the barcode it turns out. Way cheaper than
               | having so many moving parts like the older laser based
               | scanners.
        
       | franciscop wrote:
       | I've touched all sorts of things in my "Maker" years, but one of
       | the things I'm never going to touch by far is lasers. I know how
       | bad they are, and I also know how woeful unqualified I'm for
       | messing with lasers. Heck, I've even left a couple of dancefloors
       | in clubs that I heavily suspected were firing actual lasers at
       | the people, wonder how many of those were actual lasers vs light
       | pointers and how many people got unknowingly injured, but it was
       | just not worth the risk.
        
         | voidUpdate wrote:
         | Even better is when the dancefloor wants UV lighting, so they
         | just buy some cheap UV-C bulbs
        
           | duskwuff wrote:
           | Funranium has a post about that, too:
           | https://www.funraniumlabs.com/2023/11/ultraviolet-rant/
        
             | Sakos wrote:
             | > We do not want to share space with a UV-C air sterilizer
             | because we like to see with our eyeballs
             | 
             | This was a good read.
        
           | capitainenemo wrote:
           | https://kotaku.com/bored-apes-nft-blind-eye-pain-uv-light-
           | pa...
           | 
           | most famous example of that.
        
           | techstrategist wrote:
           | What are the implications of that choice? Safety?
        
         | krisoft wrote:
         | > Heck, I've even left a couple of dancefloors in clubs that I
         | heavily suspected were firing actual lasers at the people,
         | wonder how many of those were actual lasers vs light pointers
         | and how many people got unknowingly injured, but it was just
         | not worth the risk.
         | 
         | It is not really clear what you are saying here. What do you
         | mean by "actual lasers" vs "light pointers".
         | 
         | Whether or not a light show is safe has nothing to do with the
         | light source being an "actual laser" or not. What matters is
         | what kind of laser and how it is used.
        
         | bongodongobob wrote:
         | They are actual lasers and they're fine. Assuming you're
         | talking about the light shows and not just random people.
        
         | bryceacc wrote:
         | Last year I went to a karaoke dance floor club thing in NYC
         | k-town and I saw literal burn marks on the wall. A spinning
         | laser disco thing continuously traced across the burn mark. I
         | got our group the hell out of there but they only agreed to
         | leave because it was too loud
        
       | londons_explore wrote:
       | Are there any stats on the scale of laser eye injuries?
       | 
       | Like what percentage of the world population are blind because of
       | laser injuries? What percentage have permanent vision issues?
       | 
       | How do those compare with the number of people who work with
       | lasers?
       | 
       | How does it compare with say vision loss from arc welding?
        
         | Szpadel wrote:
         | it's hard to know if you have eye damage, we have big blind
         | spots right in the center of our eyes that we are not aware of.
         | 
         | our brain can fill out missing data from context and the same
         | happens with eye damage.
         | 
         | with progressing damage you will see normally until you cross
         | some threshold where your brain gives up and you are then blind
        
       | iaresee wrote:
       | Having started out my tech career as an intern in an industrial
       | laser lab, this story is parts amusing and horrifying. Brought
       | back a lot of memories of all the ablation tests and via drilling
       | I used to do, with varying degrees of success, to help sell this
       | massive lasers.
        
       | Flop7331 wrote:
       | 1999, when you could pull a stunt like this and still get two
       | weeks notice for it
        
       | tomcam wrote:
       | > the company claims the machine can take care of business safely
       | "even in the most movement-heavy conditions," and that dry run
       | testing on moving humans has all been successful.
       | 
       | So many questions
        
       | hinkley wrote:
       | One of my cleverest friends loves to say, "do not look into laser
       | with remaining eye."
        
       | manithree wrote:
       | Not to be insensitive about your injury, but I'm more curious how
       | you got your laser eye.
        
       | strickman wrote:
       | Didn't anyone ever tell you to make sure your optics are clean?
       | 
       | -Kent
        
       | phaedrus wrote:
       | My electronics mentor worked at 3M in the 80s. One of his
       | coworkers thought it would be funny to prank him by asking him to
       | look into a piece of equipment with something like a binocular
       | microscope that the prankster had rigged to flash laser light at
       | the sample. (I'm not sure what the equipment was, maybe something
       | to do with chip lithography or looking at the surface of a
       | magnetic platter.)
       | 
       | Somehow 3M was able to get out of compensating him for this
       | workplace injury even though, if an ophthalmologist were to give
       | him an eye exam (he tells me) they can literally read lithography
       | writing (albeit backwards) burned in scar tissue on his retina.
       | IIRC the prankster was never appropriately disciplined either.
       | 
       | Like OP it mostly affects/affected his peripheral vision and he
       | just ignored it much of the time, but as he's gotten older his
       | eyesight in general has gotten worse such that he can no longer
       | compensate for it.
        
       | RIMR wrote:
       | I have had lasers in my life a long time and have always
       | appreciated the risks, but I have taken a couple of very brief
       | hits to the eye.
       | 
       | Fortunately, my eye doctor has never seen anything that looks
       | like damage, and aside from extreme nearsightedness totally
       | unrelated to lasers, my eyes work fine.
       | 
       | These ultra-powerful lasers that will toast your retinas
       | instantly scare the shit out of me. The fact that you can buy a
       | tattoo removal gun on AliExpress
       | (https://www.aliexpress.us/item/3256806988159318.html) is just
       | insane. The kinds of mass-violence you could commit with a device
       | like are outrageous, I figure it's only a matter of time before
       | someone uses something like this against an unsuspecting crowd.
       | 
       | Even just using the wrong kinds of lasers or UV lights at a
       | concert can have awful consequences:
       | https://www.theguardian.com/music/2008/jul/16/news.seanmicha... /
       | https://arstechnica.com/health/2023/11/bored-ape-creator-say...
       | 
       | If this kind of thing can happen by accident, imagine what could
       | be done on purpose.
        
       | hatsunearu wrote:
       | not really related, but people say you shouldn't look directly at
       | the sun.
       | 
       | I don't understand why having the sun in your field of view at
       | all isn't dangerous then. wouldn't that cause the sun to burn a
       | hole somewhere inside your eyeball that isn't the direct center?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-08-01 23:00 UTC)