Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By Jane Moody
I wonder if anyone can clarify the connection between safety and CE marking ?
My client has been supplied with a machine that seems to be unsafe. Access to a dangerous part is not guarded at all. They have queried the safety of the machine with their supplier who has provided an EC declaration of conformity (for CE marking).
The declaration of conformity refers to 98/37/EC machinery directive (This relates to a European Directive that has yet to be incorporated into UK legislation. However an earlier directive is incorporated into UK legislation as the Supply of Machinery (Safety) Regulations 1992).
Surely if access to a dangerous part is not guarded the machine does not comply with either the 98/37/EC machinery directive or the Supply of Machinery (Safety) Regulations ? How has a declaration of conformity been granted without compliance ?
There is no reference to PD 5304 in the declaration of conformity. Is this because there are no guards ?
The obvious thing, of course, is to install guards, however this would involve considerable expense and research which surely should be borne by the supplier, rather than their customers.
Am I correct in thinking that a CE mark does not necessarily confirm safety, but merely compliance with named standards ? Should mention of 98/37/EC confirm safety of the machine ?
Many thanks in anticipation of your response.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Nick Higginson
Jane,
Not an expert on this by any means, but aside from the CE marking issue, surely Section 6 of HSWA74 applies i.e. duties on suppliers, manufacturers, designers etc.
There is also a british standard relating to machinery safeguarding, and of course Regulation 11 of PUWER.
Regards,
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Zyggy Turek
Jane,
I dug out a paper presented in 1998 by RJ Wilson, Head of Machinery Safety at the HSE in Bootle which I hope will answer your question:
" The CE mark is the way a manufacturer or final installer demonstrates that they have complied with all relevant Directives in force at that time.The CE mark also acts as a "Technical Passport" allowing free movement of a product so marked throughout the European Union and the European Economic Area.While the driving force behind these Directives is free movement of goods, many of the requirements are safety related.This is due to the fact that many of the non-tarrif barriers which are used as trade barriers are justified by linking them to safety".
In essence, a CE mark has to be properly affixed and the machinery must be safe (Article 2 of the Machinery Directive uses the phrase "do not endanger the health and safety of persons").
Zyggy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Clive Richardson
Hi Jane.
Basically if the machine seems unsafe then it must not be put into production until it is made safe regardless of what ever marking it has on it. The machine should/must satisfy the Essetial Health and Safety requirements relating to the design and construction of machinery (annexe 1 of the machinery directive). At the design stage the manufacturers should apply EN 1050 (principals of risk assessment), and then the subsequent standards for guarding and safety systems which I believe are EN 292-1, 292-2, 953, 954-1 and 954-2 (although I am sure someone will be kind enough to correct me if I am wrong). The CE mark is no guarantee of safety, all it signifies is that certain standards have been applied and it is allowed free movement within the European Ecconomic Area. Look at regs. 6,10 and 11 of PUWER 98.
I have no attachments with Pilz, but contact Susan Hayward, training administrator 01536 462223 and get on the Machine Safety Interactive Workshop, its an excellent course.
Regards Clive Richardson MIOSH
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Jim Sweetman
Jane,
This is an old chestnut that has come up a number of times.
The CE marking, or CE declaration, is only a suppliers declaration that the product meets the Essential Safety Requirements (ESR's)of a particular country/state.
Unfortunately, standards vary country to country. Also, people are inclined to tell the occasional 'porkie'.
Under your circumstances, I would advise a proper assessment of the equipment to satisfy yourself that the requirements of PUWER 98 are met.
Regards
Jim Sweetman
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Jim Walker
I wrote this off-line before I saw Clive and Jims responses, so some is a repeat of what they have stated
Having been involved in equipment safety for more years than I care to remember, I'm not really surprised you have found CE marked equipment that you believe to be unsafe.
In theory anything CE marked is safe; in practice the supplier has most likely just slapped a label on it and is hoping for the best. With few exceptions, the CE mark means, " in the opinion of the manufacturer, this equipment complies with all relevant directives". Some of these seem to have a risk assessment that says "what can we get away with" – as most things are bought on price alone, we the consumers are partly responsible for this attitude.
The CE mark is of only the same worth as the integrity of the person who applied it – never thrust the mark. Always risk assess the equipment and reject if you are not happy. Any reasonable supplier will help with a risk assessment; any that cannot or will not, should immediately arouse suspicion.
The enforcing body in the UK is local trading standards; generally speaking it does not seem to work – I guess because they are under resourced. I suggest you call them in and threaten the supplier too. See what happens
Note that guards are only one control method for ensuring people do not come into contact with hazardous parts of machinery.
Standards
PD 5304 was originally BS 5304, but became “redundant” when superseded by Euronorms (themselves based on IEC standards). ‘5304 was considered so useful that an unprecedented step was made to re-issue it as a Published Document; it’s relevance in UK H&S law is debatable.
Machinery standards (one does not do all) include:
BS EN1050: 1997 Safety of machinery – Principles of risk assessment
BS EN294: 1992 Safety of machinery – Safety distances
BS EN61032: 1997 Protection of persons by enclosures – Probes for verification
EN 292 parts 1 &2 Design principles
Then there is presumably the electrical side - BS EN 60204:1992
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Denis Hands
Although I can't remember the exact details, I can recollect an accident report in one of the safety journals that related the details of an employer being prosecuted by HSE for allowing the use of a (CE marked) machine that, because of exposed dangerous parts, caused an injury to the user.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.