Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By Jane Watts
Ooh, another perception of the regulations question!
We've got a lathe which has guards (in the form of covers) which protect the user from the moving parts underneath the covers.
However, the guards are not locked, although cannot be opened acidentally as they take a definite action to open them, if you get what i mean.
I know these things are often risk based. Basically, if someone did make the action of lifting open the cover the machine would not stop and they would be exposed to moving parts. So with this in mind, should they be locked? Even though they take a definite action to open?
Thanks in advance
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Hilary Charlton
Basically this is down to a risk assessment conducted by you - you should ask yourself what is the likelihood of the operator opening the guard to see how the work is getting on. If this is high, which I suspect it will be, then you should fit an interlock guard. This can be retrofitted to your existing guard and can stop the machine when the guard opens.
We have interlock guards on all our lathes for exactly that reason, however, you are the only one that can decide once you have conducted your RA.
Hilary
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Jane Watts
I knew someone would say risk assessment! I wanted to try and attain what was 'general' practice!
They wouldn't need to open the doors to see how work is getting on as the doors cover the gear box and belt, not what's being worked on.
I would have thought if anything locking them would be more apropriate.
It just seems OTT to me when a specific movement has got to be carried out in order to open the doors. Surely we've got to hand some responsibility to the user's not to open these doors when the machine is in use?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Paul Leadbetter
If guards can be opened, they will be!
If access is not normally required, bolt them shut; if access is required, interlock them.
Paul
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Kevin Irwin
Hi Jane, I understand what you mean by the response carry out a risk assessment! Stock answer to almost every question. From my experience with guards that cover the rotating chuck I would not immediately fit an interlock - I would however monitor how the guard was used and if it is frequently left out of position then I would ask for them to be fitted. Hope this helps.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Jane Watts
hi, it's not the cover/guard over the chuck, but the cover over the gear box and belt
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Jeff Watt
Jane
Guards over a drive train like you describe need to be fixed in place i.e. bolted at least. Control guard may be necessary if frequent access to check work or fix something is likely.
If its a standard lathe I would imagine that this is unlikely, fixed guard with a lock out procedure for isolation of hazardous energy during maintenance work should be sufficient IMHO.
Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Adrian Watson
Dear Jane,
Risk assess, no way! Drive belts are well known to be dangerous. Furthermore, there should be no need to gain regular access to the dive belt or motor unless it is in poor condition. As such, YOU MUST PUT IN A FIXED GUARD.
For reference Regulation 11 of PUWER 98 states:
Dangerous parts of machinery
11. - (1) Every employer shall ensure that measures are taken in accordance with paragraph (2) which are effective -
(a) to prevent access to any dangerous part of machinery or to any rotating stock-bar; or
(b) to stop the movement of any dangerous part of machinery or rotating stock-bar before any part of a person enters a danger zone.
(2) The measures required by paragraph (1) shall consist of -
(a) the provision of fixed guards enclosing every dangerous part or rotating stock-bar where and to the extent that it is practicable to do so, but where or to the extent that it is not, then
(b) the provision of other guards or protection devices where and to the extent that it is practicable to do so, but where or to the extent that it is not, then
(c) the provision of jigs, holders, push-sticks or similar protection appliances used in conjunction with the machinery where and to the extent that it is practicable to do so, but where or to the extent that it is not, then
(d) the provision of information, instruction, training and supervision.
(3) All guards and protection devices provided under sub-paragraphs (a) or (b) of paragraph (2) shall -
(a) be suitable for the purpose for which they are provided;
(b) be of good construction, sound material and adequate strength;
(c) be maintained in an efficient state, in efficient working order and in good repair;
(d) not give rise to any increased risk to health or safety;
(e) not be easily bypassed or disabled;
(f) be situated at sufficient distance from the danger zone;
(g) not unduly restrict the view of the operating cycle of the machinery, where such a view is necessary;
(h) be so constructed or adapted that they allow operations necessary to fit or replace parts and for maintenance work, restricting access so that it is allowed only to the area where the work is to be carried out and, if possible, without having to dismantle the guard or protection device.
(4) All protection appliances provided under sub-paragraph (c) of paragraph (2) shall comply with sub-paragraphs (a) to (d) and (g) of paragraph (3).
(5) In this regulation -
"danger zone" means any zone in or around machinery in which a person is exposed to a risk to health or safety from contact with a dangerous part of machinery or a rotating stock-bar;
"stock-bar" means any part of a stock-bar which projects beyond the head-stock of a lathe.
Regards Adrian Watson
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Barry Cooper
Jane
Adrian is right, the guard should be a fixed one.
Access should be via a SSW where by the power is isolated and locked off.
Even if an interlock was fitted, I doubt if the moving parts would stop immediately, so you would then have to fit an interlock to prevent access until motion had stopped.
Fit a fixed guard, and implement a SSW
Barry
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Lumpy
Absolutly, and without any question, the guard should be fixed.
It would not be too costly to bolt this guard in place, so what's stopping you ?
Lumpy
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Leighton Willox
Jane
If these are covers are for areas of the machine that only need to be accessed during maintenance then I would suggest that the covers need to be secured by tamperproof bolting.
Your safe system of work should address isolation for maintenance. Too many interlocks on fixed covers makes for a temperamental machine and would encourage operator 'investigations'.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By John Murgatroyd
The drive machinery of the lathe doesn't need guards, it is enclosed anyway....very few machines have interlocked machine covers....just on electrical access covers. The lathe described seems to me to have no guards on the chuck or tools, let alone on the workpiece.
Obviously, the chuck needs to be guarded and that guard has to be of the "guard removed machine off".
Whether the work and the cutting tools need to be guarded depends....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By John Murgatroyd
Oh, and i forgot.
For small companies the switching on the guards should preferably be easly by-passed. This aids the production process considerably. In the case of an accident you can always say: "wasn't me guv, the guy musta dun it hiself"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Jane Watts
Thanks for all your advice, yes, fixed guards is the way i'm heading.
For those still unsure, the chuck already has a guard, which I have previously stated.
The drive machinery is enclosed, but by a door which can be opened whilst the machine is in action, albeit, the opening of this door would have to be a definite action, you couldn't just 'knock' it open.
Anyway, closed for lunch now:)
Thanks all, helpful as usual.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.