Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

IOSH Forums are closing 

The IOSH Forums will close on 5 January 2026 as part of a move to a new, more secure online community platform.

All IOSH members will be invited to join the new platform following the launch of a new member database in the New Year. You can continue to access this website until the closure date. 

For more information, please visit the IOSH website.

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Admin  
#1 Posted : 05 March 2008 09:43:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Anthony Edwards Hi there, An employer has purchased a 4" hand held polisher and adapted it to sand stainless steel (for the removal of burs). There is no guarding, but his thoughts are it is safer due to the lower speeds involved. Am I correct in advising him that he has changed the use of the machines from that which it was originally designed to do and if any employee was injured whilst using it he would be liable due to said changes? Thanks for any replies in advance regards Tony
Admin  
#2 Posted : 05 March 2008 10:32:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Dave Merchant ooh, this is fun. If the change was the swapping of one attachment disc for another, and both discs are acceptable parts according to the manufacturer, then you haven't changed use per se, but rather the tool is dual-use in the first place and you're simply exploiting both. The issue of a guard is separate as the 'abrasive wheels' definitions are not entirely simple to apply to sanding discs that aren't "formed from bonded particles". If the new disc isn't accepted as compatible by the tool manufacturer then yes, it's a CoU and a problem.
Admin  
#3 Posted : 05 March 2008 11:09:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Mitch Anthony, Agree with Dave but I would insist on guarding if using any type of abrasive (you will need an abrasive to efficiently remove stainless steel). The most basic assessment will dictate this, physical particles ( have you ever had a stainless steel splinter?), hot particles, and the obvious removing skin and bone at a rapid rate! Mitch
Admin  
#4 Posted : 05 March 2008 11:15:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Anthony Edwards Thanks dave, They are using a sealey polisher and a Bosh backing pad, they hold the machine with one hand and apply pressure to the plate being sanded with the other. Apparently its not feasible due to the amounts involved to secure the workpiece and hold the sander two handed. 'time is money my boy'!!!!!! regards Tony
Admin  
#5 Posted : 05 March 2008 11:30:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Mitch Anthony, I used to use a bench mounted deburrer which clamped to the edge of the bench, was fully guarded and utilised a nylon impregnated wheel, if this is of interest I can let you have the manufacturers/suppliers details. Mitch
Admin  
#6 Posted : 05 March 2008 11:46:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Anthony Edwards Mitch, That information would be handy, whether management will go for it is another matter. They may need the money to add to there family fleet of cars, BMW M3, 2x Porsche and mini cooper S!!!!!!!!!
Admin  
#7 Posted : 05 March 2008 12:03:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Karen Todd There are a wide range of tools that can be used depending on the part and the volumes. Have sent you some info. Karen
Admin  
#8 Posted : 05 March 2008 12:10:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By holmezy Anthony, What exactly are you using? If its an orbital sander type tool then the need for guarding is reduced and probably wont be required as debris is not ejected at high speed. Also, so long as the pads are compatible with the tool there shouldn't be an issue. PPE for eyes, ears and hand might be required. Your comment re "holding it with one hand" might not be an issue with this tool as it doesnt revolve at "X" thousand revs. If its an angle grinder type tool, then the "one hand" is a no no. These are designed for use with 2 hands. Removal of the guard would also be unadvisable and would almost certainly void any manufacturers warranty or safe operation instruction. (although I do know some of operations that cant be carried out with the guard on, but thats probably more of a "wrong tool for the job" case. Holding the workpiece by hand is also not advisable. Angle grinders do occasionally "skid" off in wrong direction taking everything and anything it touches with it!! or perhaps I just mis understood your post? Holmezy soon be beer time
Admin  
#9 Posted : 05 March 2008 12:18:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By steve e ashton Tony: I think the issue is much simpler than the question of 'is this a change of use?'. The manufacturer's or supplier's literature with the Sealey polisher will, almost certainly, give clear instructions as to how it should be used. Those instructions will, I am almost certain, specify that users should hold the machine in two hands for safety in operation. Sealey polishers are not designed to be used in the manner you describe, and yes, the employer will be held liable in the event of an injury arising as a result. Not because there has been a 'change of use' but because the employees are being told to ignore the manufacturer's instructions. Steve
Admin  
#10 Posted : 05 March 2008 12:39:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Anthony Edwards Hi there, Stainless steel is cut using a profile cutter and cleaned off using the said polisher (as a sander) Thickness varies from 1mm to 1.6mm of a variety of shapes and sizes. The risks are highlighted through risk assessment (regarding using a sander one handed) but management are willing to take risk stating the reasons on the risk assessment, no injuries to date, 3,000 pads used in a month etc but will review assessment if there are any incidents. regards Tony
Admin  
#11 Posted : 05 March 2008 12:46:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Bob Shillabeer Your last comment is a bit worrying. They will do something if it goes wrong??? That sounds like they are willing to take a chance so long as it doesn't cost them anything. Have you mentiioned this to your union reps or H&S reps?? Make sure the management specify all of this in writting for your own defence.
Admin  
#12 Posted : 05 March 2008 12:49:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Mitch Anthony, If you cut with nitrogen you don't get any oxidised burrs! Mitch
Admin  
#13 Posted : 05 March 2008 12:51:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Mitch PS I'll let you have details of the bench deburrer tomorrow.
Admin  
#14 Posted : 05 March 2008 12:53:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By holmezy WOW.....3000 pads per month, thats 17ish per hour. I bet your consumables supplier loves you. Still doesnt sound like the best way of de-burring. Have you considered a vibro-tumbler or similar mass deburring machine. You just throw in your batch of bits, turn it on and walk away for an hour or 2. Might cost a bit to set up, but with your usage of pads, it would probably pay for itself quite quickly. Plus it frees the operator up to do other things and eliminates the "one hand" and any WRULDS etc that may be associated with the job. Holmezy
Admin  
#15 Posted : 05 March 2008 13:28:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Anthony Edwards They do use a tumbler to debur thicker material, and yes they as you say are willing to take the risk, no union and safety reps have no pull (V small family firm). External safety adviser informs management of risks and best way ahead but can only advice explaining the risk to employees and possible penalties. regards Tony
Admin  
#16 Posted : 06 March 2008 10:42:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Mitch You have mail Mitch
Users browsing this topic
Guest (5)
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.