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

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
will1977  
#1 Posted : 01 April 2010 14:40:07(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
will1977

Hi,
My company have recently bought a new Jigsaw for cutting out templates. I have done a risk assessment and found that this has no guarding to prevent access to moving parts. Regulation 11 of PUWER springs to mind. I have recomended that the Jigsaw be removed from service as there is potential for severe injury.

Does any one have any oher thoughts they can throw into the equation?

PhilBeale  
#2 Posted : 01 April 2010 15:09:47(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
PhilBeale

so long as the guard isn't missing / should be supplied then probably the jigsaw is fine to use. yes you need to prevent access to moving parts as much as possible but enough still needs to be exposed for it to do it's work. Think of a handsaw it has the best part of 2ft of expose cutting edge. but it would be impossible to guard it and for it to do it's job.

i would say so long as it's got relevant CE markings then it will be fine. There are a lot of equipment out there that has the potential to cause severe harm chainsaws, grinders, bandsaws & lathes all have exposed moving parts especially chainsaws that's where training and competence of the operator comes into play

So would you remove a chainsaw from service because of it's exposed moving parts when they are used everyday by Qualified operators.

Phil
MaxPayne  
#3 Posted : 01 April 2010 15:36:48(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
MaxPayne

Agree completely with PhilBeale but being from a joinery background I can confirm two points with regards to jigsaws. Firtly they are almost impossible to guard the moving cutter blade completely since it needs to run through the depth of material. Some you will find have a guard/cover over the front section between the stock holding the blade and the base of the tool. Secondly, you need access to the stock area in order to change the blade, so predominantley any guard or cover there is removable.

Having said all that though, jigsaws don't appear to present the biggest risk in terms of power tools compared to say a router, circular saw or even the humble drill.
jwk  
#4 Posted : 01 April 2010 15:42:23(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
jwk

Sorry but I can't agree that a CE mark means that equipment automatically meets the requirements of HASAWA and PUWER. The CE mark is intended to reduce the effects of trade barriers by setting a minimum standard, and equipment carrying a CE mark can't be prevented from entering or being sold in any EU state. It doesn't mean that it necessarily meets local standards of safety. In R v Bristol Magistrates Courts and others the majority verdict was to allow an HSE appeal that they could use the 1974 Act even though the equipment which had failed bore a CE mark.

So if you think your jigsaw is unsafe in use without a guard, and that a guard is a reasonably practicable way of reducing risk, you should get one fitted, CE mark or no,

John
PhilBeale  
#5 Posted : 01 April 2010 15:43:22(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
PhilBeale

Common sense applies with such tools isolating when changing blades and in normal operation you shouldn't have any reason to put your finger near the dangerous part. of course people do.

A guy at our old company was drilling a hole using a battery drill. he was holding the work piece falt in his palm and managed to drill straight through his hand. when we asked why he didn't stop when he felt the pain he said he tensed up and the drill went faster and quicker through his hand.

Oh did we laugh, No we really did laugh.

Phil
PhilBeale  
#6 Posted : 01 April 2010 15:51:16(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
PhilBeale

My comment around CE marking was basically saying if you bought it from a dodge bloke out the back of his van or from ebay and it's come from china then you could be right to be concerned. If it's a recognised company bosch, dewalt, black and decker and you bought it from a normal retail outlet then it is going to be fine. perhaps it might be that you are not familiar with working or risk assessing such equipment. have a look in the average home loads of stuff with exposed moving parts or other hazards that are unguarded. electric hand whisk, irons, vacuum cleaners before you even get to the DIY tools in the house.

Phil
jwk  
#7 Posted : 01 April 2010 15:59:28(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
jwk

Fair comment Phil, but still, if you identify a risk and there's a reasonably practicable solution you have to implement it where machinery's concerned,

John
PhilBeale  
#8 Posted : 01 April 2010 16:14:39(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
PhilBeale

jwk wrote:
Fair comment Phil, but still, if you identify a risk and there's a reasonably practicable solution you have to implement it where machinery's concerned,

John


yes i agree with you john but the practicability can be an issue when guarding some equipment because by adding guarding you can make the equipment less safe or unusable. take the chainsaw you could add guarding but the sawdust would not be able to escape and jam the blade or you wouldn't be able to cut through the wood beacuse the guarding gets in the way.

i would say the jigsaw has been made as safe as possible. maybe by comparing different makes or models you might find one you are happier with. But the part more likely to do the damage is the blade on the other side of the wood when the operator goes cutting through the cable.

it's a case of weighing up reasonable practicable against equipment that is still usable. get the operator to read the manual and make sure they are aware of the dangerous parts are. i've used a range of such equipment from hand tools to heavy industrial equipment all have the potential to bite back if you don't treat such equipment with respect so training on the equipment is important.

Phil
Steve e ashton  
#9 Posted : 02 April 2010 08:31:34(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Steve e ashton

Whilst I agree with the sentiment that its difficult to guard the blade on jig saws - it's not impossible.

I used to own a (cheap - Woolworths?) DiY jig saw that had a spring loaded cover / guard over the blade - the bottom of the cover had to be placed on the top surface of the workppiece and the saw lowered to operating height to push the cover out of the way. Effectively prevented fingers etc coming into contact with the oscillating blade when not actually cutting and porotected by the workpiece. Simples!

But I don't think I've ever seen this sort of guard fitted on 'professional' tools... Anyone with more intensive experience or suppliers out there may be able to comment?

Steve
Canopener  
#10 Posted : 02 April 2010 09:19:21(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Canopener

!!!! No doubt I stand the chance of being accused of being 'obtuse' and/or provocative but am I missing something here?

I can think of any number of tools not dissimilar to a jig saw where it is impossible to prevent all access to moving parts without rendering the tool itself useless. How about a bench grinder(Summers/Frost), angle grinder, bench saw, band saw, cement mixer, drill (bench or hand) etc etc.

Perhaps a reality check required? I have been using jig saws and most of the above for more years than I can remember, and I am still here with all fingers and both eyes intact.

Can I suggest reading regulation 'in the round' (rather than homing in on selective parts) and indeed the accompanying guidance which adds a little more clarity (and a 'common sense' approach) in particular have a look at para 210
Garfield Esq  
#11 Posted : 02 April 2010 09:57:44(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Garfield Esq

will1977 wrote:
Hi,
My company have recently bought a new Jigsaw for cutting out templates. I have done a risk assessment and found that this has no guarding to prevent access to moving parts. Regulation 11 of PUWER springs to mind. I have recomended that the Jigsaw be removed from service as there is potential for severe injury.

Does any one have any oher thoughts they can throw into the equation?



Putting PUWER aside for the moment I take it that your RA concluded significant risk of injury? If so, was this conclusion based on your own experience of operating Jigsaws and did you consult with the users during the RA process? If so, what was there view?

If this new Jigsaw has been purchased from a reputable source and/or is a recognised make then it should have some sort of blade / splinter guard, if not check with your supplier.

There should not be a issue with a brand new piece of equipment unless it is being used for an inappropriate application or the users have removed guarding or altered the tool.

All of which should have been considered in your RA...


GC


Guru  
#12 Posted : 03 April 2010 22:13:11(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Guru

Dear o dear...its the end of the world, we have a jig saw in the workshop.

lets be sensible here... a jig saw is what it is, and in my experience practically impossible to guard completely. Ensure the toll is fit for purpose, inspected before use, replace blades when appropriate etc...and include it in your PAT programme.

Ensure all persons are competent and trained to use tool and move on.
ahoskins  
#13 Posted : 04 April 2010 18:34:03(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
ahoskins

Well said guru,

If it can be guarded then guard it, but don't overlook the training and competence of the user...
Users browsing this topic
Guest
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.