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
Admin  
#1 Posted : 24 April 2005 15:10:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Dave Richardson I work in a medical devices manufacturing company and in one of our departments we assemble Cannular needles into hubs, then the hubbed needles are packaged into hard plastic guard containers. As the needle pass along a conveyor in narrow racks, each rack contains 25 needles in the verticle position, they sometimes fall over and the operatoer will raise the covered section and set the rack in the upright position again. My problem is that the operators sometime leave the covers open. There is no way for the operator to fall on the verticle needles due to the height of the side panels of the cover. However the quality department see this as an issue with contamination and want to attach interlocks on the covers. The problem with doing this would be that if the cover, when opened stopped the line, more racks would fall over due to inertia on the conveyor. This would mean more racks would falls over, leading to potentially more needle stick injuries overall. My thoughts are to alarm the covers and place warning signs on the side of the conveyor. Firstly, would this be a responsible enough action and secondly would it be suitable and compliant with legislation. I am aware of the need to guard dangerous parts of equipment but in this case I feel it may be overkill to completly cover the conveyor with unmovable or interlocked gurding. Any advise would be appreciated. Are there any QA guys out there who would disagree. Thanks Dave
Admin  
#2 Posted : 24 April 2005 20:55:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Robin B If a guard dosen't lock to 'safe' its not a guard. What is the point of having a guard that can be by-passed? Remember FIAT Robin
Admin  
#3 Posted : 24 April 2005 22:55:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By RP From your description, it does sound like a problem with the conveyor belt rather than the guarding (although guards provided should be difficult to remove or interfer with). Have you contacted the equipment manufacturers for a solution to prevent the needle racks falling over in the first place. This may need a re-design but I would think it was possible.
Admin  
#4 Posted : 25 April 2005 10:51:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Andy Bennett Hi Dave, As mentioned previously tackling the root cause of the issue may well negate the need for further action with the "guard". I have worked with high speed automated assembly machinery for some years, It may well be of use to get together with the machine designers or any of your onsite engineering support bods and carry out a Process FMEA. Also, I must agree with one other responder, in that this doesnt seem to be a Guard in the true sense of the word. Is it actually affording any protection from entrapment points or moving parts ? or is it simply a cover to protect from debris etc. I have had similiar issues with covers and cabinet doors etc.....one solution in lieu of a fully monitored interlocked system is an audible alarm or neon flashing beacon at the control console or machine operator station, I have used these in the past with success. The princilpe being that any audible alarm is unwanted and the opertaor will ensure the cover is back in place. Regards Andy
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.