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 : 27 June 2006 21:47:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Martin Taylor Recently we have seen a number of small assembly machines supplied with 2 handed start controls as a safeguard for the operator as opposed to interlocked guards or light beams. Personnaly I am not keen on this type of system as I always see a risk to bystanders although the operator is protected What are your opinions on using this method and does anybody have guidelines as to how to select between the various types of operator safeguarding. As always all comments and opinions welcome thanks everybody Martin
Admin  
#2 Posted : 28 June 2006 09:04:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Bunny I think it's a question of applying the hierarchy of controls. Fixed guards, interlocked guards, and so on. Personally I don't have a problem with two handed controls on some pieces of plant where it would be impractical to use anything else but it needs careful control. For example ensuring that the two handed controls require silmutaneous operation (within 0.5 seconds of each other). Operation of the controls should also only allow limited movement, such a single stroke of the machine and release of just one of the controls should stop the machine (failing to safe). Hope that helps.
Admin  
#3 Posted : 28 June 2006 09:17:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Steve Holliday Martin, In my previous position I came across this and “hold-to-run” controls frequently used on pieces of machinery. As you correctly state, when using this type of guard the operator is safeguarded but not others who may enter the danger zone. If you can get a copy of BS PD 5304 - Safe Use of Machinery (2000), there is some guidance in here in a couple of places (6.3 is one but I cannot find the others for looking). In summary this type of control is the last on the recommended hierarchy and should only be considered where there is no likelihood of bystanders. I have been extremely unpopular raising this on a couple of occasions with machinery designers who are happy to state BS’s in their Declaration of Conformity but have not fully read them or hope you have not! Hope this helps Steve
Admin  
#4 Posted : 28 June 2006 11:26:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Tabs Obviously scale plays a part in this too. When you talk of dangers to bystanders, the layout of the jigs/fixtures will play a part - one can almost fully enclose the operation and retain an opening suitable only to the loading/unloading. As long as there is no risk of tools/components bursting consider a single button start but a light curtain protection. As a Production Engineer on assembly, I found this to be about the best for speed and protection (light curtains can be set to require "made/break/made" cycles before allowing a start - making them incredibly difficult to bypass). Many presses will use a falling/rising guard to operate the process (person closes guard, guard locks, process starts) Sadly, these tend to be the easiest to bypass, and some operators will try. Your insticts are right though, a double handed start is not a proper protection. Quick hierarchy we used to use: Jig/Fixture design without danger; interlocked enclosure (Makralon/Perspex); interlocked enclosure (mesh); light curtain; light beams; two handed start. Hope that helps.
Admin  
#5 Posted : 28 June 2006 22:30:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Martin Taylor thanks for the feedback and additional information everybody - any further views on guidance for 2 handed start operation very welcome Martin
Admin  
#6 Posted : 29 June 2006 11:03:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Dave Daniel This was an issue we had to address in the Motor Industry back in the 1970's (when there was one). Such systems were regularly used on projection spotwelders which were widely used. In a business of 50,000 employees over a 10 year period we only had one accident where 2 employees tried to work one machine to save time. The costly option then being pressed by the HSE of low pressure/low speed approach for the welding head doubled cycle time and was successfully resisted over a 10 year period. 2 button control systems properly installed are an effective control and as long as the danger area is visible to the operator the 3rd party risk is low. There may be a need for 3rd party shielding in some cases, but it is a much cheaper and more flexible option than photoelectrics etc. for low risk situations.
Admin  
#7 Posted : 30 June 2006 16:33:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Stuart Porter You could argue that there is a health and safety risk on the welder machine (or other similar application) when two people work at it. I would say that this is a 'residual risk' and would be dealt with by warning and informing. eg 'Danger Warning - only one person to work at this machine at any one time'. To also help protect 3rd party persons, barriers or guards could be placed to restrict access, although this is not always necessary or practical. On the spot welders example again, operators may have access to all round the machine, although the danger area is within the operators field of view, this may be acceptable if there is a suitable warning about single operator use. Plus operator training should advise him/her not to use the machine if other persons are present. As far as light curtains go, I would tend to use a light curtain if the machine had a longer or more complicated cycle where we would not want to hold in a 2-hand start for the duration of processing. Light curtains may well do the job, but they may also be an over specification if another method is suitable. A bit like using a four by four for doing the school run. 2 hand start circuits are not a bottom of the pile option, most are designed for applications in risk category 3 and 4 (BSEN954-1). A propriatory 2-hand start safety relay only activates if the two buttons are pressed simultaneuosly and held in, and releasing either button kills the power (to the dangerous device). They must be hard-wired to kill the power and errors in software logic must have no effect on the ability to power down the dangerous device.
Admin  
#8 Posted : 04 July 2006 22:40:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Peter Bell The Machinery Directive requires "safety components " as Annex 4, essentially this means that they have to be type approved by an accredited body . The old practises if creating two hand safety logic , with simultaneous push button action (within 0.5 sec ) by careful use of standard discrete components {such as Pnuematic 5/2 push button valves) can thus no longer be employed . The Electronic safety relay manufactures and pneumatic companies thus produce 2 hand start logic modules to provide machine builders and users with modules type approved to be in accordance with requirements of EN594. Despite availabilty of such modules I freaquently still see examples of 2 hand start using two buttons in series etc where defeat by operator is easy If the application is appropriate to use 2 push button start , then by the very prescence of two buttons ,implies that it is a true 2 hand start and the logic must be in accordance with EN594.
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.