Machine safety and degrading component reliability
Is your machine downtime sometimes a surprise? Did a component in a safety circuit fail because it simply wore out and nobody knew it was about to fail? Well, maybe help has just arrived. Has anyone heard about EN ISO 13849-1; 2008? See "4 ways to reduce surprise downtime."
Is your machine downtime sometimes a surprise? Did a component in a safety circuit fail because it simply wore out and nobody knew it was about to fail? Well, maybe help has just arrived. Has anyone heard about EN ISO 13849-1; 2008?
This new standard (Safety of machinery, Safety-related parts of control systems) has arrived and the Machinery Directive in Europe has established its effective date as Jan. 1, 2012. Since the US is part of the ISO (International Standards Organization) many companies in the US are making plans to or have already adopted this new standard. In my opinion, 13849-1 improves machine safety because it moves machine safety from qualitative Categories to quantitative Performance levels. Compliance requirements in this new standard will now address all of the components in a safety circuit while determining that circuit’s Performance Level. As such, the expected life of a component is determined and documented relative to its expected number of cycles during machine operation. Therefore, the weak links can be identified and flagged early on during the design stage. This is particularly important for those components that are electro/mechanical, such as contactors or safety relays, and have moving parts or points that wear out over time. This wearing out over time is what many people refer to as “degrading component reliability”.
OK, great! Does anyone have an idea with this information how to reduce the surprise downtime (and possible hazard) related to this type of component failure?
4 ways to reduce surprise downtime
Several thoughts I have are as follows:
1.) Identify and document these components in your risk assessment for the machine.
2.) Add these components to your preventive maintenance plan.
3.) Plan for routine machine maintenance to replace these components before their expected failure.
4.) Update your risk assessment for the machine.
I have barely touched on the comprehensive approach for Functional Safety addressed by EN ISO 13849-1; 2008. Several companies and consultants offer two and three day classes on the new compliance requirements embedded in this new standard. In my opinion, to fully understand these compliance requirements you should consider contacting these sources and consider enrolling in one of their classes.
Your comments or suggestion are always welcome so please let us know your thoughts. Submit your ideas, experiences, and challenges on this subject in the comments section below. Click on the following text if you don't see a comments box, then scroll down: Machine Safety & Degrading Component Reliability.
Did you see the Safety Integration Webcast?
Contact: www.jbtitus.com for “Solutions for Machine Safety”.
Case Study Database
Get more exposure for your case study by uploading it to the Plant Engineering case study database, where end-users can identify relevant solutions and explore what the experts are doing to effectively implement a variety of technology and productivity related projects.
These case studies provide examples of how knowledgeable solution providers have used technology, processes and people to create effective and successful implementations in real-world situations. Case studies can be completed by filling out a simple online form where you can outline the project title, abstract, and full story in 1500 words or less; upload photos, videos and a logo.
Click here to visit the Case Study Database and upload your case study.
2012 Salary Survey
In a year when manufacturing continued to lead the economic rebound, it makes sense that plant manager bonuses rebounded. Plant Engineering’s annual Salary Survey shows both wages and bonuses rose in 2012 after a retreat the year before.
Average salary across all job titles for plant floor management rose 3.5% to $95,446, and bonus compensation jumped to $15,162, a 4.2% increase from the 2010 level and double the 2011 total, which showed a sharp drop in bonus.