Machine safety: DANGER: Machine without brain requires yours!
Who really has the brain, the machine or the person? Whether it’s the operator, maintenance technician, set-up technician, engineer, or clean-up staff, the human brain has capabilities that surpass any brain on the machine.
Who really has the brain, the machine or the person? Whether it’s the operator, maintenance technician, set-up technician, engineer, or clean-up staff – YOUR brain has capabilities that surpass any brain on the machine. Have you ever seen injuries on a machine that didn’t need to happen? Could they have been avoided? Did those involved simply make a mistake? Where were their brains?
Machines often have brains, either wired or solid-state intelligence. But can they listen? Can they anticipate a human injury? Do they know when an operator will take a chance? So what are we doing with machine guarding? Protecting someone from making a mistake in judgment?
The Department of Defense many years ago developed a standard, MIL-STD 882D, wherein they defined a term “mishap” as: “An unplanned event or series of events resulting in death, injury, occupational illness, damage to or loss of equipment or property, or damage to the environment.” Yet this seems to be directed (for personnel) at injuries inflicted on people that should be fully cognizant of every moment and ready to protectively respond to anything in a nanosecond?
Is that how the majority of machine related injuries occur? I think not! It’s been my experience that most machinery related injuries occur when personnel make a misjudgment or are temporarily disconnected from their brains. So, isn’t a majority of machine guarding required to protect personnel from themselves?
What has your experience been? In today’s level of machine safety planning and implementation, are we:
1. Protecting the machine from the person?
2. Protecting the person from the machine?
3. Or, both?
4. Or, neither?
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: DANGER: Machine without brain requires yours!
Related articles:
Machine Safety – does a risk assessment need to be updated for a minor modification to a machine?
Machine Guarding & The Hierarchy of Measures for Hazard Mitigation
Machine Safety: System degradation and incidence of injury
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.