Machine safety: Incorporating functional safety as part of your machine safety plan, Part 4

When considering “functional safety,” look at what differs compared to other safety initiatives, consider U.S. versus international standards, examine conformance responsibilities, and think about what changes are needed, if any, as a manufacturer. Part 4 of 4 looks at how manufacturers should look at their machine safety programs in light of international safety compliance requirements.

04/08/2013


Four questions related to functional safety follow, including what changes manufacturers need to make.

1. What is so different about “functional safety”? (Part 1)

2. Are U.S. domestic standards adopting functional safety requirements from the international standards? (Part 2)

3. Do the international standards place primary conformance responsibility on manufacturers like with OSHA? (Part 3)

4. Do we have to change our machine safety program as a manufacturer in order to meet the compliance requirements? (Part 4)

Let’s take a look at these four questions addressing the fourth question in Part 4.

 

Definition from IEC 61508-1 - Functional safety is “part of the overall safety relating to the equipment under control and the equipment under control’s control system which depends on the correct functioning of the Electrical/Electronic/Programmable Electronic safety-related systems, other technology safety-related systems and external risk reduction facilities”.

  

Do we have to change our machine safety program as a manufacturer in order to meet the compliance requirements?

 

Note – in this discussion the term “manufacturer” is very broad and includes; end users, OEM’s, machine builders and systems integrators, for example. As such it is strongly advised that the reader understand some granularity and interpret accordingly. 

 

In my opinion, more than likely you will have to make some modifications to your machine safety program in order to incorporate functional safety requirements. Now, this kind of blanket statement needs some granularity for understanding and interpreting its application to your particular business. To begin with we’re talking about the current version of ISO 13849-1; 2006 Safety of Machinery – Safety-related parts of control systems. In broad scope:

·         As an OEM, machine builder or systems integrator (aka supplier) you will have to determine the performance level of a complete safety-related circuit including all components and devices and the related software. This performance level must be optimized in order to meet or exceed the performance level required for that safety function. Testing and validating will be required.

·         As an end user doing an in house machine retrofit/modification you have become a supplier doing design and build and should follow the same guidance as suggested above.

·         As an end user simply replacing a defective component or device in an existing safety-related circuit you should make every attempt to replace that component or device with another component or device with the same or greater safety rated performance. The advice is to not degrade the safety-related performance for the safety function.

 

There are many more details that come along functional safety and compliance to ISO 13849-1. This narrative is only intended to give you a high level opinion of what may be involved and how your safety program might see the need for modifications. Clearly there are engineering level resource requirements that you may already have access to for performing the incremental design, build, test and validating requirements.    

 

For the benefit of everyone I encourage you to add your comments or thoughts to this discussion by submitting your ideas, experiences, and challenges in the comments section below. I have not met anyone thus far who has all the answers!

 

J.B. Titus, CFSERelated articles:

Inside Machines: Does adopting ISO 13849-1:2006 change the U.S. model for compliance and enforcement?

Machine Safety: Can end user companies comply with ISO 13849-1: 2006 without design engineering resources?

Machine Safety – incorporating “Functional Safety” as part of your machine safety plan – Part 1

Machine Safety – incorporating “Functional Safety” as part of your machine safety plan – Part 2

Machine Safety – incorporating “Functional Safety” as part of your machine safety plan – Part 3

 

Contact: http://www.jbtitus.com for “Solutions for Machine Safety”.



No comments
The Top Plant program honors outstanding manufacturing facilities in North America. View the 2013 Top Plant.
The Product of the Year program recognizes products newly released in the manufacturing industries.
The Leaders Under 40 program features outstanding young people who are making a difference in manufacturing. View the 2013 Leaders here.
The new control room: It's got all the bells and whistles - and alarms, too; Remote maintenance; Specifying VFDs
2014 forecast issue: To serve and to manufacture - Veterans will bring skill and discipline to the plant floor if we can find a way to get them there.
2013 Top Plant: Lincoln Electric Company, Cleveland, Ohio
Case Study Database

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.

Bring focus to PLC programming: 5 things to avoid in putting your system together; Managing the DCS upgrade; PLM upgrade: a step-by-step approach
Balancing the bagging triangle; PID tuning improves process efficiency; Standardizing control room HMIs
Commissioning electrical systems in mission critical facilities; Anticipating the Smart Grid; Mitigating arc flash hazards in medium-voltage switchgear; Comparing generator sizing software

Annual Salary Survey

Participate in the 2013 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.

2012 Salary Survey Analysis

2012 Salary Survey Results

Maintenance and reliability tips and best practices from the maintenance and reliability coaches at Allied Reliability Group.
The One Voice for Manufacturing blog reports on federal public policy issues impacting the manufacturing sector. One Voice is a joint effort by the National Tooling and Machining...
The Society for Maintenance and Reliability Professionals an organization devoted...
Join this ongoing discussion of machine guarding topics, including solutions assessments, regulatory compliance, gap analysis...
IMS Research, recently acquired by IHS Inc., is a leading independent supplier of market research and consultancy to the global electronics industry.
Maintenance is not optional in manufacturing. It’s a profit center, driving productivity and uptime while reducing overall repair costs.
The Lachance on CMMS blog is about current maintenance topics. Blogger Paul Lachance is president and chief technology officer for Smartware Group.