Machine Safety: Is prevention through design enough?
U.S. consensus standards provide direction to suppliers on how to design in machine safety. Can users understand and comply with the additional requirements of ISO 13849-1?
Prevention through design (PTD) has been a central theme of innovation for accomplishing machine safety in my view for at least the past decade. So, where does this concept reside today on the scale of idea through broad adoption?
I have had the privilege of knowing two industry experts for over 10 years, Bruce Main and Fred Manuele. These two gentlemen are strong industry leaders in the understanding, promotion, and implementation of PTD for machine safety. I have learned a lot about machine safety from both of them. The American Society of Safety Engineers (ASSE, www.asse.org) January issue of “Professional Safety” is largely devoted to the concept of PTD.
In my profession I have been on the user and supplier sides of industry. As a seasoned industry expert, I readily understand and agree that a lot of attention needs to be focused at the design (supplier) side of industry. By doing so we accomplish moving machine safety from an afterthought, where safety is added to a machine on the manufacturer’s (user’s) plant floor, to a forethought, where safety is designed into the machine. Accomplishing this transition means that a user can actually purchase a (somewhat) safe machine, even though OSHA does not require a supplier to ship a safe machine.
Ah, this is the U.S. dilemma. PTD and our domestic consensus standards provide direction to suppliers on how to design in machine safety. Great!&nb
However, enforcement via OSHA is accomplished only by inspecting installed machines on a user’s plant floor. Machines being designed and manufactured by an OEM are not inspected by OSHA. Additionally, more influence comes to the U.S. via international standards, like ISO 13849-1, focused at helping designers with safety-related compliance requirements. Again, the supplier side! So who helps the user? Can users understand and comply with the additional requirements of ISO 13849-1? Do users have the qualified resources for design?
In my opinion, it’s great that we’re focusing on suppliers’ requirements to improve machine safety. But, let’s not forget about users and how they’ll use the same standards to maintain their safety compliance.
Has this presented you with any new perspectives? Add your comments or thoughts to the discussion by submitting your ideas, experiences, and challenges in the comments section below.
Contact: http://www.jbtitus.com for “Solutions for Machine Safety”.
- Events & Awards
- Magazine Archives
- Oil & Gas Engineering
- Salary Survey
- Digital Reports
- Survey Prize Winners
- CFE Edu
Annual Salary Survey
Before the calendar turned, 2016 already had the makings of a pivotal year for manufacturing, and for the world.
There were the big events for the year, including the United States as Partner Country at Hannover Messe in April and the 2016 International Manufacturing Technology Show in Chicago in September. There's also the matter of the U.S. presidential elections in November, which promise to shape policy in manufacturing for years to come.
But the year started with global economic turmoil, as a slowdown in Chinese manufacturing triggered a worldwide stock hiccup that sent values plummeting. The continued plunge in world oil prices has resulted in a slowdown in exploration and, by extension, the manufacture of exploration equipment.
Read more: 2015 Salary Survey