Machine Safety: Only engineers can lead the Risk Assessment process?
An incremental documented process called “Risk Assessment” is required in many updated standards. And, a new standard, ANSI B11.0 – 2010, Safety of Machinery – General Requirements and Risk Assessment, is dedicated to this topic. With all this attention folks still are not clear regarding whether an engineer is essential to lead the risk assessment process.
Over the past 10 years significant focus has been spotlighted on machine safety. Simultaneously, an incremental documented process called “Risk Assessment” has been introduced to industry. In fact, many updated standards require that risk assessments be performed. And, a new standard, ANSI B11.0 – 2010, Safety of Machinery – General Requirements and Risk Assessment, is dedicated to this topic. With all this attention folks still are not clear regarding whether an engineer is essential to lead the risk assessment process.
ANSI B11.0 provides the following two definitions:
“3.69 risk assessment: The process by which the intended use of the machine, the tasks and hazards, and the level of risk are determined.”
“3.70 risk assessment process: The entire process of identifying hazards, assessing risk, reducing risk, and documenting the results.
Industry experts recommend that a team concept be utilized for conducting risk assessments. The team leader should have prior experience and be very familiar with the risk assessment process. Any mix of the following skills and expertise within the team are also recommended:
• Environment, health and safety
• Maintenance and/or field service
• OEM, system integrator, or supplier(s) with backgrounds in safety/engineering.
The risk assessment process should be carried out by this team for each machine to identify all hazards in order to implement risk reduction(s) using the five mitigation steps as follows:
1) Eliminate the hazard – design it out
2) Isolate the hazard with hard guarding
3) Add additional engineering, guards, devices, or layers of safety (controls or systems)
4) Administrative controls like – training, signage, assessments, etc.
5) Personal protective equipment (PPE) like - goggles, gloves, outer clothing, shields, etc.
Steps 4 and 5 probably don’t need any engineering expertise and most often the maintenance cadre can apply hard guards in Step 2. Engineering skill sets are likely to be helpful for Steps 1 and 3 as part of the team. The reason for this position is - as hazard levels are determined and mitigation steps are evaluated, it’s helpful for someone to potentially evaluate the application issues when the mitigation option involves the control system. It could also be possible that an engineer could evaluate a mechanical modification to the machine hazard as a mitigation option. However, timing wise, these two evaluation steps could also occur following the risk assessment report.
In another case example it might be helpful to have an engineer on the team in order to help determine an existing guarding level for a given hazard. Establishing existing Category levels for each hazard is one of the first steps in the risk assessment process. It is from that hazard level that mitigation options are considered in order to reach an “acceptable” (reduced) hazard level for each identified hazard. For example, it may not be obvious to a team if the current design includes control reliable wiring, safety rated components, and other functional safety provisions. Yet, in most cases an engineering skill set is not required to help answer (for each hazard) the three questions; how serious, frequency of exposure, and possibility of avoidance?
In practice, we do frequently find an engineer leading the risk assessment process because someone has made that decision. However, in my opinion and according to current industry standards, it is not required that an engineer lead the risk assessment process. Having access to an engineering skill set can be helpful to the process.
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: only engineers can lead the Risk Assessment process?
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.
Annual 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.