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”.
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.