Broad responsibilities of designing and building a safe machine from the supplier perspective were detailed in a November Control Engineering article by Steve Wright. Issues beyond that include additional shared responsibilities.
Moving machine guarding solutions to solid-state-based components from hard-wired components has been a persistent U.S. discussion since 2002. Are solid-state components enough to provide effective machine safety and personnel safety?
When talking about qualitative versus quantitative as they relate to machine safety standards and compliance requirements, are we talking about the risk assessment process? Or do we consider the process to engineer and mitigate hazards related to the Safety Related Parts of Control System (SRP/CS)?
When NFPA 79 changed by removing requirements for hard wiring machine safety devices in 2002, many automation suppliers introduced new safety rated devices for machine guarding. Domestic standards also have updated requirements to provide direction for use of safety rated devices. Do the new devices represent new hazards, such as lighted emergency stop...
A joint committee is merging two global machine safety standards (ISO 13849-1:2006, Safety of machinery -- Safety-related parts of control systems -- Part 1: General principles for design and IEC 62061:2005, Safety of machinery - Functional safety of safety-related electrical, electronic and programmable electronic control systems). Is this a good thing?
If a machine shop hasn't had an incident or employee injury for 10 years, is that result of an excellent safety culture or simply great luck? Are “hope” and “lack of attention” proactive business strategies?
What's the residual risk for Cat 3 hazard mitigated by a fixed steel plate? Did the repair result in a control reliable solution? Are physical barriers or control solutions better to reduce risk. Five steps define the hierarchy of measures for hazard mitigation and machine safety risk reduction.