To mitigate a machine hazard, might it work to install one small safety PLC, then slave the other distributed standard PLCs to the safety PLC? Would that avoid the need for a risk assessment for the whole machine and create compliance? The answer is no. At least seven steps follow a risk assessment.
Why is knowing the difference between a machine actuator versus an actuator control important? The hazard on a machine is what’s really important to reducing risk! Understanding two standards-based definitions can help.
Functional safety is supposed to be designed into machine design, but is it being farmed out for others to do? Are automation suppliers truly considering farming out the design and safety certification effort of integrating functional safety features into existing components? See four strategies and one caution.
Robotic Industries Association (RIA) has announced its updated ANSI/RIA R15.06-2012 standard. This first update since 1999 (now harmonized with the international standard ISO 10218:2011) is a major step forward for users and manufacturers of robotics in the U.S.
New quantitative requirements for designing safety-related parts of the control system (SRP/CS) have created many discussions. Even with new requirements from ISO 13849-1, this updated standard begins with the same old qualitative approach to determine the “goal” (Performance Level required- PLr) for any safety function, asking about severity, frequency,...
How can the ambient air temperature range from -30 to +120 degrees Fahrenheit inside a manufacturing plant? The product specs call for certification at -5 to +30 degrees Centigrade for safe operation. Do the international machine safety standards address this?
It is odd to think that anyone in the U.S. believes most machines are intrinsically safe by design. Yet, only three weeks ago I heard this comment spoken in a conference room. Honestly, this kind of statement needs a lot of scrutiny to understand the intended validity.