SEARCH Archives
Loading
Sponsored by:

Machine Safety

J.B. Titus, Machine Safety blog, Control EngineeringAn ongoing discussion of machine guarding topics, including solutions assessments, regulatory compliance, gap analysis, operating efficiencies and cost savings, as well as all relevant safety standards, such as those from NFPA, ANSI, RIA, IEC, ISO and OSHA. About J.B. Titus.

See all Machine Safety blogs and comments


Machine Safety Standards, Additional Costs?

October 02, 2009

Bookmark and Share

EN ISO 13849-1: 2006, in my opinion, will launch a paradigm shift that could force some businesses into financial difficulty if fully implemented in the US. Several reports have crossed my desk indicating that some machine safety standards are considering including the incremental compliance requirements of 13849-1. These incremental requirements involve engineering and analytical skills far and above the skills needed for task based risk assessments and the qualitative Category based hazard analysis process. Several Medium and Small businesses are indicating that they don’t have these incremental employee skill sets to either fully understand or implement the requirements of 13849-1. And, many companies these days don’t enjoy large profit margins allowing them to hire these additional engineering services.

So, do these smaller companies simply bypass the additional analytical steps and go directly to the highest Category hazard for their machine safety strategy? These companies can’t be forgotten simply because they spend less than the big guys! They want safety and machine guarding for their employees as much as anyone else. And, there’s a huge market out there for the development of a “Cliff Notes” version to implement these requirements without the costs for additional skills. Plus the opportunity for increased safety and bottom line improvements via the additional requirements is real for any size company. In my opinion, it would be a huge mistake for suppliers to ignore the smaller companies and only focus on the large companies who have the skill sets for compliance.

Posted by J.B. Titus on October 2, 2009


For more than 30 years, J.B. Titus has advised a wide range of clients on machine functional safety solutions, including Johnson + Johnson, Siemens, General Motors, Disney, Rockwell Automation, Bridgestone Firestone, and Samsung Heavy Industries. He holds a Bachelor of Business Administration degree from Oklahoma University in industrial management and an MBA from Case Western Reserve University in marketing and finance. He is a professional member of the American Society of Safety Engineers and is OSHA-certified in machine guarding. Titus is also TUV-certified as a Functional Safety Expert and serves on several American National Standards Institute, National Fire Protection Association, and National Electrical Manufacturers Association national safety and health standards committees. Reach him at jb(at)jbtitus.com and via www.jbtitus.com.


No entries

Nothing found in the guestbook.

CAPTCHA image for SPAM prevention


Poll of the Week

How integrated are your maintenance, controls, and instrumentation systems?
Fully integrated
Somewhat integrated
Loosely integrated
They're not


Click Here for Poll Archives
Sponsored by:

CFEMedia.com | Subscribe to Magazine | Advertise | Contact Us | About Us | Site Map | Privacy Policy
Channels | New Products | Media Library | Connect | Industry News | Events and Awards | Newsletters | Blogs | Magazine
Control Engineering | Plant Engineering | Consulting-Specifying Engineer
All content copyright © 2010-2013 CFE Media. All rights reserved.