The hazard can be eliminated by design
Consider whether the hazardous movement, access requirement or manual task can be removed or reduced. For example, automation, remote adjustment, enclosed material handling or reduced-force operation may eliminate the need for regular access to a hazard.
Access is not required during normal operation
A fixed guard will often be an appropriate safeguarding method. ISO 14120 provides more specific guidance on the selection and design of fixed and movable guards.
Regular access is required for loading, cleaning or adjustment
A movable guard, interlocked access door, protective device or another safeguarding arrangement may be required. The method must account for the hazard, access frequency and potential for reasonably foreseeable misuse. Where protection relies on hazardous motion stopping before a person can reach the danger zone, stopping time and the associated safety distance must also be assessed.
Personnel can enter an automated cell
The assessment should consider entrapment, restart prevention, reset location, access control, hazardous stored energy and the risk of unexpected start-up. Perimeter fencing alone may not provide adequate protection.
The process includes conveyors or material openings
Product-entry and exit points must be assessed for access to rollers, transfer points, automated machinery or other hazards. Materials must be able to pass through without creating an uncontrolled route for people to enter the danger area.
A guard is likely to be bypassed or removed
The design should account for reasonably foreseeable defeat or misuse. Guards that obstruct legitimate production, cleaning or maintenance tasks are more likely to be bypassed. Practical access arrangements are therefore central to effective risk reduction.
The machine is being modified or retrofitted
Changes to tooling, speed, process flow, automation, guarding or controls can introduce new hazards. The risk assessment should be reviewed before the modified machinery is returned to service.