Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are on the brink of losing touch with the requirements of the 2018 registration deadline under REACH. At the SME workshop organised by the European Commission and ECHA, representatives from the world of politics, authorities and industrial associations expressed concern that SMEs may fail with their registrations. TÜV SÜD has developed a strategy which guides SMEs in obtaining successful registration of their substances.
To read the full article, please click here
Friday, 10 January 2014
Tuesday, 7 January 2014
Webinar Announcement: Introduction to the Physical Agents Directive (EMF)
Our next free webinar is being held on January 29th 2014 at 2pm GMT and will focus on the new Physical Agents Directive, which covers the minimum health and safety requirements for workers exposed to electromagnetic fields.
Member State legislation is due by 1 July 2016, therefore industries have time to consider their health & safety arrangements and prepare/update their policies and procedures to comply with the PAD (EMF).
TÜV SÜD Product Service will give an overview of the PAD (EMF) requirements and their expected implementation.
Registration for this webinar is free and can be carried out by clicking here.
Member State legislation is due by 1 July 2016, therefore industries have time to consider their health & safety arrangements and prepare/update their policies and procedures to comply with the PAD (EMF).
TÜV SÜD Product Service will give an overview of the PAD (EMF) requirements and their expected implementation.
Registration for this webinar is free and can be carried out by clicking here.
Thursday, 19 December 2013
"Regionality" module added to ecopower certification
Increased focus on regional power generation may reduce the need for installation of additional transmission lines. TÜV SÜD has now expanded its ecopower certification by adding the "Regionality" module. The certification of Swiss energy provider Romande Energie, located in Morges, was completed successfully in 2013. TÜV SÜD will present this and further services at E-world (Hall 1 / Stand 322), held in Germany, between 11 and 13 February 2014.
To read the full article, please click here.
To read the full article, please click here.
Tuesday, 17 December 2013
TÜV SÜD develops NDT procedure for composite components
The increasing use of composite materials in aircraft construction calls for new test methods. TÜV SÜD and T.A.U.R.U.S have developed a new system for small and medium-scale composite components that offers premium safety and a high level of cost-effectiveness. In a premiere, the method is now being applied to the testing also of aircraft components on behalf of Boeing.
Click here to read the full article.
Click here to read the full article.
Friday, 13 December 2013
TÜV SÜD: Five tips for getting the Christmas tree home safely
Christmas tree? Definitely! Transport? Car, of course! But a few things must be considered if the festive freight is to arrive home safely – whether it's packed into the boot or strapped to the roof. TÜV SÜD's experts have five tips for tree transport.
Click here to read the full article.
Click here to read the full article.
Tuesday, 10 December 2013
When PUWER is not enough
Many employers assume that
if they carry out regular inspections of production machines, in line with the
Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations (PUWER), that they have done
all that is necessary to meet their legal obligations.
In particular, responsible organisations are careful to ensure that their machines are inspected in line with Section 6 of PUWER, which includes a requirement that if machines are exposed to conditions that may lead to deterioration, the inspections must be repeated "at suitable intervals". Since, in reality, every machine is exposed to conditions that may lead to deterioration, the requirement effectively means that all machines must be regularly inspected.
It would seem reasonable to assume that, provided these PUWER inspections are conducted conscientiously and at appropriate intervals, machinery is safe. Unfortunately, if that machinery incorporates electro-sensitive protective equipment (ESPE), this may not be the case.
ESPE includes, light guards and laser scanners, and is increasingly taking the place of traditional guarding on machines. Because of the growing popularity of ESPE and the need to ensure that it is properly used and maintained, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has published guidance note HSG180, ‘Application of electro-sensitive equipment using light curtains and light beam devices to machinery’.
The section of HSG180 that deals with inspection refers directly to Section 6 of PUWER and also states that "inspection and testing is required where the safe operation [of the ESPE] is critically dependent on its condition in use and deterioration would lead to a significant risk to the operator or other worker. If this is the case, then installations using ESPE should be inspected at suitable intervals."
The right timing
Of course, this raises the question of what a suitable interval is. The answer is provided in paragraph 124 of HSG180, which states that "the recommended maximum period between each periodic inspection and test is six months for type 4 ESPE and twelve months for type 2 ESPE, but this will depend on the equipment it is fitted to and the risk as a whole."
The types of ESPE referred to in HSG180 are defined in IEC 61496-1, ‘Safety of machinery, Electro-sensitive protective equipment; Part 1: General requirements and tests’. Type 2 ESPE has a means of periodic test to reveal a failure to danger, while Type 4 will not fail to danger for a single fault and is resistant to an accumulation of single faults.
By now it will be clear that the frequency of periodic testing required for ESPE depends on multiple factors, and that a six-month interval will apply in many cases. Now consider the periodic PUWER assessments. There is, of course, no simple answer to the question of how often these should be carried out, but the norm seems to be annual assessments. In many cases this will not be regular enough to meet the recommendations of HSG180 for ESPE installed on a machine. This means that that inspection of ESPE must be treated as a separate task, and not simply as part of the routine PUWER assessments.
The right person
HSG180 also raises the issue of the competence of the person performing the inspection as there are many factors that require skilful evaluation. These include ensuring that the equipment is the correct distance from the danger zone; ensuring suitable safeguards prevent access to the danger zone from directions not covered by the ESPE; testing the overall response time and the detection capability; inspecting the stopping performance monitor; and testing the primary machine control elements to ensure correct functionality.
Once the ESPE inspection has been completed it must also be documented so that evidence can be produced to verify that the appropriate inspection regime has been followed.
The use of ESPE on machines offers many benefits and, if correctly applied, can provide levels of safety at least as good as those offered by more conventional guarding and protection techniques. However, to ensure that ESPE dependably fulfils its purpose, simply relying on routine PUWER inspections is not enough and it must be regularly inspected and tested against the HSE guidance note HSG180. So, while this topic remains fresh in your mind, it is advisable to start making your ESPE inspection plans right now.
In particular, responsible organisations are careful to ensure that their machines are inspected in line with Section 6 of PUWER, which includes a requirement that if machines are exposed to conditions that may lead to deterioration, the inspections must be repeated "at suitable intervals". Since, in reality, every machine is exposed to conditions that may lead to deterioration, the requirement effectively means that all machines must be regularly inspected.
It would seem reasonable to assume that, provided these PUWER inspections are conducted conscientiously and at appropriate intervals, machinery is safe. Unfortunately, if that machinery incorporates electro-sensitive protective equipment (ESPE), this may not be the case.
ESPE includes, light guards and laser scanners, and is increasingly taking the place of traditional guarding on machines. Because of the growing popularity of ESPE and the need to ensure that it is properly used and maintained, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has published guidance note HSG180, ‘Application of electro-sensitive equipment using light curtains and light beam devices to machinery’.
The section of HSG180 that deals with inspection refers directly to Section 6 of PUWER and also states that "inspection and testing is required where the safe operation [of the ESPE] is critically dependent on its condition in use and deterioration would lead to a significant risk to the operator or other worker. If this is the case, then installations using ESPE should be inspected at suitable intervals."
The right timing
Of course, this raises the question of what a suitable interval is. The answer is provided in paragraph 124 of HSG180, which states that "the recommended maximum period between each periodic inspection and test is six months for type 4 ESPE and twelve months for type 2 ESPE, but this will depend on the equipment it is fitted to and the risk as a whole."
The types of ESPE referred to in HSG180 are defined in IEC 61496-1, ‘Safety of machinery, Electro-sensitive protective equipment; Part 1: General requirements and tests’. Type 2 ESPE has a means of periodic test to reveal a failure to danger, while Type 4 will not fail to danger for a single fault and is resistant to an accumulation of single faults.
By now it will be clear that the frequency of periodic testing required for ESPE depends on multiple factors, and that a six-month interval will apply in many cases. Now consider the periodic PUWER assessments. There is, of course, no simple answer to the question of how often these should be carried out, but the norm seems to be annual assessments. In many cases this will not be regular enough to meet the recommendations of HSG180 for ESPE installed on a machine. This means that that inspection of ESPE must be treated as a separate task, and not simply as part of the routine PUWER assessments.
The right person
HSG180 also raises the issue of the competence of the person performing the inspection as there are many factors that require skilful evaluation. These include ensuring that the equipment is the correct distance from the danger zone; ensuring suitable safeguards prevent access to the danger zone from directions not covered by the ESPE; testing the overall response time and the detection capability; inspecting the stopping performance monitor; and testing the primary machine control elements to ensure correct functionality.
Once the ESPE inspection has been completed it must also be documented so that evidence can be produced to verify that the appropriate inspection regime has been followed.
The use of ESPE on machines offers many benefits and, if correctly applied, can provide levels of safety at least as good as those offered by more conventional guarding and protection techniques. However, to ensure that ESPE dependably fulfils its purpose, simply relying on routine PUWER inspections is not enough and it must be regularly inspected and tested against the HSE guidance note HSG180. So, while this topic remains fresh in your mind, it is advisable to start making your ESPE inspection plans right now.
TÜV SÜD PMSS has a new chairman and divisional director
Alan Chivers, founder and CEO of renewable energy consulting firm PMSS has been appointed as Chairman of the company, and will, over the coming month’s handover certain day-to-day responsibilities for the TÜV SÜD renewable energy division to Scott Craig, in the role of Divisional Director.
To read the full article, please click here.
To read the full article, please click here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)