CMPA Guarding Workshop

DR ELIZABETH GIBSON, General Manager CMPA, provides a summary on the Guarding Workshop.

THE CMPA Guarding Workshop was held at William Adams on Thursday, 13 February, 2014.

CMPA Secretariat reports on the successful Workshop recently held in Laverton for CMPA members.

The Workshop began with a brief introduction from Mark Harkins of William Adams who sponsored the event through use of their training facilities. David McKelvie of DMcK Management Pty Ltd facilitated the Workshop for which there were 32 attendees. The objectives of which were to provide participants with:

• A comprehensive awareness of their responsibilities in regards to the guarding of plant and equipment,
• An understanding of what are unacceptable guarding practices in the construction material industry,
• An understanding of what could be best practice guarding in the construction materials industry.

The outcome was to form a representative committee that will identify best practice guarding within the construction material industry and produce industry specific guidelines that are endorsed by WorkSafe Victoria.

The first presentation was delivered by Christopher Walschots, Senior
Inspector, WorkSafe with the purpose of the presentation being to:

• Explain WorkSafe Inspector’s expectations of adequate plant guarding compliance in a quarry
• Reiterate that all plant hazards should be identified by the Employer for each item of plant; (e.g. each conveyor – not as a group)
• Ensure that the adopted risk controls are the highest level that demonstrate “as far as is reasonably practical” and
• If guarding is used as a control measure that it is appropriate to the state of knowledge relating to the risk and a reasonable person’s expectation would uphold this in court.

He then went on to explain what plant is required under the regulations.

Any part of:

• A plant that processes, drills, cuts, grinds, presses, forms, hammers, joins, combines, mixes, sorts, packages, assembles, knits and weaves and pressure heat equipment.
• Moves persons and materials with plant defined under the regulations such as cranes lifts or hoists.

Examples of plant hazards but not limited to:

• 2 rollers supporting a belt on a Bulk Material conveyor (pinch point) or
• A pipe or hose carrying high pressure fluids on a fixed item of plant (impact and striking)

The main mechanical hazards associated with quarry plants are:

• Entanglement
• Friction and abrasion
• Shear points
• Impact
• Crushing (falling into crusher)
• Drawing – in (especially nip points)
• Material ejected by the machine
• Material ejected from the machine (e.g. failure of impact mill)

Further information was given on the relevant documents for guarding that are referred to by WorkSafe. A series of photographs were shown that depicted examples of guarding and where their deficiencies could be rectified.

The next presentation was given by David Anderson of Alex Fraser Group who outlined the process that Alex Fraser Group undertook to review the whole business (7 sites across 3 states) to assess their compliance to guarding.

This review covered:

• Preparation of a database of all items that do not meet Australian Standards or regulations
• Prioritisation of actions necessary to rectify faults using risk based analysis
• Provision of engineering solutions to problems
• Preparation of an action plan for rectification work
• Increasing the knowledge of site personnel on guarding requirements
• Ensuring that in the future all guarding work performed or modifications made meet the relevant standards

Alex Fraser find a pragmatic approach is necessary in order to develop solutions that can satisfy the Act as being “as far as reasonably practical” as well as ensuring that the plant is still able to operate effectively.

Over complicated solutions can often tempt operators to bypass guarding in order to perform their work. Alex Fraser Group want their
staff to understand:

• Their obligations under the Act
• The difference between, and hierarchy of Fixed Enclosure, Fixed Distance and Fence Guards and when they should be used
• The parts of a conveyor that must be guarded, in particular include:
  • Definition of a pinch point
  • Head pulleys
  • Tail pulleys
  • Return Pulleys
  • Trough idler sets
  • Gravity take ups
• Critical distances
  • From centre line of head/tail drum
  • From any pinch point
  • Reach distances
• Guarding requirements of rotating parts
  • Shafts
  • Couplings
• Hoppers and chutes
• Reach height 2.5m from ground
• Simple understanding of correct mesh sizing
  • 40mm mesh must be 200mm from hazard
  • 10mm mesh must be 25mm from hazard

Alex Fraser Group don’t require all their staff to be experts. However, they do want them to be aware of the guarding requirements and know when to ask for help if they think there is an issue and who to get help from. David Anderson then highlighted problem areas with photographs.

David McKelvie continued covering guarding requirements and raised some guarding issues such as fixed distance or perimeter fencing; methods of attachment; access for cleaning, maintenance, removal and replacement (weight, size, shape) then there was a break for a sandwich lunch.

The Workshop continued with the attendees working in groups to develop a scope for the proposed Guarding Guidelines.

Each group made a presentation and then members of the working group were identified: Elizabeth Gibson (CMPA, Chair), David McKelvie (DMcK Management, Consultant), Adrian Bull (Mawson), Steve McNair (Mawson), Stuart Dunoon (Newcomb Sands), Michael Maraspin (Fulton Hogan), Nathan Gee (Alex Fraser), Kevin Jones (City Circle Group) and John Rist (Conundrum Holdings).

The Workshop was concluded and the there was a site visit to Alex Fraser Group by bus to view their guarding. At the site we were taken to the viewing room that overlooked the plant. There Gordyn & Palmer were set up to demonstrate their business.

After viewing the plant, the plant was shut down so that we could get a closer look at the guarding and were escorted round the site in two groups.

The attendees were impressed with the high standard of guarding. We then departed the site after thanking Alex Fraser (David Carrucan). In summary, the ratings for the presenters at the Workshop were “very good”. All expectations were met or exceeded with the following comments:

“As a workshop it is good to get the people concerned all on the same page”

“People up with all the needs”

“Great contributions”

“Better understanding of the requirements round machine guarding”

“Gained info/support”

Progress with the Guarding Guidelines will be published in Sand & Stone with Members having the opportunity to comment prior to the Guidelines being released.

Thanks to our sponsors:

You must be logged in to post a comment Login