Thread: gloves for metalworking?

I forgot to mention that these timber companies are relying on PPE to protect EVERYONE who visits their premises regardless of the fact that this particular PPE is not designed to provide that form of protection. Impact protection only is provided by safety glasses. I don't think that a safety supplier would class their safety glasses to provide airborne dust protection when it is obvious that they do not provide this protection. Ring them and see if they will cover you for airborne protection.

Dean

Originally Posted by Oldneweng

One of my issues with airbags is that they will effect your view and actions in a crash situation. Again protecting the lowest common denominator. I have had many serious traffic situations but have never had a serious accident. My only impacts with other cars is in carparks.

Dean

I recently attended a single car motor vehicle accident that involved a car into a tree. The single occupant, a male in his 60's had a cut on his head where he impacted with the windscreen. You could still see some of his hair imbedded in the smashed windscreen. No big deal, except it was evident that the air bag had deployed. I guess he was just unlucky?!!

Well on closer investigation (not my job to investigate but curiosity was killing me!) he came from the other side of a dual carriage way that had a median strip in the centre. His airbag must have deployed when he hit the centre median strip, much too early to provide him with any protection when a split second later he collided with the tree.

Airbags are great but they only work once, and only for a fraction of a second after the sensors detect a sudden deceleration. They deflate in less than a second after inflating. Some car manufacturers now have multiple charges in the airbag system to give you a larger timeframe of protection.

As for injuries from airbags, I'm forever reminding my wife not to carry her handbag on her lap. It will end up in her face in a collision. Also the correct method for driving is the left hand at 9 and right hand at 3. hopefully then your hands won't be caught with the airbag and thrown into your face.

Of course we never see people with passengers less than 12 yo in the front passenger seat do we? Children under 12 don't have enough strength in their necks to absorb the energy from an airbag without serious neck injury.... or death.

Also out of interest, airbags in Australia are armed after reaching a speed (I think) 42 Km/h as they are a supplementary restraint system, seat belts being our primary restraint. In the US however, seat belts are not compulsory so the airbag system is considered a primary restraint system and they are armed for use from the minute the vehicle moves.

Anyway that's my rant.

Cheers

Simon

Interesting information. I am now more informed than I was. I am considering updating two vehicles in the future to models within the airbag region. My Falcon wagon missed out by one model thank goodness.

I drive with hands at 2 and 10 oclock myself. Is the 9 and 3 just for airbags? I recently saw mention in a letter in the paper (SA) re objects such as handbags on the passenger seat. Apparently the police are looking for this sort of object placed in harms way like that. Probably a good idea to avoid anything on the seats if possible.
It is the job of everyone to ensure their own safety as they are in the best position generally to do so. Living in the bush with the risk of fires and wildlife issues, snakes etc you realise this.

Dean

Originally Posted by Oldneweng

I am saying that safety should be related to the issues at hand, not rules made up by people who have no idea. If I think something will provide me with better safety I will use it. Think about the real truth behind what you are doing, safety wise, use your own judgement to determine if it is really safer that way and take your personal safety into your own hands, not the hands of someone sitting in an office typing at a keyboard.

Hi Dean,
where I work we have no 'Hi-Vis vest or hard hats and we have no 'appropriate' guarding on any of our machinery. Flat belts and pulleys running everywhere. The only safety mechanism we have in place is situated between our ears. It is amazing how aware you are of your surroundings when imminent danger is present. We have operated this way for 40 years now without an accident (touch wood). I wear gloves when loading wood onto the boilers purely because I am sick of microfine splinters from the Stringybark. It drives the H&S officers insane but the proof is in the pudding. At the end of the day, common sense will play a big part in your survival. Machining late one night and using the centre drill in the tailstock I cranked the speed up. A loose thread from my jumper started to wrap around the leadscrew which then grabbed the jumper. To this day I will never know how I managed to get the start lever into reverse with my face just inches from the chuck. I really thought this was it.
Everytime I use machines they get maximum respect which makes me as safe as is possible.

Phil

Originally Posted by Oldneweng

Interesting information. I am now more informed than I was. I am considering updating two vehicles in the future to models within the airbag region. My Falcon wagon missed out by one model thank goodness.

I drive with hands at 2 and 10 oclock myself. Is the 9 and 3 just for airbags? I recently saw mention in a letter in the paper (SA) re objects such as handbags on the passenger seat. Apparently the police are looking for this sort of object placed in harms way like that. Probably a good idea to avoid anything on the seats if possible.
It is the job of everyone to ensure their own safety as they are in the best position generally to do so. Living in the bush with the risk of fires and wildlife issues, snakes etc you realise this.

Dean

I assume the change from 10 to 2 to the recent 9 and 3 hand positions are for airbag equipped cars. But as time goes on, the number of non airbag cars will be less and less.

As for occupy melbourne protestors, I din't know they actually had a cause!

Originally Posted by Oldneweng

One of my issues with airbags is that they will effect your view and actions in a crash situation. Again protecting the lowest common denominator.
Dean

Dean, no disrespect mate, but I've resisted saying anything until now. However you've made some pretty broad brushed, and I'd suggest quite naïve, statements regarding safety and equipment. I don't see much point in labouring through them, as I'm quite sure I will have zero impact in changing your mind. For the record however I have seen the "it won't happen to me" mentality before, sadly some of the people I met were missing a few digits. Others I never got to meet. Yes sometimes it's all a PIA, and seemingly stupid. For example I can't walk around work without a high-vis vest on. So wait, somebody won't see me in the middle of a sunny day in a freshly washed bright white shirt and could run me over, but cover the bright shirt with a grubby, dirty "high-vis" vest and I'm safer? But hey, overall the workplace sure is a HECK of a lot safer now than even when I was a kid. Like to go back further? Travel through Asia and see some of the work practices there and tell me you'd prefer them!

A couple of points I thought I would however make. Firstly, a bit like what the actual function of steel cap boots are, the primary function of a hard hat is NOT to stop you hitting your head. That would be the function of the material residing between our ears. Instead we wear hard hats to protect our skulls for such occasions when Noggins, working on the roof, accidentally drops a spanner and Newton takes over. A spanner travelling at terminal velocity would really spoil your day if it parted your hair I can assure you! I've heard the anti-helmet argument in other areas too, and can promise you I would not be sitting here writing to you now if, on at least 2 occasions in my life, I had not be wearing mine. Indeed the last time it happened I wrote to the manufacturer with the simple line, "Thanks for saving my life!". I keep that "lid", complete with the part missing from it where my brain would have started its outward bound journey, as a not so gentle reminder that life can be over, literally, in the blink of an eye.

The problem is the "system" doesn't really care what the shape of your feet is, nor how clean my shirt happened to be on the day. It would be impossible to administer a system so prescriptive that it specified precisely when or when not to wear our high-vis/hard hats/etc. Instead "the system" just says wear them all the time. Yes it's inconvenient. Yes it sometimes seems stupid. Yes we all like to whinge about it. But it sure as heck is better than the alternative! Phil, above, describes how it used to be. I can recall my grand-parent's factory, with its flat belt system and even as a kid I knew it was scary! These safety devices aren't there to stop accidents from happening, they're there to minimise the damage WHEN the accidents happen. Stopping them is, once again, the job of what remains (thankfully in my case) between our ears. Only a fool would rely on them and lower their guard because they are there.

Finally, regarding the above quote, I trust you're actually joking about controlling a vehicle after the airbag/seatbelt tensioners/crumple zones/[insert modern safety feature here]. You do know WHEN the airbag deploys right? If you want to argue "bang for buck" safety products I'd be going for anti-lock brakes over no airbag myself

Pete

Phil. Most sites will investigate an incident and implement a policy change to prevent further recurrences. This process is based on the work cover and other govt departments re safety in the work place. I believe that there are many dangerous sites and industries out there with little or no protection. Most of the policy changes I have seen have been to limit activities because someone has done something that is totally stupid such as pouring caustic into an already full drum? Most are limiting and pointless to a sensible person who has already worked out their own safety procedures. Guarding is an issue that can save accidents but you have to consider the fact that if the machine is made safe then operators do not take care. It does not matter how safe things are someone will injure themselves and the whole job gets harder and harder with more and more restrictions. What is between your ears is indeed the best safety mechanism we have if we care to implement it. Respect is everything.

Occupy Melbourne is not quite what I was talking about. I was talking about the hundreds of thousands of similar protestors around the world in hundreds of western capitals. Open your eyes and look at what is happening. I am no expert but their grief is based on the ways big corporations use their power to make huge profits at the expense of the individual person. Look at BP and their oil spill.

Safety of the individual worker is also an issue. Supplying the world with processed food which is bad for our health. In US recently a company supplying food suppliments to poultry industry finally admitted that the arsenic they put in the suppliment actually stayed in the chicken meat all americans were eating, not exit thru waste as they had claimed for 30 years or more. The FDA(Food and Drug Agency) did not change their stance however. Think about the responsible behaviour of James Hardie.

It is the difference between profit and humanity! This earth is on a fast spiral towards destruction and noone is going to be able to stop it in time because the thing that is causing it is corporate profits. I personally believe that we have long passed the balance point. We have already lost the fight and if you look carefully at info on internet you will get scared at what is happening. Just last week I read a news article that said global warming scientists (not specified) have realised that global warming is happening at a far faster rate than expected. I made that prediction to myself about 10 years ago, after reading a book by a leading oz scientist called Tim something?

The artic and antarctic ice is melting at a rate that is unprecedented throughout history. This is not normal warming. During normal warming events the ice melts over a period of thousands of years, not tens.

If you think they are just trying to get in the news I suggest that you widen your research and see what sort of legacy we are leaving our children. My children will see the effects of our stuffups. Yours too.

Off topic I know but I get tired of hearing people make comments without any knowledge of the real truth. I would love to hear it is not true but there is overwhelming information out there that cannot be denied.

Dean

You'd better have a lie down Dean. That was some rant.

Originally Posted by jack620

You'd better have a lie down Dean. That was some rant.

Agreed, and I am about to lie down.

Dean

roos v trees. While a tree is about the worse thing you can hit, there are lots of stories of people ending up with a roos coming up the bonnet and through the windscreen. Turns out they aren't very happy to be there! I'm not aware of any evidence to back this up

airbags/helmets etc. Care needs to be taken talking about airbags as the ones in the USA are generally bigger, inflate faster and in less severe crashes. Personal anecdotal evidence on safety equipment isn't always a good thing.

antilock bakes, The last figures I have seen on anti lock brakes said they made little difference to accident rates as people adjust their driving accordingly.


Every one find a comfy seat, this could be a long one lol

Stuart

Originally Posted by simonl

Hi Dean,

Yes, PPC is the last option in the hierarchy of control measures for dealing with hazards. Elimination and substitution are the first two but they are often the most expensive. Somewhere down the list is engineering systems. In your example, cheaper and easier to give everyone a P2 dust mask than to install expensive dust extraction to eliminate the risk. Not the best option for worker comfort and overall safety though I wouldn't think....

In my line of work we rely heavily on PPC because the other control measures are not practical and generally out of our hands.

Cheers,

Simon

it always seem to be the last choice ie ppe and some administrative controls that i seem to be always relying on save my but. that and being careful and watching your back.

Originally Posted by Stustoys

antilock bakes, The last figures I have seen on anti lock brakes said they made little difference to accident rates as people adjust their driving accordingly.

Stuart

Out of curiosity I just did a search and that doesn't seem to agree with the findings I found. There are certain situations when ABS actually increases stopping distance, however in all cases increases a vehicles controllability. Either way, like ESC, they're intended to reduce being involved in an accident in the first place. The big gotcha is that when comparing ABS/non-ABS it's under laboratory style conditions. Unfortunately real life isn't like that. While we may all like to think we're better than may be reality, the fact is that in an emergency situation we may not behave as we would in a prepared "emergency".

Anyway, a long way from wearing gloves, so I'll leave it at that. Somebody else can start a thread on safety systems

Pete

Originally Posted by Pete F

Out of curiosity I just did a search and that doesn't seem to agree with the findings I found. There are certain situations when ABS actually increases stopping distance, however in all cases increases a vehicles controllability.

I didn't say ABS didn't reduce stopping distance, in most cases it does.(though I do question the idea of swerving to miss a cardboard box that's fallen off the back of a truck into the path of an oncoming truck and hoping the ESC will get you back in your lane before the truck drives over the top of you)
I said "made little difference to accident rates"
Stuart

Yes. What I'm asking is, where did you read that Stuart? As I mentioned, that doesn't correlate with what I've read. Instead the findings I've read indicate there is indeed a small but consistent decrease in accident rate as a direct result of ABS being fitted. Some findings were however inconclusive. That's why I'm interested in where you've read something different.

Pete