Document 915JV0pJ1R9pKdOw2xdqZVXE7

1907 National Safety Congress of tho areas tested were above the minimum suggested criteria. In November, 1065, a third plant analysis was completed. Three hundred and thirtyfour noise measurements were made using this equipment. Tho results showed that 0.6 per cent of tho measurements were abovo the suggested minimum criteria. From this, wo know that we havo made a tremendous accomplishment in reducing the noise level within tho plant, and with continuing efforts further achievements are possible. In November, 1066, further noise analyses were completed and another reduction was noted. We hope this program on noise abatement is only a beginning. A concerted effort on theso problems by all industry will contrib ute a great doal toward making our plants safer and healthier places in which to work. HAND AND ARM PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT FOR SHEET METAL OPERATORS By JOHN A. FAUGH, JR. Division Safety Engineer, Metal Stamping Division, Ford Motor Company, Dearborn, Mich. Manual material handling is tho number one source of disabling occupational injuries in tho United States. It accounts for more than one out of every five workmen's com pensation claims. Whllo the greatest number of these claims are for torso Injuries, a great many of them result from injuries to tho hands and arms. In some states, the claimant may collect compensation for loss of use of a part of the hand or arm, and for disfigure ment of the same appendages. This mone tary loss and the desire for elimination of the accompanying personal suffering are the basis for every safety engineer's efforts to as sure safe material handling techniques and equipment Elimination of hand and arm injuries is one of the top objectives of tho sheet metal industry. In some locations, they account for more than 50 per cent of all occupational injuries. Three problem areas face the Safety Engi neer in his effort to eliminate this type of in jury through utilization of the most effective type of personal protective equipment. These areas are need, selection, and use of the equipment. Need for the equipment. As in any indus try, mechanical handling aids or efficient hand operated tools ore preferred to manual handling of materials, because they greatly diminish the potential of personal injury. A thorough review and evaluation may be mode of all types of material handling oper ations contemplated, in order to plan han dling the material in any way other than manually. If mechanical handling is not fea sible, the need for personal protective equip ment becomes apparent and tho type needed must then bo determined. It is better to eliminate tho need for man ual handling, if at all possible, through engi neering revisions, guarding, and changes of procedures and methods on established oper ations as well as those in the planning stage. With the human element minimized, the po tential of injury is greatly diminished. Selection of equipment. When the deter mination is made that hand and arm protec tion is necessary, there are two criteria to be used: the degree of protection needed, and case and comfort in use. Some studies have revealed that employes handling sheet metal with a dimension of more than 12 Inches in any direction have incurred lacerations at various locations on their arms; more particularly, on the fo rearm. This observation indicates tho: need for a gauntlet type glove that wfil extend to a point about 9% inches above the wrist However, the flare of the gauntlet must not be great enough to permit it to fall down in advertently or to be easily rolled down, thus leaving the arm exposed. It was also disclosed that with proper han dling practices the use of terry cloth material 22