Document EmqDgv33rgbbpD7Qn0QL5e1w0

is 1954 National Safety Congress t rales on removing the work from the ma chine, transferring it to another and pre pares to repeat the operation. In a typical sequential operation, in cer tain processes we require two duplicate lines probably being fed by a single system. A work unit is located upon the auto mation. It may have been indexed from a previous machine tool such as Machine Tool "A." The weight or contact of the work unit on the switch located in the automation *ct? up the electrical impulse to the electrical panel, the nerve center or brain. The infor mation is then resolved into a mechanical action through valves and cylinders to trans fer a shuttle bar or actuate an arm to accomplish one operation such as moving our work unit from Automation A1 to the Auto mation Intersection A2 to Automation A3. It* as in cur example, we have a second machine too! such as "B" which feeds work units into the same automation as Machine Tool "A" such as Automation Intersection B2. we get a better insight to the workings f automated processes. For example, if we have a work unit c-n Automation A3 and a wr.rk unit on Automation Bl, both should move into Automation Intersection B2, but obviously not at the same time. The depressing or the switch in one of these section? by the weight or contact of the work unit would relay the impulse to the panel which would then actuate a shuttle bar transferring the work unit into B2. The weight of the work units depressing switches in boils sections at the same time indicates there are work units in tath critical posi tion*. Therefore, the panel, receiving warnings irom both lookouts would select a prefer ential index, establishing which transfer device is to operate first. B] would be given preference, the work unit would slide into Automation Intersection B2, the work unit in Automation A3 would be delayed to sub sequently be moved when B2 was emptied. Thereafter, until different impulses would be received, the two sections. Automation Bl and A3 would feed alternately. If and when the switch in either section teas not depressed, the preference would be given to the other on a steady feed basis. The panel" or brain retains information given it. for an indefinite period of time or until such time as an additional impulse is received to rearrange the sequence of operations to accommodate the new phys ical arrangements indicated by the impulse as now existing. These panels are electrically interlocked with others in the machine tool performing an operation upon the work piece. Occasion ally there is an additional operation to 1 performed such as turning the piece end f'.r end, rotate it. or upside down. In this case. Shuttle or Automation A1 receives a work unit from Machine Tool "A." and through the panel and solenoid valve? and cylindershuttles the work unit into Automation In tersection A2. This data is conveyed to the electrical panel of the automation section. The pane) actuates the valves and cylinders to return the Shuttle A1 to its home position. It also determines that the Shuttle or Automation A3 is in its home position ar.d clear. It also determines that the work ur.it is in proper position at Automation Inter section A2. After all this information is disseminated in the control panel, the impulse i< sent to the solenoid valve* and from there to the cylinder that will perform the turning operation. From there the data is again returned to the panel and another cycle begins. I`d like to outline some of the safety ;*?pert5 of automation experienced by Ford safety engineers. In order to fairly evaluate the effect that automation is haring on the safety of our employees, I believe it is important that we consider what it accomplishes in the elim ination of the well-known accident causes which are found in the non-automated typ*of operation. With regard to the latter, particular reference is made to single opera tion machines where there is a need for manual handling of heavy stock in the loading, positioning and unloading of the machine and the transfer of stock from one operation to another. As safety men. we are all quite aware of the fact that stock handling, csj-ecsallv that which is heavy by nature* is an impor tant contributor to industrial injuries. It is well-known that a very high percentage of serious foot injuries are the result of heavy stock falling from a transfer truck. It is further a fact that the handling of stock is Metals Industry 19 almost the exclusive cause of industrial hernias and injuries to the back. .Vow, let us see what automation has done to eliminate or minimize these accident cause?. You will recall that, in many in stances, after the initial loading of the stock into a series of in-line machines, a multiplicity of operations are performed without the need for any manual stock handling whatsoever. By comparison with former method* ot single operation ma chine*. it is obvious that the hazards asso ciated with manual handling cf stock into and out oi a machine and transferring it to the next operation is almost entirely elim inated. By the same reasoning the hernias and back injuries directly related to heavy jilting arc greatly minimized, if not entirety eliminated. Our experience indicates an c5.5 per cent reduction in the number ox hernias in sim ilar operations with the advent of automa tion. We truly believe that automation has taken the back break, and the ''toot break" tor that matter, out of engine manufactur ing. Wc arc most thankful tor this, tor n.t only have we been able to reduce our accident rate and the related costs, but far more importantly every day wc arc sending our employees, safe and sound, home to :hcir families. Although I am not a safety engineer, I am quite aware of the fact that every safety man dreams of the perfect mechanical oper ation where, in the performance of his job, he employee need not at any time expose himself to the working pans of a machine. It is a well-known fact that most of the *erious injuries to hands and fingers are the result of the operator exposing himself to the closing or working pans of a machine in the process of loading or unloading it. It 5* recognized that this problem has been -olved to a degree in the single operation method by the application ot indexing fix tures, sliding dies and the use ot tongs. However, at its best you arc faced with the problem of enforcing the use of these pro vided devices. While automation has not completely solved this important problem, it :* a real step in the right direction since it completely eliminates the need for repetitive exposure to the point oi ojcn,tion. We recognize, however, that because of the relationship of one automated operation to another, it is highly important that a breakdown or machine failure be quickly corrected. This condition could result in the repairman inadvertently exposing him self to working parts of the equipment. However, we have been able to solve this problem with a high degree of success by invoking our safety policy of long standing which provides that before working on a piece of moving machinery the repairman must completely de-cnergize the equipment by placing his personally issued padlock on the power source. So, with regard to hand and fingers injuries, we see in automation the possibility of almost comptete elimination of this problem. 1 am sure you are wondering what hap pens when a piece ot stock gets out of posi tion tn its travel through a given sequence of operation?. To avoid the need for the operator reaching into the equipment to re position the stock, "push*' or positioning sticks are provided at conveticnt locations for this purpose. The very nature oi automation dictate? the generous use of stiles or cross-overs for the convenience and safety oi employees in traveling from one location to another. These stiles are strategically located throtighont the plant. They arc not only important in terms of normal travel but serve an important purpose in the emergency evacu ation of the plant. Our engineers and safety personnel are constantly alert to the improvement ot the design of our machines as it relates to the safety of employees. Their thinking has been passed along to our machine tool build ers who have incorporated it into the design and construction n machines being built for our plants. In many instances, the representatives of these companies came to our plants and consulted with our engineers and safety per sonnel and. in other instances, our repre sentatives visited the machine tool builder's plant and advised him of our needs and requirements with regard to mechanical safety. The net result of this relationship has been a thorough understanding on the pan oi our machine tool builders of our pro gram to engineer the mechanical hazards out oi the job. While we recognize that there will, undoubtedly, be a continuing need tor the guarding of mechanical hazards, we firmly believe that great progress is being