Equipment guarding
Equipment guarding
(OP)
We quote and build a lot of custom conveyors for bulk and package handling. We are not always responsible for the installation of these conveyors and most of the time we do not know the exact location of where the equipment will be installed. As a general rule we do not include guarding as a standard option (specifically tail pulley, return roller guards and pull cords). Often times conveyors are guarded by location and do not require these guards so it doesn't make sense for us to inflate our price to include unnessesary guards. We now have a customer arguing that we should have included guarding on some conveyors that we built for him. The customer does not want to pay for the required guarding, even though it was clearly spelled out in the quote that guarding was not included in the price.
So my question is: Who is responsible for providing guarding for a piece of equipment, the user or the manufacturer? We have added an extensive amount of guards to equipment (that was manufactured by someone else) throughout the years. The user was always charged for these additional guards, not the OEM. Is there a standard somewhere that clearly states who is responsible for the guarding of equipmnet?
So my question is: Who is responsible for providing guarding for a piece of equipment, the user or the manufacturer? We have added an extensive amount of guards to equipment (that was manufactured by someone else) throughout the years. The user was always charged for these additional guards, not the OEM. Is there a standard somewhere that clearly states who is responsible for the guarding of equipmnet?





RE: Equipment guarding
a) Offer from supplier specifying 'guarding necessary according to rule so and so...' NOT included.
b) Extra guarding above customary may be offered as an option, but always against given details or specification from the customer/end user according to the sites requirements. (Else you do not know what to include or the cost)
c) The end user/equipment owner is always responsible towards athorities for total function for his factory/installment.
d) Local authorities are responsible for local inspection and any actions or extra requirements against owner for improper installation. (Rules and applying and understasnding of rules could vary locally - you do not know as a supplier)
e) Supplier is responsible for product function, but not for guardrails or shieldings etc. As you state, the equipment could be guarded locally by access or location. You can find a lot of practical exampels for this just looking around...you will find a lot of rotating fans in shop ceilings, but they only have to be protected if you can easily reach them from the floor...
f) Only exception from above would be if it is clearly stated in inquiries or included in contract that the delivery is complete including guards.
g)... and only if there is a discrepancy between inquiry, offer and /or contract on the description of the delivery this should be a problem.
....Unfortunately most often customers or purchasers going into this type of discussion are trying to cover up for their own neglect in specifying,reading or understanding the technical details in an offer or a piece of machinery correctly..
RE: Equipment guarding
Either way it may be cheaper to just make the guards.
Griffy
RE: Equipment guarding
"Either way it may be cheaper to just make the guards."
We have built a lot of equipment guarding and it can be very expensive. It really depends on what the customer wants. Some customers want their equipment totally caged in, or may want light curtains installed which can be tens of thousands of dollars.
RE: Equipment guarding
"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."
Ben Loosli
Sr IS Technologist
L-3 Communications
RE: Equipment guarding
Your quote clearly stated that guards were not included so you need to weigh how badly you want to keep this customer.
Anything you build should be safe, that's your responsibility or at least, my opinion.
I have never had a customer complain about pricing on guards.
Charlie
www.facsco.com
RE: Equipment guarding
Properly guarding equipment is the end user's responsibility. But here again I agree with FACS. I would always include guarding. If adding guarding inflates the cost with respect to the competition, take advantage of it by pointing it out to the customer. It's added value in your product and it shows the end user that you care about safety. Since you took the time to properly guard the equipment, you obviously approached the overall construction with equal care. If you cut corners to cut costs in one place, what's to make the customer think you didn't do it in other places?
Most customers appreciate value, service and attention to detail, even it if costs them a few bucks.
RE: Equipment guarding
If you're interested in selling in the EU here's a start point for your investigations.
http://
PS, ignorance of the law is NO excuse. Selling "unsafe" equipment can result in prosecution, fines, even prison!
RE: Equipment guarding
RE: Equipment guarding
RE: Equipment guarding
RE: Equipment guarding
Maybe the two companies could come to a compromise.