cards and protections: how resistant should they be?

[reggio]

Good morning, maybe it's a silly question, but I always asked myself:

ok, there I have to put a shelter / protection / closure because below there is something potentially dangerous ... so I preview a panel dim... x ... in
- plexiglass/lexan?
- sheet 0.5mm ÷ 15mm
- Wire mesh...
- ...
- film domopack

... i.e., is there a rule/formula to understand that resistance must oppose protection?
must I block a finger that pushes? a man who falls against him? a forklift?
how to adjust (in addition to personal and questionable common sense) in these cases?

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

I'm ignorant of this, but I guess we have to assume the worst situation and put a safety coefficient on it.
We must cover a danger on which we walk above: what goes on above us?
if a person will consider the average weight with any additional weights type toolbox, if a bedbed will consider the weight of the bedbed + the person+ any additional weights
on the market there are covers and grates that specify the bearable weight to the square meter, then I will apply safety calculations
you have to put a side protection: What are the risks? only the support (the worker who stops) or even a lateral force (the worker who is for some reason rejected on the railing or panel)
on the market it does not seem to me that there are elements that guarantee a transversal force so it will be to apply a force in some way measurable (the 80 kg worker leans there are only 80 kg to consider, the worker is pushed there are 80kg + the thrust force)

I repeat that I say it as ignorant, but trying to make a logical reasoning; first make verification of potential situations then on these take the worst

 

[Calender]

There is no specific norm, at least I know (I have been looking for it a long time ago). However, I confirm that,as in all things you have to calculate/evaluate the risk and provide to lower it, if there is a residual risk there are other elements on which to rely (signs danger organs in movement etc.). as well as no oil tanker is designed to withstand a meteorite falling on it, a carter is certainly not designed against the charge of a rhinos::roflmao:

 

[meccanicamg]

In the light of the machine directive, there are harmonized standards on shelters and protections such as en iso 14120 where there are explanations about distances, if there is no need to pass a finger, heights, etc.
among the many things it is written that the shelters must not create more harm, they must be removable with keys......if behind there is the projection of material must be adequate and if necessary you make the ballistic evidence of impact with sphere ...... I no longer remember that diameter but will be around 10 cm....

 

[meccanicamg]

I attach a series of very useful slides to have at least one general indication and understand the topic.

 

[paulpaul]

@reggio depends on what failure you consider! time ago I had to check the shelter of a transmission (joint to lamelle + flywheel) of a rotating machine: I couldn't possibly consider that the whole fly was detached. ..we were talking about 400 kg and 1800 rpm, and more than one shelter would take a armor :d
However, since the above fault is very unlikely, I have speculated much more realistically than someone, during a maintenance, did not properly tighten one of the screws of the joint or the calettator: I therefore calculated the shelter considering the projection of one of these.
just one example...in the absence of a specific norm should be made assumptions taking a minimum of responsibility (supported by experience).

 

[gerod]

You must comply with the res of all 1 of the Directive. the en 14120 and other types of standards define shelters, as they must be (e.g. for machine tools) and will give you help. define the dangers and evaluate the risk, or calculate the protections according to the conditions you impose.