Lathe chuck guards – how many folk use them?

[not done it yetParticipant @notdoneityet]

… does what it is intended i.e. stops you leaving the chuck key in, then why not leave it on?
…

If that is all it is there for, it is no longer needed if all supplied chuck keys have springs on them, to prevent such scenarios. Guards are there to prevent operators getting entangled with moving parts. Further, can a key not be left in the chuck behind the guard (one of two used with a 4 jaw chuck). Probably most useful when turning between centres – but totally useless when using a face plate.

Leaning on a guard is not good practice if it is the flimsy plastic arrangement that one often encounters. Unfortunately the chuck guard does not generally help to prevent the operator getting tangled up with the workpiece. (who uses a lathe without something in the chuck?).

Making all lathes revolve one revolution very slowly, before speeding up would be a suitable substitute? Something that VFDs can be programmed to do for us. YIPPEE! a simple solution for many of us. Mine does this already, and it could be programmed for more than one ramp rate, if I so desired.

Put bluntly: Lathes simply cannot be made idiot-proof unless completely guarded from the operator – that means fully enclosed before starting the machine.  Unfortunately, there are a lot of idiots out there – and lots of ‘no win – no fee‘ litigators awaiting easy pickings…

Edited By not done it yet on 08/11/2019 15:29:36

[SillyOldDufferModerator @sillyoldduffer]

Posted by not done it yet on 08/11/2019 15:28:38:

…

Put bluntly: Lathes simply cannot be made idiot-proof unless completely guarded from the operator – that means fully enclosed before starting the machine. Unfortunately, there are a lot of idiots out there – and lots of ‘no win – no fee‘ litigators awaiting easy pickings…

…

Modern machine:

Note control panel, traffic lights, big red button and sliding door which must be closed before cutting starts…

Of course CNC machines like this are considerably more dangerous than a manual lathe. Automatic cutting and carousel tool changers, aerosol coolant sprays, multiple-spindles and several kilowatts to the motors. No-one wants to be inside one of these when it's running. These are what Health & Safety in the workplace are about and safe by design. Of my nearest engineering firm's thirty machines only two are manuals. Many good reasons for industry having a couple of basic machine tools handy, but they're increasingly less mainstream as the years roll by.

Dave

[ChrisHParticipant @chrish]

Posted by Robert Atkinson 2 on 08/11/2019 12:45:05:

Posted by ChrisH on 07/11/2019 00:05:13:

<BIG SNIP>

Remember also, whether in your own shed on your own or in the firms shop, an accident only ever happens due to there being an unsafe action taken or unsafe condition existing. It therefore the responsibility of all of us to ensure unsafe conditions do not occur, neither do we take unsafe actions, however we operate our machines or provide for our own safety.

Have a nice day!

Chris

The problem is that you say you have taken that first "Unsafe action" – removing the guard- in your workshop. You also seem to be advocating removing guards to others.

Sorry Robert, but you are wrong in your criticism of me in both respects.

Regarding your "Unsafe Action", the guard was removed so that a potentially "Unsafe Condition" could be addressed. You seem not to have appreciated the significance of what was written in the whole paragraph. I said the guard interferred too much with the setting up process. This it did. If the job to be milled is not very well secured to the mill table then the likelihood exists that it can move when being machined. This could result at best with a damaged part and broken cutter; at worst the part could be flung off the table and cause the operator serious or possibley fatal injury. I like to try to avoid such situations arising so if the guard got in the way of me applying clamps etc and bolting it all down, being able to get the spanner on the nuts, then it is right in my mind to remove it. Better the job is securely fixed down. The last sentence in that paragraph said that I fitted a temporary – meaning not permanent thus removable – screen (guard) to stop swarf and coolant being flung out. I should have said that this is the length of the table giving a better length of protection; I could have also said that if it stops swarf and coolant being flung out it also stops me trying to put my hand in to the cutter area too, but I sort of assumed that folk reading that would figure that for themselves. So I removed a badly designed guard and replaced it with a better one, hardly an Unsafe Action.

No-where in my post did I advocate removing guards to others, so where you deduced that from is a mystery. Look, if someone wants to remove all the guards from their machine, or in reverse, totally enclose their machine with guards, then that is up to them. It is their machine, their shed, their responsibility; I would not presume to advocate any action to them, it's nothing to do with me, but having worked as a H&S advisor I would not advocate removing guards to others, unless, as in my case above, it is to be replaced with better guarding.

What I did try to do in my post was make the point that a) too often guarding fitted to machines is badly designed in that it prevents the operator in running the machine efficiently, or sometimes not at all as has been alluded to in other posts in this thread, or the maintainence engineer easily accessing the parts to be maintained, and b) guarding should be designed and fitted once the designer has seen for him or herself how the operator and engineer have to go about their respective tasks. A well guarded machine is usually a joy to operate in comparison to a badly guarded machine, and the bonus to the production manager is not only does he/she know it is a well guarded machine for their operators but production line efficiency usually rises as a result of it too.

Having been involved in the application of guarding to numerous machines, some built in a time before modern standards were required and thus were never designed to be guarded, I know only too well the issues involved. I also know, having seen first hand examples, the lengths some operators will go to circumvent badly designed guarding, human nature being what it is, leaving the machine in an Unsafe Condition.

Chris

[Robin GrahamParticipant @robingraham42208]

Thanks for further discussion – I'm still not convinced that leaving the key in the chuck is a hazard in my particular circumstances. By which I mean one man, one lathe and an established pattern of working. Obviously things are different in an environment where machines are shared.

I'm not going to the stake (or even A&E) in defence of that view though – I am retraining myself.

Robin.

[thaiguzziParticipant @thaiguzzi]

Posted by Robert Atkinson 2 on 08/11/2019 12:45:05:

Posted by ChrisH on 07/11/2019 00:05:13:

<BIG SNIP>

Remember also, whether in your own shed on your own or in the firms shop, an accident only ever happens due to there being an unsafe action taken or unsafe condition existing. It therefore the responsibility of all of us to ensure unsafe conditions do not occur, neither do we take unsafe actions, however we operate our machines or provide for our own safety.

Have a nice day!

Chris

The problem is that you say you have taken that first "Unsafe action" – removing the guard- in your workshop. You also seem to be advocating removing guards to others.
Assessing the suitability of guards should be part of the machine selection process. If it's not suitable get the vendor to fix it or look elsewhere.

Generally in industry it is insurance assessors that drive good behaviour regarding guards and the like. If they refuse cover you can't legally work (at least in the UK if you have employees or public access to your business) Note that even in the home workshop removing guards could have accident or life insurance implications if the worst happens and they find guards were removed. Not very likely but some insurance companies seem to be looking for any excuse to reduce a settlement or increase a premium.

Robert G8RPI.

Disagree completely.

See Martin Perman's post 3 posts above yours.

Sounds like you work for the council H&S. Or an insurance company….

[thaiguzziParticipant @thaiguzzi]

Posted by ChrisH on 07/11/2019 00:05:13:

I've been using lathes on and off for over 50 years, but all the lathes I've used were old ones – my lathe at home is circa late 1960's early 1970's. No lathe I used ever had a chuck guard fitted, and I've lived happily without one, most of the time. The only time I would like one is when I'm using coolant, so save on the mess going all over the shed floor, but otherwise I've never felt I needed one. I never stand in way of the swarf coming off, never leave a chuck key in the chuck – my initial training left a huge impression on me – and don't use two chuck keys on 4 jaw chucks.

But I see new lathe increasingly have a guard fitted in front of the toolpost as well, and for the life of me cannot understand why. In my shed that would be the first thing to be binned, but there is only me in my shed.

My mill/drill had an interlocked guard fitted in front of the quill action bit. That got binned very quickly, it interfered too much with setting up processes. Too often guards fitted to machines prevents the operator from seeing exactly what is going on too. A temporary screen gets put in place to stop chips and coolant getting flung all over the shed, but is quickly able to be removed out the way when required.

The important thing about guards is that they should be designed with the operation and maintenance of the machine in mind, so that their interference with the discharge of both tasks are minimised. This should be borne in mind when guarding is designed, but is very often not, guarding usually seemingly being designed by someone sitting at a desk far away from the shop floor, who has never had to operate or maintain (or even seen?) the machine they are designing guarding for; if they had, that guarding would have surely been very quickly redesigned!

If a guard interferes with the natural operation of a machine by its operator, human nature being what it is, then ways will be quickly found to circumvent the guard – and from experience in production industry, that is a proven. Guarding design is not the walk in the park designers often seem to think it is. Anyone can slap a secure 'screen' around a machine or tool, but can you then operate it?

Remember also, whether in your own shed on your own or in the firms shop, an accident only ever happens due to there being an unsafe action taken or unsafe condition existing. It therefore the responsibility of all of us to ensure unsafe conditions do not occur, neither do we take unsafe actions, however we operate our machines or provide for our own safety.

Have a nice day!

Chris

+1.

Well said.

Completely agree.

[SillyOldDufferModerator @sillyoldduffer]

Posted by Robin Graham on 12/11/2019 23:26:25:

… I'm still not convinced that leaving the key in the chuck is a hazard in my particular circumstances. By which I mean one man, one lathe and an established pattern of working….

…

The flaw is relying on 'my particular circumstances'! Human beings are easily distracted, are often tired, unwell, frustrated, irritable, drunk, or harassed. You're expecting an important phone call and return to the machine after a criminal has tried to tell you he's Microsoft, or the Inland Revenue, or your Bank's fraud unit.

Overconfidence is a poor substitute for calculated risk taking. Everyone makes mistakes and has been a bloody fool at least once.

The most unreliable tool in my workshop is me!

Dave

[Nigel McBurney 1Participant @nigelmcburney1]

When I was a lad, in rural Sussex the factory inspector was a lady and the staff always seemed to know when a visit was due ,so there was a warning find the drilling machine guard and fit it ,none of the lathes had chuckguards,they were probably unheard of in those days, the horizontal mill always had it guards fitted,when the inspector left the drill guards went back on the shelf.

[Martin KyteParticipant @martinkyte99762]

Whatever you want to do in your own workshop and whatever you think of Health and Safety you cannot refute the fact that workplace injuries and deaths have reduced considerably over time. See Charts 5 to 7

**LINK**

regards Martin

[ChrisHParticipant @chrish]

Agreed Martin, both as a result of safer measures being put in place, a more aware approach as what is safe and what is not and a more realistic approach from employers and employees alike. It is a shame that some people do not display a sense of common sense or have a too zealous approach at times which often has the opposite effect and puts people off, discouraging rather than encouraging. You have to take the employees with you!

What is interesting is seeing how other countries approach the H&S issues that raise so much concern here. For example, to return to this thread's OP – go onto YouTube and watch our American cousins on a lathe, guards there are not, or none that I have seen! Same for mills, unless of course they are CNC machines.

You would have thought that being in the EU we would have had a unified approach to H&S across the EU, but oh no. In the 1990's on factory visit we commented on an operator smoking in a paint spray booth in France, yes, really!, and in a factory in Holland, a 12" or so diameter circular saw with half the blade above the table, completely unguarded and the floor area surrounding the saw covered with short lengths of about 1" diameter tube, a tripping/slipping horrific accident waiting to happen. Our Dutch guide was quite surprised and complexed when we queried the safeness of this situation, like 'but what is wrong?' and was amazed when we said that in England the Factory Inspector on seeing that would have probably put a prohibition order on them! Earlier in the 1980's , looking at a bottling machine operating in NI without any guarding at all, we asked why did they not have any guarding. As only the Irish could respond, they said oh yes we have all the guards, they're in the store, we don't bother with them – as indeed the unguarded machine always had been operated from new, it having never been designed to be guarded in the first place as it was originally considered to be unnecessary when first designed.

Sorry, this has taken the OP a little off track!

Chris

 

Edited By ChrisH on 13/11/2019 17:32:26

[martin perman 1Participant @martinperman1]

Posted by Martin Kyte on 13/11/2019 14:55:30:

Whatever you want to do in your own workshop and whatever you think of Health and Safety you cannot refute the fact that workplace injuries and deaths have reduced considerably over time. See Charts 5 to 7

**LINK**

regards Martin

Martin,

Interesting reading but it relates to industrial injuries, I would assume most of us me included are either semi or fully retired, apart from household management who would we report our injuries to, I conjecture when asked by a doctor/nurse we would tell a little white lie to hide our embarrassment/stupidity

Martin P

[David James JennerParticipant @davidjamesjenner99025]

What would be interesting, to me at least, would be peoples designs for chuck and milling guards that are effective and usable.

I believe that guards are removed because they prevent the effective operation and setting up of the machine.

Dave J

[SillyOldDufferModerator @sillyoldduffer]

Posted by David James Jenner on 28/11/2019 12:05:24:

…

I believe that guards are removed because they prevent the effective operation and setting up of the machine.

 

Dave J

Guards do get in the way – the price of having them is they often slow things down. It's all a matter of balance though. What's the benefit of keeping a machine well fed compared with the cost of an accident?

In the UK the taxpayer mostly picks up the cost of injuries via Social Security and the NHS. Explains why the Nanny State is so keen to reduce accidents! From their point of view the world is full of clowns determined to hurt themselves!

Although it's impossible to make any process completely safe, surely it's worth minimising the risks?

On my lathe:

• Taken the tool-post guard off – it gets in the way a lot for very little benefit. Risk low, benefit of removing high.
• Kept the chuck guard on – makes sure the motor is off before the chuck can be adjusted, stops things falling in, and catches flying coolant and swarf. Risk of removing moderate, benefit low.
• Kept the leadscrew guards on, even though they reduce saddle movement. Not because I'm worried about getting caught in the leadscrew, but mainly because they keep it clean Others may find removing them useful. Risk of removing low, benefit of keeping moderate.
• Kept the change-gear guard interlock. Stops the gears powering up whilst fingers and loose clothing are anywhere near them. Risk of high impact accidents. Benefit of removing would be saving time adjusting the change gears 'just-so'. In my case the exposed gears are next to a walk way, it would be less dangerous to disable if the headstock was against a wall. But I'd still think twice about doing it!
• Interlocks would be repaired rather than bypassed if they went wrong
• Took the trouble to fire an airgun at my Chinese screens to prove they are polycarbonate rather than cheap and nasty. The pellet bounced off, no damage to the screen.
• Don't have long hair, or wear a tie, gloves other than latex, rings or loose clothing. Steel toe-capped boots, and eye shields. And even though I'm a messy toad, I keep the floor clear of trip hazards. The electrics are all within code.

Dave

Edited By SillyOldDuffer on 28/11/2019 14:17:49

[Mick B1Participant @mickb1]

Posted by David James Jenner on 28/11/2019 12:05:24:

What would be interesting, to me at least, would be peoples designs for chuck and milling guards that are effective and usable.

…

Dave J

You might be asking for a holy grail. I think that if any such design were possible, somebody would've done it and cashed in on it by now. Tool designers must be just as aware as users how the existing designs usually get defeated, circumvented or removed completely.

[John Paton 1Participant @johnpaton1]

Posted by martin perman on 13/11/2019 17:30:09:

Posted by Martin Kyte on 13/11/2019 14:55:30:

Whatever you want to do in your own workshop and whatever you think of Health and Safety you cannot refute the fact that workplace injuries and deaths have reduced considerably over time. See Charts 5 to 7

**LINK**

regards Martin

Martin,

Interesting reading but it relates to industrial injuries, I would assume most of us me included are either semi or fully retired, apart from household management who would we report our injuries to, I conjecture when asked by a doctor/nurse we would tell a little white lie to hide our embarrassment/stupidity

Martin P

We have a large wood locally which is a great favourite with serious mountain bikers. Our A&E unit commented recently the huge number of wrist and collar bone injuries that occur in the car park at the roadside. 'Its how you tell the story!" (they would never admit to riding recklessly and accept the risks so do not fit air bags)

[old martParticipant @oldmart]

I wonder how many people alone in their workshop stop to think how long it would take for help to arrive if a bad accident did occur?

[Mick B1Participant @mickb1]

Posted by Martin Kyte on 13/11/2019 14:55:30:

Whatever you want to do in your own workshop and whatever you think of Health and Safety you cannot refute the fact that workplace injuries and deaths have reduced considerably over time. See Charts 5 to 7

**LINK**

regards Martin

So far as I can see, there's nothing to suggest the extent of any role for machine guarding in these statistics – they may simply reflect the decline in the proportion of the workforce engaged in manual work bearing these risks.

[Mike PooleParticipant @mikepoole82104]

Would the panel agree that if you hurt yourself on a machine then you must have done something stupid? If you hurt yourself then you must have ignored the danger or been unaware of the danger. A competent machine operator should be aware of the danger and work safely. Here is where I digress from health and safety, they seem to think everyone is an idiot and precautions should protect the idiot. I like to think that some of us can make a risk assessment and work safely on a machine that would be risky for an idiot. Even the most dangerous machine can be used safely if you understand the risks and if if the risk is too high then you don’t expose yourself to it. People used to have common sense but we seem to have successfully bred this out of our youth.

Mike

63 years old and still completely intact despite riding motorcycles for 45 years and using tools for 55 years, not entirely without incident but no lasting harm done.

Edited By Mike Poole on 29/11/2019 23:43:47

[thaiguzziParticipant @thaiguzzi]

Posted by SillyOldDuffer on 28/11/2019 14:16:54:

Posted by David James Jenner on 28/11/2019 12:05:24:

…

I believe that guards are removed because they prevent the effective operation and setting up of the machine.

Dave J

Guards do get in the way – the price of having them is they often slow things down. It's all a matter of balance though. What's the benefit of keeping a machine well fed compared with the cost of an accident?

In the UK the taxpayer mostly picks up the cost of injuries via Social Security and the NHS. Explains why the Nanny State is so keen to reduce accidents! From their point of view the world is full of clowns determined to hurt themselves!

Although it's impossible to make any process completely safe, surely it's worth minimising the risks?

On my lathe:

• Taken the tool-post guard off – it gets in the way a lot for very little benefit. Risk low, benefit of removing high.
• Kept the chuck guard on – makes sure the motor is off before the chuck can be adjusted, stops things falling in, and catches flying coolant and swarf. Risk of removing moderate, benefit low.
• Kept the leadscrew guards on, even though they reduce saddle movement. Not because I'm worried about getting caught in the leadscrew, but mainly because they keep it clean Others may find removing them useful. Risk of removing low, benefit of keeping moderate.
• Kept the change-gear guard interlock. Stops the gears powering up whilst fingers and loose clothing are anywhere near them. Risk of high impact accidents. Benefit of removing would be saving time adjusting the change gears 'just-so'. In my case the exposed gears are next to a walk way, it would be less dangerous to disable if the headstock was against a wall. But I'd still think twice about doing it!
• Interlocks would be repaired rather than bypassed if they went wrong
• Took the trouble to fire an airgun at my Chinese screens to prove they are polycarbonate rather than cheap and nasty. The pellet bounced off, no damage to the screen.
• Don't have long hair, or wear a tie, gloves other than latex, rings or loose clothing. Steel toe-capped boots, and eye shields. And even though I'm a messy toad, I keep the floor clear of trip hazards. The electrics are all within code.

Dave

Edited By SillyOldDuffer on 28/11/2019 14:17:49

I must have gone "native" as they say over here…

No chuck guards on lathe, pillar drill or mill.

Shorts, no shirt, no socks, bare feet in flip flops.

Safety wear consists of glasses when grinding or machining, occasionally an apron when doing proper ouch work like mig welding or in the line of fire with the shaper…, but mostly not….

[Danni BurnsParticipant @danniburns84841]

Obviously they can be a pain and restrictive, but really handy for stopping coolant (and chips) from splashing all over the place.

BTW I have a little Clarke CL500M which I would like a chuck guard for if anyone has lying around.

Regards

Danni

[larry phelan 1Participant @larryphelan1]

Never use them, a total pain-in-the-arse.

Common sense is much more effective.

PS Anyone who leaves the key in the chuck has not got their mind on the job.

Not a great idea !

[Howard LewisParticipant @howardlewis46836]

When contemplating buying a Myford Super Sigma, was asked "Is it for school, college or personal use"?

Apparently for school or college use it has to have a guard, but not for personal use!

My Taiwanese lathe came with a transparent acrylic guard over the chuck and the Toolpost. The Toolpost one soon went onto the shelf. The chuck guard got modified, 'cos it fouled the Faceplate.

Needs constant wiping or washing.

Then modded again, so that it could be removed to prevent a foul with the rear Toolpost when working close up with a Collet Chuck. It has to be down, to allow the lathe to run, so the guard shaft is now a two piece.

Never had a chuck key fly out of the chuck, but had a near miss with my Mandrel Handle because of forgetfulness and carelessness. Fortunately was out of the way. Lesson learned!

Howard

[Nigel Graham 2Participant @nigelgraham2]

Hmmmm…..

About 6 weeks ago now I think, but less than a week after the lock-down eased, I was working on my steam-lorry on the concrete slabs outside the workshop. To protect th eyar from paint-drips I pinned an old carpet-tile under the wheels. A rain shower started, and hurrying to clear an obstruction to pushing the wagon back into the shed, I caught my foot under the carpet-tile.

I went flying, landing hard on the concrete, on my side and suffering a very painful internal hip injury. An X-ray the next day showed no broken bones but I am still recovering from what was probably a torn ligament. I had my first physiotherapy appointment yesterday, the next is in 4 weeks' time.

I was unable to do anything in the workshop for the first week or so, could not operate any machine for more than a hour so for the next couple of weeks. When I had to move my car a few yards so a road-works team could use a small digger, one of them moved it for me. Dressing is still a bit difficult. I have only just started driving again, and then only short local trips. I have had to cancel an arrangement to inspect a friend's loco boiler for him, and of course I have no idea when I will be fit and safe enough to re-join my caving-project team.

'

Just one second's lapse; one second too quick….

Ironically the rain was so short-lived it had practically stopped by the time I had had to use the wagon and a stack of slabs as hand-holds to pull myself back vaguely upright,

[Martin KyteParticipant @martinkyte99762]

Trip hazards are probably the cause of more (home) workshop injuries than not having a chick guard. The primary thrust of health and safety is learning to automatically think about hazards.

Hope you recouver quickly Nigel. We all come unstuck now and again.

[not done it yetParticipant @notdoneityet]

Posted by Danni Burns on 13/05/2021 11:46:00:

Obviously they can be a pain and restrictive, but really handy for stopping coolant (and chips) from splashing all over the place.

BTW I have a little Clarke CL500M which I would like a chuck guard for if anyone has lying around.

Regards

Danni

Not used one, then?

Think about where the coolant is going, if the guard only covers the chuck? Not much use if a (large) face plate is substituted for a chuck? A screen would be more useful.

Chips are predominantly produced closer to the tailstock and most of us cut dry, anyway.🙂

Of course, I make every effort to avoid leaving the chuck key installed in the chuck – and even if I did, the soft start, programmed for my VFD, would unlikely do more than stall the lathe in half a turn. It’s what the jog facility is for and would most likely show up the error. Just one more advantage of fitting a three phase motor.🙂

Overall more of a pain and restriction, IMO, but your choice snd good luck in finding an original guard for your lathe, although I expect Machinemart could supply a replacement – eventually.

[Author]

Posts