Martin Engineering: Challenging Conveyor Safety Myths
ECONOMY & POLICY

Martin Engineering: Challenging Conveyor Safety Myths

Martin Engineering, a global leader in conveyor safety, challenges the traditional notion of "Guarding by Location" in conveyor equipment. Despite decades of safe design and comprehensive training, the industry has witnessed lapses in workplace safety due to this practice, sometimes resulting in injuries and fatalities. This article questions the assumption that machinery placed beyond a worker's reach doesn't require a guard and highlights the potential risks associated with this approach.

Risks of Guarding by Location: Conveyors and machinery near workers or walkways are typically fitted with safety guards, but "Guarding by Location" assumes that hazards positioned out of a worker's immediate reach do not require such protection. This assumption can lead to serious hazards, such as unguarded return rollers over walkways that can pose a significant risk.

Worker Risks: Regulations often define a general safe height for components based on the average height of workers. Taller employees, however, may be at risk when reaching into components placed above a certain height. Working above machinery considered "guarded by location" exposes workers to a higher risk of injury if they slip or fall to a lower level.

Unaccounted Factors: Most regulations do not consider the potential accumulation of spillage beneath conveyors or in walkways, which can alter the distance between the working surface and a hazard. In some cases, material is deliberately collected or bins are filled to gain access for service or inspection, leading to hazardous activities when tools extend a worker's reach while the belt is running.

Hazards From Above: Guarding by location can create exceptions to the general requirements for hazard guarding. Hazards such as nip points between the belt and return rollers, drive components, pulley shafts, couplings, drive belts, gears, and chains are often found around elevated conveyors. These hazards, including falling components, can be overlooked if considered guarded by location.

Guarding Best Practices: To address the issues associated with guarding by location, installing guards and baskets to protect workers from lateral and overhead hazards while ensuring safe access is a logical solution. All nip points, shear points, and moving or rotating components should be guarded, regardless of location or access.

Standardisation for Safety: While there is no global standard for guard mesh sizes and mounting distances, standardizing these aspects would improve safety. It would allow maintenance workers to build guards with a shortlist of materials and eliminate the need for gauges to measure distances. Standardisation encourages routine inspections without the need to remove guards.

Ending the Myth: Guarding by location, despite its widespread acceptance, presents challenges in overhead conveyor applications. It's time to acknowledge that, when it comes to conveyors, the concept of "guarding by location" is a myth that should be abandoned in favour of more comprehensive safety measures.

Martin Engineering, a global leader in conveyor safety, challenges the traditional notion of Guarding by Location in conveyor equipment. Despite decades of safe design and comprehensive training, the industry has witnessed lapses in workplace safety due to this practice, sometimes resulting in injuries and fatalities. This article questions the assumption that machinery placed beyond a worker's reach doesn't require a guard and highlights the potential risks associated with this approach. Risks of Guarding by Location: Conveyors and machinery near workers or walkways are typically fitted with safety guards, but Guarding by Location assumes that hazards positioned out of a worker's immediate reach do not require such protection. This assumption can lead to serious hazards, such as unguarded return rollers over walkways that can pose a significant risk. Worker Risks: Regulations often define a general safe height for components based on the average height of workers. Taller employees, however, may be at risk when reaching into components placed above a certain height. Working above machinery considered guarded by location exposes workers to a higher risk of injury if they slip or fall to a lower level. Unaccounted Factors: Most regulations do not consider the potential accumulation of spillage beneath conveyors or in walkways, which can alter the distance between the working surface and a hazard. In some cases, material is deliberately collected or bins are filled to gain access for service or inspection, leading to hazardous activities when tools extend a worker's reach while the belt is running. Hazards From Above: Guarding by location can create exceptions to the general requirements for hazard guarding. Hazards such as nip points between the belt and return rollers, drive components, pulley shafts, couplings, drive belts, gears, and chains are often found around elevated conveyors. These hazards, including falling components, can be overlooked if considered guarded by location. Guarding Best Practices: To address the issues associated with guarding by location, installing guards and baskets to protect workers from lateral and overhead hazards while ensuring safe access is a logical solution. All nip points, shear points, and moving or rotating components should be guarded, regardless of location or access. Standardisation for Safety: While there is no global standard for guard mesh sizes and mounting distances, standardizing these aspects would improve safety. It would allow maintenance workers to build guards with a shortlist of materials and eliminate the need for gauges to measure distances. Standardisation encourages routine inspections without the need to remove guards. Ending the Myth: Guarding by location, despite its widespread acceptance, presents challenges in overhead conveyor applications. It's time to acknowledge that, when it comes to conveyors, the concept of guarding by location is a myth that should be abandoned in favour of more comprehensive safety measures.

Next Story
Real Estate

The Real Picture!

How did the Indian real-estate sector fare from FY2025-26? What were the factors at play and how was the impact felt by major players? What set the overperformers apart from the underperformers? Here is a comprehensive analysis – gleaned from management and stakeholder inputs – that brings together all the moving parts to provide some reasoned and rational answers.To read the full story Click Here..

Next Story
Technology

From Digital Adoption to Intelligent Infrastructure

At Illuminate Mumbai 2026, industry leaders highlighted how AI, digital twins and connected data ecosystems are reshaping infrastructure delivery, enabling greater efficiency, resilience and long-term asset performance. India's infrastructure sector is entering a new phase of digital maturity. While the initial years focused on digitising workflows, the industry is now moving towards deploying intelligent, connected and data-driven systems that can improve project outcomes across the asset lifecycle.This transition was at the centre of discussions at Illuminate Mumbai 2026, organised by Bentle..

Next Story
Infrastructure Urban

Infrastructure Opportunity Outlook by IMPACCT.Info

India’s infrastructure pipeline is witnessing dynamic activity across stages — from immediate bidding to future planning. IMPACCT segments these into three categories: Immediate, 3–6 Month, and Future Opportunities, enabling businesses to identify, prepare, and participate in high-value tenders and projects across sectors.To read the full article Click Here..

Advertisement

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get daily newsletters around different themes from Construction world.

STAY CONNECTED

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement