Another Cat 4 safety circuit question:

Short Circuit

Member
Join Date
Jun 2013
Location
Ohio
Posts
12
I intend to use two contactors connected in series on the line side of my motor contactors and VFDs.

I am designing for Cat 4 safety.

My question is: do I install the contactors before the fuses to the motor contactors and VFDs or after them?

Thanks for your help.
 
I've always done it this way:

Line Power In
Fuses or other Overload protection for VFD
Line reactor (if applicable)
VFD
Load reactor (if applicable)
Contactor (safety rated, properly wired to a safety relay or PLC)
Motor

Edit:
Sorry, some reason it deleted all my extra spaces and made it all one line.
 
Last edited:
I would install the contactors between the circuit protection device and the drive.

why not 3 or 4, two might fail closed!

This is the second time I've noticed you taking a jab at the use of redundant safety contactors.

What are you getting at.. do you think it is not necessary?
 
Last edited:
I would install the contactors between the circuit protection device and the drive.



This is the second time I've noticed you taking a jab at the use of redundant safety contactors.

What are you getting at.. do you think it is not necessary?

Sorry, Been in this field 30 years and am amazed how everything has to be so "safe" nowadays. To me the real key to safety is taking responsibility for your own safety and not relying on some-one else to keep you safe. If you can't do that no amount of safeguards will save you, you are doomed to fail. long story short
 
After the VFD gets my vote. Otherwise you are constantly waiting for the drive to power back up when the contactor has gone off.

Remove the Drives 'enable' signal at the same time as you drop the contactor, then put the enable back on when the contactor is re-engaged.

(is what I would do...)
 
Hi

If you are designing for cat 4 then you have no other choice but to use two mechcinal guided contractors that the reset of your Safty relay has to go through two normally closed contacts on these contractors.

Just on maxketcham point why do we know need to have all this safety nowadays
It may seem a lot to some peoble but if it saves 1 life and that may be someone with 20 years plus on the job that just some day does something by mistake then all that safety is worth it. Just because that is the way it was always done does not mean it was right or that we can not try to improve on something that was right.

Again just my thoughts as a programmer who has severed his time as a spark and I have seen so many changes like the introduction of safety relays and I have seen how they have improved all kinds of high and low speed machines and plants.


Donnchadh
 
Sorry, Been in this field 30 years and am amazed how everything has to be so "safe" nowadays. To me the real key to safety is taking responsibility for your own safety and not relying on some-one else to keep you safe. If you can't do that no amount of safeguards will save you, you are doomed to fail. long story short

If you've been in this field 30 years then I'm guessing you've probably seen your fair share of welded contacts. If not, then you've been awfully lucky. How safe is an old-style non-redundant E-Stop circuit when the MCR contacts are welded shut? It is true that it is impossible to make any machine 100% safe, but just because a problem cannot be 100% solved doesn't mean that trying to reduce it as much as you can isn't worthwhile.

It's easy to say people should be responsible for their own safety. But there are mitigating factors. What about accidents? Trips and falls? Someone horseplaying around you and accidentally pushing you? Are you honestly saying you've never, ever, done anything unsafe while on the job? If you have, and hadn't been so lucky, wouldn't you rather have a close call than a lost limb?

Do you think these standards are created by a bunch of people who sit up in an office somewhere and draw their crazy ideas out of a hat? These standards actually arise from accidents that really have happened and could have been prevented. A machine can run for 30 years without hurting anyone, and then on 30 years and 1 day kill somebody. After that, those 30-years of injury-free running mean NOTHING.

The thing about safety sensors is that they are far more reliable than any procedure enacted by people. No safety circuit is infallible, BUT the higher categories are far LESS fallible than relying on human beings to perfectly follow all safety procedures while operating a machine. It's common knowledge that the most dangerous people on a job are those who have been doing it for a long time. It's so easy to lose respect for how dangerous a machine can be, and if you run one machine for 10, 20, 30 years and never get hurt, it is incredibly difficult to maintain the same level of caution you had on day one.

It's hard to see the value of safety design because it is hard to quantify how many accidents DIDN'T happen because of the circuit. But in most cases, all it takes is one or two prevented accidents to make the time and initial expense worth it.

EDIT: And just because there are far more elaborate safety circuit standard these days doesn't mean that one's responsibility for his own safety and the procedures involved are being thrown out the window. Machines still have to be locked and tagged-out. Appropriate PPE still has to be worn. Energy sources still have to be isolated.
 
Last edited:
as far as double contacts and other safety improvements
34 yease ago there was a big push to maintain high level of safety up to the now CAT.4 standard.
infact the victorian (Aus) standards were generated by a few peopls and formed a major beginning to the current Australian standards
I was involved with this as I was working in a Stamping Shop (Toyota Altona) you dont get second chances with large presses.
I will point out that even 15 years fter I left they are still constantly upgrading their safety systems and procedures.
it is time for people to move forward.
Oddly the government Gas agencey in Aus. won't allow any control other than single contact stop buttons, Go Figure
they still dont like any form of electronics.
They might be drawn into the 19th century some day
 
You should be looking at SIL levels now instead of the categories determined by the older EN 954-1 standard, which was phased out starting at the end of 2009.
Here is a document from ABB with useful information.

http://www05.abb.com/global/scot/scot209.nsf/veritydisplay/2d936e3efe5089ddc12576cd0028dce8/$file/1sfc001008b0201.pdf
 
You should be looking at SIL levels now instead of the categories determined by the older EN 954-1 standard, which was phased out starting at the end of 2009.
Here is a document from ABB with useful information.

http://www05.abb.com/global/scot/scot209.nsf/veritydisplay/2d936e3efe5089ddc12576cd0028dce8/$file/1sfc001008b0201.pdf
sorry but you are wrong
the safety standards are not international.
Aus. still uses the Cat. levels and SIL standards are accepted.
as was some other countries but than is how it is.
 
sorry but you are wrong
the safety standards are not international.
Aus. still uses the Cat. levels and SIL standards are accepted.
as was some other countries but than is how it is.


Not to worry mate, I am well used to being wrong.

Wife tells me all the time... :)
 

Similar Topics

Hi, The hardware is: Click Plc model # CO-O1DD1-O HMI model # S3ML-R magnetic-inductive flow meter model # FMM100-1001. I will set the flow meter...
Replies
4
Views
115
So I had an odd request from a customer for the above. I have written the logic and tested it all in one PLC with only using 7 outputs and 7...
Replies
15
Views
421
Hello I need to message read the entire 16 channel raw analog inputs from a 1769-L33ER Compact Logic controller to another 1769-L33ER Compact...
Replies
8
Views
239
I am noticing a problem where i am using MOV instruction and writing literal text into source and String datatype in destination. It works fines...
Replies
6
Views
478
I'm not actually in front of the equipment yet, but this is the information that I have been given by a client: ------------ Data from HART...
Replies
2
Views
327
Back
Top Bottom