|
OSHA
[ Tutorial ]
[ Hot Topics ]
[ Case Studies ]
[ LOTO standard ]
[ LOTO preamble ]
[ Compliance directive ]
[ Selected case law ]
[ Selected letters of interpretation ]
Case Study 2: Automotive Component Lubrication Robotics
Correct.
The interlocked gate would not meet the requirements for an energy isolation device. In
this case, the interlocked gate is considered to be control circuitry which is expressly
prohibited by the rule. It does not protect employees who are inside the fenced area
because it fails to de-energize the robot arm.
<<Return to Case Study Discussion | Question 5>>
| 
