NEWS


Manufacturing Month returns in May to showcase excellence


Manufacturing Month, an annual initiative which showcases the success and strength of Northern Ireland’s manufacturing and engineering sector, returns next month. Led by representative body Manufacturing


Northern Ireland, the entire month of May is dedicated to highlighting the companies, workers, and leaders in the Northern Irish manufacturing sector.


The month includes a busy programme of


events, webinars, content from the sector, the flagship ‘Anchor High’ leadership summit, and the Manufacturing Hall of Fame dinner. This year’s Manufacturing Month will also mark anniversary of Manufacturing


the 20th Manufacturing Month was first launched


pre-Covid in March 2020 and brings together manufacturing firms, industry leaders, policy and key decision makers, schools, and young people to recognise the strengths of the sector, the great careers which are enjoyed and are possible, and celebrate the contribution local firms make to our economy and solving problems globally. Stephen Kelly, chief executive at Manufacturing


NI, said: “It is particularly timely that Manufacturing Month 2023 comes as we have been commemorating the 25th


anniversary of the


Good Friday Agreement. “Global eyes have been fixed on this place for the past month, politicians and leaders from


across the world have heralded the progress we have made since 1998, and they have spoken of our untapped economic potential. Our local manufacturing and engineering sector is at the forefront of that positive economic story we have to tell here in Northern Ireland – Manufacturing Month is an opportunity to recognise and properly mark the contribution made by our makers and innovators.”


TÜV SÜD highlights risk issues connected to Industry 4.0


TÜV SÜD, a global product testing and certification organisation, said that while Industry 4.0 (I4.0) sees reduced risk in several areas, the range and flexibility of connected interfaces introduce a new set of risk issues. Darren Hugheston-Roberts, head of machinery safety at TÜV SÜD, said: “As production facilities become more complex, operators must manage a rapidly evolving system that incorporates multiple interdependencies, while minimising downtime. It is, therefore, vital to consider the shifting landscape of risk, which is why I4.0 requires a new risk management approach that is customised to each individual actual use case.


As the increased flexibility created by I4.0 systems introduces new


complexities and challenges, Mr Hugheston-Roberts said there is a shift from static risk assessment to one of dynamic risk. Analysing and assessing the underlying physical and cyber risks to humans, property, and the environment is therefore a challenging task. “Tackling safety issues by using a


conventional static risk assessment approach would require time- consuming reiterations for every changing condition, which could potentially result in operational downtime,” he said. “Machinery safety standards define a set of general physical hazards that are used during type certification. However, current standards, such as ISO 12100 – Safety of machinery - General principles for design - risk assessment and risk reduction, have not been designed around the concept of machine connectivity and interoperability.


“While hazards depend on the intended use and other limits of the machine in the physical world,


4 April 2023 Irish Manufacturing www.irish-manufacturing.com


conventional safety concepts do not consider the sources and effects of cyber threats that could create new hazards. Another limit related to hazards is that safety measures are designed to protect only human health using a “worst-case” approach.” In practice, when a machine


operates in an application-specific context, its limits and applicable


hazardous situations may differ significantly from those considered under worst-case and stand-alone scenarios.


Mr Hugheston-Roberts added: “Additional hazardous situations may also arise from machine-to-machine interaction. They can be related to human health, property and environment, as well as to undesired operational downtime or bottlenecks.”


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42