Apply cant rather

than dont to your

process
Amey Pathak
2012B5A711
 Whats in this presentation
The idea.
Where did it come from.
It meaning in the context of Chemical process industries.
Various strategies to implement it in chemical industries.
Accidents of the past and how they could have been
avoided with this procedure in place.
How did the principle originate?
During the early 20th century, thousands of workers were
affected in accidents involving a punch press.
A punch press is a type of machine press used to cut holes
in material.
A punch press is able to quickly apply ten, twenty, fifty, or
five hundred tons (or more) of pressure to a slab of
material such as steel.
Continued..

Punch Press
 Continued..
During the early 20th century, punching press was a major
cause of accidents in manufacturing industries around the
world.
Each year more than thousands of workers were losing
their fingers and limbs.
The numbers were staggering despite all the safety
measures in place.
 Continued..
Companies claimed to have thoroughly trained the
workers before they operate the machine.
Procedures that instructed workers to signal each other
when ready to begin operation.
Their were combinations of signs all over the press that
warned workers like Dont put your hands in the punch
press.
Continued..
Continued..
 Continued..
Ford Motor Co. redesigned the punch press.
This new design turned out to be a game changer.
The number of accidents reduced to less than 10% in
shops using the new punch press.
This was remarkable! But what was this new design?
Two hand operation.
 Continued..
The Ford Motor Co. designed punch presses that require the
worker to press two buttons, one with each hand to operate
them.
It was impossible for a worker to lose a hand in one of Henry
Fords punch presses no matter how inattentive, exhausted, or
even drunk he might have been.
A two-man press required four buttons to be pressed
simultaneously, so one worker could not close it without
knowing where the others limbs were.
 Continued..
Instead of warning workers with signs, the press was
redesigned so that workers hands cant be in the press
when it closes.
Dont close the press if you see a red light was
obviously far less effective in preventing injuries than
You cant close the press unless the hands of every
worker involved are where they belong!
 Apply cant rather than dont
Dont refers to vigilance, conformance of rules and other
forms of human interventions such as inspections and
preventions.
It requires constant monitoring and attention.
Relies heavily on procedures.
Example: Traffic Safety.
 Apply cant rather than dont
Cant on the other hand refers to devices, processes or
technologies that make accidents impossible regardless of
humans vigilance.

The punch press designed by the Ford Motor Co. is an

excellent example.
Implementations in CPI
Zero potential and lockout-tagout.
Inherently safer technologies.
 Lockout-Tagout
A machine can unexpectedly start up during the maintenance.
Due to stored energy which wasnt released properly or through
the actions of someone who may not be aware of the
maintenance.
Lockout-tagout is an effective safety procedure that deals with
such accidents.
It ensures that dangerous machines are properly shut off and are
unable to be started up again before the completion of
maintanence.
 Lockout-Tagout
Hazardous energy sources are "isolated and rendered
inoperative" before work is started on the equipment in
question.
The sources are locked with a tag of the worker who placed
it.
The worker holds the key to it ensuring only he can start the
machine.
This prevents accidental startup of a machine while a
worker is in direct contact with it.
Lockout-Tagout
 Lockout-Tagout
A warning sign that says Dont open this valve or a
setting which ensures You cant open this valve .
Which is safer and preferable?
But in most cases, a chemical process relies on chemical
potential(kinetic and thermodynamic forces), and heat and
pressure too.
Is it possible to apply cant rather than dont?
 Inherently Safer Technologies
A system is inherently safe when it is physically incapable
of causing harm regardless of human error.
It relies on the following things;
Substitute- Substitute safe materials for dangerous ones
such that its release cannot endanger someone.
Minimize- If a hazardous material is necessary, use
smaller quantities of it. Consume is as rapidly as it is
produced.
 IST
Moderate- Use less intensive conditions, such as lower
pressures and temperatures reducing the potential for
fires and accidents.
In many cases substitution or moderation might not be
practical or possible.
Reactivity of ingredients, high temperatures and
pressures increase yield in many cases.
Best course of action is to minimization in such processes.
 Dont in Bhopal
Highly reactive and toxic methyl isocyanate (MIC) gas
leaked from its storage tank causing thousands of
casualties.
Methylamine was reacted with phosgene to produce MIC,
which was stored before it reacted in a second process
with 1-napthol to form carbaryl.
The disaster occurred when water entered the MIC
storage tank and caused an exothermic runaway reaction.
 Dont in Bhopal
The plant had multiple safety systems to deal with a
discharge of MIC, and all of those had to fail for release to
occur.
Those layers were based on dont.
Dont overfill the tank. Dont allow the temperature and
pressure in the tank to exceed alarm points. Dont disable
the refrigeration system. Dont operate the plant if the
flare system is out of service.
 Dont in Bhopal
Anything that relies on human activity or lack thereof
constitutes dont rather than cant.
If MIC was produced only as rapidly as it was consumed
by the downstream process consumed it, it would have
been present is far less quantity.
This would have checked the catastrophic release
regardless of the activities of plant personnel or the
condition of safety systems.
 Just-in-time production
A process in which the reactor sets the pace for the
generation of dangerous reactant is JIT production.
Nothing is made until it is needed, whereupon it is used
immediately.
This is practical for hazardous chemical such as chlorine
and phosgene.
Accident: Jan 23,2010, at DuPont facility in Belle.
 Continued..
A worker was exposed to phosgene, and subsequently dies
from the exposure.
According to USCSHIB, a braided steel hose connected to
1-ton capacity phosgene tank, suddenly ruptured,
releasing phosgene into air, spraying the worker in the
face and torso.
The American Chemistry Counsil Phosgene Panel
recommends against the use of hoses constructed of
permeable cores which was used.
 Continued
This is an example of dont where a safety procedure is
recommended but relied on the human conformance of
the rules.
An even more important detail in the accident is the 1 ton
capacity of the phosgene tank.
Such large storage makes dont the only obstacle to
disaster.
As JIT production suggests, generating phosgene on as-
needed bases would have eliminated the need to keep
large quantities and hence the disaster.
 Important Takeaways
Despite all safety procedures, human error can lead to
catastrophic events.
It is preferable to implement cant rather than dont to our
processes.
The various accidents in the pasts hints at the need for
such a procedure in place which guarantees safety
regardless of human vigilance and error.
Thank You!