Difference Between Proactive and Reactive Inhibit Functions

What are Proactive and Reactive Inhibit Functions and When Should They be Used?

Inhibit functions are used to reduce risk for personnel while inside a safeguarded space. Proactive inhibit functions give individuals control to prevent a machine from being reset while they are inside the space, whilst reactive inhibit functions allow them to escape the area or stop a reset that has been inadvertently initiated.

 

Below more information on what proactive and reactive inhibit functions are, as well as some examples.

In whole body access applications – any situation where a person can be completely inside a safeguarded space – it is important to make sure that the machine cannot be reset while personnel is still inside.

 

The method chosen to prevent unexpected start-up will be dependent on the risk assessment. This could include placing a manual reset device in a location with a full view of the entire safeguarded space, or by using presence sensing devices to detect people in unobservable locations.

 

However, these options are not always possible or practical due to the size, layout, or environment of the safeguarded space. In such situations inhibit functions should be considered.

The two types of inhibit functions are proactive and reactive inhibit functions.

Proactive Inhibit Functions

 

Proactive inhibit functions give an individual control to prevent a machine being reset while they are inside the safeguarded space.

 

An example is interlock blocking, preventing an interlock from being closed. This can be achieved by applying a personal padlock onto the interlock (or its actuator), or by using a personnel key which the operator takes into the safeguarded space.

 

In both cases the guard cannot be locked while personnel are inside, and the machine cannot be reset.

Reactive Inhibit Functions

 

Used in the event of inadvertent restart of a hazardous situation, reactive inhibit functions give personnel the ability to avoid exposure to hazards if they become trapped.

 

The most common example is an escape release function, used in conjunction with an initiation warning system. The interlock must be easily openable from inside the safeguarded space in all modes of operation, even if the power has failed.

 

Operating the interlock with an escape release function must initiate a stop command and unlock the device, allowing personnel to exit.

Examples of Inhibit Functions

Personnel keys

 

Each person takes a personnel key from the interlock into the safeguarded space. While that key is with the person the interlock cannot be reset.

 

Fortress offers several different options to give personal control and reduce risk to personnel entering a safeguarded space, including forced extraction and supplementary solutions (either mechanical or RFID coded).

Interlock Blocking

 

Each person entering the space attaches a personal padlock onto either the interlock or its actuator, securing the interlock in the open position and preventing the reset of the machine until every person has left and removed their personal padlock.

Escape Release

 

The most common example of a reactive inhibit function. An escape release will allow personnel to escape when a reset that has been initiated unintentionally or when they have become trapped in the safeguarded space.

Picture of Stefano Tommasone, PhD

Stefano Tommasone, PhD

Stefano is an experienced writer and editor with a proven track record of creating authoritative, insightful content. As the Content Manager at Fortress Safety since April 2023, he produces high-quality articles, press releases, case studies, and more for both industry experts and wider audiences. With a PhD in Chemistry and a B11 Licensed Machinery Safety Specialist certification, Stefano’s background combines academic training with practical expertise. Known for his attention to detail and technical accuracy, he ensures complex concepts are communicated clearly. Stefano writes on a broad range of topics, consistently delivering content that is precise, accessible, and actionable, earning him a reputation as a trusted authority in his field.

Stefano Tommasone, PhD

Stefano is an experienced writer and editor with a proven track record of creating authoritative, insightful content. As the Content Manager at Fortress Safety since April 2023, he produces high-quality articles, press releases, case studies, and more for both industry experts and wider audiences. With a PhD in Chemistry and a B11 Licensed Machinery Safety Specialist certification, Stefano’s background combines academic training with practical expertise. Known for his attention to detail and technical accuracy, he ensures complex concepts are communicated clearly. Stefano writes on a broad range of topics, consistently delivering content that is precise, accessible, and actionable, earning him a reputation as a trusted authority in his field.

Share this article via:

Share to Teams
Sign Up To Our Newsletter

Receive expert insights, industry updates, and exclusive content straight to your inbox.

Related Articles

Webinar Recap: Enhancing Safety in Automated Storage and Retrieval Systems (ASRS)
Driving Sustainable Change at Fortress
Channel Partner Profile Featuring East Coast Automation
Channel Partner Profile Featuring Deebar

Get started on your custom solution

Our sales team are on hand to help provide the perfect interlock solution for your industry; or, with our product configurator, you fill in a quick form outlining your specific needs, to generate a custom configuration part number.

© Fortress Interlocks 2021. All rights reserved.

Log In to MyFortress

Don’t have an account yet?

© Fortress Interlocks 2024. All rights reserved.

Login to MyFortress

Don’t have an account yet?

© Fortress Interlocks 2021. All rights reserved.

Upcoming Webinar:

Difference Between Proactive and Reactive Inhibit Functions