Reflective Safety Glasses

[JohnBoucher]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

This isn't an unusual restriction. Every industrial workplace I've visited has had the same restriction. Mirrored and tinted safety glasses are designed for outdoor use, not indoors.

This. Enough said.

Also you could blame us for this

[Phyrxes]

I am assuming that Lockheed Martin mailed every team they sponsored 30 pairs of blue tinted safety glasses again this year. A number of safety advisors asked about them but it was nothing more than an inquiry. Several students including our driver prefer clear lenses anyway.

[Bob Steele]

Originally Posted by Phyrxes

I am assuming that Lockheed Martin mailed every team they sponsored 30 pairs of blue tinted safety glasses again this year. A number of safety advisors asked about them but it was nothing more than an inquiry. Several students including our driver prefer clear lenses anyway.

We are also Lockheed sponsored and we got the same glasses.

FRC's guidelines on the matter:

Quote:
Wear ANSI-approved, UL Listed, or CSA rated non-shaded safety glasses. Lightly tinted Rose, Blue, Amber tints are FIRST approved, but reflective lenses are not (eyes must be clearly visible to others).

Blue tinted are FIRST approved...this should not be a problem

[Tristan Lall]

Originally Posted by Cynette

Story aside, as an auditor and implementer of international standards, I always have a problem when "guides" become "rules." Guides are suggestions, recommendations, best practices, encouragements, good ideas. Rules are rules, requirements, shalls, must dos (or must not dos) as the case may be.

This is the purpose of the FIRST Safety Manual:

This safety manual is an easy-to-use guide for important safety information and provides FRC participants with a basic set of requirements to maintain a safe environment during the build season and at competition events.

Which is it? A Guide or Requirements?

I was pressing this point recently: the competition manual says that "[p]articipants and team mentors must review the FIRST safety policies and the FIRST Safety Manual..." and "[e]very team should know, understand and follow the safety rules found in the FIRST Safety Manual" (emphasis added). Apparently, the first quoted sentence is a requirement and the second quoted sentence is a recommendation.

That leads me to believe that the safety manual is intended as a set of recommendations rather than requirements.¹ Note that elsewhere in the competition manual, FIRST has certain explicit safety requirements that are independent of the safety manual. I consider this distinction to be perfectly reasonable: there are some safety-related things which FIRST might like (for entirely valid reasons) which are infeasible to demand, and there are some safety-related things which need to be demanded in order to promote an acceptable level of risk.

By the same token, I realize that event staff have the power and duty to make the competition reasonably safe, and that if they choose to implement the safety manual recommendations, they may be justified in doing so. In that case, they need to realize that they are acting on their own initiative, rather than implementing a mandatory FIRST directive.

¹ I realize that given the conflicting use of terms, that this could be interpreted in other ways. I think this one is the most reasonable, given the text and its source (the competition manual), but this isn't a case where the proper interpretation is necessarily obvious.

[Peter Matteson]

Originally Posted by sanddrag

Could it be that they don't want to confuse them with non-rated sunglasses? If you let it go tinted and/or reflective, then people could wear sunglasses and claim they are safety glasses, and it would result in a lot of debate. Just a thought.

I see so many unrated glasses at events that I stopped even commenting. The worst offenders are those that wear regular non-safety rated perscription glasses with flimsy plastic sides shields. I see them at every event and they do not adequetely prevent debris from getting to the eyes.

For that matter when grinding you should be wearing glasses and a face shield or goggles that seal tightly to the face. NO ONE FOLLOWS THIS AT EVENTS!

Originally Posted by Qbot2640

What if...hypothetically, of course, a team's Human Player used reflective safety glasses to protect his (or her) eyes from the bright vision tracking light?

Then said tracking light is a safety hazard and should not get through inspection because everyone else in the building is dealing with it.

Originally Posted by Matt_Boehm_329

I use Oakley flak jackets as my safety glasses. Originally I was using tinted because that is what they come with but after someone pointing it out at a regional I have since bought new clear lenses. Is ANSI Z87.1 good enough?

I wear Oakley Radars with a clear lens occansionallyto the shop and evants, I originally got an array of lenses for biking, all Oakley lenses meet or exceed all safety requirements for ANSI impact testing, but only the "sports" glasses typically meet the side shield requirements.

[goofy173]

My understanding as a mentor is to prepare these teens to what it's like in the real world. No place I've worked that require safety glass would allow anything other than #1 tint.

Also, when purchasing prescription safety glasses, you cannot get anything other than #1 tint. When I replace my last set of glasses, I asked to have the old pair tinted darker for sunglasses, like I did a few years ago with my non-safety glasses, and because of liability, they would not do it.

[goofy173]

Originally Posted by cadandcookies

Plus, in my experience, kids like to wear safety glasses that look cool over safety glasses that look "normal."

Cool is irrelevant. Decorate your robot, but safety is safety. For the same reason factories don't allow tinted safety glasses, FIRST doesn't allow them.

Part of my mentor training was to teach these students what they will see in an actual machine shop environment. Sometimes things suck, like real life.

Safety rules are not ambiguous.

[goofy173]

Originally Posted by Andrew Remmers

I was bothered in the sense that the Safety Judges/Competition personnel actually didn't enforce this among everyone who attended the event, volunteer, or spectator.

There's a phrase for that: Real life.

If you've worked in the real world for any amount of time, fair is not a word that is often used or enforced.
27 years in industrial/factory maintenance, and I've never been hurt other than a scratch, and I've never seen ridiculous safety rules.

[Nirvash]

Originally Posted by goofy173

There's a phrase for that: Real life.

If you've worked in the real world for any amount of time, fair is not a word that is often used or enforced.
27 years in industrial/factory maintenance, and I've never been hurt other than a scratch, and I've never seen ridiculous safety rules.

So when we see a superior blatantly breaking written safety rules, we should just shrug and look the other way because that is life?

[FrankJ]

Originally Posted by Nirvash

So when we see a superior blatantly breaking written safety rules, we should just shrug and look the other way because that is life?

Much depends on degree. You see someone playing with light sabers in the pits, do something right now. Some one walking around with tinted glasses, roll yours eyes.

[Bryan Herbst]

Originally Posted by Andrew Remmers

My problem with this rule is not more so the fact that you can't have them. My problem the fact that I have actually been to an event where I was told to remove the glasses I had (understandable, but I grabbed what I could), then the Head Ref at said event was wearing heavily tinted glasses.

I was bothered in the sense that the Safety Judges/Competition personnel actually didn't enforce this among everyone who attended the event, volunteer, or spectator.

While it is unfortunate that the rule doesn't seem to be enforced equally across all those at an event, I doubt that it is in any way a conspiracy or a conscious effort to let some people break the rule.

At most events I've been to, the safety advisors rarely make it out to the field. This makes sense, as the pits are a far more dangerous environment than the field. The field is also very closely monitored by many of FIRST's best trained volunteers, so they don't require supervision by a safety advisor to remain safe for those nearby.

Secondly, the description of the Safety Advisor role puts a lot of emphasis on coaching teams in proper safety procedures. While volunteers should not be and are not exempt from safety rules, the general assumption is that volunteers are aware of them and follow them.

If you do see volunteers violating the safety rules and guidelines, then you should either politely inform the volunteer or tell a safety advisor to do so if you do not feel comfortable approaching the volunteer.

[kmusa]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

This isn't an unusual restriction. Every industrial workplace I've visited has had the same restriction. Mirrored and tinted safety glasses are designed for outdoor use, not indoors.

In spite of the fact that FIRST explicitly allows lightly tinted Yellow, Rose, Blue, and Amber tints, the generalization, mentioned several times, that tinted glasses are only for outdoor use is too broad.

It is typically the colors listed that are used for contrast enhancement, color correction, and/or glare reduction in an indoor setting as well.

Adding gray to the list would be useful - UVEX, for instance, has a gray lens that still allows 80% of visible light to pass, while reducing the amount of transmitted IR.

[dtengineering]

Originally Posted by Nirvash

So when we see a superior blatantly breaking written safety rules, we should just shrug and look the other way because that is life?

Recently at a FIRSTWA district event our judging team approached a pit area to ask questions about the team's robot. The team safety captain politely stopped us before we got there, "We'd be happy to answer your questions, but first I'm going to have to ask you to put on your safety glasses, sir." she said to one of the judges who, although wearing prescription glasses had forgotten his over-glasses in the judging room.

We were more than happy to wait and talk with the team while he went and got his safety glasses and the discussion carried on from there.

Moral of the story: the student spoke up to a judge, politely but firmly insisted that he get his glasses, the team got additional time talking to the judging team, the judging team went away impressed with both the robot and the team's professionalism, and afterwards I went and tracked down a safety advisor to put in a good word for the team.

So, no. While there are times in life when it appropriate to keep your mouth shut, at an FRC event you should always -- politely -- feel free to advocate for FRC principles. If you see someone with inappropriate safety glasses, you can politely mention it to them, offer to loan them a pair of approved glasses, or -- if you are uncomfortable with that -- bring it to the attention of a safety advisor. If that upsets anyone, it's them that is doing it wrong... not you.

Jason

[goofy173]

Originally Posted by Nirvash

So when we see a superior blatantly breaking written safety rules, we should just shrug and look the other way because that is life?

You should notify a mentor and let them deal with it, just as in real life, you report safety violations to your boss, manager, supervisor.