HSE information sheet

Control of noise at power presses

Engineering Sheet No 29

Introduction improvements quickly, ie in a few weeks; others may take

longer. What is important is that there is a realistic and
This Information Sheet is to help managers to effective plan to deal with the known problems; that the
understand how noise exposure may be reduced in plan is followed, and that where necessary suitable
press shops. It should be read in conjunction with hearing protection is provided and used in the meantime.
Engineering Information Sheet EIS261 which gives more It will rarely be possible to control noise completely by
background information. means of a single control measure. Just as total noise
exposure is often the cumulative effect of many noise
Most press users are likely to need specialist advice sources, satisfactory noise reduction may depend on the
before attempting to implement noise reduction measures cumulative effects of a number of separate control
in press shops. This advice may be available from press measures. Do not under-estimate the effect of an
suppliers, trade associations or noise consultants. 2 apparently small noise reduction. It is often not
appreciated that the decibel scale is logarithmic and
The problem that a reduction of ‘only’ 3dB(A) halves the noise energy.
Power presses are inherently noisy, and numbers of It may not be reasonably practicable to reduce noise in
them are often used in a press shop at the same time, many press shops to levels where hearing protection is
all contributing to a cumulative noise exposure for no longer required, but all noise reduction measures will
operators and for nearby workers. Noise levels as high help to reduce the overall risk of hearing damage.
as 95-115 dB(A) are typical in many press shops.
New presses
The potential for hearing loss is well known. Some press
users have taken some steps to reduce noise at source, The Noise at Work Regulations3 require suppliers to
but many have not taken all reasonably practicable provide noise test data for power presses unless a
measures and still rely too heavily on the use of hearing particular machine is unlikely to cause noise exposures
protection by employees. of 85dB(A) or more.

A control strategy The Supply of Machinery (Safety) Regulations4 require

noise emission data to be provided where the equivalent
The Noise at Work Regulations3 require noise continuous A-weighted sound pressure level at
assessments to be made if noise levels exceed a daily workstations exceeds 70dB(A). They also require that
personal noise exposure (LEP,d) of 85dB(A), and noise machinery be so designed and constructed that risks
reduction measures to be taken where these are resulting from emission of airborne noise are reduced to the
reasonably practicable. The use of ear protectors is a lowest level, taking account of technical progress and the
last resort where control at source is not reasonably available means of reducing noise, in particular at source.
practicable, or may be a temporary measure to be used
until controls can be implemented. Users considering buying new presses are advised to
ensure that adequate data and noise reduction
The key to understanding whether there is a problem is measures are included with any new power presses
the noise assessment - see EIS 26.1 The assessment offered for sale. Care is needed in interpreting noise
should be more than a series of noise measurements. It emission data because standard test conditions may be
should give clear recommendations on what needs to be very different from actual conditions of use, which
done to comply fully with the Noise at Work Regulations. themselves may be very variable. Further information on
In particular, it should either give clear recommendations noise reduction at new power presses can be found in
on what measures can be taken to control noise, BS EN 692:1997.5
including control at source, or should indicate where
such help is available. Where noise comes from a range Control measures
of sources, as will normally be the case in press shops,
the assessment should suggest priorities. The information which follows is not a design guide but
is intended to give press shop managers an outline of
On the basis of the assessment, managers should the main noise reduction measures they may need to
produce an implementation plan to tackle the problems consider. Not all of these measures will necessarily be
identified. It may be reasonably practicable to make some appropriate at every press or in every press shop.
Information has been included on case studies and Transmission of noise
sources of further information.6,7
The flywheels of power presses radiate noise due to
The sources of power press noise identified by a good vibrations caused both by the operation of the clutch and
assessment are likely to be either pneumatic or mechanical: by the impact of the tooling. Analysis of the vibration
patterns and modes of vibration can allow dynamic
● pneumatic: compressed air is used in many
absorbers to be designed to bond to the flywheel.
presses, either for the control system, or for
ejecting parts from the tools or both;
Case study
● mechanical: from the press action itself,
One case study reports an overall noise reduction of 10dB(A)
ie tool/workpiece interaction; clutch/gear/flywheel
(Ref 7, page 55).
mechanisms; and from workpiece impacts with
discharge chutes, collection bins etc.
A sheet of metal with felt padding bolted to the outside
Technical measures surface of a flywheel, like a finger touching a bell to damp
down its ringing, may have a similar effect and an acoustic
Various technical measures may be taken to reduce cover around the flywheel and gear wheel can further
noise from these sources. reduce noise from this source.

Pneumatic exhausts The transmission of mechanical vibration from a press

frame through its supporting legs may result in noise
Pneumatic exhausts should either be ducted away from radiating from the legs and floor. Suitable anti-vibration
work positions or fitted with silencers. Care needs to be mounts fitted between the press base and the floor may
taken to ensure that excessive back pressures do not reduce this problem.
adversely affect operating cycle times or control
Case study
systems, particularly those operating press guards.
In one published example, a noise reduction of 9dB(A) was
achieved by this method, along with the application of self-
Workpiece air ejection nozzles
adhesive damping sheet to the sheet metal surfaces of the
press guards which were also radiating noise (Ref 7, page 61).
Noise from ejection air jets can be reduced by any of the
following measures or by a combination of them:
Tool design
● change a continuous jet to an intermittent supply;
● fit acoustic quiet nozzles; It has been found that including a shear or skew cut in
● reduce the duration of the jet; blanking tools (a technique adopted for extending the
● reduce the air pressure. work range of a power press) can also reduce noise.

These measures should also result in savings of

Case study
compressed air. In one example, stamping 16-inch diameter blanks from 2mm
Case studies thick aluminium sheet using tools modified in this way
produced an 8-10dB(A) noise reduction (Ref 6, page 18).
● A combination of the first two measures above, in one
instance, reduced noise levels from 99 to 93dB(A) (Ref 6,
page 45). Press enclosure
● In another example noise levels were reduced from 97 to
90dB(A) by reducing air pressure from 80 to 20psi (Ref 6, The provision of acoustic enclosures on hand-fed and
page 28). automatic, strip-fed presses will significantly reduce noise
emission levels in many instances. Partial acoustic
Machine design enclosures closely fitted around the tools or an existing
guard modified to act as a partial acoustic enclosure may
A good noise assessment will have identified which parts also offer significant noise reduction. In other circumstances
of each press are generating noise. Discussion with press it may be appropriate to provide an acoustic enclosure
suppliers may reveal modifications which can be made. around a complete press or whole press line.

Case study An existing guard could be modified to act as a partial

In one instance involving a multi-stage transfer press, acoustic enclosure by covering the guard panels with a lead
redesigning a cam system and replacing straight spur gears sheet sandwiched between acoustically absorbent foam,
on the main drive train with helical toothed gears produced a inserting polycarbonate windows where necessary. Such
noise reduction of about 10dB(A) and improved the output of acoustic panels are quite easy to fix using plastic band fixing
the press (Ref 7, page 70). strips, making sure that all gaps are sealed. Low voltage
lighting could be fitted inside the guard to increase visibility.
 Case studies Discharge chutes and collection bins
● In one example, enclosing four lines, each of three
presses, with acoustic enclosures having full-length access Press components are often discharged automatically or
doors, visual inspection panels, internal lighting and dropped manually into metal bins, often via metal
integral ventilation reduced noise levels from 95-108dB(A) chutes. Metal to metal impacts often contribute
to 70-80dB(A) at various operating positions, (Ref 6, page 73). significantly to noise exposures. Bins and chutes can be
● In another, acoustic treatment of existing guard enclosures
lined with suitable resilient material like rubber, pvc etc
on multi-stage, high-speed transfer presses produced noise of appropriate hardness; the under or outsides can be
reductions of up to 11dB(A) per press (Ref 7, page 60). coated with sound-deadening compound. Alternatively,
● In a third example, noise levels from 30-ton power presses
acoustic enclosures can be provided around bins.
blanking from continuous strip were reduced from 105 to
84dB(A) by a combination of measures which included Case study
close-fitting acoustic enclosures around the tools (Ref 6, Examples from other machine tools in Ref 6, page 36 and
page 28). Ref 7, page 71 gave noise reductions of 5-10 and about
15dB(A) respectively, and the principles described would be
adaptable to many press shop applications.
Enclosures made by suspending strips of appropriate
flexible PVC have been used around individual presses
to reduce noise. Press maintenance

Case studies Virtually all machinery can be expected to work better,

● Noise reductions of 10dB(A) in two cases and 12-16dB(A)
and often more quietly, if it is properly maintained.
in a third have been achieved in specific examples (Ref 6,
page 75; Ref 7, page 59; and Ref 6, page 74 respectively). Case study
A study of a particular 20-ton press piercing aluminium plate
showed that noise reductions at the operator position of
Absorption panels between 7 and 16dB(A) were achieved (depending on plate
thickness and tool conditions) after the press was refurbished
In many press shops, most of the noise to which with new bearing shells, properly adjusted slide bearings and
operators are exposed radiates directly from the nearest oil flood lubrication. The refurbishment also restored the press
presses, but reflected noise from walls and ceilings can to its original rated tonnage from the 60% it had been
contribute to total noise and may sometimes be particularly achieving (Ref 6, page 20)
significant. Sound absorbing panels suspended from
ceilings, fitted as wall linings or provided as mobile screens
may reduce noise exposures. Depending on the area to
be treated, the expense of this type of control measure
means that careful thought has to be given to its suitability
(ie cost versus benefit) and correct installation.

Case study
In one example, 1400 absorbers suspended from a press
shop ceiling produced an overall noise reduction of 4dB(A).
(Ref 7, page 58). In another case, similar treatment gave
5-6dB(A) reduction (Ref 6, page 52).
 References

1 Noise in engineering EIS 26 * and Reducing noise

at work: Guidance on the Noise at Work Regulations
FRONT
1989 L108 HSE Books 1998 ISBN 0 7176 1511 1
Pneumatic 'hold close' bolt
2 Selecting a health and safety consultant INDG 133 *
Ejector control
(open door 'off')
Flywheel and gears 3 Introducing the Noise at Work Regulations
Acoustic panel severed by damped INDG75 * (single copies free; ISBN 0 7176 0961 for
and isolated guard
priced pack of 15 copies)
Low voltage light

Pneumatic 4 Supplying new machinery INDG270 1998 *; and

silencers
Product standards: machinery. Guidance notes on UK
Interlocked guard
regulations DTI May 1995 (available free of charge by
Combined isolated
enclosure and guard
calling the DTI Hotline 0117 944 4888)
Operator’s control panel
5 Mechanical presses - safety BS EN 692: 1997
‘Quiet’ bin, lined and
damped to control
impact noise 6 100 practical applications of noise reduction
Silenced ejector
nozzle methods HSE Books 1983 ISBN 0 11 883691 9 (out of
print; photocopies of the case studies quoted are
Enclosure around bin available from HSE’s Engineering National Interest
Areas that could be treated
Group [Tel 0121 607 6317])
to reduce noise
7 Sound solutions: techniques to reduce noise at
work HSG138 HSE Books 1995 ISBN 0 7176 0791 7

* HSE free leaflet

Typical noise sources on a press and some forms of treatment combined with a
safety guard
Further information

The future availability and accuracy of the publications

REAR listed in this leaflet cannot be guaranteed.

Partial acoustic panel

HSE priced and free publications are available by mail
order from: HSE Books, PO Box 1999, Sudbury, Suffolk,
CO10 6FS Tel 01787 881165 Fax 01787 313995.

HSE priced publications are also available from good

Operator’s booksellers.
Pneumatic
silencers control panel
For other enquiries ring HSE’s Infoline, Tel: 0541 545500
or write to HSE’s Information Centre, Broad Lane,
Sheffield S3 7HQ.

HSE home page on the World Wide Web:

http://www.open.gov.uk/hse/hsehome.htm
Acoustic panel

This leaflet contains notes on good practice which are

not compulsory but which you may find helpful in
considering what you need to do.

This publication may be freely reproduced, except for

advertising, endorsement or commercial purposes. The
Areas that could be treated information it contains is current at 6/98. Please
to reduce noise acknowledge the source as HSE.

Printed and published by the Health and Safety Executive 6/98 EIS29 C150