Scoping tool

Maintenance Access Matrix

Guards get defeated for one reason: someone has a job to do and the guard is between them and it. Every task you list here is a door, a panel or a lift-off section that either exists in the design or gets created later with an angle grinder. Map them before layout is frozen — it costs nothing now and a great deal afterwards.

Setup

$
Build this number if you don't have it.

Maintenance tasks

no tasks yet

Why this predicts bypass

Each task gets a friction score from how often it happens and how hard the guard makes it. A quarterly task behind a bolted panel is fine. A twice-a-shift task behind the same panel is a guard that will be left off by the end of the month — and at that point you have no guard, no interlock, and a documented control that inspection will assume is working.

Access methodFrictionWhat actually happens over time
No access provision — guard must be unbolted or cut5Gets modified on the floor. Usually permanently.
Remove bolted panel or guard section4Panel ends up leaning against the wall next to the machine.
Lift-off or drop-in panel3Workable if it's light and there's somewhere to put it.
Hinged or sliding door, no interlock2Fine — but confirm no interlock is genuinely correct.
Interlocked door1The interlock gets defeated only if the stop costs more than the risk feels like.
Reach-through port or external service point0Best case — the guard never opens at all.

Limits

This tool structures maintenance access requirements and highlights where guard design and maintenance practice are likely to conflict. It is not a risk assessment, does not determine interlock type or required safety performance level, and does not replace lockout/tagout procedure design. Any task requiring access to a hazard while equipment is energised needs review by a competent person.

Bypass risk
add tasks to assess

Access requirements

Add tasks to derive the openings you need.

Annual cost of access

production time spent getting into the machine
Carry into a project brief →