Activity 002: Pre-Cut Safety Inspection & Risk Assessment¶
Activity ID: U5M4-ACT-002 Duration: 30 minutes Objective: Students will perform a complete pre-cut safety inspection of the plasma cutting area, identify hazards, and complete a written risk assessment for a given cutting scenario. Group Size: 2-3 students
Overview¶
The instructor will intentionally introduce 8-10 safety hazards into the plasma cutting area. Students must identify all hazards, assess their risk level, and prescribe corrective actions. This trains the observational skills needed for the pre-cut safety check that must be performed before every cutting session.
Materials & Equipment Needed¶
- CNC plasma table area (machine powered off)
- Intentionally placed hazards (instructor sets up before class):
- Cardboard box within 15 feet of the table
- Solvent can (empty, labeled) within 20 feet
- Frayed cable on the plasma cutter (simulated with tape marking)
- Missing shield cup from the torch
- Water table at incorrect level (too low)
- Work clamp disconnected and placed on the table frame (not workpiece)
- Safety glasses left on the table bed (loose item in cutting zone)
- Fire extinguisher moved to 30+ feet away (behind a barrier)
- Welding screen folded/collapsed (not deployed)
- A polyester jacket draped over a chair in the cutting area
- Hazard identification worksheet
- Risk assessment matrix (provided)
- Pens/clipboards
Instructions & Procedure¶
Phase 1: Hazard Identification (12 minutes) 1. Each group receives a blank hazard identification worksheet 2. Groups walk through the plasma cutting area and systematically inspect: - The machine and all connections - The cutting surface and water table - The surrounding area (35-foot radius) - Emergency equipment locations and accessibility - PPE availability - Environmental conditions (ventilation, lighting) 3. Record each identified hazard with: - Location - Description - Hazard category (electrical, thermal, radiation, respiratory, mechanical) - Severity (minor, moderate, serious, critical, fatal)
Phase 2: Risk Assessment (10 minutes) Using the provided risk assessment matrix, evaluate each hazard:
| Likelihood | Consequence: Minor | Moderate | Serious | Critical |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Very Likely | Medium | High | Very High | Extreme |
| Likely | Low | Medium | High | Very High |
| Possible | Low | Medium | Medium | High |
| Unlikely | Negligible | Low | Medium | Medium |
For each identified hazard: 1. Rate the likelihood (if cutting were to proceed without correction) 2. Rate the potential consequence 3. Determine the risk level from the matrix 4. Prescribe a corrective action 5. Determine if the corrective action can be taken immediately or requires external support
Phase 3: Presentation & Debrief (8 minutes) 1. Each group presents their findings (2 minutes each) 2. Instructor reveals the complete list of planted hazards 3. Groups compare — did any group catch all of them? Which were most commonly missed? 4. Discuss: Which hazard had the highest risk rating? Which could cause the most severe injury? 5. Key question: "Would you start cutting with ANY of these hazards uncorrected?" (Answer must be NO)
Discussion Points¶
- Which hazard category was most commonly found? Which was easiest to miss?
- How does the 35-foot radius requirement change your inspection scope?
- In a real scenario, what would you do if you identified a hazard you could not correct yourself?
- Why is a systematic inspection (start at machine, work outward) better than a random walk-around?
Expected Outcomes¶
- Students identify at least 8 of 10 planted hazards
- Students correctly categorize hazards by type and severity
- Students understand that ALL hazards must be corrected before cutting begins
- Students develop the habit of systematic pre-cut inspection
Assessment Rubric¶
| Criteria | Excellent (4) | Proficient (3) | Developing (2) | Beginning (1) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hazard Detection | 9-10 hazards found | 7-8 hazards found | 5-6 hazards found | Fewer than 5 found |
| Risk Assessment | All ratings justified and accurate | Most ratings accurate | Some ratings correct | Cannot apply risk matrix |
| Corrective Actions | Specific, actionable, and prioritized | Reasonable actions for most hazards | Vague or incomplete actions | No viable corrective actions |
| Systematic Approach | Organized, thorough inspection pattern | Good coverage with minor gaps | Random, incomplete coverage | No systematic approach |
Safety Considerations¶
- Machine must be powered off and locked out throughout the entire activity
- The "frayed cable" hazard should be SIMULATED (marked with colored tape) — do not actually damage cables
- The solvent can must be empty and clean — no actual flammable contents
- Remind students this is an inspection exercise — do not handle or attempt to fix electrical hazards
- At the end of the activity, the instructor must restore all items to their correct positions and verify the area is properly set up
Last Updated: 2026-03-19