Home 
Free Downloads
Free Downloads
Powered Sliding Gates Risk Assessment
BS EN 14121-1 Risk Assessments
Risk Assessment Methodology IOSH Method / RoSPA
Each risk should be assessed individuallyLikelihood of Occurrence (LO)
| 0 | Impossible - cannot happen under any circumstances. |
| 0.1 | Almost inconceivable - possible only under extreme circumstances. |
| 0.5 | Highly unlikely - though conceivable. |
| 1 | Unlikely - but could occur. |
| 2 | Possible - but unusual. |
| 5 | Even chance - could happen. |
| 8 | Probable - not surprised. |
| 10 | Likely - only to be expected. |
| 15 | Certain - no doubt. |
Frequency of Exposure (FE)
| 0.1 | Infrequently |
| 0.2 | Annually |
| 1.0 | Monthly |
| 1.5 | Weekly |
| 2.5 | Daily |
| 4.0 | Hourly |
| 5.0 | Constantly |
Degree of Possible Harm (DPH)
| 0.1 | Scratch / bruise |
| 0.5 | Laceration / mild ill health effect |
| 1 | Break - minor bone or minor illness (temporary) |
| 2 | Break - major bone or minor illness (permanent) |
| 4 | Loss of 1 limb / eye or serious illness (temporary) |
| 8 | Loss of 2 limbs / eyes or serious illness (permanent) |
| 15 | Fatality |
Number of Persons at risk (NP)
| 1 | 1-2 persons. |
| 2 | 3-7 persons. |
| 4 | 8-15 persons. |
| 8 | 16-50 persons. |
| 15 | More than 50 persons |
Calculate the HRN
HRN = LO x FE x DPH x NPScore Chart
| HRN | Degree of Risk (DOR) |
| 0-1 | Negligible Risk. |
| 1-5 | Very Low Risk. |
| 5-10 | Low Risk. |
| 10-50 | Significant Risk. |
| 50-100 | High Risk. |
| 100-500 | Very High Risk. |
| 500-1000 | Extreme Risk. |
| Over 1000 | Unacceptable Risk. |
Example risk assessment
What follows is a typical example of a risk assessment undertaken on a single-leaf powered sliding gate with vertical bar infill, installed on a busy industrial estate with frequent vehicle use. Each potential hazard should be assessed individually because the construction, location and number of people at risk will vary; this in turn will have an effect on the Hazard Rating Number (HRN). Once the HRN has been calculated the appropriate control measures should be put in place and the hazard re-assessed using the same method. The outcome should be that the proposed control measures for each identified hazard result in a residual Degree of Risk (DOR) that is as low as reasonably practicable (ie the money, time or trouble required to reduce the risk any further would be grossly disproportionate to the risk reduction achieved).Important Note: The hazards identified below are typical examples only and not exhaustive. A site-specific risk assessment should be undertaken in order to identify hazards specific to the site and the particular gate design being assessed, as well as any further residual hazards.
| Powered sliding gate risk assessment |
| Customer: |
| Site Location: |
| Order Number: |
| Date of Assessment: Assessed by: |
Risk Assessment Number 1 |
| Possibility of injury due to a person getting crushed between the leading edge of the moving gate leaf (while closing) and the fixed adjacent support structure. |
| LO FE DPH NP HRN DOR |
| 5.0 5.0 15 1 375 Very High Risk |
Recommended Control Measures |
| Control Measure 1, install two photocell beams, one either side of gate opening, to detect any movement. |
| In accordance with BS EN ISO 13855, activation of either of these beams will cause the gate to stop and retract. |
| Control measure 2, install two electronic safe edges to the fixed support structure to prevent any possibility of entrapment in accordance with BS EN 13849-1, in the event that the photocell beams are not activated. When the safe-edges are activated, they will stop the gate leaf. |
| Control measure 3, where the gate power source is fitted a with a force limitation device, measure the closing force in accordance with BS EN 12445 and adjust the force accordingly |
| Control Measure 4, install visual activation flashing warning light |
| Control Measure 5, install a separate pedestrian access gate |
| LO FE DPH NP HRN DOR |
| 0.1 5.0 15.0 1 7.5 Low Risk |
| Customer: |
| Site Location: |
| Order Number: |
| Date of Assessment: |
Risk Assessment Number 2 |
| Possibility of entrapment/crushing to a person while the gate is opening, between the gaps in the vertical rails and the fixed gate support structure, |
| LO FE DPH NP HRN DOR |
| 5.0 4.0 15 1 300 Very High Risk |
Recommended Control Measures |
| Control Measure 1, install two photocell beams (as Risk assessment No 1) either side of gate opening to detect any movement, In accordance with BS EN ISO 13855, activation of these beams will cause the gate to stop and retract. |
| Control measure 2, install further two electronic safe edges to the fixed gate support structure to prevent the possibility of entrapment/crushing in accordance with BS EN 13849-1, in the event that the photocell beams are not activated. When the safe-edges are activated, they will stop and reverse the gate leaf |
| Control measure 3, where the gate power source is fitted with a force limitation device, measures the closing force in accordance with BS EN 12445 and adjust the force accordingly (as Risk Assessment No 1) |
| Control Measure 4, install a visual activation flashing warning light (as Risk Assessment No 1) |
| LO FE DPH NP HRN DOR |
| 0.1 5.0 15 1.0 7.5 low Risk |
| Customer: |
| Site Location: |
| Order Number: |
| Date of Assessment: |
Risk Assessment Number 3 |
| Possibility of entrapment/crushing to a person to the rear of the moving gate, the hazard is present between the gate leaf and the fixed adjacent wall/fence when the gate is opening and also between the fixed gate support framework when the rear section of the door is closing |
| LO FE DPH NP HRN DOR |
| 2.0 5.0 15 1 150 Very High Risk |
Recommended Control Measures |
| Control measure 1, install a perimeter guard fence around the area into which the gate leaf retracts, in accordance with BS EN ISO 13857 |
| Control Measure 2, install a visual activation flashing warning light (as Risk Assessment No 1) |
| LO FE DPH NP HRN DOR |
| 0.1 0.1 15 1 0.15 Negligible Risk |
| Customer: |
| Site Location: |
| Order Number: |
| Date of Assessment: |
Risk Assessment Number 4 |
| For "Track Guided Gates" there is a possible pedestrian trip hazard on the exposed floor- mounted wheel guide |
| LO FE DPH NP HRN DOR |
| 8.0 5.0 1 1 40 Significant risk |
Recommended Control Measures |
| Control measure 1, reduce the height of the hazard as far as reasonably practicable |
| Control measure 2, add signage to indicate "not for pedestrian access/use" |
| Control measure 3, introduce a personal access gate |
| LO FE DPH NP HRN DOR |
| 1 5.0 1 1 5 Very Low Risk |
| Customer: |
| Site Location: |
| Order Number: |
| Date of Assessment: |
Risk Assessment Number 5 |
| For "Track Guided Gates" there is a potential nip/entrapment point between the floor-mounted guide track and the leading edge of the gate leaf wheel |
| LO FE DPH NP HRN DOR |
| 1.0 5.0 1 1 5 Low Risk |
Recommended Control Measures |
| Control measure 1, install a local guard around the exposed wheel in accordance with BS EN 953 and BS EN iso 13857 |
| Control Measure 2, install a visual activation flashing warning light (as Risk Assessment No 1) |
| LO FE DPH NP HRN DOR |
| 1.0 0.2 1 1 0,1 Negligible risk |
| Customer: |
| Site Location: |
| Order Number: |
| Date of Assessment: |
Risk Assessment Number 6 |
| Nip/entrapment point between the upper and lower carriage and guide wheels |
| LO FE DPH NP HRN DOR |
| 2.0 5.0 15 1 150 Very High Risk |
Recommended Control Measures |
| Control Measure 1, install local guards or enclose the area around the exposed wheels in accordance with BS EN 953 and BS EN ISO 13857 |
| Control Measure 2, install a visual activation flashing warning light (as Risk Assessment No 1) |
| LO FE DPH NP HRN DOR |
| 0.1 0.1 15 1 0.15 Negligible Risk |
| Customer: |
| Site Location: |
| Order Number: |
| Date of Assessment: |
Risk Assessment Number 7 |
| Possibility of electrocution from the power source to and from the drive motor and safety devices |
| LO FE DPH NP HRN DOR |
| 1.0 5.0 15.0 1 75 High Risk |
| Recommended Control Measure |
| Control Measure: Use CE marked components and materials in accordance with the Low Voltage Directive (2006/95/CE) |
| LO FE DPH NP HRN DOR |
| 0.1 5.0 15 1 7.5 Low Risk |
