Static-control project guide
Earthing, bonding and static control for ATEX filling machinery.
Define the product-transfer path, container behaviour, equipment connections, monitoring, interlocks and verification evidence needed for a project-specific static-hazard review.
Scope and safety boundary
This guide supports commercial and engineering scoping. It is not a substitute for a competent DSEAR risk assessment, electrostatic-hazard assessment, hazardous-area classification, installation design, conformity assessment, operating procedure or legal advice. The duty holder and responsible equipment manufacturer retain their respective duties.
Static control starts with the complete product and container path
Electrostatic charge can be generated and transferred through liquid movement, filtration, splashing, contact and separation of materials, container handling and people. The relevant control strategy depends on the real product, transfer rate, equipment, hoses, container material, operating sequence and environment. It should not be reduced to selecting a generic clamp from a list of accessories.
Trace the path from the source vessel through pumps, pipework or hoses, valves and the filling nozzle into the container. Include conveyors, scales, cap handling, operators, cleaning tools, waste or recovery vessels and any temporary connections. Identify which parts are conductive, dissipative or insulating and where an effective conductive path can and cannot be established.
Bonding and earthing are related but distinct project terms.
Bonding connects conductive items so that a hazardous potential difference is less likely to develop between them. Earthing connects the relevant conductive system to earth. The competent assessment should define where those measures are required, how continuity is achieved and what other controls are necessary for insulating materials or processes that cannot be addressed through a simple connection.
Metal, dissipative and insulating containers need different questions
| Container or item | Question for the assessment | Machine-interface information |
|---|---|---|
| Conductive metal drum or can | Is there a reliable conductive path through coatings, liners, paint, wheels, pallets or contact surfaces? | Connection point, clamp or contact arrangement, monitoring requirement, sequence and maintenance access. |
| Dissipative pack or component | What material evidence and complete path support the claimed behaviour under the real conditions? | Approved material, contact arrangement, test basis and limits of intended use. |
| Insulating plastic container | What charge-generation and accumulation mechanisms remain, and which controls are appropriate if the container cannot be effectively earthed? | Pack material and geometry, product properties, fill method, operator and conveyor interfaces, and any specified additional controls. |
| Flexible hose, liner or filter | Does the construction maintain the intended conductive or dissipative path, and what changes after replacement? | Material schedule, end connections, replacement specification, inspection and continuity or condition checks. |
| Operator and mobile equipment | Can people, trolleys, scales or pallets introduce or isolate conductive paths during normal and abnormal work? | Floor and footwear assumptions where relevant, handling sequence, connection order, access and procedural controls. |
Define the connection and permissive sequence
Where the project includes an earthing or bonding connection, specify when it is made, how the correct point is identified, whether the connection is monitored and what prevents product flow before the required condition is satisfied. The sequence should also cover a lost connection during filling, rejected containers, bypass or maintenance modes and the checks required before restart.
A monitoring device is only one part of the control. The specification should identify the items within its scope, the acceptable state, the signal presented to the machine, the fail-safe response, proof-test method and the responsibilities for the final installed earth. Avoid describing a simulated factory connection as proof of the site installation.
Integrate static control with weighing, extraction and line controls
Weigh filling
Hoses, nozzles and connection devices should not impose changing forces on the scale or disturb the container. Agree the connection sequence, tare method and how the pack remains stable while the required control is maintained.
Ventilation and extraction
Static control does not replace control of flammable releases. Extraction or ventilation design, performance and machine permissives should be defined with the area-classification and facility responsibilities.
Line interlocks
For an automatic line, decide whether a failed connection inhibits container entry, filling or the wider sequence, and how accumulation or an open filled pack is handled safely.
Prepare evidence for design review, FAT, SAT and maintenance
| Stage | Useful evidence | Boundary to state |
|---|---|---|
| Design review | Product and container data, path sketch, area classification, control philosophy, connection details, materials and interface register. | Assumptions, competent approvals and site items outside the machinery supply. |
| FAT | Connection sequence, monitoring inputs, permissives, alarm and fault response, software references and agreed proof-test arrangement. | Factory test setup versus the final installed earth, containers and workplace. |
| SAT | Installed connections, site earth and interfaces, final containers, extraction permissives, cause-and-effect tests and operating procedures. | Acceptance responsibility and any specialist measurements or inspections. |
| Routine operation | Pre-use checks, connection condition, alarm response, authorised bypass controls and cleaning restrictions. | Frequency, responsible role and records retained. |
| Inspection and change | Condition checks, continuity or monitor proof tests where specified, replacement-part control and review after product or pack changes. | Competence, acceptance criteria and management-of-change trigger. |
Information to send with a machinery enquiry
- Current SDS, full formulation or the product data available for competent assessment.
- Container material, drawings, coatings or liners, closure and pallet or conveyor arrangement.
- Product source, pump, pipework or hose, filter, recirculation and filling-nozzle arrangement.
- Area-classification drawing and the assumptions relevant to releases and ventilation.
- Existing earthing, bonding, monitoring and site control philosophy.
- Normal production, start-up, stop, fault, cleaning, sampling and maintenance sequences.
- Required machine permissives, alarms, cause-and-effect logic and records for FAT and SAT.
Use official guidance with competent project-specific assessment.
Relevant starting points include the HSE DSEAR overview, HSE guidance on explosive atmospheres and ignition risks, HSE ATEX equipment and zoning guidance and HSE guidance on the safe use and handling of flammable liquids.
Guide FAQs
Questions buyers ask about earthing, bonding and static control.
Is an earthing clamp enough for a flammable-liquid filling machine?
Not by itself. The competent assessment should consider the product, source vessel, transfer path, equipment, container, operator and surrounding conductive or insulating items. A clamp may form one connection within that strategy, but its location, effectiveness, monitoring and maintenance need to be defined for the real operating case.
Can a plastic container be earthed in the same way as a metal drum?
No generic assumption should be made. Conductive metal, dissipative material and insulating plastic behave differently. An arbitrary clamp on insulating plastic does not create a reliable conductive path through the container. The product, pack and filling method require competent static-hazard assessment.
Should filling be interlocked to an earthing monitor?
That decision belongs in the project-specific control strategy. Where monitoring is required, the specification should define what is monitored, the permissive state, the response to a failed connection, bypass controls, proof testing and the checks retained for site acceptance.
What static-control evidence can be checked at FAT?
Factory testing can demonstrate supplied connections, monitoring devices, permissives, alarms and cause-and-effect logic using the agreed test arrangement. It cannot by itself prove the final installed earth, room conditions or every site item, which should be identified for SAT and workplace verification.
Who defines the static-control strategy for an ATEX filling project?
The employer or duty holder should ensure the workplace risks are competently assessed. The machinery supplier can then define the equipment connections, monitoring and interlocks included in the supply against the approved project inputs. Responsibilities and acceptance evidence should be recorded in the interface register.
Does bonding remove every ignition risk from the filling machine?
No. Bonding and earthing address parts of the electrostatic hazard where an effective conductive path can be established. Electrical and non-electrical ignition sources, hot surfaces, friction, impact, ventilation, releases, maintenance and operating procedures also require assessment and control.
Your machine recommendation
Tell us what you need to fill — we’ll recommend the most suitable machine.
Send your product SDS, container details, fill range, target output and any ATEX information. You’ll receive a practical shortlist matched to your application.
☎ 01494 623015✉ sales@lancinguk.comDirect support for new machines, line upgrades and complete filling projects.