-300x300.jpg&w=48&q=75){kind=small}
Author: Veress Árpád · Explosion-protection expertDAILY Ex - 12 OCTOBER 2026
Today's focus: Ex modifications, autonomous robotics and the responsibility to maintain protection throughout the equipment lifecycle. This morning's strongest verified developments concern the October HazardEx technical issue, the growing use of robotics in hazardous areas, and upcoming European discussions on competence, electrostatics and inspection close-out. No new major industrial explosion with sufficiently verified details was identified in the initial search. Rather than present an unconfirmed incident, today's edition includes a documented historical lesson.
⚡ DAILY Ex - 12 OCTOBER 2026
Explosion Protection | Operational Ex | Global Watch
Today's focus: Ex modifications, autonomous robotics and the responsibility to maintain protection throughout the equipment lifecycle.
This morning's strongest verified developments concern the October HazardEx technical issue, the growing use of robotics in hazardous areas, and upcoming European discussions on competence, electrostatics and inspection close-out.
No new major industrial explosion with sufficiently verified details was identified in the initial search. Rather than present an unconfirmed incident, today's edition includes a documented historical lesson.
▶️ 1. Ex EQUIPMENT MODIFICATIONS - A NEW TECHNICAL DISCUSSION
CURRENT PUBLICATION | October 2026
The October edition of HazardEx includes an article by Dr Martin Thedens, Chair of IEC TC 31 and a department head at Germany's PTB, examining modifications to Ex equipment.
The discussion highlights the importance of maintaining the Verification Dossier and performing appropriate initial inspection following modifications.
Why it matters operationally
An Ex-certified product can be modified without anybody recognising that its assessed configuration has changed.
The question is not simply whether the modified equipment still works.
It is whether the change affects the explosion-protection concept, certification conditions or installation requirements.
Head of Operations action: Require a documented Ex impact assessment before returning modified equipment to service.
▶️ 2. AUTONOMOUS ROBOTS - WHO OWNS Ex INTEGRITY?
CURRENT TECHNOLOGY DISCUSSION | October 2026
The same HazardEx edition examines hazardous-area robotics from several perspectives.
GEROTTO discusses robotic tank cleaning and sludge removal. ExRobotics examines autonomous inspection on offshore platforms, including certification, charging, navigation and remote supervision.
These are relevant developments for reducing human exposure to hazardous environments.
But replacing human entry with a robot does not eliminate explosion-protection responsibilities.
Operational questions:
Can the robot operate in the actual classified area? Is its complete configuration suitable? What happens if communications fail? Where is charging permitted? Who approves software, battery or accessory changes?
Why it matters: An Ex-certified robot must still be integrated into a safe operating system.
▶️ 3. UK - FAKE CERTIFICATES AND INSPECTION CLOSE-OUT
UPCOMING EVENT | 21 October 2026
The HazardEx regional conference in Great Yarmouth will address counterfeit Ex certificates and equipment, manufacturing competence, electrostatic ignition risks and a particularly practical subject:
“Hazardous-area inspections - What happens after the report?”
This is exactly where Operational Ex becomes a management issue.
Finding a defect does not restore equipment integrity.
Finding → assessment → priority → owner → corrective action → verification → closure.
A certificate should also be verified through the relevant issuing body or certification database, not accepted solely because a PDF appears authentic.
▶️ 4. SINGAPORE - AI ENTERS EXPLOSION-PROTECTION MANAGEMENT
UPCOMING RESEARCH & INDUSTRY EVENT | 12 November 2026
Singapore's Society of Loss Prevention and Singapore Institute of Technology will host the Major Hazards Symposium 2026.
The programme includes digital twins, predictive risk management, AI-assisted hazard analysis and a presentation by BS&B Safety Systems on large language models and safety-critical devices.
This is particularly relevant as AI tools become more common in plant engineering and operations.
Operational Ex lesson: AI can support information retrieval, defect analysis and decision preparation. It must not independently determine whether an installation is safe to operate without competent engineering assessment and appropriate authorisation.
https://slp.org.sg/major-hazards-symposium-2026/.
▶️ 5. INCIDENT LEARNING - THE IMPERIAL SUGAR EXPLOSION
HISTORICAL CASE | USA - 2008
The Imperial Sugar refinery explosion in Port Wentworth, Georgia, killed 14 workers and injured 36.
Combustible sugar dust accumulated in the facility. The initial explosion propagated, disturbing additional deposits and causing devastating secondary explosions.
The investigation demonstrated how inadequate dust management, equipment design and hazard recognition can combine into a catastrophic event.
Why it matters operationally
Dust accumulation is not merely a housekeeping issue.
It is potentially an additional fuel inventory.
The lesson remains relevant to sugar, grain, pharmaceuticals, chemicals, wood processing and other combustible-dust industries.
https://www.csb.gov/imperial-sugar-company-dust-explosion-and-fire/
▶️ 6. STANDARDS WATCH - IEC 60079-1:2026
RECENT STANDARD | Published 9 October
The newly published IEC 60079-1:2026 addresses equipment protection by flameproof enclosures, Ex d.
For manufacturers and certification bodies, the new edition requires a technical review of changed requirements.
For operators, publication does not automatically invalidate existing certified equipment.
Operational lesson: Keep the applicable certification basis and installation history intact. Review the new requirements when specifying equipment, making modifications or assessing repairs.
https://webstore.iec.ch/en/publication/71515
▶️ 7. OPERATIONAL Ex USE CASE - THE EMERGENCY PRODUCT SUBSTITUTION
PRACTICAL |
A chemical manufacturer cannot obtain its usual solvent.
Procurement identifies an alternative with similar processing properties.
Production wants to continue.
The replacement works in laboratory trials.
But nobody has reviewed its ignition and explosion characteristics.
The new substance may have a different flash point, vapour pressure, gas group, autoignition temperature or electrostatic behaviour.
The original hazardous-area classification and equipment selection may no longer represent the actual process.
Before authorizing the substitution:
Check the material properties, operating temperatures, release scenarios, ventilation assumptions, ignition-source assessment and existing protection measures.
Operational lesson: Commercial equivalence does not establish explosion-protection equivalence.
▶️ 8. GOOD ENGINEERING PRACTICE - VERIFY INDEPENDENT ALARM LAYERS
Modern plants increasingly connect gas detection, ventilation, process control and alarms through common digital systems.
Integration improves visibility.
But integration can also introduce common-cause failures.
If one controller, network or power supply fails, how many protective functions become unavailable?
Head of Operations action: Select one critical alarm or shutdown function and verify its independence, testing arrangements, failure response and temporary bypass controls.
▶️ TODAY'S Ex QUESTION
“Who has the authority to approve a change that affects explosion protection?”
Consider a replacement solvent, modified Ex equipment, new robot, changed alarm configuration or alternative process component.
Who identifies the Ex implications?
Who performs the technical assessment?
Who authorizes the change?
Who verifies the installation?
Who accepts the equipment back into service?
If these responsibilities are unclear, the management-of-change process has a gap.
️DAILY Ex | Closing thought
A certificate establishes the conformity of equipment under defined conditions.
An inspection provides evidence about its condition.
A risk assessment establishes the assumptions supporting safe operation.
Operational Ex connects all three with the plant that is actually operating today.
The Head of Operations does not need to perform every technical assessment.
But someone must be accountable for ensuring that the assessments are performed, the findings are acted upon and the required protection remains effective.