Estimation of Efficiency of Welding Incident Mitigation Measures at Mechanical Engineering

Abstract:

Welding is the basic process of metal working and metal structural repair in mechanical engineering and other industrial settings. However, welding is considered to be potentially hazardous work. Welding can be a source of injury causing eye damage, body burns, mechanical injuries and poisoning. The present paper identified the possible causes of burns by the Causal tree method. The probability of initial events, leading to burn, was estimated by the expert evaluation method. The severity of the injury consequences for welder's health was assessed. The severity of the consequences was defined as the financial loss of a company depending on the damage to worker's health during the welding work performance. The risk of burn of various severities was estimated and measures for its reduction were offered. The estimation of efficiency for the offered safety measures was carried out based on the cost for their implementation.

• Periodical: Materials Science Forum (Volume 970)
• Pages: 24-34
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/MSF.970.24
• Online since: September 2019
• Authors: Yuliya Anishchenko, Anna N. Vtorushina*, Vasilisa Gorshkova
• Keywords: Efficiency of Safety Measures, Incidents Mitigation Measures, Occupational Risk Assessment, Severity of the Incident Consequences, Welding Work

References

[1] GOST R 12.0.010-2009 Occupational safety management systems. Hazard identification and risk assessment.

[2] M. Murtonen, Workplace Risk Assessment, Practical Manual: Series of Occupational Safety: International Experience, Issue 1, ILO Subregional Office for Europe and Central Asia, (2007).

[3] S. Bonvicini, G. Antonioni, P. Morra, V. Cozzani, Quantitative assessment of environmental risk due to accidental spills from onshore pipelines, Process Safety and Environmental Protection 93 (2015) 31–49.

DOI: 10.1016/j.psep.2014.04.007

[4] K. Alkhaledi, S. Alrushaid, J. Almansouri, A. Alrashed, Using fault tree analysis in the Al-Ahmadi town gas leak incidents, Safety Science 79 (2015) 184–192.

DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2015.05.015

[5] W. Liang, J. Hu, L. Zhang, C. Guo, W. Lin, Assessing and classifying risk of pipeline third-party interference based onfault tree and SOM, Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence 25 (2012) 594–608.

DOI: 10.1016/j.engappai.2011.08.010

[6] P.K. Marhavilas, D. Koulouriotis, V. Gemeni, Risk analysis and assessment methodologies in the work sites: On a review, classification and comparative study of the scientific literature of the period 2000‒2009, Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 24 (5) (2011) 477‒523.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jlp.2011.03.004

[7] A. Shahriar, R. Sadiq, S. Tesfamariam, Risk analysis for oil & gas pipelines: A sustainability assessment approach using fuzzy based bow-tie analysis, Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 25 (2012) 505-523.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jlp.2011.12.007

[8] A. de Ruijter, F. Guldenmund, The bowtie method: A review, Safety Science 88 (2015) 211–218.

DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2016.03.001

[9] F. Khan, S. Rathnayaka, S. Ahmed, Methods and models in process safety and risk management: Past, present and future, Process Safety and Environmental Protection 98 (2015) 116–147.

DOI: 10.1016/j.psep.2015.07.005

[10] С. Dağsuyu, M. Oturakci М., A. Kokangül, A new approach to Fine-Kinney method and an implementation study, Alphanumeric journal, 3 (2) (2015) 83‒92.

DOI: 10.17093/aj.2015.3.2.5000139953

[11] A.N. Vtorushina, Yu.V. Anishchenko, E.D. Nikonova, Risk Assessment of Oil Pipeline Accidents in Special Climatic Conditions, IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science 66 (2017) 012006.

DOI: 10.1088/1755-1315/66/1/012006

[12] J. Leppälä, M. Murtonen, I. Kauranen, Farm risk map: A contextual tool for risk identification and sustainable management on farms, Risk Management 14 (1) (2012) 42-59.

DOI: 10.1057/rm.2011.14

[13] C. Slincu, V. Ciobanu, A.-E. Dumitrascu, Risks evaluation of occupational health and security specific to forest road execution, Bulletin of the Transilvania University of Brasov 1(54) (2012) 103–108.

[14] Yu.V. Anishchenko, A.N. Vtorushina, T.A. Zadorozhnaya, V.E. Gorshkova, Welding Incident Mitigation at Mechanical Engineering, Materials Science Forum 927 (2018) 6-12.

DOI: 10.4028/www.scientific.net/msf.927.6

[15] C.T. Mgonja, The effects of arc welding hazards to welders and people surrounding the welding area, Int. J. of Mech. Eng. and Tech. 8(3) (2017) 433-441.

[16] D. Thornton, Improving welder safety, Welding Journal 93(3) (2014) 36-38.

[17] ISO/IEC 31010:2009 Risk management - Risk assessment techniques (IDT).

[18] S.C. Mangones, P. Fischbeck, P. Jaramillo, Safety-related risk and benefit-cost analysis of crash avoidance systems applied to transit buses: Comparing New York City vs. Bogota, Colombia, Safety Science 91 (2017) 122-131.

DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2016.08.003

[19] C.D. Harper, C.T. Hendrickson, C. Samaras, Cost and benefit estimates of partially-automated vehicle collision avoidance technologies, Accident Analysis & Prevention 95(A) (2016) 104-115.

DOI: 10.1016/j.aap.2016.06.017

[20] G.E. Gurcanli, S. Bilir, M. Sevim, Activity based risk assessment and safety cost estimation for residential building construction projects, Safety Science 80 (2015) 1-12.

DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2015.07.002

[21] Order №160 of the Ministry of Health and Social Development, «About the severity of health damage in case of accidents at work», February 24, (2005).

[22] R.M. Stern, The Management of Risk: Application to the Welding Industry, Risk Analysis 5 (1) (1985) 63-72.