Risk Assessment Associated with the Use of Manual Commands in an Industry

• Type: Article in International Conference Proceedings Book
• Date: 2020

Authors

Espinheira, I (Author) Other; Duarte, J (Author) FEUP; João Santos Baptista (Author) FEUP

Conference proceedings International

Title: OCCUPATIONAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY AND HEALTH II

Pages: 115-121

16th International Symposium on Occupational Safety and Hygiene (SHO)

Porto, PORTUGAL, APR 06-07, 2020

Indexing

ISI Web of Knowledge - 4 Citations

Other information

Authenticus ID: P-00R-R1N

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-41486-3_13

Abstract (EN): Introduction In the early twentieth century, maintenance tasks were on the list of the top 10 processes responsible for the highest number of fatal accidents. To reduce the likelihood of these accidents, operators use manual controls for the machines. Objectives The main purpose of this analysis is, through risk assessment procedures, to evaluate the relevance of replacement of enabling switch by a two-hand control device. Methodology To this end, all control devices in the industrial area were surveyed, as well as all risks associated with their use. These risks were assessed by three distinct risk assessment methods: William T. Fine WTF), Notas Tecnicas de Prevencion 330 (NTP 330) and Integrated Risk Management Method (IRMM). Results In the end, 503 occupational risks were assessed, mostly associated with contact with moving parts, entrainment and entrapment that can cause bruising, pinching, crushing, amputation and, in the extreme case, death of the worker. The results of the risk assessment did not show agreement between all methodologies. The different risks were assessed similarly by WTF and IRMM. However, using NTP-330, the same risks were assessed as more severe. Conclusion The highest risks are related to the possible tampering with the activation of the hand controls, deactivation of safety devices on the machine, no emergency button on some controls and damaged manual controls.

Language: English

Type (Professor's evaluation): Scientific

No. of pages: 7