IOSH EDINBURGH BRANCH
Minutes of 193 Edinburgh Branch Meeting
Craighouse Campus, Napier University, Edinburgh – Thursday 12 June 2008 – 1:30pm
Sederunt:
A Sharman H Pearson R Lovering KLloyd A Diment J Russell A Bell
R McLean G Pearson V Stewart I Sinclair S Holland R Weir S Blythe
B Johnston P Campbell A Mcleod P Ayer P Brown A Fowler K Drum
N Goveia J Brunnigan L McCartney B Anderson D McCormick
Apologies:
Max Bancroft, Kevin O’Donnell, Paul Graham, Mike Dunne, Liz Young, Ross Innes, Alistair McNeill, Bob Cox
1 Chair:
Andrew Sharman took the Chair.
Andrew commented on the low attendance for this meeting. This may be due to an event to launch new HAVS equipment also running at the same time as the meeting in Edinburgh.
Andrew congratulated everyone on being a part of IOSH, now the biggest professional organisation in the world with 3,389 members as of 31 March 2008. IOSH is averaging 400 new members a month. Andrew brought a tin of chocolates for everyone to share to celebrate.
Andrew commented on a letter from Ray Hurst to the Scottish Parliament which read “if you see Health and Safety as a burden, then you are not doing it right”. We need to a sensible approach and if we don’t get it right the cost is human as well as monetary.
2 Minutes of previous meeting: April 2008
2.1 Receipt
Anyone not in receipt please email Secretary.
2.2 Accuracy
Proposed by – R McLean, Seconded by – A Diment.
2.3 Matters arising
None not on agenda.
3 Correspondence
None to report
4 Group Reports
Forth & Tay District: Site visit to Nynas in Dundee on 5th June had to be postponed at their request – await further announcement
5 Members Items
5.1 Site Visits:
5.1.1 Cockenzie Power Station
Thurs 19 June – email Secretary. 24 places but only 12 still available; deadline Monday 16 June 2008. Email Secretary for your place!
5.1.2 Fire Service College in October
5.1.3 “Never mind the Bonkers” in November
We are planning a “Question Time” event at Holyrood for MSPs and invited guests.
5.2 “We’re doing for the Kids”
We are looking for contacts for schools in the area to help with implementing the workplace hazards awareness course.
The Risk Factory is also looking for more volunteers we sponsor as a Branch.
5.3 New Venue?
We are getting too big for the room we have at Napier and parking is a problem so we are thinking about a new venue – suggestions? Any suggestions please to a member of the Exec Committee.
5.4 Subscriptions
If you are not paid up by June you will be suspended and need to reapply. HQ have been tolerant in the past but are tightening up on members.
5.5 From the floor
Consultancy is required to update risk assessments & procedures for a company in Stirling. See Secretary for further info.
6 Guest Speaker:
Ronald Weir of Mott MacDonald, Product Safety Engineering
Executive member Ali McLeod introduced the speaker as Ronald Weir – a member of the branch who has had a varied career in safety engineering covering everything from dealing with high technology related to aircraft to performing the functions of a CDM coordinator. Ali then indicated that Ronald obviously liked the idea of dealing with safety on a practical basis as one of his past-times was related to motorcycling – thereby combining a risky activity on one hand with safety on the other hand through a practical approach in order to stay alive.
The speaker then indicated that his career had in fact been so varied that he saw it as easier to state that he had not worked in Oil or Gas – everything else in the safety engineering field though had been undertaken to some degree.
Products:
The RAF Tornado GR4 bomber was one of the high tech products where the occupant of the rear seat needed to have a forward view and the development of a digital display presenting a full forward image met the need.
Advanced Military Aircraft like the Tornado were obviously bristling with high technology systems and equipment which would present challenges to the aircrew and to the ground staff who must maintain it alike.
The local design team which he was apart of, (originally BA Systems) worked on the Navigation Systems displays for the rear cockpit where the implications for flight safety were quite serious and the need for accurate and true information was paramount.
E.g. If believable but erroneous flight information was presented to the aircrew they could possibly fly the aircraft into the ground or strike objects during low flying operations.
Wind Turbines were another of the major products on which Ronald had worked. He indicated at this stage that he had hoped to show a short video clip of a turbine shaking itself to bits, but the technology had not allowed this. If members wished to see the video it is available on “You Tube” @ http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=7nSB1SdVHqQ
The turbines consist of highly complex electromechanical equipment which are mounted on top of huge structures so collapse is not an option. This is one reason that they are not located close to residential areas, just in case they do shake themselves to bits or are subject to external forces which they cannot cope with such as collision by an aircraft. They work on a semi automatic operation such that there is little risk to operators under normal working however maintenance requires working at height in a confined space and high voltages are generated and fed to the national grid.
The Safety Process:
The speaker sees the Hazard Identification system for product safety engineering as being of three types:-
– internal hazards – external hazards - functional hazards (will cover these later)
The Hazard Assessment will be undertaken taking account of probability and severity and then the mitigation process which is aimed at removal of the hazard by designing in safety measures. The going back to undertake a re-assessment to check whether the design ALARP is met – (As Low As Reasonably Practicable)
Hazard identification
Hazard Identification requires a combination of engineering knowledge and experience plus some imagination in consideration of some of the “what if situations”.
A list of known internal or inherent designed in hazards are considered such as – high voltages, noise generation, heavy weights, chemical usage, radiation emissions, and moving parts; and each hazard is assessed in terms of severity and likelihood (or probability) of occurrence much the same as in any risk assessment, but in product safety engineering terms we are looking specifically at design characteristics.
E.g. For a high voltage power supply, the assessment might be catastrophic (ie death) and the likelihood considered as probable, such that mitigation could be by design changes or procedural modification or both.
Severities & Probability
The speaker defined the severity levels which he uses as being
Ø Catastrophic – Any fatality
Ø Critical – major trauma injury e.g. fractures – loss of sight
Ø Marginal - Minor injury (back injury, dermatitis
Ø Negligible - Minor injury (cuts and bruises)
Ø Whilst the probability levels as –
Ø Frequent - Likely to occur frequently e.g. Less than once per month
Ø Probable - Likely to occur several times e.g. Once per year
Ø Occasional - Likely to occur at some time e.g. Once per 10 years
Ø Remote - Unlikely to occur e.g. Once per 100 years
The severity and probability combine to form a risk matrix which dictates whether the risk index is acceptable or unacceptable or acceptable only with further review.
The risk matrix in this case is a 4 x 4 matrix but if the system uses a 6 x 5 matrix then it must be common to the system.
Internal Hazards:
Internal hazards are defined as such aspects as:-
Ø Voltage supplies above 50V ac – mitigation would then consider use of interlocks and warning labeling and ensuring the design precludes access.
Ø Heavy weights in excess of 16Kg – mitigation would include warning labels or addition of lifting points for machinery to lift. (NB The 16Kg limit had to be adopted for the maintenance of the Tornado GR4 Bomber as a number of the mechanics could have been female)
Ø Noise levels in excess of 80dB – mitigation factor would include undertaking noise assessments and addition of noise reduction systems
Ø RF or Ionizing Radiation – control factors here would include the use of Interlocks or system modification to avoid use of the factor.
Ø Moving parts – here the test has to be that it is not possible for a finger or hand to become trapped.
Ø Hot or cold temperature surfaces or components. Anything over 60 degrees is seen as HOT and can cause burns plus the consideration here also has to consider that the parts being handled could be worth £millions and therefore dropping a part because it was hot to touch could be extremely expensive
Ø Hazardous substances used in construction or maintenance - mitigation factors would be to choose chemicals carefully and avoid use of toxic or potentially carcinogenic materials
Ø Pressurised systems – avoid their use and careful engineering design to avoid bursts.
Ø Fire and the use of flammable materials – use materials that self-extinguish when the source of energy is removed.
External Hazards:
These can be caused by external conditions (such as the weather or the environment) and there is a need to identify where other parts of the system can interfere with or cause an unsafe condition in the equipment design. Consider - is the product to be used in a hazardous environment? - Can the product produce loose components that can break off?
Functional Hazards:
Functional Hazards arise through the failure of the equipment in certain operational situations.
Fault Tree Analysis or more likely Failure Mode and Effects Analysis are used to identify the end effects of the equipment failure and they therefore require a good working knowledge of the equipment to be assessed.
Identification of Functional Hazards should lead to design changes and there are 3 types of functional Hazard which can be identified using the following assessment on each function or operating mode of the equipment.
Ø Supply of a Function incorrectly – e.g. lift doesn’t operate correctly on pressing the lift button.
Ø Supply of Function when it’s not required – e.g. the lift operates without any external command.
Ø Function Not supplied when required – e.g. the lift doesn’t work when commanded.
In most cases a Functional failure won’t actually lead to a hazard provided the equipment has been designed to fail to a safe position/condition.
Equipment might have hundreds or thousands of functions each of which will need to be assessed for failure to safety such that the assessment process is protracted and time consuming. The equipment might be software controlled in which case the software code has to be analysed too and software functional hazard assessments are not easy to do.
All identified Functional Hazards that can cause a hazard should be added to the equipment hazard log like internal and external hazards.
Hazard Log & Safety Case:
This is the principle means of providing the status of the safety programme where the Hazards are identified, Risk assessment is undertaken and additional mitigation such as a design change is employed where necessary
The risk assessment is revised and when the risk index is at an acceptable level then it is considered to be ALARP. Those hazards that cannot be reduced to an acceptable level will need further design effort or some procedural controls.
A safety case can be one comprehensive document showing that all the aspects of the design have been considered or it can be a suite of safety assessment reports at various stages of the equipment development and thus the safety case provides the evidence that safety certification can be supplied or issued.
CE Marking:
CE Marking generally applies to all products produced for sale within the EU. One important exception is military equipment destined for aircraft such as the Tornado, however the test equipment used to test the aircraft equipment would need to be CE marked. Manufacturers cannot just apply a CE mark to their equipment without having something to back up the claim it is safe to operate and maintain.
In the absence of a CE mark a certificate of conformity is acceptable to show what standards the equipment meets. This is usually added within the operating manual or documentation supplied with the equipment.
7 Closing details
Please stay and have a coffee and meet your colleagues.
Dates of next meeting:
Forth & Tay District: 4 September: Robert Fife, Anderson Strathearn - Legal Update
Edinburgh Branch: 11 September, Napier Craighouse Campus
Helen Pearson MIIRSM, CMIOSH
Branch Secretary
Richard Lovering, CFIOSH
Branch Executive