Risk Assessment (RA) in Maintenance Activities - : A Simplified Approach

AN INITIATIVE OF PRODUCED BY
Session 1.8.1
:
Risk Dr George Scroubelos

General Manager
Assessment RMS SPPCC
(RA) in ENTER LOGO
Maintenance
Activities - ENTER LOGO
A simplified
approach
Copyright © 2018 by <enter author(s) and/or organization.> All rights reserved.
This presentation or any portion thereof may not be reproduced or used in any manner whatsoever without the express written permission of the author or rights holder.
AN INITIATIVE OF PRODUCED BY
C O N TA C T
Dr George Scroubelos +30 210 6149963
General Manager gs@rmsgreece.com
ENTER LOGO
ENTER LOGO
Copyright © 2018 by <enter author(s) and/or organization.> All rights reserved.

This presentation or any portion thereof may not be reproduced or used in any manner whatsoever without the express written permission of the author or rights holder.
The Issue
Maintenance Works
High Risk Complex
Risk(Job
Detailed Assessment
Safety Study (RAS)
Analysis) Extensive
Result
Incomplete Unmanageable
Copyright © 2018 – Do not use without permission or proper licence from the author or rights holder. 3
Objective
The objective of this presentation is bi-fold:
1. To present a Risk Assessment Study (RAS) for
maintenance activities which will be as analytical as
possible but also, easy to compile, use and update
2. To present several tools for recording the results in a
user-friendly manner in the RAS Sheets
Maintenance Activities in Phases
Preparation Infrastructure works management
• Target (machinery, equipment, building, installations etc.)
• Procedures, guidelines
• Hardware (tools, chemicals, PPE, LOTOTO, spare parts etc.)
• Maintenance area preparation (evacuation, traffic control, signage etc.)
• Maintenance target (machinery, equipment, installation, building etc.)
Execution “Core” maintenance works

• Procedures, guidelines Implementation
• Power supply management  LOTOTO, Confined space entry
• Hardware use for repair  Hand & power Tools, Devices
• Repair, replacement of worn parts
• Disassembly, reassembly  Special tasks
Delivery Trial runs, commissioning, restoration

• Procedures, guidelines Implementation
• Hardware use
• Commissioning (test/ trial runs)
• Area & object restoration (housekeeping, waste management)
• Delivery to users
Maintenance works special
characteristics
Maintenance works
• Lack of housekeeping
• Mentally & physically demanding activities
• Specialized knowhow
• Task complexity
• Repeated tasks
• “Non-productive” work
Maintenance personnel
• Moves in all areas
• Move outside the premises
• They are potentially involved in all installations & equipment
• They believe that since they are usually highly skilled they possess
the knowhow to execute their works safely
Maintenance works (MW)
combination of risks
Risks Analysis
MW
Area- Job/Task -
hazard-
related related
related
Energy-related
Workstations
Regular • Physical
• Chemical
Non-working • Radiation etc.
areas
• Confined spaces
• Roofs etc. Non-regular Behavioral
Outdoor areas
Specialized
Psychosocial
Off-site knowhow
RA Methodology Process
Specifications
Maintenance-specific
Maintenance RA Special
Outside works Special works
works equipment
RA per job position

Specialties Jobs Tasks
Job (Task) Safety Analysis

The Risk Assessment Methodology
Materials, machinery,
Slipperiness, voltage, equipment,
reactivity, velocity, structures, vehicles,
sharpness, fragility, …, installations, …,
hastiness, horseplay, … BEHAVIOR
Contact, fall, hit, trip,

Measures swallow, inhale, …
Electrocution,
stress, fire, Risk Factor
exposure to, … Calculation
Laceration, burn,
fracture, death,
coma, …
Consequences
The Risk Assessment Decision Focus
Based on
1. Knowledge
2. Past
Probable experience
Incident
Scenario
Identification
Consequences
Hazard (Source) list
(accidents – occupational diseases)
1. Floors 11. Loads
2. Hot/ cold objects 12. Confined Spaces
3. Chemicals 13. Low density materials
4. Machinery 14. Pests, animals, rodents
5. Tools (hand, power) 15. Microorganisms
6. Equipment 16. Microclimate
7. Network lines (cabling, 17. Workplace organization
piping, ducts etc.) 18. Work organization
8. Installations (psychosocial)
9. Structural installations 19. Combustibles + ignition
sources
10. Vehicles
20. Behaviour
Danger list
(accidents – occupational diseases)
1. Slipperiness 11. Pressure 21. Low density
2. Obstruction of 12. Vacuum 22. Poor illumination
movement 13. Noise 23. Air draught
3. Height difference 14. Poor visibility 24. Vibration
4. Temperature 15. Radiation 25. Sedentary/ static
extremes 16. Electrical voltage work
5. Reactivity 17. Asphyxiating 26. Monotony
6. Movement/ Inertia atmosphere (lack 27. Stressfulness
7. Sharpness (edge/ of O2/ toxic 28. Intensiveness
point) substances 29. Storage height
presence) 30. Center of gravity
8. Particle release
18. Humidity position
9. Tension (belt/
19. Insufficient
spring) ventilation
10. Weight 20. Infectiousness
Probable Incident Scenarios list
(Maximum 17)
1. Slipping at (& falling at/ to/ from) 10. Swallowing of objects/
2. Tripping/ stumbling at (& falling chemicals
at/ from/ to) 11. Exposure to biohazards
3. Bumping/ knocking/ hitting into/ 12. Fire
against (protruding) objects/ 13. Explosion
surfaces at the same level 14. Entrapment/ asphyxiation by
4. Hit/ struck/ crushed by falling/ low density/ asphyxiant
moving objects materials
5. Falling from another level 15. Overexertion
6. Contact with elements under 16. Exposure to adverse working
voltage environment (microclimate,
7. Contact of the skin/ eyes with physicochemical agents)
sharp/pointed objects 17. Working under adverse
8. Contact of the skin/ eyes with psychosocial conditions
hot/ cold surfaces/ chemicals
9. Inhalation of chemicals
Risk Assessment Study
The 10-step process
1. Area/ Operations identification
ORGANIZATION +
2. Determination probable incident scenarios/ area & operation
ASSESSOR
3. Identification of the affected employees
4. Description of the health effects
5. Description of the recommended measures
6. Evaluation of the implemented measures
7. Description of the additional measures

ASSESSO
8. Evaluation of present and after full implementation risk level R
MANAGE-
9. Implementation followup
MENT
10. Review & feedback
RA Measures Categories/ List
The RAS Process Stages
Per Area
Less
Per Hazard Source (Machine)

ANALYSIS
Per Danger (Reactivity)
Per Specialty (Maintenance Technician)
Per Job (Spindle lubrication)

More
Per Task (Remove guarding)
RA Sheet Example
Per Area (valid for all works performed in the area)
Max no. of probable incident

scenarios/ Area 
(Avg. 14/ Area)
Number of RA
Sheets = few 100eds
Avg no. of RA Sheets = 14
* Number of Areas (Avg. = 420)
(Avg no. of Areas = 30)
RA Example
Per Area (valid for all works performed in the area)
18
RA Sheet Example
Per Hazard (valid for all works performed using the hazard source)
Max no. of probable incident

scenarios = 17/ Hazard Source
(Avg 7/ Hazard)
Number of RA
Sheets = few 100eds
(Avg. = 1400)
Avg no. of RA Sheets =
7 * Number of Hazard Sources
(Avg no. of Hazard Sources =
200)
19
RA Example
Per Hazard Source (valid for all works using the hazard
source)
RA Sheet Example
Per Task (valid for all Jobs conducted by all
Specialties)
Avg no. of probable incident

scenarios =
15/ [Job * Task/ Specialty] Number of RA
Sheets = few
Avg no. of RA Sheets = 1000ands
15 * No. of Jobs * No. of Tasks * (Avg.=13500)
No. of Specialties
(Avg no. of Specialties = 3
Avg no. of Jobs = 20
Avg no. of Tasks = 15)
21
Simplified RA Methodology for
Maintenance
•The
The Line of Thinking
Maintenance & the
Works RAS must Principle
specify preventive
measures for all Tasks performed
• Maintenance Job Tasks are more than one thousand
• However, the Probable Incident Scenarios are limited
(maximum 17)
• Some Probable Incident Scenarios are already
identified during the previous Risk Assessment Stages
and need not be repeated for each Task
• Therefore, one can develop a RAS per Probable
Incident Scenario which would include all
applicable Job Tasks of each specialty excluding
the scenarios already identified in the General
RAS.
Risk Assessment Study
The MW Task Analysis 10-step process
3  1.1.Specialties/ job positions recognition
ORGANIZATI
Area/ Operations identification
+
ASSESSOR ON
1.2. 2. Determination
Determination of all maintenance
of probable tasks/ area
incident scenarios/ job/ &
joboperation
position
ORGANIZATION
2.  3. Determination probable incident
3. Identification scenariosemployees
of the affected FOR ALL APPLICABLE
TASKS/ JOBS
4. Description of the health effects
ORGANIZATION +
ASSESSOR
5. Description of the recommended measures
6. Evaluation of the implemented measures
7. Description of the additional measures

ASSESSO
8. Evaluation of present and after full implementation risk level R
MANAGE-
9. Implementation followup
MENT
10. Review & feedback
RA Sheet Example
Per Job (valid for all job tasks)
RISK ASSESSMENT STUDY VOLUME & TIME SAVINGS

(example)
Normally 20 Jobs/ Job Position x 15 Avg. P.I.Scenarios  300 RA sheets/ JP
According to this methodology  15 RA Sheets/ JP
Estimated savings: 150 working hours/ JP
RA Sheet Example
Per Task (valid for each Job)
RISK ASSESSMENT STUDY VOLUME & TIME SAVINGS

(example)
Normally 15 Tasks/ Job x 15 Avg. P.I. Scenarios  225 RA sheets/ Job
According to this methodology  6 additional RA Sheets/ Job
Estimated savings: 100 working hours/ Job
Total Risk Assessment Study
Number of RA
Number of RA
Sheets = few
Sheets = few 100eds
1000ands
(Avg. = 400)
(Avg.=13500)
• This methodology has been implemented in the heavy

industry (metal processing, plastics, food)
• Working hours saved  approximately 250/ RA
Study
RA Sheet Example
RA Sheet Example
RA Sheet Example
3,5,7,11,12,16,17,18,20
RA Sheet Example
RA Sheet Example
RA Sheet Example
The simplicity of the updating
process
(through a RA Sheet Example)
If a job/ task is added, removed, changed, then …
1. Change the job/ task list
2. Add/ remove the incident scenario task list box
3. Update the data only in the applicable fields
Conclusions
• Maintenance activities are so complex that, in order for risk
assessment study (RAS) to be effective, it should be conducted
per Task, which demands excessive resources if conducted
with the conventional methodologies.
• These methodologies can be simplified if the safety expert
takes into account that, instead of conducting a RAS per Task,
they can instead conduct a RAS per Probable Incident Scenario
excluding the ones already covered by more general versions
of the RAS.
• The achieved volume as well as time savings may reach 80%
thus making the RAS easier to conduct as well as more
manageable by the target Organization.

Risk Assessment (RA) in Maintenance Activities - : A Simplified Approach

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Risk Assessment (RA) in Maintenance Activities - : A Simplified Approach

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

AN INITIATIVE OF PRODUCED BY

Risk Dr George Scroubelos

(RA) in ENTER LOGO

Dr George Scroubelos +30 210 6149963

General Manager gs@rmsgreece.com

Copyright © 2018 by <enter author(s) and/or organization.> All rights reserved.

Execution “Core” maintenance works

Delivery Trial runs, commissioning, restoration

RA per job position

Job (Task) Safety Analysis

Contact, fall, hit, trip,

4. Description of the health effects

5. Description of the recommended measures

6. Evaluation of the implemented measures

7. Description of the additional measures

Per Hazard Source (Machine)

Per Danger (Reactivity)

Per Specialty (Maintenance Technician)

Per Job (Spindle lubrication)

Per Task (Remove guarding)

Max no. of probable incident

Max no. of probable incident

Avg no. of probable incident

6. Evaluation of the implemented measures

7. Description of the additional measures

RISK ASSESSMENT STUDY VOLUME & TIME SAVINGS

RISK ASSESSMENT STUDY VOLUME & TIME SAVINGS

• This methodology has been implemented in the heavy

You might also like