scholarly journals Use of the Safety Factor and Margin of Safety in Motorcyclist Accident Risk Management

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 737
Author(s):  
Don Gaspar Noesaku da Costa ◽  
Siti Malkhamah ◽  
Latif Budi Suparma
Keyword(s):  
Risk Management ◽  
Safety Factor ◽  
Accident Risk ◽  
Margin Of Safety

scholarly journals Considering the Effect of Motorcyclist Risk Tolerance in Accident Risk Management: A Preliminary Study

2018 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 78
Author(s):  
Siti Malkhamah ◽  
Latif Budi Suparma ◽  
Don Gaspar Noesaku Da Costa
Keyword(s):  
Risk Management ◽  
Risk Tolerance ◽  
Accident Risk ◽  
Combine Approach ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Speed Management ◽  
Negative Perceptions ◽  
Margin Of Safety ◽  
Preliminary Study ◽  
Management Policies

Negative perceptions about accident are usually associated with speeding behavior. However, risk perception has not been considered in accident risk management. It is accepted as a personality matter, thus the number of accidents per year was used as accident risk tolerance indicator. Consequently, due to insufficient measurable indicators, it would be difficult to prevent the increasing speeding behavior. This paper discusses the improvement of accident risk tolerance indicators, i.e. safety factor and margin of safety, and their possible usage in speed management policies. These indicators were built based on the correlation between the results of interview and braking maneuver test. From this combine approach, using aggregated-individual and expert acceptance models, it was found that risk tolerance arose because motorcyclists accepted both the advantages and disadvantages gained from speeding, obtained through their riding frequency, duration of riding and/or accident involvement experienced. However, inappropriate speed due to miss-perception toward braking capability should be avoided. Inversely, an appropriate speed management should consider their travelling expectation

Self-Verification Program in bp: Success Story of Major Accident Risk Management via Bowtie Barrier Model

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Roman Bulgachev ◽  
Michael Cromarty ◽  
Lee Milburn ◽  
Kevan Davies
Keyword(s):  
Risk Management ◽  
Risk Function ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Management Tool ◽  
Accident Risk ◽  
Component Level ◽  
Holistic View ◽  
Operational Risks ◽  
Program Evolution ◽  
Major Accident

Summary bp’s (“the company’s”) wells organization manages its operational risks through what is known as the “three lines of defense” model. This is a three-tiered approach; the first line of defense is self-verification, which wells assets apply to prevent or mitigate operational risks. The second line of defense is conducted by the safety and operational risk function using deep technical expertise. The third line of defense is provided by group audit. In this paper, we discuss the wells self-verification program evolution from its first implementation and share case studies, results, impact, lessons learned, and further steps planned as part of the continuous improvement cycle. The company’s wells organization identified nine major accident risks that have the potential to result in significant health, safety, and environment (HSE) impacts. Examples include loss of well control (LoWC), offshore vessel collision, and dropped objects. The central risk team developed bowties for these risks, with prevention barriers on cause legs and mitigation barriers on consequence legs. Detailed risk bowties are fundamental to wells self-verification, adding technical depth to allow more focused verification to be performed when compared with the original bowties, because verification is now conducted using checklists targeting barriers at their component level, defined as critical tasks and equipment. Barriers are underpinned by barrier enablers (underlying supporting systems and processes) such as control of work, safe operating limits, inspection and maintenance, etc. Checklists are standardized and are available through a single, global digital application. This permits the verifiers, typically wellsite leaders, to conduct meaningful verification conversations, record the resulting actions, track them to closure within the application, and gain a better understanding of any cumulative impacts, ineffective barriers, and areas to focus on. Self-verification results are reviewed at rig, region, wells, and upstream levels. Rigs and regions analyze barrier effectiveness and gaps and implement corrective actions with contractors at the rig or region level. Global insights are collated monthly and presented centrally to wells leadership. Common themes and valuable learnings are then addressed at the functional level, shared across the organization, or escalated by the leadership. The self-verification program at the barrier component level proved to be an effective risk management tool for the company’s wells organization. It helps to continuously identify risks, address gaps, and learn from them. Recorded assessments not only provide the wells organization with barrier performance data but also highlight opportunities to improve. Leadership uses the results from barrier verification to gain a holistic view of how major accident risks are managed. Program evolution has also eliminated duplicate reviews, improved clarity of barrier components, and improved sustainability through applying a systematic approach, standardization, digitization, and procedural discipline.

scholarly journals Probability justification for a minimum margin of safety when calculating ship machine parts and endurance mechanisms

2020 ◽  
pp. 110-115
Author(s):  
В.К. Румб
Keyword(s):  
Safety Factor ◽  
Modern Technology ◽  
Fundamental Difference ◽  
Large Share ◽  
Strength Factor ◽  
Endurance Strength ◽  
Margin Of Strength ◽  
Margin Of Safety ◽  
Machine Parts ◽  
Minimum Margin

Расчеты прочности при проектировании и создании современной техники являются одним из главных критериев качества и конкурентоспособности изделий машиностроения. Неотъемлемой частью расчета прочности на выносливость является оценка минимально допустимого запаса прочности. Существующая оценка этого запаса на основе данных по отказам деталей несет в себе большую долю субъективизма. Предлагается методика определения минимально допустимого коэффициента запаса прочности. Ее принципиальное отличие от существующих заключается в том, что здесь этот коэффициент запаса прочности подсчитывается с учетом рассеяния характеристик прочности детали и действующих в ней напряжений при заданной вероятности отсутствия усталостного разрушения. Это позволяет исключить многие условности при прогнозировании прочностной надежности деталей и создает предпосылки для получения проектных решений, оптимальных по прочности и массе. Strength calculations in the design and creation of modern technology are one of the main criteria for the quality and competitiveness of engineering products. An integral part of the endurance strength calculation is the assessment of the minimum allowable margin of strength. The existing assessment of this stock, based on data on the failure of parts, carries a large share of subjectivism. It is proposed a method of determining the minimum allowable safety factor. Its fundamental difference from the existing one is that here this strength factor is calculated taking into account the scattering of the characteristics of the strength of the part and the stresses in it at a given probability of absence of fatigue destruction. This eliminates many conventions when predicting the strength of the reliability of parts and creates the prerequisites for obtaining design solutions that are optimal in strength and mass.

Collective Knowledge for Industrial Disaster Prevention

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Maslen
Keyword(s):  
Risk Management ◽  
Organizational Performance ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Economic Value ◽  
Gas Production ◽  
Accident Risk ◽  
Disaster Prevention ◽  
Information And Communications Technologies ◽  
Industrial Disaster ◽  
Major Accident

Since the 1990s there has been an increasing interest in knowledge, knowledge management, and the knowledge economy due to recognition of its economic value. Processes of globalization and developments in information and communications technologies have triggered transformations in the ways in which knowledge is shared, produced, and used to the extent that the 21st century was forecasted to be the knowledge century. Organizational learning has also been accepted as critical for organizational performance. A key question that has emerged is how knowledge can be “captured” by organizations. This focus on knowledge and learning demands an engagement with what knowledge means, where it comes from, and how it is affected by and used in different contexts. An inclusive definition is to say that knowledge is acquired theoretical, practical, embodied, and intuitive understandings of a situation. Knowledge is also located socially, geographically, organizationally, and it is specialized; so it is important to examine knowledge in less abstract terms. The specific case engaged with in this article is knowledge in hazardous industry and its role in industrial disaster prevention. In hazardous industries such as oil and gas production, learning and expertise are identified as critical ingredients for disaster prevention. Conversely, a lack of expertise or failure to learn has been implicated in disaster causation. The knowledge needs for major accident risk management are unique. Trial-and-error learning is dangerously inefficient because disasters must be prevented before they occur. The temporal, geographical, and social scale of decisions in complex sociotechnical systems means that this cannot only be a question of an individual’s expertise, but major accident risk management requires that knowledge is shared across a much larger group of people. Put another way, in this context knowledge needs to be collective. Incident reporting systems are a common solution, and organizations and industries as a whole put substantial effort into gathering information about past small failures and their causes in an attempt to learn how to prevent more serious events. However, these systems often fall short of their stated goals. This is because knowledge is not collective by virtue of being collected and stored. Rather, collective knowing is done in the context of social groups and it relies on processes of sensemaking.

Tire Design Methodology Based on Safety Factor to Satisfy Tire Life (Simulation Approach to Truck and Bus Tire Design)

2005 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 195-209 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Kabe ◽  
K. Rachi ◽  
N. Takahashi ◽  
Y. Kaga
Keyword(s):  
Safety Factor ◽  
Strain Field ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Experimental Fact ◽  
Fiber Reinforced ◽  
Breaking Strain ◽  
Rubber Part ◽  
Low Modulus ◽  
Margin Of Safety ◽  
Different Strains

Abstract A tire is not only simply made of rubber, but also twisted cord, which we can call FRR (Fiber Reinforced Rubber). The rubber in FRR is made of many materials, including rubber compound, carbon black, silica, and other materials. FRR is a double composite material, which means a particle reinforced material in a microscopic view and also a fiber reinforced one in a macroscopic view. Therefore, it is very difficult to apply fracture mechanics to the evaluation of tire durability on a practical tire design level. This paper gives a proposal for a new design methodology considering the actual tire condition which gives tire profile growth and rubber aging due to heat build-up under operation. These two issues are especially important for truck and bus tire design. Tire profile growth is a very important one because the change of tire profile induces different strains in the rubber at the same location in the tire during its life. We apply the FEM (Finite Element Modeling) based Double Inflation Pressure (DIP) method to simulate the experimental fact of the change of tire profile. In order to use the relationship between the change of the tire profile and change of rubber properties, like breaking strain in the tire as service time passes, the concept of safety factor is introduced. The low modulus rubber parts in the tire dominate the strain field and allow the large deformations of the tire. Safety factors derived from the strain field are called “Margin of Safety.” On the other hand, the durability of FRR, like the belt layer and carcass layer with the cord part, is evaluated by stress because the FRR part reacts to the stress of the internal pressure and load of the tire. But, the Margin of Safety of the rubber part is more important because the cord part has enough safety factor in comparison with the rubber part. Tire life is predicted with the Margin of Safety described above.

scholarly journals Construction and Research of Safety Management System for Machine Patrol Operation

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Ying Zhang ◽  
Jin Chao Guo ◽  
Jian Dong Liao
Keyword(s):  
Risk Management ◽  
Management System ◽  
Safety Management ◽  
Risk Level ◽  
Accident Risk ◽  
Safety Management System ◽  
Application Analysis ◽  
Target Management ◽  
Policy Risk ◽  
Accident Case

Aiming at the flight safety problems existing in UAV power patrol inspection, this study proposes a UAV patrol inspection safety management system (SMS) scheme, which takes the safety target level specified in soar as the target management, based on safety management, modern control theory, risk management, and UAV operation regulations, combined with the actual needs of machine patrol inspection of China Southern Power Grid and the requirements of local government. The UAV SMS scheme is developed from four parts: safety policy, risk management, safety guarantee, and safety promotion, and the application analysis is carried out in combination with the Kobe accident case in 2020. The experimental results demonstrate that the implementation of SMS scheme can effectively reduce the accident risk level during UAV power patrol inspection.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document