Occupational Risk Assessment of Flaw Detectors at a Gas Production Enterprise

Q3 Engineering
V. Firsova, E. P. Pototskiy
{"title":"Occupational Risk Assessment of Flaw Detectors at a Gas Production Enterprise","authors":"V. Firsova, E. P. Pototskiy","doi":"10.24000/0409-2961-2023-2-82-87","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The assessment was conducted concerning the occupational risk of personnel at a gas field facility using five methodologies. To date, there is no unified methodology for assessing occupational risk, this is the main problem in the field of occupational risk management in the Russian Federation. All existing methods consider the theoretical side of risk assessment, while a wide range of practical issues remain unresolved. A comparative description of the five most common methodologies is presented in the article: the risk assessment methodology according to the Fine — Kinney system; guide R 2.2.1766—03; methodology for the integral assessment of working conditions taking into account the combined effect of a complex of harmful production factors; risk assessment methodology consideringthe multifactorial action of a complex of harmful factors of the production environment; methodology for calculating individual occupational risk depending on the working conditions and the health status of the employee. To assess the occupational risk, the workplaces of flaw detectorists were chosen, since they are exposed to the greatest number of harmful factors in the production environment, which is required for the most complete risk assessment and identification of the dependence of its magnitude on various factors. To assess the occupational risk for flaw detectorists, the methodologies were used that consider both general and individual risk; the methodologies that give qualitative and quantitative characteristics of risk. A comparative analysis of the obtained results of risk assessment using these methodologies was carried out.","PeriodicalId":35650,"journal":{"name":"Bezopasnost'' Truda v Promyshlennosti","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bezopasnost'' Truda v Promyshlennosti","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24000/0409-2961-2023-2-82-87","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Engineering","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The assessment was conducted concerning the occupational risk of personnel at a gas field facility using five methodologies. To date, there is no unified methodology for assessing occupational risk, this is the main problem in the field of occupational risk management in the Russian Federation. All existing methods consider the theoretical side of risk assessment, while a wide range of practical issues remain unresolved. A comparative description of the five most common methodologies is presented in the article: the risk assessment methodology according to the Fine — Kinney system; guide R 2.2.1766—03; methodology for the integral assessment of working conditions taking into account the combined effect of a complex of harmful production factors; risk assessment methodology consideringthe multifactorial action of a complex of harmful factors of the production environment; methodology for calculating individual occupational risk depending on the working conditions and the health status of the employee. To assess the occupational risk, the workplaces of flaw detectorists were chosen, since they are exposed to the greatest number of harmful factors in the production environment, which is required for the most complete risk assessment and identification of the dependence of its magnitude on various factors. To assess the occupational risk for flaw detectorists, the methodologies were used that consider both general and individual risk; the methodologies that give qualitative and quantitative characteristics of risk. A comparative analysis of the obtained results of risk assessment using these methodologies was carried out.
某燃气生产企业探伤员职业风险评价
采用五种方法对气田设施人员的职业风险进行了评估。迄今为止,还没有统一的评估职业风险的方法,这是俄罗斯联邦职业风险管理领域的主要问题。所有现有的方法都考虑了风险评估的理论方面,而大量的实际问题仍未解决。本文对五种最常用的风险评估方法进行了比较描述:基于Fine - Kinney系统的风险评估方法;导轨R 2.2.1766-03;考虑到各种有害生产因素综合影响的工作条件的综合评估方法;考虑生产环境中多种有害因素多因素作用的风险评估方法;根据工作条件和雇员的健康状况计算个人职业风险的方法。为了评估职业风险,选择了探伤员的工作场所,因为他们在生产环境中接触到的有害因素最多,需要进行最完整的风险评估,并确定其大小与各种因素的依赖关系。为了评估探伤人员的职业风险,采用了考虑一般风险和个人风险的方法;给出风险定性和定量特征的方法。对使用这些方法所获得的风险评估结果进行了比较分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Bezopasnost'' Truda v Promyshlennosti
Bezopasnost'' Truda v Promyshlennosti Environmental Science-Environmental Science (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
110
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信