Question

 

CASE STUDY

In the Appliances Manufacturing Plant, a large number of engineering activities are carried out in a wide range of areas. These activities include design, production of parts, assembly, testing, and quality assurance.

Many of the manufacturing processes in the plant are performed using automated technologies and equipment. People also perform some of the manufacturing tasks and the plant employs over 400 workers. The decision on whether people or machines will be used for a particular task is dependent on many factors, including costs, time, quality and worker health and safety.

The plant considered here produces a many part for appliances and assembles them. Among the parts produced are door and housing materials and parts, compressors, motors, fans, some exterior parts, and electronics components. The plant normally operates three shifts per day and has production lines including machining equipment, conveyers and overhead cranes, punch presses, and paint-spray booths. The plant utilizes electricity and natural gas extensively.

A number of workers at the plant have over the last six months been subject to several different health problems. The following information has been received by the head engineer at the plant.

The head engineer at the plant wants to ensure that the plant provides a safe and healthy environment. So, she decides to ask an engineering health and safety consulting company to do a health and safety audit of the plant. The report provided by the consulting company lists the following safety problems:

a)     An expert on fires and explosions notes that the extensive use of natural gas in the plant could lead to an explosion in the plant in some circumstances. The force of such an explosion could lead to severe injuries or deaths of workers and, possibly, cause the building to be damaged or to collapse. The potential for an explosion could develop if a sufficient natural gas leak occurs or the plant ventilation system fails to perform properly or certain controls or sensors fail. But, the expert further notes, there is insufficient

         information available on the concentration of natural gas in the plant air, as only one natural gas sensor is in place at the plant, but it is not located in the main area where an accumulation of natural gas is likely to occur. Thus, the potential for an explosion could exist, yet not be detected or acted upon. In addition, the expert is concerned because the natural gas sensor is connected neither to an automated shut-off system for the natural gas supply nor to an alarm, thus increasing the likelihood of an incident and its potential severity.

b)     Although maintenance is supposed to be done quarterly on the natural gas lines and equipment, no evidence is found that maintenance has ever been performed since they were first installed four years ago. Such maintenance typically involves checking for and fixing gas leaks. Also, no training has been provided to workers on either understanding the potential for explosion, or the steps to take to avoid an explosion. In fact, most workers did not even realize the potential for an explosion existed. Furthermore, no written procedures relating explosions exist within the plant.

c)      The plant contains toxic materials that can harm people and animals. The way this material is stored in the plant, it could, in the event of a plant explosion, be released and impact an area within one kilometer of the plant. Such an incident could lead to illnesses or deaths among members of the public and could harm animals in the environment.

Questions:

1)     If the head engineer at the plant decides that measures must be taken to protect health and

         safety, but the plant manager refuses to approve the measures, what are the obligations of

         the head engineer?

2)      Do any of the problems cited demonstrate that it is best to address health and safety

         comprehensively in the early stages of an engineering activity, preferably within the

         design process and not as an afterthought? For instance, can you indicate some measures

         that will likely be more expensive to implement to fix the problem compared to the cost

         that would have been incurred during the design process to resolve the problem then?

Answer 1

1)Obligations of the engineer

The primary responsibility of the head engineer is to convince the manager by detailing the possible dangerous outcomes and loss incurred due to present unsafe conditions and elobarate the gains in terms of production costs and market value by implementing safety measures.

If he still refuse to imlement then he have to report the same to higher authority if any,and do possible implementations which he can authorise to do such as conducting safety awareness program.He has to inform the related regulating body about the violations of Health and safety laws.

2)The buildings are designed with such a ventilation that the accumulation of gas is impossible.The sensors which are installed initially should have proper automated shut-off system,retrofitting the same or installation of the same with new one costs more than the initial cost.

maitainance of the gas lines should be carried out as per the schedule or requirement,failure of any line will be expensive in the forms of production halts and equipment replacement than the maintainance costs.