Lecture

 3  
Health,  Safety  &  Environment  (HSE)  
 
 
 
  Sadiq  Kha@ak  
Dr.  Muhammad  
 
Associate  Professor  
Department  of  Mechanical  Engineering  
UET  Peshawar  
 Major  Topics    
 
•  The  most  widely  known  theories  of  accident  
causaKon  are:    
 
Ø Domino  Theory  of  Accident  CausaKon  
Ø Human  Factors  Theory  of  Accident  CausaKon  
Ø Accident/Incident  Theory  of  Accident  CausaKon    
Ø Epidemiological  Theory  of  Accident  CausaKon  
Ø Systems  Theory  of  Accident  CausaKon  
Ø CombinaKon  Theory  of  Accident  CausaKon    
Domino’s  Theory  of  Accident  CausaKon    
 
•  An  early  pioneer  of  accident  prevenKon  and  industrial  
safety  was  Herbert  W.  Heinrich,  an  official  with  the  
Travelers  Insurance  Company.  In  the  late  1920s,  aYer  
studying  the  reports  of  75,000  industrial  accidents,  
Heinrich  concluded  that    
•  88  percent  of  industrial  accidents  are  caused  by  unsafe  
acts  commi@ed  by  fellow  workers.    
•  10  percent  of  industrial  accidents  are  caused  by  unsafe  
condiKons.    
•  2  percent  of  industrial  accidents  are  unavoidable.  
 
 Heinrich’s  Axioms  of  Industrial  Safety    
•  Heinrich  summarized  what  h   e  thought  health  and  safety  
decision  makers  should  know  about  industrial  accidents  in  
10  statements  he  called  Axioms  of  Industrial  Safety.  These  
axioms  can  be  paraphrased  as  follows:    
1.  Injuries  result  from  a  completed  series  of  factors,  one  of  
which  is  the  accident  itself.    
2.  An  accident  can  occur  only  as  the  result  of  an  unsafe  act  
by  a  person  and/or  a  physical  or  mechanical  hazard.    
3.  Most  accidents  are  the  result  of  unsafe  behavior  by  
people.    
4.  An  unsafe  act  by  a  person  or  an  unsafe  condiKon  does  
not  always  immediately  result  in  an  accident/injury.    
5.  The  reasons  why  people  commit  unsafe  acts  can  serve  as  
helpful  guides  in  selecKng  correcKve  acKons.    
 Heinrich’s  Axioms  of  Industrial  Safety    
 
6.  The  severity  of  an  accident  is  largely  fortuitous,  and  the  
accident  that  caused  it  is  largely  preventable.    
7.  The  best  accident  prevenKon  techniques  are  analogous  
with  the  best  quality  and  producKvity  techniques.    
8.  Management  should  assume  responsibility  for  safety  
because  it  is  in  the  best  posiKon  to  get  results.    
9.  The  supervisor  is  the  key  person  in  the  prevenKon  of  
industrial  accidents.    
10.  In  addiKon  to  the  direct  costs  of  an  accident  (for  example,  
compensaKon,  liability  claims,  medical  costs,  and  hospital  
expenses),  there  are  also  hidden  or  indirect  costs.    
 Domino  Theory  of  Accident  CausaKon    
 
•  These  factors  are  as  follows:  
i.  Social  environment  and  ancestry  
ii.  Faultofperson  
iii.  Unsafe  act  /  mechanical  or  physical  hazard  iv.  
Accident  
v.  Injury    
•  Heinrich’s  theory  has  two  central  points:  (1)  injuries  
are  caused  by  the  acKon  of  preceding  factors  and  (2)  
removal  of  the  central  factor  (unsafe  act/hazardous  
condi3on)  negates  the  acKon  of  the  preceding  factors  
and,  in  so  doing,  prevents  accidents  and  injuries.    
 Domino  Theory  of  Accident  CausaKon    
 
•  According  to  Heinrich,  there  are  five  factors  in  the  sequence  of  events  
leading  up  to  an  accident.    
•  These  factors  can  be  summarized  as  follows:    
•  Ancestry  and  social  environment.  NegaKve  character  traits  that  may  lead  
people  to  behave  in  an  unsafe  manner  can  be  inherited  (ancestry)  or  
acquired  as  a  result  of  the  social  environment.    
•  Fault  of  person.  NegaKve  character  traits,  whether  inherited  or  acquired,  
are  why  people  behave  in  an  unsafe  manner  and  why  hazardous  
condiKons  exist.    
•  Unsafe  act/mechanical  or  physical  hazard.  Unsafe  acts  commi@ed  by  
people  and  mechanical  or  physical  hazards  are  the  direct  causes  of  
accidents.    
•  Accident.  Typically,  accidents  that  result  in  injury  are  caused  by  falling  or  
being  hit  by  moving  objects.    
•  Injury.  Typical  injuries  resulKng  from  accidents  include  laceraKons  and  
fractures.    
Domino  
Domino Theory  
Theory of o f  Accident  
Accident CausaKon    
Causation
 
“Industrial Accident Prevention”

Social Fault of the Unsafe Act

Environment Person or Accident Injury
and Ancestry (Carelessness) Condition

MISTAKES OF PEOPLE

DME, UET, Peshawar. 10

 The  Human  Factors  Theory    
 
The  human  factors  theory  of  accident  causaKon  
a@ributes  accidents  to  a  chain  of  events  
ulKmately  caused  by  human  error,  it  consists  of  
the  following  three  broad  factors  that  lead  to  
human  error:    
•  Over  load  
•  inappropriate  response    
•  Inappropriate  acKviKes    
 Factors  
Factors that  chuman
that cause ause  herrors.
uman  errors    
 

DME, UET, Peshawar. 13

 Overload    
 
•  Overload  amounts  to  an  imbalance  between  a  person’s  capacity  at  
any  given  Kme  and  the  load  that  person  is  carrying  in  a  given  state.    
•  A  person’s  capacity  is  the  product  of  such  factors  as  his  or  her  
natural  ability,  training,  state  of  mind,  faKgue,  stress,  and  physical  
condiKon.    
•  The  load  that  a  person  is  carrying  consists  of  tasks  for  which  he  or  
she  is  responsible  and  added  burdens  resulKng  from    
•  environmental  factors  (noise,  distracKons,  and  so  on),    
•  internal  factors  (personal  problems,  emoKonal  stress,  and  worry),    
•  situaKonal  factors  (level  of  risk,  unclear  instrucKons,  and  so  on).    
 Inappropriate  Response    
 
•  How  a  person  responds  in  a  given  situaKon  can  cause  or  prevent  an  
accident.    
•  •  If  a  person  detects  a  hazardous  condiKon  but  does  nothing  to  
correct  it,  he  or  she  has  responded  inappropriately.    
•  •  If  a  person  removes  a  safeguard  from  a  machine  in  an  effort  to  
increase  output,  he  or  she  has  responded  inappropriately.    
•  •  If  a  person  disregards  an  established  safety  procedure,  he  or  she  
has  responded  inappropriately.    
•  Such  responses  can  lead  to  accidents.    
•  •  In  addiKon  to  inappropriate  responses,  this  component  also  
includes  workstaKon  incompaKbility.  The  incompaKbility  of  a  
person’s  workstaKon  with  regard  to  size,  force,  reach,  feel,  and  
similar  factors  can  lead  to  accidents  and  injuries.    
 Inappropriate  AcKviKes    
 
•  Human  error  can  be  the  result  of  inappropriate  
acKviKes.  An  example  of  an  inappropriate  acKvity  
is  a  person  who  undertakes  a  task  that  he  or  she  
doesn’t  know  how  to  do.    
•  Another  example  is  a  person  who  misjudges  the  
degree  of  risk  involved  in  a  given  task  and  
proceeds  based  on  that  misjudgment.  Such  
inappropriate  acKviKes  can  lead  to  accidents  and  
injuries.    
 The  Accident  /  Incident  Theory    
 
•  The  accident/incident  theory  is  an  extension  of  
the  human  factors'  theory.  It  was  developed  by  
Dan  Petersen  and  is  someKmes  referred  to  as  the    
•  Petersen  accident/incident  theory.    
•  Petersen  introduced  such  new  elements  as  
ergonomic  traps,  the  decision  to  err,  and  systems  
failures,  while  retaining  much  of  the  human  
factors  theory.    
•  In  this  model,  overload,  ergonomic  traps,  or  a  
decision  to  err  lead  to  human  error.    
Petersen’s   Accident/Incident  
Petersen’s Accident/Incident Theory Theory    
 
Overload Ergonomic Traps Decision to Err
•Pressure •Misjudgment of
•Incompatible
•Fatigue workstation (i.e. the risk
•Motivation size, force, reach, •Unconscious
feel) desire to err
•Drugs
•Incompatible •Logical decision
•Alcohol expectations based on the
•Worry situation

Human Error
Systems Failure
Policy Inspection Accident
Responsibility Correction
Training Standards Injury/Damage
 Overload    
 
Same  as  that  of  Human  Factor  theory.    
•  A  variety  of  pressures  such  as    
•  Deadlines,  Budget  Factors,  Peer  Pressure,  
FaKgue,  MoKvaKon,  Worry  and  so  on    
•  can  lead  to  unsafe  behavior.    
 Ergonomic  Traps    
 
•  Ergonomic  traps  mostly  cover  IncompaKble  
WorkstaKon  and  IncompaKble  ExpectaKons    
•  •  IncompaKble  WorkstaKon:  An  ergonomic  hazard  is  
any  interacKon  with  the  man  made  world  that  causes  
the  user  discomfort  or  strain.  There  are  three  primary  
types  of  ergonomic  hazards:  objects,  environments,  
and  systems  that  result  in  poor  posture  or  unnatural,  
uncomfortable,  or  awkward  movements.    
•  •  IncompaKble  ExpectaKons:  Not  all  employees  are  
right  handed.  Asking  leYies  to  use  tools  designed  for  
their  non-­‐dominant  hand  is  sure  to  cause  discomfort.    
 Decision  to  Err  (Be  Mistaken)    
 
•  The  decision  to  err  (to  overlook)  may  be  conscious  and  
based  on  logic,  or  it  may  be  unconscious.    
•  •  Misjudgment  of  Risks  
•  Unconscious  Desire  to  Err  
•  Logical  Decision  Based  on  SituaKon  /  Circumstances    
•  Another  factor  that  can  influence  such  a  decision  is  the  
“It  won’t  happen  to  me”  syndrome.    
•  •  Superman  Syndrome  (It  won’t  happen  to  me!)  
(Body  of  steel,Bulletproof,  Invincible,  Immortal,  Lucky)    
 System  Failure    
 
•  The  systems  failure  component  is  an  important  contribuKon  of  Petersen’s  
theory.    
•  First,  it  shows  the  relaKonship  between  management  decisions  or  
management  behavior  and  safety.    
•  Second,  it  establishes  management’s  role  in  accident  prevenKon  as  well  as  
the  broader  concepts  of  safety  and  health  in  the  workplace.    
•  Following  are  just  some  of  the  different  ways  that  systems  can  fail,  
according  to  Petersen’s  theory:    
•  •  Management  does  not  establish  a  comprehensive  safety  policy.  •  
Responsibility  and  authority  with  regard  to  safety  are  not  clearly    
•  defined.    
•  •  Safety  procedures  such  as  measurement,  inspecKon,  correcKon,  and  
invesKgaKon  are  ignored  or  given  insufficient  a@enKon.    
•  •  Employees  are  not  given  sufficient  safety  training.  
 
 Epidemiological  Theory  of  Accident  
CausaKon    
 
•  •  TradiKonally,  safety  theories  and  programs  have  
focused  on  accidents  and  the  resulKng  injuries.    
•  •  However,  the  current  trend  is  toward  a  broader  
perspecKve  that  also  encompasses  /  incorporates  the  
issue  of  industrial  hygiene.    
•  •  Industrial  hygiene  concerns  environmental  factors  
that  can  lead  to  sickness,  disease,  or  other  forms  of  
impaired  health.  This  trend  has,  in  turn,  led  to  the  
development  of  an  epidemiological  theory  of  accident  
causa3on.    
•  •  Epidemiology  is  the  study  of  causal  relaKonships  
between  environmental  factors  and  disease.    
 Epidemiological  Theory  of  Accident  
CausaKon    
 
•  •  The  key  components  of  this  theory  are  pre-­‐
disposiKonal  characterisKcs  (liability  or  tendency  to  
suffer  from  a  parKcular  condiKon,  phobia,  sea  sickness,  
moKon  sickness),  and  situaKonal  characterisKcs.    
•  These  characterisKcs,  taken  together,  can  either  result  
in  or  prevent  condiKons  that  may  result  in  an  accident.    
•  For  example,  if  an  employee  who  is  parKcularly  
suscepKble  to  peer  pressure  (pre-­‐disposiKonal  
characterisKc)  is  pressured  by  his  coworkers  
(situaKonal  characterisKc)  to  speed  up  his  operaKon,  
the  result  will  be  an  increased  probability  of  an  
accident    
Epidemiological  Theory  of  Accident  
CausaKon    
Epidemiological Theory of Accident Causation
 

DME, UET, Peshawar. 27

Systems  Theory  Of  Accident  CausaKon    
 
•  A  system  is  a  group  of  regularly  interacKng  and  interrelated  
components  that  together  form  a  unified  whole.  This  
definiKon  is  the  basis  for  the  systems  theory  of  accident  
causaKon.    
•  This  theory  views  a  situaKon  in  which  an  accident  may  
occur  as  a  system  comprised  of  the  following  components:    
–  person  (host),    
–  machine  (agency),    
•  3.  environment.    
•  •  The  likelihood  of  an  accident  occurring  is  determined  by  
how  these  components  interact.  Changes  in  the  pa@erns  of  
interacKon  can  increase  or  reduce  the  probability  of  an  
accident.    
Systems  Theory  Of  Accident  CausaKon    
 
•  •  For  example,  an  experienced  employee  who  operates  a  
numerically  controlled  five  axis  machining  center  in  a  shop  
environment  may  take  a  two-­‐week  vacaKon.  His  /  Her  temporary  
replacement  may  be  less  experienced.  This  change  in  one  
component  of  the  system  (person/  host)  increases  the  probability  
of  an  accident.    
•  Such  a  simple  example  is  easily  understood.  However,  not  all  
changes  in  pa@erns  of  interacKon  are  this  simple.  Some  are  so  
subtle  that  their  analysis  may  require  a  team  of  people,  each  with  a  
different  type  of  experKse.    
•  The  primary  components  of  the  systems  model  are  the  person/  
machine/environment,  informaKon,  decisions,  risks,  and  the  task  to  
be  performed.  Each  of  the  components  has  a  bearing  on  the  
probability  that  an  accident  will  occur.    
Systems  Theory  Of  Accident  CausaKon    
 
Systems  Theory  Of  Accident  CausaKon    
 
•  As  this  model  shows,  even  as  a  person  interacts  with  a  
machine  within  an  environment,  three  acKviKes  take  place  
between  the  system  and  the  task  to  be  performed.    
•  Every  Kme  a  task  must  be  performed,  there  is  the  risk  that  
an  accident  may  occur.  SomeKmes  the  risks  are  great;  at  
other  Kmes,  they  are  small.  This  is  where  informaKon  
collecKon  and  decision  making  come  in.    
•  Based  on  the  informaKon  that  has  been  collected  by  
observing  and  mentally  noKng  the  current  circumstances,  
the  person  weighs  the  risks  and  decides  whether  to  
perform  the  task  under  exisKng  circumstances.    
•  For  example,  say  a  machine  operator  is  working  on  a  rush  
order  that  is  behind  schedule.  An  important  safety  device  
has  malfuncKoned  on  his  machine.  Simply  taking  it  off  will  
interrupt  work  for  only  five  minutes,  but  it  will  also  
increase  the  probability  of  an  accident.  However,  replacing  
it  could  take  up  to  an  hour.  Should  the  operator  remove  
the  safety  guard  and  proceed  with  the  task  or  take  the  Kme  
to  replace  it?  The  operator  and  his  supervisor  may  assess  
the  situaKon  (collect  informaKon),  weigh  the  risks,  and  
make  a  decision  to  proceed.  If  their  informaKon  was  right  
and  their  assessment  of  the  risks  accurate,  the  task  will  
probably  be  accomplished  without  an  accident.    
Systems  Theory  Of  Accident  CausaKon    
 
•  However,  the  environment  in  which  the  machine  
operator  is  working  is  unusually  hecKc,  and  the  
pressure  to  complete  an  order  that  is  already  
behind  schedule  is  intense.    
•  These  factors  are  stressors  that  can  cloud  the  
judgment  of  those  collecKng  informaKon,  
weighing  risks,  and  making  the  decision.    
•  For  this  reason,  five  factors  should  be  considered  
before  beginning  the  process  of  collecKng  
informaKon,  weighing  risks,  and  making  a  
decision:    
•  Job  requirements    
•  The  workers’  abiliKes  and  limitaKons    
•  The  gain  if  the  task  is  successfully  accomplished    
•  The  loss  if  the  task  is  a@empted  but  fails    
•  The  loss  if  the  task  is  not  a@empted    
•  •  These  factors  can  help  a  person  achieve  the  proper  
perspecKve  before  performing  the  above-­‐menKoned  
tasks.  It  is  parKcularly  important  to  consider  these  
factors  when  stressors  such  as  noise,  Kme  constraints,  
or  pressure  from  a  supervisor  may  tend  to  cloud  one’s  
judgment.    
 CombinaKon  Theory  of  Accident  
CausaKon    
 
•  There  is  oYen  a  huge  difference  between  any  theory  of  
accident  causaKon  and  reality  so  a  single  theory  may  
not  suit  all  circumstances.    
•  Some  theories  address  parKcular  problems  be@er  than  
other  theories.    
•  The  various  models  presented  with  their  
corresponding  theories  already  studied,  a@empt  to  
explain  why  accidents  occur.  For  some  accidents,  a  
given  model  may  be  very  accurate.  For  others,  it  may  
be  less  so.  OYen  the  cause  of  an  accident  cannot  be  
adequately  explained  by  just  one  model  or  theory.    
•  Thus,  according  to  the  combinaKon  theory,  the  
actual  cause  may  combine  parts  of  several  
different  models.  Safety  personnel  should  use  
these  theories  as  appropriate  both  for  accident  
prevenKon  and  accident  invesKgaKon.  However,  
they  should  avoid  the  tendency  to  try  to  apply  
one  model  to  all  accidents.    
•  A  combinaKon  of  theories  and  models  may  be  
the  opKmal  approach  toward  problem  soluKons.