EL AQUA Fatigue Free Hull Flat Bottom Hydro Blaster

Transcription

1 18 th ASMI WSH Innovation Convention 2015 Picture EL AQUA Fatigue Free Hull Flat Bottom Hydro Blaster Presented By: Painting Department Team Dynamic Seahorse Sembcorp Marine Admiralty Yard

2 Team Introduction Dynamic Seahorse Team Members Project Facilitator Mr. Ahmad Rosli Team Leader Mr. Rais Bin Taib Mr. Lee Zhao Qi Mr. Patrick Kok Mr. Saurabh Bajaj Mr. Ren KeYing Mr. Indra Lal Datta

3 Department Operation Introduction Corrosion control & Coating Preservation - Removal of existing paint & rust - Prepare the surface for coating application - Laborious, long & tedious - High risk in nature Higher probability of injuries & accident occurrence

4 Project Execution P-D-C-A Cycle PLAN DO CHECK ACT

5 Project Selection To reduce injuries arising from: P D C A 1. Abrasive Blasting operations 2. Painting operations 1. Hydro Jetting operations 2. Power Tooling operations

6 Data Collection & Analysis WSH workplace injuries & occupational diseases in 2013 & 2014 Injury Type Safety Health % of 13/14 s Injuries Crushing, fractures & dislocation (Major) 52.7 % Amputations (Major) 19.2 % Cut & bruises (Minor) 39.7 % Crushing, fractures & dislocation (Minor) 24.3 % Back injuries due to ergonomic risk (Occupational Diseases) 30.4 % * Recorded workplace injuries & confirmed occupational dieseases in 203 & 2014, obtained from WSH Insitute Annual Report

7 Data Collection & Analysis Admiralty Yard HSE Reported Injuries in 2013 & 2014 (150 in total) Back 11% Head / Face 5% Eyes 6% Multiple 4% Others 12% Leg 19% Hand, Finger & Arm 43% Serious Cuts & Back Injuries are common injuries found within our operations

8 Data Collection & Analysis Survey on Hazardous Operations of Painting Department (2013 to 2014) Painting (Project 4) 26% Power Tooling (Project 1) 9% Grit Blasting (Project 2) 30% Hydro-Jetting at 30k psi (Project 3) 34% Hydro-blasting identified as the Most Hazardous operation

9 Data Collection & Analysis Wet Environment 8% Hydro-Jetter s Survey on Hazards (2013 to 2014) Flying Debris 5% Low Visibility Ergonomics 14% 29% Noise 5% Tripping 7% High Pressure Jet & Ergonomics identified as the Most Hazardous Close proximity with high pressure jet 32%

10 Hazard & Risk Identification Factors contributing to potential hydro-jetting injuries & accidents Factor 1 1. Permanent / Temporary disability a. Cuts b. Amputations 1. Insufficient reaction time Close Proximity to High Pressure Jet 2. Extreme concentration demands

11 Hazard & Risk Identification Factors contributing to potential hydro-jetting injuries & accidents Factor 2 1. Fatigue due to task load or duration 2. Limited ability to sustain body position 1. Musculoskeletal disorders & injuries Ergonomic Hazards

12 Hazard & Risk Identification Factors contributing to potential hydro-jetting injuries & accidents Factor 3 1. Vision constraints 2. Poor coordination 3. Inadequate orientation 4. Lack of situation awareness Poor Visibility

13 Hazard & Risk Identification Factors contributing to potential hydro-jetting injuries & accidents Factor 4 1. Slipping hazards 2. Fatigue due to task load or duration 3. Exposure to health hazards Wet Environment

14 Hazard & Risk Identification Factors contributing to potential hydro-jetting injuries & accidents Factor 5 1. Tripping hazards 2. Constraint movement 3. Focal distractions Poor Hose Management

15 Hazard & Risk Identification Impacts of Hydro-jetting operations Operating Specification of a Hydro-Jetting Gun Gun discharge pressure Water discharge velocity ms -1 Flow rate Back pressure force 2,200 Bar / 31,900 Psi 4.99 kg/min 55 N 2 x Speed of Handgun Bullet 5kg Rice Bag

16 Current Practices of Manual Hydro-Jetting Operation

17 Project Selection Decision Matrix Criteria Requiring Improvement Team s Ability Total (max 30) Project Urgency Beneficial Feasibility HSE Impact Resource Availability Time saving To reduce injuries arising from Hull Flat Bottom Hydro Jetting operations

18 Steps Activities May Jun 14 Jul Aug 15 Sep Oct 15 Nov Dec 14 Jan Feb 15 Mar Apr 15 May Jun Project Selection 2. Project Schedule Planned 3. Data Collection Actual PLAN 4. Target Setting 5. Cause Analysis 6. Solution Recommendation 7. Management Approval DO 8. Implementation CHECK 9. Result Evaluation ACTION 10. Standardization 11. Follow-up Action

19 SEVERITY People Assets and Consequential Loss Environment Reputation 18 th ASMI WSH Innovation Convention 2015 El-Aqua Risk Assessment (Before) CONSEQUENCE LIKELIHOOD A=1 B=2 C=3 D=4 E=5 So unlikely it can be assumed occurrence may not be experienced Not likely to occur in company but possible Likely to occur sometimes in company (1 3 times a year) Likely to occur several times in company (4 10 times a year) Likely to occur repeatedly in company (>10 times a year) 5 Fatality Extensive Damage Massive Effect Internal/ National Impact 4 Permanent Total Disability Major Damage Major Effect Industrial Impact Before 3 Major injuries or Health Effect Localised Damage Localised Effect Considerable Impact 2 Minor Injuries or Health Effect Minor Damage Minor Effect Limited Impact 1 No Injuries or Health Effect No Damage No Effect No Impact Low Medium High

20 Root Cause Analysis MAN MACHINE MATERIAL Complacent Lack of Focus Fatigue Inexperienced Poor working posture Wet / Slippery Low ENVIRONMENT Failure to follow safe working procedure Misty Defective equipment Poor working posture Poorly lilted Limited fail safe Unsuitable equipment Heavy METHOD Lack of grip Take shortcuts Flying debris High pressure jet To reduce hands, fingers, arms & back injuries during hydro blasting on hull flat bottom Unable to carry out sustainable operation

21 Target Setting Before Implementation Pareto Diagram x x 62.6 % x 74.6 % x x x 91.3 % 96.0 % 85.3 % 100 % 90 % 80 % 70 % 60 % 65 x 43.3% Target: Reduce by 100% for Hydro Blasting Operation 50 % 40 % 30 % Hand, Finger & Arm Leg Others Back Eyes Head & Face Multiple Frequency of Injury Type Report Reported ( ) 20 % 10 % 0 %

22 Generation of Solutions 3 concepts / solutions: 1. Aquablast & Bobcat 2. Aquablast & Scissor Lift 3. Aquablast & Frame

23 Selection of Solution 4 deciding factors: Feasible to implement Easy to fabricate Cost effective High health & safety benefits Concept \ Criteria Feasible to implement Easy to fabricate Cost effective High health & safety benefits Total Aquablast & Bobcat Aquablast & Scissor Lift Aquablast & Frame

24 El-Aqua Conceptual Design Incorporate Aquablast Mount inverted Aquablast onto a portable frame Design considerations for body frame Extended arm Adjustable height Light & portable Simple design & operation Easy to fabricate

25 El-Aqua Engineering Design 1. Stress acting on the critical member (boom) 2. Stability of the structure from overturning 3. Efficient Structural Mobility P D C A

26 El-Aqua Engineering Design Stress analysis Professionally designed and certified by Engineering Design Office for safe work operation

27 El-Aqua Type I Fabrication Process Fabrication & Assembly Combined Gun Head System 1. 3-in-1 mounted gun head 2. Rubber coaming 3. Spring absorption system

28 El-Aqua Type I Fabrication Process Fabrication & Assembly Turret System 1. Turret with handle 2. Rotatable turret (swing angle of 15 on each side) 3. Adjustable height mechanism

29 El-Aqua Type I Fabrication Process Fabrication & Assembly Leg Foundation System 1. Stable foundation free-rotating rear wheel with two forward wheels 2. Hose manifold 3. 3-in-1 hose connector

30 Evaluation of Results HSE Performance P D C A Close proximity to high pressure jet No contact with water jets Safety

31 Evaluation of Results HSE Performance Ergonomics Large back pressure force (absorbed by operator) Force transmitted through El-Aqua Health

32 Evaluation of Results HSE Performance Ergonomics Overhead blasting by operator Overhead blasting by El-Aqua Health

33 Evaluation of Results HSE Performance Higher Lower Poor visibility Better situational awareness Safety

34 Evaluation of Results HSE Performance Dry Wet Direct Exposure to Wet Environment Better work environment Safety & Health

35 Evaluation of Results HSE Performance Tripping Hazards Improved hose management Safety

36 Evaluation of Results HSE Performance Abrasive blasting Hydro-jetting Expended grit generated Cleaner and greener Environment

37 Evaluation of Results HSE Performance Three operators per UHP One operator per UHP Improving safety through productivity Safety

38 Benefits Faster & better finishing Productivity & Quality Environmental hazards Fatigue & Miss-outs

39 Evaluation of Results Hierarchy of Hazard Controls Hazard elimination through engineering controls

40 Evaluation of Results Pareto Diagram (After) Before After Implementation Pareto Diagram Overall Reduction of Problems by 90% 100 % 90 % 80 % Target: Reduce by 100% for Hydro Blasting Operation (Hand, Finger & Arm and Back Injuries) 70 % 60 % 50 % % 30 % Hand, Finger & Arm Leg Others Back Eyes Head & Face Multiple Frequency Frequency of Injury of Type Injury Report Type Reported ( ) 20 % 10 % 0 %

41 SEVERITY People Assets and Consequential Loss Environment Reputation 18 th ASMI WSH Innovation Convention 2015 El-Aqua Evaluation of Results Risk Assessment (After) CONSEQUENCE LIKELIHOOD A=1 B=2 C=3 D=4 E=5 So unlikely it can be assumed occurrence may not be experienced Not likely to occur in company but possible Likely to occur sometimes in company (1 3 times a year) Likely to occur several times in company (4 10 times a year) Likely to occur repeatedly in company (>10 times a year) 5 Fatality Extensive Damage Massive Effect Internal/ National Impact 4 Permanent Total Disability Major Damage Major Effect Industrial Impact Before 3 Major injuries or Health Effect Localised Damage Localised Effect Considerable Impact 2 Minor Injuries or Health Effect Minor Damage Minor Effect Limited Impact After 1 No Injuries or Health Effect No Damage No Effect No Impact

42 Evaluation of Results Benefits Tangible Operating Specification Hydro-Jetting Gun El-Aqua % Change No. of Operator per UHP % Back Pressure Force absorbed by Operator 55 N / 5.6 kg 0 N % Removal Rate 15 m 2 hr -1 21m 2 hr % Time Taken to Blast 1 m 2 12 mins 2.9 mins % Cost $ 19,500 $ 19, % Effective solution for safer, healthier and greener operations

43 Evaluation of Results Benefits Intangible Gives a sense of achievement & morale booster Improvement in work process & method Projects a professional image Promotes greener operations Improves safety awareness

44 Future Improvement and Standardization P D C A A) Future development Mark II Mark I B) Standardization

45 A) Improvement Type II Mark I Mark II

46 A) Type II Improvement Mark I Mark II Rubber Coaming Better Hose Management Dual Rear Wheels

47 A) Future Improvement Type III Development Higher Lumen Light Better vision of blasting surface Ergonomic Knob Design Easier adjustment of header Shielding Screen Protection from the mist and debris produced Whip Arrestor To prevent whipping to run-away hoses Adjustable Shaft To accommodate different dock block height Dead-man Switch Emergency cut-off to stop water supply Seat Allows workers to work in a more comfortable position Lights around the Base Better navigation in dark dock bottom Brush Coaming Reduce friction between surface and device

48 Operation of El Aqua

49 B) Standardization Risk Assessment Safe Work Procedure OJT Log

50 Future Project Integrate into existing hull vertical hydro blasting operation Work-at-height operation; aerial platforms Design & fabricate for mounting onto the aerial platform baskets Incorporate into abrasive blasting operations Similar work hazards in flat bottom operations Target to improve HSE elements

51 El Aqua Fatigue Free Hull Flat Bottom Hydro Blaster Presented By: Painting Department Team Dynamic Seahorse Sembcorp Marine Admiralty Yard

52 Operating Specification El-Aqua No. of Guns 3 No. of Nozzles 9 No. of Operator 1 Operating System Manual Gun Discharge Pressure 2,200 Bar / 31,900 Psi Water Discharge Velocity ms -1 Flow Rate Back Pressure Force Productivity / Removal rate Working Width Arc Width kg/min 165 N / 16.8 Kg 21 m 2 hr mm 0.5 m P D C A

53 Operating Specification Hydro-Jetting Gun DockBoy El-Aqua No. of Guns No. of Nozzles No. of Operator Working Width 50 mm 375 mm 215 mm Working Height m 1.6 ~ 1.9 m Operating System Manual Hydraulic Manual Arc Width m 0.5 m Removal rate 5 m 2 hr m 2 hr m 2 hr -1 Cost $ 19,500 $ 300,000 $ 19,950

54 Operating Specification Hydro-Jetting Gun El-Aqua No. of Guns 1 3 No. of Nozzles 3 9 No. of Operator 1 1 Gun Discharge Pressure Water Discharge Velocity 2,200 Bar / 31,900 Psi ms -1 Flow Rate 4.99 kg/min kg/min Back Pressure Force Productivity / Removal rate 55 N / 5.6 Kg 165 N / 16.8 Kg 5 m 2 hr -1 21m 2 hr -1 Duration to Blast 5,000 m 2 Flat Bottom El-Aqua Rate: 21 m 2 hr -1 5 units over 14 work-hr day: 3.4 days Hydrojetting Gun Rate: 5 m 2 hr -1 To complete in 3.4 days over 14 work-hr day: 21 blasters (consistent operation)