Health Content Overview
eISSN : 0000-0000
10.5
citescore
CiteScore measures the average citations received per peer-reviewed document published in this title. CiteScore values are based on citation counts in a range of four years (e.g. 2018-2021) to peer-reviewed documents (articles, reviews, conference papers, data papers and book chapters) published in the same four calendar years, divided by the number of these documents in these same four years
10.5
impact factor
CiteScore measures the average citations received per peer-reviewed document published in this title. CiteScore values are based on citation counts in a range of four years (e.g. 2018-2021) to peer-reviewed documents (articles, reviews, conference papers, data papers and book chapters) published in the same four calendar years, divided by the number of these documents in these same four years (e.g. 2018 – 21).
10.5
pubmed
CiteScore measures the average citations received per peer-reviewed document published in this title. CiteScore values are based on citation counts in a range of four years (e.g. 2018-2021) to peer-reviewed documents (articles, reviews, conference papers, data papers and book chapters) published in the same four calendar years, divided by the number of these documents in these same four years (e.g. 2018 – 21).
10.5
Embase
Biosis Preview
Volume 5, Issue 1 (2017)
Geo Res 2017, 5(1): 31-38 |
Back to browse issues page
Request Type:
Subject:
History
Received: 2017/07/27 | Accepted: 2017/03/1 | Published: 2017/09/17
Received: 2017/07/27 | Accepted: 2017/03/1 | Published: 2017/09/17
How to cite this article
Identifying, Assessment and Prioritization of the Existing or Potential Hazards in the Automotive Industry by Combining Three Methods: FMEA, Wiliam Fine and AHP. Geo Res 2017; 5 (1) :31-38
URL: http://daneshafarand.org/article-4-9293-en.html
URL: http://daneshafarand.org/article-4-9293-en.html
Authors
Abstract (7485 Views)
Aim: Every year, a huge number of incidents of irreparable damage to personnel and industries occur, most of which are predictable with identifying hazards as well as risk assessment and control. Therefore, in order to prevent occupational accidents, the automotive industry is one of the top priorities for evaluating and identifying the hazards.
Methods: The purpose of this study is to identify, control and rank the hazards of actions and processes in the hazardous automotive industry. This descriptive-analytical study was carried out in 2017 in one unit of Iran Khodro Company by using FMEA method. Also to accurately assess the health risks and make decisions for corrective actions to prioritize hazard risks, Wiliam Fine and AHP (Analytical Hierarchy Process) methods were used, respectively.
Findings: In this research, a list of 301 risks in 7 units including cutting line, assembly line, prototyping and modification, manufacturing, packaging, quality control, laboratory, and repair and maintenance were provided. The results of FMEA method indicated that the highest risk priority number (RPN) is related to the risks of particle swirling in grinding operations (336). Moreover, based on the results of William Fine method, the exposure to noise in the Kissing & Wessich Sersim Strandbauft operation was rated at 540 and 500, respectively, with the highest risk of evaluation. The risk of exposure to noise (Kicking operation) with a relative weight of 0/1904 was ranked the first.
Conclusion: The results of the hazard analysis showed that the effect of noise pollution that leads to hearing impairment in the staff is very high.
Methods: The purpose of this study is to identify, control and rank the hazards of actions and processes in the hazardous automotive industry. This descriptive-analytical study was carried out in 2017 in one unit of Iran Khodro Company by using FMEA method. Also to accurately assess the health risks and make decisions for corrective actions to prioritize hazard risks, Wiliam Fine and AHP (Analytical Hierarchy Process) methods were used, respectively.
Findings: In this research, a list of 301 risks in 7 units including cutting line, assembly line, prototyping and modification, manufacturing, packaging, quality control, laboratory, and repair and maintenance were provided. The results of FMEA method indicated that the highest risk priority number (RPN) is related to the risks of particle swirling in grinding operations (336). Moreover, based on the results of William Fine method, the exposure to noise in the Kissing & Wessich Sersim Strandbauft operation was rated at 540 and 500, respectively, with the highest risk of evaluation. The risk of exposure to noise (Kicking operation) with a relative weight of 0/1904 was ranked the first.
Conclusion: The results of the hazard analysis showed that the effect of noise pollution that leads to hearing impairment in the staff is very high.
Keywords: