Tersanelerde Vinç ile Yük Elleçleme Operasyonları ve FRAM Yöntemi Kullanılarak Risk Analizi

Öz

Vinçler günlük hayatta inşaat ve gemi inşaatı sanayi, çeşitli fabrikalar, limanlar, demiryolları, her türlü kurtarma işleri gibi çeşitli alanlarda kullanılan, ağır yüklerin kaldırılması ve taşınmasında çok büyük kolaylık sağlayan ekipmanlardır. Kullanım alanlarına ve yük taşıma kapasitelerine göre çok farklı vinç tipleri vardır. Tersaneler, ağır yük elleçleme operasyonları nedeniyle vinçlerin en çok kullanıldığı yerlerden birisidir. Portal vinçler, kule vinçler ve mobil vinçler tersanelerde başlıca tercih edilen vinç tipleridir. Vinçlerin sıklıkla kullanılması vinç kazalarını da beraberinde getirmektedir. Ülkemizdeki tersanelerde, geçmişten günümüze çok sayıda vinç kazası olmuş ve bu kazalarda istenmeyen yaralanma ve ölümler gerçekleşmiştir. 2010-2015 yılları arasında tersanelerimizde gerçekleşen 77 vinç kazası tespit edilmiştir. Bu kazalarda yük çarpması %62.3 ile en çok karşılaşılan kaza tipi olurken, yük düşmesi %28.6, yüksekten düşme %7.8 ve elektrik çarpması %1.3 ile onu takip etmiştir. Vinç devrilmesi, montaj sırasında ezilme ve bom/kablo arızası gerçekleşme olasılığı yüksek diğer risklerdir. Ancak vinç tipine göre risklerle karşılaşılma durumları değişmektedir. Bu çalışmada tersanelerdeki vinç kazaları incelenmiş ve yük elleçleme operasyonlarındaki risk analizi Fonksiyonel Rezonans Analiz Metodu (FRAM) kullanılarak gerçekleştirilmiştir. Teknik, organizasyonel ve insan faktörleri, FRAM’ın ortak performans koşullarına göre belirlenmiştir. Fonksiyonel rezonans ilişkisi incelendiğinde ise ‘Yüke kaldırma aparatlarının bağlanması’, ‘Vincin gözle muayenesi’, ‘Operasyondan önce iletişim prosedürünün belirlenmesi’ ve ‘Taşınacak yükün istiflenmesi’ kritik fonksiyonel modüller olarak belirlenmiştir. Çalışmada kazaları önlemek ve riskleri ortadan kaldırmak için fiziksel, fonksiyonel, sembolik ve görünmeyen engeller ortaya konulmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Vinç kazaları
• Tersane
• Risk analizi
• FRAM

Cargo Handling Operations with Cranes in Shipyards and Risk Analysis Using FRAM Method

Abstract

Cranes are equipment used in multiple areas such as shipbuilding industry, construction sector, factories, ports, railways, rescue works and etc. in daily life and provide excellent convenience in lifting and transporting heavy loads. There are many different types of cranes according to their usage areas and load-carrying capacities. Due to heavy load handling operations; shipyards are one of the most used places for cranes. Portal, tower cranes are the primary, and mobile cranes are the preferred crane types in shipyards. The extensive use of cranes has brought occupational accidents. Between 2010 and 2015, 77 related occupational accidents in Turkish shipyards were identified. In these accidents, being struck by load was the most common type of accident with 62.3%, followed by load drop at 28.6%, falling from height at 7.8% and electrocution at 1.3%. Crane tip over, crushed during assembly, and boom/cable failure are other risk factors with a high probability of occurring. In this study, crane accidents in shipyards were examined and risk analysis in cargo handling operations was carried out using the Functional Resonance Analysis Method (FRAM). Technical, organizational and human factors were determined according to the typical performance requirements of FRAM. Crane load handling operation is divided into 11 functional modules and risk factors for these functional modules are evaluated accordingly. As a result of the FRAM analysis, the performance fluctuation of the functional modules 'Lifting the load by crane' and 'Carrying the load' is high. These two functions have been determined as functions with increased accident risk in load-handling operations with a crane. When the functional resonance relationship is examined, 'Connecting the load lifting apparatus', 'Visual inspection of the crane', 'Determining the communication procedure before the operation,' and 'Stacking the load to be transported' are determined as critical functional modules. The physical, functional, symbolic and invisible barriers were revealed to prevent accidents and eliminate risks.

Keywords

• Crane accidents
• Shipyard
• Risk analysis
• FRAM

Kaynakça

1. Barlas, B. (2012). Shipyard fatalities in Turkey. Safety science, 50(5), 1247-1252.
2. Beavers, J. E., Moore, J. R., Rinehart, R., & Schriver, W. R. (2006). Crane-related fatalities in the construction industry. Journal of construction engineering and management, 132(9), 901-910.
3. Diop, I., Abdul-Nour, G., & Komljenovic, D. (2022). The Functional Resonance Analysis Method: A Performance Appraisal Tool for Risk Assessment and Accident Investigation in Complex and Dynamic Socio-Technical Systems. American Journal of Industrial and Business Management, 12(2), 195-230.
4. Gharaie, E., Lingard, H., & Cooke, T. (2015). Causes of fatal accidents involving cranes in the Australian construction industry. Construction Economics and Building, 15(2), 1-12.
5. Hollnagel E., 2009. Barriers and Accident Prevention. Ergonomics. 50(6), 961-962.
6. Hollnagel E., 2012. FRAM: The Functional Resonance Analysis Method: Modeling Complex Socio-Technical Systems.
7. Hu J. & Tang J., 2018. Risk analysis of CTV transfer operation mode based on Functional Resonance Accident Model. Kim, S., & Kang, C. (2022). Analysis of the Complex Causes of Death Accidents Due to Mobile Cranes Using a Modified MEPS Method: Focusing on South Korea. Sustainability, 14(5), 2948.
8. Lee, J., Phillips, I., & Lynch, Z. (2020). Causes and prevention of mobile crane-related accidents in South Korea. International journal of occupational safety and ergonomics, 1-10.

9. McCann, M., Gittleman, J., & Watters, M. (2009). Crane-related deaths in construction and recommendations for their prevention. The Center of Construction Research and Training.
10. Milazzo, M. F., Ancione, G., Brkic, V. S., & Vališ, D. (2016). Investigation of crane operation safety by analysing main accident causes. Risk, Reliability and Safety: Innovating Theory and Practice, 74-80.
11. Norton, R. F. (2016). Of Cracks, Cranks and Cranes 25.03.2022
12. Ross, B., McDonald, B., & Saraf, S. V. (2007). Big blue goes down. The Miller Park crane accident. Engineering Failure Analysis, 14(6), 942-961.
13. Shapira, A., Lucko, G., & Schexnayder, C. J. (2007). Cranes for building construction projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 133(9), 690-700.
14. Swuste, P. (2013). A ‘normal accident’ with a tower crane? An accident analysis conducted by the Dutch Safety Board. Safety science, 57, 276-282.
15. URL-1 08.12.2022
16. URL-2 07.12.2022
17. URL-3 < https://commons.wikimedia.org/> 05.03.2023
18. URL-4 05.03.2023
19. Zaini, N. Z. M., Hasmori, M. F., Salleh, M. A. M., Yasin, M. N., & Ismail, R. (2020, May). Crane Accidents at Construction Sites in Malaysia. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science (Vol. 498, No. 1, p. 012105). IOP Publishing.
20. Zhao, C. H., Zhang, J., Zhong, X. Y., Zeng, J., & Chen, S. J. (2012). analysis of accident safety risk of tower crane based on fishbone diagram and the Analytic Hierarchy Process. In Applied Mechanics and Materials (Vol. 127, pp. 139-143). Trans Tech Publications Ltd.