Analysis of Occupational Health and Safety Risks in Beekeeping with FMEA Method

Yıl 2023, , 708 - 723, 25.08.2023

Mustafa Özdemir , Serhan Kökhan

https://doi.org/10.16984/saufenbilder.1228959

Cited By: 1

Öz

Contrary to popular belief, beekeeping, which dates back to prehistoric times and is one of the most important plant and animal production branches today, is not an innocent profession in terms of occupational health and safety. In this study, in order to determine the occupational health and safety risk factors in the beekeeping profession, Interviews with beekeepers were conducted in 10 apiaries operating in Bayburt, where especially wandering beekeeping is practiced. In light of the data obtained from the danger hunt applied by the occupational health and safety specialist, ergonomic, physical, biological, and chemical risks were revealed using the FMEA risk analysis method. The effect, probability, and detection values were found for each failure mode, and then Risk Priority Number values were calculated. As a result of the study, for the five basic stages of beekeeping, 15 processes, 39 failure modes, 72 potential effects, and 39 failure causes were determined. Failure modes with a Risk Priority Number value of 100 and above were evaluated as “situations where urgent action and axiom should be taken,” and preventive axioms were proposed for each relevant failure mode. The number of studies on the risk factors in the beekeeping profession is very limited in the literature. For this reason, it is predicted that this study will fill an important gap in the related field and make significant contributions to the literature.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Beekeeping, FMEA, occupational health and safety, risk management

Kaynakça

• Ç. Fıratlı, F. Genç, M. Karacaoğlu, H. Gençer, “Türkiye arıcılığının karşılaştırmalı analizi, sorunlar-öneriler,” Türkiye Ziraat Mühendisliği V. Teknik Kongresi, Ankara, 2000, pp. 811-826.
• V. Burucu, Ürün Raporu – Arıcılık: Ankara Tarımsal Ekonomi ve Politika Geliştirme Enstitüsü–TEPGE, Report no. 351, pp. 39, 2022.
• İ. Kılkış, İş Sağlığı ve Güvenliği. Sosyal Politika: Fourth Edition. Dora Basın Yayın, 2014.
• Y. Kim, J. Park, M. Park, “Creating a Culture of Prevention in Occupational Safety and Health Practice,” Safety and Health at Work, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 89-96, 2016.
• E. Topal, M. Strant, C. Pocol, M. Kösoğlu, “Critical Point in Beekeeping: Beekeepers’ Health,” Bulletin UASVM Food Science and Technology, vol. 1, pp. 76, 2019.
• S. Jrıbı, N. Hanafi, D. Hajer, H. Ismaıl, “Application of Failure Mode and Effect Analysis and Cause and Effect analysis for honey production in Tunisia: A case study,” International Journal of Innovative Approaches in Agricultural Research, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 434-444, 2021.
• K. Karakuş, İ. Aslan, “Occupational Health and Safety In Beekeeping Enterprises: Bingöl Example,” Idrc International Disaster and Resilience Congress, Eskişehir, 2019, pp. 623-626.
• Z. Sengül, “Ege Bölgesinde Arıcılık Yapan İşletmelerin Sürdürülebilirlik Yönünden Değerlendirilmesi,” Ph.D. dissertation, Ege University, Tarım Ekonomisi Anabilim Dalı, İzmir, 2020.
• D. Fels, A. Blackler, “Cook D, Foth M. Ergonomics in apiculture: A case study based on inspecting movable frame hives for healthy bee activities,” Heliyon, vol. 5, pp. 1-9, 2019.
• J. Stanhope, S. Carver, P. Weinstein, “Health outcomes of beekeeping: a systematic review,” Journal of Apicultural Research, vol. 56, no. 2, pp. 100-111, 2017.
• C. Ebeling, An İntroduction to Reliability and Maintainability Engineering: Third Edition. Tata McGraw-Hill Education, 2004.
• S. Bhattacharyya, A. Cheliyan, “Optimization of a subsea production system for cost and reliability using its fault tree model,” Reliability Engineering and System Safety, vol. 185, no. 213, pp. 9, 2019.
• P. McNelles, G. Renganathan, Z. Zeng, M. Chirila, L. Lu, “A comparison of fault trees and the dynamic flowgraph methodology for the analysis of FPGA-based safety systems part 2: theoretical investigations,” Reliability Engineering and System Safety, vol. 183, pp. 60–83, 2019.
• E. Ruijters, D. Reijsbergen, PT. de Boer, M. Stoelinga, “Rare event simulation for dynamic fault trees,” Reliability Engineering and System Safety, vol. 186, no. 220, pp. 31, 2019.
• M. Catelani, L. Ciani, M. Venzi, “Failure modes, mechanisms and effect analysis on temperature redundant sensor stage,” Reliability Engineering and System Safety, vol. 180, pp. 425–33, 2018.
• K. Kim, M. Zuo, “General model for the risk priority number in failure mode and effects analysis,” Reliability Engineering and System Safety, vol. 169, pp. 321, 2018.
• S. Woo, M Pecht, D. O’Neal, “Reliability design and case study of the domestic compressor subjected to repetitive internal stresses,” Reliability Engineering and System Safety, pp. 193, 106604, 2020.
• H. Mohammadnazar, M. Pulkkinen, H. Ghanbari, “A root cause analysis method for preventing erratic behavior in software development: PEBA,” Reliability Engineering and System Safety, pp.191, 106565, 2019.
• C. Queral, J. Gómez-Magán, C. París, J. Rivas-Lewicky, M. Sánchez-Perea, J Gil, “Dynamic event trees without success criteria for full spectrum LOCA sequences applying the integrated safety assessment (ISA) methodology,” Reliability Engineering and System Safety, vol. 171, pp. 152–68, 2018.
• S. Rahman, D. Karanki, A. Epiney, D. Wicaksono, O. Zerkak, V. Dang, “Deterministic sampling for propagating epistemic and aleatory uncertainty in dynamic event tree analysis,” Reliability Engineering and System Safety, vol. 175, pp. 62–78, 2018.
• D. Stamatis, Failure Mode and Effect Analysis: FMEA From Theory to Execution: Second Edition. ASQ Quality Press, 2003.
• H. Liu, FMEA Using Uncertainty Theories and MCDM Methods. Springer, 2016.
• D. Chang, K. Sun, “Applying DEA to enhance assessment capability of FMEA,” International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, vol. 26, pp. 629–643, 2009.
• K. Chang, “Evaluate the orderings of risk for failure problems using a more general RPN methodology,” Microelectronics Reliability, vol. 49, pp. 1586–1596, 2009.
• K. Chang, C. Cheng, “A risk assessment methodology using intuitionistic fuzzy set in FMEA,” International Journal of Systems Science, vol. 41, pp. 1457–1471, 2010.
• K. Chang, T. Wen, “A novel efficient approach for DFMEA combining 2-tuple and the OWA operatör,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 37, pp. 2362–2370, 2010.
• K. Chang, C. Cheng, Y. Chang, “Reprioritization of failures in a silane supply system using an intuitionistic fuzzy set ranking technique,” Soft Computing, vol. 14, pp. 285–298, 2010.
• Ford Motor Company, “Potential failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) reference manual,” 1995, [Online]. Available: https://www.lehigh.edu/~intribos/Resources/SAE_FMEA.pdf
• F. Franceschini, M. Galetto, “A new approach for evaluation of risk priorities of failure modes in FMEA,” International Journal of Production Research, vol. 39, pp. 2991–3002, 2001.
• H. Liu, L. Liu, N. Liu, L. Mao, “Risk evaluation in failure mode and effects analysis with extended VIKOR method under fuzzy environment,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 39, pp. 12926–12934, 2012.
• N. Sankar, B. Prabhu, “Modified approach for prioritization of failures in a system failure mode and effects analysis,” International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, vol. 18, pp. 324–336, 2001.
• S. Seyed-Hosseini, N. Safaei, M. Asgharpour, “Reprioritization of failures in a system failure mode and effects analysis by decision making trial and evaluation laboratory technique,” Reliability Engineering and System Safety, vol. 91, pp. 872-881, 2006.