PSI - Issue 48

Ramdane Bouzerara et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 48 (2023) 4–11 Bouzerara et al/ Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2023) 000 – 000

6

3

Table 3 Matrix determining the Level of Protection (L.P)

Matrix N°3

Level of Protection (L.P)

Unprotected

No preventive measures

1

Poorly protected

One or more prevention measures exist, but are not structured or are insufficient 0.7

Fairly well protected structured prevention measures exist

0.4

Semanti cs

Well protected

Structured prevention measures with the review and periodic control exist

0.05

protection levels can be weighted with factors such as lighting level, noise level, or lone working

Table 4: Matrix determining the mastered level.

Table 5: Matrix determining the probabilities

Matrix N°4

Level of Mastery LM = EL* SL* LP

Probabilities

Controlled risk

0.05 à 19 20 à 39 40 à 100

P = 4

Almost certainly

Risk not well controlled

P = 1.6 à 4

Possible

Semantic s

Uncontrolled risk

P = 1.6

Improbable

A. Case study of the ACO1 Unit Following the consultation of the file on the history of the accidents of work at the level of the steel complex of El Hadjar, particular attention was retained for the unit of the hot zone of the oxygen steel plant N°1 (ACO1), which is our object of study, figure 1.

Fig. 1: Presentation of the hot area unit of the oxygen steel plant n°1 (ACO1)

B. Risk assessment of the oxygen steel plant N°1 (ACO1) The exploitation of the historical file is an essential step to research past events and identify the information necessary to develop a risk analysis. The statistical indicators most commonly used to describe the situation of an organization in terms of occupational injuries are the severity and frequency rates. Thus, to have an idea of the evolution of the safety situation during the period 2016- 2020, we calculated these two indicators SR and FR at the level of the ACO1 unit which are as follows, figure2. These two indicators allow us to measure the frequency of accidents and their severity. Finding: By analyzing these two figures, we note that the safety at the oxygen steel plant n°1 (ACO1) is failing and catastrophic. The severity rate and the frequency rate are clearly increasing. Consequently, the risk management adopted is insufficient. This requires reviewing the risk management at the level of the unit and to put an emergency action plan responding to the social and economic expectations of the employer and the employees.