PSI - Issue 5

Rosário Oliveira et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 5 (2017) 1129–1135 Rosário Oliveira / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2017) 000 – 000

1134

6

But what we want to achieve is the Number Risk (Risk No.). Thus, if the Probability and Severity scores are multiplied, we obtain the Risk Number in each case. In these cases the Risk Numbers that we can obtain vary between the minimum value 1 and the maximum value 16.

Table 4: Risk number

Based on the experience we defined a criterion to classify the Risk Number in each case study. Therefore, we can classify High Risk as values higher than 9, from Medium Risk values of 9 and Low Risk values lower than 9. Defined the criterion to classify the Risk Number, then we can start the evaluation of this Risk associated to the type of control, measurement and monitoring. In each type of control, measurement and monitoring have to appreciate the ranking of your risk, namely, what the events in which the outputs cannot be desired. Thus the outputs this control, measurement and monitoring will be possible to revise characterized tests and inspections identified, and if necessary to adopt other types of control, measurement and monitoring. The countryside (12) is intended to identify the risk ranked High, Medium or Low or not adequately controlled. However, according to the criteria defined for the Risk Number, we must consider the Risk appropriately controlled (S) if the Risk Number is ≤ 9 (for Medium or Low Risks), otherwise we should consider uncontrolled (N). For the uncontrolled risks (N) we must then indicate the action required to mitigate. Field (13) should indicate what actions are necessary to mitigate uncontrolled Risk, making it adequately controlled (S). Example: Make adjustments to the periodicity of the inspection; Repeat the test performed;... 4 - CASE STUDY This article presents a brief presentation of a PCMM used in a work of Building Rehabilitation. The purpose is to present a practical example of the use of PCMM drawn from the methodology set out above. In this particular case PCMM were prepared for the critical activities of the project. However, the Table 5 shows graft PCMM prepared for the execution of reinforced concrete beams of the building structure to be rehabilitated. Use of this procedure allows, on the one hand planning inspections and tests to make the critical activities, so as to control, measure and monitor all the work, on the other hand helps to prevent the risk in the occurrence of monitoring events with a negative impact on the development of work. 5 - CONCLUSION With the case study presented, it was possible to conclude that in rehabilitation works, defects and reworks of work should not be accepted as inevitable or even as certainties, but considered as a permanent challenge to the management of the work. Use of risk assessment techniques, in the planning and control of the work's production operations. We also conclude that the use of the proposed methodology for the preparation of PCMM with assessment of risk can be a solution to prevent these defects and reworks of work, since it allows you to easily identify which tests and inspections to be implemented for the control, measurement and monitoring of the critical activity of the project. It also allows the assessment of risk by identifying their sources, events, respective causes and potential consequences, determining the risk level and their acceptance or tolerance. Finally, the use of PCMM with risk assessment to indicate what actions needed to mitigate uncontrolled risks.