Журналов:     Статей:        

XXI век. Техносферная безопасность. 2021; 6: 103-113

Профессиональные риски работников в авиационной промышленности

Рябчикова И. А., Петюкова А. В.

https://doi.org/10.21285/2500-1582-2021-1-103-113

Аннотация

Авиационная промышленность России является одной из важнейших высокотехнологичных и наукоемких отраслей машиностроения. На авиастроительных предприятиях трудятся около 150 тыс. работников, условия труда которых часто не соответствуют санитарно-гигиеническим требованиям. Цель работы – анализ условий труда и оценивание профессиональных рисков для здоровья работников авиационной промышленности на примере авиационного завода. Объект исследования – Улан-Удэнский авиационный завод, являющийся крупнейшим предприятием Республики Бурятия и входящий в холдинг АО «Вертолёты России» государственной корпорации «Ростех». Установлено, что риск получения профессионального заболевания определяется преимущественно вредными физическими (производственный шум) и химическими (вредные вещества) факторами, а также тяжестью трудового процесса для всех исследуемых профессий. В частности, для профессий «клейщик силовой авматуры и мягких баков», «сборщик изделий» и «слесарь-монтажник гидроагрегатов» выявлены самые набольшие отклонения уровней профессионального риска от максимально допустимого и характеризуют его как «высокий» и «средний». Рабочие места «обойщик», «обойщик по изготовлению стеломатов», «регулировщик электромеханических и радиотехнических приборов и систем» находятся в пределах допустимых условий труда. Сделан вывод о необходимости уменьшения профессиональных рисков путем модернизации производства и его технологических процессов: замена морально устаревшего оборудования современным, внедрение наилучших доступных технологий, автоматизация процессов.

Список литературы

1. Jannadi O.A., Almishari S. Risk assessment in construction // Construction Engineering and Management. 2003. Vol. 129 (5). P. 492–500. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2003)129:5(492)

2. Faber M.H., Stewart M.G. Risk assessment for civil engineering facilities: critical overview and discussion // Reliability Engineering and System Safety. 2003. Vol. 80. Р. 173–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0951-8320(03)00027-9

3. Aneziris O.N., Papazoglou I.A., Doudakmani O. Assessment of occupational risks in an aluminium processing industry // International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics. 2010. Vol. 40 (3). Pp. 321–329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2010.01.005

4. Zhu-Wu Z., Yong-Kui S., Guang-Peng Q., PingYong В. Research on the Occupational Hazards Risk Assessment in Coal Mine Based on the Hazard Theory // Procedia Engineering. 2011. Vol. 26. P. 2157–2164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2011.11.2420

5. Khanzode V.V., Maiti J., Ray P.K. Occupational injury and accident research: A comprehensive review // Safety Science. 2012. Vol. 50 (5). P. 1355–1367.

6. Emrah K., Mumtaz A.U. Worker safety and injury severity analysis of earthmoving equipment accidents // Journal of Safety Research. 2018. Vol. 65. P. 73–81.

7. Pinto A., Nunes I. L., Ribeiro R. A. Occupational risk assessment in construction industry – Overview and reflection // Safety Science. 2011. Vol. 49. Issue 5. P. 616–624.

8. Kasap Y., Subaş E. Risk assessment of occupational groups working in open pit mining: Analytic Hierarchy Process // Journal of Sustainable Mining. 2017. Vol. 16. Issue 2. P. 38–46.

9. Dhananjayan V., Ravichandran B. Occupational health risk of farmers exposed to pesticides in agricultural activities // Current Opinion in Environmental Science & Health. 2018. Vol. 4. P. 31–37.

10. Хамидуллина Е.А., Чемякин А.В. Прогнозная оценка риска ущерба здоровью в результате профессиональной деятельности в нефтедобыче // XХI век. Техносферная безопасность. 2018. Т. 3. № 2 (10). С. 108–116. https://doi.org/10.21285/2500-1582-2018-2-108-116

11. Cuny X., Lejeune M. Statistical modelling and risk assessment // Safety Science. 2003. Vol. 41. P. 29–51.

12. Boyd A., Radson D. Statistical analysis of injury severity rates // IIE Transactions. 1999. Vol. 31. P. 207–216.

13. Azadeh-Fard N., Schuh A., Rashedi E., Camelio J. A. Risk assessment of occupational injuries using Accident Severity Grade // Safety Science. 2015. Vol. 76. P. 160–167.

14. Marhavilas P.K., Koulouriotis D.E., Mitrakas C. On the development of a new hybrid risk assessment process using occupational accidents’ data: Application on the Greek Public Electric Power Provider // Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries. 2011. Vol. 24. Issue 5. P. 671–687.

15. Liu H-T., Tsai Y-l. A fuzzy risk assessment approach for occupational hazards in the construction industry // Safety Science. 2012. Vol. 50. Issue 4. P. 1067–1078.

16. Niskanen T., Naumanen P., Hirvonen M. L. An evaluation of EU legislation concerning risk assessment and preventive measures in occupational safety and health // Applied Ergonomics. 2012. Vol. 43. Issue 5. P. 829–842.

17. Papadopoulos G., Georgiadou P., Papazoglou C., Michaliou K. Occupational and public health and safety in a changing work environment: An integrated approach for risk assessment and prevention // Safety Science. 2010. Vol. 48. Issue 8. P. 943–949.

18. Papazoglou I. A., Aneziris O. N. , Bellamy L. J., B. Ale J. M., Oh J. Multi-hazard multi-person quantitative occupational risk model and risk management Reliability // Engineering & System Safety. 2017. Vol. 167. P. 310–326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2017.06.019

19. Левашов С.П., Шкрабак В.С. Профессиональный риск: методология мониторинга и анализа: монография. Курган: Изд-во Курганского государственного университета, 2015. 308 с.

XXI Century. Technosphere Safety. 2021; 6: 103-113

Occupational risks in the aviation industry

Ryabchikova I. A., Petyukova A. V.

https://doi.org/10.21285/2500-1582-2021-1-103-113

Abstract

The Russian aviation industry is one of the most important high-tech and science-intensive branches of machine building. The aircraft building enterprises employ about 150 thousand workers, whose conditions do not meet sanitary and hygienic requirements. The purpose of the article is to analyze working conditions and assess occupational health risks for aviation workers on the example of an aircraft plant. The object of research is Ulan-Ude Aviation Plant, which is the largest enterprise in the Republic of Buryatia and part of Russian Helicopters JSC. It was found that the risk of occupational diseases is determined by harmful physical (industrial noise) and chemical (harmful substances) factors, as well as severity of the labor process. The largest deviations of the levels of professional risk from the maximum permissible level were revealed for the follwoing professions "screenman", "assembler" and "assembler of hydraulic units". The risks are "high" and "medium". For upholsterer and regulators of electromechanical and radio-technical equipment, the risks are within the permissible working conditions. It is necessary to reduce professional risks by modernizing production and its technological processes: replacing obsolete equipment with modern one, introducing the best available technologies, and automating processes.

References

1. Jannadi O.A., Almishari S. Risk assessment in construction // Construction Engineering and Management. 2003. Vol. 129 (5). P. 492–500. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2003)129:5(492)

2. Faber M.H., Stewart M.G. Risk assessment for civil engineering facilities: critical overview and discussion // Reliability Engineering and System Safety. 2003. Vol. 80. R. 173–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0951-8320(03)00027-9

3. Aneziris O.N., Papazoglou I.A., Doudakmani O. Assessment of occupational risks in an aluminium processing industry // International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics. 2010. Vol. 40 (3). Pp. 321–329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2010.01.005

4. Zhu-Wu Z., Yong-Kui S., Guang-Peng Q., PingYong V. Research on the Occupational Hazards Risk Assessment in Coal Mine Based on the Hazard Theory // Procedia Engineering. 2011. Vol. 26. P. 2157–2164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2011.11.2420

5. Khanzode V.V., Maiti J., Ray P.K. Occupational injury and accident research: A comprehensive review // Safety Science. 2012. Vol. 50 (5). P. 1355–1367.

6. Emrah K., Mumtaz A.U. Worker safety and injury severity analysis of earthmoving equipment accidents // Journal of Safety Research. 2018. Vol. 65. P. 73–81.

7. Pinto A., Nunes I. L., Ribeiro R. A. Occupational risk assessment in construction industry – Overview and reflection // Safety Science. 2011. Vol. 49. Issue 5. P. 616–624.

8. Kasap Y., Subaş E. Risk assessment of occupational groups working in open pit mining: Analytic Hierarchy Process // Journal of Sustainable Mining. 2017. Vol. 16. Issue 2. P. 38–46.

9. Dhananjayan V., Ravichandran B. Occupational health risk of farmers exposed to pesticides in agricultural activities // Current Opinion in Environmental Science & Health. 2018. Vol. 4. P. 31–37.

10. Khamidullina E.A., Chemyakin A.V. Prognoznaya otsenka riska ushcherba zdorov'yu v rezul'tate professional'noi deyatel'nosti v neftedobyche // XKhI vek. Tekhnosfernaya bezopasnost'. 2018. T. 3. № 2 (10). S. 108–116. https://doi.org/10.21285/2500-1582-2018-2-108-116

11. Cuny X., Lejeune M. Statistical modelling and risk assessment // Safety Science. 2003. Vol. 41. P. 29–51.

12. Boyd A., Radson D. Statistical analysis of injury severity rates // IIE Transactions. 1999. Vol. 31. P. 207–216.

13. Azadeh-Fard N., Schuh A., Rashedi E., Camelio J. A. Risk assessment of occupational injuries using Accident Severity Grade // Safety Science. 2015. Vol. 76. P. 160–167.

14. Marhavilas P.K., Koulouriotis D.E., Mitrakas C. On the development of a new hybrid risk assessment process using occupational accidents’ data: Application on the Greek Public Electric Power Provider // Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries. 2011. Vol. 24. Issue 5. P. 671–687.

15. Liu H-T., Tsai Y-l. A fuzzy risk assessment approach for occupational hazards in the construction industry // Safety Science. 2012. Vol. 50. Issue 4. P. 1067–1078.

16. Niskanen T., Naumanen P., Hirvonen M. L. An evaluation of EU legislation concerning risk assessment and preventive measures in occupational safety and health // Applied Ergonomics. 2012. Vol. 43. Issue 5. P. 829–842.

17. Papadopoulos G., Georgiadou P., Papazoglou C., Michaliou K. Occupational and public health and safety in a changing work environment: An integrated approach for risk assessment and prevention // Safety Science. 2010. Vol. 48. Issue 8. P. 943–949.

18. Papazoglou I. A., Aneziris O. N. , Bellamy L. J., B. Ale J. M., Oh J. Multi-hazard multi-person quantitative occupational risk model and risk management Reliability // Engineering & System Safety. 2017. Vol. 167. P. 310–326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2017.06.019

19. Levashov S.P., Shkrabak V.S. Professional'nyi risk: metodologiya monitoringa i analiza: monografiya. Kurgan: Izd-vo Kurganskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, 2015. 308 s.