Rank: New forum user 
|
Ive been asked by my Director to undertake audits of our DRA's where the risk is at high level and cannot be mittigated, any views on how I would undertake such an audt
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Get one of the other designers to do them with you.
Also I am going to say that if the residual risk is high after the implementation of the control measures then the measures are inadequate.
It’s only acceptable to allow a low or very low, regardless of whether it is machinery, electrical equipment or a construction design activity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: New forum user
|
The high risk on the DRA stems from electrical equipment that our client deems as being critical to their operation and cannot be isolated they are in 99.9% of cases 50v DC battery systems, thus the emphasis is to undertake the work live using control measures via the projects team and their risk assessment for undertaking the works. Edited by user 03 September 2021 12:52:34(UTC)
| Reason: additional info
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Slack How do you define "high risk"? Not directly relevant to your Q, but to illustrate a point.....you might design some roadworks, and short of a full closure, there might be no way of doing it without many people considering the activity being "high risk" despite the implementation of all "reasonably practicable" measures. Sometimes the risk could be SO HIGH that a road closure is the only practical way to do the job. However, I have seen numerous design risk assessments that have simply fiddled the figures to ensure that the "residual risk" isn't within some definition of "high risk".
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
This is a tail wagging the dog scenario.
How the client decides to operate is not your concern.
If you deem it necessary to isolate, so be it, this is what your DRA reflects.
If you allow the live working you become liable.
50V is not a hazardous voltage, electric shock wise, it’s classed as extra low voltage.
However, the energy discharge from the batteries under short-circuit conditions could be catastrophic.
If it’s that critical then your client needs an n+1 solution with a changeover switch to allow safe maintenance.
Edited by user 03 September 2021 13:35:40(UTC)
| Reason: Mobile phone doesn't put line breaks in for some reason!
|
 1 user thanked paul.skyrme for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
There are a couple of approaches to this. Are your designers designing against a particular technical standard/British Standard? If so audit against those. Does your company have a procedure for undertaking designs and a business process/guidance documents? E.g. HAZOP, HAZID, DSEAR methodology This could also include designers duties under the CDM regs - passing on information to the Principal Designer, risk mitigation strategies. I would be asking questions why 'high' risk issues haven't been designed out of the design. Not always possible, but worth asking why not. If the issue is around electrical isolation then identify what is good design practice (HSR Electricity at work Regs guidance) as a starting point
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.