Features

Real Time Assessment Management

Human Factor Engineering

Sudhir Mishra

T
his paper discusses an applied approach for HFE integration and implementation
into the design, whether it is a new vessel, a facility construction project, or the
expansion, modernization, or upgrading of an existing vessel or facility. This success-
ful strategy has evolved over many years in the marine industry. This strategy integrates
HFE throughout the various life cycle phases of a project with the objective of efficiently
executing relevant HFE activities throughout conceptual, preliminary, and detail design as
well as during construction and operation.

T
he proactive approach attempts
to analyze the lagging patterns
& predicts possible future
failures, thus avoiding the system
breakdown. Measures can then be
put in place to prevent the failure or
failures that have been anticipated.
Proactive approaches include well
developed qualitative methods such
as HazOp (Hazard Operability), FMEA
(Failure Mode and Effects Analyses),
and quantitative methods such as PRA
(Probabilistic Risk Analyses) and QRA
(Quantified Risk Analyses).
The reactive approach is based
on analysis of the failure or near
failures (incidents, near-misses) of
a structure system. An attempt is
made to understand the reasons for
the failure or near failures, and then
to put measures in place to prevent
future failures of the structure system.
The interactive approach is based
on RAM (Real-time Assessment and
Management) this is where Human
Factor Engineering comes to play a
vital role to influencing the friendly
design of machine to suit human
interface that assures the safety and
increased productivity.
Presently, quality and reliability
of offshore structures is carried out
by structural reliability analysis (SRA)
and probabilistic risk analysis (PRA)
that did not take into considerations
Human Factor Engineering (HFE).
Effective integration of HFE principles
into the design stage greatly reduces
the potential of human error. It is
therefore necessary to ensure that the
systems encompass human capability
and limitations.
Purpose of HFE
The purpose of this paper is to
suggest how various hazards can
be reduced with implementation of
HFE (Human Factor Engineering) by
rationalisation of ALARP system. This
has to start right from conceptualisation
stage of a project thus ensuring that
the safety gets precedence over trifle
monetary consideration. The world
over management has realised that

Offshore World | 13 | FEBRUARY - MARCH 2011 www.oswindia.com

Features
the money spent on safety compared to
other project components is insignificant
and yields phenomenal result.
The objective of Human Factors
Engineering (HFE) is to minimize the
potential for human error and accidents and
encouraging the performance of assigned
activities as efficiently and effectively as
possible. Offshore is inherently a risky
business that involves most ambitious
projects of the modern world.
Major accidents represent the most
disastrous way in which an offshore
engineering project can go wrong.
Accidents cause death, suffering, pollution
of the environment and disruption of
business. Being so dramatic, they attract
attention from the news media and linger
in the public memory, causing concern
about safety at offshore.
Currently HSE in offshore is not given
its due importance in project management
and is generally relegated to compliance
with regulatory requirements. The health
function influences the operational
consideration during conceptualisation to
remove or control health issues at source.
Consequently, risk and safety activities in
relation to offshore projects have two main
areas of concern;
 Personal safety
 Environmental safety
This paper aims at Human Factor
Engineering consideration; it starts with
briefly outlining the nature of health risks
in the offshore oil and gas industry as
prevalent today.Subsequently it outlines the
techno-commercial and social challenges
that could influence the future context of
health management in this industry, next is
adoption of hazard mitigation methodology,
and, the final goal is to enunciate how the
www.oswindia.com
health function within the industry needs
to respond to these challenges.
Prevailing Scenario
There is a serious concern on health
of offshore workers resulting from
musculoskeletal disorders and stress.
These arise as a result of improper design
of machines, which do not take into
consideration man machine interface and
other ergonomic functions. The process of
health risk assessment (HRA) as it is usually
applied in the industry covers five groups of
potential health hazards: physical, chemical,
biological, ergonomic and psychological
hazards. These are each briefly reviewed
below.
Physical Hazards
Noise and vibration can both
independently pose significant health risks
(e.g. from drill floors, shakers, sack rooms,
generators, compressors and mixers).
This creates the possibility for hand–arm
vibration syndrome in workers who use
these tools routinely.
Chemical Hazards
These hazards are usually well controlled
through sealed systems, permit to work
systems, gas purging, area and personal
monitoring, training, emergency plans,
etc. Other potential toxic and suspected
carcinogenic agents or mixtures exist, such
as mineral oil mist and vapour, asbestos
fibres, formaldehyde, tetrachloroethylene,
welding/cutting fumes, acids, coatings, etc.
Biological Hazards
Water dispensers, ice makers, ice cream
machines, ill maintained cold storage and
improper handling of food can lead to
outbreak of biological hazard in the form of
food-poisoning and other diseases.Airborne
Offshore World | 14 | FEBRUARY - MARCH 2011
Types of Health
Hazards
 Physical Hazards
 Chemical Hazards
 Biological Hazards
 Ergonomic Hazards
 Psychological Hazards
 Transportation Hazards
diseases can erupt from ventilation system
due to contamination and uncontrolled
medical management of cases.
Ergonomic Hazards
These are the result of improper
human body and machine coordination;
the incompatibility can lead to long term
and permanent effect. Ergonomic health
issues are usually associated with the
musculoskeletal disorder and principally
the most affected parts are upper limbs,
neck and lower back.
Psychological Hazards
Psychological hazards are different from
other occupational hazards and are product
of stressors arising out of psychosomatic
conditions, work overload, lack of job clarity
and frequent change. Also relevant are
prolonged periods of limited interaction
with people (phone, Internet, etc.), poor
leisure activities, limited sleep quality and
quantity (as a result of shift patterns and
noise).
Transportation Hazards
The increased use of higher risk
methods of transport (e.g. helicopters) can
also increase perceived levels of stress and
are risk as transportation to far off locations
are taken up frequently.
 Features

The future of Offshore becomes more difficult the socio-political proactive integration of industrial hygiene
This is going to be tougher every demand on upstream companies increases and HFE principles could add significant
passing day. The awareness and professio- for greater health & environmental health value to the design phase of capital
nal excellence required probing further into compliances. Very obviously the society, projects by ensuring that health risks
future offshore exploration and extraction culturally, is less willing to accept health are reduced to ALARP through improved
is going to decide the cost incurred and hazard and risks associated with offshore engineering measures, with less reliance
probably futuristic approach to safety commercial activities. Paradoxically the on management, training, procedures and
implementation and compliances. The very chemical and other gases that are personal protective equipment as controls.
techno-commercial and social issues introduced in platform effluence to reduce Project management should physically and
organizationally locate the HFE activity such
>> Effective integration of HFE principles into the design that it promotes interaction between HFE,
stage greatly reduces the potential of human error. It is Engineering, Operations and Health, Safety,
and Environmental (HSE). The example
therefore necessary to ensure that the systems encompass
below illustrates how HFE consideration in
human capability and limitations. organisational location has proven to be
very effective in design of capital projects.
constitute two important characteristics pollution have a deleterious effect on the
of the expected macroeconomic context health of offshore worker. Evaluating the skill gap
of future petroleum operations as they Since health Factor engineering (HFE)
affect the management of health hazards Health paradigm: Introducing is not a known face in offshore engineering
offshore. engineering component for and associated facilities, a combined
total safety methodology to simultaneously ensure
 The Techno commercial issue is best Every single worker deserves to go home every single daytraditional
Human factors engineering (HFE) to his family inmeasures the same condition and hetransactional
arrived in!!!!!
exercised by ‘Prized Catch’ and concentrates on supporting capital projects support for greater hazard evaluation &
 Non-acceptance of risk in both the from ..............................................................................................................................................................................................
the early stages of the development mitigation during design phase of major
developed and the developing worlds. locate
process (i.e. the FEED,HFE activityHAZOP/HAZID, such that SIL,it FEMA
promotesproject interaction life cycle between will set HFE,the Engineering,
ground for
andOperations
other methods and Health, of controlSafety, as AFP/and PFP).EnvironmentalHFE. This means (HSE). thatThe the HSE example below
practitioners
Prized Catch It illustrates
is clear fromhow HFE consideration
experience to date that more in organisational need to leverage locationtheir has skillsproven to be very
in anticipating,
It is understood that the days of easy effective in design of capital projects.
oil is gone. The exploration has moved
from shallow water to deep water and so
are the challenges for managing safety,
the infrastructures, resources and cost
required for managing more remote and
deepwater exploration all these leads to
greater demand for HSE considerations. The
technological challenges arising out of these
would pose greater financial implication on
project cost; this may further marginalise
safety consideration.

Non-acceptance of Risk by
Society
As the exploration and extraction of oil

Evaluating the skill gap

Offshore World | 15 | FEBRUARY - MARCH 2011 www.oswindia.com
Since health Factor engineering (HFE) is not a known face in offshore engineering
Features

predicting and modelling exposure to health to evaluate engineering practices followed engineering would need to be filled up to
hazards rather than relying on measuring across the projects and institute corrective maintain semblance of ethical balance. The
them and developing procedural and other measures to achieve Zero Accident Rate global nature of the industry has already
operational controls. (ZAR) brought problems of managing health in
ever more isolated areas and under the
Quantifying the potential Conclusions threat of quite exotic diseases. Global oil
benefits Developing technologies in offshore companies should realise the importance
The present mindset rests on doesn’t guarantee personnel or engineering of HFE during the conceptualisation of new
maintaining HSE (Key Performance safety.The principle of ‘As Low as Reasonably capital projects. Engineering companies
Indicators) KPIs as a way to meet legal practicable’ (ALARP) and prized catch do should develop capabilities to take care
of HFE during design stage. Regulatory
>> Since health Factor engineering (HFE) is not a known face authorities and prevailing codes should
in offshore engineering and associated facilities, a combined institutionalise the HFE considerations
methodology to simultaneously ensure traditional measures in standards to be promulgated in future
thus ensuring the practical application are
and transactional support for greater hazard evaluation &
universally accepted as guideline.
Every single worker deserves to go home every single day to his family in the same condition he arrived in!!!!!

mitigation during design phase of major project life cycle will ..............................................................................................................................................................................................
should institutionalise the HFE considerations in standards to be promulgated in
future thus ensuring the practical application are universally accepted as guideline.

set the ground for HFE. Author

BTech (Elec) with Masters in Management Studies and advanced
Author Details diploma in OHS & E, a certification in Nuclear & Radiological safety

compliances. KPIs are usually subjective
and could only be realised over a long run,
not go hand in hand and are in fact contrary
to each other. In future more projects will
Sudhir Mishra
BE (Elec), BS (Aeronautics),
from BARC in consultation with IARP (USA). Worked as Elect
Engineer, QA Inspector, Barge Master and QHSE Consultant with
world renowned EPC & Drilling engineering contractors, Credited
with pioneering structured safety system to further improve QHSE
performances to align with corporate objective and profitability.

the health inputs are frequently seen as a
stumbling block and necessary evil which
doesn’t has much value in itself. The need
become commercially or economically
unviable due to the cost and effort needed
to control risk than is currently the case. The
MBA Senior Consultant Has been instrumental in devising and implementing Behaviour
Based Safety to minimise health hazards and formalise various
reward schemes to promote QHSE at grass root level.
Marine Engg, QA, HSE & ISPS
References Member IEEE and ATE (UK)
1. Gardner R. Overview and characteristics of some occupational exposures and health risks on offshore oil and gas installations.

E-mail: Sudhir_Mishra@Intenc.com
2. IPIECA/OGP. Controlling Health Risks at Work: A Roadmap to Health Risk Assessment in the Oil and Gas Industry. 2006.
3. Health and Safety Executive. Noise Exposure and Control in the Offshore Oil and Gas Industry. An Tool for HSE/ OSD Inspectors.

of the hour is to use these statistical data
gap between process engineering and value
4. Divine BJ,HartmanC. Update of a study of crude oil productionworkers1946–94.OccupEnvironMed2000;57:411–417.
5. Lewis RJ, Schnatter AR, Drummond I et al. Mortality andcancer morbidity in a cohort of Canadian petroleum workers.
6. Health Watch. Health Watch 12th Report. The Australian Institute of Petroleum Health Surveillance Program,
7. Kirkeleit J, Riise T, Bratveit M, Moen BE. Increased risk of hematopoietic malignancies in a historical cohort of upstream petroleum workers.
8. Sathiakumar N, Delzell E, Cole P. A case control study of leukemia among petroleum workers. J Occup Environ Med 1995;37:1269–1277.
9. Whitely S, Plant N. Occupational Exposure to Benzene, Toluene,Xylene and Ethylbenzene during Routine Offshore Oil and Gas Production Operations. HSE
Offshore Technology Report OTO 1999 088:2000.
10. Health and Safety Executive. Manual Handling Incidents Database: Research Report 500:2006.
11. Van der Veer J. ‘‘We Need More Grey Cells Per Barrel’’
12. Health and Safety Executive. ALARP ‘‘at a Glance’’.
13. IPIECA/OGP. A Guide for the Oil and Gas Industry. OGP Report Number 393:2007.

India Need Not Worry of High Global Oil Prices: FM

14. K. NIVEN AND R. MCLEOD: OFFSHORE INDUSTRY: MANAGEMENT OF HEALTH HAZARDS
15. Sudhir Mishra. A Guide to Offshore Safety. FQMM 1993, Report No. 86F

Disclaimer: The views presented herein is of the author and has no relation to any person or company

New Delhi: Finance Minister Pranab
Mukerjee said that the Indian
markets need not worry over
global oil price uncertainty, giving
a signal on the budget declared
on February 28, 2011 so that taxes
may be eased and subsidies may
be rationalized to cushion the
impact of surging global oil prices.
Oil rallied more than $1 a
barrel to top $112 on Friday as
a revolt in Libya sparked fears
of supply shortages, despite
assurances by top oil exporter
Saudi Arabia that it would step in
to fill any shortfall [O/R]. “No. Oil
prices uncertainty is there but the
Indian market need not be worried
over it, because we are watching
the situation and market should
not be unnecessarily agitated
over it,” Pranab Mukherjee said
in a statement. In June 2010 India
granted autonomy to oil firms
-- Indian Oil Corp, Hindustan
Petroleum and Bharat Petroleum
to fix prices of petrol but decided
to keep controls on diesel, cooking
gas and kerosene to rein in
inflation and protect the poor.

www.oswindia.com Offshore World | 16 | FEBRUARY - MARCH 2011