Hazard Identification and Evalution in Construction Industry

IJSTE - International Journal of Science Technology & Engineering | Volume 1 | Issue 10 | April 2015
ISSN (online): 2349-784X
Hazard Identification and Evalution in

Construction Industry
Abhishek Sharma
Research Scholar
Department of Fire Technology and Safety Engineering
IES-IPS Academy, Indore (M.P), India
Abhaynath Kumar
Research Scholar
Veerendra Suryawanshi
Assistant Professor
Abstract
The construction industry has the largest number of injuries compared to other industries. Thus, reducing accidents and
determining construction risks are extremely important. One of the essential steps for construction safety management is hazard
identification, since the most unmanageable risks are from unidentified hazards. This paper aims to rank the risk of construction
hazards. To achieve this aim, the frequency and severity of accidents from the most common hazards at construction sites, were
assessed. The data for this study were collected using a web survey. The questionnaire was sent to 300 safety professionals
including safety managers, safety officers, and safety experts who were randomly selected from 20 countries. Of those, 76
completed responses were returned. The results reveal that there is no significant difference in severity and frequency of
accidents between the studied countries. It was also found that a lack of safety-forward attitudes, a lack of awareness of safety
regulations, poor safety awareness of project managers, and a lack of knowledge are the hazards with the most risk in
construction projects. The outcome of this study can help organizations and managers prepare proper safety plans and also to
increase the knowledge of partners in construction sites through training and awareness programs.
Keywords: Construction planning; Health and safety; Risk identification, Construction Hazard, Construction Safety,
Checklist etc
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I. INTRODUCTION
Indian construction industry is passing through very unique phase. Massive infrastructure like, National Highway, Dam
construction for Irrigation, Airports up-gradation for Tourism of domestic & International tourists, Urban rapid transportation
like Metros, Bus Rapid Transport system Flyover poised to grow exponentially within last 10 years. This situation leads to
excellent opportunities for the construction industry in terms of business opportunity. This also leads to Indian economic growth
even through FDI. Many national constructions housed such as Hindustan Construction Company, DLF, Tata projects and
Larson & Turbo limited actively managing projects in India & Aboard. The main reason of boost of the construction industry is
due to increase of Purchas power of middle class and improved living standard. Only Construction industry would provide the
basic physical infrastructure for the nation as well as other industries. Construction projects are dynamic. They are characterized
by many unique factors such as frequent work team rotations, exposure to weather conditions, high proportions of unskilled
and temporary workers. Construction sites, unlike other production facilities, undergo changes in topography, topology and work
conditions throughout the duration of the projects. These features make managing construction site-safety more difficult than
managing safety in manufacturing plants. Particularly in construction, a different approach is needed to identify hazards and
risks, increase safety and prevent accidents.
A. Safety Codes And Standards: [1]
Codes of practice and standards are normally derived by experienced professionals and their organisations. Codes and standards
transmit experience of problems and solutions and develop good industrial or engineering practice.
With change in technology and new inventions, revision becomes necessary. Thus codes and standards should be updated with
the current time.
Standards and Codes should be followed in following order:
1) Statutory Standards.
2) Indians Standards (IS) and Codes.
3) International Standards like ISO 9001 & 14001 and OHSAS 18001.
All rights reserved by www.ijste.org
47
Hazard Identification and Evalution in Construction Industry

(IJSTE/ Volume 1 / Issue 10 / 009)
II. ANALYSIS & METHODOLOGY

B. Job Safety Analysis:
Job Safety Analysis (JSA) is the procedure of recognizing possible hazards evaluating their risk and record how to remove
isolate and minimize the risk to employee safety controls. Somewhere possible hazards are recognized as Significant, Job Safety
Analysis shall be complete using the step by step guide above the page. The first step in this process is the development of a
Work Method Statement (WMS) which briefly describes the entire work activity some example are;
C. Purpose & Definition:
Job safety Analysis is a procedure of analysing job for the purpose of finding the hazards in each step and developing safety
precautions to be adopted. [2]
Though this technique tan be applied at any stage, it is most useful at the stage of planning, design and starting the process.
It can be used to review job method and uncover hazards;
1) That may have been overlooked at the design or planning stage of plant layout, building, machinery, equipment, tool,
workstations, processes etc.
2) That were noticed subsequently
3) That were resulted from changes in work procedure or personnel. It is the first step in hazard or accident analysis and
safety training.
It determines details of each job in terms of duties, skills, abilities, qualification, safety aspect, tools required, methods,
sequence of operation and working condition. It is useful for routine or repetitive job as well as maintenance and short orders.
D. JSA Procedure:
Four basic steps of simple procedure
1) Select the job.
2) Breakdown the job into successive steps.
3) Identify hazards and potential accidents in each step.
4) Develop safety measures to eliminate above hazards and consequential accidents. These steps are briefly explained
below:
Jobs with potential for more frequent accidents, severe injuries and new jobs wherein hazards are unknown should be selected
first.
The job should be broken down in proper sequence and steps. Operation, description, hazards (existing or potential) and
precautions should be mentioned.
To identify hazards observe the operations as many times as necessary, ask the operator concerned or others having good
knowledge of that job and list the hazards in each step. Consider all possibilities of accident, failure mode and effect etc.
The safely solution to the hazards noticed may be worked out by:
Finding a new method to do the job
Changing the physical conditions creating hazards
Eliminating hazards still present or changing the work procedure
Reducing the need of doing that job or at least the frequency of the job and
Suggesting personal protective equipment if any.
Everything of above findings should be recorded on Job Breakdown Sheet (Job sheet or Job instruction sheet) and it should be
explained to operators and trainees to perform the job safely.
Job safety analysis should be carried out by a person well conversant with the job. The supervisor is well suited for this.
Where safety officer is appointed he may carry out the analysis jointly with the supervisor.
48

E. Controls Should Be As High As Real In The Best To Worst Guide Shown Below:
1) Eliminate the Hazard Completely:
Remove items from the area or select different area for employees and volunteers to utilise.
2) Isolate People from the Hazard:
Guards on entry points

Use effective barriers and edge protection.
Enclose noisy machinery.
3) Minimise By:
a)
b)
Use An Engineered Control:

Use a machine to lift heavy objects.
Use barrier controls to assist patron movement
Change Work Practices:
Training in lifting techniques.
Training in dealing with patrons
c)
Provide Personal Protective Equipment:
Provide Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) in all cases, this must be seen as the last line of defence in the effective control of
workplace hazards and the least preferred option.
High visibility jackets in car-park areas
F. Job Safety Analysis Step By Step Does the JSA Provide:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
The name of the organisation - The major event LOC

An explanation of the work action and task to be accepted.
The date the JSA was established.
The signature and name of the being who advanced the JSA.
The assignment name number and the name of the Principal Service provider and contractor.
The job steps intricate in performance the work.
49

7)
8)
9)
10)
Possible hazards related with the work and its job stages.
Controls will be put in place to remove separate and minimise the possible hazards recognised.
The controls as high as feasible on the Best to Worst control guide.
The name of the individual liable for certifying that the control is in place.
G. The Procedure Of Job Safety Analysis Is Illustrated Below. [2]

Table:
ANNEXURE-I
Job Breakdown Sheet
Operation
Step
Description
Hazards
1.
Start the job.
1) Breakage of wheel
2) Contact with wheel
3) Flying particles
2.
Pick up the
job.
1) Sharp edges
2) Unsafe gripping or lifting
3.
Grind
1) Flying particles
2) Wheel breakage due to jamming
etc.
3) Dust-Silicosis, nuisance
4.
Replace the
job.
1) Sharp edges
2) Fall of casting
3) Strain and sprain
III.
Precautions / controls
1) Check and adjust the Guard
2) Adjust tool rest
3) Get wheel dressed if necessary
4) Use goggles/ shield
1) Use hand gloves
2) Use Safety shoes
3) Proper method of storing
4) Proper training in lifting.
1) Use goggles shield
2) Do not jam
3) Local exhaust for machine and
respirator
4) Aprons
5) Gloves
1) Use hand gloves
2) Use safety shoes
3) Proper method of storing
4) Proper training in lifting
JOB SAFETY ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

Evaluation in Construction
Company name : .
Site name:
Unit in charge: .
Date :..
Permit to work:..
Approved by:.
Table:
JSA (Job Safety Analysis)
Sr.
No.
Work or Basic
Job Steps
Potential Hazard
Control or Recommended Action
1.
Work at height
Fall, slip
Safety belt, harness provide
2.
Work at crane
Outriggers failure, crane touch to any electric

wire, Struck by object falling from a crane
Maintain distance from electric sources
3.
Work on
excavation
Earth slide
Helmet, PPE
4.
Foundation
Fall of material
Safety helmet, proper protection
5.
Trenching
Respiration problem
Respiratory system
6.
Steel erection
Fall of object & workers
Safety helmet, safety harness and belt provide
7.
Scaffold work
Fall, slip of workers, object fall
Safet harness at height,
50

8.
Work at column
Workers slip
Safety harness, hook
9.
Work at slabs
Fall from height or slip
Use net form, use proper safety belt and PPE
10.
Lifting crane
Fall any object,
Should be used safety helmet, give proper

instructions to the crane operator
H. CJSA Process:
The Construction Job Safety Analysis (CJSA) method generates a large knowledge based describing all possible loss-of-control
events in construction. The knowledge is structured in a form that can be used by software implementing the CHASTE
(Construction Hazard Assessment with Spatial and Temporal Exposure) is a conceptual model that enables forecasting of safety
approach to compute the predicted levels of risk for the activities of specific projects, by using a three-dimensional building
model and a construction schedule.
The CJSA process comprises three major steps:
1) Step 1: Identify hazards.
2) Step 2: Assess probability.
3) Step 3: Assess severity.
Table -1:
Categories for Likelihood Of Harm
Risk Levels: Likelihood Score/Rating
Very likely
4
Likely
3
Unlikely
2
Very unlikely
1
Table -2:
Categories for Severity Of Harm
Risk Levels: Severity Score/Rating
I.
Extremely harmful
Harmful
Slightly harmful
Very slightly harmful
CJSA Step 1 Hazard Identification:
Fig. 1: CJSA Flow Chart Diagram
51

The first step of the CJSA process is performed in a set of work-shops in which the researchers interview experts in the execution
of construction activities, usually senior construction superintendents. The activities relevant to the domain being explored (e.g.
multistory residential construction) are identified, and each ex-pert is asked to analyze one or more activities with which they are
familiar.
The experts begin by dividing each activity into sub-activities. They determine the start and finish times of each sub-activity in
relation to the overall activity duration as it would be defined in a construction plan. Values are set as percentages of the planned
duration (activity start = 0%, activity end = 100%).
J.
Process Flow Activity Chart:
Fig. 2: Process Activity Chart

Table -3:
Sr. No.
A
B
C
D
E
F
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
Accident Scenario Type

Accident scenario type
Fall from height
Injury from tools/equipment
Run over by vehicle
Burns or inhalation of smoke or toxic fumes
Electrocution
Collision
Struck by object falling within a floor area
Struck by object falling from faade towards ground
Struck by object falling from a crane
Struck by object dropped by self
Collapse of crane or concrete pump
Collapse of formwork, scaffolding, etc.
Structural (floor) collapse
Slipping
Struck by transported material
Struck by sprayed materials
Locations of workers exposed

Self-impact only
Self-impact only
Adjacent
Adjacent and above
Self-impact only
Self-impact only
Adjacent
Below
Adjacent and below
Self-impact only
Below
Adjacent and below
Adjacent and below
Self-impact only
Adjacent
Self-impact only
52

The last step of the workshop is to identify all the possible loss-of-control events that may occur during each working stage of
the activity, regardless of their likelihood.
In order to classify the accident scenario types, it must be possible to calculate the level of exposure for each type as a function
of the geometric relationships between the locations and any equipment involved. This requires a unique algorithm for each class
of accident types. The necessary exposure algorithms have been developed and their application has been tested.
K. CJSA Step 2 Risk Assessment:
The second step of the CJSA procedure seeks to determine the following information about the activities that were detailed in the
first step:
1) The expected rate of occurrence for each possible loss-of-control event.
2) The degree of influence of the different managerial and environ-mental factors that affect the expected rates of
occurrence.
3) The expected degree of use of personal safety gear.
Calculating the expected severity of a fall from above 5 m height while casting concrete for exterior walls using industrialized
forms.
Table -4:
Ecpected Severity
Expected occurrence (%)
Severity
Severity weight
Weighted average
level
With safety gear (33%) Without safety gear (67%)
Minor injury
Medium injury
Severe injury
Death
1
5
25
100
79
17
4
0
Severity level
Table -5:
Activity analysis
1
5
23
71
0.3
0.5
4.2
47.6
52.6
Activity analysis summary

Activity
Interviewee specialization
Finishing activities
Foundations
Structural activities
Number of stages
Piling
Superintendent
Concrete slabs
Cast-in-place concrete
Superintendent
Superintendent
columns and walls
safety inspector
Erecting precast slabs
Superintendent
Erecting precast walls
Superintendent
Forming walls with stone cladding
Superintendent
Brick masonry
Superintendent
Superintendent stone
Stone cladding
contractor
Exterior plastering
Superintendent
Gypsum boards
Finishing foreman
Floor tiling
Finishing foreman
Roof insulation
Insulation contractor
Roof sealing
Sealing contractor
2
3
2
2
2
8
2
3
2
3
2
4
1
2
1
4
2
7
1
4
1
2
1
1
6
1
Number of loss-of-control events

57
85
74
59
57
67
33
32
62
25
19
29
18
53

Glazing contractor
1
46
2
Electrical installation
Electrical engineer
3
75
2
9
Plumbing
Plumbing engineer
57
4
6
HVAC installation
A.C. Engineer
80
3
The CJSA method acknowledges the importance of these factors and their integration in any application of the CHASTE
approach. In the trial implementation described below, four specific factors (schedule delays; a work groups first day on site;
crowding of workers in the work area; and short notice before work begins) were tested for because they were of particular
interest for re-search of the application of Lean Construction on the site in which the CHASTE method was implemented. Future
users of the CJSA method should select factors relevant to the context of their industry in order to increase the reliability of the
model.
Other activities
Glazing
L. CJSA Step 3 Assess Severity:

The final step of the CJSA method determines the relative probabilities of severity for each accident scenario type. The
distributions are obtained by asking safety expert interviewees to distribute the likelihood of the severity of the outcome for each
type among four distinct possible outcomes:
1) Minor injury (up to one day of absence) scratch, wound.
2) Medium injury (long absence) burn, fracture.
3) Severe injury permanent disability.
4) Death
IV. TRIAL IMPLEMENTATION

The CJSA method was developed and first applied in practice within the framework of the CHASTE research project. The scope
for this implementation covered 14 common construction activities from all phases of a typical multi-story building project.
A. Step 1 Identification:
In step 1, the knowledge was elicited in a series of workshops with safety experts and senior site managers, who are legally
responsible for site-safety. Each expert was asked to analyze a single construction activity according to his or her experience.
B. Step 2 Assessment:
The population for the survey in step 2 consisted of 91 senior superintendents from 45 construction companies. The majority
were interviewed in depth about a single construction activity type. A small number of them were interviewed twice, because
they were familiar with more than one activity type; a total of 101 interviews were conducted.
1) Likelihood of Loss-Of-Control Event Occurrences:
Average values for likelihood of occurrence for all loss-of-control events were summarized in measures of number of events per
year of work per person, i.e. the expected number of times a single event might occur, if a single worker performs a single task
for a time period of one year.
2) Intensifying Factors:
Implementation of the CJSA assessment step included examination of factors affecting the expected likelihood of occurrence of
loss-of-control events. The respondents in step 2 were asked to assess, based on their past experience, how the likelihood of lossof- of control events would be increased during each work stage of the entire activity, in the presence of each of the following
intensifying factors: schedule delays; a work groups first day on site; crowding of workers in the work area; and short notice
before work begins.
C. Construction Safety Checklist:
Name and address of the Construction Company _________________ working at _________________
Audited by ________________________ Audit date _____________
54

No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
Table:
Construction Safety Checklist
Checkpoints
Helmets used by all
Safety belts used by all during work, if height is more than 2 meters.
Static lines are provided to facilitate hooking of safety belts.
Safety nets are provided where scaffolds not feasible.
Scaffolds are in good condition, ladders are used.
Hand tools are of standard type and maintained properly.
Power tools are in good condition and supply through ELCB.
Grinding machines are with guards.
Welding machine and cables are in good condition.
Gas cylinder of cutting sets are protected from spark.
Hose of cutting sets, pressure regulators and pressure gauges are in good working condition leak free.
Good insulation, earthing and ELCB are maintained in electrical installations.
Cranes are in good working condition.
Lifting tackles are in good working condition.
Crane is operated by competent operator.
Standard signaling and rigging practices are followed.
Area where heavy erection is done is barricaded.
Area where load is lifted or suspended by crane is barricaded.
Fire hazards are taken care of combustibles removed from site of hot work.
Fire extinguishers are provided.
Floor openings are protected / covered / guarded.
Procedure for critical job is available and followed.
Persons employed on job possess required skills.
Vessel entry permits are taken for confined space entry.
Safety permits are taken to work at height.
Comments
V. RESULT AND DISCUSSION

The CHASTE approach represents a progressive way to evaluate risks in construction. It confronts the difficulties and unique
hazards of the construction industry by considering likelihood of loss-of-control events and exposure of potential victims to their
consequences separately. The CJSA method provides a mechanism for collecting the extensive knowledge of the likelihood of
loss-of-control events in construction that is needed for implementation of the CHASTE approach. The CJSA method is loosely
based on the standard JSA approach to safety planning in manufacturing;
Matrix method in risk assessment is a semi-quantified way of evaluation. Risk value is determined by estimating of the
potential severity of hazardous event and the likelihood that it will occur. Risk value is formulated as:
R = P*S
Where:
P = Likelihood of occurrence
S = Potential severity of harm
Now for work at height
R=P*S =3*4 =12
Now for work at cranes
R=P*S
=3*3
=9
Table -6:
Risk Categories
Category of Risk
Evaluation of Tolerability
Very low (Level 1, 2,

3, 4)
Acceptable (or Negligible)
Low (Level 5, 6)
Risks that should be reduced so

that they are tolerable or acceptable
(Unwanted)
55

Medium (Level 8, 9)

(Unwanted)
High (Level 10, 12)

(Unwanted)
Very high (Level 15,

16,)
Unacceptable
VI. CONCLUSIONS
The CHASTE approach represents a progressive way to evaluate risks in construction. It confronts the difficulties and unique
hazards of the construction industry by considering likelihood of loss-of-control events and exposure of potential victims to their
consequences separately. The CJSA method provides a mechanism for collecting the extensive knowledge of the likelihood of
loss-of-control events in construction that is needed for implementation of the CHASTE approach. The CJSA method is loosely
based on the standard JSA approach to safety planning in manufacturing. The CJSA method described was implemented for the
construction activities and methods typical of the Israeli building construction industry, and a comprehensive analysis was conducted of its results.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This Article has benefited from discussions with many people for more than can be acknowledged completely here. I would like
to extend our sincere thanks to all of them. It is our great pleasure to express our profound gratitude to our esteemed guides Mr.
Bhadresh Modi, Head of Safety Department, L & T Company, Shree Singaji Thermal Power Project (SSTPP), M.P.P.G.C.L
Khandwa, Assistant Professor Veerendra Suryawanshi, Fire Technology & Safety Engg. Dept., IES, IPS Academy Indore for his
valuable inspiration, able guidance and untiring help, which enabled me to carry out and complete this work. I am sincerely and
heartily grateful to Prof. Praveen Patel Head of the Department, Dept. of Fire Technology & Safety Engineering to support me
throughout my project. I express our sincere gratitude to Dr. Archana Keerti Chowdhary Principal, Institute of Engineering &
Science, IPS Academy for extending all the facilities during the course of study. At this juncture I also take this opportunity to
express our deep gratitude to all the Faculty members and Staff of Fire Technology & Safety Engineering Department, for their
appreciation and moral support. I am also thankful to all the persons who helped us directly or indirectly to bring the research
paper work to the present shape.
REFERENCES
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
The factory act 1948,M.P./C/G Rules 1962 ,

Fundamentals of Industrial Safety & Health- K.U. Mistry.
Safety at work - John Ridle
A book by Clifton A. Ericson, II ,Hazard Analysis Techniques for System Safety,Hazard Analysis Types and Techniques , a John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Publication.
Ahmed, S.M., Kwan, J.C., Ming, F.Y.W., Ho, D.C.P., 2000. Site safety management in Hong Kong. Journal of Management in Engineering, November
2000, 3442.
Ale, B.J.M., Bellamy, L.J., Baksteen, H., Damen, M., Goossens, L.H.J., Hale, A.R., Mud, M., Oh, J., Papazoglou, I.A., Whiston, J.Y., 2008. Accidents in
the construction industry in the Netherlands: an analysis of accident reports using Storybuilder. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 93 (2008), 1523
1533.
Bar, S., Shtrosberg, N., Prior, R., and Neon, D., 2005. National Insurance Compensation Claims. Research Report 89. National Insurance Institute,
Research and Planning Administration, Jerusalem, Israel.http://www.btl.gov.il/SiteCollectionDocuments/btl/Publications/mechkar_89.pdf
Hansen, L., 1993. Safety management: a call for (r)evolution. Professional Safety 38 (3), 1621.
Rozenfeld, O., Sacks, R., Rosenfeld, Y., 2009. CHASTE construction hazard analysis with spatial and temporal exposure. Construction Management &
Economics 27 (7), 625638.
Sacks, R., Rozenfeld, O., Rosenfeld, Y., 2009. Spatial and temporal exposure to safety hazards in construction. ASCE Journal of Construction Engineering
and Management 135 (8), 726736.
Saurin, T.A., Formoso, C.T., Guimaraes, L.B.M., 2004. Safety and production: an integrated planning and control model. Construction Management and
Economics 22, 159169.
Shepherd, G.W., Kahler, R.J., Cross, J., 2000. Crane fatalities a taxonomic analysis. Safety Science 36, 8393.
Womack, J.P., Jones, D.T., 2003. Lean Thinking: Banish Waste and Create Wealth in Your Corporation. Free Press, New York.
56

Hazard Identification and Evalution in Construction Industry

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Hazard Identification and Evalution in Construction Industry

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Hazard Identification and Evalution in Construction Industry

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IJSTE - International Journal of Science Technology & Engineering | Volume 1 | Issue 10 | April 2015

ISSN (online): 2349-784X