Identification knowledge analysis

Amin, Rajan, Max Bramer, and Richard Emslie. Intelligent Data Analysis for Conservation Experiments With Rhino Horn Fingerprint Identification. Knowledge-Based Systems 16 (2003) 329-336. 

System safety is hazards-focused, as are all the subsets of the practice of safety, whatever they are called. System safety commences with hazard identification and analysis. Do that poorly, and all that follows is misdirected. Applications of the hazard analysis and risk assessment methods developed in the evolution of system safety have been successful. The generalist in safety practice ought to know more about them. As a minimum, generalist safety practitioners should be knowledgeable about these methods Preliminary Hazard Analysis What-If Analysis and Failure Modes and Effects Analysis. (See Chapter 14, Hazard Analysis and Risk Assessment. )... 

These provisions presume that the culture and the management commitment include upstream design and engineering considerations and knowledge of hazard identification and analysis and risk assessment methodologies. 

A hazard identification and analysis system must be implemented to systematically identify basic and unforeseen safety and health hazards, evaluate their risks, and prioritize and recommend methods to eliminate or control hazards to an acceptable level of risk. Through this system, management must gain a thorough knowledge of the safety and health hazards and employee risks. 

Through this system, management must gain a thorough knowledge of the safety and health hazards and employee risks. The required methods of hazard identification and analysis are described below. 

Having knowledge of hazard identification and analysis and risk assessments that become rooted within an organization s culture is the type of innovative action needed to reduce serious injury and fatality potential. 

Failure Mode and Effects (and Criticality) Analysis (FMEA/FMECA) are structured methodologies for the identification and analysis of the effects of latent equipment failure modes on system performance. This is a bottom-up process starting with the failure of a constituent/subsystem and investigating the effect of this on the system. It should be conducted by a team of experts with cross-functional knowledge of the analysed system, process or product. The methodology consists of the following steps ... 

Knowledge of the identity of phenolic compounds in food facilitates the analysis and discussion of potential antioxidant effects. Thus studies of phenolic compounds as antioxidants in food should usually by accompanied by the identification and quantification of the phenols. Reversed-phase HPLC combined with UV-VIS or electrochemical detection is the most common method for quantification of individual flavonoids and phenolic acids in foods (Merken and Beecher, 2000 Mattila and Kumpulainen, 2002), whereas HPLC combined with mass spectrometry has been used for identification of phenolic compounds (Justesen et al, 1998). Normal-phase HPLC combined with mass spectrometry has been used to identify monomeric and dimeric proanthocyanidins (Lazarus et al, 1999). Flavonoids are usually quantified as aglycones by HPLC, and samples containing flavonoid glycosides are therefore hydrolysed before analysis (Nuutila et al, 2002). 

Whereas the components of (known) test mixtures can be attributed on the basis of APCI+/, spectra, it is quite doubtful that this is equally feasible for unknown (real-life) extracts. Data acquisition conditions of LC-APCI-MS need to be optimised for existing universal LC separation protocols. User-specific databases of reference spectra need to be generated, and knowledge about the fragmentation rules of APCI-MS needs to be developed for the identification of unknown additives in polymers. Method development requires validation by comparison with established analytical tools. Extension to a quantitative method appears feasible. Despite the current wide spread of LC-API-MS equipment, relatively few industrial users, such as ICI, Sumitomo, Ford, GE, Solvay and DSM, appear to be somehow committed to this technique for (routine) polymer/additive analysis. 

Chromatographic procedures applied to the identification of proteinaceous paint binders tend to be rather detailed consisting of multiple analytical steps ranging from solvent extractions, chromatography clean up, hydrolysis, derivatisation reactions, and measurement to data analysis. Knowledge of the error introduced at each step is necessary to minimise cumulative uncertainty. Reliable results are consequently obtained when laboratory and field blanks are carefully characterised. Additionally, due to the small amounts of analyte and the high sensitivity of the analysis, the instrument itself must be routinely calibrated with amino acid standards along with measurements of certified reference proteins. All of these factors must be taken into account because many times there is only one chance to take the measurement. 

---