Big Chemical Encyclopedia

Chemical substances, components, reactions, process design ...

Articles Figures Tables About

Safety design reviews generally

Checklists are easy to use and provide a cost-effective way to identify customarily recognized hazards. Nevertheless, the quality of checklists is dependent on the experience of the people who develop them. Furthermore, they must be crafted to suit particular needs. If a checklist is not complete, the analysis may not identify some hazardous situations. An example of a checklist for machinery design is provided in Addendum B at the end of this chapter. A checklist for general design purposes appears in Chapter 13, Safety Design Reviews. Both serve as resources for those who choose to build their own checklists. [Pg.127]

Designate persons to intervene in events threatening life, health, or property. Review general safety policies as often as necessary but at least every 3 years. Respond to product safety recalls by taking appropriate actions. [Pg.79]

The results of general safety research programmes may also provide useful support to designers and reviewers in their evaluation tasks. The results of safety research are generally available in open meetings, the literature and computer databases. The IAEA generic safety issues databases and IAEA technical documents (lAEA-TECDOCs) are examples of international results in the area of safety research. [Pg.8]

The Toyota Electronic Throttle Control System (ETCS) is a system deployed in almost a decade of vehicle production that exhibits many of the common problems I have seen in design reviews. It has numerous lapses in following good software practices in general, and safety-critical software practices in particular. [Pg.371]

System safety is generally involved in the acceptance test process. Safety may review test results to ensure safety concerns are adequately resolved and that design safety requirements are met. Safety may also review acceptance test procedures to ensure that no test hazards exist and that the potential mishap risk of a test is acceptable. It may be necessary for safety to be present as a witness to the conduct of certain acceptance tests, generally on safety-critical components. [Pg.19]


See other pages where Safety design reviews generally is mentioned: [Pg.4]    [Pg.5]    [Pg.236]    [Pg.265]    [Pg.142]    [Pg.246]    [Pg.2459]    [Pg.2369]    [Pg.153]    [Pg.63]    [Pg.157]    [Pg.38]    [Pg.76]    [Pg.1]    [Pg.509]    [Pg.152]    [Pg.229]    [Pg.143]    [Pg.26]    [Pg.221]    [Pg.228]    [Pg.429]    [Pg.48]    [Pg.250]    [Pg.82]    [Pg.224]    [Pg.341]    [Pg.321]    [Pg.2288]    [Pg.188]    [Pg.911]    [Pg.426]    [Pg.45]    [Pg.116]    [Pg.24]    [Pg.67]    [Pg.1]    [Pg.30]    [Pg.61]    [Pg.26]    [Pg.85]    [Pg.547]    [Pg.1339]    [Pg.321]   
See also in sourсe #XX -- [ Pg.237 , Pg.238 ]




SEARCH



Design generalizing

Design reviews

General Design

Safety design

Safety design reviews

Safety generalization

Safety reviews

© 2024 chempedia.info