Case Study 4:
Chemical Drum Handling
Background: The operation analyzed was a manufacturing
step which involved the manual transfer of materials into a
kneader for processing. The original process
involved the manual handling of drums, bags, and pails
associated with the addition of powders and liquid into the
kneader for mixing. The process of weighing
out powder and liquid to blend in the kneader was labor
intensive and also introduced process fluctuations due to the
variability of material mixed caused by manual dispensing.
Hazard Identification
The company is considered a world leader in
the prevention of injuries and illness. As
part of their safety management system, workplace risk
assessments identified the operation as having the potential to
cause ergonomic injuries and/or illnesses due to the routine
handling of drums, bags, and pails of various weights.
The open handling also introduced exposure to
low-toxicity dusts, which required air-purifying respirators to
be worn.
Hazard Intervention
The intervention involved the design and
installation of an automated system to add liquids and powder to
the kneader. This design eliminated the
manual handling of powders using bags, pails, and scoops at the
filling stage. The project included the installation of lifting
devices to handle drums at raw material and finished product
loading and unloading stations. It also reduced airborne dust
exposures that eliminated the need for employees to wear
respiratory protective equipment (RPE).
Impacts of the Intervention
The intervention significantly reduced the
ergonomic exposure associated with the routine handing of drums,
bags, and pails. The company estimated that the intervention
would normally eliminate one serious injury over a 10-year
period. However, the operation is in a
country with very liberal laws regarding injury/illness
reporting and disability and as such it is likely that the
intervention could achieve even greater cost reductions
associated with fewer injuries being incurred.
The intervention also enclosed the transfer operation
resulting in a more efficient containment of dusts and
eliminating the need for RPE at this manufacturing stage.
The intervention also resulted in a
significant productivity improvement resulting in one less
person needed to operate the kneader process. During the project
implementation, a scale was incorporated into the closed
transfer process thus allowing more accurate liquid addition and
reducing the variability of the quality of the final product.
Financial Metrics
A financial analysis of the intervention
showed a 5-year net present value (NPV) of $39,708 with an
internal rate of return (IRR) of 32%. This
scenario assumed that if the intervention had not been
undertaken, one serious ergonomic injury would have occurred
during the 5-year period. The company uses an
internal cost of $40,000 per ergonomic injury/illness. A second
scenario that assumed no injury would occur yielded an NPV of
$24,160 with an IRR of 25%. Both scenarios
resulted in a discounted payback period (DPP) of 3.1 years.
Lessons Learned
Facility management recognized the
ergonomic risk associated with the routine manual handling of
drums involved in this production operation.
From a financial viewpoint, it was hard to determine future
health and safety benefits associated with the project other
than to project that a serious ergonomic injury was likely
during the next 5 years. However, the
productivity improvement associated with the more efficient
handling of drums and the transfer of product were the financial
drivers to justify the project. Improvement in operator health
and safety, along with improved product quality, were intangible
benefits. This project demonstrated that
health and safety consequences should be considered when work
systems are designed or retrofitted to ensure the benefits to
the organization are optimized.
. |