Vargas, C A (1998) Investigating construction falls using fault tree analysis and developing a prototype tool to reduce falls using expert system and computer-assisted instruction methods. PhD thesis, Ohio State University, USA.
Abstract
Construction falls have been identified as the most frequent cause of deaths and injuries to workers during construction operations. The objective of this study is to systematically analyze construction systems as they relate to fall protection safety and identify the potential hazards that may cause falls and slips. A fault tree analysis technique is used to identify all the possible events that may lead to a fall accident in construction. This knowledge is then incorporated into a prototype tool, SAFETY FIRST, that consists of the following four modules: (1) An expert system to investigate a construction fall that has already occurred. The system identifies a particular event or combination of events that are the likely cause of the fall and explains how it could have been prevented. (2) An expert system to evaluate the existing fall protection in a construction site. The system determines if the fall protection in a given elevated component is adequate and provides suggestions to eliminate or avoid any potential hazard identified. (3) An expert system tool that can be used at the design and planning stages of a construction project to identify and eliminate potential fall hazards at the early stages of the project. (4) A computer based training tool to educate workers on all aspects of fall safety. The training program will also maintain records on each of its users' performance. It is important to recognize that this kind of tool will be best used in a company whose environment already promotes safety as a major priority. Therefore, as a part of this study, we include a discussion of the elements that a sound, long term safety program should have in order to succeed. The SAFETY FIRST system is expected to be used by private companies, such as general contractors and subcontractors to identify potentially dangerous conditions, investigate falls, and train their employees; by government agencies, such as OSHA and BWC to investigate falls and to train their safety inspectors; and by academic institutions to train construction students in fall related matters. The system has been evaluated by experts and potential users. All evaluation criteria, including the overall performance of the system have been rated to be good or better than good.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Hadipriono, F C |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction systems; hazards; construction project; construction site; construction operations; expert system; government; safety; training; employee; subcontractor |
| Index terms: | construction project, fall hazard, falls, expert system, module, fault-tree analysis, construction system, government agency, construction operation, program, general contractor, injury, construction site, prototype, subcontractor |
| Subjects: | practitioner, construction operations, building construction, production management, risk management, health risk and incident analysis, data management, software systems, architectural elements, administrative law, health conditions and diseases, modelling and simulation, work location |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Digital Applications, Legal Issues, Design Practice, Project Management, Health and Safety, Engineering Principles, Site Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here