论文部分内容阅读
目的应用新加坡化学物质半定量职业健康风险评估方法 (新加坡风险评估法)评估起重机制造企业各岗位的职业健康风险水平,探索起重机制造行业的职业风险评估与管理模式。方法选择某起重机制造企业开展现场职业卫生调查,运用新加坡风险评估法进行风险评估,并将评估结果与我国现行的作业分级标准和职业接触限值进行比较。结果起重机制造企业存在苯、甲苯、二甲苯、锰及其化合物、丁醇、乙酸丁酯、电焊烟尘、矽尘、砂轮磨尘和噪声等多种职业病危害因素。新加坡风险评估法分析显示该企业各化学物质接触岗位中,高风险等级占3.28%、中等风险等级占8.20%、低风险等级占55.74%、可忽略风险等级占32.78%;其中铸造生产线浸涂、结构件生产线机器焊接、结构件生产线配重、铸造生产线制芯、砂混炼、落砂岗位为中高风险岗位。而应用国家职业病危害作业分级标准评定仅反映轻度危害占1.64%,而相对无害作业占98.36%。两种方法对各岗位的职业病危害作业风险评估结果存在差别(P<0.05)。结论新加坡风险评估法能较好地识别和评估劳动者工作场所化学物质暴露风险水平,但不能对企业的噪声、高温等物理因素作出风险评估,可考虑与国家职业病危害作业分级并用。
Objective To assess the occupational health risk of various positions in crane manufacturing enterprises by Singapore semi-quantitative occupational health risk assessment method (Singapore risk assessment method) and explore the occupational risk assessment and management model of crane manufacturing industry. Methods A crane manufacturing enterprise was selected to carry out on-site occupational health survey, risk assessment was carried out by using Singapore risk assessment method, and the assessment results were compared with the current job grading standards and occupational exposure limits in our country. Results There were many occupational hazards in the crane manufacturers such as benzene, toluene, xylene, manganese and their compounds, butanol, butyl acetate, welding fume, silica dust, grinding wheel dust and noise. Singapore risk assessment method analysis shows that the company exposure to chemical substances in various positions, accounting for 3.28% of high-risk level, medium risk level accounted for 8.20%, 55.74% low risk level, ignorable risk level 32.78%; of which casting line dip coating, Structural parts production line machine welding, structural components production line weight, casting production line core, sand mixing, falling sand positions for the high-risk jobs. The application of national occupational hazards assessment rating only reflects mild hazard accounted for 1.64%, while the relatively harmless operation accounted for 98.36%. There was a difference between the two methods in assessing occupational hazards in various positions (P <0.05). Conclusion The Singapore risk assessment method can better identify and assess the exposure level of workers in the workplace but does not make any risk assessment on the physical factors such as noise and temperature of the enterprise. It can be considered in combination with the national occupational hazards program.