Health & Safety

The article discusses how the neuroscience behind Critical Error Reduction Techniques aligns with safety practices. (Image source: Adobe Stock)

Larry Wilson, author and CEO, SafeStart, looks at how neuroscience aligns with critical error reduction techniques

As we continue our series on Paradigm Shifts in safety (if you haven’t yet, catch up at https://ae.safestart.com/paradigm-shifts/), we encourage you to dive into the seventh article of the twelve-part series.

In the last issue, we discussed the concept of self-triggering; the importance of learning how to self-trigger quickly, or at least quickly enough to prevent making a critical error, which means that we must train the sub-conscious mind. Now, to a certain extent, we have already discussed the importance of involving or using the sub-conscious mind to prevent injuries when we talked about developing good habits with eyes on task, so that if or when your mind goes off task, you’ll still, most likely, get the benefit of your reflexes.

Habits and reflexes are not things we are deciding to do in the moment with our conscious mind. They are both sub-conscious. All this is where the neuroscience comes in. Until recently (last 10 years or so) scientists and psychologists could speculate as to what part of the brain was being used. But it wasn’t until FMRI’s that they could prove it. And I think that it’s interesting how the neuroscience and the Critical Error Reduction Techniques (CERTs) are aligned or how the neuroscience supports or validates the CERTs. But my dad, who is an engineer, was unimpressed. When I explained it to him, he said that it was one of the best examples of, “Locking the door after the horse has got out” he’d ever heard.

So, he’s got a point. But it’s still pretty interesting. And it is science which always helps when dealing with sceptics. So, we’re going to get into at least a bit of it as we go through all four CERTs. Two of which we have discussed already: work on habits, or work on improving your safety-related habits and self-triggering on the states (rushing, frustration, fatigue) so you don’t make a critical error. And obviously, this has to happen quickly.

Even if it’s only a split-second too late, it’s still too late. And to get close to reflex speed, we need to use the sub-conscious mind. The conscious mind just isn’t quick enough. Ironically, training the sub-conscious mind—isn’t quick—and when you think about learning arithmetic, it wasn’t always exciting either. To give you an example of speed, repetition, and the power of the sub-conscious mind, just answer the following question as quickly as you can: What is 3 x 4? You probably already have the answer in your head before you read it here. It’s 12. That’s how quick your sub-conscious mind is. But how many repetitions did it take to get that quick—so you didn’t have to process anything? And very reliable: almost impossible to get it wrong… now try quickly 13 x 14.

To find out the answer to the last question (without checking your calculator) and explore how the neuroscience behind Critical Error Reduction Techniques aligns with safety practices, continue reading the full article clicking here. Stay with us as we delve deeper into the power of the subconscious mind and its role in preventing critical errors.

Scan the QR Code below to read the article in its entirety: 

Understanding and leveraging the benefits of reflexes offers a powerful opportunity to prevent serious injuries. (Image source: SafeStart)

When discussing risk management and workplace safety, Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) is often regarded as the last line of defence. This traditional approach, doesn’t account for the most basic protective measures, especially those involving mechanical or kinetic energy.

The role of reflex actions in preventing incidents is a critical factor which is often overlooked. Understanding and leveraging the benefits of reflexes offers a powerful opportunity to prevent serious injuries and fatalities in the workplace.

The traditional model of safety management follows the hierarchy of controls, which places PPE as the last line of defence, a final measure after other controls have failed. However, in certain cases, PPE functions as an escalation control, protecting workers after an incident has already begun. Seat belts, fall arrest harness and similar gear do not prevent accidents but aim to reduce the severity of injuries once an error has occurred. While PPE plays an important role, reflex actions serve as the true last line of defence and the first line of protection in many scenarios.

The Bowtie Model helps illustrate this by mapping sources of hazardous energy—whether mechanical, chemical, thermal, electrical, or biological—and categorising controls into prevention and mitigation. In most cases (over 90%), mechanical or kinetic energy is the source of serious workplace injuries and fatalities, and as a result reflexes or whether the person will get the benefit of their reflexes becomes a critical factor in terms of the potential severity of the outcome. Outside the controlled work environment, where situations are more unpredictable, reflex actions often determine the difference between a close call or near-miss and a fatality. For instance, a reflexive movement could help a pedestrian avoid being hit by an oncoming vehicle.

Traditional safety practices tend to focus on high-risk activities through rules, procedures, and PPE. However, the majority of serious incidents occur during medium or low-risk tasks. Data from over 400 fatal workplace incident reports shows that 47-71% of these fatalities could have been avoided or lessened had the workers benefited from reflexive responses.

The data also reveals that in over 95% of incidents, the unexpected event that caused the injury stems from the individual themselves. Whether it’s due to rushing, fatigue, frustration, or complacency, human factors play a critical role in workplace safety. Reflexes are key to mitigating incidents in these medium to lower-risk scenarios, where more traditional controls may not be as effective.

The role of reflexes in preventing serious injuries

Reflexes are innate to humans and tested at birth to ensure they function properly. However, whether someone gets the benefit of their reflexes is influenced by human factors such as rushing, frustration, fatigue and complacency, which can cause eyes not on task and mind not on task. If a person’s mind is not on task due to complacency, their reflexes can still help prevent accidents, even if the reflex is a bit slower. But if their eyes are also off task, then they might not get a reflex at all, which can significantly increase the risk of a serious injury or fatality.

External factors like technology can exacerbate the issue. Mobile phones and fast-paced environments condition our brains to experience shorter bursts of focus, leaving us vulnerable to distractions.

This highlights the importance of critical error reduction techniques, such as self-triggering on states like rushing, frustration and fatigue, as individuals can feel and identify these states in the moment and then quickly think about keeping their eyes and mind on task. Complacency, on the other hand, is more passive and harder to detect.

One way to counteract complacency is to build strong safety-related habits, such as maintaining visual awareness before moving hands, feet, body or machinery. These habits ensure that employees will still get the benefit of their reflexes even if their minds are not on task, because they will still be looking at what they are doing.

At an organisational level, addressing human factors is crucial for reducing incident rates. Employers can help by ensuring workers have adequate rest, hydration, and a work environment that minimises unnecessary stress. When examining the Bowtie Model, it becomes clear that human factors like rushing, frustration, fatigue, and complacency need to be considered along with the various forms of hazardous energy as these factors lead to critical errors such as "eyes not on task" and "mind not on task," which can severely impact reflexive responses. By understanding and implementing critical error reduction techniques, organisations and individuals can add an extra layer of protection, leveraging reflexes as both a preventative and mitigation tool in workplace safety.

In conclusion, the role of human factors and reflexes and their significance as the real last line of defence and first line of protection has been largely overlooked in workplace safety. Organisations that focus on enhancing cognitive effectiveness and reflexive responses have a much better chance of preventing serious incidents or reducing their consequences.

To explore the full insights from Larry Wilson and Dr Waddah S Al Hashmi on workplace safety and reflexes, read the complete article at https://ae.safestart.com/article/the-hierarchy-of-controls-and-the-bowtie-model/

Kevin Killeen, global product line manager for Flame Detection at MSA Safety, outlines how advanced diagnostic technologies help minimise false alarms in flame detectors

In industrial environments where flammable materials are handled, flame detection systems are crucial for safety. They serve as an essential layer in safety programs, helping to prevent fires and explosions by detecting the presence of flames early on. However, false alarms can be a significant issue, disrupting operations and potentially desensitising personnel to real alerts. Different flame detection methods exhibit varying false alarm profiles depending on the application, which is why advanced diagnostic technologies, like artificial neural networks (ANNs), have been developed to enhance these systems and reduce false alarms.

Traditional flame detection systems rely on sensors such as infrared (IR) and ultraviolet (UV) detectors to identify flames. These sensors, however, can be prone to interference from sources like sunlight, arc welding, and hot surfaces, which may lead to false alarms. Environmental factors like dust, smoke, and fog can further limit the effectiveness of flame detectors, making it challenging to distinguish between genuine threats and false alarms.

Addressing the challenges

ANNs are a powerful solution to these challenges. They are computational models inspired by the structure and function of the human brain, capable of learning complex patterns and making decisions based on vast datasets.

When applied to flame detection, ANNs can discern subtle differences between actual flames and potential sources of interference, significantly reducing false alarms.
ANNs are trained using extensive datasets of spectral data from both real flames and common sources of interference. Through supervised learning, the network adjusts its internal parameters to optimize its ability to accurately classify input data.

Once trained, the ANN can quickly analyse incoming sensor data and determine whether a detected anomaly corresponds to a genuine flame or a false alarm. Since 2005, MSA has been at the forefront of using artificial neural networks in flame detection technology.

Numerous industries, including oil and gas, chemical processing, and manufacturing, have adopted ANNs for flame detection with remarkable results. By integrating ANNs into their safety systems, companies have reported significant reductions in false alarms, leading to enhanced operational continuity and improved worker safety.

Additionally, the scalability of ANNs allows them to be deployed in diverse environments, from offshore platforms to industrial plants, highlighting their versatility and effectiveness.

Key advantages

The key advantages of using ANNs in flame detection include:
1. Adaptability: ANNs can handle varying environmental conditions and sources of interference due to their extensive training library, making them robust in real-world applications.
2. Accuracy: ANNs leverage sophisticated pattern recognition capabilities to differentiate between genuine flames and false alarms with high precision.
3. Efficiency: ANNs can process large volumes of data in real-time, enabling rapid decision-making and minimizing response times in critical situations.
4. Reduced maintenance: With fewer false alarms, flame detection systems that incorporate ANNs require less frequent maintenance, resulting in cost savings and improved operational efficiency

The FL5000 Multi-Spectrum Infrared (MSIR) Flame Detector is our latest generation flame detector. It builds on the foundation set by the FL4000H, with increased neural network capabilities that further reduce false alarms.

The proprietary MSIR flame algorithm ensures that the detector verifies the presence of a legitimate flame before initiating an alarm, protecting both assets and budget.
Additionally, the FL5000 is the first flame detector to incorporate Bluetooth technology. With the exclusive Flame Connect App, users can easily set up, configure, and download event logs from mobile devices.

Advanced diagnostic technologies, especially artificial neural networks, offer excellent accuracy and efficiency in flame detection while minimizing false alarms. By harnessing the power of ANNs, industries can mitigate risks, protect assets, and safeguard personnel. As technology continues to evolve, the integration of next-generation ANNs is poised to set new benchmarks for excellence in industrial flame detection.

Ampelmann’s portfolio of gangways is ready for operations on any type of floating structure. (Image source: Ampelmann)

Ship to Ship operations (S2S) have been a cornerstone of offshore logistics for years, providing a critical link in the transfer of personnel and cargo between floating vessels and structures

As the offshore energy sector expands into deeper waters, where constructing fixed structures is prohibitively expensive, the demand for safe and efficient access from one floating structure to another has surged.

Despite the technical complexity involved in transferring personnel and cargo between two floating objects, Ampelmann’s innovative motion compensated gangways have long been capable of facilitating S2S operations. Until recently these systems have successfully enabled operations on a variety of different floating structures, including floating wind turbines and other vessels, but not yet on Single Point Buoy Moorings (SPMs).

An important component of the modern oil and gas sector, SPM’s, often paired with FPSO’s, enable the quick on- and offloading of crude oil or gas. Traditional access methods, such as “bump and jump” – where a vessel pushes against the structure to allow personnel to jump across – or towing the SPM back to port for repairs, have been the primary methods of access during maintenance operations. While these methods have been effective, they come with obvious safety and efficiency concerns.

UAE pilot project

Earlier this year, Ampelmann’s electric L-type gangway was used on a pilot project for a maintenance campaign on an SPM offshore Abu Dhabi, UAE. As these floating structures can exhibit extreme motions relative to the vessel, they present additional challenges for Walk to Work (W2W) systems. A custom-designed landing platform was built and attached to the SPM to ensure a safe and stable gangway connection and with the help of in-depth workability studies and through years of experience with similar operational procedures, the project was completed within 12 days.

The successful completion of the project marks a turning point in the servicing of these structures and shows that Ampelmann’s gangways have the capacity to compensate for the complex and divergent motions of both the vessel and the SPM, ensuring safe and efficient personnel and cargo transfers.

As the offshore energy sector fixes its gaze beyond the horizon, further out from shore, where fixed offshore structures are no longer desirable, the S2S capabilities of W2W systems such as Ampelmann’s are poised to become increasingly relevant. From operations between two vessels to FPSOs, semi-submersibles, floating wind turbines, and now SPMs, Ampelmann’s portfolio of gangways is ready for operations on any type of floating structure.