What SMS (Safety Management System ) does?
SMS Integrates with other management systems:
However,
it has some drawbacks concerning the Safety Approval work if the two systems
are merged into one system without a possibility to distinguish between Safety
and Quality tasks: Any change in any procedure in the Quality System must
subsequently be presented to the Safety Authority because it potentially have
an impact on Safety.
But the answer is 'Yes'.
The question was raised by the Chinese delegation at
an international railway safety conference. They concluded that when the staff
was paid with bonus arrangements if regularity increased, then they had a
tendency to jeopardize the safety. As an example, incidents had occurred where
the train driver started the train when an umbrella was stuck in the door,
forcing the passengers on a platform to jump.
Therefore, the answer must be 'No'.
Let’s take a look at the rough system definition
above. The blue line marks the system.
Furthermore, the blue line immediately shows the
interfaces. The interfaces are marked with green circles. An interface occurs
whenever the system interacts with other systems e.g. the wheels interact with
the tracks and the train doors interact with the passengers.
Although the system definition is clear, there are
still many issues it would be advantageous and time-saving to discuss as early
as possible in the trains life cycle:
- Is the maintenance manual a part of the system?
- Should the system involve coupled trains?
- Should the mission definition be a part of the
system?
- Is intentional misuse part of the system?
The system definition can be organized into Generic
Product, Generic Application and Specific Application as described in the
Safety Approval Process.
The system definition defines the hazards in the
hazard log because hazards occur at the system borders.
Finally, it might end up with a system definition at
block diagram level as shown below. The example below shows the subsystems that
were considered inside and outside of the electronic brake system of a
Copenhagen commuter train type during a safety approval process.
The rectangle boxes are subsystems and the hexagons
boxes are measuring sensors.
Once your company has paid the fee for the NC, you can
enroll into a WG of your interest.
Each standard is - in principal - updated every 5'Th
year. This means every standard has almost all the time an affiliated active
WG, working on the next update.
It can be risky for the major players on the market to
ignore the work in the WGs. - Imagine, a major supplier is developing a new
Railway safety product (e.g. an interlocking system, a train,..). It takes 5
years and cost 15 million Euro. Once the Company has finished the product, it
realizes, a WG in the meantime has released an updated standard, which the
product does not satisfy.
Every WG has an appointed chairman who organizes the
work. Typically the group meets every 3'rd month in a major city in Europe.
Everyone is seated around a table; the text is projected on a large screen. The
chairman controls the keyboard; the standard is written as a "One-text
negotiation". For example the chairman asks: "Which key documents are
necessary in order to implement an adequate Safety Management System?"
Typically participants could be: Siemens, Bombardier, Alston,
Westinghouse etc. Other participants could be the Infrastructure owners, the
Safety Authorities: French EPSF, German EBA; independent Assessors like DNV and
Tub; and the Advisors like Atkins.
Once the WG releases a version it must be formally be
approved by the national committees.
If the WG agrees about a subject, it is formulated
clearly in the standard; if they disagree, the standard will only contain some
vague superior sentences like: "An adequate mitigation activity should be
established...".
In the daily work, you can then try to interpret and
discuss, what is actually "adequate"?
Hopefully, this blog can inspire the interpretations.
For More Info : Safety Officers Course
Comments
Post a Comment