Risk Assessment for Sultan Qaboos Mosque Construction – Capstone Project Example

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing

The paper "Risk Assessment for Sultan Qaboos Mosque Construction" is a good example of a capstone project on engineering and construction. 1.0 Introduction 1.1 The aims The aim of the report is to analyze the Sultan Qaboos Mosque construction from the perspective of health and safety and risk assessment. The areas of focus are manual handling, noise, workplace transport, and machine safety. In analyzing the requirements, other considerations include the appropriateness of the methodology employed, identification of hazards and harms, evaluation of risks, identification, and prioritization of appropriate controls. Furthermore, discussions on the evaluation of the effectiveness of the processes towards advancing safe and healthy working conditions.

Some of the variables analyzed include planning, organization, implementation and monitoring, and review. 1.2 A description of the activity/activities In any construction site, risks and hazards are unavoidable but effective implementation of mitigation actions is important. Different hazards and risks exist that affect the integrity of the construction with a focus on health and safety requirements. Some of the potential sources of risks and hazards in the Sultan Qaboos Mosque, Sohar included manual handling, machinery safety, workplace transport, and noise.

Sultan Qaboos Mosque, Sohar understood problems that would occur if these issues were not managed effectively, and different strategies were formulated and implemented towards championing health and safety requirements. 1.3 Background information Sultan Qaboos Mosque is located in Sohar. The design and construction focus on civilization, science, and Islam as a religion. In addition, the design incorporated intellectual and scientific sources of knowledge. It will take around three years to construct Sultan Qaboos Mosque, Sohar after a competition was held to determine the best artistic impression. Its current hosts 8,000 people and the area it covers is more than 300,000 square meters.

The main square-shaped prayer room hosts more than 5,000 worshipers and has a central dome, which is 50 meters above the ground while the main minaret reaches more than 92 meters. The distinctive features of the Sultan Qaboos Mosque inSoharare the minaret and its unique design. The internal courtyard and mosque’ s walls are connected with a bar that has been inscribed with Islamic geometric frameworks and verses from the Koran in Thuluth script. The southern part of the walls contains a library that has more than 10,000 references volumes on humanity, culture, Islamic, and science. 2.0 Duty Holder’ s Risk Assessments 2.1 The Appropriateness of the Methodology Used Numerous methodologies and tools exist that can be used to understand the nature of the risk and the complexity of the risk (Pinto, Nunes and Ribeiro, 2011; Zhou, Whyte, and Sacks, 2012).

Some of the common tools or approaches include qualitative analysis, semi-quantitative analyzing, and quantitative analysis. Utilizing these methods focuses on HAZOP-FMEA, quantified FMEA, LOPA Bow-tie, and event tree/fault tree (Baybutt, 2015).

Sultan Qaboos Mosque construction processes utilized these different tools at different phases and sometimes, the different tools were used to address the requirements of a specific phase during the construction (Dikmen, Birgonul and Han, 2007). For example, when problems such as injuries occurred on the site, a fault tree was used to determine the causative agent. FMEA was also used before carrying out some projects to understand the relationship between the numerous processes, and how one process can affect the integrity of the entire project. The focus was on the design of the Mosque in that any problem in the design would affect the entire deliverables.

International Electrotechnical Commission(2010) advises that ETA and FTA have tobe combined in doing analysis since it overcomes the shortcomings of each of the techniques. A combination of both processes results in a new technique referred to as Cause-Consequence Analysis, which easily informs the users on potential threats and mechanisms in which these threats can be avoided and addressed(Dikmen, Birgonul, and Han, 2007; Zhou, Whyte and Sacks, 2012). Even though the Sultan Qaboos Mosque did not employ the framework, different issues and problems were identified, and corrective frameworks incorporated.

References

Aminbakhsh, S., Gunduz, M., and Sonmez, R., 2013. Safety risk assessment using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) during the planning and budgeting of construction projects. Journal of Safety Research, 46, pp. 99-105.

Antonioni, G., Spadoni, G., and Cozzani, V., 2007. A methodology for the quantitative risk assessment of major accidents triggered by seismic events. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 147(1), pp. 48-59.

Ball, D.J., and Watt, J., 2013. Further thoughts on the utility of risk matrices. Risk Analysis, 33(11), pp. 2068-2078.

Baybutt, P., 2015. Calibration of risk matrices for process safety. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 38, pp. 163-168.

Bosher, L., and Dainty, A., 2011. Disaster risk reduction and ‘built‐in resilience: towards overarching principles for construction practice. Disasters, 35(1), pp. 1-18.

Bosher, L., Dainty, A., Carrillo, P., Glass, and, J. and Price, A., 2007. Integrating disaster risk management into construction: a UK perspective. Building Research and Information, 35(2), pp. 163-177.

Bu-Qammaz, A.S., Dikmen, I. and Birgonul, M.T., 2009. Risk assessment of international construction projects using the analytic network process. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 36(7), pp. 1170-1181.

Cárdenas, A.A., Amin, S., Lin, Z.S., Huang, Y.L., Huang, C.Y. and Sastry, S., 2011, March. Attacks against process control systems: risk assessment, detection, and response. In Proceedings of the 6th ACM Symposium on Information, Computer and Communications Security (pp. 355-366). ACM.

Carpenter, A.C., Gardner, K.H., Foppiano, J., Benson, C.H. and Edil, T.B., 2007. Life cycle-based risk assessment of recycled materials in roadway construction. Waste Management, 27(10), pp. 1458-1464.

Chang, K.H., and Cheng, C.H., 2010. A risk assessment methodology using intuitionistic fuzzy set in FMEA. International Journal of Systems Science, 41(12), pp. 1457-1471.

Dikmen, I., Birgonul, M.T., and Han, S., 2007. Using fuzzy risk assessment to rate cost overrun risk in international construction projects. International Journal of Project Management, 25(5), pp. 494-505.

Dikmen, I., Birgonul, M.T., and Han, S., 2007. Using fuzzy risk assessment to rate cost overrun risk in international construction projects. International Journal of Project Management, 25(5), pp. 494-505.

Dohmen, T., Falk, A., Huffman, D., Sunde, U., Schupp, J., and Wagner, G.G., 2011. Individual risk attitudes: Measurement, determinants, and behavioral consequences. Journal of the European Economic Association, 9(3), pp. 522-550.

Du, S., Keil, M., Mathiassen, L., Shen, Y. and Tiwana, A., 2007. Attention-shaping tools, expertise, and perceived control in IT project risk assessment. Decision Support Systems, 43(1), pp. 269-283.

Dufour, B., Plee, L., Moutou, F., Boisseleau, D., Chartier, C., Lancelot, R., Saergerman, C., Thebault, A., Hattenberger, A.M. and Toma, B., 2011. A qualitative risk assessment methodology for scientific expert panels. Revue Scientifique ET Technique-Office International Des Epizooties, 30(3), pp. 673-681.

Duijm, N.J., 2015. Recommendations on the use and design of risk matrices. Safety Science, 76, pp.21-31.

El-Sayegh, S.M., 2008. Risk assessment and allocation in the UAE construction industry. International Journal of Project Management, 26(4), pp. 431-438.

European Standard. (June 2016). Hazard and operability studies (HAZOP studies) – ApplicationGuide (IEC 61882:2016). European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardization.

Garg, A., Boda, S., Hegmann, K.T., Moore, J.S., Kapellusch, J.M., Bhoyar, P., These, M.S., Merryweather, A., Deckow-Schaefer, G., Bloswick, D. and Malloy, E.J., 2014. The NIOSH lifting equation and low-back pain, part 1: association with low-back pain in the Back works prospective cohort study. Human Factors, 56(1), pp. 6-28.

Hallowell, M.R., and Gambatese, J.A., 2009. Construction safety risk mitigation. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 135(12), pp. 1316-1323.

International Electrotechnical Commission, 2010. Analysis Techniques for Dependability–Event Tree Analysis (ETA). IEC, 62502, pp. 2010-10.

Nieto-Morote, A., and Ruz-Vila, F., 2011. A fuzzy approach to construction project risk assessment. International Journal of Project Management, 29(2), pp. 220-231.

Pinto, A., Nunes, I.L., and Ribeiro, R.A., 2011. Occupational risk assessment in the construction industry–Overview and reflection. Safety Science, 49(5), pp. 616-624.

Pinto, A., Nunes, I.L., and Ribeiro, R.A., 2011. Occupational risk assessment in the construction industry–Overview and reflection. Safety Science, 49(5), pp. 616-624.

Redmill, F., 2002. Exploring subjectivity in the hazard analysis. Engineering Management Journal, 12(3), pp. 139-144.

Rozenfeld, O., Sacks, R., Rosenfeld, Y. and Baum, H., 2010. Construction job safety analysis. Safety Science, 48(4), pp. 491-498.

Sadeghi, N., Fayek, A.R., and Pedrycz, W., 2010. Fuzzy Monte Carlo simulation and risk assessment in construction. Computer‐Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering, 25(4), pp. 238-252.

Seo, J.W., and Choi, H.H., 2008. Risk-based safety impact assessment methodology for underground construction projects in Korea. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 134(1), pp. 72-81.

Theoharidou, M., Kotzanikolaou, P., and Gritzalis, D., 2011. Risk assessment methodology for interdependent critical infrastructures. International Journal of Risk Assessment and Management, 15(2-3), pp. 128-148.

Tsai, C.H., and Chen, C.W., 2010. An earthquake disaster management mechanism based on risk assessment information for the tourism industry-a case study from the island of Taiwan. Tourism Management, 31(4), pp. 470-481.

Tsai, C.H., and Chen, C.W., 2011. The establishment of a rapid natural disaster risk assessment model for the tourism industry. Tourism Management, 32(1), pp. 158-171.

Waters, T.R., Lu, M.L., and Occhipinti, E., 2007. The new procedure for assessing sequential manual lifting jobs using the revised NIOSH lifting equation. Ergonomics, 50(11), pp. 1761-1770.

Zavadskas, E.K., Turskis, Z., and Tamošaitiene, J., 2010. Risk assessment of construction projects. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 16(1), pp. 33-46.

Zavadskas, E.K., Turskis, Z., and Tamošaitiene, J., 2010. Risk assessment of construction projects. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 16(1), pp. 33-46.

Zeng, J., An, M., and Smith, N.J., 2007. Application of a fuzzy-based decision-making methodology to construction project risk assessment. International Journal of Project Management, 25(6), pp. 589-600.

Zeng, J., An, M., and Smith, N.J., 2007. Application of a fuzzy-based decision-making methodology to construction project risk assessment. International Journal of Project Management, 25(6), pp. 589-600.

Zhou, W., Whyte, J., and Sacks, R., 2012. Construction safety and digital design: A review. Automation in Construction, 22, pp. 102-111.

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing
Contact Us