A safety engineer is someone who builds castles in the air and an operator is someone who goes and lives in them. But nature is the one who collects the rent…
Well if news from the G20 is anything to go by we may be on the verge of a seismic shift in how the challenge of climate change is treated. Our Prime Ministers denial notwithstanding :)
A report issued by the US Chemical Safety Board on Monday entitled “Regulatory Report: Chevron Richmond Refinery Pipe Rupture and Fire,” calls on California to make changes to the way it manages process safety.
The report is worth a read as it looks at various regulatory regimes in a fairly balanced fashion. A strong independent competent regulator is seen as a key factor for success by the reports authors, regardless of the regulatory mechanisms. I don’t however think the evidence is as strong as the report makes out that safety case/goal based safety regimes perform ‘all that better’ than other regulatory regimes. Would have also been nice if they’d compared and contrasted against other industries, like aviation.
So I’ve been invited to to give a talk on risk at the conference dinner. Should be interesting.
When is an interlock not an interlock?
I was working on an interface problem the other day. The problem related to how to judge when a payload (attached to a carrier bus like) had left the parent (like the Huygens lander leaving the Cassini spacecraft above). Now I could use what’s called the ‘interlock interface’ which is a discrete ‘loop back’ that runs through the bus to payload connector then turns around and heads back into the bus again. The interlock interface is there to provides a means for the carriers avionics to determine if the payload is electrically mated to the bus. So should I use this as an indication that the payload has left the carrier bus as well? Well maybe not.