創造更安全,更可靠的世界

了解我們如何做

在SEAM Group,我們所做的一切都是為了提高安全性和優化資產性能。

安全圖示

安全

我們將説明您預防事故、教育員工和承包商、開發流程、降低成本和拯救生命。

瞭解更多資訊

圖示可靠性

可靠性

加強資產績效、增加總體正常運行時間、簡化運營並改進工作優先順序。

瞭解更多資訊

圖示性能

維護

通過關鍵任務安裝、維護和維修完成資產優化生命週期

瞭解更多資訊

我們的服務產品

幫助組織優化有活力的資產績效。

我們的企業資產管理能力每天都在説明全球 50 個州和 80 多個國家/ 地區 500 多個客戶實現其安全和優化目標。 探索我們的能力,瞭解為什麼這麼多人開始依賴我們的團隊取得成功。

諮詢和培訓

諮詢和培訓

瞭解更多資訊

檢查和評估

檢查和評估

瞭解更多資訊

維護

安裝與維修

瞭解更多資訊

科技

數據與技術

瞭解更多資訊

關於 SEAM 組

優化成功從這裏開始

SEAM 集團專注於為全球多個行業的500多家客戶提供資產安全、可靠性和維護。 我們的團隊利用我們的”一個 SEAM,一個解決方案”方法,通過最全面的資產優化功能套件,為常見的資產挑戰提供集成解決方案。

每年,我們的專家團隊將檢查、評估和支援全球超過 2,000,000 件設備。 我們的團隊説明酒店、製藥、食品加工、消費品等組織提高資產、團隊和流程的績效,從而產生更顯著的運營和財務影響,並確保每個人與充滿活力的資產進行交互的安全。

企業資產管理九大法

What are the foundational rules of Enterprise Asset Management (EAM) that must be in place to ensure success? We identify the top 9 rules successful and sustainable EAM programs have implemented by organizations.

來自我們博客的最新消息

瞭解我們的專家團隊的行業趨勢、新聞和見解。

In December 1970 President Nixon signed the Occupational Safety and Health Act into law and in so doing created OSHA, NIOSH, and OSHRC.  In April of 1971 OSHA opened its doors and this month, therefore, celebrates its 50th anniversary.   Over the last 5 decades, it is undoubtedly the case that the efforts of OSHA, Employers, and Labor have collectively conspired to improve the health and safety of the workplace and that is, indeed, a cause for celebration. Non-fatal injuries in the workplace are estimated to have been cut by a factor of 4 in the intervening period. That equates to tens of thousands of workers, and their families, who have not had to deal with the trauma, pain, and loss of security that goes along with workplace injury. This is, most certainly, something for which we should all be immensely grateful.

It has been a collective effort, with stakeholders in government, unions, and industry working towards a common goal – that more people go home exactly as they came to work.  Though a collective effort, it is fair to say it has not always been collaborative. The focus and orientation of the various stakeholders have not always been aligned. The view on how best to make progress, and who best to drive the agenda, has been a point of contention. Nonetheless, we have made progress and we now have a regulatory framework, reporting requirements, standards, and management systems that any employer must or should be using as part of running their business safely.  In reality, however, progress has slowed. Recent administrations have struggled to drive the agenda, and the focus on rules and compliance has failed to sustain ongoing improvement.

Perhaps of greatest concern are two issues. First, that fatal incident rates have not improved in parallel with nonfatal. You can read more on this in our recent White Paper "Follow the Energy: One Factor Above All Defines Fatality and Serious Injury Causation – And Spots It in Advance." Great progress was made in the first three decades of OSHA’s existence, with fatal incidents falling by over half despite significant growth in the total workforce. But over the last two decades, this fatal injury number has been remarkably stubborn and resistant to the rates of improvement we should all expect. Clearly, the collective stakeholders here are getting something wrong.  Second, all the evidence suggests that occupational health in the US is a serious problem, lacking visibility, underreported, and with accountability and collective effort many decades behind our work in occupational safety. It is estimated 50,000 Americans lose their lives each year due to workplace exposures to harmful substances.

So, what for the future of OSHA?  There are those who may argue that more funding, more standards, more inspection, and more fines are a pathway to move forward. It is undoubtedly the case that some OSHA standards are ludicrously outdated, and the agency needs support in addressing those gaps. But, even a doubling of the inspection regime would mean most employers only getting a visit from OSHA once in the average American lifetime – hardly likely to move the bar. Penalizing those committing egregious acts, those responsible for the deliberate commission should be the stick used against the bad actors who willfully fail to take on board their responsibilities to their employees to keep them out of harm’s way. Most employers in this country would support that notion because most employers want the staff to be safe at work, and at home.  Stronger fines and negative publicity can be powerful levers in getting bad employers to pay attention. However, for the majority of employers, a more collaborative and participative model is far more likely to gain traction. And that starts with OSHA being at the leading edge of thinking in workplace safety and health. The agency should be the go-to place for help, support, advice, and assistance. This requires a pivot from ‘policing’ to ‘partnering’. It requires that OSHA take the lead on the issues and challenges employers face, providing tools, insights, resources that enable. OSHA has the wherewithal, as a short visit to the OSHA website illustrates. Multiple tools and assessments, guidance, and best practices. Indeed, even the offer of free onsite consultation. Directionally OSHA started moving toward this more collaborative approach 6-7 years ago and further investment in these resources is far more likely to bear fruit.

In the same vein, all stakeholders should be undertaking a concerted effort to collaborate and drive the agenda. All too often we see competition not collaboration – between industry bodies, workers representatives, industry leaders, consultants, and service providers. We would all do well to remind ourselves that safety is not proprietary – it’s a collective moral obligation to share what we know that can save lives and prevent injuries. And at the forefront of this collective effort should be OSHA (and NIOSH) driving new thinking, new approaches, new science, and understanding, leveraging new technology – all in pursuit of doing, even more, to make work safer still in the next 50 years.

 
每 30 分鐘,由於突然的電弧閃光,員工就會受到電氣誘發的傷害。 為了保護員工免受電氣相關傷害,國家消防協會 (NFPA) 制定了《工作場所電氣安全標準®稱為 NFPA 70E ®。 為 NFPA 70E 員工提供電氣資產處理和管理培訓的組織可以説明防止事故、提高安全性並對其底線產生積極影響。 以下是一些培訓考慮,以確保 NFPA 70E 培訓在您的組織中取得成功。

成功 NFPA 70E 的關鍵®培訓



  1. 考慮不斷變化的工作力——老一輩工人在管理電氣危害方面擁有大量知識,這些知識是在多年工作期間收集的。 在培訓年輕一代時,應考慮到這一點。 他們需要超越按書指導的培訓,包括個人趣聞和故事、近距離通話和案例研究。 如果可能的話,讓這些員工給員工蒙上幾十年生活和呼吸安全的陰影。

  2. 瞭解電弧閃爍的原因——如果不瞭解危險是如何發生的及其原因,您就無法對如何管理危險進行培訓。 通常,當設備出現故障或與充滿活力的設備(如拆卸面板和使用斷路器工作)進行物理交互時,都會發生電弧閃光。 某些原因可能包括人為錯誤、未使用絕緣工具、灰塵過多、腐蝕以及維護不當或安裝開關和斷路器。

  3. 識別具有電弧閃光潛力的設備-識別具有電弧閃光潛力的設備類型也很重要。 每當人員使用過流保護裝置(如斷路器或引信)時,就會出現安全問題。 這些設備可防止過流的潛在危險影響,例如過載電流或短路電流,從而產生斷層電流。 為了確定和確認電弧閃光潛力,應對 50V 或更高設備進行評估或電弧閃光危險分析。

  4. 知道如何應用和讀取電弧閃光標籤 - NFPA 70E 要求對在充滿活力時可能需要檢查、調整、服務或維護的任何電氣設備進行標記,從而有可能發生電弧閃光事件。 電氣工人需要瞭解危害如何影響那些執行診斷(或手頭的常規任務),知道如何應用標籤,以及如何閱讀這些標籤上的數據。

  5. 進行電弧閃光評估以確定危險性 – 電弧閃光風險評估是確定每個電氣外殼(如控制面板、面板板、斷開開關或開關)中存在的危害級別的過程。 70E 培訓提供如何執行評估的指導。 但是,如果一個組織沒有進行評估的可用資源或知識淵博,則像SEAM Group這樣的外部供應商可以提供説明。


通過適當的弧形閃光燈培訓保護您的員工、資產和底線


NFPA 70E 培訓對於您的電氣工人安全處理充滿活力的資產至關重要。 您的組織可以進行許多培訓,但要知道,按書閱讀程式只能讓您的員工走到這一步。 適當的培訓包括從管理電氣資產和減輕災害方面的專家那裡獲得知識和指導。 具有不同電氣背景的專家將平衡教科書培訓與現實生活中的場景,以獲得最佳的學習體驗。

要瞭解有關為您的組織提供 NFPA 70E 培訓或弧形閃光危險評估的更多瞭解,請參閱我們的完整 培訓產品 清單或 聯繫 SEAM Group,並在今天開始!