A review on hybrid mixture explosions: Safety parameters,explosion regimes and criteria,flame characteristics

The hybrid mixture of combustible dusts and flammable gases/vapours widely exist in various industries, including mining, petrochemical, metallurgical, textile and pharmaceutical. It may pose a higher explosion risk than gas/vapor or dust/mist explosions since the hybrid explosions can still be initiated even though both the gas and the dust concentration are lower than their lower explosion limit (LEL) values. Understanding the explosion threat of hybrid mixtures not only contributes to the inherent safety and sustainability of industrial process design, but promotes the efficiency of loss prevention and mitigation. To date, however, there is no test standard with reliable explosion criteria available to determine the safety parameters of all types of hybrid mixture explosions, nor the flame propagation and quenching mechanism or theoretical explanation behind these parameters. This review presents a state-of-the-art overview of the comprehensive understanding of hybrid mixture explosions mainly in an experimental study level; thereby, the main limitations and challenges to be faced are explored. The discussed main contents include the experimental measurement for the safety parameters of hybrid mixtures (i.e., explosion sensitivity and severity parameters) via typical test apparatuses, explosion regime and criterion of hybrid mixtures, the detailed flame propagation/quenching characteristics behind the explosion severities/sensitivities of hybrid mixtures. This work aims to summarize the essential basics of experimental studies, and to provide the perspectives based on the current research gaps to understand the explosion hazards of hybrid mixtures in-depth.     

Identification, analysis and dissemination of information on near misses: A case study in the construction industry

Near misses are well-known for providing a major source of useful information for safety management. They are more frequent events than accidents and their causes may potentially result in an accident under slightly different circumstances. Despite the importance of this type of feedback, there is little knowledge on the characteristics of near misses, and on the use of this information in safety management. This article proposes guidelines for identifying, analyzing and disseminating information on near misses in construction sites. In particular, it is proposed that near misses be analyzed based on four categories: (a) whether or not it was possible to track down the event; (b) the nature of each event, in terms of its physical features (e.g. falling objects); (c) whether they provided positive or negative feedback for the safety management system; and (d) risk, based on the probability and severity associated with each event. The guidelines were devised and tested while a safety management system was being developed in a healthcare building project. The monitoring of near misses was part of a safety performance measurement system. Among the main results, a dramatic increase in both the number and quality of reports stands out after the workforce was systematically encouraged to report. While in the first 4 months of the study – when the workforce was not encouraged to report – there were just 12 reports, during the subsequent 4 months – when the workforce was so encouraged – there were 110 reports, all of them being analyzed based on the four analytical categories proposed.     

A review of driving risks and impairments associated with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and the effects of stimulant medication on driving performance

INTRODUCTION: Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) may interfere with driving competence, predisposing those with the disorder to impaired driving performance and greater risk for adverse driving outcomes. Effective treatment may minimize the risk in those with ADHD. METHOD: We reviewed the scientific literature on driving risks and impairments associated with ADHD and the effects of stimulants on driving performance. Several lines of evidence were considered, including longitudinal studies and community-derived sample studies. The present review is based on a weekly review (by the first author) of all journals in the behavioral and social sciences indexed in the publication Current Contents spanning the past 15 years, as well as a search of the reference section of all studies found that pertained to driving risks associated with ADHD or to the treatment of ADHD as it relates to driving difficulties. RESULTS: The review of the scientific literature demonstrated well-documented driving risks and impairments associated with ADHD and the positive effects of stimulant medications on driving performance. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians should educate patients/caregivers about the increased risk of adverse outcomes among untreated individuals with ADHD and the role of medication in potentially improving driving performance. IMPACT ON INDUSTRY: Owing to the significantly higher risk of adverse driving outcomes, the use of stimulant medications to treat people with ADHD who drive may reduce such safety risks.     

25 years of higher‐order confirmatory factor analysis in the organizational sciences: A critical review and development of reporting recommendations

We discuss how confirmatory factor analysis results should be used to examine potential higher‐order constructs and advocate that researchers present five types of evidence, which are as follows: (1) the ability of the higher‐order model to reproduce the observed covariation among manifest variables; (2) the ability of the higher‐order model to reproduce the observed covariation among manifest variables better than more parsimonious alternative models—and no less well than less parsimonious alternative models; (3) the ability of the higher‐order model to reproduce the observed covariation among lower‐order factors; (4) the ability of the higher‐order factor to explain variation in lower‐order factors; and (5) the ability of the higher‐order factor to explain variation in manifest variables. We illustrate how this type of evidence could be presented with a worked example and contrast our recommendations with the manner in which higher‐order confirmatory factor analysis has been used in the organizational sciences over the past 25 years to support claims regarding higher‐order constructs such as core self‐evaluations and transformational leadership. Our review shows that a substantial proportion of the 44 examined articles failed to present enough evidence to allow readers to understand the size and importance of higher‐order factors. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.