RISK PROFILES IN THE OLIVE OIL PRESSING SECTOR

OLIVE OIL PRODUCTION CYCLE

Type of processing

1. Flowchart .1. (traditional method)

Work phase Machinery used

Weighing	Manual and/or mechanical
Washing	Washing machine
Crushing	Stone press
Malaxing	Kneading unit – malaxing unit
preparing the tower	Panelling machine and filter panel trolley
pressing (extraction)	Hydraulic presses
Separation	Disk centrifuge (separator)

2. Flowchart .2. (continuous method)

Work phase Machinery used

Weighing	Manual and/or mechanic
Washing	Washing machine
Crushing	Cylinder or hammer mill
Malaxing	Kneading Unit – Malaxing Unit
Pressing (extraction)	Centrifuge extractors (decanters)
Separation	Disk centrifuge (separators)

1. SECTOR

OLIVE OIL PRESSING PLANTS

2. ISTAT CODES

3. ISPESL CODES

(for office use only)

SURVEY AREA

4. NATIONWIDE:

5. REGIONAL

TUSCANY

6. PROVINCIAL

FLORENCE

7. LOCAL HEALTH UNIT

10 FLORENCE, SOUTH-EAST

8.YEAR SURVEY CONDUCTED

2

0

0

1

9. NO. OF EMPLOYEES:		70
9A. OFFICE WORKERS:		men women
9B. LABOURERS:	70	men women

44

10. NO. OF FIRMS :

All. 2/B

11. survey structure

OCCUPATIONAL PREVENTION, HYGIENE AND SAFETY DEPT IN THE SOUTHEAST OF THE REGION.

12. REFEREES: Mr. Mauro Giannelli, Mr. Paolo Borghi, Mr. Roberto Ghirelli,

Ms. Maria Teresa Mechi, Ms. Donatella Pagni

ADDRESS:	via Chiantigiana, 37
POSTAL CODE:	50126
CITY’:	FLORENCE
PROVINCE:	FI
TELEPHONE:	0556530631
FAX:	0556532383
E-MAIL:	mauro.giannelli@asf.toscana.it

13. ACCIDENTS:(five-year period from 1995-1999)

TOTAL:

8

OF WHICH LETHAL

/

14. PROFESSIONAL ILLNESSES:

DENOMINATION	N° CASES	INAIL CODE
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/

NOTES:

SECTOR DOCUMENT

“Mankind has farmed the olive since the most ancient times and it has represented, in addition to a considerable source of income, the symbol of wisdom, prosperity, glory and peace”. [1]

Olive farming in Italy involves more than 1 million firms (44.9% of the total), covering a total surface area of approximately 1.2 million hectares, with an average per firm of 1.2 hectares and an overall production of approximately 27 million quintals; these firms increase the relative weight of the farming sector, that has risen from 37.0% in 1990 to 44.9% in 1999. (ISTAT 2000).

Particularly widespread in Mediterranean areas, olive farming represents an important activity for both the rural economy and the ecological equilibrium of the production areas. The EU has a total of 2,240,000 olive growers, of whom 850,000 in Italy, the second highest after Spain. (ISTAT 1999).

In the Province of Florence, some 29,436.72 ha are destined to olive farming, of which 401.46 ha for table use and 29,035 for oil production.. (ISTAT 1991 – Agricultural Census)[4]

The territory covered by this survey comprises the area of Chianti Fiorentino, Valdarno Fiorentino and the lower Val di Sieve, for a total of 13 municipalities (Bagno a Ripoli, Barberino Val d’Elsa, Figline Valdarno, Greve in Chianti, Impruneta, Incisa Valdarno, Pelago, Pontassieve, Reggello, Rignano sull’Arno, Rufina, San Casciano Val di Pesa, Tavarnelle Val di Pesa ). It is characterised by small and medium-sized urban settlements, within an agricultural area dominated to a large extent by vineyards and olive groves and their relative processing plants.

44 olive pressing plants operate on the territory (corresponding to 68% of all olive pressing plants present within the competent territory of Florence Asl (Local Health Unit) 10.

As far as the characteristics of the production cycle are concerned, olive pressing plants can be divided into two main groups:

· Traditional pressing plants (flow chart 1)

where during the work cycle, the correct execution of the various work phases is guaranteed by the intervention of workers.

· Continuous pressing plants (flow chart 2)

Where the various phases (from the washing of the olives to the separation of the vegetation oil) proceed autonomously, without the intervention of workers. This type of pressing plant has greater work potential that the traditional method and requires less physical involvement of staff, who in this type of press, concentrate their efforts on ensuring that the machinery works correctly.

Schema del ciclo continuo= diagram illustrating the continuous cycle

Diagrams reproduced from [5]

Traditional olive pressing plants account for some 38% of the total, whilst 68% employ the continuous method.

The criteria adopted by ETSAF (Tuscan Authority for the Development of Agriculture and Forestry) was used to classify oil pressing plants according to the average quantity of olives processed per year:

1st class from 1 to 500 qls.

2nd class from 501 to 1.000 qls.

3rd class from 1.001 to 5.000 qls.

4th class from 5.001 to 10.000 qls

5th class more than 10.001 qls

For the 1998-1999 campaign, in the municipalities covered by the research, distribution according to the abovementioned classification was:

1st Class - 10 plants

2nd Class - 4 plants

3rd Class -18 plants

4th Class - 9 plants

5th Class - 3 plants

The traditional method of olive processing is most frequently encountered in the first three classes, where it is practiced in 47% of crushing plants. In the classes (4th and 5th) handling larger quantities, the adoption of continuous plants prevails (82%).

The production cycle for transforming olives into oil can be broken down as follows: after harvesting, the olives are transported to the pressing plant in containers of various types and sizes (sacks or bales, crates, boxes, trailers, etc.), where, after the batch has been weighed, they are usually deposited in an olive store until such time as they are milled.

Weighing the batch of olives can take place using manual transfer of the containers (sacks, boxes) on to platform scales or by overall weighing using horizontally pivoted weights or hoppers.

Olive container transfer can either be completely manual or may involve the use of conveyor belts, trolleys, etc. The containers are then emptied into loading hoppers of varying capacities and positions (above floor level, with the opening level with the floor, etc.) through which the olives then pass on to the milling process.

Milling is preceded by a washing and cleaning phase where leaves are removed by suction and the olives are washed. A screw feeder or conveyor belt then feeds the milling plant, which can be constituted by millstones or by hammer, cylinder, or more rarely, cone mills.

The paste obtained then passes into one or more malaxing units, where the oil is made to float on top of the paste, following a continuous “massage” produced by a series of rotating blades.

In traditional pressing plants, the oil is extracted from the paste under the pressure exerted by a hydraulic press on the paste distributed on filtering disks arranged on top of one another to form a “tower”. The filtering disks form a filtering layer through which the must, composed of the oil and vegetation water runs before being taken to the centrifuge machine.

In modern, continuous pressing plants, the hydraulic press and the tower are replaced by a so-called decanter, or horizontal centrifuge machine, capable of separating the liquid part composed of oil and water from the solid part (pomace) by means of the centrifugal force exerted on the paste. Certain types of decanter are able to separate out the oil alone, leaving a wetter pomace, in order to minimise the vegetation water disposal problem.

The must obtained from the extraction plants is sent on to separators or disk centrifuges where the water and oil are separated. Following this last step, the olive oil is ready for direct consumption or bottling after any filtering operations required have been performed.

The pomace is accumulated near to the crushing plant, on forecourts, in silos or tanks, until such time as it is sent to a pomace plant for the remaining oil fraction to be extracted.

Damage recorded

Olive harvesting and crushing are seasonal activities that usually commence in late October and terminate at the end of December. During this period work continues in shifts 24 hours a day.

In pressing plants on farms (approximately 2/3 of the oil presses covered by this research) workers generally receive fixed wages from the farm, in other pressing plants, (run by co-operatives or private subjects), they are taken on on casual grounds.

As far as accidents are concerned, specific pressing plant registers are signed where the hours worked are subject to a specific INAIL premium.

The duration of the olive campaign and therefore use of manpower is obviously closely connected to olive production.

In the five year period 1995-1999, 8 accidents were recorded, with 105 days’ work lost against 90,871 hours worked (referring to 27 firms that produce approximately 70% of the oil in the south-eastern area).

In the same period, no occupational illnesses that can be attributed to exposure in oil presses were recoded.

Transversal risks

Risk profile analysis focused on three types of risk concerning a number of work phases:

manual load handling;

the use of electricity;

noise exposure.

With regards to these specific aspects, instrumental recording and investigations were conducted, the results of which are given herein.

Bibliography

[1] Medori C., Ballardini A.; Industrie Agrarie, Edagricole, 1992

[2] Pasquinelli P., Baluganti A., Bianchi A., Borghi P., Gioviti D., Grassi M., Ulivi A.; Prevenzione e sicurezza nei frantoi – coll. I Manuali, Regione Toscana, 1996

[3] Silvestri E., Toma M.; Banca dati dei olive pressing plants toscani – aggiornamento 1997, ARSIA – Regione Toscana, 1998.

[4] ISTAT; Caratteristiche strutturali delle aziende agricole, fascicoli provinciali –Firenze, 4° Censimento generale dell’agricoltura, 1991

[5]Marco Mugelli, , L’estrazione dell’olio dalle olive, A.R.S.I.A. Regione Toscana, 1999

MANUAL LOAD HANDLING

1. General comments and risk factors

In the olive pressing sector, manual load handling still interests a large number of companies present in the territory of the south-eastern area of the Florence Local Health Unit, especially the smaller ones.

Such operations consist mainly in unloading crates of olives, with average weights of 20 – 25kg, from vehicles and then emptying them into hoppers before the crushing phase begins.

The period in question coincides with the harvesting period, in other words the months of November and December. During this period, the problem would appear to be an important one, although it does not affect pressing plant workers as handling is usually performed by producers or their employees.

In order to assess the situation in more detail, inspections were conducted at all the firms in the territory in question, thus identifying a sample constituted by the 4 companies considered to be most significant in terms of risk.

The situation detected in the abovementioned sample would appear somewhat heterogeneous due to the considerable differences between the various work environments, with consequential repercussions on the space available, on pathways and on the arrangement of equipment such as loading hoppers and scales.

Whereas in the more advanced companies, the mechanisation and/or mechanical assistance have drastically reduced the proportions of the problem, in those inspected olive loading/unloading was often performed incongruously and with a gross underestimation of the risk connected and the hoisting, transportation, pushing and dragging of the loads without suitable precautions able to rationalise execution were observed.

2. Expected damage

Biomechanical overloading of the vertebral column, especially in the lumbar and cervical portions, less frequent in the dorsal stretch and the other extra-rachidal districts of the locomotive system (shoulder, elbow, wrist, hand, hip, knee) due mainly to manual load handling and, to a lesser extent, to the adoption of fixed or prolonged work positions or the performance of repeated movements by the upper extremities.

However, it must be pointed out that all the syndromes listed below are to be included in the vast group of “work-related diseases”, in other words, all the multi-factorial conditions in whose origin and expression work activities constitute a non univocal causal agent, often assuming the role of joint cause.

In actual fact it should be remembered that work activities intertwine with other constitutional factors or those connected to lifestyles, hobbies, etc. all of which can potentially affect the onset and evolution of the single disorders.

Of the various spinal cord disorders that can be correlated to “manual load handling” and “fixed and/or prolonged work position” risks, undoubtedly the most frequently encountered is backache, which can be complicated by sciatica or cruralgia, which provide evident signs of radicular suffering.

Muscolo-skeletal disorders of the cervical rachis and the upper extremities attributed to “repeated and/or forced movements of the upper extremities” risk are characterised by hyposthenia, difficulty/incapability in performing certain movements, pain (either constant or in bouts) in the joints, muscles, tendons and other soft tissues, which may or may not be associated to manifest organic lesions.

Paresthesia and neurovegetative disorders may also occur (Raynaud’s, acrocyanosis) usually in the fingers, but may also involve the hand and even spread up the forearm.

These include tendinitis, tenosynovitis, carpal tunnel syndrome, Guyon’s channel syndrome, epicondylitis, rotator cuff tendinitis, thoracic egression syndrome and cervical-brachial tension.

Less important in this context are disorders affecting other districts of the locomotive system, such as gonalgia and coxalgies, which can present either isolated or associated to the abovementioned conditions.

3. Materials and methods

In order to perform quantitative evaluation of the specific “Manual load handling” risk, the NIOSH criterion (1993, adapted to Italian regulations)) was used (1) and the tables published by Snook and Ciriello (3) were employed to evaluate the maximum weight that can be lifted and carried respectively by a healthy, trained subject without encountering situations of biomechanical overload.

By applying these procedures, it is possible to calculate risk indexes, in other words, limits below which the operations in question are considered to be risk-free.

This study does not include the quantification of pushing and dragging operations, which are considered from a qualitative point of view only.

The investigation comprised various on-site examinations with more detailed inspections of those companies considered most significant, during which the staff appointed to the operations in question was filmed by video cameras; data detected in this way (height from the ground of the load prior to lifting, vertical lifting distance, angular dislocation of the weight, distances travelled, frequency of actions, etc.) were used for the calculation of the abovementioned indexes.

4. Results and risk reduction measures

The table below illustrates the results obtained:

Table 1

Company	Operations performed	Hoisting risk index	Transport risk index
1	Unloading from lorry for loading on scales	from 2.72 to 1.73 (varies according to the height from which the crate is moved)	Not calculable
2	Transportation of the crates from the scales to the hopper Unloading of crates into hopper	from 2.55 to 2.11 (varies according to the height from which the crate is moved)	2.0
3	Transportation from the lorry to the scales. Unloading of crates into hopper	from 2.27 to 1.97 (varies according to the height from which the crate is moved)	2.44
4	Risk indices impossible to calculate in that manual handling consists in unloading crates into the hopper directly from the lorry floor.

Table no. 1 for the calculation of the lifting index that indications container in the Regional Co-ordination Guidelines (2) (use of the weight constant of 30 kg for adult males and 20 kg for adult females, as opposed to23kg as suggested by NIOSH).

The methodical calculation of risk indexes permits the identification of the following bands and therefore the classification of behaviour for preventative ends.

1. Index £ 0.75: situation acceptable, no specific measure is required.

2. Index ³ 0.75 e £ 1: borderline situation. A part of the population (estimated at between 1% and 10% of each sex and age subgroup) may be unprotected and therefore caution is required, although no specific measures are called for; training and specific health monitoring of the staff affected is recommended.

3. Index > 1: the situation may present a risk for increasing portions of the population and therefore requires primary prevention measures, this should be immediate if the index is higher than 3.

All the operations examined fall within this risk band, demonstrating the need for structural and organisational corrective measures, which, although not urgent, must be introduced as soon as possible.

In addition to the abovementioned operations, for which quantitative risk evaluation was possible, many others were observed, such as pushing and dragging operations, often in conditions of awkward posture, which, although not quantifiable, nevertheless contribute to the creation of unfavourable ergonomic conditions.

Considering that the best solution for maximum risk reduction, consists in mechanising transportation and unloading operations, in the cases examined, the adoption of truly adequate solutions is made extremely problematic by the structural conditions of the workplace. All the available prevention techniques must be adopted, including the structural and organisational solutions required by each individual case.

The indications gleaned from the situations examined and that can be presumably extended to other sector companies, can be summarised as follows:

v Use of smaller crates, resulting in a reduction in the weight to be transported;

v Reduction of the distance between the points of unloading and loading on to scales or into hoppers;

v Adoption of mechanised aids ( e.g. hoisting and lowering platform for vehicles, manual transpallets, etc.);

v Use of trolleys to aid dragging and pulling of loads;

v Reduction in crate stacking height.

It is believed that the abovementioned recommendations, together with an adequate information and training plan, can achieve significant risk level reduction; once the respective modifications have been made, the relative indexes should be calculated again in order to evaluate the benefits obtained from a quantitative point of view.

5. Bibliography

[1] Waters t., Putz Anderson V., Garg A., Finel J., Revised Niosh equation for the design and evaluation of manual lifting tasks, Ergonomics, 36, 7, 1993

[2] Conferenza dei Presidenti delle Regioni, delle Province Autonome, Linee guida per l’applicazione del D.Lgs.626/94

[3] Snook S.H.; Ciriello V.M. The design of manual handling tasks: revised tables of maximum acceptable weights and forces. Ergonomics, 34, 9, 1197-1213, 1991.

THE USE OF ELECTRICITY

1. General comments

Electricity used by machinery and plant in olive pressing plants is supplied by the national grid to the user at two different voltages, depending on the contractual power needed and required for productive activity. In fact, Low Voltage electricity is supplied directly (BT, 380-220 V) for powers lower than 40 – 50 KW and Medium Voltage ( MT, 10 - 15 - 20.000 V ) for electricity powers higher than 40 - 50 KW; in this last case the MV is transformed into LV by means of a “MV/LV transformation cabin” installed on the farm.

In the area in question, “traditional” olive pressing plants are generally powered by Low Voltage, whereas “continuous cycle” olive presses (which generally have higher hourly production) are powered by MV/LV transformation of the electricity.

Medium Voltage risks due to the presence of the “transformation cabin” are dealt with in this study only, whereas Low Voltage risks, common to both types of olive press, will be dealt with here and in the various phases.

2. Low Voltage machinery and plant

2.1. Introduction and risk factors

Every part of Low Voltage electric plant must be suited to the place in which it is installed (art.267,268,269,270,271 and subsequent, of Presidential Decree 547/55); in particular, those areas defined as being “damp and humid” are at “greater risk”.

IEC standard 64-8 “Electrical plant using nominal voltage not higher than 1000V in alternating current and 1500 V in direct current” classifies (in section VI ) areas used for agricultural and livestock activities as "damp and humid environments".

Given that this type of environment is considered to be at greater electrical risk, section IV imposes a maximum voltage limit (25 Volts), resulting on earths in the case of breakdowns, and in creating the earth system, that relative lower earth resistance according to the formula

RT = 25 V / IF where IF is the protection device intervention current, satisfied once again, by differential protection devices ( D I lower than or equal to 30 mA ).

Law n. °46/1990 imposes the obligation of the Electrical System Project in such workplaces (art. 6 Law 46/90 and art. 4 of Presidential Decree 447/91).

More over, the IEC report 1335 P of 1990 entitled “Effects of electrical current through the human body” establishes the “areas” and the safety limit values, after the analysis of the endogenous currents and the appearance of them with those flowing through the organism in the event of “electrocution”.

The two types of olive pressing plant, the “traditional” and the “continuous cycle” type, mentioned in the introduction, taken as a sample for this research study are equipped with electrical room and machinery systems that in general conform with IEC standards 11-1 for MV/LV cabins and IEC 64 – 8 for LV alone.

LV systems include built-in or closed metal channelling fixed to the walls. The essential components: the main panel, subpanels, ceiling light, channel, cable runs, junction boxes and equipment are manufactured either in painted or galvanised steel, or polycarbonate and PVC resin. Junctions, from the boxes or channels to the equipment and presses are often manufactured in “Taz”-type steel, through a “medium” IP44 degree of protection and a mechanical shock protection, which is not however, easy to evaluate. The same degree of protection applies to the “machine panels” of the “operative phase”: cable runs, sockets, plugs and extension leads. Portable lamps are supplied in 24V low voltage.

Earthing systems are generally made according to the max. total earth voltage (24V prescribed for places used for agricultural and livestock activities, resulting on the mass in the event of a breakdown and co-ordination of the protections by means of high sensitivity differential switches (DI lower than or equal to 30 mA ).

In the Low Voltage electrical plant and machinery used in olive pressing plants, in addition to the possible recorded defects, the following deteriorations of materials and components (real and potential causes of electrical risk) examined above for each work phase can be observed:

- the lack of electrical project

- the lack of selectivity in protective devices

- the lack of adequate mechanical protection (cables, sockets, plugs and extension leads, terminal board switch casing, machine panels, etc.).

Moreover, the following organisational/informative/preventative shortfalls are observed:

- lack of installation and or assembly and maintenance instruction manuals for machines and/or components, electrical parts and/or equipment;

- lack of posting of reference standards;

- failure to identify the Manager of the pressing plant;

- Electrical check register (that should be kept by the Head of the pressing plant) to be performed before activities and routinely: differential switch check before the start of activities and every month; emergency lighting and evaluation tests, production start-up command tests, production shut-off in case of hazards, safety device function tests (protection casing, gate covers, permanent fasteners, smoke detectors, gas detectors etc.);

- Posting of rescue and first aid rules for treating those struck by electric currents.

2.2. Expected damage

In reference to table no. 2 “total agricultural accidents in Italy – due to agent material no. 46 discharge of electrical radiation”) of electrocution caused by direct or in direct contact and in the diversified ways foreseen by IEC standards 479-1 and IEC 479-2 Publication IEC 1990 report 1335P “Effects of electrical current on the human body” (hand – hand, hand – foot, hand – trunk”) and “damp and humid” (higher risk factor) environments, the risks run are severe electric shock; physiological effects range from tetanisation to ventricular fibrillation; expected damage can range from slight lesions to reversible, and lethal cases.

Similarly severe lesions and damage that can result in death are also expected according to the DURATION of electrocution, (without neglecting other parameters, such as voltage and current, even if we are not in the presence of High Voltage (HV).

2.3. Making safe measures

We have already seen that electric risk is “very present” in olive pressing machinery and plant, as they contain a large number of machines and appliances and their electrical systems are widespread and branching. There are many evident hazard centres and just as many that are not evident. Whilst the former (visible) can be detected by “anyone”, the latter can only be discovered and resolved with scientific knowledge, standards, instruments, calculations and “expertise”. The design, manufacture, routine and occasional maintenance (programmed and added to the initial design project) according to expertise and routine checks and tests, are considered by us as a whole, as a key to the reduction – elimination of electrical risks.

3. Transformation cabins

3.1.Introduction

The cabin transforms electricity originating from a transmission line, transmitting it directly to the user. Cabins are usually stable, or rather housed in a dedicated aboveground building. The transformation cabin is manufactured according to the prescriptions and indications provided by IEC standards.

The High Voltage (HV) arriving at the cabin (10 – 15 – 20,000 V), that in the new IEC standard 11-1 is referred to as Medium Voltage (MV) in order to distinguish it from the even higher voltages used to transport energy, is transformed into grid voltage (Low Voltage LV, 380V – 220V).

The user manages the cabin through his trained staff, sees to the maintenance of both the cabin and the equipment it houses (disconnection switches, switches, transformers, protection and measurement panels, etc.).

In general, in the territory in question, users with an electric cabin appoint “specialised electrician firms” to perform the manoeuvres (especially those in HV) and the maintenance of the cabin, only directly taking care of access and recovery in the case that Low Voltage switches trip and the lighting system in the cabin itself.

3.2.Risk factors

The greatest risk is due to a lack of electrical safety connected to the suitability of use of the cabin due to:

- electrical risks inside the cabin: these are mainly due to the presence of high voltage in copper conductors and naked bars, in cable conductors, in electrical components such as switches, disconnection switches, etc., and can be divided into risks caused by direct contact, indirect contact, and pitch and contact voltage.

- electrical risks around the cabin: these are due to contact and pitch voltages that in turn occur in the even of blackout toward earth in high voltage and in the case of electrical atmospheric discharge.

In MV/LV cabins, the following occur frequently:

- the presence of large amounts of dust deposited on the floor, on transformers on sulphur hexafluoride, on disconnection switches, on the LV panel and so on.

- The lack or non-function of emergency lighting.

- The lack of manoeuvre instructions due to the deactivation of high voltage (in the case of maintenance work in the cabin and for routine stoppage) and reactivation of voltage (in the case of recovery of work activities).

- The lack of signs showing the prohibition of voltage reactivation for the cases mentioned in the previous point and in the case of HV and LV maintenance (olive pressing plant).

3.3. Expected damage

In the somewhat rare cases (see “total agricultural accidents in Italy – due to agent material no. 46 discharge of electrical radiation”) of electrocution caused by direct or indirect contact and in the diversified ways foreseen by IEC standards 479-1 and IEC 479-2 Publication IEC 1990 report 1335P “Effects of electrical current on the human body” (hand – hand, hand – foot, hand – trunk”) given the very high contact voltage, severe electric shocks are encountered; physiological effects immediately involved range from stoppage of breathing to ventricular fibrillation; the damage expected is irreversible, severe – very severe and lethal.

Severe-very severe lesions and damage identical to those in other cases of electrocution by pitch and contact tensions on the masses.

Table 2

INAIL DATABASE
Occupational accidents in Italy’s agriculture sector compensated by INAIL
Material agent: electrical discharge radiation
	Independent workers				Employees
Year	Temporary disability	Permanent disability	Death	Total	Temporary disability	Permanent disability	Death	Total
1996	9	0	6	15	6	0	1	7
1997	9	1	2	12	6	0	0	6
1998	12	0	1	13	3	0	1	4
1999	4	0	0	4	3	1	2	6
2000	5	0	0	5	6	0	1	7

3.4. Risk reduction measures

Electrical risks in pressing plants with HV/BV cabin can be caused by bad plant design and manufacture or use of inadequate components and/or due to breakdowns or faults during use, but can also be caused by erroneous worker behaviour during access to places, maintenance, manoeuvres, recovery and equipment use etc.

Maintenance operations are generally performed by specialised companies able to ensure swift intervention during the crushing period. During such operations, worker access to the olive press should be limited for manoeuvre and recovery operations, thus reducing the possibility of electrocution.

IEC Technical standard are imposed, aimed at eliminating risks inside cabins, such as:

- safe distancing from active parts (gates, grids that can only be removed using suitable tools) with a height of 2.20 metres from the ground and as wide as the entire room.

- earthing system, connection to earth of neutral of the transformer, metal parts of all the equipment present starting from the MV/LV transformer, the masses, the foreign masses, metal doors and windows, etc.

- manoeuvres made with the aid of levers, switch hook, gloves and insulating platforms, etc.

For the elimination of pitch and contact voltage risks, that are most frequently encountered outside the cabin, near to it and at the limits of the equipotential link are imposed by IEC Technical Standards, such as:

· for contact voltages: earthing system with an appropriate number of deeply buried ground plates (creation of a very low earth resistance value, approximately lower than one ohm) so as to create a non-hazardous voltage value in case of breakdowns.

· For pitch voltages; equipotential earth system, composed of a suitable number of ground plates arranged geometrically (link-shaped) in the ground, in order to create an equipotential place, especially around the cabin, and in the vicinity of the dispersers themselves, where the potential in the case of medium voltage and atmospheric discharges is higher.

In order to further reduce pitch and contact voltage values, should they still be dangerous, the specific resistance of the earth (r = ohm x metro) must be raised around the cabin, insulating it to a greater degree at the surface, for example with bitumous material (tarmac).

4.Bibliography

Legal regulations :

PRESIDENTIAL DECREE 27th April 1955 n°547; “ Accident prevention regulations - Item VII – electrical plant “

Ministerial Decree 12th September 1959 ; “Assignment of tasks and selection of modalities and documentation concerning the conduction of checks and testing foreseen by regulations for the prevention of occupational accidents”

Law 1^st March 1968 n°186;

Law 5^th March 1990 n°46 ; “ Plant safety regulations “

Presidential Decree 6^th December 1991 n° 447; “Implementation standards for Law 5^th March 1990 n° 46, on plant safety”.

Law 626/96; “Implementation of EEC directives 89/391; 89/654; 89/655; 89/656; 90/269; 90/270; 90/394 and 90/679 concerning the improvement and safety of worker health in workplaces.”

IEC Regulations :

IEC 11-8 - “ Electricity production, transmission and distribution plant. Earthing plant”

IEC 81-1 – “Plant against atmospheric discharge”

IEC 64-8 - “Electric plant using nominal voltages not higher than 100V in alternating current and 1500V in direct current”

V1 sect. 6 - “Electric plant in structures equipped for agricultural and livestock activities”

V2 sect. 8 - “Environments at risk from greater fire hazards”

IEC 70-1 - “ Degrees of protection of wrapping to penetration of solid and liquid bodies

NFC 20-010 “ Degrees of mechanical protection of wrappings”

IEC 479-1 e IEC 479-2 IEC publication 1990 report 1335 P

“Effects of electricity passing through the human body”

NOISE EXPOSURE

1. General comments

The evaluation of occupational exposure necessarily involves an analysis of the workplaces and the arrangement of machinery within them.

Traditionally, olive pressing, following weighing operations, is performed in a single room; some of the pressing plants included in this study were still arranged within a single space inside an existing, or purpose-built structure.

The evolution of safety regulations on foodstuff protection has caused the separation of the operations for olives from the processing of olives into oil; this has also led to the separation of the washing phase from the other operations. More advanced pressing plants generally have two separate rooms, the first houses phases 1 and 2 and the second phases 3 to 7.

Technical progress has led to the replacement of human activity with the use of electrical energy and the transformation of the same into mechanical energy. In traditional pressing plants, the machines that cause sound pressure level that fall into the field of values for which hearing damage is encountered, are the washing – leaf-removing machine and the vertical centrifuge separator. In continuous cycle pressing plants the crushing machine and decanter are also noisy.

2. Materials and methods

Professional exposure evaluation was carried out by analysing the evaluations of occupational exposure to noise drafted by the individual firms under art. 40 Legislative Decree 277/91 and by performing sample instrumental checks of sound pressure levels.

No analyses were performed on sound pressure levels deriving from the individual machines.

3. Results and risk reduction measures

The evaluations examined included a series of instrumental measurements performed in areas where the control panels of the various machines are installed (there is usually a single operator managing the entire pressing plant). The analyses were generally performed with all the machines in function, for which the values obtained inside the same pressing plant, in the various positions can oscillate 2-3 dB (A).

Table 3 contains the sound pressure levels detected per type of machine:

Table 3

Phase	DB(A)
Washing –leaf removal machine	85-95
Crushing machine	85-90
Extractor (decanter)	85-90
Separator	80-90

Generally, the Lep,D value calculated for the employee assigned to the pressing plant is within the interval 85-90 dB(A) with values in the vicinity of the lower limit values for traditional pressing plants and the upper limit for continuous type.

Measures aimed at reducing noise exposure generally include:

a) the replacement of machinery with less noisy models;

b) reduction in the concentration of machines within the noisy environments;

c) enclosure using insulated cabins of the noisiest machines or machine parts;

d) separation of plant or insulation with sound-proof barriers of the processes most at risk;

e) covering walls and ceilings with sound-proof material;

f) use of personal protection devices.

The measures considered of certain efficiency for the reduction of exposure to those indicated in the points:

a) and c) there is a concrete commitment of plant producers in this direction;

f) the presence of the abovementioned occupational exposure levels obliges the employer to provide suitable personal protection devices (earplugs or earphones).

4. Bibliography

[1] Pasquinelli P., Baluganti A., Bianchi A., Borghi P., Gioviti D., Grassi M., Ulivi A.; Prevenzione e sicurezza nei frantoi – coll. I Manuali, Regione Toscana, 1996

[2]Marco Mugelli, , L’estrazione dell’olio dalle olive, A.R.S.I.A. Regione Toscana, 1999

PHASE/RISK FACTOR SHEET

PHASE 1

1. SECTOR:	OIL PRESSING PLANT
2. WORK PHASE:	PHASE 1 – WEIGHING
3. INAIL CODE:
4. RISK FACTORS:	SAFETY RISK due to structural workplace shortfalls; Lack of safety on machinery and equipment; electrical risks HEALTH RISKS due to: manual load handling.
5. RISK CODE
(office use only)
6. NO. WORKERS:

Chapter 1 - “Weighing” (present in both types of processing)

The weighing of a batch of olives can be performed through manual transfer of the containers (sacks, crates) on to scales or with overall weighing using weights of bridge or electronic hoppers.

The transfer of olive containers can be entirely manual or can involve the use of conveyor belts, trolleys, etc.

Chapter 2 – “Equipment, machinery and plant”

The equipment that can be used during olive manoeuvring in the weighing phase is:

1. conveyor belt

2. manual trolley

3. hopper constituting the weighing plant, equipped with rubber conveyor belts.

4. scales

Scale Conveyor belt

Rubber conveyor belts: are composed of a load-bearing structure in tubing or embossed sheet metal, a driving head, transmission head with tensioner device, roller unit and rubber belt. The roller holder sets can vary according to whether they have to house rollers in a flat, coupled or concave arrangement.

Optional conveyor belt accessories that may be present are lateral retainers.

The weighing equipment used are of recent manufacture and those that were installed subsequent to the introduction of the Machinery Directive, have a CE mark.

Chapter 3 - “The risk factor”

Risks deriving from processing.

a) Safety risks.

a₁) Risks due to structural shortfalls of the workplace concerning:

flooring (smooth or uneven);

holes in the flooring;

indoor and outdoor mobility; manual load handling.

a₂) Risks from safety shortfalls on machinery and equipment concerning:

protection of transmission organs;

protection of control organs.

a₃) Risks from poor electrical safety connected to non-suitability of use for:

direct contact with plant carcasses, connection socket, the aluminium casing of the blocking action switch.

Direct contact in the case of deterioration or breakage of the cable, the socket or the blockage action switch itself in the case of a mechanical blow when the active parts are accessible.

b) Health risks.

b₂) Manual load handling: risk evaluated separately, see sector document.

Chapter 4. “Expected damage”

Is described in the sector document.

Chapter 5 - “Action”

a) Safety risks.

The loading and unloading mouths of transporters in general must be protected against the falling of people and against the contact with dangerous organs in movement (art. 212 [1]), (point 1.3.7, 1.3.8, 1.4 Enclosure I [5]).

All movement drive organs and elements must be segregated (art. 55 [1]), in particular the belts and pulleys and the conveyor belt intermediate control areas (art. 56 [1]) (point 1.3.7, 1.3.8, 1.4 Enclosure I [5]).

The areas below the conveyor belts must be inaccessible or segregated (art. 214 [1]).

For conveyor belts see [6] and [7]

In the plant’s various floors there must be normal parapets (art. 26 [1]), and all areas that require maintenance work must be made accessible. (art. 376 [1]).

Dangerous holes and protrusions, which it may not be possible to eliminate (presence of conveyor belts, etc.) must be carefully segregated and adequately indicated (art. 8 [1] and [4]).

b) Health risks.

Action concerning manual load handling is described in the sector document.

Chapter 6 - “Sub-contracting”

This phase is not sub-contracted to third parties.

Chapter 7 - “Legal references”

[1] PRESIDENTIAL DECREE 547/55;

[2] PRESIDENTIAL DECREE 303/56;

[3] Legislative Decree 277/91;

[4] Legislative Decree 626/94;

[5] PRESIDENTIAL DECREE 459/96

[6] UNI ISO 1819/89

[7] UNI ISO 7149/89

[8] UNI EN 294/93

[9] UNI EN 349/94

Chapter 8 - “External risk”

See environmental risk profiles for productive sectors.

PHASE/RISK FACTOR DOCUMENT

PHASE 2

1. SECTOR:	OIL PRESSING PLANTS
2. WORK PHASE:	PHASE 2 – WASHING
3. INAIL CODE:
4. RISK FACTOR:	RISKS FOR SAFETY due to: Structural shortfalls of the workplace; safety shortfalls on machinery and equipment; electrical risks HEALTH RISKS due to: manual load handling, physical agents: noise.
5. RISK CODE
(for office use only)
6. NO. EMPLOYEES:

Chapter 1 - “Washing”(present in both types of processing)

After weighing, and storage in the olive store, the olives are unloaded into loading hoppers of various sizes in various positions (higher than ground level, opening level with the ground, etc.), in order to be subject to cleaning performed by leaf removal and washing with water. A screw feeder or conveyor belt then powers the grinding plant.

Olive store

Chapter 2 – “Equipment, machinery and plant”

The equipment that can be used during the washing phase is:

1. manual trolleys

2. hoppers

3. rubber conveyor belts

4. leaf remover machine

5.

washing machine

Hoppers

Hoppers According to the plant’s production potential, the hoppers may have varying capacities and geometric dimensions. They are generally positioned with the upper opening at floor height, in order to facilitate olive unloading. The hoppers are emptied by rubber conveyor belts.

Rubber conveyor belts: These are composed of a load –bearing structure in metal piping or embossed metal sheet, a drive head, transmission head with tensioner device, roller unit and rubber belt. The roller holder units have various versions according to whether they are to house rollers in a flat, V- coupled or a concave arrangement.

Optional conveyor belt accessories may include the lateral retainers.

Leaf removal machine: this is mainly constituted by an aspiration device, which aspires dust, twigs and leaves, and a channel that takes the materials aspired to outside the pressing plant.

Washing machine: rinsing with cold running water removes soil and foreign bodies, Following washing, the olives pass over a vibrating grid, in order to remove the water and any small pebbles or stones.

The Washing and leaf-removing units usually constitute a single machine.

Washing machine

Washing machinery was of recent construction and EC marked when installed subsequent to the introduction of the Machinery Directive.

Chapter 3 - “The risk factor”

Risks deriving from processing.

a) Safety risks.

a₁) Risks from structural faults of the workplace concerning:

flooring (smooth or uneven);

holes in the floor;

internal and/or external mobility; manual load handling.

a₂) Risks from safety faults on ,machinery and equipment concerning:

protection of drive organs;

protection of work organs;

protection of command organs.

a₃) Risks from electrical risk faults connected to unsuitability of use for:

indirect contact with the carcass of equipment in the case of collapse of motor insulation and/or disconnection of wiring from the terminal board due to vibrations.

direct contact in the case of deterioration or breakage of the cable, terminal board, plug etc.

b) Health risks.

b₂) Manual load handling: risk evaluated separately, see sector document.

b₃) Physical agents: risks from exposure to physical values that interact in various ways with the human body:

noise (presence of noisy equipment during processing and functioning cycle: suction plant and channel for expelling the materials sucked up such as leaves, stones, etc., poor plant maintenance) with propagation of sound energy in the work environment.

The situation arising during the washing phase should be pointed out (2 parallel washing plants), highlighting that the washing process is conducted in a separate room from that used for crushing and extraction.

The noise exposure evaluation performed in 1992 bears the following values of Leq = 90,0 dB(A) and Lep,d = 88,0 dB(A).

Following a Local Health Unit initiative during the 1995 campaign, a sound pressure level Leq = 95.0 dB(A) was measured, thus highlighting the leaf removing machine as the principle source of noise (suction fan and channelling).

Noise exposure evaluation is repeated by confirming the Leq value and declaring an Lep,d = 90,0 dB(A).

Chapter 4 - “Expected damage”

Described in sector document.

Chapter 5 - “Action”

a) Safety risks.

All working organs must be segregated (art. 68 [1]), especially the fan rotor.

Transporter loading hoppers in general must be protected against falls of people and against contact with dangerous moving organs (art. 212 [1]). The transporter unloading area in general must be protected against contact with dangerous moving organs (art. 212 [1]), (point 1.3.7, 1.3.8, 1.4 Enclosure I [5]).

All drive organs and elements must be segregated (art. 55 [1]), in particular the belts and the pulleys and the intermediate command area of conveyor belts (art. 56 [1]), (point 1.3.7, 1.3.8, 1.4 Enclosure I [5]).

The areas below the conveyor belts must be inaccessible or segregated (art. 214

[1]).

For conveyor belts see also [6] and [7].

Dangerous holes and protrusions, which it may not be possible to eliminate (presence of conveyor belts, etc.) must be carefully segregated and adequately indicated (art. 8 [1] and [4]).

b) Health risks.

Action concerning manual load handling is described in the sector document.

Noisiness.

Suction plants must be designed according to good technical criteria and they must be separated from production plants (art. 41 [3]). Channelling must be manufactured with materials that limit sound propagation (e.g. replacement of metal channel with plastic one.

In the case in question, the action performed was:

shift of electro-ventilators for leaf removal outside;

soundproofing of leaf suction tubes.

Following the abovementioned action noise exposure reduction provided the following values Leq = 85.0 dB(A) and Lep,d = 84.0 dB(A).

Chapter 6 - “Subcontracting”

This phase is not sub-contracted to third parties.

Chapter 7 - “Legal references”

[1] PRESIDENTIAL DECREE 547/55;

[2] PRESIDENTIAL DECREE 303/56;

[3] Legislative decree 277/91;

[4] Legislative decree 626/94;

[5] PRESIDENTIAL DECREE 459/96

[6] UNI ISO 1819/89

[7] UNI ISO 7149/89

[8] UNI EN 294/93

[9] UNI EN 349/94

Chapter 8 - “External risk”

Refer to environmental risk profiles for productive sectors.

PHASE/RISK FACTOR DOCUMENT

PHASE 3

1. SECTOR:	OIL PRESSING PLANTS
2. WORK PHASE:	PHASE 3 – CRUSHING
3. INAIL CODE:
4. RISK FACTOR:	SAFETY RISKS DUE TO: Structural faults of the workplace; safety faults on machinery and equipment; electrical risks. HEALTH RISKS due to: physical agents: noise.
5. RISK CODE
(for office use only)
6. NO. EMPLOYEES:

Chapter 1 - “crushing”(present in both types of processing, different machinery used)”

Once the olives have been washed, they fall into a hopper, and from here, by means of a screw feeder elevator, they are sent on to the crushing phase.

The crushing plant can be constituted by millstones in the traditional cycle, or hammer, cylinder, or, more rarely, cone crushers in the continuous cycle.

Chapter 2 – “Equipment, machinery and plant”

The equipment that can be used in the crushing phase is:

1) Hopper and screw feeder lift

2) Millstone

3) Crusher

Hopper Millstone

Screw feeder elevator: this is constituted by a shaft to which a spiral or helix is attached, which rotates inside a channel without touching the walls; the helix-shaped motion of the rotating part permits the progression of the olives.

Millstone: this is the most ancient system of milling and is constituted by:

a granite base millstone;

basin of metallic material with a lateral opening;

vertical granite millstones, normally 2 or 3, with a cylindrical or elliptical shape;

millstone and basin scraper;

mixing spatulas (that take the paste under the millstones);

blade for expelling paste from the basin;

movement organs.

Hammer crusher constituted by:

hammer holder rotor on which fixed or floating hammers are positioned;

circular grid (cage) on which the hammer lacerates the olives and through which the treated product is sent on for malaxing;

moving organs.

Cylinder and cylindrical crushers are not described as they were not present in the companies involved in the survey.

Crushing plants were of recent construction and when installed subsequent to the introduction of the machinery directive, they had CE mark.

Chapter 3 - “The risk factor”

Risks caused by processing.

a) Safety risks.

a₁) Risks due to structural faults in the work place concerning:

floors (smooth or uneven);

holes in the floor;

internal mobility.

a₂) Risks from safety faults on machinery and equipment concerning:

protection of transmission organs;

protection of work organs;

protection of command organs.

a₃)Risks from the handling of dangerous substances for the use of corrosive substances during cleaning operations (e.g. caustic soda)

a₄) Risks caused by poor electrical safety connected to non-suitability of use due to:

indirect contact with metal parts of the equipment under voltage in case of the collapse of motor insulation and/or disconnection of the wiring from the terminal board and the protection conductor, caused by vibrations, blows etc.

direct contact in the case of deterioration or breakage of the cable, terminal board, plug, etc.

b) Health risks.

B1) Physical agents: risks from exposure and physical values that interact in various ways with the human body:

noise (presence of noisy equipment during the work and function cycle: hammer mills, poor plant maintenance) with propagation of the sound energy inside the work environment.

The millstone does not pose this type of problem.

With most types of plant, phases 3, 4,5, 6 and 7 and their relative systems, are performed inside the same room. The crusher contributes to the level of sound pressure inside the room. High sound pressure levels belong to the 85-90 Leq dB(A) interval.

Chapter 4. “Expected damage”

Described in the sector document.

Chapter 5 - “Action”

a) Safety risks.

All work organs must be segregated (art. 68 [1]) and fitted with blockage devices (art. 72 [1]).

The channels housing the screw feeder must be closed (art. 211 [1]).

Screw feeder loading and unloading mouths must be protected against contact with dangerous moving organs (art. 212 [1]).

All organs with motion transmission organs must be segregated (art. 55 [1]), in particular the belts and pulleys (art. 56 [1]). (point 1.3.7, 1.3.8, 1.4 Enclosure I [5]).

The various levels of the plant must be fitted with normal parapets (art. 26 [1]) in order to make accessible all the areas in which maintenance work is required (art. 376 [1]).

Dangerous holes and protrusions, which it may not be possible to eliminate (presence of hoppers, etc.) must be carefully segregated and adequately indicated (art. 8 [1] and [4]).

In order to avoid the danger of touching the work organs of the millstones and scrapers with the hands, the container must be protected by a screen suitably fixed around the entire perimeter of the container and with a suitable height (art.127 [1]). The paste discharge hatch must also be protected in such a way as to prevent the same moving organs from being accessible by the worker (art. 212 [1]),( see [6] and [7]).

Hammer crushers must have protection devices (casing) firmly fixed to the structure with screws and bolts that can only be removed using special tools. Alternatively, the casing must have a safety device that, in the case of their removal, causes the machine to stop and prevents start-up until the protection device has been replaced (art.41, 72 and 124 [1]), (point 1.3.7, 1.3.8, 1.4 Enclosure I [5]).

Health risks.

Noise.

Given the presence of a number of machines within the same room, the main reclamation operations can only concern the reduction of sound power by the machinery itself.

Chapter 6 - “Subcontracting”

This phase is not sub-contracted to third parties.

Chapter 7 - “Legal references”

[1] PRESIDENTIAL DECREE 547/55;

[2] PRESIDENTIAL DECREE 303/56;

[3] Legislative decree 277/91;

[4] Legislative decree 626/94;

[5] PRESIDENTIAL DECREE 459/96

[6] UNI EN 294/93

[7] UNI EN 349/94

Chapter 8 - “External risk”

Refer to environmental risk profiles for productive sectors.

PHASE/RISK FACTOR DOCUMENT

PHASE 4

1. SECTOR:	OIL PRESSING PLANTS
2. WORK PHASE:	PHASE 4 – MALAXING
3. INAIL CODE:
4. RISK FACTOR:	SAFETY RISKS due to: Poor structure of workplace; poor safety on machinery and equipment; electrical risks. HEALTH RISKS due to: physical agents: noise.
5. RISK CODE
(for office use only)
6. NO. EMPLOYEES:

Chapter 1 - “malaxing”(present in both types of processing)

The paste obtained from grinding subsequently passes on to one or more malaxing units where the oil is made to float on the paste, following a continuous “massage” produced by the blades mounted on a rotating rod.

Chapter 2 – “Equipment. Machinery and plant”

A malaxing machine is used.

Malaxing containers

Malaxing unit: one or more steel containers inside which the paste is made to progress towards the outlet by one or more rotating rods, with the function of favouring the formation of larger drops of oil.

Crushing paste is made homogeneous and fluid, by means of the slow motion of the mixer blade (approximately 30 turns/minute) and the heating (24°C) of the kneading machine container. The temperature is reached and maintained by heating the body of the kneading machine with hot water in turn heated by a reinforced electrical resistance inserted into the machine body or with a wall-mounted water heater and copper transfer tubes.

In traditional olive pressing plants, the malaxing container is coupled to a dosing device for the distribution of the paste on the filtering disks, ready for the subsequent tower preparation phase. The paste is supplied to the dosing device by means of a screw feeder system.

Malaxing plant was of recent construction and those installed subsequent to the introduction of the Machinery Directive have CE marks.

Chapter 3 - “The risk factor”

a) Safety risks.

a₁) risks due to poor structure of the workplace concerning:

flooring (smooth or uneven);

holes in the floor;

internal mobility.

a₂) Risks from poor safety on machinery and equipment concerning:

protection of transmission organs;

protection of work organs;

protection of command organs.

a₃) Risks from handling dangerous substances for the use of corrosive substances during cleaning work (e.g. caustic soda)

a₄) risks due to poor electrical safety connected to unsuitability of use for:

in direct contact with metal parts of the equipment under voltage in the event of a collapse of motor insulation and/or disconnection of the wiring from the terminal board and the protection conductor, due to vibrations, blows, etc.

by direct contact in the even of deterioration or breakage of the cable, terminal board, plug, etc.

b) Health risks.

b₁) Physical agents: risks from exposure and physical values that interact in various ways with the human body:

noise (presence of noisy equipment during the work cycle and functioning: hammer mills, decanters and vertical centrifuge separators and poor plant maintenance) with the propagation of sound energy in the work environment.

Chapter 4. “Expected damage”

Described in the sector document.

Chapter 5 - “Action”

c) Safety risks.

All work organs must be segregated (art. 68, 97, 98 [1]) and any removable protection devices must be fitted with a blockage device (art. 72 [1]).

The machine loading and unloading openings must be protected against contact with dangerous moving organs (art. 73 [1]).

All movement drive organs and elements must be segregated (art. 55 [1]).

The channels housing the screw feeder must be closed (art. 211 [1]).

The screw feeder loading and unloading openings must be protected against contact with dangerous moving organs (art. 212 [1]). (point 1.3.7, 1.3.8, 1.4 Enclosure I [5]).

The plant’s various floors must be equipped with normal parapets (art. 26 [1]) in such a way as to make accessible all the areas in which maintenance operations are required (art. 376 [1]).

Dangerous holes and protrusions, which it may not be possible to eliminate (presence of conveyor belts, etc.) must be carefully segregated and adequately indicated (art. 8 [1] and [4]).

Health risks.

Noise.

Action must be taken on the machinery and plants of the other work phases present inside the room.

Chapter 6 - “Sub-contracting”

The phase in question is not sub-contracted to a third party

Chapter 7 - “Legal references”

[1] PRESIDENTIAL DECREE 547/55;

[2] PRESIDENTIAL DECREE 303/56;

[3] Legislative decree 277/91;

[4] Legislative decree 626/94;

[5] PRESIDENTIAL DECREE 459/96

[6] UNI EN 294/93

[7] UNI EN 349/94

Chapter 8 - “External risks”

Refer to environmental risk profiles for productive sectors.

PHASE/RISK FACTOR DOCUMENT

PHASE 5

1. SECTOR:	OLIVE PRESSING PLANTS
2. WORK PHASE:	PHASE 5 – PREPARING THE TOWER
3. INAIL CODE:
4. RISK FACTOR:	SAFETY RISKS due to: poor workplace structure; poor machinery and equipment safety; electrical risks. HEALTH RISKS due to: manual load handling; physical agents: noise.
5. RISK CODE
(for office use only)
6. NO. EMPLOYEES:

Chapter 1 - “Preparing the tower”(only present in the traditional cycle)

In the traditional system, the olive paste is placed in a thin layer of filtering disks with a central hole, constituted by high-resistance synthetic fibres. The disks are then piled up, alternated with metal disks (one metal disk every three filtering disks), on a trolley with a central tube with holes. This operation, which is usually performed manually, in certain pressing plants this operation is performed using automatic stacking machines.

Chapter 2 – “Equipment, machines and plant”

The machines used are:

1) Filtering disk trolley;

2) Mobile platform;

3) Stacking machines;

4) Electrical transporter.

Malaxing machine for Stacking machine

distributing the paste

Trolley: can be stacked manually or automatically.

In the former case the trolley is placed on a mobile platform that, under the effect of a hydraulic jack, allows the trolley to be lowered in order to facilitate the stacking operation.

In the latter case, a stacking machine is used.

Stacking machine: performs many movements, from rotating the filtering disks during paste loading to a 120° shift and stacking on filtering disk trolleys.

This machine requires constant human manpower, which having removed the exhausted olive pomace from the filtering disks that have been pressed, arranges them on a surface in order to spread a layer of olive paste on top. The machine then stacks the filtering disks on the trolley.

Because of these continuous movements of the mechanical arms within the surrounding space, the machine is completely surrounded by a metal grid, with a height of approximately 2.5 metres from the ground, in the middle of which there is an opening gate that allows the passage of the filtering disk trolleys to the press and for transporting the pressed disks back to the stacking machine.

When the gate opens it activates a microswitch that interrupts the electricity supply and therefore all the machine’s pneumatic machines (dangerous for those who manoeuvre the trolley of filtering disks described above).

An electric transporter is used to move the filtering disk trolley.

Electrical transporters for filtering disk trolleys: these are mobile appliances fitted with an asynchronous single- or three phase electrical motor, that operates at a mains voltage of 380/220 V and control buttons on the handlebar. They are used to tow the filtering disk trolley from the stacking position to the presses and vice versa.

The plant is of recent construction and where installed subsequent to the introduction of the Machinery Directive, has CE marks.

Chapter 3 - “The risk factor”

Risks from processing.

a) Safety risks.

a₁) Risks caused by a poor structure of the workplace concerning:

floors (smooth or uneven);

internal and external mobility.

a₂) Risks from poor machinery and appliance safety concerning:

protection of the start-up organs;

protection of the drive organs;

protection of the work organs;

protection of the control organs.

a₃) Risks from poor electrical safety connected to unsuitability of use due to:

indirect contact with metal parts of appliances connected to the current in the event of collapse of the insulation of the motor and/or disconnection of wiring from the terminal board and projection conductor, due to vibrations, blows, etc.

direct contact in the event of deterioration or breakage of the cable, the terminal board, the plug, etc.

b) Health risks.

b₂) Manual load handling: the risk has not been evaluated in the sector document in that this type of plant was rarely used in the survey sample.

b₃) physical agents: risks from exposure and physical values that interact in various ways with the human body:

noise (presence of noisy equipment during the working and functioning cycle: hammer mills, decanters and vertical centrifuge separators, poor plant maintenance) with propagation of energy in the work environment.

Chapter 4. “Expected damage”

Described in the sector document.

Chapter 5 - “Action”

c) Safety risks.

All work organs must be segregated (art. 68 [1]) and fitted with lock devices (art. 72 [1]).

The channels where the screw feeders are must be closed (art. 211 [1]).

The loading and unloading mouths of the screw feeders must be protected against contact with dangerous moving organs (art. 212 [1]).

All motion drive organs and elements must be separated (art. 55 [1]), in particular the belts and pulleys (art. 56 [1]). (point 1.3.7, 1.3.8, 1.4 Enclosure I [5]).

The plant’s various levels must be fitted with normal parapets (art. 26 [1]) in order to make accessible all the areas in which maintenance work is required. (art. 376 [1]).

Dangerous holes and protrusions, which it may not be possible to eliminate (presence of hoppers, etc.) must be carefully segregated and adequately indicated (art. 8 [1] and [4]).

Suitable foot protection should be worn because of the handling of the metal disks and the filtering disk trolleys ( art.384 [1] and art.41 [4]).

Health risks.

Manual load handling

The main action for reducing risk is the aid in filtering disk and metal disk handling using the stacking machine and electrical transporters.

Noise.

Measures must be taken on machinery and plant of the other processing phases inside the room. .

Chapter 6 - “Subcontracting”

This phase is not sub-contracted to third parties.

Chapter 7 - “Legal references”

[1] PRESIDENTIAL DECREE 547/55;

[2] PRESIDENTIAL DECREE 303/56;

[3] Legislative decree 277/91;

[4] Legislative decree 626/94;

[5] PRESIDENTIAL DECREE 459/96

[6] UNI EN 294/93

[7] UNI EN 349/94

Chapter 8 - “External risks”

Refer to environmental risk profile for productive sectors.

PHASE/RISK FACTOR DOCUMENT

PHASE 6

1. SECTOR:	OLIVE PRESSING PLANTS
2. WORK PHASE:	PHASE 6 – PRESSING (EXTRACTION)
3. INAIL CODE:
4. RISK FACTOR:	SAFETY RISKS due to: poor structure of the workplace; poor machine and appliance safety; electrical risks. HEALTH RISKS due to: manual load handling; physical agents: noise.
5. RISK CODE
(for office use only)
6. NO. EMPLOYEES:

Chapter 1 - “Pressing or extraction”(present in both types of process, different machinery used)”

In traditional pressing plants, the extraction of oil from the paste takes place through the pressure that a hydraulic press exerts on the paste spread over the filtering disks piled up to form a tower. The filtering disks constitute a filtering surface through which the must, composed of oil and vegetable water, runs off before being sent to a centrifuge separator.

In modern, continuous pressing plants, the hydraulic press and the tower are replaced by centrifugal extractors (UNI EN 12505-2001 definition), that by the centrifugal force exerted on the paste, separate the liquid phase, comprised of water and oil from the solid phase (pomace).

Chapter 2 – “Appliances, machinery and plant”

The machinery used in this phase is the press for the traditional cycle and the centrifuge extractor for the continuous cycle.

Press: open tower type and activated by two or four body hydraulic pumps with single action and device for varying the capacity by means of stroke adjustment. Working pressure can reach 400 Atm. The filtering disk trolley is positioned on the head of the piston from where it is pushed upwards, thus causing the insertion of the pierced tube of the trolley into opening at the top of the press. The diameter of the press piston is normally 35cm.

Hydraulic press

Centrifuge extractor: based on the physical property of separation by stratification of a product composed of a number of elements with different specific weights The hydroextractors treat the olive paste according to three different modes:

three-phase system (oil, vegetable water and dry pomace);

two-phase system (oil and wet pomace).

The interior of a centrifuge extractor is constituted by a horizontal tabbed cylinder (screw feeder) with a conical part, in stainless steel that turns at approximately 3000/3500 turns per minute. As mentioned previously, under the centrifugal force that is exerted on the different specific weights of the components, the pomace and must are separated. The paste is taken to the centrifuge by tubes under the thrust of a momo type pump.

During the survey one crushing machine was found to use the Sinolea procedure, which is based on the principle of oil’s high capacity of adhesion in comparison to that of vegetable water present in the oil paste. Stainless steel blades slowly and continuously penetrate the moving oil paste with slow and continuous movements and come out again drawing the oil out of the container, where recovery takes place due to both natural dripping and shaving with special plastic combs. The residual oil (10 – 30%) can be recovered using one of the two procedures described above.

The machinery was of recent construction and that installed after the introduction of the Machinery Directive had CE marks.

Chapter 3 - “The risk factor”

Risks from processing

a) Safety risks.

a₁) Risks from poor workplace structure concerning:

floors (smooth or uneven);

internal and external mobility.

a₂) Risks from poor machinery and equipment safety concerning:

protection of start-up organs;

protection of transmission organs;

protection of work organs;

protection of command organs.

a₃) Risks from poor electrical safety connected to suitability of use:

concerning the presses:

indirect contact with the metal structure of the presses, of the oil pressure hydraulic pump unit and the supply and control panel, in the event of motor breakdown (due to overheating) and/or pump control, panel, terminal board wiring disconnection (caused by vibrations).

direct contact in the event of deterioration or breakage of the insulating wrapping and covers of the supply panel, cable, terminal board, plugs and sockets, etc.

Concerning the decanter:

in direct contact with the centrifuge extractor (in the event of collapse of the motor’s insulating cover and disconnections and contacts, caused by strong vibrations, power conductors and terminal board protection) to the panel and lock switch casing.

by direct contact in the event of deterioration or breakage of the cable, cable run, motor terminal board, the plug and socket at the locking action switch in the case of mechanical blows.

With regards to the centrifuge extractor, UNI EN standard 12505/2001 identifies the following dangers:

crushing;

shearing;

tangling;

dragging;

abrasion;

expulsion of machine parts;

expulsion of treated product;

loss of stability.

As far as these dangers are concerned, the following 9 danger areas are identified:

belts and pulleys, static sensor and rotating cam of the drum speed indicator

belts and pulleys, static sensor and rotating cam of the gearbox speed indicator, gears for reducing speed between screw feeder and drum;

toothed chain and crown (or gears);

scraper, low speed rotating blade;

drum;

extremity of the drum (liquid output side);

extremity of the drum (solid residue discharge side);

supply tube;

rotating hydraulic joint with outer cooling blading, pulleys and belts.

b) Health risks.

b₂) Physical agents: risks from exposure and physical orders that interact with the human body in various ways:

noise (presence of noisy machinery during work and running cycle: centrifuge extractor, poor plant maintenance) with the propagation of sound energy in the work environment.

The hydraulic press does not create this type of problem.

In most plants, phases 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7, with their relative plants, are performed in a single room. The centrifuge extractor contributes to the sound pressure level inside the room. The sound pressure levels were within the 85-90 Leq dB(A) .

Chapter 4. “Expected damage”

Described in the sector document.

Chapter 5 - “Action”

a) Safety risks.

As far as the presses are concerned: all the motion transmission elements and organs must be segregated (art. 55 [1]), especially the belts and pulleys (art. 56 [1]). (point 1.3.7, 1.3.8, 1.4 Enclosure I [5]).

As far as the centrifuge extractor is concerned: the areas concerning the motion transmission mechanisms and the rotating parts must be protected by fixed screens (3.22.1 EN 292-1/91 ).

If the fixed screens have perforations, they must be manufactured in compliance with standards EN 294/92 and EN 953/97.

The main switch must be fitted with devices to prevent accidental start-up. (EN 1037/95).

The various floors of the plant must be fitted with normal parapets (art. 26 [1]) and all the areas requiring maintenance work must be made accessible (art. 376 [1]).

Dangerous holes and protrusions, which it may not be possible to eliminate (presence of conveyor belts, etc.) must be carefully segregated and adequately indicated (art. 8 [1] and [4]).

b) Health risks.

Noise.

Given the presence of various machines within the same room, the main reclamation action must concern reducing the sound power created by the machines.

Chapter 6 - “Subcontracting”

This phase is not subcontracted to a third party.

Chapter 7 - “Legal references”

[1] PRESIDENTIAL DECREE 547/55;

[2] PRESIDENTIAL DECREE 303/56;

[3] Legislative decree 277/91;

[4] Legislative decree 626/94;

[5] PRESIDENTIAL DECREE 459/96;

[6] UNI EN 292-1/91;

[7] UNI EN 294/93 ;

[8] UNI EN 349/94 ;

[9] UNI EN 12505/2001

Chapter 8 - “External risks”

Refer to the environmental risk for productive sectors.

PHASE/RISK FACTOR DOCUMENT

PHASE 7

1. SECTOR:	OLIVE PRESSING PLANTS
2. WORK PHASE:	PHASE 7 – SEPARATION
3. INAIL CODE:
4. RISK FACTOR:	SAFETY RISKS due to: poor structure of the workplace; poor machinery and equipment safety; electrical risks. HEALTH RISKS due to: physical agents: noise.
5. RISK CODE
(for office use only)
6. NO. EMPLOYEES:

Chapter 1 - “Separation” (present in both types of processing)

The must obtained from the extraction plants was sent to the separators or disk centrifuges (definition UNI EN 12505-2001), in order to separate the oil from the water.

Following this last passage, the olive oil is ready for direct consumption or for packaging after any filtering operations required.

Chapter 2 – “Equipment, machinery and plant”

Disk centrifuge. Inside the machine, by the principle of separation by centrifugation of a liquid composed of elements with different specific weights, the oil, the lighter substance, is collected in the inner tube, having passed through a series of cones that withhold impurities.

Disk centrifuge

The plant was of recent construction and that installed subsequent to the introduction of the Machinery Directive had CE marks.

Chapter 3 - “The risk factor”

Risks from processing.

a) Safety risks.

a₁) Risks caused by poor workplace structure concerning:

floors (smooth or uneven);

internal and external mobility.

a₂) Risks caused by poor machinery and equipment safety concerning:

protection of start-up organs;

protection of transmission organs;

protection of work organs;

protection of command organs.

a₃) Risks caused by poor electrical safety connected to suitability of use due to:

indirect contact with the metal carcass of the centrifuge separator (in the event of collapse of the insulation of the motor winding and disconnections and contacts, caused by strong vibrations, power conductors and terminal board protection), the panel casing and the lock switches.

direct contact in the event of deterioration or breakage of the cable, cable run, motor terminal board, socket and plug at the lock switch in the event of mechanical blows.

As far as disk centrifuges are concerned, UNI EN standard 12505/2001 identifies the following dangers:

crushing;

shearing;

tangling;

dragging;

abrasion;

expulsion of machine parts;

expulsion of treated product;

loss of stability.

In connection with these dangers, 6 danger zones are identified:

drum;

brake device, mechanical joint with outer cooling tabs;

motion transmission gears between the horizontal and vertical shaft, gear lubrication oil (oil cup);

ventilation opening.

b) Health risks.

b₂) Physical agents: risk from exposure and physical orders that interact in various ways with the human body:

noise (presence of noisy equipment during the work and running cycle: disk centrifuge, poor plant maintenance) with the propagation of sound energy within the work environment.

In most plants, phases 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7, with their relative systems, are performed in a single room or area. The disk centrifuge contributes to the sound pressure level inside the room. The sound pressure levels recorded were within the 80-90 Leq dB(A) interval.

Chapter 4. “Expected damage”

Described in the sector document.

Chapter 5 - “Action”

c) Safety risks.

The areas around the motion drive mechanisms and the rotating parts must be protected by fixed screens ( 3.22.1 EN 292-1/91 ).

If the fixed screens are designed with perforations, they must be manufactured in conformity with standards EN 294/92 and EN 953/97.

The main switch must be fitted with means for preventing accidental start-up (EN 1037/95).

The plant’s various floors must be fitted with normal parapets (art. 26 [1]) and all areas requiring maintenance work must be made accessible (art. 376 [1]).

Dangerous holes and protrusions, which it may not be possible to eliminate (presence of conveyor belts, etc.) must be carefully segregated and adequately indicated (art. 8 [1] and [4]).

b) Health risks.

Noise.

Given the presence of a number of machines inside the room, the main reclamation actions must focus on reducing the sound power of the machines.

Chapter 6 - “Subcontracting”

This phase is not sub-contracted to third parties.

Chapter 7 - “Legal references”

[1] PRESIDENTIAL DECREE 547/55;

[2] PRESIDENTIAL DECREE 303/56;

[3] Legislative decree 277/91;

[4] Legislative decree 626/94;

[5] PRESIDENTIAL DECREE 459/96;

[6] UNI EN 292-1/91;

[7] UNI EN 294/93 ;

[8] UNI EN 349/94 ;

[9] UNI EN 12505/2001

Chapter 8 - “External risks

Refer to environmental risk profiles for productive sectors.