2008 Q5 COMMISSIONING ACTIVITIES AND RISKS

[cgallafant]

The York Study group recently attempted Q5 of the 2008 exam.

The question was tackled in three different ways and during a group discussion we came up with further potential answers. We would appreciate any feedback from the forum.

[PJW]

For those without ready access to the question paper, I include the text:

A 36-hour line closure is planned for final installation, testing and commissioning of a new
signalling or trackside telecommunications system.
a) Describe the principal activities which would take place during the commissioning period.
[5 marks]
b) Considering the range of activities which you have described in part (a), identify the main risks
to staff safety and describe any mitigating measures which may be necessary.
[10 marks]
c ) Describe the documentation which should be produced prior to the commissioning in order to
ensure the safety of the commissioning staff and explain how the documentation you have
described ensures this. [10 marks]

Overall I think that the [IP] answer was the best; I'd have preferred a bit more in some areas but I'd have rated as a clear Pass.
The [JF] answer was too short and didn't quite do enough for me in really scoring the marks; you can be very brief but you need to ensure that what you write is absolutely spot on and to the point. Actually the material was generally there and relevant; it was just that it needed to be a bit sharpr in really answering the question. I guiess that this would be hovering around the Near Miss- the extra few words at the end of the second page may just tip it to a Pass perhaps.
The [JB] answer was certainly along the right lines and as some ideas to take to a Study Group session it was fine; if offered as a full answer to the exam question then it was lacking in length and detail. It was best for part b) as it explicitly considered injuries, and clearly gave a range of different ones to a variety of staff.

So here is my feedback, but I'd like others to join in as well so that we can have more of a discussion. I am assuming that the context of the answers (and certainly my experience) is Network Rail UK; we might get somewhat different views from Metroland, India, Ireland, Australia.....

[PJW]

a) Describe the principal activities which would take place during the commissioning period.
[5 marks]

The use of a list of items [IP] was good but perhaps there should have been a bit more detail on each (as it said "describe"). In particular item 5 was too brief. Worth recognising that briefing would be before possession taken and that signalling disconnections as well as possession are likely to be involved and may well also need to be a traction power isolation.

The [JF] answer did give a bit more re the likely activities (changeover, function testing and Principles testing) although I'd have added a bit more detail than that- there is almost certainly through testing, correpondence testing and in particular testing at the fringes of whatever is new. I can't make up my mind whether the bit about shortfalls and outstanding Test Logs is valuable here- it is certainly true but I think there were other bits that I'd have expanded rather than this.

The [JB] answer was very brief. Perhaps as the industry in UK moves to modular signalling this scale of work may be possible within 36 hours, but currently it certainly looks pretty "ambitious" (translation = foolhardy). There certainly won't going to be much time left to test anything if at the beginning of the possession the UTXs are being dug and the REB craned onto site- it would certainly need to be "plug and play".

Perhaps this is a reminder that none of the answers gave any indication of the context of the environment / railway / scale of work being discussed.
Also no-one mentioned any data changes to anything; even on RRI there would be changes to TD and other ancilliary information systems. Similarly no one mentioned any Telecomms changes or P'Way activities. At least [JB] did think about the signaller's interface and power supply.

I reckon that for 5 marks you need to expect to write for 5 minutes and hence that may be a list of 10 "one liner" items or perhaps 5 broad category items with a bit more of a description or indeed a sub-list of for e.g. all the separate categories of testing activity. Obviously it depends on your handwriting but I'd be expecting around half a page.

[PJW]

b) Considering the range of activities which you have described in part (a), identify the main risks to staff safety and describe any mitigating measures which may be necessary.[10 marks]

Remember it is a module 1 paper, so worth starting off this portion with an introduction that makes it clear that you know what a "risk" is and the criteria that made you rate it as "a main risk". It may sound pedantic but "working at height" is not strictly a risk; the risk is the personal injury that can be sustained if you drop something that injures someone below or you yourself fall from where you are supposed to be working. It is quite reasonable that your answer spends most of the time discussing the various hazards, but you should explain how these relate to potential accidents.
For example [JF] talked about the staff working likely to be from away and therefore unfamiliar; a good point but you do need to explain how this contributes to risk. Is it for example the possible provocation of the local populace if wearing "all orange" when leaving the railway and emerging onto the public road in the wrong part of Ireland?

[JB] and [JP] very obviously had identified 5 / 6 items which seems about right- it wasn't as easy for the examiner to see at a glance in [JF] answer. In fact this really only hinted at the risks as it was just describing in general terms the hazardous environment; I think that [IP] was best at being clear of at least what the hazards are. I think that I may have provided a table with the brief descriptions and had other columns for ranking liklihood and severity into high / medium / low and thus use this to explain why I regarded themm as "main risks"; it would have been a way of showing that the trips, slips and falls are probably more important in aggregate than what are thought of significant incidents.

[JF] didn't give enough for mitigating measures but I think took the right approach by deciding that they could basically be described once as in generic terms the same apply to each. Looking at [JB] answer can see similar wording repeating in each case; better to have had some titles such as "designed out", "planning", "training", "assessment of staff competency", "PPE", "briefing" and against each of these as appropriate give a specific piece of detail applying to one or more of the hazards as illustration.

The level of [IP] answer regarding the mitigations I thought was about right in its range and level of detail with enough examples to make it "real"

I think that [JB] was right to try to include risks to staff not directly undertaking the activity (signallers, mintainers); you wouldn't want to focus on such to the detriment to the main thrust of the question but as an aside to broaden the answer I thought it was good.

[PJW]

c ) Describe the documentation which should be produced prior to the commissioning in order to ensure the safety of the commissioning staff and explain how the documentation you have described ensures this. [10 marks]

The [JB} answer is very brief; it was ok as far as it went but this was not far enough. Certianly given the scakle of the installtion / consturction works envisaged in part a) then there is clearly far more going on than a bit of testing and so the Testing & Commissioning Plan will only have a small part of the story.

Construction Phase Plan, Work Package Plan, Method Statement, Task Briefing Sheet as is added on at the end of [JF] answer is certainly relevant. Again I think I'd go for a tabular apporach with three columns, the first giving the name, the second giving a hint that I had an idea of the sort of contents within and the third explaining how this document helps to ensure staff safety.

The description of the contents of the Testing & Commissioning Plan in [JF] answer was good at demonstrating that familar with this sort of document and certainly describes it as requested, but didn't really address the very last part of the question explicitly,a lthough it wouldn't have taken much to have made it do so.

Be aware that Testing and Commissioning Plans (certainly for this scale of job) nowadays tend to have less in them than previously re safety arrangements etc; this role is now largely taken over by the other documenst that have been mentioned as staff safety risks are broadly similar for all staff but tend to be greatest for those undertaking the heavier physical work and therefore the Construction function tend to lead on this, thus testing plans far more focussed on the actual testing specifics.

Certainly he answer was also looking for the documentation produced well prior to the commissioning as well, so mention of the CDM, Designers Risk Assessment , Hazard log etc should all be included within the answer. [IP] attempt was best in this area even though it lacked any reference to the "details for on the day" documents which I think was a deficiency.

[IJP]

Thanks PJW, IJP and JF are from a maintenance backgorund, hence find the major project type questions rather tricky!

We are attempting 2007 Q1 and one other question from a mod 1 paper for the next study group, will post our answers up directly.

[PJW]

Thanks PJW, IJP and JF are from a maintenance backgorund, hence find the major project type questions rather tricky!

We are attempting 2007 Q1 and one other question from a mod 1 paper for the next study group, will post our answers up directly.

As you'll realise it is precisely because it forces you to look beyond your day job that makes studying for IRSE Exam useful.

Will look forward to your next offerings; certainlt it was a first to have several different attempts of the same written answer to compare

[jbrownhill]

Thanks PJW, your feedback has been very useful as were the discussions with IJP, JF and CG in our session. I am from a design background and would now view that question very differntly in future.

[KonduriRaghavakumar]

I am attempting this year mod1 and mod2 exam. Just trying to answer the previous paper questions. suggestions are welcome. I had seen this question and I took one half hour to answer this much.
Thank you

[PJW]

I am attempting this year mod1 and mod2 exam. Just trying to answer the previous paper questions. suggestions are welcome. I had seen this question and I took one half hour to answer this much.
Thank you

Context
I imagine that you are describing a typical commissioning in India; in some respcts it may be different from the UK so do get used to starting your answerwith some form of context statement. Similarly you have used abbrieviations such as RE that I do not know and have difficulty guessing; the examiner would have the same difficulty. If the full words are used on the first occasion of use, it does give a better basis for working out what is meant, even if the term / practice is unfamiliar.

Describe Principal activities
You haven't done this; I believe you misunderstood what was wanted. The things you wrote may be useful elswhwere in the question and if so the examiner would give you credit, but for what was wanted here for the 5 marks there is very little relevant.
However you did say:
errect signals,
energising track circuits
installation of point machines
functional / principles testing
so you would get some credit for these but you shuld have firstlly included more items and also given a little more detail that would show first show a deeper understanding and also be useful to you when answering parts b) and c)- therefore include a variety of risks.

Hence I'd I have said such things as:
#1 using a road-rail vehicle having a jib to crane into position a signal onto a pre-cast base, ensuring that it is safe to climb and correctly aligned and then terminating a prepared tail cable in the head,
#2 performing a 650V power supply changeover to deaden an existing group of locations to permit their recovery including removing some old redundant batteries,
#3 "P Way" track staff installing extended timbers, then drilling the rails for installation of a new point machine. Lifting into position, connecting mechanically and electrically. Adjusting, gauging, checking power operation and detection.
#4 renewing the barriers at a level crossing with a vehicular road closure but the need to permit the passage of pedestrians across the railway
#5 undertaking fringe alterations changing the wiring within an existing relay room and lineside locations, circuit testing locally and then between separate sites and finally functional testing from a remote signalbox

There is 5 minutes for this first section so you should be giving 5 descriptions at least as detailed as above or 10 briefer items


Identify risks / mitigations
You have definitely put in some useful content, but I suggest that you need to relate the mitigations to the risks more clearly and consistently. Sometimes you have, but not always- particularly the latter entries.
I think I'd have used a table with separate columns for risk and mitigations as you have put in some sensible mitigations that are not obviously related to a particular risk.
Also since your part a) was weak you had difficulty in doing what they asked for part b)


Documentation
For a possible 10 marks, there was not much written here, nor was much you wrote in part a) to add to this.
In particular I'd have expected some form of document that explained who was to do what task when to enable the planning of different activities to conflict with each other as little as possible and make sure things were done in the right order.

In particular you didn't generally do enough to explain how documentation ensures . For example I had difficulty in guessing what "document of station working rules" meant- I was thinking that this was about the methodogy of operating trains, but this doesn't seem to tally with the lat bullet in your first section which suggested that no train would be operated during the period. Perhaps it is something completely different such as a document giving the hazards that exist in the locality, perhaps buried services such as power or water, hazardous areas of restrictive clearances or outside the railway fence, weak roofs or confined spaces within the buildings, security arrangements etc. If you had explained how the document ensured safety then I could probably have worked out what you had failed to describe but had really only listed

Summary
Answer was on the right lines but needed more detail and should have been more carefully aligned to the precise question. It would have scored reasonably for the middle section but would have been struggling to pick up many marks in the first section and in particular the last portion. Given the mark weighting I therfore think that overall it would probably have been somewhat below a pass; I suspect that you have enough knowledge and that what you need is a little more practice in presenting your answer in a way that displays it better by fully addressing what you were asked.