Construction Plant-hire Association Plant Safety Projects · analysis of incident data indicating unintended movement a rising issue • Supported by an HSE review of unintentional

Construction

Plant-hire

Association

Plant Safety

Projects

Peter Brown – CPA

Technical Manager

What we do…

• Founded in 1942, represents the plant hire sector with in

excess of 1700 members

• Membership includes hirers, owners, contractors,

manufacturers/importers, training organisations…

• Provides legal, technical, operational and training

guidance to members

• Liaison with Governmental bodies inc. IfATE, DEFRA,

DoT, HMRC, HSE, CITB etc.

• Administers Special Interest Groups, Training Groups and

Plant Safety Group

• Provides/develops initiatives and produces guidance

publications

• A sub-group set up within the Health and Safety strand of the Strategic Forum for Construction

• Part of the CONIAC Safety Working Group which advises the HSE

• Forms an integral part to the aims of the Strategic Forum and supporting construction-based strategies for safety and working together

• Tackles plant-related safety subjects on behalf of industry to bring a continuous reduction of injuries and ill-health

• Bring together federations and organisations for specific actions

• Managed, funded and chaired by CPA

Strategic Forum Plant Safety

Group

• Current publications produced by the PSG include: - Safe Use of Quick Hitches on Excavators (50)

- Ground Conditions (73)

- Competence to Operate Construction Plant (40)

- Medical Fitness (51)

- Safe Use of Telescopic Handlers (103 + supplement on lifting - 4)

- MEWPS and crushing (33)

- MEWPs Safety Alert Protocol (6)

- Managing the Safe Condition of MEWPs (44)

- Reducing Unintended Movement of Plant (60)

- Lifting Operations with Excavators (83)

- Safe Use of Dumpers (89)


Group

• CPA further produce safe-use documents through their special interest groups which include:- Mobile cranes

- Tower Cranes

- Hoists

- Concrete Pumps

- Suction/Vacuum Excavators

- Shoring Technology

• All are provided FOC to support each sub-sectors approach to safety

• All SFPSG publications are non-partisan and inclusive

Other CPA Publications

Reducing

Unintended

Movement of

Plant

Managing Exposure to

Consequential Risks


Group

Reducing Unintended Movement

• RUMP Project undertaken following anecdotal evidence and analysis of incident data indicating unintended movement a rising issue

• Supported by an HSE review of unintentional movement (IOOC) with excavators

• Report (RR1000) findings based on interviews with excavator operators and SMEs who confirmed that IOOC was a ‘serious problem’

• The underlying problem of IOOC was reported as complex and multi-faceted

• CPA-organised open meeting held April 2015 with a result to devise good practice guide and engage with manufacturers


• A known issue, most occurrences are unreported, is viewed as a natural occurrence of plant operating, with the potential devastating consequences not realised

• Causes falls within three main areas:

- control (lever, switch etc.) being activated without the operator’s knowledge

- operator intends to activate a control but selects incorrect direction or mode, or applies excessive input

- safety systems are bypassed/defeated

- operator activates a control but mechanical malfunction creates, prevents or limits an action, or provides incorrect or a non-action


Examples include:• The driver of a builder's merchant's delivery truck was delivering landscaping

materials to a house. He was operating the loader crane whilst standing on the truck bed, using a remote control unit attached to his body.

• Whilst attaching the loop of a bag of ballast to the legs of the clamp, he positioned himself between the legs and inadvertently operated the clamp which closed and fatally crushed his pelvis.

• The operator of the excavator was on the edge of an embankment loading dump trucks. After loading, he went to track rearwards to move the machine away from the edge

• He forgot that the track motors were at the front resulting in the machine tracking over the edge and down the embankment and overturning

• Consequences – machine movement meaning that operator and those nearby are unprepared, giving little or no time to take remedial action

• Outcome – annoyance, damage, injury, lost time, death

• It is those around the machine who may suffer the consequences of unintentional movement

• The working group have produced this guidance to highlight the issues and causes, and actions to be taken to mitigate the causes of unintentional movement and the effects on others

• Consists of 63 pages including 12 annexes


• The contributory factors to prevent causes and

consequences of unintended movement fall into three

interdependent areas:

- Management of plant operations

- Machine design

- Personal competence

• Topics within guidance includes…

- Task planning (factoring in unintended movement)

- Selecting machines

- Providing adequate supervision


- Training and familiarisation of plant operators

- Aware of the hazards by those working around/in close proximity to the machine

- Controlling of working zones - separation of machines and non-direct personnel

- Means of machine isolation and additional control interlock-type systems

- Use of plant controllers and communication systems such as ‘thumbs up’

- Specification of clothing to prevent catching on a control


• A number of case studies (20) has been added to highlight actual causes and consequences, for example:

‘A ground worker was working in front of the machine. Being a hot day, the operator stood up and opened the front window. On sitting down, they inadvertently touched a control lever. As the levers were not isolated, the bucket moved towards the machine trapping the groundworker. He lost both legs’.

• Most frequently causal factor includes:- Operator competence and driver error (17)

- Lack of supervision (16)

- Poor planning (16)

- Persons in the machine’s working area (14)

- Non-isolation of controls (14)


• Control of working zones section identifies areas that should not be entered unless machine is isolated and approval given by operator


Annexes include:• Guidance notes for plant operators

• Guidance notes for people in the vicinity of plant

• Guidance notes for site managers

• Examples of additional measures

• Methods of isolating plant

• Factors for training syllabus (for those working near to plant)

• Role of supporting staff

• Typical hand signals

• The guidance deals with the use of remote control units as well as fixed operator stations

• Launched 2018


Lifting

Operations

with

Excavators


Group

Guidance first published 2007 (7 pages)

Issues using excavators for lifting include:

• Not designed for lifting

• Fast boom and slew movements

• No hoist rope – issues over vertical lifting

• Standard excavator overload warning devices are rated with the

excavator in its least stable condition

• Standard excavator overload warning devices only warn, and do

not limit movement

• Operator can switch off the alarm

• Lifting charts variable (do not generally cover pick and carry)

• Not all excavator operators have been trained and assessed in

carrying out lifting operations with excavators

Lifting Operations with Excavators


Key additions and insertions in the revision include:

• Planning requirements by an AP

• Selection of machine

• Lift complexity (basic, intermediate and complex)

• Requirements for excavators equipped for lifting and changes

over time

• Rated capacity and lift capacity charts

• Lifting points on quick hitches

• Factors that affect stability

• Self-slinging

• Travelling with suspended loads

• Training and familiarisation


Load placed in a deep

excavation, without line of

sight, and with proximity

hazards, such as scaffolding

or overhead power lines.

En

vir

on

men

tal

Co

mp

lexit

y

3 Complex Complex Complex

Load placed in a deep

excavation under the direction

of a slinger signaller 2 Intermediate Intermediate Complex

Operator has clear line of

sight

1 Basic Intermediate Complex

1 2 3

Load Complexity

Simple load of

known weight and

C of G, with

designated lifting

points

A load known weight

with designated

lifting points, large

surface area subject

to wind and needs

tag lines

A load of estimated

weight, without

designated lifting

points and an offset

centre of gravity.

Unstable excavator

with combined centre

of gravity outside the

tipping line


Adverse effect of

slope on load

radius


Lifting Points,

Accessories

and Attaching

loads


Emphasis on

180 excavators

and causes of

instability



• Additions include

• tined fork attachments

• tilt rotators

• rated capacity for “pick and carry”

• case studies to illustrate lift

categories

• Publication consists of 68 pages and

10 annexes

• Can be downloaded FoC from

www.cpa.uk.net/sfpsgpublications

http://www.cpa.uk.net/sfpsgpublications

Forward

Tipping

Dumpers


Group

Factors for review

• High number injuries and fatalities have occurred with

FTDs

• Between June to December 2016….

- 6 deaths within 6 months, or 4 deaths in 1 month or 2

deaths in one day…

31/5/16 – Cirencester - dumper overturned - deceased jumped from

machine (Tuesday)

3/10/16 – Manningtree, Essex – dumper overturned - deceased not

wearing seat restraint (Monday)

3/10/16 – St Athan, Vale of Glamorgan – deceased found next to

overturned dumper (Monday)

10/10/16 – M1 near Daventry – struck by dumper (Monday)

28/10/16 – Keith, near Aberdeen – struck by dumper (Friday)

5/12/16 – Edinburgh – struck by dumper (Monday)

Research reports

• HSE commissioned research report (RR1066) – Use and

non-use of seatbelts in FTDs - published 2015

• Report identified reluctance of operators to wear seatbelt

due to:

- Low levels of trust in the ROPS

- Seat belts: inconvenient and uncomfortable, become dirty,

damaged

- Perception: they were better off jumping clear

• Report suggested manufacturers should consider:

- Fitting integral cabs

- Improving seat belt/seat design for better restraint

- Industry should consider encouraging higher specification

machines (all weather operations)

- Enforcement of seat-belt wearing

Joint-industry Forum

• Industry Forum meetings held October 2016, February

and September 2017

• Main discussion items included:- site discipline

- machine and operator selection

- operator positioning when off the machine

- banning dumpers on stockpiles

- designing a minimum dumper specification

- cab specifications and operator staying seated during loading

- education

- machine and operator selection

- removing dumpers as a ‘free-for-all’ machine (1 person, 1 machine)

- CDM principles – designing out risk at planning stage

- training of CDM designers

Joint-industry Forum - Surveys

• CPA surveyed its members on dumper activities:

- Fleet sizes - some with over 150 units

- None had inclinometers, a few had cameras/CAS (but would retrofit)

- Some actively fitting/supplying cabs, CAS (although OEM only as

expensive retrofitting)

- Remainder will fit on request – providing customer’s pay more

- Suggested better enforcement for rule transgressions

• EN474 Cab specification for manufacturers

• CECA survey 2017:

- Industry (132 responses)

Industry Responses

< L

ow

pri

ori

ty

Hig

h p

rio

rity

>

Joint-industry Forum - Actions

1. Full vision – that new FTDs should provide a full field of

vision for operators

2. Stability – that new FTDs should have improved stability to

reduce the risk of overturning

3. Training and Information– that industry should

collaborate to provide better understanding for operators,

operatives and planners about the risks of FTDs

4. Competence – that no one should operate an FTD unless

the employer has assured themselves of their competence to

use the machine

5. Spoil heaps – that industry will tightly control operation of

FTDs on spoil heaps, with ban where not absolutely

necessary.

6. Exclusion – that industry will collaborate to develop a

standard approach to exclusion zones for FTDs.

• Plant Safety Group devised Safe

Use Guidance

• First meeting held February 2018

• 4 x sub-groups focused on specific

areas:

- Exclusion/segregation

- Ground conditions

- Training

- Operational

• Draft content from each sub-group

‘stitched’ into single document


Group

• Topics inserted into guidance:

- Task planning and machine selection

- Exclusion zones classification

- Dumper stability

- Ground hazards, stockpiles and improvements

- Training syllabus – operators, supervisors and those around the

machine

- Vision

- Familiarisation and behaviours

- Towing and use of dumpers on the highway

- Cab impact protection and seated during loading

- Methods of loading a dumper

- Maintenance

Plant Safety Group Guidance

• Key areas: Spoil heap/stockpiles

- Travelling to be avoided where possible

- RAMS to include temporary works design

control procedures

- Ground compaction and stability assessed

- Constant monitoring - stockpiles are

dynamic entities

- Safe access and egress with ramp

inclination not exceeding dumper safe

capability

- Sufficient room for manoeuvring

- Appropriate edge protection

- Effects of environmental changes

- Constant monitoring!

Key areas: Exclusion/segregation

- Reg 27 of CDM re: traffic routes

- Excluding those who are not

involved in the activity

- Zonal working classification inc:

Exclusion zone – fixed

Exclusion zone – mobile

Restricted zone

Normal zone

- Segregation equipment (pros and

cons)

- Safety zones for approaching

machine operators (yellow, amber

and red zones)

Plant Safety Group Guidance

• Key areas: Operational

- Planning and machine selection

- Non-cabbed dumpers – operator

exposure

- Load/material types

- Loading hierarchy and process:

a) forward loading

b) side loading

- Unacceptable loading practices

- Transporting ancillary equipment

- Seatbelt design and use

• Key areas: Cabbed Dumper Factors

- Cabbed versions do not

automatically allow seated

operator

- No minimum standard for cab

protection

- OPS/non-OPS cabs

- Risk assessment considerations

for a seated operator include:

Loading machine type and size

Method of loading

Ascertaining level of protection

designed by manufacturer

Manufacturer providing that

information

https://youtu.be/QFrJRnmd8uE

• Written as a learning tool to support

refresher training, toolbox talks etc.

• Used to support and compliment other

publications such as HSE’s CIS 32 and

HSG 144

• Format of positive messages in a ‘stay

safe by’…message

• Aimed at operators, supervisors and

managers of dumper-based operations

• Case study Annex

• Based on an observed incident

CPA ‘Staying Safe’ Guidance

[email protected]

• All SFPSG and CPA documents available as free

download

www.cpa.uk.net/sfpsgpublications

www.cpa.uk.net/safetytechnicalpublications

http://www.cpa.uk.net/sfpsgpublications

http://www.cpa.uk.net/safetytechnicalpublications

Documents

Construction Plant-hire Association Plant Safety Projects · analysis of incident data indicating unintended movement a rising issue • Supported by an HSE review of unintentional