Upload
others
View
50
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
The effectiveness of British Standard BS EN ISO 28927-11:2001 concerning the vibration emission of stone hammers
Prepared by the Health and Safety Executive
RR1163 Research Report
2
© Crown copyright 2020 Prepared 2015 First published 2020 You may reuse this information (not including logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view the licence visit www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/, write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email [email protected]. Some images and illustrations may not be owned by the Crown so cannot be reproduced without permission of the copyright owner. Enquiries should be sent to [email protected].
This report and the work it describes were funded by the Health and
Safety Executive (HSE). Its contents, including any opinions and/or
conclusions expressed, are those of the authors alone and do not
necessarily reflect HSE policy.
Hand Arm Vibration Syndrome (HAVS) is a painful and disabling disorder of the blood vessels, nerves and joints, caused by exposure to hand transmitted vibration, often from use of power tools. HAVS is preventable, but once damage is done, it is irreversible.
The Supply of Machinery (Safety) Regulations 2008 require manufacturers to minimise machinery vibration risk and declare vibration emission. British standard test codes can be used for this declaration. Manufacturers must also provide information to enable any residual risk (after minimisation by the manufacturer) to be assessed and effectively managed. The information should identify any gap between the risk indicated by the declared vibration emission and the likely actual risk during use: however this information is often missing.
This report will be of interest to standards makers and technical specialists dealing with hand-arm vibration emission standards. It describes work carried out up until 2013 to investigate BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011, a British Standard that defines a vibration emission test code for stone hammers.
The research shows that different techniques for using stone hammers can result in wide variations in vibration magnitudes. The variations suggest test reproducibility may be poor, but in the absence of comparable manufacturers’ data this could not be assessed.
3
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet
consectetuer adipiscing elit
Sue Hewitt, Graeme Hunwin and Mick Mole Health and Safety Executive Harpur Hill Buxton Derbyshire SK17 9JN
The effectiveness of British Standard BS EN ISO 28927-11:2001 concerning the vibration emission of stone hammers
4
KEY MESSAGES
Prolonged exposure to vibration transmitted to the hand can cause painful and disabling
disorders of the blood vessels, nerves and joints. These health effects are referred to as Hand
Arm Vibration Syndrome (HAVS). HAVS is preventable, but once the damage is done, it is
permanent.
This report describes work carried out on stone hammers up until 2013. It will be of interest to
standards makers and technical specialists dealing with hand arm vibration emission standards.
It describes an investigation of BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011, the British standard that defines a
vibration emission test code for stone hammers to establish vibration emission information for
the management of risk.
The work has shown that the test is repeatable; the operators can control the tool, and hence the
vibration of the tool, to achieve repeatable results.
Techniques for use of stone hammers adopted by different operators can result in wide
variations in vibration magnitudes on both the tool body and the chisel; this may be due to
different operating forces or due to changing the airline pressure. The variations suggest
reproducibility may be poor, but in the absence of comparable manufacturers’ data this could
not be assessed.
Use of the a+K values from BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011 stone hammer emission test was a
reasonable representation of the vibration risk determined during typical use for three of the four
tools tested for this research.
5
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Background
Prolonged exposure to vibration transmitted to the hand can cause painful and disabling
disorders of the blood vessels, nerves and joints. These health effects are referred to as Hand
Arm Vibration Syndrome (HAVS). HAVS is preventable, but once the damage is done, it is
permanent.
The Supply of Machinery (Safety) Regulations 2008 requires manufacturers to minimise
vibration risk from their machinery and to declare the vibration emission. The measurement
method and operating conditions to determine vibration emission must be specified; this may be
by reference to a British standard, which must include the appropriate part number and date.
Following publication of the British standard test codes, and in anticipation of declared
vibration emission data being used to assess and manage workplace risk, the Health and Safety
Executive (HSE) began to investigate the relationship between vibration emission measured
according to British standards and the vibration measured in use. This report describes the
findings from tests conducted for stone hammers up until 2013, to establish vibration emission
information for the management of risk.
Objectives
The current standard test code for measurement of vibration emission of stone hammers is BS
EN ISO 28927-11:2011 “Hand-held portable power tools – Test methods for evaluation of
vibration emission. Part 11: Stone hammers”. The work described in this report had three aims:
1. To assess the standard test defined in BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011 for usability,
repeatability and where possible for reproducibility.
2. To compare vibration emission values according to BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011 with
vibration magnitudes measured under real operating conditions and to consider the
factors that might influence the relationship between the two.
3. To produce information regarding the above investigations, so that HSE can better
inform users and suppliers of machines of the worth of vibration emission data
measured in accordance with BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011 in terms of assessing the risk
from vibration exposure.
Main findings
Four tools were acquired for testing according to BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011. Three of the tools
had declared emission values and a variety of standards were quoted in these declarations. None
of the declarations were made in accordance with BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011. Verification
comparisons according to BS EN 12096:1997 have therefore not been possible.
The test in BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011 was shown to be repeatable. However the large
uncertainty values, K, obtained in the HSE emission tests highlight the variability between
operators, due to different operating techniques. The operator influence on the vibration of a
stone hammer and chisel is also evident during typical use and can be due to differences in
operating forces, or due to changing the airline pressure to suit the task. Variations in airline
pressure were also shown to have a significant influence on measured vibration magnitudes.
6
In most cases, the hardness of the work piece did not have a significant influence on the
vibration of the tool body.
Declaration values for the tool body alone may be inadequate where a stone hammer is used
with a non-captive chisel that comes in to contact with the operator’s hand. BS EN ISO 28927-
11:2011 stipulates a declaration of > 30 m/s2 in this situation, but this may be a substantial over-
estimate of the likely magnitude for some tools.
The ability of the BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011 emission data to reflect workplace risk may be
judged by comparing the measured emission values, a, with the workplace vibration
magnitudes. Based on the limited data collected here, the a emission values measured on the
tool body exceeded the in-use vibration in only 1 of the 4 cases (25%). However, the a+K
emission value, reached or exceeded the in-use vibration in 3 out of 4 (75%) of cases and
consequently could be regarded as a reasonable indicator of real use risk.
There is a lack of information about the influence of the operating styles of experienced
operators on the vibration of the tools they are using. There is also a lack of knowledge about
the extent of the variations of airline pressure that occur during normal work processes by
trained stone masons. Such knowledge might indicate if changes to airline pressure might affect
typical daily exposures and determine if there is any scope for developing best practice guidance
for particular tasks in the industry.
There may be some circumstances, for example when using lower-powered stone hammers,
where proprietary vibration-reducing holders might reduce the vibration both on the tool body
as well as on the chisel. There is a lack of knowledge on this. Also the durability of such devices
and how the performance varies over a typical lifespan are not yet known.
7
CONTENTS
KEY MESSAGES ............................................................................................... 4
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.................................................................................... 5
1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................... 9 1.1 Declaration of vibration emission ............................................................. 9 1.2 Outline of work ....................................................................................... 10
2 METHOD ............................................................................................... 11 2.1 Tools tested ........................................................................................... 11
2.2 Emission tests ........................................................................................ 11
2.3 In-use measurements ............................................................................ 15
3 RESULTS .............................................................................................. 17 3.1 Emission test results .............................................................................. 17 3.2 In-use measurement results .................................................................. 18
4 DISCUSSION ........................................................................................ 20
4.1 Manufacturers’ declared and HSE measured emission ......................... 20 4.2 HSE measured emission data for tool body ........................................... 21
4.3 HSE measured emission data for chisels .............................................. 22 4.4 Influence of airline pressure on vibration ............................................... 24 4.5 HSE vibration data for all tools and chisels ............................................ 26
4.6 Comparison of emission and in-use data ............................................... 27 4.7 Emission values as indicators of risk ..................................................... 29
5 CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................... 32
6 KNOWLEDGE GAPS ............................................................................ 33
7 REFERENCES ...................................................................................... 34
ANNEX A - EQUIPMENT FOR TESTING ........................................................ 35
ANNEX B - MOUNTING LOCATIONS ............................................................ 36
ANNEX C - EMISSION TEST RESULTS ......................................................... 37
ANNEX D - FIELD TEST DATA ....................................................................... 55
ANNEX E - RESULTS FOR SITE#2’S OWN STONE HAMMERS .................. 77
ANNEX F - RESULTS OF ANOVA COMPARISONS ...................................... 78
ANNEX G - POTENTIAL INFLUENCES ON TOOL BODY EMISSION MEASUREMENTS ........................................................................................... 81
8
G.1 Influence of hardness of work piece .......................................................... 81 G.2 Influence of chisel type .............................................................................. 82 G.3 Influence of vibration reducing chisel holder .............................................. 83
ANNEX H - POTENTIAL INFLUENCES ON CHISEL EMISSION MEASUREMENTS ........................................................................................... 87
H.1 Influence of work piece on chisel vibration emission ................................. 87 H.2 Influence of tool on chisel vibration emission ............................................. 88 H.3 Influence of operator on chisel vibration emission ..................................... 89
ANNEX I - INFLUENCE OF AIRLINE PRESSURE ON STONE HAMMER VIBRATION MAGNITUDE ............................................................................... 91
I.1 Method ........................................................................................................ 91 I.2 Results ........................................................................................................ 91
I.3 Discussion and Conclusions ........................................................................ 95 I.4 Further work ................................................................................................ 95
9
1 INTRODUCTION
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has an on-going programme of research, carried out by
staff at its research laboratory at Buxton. HSE has been investigating the relationship between
manufacturers’ declared vibration emission, HSE measured emission and vibration measured
during simulated real, or real use for different categories of tool. The current programme of
research aims to investigate the emission test codes for hand-held, portable machine tools
defined in the BS EN 28927 series of standards. These test codes have been produced in line
with the requirements of BS EN ISO 20643, which specifies, amongst other things, that the
emission values from test codes should reflect the upper quartile of in-use vibration. This report
describes an investigation of the effectiveness of BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011 concerning the
vibration of stone hammers. In particular, the work addresses the question of whether the
revised test code is capable of producing data that reflect the actual vibration risks associated
with use of machines that fall within its scope.
The BS EN ISO 28927 series of test codes is a revision of the older BS EN ISO 8662 series,
which previous research by HSE showed to be unsuitable for the purposes of risk assessment
(eg Hewitt et al 1999). BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011, along with BS EN ISO 28927-9:2009 for
needle scalers and scaling hammers, supersedes BS EN ISO 8662-14:1997.
1.1 DECLARATION OF VIBRATION EMISSION
The Supply of Machinery (Safety) Regulations 2008 require that, among other information,
suppliers of machinery must declare the vibration emission of their tools and machines. The
purpose of declaring such information is to allow purchasers and users of tools and machinery
to make informed choices regarding the safety of a potential purchase.
The declaration of vibration emission is based on the application of a standard test for a machine
or tool. The purpose of the standard test is to provide a repeatable and reproducible method of
producing a vibration emission value for declaration purposes. In the case of emission testing,
repeatability and reproducibility are defined as:
• Repeatability - the ability of the test to repeat the result for a specific product upon repeat of
the series of tests for the tool, using the same group of operators and the same test and
measurement system.
• Reproducibility - the ability of the test to reproduce the result for a specific product upon
conducting the series of tests for the same tool in different test houses, with each test house
using their own group of operators and their own test and measurement system.
In practice it has been difficult to design a standard test that is both based on a realistic
operation and provides the repeatability and reproducibility sought by manufacturers. The
standard tests are therefore often based on artificial operations.
The BS EN ISO 28927 series is a revision of the BS EN ISO 8662 series of test codes, which
brings the test codes for pneumatic tools into line with the requirement for triaxial
measurements of vibration. The BS EN ISO 28927 series of test codes specifies measurements
on both the tool body and the chisel, with declaration of the vibration emission at the higher
hand. The procedures for some machines have also been modified to make the test conditions
more representative of real work and thereby produce vibration emission values that better
represent the likely vibration risk from use of the machine. The target value for emission tests,
as defined in BS EN ISO 20643:2008+A1:2012, is for declared vibration emission values to
reflect the upper quartile of in-use vibration.
10
1.1.1 Emission declaration
The declaration of vibration emission values is standardised under BS EN 12096:1997. This
standard gives the following vibration-related definitions:
1. Measured vibration emission value, a, in m/s²: A value that represents the measured
vibration emission value of a single machine or the mean value of a sample from a batch of
machines.
2. Uncertainty, K, in m/s²: A value representing the measurement uncertainty of the measured
vibration emission value a, and also, in the case of batches, production variations of
machinery.
3. Declared vibration emission value, a+K: The sum of the measured vibration emission
value, a, and its associated uncertainty, K. The a+K value indicates the limit below which
the vibration value of an individual machine, and/or a specified large proportion of the
vibration values of a batch of machines, are stated to lie when the machines are new.
1.2 OUTLINE OF WORK
The current standard test code for measurement of vibration emission of stone hammers is BS
EN ISO 28927-11:2011 “Hand-held portable power tools – Test methods for evaluation of
vibration emission. Part 11: Stone hammers”. The work described in this report had three aims:
1. To assess the standard test defined in BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011 for usability,
repeatability and where possible for reproducibility.
2. To compare vibration emission values according to BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011 with
vibration magnitudes measured under real operating conditions and to consider the
factors that might influence the relationship between the two.
3. To produce information regarding the above investigations, so that HSE can better
inform users and suppliers of machines of the worth of vibration emission data
measured in accordance with BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011 in terms of assessing the risk
from vibration exposure.
To achieve these aims, the vibration emission of four stone hammers was measured according to
the provisions in BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011. After completion of the laboratory measurements
of vibration emission, in-use measurements using the same transducer mounting locations were
made so that the emission and field data could be compared. The current standard technique for
workplace exposure measurements is defined in BS EN ISO 5349 parts 1 and 2. In BS EN ISO
5349-2:2001 the transducer mounting locations are defined in the centre of the gripping zone.
This is different from the locations defined in BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011. To ensure that
selection of mounting location did not cause a systematic error in the results, the BS EN ISO
28927-11:2011 mounting locations were used for both emission and field measurements.
11
2 METHOD
2.1 TOOLS TESTED
Four machines were selected for testing. Details for each machine as provided by the
manufacturer are given in Table 1.
Table 1 Details of the stone hammers tested
ID Sample
number
Mass
Blow
rate
(bpm)
Piston
diameter
Airline
pressure
and
flow rate
Declared emission (m/s²)
Test code
quoted
a K
A NV/11/18 4.41 lb 3000 3/4 in 3 - 6 bar
10.59cfm
N/A - -
B NV/12/02 0.59 kg 3900 16 mm Max 6 bar
-
DIN EN ISO
12100-1/2*
DIN 457
DIN1299
(Year:2012)
8.11 -
C NV/12/03 1.65 to
1.88 kg
5500 5 bar
180 l/min
UNI EN ISO
8662-14:1998
(EN ISO 8662-
14:1996)**
(Year:2012)
4.4§
hammer
1.5
0.42 kg 3.64§
holder
1.7
D NV/12/09 2 3/4
lbs
7/8 in 3.5 - 4.5
bar
4 ½ cfm
EN ISO 8662-
14:1996
15 -
* DIN EN ISO 12100-1:2003 + A1:2009 Safety of Machinery. Basic concepts. General principles for design. Basic terminology, methodology.
DIN EN ISO 12100-2:2003 + A1:2009 Safety of Machinery. Basic concepts. General principles for design. Technical principles.
DIN EN 457:1992-04 Safety of machinery; auditory danger signals; general requirements, design and testing. DIN EN 1299:1997 + A1:2008 Mechanical vibration and shock - Vibration isolation of machines – Information for the
application of source isolation
**ISO 8662-14 is quoted, but the text indicates that the tool was operated on a marble block, not using a dynaload.
§ Data are quoted for both tool body and chisel holder, but are only single axis.
2.2 EMISSION TESTS
All four tools were tested in the laboratory at HSE in accordance with the test code BS EN ISO
28927-11:2011. The test code describes a method that involves operating the tool on a stone
work piece. For each test, three different operators carry out a series of five test runs. After
each set of five tests with one operator, the mean, standard deviation, sn-1, and coefficient of
variation, Cv, are calculated. The Cv is the ratio of the standard deviation of the five
measurements to the mean value of the five measurements.
If the Cv is greater than 0.15, then the standard states that the “measurements shall be checked
for error before data are accepted”. The current test code does not, however, indicate what is
meant by the word “error”, or how to proceed if the Cv is greater than 0.15 and the data do not
contain ‘errors’. This differs from the previous test code, BS EN ISO 8662-14:1996, where, to
be acceptable, testing continues until five consecutive measurements give a value of CV which
should be less than 0.15.
For each tool, the overall arithmetic mean, a, was obtained from the mean values of the three
operators. A value for the uncertainty K for each tool was also calculated from the results of all
12
the three operators, according to the provisions of Annex B of BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011
where a single tool is used to declare the vibration emission. For emission declarations
according to BS EN 28927-11:2011 both a and K values should be given.
The vibration emissions, a, are given in terms of the vibration total values at each measurement
location. The vibration total value is the root-sum-of-squares of the vibration magnitudes in
three orthogonal axes of vibration.
2.2.1 Equipment
Details of the equipment used for the vibration emission measurements are given in Annex A.
2.2.2 Transducer mounting locations
The transducer mounting locations for the tool are specified in BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011 for
the different styles of machine. The general principle is that the transducers are located as close
as possible to the hand, between the thumb and the index finger, where an operator normally
holds the machine. Clause 6.2 of BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011 states ‘For machines intended for
one-handed operation, it is only necessary to measure at a single point.’ The test code requires
measurement to be made at two locations when the tool has two natural hand positions. The
stone hammers tested here are all single-handed tools and only one measurement location was
required.
Clause 8.4 of BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011 states ‘If the hammer is intended for use with a
conventional chisel (without a sleeve) and this is in contact with the operator’s hand in intended
use, it is not usually practicable to measure the vibration on the chisel or bush. However it is
likely that the vibration at this hand position would be much greater than that measured on the
hammer. In such cases, a vibration emission value of “greater than 30m/s²’ shall be declared
(see Clause 9) and measurement is not required.’ The tools tested all use non-captive chisels, ie
chisels that have to be held in the tool by the operator. Measurements of the second hand
location were made on chisels in the emission tests to investigate the validity of the requirement
to declare a value of > 30 m/s².
Annex B contains photographs showing the transducer mounting locations for the three
different styles of machine tested; in-line, pistol grip and closed bow handle.
2.2.3 Data acquisition and analysis
The transducers used for all the measurements were Brüel & Kjær (B&K) type 4393
piezoelectric accelerometers. For measurements on the tool, chisel or vibration-reducing holder,
the accelerometers were bolted on to an aluminium mounting block, which was fixed using a
nylon cable tie fitted using a tensioning gun as shown in Figure 1. The total mass of this
mounting assembly was approximately 18 grams. For measurements made at the rear hand
position or on the tool body (for tools A, B and D), or directly on the chisel, a 1 mm thick butyl
rubber strip was attached to the tool underneath the mounting block to mitigate the effects of the
impulsive vibration and prevent signal distortion in the accelerometers. Where necessary, B&K
type WA0224 mechanical filters were attached to each accelerometer, or the accelerometer
parallel to the direction of the action of the tool, in order to further mitigate the impulsive
effects.
The signals from the accelerometers were amplified using B&K type 2635 charge amplifiers
and analysed using a B&K Pulse multi-channel real-time frequency analyser. Vibration was
measured in unweighted one-third octave bands for each of the three accelerometers at each
13
hand position. The one-third octave band data were frequency-weighted in accordance with BS
EN ISO 8041:2005 and then the vibration total values were calculated.
2.2.4 Test material
BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011 defines a test for stone hammers on a work piece with an apparent
specific weight ranging from 25.0 kN/m3 to 32.5 kN/m3 (the equivalent apparent density is
stated in the standard as 2500 kg/m3 to 3200 kg/m3). Materials that fulfil this specification
include granite, marble or hard limestone.
In the test code, the minimum dimensions of the material are specified as 500 mm x 250 mm x
250 mm. The work piece is mounted on a rigid, heavy base with no resonances below 1 kHz, at
a suitable height to enable the operator to adopt a comfortable upright posture. Two materials
were chosen as work pieces for the tests, these were granite and hard limestone. They were
chosen because they both satisfy, or almost satisfy, the apparent density requirements of the test
(limestone was just slightly below at 2410 kg/m3) and yet the hardness of the two materials is
very different. Granite has a measurement of hardness (Mohs scale) of 6-7 whereas limestone
and marble have a Mohs scale value of 3-4. The two test materials were chosen to investigate if
the hardness of the material could have an influence on the emission test outcome.
Figure 1 Illustrating the attachment of the transducers to the tool and vibration-reducing chisel holder
2.2.5 Test method
BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011 states that the hammer shall be fitted with the inserted tool that is
most commonly used with that tool, and where more than one type is commonly used, the
lightest shall be selected. As each hammer could be used with a number of different types of
inserted tools, the vibration was measured under a number of different test configurations. The
variations included using different chisels: plain chisel, chisel in vibration-reducing holder, or
14
bush hammer in vibration-reducing holder. Figure 2a shows examples of 6 mm, 20 mm, 25 mm
chisels, a claw, a vibration-reducing holder and a bush hammer (right). Figure 2b shows the
internal components of the vibration-reducing sleeve. Figure 3 shows examples of the working
posture and hand positions for chiselling tests (left) and for bush hammering tests (right).
Figure 2a Examples of different chisels and vibration-reducing chisel holder (left) and bush hammer (right)
Figure 2b Internal components of the vibration-reducing chisel holder
15
Figure 3 Examples of working posture for chiselling (left) and bush hammering (right)
Table 2 shows the different combinations of emission tests that were carried out. Some
combinations were not investigated due to resource constraints. Despite the use of mechanical
filters and a rubber mounting strip to mitigate the effects of impulsive vibration, signal
distortion made it difficult to achieve valid measurements for some machine and inserted tool
combinations.
Table 2 Emission test combinations for each stone hammer
Tool Limestone Granite Limestone Granite Limestone Granite
Vibration-reducing holder
with chisel
Vibration-reducing holder
with bush hammer
Plain chisel
A X
B
C X X
D X X X X
= tested
X = not tested
2.3 IN-USE MEASUREMENTS
In-use measurements were made at two different sites. During the measurements operators used
the machines Tools A to D (as detailed in Table 1) for typical tasks, whilst vibration
measurements were made with the accelerometers positioned at the same locations as used for
the emission tests.
2.3.1 Measurements at Site 1
At Site 1, measurements were made with up to four different operators carrying out up to five
different tasks. Each operator carried out up to three repeats and vibration measurements were
16
made over a 16 second period. The tasks were carried out on a hard Ancaster Weatherbed
limestone work piece, and involved initial preparation or roughing out of the stone surface. The
inserted tool was a 1 inch (25 mm) chisel fitted in a vibration-reducing holder. Figure 4a
illustrates the set-up of the work piece and the activity at Site 1.
2.3.2 Measurements at Site 2
At Site 2, the tasks were carried out on a Portland Base Bed limestone work piece, using up to
three different operators and involved roughing out and smoothing of the stone surface. Each
operator carried out up to three repeats of approximately 30 seconds duration. Tools A, B and D
were operated with the inserted tools:
• A 6 mm wide chisel in a vibration-reducing holder.
• A 37 mm wide claw tool in a vibration-reducing holder.
An 8 mm wide chisel and a 20 mm wide chisel were the inserted tools for the activities using
Tool C. Figure 4b illustrates the test set-up at Site 2.
During the site visit, measurements of the vibration magnitudes were also made on stone
working tools owned by the site.
Figure 4a Set-up for field measurements at Site 1
Figure 4b Set-up for the field measurements at Site 2
2.3.3 Measurement technique
The same equipment was used in the field tests and the emission tests and details are given in
Annex A. The data acquisition technique for the field measurements was the same as for the
laboratory tests. Each tool and chisel was set up with the accelerometers positioned at the same
positions used for the emission tests. For each operator, sample measurements were made
during use of the tool. Data were analysed using a B&K Pulse multi-channel, real time
frequency analyser. One-third octave band analyses of the data were carried out. The data were
frequency-weighted in accordance with BS EN ISO 8041:2005 and then the vibration total
values were calculated. All of the measurements obtained for each of the tools and chisels were
then used to derive a mean frequency-weighted vibration magnitude, standard deviation and
upper quartile of the range of magnitudes for each hand position.
17
3 RESULTS
3.1 EMISSION TEST RESULTS
Table 3 shows a summary of all of the HSE emission test data for each of the measured
combinations of machine, inserted tool and work piece. All emission test results are given in
Annex C. Several full emission tests were carried out for each machine with different
combinations of chisel and work piece and there was some variation in the emission value
produced. The results selected to represent the HSE measured emission value are those for tests
on granite, shown in bold in Table 3. Granite is the material that is fully compliant with the
requirements of the test code. Data selected to compare the four tools are from tests using a
vibration-reducing chisel holder.
Table 3 Summary of emission test results
Tool Test
material
Test configuration Tool (m/s²) Holder/chisel
(m/s²)
Inserted tool Holder (tool) a K a K
A Limestone 20 mm chisel Chisel holder 11.8 2.1 15.5 2.6
A Granite 20 mm chisel Chisel holder 11.2 4.1 14.5 3.4
A Granite Bush hammer Chisel holder 10.0 2.8 9.0 3.1
A Limestone 1 inch chisel Plain chisel 11.4 2.8 26.7 6.8
A Granite 1 inch chisel Plain chisel 13.8 2.9 dc shift dc shift
B Limestone 20 mm chisel Chisel holder 11.4 5.1 10.5 2.3
B Granite 20 mm chisel Chisel holder 11.8 3.9 10.9 2.1
B Limestone Bush hammer Chisel holder 10.5 3.7 7.1 1.73
B Granite Bush hammer Chisel holder 11.5 3.3 7.8 2.3
B Limestone 1 inch chisel Plain chisel 18.1 3.7 12.0 4.9
B Granite 1 inch chisel Plain chisel 19.7 4.8 18.1 4.5
C Limestone 1 inch chisel Chisel holder 3.4 1.36 6.0 2.1
C Granite 1 inch chisel Chisel holder 3.9 1.89 9.9 3.4
C Limestone Bush hammer Chisel holder 3.1 1.50 8.1 4.3
C Granite Bush hammer Chisel holder 3.7 1.8 11.9 3.4
D Limestone 25 mm chisel Chisel holder 15.9 6.7 8.2 4.1
D Granite 25 mm chisel Chisel holder 15.7 6.6 11.0 5.8
D Limestone 25 mm chisel Plain chisel 3 bar 10.3 2.9 10.1 3.5
D Limestone 25 mm chisel Plain chisel 4 bar 13.9 4.9 12.7 5.6
D Limestone 25 mm chisel Plain chisel 5 bar 19.2 5.3 11.6 4.7
18
3.2 IN-USE MEASUREMENT RESULTS
A summary of the in-use measurement data for each of the tools and chisel combinations is
shown in Table 4. The mean, standard deviation and upper quartile of the frequency-weighted
acceleration for the highest hand position are highlighted in bold. More detailed results for each
of the tools are given in Annex D.
Table 4 Summary field test results
When considering the data in Table 4, it is important to remember that all of the in-use
measurements were made using one of two vibration-reducing holders; none used plain chisels.
Tool
ID
Site
ID
Inserted
tool
(holder)
Work
piece /
material
Frequency-weighted vibration total values (m/s²)
Tool body Chisel
mean standard
deviation
upper
quartile
mean standard
deviation
upper
quartile
A 1 Chisel
1 inch
Ancaster
Weatherbed
limestone
18.9 1.5 19.7 23.9 6.0 26.1
A 2 Chisel
6 mm
Portland
Base Bed
limestone
13.1 1.6 14.3 21.8 2.0 23.3
A 2 Claw
Portland
Base Bed
limestone
13.7 1.6 15.1 14.4 1.5 15.4
B 1 Chisel
1 inch
Ancaster
Weatherbed
limestone
7.8 1.4 8.3 12.9 8.6 14.7
B 2 Chisel
6 mm
Portland
Base Bed
limestone
11.1 3.1 13.5 8.1 0.2 8.2
B 2 Claw
Portland
Base Bed
limestone
9.2 1.9 10.7 5.9 0.7 6.1
C 1 Chisel
1 inch Ancaster
Weatherbed
limestone
5.6
1.1 6.4 9.4 1.4 10.1
C 2 Chisel
8 mm
Portland
Base Bed
limestone
5.4 1.0 6.2 6.2 1.7 7.1
C 2 Chisel
20 mm
Portland
Base Bed
limestone
5.6 2.3 7.1 7.1 2.1 8.2
D 2 Chisel
6 mm
Portland
Base Bed
limestone
22.1 1.9 23.4 18.6 1.5 19.4
D 2 Claw
Portland
Base Bed
limestone
17.9 5.3 23 8.9 1.6 9.5
19
Vibration measurements on plain chisels are prone to difficulties of signal distortion, due to the
highly impulsive nature of the vibration and are consequently difficult and time-consuming to
achieve. Techniques for measuring on plain chisels involve the use of mechanical filters and/or
other resilient materials to mitigate the effects of the impulsive vibration. This procedure
introduces variability to the data, which may inadvertently influence the outcome of the
measurements and could potentially mask any influences that exist.
3.2.1 Vibration magnitudes on additional stone hammers at Site 2
During the in-use measurements at Site 2, vibration measurements were also made on
traditional in-line stone hammers that belonged to the site and were in use at the time of the
measurement visit. The data for these additional tools are shown in Annex E.
20
4 DISCUSSION
4.1 MANUFACTURERS’ DECLARED AND HSE MEASURED EMISSION
A summary of emission test results is given in Table 5. The HSE measured emission data in
Table 5 are from the tests carried out on granite. In each test the hammers were used with a
vibration-reducing chisel holder. Results in bold indicate the highest hand from the emission
tests. The highest hand for Tools A and C was the chisel hand and for Tools B and D was on the
tool body.
Table 5 Manufacturers’ declared emission data and HSE measured BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011 emission tests results
* These values were calculated according to the provisions of BS EN 12096:1997.
** These values were calculated by HSE from the data set which was provided by the manufacturer.
4.1.1 Comments on manufacturers’ declarations
As can be seen from Table 5, none of the manufacturers’ declarations were made in accordance
with BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011. One of the aims of this work was to compare HSE measured
and manufacturers’ declared emission data. However, the diverse nature of the vibration
declaration information for the four machines tested and the fact that none have been tested
according to BS EN ISO 28917-11:2011 means that such comparisons are of little value for
these tools. An investigation of the reproducibility of the new test code could not be made either
because of considerable differences in the test methods used in earlier versions of the test code
for stone hammers.
For Tool A, no emission data were found, either in any literature accompanying the tool, or on
the manufacturer’s website.
For Tool B, the standards quoted on the declaration of conformity do not relate to vibration
emission declaration. It has been assumed that vibration data provided by the manufacturer
Tool
ID
Manufacturer’s vibration
declaration
(m/s2)
HSE measured BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011
emission (m/s2)
Standard a K a+K
Tool Chisel &
holder
Highest hand
a K a K a K a+K
A N/A - - - 11.2 4.1 14.5 3.4 14.5 3.4 17.9
B DIN EN ISO
12100-1/2
DIN 457
DIN 1299
8.1 3.2* 11.3 11.8 3.9 10.9 2.1 11.8 3.9 15.7
C
Tool
body
EN ISO
8662-14
1998
4.4 1.5** 5.9 3.9 1.9 - -
9.9 3.4 13.3 C
Chisel
holder
EN ISO
8662-14
1998
3.6 1.7** 5.3 - - 9.9 3.4
D BS EN ISO
8662-14
15 6* 21 15.7 6.6 11.0 5.8 15.7 6.6 22.3
21
relate to the tool only and do not take account of the chisel. The declaration of conformity is
dated 2012, it is therefore reasonable to assume that the vibration emission is a total value.
For Tool C, the standard quoted in the handbook is EN ISO 8662-14:1998. However, the text
goes on to say that data are measured whilst carving stone. To comply with EN ISO 8662-
14:1998 tests should involve use of a test device known as a dynaload, rather than carving
stone. Data are provided for both the tool body and the manufacturer’s own chisel holder in
separate handbooks. The data are single axis data rather than total values. A full series of fifteen
measurement results are replicated in each handbook. From these data it has been possible to
calculate K according to the provisions of Annex B of BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011 where a
single machine is tested.
For Tool D, the manufacturer confirmed that the emission data were measured according to BS
EN ISO 8662-14, which involved the use of the dynaload test device and that data were for the
tool body only.
BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011 states that a magnitude of ‘greater than 30m/s² shall be declared’ if
use of the tool involves contact with a chisel without a holder. All four tools tested potentially
fit this description (although Tool C can be purchased with a vibration-reducing sleeve).
According to the test code BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011 all four tools would therefore be declared
as >30m/s².
4.1.2 Analysis of variance on HSL emission test data
There are clear differences in design, configuration and power of the stone hammers and their
associated chisels tested in this study, which make statistical comparison of differences between
tools irrelevant. However, statistical analysis was used to investigate the influence of hardness
of work piece, style of chisel, and use of vibration-reducing chisel holder. Analysis of variance
(ANOVA) was carried out using the SPSS for Windows V14.0 statistical analysis software. For
each tool, ANOVA was applied to all of the fifteen individual emission test results, five for each
of the three operators, for each combination of tool, work piece and chisel tested. The results of
pairwise comparisons are reproduced in full in Annex F.1 for the tool bodies and Annex F.2 for
the chisels. They indicate that there are significant differences between data sets.
4.2 HSE MEASURED EMISSION DATA FOR TOOL BODY
Four factors were investigated to establish their influence on the vibration on the tool body of a
stone hammer. These were:
• Material hardness
• Style of chisel used
• Use of vibration-reducing chisel holder
• Operator
Annex G contains details of the investigation of these four influencing factors. The outcomes
are summarised in Table 6.
22
Table 6 Influences on vibration emission for tool body
Factor
investigated
Does the factor
influence
vibration
emission?
Comments Annex
for
detail
Material
hardness
No – when used
with vibration-
reducing chisel
holder
• Four hammers tested on two types of
work piece using vibration-reducing
chisel holder. No significant differences
found between work pieces of different
hardness.
• Two hammers tested using plain chisel.
No significant difference for Tool B. Tool
A not significant within the 95%
confidence interval.
G.1
Size/style of
chisel
No – when used
with vibration-
reducing chisel
holder
• 20 mm / 25mm and bush hammer on
granite only. No significant differences
with different chisels.
• Only tested using vibration-reducing
chisel holder.
G.2
Use of
vibration -
reducing
chisel holder
Yes • For a low powered tool, vibration-
reducing holder reduces vibration
significantly on tool (and chisel). The
effect is more pronounced on the softer
work piece (limestone).
G.3
Operator Yes • Operator can have a major influence on
vibration magnitude. This is assumed to
be due to different operating forces.
G.4
Investigations of the factors described here were limited by resources. Further work would be
necessary to clarify the particular circumstances under which vibration-reducing holders might
reduce the vibration on the tool body and how vibration-reducing holders influence the
efficiency of the hammers. It is also necessary to establish the durability of vibration-reducing
holders and how the performance varies over a typical lifespan.
The HSE measured emission values for the tool bodies have large K values due to the
differences between operators. The differences between operators can be seen in detail in the
raw data for the emission tests in Annex C.
4.3 HSE MEASURED EMISSION DATA FOR CHISELS
Simultaneous triaxial vibration measurements were made on the chisels used with the tools
during the emission tests. Their purpose was to investigate the range of vibration magnitudes
likely on the chisels and to consider how these compare with the ‘>30 m/s²’ declaration value
specified in BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011.
23
Annex H contains details of three factors that were investigated to establish their influence on
the vibration on the chisel. These were:
• Material hardness
• Power tool used
• Operator
The outcomes of these investigations are summarised in Table 7.
Table 7 Influences on vibration emission for chisels
Factor investigated Does the
factor
influence
vibration
emission?
Comments Annex
for
detail
Material hardness Variable • Four tools tested. Only tested using
vibration-reducing chisel holders.
• No significant effect for Tools A, B and D.
Significant difference for Tool C, but this
tool has its own vibration-reducing holder.
H.1
Power tool used Yes • Three tools tested using vibration-reducing
chisel holder.
• Tool A, which is more powerful, results in
significantly higher magnitudes than Tools
B and D.
• Tool A also results in significantly higher
magnitudes than Tool B when a plain
chisel is used, but not when a bush
hammer is used.
H.2
Operator Yes • Operator has a major influence due to
different operating forces.
H.3
The results of the comparisons in Table 7 show that the vibration magnitudes on a chisel, or on
a vibration-reducing chisel holder, can vary significantly depending on the tool with which it is
used and the operator using it. The hardness of the material was not shown to make a difference,
but comparisons were limited to measurements on a vibration-reducing holder. Measurements
on plain chisels were affected by dc-shift and therefore no conclusions could be drawn from
them.
As with the emission data for tool bodies, the HSE measured emission values for chisels have
large K values due to the differences between operators. The differences between operators can
be seen in detail in the raw data for the emission tests in Annex C.
4.3.1 BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011 declarations when the operator holds the chisel
Three of the four tools tested are sold without any accompanying vibration-reducing holder, so
the operator’s hand could potentially be in contact with a plain chisel during use for these three
tools. The manufacturer of Tool C makes a chisel-holder for which there is declared vibration
information. However, it is possible to buy Tool C without the vibration-reducing holder. All
four tools might therefore be declared as “> 30m/s²” if they were declared according to BS EN
ISO 28927-11:2011.
24
BS EN ISO 20643:2008+A1:2012 now also includes a statement about declaring “> 30m/s²” for
tools with chisels that are held by the operator and all conflicting national standards had to be
withdrawn by January 2013. This does not however mean that the requirement is automatic,
because C-type standards (such as tool specific test codes) can override the requirements of the
B-standard.
Due to the difficulties of measuring on plain chisels and the extremely high magnitudes to
which the operators are exposed, only limited measurements were made on plain chisels. The
vibration magnitudes on the plain chisels (presented in Table 3), measured during the emission
tests, as used with Tools A and B are:
• Tool A on limestone, plain chisel data a = 26.7 m/s², K = 6.8 m/s²
• Tool B on granite, plain chisel data a = 18.1 m/s², K = 4.5 m/s²
• Tool B on limestone, plain chisel data a = 12.0 m/s², K = 4.9 m/s²
None of these a values reach 30 m/s², although the a+K value for the plain chisel with Tool A
does exceed 30 m/s². Any vibration magnitude above 30 m/s² will cause the operator to reach
the Exposure Action Value (EAV) in the Control of Vibration at Work Regulations 2005 in less
than around 3 minutes and the Exposure Limit Value (ELV) in less than 13 minutes. A
declaration of > 30 m/s² may be a substantial over-estimate of the likely magnitude in many
cases on the basis of the limited data shown here, especially for lower powered tools like Tool
B.
4.4 INFLUENCE OF AIRLINE PRESSURE ON VIBRATION
One of the factors known to influence the vibration magnitude measured on the body of a stone
hammer, or on the associated chisel, is the operating pressure at which the tool is being used.
Manufacturers recommend the correct airline pressures for their machines. These may be a
maximum value, a range, or just a single value, as shown in Table 1. During the HSE emission
tests, the airline pressures were carefully controlled to minimise any effects on vibration
magnitude. However, during the normal operation of a pneumatic stone hammer, an
experienced stone mason will adjust the operating pressure to achieve the optimum performance
for the task in hand. The hammer may be made more or less powerful by the use of different
airline pressures, which consequently has an effect on tool efficiency. There will also be a range
of vibration magnitudes associated with any adjustments to the airline pressure. The influence
of operating pressures on stone hammer vibration magnitudes was investigated using Tools B
and D. Full details are given in Annex I.
Figure 5 shows the measured a mean frequency-weighted acceleration values obtained as a
result of the emission test procedure for different combinations of Tool B and Tool D with
vibration reduced (VR) and plain chisels. The error bars indicate the calculated K values. The
investigation showed that increasing the airline pressure caused an increase in measured
magnitude on the tool body. In the worst case, for Tool D measured on the tool body with plain
chisel, the mean, a emission increased from 10.3 m/s² to 19.2 m/s²; an increase of 86%. An
increase of 75% was observed for measurements on the body of Tool D when using the
vibration-reducing holder and claw chisel; the mean, a emission increased from 9.6 m/s² to 16.8
m/s. On the lower powered Tool B, the mean, a emission increased from 10.6 m/s² to 13.9 m/s²;
an increase of 31%.
25
Figure 5 Examples of influence of airline pressure
There is a great deal of variability in the results between operators. The biggest range of
individual data points was on the tool body of Tool D with a plain chisel. Across the three
operators, the range was from a minimum of 6.7 m/s² (Operator 2 at 3 bar) to a maximum of
24.7 m/s² (Operator 3 at 5 bar). The results suggest that vibration magnitudes can vary widely,
which makes it very difficult to predict exposures from use of the tool. However, information
on increasing vibration magnitudes for specified increments in airline pressure would go some
way towards facilitating exposure prediction.
HSE does not currently have any information on the range of typical airline pressures used by
experienced stone masons for different stone hammers during normal operation, or how changes
in airline pressure affect tool efficiency. This information would be necessary to inform advice
on how much variability in daily vibration exposures might occur during routine stonemasonry
work.
4.4.1 Vibration magnitudes on additional stone hammers at Site 2
During the in-use measurements at Site 2, additional vibration measurements were made on
traditional in-line stone hammers provided by the site that were in use during the visit. The data
for these additional tools are shown in Annex E.
The stone hammers used on Site 2 were similar in design to Tool D, but lower vibration
magnitudes were measured for these tools. Upper quartile vibration total values for the tools
were 8.9 m/s², 11.4 m/s² and 14.6 m/s². During the measurements the experienced operators
controlled the grip and feed forces used and adjusted the airline pressure. No measurements
were made that could indicate whether differences in airline pressure were influencing the
measurements and there was no indication of how effectively the hammers were working.
However, the data in Annex E show that workplace vibration exposures could be managed to
below the exposure Action Value (EAV) in the Control of Vibration at Work Regulations 2005.
26
4.5 HSE VIBRATION DATA FOR ALL TOOLS AND CHISELS
This section considers all the vibration data obtained for the tool bodies and the chisels, either in
emission tests, further laboratory tests or during typical use, to look at the overall picture of the
vibration magnitudes from the four tools.
Figure 6 shows a summary of all data. Data are presented for Tools A to D in pairs. The shaded
columns on the left hand side of each pair represent the vibration total values measured on the
tool body and the white columns on the right hand side of each pair represent the vibration total
values measured on the chisel during the same test. The first two columns for each tool
represent the HSE determined emission values, for tool (left) and chisel (right). All other
columns represent data from a combination of all other laboratory or in-use tests. The error bars
represent the K value, for emission tests, or the standard deviation from the mean for the other
tests. All of the data in Figure 6 are from measurements with vibration-reducing holders, which
tend to give lower vibration magnitudes, so these data may represent the lower end of the
possible range for these tools.
Figure 6 Comparison between measured vibration for HSE emission tests and different in-use activities
For Tool A the vibration on the tool body is always lower than on the chisel holder (the left
hand column is always lower than thergiht hand column) and the emission values for both the
tool body and the chisel holder, in the columns marked ‘A emission’, are at the low end of the
range of all vibration values for Tool A.
For Tool B the vibration on the tool body is higher than on the chisel holder, except for
measurements with the 1 inch chisel. The emission values for both the tool body and the chisel
holder are at the high end of the range of all vibration values for Tool B.
For Tool C the vibration on the tool body is always lower than on the chisel holder. The
emission value for the tool body is at the low end of the range of vibration values, whereas the
emission value for the chisel holder is at the high end of the range. Tool C has its own vibration-
27
reducing chisel holder, which has an associated declared vibration emission. It is assumed that
this declared emission value relates to use of the chisel holder with the manufacturer’s own
stone hammers and therefore the vibration-reducing holder for Tool C was not tested with any
other tools.
For Tool D the vibration on the tool body is always higher than on the chisel holder. The
emission value for the tool body is at the low end of the range of all vibration values for Tool D
whereas the emission value for the chisel holder is in the middle of the range.
Highest measured vibration magnitudes were for the chisel holder of Tool A and the body of
Tool D. The data presented in Figure 6 shows that there is no clear pattern to indicate which is
likely to be the higher vibration of the two hand positions for operation of a stone hammer.
Therefore it is necessary to provide information for both the tool body and the chisel hand
location.
Vibration magnitudes on the body of Tool C are consistently lower than the other three tools
tested. Tool C incorporates a vibration-reducing sleeve on the tool body as well as having a
vibration-reducing chisel holder. It would appear from the vibration data that Tool C would be a
good choice of stone hammer to minimise vibration exposures of operators. During the tests on
this tool however, operators commented that the tool was heavy and also that the diameter of the
gripping zone of this tool was uncomfortably wide compared with traditional tools.
4.6 COMPARISON OF EMISSION AND IN-USE DATA
The HSE measured emission data used in this comparison were measured on tools when tested
on the granite work piece using the vibration-reducing chisel holder. The data for granite were
selected because granite strictly complied with the requirements of the test code. The data using
the vibration-reducing chisel holders were used because these were the only data where
successful measurements were achieved on the chisel as well as the tool body for all tools
tested.
Data obtained using a plain chisel were not included in the comparison, which means that for
some tools the data do not represent the maximum vibration magnitudes possible when using
these tools.
Figure 7 shows a comparison of the HSE measured a emission values for both hand positions
for all four machines, against the HSE measured upper quartile field magnitude at the same
locations. A triangle indicates an HSE measured a emission value according to BS EN ISO
28927-11:2011, with the error bars indicating the K value. A diamond indicates the upper
quartile of the in-use vibration total values. The dotted line indicates the range of in-use values
measured. A circle indicates the manufacturer’s declared a vibration emission, with the error
bars indicating the manufacturer’s K value, or the calculated K value, where no K value was
declared. Manufacturers’ emission data are only available for the tool body, because the
declarations are made to previous versions of the test code. HSE emission data are provided for
both the tool body and the chisel.
The manufacturers’ declared emission data, where available, have been included to allow
comparison with the upper quartile of the in-use vibration. Manufacturer’s declared emission
data was not available for Tool A. For all four tools tested in this study, none of the
manufacturers’ declared emission values are made in accordance with BS EN ISO 28927-
11:2011. This means that direct comparison with the HSE measured a emission values would
not be valid.
28
Figure 7 Comparison of manufacturers’ declared emission, HSE measured a (+K) emission and upper quartile in-use values for both hand positions
In the handbook for Tool C, the manufacturer states that EN ISO 8662-14:1998 was adopted,
but “no energy absorber was used as it was decided that its use would not give representative
results for normal working conditions”. Instead, measurements were made whilst the tool was
being used to carve stone, so the test is probably more in line with the requirements of BS EN
ISO 28927-11:2011 than with EN ISO 8662-14:1998.
In most cases the in-use vibration magnitudes varied over a wide range. For measurements on
the body of Tools A, C and D, the upper quartile value (diamond) is at the top end of the range
of in-use values. When the upper quartile value is at the top end of the range it suggests that
most of the vibration magnitudes are high, with fewer values at the bottom end of the range, ie
the distribution of the data is skewed. For Tool B the upper quartile values are in the middle of
the range of in-use values, indicating there are more values in the bottom of the range for this
tool. This means that the upper quartile value might be a better indicator of the vibration risk for
Tools A, C and D than for Tool B. For Tool B the vibration risk in 25% of cases can be much
higher than indicated by the upper quartile value.
The data in Figure 7 show that in general the upper quartile in-use value is higher than either the
HSE measured or the manufacturer’s declared emission value for each tool. The manufacturer’s
declared emission value, where available, is typically at or near the bottom end of the range of
values presented.
To achieve repeatable emission test data, the operators have to consciously control their
operating technique. Higher vibration magnitudes may be measured during typical use of the
tools because the operators do not consciously try to control the use of the tools to give
repeatable vibration magnitudes. This implies that the operator may be able to modify their
technique to keep vibration exposure values low. On the other hand, the lower magnitudes
obtained during the standard emission tests may actually be due to the increased forces applied
29
by the operator to control the vibration. These increased forces would have the effect of
increasing the damping, resulting in lower measured magnitudes. However, the transmission of
vibration to the operator may be increased. Further investigation of the forces applied during
typical operation, and the consequences for the measured vibration magnitudes, would help
increase understanding and inform guidance for management of vibration exposure from the use
of stone hammers.
For Tool A, Figure 7 shows that the HSE measured a emission value is around half the upper
quartile in-use value for both the tool body and the chisel. Even taking into account the
uncertainty, K, the HSE measured emission value is well below the upper quartile in-use value,
so for this tool the emission data do not represent the vibration risk.
The widest range of vibration magnitudes is for the chisel of Tool B, where the range is from
5.3 m/s² to 32.6 m/s². For Tool B, the upper quartile in-use value on the tool body was slightly
lower than HSE measured a emission value, which itself was within the calculated uncertainty,
K, of the manufacturer’s declared emission value. For the Tool B chisel data, however, the a+K
emission value did not reach the upper quartile of in-use vibration. The upper quartile of the in-
use data on Tool B chisel was higher than on the tool body, although in the emission tests, the a
chisel emission data for Tool B were slightly lower than for the tool body.
For Tool C, the manufacturer’s declared emission value is very close to the HSE measured a
emission value on the tool body. This is despite the fact that the manufacturer’s declared
emission value is single axis, measured along the axis of percussion of the tool, in accordance
with BS EN ISO 8662-14:1997. The vibration magnitudes on Tool C and the chisel used with
Tool C are the lowest of all of the tools tested. Unfortunately Tool C was not popular with
operators, because it had a very large diameter gripping zone, which the operators said made it
uncomfortable to use.
For Tool D the HSE measured a emission value was very close to the manufacturer’s declared
emission value. However, the upper quartile in-use value is again much higher than both the
HSE measured and manufacturer’s declared a emission value on both the tool body and the
chisel.
4.7 EMISSION VALUES AS INDICATORS OF RISK
The consequences of using emission values as an indicator of risk can be shown by plotting the
ratio of the a vibration emission and the vibration in-use. A ratio of less than 1 indicates that the
emission value under-estimates the vibration in-use. A ratio of greater than 1 indicates that the
emission value over-estimates the vibration in-use. In Figure 8, the upper quartile of the in-use
data has been used to represent vibration in-use. BS EN ISO 20643 specifies that new test codes
should be developed to produce vibration emission values which reflect the upper quartile of in-
use values. The upper quartile of in-use vibration can therefore be seen as the target value for
the measured a emission to achieve. Figure 8 shows the ratio of the HSE measured a emission
value measured on the tool body and chisel on the granite work piece, to the upper quartile of all
in-use vibration values. The error bars indicate the difference that the associated uncertainty K
makes; the top of the error bars indicate the ratio of a+K emission to in-use upper quartile.
30
Figure 8 Ratio of HSE measured a emission test data for the tool body and chisel positions to the upper quartile in-use data for each tool (the top of the error bars
indicate the a + K value)
4.7.1 Tool body data
For Tools A, C and D the HSE measured a emission value is approximately 60 to 70% of the
upper quartile in-use value on the tool body. Tool B is the only tool of the four tested for which
the emission value exceeds the upper quartile in-use vibration value.
4.7.2 Chisel data
For Tools A, B and D, the a emission value is between 56 % and 74 % of the in-use upper
quartile. For Tool C, the a emission value is very close to the upper quartile in-use value at the
chisel position. If the uncertainty, K, is taken into consideration, the upper quartile value is
reached (or almost reached) for Tools B and D.
If the four tools tested were declared at > 30 m/s2, in accordance with the provisions of BS EN
ISO 28927-11:2011, the ratio of emission to in-use upper quartile in-use vibration would exceed
1.0 for all four tools.
4.7.3 Highest hand data
From the HSE emission test data, the highest hand locations for each of the tools were on the
chisel for Tools A and C and on the tool body for Tools B and D. Figure 8 shows that at these
four locations, the ratio of a emission to in-use upper quartile only exceeds 1.0 for Tool B.
However, the ratio of a+K to upper quartile in-use value is 1.0 or nearly 1.0 at this location for
all tools except for Tool A.
31
On the basis of the limited amount of data collected here, for three of the four stone hammers
tested (75%) the highest hand a+K emission value reached or exceeded the in-use vibration, i.e.
it reflected in-use risk.
32
5 CONCLUSIONS
The investigation of the test code for stone hammers in BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011 has shown
that repeatable results can be obtained with this test. It was not possible to assess the
reproducibility of the test, because none of the tools were declared to BS EN ISO 28927-
11:2011. However, the large K values obtained in the HSE emission tests highlight the
variability between operators, due to different operating techniques.
In most cases, the hardness of the work piece did not have a significant influence on the
vibration on the tool.
The operator can have a major influence on the vibration of a stone hammer and chisel, either in
an emission test or during typical use. This may be through differences in operating forces or
due to changing the airline pressure to suit the task.
Declaration values for the tool body alone may be inadequate where a stone hammer is used
with a non-captive chisel that contacts the operator’s hand. Although BS EN ISO 28927-
11:2011 stipulates a declaration of > 30 m/s2 in this situation, it may be a substantial over-
estimate of the likely magnitude for some tools.
There may be some circumstances, for example when using lower powered stone hammers,
where vibration-reducing holders might reduce the vibration on the tool body as well as on the
chisel. There is a lack of knowledge on this, as well as on the durability of such devices and
how their performance varies over a typical lifespan.
The ability of BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011 emission data to reflect workplace risk may be judged
by comparing the highest hand a+K emission values with the workplace vibration magnitudes.
Although based on limited data, the highest hand a+K emission value reached or exceeded in-
use vibration for three of the four stone hammers tested, i.e. it reflected workplace risk.
33
6 KNOWLEDGE GAPS
The influence of the operating styles of experienced operators on the vibration of the tools they
are using has not been studied. The extent of the variations in airline pressure that occur during
normal work processes by experienced stone masons, and how such variations affect the
efficiency of tools and duration of operating times are also not known. Information on this
might show how changes in airline pressure impact on typical daily exposures and could help to
determine if there is any scope for developing best practice guidance for particular tasks in the
industry.
The circumstances under which a vibration-reducing holder might reduce the vibration on a tool
body, as well as on the chisel, are not known. Information is also needed on the durability of
such devices and how their performance varies over a typical lifespan, if they are to be
recommended as vibration-reducing devices.
Investigating the effect of ageing on the vibration performance and the efficiency of older stone
hammers would help inform recommendations about the use of old, worn stone hammers and
how this might impact on the vibration exposure of the operators using them.
34
7 REFERENCES
BS EN 12096:1997 (1997) Mechanical vibration – Declaration and verification of vibration
emission values. British Standards Institution, London.
BS EN ISO 20643:2008+A1:2012 (2012) Mechanical vibration. Hand-held and hand-guided
machinery. Principles for evaluation of vibration emission. British Standards Institution,
London.
BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011 (2011) Hand held-portable power tools – Test methods for
evaluation of vibration emission. Part 11: Stone hammers (ISO 28927-11:2011), British
Standards Institution, London.
BS EN ISO 28927-9:2009 (2009) Hand held-portable power tools – Test methods for evaluation
of vibration emission. Part 9: Scaling hammers and needle scalers (ISO 28927-9:2009), British
Standards Institution, London.
BS EN ISO 5349-1:2001 (2001) Mechanical vibration – Measurement and evaluation of human
exposure to hand-transmitted vibration. General requirements. British Standards Institution,
London.
BS EN ISO 5349-2:2001 (2001) Mechanical vibration. Measurement and assessment of human
exposure to hand-transmitted vibration. Practical guidance for measurement at the workplace.
British Standards Institution, London.
BS EN ISO 8041:2005 (2005) Human response to vibration. Measuring Instrumentation. British
Standards Institution, London.
BS EN ISO 8662-14:1997 (1997) Hand-held portable tools – Measurement of vibrations at the
handle. Part 14. Stone-working tools and needle scalers. British Standards Institution, London.
Control of Vibration at Work Regulations 2005. Statutory Instrument No. 2005/1093.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2005/1093/pdfs/uksi_20051093_en.pdf
DIN EN ISO 12100-1:2003+A1:2009 Safety of Machinery. Basic concepts. General principles
for design. Basic terminology, methodology.
DIN EN ISO 12100-2:2003+A1:2009 Safety of Machinery. Basic concepts. General principles
for design. Technical principles.
DIN EN 457:1992-04 Safety of machinery; auditory danger signals; general requirements,
design and testing.
DIN EN 1299:1997+A1:2008 Mechanical vibration and shock - Vibration isolation of machines
– Information for the application of source isolation.
Hewitt S M, Critchlow S G, and Ward T (1999). Comparison of EN ISO 8662 emission data
with vibration in use: Chipping hammers and stoneworking tools. HSL Report NV/99/04.
Supply of Machinery (Safety) Regulations 2008. Statutory Instrument No. 2008/1597.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2008/1597/pdfs/uksi_20081597_en.pdf
35
ANNEX A - EQUIPMENT FOR TESTING
Table A.1. Details of accelerometers (30/7/2012)
Channel B&K
type
Serial
number
Sensitivity
(pC/ms-2)
Date of
last
calibration
1 4393 10701 0.323 Aug 2011
2 4393 11877 0.324 Aug 2011
3 4393 32163 0.307 Aug 2011
4 4393 32759 0.298 Aug 2011
5 4393 1873331 0.320 Aug 2011
6 4393 32760 0.297 Aug 2011
Table A.2. Details of accelerometers (5/4/2013)
Channel B&K
type
Serial
number
Sensitivity
(pC/ms-2)
Date of
last
calibration
1 4393 2279751 0.317 Aug 2012
2 4393 10693 0.320 Aug 2012
3 4393 1873329 0.321 Aug 2012
4 4393 32163 0.307 Aug 2012
5 4393 32760 0.297 Aug 2012
6 4393 1665258 0.313 Aug 2012
Table A.3. Details of charge amplifiers
Channel B&K
type
Serial
number
Date of
last
calibration
1 2635 1473734 20/12/11
2 2635 1473733 6/6/11
3 2635 1709921 6/6/11
4 2635 2448012 23/8/11
5 2635 2448013 24/8/11
6 2635 2448014 24/8/11
B&K Pulse frequency analyser serial no. 2423351 last calibrated Jan12 (Calibration period: 2
years).
From 5/4/2013 B&K Pulse frequency analyser serial no. 2325758 last calibrated Jan12
(Calibration period: 2 years).
B&K calibrator type 4294 serial no. 2361765 last calibrated Oct 2010.
6x WA0224 mechanical filters.
36
ANNEX B - MOUNTING LOCATIONS
Figures B.1, B.2 and B.3 show photographs of the measurement locations used for testing on the
main types of machine: in-line, pistol grip and closed bow grip.
Figure B.1 In-line type showing the position on the chisel/sleeve and tool
Front hand
Rear hand
Figure B.2 Pistol grip type with front and rear hand positions
Figure B.3 Closed bow grip type showing front and rear hand positions
37
ANNEX C - EMISSION TEST RESULTS
Note: In the following tables, figures in red indicate the standard deviation or coefficient of variation of the data set may be outside tolerances suggested
in the emission test code. The test code states that when the coefficient of variation is outside the tolerances“measurements shall be checked for error
before data are accepted”. The current test code does not, however, indicate what is meant by the word “error”, or how to proceed if the Cv is greater
than 0.15 and the data do not contain ‘errors’. In some cases there has been difficulty in achieving a coefficient of variation of <0.15 because of the
variable nature of the vibration. All emission data have been considered on a case by case basis before being accepted.
38
Vibration Emission Test report Pulse file version: HAV Emission V2.1.2 2008-07-25.pls
Spreadsheet: Version 4.0 19/1/12
Hand Position 1 - Front handle Hand position 2 - Rear handle
Meas. Meas. Operator Statistics Operator Statistics
TestNo. Operator Name Date Meas Time a whx a why a whz a hv Mean a hv S n-1 Cv a whx a why a whz a hv Mean a hv S n-1 Cv
1 1 5.12 12.93 7.73 15.91 9.93 4.54 1.38 11.00
2 1 5.50 15.17 6.43 17.37 9.15 3.90 1.51 10.06
3 1 4.20 15.60 5.91 17.21 16.62 0.955 0.057 9.47 3.13 1.92 10.16 10.60 0.458 0.043
4 1 5.44 14.94 6.88 17.32 10.11 3.87 1.60 10.94
5 1 4.85 12.74 6.94 15.30 9.97 4.07 1.45 10.86
6 2 5.99 11.37 7.07 14.67 10.92 5.13 2.34 12.29
7 2 6.30 12.30 8.20 16.07 10.34 5.98 2.40 12.18
8 2 5.21 10.57 8.00 14.24 15.69 1.176 0.075 11.03 5.95 2.66 12.81 12.23 0.373 0.031
9 2 5.21 13.68 8.00 16.68 10.25 5.86 2.49 12.07
10 2 4.27 14.69 6.99 16.82 10.36 5.10 2.40 11.79
11 3 3.62 10.32 6.73 12.84 11.15 4.41 1.95 12.14
12 3 4.01 10.89 7.20 13.65 11.21 4.61 1.95 12.27
13 3 4.31 11.42 7.74 14.45 14.08 0.828 0.059 11.29 4.82 2.26 12.49 12.56 0.378 0.030
14 3 4.06 12.09 6.99 14.54 12.01 4.58 1.93 13.00
15 3 4.26 12.59 6.73 14.89 12.06 4.12 2.03 12.91
a h (overall mean a hv ) : 15.46 m/s² a h (overall mean a hv ): 11.80 m/s²
r R(single m/c.): 1.57 m/s² or 1.23 r R(single m/c.): 1.28 m/s² or 1.01
K (single m/c.) value: 2.60 m/s² K (single m/c.) value: 2.11 m/s²
Single machine emission a hd ( = greatest a h value): 15.46 m/s² K (single m/c.) value: 2.60 m/s²
Standard:
N&V reference ID:
Measurement file name:
BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011
NV/11/18
Tool A Limestone, Chisel
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 1 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 1 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 2 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 2 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 3 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 3 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
39
Vibration Emission Test report Pulse file version: HAV Emission V2.1.2 2008-07-25.pls
Spreadsheet: Version 4.0 19/1/12
Hand Position 1 - Front handle Hand position 2 - Rear handle
Meas. Meas. Operator Statistics Operator Statistics
TestNo. Operator Name Date Meas Time a whx a why a whz a hv Mean a hv S n-1 Cv a whx a why a whz a hv Mean a hv S n-1 Cv
1 1 4.48 6.86 7.28 10.97 5.92 4.60 1.29 7.61
2 1 5.08 4.89 7.23 10.10 4.45 4.03 1.22 6.13
3 1 5.06 9.78 6.88 12.99 12.05 1.825 0.151 6.79 4.68 1.48 8.38 7.80 1.057 0.136
4 1 4.53 7.85 7.04 11.48 6.18 4.84 1.33 7.96
5 1 5.72 10.98 7.97 14.72 6.93 5.41 1.59 8.93
6 2 5.49 13.58 9.44 17.43 10.43 6.80 2.61 12.72
7 2 4.60 11.41 10.26 16.02 11.09 7.28 2.17 13.45
8 2 5.19 10.65 9.17 14.98 15.73 1.149 0.073 10.23 6.42 2.63 12.36 12.47 0.640 0.051
9 2 6.29 11.16 9.27 15.81 9.67 6.63 2.56 12.00
10 2 5.47 9.90 8.93 14.42 9.82 5.95 2.90 11.84
11 3 4.93 11.24 9.41 15.47 11.42 6.72 1.91 13.39
12 3 4.87 11.29 9.80 15.72 10.93 6.37 1.87 12.79
13 3 5.15 12.86 8.86 16.45 15.58 0.588 0.038 11.77 6.26 2.28 13.53 13.32 0.299 0.022
14 3 4.71 11.77 8.80 15.43 11.75 6.07 2.24 13.42
15 3 4.20 11.44 8.43 14.82 11.92 5.82 2.26 13.46
a h (overall mean a hv ) : 14.45 m/s² a h (overall mean a hv ): 11.20 m/s²
r R(single m/c.): 2.08 m/s² or 1.17 r R(single m/c.): 2.48 m/s² or 0.97
K (single m/c.) value: 3.44 m/s² K (single m/c.) value: 4.10 m/s²
Single machine emission a hd ( = greatest a h value): 14.45 m/s² K (single m/c.) value: 3.44 m/s²
Standard:
N&V reference ID:
Measurement file name:
BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011
NV/11/18
Tool A Granite, Chisel
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 1 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 1 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 2 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 2 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 3 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 3 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
40
Vibration Emission Test report Pulse file version: HAV Emission V2.1.2 2008-07-25.pls
Spreadsheet: Version 4.0 19/1/12
Hand Position 1 - Front handle Hand position 2 - Rear handle
Meas. Meas. Operator Statistics Operator Statistics
TestNo. Operator Name Date Meas Time a whx a why a whz a hv Mean a hv S n-1 Cv a whx a why a whz a hv Mean a hv S n-1 Cv
1 1 4.73 8.09 3.06 9.86 8.07 2.78 3.15 9.10
2 1 3.65 9.14 3.14 10.34 7.72 2.81 2.78 8.68
3 1 3.99 8.76 3.44 10.22 10.59 0.658 0.062 7.33 3.08 3.15 8.55 8.86 0.337 0.038
4 1 4.89 9.77 3.52 11.48 7.49 2.62 3.42 8.64
5 1 5.31 8.88 3.85 11.04 8.08 2.82 3.69 9.32
6 2 4.64 7.39 4.25 9.70 9.64 3.55 2.76 10.64
7 2 4.48 6.61 4.44 9.14 7.84 3.53 3.40 9.24
8 2 5.33 7.05 4.78 10.05 9.59 0.441 0.046 7.58 3.85 3.97 9.38 9.34 0.819 0.088
9 2 5.42 6.12 4.05 9.13 7.41 3.66 3.65 9.03
10 2 6.00 6.66 4.31 9.95 6.45 3.52 4.08 8.40
11 3 4.57 5.64 3.10 7.90 10.24 3.06 2.70 11.02
12 3 3.45 4.40 3.31 6.50 11.24 3.14 1.92 11.83
13 3 3.54 5.03 2.77 6.75 6.86 0.587 0.086 12.46 3.25 1.94 13.02 11.84 0.795 0.067
14 3 4.18 3.93 3.09 6.52 10.46 3.42 2.16 11.21
15 3 3.89 4.60 2.81 6.65 11.51 3.10 2.14 12.11
a h (overall mean a hv ) : 9.01 m/s² a h (overall mean a hv ): 10.01 m/s²
r R(single m/c.): 1.88 m/s² or 0.84 r R(single m/c.): 1.72 m/s² or 0.90
K (single m/c.) value: 3.11 m/s² K (single m/c.) value: 2.83 m/s²
Single machine emission a hd ( = greatest a h value): 10.01 m/s² K (single m/c.) value: 2.83 m/s²
Standard:
N&V reference ID:
Measurement file name:
BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011
NV/11/18
Tool A Granite, Bush Hammer
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 1 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 1 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 2 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 2 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 3 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 3 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
41
Vibration Emission Test report Pulse file version: HAV Emission V2.1.2 2008-07-25.pls
Spreadsheet: Version 4.0 19/1/12
Hand Position 1 - Throttle Hand position 2 - Support
Meas. Meas. Operator Statistics Operator Statistics
TestNo. Operator Name Date Meas Time a whx a why a whz a hv Mean a hv S n-1 Cv a whx a why a whz a hv Mean a hv S n-1 Cv
1 1 7.53 4.35 3.36 9.33 8.68 16.36 7.92 20.14
2 1 9.95 5.10 3.15 11.62 9.75 17.90 8.41 22.05
3 1 8.32 3.51 3.33 9.62 10.57 1.026 0.097 12.57 15.19 8.98 21.66 21.15 2.377 0.112
4 1 9.29 5.03 3.86 11.25 12.23 18.11 10.27 24.14
5 1 9.58 4.60 2.93 11.02 9.37 13.45 6.79 17.75
6 2 8.65 5.13 5.96 11.69 10.42 21.79 11.77 26.87
7 2 8.54 6.32 5.40 11.92 12.78 27.04 14.26 33.14
8 2 8.27 7.25 4.35 11.83 11.60 0.324 0.028 11.09 25.59 14.12 31.26 32.41 3.556 0.110
9 2 7.96 6.47 4.28 11.12 13.33 29.42 15.02 35.62
10 2 8.14 6.01 5.33 11.44 12.59 29.64 14.18 35.19
11 3 7.94 6.30 3.55 10.74 11.41 21.01 12.09 26.80
12 3 8.14 6.23 4.42 11.17 11.31 21.30 11.77 26.84
13 3 7.96 6.80 3.89 11.17 12.05 1.668 0.138 8.46 19.19 10.57 23.49 26.38 1.775 0.067
14 3 8.25 8.32 3.79 12.31 8.72 21.54 12.63 26.45
15 3 10.70 9.06 4.88 14.84 6.73 24.23 13.07 28.35
a h (overall mean a hv ) : 11.40 m/s² a h (overall mean a hv ): 26.65 m/s²
r R(single m/c.): 1.72 m/s² or 0.98 r R(single m/c.): 4.10 m/s² or 1.90
K (single m/c.) value: 2.83 m/s² K (single m/c.) value: 6.76 m/s²
Single machine emission a hd ( = greatest a h value): 26.65 m/s² K (single m/c.) value: 6.76 m/s²
Standard:
N&V reference ID:
Measurement file name:
BS EN ISO 28927: 2011
NV/11/18
Tool A Limestone, 1 in Chisel, No Sleeve
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 1 Hand 1
x-ax is y-ax is z-ax is
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 1 Hand 2
x-ax is y-ax is z-ax is
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 2 Hand 1
x-ax is y-ax is z-ax is
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 2 Hand 2
x-ax is y-ax is z-ax is
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 3 Hand 1
x-ax is y-ax is z-ax is
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 3 Hand 2
x-ax is y-ax is z-ax is
42
Vibration Emission Test report Pulse file version: HAV Emission V2.1.2 2008-07-25.pls
Spreadsheet: Version 4.0 19/1/12
Hand Position 1 - Throttle Hand position 2 - Support
Meas. Meas. Operator Statistics Operator Statistics
TestNo. Operator Name Date Meas Time a whx a why a whz a hv Mean a hv S n-1 Cv a whx a why a whz a hv Mean a hv S n-1 Cv
1 1 10.83 7.63 3.71 13.75 13.71 19.96 13.28 27.62
2 1 10.57 6.19 4.03 12.90 24.87 17.35 11.14 32.31
3 1 9.19 7.02 3.58 12.10 12.70 0.696 0.055 18.51 20.05 16.10 31.68 30.41 2.685 0.088
4 1 8.35 7.87 3.66 12.04 20.56 21.53 14.30 33.03
5 1 8.97 8.25 3.62 12.71 13.85 19.44 13.49 27.41
6 2 8.34 9.44 5.61 13.79 19.73 22.92 18.02 35.20
7 2 10.65 8.56 5.18 14.61 20.92 20.63 15.45 33.20
8 2 11.39 7.01 5.76 14.57 13.69 0.925 0.068 18.05 17.07 12.94 28.01 31.20 2.955 0.095
9 2 9.16 6.76 5.83 12.79 18.79 17.43 13.87 29.14
10 2 8.57 8.00 4.87 12.69 18.47 18.96 15.08 30.47
11 3 10.00 10.98 4.52 15.53 10.62 21.30 14.86 28.06
12 3 9.46 10.40 4.68 14.82 43.68 21.37 14.25 50.67
13 3 8.84 8.68 3.75 12.94 15.10 1.330 0.088 24.07 18.64 12.63 32.96 37.03 9.093 0.246
14 3 10.30 12.05 4.21 16.40 31.99 21.52 15.63 41.60
15 3 10.50 10.88 4.54 15.79 13.69 24.56 15.00 31.87
a h (overall mean a hv ) : 13.83 m/s² a h (overall mean a hv ): 32.88 m/s²
r R(single m/c.): 1.73 m/s² or 1.13 r R(single m/c.): 5.87 m/s² or 2.27
K (single m/c.) value: 2.86 m/s² K (single m/c.) value: 9.68 m/s²
Single machine emission a hd ( = greatest a h value): 32.88 m/s² K (single m/c.) value: 9.68 m/s²
Standard:
N&V reference ID:
Measurement file name:
BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011 Hand-held portable power tools - Test methods for evaluation of vibration emission
NV/11/18
Tool A, Granite, 1in Chisel, No Sleeve
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 1 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 1 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 2 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 2 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 3 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 3 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
43
Vibration Emission Test report Pulse file version: HAV Emission V2.1.2 2008-07-25.pls
Spreadsheet: Version 4.0 19/1/12
Hand Position 1 - Front handle Hand position 2 - Rear handle
Meas. Meas. Operator Statistics Operator Statistics
TestNo. Operator Name Date Meas Time a whx a why a whz a hv Mean a hv S n-1 Cv a whx a why a whz a hv Mean a hv S n-1 Cv
1 1 3.26 8.43 3.04 9.54 6.05 4.05 1.27 7.39
2 1 3.81 10.86 2.97 11.88 6.43 3.66 1.21 7.49
3 1 2.71 10.58 2.95 11.31 10.46 2.071 0.198 6.39 3.50 1.34 7.41 7.38 0.414 0.056
4 1 3.21 11.33 3.57 12.31 6.79 3.61 1.65 7.86
5 1 2.11 5.92 3.66 7.28 5.81 3.12 1.30 6.72
6 2 3.61 7.89 3.05 9.20 11.57 4.81 2.60 12.80
7 2 3.35 9.64 3.72 10.86 10.45 5.34 2.49 11.99
8 2 3.67 9.24 3.03 10.39 10.57 0.928 0.088 9.03 4.37 2.03 10.23 11.15 1.329 0.119
9 2 4.14 9.40 2.71 10.63 8.03 4.70 1.82 9.48
10 2 3.65 10.66 3.40 11.77 9.67 5.18 2.40 11.23
11 3 4.48 8.13 3.97 10.10 13.06 6.91 1.53 14.86
12 3 4.83 9.33 4.68 11.51 14.94 8.04 2.09 17.09
13 3 4.84 8.06 4.83 10.57 10.56 0.649 0.061 14.56 7.36 2.11 16.45 15.60 1.108 0.071
14 3 4.81 8.65 4.32 10.80 13.44 6.38 2.02 15.02
15 3 4.29 7.83 4.15 9.84 12.95 6.44 1.68 14.56
a h (overall mean a hv ) : 10.53 m/s² a h (overall mean a hv ): 11.37 m/s²
r R(single m/c.): 1.38 m/s² or 0.93 r R(single m/c.): 3.06 m/s² or 0.98
K (single m/c.) value: 2.28 m/s² K (single m/c.) value: 5.06 m/s²
Single machine emission a hd ( = greatest a h value): 11.37 m/s² K (single m/c.) value: 5.06 m/s²
Standard:
N&V reference ID:
Measurement file name:
BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011
NV/12/02
Tool B Limestone, Chisel
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 1 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 1 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 2 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 2 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 3 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 3 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
44
Vibration Emission Test report Pulse file version: HAV Emission V2.1.2 2008-07-25.pls
Spreadsheet: Version 4.0 19/1/12
Hand Position 1 - Front handle Hand position 2 - Rear handle
Meas. Meas. Operator Statistics Operator Statistics
TestNo. Operator Name Date Meas Time a whx a why a whz a hv Mean a hv S n-1 Cv a whx a why a whz a hv Mean a hv S n-1 Cv
1 1 3.31 8.24 4.58 9.99 7.10 4.64 1.42 8.60
2 1 3.78 7.33 4.30 9.30 6.97 4.94 1.61 8.69
3 1 3.48 8.72 3.57 10.04 10.20 0.687 0.067 6.99 4.76 1.65 8.62 9.19 0.812 0.088
4 1 2.95 9.14 4.25 10.50 7.97 5.15 1.62 9.63
5 1 3.69 9.55 4.44 11.16 8.51 5.78 1.66 10.42
6 2 4.45 7.09 4.31 9.41 12.11 5.36 2.32 13.45
7 2 3.95 10.16 3.67 11.51 8.84 4.65 2.27 10.24
8 2 3.41 8.54 4.60 10.29 10.83 1.049 0.097 11.83 4.76 2.95 13.09 12.28 1.289 0.105
9 2 3.64 9.31 4.21 10.85 10.39 4.78 2.99 11.82
10 2 3.72 10.77 4.09 12.11 11.05 5.52 3.32 12.79
11 3 5.99 9.51 4.00 11.93 12.23 6.80 2.12 14.15
12 3 5.45 9.18 4.58 11.62 13.22 6.87 2.25 15.07
13 3 5.09 9.03 4.46 11.29 11.57 0.521 0.045 11.76 5.22 2.45 13.10 13.96 0.792 0.057
14 3 4.57 8.70 4.59 10.84 11.94 5.32 2.40 13.29
15 3 5.49 9.99 4.22 12.16 12.52 6.41 2.00 14.20
a h (overall mean a hv ) : 10.87 m/s² a h (overall mean a hv ): 11.81 m/s²
r R(single m/c.): 1.26 m/s² or 0.95 r R(single m/c.): 2.34 m/s² or 1.01
K (single m/c.) value: 2.08 m/s² K (single m/c.) value: 3.87 m/s²
Single machine emission a hd ( = greatest a h value): 11.81 m/s² K (single m/c.) value: 3.87 m/s²
Standard:
N&V reference ID:
Measurement file name:
BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011
NV/12/02
Tool B, Granite, Chisel
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 1 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 1 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 2 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 2 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 3 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 3 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
45
Vibration Emission Test report Pulse file version: HAV Emission V2.1.2 2008-07-25.pls
Spreadsheet: Version 4.0 19/1/12
Hand Position 1 - Front handle Hand position 2 - Rear handle
Meas. Meas. Operator Statistics Operator Statistics
TestNo. Operator Name Date Meas Time a whx a why a whz a hv Mean a hv S n-1 Cv a whx a why a whz a hv Mean a hv S n-1 Cv
1 1 3.19 6.04 2.33 7.21 7.08 6.20 2.39 9.71
2 1 3.97 4.85 2.42 6.72 6.62 5.30 2.76 8.92
3 1 4.02 4.92 2.78 6.93 7.16 0.341 0.048 8.84 7.09 2.79 11.67 10.49 1.365 0.130
4 1 4.70 5.18 2.88 7.56 9.18 7.32 3.13 12.15
5 1 4.57 5.32 2.33 7.38 7.48 5.85 3.19 10.01
6 2 3.12 7.07 3.01 8.29 13.92 7.65 2.22 16.04
7 2 3.01 6.17 2.57 7.33 11.47 6.05 1.71 13.08
8 2 2.87 6.91 2.51 7.89 7.96 0.388 0.049 11.42 6.38 1.99 13.23 13.42 1.530 0.114
9 2 2.80 7.38 2.43 8.26 10.90 6.18 2.06 12.70
10 2 2.97 7.09 2.33 8.03 10.43 5.81 1.78 12.07
11 3 2.13 5.76 1.56 6.34 6.30 3.88 1.69 7.59
12 3 2.03 5.87 1.70 6.44 5.89 3.71 1.77 7.18
13 3 2.22 5.31 1.77 6.02 6.16 0.227 0.037 6.16 4.02 1.81 7.58 7.45 0.186 0.025
14 3 2.15 5.21 1.67 5.88 5.97 3.88 1.78 7.34
15 3 2.14 5.42 1.86 6.12 6.24 4.02 1.55 7.58
a h (overall mean a hv ) : 7.09 m/s² a h (overall mean a hv ): 10.46 m/s²
r R(single m/c.): 1.05 m/s² or 0.73 r R(single m/c.): 2.26 m/s² or 0.93
K (single m/c.) value: 1.73 m/s² K (single m/c.) value: 3.73 m/s²
Single machine emission a hd ( = greatest a h value): 10.46 m/s² K (single m/c.) value: 3.73 m/s²
Standard:
N&V reference ID:
Measurement file name:
BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011
NV/12/02
Tool B, Limestone, Bush
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 1 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 1 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 2 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 2 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 3 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 3 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
46
Vibration Emission Test report Pulse file version: HAV Emission V2.1.2 2008-07-25.pls
Spreadsheet: Version 4.0 19/1/12
Hand Position 1 - Front handle Hand position 2 - Rear handle
Meas. Meas. Operator Statistics Operator Statistics
TestNo. Operator Name Date Meas Time a whx a why a whz a hv Mean a hv S n-1 Cv a whx a why a whz a hv Mean a hv S n-1 Cv
1 1 4.01 6.24 2.53 7.84 6.62 5.78 2.37 9.10
2 1 3.78 6.79 2.54 8.18 6.65 5.74 2.51 9.14
3 1 4.11 7.99 2.66 9.37 8.47 0.574 0.068 6.37 5.18 2.14 8.48 8.93 0.515 0.058
4 1 4.12 7.11 2.47 8.58 6.34 4.99 2.07 8.33
5 1 4.04 6.95 2.40 8.39 7.37 5.73 2.19 9.59
6 2 3.74 7.99 2.45 9.15 10.92 5.58 2.51 12.51
7 2 3.78 7.06 2.30 8.34 10.65 5.43 2.29 12.17
8 2 3.25 7.26 2.29 8.28 8.61 0.616 0.072 10.04 5.26 1.92 11.50 12.10 0.373 0.031
9 2 3.50 6.58 2.66 7.92 10.35 5.96 2.69 12.24
10 2 3.32 8.41 2.39 9.35 10.35 5.58 2.73 12.07
11 3 2.75 4.57 2.86 6.05 13.19 6.85 2.41 15.06
12 3 2.49 5.16 3.06 6.50 12.80 6.96 2.36 14.75
13 3 2.33 4.40 2.78 5.70 6.35 0.558 0.088 10.85 6.25 2.53 12.77 13.43 1.366 0.102
14 3 2.39 6.12 2.93 7.19 10.50 5.79 2.29 12.20
15 3 2.64 4.80 3.17 6.33 10.55 6.02 2.35 12.37
a h (overall mean a hv ) : 7.81 m/s² a h (overall mean a hv ): 11.49 m/s²
r R(single m/c.): 1.41 m/s² or 0.77 r R(single m/c.): 1.99 m/s² or 0.99
K (single m/c.) value: 2.33 m/s² K (single m/c.) value: 3.29 m/s²
Single machine emission a hd ( = greatest a h value): 11.49 m/s² K (single m/c.) value: 3.29 m/s²
Standard:
N&V reference ID:
Measurement file name:
BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011
NV/12/02
Tool B, Granite, Bush
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 1 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 1 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 2 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 2 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 3 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 3 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
47
Vibration Emission Test report Pulse file version: HAV Emission V2.1.2 2008-07-25.pls
Spreadsheet: Version 4.0 19/1/12
Hand Position 1 - Tool handle Hand position 2 - Chisel
Meas. Meas. Operator Statistics Operator Statistics
TestNo. Operator Name Date Meas Time a whx a why a whz a hv Mean a hv S n-1 Cv a whx a why a whz a hv Mean a hv S n-1 Cv
1 1 15.41 9.93 6.59 19.48 4.08 4.07 4.35 7.22
2 1 12.93 13.73 5.11 19.54 5.46 6.65 3.93 9.46
3 1 11.42 8.77 5.16 15.30 17.18 2.253 0.131 3.99 4.93 4.10 7.56 7.99 0.893 0.112
4 1 10.89 8.56 5.17 14.78 3.49 5.75 4.64 8.17
5 1 13.04 9.49 4.73 16.80 4.36 4.43 4.26 7.53
6 2 15.10 7.90 6.90 18.38 6.10 13.92 4.30 15.80
7 2 14.32 10.67 7.07 19.21 5.90 11.79 4.69 14.00
8 2 15.13 10.82 8.39 20.40 18.38 1.504 0.082 6.11 11.56 5.11 14.04 13.95 1.168 0.084
9 2 11.32 9.28 9.18 17.28 5.97 10.63 3.94 12.81
10 2 11.14 8.98 8.47 16.63 6.23 10.76 4.08 13.09
11 3 16.66 11.82 8.45 22.11 5.27 15.09 7.06 17.47
12 3 11.88 10.48 4.04 16.35 3.33 10.79 6.92 13.24
13 3 16.22 10.65 6.62 20.50 18.65 2.644 0.142 2.88 10.43 6.08 12.41 14.03 2.043 0.146
14 3 13.57 10.68 6.16 18.34 3.60 10.49 6.35 12.78
15 3 11.19 10.23 5.00 15.97 3.83 12.22 6.24 14.24
a h (overall mean a hv ) : 18.07 m/s² a h (overall mean a hv ): 11.99 m/s²
r R(single m/c.): 2.25 m/s² or 1.38 r R(single m/c.): 2.97 m/s² or 1.02
K (single m/c.) value: 3.72 m/s² K (single m/c.) value: 4.90 m/s²
Single machine emission a hd ( = greatest a h value): 18.07 m/s² K (single m/c.) value: 3.72 m/s²
Standard:
N&V reference ID:
Measurement file name:
BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011
NV/12/02
Tool B Granite 1in, No Sleeve, Limestone.pls
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 1 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 1 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 2 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 2 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 3 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 3 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
48
Vibration Emission Test report Pulse file version: HAV Emission V2.1.2 2008-07-25.pls
Spreadsheet: Version 4.0 19/1/12
Hand Position 1 - Tool handle Hand position 2 - Chisel
Meas. Meas. Operator Statistics Operator Statistics
TestNo. Operator Name Date Meas Time a whx a why a whz a hv Mean a hv S n-1 Cv a whx a why a whz a hv Mean a hv S n-1 Cv
1 1 17.30 15.52 4.11 23.60 5.28 9.57 7.05 13.00
2 1 17.64 13.97 4.92 23.03 9.88 11.70 6.42 16.61
3 1 18.13 14.90 4.91 23.98 22.88 1.004 0.044 7.10 8.86 6.38 13.03 15.25 2.164 0.142
4 1 15.34 14.25 4.84 21.49 10.82 12.86 5.96 17.83
5 1 16.77 13.96 4.56 22.29 8.62 11.52 6.50 15.79
6 2 14.41 12.71 3.82 19.59 8.88 14.65 8.95 19.32
7 2 13.30 11.29 3.40 17.77 7.83 13.76 6.70 17.19
8 2 13.55 12.19 3.00 18.47 18.76 0.892 0.048 9.37 15.10 7.86 19.43 18.81 0.921 0.049
9 2 15.50 11.92 3.06 19.79 8.38 15.61 6.77 18.97
10 2 15.42 9.29 2.36 18.16 8.91 15.89 5.83 19.12
11 3 11.35 9.53 7.98 16.83 5.75 15.73 7.24 18.24
12 3 10.06 9.19 7.74 15.67 5.49 17.52 7.44 19.81
13 3 8.64 10.41 8.73 16.10 17.34 2.368 0.137 12.18 14.89 7.39 20.60 20.19 1.262 0.062
14 3 14.38 11.80 10.78 21.50 7.81 18.00 9.07 21.62
15 3 9.68 9.06 9.96 16.59 7.42 16.90 9.29 20.66
a h (overall mean a hv ) : 19.66 m/s² a h (overall mean a hv ): 18.08 m/s²
r R(single m/c.): 2.93 m/s² or 1.48 r R(single m/c.): 2.71 m/s² or 1.38
K (single m/c.) value: 4.84 m/s² K (single m/c.) value: 4.47 m/s²
Single machine emission a hd ( = greatest a h value): 19.66 m/s² K (single m/c.) value: 4.84 m/s²
Standard:
N&V reference ID:
Measurement file name:
BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011
NV/12/02
Tool B Granite, Granite 1in, no sleeve
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 1 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 1 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 2 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 2 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 3 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 3 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
49
Vibration Emission Test report Pulse file version: HAV Emission V2.1.2 2008-07-25.pls
Spreadsheet: Version 4.0 19/1/12
Chisel Throttle
Meas. Meas. Operator Statistics Operator Statistics
TestNo. Operator Name Date Meas Time a whx a why a whz a hv Mean a hv S n-1 Cv a whx a why a whz a hv Mean a hv S n-1 Cv
1 1 4.66 3.86 2.83 6.68 2.63 1.58 0.87 3.19
2 1 3.35 2.54 3.19 5.27 2.43 1.66 1.05 3.13
3 1 3.09 2.59 3.38 5.26 5.62 0.598 0.106 2.47 1.35 1.09 3.02 2.99 0.175 0.058
4 1 3.89 2.55 2.92 5.49 2.42 1.00 0.94 2.78
5 1 3.62 2.43 3.21 5.41 2.33 1.22 1.09 2.84
6 2 5.67 2.81 2.90 6.96 3.66 1.14 1.54 4.14
7 2 6.54 4.42 3.82 8.77 3.68 1.40 1.65 4.27
8 2 5.19 2.71 2.85 6.52 7.22 1.023 0.142 2.89 1.26 1.45 3.47 4.05 0.471 0.116
9 2 4.78 2.87 2.70 6.20 3.09 1.36 1.56 3.72
10 2 6.26 3.06 3.17 7.65 4.28 1.14 1.47 4.66
11 3 3.73 2.09 3.30 5.40 2.61 1.16 0.98 3.02
12 3 3.69 2.27 2.89 5.21 2.72 0.94 1.02 3.06
13 3 4.04 1.86 2.18 4.96 5.14 0.169 0.033 2.80 0.86 0.86 3.05 3.11 0.187 0.060
14 3 4.21 1.98 2.10 5.11 2.67 0.93 0.98 3.00
15 3 4.15 2.02 2.05 5.05 3.13 0.90 1.14 3.45
a h (overall mean a hv ) : 6.00 m/s² a h (overall mean a hv ): 3.39 m/s²
r R(single m/c.): 1.26 m/s² or 0.66 r R(single m/c.): 0.83 m/s² or 0.50
K (single m/c.) value: 2.08 m/s² K (single m/c.) value: 1.36 m/s²
Single machine emission a hd ( = greatest a h value): 6.00 m/s² K (single m/c.) value: 2.08 m/s²
Standard:
N&V reference ID:
Measurement file name:
BS EN ISO 28927-10:2011
NV/12/03
Tool C Limestone, Chisel
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 1 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 1 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 2 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 2 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 3 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 3 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
50
Vibration Emission Test report Pulse file version: HAV Emission V2.1.2 2008-07-25.pls
Spreadsheet: Version 4.0 19/1/12
Chisel Throttle
Meas. Meas. Operator Statistics Operator Statistics
TestNo. Operator Name Date Meas Time a whx a why a whz a hv Mean a hv S n-1 Cv a whx a why a whz a hv Mean a hv S n-1 Cv
1 1 9.83 6.00 7.11 13.54 2.53 3.12 3.04 5.04
2 1 7.63 5.23 5.30 10.66 2.56 2.32 2.36 4.18
3 1 7.26 4.18 5.13 9.82 11.10 1.474 0.133 2.67 2.16 2.19 4.07 4.19 0.513 0.122
4 1 7.24 5.36 4.72 10.16 2.54 1.86 1.85 3.65
5 1 7.35 6.20 5.99 11.33 2.56 2.17 2.24 4.03
6 2 7.11 4.80 6.35 10.67 3.83 1.64 2.29 4.75
7 2 8.86 5.57 5.50 11.82 3.73 1.59 2.16 4.59
8 2 7.94 5.37 5.09 10.85 11.16 0.444 0.040 4.49 1.53 2.32 5.28 4.84 0.289 0.060
9 2 8.52 5.28 5.22 11.30 3.74 1.52 2.24 4.62
10 2 8.57 5.28 4.87 11.17 4.12 1.68 2.22 4.97
11 3 5.63 3.81 4.78 8.31 2.13 1.27 1.03 2.68
12 3 4.91 3.76 4.55 7.68 2.49 1.25 0.99 2.96
13 3 4.89 3.65 4.43 7.54 7.55 0.518 0.069 2.29 1.16 0.95 2.73 2.79 0.130 0.047
14 3 4.58 3.27 3.97 6.89 2.22 1.20 0.85 2.66
15 3 4.64 3.74 4.30 7.35 2.43 1.26 0.91 2.88
7.00 4.77 5.15 9.94 2.95 1.72 1.84 3.94
a h (overall mean a hv ) : 9.94 m/s² a h (overall mean a hv ): 3.94 m/s²
r R(single m/c.): 2.03 m/s² or 0.90 r R(single m/c.): 1.15 m/s² or 0.54
K (single m/c.) value: 3.35 m/s² K (single m/c.) value: 1.89 m/s²
Single machine emission a hd ( = greatest a h value): 9.94 m/s² K (single m/c.) value: 3.35 m/s²
Standard:
N&V reference ID:
Measurement file name:
BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011
NV/12/03
Tool C, Granite, Chisel
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 1 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 1 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 2 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 2 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 3 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 3 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
51
Vibration Emission Test report Pulse file version: HAV Emission V2.1.2 2008-07-25.pls
Spreadsheet: Version 4.0 19/1/12
Hand Position 1 - Front handle Hand position 2 - Rear handle
Meas. Meas. Operator Statistics Operator Statistics
TestNo. Operator Name Date Meas Time a whx a why a whz a hv Mean a hv S n-1 Cv a whx a why a whz a hv Mean a hv S n-1 Cv
1 1 4.13 8.42 1.74 9.54 2.49 1.18 0.59 2.82
2 1 3.92 10.13 2.01 11.05 2.30 1.32 0.62 2.72
3 1 4.15 9.87 2.02 10.89 10.37 0.631 0.061 2.31 1.29 0.62 2.72 3.01 0.360 0.120
4 1 3.67 9.24 3.07 10.41 3.17 1.08 1.01 3.50
5 1 3.10 8.99 2.95 9.95 2.98 0.96 1.00 3.29
6 2 3.46 6.62 2.51 7.88 2.85 1.11 0.87 3.18
7 2 3.12 6.87 2.60 7.98 2.80 0.96 0.91 3.10
8 2 3.96 6.71 3.11 8.39 8.66 0.818 0.094 2.58 0.93 0.93 2.90 3.15 0.167 0.053
9 2 4.89 7.29 3.89 9.61 2.96 1.10 1.10 3.34
10 2 5.02 7.44 2.98 9.46 2.87 1.11 1.02 3.24
11 3 2.28 4.71 1.64 5.48 2.86 0.63 0.64 3.00
12 3 2.13 3.60 2.13 4.69 2.97 0.52 0.60 3.08
13 3 1.86 5.31 1.78 5.90 5.24 0.464 0.089 2.64 0.62 0.61 2.78 3.01 0.144 0.048
14 3 2.19 4.10 1.89 5.02 2.87 0.68 0.66 3.02
15 3 1.90 4.54 1.41 5.12 3.04 0.67 0.57 3.17
a h (overall mean a hv ) : 8.09 m/s² a h (overall mean a hv ): 3.06 m/s²
r R(single m/c.): 2.31 m/s² or 0.79 r R(single m/c.): 0.38 m/s² or 0.48
K (single m/c.) value: 3.81 m/s² K (single m/c.) value: 0.80 m/s²
Single machine emission a hd ( = greatest a h value): 8.09 m/s² K (single m/c.) value: 3.81 m/s²
Standard:
N&V reference ID:
Measurement file name:
BS EN ISO 28927-11: 2011
NV/12/03
Tool C, Limestone, Bush Hammer and Sleeve
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 1 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 1 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 2 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 2 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 3 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 3 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
52
Vibration Emission Test report Pulse file version: HAV Emission V2.1.2 2008-07-25.pls
Spreadsheet: Version 4.0 19/1/12
BS EN ISO 28927-11: 2011
NV/12/03
Tool C Granite, Bush Hammer and Sleeve
Chisel Throttle
Meas. Meas. Operator Statistics Operator Statistics
TestNo. Operator Name Date Meas Time a whx a why a whz a hv Mean a hv S n-1 Cv a whx a why a whz a hv Mean a hv S n-1 Cv
1 1 4.75 11.35 3.71 12.85 2.83 1.20 1.12 3.27
2 1 5.14 10.17 3.04 11.80 2.81 1.30 1.11 3.29
3 1 4.73 10.95 2.82 12.26 12.09 0.743 0.061 2.60 1.18 1.04 3.04 3.02 0.258 0.085
4 1 4.28 11.52 2.62 12.56 2.27 1.09 1.03 2.73
5 1 4.45 9.63 2.73 10.95 2.35 1.15 1.00 2.80
6 2 4.77 13.63 4.17 15.03 3.71 1.36 1.18 4.13
7 2 5.57 11.73 3.70 13.50 3.18 1.35 1.02 3.60
8 2 5.58 8.66 4.72 11.34 13.93 1.660 0.119 2.63 1.31 1.06 3.12 3.45 0.481 0.139
9 2 5.64 12.26 4.34 14.18 3.13 1.34 1.02 3.55
10 2 4.64 14.25 4.37 15.62 2.40 1.28 0.94 2.88
11 3 4.42 8.51 4.27 10.50 4.71 0.93 1.29 4.97
12 3 4.02 9.41 3.48 10.81 5.18 0.96 1.36 5.44
13 3 4.15 7.94 3.58 9.65 9.76 0.872 0.089 4.01 1.04 1.24 4.32 4.75 0.610 0.129
14 3 4.04 6.76 4.09 8.88 4.71 1.22 1.41 5.07
15 3 3.86 7.29 3.54 8.98 3.55 1.17 1.19 3.92
a h (overall mean a hv ) : 11.93 m/s² a h (overall mean a hv ): 3.74 m/s²
r R(single m/c.): 2.05 m/s² or 1.02 r R(single m/c.): 1.06 m/s² or 0.52
K (single m/c.) value: 3.38 m/s² K (single m/c.) value: 1.75 m/s²
Single machine emission a hd ( = greatest a h value): 11.93 m/s² K (single m/c.) value: 3.38 m/s²
Standard:
N&V reference ID:
Measurement file name:
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 1 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 1 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 2 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 2 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 3 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 3 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
53
Vibration Emission Test report Pulse file version: HAV Emission V2.1.2 2008-07-25.pls
Spreadsheet: Version 4.0 19/1/12
Hand Position 1 - Tool Hand position 2 - Chisel sleeve
Meas. Meas. Operator Statistics Operator Statistics
TestNo. Operator Name Date Meas Time a whx a why a whz a hv Mean a hv S n-1 Cv a whx a why a whz a hv Mean a hv S n-1 Cv
1 1 2.12 10.47 1.18 10.75 11.65 14.25 5.29 19.15
2 1 1.55 11.11 1.46 11.31 7.82 7.38 9.18 14.14
3 1 1.67 11.35 1.22 11.54 10.84 0.632 0.058 7.50 6.88 8.74 13.42 15.64 2.220 0.142
4 1 1.81 10.39 1.79 10.70 8.61 11.20 6.25 15.45
5 1 1.76 9.42 2.53 9.91 10.28 7.47 9.84 16.07
6 2 1.95 15.59 1.77 15.81 4.27 4.03 5.43 8.00
7 2 2.27 16.38 1.92 16.65 5.77 5.51 4.97 9.39
8 2 2.31 15.16 2.29 15.51 15.23 1.139 0.075 6.01 5.47 5.79 9.98 9.80 1.174 0.120
9 2 2.23 13.98 2.06 14.31 5.78 5.61 6.94 10.63
10 2 2.21 13.55 1.85 13.85 6.07 4.63 7.89 10.98
11 3 2.07 19.65 2.58 19.92 4.92 4.90 3.69 7.86
12 3 2.38 20.41 2.67 20.72 5.28 5.08 3.16 7.97
13 3 2.57 21.47 2.62 21.78 21.15 0.825 0.039 4.76 4.90 2.78 7.37 7.59 0.392 0.052
14 3 1.98 21.25 2.16 21.45 5.13 4.98 2.95 7.73
15 3 2.18 21.70 1.83 21.89 4.54 4.52 2.86 7.02
a h (overall mean a hv ) : 15.74 m/s² a h (overall mean a hv ): 11.01 m/s²
r R(single m/c.): 4.01 m/s² or 1.24 r R(single m/c.): 3.53 m/s² or 0.96
K (single m/c.) value: 6.62 m/s² K (single m/c.) value: 5.83 m/s²
Single machine emission a hd ( = greatest a h value): 15.74 m/s² K (single m/c.) value: 6.62 m/s²
Standard:
N&V reference ID:
Measurement file name:
BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011
Tool D Granite and Chisel with Sleeve Apr 2013 #2
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 1 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 1 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 2 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 2 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 3 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 3 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
54
Vibration Emission Test report Pulse file version: HAV Emission V2.1.2 2008-07-25.pls
Spreadsheet: Version 4.0 19/1/12
Hand Position 1 - Tool Hand position 2 - Chisel Sleeve
Meas. Meas. Operator Statistics Operator Statistics
TestNo. Operator Name Date Meas Time a whx a why a whz a hv Mean a hv S n-1 Cv a whx a why a whz a hv Mean a hv S n-1 Cv
1 1 1.66 10.73 1.31 10.93 7.69 8.91 3.74 12.35
2 1 1.59 10.19 1.40 10.41 8.73 4.48 6.12 11.57
3 1 1.13 8.95 1.02 9.08 10.95 1.303 0.119 5.73 5.52 5.50 9.68 10.71 1.327 0.124
4 1 1.24 11.76 1.31 11.89 7.76 4.59 6.02 10.84
5 1 1.53 12.25 1.27 12.41 5.37 5.70 4.68 9.12
6 2 2.52 13.83 1.94 14.19 5.67 5.29 5.85 9.71
7 2 2.54 15.94 2.21 16.29 5.49 4.73 4.91 8.75
8 2 2.34 14.70 1.51 14.96 14.84 0.901 0.061 3.68 3.42 4.84 6.98 8.68 1.066 0.123
9 2 2.26 14.49 1.83 14.78 4.02 5.31 5.33 8.53
10 2 2.00 13.73 1.84 14.00 4.64 5.72 5.90 9.44
11 3 2.80 21.60 2.25 21.90 3.01 3.43 2.39 5.15
12 3 2.40 21.46 1.85 21.68 2.93 4.44 2.51 5.88
13 3 2.10 21.98 1.39 22.13 22.00 0.274 0.012 2.99 3.34 2.65 5.21 5.27 0.381 0.072
14 3 1.04 22.24 2.49 22.40 2.43 3.20 2.69 4.84
15 3 1.10 21.80 1.96 21.91 3.35 3.30 2.41 5.28
1.88 15.71 1.71 15.93 4.90 4.76 4.37 8.22
a h (overall mean a hv ) : 15.93 m/s² a h (overall mean a hv ): 8.22 m/s²
r R(single m/c.): 4.06 m/s² or 1.26 r R(single m/c.): 2.49 m/s² or 0.79
K (single m/c.) value: 6.70 m/s² K (single m/c.) value: 4.11 m/s²
Single machine emission a hd ( = greatest a h value): 15.93 m/s² K (single m/c.) value: 6.70 m/s²
Standard:
N&V reference ID:
Measurement file name:
BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011 Hand-held portable power tools - Test methods for evaluation of vibration emission, Part 11: Stone hammers
NVI/12/09
Tool D Limestone and Chisel with Sleeve Apr 2013 #2
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 1 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 1 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 2 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 2 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 3 Hand 1
x-axis y-axis z-axis
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
1/3
Oct. a
ccele
ratio
n (m
/s²)
Frequency (Hz)
Subject 3 Hand 2
x-axis y-axis z-axis
55
ANNEX D - FIELD TEST DATA
The following data tables are generated using standard excel forms. In some instances there are
no relevant data to report, for example there are no daily exposure values because exposure time
information was not collected. In these cases the excel default is to fill the spaces with the text
‘#VALUE!’. These are not errors, but indicate that there are no data.
56
D.1
Site 1 – Tool A
Dateofentrytodatabase:
PrintDate 4-Jul-13
MainID: 1669
DateOfVisit: 29/03/12
LocationName: York college
Occupation: stone mason
Process: Chiselling limestone
ProcessNotes:
MachineModel: 1 inch chisel InsertedToolType:
MachineModifications: InsertedToolPhotoDirectoryName:Photos\York college
MachineSize: DataSource:
MachineWeight(kg):
MachineOperatingPressure: HSLReportNumber:
MachineSpeed(impacts/min): HSLReportDirectoryName:
MachineSpeed(revs/min):
MachinePower: ShotsPerDay:
MachinePowerSource: DailyExposureTime:
MachinePhotoDirName: Checked2012Initials: SMH
InsertedToolCategoryID:
Chisel sleeve (m/s²) 0 (m/s²)
Results_
MainID:
ResultsID
:
x-axis y-axis z-axis ahv ahv Measure-
ment
time (s)
No.
Shots in
Meas.
Source file name
1669 11647 13.49 6.88 6.53 16.49 16.00 GH1 dc shift.txt
11648 17.58 5.26 7.70 19.90 16.00 GH2.txt
11649 20.73 7.02 6.68 22.88 16.00 GH3 dcshift.txt
11650 22.19 7.56 5.10 23.99 16.00 GH4.txt
11651 19.21 6.85 4.81 20.95 16.00 GH5.txt
11652 12.38 9.53 2.02 15.76 16.00 MM1.txt
11653 13.35 10.15 2.94 17.03 16.00 MM2.txt
11654 18.37 10.47 2.96 21.35 16.00 MM3.txt
11655 19.84 10.47 2.96 22.62 16.00 MM4.txt
11656 17.92 10.18 2.99 20.82 16.00 MM5.txt
11657 17.67 12.00 6.05 22.19 16.00 PH1 dcshift.txt
11658 18.21 11.13 8.85 23.10 16.00 PH2 dcshift.txt
11659 16.51 10.29 8.72 21.32 16.00 PH3 dcshift.txt
11660 18.20 10.89 8.53 22.86 16.00 PH4 dcshift.txt
11661 16.26 9.08 8.80 20.60 16.00 PH5 dc shift.txt
11662 29.03 12.70 7.96 32.67 16.00 SH1.txt
11663 30.86 11.63 7.21 33.76 16.00 SH2.txt
11664 29.59 11.91 8.62 33.04 16.00 SH3.txt
11665 31.47 11.48 8.12 34.47 16.00 SH4.txt
11666 29.43 10.74 7.54 32.23 16.00 SH5.txt
Count: 20 Total: 320.00 seconds
Mean: 20.62 9.81 6.25 23.90
Stdev: 6.10 2.05 2.36 5.95
Time to EAV: 0:05
Time to ELV: 0:21
A(8): #VALUE!
25%ile 17.32 8.70 4.35 20.77
Median: 18.29 10.38 6.95 22.41
75%ile 23.90 11.21 8.22 26.05
IQ range 6.59 2.51 3.87 5.28
Time to EAV: 0:05
Time to ELV: 0:23
A(8): #VALUE!
Time-weighted mean: 20.62 9.81 6.25 23.90
Stdev: 7.52 2.97 2.69 7.89 V2.2 April 2012
Highest hand ahw
23.9 ± 5.9 m/s²
26.1m/s²
Highest hand 75%ile
57
Site 1 – Tool A
Dateofentrytodatabase: 28-Jan-13
PrintDate 5-Jul-13
MainID: 1670
DateOfVisit: 29/03/12
LocationName: York college
Occupation: stone mason
Process: Chiseling limestone
ProcessNotes:
MachineManufacturer: Weha InsertedTool: 1 inch chisel
MachineModel: WSH 319 InsertedToolManufacturer: Viprotec
MachineModifications: InsertedToolNotes:
MachineSize:
MachineWeight(kg): 2 HSLJobNumber:
MachineOperatingPressure: 3 - 6 Bar HSLAnonymisedToolLetter: Tool A
MachineSpeed(impacts/min): 3000
MachineSpeed(revs/min): SingleMultiShotMachine: No
MachinePower: ShotsPerDay:
MachinePowerSource: Pneumatic DailyExposureTime:
MachineNotes: Tested with Viprotech vibration reduced chisel sleeve. Chisel data in 1669.
Throttle handle (m/s²)
Results_
MainID:
ResultsID
:
x-axis y-axis z-axis ahv Measure-
ment
time (s)
No.
Shots in
Meas.
Source file name
1670 11668 7.84 13.12 10.49 18.54 16.00 GH2.txt
11670 7.34 10.76 10.70 16.86 16.00 GH4.txt
11671 9.36 13.03 10.30 19.07 16.00 GH5.txt
11672 5.49 10.00 13.53 17.70 16.00 MM1.txt
11674 6.46 13.79 14.22 20.83 16.00 MM3.txt
11675 6.42 10.89 14.13 18.96 16.00 MM4.txt
11678 7.47 15.08 12.88 21.19 16.00 SH1.txt
11679 7.27 12.57 11.34 18.42 16.00 SH2.txt
11680 5.62 16.01 10.65 20.03 16.00 SH3.txt
11681 5.69 15.34 10.45 19.42 16.00 SH4.txt
11682 5.88 12.15 9.45 16.48 16.00 SH5.txt
Count: 11 Total: 176.00 seconds
Mean: 6.80 12.98 11.65 18.86
Stdev: 1.18 1.97 1.71 1.50
Time to EAV: 0:08
Time to ELV: 0:33
A(8):
25%ile 5.79 11.52 10.47 18.06
Median: 6.46 13.03 10.70 18.96
75%ile 7.40 14.43 13.21 19.73
IQ range 1.62 2.91 2.74 1.66
Time to EAV: 0:08
Time to ELV: 0:33
A(8):
Time-weighted mean: 6.80 12.98 11.65 18.86
Stdev: 2.34 4.34 3.87 5.86 V2.2 April 2012
Highest hand ahw
18.9 ± 1.5 m/s²
Chiseling with 1inch chisel, with anti-vibration sleeve.
19.7m/s²
Highest hand 75%ile
58
Site 1 – Tool B
Dateofentrytodatabase:
PrintDate 5-Jul-13
MainID: 1668
DateOfVisit: 29/03/12
LocationName: York college
Occupation: stone mason
Process: Chiselling limestone
ProcessNotes:
MachineModel: 1 inch chisel InsertedToolType:
MachineModifications: InsertedToolPhotoDirectoryName:Photos\York college
MachineSize: DataSource:
MachineWeight(kg):
MachineOperatingPressure: HSLReportNumber:
MachineSpeed(impacts/min): HSLReportDirectoryName:
MachineSpeed(revs/min):
MachinePower: ShotsPerDay:
MachinePowerSource: DailyExposureTime:
MachinePhotoDirName: Checked2012Initials: SMH
InsertedToolCategoryID:
Chisel sleeve (m/s²) 0 (m/s²)
Results_
MainID:
ResultsID
:
x-axis y-axis z-axis ahv ahv Measure-
ment
time (s)
No.
Shots in
Meas.
Source file name
1668 11622 27.56 14.89 2.60 31.43 16.00 GH1.txt
11623 29.09 14.68 2.36 32.67 13.13 GH2.txt
11624 23.97 12.03 2.24 26.91 16.00 GH3.txt
11625 7.23 4.11 2.38 8.65 16.00 GH4 dc shift.txt
11626 9.94 6.18 2.65 12.00 16.00 GH5.txt
11627 6.39 3.85 2.21 7.78 16.00 GH6 dc shift.txt
11628 5.25 2.62 2.09 6.23 16.00 GH7.txt
11629 7.34 4.02 2.37 8.69 16.00 GH8.txt
11630 6.63 5.02 1.54 8.45 16.00 MM1.txt
11631 5.20 3.62 1.22 6.46 16.00 MM2.txt
11632 4.72 2.21 1.07 5.32 16.00 MM3.txt
11633 5.48 2.23 1.19 6.04 16.00 MM4.txt
11634 5.37 2.06 1.18 5.87 15.13 MM5.txt
11635 9.55 6.66 2.87 12.00 16.00 PH1 dc shift.txt
11636 6.87 4.07 3.11 8.57 16.00 PH2 dc shift.txt
11637 11.60 8.63 2.42 14.66 16.00 PH3.txt
11638 12.39 8.94 2.79 15.53 16.00 PH4.txt
11639 9.07 5.46 2.53 10.88 16.00 PH5.txt
11640 26.33 14.62 3.65 30.34 16.00 SH1 dcshift.txt
11641 19.11 10.34 3.26 21.97 16.00 SH2.txt
11642 9.09 4.95 1.86 10.52 16.00 SH3.txt
11643 6.97 3.33 1.53 7.88 16.00 SH4.txt
11644 7.33 3.54 1.50 8.28 16.00 SH5.txt
11645 8.89 4.11 2.20 10.04 16.00 SH6.txt
11646 5.99 1.88 1.37 6.42 16.00 SH7.txt
Count: 25 Total: 396.25 seconds
Mean: 11.09 6.16 2.17 12.94
Stdev: 7.62 4.15 0.70 8.60
Time to EAV: 0:17
Time to ELV: 1:11
A(8): #VALUE!
25%ile 6.39 3.54 1.53 7.78
Median: 7.34 4.11 2.24 8.69
75%ile 11.60 8.63 2.60 14.66
IQ range 5.21 5.09 1.07 6.87
Time to EAV: 0:39
Time to ELV: 2:38
A(8): #VALUE!
Time-weighted mean: 10.98 6.11 2.17 12.82
Stdev: 7.79 4.24 0.82 8.81 V2.2 April 2012
Highest hand ahw
12.9 ± 8.6 m/s²
14.7m/s²
Highest hand 75%ile
59
Site 1 – Tool B
Dateofentrytodatabase:
PrintDate 5-Jul-13
MainID: 1667
DateOfVisit: 29/03/12
LocationName: York college
Occupation: stone mason
Process: Chiselling limestone
ProcessNotes:
MachineModel: 714 InsertedToolType:
MachineModifications: InsertedToolPhotoDirectoryName:Photos\York college
MachineSize: DataSource:
MachineWeight(kg):
MachineOperatingPressure: HSLReportNumber:
MachineSpeed(impacts/min): HSLReportDirectoryName:
MachineSpeed(revs/min):
MachinePower: ShotsPerDay:
MachinePowerSource: Pneumatic DailyExposureTime:
MachinePhotoDirName: Checked2012Initials: SMH
InsertedToolCategoryID: 1
Tool body (m/s²)
Results_
MainID:
ResultsID
:
x-axis y-axis z-axis ahv Measure-
ment
time (s)
No.
Shots in
Meas.
Source file name
1667 11597 6.19 5.23 4.80 9.41 16.00 GH1.txt
11598 6.95 6.22 4.12 10.20 13.13 GH2.txt
11599 6.20 7.64 4.03 10.63 16.00 GH3.txt
11603 3.81 4.50 2.90 6.58 16.00 GH7.txt
11604 4.41 4.71 3.18 7.19 16.00 GH8.txt
11605 3.89 5.25 3.59 7.45 16.00 MM1.txt
11606 4.31 5.54 3.13 7.69 16.00 MM2.txt
11607 3.56 5.90 1.99 7.18 16.00 MM3.txt
11608 3.76 4.90 2.59 6.70 16.00 MM4.txt
11609 2.66 5.13 2.33 6.23 15.13 MM5.txt
11612 3.36 5.02 4.55 7.56 16.00 PH3.txt
11613 4.15 5.74 4.58 8.44 16.00 PH4.txt
11614 4.35 4.44 3.84 7.31 16.00 PH5.txt
11616 5.71 6.75 4.91 10.11 16.00 SH2.txt
11617 4.14 6.09 3.45 8.13 16.00 SH3.txt
11618 2.59 5.49 3.03 6.78 16.00 SH4.txt
11619 2.88 6.19 3.21 7.55 16.00 SH5.txt
11620 3.38 5.70 2.99 7.26 16.00 SH6.txt
11621 2.28 4.04 2.30 5.18 16.00 SH7.txt
Count: 19 Total: 300.25 seconds
Mean: 4.14 5.50 3.45 7.77
Stdev: 1.30 0.86 0.87 1.43
Time to EAV: 0:49
Time to ELV: 3:18
A(8): #VALUE!
25%ile 3.37 4.96 2.94 6.98
Median: 3.89 5.49 3.21 7.45
75%ile 4.38 5.99 4.07 8.28
IQ range 1.01 1.04 1.13 1.30
Time to EAV: 0:54
Time to ELV: 3:36
A(8): #VALUE!
Time-weighted mean: 4.11 5.49 3.44 7.75
Stdev: 1.58 1.52 1.16 2.26 V2.2 April 2012
Highest hand ahw
7.8 ± 1.4 m/s²
8.3m/s²
Highest hand 75%ile
60
Site 1 – Tool C
Dateofentrytodatabase:
PrintDate 5-Jul-13
MainID: 1666
DateOfVisit: 29/03/12
LocationName: York college
Occupation: stone mason
Process: Chiselling limestone
ProcessNotes:
MachineModel: BV InsertedToolType:
MachineModifications: InsertedToolPhotoDirectoryName:Photos\York college
MachineSize: DataSource:
MachineWeight(kg):
MachineOperatingPressure: 5 bar HSLReportNumber:
MachineSpeed(impacts/min): HSLReportDirectoryName:
MachineSpeed(revs/min):
MachinePower: ShotsPerDay:
MachinePowerSource: Pneumatic DailyExposureTime:
MachinePhotoDirName: Checked2012Initials: SMH
InsertedToolCategoryID: 1
Tool body (m/s²) Chisel sleeve (m/s²)
Results_
MainID:
ResultsID
:
x-axis y-axis z-axis ahv x-axis y-axis z-axis ahv Measure-
ment
time (s)
No.
Shots in
Meas.
Source file name
1666 11577 1.19 5.09 2.40 5.75 8.49 2.98 3.07 9.51 16.00 GH1.txt
11578 1.39 4.51 2.36 5.28 8.15 4.76 3.44 10.04 16.00 GH2.txt
11579 1.50 4.33 2.26 5.11 8.26 4.96 2.25 9.89 16.00 GH3.txt
11580 1.62 3.86 2.11 4.69 10.44 4.04 2.76 11.53 16.00 GH4.txt
11581 1.88 4.73 2.11 5.51 10.28 4.01 2.93 11.42 16.00 GH5.txt
11582 1.46 3.18 1.76 3.92 5.68 4.42 2.61 7.66 16.00 MM1.txt
11583 1.50 3.38 1.74 4.08 6.66 4.96 2.47 8.67 16.00 MM2.txt
11584 1.29 3.14 1.59 3.75 5.15 4.22 2.57 7.14 16.00 MM3.txt
11585 1.39 4.08 1.75 4.65 6.34 4.33 2.78 8.16 16.00 MM4.txt
11586 1.46 3.89 1.42 4.39 4.66 3.71 2.22 6.36 16.00 MM5.txt
11587 2.59 5.23 0.93 5.91 7.25 3.91 2.72 8.67 16.00 PH1.txt
11588 2.16 5.56 1.26 6.10 6.71 7.71 2.94 10.63 16.00 PH2.txt
11589 2.59 6.07 1.51 6.77 7.39 4.76 3.16 9.34 16.00 PH3.txt
11590 2.20 6.74 1.43 7.23 6.97 6.09 3.32 9.84 16.00 PH4.txt
11591 1.82 5.95 1.31 6.36 8.08 6.81 3.20 11.04 16.00 PH5.txt
11592 1.56 4.92 2.49 5.73 8.70 4.08 2.18 9.85 16.00 SH1.txt
11593 1.32 6.03 2.63 6.71 9.23 4.13 2.32 10.38 16.00 SH2.txt
11594 1.29 5.90 2.48 6.53 8.61 4.35 2.32 9.92 16.00 SH3.txt
11595 1.47 6.15 2.45 6.78 8.28 4.43 2.38 9.69 16.00 SH4.txt
11596 1.34 5.78 2.38 6.39 7.61 4.08 2.37 8.96 16.00 SH5.txt
Count: 20 Total: 320.00 seconds
Mean: 1.65 4.93 1.92 5.58 7.65 4.64 2.70 9.43
Stdev: 0.42 1.09 0.51 1.06 1.53 1.09 0.39 1.36
Time to EAV: 1:36 0:33
Time to ELV: 6:24 2:14
A(8): #VALUE! #VALUE!
25%ile 1.37 4.03 1.49 4.68 6.70 4.07 2.36 8.67
Median: 1.48 5.00 1.93 5.74 7.85 4.34 2.66 9.76
75%ile 1.84 5.91 2.38 6.43 8.52 4.81 2.97 10.12
IQ range 0.46 1.88 0.89 1.75 1.82 0.74 0.62 1.46
Time to EAV: 1:31 0:31
Time to ELV: 6:04 2:05
A(8): #VALUE! #VALUE!
Time-weighted mean: 1.65 4.93 1.92 5.58 7.65 4.64 2.70 9.43
Stdev: 0.55 1.53 0.66 1.62 2.27 1.49 0.72 2.49 V2.2 April 2012
Highest hand ahw
9.4 ± 1.4 m/s²
10.1m/s²
Highest hand 75%ile
61
D.2
Site 2 – Tool A
Dateofentrytodatabase: 24-Apr-13
PrintDate 5-Jul-13
MainID: 1673
DateOfVisit: 17/04/13
LocationName: Collins and Curtis
Occupation: stone mason
Process: chiseling stone
ProcessNotes:
MachineModel: 6mm chisel InsertedToolType: Vibration reduced sleeve
MachineModifications: InsertedToolPhotoDirectoryName:Photos\Ipswich
MachineSize: DataSource:
MachineWeight(kg):
MachineOperatingPressure: HSLReportNumber:
MachineSpeed(impacts/min): HSLReportDirectoryName:
MachineSpeed(revs/min):
MachinePower: ShotsPerDay:
MachinePowerSource: DailyExposureTime:
MachinePhotoDirName: Checked2012Initials: SMH
InsertedToolCategoryID: 1
Front hand (m/s²) 0 (m/s²)
Results_
MainID:
ResultsID
:
x-axis y-axis z-axis ahv ahv Measure-
ment
time (s)
No.
Shots in
Meas.
Source file name
1673 11691 4.40 22.71 8.07 24.51 58.75 6mm viprotech ian1.txt
11692 5.24 21.32 7.90 23.33 63.00 6mm viprotech ian2.txt
11693 4.63 18.43 6.00 19.93 43.25 6mm viprotech mike1.txt
11694 4.92 19.48 6.43 21.09 61.00 6mm viprotech mike 2.txt
11696 4.64 19.06 5.47 20.37 57.75 6mm viprotech vince2.txt
Count: 5 Total: 283.75 seconds
Mean: 4.77 20.20 6.77 21.84
Stdev: 0.32 1.77 1.16 1.98
Time to EAV: 0:06
Time to ELV: 0:25
A(8): #VALUE!
25%ile 4.63 19.06 6.00 20.37
Median: 4.64 19.48 6.43 21.09
75%ile 4.92 21.32 7.90 23.33
IQ range 0.29 2.25 1.90 2.96
Time to EAV: 0:06
Time to ELV: 0:26
A(8): #VALUE!
Time-weighted mean: 4.78 20.31 6.83 21.97
Stdev: 2.16 9.22 3.23 9.98 V2.2 April 2012
Highest hand ahw
21.8 ± 2.0 m/s²
23.3m/s²
Highest hand 75%ile
62
Site 2 – Tool A
Dateofentrytodatabase: 24-Apr-13
PrintDate 5-Jul-13
MainID: 1683
DateOfVisit: 17/04/13
LocationName: Collins and Curtis
Occupation: stone mason
Process: chiseling stone
ProcessNotes:
MachineModel: WSH 319 InsertedToolType: Vibration reduced sleeve
MachineModifications: InsertedToolPhotoDirectoryName:Photos\Ipswich
MachineSize: DataSource:
MachineWeight(kg): 2
MachineOperatingPressure: HSLReportNumber:
MachineSpeed(impacts/min): HSLReportDirectoryName:
MachineSpeed(revs/min):
MachinePower: ShotsPerDay:
MachinePowerSource: Pneumatic DailyExposureTime:
MachinePhotoDirName: Checked2012Initials: SMH
InsertedToolCategoryID: 1
Throttle hand (m/s²)
Results_
MainID:
ResultsID
:
x-axis y-axis z-axis ahv Measure-
ment
time (s)
No.
Shots in
Meas.
Source file name
1683 11697 13.73 5.08 2.71 14.89 58.75 6mm viprotech ian1.txt
11698 13.57 4.68 2.67 14.60 63.00 6mm viprotech ian2.txt
11699 12.40 4.32 2.68 13.40 43.25 6mm viprotech mike1.txt
11700 11.52 4.62 2.94 12.75 61.00 6mm viprotech mike 2.txt
11701 11.62 3.55 2.54 12.41 45.25 6mm viprotech vince1.txt
11702 9.62 3.54 2.33 10.51 57.75 6mm viprotech vince2.txt
Count: 6 Total: 329.00 seconds
Mean: 12.08 4.30 2.64 13.09
Stdev: 1.53 0.63 0.20 1.60
Time to EAV: 0:17
Time to ELV: 1:09
A(8): #VALUE!
25%ile 11.54 3.74 2.57 12.50
Median: 12.01 4.47 2.67 13.08
75%ile 13.28 4.66 2.70 14.30
IQ range 1.73 0.92 0.13 1.80
Time to EAV: 0:17
Time to ELV: 1:10
A(8): #VALUE!
Time-weighted mean: 12.10 4.34 2.65 13.13
Stdev: 5.13 1.86 1.10 5.56 V2.2 April 2012
Highest hand ahw
13.1 ± 1.6 m/s²
Stone worked is Portland base bed.
14.3m/s²
Highest hand 75%ile
63
Site 2 – Tool A
Dateofentrytodatabase: 24-Apr-13
PrintDate 5-Jul-13
MainID: 1684
DateOfVisit: 17/04/13
LocationName: Collins and Curtis
Occupation: stone mason
Process: chiseling stone
ProcessNotes:
MachineModel: Claw InsertedToolType: Vibration reduced sleeve
MachineModifications: InsertedToolPhotoDirectoryName:Photos\Ipswich
MachineSize: DataSource:
MachineWeight(kg):
MachineOperatingPressure: HSLReportNumber:
MachineSpeed(impacts/min): HSLReportDirectoryName:
MachineSpeed(revs/min):
MachinePower: ShotsPerDay:
MachinePowerSource: DailyExposureTime:
MachinePhotoDirName: Checked2012Initials: SMH
InsertedToolCategoryID: 1
Front hand (m/s²) 0 (m/s²)
Results_
MainID:
ResultsID
:
x-axis y-axis z-axis ahv ahv Measure-
ment
time (s)
No.
Shots in
Meas.
Source file name
1684 11703 6.81 7.72 8.67 13.46 46.50 Ian claw1.txt
11704 10.51 8.18 8.88 16.01 31.00 Ian claw 2.txt
11705 6.35 6.82 7.68 12.07 31.25 Mike claw 1.txt
11706 8.78 9.76 8.13 15.44 30.25 mike claw 2.txt
11707 5.69 10.12 8.59 14.44 27.50 Vince claw 1.txt
11708 5.85 10.94 8.77 15.20 46.50 vince claw 2.txt
Count: 6 Total: 213.00 seconds
Mean: 7.33 8.92 8.45 14.44
Stdev: 1.91 1.59 0.46 1.46
Time to EAV: 0:14
Time to ELV: 0:57
A(8): #VALUE!
25%ile 5.98 7.84 8.24 13.71
Median: 6.58 8.97 8.63 14.82
75%ile 8.29 10.03 8.74 15.38
IQ range 2.31 2.19 0.50 1.68
Time to EAV: 0:13
Time to ELV: 0:54
A(8): #VALUE!
Time-weighted mean: 7.21 8.96 8.49 14.41
Stdev: 3.42 3.93 3.49 6.03 V2.2 April 2012
Highest hand ahw
14.4 ± 1.5 m/s²
15.4m/s²
Highest hand 75%ile
64
Site 2 – Tool A
Dateofentrytodatabase: 24-Apr-13
PrintDate 5-Jul-13
MainID: 1685
DateOfVisit: 17/04/13
LocationName: Collins and Curtis
Occupation: stone mason
Process: chiseling stone
ProcessNotes:
MachineModel: WSH 319 InsertedToolType: Vibration reduced sleeve
MachineModifications: InsertedToolPhotoDirectoryName:Photos\Ipswich
MachineSize: DataSource:
MachineWeight(kg): 2
MachineOperatingPressure: HSLReportNumber:
MachineSpeed(impacts/min): HSLReportDirectoryName:
MachineSpeed(revs/min):
MachinePower: ShotsPerDay:
MachinePowerSource: Pneumatic DailyExposureTime:
MachinePhotoDirName: Checked2012Initials: SMH
InsertedToolCategoryID: 1
Throttle (m/s²)
Results_
MainID:
ResultsID
:
x-axis y-axis z-axis ahv Measure-
ment
time (s)
No.
Shots in
Meas.
Source file name
1685 11709 14.68 5.71 2.19 15.91 46.50 Ian claw1.txt
11710 14.38 6.16 2.17 15.79 31.00 Ian claw 2.txt
11711 11.23 5.07 2.50 12.57 31.25 Mike claw 1.txt
11712 11.03 5.56 2.44 12.59 30.25 mike claw 2.txt
11713 11.49 5.38 2.04 12.85 27.50 Vince claw 1.txt
11714 11.16 5.76 1.88 12.70 46.50 vince claw 2.txt
Count: 6 Total: 213.00 seconds
Mean: 12.33 5.61 2.20 13.74
Stdev: 1.72 0.37 0.24 1.64
Time to EAV: 0:15
Time to ELV: 1:03
A(8): #VALUE!
25%ile 11.18 5.42 2.07 12.62
Median: 11.36 5.64 2.18 12.78
75%ile 13.66 5.75 2.38 15.06
IQ range 2.48 0.32 0.30 2.44
Time to EAV: 0:18
Time to ELV: 1:13
A(8): #VALUE!
Time-weighted mean: 12.43 5.63 2.18 13.84
Stdev: 5.31 2.32 0.92 5.84 V2.2 April 2012
Highest hand ahw
13.7 ± 1.6 m/s²
15.1m/s²
Highest hand 75%ile
65
Site 2 – Tool B
Dateofentrytodatabase: 24-Apr-13
PrintDate 5-Jul-13
MainID: 1686
DateOfVisit: 17/04/13
LocationName: Collins and Curtis
Occupation: stone mason
Process: chiseling stone
ProcessNotes:
MachineModel: 6mm chisel InsertedToolType: Vibration reduced sleeve
MachineModifications: InsertedToolPhotoDirectoryName:Photos\Ipswich
MachineSize: DataSource:
MachineWeight(kg):
MachineOperatingPressure: HSLReportNumber:
MachineSpeed(impacts/min): HSLReportDirectoryName:
MachineSpeed(revs/min):
MachinePower: ShotsPerDay:
MachinePowerSource: DailyExposureTime:
MachinePhotoDirName: Checked2012Initials: SMH
InsertedToolCategoryID: 1
Front hand (m/s²) 0 (m/s²)
Results_
MainID:
ResultsID
:
x-axis y-axis z-axis ahv ahv Measure-
ment
time (s)
No.
Shots in
Meas.
Source file name
1686 11722 3.41 6.27 3.25 7.84 30.75 vince 6mm1.txt
11723 3.22 6.99 3.07 8.29 29.50 vince 6mm3.txt
11725 2.97 6.97 3.02 8.15 28.00 vince 6mm4.txt
Count: 3 Total: 88.25 seconds
Mean: 3.20 6.75 3.11 8.10
Stdev: 0.22 0.41 0.12 0.23
Time to EAV: 0:45
Time to ELV: 3:03
A(8): #VALUE!
25%ile 3.10 6.62 3.04 8.00
Median: 3.22 6.97 3.07 8.15
75%ile 3.32 6.98 3.16 8.22
IQ range 0.22 0.36 0.12 0.22
Time to EAV: 0:45
Time to ELV: 3:00
A(8): #VALUE!
Time-weighted mean: 3.21 6.73 3.11 8.09
Stdev: 1.86 3.90 1.80 4.67 V2.2 April 2012
Highest hand ahw
8.1 ± 0.2 m/s²
8.2m/s²
Highest hand 75%ile
66
Site 2 – Tool B
Dateofentrytodatabase: 24-Apr-13
PrintDate 5-Jul-13
MainID: 1687
DateOfVisit: 17/04/13
LocationName: Collins and Curtis
Occupation: stone mason
Process: chiseling stone
ProcessNotes:
MachineModel: 714 InsertedToolType: Vibration reduced sleeve
MachineModifications: InsertedToolPhotoDirectoryName:Photos\Ipswich
MachineSize: DataSource:
MachineWeight(kg):
MachineOperatingPressure: HSLReportNumber:
MachineSpeed(impacts/min): HSLReportDirectoryName:
MachineSpeed(revs/min):
MachinePower: ShotsPerDay:
MachinePowerSource: Pneumatic DailyExposureTime:
MachinePhotoDirName: Checked2012Initials: SMH
InsertedToolCategoryID: 1
Throttle (m/s²)
Results_
MainID:
ResultsID
:
x-axis y-axis z-axis ahv Measure-
ment
time (s)
No.
Shots in
Meas.
Source file name
1687 11726 12.28 6.77 1.99 14.16 29.75 ian 6mm 1.txt
11727 9.99 5.87 2.07 11.77 30.50 ian 6mm 2.txt
11728 11.98 6.61 2.89 13.98 27.50 mike 6mm1.txt
11729 10.46 5.55 2.49 12.10 31.25 mike 6mm2.txt
11730 6.49 4.02 1.22 7.74 30.75 vince 6mm1.txt
11733 5.92 3.50 1.19 6.98 28.00 vince 6mm4.txt
Count: 6 Total: 177.75 seconds
Mean: 9.52 5.39 1.98 11.12
Stdev: 2.71 1.35 0.68 3.08
Time to EAV: 0:24
Time to ELV: 1:37
A(8): #VALUE!
25%ile 7.37 4.40 1.41 8.75
Median: 10.23 5.71 2.03 11.94
75%ile 11.60 6.42 2.38 13.51
IQ range 4.23 2.02 0.97 4.77
Time to EAV: 0:21
Time to ELV: 1:24
A(8): #VALUE!
Time-weighted mean: 9.52 5.39 1.97 11.12
Stdev: 4.61 2.52 1.01 5.34 V2.2 April 2012
Highest hand ahw
11.1 ± 3.1 m/s²
13.5m/s²
Highest hand 75%ile
67
Site 2 – Tool B
Dateofentrytodatabase: 24-Apr-13
PrintDate 5-Jul-13
MainID: 1688
DateOfVisit: 17/04/13
LocationName: Collins and Curtis
Occupation: stone mason
Process: chiseling stone
ProcessNotes:
MachineModel: Claw InsertedToolType: Vibration reduced sleeve
MachineModifications: InsertedToolPhotoDirectoryName:Photos\Ipswich
MachineSize: DataSource:
MachineWeight(kg):
MachineOperatingPressure: HSLReportNumber:
MachineSpeed(impacts/min): HSLReportDirectoryName:
MachineSpeed(revs/min):
MachinePower: ShotsPerDay:
MachinePowerSource: DailyExposureTime:
MachinePhotoDirName: Checked2012Initials: SMH
InsertedToolCategoryID: 1
Front hand (m/s²) 0 (m/s²)
Results_
MainID:
ResultsID
:
x-axis y-axis z-axis ahv ahv Measure-
ment
time (s)
No.
Shots in
Meas.
Source file name
1688 11738 3.38 4.46 3.10 6.40 30.50 mike claw 1.txt
11743 3.24 2.46 3.51 5.37 30.50 vince claw 3.txt
Count: 2 Total: 61.00 seconds
Mean: 3.31 3.46 3.31 5.88
Stdev: 0.10 1.41 0.29 0.73
Time to EAV: 1:26
Time to ELV: 5:46
A(8): #VALUE!
25%ile 3.27 2.96 3.20 5.63
Median: 3.31 3.46 3.31 5.88
75%ile 3.34 3.96 3.41 6.14
IQ range 0.07 1.00 0.20 0.51
Time to EAV: 1:26
Time to ELV: 5:46
A(8): #VALUE!
Time-weighted mean: 3.31 3.46 3.31 5.88
Stdev: 2.34 2.64 2.35 4.19 V2.2 April 2012
Highest hand ahw
5.9 ± 0.7 m/s²
6.1m/s²
Highest hand 75%ile
68
Site 2 – Tool B
Dateofentrytodatabase: 24-Apr-13
PrintDate 5-Jul-13
MainID: 1689
DateOfVisit: 17/04/13
LocationName: Collins and Curtis
Occupation: stone mason
Process: chiseling stone
ProcessNotes:
MachineModel: 714 InsertedToolType: Vibration reduced sleeve
MachineModifications: InsertedToolPhotoDirectoryName:Photos\Ipswich
MachineSize: DataSource:
MachineWeight(kg):
MachineOperatingPressure: HSLReportNumber:
MachineSpeed(impacts/min): HSLReportDirectoryName:
MachineSpeed(revs/min):
MachinePower: ShotsPerDay:
MachinePowerSource: Pneumatic DailyExposureTime:
MachinePhotoDirName: Photos\Ipswich Checked2012Initials: SMH
InsertedToolCategoryID: 1
Throttle (m/s²)
Results_
MainID:
ResultsID
:
x-axis y-axis z-axis ahv Measure-
ment
time (s)
No.
Shots in
Meas.
Source file name
1689 11746 9.24 6.09 1.49 11.17 34.00 ian claw 3.txt
11747 7.88 5.81 1.32 9.88 31.75 ian claw 4.txt
11748 9.25 5.55 1.93 10.96 30.50 mike claw 1.txt
11749 7.77 4.59 1.51 9.15 29.75 mike claw 2.txt
11752 6.44 3.98 1.25 7.67 30.25 vince claw 2.txt
11753 5.10 3.59 1.36 6.39 30.50 vince claw 3.txt
Count: 6 Total: 186.75 seconds
Mean: 7.61 4.94 1.48 9.20
Stdev: 1.62 1.03 0.24 1.88
Time to EAV: 0:35
Time to ELV: 2:21
A(8): #VALUE!
25%ile 6.77 4.13 1.33 8.04
Median: 7.82 5.07 1.43 9.51
75%ile 8.90 5.75 1.51 10.69
IQ range 2.13 1.61 0.18 2.65
Time to EAV: 0:33
Time to ELV: 2:12
A(8): #VALUE!
Time-weighted mean: 7.65 4.97 1.48 9.25
Stdev: 3.45 2.24 0.64 4.15 V2.2 April 2012
Highest hand ahw
9.2 ± 1.9 m/s²
10.7m/s²
Highest hand 75%ile
69
Site 2 – Tool C
Dateofentrytodatabase: 24-Apr-13
PrintDate 5-Jul-13
MainID: 1690
DateOfVisit: 17/04/13
LocationName: Collins and Curtis
Occupation: stone mason
Process: chiseling stone
ProcessNotes:
MachineModel: chisel sleeve InsertedToolType: Vibration reduced sleeve
MachineModifications: InsertedToolPhotoDirectoryName:Photos\Ipswich
MachineSize: DataSource:
MachineWeight(kg):
MachineOperatingPressure: HSLReportNumber:
MachineSpeed(impacts/min): HSLReportDirectoryName:
MachineSpeed(revs/min):
MachinePower: ShotsPerDay:
MachinePowerSource: DailyExposureTime:
MachinePhotoDirName: Checked2012Initials: SMH
InsertedToolCategoryID: 1
Front hand (m/s²) 0 (m/s²)
Results_
MainID:
ResultsID
:
x-axis y-axis z-axis ahv ahv Measure-
ment
time (s)
No.
Shots in
Meas.
Source file name
1690 11754 4.96 5.67 3.96 8.51 30.25 8mm ian 1.txt
11755 4.88 5.88 4.24 8.74 30.75 8mm ian 2.txt
11756 2.73 4.24 3.15 5.95 30.50 8mm mike1.txt
11757 2.93 3.47 2.78 5.33 31.00 8mm mike2.txt
11758 3.58 4.55 3.16 6.60 30.50 8mm mike3.txt
11759 1.94 2.96 2.94 4.60 36.25 8mm vince 1 not holding sleeve.txt
11760 2.13 3.53 2.77 4.96 30.25 8mm vince 2.txt
11761 2.08 2.80 2.91 4.54 29.75 8mm vince 3.txt
Count: 8 Total: 249.25 seconds
Mean: 3.16 4.14 3.24 6.15
Stdev: 1.22 1.17 0.56 1.67
Time to EAV: 1:19
Time to ELV: 5:16
A(8): #VALUE!
25%ile 2.12 3.34 2.88 4.87
Median: 2.83 3.89 3.04 5.64
75%ile 3.91 4.83 3.36 7.08
IQ range 1.79 1.49 0.48 2.21
Time to EAV: 1:34
Time to ELV: 6:17
A(8): #VALUE!
Time-weighted mean: 3.13 4.11 3.23 6.12
Stdev: 1.59 1.82 1.26 2.67 V2.2 April 2012
Highest hand ahw
6.2 ± 1.7 m/s²
7.1m/s²
Highest hand 75%ile
70
Site 2 – Tool C
Dateofentrytodatabase: 24-Apr-13
PrintDate 5-Jul-13
MainID: 1691
DateOfVisit: 17/04/13
LocationName: Collins and Curtis
Occupation: stone mason
Process: chiseling stone
ProcessNotes:
MachineModel: BV217 InsertedToolType: Vibration reduced sleeve
MachineModifications: InsertedToolPhotoDirectoryName:Photos\Ipswich
MachineSize: DataSource:
MachineWeight(kg):
MachineOperatingPressure: HSLReportNumber:
MachineSpeed(impacts/min): HSLReportDirectoryName:
MachineSpeed(revs/min):
MachinePower: ShotsPerDay:
MachinePowerSource: Pneumatic DailyExposureTime:
MachinePhotoDirName: Checked2012Initials: SMH
InsertedToolCategoryID: 1
Tool body (m/s²)
Results_
MainID:
ResultsID
:
x-axis y-axis z-axis ahv Measure-
ment
time (s)
No.
Shots in
Meas.
Source file name
1691 11762 2.22 6.30 2.07 7.00 30.25 8mm ian 1.txt
11763 2.55 5.69 2.00 6.55 30.75 8mm ian 2.txt
11764 1.93 4.07 1.56 4.77 30.50 8mm mike1.txt
11765 1.77 3.54 1.17 4.13 31.00 8mm mike2.txt
11766 1.93 5.68 1.33 6.14 30.50 8mm mike3.txt
11767 1.71 4.34 1.16 4.81 36.25 8mm vince 1 not holding sleeve.txt
11768 1.70 5.12 1.25 5.53 30.25 8mm vince 2.txt
11769 1.52 4.07 1.36 4.56 29.75 8mm vince 3.txt
Count: 8 Total: 249.25 seconds
Mean: 1.92 4.85 1.49 5.43
Stdev: 0.33 0.98 0.36 1.04
Time to EAV: 1:41
Time to ELV: 6:46
A(8): #VALUE!
25%ile 1.70 4.07 1.23 4.71
Median: 1.85 4.73 1.35 5.17
75%ile 2.00 5.68 1.67 6.24
IQ range 0.30 1.61 0.44 1.53
Time to EAV: 1:52
Time to ELV: 7:29
A(8): #VALUE!
Time-weighted mean: 1.91 4.84 1.48 5.42
Stdev: 0.74 1.94 0.62 2.15 V2.2 April 2012
Highest hand ahw
5.4 ± 1.0 m/s²
6.2m/s²
Highest hand 75%ile
71
Site 2 – Tool C
Dateofentrytodatabase: 24-Apr-13
PrintDate 5-Jul-13
MainID: 1692
DateOfVisit: 17/04/13
LocationName: Collins and Curtis
Occupation: stone mason
Process: chiseling stone
ProcessNotes:
MachineModel: chisel sleeve InsertedToolType: Vibration reduced sleeve
MachineModifications: InsertedToolPhotoDirectoryName:Photos\Ipswich
MachineSize: DataSource:
MachineWeight(kg):
MachineOperatingPressure: HSLReportNumber:
MachineSpeed(impacts/min): HSLReportDirectoryName:
MachineSpeed(revs/min):
MachinePower: ShotsPerDay:
MachinePowerSource: DailyExposureTime:
MachinePhotoDirName: Checked2012Initials: SMH
InsertedToolCategoryID: 1
Front hand (m/s²) 0 (m/s²)
Results_
MainID:
ResultsID
:
x-axis y-axis z-axis ahv ahv Measure-
ment
time (s)
No.
Shots in
Meas.
Source file name
1692 11770 7.11 6.56 3.17 10.18 29.75 20mm ian 3.txt
11771 5.64 6.21 3.25 8.99 32.00 20mm ian 4.txt
11772 5.33 3.93 3.83 7.65 29.50 20mm mike 4.txt
11773 4.55 4.17 3.58 7.14 28.75 20mm mike 5.txt
11774 5.01 4.56 4.23 7.99 29.50 20mm mike 6.txt
11775 2.41 2.04 2.49 4.02 31.25 20mm vince 4.txt
11776 3.25 2.71 2.61 4.97 31.50 20mm vince 5.txt
11777 3.56 3.03 3.14 5.63 30.75 20mm vince 6.txt
Count: 8 Total: 243.00 seconds
Mean: 4.61 4.15 3.29 7.07
Stdev: 1.50 1.61 0.59 2.08
Time to EAV: 1:00
Time to ELV: 4:00
A(8): #VALUE!
25%ile 3.49 2.95 3.01 5.47
Median: 4.78 4.05 3.21 7.39
75%ile 5.41 4.97 3.65 8.24
IQ range 1.92 2.02 0.64 2.77
Time to EAV: 0:54
Time to ELV: 3:39
A(8): #VALUE!
Time-weighted mean: 4.59 4.14 3.27 7.05
Stdev: 2.15 2.10 1.28 3.16 V2.2 April 2012
Highest hand ahw
7.1 ± 2.1 m/s²
8.2m/s²
Highest hand 75%ile
72
Site 2 – Tool C
Dateofentrytodatabase: 24-Apr-13
PrintDate 5-Jul-13
MainID: 1693
DateOfVisit: 17/04/13
LocationName: Collins and Curtis
Occupation: stone mason
Process: chiseling stone
ProcessNotes:
MachineModel: BV211 InsertedToolType: Vibration reduced sleeve
MachineModifications: InsertedToolPhotoDirectoryName:Photos\Ipswich
MachineSize: DataSource:
MachineWeight(kg):
MachineOperatingPressure: HSLReportNumber:
MachineSpeed(impacts/min): HSLReportDirectoryName:
MachineSpeed(revs/min):
MachinePower: ShotsPerDay:
MachinePowerSource: Pneumatic DailyExposureTime:
MachinePhotoDirName: Checked2012Initials: SMH
InsertedToolCategoryID: 1
Tool body (m/s²)
Results_
MainID:
ResultsID
:
x-axis y-axis z-axis ahv Measure-
ment
time (s)
No.
Shots in
Meas.
Source file name
1693 11778 1.92 5.99 2.94 6.94 29.75 20mm ian 3.txt
11779 2.18 6.09 2.82 7.05 32.00 20mm ian 4.txt
11780 3.12 5.49 2.03 6.63 29.50 20mm mike 4.txt
11781 2.71 6.63 1.36 7.29 28.75 20mm mike 5.txt
11782 3.01 7.43 1.51 8.16 29.50 20mm mike 6.txt
11783 1.15 1.42 1.10 2.13 31.25 20mm vince 4.txt
11784 1.41 2.07 1.07 2.72 31.50 20mm vince 5.txt
11785 1.43 3.16 1.40 3.74 30.75 20mm vince 6.txt
Count: 8 Total: 243.00 seconds
Mean: 2.12 4.79 1.78 5.58
Stdev: 0.77 2.25 0.74 2.33
Time to EAV: 1:36
Time to ELV: 6:24
A(8): #VALUE!
25%ile 1.43 2.89 1.30 3.49
Median: 2.05 5.74 1.45 6.79
75%ile 2.78 6.22 2.23 7.11
IQ range 1.36 3.34 0.93 3.63
Time to EAV: 1:05
Time to ELV: 4:20
A(8): #VALUE!
Time-weighted mean: 2.10 4.74 1.78 5.54
Stdev: 1.03 2.69 0.94 2.93 V2.2 April 2012
Highest hand ahw
5.6 ± 2.3 m/s²
7.1m/s²
Highest hand 75%ile
73
Site 2 – Tool D
Dateofentrytodatabase: 24-Apr-13
PrintDate 5-Jul-13
MainID: 1694
DateOfVisit: 17/04/13
LocationName: Collins and Curtis
Occupation: stone mason
Process: chiseling stone
ProcessNotes:
MachineModel: 6mm chisel InsertedToolType: Vibration reduced sleeve
MachineModifications: InsertedToolPhotoDirectoryName:Photos\Ipswich
MachineSize: DataSource:
MachineWeight(kg):
MachineOperatingPressure: HSLReportNumber:
MachineSpeed(impacts/min): HSLReportDirectoryName:
MachineSpeed(revs/min):
MachinePower: ShotsPerDay:
MachinePowerSource: DailyExposureTime:
MachinePhotoDirName: Checked2012Initials: SMH
InsertedToolCategoryID: 1
Front hand (m/s²) 0 (m/s²)
Results_
MainID:
ResultsID
:
x-axis y-axis z-axis ahv ahv Measure-
ment
time (s)
No.
Shots in
Meas.
Source file name
1694 11786 4.73 14.64 8.63 17.64 30.50 ian 6mm1.txt
11788 5.37 14.58 9.06 17.99 29.50 ian 6mm2.txt
11789 3.49 14.89 7.29 16.95 30.75 mike 6mm 1.txt
11790 3.85 15.56 8.22 18.02 31.25 mike 6mm 2.txt
11791 3.93 17.47 8.46 19.81 30.75 vince 6mm1.txt
11792 4.41 18.48 8.83 20.95 30.75 vince 6mm2.txt
Count: 6 Total: 183.50 seconds
Mean: 4.30 15.94 8.42 18.56
Stdev: 0.68 1.65 0.62 1.51
Time to EAV: 0:08
Time to ELV: 0:34
A(8): #VALUE!
25%ile 3.87 14.70 8.28 17.73
Median: 4.17 15.23 8.55 18.00
75%ile 4.65 16.99 8.78 19.36
IQ range 0.78 2.29 0.50 1.63
Time to EAV: 0:09
Time to ELV: 0:37
A(8): #VALUE!
Time-weighted mean: 4.29 15.95 8.41 18.56
Stdev: 1.86 6.68 3.48 7.70 V2.2 April 2012
Highest hand ahw
18.6 ± 1.5 m/s²
19.4m/s²
Highest hand 75%ile
74
Site 2 – Tool D
Dateofentrytodatabase: 24-Apr-13
PrintDate 5-Jul-13
MainID: 1695
DateOfVisit: 17/04/13
LocationName: Collins and Curtis
Occupation: stone mason
Process: chiseling stone
ProcessNotes:
MachineModel: D InsertedToolType: Vibration reduced sleeve
MachineModifications: InsertedToolPhotoDirectoryName:Photos\Ipswich
MachineSize: DataSource:
MachineWeight(kg):
MachineOperatingPressure: HSLReportNumber:
MachineSpeed(impacts/min): HSLReportDirectoryName:
MachineSpeed(revs/min):
MachinePower: ShotsPerDay:
MachinePowerSource: Pneumatic DailyExposureTime:
MachinePhotoDirName: Checked2012Initials: SMH
InsertedToolCategoryID: 1
Tool body (m/s²)
Results_
MainID:
ResultsID
:
x-axis y-axis z-axis ahv Measure-
ment
time (s)
No.
Shots in
Meas.
Source file name
1695 11793 1.36 19.24 1.89 19.38 30.50 ian 6mm1.txt
11794 1.39 19.79 1.89 19.92 29.50 ian 6mm2.txt
11795 3.39 23.70 1.06 23.97 30.75 mike 6mm 1.txt
11796 3.41 22.93 1.20 23.22 31.25 mike 6mm 2.txt
11797 1.98 23.33 1.31 23.45 30.75 vince 6mm1.txt
11798 1.47 22.40 1.45 22.49 30.75 vince 6mm2.txt
Count: 6 Total: 183.50 seconds
Mean: 2.17 21.90 1.47 22.07
Stdev: 0.98 1.91 0.35 1.94
Time to EAV: 0:06
Time to ELV: 0:24
A(8): #VALUE!
25%ile 1.41 20.44 1.23 20.57
Median: 1.73 22.67 1.38 22.86
75%ile 3.04 23.23 1.78 23.39
IQ range 1.63 2.79 0.55 2.82
Time to EAV: 0:05
Time to ELV: 0:22
A(8): #VALUE!
Time-weighted mean: 2.18 21.92 1.46 22.09
Stdev: 1.26 9.12 0.68 9.19 V2.2 April 2012
Highest hand ahw
22.1 ± 1.9 m/s²
23.4m/s²
Highest hand 75%ile
75
Site 2 – Tool D
Dateofentrytodatabase: 24-Apr-13
PrintDate 5-Jul-13
MainID: 1697
DateOfVisit: 17/04/13
LocationName: Collins and Curtis
Occupation: stone mason
Process: chiseling stone
ProcessNotes:
MachineModel: Claw InsertedToolType: Vibration reduced sleeve
MachineModifications: InsertedToolPhotoDirectoryName:Photos\Ipswich
MachineSize: DataSource:
MachineWeight(kg):
MachineOperatingPressure: HSLReportNumber:
MachineSpeed(impacts/min): HSLReportDirectoryName:
MachineSpeed(revs/min):
MachinePower: ShotsPerDay:
MachinePowerSource: DailyExposureTime:
MachinePhotoDirName: Checked2012Initials: SMH
InsertedToolCategoryID: 1
Front hand (m/s²) 0 (m/s²)
Results_
MainID:
ResultsID
:
x-axis y-axis z-axis ahv ahv Measure-
ment
time (s)
No.
Shots in
Meas.
Source file name
1697 11799 6.07 7.54 6.50 11.66 30.50 ian claw 1.txt
11800 5.00 5.77 6.72 10.17 30.25 ian claw 2.txt
11801 4.53 6.15 3.74 8.51 29.25 mike claw 1.txt
11802 3.57 5.08 3.12 6.95 29.75 mike claw 3 transducers turned on top.txt
11803 4.60 4.75 4.15 7.81 31.25 vince claw 1.txt
11804 4.79 6.37 3.98 8.90 29.25 vince claw 2.txt
11814 3.63 6.40 3.86 8.31 29.75 vince claw at low pressure.txt
Count: 7 Total: 210.00 seconds
Mean: 4.60 6.01 4.58 8.90
Stdev: 0.85 0.93 1.43 1.57
Time to EAV: 0:37
Time to ELV: 2:31
A(8): #VALUE!
25%ile 4.08 5.42 3.80 8.06
Median: 4.60 6.15 3.98 8.51
75%ile 4.90 6.38 5.33 9.54
IQ range 0.82 0.96 1.53 1.48
Time to EAV: 0:41
Time to ELV: 2:45
A(8): #VALUE!
Time-weighted mean: 4.60 6.00 4.59 8.91
Stdev: 1.91 2.43 2.18 3.67 V2.2 April 2012
Highest hand ahw
8.9 ± 1.6 m/s²
9.5m/s²
Highest hand 75%ile
76
Site 2 – Tool D
Dateofentrytodatabase: 24-Apr-13
PrintDate 5-Jul-13
MainID: 1698
DateOfVisit: 17/04/13
LocationName: Collins and Curtis
Occupation: stone mason
Process: chiseling stone
ProcessNotes:
MachineModel: D InsertedToolType: Vibration reduced sleeve
MachineModifications: InsertedToolPhotoDirectoryName:Photos\Ipswich
MachineSize: DataSource:
MachineWeight(kg):
MachineOperatingPressure: HSLReportNumber:
MachineSpeed(impacts/min): HSLReportDirectoryName:
MachineSpeed(revs/min):
MachinePower: ShotsPerDay:
MachinePowerSource: Pneumatic DailyExposureTime:
MachinePhotoDirName: Checked2012Initials: SMH
InsertedToolCategoryID: 1
Tool body (m/s²)
Results_
MainID:
ResultsID
:
x-axis y-axis z-axis ahv Measure-
ment
time (s)
No.
Shots in
Meas.
Source file name
1698 11806 1.35 22.81 1.32 22.89 30.50 ian claw 1.txt
11807 1.25 23.15 1.19 23.21 30.25 ian claw 2.txt
11808 1.53 12.08 1.38 12.25 29.25 mike claw 1.txt
11809 2.10 11.00 1.40 11.29 30.50 mike claw 2.txt
11810 2.07 15.20 1.80 15.45 29.75 mike claw 3 transducers turned on top.txt
11811 1.78 20.13 1.11 20.24 31.25 vince claw 1.txt
11812 1.83 24.09 1.19 24.19 29.25 vince claw 2.txt
11813 1.58 13.70 1.06 13.83 29.75 vince claw at low pressure.txt
Count: 8 Total: 240.50 seconds
Mean: 1.69 17.77 1.31 17.92
Stdev: 0.31 5.36 0.23 5.30
Time to EAV: 0:09
Time to ELV: 0:37
A(8): #VALUE!
25%ile 1.48 13.29 1.17 13.43
Median: 1.68 17.67 1.26 17.85
75%ile 1.89 22.89 1.39 22.97
IQ range 0.40 9.60 0.21 9.53
Time to EAV: 0:09
Time to ELV: 0:37
A(8): #VALUE!
Time-weighted mean: 1.69 17.79 1.31 17.94
Stdev: 0.66 8.04 0.51 8.05 V2.2 April 2012
Highest hand ahw
17.9 ± 5.3 m/s²
23.0m/s²
Highest hand 75%ile
77
ANNEX E - RESULTS FOR SITE#2’S OWN STONE HAMMERS
Description Attachment Operators Location Individual measurement data
Total values (m/s²)
mean std
dev
upper
quartile
max
In-line traditional
hammer#1
Vibration-reducing
holder and claw
1, 2 and 3 Chisel 5.9 5.6 5.9 5.8 7.3 5.7 6.0 0.6 5.9 7.3
Tool handle 7.4 9 8.8 8.8 7 8.9 8.3 0.9 8.9 9
In-line traditional
hammer#1
Plain chisel 3 Chisel Tool handle 9.1 9.5
In-line traditional
hammer#2
Vibration-reducing
holder and claw
1 Chisel Tool handle 13.3 15.3 14.3 13.2 14.0 1.0 14.6 15.3
In-line traditional
hammer#3
Vibration-reducing
holder and claw
1, 2 and 3 Chisel Tool handle 12.2 12.3 5.6 6 5.5 8.8 8.4 3.2 11.4 12.3
78
ANNEX F - RESULTS OF ANOVA COMPARISONS
79
Table F.1 Results of ANOVA tests on tool bodies
Tool
a e
mis
sio
n v
alu
e
A g
ran
ite
VR
sle
eve
+ c
his
el
A lim
esto
ne
VR
sle
eve +
ch
isel
A g
ran
ite
pla
in c
his
el
A lim
esto
ne
pla
in c
his
el
A g
ran
ite
VR
sle
eve
+ b
ush
ham
me
r
B g
ran
ite
VR
sle
eve
+ c
his
el
B lim
esto
ne
V
R s
lee
ve
+ c
his
el
B g
ran
ite
pla
in c
his
el
B lim
esto
ne
pla
in c
his
el
B g
ran
ite
VR
sle
eve
+ b
ush
ham
me
r
B lim
esto
ne
VR
sle
eve +
bu
sh
ha
mm
er
C g
ran
ite
ow
n s
lee
ve
C lim
esto
ne
ow
n s
leeve
C g
ran
ite
VR
sle
eve
+ b
ush
ham
me
r
C lim
esto
ne
VR
sle
eve
+ b
ush
ha
mm
er
D g
ran
ite
D lim
esto
ne
A granite VR sleeve + 20mm chisel 11.2
A limestone VR sleeve + chisel 11.8 ns
A granite plain chisel 13.83 ns ns
A limestone plain chisel 11.4 ns ns ns
A granite VR sleeve + bush hammer 10.01 ns ns s ns
B granite VR sleeve + chisel 11.81 ns ns ns ns ns
B limestone VR sleeve + chisel 11.37 ns ns ns ns ns ns
B granite plain chisel 19.66 s s s s s s s
B limestone plain chisel 18.07 s s s s s s s ns
B granite VR sleeve + bush hammer 11.49 ns ns ns ns ns ns ns s s
B limestone VR sleeve + bush hammer 10.46 ns ns s ns ns ns ns s s ns
C granite own sleeve 3.94 s s s s s s s s s s s
C limestone own sleeve 3.386 s s s s s s s s s s s ns
C granite VR sleeve + bush hammer 3.74 s s s s s s s s s s s ns ns
C limestone VR sleeve + bush hammer 3.06 s s s s s s s s s s s ns ns ns
D granite 15.74 s s ns s s s s s ns s s s s s s
D limestone 15.93 s s ns s s s s s ns s s s s s s ns
s = significant, ns = not significant
80
Table F.2 Results of ANOVA tests on chisels
Chisel & Holder
a e
mis
sio
n v
alu
e
A g
ran
ite
VR
sle
eve
+ c
his
el
A lim
esto
ne
VR
sle
eve +
ch
isel
A lim
esto
ne
pla
in c
his
el
A g
ran
ite
VR
sle
eve
+ b
ush
ham
me
r
B g
ran
ite
VR
sle
eve
+ c
his
el
B lim
esto
ne
V
R s
lee
ve
+ c
his
el
B g
ran
ite
pla
in c
his
el
B lim
esto
ne
pla
in c
his
el
B g
ran
ite
VR
sle
eve
+ b
ush
ham
me
r
B lim
esto
ne
VR
sle
eve +
bu
sh h
am
me
r
C g
ran
ite
ow
n s
lee
ve
C lim
esto
ne
ow
n s
leeve
C g
ran
ite
VR
sle
eve
+ b
ush
ham
me
r
C lim
esto
ne
VR
sle
eve
+ b
ush h
am
me
r
D g
ran
ite
VR
sle
eve
+ c
his
el
D lim
esto
ne
VR
sle
eve
+ c
his
el
A granite VR sleeve + chisel 14.5
A limestone VR sleeve + chisel 15.5 ns
A limestone plain chisel 26.6 s s
A granite VR sleeve + bush hammer 9.0 s s s
B granite VR sleeve + chisel 10.9 s s s ns
B limestone VR sleeve + chisel 10.5 s s s ns ns
B granite plain chisel 18.1 s ns s s s s
B limestone plain chisel 12.0 ns s s ns ns ns s
B granite VR sleeve + bush hammer 7.8 s s s ns s ns s s
B limestone VR sleeve + bush hammer 7.1 s s s ns s s s s ns
C granite own sleeve 9.9 s s s ns ns ns s ns ns ns
C limestone own sleeve 6.0 s s s s s s s s ns ns s
C granite VR sleeve + bush hammer 11.9 ns s s ns ns ns s ns s s ns s
C limestone VR sleeve + bush hammer 8.1 s s s ns ns ns s s ns ns ns s s
D granite VR sleeve + chisel 11.0 s s s ns ns ns s ns s s ns ns ns ns
D limestone VR sleeve + chisel 8.2 s s s ns ns ns s s ns ns ns s s ns ns
s = significant, ns = not significant
81
ANNEX G - POTENTIAL INFLUENCES ON TOOL BODY EMISSION MEASUREMENTS
G.1 INFLUENCE OF HARDNESS OF WORK PIECE
Two different work pieces (stone types) were used for the emission tests. Both types of work
piece were within (or almost within) the criteria for the apparent specific for the work piece, but
they had very different ratings on the Mohs hardness scale; granite has a Mohs value of 6-7 and
limestone has a Mohs value of 3. Emission test results were compared to investigate whether the
use of a softer material, in this case limestone, could cause differences in emission test results.
Figure G.1 shows the a emission values obtained from measurements on each of the 4 tools
when used on the 2 types of work piece. Each of the columns represents the mean a emission
value for the tool named on the x-axis. Clear columns represent the results on limestone and
shaded columns represent results on granite. The error bars indicate the K value for each set of
measurements. In each test, the stone hammers were used with a vibration-reducing chisel
holder to keep operator exposures to a minimum. Although use of the holder has the potential to
affect the vibration magnitude on the tool body, the comparison being made is between the two
types of work piece in this instance.
Figure G.1 Comparison of the HSE measured a (+K) emission test results for the four hammers on limestone and granite work pieces
ANOVA comparisons showed that there were no significant differences between a emission
values measured using the two work pieces with different hardness (Mohs) values for any of the
0
5
10
15
20
25
A B C D
Fre
qu
en
cy-w
eig
hte
d a
cce
lera
tio
n (
m/s
²)
Tool
Limestone Granite
82
four tools tested. This implies that the hardness of the material being carved is not a major
influencing factor in determining the vibration emission on the tool body.
It is important to bear in mind that this finding may not apply when tools are used with plain
chisels. Vibration measurements on plain chisels were not investigated in detail in this study
because they are prone to difficulties of signal distortion, due to the highly impulsive nature of
the vibration, and are consequently difficult and time-consuming to achieve.
G.2 INFLUENCE OF CHISEL TYPE
The influence of the chisel type on the vibration emission data for the tool body was
investigated by varying the type of chisel selected. The test code only requires the lightest chisel
to be used but this may include a bush hammer, which is used in a different way to a chisel.
Measurements were made for Tools A, B and C. Figure G.2 shows the results of emission test
comparisons. In Figure G.2, the HSE measured a emission value on the tool body is represented
by the vertical columns. The data are shown for the three different hammers, tested with a 20
mm or 25 mm chisel and a square bush hammer as the inserted tool, on a granite work piece.
For all of the tests, the inserted tools were used with a vibration-reducing chisel holder, except
for the 25 mm chisel for Tool C, for which the manufacturer’s supplied vibration-reducing tool
holder was used.
ANOVA comparisons on the pairs of results for each tool indicated that choice of chisel does
not have a significant effect on the vibration emission value measured on the body of each tool.
However, these results were all obtained with the use of a vibration-reducing chisel holder. It is
possible that the vibration-reducing chisel holder affected the results. Additional tests with plain
chisels were beyond the scope of the research.
83
Figure G.2 Comparison of HSE measured a (+K) emission test results on a granite work piece for Tools A, B and C, for different inserted tools in a vibration-
reducing holder
G.3 INFLUENCE OF VIBRATION REDUCING CHISEL HOLDER
BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011 does not specify in any detail, the chisel that should be used in
conjunction with the tool. Clause 8.4 states: “…inserted tool of the type that is most commonly
used with that hammer. For larger hammers, this may be a bush machine; for smaller hammers,
it may be a flat chisel. Where more than one type of inserted tool is commonly used with the
hammer, the lightest one shall be selected”.
Tools A and B were tested with two different styles of chisel:
1. A plain masonry chisel, Figure G.3a.
2. A masonry chisel in a vibration-reducing chisel holder, Figure G.3b.
Figure G.3a Plain chisel Figure G.3b Vibration-reducing holder
Figures G.4a and G4b show the influence of a vibration-reducing chisel holder on the vibration
on the tool body of a lower powered machine (Tool B) compared with a more powerful one
(Tool A).
84
Figure G.4a Influence of chisel type on magnitudes on the tool body tested on granite
ANOVA comparisons confirmed that for Tool A, there were no significant differences between
results on the tool body when using the two different chisels on limestone (Figure G4a) or on
granite (Figure G4b). The comparison on granite was just below the upper bound of the 95%
confidence interval.
For Tool B, the vibration magnitude on the tool body was significantly higher when using a
plain masonry chisel compared with a vibration-reducing chisel holder. This was true for
measurements on both granite and limestone. Tool B emission values for work pieces were 19.7
m/s2 (granite) and 18.1 m/s2 (limestone) when used with the plain chisel and 11.8 m/s2 (granite)
and 11.4 m/s2 (limestone) when used with the vibration-reducing chisel holder. One possible
explanation is that when Tool B is used with the vibration-reducing holder, a significant
proportion of the energy imparted by the hammer is actually absorbed by the vibration-reducing
mechanism. This may mean however that Tool B is made less effective by the use of the
vibration-reducing holder.
0
5
10
15
20
25
Chisel & holder Plain Chisel Chisel & holder Plain Chisel
A B
Freq
uen
cy-w
eig
hte
d a
cce
lera
tio
n (m
/s²)
Chisel & holder Plain Chisel
85
Figure G.4b Influence of chisel type on magnitudes on the tool body tested on limestone
The potential for the type of chisel used to influence the vibration magnitude on the tool body is
relevant for two reasons:
1. If the chisel used can affect the vibration emission, then the chisel needs to be
specified or at least detailed in the emission test conditions. 2. If a vibration-reducing chisel can reduce the vibration on the tool body, then it can
be regarded as a vibration-reducing device, which can be used to keep operators’
exposures to a minimum during typical use.
Further work is necessary to investigate further the circumstances under which vibration-
reducing holders might reduce the vibration on a tool body, the influence of the vibration-
reducing holders on the efficiency of the hammers, and also to establish the durability of such
devices and how the performance varies over a typical lifespan.
G.4 INFLUENCE OF OPERATOR
One factor that can have a major influence on the outcome of any emission test is the operator.
This influence is particularly strong for emission tests on stone hammers. Figure G.5 shows the
emission test data from two tests. One test was on Tool B, using a plain chisel on limestone
(indicated by the diamond-shaped marker). The other test was on Tool D, using a vibration-
reducing chisel on granite (square marker). The plots show the five results for each of the three
operators. For each operator, data are plotted in ascending order for display purposes, although
this does not necessarily represent the order in which they were measured.
Figure G.5 shows the increasing vibration magnitudes for each of the three operators for both
tests, with no overlap between the ranges for any of the three operators for either tool. The
overall mean a emission value for Tool B was 11.4 m/s² (K = 5.1 m/s²) and overall mean a
emission value for Tool D was 15.7 m/s² (K = 6.6 m/s²). All emission tests were carried out in
0
5
10
15
20
25
Chisel & holder Plain Chisel Chisel & holder Plain Chisel
A B
Freq
uen
cy-w
eig
hte
d a
cce
lera
tio
n (m
/s²)
Chisel & holder Plain Chisel
86
accordance with the test code, with the tools operating at the manufacturers’ recommended air
pressures. The same configuration of accelerometers, in exactly the same measurement location,
was used for each of the three operators. The data in Figure G.5 clearly shows there is potential
for obtaining widely different emission test results depending on the operator.
The influence of the operators on the results of the vibration measurements is believed to be due
to differences in grip and feed forces between operators. This is particularly influential for stone
hammers, possibly because of the interaction between the chisel and the tool itself, which is
highly variable depending on how the operator holds and uses the tool. In such circumstances,
the inclusion of the K value in the declaration is of great importance to reflect the inter-subject
variability that occurs even within the constraints of the emission test.
Figure G.5 Individual emission test data measured on the tool body for two sample emission tests
0
5
10
15
20
25
Operator 1 data Operator 2 data Operator 3 data
Fre
qu
en
cy-w
eig
hte
d a
cce
lera
tio
n
(m/s
²)
Tool B, limestone, plain chisel Tool D, granite, chisel in holder
87
ANNEX H - POTENTIAL INFLUENCES ON CHISEL EMISSION MEASUREMENTS
H.1 INFLUENCE OF WORK PIECE ON CHISEL VIBRATION EMISSION
Figure H.1 compares the a emission values obtained from measurements on the chisels for each
of the four tools tested on two types of work piece; granite and limestone. The comparison was
made to investigate whether the use of a softer material, in this case limestone, could cause
differences in emission test results on the chisels. Each of the vertical bars in Figure H.1
represents the mean a emission value for the chisel used with the tool named on the x-axis.
Clear bars represent the results of tests on limestone and shaded bars represent results on
granite. The error bars indicate the K value for each set of measurements.
It should be noted that none of these measurements were made on plain chisels, due to the
difficulties involved and the high exposure levels that result. Measurements were all made using
a vibration-reducing chisel holder. Tools A, B and D were all used with the same chisel holder
(shown in Figures 2a and 2b). Tool C had its own manufacturer-specific chisel holder.
Figure H.1 Comparison of the HSE measured a emission test results on the chisels for the four hammers on limestone and granite work pieces
The ANOVA comparisons showed that for Tools A, B and D there was no significant difference
between the results for the chisels on the two materials. The results for Tool C, however,
showed that there was significantly higher result on the holder when used on the granite work
piece compared with on the limestone. The differences for Tool C were assumed to be due to
differences in the performance of its own chisel holder. Unfortunately, as the Tool C chisel
holder could not be used with the other tools and vice versa, these differences could not be
investigated further.
88
H.2 INFLUENCE OF TOOL ON CHISEL VIBRATION EMISSION
The investigation of vibration on the tool bodies has already shown that the use of the vibration-
reducing holder can affect the vibration magnitude on the tool body in some circumstances. The
investigation also showed that using a flat chisel or a bush hammer in the vibration-reducing
holder did not have a significant effect on the vibration of the tool body. This section compares
the influence of the tool on the vibration magnitude on the same chisel using three of the tools,
A, B and D. Tool C is not included in this comparison, because it has its own chisel holder and
was not tested with any other chisel.
Figure H.2 shows the results of measurements on the vibration-reduced holder when used with
Tools A, B and D, tested on both limestone and granite.
ANOVA results showed that vibration magnitudes on the vibration-reducing holder were not
significantly different for Tools B or D. However, the results of the vibration measurements on
the same chisel and holder combination when used with Tool A were significantly higher than
when used with Tools B and D. This is believed to be because Tool A is more powerful than
Tools B and D and therefore transmits more energy to the chisel, resulting in higher vibration
magnitudes.
Figure H.2 Measurements on the vibration reduced holder, on both limestone and granite when used with Tools A, B and D
Figure H.3 shows the mean vibration emission value, a, on the plain chisel on limestone (clear
bars) and the bush hammer in the vibration-reducing holder on granite (grey bars) when used
with Tools A and B under emission test conditions. The error bars represent the K value.
89
Figure H.3 Measurements on the plain chisel and the bush hammer in the vibration-reducing holder on limestone when used with Tools A and B
The emission test results obtained on limestone using a plain chisel were significantly different
depending on the tool used. This was assumed to be due the more powerful Tool A imparting
more energy to the chisel than Tool B. When used with the bush hammer in the vibration-
reducing holder the differences between the two tools were not significantly different.
Tools A and B were also tested on granite with the plain chisel, but data for Tool A were
affected by dc-shift and have therefore not been included. Tool D was not tested with the plain
chisel on either work piece due to problems with dc-shift.
The results in this section show, not surprisingly, that the vibration magnitudes on a chisel, or
on a chisel holder, can vary significantly depending on the tool with which it is used.
H.3 INFLUENCE OF OPERATOR ON CHISEL VIBRATION EMISSION
Figure H.4 shows two examples of emission data from two tests: a plain chisel used on
limestone with Tool B, and a flat chisel in the vibration-reducing holder used on granite with
Tool D. The data are from the same emission tests as those presented for the tool body in Figure
G.5. The plots show the five results for each of the three operators. For each operator, data are
plotted in ascending order for display purposes, although this does not necessarily represent the
order in which they were measured.
The data show that all three operators have produced similar results for measurements on the
plain chisel used with Tool B, although there is a slightly wider spread of data for Operator 1.
For measurements on the chisel in the vibration-reducing holder when used with Tool D,
Operator 1 gave higher vibration magnitudes than Operators 2 and 3.
90
The data presented in Figures H.4 and G.5 were obtained for the same tools using the same
operators; the vibration magnitudes measured on the tool body are shown in Figure H.4 and on
the chisel in Figure G.5. Figure G.4 shows that for both tools on both test materials, the
magnitudes measured on the tool body increase from Operator 1 who produces the lowest
magnitudes to Operator 3 who gives the highest magnitudes. This pattern is not reflected in the
results measured on the chisels in Figure H.4. The mean vibration magnitudes for each operator
on limestone are similar. On granite, the magnitudes are highest for Operator 1 and lowest for
Operator 3, which is the opposite trend to that seen on the tool body.
Figure H.4 Individual data measured on the chisel for two sample emission tests
91
ANNEX I - INFLUENCE OF AIRLINE PRESSURE ON STONE HAMMER VIBRATION MAGNITUDE
I.1 METHOD Measurements were made on the body of the stone hammer and also on the chisel using the
standard HSE vibration measurement system to investigate the influence of the airline pressure
on the outcome of a vibration emission measurement.
The BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011 emission test procedure was followed using Ancaster
Weatherbed limestone, which has an apparent density just slightly lower than that specified in
the test code. This material is fairly typical of a hard limestone that might be worked in the UK.
Figure I.1 shows an example of the measurement set-up.
Figure I.1. Hammer set up with vibration-reducing holder and claw tool
In accordance with the standard test, five measurements were made for each of three operators
whilst they chiselled the stone. The resultant fifteen measurement values were used to calculate
the emission value, a, and the uncertainty, K.
Three sets of measurements were made for the following combinations of tools:
1. Tool D with vibration-reducing holder and claw
2. Tool D with plain chisel
3. Tool B with plain chisel
For each of these three tool and chisel combinations, a full set of measurements was made with
the tool operating pressure set first at 3 bar, then 4 bar and finally 5 bar.
I.2 RESULTS Figures I.2 and I.3 show the data for the tool and the chisel separately. Figures I.2a, I.2b and
I.2c show data for the tool body. Figures I.3a, I.3b and I.3c show the data for the chisels. In the
graphs, the maximum and minimum of the individual measurements for each operator are
shown followed by the a emission value at each pressure, with the error bar indicating the K
value. This is done to illustrate the influence that the operator can have on the outcome of the
measurement.
The overall emission values (a and K) are given in Tables I.1a, I.1b and I.1c.
92
Figure I.2a. Tool D. Measurements on the tool body using the vibration-reducing holder and claw tool, at increasing operating pressures
Figure I.2b. Tool D. Measurements on the tool body using the plain chisel, at increasing operating pressures
0
5
10
15
20
25
30A
cce
lera
tio
n, a
(m
/s²)
Max Min a (K)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Acc
eler
atio
n, a
(m
/s²)
Max Min a (K)
93
Figure I.2c. Tool B. Measurements on the tool body using the plain chisel, at increasing operating pressures
Figure I.3a. Tool D. Measurements on the vibration-reducing chisel holder and claw, at increasing operating pressure
0
5
10
15
20
25
30A
ccel
erat
ion
, a (
m/s
²)
Max Min a (K)
0
5
10
15
20
25
Acc
eler
atio
n, a
, (m
/s²)
Max Min a (K)
94
Figure I.3b. Tool D. Measurements on the plain chisel, at increasing operating pressures
Figure I.3c. Tool B. Measurements on the plain chisel, at increasing operating pressures
0
5
10
15
20
25A
ccel
erat
ion
, a, (
m/s
²)
Max Min a (K)
0
5
10
15
20
25
Acc
eler
atio
n, a
(m
/s²)
Max Min a (K)
95
Table I.1a. Overall frequency-weighted vibration total values (m/s²) for Tool D with vibration-reducing chisel holder and claw
Pressure Tool Body Chisel
a
(m/s²)
K
(m/s²)
a
(m/s²)
K
(m/s²)
3 Bar 9.6 3.4 7.2 1.9
4 Bar 14.8 4.4 8.7 3.4
5 Bar 16.8 5.6 10.0 3.5
Table I.1b. Overall frequency-weighted vibration total values (m/s²) for Tool D with plain chisel
Pressure Tool Body Chisel
a
(m/s²)
K
(m/s²)
a
(m/s²)
K
(m/s²)
3 bar 10.3 2.9 10.1 3.5
4 bar 13.9 4.9 12.7 5.6
5 bar 19.2 5.3 11.6 4.7
Table I.1c. Overall frequency-weighted vibration total values (m/s²) for Tool B with plain chisel
Pressure Tool Body Chisel
a
(m/s²)
K
(m/s²)
a
(m/s²)
K
(m/s²)
3 bar 10.6 3.7 8.0 2.4
4 bar 13.9 4.3 9.5 2.9
5 bar 13.9 6.3 10.8 3.4
I.3 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS The data show that increasing the operating pressure caused an increase in measured vibration
magnitude on the tool body in all three cases. The biggest difference was for Tool D measured
on the tool body with plain chisel (Table I.1b). The mean, a emission increased from 10.3 m/s²
to 19.2 m/s², an increase of 86%.
For measurements on the body of Tool D with vibration-reducing sleeve and claw (Table I.1a),
the mean, a emission increased from 9.6 m/s² to 16.8 m/s², which is an increase of 75%. On the
lower powered Tool B (Table I.1c), the mean, a emission increased from 10.6 m/s² to 13.9 m/s²,
which is an increase of 31%.
There is a great deal of variability in the results between operators, which can be attributed to
different grip and push forces. The biggest range of individual data points was for the Tool D
with plain chisel (Figure I.2b). Across the three operators, the range is from a minimum of
6.7 m/s² (Operator 2 at 3 bar) to a maximum of 24.7 m/s² (Operator 3 at 5 bar).
I.4 FURTHER WORK Further work is necessary to investigate in more detail the influence of airline pressures on the
vibration of the tools when they are used by experienced operators. In particular, it would be
necessary to investigate the variations in airline pressure that occur during normal work
processes by trained stone masons to get an indication of how this might impact on typical daily
96
exposures and to determine if there is any scope for developing best practice guidance for
particular tasks in the industry.
4
Published by the Health & Safety Executive 10/20
5
The effectiveness of British Standard BS EN ISO 28927-11:2001 concerning the vibration emission of stone hammers
RR1163
www.hse.gov.uk
Hand Arm Vibration Syndrome (HAVS) is a painful and disabling disorder of the blood vessels, nerves and joints, caused by exposure to hand transmitted vibration, often from use of power tools. HAVS is preventable, but once damage is done, it is irreversible.
The Supply of Machinery (Safety) Regulations 2008 require manufacturers to minimise machinery vibration risk and declare vibration emission. British standard test codes can be used for this declaration. Manufacturers must also provide information to enable any residual risk (after minimisation by the manufacturer) to be assessed and effectively managed. The information should identify any gap between the risk indicated by the declared vibration emission and the likely actual risk during use: however this information is often missing.
This report will be of interest to standards makers and technical specialists dealing with hand-arm vibration emission standards. It describes work carried out up until 2013 to investigate BS EN ISO 28927-11:2011, a British Standard that defines a vibration emission test code for stone hammers.
The research shows that different techniques for using stone hammers can result in wide variations in vibration magnitudes. The variations suggest test reproducibility may be poor, but in the absence of comparable manufacturers’ data this could not be assessed.
This report and the work it describes were funded by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE). Its contents, including any opinions and/or conclusions expressed, are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily reflect HSE policy.