Research Project Research Project PresentationPresentation

SteveSteve HowarthHowarth

Presentation OutlinePresentation OutlineProject TitleProject Title

Project HypothesisProject Hypothesis

Project BackgroundProject Background

Project ObjectivesProject Objectives

Research MethodResearch Method

Scope of the ResearchScope of the Research

Survey ResultsSurvey Results

Literature ReviewLiterature Review

ConclusionConclusion

RecommendationsRecommendations

Benefits of the ResearchBenefits of the Research

““The development and The development and implementation of an implementation of an

effective management and effective management and monitoring system, to monitoring system, to

ensure that cranes comply ensure that cranes comply with statutory with statutory requirements”.requirements”.

Project TitleProject Title

“The non-compliance to statutory requirements will decrease upon the implementation of the

inspection regime”

HypothesisHypothesis

In January, 2001, the Labour In January, 2001, the Labour Department conducted a survey Department conducted a survey

of the cranes and lifting of the cranes and lifting appliances on the KCRC’s West appliances on the KCRC’s West

Rail project. Rail project.

Project BackgroundProject Background

It was found that It was found that 34%34% of the of the cranes were not fitted with an cranes were not fitted with an automatic safe load indicator, automatic safe load indicator,

or if fitted, it was not or if fitted, it was not functioning correctly.functioning correctly.

Shanghai

Project ObjectivesProject Objectives

To develop an inspection and

enforcing system for ensuring

compliance to the statutory

requirements;

To implement the system;

To revise and improve the system, following comments from those concerned in the implementation, and

Project Objectives (cont)Project Objectives (cont)

To review the effectiveness of the system, in ensuring compliance to statutory requirements.

Scope of the ProjectScope of the Project

KCRC’s, West Rail and East Rail Extensions projects;

23 construction sites;

Surveys conducted monthly over a 6 month period, May – Oct, 2001;

All cranes.

Research MethodResearch MethodParticipatory Action Research (PAR)

based on Lewin’s Cyclic Model

Act

Review

Plan

ReviewReview

Conduct a survey of all

cranes being used on the

2 projects to establish if

there is a high rate of

non- compliance to

statutory requirements.

PlanPlan

Review the Hong Kong

Legislation to identify what the

statutory requirements are;

Develop an inspection

checklist;

Train the surveyors to use the inspection checklist;

Plan (cont)Plan (cont)

Conduct a survey of all the cranes being used on the 2 projects to establish if there was a problem with the statutory compliance.

ActAct

The Hong Kong Legislation

was reviewed and 12 statutory

requirements were identified;

•Form 1. Report of Results of Weekly Inspection of Lifting Appliances•Form 2. Certificate of Test and Thorough Examination of Anchoring or Ballasting of Cranes•Form 3. Certificate of Test and Thorough Examination of Cranes, Crabs and Winches•Form 4. Certificate of Test and Thorough Examination of Lifting Appliances (Except Cranes, Crabs and Winches)•Form 5. Lifting Appliances Certificate of Thorough Examination in the Preceding Twelve Months•ASLI not fitted or not functioning properly•Obstructed view•Safe working load markings•Jib angle indicator fitted•Anti- collision device fitted•Over hoist limit switch fitted•Safety latch fitted on the hook

Statutory RequirementsStatutory Requirements

The inspection checklist was

developed by a team of staff;

Act (cont)Act (cont)

Crane and Lifting Appliance Safety Inspection Form

Contract Location Conducted by:

Date and Time of Inspection:

Ref. Number:

Crawler Crane Tower Crane Hydraulic Crane Type of Crane (Tick as appropriate)

Gantry Crane Piling Rig Lorry or Train Mounted Crane

Brand/model Identification Number:

Owner

Year of Manufacture Maximum SWL (Form 3)

Contractor’s own plant permit or labelling system

No Yes Issue Date

Form 1 Latest Dated: Form 2* (if necessary) Dated:

Form 3 * Dated: Form 4* (if necessary) Dated:

Form 5* Dated:

Name of RPE Registration Number:

Operator’s Certificate* Name: Issued by: Valid until: Class: Yes No

ASLI fitted, working and being used*

Over hoist/travel limit switch* (for Crane only)

Safety latch on the hook

Unobstructed view

SWL marking/Radius chart

Jib angle indicator (telescopic or lattice jib)

Safety Devices

Anti-collision devices functioning properly* (tower crane)

Permit to Move* The latest Permit Dated:

Permit to Operate* The latest Permit Dated:

Compliance to Permits* Yes No Yes No Compliance to the

Permit to Operate Compliance to the Permit to Move

Remarks * Major safety requirement. Non-compliance will lead to suspension of operation.

Conclusion Compliance with requirement

Non-compliance Suspended from operation

PVC holder issued Yes No

The surveyors were trained to use the inspection checklist;

Act (cont)Act (cont)

A survey was conducted of all the cranes being used on the 2 projects.

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

14.00

May

Mo

nth

ly N

on

-Co

mp

lian

ce R

ate

ERE Monthly Non-ComplianceRateWR Monthly Non-ComplianceRate

Results of the Initial SurveyResults of the Initial Survey

12.32%12.32%

0%0%

339 cranes were339 cranes were

Inspected:Inspected:

276 WR276 WR

63 ERE63 ERE

6 more surveys were conducted 6 more surveys were conducted using the PAR methodusing the PAR method

Act

Review

Plan

10.87

0.00

16.57

12.32

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

May Jun

Mo

nth

ly N

on

-Co

mp

lian

ce R

ate

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

Cu

mu

lati

ve N

on

-Co

mp

lian

ce R

ate

ERE Monthly Non-Compliance Rate

WR Monthly Non-Compliance Rate

ERE Cumulative Non-Compliance Rate

WR Cumulative Non-Compliance Rate

Results of the 2nd SurveyResults of the 2nd Survey

25.89

2.601.653.05

3.55

0.673.57

9.05

2.392.49

0.00

7.146.237.29

9.23

16.57

5.716.387.39

8.91

10.8712.32

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT

Per

cent

age

of N

on-c

ompl

ianc

es

ERE (Monthly)

WR (Monthly)

ERE (Cumulative)

WR (Cumulative)

Results of the 6Results of the 6thth & Final Survey & Final Survey

0.00

10.29

3.95

1.61

4.25

5.54

3.65

1.932.35

3.073.82

4.71

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

14.00

16.00

18.00

MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT

ERE (Monthly)

WR (Monthly)

ERE (Cumulative)

WR (Cumulative)

Example of an Inspection Item Survey Example of an Inspection Item Survey Result – Form 1, Non ComplianceResult – Form 1, Non Compliance

24,82824,828items

were inspected

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

4.00

4.50

Statutory Requirement

Pe

rce

nta

ge

No

n-c

om

pli

an

ce

WR

ERE

Summary of the Results by ProjectSummary of the Results by Project

0.1

0.580.39

0.680.39

0.630.34

1.26

1.79

2.22

3.19

0.68

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

No For

m 1

No For

m 2

No For

m 3

No For

m 4

No For

m 5

ASLI n

ot fi

tted

or n

ot fu

nctio

ning

prop

erly

No O

ver H

oist

Switch

No Safe

ty Lat

ch o

n th

e Hoo

kO

bstru

cted

Vie

w

No Safe

Wor

king

Load

Mar

kings

No Jib

Ang

le In

dicat

or

No Anti-

Collisi

on D

evice

Statutory Requirement

Pe

rce

nta

ge

No

n-c

om

plia

nc

eSummary of the Results by ItemSummary of the Results by Item

63

276221

112 150 169 168164154 201 209182

826

1243

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT

ERE (Monthly)

WR (Monthly)

ERE (Cumulative)

WR (Cumulative)

No’ of Cranes Inspected by MonthNo’ of Cranes Inspected by Month

Total 2,069Total 2,069

Types of Cranes InspectedTypes of Cranes Inspected

449

352

210 214

769

583 6

1226

410

213 220

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Crawler Hydraulic Lorry or TrainMounted

Tower

Num

ber o

f Cra

nes

WRERETotal

Literature ReviewLiterature Review

•Hong Kong Safety Legislation;•Crane and Lifting Appliance Legislation in Hong Kong;•Crane and Lifting Appliance Legislation in Other Countries;•Safety Management;•Risk Perception;•Human Behavior; •Supervisors Role, and•Senior Managers Role.

ConclusionConclusion

•The inspections and the inspection checklist were successful in reducing the number of non-conformances;

•The survey has identified areas of weakness in the safety management systems of the Contractor;

•There is no penalty system in place, other than from the Contractor, for the operator.

“The non-compliance to statutory requirements will decrease upon the implementation of the inspection regime”

Conclusion - HypothesisConclusion - Hypothesis

TRUE –

The results show that the number of non-

conformances did decrease following the

implementation of the inspection regime.

RecommendationsRecommendations

•Incorporate the inspection checklist into a

safety procedure for all sites;

•Continue the inspections and continue to

record and report the non-conformances;

•Implement effective Contractor safety

management systems to ensure statutory

compliance;

•Discuss with the Labour Department and the operator’s license issuing authority, the non-conformances and discuss measures for improvement;

Recommendations (cont)Recommendations (cont)

•Make the safety procedure available to other projects in Hong Kong.

Benefits from the ResearchBenefits from the Research

•Improved compliance to statutory requirements;

•Elimination of crane incidents;

•Increased inspections and monitoring;

•Formalised inspection procedure;

•Improved quality of the inspections;

•Is now being used on other non KCRC projects

•Standardised inspection procedure;

Benefits from the Research Benefits from the Research (cont)(cont)

QuestionsQuestions