Health and Safety
Executive / Commission
Vibration at
work
Attendees: Phil Burgess (HSE), Hans Fairley (Stihl, AEA), Peter Alford (JCB), Ulrich Betten (Hilti), David Smeatham (HSE), Rob Caddy (Belle Group), Andrew Bowden (Makita), Terrance Libby (ATA Grinding), Greg Boridiak (BCAS) Kevin Minton (Hire Association of Europe), Louise Brearey (HSE), Simon Brentnall (Speedy Hire), Mark Owen (Shepherds Construction), Tony Hoyland (HSE).
Apologies: Peter Holdridge (Complete Hire Services), John Shaw (MACOB Holdings Limited), Shelly Atkinson-Frost (Construction Confederation).
Open meeting and welcome
Previous Minutes
The minutes of the 7th working group meeting held on 9th Jan 2007
were accepted and the following comment was made and accepted by the group
from A Bowden
Resolution 3
The agreed approach to presenting data was: Vibration magnitude based on the batch information (i.e. the aggregated results for a single machine). My concern is that this will not usually produce a value representative of upper quartile values. If you remember the work we did previously with upper quartile the magnitude approach will be able to take in to account values which are basically inert and therefore magnitude will be considerably lower. (Drilling wood with SDS hammers etc). May I suggest to keep everyone in the loop and supportive that either a vibration magnitude or upper quartile value as reported by manufacturers to the new approved test codes such as EN60745-1:2005 and the relevant part 2's is accepted.
Actions Arising
Database
DS discussed the process of the database. GB said that the data forwarded by pneumatic manufacturers would be included all the standard ranges of BCAS members. It was decided that the database needs another column to contain information for safe use (e.g. training requirements for the use of machines with suspended handles etc). DS provided a résumé of the evidence base used to assess the suitability of standards and identified areas where additional guidance will be necessary (e.g. the vibration from plate compactors when operating on asphalt).
Action:
DS to send a note to KM regarding information for safe use
DS to produce a technical note on the evidence based used in HSE’s decision making regarding the suitability of standards for initial risk assessment purposes. This will be peer reviewed in HSE prior to being circulated to group members for comment.
European standards
The group discussed the difference between the harmonised standards and in-use measurements of vibration Compared standard with in use. It was pointed out that there are two issues relating to the suitability of data from manufacturers:
The group discussed the suitability of data provided by various test methods. Comments were made regarding the validity of standards which adopt artificial methods to determine the vibration (i.e. dynaload and grinders test). Methods of improving the dynaload and using the information provided by these tests were discussed.
The group also discussed the reluctance of some manufacturers to release certain data from the testing conducted at OPERC.
Action:
DS to send e-mail to manufacturers summarising HSL’s research on the use of the dynaload and its ability to provided data indicative of real use
Meeting with OPERC
DS, AB and UB met with Dr David Edwards of OPERC on 01/03/07. During the meeting they discussed the suitability of standards to provide information suitable for an initial risk assessment and the areas where Dr Edwards had raised concerns regarding the standards. Dr Edwards’s areas of concerns were:
The people attending the meeting agreed that the target upper-quartile vibration provided by new standards might unnecessarily limit the use of tools on construction sites and therefore the current guidance encouraging dutyholders to use all available data for their risk assessment should not be changed. Dr Edwards stated that in his opinion the use manufacturers data was not as good as using data from ISO 5349 tests. Also Dr Edwards would welcome an opportunity to conduct research on the standards.
MO repeated his support for data produced by OPERC testing.
DS stated where standards were shown to provide suitable data then they would be appropriate for an initial risk assessment. If data was found to be unreliable then use other sources of information should be sought.
MO also raised question regarding productivity to enable appropriate tool selection. KM said if data on productivity could be included without causing confusion then he would be happy to look at putting it on HAE database
Long discussion pursued relating to standards using artificial ‘v’ real test and the contents of the database. The group supported the idea of aiming for convergence with respect to different data sources, so there was one database. It was also accepted that there would be a long transition period and the group needed to have faith in its content. Solutions include;
The proposal for HAE to host the website was discussed.
- MO pointed out OPERC website was up and running. Each group member was asked their thoughts and it was a clear majority that favoured the HAE proposal. KM confirmed HAE was happy to act as host. It was stated that Manufacturers want to take responsibility for their data and many in the group thought it was better that HAE was only acting as a broker (not a test house) just bringing information together.
The group accepted HAE proposal to host the Working Group HAV management system including the database. It was also agreed that trade bodies would police the data. In addition HSE will continue to conduct supply visits to any manufacturer with a question over vibration data.
KM stated that the Hire Association of Europe was ready to distribute the call for information to all involved with original traffic light system and all who attended November 05 Forum.
PB to send e-mail addresses of those who attended the forum to KM.
KM discussed their press release with proposed labelling system. PA suggested it needed a blessing from the group. KM stated that the label design was HAE and not an output from this group. It included the time to the exposure action value, the time to the exposure limit values and HSE points per 15 minutes of exposure, as agreed by the working group. KM suggested that initially they should consider one label per tool and then later consider derivatives for multi-use. It was also confirmed that label is only one part of the HAV management system.
KM welcomed the Construction Confederations offer to pilot messages / guidance. It was also stated that the Supporting Document should be specific for each type of tool.
The working group agreed that guidance should be managed through HAE.
KM was to discuss with SAF the various types of guidance needed i.e. generic guidance, specific for tool type, and specific to the tool.
It was also noted that, that specific guidance would be needed for old tools where there is no data in the database. It was suggested there was a variety of sources and this could be included if validated and the origin was clear.
HSE’s enforcement line was discussed HSE said it would produce draft guidance for inspectors that would be circulated to the group for comments then made available to both inspectors and industry.
HSE will prepare draft to be circulated
The important issue of communication to the end user was discussed at length. It was also made clear that a caveat was needed to ensure end users were aware of the systems limitations key point include:
Joint press release would be developed by KM and HSE to ensure consistent message to the Trade Press. KM also told group he was speaking at Construction News 24/4.
DS to send synopsis of Technical paper for MCG meeting
Delivery Plan; HAE hosting database and are working towards single database.
HAE will look at including data on productivity.
KM offered to speak or be available for the MCG / EPTA Meeting. KM and MO to discuss outside the meeting.
The group needed to develop a possible ‘Strap line’ for the HAVs management system to be discussed at the next meeting.
Next meeting 10 May to discuss labels/ guidance (Birmingham HAE offices). To enable the system to be promoted at SED.
Due to some members not being available that day it is proposed the meeting will now be on the 8th May 2007 at the HAE office in Birmingham.
Thanks were expressed to the group for a very positive meeting.