Copycat scaffolding poses major threat01 October 2005

Although perhaps more readily associated with building and construction, scaffolding is widely used throughout industry. Whether to meet a short-term access requirement or as part of a larger scale refurbishment project, the need to retain on site both the scaffolding equipment itself and an understanding of its safe use needs little emphasis. The use of such equipment is commonplace, from mobile stairtowers to 'bird cage scaffolds' - used, for example, to create a platform at a required working height - or the installation of versatile façade scaffolds to provide access at various lift levels along the face of a building. Responsibility for its safe use may rest with site engineers, maintenance departments or facilities management organisations.

Of course, the likelihood of sporadic or ad hoc scaffolding needs means that, in many cases, the erection and dismantling procedures may not be conducted by dedicated scaffolding contractors. While this would present no difficulties in terms of capability or experience, it is increasingly imperative that 'in-house' users retain a full awareness of developments within the broader scaffolding industry.

This applies from both an operational efficiency and, importantly, a safety perspective. Indeed, the latter is now being brought further into the spotlight by OSEM - the Original Scaffolding Equipment
Manufacturers group - created by the six leading system scaffolding producers specifically to address one key safety issue which, they believe, could be easily overlooked, particularly in a multi-discipline manufacturing and process plant environment.

In line with much of the building industry in this country, scaffolding used in this sector has conventionally been of the 'tube and fitting' variety. Primarily centred on lengths of steel tube, couplers or fastening devices and wooden scaffold boards, the traditional material may have been seen as versatile, but it could often place great emphasis on the installer's experience and design capability. However, and in common with the construction field, there is now a discernable shift towards 'system' or 'modular' scaffolding which is now available from a range of major manufacturers based both in the UK and Europe. In fact, this has long been the common equipment in use on the Continent.

Based on the use of a fixed number of highly versatile components, system equipment offers clear-cut advantages to users when it comes to speed, simplicity and safety. Moreover, the inherent versatility of modular designs means that virtually any layout or application requirement in a manufacturing environment can be fully met - for instance, system scaffolding manufacturers will point to their ability to accommodate the specific layout challenges of petrochemical and even offshore installations.

These factors contribute directly to minimising production downtime, but there are a number of other key benefits that the use of system scaffolding in a manufacturing environment offers. Typical examples are the neat appearance of modular structures - perhaps of particular note in high-tech environments - and the ease with which installations can be used to 'contain' building dust and debris.

The installation of equipment of all types is, of course, underpinned by the need to follow safe working practices and this calls for installers to be fully aware of any new safety related issues. Experience and understanding clearly help in this regard, but is there a risk that the manufacturing sector is now more open to one of the key questions being asked in the building and construction industry - one which has prompted the very creation of the OSEM group?

The informal coming together of Haki, Layher, SGB, RMD Kwikform, Van Thiel and PlusEight UK reflects an important consideration which, the group believes, all users of scaffolding equipment should address: namely the risk of non-genuine, 'fake' equipment entering a user's material stock. This is regarded as being as significant a risk in manufacturing and plant management as it is in the building and construction field - perhaps even more, so given the former's multi-disciplined, rather than specialist, environment.

The safety risks that OSEM highlights are both concise and highly significant and, it says, are as relevant to users of tube and fitting scaffolding as modular alternatives. The group contends that, if non-genuine componentry is incorporated into a scaffold structure, it may not be possible to guarantee the integrity of the design and thus its reliability - with clear risks to safety. The potential implications are farreaching, particularly within the context of the 'Working at Height Regulations' whereby anyone who controls the work of others is potentially liable for any problem that may arise. The site owners, operational management, facilities companies, consultants - each of those involved in work in which scaffolding is used - is perceived as a duty holder, with clearly defined joint responsibilities.

Negative impact

OSEM believes that, if the risk of non-genuine equipment being used within a structure is not addressed, its use can completely negate all other risk control measures associated with scaffold installation and use. Quite apart from the key consideration of personnel safety, this can also have direct effects on guarantees, insurance and, potentially, even corporate reputation.

So how do users know whether or not their scaffolding stock contains only the genuine article? And what are the steps that can be taken to ensure that the risk of mixing in copy equipment is dramatically reduced or even eliminated?

"There are a number of visual checks which can be made, alongside specific questions that should be addressed to the supplier," comments OSEM's independent chairman Peter Bennett, who says that the former are often related to methods of manufacture and build quality.

Paul Brunt, UK managing director of OSEM member Haki, points out that problems could arise from the use of sub-standard material. He highlights a number of key points, by way of illustration: "Our upright components, for example, feature a series of pockets into which ledger beams are located and with an inferior, non-genuine copy, these may be attached via hand welds, with consequent spatter clearly visible. Alongside this, the ledger beam tongues that locate into the pockets may exhibit sharp corners - in themselves an added risk of injury during handling - whilst inferior copies of our leg components may even comprise bolted sections."

The genuine article

With the genuine product, Brent continues, a swaged spigot is featured, with no requirements for bolts or welds. "The resultant continuous piece accommodates a leg load of 34 kN whilst, with the copy version, the bolt or spigot may become loose or even lost, while the permissible leg load can be little short of a 'best guess'."

Sean Pike is managing director of Layher, another OSEM founder company, and he endorses the point by making comparisons between his company's 'Allround' scaffold and a competitive unit that has been designed to offer a visually similar connection, but which may represent dramatic differences in performance. "For example, the bending moment of our Allround K2000 Plus product can be measured as 101 kNcm, compared with 68 kNcm for the alternative - an alarming deviation of 49%," he explains. "Worse still, the vertical shear force in kN of our original equipment is 26.4, with 17.4 assessed for the alternative - giving an even higher deviation of 52%."

Apart from such quick visual checks, there are also a number of key factors that should be considered and additional elements which need to be taken into account. Factors such as product stamping and traceability are highlighted, while just as important is the back-up, training and design support that is available.

"The new Working at Height Regulations and EN12811 require that scaffolds constructed from any equipment need proven calculations and designs to comply," adds David Johnson, managing director of SGB Hire and Sale. "This is impossible to achieve when original equipment is mixed with an unproven unknown source.

"Understandably, responsible scaffold contractors across the UK have taken great pains to avoid contaminating their contract fleets with the copy products. Surely if the major players are adopting this approach, then the industry must listen," he says. Peter Bennett sums up: "It is vital these are questions that should be asked of a supplier, whether equipment is to be used by a scaffold contractor on site or a multi-discipline plant maintenance team. This is a serious issue, but, with correct vigilance and questioning, can be dramatically offset in the manufacturing and processing plant environment."

Author Peter Bennett is independent chairman of OSEM


Don't mix it!

Co-operation between the six main manufacturers of system scaffolding in Europe - at the heart of the Original Scaffolding Equipment Manufacturers group (OSEM) - demonstrates the importance that each attaches to a key safety issue. Their joint belief in its importance and the potential risks for safety has seen them put commercial issues in this regard to one side. A joint voice on this issue is, they believe, the logical way forward.

Haki, Layher, SGB, RMD Kwikform, Van Thiel and PlusEight UK have been at the forefront of this highly specialist sector of the industry for many years. Increasingly common in the UK, where conventionally tube and fitting has been the norm, system design brings with it benefits in terms of design versatility and erection and dismantling speed - as important in a plant or manufacturing environment as in the broader construction industry.

The OSEM organisation - which echoes the similar SLS organisation in Scandinavia - has a single and very clear message. Members believe that 'where their own products are mixed with alternative, unapproved supply sources, clients risk product liability issues and the likelihood of failures occurring'.
Under the banner 'Don't Mix It!' - details of which can be found at www.dontmixit.org - member companies highlight the potential risks and key points that users of all scaffolding, both system and conventional tube and fitting, should always check. Apart from the safety issues, there are many commercial considerations that could occur with equipment failure - from invalidating guarantees or insurance, to damaged corporate reputation.

The OSEM group is taking these key health and safety points directly to all users of system scaffolding; not least, of course, the major construction companies. While it acknowledges that such organisations have an unquestioned commitment to following optimum safety procedures, OSEM is basing its initiative on a real fear that many scaffolding contractors and construction companies may not be fully aware of the problems or potential risks that can arise from the use of inferior equipment or its mixing on site. The same concerns, it says, can apply in a manufacturing plant operation where there may be, arguably, a greater presence of 'non-dedicated' scaffold erectors.

"Our law makers and enforcers must also play an active role in this vital area," says Sean Pike, managing director of Layher, "to make sure that the key objectives defined by OSEM are acknowledged for their importance.

"We believe it is a question first of recognition and then of pulling together," he adds, "to the benefit of not just the responsible manufacturers and suppliers in the business, but indeed of everybody involved on a site."

For maintenance and works activity in a plant and manufacturing environment, these are key issues and should not be separated from effective and safe site management. At a time when operational efficiency and safety considerations are paramount, the OSEM message is one that, it believes, is well worth taking on board.

SOE

This material is protected by MA Business copyright
See Terms and Conditions.
One-off usage is permitted but bulk copying is not.
For multiple copies contact the sales team.