Search results

The Control of Vibration at Work Regulations (CVWR), quantify workplace vibration exposure using exposure action, and exposure limit values (EAV and ELV respectively). Hand‐arm vibration (HAV) risk can be objectively assessed using hand‐tool vibration magnitude data, for comparison to the EAV and ELV. When considering risk controls, one disadvantage of this ‘focus’ on vibration magnitude, is that it might deflect appreciation of the economic implications of such controls, resulting from for example: restrictions on tool usage time; the need for operator rotas where continuous tool use is required; and complications in estimating labour costs because of these types of condition. Based on a sample of hand‐tools’ performance data, this research developed ‘hybrid’ (performance/vibration) dimensions for quantifying tools’ efficacy; representing (interalia) units of work achievable to reach the EAV and ELV. These hybrid dimensions characterize an alternative performance‐based (and therefore financially related) way of considering a tool’s ‘suitability’ within CVWR parameters; over and above the (selection) criterion of tool vibration magnitude. Analyses are then presented that investigate the time and cost ramifications of using multiple operators, to sustain continuous tool usage while keeping exposure levels within CVWR limits.

Human vibration exposure from hand-operated equipment emissions can lead to irreparable and debilitating hand-arm vibration syndrome (HAVS). While work-place health and well-being (H&WB) policies, strategies and procedures have been extensively researched and documented, little has been done to develop a specific strategic framework tailored to the management of hand-arm vibration (HAV). This study fills that gap.

A mixed philosophical approach of interpretivism and critical realism is adopted within a case study of a utilities contractor. Within this overarching epistemological design, action research approach is implemented via a three-stage investigation, namely, relevant company H&WB documents and procedures were examined, leading to the formulation of semi-structured interview questioning of the H&WB team. Their responses informed the next line of questions, delivered to middle-management responsible for overseeing H&S.

The findings are instructive in revealing that while substantial documentation management (augmented with protocols and checks) was in place, the system fell short of implementation within the workforce and thus failed to preserve worker H&WB. The investigation generated recommendations for shoring up H&WB deficiencies observed and developed a theoretical model to represent these. Though these recommendations were developed in response to a specific case, they form the core of a HAV operational H&WB strategy framework with applicability over a broader context.

This research provides unique insight into contemporary industry practices employed to manage HAV in the workplace and represents an invaluable opportunity to learn from prevailing practices and rectify deficiencies observed.

Excessive exposure to HAV can lead to hand–arm vibration syndrome (HAVS) which is a major health and well-being issue that can irreparably damage the neurological, vascular and muscular skeletal system. This paper reports upon field research analysis of the hand–arm vibration (HAV) exposure levels of utility workers in the UK construction sector when operating hand-held vibrating power tools.

An empirical epistemological lens was adopted to analyse primary quantitative data on the management of hand-held tool trigger times (seconds) collected from field studies. To augment the analysis further, an interpretivist perspective was undertaken to qualitatively analyse interviews held with the participating company's senior management team after field study results. This approach sought to provide further depth and perspective on the emergent numerical findings.

The findings reveal that none of the operatives were exposed above the exposure limit value (ELV) and that 91.07% resided under the exposure action value (EAV). However, the Burr four parameter probability model (which satisfied the Anderson–Darling, Kolmogorov–Smirnov and chi-squared goodness of fit tests at α 0.01, 0.02, 0.05, 0.1 and 0.2 levels of significance) illustrated that given the current data distribution pattern, there was a 3% likelihood that the ELV will be exceeded. Model parameters could be used to: forecast the future probability of HAV exposure levels on other utility contracts and provide benchmark indicators to alert senior management to pending breaches of the ELV.

HAV field trials are rarely conducted within the UK utilities sector, and the research presented is the first to develop probability models to predict the likelihood of operatives exceeding the ELV based upon field data. Findings presented could go some way to preserving the health and well-being of workers by ensuing that adequate control measures implemented (e.g. procuring low vibrating tools) mitigate the risk posed.

The Control of Vibration at Work Regulations (CVWR) became law in 2005. They are of particular relevance to construction – which by nature of its activities – presents abundant whole‐body, and hand‐arm, vibration hazards. The principal aim of this research was to assess perceptions among a sample of UK construction professionals; regarding workplace vibration hazards generally and the CVWR specifically.

A structured questionnaire survey was carried out among a small but carefully targeted sample of professionals drawn from construction. These included health and safety managers, production managers and designers. A total of 88 useable responses were received. Data were analysed principally using the mean index technique.

Generally, a realistic view of hazards was observed; although some significant misperceptions were noted. Self‐confessed levels of knowledge regarding the subject were typically “low”. This appeared something of a paradox, in that “training workers” was cited as the most commonly used risk control method for both whole‐body, and hand‐arm vibration risks, respectively.

Disparity was observed between what respondents knew about the subject and the purported (extensive) use of training as a risk control method. This indicates that a degree of introspection may be beneficial on the part of employers, regarding their training design and delivery mechanisms. Differences in perceived degrees of vibration risk, exist between health and safety professionals and construction managers; implying that there is a need for improved communication between those responsible for planning vibration management controls, and those charged with implementing them at the workplace.

The paper presents research that assess perceptions among a sample of UK construction professionals; regarding workplace vibration hazards generally and the CVWR specifically.

As a tool to help compliance with relevant health and safety legislation, a cost‐effective method of risk assessing construction workers' exposure to hand‐arm vibration (HAV) is presented that allows larger numbers of workers to be evaluated, either as a stratified sample of a population or as a population where numbers are not prohibitive.

The method, developed and tested in the field with a national UK contractor, employs work study to collect exposure level data of workers undertaking real work and analyse these, to inform HAV management and risk control decisions.

The method benefits from economies of scale to efficiently risk assess large numbers of workers, without the need for specialist equipment or analysis software. It can be applied to sample strata defined by, for example, equipment used, types of work or classifications of worker.

Results add to the growing body of academic knowledge relating to construction worker HAV exposure and its management.

The method can easily be moulded to suit any type of construction organisation and help control cost associated with HAV legislation compliance.

Potential benefits of controlled HAV exposure include reduced incidence of (HAV induced) medical conditions and concomitant personal financial gains to society.

The method and context are novel. The methodology of work study and sampling in a broader sense are well established.

THE vast majority of noise specifications, rating indices, requlations and working procedures are based around overall levels and/or octave or fractional octave frequency analysis. Traditionally, analyses of this type are carried out by passing noise signals through analogue filter sets, using the ‘energy’ (pressure‐squared) outputs that result to drive analogue or digital indicators.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.