Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Challenges in implementing DfS and ways to overcome
them
Dr Goh Yang Miang
Department of Building, NUS
• DfS – Key Concepts
• International Perspectives
• Sg Study on DfS – Challenges & recommendations
Key DfS Stakeholders
Clients/ Developers
Contractors Designers
Inception Completion Project Stages
Scope for change
Cost of change
Core Concept
Minimize risk of accidents and ill health through consideration
of hazards during upstream design phases of a construction
project
Overlapping areas
Process Hazard Analysis (PHA)
HAZOP What-if Analysis Layers of Protection Analysis (LOPA)
Building Control Act & Building Control Regulations
Qualified persons Builders licensing Building plan submission
DfS is focused on Workplace Safety and Health (WSH) hazards
Singapore, Design for Safety
(DfS)
US (non-mandatory) Prevention through Design (PtD)
Australia, Safe Design (SD or SiD)
EU, e.g. UK’s Construction (Design and Management) (CDM)
South African Construction Regulations (2003)
DfS had been around
DfS is a potential game changer!
Attitude
Knowledge
Practices
Challenges in 3 aspects (KAP)
USA (Gambatese et al., 2005; Toole, 2005); Spain (López-Arquilloset al., 2015) ; UK (Larsen and Whyte, 2013; Brace et al., 2009; Bhutto, 2015)
Practices • Lack of consideration for safety during design (US) • Concerns about liabilities, contract terms & professional fees (US) • “the [CDM Coordinator] role has effectively become a bureaucratic exercise and many
construction clients struggle to see any tangible benefits from it” (UK)
Attitude • Designer mindset toward
safety [is lacking] (US) • “safety is very much seen as
an after thought or bolt-on to the design” (UK)
• Designers typically do not see safety and health as part of their job (UK)
Knowledge • Lack of safety
knowledge among designers in US
• Lack of emphasis on DfS in the university courses for architects and engineers in Spain
• Lack of understanding of construction [& maintenance/operation] processes in US
Goh, Y. M., and Chua, S. J. (2015). "Knowledge, attitude and practices for design for safety: A study on civil & structural engineers." Accident Analysis & Prevention, Accepted for publication.
Singapore 2014/15 Online Survey
43 C&S engineers responded
98% agree that DfS should be included as part of
their professional duties
C&S engineers were supportive of DfS
86% felt that DfS is important or very important
88% indicated that DfS will improve the safety
performance of the construction industry
70% of respondents felt that the client and end-
user provide the greatest motivation for undertaking DfS
Importance of Clients in motivating DfS
Client’s commitment seems to be influenced by…
size of client organization
client’s concern for reputation
public or private developer
Importance of Clients in motivating DfS
Need to develop business case to
convince clients on the importance of DfS
Factors influencing Success of DfS
1. Designers’ mindset towards safety + Legislative force
2. Support from other stakeholders
3. DfS tools and guidelines
4. DfS experts to guide designers
Most important
Least important
Mindset is more important than tools and knowledge
Effect of DfS training - Fisher’s exact test Attended DfS Training
Level of understanding of DfS < “Well”
Level of understanding of DfS >= “Well”
Total
No 26 4 30
Yes 5 8 13
Total 31 12 43 *Level of understanding of DfS significantly differed by whether the respondent attended formal DfS training (p < 0.05)
Attending DfS training = understand DfS “well” or “very well”
… but only 13 (30%) of the respondents attended the DfS training
Need to get more people into DfS Training!!
DfS Knowledge
More familiar with control of e.g. falling from height, slips
and trips, and inhalation of dust
Less familiar with control of e.g. radiation, drowning
hazards and hazardous chemical and biological substances or
material
Current DfS training did not improve knowledge in control of hazards focus on DfS process
DfS training should include:
Practical case studies of the impact of different designs Master Class in Jan 2016
Different hazards and their corresponding design-related controls
Interesting Case Study found in Pat Perry’s book on CDM (2007)
HSE Inspector conducts routine CDM visit Went onto a roof of a building under refurbishment
Inspector unwilling to accept fall arrest system used on the roof as a suitable design solution
Wanted to know why the Designers (Architect) had not replaced the fall arrest system with a full edge protection system
Designer had not considered the “Principles of Prevention” and had not eliminated a hazard which was foreseeable and reasonably practicable to do
Top 3 Perceived problems in practicing DfS
Client’s concern of cost
Contractor coming in too late
Inconsistency in DfS review/ checks
Client’s mindset
Early contractor Involvement (ECI); Virtual Design & Construction
Develop body of knowledge and promote discussions on hazards and controls standards/ guidelines
DfS Coordinator/ Professional is essential…
Strongly agree Strongly disagree
Most felt that a DfS Professional or Coordinator is essential Singapore’s DfS Regulations allow for both
To have or not to have… DfSP
is not a critical question
Key to success of a DfS Review: 1. Commitment of stakeholders 2. Effective facilitator & coordinator 3. Design, WSH and operational competency
of stakeholders (not facilitator) 4. Information are available and reviewed 5. Detailed documentation and tracking
No paper exercise, please!
Someone (QP (supervision)?) need to ensure WSH control measures identified during design safety reviews were actually implemented onsite
Attitude
Knowledge
Practices
Clients provide motivation, but designers need to be proactive
Mindset is more important than tools and knowledge
Need to get more people trained
Improve operational & WSH knowledge
Early contractor involvement or operational knowledge
Guidelines/ BOK for DfS review/ checks
Ensure implementation on site & during operation
DfS is a potential game changer!
… but we need to prevent it from becoming a paper exercise
