Upload
aubrey-watson
View
212
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Safety in Design and Construction: A Lifecycle Approach
Design for Construction Safety in the U.S.
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
T. Michael Toole, PhD, PE
Associate Professor
Bucknell University
John Gambatese, PhD, PE
Associate Professor
Oregon State University
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Learning Objectives
By the end of this session, participants should be able to:
Provide several examples of designing for safety Name several large firms who have design for
safety programs Identify sources of design for safety tools List several potential barriers to having design for
safety performed on your projects Summarize three steps for implementing design
for safety in your organization
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Overview
Safe Design Examples Tools and Processes Barriers Initiatives Trajectories and Implications Moving forward in your
organization
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Ethical Reasons for DfCS
National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE) Code of Ethics: Engineers shall hold paramount the safety,
health, and welfare of the public.
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Code of Ethics: Engineers shall recognize that the lives,
safety, health and welfare of the general public are dependent upon engineering decisions ….
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Example of the Need for DfCS
Design spec: Dig groundwater monitoring wells at
various locations. Wells located directly under overhead
power lines. Accident:
Worker electrocuted when his drill rig got too close to overhead power lines.
Engineer could have: specified wells be dug away from power
lines; and/or better informed the contractor of
hazard posed by wells’ proximity to powerlines through the plans, specifications, and bid documents.
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
DfCS Examples: Anchorage Points
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
DfCS Examples: Roofs and Perimeters
Skylights
Upper story windows
Parapet Walls
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Head Knocker at Catwalk
Fall Hazard at Catwalk
DfCS Examples: Clearances
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
DfCS Examples: Microchip Fabrication Plant
Plan of Record (POR): Trench
below sub-fab level
OPTION "A"- PLAN OF RECORD1
32" =1'-0"
OPTION "C"1
32" =1'-0"
New Fab: full basement and taller basement
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
DfCS Examples: Prefabrication
Steel Stairs
Concrete Wall Panels
Concrete Segmented Bridge
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Prefabrication and Modularization
Construction Drives Design
Bechtel Solar BoilerURS/WGI USACE
DamURS/WGI Power Plant
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Photos courtesy of URS, Washington Division
Modularization at a Power Plant
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Modularization: Module on Ground
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Modularization: Stair Tower
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Detailing Guide for the Enhancement of Erection Safety Published by the National Institute for Steel
Detailing and the Steel Erectors Association of America
Constructability Tips for Steel Design
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
The Erector Friendly Column Include holes in
columns at 21” and 42” for guardrail cables and at higher locations for fall protection tie-offs
Locate column splices and connections at reasonable heights above floor
Provide seats for beam connections
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Avoid hanging connections Design
connections to bear on columns
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Avoid awkward and dangerous connection locations
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Avoid tripping hazards
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Eliminate sharp corners
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Provide enough space for making connections
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Know approximate dimensions of necessary tools to make connections
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Checking in: Do we have a good idea of what design for safety is about?
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
DfCS Process
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Design for Construction Safety Toolbox
Created by Construction Industry Institute (CII)
Interactive computer program
Used in the design phase to decrease the risk of incidents
Over 400 design suggestions
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Safety in Design ChecklistsItem Description
1.0 Structural Framing
1.1 Space slab and mat foundation top reinforcing steel at no more than 6 inches on center each way to provide a safe walking surface.
1.2 Design floor perimeter beams and beams above floor openings to support lanyards.
1.3 Design steel columns with holes at 21 and 42 inches above the floor level to support guardrail cables.
2.0 Accessibility
2.1 Provide adequate access to all valves and controls.
2.2 Orient equipment and controls so that they do not obstruct walkways and work areas.
2.3 Locate shutoff valves and switches in sight of the equipment which they control.
2.4 Provide adequate head room for access to equipment, electrical panels, and storage areas.
2.5 Design welded connections such that the weld locations can be safely accessed.
HARVARD UNIVERSITYOption Evaluation Sheet Intel D1D Programming
Option Title Subfab vs Basement Opion #1
Option Description D1B (Similar) Basement W/ 14' SubfabDescription of Issue:
Evaluation Criteria ScoreFSCS GOALS wt. worse better total Comments
5- *0 5+
C1 Dollars / Sq Ft 1 1 1 1 1 1 -5 11.9 M Impact to Base Build Cost
C2 Tool Install Cost 1 1 1 2 1.9 M Cost Savings
E1 Energy Conservation 1 1 -1 added building Volume
E2 Reduce Emissions 1 1 -1 More materials
S1 Support 2 Technology and 1 1 1 1 3 Move Available space5 HVM Generations
S2 Maintain Existing Reliability and 1 1 1 More room for maintenanceMaintainability
S3 Improved Life Cycle Safety 1 1 1 2 Ergonomics - Cable Instalation
S4 Maximize Reuseability and 1 1 1 0 Small Benifet to ElectricalFungibility Only adapts to Copy D1b
B FABSD1 Overall Construction Duration 1 1 1 2 weeks faster than POR ( Trench)
D2 Consructability 1 1 1 Better than Trench
D3 Tool Install Duration 1 1 1 2 More space available
5 Total Score
Comments:
Multi-criteria alternative analysis tools
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
CHAIR Safety in Design Tool
Begin Concept Design
Commence Construction
CHAIR-2
CHAIR-3
Project Phase
CHAIR-1
Review of Concept Design
Review of Detailed Design
Construction Hazard Assessment and Implication Review (CHAIR)
(Source: NSW WorkCover, CHAIR Safety in Design Tool, 2001)
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
CHAIR Safety in Design Tool
No. Guideword Risk Issue Causes Consequence
sSafeguard
s Action Person Resp.
GENERIC
1. Size
2. Heights / Depths
3. Position / Location
4. Poor Ergonomics
5. Movement / Direction
6. Load / Force
7. Energy
Project: Element: Date:
Drawing(s): Revision:
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Websites
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Links on www.designforconstructionsafety.org
OSHA Construction Alliance Roundtable NIOSH's PtD Webpage Information about OSHA’s Alliance Program Homepage for the United Kingdom’s Law Requiring Designing fo
r Safety The Actual Text of the UK Law Design Best Practice Australia's Safe Design Webpage Singapore's Workplace Safety & Health Council webpage SaferDesign.org Federal OSHA Standards for Construction Department of Labor Accident Data
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
DfCS in Practice: Design-Builders
ParsonsURSJacobsBechtel
Photo credit: URS, Washington Div.
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
URS/Washington Group Int’l DfCS Process
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Bechtel’s Influence Curves
High
Low
Preliminary Design
Front-End Design
Startup
Infl
uen
ce
Maxim
um
re
turn
on
eff
ort
s
Maxim
um
resou
rce
deplo
ym
en
t
I nitiation
Engineering
I nfluence
Management of Change
Detailed Design
Costs
Res
ourc
es
Dep
loye
d
Construction
High
Low
Preliminary Design
Front-End Design
Startup
Infl
uen
ce
Maxim
um
re
turn
on
eff
ort
s
Maxim
um
resou
rce
deplo
ym
en
t
I nitiation
Engineering
I nfluence
Management of Change
Detailed Design
Costs
Res
ourc
es
Dep
loye
d
Construction
High
Low
Preliminary Design
Front-End Design
Startup
Infl
uen
ce
Maxim
um
re
turn
on
eff
ort
s
Maxim
um
resou
rce
deplo
ym
en
t
I nitiation
Engineering
I nfluence
Management of Change
Detailed Design
Costs
Res
ourc
es
Dep
loye
d
Construction
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Bechtel’s Steel Design Process
Temporary access platforms
Lifting lugsShop installed
vertical brace ladders
Bolt-on column ladders and work platforms
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Temporary ladder, platform and safety line
Photos courtesy Bechtel Corp.
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Modular Platforms
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Brace Lifting Clips and Rungs
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
DfCS in Practice: Owners
Southern Co.BHP BillitonUSACEIntel
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
BHP Billiton Courses
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
National Initiatives and Activities
NIOSH PtD National Initiative
PtD Workshops: July 2007 and August 2011
NORA Construction Sector Council CHPtD Workgroup
OSHA Construction Alliance Roundtable
ASCE-CI PtD Committee (terminated 2009)
ASSE PtD Standard Z790
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Checking in: Do you sense that big organizations are pursuing DfCS?
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
DfCS Barriers
Like many good ideas, DfCS faces a number of barriers that can slow its adoption.
Potential solutions to these barriers involve long-term education and institutional changes.
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Barrier: Designers' Fear of Liability
Barrier: Fear of undeserved liability for worker safety.
Potential solutions: Clearly communicate we are NOT
suggesting designers should be held responsible for construction accidents.
Develop revised model contract language Propose legislation to facilitate DfCS
without inappropriately shifting liability onto designers.
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Barrier: Increased Designer Costs
Barrier: DfCS processes will increase both direct and overhead costs for designers.
Potential solution: Educate owners that total project costs
and total project life cycle costs will decrease.
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Barrier: Designers' Lack of Safety Expertise
Barrier: Few design professionals possess sufficient expertise in construction safety.
Potential solutions: Add safety to design professionals’
curricula. Develop and promote 10-hour and 30-
hour OSHA courses for design professionals.
Utilize IPD to allow for constructor input.
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
The Future of DfCS
Trajectories in technological innovation (Dosi 1992)
Where is DfCS heading? Five proposed DfCS trajectories Implications for professions and
individual organizations
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Five DfCS Trajectories
1. Increased prefabrication2. Increased use of less hazardous
materials and systems3. Increased application of construction
engineering4. Increased spatial investigation and
consideration5. Increased collaboration and
integration
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Increased Prefabrication
Shift site work to safer work site environment elevation to ground underground to grade confined space to open space
Shift site work to factory Allows use of safer, automated equipment Provides safer, engineered environment
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Increased Collaboration and Integration
Communication about risks, costs, time, quality….
Between owner, AE/DB, CM/GC, manufacturers, and trade contractors
In every phase of project concept design detailed design procurement construction
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Implications for Contracting
New contract terms neededDesign-Bid-Build project delivery
method typically hinders collaboration during design
Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) methods, such as Design-Build and Design + Negotiated construction, better facilitate collaboration
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Sutter Health IPD Process
Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) facilitates collaboration of design and construction professionals during design Co-located Processes and norms for candid feedback Trust Sufficient time Life cycle costing criteria Common success criteria
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Three Steps towards DfCS
1. Establish a lifecycle safety culture2. Establish enabling processes3. Team with organizations who value
lifecycle safety
Culture Processes Partners
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Establish a Lifecycle Safety Culture
Instill the right safety values Secure management commitment Ensure recognition that designing for
construction safety is the smart thing to do and the right thing to do1. Professional Codes of Ethics2. Payoff data
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Establish Enabling Processes
Provide designers with safety training
Ensure designer-constructor interaction
Provide designers with DfCS tools
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Team with Organizations Who Value Lifecycle Safety
Design-Builders less dependent on clients’ safety values
International clients favorableIndustrial clients favorableNegotiated projects in other sectors
offer opportunity to educate clients
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Summary
Successful owners and design-builders have implemented DfCS
Keys to designing for construction safety: Collaboration between all project team members Designers knowledgeable of construction practices,
site safety principles and safe designs Use of DfCS tools and guidelines
Three first steps to implementing DfCS Culture, Processes, Clients
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Are you feeling more comfortable about having design for safety occur in your organization?
Thanks for listening!
[email protected]@oregonstate.edu