worksite safety update · worksite safety update promoting safety in road construction no 112...

Worksite Safety UpdatePromoting safety in road construction

No 112 October 2011

Will Your Plant SWMS Prevent Rollover.Do the Controls Include Construction Method?

of 13

In this Edition: Safety Excellence Award for Anthonys Cutting Project Page 1 Towards National TMA Guidelines Page 5 Barrier Length of Need Page 14

Safety Excellence Award for Anthonys Cutting ProjectThe Anthonys Cutting Project has received the VicRoads Major Projects Safety ExcellenceAward for the consistently high standard of safety achieved during the construction ofthe freeway and bridgeworks associated with the realignment of the Western Highwaywest of Melton.

The Realignment involved the construction of a new 5 kilometre highway connectionsouth of the existing route, from Melton West to east of Bacchus Marsh. The newfreeway alignment will avoid the steep grades and tight curves through the previousalignment, improving safety and reducing travel times and transport costs, with driversable to travel this new section at 110 km/h.

Bridge beam erection at the Djerriwarrh Creek Bridge

of 14

High risk construction work involved:

Work at height: Bridge works and cutting excavation. Bridgeconstruction minimised fall risks through modular construction ofDjerriwarrh Creek Bridge piers and the on ground construction ofHopetoun Park Bridge.

Mobile plant operation: Significant plant movement, haul roads onsteep inclines, UHF traffic management. The trialling of rollover warningdevice of an articulated dump truck which was communicated to ourindustry via the June 2011 edition of VicRoads Safety Update Newsletter.

Work near services: Proving and marking of services both overhead andunderground. Permits to work.

Deep Excavations: The cutting and excavation underneath theconstructed Hopetoun Park Bridge after its construction.

Work near traffic: Western freeway and various roads near Melton.Road closure, safety barriers and TMAs as higher level controls weredeployed for work on or adjacent to roads.

Removal of asbestos: AC Pipes in the orchard areas were removed byapproved methods.

Award Recipients Were:

Rod Jeffrey, Alliance ManagerMatthew Maltman, Construction ManagerMario Saliba, Project Delivery ManagerPaul Portelli, Safety CoordinatorDavid Stephens, Safety AdvisorMark Beiers, Structure ManagerAdele Hardwick, Project EngineerLaurence Harrison, Site EngineerTameika Leak, Traffic CoordinatorTerry Brett, Structure SupervisorMatthew Stirling, Civil EngineerShaun McCarthy, Project ManagerRohan Deed, Site EngineerJames O'Reilly, Site EngineerMichael Gradnig, Project ManagerBrendan Xuereb, Project EngineerDaniel Rose, Project EngineerChris Melvin, Site EngineerBrad Gebhardt, Site EngineerKapish Shah, Site EngineerTony Briski, Surveillance ManagerSteve Chapple, Surveillance ManagerLloyd Knowler, Engineering ManagerGary Thorn, Design ManagerDavid Durante, Health and Safety RepresentativeKeith Morehead, Health and Safety Representative

Certificates were also presented to Alliance Partners John Holland as the PrincipalContractor and AECOM for Design.

of 14

Framed Certificates were presented to award recipients by George Mavroyeni, VicRoadsExecutive Director Major Projects.

Group photograph of award participants

John Holland award certificateleft to right: David Moran, Matthew Gault, George Mavroyeni, Rod Jeffrey.

of 14

AECOM award certificateleft to right: Ian Pitcher, George Mavroyeni, Lara Poloni

The safety teamleft to right: Nathan Cracknell, David Stephens, Michael Rose, Paul Portelli

of 14

The award recipients are to be congratulated. They were actively involved in safety and madesignificant contributions to safety on the project.

It must also be recognised that all personnel who worked on the project made the awardpossible and are to be congratulated for working safely and contributing to the excellentoutcome.

Safety is everyone’s business and good outcomes cannot be achieved without the activeparticipation of everyone working on a project. Additional to the safety managementsystems the Alliance fully supported safety culture improvement and introduced a number ofinitiatives including full day workshops to seek safety improvements when necessary.

Central to this safety culture improvement the Alliance introduced the Safety Stop, Think,Ask, Risk Assess (STAR) Program and necessary culture change training.

The STAR logo on high visibility jackets issued to personnel as part of theculture change program.

The new freeway alignment provides:

Safer driving conditions for freeway users avoiding the steep grades, tight curvesand local road intersections on the existing highway

Travel time savings with the freeway speed limit raised to 110 km/h comparedwith 80 km/h limit now operating on sections of the highway

Reduced costs for the road freight industry and its customers for goodstransported between Melbourne, Ballarat, western Victoria and South Australia

Better connections for communities with new road links for local travel in andaround Melton and Bacchus Marsh

Support for jobs and growth for the future with easier travel for commuters,tourists, and regional businesses.

of 14

Towards National TMA GuidelinesIn 2010 representatives of the New South Wales, Queensland and Victoria RoadAuthorities met in Sydney to share their cumulative experience with Truck and Trailertype Crash Attenuators (TMAs).

At the first meeting it was evident all states were (and still are) increasing thedeployment of TMAs for the protection of both maintenance and construction works. Allstates had similar experience with TMA operation, use of new technology such as VMS(including colour displays) and TMA incident experience. Since the first meeting we havecontinued to share our experience and innovation. Feedback to our industry wasprovided on the September 2010 meeting via the October 2010 edition of thisnewsletter.

In October 2011 representatives from the NSW, Queensland, Western Australia andVictorian Road Authorities met for the second time to consider proposals for NationalTMA Guidelines which would facilitate a standard approach to TMA operations inAustralia.

Current TMA GuidelinesAll participating states have based their respective state guidelines on the earlierQueensland version. The potential advantages of standardisation have been recognisedand all states have endeavoured to achieve this objective, subject to the necessaryconsultation with stakeholders in each state and taking into account their differingcircumstances. Western Australia currently has less TMAs than the other states andintends to develop guidelines.

A copy of the current draft VicRoads TMA Guidelines, developed in consultation with ourstakeholders, are provided with this edition of the newsletter.

The RTA in NSW (Now Roads and Maritime Services) and DMR Queensland has beenworking across their respective border for some time and as a consequence their currentguidelines are very similar to facilitate potential cross border equipment deployment.Both states have a relatively large fleet of TMAs within their road authorities whereasVicRoads does not and depends significantly on contractors.

As major TMA fleet operators NSW and Queensland guidelines tend to be moreprescriptive than those in Victoria, the current VicRoads Guidelines reflect theperformance based approach common to safely guidelines in Victoria, particularly inrespect to TMA construction options.

Most TMAs available in Victoria have been constructed to the operating company’srequirements which should include the crash attenuator manufacturer’s specifications forthe truck fitted with or required to tow the attenuator in order to achieve safe operationof the TMA.

It is also evident from discussions with our industry that many non road authority TMAoperators in other states have also based their respective truck designs and weights onthe applicable attenuator equipment manufacturer’s specifications.

TMA Manufacturer’s RecommendationsThere are inconsistencies in weight recommendations for TMAs probably due to lack ofdefinition of their meaning of ‘weight’ and whether they are referring to TARE or GVM. It

of 14

is very clear in some manufacturer’s installation / operating manuals but is open tointerpretation in others. The actual attenuators weigh around 900 kg.

The manufacturer’s recommendations for TMA GVM weights (Truck including the crashattenuator, arrow boards, etc.) for the most frequently deployed designs vary between7.3 tonnes and 9 tonnes for optimal performance.VicRoads guidelines currently specify 10.4 tonnes GVM minimum which is higher thanthe manufacturer’s specifications, taking into account recommendations from ourindustry stakeholders, with a recommended optimum of 15 tonne GVM taking intoaccount the NSW and Queensland practices but not mandating this at present.

The TMAs are designed to attenuate and crash tested in general by a maximum vehicleweight of 2 tonne travelling at 100 km / hour for the NCHRP 350 test level 3, not aheavier vehicle such as a truck. Note that the new Manual for Assessing SafetyHardware (MASH) will apply in future.

Experience has shown that much heavier vehicles such as trucks do impact thesevehicles and one TMA has been rolled onto its side in Queensland. Everyone has walkedaway from these impacts and the experience has influenced additional operatorprotection to the RoadTek / DMR Queensland TMAs, such as four point seat harnesseswhen operated in attenuator mode. Naturally the safety of the TMA operator must be animportant consideration.

The following photographs show crash experience in Queensland and USA:

RoadTek TMA after impact by heavy truck.

of 14

The attenuator after the heavy truck impact(Four point harnesses and other protection was recommended to better protect operators)

TMA subsequent to a heavy truck impact in USA

of 14

The impacting 30 tonne heavy truck (the driver fell asleep) everyone walked away and the TMAtruck was not seriously damaged. The damage to the impacting truck is evident. Both

occupants of the truck were sleeping.

The manufacturer’s recommended truck weight is sometimes achieved through theaddition of ballast safely secured to the truck tray at the lighter end of the available andrecommended TMA support truck ranges. The ballast varying from steel plates securelybolted to the tray to large water containers secured with straps. If straps are used tosecure ballast one major TMA manufacturer states in their operating manual that:“Ballast and other heavy objects MUST BE ADEQUATELY ANCHORED to the truck toprevent shifting during an impact. (The force on the tie-down straps could be 20 timesthe weight of the ballast)”.

Naturally this aspect of TMA operation must be a safety consideration if the truckrequires ballast to achieve the TMA manufacturer’s weight for optimum performance. Ifthe ballast is removed and not replaced this presents another safety issue. It wasproposed at the last meeting that ballast not be permitted in future TMA truck designs.

US FHWA ApprovalThe weight of the truck plays an important role in efficient impact reduction process.The US FHWA approval letters usually the acceptance is based on the weight ofthe support vehicle used in the crash tests. The approval letters have beenconsulted for two attenuator designs and they refer to required support truckweights as shown on the table below. Some approvals recommend against theuse of trucks which are significantly lighter or heavier unless tests are conducted.Shunt forward distances are likely to be greater with lighter support trucks.

Attenuator Design Attenuator Weight (Kg) Test Level Tested Support Truck andApproval Weight (Kg)

Scorpion 10000Truck Mounted

629 TL-3 9000

Safe Stop 180Truck Mounted

945 TL-3 8550

of 14

The U.S. Department of Transport (FHWA) in their Field Guide for the Use and Placementof Shadow Vehicles in Work Zones (which includes TMA application for both mobile andstationary operations) specify that the mass of the vehicle should be within 5 percent ofthe mass of the shadow vehicle on which the TMA was crash tested (9000 kg).

TMA Weight ProposalsThe DMR Queensland and RTA (Now Roads and Maritime Services) NSW have specifiedheavier truck and crash attenuator combinations than the crash attenuatormanufacturer’s recommendations for optimum performance. It is understood that thishas already been applied to their respective fleets of TMAs.

Their preferred weight of TMA (Truck, crash attenuator, illuminated arrow boards, etc.)is 15 tonne. Data on impact shunt / roll forward distances show that the heavier weightunits should perform better under impact and they will not require ballast. Axle weightsmay be another consideration.

TMA impact experience in Queensland has significantly influenced their decision toincrease the size of their vehicles and for other requirements.

RoadTek has provided their rationale for introducing the 15 tonne GVM to their fleet ofTMAs. It may be found on the next page. It is important that our industry understandthe reasons why Queensland and New South Wales are proposing that 15 tonne GVM beconsidered for the proposed National TMA Guidelines.

VicRoads thank RoadTek and specifically Peter Kelly and Ken Clayton for providing theRationale and documenting their safety case for 15 tonne GVM TMAs.

of 14

15 Ton GVM Rationale

Critical to the development of a TMA that affords protection to the public, the roadworkers and the operator is the selection of the host vehicle. The vehicle must beappropriate for the use that is intended and also comply with all legislative requirements.The specification requirement for the components added to it must also be considered.

As a minimum standard it has been found that a 15 Ton GVM vehicle will meet therequirements of the attenuator manufacturer’s specifications for both the major suppliersof attenuators. The attenuators available require 9 Ton and 7.3~9 Ton Tare weights. Inindustry there seems to be some confusion over Tare and GVM so we need to spell thisout plainly and simply for those who do not know.

The Tare weight is the weight of the host vehicle with all the components attachedincluding attenuator, arrow board, mast and in cab fit out. (Minimum 9T for TMA)The GVM is the total weight capacity of the vehicle allowed when fully loaded. The GVMminus the Tare weight will give the allowable weight of the load the vehicle can carry.

Other considerations are the weight over axles when the vehicle is used as a TMA andthe 15 Ton GVM vehicle and above can achieve this without the use of ballast weights.The use of ballast weights was discounted because of the necessity to resist twentytimes the force of gravity for restraints. Although this could be achieved easily attachingto the body, the body itself attached to the chassis with the extra ballast was consideredunrealistic and expensive.

So in the development of these vehicles it was determined that a as minimum standardthe 15GVM vehicle had the correct requirements to achieve Tare weight requirementsand axle loadings.

This gives a whole of life balance when the vehicle is to be decommissioned because itcan be done without major modifications for disposal.

Peter KellyRoadTek Plant Hire Services15 November 2011

of 14

Department of Transport and Main Roads Queensland (RoadTek) TMA

Roads and Maritime Services NSW TMA

of 14

Typical TMA in U.S.A.

Some of the more prescriptive aspects of the proposals include automatic transmissionsand illuminated arrow boards which may be raised and lowered.

A draft of the proposed National TMA Guidelines is expected to become available lateNovember to early December 2011. It will then become clear as to what precisely hasbeen recommended by the TMA industry in Queensland and New South Wales. Bothstates are proposing a transition period of 3 years before they are expected to becomefully implemented in their states. This period needs to take into account the existingstate situations and current availability of complying TMAs.

VicRoads will continue to consult with our TMA stakeholders in Victoria and how theproposed weight increase and other more prescriptive recommendations could impactthem and this will be taken into account by VicRoads as we move forward.

Advance Warning VMS when TMAs Occupy Trafficked LanesQueensland, NSW and Victoria report the successful use of Advance Warning VMS tobetter advise drivers that a lane ahead is closed by a TMA and roadwork. No significantimpacts have been reported by NSW, Queensland or Victoria over the past 12 months.Consequently all states support this practice on high traffic volume high speed roadssuch as urban freeways where the forward view of drivers is more likely to be obscuredby other traffic.

Previous to their introduction in Victoria there were four significant TMA impacts. Threeof them occurred on the M80 project and one on the M1 West Gate Project. A TMAindustry workshop was convened with stakeholders to investigate the incidents. Allincidents occurred during the establishment or removal of formal lane closures. It wasagreed to follow the New Zealand Best Practice Guidelines and include them in our TMA

of 14

Guidelines for high traffic volume high speed roads such as urban freeways. As aconsequence Victoria has been deploying VMS advance warning for over 12 months onurban freeway works.

Roadtek narrow wheelbase TMA Pre Warning Vehicle.TMAs equipped with VMS are also deployed in Victoria in higher risk areas.

TMA MaintenanceFatigue cracks have been reported in the brackets attaching truck mounted attenuatorsto the supporting truck. Similar cracking was reported last year. Cracks have beenfound in TMAs which have been in service for a long period. All operators are remindedof the need for frequent inspections of this area in addition to other recommendedinspections contained in the current guidelines.

Barrier Length of NeedLast months Worksite Safety Update included an article regarding the No Go ZoneProcedure which has been applied within the M80 Tulla Sydney Alliance (TSA). Theprimary objective of the article was to share the red No Go Zones dimensions shown inthe table, not the barrier length of need distances shown in the procedure.

The barrier length of need distances must take into account the circumstances at thelocation and the TSA dimensions should not be seen as generic and applicable to otherlocations.

The Worksite Safety – Traffic Management Code 2010 requires that the safety barrierlength of need should be determined as set out in the Austroads Guide to Road Design –Part 6: Roadside Design, Safety and Barriers and any relevant VicRoads guidelines.

Worksite Site Safety Update is produced monthly by VicRoads Major Projects Division tocommunicate industry safety information and initiatives within VicRoads and to ourcontractors. It is also circulated via the WorkSafe Safety Soapbox to industry. The contentreflects civil road construction and maintenance safety and includes works conducted on orbeside operational roads. The editor may be contacted at: [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

worksite safety update · worksite safety update promoting safety in road construction no 112...

Documents