Research Project
Presentation
Steve Howarth
Presentation Outline
Project Title
Project Hypothesis
Project Background
Project Objectives
Research Method
Scope of the Research
Survey Results
Literature Review
Conclusion
Recommendations
Benefits of the Research
Project Title
“The development and
implementation of an
effective management and
monitoring system, to ensure
that cranes comply with
statutory requirements”.
Hypothesis
“The non-compliance to
statutory requirements will
decrease upon the
implementation of the
inspection regime”
Project Background
In January, 2001, the Labour
Department conducted a survey of
the cranes and lifting appliances on
the KCRC’s West Rail project.
It was found that 34% of the
cranes were not fitted with an
automatic safe load indicator, or if
fitted, it was not functioning
correctly.
Shanghai
Project Objectives
To develop an inspection and
enforcing system for ensuring
compliance to the statutory
requirements;
To implement the system;
Project Objectives (cont)
To revise and improve the system,
following comments from those
concerned in the implementation,
and
To review the effectiveness of
the system, in ensuring
compliance to statutory
requirements.
Scope of the Project
KCRC’s, West Rail and East Rail
Extensions projects;
23 construction sites;
Surveys conducted monthly over a
6 month period, May – Oct, 2001;
All cranes.
Research Method
Participatory Action Research (PAR)
based on Lewin’s Cyclic Model
Review
Act
Plan
Review
 Conduct a survey of all
cranes being used on the 2
projects to establish if
there is a high rate of noncompliance to statutory
requirements.
Plan
 Review the Hong Kong
Legislation to identify what the
statutory requirements are;
 Develop an inspection checklist;
Plan (cont)
 Train the surveyors to use the
inspection checklist;
Conduct a survey of all the
cranes being used on the 2 projects
to establish if there was a problem
with the statutory compliance.
Act
The Hong Kong Legislation was
reviewed and 12 statutory
requirements were identified;
Statutory Requirements
•Form 1. Report of Results of Weekly Inspection of Lifting
Appliances
•Form 2. Certificate of Test and Thorough Examination of
Anchoring or Ballasting of Cranes
•Form 3. Certificate of Test and Thorough Examination of Cranes,
Crabs and Winches
•Form 4. Certificate of Test and Thorough Examination of Lifting
Appliances (Except Cranes, Crabs and Winches)
•Form 5. Lifting Appliances Certificate of Thorough Examination in
the Preceding Twelve Months
•ASLI not fitted or not functioning properly
•Obstructed view
•Safe working load markings
•Jib angle indicator fitted
•Anti- collision device fitted
•Over hoist limit switch fitted
•Safety latch fitted on the hook
Act (cont)
The inspection checklist was
developed by a team of staff;
Crane and Lifting Appliance Safety Inspection
Form
Contract
Location
Date and Time of
Inspection:
Type of Crane
Conducted by:
Ref. Number:
(Tick as appropriate)
Crawler Crane
Tower Crane
Hydraulic Crane
Gantry Crane
Piling Rig
Lorry or Train
Mounted Crane
Brand/model
Identification
Number:
Owner
Year of Manufacture
Contractor’s own plant
permit or labelling system
Form 1
Maximum SWL (Form 3)
No
Yes
Issue Date
Latest Dated:
Form 2* (if necessary)
Dated:
Form 3 *
Dated:
Form 4* (if necessary)
Dated:
Form 5*
Dated:
Registration Number:
Name of RPE
Operator’s Certificate*
Name:
Issued by:
Valid until:
Class:
Safety Devices
Yes
No
ASLI fitted, working and being used*
Over hoist/travel limit switch*
(for Crane only)
Safety latch on the hook
Unobstructed view
SWL marking/Radius chart
Jib angle indicator
(telescopic or lattice jib)
Anti-collision devices functioning properly*
Permit to Move*
The latest Permit Dated:
Permit to Operate*
The latest Permit Dated:
(tower crane)
Compliance to Permits*
Compliance to the
Permit to Operate
Remarks
Yes
No
Compliance to the
Permit to Move
PVC holder issued
* Major safety requirement. Non-compliance will lead to suspension of operation.
Conclusion
Compliance with
requirement
Non-compliance
Suspended from operation
Yes
Yes
No
No
Act (cont)
 The surveyors were trained to
use the inspection checklist;
A survey was conducted of all
the cranes being used on the 2
projects.
Results of the Initial Survey
Monthly Non-Compliance Rate
14.00
12.00
10.00
12.32%
ERE Monthly Non-Compliance
Rate
WR Monthly Non-Compliance
Rate
8.00
339 cranes were
6.00
Inspected:
4.00
276 WR
2.00
63 ERE
0%
0.00
May
6 more surveys were conducted
using the PAR method
Review
Act
Plan
Results of the 2nd Survey
30.00
25.00
ERE Monthly Non-Compliance Rate
25.00
ERE Cumulative Non-Compliance Rate
20.00
WR Cumulative Non-Compliance Rate
16.57
20.00
15.00
12.32
15.00
10.87
10.00
10.00
5.00
5.00
0.00
0.00
May
0.00
Jun
Cumulative Non-Compliance Rate
Monthly Non-Compliance Rate
WR Monthly Non-Compliance Rate
Results of the 6th & Final Survey
30.00
ERE (Monthly)
Percentage of Non-compliances
25.89
WR (Monthly)
25.00
ERE (Cumulative)
WR (Cumulative)
20.00
16.57
15.00
12.32
10.87
9.23
10.00
7.29
9.05
8.91
7.39
5.71
6.38
5.00
2.60
3.55
2.49
0.67
0.00
7.14
6.23
0.00
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
3.05 1.65
SEP
3.57
2.39
OCT
Example of an Inspection Item Survey
Result – Form 1, Non Compliance
24,828
items
were inspected
AS
or
no
tf
N
N
o
o
o
o
Fo
rm
Fo
rm
Fo
rm
Fo
rm
4
3
2
1
o
Fo
un
ct
rm
io
5
ni
n
g
N
o
pr
O
op
N
v
er
er
o
ly
Sa
H
o
fe
is
ty
tS
La
wi
tc
tc
h
h
on
th
N
e
o
H
O
Sa
oo
bs
fe
k
tru
W
c
te
or
d
ki
Vi
ng
ew
Lo
ad
N
M
o
ar
Ji
ki
b
ng
A
ng
s
N
le
o
In
An
di
tica
C
to
ol
r
l is
io
n
D
ev
ic
e
LI
no
tf
i tt
ed
N
N
N
Percentage Non-compliance
Summary of the Results by Project
4.50
4.00
3.50
WR
3.00
ERE
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
Statutory Requirement
or
no
tf
N
N
o
Fo
rm
4
3
2
1
0.58
o
Fo
un
rm
ct
io
5
ni
ng
N
pr
o
O
op
N
ve
er
o
rH
ly
Sa
oi
fe
st
ty
S
La
wi
tc
tc
h
h
on
th
N
e
o
H
O
Sa
oo
bs
k
fe
tru
W
ct
or
ed
ki
Vi
ng
ew
Lo
ad
N
M
o
ar
Ji
ki
b
ng
A
ng
s
N
le
o
In
An
di
tica
C
to
ol
r
l is
io
n
D
ev
ic
e
LI
no
tf
i tt
ed
Fo
rm
Fo
rm
Fo
rm
1
AS
o
o
o
0.5
N
N
N
Percentage Non-compliance
Summary of the Results by Item
3.5
3.19
3
2.22
2.5
2
1.79
1.5
1.26
0.68
0.68
0.39
0.39
0.1
Statutory Requirement
0.63
0.34
0
No’ of Cranes Inspected by Month
Total 2,069
Types of Cranes Inspected
1400
1226
WR
ERE
Total
Number of Cranes
1200
1000
769
800
600
449
410
352
400
213
210
220
214
200
58
3
6
Lorry or Train
Mounted
Tower
0
Crawler
Hydraulic
Literature Review
•Hong Kong Safety Legislation;
•Crane and Lifting Appliance Legislation in
Hong Kong;
•Crane and Lifting Appliance Legislation in
Other Countries;
•Safety Management;
•Risk Perception;
•Human Behavior;
•Supervisors Role, and
•Senior Managers Role.
Conclusion
•The inspections and the inspection
checklist were successful in reducing the
number of non-conformances;
•The survey has identified areas of weakness
in the safety management systems of the
Contractor;
•There is no penalty system in place,
other than from the Contractor, for the
operator.
Conclusion - Hypothesis
“The non-compliance to statutory requirements
will decrease upon the implementation of the
inspection regime”
TRUE –
The results show that the
number of non-conformances
did decrease following the
implementation of the
inspection regime.
Recommendations
•Incorporate the inspection checklist into a
safety procedure for all sites;
•Continue the inspections and continue to
record and report the non-conformances;
•Implement effective Contractor safety
management systems to ensure statutory
compliance;
Recommendations (cont)
•Discuss with the Labour Department and the
operator’s license issuing authority, the nonconformances and discuss measures for
improvement;
•Make the safety procedure available to other
projects in Hong Kong.
Benefits from the Research
•Improved compliance to statutory
requirements;
•Elimination of crane incidents;
•Increased inspections and monitoring;
•Formalised inspection procedure;
Benefits from the Research
•Standardised inspection procedure;
•Improved quality of the inspections;
•Is now being used on other non KCRC
projects
(cont)
Questions