IDH JOB:
Plastered on Facebook & Twitter yesterday is a photograph of a tube & fitting/tin sheet temporary roof structure & accompanying design scheme. The scaffolding structure has NOT been built according to the content of 2x design drawings (missing ledger bracing, roof beam chord bracing etc) and the design scheme drawings themselves do not provide enough information or elevation views, to enable a mere layman to interpret them correctly. There is no tie information on the design drawings mirroring the lack of ties in the scaffolding structure....except for 1x "after thought" tie around the internal chimney stack. The design drawings remain mainly rely on coloured lines to impart information (great if the layman is colour blind!) and do not follow the accepted standards of best practise regarding content set out in BS:8888. I appreciate that this is subjective to interpretation, but in my opinion the standard is there to establish best practise & these particular design drawing to not follow the contents of that standard! The scaffolding structure in question relies upon a bridging beam configuration to provide stability for 1-side of the Temporary roof support, but the design drawings have not been produced for this particular elevation. How is a layman (a scaffolder according to some!) expected to interpret (guess?) the tie-patterns and beam bracing requirements if that elevation view hasn't been provided by the designer in question? How has the designer "proved" that the calculations have been considered for this elevation within the scaffolding structural configuration?
Did the designer not "understand" what the scaffolding installer required when undertaking the "site investigation" as part of the site visit process? Is the scaffolder (sorry layman) then expected to just "make it up" or interpret the design drawing however he wants? Does the scaffolder have to wait for a passing Lawyer or Doctor to explain the lack of detail & elevational content to him before proceeding? If certain Design Engineer company owners dismiss scaffolders as simply layman, how does he expect them to interpret the content of his schemes, even in the event they actually contained the complete amounts of information & detail necessary? On what grounds is the scaffolder expected to question or complain, being of a lower intellect? Surely that is exactly what the layman requires in these circumstances......his hand being held by the charging professional? So who is to blame in this particular situation then? The scaffolder for not building the structure to the incomplete (elevational view/detail) design scheme? Maybe the owner of this particular design company ought to attend a 3-day course on business management, communication, providing adequate supervision of staff & maintaining/enforcing standards, or more commonly known as a Health & Safety management course. I would suggest a quick refresher on the content of TG20:08 too, as this structural scheme was installed using traditional tube & fittings. I am also very interested in how this structure was built safely, due to the lack of ties & detail in both the completed structure & the design scheme? It is fine belittling others profession & skill sets, whilst demonstrating a level of arrogance & ignorance reserved for the "holier than thou" brigade, but I suggest one really should get his house in order & pay attention to the small detail before stupidly sounding off.
Not even 1 reply from IDH on this matter! Ignorance at the highest level!
