Hi Guys, have a project job at work, and there is no drawing, guys who are on it, have gone 6 boards and 2 inside wide, which is out of scope anyway, so requires a drawing, but theres power stations for you, they have put a kicker lift in and 2 dummy lifts, and top lift boarded is 17 foot high, they are following a cable tray, everything is braced up, to spec, trannys are butted into wall, theres a run of 300ft at a time, they have put 21's rakers off the handrail, on the lift below the boarded lift, into the kerb, and now have a H & S officer saying he wants more rakers put in, whats the ruling on this one, theres no where to get ties in and theres no way you can drill ties in, but at 17 foot high, is there any need to even have rakers in, just the guys doing a good job and getting **** that some **** thinks there should be more, any help on this.:wacko:
Rakers
- Thread starter T.ANIMAL
- Start date
chosen one
Well-known member
general rule of thumb is the same as anchor points every 4m mate so that would work out every other bay mate. how ever you could stretch that by way of plan bracing the working lift
superscaff75
Well-known member
The guy says he wants more rakers in, From my point of view I dont like rakers full stop. they are a trip hazard, a collision hazard, head bang hazard and just look untidy and crap. at 6 boards wide alone it should be stable as fcuk ,
why does he actually want more in anyway is it moving or summit
why does he actually want more in anyway is it moving or summit
We regularly use rakers for this type of job but fortunately the safety advisor's rarely dig us for much about them. It definitely needs tying but he is probably just being another erse trying to dig you for something. I bet he doesn't even know the width needs a drawing.
Exactly that super, they have put them every other bay, where theres no walkway, but have put a couple in a 60ft length wheres theres traffic and pedestrians so clients safety officer wants the same, when in my opinion theres no need for them anyway.
Mr.B
Well-known member
you dont say the spacing of the rakers, every/every other standard?
could you not turn the rakers in to a butteress?
4m with rakers at every standard, with kicker lift and tied back to the main scaffold then the same on any intermediate lifts with ledger and facade bracing
that way you could do one ever 4m as it will cover you for your tie ratio of 16m2
could you not turn the rakers in to a butteress?
4m with rakers at every standard, with kicker lift and tied back to the main scaffold then the same on any intermediate lifts with ledger and facade bracing
that way you could do one ever 4m as it will cover you for your tie ratio of 16m2
bigfish
Moderator
Plan brace it,and tell him its a lateral brace doing the same job as a raker:bigsmile:
superscaff75
Well-known member
Yeah I agree with that, if there is foot or vehicular traffic in a certain area , common sense should surely be applied , and obstacles kept to a minimum,
the only idea i have off top of my head would be to put a couple of buttress towers each side of the pedestrian zone and put some horizontal tie tubes from outside edge off buttress to the scaffold above head height and at lift height .
or be an awkward tw@t if he insists and put tie backs from rakers at awkward heights :nuts:
the only idea i have off top of my head would be to put a couple of buttress towers each side of the pedestrian zone and put some horizontal tie tubes from outside edge off buttress to the scaffold above head height and at lift height .
or be an awkward tw@t if he insists and put tie backs from rakers at awkward heights :nuts:
spot on aom, the board size between the standards, he hasnt picked up the sleeves halfway in the bays, couple of other little things, that if i was tagging the job i would splice them, just all he could say, was why did one side have a lot more rakers than the other side, but still pulled the sparkies off the job, until more rakers were added, but couldnt spot some of the basic faults.
---------- Post added at 08:47 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:36 PM ----------
You can put a 6.3m raker in without tying it back to the job, but spur anything with more than a 3 metre tube, it has to be typed back into the job.:suspicious:
---------- Post added at 08:47 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:36 PM ----------
You can put a 6.3m raker in without tying it back to the job, but spur anything with more than a 3 metre tube, it has to be typed back into the job.:suspicious:
FFS, he sounds like another 3 day inspector, we are having problems along the same ilk and it can get very dis heartening filling in 3 inch gaps on an inside board and wondering why all your ties have been ripped out and why the bottom lift is sagging and a load of rubble from 30 foot up is now lying on the pavement.
---------- Post added at 08:53 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:51 PM ----------
Just put the rakers on and get him to sign the tag, annoying but at least he will have to be responsible for his own actions.
---------- Post added at 08:53 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:51 PM ----------
Just put the rakers on and get him to sign the tag, annoying but at least he will have to be responsible for his own actions.
daffy
Well-known member
problem is, if it is not in the TG20 rules of standard scaffold,then this H&S bloke should know it needs a drawing, unless he's the 3 dater as mentioned.I would think job is ok as it is,a decent scaff knows what's safe and what's not without having to have a drawing or be told by some bloke who knows bog all about structures, apart from in a book. problem is do you shoot yourself in the foot and end up having to get a drawing done and having to pay for it by putting the bloke right, or do as he says on this occasion to put cut your losses, and next time charge them for a drawing and tell them it will take 4 wks to get it designed.We use that one about the time delay, and it's amazing how these guys can bend the rules when they want the job done quick.
daffy
Well-known member
Spread the blame far and wide to reduce any single liability. The thread and I think the man's wife explains the problem with the job was not how it was erected but with the inspections. Everyone is at it, reduce reduce reduce.
Rigger
Moderator
When inspecting a scaffold ask your self
a) can anybody fall from it ?
b) can anything fall from it ?
c) Is the structure "fit for purpose" ?
The questions "a" & "b" can normally be answered after a visual inspection of the scaffold at every working level including access and egress to the working platform.
With question "c" we must use TG:20 , System Manufactures Instructions, and Designers drawings.They all cover differant "scaffolds" in different configarations, for different loadings and/or different uses.Also bear in mind the geographical position plays a part in your assessment.
If the structure does not fall within TG:20 or System "typical application" then a bespoke drawing is required.
As most scaffold inspectors are not structural engineers, we need to stick to the above parrameters, to answer the question is the scaffold "fit for purpose"
The days of "custom & practice" are now well gone, you must be able to "prove" your decision that the scaffold is fit for use.To do this you will be using the "experts" calculations wether for tube & fitting or system scaffold.
To sign off a scaffold that you know requires a drawing,and you should know if you are a scaffold inspector, is asking for a load of sh*te to come your way, if anything does go wrong
You are also being complicate, in risking life and limb of anyone working on it, or near it.
a) can anybody fall from it ?
b) can anything fall from it ?
c) Is the structure "fit for purpose" ?
The questions "a" & "b" can normally be answered after a visual inspection of the scaffold at every working level including access and egress to the working platform.
With question "c" we must use TG:20 , System Manufactures Instructions, and Designers drawings.They all cover differant "scaffolds" in different configarations, for different loadings and/or different uses.Also bear in mind the geographical position plays a part in your assessment.
If the structure does not fall within TG:20 or System "typical application" then a bespoke drawing is required.
As most scaffold inspectors are not structural engineers, we need to stick to the above parrameters, to answer the question is the scaffold "fit for purpose"
The days of "custom & practice" are now well gone, you must be able to "prove" your decision that the scaffold is fit for use.To do this you will be using the "experts" calculations wether for tube & fitting or system scaffold.
To sign off a scaffold that you know requires a drawing,and you should know if you are a scaffold inspector, is asking for a load of sh*te to come your way, if anything does go wrong
You are also being complicate, in risking life and limb of anyone working on it, or near it.
Last edited:
Good post Rigger but what we are talking about here is a guy who doesn't know his erse from his elbow, getting him to sign the tag must help the scaff. If he doesn't know the width classes that's his problem.
Rigger
Moderator
You do not "Sign" anything you are not confident or competent with
Do it the way the H&S guy instructs, then tell him that it his "design" and he must sign it off,as you cannot "prove" his design with any published guidence,and as such cannot "sign" it is fit for purpose.
Do it the way the H&S guy instructs, then tell him that it his "design" and he must sign it off,as you cannot "prove" his design with any published guidence,and as such cannot "sign" it is fit for purpose.
Damo fraser
Well-known member
I've found you need to make a stand with these hs officers who have done a 2day scaffold appreciation course and now no more than a20yr man ,get him to sign for any thing you don't agree with ,he will suddenly lose interest after all he is only trying to justify his wages and you are the easiest target.