Asphalt Review - Feb/March 2013 - Australian Asphalt Pavement ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

ASPHALT REVIEW This control achieves the primary objective of hazard elimination, where reasonably practicable to do so, as required under the OHS Regulation 5.1.7. b. Isolation of Hazard – Temporary Safety Barriers Isolation of traffic from the work zone through the use of temporary safety barriers has also proven to be an effective control, particularly for longer term works adjacent to high volume traffic. They are usually deployed where the works will be more than two weeks duration in Victoria. Speed limits are reduced to a maximum of 80 km/h past barriers in Victoria, to reduce impact energy and provide an allowance for heavier vehicle impacts when workers are present on site. On freeway works alone since 2006, more than 500 million vehicles have passed temporary barrier protected worksites in Victoria without penetration or other serious incident when deployed parallel to the road. Concrete barriers are the most common for the high speed-high volume roads such as freeways, although steel barriers are increasing in popularity. Performance of free standing concrete barriers in terms of deflection under impact is superior to free standing steel barriers However, anchoring the steel barriers improves their performance. The speed limits may also be reduced to 60 km/h instead of 80 km/h in these situations to further reduce heavy vehicle impact severity. Barrier screens have proven very effective as both debris and anti- ‘gawk’ screens. Permanent barriers are being installed because statistics show that a significant number of vehicles are running off the road and crashing in these areas. Lane closures and speed reductions are unreliable controls on their own because drivers do not always slow down and micro sleeping drivers may pass through the worksite at any time. c. Isolation of Hazard – (Short Term Works) Truck Mounted Attenuator (TMA) Where road closure (level 1 control) or safety barriers (level 2 control) are not reasonably practicable Truck Mounted Attenuators (TMAs) (level 3 control) are proving an effective physical isolation particularly for short-to-medium term works. Their effectiveness continues to be demonstrated even when they are impacted by heavy vehicles. Many, but not all of the worksites, may also be protected by lane closures, signs and speed reductions. Bollards may also be used but these will not protect against a vehicle which is not under effective control of its driver. Fatigued drivers, drugs/alcohol and distractions such as electronic devices are some of the possible causes for drivers losing control. TMAs are now applied on all classes of roads in Victoria and are mandatory on urban freeways and for line marking operations on all roads. They are required to be TL-3 rated (100 km/h, 2 tonne vehicle impact tested and approved), with a minimum weight of 10.4 tonne GVM. Fifteen tonne GVM TMAs are gaining popularity for high speed road applications and particularly freeways and interstate highways where heavy trucks will be encountered. For low speed roads (< 60 km/h) the use of works vehicles to “shadow” and provide some degree of physical protection for pedestrian workers against errant vehicles entering the worksite is always a good practice. Such vehicles need to be heavier than two tonnes, such as small trucks; otherwise they may be shunted significant distances. d. Isolation of Hazard – Clearance to Traffic Where it is not reasonably practical to eliminate the traffic hazard by closing roads or placing physical barriers between the actual work zone and traffic, various combinations of controls or conventional traffic management are available to be deployed and may include a clearance or lateral vehicle recovery/buffer zone between traffic and the workplace. Note that the Worksite Safety –Traffic Management Code of Practice (2010 version) requires that the reason why the higher level controls are not considered practical be documented taking into account the WorkSafe Test of Reasonably Practicable. This reason needs to be credible because clearance to traffic controls do not provide any physical protection and are a lower level control - unless the combination of controls includes a TMA or similar protection. e. Combination of Controls A combination of controls is usually deployed at roadwork sites. Controls which eliminate hazards through road closures or isolate through physical protection should be present to comply with the OHS Act concept of Ensuring Health and Safety via elimination of the hazard, or reducing the risk through applying the hierarchy of safety controls. Typically signage and speed reductions are deployed on short term works, although these controls are behavioural controls and not as reliable as the higher level controls (level 1 to 3 above). Behavioural controls require effective reinforcement and or enforcement to be effective and the police, VicRoads Transport Safety Services and Department of Justice Officers provide much support in this area, providing the traffic management scheme is correctly deployed. Combining highly visible electronic Variable Speed Limit Signage (VSLS) with signs warning that speed limits are enforced together with visible patrol cars and camera presence is as demonstrated on the longer term major worksites such as the M80 Upgrade Project. The technology exists now for this to be potentially extended to smaller shorter term worksites. In the United Kingdom, point-to-point speed cameras are in place on all long term roadwork workplaces. Speed Display Trailers, VMS Displays and Temporary Speed Humps are also available as part of the combination of controls approach. The safety challenge presented by the movement of powered mobile plant and vehicles within site The construction industry which includes road construction is experiencing a significant number of fatalities and serious injuries from work involving the movement of powered mobile plant and other vehicles within sites. It is evident that the traditional controls of reversing/tracking alarms and flashing lights are not entirely effective. Reversing is the major cause and, although dump trucks are mainly involved, they are by no means the only source of serious injury. During 2011, there were five identified road construction plant reverse-over type fatalities in Australia over a 12 month period: two in Queensland, one in New South Wales, one in Victoria (road sweeper) and more recently one in Canberra (grader). Because of the number of fatalities this is our industry’s major high risk area and presents the challenge to our industry to seek more effective and reliable controls to prevent such incidents. Construction plant and vehicle blind spots It should be recognised that one of the reasons why workers and other pedestrians are reversed over by plant and vehicles on road construction sites is because of the large blind spots behind and sometimes beside them. CCTV cameras, reversing alarms and proximity warning devices are being used to reduce the risk but reverse over fatalities still occur so we 26 ROADS FEB/MARCH <strong>2013</strong>
need to seek controls higher in the hierarchy of controls that depend less on behaviour. Internal Traffic Management Plans (ITMP) as described below should assist to improve site safety where mobile plant and vehicles are separated from pedestrian workers as far as practical from plant and truck operating areas. Everyone who works on road construction sites needs training to understand the risk of mobile plant and trucks where the driver/ operator cannot see them. Safe Work Method Statements (SWMS) could seek to control this risk by requiring workers to be more than six metres from the rear of plant but it is safer to not be behind plant or within its swing radius at any time. The US National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) has produced Construction Equipment Visibility Diagrams for most of the commonly expected mobile plant and vehicles. These diagrams show the operators visibility profiles around the plant from the viewpoint of the operator. The US Work Zone Safety Clearing House also produces a “Know the Blind Spots” Poster. Internal traffic management plans (ITMP) An ITMP is used to safely coordinate the interaction between pedestrians (workers and public), construction plant, delivery trucks and incidental visitors in the work space of a road construction work zone. In the US, they are referred to as Internal Traffic Control Plans (ITCP). Similar, but less sophisticated plans, have been used previously on VicRoads major project sites combined with UHF radio communications. However, the fundamental principles are applicable to all roadwork sites (including smaller sites) for internal traffic management. Based on the US experience, the fundamental principles for setting up an effective ITMP are: • Isolate workers and other pedestrians from mobile plant and works vehicles; • Reduce the need to back up; • Limit vehicle access points to work zone; • Coordinate truck and mobile plant movements; • Provide signs within the work zone to give guidance to pedestrian workers, equipment and trucks; • Design buffer spaces to separate pedestrian workers from errant vehicles and work zone equipment; and • Inform all on-site personnel of ITMP provisions. Two examples of the isolation of pedestrians from mobile plant and other vehicles on recent VicRoads major projects are: • Leighton Contractors introduced its Pedestrian No Go Zones on the M80 Upgrade Project early in 2011. It was the first highly visible ITMP to be introduced on a VicRoads Project. Leighton was recently presented with the VicRoads Major Project Safety Innovation Award in recognition of the establishment of the Pedestrian No Go Zones, and trial of GPS Personal Warning Devices for mobile plant operators and personnel authorised to work near plant, but outside of minimum approach distances. The concept had origins in the mining industry where they are sometimes called “Red Zones”. It requires compliance with behavioural controls, just as drivers are required to do on public roads but the system does isolate plant operations from pedestrians and gives the lead plant operator authority to give permission to other vehicles to enter the zone and pass other plant. Plant is required to stop all movement and rest the booms in the case of excavators pending the safe passing by plant and vehicles authorised to pass/enter the area. If it is necessary for a pedestrian to enter or approach plant they must seek permission over the radio and machines will be stopped until they are sighted and, if necessary, given permission to come closer. All permissions and instructions must be confirmed over the radio before entering the Red Zone. Some areas are made absolute Pedestrian No Go Zones where pedestrians entry is completely prohibited. Appropriate signage is then displayed. General Warning Sign – Also a reminder to contact the Lead Plant Operator by Radio and wait for permission to enter. Details of the radio frequency and name of the lead operator are provided on an adjacent Safe Notice Board. They are not provided if the area has been declared an absolute ‘Pedestrian No Go Zone’ Safe Notice Board - Details are not provided when an area has been declared an absolute Pedestrian No Go Zone. • Working in a residential area always presents a challenge for road construction with respect to the separation of mobile plant and other construction vehicles from the public. BMD Constructions has just commenced the duplication of Clyde Road at Berwick in Victoria in an area where access to businesses and residences needs to be maintained and effective isolation of construction plant and vehicles from the public is necessary. BMD, together with VicRoads, is seeking more effective isolation between mobile plant and vehicles to achieve compliance with expectations in this area. ROADS FEB/MARCH <strong>2013</strong> 27
Page 1 and 2: feb/march 2013 AsphaltReview Above:
Page 3 and 4: AUSTRALIA PTY LTD Heavy Duty, tough
Page 5 and 6: Partnering with road paving busines
Page 7: 15 TH INTERNATIONAL FLEXIBLE PAVEME
Page 11 and 12: • Engage trained personnel compet
Page 13 and 14: Phillip Island Grand Prix Track Res
Page 15 and 16: “This project is a great example
Page 17 and 18: put it down to good planning and a
Page 19 and 20: work tips - full list 1. Priming of

Asphalt Review - Feb/March 2013 - Australian Asphalt Pavement ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?