Construction Injury Prevention through Design
June 2009
Injury prevention usually falls in the safety
arena. It becomes the responsibility of operational and safety personnel to
try to identify risk, hazards, and exposures to the workforce. We know that
the most effective way to deal with risk is to eliminate it. But in most cases,
this is very difficult to achieve, so the best management can accomplish is
to minimize its impact on the workforce while they are engaged in performing
the tasks required of them.
by Peter
G. Furst
Lecturer
In a broader sense more people are exposed to risk when working in or using
facilities. We have addressed workers working in facilities and worker building
the facilities, but there is also the public that visits facilities and those
who maintain these facilities. These folks also encounter risks and may get
injured.
Building Codes
What are the means for protecting these four groups of people? Different
codes and standards exist to ensure that people can enter, conduct business,
work, and exit these facilities safely even in emergency situations. The building
and life safety codes ensure that people in buildings are able to use and work
in buildings that are healthful and are able to exit them in emergency situations.
Design professionals are required to ensure that these standards are utilized
in the design of structures, and the plans produced by these professionals are
checked by building officials and fire marshals to ensure compliance. These
same officials inspect the finished structure to ensure that it was built according
to the approved plans and specifications.
The safety and health of workers working in facilities is governed by the
OSHA General Industry (1910) Standards. These standards define minimum levels
of safety that the employer is obligated to provide. These standards not only
look at the physical conditions, but also at work practices, and obligate the
employer to provide training and protective equipment so that workers may perform
their tasks free from injury. This would apply to both the workers working in
the facilities as well as those that maintain it. The safety of the construction
workers is covered by another part of the OSHA (1926) safety standards. These
standards cover the protection of the construction workers from harm while they
go about building the facility.
This article addresses the building process and the risks faced by construction
workers engaged in building structures. The safety of the construction workers
is viewed as the responsibility of the employer (the contactor). Research over
the past quarter century has shown that a substantial number of worksite accidents
have their root in decisions made before any construction work starts. These
studies have, to some extent, focused on the design decisions made during the
design process which create risks the contractors and construction workers have
to deal with during the building process. Many of the solutions proposed by
these researchers focused on what the design professional can or should do to
mitigate these risks.
The complexity of the situation requires a holistic approach to identify
and eliminate, where possible, the risk in the workplace. If elimination is
not entirely possible, then the reduction of the impact of these risks should
be addressed so that they are reduced to an acceptable level. To this end, we
need to look at the process from inception (the decision by the owner that some
sort of facility is needed) through the completion of the construction process.
From this perspective, the key participants of the process are the facility
owner (owner), the design team (architects and engineers—designers), and the
constructor team (contractor, subcontractors, and construction managers, where
applicable). To some extent, every decision made in this process ends up affecting
the risks that the construction worker, in some way or another, has to deal
with in the building process.
The Owner
The process starts with the owner, who has the greatest influence and control
over it. So the decisions made at project inception should be carefully reviewed
and analyzed for their potential influence on the design and construction process
and the resultant risks they create. The owner decides what is needed and establishes
a budget and time line for it based on financial and business considerations.
The owner selects and procures the site. The owner selects the key participants
(designers and contractors) in the process. And, to some extent, the role the
owner plays during the development for the design ultimately has an impact on
the cumulative project risk faced by the employees of the constructor team.
Click here for
Figure 1.
The initial decisions by the project owner can influence the quantity and
quality of the risks eventually faced by the construction workers. Also, these
decisions quite possibly create barriers to elimination strategies that may
be considered downstream. The type of facility planned, its operational requirements,
the physical attributes of the site acquired, where it is located, etc., all
have associated risks that flow downstream. There also are the financial and
business considerations that may dictate certain project duration and completion
requirements that will necessitate accelerated schedules of operational plans
by the contractor creating its own body of risks.
The selection of the design team by the owner also influences the risk picture.
The determination of the designer's expertise or experience in designing the
project with sensitivity to construction risk in important. The scope of services,
the negotiated fee, the establishment of the time available for design, and
the owner's sophistication all impact the risk picture as well. The owner's
involvement in the process and the extent to which the owner oversees the development
of the design and the construction process also has an effect on the end results.
The quality of the owner's staff involved in the process plays a role too.
The designers, contractors, and safety professionals selected by the owner
can play a critical role at the inception of the project by providing the owner
with input on the "safety" consequences of decisions. They may also assist in
the selection of design solutions and materials, as well as address means and
methods, which will either eliminate the resultant "system" risks or lower their
impact to an acceptable level.
Fast-track construction is the norm rather than exception these days. In
situations where accelerated schedules are a contract requirement and competitive
bidding is the project delivery method, a greater quantity of risk is introduced
into the system and more than likely increases the likelihood of incidents occurring.
Given the required accelerated production schedule, the contractor may not be
able to eliminate the imposed risks. And the aggressive pricing may limit resources
available for instituting some of the mitigating interventions so as to diminish
the impact of the identified risks which the construction worker will have to
deal with.
The Design Team
From the purely architectural sense, prevention through design is a methodology
applied to the various phases of the design process for the identification and
mitigation of risks and hazards that will be encountered by construction workers
during the building of the facility. This involves systematically incorporating
hazard identification, analysis, and mitigation steps during the design phases
of construction or renovation drawings and specifications. To accomplish this,
one has to visualize the physical hazards and the exposure to the construction
workers to conceptual design solutions.
Architects and engineers are used to referring to standard such as ASTM,
NFPA, etc., in their specifications. So it would seem natural to refer to the
OSHA 1926 standards when it comes to safety. Unfortunately, following the standards
does not guarantee an injury-free worksite. Let us review some of the fall protection
requirements in the standard.
|
|
|
| Most trades |
6 feet |
Subpart M |
| Scaffold erectors |
10 feet |
Subpart L |
| Metal deck welders |
>15 feet |
Subpart R, etc. |
| Steel connectors |
>30 feet |
Subpart R |
So, following these standards, especially for steel erection, will result
in considerable risk to workers on a construction site. To provide an injury-free
work environment, the contractor should go beyond these minimum standards, and
the designer cannot use them to that end.
Designer's Challenge
The designer's challenge at this conceptual phase of the design is to identify
risks and potential physical hazards to construction operations from the design
requirements. This may require contractor input as to the means and methods
anticipated. Here, many researchers have suggested building parapet walls that
are 42" high so as to eliminate the fall exposure for workers working on the
roof of facilities. Assuming this does not have an adverse effect on other requirements
or the design, it may be a good suggestion. But there are other situations where
solutions are not as obvious or straightforward.
Let's consider the building's structural frame. It can either be steel or
concrete, each having its own unique hazards and risks. There are some fundamental
reasons for selecting one over the other where the fall exposure may not be
a deciding factor. Given that one or the other frame will be selected, then
the challenge is to come up with a design and construction operational solution
that will reduce the hazard to the workers engaged in the erection of any structural
frame selected.
The building envelope has its own challenges, as does the foundations, basements,
materials, finishes—to name a few. There are other considerations that will
make the job safer for construction workers. When placing equipment, it's preferable
that it be installed while the worker is standing on the "ground" rather than
in an elevated position. Allowing enough space/room so that workers can make
the installation in a safe manner is another consideration, as is creating a
design that will lend itself to prefabrication, modularization, or "make-ready"
to minimize the exposure time. Creating design solutions that are inherently
safe to install is the goal. Reviewing the constructability of details, all
of which will reduce the risks faced by construction workers, takes time, but
making changes during construction tends to be more time consuming and expensive
than addressing issues during design.
Understanding and appreciating the risks faced by contractors and their workers
probably necessitates an exchange of information and ideas between the designers
and the constructors. The design team will require some education in construction
means and methods required to execute the design in the field. They will have
to gain an understanding of how to use their design tools to identify risks
and hazards (Building Information Modeling (BIM), etc.). Then, with the assistance
of contractors and safety consultants, identify additional risks and hazards
and come up with mitigating solutions that will meet the design requirements
and intent as well as create a safer work environment for the construction worker.
Designing for safety also encompasses communicating to the contractor the remaining
risks and hazards that could not be eliminated during design so that the contractor
may plan for appropriate controls to reduce their impact in the field.
There are a number of aspects to the implementation of the prevention though
design concept. Architects and engineers, as well as other consultants, are
reluctant to address construction worker safety as part of their standard practice.
The design professionals' codes of ethics, such as the code established by the
American Institute of Architects (AIA) dated 2004, as well as others set ethical
priorities for ensuring final occupant safety and safety of the finished facility,
but do not address the safety of the workers during construction. These professionals
are also likely to avoid addressing worker safety out of fear that doing so
will open them to legal action by injured construction workers. And there generally
are no legal, contractual, or regulatory requirements to incorporate safety
in design. Should a design professional want to engage in designing for safety,
he or she will find it difficult to find insurance coverage. Risk transfer products
are not readily available in the marketplace at the moment.
Conclusion
There is no question that safety can only be effective if the organization
approaches it holistically. The creation of a safe work environment on a construction
site requires a team effort in identifying, evaluating, and managing the risks
that flow to the worksite. All the participants—owners, designers, contractors,
and safety professionals—must cooperate and contribute to achieve this lofty
goal. The owner plays a crucial role in orchestrating and managing the process,
ensuring cooperation between the design team and the contractor team. Paying
close attention to the risks associated with the owner's requirements and the
design of the facility are critically important.
See the second part of this article on the role of the construction and safety
teams, Construction Injury
Prevention through Safety.
Bibliography
Breyfogle, Forrest W. Implementing Six Sigma:
Smarter Solutions Using Statistical Methods. 2d ed. John Wiley, 2003.
Burton, Terrence T, and Broeder, Steve. The
Lean Extended Enterprise: Moving beyond the Four Walls of Value Stream Excellence.
J. Ross, 2003.
Dekker, Sidney. The Field Guide to understanding
Human Error. Ashgate, 2006.
Deming, W. Edwards. The New Economics for
Industry, Government, Education. MIT, 1994.
Furst, Peter G. "Five
Pillars of a Highly Effective Safety Process."
www.Safety.BLR.Com,
Sept. 22, 2005.
—. "Managing Construction Risk through Pre-Operational
Planning." www.IRMI.com, 2006.
—. "Safety Excellence by Design—Integrated
Risk Management." www.IRMI.com, 2006.
Gambatese, John, Hecker, Steven, Weinstein, Marc.
Designing for Safety and Health in Construction.
U. of Oregon Press, 2004.
Leach, Lawrence. Lean Project Management:
Eight Principles for Success. Advances Project, 2006.
Mascitelli, Ronald. Building a Project-Driven
Enterprise. Quality Books, 2002.
Peters, Tom. Re-Imagine. Dorling Kindersley,
2003.
Pyzdek, Thomas. The Six Sigma Handbook: The
Complete Guide for Green Belts, Black Belts, and Managers at All Levels, Revised
and Expanded Edition. McGraw-Hill 2003.
Toole, Michael. Designing for Geoconstruction
Safety. Paper presented at ASCE 2006.
Reason, James. Human Error. Cambridge
U. Press, 1990.
Wheeler, Donald J. Understanding Variation
the Key to Managing Chaos. SPC Press, 1999.
Womack, James. Lean Solutions. Simon
& Schuster, 2005.
Opinions expressed in Expert Commentary articles are those of the author and are
not necessarily held by the author's employer or IRMI. Expert Commentary articles
and other IRMI Online content do not purport to provide legal, accounting, or other
professional advice or opinion. If such advice is needed, consult with your attorney,
accountant, or other qualified adviser.