Edwards, D J and Holt, G D (2006) Hand-arm vibration exposure from construction tools: Results of a field study. Construction Management and Economics, 24(2), pp. 209-217. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
By the nature of its activities, construction poses a significant risk from hand-arm vibration (HAV). The Control of Vibration at Work Regulations place a duty upon employers to limit HAV exposure, which can entail risk assessment of hand-held tools (by using vibration magnitude data). A field study recorded vibration measurements from a range of hand-held construction tools, so that the 'characteristics' of their vibration data could be explored. Substantial variance among vibration data are confirmed resulting from: method of vibration measurement; tool manufacturing tolerances; sharpness of tools' cutting edges; and differing operator techniques. Results of these measurements and analyses provide guidance for construction managers for performing HAV risk assessments. This includes preference for 'real' data over those from controlled conditions, and the need to recognize potential data variance when calculating operators' maximum exposure times.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | hand tools; hand-arm vibration; health and safety; site operatives; vibration |
| Index terms: | variance, risk assessment, field study, hand tool, health and safety, construction manager, regulation, exposure, preference, controlled conditions, duty, vibration, site operative |
| Subjects: | testing methods, measurement and scaling, political science, manufacturing engineering, research methods, public and environmental health, decision-making and reasoning, health safety and environment, financial risk, profession, contractual role, mechanical systems, practitioner |
| Topics: | Contract Administration, Governance, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Cost Management, Health and Safety |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here