Spillard News

Continuous industry related updates

Opting out of Blind Spots ‘an American Perspective’

Hindsight is always 20/20, but a bit late after backing over a pick-up truck with a haul truck. And though companies can’t change the past, they can have the foresight to change the fu¬ture by watching their behinds. Rear-vision cameras were first used about 20 years ago by refuse haulers and operators of other street vehicles whose routes required drivers to frequently back up. Cameras and monitors running up to $2,000 per installation, however, were susceptible to heat and vibration and no match for a quarry environment.
But innovations during the past 10 years have allowed cameras to with¬stand the stressful elements of the aggregates industry, says Safety Vision VP of Sales Rex Colorado. Tube cameras the size of bread boxes have been replaced by lightweight cameras the size of a fist. The small components are surface mounted and handle more stress. Cumbersome, black ¬and-white monitors for cab interi¬ors have been replaced by I-in. thick color LCD units, while infrared technology provides the driver a clear view from dusk to dawn.
A clear view is paramount when driving a vehicle that is so unforgiv¬ing. During the production of an in¬house safety video at a Pennsylvania plant, Hanson Aggregates/Central Safety Director Dave Pfile once watched a 50-ton haul truck back over a pick-up. “Dear Lord, did it squash it. The (haul truck) driver said, ‘I never felt anything.'”
At Hanson Aggregates/Central, Phle has not logged a backing ac¬cident and, with rear-vision cam¬eras, he hopes to keep it that way. That sentiment is not confined to his region. Plants at Hanson Aggregates/Mideast often have pick-up trucks near the dump blocks. “But the cameras pick those up right away,” says Mobile Equipment Supervisor Curtis West, who has rear-vision cameras on the rear differentials of five haul tucks.
Aside from added safety, West says the cameras increase efficiency on the dump blocks. The operators can see precisely where the block is when backing in and when a load stops dumping. Also, operators can see rocks that spill onto the road and notify loaders to remove them.
Aggregate Industries, which like Hanson Aggregates has materials operations across multiple regions, began equipping haul trucks with rear-vision cameras two years ago, says Safety Director Al Quist. The company has installed the cam¬eras on its Cat 777 and 773 haul trucks, as well as several loaders in¬cluding Cat 992 and 880C models. This summer, Quist will finish in¬stalling cameras on a fleet of 300 mixer trucks operating in Colorado.
Within three regions, Aggregate Industries has installed 250 camera kits that average $1,148. The kits include a 6.8¬in. monitor, a control box and an SV camera. The components are con¬nected by a waterproo£ threaded 0¬ring cable. The monitors can accom¬modate up to three cameras, and an optional splitter can allow for a fourth. Aggregate Industries began with a single black-and-white unit that was provided on a trial basis. The unit’s price is about $648. Quist says most oper¬ators were satisfied with the results, but there were a few complaints.
The black-and-white monitors would not show the neon-green vests worn by employees. So the company upgraded to color LCD screens that are similar to plasma televisions. The new monitors occupy less space, which was another concern regarding the black-and-white monitors. The LCD monitors’ visibility, however, is hampered by glare in direct sunlight, though a monitor shade will partially eliminate glare.
 
Quarry dust on the camera also can limit visibility after a few days, Quist says. But cleaning the lens is just a matter of wiping it off or even pressure-washing it. The glass that encapsulates the camera is scratch ¬resistant, and the housing is 12¬gauge steel. Quist says the mixer trucks are the most problematic be¬cause of cement dust, sand and slur¬ry. But a concrete truck has to be hosed down after every delivery, so “that’s a driver issue, not a camera issue,” Quist says. Another problem was static on the screen caused by interference from the CB radios, he adds. That was easily remedied, however, by moving the monitor higher in the cab and moving the CB unit behind the seat Intec Eastern Region Sales Manager Dan Pinney says radio in¬terference is rare and usually the re¬sult of very high-energy radio sys¬tems of 100 watts or more. Shielding the unit or moving it, as Quist did, are quick solutions. Despite a few minor glitches and annoyances, the cameras do what they were intended to do–decrease accidents.
Hanson and Aggregate Industries are not alone among major pro¬ducers who have chosen to im¬prove drivers’ operating perspec¬tives. Old castle Materials Group has experienced a 12 percent de¬crease in preventable motor vehi¬cle accidents, primarily in mixer trucks. Steve Benton, co-chairman of the group’s Safety and Best Practices initiative, attributes a large part of that decline to the use of cameras. Benton is now in¬stalling more cameras on mobile quarry equipment.
An independent player in north¬ern Illinois, Thelen Sand and Gravel, had 17 backing accidents in 2002 and only two in 2003 after in¬stalling the cameras, says Safety Director Chad Broege. The two in¬volved in accidents were not equipped with cameras. “It’s defi¬nitely worth the investment,” Broege says.
“We have reduced backing acci¬dents, and are looking forward to eliminating them 100 percent,” adds Aggregate Industries’ Quist. “We still have them, but those are with equip¬ment that does not have the camera.”
He says the equipment rarely malfunctions. If it does, it fails right away while still under warranty. The cameras, however, can take the abuse of a stone quarry. Each has a lOG vibration rating and monitors have 4G.
“The big plus is they have great clarity and visibility in darkness,” Quist says. The Safety Vision units are equipped with electronic irises that regulate the light and infrared technology for working in the dark. The cameras also are equipped with a microphone so the driver can hear what a person within view says. National Sales Manager Steve Sappol says cameras decrease the likelihood of accidents and property damage. They also in¬crease efficiency by allowing the drivers to manoeuvre in tight spaces by watching the monitor rather than jumping out of the truck to look. Intec, which created the first car vi¬sion system, provides two systems suit¬ed for the mining industry. Its systems range from $1,000 to $3,000. Dan Pinney says both units are 9G vi¬bration-resistant and waterproof  “Moisture is the number one killer of cameras,” Pinney says. The units are equipped with military-spec connectors that create a vapour barrier to protect against the moisture that destroys lenses and circuitry. A CCD directs light into the and an electronic iris varies the shut¬ter speed to accommodate light and dark environments, Pinney says. Average cameras can see 125 de¬grees x 100 ft. Pinney says if op¬erators need to see more than 100 ft., they are driving too fast. For rear vision, the camera is com¬ manly mounted on the chassis of a haul truck for a view that shows a portion of each tire. Cameras can also be mounted to eliminate blind spots on the passenger side and front.
Quist says anyone who can install a CB radio can install a camera sys¬tem. The process requires tapping into a 12/24-volt power source and routing the cable through the engine compartment to the camera. He says it takes about two hours, depending on the equipment and the routing of the cable.
Pinney says a common installation mistake is routing the cable too close to heat sources or moving parts. Intec cables are coated with polyurethane, but even those can wear under extreme circumstances. A few times, Pinney says, cables have melted after being routed too close to the turbocharger.
A melted or severed cable can short a camera conductor and blow a camera or monitor. The systems are equipped with resistors to minimize that possibility, but caution should be exercised because operator error is not covered by the warranty.
The U.S. Labor Department’s Mining Safety and Health Admini¬stration recommends installing cam¬eras to eliminate blind spots. In 1998, the agency began pushing to make rear, side and front cameras mandatory. The effort lost momentum, however, after the departure of Assistant Secretary J. Davitt McAteer.
National Stone, Sand & Gravel Association members resisted the proposal, saying the cameras were unnecessary and too expensive. At the time, the cost would have added as much as $30,000 for a fleet of 10 haul trucks. And, a regulation would have opened the door for citations and maintenance costs.
Camera and monitor economies have since improved. In addition to cost savings associated with injury and property damage, users are finding that the equipment may reduce insurance costs.
“Ultimately it will have a positive effect on your insurance,” says R & R Insurance Account Executive Brad Stehno. Although he knows of no
specific credits for installing cameras, they can be used as a negotiation tool during the evaluation phase. Fewer accidents always result in lower pre¬miums, and backing accidents are the most common for every vehicle, Stehno says.

Commendation for object detection system

The Preview object detection system has received a special commendation at the SED 2004 Awards for Excellence for no operated plant and support products.


 The PreView features patented pulsed time domain radar which, unlike conventional radar systems, detects static as well as moving objects. These systems have already been fitted to machines for national companies in both the aggregate and waste industries and are currently being installed to seven new dump tricks for use in open cast coal miming.
Contract journal said:” The judges felt that the safety aspects of Spillard’s radar system made it worthy of a mention-especially its ability to ‘see’ into the gap in an articulated machine”.
“What held it back from making the shortlist-or even possibly winning-was the uncertainty of how the HSE would view the system”.
Spillard Safety Systems Managing Director Peter Spillard said: “Our radar is an enhancement to our existing All Round Vision package.
Even the most diligent drivers can be involved in accidents”.

2004 SED awards Non- operated plant/support products

Easily the highest number of entries this year was to be found in the non-Operated Plant/Support Products category. So difficult was the selection that the judges decided to extend the shortlist and give commendations to an additional two products. These were the Solar-Loo from Garic and Preview Object detection Radar from Spillard Safety Systems.  The judges felt that the safety aspects of Spillard’s radar system made it worthy of a mention-especially its ability to ‘see’ into the gap in an articulated machine. What held it back from making the shortlist- or even possibly winning was the uncertainty of how the HSE would view the system?   

 

Now you see it

Recent differences of opinion between the Heath & Safety Executive and the Con­struction Equipment Association seem to centre on the regulations relating to an operator’s field of vision. On the one hand, the CE marking lays down certain specifications, while the HSE quotes the Provision and Use of Work Equip­ment Regulations. The regulations state: “where the operator’s direct field of vision is inadequate to ensure safety, there are adequate devices for improving their vision as far as is reasonably practical”.
It is hoped that a new set of regulations being drafted (ISO 5006) will specify how to measure visibility and the view that must be available to plant operators. Plant manufacturers will gear up to ensure their products meet the new specification, but what happens to your existing machines both in the meantime and once the new legislation arrives? Spillard Safety Systems is one of several companies offering vision enhancement aids. Operations director Peter Spillard says: “There are several ways to overcome visibility problems including cctv systems, but the most cost-efficient way for most plant is the addition of wide-angle convex mirrors.”
In using non-uniform radius convex mirrors, the operator gets an infinite field of vision where the image gets progressively smaller as the reflected image moves towards the extreme edges. This requires some familiarisation on the part of the operator and high-visibility jackets help by being instantly recognisable. “Within a few days, operators are carrying out fine adjustments to the mirrors’ positioning,” says Spillard.
Whatever the machine, the retrofit process is the same: park the unit in the middle of an open space and map the areas where the operator can and, more importantly, cannot see a 1m high cone. To overcome the blind areas, mirrors can be temporarily mounted to check the suitability and to ensure they give the correct field of vision. The process of mapping the visibility is repeated and if the results are satisfactory, permanent mountings can be manufactured. If not, alternative options, including CCTV, may have to be explored.
While the basic layout of the mirrors will be similar for each type of machine, the exact positioning and mounting brackets change from one model to another, even from the same manufacturer. Spillard has built up a library of more than 80 machines from pavers and rollers to dump trucks and excavators.
A typical excavator package would cost about £265 and a telehandler about £195. While there are dozens of different sizes and optical shapes of mirrors to choose from when overcoming visibility problems, Spillard usually sticks to six variants to reduce confusion and inventory needs. The mirror lenses are acrylic and if a replacement head is required, the typical cost is about £60, with delivery within 24 hours.
Some operators will see only the cost element and wait until legislation forces visibility upgrades, but there are wider considerations. While emphasising that improved visibility is only part of site safety (along with operator training, segregation and lighting), Spillard says companies that add visibility enhancement packages to their plant probably lesson the risk of conflict with the HSE.
He says that many contractors are already insisting on machines meeting the 1x1x1 specifications devised by the quarrying and mining companies. Such machines can demand higher rental rates from blue-chip contractors that back their safety statements with action.
Were also getting reports back from end-users that damage to counterweights, light clusters and paintwork reduces once visibility is enhanced,” says Spillard
There is another. and potentially more serious consideration. This is the potential of prosecution in the event of an accident that relates to compromised visibility. An injured party could argue the case that improvements to visibility are available but the company chose not to use them for financial reasons. For all concerned, directly and throughout the industry, it would be better that any such accident and court case did not happen in the first place.

Lots of Loadalls for Fork Rent

Ipswich-based Fork Rent plc has placed an £18million order with JCB for the company’s latest generation Loadall telescopic handlers. The deal ­said to be one of the biggest in JCB’s history – will see the East Anglian plant hire firm receive up to 500 Loadalls over the next two years. Supplied through dealer Watling JCB, the new look Loadalls ordered by Fork Rent include the models 520-50, 530-70, 532-120, 533-105 and 540-170. These revamped machines, with their enlarged cabs and enhanced operator visibility package, incorporate some user feedback from Fork Rent. 

Fork Rent Chairman Trudi Nicholls reveals that key factors in choosing these Loadalls were the health and safety features of the machines and the JCB dealer support network. She says “JCB has always been at the forefront of innovation and the new machines not only give high levels of operator comfort but also improved visibility which we take very seriously.” 

HSE must justify vision aids

The construction Equipment Association (CEA) has advised employers and hirers to ask Health & Safety Executive (HSE) inspectors to justify any demands for extra vision aids on plant.
 The move comes after the HSE’s London, East and South-East on construction sites to check that risks were being properly controlled, including adequate visibility from the operator’s seat.
 However, the CEA warned against a simplistic approach to identifying machines without adequate visibility. According to the CEA, current regulations mean manufacturers must already ensure sufficient visibility from the driving position for the driver to operate the machine safely in all intended conditions of use.
 “The CEA recognises that, because of the nature of operations in the UK, there can be situations where additional visibility aids might be useful. We have been actively working with the HSE with a view to developing knowledge on the value of these,” said Tim Faithfull, the CEA’s director of member services.
 Faithfull said that as a result, the HSE had agreed to draft guidelines for use by hirers, operators and inspectors to meet its specific concerns.
 However, he added that so far the HSE had been unable to show that inadequate visibility from a machine had contributed to accidents and that other factors, such as operator training and poor pedestrian segregation had not been more important.
 He also said that if any extra risk was established, the only way to address if fairly would be to amend the EU-wide manufacturing directive. “Otherwise local interpretations will undermine the Europe-wide harmonisation that underpins CE marking and allows manufacturing and allows manufacturers to produce one machine for the whole European market,” said Faithfull.
 
 According to the HSE, during the recent blitz on 10 to 14 march 03 inspectors identified failure to secure effective separation of people and plant, coupled with inadequate maintenance and provision of visibility aids, as the main areas of concern. This resulted in 55 prohibition notices and 20 improvement notices.

« Previous Page