Rank: New forum user 
|
I work for a manufacturing company with a high employee head count where i'm trying to identify a more suitable solution for monitoring vibration exposure for tool users. I'm after something more practical for use than the traditional paper based (trigger time sheet) system.
I've heard of the Reactec HAVwear (wearable wrist band) which gives real time readings of vibration exposure. I've looked into these devices and on first look they appear, potentially, very useful.
Has anyone had experience using this device or similar (Havi).... how has it performed? Any reviews? How have employees found using it? Any feedback would be useful.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Hi Helen, I have introduced the HAVwear system recently. Please PM me and you can have a look if suitable.
|
 1 user thanked Mick C for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
As far as I am aware the Reactec wristband is just basically a stopwatch which you can program or automatically have the tool being useds vibration value on. You will still need to test each tool with a vibration meter. Personally I think they are gimicky, hard to enforce and over the top. You will spend more time/effort trying to implement that system that actually getting use out of it. If you measure each tools vibration, highlight it to staff and train them how to calculate their exposure and what actions to take at each limit then you are doing whats reasonably practical. Couple this with health surveillance, toolbox talks and proactive monitoring and you have a good risk management process in place. For an administrative control I found the HAVControl tag system useful just to highlight how long a worker should use each tool. You could also provide signage where tools are stored which highlight similar info and exposure limits.
|
1 user thanked rsherl01 for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: New forum user
|
Thanks rsher01. I have simialr concerns about it being gimicky. But the data you get from operators calculating their exposure can be inaccurate. Plus it's time delayed, by the time you get the data from a large workforce and analyse, the operators could have already exceeded the limits.
I guess there are pro's and con's to any system but as long as your controlling exposure then thats the main thing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Hi Helen, the data can be set to email managers when someone exceeds the action value etc. Works great on a large workforce as long as they all use it. If you find a better system, I would be very interested.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
The HSE does not require you have have a highly accurate measure of exposure, emphasis should be placed on reducing exposures where it is "likely" they exceed action values or preventing them from exceeding limit values. If you just look at the types of tools you have you can estimate the emmission level (again measurement is often not necessary or meaningful) you can estimate maxmimum usage times (as well as an action plan to replace or design out high risks tools or activities) and line managers can plan and distribute work accordingly based on these guidelines.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Agreed but the problem is how do you know the trigger times and vibration levels your operators are being subjected to? I guess in the event of a claim and/or prosecution you will need robust data not an estimate?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: New forum user
|
Originally Posted by: descarte8  The HSE does not require you have have a highly accurate measure of exposure, emphasis should be placed on reducing exposures where it is "likely" they exceed action values or preventing them from exceeding limit values. If you just look at the types of tools you have you can estimate the emmission level (again measurement is often not necessary or meaningful) you can estimate maxmimum usage times (as well as an action plan to replace or design out high risks tools or activities) and line managers can plan and distribute work accordingly based on these guidelines.
If we were to stipulate a maximum time for a tool to be used (i.e. the length of time the tool can be used before the EAV is reached) how would this system work when the individual uses multiple tools in one day, say five or six tools. If we allow the individual to use each of these tools up to the maximum time this could start to accumulate and bring the individual towards or even to go above the ELV. Which means this contol measure would be ineffective.
The HAVwear would give the individual a live representation of their exposure at any time.
Edited by user 24 October 2017 08:16:04(UTC)
| Reason: typo
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
I am currently testing the HAV equipment these next 2 weeks, for information each tool used has its own unique tag with which the wrist device is held against to connect to during operation.
The wrist device gives an audible alarm when getting close to vibration limits of the individuals use, these are returned daily to a docking station where data is automatically populated and entered into spreadsheet and this data is stored.
A version comes out soon whcih allows a second party (auditor) to connect via bluetooth on site to also monitor the data on the wrist device. I do wonder if discounts or insentives will be provided from insurance companies in this sector in the near future? I wonder if is going to be a mandatary requirement anytime soon? Its not cheap, may come down in cost in the future.
|
1 user thanked scoen for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Hi all
Interesting topic. I’ve just recently reviewed our HAVS risk assessment and procedures. The one issue we have identified is inaccuracies noted down on the employee trigger cards. One time it can be 5 hours and 500 points, others it can be 5 minutes and 50 points etc.
It’s impractical for someone to shadow them and time with a stopwatch. All our work is as hoc, with the exception of a couple of routine tasks. We have assessed each tools magnitude, created an A3 wall chart with traffic light colours for low, medium, high risk, placed a copy of the HSE ready reckoner next to it and require employees to complete daily trigger cards.
I’ve had Reactec out to demonstrate the HAVwear meter I think SCOEN is referring to. It syncs with the tool via Bluetooth and knows what vibration mag the tool has. I am going to be trialling them in January with massive buy in from the guys purely down to the elimination of paper.
From the demo I can’t see why anyone would decide against. It would ensure full compliance, save records electronically for 40 years, allow users to see at a glance if they are at high risk, and would assist in the prevention of a permanent disability.
SCOEN, can you advise if your trial was successful? Pros/cons. As you say I think the HSE will tighten up on what they refer to as “accurate estimation”
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.