Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Admin  
#1 Posted : 02 July 2003 14:25:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Jim Walker I’m providing (FOC) H&S assistance to an Archaeology unit. Within this I want to provide them with a decent set of guidelines for excavations. However, although I can understand the theory, I’ve no experience of ‘oles. Maybe some of our construction colleagues might be able to assist me. I intend to provide CIS8 (safety in excavations) as a basic document supplimented by information gleaned from HSG185 and other sources. I have a bit of a problem with a generally accepted “rule of the thumb” that shallower than 1.2 metres no control is required. I intend to use examples from HSG185 to show why this is not necccesarily so. Another factor is than in construction excavations there is a natural attempt to remove as little material as possible i.e. narrow trenches (making burial more likely) – this isn’t an issue in my situation. I’m considering a new “rule of the thumb” – if you can look horizontally from your work position and see over the edge you are OK without supports or similar. Anyone care to comment??
Admin  
#2 Posted : 02 July 2003 15:43:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Oliver Whitefield Jim You are right to ignore the 1.2m rule of thumb, as this is not an acceptable approach to the problem. Whether or not an excavation should be supported is down to a matter of risk assessment by a competent person, it depends on a wide variety of factors such as the type of soil/rock, its strength and other characteristics, the level of water saturation, the effects of wetting and drying, external loading factors, proximity of structures etc etc. Creating a battered or stepped excavation may be another option. You also need to consider the risks of items falling, or being kicked into the excavation. This leads onto the need to provide suitable protection at ground level to prevent persons on machinery falling into the hole. Finally,if this is classed as a construction site (?) the excavations should be inspected by a competent person before each and every shift and after any event likely to affect the stability of the excavation. Probably not the answers you were looking for, but the texts you have mentioned are good, though you may also wich to refer to the Con (HS&W) Regs, try INDG220 for an overview. Regards Oliver
Admin  
#3 Posted : 02 July 2003 18:50:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Stuart Nagle Jim. Apart from the excellent advise given above by Oliver, there needs to be an assessment of the type of material in which the excavation is taking place. A qualified Civil Engineer should be able to assist. As excavations of this ilk tend to 'extend' (wider and deeper depending on whats located) of obvious interest is the manner in which the excavated materials are removed or stored and the 'angle of repose' of the materials being excavated. Differing soils act in different ways e.g. clays and sandy soils. They have a limit (which can also be affected by their water content) at which they will no longer be piled up, without sliding or falling to the the sides and ends of the pile. Over-burden of the edge of the excavation is also a serious factor, whether caused by excavated materials or proximity to traffic, plant or stored heavy items etc or proximity to buildings and ground pressure from footings (or water in the ground) Hope this assists...
Admin  
#4 Posted : 02 July 2003 20:31:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Michael Miller All the information previously given is spot on. One small point about the 1.2m rule, remember to take into consideretion that whilst digging down, you are also piling up! This needs to be counted in the measure. A 600mm hole + 600mm of spoil etc. And having dug the hole keep excavators and dumpers well away. They have a tendancy to fall in! Mike
Admin  
#5 Posted : 02 July 2003 22:56:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Jack There is a fair bit of guidance published from within archeology. The one usually referred to is 'SCAUM'. I checked via Google and low and behold one A St John Holt had a hand in it! Details are: Allen, J, and St John Holt, A, 1997 Health and safety in field archaeology, SCAUM British and Irish Archaeological Bibliography, vol 1 no 2, Council for British Archaeology I'd be surprised if the Archaeology Unit did not have a copy. Those I have worked with always have.
Admin  
#6 Posted : 03 July 2003 08:10:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Ken Urquhart Jim, Try also this CIRIA publication, details below. It addresses the technicalities in a stright forward way. It also gives good guidance as to ground condition assessment etc. R097 - Trenching practice (second edition) (Non-Member price) Author(s): D J Irvine and R J H Smith Date: 1983 ISBN: 0 86017 192 2 Description: Trench collapses cause a number of deaths and injuries every year in the UK. All clients, designers and contractors concerned with trenching work are therefore urged to study this guide to safe practice and act upon its advice. The recommendations made here apply to the design and use of temporary support for trenches up to 6 m deep. The guide alerts the user to the wide range of problems in the variety of the site and soil conditions that are likely to be met in practice. The emphasis is on safe design and methods of work and particular dangers are highlighted. Both those with limited experience in trenching operations and experienced trenching practitioners will find this guide invaluable. The illustrations will be particularly helpful for training and communication with site operatives. Keywords: health and safety, ground engineering, underground construction, construction management. Price: £40.00 CIRIA is: The Construction Industry Research and Information Association and they are located at: CIRIA Web: www.ciria.org Email: enquiries@ciria.org Tel: (+44) (0)20 7222 8891, Fax: (+44) (0)20 7222 1708 Postal address: 6 Storey's Gate, London SW1P 3AU, UK Whilst you are at it why not talk to Channel 4's "Time Team", they might be interested in promoting a section in one of there future programmes to promoting the Safety aspects of Archeological work. As a programme it has great following and although the safety message they can put across would be specific to one activity, it is one that many amateurs and tempoary's get involved in and it would be a good communicator for them on Safety. Hope this is of help and interest. Regards. ken Urquhart
Admin  
#7 Posted : 03 July 2003 13:46:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Jim Walker Many thanks for all responses, some confirm what I thought and others give me lines for further research. Jack, yes, I have the SCAUM document and it is an excellent piece of work, what I want to get over is the issues outlined in HSG185 (and discussed by Oliver). The Unit had a copy but I got the impression it was largely ignored – I’m “selling” its merits. The issue regarding spoil has been resolved – I raised this at a site visit and there were comments that often they had to shift the spoil heap as the excavation went off in an unexpected direction. So, killed two birds with one stone, but better than that the excavators have a reason other than safety for siting spoil heaps further away. Archaeologists don’t like battering/steps very much, which is my preferred method, I’ve been asking for good reasons and thus far it is usually “that’s what we were taught”, but there is some agreement that there is often no good reason. They are coming around!
Users browsing this topic
Guest
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.