final-report-of-the-advisory-committee-on-falsework-bragg-report - Flipbook - Page 39
of no more than 14 days between a constructor receiving an order and the starting date of a contract
which included sixty bridge spans. In circumstances
such as these it is little wonder that falsework design
is sometimes skimped, and that mistakes occur
because there is no time for proper communication
and discussion.
Design Modifications
Another line of communication which needs clearing
is that between the people on site and the falsework
designer. We have heard of many cases where, because
of non-availability of material or unforeseen local
conditions, it was not possible to follow the design
details exactly. Sometimes the need for changes was
not communicated back to the designer and modifications were made on site which seriously weakened
the structure.
Errors in Design
There can be no doubt that some failures of falsework
are the result of errors in design. We have studied
reports which indicate beyond doubt that the primary
cause of the failure arose through a fundamental
design error which was either not detected or not
rectified before loading took place. It is of considerable
significance that the design errors could have been
avoided by using existing technology. That is, they
could have been discovered had an adequate checking
procedure existed. One would expect such a check to
be made internally, that is in 'the office where the
design was done.
Unfortunately the evidence we have received shows
considerable variation in opinion as to what the
engineer is required to do under contract, what he
ought to do to discharge his professional responsibilities, and what he might do to enhance the safety of
temporary works.
The most significant divergence of view in this area
was the polarisation of opinion on the action which
should be taken if, for example, the engineer discovers
a defect in the erection of a falsework. One school of
thought stated that even if a serious fault be observed,
he should in no circumstances draw the contractor's
attention to it for fear of incurring some responsibility
in the event of his fears being realised. Some design
engineers went as far as to express unease about even
visiting a site where permanent works of their design
were being constructed. Separate witnesses said that
they believed absence of body was better than
presence of mind. At the other extreme, many professionally qualified witnesses stated that if they
observed material defects which, in their view could
lead to unsatisfactory completion of the falsework,
40
they would, regardless of any legal consequences,
inform the parties having direct responsibility. We
consider this attitude furthers the interests of safety.
The scope for differences of viewpoint is shown by
the standard contractual forms used in the civil
engineering and building industries as well as by
more specialised forms of document entered into by
government departments and nationalised industries.
The revised contract of the Institution of Civil
Engineers, 5th edition, has been amended in an
endeavour to clarify the duties of the respective parties
and, in particular, to clarify the status, and consequently power, of the engineer. Not everyone seems
to agree, however, on the true interpretation of parts
of this document.
Construction Industry in Britain
This leads in practice to diametrically opposite
actions being taken on the field which does not
advance the cause of falsework safety. The areas of
doubt include the powers of the engineer to call for
the contractor's falsework proposals in cases where
the permanent works are not directly affected;
whether the engineer is entitled to ask for calculations
as well as drawings of the contractor's proposals;
the exact position of the engineer when, in examining
proposals, he believes he has found a design error.
The standard form of contract of the Royal Institute
of British Architects (RIBA), which has been under
discussion from many points of view, makes no
mention of the consulting engineer who thus appears
to have no status under the contract. The building
contract of the Institute of Registered Architects and
the British Railways forms seem clearer than many
of the others. The recently revised government form
of contract GC(Works/1 has not made the inroad
which it could have done in setting out a categoric
statement of duties and we shall have comment on
this when dealing with contracts.
Site Organisation
It is all too easy to focus attention upon the erection
stage of the falsework construction. It is at this point
that errors, omissions and deviations from design are
most apparent. However, on poorly managed sites,
the deficiencies which are made apparent at . the
erection stage largely result from a failure to provide
the erection team with the properly prepared preliminary instructions which are essential for the success
of their work, and the materials required for its
execution. It is not sufficient merely to prepare a
sound design. This must be translated into adequately
