PDA

View Full Version : has the minimum height changed



mightymouse
6th October 2010, 06:31 PM
we had some young little P*ick on site today(safety inspector)
he took great pleasure in telling us the minimum height of the top handrail has changed to 1090mm on 01 09 2010
can anyone confirm this

dave b 2
6th October 2010, 06:46 PM
never heard that is that from ledger or top of boards m8

Joe90
6th October 2010, 06:58 PM
If somebody falls over the top of the handrail he or she would have been doing something they should not of been doing :nuts:

scaffarobbo
6th October 2010, 07:14 PM
They make it up as they go along . Some systems may not cover this height . I can only assume it`s a back door move to get a third handrail for nowt .

rumple
6th October 2010, 07:32 PM
Utter bulls**t

philliosmaximus
6th October 2010, 07:42 PM
news to me mate :suspicious:

ragscaff
6th October 2010, 08:00 PM
Heard it was going to change but never been given a date. Stopped using a bubble down because of it. Now do 16".

:sad::cry:

philliosmaximus
6th October 2010, 08:04 PM
why would the height change ? is the average man height growing that fast ?

mightymouse
6th October 2010, 08:20 PM
he told us......
it was from the top of the boards,to the top of the tube of the top handrail.
i did ask for some written proof,
as i have heard nothing about this change.
and i like to think im on top things like this
and i know my firm would have been all over this like white on rice

but if it has slipped through
i would like any info you guys can give me as i cant find any at all

dave b 2
6th October 2010, 08:23 PM
thats because its ********

brandy
6th October 2010, 08:50 PM
If somebody falls over the top of the handrail he or she would have been doing something they should not of been doing :nuts:
Thats talking sense Joe, but sense is not very common with a lot of these muppets.

rumple
6th October 2010, 09:08 PM
he told us......
it was from the top of the boards,to the top of the tube of the top handrail.
i did ask for some written proof,
as i have heard nothing about this change.
and i like to think im on top things like this
and i know my firm would have been all over this like white on rice

but if it has slipped through
i would like any info you guys can give me as i cant find any at all

utter rubbish, it means changing the law and the law has not changed.

Phil
6th October 2010, 09:09 PM
thought it was still 950mm. the fabricated stairs that get fixed to buildings, them handrails are welded at 1090mm. fire escapes etc. just googled 1090mm handrail height. if thats any help to you.

grum
6th October 2010, 09:21 PM
On a fixed guard rail the height is 1.1m,which i thought should be the height for scaffolding,so when they changed it a bit since i hoped citb would follow suit but dint.scaffold is a temporary structure,the man is talkin sh-t,
Am 6'2 n like a good guard rail,with 470+470+225 it is cool to me, but i sometimes got odd stair for putting them in heigh.Yes i also know the minimum height of a toe board is 150mm

phil181
6th October 2010, 09:27 PM
On a fixed guard rail the height is 1.1m,which i thought should be the height for scaffolding,so when they changed it a bit since i hoped citb would follow suit but dint.scaffold is a temporary structure,the man is talkin sh-t,
Am 6'2 n like a good guard rail,with 470+470+225 it is cool to me, but i sometimes got odd stair for putting them in heigh.Yes i also know the minimum height of a toe board is 150mm

It's got nothing to do with the CITB mate.

It's the HSE that dictate the rule in schedule 2 of the WAH regs.

grum
6th October 2010, 09:31 PM
Cool,new it wo some 1,still 2 low for me

soulhawk
7th October 2010, 07:50 AM
Tell him to wap off !

instructor
7th October 2010, 11:54 AM
The Working at Height Regulation states 950mm from the top of boards

T.ANIMAL
7th October 2010, 01:06 PM
On a fixed guard rail the height is 1.1m,which i thought should be the height for scaffolding,so when they changed it a bit since i hoped citb would follow suit but dint.scaffold is a temporary structure,the man is talkin sh-t,
Am 6'2 n like a good guard rail,with 470+470+225 it is cool to me, but i sometimes got odd stair for putting them in heigh.Yes i also know the minimum height of a toe board is 150mm


The Working at Height Regulation states 950mm from the top of boards

At 6' 2" or 1880mm new money, the height of my hip goes the top handrail and a bubble down goes the bottom handrail, then the toe board, never known anyone to fall thru a fully double handrailed and toe board lift.
When i do the maths that works out 1000mm top handrail then length of your bubble which is 260mm from bottom of double to top of bottom double for your bottom handrail and then your toe board which a standard board is 225mm.
Im near on the money with the regs, your talking about 30mm to 50mm difference with each component, i find the 950, to low. unless your 5" 5'.:suspicious:

superscaff75
7th October 2010, 01:22 PM
they were on about changing it a while ago, but as you will know brickguards barely touch toeboards to start with never mind raising the hrail height, imagine cost of replacing full stock of bguards for a big company with a stock for example of 20,000 guards , no good i say its no good

instructor
7th October 2010, 01:31 PM
The Working at Height Regulations is what the law courts will base there finding on, 950mm from the underside of the handrail 50mm thickness of the tube =1meter. 225mm toe board + 470mm gap + 50mm tube thickness +470mm gap + 50mm tube thickness =1265mm.
Share the Love/spread the load

scaffjim
7th October 2010, 04:58 PM
The little **** is talking rubbish !!!!!!!!!

grum
7th October 2010, 05:05 PM
thats cool,but i thought a tube was 48mm,lol
there is another 1 with 4xthickness thats 10mm out 2,any1 know it?

instructor
7th October 2010, 06:18 PM
48.3mm if you want to start spliting hairs.But for you we will call it 50mm.

ragscaff
7th October 2010, 06:32 PM
But for you we call it 50mm.

Can you spread the ties to 8m again?

Ladder height?

Base lift Height?

Number of transoms in a loading bay?

If so I might get home early & see what the wife looks like!!

:p:weird:

instructor
7th October 2010, 06:43 PM
Ties 4m or 16 m2.
Ladders 1050mm.
Base lift Heigth 2.7m
Loading bay transoms undesigned 900mm.
The wife bit i cannot help you with.

philliosmaximus
7th October 2010, 07:08 PM
and heres me thinking a tube was 2 inchs thick :unsure:

TomP
7th October 2010, 07:26 PM
depends on how much mud is left on the outside from all the bombing!!!! ha ha!

philliosmaximus
7th October 2010, 07:54 PM
arrrr tube turds :D

ragscaff
7th October 2010, 08:53 PM
Loading bay undesigned !!!

Back to the old days :nuts:

philliosmaximus
7th October 2010, 08:56 PM
well said rag , when the scaffolders done the job years ago was it really that bad :unsure:

TomP
7th October 2010, 09:34 PM
i remember when Scaffs used to get danger money, i know some scaffs who get £10 a week more than the skip drivers and that is classed as the danger money!:amazed:

brandy
7th October 2010, 09:34 PM
and heres me thinking a tube was 2 inchs thick :unsure:
And a board was 9'', A 5' a 5', a 21' is still a 21', still measure in imperial, can't be bothered with metric, All turns out same in the end.

TomP
7th October 2010, 09:52 PM
i'm soo glad they brought out 8m ally beams though!;)

brandy
7th October 2010, 09:58 PM
i remember when Scaffs used to get danger money, i know some scaffs who get £10 a week more than the skip drivers and that is classed as the danger money!:amazed:
Remember on a power station all other trades got height money us scaffs did'nt cause it was classed as our job, so we negotiated and they compromised an gave us the money but called it scratch money on account of the itch from the lagging, happy days then.

grum
7th October 2010, 10:11 PM
Used to get muck money 50p p/h,that dissaperaed in mid to late ninetys

---------- Post added at 10:11 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:10 PM ----------

To use as guard rail Tomp?

T.ANIMAL
9th October 2010, 01:53 PM
Use to get wet money as well, now dont get nothing,:cry:

paddy carr
9th October 2010, 02:54 PM
Also used to make good money, thats gone also:sad:

TomP
9th October 2010, 03:32 PM
Grum

nah skip drivers dont like to be used as handrail they think its boring just being attached to the standards all day! ha ha!

ive used beams a few times for handrail mainly in long runs of edge protection though but that was a couple of yeras ago now after being told to by our boss, no good though when you need them two days later!

Gaz
3rd October 2011, 10:25 PM
So which is right 1265mm or 1000mm to top of handrail? Cant the HSE add up or something?

frederik
3rd October 2011, 10:45 PM
Gaz,I believe 950mm is minimum to Top ,470 between handrails.I was told euro regs wanted to make it 1mtr,but compromised with hse because of the massive changes that would have effected other plant,eg, mewps.

Gaz
3rd October 2011, 11:05 PM
Cheers Frederick. I thought that was right in the first place lol. I shouldnt read this section of the forum, its all so confusing lol :confused:

frederik
3rd October 2011, 11:17 PM
:rolleyes:Strange thing tho Gaz, 2X470 =940......950 easy to remember...

Alan Reade
4th October 2011, 03:04 AM
we had some young little P*ick on site today(safety inspector)
he took great pleasure in telling us the minimum height of the top handrail has changed to 1090mm on 01 09 2010
can anyone confirm this

If guard rails move up to 1090, none of the system scaffolds will work.
Cups set at 500 increments = 1.0m from top of transom to top of top rail less the boards 38mm =962mm.

Think there would be a lot of happy people out there with system scaffolds??
regards
Alan

Jason-Gibbs
4th October 2011, 04:50 AM
If guard rails move up to 1090, none of the system scaffolds will work.
Cups set at 500 increments = 1.0m from top of transom to top of top rail less the boards 38mm =962mm.

Think there would be a lot of happy people out there with system scaffolds??
regards
Alan

System Scaffolds are a law to themselves though.
I cant see how CupLok is still being used... its dangerous as fukk.

How can it be safe to whack a upper cup up to take/put in a tube and leave 2/3 other exposed tubes that could (in theory) pop out the lower cup?


I think its a shiit System, tbh.
Layher blows it out the water.

thumper
4th October 2011, 07:52 PM
its 950 mm from top of board to top of tube finnished my part two about 6 months ago

Alan Reade
5th October 2011, 02:23 AM
System Scaffolds are a law to themselves though.
I cant see how CupLok is still being used... its dangerous as fukk.

How can it be safe to whack a upper cup up to take/put in a tube and leave 2/3 other exposed tubes that could (in theory) pop out the lower cup?


I think its a shiit System, tbh.
Layher blows it out the water.


Each to his own Jason, you may be right i'm not sure but not a lot you can do when you have 15,000 tonne of the stuff.
Must say have never had any trouble with cuplok falling out of the cups the opposite in fact cant' get the bloody ledgers out without a good clump when doing an adaption.

However I am sure that most systems will still have a problem if the rail height alters. (I can remember when the height was altered previousley and I am almost certain that the height took into consideration existing systems)
regards
Alan

Tough Scaff Spain
25th October 2011, 03:46 PM
If im not wrong with the ed standard the minimum hieght is 950 with the maximum hieght
bieng 1090

---------- Post added at 02:46 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:45 PM ----------

sorrt ec standard

aom
25th October 2011, 04:30 PM
There is no maximum height just a maximum spacing between rails.

colinkelly(L)scaff
25th October 2011, 07:09 PM
just dun my part 1 6 week ago an the regs wer 950 min no max an 470 between top and bottom hand rail

Bri
25th October 2011, 09:00 PM
The W@HR havent changed so the same rules apply a minimum of 950mm.

Tough Scaff Spain
25th October 2011, 09:01 PM
With alot of the European scaff systems they vary ive got a frame system here with
CE certicication and the side guard rail goes to a hieght of 1070 .If you go to En 12811
with the manufacturing of system and the frame scaffolding the maximum hieght is 1090 maybe thats where he is getting his hieghts from.

frederik
25th October 2011, 09:26 PM
we had some young little P*ick on site today(safety inspector)
he took great pleasure in telling us the minimum height of the top handrail has changed to 1090mm on 01 09 2010
can anyone confirm this

The first post that started this disussion by mm. This inspector was correct in stating minimum heights 1090. This does not aply to scaffolding. More to do with public ballustrading and residential handrails on new builds. As Alan Reade also stated, a compromise was made to take into account the sheer volume of changes and cost to companies on system scaff and plant such as mewps etc. 950mm is the minimum heights for handrails on scaffolding. How easy is it for t&f scaffolders to change height??? System would be knackered.

Alan Reade
26th October 2011, 02:46 AM
There is no maximum height just a maximum spacing between rails.

Morning all,
I thought I knew the answer to this as 5973 gave a range which I recalled as 910 to 1150.
However I note from TG20 11.6 sets no such range but states that guard rails should be fixed inside the standards at a height of at least 950mm. This section go's on to state that the maximum gap between guard rails should not exceed 470mm.
I assume the logic behind this is that if you set a maximum height what hapens when a third rail is required above the standard height? That is now predetermined for you by the 470mm rule.
regards
Alan

jakdan
26th October 2011, 08:28 AM
alan

you have just stated in 5 lines what it has took us scaffs 6 pages to say:laugh:

Alan Reade
26th October 2011, 09:48 AM
alan

you have just stated in 5 lines what it has took us scaffs 6 pages to say:laugh:


I'm a man of many words with little meaning!

scaffdar
6th November 2011, 10:16 AM
3. In relation to work at height involved in construction work—

(a)the top guard-rail or other similar means of protection shall be at least 950 millimetres or, in the case of such means of protection already fixed at the coming into force of these Regulations, at least 910 millimetres above the edge from which any person is liable to fall;

(b)toe-boards shall be suitable and sufficient to prevent the fall of any person, or any material or object, from any place of work; and

(c)any intermediate guard-rail or similar means of protection shall be positioned so that any gap between it and other means of protection does not exceed 470 millimetres.

Source : The Work at Height Regulations 2005 (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2005/735/schedule/2/made)

Hope this helps. i had this discussion with my tutor on the nebosh diploma course. A well respected chartered member of iosh and by far the most competent tutor we've dealt with ( believe some of these guys should not be teaching, tho their technical knowledge is astounding) He argued , though unquoted , hand rail/ stroke edge protection had minimum heights close to 1100 mm to which i said someone should let the n.a.s.c know and then we picked the finer points in landing places for ladders amongst other things. Industry guidance from time to time conflicts with statute law or can also be open to interpretation. But in this instance i still believe it's there in black n white :D

slav80
10th November 2011, 07:47 PM
handrails for public use 1100mm plus fully close boarded for child protection

scaffdar
10th November 2011, 09:16 PM
that in cdm reg's slav ?

slav80
12th November 2011, 01:04 AM
From the Building Regulation approved docs, top of stair handrail to be min 900, max 1000 above string line of the stair, anywhere it forms guarding i.e landings, balconies, balustrades, to be 1100mm above finished floor level.
Handrail diameter to be between 40 and 45mm.

---------- Post added at 01:04 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:02 AM ----------

From the Building Regulation approved docs, top of stair handrail to be min 900, max 1000 above string line of the stair, anywhere it forms guarding i.e landings, balconies, balustrades, to be 1100mm above finished floor level.
Handrail diameter to be between 40 and 45mm.

scaffdar
12th November 2011, 09:21 AM
Going back to it then, a scaff with a bit of clout would tell him building regs don't apply scaffolding as such. If it can't be found in WAH, TG20 then the elf n safety needs to read up on what he's dishing out as advice.

slav80
18th November 2011, 02:47 PM
this advice about public 1100 came recently while i was doing adv inspec course so just shared the info i suspect the principal contractor would ask for this height specifically....at relevant location as public staircase...

jakdan
18th November 2011, 09:23 PM
this advice about public 1100 came recently while i was doing adv inspec course so just shared the info i suspect the principal contractor would ask for this height specifically....at relevant location as public staircase...

how the NEBOSH go bud

scaffdar
19th November 2011, 09:40 AM
Guess that's a grey area for consideration- if the designer has left an open space on a staircase without a prefabricated handrail ready to install from a " safe place" ie the ground, then the hand rail to go in, whilst not pre-fab', isn't on a scaffold platform form so probably can't come within the reg's i mentioned and the pc can ask for building regs height- but there's arguably design flaws depending on circumstances, and i think this discussion was started on the handrail on a scaffold ( again site H&S needs to sort himself) in my humble.....lol- Jakdan, don't know if you were asking me or slav there but i were 3pts off the distinction at certificate and the Diploma's going great cheers

marra watson
6th April 2012, 09:54 PM
By my cals the max high is 1261

toe board 225 +max distance 470+tickness of tube 48+max distance470+plus thickness of tube48 = 1261 mm

so centres of handrails bolt to bolt max
top 1237
bottom 767

but they way i do it is hip top doubble knee bottom hanrail or
top doubble hip bottom doubble a spanner down

Tony Mason
7th April 2012, 07:58 AM
No good for brick guards at that height.

southernpoofter
7th April 2012, 02:54 PM
should have asked him to back it up by showing you something in wrighting,however it doesnt make sense raising the minimum height but i always thought it was too low anyway look at it like this -
top of brd to top of toe 225m
maximum gap to undrside of bottom rail 470mm
witdh of botom handrail 48mm
max gap to bottom of top handrail 470mm
width of top hand rail 48mm

gives a total of 1260mm

Alan Reade
8th April 2012, 03:05 AM
should have asked him to back it up by showing you something in wrighting,however it doesnt make sense raising the minimum height but i always thought it was too low anyway look at it like this -
top of brd to top of toe 225m
maximum gap to undrside of bottom rail 470mm
witdh of botom handrail 48mm
max gap to bottom of top handrail 470mm
width of top hand rail 48mm

gives a total of 1260mm

Morning SP
Sorry fella but neither yours nor 1989's answer has any bearing on the question. Both answers would indicate a maximum ht not a minimum.
TG20:08, 11.6 Guardrails fixed inside the standards at a height of at least 950mm from top of deck to top surface of guardrail.
regards
Alan

marra watson
8th April 2012, 04:19 PM
mearly addin info to throw at the little cant lol

southernpoofter
8th April 2012, 05:36 PM
alan- was trying to get the maths to work out to where he wanted it but still doesn't lolo

Alan Reade
9th April 2012, 02:39 AM
alan- was trying to get the maths to work out to where he wanted it but still doesn't lolo

The math's can work out if you want it to, to obtain the desired 1090 (which is a permanent guard rail not a temp) TB225 off deck +48+48+2gaps at 385. dont forget that the 470 gap is a max not a min and that we use 225 TB's but the minimum requirement is 150. Lots of variations possible none of which stop this fella being a t0sser.
regards
Alan

frederik
9th April 2012, 03:26 AM
Alan,wouldnt t.boards be off trannies. Not that it alters measurements by much.

Alan Reade
9th April 2012, 04:28 AM
Alan,wouldnt t.boards be off trannies. Not that it alters measurements by much.

Not always Frederik, but as to say it alters the dimensions very little.

southernpoofter
9th April 2012, 10:40 AM
alan - where did the 348 come from lolo, am i being dumb but wouldn't we allow for max anyway so even if u went to top of tube 225+470+470 would still be 1165 which is only slightly more than the minimum anyway, - i didnt think there was a max ,only no more than 470 between rails - but lets be honest what the SO want they normally get reguardless,i.m certainly not gonna argue with one over a few mm than have him allover everything else like a rash,lolo the 2 day courses they go on can certainly make them more than a litle anal

Alan Reade
9th April 2012, 11:21 AM
SP,
as my previous mail indicates the 470 is a maximum opening, and there is no maximum stated height for temp guard rails to my knowledge. The 385 was an indication that all the heights are atainable and within the requirements. What would be interesting would be if there was a system scaffold on this site as they are all in 500mm increments what would the SO look for then??

aom
9th April 2012, 05:43 PM
A brick guard.:idea:

philliosmaximus
9th April 2012, 05:47 PM
I didnt know there was a Minimum height for scaffolders , i have seen some right little fookers over the years, make sense though with all this scaff step malarkey that there is a minimum height else how the little fookers gonna get on the step

aom
9th April 2012, 05:53 PM
Bang it in at baw height and bubble down, simples really. As I tell the boys if baw height doesn't work for you find a spot on your body that it does work and bubble down. I have lost count of the amount of times I have walked on to a job and know just by putting my hand on the rail if it's at the right height or not.

I think I have always known the hand rail was a minimum height Phil, if memory serves it has always been measured that way but obviously the maximum gaps gives you a height unless you are over water.

philliosmaximus
9th April 2012, 05:57 PM
Just looked through SG20 AOM but cant find any reference to " baw " height :laugh::laugh::laugh:

aom
9th April 2012, 06:04 PM
haha, well there fekin should be. Strictly speaking it's not actually baw height it's just on the buckle of my belt but belt height hasn't got the same ring too it.

I could never understand why they don't ask me to do the re writes. :laugh:

---------- Post added at 06:04 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:02 PM ----------

I am not really sure why but I really fekin hate hand rail measurers.:mad:

ragscaff
9th April 2012, 06:11 PM
Nowadays the lads wear there belts low so you can see the label on there boxer shorts!!!

That would make the handrail height to be 380mm!! :eek:

aom
9th April 2012, 06:20 PM
Not at Aom, just make them wear ovies, that sorts that out.

Alan Reade
10th April 2012, 02:37 AM
haha, well there fekin should be. Strictly speaking it's not actually baw height it's just on the buckle of my belt but belt height hasn't got the same ring too it.

I could never understand why they don't ask me to do the re writes. :laugh:

---------- Post added at 06:04 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:02 PM ----------

I am not really sure why but I really fekin hate hand rail measurers.:mad:

Morning AOM
I tried this technique some time ago whilst cutting an over grown run of hedge with my mate. We started at opposite ends of the hedge and met in the middle somewhere. He is 6'4" and I am 5'9" guess the rest LOL

aom
10th April 2012, 07:07 PM
Yeah I guessed it Alan but for the full Aom experience you forgot to spend the previous 4 years punching the information into your mate to reduce mistakes. I have all the relevant information in my method statement, I could forward you a copy should you wish to reduce your risk of errors on future projects.:cool:

marra watson
10th April 2012, 07:55 PM
Am guesing perfectly level (he got short leggs and long body u got short leggs and short body ) lol yeha it dosent work if 2 people are doing it at belt hight on the the same piece of hand rail unless your leveling of only one baw as amo puts it wel come in all shapes and sizes thats y 1 runs the lift in while the other hand rails

---------- Post added at 07:55 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:42 PM ----------

Am guesing perfectly level lol (he's got short leggs and long body u got short leggs and short body ) lol yeha it dosent work if 2 people are doing it at belt hight on the the same piece of hand rail unless your leveling of only one baw as aom puts it we all come in all shapes and sizes thats y 1 runs the lift in while the other hand rails

aom
10th April 2012, 08:20 PM
haha marra very funny but you just have to find your own level it doesn't matter where it is on your body but if you have a mark you will do it every time and can sell your bubble. My belt mark suits me and complies with all the measurements without having to waste time actually measuring.

happyhugenoet
3rd May 2012, 12:23 AM
sorry to alarm some of you guys or as AOM seems determinned to call us all MARRAS(as stupid m/borro name for mate)but due to receant laws against discrimination there is no longer any height restrictions ;)

aom
4th May 2012, 10:46 PM
haha, fekin magic.:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

marra watson
9th May 2012, 10:01 PM
Ow marra this phrase if from the land were dream are made off whitehaven (not workington there jam eaters) :d

aom
9th May 2012, 10:19 PM
:laugh:

sambhoy
16th April 2014, 03:49 PM
yeah Mate its Crap too many C===S Full of Self importance come the revolution all safety men will be put up against the wall and shot the words HEALTH AND SAFETY struck from the Dictionary Dont ge me wrong we all want to go home at night but some people take it to the MAX LOL

Double-Standards
16th April 2014, 06:01 PM
yeah Mate its Crap too many C===S Full of Self importance come the revolution all safety men will be put up against the wall and shot the words HEALTH AND SAFETY struck from the Dictionary Dont ge me wrong we all want to go home at night but some people take it to the MAX LOL

How many years experience do you have !!! how many life changing accidents have you investigated :laugh:.

bazzaffc
12th February 2015, 11:40 AM
min 950
max 1050

thats to centre of tube and from working platform.

see TG20 and SG4

SWIFTY
12th February 2015, 09:13 PM
Thanks Baz

scaffy 1980
12th February 2015, 10:26 PM
Here's me thinking that was maximum ledger height.....it all makes sence now.

Joescaff65
11th May 2015, 04:07 PM
Still 950 with 470 max gaps ... offshore is different beast but that is nowt to do do with W@H regs !

fuckhse
13th August 2015, 06:23 PM
Loading bay undesigned !!!

Back to the old days :nuts:

when I started 1986 a loading bay had 3 standards,5 trannys,a brace each end a sway brace, a single stop end if over 2 mtrs and check fittings if not using boultons more than finger tight. ive seen these with double stacked pallets of conkers and not budge.sag a bit mind!!!!. bit in them days they had people called hod carriers so firms didn't wanna pay for loading bays. Also wooden pole ladders,compared to metal ladders an absolute joy to climb

Dennis
18th January 2016, 03:10 PM
min 950
max 1050

thats to centre of tube and from working platform.

see TG20 and SG4

This is wrong. TG 20 and SG4 are not the law. The Work at Height regs cover it.
There is no longer a max. It's 950mm minimum with no gap of more than 470mm where a person could fall.

In practice this means that any ladder access on the outside of a scaffold must have the third handrail.

Alan Reade
19th January 2016, 03:21 AM
[/COLOR]Work at height regs = THE LAW

The Work at Height Regulations 2005 (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2005/735/schedule/2/made)

SCHEDULE 2
REQUIREMENTS FOR GUARD-RAILS, TOE-BOARDS, BARRIERS AND SIMILAR COLLECTIVE MEANS OF PROTECTION

1. Unless the context otherwise requires, any reference in this Schedule to means of protection is to a guard-rail, toe-board, barrier or similar collective means of protection.

2. Means of protection shall—

(a)be of sufficient dimensions, of sufficient strength and rigidity for the purposes for which they are being used, and otherwise suitable;

(b)be so placed, secured and used as to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, that they do not become accidentally displaced; and

(c)be so placed as to prevent, so far as is practicable, the fall of any person, or of any material or object, from any place of work.

3. In relation to work at height involved in construction work—

(a)the top guard-rail or other similar means of protection shall be at least 950 millimetres or, in the case of such means of protection already fixed at the coming into force of these Regulations, at least 910 millimetres above the edge from which any person is liable to fall;

(b)toe-boards shall be suitable and sufficient to prevent the fall of any person, or any material or object, from any place of work; and

(c)any intermediate guard-rail or similar means of protection shall be positioned so that any gap between it and other means of protection does not exceed 470 millimetres.

4. Any structure or part of a structure which supports means of protection or to which means of protection are attached shall be of sufficient strength and suitable for the purpose of such support or attachment.

5.—(1) Subject to sub-paragraph (2), there shall not be a lateral opening in means of protection save at a point of access to a ladder or stairway where an opening is necessary.

(2) Means of protection shall be removed only for the time and to the extent necessary to gain access or egress or for the performance of a particular task and shall be replaced as soon as practicable.

(3) The task shall not be performed while means of protection are removed unless effective compensatory safety measures are in place.