Collapsed scaffold photos (1 Viewer)

C

ChrisEng

Guest
Just thought I would get the ball rolling with these that I found on the internet of some russian scaffolding.

Looks a bit light weight, no ledger bracing and no ties by the look of it.

Will try to find some UK examples as would be better.

All the best

Chris Eng:huh:
 

Attachments

  • Russian scaffolding 1.jpg
    Russian scaffolding 1.jpg
    100 KB · Views: 328
  • Russian scaffolding 2.jpg
    Russian scaffolding 2.jpg
    95.1 KB · Views: 323
Last edited:
Another decent site for scaffold images is safety_photo_links It might be worth the forum contacting him with a view to having a link on his site - you need to provide a couple of images for you to do this.
 
Importance of ties - Cardiff 2000

Expect you all seen this one in Cardiff. It shows why they have been tightening up on designs and ties over the past few years, but we still had the incident at Milton keynes recently. :eek:h:

It also does not tell you how much the claims from Network Rail, Sainsburys and others charge for the disruption it caused them.

Also think the scaffold contractors Insurance Company went bust just before it happened, but they probably would not have paid out anyway as the would have claimed negligence I expect.

Amazing that no one was injured.

Extract from photo below

Two building companies were fined a total of £320 000 after 12 storeys of scaffolding partially collapsed onto a road and railway in Cardiff. Miraculously, nobody was hurt as the incident occurred late at night. The collapse, which happened in December 2000, caused major disruption as the road and railway were closed for five days. An HSE investigation identified a catalogue of errors, which contributed to the collapse:

■ The scaffold design was defective in certain areas. In particular, the design drawing for the scaffolders did not provide adequate information on the number, location and make-up of the ties.

■ A decision was taken at site level by the contracts manager and scaffolder to change the design, without checking with the designer. This was because the design drawing supplied was poorly prepared and ambiguous.

■ Ninety-one anchor ties were installed, rather than the required 300.There were no drilled fixings in the topmost 6 m of the scaffolding.

■ Each tie consisted of two ringbolts with drilled anchors. The ties were defectively installed, as the scaffolders were not trained in the proper fixing of the anchors and associated ringbolts. As a result the ties failed prematurely in high winds.

■ The principal contractor did not carry out checks on either the design of the scaffolding or the adequacy of the installation. A scaffolding register was not completed, nor was there a system for carrying out weekly inspections of the scaffolding. The number of ties installed was not checked at hand-over, nor had any been tested. Andrew Knowles, the HSE inspector who led the investigation, said: ‘This is the worst scaffold collapse I have investigated. It is only a matter of good fortune that nobody was injured. Had the incident happened during the daytime, the consequences could have been catastrophic. ’Since the incident the principal contractor has trained over 40 engineers in scaffold inspection and the scaffolding contractor has carried out a company-wide retraining programme. (http://www.hse.gov.uk/construction/pdf/may2003.pdf )
 

Attachments

  • scaffold_collapse_cardiff.jpg
    scaffold_collapse_cardiff.jpg
    94.3 KB · Views: 196
100% Chris, as we all know its always about the ties and bracing. Normally the first two items the contractor asks to be removed!

It's always easier to be the critic rather than the artist but the article could have been clearer.
The scaffold was not built to a design, defective design or not would the scaffold of stayed up if the scaffold had of been built to it? Who knows?
Decision taken by Contracts Manager (was he the scaffold Contracts Manager or Site Contracts Manager?) and Scaffolder (was he taking instruction?) to change the design (which elements of the design?) remove the ties perhaps?
91 ties instead of 300 (a lot of ties is 300) is that for the full scaffold or just the failed area?
Were the tie in in the area of the failure? or perhaps removed?

Not suggesting the design or scaffold was right or wrong just that the article is not as clear as it could be
 
To be fair, the media think we wear fecking joiners belts to go to work with!!!!! so its hardly surprising that when ever there is an incident, the way any of the articles ever sound suggests the scaffold company are main recipient of any blame.

For instance if a bus/wagon hits a job, its never bad driving that you think when you read the article because of how it has been written. And then the cheeky fecker always manage to get the poor scaffs sign board in the picture.

Don't get me wrong, i know we're not all angels, but you've got to admit, we get a bad rub of the green with sh1t like this.
 
To be fair, the media think we wear fecking joiners belts to go to work with!!!!! so its hardly surprising that when ever there is an incident, the way any of the articles ever sound suggests the scaffold company are main recipient of any blame.

For instance if a bus/wagon hits a job, its never bad driving that you think when you read the article because of how it has been written. And then the cheeky fecker always manage to get the poor scaffs sign board in the picture.

Don't get me wrong, i know we're not all angels, but you've got to admit, we get a bad rub of the green with sh1t like this.

And if anything gets broke its always the scaffolders that the finger gets pointed at first
 
the scaffold was built by interserve for taylor woodrow i think peach but the wind came from the opposite direction from the elavation shown.It tore the monoflex off that side and blew through the building as the windows had been removed
 
Top Bottom