Hi GUYS HAVE ERECTED A SMALL JOB ON STREET 4m long x 4.5m high, HANDOVER CERT GIVEN TO BUILDER, NOW HIS CLIENT HAS ASK FOR COMPLIANCE SHEET MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE HANDOVER CERT IS ENOUGH SCAFFOLD NOT DESIGNED JUST BASIC ACCESS TOWER TO ROOF
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
compliance sheet
- Thread starter BIG G
- Start date
I think he is probably talking about a TG20 compliance sheet which gives a list of the criteria to make it acceptable as a basic scaffold. With the information about the location, height, lift height, bay length, pavement lift, cladding, ladders, and probably a couple of good photos, it is a five minute job to produce one using the NASC program. Unfortunately NASC hard enter the owner of the program in the sheet to stop people sharing it so you need to find a friendly designer chap who doesn't mind adding his name to your work.
I think he is probably talking about a TG20 compliance sheet which gives a list of the criteria to make it acceptable as a basic scaffold. With the information about the location, height, lift height, bay length, pavement lift, cladding, ladders, and probably a couple of good photos, it is a five minute job to produce one using the NASC program. Unfortunately NASC hard enter the owner of the program in the sheet to stop people sharing it so you need to find a friendly designer chap who doesn't mind adding his name to your work.
Great we cover all THAT on are handing over certs SO all good many thanks for your reply
The compliance sheet isn't a legal requirement neither is a handing over certificate at this moment in time. If the client stipulated the compliance sheet in his tender then he is entitled to it, if not and he wants one then he should pay for it.
Roger Nutkins
Well-known member
i can conform that ALL jobs now need a TG20 sheet as its the law. fact
i can conform that ALL jobs now need a TG20 sheet as its the law. fact
Just to help everyone who may look at this thread:
If there is no TG20 compliance sheet (or a design) relating to an erected scaffold, which law is being broken and who is breaking that law?
Here's a thought then:
From Work at Height Regulations 2005 Schedule 3
7. Strength and stability calculations for scaffolding shall be carried out unless—
(a) a note of the calculations, covering the structural arrangements contemplated, is available; or
(b) it is assembled in conformity with a generally recognised standard configuration.
Note that this b) does not refer to a European or British Standard but to a 'recognised standard configuration'. It does not specify who should recognise the configuration. It does not specify a compliance sheet. If a scaffolder has been formally trained to erect straightforward 2-3 storey house scaffolds and continues in his working life to follow what he was taught, can you argue that he has not assembled it in conformity with a generally recognised standard configuration? If you can't, then the clause in the regulations has been satisfied and a compliance sheet is not required.
From Work at Height Regulations 2005 Schedule 3
7. Strength and stability calculations for scaffolding shall be carried out unless—
(a) a note of the calculations, covering the structural arrangements contemplated, is available; or
(b) it is assembled in conformity with a generally recognised standard configuration.
Note that this b) does not refer to a European or British Standard but to a 'recognised standard configuration'. It does not specify who should recognise the configuration. It does not specify a compliance sheet. If a scaffolder has been formally trained to erect straightforward 2-3 storey house scaffolds and continues in his working life to follow what he was taught, can you argue that he has not assembled it in conformity with a generally recognised standard configuration? If you can't, then the clause in the regulations has been satisfied and a compliance sheet is not required.
Here's a thought then:
From Work at Height Regulations 2005 Schedule 3
7. Strength and stability calculations for scaffolding shall be carried out unless—
(a) a note of the calculations, covering the structural arrangements contemplated, is available; or
(b) it is assembled in conformity with a generally recognised standard configuration.
Note that this b) does not refer to a European or British Standard but to a 'recognised standard configuration'. It does not specify who should recognise the configuration. It does not specify a compliance sheet. If a scaffolder has been formally trained to erect straightforward 2-3 storey house scaffolds and continues in his working life to follow what he was taught, can you argue that he has not assembled it in conformity with a generally recognised standard configuration? If you can't, then the clause in the regulations has been satisfied and a compliance sheet is not required.
As you said i think it comes down to who recognises the configuration. At the moment NASC are the only player in this industry who has guidance out there that has been 'adopted' by the HSE and the construction companies - this is where as i see it becoming a recognised configuration.
NASC have built the scaffolds whether it be a live environment or by structural calculation and have proved parameters that scaffolds constructed to their measurements are within design so to speak.
I was taught pre 2000 and what i learnt was different to what's taught now, dimensions change, swl change, regulations change - so unless i work at a company who keep up with all this and pass this information on i could still be building scaffolds with handrails at 910mm and think that a class 3 independent still has a bay size of 2.1, so would it be compliant.
I can see your view and no doubt you have little devils advocate there, but if they can use tg20 in prosecutions then it must be the only adopted configuration. Unless someone goes through it all and proves a different version, say, CAPE/ALTRAD have a standard solution book that they have proven by calculation.
I was taught pre 2000 and what i learnt was different to what's taught now, - but of course CPD has kept you up to date?
no doubt you have little devils advocate there, - Yes, or perhaps more than a little.
I just think that as properly tied scaffolds to straightforward jobs were not falling down all over the place before EN12811, we must have been doing something right. Also, the aim of building a scaffold is to have it stay up and provide a safe working platform. We are nowadays fixated on paperwork and covering ourselves just in case it fails to achieve these aims. Getting it done right on site should be the main focus and then nobody gets hurt and all is good.
EN12811 is a royal pain in the backside - try using it to prove that scaffold beams work and you're on to a loser. Next year, when we are out of Europe. I would love to see NASC putting a lot of lobbying into reverting to BS5973 which, as I said, seemed to work just fine. I bet that won't happen though.
to be honest, i didn't go back to do my part 2 till around TG20-08 was coming in so didnt know the handrail height had changed (working for a smaller street firm) and as usual, walk out the door of the centre and forget the majority of what id learnt as i didnt use it, no thinking just doing!
I try to take a bit more of an interest in it now, getting older cant stay on the tools forever!
I really cant see it changing back although things did seem to be easier, but that was pre-Facebook!
I try to take a bit more of an interest in it now, getting older cant stay on the tools forever!
I really cant see it changing back although things did seem to be easier, but that was pre-Facebook!
johnford
Active member
Has anyone bought the TG20:13 Guide to Good Practice for Tube and Fitting Scaffolding (Full Suite). Is it worth the cost for a small company.
meercat
Well-known member
Hold fire the new TG20 version will be along soon.
to be honest, i didn't go back to do my part 2 till around TG20-08 was coming in so didnt know the handrail height had changed (working for a smaller street firm) and as usual, walk out the door of the centre and forget the majority of what id learnt as i didnt use it, no thinking just doing!
I try to take a bit more of an interest in it now, getting older cant stay on the tools forever!
I really cant see it changing back although things did seem to be easier, but that was pre-Facebook!
I would say6 there are many, many scaffolders, me included, that really only took onboard TG20, SG4 etc once off the tools....
ALL, scaffolds should designed. That is the recommendation and good practice. Not law, but if something goe wrong and you're stood in front of the man in the curly wig. Try explaining why youy ddn't follow TG20
The Work at Height Regs says that all scaffolds should be designed unless built to a generally recognised configuration, which is TG20, so i would say that it is law?
Just to help me, how many scaffolds have failed in the UK since 2005 (when NASC first published their design guidance)? On how many of those failures was there no design? I am asking because I suspect that the main cause of failure is not the poor or missing design but an operational issue on a designed or compliant scaffold. For instance leaving out or prematurely removing the ties or putting the wrong beams in the scaffold without anyone noticing are pretty common errors.
outward bound
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2010
- Messages
- 304
- Reaction score
- 0
I have already mentioned this to parliment but the problem you have is that the nasc may lobby against all that. Reading through the thread all i have to say is that the law takes preaident over any codes of practice or practice.but you must show the scaffold is erected to a recognised standard which is acknowleged by the industry..the law say structural calculations. Tg 20 gives you that basic design without calcs this is the same principle as the old 5973 but in a different format etc. Tg20 os trying to give you solutions without the calculations as they say they have these calcs some where..so these are generic designs based on different factors. Which i was told by one of the top designers in the uk that this is not allowed.
outward bound
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2010
- Messages
- 304
- Reaction score
- 0
Something i would like to add...the tg20 is not law it is not written in any regulation so if someone else wanted to develop a guidance for scaffolding this woukd be acceptable ..you can not copyright physics or maths. Some companies have their own scaffolding design solution for works on oil and gas plants and why not..im currently developing something which will help everyone.