Worksite Safety Update
Promoting safety in road construction
No 112 October 2011
In this Edition:



Safety Excellence Award for Anthonys Cutting Project
Towards National TMA Guidelines
Barrier Length of Need
Page 1
Page 5
Page 14
Safety Excellence Award for Anthonys Cutting Project
The Anthonys Cutting Project has received the VicRoads Major Projects Safety Excellence
Award for the consistently high standard of safety achieved during the construction of
the freeway and bridgeworks associated with the realignment of the Western Highway
west of Melton.
The Realignment involved the construction of a new 5 kilometre highway connection
south of the existing route, from Melton West to east of Bacchus Marsh. The new
freeway alignment will avoid the steep grades and tight curves through the previous
alignment, improving safety and reducing travel times and transport costs, with drivers
able to travel this new section at 110 km/h.
Bridge beam erection at the Djerriwarrh Creek Bridge
Will Your Plant SWMS Prevent Rollover.
Do the Controls Include Construction Method?
Page 1 of 13
High risk construction work involved:






Work at height: Bridge works and cutting excavation. Bridge
construction minimised fall risks through modular construction of
Djerriwarrh Creek Bridge piers and the on ground construction of
Hopetoun Park Bridge.
Mobile plant operation: Significant plant movement, haul roads on
steep inclines, UHF traffic management. The trialling of rollover warning
device of an articulated dump truck which was communicated to our
industry via the June 2011 edition of VicRoads Safety Update Newsletter.
Work near services: Proving and marking of services both overhead and
underground. Permits to work.
Deep Excavations: The cutting and excavation underneath the
constructed Hopetoun Park Bridge after its construction.
Work near traffic: Western freeway and various roads near Melton.
Road closure, safety barriers and TMAs as higher level controls were
deployed for work on or adjacent to roads.
Removal of asbestos: AC Pipes in the orchard areas were removed by
approved methods.
Award Recipients Were:
Rod Jeffrey, Alliance Manager
Matthew Maltman, Construction Manager
Mario Saliba, Project Delivery Manager
Paul Portelli, Safety Coordinator
David Stephens, Safety Advisor
Mark Beiers, Structure Manager
Adele Hardwick, Project Engineer
Laurence Harrison, Site Engineer
Tameika Leak, Traffic Coordinator
Terry Brett, Structure Supervisor
Matthew Stirling, Civil Engineer
Shaun McCarthy, Project Manager
Rohan Deed, Site Engineer
James O'Reilly, Site Engineer
Michael Gradnig, Project Manager
Brendan Xuereb, Project Engineer
Daniel Rose, Project Engineer
Chris Melvin, Site Engineer
Brad Gebhardt, Site Engineer
Kapish Shah, Site Engineer
Tony Briski, Surveillance Manager
Steve Chapple, Surveillance Manager
Lloyd Knowler, Engineering Manager
Gary Thorn, Design Manager
David Durante, Health and Safety Representative
Keith Morehead, Health and Safety Representative
Certificates were also presented to Alliance Partners John Holland as the Principal
Contractor and AECOM for Design.
Page 2 of 14
Framed Certificates were presented to award recipients by George Mavroyeni, VicRoads
Executive Director Major Projects.
Group photograph of award participants
John Holland award certificate
left to right: David Moran, Matthew Gault, George Mavroyeni, Rod Jeffrey.
Page 3 of 14
AECOM award certificate
left to right: Ian Pitcher, George Mavroyeni, Lara Poloni
The safety team
left to right: Nathan Cracknell, David Stephens, Michael Rose, Paul Portelli
Page 4 of 14
The award recipients are to be congratulated. They were actively involved in safety and made
significant contributions to safety on the project.
It must also be recognised that all personnel who worked on the project made the award
possible and are to be congratulated for working safely and contributing to the excellent
outcome.
Safety is everyone’s business and good outcomes cannot be achieved without the active
participation of everyone working on a project. Additional to the safety management
systems the Alliance fully supported safety culture improvement and introduced a number of
initiatives including full day workshops to seek safety improvements when necessary.
Central to this safety culture improvement the Alliance introduced the Safety Stop, Think,
Ask, Risk Assess (STAR) Program and necessary culture change training.
The STAR logo on high visibility jackets issued to personnel as part of the
culture change program.
The new freeway alignment provides:





Safer driving conditions for freeway users avoiding the steep grades, tight curves
and local road intersections on the existing highway
Travel time savings with the freeway speed limit raised to 110 km/h compared
with 80 km/h limit now operating on sections of the highway
Reduced costs for the road freight industry and its customers for goods
transported between Melbourne, Ballarat, western Victoria and South Australia
Better connections for communities with new road links for local travel in and
around Melton and Bacchus Marsh
Support for jobs and growth for the future with easier travel for commuters,
tourists, and regional businesses.
Page 5 of 14
Towards National TMA Guidelines
In 2010 representatives of the New South Wales, Queensland and Victoria Road
Authorities met in Sydney to share their cumulative experience with Truck and Trailer
type Crash Attenuators (TMAs).
At the first meeting it was evident all states were (and still are) increasing the
deployment of TMAs for the protection of both maintenance and construction works. All
states had similar experience with TMA operation, use of new technology such as VMS
(including colour displays) and TMA incident experience. Since the first meeting we have
continued to share our experience and innovation. Feedback to our industry was
provided on the September 2010 meeting via the October 2010 edition of this
newsletter.
In October 2011 representatives from the NSW, Queensland, Western Australia and
Victorian Road Authorities met for the second time to consider proposals for National
TMA Guidelines which would facilitate a standard approach to TMA operations in
Australia.
Current TMA Guidelines
All participating states have based their respective state guidelines on the earlier
Queensland version. The potential advantages of standardisation have been recognised
and all states have endeavoured to achieve this objective, subject to the necessary
consultation with stakeholders in each state and taking into account their differing
circumstances. Western Australia currently has less TMAs than the other states and
intends to develop guidelines.
A copy of the current draft VicRoads TMA Guidelines, developed in consultation with our
stakeholders, are provided with this edition of the newsletter.
The RTA in NSW (Now Roads and Maritime Services) and DMR Queensland has been
working across their respective border for some time and as a consequence their current
guidelines are very similar to facilitate potential cross border equipment deployment.
Both states have a relatively large fleet of TMAs within their road authorities whereas
VicRoads does not and depends significantly on contractors.
As major TMA fleet operators NSW and Queensland guidelines tend to be more
prescriptive than those in Victoria, the current VicRoads Guidelines reflect the
performance based approach common to safely guidelines in Victoria, particularly in
respect to TMA construction options.
Most TMAs available in Victoria have been constructed to the operating company’s
requirements which should include the crash attenuator manufacturer’s specifications for
the truck fitted with or required to tow the attenuator in order to achieve safe operation
of the TMA.
It is also evident from discussions with our industry that many non road authority TMA
operators in other states have also based their respective truck designs and weights on
the applicable attenuator equipment manufacturer’s specifications.
TMA Manufacturer’s Recommendations
There are inconsistencies in weight recommendations for TMAs probably due to lack of
definition of their meaning of ‘weight’ and whether they are referring to TARE or GVM. It
Page 6 of 14
is very clear in some manufacturer’s installation / operating manuals but is open to
interpretation in others. The actual attenuators weigh around 900 kg.
The manufacturer’s recommendations for TMA GVM weights (Truck including the crash
attenuator, arrow boards, etc.) for the most frequently deployed designs vary between
7.3 tonnes and 9 tonnes for optimal performance.
VicRoads guidelines currently specify 10.4 tonnes GVM minimum which is higher than
the manufacturer’s specifications, taking into account recommendations from our
industry stakeholders, with a recommended optimum of 15 tonne GVM taking into
account the NSW and Queensland practices but not mandating this at present.
The TMAs are designed to attenuate and crash tested in general by a maximum vehicle
weight of 2 tonne travelling at 100 km / hour for the NCHRP 350 test level 3, not a
heavier vehicle such as a truck. Note that the new Manual for Assessing Safety
Hardware (MASH) will apply in future.
Experience has shown that much heavier vehicles such as trucks do impact these
vehicles and one TMA has been rolled onto its side in Queensland. Everyone has walked
away from these impacts and the experience has influenced additional operator
protection to the RoadTek / DMR Queensland TMAs, such as four point seat harnesses
when operated in attenuator mode. Naturally the safety of the TMA operator must be an
important consideration.
The following photographs show crash experience in Queensland and USA:
RoadTek TMA after impact by heavy truck.
Page 7 of 14
The attenuator after the heavy truck impact
(Four point harnesses and other protection was recommended to better protect operators)
TMA subsequent to a heavy truck impact in USA
Page 8 of 14
The impacting 30 tonne heavy truck (the driver fell asleep) everyone walked away and the TMA
truck was not seriously damaged. The damage to the impacting truck is evident. Both
occupants of the truck were sleeping.
The manufacturer’s recommended truck weight is sometimes achieved through the
addition of ballast safely secured to the truck tray at the lighter end of the available and
recommended TMA support truck ranges. The ballast varying from steel plates securely
bolted to the tray to large water containers secured with straps. If straps are used to
secure ballast one major TMA manufacturer states in their operating manual that:
“Ballast and other heavy objects MUST BE ADEQUATELY ANCHORED to the truck to
prevent shifting during an impact. (The force on the tie-down straps could be 20 times
the weight of the ballast)”.
Naturally this aspect of TMA operation must be a safety consideration if the truck
requires ballast to achieve the TMA manufacturer’s weight for optimum performance. If
the ballast is removed and not replaced this presents another safety issue. It was
proposed at the last meeting that ballast not be permitted in future TMA truck designs.
US FHWA Approval
The weight of the truck plays an important role in efficient impact reduction process.
The US FHWA approval letters usually the acceptance is based on the weight of
the support vehicle used in the crash tests. The approval letters have been
consulted for two attenuator designs and they refer to required support truck
weights as shown on the table below. Some approvals recommend against the
use of trucks which are significantly lighter or heavier unless tests are conducted.
Shunt forward distances are likely to be greater with lighter support trucks.
Attenuator Design
Scorpion 10000
Truck Mounted
Safe Stop 180
Truck Mounted
Attenuator Weight (Kg)
Test Level
629
TL-3
Tested Support Truck and
Approval Weight (Kg)
9000
945
TL-3
8550
Page 9 of 14
The U.S. Department of Transport (FHWA) in their Field Guide for the Use and Placement
of Shadow Vehicles in Work Zones (which includes TMA application for both mobile and
stationary operations) specify that the mass of the vehicle should be within 5 percent of
the mass of the shadow vehicle on which the TMA was crash tested (9000 kg).
TMA Weight Proposals
The DMR Queensland and RTA (Now Roads and Maritime Services) NSW have specified
heavier truck and crash attenuator combinations than the crash attenuator
manufacturer’s recommendations for optimum performance. It is understood that this
has already been applied to their respective fleets of TMAs.
Their preferred weight of TMA (Truck, crash attenuator, illuminated arrow boards, etc.)
is 15 tonne. Data on impact shunt / roll forward distances show that the heavier weight
units should perform better under impact and they will not require ballast. Axle weights
may be another consideration.
TMA impact experience in Queensland has significantly influenced their decision to
increase the size of their vehicles and for other requirements.
RoadTek has provided their rationale for introducing the 15 tonne GVM to their fleet of
TMAs. It may be found on the next page. It is important that our industry understand
the reasons why Queensland and New South Wales are proposing that 15 tonne GVM be
considered for the proposed National TMA Guidelines.
VicRoads thank RoadTek and specifically Peter Kelly and Ken Clayton for providing the
Rationale and documenting their safety case for 15 tonne GVM TMAs.
Page 10 of 14
15 Ton GVM Rationale
Critical to the development of a TMA that affords protection to the public, the road
workers and the operator is the selection of the host vehicle. The vehicle must be
appropriate for the use that is intended and also comply with all legislative requirements.
The specification requirement for the components added to it must also be considered.
As a minimum standard it has been found that a 15 Ton GVM vehicle will meet the
requirements of the attenuator manufacturer’s specifications for both the major suppliers
of attenuators. The attenuators available require 9 Ton and 7.3~9 Ton Tare weights. In
industry there seems to be some confusion over Tare and GVM so we need to spell this
out plainly and simply for those who do not know.
The Tare weight is the weight of the host vehicle with all the components attached
including attenuator, arrow board, mast and in cab fit out. (Minimum 9T for TMA)
The GVM is the total weight capacity of the vehicle allowed when fully loaded. The GVM
minus the Tare weight will give the allowable weight of the load the vehicle can carry.
Other considerations are the weight over axles when the vehicle is used as a TMA and
the 15 Ton GVM vehicle and above can achieve this without the use of ballast weights.
The use of ballast weights was discounted because of the necessity to resist twenty
times the force of gravity for restraints. Although this could be achieved easily attaching
to the body, the body itself attached to the chassis with the extra ballast was considered
unrealistic and expensive.
So in the development of these vehicles it was determined that a as minimum standard
the 15GVM vehicle had the correct requirements to achieve Tare weight requirements
and axle loadings.
This gives a whole of life balance when the vehicle is to be decommissioned because it
can be done without major modifications for disposal.
Peter Kelly
RoadTek Plant Hire Services
15 November 2011
Page 11 of 14
Department of Transport and Main Roads Queensland (RoadTek) TMA
Roads and Maritime Services NSW TMA
Page 12 of 14
Typical TMA in U.S.A.
Some of the more prescriptive aspects of the proposals include automatic transmissions
and illuminated arrow boards which may be raised and lowered.
A draft of the proposed National TMA Guidelines is expected to become available late
November to early December 2011. It will then become clear as to what precisely has
been recommended by the TMA industry in Queensland and New South Wales. Both
states are proposing a transition period of 3 years before they are expected to become
fully implemented in their states. This period needs to take into account the existing
state situations and current availability of complying TMAs.
VicRoads will continue to consult with our TMA stakeholders in Victoria and how the
proposed weight increase and other more prescriptive recommendations could impact
them and this will be taken into account by VicRoads as we move forward.
Advance Warning VMS when TMAs Occupy Trafficked Lanes
Queensland, NSW and Victoria report the successful use of Advance Warning VMS to
better advise drivers that a lane ahead is closed by a TMA and roadwork. No significant
impacts have been reported by NSW, Queensland or Victoria over the past 12 months.
Consequently all states support this practice on high traffic volume high speed roads
such as urban freeways where the forward view of drivers is more likely to be obscured
by other traffic.
Previous to their introduction in Victoria there were four significant TMA impacts. Three
of them occurred on the M80 project and one on the M1 West Gate Project. A TMA
industry workshop was convened with stakeholders to investigate the incidents. All
incidents occurred during the establishment or removal of formal lane closures. It was
agreed to follow the New Zealand Best Practice Guidelines and include them in our TMA
Page 13 of 14
Guidelines for high traffic volume high speed roads such as urban freeways. As a
consequence Victoria has been deploying VMS advance warning for over 12 months on
urban freeway works.
Roadtek narrow wheelbase TMA Pre Warning Vehicle.
TMAs equipped with VMS are also deployed in Victoria in higher risk areas.
TMA Maintenance
Fatigue cracks have been reported in the brackets attaching truck mounted attenuators
to the supporting truck. Similar cracking was reported last year. Cracks have been
found in TMAs which have been in service for a long period. All operators are reminded
of the need for frequent inspections of this area in addition to other recommended
inspections contained in the current guidelines.
Barrier Length of Need
Last months Worksite Safety Update included an article regarding the No Go Zone
Procedure which has been applied within the M80 Tulla Sydney Alliance (TSA). The
primary objective of the article was to share the red No Go Zones dimensions shown in
the table, not the barrier length of need distances shown in the procedure.
The barrier length of need distances must take into account the circumstances at the
location and the TSA dimensions should not be seen as generic and applicable to other
locations.
The Worksite Safety – Traffic Management Code 2010 requires that the safety barrier
length of need should be determined as set out in the Austroads Guide to Road Design –
Part 6: Roadside Design, Safety and Barriers and any relevant VicRoads guidelines.
Worksite Site Safety Update is produced monthly by VicRoads Major Projects Division to
communicate industry safety information and initiatives within VicRoads and to our
contractors. It is also circulated via the WorkSafe Safety Soapbox to industry. The content
reflects civil road construction and maintenance safety and includes works conducted on or
beside operational roads. The editor may be contacted at: [email protected]
Page 14 of 14