Spillard News

Recent differences of opinion between the Heath & Safety Executive and the Con­struction Equipment Association seem to centre on the regulations relating to an operator’s field of vision. On the one hand, the CE marking lays down certain specifications, while the HSE quotes the Provision and Use of Work Equip­ment Regulations. The regulations state: “where the operator’s direct field of vision is inadequate to ensure safety, there are adequate devices for improving their vision as far as is reasonably practical”.
It is hoped that a new set of regulations being drafted (ISO 5006) will specify how to measure visibility and the view that must be available to plant operators. Plant manufacturers will gear up to ensure their products meet the new specification, but what happens to your existing machines both in the meantime and once the new legislation arrives? Spillard Safety Systems is one of several companies offering vision enhancement aids. Operations director Peter Spillard says: “There are several ways to overcome visibility problems including cctv systems, but the most cost-efficient way for most plant is the addition of wide-angle convex mirrors.”
In using non-uniform radius convex mirrors, the operator gets an infinite field of vision where the image gets progressively smaller as the reflected image moves towards the extreme edges. This requires some familiarisation on the part of the operator and high-visibility jackets help by being instantly recognisable. “Within a few days, operators are carrying out fine adjustments to the mirrors’ positioning,” says Spillard.
Whatever the machine, the retrofit process is the same: park the unit in the middle of an open space and map the areas where the operator can and, more importantly, cannot see a 1m high cone. To overcome the blind areas, mirrors can be temporarily mounted to check the suitability and to ensure they give the correct field of vision. The process of mapping the visibility is repeated and if the results are satisfactory, permanent mountings can be manufactured. If not, alternative options, including CCTV, may have to be explored.
While the basic layout of the mirrors will be similar for each type of machine, the exact positioning and mounting brackets change from one model to another, even from the same manufacturer. Spillard has built up a library of more than 80 machines from pavers and rollers to dump trucks and excavators.
A typical excavator package would cost about £265 and a telehandler about £195. While there are dozens of different sizes and optical shapes of mirrors to choose from when overcoming visibility problems, Spillard usually sticks to six variants to reduce confusion and inventory needs. The mirror lenses are acrylic and if a replacement head is required, the typical cost is about £60, with delivery within 24 hours.
Some operators will see only the cost element and wait until legislation forces visibility upgrades, but there are wider considerations. While emphasising that improved visibility is only part of site safety (along with operator training, segregation and lighting), Spillard says companies that add visibility enhancement packages to their plant probably lesson the risk of conflict with the HSE.
He says that many contractors are already insisting on machines meeting the 1x1x1 specifications devised by the quarrying and mining companies. Such machines can demand higher rental rates from blue-chip contractors that back their safety statements with action.
Were also getting reports back from end-users that damage to counterweights, light clusters and paintwork reduces once visibility is enhanced,” says Spillard
There is another. and potentially more serious consideration. This is the potential of prosecution in the event of an accident that relates to compromised visibility. An injured party could argue the case that improvements to visibility are available but the company chose not to use them for financial reasons. For all concerned, directly and throughout the industry, it would be better that any such accident and court case did not happen in the first place.