Struck by Falling Objects - Workplace Safety and Health Council
Struck by Falling Objects - Workplace Safety and Health Council
Struck by Falling Objects - Workplace Safety and Health Council
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
PREFACE<br />
This compilation of case studies on fatalities in the construction industry<br />
is initiated <strong>by</strong> the <strong>Workplace</strong> <strong>Safety</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Health</strong> <strong>Council</strong>, <strong>and</strong> put together<br />
<strong>by</strong> the WSH Construction Committee in collaboration with the Ministry<br />
of Manpower. This booklet depicts how the accidents occurred <strong>and</strong><br />
provides valuable learning points on how they may have been prevented.<br />
This is the first in a series of such booklets to be published.<br />
As much as the next few years promise to be exciting for the construction<br />
industry, they also pose a great challenge to the industry to maintain<br />
workplace safety <strong>and</strong> health. Construction sites have customarily been<br />
viewed as high-risk workplaces, which more often than not have a higher<br />
incidence of workplace fatalities. We must address this perception <strong>and</strong><br />
change the reality. While construction workers strive to complete a building<br />
or facility, it is important that they do not risk life <strong>and</strong> limb. It is crucial<br />
that these workers go home safely after work each day.<br />
This booklet of case studies offers insights to all in the industry on how<br />
these tragic accidents occurred, so that we may glean important, lifesaving<br />
lessons from the experience. In learning from our past mistakes,<br />
we can <strong>and</strong> must prevent these mishaps from happening again. Together<br />
with your help, we can transform construction sites into safe <strong>and</strong> healthy<br />
workplaces for our workers.<br />
Mr Lee Tzu Yang<br />
Chairman<br />
<strong>Workplace</strong> <strong>Safety</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Health</strong> <strong>Council</strong>
<strong>Struck</strong> <strong>by</strong> <strong>Falling</strong> <strong>Objects</strong><br />
Case 1 Pinned <strong>by</strong> a brick wall 64<br />
Case 2 Pinned <strong>by</strong> a collapsed roof slab 67<br />
Case 3 <strong>Struck</strong> <strong>by</strong> falling beams 70<br />
Case 4 <strong>Struck</strong> <strong>by</strong> steel beams 73<br />
Case 5 <strong>Struck</strong> <strong>by</strong> falling material in a trench 76<br />
Case 6 <strong>Struck</strong> <strong>by</strong> a crane boom 78<br />
Case 7 Hit <strong>by</strong> a collapsed wall 81<br />
Case 8 Hit <strong>by</strong> steel rebars 84<br />
Case 9 Buried under collapsed soil 87<br />
Case 10 Crushed <strong>by</strong> a collapsing boom 90<br />
Case 11 <strong>Struck</strong> <strong>by</strong> falling timber 92<br />
Case 12 <strong>Struck</strong> <strong>by</strong> a falling crane boom 95<br />
Case 13 <strong>Struck</strong> <strong>by</strong> a collapsed wall 97<br />
Electrocution<br />
Case 1 Electrocution <strong>by</strong> a faulty residual circuit breaker 100<br />
Case 2 Killed <strong>by</strong> an exposed electrode holder 103<br />
<strong>Struck</strong> By or Against <strong>Objects</strong> / Machines<br />
Case 1 Hit <strong>by</strong> a scissors lift platform 108<br />
Case 2 Hit <strong>by</strong> a moving vehicle 111<br />
Case 3 Hit <strong>by</strong> a moving crane 114
STRUCK BY FALLING OBJECTS
CASE 1<br />
PINNED BY A BRICK WALL<br />
Description of Accident<br />
A worker was constructing a new<br />
drain inside an excavation in front<br />
of a building under construction.<br />
While he was leveling the concrete<br />
for the new drain, a brick wall<br />
(left behind from the old drain)<br />
collapsed from the side of the<br />
excavation <strong>and</strong> pinned him<br />
under it, killing him on the spot.<br />
Causes <strong>and</strong> Contributing<br />
Factors<br />
• The brick walls were constructed<br />
on both banks of the old drain<br />
to retain the soil.<br />
• Before constructing the new<br />
drain, one bank of the old drain<br />
was removed <strong>and</strong> the area was<br />
excavated so as to facilitate<br />
the construction process. The<br />
other bank was not removed<br />
as it did not obstruct the<br />
construction of the new drain.<br />
1. A staircase in the worksite<br />
2. The section of brick wall that sank<br />
3. The excavation<br />
4. Formwork for the second section of the<br />
drain was to be constructed here<br />
5. The new retaining wall<br />
6. This side of the brick wall was removed<br />
7. Formwork for the first section of the drain<br />
1. Site of accident<br />
64<br />
<strong>Struck</strong> By <strong>Falling</strong> <strong>Objects</strong>
• Investigations revealed that the<br />
collapse of the brick wall was due<br />
to soil movement in the<br />
excavation compounded <strong>by</strong><br />
the heavy rain prior to the<br />
accident. The main contractor did<br />
not provide shoring for the<br />
existing brick wall to prevent<br />
it from collapsing into the<br />
excavation when the workers<br />
were working inside the<br />
excavation.<br />
Root Cause Analysis<br />
Evaluation of loss<br />
Type of contact<br />
• One worker killed<br />
• Caught between or under object<br />
Immediate cause(s) • Inadequate guards or barriers<br />
Basic cause(s)<br />
Failure of SMS<br />
• Inadequate assessment of loss exposure<br />
• Inadequate leadership <strong>and</strong>/or supervision<br />
• Inadequate work st<strong>and</strong>ards<br />
• Hazard analysis <strong>and</strong> risk assessment<br />
• WSH training <strong>and</strong> competence<br />
• WSH inspections<br />
Follow-up<br />
A Stop Work Order was issued to the main contractor, which required<br />
them to rectify the safety contraventions <strong>and</strong> to also engage a<br />
professional engineer to carry out detailed soil investigations<br />
<strong>and</strong> to develop a method statement for the construction of the<br />
new drain as well as shoring for the excavation.<br />
<strong>Struck</strong> By <strong>Falling</strong> <strong>Objects</strong> 65
Recommendations<br />
Check the integrity <strong>and</strong> strength of any retaining structure prior<br />
to an excavation.<br />
Remove any brick wall, if present, prior to a reconstruction.<br />
During a downpour, cover <strong>and</strong> protect all uncompleted concreting<br />
work or brick-laying work with plastic or canvas sheets. The same<br />
practice should apply for excavated trench sides <strong>and</strong> stockpiles<br />
of excavated soil. No one should be allowed to be in the vicinity.<br />
66<br />
<strong>Struck</strong> By <strong>Falling</strong> <strong>Objects</strong>
CASE 2<br />
PINNED BY A COLLAPSED ROOF SLAB<br />
Description of Accident<br />
The accident occurred during the<br />
demolition of an automated teller<br />
machine (ATM) kiosk. After the<br />
supporting walls of the kiosk<br />
had been largely demolished,<br />
the roof slab collapsed under its<br />
own weight <strong>and</strong> a worker was<br />
pinned underneath it.<br />
Causes <strong>and</strong> Contributing<br />
Factors<br />
• The roof slab was resting on <strong>and</strong><br />
supported <strong>by</strong> three brick walls<br />
of the ATM kiosk.<br />
1. The collapsed roof slab<br />
2. The remaining rear portion of the<br />
left brick wall<br />
• Demolition of the brick walls<br />
was carried out without providing<br />
any shoring to support the<br />
weight of the roof slab <strong>and</strong><br />
prevent it from collapsing.<br />
• After the brick walls were<br />
demolished, the roof slab was<br />
left without any support <strong>and</strong> it<br />
crashed down under its own<br />
weight.<br />
• The worker was st<strong>and</strong>ing under<br />
the roof slab when it collapsed<br />
on him.<br />
1. The roof slab of the ATM kiosk involved<br />
in the accident<br />
2. The deceased was pinned under the<br />
slab here<br />
3. The front end of the roof slab (marble<br />
cladding removed)<br />
<strong>Struck</strong> By <strong>Falling</strong> <strong>Objects</strong><br />
67
Root Cause Analysis<br />
Evaluation of loss<br />
Type of contact<br />
Immediate cause(s)<br />
Basic cause(s)<br />
Failure of SMS<br />
• One worker killed<br />
• Caught between or under object<br />
• Inadequate guards or barriers<br />
• Inadequate leadership <strong>and</strong>/or supervision<br />
• Inadequate work st<strong>and</strong>ards<br />
• Lack of knowledge<br />
• Hazard analysis <strong>and</strong> risk assessment<br />
• WSH practices <strong>and</strong> procedures<br />
Follow-up<br />
The main contractor has to engage a professional engineer to<br />
conduct a hazard analysis <strong>and</strong> develop a method statement for the<br />
outst<strong>and</strong>ing reinstatement work.<br />
The bank concerned indicated that they will engage a professional<br />
engineer to develop the method statement for all future demolition<br />
of ATM kiosks.<br />
A circular was sent to all banks with ATMs to alert them of the<br />
circumstances leading to this accident <strong>and</strong> to urge them to play a<br />
more proactive role to provide relevant information to their<br />
contractors before work commencement.<br />
68 <strong>Struck</strong> By <strong>Falling</strong> <strong>Objects</strong>
Recommendations<br />
Shore the roof slab prior to the demolition of brick walls.<br />
Alternatively, demolish or remove the roof slab first before<br />
the walls.<br />
Carry out a thorough inspection <strong>by</strong> a competent person to determine<br />
the ATM kiosk’s structural arrangement prior to work commencement<br />
especially if there are no construction drawings of the ATM kiosk.<br />
Conduct continuous inspection <strong>by</strong> a competent person during the<br />
demolition of the ATM kiosk to detect the hazards of any collapsing<br />
structure (roof slab) resulting from weakened supporting brick walls.<br />
<strong>Struck</strong> By <strong>Falling</strong> <strong>Objects</strong><br />
69
CASE 3<br />
STRUCK BY FALLING BEAMS<br />
Description of Accident<br />
A stack of steel beams were<br />
placed near an excavated area.<br />
The beams toppled <strong>and</strong> l<strong>and</strong>ed<br />
into the excavated area where<br />
two workers were working.<br />
One worker was killed <strong>and</strong><br />
another was injured.<br />
Causes <strong>and</strong> Contributing<br />
Factors<br />
• Steel beams were to be installed<br />
as supporting structures for the<br />
excavation.<br />
1. The injured worker was tasked to clean<br />
mud on the sheet pile<br />
2. The deceased was tasked to weld a<br />
metal plate onto the sheet pile<br />
3. Sheet pile<br />
• The beams were placed about<br />
350mm away from the excavated<br />
area <strong>and</strong> each beam weighed<br />
about 500kg.<br />
• The steel beams were not placed<br />
in a stable manner <strong>and</strong> were<br />
very close to the edge of the<br />
excavated area.<br />
1. Excavation started from here<br />
2. The 24 ‘I’ beams that were stored<br />
directly above the place of work<br />
3. Place of accident<br />
4. Toppled beams<br />
5. Excavation ended here<br />
6. Excavator was shifting these metal<br />
plates prior to accident<br />
70 <strong>Struck</strong> By <strong>Falling</strong> <strong>Objects</strong>
• Digging work within the<br />
excavated area might have<br />
destabilised the stack of steel<br />
beams <strong>and</strong> vibrations from the<br />
excavators further contributed<br />
to the instability.<br />
• The main contractor did not<br />
engage a site safety supervisor<br />
as required <strong>by</strong> regulation.<br />
Root Cause Analysis<br />
Evaluation of loss<br />
Type of contact<br />
Immediate cause(s)<br />
Basic cause(s)<br />
Failure of SMS<br />
• One worker killed <strong>and</strong> one injured<br />
• <strong>Struck</strong> <strong>by</strong> object<br />
• Improper placement<br />
• Failure to secure<br />
• Inadequate leadership <strong>and</strong>/or supervision<br />
• Lack of experience<br />
• Inadequate work st<strong>and</strong>ards<br />
• Hazard analysis <strong>and</strong> risk assessment<br />
• WSH practices <strong>and</strong> procedures<br />
<strong>Struck</strong> By <strong>Falling</strong> <strong>Objects</strong><br />
71
Follow-up<br />
A Stop Work Order (SWO) was issued to the main contractor which<br />
required them to put in place a safety organisational structure <strong>and</strong><br />
management system to better manage the project as well as rectify<br />
the unsafe site condition.<br />
The SWO also required the project management staff of the main<br />
contractor to attend a safety training workshop organised <strong>by</strong> OSHD.<br />
Workers of the worksite were also required to attend the “<strong>Safety</strong><br />
Orientation Course for Construction Workers” conducted <strong>by</strong> OSHD.<br />
This was to increase their awareness <strong>and</strong> knowledge about site<br />
safety.<br />
Recommendations<br />
Conduct risk assessment prior to job commencement.<br />
Stack materials properly so as to prevent materials from falling <strong>and</strong><br />
practice good housekeeping to prevent accidents.<br />
Do not conduct multiple hazardous activities at the same time or<br />
in the same place. In this case, heavy materials were stored near<br />
a deep excavation.<br />
72 <strong>Struck</strong> By <strong>Falling</strong> <strong>Objects</strong><br />
• It was also found that the boom<br />
hoist wire rope was not of the type<br />
that the manufacturer had specified.
CASE 4<br />
STRUCK BY STEEL BEAMS<br />
Description of Accident<br />
Two workers were st<strong>and</strong>ing on the<br />
deck of a lorry to unload steel<br />
beams. The lorry which was<br />
unmanned <strong>and</strong> parked on a slope,<br />
rolled down the slope.<br />
The steel beams swung off the<br />
moving lorry <strong>and</strong> hit the workers.<br />
One worker died while the other<br />
suffered some cuts.<br />
Causes <strong>and</strong> Contributing<br />
Factors<br />
• The lorry loader driver had<br />
switched off the engine <strong>and</strong><br />
engaged the h<strong>and</strong> brake<br />
of the lorry. However, he did<br />
not place stoppers behind<br />
the wheels of the lorry which<br />
would have prevented the<br />
lorry from rolling down<br />
the slope.<br />
1. Crawler crane<br />
2. Lorry involved in the accident<br />
3. Slope<br />
4. Steel beams<br />
5. The deceased<br />
1. Crawler crane<br />
2. Lorry<br />
3. Steel beams<br />
• The slope was cut at a gradient of<br />
one to seven which is considered<br />
steep for a workplace. Despite its<br />
steepness, the occupier did not<br />
impose the necessary safety<br />
precautions before allowing lifting<br />
operations to be carried out.<br />
<strong>Struck</strong> By <strong>Falling</strong> <strong>Objects</strong> 73
Root Cause Analysis<br />
Evaluation of loss<br />
Type of contact<br />
Immediate cause(s)<br />
Basic cause(s)<br />
Failure of SMS<br />
• One worker killed <strong>and</strong> one injured<br />
• <strong>Struck</strong> <strong>by</strong> object<br />
• Failure to secure<br />
• Lack of experience<br />
• Inadequate work st<strong>and</strong>ards<br />
• Hazard analysis <strong>and</strong> risk assessment<br />
• WSH practices <strong>and</strong> procedures<br />
Follow-up<br />
The occupier reviewed <strong>and</strong> improved the lifting operations on<br />
the slope area.<br />
The lifting personnel were instructed that no lifting operation is<br />
to be carried out on the slope area.<br />
If lifting operations are to be carried out on the slope area due to<br />
an unavoidable situation, the following precautions are to be taken:<br />
• To reduce the amount of load to be unladed onto the lorry.<br />
• The lorry driver is to place stoppers to prevent the lorry from<br />
sliding down the slope.<br />
74 <strong>Struck</strong> By <strong>Falling</strong> <strong>Objects</strong>
Recommendations<br />
Place stoppers behind the wheels of the lorry before any loading<br />
<strong>and</strong> unloading.<br />
Provide regular safety briefings to drivers on loading <strong>and</strong><br />
unloading procedures.<br />
Take extra care to ensure the safety of personnel working near<br />
crane operations.<br />
<strong>Struck</strong> By <strong>Falling</strong> <strong>Objects</strong><br />
75
CASE 5<br />
STRUCK BY FALLING MATERIAL IN A TRENCH<br />
Description of Accident<br />
Worker A was supervising the<br />
excavation of a trench. The bank<br />
of the trench collapsed <strong>and</strong> Worker<br />
A was found inside the trench,<br />
partially covered with the granite<br />
rocks <strong>and</strong> quarry dust that slid<br />
from the bank. He had suffered<br />
severe head injury <strong>and</strong> was<br />
pronounced dead at the scene.<br />
Causes <strong>and</strong> Contributing<br />
Factors<br />
• Prior to the accident, the project<br />
manager checked the excavation<br />
work <strong>and</strong> saw that the depth<br />
of the trench had not met<br />
requirements.<br />
1. The deceased was found here<br />
2. The “changkol”<br />
3. The crow-bar<br />
4. The collapsed quarry dust <strong>and</strong><br />
granite rocks<br />
5. The tarmac<br />
6. The granite rocks<br />
7. The quarry dust<br />
• He told Worker A to install<br />
shoring for the trench before<br />
further excavation.<br />
• Worker A then tasked two other<br />
workers to carry out shoring<br />
work for the trench.<br />
• While the workers went to fetch<br />
the timbers, Worker A was seen<br />
going into the trench to check<br />
for any underground services<br />
that might be located near the<br />
1. The new substation<br />
2. The excavator used for excavating<br />
the trench<br />
3. The timbers to be used for shoring<br />
4. The trench was located here<br />
76 <strong>Struck</strong> By <strong>Falling</strong> <strong>Objects</strong>
trench. This was to ensure the<br />
services would not be damaged<br />
when the timbers (shoring<br />
support) were inserted into<br />
the ground.<br />
• The trench collapsed <strong>and</strong><br />
granite rocks <strong>and</strong> quarry dust<br />
l<strong>and</strong>ed on Worker A.<br />
Root Cause Analysis<br />
Evaluation of loss<br />
Type of contact<br />
Immediate cause(s)<br />
Basic cause(s)<br />
Failure of SMS<br />
• One worker killed<br />
• <strong>Struck</strong> <strong>by</strong> object<br />
• Inadequate guards or barriers<br />
• Inadequate work st<strong>and</strong>ards<br />
• Lack of experience<br />
• Hazard analysis <strong>and</strong> risk assessment<br />
• WSH practices <strong>and</strong> procedures<br />
Follow-up<br />
A Stop Work Order was issued.<br />
Recommendations<br />
Provide shoring prior to allowing entry into an excavation.<br />
Conduct risk assessment of hazards prior to work commencement.<br />
Conduct regular safety briefings/tool box meetings before entry<br />
into an excavation.<br />
<strong>Struck</strong> By <strong>Falling</strong> <strong>Objects</strong><br />
77
CASE 6<br />
STRUCK BY A CRANE BOOM<br />
Description of Accident<br />
A crane operator was operating<br />
a crawler crane to install a pre-cast<br />
staircase. He hoisted the pre-cast<br />
staircase from the ground to a<br />
height just above the building<br />
that was still under construction.<br />
As his view of the unloading<br />
was partially obstructed <strong>by</strong> the<br />
building column, he inched the<br />
crane forward causing the crane<br />
to tilt forward <strong>and</strong> collapse.<br />
1. The pre-cast staircase<br />
The crane operator was trapped in<br />
the cabin but subsequently freed<br />
himself with the help of other<br />
workers.<br />
A worker who was working at<br />
about 33m away from the crane,<br />
was hit <strong>by</strong> the boom when the<br />
crane collapsed.<br />
Causes <strong>and</strong> Contributing<br />
Factors<br />
1. Location where the deceased was hit<br />
<strong>by</strong> the falling boom<br />
2. The second piece of the pre-cast staircase<br />
• When the crane operator’s vision<br />
was partially obstructed, he did<br />
not wait for the signalman to<br />
get to the top of the building<br />
to give him further instructions<br />
78 <strong>Struck</strong> By <strong>Falling</strong> <strong>Objects</strong>
<strong>and</strong> proceeded to move the<br />
crane forward with the<br />
suspended load in order to<br />
obtain an unobstructed view<br />
of the unloading position.<br />
This was not a safe practice.<br />
• Investigations concluded that<br />
the collapse of the crane was<br />
due to the crane moving<br />
beyond the steel plates which<br />
caused the crane’s crawler<br />
“track” to dip into the ground<br />
<strong>and</strong> tilt to an extent that the<br />
crane was unstable.<br />
• Investigations also revealed<br />
that the maximum safe working<br />
load of the collapsed crane<br />
(i.e. 5880kg) as certified <strong>by</strong><br />
the approved person was<br />
exceeded. The pre-cast<br />
staircase weighed 7200kg.<br />
Root Cause Analysis<br />
Evaluation of loss<br />
Type of contact<br />
Immediate cause(s)<br />
Basic cause(s)<br />
Failure of SMS<br />
• One worker killed<br />
• Caught between or under object (crushed)<br />
• Improper lifting<br />
• Improper attempt to save time<br />
• WSH practices <strong>and</strong> procedures<br />
Follow-up<br />
The occupier was instructed not to exceed the maximum safe<br />
working load as verified <strong>by</strong> the approved person (authorised<br />
examiner) when operating the lifting machines (cranes).<br />
The occupier was also instructed to review <strong>and</strong> enhance the <strong>Safety</strong><br />
Management System (SMS).<br />
<strong>Struck</strong> By <strong>Falling</strong> <strong>Objects</strong><br />
79
Recommendations<br />
Check the crane base/foundation prior to lifting.<br />
Conduct proper risk assessment to ensure that the risk exposure is<br />
reduced to as low as reasonably practicable.<br />
Crane operators should not take ad-hoc decisions without<br />
assessing the overall situation.<br />
Ensure continuous supervision for all lifting operations.<br />
80 <strong>Struck</strong> By <strong>Falling</strong> <strong>Objects</strong>
CASE 7<br />
HIT BY A COLLAPSED WALL<br />
Description of Accident<br />
A worker was demolishing a<br />
partition brick wall inside a toilet<br />
at the third floor of a building.<br />
He was hit <strong>by</strong> a wall that collapsed<br />
on him. He was subsequently<br />
sent to hospital where he passed<br />
away on the same day.<br />
Causes <strong>and</strong> Contributing<br />
Factors<br />
1. The 10-pound hammer that was used<br />
for the hacking operation<br />
• Investigations revealed that the<br />
worker had hacked the partition<br />
wall from the bottom section<br />
using a 10-pound hammer.<br />
The collapsed wall weighed<br />
about 300kg.<br />
• The partition wall was simply<br />
resting on the ground <strong>and</strong><br />
abutted against the adjacent<br />
main wall. There was no<br />
interlocking joint between<br />
the partition wall <strong>and</strong> the<br />
main wall.<br />
• Hacking of walls should start<br />
from the top section <strong>and</strong> should<br />
be extended down progressively<br />
so as to maintain its stability.<br />
1. Partition wall that had collapsed <strong>and</strong><br />
hit the deceased on the head<br />
2. The concrete breaker that was used<br />
for removing the wall tiles<br />
<strong>Struck</strong> By <strong>Falling</strong> <strong>Objects</strong><br />
81
In this case, a wrong sequence of<br />
demolishing the partition wall<br />
was employed (i.e. from bottom<br />
section first).<br />
• Coupled with the weak design<br />
of the partition wall, it resulted<br />
in the structural collapse of<br />
the wall.<br />
Root Cause Analysis<br />
Evaluation of loss<br />
Type of contact<br />
Immediate cause(s)<br />
Basic cause(s)<br />
Failure of SMS<br />
• One worker killed<br />
• Caught between or under object (crushed)<br />
• Improper position for task<br />
• Lack of knowledge<br />
• WSH practices <strong>and</strong> procedures<br />
Follow-up<br />
The occupier was instructed to undertake the following<br />
improvements to the work practices/conditions at the site:<br />
• Prior to demolition work, the supervisor should check the<br />
site <strong>and</strong> brief the workers properly to ensure that they fully<br />
underst<strong>and</strong> the safe work procedures <strong>and</strong> sequencing of work.<br />
Interpretation from native workers should be employed<br />
when necessary.<br />
• Workers should be grouped into teams of two or more when<br />
carrying out demolition work.<br />
82 <strong>Struck</strong> By <strong>Falling</strong> <strong>Objects</strong>
Recommendations<br />
Provide proper design <strong>and</strong> shoring of the wall.<br />
Follow proper sequence of demolition.<br />
Provide supervision during demolition to ensure that the worker<br />
works safely.<br />
<strong>Struck</strong> By <strong>Falling</strong> <strong>Objects</strong><br />
83
CASE 8<br />
HIT BY STEEL REBARS<br />
Description of Accident<br />
A lorry driver had delivered two<br />
bundles of rebars to a worksite.<br />
Two other workers assisted him in<br />
the unloading of rebars.<br />
While the lorry driver <strong>and</strong> other<br />
workers were unloading a bundle<br />
of steel rebars from the lorry using<br />
the lorry crane, the bundle of<br />
rebars fell onto the lorry driver.<br />
1. Rebars bundles<br />
Causes <strong>and</strong> Contributing<br />
Factors<br />
• The rebars measured 12m long<br />
<strong>and</strong> 10mm in diameter.<br />
• One end of the bundle of rebars<br />
was lifted from the lorry <strong>and</strong><br />
placed on the ground.<br />
• The other end of the same<br />
bundle, which was placed on<br />
the top of a bracket above the<br />
front of the lorry, slid down<br />
from the lorry <strong>and</strong> hit the lorry<br />
driver who was operating the<br />
lorry crane at the time of<br />
accident.<br />
1. The deceased was operating the<br />
lorry crane in this position<br />
84 <strong>Struck</strong> By <strong>Falling</strong> <strong>Objects</strong>
• Site investigations indicated<br />
that the boom length of the<br />
crane was about 7.5m in which<br />
the recommended safe<br />
working load was about<br />
1730kg. However, the weight<br />
of the bundle of rebars was<br />
more than 2000kg. Hence<br />
the workers had to lift the<br />
bundle of rebars at one end<br />
as the lorry crane could not<br />
withst<strong>and</strong> the full load of<br />
the bundle.<br />
• The lorry driver <strong>and</strong> the two<br />
workers had not undergone<br />
any training course in rigging<br />
operations. The lifting<br />
supervisor was also not<br />
informed of the lifting activity.<br />
Root Cause Analysis<br />
Evaluation of loss<br />
Type of contact<br />
Immediate cause(s)<br />
Basic cause(s)<br />
Failure of SMS<br />
• One worker killed<br />
• <strong>Struck</strong> <strong>by</strong> moving object<br />
• Improper lifting<br />
• Lack of knowledge<br />
• Lack of skill<br />
• Inadequate supervision<br />
• WSH training <strong>and</strong> competence<br />
<strong>Struck</strong> By <strong>Falling</strong> <strong>Objects</strong><br />
85
Follow-up<br />
The occupier was instructed to undertake the following<br />
improvements to the work practices/conditions at the site:<br />
• To review their lifting procedures <strong>and</strong> improve the communication<br />
channels between the lifting supervisor <strong>and</strong> the trade foremen.<br />
• To increase the manpower stationed at the entrance of the<br />
worksite to ensure that the cranes coming into their worksites<br />
are properly attended to.<br />
Recommendations<br />
Ensure that the capacity of crane is greater than the load to<br />
be lifted.<br />
Closely supervise a lifting operation.<br />
Improve lifting procedures <strong>and</strong> ensure that it is communicated to<br />
all lifting personnel.<br />
86 <strong>Struck</strong> By <strong>Falling</strong> <strong>Objects</strong>
CASE 9<br />
BURIED UNDER COLLAPSED SOIL<br />
Description of Accident<br />
Worker A <strong>and</strong> his co-workers<br />
were working inside an excavation<br />
in a multistorey carpark. Worker A<br />
was trimming the side of the<br />
excavation when the soil suddenly<br />
collapsed <strong>and</strong> pinned him down<br />
up to his chest level.<br />
Worker A was rescued from<br />
the collapsed soil <strong>and</strong> sent to<br />
the hospital where he<br />
subsequently passed away.<br />
1. Collapsed soil<br />
2. Timber planks<br />
3. Ladder<br />
Causes <strong>and</strong> Contributing<br />
Factors<br />
• The depth of the excavation<br />
measured 2.9m.<br />
• The sides of the excavation<br />
were almost 90°. They were<br />
not shored. The adjacent<br />
excavations were also not even<br />
partially shored.<br />
1. Shovel<br />
2. Timber planks<br />
3. The deceased was found underneath<br />
this chunk of soil<br />
4. Pile heads<br />
5. Lean concrete<br />
• The senior resident engineer of<br />
the worksite confirmed that<br />
hacking <strong>and</strong> placing of lean<br />
concrete work were carried out<br />
inside the excavation before it<br />
was shored.<br />
<strong>Struck</strong> By <strong>Falling</strong> <strong>Objects</strong><br />
87
• The operator of the excavator<br />
confirmed that hacking work to<br />
the pile-caps was carried out <strong>by</strong><br />
a breaker deployed at the edge<br />
of the excavation before it<br />
was shored.<br />
• The accident occurred because<br />
the factory occupier did not<br />
provide shoring to the<br />
excavation before allowing<br />
the workers to work there.<br />
Root Cause Analysis<br />
Evaluation of loss<br />
Type of contact<br />
Immediate cause(s)<br />
Basic cause(s)<br />
Failure of SMS<br />
• One worker killed<br />
• Caught between or under (crushed)<br />
• Inadequate guards or barriers<br />
• Inadequate work st<strong>and</strong>ards<br />
• WSH practices <strong>and</strong> procedures<br />
Follow-up<br />
The occupier was instructed to submit safe work procedures for<br />
all excavation work on site <strong>and</strong> ensure that all workers follow the<br />
safe practices.<br />
88 <strong>Struck</strong> By <strong>Falling</strong> <strong>Objects</strong>
Recommendations<br />
Provide shoring prior to any work in an excavation exceeding 1.5m.<br />
Provide close supervision for any work in an excavation.<br />
Conduct regular checks on excavation side stability.<br />
<strong>Struck</strong> By <strong>Falling</strong> <strong>Objects</strong><br />
89
CASE 10<br />
CRUSHED BY A COLLAPSING BOOM<br />
Description of Accident<br />
A crawler crane mounted on a<br />
crane barge was lifting two crates<br />
of acetylene <strong>and</strong> oxygen cylinders<br />
over to a jetty mooring dolphin.<br />
After the crane boom had swung<br />
over to the dolphin, the crane<br />
suddenly vibrated violently.<br />
The next moment, the crane<br />
boom came crashing down.<br />
A worker was crushed <strong>by</strong> the<br />
collapsing boom <strong>and</strong> died on<br />
the spot. Another worker<br />
suffered leg injury caused <strong>by</strong><br />
the falling crates of acetylene<br />
<strong>and</strong> oxygen cylinders.<br />
1. View of the dolphin <strong>and</strong> the Emergency<br />
<strong>Safety</strong> Access<br />
Overview of collapsed crane<br />
Causes <strong>and</strong> Contributing<br />
Factors<br />
• Investigations revealed that<br />
the boom hoist wire that was<br />
supporting the boom had<br />
snapped, thus causing the<br />
crane boom to collapse on<br />
the workers.<br />
90 <strong>Struck</strong> By <strong>Falling</strong> <strong>Objects</strong>
• The cause of the accident was<br />
most probably due to the poor<br />
maintenance of the boom<br />
hoist wire rope. Excessive<br />
wear/abrasion on the wire<br />
rope surfaces might have<br />
resulted in the sudden fracture<br />
of the boom hoist wire.<br />
• The boom wire rope used on<br />
the crane involved in the<br />
accident was of inadequate<br />
strength. The wire rope used<br />
had a breaking strength of<br />
37 tons but according to the<br />
manufacturer’s specification,<br />
it should be 41.9 tons.<br />
Root Cause Analysis<br />
Evaluation of loss<br />
Type of contact<br />
Immediate cause(s)<br />
Basic cause(s)<br />
Failure of SMS<br />
• One worker killed<br />
• <strong>Struck</strong> <strong>by</strong> falling object<br />
• Defective tools, equipment or materials<br />
• Inadequate maintenance<br />
• WSH practices <strong>and</strong> procedures<br />
• WSH inspection<br />
Recommendations<br />
Ensure planned maintenance.<br />
Ensure regular inspection.<br />
Ensure the hoist wire of the crane is sufficiently strong with<br />
an appropriate factor of safety.<br />
<strong>Struck</strong> By <strong>Falling</strong> <strong>Objects</strong><br />
91
CASE 11<br />
STRUCK BY FALLING TIMBER<br />
Description of Accident<br />
Worker A <strong>and</strong> his co-worker were<br />
to dismantle formwork for the wet<br />
joint at a lift lob<strong>by</strong> of a lift shaft,<br />
from the seventh to 12th storey.<br />
Worker A had loosened a<br />
horizontal prop that was used to<br />
secure two timber formwork<br />
pieces on both sides of the wall<br />
of the nineth storey lift lob<strong>by</strong>.<br />
The timber piece on one side fell<br />
into the lift shaft opening <strong>and</strong><br />
struck Worker A who was clearing<br />
debris at the bottom of the lift<br />
shaft. Worker A suffered serious<br />
head injuries <strong>and</strong> succumbed to<br />
his injuries on the same day.<br />
1. The new lift shaft under construction<br />
Causes <strong>and</strong> Contributing<br />
Factors<br />
• The timber formwork for the wet<br />
joint at the nineth storey‘s lift<br />
shaft lob<strong>by</strong> was supported <strong>and</strong><br />
held in position <strong>by</strong> two horizontal<br />
<strong>and</strong> two vertical metal props.<br />
1. This timber fell into the lift shaft<br />
opening<br />
2. The lift shaft opening<br />
3. The timber formwork for the<br />
wet joint<br />
4. The plywood fencing was put up<br />
after the accident<br />
5. The position of the lower<br />
horizontal prop<br />
6. Deceased was squatting here when<br />
loosening the horizontal metal prop<br />
92 <strong>Struck</strong> By <strong>Falling</strong> <strong>Objects</strong>
• Prior to the accident, one worker<br />
had removed the two vertical<br />
props <strong>and</strong> the higher of the<br />
two horizontal props. The<br />
timber piece on one side fell<br />
into the lift shaft opening after<br />
he had loosened the lower<br />
horizontal prop, which was<br />
the last prop holding the timber<br />
formwork in position.<br />
• At the time of the accident<br />
the lift shaft opening was not<br />
fenced or covered with any<br />
plywood or other material.<br />
The falling timber fell into<br />
the lift shaft opening <strong>and</strong><br />
struck Worker A who was<br />
clearing debris at the bottom<br />
of the lift shaft.<br />
Root Cause Analysis<br />
Evaluation of loss<br />
Type of contact<br />
Immediate cause(s)<br />
Basic cause(s)<br />
Failure of SMS<br />
• One worker killed<br />
• <strong>Struck</strong> <strong>by</strong> falling object<br />
• Inadequate guards or barriers<br />
• Inadequate work st<strong>and</strong>ards<br />
• Inadequate leadership <strong>and</strong>/or supervision<br />
• Hazard analysis <strong>and</strong> risk management<br />
• WSH practices <strong>and</strong> procedures<br />
<strong>Struck</strong> By <strong>Falling</strong> <strong>Objects</strong><br />
93
Follow-up<br />
The occupier was instructed to implement the following safety<br />
measures:<br />
• The foreman-in-charge is to check <strong>and</strong> ensure that lift shaft<br />
openings are securely fenced with timber prior to assigning<br />
workers to dismantle formwork at the lift lob<strong>by</strong>.<br />
• No worker is to be assigned to work in the lift pit if any work is<br />
carried out above.<br />
• Workers assigned to dismantle formwork are to be instructed to<br />
check for the presence of the fencing of the lift shaft openings<br />
prior to the commencement of work. They should stop work<br />
<strong>and</strong> report to their supervisor if the lift shaft opening is not<br />
securely barricaded.<br />
Recommendations<br />
Ensure proper supervision.<br />
Ensure that incompatible work is not carried out simultaneously<br />
at a particular location.<br />
94 <strong>Struck</strong> By <strong>Falling</strong> <strong>Objects</strong>
CASE 12<br />
STRUCK BY A FALLING CRANE BOOM<br />
Description of Accident<br />
A crawler crane operated <strong>by</strong> a<br />
worker was lifting a bundle of<br />
rebars from the ground floor to the<br />
second storey of an uncompleted<br />
building.<br />
When the bundle of rebars was<br />
about to be unloaded, the crane<br />
boom suddenly collapsed.<br />
Two workers were killed <strong>and</strong><br />
another injured as a result of the<br />
collapsed boom.<br />
1. Rebars bundle<br />
2. Main hook block<br />
3. One of the deceased was hit <strong>and</strong> pinned<br />
under the fly jib here<br />
4. Auxiliary hook block<br />
Causes <strong>and</strong> Contributing<br />
Factors<br />
• Investigations revealed that the<br />
boom hoist wire rope that was<br />
supporting the boom had<br />
snapped, causing the crane boom<br />
to collapse onto the workers.<br />
• Laboratory findings indicated<br />
that the wire rope had failed<br />
as a result of accelerated fatigue.<br />
This means that the failure had<br />
occurred in the internal areas of<br />
the wire rope which are hard<br />
to detect during a routine<br />
visual inspection.<br />
1. Gantry bridle<br />
2. Boom hoist wire rope<br />
3. A completely broken portion (about<br />
2.5m) of the boom hoist wire rope<br />
found on the ground<br />
<strong>Struck</strong> By <strong>Falling</strong> <strong>Objects</strong><br />
95
• It was also found that the boom<br />
hoist wire rope was not of<br />
the type that the manufacturer<br />
had specified. The breaking<br />
strength of the wire rope was<br />
also lower than what the<br />
manufacturer had specified.<br />
• The crane operator did not<br />
know how to read <strong>and</strong> interpret<br />
the load capacity chart.<br />
Root Cause Analysis<br />
Evaluation of loss<br />
Type of contact<br />
Immediate cause(s)<br />
Basic cause(s)<br />
Failure of SMS<br />
• Two workers killed<br />
• <strong>Struck</strong> <strong>by</strong> crane boom<br />
• Defective tools, equipment or materials<br />
• Inadequate removal <strong>and</strong> replacement of<br />
unsuitable items<br />
• Inadequate maintenance<br />
• Maintenance regime<br />
Recommendations<br />
Ensure that the wire rope used is the type specified <strong>by</strong> manufacturer.<br />
Conduct regular checks before lifting operations.<br />
Continually train the crane operator on how to read <strong>and</strong> interpret<br />
the load capacity chart.<br />
Ensure that the lifting supervisor is present for all lifting operations.<br />
96 <strong>Struck</strong> By <strong>Falling</strong> <strong>Objects</strong>
CASE 13<br />
STRUCK BY A COLLAPSED WALL<br />
Description of Accident<br />
Worker A <strong>and</strong> his co-worker were<br />
working in a trench at the worksite.<br />
They were laying <strong>and</strong> tightening<br />
reinforced steel wires at the<br />
bottom of the trench.<br />
The boundary wall of the adjacent<br />
house that was st<strong>and</strong>ing at the<br />
edge of the trench toppled into<br />
the trench. Worker A was pinned<br />
under the collapsed wall.<br />
1. The boundary wall was here before<br />
it toppled<br />
2. The deceased was pinned here under<br />
the wall<br />
3. The trench<br />
Causes <strong>and</strong> Contributing<br />
Factors<br />
• The boundary wall that toppled<br />
measured about 15.5cm in<br />
thickness, 160cm in height <strong>and</strong><br />
1680cm in length. It was a brick<br />
wall with plaster on its surface.<br />
• The trench where Worker A <strong>and</strong><br />
his co-worker worked was dug<br />
parallel to this boundary wall.<br />
• No support such as sheet piling,<br />
bracing, shoring, underpinning<br />
or other means to ensure the<br />
stability of the boundary wall<br />
beside the trench had been put<br />
up to prevent injury to workers<br />
working in the trench.<br />
1. The deceased was pinned here under<br />
the wall<br />
<strong>Struck</strong> By <strong>Falling</strong> <strong>Objects</strong><br />
97
• Excavation of the trench had<br />
weakened the foundation of the<br />
boundary wall. As some of the<br />
earth below the cement slab on<br />
which the boundary wall was<br />
erected had fallen off into the<br />
trench, the cement slab’s<br />
strength to support the<br />
boundary wall was reduced.<br />
• The cement slab gave way <strong>and</strong><br />
resulted in the wall toppling into<br />
the trench.<br />
Root Cause Analysis<br />
Evaluation of loss<br />
Type of contact<br />
Immediate cause(s)<br />
Basic cause(s)<br />
Failure of SMS<br />
• One worker killed<br />
• <strong>Struck</strong> <strong>by</strong> object<br />
• Failure to secure<br />
• Inadequate work st<strong>and</strong>ards<br />
• Hazard analysis <strong>and</strong> risk assessment<br />
Follow-up<br />
The occupier was instructed to erect supports according to the<br />
design of a professional engineer for structures adjoining any<br />
trench to prevent injury to any person working in the trench.<br />
Recommendations<br />
Provide supports such as sheet piling, bracing, shoring, underpinning<br />
or other means to ensure the stability of a boundary wall beside a<br />
trench to prevent injury to workers working in the trench.<br />
Ensure that the integrity of the wall is checked regularly <strong>by</strong> a<br />
competent person.<br />
98 <strong>Struck</strong> By <strong>Falling</strong> <strong>Objects</strong>
Published in June 2008 <strong>by</strong> the<br />
<strong>Workplace</strong> <strong>Safety</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Health</strong><br />
<strong>Council</strong> in collaboration with<br />
the Ministry of Manpower.<br />
All rights reserved. This<br />
publication may not be<br />
reproduced or transmitted in<br />
any form or <strong>by</strong> any means,<br />
in whole or in part, without prior<br />
written permission. The<br />
information provided in this<br />
publication is accurate as at time<br />
of printing. All cases shared in this<br />
publication are meant for learning<br />
purposes only. The learning points<br />
for each case are not exhaustive<br />
<strong>and</strong> should not be taken to<br />
encapsulate all the responsibilities<br />
<strong>and</strong> obligations of the user of this<br />
publication under the law. The<br />
<strong>Workplace</strong> <strong>Safety</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Health</strong><br />
<strong>Council</strong> does not accept any<br />
liability or responsibility to any<br />
party for losses or damage arising<br />
from following this publication.