1. ……………………………… Health and Safety Consultant – HAVS
Reactec Ltd

2. Hand Arm Vibration Syndrome What’s the problem?
HAVS sufferers face long term disablement.
There is no cure.
Prevention is the only option.

3. Hand Arm Vibration Syndrome
Health effects
A range of reversible and permanent injuries:
Nervous System
Blood circulation - blanching
Sensory nerves - numbness, pins and needles
Muscles
Bones
Joints

4. HAVS Current Legislation
Interpretation
Health And Safety At Work Act 1974.
Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998.
Management Of Health And Safety At Work Regulations 1999.
Physical Agents (Vibration) Directive 2002.
Control of Vibrations Regulations 2005.
Supply of Machinery (Safety) Regulations 2008.
1918: Dr Alice Hamilton MD refers to
“dead fingers" syndrome in 1918

5. HAVS Current Legislation
Exemptions
Emergency services
Air transport
Ministry of Defence

6. Vibration exposure risk assessment
The Control of Vibration at Work Regulations 2005 and associated guidance
Elimination or control of exposure
Risk assessment
Health surveillance
Information, instruction and training

7. Meeting HSE legislation
Continuous reduction of exposure
RESPONSIBILITY OF DUTY HOLDERS Clients, Designers, CDM coordinators, Principal contractors, Contractors & Small builders & Workers.
ASSESS
Plan – your overall strategy
Identify – the health hazards linked to work
Assess – significance of these hazards
Involve – workers in managing health risks
CONTROL
Prevent – risks before work starts
Control – remaining risks
Train – workers
Health assessment – of workers at risk
REVIEW
Supervise – workers
Maintain – controls
Monitor – to ensure controls are effective
Act – to correct any problem
SUMMARY of HSE statements
Everyone is responsible to manage and mitigate HAV risks
Where there are things you can do to reduce risks from vibration, that are reasonably practicable, they should be done no matter what the risk level.
Below EAV - take actions, which are relatively inexpensive and simple to carry out.
Above EAV - look for alternative processes, equipment and/or working methods which would eliminate or reduce exposure or mean people are exposed for shorter times.
Also be keeping up with what is good practice for vibration control within your industry.
No one should exceed their ELV.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Assess risk
Identify any processes involving regular exposure to vibration;
A reasonable estimate of your employees’ exposures;
Identify requirements to comply with the law eg, if vibration control measures are needed, and, if so, where and what type;
Identify if health surveillance is required for employees at particular risk.
Plan & Execute
If exposure is at or above the EAV, you must put in place a planned programme of vibration control.
If below EAV you are still required to reduce risks ALARP.
Alternative work methods (good practise, mechanise or automate)
Equipment selection (make sure its best for the job)
Procurement (lower vibration tools)
Improve workstation design
Maintenance program (avoid increases in vibration)
Work Schedules (work rotation)
Clothing (keep warm)
Review
Check regularly that the programme of controls is being carried out by managers and employees.
Talk regularly to managers, supervisors, employees and trade union/employee safety representative if there are any vibration problems with the equipment or the way it is being used.
Check the results of health surveillance and discuss with the health service provider whether the controls appear to be effective or need to be changed.
Monitoring data to identify a reduction in exposure and to remain below ELV.
HSE now state monitoring is good for assessing risk and effectiveness of risk reduction actions.
RAP is only part of the hierarchy of controls
RAP is good for assessing a risk and then if a risk cannot be removed to support managing the risk that remains
The Control of Vibrations Regulations 2005: states that if any employees use vibrating tools that produce 2.5m/s2 or above then the employees exposure must be assessed.
New statement “…There is no legal requirement for continual monitoring and recording of vibration exposure. Timers and vibration meters can be a useful tool for carrying out a risk assessment or for monitoring the preventive measures in place to ensure that they are effective. Relying on these devices to ensure that workers do not exceed the Exposure Limit Value (5 m/s2 A(8)) on a day to day basis is not appropriate and if your employees are continually working up-to the Exposure Limit Value then you should be looking at doing the work in a different way. Restricting exposure to just below the Exposure Limit Value will still result in many workers developing Hand-Arm Vibration Syndrome (HAVS).
HSE state the good points when using tool timers;
Help quantify trigger times during exposure assessment
Complex systems can estimate exposure for multiple tool use
Can be used to audit success of planned controls
Keeping a record of likely exposure (Note, good when having to store records for 40 years)
Show methodology
1. Evaluate the vibration risk to your employees.
- Decide if they are likely to be exposed above the daily exposure action value (EAV)
- Use RAP to accurately assess risk
2. Control management
- Introduce a programme of controls to eliminate risk, or reduce exposure to as low a level as is reasonably practicable.
3. Carry out exposure monitoring to quantify exposure and determine level of Health surveillance required.
- Provide health surveillance (regular health checks) to those employees who continue to be regularly exposed above the action value or otherwise continue to be at risk;
decide if they are likely to be exposed above the daily exposure limit value (ELV) and if they are take immediate action to reduce their exposure below the limit value;
provide information and training to employees on health risks and the actions you are taking to control those risks;
consult your trade union safety representative or employee representative on your proposals to control risk and to provide health surveillance;
Keep a record of your risk assessment and control actions;
Keep health records for employees under health surveillance;
- Review and update your risk assessment regularly.

8. EAV ELV Meeting HSE legislation
The HSE exposure point system to quantify risk For an accurate estimate of risk - trigger time and the representative vibration magnitude need to be known in any one day.
100 points (8 hrs of a tool with 2.52 m/s2 )
EAV
Take action to reduce exposure. 1 in 10 develop HAVS in 12 years at this level.
400 points (8 hrs of a tool with 52 m/s2 )
SUMMARY
How the points system relates to tool vibration magnitude and duration of use.
Below EAV - take actions, which are relatively inexpensive and simple to carry out.
Above EAV - look for alternative processes, equipment and/or working methods which would eliminate or reduce exposure or mean people are exposed for shorter times.
Also be keeping up with what is good practice for vibration control within your industry.
No one should exceed their ELV.
Do not work above this level. 1 in 10 develop HAVS in 6 years at this level.
ELV

9. Meeting HSE legislation
What vibration magnitude to use?
10% injury is not acceptable.
Unlike other risks, HAVs is visible and measurable.
Reduce the margin of error
to reduce injury.
Critical need
Use tool data that is safely representative of the vibration exposure risk experienced in the field.
An employer is responsible for assessing representative risk.
SUMMARY
Employers are responsible for assessing a representative risk and not just relying on average manufacturers data. For example if tools are being used more robustly then a higher than average value should be used.
HSE state the average should be the 75 percentile of a tools varying values.
HSE recommendation
Use upper limit of upper quartile (75th percentile) to not under assess the risk.

10. What’s not working?
The HSE stated “all new cases of HAVS will be eliminated by 2015” but HAVS remains a constant risk.
HAVS risks need to be reduced as soon as possible to as low as “reasonably practical”
SUMMARY
We are 10 years on from the release of the regulations concerning the vibrations at work.
At the time the Government set a target of reducing to 10%
We are no where near that with HAVs still the highest recorded RIDDORS across all industries sectors.
It will not be eradicated while we guess how big the problem is
It will not be eradicated if we outsource responsibility to contractors with nicely worded policies and a few forms
Take accountability and know the HAVs exposure at your projects and in your business

11. Increase in successful HAVS claims (2007 – 2013)**
What’s not working?
Hand Arm Vibration (financial impact)
Highest % of disability claims are HAVS related* *
Every £1 recovered through insurance, costs a company £10 in uninsured costs***
50%
Surge in employee claims*
60,000
Increase in successful HAVS claims (2007 – 2013)**
Key points
UK is good on Safety but Health as not had equal investment or focus
HAVS RIDDORS have decreased over time but are still a real issue
Employee litigation has increased
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Employee general claims trend - surge in employee claims (DWF). This trend has increased due to noise claims.
,000 claims – 2013, 60,000 claims
18,000
2008
2013
*HSE **Industrial Injuries Disablement Benefit *** HSE - Fines, legal fees, sick pay, production delays

12. 300,000 suffering advanced stages of HAVS*
What’s not working?
Hand Arm Vibration (Social impact)
2,000,000 people at risk of HAVS*
300,000 suffering advanced stages of HAVS*
3,000 claims each year * *
<100,000 Protected by digital monitoring * * *
Key points
10% risk is taken from the HSE inspectors pack – Appendix C of
The other key points are taken from the HSE website -
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Vibration white finger (VWF), also known as hand-arm vibration syndrome (HAVS) or dead finger, is a secondary form of Raynaud's syndrome. HAVs is an industrial disease triggered by continuous use of vibrating hand-held machinery. Use of the term "vibration white finger" has generally been superseded in professional usage by broader concept of HAVS, although it is still used by the general public. The symptoms of vibrating white finger are the vascular component of HAVS.
Hand Arm Vibration Syndrome can be contracted within 6 months
Staging
The Stockholm system is used to grade severity:
Sensorineural component
0SN - exposed to vibrations but no symptoms.
1SN - intermittent numbness +/- tingling.
2SN - numbness (intermittent or continuous) with loss of feeling of touch.
3SN - numbness (intermittent or continuous) with loss of discrimination by touch +/- manual dexterity.
Vascular component
Stage 1 - mild, with only occasional attacks affecting the tips of one or more fingers.
Stage 2 - moderate, with occasional attacks affecting the distal or middle phalanges of one or more fingers.
Stage 3 - severe, with frequent attacks affecting all phalanges of most fingers.
Stage 4 - very severe, as Stage 3, plus trophic changes in fingertips.
*HSE ** Industrial Injuries Disability Benefit scheme *** Reactec

13. What’s not working?
10% of employees exposed at the exposure action level will contract HAVS within 12 years or within 6 years if exposed to the exposure limit level. (HSE)
“Exposure below the Action Value cannot be considered safe...” (HSE)
For those of you unfamiliar with the HSE point system. It is a system to allow you to clock up that is combine the risk associated with the daily use of vibratory system. It is based on daily use and the advise is that if someone uses the equivalent of a drill with 2.5m/s2 magnitude of vibration for 8 hours they would have exposure points of 100. If they used a tool equivalent to a hammer drill on hammer of 5m/s2 for 8 hours they would amass exposure points of 400.
The advise is NOT to work above 400 points per day and if working above 100 points then to put in place controls and demonstrate ongoing reduction of the exposure risk
HOWEVER please note
Headline statistic as provided in the HSE inspector’s guide.
10% of employees exposed at the exposure action level will contract HAVS within 12 years or within 6 years if exposed to the exposure limit level.
“Exposure below the Action Value cannot be considered safe...”
Clicker question #1. Are you aware of this statistic
Clicker question #2. Given this statistic would you set your action value at 50, 75 or 100
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

14. Inaccuracy of assessment
Current practices
Estimating tool use, performance and types of work.
Tool data more
representative
Greater & consistent coverage
Measurement no longer reliant on tool fixed data.
Complies to ISO5349
Considerations
Factor of 3
Factor of 2
40%
20%
Inaccuracy
Under/Over estimation
 Process
monitoring
 Worker coverage/
duration
Digital tool monitor
Digital worker monitor
 HSE points calculation
Based on manufacturers
data
Based on ISO5349
Of “typical” work
Estimate of
ISO5349
in use
Complaint ISO5349
In use
Paper based estimation
Sample workforce/
time period

15. Sampling representative exposure
When to sample workforce exposure?
Sampling representative exposure
The 2 charts represent 18 months of recent data from 2 differing industry sectors.
Each displays over time operator exposure varies greatly.
Conclusion
All sectors can have high levels of variability in exposure over time (even sectors renowned for accurate time in motion studies).
These levels of variability limit the accuracy of exposure assessment.
Civil Engineering EAV=75, ELV=100
The charts displayed represent 18 months of recent data from different industry sectors with reasonable high levels of operator monitoring.
The report counts the days where operators have used a HAVmeter and remained below limit value days they have exceeded action value versus days that have exceeded limit value.
One of the charts has EAV set at 100 and ELV set at 400 another has EAV of 75 and ELV of 100 – an organisation intent in staying in the HSE not so safe, safe zone
Our conclusion is every industry has variability even the ones that believe they have very thorough time in motion studies
Could these levels of exposure be estimated or tracked by asking for time on the tools
Manufacturing EAV=100, ELV=400

16. Inaccuracy of tool vibration?
FACT: Tool vibration varies due to work types.
The graph displays the average vibration of tools over 18 months. All tools are either below or above the predefined exposure magnitude.
5m/s² variation on 5m/s² yields 200 points per hour rather than 50 points per hour
10m/s² variation on 5m/s² yields 450 points per hour rather than 50 points per hour

17. Pre-defined tool average
Inaccuracy of tool vibration?
Examples of inaccuracy
FACT: Tool vibration exposure varies per user
Average operator magnitudes over a 2 year use of a Hilti TE3000 breaker (manufacturers vibration magnitude 7 m/s²
Row Labels
Pre-defined tool average
Average of HM
Sum of Trigger (hours)
Average of Tag points
Average of HM points
OPERATOR R
10.5
16.8
255 94
250
Operator B
16.6
174 58
142
Operator C
15.9 18 22 44
Operator D
15.6
456 60
138
Operator A
15.3 15 53
113
Operator E
13.9
465 66
119
OPERATOR H
10.6 40 73 74

18.  HSE points calculation
Results of inaccuracy
Estimating tool use, performance and types of work.
Tool performance more
representative
Greater & consistent coverage
Measurement no longer reliant on tool fixed data.
Complies to ISO5349
Considerations
Factor of 3
Factor of 2
40%
20%
Inaccuracy
Under/Over estimation
Ineffective controls based on inaccurate data.
Inability to measure the effectiveness of controls.
Operators exposure far higher than assessed (possibly exceeding limit values when only simple controls are in place).
 Process
monitoring
Digital tool monitor
Digital worker monitor
 Worker coverage/
duration
Total coverage/
Constant
 HSE points calculation
Based on manufacturers
data
Based on ISO5349
Of “typical” work
Estimate of
ISO5349
in use
Complaint ISO5349
In use
Paper based estimation
Sample workforce/
time period
There is the view and it has been expressed by the HSE that the inaccuracies do not matter
It is said they do not matter – PROVIDED – you are always consistent and you put in place controls to continuously
Now I am an engineer (of sorts) and in any continuous improvement or fault finding work there is the age old adage “rubbish in gives you rubbish out”
How effective will controls be when based on approximate information
How do you even know if controls are effective when the assessment is very approximate
More importantly can you be sure of the risk you are exposing the tool users to in your business or on your projects

19. Results of greater accuracy & continuous digital monitoring
Estimating tool use, performance and types of work.
Tool data more
representative
Accurate time on tools with representative tool info
Measurement no longer reliant on tool fixed data.
Complies to ISO5349
Considerations
Factor of 3
Factor of 2
Factor of 0.4
20%
Inaccuracy
Under/Over estimation
 Tool
monitoring
Paper based estimation
Digital tool monitor
Digital worker monitor
 Worker coverage/
duration
Sample workforce/
time period
Total coverage/
Constant
 HSE points calculation
Based on manufacturers
data
Based on ISO5349
Of “typical” work
Estimate of
ISO5349
in use
Complaint ISO5349
In use
Digital monitoring offers greater protection for employers and employees…
…How?
So how much better can it be with digital monitoring
Assuming a solid effort to tag tools with a truly Representative vibration level of the work to be undertaken Reactec would suggest that the error will be less than 40%

20. The Value of Continuous Monitoring
Accurate trigger exposure monitoring and tool vibration comparison
Constant protection monitoring and supports early
Intervention & prevention.
Measure the effectiveness of controls and aid designing out risks.
Help educate and involve all duty holders.
More robust defence against litigation.
Why does digital monitoring bring greater protection:
Trigger accurate exposure monitoring and tool vibration comparison across all projects and work rotas.
Constant monitoring to ensure employees exposure levels minimised while work rotas & tool plans followed
Exposure trend reports to measure the effectiveness of controls and aid the design of any required changes
Real-time exposure monitoring and easy access to reports helps educate and involve all duty holders.
More robust defence against litigation.
By way of illustration below graphs from a real customer example
This customer adopted digital monitoring
Could see overall exposure trending down so increased the level of monitoring within their organisation – even with more monitoring the overall exposure is trending down
Clicker question #11 Do you know what level of exposure your projects or business is exposing the tool users to? Y/N
So far we to many of you are probably going over old ground, but have hopefully at least increased your awareness of our cloud based reporting. We will take a 10 minute break at this point, there are teas and coffee available and we have a number of display areas set up to enable you to have a closer look at the reporting software available as part of Reactec’s Analytics Platform
If I can ask you all to return to your seats by …………………….

21. The HAVWEAR beeps and vibrates to alert the operator
Personal HAVS Protection
Example technology
ELV reached
20 second alert
Latest tool used
Last 4 characters of tool model number.
HSE points
Vibration exposure points
66% of ELV-EAV
10 second alert
Battery Level
Indicates battery level
33% of ELV-EAV
5 second alert
Operator initials
First name initial and first three characters of last name
EAV reached
2 second alert
Exposure action values
LED indicator of exposure thresholds reached
The HAVWEAR beeps and vibrates to alert the operator

22. Example technology HAVWEAR Using the System 1 Sign out 2 Collect
Personal HAVS Protection
Example technology
Using the System
RFID
Card
1 Sign out
Place an ID card against the Docking station.
2 Collect
Unclip the HAVWEAR module from the bay with the flashing LED light.
3 Protect
Insert HAVWEAR module into holder, thread the strap through the holder and snugly fit the strap around the wrist.
4 Connect
“Connect” with each tool by pressing the HAVWEAR button and place the HAVWEAR monitor next to a tool label until you hear a beep.

23. 3 2 4 1 Example technology HAVWEAR Data & reports management
Personal HAVS Protection
Example technology
Secure data hosting and employee access.
Internet enabled PC or tablet to access reports.
Customer controls employee access to all or specific reports.
HAVWEAR and HAVMETER’s can be used together.
Data & reports
management 3
Cloud based reports
Company manages employee access to real-time reports.
Docking station sends data to the cloud based reports 2
HAVWEAR data downloads to the Docking station
Regional Managers
H&S
Managers 4
Employees view
reports and receive auto alerts 1
HAVWEAR placed back onto a Docking station
Depot
Manager
Team leaders

24. Example reports HAVWEAR Secure access & data backed up daily
Personal HAVS Protection
Example reports
Secure access & data backed up daily
View reports online and/or by
Clear and pertinent information to help deploy the most effective controls.
Alternate work methods
Equipment selection
Maintenance & purchasing policy
Work schedules
Involves all duty holders & raises HAVs risk awareness
Easily measure the effectiveness of controls to aid design changes

25. Example reports HAVWEAR Simple overview of operative exposure
Personal HAVS Protection
Example reports
Simple overview of operative exposure
Instances where EAV/ ELV are exceeded highlighted automatically
Records kept indefinitely
Information defendable in court
Quick & easy to produce

26. Example reports HAVWEAR Quantifies exposure Quantifies risk
Personal HAVS Protection
Example reports
Quantifies exposure
Quantifies risk
Identifies high risk employees, tools and activities
Raises awareness
Educates
Enables prevention before detection

27. Example reports HAVWEAR
Personal HAVS Protection
Example reports
Detailed information of what tools are being used and when
Easily investigate which tools causing over exposure
Staff productivity analysis
Potential for comparison of task completion rates between squads

28. Example reports HAVWEAR
Personal HAVS Protection
Example reports
Measure the results of risk reduction activity.
Assess exposure trends over time.
Easy to read pie chart showing individuals share of exposure as percentage of the team
Useful ongoing management tool
Allows supervisors to balance out total exposure among team

29. Example reports HAVWEAR Track the trend of tool vibration.
Personal HAVS Protection
Example reports
Track the trend of tool vibration.
Identify increases in tool vibration to suggest early maintenance or incorrect tool use.

30. End
Thank you