13 df s a trial beginning on the singapore sports hub1(1)

DfS - a tentative beginning on the Singapore Sports Hubg p p

Forum on Workplace Safety and Health Suntec - May 9th 2014

Presented by Marcel Finlay and Audrey Perez of Dragages Singapore Pte Ltdof Dragages Singapore Pte Ltd.

Contents of this Presentation:

1. Some Facts and Figures on the Sports Hub

2 Who were the designers of the Sports Hub ?2. Who were the designers of the Sports Hub ?

3. What is Design for Safety?

4. Singapore’s plan to implement Design for Safety and the GUIDE process

5. DSPL process for implementation of Design for Safety on the Sports Hub

6. Case Study – making it safer for the site workers

7. Case Study – making it safer for the users of the buildings

8. Case Study - making it safer for those who maintain the buildings

9 Case Study making it safer for those who demolish the building9. Case Study – making it safer for those who demolish the building

10. The role of legislation in promoting Design for Safety

11. Some Conclusions

Sports Hub – Design for Safety Presentation Contents

55 000 t t di f t h55,000 seat stadium for sports such as athletics, football, rugby, cricket and the annual National Day Parade

3,000 seat multi-purpose indoor arena

6 000 seat aquatic centre

40,000m2 retail mall, 2-storey office building, 4-storey car park, sports

6,000 seat aquatic centre

museum, sports library and water sports centre

Integrated MRT station and manyIntegrated MRT station and many hectares of publicly-accessible landscaping plus waterfront providing community sports and leisure

i i iactivities

1. Singapore Sports Hub – Facts and Figures

Consultant Designers of the Sports Hub :

Mechanical, Electrical & Plumbing Services ‐ Design

Stadium, MPIA and AQC architectural DesignAll Building Structural DesignCivil Design (Roads Bridges Drains Tunnels)Civil Design (Roads, Bridges, Drains, Tunnels)Acoustic, Sports Lighting, Pedestrian Modeling

Retail, Office, Car Park, SIRC and WSC architecture &Retail, Office, Car Park, SIRC and WSC architecture &Masterplanning

Masterplanning & Landscape Design

Façade performance and Design review

2. Who were the designers of the Sports Hub?

Other designers of the Sports Hub :Architecture coordination and shopdrawingsStructural co‐ordination and shopdrawingsCivils co‐ordination and shopdrawingsStructural Steelworks co‐ordinationFaçade co‐ordination

Mechanical Electrical PlumbingMechanical, Electrical, Plumbing –Co‐ordination and documentation

Structural detailing and BBSStructural detailing and BBS

Commercially‐related changes to the contract design (modifications to retail mall advertising locations event(modifications to retail mall, advertising locations, event operations, etc)

Sport‐related changes to the contract design (changes of sports toSport‐related changes to the contract design (changes of sports to be played in MPIA for example)


DPA Pte. Ltd.

Architectural Design

Architectural Design

Landscape Design

Landscape DesignSports DesignSports Design

Arup SportsPte. Ltd.

DesignDesign

Squire Mech

Sports DesignSports Design

SingaporeSports

D&B Contractor

MEP DESIGNMEP DESIGN

Pte. Ltd.Operations Changes

Operations Changes

Hub

BYME Int’l.

D&B ContractorLead Co‐ordinator

SingaporeSportsCouncil

Arup Pte Ltd

Combined Services Model

Combined Services Model

SigmaBear

Sports ChangesSports Changes

Council

Structural Design ModelStructural

Design Model

Pte. Ltd.

Structural Detailing Model

Structural Detailing Model

Inc.


3. What is Design for Safety ?

What is Design for Safety ?

Put simply the aim of a design for safety process is to ensure that thebuilding is safe:

To construct Protection of the site workersTo use Protection of employees and the publicTo use Protection of employees and the publicTo maintain Protection of those employed to maintain the buildingTo demolish Protection of those employed to demolish the building

Later we will look at examples to illustrate these from the design andconstruction of the Singapore Sports Hub


Why should Design for Safety be important to Dragages ?

Dragages is committed to safety – it has excellent Quality, Safety andEnvironmental systems and teams which ensure that it is second-to-none inEnvironmental systems and teams which ensure that it is second-to-none insite safety statistics in Singapore.

Design for Safety can help ensure that Dragages maintains that positionDesign for Safety can help ensure that Dragages maintains that positionbut it will also strengthen DSPL’s reputation for producing buildings which notonly were safe to build but which are safe to occupy, use and maintain.

The Sports Hub being a PPP project means that DSPL have been obligedto look forward to the occupation and maintenance phases. This kind ofcontract form lends itself to a Design for Safety mindset.

We used our in-house magazine and safety seminars to introduce theoverall message to our staff.


Singapore’s Plan to Implement Design for Safety

WSH Council published the Guidelines on Design for Safety in Building & Structures in Nov 2008 with second edition published in July 2011C t b d DfS C di t C i t d d i A t 2010Competency-based DfS Coordinator Course introduced in August 2010 There are now just over 100 qualified DfS Coordinators in SingaporeDfS Mark and DfS Award programmes introduced in 2013

4. Singapore’s Plan to Implement Design for Safety

The GUIDE Process

To Help Users through the process Singapore is using “GUIDE”

It is described like this in the booklet:

“To ensure the design is safe, a Design Review Process is introduced in the o e su e t e des g s sa e, a es g e e ocess s t oduced t eproject flow”

“There should be a systematic process whereby the risks of the design are highlighted, reviewed and recorded”

“The GUIDE Process should be chaired by the Design for Safety Coordinator who should be suitably qualified in both safety and technical aspects so as to guide the review team to identify and manage the hazards”


The GUIDE Process

G ‐ Group together a review team consisting of major stakeholders

U ‐ Understand the full design concept by looking at the drawings and calculations, or have the designers elaborate on the design

I Id if h i k h i l f h d i iI ‐ Identify the risks that arise as a result of the design or construction method. The risks should be recorded and analysed to see if they can be eliminated by changing the design

D ‐ Design around the risks identified to eliminate or to mitigate the risks

E Enter all the information including vital design change informationE ‐ Enter all the information including vital design change information affecting safety and health or remaining risks to be mitigated into the Safety and Health Risk Register

Steps 3 and 4 should be iterative and repeated until the review team is satisfied that the design can no longer be changed to totally eliminate all risks (these residual risks must be passed on to the construction team and the operation & maintenance teams)


DSPL’s introduction of Design for Safety on the Sports HubDSPL s introduction of Design for Safety on the Sports Hub

Dragages committed to Singapore’s Ministry of Manpower that they would carry out a trial of Design for Safety on the Sports Hub

Our consultant partners Arup also made an informal commitment to MOM to try and put in place some of the elements of the Design for Safety process on the Sports Hub:

Neither DSPL nor Arup had dedicated resources in place to systematically carry through the process.

Very few of the designers or design managers on the project had experience in this type of process – only some of those who have worked in large projects in the UK or Australia

O t i l ld th f l b ti l b t it ld till b f l d ff tiOur trial could therefore only be partial but it could still be useful and effective.

5. DSPL process for implementation of DFS on the Sports Hub

DSPL’s implementation of the GUIDE process at Sportshub

Step 1: DSPL DfS Co-ordinator sets-up design safety review for one building or one area of one building and invites representatives from each of the designers

G - Group together a review team consisting of major stakeholders

Step 2: DSPL publishes a list of potential discussion points for people to think about before the meeting and help give the meeting some initial structure. The meeting room isbefore the meeting and help give the meeting some initial structure. The meeting room is prepared with relevant drawings, images, sketches etc stuck to the wall - it is critical in this process to provoke discussion – the method we often use is that of a journey through the building

e.g. “You are the maintenance man for the AHU at level 6 of the NST, you arrive on site by car. How do you and your tools reach your destination ? Once you are there how do you replace the filters?”you replace the filters?

By doing this we can more easily identify risks step-by-step


DSPL’s method for introduction of DFS on the Sports HubA simple ‘starter’ template to get the team to think about the subject before the meeting and to help move the discussion during the meeting

I - Identify the risks that arise as a result of the design or construction method. The risks should be recorded and analysed to see if they can be eliminated by changing the design


Step 3: DSPL Design For Safety Co-ordinator chairs a meeting with Arup, Squire Mech, DPA BYME and his DSPL colleagues from Architectural Structural Civils and SteelworkDPA, BYME and his DSPL colleagues from Architectural, Structural, Civils and Steelwork design teams. (The architect is requested to present the building to the attendees of the meeting)

G ‐ Group together a review team consisting of major stakeholders

U ‐ Understand the full design concept by looking at the drawings and calculations, or have the designers elaborate on the design z

Safety + Health Review Committee


DSPL’s method for introduction of DFS on the Sports Hub

Step 4: DSPL DfS co-ordinator documents the review – attendees and notes of the meeting

I ‐ Identify the risks that arise as a result of the design or construction method. The risks should be recorded and analysed to see if they can be eliminated by changing the designeliminated by changing the design



Step 4: DSPL DfS co-ordinator documents the review actions agreed and distributes them with the risk register:g

I - Identify the risks that arise as a result of the design or construction method. The risks should be recorded and analysed to see if they can be eliminated by changing the designchanging the design



Step 5:

B f After

D ‐ Design around the risks identified to eliminate or to mitigate the risks

Before After

Designing a site lighting column which could be lowered to the ground eliminated the risks associated with working at height.



Step 6: DSPL Design for Safety Co-ordinator documents the review and issues updated register of risks identified

E Enter all the information including vital design change information affecting safetyE‐ Enter all the information including vital design change information affecting safety and health or remaining risks to be mitigated into the Safety and Health Risk Register



Step 7: DfS co ordinators for each team review the actions from minutes ofStep 7: DfS co-ordinators for each team review the actions from minutes of meeting and follow up outstanding items within their own design teams.

Step 8: DSPL DfS co-ordinator sets up follow-up reviews with all the other co-Step 8: DSPL DfS co-ordinator sets up follow-up reviews with all the other co-ordinators and agrees on actions. A revised spreadsheet is distributed.

Step 9 DSPL DfS co ordinator calls a meeting with Technical Director and HealthStep 9: DSPL DfS co-ordinator calls a meeting with Technical Director and Health and Safety Director to review items which are likely to involve spending additional monies but which are generally agreed to be necessary to guarantee our safety objectivesour safety objectives.

This must be done in a totally transparent way. Actions are agreed. Project Directors are allowed to take cost in to account when making the decision butDirectors are allowed to take cost in to account when making the decision but only insofar as it is proportionate to the risk. The fact that it costs money is not itself a reason for rejecting a safety proposal.

Step 10: Register of outstanding risks and agreed actions is passed onto the QSE team for monitoring and implementation


6. Case Studies – Making it safer for Site Workers

National Stadium – section through the seating bowl


NST – section through seating tiers showing cantilevered beams

Cantilevers could not be designed out as the area below had to be kept column free to allow the moving platforms to work

Cantilevered Beams

Moving TiersMoving Tiers

Moving Platforms


NST – location of raker beams on plan with crane locations

The risks caused by the design of installing large beams at high level ere identified and o r Methods team set abo t designing a safe a ofwere identified and our Methods team set about designing a safe way of

carrying out the works


NST – 3D view of formwork and access platforms

The idea was to avoid any scaffolding from below and to provide aThe idea was to avoid any scaffolding from below and to provide a reusable steel structure for the formwork installation and to provide all worker access from the slab side


NST Raker Beam formwork installation sequence

Formwork and safety platforms craned into position and safely anchoredFormwork and safety platforms craned into position and safely anchored to the existing structure by use of simple collars and clamps


NST Raker Beam platform on site


Cantilevered raker beams in final arrangement


7. Case Studies – Making it safer for Users

For the safety of the general public using buildings the Singaporebuilding codes provide a good level of protection (for example - barriersbuilding codes provide a good level of protection (for example barriersto prevent fall from height, fire prevention and suppression, transportsafety, plumbing and sanitary systems to prevent spread of disease…)

The new 2013 Code on Accessibility in Buildings pushes this furtherespecially in the areas of trips and falls and general orientation(becoming confused and panicking as a result can be a cause of( g p gaccidents)

Where the Codes did not fit so well (i.e. for a stadium with a capacity of55,000 spectators) the authorities embraced The Green Guide toensure orderly escape in case of incident.

S f f f fSo, much of our safety work for users was covered by application of theCodes. Where Design for Safety was more important was in looking atthe safety of the building staff who spend more time in the Back ofH f th b ildiHouse areas of the buildings.


The basement to the competition pool building contains all the filtration and pump equipment along with ICT El t i l d Li htiICT, Electrical and Lighting room rooms servicing the whole building. It will have t ff l l lki lstaff regularly walking along

its corridors. Initially an ejector pit room was included in the design to deal with thein the design to deal with the sanitary waste from the WC on the 1st floor.

The DfS review for the building highlighted the risks associated with the deep excavation during construction creation of a confined space and with emptyingexcavation during construction, creation of a confined space and with emptying the tanks on a regular basis throughout the life of the building.


We followed up with a fundamental rethink of the sanitary design and through a small change in levels we were able to get the waste to flow by gravity to an

Before After

a small change in levels we were able to get the waste to flow by gravity to an existing ejector pit in an adjacent building. This effort combined two ejector pits into one, mitigated the overall risk and saved money.


The Aquatic Centre

8. Case Studies – Making it safer for Maintenance Staff

The Aquatic Centre

The Design for Safety review of the Aquatic Centre covered all areas ofAquatic Centre covered all areas of the building but one of the more important subjects was how do we access lights speakers countries’access lights, speakers, countries flags, etc above the water ?

We wanted something like this:We wanted something like this:

and not like this:


Aquatic Centre – Catwalk reduction

The design for safety process highlighted the requirement for safe access above the water but the initial technical reports on the TV lights, the event speakers, the emergency speakers and the cooling fans put them in so many different locations that we would not be able to access them all from catwalks.

Over the months we worked with the lighting and audio-visual designers to align their services so that they could all be accessed from just three catwalks running the length of the pool.

This effort was successful.

The result will ensure safe access for all roof mounted services and obviatesThe result will ensure safe access for all roof-mounted services and obviates the need for any scaffolding in the future (except for exceptional circumstances) which will keep our maintenance staff safe and our operations costs down.


Aquatic Centre – Catwalk Rationalization

Lights

Speakers

Lights

Speakers

Lights

Level 3.5 plan of AQC from early 2011 showingFinal level 3.5 plan of AQC showing 3 main catwalks Level 3.5 plan of AQC from early 2011 showing 5 main catwalks

Final level 3.5 plan of AQC showing 3 main catwalks


Detail drawings from Arup’s Sport lighting report

Lighting design done starting with safe access as a requirement(3 catwalks)


Arrangement of Speakers (from Arup AV/Acoustics Report)

AV design done with safe access as a requirement(the same 3 catwalks)


Maintenance Access Walkways

Here is the finished product – no services requiring maintenance between the catwalks

8. Case Studies – Making is safer for Maintenance Staff

Maintenance Access Walkways

Side view of the walkways

8. Case Studies – Making is safer for Maintenance Staff

9. Case Studies – Making it safer for Demolition

DemolitionIncluding ease of demolition as part of the Design for Safety process iscurrently problematic

Asking designers to think about demolishing their creation before it hasemerged from the ground is psychologically difficult especially as theyhave so many other more pressing issues to deal with.y p g

Singapore along with much of the region builds most buildings fromreinforced concrete – not the easiest material to demolish. And designing‘bolt-together’ structures from concrete has not yet reached a level of cost-efficiency which could match that of steel. Increased labour costs and newtechnologies could change this equation in the future but in the meantime

f d i h fi di f f d li hi hi hwe are faced with finding safe ways of demolishing structures which werenot designed to be taken down.

H d liti i ft t f th b ild i SiHowever, demolition is often part of the new-build process in Singaporeand can form part of the Design for Safety process as the next exampleshows


The old national stadium had 4 large concrete lighting towers which needed to be demolished as part of the works for the Sports Hub. This was identified as a major risk in our early safety reviews


A safety platform was fixed to the tower and a diamond saw was used to cut the tower into 4 l ti

The sections were then lifted away from the

l tf b4m long sections platform by crane


The risk assessment highlightedthe possibility of the sectionst li h thtoppling over when they wereplaced on the ground so pitswere dug for the sections to beleant into at 45 degreesleant into at 45 degrees

The sections were then broken upThe sections were then broken upin controlled conditions on theground and all four towers weredemolished efficiently and withoutdemolished efficiently and withoutincident


GFA in Singapore as in many other countries is strictly controlled It isGFA in Singapore as in many other countries is strictly controlled. It isgoverned by the URA’s GFA handbook which tries to make it clear todesigners what counts and what does not count as GFA. A developer willnearly always ask his designer to use the maximum GFA permitted for thenearly always ask his designer to use the maximum GFA permitted for theplot.

No set of rules is perfect but can they be modified to help designers keepNo set of rules is perfect but can they be modified to help designers keepsafety at the forefront of their mind ?


The catwalks in the Aquatic Centre could only be1000mm wide so as not to attract GFA and tomaintain fire escape width we had to place somemaintain fire escape width we had to place someequipment on the outside of the catwalks. Thesespaces will never be used for anything else sowhy not allow them to be the width they need tob t id f f i t ?be to provide safe access for maintenance?

Most of the diving boards counted as GFA as some are above others and the ones below are therefore ‘covered by a yslab above’. GFA which cannot be used to provide safe access elsewhere.


Every new apartment in Singapore has air conditioning

For the systems to work there has to be an external space in which to place the condenser units.

Nobody will remove air conditioning from their unit. Therefore the chances of these external spaces being used for additional living space are minimal. The emphasis should be on providing a safe environment for those technicians who need to access the units every 3 months.

Very good Very bad


The URA handbook on GFA allows ledges of up to 1m in width GFA free on which you can place the outdoor AC unitson which you can place the outdoor AC units.

Is this space really enough to place the condenser unit and safely maintain it?maintain it?


Two typical A/C ledges in new condos.

Worrying from a safety point of view is that you have to climb out of awindow to get to them so as you emerge from the building you are abovethe safety railing. Also of concern is that maintenance requires removal

f th d filt th i littl t t th id t ll f lliof the cover and filters – there is little to stop these accidentally fallingthrough or over the railings.


Star City Project , Thanlyin, Myanmar

An alternative way to provide access to services risers and aircon units


Maintenance Platforms for Services at Star City Myanmar

This typical floor plan shows the location of the indoorThis typical floor plan shows the location of the indoor and outdoor AC units.

Circled are the dedicated naturally-ventilated areas forCircled are the dedicated naturally ventilated areas for services which also contain the aircon condenser units


Maintenance Platforms for Services Star City ElevationElevation

An additional 2.3m2 ofconcrete slab per instanceto ensure permanent safe

f i l litaccess for single-split ormulti-split systems.

The cost is only the

Before After

The cost is only theconcrete as there is noadditional GFA in Myanmar.


Maintenance Platforms for Services Star City Myanmar

External View Internal View


Safe Access for Air Con UnitsThe aircon ledge is a controversial subject in Singapore.

Owners resent it when developers include the ledge in the overall area of the apartment and then use that area to calculate the headline cost per square f t f th ll t tfoot for the overall apartment.

‘Why do I pay the same for the a/c ledge as I do the living space ?’ – This leads to people asking for ledges to be made smaller which is not helpful inleads to people asking for ledges to be made smaller….which is not helpful in creating safe places for the maintenance worker.

Could a set of simple requirements could be introduced for the A/C ledges?Could a set of simple requirements could be introduced for the A/C ledges?

1. Accessible without climbing through a window.2 Wide enough for a worker to crouch down in front of each unit and2. Wide enough for a worker to crouch down in front of each unit and

remove the cover. 3. Screened well enough to prevent falling materials.4. Not be included in the area of the apartment by the selling agents.4. Not be included in the area of the apartment by the selling agents.

And if they meet the above requirements they would be GFA free.


Getting to work safely

Not Good At All A Little Better

We spend a lot of timeWe spend a lot of time and money keeping our workers safe once they are on site so why

t th t i k f t

We have designed transport vehicles to be safer and safer

Best

put them at risk of not getting to site at all ?


DSPL’s trial of DfS on the Sports HubWhat have we learnt? :

Setting up a one-off design review takes a significant amount of time for one person but for most people involved the time they spend is only the few hours they spend in the review sessions

Documenting this process is time-consuming and on a project of this size it is at leastDocumenting this process is time consuming and on a project of this size it is at least one full-time job for the Design + Build or Management Contractor (plus significant document control & secretarial assistance)

F ll i t h d t th d i f t i i tFollowing-up on agreements reached at the design safety reviews requires management resources (a full-time Design for Safety Co-ordinator) and requires full buy-in from our design partners. Design for Safety is not something which can just be imposed – it is a collaborative, iterative + interactive processcollaborative, iterative interactive process

For it to be truly effective a member of each design team (i.e. every DSPL team, every consultant and every major contractor with design responsibility has to have their

i t d D i f S f t di t )appointed Design for Safety co-ordinator)

11. Conclusions

DSPL’s trial of DfS on the Sports HubWhat have we learnt? :

Unfortunately not all consultants or contractors see DfS as something which applies to them and unless sums are included in their design fees to provide a DfS Co-ordinator they are not going to provide one.

It may be that unless DfS becomes a legal requirement it will be difficult to successfullyIt may be that unless DfS becomes a legal requirement it will be difficult to successfully implement unless it is specificially required by the building owner on a particular project as a part of the tender process.

Y t b illi t d b t it h l t i t th b li i th t itYou must be willing to spend money but it helps to go into the process believing that it will save you money rather than cost you money. (every time you manage to design out some expensive excavations and temporary works you put money ‘in the bank’ to deal with unforeseen safety requirements later in the project)unforeseen safety requirements later in the project)

A Design for Safety process is a robust system for identifying risks and more importantly it can create a sense of shared responsibility for mitigating those risks.

A successful implementation in Singapore should be highly beneficial in improving safety in buildings.

11. Conclusions

13 df s a trial beginning on the singapore sports hub1(1)

Education