Page 1 of 2
Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 6:58 pm
by Tony McC
Many of the regulars will be vaguely aware that I've been involved with a HSE project looking at ways to introduce compulsory dust suppression for cutting all concrete paving materials from the Spring of this year. Basically, from the launch (probably April), it will be "sternly frowned upon" for any paving contractor to use a cut-off saw without dust suppression, which will mean a water-kit being attached.
This is not some eejit idea from the HSE imposed on us: they've pulled together a fairly representative committee of "interested parties", which includes meself, Interpave (for the manufacturers), Highways Agency, Daniel, Civil Engineers Contractors Association, Stihl, Makita, Speedy Hire, Local Govt, Unions and a few others. The aim has been to produce a strategy that will be accepted by the industry rather than summat we'll all resent and ignore.
I've been heavily involved in the "training and communications" sub-group, and it's our job to produce the posters, leaflets, videos and whathaveyou. We now have what we think is a reasonable information leaflet and we need feedback from contractors to make sure it gets the message across clearly and succinctly. The leaflet is still "draft" but I've got permission to let it be viewed by sensible and professional contractors to obtain their feedback. In the absence of any such tradesmen, i thought I'd ask you lot!
Anyone willing to review the very short leaflet and let us have their thoughts should email me at the usual address (tony AT name-of-website) and I'll send you a link. Comments required by Jan 17th (a week tomorrow), please.
I'll post this same message to the blog for those too refined to enter the Brew Cabin.
Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 8:56 pm
by Pablo
Bought a couple of bowsers in december figured it's gonna be cheaper than buying a pack of decent masks every monday morning. Wet cutting makes a filthy mess though and if you don't clean up at regular intervals the slurry stains as bad as cement and is a killer to clean well. This then means that you end up with a lot of water going onto the paving during installation which comes to the surface when you plate and ruins your dry sand so you have to slurry that in which means more water and possible logging of the bedding course etc. Will have to work with it for a while till we find a way to give us an efficient and quality finish.
Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 12:12 am
by lutonlagerlout
i find this too pablo so i try and cut on the road with cones,off course with the splitter theres no dust at all 
LLL
Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 12:47 am
by enigmaenigma
I would be interested in taking a look at the leaflet and will see about dropping you an email
Out of curiosity and in relation to the new system
Do you foresee any problems in regards injury or illness from the slurry and if so whether it’s worth adopting some joined up thinking in relation to that, or does that run the risk of information overload and it being viewed as bureaucratic / red tape headache that would make people avoid or ignore what you are saying?
Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 6:12 am
by seanandruby
A bit of slurry is better than lung disease. a slurry catcher with a grid on top will help keep paving clean. we have to take the public into consideration when cutting as they also breath in the dust. :;):
Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 11:13 am
by Tony McC
It's relatively easy to control/manage the slurry, compared to dust. A bench-mounted chop-saw is the best cutting method, if you must use a saw, but what we really want to do is convince contractors to go back to the traditional method of using a splitter.
There's a really excellent guidance document put together by John Howe at Interpave (a fellow committee member) that addresses all the issues faced by contractors when it comes to cutting concrete paving. You can download it as a PDF from the Interpave website.
Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 1:18 pm
by surreyhillslandscapes.com
We had a wet cutter on site today, his name is Dan....
Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 9:09 pm
by enigmaenigma
Seanandruby
Whilst a bit of slurry may be preferable to lung disease, the slurry and by product is not without its own problems
Because changing from dry cutting to wet cutting you aren’t eliminating the risk or hazard completely, but merely shape shifting it into another form
What concerned me and why I asked my initial question was due to the thought or fear that you might swap dry cutting for wet cutting, only to find that you swap respiratory illness or injury for a different occupational illness or injury such as contact dermatitis or the like instead
Due to operatives or supervisors being far to preoccupied in only addressing the single objective or mischief of respiratory problems associated with dry cutting, and their failing to appreciated the new risks that are associated with wet cutting or the proper precautions that they must take
In addition to that I was also concerned in relation to the legal problems, in relation to environmental concerns or issues involved in wet cutting
Or to put it bluntly
Just imagine the slurry and water being carelessly allowed to run freely from a domestic job and find its way into the street drain – now imagine the evil grin upon the face of the man from the environmental section or the local council sat up the road, as they thumb thru their big book of fines to find one that fits that scenario
And last but not least and probably more for larger contracts or those covered by CDM, the slurry would still need some form of data safety sheet for COSHH – that could create a whole new set of headaches for all involved
Don’t get me wrong and I’m not being awkward or trying to rain on the parade of what’s being done here by mentioning these items above, but trying to demonstrate that my questions and fears about the slurry are valid
Because as you can see the swap from dry to wet is simply changing one hazard or risk for a new one instead, one which could be worse due to peoples lack of understanding of that new risk or complacency about it
Tony McC
Whilst the Interpave leaflet was very informative it did only pay lip service to the precautions in relation to the slurry and the fact that that is still a hazard or risk to health,and responsibilities in relation to its disposal
And whilst I fully concede that the pictures showed the wet cutter decked out in waterproof kit that must have met all the requirements, I do feel that it sometimes takes a more direct approach so that everyone understands what’s involved or needed
That was part of my initial concern
Whether as an industry it was aware of the new risks and responsibilities that are created with wet cutting or whether doing that or adding that into your literature could create information overload
all the best 
Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2008 6:56 am
by seanandruby
Thank you for pointing that out eni. although you are correct wet cement etc can cause other problems they are hardly life threatening. proper ppe would eliminate, or, lessen the chances of skin disease. once "contained" the slurry is easily disposed of. Respiratory disease is a killer mate , make no mistake. at the end of the day it is down to the men on site to choose, this is what tony and co are trying to do away with.
Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2008 11:58 am
by Edgecraft
Hi
As a regular producer of bright red waste slurry from the rather large paddle mixer used in my extruded edging business, I can confirm that disposal is a real pain !
I realise cutting blocks isn't going to produce as much slurry but I would like to know what the accepted "correct" disposal method for such waste is, because as mentioned in previous posts coloured concrete slurry does tend to stain.
Anyone got there own soak away pit ?
Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2008 2:50 pm
by seanandruby
usually line a skip with polythene for slurry waste, concrete etc. staining is a problem of its own that will have to be dealt with by the individual. Remember..."necessity is the mother of invention"
Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2008 3:42 pm
by Pablo
I reckon a bench saw would be to expensive and time consuming and you still have to wash the bricks once they're cut. Block splitters are great but there are a lot of bricks out there that cannot be cut by them. At the moment we just make a mess and clean as we go then at the end we acid wash with a very dilute solution so as not to harm the brick. The washing helps to settle the jointing sand and lifts the staining perfectly but it's extra work and the market here is very competative. Cutting in one area to contain the mess doesn't work due to dirty footprints. I'm happy to obey the rules but I know it will be years before most of the others around here will do the same.
Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 10:51 pm
by bamboo
woodworkers often use dry vacuum systems in joinery workshops, could this idea be extended to angle grinders etc
Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2008 6:45 pm
by clive
The system we use for cutting is a 9" 110v angle grinder using a dry cutting diamond blade. We use this as it allows use to cut a variety of materials with a great deal of accurecy. Its also lighter which makes it easyer on the back, quieter overall and cheaper to purchase. Whilst the dust can be suppressed using a vac I don't see this as being practical. Any ideas? Although we are committed to improvements in H&S, the thought of wet cutting on a domestic site and all the mess that would make doesn't rearly appeal.
Posted: Wed Mar 19, 2008 12:00 am
by matt h
Whilst dry cutting I made a plywood catchment box and attached an old wickes vax to it. I t was very effective and there was little dust else where. Only trouble was the fine dust kept clogging the filter of the vax and it took ages to clean them.. ended up getting several filters and changing them over and just cleaning them at the end of the day. Big site work was always wet cut though and the staining and slurry problems were always a pain, but necessary evil I'm afraid:(