Question for plant operators and fleet managers about Human Form Recognition

[HarrieBrigade]

Hello all - Harrie from Brigade Electronics here.

I hope it's OK to ask a question rather than simply promote one of our products.

We've been having a lot more conversations recently around Human Form Recognition, particularly since companies such as Balfour Beatty introduced HFR requirements for certain vehicles and plant.


One thing which keeps coming up is that operators aren't necessarily questioning the benefits of HFR, but are asking what are they supposed to do with fleets that already have perfectly good camera systems installed.

Some have considered or are replacing entire systems, others are waiting until vehicles and equipment get replaced and many are looking at retrofit options.


I'd genuinely be interested to hear how people on here are approaching it (if at all) and what your thoughts are. If you've already had to comply with HFR requirements, what did you do and why?

 

[Mick-the-fitter]

Hi, interesting post, is this something that will become HSE legal, or preference by the owner? We deal with to customers at the moment with such systems fitted, the only feedback we seem to get is, they have been fitted by a third party and not very well!

 

[HarrieBrigade]

Hi, interesting post, is this something that will become HSE legal, or preference by the owner? We deal with to customers at the moment with such systems fitted, the only feedback we seem to get is, they have been fitted by a third party and not very well!

That's a really good question.

At the moment, HFR isn't a legal requirement under HSE legislation. What we're seeing is customer-led adoption, with some major contractors introducing HFR requirements for certain plant and vehicle operations as part of their own safety standards.

What's particularly interesting is that the technology is now being discussed much more widely across the industry. The Construction Industry Plant Safety Group (working alongside the HSE) recently developed industry good practice guidance for Human Form Recognition Systems, which went out for public consultation before being published.

So, while it's not a legal requirement today, there is clearly a wider industry conversation taking place around how HFR should be specified, installed and managed as the technology matures.

Your point about third-party installations is a really important one too. Like any safety system, correct installation, calibration and commissioning make all the difference. Out of interest, were the issues you've seen with the installation itself, or with the performance of the HFR system once it was fitted?

 

[Lancs Lad]

@JD450A is your man for HFR

 

[JD450A]

Great systems, fantastic for distracting operators with additional screens and noises.....

 

[Furniss]

hfr ?

 

[Smiffy]

Great systems, fantastic for distracting operators with additional screens and noises.....

Definitely not. What we are really after is system with a minimum of 5 different colour flashing lights. We dont just want the amber and the seat belt light. We need to have a light to indicate to ensure the operator is wearing their hard hat in the cab. As well as a separate light for hi vis. We find it very alarming the amount of operators who can't see the clear danger of taking a hard hat off whilst sat in a 30t machine loading lorries from on top of the pile. I also think it's prevalent to have an array of light up graffics around the machine as we repeatedly have problems with operatives being unable to see 20t of bright orange hitachi and walking into its working radius. I feel a 4in round stop symbol will be far easier to see. On top of this we think breatherlisers should be installed as we like to employ the type of characters who can't be trusted not to have whiskey on their wheatabix. And a few more light up screens, led light bars and buzzing and beeping boxes is far better for company image and LinkedIn posts than actual implementing both a quality screening process for potential heavy equipment operators. It also allows us to avoid those inconveniences and potentially profit affecting task like rigorous training regimes. Whilst allowing us to pay ourselves on the back and give management the bonuses they deserve for being forward thinking when it comes it comes to health and safety.

 

[Lancs Lad]

Definitely not. What we are really after is system with a minimum of 5 different colour flashing lights. We dont just want the amber and the seat belt light. We need to have a light to indicate to ensure the operator is wearing their hard hat in the cab. As well as a separate light for hi vis. We find it very alarming the amount of operators who can't see the clear danger of taking a hard hat off whilst sat in a 30t machine loading lorries from on top of the pile. I also think it's prevalent to have an array of light up graffics around the machine as we repeatedly have problems with operatives being unable to see 20t of bright orange hitachi and walking into its working radius. I feel a 4in round stop symbol will be far easier to see. On top of this we think breatherlisers should be installed as we like to employ the type of characters who can't be trusted not to have whiskey on their wheatabix. And a few more light up screens, led light bars and buzzing and beeping boxes is far better for company image and LinkedIn posts than actual implementing both a quality screening process for potential heavy equipment operators. It also allows us to avoid those inconveniences and potentially profit affecting task like rigorous training regimes. Whilst allowing us to pay ourselves on the back and give management the bonuses they deserve for being forward thinking when it comes it comes to health and safety.

I think that's the last we'll see of our new friend

 

[V8Druid]

as with all of this tish, it is only necessary due to the complete demise of common sense and the total annihilation of self preservation instincts in anyone under circa 40 years of age.
weened by a nanny state, they can't think for themselves, or recognise danger until they're about to be carted off in the meat wagon or 6 feet under

I survived growing up without all this crap, as did many others here

 

[Lancs Lad]

as with all of this tish, it is only necessary due to the complete demise of common sense and the total annihilation of self preservation instincts in anyone under circa 40 years of age.
weened by a nanny state, they can't think for themselves, or recognise danger until they're about to be carted off in the meat wagon or 6 feet under

I survived growing up without all this crap, as did many others here

They could solve a huge amount of stupid accidents in one hit.... mandatory morning drug tests... Slight problem tho...they'd have no staff .
That's from the horses mouth of a mate running a large gang

 

[JD450A]

They could solve a huge amount of stupid accidents in one hit.... mandatory morning drug tests... Slight problem tho...they'd have no staff .
That's from the horses mouth of a mate running a large gang

HS2 apparently you can buy your baggies off some of the gangers and managers

 

[Jimbo69]

I say we should go back to letting natural selection sort it out.

 

[Smiffy]

HS2 apparently you can buy your baggies off some of the gangers and managers

Probably also sell you the clean cup of piss as well.

 

[Gunners]

That's a really good question.

At the moment, HFR isn't a legal requirement under HSE legislation. What we're seeing is customer-led adoption, with some major contractors introducing HFR requirements for certain plant and vehicle operations as part of their own safety standards.

What's particularly interesting is that the technology is now being discussed much more widely across the industry. The Construction Industry Plant Safety Group (working alongside the HSE) recently developed industry good practice guidance for Human Form Recognition Systems, which went out for public consultation before being published.

So, while it's not a legal requirement today, there is clearly a wider industry conversation taking place around how HFR should be specified, installed and managed as the technology matures.

Your point about third-party installations is a really important one too. Like any safety system, correct installation, calibration and commissioning make all the difference. Out of interest, were the issues you've seen with the installation itself, or with the performance of the HFR system once it was fitted?

Harrie, your going to get a lot of stick on here - basically, from an operator point of view, the systems fitted (personally I've only used the safety shield system) are a hinderance and annoyance to our working day.

The fact is, its always been an operators job to not hit a pedestrian. Be they the man your working with on the ground, or a random member of the site team who amble into your work area - usually totally oblivious to the hazards. I get the idea that the human form recognition system should in theory help us as its constantly monitoring for pedestrians and may well spot an intruder before the operator does.

However in practice, the thing is almost constantly going off! If its to become a truly useful piece of technology, then maybe the operator should be able to set it up to suit his work. If working alone then a full 360 scanning area would be appropriate. But say your working on drainage - a job that requires a banksman to be constantly within the working radius of the machine, maybe being able to turn off the front area would be useful. Certainly more useful than the system constantly telling me someone is there when I already know that! Very tiring after a full days work....

The real issue of course is the age old problem of people getting too close to plant in the first place! I'm a big believer in removing the hazard entirely, which then means you don't need to have secondary any safety measures such as HFR systems. You can achieve this with training, fencing, utilising technology to reduce the need for ground crew, and many other ways.

But we live in an age where we have to allow for the stupidity of people. Be that pedestrians and operators. And therefore we need to assume everyone is stupid (even though trained) and fit fool proof systems that cant be altered, rather than allow the operator to decide where the tech is useful to him or not.
I would actually have a system on my backhoe if I could configure it to be useful rather than annoying. Imagine if it worked only when reversing - which with the arm folded up behind you, is the more risky part of driving that machine. Cameras are good, so a mirrors, but they don't see everything and you cant watch them all at the same time. A warning to tell me someone is close when reversing would be genuinely useful. But do I need it all the time? No!

 

[V8Druid]

I say we should go back to letting natural selection sort it out.

absolutely .... population control at its best ... soon reduce it by a couple of million

 

[6feetdown]

hfr ?

How f****ng rong obviously

 

[JD450A]

How f****ng rong obviously

Heavy Faggot Restructuring