Accident Analysis and Prevention 48 (2012) 235–245

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Accident Analysis and Prevention

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/aap

Rapid demountable platform (RDP)—A device for preventing fall from height
accidents
Esther Cheung a,∗ , Albert P.C. Chan b,1
a
Housing and Built Environment, College of Humanities and Law, HKU School of Professional and Continuing Education, Room 1008, 10/F, Fortress Tower, 250 King’s Road, North
Point, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China
b
Department of Building and Real Estate, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The prevention of fall from height accidents has long been a popular topic in the field of construction
Received 24 August 2010 safety. Previous research has indicated one of the potential hazards was induced by the use of steel
Received in revised form 8 March 2011 bracket as scaffold support. While researchers are focusing to improve the existing scaffolding system, this
Accepted 20 May 2011
research introduces a newly developed device to minimize fall accidents. The working platform, namely
Rapid Demountable Platform (RDP) can be applied across window frames without fixing anchor bolts.
Keywords:
Emphasizing on the rapid installation/dismantling, the RDP provides another safer option for working
Construction safety
at height. The development of the RDP has incorporated modular concept and aesthetic factor into the
Accident prevention
Fall accidents
design, achieving a more user-friendly platform. Although the RDP is not intended to totally replace
Repair and maintenance the traditional bamboo truss-out scaffold, it is designed to act as an alternative or a supplement to the
Scaffolding existing bamboo truss-out scaffold. The RDP is the first of this kind to minimize fall from height accidents
especially in cities similar to Hong Kong where external working at height is frequently encountered.
© 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
The ageing of buildings in Hong Kong has become an increas-
ing concern for the government and the general public recently.
In order to keep residential buildings in good condition, there is
an increasing demand on proper repair and maintenance of exist-
ing housing stock. The Hong Kong construction industry has shown
significant improvement in safety performance in the last decade.
The number of industrial accidents in the construction industry has
decreased from 14,078 in 1999–3033 in 2008, which demonstrates
an encouraging drop of almost 80% (Labour Department, 2009).
However, fall of person from height has always represented a large
proportion of the fatal accidents, almost half of the total number
of fatal accidents in the construction industry (Labour Department,
2008). In Hong Kong, residential building repair and maintenance
works very much rely on the bamboo truss-out scaffold supported
by steel brackets. Due to height and the existing conditions of the
high-rise buildings, external wall repair and maintenance works are
extremely difficult to undertake. For example, it would be imprac-
tical to use scaffolding towers or equivalent devices which need to
be erected from the ground, to reach a flat say on the 28th floor, for
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +852 2508 8863; fax: +852 2508 6403.
E-mail addresses: e.cheung@hkuspace.hku.hk (E. Cheung),
bsachan@polyu.edu.hk (A.P.C. Chan).
1
Tel.: +852 2766 5814; fax: +852 2766 5131.
a small job such as changing an air conditioner. However, a lot of fall
from height accidents are related to the use of the bamboo truss-
out scaffold/bamboo scaffold (Ming Pao Newspaper, 2005; Oriental
Daily Newspaper, 2005; Apple Daily Newspaper, 2006; Sing Tao
Newspaper, 2007).
The current practice for performing external maintenance work
in Hong Kong is to erect a temporary platform by means of a bamboo
truss-out scaffold supported by steel brackets (Chan et al., 2008).
However, the practice appears to be highly unreliable and a number
of fatal accidents have occurred (Fig. 1). During 1998–2007 there
were a total of fifty-three fatal fall from height accidents which
occurred during repair and maintenance works; amongst these
almost half were related to bamboo scaffolds (Labour Department,
2008). The number of fatal accidents associated with the bamboo
truss-out scaffold has shown that this practice is highly unreli-
able. Chan et al. (2009) identified a number of problems with this
practice. Firstly, there are no standards or specifications for the
steel bracket design. As a result, the strength and quality cannot
be assured or unified. Often workers will make the steel brackets
themselves, or they may purchase them but there are so many dif-
ferent variations available on the market the quality cannot be pre-
dicted. The steel brackets are supposedly secured by three anchor
bolts but the distance of the third anchor bolt is difficult to reach and
hence often workers do without securing it. The quality of anchor
bolts can also vary and workers often opt for those cheaper ver-
sions where the quality cannot be guaranteed. The conditions of the
external walls are unpredictable so the use of the truss-out scaffold

0001-4575/$ – see front matter © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.aap.2011.05.037
236 E. Cheung, A.P.C. Chan / Accident Analysis and Prevention 48 (2012) 235–245
Fig. 1. A worker erecting a traditional bamboo truss-out scaffold at height.
may not always be safe. Safety training for truss-out scaffold work-
ers is not mandatory hence often they work without proper safety
equipment and precautions. The construction of truss-out scaf-
folding is also tedious, hence accidents often occur during the
installation and dismantling instead of while it is being used.
The concept for the Rapid Demountable Platform (RDP) was
developed in a previous project looking at fall from height acci-
dents in repair and maintenance works (Chan et al., 2007). The
findings from this project showed that there was a desperate need
to design/provide an alternative/supplement to the current com-
mon agent for working at height, the bamboo truss-out scaffold. As
a result, this paper reports the development of the RDP which aims
to reduce fall from height accidents especially during repair and
maintenance works. It is hoped that the RDP will provide a more
reliable temporary working platform to enable workers to work at
height externally. It is anticipated that the RDP could be used as
an alternative or a supplement to the traditional bamboo truss-out
scaffold.
2. Prevention of fall accidents
The prevention of fall accidents requires serious attention.
Besides causing bodily harm to workers which may result in
death or disability, the related costs can also be staggering
(Bobick et al., 2010). Therefore, the prevention of fall accidents
should be a primary concern for all stakeholders involved. The
authors of this paper had previously conducted a study analysing
twenty-two fatal accidents associated with fall of persons from
height in repair, maintenance, alteration and addition works in
Hong Kong (Chan et al., 2008). Five strategies were identified
as a result of the study for preventing similar accidents in the
future. These included providing and maintaining a safe system
of work; providing a suitable working platform; providing safety
information/training/instruction/supervision; providing suitable
fall arresting system/anchorage; and maintaining a safe workplace.
Other researchers have also suggested some practical solutions
for reducing construction related fall accidents. These suggestions
have been discussed further in the following sub-sections.
2.1. Training and education
Employee training is crucial to ensuring that the fall protection
program works (Janicak, 1998). Employees should be trained on
the fall hazards in the work-place. Those situations that require fall
protection and the proper system to use should also be addressed.
Training should also include how to properly install, use, test, and
inspect the fall protection systems. This idea was echoed by Janicak
(1998), who believed that prevention activities should include
employee training, the enforcement of the use of fall protection
systems, and inspection and testing of the fall protection system in
use. Howell et al. (2002) asserted that worker training and moti-
vation is the key to prevention, and Howell et al. (2002) described
the essential elements of most safety programs, including training,
responding to regulation, motivation, planning, investigation and
incident analysis.
Martína et al., 2009 conducted a study looking at fall from height
accidents. Their study suggested that training would be the most
effective way to minimise the risks that arise from incorrect posture
and other unsafe behaviours, but it is only effective if conducted
long-term and under controlled perseverance. Another study sug-
gested that specific training should be provided to groups that were
more prone to fall accidents (Dong et al., 2009). The study consid-
ered fatal falls amongst Spanish construction workers. The results
indicated that those construction establishments with fewer than
ten employees were more prone to fall accidents (two out of three
are amongst workers of small establishments). Specific training was
therefore suggested for these workers.
2.2. Devices and technology
Various new technologies and techniques have been adopted
by organizations within the scaffolding industry in an attempt
to prevent falls, such as the above-head fixing clamps, portable
clamps incorporated into a lanyard, inertia reels/blocks, advanced
guardrails and pole systems (Glasgow Caledonian University,
2005).
A leading scaffolding company in Hong Kong has developed a
computerized climbing scaffold (Chan et al., 2006). The invention
is a safe means of carrying out external works. The need for scaf-
fold construction and dismantle is prevented, eliminating many
accidents caused when the scaffolding is not properly erected. The
climbing scaffold can be moved upwards and downwards depend-
ing at which level it is required. The company claims that this
invention has been able to reduce their accident figures as a result
of fall. Nevertheless, this system is more suitable for large scale
scaffolding works.
Another device is the temporary transportable anchor device
which is manufactured knowingly in the U.S. and Europe. A number
of these devices have been introduced jointly by the Labour Depart-
ment and the Occupational Safety and Health Council in Hong Kong
to provide local contractors with a temporary anchor point at work.
Contractors are subsidized to purchase this device on the condition
that from their company one employee will attend a one-day course
on the temporary transportable anchor device, and two employees
will attend a half-day course on bamboo truss-out scaffold safety
(OSHC and LD, 2005). The name of the device has already indicated
that it can be used as a temporary anchor point which is easily
transportable. The device can be fixed to a door frame or a window
frame, a fall arrest system can be connected to the device and if load
is applied to the device it will push against the frame to prevent the
worker from falling (OSHC, 2006).
2.3. Design for safety
Designers should be trained in health and safety issues or such
experts should be recruited to work with the designer at the design
stage (Dalton, 2002). For instance, clients, architects, and engineers
planning renovation or designing new facilities should incorpo-
rate strategically located anchor points on structural members
of buildings for future exterior maintenance and repair work so
anchor drop lines for body belts or harness systems and tiebacks
 E. Cheung, A.P.C. Chan / Accident Analysis and Prevention 48 (2012) 235–245
for suspension scaffold support devices can be used. Drop lines
and tiebacks should be secured to separate anchor points on
structural members (Centers for Disease Control, 1992). Moreover,
Gambatese and Hinze (1999) believed that facility designers can
positively influence construction site safety by integrating safety
considerations into the design process.
2.4. Management efforts
Cattledge et al. (1996) stressed the importance of management
implementation and enforcement of fall protection and preven-
tion measures at the jobsite. The Centers for Disease Control (1992)
also recommended some measures to prevent serious injuries and
fatal falls while working from suspension scaffolds, such as the
inspection of all scaffolds, scaffold components and personal fall
protection equipment before use. They believed that the scaffolds
should be erected, moved, dismantled, or altered only under the
supervision of a competent person. All components of personal fall
protection equipment, including body belts or harnesses, lanyards,
droplines, trolley lines, and points of anchorage should be inspected
by a competent person before use. Any visibly damaged or worn
equipment should be removed from service immediately. The scaf-
fold manufacturers’ guidance regarding the assembly, rigging, and
use of scaffolds should also be strictly followed.
2.5. Collective measures
Kines (2003) suggested that the adoption of collective protec-
tion measures would represent less effort and would ultimately be
more effective for preventing fall accidents. Similarly in Aneziris
et al.’s (2008) study looking at falls from ladders, he proposed ten
preventive measures which could be used collectively. In order
of importance these included (1) Provide adequate anti-slip lad-
ders; (2) Have adequate procedures in place; (3) Carry out yearly
inspection/maintenance program for ladders + spare parts present
(anti-slip shoes); (4) Carry out critical task observation program
for ladder use (placement and protection); (5) Make Available of
ladders of adequate size and type; (6) Provide adequate train-
ing/instruction; (7) Put a Work Permit System in place for working
at height; (8) Enforce Work Preparation (method, tools) for work-
ing at height (for nonstandard jobs, not addressed in procedures);
(9) Put Health Monitoring/assistance program in place (with clear
criteria for working at height); and (10) Provide adequate space and
lay-out for stepping on/off ladder.
This brief review of solutions to fall accidents has provided a
foundation for the development of the RDP. From the review, it is
known that certain practical devices and equipment have also been
used previously and are efficient in preventing fall accidents. These
include portable clamps and guardrails, the concepts of which have
also been incorporated into the design of the RDP. As described in
later sections of this paper, the RDP is fixed by clamping on to the
building’s structural wall. The RDP is also protected by guardrails to
prevent fall of persons and objects. Although the RDP can be used to
prevent fall accidents, the experience and studies identified above
show that the following measures should also be applied to ensure
its safe use: proper use of the RDP which can be achieved by pro-
viding training for the users; use of personal protective equipment;
appropriate design measures (e.g. anchor points included in the
design of building); regular inspection, cleaning and maintenance
of the RDP; and also adequate management support to provide
safety knowledge and measures.
3. Research methodology
An initial version of the RDP was developed by the authors
from a previous research project looking at construction safety for
237
working at height in residential buildings during repair and main-
tenance (Chan et al., 2007). As part of the findings it was realized
that many of these accidents were related to the bamboo truss-out
scaffold. Therefore, an alternative/supplement to the exiting prac-
tice would be needed. Although the authors were convinced that
the RDP would be a long waited breakthrough in the industry, like
any new product it was yet to be refined and tested. This exercise
was conducted by the efforts of three sub-teams within the research
group namely: Implementation Team, Design Team and Structural
Team. The Implementation Team focused on collecting opinions
from government officials, industrial practitioners and end-users
regarding the RDP. This study applies a typical methodology in
construction management research in soliciting information from
various sources (Chow, 2005). Valuable opinions and suggestions
were collected from government officials, senior industrial practi-
tioners and front-line workers through various activities including
workshops, a site visit and interviews. The Design Team focused pri-
marily on refining the design and appearance of the RDP. The design
engineers within this team looked at how components could be
designed so that the whole system would be user-friendly to install,
dismantle, use and transport. The Structural Team was mainly
responsible for ensuring the safety of the RDP. This was conducted
via a series of laboratory tests and analysis to ensure its strength
and stability according to local and international standards and
requirements. The Structural Team also took up the responsibil-
ity of fabricating the RDP. The research team as a whole was led by
the project leader and co-project leader. It was also governed by a
task force comprising of experts from government departments,
estate management companies, trade specialists, construction
companies, as well as other relevant institutes and organizations
(refer to Fig. 2 for organization chart of research team and task
force).
4. Refinement of the initial rapid demountable platform
4.1. Initial version of the rapid demountable platform
The initial version of the RDP was manufactured using readily
available materials in the laboratory. Materials included mainly of
steel and wood. Similar to the final version of the RDP there were
four major units namely:
1. Supporting Frame Unit (SFU);
2. Triangular Frame Unit (TFU);
3. Platform Panels Unit (PPU) and,
4. Railings and Toe- boards Unit (RTU).
The SFU and TFU were used to support the platforms
on either side, these were manufactured using Steel SHS of
40 mm × 40 mm × 3 mm. There were three PPUs made using
wooden planks which rested on the TFUs. The ten railings (six hor-
izontal and four vertical on the sides and front) used galvanized
iron pipes and were connected using pins which were attached
by chains to avoid lose parts. The three toe boards (one on each
side and one on the front) were made using hardwood. The total
weight was 95 kg with the heaviest components being the SFUs
and TFUs.
4.2. Workshop with senior industrial practitioners
Two workshops were conducted to solicit the opinions of both
senior industrial practitioners and front-line workers. These were
held on separate occasions so that the participants could express
their views and ideas more freely amongst their own peers. The first
workshop was conducted with nine senior practitioners responsi-
238 E. Cheung, A.P.C. Chan / Accident Analysis and Prevention 48 (2012) 235–245

Research Team Task Force

Government departments, estate management

Project Leader and
companies, trade specialists, construction companies
Co-project leader

Design Team Structural Team Implementation Team

Team Leader Team Leader Team Leader

(designer) (structural engineer)
Team members and Team members and
research personnel with research personnel with
background in design background in structural
engineering
(project manager)
Team members and
research personnel with
background in project
management

Fig. 2. Organization chart of research team and task force.

ble for working externally at height (Table 1 shows the detailed
profiles of these practitioners). A demonstration of the RDP (initial
version) was conducted and the participants were given the oppor-
tunity to express their opinions and suggestions via a feedback
survey.
In general, the response from the senior industrial practitioners
was positive. A large proportion of the respondents felt that the
RDP would be useful for working at height of old residential build-
ings. Although, there was a slight concern that the bay windows
would limit the accessible working area, in general the respondents
expressed that there was much potential for the RDP to be used
as a replacement to the traditional truss-out scaffold. With safety
being the foremost concern when developing the RDP it was assur-
ing that over half of the respondents strongly agreed that it would
be secure for undertaking external repair and maintenance works.
Although, their perception may not reflect the actual safeness of the
RDP, their confidence in its safety is also important. Other positive
feedback received was that the respondents agreed that the RDP
would be a time-saving and durable device. Although the respon-
dents indicated that the RDP would not be a complex device to use,
they still expected that the RDP would undergo fine tuning before
launching to the market. Suggestions for the refinement included
to reduce the weight which in its current form would be too heavy
to transport and install if made solely of steel. Following this com-
ment the respondents also suggested that other materials such as
aluminum should be considered. And also, they suggested reducing
the number of components which would ease transportation and
installation. To conclude most of the respondents felt comfortable
to recommend the device to their staff.
4.3. Workshop with front-line workers
The second workshop was conducted to solicit opinions on
the RDP (also the initial version) from front-line workers work-
ing externally at height. Their hands-on experience was important
and provided a different angle of looking at the RDP compared
to the senior industrial practitioners. A demonstration video of
the RDP was shown to the twenty-one participants prior to the
discussion session. The participants were divided into groups of
approximately five people and given some predefined questions
related to the safeness, adoptability, fabrication and materials for
discussion. In general, their attitude towards the RDP was also
supportive. Regarding the application of the RDP, the respondents
showed concern over using it for old residential buildings where
the external wall strength cannot always be predicted. Although so,
they believed that the RDP would be convenient and efficient for
small-scale maintenance works compared to the traditional bam-
boo truss-out scaffold. They also believed that it would be easy to
handle, but training should still be supplemented by for example
a half day course regarding its safe and proper use. Although they
welcomed the idea of the RDP, the respondents expressed that the
RDP could not replace the bamboo truss-out scaffold in all situa-
tions for example changing window frames. But for other jobs such
as repairing air-conditioners it could be cheaper than erecting bam-
boo scaffold. Suggestions were proposed from the design point of
view including consider adjustable levels to increase the working
area, dimensions should be flexible for different types of works, and
wooden planks should not be used for the working platform as it
would not durable. From the material point of view the respondents

Table 1
Profiles of senior practitioners.

Position of respondent Working experience of respondent

In construction safety In building repair and maintenance

1 Technical service manager 10 yrs 10 yrs

2 Assistant technical service manager 3 yrs 3 yrs
3 Safety manager 15 yrs Few
4 Associate professor 10 yrs industrial experience, 0 yrs in safety 4 yrs in public building maintenance sector
5 Safety manager >10 yrs Little
6 Chief officer 34 10
7 Executive >30 yrs >30 yrs
8 Promoting & monitoring site safety 12 yrs 6 yrs
9 Anonymous – –
 E. Cheung, A.P.C. Chan / Accident Analysis and Prevention 48 (2012) 235–245 239

suggested that alternative materials such as zinc and aluminum

alloy should be used for the working platform. Also, the working
platform could be designed with sinkholes to prevent water seep-
age. From the installation point of view plastic pads should be fitted
between the screws and inner wall to prevent damage to surfaces,
the railings should be securely fastened so that there would be no
movement from leaning, the locking device should be replaced by
an interlocking system. Similar to the suggestions from the indus-
trial practitioners the front-line workers also suggested that the
number of components should be reduced. Other concerns of the
respondents included the heavy weight of the RDP, and the wooden
planks being unable to withstand long exposure to sunlight. The
respondents felt that the RDP would be limited to the window
size and access level. The respondents expressed their interest in
using the RDP if its safeness for working at height could be certified
by recognized certification bodies. Lastly, they suggested a rental
scheme rather than having to purchase it as storage would be a
consideration. Fig. 3. Perspective of the RDP.

4.4. Site visit to the machinery workshop

The research team was invited to visit a machinery workshop of
a local large property firm. The purpose of the visit was to observe
the firm’s own devised working platform and also to learn from
their skills of aluminum welding. A temporary working platform
supported by a vertical prop had been designed by this firm. The
installation and dismantling procedures of their working platform
was demonstrated to the research team. The research team gained
insights regarding the materials and techniques adopted. Strain
tests conducted in their workshop indicated that the bearing capac-
ity of aluminum frames were comparable to that of steel frames.
This result was encouraging for steel to be replaced by alternative
lighter materials such as aluminum.
4.5. Interviews with government officials
Two interviews were conducted with relevant government
departments. The purpose of these interviews was to consult the
feasibility of launching the RDP. The first interview was conducted
with the Executive Director of a local council and his colleague.
They expressed that any products intended to be subsidized by
their council would only be considered subsequent to the approval
of the local Labour Department. They raised their concern over this
approval as there are no unique international standards or specifi-
cations on the proposed RDP. Moreover, they further commented
on the sole distributor arrangement which might cause a lack of
competition in the market. According to their experience, the sub-
sidization approval should be made more difficult owing to the
sole distributor. Also, they doubted about who should take up the
responsibility of insurance. In case of purchase, owners should be
fully responsible for the insurance. If the RDP is rented, the contrac-
tor or workers should purchase the third party insurance similar to
the usual practice as in car rental.
The second interview was conducted with a senior structural
engineer of a local works department. He believed that the research
team should have thorough understanding of the market on the
demand of the RDP before the manufacturing stage. Preparation
works such as patent application and certification of laboratory
testing should be ready as the first step. Similar to the previous
interviewee, he also expressed that approval from the local Labour
Department should be sought. Further, the concept of “agent” could
be fused into the launch process. The employment of an agent could
assist in the marketing and liaison duties with external contractors
or relevant government departments. Besides, he supported that
the RDP should fall into the category of “minor works” under the
local Buildings Department.
5. Design of the rapid demountable platform
The RDP (Fig. 3) was designed as a new revolutionary alter-
native/supplement to overcome the potential problems observed
with the bamboo truss-out scaffold. It provides a safe, rapidly
installed/demountable temporary working platform for undertak-
ing outdoor activities in high-rise buildings. This section presents
how the views and opinions gathered from the workshops, site visit
and interviews have been incorporated into the refined RDP.
5.1. The key components
In the fabrication of the RDP, structural steel and aluminum alloy
were adopted as the major structural materials. Structural steel was
chosen due to its durability and ability to withstand strength. But
to produce the RDP entirely with structural steel would be bulky.
Hence stainless steel was used to replace some of the components
in order to reduce the overall weight of the RDP. To replace all the
components with stainless steel would not be able to ensure the
same level of safety anticipated, therefore a combination of these
materials was believed to be the most suitable choice. The railings
were made of stainless steel pipes; and the platform panels and
toe-boards were aluminum alloy. The key components remain the
same and include: Supporting Frame Unit (SFU) (Fig. 4); Triangular
Frame Unit (TFU) (Fig. 5); Platform Panels Unit (PPU) (Figs. 6 and 7)
and, Railing Panels and Toe-boards Unit (RTU) (Figs. 8 and 9).
The SFU and TFU were manufactured using Square
Hollow Sections (SHS) of 50 mm × 30 mm × 3 mm and
25 mm × 25 mm × 2.5 mm, respectively with Grade S355 steel.
Three square PPUs made by aluminum alloy rest on the TFUs.
Four sets of railing panels in stainless steel were slotted into the
sockets and were securely fastened by pins. The five toe-boards
were also made of aluminum alloy. The total weight of the RDP
is approximately 81 kg. The SFUs are the heaviest unit amongst
the four but they are divided into parts and can be easily installed
from inside of a building.
5.2. Installing/dismantling procedures
The installing/dismantling procedures of the refined RDP are
described as follows:
1. Set up the SFU to the parapet wall through the window frame.
The SFU can be adjusted to appropriate height. Gently tighten
the screws on the SFU to bear against the wall (Figs. 10 and 11).
240 E. Cheung, A.P.C. Chan / Accident Analysis and Prevention 48 (2012) 235–245

Fig. 6. Platform Panels Unit (PPU).

Fig. 7. Platform Panels Unit (PPU).

Fig. 4. Supporting Frame Unit (SFU).

Fig. 5. Triangular Frame Unit (TFU).

Fig. 8. Railing Panels and Toe-boards Unit (RTU).
 E. Cheung, A.P.C. Chan / Accident Analysis and Prevention 48 (2012) 235–245
Fig. 9. Railing Panels and Toe-boards Unit (RTU).
Fig. 10. Exterior SFU Setting.
2. Install the TFU to the SFU at the desired level. Insert the anchor
pin into the slot at the top of the TFU and SFU (Figs. 12 and 13).
Repeat Steps 1 and 2 for the other end of the RDP system.
3. Install the PPU to the TFU. Slot each set of RTU to the SFU and
secure by the pin on the socket (Figs. 14 and 15).
4. Interlock the RTU by the pre-installed locking system on the rail-
ing panels. Check the tightness of the screws of the SFUs (Figs.
16 and 17).
The dismantling procedures are only the reverse of Steps 1–4.
Such a design is handy in that it could be easily erected by one single
worker from inside a building.
Fig. 11. Adjust to appropriate height.
241
Fig. 12. Install the TFU to the SFU.
Fig. 13. Anchor pin into the slot.
5.3. Special/innovative features of the RDP
The special features incorporated into the design of the RDP
can be considered according to five main groups. These include
safety which refers to the safe installation from within buildings
(Fig. 18), user friendliness which includes the quick process instal-
lation/dismantling (Fig. 19) modular design which has adopted
compact modular design and standardized components (Fig. 20),
product semantics meaning that components are coordinated by a
Fig. 14. Install the PPU to the TFU.
242 E. Cheung, A.P.C. Chan / Accident Analysis and Prevention 48 (2012) 235–245

Fig. 15. Secure the PPU and TFU by Pin. Fig. 17. Install toe-boards to the PPU.

Fig. 16. Install railing panels to the PPU. Fig. 18. Safety features of the RDP.

Moreover, the risk of falling objects was another important con-

color scheme for clear identification and assembling procedures
(Fig. 21), and lastly innovation demonstrated by the innovative
interlocking system (Fig. 22).
5.3.1. Safety
Safety was the main concern in the design of the RDP. The simple
but critical prime considerations in the design of the RDP were that
it had to be mounted firmly onto the walls and that the workers
were able to install and dismantle it from within the building.
sideration in the RDP installation process. Therefore, safety hooks
could be found in each part of the RDP. Users were required to hook
each part when they were doing the installation process. So, safety
could be ensured from this aspect. Also, toe-boards were covered
on outer boundary and linked with the railing base. It prevented
the components of the RDP to be accidentally dropped from the
working platform.
The platform panels were made of aluminum, which provides a
strong support for the working environment. It was more durable

Fig. 19. Speed of installation and removal for RDP.

 E. Cheung, A.P.C. Chan / Accident Analysis and Prevention 48 (2012) 235–245 243

Fig. 20. Modular design of RDP.

and suitable for outdoor working environment because the util-
ity of the platform was greatly improved. Correspondingly, the
total cost could be lower and it could be more bearable to nor-
mal wear and tear. Sinkholes of the panels were provided to stop
water from cumulating on the platform. The sinkholes also formed
a non-slippery surface to avoid users from slipping in a soggy envi-
ronment.
5.3.2. User friendliness
User-friendliness in installing and dismantaling the RDP rapidly
were the key considerations of the invention. Hence the name
“RDP” also incorporates “rapid” and “demountable” to highlight
these features. For example, equipment for working at height
should be simple in nature because a complicated process would
affect the effectiveness and efficiency of the RDP installation. There-
fore, safe and fast locking systems were designed for the RDP. One
of the features was the simple locking device which could ensure all
parts were well locked systematically. Its quick release system was
essential too. In particular, there were no loose parts (such as pins).
All of the moveable and detachable small parts were well-fixed to
the main body or parts of the RDP. This design feature prevented
fall accidents during installation and dismantling of the RDP. As a
whole, it was expected a high recognition from workers towards
the RDP could be gained.
5.3.3. Modular design
The RPD was specially designed so that each part would have
a standard style. The workers could set up the RDP easily without
any obstacles because of the simplicity and uniqueness of the parts
from the appearance, length, size, material, etc. Through simple
244 E. Cheung, A.P.C. Chan / Accident Analysis and Prevention 48 (2012) 235–245

Table 2
Comparisons between bamboo truss-out scaffold and RDP.

Attributes Bamboo truss-out RDP

scaffold

Material Bamboo and wooden Steel, aluminum panels

planks and railings
Have to carry through Light weight and tidy
living areas
Durability Limited life Compact, durable and
repeated usage
Engineering design Trade practices Yes
Need for anchor bolts Yes, at least three Not required
pieces
Damage to external Yes No
walls
Installation place Outside the building Inside the building
Risk of falling objects High, especially with Minimal
many loose parts
Training requirements Skillful bamboo Any workers with
Fig. 21. Product semantics of RDP. for erector scaffolders adequate training
Cost $2000–$3000 per time $6000–$10,000 per set
Speed of erection 3 h for erection, 2 h for 10–15 min each for
removal by two erection and removal
training and assistance of the installation procedures, the workers
scaffolders by one competent
could grasp the installation skills easily. worker
Security risk High Minimal

5.3.4. Product semantics Note: HK$1 = USD0.1288 approximately on 9 August 2010.

Product semantics was one of the emphases in the RDP. The
dimensions of the railings and platform (e.g. thickness) were care-
fully designed for the loading needs. Moreover, the design of each
part of the RDP was specially considered to give clear messages to
workers on how to use it. For example, looking at the interlocking
system of the railing panels, workers could easily understand and
recognize how the system should be operated. The bright florescent
colors and the hatching lines/patterns of the toe-boards caught the
attention of the workers to prevent accidents. In summary, quantity
and quality were two pivotal elements in the design that enabled
workers to use it with confidence.
5.3.5. Innovation
As mentioned in previous sections of this paper the RDP was
designed after much research. As a result, several breakthroughs
were achieved in the design of the RDP. For example, a new inter-
locking system was applied for securing railing panels together in a
safe and also convenient way. The system was attached at the top of
each railing panel, providing flexible lock with horizontal rotations.
Workers could fix all railings together through the interlocking sys-
tem. Moreover, the toe-boards were designed not only to serve as
a guard to prevent falling of objects and accidents. They were also
used to secure the platform panels in position; that is no additional
device was required to satisfy the latter function.

6. Advantages over the traditional system

The RDP provides a safe and user-friendly (i.e. user-oriented,

Fig. 22. Innovative locking devises of railings for RDP.
fast and easy to install/dismantle) temporary working platform
for general external building inspection, repair and maintenance
works. The device can be used in any country with old residential
buildings where it can rest on a window frame and be clamped to
the wall. The RDP is feasible for use on small-scale maintenance
works such as external building inspection, to act as a tempo-
rary working platform for installing bamboo truss-out scaffold
(alternative), for changing air-conditioning units, maintenance on
plumbing/drainage systems, painting, plastering, tiling/rendering,
fixing of water seepage, etc.
Despite the popularity of using bamboo truss-out platforms in
the current practice, they are risky because workers have to climb
out of a building to erect them. The RDP could be installed from
inside a building. By not requiring anchor bolts to fix the triangu-
lar steel brackets onto the building exterior wall, the demountable
platform eliminates the risks of structural failure of the anchor
bolts or collapse of the entire platform due to pull-out forces of
the anchor bolts.
The platform would cost from HK$6000 to HK$10,000 per set,
while the bamboo alternative costs from HK$2000 to HK$3000
per time. Although the demountable platform incurs a higher
initial capital cost, it could last for at least five years if prop-
erly maintained; while a bamboo platform could be used only
two or three times. Given the price, an RDP costs only HK$2000
every year. If it is used 10–20 times, every usage costs only a
 E. Cheung, A.P.C. Chan / Accident Analysis and Prevention 48 (2012) 235–245
few hundred dollars (Note: HK$1 = USD0.1288 approximately on
9 August 2010).
Installation and dismantling of the RDP was trialed under a lab-
oratory environment. The RDP was quicker to install and dismantle
than a bamboo platform. It could be erected in around 10 min,
while a bamboo platform could take three hours to erect and two
hours to dismantle according to experienced scaffolders. Therefore
at the end of each working day, the worker could dismantle the
RDP without much hassle, thereby ensuring peace of mind to the
occupier of the apartment requiring maintenance works and avoid
potential break-in cases if a bamboo platform was left outside the
building.
The platform is engineer-designed capable to withstand a
weight of 200 kg (equivalent to 2 kPa). However, the platform
also has its limitations in that it could not be used in bay win-
dows or on windows with a planter; it could not reach around
corners and is not as flexible in various shapes as a bamboo
platform.
A comprehensive comparison between the RDP and the tradi-
tional bamboo truss-out scaffold is presented in Table 2.
7. Conclusion
The RDP is a brand-new device which is particularly suited
to small-scale external maintenance works involving working at
height. It does not cause damage to the external wall; and further-
more, this device could eliminate the necessity to hire a separate
trade to erect the bamboo truss-out scaffold which is always costly
on small-scale projects. The RDP does not aim to replace the tra-
ditional working method, instead it can act as a supplement or
alternative for small-scale maintenance works. It is anticipated that
launching the RDP will greatly help to enhance the safeness of
working at height in Hong Kong as well as other countries facing
similar obstacles.
Acknowledgement
The work described in this paper was jointly funded by a grant
from the Construction Industry Institute, Hong Kong and The Hong
Kong Polytechnic University. The authors would like to express
sincere thanks to the workshop participants, interviewees and
advisers of this research project. In addition, the support from other
research team members (Prof. Francis K.W. Wong, Dr. Michael C.H.
Yam, Dr. Daniel W.M. Chan, Ir. Albert W.K. Kwok, Mr. W.C. Lee, Mr.
Pete C.W. Wong, Prof. Michael K.W. Siu and Mr. Paul Lo) for their
valuable input throughout this study is acknowledged.
The authors are also grateful to those bodies that have awarded
the following prizes for the invention of the RDP: • Outstanding
Professional Services and Innovation Awards from the Institute for
Enterprise, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University on 29 October
2009. • Innovation Achievers Award from the Chartered Institute
of Building (CIOB) in Englemere, United Kingdom on 14 May 2009.
• Gold Medal with the Congratulations of the Jury and a National
Authority for Scientific Research Award of the Romania Ministry
of Education at the 36th International Exhibition of Inventions,
New Techniques and Products held in Geneva, Switzerland on
2–6 April 2008. • Research and Youth for the High Scientific and
Technological Level of the Invention at the 36th International Exhi-
bition of Inventions, New Techniques and Products held in Geneva,
Switzerland on 2–6 April 2008.
245
References
Aneziris, O.N., Papazoglou, I.A., Baksteen, H., Mud, M., Ale, B.J., Bellamy, L.J., Hale,
A.R., Bloemhoff, A., Post, J., Oh, J., 2008. Quantified risk assessment for fall from
height. Safety Science 46 (2), 198–220.
Apple Daily Newspaper, 2 December 2006. (English Transla-
tion: Process of Scaffold Collapse at Tai Wor Centre), Hong Kong.
Bobick, T.G., McKenzie Jr., E.A., Kau, T.Y., 2010. Evaluation of guardrail for preventing
falls through roof and floor holes. Journal of Safety Research 41 (3), 203–211.
Cattledge, G.H., Hendricks, S., Stanevich, R., 1996. Fatal occupational falls in the
U.S. construction industry, 1980–1989. Accident Analysis and Prevention 28 (5),
647–654.
Centers for Disease Control, August 1992. Request for Assistance in Preventing
Worker Injuries and Deaths Caused by Falls from Suspension Scaffolds. U.S.
Department of Health and Human Resources.
Chan, A.P.C., Wong, F.K.W., Cheung, E., Choy, E.W.K., Chung, T.S.K., Kwok, A.W.K.,
Lam, E.W.M., Lee, W.C., Liu, C.H., Lo, P.C.H., Siu, M.K.W., Wong, P.C.W., Yam,
M.C.H., 2009. Developing a Prototype for the Rapid Demountable Platform (RDP),
Stage II of CII-HK Research on “Construction Safety Involving Working at Height
for Residential Building Repair and Maintenance”, Research Summary, CII-HK
Research Report No.14, April 2009, Construction Industry Institute, Hong Kong,
ISBN 1978-988-9558-7-8.
Chan, A.P.C., Wong, F.K.W., Chan, D.W.M., Yam, M.C.H., Kwok, A.W.K., Lam, E.W.M.,
Cheung, E., 2008. Work at height fatalities in the repair, maintenance, minor
alteration, and addition (RMAA) sector. Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management, ASCE 134 (July (7)), 527–535.
Chan, A.P.C., Wong, F.K.W., Chan, D.W.M., Yam, M.C.H., Kwok, Yiu, E.C.Y., Chan,
E.H.W., Lam, E.W.M., Cheung, E., 2007. Construction Safety – Construction Safety
Involving Working at Height for Residential Building and Repair, Research Sum-
mary, CII-HK Research Report No.9, November 2007, Construction Industry
Institute, Hong Kong, ISBN 988-98153-9-7.
Chan, A.P.C., Wong, F.K.W., Chan, D.W.M., Yam, M.C.H., Kwok, Yiu, E.C.Y., Chan,
E.H.W., Lam, E.W.M., Cheung, E., 2006. Construction Safety - Construction Safety
Involving Working at Height for Residential Building and Repair, Full Report,
June 2006, Construction Industry Institute, Hong Kong.
Chow, L.K., 2005. Incorporating Fuzzy membership functions and gap analysis con-
cept into performance evaluation of engineering Consultants, Hong Kong Study,
Unpublished PhD Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, The University of
Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administration Region.
Dalton, 2002. Fatal Accidents in the Irish Construction Industry 1991–2001: A Survey
of Contributory Factors. Health and Safety Authority, 71 p.
Dong, X.S., Fujimoto, A., Ringen, K., Men, Y., 2009. Fatal falls among His-
panic construction workers. Accident Analysis and Prevention 41,
1047–1052.
Gambatese, J., Hinze, J., 1999. Addressing construction workers safety in the design
phase. Automation in Construction 8 (6), 643–649.
Glasgow Caledonian University, 2005. A technical guide to the selection and use
of fall prevention and arrest equipment, Health and Safety Executive (HSE)
Research Report 302, 311 p.
Howell, G.A., Ballard, G., Abdelhamid, T.S., Mitropoulos, P., August 2002. Working
near the edge: a new approach to construction safety. In: Proceedings IGLC-10
, Gramado, Brazil, pp. 1–12.
Janicak, C.A., 1998. Fall-related deaths in the construction industry. Journal of Safety
Research 29 (1), 35–42.
Kines, P., 2003. Case studies of occupational falls from heights: cognition and behav-
ior in context. Journal of Safety Research 34, 263–271.
Labour Department, August 2009. Occupational Safety and Health Bulletin Issue No.
9. Occupational Safety and Health Branch, Labour Department.
Labour Department, 2008. Accidents in the Construction Industry of Hong Kong
(1998–2007). Accident Analysis and Information Division, Occupational Safety
and Health Branch, Labour Department, The Hong Kong Special Administrative
Region Government.
Martína, J.E., Rivasb, T., Matíasc, J.M., Taboadab, J., Argüellesb, A., 2009. A Bayesian
network analysis of workplace accidents caused by falls from a height. Safety
Science 47 (2), 206–214.
Ming Pao Newspaper, 2005. (English Translation:
Scaffold Worker Falls to Death Before Safety Belt is Used), Hong Kong.
Occupational Safety and Health Council (OSHC), 2006. Protection Against Falls From
a Height – Anchor Devices—Requirements and Testing.
Occupational Safety and Health Council (OSHC), Labour Department (LD), 2005.
(Chinese Ver-
sion Only: Temporary Transportable Anchor Device Subsidy Scheme for Repair
and Maintenance, Medium and Small Enterprises).
Oriental Daily Newspaper, 2005. (Scaffold Falls to Death
from Seventh Floor), Hong Kong.
Sing Tao Newspaper, 6 January 2007. (Worker
Falls to Death During Ex-gambler King’s Posh Flat Renovation), Hong Kong.