parapet height in workplaces

[gil]

to build parapets in workplaces, and therefore leaving those laid in other cases (inhabitations, malls stadiums etc.) I think it is reasonable to apply Legislative Decree 17/2010 also called Machine Directive which then refers to uni en114122. that in conclusions establish that the parapet should be 110 cm tall.

However, there is also the d.lgs 81/2008 (security on the workplace) which indicates as height for the parapets 100 cm.

to me they seem two contradictory directions. I am told that if the parapet is not protective of the machine and does not lead to it, the less stringent norm applies. However, in a workplace, it seems obvious that the routes lead to some sort of machinery. or what are they doing?
just in case there is a path that only leads to the bathroom, I can understand the exception. But obviously there's something I miss.

I ask to make some explanations about this. when I hang the 110cm high parapet and when the 100cm?

 

[TETRASTORE]

to me they seem two contradictory directions. I am told that if the parapet is not protective of the machine and does not lead to it, the less stringent norm applies. However, in a workplace, it seems obvious that the routes lead to some sort of machinery.

in the industrial field there are various applications of catwalks with parapet in addition to those previewed for access to machinery.
a very widespread is the industrial loft (see attached image) for which the minimum height of the parapet of 1 meter is expected.
I refer you to two links that I think can give comprehensive answers to your questions.parapets a matter of height (suva)The Parapete (Sweet)

 

[gil]

Thank you. I read what I propose before further considerations.

 

[New Rider]

hi, I would say that if I have to design and install on a machine a parapet I would go to dimension it with the machine directive and therefore with uni114122. If I have to install a parapet in an industrial environment I would go to dimensional it with Legislative Decree 81. it is not said that the parapet installed in industrial environment is part of the machine.
However, dlgs.81 speaks of ''normal', which means that the same has a useful height of at least one meter.
therefore also the 110 cm parapet that you speak of can be considered '' normal parapet''.
so if I have to certify the machine (being manufacturer) I will apply the 110 cm. If I have to protect a pedestrian crossing between two machines, I will apply a normal 'parapetto' of at least 100cm.

 

[Legs]

The precondition is that outside the machinery directive the uni 14122-1-2-3-4 is not consistent (because it is not mentioned in other rules). However, it can be used (because it is a harmonised standard published in the European gazette) when precise use destinations do not go in contrast with those indicated in ntc18. For example, when the parapet acts as a protection for operators who access plants or machinery it is possible to consider the category e2 of ntc18 that does not report a value. This is where the uni14122 comes into play for the indication of the project load. load of 0,30 kn/m (for warehouses e1 the value is at least 1.0kn/m. so there is a good difference).
just the example made by new rider is the one where you can apply the one and therefore it is the typical case where you do the parapet by 1,1m sized for 0,30 kn/m.
When you order the parapets. normally they are supplied according to the uni 14122-3 for the simple passage of the operators (category e2). always specify the desired destination and height to avoid any misunderstanding.

 

[Steppermotor]

I also use 1100mm tube axis (42mm) and no certificater has ever contested.

 

[gil]

the one 14122-1-2-3-4 is not cogent (because it is not mentioned within other norms).

I believe that the only 14122 is cogent because cited in Legislative Decree 17/2010 (also called Machine Directive).

My problem is when I deal with designers who would like the 1 meter high parapet. I say it would take 1,1 meters, at least around the car. clearly this annoys them, because then they would not want to recognize the variation, therefore they always want to limit the use of 1,1meter high parapets. Unfortunately in Italy many designers do not plan, at most they just tell me "then fall in norm, but change as little as possible".

If we have a walk around a spot (for example banal air treatment plant) I have to use height 1.1meters. Clear.
If there is a walk to get to the spot the parapet is always 1,1 meters high?
If I have 30 meters of catwalk to get to the car I have to do it 1,1 for all 30 meters?
here I do not see indications for example "the parapet of the machine is what is within 3 meters from it, everything else is normal parapet".

This gap puts me in difficulty because designers make barrel discharge on responsibility, but they want to limit to the maximum changes to their 1.0 meters high parapet.
and I don't know how long I can settle them.

where the machine directive applies and when it is normal parapet?
If I'm just passing through, now I'm clear. but if we find ourselves in the above described case with long paths, machines scattered along the way, intervellate from area used to other like unloading goods, deposits, simple steps to get to the bathroom or shelter tools? based on what norm? since I have to justify the choice.

 

[New Rider]

I believe that the only 14122 is cogent because cited in Legislative Decree 17/2010 (also called Machine Directive).

My problem is when I deal with designers who would like the 1 meter high parapet. I say it would take 1,1 meters, at least around the car. clearly this annoys them, because then they would not want to recognize the variation, therefore they always want to limit the use of 1,1meter high parapets. Unfortunately in Italy many designers do not plan, at most they just tell me "then fall in norm, but change as little as possible".

If we have a walk around a spot (for example banal air treatment plant) I have to use height 1.1meters. Clear.
If there is a walk to get to the spot the parapet is always 1,1 meters high?
If I have 30 meters of catwalk to get to the car I have to do it 1,1 for all 30 meters?
here I do not see indications for example "the parapet of the machine is what is within 3 meters from it, everything else is normal parapet".

This gap puts me in difficulty because designers make barrel discharge on responsibility, but they want to limit to the maximum changes to their 1.0 meters high parapet.
and I don't know how long I can settle them.

where the machine directive applies and when it is normal parapet?
If I'm just passing through, now I'm clear. but if we find ourselves in the above described case with long paths, machines scattered along the way, intervellate from area used to other like unloading goods, deposits, simple steps to get to the bathroom or shelter tools? based on what norm? since I have to justify the choice.

he said that uni14122 is not cogent outside the machinery directive
I see her so much in practice. if the parapet arrives in the yard together with the car then uni14122.
if I have to install a parapet (from the construction company of turn for example) to protect an air crossing then dlgs/81 or ntc.
in practice if the machine needs to use a parapet to be sure you will need to use uni14122. It is obvious that without parapet the declaration of conformity falls.
The question to ask is... if my car puts it in a mall and use what happens if I work without a parapet?
the air route that need parapet to get to the car will be ''normal' because it does not fall into the certification of the car.

 

[gil]

I happen to provide parapets to be installed near machines (air treatment unit, gas management plants, electrical plants) provided by others, with which I do not have direct contact and that do not produce parapets. therefore the construction company orders the machinery to specialist. and any lofts, catwalks, carpenters. so who provides the machine does it without parapet. I do not know, within what distance from the machine falls the directive indicating parapets 1,1 meters high. so on the basis of what norm do I choose?

 

[New Rider]

Can your air treatment unit be installed on floor? I think so in your statement there will be no parapets in the same 14122. If instead you provide the air treatment unit installed on a dowel embedded in the machine you should use the parapets uni 14122. In this last case, it will be used only and exclusively to support the air treatment unit in question since it will be incorporated into the declaration of conformity.
Finally, if this treatment unit goes to install it on an existing or existing shelf, the same shelf should have normal parapets. (I could install an air treatment unit or other plants or nothing on the wall. . )

 

[gil]

your air treatment unit

It's not mine. machines are installed by the tractor company.

Can it be installed on the floor?

no

(I could install an air treatment unit or other plants or nothing on the wall. . )

But the general enterprise tells me what and where it will be

In this last case, it will be used only and exclusively to support the air treatment unit in question since it will be incorporated into the declaration of conformity.

often the catwalks with parapets have multiple functions, especially if some ten meters long. if there is also the car along the way, you have to take into account it, but it can be a 40-metre long route with so many other things in the car.
so often it happens that the dowel doesn't just need the car.

the unit of air treatment in question since it will be incorporated in the declaration of conformity.

I do not provide the machine so I do not provide any declaration of conformity of the same.

 

[Legs]

I often have to calculate structures like parapets, walkways and stairs made by a couple of manufacturers. In fact in the industrial field it is practically always possible to find a justification for the use of the parapet uni 14122 (not by chance they are called industrial).
But pay attention to the strict respect of use destinations. if even a comma does not fall into the case that you are treating then discard it.
News you ask yourself on the basis of what standard to make the choice outside the machine directive.
the rules that command are ntc18. you must read there the destinations of use (table 3.1.ii). cases not covered or in which the choice is left are usually those that you can cover with one 14122 (choice justified according to Chapter 12 of ntc18. In fact I was referring to the category e2 of loads to be able to use one).
then opens the choice between using the uni14122 or using only ntc18. but it's your choice. what I see is that customers normally turn 90% towards those according to uni14122. I believe for a reason of costs.
then there are cases where you can't use one 14122, even in the industrial field. for example archives and warehouses require a parapet that is not compatible with each other. You have no choice here. Just go ntc18.

 

[gil]

Thank you for your contribution. I would like to ask for some explanations.
Table 3.1.ii indicates "overload values for the different categories of use of buildings", I do not think you indicate what type of parapet to use.

because 90% of customers choose for reason of costs a parapet according to d.lgs 17/2010 - uni1422 high 1,1 meters instead of according to d.lgs 81/2008 high 1 meter? the first should cost more, they are equal but one is higher. not that it is an overwhelming difference however...

 

[Legs]

Table 3.1.ii shows loads for use destinations; including parapet loads.
It is obvious that if the destination requires a load of at least 1.0 kn/m or more you will not be able to use parapets in any way according to a 14122 for the simple reason that they are designed for 0,30kn/m.
but there are some cases not directly covered by this table that can be covered directly by one. It's just for these few cases that you can choose these 1,1m parapets.
the cost difference can be relevant because the parapets one carry a load that is 1/3 of the normal ones. on large quantities the difference is noted. not to mention that those according to one are lighter and more practical to move.

 

[gil]

thanks for the clarification. I will continue to study the subject.

 

[Esselle]

Good morning I attend this discussion to ask if you think you can use the attached components. how do you adjust for the construction of parapets how can you optimize the cost?

 

[gil]

If the product is marked and has certificates on the materials used, I think it can be used. does the card not compute indications on the courses and resistances, therefore the verification of each component falls on the designer? If yes, it is a big problem, since they are custom pieces to detect test and calculate each.

 

[Esselle]

In fact, the legal question is, in my opinion, I find it difficult to overcome. the problem is to optimize the costs of these parapets. How do you behave? what solutions adopted?

 

[gil]

where I work, if we have to build a parapet, this is checked and certified every time.

if using prefabricated solution, the calculations and certificates provided by the manufacturer are used. therefore the verification is limited to the connection between wall and plate of the mount.
for example pharaoh or metra parapets are precast and precalculated and certified solutions.

 

[volaff]

Good evening, everyone.
I read the discussion.
In summary you could do:
- parapet, if it is part of the machine, h = 1100 mm (uni en iso 14122-3) - case of the constructor/designer;
- Parapet, if it is not part of the machine, h = 1000 mm (d.lgs 81/08)? ? ? ?

If they were all 1100 mm tall, I would always respect both regulations.