Productivity, Efficiency, Safety

Productivity, Efficiency, Safety

The impact of mast climbing work platforms

Interview with Dale Stoddard

 

Dale Stoddard is president of Intervect USA(Bridgeport, Conn.) manufacturer of HEK mast climbing work platforms and Alimak construction hoists. Stoddard formerly worked for Manitowoc Cranes and Bechtel. He has been president of Intervect USA since 2002. You can contact him at dstoddard@intervect.com.

 

 

September 15, 2004 • Use of mast climbing work platforms is in its infancy in the United States, while the popularity of scaffolding still holds strong. With mast climbers' safety aspects and overall efficiency basically handed to users on a silver platter, why would contractors continue to insist on using scaffolding? Dale Stoddard, president of Intervect USA (Bridgeport, Conn.), answers these questions and more in an interview with Lift and Access's Katie Parrish.

 

click to enlarge A HEK dual-mast MSM Super mast climber used on a recent jobsite in Baltimore.

“We believe here, with notably few exceptions, the mast climbing work platform is still an unknown entity in the United States,” Stoddard said. “People are aware of what it does, but they really are not aware of the impact it can have on productivity, efficiency, and safety.”

 

In Europe, mast climbers are used without question. “The concept is very mature,” Stoddard said. When people think about how they are going to put cladding on the outside of a building or how they are going to put bricks up, they automatically think of a mast climber.”

 

Why hasn't it caught on in the United States? Stoddard explained: “If you know the nature of a contractor, they do not like to take risks. They've been up there and forced to bid in advance of what they know the cost base to be. If they put up a structure three months ago using scaffolding, then they'll put up something three months from now using scaffolding.”

 

According to Stoddard, contractors often own their own scaffolding, so they think there's no additional cost to using it. They don't consider, however, labor costs associated with assembly and disassembly, and many times contractors “never really put pencil to paper” to determine the efficiency of scaffolding, he said.

 

In terms of safety, scaffold users have to climb to get to the height they need to be, and once they are at that height, it is fixed. If they have to bend down or reach up, there's a lot room for ergonomic injuries, such as back injuries. One advantage of mast climbers is the ability to adjust the height of the platform.

 

“If it was a scaffolding job, you'd have scaffolding on the side of a building, but you'd also have some type of telescopic forklift or hoist to deliver materials up to the [scaffold], and then you have to distribute the material along the scaffolding where it needs to be applied to the building,” Stoddard said. In contrast, Stoddard explains that with a mast climber, workers load the material at the beginning of the shift, they then position the platform in the work area, and go to work until the shift is over. “While the laborers are taking their coffee breaks, the material guys will load the platform back up,” Stoddard said. “So there's a lot less opportunity for injury or damage.”

 

Mast climbers aren't always the more economical solution, such as on one- or two-story buildings and where the project is expected to last one month or less. “Then the economics are difficult to justify,” Stoddard said. “But if the structure gets a little higher, or it's a little more complicated installation, then we can sit down and talk about benefits versus the cost.”

 

When it comes to the growth of mast climbers, Stoddard outlines Intervect's challenge: educate the contractor of the verifiable cost savings, improved productivity, and increased safety. “[We] have to quantify that so we can get [the contractor] to a comfort zone where he's willing to take a risk,” Stoddard said. “[Mast climbers] won't displace all the applications for scaffolding. We think there's plenty of opportunity to grow to where we will still be somewhat inconsequential against the other forms of access.”