A Multipurpose Collapsible Scaffold for Flat and Irregular Surfaces

Rosalie Grace S. De La Cruz


The construction industry heavily relies on scaffolding to facilitate work at elevated heights. This study presents a new and innovative design for a collapsible, multifunctional scaffold that is suitable for both flat and irregular surfaces. The design of the scaffold was evaluated using a Likert scale survey, which revealed high acceptability across all evaluated categories. The scaffold was fabricated using a combination of steel and aluminum materials and designed using computer-aided design CAD software. The fabrication process, portability, performance, and safety of a prototype scaffold were thoroughly assessed. The evaluation methodology employed a Likert-scale questionnaire and a descriptive research approach. A total of 30 engineers, architects, and construction laborers participated in the evaluation, assessing four essential aspects of the scaffold. The results indicated a consistently high level of acceptability, with weighted mean scores ranging from 4.69 to 4.94 out of a maximum score of 5.0 in all categories. The design parameters of the scaffold, such as the footing mechanism and working platform design, were determined based on industry standards and the intended usage of the scaffold. However, this study did not include a sensitivity analysis to explore the impact of different parameter values on the scaffold's performance. This study introduces a collapsible, multifunctional scaffold that effectively addresses the limitations of traditional scaffolds by offering enhanced portability, safety, and adaptability to flat and irregular surfaces. The widespread adoption of this scaffold design is expected to have significant implications for the construction industry, improving productivity and safety in construction projects.


Doi: 10.28991/CEJ-SP2023-09-09

Full Text: PDF


Multipurpose; Collapsible; Scaffold; Regular; Irregular; Construction Industry.


Melenbrink, N., Werfel, J., & Menges, A. (2020). On-site autonomous construction robots: Towards unsupervised building. Automation in Construction, 119, 103312. doi:10.1016/j.autcon.2020.103312.

Hou, L., Wu, S., Zhang, G. K., Tan, Y., & Wang, X. (2021). Literature review of digital twins applications in constructionworkforce safety. Applied Sciences (Switzerland), 11(1), 1–21. doi:10.3390/app11010339.

Jipa, A., Giacomarra, F., Giesecke, R., Chousou, G., Pacher, M., Dillenburger, B., Lomaglio, M., & Leschok, M. (2019). 3D-printed formwork for bespoke concrete stairs. Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Computational Fabrication, 1-12. doi:10.1145/3328939.3329003.

Girma, B. (2020). Cost and Quality Comparison of Different Types of Formwork Systems in Concrete Structure Buildings Case Study in Bahir Dar. Ph.D. Thesis, Bahir Dar University, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia.

Abbaszadeh, S., Jahangiri, M., Abbasi, M., Banaee, S., & Farhadi, P. (2022). Risk assessment of probable human errors in the scaffold erection and dismantling procedure: a fuzzy approach. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, 28(3), 1773–1778. doi:10.1080/10803548.2021.1932110.

Jang, M. (2017). Development of an Adjustable board and a Rotational Board for Scaffold. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 216, 012057. doi:10.1088/1757-899x/216/1/012057.

Bailey, H., Hancock, D. (1990). Scaffolding. In: Brickwork 3 and Associated Studies. Palgrave, London. doi:10.1007/978-1-349-11381-1_6.

Quadri, A. I., & Fadugba, O. G. (2022). Risk Assessment and Safety Precautions for Construction Site Scaffolding. Journal of Rehabilitation in Civil Engineering, 10(4), 1–13. doi:10.22075/JRCE.2021.22451.1480.

Crestelo Moreno, F., Roca Gonzalez, J., Suardíaz Muro, J., & García Maza, J. A. (2022). Relationship between human factors and a safe performance of vessel traffic service operators: A systematic qualitative-based review in maritime safety. Safety Science, 155. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105892.

Thompson, T. (2015). The Construction Zone: Building Scaffolds for Readers and Writers. Stenhouse Publishers, Portsmouth, United States.

van Dijk, L. M., van Eikenhorst, L., & Wagner, C. (2022). Daily practice performance (Work-as-Done) compared to guidelines (Work-as-Imagined) of medication reconciliation at discharge: Outcomes of a FRAM study. Safety Science, 155. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105871.

Levy, S. M. (2018). Project management in construction. McGraw-Hill Education, New York, United States.

Davila Delgado, J. M., Oyedele, L., Ajayi, A., Akanbi, L., Akinade, O., Bilal, M., & Owolabi, H. (2019). Robotics and automated systems in construction: Understanding industry-specific challenges for adoption. Journal of Building Engineering, 26. doi:10.1016/j.jobe.2019.100868.

NIOSH. (2023). National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health. Selangor, Malaysia. Available online: http://www.niosh.com.my/ (accessed in May 2023).

He, L., Liu, C., Wu, Z., & Yuan, J. (2019). Stability analysis of an aluminum alloy assembly column in a modular support structure. Thin-Walled Structures, 135, 548–559. doi:10.1016/j.tws.2018.11.026.

Wang, C., Zhang, H., Rasmussen, K. J. R., Reynolds, J., & Yan, S. (2020). System reliability-based limit state design of support scaffolding systems. Engineering Structures, 216. doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.110677.

Kim, K., & Teizer, J. (2014). Automatic design and planning of scaffolding systems using building information modeling. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 28(1), 66–80. doi:10.1016/j.aei.2013.12.002.

Xavier, G & Perreau – Saussine, D. (2007). Guide Tube for a Flexible pipe for transporting hydrocarbons. Derwent Innovation Publication US7292940B1, United State.

Jiang, L., Liu M., Tang, S., Wang D., & Xu, W. (2019). An Adjustable Scaffold Ladder. Derwent Innovation Publication CN209723581U, China.

Fleischer Henry, Little Falls, NJ & US (1973). Adjustable Ladder and Scaffold. Derwent Innovation Publication US3724592A, United State.

Dong, J., Liu, H., Lei, M., Fang, Z., & Guo, L. (2022). Safety and stability analysis of variable cross-section disc-buckle type steel pipe high support system. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping, 200. doi:10.1016/j.ijpvp.2022.104831.

Guillamón Causi, P. (2012). Stability analysis on different type of steel scaffolds. Final Project, Politecnico Di Torino, Turin, Italy.

Department-Order-No.-128-13. (2013). Amending Rule 1414 on Scaffoldings of the 1989 Occupational Health and Safety Standards, As Amended. Department of Labor and Employment, Manila, Republic of Philippines.

Hossain, M. A., Moazzem Hossain, M., Tarannum, S., & Chowdhury, T. H. (2015). Factors affecting OHS practices in private universities: An empirical study from Bangladesh. Safety Science, 72, 371–378. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2014.10.007.

Fawaz, G., Waked, M., Mabsout, M., & Tarhini, K. (2017). Influence of railings on load carrying capacity of concrete slab bridges. Bridge Structures, 12(3–4), 85–96. doi:10.3233/BRS-170107.

Dogan, E., Yurdusev, M. A., Yildizel, S. A., & Calis, G. (2021). Investigation of scaffolding accident in a construction site: A case study analysis. Engineering Failure Analysis, 120. Doi:10.1016/J.Engfailanal.2020.105108.

Zeina, S. M. (2021). Investigation on Scaffolding Health and Safety Risk Management A Case of On-Going Building Construction Project in Bahir Dar City. PhD Thesis, Bahir Dar University, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia.

Awolusi, I. G., & Marks, E. D. (2017). Safety Activity Analysis Framework to Evaluate Safety Performance in Construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 143(3). doi:10.1061/(asce)co.1943-7862.0001265.

Sharma, A. T., Kumarason, R., Sudesh Nair, B., & Kishan, G. (2022). Investigation on the Causes of Falling from Height and Fall Protection System at Sabah. Journal of Innovation and Technology, 2022(07), 1-4.

P. D. 1096. Adopting a National Building Code of the Philippines Thereby Revising Republic Act Numbered Sixty-Five Hundred Forty-One. National Building Code of the Philippines, Manila, Republic of Philippines.

Assmann, S. F., Pocock, S. J., Enos, L. E., & Kasten, L. E. (2000). Subgroup analysis and other (mis)uses of baseline data in clinical trials. Lancet, 355(9209), 1064–1069. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(00)02039-0.

Schroder, C., Medves, J., Paterson, M., Byrnes, V., Chapman, C., O’Riordan, A., Pichora, D., & Kelly, C. (2011). Development and pilot testing of the collaborative practice assessment tool. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 25(3), 189–195. doi:10.3109/13561820.2010.532620.

Rodriguez, J., Wu, B., Bernet, S., Zargari, N., Rebolledo, J., Pontt, J., & Steimer, P. (2008). Design and evaluation criteria for high power drives. Conference Record - IAS Annual Meeting (IEEE Industry Applications Society) Edmonton, AB, Canada. doi:10.1109/08IAS.2008.341.

Md Ghazali, N. H. (2016). A Reliability and Validity of an Instrument to Evaluate the School-Based Assessment System: A Pilot Study. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 5(2), 148. doi:10.11591/ijere.v5i2.4533.

Weiler, B., & Ham, S. H. (2010). Development of a research instrument for evaluating the visitor outcomes of face-to-face interpretation. Visitor Studies, 13(2), 187–205. doi:10.1080/10645578.2010.509697.

Gile, K. J., Beaudry, I. S., Handcock, M. S., & Ott, M. Q. (2018). Methods for Inference from Respondent-Driven Sampling Data. Annual Review of Statistics and Its Application, 5, 65–93. doi:10.1146/annurev-statistics-031017-100704.

Sedlmair, M., Heinzl, C., Bruckner, S., Piringer, H., & Moller, T. (2014). Visual Parameter Space Analysis: A Conceptual Framework. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 20(12), 2161–2170. doi:10.1109/tvcg.2014.2346321.

Full Text: PDF

DOI: 10.28991/CEJ-SP2023-09-09


  • There are currently no refbacks.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.