26.03.2014
Best method or not?
A reader in Australia spotted an aerial lift being used to lift both men and a suspended load and wondered if this was permitted, safe working practice or perhaps a Death Wish.
The original email and photographs we received said: “A job in Perth, Western Australia, where it seems that they decided to use this work platform as a crane. I think they were lifting cabling for telecommunication cables. I am pretty sure that the legislation in Australia forbids them to do this. Anyway I thought it worth sharing.”
Please register to see all images
The load is rigged
Our first impressions tended to lead us to agree, and it certainly looked like a corner cutting exercise. The only thing that seemed to conflict with this impression was that a machine of this size was almost certainly supplied with a dedicated operator, and it came from a company that makes strong claims for safe working practices.
We therefore decided to contact the rental company - Summit Tower Hire - and have had a full and open response back.
Please register to see all images
Up she goes, a total load of around 600kg with operator and slings etc.
Summit issued the following statement:
“Summit Tower Hire was engaged to assist with height access to the side of a building for telecommunications work. The site had very specific requirements as there was limited room for setting up vehicles and numerous underground hazards, along with time constraints put in place by road closures.”
“Summit was asked to provide a solution that would allow the client to address all possible risks associated with the work. After consultation with qualified riggers and utilising the points under the cage that are used for suspending loads during maintenance for calibration of the unit’s load cell, it was determined that a safe system of work would be to suspend the 450kg load from these points (The cage has a rating of 700kg) as it kept the load central to the load cell, and the weight would still be calculated by the load cell.”
“The unit was used within its safe working radius at all times and a safe work area/drop zone was defined and controlled. All Summit Tower Hire Bronto units are equipped with 300kg cage winches that are used for lifting items into place that are then secured from the cage. Several of the Summit Tower Hire units are also fitted with a boom winch with a capacity of 1,300kg however this would not reach the height required for the job. The images show the lifting of the cable drum (mobile phone cable) to the roof of the building. As mentioned, this was a system of work that was risk controlled and the unit was still within its safe working load.”
Please register to see all images
And on to the roof
“There are numerous activities performed everyday across the world that push the boundaries of equipment. Summit Tower Hire has a strong focus of safety and ensures every task undertaken from one of its units is performed only after a full risk assessment had been completed to ensure there is no safer alternative. While this may not be the normal process, Summit Tower Hire stands by its safety record of being Lost Time Injury free in our three plus years of operation. We will always consult with the experts, be that the OEM, third party engineers or qualified persons in relation to work being performed.”
Vertikal Comment
Considering the information provided, while unorthodox, this does indeed seem to be a safe way of carrying out the work at hand. It is hard to argue that having both a crane and a lift in the small space allowed would have been any safer. In fact it could easily be argued that two machines working in close proximity could have been less safe. If used separately it might have involved at least three machine set ups - lift, crane and lift again - with three possibilities of an error occurring.
The safety advice with platforms has always been - platforms are not designed for lifting loads - although many lifts now have hook attachments and telehandlers are often used for both. In this case the load was well within the safe platform capacity so no margins of safety were reduced, the only difference was that this load was suspended, rather than carried in the platform. Wind would have been a factor of course, but one assumes that this was considered.
We thought that this was an interesting case study that might spark off a useful and constructive debate. So perhaps in this case not a Death Wish.
Manning47
Employee killed after using cherry picker as crane substitute
Australia - April 14 2014
The Queensland Coroner has found that, in the course of carrying out work for, and at the direction of the employer, a worker was exposed to a risk to her safety and subsequently sustained fatal injuries. The employer had directed the worker to use a cherry picker in an inherently unsafe manner and for a purpose contrary to its design. In addition, the machine had a number of faults which may have contributed to the incident. Also, the worker had not been provided with any training as to the appropriate and safe use of the equipment prior to the incident. However Workplace Health and Safety Queensland eventually withdrew its prosecution of the employer because Charles Eden died in January 2013, and his wife Margaret Eden had no input or control over the conduct of the business at the time of the incident. The Coroner found it wouldn’t be in the public interest to proceed to inquest because no further matters required investigation.
Manning47
I am somewhat bemused by this article, I am pretty sure the Australian Standard 2550.10 states that MEWP must not be used as a crane, this is the same for most safety authorities in Australia and also the British Standard 8460. The standard in Australia states unless the OEM allows this, which I am sure this was not their intention, unless they have a specific winch. I am also surprised that this can be explained away with mention of a 'risk assessment'. Might be good to publish this as a way of settling clients minds around this. I was also surprised that stating the lifting points below the basket used for calibration of SWL made these suitable for hazardous activity. I wonder if these calibrations are done with someone in the basket as in the photos. I think not! I also wonder if the 'risk assessment' addresses this risk effectively. Finally, I am surprised a publication like Vertikal Net would give such tacit acceptance of this practice, it doesn't seem to me that they think their is a debate. This is definitely NOT the best method.
Check these publications from HSE UK;
http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/misc614.pdf page 2 Safe Plant
cfk88
Seems ok to me properly planned with all factors taken into account. To me this is a bit like lifting people with cranes, should be a last resort but if done right and properly planner perfectly ok.