re-using safety bonds? am i mad or wrong?

[Guest lightnix]

P.S. Moderators: Should this not really be in the Safety forum!

:( - Ahhh... yes. Thanks, Ellis :)

 

Don't be shy about using the Report button, if you feel a thread needs moving, splitting or merging. We may not agree 100% of the time, but it's the quickest way to get your concerns checked out ;)

 

My €0.02... any item of "rigging" gear that has been shock-loaded, be it safety bond, motor, shackle, truss, wind-up stand, wall bracket or whatever, should at least be taken out of service for testing, appropriately marked and sent back to the warehouse.

 

Fair enough - time was when I probably wouldn't have given a toss, either, but things are just getting too scary to take the chance any more :(

[tatty_head]

you were right. never use a safety bond after ti has held somethings weight. as for the unit. it should be taken down and checked it fell for a reason how could they know what was wrong if they didnt check it.

[Ynot]

you were right. never use a safety bond after ti has held somethings weight. as for the unit. it should be taken down and checked it fell for a reason how could they know what was wrong if they didnt check it.

Sorry, but I just cannot accept this statement as it stands.

 

Whilst I appreciate that we live in an ever-growing society of litigative money grabbing which fuels a great deal of panic measures from those who think they know more than they do, and not as much as they should BUT let's not forget that those who deal with theatre kit day in day out do have some measure of competence and common sense.

 

If a fixtures falls, and that fall is arrested by it's bond, then there are a number of factors that must be considered before one puts the cutters through the wire:

 

What fixture was it? A par can or a Mac2000? Even the small 5k bonds can easily withstand a bunch of par cans bouncing around on it without any fear of over-stressing it's capacity.

 

Visual inspection: If a bond has been needed for a heavier lantern's fall, then of course it should be assessed. IMHO, were that bond to have been affected seriously, then there will likely be some sign that it has been compromised. Whether it has can depend entirely on whether the falling fixture fell a significant distance so that it caused a sudden and sharp stop - thus putting more resultant force onto the wire, but if the bond was wrapped fairly tight around the SRS, then it may be that there was no significant force applied.

 

Don't get me wrong - I'm in no way advocating a 'sod it and reuse it anyway' attitude, but what I would say is take each instance in turn (hopefully you won't have many in your career!) and assess the risks accordingly.

 

TD

[Brian]

A bond costs what? about £10? How much do you think it'll cost to send it away and have it tested? How much do you think your time is worth to either yourself or your employer while you mess around with a bond that has done it's job? In the hour or so it'll take to mess around I can make 10 times the money it'll cost to replace by making a few phone calls and getting in some more business.

[BenWall]

Just been speaking to a rep from a very large and reputable rigging company after a get-in at uni and got onto the conversation of this thread. His personal and professional opinion was that once a safety bond has had a mass dropped onto it it should then be discarded/destroyed and replaced.

 

Visual inspection is just NOT good enough to insure that the bond is still able to take a second mass being dropped onto it. It has been said hundreds of times now, but whats the point in risking someone Else's safety (potentially life) by not replacing what could be a faulty/damaged safety bond? £10......

 

Ben.

[Chappie]

The point is, once a bond has had a dynamic load applied to it, it is very hard to visually see the level of damage. A load falling 600mm may impose a force of 11 times the original load if stopped abruptly and this level of uncertainty cannot be overcome by looking at the bond and giving it the thumbs up.

 

All rigging (shackles, bonds, slings, spansets, clamps, truss etc) in temporary installations (touring stock) needs to be serial numbered, with an SWL and visually tested every 6 months by a competent person. You need original test certificates from the manufacturer, or whoever made it in the first place, and subsequent inspection certs. If the item was load tested after construction (by no means necessary) then it should not have another load test within its usable life, only visual inspections, as a load test itself can damage equipment.

 

Any item that has taken an impact should be put beyond use and discarded. Technically, if you drop a shackle from above waste height you should put a hacksaw through it.

[gnomatron]

Hang on, though - as I said earlier, wasn't the main reason for the industry swapping out chains for steel wires BECAUSE you could supposedly stress test a bond without rendering it useless...? (Within spec'd limits).

 

Surely this provision is for testing at the factory, so that bonds can be tested before use. You give the answer yourself to why you shouldn't reuse a bond that's been stressed out "in the wild" -

(Within spec'd limits)

. You don't know what the stress on that bond was when the mover fell, it isn't a simple case of knowing the weight of the fixture, the force on the bond also relates to how far it fell, how long it held the weight of the fixture, etc. etc. I'm appalled that so many people here seem to think it would be fine to reuse a safety bond!

[Nicktaylor]

How would you know if the replacement hadn't been stressed in the past? usually if safeties look OK they are OK.

 

I would hope that any safeties that have been stressed as indicated in the original post would have been destroyed/disposed of to avoid the possibility of them being reused because they look OK

 

 

How on earth do you, as a hirer, know if a lantern has been dropped on its bond? All very well if you see it happen, but most times you will not be on site. ( most times I type. I have never seen a latern have to hang from a bond for any reason!)

 

As another poster said the only way of checking a bond is a visual check in my opinion

[Ynot]

Hang on, though - as I said earlier, wasn't the main reason for the industry swapping out chains for steel wires BECAUSE you could supposedly stress test a bond without rendering it useless...? (Within spec'd limits).

 

Surely this provision is for testing at the factory, so that bonds can be tested before use. You give the answer yourself to why you shouldn't reuse a bond that's been stressed out "in the wild" -

(Within spec'd limits)

. You don't know what the stress on that bond was when the mover fell, it isn't a simple case of knowing the weight of the fixture, the force on the bond also relates to how far it fell, how long it held the weight of the fixture, etc. etc. I'm appalled that so many people here seem to think it would be fine to reuse a safety bond!

1. How does anyone who looks at a bond tell whether it's been stressed in ANY way?

2. How does a supplier of hire goods KNOW that any bond has been stressed whilst out with a customer?

3. Conversely, how does anyone hiring a lantern with bond KNOW that it's NEVER been stressed before they hired it?

(In all three instances, this assumes there is no obvious visible damage)

 

It's all well and good to sit at a screen and pontificate about what SHOULD happen but most of us live in the real world.

 

Am I advocating the use of a bond that I KNOW was called into use because a Mac 2000 fell off it's moorings and dropped with a jolt? Certainly not.

Am I advocating the re-use of a bond that I KNOW was called into use because a Mac 2000 fell off it's moorings and dropped with a jolt? If I know that it was a minimum 5kg rated bond and that the lantern dropped only the foot or so that a normal bond would allow, then yes I certainly would.

Am I advocating the use of a bond that arrives with a hired lantern without first a visual check? No, but that visual check will only tell me if there is any obvious damage, so past that, I have to rely on my trust for the supplier. But as I said above, the supplier has to trust his previous customers to have told them about any incidents, and there are many customers out there who likely wouldn't know that they'd NEED to advise of any 'drops'.

 

This issue, as with ALL other safety issues, MUST be treated with common sense and a valid and experienced risk assessment. Take what you KNOW to be fact, take what you think MIGHT happen, look at other contributory factors and make a decision.

 

Anyway, the short & curlies on the original poster's question is that NO, the bond in question should NOT have been re-used, and the lantern should have been fully inspected for reasons WHY it fell in the first place.

 

Other than that, each case must be taken on it's individual merits.

You may be apalled to know that some MIGHT re-use a bond, I'd be surprised if many bonds WEREN'T re-used, even by experienced LX crews, except in more extreme instances like the one originally mentioned.

 

I know I have enough experience, even as an amateur, to know what my gear can do. If I have doubts then I don't use it, but my experience gives me that comfort zone to make a distinction.

 

You can never cater for inexperienced 'help' making unseen and undeclared mistakes, so you HAVE to go with what you KNOW and can prove (by testing) otherwise you'd just end up as a basket case in no time!!

[Just Some Bloke]

I have never in my 12 year career in this industry heard of directly or seen a clamp/bolt set fail on any single clamped fixture, for it to happen on a fixture which should of been hung from two clamps is pretty incredible to me!

 

 

... the omega clamp failing - never heard of that before as it should have a 10/12mm mounting bolt.

 

 

If the unit has failed with those fixings, how on earth can someone be stupid/incompitent enough to then return the unit with its original fixings to the air. Those fixings (and by that I mean the clamps, not the safety bond, as that has done its job of protecting the fixture from falling) are obviously not up to the job of holding the unit-as has already been proven-so to reuse those same fixings again is surely dangerous?

 

I have never witnessed a failing fixture in 7 years, and hope that I never will, however the apparent lack of concern by the lighting company is worrying. Surely the SAFEST thing to do would have been to bring the unit to the ground and keep it there,as it is simply too unsafe to remain in the air? Obviously, that is at the expense of the show, but rather that than the unit failing during the show?

 

 

I can't see how those clamps would fail unless they have been hung by someone unqualyfied ore someone sleeping on their job. That would explain their defensive attitude towards you, and why they would just put the unit back up.

 

 

I didnt see any damaged bolts etc, they just proclaimed it was a stripped thread.

 

Imagine this possible situation which, of course, would never happen:

 

 

 

Someone rigs a fixture, forgetting to tighten up the bolt.

 

The weight of the fixture pulls it off the remaining length of bolt as it was never tightened.

 

Lighting company thinks "this makes us look very bad" and quickly hides the bolt, claiming that it has failed, thus putting the blame fairly and squarely off themselves.

 

They take the bolt away, bring it back, claim it as a new bolt and re-hang the fixture. All is well this time as they remember to tighten the bolt.

 

 

Now, obviously I'm not saying that is what happened in this situation, but it does make you wonder, doesn't it?