kerry davies Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 The details are horrific and I don't want to get into single point suspension of performers etc. What interests me and will possibly Tom is that this occurred the same week that Fireman's Fund, the biggest US insurer in entertainment, have endorsed the ESA Events Safety Guide and have begun making noises about premium levels becoming dependent on H&S training and adherence to the Guide. (Their guide incorporates much of the Purple Book and the IStructE guide to TDS.) We have tried to create a "culture of safety" in the UK through self-regulation whereas the US is a few decades behind but I truly hope that the UK insurance industry takes note and creates some incentive scheme if and when the US introduces one. It may not prevent a recurrence of this incident but it will surely concentrate minds were it to become the norm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jivemaster Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 I look forward to seeing published a formal official report with all the vagaries of news reporting corrected. Til then I hope that the injured get good care and start on the path to recovery. Sadly few organisations do publish accident reports for others to learn from. I'm used to the Air Accident Investigators sending reports to all flying schools etc, done right you do learn lots which can stop repeated misfortune. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OllieDuff Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 1399370895[/url]' post='499188']1399364751[/url]' post='499175']Personally (ignoring the equipment spec issue) I'm struggling to understand why the entire rig had a single point of failure that was rated so relatively low. If I was designing something for a performer and absolutely had no choice about having a single fail point (above the performer) I would have over-specified it by an order of magnitude http://www.blue-room.org.uk/public/style_emoticons/default/huh.gif That was indeed my question. It has already been stated publicly that the incident happened when a single carabiner broke. So to discuss the concept of a single point of failure in an acrobat system is NOT undue speculation, since it has already been established. Basically I was surprised to see that so many performers were relying on one single point of failure, with no kind of backup, and I was interested to hear Tom's word over whether this was normal circus practice (clearly not, thanks Tom). 1399369258[/url]' post='499183']I think people doing performer flying are most likely always looking at secondary safeties when designing a new effect, but it's not always possible due to swivels as you've alluded to above. I worked on a dance show with an aerialist a few months back where the silks were hung off a single point - it's just that the point was rated (SWL) about two tons, so the chance of it failing under the weight of one performer, even if that performer is doing a silks routine, is small provided it is installed correctly and the kit was inspected before use. To be fair, that isn't always the best approach either.as it only recognises the risk of the point failing due to over loading, it does not recognise any other condition which may lead to a failure. I feel you've quote mined my post slightly. To make it more explicit, I was referring to the risk of failure due to overloading, and the rest of the sentence following the bolded clause alludes to ensuring that e.g. the hardware has not previously been damaged, screw gates are done up, shackles moused etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
top-cat Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 I think people doing performer flying are most likely always looking at secondary safeties when designing a new effect, but it's not always possible due to swivels as you've alluded to above. I worked on a dance show with an aerialist a few months back where the silks were hung off a single point - it's just that the point was rated (SWL) about two tons, so the chance of it failing under the weight of one performer, even if that performer is doing a silks routine, is small provided it is installed correctly and the kit was inspected before use. To be fair, that isn't always the best approach either.as it only recognises the risk of the point failing due to over loading, it does not recognise any other condition which may lead to a failure. I feel you've quote mined my post slightly. To make it more explicit, I was referring to the risk of failure due to overloading, and the rest of the sentence following the bolded clause alludes to ensuring that e.g. the hardware has not previously been damaged, screw gates are done up, shackles moused etc. Not at all. I was just pointing out to others that safety doesn't just come in the form of double checking your work, and high safety factors on the rigging loads. There are other factors in the way things are hung which can cause a failure than just weight or mispractice. I wasn't saying however that your point was wrong. Just 'not limited to' if you like... Sadly few organisations do publish accident reports for others to learn from. I'm used to the Air Accident Investigators sending reports to all flying schools etc, done right you do learn lots which can stop repeated misfortune. IRATA, the trade body for rope access technicians, are also very good for this, and you don't have to be qualified or a member to receive the updates. Thus, being the correct forum for it, just a good opportunity to mention anybody engaged in rope access or rope rescue scenarios in their workplace could do worse than to sign up to them. They did an interesting video on using a Petzl ASAP vs using a Petzl Shunt to stop a vertical fall. Since many climbing riggers were still using shunts at that point, some of their advice can be useful to people outside the direct line of rope access too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OllieDuff Posted September 29, 2014 Share Posted September 29, 2014 Sorry to resurrect a long-dead thread, but is anyone aware of any OSHA or other report getting to the bottom of this? I've not being able to find anything on the net, other than the fact that the same circus had a few accidents (not all rigging related) in that venue in the Nineties... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ImagineerTom Posted September 29, 2014 Share Posted September 29, 2014 I've not heard or read anything so far though the "grapevine news" told the industry what actually happened fairly quickly and nothing since has contradicted that. On your second point, outside of the USA it's impossible to appreciate just how big /that circus/ are - they're actually a subdivision of Felds Entertainment (who produce ALL the disney live & ice shows) and "that circus" actually have AT LEAST 3 productions (each with 100+ performance staff) touring the country at the same time all branded under the same name so to outsiders it can look like they have a high rate of accidents when in reality any one of their touring productions is about the same size as the entire touring circus industry in the uk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
musht Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 Report released. http://wpri.com/2014/11/04/federal-investigation-reveals-improperly-loaded-clip-led-to-circus-fall/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timsabre Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 Report released. http://wpri.com/2014...to-circus-fall/ Slightly bizarre that being America they publish a pdf of the fine and how to pay it but not the actual details of the report. So what actually happened - was it a bridle arrangement pulling the carabiner apart sideways rather than the expected vertical load? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grizzly Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 This link from OSHA provides more details: OSHA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew C Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 Wow. $7000. I'll bet they feel suitably chastised. :unsure: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigclive Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 From the description of the failure being due to the carabiner being improperly loaded by having two loads coming off at a tangent, and physically breaking (not at the latch mechanism) despite being rated for 10,000 pound while being loaded with 1,500 pounds. I'd ponder whether that was a faulty carabiner with a flaw in it. It's all very well the manufacturer stating that it was only supposed to be loaded from a single point, but I'm not convinced that could cause the result on its own. Hmm. The main thing I'd conclude from this is that extra safety features should be incorporated where possible. (That obviously excludes rotating points which could just routinely be replaced as a safety precaution.) The fine is probably token gesture, since the accident was not specifically caused by negligence. Just perhaps overconfidence in what seemed like a well rated component. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew C Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 The fine is probably token gesture, As a result of its findings, OSHA has cited Feld Entertainment Inc., doing business as Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus, for one serious safety violation with a proposed penalty of $7,000, the maximum fine allowed by law.That is what you get when your government is owned by big business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbuckley Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 I read the little detail that is there yesterday, and it got me thinking. is this "tri-axial" arrangement so unusual? I've never seen a set of caribiner instruction manual, so I don't know what it says. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the kid Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 http://www.fusionclimb.com/Carabiners_c_4.html looks like its one of these info here http://www.fusionclimb.com/ANSI-Information_c_82.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trussmonkey Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 trouble is karabiners are only strongest along the length of the spine and it is marked as such on them. any off axis loading will always be with a severely reduced load rating. In this situation the karabiner was loaded so that there were loads coming in from angles not normally experienced by karabiners. clearly this was not the right piece of kit for the situation. a big bow shackle would have been better as it is used to angled loading or a master link (O ring). and that report looks like it was written by a 5 year old... a nice $7k slap on the wrist that can be paid by anyone with a credit card and on you go....... sad and a slap in the face to those performers who are still having surgery and therapy from the accident. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.