Risk Assesment

[Shez]

Kind of covered the points I would have made, people seem to forget that PPE should be last resort.

I don't spend a lot of time on loading galleries - really not my domain - so I'm genuinely interested in asking how other venues mitigate the risk of falling from that location. I would expect that any kind of barrier would also present risks by impeding clear access to the safe movement of (sometimes very) heavy weights to and from the cradles. The consequences of dropping a weight are potentially fatal too for those below on the fly floor.

 

I have a suspicion that in some venues it might be a "we don't talk about that" / "we've always done it this way" kind of scenario. What's the standard recommended practice these days?

[Bryson]

Obviously the design varies, but in most loading galleries I've been on, falling "into" the counterweight well is prevented by handrails with large enough gaps to get your arms / a counterweight through. The new front loading arbours (Thern Brickhouse, Clancy Frontloader and similar*) make the risk even smaller as there's no reaching "through" the handrail to be done. I certainly wouldn't specify a new counterweight system these days with the old style of arbour.

 

Regarding the weight-dropping issue: This is particularly a concern in double-purchase houses where the wings may extend below the loading floor. That was the case in my last venue I worked in. We controlled it by managing access to the area below and having a call/response system for spotting the area below, but I didn't love the solution as it was very prone to failure. (Tape/rope doesn't seem to apply to people sometimes....) I was researching some kind of kevlar webbing catch net solution when I left but never got to installing it.

 

 

 

* = A friend of mine owns the patent on those arbours and licences it to Thern / Clancy and whoever. Yay for Canada!

[sandall]

I don't recall the OP saying anything about this recommendation being given in writing??

Agreed - I just assumed it was more than a sort of off-hand remark.

You are quite right in that if it's in the written report they are stuck with it until or unless the relevant stage set-up gets modified (when a new set of recommendations will no doubt appear), but surely a verbally-expressed opinion on whether something is desirable or not is just that, an opinion ?? Not to mention the question of what value do you put on a verbally-expressed opinion that appears to regard PPE as a first line of defence ??

Edited October 16, 2019 by sandall

[Shez]

Obviously the design varies, but in most loading galleries I've been on, falling "into" the counterweight well is prevented by handrails with large enough gaps to get your arms / a counterweight through. The new front loading arbours (Thern Brickhouse, Clancy Frontloader and similar*) make the risk even smaller as there's no reaching "through" the handrail to be done. I certainly wouldn't specify a new counterweight system these days with the old style of arbour.

Very nice designs and certainly a big improvement on the older ones. I suspect there are an awful lot of older systems still in use though.

[Bryson]

 

Very nice designs and certainly a big improvement on the older ones. I suspect there are an awful lot of older systems still in use though.

 

The old design doesn't preclude the use of a handrail on that side, though. (Well, in most situations.) It's just a little more awkward. I wonder if the OP could actually have a minimal handrail added and solve his harness issue.

 

OP: How about a photo of your loading floor?