Background to the HSE decision on two rope working

[Craig Johnson]

On 07/09/2019 at 16:29, Steve Bullman said:

Will also make climbing competitions even more boring to watch, or will they be exempt?

its a sport

[Khriss]

So's free climbing tall building - i have some paint drying to watch thanks. K

[BenR]

Arboricultural Association - Draft for Consultation: ICoP – Tree Work at Height

WWW.TREES.ORG.UK

---

<h2 class= dblue bold >Revised Industry Code of Practice for Arboriculture – Tree Work at Height</h2> <h1 class= blue bold display ><span class= blue display >INDUSTRY...

 this may be helpful to someone..

[MattyF]

Thoughts today on the today’s job... fully intended to use two ropes but we decided to go on a single line route and use the usual work positioning strop method whilst cutting as usual.... too much hassle and would of made the job almost impossible.

[Mark Bolam]

Police informed.

[Mark Bolam]

I hope you like prison turkey.

[Khriss]

3 hours ago, MattyF said:

Thoughts today on the today’s job... fully intended to use two ropes but we decided to go on a single line route and use the usual work positioning strop method whilst cutting as usual.... too much hassle and would of made the job almost impossible.

I am completely with you on this- I also have to preach the exact opposite ? K

[Marc]

On 20/12/2019 at 13:58, BenR said:

Arboricultural Association - Draft for Consultation: ICoP – Tree Work at Height

WWW.TREES.ORG.UK

---

<h2 class= dblue bold >Revised Industry Code of Practice for Arboriculture – Tree Work at Height</h2> <h1 class= blue bold display ><span class= blue display >INDUSTRY...

 this may be helpful to someone..

Hi Ben,

 

I called the other day to discuss just this could you expand on these points or anyone here care to discuss. The ICOP seems to completely screw over the SRT user with some frankly unfair logic.

My interpretation of 2.9:-

The definition between one rope and one rope is the same regardless of weather it is a loop with a static side and dynamic side, or completely a static rope system, it’s still one rope/system, both systems are used to access and achieve work positioning.

 

The phrase on 2.9.2 “”the system must incorporate a suitable back-up “” what does that actually mean? Is a lanyard a suitable back up, this is not clearly defined here, please clarify.

Where as 2.9.3 clearly states “”When SRT is used, the system must comprise two independently anchored lines and may only utilise a single line where the use of the second line entails higher risk.6”” More on footnote 6 later

 

As 2.9.2 and 2.9.3 both rely on a single rope to achieve work positioning and crown access then both should be treated as equal in the requirement to use two independently anchored lines (where possible, or both anchored at same point if not) and may only utilise a single line where the use of the second line entails higher risk.

 

In fact 2.9.2 due to being a dynamic loop requires a form of anchoring device-friction/pulley saver, and due to the system being a moving rope system only one effective anchor can be achieved (unless some form of load sharing anchor device #rare)-this anchor point needs to be suitably strong. 

Where as 2.9.3 (SRT)being a stationary rope system multiple anchors can be used to load share and achieve a more suitable work position/more favourable rope angles when working at crown extremities.

Climbing on 2.9.2 requires the anchor point to be moved multiple times during a climbing day there by increasing the risk during multiple aerial changes overs to achieve a more favourable anchor point so as to lower rope angles whilst working at the crown extremities. 

Again this point makes utilising 2.9.3-SRT a more favourable and safer system as you are able to create new anchor points without having to change over or unclip from the system there by changing rope angles is a safer process with SRT.

 

Footnotes 5 and 6

I see no reason why the definition of risk is different due to the above points. In fact as is clearly demonstrated over the last ten years among active professional climbing arborists the use of SRT Systems significantly reduce the risk involved through no need to carry out aerial change over once initial anchor point is achieved, and the ability to load share through multiple anchors, and the ease of improving rope angles whilst working at crown extremities.

 

The wording of the foot note 5 implies that you can risk asses out the need for a back up whilst utilising 2.9.2 MRT

Yet whilst utilising 2.9.3 SRT you must always use two independent lines and the only occasions where it can possibly be risk assessed out is during aerial rescue.

This is an unfair bias as both systems utilise one rope, and as demonstrated above SRT has many advantages over MRT making it a safer option, therefore footnote 6 is irrelevant to SRT and has greater importance for MRT thereby making the need to have a suitable second line perhaps greater as backed up by HSE reports into falls in arboricultural aerial operations.
 

Edited December 21, 2019 by Marc

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

On 01/09/2019 at 22:41, AA Teccie (Paul) said:

Apologies all, there's much background tbh and my colleague Simon, who wrote the article, tried to cover all bases.

In a nutshell the HSE would expect to see 2x independent lines, and independent anchors, such that one system can act as a robust backup in the event of the other being damaged or becoming detached and the climber falling. 

In terms of timescales this is not gonna happen overnight and, in all honesty, nothing is likely to 'start to' change until the industry code of practice (ICoP) is amended and 'Technical Guide 1 - Tree Ascent and Descent' is released. As you rightly mention training, and assessment, will have to change to and existing operators will have to change their MO to comply with the law (effectively.) In his article Simon likened this to the industry's equivalent to seat belts being intro'd. so gonna be years rather than months.

Does this help clarify things...a little?

Thanks for asking Kevin and I hope you;re well

Paul

So what Your saying or being vague about saying is that in the not too distant future it will be law that a climber must use two climbing ropes. I'm glad my career is nearly over! now HSE is indeed going over and beyond sanity. 

[Marc]

6 minutes ago, Tony Croft aka hamadryad said:

So what Your saying or being vague about saying is that in the not too distant future it will be law that a climber must use two climbing ropes. I'm glad my career is nearly over! now HSE is indeed going over and beyond sanity. 

Nothing vague about Tony, with immediate effect you should be on two climbing ropes...

Hope you are keeping well.