Jump to content
kevinjohnsonmbe

Background to the HSE decision on two rope working

Recommended Posts

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

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 20/12/2019 at 13:58, BenR said:
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 by Marc
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Featured Adverts

  • Tip site reviews

About

Arbtalk.co.uk is a hub for the arboriculture industry in the UK.  
If you're just starting out and you need business, equipment, tech or training support you're in the right place.  If you've done it, made it, got a van load of oily t-shirts and have decided to give something back by sharing your knowledge or wisdom,  then you're welcome too.
If you would like to contribute to making this industry more effective and safe then welcome.
Just like a living tree, it'll always be a work in progress.
Please have a look around, sign up, share and contribute the best you have.

See you inside.

The Arbtalk Team

Follow us

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.