Stationary Rope Work Positioning (SRWP) Research Project

[nod]

Good Afternoon Folks

 

Within the UK we have a legislative framework through which all arboricultural operations should be carried out. Now we all know someone/company who does follow this closely or even at all, but that's a whole other bag from this matter. From the Guide to Good Climbing Practise, AFAG/FISA guides, LOLER, PUWER, Work at Height Regs, ICOP, EN stanards, CE certification etc & any other documents not listed, from which we are able to take direction & guidance on how we go about our business.

 

In recent years techniques & equipment have developed at a rate where this framework has not kept up to speed with & to this end Ben Rose & myself chose to try & take the matter in hand & do the necessary research that will bring the different single rope working methods up to date within that framework. I will post below the aims & objectives of the research & hopefully this will aid to keep the discussion on track as I'm sure you can appreciate that this is not a 5minute job & we will do our best to respond & maintain dialogue that's on track with those objectives.

 

Many thanks

Rob Knott 'Noddy'

 

Stationary Rope Technique (SRT) Work Positioning – A UK Perspective

 

Project/Research aim:

To appraise Stationary Rope Work Positioning (SRWP) techniques and equipment commonly used within the United Kingdom arboricultural industry, and their relationship and relevance to legislation, good practice and EU equipment test standards.

 

Objectives:

1. To research the equipment currently being used by SRWP climbers and how it is applied in the work-place;

2. To analyse the relationship of the tools and techniques used against the UK framework of legislation and good practice

3. To gain understanding of the forces experienced in both SRWP practices and those equipment may be subject to;

4. To compare the forces equipment is subject to against commonly accepted EU PPE test standards;

5. To assess whether equipment application matches the currently accepted test criteria and manufacturers recommendations for use.

[nod]

But irata will say we work

With two lines this is what tree srt should be doing , but that isn't going to work out for tree work so where does that leave us ???

 

Our industry has always climbed on a single rope, at least since the 50's in the UK, & I'm thinking that it's high time that we took arbwork in hand for what it is. In most, if not all, instances it is not comparable with other work at height industries where rope & harness are employed apart from the fact that we're above ground & use similar equipment/tools to carry out our work, that's about where the similarities end.

 

Maybe this will be the catalyst that's been long needed?

[nod]

Not change, poor choice of words on my behalf. I'm saying it would be good to have a definitive guide which is long overdue in the uk I think

 

It seems there's so many abbreviations for the same set of wording is what I mean. Srtwp was my example. I'm all for it so don't think my comments werent intended to be taken as negative I was just being curious.

 

Hey Ian

 

All these words may be just symantics but it's also important that when a subject is discussed there is clarity for everyone. We then know we're closer to being on the same page & misinterpretation is eliminated.

 

So DRT, DdRT, SRT, SRWP, TRT, TtRT if we are all clear on what these mean then we ARE all on the same page:-)

 

I didn't take your comment negatively, just needing clarity:thumbup:

[slack ma girdle]

Hey Ian

 

All these words may be just symantics but it's also important that when a subject is discussed there is clarity for everyone. We then know we're closer to being on the same page & misinterpretation is eliminated.

 

So DRT, DdRT, SRT, SRWP, TRT, TtRT if we are all clear on what these mean then we ARE all on the same page:-)

 

I didn't take your comment negatively, just needing clarity:thumbup:

 

Nope because the acronyms meaning keep changing. Maybe this would be a good place to start so that every body is talking the same language.

[Ian Flatters]

Nope because the acronyms meaning keep changing. Maybe this would be a good place to start so that every body is talking the same language.

 

 

Yeah that's what keeps bugging me. Once these are in a document, like what you and ben are doing I hope it will bring acronym clarity.

 

I saw a post a few weeks back in "I love srt" and had more comments about if it was single, stationary or static than the actual question.

[Tommy_B]

TRT and TtRT?

[BenR]

For me Single rope technique is a bit of a misnomer.. whatever technique we use in arb, it is with a single rope, unless we are using two ropes (Double Rope Technique) not to be confused with DoubleD Rope Technique. It therefore seems to make sense to clarify things a bit. This will hopefully be one of many beneficial outcomes...

 

My interpretation of the acronyms are as follows, however it is only an interpretation.

 

DdRT - Doubled Rope Technique - 2:1 - an adjustable loop.

DRT - Double Rope Technique - Using two ropes whatever the system used, for example two lines and two climbing systems such as a hitch climber.

SRT - Stationary Rope Techniques - 1:1 - The climber moves along any stationary rope. Whether it be for access or work.

SRWP - Stationary Rope Work Positioning - Using 1:1 systems for work positioning, not just access

TRT- Twin Rope Technique - Using one device working around two host lines

 

It sure would be nice to simplify that a bit.

[Marc]

For me Single rope technique is a bit of a misnomer.. whatever technique we use in arb, it is with a single rope, unless we are using two ropes (Double Rope Technique) not to be confused with DoubleD Rope Technique. It therefore seems to make sense to clarify things a bit. This will hopefully be one of many beneficial outcomes...

 

My interpretation of the acronyms are as follows, however it is only an interpretation.

 

DdRT - Doubled Rope Technique - 2:1 - an adjustable loop.

DRT - Double Rope Technique - Using two ropes whatever the system used, for example two lines and two climbing systems such as a hitch climber.

SRT - Stationary Rope Techniques - 1:1 - The climber moves along any stationary rope. Whether it be for access or work.

SRWP - Stationary Rope Work Positioning - Using 1:1 systems for work positioning, not just access

TRT- Twin Rope Technique - Using one device working around two host lines

 

It sure would be nice to simplify that a bit.

 

Right now acronyms are out of the way can we move on

 

Tree work has always been based around one rope wether you double it over or not.

I often find there is a preconceived idea that single line adds more force, I do not see this as true only in respect to the fact the device bears more weight your anchor points when top tied will be subject to the same forces.

When base tied there are many factors to consider.

 

I've also heard that a rope doubled over halves the force on each line there by making the rope stronger, yet there is always a point where the to parts meet cambium/pulley saver at that point it's a single line on a tight radius and no superior to a rope anchored single line which can be tied off in many ways.

 

Paul Poynter has been doing some testing on rope tie offs the info on that would be interesting once the data has been compiled.

 

I also see mentioned here that there are only a few CE approved SRWP devices what are they?

[Ian Flatters]

Right now acronyms are out of the way can we move on

 

 

 

Tree work has always been based around one rope wether you double it over or not.

 

I often find there is a preconceived idea that single line adds more force, I do not see this as true only in respect to the fact the device bears more weight your anchor points when top tied will be subject to the same forces.

 

When base tied there are many factors to consider.

 

 

 

I've also heard that a rope doubled over halves the force on each line there by making the rope stronger, yet there is always a point where the to parts meet cambium/pulley saver at that point it's a single line on a tight radius and no superior to a rope anchored single line which can be tied off in many ways.

 

 

 

Paul Poynter has been doing some testing on rope tie offs the info on that would be interesting once the data has been compiled.

 

 

 

I also see mentioned here that there are only a few CE approved SRWP devices what are they?

 

 

 

Just thinking out loud in my head.. So don't take it as anything concrete.

 

Other than access systems aimed at irata. I can only think of the rope wrench system. Which has many variables because it's more of made up of different CE marked components. Rather than a system like the bdb, rope runner (neither have a CE mark).

[peatff]

Right now acronyms are out of the way can we move on

 

Those are not acronyms they are initials Acronyms are initials or syllables that make a word like radar or NATO. Just saying, not getting on a high horse or owt