|
ROPE ACCESS EQUIPMENT TESTING |
|
The back-up safety system By Jan Holan and Steve Beason
Download the full report (496 Kb PDF format)
In August 2002, The Bureau of Reclamation and Ropeworks, Inc. conducted testing of industrial rope access equipment used in the back-up safety system. One-person and two-person loads were considered. This research addresses some unanswered questions raised by an extensive 2001 study conducted by Lyon Equipment for the United Kingdom's Health and Safety Executive.
Introduction and Background Much of the equipment used in commercial rope access was originally designed for other purposes and subsequently adopted for use in the industrial environment. While most rope access equipment is used in a similar manner to its original intended function, some equipment is routinely applied in ways never envisioned, much less tested, by its manufacturers. Additional variables, introduced by the unknown compatibility of various rope brands with the equipment chosen, are another potential cause for concern.
Properly trained and supervised rope access technicians uphold an impeccable safety record. Operatives generally employ a two-rope system, a main working line for support, and a safety line for back-up in the event of a failure in the primary means of support. The process of ascending and descending on the main working system is well tested in the field and the equipment used is generally consistent with manufacturer's intentions. Because the back-up safety system generally does not bear a load during use, an extended incident-free history does not necessarily mean that the system is "bullet-proof".
The goal of the study was to test rope access equipment commonly used in the back-up safety system. We were especially interested in testing equipment that has been used, or considered for use, by the Bureau of Reclamation or Ropeworks, Inc. Additional types of equipment not commonly used in rope access were tested for comparison. We were most interested in testing the "back-up device" used in a "self-belay" system. We also tested a few belay devices that might be used by a co-worker to provide an "attended belay" for regular work activities, or in a rescue situation. All of the belay devices were also (or mainly) designed to function as descenders. We tested a few other devices, techniques, and variables in a non-systematic manner to explore some curiosities. Although this additional data was not necessarily statistically valid, the results are informative nonetheless.
While we considered existing test standards, our test methods were designed to replicate conditions found in the field. We were less interested in seeing if a particular device met a specific standard, rather we wanted to make sure that it worked effectively in the manner that it was commonly used in the field. Our testing also explored how the devices would perform as a safety back-up when used in an emergency situation under a two-person load, in a pick-off descent for example.
Our aim was to test the compatibility of the equipment paired with North American rope brands in various diameters. The Lyon Equipment testing was conducted using rope brands and diameters that are not common in North America. Rope access technicians in Europe often use 10.5mm rope while 11 mm (7/16") or larger diameters are commonly used by operatives in North America. We were interested to see how the general construction characteristics of the ropes affected the performance.
Download the full report (496 Kb PDF format)
|
|
|
|