Lifting Slings

On Tue, 19 Dec 2006 11:14:14 GMT, with neither quill nor qualm, "Pete C." quickly quoth:

Doesn't he live in the UK, where guns, kitchen knives, long-arbored table saws (we can't have anyone using a dado stack now, can we?), and common sense are outlawed?

I would be delighted to meet you and learn something from you...

i

I don't think we're on the same page. I mean lifting a load such that the person is underneath it, not just above the level of their head.

We can be fired on the spot if found under a load intentionally, or the crane operator can be fired if he moves a load over someone. I'm pretty sure it *is* illegal. We've had crane brakes stop working and they drop the load. The biggest danger is that someone hooks up the load incorrectly, and after some movement, one of the chains comes off.

Death is not only a possibility, but rather a probability. Your head gets hit first, and flesh doesn't have much of a chance anyway.

Really? Your chains always fail gracefully? Who says the load isn't moving when the chain breaks? Shock loading? Must be nice... Hey, it's your life.

There are other ways. Also, when chains get caught on things like screws or other small items, they can also break (shocking the chain, BTW).

We have a 2 ton gantry crane that is very much capable of doing some serious damage. But, what would I know? I've never seen eye bolts pull out from a 2-3 ton load and end up across the shop...

There's a lot to be aware of when lifting. When Iggy starts talking about "hardware store" chain, perhaps we need to keep an eye on what's written here. Perhaps you think common sense is common, but it's not. People are ignorant and foolish. Feeding their fire shouldn't be a priority.

Regards,

Robin

Yes, that is exactly what I mean, *over a person's head*. It happens every single day and is absolutely essential and unavoidable in many, many cases.

That may be company policy, but it is certainly not any actual law. If your crane brakes have failed then it sounds like your cranes are getting substandard maintenance and inspections and that's where your problem lies.

That would be the case with just about any falling overhead hazard and doesn't require a crane either.

Who said anything about gracefully? I indicated that it simply won't have enough energy to do any significant damage.

I had one of two chains holding a 4,700# load come loose once. The load was as per good practice lifted as little as possible and the chains safe working load were each adequate for the load. The chain that came loose popped up a couple feet at most and if I had been within it's reach I might have gotten a bruise. The load simply tilted and that edge touched the ground.

It this had been one of your 40T loads the results would have likely been different, but a load barely over 2T simply does not create a flying chain hazard, but only a crushing hazard.

If that can happen then it's the result of poor rigging practice. Good practice dictates slowly applying tension to the rigging and insuring that all connections are solid and nothing is caught short of where it should be before applying anywhere near lifting force to the rigging.

Sounds like you don't have safety latches on your load hooks. I think that's an OSHA violation. Also sounds like you're not using quality eye bolts either. Are they forged swivel rings rated for lifting or are they hardware store crap?

"Hardware store" chain is a meaningless term. As I noted previously, you can get perfectly suitable chain at a hardware store or Depot / Lowe's, just not usually in bulk.

Common sense is indeed in short supply these days, however feeding ignorant paranoia by claiming that you need grade 80 chain rated for overhead lifting for any rigging operation is absolutely false and certainly not warranted.

Pete C.

It's naive to claim that it's only *other* countries that are populated by fraidy-cats. In case you haven't noticed, table saws and all manner of cutting tools are pretty much banned from our schools already. And it's only a matter of time before somebody figures out how to build a ladder from warning labels alone. There's no denying it, in an international pantywaiste contest we'd have as good a chance at winning as any other country. If it came down to a tie-breaker, our need to be surrounded by airbags inside 3 ton 4WD drive battlestars to "safely" make a trip to the 7Eleven would win it for us.

There's no need to outlaw it anywhere, most seem happy to give it up voluntarily. Turn on your TV and watch a steady stream of drug makers and ambulance chasers vie for your business. It's about as far from common sense as you can get for folks to eat themselves into needing so many pills, and sue each other for every slight. If you need another example, we've been waging a "war on drugs" for decades, but this morning I read that our annual pot crop is more valuable than our corn crop. Maybe we need to start a war against power tools. :-)

Wayne

You'll soon discover _where_ the energy is stored, when one end breaks and the whole length of the chain kinda unwraps around the load. But maybe the time to think about it will not be long enough.

Nick

Well, I can ask the safety guy at work. I've never heard of any instance where it is required to lift a load over someone using a crane. It is a major offence at our shop, and at any of our customers' shops.

Any examples?

There are *lots* of things that can happen to a crane between inspections. While the crane *should* not function after such abuses, that is not always the case. If you don't understand why it's possible to abuse a crane and continue to have it function, well...

Certainly. And I don't tend to walk under things which are temporarily secured for overhead lifting either. Again, your life, your trust.

It sounds like you haven't done any lifting beyond perhaps a couple of inches off the ground. Again, incomplete information.

I guess we're all safe all the time then.

Is this a description of your incident, or is this always the case? A rule if you will.

Well, it isn't always easy to see exactly what's going on. Some lifts are more complicated than others.

We do have safety latches and we use forged swivel hoist rings. This isn't a joke of an operation. We do serious lifting and have serious equipment to deal with it. Our parent company, the government, and our customers require it. I work for a tier 1/2 automotive die shop.

That's not the way Iggy said it. Remember the lowest common denominator.

Remember that none of this matters to me specifically. I already know how to lift heavy loads safely. Think of the other readers. Complete info is important, and "hardware store chain" is *not* complete info.

And implying that people can lift massive loads over their heads with hardware store chain is not only false and not warranted, but specifically dangerous and very reckless. An exaggeration, of course, but at least my info won't kill anyone.

Regards,

Robin

Thanks very much for the input, Robin. Concerning the "legality" of personnel beneath loads I was able to easily find the following. Anyone using the internet can find more if they're interested:

"March 24, 1999

Mr. Phillip J. Pekron, CIH, CSP KETER Consultants Inc.

8270 Archer Ave Willow Springs, IL 60480

Dear Mr. Pekron,

This is in response to your letter of 10 February, 1999 requesting clarification of interpretation of OSHA standard 29 CFR

1910.179(n)(3)(vi).

OSHA standard 29 CFR 1910.179(n)(3)(vi) states, "The employer shall require that the operator avoid carrying loads over people." This is required to protect people from the hazard of a falling load due to inadvertent failure of the crane mechanism or operator error.

To protect employees working in an enclosed cage which has its structural integrity verified by a professional engineer, you must submit a written application to OSHA to obtain a variance from the OSHA standards, for carrying indeterminate loads over these employees. There is not enough information in you letter to act as an application. However, we will review your application for granting a variance from paragraph 1910.179(n)(3)(vi) of OSHA standards.

The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 grants the agency the discretion to grant an employer an exemption to OSHA regulations in certain instances. Variances are granted in three forms: temporary, permanent and for reasons of national defense (29 U.S.C. 655(b)(6)(A),

655(d) and 655). You are probably interested in obtaining a permanent variance.

To qualify for a permanent variance, the employer must prove that alternative practices or equipment will provide a work environment which is safe and healthful as one that complied with the standard. The variance, if granted, is narrow in scope and will specify the conditions the employer must meet and/or the alternative practices it must adopt to receive such protection.

OSHA has published specific agency rules and procedures for applying for a variance from a regulation in the Federal Register. These rules can be found at 29 CFR Part 1905. I have enclosed a copy of Part 1905 for your review. OSHA has an extensive web site on the Internet, which is a valuable source of information on agency activity. I have enclosed information about variances downloaded from our site. Please feel free to visit our web at

Thank you for your interest in Occupational Safety and Health Administration. If you have any questions, please contact Jennifer C. Silk at (202) 693-2110.

Sincerely,

Richard E. Fairfax, Director Directorate of Compliance Programs"

My interpretation of the above is that unless a variance is created personnel will not be allowed beneath a load. Of course this is from federal osha regulations so other jurisdictions are not bound. Would anyone know about international regulations?

Steve B., our other resident crane person; what do you have to say on the subject?

As far as the following, however:

First let me state I feel "complete information" is not possible in a single usenet post; it would be so long no one would want to spend the time to read it.

In usenet groups it's hard to sift the fact from the opinion. It's easy for myself to assign a "value rating" to rigging information because of my years as a rigger but what about the inexperienced trying to interpret the same information?

You will find well meaning, intelligent people offering their best solutions to problems they know nothing about, but who are willing to try to "help" the situation (and other people) by using problem solving methods used in other areas. These people may feel, because these methods of problem solving have succeeded previously, that there should be no problem applying them in other environments as well, and in general this will be found to be true.

But what these intelligent and well meaning people may fail to take into account (indeed, are UNABLE to take into account) are some of the potential rapid and devistating effects that an error in rigging can cause. You, through training and experience, are aware of these dangers and will error on the side of safety, others, despite their intelligence in other areas, may not. AND the newbee asking the question, with less experience than either of you, often can not tell which is the more valid solution and, due to considerations such as cost, time, etc. may choose the unsafe solution.

This does not mean you shouldn't offer safe rigging information, after all I still do so, but instead I suggest you try for "essential" information rather than "complete." Thanks for your input.

dennis in nca

Iggy. I think he's stalking you. I think he secretly admires you. Watch out.

Seriously though, doesn't he know not to do this type of thing? Or perhaps he's a disgruntled customer? Wierd.

dennis in nca

dennis in nca

I was a crane operator in the 1970s in the Gulf of Mexico. I operated cranes on drilling platforms, drill tenders, barges, and on land. We certainly did things ALL THE TIME that were against the laws of OSHA and common sense and nature.

Wait, wait. OSHA does not apply after three miles at sea.

Anyway, in the oilfield, we took a lot of risks and pushed the envelope a lot. Git-R-Done hadn't been invented yet, and the catchphrase was "just get it". Meaning, "take care of this and don't tell me anything so I will have plausible deniability in case YOU mess up."

That being said, there was just about only one thing that was frowned upon, and that everyone was of one mind about ......... and that was about being under a suspended load.

Yes, I can see that traveling overhead dolly cranes will have materials pass over people all the time. I can see that no matter what you do, there are times when a load will pass over someone.

But, again, that being said, if everyone is paying attention, it's a momentary thing, or everyone ducks into cover, or they are just mindful of the situation.

We had times when we would unload casing, and it would be a nonstop process that took 24 hours or more. At times, the load would be over someone, but at those times, the guys were watching, and aware. Pucker factor high. There was no other way to do it to bring it off the boat, get it high enough to clear the exhaust stacks and boat parts, swing it over the water, and then swing it back over the boat to get it through the clear area where it came onto the landing area on top of the platform. At times, it HAD to be over people. Or else, we would have had to pick up two pieces of pipe, have the boat pull out, bring up the pipe and land it, and then have the boat back under again, and do it again. It would have taken a week to unload a boat.

When we had the speedboats, and workboats unload small amounts of supplies or "stuff", they would not tie up, but when each load cleared the deck, they would drive out from under the load, hover, and then back up under the headache ball to hoist the next.

Yes, under ideal situations, you don't want anyone under the load at any time for any reason.

And then, there's the real world where it has to be done, and is done successfully all the time. Well, I don't mean 100% of the time, because shit happens, but ALMOST all the time.

If everything goes according to plan, okay. If not ......

But, in rigging, as every rigger knows, there's times when you have a safety factor that is very high. And then there are times when you know you're pushing it. And then there's the times when you figure everything, have a high safety factor, and the wheels fall off. And if a rigger can say that they have never "pushed it", I would just think that the person hasn't been around very long.

Just MHO, YMMV.

It was quite an adventure.

Steve

Per Pete C.:

Paranoia is defined as irrational fear; do you mean rules concerning "breaking chains" are not rational??? Perhaps consider the wide range of industry represented by the members of this newsgroup and realize everyones legitimate concernes do not necessarily relate to your personal "paranoia." Whether lifting 40 tons or an engine block, safety is important; always use safe methods and safe rigging materials.

What evidence do you have the people lifting overhead are following OSHA regulations? Or even that it's "indeed necessary and unavoidable in most of them?" I have no doubt these are the situations where most lifting accidents happen. Is this what you're promoting? I'd advise against it. And where is your proof that unsafe procedures are the norm? Or are you saying that because you've had direct, personal experience in such matters that you're willing to accept them? Most thinking people who have a choice will not.

dennis in nca

This is rec.crafts.metalworking, it is by definition a group for home / hobby machinists and metalworkers. OSHA has no jurisdiction and home / hobby folks are very unlikely to be hoisting 40T loads with a 100' crane.

Paranoia is trying to apply OSHA / industrial safety rules where they do not apply, i.e. rules that are quite valid for a bridge crane lifting

40T dies simply are not applicable and are irrelevant to an engine hoist lifting a 1/2T engine 3' out of the back of a pickup truck.

Even OSHA recognizes practical limitations in the real world (Cal-OSHA may not). They recognize that it is not practical to clear the area under the path of a crane lift in many cases. Think of a building under construction, is it even remotely practical to interrupt all the various tradespeople and have them clear the area under the path of the next load of materials being lifted by a crane? How about shipbuilding?

Certainly it is prudent to clear the area when practical, but in the real world it is simply not always practical. Again this is a home / hobby group and the lifts that 99.999% of the people in this group would be doing at home are *not* overhead, the weights are not even remotely close in weight to the SWL of the better grades of readily available chain and chain breakage is probably the absolute least risk of the entire lift.

Pete C.

Here's a little summary of what I have learned from this thread.

I think that we can all agree that lifting stuff over people's heads (or, same thing, standing under or too close to loads) is something to be avoided.

But we also should recognize that even if everyone makes an effort to avoid it, it could happen sometimes, due to error or carelessness.

So, that's why lifting things that MIGHT possibly pass over people, requires a larger margin of safety.

Hoisting an enging out of a pickup truck does not qualify as overhead lifting. That does not mean that loads should be handled carelessly, but it is not overhead lifting.

i

What part of "Avoid" don't you understand? Avoid is not an absolute. "Shall not" and "Shall avoid" are not the same thing.

Again, this is a home /hobby group, not an industrial one. The risks that have been hyped in this thread have very little applicability to the home / hobby world. By getting people paranoid about something that is about the lowest risk they will face in any lift they are likely to attempt at home, you distract their attention from the far greater risks of CG issues and unstable loads tipping.

Pete C.

Hi Pete. You mentioned in an earlier post:

"This is rec.crafts.metalworking, it is by definition a group for home / hobby machinists and metalworkers. OSHA has no jurisdiction and home / hobby folks are very unlikely to be hoisting 40T loads with a 100' crane." And now, similarily, you say:

But you will find, after hanging out here for a while, your definition is too narrow and that people from all levels of industry are also represented here. To me this means any information I offer must apply to all or there must be caveats offered to not misdirect others. You might consider a similar course of action.

dennis in nca

I don't think it is at all unreasonable to expect people to be cognizant of the context of the group. If we inflate the context to include everything remotely related then we'll end up having to paste 12 pages of boilerplate disclaimers onto a two sentence reply.

Pete C.

"If we...????" Who's asking you to do anything? I just want people (and by extension, their machines) to be safe. If wasting a little of your time and creativity is too much for you to contribute then don't. No on's forcing you to do anything.

dennis in nca

I definitely found out about that energy stored in a chain. I was a merchant seaman in 1965. My ship was docking in Karachi Pakistan. As an ordinary seaman, my job was to wrap and stop a 1" mooring cable with a

3/8 chain stopper. The chain broke and the end landed in my right shin. I spent my first day and night in a Karachi hospital. A miserable experience, but I consider myself very lucky. Chains move very fast 8^)

Jay Cups

Nick Mueller wrote: