Posted By CFT Does anyone happen to know what the standards are for this particular work? My question is restricted to the engineered restraints for connection of the equipment, not the professionalism or training or competency of said workers. Personally I loathe this procedure and favour lorry mounts up to 200 feet but need to know what I am talking about before launching into hierarchical procedures for my employer. Building is 60 feet high, 1920's style detached London style property used as multi tenanted light office use, roof is flat with 1.5 metre high railings to all edges secured into edge with typical reverse cross bracing to approximately one metre back; I have put prohibition on the works until I have completed report. Contractor is national and best in field but I don't like current procedures for securing operative from the top which is why I am after knowledge on the way they should be secured. I would say it is highly unlikely I will permit this to take place anymore but for sake of correct reasoning, it is vital I understand how they are supposed to ensure they are secured properly. Many thanks if you can help. CFT

Posted By Brett Day Having had to use a lot of these access / mansafe systems (yes including abseiling) I don't like them as often after 5-6 years the latch points, eye bolts running lines etc haven't been tested or maintained (how many buildings have you been too with eybolts with a 'Do Not Use' tag on?), them likewise the harness and fittings that I own are often different from the fittings required at the venue and heaven forbid the FM department will allow me to use their fittings to clip onto the system. Luddite? No. Mug that spent 6 years having to get access using these types of arrangements and half the time resorting to a mewp, zip up or truck mounted boom Yes !!

Posted By David AB Thomas See HSE's MISC 612, http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/misc612.pdf as well as BS 7985 and IRATA.

Posted By Dave Merchant To reply to the original post, rope access in the UK is extremely safe compared to other methods (the accident figures on Irata's website compared to the HSE's general falls from height figures show that conclusively). I agree that elsewhere and in the distant past things were more "amusing", but these days it's probably the most highly-regulated form of work at height there is. There are far more potential hazards with a large-scale MEWP than with rope access (and the HSE reports tally up the cases to prove it). Irata remain "the people" to many, but remember that they're only a trade body (albeit a good one), and the official national standards for industrial rope access are given in BS7985:2002. Irata's own guidelines broadly agree with 7985 but a rope access worker can be perfectly safe and legal without being an Irata member - in the facilities maintenance sector Irata is actually quite rare as their training program tends to be a little over-the-top (pun intended) for simple window cleaning tasks. To reply to Brett about anchorages not being tested - that may have been personal experience but it's illegal and extremely rare. Anchors used for rope access must have a recorded inspection every 6 months (under LOLER) and no competent access worker would connect to one that's out of date. The work plan for a rope access job must include anchorage suitability and inspection, but if a building has expired eyebolts (many do if they're no longer being used) most rope access companies can re-test them, replace them if needed, or use alternative structural elements where they can't.

Posted By CFT Thanks chaps most appreciated; my concerns commenced on a property that came into the portfolio whereby the cleaning of the windows had been completed utilising an abseiling method; with the absence of any anchorage points (just a fixed railing) you can probably see why I wanted this practice ceased with immediate effect. I may stand corrected if I can get further into just how a proper anchor point would be installed and what type; I still favour the MEWP in this particular situation though. Tabs 'bits of string' was always intended to be tongue in cheek, but I know you knew that really. Thanks again Charley

Posted By CFT Bob When I said railing I meant just that, the protective barrier to prevent someone falling off the roof and with that in mind I consider it an altogether unacceptable method for securing an operative to, little more than a 50/50 will it hold or won't it, a ridiculous situation which is why it was stopped!! Charley

Posted By Steve99Jones Has anyone ever come across or had any experience in the use of dead weight trolley's to provide a safe anchorage point for rope access work? Any comments positive or negative would be welcome. Thanks Steve

Posted By Helen C Yeh, in a previous job I used the weights as anchor points regularly. They are very versatile and great for (not sure of the correct term) diverting your ropes so you can abseil in exactly the right place. I wouldn't recommend them as a main attachment point but ok for a secondary attachment. However, you have to be careful on roof tops coated with gravel - they do slide!

Posted By Dave Merchant They're called a lot of things - "mansafe anchors", "deadweight anchors" and "cookie cutters" but they're also part of EN795 (this time in class E). As such they count as fall protection equipment and must have the same inspection, certification and testing as an eyebolt (without the pull-test of course). Sadly the ones I've found semi-abandoned on rooftops almost never have any labelling. Yes they're surface-specific in a lot of cases - the most common types use steel blocks bolted to an X-frame, and the rubber bottom surface of each block is chosen to match the surface (smooth, treaded, etc.) so they're not quite as no-brainer as maybe some people treat them. You've also got a manual handling issue getting the bits onto the rooftop, but there are a few models that rely on water-filled bags which get round that problem. Amusingly YouTube-ish if you spring a leak though... Their 'advantage' is they don't need to alter the building by drilling holes, but rope access workers don't need to do that either - they can almost always find a structural anchor arrangement if they're told not to pierce your precious stonework. The reason they're called cookie cutters is that they're heavy (as in several hundred kilos) and you put them on a flat roof. The result, on occasion, is a series of perfect little X-shaped holes in roof..floor..ceiling..floor... (a small sign to hold up saying "whimper" is available for such eventualities)

Posted By CFT AHS Thanks; I do utilise 'reach & wash' on many properties we manage but sadly this one is not a suitable candidate; it would have been the first consideration as it eliminates any need for working at height. Charley