Rank: Forum user 
|
The company have just purchased a JCB tele-handler and a JCB man basket attachment. I am trying to do a risk assessment on this piece of kit and wondered if anyone has already carried one out. Its a relatively new piece of kit on the market, and can be operated by the person in the basket via a remote control unit.
Once the control chip is removed from the tele-handler cab, it is rendered inoperable and you can only bring the boom down from the cab in an emergency situation. I'm treating it as a MEWP and looking at the same risk & controls involved when using this type of equipment. Any help or suggestions would be gratefully received.
Many Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
I have not come across this equipment before but it does sound like a normal MEWP when used in conjunction with the basket. I presume you have someone trained to use the equipment. If so, I suggest you sit down with them and pick their brains. You will need to understand the operation, emergency use, failure modes, etc. The supplier should have provided you with the manufacturer's manual which should help with the assessment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
shickey
have you read this document?
http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/pm28.pdf
I know it strictly relates to fork Lifts but I believe similar principles apply
For me the key statement is on the front page. _ the equipment is primarily for lifting materials and not people and can be used with working platforms only in exceptional circumstances.
Hope that helps
Brian
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Good advice from Brian read PM 28 as a metter of urgency it applies to this kit.
Good rule of thumb if it's an intergrated basket then insist on a high standard of training and treat it like a MEWP with lift plans etc.
If it's not intergrated try returning it and get your money back.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
We have prohibited use of our JCB telehandler with a personnel platform (man-cage).
The reason is the tilt facility. There's a tilt control next to the main control stick. The tilt could be accidently operated with the man-cage, so the risk assessment has prohibited its use with man-cage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
By 'tilt' I mean the forks tilt downwards !
JohnW wrote:We have prohibited use of our JCB telehandler with a personnel platform (man-cage).
The reason is the tilt facility. There's a tilt control next to the main control stick. The tilt could be accidently operated with the man-cage, so the risk assessment has prohibited its use with man-cage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
But this is a manufacturers piece of equipment and it sounds like JCB intend the cage to be operative controlled with the in cab equipment overridden by the removal of the control chip. Given proper use there should then be no real problem. All boom lifts have cage tilt ability so what is the real problem. Sounds like JCB boffins have done some deep thinking about the potential for their machines.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user 
|
If the tele-handler, with the basket attached, can only be operated from within the basket then this is an integrated machine as defined on Page 3 Para 8, and therefore PM28 does not apply (page 3 Para 5).
I would assess it as a MEWP, and ask the manufacturer for advice on specific scenarios, if they are not covered in the operating manual. If you use an external training company they can give you practical advice for your Risk Assessment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
I was wondering what tickets would the operator need to hold to operate this , CPCs or IPAF or other ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
IPAF would be a good idea!
(boblewis, sorry I went a bit OT earlier,,I was referring to our prohibition of our non-integrated cage with the JCB tilting telehandler)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Thanks everyone for you input
As Bob and SJP said this is a man basket that has been manufactured by JCB and once the chip is removed from the cab and inserted into the remote unit, it can only be operated by the person in the basket. I looked at PM 28 and found nothing in that as it relates to non-integrated man cages. I did think that it should be treated as a MEWP and the guys controlling it have IPAF tickets.
Thanks for your help guys; it’s good to get feedback from others
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
I used to work somewhere where we had similar equipment manufactured by Caterpillar and our rules where treat as telehandler when operating on its own and treat as MEWP when operating with the basket. Our guys were trained by a CPCS qualified trainer to CPCS standards although we issued an in-house certificate of competence which was renewable every 3 years. Our guys also did L2 Plant Operations NVQ's for the equipment as we were an accredited NVQ centre.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.