Posted By Sean Fraser
and you point is, caller?

Posted By Peter MacDonald
Excellent posting.

Have passed on the link to our Working At Height Group.

Peter

Posted By Stuart Nagle
And this today from the HSE (Via Croners alert service) which I find a touch mystifying.... If a person is required to wear a harness, by not attaching either end of the lanyard, or only one end (not to the harness)...how is the harness supposed to be effective in incidents where persons fall (e.g. in aresting a fall)?

Read for yourself.... as below. or am I misunderstanding this - explainations please:

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has issued a warning about the importance of following manufacturers’ instructions on the use of fall arrest equipment, and in particular systems based on twin-tailed energy-absorbing lanyards.

The warning follows a recent incident in Australia, where a worker was killed when his lanyard failed.

An energy-absorbing lanyard is a line for connecting a full-body harness to an anchorage point, with an inbuilt in-line device that reduces the impact of a fall. Twin-tailed lanyards enable users to move freely whilst remaining clipped on at all times.

Martin Holden, Principal Specialist Inspector with the HSE’s Construction Division Technology Unit, said it is vital that everyone using fall arrest systems based on twin-tailed lanyards understands and follows the manufacturer’s instructions.

He stressed that when one of the lanyard legs is connected to the anchor point, the second leg should not be attached to the user’s harness, or to a belt or other item of clothing, as this could limit the extension of the energy absorber in the event of a fall.

Mr Holden said that if this happened, excessive arrest forces would be applied to both the user and to the system, which could lead to equipment failure with potentially fatal consequences.

Unless the harness has been provided or retro-fitted with lanyard “parking” points, which are specifically designed to break away in the event of a fall, the second leg should be left to hang free. Alternatively, the HSE says, on this and only this specific type of lanyard, the second leg can also be connected to the anchor point.

The HSE stressed that employers must have formal procedures in place to ensure that equipment is used correctly, and workers must know how to use lanyards properly and should check them regularly before use.

Posted By steve e ashton
Stuart,

think of the device as a letter 'Y'. the shock absorber is the upright - the lanyards are the two 'arms' of the Y. the reason for having twin lanyards is to enable the user to be clipped on at all times even when transferring between attachment points.

The problem with attaching the 'loose' lanyard to the body harness or other clothing is that the fall distance will then be restricted to the combined length of the twin lanyards. The shock absorber won't be able to 'stretch' to its full extent. In a fall the user will be brought to an abrupt halt reducing or defeating the margin of safety provided by the absorber.

Hope this helps understanding

Steve

Posted By Robert K Lewis
But the HSE advice is confusing if there are 2 separate landyards and not the Y formation. On the first type there is NO disadvantage to clipping back to the harness as each has an independent shock absorber. There is however the possibility of lack of deployment if both are clipped on to the anchor point.

Ther emphasis is Know Your Harness

Bob

Posted By Gordon Thelwell
Jim,

An excellent point that I hoped someone would mention. Our work involves high level tasks within the structure of pallet racking, an environment that would not cater for readily available MEWP access. Having a MEWP ‘just in case’ is not seen as reasonably practicable and would price us out. So what could we do? I’m open to any suggestions.

Many thanks,

Gordon.

Posted By Gordon Thelwell
Fantastic!

Many thanks!