Rank: New forum user 
|
I have been asked a question about mooring bollards in dock systems.
Do they come under the LOLER regulations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Ant
I would say not. The bollard is not lifting or part of any lifting device
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: New forum user
|
I agree with Steve. What is the issue, i cover tug ops in Huskisson Docks for my employer, may be able to assist
Mike
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: New forum user
|
I am introducing a testing programe on privatly owned landing stages. I am advising that we use the principles set up under current LOLER testing as the standard. So if challenged we can demonstrate we are applying a standard. The dock regs aquite poor on this subject and there seems to be no notes to mariners on the MCA site.
thanks for your replies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Ant C wrote:I have been asked a question about mooring bollards in dock systems.
Do they come under the LOLER regulations.
Quick answer - NO.
The purpose of bollards is to secure vessels at berth by means of mooring lines normally supplied by the vessel; they are not designed as ‘lifting gear’ therefore LOLER is not applicable. A vessel may use many lines to prevent the it from shifting and it is the rope that is subject to regular testing. The determination of the loads applied to these mooring lines is dependent on a number of factors including sea conditions, wind and vessel size etc. These mooring line loads would normally determine the required ‘load rating’ of a bollard. A thorough mooring requirement analysis should be performed by a competent engineer to determine the actual mooring line loads and the required load rating of bollard. The actual load factor used depends on variables including, wind and current data, specific project specifications, degree of angle from quay to vessel and of course the type of bollard.
Some bollards may also have shear bolts fitted to reduce the likelihood of quayface / cope damage and rope failure.
I fear you are wasting your time specifying LOLER as a benchmark standard. Load rating is the issue you should concentrate on. And also consider the fact that by far the most significant safety issues of bollards and mooring activities lie with rope failure and ‘snap back’ injuries, in some cases fatal.
Remember to reference the Merchant Shipping and Fishing Vessels (Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment) Regulations 2006.
GC
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Morning Ant et al,
I think that the principal you are trying to impliment is commendable there have been instance of mooring bits failing under strain (admittedly I have not seen this in either the UK ar EU).
However, you may wish to consider some of the following :
Do you wish to overload the bits in an attempt to gain a failure - it may do more harm than good.
Would the load applied test the bits structure, the fixing, or the medium fixed into?
What angle would you apply the load at 0/22.5/45/90 degrees?
how would you apply the load?
The medium fixed into has a different resistance to load.
Just food for thought - I would use PUWER at sea.
Finally what about Warping Capstans used in dry docks? the are used for pulling - but if the capstan fails the load will continue to move - under ISO that makes it a lift!
Yours aye
Db
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Bollards fall firmly under shore legislation so references to the Merchant Shipping regulations (PUWER or LOLER) are not relevant.
To see the boundaries look at the Memorandum of Understanding between the HSE, MCA and MAIB at:
http://www.mcga.gov.uk/c...ol=mca&n=2&la=en
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
it would appear Colin has a point - I stand corrected. I would now consider PUWER 98 under HASAWA 74 unless the bits are on the craft then use PUWER at sea which replaced the old hatch and plant regs 1988.
thinking on it - a test on the bits would need to be in most major planes from 0-90 degrees to put a load on simulating a fall and rise in tide/freeboard of the craft.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
colinreeves wrote:Bollards fall firmly under shore legislation so references to the Merchant Shipping regulations (PUWER or LOLER) are not relevant.
To see the boundaries look at the Memorandum of Understanding between the HSE, MCA and MAIB at:
http://www.mcga.gov.uk/c...ol=mca&n=2&la=en
Yes Colin me old mucker, however the main drive of my point if you read it through was that mooring rope failure by ropes belonging to vessels could come under the regulations stated (if the vessel was applicable to them) and therefore my point of reference was valid.
Do I smell sulpur in the air...
Gary
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
garfield esq wrote:colinreeves wrote:
Do I smell sulpur in the air...
And the snow yesterday had an odd tinge of colour .....
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.