cranes

[News]

In message , Chris J Dixon writes

Interesting indeed. I could not see a counterweight, although there must have been one.

[Chris J Dixon]

They are hard to make out on the video, but there are a couple of gray rectangular units.

Looking at the data sheet for a similar unit (M14)

It is described as having 2 x 2450 kg permanent steel ballast.

Chris

[Adrian]

In message , Chris J Dixon writes

We used to see that sort of thing in Germany 40+ years ago, I never worked out why they didn't catch on over here.

Adrian

[news]

You may not use a cage with a telehandler for planned work, only for unexpected occurrences, even then the driver must stay in the cab of the telehandler at all times a person is in the (approved) cage. The person in the cage must be secured in a cage with a restraint that is short enough to prevent his body falling out of the cage.

A Mobile Elevated Work Platform must have controls in the cage and emergency controls that can take control from the ground. I'd love to be able to use our JCB 535 as a MEWP but there doesn't seem to be a way of doing this and staying within the working at height regulations.

Telehandlers may lift building materials up to the work height, they will still have to comply with LOLER.

AJH

[Clive George]

Couple of people died in Ireland recently from that didn't they? Cage fell in the water, they couldn't release themselves.

[News]

Yes, I saw those. It just looked as though, with a weight at the far end of the jib, it would be fairly unstable. Apparently not, as it seems to work.My only practical experience of such things is building Meccano cranes years ago :-)

[Chris J Dixon]

They failed to appreciate the guidance that, over water, harnesses should not be worn.

Chris

[news]

Yes that's correct and in that case a buoyancy aid should be used. I suppose the theory is that hitting deep water is less of an evil than hitting solid ground.

Actually a farmer was fined within the last week for using a pallet fork mounted cage which slid off the tines with two men who fell three metres and sustained broken bones, that's only 1 metre above the lower limit for the working at height regulations I think.

I actually walked off site last week when the health and safety manager refused to allow me to use the MEWP to chemfix some loose fixings for a horizontal pipe 4 metres above the ground, requiring me to use a ladder footed by another employee instead, on the grounds I could not prove my competency to use the MEWP. I had basic training when I hired them in the past but no certificate and on flat ground the MEWP was far and away the safest platform to work from.

AJH

[Clive George]

What was the ladder setup? Just the ladder with somebody standing at the bottom, no belay, etc?

[news]

Yes but I would have had to tie it off once at the top.

AJH

[Clive George]

Get the certificate for the MEWP :-)

hints that they're enough of a problem that in a work environment some training is probably appropriate, and a certificate is probably the only way you can prove that.

I don't like being up ladders with no backup. For 4m up (feet 4m above ground) I'd be using a rope and harness.

[news]

Did that on Wednesday NPTC CS47 which should cover me for other tasks using a MEWP.

I had already had very similar tracing in the past, just not had a certificate that my competency had been assessed.

I'm used, albeit long ago, to working at height with a rope and harness, never did like using ladders but I'm too old to want to haul myself up nowadays.

I'd quite like the idea of going up in a MEWP and then transferring into rope and harness to work but that seems to go against the rule of staying in the basket.

AJH