LORRY LOADER CRANES: Testing and inspection
With the number of lorry loader cranes operating in the UK increasing every year, the need for properly tested and inspected equipment has never been greater - not only for the safety of crane operators and site workers, but also for the well being of the nation’s road users.

A crane that has not been properly maintained poses a risk not only in its place of operation, but also when travelling between jobs. But a great deal of confusion exists over the requirements for the testing of loader cranes. The Construction and Use (Lifting) Regulations 1961 covered this, but these were repealed in 1998 with the advent of the Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations (LOLER).

LOLER introduced the requirement for an annual ‘Thorough Examination and Inspection’. This made it the responsibility of a ‘Competent Person’ to determine if, and when, an overload test should be carried out on the grounds that “the design of certain lifting equipment is such that damage may be caused by conventional overload tests”. Loader cranes do not fall into such a category.

But who is a ‘Competent Person’? A ‘Competent Person’ is defined in the Approved Code of Practice for LOLER as having “such appropriate practical and theoretical knowledge and experience of the lifting equipment to be thoroughly examined as will enable them to detect defects or weaknesses and to assess their importance in relation to the safety and continued use of the lifting equipment”.

“One of the major problems facing the lorry loader industry today is that the people carrying out annual inspections are not always ‘competent’, having limited knowledge and experience of the equipment, and sometimes not even being aware of the relevant standards,” says Paul Duke, service manager for TH White Ltd, the Palfinger distributor for England and Wales.

So what does British Standard 7121, the “Code of Practice for the Safe Use of Cranes”, have to say on the subject? BS7121 isa most important source of advice, witnessed by the fact that it is referred to eight times in the LOLER Approved Code of Practice and Guidance. Every competent loader crane examiner should be aware of BS 7121 Part 2: “Inspection, Testing and Examination” and Part 4: “Lorry Loaders”, and if they are not, they are not “competent” as defined in the Regulations.

It is acknowledged that the British Standard 7121 is a recommendation, and not a legal requirement. However, in the event of a prosecution following an accident, the competent person would probably be questioned as to whether the requirements of BS 7121 parts 2 and 4 were applied during the ‘Thorough Examination and Inspection’ and, if not, what alternative standards were applied. The failure of a competent person to satisfy the court that an acceptable alternative standard had been used could result in that person being recorded as “incompetent”. BS7121 Parts 2 and 4 recommend a 25 per cent overload test to be carried out:

• Before first being taken into use.

• Every four years after first being taken into use.

• Every eight years after first being taken into use.

• The test should also include a Non Destructive Test.

• After each major repair or component change.

• When a change of chassis takes place.

BS 7121 parts 2 and 4 also recommend that a proof load test, plus 10 per cent, at maximum radius be applied as part of the annual ‘Thorough Examination and Inspection’. This is necessary for calibration checks of the Overload Protection System and the Rated Capacity Indicator to be verified.

 ALLMI totally endorses the recommendations of BS 7121 Parts 2 and 4 (ALLMI was party to the preparation) to be incorporated in the annual ‘Thorough Examination and Inspection’ as required by LOLER.
If you require further clarification on this issue then please call ALLMI Training Ltd on 01249
No Responsibility accepted for the accuracy of any articles found on this site.   Reproduced from cranes & access Oct issue 04

A Through Examination

ALLMI
  Advice note on
REG & STANDARDS
(80k pdf)

A  thorough examination on chains and lifting equipment.
In the UK, the current legal requirements for regular thorough examination of lifting equipment are spelt out in the Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations (LOLER). However, despite the fact that LOLER was introduced in 1998, there is still a degree of confusion over the meaning and implications of a thorough examination.
Click on the left hand link for more on this story.............

www.highways.gov.uk

ALLMI
  Advice note on
BRIDGE BASHING
(80k pdf)

ALLMI.Catagories

A question of stability

Preliminary Guidance on PUWER98 and LOLER
A summary of the main changes relating to lifting equipment arising out of The Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998, SI No 2306 and The Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment regulations 1998, SI No 2307 which came into force on 5th December 1998.
Click on the left hand link for more on this story..........

Northumbrian Water fined £50,000 after employee crushed between vehicles
Northumbrian Water ltd was fined £50,000 after a court heard how one of its employees was crushed to death on a public roadway.
Prosecuting on behalf of the Health and Safety Executive, David Rowlands told Teesside Crown Court that maintenance worker David Mason was working in Brotton, Cleveland, when the accident happened on 8 December 2000.
Mason was helping to repair a water main on Brotton High Street, and was using a lorry mounted crane or lorry loader to transfer soil from the side of the road into the rear of the vehicle, on the day the the accident.
To carry out the work, the side of the road where the lorry was parked was closed off to traffic, and temporary traffic lights were set up to allow vehicles to pass through using the other lane.
However, trees positioned alongside the road prevented Mason from swinging the crane’s jib above the pavement, so he had to swing the jib over the ‘live’ lane of traffic to pick up and deposit the loads of soil, said Rowlands.
The court was told that although Mason was only swinging the crane’s jib into the ‘live’ lane when there were gaps in the traffic flow, it accidentally hit a passing bus. This caused the bus to swerve alongside the lorry, and Mason — who was standing on the ground operating the crane was crushed to death between the two vehicles. The driver of the bus, which was not carrying any passengers  at the time  of  the incident, was taken to hospital with minor injuries, said Rowlands.
The court heard that the accident happened because Northumbrian Water failed to ensure that a safe system of work was in place for operating the lorry-loader.
In particular, if it was necessary to swing the crane across the lane of traffic, the company should have ensured that the lane was closed off by workers holding up ‘stop and go boards', or by changing the temporary traffic lights to red, said Rowland.
The court also heard that the company failed to adequately monitor the use of lorryoaders at road works, and failed to provide its staff with adequate training on how to operate lorrymounted  cranes on or near public roads. As a result, it had become normal practice for employees to swing crane jibs across live lanes without using a banksman to control the traffic flow, added Rowlands.
Speaking in mitigation for Northumbrian Water, which pleaded guilty, Keith Morton said that since the incident, the company has revised its procedures to ensure that, if the jibs of lorry loaders need to be moved across live roadways, all traffic is stopped.
Northumbrian Water Limited was fined a total of  £50,000, split  equally under sections 2(1) and 3(1) of the Health and Safety at work Act 1974 for failing to ensure the safety of employees and non-employees,respectivaly. The company was also ordered to pay the full prosecution costs of £10,000
No Responsibility accepted for the accuracy of any articles found on this site

Interlock Clarification