|
Employee safety is
a concern in any occupation. We plan for unintentional fires by having
fire sprinkler systems and extinguishers available and ready to use. We
wear protective clothing to guard against caustics and other harmful substances.
Yet when it comes to protecting workers at height we often do not provide
the needed degree of safety. Falls to lower levels fatally injure more
than three times as many people annually as unintentional fires and exposure
to caustics combined.
In 1997, according
to the National Safety Council Accident Facts, falls to lower levels were
the third leading cause of fatal occupational injuries (652 fatalities).
One could argue that there always will be falls; gravity cannot be changed.
However, we can limit the effect of gravity by protecting people who must
work at elevations. Numerous personal fall arrest systems are available
to help reduce injuries and improve productivity. One specific type of
system, a horizontal fall arrest system, provides a high degree of mobility
and safety if properly designed, installed, and used.
Horizontal fall arrest
systems can be classified as one of two types, rigid or flexible lifeline
types. There are advantages and disadvantages of each one. By understanding
these systems you can make better decisions when it comes to protecting
workers at height.
Flexible Horizontal
Lifeline Systems
A flexible horizontal
lifeline (HLL) is a pliable line rigged in a horizontal plane secured
at each end to an anchorage. A worker is connected to the line using a
personal fall arrest system that moves with the worker between the two
anchorage points. By providing a sliding connection along the entire walkway
the anchorage is kept overhead, reducing the hazard of dangerous swing
falls that can occur if the worker moves to a location where the anchorage
is no longer directly overhead.
Although installing a flexible horizontal lifeline may appear to be as
simple as stringing a line between two supports, determining the loads
that are applied to the anchorage and the clearance required below the
working surface in the event of a fall can be extremely complicated. In
this respect flexible horizontal lifelines are one of the most complex
types of fall protection equipment.
To further complicate
matters for the safety engineer, no U.S. standards currently address specific
performance requirements for horizontal fall arrest systems. Consequently,
designers and manufactures are able to install systems as they see fit.
It also puts the responsibility of determining what constitutes a safe
system in the hands of the end user. It is important for the employer
or safety engineer to understand the different types of horizontal lifelines
that are available and the limitations of each type in order to make an
educated decision when selecting a horizontal lifeline system.
Flexible Lifeline
Classification
Flexible HLL systems
may be classified as either permanent or temporary. A permanent HLL becomes
an integral part of the anchoring structure and should be designed to
function for an extended period of time. Permanent HLL's are usually constructed
of metallic components. Most synthetic fiber ropes are not resistant to
long-term UV and environmental exposure.
Temporary HLL systems
are pre-engineered packaged systems that should be supplied with complete
instructions for installation and use, including the number of users allowed
to be connected, the maximum allowable span length, clearance requirements
and anchorage requirements. They are designed for a short-period-of-time
use, usually for protection during construction. When the project is complete
the HLL can be removed and reused at the next project. Both steel cable
and synthetic rope are common materials used for temporary HLL systems.
HLL's can also be
classified as either single span or multi-span. This classification is
independent of the system being permanent or temporary. The simplest type
of HLL is a single span. Single span HLL's are limited in length by their
dynamic deflection. Long spans result in large deflections that may not
prevent the worker from hitting the ground in most applications. Having
only two anchorage points, single span HLL's are limited to a straight
line.
Multi-span HLL systems
are not limited in length since they are supported at intermediate anchorages.
The basic method of constructing a multi-span HLL is to thread the line
through eyebolts or holes in the intermediate anchorages. This requires
the worker to use a double-legged lanyard to "leap frog" across
the intermediate supports to remain connected at all times. An additional
disadvantage of this type of system is that the line must be within reach
of the workers, which is impractical for applications such as railcar
loading where setback requirements would place the lifeline beyond reach.
A more sophisticated
type of multi-span HLL uses a specially designed intermediate bracket
that retains the cable, but allows a special connector to pass over the
bracket keeping the worker connected at all times. This could either involve
snaking the connector through an "S" shaped path that retains
the line or a more ingenious bracket and slider arrangement that allows
hands-free bypass without requiring any action from the worker. Some of
the proprietary multi-span HLL systems that are available can accommodate
direction changes to make corners or bend around and under obstructions
such as grain loading spouts and roof stacks.
The complexity and
infinite number of configurations of a multi-span HLL system requires
the use of a computer simulation to accurately calculate the system performance.
"Real world" testing to prove its accuracy must back up the
computer model
|
Common HLL
Applications
- Railcar
and truck loading
- Industrial
crane runways
- Building
rooftops
- Structural
framing
- Pipe racks
- Aircraft
hangars
- Bridge
construction
- Arena rigging
- Exposed
walkways
|
Design Issues
Having a fall protection
system in place does not necessarily mean your employees are protected
in the event of a fall. When, and if, a fall occurs the employer needs
to know that the fall protection system is properly anchored and will
prevent the worker from hitting an obstruction or lower level before the
fall has been completely arrested.
Two primary factors
must be considered in designing a flexible horizontal lifeline system.
- The loads that
are applied to the anchorages during a fall arrest situation must be
known to design or verify the strength of the anchorages.
- The deflection
of the lifeline during a fall arrest situation must be known to ensure
the worker will not contact an obstruction or lower level.
The deflection and
loads are closely related. They are a function of several factors including
the pretension in the lifeline, total length of the lifeline, length of
the intermediate spans, number of workers connected and the properties
of the lifeline material.
Anchorage requirements
The dynamic loads
at the end terminations of a flexible HLL system can be several times
higher than the arresting force generated by the falling worker. This
is a function of the geometry of a horizontal line during fall arrest.
OSHA 29 CFR Part 1926, Subpart M, Appendix C states:
Horizontal lifelines
may, depending on their geometry and angle of sag, be subjected to greater
loads than the impact load imposed by an attached component. When the
angle of horizontal lifeline sag is less than 30 degrees, the impact force
imparted to the lifeline by an attached lanyard is greatly amplified.
For example, with a sag angle of 15 degrees, the force amplification is
about 2:1 and at 5 degrees sag, it is about 6:1. Depending on the angle
of sag and the line's elasticity, the strength of the horizontal lifeline
and the anchorages to which it is attached should be increased a number
of times over that of the lanyard."
This statement is
taken from non-mandatory guidelines for complying with the mandatory requirements
of Part 1926.502. It provides an overview of the relationship between
the dynamic deflection and end loads of HLL's, but is not intended to
provide any strength requirements for anchorages.
The specific requirements
for HLL's in Part 1926.502(d)(8) state:
"Horizontal
lifelines shall be designed, installed, and used, under the supervision
of a Qualified Person, as part of a complete personal fall arrest system,
which maintains a safety factor of at least two."
This paragraph clearly
dictates that HLL's must be designed by a qualified engineer or manufacturer
that has experience designing HLL systems. It also gives the engineer
guidance for designing anchorages or stanchions that will be supporting
the system. It does not give quantitative values for anchorage strength.
The designer or manufacturer of a HLL system must provide documentation
of the loads on the system for the purpose of designing or verifying the
strength of the anchorages. The designer or manufacturer must also specify
what type of equipment may be used in conjunction with the HLL as a complete
system.
The load requirement
for HLL's is often confused with the 5,000 pound OSHA requirement for
personal fall arrest systems. For example, if the maximum arresting force
on a worker's lanyard was 1,800 pounds each support must sustain an 1,800
vertical load, but also a horizontal load at the end anchorages that could
be much greater than 1,800 pounds. Assume the end loads were three times
the load on the worker's lanyard, or 5,400 pounds, which is reasonable
considering the information presented above relating the dynamic deflection
to the end loads. The required anchorage strength would be 10,800 pounds
applying the requisite safety factor of two. This example illustrates
how a 5,000-pound requirement for end anchorages would be inadequate for
most HLL installations.
|
OSHA Regulations
for Horizontal Lifelines
- Qualified
person responsible for:
- Design
- Installation
- Training
- Part of
a complete personal fall arrest system
- Must maintain
a minimum safety factor of 2.0
|
|
Controlling
Loads
Designing end
anchorages for HLL's is often challenging due to heavy loads. In-line
energy absorbers, which connect one or both ends of the line to
the anchorage, can be used to reduce the end loads on HLL systems.
In general,
in-line energy absorbers:
- Increase
the deflection of the HLL.
- Require
additional clearance below working surface.
- Can substantially
reduce severe end loads.
- Require
lighter and less costly anchorages.
If the energy
absorbing capacity is used up, or the absorber has "bottomed
out", the end loads may increase beyond the rating of the absorber.
The manufacturer should supply instructions for proper use.
|
Clearance Requirements
The other primary
factor that is critical to the design of HLL systems is calculating the
dynamic deflection of the lifeline. Other factors that must be accounted
for include freefall of the worker, the deceleration distance of the worker's
shock-absorbing lanyard or retractable lifeline and any other considerations
that increase the worker's fall distance. The sum of these factors must
not be so great that the worker can contact an obstruction or lower level.
The designer or manufacturer of a HLL system should provide a recommended
minimum clearance value for permanently installed HLL systems and a method
of calculating minimum clearances for temporary systems that can be installed
in multiple configurations.
Rigid
Horizontal Systems
A rigid horizontal
fall arrest system, as the name implies, is a rigid structural shape such
as a pipe, channel, or I-beam secured in a manner that provides a continuous
horizontal anchor for fall arrest systems. This type of system is normally
mounted at shoulder height or higher based on the particular work site
perimeters. A sliding trolley arrangement freely moves along the horizontal
rail as the attached worker travels parallel to the system.
Attached to the sliding
mechanism is a connecting subsystem. This connecting subsystem, or lanyard,
can be of a set length or a self-retracting type. The particular type
of lanyard selected depends upon the required mobility; the location of
the rigid horizontal anchor in reference to the user, the work environment
and the basic type of work being performed (fall arrest potential or restraint
system).
Classification
Rigid horizontal
fall arrest systems are almost always considered permanent installations.
The cost and time involved installing a rigid system dictate that the
system remains in place for an extended period. Rigid systems typically
are not limited in length; the structural shape can run as far as the
anchoring structure does. While some more complex rigid systems can be
designed to go around corners, or at least have slight bends in the rail,
the majority are straight, level runs. Inclines or slopes are normally
not possible because of the potential for the sliding mechanism to travel
downhill should a person be freely suspended from the system.
|
Rigid
Horizontal Fall Arrest Systems
Advantages
- Substantial
structural member as anchor - Peace of mind, more resistant
to damage or corrosion.
- Less
clearance required arresting a fall - No deflection or sag
in rail to add to fall distance, reduces potential of second worker
being pulled off by first worker falling.
- Anchorage
strength calculations simplified - Less complicated to determine
anchoring strength requirements (no sag, deflection angles to
deal with).
Disadvantages
- Initial
installation costly - Large investment in material and labor
to install system.
- Numerous
anchoring/support members required - Long spans require a
large number of supports and/or a large/heavy rigid rail system.
- More
visual/architecturally less appealing - Physically larger
than flexible cable system.
|
Design Issues
A Qualified Person
must design the rigid horizontal fall arrest system. The designer involved
will need to consider the distance or run length of the system, the number
of workers attached to the system, the anchoring structure required to
attach the rigid horizontal member to, and the position of the horizontal
rail in reference to the work zone. The longer the span distance between
supports the stronger the rigid horizontal structural shape must be. This
results in larger and heavier horizontal members. If the rigid member
is to be attached to existing structural members the overall strength
of the structure must be evaluated. As an example, systems installed to
the bottom side of existing roof members must be evaluated for strength
based on the potential loading of falling workers, rigid rail weight,
and other loads imposed by building codes.
The weight of rigid
horizontal members can be substantial, ranging from 10 pounds to 100 pounds
per foot or more, depending upon the number of users and the span distance.
Selection of the appropriate sized rigid member must account for vertical
loading as well as side loading capacity. Many structures have a high
strength in a vertical plane, but may be limited in side-load capacity.
Anchoring of the
rigid system can be done from existing structure or new structure specifically
designed for the fall arrest system. The designer needs to determine what
the anchorage strength criteria will be; a 5,000 pound anchorage requirement
per person, or an engineered system providing a 2:1 safety factor minimum.
Engineered systems in particular need to be designed around data from
personal fall arrest system manufacturers in order to make certain appropriate
safety factors are maintained. Anchorage strength calculations for rigid
systems are less complicated then the calculations for flexible lifeline
systems; the designer is not concerned with wire rope deflection and sag
angles. Because there is no sag or deflection is the rail, the required
clearance distance is also less with rigid systems when compared to flexible
types.
The sliding trolley
mechanism is a critical design issue. This device must move freely (even
through splices or assembly joints) along the rigid horizontal member,
typically trailing behind the worker a short distance. If the trolley
does not freely slide, the worker is hindered from moving and could possibly
be subjected to a harmful swing fall.
I-beam trolleys in
particular need to be reviewed closely to make certain they are appropriate
for the application. The overall strength and mobility are critical to
the system performance. An I-beam trolley should be "man-rated"
just like a lifting winch or anchoring hook used for personal fall protection.
Man rated trolleys are designed to freely move along the rail and withstand
the forces of a fallen worker. Most man rated trolleys provide adjustability
to adapt to various flange widths.
Evaluating
Horizontal Systems
When selecting a
horizontal fall arrest system there are several issues that should be
considered.
Safety. The
purpose of the system is to protect people from fall injuries. Other features
are irrelevant if the system can not do the job it is intended to. Look
for suppliers that are experienced in the design of horizontal fall arrest
system.
Ease of use.
Consider the type of work being done and determine which system will be
the least cumbersome for the worker. If the system makes work inefficient
it's more likely that the employee will choose to work unprotected.
Length of service.
The system should be appropriate to the expected term of use. Using a
temporary lifeline in a permanent installation may put employees at risk.
The strength of the materials may be reduced by long-term environmental
exposure.
Environment.
Make certain the materials are suitable for use in harsh environments
if there is exposure to corrosive agents, elevated temperatures, or other
severe conditions.
Adequate coverage.
The primary advantage of a horizontal fall arrest system over a single
point anchorage is the mobility it provides and the increased protection
from swing falls. If the system ends short of the work area the worker
could be at risk of a swinging collision.
Performance data.
Performance data should be provided as part of any complete fall protection
system.
Training.
Thorough instructions and on-site training ensures the workers that will
be using the equipment know how to use the equipment safely.
__________________________________________________________________
Matthew Blackford
is a project engineer for SALA Engineered Systems, 3965 Pepin Ave.,
Red Wing, MN 55066; (877) 746-2672; Fax: (651) 385-8658
Craig Firl is
Vice President of Technical Services for DBI/SALA, 3965 Pepin Ave.,
Red Wing, MN 55066; (800) 328-6146; Fax: (651) 388-5065
This paper appears in the eLCOSH website with the permission of the author
and/or copyright holder and may not be reproduced without their consent. eLCOSH is an
information clearinghouse. eLCOSH and its sponsors are not responsible for the accuracy of
information provided on this web site, nor for its use or misuse.
|