Insights on Crane Compliance Issues in Western Australia

The presentation provides data on crane registration compliance issues in Western Australia, highlighting common non-compliances and industry performance based on submissions between July 2012 and April 2014. Key areas of concern include AS 1418 compliance, design issues, and calculations for both cranes and support structures. Non-compliance rates are significant, raising critical safety concerns and emphasizing the need for improved adherence to regulations.

• Compliance issues
• Crane registrations
• Western Australia
• Safety regulations
• Industry performance

adin656 Follow

Uploaded on Nov 24, 2024 | 0 Views

Download Presentation

Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.

The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. Download presentation by click this link. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Presentation Transcript

1. Please read this before using presentation This presentation is based on content presented at the Registration of cranes information session held in July 2014 It is made available for non-commercial use (e.g. toolbox meetings, OHS discussions) subject to the condition that the PowerPoint file is not altered without permission from Resources Safety Supporting resources, such as brochures and posters, are available from Resources Safety For resources, information or clarification, please contact: RSDComms@dmp.wa.gov.au or visit www.dmp.wa.gov.au/ResourcesSafety 1 www.dmp.wa.gov.au/ResourcesSafety

2. Crane registrations in Western Australia Common non-compliances 2 www.dmp.wa.gov.au/ResourcesSafety

3. How is industry performing? Data collected from 58 crane registrations submitted between July 2012 and April 2014 Comparisons refer primarily to initial submission attempts Data primarily addresses areas where high degree of non-compliance was identified Non-compliance is of regulations 6.33 and 6.34 of Mines Safety and Inspection Regulations 1995 3 www.dmp.wa.gov.au/ResourcesSafety

4. How many submissions were AS 1418 compliant? Major compliance issues Deflection checks Fatigue checks Seismic checks Combined stress evaluation Welding and other connection checks and AS 1418 criteria failures not addressed Compliant 9% Non-compliant 91% 4 www.dmp.wa.gov.au/ResourcesSafety

5. Common non-compliances Design Crane design compliance Support structure compliance Comply 24% Comply 19% Had issues 81% Had issues 76% 5 www.dmp.wa.gov.au/ResourcesSafety

6. AS 1418 compliance issues in crane calculations 50% 45% Percentage of submissions with compliance issues 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Deflections Fatigue Other Calculation Errors and Omissions Critical Seismic Wind Combined Stresses (eccentricity, torsion etc.) AS1418 Criteria Failure Not Addressed Welds Connection(s) 6 www.dmp.wa.gov.au/ResourcesSafety

7. AS 1418 compliance issues in support structure calculations 50% 45% Percentage of submissions with compliance issues 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Deflections Fatigue Other Calculation Errors and Omissions Critical Seismic Wind Combined Stresses (eccentricity, torsion etc.) AS1418 Criteria Failure Not Addressed Welds Connection(s) 7 www.dmp.wa.gov.au/ResourcesSafety

8. Common non-compliances Verification From r. 6.34(2), verifier role is defined as: (c) verification by a person other than the person who prepared the design that the design complies with the Australian Standard applicable under regulation 6.33 Also recall that under r. 6.33 ensure that the plant is designed, constructed and tested in accordance with (b) in the case of a crane or hoist, AS 1418 8 www.dmp.wa.gov.au/ResourcesSafety

9. Definition of verify Oxford Dictionary: Make sure or demonstrate that (something) is true, accurate, or justified TheFreeDictionary (online): 1. To prove the truth of by presentation of evidence or testimony; substantiate 2. To determine or test the truth or accuracy of, as by comparison, investigation, or reference 9 www.dmp.wa.gov.au/ResourcesSafety

10. Time span between original crane calculation and verification Verified on the same day 12% Negative verification time* 4% 2 days or less for verification 10% More than 2 days for verification 74% * Where verification time is negative, is it an input error? 10 www.dmp.wa.gov.au/ResourcesSafety

11. How many crane designs with short verification times have AS 1418 compliance issues? Compliance issues 93% Other 26% More than 2 days for verification 74% No compliance issues 7% 11 www.dmp.wa.gov.au/ResourcesSafety

12. Time span between original support structure calculation and verification Verified same day 5% Negative verification time* 4% 2 days or less for verification 5% More than 2 days for verification 86% * Where verification time is negative, is it an input error? 12 www.dmp.wa.gov.au/ResourcesSafety

13. Compliance of in-house reviewed calculations (for both crane and support structure) Compliant 7% In-house reviews are when a company both designs the crane or the support section and verifies it using two members in their company Non-compliant 93% 13 www.dmp.wa.gov.au/ResourcesSafety

14. How many submissions contained poor documentation practices? No issues identified 59% Documentation practices considered to be poor when: Important documents or information missing from the submission Submission is disorganised or sections are not well labelled Issues identified 41% 14 www.dmp.wa.gov.au/ResourcesSafety

15. How many submissions contained incorrect or inconsistent parameters? No issues identified 41% Inconsistent parameters are situations where: Measurements or parameters differ between two sources in document (e.g. between drawings and calculations) Parameters used are incorrect, leading to calculation errors Parameters are not sourced correctly, and lack any justifying references Issues identified 59% 15 www.dmp.wa.gov.au/ResourcesSafety

16. How many submissions missed basic information relating to crane? No issues identified 50% Missed sections may include: The crab The hoist End stops End carriages Issues identified 50% 16 www.dmp.wa.gov.au/ResourcesSafety

17. Factors contributing to structural safety The Australian Steel Institute on confidential reporting on structural safety (December 2013) David Ryan ASI National Manager Commonly identified risks include lack of competence and engineering appreciation, fixings, tensile components, poor communications, over-reliance on IT, temporary works, free standing walls, lack of maintenance and falsified documentation, with the risk increasing when factors are combined. 17 www.dmp.wa.gov.au/ResourcesSafety

18. Institute of Structural Engineers Dr Soane of the Institute of Structural Engineers recently highlighted that some identified risks which frequently appear in structural-safety reports and alerts include issues of competence, and stated: Before most, if not all, collapses there are pre-cursers elsewhere and if these are recognised, and lessons learned from them, then more serious events may be prevented. 18 www.dmp.wa.gov.au/ResourcesSafety

19. Swiss cheese model of accident causation 19 www.dmp.wa.gov.au/ResourcesSafety