28.04.2016
Truck mount overturn
A new 48 metre truck mounted lift overturned while working on a film set in Swansea, UK the week before last.
According to reports that we received at the end of last week, the machine was working with an extended reach over the rear, while being operated from the lower controls. It lost stability and tipped, with the boom coming down onto scaffolding. The damage can be seen in photograph behind the machine.
The recovery team reportedly cut the end half of the boom and jib away as it had bent, possibly on impact? No one was injured or hurt in the incident, as the machine was equipped with some sort of lighting rig at the time and no one was in the platform.
We understand that the HSE is investigating the cause of the incident. The machine, a new Palfinger P480NX is owned by Loxam, UK, which says that it is working with the manufacturer to ascertain the cause. There was little or no wind and the ground played no part in the overturn.
Please register to see all images
The Palfinger P480 after the incident
It is therefore either a software issue with the lower control station, which allowed the boom to extended beyond its working envelope, or some sort of operator error. The lighting rig is said to have weighed no more than 150kg.
The other machines in the Loxam fleet have been checked and cleared for normal use. Although we understand that the company is only allowing them to be operated from the platform until further information is received. While there is no reason to overreact at this stage, it is probably a wise precaution NOT to operate one of these machines at an extended outreach from the lower control panel, until Palfinger has fully identified the cause of the incident.
The incident has been logged on the IPAF accident reporting web site as an near miss incident.
Please register to see all images
The boom end and jib was cut off in order to complete a rapid recovery
UPDATE
We know know that the main boom on the 480 was almost fully extended, and the two section jib/top boom retracted, and the short X jib horizontal. With the boom at a very low elevations. In this configuration he machine would have been working close to its 31 metre maximum. At the same time the retracted jib but extended main boom, would have meant that there was more weight out there than necessary - a retracted boom and extended jib would have been lighter - But even then the capacity at full outreach over the rear is 100kg.
Please register to see all images
The machine must have been working close to full outreach
We have also learnt that the 'lighting rig' consisted of a scaffold platform and bracing rigged up below the platform and covered with plastic sheet. Given that this is likely to exceeded the 100kg when loading with lights, and given the boom/jib set up, it is possible to see how the machine might have lost sability - and then the lower boom striking the scaffolding closer to the machine would have created a dynamic loading that could easily have caused the boom bend.
As to what went wrong - certainly the operator will have some questions to answer, but one also wonders about the boom configuration and how it is controlled by the software. The investigation continues, with both manufacturer and rental company fully co-operating in order to firmly establish what exactly what went wrong and what, if anything might be done to help avoid/prevent situations like this in the future.
Mr X
This particular machine has a Swl of 600 kgs, so overload is not the issue here, especially as the upper boom had not been extended, not sure what lighting rig they were attempting, looks rather excessive, and if the wind had of got up a sail affect could of been an issue, it's just shocking the amount of lower boom has been extended out on this machine, unless there has been a malfunction (which I doubt), under normal circumstances there is no way that much boom could be deployed without some sort of intervention by the operator! Mindblowing.
Mr X
This particular machine has a Swl of 600 kgs, so overload is not the issue here, especially as the upper boom had not been extended, not sure what lighting rig they were attempting, looks rather excessive, and if the wind had of got up a sail affect could of been an issue, it's just shocking the amount of lower boom has been extended out on this machine, unless there has been a malfunction (which I doubt), under normal circumstances there is no way that much boom could be deployed without some sort of intervention by the operator! Mindblowing.
Crane01
Would somebody from the IPAF like to comment on the use of the platform basket??
The scaffold alone would have been at least 100 kgs then the weight of the lights at 150 kgs = 250 kgs
This in the crane world is called an Overload.
Barry Fukes
As a time served Operator who has worked on many media jobs, it is always important to follow the manufacturer's guide lines and what you have been taught. Technology is here to help us, but can also lead to thinking that the machine knows everything, nearly but not all.
Knowledge of old practices need to be combined with what is being taught to the new operator's coming Into the industry. These machines both access platforms and cranes alike are built with safety limits which should be adhered to, and only be overridden in an emergency situation. We need to work safely to give the best service to our customers and to protect everybody alike.
There will be a lot of finger pointing and and assumptions being made? We must all learn from this and be thankful nobody was injured, luckily in this incident, we cannot rely on luck alone. Be safe, work safe and stay within the limits of what man and machine can do safely.
Gasping for air
Proverbs 28:13
Whoever conceals their sins does not prosper, but the one who confesses and renounces them finds mercy.
Michael Brown
We have specially designed frames for mounting lighting rigs on film sets, reason being correct use of appropriate cranes, not working platforms.
Crane01
Absolutely
I have seen too many cranes overturn and none of them were the fault of the crane.
IPAF operator.
Cranes with Man baskets.....
Andy, I honestly wasn't trying to scandalise and I bow to the knowledge of guys like yourself with far more experience with these machines than I. I am only trying to raise awareness and questions so that others can look at their own operations to check their own systems. We try and use these incidents at elavation to raise awareness with our own staff so that we constantly look to intervene if any of our own hires look unusual. I bet that Loxam will let the true reason be known, unlike historical incidents that we all know get brushed under the carpet. I think they should be commended for their stance.
Crane01
Access platforms working as Cranes?
I will say no more.
AndyA
Congratulations to one of our UK safety Champions in sharing this with us. It will go some way to stop some of the rumours and speculation we are all hearing. However, it does raise more questions than it provides answers. Hopefully the reason will be shared when know.
IPAF operator.
Don't want to speculate, but unless the Main boom was tele'd out after the event, if you have the fly fully out then that main boom wouldn't be out that far. The only way for that to happen is for the emergency controls on the ground control to be engaged and this would allow you to tele the machine until it goes over. May seem stupid but if you don't know these machines then you shouldn't be at the controls..
Si
There was a incident a few years back when a truck mount was being used as a lighting rig and it went out of level. I think they concluded that the truck had been rigged up for two days with the light rig attached to the cage and had not been stowed, as the hydraulic rams has not been repressure in that time the machine had settled and gone out of level. I happens lot on film jobs. Rigged up on day one. Worked for 3-5 days without being stowed. I think the manual says something about not being rigged up for long periods of time, so was deemed as operator error
Good points Gary. As the older more experienced operators move on there will be a huge onus on Training. Whilst I am not suggesting that this had anything to do with the accident, I have noticed a huge over reliance on new machine technology when training 3b operators. They seem to expect the machine to protect them. We all need to keep an eye on this, and constantly improve the level of operators on new equipment.
Gary Brady
Until the findings are published, we cannot offer anything other than opinion or hypotheses. However, if the boom was extended to maximum reach, a load of 150kg if placed in a way that did not spread the load equally, could easily create an overload situation. It is easy to forget that swl data is based evenly spread loads and not massed in/on one particular part of the cage. In addition, acceptable loadings are calculated on being within the cage and this particular application demands extra care as the loads are often placed in way that is extended beyond, below or above the cage, thus creating potentially additional load moments.
So pleased no one was hurt. I'm sure, having met Brian recently, that Loxam will co-operate fully. I think it's brilliant that they are putting this information out there to help prevent/warn other users of the incident. In the past cover ups in the industry have led to other incidents repeating. Manufacturers, and Rental Companies, have a duty to each other. I'm sure there will be a resolution. Well done all, and Vertikal for getting this in our focus. Strange incident though?