A 250 tonne five axle All Terrain crane overturned in Everett, on the north side of Seattle, Washington yesterday, while working on a construction project at the towns Mall.
The incident appears to be related to one of the front outriggers, which either punched through the ground or was not extended, however, the other outriggers were set on large steel pads, so one imagines they all were. The crane, a new looking Grove GMK 5250XL - owned by local company Ford Crane, tipped forward and dumped its counterweight which seems to have travelled down the deck to the retracted outrigger. What caused the initial overturn is not clear at this point.
The impact of the boom on the building set off the sprinkler system, which automatically alerted the local fire department which arrived soon afterwards. Two men working inside the building were injured, one was treated at the scene, while the other was taken to hospital with non-life threatening injuries. The crane operator escaped injury.
The Washington State Department of Labor and Industry is investigating the incident. photos courtesy of Everett Fire Department
The Force
Crane lads, i started my career as a crane op on 12th April 1976 on a Iron Fairy Onyx 6t, and i still haven't done it all, but there is one thing i do know is that if that Grove had had its ballast installed on the superstructure you and i would not be chatting to each other, Its not allways the Chinese cranes that go over, and 90% of them are due to operator error. I dont want to get into a p.........g contest with the none believers so this is my last post on the matter, just hope no one was hurt so they can learn from their mistake,
The overturned Crane depicted above prompts me to reply to your question
earlier this month, which for clarity is repeated below:-
" None of your research ever actually gives any advice on how to prevent
these (Crane) accidents”. That is the 1622 Crane and lifting Incidents
causing 907 fatalities all researched and corroborated by me worldwide
over the past 18yrs.
So in answer to your question, I take pleasure in replying as follows.
The answer is compliance with the Law.
For example, in the UK the employer is the Duty holder in English Law, not the
employees. Therefore it is incumbent on all UK Crane Industry employers to
adopt 'Safe Systems of Work'. This duty is stated in the primary legislation
namely Sections 2(1) & 3(1) of The Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974.
With serious implications for all Directors and Managers stated in Sections
36, 37 & 40 of the same Act above.
How to achieve this desirable objective is then stated in the secondary legislation
namely Section 3(1) of The Management (of HSW) Regulations 1999.
which mandates the use of Risk Assessment (RA) and Training for all New
Machines & Lifting Operations in the UK.
The Risk Assessment (RA) procedure is based on 5 x steps to evaluate the
Possibility, Probability and Consequences of all Lifting Hazards causing a
Fatal or personal Injury. The RA itself must always be ‘Suitable & Sufficient’
in line with Regulation 3(2) which means that it must take into account the
possibility of a Fatal Injury, no matter how remote one thinks that maybe.
Once the RA is complete the Method Statement (MS) or Lift Plan is then
relatively easy because the hazards have already been identified in the RA.
Finally the completed RAMS must be based upon British Standard 7121
taking account of the ongoing need for Crane Stability, Outrigger Mat Size
Calculations and the Tonnage of Ballast required for that particular Crane
To remain Vertical, unlike the Machine above.
Plus all of the other obligations in The LOLER Regs 1999.
All of this info is freely available to the Crane Industry.
Finally and in closing, I have undertaken this 18yrs of research because
Worker Safety is important, Very Important and much too Important to
Leave it to chance.
Happy to explain further, just say where and when ?
Pemby
From the look of it the front right outrigger was probably out, and you can see a mat between the ballast and cab, but also the location of the front lefts mat, it seems the right rigger was forced in, after tipping, so it probably wasn't pinned out. I have had a Grove that only pins riggers for travel not rigged, a 50, but at that size?
Also from the upside down ballast he was probably finished stacking his ballast, so... don't think a dummy run before picking up the stack would tip...
neil-berry61
Just a thought, I wonder if all that ballast that's on the floor was fitted to the back of the crane instead of being left on the deck it might of prevented it!
The Force
Crane lads, i started my career as a crane op on 12th April 1976 on a Iron Fairy Onyx 6t, and i still haven't done it all, but there is one thing i do know is that if that Grove had had its ballast installed on the superstructure you and i would not be chatting to each other, Its not allways the Chinese cranes that go over, and 90% of them are due to operator error. I dont want to get into a p.........g contest with the none believers so this is my last post on the matter, just hope no one was hurt so they can learn from their mistake,
Red
A large late model state of the art crane.
A flat paved working area.
Big appropriate mats for the outriggers.
And they still manage to tip the crane over......!
Something does not add up.
Crane lads
Reply to the force. Because people can't handle the truth
Eric_L
Mike
I'm curious, which specific law was not complied with, that would have prevented this accident ?
o
Good Morning Mr Wood,
The overturned Crane depicted above prompts me to reply to your question
earlier this month, which for clarity is repeated below:-
" None of your research ever actually gives any advice on how to prevent
these (Crane) accidents”. That is the 1622 Crane and lifting Incidents
causing 907 fatalities all researched and corroborated by me worldwide
over the past 18yrs.
So in answer to your question, I take pleasure in replying as follows.
The answer is compliance with the Law.
For example, in the UK the employer is the Duty holder in English Law, not the
employees. Therefore it is incumbent on all UK Crane Industry employers to
adopt 'Safe Systems of Work'. This duty is stated in the primary legislation
namely Sections 2(1) & 3(1) of The Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974.
With serious implications for all Directors and Managers stated in Sections
36, 37 & 40 of the same Act above.
How to achieve this desirable objective is then stated in the secondary legislation
namely Section 3(1) of The Management (of HSW) Regulations 1999.
which mandates the use of Risk Assessment (RA) and Training for all New
Machines & Lifting Operations in the UK.
The Risk Assessment (RA) procedure is based on 5 x steps to evaluate the
Possibility, Probability and Consequences of all Lifting Hazards causing a
Fatal or personal Injury. The RA itself must always be ‘Suitable & Sufficient’
in line with Regulation 3(2) which means that it must take into account the
possibility of a Fatal Injury, no matter how remote one thinks that maybe.
Once the RA is complete the Method Statement (MS) or Lift Plan is then
relatively easy because the hazards have already been identified in the RA.
Finally the completed RAMS must be based upon British Standard 7121
taking account of the ongoing need for Crane Stability, Outrigger Mat Size
Calculations and the Tonnage of Ballast required for that particular Crane
To remain Vertical, unlike the Machine above.
Plus all of the other obligations in The LOLER Regs 1999.
All of this info is freely available to the Crane Industry.
Finally and in closing, I have undertaken this 18yrs of research because
Worker Safety is important, Very Important and much too Important to
Leave it to chance.
Happy to explain further, just say where and when ?
Kindest regards
Mike Ponsonby
The Force
How can Crane lads & neil-berry61 possibly have 10 & 13 dislikes when what they have posted is true.
Pemby
From the look of it the front right outrigger was probably out, and you can see a mat between the ballast and cab, but also the location of the front lefts mat, it seems the right rigger was forced in, after tipping, so it probably wasn't pinned out. I have had a Grove that only pins riggers for travel not rigged, a 50, but at that size?
Also from the upside down ballast he was probably finished stacking his ballast, so... don't think a dummy run before picking up the stack would tip...
Crane lads
Looking at the ballast it was just sat on the deck no damage to the back of the crane.
neil-berry61
Just a thought, I wonder if all that ballast that's on the floor was fitted to the back of the crane instead of being left on the deck it might of prevented it!