Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adoption?

[jomoco]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

If it please the court your honor, counsel for the plaintiff presents exhibit A.

Morbark Industries' patent for a wood chipper in chute emergency pull cord.

http://www.google.com/patents/US6000642



Your honor, why would Morbark spend both money and engineering time to develope produce and sell such a product on the general market unless they themselves were not acutely aware of the distinct possibility of the operator of their product becoming entrapped in brush and being pulled inside that wood chipper's in chute?

Counsel for the plaintiff submits that Morbark Industries was well aware that their wood chippers presented enough of a hazard to their wood chipper's operators to actually provide that operator a last chance for continued life and well being in the form of an emergency in chute pull cord. A tangibly evident proof that Morbark Industries themselves were well aware that their wood chippers presented a potentially fatal hazard to their product's operator.

Counsel for the plaintiff rests their case your honor.

jomoco

 

[Pelorus]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

Your Honor,
Not to muddy the still waters but I'd like to mention that my wee 6" Bandit (whole limb chipper) is outfitted with last chance emergency pull cables.

 

[jomoco]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

Objection your honor!

It is quite evident to all parties involved in this case that my fat head could never fit through a mere six inch capacity wood chipper!

Objection sustained, next case!

jomoco

 

[climbhightree]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

I guess we all need to live in a bubble, to protect ourselves from all the things in this world that could kill us.

Or maybe just outlaw chippers and just haul the brush.

It isn't the manufacturer's fault the worker wasn't competent, and allowed himself to get swept and sucked in. Imo that be a frivolous law suit. Similar to person who sued Mcdonald over hot coffee, she spilled on herself. But she won, and so probably would family of guy through chipper. Stupid.

People need to take responsibility for their actions and not blame others.

Over the last few years chipper manufacturers have done leaps and bounds to make there machines safer...some to the the expense of easy efficient use.

 

[jomoco]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

[ QUOTE ]


People need to take responsibility for their actions and not blame others.



[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly what every WTC manufacturer should take to heart, assuming they have one.

Blaming dead and mangled treeworkers for making the same sort of mistakes that aerial rescue training was brought into being to lessen the numbers of climbing injuries and fatalities on the job for, is an industry wide embarrassment IMO.

Both work on the same bloody crew, and both deserve the best protections for their well being this industry is capable of providing.

jomoco

 

[jomoco]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

Let's throw a few extremely pertinent facts on the table for objective analysis here.

Whole tree chippers. Implying quite truthfully that these machines have the capacity to chip an entire tree whole.

Indeed my crews routinely fed 80 foot tall fastigiate eucs through a 300 HP Morbark 2400 Hurricane WTC with a crane on many job sites.

Now what is common practice in the tree industry worldwide?

Cabling and bracing using steel eyebolts and J lags?

How well do steel eyebolts and J lags mix with high carbon steel chipper knives found in every WTC manufactured?

Is it reasonable to assume that eyebolts and J lags' cables break off over the years or get replaced with new hardware, leaving the old hardware embedded in the wood structure below? That the hardware embedded in that wood gets overgrown to the point it's undetectable even to a trained eye?

How do industrial modern wood mills protect their workers and cutting blades from injuries and damage from embedded hazards in the logs they mill today?

They voluntarily, of their own accord run each and every log they mill through a metal detector to insure not only their employees safety and well being on the job, but their expensive mill components from damage and profit sucking down time as well.

Can the same technology be incorporated into today's WTC to prevent employee injury and equipment damage and down time?

Yes, it was offered to them for free in 1999 by a concerned tree industry veteran who wanted to protect his fellow treeworkers from injury and potential death?

Why did the WTC manufacturers turn down this free technology offered to them 14 years ago? Why did they not emulate every modern wood mills technology that helps keep their employees and equipment safe from embedded hazards in the logs they routinely mill by the millions?

This poll will I hope remain open for one year. Between now and that year elapsing I intend to share the shocking answer to why WTC manufacturers do not emulate the example set by modern wood mills?

jomoco

 

[Tom Dunlap]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

Have you written to the ANSI Z133 Committee about your concerns? The next meeting is in October. Your comments would be directed to the Chipper/Machinery sub-group so they can work up a plan or response.

Contact ISA for information.

Taking the time to discuss this on TreeBuzz is fine but nothing can be changed here. YOU need to take it up the ladder.

 

[jomoco]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

I would respectfully ask why the issue of WTC operator safety on the job would be my individual concern alone?

I'm not the paid tree care industry safety officer and govt go between representative for this nation.

Nor do the major WTC manufacturers pay to advertise in any monthly magazine associated with me period.

I'm simply a common treeworker deeply concerned about my fellow treeworkers safety and well being on the job Tom.

However I am compiling a list of tree company owners and crew leaders who share my desire to have a WTC two man minimum standard voluntarily adopted by the ANSI committee in the coming year, which is but one of the purposes of starting this thread/poll/debate.

jomoco

 

[Tom Dunlap]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

J,

In less time than you spend on this thread alone you could have written to the Z Committee.

There's a saying you might harken to:

If it's to be
It's up to me

 

[jomoco]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

I've no intention of entering this treeworker safety battle armed with nothing more than a fly swatter Tom.

It may take a year to gird myself for this battle, I expect it will.

But when I do get to that ANSI committee after a year's time?

You can bet your work boots I'm going to have considerably more than a fly swat to present my case with.

jomoco

 

[GoodYautja]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

Personally, I think problems should be solved, not regulated.

Maybe there should just be infrared cameras mounted just above the feeder. (Like the ones at airports that can tell if people have a fever).
If anything near 98.6 gets read, it shuts down.

Just a thought.

 

[Treeweasel]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

 

[jomoco]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

[ QUOTE ]
Personally, I think problems should be solved, not regulated.

Maybe there should just be infrared cameras mounted just above the feeder. (Like the ones at airports that can tell if people have a fever).
If anything near 98.6 gets read, it shuts down.

Just a thought.

[/ QUOTE ]

American history itself teaches us that regulation is the key factor in solving labor safety problems GP.

How do you think seat belts, air bags, hwy guard rails, inertia chain brakes, emergency theatre exit doors, hard hats, safety glasses, chainsaw leg protection chaps etc came into being in this and other countries worldwide?

All these products have a grim blood soaked list of dead and mangled people behind them that led to the regulations and standards that curbed the numbers of the dead in a very tangible manner.

Lack of regulations led directly to over 100 dead burned alive Chinese poultry factory workers just a few days ago mate.

So don't give me that anti-regulation crap please. I'm sick of it.

jomoco

 

[jomoco]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

In keeping with Tom D's suggestion that I quote Peter Gerstenberger's opinions on WTC safety verbatim, the following quote is indicative of why this problem still exists and plagues our industry today.

[ QUOTE ]


As I'm sure you know, all manufacturers of mechanical in-feed, hand-fed chippers are required to equip their units with feed control bars. Research suggests that even having a dedicated "attendant" on the feed control bar would not be sufficient by itself to prevent injury.

According to field research conducted by Dr. John Ball (South Dakota State University) and his students, hands are often injured even if the feed control bar is used. Your hand can be pulled in less than 0.5 sec as shown in demonstrations using rescue dummies. Those same dummies could be pulled completely through the chipper in less than 1.2 seconds.

[end quote]

So to bolster maintaining the very status quo the WTC manufacturers would like to prevail in this industry, Mr. Gerstenberger trots out the above "field research" conducted by a university professor and his students.

That quote would have us believe that even with a second operator, that operator would need to react within .5 to 1.2 seconds to save an entrapped chipper operator from injury or death.

Now all three WTC close calls that I've witnessed firsthand on the job site involved the dragon tail sweep knocking one of the operators off their feet and onto the large branch they were feeding from far behind the chipper to gain enough leverage to feed it into the feed wheels. Say 10-15 feet or so.

Now how long a time did my operator, dazed, upended and trapped by the leg have before he reached the chipper's feed wheels? .5 or 1.2 seconds?
No, more like 10 seconds! The auto-feed delay came into play in a very big way! That's what gave me in the treetop enough time to yell at the second groundman and point to what was happening! Allowing that second groundman to sprint to that feed bar and hit it just as the trapped operator's
knee reached the feed wheels.

Mr. Gerstenberger needs more input from actual treeworkers hard at work in real life on the job site to base his opinions on, and far less input from professors and students playing with dummies IMO.

jomoco

 

[Tom Dunlap]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

Too bad you're opting not to get involved in the Z133 process right now. Waiting until 'you're ready' could make a difference.

The sooner you bring this to the Z133 the sooner it has a chance to make a difference. Since we only meet twice a year timeliness is SO important.

 

[jomoco]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

I would respectfully ask when Mr. Gerstenberger will do the job he gets paid for, and heed one of the top three recommendations of OSHA to help prevent wood chipper injuries/fatalities from happening in the future?

Specifically having a second chipper operator in the immediate vicinity of chipper operations.

jomoco

 

[prana360]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

Just a few side notes / questions. What are your feelings on chippers with a winch? I myself just finished a 3 day project running my BC1800 while my crew did the cutting and hooking the winch line for me. Each piece got pulled to the chipper and the butt end placed on the feed table, the winch line was moved down the limb or log and used to pull the piece to the feed wheels. In this type of usage I wasn't placed in harms way because I was always running the chipper from beside it at the winch / green override button controls.

Vermeer no longer makes any chippers that have hydraulic arms / grapples. The BC2000 was the only one that Vermeer made that I know of and it isn't in production any longer. Vermeers website only lists 1 chipper as a WTC thats the WC2300 every other model is listed as a brush chipper. Now on that same not I would agree that the new BC2100 would be a whole tree chipper in my opinion.

 

[jomoco]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

In so much as you limit the winch's role to getting the branch's butt into the feed wheels' grasp alone, then disconnecting and securing the winch line and hook prior to the butt's contact with the mandrel's knives?

It would be my opinion you would be good to go as long as your groundies are out of the dragon tail sweep area behind the chipper.

I had a long conversation with my brother yesterday about the extreme violence of the dragon tail affect behind big hydraulic feed WTC's. We both noted that even with the relatively thick structural steel used in the feed tables of Vermeer WTC's, years of hard use seemed to invariably require additional supports being welded onto them once they crack apart from the beating they take.

We both agreed that the very best and safest method of feeding big WTC's was with a bobcat or other mechanical equivalent that protects whoever's feeding it inside a cab, and that even then the operator needed full PPE and the good sense to turn that bobcat around and get the heck out of the zone of extreme violence.

Treeworkers who haven't worked around big WTC's like the BC 1800 Vermeer and 2400 Hurricane Morbark will be amazed by just how powerful and violent the action really is behind, beside and even in front of their feed tables. It depends on what you're feeding them, how it's configured, whether it's dead and brittle etc?

jomoco

 

[jomoco]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

Come on folks!

Don't forget there's a poll on the first page of this thread!

I need five more yea votes to democratically surpass the nays!

Show some solidarity with all the hardworking chipper operators out there ducking, dodging and hiding from the forces trying to do them in!

Here's to every chipper operator sweating their butts off on the job making it home safely to their family!

jomoco

 

[jomoco]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

What are the top recommendations of OSHA for preventing wood chipper injuries and fatalities?

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/face/stateface/ca/08CA005.html#recommendations

Recommendation #1: Ensure that employees never operate a wood chipper alone.

Discussion: A safety watch (additional worker) is mandated in many high-risk occupations to help prevent injuries. When the wood chipper is in operation, at least one worker in addition to the operator should be placed in the immediate vicinity of the work area and in close contact with the operator. In this incident, there was a co-worker but he was not working with the victim at the wood chipper. An additional person stationed near the chipper may have prevented the victim from feeding material immediately in front of the in-feed chute, or may have been able to activate the safety bar before the victim made contact with the chipper blades.

Recommendation #2: Ensure that all employees stand to the side of the feed table when feeding trimmings into the brush chipper.

Discussion: In this particular case, a witness observed the victim standing directly behind the feed table in front of the chute as he fed tree branches into the wood chipper. The feed table provides an important measure of safety by increasing the distance between the feed rollers and the operator. The wood chipper was equipped with a safety stop and reversing feed control bar located across the top and down each side of the feed chute. The operator could easily activate this safety device while standing at the side of the feed table. However, if standing directly in front of the feed table, the operator is out of reach of this safety device. Also, if an operator should place any part of his/her body on the feed table, the risk of getting snagged or dragged into the chipper blades is greatly increased and a worker caught by the hands could not activate the quick stop device. The correct and safe feeding pathway is from the side, and the operator should walk away immediately following feeding as depicted in the following illustration.


(Courtesy of Michigan Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Pub OSC-6125).


Recommendation #3: Ensure that employees are thoroughly trained and tested on the operation of wood chippers.

Discussion: The victim in this case had received initial training on the wood chipper when it was purchased in 2002. There was no documentation that indicated any additional or refresher training had been offered to employees since the chipper was purchased. A serious incident can occur if the worker loses balance and falls forward into the feed chute, reaches too far into the feed mechanism, or becomes entangled or pushed by branches and limbs that are being pulled into the chipper. The risk can be minimized if workers are trained and retrained (at least annually) in safe feeding techniques that include the following:

Never place hands or feet inside the feed chute;
Always stand to the side of the in-feed hopper when feeding the wood chipper. This minimizes the risk of entanglement in branches and allows quick access to the feed control bar to turn off or reverse the feeding mechanism. (Because of differences among machines, the manufacturer’s operating manual should be consulted for guidance. Safe feeding of some disc-type chippers requires the worker to be on the right side);
Immediately walk away once the machine has grabbed the material and been fed through the chipper knives;
Feed brush and limbs into the in-feed hopper butt end first; and
Lay short/small material on top of longer material to feed or use a push paddle to push short or thorny brush through the in-feed hopper.
Safe work practices can be assured through programs of training, supervision, rewards, and progressive disciplinary measures.


Reference
California Code of Regulations, Subchapter 7. General Industry Safety Orders Group 3. General Plant Equipment and Special Operations Article 12. Tree Work, Maintenance or Removal §3424. Mobile Equipment. (c) Brush Chippers.

Are ignoring these recommendations a wise business practice?

jomoco