Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adoption?

[Treemachine]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

This is silly.No need for two to feed a chipper.When i hire new groundies i show them the warning decals on the machine,they follow the safety rules of the machine and all is well.Feed the machine and walk away to get more material.I hate seeing two at the infeed table,just no need

 

[jomoco]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

[ QUOTE ]
I have never heard a bc1800 called a "whole tree chipper".



Are there situations when two opperators are required to safetly run a chipper? Absolutely, but not every in every situation. Workers, foremen, managers, and owners need to use common sense and run their job sites in a safe manner using procedures that fit the situations they are working in.



[/ QUOTE ]

Okay Marquis.

First of all, thank you for a semi well reasoned reply.

Considering that whole trees are routinely fed through BC 1800's with cranes, like say fully skirted Washingtonian fan palms, 80 foot tall fastigiate or single trunked eucs and similar skinny tree species, would from an objective point of view qualify them as WTC's to most people. Try that with a BC 1000 and you'll see what I mean rather quickly.

In the paragraph you wrote above, you yourself freely admit that there are absolutely situations where two men are required to safely run a chipper, and I agree whole heartedly when it involves WTC's like the BC 1800. But would disagree when running a BC 1000 because the brush fed to them is necessarily smaller, and can therefor be fed by a single operator from the side of the feed table. Unlike the huge branches an 1800 was designed to eat without being cut into smaller more manageable pieces.

It is that very aspect of an 1800's capacity to eat big long heavy branches that are impossible for a single man to feed from the side, and therefor demands they get it on the feed table first, then back up far enough to gain the leverage necessary to actually get it into the feed wheels, that causes the close calls I've witnessed.

You see, without that vital second man at the feed bar at the point the first man leverages the long branch into the feed wheels to stop the feed once the feed wheels have a grasp on the branch's butt? That first man often can't move fast enough to avoid the dragon tail affect knocking them off their feet and landing on top of the long branch being chipped. That dragon tail affect happens quickly, and often times very violently when the butt wood meets the cutting mandrel. Without that second man on the feed bar to stop the feed process once the sweep happens?

That's when single WTC operators become entrapped, and stand a very real and imminent likelihood of being eaten alive.

Thank you for your condolences on my friend's death on the job.

jomoco

 

[Tom Dunlap]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

The first chipper I worked around was an Asplundh 12" chuck n duck. It was 6v...does that tell you how long ago?!

I learned my chops...literally...on the chipper. STAY THE HECK AWAY FROM THE BRUSH111 This is a decade and more before OSHA. I didn't need rules and regs to tell me where to stand. I did get pulled once by another C/D and I buckled my knees to get flat on the ground to get out of the way. Again, before any sort of training, or awareness on my part, about 'proper' techniques.

What I see happening is that if/when a reg is formed to address one/two operators there will be NO WAY to justify it by the chipper configuration. To be consistent the reg will apply to ALL brush chippers or else it won't be written.

 

[jomoco]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

Okay Tom, I see your point.

But consider that cranes have a cut off point that accepted standards and regulations demand that beyond X amount of capacity, two qualified trained operators must be on the job site.

But smaller cranes can be legally operated by one qualified operator.

jomoco

 

[MarquisTree]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

My response to the hazard you just described is if it is unsafe to feed the entire limb, leader, tree, log into the chipper then the chipper operator shall cut it into manageable sections that can be safely feed or use a mechanical method of feeding (winch, log truck, skid steer, crane, excavator...) or enlist the help of as many workers are need safetly feed the machine.

My point is every situation is unique and each machine / job has its own hazards. I would argue that chipping vine covered material with a 6" chipper is more hazardous then feeding whole trees into a 790 (22"x36" feed opening) . In many situations the larger capacity chippers can be safer since the operator doesnt have to fight with the material to get it through. Most larger machines are bought with winches on them, giving the operator more options for loading material without putting themselfs in harms way.

I have a problem with a regulation like this based on chipper size, you have described a very specific hazard created durring a specific type of work. Our smallest chipper is a 1390xp (15" cap) used primarily on line clearance crews, should they be required to have two guys on the chipper at all times? Our bucket and hand climbing crews all go out with a min of an 18" chipper, some times they are pruning hedges...

There are too many variables to make a useful regulation like this based on chipper size. You can not regulate out the need for common sense.

 

[jomoco]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

This from the OSHA link's number one recommendation to help prevent wood chipper related injuries and fatalities certainly is very pertinent to this conversation, and WTC operations in particular.

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.

jomoco

 

[Grais]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

I climb trees alone every day.
And I have operated whole tree chippers for months on end by myself
Every chipper I have ever fed has had the ability to eat me alive, we dont use junior chippers, these things will chew you up and spit you out before you could say boo. Not that size matters a bit to me in regards to chipper danger, I treat them al the same, as a lethal piece of machine we need to operate in a safe manner.
I dont think we should start ratinng chippers as only sort of dangerous, or really fatally dangerous, every chipper I work on I treat it as a lethal weapon, that can kill me in a flash.

The whole idea is sort of self contradicting, you want regulation, or rules, but you dont regulation ? Whats the diff ?
Tree climbing has long been a self regulatory industry, I have never once in my life seen a WCB inspecotr at a any job site involving climbing, but I have had a few other jobs were we visited weekly, dangerous stuff like working on the floor of a warehouse, and working as a janitor....lol. Slip and falls are dangerous biznesss(and no I dont need a lecture on the hazards of slip and falls and the comensurate costs thet incur, been fully schooled on that thanks).
To me the amount of fatal accidents speaks more to the cut throat economy and lack of training guys feel forced to employ as means of making a bit of green.
Workers are forced to forgo safety for production and accidents are the logical result.
Thats a crime.
Basically if an employee cannot learn to operate the chipper safely, knowing that saftey with the chipper, takes precedent over anything else, production included, then we cannot use them. They have to be able to make a decision to stop the chipper to clear the chute, to clear the feed area, to limb dangerous branched of a tree. etc etc... to be able to feed the chipper safely, if they cannot manage it, if after a couple of weeks of training they cannot grasp this, they are just too unsafe to have around, cant be worrying about the guy on the ground chipping while up top.
When you find a person that can pull this off, treat them well, they are a valuable asset, and not one to be disregarded. One of the first things your chipper man neds o know is their safety is one fo the keys to efficient production, without them running the ground operations, I need to do it myself, or hold someones hand , this slows things down ten times more than simply taking a bit mre time to safeley chip the big guys.
If by safely, that means getting an extra pair of hands and eys in on the operation, so be it. In most cases we do have two groundies running around, but its not a hard and fast rule, we have to be adaptable, thats wherre really good training pays off.

 

[MarquisTree]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

[ QUOTE ]
Okay Tom, I see your point.

But consider that cranes have a cut off point that accepted standards and regulations demand that beyond X amount of capacity, two qualified trained operators must be on the job site.

But smaller cranes can be legally operated by one qualified operator.

jomoco

[/ QUOTE ]

Those are state specific rules. Much of them coming from way outdated logic. Back when an oiler had things he needed to do while the crane was running, now they mostly just clean the cab and wax the crane. Sorry not to get off track, MA doesn't have those rules, but If I crossed into ny I would need an oiler on site to run my crane

 

[MarquisTree]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

[ QUOTE ]
This from the OSHA link's number one recommendation to help prevent wood chipper related injuries and fatalities certainly is very pertinent to this conversation, and WTC operations in particular.

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.

jomoco

[/ QUOTE ]

Since when has OSHA been any sort of expert on tree work?

You need to get wtc out of your head on this one. This would be an all or nothing rule. Every chipper is a whole tree chipper by your definition. Just depends on the size of the tree.

Of those 50 how many went in feet first? Pushing material in with their feet, getting caught then pulling on the safety bar to try to get out (death grip) until it was too late.

 

[MarquisTree]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

Actually the size of the chipper is important. Big orange is a powerful lobbying force. If their average chipper size is say 12"I would bet the 2 man rule would be for chippers 12" and above so their crews would be exempt....

 

[jomoco]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

But surely Marquis you appreciate the fact that the numbers of crews that don't have the common sense and professional training that you have so wisely and responsibly given your's, out number us by a large enough factor, that without regulation, the number of chipper operators eaten alive on the job will keep climbing?

If those shoddy owners and operators know that not having two men in the immediate vicinity of their WTC's will result in them being fined out of business if a fatality occurs on their job sites? It will most certainly lessen their enthusiasm for running off to the nearest Walmart parking lot and hiring illegals to operate their WTC's alone?


What's to stop them doing that very thing legally today my friend?

What do we as a professional industry do about it?

jomoco

 

[jomoco]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

[ QUOTE ]
Actually the size of the chipper is important. Big orange is a powerful lobbying force. If their average chipper size is say 12"I would bet the 2 man rule would be for chippers 12" and above so their crews would be exempt....

[/ QUOTE ]

You mean the two man rule would only apply to hydraulically fed chippers over 12 inches, right?

Fine with me.

Most the Asplundh 2 man crews I see in my area run small chippers. An excellent and safer setup IMO.

jomoco

 

[MarquisTree]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

[ QUOTE ]
But surely Marquis you appreciate the fact that the numbers of crews that don't have the common sense and professional training that you have so wisely and responsibly given your's, out number us by a large enough factor, that without regulation, the number of chipper operators eaten alive on the job will keep climbing?

If those shoddy owners and operators know that not having two men in the immediate vicinity of their WTC's will result in them being fined out of business if a fatality occurs on their job sites? It will most certainly lessen their enthusiasm for running off to the nearest Walmart parking lot and hiring illegals to operate their WTC's alone?


What's to stop them doing that very thing legally today my friend?

What do we as a professional industry do about it?

jomoco

[/ QUOTE ]

We just disagree. I dont believe another regulation will save lives, it will add another way to be fined.

Why would another regulation have any affect on the hacks? They ignore all the rules as it is. No comp, ppe, training, inspections on their equipment. Whats one more fine for them.

More training and awareness I believe is they way to improve chipper safety. A gruesome safety video might help.

This rule would essentially ban a 2 man bucket crew. Light pruning or removals one bucket opp and a ground man. Instead of groundman being able to chip inbetween cuts he would have make a pile and wait for the bucket opp to come down before he chips. Chipping a brush pile is far more dangerous then chipping limbs one at a time.

This reg would have far reaching consequences far beyond the narrow scope you are looking at it from.

 

[jomoco]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

My whole point is that pre-empting OSHA and voluntarily adopting a two man minimum rule specifically applying to only hydraulically fed chippers over 12 or 14 inches is the best means of avoiding OSHA handing down a blanket two man minimum rule applying to all chippers if we keep ignoring this problem and the death toll keeps climbing to the point public outrage forces their hand.

My way allows you to run two man bucket bucket crews with a single man feeding the the BC 1200 or 1400 at will. Whereas continuing with the status quo until the fatality threshold is reached forcing OSHA's hand will rob you of the very thing you wish to retain.

Acting voluntarily of our own accord not only proves we're not reptilian in our concerns for our chipper operators safety and well being on the job, it allows us to determine the cut off point where chipper capacity determines when a two man minimum is warranted.

Why even run a BC 1800 when a single man feeding it can come nowhere close to using it to its full capacity safely?

What's the fatality threshold that will force OSHA's hand? 100? 200? 300?

Does sitting on our hands until that threshold's reached seem a bit reptilian when it's treeworkers being chipped alive on the job?

Does waiting for that point to be reached demonstrate any true commitment to our own workers safety and well being on the job as a professional industry?

Yes, we disagree. But which of us is truly most concerned for our chipper operators safety and well being on the job? The one who enforces an in house two man minimum rule on WTC's? Or the one who doesn't?

Thanks for a courteous well reasoned debate on this important matter Marquis. I very much appreciate your participation in this thread.

jomoco

 

[ward]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

Jomoco,

Fantastic thread. You seem a little off your game in the end here. I was expecting a little more salt, perhaps an "you're welcome" or something.

 

[jomoco]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

When my peers make an effort to offer objective reasonable opinions for why they disagree with me on this treeworker life and death matter?

Only a reptilian cad would not reciprocate in kind.

You see I genuinely care about all members of our profession. Even the jerks who attack me personally by veering way off topic, mis-spelling every other word as they make fun of my humble innovations and contributions to this industry, modest as they are.

Even the worst sort of childish playground bully behavior online doesn't really faze me at all. None of my fellow treeworkers deserve the grisly and untimely end my friend met going through that BC 1800 14 years ago now. Nor any of the fifty others that met the same fates on the job. This is a very real life and death issue involving members of my profession that I'm dead serious about helping prevent happening again and again in the future.

Folks who disagree with me on this subject and offer logical objective reasons for doing so, will get the same in return for why I think they should change their minds and join me in this vital treeworker safety battle for all. Not just fat headed pre-madonna climbers like me, being baby sat by my groundies, dreading the thought of climbing way the hell up there and trying to save my lame azz because the ISA considers it vitally important for our industry's image.

All of us without exception are prone to making mistakes and needing assistance occasionally. Chipper operators are no different, and deserve the same compassion and concern heaped upon climbers by this industry's leadership over the past 30 years.

jomoco

 

[KellyG]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

The problem is not that you have a cause that you feel passionate about but rather how you deal with discussion and a matter of opinion. This thread started out as a poll which, when used properly will allow you to gather information from other industry professionals. Instead of accepting a matter of opinion you use any opposing views as a launching pad of demeaning and insulting rhetoric.You yourself have hijacked you own thread and taken it off topic-not others as you have implied Your responses are so extremely arrogant in that you can't believe that they don't have the clarity and common sense that you exhibit and the ,Why would you be so (insert insult here )to disagree with me comebacks are not very motivating and hard for others to take .The irony is that you are a treeman who can't see the forest through the trees ,you bully anyone who disagrees with you and then claim to be the victim when they push back,you claim to be a champion for the safety standards yet you don't follow the rules.
We all agree that no one wants to see anybody go through a chipper. The adoption of a 2 man rule would definately make things safer no doubt, however it is a rule that would be hard to enforce . Personally , I think that Bandit has a great concept with their feedwheel foot control ,Check it out.just sayin'

 

[guymayor]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

Jon we hate to hear of injuries and deaths.

hoping you recover from the PTSD; from one reptilian cad to another.

"pre-madonna" for prima donna, and you crack on others' spelling? Thanks for lightening up a gloomy thread.

ok gotta go scrape some melted cobra off some burnt trees now...

 

[ward]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

In forming rules, efficiency vs. safety must be balanced.

Your way allows for the efficiency, but it suggests that a "best practices" would have 2 man operation of the machine...but short of legally requiring such operation.

Question: when does "best practices" become "always must" (i.e, "law")?

If it were to become an industry-wide best practice for 2 people to work the machine, anybody who had an injury or died by not observing the industry-wide best practice (2 man operation) might face very serious objections from their insurance. Liability might be put back onto the negligent user....

...just wondering how that line between best practices and law begins and forms...

 

[jomoco]

Re: Whole Tree Chipper Two Man Minimum Rule Adopti

[ QUOTE ]
Jon we hate to hear of injuries and deaths.

hoping you recover from the PTSD; from one reptilian cad to another.

"pre-madonna" for prima donna, and you crack on others' spelling? Thanks for lightening up a gloomy thread.

ok gotta go scrape some melted cobra off some burnt trees now...

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey there Guy!

Nice to have you pirouette onto stage here at the Bolshoi theatre!

Wouldn't happen to have any logical well reasoned opinions on why as an industry we should protect a "cad's" legal ability to hire a newbie off the street corner and put him on the job feeding a BC 1800 alone?

I know you hate to "hear" of such things as that newbie being chipped alive.

But do you have a logical reason for protecting that cad's ability to legally put that newbie into harm's way to make money?

Do you think the number of by the book companies exceeds the number of companies run by shady reptilian cads?

Thanks for the spelling correction Guy. It must've been those twin peaks of that material girl that discombobulated me and caused my fall from that height.

jomoco