Sub-working group on Hazards & Risk Assessment
(SwGH&RA)
Scope of the Sub-working Group:
The SwGH&RA is of the opinion that concerning Hazards and Risk Assessment two aspects have to be taken into account:
· Machinery development, building and commissioning.
· Productions (the USE of machinery on stage and in production area’s).
The SwGH&RA recommends arena rigging (for instance in Trade Fairs) to be a mandatory part of the standard on Hazards and Risk Assessment. If this can’t be achieved, the standard should at least be the appropriate guideline for arena rigging.
The SwGH&RA evaluated the existing standards.
The DIN 56950 mentions Hazardous situations and hazardous events. In its annexes a lot of detailed aspects are given on how the handle risks and come to the proper analysis. The BGV C1 does not specifically mention risk assessment. The focus in this ‘Vorschrift für Sicherheit und Gesundheit bei der Arbeit’ looks specifically into safe operation when using installations.
The British Standard, Ö-norm and Swedish Standards do take general safety regulations into account, but neither of them provides information on how to execute a risk assessment.
The SwGH&RA considers it not feasible to mention only the SIL (as in the DIN 56950) because this is not in line with the IEC standards for machinery and processes.
Existing international standards concerning risk assessment are:
ü 98/37/EG Machine Directive, replaced by 2006/42/EC dd17/05/06 released 9th of June 2006
ü 73/23/EEG Low voltage installations Directive
ü 97/23/EG Pressure Equipment Directive (PED)
ü IEC 61508 Basic standard (7 parts)
ü IEC 62061 Machine sector (1 part, Harmonised with MD)
ü IEC 61511 Process industry (3 parts, Not yet harmonised with MD)
ü EN 1050 Safety of Machinery, Principles for risk assessment
ü EN-ISO 12100 Safety of Machinery Basic concepts, General principles for design
ü National legislations concerning public health and safety
Machine Directive 2006/42/EC has specific exclusions in relation to the entertainment industry.
Exclusions are:
Ø A. Lifting and hoisting equipment with maximum speed of 0.15 m/s
Ø B. Installations intended for the movement of artists during a performance
Ad A. This specifically matters; the existing standard for lift elevators also
excludes theatre lifts and lifts with a stroke of more than 3m.
Ad B. This is an important opening for the entertainment industry. The exclusion
concerns the (intended) movement of performers. This exclusion gives the
entertainment industry an opening to do so! However, it must be ensured that
it will be done in a save way. Safety can be obtained by using the right
machinery in the proper way and by organisational measurements; i.e. a proper
risk assessment.
When should a risk assessment be executed?
To the SwGH&RA the necessity of a risk assessment is obvious. The SwGH&RA likes to emphasize the need of evaluation of risk and hazard. It is not only necessary to establish what possible risks can be involved in a specific situation, but one step more has to be made: the evaluation of consequences has be taken into account.
By describing how risks can be avoided as well as analysing consequences, a path can be set towards handling risks. Risks can never be excluded totally. Therefore a proper risk assessment establishes what specific risks are involved and evaluates how to handle them. As a result a well trained crew and well trained performers can handle an initial unsafe situation safely.
The circumstances under which latent hazardous actions are carried out, should be technically optimal. Therefore, even in specific cases such as:
· Designing a new theatre and/or a theatre installation
· Restorations of existing installations
· Modification of existing installations
a risk assessment concerning the lifting of people should also be mandatory.
When executing a risk assessment on lifting people in a production area
· A functional and precise specification of the movement of a person is required
· An assessment has to be made; a inventory and evaluation of possible risks and how to handle them
· Additional measurements are to be taken in order to take away risks
· A serious option can be to decide NOT to lift the performer (as a result of the conclusions of the aspects mentioned above).
First conclusion:
Standards for risk assessment can be used according to the Machine Directive annex 1: ‘essential safety and health requirements concerning the design and construction of machines’.
Note: an additional risk, in indissoluble relation to the entertainment industry, is of course that lifting in general will be done in the direct vicinity of people; moreover, it is likely that people are standing directly under the load, even when it is in motion and very likely in situations in which the visibility is poor.
These branch-related risks should be mentioned to the manufacturers when functional specifications are discussed. In order to get the scope of work straight the proper risk assessment, in compliance with the contracting authority, should be carried out when dealing with:
· Designing a new theatre and/or a theatre installation
· Restorations of existing installations
· Modification of existing installations
Second conclusion:
The SwGH&RA is convinced that the (welcome) exclusion of lifting people during performances as mentioned in the Machine Directive, originates from other points of view than the sheer lifting of the performers and the state of technical conditions of machinery they are lifted with.
It is the opinion of the SwGH&RA that the exclusion is based upon the known fact that the lifting of people is carried out under controlled, yet non optimized situations: possible darkness, people standing under the load, possible objects in the vicinity or directly in line of the movement, multiple and simultaneous movements, possibility of distracting sounds and/ or music, etcetera.
The reason lies not in the in the lifting itself. It has very little to do with the safety of the machinery – just compare it to hoisting a deadweight; should machinery be more safe under the circumstances as mentioned above?
Remark 1: From a mechanical point of view the risk of a mechanical break down is the same for lifting people and lifting scenery. However, when lifting people the risk assessment should provide a scenario for the safe release of the performer in case of breakdown. Objective is to safely take down the performer from the position he/she is hanging or standing.
Remark 2: Regarding the performers point of view, the safety remarks in the BGV C1 can be used to safeguard the personal safety. This means evaluating risks and hazardous situations, training (rehearsal and getting used to possibly hazardous situations – ‘calculated risk’), handling equipment that will be attached to the person and the technical state of the machinery.
It is not unthinkable that the standard for bungee-jumping can be used as a reference to obtain the personal safety. This has yet to be investigated.
Finally:
It is mandatory, given the arguments mentioned above, that a risk assessment is made for every project in which lifting and hoisting is involved, whether with people or with people in the vicinity. Risk for performers, but no less for people working on stage, should always be minimized. There is nothing against a certain risk, as long as it is a calculated risk, provided it is assessed and evaluated.
When performers are lifted, a special assessment is required in order to be able release them from a hanging or standing situation. From a mechanical point of view however, the risk of a mechanical break down is the same for lifting people and lifting scenery.
NOTE: In the Netherlands various formats for a digital risk assessment are available.
Amongst them is one that is provided by the special committee on safe working circumstances (ARBO), in which field participants are cooperating.
The SwGH&RA considers a format that will be useful for European practice.
SwGH&RA, November 2006,
Dirk Bakker, Bert Determann, Torsten Nobling, Roy Schilderman.