Old style safety chains

[psynegy]

Hi, I was talking with a friend who works in a theatre a little way away from me, and they had recently been on a lighting course, and they informed me that old style chain link safety chains were no longer 'legal' for use, and instead must be replaced with rated safety wires. I was just wondering if anyone could shed some light on the situation, I'd rather get it right before I shell out £200 on new safety bonds.

 

Also, while hanging some moving head lights today, which we hire from an external company, I noticed that the safety rating on the bonds they provided were 35kg, but on the top of the light it explicitly says that the safety chain that holds the light must have a rating of at least 10x the weight of the fixture. My back will tell you that they did not weigh 3.5kg. Is this just negligence from the hire company, or the manufacturers being overly precautious?

 

Many thanks!

[Guest lightnix]

Hi, I was talking with a friend... and they informed me that old style chain link safety chains were no longer 'legal' for use, and instead must be replaced with rated safety wires. I was just wondering if anyone could shed some light on the situation.

Yes ;)

[dunk_1984]

Also, while hanging some moving head lights today, which we hire from an external company, I noticed that the safety rating on the bonds they provided were 35kg, but on the top of the light it explicitly says that the safety chain that holds the light must have a rating of at least 10x the weight of the fixture. My back will tell you that they did not weigh 3.5kg. Is this just negligence from the hire company, or the manufacturers being overly precautions?

 

The safety bonds rating is that of the fixture weight. The bond can withstand 10x it's rating.

[frog3d]

Hi, I was talking with a friend who works in a theatre a little way away from me, and they had recently been on a lighting course, and they informed me that old style chain link safety chains were no longer 'legal' for use, and instead must be replaced with rated safety wires. I was just wondering if anyone could shed some light on the situation, I'd rather get it right before I shell out £200 on new safety bonds.

 

What I thought was that you were allowed to use them, but they were being fazed out. You can no longer buy them.

[J Pearce]

Plenty of people still sell safety chains.

 

However, I'm not sure of any circumstances where a chain is safer than a steel bond.

[jonathanhill]

Hi, I was talking with a friend who works in a theatre a little way away from me, and they had recently been on a lighting course, and they informed me that old style chain link safety chains were no longer 'legal' for use,

 

As far as I know, there is no legal precedent that outlaws safety chains, merely the fact that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link and therefore a breaking strain cannot be relied upon. Steel wire rope is a lot more predictable in its behaviour and therefore is more suitable for a safety type application. Also its breaking strain to own weight ratio is a lot better than chain.

[paulears]

To the best of my knowledge, there still is not a legal requirement to use a secondary suspension, however for years everyone has treated it as perfectly sensible practice. The current thinking is that it is testing that is the key, hence why people now buy bonds that are rated, rather than chains that weren't. My question therefore is that an unrated chain is still a better secondary protection than no chain at all - with a proper bond being by far the best way, so surely it follows that the use of safety chains isn't illegal - or is it the case that if you had a venue with hundreds of old rusty chains in use and just a dozen or so proper bonds, then you should remove the chains and be legal, or keep them to be 'safer'.

[Andrew C]

I suppose this all comes down to doing a risk assessment. The hazard is the same in all cases. The lantern may fall, and kill the person below. The likelyhood of this happening depends on your venue.

 

Is the kit moved (and hence checked) often? Or does it stay in the same place for weeks with a nut loosening due to heat/cold cycling?

 

Do you have flybars whipping in and out inches from the lanterns?

 

Are they particularly heavy? Or just a few 123s?

 

Sensible people doing up the nuts, or idiot students?

 

If the likelihood is low, and the chance of a chain failing is low, then why change it? The obverse is also true; if the likelihood is high, or the chains are knackered...

 

I'm still happy to use chains in both venues I regularly frequent. Except movers where the likelihood goes up (vibration/weight). However, in one venue, I do bang my head on the wall where people get stressed about the use of chains in the loft, where the lantern CANNOT fall more than 6", but the chain CAN. Not to the extent of a lantern above a tension wire grid.

 

The key is to THINK.

[Alex222]

Sensible people doing up the nuts, or idiot students?

Hope you aren't referring to ALL students as idiots ? :o .. or are you just referring to the ones that don't know the difference between simple things like plugs/sockets and so on (who you would be worried about if they were doing the rig).. and say "what is the difference between a round and a square plug?", or people that don't have common sense, or haven't thought that what they are rigging might fall on someone if they don't tighten up a bolt and rig it properly!!!

[johnlinford]

Sensible people doing up the nuts, or idiot students?

 

The only time I've ever seen a lantern fall out the grid was the "professional" get-in crew who didn't believe in safety bonds and managed to undo the wingnut on the hook clamp all the way while focusing. He got sent home shortly thereafter.

[Ali2580]

Just noticed when I was looking earlier and it was related to this, Doughty are still selling safety chains for safety bonds so I am assuming they aren't illegal or there hasn't been any law created against them yet?

[Joe Betts]

To the best of my knowledge, there still is not a legal requirement to use a secondary suspension, however for years everyone has treated it as perfectly sensible practice. The current thinking is that it is testing that is the key, hence why people now buy bonds that are rated, rather than chains that weren't. My question therefore is that an unrated chain is still a better secondary protection than no chain at all - with a proper bond being by far the best way, so surely it follows that the use of safety chains isn't illegal - or is it the case that if you had a venue with hundreds of old rusty chains in use and just a dozen or so proper bonds, then you should remove the chains and be legal, or keep them to be 'safer'.

 

Here is a quote from BS7906 part 1, Use of lifting equipment for performance, broadcast and similar applications

regarding secondary suspensions or "safety bonds"

"Assess the likelihood of failure of the load attachment and the structural integrity of the load as a

whole to ensure that a single suspension is safe. It is essential that the load attachment and/or any

part of the load cannot become detached, for example due to rotation resulting in an eye-bolt

unscrewing. It may be necessary to add a second suspension which might be load bearing or may carry

no load in normal use but provide security should the primary suspension fail. The latter type is often

referred to as a “secondary suspension”. For example, a safety bond securing a luminaire to a lighting

bar to retain the luminaire should the hook clamp fail or be dislodged"

 

Essentially if it cannot possibly come dislodged, or undone, then you dont need one.

Otherwise you do.

 

Canford, doughty and various others still sell chain style safety's, so they are certainly still available.

Having spent some time looking, I cannot find any reference HSE or otherwise, other than this thread to

chain style safety's being made illegal.

 

 

A concurrent post has been automatically merged from this point on.

 

My position on chain style safetys is that they are not great, but better than nothing.

 

The problem with using chain, is that you can point load, and bend a link very easily

when you wrap it around the yoke of a fixture, and even a lighting bar, or truss chord.

 

For using chain as a sling, the curve of the object you sling around should be large enough to

support the length of each link it contacts, and not point load ant one link.

As a rule of thumb, that means a sharp edge such as a par can yolk is a no-no, and a 50mm

pipe is probably too small (depending on the size of your chain link)

 

If I were you, I would replace the chains with wires, and keep the chains as spares,

that way you will get your "in service stock" as safe as can be, and have spares incase

a visiting company didnt bring anything.

[andy_s]

Re John Linford's remarks...sadly, "professional" is not necessarily synonymous with "sensible", just as "student" is not always interchangeable with "idiot"..... :unsure:

 

Andrew's key word "think" is always a good one to have in your vocabulary. In fact when I started out, "thinking it through" is what we called risk assessment way back when.

 

but before anyone else points it out - no I won't claim to be infallible or never to have made a mistake or two in my career....

[Brian]

Here is a quote from BS7906 part 1, Use of lifting equipment for performance, broadcast and similar applications

regarding secondary suspensions or "safety bonds"

However, no British Standard is a legal document and failure to conform to them does not make anything illegal.

[Joe Betts]

Correct, and well observed.

But they are written specifically as guidelines to help people do things correctly.

 

If "knock on wood" you were to find yourself in the unfortunate circumstance for having had an accident

of any type, being able to show you followed the spirit of a BSEN or other standard will go a long way

to keeping you out o trouble.