Choosing Confined Space Equipment

I often get asked to visit clients with a view to looking at their processes, usually because something has happened or they are new to us. This then generally leads to a very in depth discussion about what tasks they undertake so I can clearly establish the type of entries that they do. This is of course wide ranging, from restricted entry into silos to conducting walk through surveys in 6 meter culverts. But as the task is wide ranging so is the equipment that will be required. The training we select needs to be fit for purpose and far too often we just apply the label, confined space entry.

This is where there seems to be a common theme of where things go wrong. Whilst many have been trained to enter confined spaces we all know how these can vary. How often do people see the different equipment that is available, bearing in mind that a lot of product selected is because you were trained using that. So for instance a vast amount of people are trained using a fall arrest retrieve block. The reason though for this is not because it is necessarily right for the task the candidates will be working on, but it is much easier for the trainer to demonstrate with. So assuming a fall arrest retrieve block, FARB has been used (a fall arrest retrieve block is a fall arrest device, FAD or SRL self retracting lifeline depending on who you talk to, that has an emergency recovery option built into it. But how many people when being trained are told that a FARB should only be used in the fall arrest mode and that the recovery system is for emergency use only. If the emergency recovery is used the unit should be sent away for servicing upon return to the depot. Or that it can only be used as a secondary device, rather than the primary means of access.

So in this instance your team are sent to site with an FARB and something that it can be mounted to for use, tripod, quadpod, davit or polehoist etc. When they get there they find their entry has no ladder or foot irons, so they now should not use their FARB for entry unless they have taken a ladder with them. Because if they do use it they would have to engage the recovery system. This means they are using the FARB as a man riding winch, which is a primary means of access. The unit now should be sent away for servicing, but we know from the units we see for servicing that this doesn't happen. We will see this unit back in when its 6 monthly inspection is due. The customer could then receive a shocking repair bill if this has happened a few times. These units are not designed to be used as man riding winches except in an emergency recovery situation. As the old saying goes, it does what is said on the tin, it is a fall arrest, retrieve block. A repair bill after saving an entrants life is immaterial, but a repair bill for incorrect use or even worse a failure when it is really needed because of incorrect use is intolerable. But if this is not being made made clear at the training level the entrant can not be blamed for not knowing this, but they may end up paying the ultimate price.

The same goes for the means of attachment for this device. Quite often a tripod may well be the correct choice but that doesn't mean it is every time. After all a tripod always has the entrant suspended directly over the entry point, if set up correctly. But you may need to swing them back over to ground and a davit may be the best selection for a task that involves that. Silos require even more unusual equipment, but it does exist. All of this should be picked up on your risk assessment before you even take the task on. A well written risk assessment will identify all of the hazards and this will in turn lead to the correct equipment selection. What do I mean by this? Well if you have a silo for instance that has a domed top that you can not place a tripod or quadpod on then you may require a davit socket to be fitted. You ask if this can be done and are told no we can't drill or weld to the structure. So then an adjustable collar clamp may be required or a drop in insert with davit socket welded to it. Either way the doing the risk assessment correctly will lead to the correct equipment selection and safety to all those doing the task.

Escape sets can pose the same problems if you don't know what is out there and how they work. A classic example of this is you are looking to purchase or hire some escape sets. The ones you were trained on were full face mask positive pressure sets. So unfortunately it is quite likely that these will be chosen. Not because they are bad sets but they may well not be the correct choice for your application. Virtually all of your entries may be where the atmosphere is usually safe but there is a chance that you may get a gas alarm. Your workforce for this task are made up of people of various fitness levels, some smoke, some have facial hair, some have long hair and some have glasses. A few may have all of these attributes, so will they get a seal on a full face mask? Did you even think about it? The standard air consumption of an average man, under average duress is 40 liters of air per minute. But trust me when I say, if your workers have an actual alarm they will be anything, but average, unless they are training constantly to deal with this. So the full face mask set because it delivers the air flow the wearer is now breathing at when panicked, is greatly increased and may now deliver way less time for the escape than is required. Where as a person who wears and uses full breathing apparatus frequently, due to understanding how it works and controlling their breathing rate and panic may get longer than the time stated. Again your risk assessment should have identified all of these things prior to any product choice. A hood type escape set can deliver a restricted flow of only 40 liters per minute, can be worn by people with facial hair, long hair and glasses and ensures the time value for escape as stated regardless of the wearers panic or fitness. Does this make it the correct selection, only your risk assessment, if done correctly will determine this because all of these questions should be asked before selection.

Then we have the worst equipment selections of all. The ones chosen because they are the cheapest, or sometimes because they are the most expensive, but either choice can be equally as bad because they were not identified as being fit for purpose. They are simply viewed as the cheapest or the best. This generally happens when the buyer is very unlikely to be the end user, so has little understanding of the task to be done other than it is a confined space. Because as I have said before, there are people that adopt the attitude that all confined spaces are the same! Those of us that actually do work in them of course know that each and every entry is different. So with the cheap and the best products they actually do have a place where they are fit for purpose so long as your risk assessment shows them to be the correct selection.

The same argument stands for every piece of equipment you select for your entry. So before you do your next task. Stop and ask yourself, if I was writing the risk assessment to select the equipment for this entry, would it be what I have been using. If you doubt it then yours and your teams safety are a constant game of chance.

Ash Safety because every life is important. https://www.ashsafety.com/contact.htm