Lifelines -- standards

[wholybee]

Originally Posted by HankOnthewater

Hi Sailingharry, hmmm, I am not an engineer, although studied electronic engineering, did not complete that. Does that count?

I agree with the above posts that handrailing or lifelines on most boats are way too flimsy and/or too low. The requirement in Oz for commercial vessels is 800 mm (that is approx 32") for boats under 16 metres, and 100 mm (40") for larger boats.
https://www.amsa.gov.au/sites/defaul...ted-yellow.pdf
Hmmm, I thought it was 900 mm.......

I never really measured the height on my boat, but would be around 2600 mm/24"... too low. Would love to redo my handrailing, but that exercise would cost me too much (it is already solid handrail).

Commercial is yet another set of rules. For commercial vessels in the US, the USCG requires either 1000mm or 910mm, depending on the usage of the vessel.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/46/116.900

[HankOnthewater]

Originally Posted by HankOnthewater

Hi Sailingharry, hmmm, I am not an engineer, although studied electronic engineering, did not complete that. Does that count?

I agree with the above posts that handrailing or lifelines on most boats are way too flimsy and/or too low. The requirement in Oz for commercial vessels is 800 mm (that is approx 32") for boats under 16 metres, and 100 mm (40") for larger boats.
https://www.amsa.gov.au/sites/defaul...ted-yellow.pdf
Hmmm, I thought it was 900 mm.......

I never really measured the height on my boat, but would be around 2600 mm/24"... too low. Would love to redo my handrailing, but that exercise would cost me too much (it is already solid handrail).

In above post I omitted a zero from the number "100", should be "1000" mm. And "2600" should read "600" mm.
Maybe I should proofread better before submitting a post.

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by sailingharry

... In the late 80's, I came across a book called "The NEC Handbook." It contains the entire text of the National Electric Code (NEC). But heavily drizzled across the text of the code were many explanations of why the code was written the way it was. Fascinating stuff!...

It's still being published.
“National Electrical Code Handbook 2023" [N-70HB-23]
➥ https://www.firesafetycouncil.com/bo...-handbook-2023

“Only the NEC handbook, 2023 edition, offers:
Integrated expert commentary positioned in line with NEC text
Summary of Technical Changes table demonstrating where and why code changes occurred between editions
A cross-reference feature to help you quickly find related information in other articles or sections ... ”

[sailingharry]

Originally Posted by GordMay

It's still being published.
“National Electrical Code Handbook 2023" [N-70HB-23]
➥ https://www.firesafetycouncil.com/bo...-handbook-2023

Oh, for sure, they publish it every code edition. But at $300+, it's not THAT much fun to read! LOL.

[Breaking Waves]

Originally Posted by thinwater

Standards can be a bit prescriptive, but they have the major advantage of being based upon a very large pool of experience. I used to work on several standards organization within the oil and refining business, and there were many standards that seemed pointlessly expensive, until you read the history of why it came to be. Often someone died. Taking this back to the topic at hand....

Not disagreeing with your major point here . . . .

But I was personally directly involved with World Sailing's OSR decisions regarding dyneema lifelines . . . .and the process was rather less analytical and fact-based than I would have hoped.

[thinwater]

Originally Posted by Breaking Waves

Not disagreeing with your major point here . . . .

But I was personally directly involved with World Sailing's OSR decisions regarding dyneema lifelines . . . .and the process was rather less analytical and fact-based than I would have hoped.

That, unfortunately, is also the case with many standards. There are always opinions, compromises, and politics, and in many cases including this, not really enough experience to really understand the frequency of failure and all possible causes. Not all standards can be cut and dry, one answer.

[sailingharry]

Originally Posted by thinwater

That, unfortunately, is also the case with many standards. There are always opinions, compromises, and politics, and in many cases including this, not really enough experience to really understand the frequency of failure and all possible causes. Not all standards can be cut and dry, one answer.

As I stated at the very beginning, I am a FIRM believer in standards, as even the OSR decisions are MUCH more analytical than "I've sailed for years, I'm good, I see nothing wrong with xxx (not dyneema specifically), and I know more than anyone else what is needed on my boat."


But, here's an anecdote. I've just built a brand new dock in my front yard (30 feet fixed done by a contractor, another 80 feet floating with a 10x14 platform done by me -- I'm pretty proud of how it turned out!). Then, I took the County test on the NEC and became "licensed" to do my own electrical work, and have my final inspection later today. The lead county electrician has been very helpful working out issues and details. Here's the crazy one.


* All electrical on a pier has to have an insulated ground from one end to the other.
* There are NO "cables" (service entrance, UF, Romex, etc) that have an insulated ground (the ground is bare, the cable outer edge is a covering or sheath, not insulation).
* My existing wire is Service Entrance from the breaker in the basement to a box on the side of my house, about 20'. Then it is individual conductors in conduit for the 100' run to the dock.
* I wanted to put the panelboard 1 foot on the dock, mounted on the dock stringers.
* Because this was on the dock, the 20' feet of service entrance cable 100' away (without an insulated ground) made the entire run require replacement (or other almost equally crazy work-arounds).
* The County suggested that I move it 18" from the dock stringer to the bulkhead. Then it is not on the dock, and the feeder is fine as is.


Really? I move it 18" and save untold labor and material? Because of a wire 100' away?


But rules are VERY hard to write to cover all issues.


I actually have real heartburn with this one. Because conduit is a real pain inside, it is common to do the install like mine. They need to add a loophole to cover it.

[Paradox111]

USA construction standard called OSHA recommends 5:1 safety factor applies to items that are subject to wear cables, sheaves, etc. You should apply this factor to anything subject to wear, shackles, lifting eyes, etc.

As for ASME BTH1, “Design of Below the Hook Lifting Devices”, I never felt comfortable using this standard, unless strictly monitored and not forgotten, and preferred using OSHA(5:1) in order to CMA, lol. Marine dynamic loads more likely easily exceed BTH1 loading?

OSHA 1926.753(e)(2)
Components of the multiple lift rigging assembly shall be specifically designed and assembled with a maximum capacity for total assembly and for each
individual attachment point. This capacity, certified by the manufacturer or a qualified rigger, shall be based on the manufacturer's specifications with a 5 to 1 safety factor for all components.

[iduff]

Originally Posted by GordMay

IMHO: Even a 30" high lifeline will provide minimum overboard fall prevention.

FWIW: CSA Standard Z797-18 Code load bearing and height requirements for scaffold* guardrails:
A top rail must be at least 0.9 metres [35 Inches] but not more than 1.1 metres [43"] above the surface of the platform*.
* Scaffold platforms are very stable work surfaces, compared to boast decks.

A scaffold lifeline is likely encountered from a standing position, as one is on a stable work surface.

A boat lifeline is likely to be encountered from something closer to a crouched position, as the platform is anything but stable, and standing upright is quite unusual.

Conversely, a boat lifeline might be encountered while falling from some distance, like falling while on the windward side, down to the lifeline on the leeward side.

[rognvald]

Wire strength, height are important but your terminal connections(swaged/Norseman, etc) and their continual inspection are critical. Many sailors never look at their studs/turnbuckles/wire corrosion at the connection points which are more likely to cause failure than the easily visible stranded wire. And, if you're offshore or in sloppy conditions, you should be tethered to secure jacklines on your coachroof keeping you well away from a lifeline in a critical situation.
Rognvald

P.S. Never use coated wire. R

[dannc]

Originally Posted by sailingharry

...

But, here's an anecdote...

I actually have real heartburn with this one. Because conduit is a real pain inside, it is common to do the install like mine. They need to add a loophole to cover it.

Maybe this will make you feel better.

• I designed our house.
• Our builder was a PE(Professional Engineer)
• Our builder used to be in charge of the state's building code.
• Bedrooms have to have two ways in/out.
  • This usually means a window has to be used as a way in/out
  • I think the minimum window width is/was 18 inches.
  • I did read the code on windows size.
• The bedrooms in this discussion have two windows, one 8 feet wide and the other is 4 feet wide.
  • However, the windows are casement windows with two or four operable windows which are 16 inches wide if I remember correctly.
• My understand was the real reason for the window size limit was to allow a firefighter with breathing gear to ENTER the window.
• The building inspector would not give us a CO(Certificate of Occupancy) because of the definition of what is a window.
  • Is the window size defined by the operating pane size or the size of the window from stud to stud?
  • Our builder, the PE, and ex approver of building code in the state, and my reading of the code, said the size is from stud to stud.
  • The inspector said it is the operable pane size.
  • The inspector won because he has the power of the pen.
• We had to put in two crappy windows to get the CO.

Even my overweight, elderly parents could have gotten out the original windows. A firefighter would have simply used a fire axe to destroy the window pane to get access if needed. It would take a firefighter less time to destroy the window than the time it takes me to type how long a it would take for the fireman to take out the window. And I type fast.

[CarinaPDX]

Originally Posted by rslifkin

On a sailboat, required strength would be higher, yet most sailboats I see have stanchions spaced much further apart than mine and lifelines no stronger than mine (mine are 3/16" stainless with a coating, at some point I'll switch to 5/16" bare stainless but all of the hardware needs to be changed for that).

Yes, get rid of the vinyl-coated lifelines - they are a disaster waiting to happen. On my first Atlantic crossing my lifelines failed twice (after sailing in salt water for 4 years). The first failure was a result of severe corrosion to the SS wire, hidden by the vinyl, near one end. The second was the twinky tubular turnbuckle. I never touch the lifeline unless necessary: I always grab the handrail on the housetop instead. I also always am tethered to the jackline forward of the cockpit, although that has limited value as being dragged through the water is just a faster way to drown. Unless a second person is aboard then going over/through the lifelines is a fatal error, even with a tether.

I replaced those lifelines in 1996 in Ireland, with 1/4" flexible SS wire. I am only now replacing them again, because rubbing caused a strand to break. 5/16" is not necessary, and in fact is a much larger problem - if it even fits through the stanchions. 1/4" is more than strong enough, and large enough to not become a cheese cutter on your body, but also small enough that a simple crimper can be used. I terminated the wires with Nicopress fittings and SS eyes - a very strong and robust solution, easy to do DIY, and also inexpensive. 5/16" requires different crimpers ($$$). No more silly little turnbuckles for me: I use lashings to tension and adjust the lifelines. Again, they are an inexpensive and robust solution. They do need to be replaced every few years to be on the safe side.

Greg

[thinwater]

Originally Posted by dannc

Maybe this will make you feel better.

• I designed our house.
• Our builder was a PE(Professional Engineer)
• Our builder used to be in charge of the state's building code.
• Bedrooms have to have two ways in/out.
  • This usually means a window has to be used as a way in/out
  • I think the minimum window width is/was 18 inches.
  • I did read the code on windows size.
• The bedrooms in this discussion have two windows, one 8 feet wide and the other is 4 feet wide.
  • However, the windows are casement windows with two or four operable windows which are 16 inches wide if I remember correctly.
• My understand was the real reason for the window size limit was to allow a firefighter with breathing gear to ENTER the window.
• The building inspector would not give us a CO(Certificate of Occupancy) because of the definition of what is a window.
  • Is the window size defined by the operating pane size or the size of the window from stud to stud?
  • Our builder, the PE, and ex approver of building code in the state, and my reading of the code, said the size is from stud to stud.
  • The inspector said it is the operable pane size.
  • The inspector won because he has the power of the pen.
• We had to put in two crappy windows to get the CO.

Even my overweight, elderly parents could have gotten out the original windows. A firefighter would have simply used a fire axe to destroy the window pane to get access if needed. It would take a firefighter less time to destroy the window than the time it takes me to type how long a it would take for the fireman to take out the window. And I type fast.

Moral of the story: even with codes, and even among people on the committees, there is disagreement. Also a common problem during race committee inspections.


In this case the PE personally thought one thing but the code said another. I've been involved in this, and it is the operable size. 16" is also too small for egress for larger people, particularly wearing bulky clothes. I've also done a lot of tanks inspections and learned to loath manways smaller than 20" ... and I'm 160#.

If the person has to break out the window, that means broken glass on the edges. That's a problem.

The other evolution of this problem is people trying to put bedrooms into basements. Casement windows don't cut it.


---


Look at it from the inspector's point of view:
a. If I don't have a fixed standard to inspect against I will constantly be asked to bend the rules. Too far.
b. Most inspectors have to sign a piece of paper that says they can be held personal liable, criminal and civil, if they pass something and then there is a problem, or even if there is not a problem and it is caught later. If I was inspecting a tank and there was something I could not pass (judgment is allowed on some things but not most) the best I could do for you was not finish the inspection. I could not wink or bend without personal liability. And it does not matter if you have an employer or if the employer says they will cover you. It is personal.

[bailsout]

I removed all my lifelines. I only tether.

[Iron E]

Originally Posted by sailingharry

First, a 200lb crew member falling 4 feet to leward in a wave is WAY beyond 400lb.

The shock load in your scenario is over 3000 lbs (Thanks Brion Toss)