WESTERN CANADIAN LUMBER WORKER

er. 1962

REPORT ON BUOYANCY DEVICES

BY IWA REPORTER

How valid is the criticism of the type of buoyancy equipment presently approved by the Work-

men’s Compensation Board for industrial use? Is it true

that workmen still drown wearing life-

jackets approved by the Board? Does the Board investigate all types of buoyancy equipment on the

market or do they arbitrarily decide what type workers must wear?

These and other questions on buoyancy equipment have provoked bitter argument among IWA mem- bers from the bunkhouses to Region- al conventions. Two resolutions at the recent Delegated Meeting of Local 1-71, IWA, referred to the WCB approved jackets “as a horse saddle” and “more of a hindrance than a safety measure.” While these resolutions were soundly defeated by the Meeting, they do show the strong feeling held by some IWA members on the subject.

Reservations Too

Strange as it may seem the Work- men’s Compensation Board has reservations about the jackets too. This I discovered during a recent talk with Mr. Arthur Francis, the Board’s Accident Prevention Direc- tor. During the interview I asked him how justified was this criticism.

“Let me give you first the back- ground on our buoyancy equipment project,” he suggested, “after which you can judge for yourself.” “Our department,” he went on, “is charged with the responsibility of preventing needless industrial acci- dents. This is not an easy task. The forest industry alone has over forty thousand workers in British Colum- bia,” he stated, ‘and each one of them is a potential accident victim.”

Buoyancy Project

During the mid-1950’s, Mr. Fran- cis said, his department was given the added responsibility of finding a suitable Jlife-jacket which would eliminate the drastic increase in in- dustrial drownings.

This project was a completely new venture and one that necessitated a great deal of planning. Following a series of top level meetings it was decided that Murray Clarke, the Board’s Programme & Training Supervisor and Doug Watts, Safety Inspector, were the ones to find the answers,

“It took us nearly a year to find some of the answers,” recalled Mur- ray with a laugh, “and a lot of swimming we hadn't planned on.”

No Literature

The reason for this came about when the two investigators discov- ered there was no available literature on buoyancy devices. Even the Royal Navy had done no testing on per- sonal life saving equipment until after World War II.

This meant starting from scratch. Fortunately, the pool at the Board’s Rehabilitation Centre was suitable for conducting their experiments. Their first undertaking was to deter- mine the amount of buoyancy ac- tually required for a workman in water.

Different Buoyancy During this experiment they dis- covered a widely differing buoyancy between individuals. They also found a differing buoyancy in the same in- dividuals depending on the amount

of air in their lungs. Some children having a body weight in air of not over seventy-five pounds were found to weigh in water, far more than a two hundred pound adult.

Checks were also made in the dis- tribution of body weight in women. The greatest buoyancy point on women was found to be their thighs,

The weight of work clothing in water was thoroughly tested too. Here it was discovered that normal wet clothing usually (because of en- trapped air) provides more buoyancy to a person. Offsetting this extra buoyancy however is that water soaked clothing hampers movement.

Cold Water Test

The investigators found also that in extremely cold water, a person with clothes on would survive long- er. The reason for this is that cloth- ing acts like a diver’s “wet suit” and traps the water warmed by the body close to the skin.

The greatest danger to a clothed person in water comes when attempts are made to raise the body above the water level.

Opinions Differed

The two men worked well to- gether during their years on the project but admit now to having had differences of opinion on what con- stituted a reasonably safe life-jacket. Murray believed the emphasis had to be placed on adequate buoyancy, regardless of how bulky the jacket became. Doug, an ex-logger, balked at this insisting that the workman’s comfort was of equal importance.

Having no intention of comprom- ising their respective beliefs, they worked even harder to find the necessary answers.

As a result of their preliminary experiments, they concluded that a buoyancy of 10%2 pounds was suffi- cient to support the average work- man. However, because of other fac- tors involved, it was decided that the minimum requirement would be 14

d

pounds. Bulk Problem

The next phase of the project was to find suitable equipment which would provide the necessary buoy- ancy. All the buoyancy devices approved by the Department of Transport for the equipping of ships were found to be too bulky. The problem now facing them was how to overcome the fact that buoyancy is attained by displacement of water with a lighter medium, and to ob- tain buoyancy, bulk must be pro- vided.

An important fact was discovered by the two men during this part of their investigation which is of prime importance to [WA members owning boats. The Department of Transport approved buoyancy devices, made from kapok, were found to have plenty of buoyancy when new. How- ever, if old and not looked after, this buoyancy could disappear,

ut

Because of the unreliability of kapok, a search was conducted for an improved substitute. Experiments were made with cork chips, therma- lite plastic blocks and nodules, with the bark of the ti plant, and with various inflatable devices and devices containing vinyl covered sponge, and unicellular sponge.

Partly as the result of the efforts of these two men, a permanently buoyant material was developed. This was a cellular material very similar to a sponge in appearance, but actually consisting of a multi- tude of tiny, thin-walled cells, full of air, and not connected to each other. The material it was found could be cut in pieces or stabbed re- peatedly with an ice pick with little loss of buoyancy.

After studying the causes of a num- ber of industrial drownings the men decided that ary buoyancy device which required manual operation to activate it would not be acceptable because of the possibilities of human error.

Automatic Devices

All types of automatic buoyancy devices were also tested. While some of the devices worked well and pro- vided adequate buoyancy, constant attention was needed to ensure that the triggering valve would remain operative. To date this has been the main objection to this type of equip- ment.

The next problem they faced was how to decide on the placement of buoyancy. The standard D.O.T. re- quirement of buoyancy was divided almost equally between the front and back parts of the body. This worked fine provided the person in the water was conscious. Unfortun- ately, boommen especially, can be knocked out by striking their heads on the boom logs.

By further experiments they found that to protect the unconscious work- men, the ideal placement for the buoyancy was in front of the chest and high up towards the chin, with just sufficient buoyancy immediately behind the head. This would prevent the head dropping backwards and save the face going under water.

Jackets Save Lives

This placement of the buoyancy they knew would lead to consider- able opposition from the wearers. Such opposition they readily admit is not based purely on imaginary grounds. But, they state, the jackets are saving lives and must be used until better ones are discovered.

When the approved life-jackets were commercially available, the Board issued the following directive: “On and after January 1, 1957 when a workman is employed under condi- tions which expose him to a serious risk of drowning he shall be supplied with and shall wear a device having buoyant effect sufficient to maintain his head above water without any

Aerial view of Celgar’s new Westley Sawmill near Castlegar.

effort on his part. The device pro- vided shall not be dependent upon manual manipulation to secure the buoyant effect.”

Tests Go On

The Board is still testing life- jackets at frequent intervals. Included in these tests are both new units and old units which are being constantly modified. The Board also investi- gates all legitimate jacket complaints and takes remedial action when necessary.

While the WCB recognizes the right of workmen to question their judgment on the approved buoyancy equipment, all the evidence, they point out, supports the Board.

“We go by statistics,” stated Mur- ray, “and to our knowledge, no work- man in B.C. has ever died from drowning while wearing a _ life- jacket.”

There have been a number of in- dustrial drownings following the di- rective, the Board admits, but in each case the victim was not wear- ing a life-jacket.

Drowning Statistics A review of the Board’s drowning statistics for the last eight years shows there were 6 drownings in 1954, 11 in 1955, 8 in 1956, 8 in 1957, 1 in 1958, 2 in 1959, 0 in 1960, and 0 in 1961.

Celgar’s Safety Program Praised By Atkinson

By JOHN T. ATKINSON

IWA Regional Safety Director-

It is well-known to safety officials, that new operations or plants seldom operate without first incurring a higher accident frequency rate than do established firms of comparable size. When a new plant or operation does eliminate or reduce this high accident rate, it proves they have a sound safety policy.

For this reason, we in the IWA commend the safety progress re- corded at the Celgar’s new modern sawmill at Westley. We also com- mend the fine safety record estab- lished by the crew at the Company’s old mill at Castlegar.

Only One Accident

The mill at Castlegar has oper- ated 408 days with only 1 compen- sable accident, and since that time has worked 239 days accident-free. This plant employs 140 men and operates 2 shifts. Many new men have been hired in the past year to replace transfers to the new mill at Westley. Under the company policy of safety training of new employees and constant «safety supervision, maximum results have been achieved in spite of the inherent hazards that never can be removed.

The Castlegar mill operates under the Columbia Cellulose program that embraces the three E’s of Safety— Engineering, Enforcement, and Edu- cation — but it also has the spirit of co-operation and enthusiasm. As long as this is developed and main- tained, Castlegar will continue to lead in safety all other operations of this giant company.

estley Sawmill

This is the largest, newest and most up-to-date sawmill built in Canada in the last 25 years. It fea- tures automation in all departments and is designed especially for the size, specie and type of timber avail- able in the interior of British Colum- bia. A new type of log haul that de- livers in bundles, automatic car- riages with gunshot feed, fast action gang saws and many other innova- tions in methods and plant design that provide greater efficiency.

Early in the construction stages of the project, it became clearly evident that unless a strong policy of safety first was established and enforced, the usual high accident rate for newly established industrial plants would prevail. New methods, new equipment, and new men have al- ways produced these very undesir- able results.

Notable Reduction

In spite of the program of safety training and safety supervision, the extensive use of protective equip- ment, etc., accidents did happen but with a notable reduced frequency. Contributing to this, of course, is the fact that those employees trans- ferred from the Castlegar Mill are

» well-informed in the matter of safe-

ty. All workmen are given a hard hat upon entering the employ of Celgar which he must wear at all times on the job. He is also in- formed that he is expected to contri- bute to the safety program by work- ing safely himself and obeying all safety rules.

The never-ending task of protect- ing people both on and off the job will go on and on. The spirit of teamwork that was in the main res- ponsible for the splendid record in the old mill will overcome the prob- lems on safety now showing up in the new mill.

The workers in Castlegar know about safety and like it. This is the only place in Canada where barten- ders and store-keepers wear hard hats.

Safety Belts Must In Wisconsin

All 1962 cars sold in Wisconsin must be equipped with safety belts on the two front seats.

The law making seat belts man- datory was passed during the last session of the state legislature and signed by Gov. Gaylord Nelson. Wisconsin is the first state to enact such legislation.

The law states: “It is unlawful for any person to buy, sell, lease, trade or transfer from or to Wis- consin residents at retail an auto- mobile, which is manufactured or assembled commencing with the 1962 models, unless such vehicle is equipped with safety belts installed for use in the left front and right front seats thereof.”

It also makes the following pro- visions regarding installation: “All such safety belts must be of a type and must be installed in a manner approved by the motor vehicle, de- partment. The department shall establish specifications and require- ments for approved types of safety belts and attachments thereto. The department will accept, as approved, all seat belt installations and the belt and anchor meeting the society of automotive engineers’ specifica- tions,”