Subsea lifting and dropped loads

  • Safety Flash
  • Published on 1 January 1999
  • Generated on 2 December 2024
  • IMCA SF 01/99
  • 3 minute read

A number of incidents have been reported where loads have been dropped during subsea operations, with the following causes being identified:

  • Failure of mechanical latches.
  • Modified ‘off-the-shelf’ rigging.
  • Lack of understanding of the dynamics of subsea loads.

Below is a brief summary of a number of incidents.

1 – Dropped umbilical handling basket

An umbilical handling basket was dropped during recovery from the stern A-frame of a monohull construction vessel. Subsequent investigations showed that the lifting bracket had become detached. Another basket was similarly damaged. Previously the baskets had been deployed from a semi-submersible construction vessel where no incidents had occurred. The cause of failure is attributed to an inadequate appreciation of the low terminal velocity of the basket due to its high in-water drag. This resulted in snatch loads whilst lifting in a relatively high sea state from the stern of the monohull vessel. No guidance on operational sea state for types of deployment vessel was documented in the procedures. Remedial measures included strengthening the lifting bracket on the baskets and the specification of limiting sea states from future deployment vessels.

2 – Dropped clump weight

A 1 tonne displacement buoy connected to a 1.25 tonne clump weight became detached from a lift wire and fell 20 metres to the seabed. Subsequent investigation with an ROV showed that the 6.5 te shackle used to connect the load had become undone, with the bolt, securing nut and locking R clip missing. The load landed 1 metre away from a flowline jumper, which could have been damaged. The cause was attributed to an R clip becoming displaced from the shackle bolt, enabling the nut to back off and release the bolt. It is thought that vessel motions transmitted to the lifting wire plus high drag low weight of the combined load enabled the shackle R clip to contact the load and become displaced. Subsequent movement then rotated the bolt to the point where the load became detached. The contractor involved advised that all lifting operations should be conducted within sea state limits identified in the risk assessment for the specific vessel/load/rag combination. It also recommended that conventional R clips should not be used to secure shackles as they can become dislodged by the load and that split pins bent fully back or some equally secure alternative was preferred.

3 – Dropped clamp and buoy

A 225 kg clamp plus buoy was being transferred from a crane hook to a subsea winch hook in a moonpool of a semi-submersible construction vessel when the load was lost. The incident was attributed to the use of a single master link in the rigging. Two links should have been used, one for each lifting device. The load transfer procedure was modified for future operations of this kind.

4 – Modified latch failure

An incident occurred when an ROV was inadvertently released from a TMS that had a modified latch mechanism. The ROV and TMS were on deck and in the process of being latched into the A-frame when the ROV fell approximately 0.5 m onto the A-frame deck. No one was hurt and damage was minimal. A full investigation is underway but initial conclusions are that some of the latch rollers could have been seized in the open position. The contractor involved has instructed a check of latching mechanisms.

Latest Safety Flashes:

LTI: Finger injury during emergency recovery of ROV

A worker suffered a serious finger injury when their finger was caught between a crane wire and the recovery hook on an ROV.

Read more
BSEE: recurring hand injuries from alternative cutting devices

The United States Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) has published Safety Alert 487.

Read more
NTSB: Crane wire failure

The National Transportation Safety Board of the United States (NTSB) published "Safer Seas Digest 2023".

Read more
Hot work performed outside of Permit to Work (PTW) boundary limit

A near miss occurred when a third-party contractor working removed a trip hazard from the vessel main deck, using a cutting torch and grinding disc.

Read more
Vital safety information (height of vehicle) found incorrect

“Height of vehicle” information displayed on a truck, was found to be incorrect.

Read more

IMCA Safety Flashes summarise key safety matters and incidents, allowing lessons to be more easily learnt for the benefit of the entire offshore industry.

The effectiveness of the IMCA Safety Flash system depends on the industry sharing information and so avoiding repeat incidents. Incidents are classified according to IOGP's Life Saving Rules.

All information is anonymised or sanitised, as appropriate, and warnings for graphic content included where possible.

IMCA makes every effort to ensure both the accuracy and reliability of the information shared, but is not be liable for any guidance and/or recommendation and/or statement herein contained.

The information contained in this document does not fulfil or replace any individual's or Member's legal, regulatory or other duties or obligations in respect of their operations. Individuals and Members remain solely responsible for the safe, lawful and proper conduct of their operations.

Share your safety incidents with IMCA online. Sign-up to receive Safety Flashes straight to your email.