Line of fire/pinch point – fractured fingers
- Safety Flash
- Published on 3 May 2019
- Generated on 17 May 2026
- IMCA SF 09/19
- 2 minute read
A crewman suffered a pinch point injury resulting in two fractured fingers and a fingertip amputation.
What happened?
The incident occurred when a piece of equipment weighing 86 kg was being installed by warehouse personnel into a seabed frame. The equipment was lowered into the frame using a forklift with a lifting attachment, but before the securing clamps were fully tightened, the lifting strops were removed.
It was then observed that the equipment was not aligned correctly, so it was manually turned in the frame. Whilst turning the equipment it slipped through the hand tightened clamps, crushing the injured person’s fingers between the equipment and the frame.
What went wrong? What were the causes?
Our member’s investigation found:
- There was no risk assessment or work instruction in place for this task. This was found to be the case for many of the routine tasks carried out in the warehouse/workshop.
- The warehouse team had not carried out this task before without supervision.
- There were insufficient engineering controls to prevent the incident from occurring.
What actions were taken?
- A straightforward modification to the seabed frame engineered out the pinch point. When designing equipment, it is vital that safety during installation, maintenance and transportation is considered, as well as operational safety.
- Review workshop, warehouse and yard activities to ensure that suitable risk assessments are in place and used:
- Seemingly routine activities should be adequately supervised and subject to suitable and sufficient task risk assessment; in this instance, no risk assessment or instruction was in place covering the task.
- Previously the task had always been supervised by a senior engineer, but on this occasion, the workshop personnel carried it out unsupervised.
- Seemingly routine activities should be adequately supervised and subject to suitable and sufficient task risk assessment; in this instance, no risk assessment or instruction was in place covering the task.
Related Safety Flashes
-
IMCA SF 04/16
5 February 2016
-
IMCA SF 18/14
25 November 2014
-
IMCA SF 13/11
25 November 2011
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.