Airline coupling failure

  • Safety Flash
  • Published on 1 September 2003
  • Generated on 5 December 2024
  • IMCA SF 11/03
  • 2 minute read

We have received the following report of an incident which occurred during internal cleaning operations in a produced water de-gasser which was being undertaken by two contract cleaners.

What happened?

This vessel had been open for over a week and forced extraction was in place to ensure that fresh air was being drawn in. In line with normal operating procedures the two cleaners were working under air from a breathing apparatus air line unit fed from a breathing apparatus compressor. During the operation a coupling on the air line parted, terminating the primary source of air supply. The problem was immediately recognised by the vessel entry control personnel and both cleaners immediately opened the air supply from their personal secondary supply and withdrew from the vessel to a place of safety.

The inventory of breathing apparatus (BA) air hoses was collected together for inspection and on cursory inspection the male and female connections looked identical on all hoses. The inspection data, certificates and equipment register also did not indicate any difference between the types of hose.

However, on closer inspection the male fitting indicated a slight difference (see below) which appears to prevent satisfactory connection with the female fitting. The pictures below indicate the difference in the appearance of the made up joints. Both joints hold when tested by hand on initial set up, but the dissimilar tubing fitting is not secure if the tubing is flexed, indicating it does not make a tight/locked connection on the make up.

Both ‘male’ connectors. Both ‘female’ connections look identical superficially. Groove present on left (circled), but not obvious on a cursory examination

Both ‘male’ connectors. Both ‘female’ connections look identical superficially. Groove present on left (circled), but not obvious on a cursory examination

Black ‘male’ connection to blue ‘female’ connection.

Black ‘male’ connection to blue ‘female’ connection. This combination is the only one that would not seat correctly. Note the gap. NB some pressure is being exerted to push the connection together

Blue ‘male’ connection to blue ‘female’ connection

Blue ‘male’ connection to blue ‘female’ connection. A tight connection. No pressure

Swipe for next image

The following key lessons have been noted:

  • Male connections were not stabbing fully into the female connection because of the slight differences in the design of the male connectors.
  • Back up air systems worked correctly.
  • Safety procedures were complied with.

The company involved has made the following recommendations:

  • A system is to be put in place to record that equipment has been fully checked each day before being used on a worksite, to include a supervisor’s signature.
  • The contractor is to establish how it was that it was supplied with hoses with ‘mixed’ fittings with the project equipment.
  • A new set of compatible hoses has been requested of the contractor.

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.