Failure of bell winch clutch coupling during bell recovery

  • Safety Flash
  • Published on 25 November 2014
  • Generated on 13 December 2024
  • IMCA SF 18/14
  • 4 minute read

A member has reported an incident in which a winch clutch failed during bell recovery. 

What happened?

A diving support work barge was performing riser installation in saturation mode. The saturation dive system was third party hired equipment with technicians provided by the supplier. The system model is of a type the diving contractor also owns and operates.

During recovery with three quarters of the bell submerged the clutch between the winch and the hydraulic motor disengaged causing an in water descent of the bell to 10 msw. There were no injuries to bell occupants or topside support personnel.

The secondary motor and clutch assembly was engaged and the bell was recovered to surface, locked-on and transfer under pressure (TUP) without further incident. The faulty equipment was replaced and a load test was carried out to 14.88Te

Subsequently two further dry bell runs were carried out on each motor during which the bell was lowered to below surface and lifted back to hooks.

What went wrong?

Excessive wear of the clutch components and their retaining device provided enough ‘slop’ in the assembly to allow space for separation of the coupling. The winch brake did not engage and prevent the free fall as the fail safe hoist lever was not immediately released upon descent (both the internal disc and external band brakes engage only when the lever is in the neutral position).

Bell winch showing the clutch coupling mechanism in the undogged and locked position (LR)

Bell winch showing the clutch coupling mechanism in the undogged and locked position (LR)

Material loss on the bronze bushing

Material loss on the bronze bushing

Clutch cog wear showing – the actual gap against the replacement clutch

Clutch cog wear showing – the actual gap against the replacement clutch

Swipe to see next image

Our member’s investigation revealed the following:

The leading edge of the clutch on the load bearing side pushed the pinion coupling outwards causing wear of both the bronze bushing and the engaging edge of the clutch cog, providing a gap which eventually allowed unintentional disengagement of clutch.

It was learned that a similar loss of control incident involving identical wear of the same components on that system had occurred several years previously.

Of the many system ‘General Safety Recommendations’, and ‘Operating Procedures’ listed in the supplier/manufacturer’s manuals are the following:

  • Read all warning tag information and become familiar with all controls before operating the winch.
  • Slowly hoist or lower (main bell winch). The gearbox brake will automatically release and the hand brake automatically opens.
  • Inspect rigging, drive and hydraulic hoses at the beginning of each work shift. Defects should be corrected immediately.
  • Check all hinges, clevises and grease points.

Our member noted the following causes:

  • Worn/damaged components led to an unintended disengagement of the clutch.
  • The location/position of the components involved does not lend immediately to direct observation.
  • An inadequate inspection regime: information regarding the correct operation and maintenance was available from the manufacturer however, the planned maintenance system (PMS) used was of a general type and had omissions of critical component care.
  • Failure to follow up on recommendations resulting from the initial incident.

Our member took the following actions:

  • Repaired and made function test of the equipment.
  • Forwarded advice to the system supplier and held meetings soon after.
  • Reviewed system maintenance and operating procedures.
  • Sent pre-investigation internal notification to worksites, requiring inspection of like components where installed.
  • Formal investigation initiated.

The following preventative actions are being taken:

Clean and apply fresh paint of bright, unlike colours to the two opposing jaws of such couplings to highlight any developing increase in spacing and increase visibility/retain awareness of the critical components. Currently, the modification has been implemented on the bell winch system on one of the saturation diving systems. The method is not limited to this particular equipment and should be considered for application wherever safety critical components are installed, especially if they have a history of a previous incident;

Colours – before

Colours – before

Colours – after

Colours – after

Swipe to see next image

  • Measurements of the coupling jaws to be taken over time and logged in order to monitor wear and tear on this and similar devices.
  • Once every two weeks, alternate the primary and secondary clutch and motor in order to reduce wear and tear and monitor the system.
  • Increase the thoroughness of inspections for third party equipment with the use of company saturation system function test protocol, updated to include the particulars of the components involved in this incident.
  • Revision of company maintenance schedules for inclusion of a segment on critical components and with closer attention to specifics. Note: grease nipples are not applicable to this area. ‘Open gear lubricant’ is the requirement (at the bushing interface).

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.