A review of the design review process for fairground rides

1 Health and safety Executive A review of the design review process for fairground rides Prepared by Atkins for the Health and safety Executive 2007 RR524 Research Report Health and safety Executive A review of the design review process for fairground rides Rachel Packer CEng MIMechE Bert Commandeur MDipTech, DMS David Linkens CEng, MIMechE Ian Ward CEng, FIMechE Atkins Limited Woodcote Grove Ashley Road Epsom Surrey KT18 5BW This report reviews the current usage of the ' design review ' process in the UK fairground industry. Its influence in assuring the safety of rides has been evaluated, considering background perspectives from normal practice in other industries. The UK framework and practice for fairground safety has been developed over a number of decades, which includes the involvement of a number of regulatory bodies and other organisations.

2 Various guidance documents and publications are available, and these have been used as the baseline measure of current practice. Liaison has been established with a number of ride owners and design reviewers to confirm how this is applied in practice. The review has focused on two areas of the design review : the structural integrity of the ride and the risk assessment process . Particular attention has been concentrated on the structural aspects, since operating experience has shown these to be the largest current contributor to significant incidents on fairground rides . A number of key points and recommendations have been raised throughout this report. The key points arising from this review have been assembled in summary form in the Conclusions of this report with respect to the following aspects of the design review .

3 N safety Framework n design review n Structural Fatigue n Inspection and Maintenance for Fatigue n Risk Assessment n Communication This report and the work it describes were funded by the Health and safety Executive (HSE). Its contents, including any opinions and/or conclusions expressed, are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily reflect HSE policy. The Amusement Device safety Council (ADSC) has noted the findings of this report carried and is pleased to record that it has already taken positive measures to effectively address a number of the issues raised in this report including the introduction of revised systems and procedures relating to the production of design Reviews. The ADSC will continue to monitor and review ways in which safety can be further promoted in conjunction with the HSE.

4 HSE Books Crown copyright 2007 First published 2007 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise) without the prior written permission of the copyright owner. Applications for reproduction should be made in writing to: Licensing Division, Her Majesty s Stationery Office, St Clements House, 2-16 Colegate, Norwich NR3 1BQ or by e-mail to ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors would like to thank those who helped them in carrying out this work, especially the interviewees and HAZID participants for giving up their time to discuss issues around design reviews of fairground rides .

5 The authors would particularly like to thank Mr Doug Dadswell from Jocobs Babtie, Mr Craig Kirkman and Mr Richard Stockley from Associates, Mr Robert Roberts from Adventure Island, and Mr Markus Brian from the Tussauds group. iiiivCONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 1 2 SCOPE AND 3 Aim of 3 Scope of 3 3 Layout of 4 3 FRAMEWORK FOR fairground 5 Current 5 Parties 6 Purpose of a design review .. 7 When a design review is 7 Responsibilities of 8 Appointment of design 10 Reporting of 10 Framework Key 10 4 design 13 Contents of a design 13 Criticality 14 Level of Detail Required .. 14 Commercial 14 Information 14 Performing the design 15 Balance of 16 Practice in Other 16 design review - Key 16 5 STRUCTURAL FATIGUE 19 Context of Fatigue 19 Definition of design 20 Performing a Fatigue Analysis.

6 20 Practice in Other 21 Structural Fatigue Key 22 v6 INSPECTION FOR FATIGUE 23 The Inspection Requirements Document .. 23 Setting of Inspection 23 Commercial 24 Changes to Inspection 25 Change 25 Inspection Key 26 7 RISK and safety 27 Background to Risk 27 Level of Detail in a Risk 28 Risk Reduction 29 Risk Assessment 31 safety Integrity of Control Systems for fairground 31 Risk Assessement 32 Risk Key 34 8 COMMUNICATING KEY 35 Points to 35 Suggested 35 Information Key 37 9 39 safety 39 design 40 Structural 40 Inspection and Maintenance for 40 Risk 41 41 10 43 APPENDIX A CRITICALITY LEVELS APPENDIX B INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR A design review APPENDIX C RECORDING OF INFORMATION APPENDIX D RISK ASSESSMENT APPENDIX E HAZARDS

7 Vi EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report reviews the current usage of the " design review " process in the UK fairground industry. Its influence in assuring the safety of rides has been evaluated, considering background perspectives from normal practice in other industries. The UK framework and practice for fairground safety has been developed over a number of decades, which includes the involvement of a number of regulatory bodies and other organisations. Various guidance documents and publications are available, and these have been used as the baseline measure of current practice. Liaison has been established with a number of ride owners and design reviewers to confirm how this is applied in practice.

8 The review has focused on two areas of the design review : the structural integrity of the ride and the risk assessment process . Particular attention has been concentrated on the structural aspects, since operating experience has shown these to be the largest current contributor to significant incidents on fairground rides . A number of key points and recommendations have been raised throughout this report. The key points arising from this review have been assembled in summary form in the Conclusions of this report with respect to the following aspects of the design review . safety Framework design review Structural Fatigue Inspection and Maintenance for Fatigue Risk Assessment Communication vii viii1 INTRODUCTION The UK fairground industry has received a good measure of attention from the HSE and other interested bodies, which is commensurate with its public involvement.

9 The latest published HSE review of the industry is entitled " review of fairground safety ", and was written by HSE Principal Inspector P. Roberts in 2001 (Ref. 1). A number of points arising from this document have been addressed during the following years. The HSE also provides guidance information for use by the fairground industry. For example, the document entitled " fairgrounds and Amusement Parks Guidance on Safe Practice", HSE report HSG 175 (Ref. 2) is a standard UK reference, which is referenced internationally. Information published on its website includes Entertainment Sheet No 5, " fairgrounds and Amusement Parks" (Ref. 3), and Entertainment Sheet No 8, "The Amusement Devices Inspection Procedures Scheme (ADIPS)" (Ref.)

10 4). There are several organisations and guilds which exercise an influence over different aspects of the fairground industry in the UK. They involve varying degrees of membership, certification and discipline, and they disseminate guidance on good practice. Examples of these organisations are the fairgrounds Joint Advisory Committee (JAC) and National Association for Leisure Industry Certification (NAFLIC), amongst others. They contribute to the formation of standards in the UK and internationally, relying on the experience of several well established and leading UK practitioners. One of the points arising from the 2001 review of fairground safety is that there are some areas where HSE influence is less direct.