jomoco
Tree Freak
Greetings fellow arborists,
A little background on me, I'm a 33 year veteran of the tree industry, most of it as a demolition climber. I gained a very small amount of fame back in 1992 when I invented the leather Cambium Saver and Helen Stone put me on the cover of the June issue of Arbor Age magazine.
As a long time tree veteran, I have a very real respect for how dangerous wood chippers can be, particularly lately, as they are more powerful and more capable of taking very large wood.
In 1995, I filed for and was granted a US patent on a wood chipper safety device that I called a chipper safety gate ( US Patent# 5667152 ). The device was relatively simple, it consisted of a closed loop metal detector mounted in the feed shoot of a chipper, that wood detect when the metal strips encapsulated in the gloves, hard hat and boots of the chipper operator, came into it's field, triggering either the reversal of the feed wheels,
( hydraulicly fed chipper ) or activate a safety barrier to close just in front of the cutting mandrel ( old drum style chippers ).
It seemed to me that this new invention had two very important advantages over the existing safety features at that time. First and most important, it would prevent a disabled or unconscious chipper operator from being dragged into the machine, if he or she was properly equiped. Second, it would prevent foreign metallic objects from being inadvertently fed through the machine and doing damage to the machine or it's operator.
I was very excited and hopeful that my new invention would be well received by the chipper companies and promptly incorporated into their new models.
However I was shocked to learn that they wanted nothing to do with my new invention, and refused to tell me why. It took me many months to find the real reason for their refusal to adopt my invention for use.
LIABILITY, when a person is injured or killed in a chipper accident, the manufacturer faces only a limited liability, and if it can be determined that the safety systems were not maintained in good working order, or that the operator was negligent somehow, they face no liability at all. If they were to incorporate a modern safety device like mine into their machines, and it failed for any reason in an accident, their liability is large, perhaps even complete.
It all boils down to money, making it a thorny issue indeed.
It was my opinion then, and still is now, that it will take who knows how many injuries and fatalities to occur working with wood chippers, before a court of law determines that these companies have purposely ignored available technology, quite capable of preventing the majority of these tragic injuries and deaths. These companies will have to learn the hard way that effective safety controls on their equipment, is in their own best interest, and that ignoring these unnecessary deaths will one day put them out of business, while more enlightened companies fill their shoes.
Each time a tree worker is eaten alive by one of these supposedly modern wood chippers, I receive calls from lawyers, state and federal officials asking me why my system is not in use? I tell them the same story that I'm telling you in this post.
I urge all tree industry professionals to write or e-mail the TCIA or the ISA
and let them know that it's high time these companies that manufacture wood chippers see the light and get with the program!
And by the way, in 1998 I let all the major chipper manufacturing companies in the US know that my patent was available to them free of charge if they would just use the technology in their chipper models, once again they turned me down.
I have allowed the patent to expire, and am hopeful that a manufacturer somewhere in the world is willing to put lives above money.
Sincerely,
jomoco
[email protected]
A little background on me, I'm a 33 year veteran of the tree industry, most of it as a demolition climber. I gained a very small amount of fame back in 1992 when I invented the leather Cambium Saver and Helen Stone put me on the cover of the June issue of Arbor Age magazine.
As a long time tree veteran, I have a very real respect for how dangerous wood chippers can be, particularly lately, as they are more powerful and more capable of taking very large wood.
In 1995, I filed for and was granted a US patent on a wood chipper safety device that I called a chipper safety gate ( US Patent# 5667152 ). The device was relatively simple, it consisted of a closed loop metal detector mounted in the feed shoot of a chipper, that wood detect when the metal strips encapsulated in the gloves, hard hat and boots of the chipper operator, came into it's field, triggering either the reversal of the feed wheels,
( hydraulicly fed chipper ) or activate a safety barrier to close just in front of the cutting mandrel ( old drum style chippers ).
It seemed to me that this new invention had two very important advantages over the existing safety features at that time. First and most important, it would prevent a disabled or unconscious chipper operator from being dragged into the machine, if he or she was properly equiped. Second, it would prevent foreign metallic objects from being inadvertently fed through the machine and doing damage to the machine or it's operator.
I was very excited and hopeful that my new invention would be well received by the chipper companies and promptly incorporated into their new models.
However I was shocked to learn that they wanted nothing to do with my new invention, and refused to tell me why. It took me many months to find the real reason for their refusal to adopt my invention for use.
LIABILITY, when a person is injured or killed in a chipper accident, the manufacturer faces only a limited liability, and if it can be determined that the safety systems were not maintained in good working order, or that the operator was negligent somehow, they face no liability at all. If they were to incorporate a modern safety device like mine into their machines, and it failed for any reason in an accident, their liability is large, perhaps even complete.
It all boils down to money, making it a thorny issue indeed.
It was my opinion then, and still is now, that it will take who knows how many injuries and fatalities to occur working with wood chippers, before a court of law determines that these companies have purposely ignored available technology, quite capable of preventing the majority of these tragic injuries and deaths. These companies will have to learn the hard way that effective safety controls on their equipment, is in their own best interest, and that ignoring these unnecessary deaths will one day put them out of business, while more enlightened companies fill their shoes.
Each time a tree worker is eaten alive by one of these supposedly modern wood chippers, I receive calls from lawyers, state and federal officials asking me why my system is not in use? I tell them the same story that I'm telling you in this post.
I urge all tree industry professionals to write or e-mail the TCIA or the ISA
and let them know that it's high time these companies that manufacture wood chippers see the light and get with the program!
And by the way, in 1998 I let all the major chipper manufacturing companies in the US know that my patent was available to them free of charge if they would just use the technology in their chipper models, once again they turned me down.
I have allowed the patent to expire, and am hopeful that a manufacturer somewhere in the world is willing to put lives above money.
Sincerely,
jomoco
[email protected]
