fbpx
Wikipedia

Rollover protection structure

January 01, 1970

"ROPS" redirects here. For other uses, see Rops (disambiguation).

A rollover protection structure or rollover protection system (ROPS) (/roʊps/ or /ˌɑːroʊpiˈɛs/) is a system or structure intended to protect equipment operators and motorists from injuries caused by vehicle overturns or rollovers. Like rollcages and rollbars in cars and trucks, cabs, frames or rollbars on agricultural and construction equipments, a ROPS involves mechanical components attached to the frame of the vehicle that maintain a clearance zone large enough to protect the operator's body in the event of rollover.

Unimog fire engine with roll over protection structures
ROPS bar on a Fordson tractor.
Rollover protection structure on an MF 135. Photo: K.A. Gallis.

Commonly found on heavy equipment (i.e. tractors), earth-moving machinery and UTVs used in construction, agriculture and mining, ROPS structures are defined by various regulatory agencies, including US Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)[1] and international standard organizations such as ISO and OECD.[2] The regulations include both a strength requirement as well as an energy absorption requirement of the structure. Some dump trucks add a protrusion to their boxes that cover the operator's compartment for ROPS purposes.

ROPS are commonly fitted to 4x4s, pickup trucks, earth moving equipment, soil compactors and utility vehicles used in the mining industry. Products such as this were developed out of necessity so employees travelling around or within mine sites were provided with extra protection in the event of a fleet vehicle rollover.[3]

In the US, ROPS designs have to be certified by a professional engineer, who will normally require a destructive test. The structure will be tested at a reduced temperature (where the metal is more brittle), or fabricated from materials that have satisfactory low temperature performance.[4] The International Organization for Standardization has guidelines for destructively testing ROPS structures on earthmoving machinery, excavators, forestry equipment and tractors. Theoretical performance analysis of major new design ROPS is not permitted as an alternative to physical testing.[5]

Variants edit

Some tractor operators have raised concerns about using ROPS in low-clearance environments, such as in orchards and buildings. In response, NIOSH developed an Automatically Deploying Rollover Protective Structure (AutoROPS) which stays in a lowered position until a rollover condition is determined, at which time it deploys to a fully extended and locked position. It is currently[when?] working with manufacturers to streamline the commercialization of this technology.[6] The Division of Safety Research branch of NIOSH has developed cost-effective rollover protection structures (CROPS) for four tractor models (Ford 8N, Ford 3000, Ford 4000, Massey Ferguson 135), in an effort to provide safety for older model tractors.[7]

Some automobile models have begun to adopt the phrase, substituting system for structure in the ROPS acronym, notably the Volvo C70 convertible models, and Jaguar XK. Their ROPS structures consist of two pyrotechnically charged roll hoops hidden behind the rear seats that will pop up in the case of a roll-over to protect the occupants. If the roof is up, the system will still work, shattering the rear window at the same time.[8]

History edit

Rollover injury and fatality edit

Tractor rollover has become one of the leading causes of occupational death in the agricultural industry. In the United States from 1992 to 2005, 1,412 workers were killed from tractor rollover, with roughly 10,000 suffering an injury.[9] These rollover fatalities represented about 20% of all agricultural fatalities.[10] During 2003 to 2010, 933 workers in agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting industries were killed as a result of tractor rollover, accounting for over 63% of all tractor-related deaths.[11] The National Safety Council estimates that between 150 and 200 tractor operators are killed due to rollover in the US each year.[12] Researchers have also attempted to estimate the chances that a tractor rollover will result in a fatality of the operator. An adjusted probability of about 8 deaths per 100 tractor overturns (8%) was extrapolated using data from the Kentucky Fatality Assessment and Control Evaluation (FACE) Program.[12] Furthermore, youth are particularly at risk of being crushed or pinned by a machine (all-terrain vehicle, tractor, etc.) that is not equipped with a rollover bar. All-terrain vehicles and tractors continue to be leading causes of fatal injury among youth in agricultural settings.[13]

The installation of Rollover Protective Structures (ROPS) on older tractors that lack these protective devices has been identified as a viable solution for reducing overturn fatality rates among US farmers.[14][15][16] When worn with a seat belt, these engineering controls are 99% effective in preventing operator death if an overturn occurs.[17][18] The US National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health estimates that fatality rates from tractor overturns in the US could be reduced by a minimum of 71% if all tractors were equipped with ROPS.[19] When paired with proper seat belt use on tractors, NIOSH estimates that ROPS could eliminate nearly all fatalities caused by tractor and lawn mower overturns.[6] Without a seat belt, the ROPS is still 70% effective in preventing operator death,[20] though there is a possibility that the rider may be thrown from the tractor during the overturn, and thus left unprotected by the ROPS.[19]

Usage rates edit

Research from Sweden shows that the fatality rate from tractor rollover remains stable when ROPS prevalence rates range from 40% to 75%; only until the rate of ROPS adoption reaches 75% to 80% does the fatality rate from rollover fall significantly, to near-zero.[9] The latest estimates of tractors equipped with ROPS in the United States show that 59% of tractors were ROPS-equipped in 2006, an increase from the 38% in 1993. With steady increases in the installation of ROPS, it is projected that the rollover fatality rate will decline steadily, until reaching a rate near zero by 2028.[20]

ROPS usage has also appeared to be linked to a number of factors. There is regional variation in ROPS usage within the United States, as estimates from 2006 showed that tractor operators in the South had the highest prevalence of ROPS usage at 65%, while the Northeast had the lowest prevalence of ROPS usage at 51%.[9] The West and Midwest reported rates of 60% and 56% respectively.[9]

Age of tractor operator is a large risk factor, as increasing age is associated with decreasing rates of ROPS usage.[20] The oldest group of tractor operators, those ages 65 and above, have the lowest rate of overall ROPS usage at 42%.[20] Additionally, older tractor operators are more likely to suffer fatality and severe injury outcomes following tractor rollover than younger operators.[9] Along with the age of the tractor operator, the age of the tractor itself is a risk factor. Older tractor models are less likely to be equipped with ROPS, possibly owing to impracticality in installation or to mandated installations in newer models. Further, older tractors are more dangerous than newer tractors, possessing narrow front ends and a higher center of gravity, as well as being more prone to operational failure.[21]

Economics also appears to be a major factor in rates of ROPS adoption. Farms with low value of sales, part-time operations, and smaller acreage are less likely to employ ROPS-equipped tractors than farms with high value of sales, full-time operations, and larger acreage.[20] Additionally, farms that use more hired labor over non-hired labor (family) are found to have fewer fatal tractor overturns.[9] Overall, farms that are more economically viable are more likely to install ROPS on tractors than smaller, lower-income farms.[20]

ROPS adoption edit

Tractor rollover deaths have been identified as a public health problem since the 1920s.[10] Research efforts from several countries towards the development of engineering controls to reduce injury from rollover persisted for several decades before any legislation took place.[22] In 1959, Sweden became the first country to enact ROPS legislation, requiring all newly manufactured tractors in the country to have ROPS installed. This requirement was expanded in 1965, requiring all tractors in Sweden, regardless of manufacture date, to have ROPS installed if it was operated by an employee and not the actual owner.[11][23] Similar legislation requiring ROPS installation has been enacted in Australia, Germany, and Denmark.[10]

In the United States, standards for ROPS design and utilization for tractors were first developed in 1967 by the American Society for Agricultural and Biological Engineers.[11] ROPS legislation was passed in 1975, with OSHA requiring that all tractors manufactured from 25 October 1976 onwards be equipped with ROPS.[11] In 1985, the development of a new voluntary safety standard by the American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers (S318.10) encouraged an initiative by American tractor manufacturers to equip new tractors over 20 horsepower with ROPS.[20][24]

Agricultural health and safety researchers have observed that increases in ROPS protected tractors in the United States can largely be tied to attrition (older tractors without ROPS being replaced with newer tractors with ROPS) vs. installation of ROPS.[15] Additional studies have indicated the need to promote and facilitate ROPS installation on older tractors, as many farmers are unwilling to replace their older tractors.[10][25] Overall, these studies demonstrate that relying on the eventual replacement of tractors without ROPS – and the installation of ROPS on all older tractors – is not an expeditious solution to tractor overturn deaths and will result in the deaths of many US tractor operators over the next few decades.[15][26][timeframe?]

Barriers to ROPS installation in the United States edit

Over the past few decades, quantitative and qualitative research studies have attempted to identify farmers' potential barriers to ROPS adoption.[27][28][29] Cost, time to find and install ROPS parts, and dismissal of personal risk have all been prominently identified barriers to ROPS adoption.[28][30][31] Research also shows that knowledge of tractor overturn risks and the benefits of ROPS installation do not appear to stimulate farmer interest in installing ROPS.[32] Equipment dealers have also cited a number of barriers, such as a perceived lack of farmer interest, injury liability, difficulty recovering expenses and a lack of understanding amongst dealers regarding the magnitude of the overturn fatality problem, which negatively impacts dealers' interest in ROPS installation.[33]

Programs to increase ROPS installation in the United States edit

Several strategies have been employed to address these barriers and motivate farmers to install ROPS. In 1985, equipment manufacturers launched a promotional campaign to encourage ROPS installation activities, although industry representatives state the campaign did not stimulate considerable interest in ROPS installation in the farm community [1]. Education has also been largely employed by extension agents and agricultural health and safety educators as a means for increasing ROPS installations,[1] although evaluations of educational interventions indicate they do not markedly decrease agricultural worker injury rates or increase ROPS installation activity.[32][34] However, in Kentucky, a community awareness campaign did appear to increase interest in ROPS installation.[35] Various state farm bureaus (VA, NC, and IL) have also offered financial incentives for members to install ROPS,[1][6] while an online ROPS Inventory Site called the KY ROPS Guide, was developed to assist farmers searching for ROPS.[36]

In 2006, the New York ROPS Rebate Program[37] was launched in an effort to increase access to ROPS among New York tractor operators; this addressed the Northeastern United States' consistently lower rates of ROPS usage than other regions of the United States.[38] The program has since expanded to seven states including New York, Pennsylvania, Vermont, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Massachusetts, and Minnesota.[39]

These programs incorporate a number of components that build on prior ROPS research. These include targeted promotions, rebates for 70% of the cost to install ROPS (with varying caps on farmers out of pocket expense) and toll-free ROPS hotline assistance with the ROPS purchase and ordering process.[40] Rebate funding is provided via state funding resources or private industry / fundraising campaigns.[41] Programs have increased farmer interest in ROPS installation with an average of 1,200 calls annually to the ROPS hotline and farmers are generally satisfied with these services (99% of program participants would recommend the program to other farmers).[42] Programs have also documented the prevention of injury and death for farmers who have participated in these installation programs.[43]

Current efforts to increase ROPS adoption in the United States edit

National Tractor Safety Coalition (NTSC) edit

In an effort to build on the momentum of prior ROPS interventional efforts to create a national ROPS installation solution, a number of research, government and industry groups organized a two-day 'Whole-System-in-the-Room' workshop in Chicago, Illinois in May 2014.[44] The purpose of the meeting was to outline a national strategy for ROPS installation that all stakeholders could agree on and to engage multiple industry groups in strategy implementation efforts. Close to 50 organizations were represented at the meeting and included representatives from the following industry groups: manufacturers and dealers, agricultural organizations, health and safety organizations, financial and insurance groups, government organizations, researchers, private corporations, media, farmers/farm safety advocates.[45] By the end of the meeting, the National Tractor Safety Coalition was officially organized with the mission "to prevent tractor-related injuries and deaths in US agriculture by developing and implementing collaborative, stakeholder-driven, evidence-based solutions." A detailed list of common goals are featured in the NIOSH Science Blog "The National Tractor Safety Coalition: Taking a new systems-approach to a well-known problem."[46]

Currently the Coalition includes 87 members from a number of agricultural or health related organizations. These organizations include: NIOSH, American Farm Bureau Federation, Farm Foundation, and several Universities, Extension agencies, NIOSH Agricultural Safety and Health Centers, State Departments of Health, and insurance companies, among others.[33] Some members serve on the NTSC Steering Committee, which meets on a monthly basis and provide guidance on the overarching initiative to expand ROPS installation programs nationally while others provide assistance on various aspects of national ROPS implementation efforts, such as promotions, testimonials, congressional outreach or networking. A manufacturing and technology task force has also been assembled, and provides guidance to the group on technical issues.[31]

National ROPS Rebate Program edit

The NTSC launched the National ROPS Rebate Program in 2017 which helps to facilitate individual state based programs as well as trying to obtain national-level funding. Given the NTSC's broad mission to address tractor-related deaths, the group seeks to tackle issues such as run-overs or implement entanglements once a National ROPS Rebate Program has been sustainably established.

See also edit

References edit

  1. ^ a b c See OSHA Roll-Over Protective Structures, Direct Final Rule.
  2. ^ "OECD Tractor standard Codes".
  3. ^ . Minecorp. Archived from the original on 11 April 2013.
  4. ^ "Agricultural Safety and Health". web.extension.illinois.edu/agsafety/factsheets/rops.cfm. 2017. Retrieved 29 March 2017.
  5. ^ "ISO Update". International Organization for Statistics. May 2015.
  6. ^ a b c See National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (US) NIOSH Program Portfolio: Traumatic Injury: Selected Research-to-Practice Efforts Addressing Traumatic Injury Problems: Automatically deployed roll-over-protection structure (ROPS).
  7. ^ "CDC - Agricultural Safety: Cost-effective Rollover Protection Structures". NIOSH. Retrieved 10 January 2013.
  8. ^ "picture of broken c70 window and deployed ROPS". Retrieved 21 September 2014.
  9. ^ a b c d e f Myers, John R.; Hendricks, Kitty J. (2010). "Agricultural tractor overturn deaths: Assessment of trends and risk factors". American Journal of Industrial Medicine. 53 (7): 662–72. doi:10.1002/ajim.20775. PMID 19894222.
  10. ^ a b c d Murphy, Dennis J.; Myers, John; McKenzie Jr, E.A.; Cavaletto, Richard; May, John; Sorensen, Julie (2010). "Tractors and Rollover Protection in the United States". Journal of Agromedicine. 15 (3): 249–63. doi:10.1080/1059924X.2010.484309. PMID 20665310. S2CID 205723489.
  11. ^ a b c d Biddle, Elyce Anne; Keane, Paul R. (2012). "Action Learning: A New Method to Increase Tractor Rollover Protective Structure (ROPS) Adoption". Journal of Agromedicine. 17 (4): 398–409. doi:10.1080/1059924X.2012.713842. PMC 4721555. PMID 22994641.
  12. ^ a b Cole, HP; Myers, ML; Westneat, SC (2006). "Frequency and severity of injuries to operators during overturns of farm tractors". Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health. 12 (2): 127–38. doi:10.13031/2013.20386. PMID 16724789.
  13. ^ Weichelt, Bryan; Gorucu, Serap (17 February 2018). "Supplemental surveillance: a review of 2015 and 2016 agricultural injury data from news reports on AgInjuryNews.org". Injury Prevention. 25 (3): injuryprev–2017–042671. doi:10.1136/injuryprev-2017-042671. ISSN 1353-8047. PMID 29386372. S2CID 3371442.
  14. ^ Murphy, Dennis J.; Myers, John; McKenzie, E. A.; Cavaletto, Richard; May, John; Sorensen, Julie (1 July 2010). "Tractors and rollover protection in the United States". Journal of Agromedicine. 15 (3): 249–263. doi:10.1080/1059924X.2010.484309. ISSN 1545-0813. PMID 20665310. S2CID 205723489.
  15. ^ a b c Conway, George A. (1 January 2010). "Retrofitting roll bars and seatbelts for old U.S. tractors to prevent farm deaths: now or never". Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health. 16 (1): 3–4. doi:10.13031/2013.29250. ISSN 1074-7583. PMID 20222266.
  16. ^ Centers for Disease Control Prevention (CDC) (1993). "Public Health Focus: Effectiveness of Rollover Protective Structures for Preventing Injuries Associated with Agricultural Tractors". MMWR. 42 (3): 57–59. PMID 8421458.
  17. ^ NIOSH Center Directors. National Agricultural Tractor Safety Initiative. E. Swenson, ed. Seattle: University of Washington, 2004.
  18. ^ Myers, M. L. (1 February 2000). "Prevention effectiveness of rollover protective structures--Part I: Strategy evolution". Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health. 6 (1): 29–40. doi:10.13031/2013.17812. ISSN 1074-7583. PMID 10938751.
  19. ^ a b "CDC - NIOSH Science Blog - Preventing Death and Injury in Tractor Overturns with Roll-Over Protective Structures". NIOSH. Retrieved 10 January 2013.
  20. ^ a b c d e f g Loringer, Kelly A.; Myers, John R. (2008). "Tracking the prevalence of rollover protective structures on U.S. Farm tractors: 1993, 2001, and 2004". Journal of Safety Research. 39 (5): 509–17. doi:10.1016/j.jsr.2008.08.003. PMID 19010124.
  21. ^ Sorensen, J. A.; May, J.; Ostby-Malling, R.; Lehmen, T.; Strand, J.; Stenlund, H.; Weinehall, L. W.; Emmelin, M. (2008). "Encouraging the installation of rollover protective structures in New York State: The design of a social marketing intervention". Scandinavian Journal of Public Health. 36 (8): 859–69. doi:10.1177/1403494808089655. PMID 19004904. S2CID 3805291.
  22. ^ Rudolphi, Josie M.; Campo, Shelly; Gerr, Fred; Rohlman, Diane S. (May 2018). "Social and Individual Influences on Tractor Operating Practices of Young Adult Agricultural Workers". Journal of Adolescent Health. 62 (5): 605–611. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2017.11.300. ISSN 1054-139X. PMC 8189182. PMID 29478719.
  23. ^ The Swedish Work Environment Authority's regulation AFS 2004:06, page 10 (in Swedish)
  24. ^ Alkhaledi, Khaled; Means, Kenneth; McKenzie, Eugene; Smith, James (2013). "Reducing occupational fatalities by using NIOSH 3rd generation automatically deployable rollover protective structure". Safety Science. 51 (1): 427–31. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2012.08.004.
  25. ^ Myers, J. R. (1 October 2010). "Factors associated with the prevalence of non-ROPS tractors on farms in the U.S". Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health. 16 (4): 265–278. doi:10.13031/2013.34837. ISSN 1074-7583. PMID 21180350.
  26. ^ Myers, M. L.; Pana-Cryan, R. (1 February 2000). "Prevention effectiveness of rollover protective structures--Part II: Decision analysis". Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health. 6 (1): 41–55. doi:10.13031/2013.2911. ISSN 1074-7583. PMID 10938752.
  27. ^ Sorensen, J. A.; May, J. J.; Jenkins, P. L.; Jones, A. M.; Earle-Richardson, G. B. (1 August 2006). "Risk perceptions, barriers, and motivators to tractor ROPS retrofitting in the New York state farm community". Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health. 12 (3): 215–226. doi:10.13031/2013.21229. ISSN 1074-7583. PMID 16981445.
  28. ^ a b Sorensen, J. A.; May, J. J.; Paap, K.; Purschwitz, M. A.; Emmelin, M. (1 January 2008). "Encouraging farmers to retrofit tractors: a qualitative analysis of risk perceptions among a group of high-risk farmers in New York". Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health. 14 (1): 105–117. doi:10.13031/2013.24127. ISSN 1074-7583. PMID 18376539.
  29. ^ Jenkins, PL; Sorensen, JA; Yoder, A; Myers, M; Murphy, D; Cook, G; Wright, F; Bayes, B; May, JJ (2012). "Prominent Barriers and Key Motivators to Installing ROPS: An Analysis of Survey Responses from Pennsylvania and Vermont". Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health. 18 (2): 103–112. doi:10.13031/2013.41328. PMID 22655520.
  30. ^ Hallman, E. M. (1 February 2005). "ROPS retrofitting: measuring effectiveness of incentives and uncovering inherent barriers to success". Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health. 11 (1): 75–84. doi:10.13031/2013.17898. ISSN 1074-7583. PMID 15782890.
  31. ^ a b Sanderson, W. T.; Madsen, M. D.; Rautiainen, R.; Kelly, K. M.; Zwerling, C.; Taylor, C. D.; Reynolds, S. J.; Stromquist, A. M.; Burmeister, L. F. (1 February 2006). "Tractor overturn concerns in Iowa: perspectives from the Keokuk county rural health study". Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health. 12 (1): 71–81. doi:10.13031/2013.20198. ISSN 1074-7583. PMID 16536175.
  32. ^ a b May, JJ; Sorensen, JA; Burdick, PA; Earle-Richardson, GB; Jenkins, PL (2006). "Rollover Protection on New York Tractors and Farmers Readiness to Change". Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health. 12 (3): 199–213. doi:10.13031/2013.21228. PMID 16981444.
  33. ^ a b Tonelli, S. M.; Donham, K. J.; Leedom-Larson, K.; Sanderson, W.; Purschwitz, M. (1 October 2009). "Retrofitting tractors with rollover protective structures: perspective of equipment dealers". Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health. 15 (4): 365–375. doi:10.13031/2013.28890. ISSN 1074-7583. PMID 19967910.
  34. ^ Rautiainen, RH; Lehtola, MM; Day, LM; Schonstein, E; Suutarinen, J; Salminen, S; Verbeek (2008). "Interventions for preventing injuries in the agricultural industry". The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 1 (1): CD006398. doi:10.1002/14651858.cd006398.pub2. PMID 18254102.
  35. ^ Myers, M. L.; Cole, H. P.; Westneat, S. C. (1 June 2005). "Cost effectiveness of a dealer's intervention in retrofitting rollover protective structures". Injury Prevention. 11 (3): 169–173. doi:10.1136/ip.2004.007039. ISSN 1353-8047. PMC 1730229. PMID 15933410.
  36. ^ "ROPS Guide". warehouse.ca.uky.edu. Retrieved 5 November 2016.
  37. ^ "New York ROPS Rebate Program". www.ropsr4u.org.
  38. ^ Sorensen, JA; Jenkins, PL; Bayes, B; Madden, E; Purschwitz, MA; May, JJ (2013). "Increases in ROPS pricing from 2006-2012 and the impact on ROPS demand". Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health. 19 (2): 115–24. PMID 23923731.
  39. ^ "ROPS Retrofit Program".
  40. ^ "Rollover Protective Structure ROPS Retrofit Program". www.ropsr4u.org. Retrieved 5 November 2016.
  41. ^ Sorensen, Julie A.; Brewer, Devon; Wyckoff, Lynae; Horsman, Melissa; Scott, Erika; May, John J. (1 June 2013). "Building Safety Partnerships Using Social Network Analysis". Social Marketing Quarterly. 19 (2): 67–75. doi:10.1177/1524500413483457. ISSN 1524-5004. S2CID 73213675.
  42. ^ Rebecca Russell. ROPS Hotline Coordinator. Personal Communication. 2 November 2016.
  43. ^ Sorensen, J. A.; Jenkins, P.; Bayes, B.; Clark, S.; May, J. J. (1 January 2010). "Cost-effectiveness of a ROPS social marketing campaign". Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health. 16 (1): 31–40. doi:10.13031/2013.29247. ISSN 1074-7583. PMID 20222269.
  44. ^ Tinc, P. J.; Ayers, P. D.; May, J. J.; Purschwitz, M. A.; Sorensen, J. A. (1 April 2015). "Creating a National Coalition to Address Tractor Overturn Fatalities". Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health. 21 (2): 105–112. ISSN 1074-7583. PMID 26204786.
  45. ^ Tinc, Pamela J.; Ayers, Paul; May, John J.; Purschwitz, Mark A.; Park, Samantha; Bayes, Barbara; Sorensen, Julie (1 January 2016). "Implementing a National Tractor Safety Program: Using "Whole System in a Room" to Mobilize Partners and Implement Solutions". Journal of Agromedicine. 21 (2): 127–131. doi:10.1080/1059924X.2016.1142916. ISSN 1545-0813. PMID 26788905. S2CID 3778289.
  46. ^ Sorensen J and Tinc P. The National Tractor Safety Coalition: Taking a new systems-approach to a well-known problem. 12 August 2014. Accessed 2 November 2016.

External links edit

  • The Kentucky ROPS Guide
  • Legislation in the EU: Council Directive 87/402/EEC of 25 June 1987 on roll over protection structures mounted in front of the driver's seat on narrow-track wheeled agricultural and forestry tractors. It was modified several times, for the latest version refer to the consolidated version.
  • ROPS test procedure (US State of Washington)
  • ROPS Decider
  • National ROPS Rebate Program

January 01, 1970
rollover, protection, structure, rops, redirects, here, other, uses, rops, disambiguation, rollover, protection, structure, rollover, protection, system, rops, ɑːr, system, structure, intended, protect, equipment, operators, motorists, from, injuries, caused, . ROPS redirects here For other uses see Rops disambiguation A rollover protection structure or rollover protection system ROPS r oʊ p s or ˌ ɑːr oʊ p i ˈ ɛ s is a system or structure intended to protect equipment operators and motorists from injuries caused by vehicle overturns or rollovers Like rollcages and rollbars in cars and trucks cabs frames or rollbars on agricultural and construction equipments a ROPS involves mechanical components attached to the frame of the vehicle that maintain a clearance zone large enough to protect the operator s body in the event of rollover Unimog fire engine with roll over protection structures ROPS bar on a Fordson tractor Rollover protection structure on an MF 135 Photo K A Gallis Commonly found on heavy equipment i e tractors earth moving machinery and UTVs used in construction agriculture and mining ROPS structures are defined by various regulatory agencies including US Occupational Safety and Health Administration OSHA 1 and international standard organizations such as ISO and OECD 2 The regulations include both a strength requirement as well as an energy absorption requirement of the structure Some dump trucks add a protrusion to their boxes that cover the operator s compartment for ROPS purposes ROPS are commonly fitted to 4x4s pickup trucks earth moving equipment soil compactors and utility vehicles used in the mining industry Products such as this were developed out of necessity so employees travelling around or within mine sites were provided with extra protection in the event of a fleet vehicle rollover 3 In the US ROPS designs have to be certified by a professional engineer who will normally require a destructive test The structure will be tested at a reduced temperature where the metal is more brittle or fabricated from materials that have satisfactory low temperature performance 4 The International Organization for Standardization has guidelines for destructively testing ROPS structures on earthmoving machinery excavators forestry equipment and tractors Theoretical performance analysis of major new design ROPS is not permitted as an alternative to physical testing 5 Contents 1 Variants 2 History 2 1 Rollover injury and fatality 2 2 Usage rates 2 3 ROPS adoption 2 3 1 Barriers to ROPS installation in the United States 2 3 2 Programs to increase ROPS installation in the United States 3 Current efforts to increase ROPS adoption in the United States 3 1 National Tractor Safety Coalition NTSC 3 2 National ROPS Rebate Program 4 See also 5 References 6 External linksVariants editSome tractor operators have raised concerns about using ROPS in low clearance environments such as in orchards and buildings In response NIOSH developed an Automatically Deploying Rollover Protective Structure AutoROPS which stays in a lowered position until a rollover condition is determined at which time it deploys to a fully extended and locked position It is currently when working with manufacturers to streamline the commercialization of this technology 6 The Division of Safety Research branch of NIOSH has developed cost effective rollover protection structures CROPS for four tractor models Ford 8N Ford 3000 Ford 4000 Massey Ferguson 135 in an effort to provide safety for older model tractors 7 Some automobile models have begun to adopt the phrase substituting system for structure in the ROPS acronym notably the Volvo C70 convertible models and Jaguar XK Their ROPS structures consist of two pyrotechnically charged roll hoops hidden behind the rear seats that will pop up in the case of a roll over to protect the occupants If the roof is up the system will still work shattering the rear window at the same time 8 History editRollover injury and fatality edit Tractor rollover has become one of the leading causes of occupational death in the agricultural industry In the United States from 1992 to 2005 1 412 workers were killed from tractor rollover with roughly 10 000 suffering an injury 9 These rollover fatalities represented about 20 of all agricultural fatalities 10 During 2003 to 2010 933 workers in agriculture forestry fishing and hunting industries were killed as a result of tractor rollover accounting for over 63 of all tractor related deaths 11 The National Safety Council estimates that between 150 and 200 tractor operators are killed due to rollover in the US each year 12 Researchers have also attempted to estimate the chances that a tractor rollover will result in a fatality of the operator An adjusted probability of about 8 deaths per 100 tractor overturns 8 was extrapolated using data from the Kentucky Fatality Assessment and Control Evaluation FACE Program 12 Furthermore youth are particularly at risk of being crushed or pinned by a machine all terrain vehicle tractor etc that is not equipped with a rollover bar All terrain vehicles and tractors continue to be leading causes of fatal injury among youth in agricultural settings 13 The installation of Rollover Protective Structures ROPS on older tractors that lack these protective devices has been identified as a viable solution for reducing overturn fatality rates among US farmers 14 15 16 When worn with a seat belt these engineering controls are 99 effective in preventing operator death if an overturn occurs 17 18 The US National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health estimates that fatality rates from tractor overturns in the US could be reduced by a minimum of 71 if all tractors were equipped with ROPS 19 When paired with proper seat belt use on tractors NIOSH estimates that ROPS could eliminate nearly all fatalities caused by tractor and lawn mower overturns 6 Without a seat belt the ROPS is still 70 effective in preventing operator death 20 though there is a possibility that the rider may be thrown from the tractor during the overturn and thus left unprotected by the ROPS 19 Usage rates edit Research from Sweden shows that the fatality rate from tractor rollover remains stable when ROPS prevalence rates range from 40 to 75 only until the rate of ROPS adoption reaches 75 to 80 does the fatality rate from rollover fall significantly to near zero 9 The latest estimates of tractors equipped with ROPS in the United States show that 59 of tractors were ROPS equipped in 2006 an increase from the 38 in 1993 With steady increases in the installation of ROPS it is projected that the rollover fatality rate will decline steadily until reaching a rate near zero by 2028 20 ROPS usage has also appeared to be linked to a number of factors There is regional variation in ROPS usage within the United States as estimates from 2006 showed that tractor operators in the South had the highest prevalence of ROPS usage at 65 while the Northeast had the lowest prevalence of ROPS usage at 51 9 The West and Midwest reported rates of 60 and 56 respectively 9 Age of tractor operator is a large risk factor as increasing age is associated with decreasing rates of ROPS usage 20 The oldest group of tractor operators those ages 65 and above have the lowest rate of overall ROPS usage at 42 20 Additionally older tractor operators are more likely to suffer fatality and severe injury outcomes following tractor rollover than younger operators 9 Along with the age of the tractor operator the age of the tractor itself is a risk factor Older tractor models are less likely to be equipped with ROPS possibly owing to impracticality in installation or to mandated installations in newer models Further older tractors are more dangerous than newer tractors possessing narrow front ends and a higher center of gravity as well as being more prone to operational failure 21 Economics also appears to be a major factor in rates of ROPS adoption Farms with low value of sales part time operations and smaller acreage are less likely to employ ROPS equipped tractors than farms with high value of sales full time operations and larger acreage 20 Additionally farms that use more hired labor over non hired labor family are found to have fewer fatal tractor overturns 9 Overall farms that are more economically viable are more likely to install ROPS on tractors than smaller lower income farms 20 ROPS adoption edit Tractor rollover deaths have been identified as a public health problem since the 1920s 10 Research efforts from several countries towards the development of engineering controls to reduce injury from rollover persisted for several decades before any legislation took place 22 In 1959 Sweden became the first country to enact ROPS legislation requiring all newly manufactured tractors in the country to have ROPS installed This requirement was expanded in 1965 requiring all tractors in Sweden regardless of manufacture date to have ROPS installed if it was operated by an employee and not the actual owner 11 23 Similar legislation requiring ROPS installation has been enacted in Australia Germany and Denmark 10 In the United States standards for ROPS design and utilization for tractors were first developed in 1967 by the American Society for Agricultural and Biological Engineers 11 ROPS legislation was passed in 1975 with OSHA requiring that all tractors manufactured from 25 October 1976 onwards be equipped with ROPS 11 In 1985 the development of a new voluntary safety standard by the American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers S318 10 encouraged an initiative by American tractor manufacturers to equip new tractors over 20 horsepower with ROPS 20 24 Agricultural health and safety researchers have observed that increases in ROPS protected tractors in the United States can largely be tied to attrition older tractors without ROPS being replaced with newer tractors with ROPS vs installation of ROPS 15 Additional studies have indicated the need to promote and facilitate ROPS installation on older tractors as many farmers are unwilling to replace their older tractors 10 25 Overall these studies demonstrate that relying on the eventual replacement of tractors without ROPS and the installation of ROPS on all older tractors is not an expeditious solution to tractor overturn deaths and will result in the deaths of many US tractor operators over the next few decades 15 26 timeframe Barriers to ROPS installation in the United States edit Over the past few decades quantitative and qualitative research studies have attempted to identify farmers potential barriers to ROPS adoption 27 28 29 Cost time to find and install ROPS parts and dismissal of personal risk have all been prominently identified barriers to ROPS adoption 28 30 31 Research also shows that knowledge of tractor overturn risks and the benefits of ROPS installation do not appear to stimulate farmer interest in installing ROPS 32 Equipment dealers have also cited a number of barriers such as a perceived lack of farmer interest injury liability difficulty recovering expenses and a lack of understanding amongst dealers regarding the magnitude of the overturn fatality problem which negatively impacts dealers interest in ROPS installation 33 Programs to increase ROPS installation in the United States edit Several strategies have been employed to address these barriers and motivate farmers to install ROPS In 1985 equipment manufacturers launched a promotional campaign to encourage ROPS installation activities although industry representatives state the campaign did not stimulate considerable interest in ROPS installation in the farm community 1 Education has also been largely employed by extension agents and agricultural health and safety educators as a means for increasing ROPS installations 1 although evaluations of educational interventions indicate they do not markedly decrease agricultural worker injury rates or increase ROPS installation activity 32 34 However in Kentucky a community awareness campaign did appear to increase interest in ROPS installation 35 Various state farm bureaus VA NC and IL have also offered financial incentives for members to install ROPS 1 6 while an online ROPS Inventory Site called the KY ROPS Guide was developed to assist farmers searching for ROPS 36 In 2006 the New York ROPS Rebate Program 37 was launched in an effort to increase access to ROPS among New York tractor operators this addressed the Northeastern United States consistently lower rates of ROPS usage than other regions of the United States 38 The program has since expanded to seven states including New York Pennsylvania Vermont New Hampshire Wisconsin Massachusetts and Minnesota 39 These programs incorporate a number of components that build on prior ROPS research These include targeted promotions rebates for 70 of the cost to install ROPS with varying caps on farmers out of pocket expense and toll free ROPS hotline assistance with the ROPS purchase and ordering process 40 Rebate funding is provided via state funding resources or private industry fundraising campaigns 41 Programs have increased farmer interest in ROPS installation with an average of 1 200 calls annually to the ROPS hotline and farmers are generally satisfied with these services 99 of program participants would recommend the program to other farmers 42 Programs have also documented the prevention of injury and death for farmers who have participated in these installation programs 43 Current efforts to increase ROPS adoption in the United States editNational Tractor Safety Coalition NTSC edit In an effort to build on the momentum of prior ROPS interventional efforts to create a national ROPS installation solution a number of research government and industry groups organized a two day Whole System in the Room workshop in Chicago Illinois in May 2014 44 The purpose of the meeting was to outline a national strategy for ROPS installation that all stakeholders could agree on and to engage multiple industry groups in strategy implementation efforts Close to 50 organizations were represented at the meeting and included representatives from the following industry groups manufacturers and dealers agricultural organizations health and safety organizations financial and insurance groups government organizations researchers private corporations media farmers farm safety advocates 45 By the end of the meeting the National Tractor Safety Coalition was officially organized with the mission to prevent tractor related injuries and deaths in US agriculture by developing and implementing collaborative stakeholder driven evidence based solutions A detailed list of common goals are featured in the NIOSH Science Blog The National Tractor Safety Coalition Taking a new systems approach to a well known problem 46 Currently the Coalition includes 87 members from a number of agricultural or health related organizations These organizations include NIOSH American Farm Bureau Federation Farm Foundation and several Universities Extension agencies NIOSH Agricultural Safety and Health Centers State Departments of Health and insurance companies among others 33 Some members serve on the NTSC Steering Committee which meets on a monthly basis and provide guidance on the overarching initiative to expand ROPS installation programs nationally while others provide assistance on various aspects of national ROPS implementation efforts such as promotions testimonials congressional outreach or networking A manufacturing and technology task force has also been assembled and provides guidance to the group on technical issues 31 National ROPS Rebate Program edit The NTSC launched the National ROPS Rebate Program in 2017 which helps to facilitate individual state based programs as well as trying to obtain national level funding Given the NTSC s broad mission to address tractor related deaths the group seeks to tackle issues such as run overs or implement entanglements once a National ROPS Rebate Program has been sustainably established See also editActive rollover protection Anti roll bar Gyroscope Roll cage Side Impact Protection System WHIPSReferences edit a b c See OSHA Roll Over Protective Structures Direct Final Rule OECD Tractor standard Codes History of ROPS Minecorp Archived from the original on 11 April 2013 Agricultural Safety and Health web extension illinois edu agsafety factsheets rops cfm 2017 Retrieved 29 March 2017 ISO Update International Organization for Statistics May 2015 a b c See National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health US NIOSH Program Portfolio Traumatic Injury Selected Research to Practice Efforts Addressing Traumatic Injury Problems Automatically deployed roll over protection structure ROPS CDC Agricultural Safety Cost effective Rollover Protection Structures NIOSH Retrieved 10 January 2013 picture of broken c70 window and deployed ROPS Retrieved 21 September 2014 a b c d e f Myers John R Hendricks Kitty J 2010 Agricultural tractor overturn deaths Assessment of trends and risk factors American Journal of Industrial Medicine 53 7 662 72 doi 10 1002 ajim 20775 PMID 19894222 a b c d Murphy Dennis J Myers John McKenzie Jr E A Cavaletto Richard May John Sorensen Julie 2010 Tractors and Rollover Protection in the United States Journal of Agromedicine 15 3 249 63 doi 10 1080 1059924X 2010 484309 PMID 20665310 S2CID 205723489 a b c d Biddle Elyce Anne Keane Paul R 2012 Action Learning A New Method to Increase Tractor Rollover Protective Structure ROPS Adoption Journal of Agromedicine 17 4 398 409 doi 10 1080 1059924X 2012 713842 PMC 4721555 PMID 22994641 a b Cole HP Myers ML Westneat SC 2006 Frequency and severity of injuries to operators during overturns of farm tractors Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health 12 2 127 38 doi 10 13031 2013 20386 PMID 16724789 Weichelt Bryan Gorucu Serap 17 February 2018 Supplemental surveillance a review of 2015 and 2016 agricultural injury data from news reports on AgInjuryNews org Injury Prevention 25 3 injuryprev 2017 042671 doi 10 1136 injuryprev 2017 042671 ISSN 1353 8047 PMID 29386372 S2CID 3371442 Murphy Dennis J Myers John McKenzie E A Cavaletto Richard May John Sorensen Julie 1 July 2010 Tractors and rollover protection in the United States Journal of Agromedicine 15 3 249 263 doi 10 1080 1059924X 2010 484309 ISSN 1545 0813 PMID 20665310 S2CID 205723489 a b c Conway George A 1 January 2010 Retrofitting roll bars and seatbelts for old U S tractors to prevent farm deaths now or never Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health 16 1 3 4 doi 10 13031 2013 29250 ISSN 1074 7583 PMID 20222266 Centers for Disease Control Prevention CDC 1993 Public Health Focus Effectiveness of Rollover Protective Structures for Preventing Injuries Associated with Agricultural Tractors MMWR 42 3 57 59 PMID 8421458 NIOSH Center Directors National Agricultural Tractor Safety Initiative E Swenson ed Seattle University of Washington 2004 Myers M L 1 February 2000 Prevention effectiveness of rollover protective structures Part I Strategy evolution Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health 6 1 29 40 doi 10 13031 2013 17812 ISSN 1074 7583 PMID 10938751 a b CDC NIOSH Science Blog Preventing Death and Injury in Tractor Overturns with Roll Over Protective Structures NIOSH Retrieved 10 January 2013 a b c d e f g Loringer Kelly A Myers John R 2008 Tracking the prevalence of rollover protective structures on U S Farm tractors 1993 2001 and 2004 Journal of Safety Research 39 5 509 17 doi 10 1016 j jsr 2008 08 003 PMID 19010124 Sorensen J A May J Ostby Malling R Lehmen T Strand J Stenlund H Weinehall L W Emmelin M 2008 Encouraging the installation of rollover protective structures in New York State The design of a social marketing intervention Scandinavian Journal of Public Health 36 8 859 69 doi 10 1177 1403494808089655 PMID 19004904 S2CID 3805291 Rudolphi Josie M Campo Shelly Gerr Fred Rohlman Diane S May 2018 Social and Individual Influences on Tractor Operating Practices of Young Adult Agricultural Workers Journal of Adolescent Health 62 5 605 611 doi 10 1016 j jadohealth 2017 11 300 ISSN 1054 139X PMC 8189182 PMID 29478719 The Swedish Work Environment Authority s regulation AFS 2004 06 page 10 in Swedish Alkhaledi Khaled Means Kenneth McKenzie Eugene Smith James 2013 Reducing occupational fatalities by using NIOSH 3rd generation automatically deployable rollover protective structure Safety Science 51 1 427 31 doi 10 1016 j ssci 2012 08 004 Myers J R 1 October 2010 Factors associated with the prevalence of non ROPS tractors on farms in the U S Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health 16 4 265 278 doi 10 13031 2013 34837 ISSN 1074 7583 PMID 21180350 Myers M L Pana Cryan R 1 February 2000 Prevention effectiveness of rollover protective structures Part II Decision analysis Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health 6 1 41 55 doi 10 13031 2013 2911 ISSN 1074 7583 PMID 10938752 Sorensen J A May J J Jenkins P L Jones A M Earle Richardson G B 1 August 2006 Risk perceptions barriers and motivators to tractor ROPS retrofitting in the New York state farm community Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health 12 3 215 226 doi 10 13031 2013 21229 ISSN 1074 7583 PMID 16981445 a b Sorensen J A May J J Paap K Purschwitz M A Emmelin M 1 January 2008 Encouraging farmers to retrofit tractors a qualitative analysis of risk perceptions among a group of high risk farmers in New York Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health 14 1 105 117 doi 10 13031 2013 24127 ISSN 1074 7583 PMID 18376539 Jenkins PL Sorensen JA Yoder A Myers M Murphy D Cook G Wright F Bayes B May JJ 2012 Prominent Barriers and Key Motivators to Installing ROPS An Analysis of Survey Responses from Pennsylvania and Vermont Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health 18 2 103 112 doi 10 13031 2013 41328 PMID 22655520 Hallman E M 1 February 2005 ROPS retrofitting measuring effectiveness of incentives and uncovering inherent barriers to success Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health 11 1 75 84 doi 10 13031 2013 17898 ISSN 1074 7583 PMID 15782890 a b Sanderson W T Madsen M D Rautiainen R Kelly K M Zwerling C Taylor C D Reynolds S J Stromquist A M Burmeister L F 1 February 2006 Tractor overturn concerns in Iowa perspectives from the Keokuk county rural health study Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health 12 1 71 81 doi 10 13031 2013 20198 ISSN 1074 7583 PMID 16536175 a b May JJ Sorensen JA Burdick PA Earle Richardson GB Jenkins PL 2006 Rollover Protection on New York Tractors and Farmers Readiness to Change Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health 12 3 199 213 doi 10 13031 2013 21228 PMID 16981444 a b Tonelli S M Donham K J Leedom Larson K Sanderson W Purschwitz M 1 October 2009 Retrofitting tractors with rollover protective structures perspective of equipment dealers Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health 15 4 365 375 doi 10 13031 2013 28890 ISSN 1074 7583 PMID 19967910 Rautiainen RH Lehtola MM Day LM Schonstein E Suutarinen J Salminen S Verbeek 2008 Interventions for preventing injuries in the agricultural industry The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 1 1 CD006398 doi 10 1002 14651858 cd006398 pub2 PMID 18254102 Myers M L Cole H P Westneat S C 1 June 2005 Cost effectiveness of a dealer s intervention in retrofitting rollover protective structures Injury Prevention 11 3 169 173 doi 10 1136 ip 2004 007039 ISSN 1353 8047 PMC 1730229 PMID 15933410 ROPS Guide warehouse ca uky edu Retrieved 5 November 2016 New York ROPS Rebate Program www ropsr4u org Sorensen JA Jenkins PL Bayes B Madden E Purschwitz MA May JJ 2013 Increases in ROPS pricing from 2006 2012 and the impact on ROPS demand Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health 19 2 115 24 PMID 23923731 ROPS Retrofit Program Rollover Protective Structure ROPS Retrofit Program www ropsr4u org Retrieved 5 November 2016 Sorensen Julie A Brewer Devon Wyckoff Lynae Horsman Melissa Scott Erika May John J 1 June 2013 Building Safety Partnerships Using Social Network Analysis Social Marketing Quarterly 19 2 67 75 doi 10 1177 1524500413483457 ISSN 1524 5004 S2CID 73213675 Rebecca Russell ROPS Hotline Coordinator Personal Communication 2 November 2016 Sorensen J A Jenkins P Bayes B Clark S May J J 1 January 2010 Cost effectiveness of a ROPS social marketing campaign Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health 16 1 31 40 doi 10 13031 2013 29247 ISSN 1074 7583 PMID 20222269 Tinc P J Ayers P D May J J Purschwitz M A Sorensen J A 1 April 2015 Creating a National Coalition to Address Tractor Overturn Fatalities Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health 21 2 105 112 ISSN 1074 7583 PMID 26204786 Tinc Pamela J Ayers Paul May John J Purschwitz Mark A Park Samantha Bayes Barbara Sorensen Julie 1 January 2016 Implementing a National Tractor Safety Program Using Whole System in a Room to Mobilize Partners and Implement Solutions Journal of Agromedicine 21 2 127 131 doi 10 1080 1059924X 2016 1142916 ISSN 1545 0813 PMID 26788905 S2CID 3778289 Sorensen J and Tinc P The National Tractor Safety Coalition Taking a new systems approach to a well known problem 12 August 2014 Accessed 2 November 2016 External links editThe Kentucky ROPS Guide Legislation in the EU Council Directive 87 402 EEC of 25 June 1987 on roll over protection structures mounted in front of the driver s seat on narrow track wheeled agricultural and forestry tractors It was modified several times for the latest version refer to the consolidated version ROPS test procedure US State of Washington ROPS Decider National ROPS Rebate Program Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title Rollover protection structure amp oldid 1177246327, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,

article

, read, download, free, free download, mp3, video, mp4, 3gp, jpg, jpeg, gif, png, picture, music, song, movie, book, game, games.