Understanding the Limits of the Current Fall Safety Testing Regime

Modern fall protection equipment, such as full-body harnesses and energy-absorbing lanyards, typically features two maximum load ratings. The higher rating complies with the US Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) standards, while the lower rating aligns with the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) guidelines.  

Why do manufacturers provide these differing specifications, and which one is more accurate? The answer is straightforward, yet even the more precise rating comes with significant limitations.

  The Differences Between ANSI and OSHA  

OSHA, a federal regulatory agency established in 1971, enforces workplace safety standards with the weight of law. Violating an OSHA regulation constitutes a federal offense, carrying potential criminal penalties. However, as a government agency, OSHA operates within a slow bureaucratic framework, making updates to standards—such as stricter weight testing for Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) like Self-Retracting Lifelines (SRLs)—a lengthy process that can take years or even decades. Consequently, OSHA standards tend to be less stringent compared to those set by ANSI.

Founded in 1919, ANSI is a non-profit organization that develops voluntary consensus standards across various industries in the United States. It accredits organizations, promotes safety and efficiency, and aligns US standards with global ones for consistency. Committees composed of manufacturers, regulators, and academics collaboratively establish and review standards based on consensus. Unlike OSHA regulations, ANSI standards are not legally binding but are updated more frequently (every six months) to reflect advancements in safety and technology.

The gulf between OSHA and ANSI testing standards is immense, as is evident in SRL load testing. OSHA’s construction regulations, 1926.502, outlines only basic requirements for SRLs in two short sentences, while ANSI Z359.14 provides a detailed 60-page standard with specific testing and performance criteria. OSHA rates a maximum load up to 420 pounds, while ANSI rates it to only 310. 

Unlike OSHA, ANSI defines key factors such as user capacity, test mass, and precise test procedures. OSHA sets general specifications but does not mandate testing, meaning compliance can be achieved with a single static weight test. In contrast, ANSI requires rigorous dynamic and environmental testing to ensure real-world reliability. Additionally, OSHA does not address tie-off below the D-ring, whereas ANSI provides clear guidelines and testing for this scenario.  

As a result, ANSI standards offer a much more comprehensive and practical evaluation of SRL safety than OSHA’s minimal requirements.

  Why Does ANSI Limit Testing Between 130 and 310 Pounds?  

Despite being more rigorous than OSHA, ANSI's testing standards have a significant limitation: they only evaluate fall protection within a weight range of 130 to 310 pounds. While this range covers most workers using PPE, it excludes those outside these limits. The goal is to ensure SRLs and lanyards effectively stop falls without generating excessive impact forces. However, a heavily equipped male ironworker with a full-body harness, a 60-foot SRL, and specialized tools can easily exceed 310 pounds, while a smaller female ironworker with gear may fall below 130 pounds. This gap leaves a portion of the workforce unaccounted for in ANSI’s testing standards.  

Workers under 130 pounds face unique risks in a fall due to how SRLs and energy absorbers are designed. These systems activate only when a certain force threshold is reached, which may not happen properly for lighter workers. As a result, they could experience higher-than- expected impact forces—sometimes exceeding 10Gs—leading to serious injuries. Additionally, if the energy-absorbing mechanism fails to deploy correctly, lighter workers may bounce excessively, increasing the risk of secondary falls or further injury.

Workers over 310 pounds face increased risks because fall protection equipment may not effectively absorb the impact. While SRLs are designed to limit forces to 1,800 pounds, heavier individuals can exceed this threshold, potentially overloading the system. This can lead to longer fall distances, improper deceleration, and even harness or anchorage failure. Additionally, higher clearance requirements increase the risk of striking obstacles before the fall is fully arrested. 

  Industry Reluctance to Widen the ANSI Testing Range  

Expanding ANSI’s weight range for testing faces several challenges. First, manufacturers would need to conduct additional testing, increasing costs that would likely be passed on to consumers. Many companies lack in-house testing facilities and rely on third-party labs, further driving up expenses. Additionally, a broader testing range might complicate compliance requirements, creating uncertainty and potential delays in industry-wide adoption and implementation.

  Will ANSI Expand the Testing Range  

There is ongoing discussion about lowering the minimum testing weight from 130 pounds to 110 pounds, with changes expected to roll out over the next decade. However, increasing the upper limit beyond 310 pounds remains controversial. While some industry experts advocate for testing up to 420 pounds, others highlight the engineering challenges and costs involved, particularly in designing SRLs that accommodate heavier users while maintaining safe fall clearances.

The debate over ANSI’s weight limits underscores the need for a more adaptive approach to fall safety. As workplace demographics shift and equipment technology advances, ANSI may need to update its standards to ensure all workers—regardless of weight—receive adequate protection in the event of a fall.