A large outfit here in Australia with big contracts on the National road network has introduced a ZERO towing policy. This includes light vehicles towing any type of trailer. Now this is where it gets real stupid. They own a large fleet of 637 scrapers all fitted with push pull setups and these machines under their new set of rules are no longer allowed to pull another scraper but pushing is ok. I wonder how idiots who write this crap ever have a job. I'm so glad I'm no longer involved with civil construction/earthworks
Sure makes a fellow wonder what brought about the new policy, and how long it will last.
How do they get equipment to the site without using a lowboy?
sounds like a kneejerk management reaction...wait a week. Howard
How do they justify a class one vehicle then?? I find things like this often, anything old has to be replaced with something new! New and improved more f*)(%# up. The old ways worked well but we don't follow instructions so have new ways to do that . It is harder to do and takes longer but it is better. ?
The rules seem to get dumber by the day. Hearing this reminds me of the George Orwell novel "1984", where everyone had to be dumbed down to the level of the biggest idiot so no one had an advantage over any other. It seems that skill has been regulated out of the workplace, and the rules set so the biggest idiot can perform any job, and if he can't do it safely, then no one can.
It isn't just regulated out, companies and corporations demand continual progress toward eliminating the human employee entirely. At this point they want to be able to put anybody with a pulse into an artic truck or even a dozer or grader with the 3D system, eventually, as in within the next few years, they want autonomous machines. There are some in the AG world now, since farm fields tend to be large and uninhabited for the most part.
Rule was probably made for a certain issue that was abused and is now being enforced across a broad spectrum. Some safety folks are like some building inspectors, having a degree but no sense, so they apply the book to everything weither it is applicable or not.
There is actually a term for that: "malicious compliance" where in appropriate standards are applied. Normally the lower level safety folks HAVE to enforce compliance, while the higher lever folks have the ability to adjust the requirements to what makes sense. However, you can also view safety and code requirements like contract requirements...violate a contract requirement and you may not get paid for the work. Howard
Sounds like one of the "Rules" where I worked. There was this form we had to fill out before using a welder or torch called a "Hot Work Permit". I was never able to get an answer on if this included using a small propane torch to install some heat shrink tubing on the end of a wire. Doing the job would take 15 to 20 seconds to heat the tubing. To go by "The Book" I would have to go to the desk in the shop to see if there were any forms there and if not go to my office, get on the computer to open the file for the forms, print out the form, fill out the form and sign it then grab the torch and shrink the tubing. After that I would have to be on "Fire Watch" for 20 minutes before leaving the "Area". So that in effect means I could not do the job less than 20 minutes before quitting time.
If I were the Safety Man on the job, I would have to evaluate, and perhaps recommend a electric heat gun instead to avoid the flame. It all depends on the particular hazards of the work place. Had an event at one of my facilities last night, left a hole where a building used to be, and probably three months lost production while we rebuild. A propane torch for 20 seconds inside of that building would have lead to total destruction from the fumes and vapors, some of which can be set of by swish of a women's skirt against her nylon hose. Remember, one size does NOT fit all. Howard
Oh Please, Don't let them women wear skirts and pantihose in that toxic of an environment. Sounds like nobody would be working there shrinking heat shrink.
Common sense is a swear word!
There are places where and engine running is considered hot work. Your fire watch needs to remain there 30 minutes after your project is completed not 20. I had a guy that sat next to a generator all day with the fire extinguisher just in case it caught fire. I'm on a job site kind of like that right now. We have to wear gloves at all times. I almost filled out my daily paperwork for them with the greaseyest pair of gloves I could find but I decided that wouldn't go over a well.
There have been a number of disasters started from running truck engines, Pampa, Texas for one, when an ethylene explosion was started by a hot truck exhaust leveling the plant, and a massive propane explosive, including a number of BLEVEs were started from a diesel truck. The world is bigger and more complex than we give it credit for. Howard
The proximate cause of a blow as you are describing is not the diesel truck. It is the fact that someone allowed the build up of gas in an enclosed space. I don't know about Texas but in Washington that would not have required a hot work permit. Working in an area where flammable gasses are possible is a hazardous situation that usually requires much more than a piece of paper. The other item concerns the ignition source. Most explosions of that kind are sparked by static or line electricity and not hot exhaust manifolds. The debates usually come about because no one can prove anything else or for outside reasons deliberately ignore sources of static or other electricity. As stated above, common sense usually prevents most accidents. Problem is common sense is not a requirement for life as a human.
John C. I believe hetkind is referring to a specific incident. If I recall correctly there was an oil refinery explosion that was ultimately traced to a vent stack which, due to a cacophony of errors, overflowed with liquid gasoline and its vapors, and quickly found an idling pickup truck as an ignition source. Killed something like 15 workers. That being said, this was an accident that occurred in an area no one expected to be full of gas fumes, and no permit was required for the pickup truck, which brings us to the question, where do you draw the line? Should you need a hot work permit because you'll be using a cutting torch within 50 feet of a cylinder of compressed flammable gas, even if it's in the middle of a river? (yes I mean the acetylene tank) side note: I work maintenance for a company that requires hot work permits for EVERYTHING, even sawing, because sawzalling metal makes heat. The reason is not because the buildings are full of grain dust or something (they're office buildings) but it's so that contractors don't show up without telling us and go setting the fire alarm off.
As I recall the suspected actual point of ignition was the catalytic convertor due to the engine runaway and overrich situation, all the unburned fuel going out the exhaust would make the catalyst red hot.
Actually, I was referring to a 1987 Celanese Chemical Plant explosion in Pampa, Tx in 1987 where a butane leak traveled outside the process area and was ignited by a truck in the industrial side of the plant... http://www.aiche.org/academy/videos...7-celanese-pampa-butane-vapor-cloud-explosion And another at a propane facility in Mexico City, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Juanico_disaster where a truck damage a transfer line and was eventually ignited by a waste gas flare. If Safety was common sense, I would still be a heavy equipment mechanic, not a degreed Safety Engineer traveling around the country on various projects concerning the manufacturing of explosives. Howard
2 years ago we had 5000gal of acetone go up when the guy filling it left his phone in his pocket and got a call. I saw the security footage...you've never seen fire until you see a fire like that.
Acetone has been quite the problem, very low flash point, low initiation energy, high vapor pressure. I have seen acetone vapor set off by rubbing nomex coveralls on plexiglass. As a teenager, I used to use acetone in my zippo lighter since I had a free supply from my father's medical laboratory. Howard
Here's a regulation few know about. FMVS rule that all commercial vehicles with air brakes have the air tanks tested once a year. At 500 psi for 10 minutes. First where am I going to find 500 psi air pressure to test with. Have any of you folks ever seen anyone do a yearly test on truck air tanks? Not to mention I wouldn't want to be anywhere near a truck air tank at 500 psi. Truck Shop
That is an easy one...call up your gas supplier and get a tank of nitrogen and two stage regulator that goes to five hundred psi. Then test while on the other side of a reinforced concrete wall, like they do split rims behind. Howard
No way I got scared then the regulator when out and I hit 200psi on my way to the shop.
That's a test that shoulb done with water, similar to a hydrotest for boilers. Water doesn't compress and release energy like bomb if the vessel ruptures. You'll just get wet.
Gee I thought the test was to empty a can of starting fluid into the tank then hold your ciggy lighter next to the inlet!
And yes the test calls for a hydro static test. But I guess the point I was making is no one does an annual test. S5.1.2.2Each reservoir shall be capable of withstanding an internal hydrostatic pressure of five times the compressor cutout pressure or 500 psi, whichever is greater, for 10 minutes. Truck Shop
Yah there is always an easy way. Just do this and that never mind money and time wasted. It's just a silly *** regulation. Truck Shop
I used to add 2/3 oz. Of acetone to every 5 gallons of gasoline Made it run Real good and better milage.
Typical dum as safety engineer The most dangerous person on the job.
Let me help you out with that...I think you wanted to say "dumb ass" and we all have rights to our opinion. We all know guys who ended in safety because they screwed every OTHER job up. When I was young I had bosses like that, later I was given teammates like that, now, that I am older and wiser, I can find them good homes where they can do little damage. But if we go back, the original question was "how do you test at 500 psi" NOT "should you test at 500 psi" The ASME pressure vessel code allows a air test when a hydrostatic could contaminate the system, and they require shielding for possible primary and secondary fragments. The split rim shops around here have a separate bay with a good reinforced concrete wall the operator stands behind to inflate instead of a cage. This would contain the possible fragments if the air tank let go. I look at test plans for high explosives on a weekly basis and know exactly what high energy fragments will do. It takes a good chunk of high explosives to generate 500 psi at 20 feet. Howard
Never heard of that one Truck Shop , I imagine if everyone tested trucks & equipment to that PSI it would stimulate air tank & related component sales . LOL!
Come on dude face it that was really bad advice for you to tell someone to put 500 psi of nitrogen in an air tank. But than anyone with a lick of sence knows it would be hydrostatic.
If I told someone to PUT 500 psi in a air tank with a hydrostatic test requirement, I would be wrong. What I said was getting the 500 psi air to put in was the easy part... However, not going to wrestle with pig, you both the get dirty and pig enjoys it. Howard
I never intended to test any air tanks. And FMVS has changed it's rules about testing annually on commercial vehicles. I can't find the rule on that, It had been around for years. I know it was there two years ago. My point was there test improperly done would lead to more people being injured. The FMVS only changed the requirements on the material and strength testing of trailer kingpins five years ago. It had been the same for 75 plus years.
Sometimes the cure is worse than the disease...I can see that a hydrostatic test improperly done would fill the system with water, and then have it freeze solid in cold weather. I would think that removing the air tank to be tested by a specialty vendor would be expensive. On the other hand, how would you find internal corrosion that would affect the overall strength? Since I am not in the trucking industry, I haven't read the FMVS. Howard Howard
Please refer to post # 23 this thread.
Sence you have no knowledge of this subject please refrain from giving dangerous advice. Here is the proper procedure which includes measuring the amount that the tank swells https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...oiwr00TId-9RVu1kA&sig2=pSC5rvBrvbro4LEwJSCgMw
Maybe I am missing it but I do not see in the link posted that this is to be a "once a year" test as the poster in #22 said it was. What I did read in the link was: The bolding and under line is my addition!
Now it makes sense...this is a design verification test, and has nothing to do with normal vehicle maintenance. All this noise about something that occurs in a testing laboratory to certify the design of a braking system. Howard
Noise from a safety engineer recommending the use of 500 psi of nitrogen to test an air tank in a truck. See post # 23 this thread
Okay, I think we're done here....
au contraire. ...I'm calling the Spelling and Grammar Police
Back to the original post 'Zero tow policy' Sound like someone had an issue with a light vehicle towing something, so instead of sorting out that issue, they disengage their brain and make a policy to blanket cover every towing situation, sit back and be proud. Then engage brain and realise what they have done, stuffed up... And wonder why the company didn't get the next contract. Push pull scrapers are designed that way to load faster and be more economical for the job. I agree we must work safely and be safe while in work, after work you get that strange feeling again 'Common sense ' maybe some time in the future we will get it back while in work.
Years ago here in the wonderful state of MN they were going to ban surge brakes or did ban them. That was until MNDOT figured out that they owned a lot of surge brake trailers. Rick
The MNDOT maintainance department is constantly getting raked over the coals by DOT enforcement and we dumba** taxpayers foot the bill for the whole comedy show.
Yep daterplant, reconed youv'e nailed it.