Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance

Fecha de registro	18 de julio de 2019
Número de asunto	19-024-VEH
Nombre	David Roy
Agencia	New York State Police
Dirección	1220 Washington Ave.Bldg. 22Albany, New York, 12226United StatesVer en el mapa (se abre en una pestaña nueva)
Teléfono	5184573258
Fax	(518) 457-9620
Correo electrónico	[email protected]
Comité	Comité de Vehículos
Estado	Cerrado
Resumen del asunto	Descubrí un depósito de aire en el sistema de frenos de aire de un camión tractor y otro remolque que estaba severamente oxidado, al punto de tener fugas de aire. En ambos casos, el tractor podía mantener la presión de aire, pero no podía aumentarla más allá de cierto punto (90 PSI). Estas fugas de aire se encontraban en el cuerpo del depósito debido a la corrosión. Actualmente, esto solo constituiría una infracción que fuera de servicio del vehículo si la fuga provocara que el vehículo no superara la prueba de tasa de pérdida de aire, lo cual no sucedió. Este problema se abordó en una Solicitud de Acción anterior (número de incidencia 12-005-VEH). En dicha solicitud, el comité analizó un pequeño orificio en el depósito. El que inspeccioné tenía un orificio lo suficientemente grande como para introducir el dedo. El depósito alrededor del orificio estaba tan oxidado que, si lo presionaba, toda mi mano se introducía en él.
Justificación o necesidad	Creo que esto es tan importante, o incluso más, que una fuga audible en la línea de aire o una conexión defectuosa. Al estar comprometida la integridad del tanque, la posibilidad de rotura es inminente. En este caso, el remolque solo tenía un tanque de aire que, de haber fallado, habría afectado a los cuatro frenos.
Solicitud de acción	Me gustaría que se revisara este tema y se tuvieran en cuenta los depósitos de aire con fugas o que estén tan corroídos que corran peligro inminente de fallar. Redacción sugerida: Un depósito de aire (tanque) presenta una fuga de aire debido a corrosión o daños en un punto distinto a una válvula o conexión adecuada.
Medidas adoptadas por el comité	Comment from industry that if it passed the air loss rate test, then it is working. Comment since it is a 396 violation, it would have to be put in as an OOS violation. There are other places in Operational Policy 15 to note violations under 396 that are not OOS, such as the transmission air line. Within Ops 15 1.b(3) it would have to be changed for the air tank to be cited. Currently says anything other than brake system goes under 396 and the tank is part of the brake system. Comment that Canada can cite the violation as this condition would be in their standard, so if US wants to note a violation that Ops Policy 15 should be modified. It was suggested that the correct violation would be 393.50. Comment from the brake industry was that 393.50 deals with sizing, and that the reservoir capacity is adequate. Comments that if it is in violation it must be fixed prior to dispatch was accepted by industry in the meeting. A mention was made to look at 393.40 where FMVSS 121 was adopted for all brakes. Comment that in this case, it should be an imminent hazard because it could fail at any time. It was discussed that 396.7 should not be cited and placed as OOS. Discussion also indicated that if the only thing wrong is leak in air reservoir, and it is not documented as a violation, then the vehicle will get a CVSA decal and they will not be made aware of the condition of the tank. Comment that a hole in an air line is in the OOSC and that air tank should get same consideration. Answer from industry, that if hole is in tank, carriers would want to be aware of it and that 396 is appropriate and it should not be OOS. A hole in an air line should not be treated the same as a hole in an air hose. If it doesn’t maintain air pressure than it should be OOS. Motion was made to amend Operational Policy 15 to indicate that the hole in the air reservoir should be noted as a violation of 396.3(a)1 but not OOS. Discussion about whether to use the word audible. Industry wanted a specific standard for audible. Comment about referring to 393.40 and FMVSS 121 saying no leaking. Comment from industry that FMVSS 121 is referring to performance standards and allows for some leakage, 10 psi in 10 minutes. There are no specific regulations in the United States which cover when an air reservoir is leaking, and so the consensus of the committee was to document a violation of 396.3(a)(1). It was determined that a leaking brake chamber diaphragm and the air reservoir are the only 2 non-OOS violations of the 396.3(a)(1) for brakes, so the leaking brake chamber diaphragm should also be added into the Operational Policy 15. The committee voted unanimously to amend Operational Policy 15. Operational Policy 15, Section 1 b.(3) When should an audible air leak in the brake system be documented as a violation? ANSWER: When a vehicle has an air leak at a proper connection, or at an undetermined location and the vehicle passes the CVSA OOSC air loss rate test, inspectors will record a violation for an air leak on the inspection report. NOTE: 393.45(d) indicates that the leak has to affect the brake performance under 393.52. Enforcement cannot determine to what extent a leak has to be to affect the brake performance; therefore, any leak in the brake system will be documented as a violation. NOTE: An audible leak in the brake system, such as a leak discovered when the treadle valve is applied or a leak in a hose from an air reservoir to a relay valve, will be documented under 393.45(d). An audible leak in a brake diaphragm or an air reservoir will be documented under 396.3(a)(1). Any other leak that cannot be attributed to the brake system or suspension systems (see 393.207(f)) will not be placed out of service and will be documented under 396.3(a)(1).

Fecha de registro

18 de julio de 2019

Número de asunto

19-024-VEH

Nombre

David Roy

Agencia

New York State Police

Dirección

1220 Washington Ave.Bldg. 22Albany, New York, 12226United StatesVer en el mapa

Teléfono

5184573258

Fax

(518) 457-9620

Correo electrónico

[email protected]

Comité

Comité de Vehículos

Estado

Cerrado

Resumen del asunto

Descubrí un depósito de aire en el sistema de frenos de aire de un camión tractor y otro remolque que estaba severamente oxidado, al punto de tener fugas de aire. En ambos casos, el tractor podía mantener la presión de aire, pero no podía aumentarla más allá de cierto punto (90 PSI). Estas fugas de aire se encontraban en el cuerpo del depósito debido a la corrosión. Actualmente, esto solo constituiría una infracción que fuera de servicio del vehículo si la fuga provocara que el vehículo no superara la prueba de tasa de pérdida de aire, lo cual no sucedió. Este problema se abordó en una Solicitud de Acción anterior (número de incidencia 12-005-VEH). En dicha solicitud, el comité analizó un pequeño orificio en el depósito. El que inspeccioné tenía un orificio lo suficientemente grande como para introducir el dedo. El depósito alrededor del orificio estaba tan oxidado que, si lo presionaba, toda mi mano se introducía en él.

Justificación o necesidad

Creo que esto es tan importante, o incluso más, que una fuga audible en la línea de aire o una conexión defectuosa. Al estar comprometida la integridad del tanque, la posibilidad de rotura es inminente. En este caso, el remolque solo tenía un tanque de aire que, de haber fallado, habría afectado a los cuatro frenos.

Solicitud de acción

Me gustaría que se revisara este tema y se tuvieran en cuenta los depósitos de aire con fugas o que estén tan corroídos que corran peligro inminente de fallar. Redacción sugerida: Un depósito de aire (tanque) presenta una fuga de aire debido a corrosión o daños en un punto distinto a una válvula o conexión adecuada.

Medidas adoptadas por el comité

Comment from industry that if it passed the air loss rate test, then it is working. Comment since it is a 396 violation, it would have to be put in as an OOS violation. There are other places in Operational Policy 15 to note violations under 396 that are not OOS, such as the transmission air line. Within Ops 15 1.b(3) it would have to be changed for the air tank to be cited. Currently says anything other than brake system goes under 396 and the tank is part of the brake system. Comment that Canada can cite the violation as this condition would be in their standard, so if US wants to note a violation that Ops Policy 15 should be modified. It was suggested that the correct violation would be 393.50. Comment from the brake industry was that 393.50 deals with sizing, and that the reservoir capacity is adequate. Comments that if it is in violation it must be fixed prior to dispatch was accepted by industry in the meeting.

A mention was made to look at 393.40 where FMVSS 121 was adopted for all brakes. Comment that in this case, it should be an imminent hazard because it could fail at any time. It was discussed that 396.7 should not be cited and placed as OOS. Discussion also indicated that if the only thing wrong is leak in air reservoir, and it is not documented as a violation, then the vehicle will get a CVSA decal and they will not be made aware of the condition of the tank. Comment that a hole in an air line is in the OOSC and that air tank should get same consideration. Answer from industry, that if hole is in tank, carriers would want to be aware of it and that 396 is appropriate and it should not be OOS. A hole in an air line should not be treated the same as a hole in an air hose. If it doesn’t maintain air pressure than it should be OOS.

Motion was made to amend Operational Policy 15 to indicate that the hole in the air reservoir should be noted as a violation of 396.3(a)1 but not OOS. Discussion about whether to use the word audible. Industry wanted a specific standard for audible. Comment about referring to 393.40 and FMVSS 121 saying no leaking. Comment from industry that FMVSS 121 is referring to performance standards and allows for some leakage, 10 psi in 10 minutes. There are no specific regulations in the United States which cover when an air reservoir is leaking, and so the consensus of the committee was to document a violation of 396.3(a)(1). It was determined that a leaking brake chamber diaphragm and the air reservoir are the only 2 non-OOS violations of the 396.3(a)(1) for brakes, so the leaking brake chamber diaphragm should also be added into the Operational Policy 15. The committee voted unanimously to amend Operational Policy 15.

Operational Policy 15, Section 1 b.(3) When should an audible air leak in the brake system be documented as a violation?

ANSWER: When a vehicle has an air leak at a proper connection, or at an undetermined location and the vehicle passes the CVSA OOSC air loss rate test, inspectors will record a violation for an air leak on the inspection report.

NOTE: 393.45(d) indicates that the leak has to affect the brake performance under 393.52. Enforcement cannot determine to what extent a leak has to be to affect the brake performance; therefore, any leak in the brake system will be documented as a violation.

NOTE: An audible leak in the brake system, such as a leak discovered when the treadle valve is applied or a leak in a hose from an air reservoir to a relay valve, will be documented under 393.45(d). An audible leak in a brake diaphragm or an air reservoir will be documented under 396.3(a)(1). Any other leak that cannot be attributed to the brake system or suspension systems (see 393.207(f)) will not be placed out of service and will be documented under 396.3(a)(1).

OOSC, Parte II, Artículo 1. sistemas de frenos, m. Depósito de aire (tanque) - Fuga