11-059-VEH: OOSC, Partie II, Article 2. Dispositifs de couplage, f. Dispositifs de sécurité, (4)

Date d’inscription	8 novembre 2011
Numéro de l’enjeu	11-059-VEH
Nom	Warren Reynolds
Organisme	Ontario Ministry of Transportation
Adresse	3rd Floor, 301 St. Paul StreetSt. Catharines, ON, L2R 7R4CanadaVoir sur la carte (s’ouvre dans un nouvel onglet)
Téléphone	905-704-2168
Courriel	[email protected]
Comité	Comité des véhicules
État	Fermé
Résumé de l’enjeu	Nos agents d'inspection ont constaté qu'U-Haul utilisait un maillon rapide pour fixer les chaînes de sécurité de sa remorque (voir la photo ci-jointe). Ces maillons rapides ne portent pas l'indication de la charge maximale d'utilisation (CMU) du fabricant. L'article 2.f.(4) des critères OOS relatifs aux dispositifs de sécurité nous enjoint d'utiliser le critère du « Tableau des défauts d'arrimage du chargement » pour déterminer si une chaîne de sécurité est défectueuse. Ce tableau indique que l'utilisation d'un maillon rapide est interdite pour toutes les applications. U-Haul a fourni la documentation ci-jointe attestant avoir effectué des tests de performance et que le maillon rapide a une résistance à la rupture de 3 875 kg (8 541 lb). U-Haul a indiqué que ce lien rapide est utilisé partout en Amérique du Nord et qu'aucun autre problème n'a été constaté, sauf en Colombie-Britannique, province qui a toutefois accepté les résultats des tests (voir lettre).
Justification ou besoin	La question est de savoir si l'utilisation du tableau des défauts des sangles d'arrimage est appropriée pour les chaînes de sécurité. Pourquoi les liens rapides sont-ils exclus, que ce soit comme lien de réparation ou comme connecteur ? Si le maillon rapide était homologué et marqué par le fabricant, serait-il acceptable de l'utiliser à la fois pour les chaînes de sécurité et les sangles d'arrimage ?
Demande d’action	Je demande une décision quant à savoir si l'utilisation du système d'attache rapide U-Haul est acceptable pour fixer les chaînes de sécurité comme illustré sur la photo ci-jointe.
Mesures prises par le comité	U-Haul has requested guidance on the use of “Quick Link” devices for repairing chains used in a safety chain application. The tiedown defect table was referenced where there is clear indication these are prohibited from repairing a tiedown. Discussion resulted and it was decided that until documentation from a chain manufacturer or Tiedown Association that these are approved practices it would not be allowed. The vehicle committee requested that U-Haul find out if the manufacturer of the link would be willing to put an ultimate break strength on the “Quick Link”. This issue could be revisited if it was determined that the link could be marked. At this point, the issues surrounding the quick link were that inspectors do not know what the link is good for, if anything and how many threads would have to be engaged in order for it to be sufficient. U-haul supplied information pertaining to the WLL/ultimate break strength of the quick link, however, the concern was that once the link is installed on the vehicle, there is nothing on the link to indicate that it is that quick link as opposed to others with a lesser or no WLL/ultimate breaking strength. U-Haul was asked to determine what more could be done with the link to indicate something to inspectors roadside. If more can be done, then the committee agreed that they would re-open the discussion with the information. U-Haul stated that they had contacted NACM to find out if they would consider it an acceptable link indicating that they would report back with their findings. The issue will be re-opened if further supporting information is received by the committee. This issue had been addressed in Bellevue and was submitted seeking to revise the OOSC to allow the use of a particular type of “quick-link” on a trailer safety chain by one large carrier. The issue had been discussed a number of times in the past and a method of marking this link has been adopted according to a standard developed by SAE. The committee had indicated without test data and marking of the Quick-Link it was unlikely that the OOS condition would be modified. Test data and support from a major chain manufacturer was provided to the Committee. Independent testing by both the carrier as well as the chain manufacturer was presented indicating the break strength to be equal at 10,000 lbs. The quick link had been marked with a manufacturer’s minimum break strength. The committee agreed that based on the information from the testing and the information provided by the chain manufacturer present in the meeting that if a quick link was marked with the break strength it would be adequate to be used as a safety device. This did not change the fact that they are not acceptable for the purposes of cargo securement. The change allows the link to be readily identified and distinguished from the more common unrated and unmarked type of hardware that could be inappropriately used. It was also discussed that the fastening nut would have to be fully engaged. The committee unanimously voted to add the exception to the OOSC. f.Safety Devices (1)Missing. (2)Unattached or incapable of secure attachment. (3)Improper repairs to chains and hooks including welding, wire, small bolts, rope, and tape. (4)Chain or Wire Rope: Damaged or defective to the same extent as the criterion used for chain or wire rope defects described in the “Securement of Cargo – Tiedown Defect Table”. EXCEPTION: Quick-link(s) that are fully engaged, and marked with a manufacturer’s minimum breaking strength/force (MBS/MBF) rating on the link that is equal to or greater than the GVW of the trailer(s), are acceptable for use in a safety device.
Documents à l’appui	132076971788365_U_Haul_Product_Division.pdf (s’ouvre dans un nouvel onglet) 132076971788365_31_oct.jpg (s’ouvre dans un nouvel onglet)

Date d’inscription

8 novembre 2011

Numéro de l’enjeu

11-059-VEH

Nom

Warren Reynolds

Organisme

Ontario Ministry of Transportation

Adresse

3rd Floor, 301 St. Paul StreetSt. Catharines, ON, L2R 7R4CanadaVoir sur la carte

Téléphone

905-704-2168

Courriel

[email protected]

Comité

Comité des véhicules

État

Fermé

Résumé de l’enjeu

Nos agents d'inspection ont constaté qu'U-Haul utilisait un maillon rapide pour fixer les chaînes de sécurité de sa remorque (voir la photo ci-jointe). Ces maillons rapides ne portent pas l'indication de la charge maximale d'utilisation (CMU) du fabricant. L'article 2.f.(4) des critères OOS relatifs aux dispositifs de sécurité nous enjoint d'utiliser le critère du « Tableau des défauts d'arrimage du chargement » pour déterminer si une chaîne de sécurité est défectueuse. Ce tableau indique que l'utilisation d'un maillon rapide est interdite pour toutes les applications. U-Haul a fourni la documentation ci-jointe attestant avoir effectué des tests de performance et que le maillon rapide a une résistance à la rupture de 3 875 kg (8 541 lb). U-Haul a indiqué que ce lien rapide est utilisé partout en Amérique du Nord et qu'aucun autre problème n'a été constaté, sauf en Colombie-Britannique, province qui a toutefois accepté les résultats des tests (voir lettre).

Justification ou besoin

La question est de savoir si l'utilisation du tableau des défauts des sangles d'arrimage est appropriée pour les chaînes de sécurité. Pourquoi les liens rapides sont-ils exclus, que ce soit comme lien de réparation ou comme connecteur ? Si le maillon rapide était homologué et marqué par le fabricant, serait-il acceptable de l'utiliser à la fois pour les chaînes de sécurité et les sangles d'arrimage ?

Demande d’action

Je demande une décision quant à savoir si l'utilisation du système d'attache rapide U-Haul est acceptable pour fixer les chaînes de sécurité comme illustré sur la photo ci-jointe.

Mesures prises par le comité

U-Haul has requested guidance on the use of “Quick Link” devices for repairing chains used in a safety chain application. The tiedown defect table was referenced where there is clear indication these are prohibited from repairing a tiedown. Discussion resulted and it was decided that until documentation from a chain manufacturer or Tiedown Association that these are approved practices it would not be allowed. The vehicle committee requested that U-Haul find out if the manufacturer of the link would be willing to put an ultimate break strength on the “Quick Link”. This issue could be revisited if it was determined that the link could be marked. At this point, the issues surrounding the quick link were that inspectors do not know what the link is good for, if anything and how many threads would have to be engaged in order for it to be sufficient.

U-haul supplied information pertaining to the WLL/ultimate break strength of the quick link, however, the concern was that once the link is installed on the vehicle, there is nothing on the link to indicate that it is that quick link as opposed to others with a lesser or no WLL/ultimate breaking strength.

U-Haul was asked to determine what more could be done with the link to indicate something to inspectors roadside. If more can be done, then the committee agreed that they would re-open the discussion with the information. U-Haul stated that they had contacted NACM to find out if they would consider it an acceptable link indicating that they would report back with their findings. The issue will be re-opened if further supporting information is received by the committee.

This issue had been addressed in Bellevue and was submitted seeking to revise the OOSC to allow the use of a particular type of “quick-link” on a trailer safety chain by one large carrier. The issue had been discussed a number of times in the past and a method of marking this link has been adopted according to a standard developed by SAE.

The committee had indicated without test data and marking of the Quick-Link it was unlikely that the OOS condition would be modified. Test data and support from a major chain manufacturer was provided to the Committee. Independent testing by both the carrier as well as the chain manufacturer was presented indicating the break strength to be equal at 10,000 lbs. The quick link had been marked with a manufacturer’s minimum break strength.

The committee agreed that based on the information from the testing and the information provided by the chain manufacturer present in the meeting that if a quick link was marked with the break strength it would be adequate to be used as a safety device. This did not change the fact that they are not acceptable for the purposes of cargo securement. The change allows the link to be readily identified and distinguished from the more common unrated and unmarked type of hardware that could be inappropriately used. It was also discussed that the fastening nut would have to be fully engaged.

The committee unanimously voted to add the exception to the OOSC. f.Safety Devices (1)Missing. (2)Unattached or incapable of secure attachment. (3)Improper repairs to chains and hooks including welding, wire, small bolts, rope, and tape. (4)Chain or Wire Rope: Damaged or defective to the same extent as the criterion used for chain or wire rope defects described in the “Securement of Cargo – Tiedown Defect Table”.

EXCEPTION: Quick-link(s) that are fully engaged, and marked with a manufacturer’s minimum breaking strength/force (MBS/MBF) rating on the link that is equal to or greater than the GVW of the trailer(s), are acceptable for use in a safety device.

Documents à l’appui