Défaillance du roulement de roue - Séparation de la roue
| Date d’inscription | 8 mars 2012 |
|---|---|
| Numéro de l’enjeu | 12-006-VEH |
| Nom | Armando Pecchia |
| Organisme | York Regional Police |
| Adresse | 17250 Yonge StreetNewmarket, ON, L3Y 4W5CanadaVoir sur la carte (s’ouvre dans un nouvel onglet) |
| Téléphone | 905-895-1221 |
| Courriel | [email protected] |
| Comité | Comité des véhicules |
| État | Fermé |
| Résumé de l’enjeu | Le problème concerne les séparations de roues déjà survenues. Étant donné qu'une immobilisation de roue (OOS) représente un danger imminent, il n'existe actuellement aucune condition hors service pour la séparation d'une roue suite à une défaillance de roulement. Une fois la roue détachée du véhicule, le danger imminent qu'elle représente disparaît. Par conséquent, à moins qu'une autre condition ne soit causée par la séparation de la roue (surcharge, freins défectueux, etc.), il est impossible de consigner cette situation comme une immobilisation. Un rapport contrôle routier devrait mentionner cette immobilisation. |
| Justification ou besoin | En raison des conséquences potentiellement mortelles qu'un ensemble de roue peut avoir en se détachant, il convient de documenter correctement ce type d'incident. |
| Demande d’action | Il convient de définir une nouvelle condition de mise hors service (OOS) pour inclure les cas de roue détachée. Ces situations doivent être consignées et classées comme OOS, qu'il s'agisse de défaillances de roulement, de fixations de roue ou de problèmes de jante. |
| Mesures prises par le comité | It was discussed that in all cases of a wheel separation, prior to the wheel separation, there are conditions that are already reflected in the OOS criteria. A wheel will separate due to a cracked rim/wheel, loose wheel fasteners or a failed bearing. The debate was around whether a vehicle that has now lost a wheel is in an OOS condition. The imminent hazard in some cases may no longer exist in instances where the wheel has separated without causing any damage to the remaining wheels and depending on the weight transference and the load on the vehicle, the resulting condition of the vehicle may not be in an OOS condition. Discussion was around the fact that simply because the inspector inspects the vehicle 5 minutes after the wheel separates, the condition of the wheel prior to the separation should still be documented on the report. The majority of the committee felt that in cases of wheel separations, that it is usually easy for the inspecting officer to determine the reason for the wheel separation. In this case, then the vehicle should be placed OOS and the utilization of the OOS condition for the cracked wheel, defective fasteners or hub failure should be used to reflect this condition regardless of whether the wheel is still on or has recently detached. The committee agreed that no additional condition should be added for this specific condition but did recommend that in cases where inspectors are called to a scene or come across a vehicle that has lost a wheel that they should conduct the inspection accordingly and place the vehicle OOS for whatever condition caused the wheel to separate. It was also made very clear that this in no way intended to eliminate the ability for carriers to intentionally remove wheels and properly chain up axles as allowed in the current Operational Policy #5 in the FAQ Interpretation #2. This inspection guidance will only apply when it is clearly evident to the inspector that an unintentional wheel separation has occurred by the observations at the wheel end at the time of inspection. Several members of the committee felt that inspectors are already using the existing OOS criteria for wheels and rims in these instances, so there was no decision to make any necessary amendments or policies. The committee agreed that the guidance within this issue request would satisfy any concerns or issues that may arise regarding how to document a wheel separation. |