Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By Dale Reed
I serve with the RAF where I test all the vehicles to regulation standards. We have just had a new piece of equipment come into service where the cab can be raised / lowered hydraulically to aid the view of the driver whilst reversing. The powers that be have deemed that this vehicle is not subject to test but I can't see how it cannot be. I'm presently out of area and haven't got any documentation or hard evidence to support my claim. Some useful advice would be much appreciated. Many thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By alex mccreadie
Dale
I would suggest it is not subject to LOLER testing
Lifting Operations Lifting Equipment Regulations.
Should fall under PUWER Regs.
Hope this helps
Alex
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By David A Cooper
I am very interested in Alex's response as we (as an inspection body) would deem the unit to be covered by both LOLER and PUWER. It is used to LIFT a person - the reason for lifting them being irrelevant. If you look at the ACOP clause 29(h) cites air cargo elevating transfer vehicles as an example. We are most definitely inspecting some airport vehicles (ambulifts) where disabled persons are raised to aircraft height and I cant see the difference. You do need to look at Reg 12 though to see if the execmptions for the armed forces applies in this case. I have an electronic library case of an ambulift failure if anyone wants a copy
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By alex mccreadie
I would not get into a dispute with anything David says. My point would be where do we stop!
I have just pumped up my computer chair my car seat raises and lowers electronically? I feel there has to be a line drawn somewhere. In the case of the cab system Dale has explained it is not in the same category as a Ambu lift?
Again only my interpretation of the regs.
Ta Alex
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Dale Reed
Thanks for the responses. I do believe the truck to require test and have asked the company for some info on SWL, tolerances etc. The armed forces are not exempt from any testing unless it is a 'war time' situation. Even then, the vehicle in question has to have a letter of validity signed by the Secretary of State deeming it exempt. I don't think that will cut in this instance!
Like I said, I have no information at all out here in the desert so any material on codes of practice would be most helpful before I start mailing my boss back in UK.
Thanks again for your comments
Dale
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By David A Cooper
I agree with Alex that there is an element of "where do we stop" here. In the good old days we had a statutory instrument known as the hoist excemption order and this placed travel limits on items which made it clear what should be inspected and what shouldnt. If I remember correctly there was a 6ft 6" travel rule but I am operating from memory and would have to go and search. I think this requirement was repealed when the 1992 Lifting Equipment (Records of Test & Examaination) regulations came out which only lasted until LOLER came in. Going back to the first point I suppose the question is whether LOLER is clear enough and whether the law makers have got it wrong yet again. Dave
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Dale Reed
I see where you're coming from on that one Alex, there is no definitive line on how high / low you go before requiring test. In this case, the cab raises about 1 metre on a hydraulic ram. Granted, this not very high but if the ram was to fail it would give the driver quite a bump...and no doubt there would be a nice law suit to follow. Love these 'grey' areas!!
Dale
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By andrew morris Hi, What sort of distance is the movement and how is the movement caused. The reason I ask is that pallet trucks (the pedestrian operated ones) have a small lifting mechanism to lift the load off the ground so it easier to move. This is not lifting equipment because the primary purpose is to move the load horizontally.... If the main purpose is similar to a cab tilt I don't think it applies... See para 8 of the document linked to... Its a freely avail HSE document so no copyright issues!! Hope this helps http://www.hse.gov.uk/fod/infodocs/803_69.pdf
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By andrew morris
sorry missed the post before mine.. forget the distance question!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.