Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By John Smith
On one of our test rigs a hand operated winch used for raising and lowering a small boom has been replaced through normal wear and tear. The winch has been purchased through a reputable supplier who is unable to provide and say that the manufacture does not provide a test certificate for the winch. The maximum load on the winch is 20kg. My question is should a test certificate be supplied and can we insist on having one.
Regards
John
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By FAH
It's LOLER and the answer is YES!
Frank Hallett
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Vrick
Frank
Yes I agree there should be a test certificate but I'm not so sure if it is to be provided by the supplier?? Perhaps you are right, I just need to clarify my thoughts.
Thanks
Vrick
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By John Hannon
good Morning all
should it not have been supplied with a declaration of conformity, which should include a report of thorough examination, which also has any test information required.
John
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Francis E S Hone
If the test is not part of the suppliers responsibility how can he say what weight it can lift.I would insist on any lifting equipment being certified prior to ordering. once you have received it you then follow the guidance of the LOLER Regs. IE Maintenance periodic checks and operator daily checks
Regards
Frank
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By FAH
Apologies for the lack of clarity in my earlier post folks; but it was early!
Whilst the "provider" must ensure that the equip has a Certificate of Conformity [CE Mark], & also has the duty to ensure that the equip complies with the Machinery [Safety] Regs; they can only provide the general design characteristics that will include info on design loads under various configurations.
In the UK, it is the users duty to ensure that the equip complies with LOLER, inc getting the equip tested for overturning, SWL etc in the situation, & under the conditions, in which it will actually be used.
This last is very important as a standard test may not address, for instance; different mountings for a moveable winch.
Frank Hallett
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ron Hunter
A winch, and a winching operation, need not necessarily be a lifting operation. The load may be pulled, but not necessarily lifted.
I suggest a copy of the declaration of conformity with relevant Directives and the instructions for safe use may be the limit of what is "reasonable" here.
Seems to me that it is John's "Test Rig" (in it's entirity) that is actually Lifting Equipment?
In practical terms, the factor of safety on this winch (considering vehicle type and winches) could be in the order of 100:1. I don't think it's going to break, but the ratchet/pawl mechanisms do wear out eventually - failing to safety as it were.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Vrick
Ron
But if it is used for raising and lowering it falls within the ambit of the definition (LOLER)and will therefore require a test certificate before use.
Thks
Vrick
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ron Hunter
Taking that to an extreme then, if I buy a length of rope or chain............?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Vrick
Ron
I do not think it's an extreme; LOLER Defn follows
"lifting equipment" means work equipment for lifting or lowering loads and includes its attachments used for anchoring, fixing or supporting it;
It's a fact and it's Friday
thanks
Vrick
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By FAH
Hi ron
Your point about the entire set-up actually being Lifting Equip is perfectly valid - & correct! Which is why I stated that any testing must include the circumstances in which the actual lifting device [the winch] is used in practice.
This will mean that the winch, boom, any other relevant supporting structure &/or equipment should be tested as a whole and not just individually.
Why couldn't I say that the first time?
Frank Hallett
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ron Hunter
Vrick: The shop sold me rope (or chain). It only becomes lifting equipment when I make it so. Where does the duty lie?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Donk
Not all lifting equipment falls within the scope of LOLER.
For example a small hydraulic pallet truck does not require a TE.
Neither does a passenger lift within a shopping precinct.
Also CE marking is not a guarantee of safety it is merely a declaration by the manufacturer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Vrick
Ron
Apologies for delay in reply,
It's monday and lets continue with our business;
The shop may have sold rope or whatever,(same for the winch) but if you decide to used that stuff as a lifting equipment, it will be your duty to have it tested prior to start using same as a lifting equipment.
The original thread said that the winch was to be used for raising and lowering, so once installed, BEFORE being used for RAISING and LOWERING, it should be test certified.
Ron,
Perhaps I'm blinkered and i'll be happy to be convinced and corrected; this is no confrontation but only a discussion.
Thanks
Vrick
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By FAH
Hi Donk
I agree that Passenger lifts in general don't fall under LOLER 'cos they have their own Directive & UK Regs.
However, could you please identify how a "small hydraulic pallett truck" isn't included under LOLER?
Also, how small is "small"?
Frank Hallett
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ron Hunter
Vrick, we would appear to be in agreement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Donk
Hi FAH
sorry in taking so long to reply i have been away.
The statement was based on a discussion with local HSE that stated they would not consider a standard pallet truck (hand operated with a minimal lifting capacity and height)as lifting equipment due to the relative severity of injury due to failure. They would however consider as work equipment which requires an inspection regime.
Insurance requirements however are a different matter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Swis
Agree with Ron here.
If it's only a simple hand operated winch then a simple in-house inspection record would be sufficient.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Peter Tanczos
If the equipment is second-hand, the last "dutyholder" should ensure (when it leaves his undertaking)that the equipment is accompanied by "physical evidence" that the last TE as required by LOLER has been done - S9(4)(b)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Chris Kelly
Ron
If it lifts vertically, with the load off the surface, supported only by the equipment then it is lifting equipment. Incidentally if you do your PUWER assessment it is likely that it would be concluded that the risk of failure of a winch when pulling would conclude that a thorough was required (whether independant or not I won't get involved in).
Also be careful about 'Test'. A load test is just one element in the competent person's toolkit - it does not constitute a thorough exam by itself.
The supplier's CE certification, metal certs and design criteria together with a load test should be sufficient. It sounds like the equipment requires installation on site. In this case it should be thoroughly examined but the user is responsible for arranging this not the supplier.
Hope of help,
Regards,
Chris
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Chris Kelly
Oh sorry - just one other. The LOLER ACOP actually states (I am going from memory here) that the supplier's CE certification / mark, design criteria and assessment are sufficient unless the equipment requires erection / installation. Then it must be thoroughly examined post-installation.
Otherwise the first thorough is 12 months after the date of the CE certificate.
Regards,
Chris
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Chris Kelly
Donk / Frank
Pallet truck does fall under LOLER but, as 'low-risk' equipment can be subject to planned preventative maintenance. At least that is the guidance which SAFed gave us and we used to give out.
Regards,
Chris
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.