<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Dearborn Overhead Crane &#187; Crane Safety</title>
	<atom:link href="http://dearborncrane.com/blog/category/crane-safety/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://dearborncrane.com/blog</link>
	<description>Building Cranes Since 1947</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Nov 2009 18:59:13 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>One requirement would be more effective than all of OSHA</title>
		<link>http://dearborncrane.com/blog/2009/06/one-requirement-would-be-more-effective-than-all-of-osha/</link>
		<comments>http://dearborncrane.com/blog/2009/06/one-requirement-would-be-more-effective-than-all-of-osha/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Jun 2009 12:42:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Larry Dunville</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Crane Regulations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Crane Safety]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hoists]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OSHA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CMAA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lifting Devices]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Overload Protection]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dearborncrane.com/blog/?p=32</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There it is, just nine words. You may have thought that a mechanical or electrical device to prevent the operator from lifting loads in excess of the safe capacity was already required, but it's not!!!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So here&#8217;s the one rule that would be more effective in making a safe work environment than all of the rest of the crane and hoist rules added together.</p>
<p align="center"><em><strong>&#8220;Thou shall have overload protection on all lifting devices.&#8221;</strong></em></p>
<p>There it is, just nine words. You may have thought that a mechanical or electrical device to prevent the operator from lifting loads in excess of the safe capacity was already required, but it&#8217;s not!!!</p>
<p>Not in OSHA, not in CMAA (Crane Manufacturers Association of America), not in HMI (Hoist Manufacturers Institute)&#8230;nowhere. Worse yet, it is such a common sense idea, most crane and hoists buyers just assume that when they insist that their equipment be OSHA and/or CMAA compliant, it will meet this most rudimentary requirement. Well it&#8217;s not. Yes, there are rules that prohibit you from lifting loads in excess of the rated capacity of the crane, but no rules that require this to be built into the crane.</p>
<p>I have even met a few buyers that insist that they don&#8217;t need overload protection, because they never get loads that exceed the rated capacity of their crane or hoist. Although they may never get larger loads, they do get that one trucker that forgets to take off all the chains or the lathe operator that forgets to un-chuck the shaft. Next thing you know, they are lifting the whole lathe.</p>
<p>Bottom line is it&#8217;s up to you. Make sure to write into all your purchasing specs that &#8220;Overload&#8221; protection is required on all new lifting equipment. If the seller says OSHA doesn&#8217;t require it, tell them that you do!</p>
<p>Dr. Frazier Crane<br />
PhD in Craneology (Piled High and Deep)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dearborncrane.com/blog/2009/06/one-requirement-would-be-more-effective-than-all-of-osha/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Overload Protection</title>
		<link>http://dearborncrane.com/blog/2008/01/overload-protection-continued/</link>
		<comments>http://dearborncrane.com/blog/2008/01/overload-protection-continued/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Jan 2008 18:24:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Larry Dunville</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Crane Regulations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Crane Safety]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hoists]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OSHA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Electric Chain Hoists]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Load Summing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Overload Protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wire Rope Hoists]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dearborncrane.com/blog/?p=8</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The topic of the day is a particular type of "overload protection", that is cranes with two hoists.  We frequently are asked to supply crane that have two hoists for flipping a die.  In this case either hoist may be required to lift the full load, lets say 5 tons, but never will the sum total of the lift be 5 tons.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Last week I talked about the folly of OSHA not requiring &#8220;<strong>overload protection</strong>&#8220;.  I have received a number of questions and let me therefore take a moment to answer them all at once.</p>
<ul>
<li>Wire rope hoists are NOT required to have any type of overload protection</li>
<li>Electric Chain hoists ARE required to have some form of overload protection</li>
<li>There are several brands of overload protection that will fit almost all brands of hoist</li>
</ul>
<p>The topic of the day is a particular type of &#8220;overload protection&#8221;, that involves cranes with two hoists.  We frequently are asked to supply a crane that has two hoists for flipping dies.  In this case either hoist may be required to lift the full load, lets say 5 tons, but never will the sum total of the lift be 5 tons.  In other words, we have to supply a 5 ton crane with two 5 ton hoists.  This may sound like a ticking time bomb, but with modern controls, there is an easy and economical answer.</p>
<p><strong>LOAD SUMMING</strong></p>
<p>Most hoist manufacturers and several third party after market control manufacturers now supply a small control system that is installed into the hoist control panel that constantly sums the total weight lifted by the two hoists.  With this, either hoist can lift the full 5 tons or can share the 5 tons in any combination.  As long as the aggregate total does not exceed the 5 ton load limit. the units operation is totally transparent, but in the event 5 tons is exceeded, the hoist will cease to lift and only operate in the down direction.</p>
<p>Dr. Frazier Crane<br />
PhD in Craneology (Piled High and Deep)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dearborncrane.com/blog/2008/01/overload-protection-continued/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Figures Don&#8217;t Lie, but Liars Figure</title>
		<link>http://dearborncrane.com/blog/2007/08/figures-dont-lie-but-liars-figure/</link>
		<comments>http://dearborncrane.com/blog/2007/08/figures-dont-lie-but-liars-figure/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 25 Aug 2007 17:14:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Larry Dunville</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Crane Regulations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Crane Safety]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hoists]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[H4 Duty Cycle]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hoist Manufacturers Institute]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hoist Manufacturing Company]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OSHA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Overhead Crane Builder]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dearborncrane.com/blog/?p=4</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The H3 hoist is considered to be a "standard" duty hoist and the h4 is the beginning of the "heavy" duty hoists. Prior to this time, most manufactures had a mixed line of offerings including, H2, H3, H4 and H5 hoists, but at this meeting we were being told that this supplier had only H4 and higher hoists from this day forward.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Dearborn Crane</span> is a crane builder and buys the hoists that go on our cranes from various hoist manufacturing companies. <span> </span>More than a decade ago, one of our major hoists suppliers introduced their new line of &#8220;up-rated&#8221; hoists. At our office, he sat us down and showed us the newly printed catalogs in which all his hoists were now rated as H4 duty cycle, rather than the previous mix of H2, H3 and H4 hoists.</p>
<p>For those of you not acquainted with the HMI&#8217;s (Hoist Manufacturers Institute,) duty cycle rating system, HMI is an industry association of member manufacturers that have set down a series of specifications for the hoist industry. The system rates hoists based on a duty cycle based performance with ratings between H1 (lightest duty) to H5 (heaviest duty).</p>
<p>The H3 hoist is considered to be a &#8220;standard&#8221; duty hoist and the H4 is the beginning of the &#8220;heavy&#8221; duty hoists. Prior to this time, most manufacturers had a mixed line of offerings including, H2, H3, H4 and H5 hoists, but at this meeting we were being told that this supplier had only H4 and higher hoists from this day forward.</p>
<p>After showing us the new catalog pages with the H4 designations, the conversation went something like this:</p>
<p><strong>Q. How much is the price increase for the new higher rated hoists?</strong></p>
<p><em>A. No price increase.</em></p>
<p><strong>Q. Is this a new line of hoists?</strong></p>
<p><em>A. No, this is the same product line as before.</em></p>
<p><strong>Q. Larger horsepower motors, better insulation?</strong></p>
<p><em>A. No, they have the same motors.</em></p>
<p><strong>Q. Larger ropes?</strong></p>
<p><em>A. No, same ropes.</em></p>
<p><strong>Q. Bigger gearboxes, larger contactors&#8230;.what&#8217;s the difference???</strong></p>
<p><em>A. Quite frankly, the only difference is that the printer changed the catalog pages from H3 to H4. We did some figuring (he probably didn&#8217;t use that exact word, but I think it fits here perfectly) and we determined that all our hoists meet the HMI H4 requirements, so we had the catalogs reprinted with every hoist at a minimum of H4&#8230;At this point, I&#8217;m sure you want to know who would be so unscrupulous. Well let&#8217;s put it this way, today I&#8217;m afraid you would have an easier time finding a living dinosaur than a H3 hoists in any manufactures catalog! Who&#8217;s at fault? Let me give you my list in David Lettermen fashion.</em></p>
<ol>
<li><strong><em>The manufacturers</em></strong> who seem to be willing to do anything to make a sale today, regardless of warranty costs later and loss of long term reputation in the market place.</li>
<li><strong><em>The manufacturers association</em></strong>, which are simply a reflection of its members. If they are willing to craft a spec that is so loose, that it no longer means anything, then why have it??? Let me put it this way, when even a lowly chain hoist has a H4 rating (and they ALL do), then the designation is meaningless.<span> </span>Worse yet, they are miss leading, in that they give the impression of being something they are not, thereby deliberately deceiving and misrepresenting.</li>
<li><strong><em>ME AND YOU</em></strong>, the buying public. We have been so taken with marketing hype that we no longer use our head and do our homework. Try buying a small Coke at McDonalds. You can&#8217;t, they only have medium, large and extra large. They think that getting a &#8220;Super Meal&#8221; with a medium drink sounds better than getting a &#8220;Super Meal&#8221; with a small drink. Even if both of them only have a 12 oz drink?</li>
</ol>
<p><strong>What can we do? </strong>Do your homework, don&#8217;t just flip to the back page and read the bottom line, read the whole document. Price should not be the only factor in your decision. If it is, don&#8217;t blame the manufacturer for supplying junk, we have all made ourselves into willing participants.</p>
<ol>
<li>Read the whole quote, not just the price</li>
<li>Make a comparison matrix. If you don’t don’t know the critical issues, ask each of your bidders.<span> </span>Yes, they will each highlight their own strong suits, but their combined list should be as comprehensive as you can get.</li>
<li>Send the new combined matrix back to each of the bidders and have them fill it out. Stipulate that is there are any blanks, they should not bother to re-submit their quote.</li>
<li>If you’re not sure of their response, put it into your own words and then use the matrix as part of your contract/purchase order.</li>
</ol>
<p>Is this air tight, no way. But it’s a lot better than what you probably have now. The old AISE (American Institute of Steel Engineers) had buyer generated specifications as opposed to manufacturers written specs. They had their flaws, but were more effective than the nothing we now have.</p>
<p>Dr. Frazier Crane<br />
PhD in Craneology (Piled High and Deep)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dearborncrane.com/blog/2007/08/figures-dont-lie-but-liars-figure/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

