Sei sulla pagina 1di 10

Lifting Equipment Engineers Association 2013 - training\2-4u

1
UNIT NO. 2.4

RATING OF LIFTING GEAR FOR GENERAL PURPOSES

This unit considers the rating of lifting equipment, that is to say how we establish the
maximum load that an item may lift in any particular circumstance. Depending on
your daily duties you will already be familiar with various types of lifting equipment.
The principles for rating the various items are much the same, however we will look
more closely at slings as they require a more detailed explanation.

Initially it is necessary to understand some basic terms. Much of the testers and
examiners work is related to the law and to standards. The terms used in the
legislation, the standards, found in manufacturers literature and in various codes of
practice are in everyday use. It is surprising then that many testers and examiners
do not understand their correct meaning. Let us consider these terms as a
preliminary to our studies in this unit.

1. Lifting Equipment
This term is used in two different ways in LOLER. It is a generic term used to
cover all lifting accessories and appliances, but also has a more specific
meaning covering lifting appliances and their anchorages and fixings.

2. Lifting Accessories
Any device such as a sling, shackle, eyebolt, clamp, spreader beam etc used
to connect the load to a lifting appliance but which is not itself part of the load
or the appliance. At one time lifting accessories were referred to as lifting
gear or lifting tackle. Although both these terms are still in common use,
lifting accessories is the only term used in the Supply of Machinery (Safety)
Regulations and LOLER. This course, Lifting Gear General, is concerned with
lifting accessories and we will often use the term lifting gear or simply gear
in the text.

3. Lifting Machine/Lifting Appliance
A device or mechanism, such as a crane, crab, winch, pulley block, gin wheel,
chain block, which does the work in lifting the load or provides the means of
movement, or the supporting structure and anchoring devices for such a
mechanism, eg runway, gantry etc, which may also permit a suspended load
to be moved in the horizontal plane. These items are covered by the term
lifting equipment in LOLER.

4. Working Load Limit (WLL sometimes called maximum SWL)
The maximum load or mass that an item of lifting equipment is designed to
sustain, ie raise, lower or suspend. This is the load required to be marked on
an item by the product standards.

5. Safe Working Load (SWL)
The maximum load or mass (as certified by a competent person) that an item
of lifting equipment may raise, lower or suspend under particular service
Lifting Equipment Engineers Association 2013 - training\2-4u
2
conditions. It is the SWL which is required to be marked on the item by
LOLER and which appears on any report of thorough examination.

6. The Minimum Breaking (or failure) Load (MBL)
The minimum breaking load is the calculated load at which a sample of the
item will break or fail. From this value is derived the WLL etc. In order to
ensure that this value has been achieved for some products, eg wire rope, a
sample may be tested to destruction and the actual breaking load recorded, or
the wire from which the rope is made is tested and the aggregate breaking
load is calculated. Other items are designed so as to sustain the WLL plus a
minimum factor of safety, eg a roundsling, however they may fail if this is
increased by only a tiny amount. For practical purposes we can consider
these tests to be the same. For a new product a sample must not fail under
test at a lesser amount than the minimum specified in the relevant standard.
The MBL should be expressed in the SI unit of force (Newtons) or Mass
(tonnes, kilograms), as required by the relevant standard.

7. Factor of Safety (FOS), Coefficient of Utilisation, Working Coefficient
These terms all have much the same meaning, but perhaps Factor of Safety
describes the function better than the more recent terms, which are replacing
it in standards and legislation. It is a factor which is applied to the MBL to
determine the WLL. It varies with the product to take account of the
susceptibility to damage and considers the type of stresses the item will meet
in normal use.

Where the conditions of use are more severe than those considered by the
product standard, eg in a chemical environment, the user will apply an
increased FOS, so reducing the value of the SWL from that of the WLL.

8. Mode Factor
A factor applied by the user (slinger or rigger) that takes into account the
geometry of a sling assembly to obtain the maximum load he may lift for a
particular mode of use. When rating and marking slings, an assumption is
made that the sling leg will be in straight pull, if this condition is varied, eg
choke hitch, the load in the sling leg will also vary. The mode factor takes
account of this, as the marked SWL is the maximum load that may be applied
to the leg, its correct use ensures that the leg will not be overloaded.

Note: Some confusion exists as to the WLL and SWL. The WLL is determined by
the designer/manufacturer and is based on the mechanical properties of the item. A
competent person specifies the SWL, based on the use to which the item will be put
and will be dependant on:
(i) Whether the load is dead or alive
(ii) The consequences of failure, eg when carrying radioactive
material the risk is high and a greater factor of safety is called for
(iii) How the load is applied, eg slowly or suddenly
(iv) The degree of possible misjudgement of weights or angles
(v) The duty cycle and working environment
(vi) Any other factors which affect the safe working life of the item or the
safety of the lifting operation.
Lifting Equipment Engineers Association 2013 - training\2-4u
3

The marked SWL normally has the same value as the WLL , but it may be less. For
instance, in coal mining and nuclear power stations the WLL is often significantly
reduced to obtain the SWL, as there are particular dangers associated with these
activities and these call for higher safety margins than in, say, an engineering works.
For new equipment, the WLL/SWL should be expressed in SI units of mass, ie
tonnes and kilograms. Older items may still be found in service which are marked in
the imperial units of tons and hundredweights.

Manufacturers of standard or series produced items, who do not know the
application in which the item will be used, specify the WLL, leaving the individual
users to decide whether or not the factor of safety is sufficient for their particular
application. Where an item is being specially manufactured for a specific application
the designer is able to take all of the relevant matters into account and can use the
applicable factors, thus he is able to specify the SWL which is to be marked on the
item.

RATING OF LIFTING GEAR
LOLER requires that the SWL is clearly marked on all items of lifting equipment,
however both standards and the Supply of Machinery (Safety) Regulations require
all newly manufactured lifting equipment to be marked with the WLL. This is not
really a contradiction, as they will usually have the same value. As we noted above,
it is only when conditions of use require additional safety margins that the user will
apply a factor greater than that normally associated with the item. This may then
require him to re-mark the item with the SWL.

Whilst old, pre-LOLER, legislation permitted certain slings to be unmarked and a
table of appropriate SWLs to be displayed no such items should now exist. British
Standards have, for many years, recommend that all gear be marked with its
maximum SWL or WLL because of the difficulties often found in reading tables in
industrial situations and the possibility of incorrect material or grade identification.
The adoption of the uniform load method of rating slings has also rendered the use
of charts obsolete. LOLER now requires all items to be marked with the SWL.

With most items of lifting equipment, the marked SWL is arrived at by making a
simple mathematical calculation applying a factor of safety to the designed minimum-
breaking load. This is then the marked WLL and is the maximum load the item may
sustain. With slings the situation is more complex. Whilst the WLL of the sling in
straight pull can be established this way, if the sling is to be rigged in any other way,
eg choke hitch, further calculation by the slinger or rigger is necessary to find the
maximum load that may be lifted. Sling users must therefore apply the correct mode
factor for the particular type of sling and its configuration of use.

Lifting Equipment Engineers Association 2013 - training\2-4u
4
RATING OF MULTI-LEG SLINGS
The rating of multi-leg slings can be very complex and calls for the designer to make
certain assumptions about the use of the sling. As the angle that the sling leg makes
to the vertical affects the stress in the leg (see LEEA Code of Practice for the Safe
Use of Lifting Equipment Appendix 1.5 paragraph 1A5.3.3.1 and Figure 1A5.8), this
is taken into account and it is a matter of geometry to establish the maximum load
that can be lifted.

There are two methods of rating multi-leg slings: the uniform load method and the
trigonometrical method. The calculation to establish the WLL is however based on
the same principle for both methods. From our Part 1 studies we know that if a force
is applied to a sling leg, which is disposed at an angle, then the resultant load in the
leg will be greater than the force applied. In fact it will increase by a factor equal to
the cosine of the angle that the sling leg makes to the vertical. With the uniform load
method of rating we limit the calculation to only two angles, 45 to the vertical for
general use and 60 to the vertical for additional use, whilst with the trigonometric
method the calculation is made for the specific angle to the vertical that the sling leg
will be used at.

(i) Uniform Load Method
This method was first recommended in a British Standard Publication PD 6464
(1972) and subsequently specified in BS 6166: Part 1 1986. It is the preferred
method for rating all general purpose slings and is used internationally. It should be
used for rating ALL general purpose slings and is the only method detailed in
Harmonised Standards that support the European Machinery Directive.

By the uniform load method, a multi-leg sling is rated with a maximum load for use at
any angle within the permitted range. This has many advantages for both the user
and the sling manufacturer. As the WLL is calculated based on an angle of 45 to the
vertical and limited to this WLL when the angle is reduced, (a) users do not have to
judge different angles and calculate the actual load that may then be lifted and (b)
manufacturers can use master links which are capable of carrying the WLL at that
angle only and can therefore use lighter construction links than would be necessary
if the WLL was allowed to increase as the angle decreased.

Traditionally in the UK the rating was expressed in terms of the included angle, ie the
angle between the opposite sling legs, of 0-90 and in special cases additionally at
an included angle between 90-120. This method of expressing the rating for
three-leg slings then calls for the user to double the angle of the leg to the vertical to
obtain the included angle, as there is no opposite leg. Although this method of
marking is not now used, many existing slings will be found in use marked this way.

The Harmonised European Standards for various slings take a different approach
expressing the rating at the angle of the legs to the vertical. This is a more logical
approach as this is the angle that is actually used in establishing the WLL, it
emphasises that the angle of each leg affects the share of the load it will carry and,
in the case of three leg slings is more easily understood by the user. The working
load limits are shown at 0-45 and in special cases 45-60. So that users will not be
confused, it is recommended that a tag or label with a pictogram is used similar to
that shown in figure 1.
Lifting Equipment Engineers Association 2013 - training\2-4u
5







Figure 1

Although we will consider the assumptions made in rating multi-leg slings later in this
unit, we should note here that, in the case of four leg slings, the uniform load method
of rating assumes that only three of the legs will effectively carry the load and that
the fourth leg will only serve to balance the load. Therefore the rating for three and
four leg slings is the same.

The following chart shows the design factors that should be applied to the WLL of a
single leg to establish the WLL of multi-leg sling assemblies or where a number of
single slings are being used in combination.

0-45
(0-90)
45-60
(90-120))

Two leg sling 1.4 1.0

Three and Four leg sling 2.1 1.5

Design Factors

Figure 2 shows how the angle is measured for two, three, and four leg slings. is the
symbol used to indicate the angle to the vertical and is used to indicate the
traditional included angle.
= 2







(a) Two leg sling










(b) Three leg sling
Lifting Equipment Engineers Association 2013 - training\2-4u
6













(c) Four leg sling

Figure 2

The master and intermediate links of slings designed strictly in accordance with the
uniform load method are capable of supporting the maximum rated load marked on
the sling at any angle between those specified. They may therefore be weaker than
those that would be used in the case of trigonometrically rated slings and should not
be used to support greater loads at reduced angles.

(ii) Trigonometrical Method
This method was traditionally used in the UK to calculate the WLL of slings at
various angles of the legs to the vertical. Even after the publication of BS 6166 in
1986, many manufacturers continued to use this method until the adoption of the
Harmonised European Standards. It provided the means of preparing the tables
required by the older lifting equipment regulations. The trigonometric method is the
non-preferred method of rating. If used now it should be restricted to slings designed
for a single purpose, eg the top sling of a lifting frame, where the angle of use cannot
not be altered. Although still permitted by the Supply of Machinery (Safety)
Regulations and LOLER, its use has almost ceased since sling manufacturers have
adopted Harmonised Standards.

The WLL is calculated using the design factors as follows:

For a two-leg sling (Fig 2a)
WLL = 2 x WLL of a single leg x cos

For a three-leg sling (Fig 2b)
WLL = 3 x WLL of a single leg x cos

For a four-leg sling (Fig 2c)
WLL = 4 x WLL of single leg x cos

Example:
A two-leg chain sling is used to lift a load with an included angle between the
legs of 60. If the WLL of a single leg is 2 tonnes, calculate the WLL of the
sling for this lift.
Lifting Equipment Engineers Association 2013 - training\2-4u
7

WLL of the sling = 2 x WLL of a single leg x cos









Figure 3

From the diagram, = 30 Cosine 30 = 0.866 (from trigonometrical tables)

.
.
. WLL of the sling = 2 x WLL of a single leg x Cos 30

Hence WLL of the sling = 3.46 tonnes

In this case the master and intermediate links must be designed to be capable of
carrying the maximum load that can be lifted by the sling for any calculated angle of
use. They are therefore larger than those used for the uniform load method. Care
must also be taken in the case of existing four leg slings rated this way, as they will
usually have been assembled assuming that all four legs carry an equal share of the
load, but in more recent times some manufacturers may have adopted the rating
assumption that only three legs will carry the load. It is therefore vital that testers and
examiners establish how the sling is assembled and rated.

Assumptions for the Rating of Multi-leg Slings
We said that, in calculating the WLL of multi-leg slings, some fundamental
assumptions have to be made by the designer (or standard writers), these are:
(a) The sling legs are identical in all respects except that the lower terminal
fittings may vary. (The leg lengths may vary in cases where the points of
attachment to the load are not in the same horizontal plane provided that the
loading is equal, see f).
(b) The terminal fittings are connected to the lifting appliance and the load
attachment points in such a manner that the legs are not bent across or
around the load, choked, back hooked or otherwise prevented from taking up
a straight line under load.
(c) All legs are at the same angle to the vertical.
(d) The angle or range of angles between the sling legs at which the sling is rated
is not exceeded.
(e) The sling legs are symmetrically disposed in plan, ie for three-leg slings all
angles between legs in plan view are equal and for four-leg slings, the
opposite angles between adjacent legs in plan are equal.
(f) For four-leg slings the length of each leg exactly matches the position of
attachment points. If this is not achieved most or all of the weight will be
carried by only two legs of the sling.

Lifting Equipment Engineers Association 2013 - training\2-4u
8

MARKING
Before being used, all lifting gear must be marked, either directly or by means of a
tag attached to it, with the following data:

(a) Identification data
(b) Quality mark or material identification
(c) SWL; and for new equipment
(d) Any other marks required by the standard being worked to or by legislation,
eg CE mark.

Markings should be readily visible, permanent and legible and if on the lifting gear
they should not affect its strength, eg cause notch effect, chemical reaction, etc.
The size of characters used should be chosen so as not to impair the mechanical
properties of the item. Where a tag is used, the identification data should (where
possible) be marked directly on the item so that if the tag is lost the documentation
can be traced and the information retrieved. In the case of webbing slings and
roundslings this should be on a part of the label enclosed by a stitched portion of the
sling or cover.

Marking of Multi-leg Slings
(1) Slings rated by the uniform load method should be permanently made up and
marked with SWL in the following manner:

For included angles 0 to 90:- eg SWL 6.3t 0 - 45,
For included angles 90 to 120 :-eg SWL 4t 45 - 60,

Where users have a mix of slings marked in terms of the included angle, they
should be encouraged to consider re-marking them with the angle expressed
to the vertical so as to avoid confusion in use.

(2) Slings rated by the trigonometrical method should be permanently made up
and marked with the SWL at the specific angle in the following manner:

SWL 6.3t at 45

Note For three-leg slings the included angle range 0-45 (or for older slings 0 to
90) for uniform load method, or 45 (or for older slings 90) for
trigonometrical method, refers to a condition when any leg does not exceed
45 to the vertical.

You are also advised to read appendix 1.5 LEEA Code of Practice for the Safe Use
of Lifting Equipment where a fuller explanation is given. Some guidance will also be
found in the text of the standard being worked to.

MODE FACTORS APPLIED BY THE USER (CHOKE HITCH/BASKET HITCH)
If a choke hitch is used in the slinging arrangement, then the marked SWL will be
derated by the use of a mode factor to establish the maximum load the slinging
arrangement may be used to lift. The amount by which the sling is derated depends
Lifting Equipment Engineers Association 2013 - training\2-4u
9
on the material and the appropriate mode factors are specified in the various product
standards.

Similarly if a sling is used in a basket hitch, the actual load that may be lifted will be
greater than the marked SWL. Again this will vary with the material, the angle of the
sling parts and other factors. Details of the mode factors are given in the relevant
product standards.

By way of revision, you are advised to read those sections of the Code of Practice
for the Safe Use of Lifting Equipment that give details of slings as the design and
mode factors, including those to be applied due to the rigging arrangement, are fully
detailed and explained.

PRACTICAL CONVERSIONS FOR USE IN RATING LIFTING EQUIPMENT
As equipment manufactured to imperial standards may still be found in use
alongside equipment to metric standards, and as it may be desirable to have all of
the equipment in a factory marked with its safe working load in the same units to
avoid operative error, standard conversions are used. The British Standards Institute
offers the following guidance with regard to marking SWL when converting from
imperial to metric units:

"Safe Working Loads of less than 1000kg should be marked in kilograms to the
nearest whole kilogram. SWL's of 1000kg or more should be marked in tonnes. Only
one place of decimals should be used except for 1.25t; for integral values of SWL the
0 after the decimal point should be omitted."

This system has certain advantages when converting from imperial to metric units or
where a mix of metric and imperial rated equipment exists side by side as it avoids
the possibility of metric markings being confused with tons and hundredweights. If,
by accident, the metric figure after the decimal place is read as cwts, the mistake will
always be on the safe side since, in fact, the single decimal figure is always half the
equivalent cwts.

This system of marking can also be used when an item is produced which is not to a
standard, eg a spreader or lifting frame. Items produced in compliance with
Harmonised Standards should be marked in accordance with the standard.

The following table gives examples of the conversions; others can then be calculated
on the same basis.











Lifting Equipment Engineers Association 2013 - training\2-4u
10
Examples of the Conversions:


1 cwt = 50kg

1 Ton = 1 t 1 Ton 11 cwt = 1.5 t



1 Ton 1 cwt = 1 t 1 Ton 12 cwt = 1.6 t

2 cwt = 100kg

1 Ton 2 cwt = 1.1 t 1 Ton 13 cwt = 1.6 t



1 Ton 3 cwt = 1.1 t 1 Ton 14 cwt = 1.7 t

5 cwt = 250kg

1 Ton 4 cwt = 1.2 t 1 Ton 15 cwt = 1.7 t



1 Ton 5 cwt = 1.25 t 1 Ton 16 cwt = 1.8 t

7 cwt = 375kg

1 Ton 6 cwt = 1.3 t 1 Ton 17 cwt = 1.8 t



1 Ton 7 cwt = 1.3 t 1 Ton 18 cwt = 1.9 t

10 cwt = 500kg

1 Ton 8 cwt = 1.4 t 1 Ton 19 cwt = 1.9 t

12 cwt = 625kg

1 Ton 9 cwt = 1.4 t 2 Ton = 2 t

15 cwt = 750kg

1 Ton 10 cwt = 1.5 t
It will be noted from the table that in the case of, say, 1 ton 3 cwt, the exact
conversion would be 1.15t, but as the second decimal place is disregarded, this
becomes 1.1 t.

Examples

(i) ton = 750 kg.
(ii) 1 ton 5 cwt = 1.25 t.
(iii) 4 ton 17 cwt = 4.8 t.

Potrebbero piacerti anche