Loler/Manufacture Date/Actual Use

[Wood wasp]

Apologies for derailing Bgt's thread but did I know see a post on here from German climber which said they don't loler climbing kit in Germany but instead use common sense when to chuck kit?

[Gary Prentice]

  Pommie said:

It depends. How has it been stored is the key, fabric degrades in UV light, if the kit has been stored in the dark you can introduce it and start your 5 year usage from there. But you must have documented history to show when it was bought into service.We inspectors use date of manufacture usually as there is no date of introduction paperwork. Another example is a rescue kit that is never used could potentially be fit for purpose for 10 years or more. Remember that the 6 monthly regime for PPE is a MAXIMUM time limit between inspections.

 

So potentially you could buy a harness or sling that has been properly stored for half, or more, of its manufacturers recommended lifespan?

[Gary Prentice]

  treequip said:

Or perhaps they have done exhaustive testing to see where the likely failure point would be to keep you safe from injury and them out of the courts???

 

I don't know about now, but when my missus was designing for troll and her name was on the ISO paperwork, troll were the only manufacturer whose harnesses still passed the testing to failure criteria after five years use. (According to her!)

 

So, in summary, the consensus is whatever the manufacturer states - whether its from manufacture date or first use is their decision. It would be nice to see something in writing, from the HSE or a manufacturer, to dispel any arguments. as examiners do seem to vary in their interpretation.

 

Discussing this earlier, with the wife who is fairly knowledgeable in all types of harnesses in most industries reckoned that three years of regular use for a tree harness would put it at the end of its safe life. For the cost of them, I'd tend to agree, average at three hundred quid equates to a couple of pounds a week.

 

Discuss:lol:

[Wolfie]

  treequip said:

Or perhaps they have done exhaustive testing to see where the likely failure point would be to keep you safe from injury and them out of the courts???

 

 

I know that they do exhaustive tests to determine strength rating to eliminate any design flaws but they can't possible carry out exhaustive, comprehensive tests for usage period, that would take several years per product - they take an educated guess and then knock off a bit.

Be honest, are you telling me that you wouldn't trust any (un-abused) kit that has reached the manufactures date.

 

As say, common sense and Inspectors discretion should be allowed.

[treequip]

  Wolfie said:

I know that they do exhaustive tests to determine strength rating to eliminate any design flaws but they can't possible carry out exhaustive, comprehensive tests for usage period, that would take several years per product - they take an educated guess and then knock off a bit.

Be honest, are you telling me that you wouldn't trust any (un-abused) kit that has reached the manufactures date.

 

As say, common sense and Inspectors discretion should be allowed.

 

Ya think so??? In another life I was involved in testing UV degradation in polymers, we used a UV cabinet that would give a hundred sunbeds a run for their money. That's science not guess work.

[Gary Prentice]

  treequip said:

Ya think so??? In another life I was involved in testing UV degradation in polymers, we used a UV cabinet that would give a hundred sunbeds a run for their money. That's science not guess work.

 

That's interesting, discussing trolls testing this morning I thought it was unscientific because there was no way of comparing the usage on a like for like basis - at the time.

[treequip]

  btggaz said:

That's interesting, discussing trolls testing this morning I thought it was unscientific because there was no way of comparing the usage on a like for like basis - at the time.

 

A harness manufacturer will test the harness and rely on the data from the materials supplier. In short the webbing supplier says, "its good for X" and its up to the manufacturer to either believe or perform their own testing.

[Gary Prentice]

This is my hang up too, the webbing supplier says yes this batch conforms to EN or whatever, even though we're now using a cheaper dye from a different supplier than we used for our original testing.

 

Personally, there's kit I wouldn't climb on, or be comfortable climbing on, regardless of age or Loler inspection. The idea of common sense itself sounds great, but there is no such thing and it isn't quantifiable.

[treequip]

  btggaz said:

This is my hang up too, the webbing supplier says yes this batch conforms to EN or whatever, even though we're now using a cheaper dye from a different supplier than we used for our original testing.

 

Personally, there's kit I wouldn't climb on, or be comfortable climbing on, regardless of age or Loler inspection. The idea of common sense itself sounds great, but there is no such thing and it isn't quantifiable.

 

But it doesn't (shouldn't) work like that. If they change the dye they have changed the specification and thus any current certification is null and void. A new certification of the new product specification would be required.

[bob]

5 yrs from first use is generally accepted

Never more than 10 from manufacture but as previously stated you should be able to prove stored out of sunlight and when it was put into service rather than just making that date up

It's all about justification.

I.e a new sling could be made today and then shipped to a supplier a few months from today and then sits on a shelf for 6 months

If you look at the paperwork it will usually state 5 from first usage or whatever the manufacturers allow. Which does vary ie ocean polyester 2 yrs

Edited December 29, 2014 by bob
predictive text mistake