SAFETY WARNING: Using Loader to Lift with Chains

[kokopelli2]

guys please dont think that chains wont "fly" all over. dont forget about shrapnel thats
basically what chain parts are then they snap. i have seen chain chunks go through cars
when they snaped. just keep that in mind.

 

[MChalkley]

Gordon - Nice post. Your comments pretty much sum up my postion nicely. I use chains (never rope) to lift stuff with the loader all the time, and I'll continue to do so. FWIW, I do not consider this part of the 10% of the time it's ok to not wear my seatbelt - it's something I think is inherently "risky", as is doing anything else with the loader, so the seatbelt stays on. When I go to work on a major project, I usually end up carrying the auger, tiller, box scraper, blade, pallet forks, and, sometimes, the backhoe. This requires two trailers, and the other trailer always gets loaded by picking the implements up with chains using the loader.

As far as dragging stuff from the loader goes, it's just as safe as, if not safer than, using the drawbar as long as the bucket is kept close to the ground, the chain is run under the bucket, and the loader is not left in float position.

MarkC

 

[gordon]

Thanks Mark, just think how much more trouble or work you would have to go through just to unload and load your trailer for a job if you didn't use the loader and chains. That is unless your trailer was long enough to stack them all on and drive them off one at a time with the freedom hitch.

But still I think about all the loader and chain work I do moving logs and loading-unloading of attachments. Quite abit
Gordon

 

[glennmac]

A few points.

1. The important thing we are doing on this thread is identifying and clarifying the risk involved.

2. Another important thing is to identify the precautions to take in order to reduce the risk to the level where it becomes a reasonable risk to take under the circumstances.

3. Professional tractorpeople--like policemen, firemen, soldiers, race car drivers and others in hazardous professions--take risks as an intrinsic part of their jobs. They get paid to engage in necessarily risky activities and they voluntarily undertake them.

4. The weekend digger, particularly the novice, is in a different situation. His reasonable risk level may be much different, and he should not be misled into thinking he can safely engage in the same activities as the pros.

5. Everything a lawyer does, including all the things that some people may resent, are done only because a non-lawyer (the client) has hired and payed him to do exactly that.

Glenn

 

[Harv]

Glenn -

Your one act play was some of the best reading I've seen on this board. You sure you're not a litigator? /w3tcompact/icons/laugh.gif

It seems like the real meat of the post was between the lines, though. Makes me feel kind of silly for still wanting to use chain hooks on my bucket. /w3tcompact/icons/crazy.gif

I guess it's kind of like the presidential debates -- many of us have already made up our minds about which way we're going to go, and all this chatter doesn't seem to be persuading anybody one way or the other. I read the 37 precautions in my loader manual and it is odd that I go along with only 35 of them. Besides the chain lift thing, I've already covered a warning label on the fender by bolting a toolbox on top of it. On a positive note, that label warned about tipping the tractor and I am going to mount a tiltmeter on the side of that toolbox.

It is interesting that many of us feel somehow qualified to pass judgement on the safety rules, and that we are supposedly brighter than all those who have sustained injuries doing the very thing we have been warned not to do. Claiming "human nature" sounds like a bit of a cop-out, yet deep down that's what I'm doing myself.

I think we all break rules on a daily basis, driven by some misguided sense of superiority, but I have to admit this is the first time I've discussed it openly with as large a group as this board. If nothing else, it's got me thinking (and I hate when that happens.) /w3tcompact/icons/wink.gif

 

[Ian]

I've changed my tractor operating habits in several ways over the past few years. Why?
Tractorbynet itself mainly, and various links I've explored at the invitation of Tractorbynet contributors.
Specifically:

I no longer take kids for rides - no exceptions, no excuses.
(too many sad, preventable stories to count)

I shut down the tractor when anyone approaches. (people can do unpredictable things, slip into danger, etc.)

I allways look behind me whenever reversing - especially when I think I'm alone. (kids and animals move)

I am going to get a folding ROPS (I'd removed mine due to interference with trees)

Point being that I did become a safer owner/operator due to this forum making me think about issues I hadn't given enough thought to.

Now, the loader issue.

I thought I was doing enough by bracing the loader with a 4x4 whenever pressure washing the mower. I also figured that the warning labels were lawyer inspired, cover your corporate butt (like the McDonalds coffee warnings - "contents are hot"...save us from our own stupidity!) sort of warnings.

I'm going to have to give this some more thought. Problem is, those loaders are such handy lifting devices!

 

[TomG]

Two things, a tractor tale and a legal note: One, its not just inexperienced weekend farmers who do dumb things. Yesterday I saw a tractor at a large commercial construction site parked and nobody was around. The loader bucket was 7' off the ground. So I say to the building supply yard guy, where I was loading materials; 'Gee, the safety guys would sure get on that.' He says: 'Yep, we've really strict rules here for the fork lift.' He points at the lift with the forks on the ground. Sure hope the construction crew didn't leave the bucket up all night. It would be really great for some kids playing around to drop the bucket on one of their heads. I guess even pros have lapses.

About litigation: I believe the corporations really are protecting themselves against really obscure events (maybe not meteor showers). As I understand, liability awards are made on the basis of an ability to pay. Many lawyers nowadays 'shotgun,' which means naming absolutely everybody with any possible connection to an injury. The idea is to name one party that has some money. Governments and corporations end up paying for injuries even when their connections with the injuries are ridiculously obscure.

For example, A couple of years ago in Ontario, there was a party in a private apartment building. Lots of beer drinking. One guy poured beer over another's head and both tumbled down an outside stair well. They broke through the stair well and fell 30' to the ground. One person ended up with a lot of parts paralyzed, and will require lifetime care.

The damage award was $7 million, and the city paid the entire award. The ruling was that the city contributed 1% of the negligence in the way building permits and inspections were carried out, but the city was the only party that had significant money.

Sort of a Robin Hood idea of law I guess. Right or wrong? Depends on values I guess. Still, the judge was faced with little more than a kid who I don't think could even manage a wheel chair, all for a moment of horseplay. The kid now can live only with some really expensive professional care that is not provided by insurance or social services. So what can the judge do but follow common law precedent and go for a party with money. Right or wrong that's what happens, and that's a major reason for the seemingly ridiculous level of warning labels.

 

[WVBill]

This has been a great thread!

Tom's mention of "lapses" at commercial construction sites. I see it all the time after they've shut down for the day, they lift the air compressor (or whatever else) up about 20 feet in the air and let it dangle there over night. I guess so it won't get stolen. I suppose the weight is a lot less than the breaking strength of the crane's cable - just "gives me the willies" is all...


I was thinking about welding hooks to my loader bucket but now I'm not sure.

Talking about chain being safer than rope or strap... Hmm... anybody know how to tell when a chain is about to break so you can back off?

Bill

 

[W5FL]

Use 3/8 chain and your loader should not be able to come close to breaking it. That is why working load is normally set to 10-20% of ultimate (breaking)load.

 

[Bird]

I agree, Wen. I used 3/8" chain most of the time and don't even think about breaking it; don't believe a B2710 could. At least not unless I got a good running start./w3tcompact/icons/laugh.gif

Bird