Operator not in seat

[powerpace]

Anybody see Darwinism at work here? Meaningful interlocks are those conceived by actual equipment users. A significant percentage of those annoyingly thrust upon us were devised more in defense of the manufacturer/employer than of we actual users.

//greg//

It's not the person that dies that is responsible for his own death. In todays world it's the manufacturer.

The Mayor of Moore, Oklahoma wants all new construction (including residential) in the city to have storm shelters. So if someone dies in a storm and they have access to a storm shelter but don't use it. Can they sue the city?

 

[Reg]

Anybody see Darwinism at work here? Meaningful interlocks are those conceived by actual equipment users. A significant percentage of those annoyingly thrust upon us were devised more in defense of the manufacturer/employer than of we actual users.

//greg//

Presumably you have EVIDENCE for that statement ?
e.g. You were part of a CAB (customer advisory board) that recommended what were thought by your team to be some safety enhancements, but they were rejected in favor of some mysterious body's nonsensical recommendations - true or false ?

 

[Wagtail]

"Anybody see Darwinism at work here?"

Yes I do... And it's the encouragement to permanently bypass a safety interlock that's essentially designed to save a life. I won't be a part of that and will alwas argue against it.

I can't stop anyone from going ahead and doing this 'modification', but I won't actively promote something that would put another person in the running for a Darwin Award. Once a safety interlock is permanently gone, complacency sets in. It may never come into play for you in years to come. But sometime in the future, the one time that it is needed, it's not there.

Would you advise permanently removing the PTO guard because it's annoying when performing routine grease maintenance?

I've said it before in this thread... all that a manufacturer really has to do to cover their legal arse is to put a bright yellow warning label on the tractor/implement. A safety interlock costs money, both to design and to install.

I watched a programme on the JD 'Megafactory' building combines. In it they showed a department that is constantly designing & implementing improvements to the machine & to the building process. If a modification to the operator-not-in-seat interlock was warranted, it would be a minor process for JD to do it AND they would retro-fit the existing tractors at the next servicing.

 

[Notforhire]

" I watched a programme on the JD 'Megafactory' building combines. In it they showed a department that is constantly designing & implementing improvements to the machine & to the building process. If a modification to the operator-not-in-seat interlock was warranted, it would be a minor process for JD to do it AND they would retro-fit the existing tractors at the next servicing.

I'm in favor of safety, interlocks. They tend to protect people from brain farts ect.
What I find interesting, is in the case of John Deere and the seat interlock, there seems to be several designs.
The one that started this thread doesn't allow PTO operation w/o someone in the seat.
Another JD style allows you to flip up the seat and run the PTO. That is a built in interlock bypass of sorts.
My 5E series has a alarm that sounds when you raise out of the seat but does not shut down the engine or disconnect the PTO.
You would think that in the same year of mfg. the thinking would be consistent, model to model.
That's why I think they may have different safety regs. for different weight class machines.

Bill

 

[Wagtail]

I'm in favor of safety, interlocks. They tend to protect people from brain farts ect.
What I find interesting, is in the case of John Deere and the seat interlock, there seems to be several designs.
The one that started this thread doesn't allow PTO operation w/o someone in the seat.
Another JD style allows you to flip up the seat and run the PTO. That is a built in interlock bypass of sorts.
My 5E series has a alarm that sounds when you raise out of the seat but does not shut down the engine or disconnect the PTO.
You would think that in the same year of mfg. the thinking would be consistent, model to model.
That's why I think they may have different safety regs. for different weight class machines.

Bill

Agree with you wholeheartedly Bill. I don't know if JD monitors this fine website but there must be a way to let them know that there's a serious discussion going on here and that they should resonably standardise this interlock. I like the "flip up the seat and run the PTO" style.

Standardisation = cost savings to them & us.

 

[Notforhire]

Agree with you wholeheartedly Bill. I don't know if JD monitors this fine website but there must be a way to let them know that there's a serious discussion going on here and that they should resonably standardise this interlock. I like the "flip up the seat and run the PTO" style.

Standardisation = cost savings to them & us.

Frankly, I like the alarm system on my machine. Sometimes if I move, (not even getting out of the seat), in order to see better, the alarm may go off. This gets my attention w/o shutting down the tractor. If there is something wrong I am made aware, and can deal with it.

I had a Kubota 3240. If it was in gear, and you raised out of the seat, the engine would shut down. No matter how I set the seat adjustment, almost every time my wife stepped on the clutch the engine would shut down. Her pressure on the clutch would lift her enough to trip the seat interlock. In that case the safety system was creating a potential hazzard, by killing the power when it may be really needed. Nothing's perfect.
I have heard of many people having to bypass seat interlocks because of that problem. Once you do that, the mfg is off the hook and it's all on you. I guess that's when you need to rely on your training rather than the safety feature to save your butt.
In the case of the member putting in a bypass switch, he could put in the switch, or not be able to run his chipper. Not much of a choice.

Bill

 

[xring100]

Same with the M8540 only thing i get is a buzzer for about 10 seconds if the the PTO is on then it goes away. I had to defeat this feature on my cub zero turn my yard was bumpy enough that it would randomly sputter as i left the seat for a few milliseconds. as well as the reverse kill switch that stopped the blades anytime both levers were in reverse. I don't really feel like burning up a $300 clutch

The "safety seat" system on my 5055E doesn't kill the engine. There is a buzzer that lets you know that you didn't disengage the PTO, ect. I expect that there is something in the regs. that doesn't require an engine kill over a certain size tractor???

Kubota has a system that allows the PTO to run if the operators seat is flipped up. There must be a timer relay that gives you several seconds to get up, and flip the seat before the engine is killed.
You can get a "better view" with the Kubota system but you better be quick about it.

Bill

 

[Notforhire]

Same with the M8540 only thing i get is a buzzer for about 10 seconds if the the PTO is on then it goes away. I had to defeat this feature on my cub zero turn my yard was bumpy enough that it would randomly sputter as i left the seat for a few milliseconds. as well as the reverse kill switch that stopped the blades anytime both levers were in reverse. I don't really feel like burning up a $300 clutch

That reverse kill switch on the Z is a new one on me. I often cut in reverse for short distances trimming around electric fence with my Ferris Z.

Bill

 

[Reg]

I'm in favor of safety, interlocks. They tend to protect people from brain farts ect.
What I find interesting, is in the case of John Deere and the seat interlock, there seems to be several designs.
The one that started this thread doesn't allow PTO operation w/o someone in the seat.
Another JD style allows you to flip up the seat and run the PTO. That is a built in interlock bypass of sorts.
My 5E series has a alarm that sounds when you raise out of the seat but does not shut down the engine or disconnect the PTO.
You would think that in the same year of mfg. the thinking would be consistent, model to model.
That's why I think they may have different safety regs. for different weight class machines.

Bill

I think my earlier explanation is more likely, i.e. they merely re-badge the imported stuff with little/no attention to how each contract manufacturer has implemented US requirements.
"re-badge" may be the wrong term, it implies that they actually DO that, but they probably have the OEM make the emblems and apply them.
The US requirements may be general or even vague, I haven't checked. They probably describe WHAT is to be implemented without detailing HOW it is to be implemented.

It may be analogous to all new US spec cars being required to have seat belts and warnings if they are not fastened, but there is variety in both the seat belt fastening and the warning flashers and buzzers between Ford, Chryco, GM, Toyota, Subaru, ,,,, etc.

Yes, there are almost certainly different regulations for "Homeowner" scale equipment vs "Agricultural" and "Industrial" (construction equipment such as skid steers, back hoes) is likely even more different.

There was a thread a few years ago about how "Convenient" a particular hydro drive tractor was for an owner because he could set it to creep along while he walked in front of it to collect small rocks and chuck them in the bucket.
This IS the kind of convenience that the seat switch helps people to at least think twice about - I HOPE !

re Darwinism; Consider that many/most tractor owners have already done their breeding (-:
There is some tragic chance that a teen off-spring will be prevented from continuing the line.

 

[Wagtail]

And right on cue we have a new thread in the Safety Forum titled "Man brings suit against equipment maker for operator presence switch malfunction".

Why? The bloke was mowing and was attacked by yellowjackets, jumped off the rig in a panic to get away from them but the mower, in gear, didn't shut down & ran him down.

But, of course, that could never happen to you so go right ahead and cheat that annoying safety interlock.