|
chitoryu12 posted:This is why when you're in between listed numbers on the load chart, you always use the next lowest numbers. If the boom lengths are listed in 10 foot increments and you're at 75 feet, you use the capacities listed for 70 feet instead of 80 feet. You always want to be operating within a good margin of safety, without maxing everything out. Don’t you mean the numbers for 80 feet?
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 23:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 15:37 |
|
|
Syncopated posted:Hello I hope this hasn't been posted yet I can't even believe that the picture of her restored scalp is real!
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 00:03
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:Most load charts aren't based on the maximum possible capacity at that boom length and angle. They're usually based on something like 85% of the maximum. The intention is that operators will never go close to the limits and the slings are designed to be stronger than the minimum necessary anyway just to provide a safety buffer in case it does get overloaded. Well all the cranes we use are unionized, as are we, and they all know everything about what they're lifting that day. They have a plan, inspectors, the whole thing. It's also really expensive but they don't gently caress up. Maybe you live in a state that has right-to-work or something that has so many lovely operators?
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 00:06
|
|
|
Like seriously, this is a person who had the top of their head pop off like a lego doll:
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 00:06
|
|
|
Eh, the scalp is a superflouous body part
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 01:06
|
|
|
mng posted:Eh, the scalp is a superflouous body part try and say that when yours is off and you're bleeding into your eyes
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 01:23
|
|
|
Eh, the scalp is a superfluous body part. Also, ow.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 01:29
|
|
|
mng posted:Eh, the scalp is a superflouous body part Didn't her eyelids get snatched off too? I think you need eyelids. Pretty sure anyway.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 01:43
|
|
|
Karma Monkey posted:Didn't her eyelids get snatched off too? I think you need eyelids. Pretty sure anyway. Only if you want the monsters to get you.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 01:51
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:Only if you want the monsters to get you. Pff, like monsters are any big deal after reading this thread. I couldn't even watch that log turning video. Got about 10 seconds in and was like nope nope nope don't even care if nothing happens, not gonna watch this.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 02:02
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:Don’t you mean the numbers for 80 feet? Yeah sorry, transposed the digits. Hot Karl Marx posted:Well all the cranes we use are unionized, as are we, and they all know everything about what they're lifting that day. They have a plan, inspectors, the whole thing. It's also really expensive but they don't gently caress up. Maybe you live in a state that has right-to-work or something that has so many lovely operators? I work for one of the largest crane training and certification institutes in the nation, one that also does international work. The operators we receive come from every state and many countries around the world. The guys we train and certify (nationally accredited certification, as well) work in every business type that uses any kind of lifting equipment. We only offer accredited certification for mobile cranes and riggers/signalpersons, but we offer training for forklifts, overhead cranes, tower cranes, and aerial lifts for personnel. What that means is we see every type of operator. Our programs aren't meant for totally inexperienced operators, so we see relatively few students (still dozens per month) who have absolutely zero experience with the equipment. But we handle construction workers, warehouse personnel, steel mill guys, repair shops that have small overhead or carry deck cranes, etc. Forklifts in particular often have inexperienced and informally trained operators, with overhead cranes probably a close second due to their supposed "idiot-proof" ease of use. Even in the more complex realm of mobile cranes, there are people who got their jobs 20 or even 30 years ago when standards were lower to get in the door; one of the guys at our meeting this week had first been in the driver's seat of a crane at 14. OSHA has been tightening up regulations for certification and training over the decades, but there's still a lot of guys who got into the business with little to no proper qualification and have managed to stick around without killing anyone. They learned through trial and error and continue to operate by the seat of their pants. And yeah, sometimes we get guys aiming for training or even full blown certification (with all the high stakes exams that entails, including a practical operating exam) who have little or no experience just because of changes in the work environment. A particular, very large dredging company is currently one of our biggest customers because the US Army Corps of Engineers changed their certification and training requirements for public works projects so that everyone who could potentially operate a crane during the job has to be certified. They've been scrambling to throw everyone into our classes, especially dredge captains who have never touched a boom lever in their life. We once got a captain who had legit autism in our class, and he barely managed to pass his practical even though he aced the written exams. chitoryu12 fucked around with this message at 02:36 on May 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 02:33
|
|
|
Several other articles I found said the surgery did reattach her scalp; the grafts were just needed to help with vascularization. But here's another incident! Also from 2015. And goddamn, another: http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2015/04/a_workplace_machining_scalping.html BRB shaving my head.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 02:40
|
|
|
Taken by a coworker in a local grocery store. 
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 03:40
|
|
|
Hot Karl Marx posted:No its not a dumb idea and the fact that you think the people lifting the load and standinh near it shouldn't know the capacity of everything they have is one of the stupidest things I've seen. Cause when poo poo does go wrong, it's the operator who was operating and it's his rear end and he better know his limits for straps and the crane. That's why you need thousands of hours to be a large crane operator. Look, I get you're a yard jockey and might not understand this, so let me explain. When I design and build a crane, I tell you the maximum load capacity is a certain number, let's say 10,000 lbs. Now, I don't know what the actual industry standard FOS is, so I'm going to use chitoryu's 85% number. This means that with load limit of 10,000 lbs., the failure point is about 11,750 lbs. Failure point doesn't mean "oh, maybe if I load 11,800 I'll be okay." Failure point means if you load 11,751 lbs, poo poo will go south in a loving hurry. Factor of Safety is the ratio between the absolute failure point and where the manufacturer says "DO NOT EXCEED". So, limiting to 85% capacity is a FOS of roughly 1.175. Which is loving narrow in my opinion. In order to certify an aircraft you have to exceed a FOS of 1.5. Most buildings have a FOS between 3 and 9. So what's my beef? If the manufacturer prints in it's documents "Load Capacity 10,000 lbs. Failure Point 11,750 lbs." some moron(s) are going to get as close to that 11,750 number as they can, and pray the devil doesn't come knocking. If a manufacturer prints "Load Capacity 10,000 lbs. DO NOT EXCEED." with no notice about what the failure point is, the hope would be that the crane operators would be smart enough to heed that warning rather than trying to blindly find where that failure point is because they "think" it's somewhere around 12,000 lbs. Also, thousands of hours is great and all, but someone who has been routinely exceeding load limits without incident is only going to get complacent. I don't care if you're open shop or union shop, this poo poo happens to the best most experienced people as well. They think to themselves, "well, I've done it before and nothing happened, I can do it again, just this once." And it's that attitude that leads to half the incidents in this thread.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 03:56
|
|
|
Retarded Pimp posted:Taken by a coworker in a local grocery store. i mean thats just as safe as being on the floor really
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 04:02
|
|
|
Why does he need to be 10" higher, just raise your hands goddamnit
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 04:40
|
|
|
YF19pilot posted:Factor of Safety is the ratio between the absolute failure point and where the manufacturer says "DO NOT EXCEED". So, limiting to 85% capacity is a FOS of roughly 1.175. Which is loving narrow in my opinion. In order to certify an aircraft you have to exceed a FOS of 1.5. Most buildings have a FOS between 3 and 9. Taking this even further, the reason aircraft get away with such a low factor of safety is they get maintained and inspected like crazy. Even so, over time the "real" load limit is hardly guaranteed. The factor of safety is a buffer for unexpected/incalculable poo poo like degredation. You should NEVER shoot for the "actual" limit, as it will very likely fail before then.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 04:50
|
|
|
Airborne Viking posted:Taking this even further, the reason aircraft get away with such a low factor of safety is they get maintained and inspected like crazy. Even so, over time the "real" load limit is hardly guaranteed. The factor of safety is a buffer for unexpected/incalculable poo poo like degredation. You should NEVER shoot for the "actual" limit, as it will very likely fail before then. Also the added weight would lead to much larger runways for takeoff as well as inefficiency while in flight. Buildings and Elevators you can have 10x Safety factors because they don't need to do their job nearly as efficiently.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 04:55
|
|
|
An oldie, but this is what happens when you allow unchecked child labor and said child labor is allowed to work around threshing machines with minimal supervision: http://i.imgur.com/P5QB8.jpgThis happened in India about five years ago.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 05:04
|
|
|
this thread took a turn towards the nightmarish. holy gently caress
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 05:16
|
|
|
So let me get this straight, when your face and scalp are removed there's time to set it up against a graph backdrop and take a photo of it before it needs to sewn the gently caress back on? Amazing.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 05:27
|
|
|
HairyManling posted:So let me get this straight, when your face and scalp are removed there's time to set it up against a graph backdrop and take a photo of it before it needs to sewn the gently caress back on? Amazing.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 05:28
|
|
|
Meh. What's the face even used for? Emoting? That's all loving muscle.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 05:40
|
|
|
Retarded Pimp posted:Taken by a coworker in a local grocery store. That should be a fireable offense but the fact that employee felt like it was perfectly OK tells me that no one gives a gently caress about safety in that store.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 05:43
|
|
|
FIRST TIME posted:That should be a fireable offense but the fact that employee felt like it was perfectly OK tells me that no one gives a gently caress about safety in that store.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 05:45
|
|
|
Retarded Pimp posted:Taken by a coworker in a local grocery store. Fallows posted:i mean thats just as safe as being on the floor really I wasn't going to say anything, but yeah I agree actually.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 05:48
|
|
|
Retarded Pimp posted:Taken by a coworker in a local grocery store. Hey now, we don't know the belt wasn't locked out/tagged out and the individual is properly harnessed, just in a way the photo doesn't show! (We know)
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 05:58
|
|
|
Doctor Bombadil posted:Because of this thread, I now have videos like this coming up as suggested: Holy poo poo gently caress me the torque on this 
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 06:01
|
|
|
Crazy Ted posted:"Proper safety procedures" and "Retail" are two words that are rarely found in close proximity to each other. Retailers might not actually care about safety but they do care about money. So what the smart ones do is make a big deal about "working safe" even though often the only way to get the work done in time is to take unsafe shortcuts. Then when someone gets hurt, they can say they violated policy, fire them, and avoid paying money for it. It's also an easy way to fire people they're trying to get rid of anyway. Also, how the gently caress is that just as safe as being on the floor? The distance to the ground is farther and the step ladder is sitting on a conveyor belt. 
Edmund Sparkler fucked around with this message at 06:03 on May 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 06:01
|
|
|
Coworkers at my old job full of spinning death wheels used to get mad at me for yelling at them to clip their long hair to their scalp. No you are not Nicolas Cage.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 10:16
|
|
|
YF19pilot posted:Look, I get you're a yard jockey and might not understand this, so let me explain. lol shut the gently caress up. When poo poo goes wrong, who dies? The operator, so yeah, i think its in our best interests to know what is going on. If you were smart you would know the people pushing operators to cut costs and use short cuts are the management cause we get paid by the hour and don't care how long things take. Stop acting like your 10x as smart as the the people operatering the equipment cause you guys don't have to to maintenance or repairs either and that poo poo is designed by a retard most of the time. get off your high loving horse you rear end edit: this screams of "i know thing that no one else does so im more important" rather than just trying to help everyone
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 10:33
|
|
|
yowza, this is the most heated the thread has been since airplane parachutes!
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 10:52
|
|
|
Smirk posted:...I wonder why they couldn't retrieve it from the drill and reattach it, rather than taking skin from elsewhere. Likely it would be covered in grease and machine oil. Probably not salvageable. When I was in college, we used to put a chuck key in the chuck of a drill press to make a vibrating table for getting rid of air bubbles in silicon molds. That drill press wasn't good for anything else. It was a garbage machine that barely worked. One day, a fellow student decided to lean over and look at his mold and the machine caught his hair. Thank Christ that his hair came off. He did get pulled into the machine and bang his head, but he didn't lose his scalp. All of us were so relieved that we didn't have what that video showed happen to him. We then chewed his rear end off for not paying attention.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 11:10
|
|
|
Collateral damage? I am pretty sure that's a thing in accidents. He is right about how things are engineered. The engineer factors in as much as they can for that shithead factor. Publishing the absolute design weight is super dumb as it removes that shithead factor consideration. I load a plane, there is maximum all up weight and centre of gravity to consider. I know there are additional margin factored in, but eating into this safety margin is risky so I don't. Maybe someone hosed up the maintenance or cheapened out on a part. Your safety and of others can no longer be guaranteed. You are that shithead that they are trying to take into account. It is meant to protect you and those around you. This is the OSHA thread, you should be interested in reducing accidents after seeing how bad things get not edging to be the next statistic. I am not sure what the issue is with airplane parachutes. It has some trade offs like additional weight, certification, COG etc. It's always better to do a proper emergency landing, but if it saves someone from trying to land on a highway vastly increasing the risks to everyone else, that's a win for everyone.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 11:11
|
|
|
Lots of office cubicle construction workers itt. It's clear you didn't read a single thing I wrote so I'm just gonna stop posting in this thread. Ciao.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 11:30
|
|
|
I guess someone doesn't want to live or have limbs.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 11:38
|
|
|
Hot Karl Marx posted:i think its in our best interests to know what is going on But the whole point of the margin of error/safety is that it's impossible for operators to always know everything that's going on. You don't know every single detail of the maintenance that was actually done (even if there's a perfect paper trail), you don't know if there were manufacturing defects in any of the parts, you don't objectively know exactly how strained parts of the equipment have been, you might not even know if your scales are accurate in the first place if they haven't been calibrated recently. The whole point of a maximum is "if you go past this, it's not safe", not "if you go past this everything will break immediately" Think of it more like a LD50 for medication. Are you guaranteed to die if you go past that amount? No, but you sure as hell don't want to risk it
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 11:52
|
|
|
oohhboy posted:I guess someone doesn't want to live or have limbs. Limbs, just like maximum load capacities, are apparently underrated
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 12:08
|
|
|
Wall Balls posted:yowza, this is the most heated the thread has been since airplane parachutes! Well, it is Hot Karl Marx.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 12:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 15:37 |
|
|
Hot Karl Marx posted:lol shut the gently caress up. When poo poo goes wrong, who dies? The operator, so yeah, i think its in our best interests to know what is going on. If you were smart you would know the people pushing operators to cut costs and use short cuts are the management cause we get paid by the hour and don't care how long things take. Stop acting like your 10x as smart as the the people operatering the equipment cause you guys don't have to to maintenance or repairs either and that poo poo is designed by a retard most of the time. God I hope you never work on one of my sites; we've spent millions on safety programs to get rid of thinking like this.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 12:14
|
|