FMCSA cargo securement laws.

[Jeff D.]

Does anyone have a good understanding of the FMCSA's cargo securement rules?

http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/rules-regulations/truck/vehicle/cs-policy.htm

I've read them over and over and can't make heads or tails of how many/what size chains I need to secure my backhoe & dozer down.

It appears to me for equipment 10klbs+ you need 4 tiedowns:
:for forward motion(braking) they must be able to withstand 0.8g
:for rearward and side 0.5g

I've 3/8" & 1/2" chain, w/no markings(so classed as grade 30?),so 2650 & 4500lbs WLL(working load limit)respectively.Welded steel chain, which is not marked or labeled to enable identification of its grade or working load limit shall be considered to have a working load limit equal to that for grade 30 proof coil chain.
But when it comes to the aggergate WLL, what does it mean?
(d) Minimum strength of cargo securement devices and systems. The aggregate working load limit of any securement system used to secure an article or group of articles against movement must be at least one-half times the weight of the article or group of articles. The aggregate working load limit is the sum of:
One-half of the working load limit of each associated connector or attachment mechanism used to secure a part of the article of cargo to the vehicle; and
One-half of the working load limit for each end section of a tiedown that is attached to an anchor point.
For a 9400lbs machine will I need two seperate 3/8" chains from trailer, through equip., back too trailer on the front, and one 1/2", one 3/8" chain from trailer through equip. back too trailer on the rear to satisfy the letter of the law?

That seems like alot of overkill, but maybe I'm not reading it correctly. Why must you half the WLL of the chain when figuring the aggregate total WLL?

[Ford LT-9000]

A rubber tired backhoe is the worst thing to try strap down because the damn thing bounces up and down because of the tires.

What we usually do is cross chain the back use two chains the front one chain is good enough.

Most guys use grade 70 chain 3/8s gets used for strapping down the lighter machines and 1/2 is for the heavier stuff.

Like a long time lowbedder told me chains just make the trailer roll over when the machine decides to slide off.

If in doubt put more chains on it :yup

Some guys like ratchet style cinches some like face rearrangers (lever cinches). I use lever cinches as they are pretty common here. Also people call cinches Boomers in different parts of the country.

[Jeff D.]

What we usually do is cross chain the back use two chains the front one chain is good enough.

Most guys use grade 70 chain 3/8s gets used for strapping down the lighter machines and 1/2 is for the heavier stuff.I would think that's adaquate too, but by reading the laws it hard too tell if it would be legal that way.:beatsme

[Ford LT-9000]

The DOT makes so many stupid rules and half of them that make the damn rules have no experience in the field what so ever.

[Mike J]

The way I read it is that you need at least 4 tie downs if it is 10k or over. In the general part is says there has to be 2 tie downs for the first 10 feet of total length and then 1 additional tie down for every 10 feet after that. It also says that any hydralic accesory such has a boom needs to be lowered and secured to the vehicle.

The aggregate is just the total.

"Issue 4: & sect;393.106(d) - Determining the aggregate working load limits for tiedowns.
Agency Policy: The aggregate working load limit of tiedowns used to secure an article or group of articles against movement must be at least one-half times the weight of the article or group of articles. The aggregate working load limit is the sum of:

1. One-half the working load limit of each tiedown that goes from an anchor point on the vehicle to an attachment point on an article of cargo; and
2. The working load limit for each tiedown that goes from an anchor point on the vehicle, through, over or around the cargo and then attaches to another anchor point on the vehicle.
Discussion: Based on numerous telephone inquiries from FMCSA field offices, State enforcement agencies, and industry groups, FMCSA has determined that the intent of & sect;393.106(d) is not easily understood. During the notice-and-comment rulemaking process, the agency proposed certain requirements that would necessitate the distinction between what were referred to as " direct tiedowns " and " indirect tiedowns. " After reviewing the docket comments, the agency attempted to adopt a more straightforward approach for calculating the aggregate working load limit, while preserving the potential safety benefits of making the distinction between the two types of tiedowns. While the language in the Final Rule is easier to understand than the proposed rule, it is still not sufficiently clear. This policy provides an effective approach for adding working load limits for individual tiedowns in a cargo securement system, and yields the same answer as the current regulatory language. "

The way I understand it is that if you have a chain hooked to both sides of the trailer and the chain runs through the equipment (like through that hole in the ford backhoe where you get access to the hoses and valvebody for the hoe) then you take the wll of the chain, but if you had a hook on each side of the machine and you hooked the chain to the trailer and to the hook on the machine then you only take half of the wll for each chain but you would have 2 chains and it would come out the same. This doesn't make sense to me in all cases because if the chain is stretched from front to back to prevent forward motion and it has a certian work load why should the wll be cut in half?:confused:



So... Wll needs to be at least 7520lbs to prevent forward motion and 4700 to the rear and to the sides. There also should be a chain over the loader bucket or loader frame in the front and also over the bucket for the backhoe. I didn't notice any thing saying that you need extra chains for the hydraulic accesories so I think you can include those as part of the 4 minimum. Having (1) 3/8 and (1) 1/2 inch chain that was 30 proof would actually be 370lbs short of being capable of .8 g's if they both go through or over the machine but i don't think that anyone would catch on.

Also some people seem to go way overkill tightening up chains. The goal is not to try to pull the equipment apart or rip the chains before you even get the added loading of the machine trying to move. As long as the slack is taken up it is good.

[Grader4me]

Attended a meeting yesterday concerning cargo securement. The above post explains it well. First, if you try to decipher all of this you will most likely go nuts. I think that the people who put it together doesn't quite understand it.

Just keep this in mind....use chain, hooks and binders that have the grade marked on them. If you are hauling a backhoe for example use 4 individual chains, not one in the back and one in the front each going through a loop hole on the machine to the other side.

The back boom on a backhoe has to be lowered and chained. Front bucket has to be chained (new to me). Any accessary, for example a spare bucket ...has to be chained.

Try to have the chains at a 45% angle if possible to prevent forward and rear movement.

Another thing that I found out....you would think that when using 4 individual chains you would use 4 binders. Lets take a roller for example...you can put the 2 chains in the front...back the roller up to tighten the chains, put the 2 chains on the rear with binders.

I found it kind of funny that you have to use all of this grade chain/binders/etc so that your machine is super secure(and there is nothing wrong with that) but there is no specs on the anchor point. So you could have an anchor point on your trailer that is questionable as far as strength goes and still be legal.

Jeff...as far as different size chains go, I would use the same size as long as it has a grade marked on it. Use the above procedure and you will be fine.

[Jeff D.]

So, for a 10k backhoe you'de recommend 4 short chains(1/2" grade 43 or 70, one each corner of machine) two binders. Also an additional chain/binder for the bucket, and additonal chain/binder for the hoe.(those could be 3/8")

A 10k dozer could be secured the same, ixnay the chain/binder for the hoe.

Totals:
(4) binders
(4) 1/2" 6ft grade 43/70 chain
(2) 3/8" 15ft grade 43/70 chain

And that could cover securing either, and satisfy the law?

[Ford LT-9000]

It all depends on what you are using for a trailer to haul this stuff. I would go with 8' chains you want them to beable to span the deck of the trailer you may even want them longer so you can cross chain a excavator.

For lowbedders or even excavation contractors all they use is grade 70 it isn't cheap to buy but worth it.

[Grader4me]

So, for a 10k backhoe you'de recommend 4 short chains(1/2" grade 43 or 70, one each corner of machine) two binders. Also an additional chain/binder for the bucket, and additonal chain/binder for the hoe.(those could be 3/8")

A 10k dozer could be secured the same, ixnay the chain/binder for the hoe.

Totals:
(4) binders
(4) 1/2" 6ft grade 43/70 chain
(2) 3/8" 15ft grade 43/70 chain

And that could cover securing either, and satisfy the law?

Jeff, I would say that what you have there should cover it. I think that the cargo securement laws are very similar between the two countrys. The only thing that I would double check on is the use of 2 binders as my above post stated. If I was you I would just want to make sure that the same rule applies in the U.S. but I am quite sure that it would.
As far as the length of your chain goes....you know what you are hauling and the length you need. As well...make sure that you either wrap the excess chain or use a strap/wire to secure your binder handle after you tie down your equipment, you probally knew that anyway but they can ding you for it.

[atgreene]

I've been told similar by DOT here. Under 10k 2 grade 70 5/16" Chains. Booms, loader arms etc... require and additional 5/16" grade 70.

Over 10k 4- 3/8" grade 70. Additional 3/8" grade 70 over any appendages.

For your dozer, you may as well bite the bullet and get 5 3/8" grade 70 chains. Hook to the tracks and cross and loop one chain over the blade. As long as the chains and binders are stamped or tagged they'll have no beef with you.

It may seem odd, but just hooking a grab hook to the edge of a track and crossing to the opposite side is legal around here.

I was told this am that a local lawn care business got nailed $9000 for their pick up and trailers. Mowers and gas cans etc.. not properly secured. Weed wackers etc..., trucks not registered commercial with proper weight etc... etc...

My 8k excavator gets 2- 3/8" chains, 2 5/16" chains, just to be safe.

[Jeff D.]

After investigating the prices of chain, I'll be buying grade 70 3/8" instead of 1/2", for sure.

1/2" cost about twice what 3/8" does. Also my current binders fit 3/8", so I'll won't have to pick so many of them up.

I'm going to buy some 20ft's and cut them down in halves, or thirds, and put some new hooks on the ends. The chains can be fairly short for what I need. I've got unmarked 3/8" 20fts coming out of my ears, so I always have them for a back-up.
As well...make sure that you either wrap the excess chain or use a strap/wire to secure your binder handle after you tie down your equipment, you probally knew that anyway but they can ding you for it.Yup-yup:yup .I wrap bailing wire through the handle and chain to prevent it from coming loose.

Thanks again all!

[T Red]

393.112 Must a tiedown be adjustable?
Each tiedown, or its associated connectors, or its attachment mechanisms must be designed, constructed, and maintained so the driver of an in- transit commercial motor vehicle can tighten them. However, this requirement does not apply to the use of steel strapping.

been studying the regs to be compliant.

Tim

[Jeff D.]

Yeah, that's a good question. It would appear, by that, that every chain would need a binder.

But if their main concern is being able to tighten it while in transit,I'd think simply moving the equipment slightly to tighten a chain without a binder, and adjusting at the other end would meet their requirements.

Who know though?:beatsme It would probobly depend on what kind of mood they're in, at the time.

[tuney443]

Yes,there must be a binder with the same or greater ratings than the chain.Here in NY,5 chains for a dozer,6 for a TLB,5 for an exc. without a blade,6 with.And yes, they must be tight--A trooper with keen eyes once saw my loader bucket jump up and he was right-it was loose--check and double check.

[Grader4me]

Yeah, that's a good question. It would appear, by that, that every chain would need a binder.

But if their main concern is being able to tighten it while in transit,I'd think simply moving the equipment slightly to tighten a chain without a binder, and adjusting at the other end would meet their requirements.

Who know though?:beatsme It would probobly depend on what kind of mood they're in, at the time.

I would check this out a little more if I was you. I know what we were told but regulations can be a little different when you cross the border. Probally just a phone call would do it. It would just make sense that tie downs for cargo would have to be adjustable as there are many types of loads, not just equipment.

[T Red]

The way I read it you must use a binder on each tiedown.

I figure it doesn't take that much more time to add a couple of binders then you know you'll be in compliance.

If you do everything perfectlly and the dot officer is in a bad mood he'll still probably find something. I had a driver get pulled and checked out. The officer wrote him up for tires that were too wore. I measured every tire on the truck and couldn't find one in violation.

A couple of years ago our county cattlemens meeting invited a couple of dot officers. Three came to the meeting. Three of the questions that came up the officers could not even agree on an answer. Even argued between themselves a little. They don't even know the rules enough to enforce them.

Tim

[tylermckee]

We always use two long chaines and 5 binders to move our excavators. One binder on each corner attached to the tracks, and the chain on the front ran over the bucket/stick with a binder on it. Don't know how legal it is but we usually only move our machines around in town, max about a 10 mile trip.

[Grader4me]

The way I read it you must use a binder on each tiedown.

I figure it doesn't take that much more time to add a couple of binders then you know you'll be in compliance.

I agree...for all the extra that it would cost

If you do everything perfectlly and the dot officer is in a bad mood he'll still probably find something. I had a driver get pulled and checked out. The officer wrote him up for tires that were too wore. I measured every tire on the truck and couldn't find one in violation.

This is one of the reasons I would go with all the binders no matter what I was told. Sometimes it seems to be the guys that really try to be in compliance that gets the shi**y end of the stick.


A couple of years ago our county cattlemens meeting invited a couple of dot officers. Three came to the meeting. Three of the questions that came up the officers could not even agree on an answer. Even argued between themselves a little. They don't even know the rules enough to enforce them.

I could tell you storys similar to this that would curl your hair. Sometimes it seems that they make their own rules as they go. Having said that, I know that they have a job to do, and I respect the fact that they are a necessity towards keeping our highways safe, but sometimes they go a little overboard. All that you can do is try and follow the regulations the best that you can, even though they seem to change continually.

[Jeff D.]

"Issue 4: & sect;393.106(d) - Determining the aggregate working load limits for tiedowns.
Agency Policy: The aggregate working load limit of tiedowns used to secure an article or group of articles against movement must be at least one-half times the weight of the article or group of articles. The aggregate working load limit is the sum of:

1. One-half the working load limit of each tiedown that goes from an anchor point on the vehicle to an attachment point on an article of cargo; and
2. The working load limit for each tiedown that goes from an anchor point on the vehicle, through, over or around the cargo and then attaches to another anchor point on the vehicle.

The way I understand it is that if you have a chain hooked to both sides of the trailer and the chain runs through the equipment (like through that hole in the ford backhoe where you get access to the hoses and valvebody for the hoe) then you take the wll of the chain, but if you had a hook on each side of the machine and you hooked the chain to the trailer and to the hook on the machine then you only take half of the wll for each chain but you would have 2 chains and it would come out the same. This doesn't make sense to me in all cases because if the chain is stretched from front to back to prevent forward motion and it has a certian work load why should the wll be cut in half?:confused:I finally found an explanation on the FMCSA's website explaining how the Aggregate WLL is determined, since it didn't make sense to me either.(halving the WLL when using 2 individual chains instead of 1)
They worded it very poorly. But by using their formula, it comes out that using shorter individual chains gives you a greater WLL than using longer chains that run over/ through the equipment.

This is opposite of the "impression" their rules give when reading them.

Much of my confusion was cleared up after reviewing their "hands on" guide.

http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/documents/cargo/cargosecurement-16-04.pdf

[Dusty]

looks like i need more tie downs on my loader thanks for the links

[LowBoy]

I've been nailed twice in the past 2 weeks by DOT (end of the year quotas,...) once in Ct. and next in New York State. Both times I just left the loading point, and an hour later I was apprehended by the Long Arm of the Law. Both times ONE chain was slightly looser than the other ones due to settlement, etc. Even though I asked the officer if I could tighten it up, and DID, it was still written up and listed on the inspection report that is sent to Wash. D.C. as "loose chain on such-&-such corner of equipment".:nono

I've been moving/hauling equipment in class 8 vehicles locally and long distances since 1978. No matter what you do to try and comply COMPLETELY with DOT & FMCSR's, believe me, if they are told by their superiors to write tickets, they're gonna write tickets. Whether it be in a brand spankingly new Peterbilt or a nostalgic old Brockway, normally you can't win the battle. Not once Beuford T. Justice makes up his mind that you're wrong. Then it's a matter of deciding if you want to spend the time, money and energy to go to night court at 7:30 p.m. on a Thursday evening in some town garage's makeshift courtroom, and stand in front of the judge that's usually also the dog catcher, the justice 'o peace, and the mailman...And still have it cost you a $25 fee for court costs even if you are found innocent of the crime, as they do in New York State. (I've had to play this silly game 3 times in NY in 20 years.):Banghead

The bottom line is to try and do as the Federal rules indicate, that supercede all state and local ones.(That is also explained in the rules, that no state or locality shall add to or delete from Federal reg's..., paraphrased of course.)

[Dwan Hall]

When they could find nothing else I have been writen up for a cluttered cab. (old hamer head behind the seat). He also tried to write me up for a cracked mid truck reflector on a truck that was only 21 feet long. I took out the broken hammer head and removed the reflector as it was not required.
I understand if you have extra lights on your truck that are not required they still have to work or they can get written up. So redundency does not always pay.
They will always find something.even a dirty windsheld.

[Cat420]

I've heard some guys will leave something simple wrong on purpose. Then when the picky inspector is going over you with his fine tooth comb, he finds the simple thing and is satisfied rather than search until finding something really bad.

[LowBoy]

I've heard some guys will leave something simple wrong on purpose. Then when the picky inspector is going over you with his fine tooth comb, he finds the simple thing and is satisfied rather than search until finding something really bad.

I can see the point to this scenario, but with my luck, the "simple" thing will just "simply" be added to the rest of the list that the picky inspector writes up... It really is ALL in the individual. I was raked over the coals in Connecticut the other week by a stone-faced one,:mad: but last week I was given an easier sentence by a decent New York state inspector. You just never know, but it really helps to "yes-sir" & "no-sir" 'em at any cost. :notworthy

[Jeff D.]

I guess I've been lucky. I haven't had instances where I've fealt I've been wrongly given a ticket. I been given numerous warning tickets for "Logbook not current" and I've even been shut down twice for running over 10hours, but have had only to sit for my 8hr break(when it still was 8hrs) in the scale and then let go without a fine.

I do like Lowboy does, "Yes Sir, No Sir". Maybe that's helped.

I hear enough stories about the bad ones too know I'm probobly gonna meet one some day, though.

[Bob Horrell]

I was stopped once for chains. The officer asked "Do you know why I stopped you". I replied "No sir". He said "You don't have enough chain for your load" as he grabbed one of the chains in his hand and added,"I have no idea what these are rated at but the best they could be for this size is 2,600lbs if they are hardened". What I use is military chains used on C130 cargo planes. They are pretty skinny looking chains that would normally be only 2,600 lbs if they were hardened. They come with a quick release binder that works really slick. I bought them for $25 per set (chain with binder) at a surplus store.
When I responded that they were rated at 10,000 lbs. he kinda rolled his eyes and gave me really bad look. I asked if I could pull one out of my tool box to show him what I meant. I have one that still has the military tag on it that states the rating. When I showed it to him, he just kept staring at it in disbelief. Finally he asked me where I got them. I told him. He then asked how much I paid for them. I told him. His final comment was, "I can't imagine what kind of metal this is or how much the military paid for them, but if it is good enough for the military and used in aircraft, it has to be good enough for me - have a nice day". He turned around and walked back to his vehicle without looking at anything else which was a real shock because this hardly ever happens. I think he was so dumbfounded by the rating on these skinny little chains that he forgot to do any other checking.

[Jeff D.]

Bob, do those aircraft chain binders look like this one?

My father gave me some that he had from the Air Force, but I can't get any of my chain to fit in it correctly. The military chain must be slightly different size than regular.

It does say "10,000lbs capacity" on it though, like you said.

[Bob Horrell]

They are very similar. The release mechanism is different (I like the one on yours better). The problem is the chain is really small looking. If you were to go to your local hardware store and look at the hardened chains that are rated at 2600lbs you would have about the same size. They only work with that size chain and of course a 2600lb chain is kinda stupid with a 10,000lb binder. I have been looking for more of these but haven't found any yet. If you want to part with the binders you have I sure would be interested since the chains will last a lot longer than the binders and some day I will have to replace the binders I have. If you would like to part with them let me know what you want for them. If you could find chains for them they are worth keeping but I have looked for several years now with no luck.

[Jeff D.]

Yup, the chains I tried either were too short between links (5/16" grade 70)(if they would've been elongated slightly) or if it did have enough space between the links it was too fat to fit in the groove(3/8").:beatsme

I imagine the military must have had specially spec'd chain that was hardened.

If I do decide too part with them I'll let you know, but for now I think I'll hang on to them in case I can find the right chain some day.

[Bob Horrell]

The chains are pretty easy to spot since they have a real wierd shaped hook on one end. There is a tag on a small ring on the opposite end that has the 10,000lb rating noted on it. They are about 7 or 8 feet long. Good luck in your search. If I ever run across any I will let you know.

[Countryboy]

There is a guy next to the local flea market that sells army surplus out of his very large back yard. He has whole plane fuselages all the way down to shoe laces for combat boots. I picked up some taxi chains a while back, that were used to taxi planes to the runway, for a couple bucks. I've been wanting to go back but haven't had the time. This weekend I will go up there and take a look. If he doesn't have them then maybe he will know where to get some.

[Jeff D.]

Cool, let us know what you find out.:yup

Thanks!

[CEwriter]

Here's the transport-tie down advice of one of the aerial work platform manufacturers (I can't remember if it was Genie or JLG)
http://www.constructionequipment.com/article/CA6403021.html

L

[Countryboy]

Cool, let us know what you find out.:yup

Thanks!

I'm glad this thread came back up because honestly I had forgotten about it.:o

I talked to the guy at the surplus place and although he didn't have any, he knew what I was talking about. He got my name and number and said he would call me if he found some. I might take a trip up there in a couple weeks and check with him again.

[case310350]

So to tie down a backhoe, you need 4 chains. on the older machines there are no hooks. and in the manual it shows securing the machine with only two chains.

so where do you tie into the backhoe so you can have 4 chains?

I know you have to tie down the loader bucket and the boom.

Just don't see how to apply the new rule to older machine.

[Jeff D.]

So to tie down a backhoe, you need 4 chains. Not necessarily. You still could use 2 long chains for the main frame, and seperate shorter chains for the loader bucket and hoe.

The 2 long chains that pass through the mainframe and connect to the trailer on each end would need to have a greater capacity than if you used 4 shorter chains.

Example: If you had a 10k machine, the rear chain(to prevent forward/side motion@.8g) would need to have a 8k WLL, and the front chain(to prevent rearward/side motion @.5g) would need to have a 5k WLL.

You would only need two binders then.

If you used 4 seperate chains, those chains could have 1/2 the WLL of above, but you would need 4 binders then.


on the older machines there are no hooks. and in the manual it shows securing the machine with only two chains.

so where do you tie into the backhoe so you can have 4 chains?Could you hook the chain at those points at all? If not, I guess it would be trying to find something to loop the chain around and hook to itself. Something structurely sound, like the axle, etc.

I know you have to tie down the loader bucket and the boom.Yup, they would require atleast one chain/binder each, also.

[Grader4me]

Not necessarily. You still could use 2 long chains for the main frame, and seperate shorter chains for the loader bucket and hoe.

The 2 long chains that pass through the mainframe and connect to the trailer on each end would need to have a greater capacity than if you used 4 shorter chains.

Example: If you had a 10k machine, the rear chain(to prevent forward/side motion@.8g) would need to have a 8k WLL, and the front chain(to prevent rearward/side motion @.5g) would need to have a 5k WLL.

You would only need two binders then.

If you used 4 seperate chains, those chains could have 1/2 the WLL of above, but you would need 4 binders then.


Could you hook the chain at those points at all? If not, I guess it would be trying to find something to loop the chain around and hook to itself. Something structurely sound, like the axle, etc.

Yup, they would require atleast one chain/binder each, also.


Hi there Jeff. Maybe I am reading this wrong? :confused: Is running two long chains through the frame hooked with two binders legal? I think that he is supposed to have the four individual chains to the main backhoe and extra chains & binders for the attachments
If the older machine has no anchor points then as you suggested would be the answer.
Looking forward to your feedback

[Jeff D.]

I tried to verify what I said (2 chains through frame instead of 4), as it was my understanding of the rules, but I can't find anything which backs that up. Rather I found this:
Securement of heavy vehicles, equipment ormachinery with crawler tracks or wheels.
In addition to the requirements of paragraph (b) of this section, heavy equipment or machinery with crawler tracks or wheels must be restrained against movement in the lateral, forward, rearward, and vertical direction using a minimum of four tiedowns.
Each of the tiedowns must be affixed as close as practicable to the front and rear of the vehicle, or mounting points on the vehicle that have been specifically designed for that purpose.From this site:http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/rules-regul.../cs-policy.htm

It does say affixed to mounting points on the vehicle, so passing through doesn't sound like affixed, does it?:beatsme

I tried the other site I'd a link to earlier, which expalined things in simpler terms, but it won't work for me now, for some reason.http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/documents/c...ment-16-04.pdf

So, without anything else to back up my claim, it appears that I am wrong in the above post.:Banghead

I apoligize for that, if so.:)

If the additional chains binders needed for the bucket and hoe would count towards that total of (4) required, it may still be considered legal. I wouldn't want to chance it without more authoritative input, though.

[Grader4me]

No need to apologize Jeff. All of these rules and regulations are hard for anybody to understand. Your math with the WLL of the chains is good :thumbsup
That by itself is enough to make a persons head reel :spaz

If the additional chains binders needed for the bucket and hoe would count towards that total of (4) required, it may still be considered legal. I wouldn't want to chance it without more authoritative input, though.
Today 07:37 AM

Good idea....but...I wouldn't want to chance it either :wink2

[Bob Horrell]

You can use one long chain on the front and one on the rear with two binders on each one. If you do it right, it is the same as two chains front and two chains rear. If one side breaks, the other side is still secure. I hope that makes sense. DOT has never questioned it.

[Grader4me]

You can use one long chain on the front and one on the rear with two binders on each one. If you do it right, it is the same as two chains front and two chains rear. If one side breaks, the other side is still secure. I hope that makes sense. DOT has never questioned it.

Hey Bob, Makes perfect sense! but... here we go with the but again...The regulations call for 4 individual chains. If the DOT officer wanted to be an a$$ he could charge you. :yup
They have been known to act that way at times:)

[jhill]

I use 4 ratcheting straps for my skid steer and mini ex. Fast and easy. For the dozer I am going to get new chains and I have some ratcheting binders to use.

Jerry

[twostick]

The regulations call for 4 individual chains


I think you will find it actually says 4 individual securements. A securement is made when one end is attached to the load and the other end to the trailer. A chain attached to the anchor point of a trailer and passed thru or over a load and attached to the anchor point on the opposite side and secured is still only 1 securement. One chain can have each end attached to 2 corners of the load and two binders pulling each corner to the trailer anchor points. Hence 2 chains and 4 binders can make 4 securements. On small dozers I have used 4 -1/2" binders and no chains. Inside of track to D-ring on outside of trailer. Each 1/2" binder is good for 9000+lbs WLL (9200?) so X4 is 36000+lbs in securement weight which on a 35000 lb dozer is over double what the law requires (35000lbs/2).

Kevin

[Grader4me]

The regulations call for 4 individual chains


I think you will find it actually says 4 individual securements. A securement is made when one end is attached to the load and the other end to the trailer. A chain attached to the anchor point of a trailer and passed thru or over a load and attached to the anchor point on the opposite side and secured is still only 1 securement. One chain can have each end attached to 2 corners of the load and two binders pulling each corner to the trailer anchor points. Hence 2 chains and 4 binders can make 4 securements.
Kevin

This is what it actually says. This has been hashed and rehashed on this forum, but through it all most agree that you use 4 individual chains to tie down heavy equipment. I respectively disagree with your theory.

(4) Despite section 22, a heavy vehicle with crawler tracks or wheels shall be restrained
against moving sideways, forward, rearward and vertically by at least 4 tiedowns,
(a) each with a working load limit of at least 2 268 kilograms, and
(b) each attached, as close as practical, at the front and rear of the vehicle or to
mounting points on the vehicle that are specifically designed for that purpose.

[nedly05]

Thats exactly what I do. I stretch the chain across in the front of the tracks and then one across the rear. I then use four binders from the pads to the chain hooked to the trailer trailer. By doing this you have created 4 chains out of 2 because there is no tension on the middle of the chain. I hook this way in 4 corners and one over the stick by the bucket. I have been through DOT like this and they had no issue with it at all.

[Grader4me]

After rereading the post from twostick (and waking up a little more) I will have to admit that there is nothing wrong with this type of hookup. All I could think of was 2 chains and I knew that it had to be 4 tie downs. As long as it has the 4 indivdual tie downs set up so that if one binder/chain lets go there is still 3 left, then I think it would be okay.

See? I can admit when I am wrong....hurts though...:)

[Kgmz]

I have also been researching this, and it is hard to find clear answers.

A couple of days ago I saw a backhoe on a trailer going up I-5 that actualy was following all the rules. It had 6 chains and 6 binders, 4 sets securing the machine, 1 on the front bucket and 1 on the rear bucket.


I have for years been only using 2 chains and 2 binders on our backhoe and D3 dozer. One looped through the rear hitch pin on the dozer, on the backhoe run behind the backhoe lower boom pivot attached to one side on trailer D-ring and then attached through D ring on other side with binder. On the front of the backhoe chain is run around axle and attached from one side to the other iwth one binder, dozer has a hook welded to top of blade with one chain from side to side with one binder.
For our excavator, CS563 rollor, 928G loader we use four chains with four binders. But have never chained down the bucket on the excavator or loader.


Looks like we will have to change our ways before we get a big ticket.



I did get pulled over awhile back for a safety check with the excavator, and they never said anything about the bucket not being chained down.

How long have these rules been in effect?




I did find something on the State of Oregon's "Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations" page, Part 390. Where it shows what was mentioned before about the one chain and two binders, and says it is legal.
http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/MCT/LAWS.shtml

Link to JPG I made of the page for 390-130, showing a picture and description of the one chain, two binder setup.

http://www.zenitram-inc.com/Files/393-130.jpg

[Grader4me]

How long have these rules been in effect?



Welcome to the forum Kgmz. I think in the U.S. it was 2004 and 2005 in Canada.
Thanks for the links as well, especially the link/picture showing the one chain with 2 binders.