[tracer]

Originally Posted by specialkay

Tracer I wasn't implying you did anything wrong just what the regs seem to say. I would probably just run one over over the top also. It doesn't really matter what it is just the length and weight. I'd imagine those those tires aren't exactly light. They've made these rules so confusing you could probably get a ticket regardless of how it was chained. lol

I actually found an answer! Landstar has a magazine called "The Landstar LINK" that they send out to drivers and agents every month or so. I opened the issue that I found in my mail box and there was a story about the CSA and how to make sure you're not in violation with tiedowns.

.................................................. ........
CARGO NOT BLOCKED - 393.110B

(This applies to my skids of tires on the upper deck because I had no wall in front of them and technically they could have moved forward)

5 ft or shorter
1,100 lbs or less 1 tiedown

5 ft or shorter
over 1,100 lbs
Or: between 5 ft and 10 ft 2 tiedowns

Longer than 10 ft 2 for first 10 ft, and 1 tiedown for every additional 10 ft of fraction thereof

.................................................. .................................................. ..........

CARGO BLOCKED FROM FORWARD MOVEMENT - 393.110C

(Thsi would apply to me if the skids with tires were on the lower deck and PUSHED against the drop section of the trailer acting as a barrier)

All cargo 1 tie down for every 10 ft or fraction thereof

.................................................. .................................

And that's your answer! They required at least 2 straps/chains for skidded coils because they were probably OVER 1,100 lbs and they were not blocked from forward movement. In my case, each skid was just under 5 ft long and the tires weighed roughly 150 x 3 = 450 or let's say 500 lbs. So, each skid was LESS than 1,100 lbs and SHORTER than 5 ft, so technically I needed only ONE strap. But, specialkey, thanks for drawing my attention to this, as we all need to go over the regulations once in a while. It can't hurt. Good discussion.

[tracer]

Originally Posted by rank

Are you sure you're interpreting that requirement to restrict .4g movement in the forward direction properly? I've never been able to make any sense of it..... so I go with their WLL rules instead.

Well, I spent half an hour searching online for the answer how this stupid 0.5 g and 0.43 g acceleration is connected to WLL of chains and wasn't able to find anything. This being a Sunday but I had nothing else to do so I kept at it until I got the answer. This is your lucky day, rank and I guess mine too. Here's what I found.

In the Canadian regulations they list pretty much the same G FORCE acceleration/deacceleration requirements which both you and I now know are impossible to interpret unless you have a Ph.D. in physics So the smart Canadians follow that useless list of the minimum G forces with this little clause:

"Equivalent means of securement
Where cargo transported by a vehicle is contained, immobilized or secured in accordance with the applicable requirements of Divisions 3, 4 and 5 and Part 2, it meets the requirements of Section 5."

Now, Section 5 was the one with the G requirements and then I looked up Divisions 3,4 and 5 and guess what? That's where they list the familiar AGGREGATE WORKING LOAD LIMIT REQUIREMENT! The one that says you must use enough WLLs to cover 50% of the weight of the cargo.

So, I return to the US Federal Regulations and right below the G force stupid clause, there's this:

EQUIVALENT MEANS OF SECUREMENT 393.102 C

THE MEANS OF SECURING ARTICLES OF CARGO ARE CONSIDERED TO MEET THE PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS SECTION IF THE CARGO IS:

1.
2.
3. SECURED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS OF ##393.104 THROUGH 393.136!!!!

So, since very few cops and dot officers have ph.d. in physics, as long as the AGGREGATE WORKING LOAD LIMIT FOR TIEDOWNS (#393.106 D) is met, the g force requirement is deemed to have been met.

Which means you rank has been doing it correctly all along. G force bad, WLL good

[Heavy Duty]

Now have some fun, look for grade markings on your chains. if they are a few years old it may be hard to find them.

The way the old guys explained it to me back in the 70's was " those chains hanging on your headache rack won't do you any good"

[tracer]

Originally Posted by Heavy Duty

The way the old guys explained it to me back in the 70's was " those chains hanging on your headache rack won't do you any good"

One of the reasons I keep chains in the side compartment under the sleeper. A bit crowded in there but the chains stay dry and rust-free.