1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192 
Answered —some vital queries
Page 57
Page 58
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
MI braking and plating I EXCEPTIONS? • TESTING?
I SECONDARY-BRAKE SYSTEMS?
ly A. J. P. Wilding, AMIMechE, MIRTE is surprising that although a considerable amount has been written about changes and proposed changes in vehicle regulations in the past two years, many operators re still not certain of what is happening. Now that the time is approaching when pecified braking efficiencies will be a legal requirement and when plating means iat vehicles will have to be operated at prescribed gross weights, many are realising iat they will have to find out all about these regulations if they are going to keep rithin the law.
Confirmation of these points was given .hen I attended a talk given by Mr. P. Crisp, f Vauxhall Motors Ltd., to some 300 operairs from the London area at the premises I Croydon Automobile Co. Ltd., Croydon. ithough his task was fairly difficult, Mr. !risp acquitted himself well in explaining se new braking and plating regulations for nods vehicles. He also handled many diffiAt questions well although there were one r two points on which comprehensive nswers could not be given. After attending re meeting I took four of the main ones up rith the Ministry of Transport and obtained )me useful clarification of the regulations rid some extra information not previously ublished.
The questions and answers are set out below 2cause the information obtained will be of use rid interest to all operators. It is not until regulions have to be implemented that the really ifficult questions crop up and it is more than kely that operators will have many more quesons to which they would like answers.
There are many points that can appear open to different interpretations in the new regulations and COMMERCIAL MOTOR will be pleased to receive these questions so that full answers to them can be obtained and published to help all operators.
One of the major questions was:-If a vehicle nes riot meet the brake efficiency requirements a its first annual test in 1968 or 1969, will it be plated for a lower weight than it was originally lesigned for?
No information has been issued on this ubject officially by the Ministry of Transport but
it is understood that the plans are:— There will be a standard list of existing commercial vehicles specifying gross weight covering some 5,000 different models, all of which it is known will be able to meet the interim, main and secondary requirements for existing vehicles— 45 and 20 per cent for four-wheelers and 40 and 15 per cent for rigid multiwheelers and artics. This list is being compiled by the MoT in conjunction with vehicle manufacturers or by actual testing, and in the vast majority of cases, the maximum weight for plating will be the manufacturer's original rating for the model.
Where it has been found that a particular model cannot meet the required brake efficiency at this weight, a suitable maximum weight is being specified. Therefore, when a vehicle goes for its first annual test and plating it will generally be known that it can meet the interim efficiency at a prescribed weight and that if it cannot there is either an obvious fault or the need for maintenance. In this case the vehicle will not be plated but returned to the operator for attention before retesting. This is obviously the only way a plating scheme can be operated fairly, for it would not be right if a vehicle were to be plated permanently for a lower weight than its original designed figure because of a brake fault.
The MoT list will be published by the Stationery Office and will be as comprehensive
as possible but there will possibly be odd vehicles in operation that are not included. When one in this category goes to an MoT station for its first test it will then be decided for what gross and axle weights the vehicle will be plated. If the vehicle meets the braking figures required at its designed gross weight this will be put on the plate, but if it cannot then a decision will be made and the vehicle plated for an acceptable lower figure. Presumably, if a vehicle on the standard list put up for testing cannot meet the requirements at the specified maximum weight even after the brakes have been put into first-class condition, then there will be some way in which it also can be plated for a reduced gross weight.
Another question:— In the regulations for new vehicles coming into effect in 1968 does the secondary-brake system for artics have to include semi-trailer brakes and are there the same requirements for existing vehicles that will be permitted to have lower efficiencies until 1972?
The simple and straightforward answers to the questions are Yes to the first part and No to the second part.
The first point is covered in Regulation 60(2) of the new 1966 No. 1288 Construction and Use Regulations. This says that except for agricultural trailers every trailer manufactured after January 1 1968 which is over 2 cwt. in weight unladen must have brakes on all its wheels that can be applied by the driver using the same means of operation as for the main service brakes on the tractor or tractive unit. And if there is a failure in the service brakes of the tractor or the trailer, the brakes on at least two wheels of the trailer (or one if it a two-wheel trailer) must be able to be applied from the tractor using the same means of operation as for the tractor secondary brakes.
Although this has been simplified from the actual wording in the regulations it is still rather complicated. In simpler, practical terms it means that both the main and the secondary braking systems on an artic must apply brakes on both parts of the outfit with the main applying all the semi-trailer brakes and the secondary those on at least one wheel of the trailer if it has only two wheels and on at least two wheels if there are more than two wheels.
There is no similar regulation for pre-1968 vehicles so on an existing artic it would be satisfactory if, for example, the 15 per cent secondary efficiency required can be cbtained using the tractive unit handbrake to the driving axle only.
A third important question:— When annual tests of vehicles registered before January 1 1968 begin (in 1968) how many vehicles are there likely to be on the list for testing and plating and will there be adequate facilities for the tests to be carried out without any delays to vehicles? Will vehicles have to be loaded when sent for testing?
It is calculated that there will be some 750,000 vehicles to be put through the annual test and plated in 1968 and 1969. The Ministry of Transport is well ahead with the setting up of the chain of testing stations that will be used and the recruitment of staff to man them; a staff training scheme is in progress.
It is planned that there will be about 70 stations covering the UK. Not all will be manned full-time—this depends on the number of vehicles in a particular area. Where there are few vehicles to be tested the stations will be opened as required. The number to be set up and their locations will ensure that tests can be completed within the two-year time limit without delays.
With regard to the second part of the question, it is understood that vehicles will not have to be sent for test in the fully-laden condition. Rollertype brake testers will be sited at all the stations and the Ministry of Transport is now developing formulae which will be used to calculate from figures obtained with an unladen vehicle the brake efficiency that would be obtained with the same vehicle laden to its plated weight.
Plating small ones
Operators also asked:— Is it intended in the regulations that all goods vehicles including light vans will be plated and what about estate cars having C licences?
Regulation No. 28 covers this point and the only exclusions from the plating regulations are vehicles registered after January 1 1968 that are passenger vehicles, dual-purpose vehicles, works trucks and trailers, pedestrian-controlled vehicles, land tractors and trailers less than I ton unladen. There are certain types of non-haulage trailers such as living vans and agricultural trailers, which although not in the under I ton category are also not included in the plating requirements.
The definition of a "dual-purpose vehicle" is that this is a vehicle constructed or adapted for the carriage of both passengers and goods which is less than 2 tons unladen and has either allwheel drive or satisfies certain conditions of construction regarding seats behind the driver and side windows. Estate cars come into the latter category and therefore these are exempt from the plating regulations whether they have a C licence or not.
It is understood that light vehicles—those with an unladen weight of 30 cwt. or less—built befon 1968 will not be plated as the heavier existim vehicles will be in the MoT testing programme They will not be included in the Government test-station scheme as they are already covered b3 existing annual test regulations as applied alsc to cars.
One question not asked at the Croydon meetinE is:— Is it true that different braking efficiencies will be required of various types of tractor /trailei combinations when the regulations for vehicleE built before 1968 come into force? (I am thinkinE of combinations with two-axle and three-axle tractors.)
The answer to this is that it is correct that the braking efficiencies to be attained with different types of combination will not be the same under the interim-efficiency regulations coming in on January 1 1968. It appears that it is one of the major anomalies in the new C and U Regulations that any artic is allowed the lower (40 per cent main, 15 per cent secondary) efficiency, while a tractor and drawbar trailer combination has to be able to obtain an efficiency that would be required if the tractor was running solo.
This point is covered by Regulation 78(2) and (3) which says quite definitely that the brake efficiencies of the tractor /trailer combination shall be the same as would be required if the towing vehicle is running solo. The result is that if the tractor has two axles the combination will need to give 45 per cent and 20 per cent as specified in Regulation 43(6) and if it is a multiwheeler the efficiencies need to be only 40 and 15 per cent as in Regulation 43(7).