en 280 2013 51_e_stf

7/26/2019 EN 280 2013 51_e_stf

1/17

EUROPEAN STANDARD

NORME EUROPENNE

EUROPISCHE NORM

FINAL DRAFTEN 280:2013

FprA1March 2015

ICS 53.020.99

English Version

Mobile elevating work platforms - Design calculations - Stabilitycriteria - Construction - Safety - Examinations and tests

Plates-formes lvatrices mobiles de personnel - Calculs deconception - Critres de stabilit - Construction - Scurit -

Examens et essais

Fahrbare Hubarbeitsbhnen - Berechnung - Standsicherheit- Bau - Sicherheit - Prfungen

This draft amendment is submitted to CEN members for formal vote. It has been drawn up by the Technical Committee CEN/TC 98.

This draft amendment A1, if approved, will modify the European Standard EN 280:2013. If this draft becomes an amendment, CENmembers are bound to comply with the CEN/CENELEC Internal Regulations which stipulate the conditions for inclusion of this amendmentinto the relevant national standard without any alteration.

This draft amendment was established by CEN in three official versions (English, French, German). A version in any other language madeby translation under the responsibility of a CEN member into its own language and notified to the CEN-CENELEC Management Centre hasthe same status as the official versions.

CEN members are the national standards bodies of Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia,Finland, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania,Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and United

Kingdom.

Recipients of this draft are invited to submit, with their comments, notification of any relevant patent rights of which they are aware and toprovide supporting documentation.

Warning: This document is not a European Standard. It is distributed for review and comments. It is subject to change without notice andshall not be referred to as a European Standard.

EUROPEAN COMMITTEE FOR STANDARDIZATION

COM IT E UROP E N DE NORM AL ISAT ION

EUROPISCHES KOMITEE FR NORMUNG

CEN-CENELECManagement Centre: Avenue Marnix 17, B-1000 Brussels

2015 CEN All rights of exploitation in any form and by any means reservedworldwide for CEN national Members.

Ref. No. EN 280:2013/FprA1:2015 E

7/26/2019 EN 280 2013 51_e_stf

2/17

EN 280:2013/FprA1:2015 (E)

2

Contents

Page

1 Modification to Clause 2 "Normative references" ..............................................................................4

2 Modification to 5.1.2 ..............................................................................................................................4

3

Modification to 5.2.2 "Loads and forces" ............................................................................................4

4 Modification to 5.2.3.2 "Structural loads" ...........................................................................................4

5 Modification to 5.2.3.5 Special loads and forces ............................................................................4

6 Modification to 5.2.4 "Stability calculations" ......................................................................................4

7

Modification to 5.2.5.2 Calculation methods ...................................................................................5

8

Modification to 5.2.5.2 Calculation methods, Table 2 ....................................................................5

9 Modification to 5.2.5.2 "Calculation methods" ...................................................................................5

10

Modification to 5.2.5.3 Analysis ........................................................................................................5

11

Modification to 5.6.14 ............................................................................................................................6

12 Modification to 5.7.9 ..............................................................................................................................7

13 Modification to 5.8.6 ..............................................................................................................................7

14

Modification to 5.11.1 ............................................................................................................................8

15

Modification to 5.11.2 ............................................................................................................................8

16

Modification to 5.11.3 ............................................................................................................................8

17 Modification to 7.1.1.2 c) .......................................................................................................................8

18

Modification to Annex C, C.3, Table C.2 ..............................................................................................9

19

Modification to D.1.2 "Notes" ...............................................................................................................9

20 Modification in Annex G (normative), Table .......................................................................................9

21 Addition of a new Annex H (informative) ............................................................................................9

22

Addition of a new Annex I (informative) ........................................................................................... 14

23

Addition of a new Annex J (normative) ............................................................................................ 15

24 Addition to the Bibliography ............................................................................................................. 17

7/26/2019 EN 280 2013 51_e_stf

3/17

EN 280:2013/FprA1:2015 (E)

3

Foreword

This document (EN 280:2013/FprA1:2015) has been prepared by Technical Committee CEN/TC 98 Liftingplatforms, the secretariat of which is held by DIN.

This document is currently submitted to the Formal Vote.

This document has been prepared under a mandate given to CEN by the European Commission and theEuropean Free Trade Association, and supports essential requirements of EU Directive(s).

For relationship with EU Directive(s), see informative Annex ZA, which is an integral part of this document.

7/26/2019 EN 280 2013 51_e_stf

4/17

EN 280:2013/FprA1:2015 (E)

4

1 Modification to Clause 2 "Normative references"

Add the following new standards:

"EN 13001-3-1:2012+A1:2013, Cranes General design Part 3-1: Limit states and proof competence of

steel structure",

"EN 62061, Safety of machinery Functional safety of safety-related electrical, electronic and programmableelectronic control systems (IEC 62061)"and

"ISO/TR 23849:2010, Guidance on the application of ISO13849-1 and IEC 62061 in the design of safety-related control systems for machinery".

2 Modification to 5.1.2

Replace the word "operated"by "powered".

3 Modification to 5.2.2 "Loads and forces"

Replace

"b) structural loads (see 5.2.3.2)"

by

"b) dead weights (see 5.2.3.2)".

4 Modification to 5.2.3.2 "Structural loads"

Replace the existing text by the following text:

"5.2.3.2 Dead weights

The masses of the components of the MEWP when they are not moving shall be taken to be static deadweights.

The masses of the components of the MEWP when they are moving shall be taken to be dynamic deadweights."

5 Modification to 5.2.3.5 Special loads and forces

In the second paragraph, replace "structural load"by "dead weight".

6 Modification to 5.2.4 "Stability calculations"

In the key of Figure 6 c), 6 d), 7 a), 8 a) and 8 b) change the definition of "M"to "manual force".

7/26/2019 EN 280 2013 51_e_stf

5/17

EN 280:2013/FprA1:2015 (E)

5

7 Modification to 5.2.5.2 Calculation methods

Replace the existing text before the figures by the following text:

"The strength of load bearing steel structures shall be calculated and proofed in accordance with EN 13001-3-

1. When EN 13001-3-1 is not applicable, e.g. the fatigue strength of welded connections with plates thinnerthan 3 mm, the calculation and proof of the load bearing structures shall follow the principles of EN 13001-3-1,and appropriate limits states shall be obtained from relevant sources.

Requirements laid down in 5.2.2, 5.2.3 and 5.2.4 above are to be considered for the determination of loadsand forces to be used in the calculations.

The elastic deformations of slender components shall be taken into account.

The analysis defined in 5.2.5.3 shall be made for the worst load combinations and shall include the effects ofthe overload test (see 6.1.4.3) and the functional test (see 6.1.4.5)."

8 Modification to 5.2.5.2 Calculation methods, Table 2

In the heading row of the table replace "Structural loads"by "Dead weights".

9 Modification to 5.2.5.2 "Calculation methods"

Move Figure 5 a) to Figure 8 b) and Table 2 between last subclause of 5.2.4 (i.e. 5.2.4.4) and 5.2.5.

Additionally move Figure 5 a) to Figure 8 b) after Table 2.

10 Modification to 5.2.5.3 Analysis

Replace the text of the whole subclause by the following text:

"5.2.5.3 Strength analysis

5.2.5.3.1 Static strength analysis

All load bearing components and joints shall be proofed against failure by yielding or fracture. All load bearing

components subjected to compressive loads shall be proofed against failure by elastic instability (e.g. bucklingor crippling).

Loads can be considered to be either regular or occasional.

Regular loads occur frequently under normal operation. Regular loads are:

rated load;

dead weights.

Occasional loads occur infrequently, and are usually neglected in fatigue assessment. Occasional loads are:

loads due to in-service wind;

7/26/2019 EN 280 2013 51_e_stf

6/17

EN 280:2013/FprA1:2015 (E)

6

manual force.

These loads are combined into two load combinations, load combination A comprising only regular loads andload combination B comprising both regular and occasional loads. The static strength of the structure shall beassessed for both load combination A and B. The loads and forces defined in 5.2.3 shall thereby be multiplied

by the partial safety factors pgiven in Table 3.

Table 3 Partial load factors

Clause LoadingPartial safety factors p

Load combination A Load combination B

5.2.3.1 Rated load 1.34 1.22

5.2.3.2 Dead weights 1.22 1.16

5.2.3.3 Wind loads 1.22

5.2.3.4 Manual force 1.22

Dead weights that are acting favourably (e.g. counterweights that reduce forces and stresses) in some load

carrying parts, shall be assigned the value p= 1 when calculating those load carrying parts.

NOTE Load combinations from EN 13001-2 are not applicable within this standard."

5.2.5.3.2 Fatigue strength analysis

The fatigue stress analysis is the proof against failure by fatigue due to stress fluctuations. The analysis shallbe made for all load bearing components and joints which are critical to fatigue taking into account theconstructional details, the degree of stress fluctuation and the number of stress cycles. The number of stresscycles can be a multiple of the number of load cycles. Other stress variations during use, caused by

movements (e.g. slewing, raising or travelling), can also contribute to the number of stress cycles. Usually,only regular loads need to be considered and the partial safety factors p shall be set to 1. Loads due tomisuse need not be considered.

NOTE 1 Due to the requirements in 5.4.6 and 5.6.13, no fatigue assessment is needed for stresses caused byvibrations during transport.

For the proof, the different parts of the load bearing structure shall be assigned to S classes in accordancewith 6.3 of EN 13001-3-1:2012+A1:2013 (see also H.1). The S classes may be established either:

by direct selection from H.2;

by directly applying the formulae in EN 13001-3-1:2012+A1:2013 (see also H.3.2);

in a simplified way described in H.3.3;

by experience with technical justification.

NOTE 2 For the design of wire rope drive systems see Annex D.

Verification of the requirements of 5.2 by design check, static tests and overload test"


Add the following new point:

7/26/2019 EN 280 2013 51_e_stf

7/17

EN 280:2013/FprA1:2015 (E)

7

"d) be positioned not more than 750 mm above the floor of the work platform."


Replace the existing text by the following new structured text:

"5.7.9 Overriding of emergency stop and/or safety functions/devices

5.7.9.1 General

Overriding of emergency stops and safety functions/devices shall not be possible at the same time, except inthe case described in 5.7.9.4.

5.7.9.2 Overriding of emergency stop

Overriding of emergency stop according to 5.7.5 shall only be allowed:

at a control station which is not in use (e.g. outrigger control station with ground control selected orground control with platform control selected and vice-versa) and/or

for rescuing a trapped and/or incapacitated operator on the platform.

Verification by design check and functional test.

5.7.9.3 Overriding of safety functions/devices

Safety functions/devices may be overridden to recover the operator where a safety device has been tripped(e.g. moment sensing system, load sensing system or position control).

Overriding of safety functions/devices is permitted only by the use of a mode selection device that isindependent from the control station selection device. Such a mode selection device is a safety device thatshall be operated by hold-to-run controls, at reduced speed, one motion at a time and be protected againstunauthorised use.

Features shall be provided to protect against misuse of the overriding safety functions/devices and to givevisible evidence that they have been used or tampered with. This evidence shall remain until the features arereturned to the condition they were in prior to the safety device(s) being operated or accessed. Resetting theevidence of overriding to its original condition shall require the use of a tool (e.g. password or physical tool).

Verification by design check and functional test.

5.7.9.4 Overriding load sensing system and emergency stop

For rescuing a trapped and/or incapacitated operator it is permissible to override the emergency stop and theload sensing system at the same time. Overriding of the load sensing system shall allow motion of theplatform sufficient to rescue the operator.

Verification by design check and functional test."


Replace the text of the first paragraph by the following text:

"The machines shall have sufficient immunity to electromagnetic disturbances to enable them to operatesafely as intended in the expected environment of use. They shall not fail to danger when exposed to the

7/26/2019 EN 280 2013 51_e_stf

8/17

EN 280:2013/FprA1:2015 (E)

8

levels and types of disturbances intended by the manufacturer. The manufacturer of the machines shalldesign, install and wire the equipment and sub-assemblies taking into account the recommendations of thesuppliers of these sub-assemblies."


Replace the existing text by the following new text:

"In the standard, wherever reference is made to this sub-clause, safety-related parts of control systems(SRP/CS) that perform the relevant safety function shall achieve the minimum performance level (PL)(according to EN ISO 13849-1:2008) specified in Table 4.

For electrical, electronic and software based circuits, corresponding safety integrity levels (SILs) according toEN 62061 may be used in accordance with Table 1 of ISO/TR 23849:2010 which is replicated below.

PerformanceLevel Average Probability of a Dangerous Failureper Hour (1/h) Safety Integrity Level (SIL)

a 105

to < 104

No special safety requirements

b 3 106

to < 105

1

c 106

to < 3 106

1

d 107

to < 106

2

e 108

to < 107

3

Where SILs and PLs are used in the same safety function, combination shall be in accordance with 7.1 and7.3 of ISO/TR 23849:2010."


Replace the existing text by the following new text:

"The validation of the safety functions and performance levels in 5.11.1 is given in EN ISO 13849-2.

Failure modes and fault exclusions of sub-systems shall be evaluated and justified in accordance with Clause7 of EN ISO 13849-1:2008. They shall be included in the technical file."


Add the following text after Table4:

"Where a performance level d is specified in Table 4, the choice of architecture should be Category 3. Furtherinformation on implementing performance level d safety functions, or their SIL 2 equivalent is outlined in

Annex J."

17 Modification to 7.1.1.2 c)

Replace the existing text by the following text:

7/26/2019 EN 280 2013 51_e_stf

9/17

EN 280:2013/FprA1:2015 (E)

9

"c) location, purpose and use of all normal controls, emergency lowering and any emergency stop equipmentincluding conditions for when they remain active, overridden or are not operational;"

18 Modification to Annex C, C.3, Table C.2

Replace the existing Table C.2 as follows:

"Table C.2 Coefficients c

Drivegroup

c in mm/ N for wire ropes which are not non-twisting

Nominal strength of the individual wires in N/mm

1 570 1 770 1 960 2 160 a 2 450 a

1 Em

- 0,067 0 0,063 0 0,060 0 0,056 0

1 Dm

- 0,071 0 0,067 0 0,063 0 0,060 0

1 Cm

- 0,075 0 0,071 0 0,067 0

1 Bm

0,085 0 0,080 0 0,075 0 -

1 Am

0,090 0 0,085 0 -

2m 0,095 0 -

3m 0,106 -

4m 0,118 -

5m 0,132 -

a Wire ropes of 2 160 N/mm2and 2 450 N/mm

2nominal strength in particular shall be of a design which makes them

entirely suitable for the special application concerned here.

"

19 Modification to D.1.2 "Notes"

In a) 1) and a) 2) replace "5.2.5.3.3"by "H.2.

20 Modification in Annex G (normative), Table

In line C, column 2 delete "2".

21 Addition of a new Annex H (informative)

Add the new Annex H, to read as follows:

"

7/26/2019 EN 280 2013 51_e_stf

10/17

EN 280:2013/FprA1:2015 (E)

10

Annex H(informative)

Stress history parameters

H.1 Introduction

The stress histories at a selected point of the structure depend on the loads, their directions and positionsduring the use of the MEWP, as well as on the MEWP configuration. The configuration of the MEWP can be acombination of the different motions of its moving structure, e.g. extension, lowering, slewing.

The total number of working cycles of a MEWP during its useful life can be divided into several typical taskswith the numbers of working cycles corresponding to them. The stress histories can be established from thosetasks.

A task can be characterized by a sequence of intended movements, with specific MEWP configurations, and aload spectrum which can be deduced for a task.

H.2 Guidance for selection of S class

The number of load cycles for a MEWP is usually in the range:

from 4 104 = light intermittent duty

(e.g. 10 years, 40 weeks per year, 20 h per week, 5 load cycles per h);

to 105 = heavy duty (e.g. 10 years, 50 weeks per year, 40 h per week, 5 load cycles per h).

Table H.1 gives guidance for the selection of S classes for the load carrying parts with the most severe stressspectrum. Other parts of the structure may be assigned lower S classes.

Table H.1 S classes for different duties

Intensity of duty

Number of stress cyclescorresponding to 4 10

4load

cycles (light intermittent duty)

Number of stress cyclescorresponding to 10

5load

cycles (heavy duty)

MEWPsclassification Load sensing system

and position controlS01 S0

Load andmoment sensing systems

S01 S0

Moment sensing system withenhanced overload criteria

S0 S1

Position control with enhancedstability and overload criteria

S0 S1

NOTE 1 MEWPs classification of Table H.1 in accordance with Table 3.

NOTE 2 With intensity of duty is meant the combination of number of stress cycles and stress spectrum.

7/26/2019 EN 280 2013 51_e_stf

11/17

EN 280:2013/FprA1:2015 (E)

11

H.3 Stress history parameters

H.3.1 General procedure

Ideally, the corresponding series of loadings has to be determined first, i.e. the magnitude, position and

direction of all loads, plus the corresponding configurations of the structure (e.g. extended, lowered/raised,rotated).

Next, the sequence of stress peaks occurring during the performance of each task can be deducted.

Figure H.1 represents an extract of a real stress sequence (history) occurring at point A of the MEWPstructure, due to two identified jib movements (extension, lowering) combined with the work platform load.

Key

a raising/lowering t time

b telescoping 1 stress sequence

c work platform load 2 reservoir/rainflow counting

d number of cycles 3 Stress spectrum

Figure H.1 Example of stress variations due to movements

Stress cycles can be identified from these resulting sequences/stress histories using one of the establishedstress cycle counting methods, such as the Rainflow or the Reservoir method. The principle of the Reservoirmethod is described Figure H.2.

The complete stress history of a certain point of the structure is obtained by summating the individual stresshistories taken from the sequences of movements of all different tasks.

Finally, the stress spectrum factor kcan be calculated.

It may also be determined from measurements.

7/26/2019 EN 280 2013 51_e_stf

12/17

EN 280:2013/FprA1:2015 (E)

12

Step 1:

Determine the stress history for the load event.Identify the largest peak B.

Step 2:

Move the part of the stress history on the left of B tothe end of the load event, i.e. link (A-B) to C.

Step 3:

Fill the resulting reservoir with water. The greatestdepth is the major stress cycle, i.e. 1 occursonce.

Step 4:

Drain on the greatest depth and find the newmaximum depth. 2

This is the second largest stress cycle.

Step 5 (and onwards):

Repeat step 4 until all the water is drained.

Stress-range spectrum:

The results of the cycle counting procedure may be

arranged in a stress-range spectrum.

Key

a cycles

t time

Figure H.2 Reservoir stress cycles counting method

7/26/2019 EN 280 2013 51_e_stf

13/17

EN 280:2013/FprA1:2015 (E)

13

H.3.2 Direct calculation of stress history class

For MEWPs, the stress spectrum factor kat a certain point of the structure and expressed as relative damageper working cycle, may be computed as

3

max

1 ii

i

k nN

=

and the corresponding stress history parameter smay be calculated as

62 10

totN

s k=

where

i is an index, running from 1 to the number of stress range classes used;

i is the stress range of class i;

ni is the number of stress cycles that fall into class i;

max is the maximum stress range at the point;

N is the number of work cycles used for evaluation of k;

Ntot is the number of work cycles during the life of the MEWP.

The stress history parameter sis classified in stress history classes S in accordance with Table H.2.

Table H.2 Classes S of stress history parameters

Class Value of stress history parameter s Characteristic value of s

S02 s0,002 0,002

S01 0,002 < s0,004 0,004

S0 0,004 < s0,008 0,008

S1 0,008 < s0,016 0,016

S2 0,016 < s0,032 0,032

S3 0,032 < s0,063 0,063

S4 0,063 < s0,125 0,125

S5 0,125 < s0,250 0,250

S6 0,250 < s0,500 0,500

S7 0,500 < s1,000 1,000

Different parts of the MWEP may be assigned different S classes or specific s values.

H.3.3 Simplified method to determine stress history class

For MEWPs having an extending structure, and where the stresses only get negligible contributions from otherloadings than the rated load and the weight of the work platform, the value of s may be estimated by:

7/26/2019 EN 280 2013 51_e_stf

14/17

EN 280:2013/FprA1:2015 (E)

14

N

k

r

rn

wm

wms

j

j

j

i rl

i

+

+=

3

max

6

i

3

102

where:

mrl is the rated load;

mi is the load level i;

ni is the number of load cycles at level mi;

w is the weight of the work platform;

rj is the working radius levelj;

rmax is the maximum working radius;

kj is the number of cycles at radius rj;

N is the total number of load cycles.

The computed s value will fall into one of the stress history classes given in Table H.2."

22 Addition of a new Annex I (informative)

Add the new Annex I, to read as follows:

"

7/26/2019 EN 280 2013 51_e_stf

15/17

EN 280:2013/FprA1:2015 (E)

15

Annex I(informative)

Fatigue assessment: Relationship between S classes in EN 13001-3-1

and B groups in DIN 15018

Before this standard came into force, fatigue assessment has been made with reference to NationalStandards. Many of them are now withdrawn, and thus not usable anymore for fatigue strength analysis.

A diagram which shows a visual comparison between S classes in EN 13001-3-1 and B groups in DIN 15018is presented, in order to give a help to manufacturers in the familiarization with the selection of S classes.

Key

1

N

k

N1 to N3

DIN S0 to DIN S3

S02, S01, S0 to S9

limit for need of fatigue assessment

number of stress cycles

stress spectrum factor

stress cycle classes in accordance with DIN 15018

stress spectrum classes in accordance with DIN 15018

stress history classes S in accordance with EN 13001-3-1

Figure I.1 B-S diagram"

23 Addition of a new Annex J (normative)

Add the new Annex J, to read as follows:

"

7/26/2019 EN 280 2013 51_e_stf

16/17

EN 280:2013/FprA1:2015 (E)

16

Annex J(normative)

Requirements for Performance Level d safety functions

J.1 General

J.1.1 Introduction

Some of the safety functions with a required Performance Level d (PL d) were previously assigned asrequiring category 3 (EN 954-1). According to EN ISO 13849-1, either a category 2 or a category 3architecture can achieve the average probability of dangerous failure per hour (PFHD) for a PL d safetyfunction.

If the requirements of J.1.2 cannot be satisfied, category 3 architecture will be the only practicable option.These requirements are intended to prevent a hazardous event from occurring (e.g. a dangerous situationsuch as instability due to the failure of the function/device) if the safety function is demanded after a singlefault.

J.1.2 Performance Level d safety functions utilising category 2 architecture

If a PL d safety function utilises category 2 architecture, it shall comply with all of the following requirements inaddition to relevant requirements of EN ISO 13849-1.

a) The machine shall be put into a safe state when the safety function detects the onset of a potentially

dangerous condition and this safe state shall be maintained until the potential for dangerous condition

elapses. It is insufficient for the safety function to only initiate an alarm. The safe state shall be defined in

the technical file, i.e. which functions are inhibited and which functions remain operational.

b) The safety function shall default the machine into a safe state on detection of any fault that can lead to

the loss of the safety function. This safe state shall be maintained until the fault has been resolved. It is

insufficient for the loss of the safety function to only initiate an alarm. The safe state shall be defined in

the technical file, i.e. which functions are inhibited and which functions remain operational.

c) The overall fault detection and reaction time for the above two conditions shall be sufficiently low so that a

dangerous condition is unlikely to occur. This shall be justified and recorded in the technical file.

d) The test function shall comply with all of the following:

1) The test rate or the demand rate of the safety function shall be defined.

2) The test rate shall be at least 100 times the demand rate.

3) The integrity of the monitoring function shall be evaluated as part of the overall safety function.

J.1.3 Performance Level d safety functions implemented by SIL 2 functions with a hardwarefault tolerance of zero

If a PL d safety function is to be implemented by an equivalent SIL 2 safety function with a hardware faulttolerance of zero in accordance with EN 62061, this shall also comply with J.1.2 in addition to relevantrequirements of EN 62061.

7/26/2019 EN 280 2013 51_e_stf

17/17

EN 280:2013/FprA1:2015 (E)

J.2 Requirements for unmonitored non-electrical parts of category 3 architectures

For PL d functions, unmonitored simple architectures with a predictable failure mode may be used where it isnot reasonably practicable to implement any form of monitoring function, provided all of the following aresatisfied:

a) Each channel meets the requirements of PL c utilising category 1 architecture.

b) The safe failure fraction of each unmonitored component that is contributory to the safety function shall

be at least 60 %.

c) The instruction handbook shall include a requirement to thoroughly inspect and test such systems in

order to identify any unrevealed failures. It shall also include details of defined test procedures, required

test equipment and the necessary inspection interval, which shall not exceed 12 months. A detailed

inspection procedure shall be specified in the instructions for maintenance by specialised personnel, see

7.1.1.7(f) item (3).

NOTE Such systems can be unsuitable if high quality inspection and testing cannot be guaranteed."

24 Addition to the Bibliography

Add to the Bibliography:

"IIW-1823-07 ex XIII-2151r4-07/XV-1254r4-07, December 2008 Recommendations for fatigue design of

welded joints and components (Hobbacher, A.: IIW International Institute of Welding)"

en 280 2013 51_e_stf

Documents