Team-BHP (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/)

-   Road Safety (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/road-safety/)

-   -   Accidents in India | Pics & Videos (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/road-safety/109249-accidents-india-pics-videos-1387.html)

Witnessed this accident at Taloja flyover on Sion-Panvel highway. Looks like an articulated lorry carrying sheet metal roll. The lashings for the roll seem to have come undone and cause this horrible accident. The place has a downward slope, which could have further caused more damage as the driver would have applied brakes. The momentum of the roll has crushed the cab and the roll stopped few meters from the crash site.

This is why your cargo must be properly secured. Also, can anyone shed light on why the rolls are kept vertical (like a tyre) and not horizontal (like a pizza) ? One reason that I could think of is the easy to load/unload factor.

I went through the link. Well what about it. That's a totally different mishap from the alto one in question. It's a frontal collision! With... a truck!! How does that have anything in common with the dead doctors situation? I'm curious

Thats the only reason why they are kept like that.
However I have noticed when these same rolls are transported by rail, they are kept flat.

In the case of trucks, there are trailers which have a dip in their bed where these rolls can be placed so they don't move even though they are secured.

The reason for keeping them 'like tyre' is to 1. easy to load and unload and 2. in this angle it's easy to secure them from rolling by latching them from both the sides.

Generally a wooden or metal stoppers would be placed on both the sides and subsequently secured with multiple latches. A regular supplier understands the serious 'weight' and 'load factor'. From the picture, it seems to be a very serious damage, hope the driver is safe. Looks like they took it very casual to transport this heavy stuff.

But that is an inherently unsafe way of keeping them. You have to take care of the rolling bit, but also the toppling over side to side. Why do they insist?
Could it also be that laying the rolls on their side would mean they would exceed the bed width of the trucks?

It does seem very unlikely, though, doesnt it?

My guess is the time saved in loading / unloading and also the type of heavy equipment available at yards.

The width should be enough for them to lie flat as well.
I've seen specific trailers for this type of load. The one in this case looks like a trailer used for the containers.

IB officer investigating the Vyapam scam killed in a road accident.
Road accident, or "road accident" is up for debate.

https://thelogicalindian.com/news/51...road-accident/

Did you actually read through the link or just skimmed through it, saw the photo of a C-Class and made a few assumptions? The S-Class collided with a truck that was moving parallel to it. Besides that S-Class, there are dozens of stories of high-end cars colliding with parked trucks and fatalities occurring due to the lack of under-run bars. Also, I read your theory on how an S-class would have saved the day; firstly, there is no rebound possible here mate :uncontrol atleast not until the damage has been done long bonnet or not, the front will crumple before "rebounding". Secondly, no car's A-Pillars are designed to take such an impact.

These are Hot Rolled steel coils and can weigh around 27MT each.
The reason for placing them, as they are, is ofcourse for easy and fast load and unload factor and that such placed coils can be loaded and unloaded by various methods like: by forfklift OR passing sling through the inner eye and using crane OR by using C fork at factory sites]






The alternate method, most are discussing, is called EYE-TO-SKY and is used for lighter and mostly CRC coils and such coils are placed on wooden pallets.
However with heavier coils, there are alway chances of damage to coil like telescoping or unfurling



Regards-Sonu

Doesn't look like anyone made it. It was a convoy of such trucks. The other 4-5 were stopped ahead. Observing those, each roll was fastened using only 2 chains. Couldn't see if they used chokes or not. From the pic shared by ariesonu, there should be multiple chains holding on to the coils.


Thanks for sharing this info.

Awesome answer!

Here's another thought:

Braking forces (longitudinal) will always be higher than cornering forced (lateral). So as an in-between the two above solutions, why aren't the rolls placed in an eye-forward orientation (rather than the current eye-sidewards).

I could imagine they might be more likely to tip over in this kind of position, but at least they wont continue to roll forward and crush the cab!

How would one secure the bundle to the truck bed in eye-forward configuration? The accident above is probably negligence (without seeing what how the bundle was loaded and secured we cannot say for sure). I have often seen wedges places on either side of the bundle to ensure that the chains holding the bundle in place are not stressed to much.

HRC bundles are almost always stored and transported eye-sideways (see pic below).

BTW at least one lifting magnet manufacturer makes lifting magnets that can be used to lift such bundles in "eye-to-sky" configuration.
http://www.walkermagnet.com/lifting-...ter-series.htm

The first picture is horrific. Those makeshift chocks look woefully inadequate for the rolling load they're trying to hold stationary. No. of chains notwithstanding, there need to be proper wedge-shaped chocks (bolt/clamp-down type if feasible) to ensure the load doesn't roll during braking/cornering (depending on axis of loading, eye-forward or eye-sideways). It'll take a lot to stop a load of that size/weight once it starts moving, the safest thing to do is to not leave a chance for the movement to begin!

The way it's loaded in the first pic is a disaster waiting to happen.:Frustrati

Things happen without notice and more so accidents. In my driving life spanning over a good two decades and half, from God's grace, I never had a single scratch to my credit on whichever vehicle I had driven. But that was destined to change one fine and sunny Sunday; albeit, without any fault of mine.

Wife suggested to visit a mall in the afternoon for some shopping to avoid weekend evening rush. Started from home around 11 and by 11:15 we were at a traffic waiting for the lights to turn green. From nowhere this Tata - 407 truck came with some speed and hit my Safari with full force. The pictures to follow may not suggest the scale of impact but the impact was good enough to damage four vehicles standing in a row, starting with mine.

Called the cops and filed an FIR against the driver. Apparently the driver was found to be driving under the influence of alcohol. He was arrested and produced before the session court. I can still see the truck in front of the police station even today. Not sure how far the case has proceeded.

What happened in the accident:

I hit a brand new (without number) Amaze. The boot of the Amaze was pushed by a good feet and tail lights broken. The Amaze in turn hit a Dzire which resulted in a scrambled boot of the Dezire and broken Bonnet of Amaze. Amaze's A/C system was also damaged. And the Dzire hit an Auto in front with the passenger in it thrown out on the road.

Now my damage - Entire door gone for a toss. Both bumpers damaged beyond repair. Back tyre cover broken. Tail lights just flew apart. Back door glass smashed to smitherness.

Gave it to Tata Concored and got it back in 10 days time. The door and both Bonnets were replaced, so was the glass (of course). But the "Live To Drive" sticker couldn't be recovered. I am already missing the sticker. Guess what - need to order a fresh pack or can the generous Mods provide me one for free as a consolation for this poor accident victim? stupid:

Pictures Here:


The driver of the truck in the picture

Sorry to hear about the unfortunate incident. But still, you do have the credit of nil accident experience. Kudos to that! Even I could feel how painful it would be to see our favourite machine damaged and that too, because of some moron's fault.
Did the truck owner obliged to pay for the expenses incurred, or at least share it?
What was the reaction of other three vehicles?