Daveg
NT & VTS Council member
I believe I am perfect, but others may differ in opinion?
Posts: 1,549
|
Post by Daveg on Jul 14, 2012 20:36:50 GMT
Is it damaged enough to fail? Dave Attachments:
|
|
phaetonott
Nominated Tester
I may not be right but at least I am trying!
Posts: 376
|
Post by phaetonott on Jul 14, 2012 20:50:24 GMT
Yep. fail!
i can see through the hole so dirt can get in
|
|
alex
Nominated Tester
Posts: 305
|
Post by alex on Jul 14, 2012 20:52:40 GMT
To me that's also a fail
|
|
nitros44
Nominated Tester
esto es un negocio serio
Posts: 741
|
Post by nitros44 on Jul 14, 2012 21:15:59 GMT
Pass/ advise for me.
|
|
Daveg
NT & VTS Council member
I believe I am perfect, but others may differ in opinion?
Posts: 1,549
|
Post by Daveg on Jul 14, 2012 21:34:50 GMT
That is what I thought Nitros , I looked as closely as I could and given my understanding of the physics of dirt and water etc, and how the behaviour of such would occur on the open road, I also decided to pass and advise Dave
|
|
|
Post by excessive on Jul 14, 2012 22:14:28 GMT
Good work with the pictures Dave.
I'd be leaning towards a fail on this one, especially with the floods around at the moment lol
|
|
nitros44
Nominated Tester
esto es un negocio serio
Posts: 741
|
Post by nitros44 on Jul 14, 2012 23:40:02 GMT
New camera??
|
|
|
Post by aylesburyjock on Jul 15, 2012 7:28:34 GMT
With drier conditions than we have at the moment, dust is always being blown around, and that gaiter is NOT going to prevent it from entering the joint. Fail.
|
|
hayden
Nominated Tester
VTS AEDM, SM & QC
Posts: 828
|
Post by hayden on Jul 15, 2012 8:21:03 GMT
i would fail it in that condition.
|
|
Daveg
NT & VTS Council member
I believe I am perfect, but others may differ in opinion?
Posts: 1,549
|
Post by Daveg on Jul 15, 2012 15:02:05 GMT
There has to be a good reason why VOSA changed the wording of the manual from a split gaiter to a excessively damaged, deteriorated gaiter and to say that it must be to such an extent that it is likely to ingress dirt etc. When the gaiter in a split condition in the test bay is examined, the NT sees a split gaiter, but how many times do you see dirt and water inside a gaiter and or inside the CV joint? This is a very questionable area, the NT sees only a split CV gaiter and bases a decision on that, but for me VOSA added the part "likely to ingress dirt etc", in other words can you prove it, or is it in such a condition that when driven on the road it will pick up dirt etc, and if so why is there no dirt looking at you at the time of test? It is as I say not clear cut the answer. If an NT understood gear ratios and input speeds, then the drive shaft speed can be understood, and if say a drive shaft was rotating at say 640 revs/min, then on a normal road in the wet, what is the likely effect that the rain water would not damp down the dust, and what is the likely effect that the rain water would actually direct itself inside the CV gaiter? Like I said, the decisions are not clear cut anymore, otherwise VOSA would of left the wording as split CV gaiter? Dave
|
|
wally
Nominated Tester
Posts: 139
|
Post by wally on Jul 15, 2012 19:48:20 GMT
Like I said, the decisions are not clear cut anymore, otherwise VOSA would of left the wording as split CV gaiter? Dave That has been done on purpose so they can justify their jobs for the next few years trying to get consistant test results around the country Wally
|
|
|
Post by excessive on Jul 16, 2012 9:16:12 GMT
Aye, it makes you wonder doesn't it.
|
|
|
Post by aylesburyjock on Jul 16, 2012 15:14:00 GMT
Vosa were very clear, that it was the European directive to fail any cover used to retain grease which became damaged or deteriorated to the extent that it could no longer prevent the ingress of dirt etc. This of course covered C.V.gaiters as well as ball joint covers. Again with the overthinking. Can it prevent the ingress of dirt. Not 'is dirt going to try to get in?' If the edges of the split will not stay together, and from the photo it is very clear that they don't, it is a fail. If that vehicle was crawling through a flood for instance, water is going in, so please, no more bullshit about gear ratios, drive shaft speeds and the 'physics of dirt and water'. Honestly Dave you do try to make this job so much more difficult than it needs to be.
|
|
kjb
Full Member
Posts: 59
|
Post by kjb on Jul 16, 2012 18:10:55 GMT
I quite simply treat it, if grease can leak out,water,dust dirt can get in,fail 4 me
|
|
nitros44
Nominated Tester
esto es un negocio serio
Posts: 741
|
Post by nitros44 on Jul 16, 2012 21:47:59 GMT
After reading other members opinions and looking at the C.V.gaiter my opinion to pass/advise would have to remain. To justify a failure on a C.V.Gaiter it would have to be in ; a lot more serious state then this one. Looking at the C.V Gaiter its clear that its split and allowing lubricant out;and one might think that "if its allowing the lubricant out,then it may be allowing dirt in".Well the problem with that method of thinking is that ,the lubricant is being forced out due to the action of the shaft rotating and in my opinion it would be unlikely that dirt will enter as the damage on the gaiter is still able to some degree to prevent ingress in its present state. The reason for rejection is; A constant velocity joint gaiter missing or excessively damaged, deteriorated or insecure to the extent that it would no longer prevent the ingress of dirt etc. So bearing in mind the rfr above; And ask yourself this question . "Has the C.V.Gaiter reached the state where its totally impossible for it to stop ingress." In my opinion the reason for rejection means that the C.V,Gaiter would have to be that bad that during the method of inspection it was found that beyond doubt that the damage/deterioration of the gaiter has exposed the internals though out all the positions of the C.V.Gaiter/C.V.Joint,in other words exposed all the time. Even though the issue of gaiters and rfr"s are fairly new,i think we may be forgetting minimum standards here and the gaiter in the photo has not reached that minimum standard,in my opinion anyway. Another issue here is that the MOI is asking testers to VISUALLY examine the gaiters when jacked up,not the drive shafts normal running position is it ;when a cv gaiter is examined like this it may expose damage/deterioration due to the angle of the drive shaft on a CV gaiter that may not be an issue on the gaiter when its driven in its normal laden position.So going back to the photo,the chances are that when the CV gaiter settles back to its normal running position the gaiter will prevent ingress which removes any doubt in my mind
|
|
Daveg
NT & VTS Council member
I believe I am perfect, but others may differ in opinion?
Posts: 1,549
|
Post by Daveg on Jul 16, 2012 22:21:18 GMT
I like the part where VOSA say that an NT is expected to use experience and judgment in assessing the condition of a compoent. This thread sums it up really, NT's take a view that as soon as something looks worn or deteriorated because the manual reason for rejection says things like damaged and deteriorated, then it is automatically a fail I remember many years ago back in the day when the DfT trainer once made a remark about NT's on a refresher training course, if I remember correctly going off subject a little he said in regards to results of a brake test that NT's were very keen to fail vehicles, I think the example went something like; NSF 200 OSF 150 NSR 050 OSR 100 Service brake efficiency = 50% Rate of increase and decrease was about the same rate. The trainer went round the NT's indivdually asking each one pass or fail, and as soon as the first NT said fail, everyone followed the same answer, then when he got to me I said no, he then said I will come back to you. After asking all NT's he asked me why wound you not fail the brakes and I said because the "rate of increase and decrease are about the same", which means that on the increase mode the proportionality after 50Kgf with regards to the 100Kgf must have continued to increase beyond 50, so because the 50% service brake efficiency has been achieved, and the manual makes specific mention to this fact before an NT is supposed to make a decision to fail or pass it, then it is beyond doubt a pass and advise. He asked us another question regarding brake pipe corrosion, giving three examples of pipe in the training room, one was brand new and the other two had surface corrosion present, again as soon as one NT said fail it was like a domino effect all NT's said fail, the trainer then asked me what do you think David, I said nothing am I looking at there can I prove beyond doubt that the pipes have reduced in diameter, therefore the two with surface corrosion are a pass and advise, he replied that the NT's were again very keen. Daveg
|
|
|
Post by aylesburyjock on Jul 17, 2012 6:29:10 GMT
Having the vehicle on full lock Nitros would open the split up in exactly the same way as jacking the vehicle up. In the photo the edges of the split are clearly not together and sealing against 'the ingress of dirt etc'. Again I say the manual does not ask you to prove that it is going to be assaulted by 'dirt etc', it only asks can the gaiter keep it out. In the case of the gaiter in the photo, clearly it cannot. I too believe that just because grease is coming out, doesn't automatically mean dirt can get in, but in that photo, it clearly can. If I repeat what I said in my last post, If the driver was trying to go through a flood deep enough to go above that gaiter, then you will find 'etc' flowing in through that split and into the joint. Nothing is going to change that. Can you guarantee 100% that that situation could never arise? No. It's a fail. Dave, agreed on your brake readings, can't comment on your brake pipes, but happy to accept your decision. ;D
|
|
|
Post by excessive on Jul 18, 2012 17:35:49 GMT
I'm staying with my original view on the gaiter i.e A fail. I feel it's a bit of a stretch to say that that gaiter pictured is still capable of stopping the ingress of dirt. The rfr states that if the gaiter does not stop the ingress of dirt, then it is a fail - It doesn't place a value on how much dirt it has to stop, only that it has to stop it. Stop as in 'to cut off, intercept or withhold" If I was to pass that gaiter, I would be stating that no dirt can pass through those holes. Bottom line, a hole does not stop ingress, even if vosa want to tell us otherwise
|
|
nitros44
Nominated Tester
esto es un negocio serio
Posts: 741
|
Post by nitros44 on Jul 19, 2012 0:14:12 GMT
Its obvious the gaiter is split,but take another look at the photo and see what has come out of the gaiter in the vicinity of the holes and ask the question what the substance is likely to do in the shorterm with regards to dirt.dust,water from floods ,water from highways.water from streams and if your feeling brave how about a river.The holes aren't that big and take into consideration the location on the shaft with regards to the issue
|
|
|
Post by aylesburyjock on Jul 19, 2012 6:13:10 GMT
Same as with the track rod end Nitros. If dirt etc was blown at it, that gaiter would be physically unable to keep it out at various points through it's turning positions.
|
|