Daveg
NT & VTS Council member
I believe I am perfect, but others may differ in opinion?
Posts: 1,549
|
Post by Daveg on Aug 27, 2009 20:33:59 GMT
What decision would you take, it's off a 55 plate VW Dave Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by jonesy1975 on Aug 27, 2009 21:13:32 GMT
providing that the brake performance is as it should be then i would say it is a pass & advise , the pitting does not look to be very deep & looks to be nothing more than very light surface pitting .
|
|
Daveg
NT & VTS Council member
I believe I am perfect, but others may differ in opinion?
Posts: 1,549
|
Post by Daveg on Aug 27, 2009 21:38:29 GMT
I did my best to try and see if it could be scraped off, but could not make any headway through the pitting, in my view had definately penetrated the surface of the Chromium base.
I have been collecting loads of pictures like these over time with mot testing, next year I am on a refresher training course at VOSA, so am going to take the pictures along to see what the Trainer thinks, instead of just talking the manual.
|
|
scoot
Nominated Tester
Posts: 305
|
Post by scoot on Aug 27, 2009 22:12:13 GMT
Pass and advise,on my 3 day training course they showed us discs that were alot worse,i would haved failed them straight away,but vosa trainer said they were pass and advise!
|
|
|
Post by mountains on Aug 28, 2009 7:52:58 GMT
pass and advise. the tester on my demo said this of a corsa we had failed and they were worse than this he also said because we had no way of measuring the thickness same outcome. although the old story they were renewed when the vehicle was serviced
|
|
Daveg
NT & VTS Council member
I believe I am perfect, but others may differ in opinion?
Posts: 1,549
|
Post by Daveg on Aug 28, 2009 17:48:29 GMT
What I find the mot interesting is what the manual says regarding the disc condition shown. (3.5.1h) says a brake disc excessively scored, pitted or worn?
Do I read that as; excessively scored, excessively pitted, excessively worn, or as it is written in the manual, as shown above?
When I oriiginally posted the picture I tried to select the worst part of the disc, and as I previously pointed out, I could not lightly scrape off the surface corrosion/pitting, which had clearly bitten into the disc face. Now I appreciate we have all seen disc faces significantly worse than the example I posted here, but if that disc face is pitted to the extent that the original face cannot be seen, as in this example, except for the outer circumference, then in the effected area how can that be considered not to be excessively pitted?
I also respect what you testers are saying, and what VOSA have said to you on previous training courses, but how can that opinion be a standard if no further guidance is given via the manual or the computerisation?
|
|
|
Post by welshtemplar on Aug 28, 2009 21:22:41 GMT
The standard VOSA line will remind you that we are looking for the component to meet minimum standards, if you try to draw them on the matter they will tell you its subjective and down to your judgement, but if there is any doubt you should go in favour of the presenter and pass and advise.
|
|
graham
Nominated Tester
Posts: 331
|
Post by graham on Aug 28, 2009 22:03:18 GMT
Ohhhh dear, not the old disc pitted problem again... I assume from Dave's posts that he would fail yet all the others are P& A. Well IMO a FAIL. Sorry guys, I know what you are saying about trainers comments and refresher course ""advice"", MOT standards and service standards, but those discs are too far gone. In the good old days one of the criteria was "would you feel safe driving this car on the motoway with your wife and kids in it." Would you? be honest. They are well past their sell by date. Graham
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 28, 2009 23:12:17 GMT
What I find the mot interesting is what the manual says regarding the disc condition shown. (3.5.1h) says a brake disc excessively scored, pitted or worn? Do I read that as; excessively scored, excessively pitted, excessively worn, or as it is written in the manual, as shown above? The RfR for failing a brake disc is: Excessively scored; Excessively pitted; Excessively worn. The wording in the manual isn't exactly helpful, but if you read it in conjunction with the VTS Device fail & advise descriptions you will be able to work out what the manual is trying to say. If excessively wasn't referring to ALL 3 items then how 'worn' would a brake disc have to be to fail ?
|
|
Daveg
NT & VTS Council member
I believe I am perfect, but others may differ in opinion?
Posts: 1,549
|
Post by Daveg on Aug 29, 2009 12:40:31 GMT
What I find the mot interesting is what the manual says regarding the disc condition shown. (3.5.1h) says a brake disc excessively scored, pitted or worn? Do I read that as; excessively scored, excessively pitted, excessively worn, or as it is written in the manual, as shown above? The RfR for failing a brake disc is: Excessively scored; Excessively pitted; Excessively worn. The wording in the manual isn't exactly helpful, but if you read it in conjunction with the VTS Device fail & advise descriptions you will be able to work out what the manual is trying to say. If excessively wasn't referring to ALL 3 items then how 'worn' would a brake disc have to be to fail ? The problem with the word "excessive" is that it sounds "harsh" and some interpret that word as if the component being examined must be "severe" before a fail is issued. VOSA may give their opinion as to what they think the condition of a vehicle component should be in, where that word "excessive" is used in that part of a regulation, but when you consider there are around 50 000 mot testers making decisions on vehicle components, then those testers are going to make significantly different decisions unless VOSA plainly show people the type of standard they consider to meet the fail criteria. The National Standard word "excessive" is understood to mean; That a component has gone beyond a permitted limit, which must be a standard agreed, which the manufacturer produces, but VOSA accept a lower limit. The component has worn by an abnormal amount, so a ball joint swinging loose within its socket could be considered as a example, take VSI which now in some instances includes the manufacturer recommendations for maximum free play in ball joints, where I have seen figures quoted between 0.4 - 01mm, after this they are considered excessive and have an abnormal amount of movement. Then we could say that something is excessively worn when that component has "more than the normal movement", so you may look at bushes on the suspension of vehicles, normally you check them and no free play is present, then on one vehicle you notice free play, and you think to yourself, it's not that bad in my personal opinion, but a VE from VOSA isn't thinking about your personal opinon when checking the bush? Now you have a person who is asking oneself, what is the criteria to be met here? The VE looks into the manual at (2.4G.3) and see's there are some specifications to use as a guide, so if your thinking is outside those guidlines then a Contemplated Withdrawel is considered against the tester? Dave
|
|
graham
Nominated Tester
Posts: 331
|
Post by graham on Aug 29, 2009 13:18:41 GMT
Coming home on Friday I joined a long traffic jam, Eventually reaching the top of the "T" junction there was 2 Police traffic cars and a Rover 214 blocking one carriageway. A quick sideways glance showed one front wheel of the 214 in the straight ahead position, the other turned outwards at 45 degrees. I wonder if that TRE (assuming that is what failed) had a P&A a couple of months ago for slight play.
|
|
Daveg
NT & VTS Council member
I believe I am perfect, but others may differ in opinion?
Posts: 1,549
|
Post by Daveg on Aug 29, 2009 13:49:53 GMT
This seems to me to be a problem with the issue of VT32's. Some testers think that it is a standard get out of jail document when they don't think they should fail a component, but the VT32 should only be considered after the tester has completely understood the correct regulation to apply to the component being examined, and if that component is not worn beyond what is considered normal, but has slight wear then the issue of a VT32 should be issued.
The second problem is that presenters of vehicles think that any items listed on the VT32 giving advice do not require attention, and therefore can be ignored, which "maybe" the Rover 214 in Grahams example above?
Presenters of vehicles are not engineers and although they have a general idea based on things they have heard or read about, this does not give them the in depth understanding of the component condition under consideration, so by another example, simple tyre pressures, does anybody ever consider that tyre pressures significantly below the manufacturer recommendations can produce "Under" and "Oversteer" conditions.
There used to be a time when our Trade had a good name for the right reasons, but unfortunately I think over the years Government have brought the trade into a disrespectful state of disrepair.
|
|
hayden
Nominated Tester
VTS AEDM, SM & QC
Posts: 828
|
Post by hayden on Sept 13, 2009 6:44:29 GMT
hi there have to disagree with welshtemplar ( if in doubt go in favor of presenter and pass and advise) if in doubt go in favor of SAFETY and FAIL. if the presenter disagrees they can always appeal. somehow after seeing the discs i don't think they would. not here to do favors but to make cars as safe as we are allowed to. just my opinion. ;D
|
|
Daveg
NT & VTS Council member
I believe I am perfect, but others may differ in opinion?
Posts: 1,549
|
Post by Daveg on Sept 13, 2009 8:32:36 GMT
I suppose that by observation of the brake disc above, some testers would look at that brake disc and say to themselves that it would not be in an unsafe condition, then some testers may say to themselves let's see what the rolling road results conclude?
Did the brake grab or judder in operation?
Nobody asked the question?
How did the service brake perform in relation to The Method of Inspection (3.7A.5c/6)? nobody asked?
What result did the parking brake performance check conclude? Again, nobody asked?
Should the result Pass or Fail or issuing an advisory VT32 be down to the testers own personal opinion?
We all make decisions everyday of every test item we observe, but when we make a final decision to do something, what is that decision based on?
I know your going to say experience, but then I am going to ask, but what standard of experience backed up by what knowledge and understanding?
|
|
|
Post by jonesy1975 on Sept 13, 2009 11:39:31 GMT
I was recently shocked at the state of the brake discs on a 7.5 t horse box , the hgv fitter at work said they were a fail , we all said they should fail & when it went to the gvts for mot it passed with just an advisory on the discs . I know for a fact that if i had a vehicle presented to me with discs in anywhere near that state I would have no hesitation in failing it . just wish i had taken a photo to show how bad they really were. the tester had basically said it didn't matter that the discs were rotten & covered in scale as they passed the brake performance .
|
|
hayden
Nominated Tester
VTS AEDM, SM & QC
Posts: 828
|
Post by hayden on Sept 13, 2009 17:23:43 GMT
quiz time. question for all here, if it were your car used for carrying round your kids, grandkids etc---- and you discovered your discs in this condition would you A) replace them. B) not replace them, or C) have someone else decide for you. press buzzer know. ;D
at the end of the day each tester must make his/her own decision.
|
|
|
Post by jonesy1975 on Sept 13, 2009 17:49:53 GMT
on my own car the answer would have to be A , but i'm the sort of person who replaces tyres at 3mm instead of 1.6mm, lol
|
|
hayden
Nominated Tester
VTS AEDM, SM & QC
Posts: 828
|
Post by hayden on Sept 13, 2009 18:04:28 GMT
hi i wonder what a poll of 100 presenters that were shown discs as if they were on their own cars would say. my guess would be majority would replace. i think most of them would be supprised if not shocked if they passed an MOT test.
|
|
Daveg
NT & VTS Council member
I believe I am perfect, but others may differ in opinion?
Posts: 1,549
|
Post by Daveg on Sept 13, 2009 22:02:00 GMT
It is a very long time since I have been to the then Heywood HGV Test Station with HGV Vehicles for testing, this was back when I was an HGV Engineer. When we had HGV's in for Testing we had to put them into the steam clean bay and give them a very serious steam cleaning, then we moved the trucks into the workshop and carried out a complete inspection. If any faults were found they were put onto a report and then sent into the managers office via the foreman. When he returned with the instruction to carry out repairs we then dismantled whatever was to be repaired and collected our parts from our own in house parts store. In those days we did not collect say a new water pump from the stores, what we were given was a repair kit, so we had to remanufacturer components and systems in house, then Our vehicles was quality checked internally before sending out to the then Heywood HGV Test Station. Most of our Trucks did pass the test first time as we had a very high integrity of workmanship, we had our own Training School which all apprentices had to attend, and in those days you had to seriously put the effort in to pass the course as if you failed, the company was informed, and if you failed your re-sit exam then you were dismissed from employment. Not like today were anybody can get under a bonnet and do whatever they wish? From what some of you are saying about VOSA on this forum, it would appear that their standards have significantly reduced, but my own experience did'nt reflect what is being said today, however times have changed and even some VE's I have read about are now inspecting vehicles and advising engineers how to do the job, and their own personal experience is basically from a class room and from in some examples from the cashiers seat at the local Natwest bank, and that is true not a joke?
|
|
hayden
Nominated Tester
VTS AEDM, SM & QC
Posts: 828
|
Post by hayden on Sept 14, 2009 6:01:30 GMT
hi a man once sang, (the times they are a changing ) how true.
|
|