Noseweight Limit

[ProfJohnL]

...........
I know of no authority that is likely to check a trailer/caravan noseweight other than a DVSA officer working alongside a police officer.

What method do the DVSA use to measure noseweight?

I can't believe they use a piece of wood on bathroom scales?

Hello Gaffer,

Playing devils advocate?

Specifically who can officially assess compliance is not relevant to my post, its the fact there are authorities who can. Don't forget this is EU law not just UK, so it's potentially an issue for anyone travelling in the EU.

Again one of the points in my post is the systems available to the consumer are not as advanced or accurate as those used by the authorities. Don't forget that for a prosecution on a weight or load issue the measurement device used by the assessor has to be officially calibrated and certified, something that none of the consumer units are.

Your post gives me the impression you're saying 'no one seems to be prosecuted for excess nose load, so why bother'. Well it may be true that the incidence of nose load prosecutions may be low, but does that mean its OK to flout the law?

Can you deny the benefits of using best practice? The effort used to use the non compliant methods is not a lot less than doing it right. So why not do it right and be confident, than to always leave you wondering if you are OK or not.

 

[Gafferbill]

Hello Gaffer,

Your post gives me the impression you're saying 'no one seems to be prosecuted for excess nose load, so why bother'. Well it may be true that the incidence of nose load prosecutions may be low, but does that mean its OK to flout the law?

..........you have got the wrong impression Prof

The only point we dissagree on is the level of accuracy required when a caravanner checks their caravans noseweight.
A caravanner should be aware of their particular caravan's nose limit in respect of their outfit and do their best to adhere to it bearing in mind that the law is stating the static limits.
Once the outfit is moving noseweights vary considerably with the pitching of the outfit and will certainly exceed the static limit on occasions.

 

[Dustydog]

I now use a Reich digital nose weight gauge first shown to me by our Woosie King.My old rusty yellow spring Milenco in the bin.Even on the TA I could
change the nw by 10 kgs with a bit of finger pressure..
With the Reich just moving a few coats around causes a significant difference.
On the move as Gaffer Bill points out there will be constant variations second by second.
I had a quick trawl of the net and can't find reference to any nose weight prosecutions. The Selby rail crash mentions weights but the prime cause was another matter.
I confess I don't measure every trip but I do know we load exactly the same each time used gas taken into account.
Like everything on here I suspect most of us are sensible.It's the ones who caravan once a year fully laden who are probably most at risk.
Bill. As this is EU law have you ever been challenged across the channel?

 

[Parksy]

....On the move as Gaffer Bill points out there will be constant variations second by second.
I had a quick trawl of the net and can't find reference to any nose weight prosecutions. The Selby rail crash mentions weights but the prime cause was another matter.
I confess I don't measure every trip but I do know we load exactly the same each time used gas taken into account.
Like everything on here I suspect most of us are sensible.It's the ones who caravan once a year fully laden who are probably most at risk.
Bill. As this is EU law have you ever been challenged across the channel?

Like most others I measured my noseweight with the caravan loaded and use it as a benchmark for loading my t/a caravan each time.
I don't knowingly overload my caravan which is in storage, so it weighs pretty much the same whenever we hitch up.
Most of our extra stuff from home including our awning and ground sheet easily fits into the towing vehicle and is loaded at home before we are anywhere near our caravan.
I'd be surprised if DVSA inspectors checked caravan noseweight, they would be much more likely to check the overall weights, but noseweight limits are important because towing hitches and towballs, including the fastening bolts, have set limits which mustn't be exceeded.
Excessive noseweight as a contributory factor in the event of failure or accident would be extremely difficult to establish or to prove, and I seriously doubt if police or DVSA officials have any noseweight measuring devices for touring caravans, or if they did they would be no more accurate than anything that we would have access to.
Too little noseweight can cause caravan instability and too much can shorten the life of hitch components and in extreme cases cause tow vehicle instability so even with no real chance of prosecutions it's still worthwhile.

 

[ProfJohnL]

Hello Parksy,

I'm sorry, but it's wrong to relax the issue of nose loading, just because there is no clear evidence of prosecutions. The absence of reports does not mean there haven't been any, but more likely in the context of caravans, if anyone has been found to be over the SVNL limit, the officers may well simply have advised the driver, and oversee them rearranging the loading of the vehicles to bring the nose load down to within limit.

In terms of measuring the nose load, this can be achieved without the use of a dedicated nose load gauge. If we consider a SA outfit then it has 3 axles. A B & C. A similar process can be adopted for TA's, but where appropriate you have to add axle E into the equations.

The outfits total weight is found by adding A+B+C, and can be compared to the tow vehicles Gross Train Weight limit.

The tow vehicles weighty is found by adding A+B, and can be compared to the tow vehicles MAM or GVW

The trailed weight is just C and can be compared to the tow vehicles permitted trailed weight limits.

Each axle can be compared to their permitted limits.

By uncoupling the trailer, and reweighing the tow vehicle, the difference in the uncoupled weight (A+B uncoupled) to the (A+B Coupled) is the nose load, and can be compared to the tow vehicle and trailers limits for SVNL.

The Trailers MTPLM can be compared to the sum of the SNVL + Axle C

This process is easy for the authorities if they suspect an overload situation. It also ensures the hitch is at the ride height and is developing its real nose load value.

Why perpetuate a set of unsatisfactory traditional methods when for only a little more effort, a safer and more precise method can be adopted with little cost, but with significant legal advantages.

The authorities are looking more closely at vehicle weights on our roads, so it pays to have confidence that your outfit complies.

 

[Parksy]

Hello Parksy,

I'm sorry, but it's wrong to relax the issue of nose loading, just because there is no clear evidence of prosecutions. The absence of reports does not mean there haven't been any, but more likely in the context of caravans, if anyone has been found to be over the SVNL limit, the officers may well simply have advised the driver, and oversee them rearranging the loading of the vehicles to bring the nose load down to within limit.

In terms of measuring the nose load, this can be achieved without the use of a dedicated nose load gauge. If we consider a SA outfit then it has 3 axles. A B & C. A similar process can be adopted for TA's, but where appropriate you have to add axle E into the equations.

The outfits total weight is found by adding A+B+C, and can be compared to the tow vehicles Gross Train Weight limit.

The tow vehicles weighty is found by adding A+B, and can be compared to the tow vehicles MAM or GVW

The trailed weight is just C and can be compared to the tow vehicles permitted trailed weight limits.

Each axle can be compared to their permitted limits.

By uncoupling the trailer, and reweighing the tow vehicle, the difference in the uncoupled weight (A+B uncoupled) to the (A+B Coupled) is the nose load, and can be compared to the tow vehicle and trailers limits for SVNL.

The Trailers MTPLM can be compared to the sum of the SNVL + Axle C

This process is easy for the authorities if they suspect an overload situation. It also ensures the hitch is at the ride height and is developing its real nose load value.

Why perpetuate a set of unsatisfactory traditional methods when for only a little more effort, a safer and more precise method can be adopted with little cost, but with significant legal advantages.

The authorities are looking more closely at vehicle weights on our roads, so it pays to have confidence that your outfit complies.

I wasn't aware that I had relaxed the issue of nose loading Prof.
If you read my comment you will see that I wrote : ' ....but noseweight limits are important because towing hitches and towballs, including the fastening bolts, have set limits which mustn't be exceeded'.
I was merely stating the fact that it would be extremely difficult to prove that excessive nose weight was a contributory factor in an incident involving a touring caravan but if you can come up with a scenario whereby an offence of excessive nose weight involving a moving touring caravan could be proven in court I'm happy to be shown the error of my weighs. (pun intended)
I'm of the opinion that the issue of overloading of any kind in respect of touring caravans is paramount but there's a greater likelihood of successful prosecution of an offence involving general overloading, construction and use etc.

 

[ProfJohnL]

........... if you can come up with a scenario whereby an offence of excessive nose weight involving a moving touring caravan could be proven in court I'm happy to be shown the error of my weighs. (pun intended)

I'm Sorry Parksy if I misinterpreted your previous posting. now to this one, I'm surprised that you have made a spelling mistake especially when dealing with such a loaded subject......

In fact its really difficult to look at the dynamic nose load whilst a vehicle is in motion, for two reasons, firstly its is constantly changing which means actually interpreting the readings is very difficult (I know because of work that we did at MIRA on appliance reliability under road induced vibration) and the equipment to actually take such reading is massively expensive.

So the solution is to only look at the SVNL. Consequently even if you could measure the dynamic loads and if they are above the SNVL no offence has been committed.

We should all be concerned with overloading and avoid it like the plague, but my point is not so much to do with caravan incidents, but more to do with how to manage the run of the mill roadside vehicle inspections.

 

[M5WJF]

I've read all this with interest, but am still of the opinion that this sounds very much a matter of common sense, since apart from the ingenious methods of bathroom scales, bits of wood, and strangely positioned caravan steps, your average joe will probably have a much less reliable method of measurement that is commercially available to him, one that isn't calibrated daily.

This just appears to be the Caravanning Equivalent of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, of static and dynamic weights position, combined with uncertain methods of measurement while the vehicle has momentum, or not.

Where you can perhaps attempt to measure the one, inaccurately, but not the other.

Gaffer bill hits the nail on the head, what equipment does any enforcement authority use? I suspect they haven't got any such equipment, and as we cannot find any enforcement that has taken place, either to regular caravaners, or indeed the once a year brigade, or indeed any instances where failure of tow ball, rated at 3.5 tonnes, or hitch mechanism, rated similarly, has taken place or been documented as causing an 'accident' by use of an improper nose weight, I therefore suspect this is all a matter of academic interest.

The defence in any Court would be that there isn't any reliably accurate commercially available nose weight measuring product, designed for the purpose, that can reasonably be purchased by a member of the public intent on towing a caravan in a reasonable fashion in compliance with the Law.

The word reasonable is the factor here, as compliance with the Law is reasonably impracticable, by anyone, industry career and bathroom scales plus bits of wood and caravan steps aside. Either the accused is acquitted, or all towing is immediately banned as no-one is complying with the Law.

All very interesting, but as I live on a hillside, without any level ground within at least a mile of my location, I'd never be able to comply with nose weight regulations, and I suspect no-one else could either, mine's a pint.

 

[ProfJohnL]

Hello M5WJF,

It's some the views expressed in your post that demonstrate the inertia to adopting best practice.

I've read all this with interest, but am still of the opinion that this sounds very much a matter of common sense, since apart from the ingenious methods of bathroom scales, bits of wood, and strangely positioned caravan steps, your average joe will probably have a much less reliable method of measurement that is commercially available to him, one that isn't calibrated daily.

Sadly 'common sense' is rather like the issue of traditions, where it's one of the excuses used to justify not having thought about the matter in hand, and why common sense is so often shown to be less than ideal.

"Strangely positioned caravan steps" Nothing 'strange' about it. It's a handy secondary use of piece of equipment that's in most caravanners arsenal. Its stable, and should as they are usually designed for a 20st person stepping on them, they should be more than capable of safely withstanding the nose load of a caravan. A much better/safer solution than balancing a hitch on the top of a wooden stick!

This just appears to be the Caravanning Equivalent of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, of static and dynamic weights position, combined with uncertain methods of measurement while the vehicle has momentum, or not.

The first part of this may be true but the SVNL measurement process as defined in the EU directives ONLY calls for the static case, there are well identified criteria which produce a robust outcome. There are inevitably some uncertainties, but these are small in comparison to the set criteria and will have a minimal effect on outcomes provide the set criteria are properly followed.

Gaffer bill hits the nail on the head, what equipment does any enforcement authority use? I suspect they haven't got any such equipment,

This is pure speculation, and does not constitute a reason for not compling with the law. Even if it were currently true, that does not preclude the authorities obtaining relevant equipment in the future. And we don't know what equipment other EU authorities would use. Besides in an earlier post I gave an example of how even with a just a weighbridge, there are simple methods of extracting the SVNL information.

and as we cannot find any enforcement that has taken place, either to regular caravaners, or indeed the once a year brigade,

I covered this possibility in a previous thread, and importantly it's not the number of prosecutions, it's the prevention of acting illegally. And the frequency of usage is irrelevant.

........or indeed any instances where failure of tow ball, rated at 3.5 tonnes, or hitch mechanism, rated similarly, has taken place or been documented as causing an 'accident' by use of an improper nose weight, I therefore suspect this is all a matter of academic interest.

The 'capability' of the equipment fitted to tow vehicles and trailers has been discussed, and is more than able to withstand loads greatly in excess of the SVNL, it has to be to cope the dynamic loading induced by towing. This is not about possible mechanical failure, it's just about staying legal. This is not just an academic issue, It has relevance to every caravanner, as they could be inspected anytime they tow on the roads.

The defence in any Court would be that there isn't any reliably accurate commercially available nose weight measuring product, designed for the purpose, that can reasonably be purchased by a member of the public intent on towing a caravan in a reasonable fashion in compliance with the Law.

The issue here is about complying with a legal limit. There is no tolerance, you are either compliant or not compliant. The matter would be based on the measurements produced by the prosecuting authorities. The authorities will know the calibration and uncertainty of their equipment and would only prosecute if they could confidently demonstrate the limit had been exceeded. Just like speeding, The courts would not take the admission that the users speedometer was inaccurate as a mitigating circumstance, so they would not accept the inherent uncertainty of the user's nose load gauge as a mitigating circumstance.

What ever method a user uses to set up a system, it is always the user's responsibility to ensure their equipment is capable of producing reliable compliant results. If for example a nose load gauge has a known -10kg under read, then the user must add 10kg to any reading they get, But in most cases the retail gauges have no known accuracy, poor consistency. and fundamentally do not assess the nose load at the actual coupled ride height.

The word reasonable is the factor here, as compliance with the Law is reasonably impracticable, by anyone, industry career and bathroom scales plus bits of wood and caravan steps aside. Either the accused is acquitted, or all towing is immediately banned as no-one is complying with the Law.

Absolutely disagree! Compliance with the law is eminently practical, the criteria and method is well defined by the EU directives, what is not so well defined are the items produced and the advice given by the industry. It's not a matter of 'can't ' more a matter of won't.

All very interesting, but as I live on a hillside, without any level ground within at least a mile of my location, I'd never be able to comply with nose weight regulations, and I suspect no-one else could either, mine's a pint.

Regardless of personal inconveniences, it is the driver's responsibility to ensure their outfit is road legal. How you achieve it is not a problem, but how it may be assessed by the authorities is quite clear.

Yours might be a pint, but is the bar horizontal and does that include the head or not?

 

[Gafferbill]

The issue for me here is that the OP's question was answered by MikeyW at post 2.

Most of us that post on this forum are interested in this leisure pursuit....its practicalities and its responsibilities.
The static noseweight limit as set out by law is arrived at as a figure to provide best practice for a particular outfit.
The limit is finite in law but not in how the law is practised.
The idea that each caravanner has to have this static figure measured to the nearest gram to make sure he is not breaking the law maybe fine in a university lecture theatre but is not the reality in the real world.

I have probably had more experience of how the DVSA work than anyone who posts on this forum.
Parksy has already mentioned that he would be surprised if they ever checked noseweight or saw it as a priority as would I.
I would also add that if they did check noseweight they would most likely work with the method of placing the jockey wheel of an unhitched caravan on a weighing plate.
Not accurate for the academic world...........but they would just be checking for gross overloading anyway if they saw a sagging rear axle on a tow car.

To clinically dissect and appear to rubbish peoples posts on this forum I for one find a complete turn off.

 

[Parksy]

I'm no legal expert but I do know that the burden of proof belongs to the prosecutor and that many legal tests are governed by precedent.
Given that there is no reliable method of regularly checking noseweight which is available to the caravanning public I'd pay good money to see how a prosecution would successfully proceed if a caravanner can show that they have acted in good faith (by producing a noseweight gauge for example or even a receipt for one which pre-dated the 'charge' whatever that may be)
For me this thread has developed into a bit of a nitpicking contest, most of us who use this forum are aware of the law and strive to obey it when it comes to towing our caravan.
This over emphasis on one facet of a law handed down by the EU which in reality is well nigh impossible to enforce is rather irksome.
We've established several methods of checking noseweight at the correct ride height, none of which are 100% accurate, so it's difficult to see any reason for this thread to rumble on like a stuck record. :dry: