The Road Haulage Association's roller brake testing accreditation scheme ensures engineers are up to scratch and ready for all the essential changes from 1 April. Ben Spencer reports
The safety risks associated with non-compliant brake tests could cause nothing short of a disaster. In a workshop, a vehicle more than 3.5 tonnes could easily move off the brake tester during an assessment if the wheels have not been chocked beforehand. This could cause a crushing injury for nearby personnel if there is another vehicle parked just behind the one being tested.
There are also wider implications if an engineer or technician fails to read or interpret issues flagged up in the results of a brake test. Such an oversight could mean that vehicles are signed off as being roadworthy when they will only deteriorate between inspection cycles – and this could potentially lead to crashes and fatalities on public roads.
To ensure compliance at every stage, the Road Haulage Association (RHA) runs a roller brake testing accreditation scheme (www.tinyurl.com/m55ur6af). This course allows maintenance providers to send an apprentice or mechanic on a course to prove they are competent at carrying out a brake test. The course is also relevant for seasoned technicians who may have qualified at a time where there was less focus on health and safety.
Aaron Peters, head of technical, engineering and policy at RHA, says: “A lot of technicians who have qualified years ago through an apprenticeship or work placement scheme may have an outdated understanding of the systems. This course will allow them to refresh their knowledge and prove that they are competent at carrying out a brake test with a valid certification that is approved by the IMI.”
Having this level of competency is important because it clamps down on another issue: workers inputing the wrong DTP number. This error would cause the brake tester to look for different figures as a ‘pass’ criteria. So, what are the implications of this error? Well, the brake tester could assess a vehicle with a 26-tonne chassis as an 18-tonne chassis, which would lead to far lower brake efficiency figures.
“We are trying to educate them on how to check that the DTP number is correct and the correct criteria for that vehicle,” Peters continues. “Alarm bells would start ringing for anyone with this knowledge who sees that the DTP number for the vehicle has ‘passed’ but is showing the wrong weight per axle, whereas someone who‘s not trained up would probably just accept the result.”
As part of the RHA scheme, a tutor will take the participants through the process of checking the DTP number, which can be done via two methods:
• An engineer can download a full list of all DTP numbers from the government website
• Match the DTP number listed on the vehicle plating certificate with the chassis number on the vehicle.
Those who are unsure can download this information as an Excel spreadsheet and search for the DTP number. The engineer would then cross-reference information relating to the manufacturer, number of axles and vehicle weights to ensure it is the correct vehicle type.
Additionally, those undertaking the scheme will also cover theory-based learnings on the basic requirements for carrying out the brake test – chocking the wheels and making sure the suspension is at the right height, an area that is dictated by the manufacturer.
As part of the assessment criteria, participants will undertake both a written and verbal exam, followed by a brake test demonstration where they must determine any issues that can have an impact on the braking system such as imbalance or wheel lockouts.
But what happens if someone fails to meet the assessment criteria? “Generally, the decision would be down to the employer who put them on the course. We can offer bespoke one-to-one training as well as an e-learning suite based on the theory behind brake testing. The employer who sent the participant on the course may decide to get them to work with an ex-member of staff to observe how the process is carried out as we know that a lot of people tend to learn more efficiently from hands-on practical experience.”
There are currently 25 engineers that have been accredited under the scheme since it launched during the second half of 2024. These numbers are expected to grow with changes to brake testing coming from 1 April 2025 following the latest Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency’s (DVSA) Guide to Maintaining Roadworthiness.
CHANGE ON THE HORIZON
Produced in collaboration with key industry stakeholders such as the RHA, Institute of Road Transport Engineers (IRTE) and Logistics UK, the new guide was covered in the previous edition of Transport Engineer (www.tinyurl.com/25f4j5ty).
Delving further into this topic, Phil Lloyd, head of engineering policy at Logistics UK, weighs in on the different options that operators can utilise to maintain compliance.
Primarily, the document places a strong emphasis on operators carrying out four laden brake tests each year. Such tests must come with a load that is 50% of the vehicle’s weight as a minimum, but operators should ideally push for a weight of 65%. This process is important because those who opt for an unladen test may encounter problems further down the line.
Lloyd says: “Traffic commissioners are concerned because they have picked up issues on brake performance reports at public inquiries that should have been spotted earlier by operators. This is happening because some operators assume that the brakes have passed the test if the wheels lockout, but they should be doing the test slowly and in a laden state to obtain a meaningful result.”
While Lloyd favours laden brake tests as the preferable method, he sheds light on why some operators may opt for an alternative solution. For example, those in remote areas may want to use a decelerometer to measure overall brake performance and use a heat gun to obtain temperature readings on each brake.
At the same time, other firms – especially those following a maintenance regime of every six weeks – may consider a risk assessment as a more financially viable alternative to four laden brake tests. Elsewhere, electronic brake performance monitoring (EBPMS) is serving as a viable solution for overcoming the challenges associated with imposing a load on tri-axle trailers.
Future developments in the technology space also look promising, with discussions already underway with OEMs and manufacturers surrounding the possibility of an EBPMS 2.0, which will extend the capability of the technology from being able to measure overall brake performance to measure brakes individually.
Whichever path operators decide to go down, Lloyd recommends a series of actions that operators can take between now and 1 April. “Those working with third-party maintenance contractors should start having discussions on how they are going to carry out a meaningful brake test once the changes come into effect. Furthermore, operators that do not have a brake tester will need to decide whether using a decelerometer with a heat gun is a more feasible alternative.
“If you have your own workshop, make sure the brake tester works and invest in electronic brake performance monitoring if you know there are going to be any issues with your trailers,“ he adds.
“Operators who will be carrying out risk assessments, particularly those with large fleets, should carry them out now because leaving everything until the 1 April will lead to a much bigger job in the long run.”
