In the sense that something designed to carry 8,000lbs can probably actually handle 10,000lbs? Or in the sense that if they both died insurance would still pay out?
In order for something to tip over, the center of mass has to move outside the area of the base and most of the weight is in the bottom part of the lift. So it is basically impossible without actively trying to tip it over.
It’s only “basically impossible” if it’s on a firm platform. If it’s on a gimbal, like a plastic floating thing, then you don’t really now where the tipping point is going to be because it depends on the flexibility of the platform.
Probably why the bottom is also anchored to the floating work surface. This implementation looks like exactly what you’re supposed to do. There’s lots of pearl clutching for some reason.
Who says this is exactly what you’re supposed to do?
If you’re ever working at height and you think it’s safer without a harness so you’re not killed to death by whatever you’re standing on it’s probably a good time to reassess.
Life insurance wouldn’t be the problem. The problem would be if they lived and were injured. That would be a work comp nightmare. Just imagining getting that call is giving me a headache.
In the sense that something designed to carry 8,000lbs can probably actually handle 10,000lbs? Or in the sense that if they both died insurance would still pay out?
The floats are EZDocks, each with a carrying capacity of 3,000lbs, total capacity is 12,000lbs.
The lift is a JLG 3246es, which has a weight of less than 5,000lbs.
What if the lift tips over?
In order for something to tip over, the center of mass has to move outside the area of the base and most of the weight is in the bottom part of the lift. So it is basically impossible without actively trying to tip it over.
It’s only “basically impossible” if it’s on a firm platform. If it’s on a gimbal, like a plastic floating thing, then you don’t really now where the tipping point is going to be because it depends on the flexibility of the platform.
Probably why the bottom is also anchored to the floating work surface. This implementation looks like exactly what you’re supposed to do. There’s lots of pearl clutching for some reason.
Safe work sites aren’t “pearl clutching”.
Who says this is exactly what you’re supposed to do?
If you’re ever working at height and you think it’s safer without a harness so you’re not killed to death by whatever you’re standing on it’s probably a good time to reassess.
those blocks are not that flexible*
never seen them at festivals or some such?
they’re much stiffer than they appear at first glance!
*if they’re properly linked
Any flexibility will change the physics.
Guaranteed the specs on that lift say it can only be operated on the ground.
Guaranteed the specs on that dock say it’s not suitable for supporting anything at any height.
They might get wet?
Uh, sure. You might also fall on the concrete walk way around the pool, or on the lift, or the lift might fall on you, or any number of things.
Yes.
Life insurance wouldn’t be the problem. The problem would be if they lived and were injured. That would be a work comp nightmare. Just imagining getting that call is giving me a headache.