Product Developments (Engineering) Ltd


This Website,describing the lifting lug (known as the Preston Shoe), is intended to be informative only and by no means comprehensive. It is provided in good faith and considerable time and effort was taken over the accuracy and comprehensability of instructions and descriptions contained within. If further information on a specific topic is required, links to other WebSites are provided. These may change with time depending on their availability and relevance to the subject matter, they are not an endorsement or approval of their products and services displayed on these WebSites.
If action is to be taken on the information contained on this WebSite then a second opinion should always be sought on the subject or information from either an independent expert, an insurance agent or your insurance engineering inspector.
Product Developments (Eng.) Ltd. cannot take any responsibility for the use of content material contained on this WebSite or any of the linked Websites and cannot be sued legally for acting or refraining from acting on information given on this WebSite or the linked Websites.

Terminology: Mass Force and Weight.

Terms and Units.

Terms used in both commerce and container handling often appear to be inconsistant, the units also may be confusing, in particular mass and weight, both usually given in the same units kg or lbs. For legal reasons an effort was made to define both terms and their associated units as long ago as 1972 and are given in the Admiralty and Maritime Law Guide amendments to the International Convention for Safe Containers. This is necessary because in commerce and the legal profession, weight means mass whilst in lifting and engineering it means force. To clearly define weight and mass, their basic units are those adopted from the SI system and are summarised here:
First and formost is mass, this is the amount of matter an object contains and at last we now know what keeps it together: the Higgs Field, but we are not absolutely certain how this works but it does. The units used to quantify mass are kilograms (kg or kgs) and in some parts of the world pounds (lb or lbs) are still used mainly because of tradition, familiarity, and resistance to change.

The general terms and symbols used to define mass include: LOAD m, LOADED m, PAYLOAD P and RATING R, however, these do NOT apply internationally.
When we need to move the mass of a container from one place to another, sufficient force will have to be applied to overcome the resistance to want to be moved. Newton called this resistance "inertia" and became his 1st Law. He next gave us the equation to evaluate the magnitude of the force needed to overcome this inertia, his 2nd Law The Law of Motion. This is simply Force= mass x acceleration. Now if the container is being transported, then whatever it is mounted on must provide enough force to move it (if it's on an incline it may even move on its own accord). The main problem arises when anything has to be lifted, again Newton's 2nd Law applies but this time the force required is that to overcome gravity.
This is where the anomaly with the terminology becomes a problem because the same units are STILL used to define force and mass. So to understand the difference we need to clearly define the units of force so restating Newton's 2nd Law with its units :

Force= mass(kg) x acceleration (m/s2)
or F=ma   where F and a are vectors,having both magnitude and direction, whilst m is a scalar just stuff in this case.
Thus the units are kg m s-2 and named newtons or the symbol N after the great man. Loading signifies Force.

Now in this equation acceleration is that due to gravity and is assumed to be constant around the world and is taken as 9.81m/s2. (The standard value for general use is 9.8m/s2 and for approximate use 10m/s2) so the force required to lift 1kg is 9.8N and this is what is termed WEIGHT and should be stated in Force units N but nobody does, nor does anyone ever ask for 9.8N of apples just a kilo so we just carry on using kgs or lbs, as usual.

The resulting force due to gravity is known as a Body Force and acts throughout the mass towards the centre of the earth and in this form is difficult to manage, however, to simplify the problem the total resulting body force is considered to act at the mass centre, generally known as the Centre of Gravity (C of G) acting in the direction of acceleration, thus simplyfing the evaluation of all other forces involved when lifting freight units. For example when top lifting a container with a hook attached to a sling assembly, the force at the hook must equal the weight of the container expressed in N's but as already stated it isn't. Instead we use kg, or lbs, the unit of mass, so to differentiate weight (force) due to gravity from mass, the suffix g is added. Hence a containers having total mass (payload plus tare) rated at R needs a force of Rg to lift it, the units being the same, the difference between them is just a g.
If still confused, an elegant explanation is given at Weight or Mass

Having precisely defined mass, weight and force and their units in the 1993 ammendment to be used on CSC Safety Approval Plate these terms should be stated as:

Maximum Operating Gross Mass (GM) kg,kgs and lb,lbs (Upper or lowercase)
When it comes to lifting where forces are expected GM becomes GW same units.

Allowable stacking load for 1.8g, same as GM above.

Side/ End wall strength newtons or N (Transverse Racking Test Force)

Slowly these units have been adopted as shown on this CSC plate for a container made in 2016. But many containers still bear the a mixture of units (in upper and lower case, singular and plural )

Finally Newton's 3rd Law states that To every action there is an equal but opposite reaction. Lifting forces are the reaction forces susceptible to failure and to prevent this they have to be predicted and evaluated in order to select the appropriate gear and avoid failure. Having evaluated a WLL based on the all the known information there is the famous "unknown unknowns" scenario where the lifting forces induced may be well in excess of those predicted and here is where the Factor of Safety (F of S) comes into play. The mandatory minimum F of S given in ISO 3874 is 4. It is straight-forward when applied to a top lifting twistlock subjected to simple tension only whearas bottom side lifting lugs are subjected to a complex stress state induced by offset loading whose F of S can only be ascertained by a test to destruction. A test to destruction conducted on a lug prior to general release was terminated at 64.6 Tons and did not fracture.