Below-the-hook lifting device inspection begins with a spreader beam that has no paperwork. Somewhere in most shops there is a spreader beam with a proud history and no paperwork. It was fabricated in-house years ago by someone competent, it has lifted the same load a thousand times without incident, and nobody can tell you its rated capacity, who designed it, or whether it has ever been inspected.
Below-the-hook lifting devices are engineered structures that carry the full load, and ASME B30.20 treats them accordingly. They require design documentation, capacity marking, periodic inspection, and in many cases proof testing — a set of obligations most owners are surprised to learn attaches to what they think of as a fixture.
What counts as a below-the-hook device
- Structural lifters — spreader beams, lifting beams, and equalizers that transmit load through their structure.
- Vacuum lifters — holding by vacuum, with their own reserve and warning requirements.
- Magnets — both close-proximity operated and remotely operated, powered or permanent.
- Mechanical devices — tongs, clamps, grabs, C-hooks, coil lifters, and plate clamps.
- Vertical and horizontal plate clamps, which have specific and frequently ignored orientation restrictions.
The distinction from rigging matters. A sling is rigging under B30.9. A spreader beam is a lifting device under B30.20, with different requirements including design documentation and a different inspection framework. Programs that lump them together apply sling criteria to engineered structures, which misses everything that matters about the structure.
The difference between a lifting beam and a spreader beam
These terms get used interchangeably and describe different structures with different loading.
A spreader beam is loaded primarily in compression, with slings from the hook angling down to each end and the load hanging from those same end points. The beam pushes the pick points apart. A lifting beam is loaded in bending, with a single attachment at the top center and the load hung from points along its length.
The consequence is practical: the two cannot be substituted for one another. A spreader beam used as a lifting beam is loaded in a way it was not designed for, and the failure mode is bending in a member sized for compression. When an inspection finds a beam being rigged differently than its design intends, that is a finding about use rather than about condition — and it is more urgent than most condition findings.
Design documentation is a requirement, not a nicety
B30.20 requires that lifting devices be designed to defined criteria, including a design factor and specified stress limits, with the design documented. That documentation is what sets up the rated capacity, and without it there is no defensible capacity at all.
Shop-built devices are where this fails. A beam fabricated by a capable welder from good material may well be strong enough — but strong enough is not a rating, and nobody can state the design factor, the assumed loading, or the weld procedure. Under inspection, an undocumented shop-built lifter is quarantined on identification grounds in the same way an untagged sling is, and for the same reason.
The remedy is engineering: have the device evaluated by a qualified engineer, rated, marked, and documented. That is usually cheaper than replacement and always cheaper than the alternative of continuing to use it.
Marking requirements
Each device must be marked with the manufacturer’s name and address, serial number, device weight, rated load, and ASME B30.20 compliance. The device’s own weight matters more than people expect — it counts against the crane’s capacity, and a heavy spreader beam consumes a meaningful fraction of a smaller crane’s chart.
We regularly find lifters where the crew has been calculating the lift using the load weight alone, on a device weighing several hundred pounds. The marking exists specifically to prevent that arithmetic error, which is why illegible or missing marking is a removal condition rather than a housekeeping note.
The below-the-hook lifting device inspection framework
| Level | Interval | Performed by | Documented |
|---|---|---|---|
| Every operating shift | Before use | Operator / designated person | No |
| Frequent | Monthly to yearly, by service class | Designated person | Records recommended |
| Periodic | Yearly, or shorter under severe service | Qualified person | Yes — dated report |
Service classification drives the intervals. B30.20 recognizes normal, heavy, and severe service, and a device in severe service — high cycle counts, extreme temperature, corrosive environment — belongs on a materially shorter cycle. The reasoning parallels how duty cycle changes the clock for cranes themselves.
What the periodic inspection covers
- Structural members — deformation, cracks, corrosion, and section loss, with particular attention to welds at connections and at any point where geometry changes.
- Welds — cleaned and examined. Coating cracks along a weld toe are the early indicator; non-destructive testing is the correct escalation on anything suspect.
- Lifting points and pad eyes — hole elongation, wear, and deformation at the bearing surfaces.
- Bolted connections — fastener condition, grade, torque, and whether anything has been substituted.
- Adjustable components — pin holes, locking mechanisms, and whether the configuration matches a rated setting.
- Hooks, shackles, and attached hardware to their own criteria — see hook removal limits and shackle criteria.
- Marking legibility, including rated load and device weight.
- Operating mechanisms on clamps, tongs, magnets, and vacuum units, including any reserve or warning system.
Adjustable spreaders and the configuration trap
Telescoping and multi-hole spreader beams have different rated capacities at different lengths — usually substantially different, since capacity falls as the span increases. The rating is configuration-dependent, and the crew has to know which configuration they are in.
This is a recurring source of overload. A beam rated 20 tons at its shortest setting may be rated a fraction of that fully extended, and the marking sometimes shows only the maximum. During inspection, verify that capacity marking covers every rated configuration, that pin holes are not elongated, and that locking pins are the correct ones rather than substitutes.
Proof testing: when it is required
New devices are proof tested by the manufacturer, typically to 125% of rated load, before first use. Testing is required again after any repair or alteration affecting structural or load-bearing components, and after any event that may have overloaded the device.
Note the trigger: repair or alteration, not routine maintenance. Replacing a worn shackle is maintenance. Welding a cracked member, adding a lifting point, or changing the geometry is an alteration, and it requires a qualified person’s evaluation followed by proof testing before the device returns to service. The distinction between routine inspection and load verification mirrors load testing versus annual inspection on the crane side.
Repairs are engineering decisions
Below-the-hook devices are structures, and structural repair requires the original manufacturer or a qualified engineer to specify the procedure. Field welding a cracked spreader beam without that documentation is a finding regardless of weld quality, because the repair may have altered the member’s properties or introduced a stress concentration that the original design never contemplated.
The same applies to modification. Adding a pick point, drilling a hole, cutting a member to fit, or extending a beam are all alterations that invalidate the original rating until re-evaluated. These happen constantly and almost never get documented, which is why undocumented modification is among the more common findings on first inspection of a lifting device inventory.
Vacuum lifters and magnets have their own rules
Powered devices that hold by vacuum or magnetic force carry requirements beyond structural inspection. Vacuum lifters need a reserve capable of holding the load for a defined period after power loss, plus a warning device that alerts the operator to a loss of vacuum. Magnets have comparable expectations around holding force verification and, for electromagnets, backup power.
These systems are tested by function under load rather than assessed visually. Verify the warning device actually warns, and where a reserve is required, verify it holds — the entire point of the reserve is that it works on the day the power fails.
Building the inventory
As with every rigging category, the practical obstacle is that nobody knows what exists. Lifting devices are fabricated, purchased, borrowed, and inherited, and they accumulate in corners with no register.
The first pass sets up what is there: identify every device, record capacity and weight where marked, flag anything unmarked or shop-built, and assign identifiers. Undocumented devices then go into one of two piles — engineered and rated, or removed. That decision is uncomfortable and it is the whole value of the exercise, because the pile of unrated shop-built lifters is where the actual risk sits. A baseline rigging inspection typically handles this alongside slings and hardware.
Clamps, tongs, and the devices that grip
Mechanical gripping devices deserve separate attention because their failure is release rather than fracture. A plate clamp that slips drops the load without anything breaking, and the conditions that cause slipping are subtle.
Inspect the gripping surfaces — cam teeth, jaw serrations, and pads — for wear, packing with debris, and rounding. Worn teeth are the primary cause of slippage and they wear gradually enough that nobody notices the transition. Check the spring or cam mechanism that maintains grip under load, the locking device that holds the clamp closed during handling, and the hinge pins.
Orientation restrictions are the other half. Vertical plate clamps are for lifting plate vertically and are not rated for horizontal lifting or for turning a plate unless specifically designed for it. Using a vertical clamp to flip a plate is a common and dangerous substitution. Verify that the marking states the permitted orientation and that the device in use matches the operation — that is a finding about practice, which is generally more valuable than a finding about wear.
Where lifting devices meet the rest of the program
A below-the-hook device sits between the crane and the load, which means its inspection intersects several others. The hook it hangs from follows its own removal criteria. The slings connecting it to the load follow B30.9. The crane carrying it follows Subpart CC or 1910.179 depending on the work.
The practical consequence is that a device can be perfectly serviceable while the assembly it is part of is not, and vice versa. Scoping an inspection to cover the whole load path — crane, hook, device, rigging — is what produces a usable answer. Where it matters most is on federal work, since EM 385-1-1 expects lifting devices to carry the same documentation as everything else, and undocumented shop-built lifters are among the more common reasons a rigging file gets questioned at a gate review.
Common questions
Do spreader beams need to be inspected?
Yes. Under ASME B30.20 they require inspection before each shift, frequent inspections at intervals set by service class, and documented periodic inspections at least yearly by a qualified person.
Can we use a shop-built lifting beam?
Only if it has been designed to B30.20 criteria, documented, rated, and marked. A well-built undocumented device has no defensible capacity and comes out of service until it is engineered and rated.
What is the difference between a lifting beam and a spreader beam?
A spreader beam is loaded in compression with slings angling to its ends. A lifting beam is loaded in bending from a single top attachment. They are not interchangeable, and substituting one for the other loads a member in a direction it was not designed for.
Does the beam’s weight count against crane capacity?
Yes. Device weight is part of the total load and is one reason marking it is required. It is a common arithmetic omission on lifts close to chart.
When does a lifting device need proof testing?
Before first use by the manufacturer, after repair or alteration to load-bearing components, and after any suspected overload. Routine maintenance does not trigger it.
Who can inspect below-the-hook devices?
Shift and frequent inspections by a designated person. Periodic inspections by a qualified person, particularly where structural assessment or weld evaluation is involved.
Are below-the-hook devices covered on a crane inspection?
Not automatically. They are a separate scope under a separate standard, and a crane inspection that does not explicitly include them has not covered them — worth confirming when reading the report.
Rate it or retire it
Below-the-hook devices are the last engineered component between the hook and the load, and they are the category most likely to be running on reputation rather than on documentation.
If your shop has lifters nobody can rate — and most shops do — we will inventory them, inspect what is documented, and tell you plainly which ones need engineering before they lift anything else.
← All Posts