I appreciate your concern regarding the potential risks associated with pallet stability during transportation. Ensuring the secure placement of pallets is crucial to prevent accidents. To address this issue, it is essential to focus on enhancing pallet foundation stability. By implementing proper pallet foundation techniques, such as using appropriate securing methods and ensuring a stable base, we can mitigate the risk of shifting or falling loads.
In the wood packaging industry, where pallets play a significant role, it is vital to adhere to best practices in pallet manufacturing processes. These processes involve meticulous attention to detail in constructing pallets that meet industry standards for strength and stability. By following established guidelines and utilizing quality materials, we can enhance the overall safety and reliability of pallets in transportation scenarios.
By emphasizing pallet foundation stability and understanding the wood pallet manufacturing process within the wood packaging industry, we can work towards minimizing the potential for accidents and ensuring the safe transportation of goods. Thank you for highlighting this important aspect of pallet safety.

Check out: https://palletfoundation.org/

load carrying equipment is generally designed to carry a certain type of load depending on the nature of the equipment design. Their design is based on a set configuration calculation.
In the case of a lift truck they are generally designed to carry a single pallet of materials.
If you vary from it's design spec then absolutly, you would need a risk accessment done and appropriate measures would have to be taken to insure the load stability beforehand.
In some cases such as a slipsheet type load, it may be stable enough to carry a double stack load as long as the load stack is stable and can be stacked upon each other without risk of loosing the top load. In any other case where a wooden pallet is being used it would not be recommended to stack them during transport on the lift.

carrying two pallets at a time is a high-risk activity.
I was asked once to report on an accident involving a truck carrying double-stacked pallets that struck another employee when travelling load leading.
The truck was used to load a vehicle over a dock leveller from a loading dock. The vehicle was a covered trailer with curtain sides. An employee had been struck by the truck and load travelling forward. The local H & S inspector had raised issues over the practice.
I found that:
the load was two laden pallets weighing, in total less than 1 ton, and well within the rated capacity of the truck being used;
when approaching the vehicle, the truck travelled with the load trailing to the side of the dock leveller before turning to face the leveller with the load leading;
in driving onto the vehicle bed, the loads were being placed side by side;
the truck did not have a free-lift mast, so was unable to raise a single pallet to stack on top of another within the vehicle, so the only way in which the vehicle's capacity could be used to the full was by double stacking;
there was no ramp to allow the truck to operate within the vehicle parking area to load from the ground;
the area around the dock leveller was a pedestrian prohibited zone, identified by cross-hatched lines and permanent barriers, with a gate.
the company's H & S arrangements and safety policy had identified the risk area, the training requirements for the truck operator, and the operator complied with all the requirements;
the pedestrian that was struck was the supervisor, who was supposed to control the area, and knew the risks, having written the safety arrangements, yet he had walked in a prohibited area, in front of the truck, travelling the short distance load leading.
I concluded that he had been the cause of his own injury, and convinced the H & S inspector that there was no case to answer for the company or the truck operator, and that any fault lay with the supervisor himself.

As far as I am aware, the top pallet must be under 1/3 of the backrest e.g. If the top pallet is 600mm in height, the bottom 200mm of the pallet, must be supported by the backrest. However, the two pallets must be secured with efficient packaging and support. The minute an operator lifts the pallet, they are responsible. Remember one of the stacking principles, the heaviest must be on the bottom of the two.

Hi , my property backs onto a animal feed manufacturing plant and they have trailers up against my fence which they double load pallets onto the trailers every night , I have asked for the trailers to be removed but they refused to moved them it's a accident waiting to happen or death , no one seems to be interested in helping us resolve this issue , if anyone can give me any feed back on this it would be appreciated regards Nige

Carrying pallets 2 high is a high risk, hence the fact LF licenses are high risk licenses. obstructed view is not an issue as driver should always face direction of travel which in this case would be backwards if in a counterbalance or business as usual in a reach truck. Yes weight shifts when cornering which is why operators corner slowly as per manufacturer specification (and common sense for anyone with a clue). If an operator is unable to clearly assess the safety of carrying a double stack then I would seriously question the validity of their holding a license in the first place.
Section 28 of the 2011 harmonised work act puts the onus back on the worker not the trainer or the PCBU. Quite simply if you aren't competent to carry out the task of carrying a double stack then just take one pallet, you are the state licensed high risk operator...

Be very very careful with any risk assessment. As i have already said carrying an unsupported pallet on top of one on the forks is inherently dangerous, no matter what the load toilets rolls or wine it will can still shift and under cornering will. In a high volume distribution centre you need to work to best practice, double stacking loads isn't good practice let alone best practice.
Whoever signs off the risk assessment is really putting him or herself in a very risky position should an reportable accident ever occur (and running double stacked pallets it most probarbly will) the signee will be one of those along with the competent person on site and the company MD who has to stand in front of a Judge and try to explain how they decided this was safe

I guess to really answer this question you should contact your local safety governing agency(OSHA here in the states)...and see what the rules and regulations state for your location.....

Hi
AS I stated, once COM height exceeds rated distance capacity needs to be down rated; once height of double stacked pallets severely restricts drivers view to the front additional safety procedures need to be activated (greatest risk is loading vehicles from rear through loading docks - forklift has to drive in with view restricted, so there has to be arrangements whereby no pedestrian can be unsighted in front of the forklift); if pallets stored 2 high once height is such that shorter employees cannot clearly see over them - say 1400 mm high - additional safety procedures need to be activated to deal with the blind corners created; once the friction factor between the top and bottom pallet drops below around 0.4 additional safety procedures should be activated (top pallet will slide off under moderate braking); once the bottom pallet comprises a compressible or unstable pallet double stacking in transport has to be prohibited;...

Hi lifter thank you for your comment.

As you have mentioned the top pallet can slip off, but what is the probability. We have loads that we transport for example toilet rolls to pallets of wine. I would consider some double stacked loads to be more stable than most other pallets we transport in the warehouse. I would never train this on a basic course but I have been asked to take part in a risk assessment for this procedue and if it is signed off the training will be trained under specific job training.

AN instructor HAS to train drivers to load carry and drive trucks the correct way. Double stacking pallets is inherently dangerous even with a flat load smooth floors etc. The upper pallet can move and when cornering probably will, we occasionally find drivers on site doing this and one of 2 things always happens we either dismiss the driver or give them a final written warning you cant mess about with safety yes it costs more to do it right but safety on site shouldn't have a cost.
If you have to move 100 pallets over regularly I suggest you look at truck, operator numbers on site

Carrying pallets 2 high is high risk. Rated distance is also measured vertically so if centre of mass is greater than the rated distance the forklift capacity has to be down rated. Then there are the issues of the driver's view being obstructed, risk of items falling backwards onto operator if load above load guard; risk of items being unstable on forks and falling forward under braking or sideways in turns; fact that the 2nd pallet load is likely to hit a persons upper torso/ head with much increased risk of death or disabling injury...

Hi John thanks for your reply.

First of all you have assumed that a double stacked pallet is going to be higher than any normal load. The pallet with load measures 600mm vertically x 2 is total 1200mm (example). Drivers view will not be obstructed and if view was obstructed just like any other normal load would travel in reverse. The items would never fall on to the operator as this double stacked pallet is being moved from a ground level position to another ground level position also the mast/ load guard would stop any products falling onto the operator.

The only positive feedback I can see is the forks need to be in the pallet.

OK so Health and Safety as Reasonable Practicable.

Some times you have to take your head out of the bible and look at Reasonable Practicable solutions sorry guys.

I assume that some Instructors never actually work in the
operation and live in the perfect world.

A scenario,,,
You have 100 pallets with a load on each to carry gross weight of each load is 250kg, lifting capacity of truck is 2000kg From corner to corner the warehouse is half a mile long. The height of both pallets together are the height of any other standard load. The boxes are solid. The floor surface is smooth. The load on each pallet is wrapped although both pallets are not wrapped together. You have 100 pallets to move so a potential 100 journeys or 50 carrying double stacked pallets.

As I mentioned above a task that may not relate to any training being given so as i see it a risk assessment to be carried out and familiarisation training to be delivered on this procedure.

It also looks like nothing is written about this procedure so I guess we all have our own view on this...

John is absolutely correct; the "load center" is rated at (usually) 24 inches from the FACE of the forks, both the horizontal and the vertical faces of the forks.

Carrying pallets 2 high is high risk. Rated distance is also measured vertically so if centre of mass is greater than the rated distance the forklift capacity has to be down rated. Then there are the issues of the driver's view being obstructed, risk of items falling backwards onto operator if load above load guard; risk of items being unstable on forks and falling forward under braking or sideways in turns; fact that the 2nd pallet load is likely to hit a persons upper torso/ head with much increased risk of death or disabling injury...

As far, as I know, there's no legal definition concerning the amount of pallets stacked, or load height.
Only rule which applies here is to maintain the truck stability (its capacity and its reduction in accordance to load centre distance).
Sometimes in the standards or safety documentation exists a phrase "use the additional means to secure..."
It means that in case of unstable loads, some safety device preventing the collapse should be used. Like load stabilzers or load backrests.
Load backrest is not an obligatory/standard attachment, pretty often the top manufacturers treat it as on option (see Linde).