For an overall state of traction (hydrostatic pressure > 0), it is clearly established that determining the lifetime of a mechanical part subjected to multiaxial stress states via a uniaxial fatigue estimation method (such as EN 1993-1- 9) can lead to overestimating the lifetime of this part and therefore have a negative impact on safety. Carrying out a multiaxial fatigue calculation (Dang Van-type criterion) is therefore more realistic but more costly in terms of time and know-how than a uniaxial fatigue calculation (EN 1993-1-9 type). In practice, the safety components of cableways are subject to multiaxial stress state, but at what level of multiaxiality is it really necessary to carry out a multiaxial fatigue lifetime calculation? To help the engineer decide which method to apply: we offer a simple tool based on reading charts, to quickly determine depending on the parameters of bi-axiality of the signal (sigma_II/sigma_I ratio, average stress, variation of loading angle) the difference in lifetime between an estimation by Eurocode (NE) or by Dang Van (NDV). We then discuss acceptable NDV/NE lifetime variation values to be applied by the cableway sector profession for future standardisation work.