76 (edited by ReVolvo-Bjorn 2010-05-10 04:17 PM)

Re: Accepted front-hoop configurations for roll cages

Need some advice on this roll cage - here is what our cage builder delivered to us.


http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3391/4593200002_96b0a94810_o.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4053/4593199994_3605840b31_o.jpg

Re: Accepted front-hoop configurations for roll cages

Pics are small and only show half the cage, but right off the bat, your harness bar is too low.  The shoulder belts need to be at a 0-15 degrees below the seat holes.  Your bar is about 8" too low.  Also, the bar that goes from the upper left to lower right behind the seats needs to be a single bar, not two bars joined in the middle.  Beyond that, I can't see any of the front structure.

BRE Datsun (Broke Racing Effluence) formerly Dawn of the Zed Racing
'74 260Z
Facebook page http://www.facebook.com/editpicture.php … 2559430584

Re: Accepted front-hoop configurations for roll cages

More photos would be good, but here's a couple things I notice right off the bat:

1. Those are pretty funky diagonals across the main hoop. Don't know that they would pass tech.
2. Harness bar is way too low.

Pat Mulry, TARP Racing #67

Mandatory disclaimer: all opinions expressed are mine alone & not those of 24HOL, its mgmt, sponsors, etc.

Re: Accepted front-hoop configurations for roll cages

Jeff, that's pretty funny that we answered the same question at the same time using almost identical language. But I think that the diagonals can be split at the harness bar -- they don't have to be 1-piece diagonals. I think the problem with these is that they change angle at the split, so any force down on the hoop in a rollover would tend to splay those bottom bars further rather than transmitting it around the outside of the cage to the car frame.

Pat Mulry, TARP Racing #67

Mandatory disclaimer: all opinions expressed are mine alone & not those of 24HOL, its mgmt, sponsors, etc.

Re: Accepted front-hoop configurations for roll cages

Sorry - meant to add that we added a higher harness bar.  My main concern is the diagonal that is an "x" instead of the one piece straight tube.

Bjorn

Re: Accepted front-hoop configurations for roll cages

Pat, I figured I'd be in a posting race with somebody.  smile

Bjorn,  Looking closer, it appears that the diagonal is not only two pieces, but doesn't even connect to the main hoop.  I can't imagine it passing tech connected to the backstays.  Can you post more, larger pics?

BRE Datsun (Broke Racing Effluence) formerly Dawn of the Zed Racing
'74 260Z
Facebook page http://www.facebook.com/editpicture.php … 2559430584

Re: Accepted front-hoop configurations for roll cages

Bigger pics posted above - I suspected we had a problem.  I guess we need to add yet another bar....

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3351/4596591035_60c74bf7ca_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3138/4596591039_f0810ecd39_o.jpg

83 (edited by Mulry 2010-05-10 04:42 PM)

Re: Accepted front-hoop configurations for roll cages

Yeah, you're going to need a diagonal that goes from the node where the halo bar meets the main hoop, bisects the new harness bar, and then continues in a straight line to the foot of the main hoop on the other side, assuming that the harness bar is planar with both of those points on the main hoop. Otherwise, it can run diagonally unbroken between the 2 main hoop nodes.

The driver's door bars will pass and the height actually really helps with the safety, but it's going to make it difficult to enter and exit the car. You might want to think about getting a steering wheel quick disconnect to make that easier. It's not a must-do, just a makes-life-a-lot-easier thing. Cheers.

Pat Mulry, TARP Racing #67

Mandatory disclaimer: all opinions expressed are mine alone & not those of 24HOL, its mgmt, sponsors, etc.

Re: Accepted front-hoop configurations for roll cages

Did the cage builder have the rules?

It seems like he tried hard to make every design decision just slightly outside the requirements.

That said, this cage would be plenty strong in a crash and unless you get hit by a tractor trailer it would hold up but wow, it is just off in every way...

El Capitan de los Bastardos De Lemons
1993 Linco Mark Ate
1957 Renault Dauphine
Driver with LemonSpeed's V6 Mustang

Re: Accepted front-hoop configurations for roll cages

I seem to recall some time ago in some "other" sanctioning body that in lieu of a main hoop diagonal one could have a dog leg diagonal or X. It probably is not accepted any longer, but might be where the cage builder was coming from.

Re: Accepted front-hoop configurations for roll cages

The SCCA still accepts X's if you also have a crossbar.  But the X has to be in the same plane as the main hoop. 

This is one to send off to Nick/Jay.  Personally, not having the diagnal in the same plane as the main hoop is a showstopper.  There is nothing to stop a crushing force on the main hoop (as in a rollover) since the rear stays would bend.

--Rob Leone Schumacher Taxi Service
We won the IOE at Southern Discomfort.
We got screwed at The Real Hoopties of New Jersey  and we took cars down with us.
We got the curse at Capitol Offense but they wouldn't let us destroy the car.

Re: Accepted front-hoop configurations for roll cages

ReVolvo-Bjorn wrote:

Bigger pics posted above - I suspected we had a problem.  I guess we need to add yet another bar....

[url]http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3351/459 … f7ca_o.jpg[url][url]http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3138/459 … cd39_o.jpg[url]

if you had a printed copy of the rules that you left with this guy prior to starting the cage I'd go back and Pitch a fit and demand he rip it out at least all those diagonals/harness bar and fix it at his cost. It's pretty clearly outlined what's acceptable for a diagonal and for harness bar positioning and he followed practically none of it. One other thing I should point out, is why is it necessary for him to put the main hoop far enough forward that it puts the seats UNDER the main hoop?

Re: Accepted front-hoop configurations for roll cages

RobL wrote:

There is nothing to stop a crushing force on the main hoop (as in a rollover) since the rear stays would bend.

The engineer in me disagrees strongly here, there is plenty to prevent a serious crushing failure BUT...

Even with an extremely large load the x bars would prevent a complete folding of the cage structure.  Yes it is quite probable that there would be local bending near the top of the structure BUT unless the welds failed completely the cage would absorb MORE energy in bending than a 'Lemons legal' cage.  That said, you are relying on the quality of the welds to hold in shear on a serious vertical / diagonal impact at the top of the main hoop to prevent a failure and compression of the cage.

Designing a textbook rigid structure is easy.  That is the point of the rules, build a rigid structure out of solid materials known to be strong enough to prevent serious injury in typical collisions.

Engineering a structure to give in a controlled manner and minimize the loading on the occupants while providing safety in a very high energy impact is far more difficult and MUCH harder to verify.  This is why the rules are fairly strict for cages.  Yes, you can make the argument that a well engineered cage with intentional impact absorption zones is better but unless you have a certified engineer willing to sign his professional credentials against it you should build to the rules. 

I am always tempted to 'improve' on the rules but then I think like a liability lawyer / professional witness and decide to just build what is mandated to avoid the hassle.

The mandated structure is pretty damn good.  Use solid gear and a head/neck restraint and be done with it.

El Capitan de los Bastardos De Lemons
1993 Linco Mark Ate
1957 Renault Dauphine
Driver with LemonSpeed's V6 Mustang

Re: Accepted front-hoop configurations for roll cages

Just sends pics to nick pon .
  Its funny because one diagonal from drivers upper to passenger side then notching others to that is a lot easier than that notching he went thru.

Correct it will be fine in accident as long as the welds are good.

Pit Crew Revenge Racing   Rolling chicanelimo,95Lamdspeeder,Gimp Pimp Cadi,300zx Car show kaboom!! 90 Wagovan, mazda v8 Lemons LOGO TATTOO!  Aces 84 Cadi Eldo Briattz I O E WINNER
Class C win with LemonOdy Cannonball Run Whambulance !EX K Captain
Lemons Trophy Truck ShaGuar Baby!

90 (edited by RobL 2010-05-11 06:10 AM)

Re: Accepted front-hoop configurations for roll cages

TheHeckler wrote:
RobL wrote:

There is nothing to stop a crushing force on the main hoop (as in a rollover) since the rear stays would bend.

The engineer in me disagrees strongly here, there is plenty to prevent a serious crushing failure BUT...

Even with an extremely large load the x bars would prevent a complete folding of the cage structure.  Yes it is quite probable that there would be local bending near the top of the structure BUT unless the welds failed completely the cage would absorb MORE energy in bending than a 'Lemons legal' cage.  That said, you are relying on the quality of the welds to hold in shear on a serious vertical / diagonal impact at the top of the main hoop to prevent a failure and compression of the cage.

The mandated structure is pretty damn good.  Use solid gear and a head/neck restraint and be done with it.

Not exactly...  Tubing is "brittle."  It has strength as long as it holds it's shape.  Once part of the tubing deforms, it loses it's 95% of it's strength.  It's not like solid bar which will still have bending resistance once it bends some. 

In a bad rollover (say landing on the drivers side roof corner), I see the rear stay bending down and failing (crimping) at the diagnal because it's a bending force not a compressing force.  You can stand on beer cans when they are upright but they crush easily from the side - same deal here.  But it's worse here because the diagnal provides a focal point on which to bend the rear stay.  Then you have about 8-10" of cage compression before you start "pulling" on welds.  At that point the welds will become the next critical point of failure.  But you are already into where the driver sits - so it's moot.

The mandated structure is there because it is generally the easiest and safest to build.  One of the problems here is that people think that steel tubing is strong.  I see it as soft because I work with it.  I'm constantly amazed at how little pressure it takes to form cage tubing (and is one of the reasons that I ONLY use DOM tubing).  Cages are generally designed to withstand 8g of forces.  So the question is - do you think that ~10tons of force will bend that corner?

--Rob Leone Schumacher Taxi Service
We won the IOE at Southern Discomfort.
We got screwed at The Real Hoopties of New Jersey  and we took cars down with us.
We got the curse at Capitol Offense but they wouldn't let us destroy the car.

Re: Accepted front-hoop configurations for roll cages

Nick & Jeff - Lemons HQ .... our Team Owner sent you a question re #555 but, Nick, your email bounced.

Re: Accepted front-hoop configurations for roll cages

Junkyard Dog wrote:
RogueLeader wrote:
Junkyard Dog wrote:

I wanted to point out this is the JEGS cage in the pic. It's generally made from 1.750 x .134 ERW tubing. the two small braces for the main hoop are smaller diameter (1.250 x .134) ERW tubing. When we used one of these kits for our '08 car, we ordered 2 extra sticks of 1.750 x .134 tubing to make the diagonal brace.

We actually got that cage from S&W Racecars, and I got the pic there as well, not sure if they supply Jegs, but all the tubing that came with it SEEMS to be the same diameter wich is actually 1.62" x .134" .  Either way a diagonal needs to be installed.

I should have clarified: the JEGS roll bar (not cage) kit for our Fox body Thunderbird (R.I.P.) was made of 1.750 tubing. They have a 'cage conversion kit' for the bar kit (must be ordered separately) which includes the halo and front down tubes which is also made of 1.750. The roll bar kit does not include a diagonal but it does include those two dinky side braces, sometimes I scratch my head over NHRA rules.

Here's the part to be aware of: if you order a complete cage kit for the same car it is 1.625. Goofy, huh?

NHRA roll bars have to be 1.750 but a full cage only has to be 1.625 so if you buy a cage kit from a typical drag race type supplier that is what you will get so no i wouldn't call it goofy

Re: Accepted front-hoop configurations for roll cages

would this configuration be legal on an open cockpit car?
http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash1/hs508.ash1/30033_776121020181_9026996_45007314_7029687_n.jpg

Re: Accepted front-hoop configurations for roll cages

Spreader plates: what are the recommended and minimum sizes for use with 1.75" tubing?

Re: Accepted front-hoop configurations for roll cages

Erik, the Lemons rules are silent on this point, but BMWCCA and NASC CCR's are virtually identical, so if you follow those, you should be safe. The key stats are as follows:

-no plate smaller than 9 square inches;
-no plate larger than 100 square inches;
-no side of any plate may be less than 2 inches on one side;
-no side of any plate may exceed 12 inches on one side
-plates must be at least .080 thick.

Here's the BMWCCA reg, which is slightly more anal than the NASA one (is that a cliche? smile ):
Each mounting plate shall be no greater than 100 square inches and no
greater than 12 inches or less than two inches on a side. Welded
mounting plates shall be at least 0.080-inch thick, and must contain an
inspection hole of .325-inch diameter. Plates may extend onto vertical
sections of the structure. Any mounting plate may be multi-angled, but
shall not exceed 100 square inches total including vertical sections.
Each mounting plate must have an area of not less than nine square
inches. Each mounting plate must be welded around a minimum of 50%
of each edge, and with a minimum stitch weld length of 1.5 inches.

Lemons doesn't require an inspection hole, either, although I've heard rumor somewhere that that may be in the cards in the future. Oy.

Pat Mulry, TARP Racing #67

Mandatory disclaimer: all opinions expressed are mine alone & not those of 24HOL, its mgmt, sponsors, etc.

Re: Accepted front-hoop configurations for roll cages

What about spreader plates where the cage is welded directly to the frame of the car.  1.5" tube meeting 2x2" steel square tubing.  Not sure what exactly a 9"x9" spreader plate is going to connect to...

http://lh6.ggpht.com/_iKh_q_zglQU/S-WaREgIylI/AAAAAAAAAiU/J29DaQ__l1g/s288/CIMG1572.JPG

El Capitan de los Bastardos De Lemons
1993 Linco Mark Ate
1957 Renault Dauphine
Driver with LemonSpeed's V6 Mustang

Re: Accepted front-hoop configurations for roll cages

In that case, it is possible to reinforce the 2x2 square with spreader plates along the top and sides of the tube - i.e. make a C-channel where the tube will meet the frame. 

I'm in the process of designing a LoCost (with leftover Lemons parts) and that is how I plan on mounting the cage to the frame.

--Rob Leone Schumacher Taxi Service
We won the IOE at Southern Discomfort.
We got screwed at The Real Hoopties of New Jersey  and we took cars down with us.
We got the curse at Capitol Offense but they wouldn't let us destroy the car.

Re: Accepted front-hoop configurations for roll cages

TheHeckler wrote:

What about spreader plates where the cage is welded directly to the frame of the car.  1.5" tube meeting 2x2" steel square tubing.  Not sure what exactly a 9"x9" spreader plate is going to connect to...

Also 9square inches is not a 9"x9" plate - it's a 3"x3" plate or a 2"x4.5" plate.

--Rob Leone Schumacher Taxi Service
We won the IOE at Southern Discomfort.
We got screwed at The Real Hoopties of New Jersey  and we took cars down with us.
We got the curse at Capitol Offense but they wouldn't let us destroy the car.

Re: Accepted front-hoop configurations for roll cages

Don't spreaders refer to unibody cars? I thought direct to frame is OK for full frame chassis...

Jim "Endo" Anderton
30 years of racing and still not Brambilla.....

100

Re: Accepted front-hoop configurations for roll cages

I've never seen anything differientiated in any ruleset about where the tubes terminate (chassis vs. frame).  Well...  except on tube frame cars, but we aren't racing those.  And having just notched a frame rail on a Crown Vic, I will say that I would not feel safe welding rollbar tube directly to the frame without spreaders.  That steel was a lot thinner than I expected it to be.

--Rob Leone Schumacher Taxi Service
We won the IOE at Southern Discomfort.
We got screwed at The Real Hoopties of New Jersey  and we took cars down with us.
We got the curse at Capitol Offense but they wouldn't let us destroy the car.