Jump to content

Additional Reinforcement Cage Bars Question


white_2kgt

Recommended Posts

15.6.17 Additional Reinforcement

Any number of additional reinforcing bars are permitted within the structure of the cage provided that they are installed strictly for safety and do not violate CCR Section #15.6.2 Intent. This rule does not permit reinforcements in classes with spec cages. All required bars must be made of the same material and meet with at least the minimum specifications for size and thickness.

 

Say my car weighs 2999lbs, so the required roll bar sizes are,

2201 - 3000 lbs.

1.500â€

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As long as the required cage bars meet the rules, you are free to work with whatever you like for gussets and additional, non-required bars. That's the way I interpret it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Optional bars can be any size, but when you get too far away from the thickness or OD of the main cage, you run into problems welding and fitting. What bars are you going to add? Some additional bars you don't want to be a different size. For example, any additional door bars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Optional bars can be any size, but when you get too far away from the thickness or OD of the main cage, you run into problems welding and fitting. What bars are you going to add? Some additional bars you don't want to be a different size. For example, any additional door bars.

 

Well most of my cage is already built, this question was prompted from a discussion from someone else in a different region, he says their tech says any additional bars must also meet the min required b/c of that rule, I disagree and want someone to give a final word on it.

 

In my cage it's all 1.75x.120 and some additional bars are 1.5x.120.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

suggest that the other region's tech inspector to talk to Jerry Kunzman [email protected]

I got a clarification earlier this year from Jerry on exactly this point. Only the 'required' bars need to meet that spec. However, an inspector will also look for things like bars (struts) that are too small, and might break and impale you.

cheers,

bruce

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The *Note refers to ERW type tubing, which is no longer accepted in NEW build cages. The date referes to the date when such cages were last allowed to be built as NEW.

ERW is a seem welded tubing, as opposed to a DOM, (drawn over mandrel) or other types of tubing.

 

I'm sure some smart engineer types out there can shed more light on why ERW is undesirable in roll cages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The consistancy of ERW is less than DOM.....

 

Now the REAL reason that ERW isn't used any more, a club racer from another organization was killed in a bad wreck, and his wife sued. Ahh I love this country...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BC...

 

DOM starts out with the same process as ERW. Both start as flat stock, then rolled and welded into the tube. That's where ERW stops. The mandrel process removes the seam and during the process, works the tubing and raises the ultimate strength of the tube.

 

Sometimes you'll still see a weld "seam" on DOM, but you can't feel it like you can with ERW... so just seeing a seam on the outside of the tube doesn't automatically mean its ERW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember that the rule says ROLL BAR, not roll cage. The idea behind this is that the bar surrounding the driver must be a minimum strength to support the car and protect the driver.

 

A reinforcing bar (such as a strut-top support) is not a roll-bar and hence shouldn't be within that constraint. I'm just a schmoe though, so check with your tech inspector to be sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

all of the "required" cage bars need to meet the min spec, not just the main hoop (which might be construed as the "roll bar").

cheers,

bruce

 

Remember that the rule says ROLL BAR, not roll cage. The idea behind this is that the bar surrounding the driver must be a minimum strength to support the car and protect the driver.

 

A reinforcing bar (such as a strut-top support) is not a roll-bar and hence shouldn't be within that constraint. I'm just a schmoe though, so check with your tech inspector to be sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 11 months later...

This is a timely topic for me because I am building my cage right now to compete in GTS2. I ran across the same issue and I sort of have a big problem with it. The use of smaller bars should not be open to "interpretation". This should be black and white and the CCR should state clearly whether its allowable or not. My two main door bars are joined by 1.25" dia vertical tubing. Is this OK???? Who knows - everyone I ask tells me something different- and thats the issue. One tech guy might say its OK, the next one not...

 

I agree with Shane below, but if you read the CCR, it says exactly the opposite. To me "additional" means anything thats NOT "required".

 

Anyhow, I think it would be worthwhile to update the CCR next time around as this is very confusing especially for people that are building new roll cages. There should be no "gray area" on this one..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15.6.17 Additional Reinforcement

Any number of additional reinforcing bars are permitted within the structure of the cage

provided that they are installed strictly for safety and do not violate CCR Section #15.6.2

Intent. This rule does not permit reinforcements in classes with spec cages.

All required bars must be made of the same material and meet with at least the minimum

specifications for size and thickness.

 

 

the last sentence says only the "required" bars must meet the min size and thickness (per your car's weight). Any additional bars can be different sizes. As noted earlier, Jerry Kunzman clarified this directly to me last year (because I also felt that he is mixing two things in the one section). If a tech inspector is giving you a hassle on it, first go to your region's Regional Director and then on to National officials like Jerry.

 

Personally, I would have used the same size bars for the vertical joiners in your door bars - you want the most meat and biggest weld area as possible there. Perhaps that is what your local tech inspector is reacting to.

 

bruce

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Bruce - my bad. You are correct. The key word is "Required". Without looking at the CCR again, I thought it said "additional", not required. It cant be more clearly stated. Turns out the only one confused here is me.

 

Thanks for the clarification. Maybe instead of driving school, I should take reading school...

 

Enzo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only question then is -why is the last sentence even included under the heading 15.6.17 "ADDITIONAL REINFORCEMENTS". Does anyone know of any additional reinforcements that are "required". If not, this sentence should be removed from 15.6.17. I think this is where I initially became misled - we already know that all the REQUIRED tubes must meet min dia/thickness per 15.6.18.

 

I'm clear on this now. I just dont want to be at the track and find out my car is illegal because of an interpretation issue. Seems like there could still be some work done to clean-up section 15.6.17, as I'm not the only one that has questioned the meaning of the last sentence.

 

Anyhow, thanks guys and have a great season...

 

Enzo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

your point is why I also suggested to Jerry that he split that section into two - I agree it can be confusing.

 

For GTS class cars, because their rules allow any additions to the cage - as long as you are meeting the basic CCR safety requirements of the cage (in your case, the two door bars), you are free to add any bars of basically any size. Just make sure that the additional bars aren't so small that they could snap and spear you.

cheers,

bruce

 

 

The only question then is -why is the last sentence even included under the heading 15.6.17 "ADDITIONAL REINFORCEMENTS". Does anyone know of any additional reinforcements that are "required". If not, this sentence should be removed from 15.6.17. I think this is where I initially became misled - we already know that all the REQUIRED tubes must meet min dia/thickness per 15.6.18.

 

I'm clear on this now. I just dont want to be at the track and find out my car is illegal because of an interpretation issue. Seems like there could still be some work done to clean-up section 15.6.17, as I'm not the only one that has questioned the meaning of the last sentence.

 

Anyhow, thanks guys and have a great season...

 

Enzo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The dilema continues - I just reviewed this with 2 different Certified NASA tech inspectors in the Great Lakes Region - one said it was OK, the other one said it was NOT OK. Hence, the interpretation issue still exists...

 

I sure would like to see 15.6.17 cleaned-up (eliminate last sentence) since the NASA Tech Inspectors cant even agree on what it means.

 

In the meantime, I have cut-out the 1.25" vertical tubes and replaced with 1.75x.095" just to avoid any more confusion / frustration over this issue....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...