Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: theoretical roll cage question

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Grove City, OH, USA
    Posts
    1,449

    Default theoretical roll cage question

    We are allowed to use a mounting plate not more than 100 sqi in, correct? But the plate does not have to be square. My question is, if I were to lengthen one side and shorten the adjacent side (assuming that I wanted to keep a rectangular shape), would it be more advanageous to lengthen the longitudinal (length of the car) side, or the lateral (across the car side).

    And I don't want to hear any of this 'it depends' stuff! If 'it depends', please explain what it depends on!

    Thanks.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    IT.com "First Loser" Greensboro, NC USA
    Posts
    8,607

    Default

    It depends.

    Think about this: The better answer might be to think about wrapping the plate onto more than one plane, like from the floor up the rocker panel. I aimed for important looking corners in my bodyshell and boxed over an area not exceeding 100 sq in so , in some cases, they wrap across 3 planes.

    K

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Buffalo, New York
    Posts
    2,942

    Default

    It depends...

    With absolutely no other considerations (available sills, rockers and vertical structures) my guess is that favoring longitude (lengthen along the wheelbase) rather than "latitude" (lengthen along wheeltrack) may have an infinitismal stiffening benefit. Why? there is usually less distance to the floor tunnel than between front and rear firewalls.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Grove City, OH, USA
    Posts
    1,449

    Default

    Thanks, guys. Of course, it depends! Everything depends on something. Thanks for going along with that.

    K: I am definitely looking at bending the plate and welding it to a vertical surface. I just wanted to keep the question as simple and theoretical as possible.

    Joe: You are saying that increasing the length of the plate across the car would be better than from front to back because the amount of increase will be a larger percentage of the distance between major structural members?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Portland, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    8

    Default

    If I remember correctly, you are allowed to have a 10"x10" maximum. which equals 100" sq in. The rules say you can not have any one side longer than 12" and no narrower than 2". Also if you use multi planes on the plate, if the plate was unfolded flat, it would have to fit in side the 10x10 box. use as much as you can on the rocker, floor, and sill. But be careful not to make the plate to big. I would hate to see you get protested by someone!

    [This message has been edited by cagedruss (edited January 13, 2004).]

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Houston, TX USA
    Posts
    2,555

    Default

    Originally posted by cagedruss:
    If I remember correctly, you are allowed to have a 10"x10" maximum. which equals 100" sq in. The rules say you can not have any one side longer than 12" and no narrower than 2". Also if you use multi planes on the plate, if the plate was unfolded flat, it would have to fit in side the 10x10 box. use as much as you can on the rocker, floor, and sill. But be careful not to make the plate to big. I would hate to see you get protested by someone!

    [This message has been edited by cagedruss (edited January 13, 2004).]
    It does not need to fit in a 10x10 box. You even said yourself that it can be 12" max on one side.


    ------------------
    George Roffe
    Houston, TX
    84 944 ITS car under construction
    92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
    http://www.nissport.com

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Ashton, MD, USA
    Posts
    169

    Default

    If I were you, I would use a piece of thin cardboard, like a manilla folder to make a pattern.
    The more planes it can attach to, the better from a safety and performance standpoint.


    ------------------
    "Bad" Al Bell
    ITC #3 Datsun 510
    DC Region MARRS Series

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Buffalo, New York
    Posts
    2,942

    Default

    No--I said front to back could be theoretically better (infinitismal, however).

    Cheers.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    IT.com "First Loser" Greensboro, NC USA
    Posts
    8,607

    Default

    I also don't believe that it is practically necessary for the "plate" to be one contiguous piece of sheetmetal: It can be a fabrication made of a number of individual pieces, the sum of which doesn't exceeed 100 sq in.

    K

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Grove City, OH, USA
    Posts
    1,449

    Default

    My thanks to all the responses. At least I will not be stabbing in the dark when it is time to fabricate the plates. I have every intention of using vertical surfaces where ever possible.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Fairfield, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    43

    Default

    Hi Bill,

    What are you building and when is your first outing?

    Wayne

    ------------------
    Wayne Briggs
    CenDiv
    ITA Capri
    Building a SM
    Move...Lest Ye Rust!

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Orlando, Fl
    Posts
    53

    Default

    I used a sheet of 8 1/2" x 11" notebook paper as a template for my plates. As long as all of the pieces fit on one sheet of paper, you are golden.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Wauwatosa, WI, USA
    Posts
    2,658

    Default

    Russell, ya gave up 6.5% Square inch area of each plate.

    Have Fun
    David

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •