Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2010 12:52:55 -0500
Reply-To: craig cowan <phishman068@GMAIL.COM>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: craig cowan <phishman068@GMAIL.COM>
Subject: Re: ebay Vanagon with extra headroom - poptop only - no roof.
In-Reply-To: <CBC9C579-5986-41CE-AA46-A97D0E720935@COMCAST.NET>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
That one cross brace is (as has been stated) on all vans, just different on
the different styles of van. The only difference on the westy is that it's
flat. It is welded in place.
Have you ever tried to cut this brace out? Either on a hardtop or a westy?
It puts up quite a nice fight. A hammer will be required.
It definitely contributes to strength (in my opinion). But that brace is not
missing from this westy....
So...
Are we analyzing the westy that this thread started with, or evolving the
conversation into the "Big Hole Method" of poptop conversion? I vote don't
cut it out, if you have to cut it out, put more bracing in elsewhere.
-Craig
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 12:34 PM, Tom Buese <tombuese@comcast.net> wrote:
> On Dec 28, 2010, at 9:45 AM, Alistair Bell wrote:
>
> > the westy's cross brace has its analogue in the tin top van. A box
> section cross beam at the point just aft of where the sunroof would go. In
> both cases i believe the cross brace is needed for torsional stiffness in
> the body
>
> Unless that cross brace is welded in, it doesn't add any torsional
> stiffness to the body- a "moment resisting connection" would be required to
> transfer that stiffness to the body & if the brace is only siting on a lip
> in the opening, it is only supporting axial or gravity loads on it.
>
> Mr. BZ-licensed architect who can legally design some structural members,
> but uses much smarter structural engineers to do that instead
>
>
> > (and as mentioned, to support forward end of westy bunk plywood). In the
> tin top, the beam is curved to match roof curvature, in the westy its not.
> >
> > Both van types have box section cross beam at forward end of roof opening
> area.
>
> yep, that box section is what provides the torsional stiffness around the
> opening
> >
> > alistair
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 28-Dec-10, at 8:10 AM, Thomas Buese wrote:
> >
> > In my professional experience w/ structural engineering, I believe
> > that the Westy cross brace in the ceiling is more for the structural
> > support of the upper bunk than for cross bracing the roof-sunroof
> > models don't have that brace, right Craig?
> >
> > YMMV,
> >
> > Mr. BZ-you can never have too much headroom, but where do you store
> > your stuff?
> >
> >
> >
> > On Dec 28, 2010, at 7:40 AM, craig cowan wrote:
> >
> >> Ahh. I guess they did pull out some structural stuff.
> >> In that case, it may be somewhat compromised. How much? It's hard to
> >> say.
> >>
> >> -Craig
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 12:05 AM, Loren Busch <starwagen@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 7:30 PM, craig cowan
> >>> <phishman068@gmail.com>wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> It's only missing the top bunks right? They're not structural....
> >>>> So, "YES"?
> >>>>
> >>>> It looks good!
> >>>> If you don't use your top bunks, that looks slick!
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> BUT it is missing all the sheet metal part of the top in that area
> >>> and
> >>> maybe more important the very beefy cross brace at the front of
> >>> the bunk
> >>> the VW/Westfalia put in.
> >>>
> >
>
|