Nitromater
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
How many legal fuel cars??
- Thread starter MW
- Start date
turbo ken
Nitro Member
The IHRA still allows the 10.1d(e) spec for nitro F/C with some talk about the addition of another tube inserted the lower frame rails, so they won't have to go to the 10.5 spec for another year or two since the IHRA teams dont have the budget or run their cars as hard as the NHRA F/C's do, I don't know about the T/F cars though.
I'm thinking there maybe a diminishing number of these cars and/or lower budget racers jumping to the softer IHRA requirements because of the insane requirements imposed on the builders by the current SFI Fuel Specs.
A requirement for the NHRA Pro Fuel chassis is that EVERY 24' length of frame tubing in the spec area has to be lab tested beyond the producing mill's specification they can provide re: properties , heat number, etc.
That is bafflingly ludicrous.
Tell me I'm wrong that the manufactuerer's paperwork isn't good enough for FAA and PROBABLY NASA.
There's even a flaw in the spec (really, many others in a court of law, but the subject is tubing, now).
4130n tubing is manufactured in 17 to 24 foot lengths, so by that, a builder shouldn't have to lab test anything SHORTER than 24' since that's all the SPEC requires.
I could go on, but nausea sets in.
A requirement for the NHRA Pro Fuel chassis is that EVERY 24' length of frame tubing in the spec area has to be lab tested beyond the producing mill's specification they can provide re: properties , heat number, etc.
That is bafflingly ludicrous.
Tell me I'm wrong that the manufactuerer's paperwork isn't good enough for FAA and PROBABLY NASA.
There's even a flaw in the spec (really, many others in a court of law, but the subject is tubing, now).
4130n tubing is manufactured in 17 to 24 foot lengths, so by that, a builder shouldn't have to lab test anything SHORTER than 24' since that's all the SPEC requires.
I could go on, but nausea sets in.
Last edited:
Wayne
Nitro Member
Mark, I'm takin' a stab here but both Smiths run at our National event each year (I think), both live here in Washington, and Brad Hadmans shop is less than 30 miles from the track. I'm guessing both have been updated.
JMHO: of course I could be talking out of my butt!
Wayne
Draw 3D
Nitro Member
OK, you're wrong, FAA and NASA both require periodic testing. NASA used to require testing on ALL materials for certain space projects like engine components of the Space Shuttle.
I have seen with my own eyes bogus material certs that came from Korea and this was on military project that required the material be bought from a list of approved suppliers which it was.
Until you have dealt with falsely certified materials, certs appear to be good enough.
I think requiring material testing is a good step, now they need to certify welders on a yearly basis.
Paul; only if there is a better test than I've seen. Chuck Beal is a nuclear quality engineer for General Atomic and set up a test for me with the results going to a lab. I walked in with my finished test parts and the guy goes, "WOW, you pass", here's your paperwork, start filling it out while I go do the cert checks". I didn't know wheather to laugh or cry!
Then I got to go on a tour of a major airliner manufacturer that I'd best not name, but I was so impressed that I did NOT get on a plane for over seven years! FACT!
Bob
Appreciate the correction on testing - I don't want to debate the subject "periodic" with you, but in the case of airframe tubing I doubt testing EACH PIECE qualifies as periodic. And I'm not sure the major tubing producers would run the risk of fraud.
CONVERSLY, though, a major rod end manufacturer was "busted" a few years back, and, I was told and I'd glad to forward the source of the information, they passed their penalty paid on to their consumers.
Locally, near to me in So Cal, there was an aerospace supplying firm that had to pay a $900,000 fine -they're still in business, though. (They were PLATING undersized hardware up to size, among other infractions!).
Underlying my previous post is the weak attempts SFI has made to truly bring their fuel car chassis specs up to where they should be from an understandable standpoint, both legal and engineering-wise. That's my major gripe.
Amen, to the weld test, but it was because the then over 130 SEMA chassis builders balked at that proposal years ago that the current diameter and wall thickness testing came to be.
CONVERSLY, though, a major rod end manufacturer was "busted" a few years back, and, I was told and I'd glad to forward the source of the information, they passed their penalty paid on to their consumers.
Locally, near to me in So Cal, there was an aerospace supplying firm that had to pay a $900,000 fine -they're still in business, though. (They were PLATING undersized hardware up to size, among other infractions!).
Underlying my previous post is the weak attempts SFI has made to truly bring their fuel car chassis specs up to where they should be from an understandable standpoint, both legal and engineering-wise. That's my major gripe.
Amen, to the weld test, but it was because the then over 130 SEMA chassis builders balked at that proposal years ago that the current diameter and wall thickness testing came to be.
Last edited:
Draw 3D
Nitro Member
Bob, I don't doubt it a bit, but the test should have taken a few days to get the results, eve if done in-house.
And doing cert check is not correct, a complete chemical and physical properties analysis is required and that takes awhile.
Years ago, I used to write material, welding and welder testing specs and had the opportunity to work with some great welders and even they sometimes failed, usually for the smallest infraction.
And Norm, when I was in aerospace, periodic meant yearly, that is, if you still had the material.
I think NHRA is trying to get an arm around the whole process of building fuel cars and until they know what they have, this type re-testing will be the norm.
I expect them to add filler rod to the testing requirement soon.
kd
Nitro Member
Great Post Bob! Smart dude that Chuck (whats he doin' besides being a grandpa?!-LOL) If you know Chuck...You Know DANA...tooooo much fun all of 'em!!! NOBODY can fill a swimming pool with waitresses like those Kats!!!
Ask Mr. Bealmobile!!! WE have fun, fun, fun, till daddy (!)(-you figure!
) took the t-bird away!!!! Gotta ask Chuck about our indoor surfing competition in an indoor pool in Spokane, Wa.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
GD BLESS!!!!
Kev!
kd
Nitro Member
Draw 3D
Nitro Member
No. I'm questioning the guy who did the testing, and if you read Bob's statement, so was he.YOU are QUESTIONING BOB ? WOW!!!! who you.
Old Sg
Nitro Member
Does anyone now on here if the welding on TF or FC chassis are third party tested(independent testing agency) after fabrication? Are all welds considered tp be fillet welds, partial, or full penetration welds? If they are third party tested who hires the agency? Who is certifying the welds meet specs? What tests are being done, visual, dye penetrate, UT, x-ray or ?
