What's new
By:
Filters

Tethers being tested (1 Viewer)

The Counterfeiter

The Counterfeiter

Nitro Member
:::Drag Racing Online::: Columns - Agent 1320 - 03/16/10

A "couple" of devices is pretty vague, but it is interesting to hear about Jim Head's take on this. More detail on this and other options would be greatly appreciated - Darr?

Obviously, this needs to be approached very carefully. A spinning wheel and tire with a huge amount of inertia loosely attached to a car could make things worse. Kudos to some very smart people who are working on this.
 
Machine the axle hubs and the wheel hubs so they interlock, the studs then do the clamping and not the driving. :rolleyes:
 
I like Randy's idea of six lugs, maybe even the lugs. It would be expensive but what isn't on these cars. I don't think there's any tether that would work and might cause more danger if the lugs did break.
 
Registered member said:
Machine the axle hubs and the wheel hubs so they interlock, the studs then do the clamping and not the driving. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

....that sounds much more practical than "One of the devices is a Jim Head design, a metal rod that is attached to the wheel by way of a bolt that slides into the axles"
I know Jim Head is a smart guy, but that just doesn't seem to solve the problem, only "band-aid" it. :rolleyes:
 
I am merely pointing out that wheel tethers are not solving the problem, .....better fasteners or a fastening system is.
 
Registered member said:
Change the bolt circle diameter. Add a stud. Problem solved.
Click to expand...

Registered member said:
Machine the axle hubs and the wheel hubs so they interlock, the studs then do the clamping and not the driving. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I also favor solutions like those suggested above that fix the basic problem rather than band-aiding it. The tethers sound problematic to me and there's no way to really test what's going to happen if one lets go at 300 mph, it could be brutal.

As I've suggested in previous posts, just some straightforward procedures put in place with the current setup (required testing and periodic replacment of wheel studs, torque tests in the staging lanes, ban on wheel spacers) would be a hugh improvement from the current situation and I think this should be done right away.

From what I understand, several of the failures that have occurred in the past few years were due to under torquing and incorrect assembly of a wheel spacer, and putting these reasonable requirements and procedures in place would have prevented those failures.
 
My trailer has more lugs and a larger bolt circle diameter than a TF dragster. And it has some pretty high side loads when I'm flipping U-turns after missing the offramp to Joliet.

The thinking behind tethers is to catch something that should have never have come off in the first place. Do Connie's 747's need tethers when they land the jets at Ontario during strong 100 MPH Santa Ana winds off the Cajon Pass. The wind pushes them sideways as much as 20+ degrees.

If GM had trouble with wheels flying off their pick up trucks on the freeway don't you think they'd figure out a way to keep the wheels on the trucks rather than catch them after they came off?

RG

.
 
Registered member said:
Machine the axle hubs and the wheel hubs so they interlock, the studs then do the clamping and not the driving. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Or the splined center style wheels used in sprint cars for about the last 15 years ?

Although, is there a need for a point of failure ? If the stud does not break and continues to allow the wheel/tire to transfer the tire shake to the car and driver what are the results ?
Im just thinking out loud here. I am not suggesting that a wheel seperating from a car is ever a good thing.

Im thinking of an Eric Medlen type situation (which hopefully never happens again) and the mass of the wheel/tire causes damage that could have been lessend by studs breaking ???

Randy any thoughts on this ? I respect your point of view and opinion on this.

Again just thinking out loud....

TK
 
Registered member said:
Or the splined center style wheels used in sprint cars for about the last 15 years ?

Although, is there a need for a point of failure ? If the stud does not break and continues to allow the wheel/tire to transfer the tire shake to the car and driver what are the results ?
Im just thinking out loud here. I am not suggesting that a wheel seperating from a car is ever a good thing.

Im thinking of an Eric Medlen type situation (which hopefully never happens again) and the mass of the wheel/tire causes damage that could have been lessend by studs breaking ???

Randy any thoughts on this ? I respect your point of view and opinion on this.

Again just thinking out loud....

TK
Click to expand...

Medlen's deal was tragic. Maybe a once or twice in a lifetime deal considering the dynamics of what happened.

I think it's more important (safety wise) to keep parts/wheels/tires out of the grandstands than mandating wheels studs that are designed to break during a run if something goes wrong.

The inertia generated by a spinning wheel/tire that weighs as much as a TF/FC wheel/tire combo has to incredible. It's really a no brainer to think that supporting all that spinning weight with a 5.5" center 5 stud retention set up is not adequate when the load is anyhere but dead center. Expanding the diameter without adding studs would significantly strengthen the assembly, but why not add a stud or two while your at it since it would involve new hubs, wheel centers and related parts anyway.

Very simple stuff. Spendy, but simple.

RG

.
 
Registered member said:
Medlen's deal was tragic. Maybe a once or twice in a lifetime deal considering the dynamics of what happened.

I think it's more important (safety wise) to keep parts/wheels/tires out of the grandstands than mandating wheels studs that are designed to break during a run if something goes wrong.

The inertia generated by a spinning wheel/tire that weighs as much as a TF/FC wheel/tire combo has to incredible. It's really a no brainer to think that supporting all that spinning weight with a 5.5" center 5 stud retention set up is not adequate when the load is anyhere but dead center. Expanding the diameter without adding studs would significantly strengthen the assembly, but why not add a stud or two while your at it since it would involve new hubs, wheel centers and related parts anyway.

Very simple stuff. Spendy, but simple.

RG

.
Click to expand...

Thanks Randy. I agree totally that it is important to protect the spectators first and foremost.

Any thoughts on the sprint car type centers ? No hub just spline on axel, spline on wheel, splined rotor, single 2 1/2 nut, left hand thread on one side to "self tighten"

Didn't Steve Faria try a large diameter wheel on his TAD at one point ? I think the idea was to reduce side wall and doubt that the hub was anything different but it would be interesting to find out why it was scrapped.

TK
 
While I agree that adding more studs is a good idea at first, IMO when you're dealing with that much torque is it really going to be a difference maker?

Just like the wing-mounted 'chute cables. If the wing comes off the car it's just going to crash anyway.
 
Registered member said:
Machine the axle hubs and the wheel hubs so they interlock, the studs then do the clamping and not the driving. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...


Bingo.

Rob Moore, Steve and Kevin Chrisman, and Stange need to all be part of the discussion/solution.

Studs will never properly transfer the Torque laterally. If they can spline a crank snout they can spline a rear hub.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Ways To Support Nitromater

Similar threads

Porkchop
Jeff Arends Blog "A Tuners Desicions"
Replies
11
Views
5K
troy boy
T
Deby
  • Article
NHRA Teleconference Transcript: John Force Racing, April 10, 2007
Replies
0
Views
3K
Deby
Deby

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)

Back
Top