Australian Streamliner Bike Build

[Jon]

Thanks Guys;

I "think" the lean angle will be ok, at a single point look it clashes, at a unloaded tyre radius it is good.
I will build it like this then test it when fully loaded wet
May need to take to it some with a beltsander on the edges if my guestimate is wrong, rather do that than build it a bit higher and then test it and find out i could have gone a bit further.

The Cable Steering is a happening thing,  I have a few post it note engineerign drawings on my desk.

cheers
jon

[Dr Goggles]

http://ifasgallery.ifas.ufl.edu/entnem/walker/buzz/489sl.wav

any reports?

[Jon]

No crickets here Goggles, only because the spiders hunted them though.
Been a little distracted with other thing so not much real work happening.

Just got the first pass of the yaw study back from Woody, there's good news and bad news from my first squint on my phone, going to cut down a Forrest and print it all on A3.
I don't need glasses honest.

Done a few little odd jobs is all, front rocker is made up, top pivot is in the yoke, gussets made up for the control arm mounts of the front yoke, a bit slack really.

Cheers
jon

[Jon]

A slight hiccup in my build.

This went to vote and apparently got passed at SCTA meeting 3rd of November:

Current Rule:
Shall completely surround the rider and shall be fitted in the rider’s compartment. Minimum diameter is 1 1⁄4 inches with .090 inch nominal wall thickness, mechanical steel tubing. No galvanized pipe, black water pipe or threaded fittings are permitted. The design of the roll cage shall incorporate the following features as a minimum: Two (2) roll bars, (one forward and one after the riders head), which shall be tied together and capped with a steel plate .090 inches thick. The cap shall cover the upper 140 deg of the riders head. The roll bar shall be braced with a tube of the same dimensions on each side. Rider’s head movement shall be limited to no more than 2 inches to each side, top or rear with the riders head in the normal position. Roll cage padding meeting SFI specifications 45.1 for round tube roll cage padding and SFI specification 45.3 for flat cage padding is required in the vicinity of the rider’s

Issue:
Motorcycle streamliner and motorcycle side car streamliner roll cage tubing size requirements

Rulebook Section: 7.H.4 Rulebook Page No: 123

Desired Outcome:
To bring motorcycle streamliner and side car streamliner tubing and cage requirements in line with the car tubing requirements

Reason for Chg:
The current tubing sizes on some streamliners and side car streamliners (Speed X weight X Mass) is inadequate.

Side Effects:
None, (Will not affect any streamliner or side car streamliner that is currently running in the SCTA or BNI).

Desired Rulebook Wording:
Shall completely surround the rider and shall be fitted in the riders compartment. Minimum diameter is 1-1/4 in. with .090 in. nominal wall thickness, mechanical steel tubing in a vehicle with speeds under 175 mph. In vehicles with speeds over 175 mph minimum requirements for the roll cage structure and the roll cage structure braces are 1-5/8 in O.D. round steel tubing with a minimum .120 in. nominal wall thickness or E4130 chromoly tubing with a minimum .095 in. nominal wall thickness, securely mounted, gusseted and braced within 5 in. of the top of the roll cage structure. ALL ROLL CAGE STRUCTURES SHALL BE DESIGNED TO PROTECT THE DRIVER FROM ANY ANGLE, INCLUDING THE BOTTOM AND REAR. The front hoop of the roll cage shall be at least 3 in. in front of the drivers helmet while the driver is in his normal driving position.



It is my understanding and that of a couple well known current Streamliner Bike owners that it does not have a Grandfather rule and that it makes all current Streamliner Bikes and all but 1 Streamliner Bikes non compliant.

A fair few of us contacted the tech committee prior to the vote, to no avail apparently.
I've heard that Sam Wheeler (the benchmark in Streamliner Bikes IMHO) went with an engineer to the meeting, I've not talked to Sam since the vote.

This rule change request was apparently accompanied by this;

Issue:
Clarification/general information

Rulebook Section: 7.A.9 Rulebook Page No: 106 Desired Outcome:
To add same wording as shown in the car general requirements

Reason for Change:
Clarify the process of requesting deviations to current rule.

Side Effects:
None
Desired Wording:
Add 7.A.9: “ALL DEVIATIONS TO CURRENT ROLL STRUCTURE RULES SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE CONTEST BOARD NO LATER THAN 45 DAYS PRIOR TO THE EVENT FOR REVIEW.”


This appears to give an out to the 1 5/8" rule, just to confuse things further.

I believe that a properly built 1 1/4" rollcage on a bike will stand up to impact forces without significant deformation beyond what my body's internal organs can stand.

I welcome safety inspection on my bike, one of the main reason this build diary exists is for peer review.

See you on the salt, with my bike....
Jon

[Rob]

G'day Jon,

Does this portion not give existing bike 'liners a free pass?

"Side Effects:
None, (Will not affect any streamliner or side car streamliner that is currently running in the SCTA or BNI)."

I feel for the guys with builds in the works as much as those with existing vehicles and hope something can be worked out.

[Jon]

Before I contacted the motorcycle tech committee I contacted a few of the top contenders to see if I was just put out because my bike is non compliant and that they gauged it as a decent rule upgrade.

I received a fairly detailed response from Mike Akatiff that I post here with his permission;

"Hi Jon:

The ACK Attack frame and roll cage is constructed with 1.250" 4130 condition N tubing with a .125" wall TIG welded with 316 stainless rod. It has survived 3 serious crashes two at over 300 MPH with no frame or roll cage structural damage whatsoever. The most violent crash occurred in 2011 while testing the traction control system the bike had no body and was going about 100 MPH the bike tumbled end over end a number of times and landed on on its back and side from about a height of 6 feet a couple of times. We could find no structural damage or deformation to the frame or roll cage cage after this accident. While the SCTA rules are designed to keep the amateur builder safe I believe the design of the frame and roll cage while taking into consideration the material characteristics of which it is made is much more important than just throwing out some number for tubing size.

Mike Akatiff"

I have removed a sentence at the end of this that is not related to this conversation.

This is the fastest bike in world and I believe the heaviest, it's come unstuck properly 3 times, 1 of those in a pretty decent way with no structural damage to its 1 1/4" cage.

Cheers
jon

[Jon]

G'day Jon,

Does this portion not give existing bike 'liners a free pass?

"Side Effects:
None, (Will not affect any streamliner or side car streamliner that is currently running in the SCTA or BNI)."

I feel for the guys with builds in the works as much as those with existing vehicles and hope something can be worked out.

Hi Rob

I don't believe so, I got this in an email from one of the current front runners:

"It turns out that current running streamliners would not be exempt or grandfathered in as stated. The
wording may be changed to existing  running machines will be analyzed for
crash worthy strength."

I haven't heard of the final wording since the vote.
jon

[wobblywalrus]

Jon, the AMA and FIM rules are relatively stable from year to year and they make a lot of sense  My favorite is the FIM.  They were hard to interpret at first but they are straightforward once I figured them out.  Maybe the DLRA could run FIM, too.  BUB runs AMA and FIM at the same meet with no problems.  The frequency and unpredictibility of the SCTA makes it hard for the home builder.  We are lucky to have alternative organizations in the States. 

[Jon]

Thanks Wobbly

I have the BUB rules, I put together a spreadsheet that has both sets of rules (BUB beingFIM/AMA and SCTA) and am building my bike to comply with both.

I have no problem with rule changes to increase competitor safety, think this has missed the mark by a pretty big margin though.

Cheers
Jon

[SaltPeter]

Hey Jon

I have been following your build it's great.

I really like the Cable Steer you are looking at.

With the Rule change

"The current tubing sizes on some streamliners and side car streamliners (Speed X weight X Mass) is inadequate."

Is that 300mph x 1 ton x 1 ton = 300 what? or Metric 480kph x 1tonne x 1tonne = 480 what?

"Definition of Mass

A measure of how much matter is in an object.

A gold bar is quite small but has a mass of 1 kilogram (about 2.2 pounds), so it contains a lot of matter.

Mass is commonly measured by how much something weighs. But weight can change depending on where you are (such as on the moon) while the mass stays the same.

It is measured in grams, kilograms and, tonnes (Metric) or ounces and pounds (US units)"

Can someone explain this formula to me?
 
Pete
DLRA

[rgn]

 Just caught this news.... Really quite unbelievable.   

[55chevr]

With the amount of prep work it takes to get a streamliner ready and the wait for ideal conditions, the best venue for streamliners of any type is Mike Cook's event. 

[grumm441]

The rule change was put up in good faith although if you read the submission it was probably not that well considered
It Stated it will not affect any vehicles that were currently running. So Mcleish's sidecar is either not running or complies
and what about the Yaccoci Costello side car was this year
The rule got up because the car guys thought it was a good idea, and there were more of them at the meeting
It makes it clear that the rule changes are not evidence based as the only accident evidence came from Ack
who said even a 300mph crash didn't bend it. Sam Wheeler took an engineer to the meeting to show the facts and that didn't help
When you look at the longest span of rollcage in a motorcycle streamliner it would be no more than a couple of feet long. compare this with 200mph car, or perhaps a truck, which uses the same size rollcage tube.
They also didn't consider that you don't just knock up a streamliner in between when the new rule book comes out and the first meeting
of the year. Some of these things have been in the build stages for a number of years. Now anyone building one or anyone who has one ready to go has to apply  for a deviation.

I got this from One tech guy

Deviation blessings:
 Just as a matter of history, I have been witness to  racers seeking deviations.  It is usually a hard sell, 
usually  including "engineering data" to back up the request.   Sometimes the good ol boys get deviations, sometimes the "other racers" do not. 
It's much better to have some hard  & fast, black/white rules for a builder to follow and feel confident that his project will pass tech.
IF we pass that new frame rule,   I think it should not come into effect for a couple of years. 


Talking to  Van Butler and Lee Kennedy.
They said if anyone is building a streamliner, they should just send them pics and they will tell you how to make it as strong as the larger tube size.


So get on with sending your pictures to Lee Kennedy and Van Butler

G

[Jon]

I have no doubt the rule submission is well intended.

I cannot see how my bike needs the same size roll age material as a vehicle at least 2 times my weight.
I plan to be ready to run on the salt about 600kg wet, I doubt if there are any cars much under 1200kg.
I believe I'm a bit over 1/3 of the weight of Ack Attack, their cage has proven itself 3 times and is still straight.

My main hoop is an eclipse 760mm (30") high by 580mm (23") wide with diagonal braces and two cross braces, the longest segment is 320mm long (13").
My front hoop is the same eclipse as the main hoop, with the longest span being 380mm (15").
The cage will be full sheeted with the same weight material that is required by the rules for the head area.

Time to get drawing on CAD to put to the tech committee.
I'm crap at CAD, can make something in steel quicker.

A minor hiccup.
jon

[Rex Schimmer]

Interesting comment from grumm441 post: "Talking to  Van Butler and Lee Kennedy.
They said if anyone is building a streamliner, they should just send them pics and they will tell you how to make it as strong as the larger tube size. " from this I am then assuming that the SCTA is accepting the design responsibility for frame designs. So from this it appears that you can make your cage from 1 1/4 tube but it has to be to the SCTA's design?


There are some times that "the powers that be" in the SCTA make changes that are not based upon good engineering and fabrication practices, the 1/4 inch thick base plate requirement for cages in unibody cars is a good example of their "if some is good then more is better" thinking and this appears to be more of the same.

Rex