Author Topic: material tubing thickness  (Read 28677 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline willieworld

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1818
material tubing thickness
« on: October 13, 2008, 05:28:17 PM »
Outside dia.       Advertised wall        Actual wall          At the bend outside
1 1/2 od                 .083 cm                 .083                 .081

1 1/2 od                 .125 dom                .126                 .122

1 5/8 od                 .120 ew                  .118                 .115

1 5/8 od                 .125 dom                 .126                 .123

1 1/4 od                 .134 ew                   .124                 .122

Straight section was sonic checked, outside of bend was sonic checked.
Some tubing not as advertised(nominal wall thickness). The smaller the radius on the bend equals the thinner material on outside of bend.
And the more degrees of bend the thinner material on the outside of bend.
This is just some testing I did today on a few random pieces of tubing I had around the shop. They are not all exactly the same bend and each tube size is different and some of the radius are different. But I think you get the idea.
If you need any testing in particular done let me know.
Willie Buchta
« Last Edit: October 13, 2008, 05:32:48 PM by willieworld »
willie-dpombatmir-buchta

Offline Cajun Kid

  • Rajun Cajun Racing E/CGALT 5690
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3189
  • Venable Rod's & Racing #805 Studebaker, #806 Ford
Re: material tubing thickness
« Reply #1 on: October 13, 2008, 06:15:44 PM »
Willie,, thanks that helps.. I was going to use .120 DOM... may use 1 3/4
.134/.135  DOM  instead.

Charles
ECTA Record Holder Maxton
E/CBFALT, E/CBGALT, E/CGALT, E/CFALT, A/CGALT, C/CGALT, D/CGALT, C/CBGALT, B/CBGALT, C/CFALT
OHIO
B/CGALT, C/CGALT

LTA Record Holder and 200 Club Member
A/CBFALT, B/CBFALT, C/CBFALT, C/CFALT, C/CGALT,   E/CGALT, E/CFALT

Fastest Standing Mile at Ohio  203.343mph
Fastest Standing Mile at Maxton 196.967mph
Fastest Standing 1.5 Mile at Loring 213.624mph
Fastest Standing Mile at Loring 204.109mph

http://s261.photobucket.com/albums/ii43/cajunkid5690/

Blog    www.venablerodsandracing.com
email   venableracing@gmail.com

Offline willieworld

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1818
Re: material tubing thickness
« Reply #2 on: October 13, 2008, 06:46:19 PM »
charles--the mininum requirement is 1 5/8 .120 nominal wall ( THERE ARE SOME EXCEPTIONS ) if you use .120 wall dom you will be above the mininum----if you can break up the long pieces of tubing  with diagonals --bracing you will make the cage much stronger than going to a larger tube size --dont lull yourself into a false since of security with your roll cage it is actually the other safety equipment that keep you safe in an " upset "  ---the cage only keeps the car fron caving in on you ---and dont forget those gussets they make all of the connections twice as strong-----just some thoughts     willie buchta
« Last Edit: October 13, 2008, 06:56:24 PM by willieworld »
willie-dpombatmir-buchta

Offline Cajun Kid

  • Rajun Cajun Racing E/CGALT 5690
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3189
  • Venable Rod's & Racing #805 Studebaker, #806 Ford
Re: material tubing thickness
« Reply #3 on: October 13, 2008, 10:26:01 PM »
willie,  got it ... Gussets and Braces.... X Bracing, Diagonal Bracing, Cross Bracing, Sill Bars, Pro Stock/Funny Car set up,  Think we will be ok on the cage once we decide entry and exit (with my size)  need some well thought our drivers door swing outs (or lower x or y bracing so I can slide in and roll out ..lol)

The Chassis and Suspension is the big project... Have not decided on type of front suspension...Several Ideas floating around, but nothing final..
Not sure how much caster adjustment can get with a trick coilover Mustang II, or Tubular A arm IFS set up will yield..or how bump steer may come to play. The dropped straight axle like the Vicky is another idea, but using parallel leafs, but not sure how low we can go that way and how adjustable it can be..?? 

 Almost certain will use 4 link and coil overs in rear with Panard Bar and sway bar. (Vicky has Pete and Jakes long ladder bars, and Panhard set up with adj coilovers)

Well my brain hurts thinking of all the possible combinations...

Charles

ECTA Record Holder Maxton
E/CBFALT, E/CBGALT, E/CGALT, E/CFALT, A/CGALT, C/CGALT, D/CGALT, C/CBGALT, B/CBGALT, C/CFALT
OHIO
B/CGALT, C/CGALT

LTA Record Holder and 200 Club Member
A/CBFALT, B/CBFALT, C/CBFALT, C/CFALT, C/CGALT,   E/CGALT, E/CFALT

Fastest Standing Mile at Ohio  203.343mph
Fastest Standing Mile at Maxton 196.967mph
Fastest Standing 1.5 Mile at Loring 213.624mph
Fastest Standing Mile at Loring 204.109mph

http://s261.photobucket.com/albums/ii43/cajunkid5690/

Blog    www.venablerodsandracing.com
email   venableracing@gmail.com

saltfever

  • Guest
Re: material tubing thickness
« Reply #4 on: October 13, 2008, 11:04:01 PM »
Great information, Willie. Thanks for posting it. :-)

What kind of sonic tester do you have and what do they cost? I would like to get one primarily for engine blocks. Any thoughts or experience using them...

Offline willieworld

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1818
Re: material tubing thickness
« Reply #5 on: October 13, 2008, 11:55:50 PM »
saltfever---i bought the sonic checker in 1993 --at that time it was expensive i think about 1200 dollars--they are probably cheaper now---it is made by the staveley instrument co in kennewick wa.---when i bought it they had 3 options for the pickup ( concave--convex--flat ) the pickup was 300 dollars so i just got one (flat)  it works well on flat and round tubing  --it is accurate to .001 in 2 inches  close enough for me ---i use it on tubing and cylinder head ports -keeps me out of the water jackets --even on the harley heads it lets me know how much meat i have left--i use to  build nhra chassis and they required a sonic check--never had one fail --it is very easy to use --i will bring it to el mirage in a couple of weeks if anybody wants anything tested look me up      willie buchta
willie-dpombatmir-buchta

Offline Sumner

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4078
  • Blanding, Ut..a small dot in the middle of nowhere
    • http://purplesagetradingpost.com/sumner/sumnerindex.html
Re: material tubing thickness
« Reply #6 on: October 14, 2008, 12:09:15 AM »
....................Not sure how much caster adjustment can get with a trick coilover Mustang II, or Tubular A arm IFS set up will yield..or how bump steer may come to play. .............................................................................

Don't forget that if you add weight like we have that you will need springs that will handle it.  Hooley has some kind of odd-ball coil overs for the mustang like suspension on the front that take springs that come in only limited spring rates.  I would design the front and rear in a way that you have a large spring rate selection available.

Great stuff on the tubing thickness Willie, thanks for doing that,

Sum

saltfever

  • Guest
Re: material tubing thickness
« Reply #7 on: October 14, 2008, 04:43:36 AM »
saltfever---i bought the sonic checker in 1993 --at that time it was expensive i think about 1200 dollars--they are probably cheaper now---it is made by the staveley instrument co in kennewick wa.---when i bought it they had 3 options for the pickup ( concave--convex--flat ). . .

Thanks for getting back to me, Willie.  :-) I'll look them up. 

Offline Cajun Kid

  • Rajun Cajun Racing E/CGALT 5690
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3189
  • Venable Rod's & Racing #805 Studebaker, #806 Ford
Re: material tubing thickness
« Reply #8 on: October 14, 2008, 09:51:48 AM »
Sum, thanks for the heads up on the springs. My plan if going Mustang II or other IFS  was to use QA1 coilovers, they have at least 10 spring rates and full ride height, preload and dampaning adjustments.

Oh any luck on getting the spill plate and spolier templates for me... If you get them let me know and I will send you my address and postage.

Thanks

Charles
ECTA Record Holder Maxton
E/CBFALT, E/CBGALT, E/CGALT, E/CFALT, A/CGALT, C/CGALT, D/CGALT, C/CBGALT, B/CBGALT, C/CFALT
OHIO
B/CGALT, C/CGALT

LTA Record Holder and 200 Club Member
A/CBFALT, B/CBFALT, C/CBFALT, C/CFALT, C/CGALT,   E/CGALT, E/CFALT

Fastest Standing Mile at Ohio  203.343mph
Fastest Standing Mile at Maxton 196.967mph
Fastest Standing 1.5 Mile at Loring 213.624mph
Fastest Standing Mile at Loring 204.109mph

http://s261.photobucket.com/albums/ii43/cajunkid5690/

Blog    www.venablerodsandracing.com
email   venableracing@gmail.com

Offline panic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 845
    • My tech papers
Re: material tubing thickness
« Reply #9 on: October 14, 2008, 11:39:20 AM »
.
« Last Edit: October 21, 2008, 06:26:49 PM by panic »

Offline willieworld

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1818
Re: material tubing thickness
« Reply #10 on: October 14, 2008, 01:14:52 PM »
panic could you do a couple more of those  one with an upright in the middle with diagonals running top right to bottom left  and one with one diaogenal running from top  right to bottom left and the other diaogenal running from bottom right to top left  ---smaller triangles with about the same amount of material  -thanks  willie buchta
willie-dpombatmir-buchta

Offline panic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 845
    • My tech papers
Re: material tubing thickness
« Reply #11 on: October 14, 2008, 02:11:11 PM »
.
« Last Edit: October 21, 2008, 06:27:05 PM by panic »

Offline panic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 845
    • My tech papers
Re: material tubing thickness
« Reply #12 on: October 14, 2008, 02:16:01 PM »
.
« Last Edit: October 21, 2008, 06:27:19 PM by panic »

Offline panic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 845
    • My tech papers
Re: material tubing thickness
« Reply #13 on: October 14, 2008, 02:36:41 PM »
.
« Last Edit: October 21, 2008, 06:27:47 PM by panic »

saltfever

  • Guest
Re: material tubing thickness
« Reply #14 on: October 14, 2008, 04:13:07 PM »
Guys, I am following this thread with a lot of interest. Great stuff and thanks to you both. However, I'm a little confused about Panic's last post. You are referring to an Excel program. Was this program posted in another thread and is public? (If yes, please point to it). Or is this a program you created and is personal?  Great example though, on the effectiveness of geometry vs. mass.  :wink: