Home  
Site Partners: SpotterGuides Veloce Books  
Related Sites: Classic Cars Monthly Your Link Here  

Go Back   TenTenths Motorsport Forum > Historic Racing & Motorsport History > Historic Racing Today

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 26 Feb 2018, 11:20 (Ref:3804010)   #1
Geraint Owen
Racer
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 100
Geraint Owen should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Scruitineering of Roll Cages - a change in interpretation by the MSA

This is a word of warning following my experience at VSCC Pom at Silverstone this weekend. I was in an ex Kuhmo Cup E36 M3 that has done over 200 races, so it is a car that has been checked once or twice in the past.

Anyway, within the last few weeks it seems the MSA have issued a "clarification" to the scruits about roll cage mounting of the main hoop and front stays to the floor. They are insisting on a foot welded to the main tube that is then welded to a reinforcing plate welded to the floor. It has been practice for many car builders to build a "box" for the cage to sit on about 6" high up from the floor for increased strength. What the scruits are now saying is that it is unacceptable for the main tube to be welded to the top of the "box", instead there must be a foot on the tube welded to the top of the box. There is no specification for the size of the foot, so in theory it could be the diameter of the tube, but in practice you may get rejected for that. The alternative is to have a reinforcing plate under the box.

If in doubt read this
http://www.awmmc.org.uk/images/infor...crutineers.pdf
Geraint Owen is offline  
Quote
Old 26 Feb 2018, 16:39 (Ref:3804093)   #2
AdrianM
Registered User
Racer
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 277
AdrianM should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
If the enforce this they are going to have 99% of cars failing scrutineering imo. I've never seen a fully welded-in cage (bolt-in yes) with a separate foot like that and a quick look at the instruction videos/documents for the major players in the market don't show any either.
AdrianM is offline  
Quote
Old 27 Feb 2018, 15:17 (Ref:3804301)   #3
Bruce Chambers
Rookie
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
United Kingdom
Silverstone
Posts: 53
Bruce Chambers should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Thanks for the information, can anyone suggest any benefit from compliance with this clarification or is it simply yet another ill-considered missive from the MSA which will be retracted a few weeks down the line?
Bruce Chambers is offline  
Quote
Old 27 Feb 2018, 15:34 (Ref:3804315)   #4
Mike Bell
Ten-Tenths Hall of Fame
Veteran
 
Mike Bell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
England
Attleborough- 5 minutes from Snet!
Posts: 14,830
Mike Bell has a real shot at the championship!Mike Bell has a real shot at the championship!Mike Bell has a real shot at the championship!Mike Bell has a real shot at the championship!Mike Bell has a real shot at the championship!Mike Bell has a real shot at the championship!
Think I’ve only got one welded in cage, but that car may be subject to questioning, reading the blurb. I’m certainly not rushing to modify anything, best to see what transpires. The car isn’t due to race this season anyway, so lucky there’s no pressure......
Mike Bell is offline  
__________________
Logic will get you from A to B. Imagination will take you everywhere. (Einstein)
Quote
Old 27 Feb 2018, 15:48 (Ref:3804322)   #5
Geraint Owen
Racer
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 100
Geraint Owen should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
I spoke to one of the roll cage manufacturers today.

Their advise was do nothing for now. The cage manufacturers have all gone to the MSA and said you have got it wrong. It is said the MSA will issue an update, but no one there is prepared to sign off the change. Watch this space!
Geraint Owen is offline  
Quote
Old 27 Feb 2018, 16:06 (Ref:3804332)   #6
Colin Parkinson
Rookie
 
Join Date: May 2006
England
Halifax 'Oop North'
Posts: 79
Colin Parkinson should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Bruce that sounds about right!

One has to ask why the MSA have suddenly looked at this issue, when cars have been scrutineered over and over again without issue.

I cannot see an easy fix, except welding a plate on the outside of the car under each mounting, but I am not sure if that will comply.

The bulletin form the MSA to scrutineers has not told them what would be an acceptable solution.

Most welded in cages will have been fitted as the car is being built and there is no easy fix as far as I can see.

Some competitors I know are already talking about jacking it in. More bureaucracy and more cost to the competitor.

Then there is the fire extinguishers............!

I believe this will affect most race and rally competitors with welded in cages.
Colin Parkinson is offline  
Quote
Old 27 Feb 2018, 16:54 (Ref:3804348)   #7
lotustwincam
Rookie
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
United Kingdom
Posts: 73
lotustwincam should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
"Some competitors I know are already talking about jacking it in. More bureaucracy and more cost to the competitor."

Its not just existing competitors that are affected, it also puts off prospective new competitors.

How many ROPS failures have there been that the "feet" would have prevented?
lotustwincam is offline  
Quote
Old 28 Feb 2018, 08:05 (Ref:3804482)   #8
Simon Hadfield
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 520
Simon Hadfield should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridSimon Hadfield should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
This is the issue that concerns me, why are the discussions being taken, and on what basis? Why is the rank and file competitor not being consulted, as far as I am aware even scrutineers have not been asked, so why the seemingly constant tinkering with regulations that seem to have been working well up to now? I would make the point that this is not specifically a historic issue, as in theory it could affect every type of car that has had a roll cage fitted.
Also, what would adding a plate under the shell do? How on earth does that better serve the structure than a box welded over many inches so as to feed the load into both side and bottom of the shell structure? Very odd.

Last edited by Simon Hadfield; 28 Feb 2018 at 08:34.
Simon Hadfield is offline  
Quote
Old 28 Feb 2018, 09:14 (Ref:3804498)   #9
Colin Parkinson
Rookie
 
Join Date: May 2006
England
Halifax 'Oop North'
Posts: 79
Colin Parkinson should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Is this anything to do with Safety Devices having a go at the MSA for some reason?
Colin Parkinson is offline  
Quote
Old 28 Feb 2018, 09:19 (Ref:3804500)   #10
Mike Bell
Ten-Tenths Hall of Fame
Veteran
 
Mike Bell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
England
Attleborough- 5 minutes from Snet!
Posts: 14,830
Mike Bell has a real shot at the championship!Mike Bell has a real shot at the championship!Mike Bell has a real shot at the championship!Mike Bell has a real shot at the championship!Mike Bell has a real shot at the championship!Mike Bell has a real shot at the championship!
Totally agree with Simon. Let's hope that the cage manufacturers can get the MSA to see some sense......
Mike Bell is offline  
__________________
Logic will get you from A to B. Imagination will take you everywhere. (Einstein)
Quote
Old 3 Mar 2018, 18:16 (Ref:3805494)   #11
andy97
Veteran
 
andy97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
United Kingdom
Castle Donington
Posts: 4,981
andy97 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridandy97 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
The MSA have had to issue a clarification about fire extinguishers, essentially changing the interpretation of the regs isued just a few weeks ago, and now they are having to re- examine their recent interpretation of the ROPS regs because the manufacturers have told them they are wrong.

You could not make this up. Confusion reins. Have the MSA not heard of consultation?

I hope that David Richards can get a grip on this.
andy97 is offline  
__________________
Born in the Midlands, made in the Royal Navy
Quote
Old 3 Mar 2018, 22:28 (Ref:3805542)   #12
Colin Parkinson
Rookie
 
Join Date: May 2006
England
Halifax 'Oop North'
Posts: 79
Colin Parkinson should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
So the interpretation on fire extinguishers is .........?

I have not seen anything yet.
Colin Parkinson is offline  
Quote
Old 4 Mar 2018, 05:45 (Ref:3805625)   #13
andy97
Veteran
 
andy97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
United Kingdom
Castle Donington
Posts: 4,981
andy97 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridandy97 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colin Parkinson View Post
So the interpretation on fire extinguishers is .........?

I have not seen anything yet.
I received the following e-mail from the MSA technical dept, in response to a direct question. The change is in the recognition that there is no maximum age limit of 10 years for extinguishers and that a qualified fire extinguisher,but non-manufacturer agent, can service the bottles, as long as you do not need the extinguisher to retain homologation, which you don't in uk club racing until 2022.


Dear Andy,

There is no maximum life for an extinguisher in either MSA or FIA regulations. Some manufacturers will give their systems a maximum serviceable life but this is a commercial decision for that manufacturer. A non-FIA homologated system can be serviced by any suitably qualified person, however we would recommend that the manufacturers service schedule is followed.

Best Regards
Michael

cid:image001.png@01D1DFA5.A18EE730
Technical Department
Motor Sports Association, Riverside Park, Colnbrook, SL3 0HG
T: +44 (0)1753 765000 | technical@msauk.org
cid:image008.jpg@01CE62D5.D4FE8850@msauk cid:image009.jpg@01CE62D5.D4FE8850/msauk | www.msauk.org
The Royal Automobile Club Motor Sports Association Limited, trading as Motor Sports Association.
Registered in England and Wales 1344829. For full email disclaimer, please click here.




From: Andy
Sent: 12 February 2018 16:57
To: Technical <Technical@msauk.org>
Subject: Fwd: Fire Extinguisher Servicing





Good Morning

The recent regulation change regarding fire extinguisher servicing states that extinguishers are to be serviced in accordance with manufacturers guidelines.

Some manufacturers have decreed that they will not service extinguishers that are 10 years old.

Please can you tell me categorically whether this is an absolute rule, that extinguishers are now lifed to 10 years from date of manufacture and then have to be discarded or whether it is possible to get an extinguisher serviced by a qualified and competent Fire Extinguisher engineer and still be useable (albeit none homologated) even if it is over 10 years old, as long as it passes the test and service regime.

Thank you

Andy
andy97 is offline  
__________________
Born in the Midlands, made in the Royal Navy
Quote
Old 8 Mar 2018, 12:28 (Ref:3806836)   #14
Colin Parkinson
Rookie
 
Join Date: May 2006
England
Halifax 'Oop North'
Posts: 79
Colin Parkinson should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
MSA told scrutineers to take no action (unless clearly poor workmanship) until advised. No idea how this mess will be sorted out but at least scrutineers now covered!

Quote from an un-named source!

Colin
Colin Parkinson is offline  
Quote
Old 5 Apr 2018, 10:45 (Ref:3812960)   #15
lotustwincam
Rookie
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
United Kingdom
Posts: 73
lotustwincam should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Did this get clarified? We will be fitting a Cortina cage in the near future and would like to avoid any hassle.
lotustwincam is offline  
Quote
Old 7 Apr 2018, 08:39 (Ref:3813509)   #16
Geraint Owen
Racer
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 100
Geraint Owen should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by lotustwincam View Post
Did this get clarified? We will be fitting a Cortina cage in the near future and would like to avoid any hassle.
The MSA issued the original Bulletin to the Scruits saying that there needed to be feet on the cage before the floor plate/box. There has been a row in the background and the MSA were forced to issue a second Bulletin saying the original rules are in their view correct, but that the Scruits shouldnt enforce it just yet while they work out what to do. From what I understand, there is a bit of politics between the cage manufacturers which doesnt help

If you are about to install a cage, then it would be worth studying the original MSA Bulletin to ensure what you make will be OK regardless of what they decide. Of course some manufacturers (who I tend to agree with) are saying that the fixing of the foot adds more heat into the tube and actually reduces the strength of the cage.

Best of luck
Geraint Owen is offline  
Quote
Old 1 May 2018, 16:05 (Ref:3818696)   #17
Gerry Taylor
Veteran
 
Gerry Taylor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location:
London. UK
Posts: 677
Gerry Taylor should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridGerry Taylor should be qualifying in the top 5 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simon Hadfield View Post
This is the issue that concerns me, why are the discussions being taken, and on what basis? Why is the rank and file competitor not being consulted, as far as I am aware even scrutineers have not been asked, so why the seemingly constant tinkering with regulations that seem to have been working well up to now? I would make the point that this is not specifically a historic issue, as in theory it could affect every type of car that has had a roll cage fitted.
Also, what would adding a plate under the shell do? How on earth does that better serve the structure than a box welded over many inches so as to feed the load into both side and bottom of the shell structure? Very odd.
I would not use the word "Tinkering"; I would say "Meddling" or "Interfering" ( Hope I spelt that correctly) GT.
Gerry Taylor is offline  
Quote
Old 19 May 2018, 00:09 (Ref:3823324)   #18
Paul D
Veteran
 
Paul D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
England
Southport, Merseyside
Posts: 820
Paul D should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridPaul D should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
I think I know what I'd be doing if I had a weld-in cage affected by this ruling: cut some new mounting feet as per the new rule, slightly smaller than the existing ones attached to the car's shell before the cage was welded in. Then, cut holes in them to match the diameter of the weld at the foot of each cage tube. Next, cut them in half lengthways, place them around the bottom of the cage tube and weld them in-situ, to both the bottom of the tube (over the existing weld) and to the existing reinforcement plate. Grind flush the welds that you made over the lengthways cuts, and then you have, to all intents and purposes, feet attached to the bottom of each cage mounting. As you made these smaller than the existing plates on the shell, then it will be obvious to anyone inspecting it that you now have the 'plate welded to a plate' as per the new rules.

It's barmy to have to do this, and it won't make one iota of difference to the strength of your cage, but it will get you through scrutineering without: (A) having to buy a complete new cage or; (B) having to cut out your existing cage just to add pointless feet to it!

I wouldn't advocate cutting corners where safety is involved, but when there's an ill-thought out regulation such as this, imposed on us by people who clearly don't understand that what they're proposing won't add anything useful to the existing arrangement, then I don't have a problem with doing whatever's necessary to pacify them, if that's what it's going to take to allow me to keep racing something that I know is safe already.

Just a thought...
Paul D is offline  
__________________
"Light travels faster than sound - that's why, at first, some people appear bright... until you hear them speak!"
Quote
Old 4 Jul 2018, 10:49 (Ref:3834581)   #19
frogisland
Rookie
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1
frogisland should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Common sense prevails, in short:
Attached Thumbnails
www.msauk.org.png  
frogisland is offline  
Quote
Old 5 Jul 2018, 10:54 (Ref:3834784)   #20
Lancsbreaker
Veteran
 
Lancsbreaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
England
Padiham, Lancashire
Posts: 4,006
Lancsbreaker has a real shot at the podium!Lancsbreaker has a real shot at the podium!Lancsbreaker has a real shot at the podium!Lancsbreaker has a real shot at the podium!
However I'm not convinced that this paragraph actually makes sense:


Each leg of a main, lateral or front
rollbar must be attached via a
mounting foot,by at least three bolts,
minimum M8 ISO grade 8.8
and utilising a steel reinforcement plate
of a material of at least the same
thickness as the wall of the tube to
which it is being welded (minimum
3mm) and of at least 120cm2 area
which is welded to the bodyshell
(see drawings K13 to K18). The
mounting foot or leg may
alternatively be welded directly
to the bodyshell/reinforcement plate
in accordance with drawing K13.



It seems to say that the plate must be welded to the tube and also that it must be welded to the shell. I'm fairly sure I know what they mean, but don't think they actually say what they mean......
Lancsbreaker is offline  
__________________
Richard Murtha: You don't stop racing because you are too old, you get old when you stop racing! But its looking increasingly likely that I've stopped.....have to go back to rallying ;)
Quote
Old 5 Jul 2018, 11:42 (Ref:3834797)   #21
BertMk2
Race Official
Veteran
 
BertMk2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
United Kingdom
Nr Maidstone, Kent
Posts: 10,268
BertMk2 is going for a new world record!BertMk2 is going for a new world record!BertMk2 is going for a new world record!BertMk2 is going for a new world record!BertMk2 is going for a new world record!BertMk2 is going for a new world record!BertMk2 is going for a new world record!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lancsbreaker View Post
I'm fairly sure I know what they mean, but don't think they actually say what they mean......
There's quite a bit of the blue book like that.
BertMk2 is offline  
Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Interpretation of MSA rule change to (J)5.2.6 Alex Hodgkinson Racing Technology 1 24 Mar 2011 08:14
Roll center and CofG...rate of roll or force of roll meb Racing Technology 27 16 Jan 2007 14:27
Roll Cages Stephen Green Marshals Forum 53 25 Oct 2002 11:57
Roll cages zefarelly Racing Technology 2 19 Aug 2002 13:24


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:51.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Original Website Copyright © 1998-2003 Craig Antil. All Rights Reserved.
Ten-Tenths Motorsport Forums Copyright © 2004-2021 Royalridge Computing. All Rights Reserved.
Ten-Tenths Motorsport Forums Copyright © 2021-2022 Grant MacDonald. All Rights Reserved.