

| Subject: | Re: ebay Vanagon with extra headroom - poptop only - no roof. |
| From: | Alistair Bell |
| Date: | Tue, 28 Dec 2010 10:11:56 -0800 |
Ah, but Tom, it is welded in. Maybe you are thinking of the exposed U-channel cross piece that you see when looking up from rear seat. There is another beam though, welded to both sides of van body. alistair On 28-Dec-10, at 9:34 AM, Tom Buese wrote: On Dec 28, 2010, at 9:45 AM, Alistair Bell wrote: > the westy's cross brace has its analogue in the tin top van. A box > section cross beam at the point just aft of where the sunroof > would go. In both cases i believe the cross brace is needed for > torsional stiffness in the body Unless that cross brace is welded in, it doesn't add any torsional stiffness to the body- a "moment resisting connection" would be required to transfer that stiffness to the body & if the brace is only siting on a lip in the opening, it is only supporting axial or gravity loads on it. Mr. BZ-licensed architect who can legally design some structural members, but uses much smarter structural engineers to do that instead > (and as mentioned, to support forward end of westy bunk plywood). > In the tin top, the beam is curved to match roof curvature, in the > westy its not. > > Both van types have box section cross beam at forward end of roof > opening area. yep, that box section is what provides the torsional stiffness around the opening > > alistair > > > > > > On 28-Dec-10, at 8:10 AM, Thomas Buese wrote: > > In my professional experience w/ structural engineering, I believe > that the Westy cross brace in the ceiling is more for the structural > support of the upper bunk than for cross bracing the roof-sunroof > models don't have that brace, right Craig? > > YMMV, > > Mr. BZ-you can never have too much headroom, but where do you store > your stuff? > > > > On Dec 28, 2010, at 7:40 AM, craig cowan wrote: > >> Ahh. I guess they did pull out some structural stuff. >> In that case, it may be somewhat compromised. How much? It's hard to >> say. >> >> -Craig >> >> >> On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 12:05 AM, Loren Busch <starwagen@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 7:30 PM, craig cowan >>> <phishman068@gmail.com>wrote: >>> >>>> It's only missing the top bunks right? They're not structural.... >>>> So, "YES"? >>>> >>>> It looks good! >>>> If you don't use your top bunks, that looks slick! >>>> >>> >>> BUT it is missing all the sheet metal part of the top in that area >>> and >>> maybe more important the very beefy cross brace at the front of >>> the bunk >>> the VW/Westfalia put in. >>> >
Have something to add on this topic today? Revive this thread in the forum »