Well I broke it, in Canada

pugslyyy

Expedition Vehicle Engineer Guy
I might be wrong but hasn't this happened before? What's the reason for the spring load mounting or pivots. You are putting a good amount of sprung mass and stress on each bolt as the box bounces Why not mount the box like all boxes are mounted with, 4 ubolts down each side?
Kevin
Help me understand how the payload mounting approach would translate to issues with the leaf spring hangers?

Wrt to mounting a rigid payload to a flexible frame, there has been a tremendous amount of discussion on the ways to do it and the pros and cons.

Bolting the camper to the frame will protect the frame at the expense of the camper. There is a big difference between the amount of flexing a box will take compared to a camper.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
 

kerry

Expedition Leader
My the boxes on each side of my utility body are joined by a piece of metal across the front of the boxes. This was tack welded to the diamond plate steel floor of the box. All those welds were broken loose when I got my truck. I assume from flexing. I haven't re-welded that piece since I think the flex is desirable. A service body, I think, will flex far more than a solid box.
 

SkiFreak

Crazy Person
As Puglsyyy has rightly noted, there is a significant difference between the box on a goods truck and that of a camper. The same goes for a service body, as Kerry mentioned, where there is normally a combination of smaller boxes that are attached to the tray independently. Smaller boxes take up less area and will generally be structurally stronger, so flexing will have less of an affect on them.

I have looked at a lot of our Rural Fire Service (RFS) trucks and they normally utilise a spring mount system between the chassis and tray and often also rubber mount some of the equipment on top of the tray. The designers of these vehicles are obviously aware that flexing can destroy equipment, so do what ever is needed to ensure that damage is reduced to a minimum.
Keeping a camper box from twisting is a whole other challenge, simply because of its physical size. If the camper is a pop-top it is even more difficult, as that type of design is less structurally sound.

At the end of the day, the mounting system used for a camper box on a truck, like the Fuso or Isuzu, needs to take into account the terrain and use that is likely to be experienced.
Hard mounting a box to the chassis of a truck is a cheap, tried and tested method and has been used for generations. However, comparing a goods truck to the requirements of an expedition camper is really an apples and oranges scenario.

Stress on metal is a fickle beast and will not necessarily present itself immediately. Stress damage is normally not easily visible either, so a simple visual inspection is unlikely to identify stress related issues, until there is an obvious failure.
The reliability of a vehicle becomes much more relevant if you plan on taking it into remote locations, where support may be limited or non existent.
Murphy's Law dictates that that failures will normally occur at the most inopportune time when you are least able to deal with it.

I see a spring mounted camper body a bit like an insurance policy... you may never need it, but if you do, it is there to do its job.
 

SkiFreak

Crazy Person
The correct rate of the spring would bring it back to level? Is that size of spring suffice?

You are missing the basic concept of this type of spring mount Kevin.
Take my truck as an example... I have 25mm thick strips of polyurethane between the truck chassis and the subframe, so the weight of the camper is distributed along the majority of the chassis.
The mounts on my truck have absolutely nothing to do with supporting the camper. The purpose of the mounts is to position and constrain the camper body on the chassis, providing fore, aft and lateral support. The springs allow for separation between the chassis and subframe when the chassis is twisted. The springs need to be strong enough hold the chassis and subframe together while in motion, but not so strong that they do not allow movement, when required.
 

pugslyyy

Expedition Vehicle Engineer Guy
Some thing like this makes more sense to me http://www.vibrationmounts.com/RFQ/Images/Images5/V10Z32100425_iso.jpg. Used at all 4 corners and set in the middle. Seems like it would be less stress, on the mounting plate and bolts on side loads.
Or something like this designed to spec could work http://www.images.searchpointer.com/anti-vibration-mountings/253/1.jpg
Kevin

Mounting it that way would concentrate all the payload forces at 4 points on the frame. If you are going to do that why not go with a traditional 3 point pivot (or 4 point pivot)? It would be way less bouncy and destructive to the payload.
 

The Artisan

Adventurer
I realize that ski, I think I understand the concept. The springs are being used for shifting loads to take stress of the frame rails. When they mount boxes or flatbeds they use treated 2x4s the length of the frame rails to dampen and support. As stated with the correct spring rate it allows for for it to do its job.
Kevin
 

SkiFreak

Crazy Person
You need to restrict motion. Something like this:View attachment 409152

This is definitely the type of mount that would give fore, aft and lateral support.

My only concern with this specific mount design is the tolerance between the sides of the upper and lower mount, which looks pretty tight in this photo.
When the chassis flexes (twists) it will change the vertical axis of the mounts. This is even more relevant on the FG if you have mounts in front of the step as well as behind it, as the mounts would also be on a different plane.
There needs to be sufficient clearance in the mounts to allow for this.
 

SkiFreak

Crazy Person
I realize that ski, I think I understand the concept.

My comments were based on the two mounts you linked to, which are both support mounts.
Unless you added other constraining mechanisms, those mounts would not be fit for purpose.
 

pugslyyy

Expedition Vehicle Engineer Guy
I realize that ski, I think I understand the concept. The springs are being used for shifting loads to take stress of the frame rails. When they mount boxes or flatbeds they use treated 2x4s the length of the frame rails to dampen and support. As stated with the correct spring rate it allows for for it to do its job.
Kevin

Okay, looking forward to the build thread, this should be interesting to watch unfold.
 

The Artisan

Adventurer
Sorry ski should have been more clear. Did I post the wrong mounts, let me check it. The constraining factor would what was used to support the camper or flat bed in my case. My thoughts on that double spring mount allows for movement in all directions but does not create stress, shown in the OPs.
Not trying to argue here just trying to learn. Guess the nice thing about if the mounts did break in the field one could always use the U bolts to secure till fixed.
Kevin
 
Last edited:

Forum statistics

Threads
188,181
Messages
2,903,489
Members
229,665
Latest member
SANelson
Top