cheers

BasilB wrote:

---

"hayman reese engineers" they bleated.


cheers

-- Edited by BasilB on Sunday 11th of February 2024 05:33:29 PM

---

 Another well thought-out, and highly intelligent contribution from one who seems to have overlooked the fact that this thread is titled "WDH" and Hayman Reece is a producer of probably the highest number of WDH made. Too complicated for you?

May be too complicated for you, but you are more than welcome to approach HR to point out to them the error of their ways.

Otherwise, you might like to simply look and learn? OR you could try to make an intelligent comment?

Plain Truth wrote:

---

---

 I would be very happy to discuss my calculations with someone from Hayman Reese.  But not worth my time unless they wanted to discuss, and I am not going to approach them. 

However many folk of the normal public would not understand the concepts and lead to dangerous loadings. 
Also I understand for policing TBW compliance, the TBW is taken as a measured weight.  It is pretty hard to measure TBW while the WDH is applied.  So for me, to make sure of compliance, I take a TBW as measured during an unhitched procedure, then making sure my towbar, hitch etc limits are all ok.

watsea wrote:

---

Plain Truth wrote:

---

---

 I would be very happy to discuss my calculations with someone from Hayman Reese.  But not worth my time unless they wanted to discuss, and I am not going to approach them. 

However many folk of the normal public would not understand the concepts and lead to dangerous loadings. 
Also I understand for policing TBW compliance, the TBW is taken as a measured weight.  It is pretty hard to measure TBW while the WDH is applied.  So for me, to make sure of compliance, I take a TBW as measured during an unhitched procedure, then making sure my towbar, hitch etc limits are all ok.

---

 Watsea,

You are absolutely correct. Measured weight is the reality, finally some common sense.

Unhitch your van, measure the ball weight, compare with the relevant ratings to ensure you are compliant.

It's not rocket science.

Unless like some posters you are the privileged owner of an "assessing scales"

You are correct again Watsea, those nice officers are only interested in measured weights.

montie wrote:

---

Brenda and Alan wrote:

---

I'll say again that Haymen Reece is wrong in their claim. 

Alan

---

 So the engineers who designed and manufactured the hitch are wrong!

The reality is it is useless information anyway and cant be measured.

Unfortunately, Alan, it is people like you who confuses the genuine buyer or prospective buyer who is looking for practical information before spending his hard earned on a caravan or motorhome. Forums such as this one are meant to be informative and helpful with genuine practical information, which is the reason I have contributed to this and other forums.

Surely there must be an engineering nerds forum out there where people like you can spruik your gobbledegook.

I suggest you take your argument up with Hayman Reece, I'm sure their engineers will have plenty of time to debate Newton's Law with you! 

---

 Its at least 50 years since a WDH was invented probably in a backyard she, what makes you think an engineer was involved.

I would doubt that HR have an engineer on staff, they would most likely use a consulting engineer when required who would only do what he/she is paid to do.

Alan 

Brenda and Alan wrote:

---

montie wrote:

---

Brenda and Alan wrote:

---

I'll say again that Haymen Reece is wrong in their claim. 

Alan

---

 So the engineers who designed and manufactured the hitch are wrong!

The reality is it is useless information anyway and cant be measured.

Unfortunately, Alan, it is people like you who confuses the genuine buyer or prospective buyer who is looking for practical information before spending his hard earned on a caravan or motorhome. Forums such as this one are meant to be informative and helpful with genuine practical information, which is the reason I have contributed to this and other forums.

Surely there must be an engineering nerds forum out there where people like you can spruik your gobbledegook.

I suggest you take your argument up with Hayman Reece, I'm sure their engineers will have plenty of time to debate Newton's Law with you! 

---

 Its at least 50 years since a WDH was invented probably in a backyard she, what makes you think an engineer was involved.

I would doubt that HR have an engineer on staff, they would most likely use a consulting engineer when required who would only do what he/she is paid to do.

Alan 

---

 The Companys Quality Management System has been certified in 1994 to ISO 9001 and proceeded to become QS9000 accredited in 1999. Their testing facility has been certified as a NATA accredited laboratory to AS ISO/IEC 17025 (1995). The Companys Environmental Management System has been certified to ISO 14001 (2001).

Both Alan and Yobarr are wrong ! anybody including HR or whoever can make a statement that TBW never changes, but no one has ever supported that statement with evidence.

Whatever method you use asertain the TBW, the one thing that is neccessary is the van must be level, either using a spirit level or by measurement or both, alas some may just visually do it.

Another thing we can agree on that using a weighbridge it comes with a variation of +/- 20kg, there are different types available multi plate, large single plate and small single plate, all will give you a result which you can work with, you can even calculate an approximate TBW without unhitching.

Then theres the option of portable weighing companies, after witnessing one operator whilst in Brisbane late last year, yeah nah not for me, if you intend to use one of these operators check currency of the calibration certificate.

So in the real world of towing your caravan, is it a possibility that the road conditions can effect the actual TBW whilst driving, lets say driving up or down say Cunninghams Gap with an 8% grade, or driving along the Gore Hwy with its undulations have an effect.

The reality is TBW is an ever changing number what it was 6 weeks ago when you started trip may in fact changed, do you check your TBW every time you hook up bet not, because even your caravan weights change as you consume or replenish its contents.

again they bleated "hayman reese", but their fallacy was old and their logic poor.


cheers

BasilB wrote:

---

again they bleated "hayman reese", but their fallacy was old and their logic poor.


cheers

---

 Another earth shattering revelation that conveys no intelligent message.

Gundog wrote:

---

Both Alan and Yobarr are wrong ! anybody including HR or whoever can make a statement that TBW never changes, but no one has ever supported that statement with evidence.

Whatever method you use asertain the TBW, the one thing that is neccessary is the van must be level, either using a spirit level or by measurement or both, alas some may just visually do it.

Another thing we can agree on that using a weighbridge it comes with a variation of +/- 20kg, there are different types available multi plate, large single plate and small single plate, all will give you a result which you can work with, you can even calculate an approximate TBW without unhitching.

Then theres the option of portable weighing companies, after witnessing one operator whilst in Brisbane late last year, yeah nah not for me, if you intend to use one of these operators check currency of the calibration certificate.

So in the real world of towing your caravan, is it a possibility that the road conditions can effect the actual TBW whilst driving, lets say driving up or down say Cunninghams Gap with an 8% grade, or driving along the Gore Hwy with its undulations have an effect.

The reality is TBW is an ever changing number what it was 6 weeks ago when you started trip may in fact changed, do you check your TBW every time you hook up bet not, because even your caravan weights change as you consume or replenish its contents.

---

 All absolutely correct with the condition that to be compliant your measured ball weight of the unhitched van must not exceed the relevant ratings of tug, towbar or van.

Gundog wrote:

---

Both Alan and Yobarr are wrong ! anybody including HR or whoever can make a statement that TBW never changes, but no one has ever supported that statement with evidence.

 

---

 Gundog, I responded to your post earlier but in hindsight that statement deserves an additional response.

A WDH distributes weight as explained by HR on their website. The system has been tried and proven over many years.

Why, as a dealer, would I need evidence to support HR's statement to prove a piece of useless information....does the ball weight change?

You know what Gundog, I'll take their word for it....am I going to look for evidence? No! I'm busy trying to pay my overheads.

Now, on the subject of useless information can anyone explain why a van manufacturer weighs the dry empty ball weight and then stamps it on the compliance plate?

My wife's parents, retired now from caravanning, went around in a '91 GQ auto diesel and a '91 23f Golf twin axle loaded to the hilt. It had a WDH on it when they bought second hand, 4yo. Many years later they sold the GQ and bought a GU auto and done bucket loads of ks in that. I said to him one day, does that WDH make any difference? He said I don't, know, it was on it when i bought the van. End of conversation. Simple times them days, never worried about any thing.

Wazza..

montie wrote:

---

 The Companys Quality Management System has been certified in 1994 to ISO 9001 and proceeded to become QS9000 accredited in 1999. Their testing facility has been certified as a NATA accredited laboratory to AS ISO/IEC 17025 (1995). The Companys Environmental Management System has been certified to ISO 14001 (2001).

---

 And all this proves they have how many engineers on their payroll. Consider that most manufactures run a chassis design for about 10 years. When a towbar is designed for that chassis it is good for 10 years. How much work would there be for a full time engineer with new design each year. that is why I suggested they would use consulting engineers.

Alan

I am still waiting for Yobarr and Montie to prove Newton is wrong. I think it will be a long wait considering all space travel is predicated on Newton being correct.

BarneyBDB wrote:

---

Monty wrote

Now, on the subject of useless information can anyone explain why a van manufacturer weighs the dry empty ball weight and then stamps it on the compliance plate?

The only reason I can see is for someone to buy a van from a dealer and think they can legally tow it away based on that number.

---

Precisely! As with all things concerning weights in the "under 4500kg GVM" category, it is nothing but deception, based around the common "smoke-and-mirrors" sales methods.  

Anybody who has any understanding of weights knows that listed towball weight means absolutely  NOTHING, Zip, zero, zilch, nil, nada, and is likely a number plucked out of thin air to make it appear that the van involved can be towed by your totally unsuitable car.

Just as some caravans are issued lower ATMs to make them attractive to owners of smaller cars who do not understand that it is perfectly legal, and usually safe, to tow a 3500kg ATM van behind a car with 3000kg ATM towing capacity. Cheers

P.S Was going to elaborate, but I'll see if any responses are received.

montie wrote:

---

Gundog wrote:

---

Both Alan and Yobarr are wrong ! anybody including HR or whoever can make a statement that TBW never changes, but no one has ever supported that statement with evidence.

 

---

 Gundog, I responded to your post earlier but in hindsight that statement deserves an additional response.

A WDH distributes weight as explained by HR on their website. The system has been tried and proven over many years.

Why, as a dealer, would I need evidence to support HR's statement to prove a piece of useless information....does the ball weight change?

You know what Gundog, I'll take their word for it....am I going to look for evidence? No! I'm busy trying to pay my overheads.

Now, on the subject of useless information can anyone explain why a van manufacturer weighs the dry empty ball weight and then stamps it on the compliance plate?

   

---

 Montie,  the operation of a WDH is as you said it distributes weight across the axle groups, but the one thing that I have never found is a a picture or video of a load cell attached under the ball.

 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=aOKg3IIg7wY&embeds_referring_euri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.autonovus.com.au%2F&source_ve_path=OTY3MTQ&feature=emb_imp_woyt

 There are a number of YouTube videos on the weigh safe suite of products at some stage I might make time to view them to see if they provide the answer

Brenda and Alan wrote:

---

I am still waiting for Yobarr and Montie to prove Newton is wrong. I think it will be a long wait considering all space travel is predicated on Newton being correct.

---

 Alan,

As explained in my post to Gundog, as a dealer why would I waste my time verifying what is useless information.

If the company who manufactured and engineered the product (HR) provide me with information that's good enough for me.

As for 'ol mate Newton, I don't think any of our customers are planning to take their van to Mars at this stage.    

Gundog wrote:

---

montie wrote:

---

Gundog wrote:

---

Both Alan and Yobarr are wrong ! anybody including HR or whoever can make a statement that TBW never changes, but no one has ever supported that statement with evidence.

 

---

 Gundog, I responded to your post earlier but in hindsight that statement deserves an additional response.

A WDH distributes weight as explained by HR on their website. The system has been tried and proven over many years.

Why, as a dealer, would I need evidence to support HR's statement to prove a piece of useless information....does the ball weight change?

You know what Gundog, I'll take their word for it....am I going to look for evidence? No! I'm busy trying to pay my overheads.

Now, on the subject of useless information can anyone explain why a van manufacturer weighs the dry empty ball weight and then stamps it on the compliance plate?

   

---

 Montie,  the operation of a WDH is as you said it distributes weight across the axle groups, but the one thing that I have never found is a a picture or video of a load cell attached under the ball.

 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=aOKg3IIg7wY&embeds_referring_euri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.autonovus.com.au%2F&source_ve_path=OTY3MTQ&feature=emb_imp_woyt

 There are a number of YouTube videos on the weigh safe suite of products at some stage I might make time to view them to see if they provide the answer

---

 Again Gundog, why would I bother? It's useless information.

Greg 1 wrote:

---

Placing a load cell under the towball in a hitched condition will prove nothing as you will also be getting a read on part car weight. TBW does not change because like the loaded weight of the van, is measured with the van off the car. That load or force that the van is exerting on the towball doesn't change with the fitting of a WDH. All the WDH does is change how the whole car and van weight is supported by shifting some of that weight from one axle to the others. It is a fairly simple concept and I cannot understand why this is constantly rehashed and why it fills up 7 pages of mostly BS. We have those that dislike WDH's, and don't have to use them, and those like myself who like them and wouldn't leave home without one, so how about we finish this pointless discussion right here because it is getting very silly.

---

 What a great idea!

montie wrote:

---

Greg 1 wrote:

---

Placing a load cell under the towball in a hitched condition will prove nothing as you will also be getting a read on part car weight. TBW does not change because like the loaded weight of the van, is measured with the van off the car. That load or force that the van is exerting on the towball doesn't change with the fitting of a WDH. All the WDH does is change how the whole car and van weight is supported by shifting some of that weight from one axle to the others. It is a fairly simple concept and I cannot understand why this is constantly rehashed and why it fills up 7 pages of mostly BS. We have those that dislike WDH's, and don't have to use them, and those like myself who like them and wouldn't leave home without one, so how about we finish this pointless discussion right here because it is getting very silly.

---

 What a great idea!

---

 ...... someone might want to see "scientific proof" that the finishing of this "pointless discussion", which is most likely agreed to by the majority of readers, is a "great idea".......!!   

And so the endless pedantic stirring  goes on ......

Plated ball weight is the measured weight at the coupling of the dry empty van at the factory. This number is stamped on the compliance plate and goes without saying it is useless information. It is however used to calculate another piece of useless information.....by subtracting the weight amount from the the rated ATM we come up with a figure known as the GTM. 

Contrary to the belief of some GTM is nothing more than a calculation (ATM minus measured ball weight). No other science or engineering is involved and again contrary to common belief is not IMO an engineered rating. 

Plated ball weight means nothing.......what matters is the measured ball weight of the loaded van. 

montie wrote:

---

Contrary to the belief of some GTM is nothing more than a calculation (ATM minus measured ball weight). No other science or engineering is involved and again contrary to common belief is not IMO an engineered rating. 

Plated ball weight means nothing.......what matters is the measured ball weight of the loaded van.

---

 In my case the GTM is the maximum the axle group and chassis, etc will support. This was defined by the suspension manufacturer as the starting point and the van manufacturer's engineer could not allocate a higher rating for the GTM. The ATM was calculated based on that.

When determining ATM, the GTM is the limiting factor driven primarily by the axle group rating. The chassis, coupling, chains, tyres (maybe more) then determine if the GTM needs to be lower than the axle group rating.

Once GTM is defined, the ATM is often a simple "add x kg". Again the engineer making the assessment would need to be satisfied that the rest of the structure supports that ATM.

It would be illogical to calculate an ATM first without knowing what the GTM is. For example, take a hypothetical single axle van plated for 215/65R15 tyres .... typically load rating of 96. What is the maximum ATM? You can't say, but you do know the tyres' maximum load rating is 710kg each, so the maximum GTM would be 1420kg regardless of the axle group rating or chassis strength. Maybe a small chassis section would reduce it further but it could not be increased. Only once you know the GTM can you specify the ATM.

Apart from that I agree that towball weight on the plate is useless, and probably misleads numerous buyers and owners, except for the occasional one that lists maximum towball weight.

Brenda and Alan wrote:

---

I am still waiting for Yobarr and Montie to prove Newton is wrong. I think it will be a long wait considering all space travel is predicated on Newton being correct.

---

 We are not saying Newton is wrong, what I would say is that your extremely simplistic interpretation of his laws is wrong.

My engineering background includes many years of measuring and calculating the weight and balance of aircraft, the forces and principles are the same.

Brenda and Alan wrote:

---

montie wrote:

---

 The Companys Quality Management System has been certified in 1994 to ISO 9001 and proceeded to become QS9000 accredited in 1999. Their testing facility has been certified as a NATA accredited laboratory to AS ISO/IEC 17025 (1995). The Companys Environmental Management System has been certified to ISO 14001 (2001).

---

 And all this proves they have how many engineers on their payroll? Consider that most manufactures run a chassis design for about 10 years. When a towbar is designed for that chassis it is good for 10 years. How much work would there be for a full time engineer with new design each year. that is why I suggested they would use consulting engineers.

---

 Two things Alan, firstly, HR do not build chassis. I don't know what you are blathering on about.

Secondly, any company that is granted certification in all those areas would not get them unless they have design engineers on staff. HR is no backyard mob, they are part of Cequent which is a large multinational organisation. Cequent have two subsidiaries in Oz, both with engineering sections with engineers on staff. I suggest you go to the next caravan show in your capital city and talk to the HR blokes on their stand. If you can get their business cards, you will see the engineering qualifications listen on them. Why do you have to be so bloody minded when there are people on this forum who actually in contact organisations like HR?

Are We Lost wrote:

---

montie wrote:

---

Contrary to the belief of some GTM is nothing more than a calculation (ATM minus measured ball weight). No other science or engineering is involved and again contrary to common belief is not IMO an engineered rating. 

Plated ball weight means nothing.......what matters is the measured ball weight of the loaded van.

---

 In my case the GTM is the maximum the axle group and chassis, etc will support. This was defined by the suspension manufacturer as the starting point and the van manufacturer's engineer could not allocate a higher rating for the GTM. The ATM was calculated based on that.

When determining ATM, the GTM is the limiting factor driven primarily by the axle group rating. The chassis, coupling, chains, tyres (maybe more) then determine if the GTM needs to be lower than the axle group rating.

Once GTM is defined, the ATM is often a simple "add x kg". Again the engineer making the assessment would need to be satisfied that the rest of the structure supports that ATM.

It would be illogical to calculate an ATM first without knowing what the GTM is. For example, take a hypothetical single axle van plated for 215/65R15 tyres .... typically load rating of 96. What is the maximum ATM? You can't say, but you do know the tyres' maximum load rating is 710kg each, so the maximum GTM would be 1420kg regardless of the axle group rating or chassis strength. Maybe a small chassis section would reduce it further but it could not be increased. Only once you know the GTM can you specify the ATM.

Apart from that I agree that towball weight on the plate is useless, and probably misleads numerous buyers and owners, except for the occasional one that lists maximum towball weight.

-- Edited by Are We Lost on Tuesday 13th of February 2024 05:39:52 PM

---

 You are confusing Axle Group Rating with GTM.

Axle Group Rating is an engineered rating set by the chassis/suspension manufacturer and one important rating when setting van's ATM.

GTM is a calculation done by the van manufacturer as explained earlier, probably when he's having a beer after work.

VSB defines GTM as the weight transmitted to the ground via the axle group when the van is level excluding any towball weight.

It is a matter of contention whether GTM is a rating....IMO it is not, others may disagree.

Brenda and Alan wrote:

---

I am still waiting for Yobarr and Montie to prove Newton is wrong. I think it will be a long wait considering all space travel is predicated on Newton being correct.

---

 Now it all is becoming clearer!

Your reference to "Space travel" gave me the necessary clue.

Sincerely, I hope that you're enjoying your trip? Cheers

montie wrote:

---

 You are confusing Axle Group Rating with GTM.

Axle Group Rating is an engineered rating set by the chassis/suspension manufacturer and one important rating when setting van's ATM.

GTM is a calculation done by the van manufacturer as explained earlier, probably when he's having a beer after work.

VSB defines GTM as the weight transmitted to the ground via the axle group when the van is level excluding any towball weight.

It is a matter of contention whether GTM is a rating....IMO it is not, others may disagree.

---

 You must not have read what I wrote .....

"When determining ATM, the GTM is the limiting factor driven primarily by the axle group rating."

You will probably recall we have had this discussion before and I posted comments from the Technical Officer, Regulatory Division of Transport for NSW.

Who would you believe? The technical specialist for the government body responsible for this specific issue or a van salesman?

Whether GTM is a rating or not is not the issue. If you don't know the GTM you can't possibly establish the ATM. Just as Axle Group Rating is the primary determinator to set the GTM, the GTM is the primary determinator to set the ATM. Start at the base and work up, not the other way around.

As this is a departure from the thread subject, I suggest creating a new thread if you wish to continue with this.