LBMEFM
|
| posted on 13/3/08 at 09:04 PM |
|
|
SVA Tests
As we know the SVA regs are to be tightened up next year. They insist on somtimes trivial items, edges of a certain radius, bolt covers etc. But have
they never noticed a somtimes glowing and always very, very hot exhaust running the length if the car.
It seems to me that they are confused and really don't know what they are doing. While I think it is a good idea to test kit cars when complete,
and I of course don't won't them to consider the exhaust but it seems to me that you are far less likely to hurt yourself by forgetting to
place a plastic shroud over the "sharp edges" of a track rod end than you are laying your leg against a 800degree exhaust pipe.
Any comments?
Barry
|
|
|
|
|
coozer
|
| posted on 13/3/08 at 09:09 PM |
|
|
Its no different to a motorcycle is it??
1972 V8 Jago
1980 Z750
|
|
|
LBMEFM
|
| posted on 13/3/08 at 09:14 PM |
|
|
Good point, I never thought about that.
Barry
|
|
|
matt_claydon
|
| posted on 13/3/08 at 09:52 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by LBMEFM
It seems to me that they are confused and really don't know what they are doing.
The SVA is a watered-down version of the content of countless European type-approval Directives and Regulations that all mass-produced passenger cars
sold in Europe must meet.
Member states are allowed to develop their own single vehicle approval programmes providing that vehicles are tested to an 'equivalent
standard'. Obviously this requirement can only be applied to the extent that vehicles cannot be damaged during testing and no particularly
specialist equipment is required. For example at SVA emissions are only checked with a gas analyser, noise is only tested statically at a specified
RPM, and brakes are only tested on an RBT.
Some of the edge requirements, amongst other things, can seem petty, but you either have a rule or you don't. You can't really say
"no sharp edges, but a few are OK if the builder didn't notice them". Likewise 2.5mm radius may seem very specific when nobody is
going to get any more injured by a 2.4mm radius, but you have to put a limit somewhere else different vehicles tested in different places would have
to meet different standards.
In the grand scheme of things sharp edges and most of the other items in SVA are probably bigger issues in crash survivability and injury outcomes
than exposed exhausts.
It's a valid point that given some of the other items that are included, exposed exhausts seem like something of an omission. Chances are that
it's never been included in type approval for one of two reasons:
- Very few cars, if any, have been produced with exposed exhausts, thus it has not really been considered.
- There have been few, if any, recorded injuries due to exposed exhausts. Requirements generally only get introduced if there is statistical evidence
that road-safety will be improved.
|
|
|
blakep82
|
| posted on 13/3/08 at 09:53 PM |
|
|
yeah, i always wondered why the exhaust was never a problem, but track rods ends could kill someone 
________________________
IVA manual link http://www.businesslink.gov.uk/bdotg/action/detail?type=RESOURCES&itemId=1081997083
don't write OT on a new thread title, you're creating the topic, everything you write is very much ON topic!
|
|
|
BenB
|
| posted on 13/3/08 at 10:13 PM |
|
|
Yup. Thought crossed my mind. Seems strange that it appears to be the 1.5mm radius that's considered dangerous on the exposed header
that's glowing at 700degC.
|
|
|
twybrow
|
| posted on 13/3/08 at 10:55 PM |
|
|
What changes are planned and when are they being introduced?
|
|
|
LBMEFM
|
| posted on 14/3/08 at 04:22 AM |
|
|
Apparently there are few which no doubt members will tell us. But I think the most important one is that, as from next year, the driver must be able
to reverse the vehicle from his seated position.
|
|
|
speedyxjs
|
| posted on 14/3/08 at 07:49 AM |
|
|
Thats ok for all us that have gone cec
How long can i resist the temptation to drop a V8 in?
|
|
|
DaveFJ
|
| posted on 14/3/08 at 08:38 AM |
|
|
I thought that the new test being forced on us nect year by the EU included things like ABS fitted by a qualified engineer? that was certainly in the
story I was reading about it.... 
Dave
"In Support of Help the Heroes" - Always
|
|
|
matt_claydon
|
| posted on 14/3/08 at 12:56 PM |
|
|
Yes, but you must have been reading the bullsh1t that was going round when nobody really knew anything. There's no way a requirement will be
introduced for amateur built vehicles that cannot be met by an amateur builder!
And besides, ABS is not even a legal requirement for production cars!
|
|
|
iank
|
| posted on 14/3/08 at 01:40 PM |
|
|
There is a requirement in the IVA test regarding ABS. But it's like the plastic tank thing in that if it's fitted then it needs to
meet some EU regulation or other*.
Seems some people read ABS in the index and thought the sky was falling.
DaveFJ if you look in this thread one of my posts about 2/3 of the way down has the 'leaked' bIVA draft requirements attached as a doc
file. There will be a 'manual' same as the SVA manual around August which will translate them into English without the refs to EU
documents.
http://www.locostbuilders.co.uk/viewthread.php?tid=84122
* paragraph 2.2.1.23 of 71/320/EEC as last amended by Directive 88/194/EEC if you really want to look it up.
--
Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience.
Anonymous
|
|
|
DaveFJ
|
| posted on 14/3/08 at 02:30 PM |
|
|
Oh B ger
Just reading through that - thanks for the clarification by the way.. - and came across a section that seems to say an immobiliser/alarm must be
fitted by a 'qualified' fitter ?? am i reading this right?
Do I need to remove my alarm before SVA then refit it
Checked back to SVA and that seems to say the same
[Edited on 14-3-08 by DaveFJ]
[Edited on 14-3-08 by DaveFJ]
Dave
"In Support of Help the Heroes" - Always
|
|
|
