Canopy - Clamp or Drill mount to ROPS??

[Farmwithjunk]

The indisputable fact is that is it not a personal conversation.. it is a public post to a public forum, and thus not a debate solely between 2 people. All the forum members here can participate, some have, as recently as yesterday. if this thread continues, I expect more to participate. Had this been a private message, then I would have expected our responses to have been limited to the scope of only our respective messages. however.. this obviously isn't the case.

I do agree that the thread has probably outlived it's usefull ness. All that are here are in 2 camps....either those that say that you shouldn't weld or drill a rops, and thus void it's certification, and those that do, or have drilled / welded and likely voided rops certification, and are now kicking the proverbial can around trying to justify their actions. ( or keep their head in the sand about the liability issues ).

My comments have been very specific as to what i was refering to when i spoke about voiding rops certification. Looking back on this thread alone, I find a message on each of the first 2 pages either asking about drilling a rops, or someone stating they did infact weld/cut/drill rops.. etc. I stopped searching at that point.

Soundguy

Never did I say it was a PERSONAL conversation. There was however, comments directed at certain quoted statements from my post's. That said, I stand behind what I've said, and NOT tried to make something appear to be other than what it was.

I'm not "trying to justify my actions". I don't need to justify anything with anyone. I've done what is best IN MY SITIUATION. The ROPS and canopy I'm using are O.E.M products. They are now mounted in the same manner as O.E.M. Anything OTHER than that would have been a compromise situation, not unlike using an aftermarket product or an add on "replacement part", albiet supplied from O.E.M. vendor. That isn't acceptable in my book.

I live in the real world. Those of us that do so, adapt to what life brings and don't reasonably expect everything to be "black or white".

 

[Soundguy]

Never did I say it was a PERSONAL conversation. There was however, comments directed at certain quoted statements from my post's. That said, I stand behind what I've said, and NOT tried to make something appear to be other than what it was. ".

You are still missing my point then. The fact that this isn't a personal conversation means that my comments are not solely limited to your comments. I.E., I am also commenting on other replies from other people.. even if I specifically replied to you, so that I could quote some of your message. When i hit reply, i can only choose one person.. i can't choose all people.... for the purpose of getting the reply box to pop open... That fact has been made very clear in multiple messages.

I'm not "trying to justify my actions". I don't need to justify anything with anyone. I've done what is best IN MY SITIUATION. The ROPS and canopy I'm using are O.E.M products. They are now mounted in the same manner as O.E.M. Anything OTHER than that would have been a compromise situation, not unlike using an aftermarket product or an add on "replacement part", albiet supplied from O.E.M. vendor. That isn't acceptable in my book. .

Again.. I did not say that you were trying to justify actions. See my reply to the above paragraph. I amd taking all the posts in this thread into consideration when I make a reply.

I live in the real world. Those of us that do so, adapt to what life brings and don't reasonably expect everything to be "black or white".

Im my experience.. nothing is black and white. and in the real world, it seems the easiest way to get rich is via suing. Check a phone book yellow pages out. 2nd largest section is physicians. Largest section is lawyers. That is a big indicator of where our society is headed.

The fact that many people, as an emergency contigency to thier homeowners policies are now purchasing 'personal umbrella excess liability insurance policies' lets you know that some people don't wan't to be sued out of existance and loose all they have.. whether they have done anything wrong or not.

Now.. do you want to get back to talking about tractor rops.. or keep re-hashing conversational syntax?

It may be of interst, that the content of my last few replies has been virtually identical in content... That should be a sign..

Soundguy

 

[Farmwithjunk]

You are still missing my point then. The fact that this isn't a personal conversation means that my comments are not solely limited to your comments. I.E., I am also commenting on other replies from other people.. even if I am specifically conversing with you. That fact has been made very clear in multiple messages.




Again.. I did not say that you were trying to justify actions. See my reply to the above paragraph. I amd taking all the posts in this thread into consideration when I make a reply.




Im my experience.. nothing is black and white. and in the real world, it seems the easiest way to get rich is via suing. Check a phone book yellow pages out. 2nd largest section is physicians. Largest section is lawyers. That is a big indicator of where our society is headed.

The fact that many people, as an emergency contigency to thier homeowners policies are now purchasing 'personal umbrella excess liability insurance policies' lets you know that some people don't wan't to be sued out of existance and loose all they have.. whether they have done anything wrong or not.

Soundguy

In an earlier post, I made mention of the fact that some of your debating tactics are not unlike a small time polititian. I take that back. They're more like big time polititians. Deny, Deny, Deny.....What you said in response to my comments is there IN BLACK AND WHITE for all the world to read.

On the lawsuits..... Thank you for making MY point. In a world gone crazy with lawsuits, no "certification", no disclaimer of liability, no manufacturers statement of warranty will stop a lawsuit. In most cases, they aren't worth the paper they're written on. They won't even pose much resistance to a good lawyer. I say do what you KNOW is safest and what insurance company requires and let the chips fall where they may beyond that point. The best way to prevent a wrongful death lawsuit is to take neccisary steps to prevent a death (or even an injury) from occuring. In cases where an insurance company or dealership requires a certification, then our hands are tied. In MY case, where I'm dealing with a tractor that came from the factory WITHOUT a ROPS in the first place, nothing will change that fact. All I can do is to install one IN THE BEST MANNER POSSIBLE. That would be replicating the original equipment in the closest possible manner.

In another thread, I've explained an opportunity to start mowing properties for a bank that is trustee on several estates. I needed enough insurance to satisfy them before signing contracts. I will have an employee running one tractor. My insurance company looked over the ROPS I've prepared (added a canopy) I explained to the agent exactly what I had done with it. He writes mostly farm policies or general liability for construction/general contractors. He's VERY familiar with tractors and construction equipment. He had ZERO problems with the way I did it. Seems to me his opinion would carry more weight than any of us. In the end, it would only matter what the opinion would be of a judge, jury, or undertaker. And that we have little control over.

 

[Soundguy]

In an earlier post, I made mention of the fact that some of your debating tactics are not unlike a small time polititian. I take that back. They're more like big time polititians. Deny, Deny, Deny.....What you said in response to my comments is there IN BLACK AND WHITE for all the world to read.

.

I beg your pardon?!? I'm certaintly not obfuscating in this thread.... as you mentioned.. my posts are in B&W.. there's no doublespeak in them... My points are clear.

With this.. I'm going to do something I should have done many posts ago.

EDIT: Whoa! much better!

Soundguy

 

[Farmwithjunk]

I beg your pardon?!? I'm certaintly not obfuscating in this thread.... as you mentioned.. my posts are in B&W.. there's no doublespeak in them... My points are clear.

With this.. I'm going to do something I should have done many posts ago.

EDIT: Whoa! much better!

Soundguy

Like I said.
Deny, Deny, Deny.....

Best to ignore what you can't understand...........

 

[RG_Upton]

Folks,

I appreciate the many, sometimes divergent views expressed in this thread, and the participation since I started the thread. I respectfully request that everyone stop responding at this point, though, because the thread has taken on a life of its own and most of the comments recently posted (from members whose opinions I respect because of their thoughtfullness and experience as evidenced in this and other threads) belong in a dialog between individuals, not on a public forum.

Again, thank you to all who shared your opinions. Lets put it to rest now.

Russ

 

[EddieWalker]

You missed the point - completely. The scenario is when you are injured by the tractor - and the ROPs are involved - you will have very much damaged your chances of fair recovery by any modification that can be construed to weaken the original design. Whether factual or in lawyeresse is unimportant, the defense will be rigorous about the modification.

While I agree with this to a certain degree in theory alone, I also wonder if you think putting a canopy of any kind on a ROPS will in fact modify the ROPS? Farm makes a very good point that even clamping on a canopy to a ROPS is a modification. I'll take it a step farther and say that unless your a qualified and certified mechanic to work on that tractor, installing any type of canopy, or any other assesory, to a ROPS is a modification by an unqualified person.

I know it's not rocket science to put these things on, but if we're gonna worry about what ifs and could haves, than it's just as likely, and very probabal, that if a person hires a lawyer to sue the owner of the tractor, they would try every avenue possible to succeed in that lawsuite.

Soundguy feels that because his canopy is a factory bolt on accessory, that he's less likely to be liable in a lawsuite if an injury happened. I disagree for the simple reason that the canopy could actually be the cause of the injury. It would then fall on him, or his heirs, to defend the canopy modification to his ROPS. This is where the decision to pay out or fight comes into play. How much would it cost to "Prove" that the modification isn't at fault?

I'm also very curious as to what damages anybody could expect to recover if they did in fact get injured while operating there tractor and their ROPS was not modified? Lots of people have accidents with there CUTS. It's not an uncommon event at all. From laying the tractor on it's side and denting the sheetmetal, to full blown rollovers resulting in death. At what time has anybody ever recovered any monetary sums from these accidents? To my knowledge, it's never happened and probably never will. If you roll your tractor, it's probably your fault. All the lawyer has to say is that you were going too fast. It will always be defended as operator error.

Obviously I'm of the opinion that this is so unlikely to happen as to be irrelevant, but find the discussion is both educational and entertaining. I'm gonna drill my ROPS and install a home made canopy. Nothing I've read has convinced me that it's a bad idea or something I need to be worried about.

If at some point in time there actually happens that an injury occurs from a similar modification and the person who made the modification was proven liable for that modification, I'll reconsider my position. Since there is not one instance of this every happening, I'm not gonna let it bother me.

Eddie

 

[keeney]

In regards to:
"... At what time has anybody ever recovered any monetary sums from these accidents? To my knowledge, it's never happened and probably never will. ... "

I disagree. When I worked at Toro, there were stories of them getting sued all the time for people causing their own injuries using Toro equipment. I didn't work in the legal dept or executive office, so maybe they were just stories, but many of them were touted as the justification for certain design changes in safety features.

Alothough Toro of course defended themselves as best they could by pointing out that the persons own actions were contributing causes of their injuries, it is often cheaper to settle such lawsuits than to fight them to the bitter end. Its hard for a corporate defendant to win over a jury against a kid with his fingers chopped off. Even if its because his dad told him to adjusts the height WHILE ITS RUNNING! Their side argued that there were no instructions or warnings to not adjust cut height while its running. New mowers have more warning stickers to not do that.

Another story I heard where a man got money out of Toro was when he duck-taped the dead-man's handle and then hurt himself emptying the bag. He claimed it was too easy to defeat the safety system AND there were no instructions or warnings not to do it. After that, in addition to warnings (in several languages) new models had a handle that had to be released and re-cocked to start the mower.

I also heard they calculated and budgeted a reserve per machine sold for lawsuits in two catagories - their own liability and for settling unfounded claims.

Note that ROPs have stickers warning to not modify them. It might not stop the lawsuit, but it might help lower the amount of the settlement.

- Rick

 

[keeney]

In regards to:
"... At what time has anybody ever recovered any monetary sums from these accidents? To my knowledge, it's never happened and probably never will. ... "

I disagree. When I worked at Toro, there were stories of them getting sued all the time for people causing their own injuries using Toro equipment. I didn't work in the legal dept or executive office, so maybe they were just stories, but many of them were touted as the justification for certain design changes in safety features.

Alothough Toro of course defended themselves as best they could by pointing out that the persons own actions were contributing causes of their injuries, it is often cheaper to settle such lawsuits than to fight them to the bitter end. Its hard for a corporate defendant to win over a jury against a kid with his fingers chopped off. Even if its because his dad told him to adjusts the height WHILE ITS RUNNING! Their side argued that there were no instructions or warnings to not adjust cut height while its running. New mowers have more warning stickers to not do that.

Another story I heard where a man got money out of Toro was when he duck-taped the dead-man's handle and then hurt himself emptying the bag. He claimed it was too easy to defeat the safety system AND there were no instructions or warnings not to do it. After that, in addition to warnings (in several languages) new models had a handle that had to be released and re-cocked to start the mower.

I also heard they calculated and budgeted a reserve per machine sold for lawsuits in two catagories - their own liability and for settling unfounded claims.

Note that ROPs have stickers warning to not modify them. It might not stop the lawsuit, but it might help lower the amount of the settlement.

- Rick

 

[Paddy]

Ah, the rops mod issue. I feel this can be sorted into two catagories, home use and comercial. Here I would agree with SoundGuy, I would not make modifications to a machine for my biz without some documentation showing carefull thought for the safety of my employes.

As far as for my personal use, that's an entirely diff story. As a poor consummer that doesn't know better, I'd be more likely to win any law suit than the evil manufacturing plant. What do you think all the stickers are for? Come on, have you seen the safetly warning on push mowers stating the lawn mower is not to be picked up for trimming bushes! They couldn't put enough stickers on equipment for all the stupid things people could come up with. Also with so many tractors with canipies, it would appear to most as a natural mod.

With regards to the effects of drilling, welding and adding a canipy to ROPS. My ROPS is made of square tube, welded to a flange and bolted to the axel. As stated above, ROPS are primarily in cantilever forces from side or back roll. The greastest forces are at the mounting flange. This is a moment problem. F x distance. Also as stated, a truely engineered minimum material would be a tappered member. Examples; power pole/flag pole. In catilever forces, one side of the material is in compression and the other is tension. The center has a net zero force. This can be seen in truss floor joist beams. Centered holes have little effect.

Distance is the measurement from where the force is applied to the point of attachment.
Force two types, Static and Dynamic.
Static; F= MA Force= mass x acc or mass x Gravity ie dead weight
Dymanic; F=MA mass does not change but Acceleration does dramaticly changes from a simple landing on it side compared to tumbling down a hill. I believe I saw the standard lists static testing at 2.5 times the tractor weight. This will not simulate much dymanic force.

In my opinion as a mechanical engineer, Drilling in 2.5" tube using 3/8" hole centered and near the top will have very little effect on cantilever loading. Much greater concern should be focused on preventing dynamic impacts from occuring, don't roll your tractor. Adding a sturdy canipy will more likely create a safer condition, protection from falling objects and reduced chances of punture in the event of a full roll over. A full roll cage would be better with as much solid protection without reducing vision.