ROPS Modification and Lights

[whodat90]

Roll-Over Protective Structures - 70:76979-77025

I just looked through the link I provided, and while I'm not an engineer, I didn't see any standards for height; only for maximum allowable deflection of the rops?

Here's another neat one with lots of info.
http://www.hse.gov.uk/research/crr_pdf/2002/crr02425.pdf

 

[m7040]

GOLIGHT Wireless Permanent Mount Lighting Tool| GEMPLER'S Was wondering if anyone have tried one these wireless controlled lights for farm tractors?

 

[Glowplug]

I'll bet if you go to the Hercules ROPS website you'd find some information. They have a whole bunch of links to websites in regards to some of the technical and statistical information on ROPS. I just don't have the time to check them right now but I will.

 

[whodat90]

Found lots of links to press releases and such, nothing substantive stating 'this is how big the operator safety zone must be' which is what I'm really looking for. FWIW, although I have no dataplate on it, it appears that the rops on my B7200D is a hercules.
whodat

 

[Glowplug]

With looking at all this complex info and regulations it just makes me feel even more strongly that there ain't no way I'm modifying my ROPS.

 

[psdx]

...I kept saying I wasn't going to intrude into this thread, but in the end I guess I couldn't resist. It's been said that by shortening the ROPS Gomer's tractor is less safe that it was. It makes for interesting reading, and I'm not complaining at all - but Gomer has taken a fair amount of grief over his ROPS modification. So I felt that a counterpoint was in order.

According to the Kubota specs, the fixed ROPS version of the 2630 is 11.56" shorter than the folding ROPS version. By looking at the picture, Gomer's ROPS still looks taller than a fixed ROPS version. And he is still using the original material that was designed to carry the rollover load. So if the fixed ROPS is sufficient at 11.56" shorter than the folding ROPS, then why is Gomer's modification so unnacceptable if it's as tall or taller than the fixed ROPS? ...not intended as kindling - just trying to offer a view that hasn't been mentioned.

 

[Bob_Skurka]

According to the Kubota specs, the fixed ROPS version of the 2630 is 11.56" shorter than the folding ROPS version.

I dunno. I can't find those specs but if they exist (which I do not doubt, I just don't have them in my brochure) then baring some other tidbit of knowledge that we may not be privy to, Gomer may still be safe, which is what he was trying to do. One other thing to factor in is the angle of the ROPS bar and if the fixed ROPS bar is angled differently than the folding bar then it would change the location of the triangle of protection and that alone could be why one is lower and one is taller.

Found lots of links to press releases and such, nothing substantive stating 'this is how big the operator safety zone must be

And I doubt you ever will find it in any cut and dry format. What you will probably find are ratios and tolerances and weight/stress bearing load requirements that an engineer will use to calculate the appropriate size ROPS bar needed for any given tractor size and shape. Certainly a heavy tractor would require a stronger ROPS bar, but would likely require a stronger front crumple brace too. Certainly a longer tractor would require a different height ROPS than a shorter one. And logically a tractor with a low mounted drivers seat would not need a ROPS as tall as a tractor with a higher seat. So there are lots of factors that will come into play which is why each ROPS is tractor specific.

 

[Glowplug]

So if the fixed ROPS is sufficient at 11.56" shorter than the folding ROPS, then why is Gomer's modification so unnacceptable if it's as tall or taller than the fixed ROPS?

It may very well be as safe. I think that most of the discussion on this thread has been about the problems that modifying the ROPS could result in. That's great if it's perfectly safe. I think early on I stated that he would probably be okay as long as he has his seatbelt on and the bar is still over his head. We now know that "safety" is much more complicated than that. But let me offer a counter-counterpoint. Maybe the Kubota fixed ROPS is 11.56" shorter than the folding ROPS. And we know for a fact that Gomer's ROPS is only 10" shorter than the folding ROPS. But is the Kubota factory fixed ROPS a solid one-piece structure and is the modified ROPS a cut-off folding ROPS welded back together to be shorter? And does this make this modified ROPS more prone to breaking than the original Kubota fixed ROPS? Something to make you think about.

And, let me reiterate, I'm not attacking Gomer. I'm just trying to bring up a point of discussion so that we can all be safer.

 

[Toolguy]

It is my understanding that the B2630 or B3030 needs to have the taller, folding ROPS if the tractor is equipped with a Backhoe. If a BH is not going to be used then the shorter, non-folding ROPS is sufficient. I don't believe the extra height is any safer, it just gives the operator more headroom when setting on the BH seat. I prefer the shorter ROPS on my B3030. It fits thru all my doors and I don't have to trim the trees around my yard as high. It is a factory, stock unit so I have confidence it will work as designed if needed.

 

[psdx]

I dunno. I can't find those specs but if they exist (which I do not doubt, I just don't have them in my brochure) then baring some other tidbit of knowledge that we may not be privy to, Gomer may still be safe, which is what he was trying to do.

See page 7 of 22 in the PDF file here - contains dealer order sheets for Kubota B-Series http://www.dot.state.mn.us/equipment/contracts/tr_cpt_utl____shrt version/k b series.pdf