Thrifty Alternatives ..Building Foam Campers

[GPW]

I can’t make any excuses for being defensive ... I WAS !! Just an old retired curmudgeonly b*****d (Cheap B*****d) living out in the woods ... I got BURNED big time by the RV “industryâ€

[linuxmanxxx]

Well the concept has been proven to work and the only negative has been longevity and the blown off the bridge thing.

As far as blowing off a bridge, as long as the bulk of weight is kept low on the camper the chances of this are very slim indeed of happening and if it did probably winds would be high enough to blow a normal one off the road as well so I think that is just irrelevant.

Longevity is current ongoing discussion which new things to try coming up constantly in answer to this issue.

Glen on your sledge test was the sample standing up like a side front wall would be when a bird or other travelling object would more than likely hit or or was it laying flat on the floor? If on the floor then the floor adds strength to the surface you are striking and not same as if you struck the front wall of your foamy.

My goal is to find an outer coating/surface that would be very hard to penetrate beyond the skin itself but yet not be nasty or toxic during application. Not very excited with the fact that the foamcoat stuff is powder based and dries like a concerte type coating as I'd much prefer liquid application and the thinner result and still strong is much more preferred by all of us I bet.

[linuxmanxxx]

When I was searching for industrial types of glues that wouldn't eat the foam, I found that 2 substances kept coming to the surface as the bulk of options that are available. They are available in many different formulations and these 2 substances are:
1 Epoxy (only danger is one that sets so fast the heat of setting would melt the foam)
2. Polyurethanes (not as readily available as the epoxies but better temp and hold properties and flexibilities)

So looking around with these 2 options in your thoughts maybe we can find a better and cheaper alternative to some of the already mentioned to try and use.

[StPatron]

I see the terms "negatives" and "negative speculation" being used here, an attitude I've not noticed elsewhere on this forum. Is it possible that what has been offered has been constructive criticism? Wise men will tell you.... slam the door shut to someone with a different opinion or mock them at your own peril.

As far as blowing off a bridge, as long as the bulk of weight is kept low on the camper the chances of this are very slim indeed of happening and if it did probably winds would be high enough to blow a normal one off the road as well so I think that is just irrelevant.

Where did the "blowing off a bridge" scenario come from? I presented the wind force question and that is not the scenario I presented.

You will indeed find a tipping point when your profile square footage exceeds the capability of the structure to maintain stability during typical road conditions. And, a wind induced severe sway in less wind. That's physics. That's my point now and all along. The numbers bear review.

If you're happy with "i think" and "chances are slim" without further study then that's your decision. If you're happy with advising others, who look up to you for advice, then you bear a burden of responsibility for their safety. If you manufacture an unsafe design.......

Still irrelevant? Your call.

Best wishes to all during this early research and design phase. Please keep safety in mind.

[linuxmanxxx]

As far as blowing off a bridge, as long as the bulk of weight is kept low on the camper the chances of this are very slim indeed of happening and if it did probably winds would be high enough to blow a normal one off the road as well so I think that is just irrelevant.

Where did the "blowing off a bridge" scenario come from? I presented the wind force question and that is not the scenario I presented.

You will indeed find a tipping point when your profile square footage exceeds the capability of the structure to maintain stability during typical road conditions. And, a wind induced severe sway in less wind. That's physics. That's my point now and all along. The numbers bear review.

If you're happy with "i think" and "chances are slim" without further study then that's your decision. If you're happy with advising others, who look up to you for advice, then you bear a burden of responsibility for their safety. If you manufacture an unsafe design.......

Still irrelevant? Your call.

Best wishes to all during this early research and design phase. Please keep safety in mind.

If someone is building a camper that large and just foam over a floor/trailer, with 80% to 90% of complete camper weight at the bottom, how could this be a tipping issue under normal driving conditions (your words above were normal). Instability would come more from imbalanced weight distribution being high more than anything else.

Now I clearly state as my official stance that if you build higher than your tow vehicle and also go over 8 to 9 foot in length, I would highly suggest adding more weight to your build than foam due to the fact a larger side surface would be much more susceptible to wind shearing like a wind sail effect if not enough weight is present. Also the larger your build go with a bit heavier trailer and as wide a stance as possible as that alone is the bulk of your vehicle weight and stability.

Mike's build is looking good with his amount of wood he has low with the bed platform and other things adding a low center of gravity to the added weight giving greater stability.

I'd worry about someone wanting to go almost all foam with just a floor as weight and trying to keep the interior and exterior as the canvas skin and doing the size of a standy and really long like 12 ft because then you have almost no weight up top and a huge area to catch wind when a semi passes or if a storm with 60mph winds hit and that is a recipe for disaster.

Maybe we need a formula for weight vs sidewall area for safety purposes????

Again this is really only a concern for someone wanting to go large on their build as far as length and height.

[linuxmanxxx]

Oh sorry and the blowing off a bridge is way back in the thread not what you presented.

[GPW]

As with any new idea there are pros and cons which need to be carefully considered on an individual basis ...

It’s never the message , just the way it’s stated!!! ... and the way it’s taken The vagaries of our language

St.P, you see... there’s this bridge , that’s very High , across a bay , and a certain party has been most hesitant to cross in winds... and it’s always windy there... Certainly Not the first time this blowing over bit has been mentioned...

All ideas,opinions , suggestions, comments are most certainly welcomed in every way , but not necessarily agreed with ... We don’t have to all agree... in fact we agree to disagree... Healthy discourse !!!

[StPatron]

Now I clearly state as my official stance that if you build higher than your tow vehicle and also go over 8 to 9 foot in length, I would highly suggest adding more weight to your build than foam due to the fact a larger side surface would be much more susceptible to wind shearing like a wind sail effect if not enough weight is present. Also the larger your build go with a bit heavier trailer and as wide a stance as possible as that alone is the bulk of your vehicle weight and stability.

Couldn't agree more on the same principles, it's the numbers that appear to be guesstimates at this point... and, I'm not criticizing your numbers specifically. Just in general. Are those reasonable guesses for length and height? Are we happy with guesses?

I'd worry about someone wanting to go almost all foam with just a floor as weight and trying to keep the interior and exterior as the canvas skin and doing the size of a standy and really long like 12 ft because then you have almost no weight up top and a huge area to catch wind when a semi passes or if a storm with 60mph winds hit and that is a recipe for disaster.

Bingo! That's where I'm coming from, too. Harbor Freight chassis, lightweight cabin, cantilevered floor, maybe a taller, standy vardo-style or caboose replica.... you know this group!

Maybe we need a formula for weight vs sidewall area for safety purposes????

That's my original suggestion. I'd rather see us with self-imposed safety limits, free from federal regulations, etc.

Thanks for your time, thoughts and reply. That makes for effective communication and productive solutions, IMO. Now, back to the regularly scheduled program..

[StPatron]

Oh sorry and the blowing off a bridge is way back in the thread not what you presented.

That's cool, no problem. I just wanted us to be on the same page, that's all.

Bridges are often cited as being accident prone areas. During my research on wind-induced accidents, I located an article where the Canadians tested loaded, unloaded and various load weight distribution in semi's.. and their amount of sway, tire side-slippage and then eventual roll-over. All in answer to the question of establishing road closure standards due to high winds, especially on certain bridges.

[StPatron]

St.P, you see... there’s this bridge , that’s very High , across a bay , and a certain party has been most hesitant to cross in winds... and it’s always windy there... Certainly Not the first time this blowing over bit has been mentioned...

Somehow I had missed that in the 200+ pages of reading here.

Thanks for filling me in. Pontchartrain by any chance?

[eaglesdare]

its the cheseapeake bay bridge (not bay/bridge/tunnel) and it takes you into the clouds! you can see what the pilot is eating while you wave as that 747 passes by. seriously, i will avoid that bridge even without towing, but i do not think i will ever cross it. its just scary.

[GPW]

Having been over that bridge a couple times myself , I can attest to Eagle’s trepidation ... It IS Scary even in a car ... and very windy when I crossed What were they thinking ???

Size limits only restrict development and evolution ... Good Common Sense seems a better way , whether building or towing Anything ...

[GPW]

Steve , regarding the Hammer test ... The foam scrap was cut from the trailer , already covered and painted , flat on the concrete ... And I gave it my Best Whack with the maul hammer (6’3â€

[linuxmanxxx]

Having been over that bridge a couple times myself , I can attest to Eagle’s trepidation ... It IS Scary even in a car ... and very windy when I crossed What were they thinking ???

Size limits only restrict development and evolution ... Good Common Sense seems a better way , whether building or towing Anything ...

Yes but some people aren't prone to common sense lol and my fear is that huge massive standy with foam spars all canvas coated and only weighing like 500 to 600 pounds vs probably 1800 to 2000 lbs standard built with sandwich walls which is a huge mass/weight ratio swing and would be very prone to wind shoving it everywhere.

Any weight under a thousand pounds total is extremely light in towing standards and most vehicles wouldn't really feel pain until 1500 or abiove behind them. Actually if you go outside your vehicle aero shield that is way more drag than the weight you are pulling.

[vwbeamer]

Aerodynamics have a greater effect on MPG, and drive-train strain ( oil, trans fluid temps and engine temps) at highway speeds, I agree.

But reduced mass has it own benefits, including better acceleration, and stopping distance.

But i agree, most would be hard pressed to tell if the trailer the tow weighed 700 lbs or 1500 lbs from the driver seat unless it was a very small Tow Vehicle.

That said, when i build i plan to keep it as light as possible.