Oops! One Item I Forgot On My "Lots of Rigging" Thread

[Aufgeblassen]

I forgot to mention that the mounting for my rear light panel (tail lights, etc.) had fatigued from flapping all those miles & broke. So I used c-clamps to hold it in place!

This thread, for those that missed out: Lots of On the Volvo I Just Traded In

[Aufgeblassen]

Oops II! I also forgot that the cabinets above the driver's head had plastic doors. The two doors nearest the driver broke at the hinges. So I used tie wraps to keep doors in place and usable.

[chris1]

With all the money you saved on service and using additives one would think that you could make a few repairs.

[Aufgeblassen]

With all the money you saved on service and using additives one would think that you could make a few repairs.

But they hurt the bottom line!

Seriously though: I did make necessary repairs (i.e. one that actually affected safety).

[chris1]

Actually a few of them are safety,backed up by the CFR.

[Aufgeblassen]

Actually a few of them are safety,backed up by the CFR.

Such as???

[Aufgeblassen]

Oops III!: I also forgot, the truck intermittently had power failures that lasted for a couple hours or a couple days. There was no rhyme nor reason as to when they occurred or fixed themselves. The items affected were: power windows, power door locks, cab & sleeper lighting, and cigarette/power outlets. Weird, eh?

[chris1]

Such as???

How about 393.28 (J1292)
Headlight wired to the running light. Headlights have to be on single left and right circuits for lowbeams. You can't combine with another circuit.

Tractor brake lights powered by the light cord.
Lights cords don't qualify as a continual power source. They are a manual interuption.
Also 393.9(a)

[Aufgeblassen]

How about 393.28 (J1292)
Headlight wired to the running light. Headlights have to be on single left and right circuits for lowbeams. You can't combine with another circuit.

Tractor brake lights powered by the light cord.
Lights cords don't qualify as a continual power source. They are a manual interuption.
Also 393.9(a)

OK, so you got me on a couple technicalities. Woohoo! for you! ***BUT*** nobody could tell these were the case while I rambled down the road. So perception was that everything was nominal. And like they like to say: "perception is reality". Hehe!

[chris1]

Any inspection where individual lights were checked would have caught it. Nice to know that safety is of no concern with you. With that mechanical attitude i doubt that you were anything more than a flunky worker at NASA,if even that.

[Aufgeblassen]

Any inspection where individual lights were checked would have caught it. Nice to know that safety is of no concern with you. With that mechanical attitude i doubt that you were anything more than a flunky worker at NASA,if even that.

I doubt an inspection would have caught anything, but there is a small chance an overzealous inspector could have caught me on a technicality.

I take issue on your safety classification of me. Safety is of utmost concern to me. I felt zero level of safety degradation - none.

Common sense tells you that is a pigtail connection is "good enough" for trailer lights, they most indubitably would be good enough for tractor lights. Like they say: what is good for the goose is good for the gander!

Besides, tractor brake lights are NOT NEEDED when you have a trailer attached. After all, what are the chances a vehicle is riding under your trailer belly??? Huh?

You are confusing mechanical attitude with mechanical aptitude!

My mechanical attitude is: If it ain't broke don't fix it!

My mechanical aptitude designing mechanical launch pad structures was the KISS Principle of Design; Keep It Simple, Stupid!

[chris1]

I doubt an inspection would have caught anything, but there is a small chance an overzealous inspector could have caught me on a technicality.

I take issue on your safety classification of me. Safety is of utmost concern to me. I felt zero level of safety degradation - none.

Common sense tells you that is a pigtail connection is "good enough" for trailer lights, they most indubitably would be good enough for tractor lights. Like they say: what is good for the goose is good for the gander!

Besides, tractor brake lights are NOT NEEDED when you have a trailer attached. After all, what are the chances a vehicle is riding under your trailer belly??? Huh?

What else do you term a technicality? Brakes? HOS? Maybe even having a license?

If you are what you say then you would understand the consequences of combining circuits.

There is no way to hard wire the trailer,thus the use of a light cord.

You may want to re-think your position on the tractor brake lights.

[RostyC]

My mechanical attitude is: If it ain't broke don't fix it!

But it was broke, and you didn't fix it, you rigged it temporarily thinking it was permanent. I know a lot of guys with this attitude "ain't broke don't fix it". I don't want no part of that. I like to be on top of things.

My mechanical aptitude designing mechanical launch pad structures was the KISS Principle of Design; Keep It Simple, Stupid!

Actually fixing things the right way the first time is Keeping it Simple. One rig upon another, upon another is complicating things.

Did you use any wire nuts in the process of all this wonderful wiring?

[Aufgeblassen]

What else do you term a technicality? Brakes? HOS? Maybe even having a license?

If you are what you say then you would understand the consequences of combining circuits.

There is no way to hard wire the trailer,thus the use of a light cord.

You may want to re-think your position on the tractor brake lights.

I take it that your 1st sentence of questions are merely rhetorical.

Of course I understand the consequences of "overloading" circuits. But combining and overloading are two different animals.

When I worked for GTE in Huntsville, AL I was a Product Reliability Test Engineer. I did all kinds of testing on telephone instruments; electrical, mechanical, environmental, UL and life testing. I did "cradle to grave"; I wrote test procedure, performed testing, and wrote test reports, conclusions, & recommendations.

Anywho, one of the tests I performed was overvoltage/overcurrent testing. On one occasion, I tested one (1) amp (rated) telephone cord that was coiled up and wrapped in cheesecloth (it was the way the Spec was written before I came onboard).

I started with 1 amp current and held for X number of minutes. Then I went to 2 amps for X number of minutes, etc., all the way up to 9 amps w/o incident. Then, when I went to 10 amps, shortly afterwards the cord/cheesecloth caught fire.

As you can see, that phone cord had at least a 900% safety margin!


BTW: Oops IV!: My old truck had several fuses that occasionally blew, such as going over rough railroad crossings, etc. So I replaced them with resettable fuses/circuit breakers - problem solved!

[chris1]

I take it that your 1st sentence of questions are merely rhetorical.

Of course I understand the consequences of "overloading" circuits. But combining and overloading are two different animals.


BTW: Oops IV!: My old truck had several fuses that occasionally blew, such as going over rough railroad crossings, etc. So I replaced them with resettable fuses/circuit breakers - problem solved!

It wasn't rhetorical. Just wondering what your line of reasoning is on a technicality. Sort of like being a little pregnant?

It isn't overloading. The reason behind seperate circuits for left and right low beam headlights is to eliminate as much as possible the loss of one or both lights. By being tied into another circuit you lose that.

Fuses or circuit breakers,your point is what?

[Aufgeblassen]

It wasn't rhetorical. Just wondering what your line of reasoning is on a technicality. Sort of like being a little pregnant?

It isn't overloading. The reason behind seperate circuits for left and right low beam headlights is to eliminate as much as possible the loss of one or both lights. By being tied into another circuit you lose that.

Fuses or circuit breakers,your point is what?

As far as technicality: Sometimes practicality overrules technicality. Just yesterday for instance, technically, once I applied for a FL Title, I wasn't supposed to drive my truck home from my company's terminal, because technically, the dealer's temp. tag was void. But even my company said it was OK to drive my truck home. If I get stopped by authorities, they said to just show my (recent) bill of sale. Then they should let me go on my way.

As a matter of fact, each of my headlights WERE on separate circuits. One headlight was wired normal, and the other to a running light circuit. They were on separate fuses.

My point on resettable fuses, is that instead of fixing the problem/short I used a "band-aid" approach. Therefore in was yet another "rigging". BTW: When I got the truck, I noticed other resettable fuse that others installed.

[chris1]

As far as technicality: Sometimes practicality overrules technicality. Just yesterday for instance, technically, once I applied for a FL Title, I wasn't supposed to drive my truck home from my company's terminal, because technically, the dealer's temp. tag was void. But even my company said it was OK to drive my truck home. If I get stopped by authorities, they said to just show my (recent) bill of sale. Then they should let me go on my way.

As a matter of fact, each of my headlights WERE on separate circuits. One headlight was wired normal, and the other to a running light circuit. They were on separate fuses.

My point on resettable fuses, is that instead of fixing the problem/short I used a "band-aid" approach. Therefore in was yet another "rigging". BTW: When I got the truck, I noticed other resettable fuse that others installed.

Just so i have it right,practicality overrules regulations and/or laws when it benefits you.

One headlight was on a combined circuit.

If it was a tempory fix to get to the nearest place to fix correctly whats the problem? If it's the "final" repair again no concern for regulations/laws.

Hopefully DOT and/or CSA2010 will eliminate your type of operation.

[Aufgeblassen]

Just so i have it right,practicality overrules regulations and/or laws when it benefits you.

One headlight was on a combined circuit.

If it was a tempory fix to get to the nearest place to fix correctly whats the problem? If it's the "final" repair again no concern for regulations/laws.

Hopefully DOT and/or CSA2010 will eliminate your type of operation.

(a) Common sense overrules nonsensicleness.

(b) But headlights were not on same circuit. The odds of both circuits failing at the exact same time is astronomical.

(c) The over-regulation applies to the manufacturer.

(d) My type of operation is currently 100% compliant. No worries! Do you really think I'd post about a current vehicle with numerous "unique" modifications?

[chris1]

nonsensicleness.

??????????

[chris1]

(a) Common sense overrules nonsensicleness.

The over-regulation applies to the manufacturer.

Reading comprehension lacking? It also applies to repairs,that's why it's included in the CFR.