Broken Welds on Floor Joists |
Post Reply | Page <1 345 |
Author | ||
Olddawgsrule
Senior Member Joined: 20 Sep 2017 Location: New Hampshire Online Status: Offline Posts: 1014 |
Topic: Broken Welds on Floor Joists Posted: 13 Jul 2020 at 5:11pm |
|
A good start to see you know of SIP's are what they are capable of. No, the system as you explained is not only poor, it's acceptable! This floor is not a SIP as defined, yet a hybrid. Which means those joints 'need' to be welded well. Sad to see they are not and do believe if not recurse, at least a formal statement of what is found. It will help those in the future! I have done tack welds.. shall I say.. I can still jump on today. Penetration of the weld is everything. Tack or bead. There are times that tacking or what is called sewing/stitching to us older folks is the best way to meet two metals together. Sorry, but system or not, those welds should hold on there own.
|
||
offgrid
Senior Member Joined: 23 Jul 2018 Online Status: Offline Posts: 5290 |
Posted: 13 Jul 2020 at 7:46pm | |
FR's panels are like SIPs in that they are a laminated composite. They are certainly not SIPs as defined for use in residential construction.
The ability pf plywood to resist deformation when shear through its thickness is applied is very good. IOW, its really hard to tear plywood. So, as long as the plywood and the adhesives holding the assembly together have not been compromised by water intrusion, you probably wouldn't need to weld the aluminum at all. The plywood will hold the aluminum pieces at the same level Besides, its clear that the floor panels are adequate if not wet or we would all have collapsing rpods. But once wet, the adhesives and the wood plies give way and the whole structure fails. So do I think the system is acceptable? Yes, if you can guarantee it stays dry. But in practice it can get wet, so I too would favor better welds for that reason. But your or my personal preferences for a more robust and foolproof design doesn't make the way FR does it wrong. That's how engineering works, you give the engineer a set of specs and a cost target and he comes up with a design that meets them, If those specs don't include "oh BTW it has to stay together when saturated with water" then you'll get the kind of thing we see here. Cost was obviously on all of our minds when we chose rpods over better constructed alternatives, so we really shouldn't complain. We got what we paid for and know by now where most of the weaknesses are: axles, tires, the frame, water intrusion, the crappy black tank pipe hanger, etc.
|
||
1994 Chinook Concourse
1995 RV6A Experimental Aircraft 2015 Rpod 179 - sold |
||
Junkinpod
Newbie Joined: 04 Jun 2019 Location: ON Online Status: Offline Posts: 18 |
Posted: 13 Jul 2020 at 10:11pm | |
Thanks for the 12 step rehab program. A lot of feedback and perspectives. Thank you to all who have replied. I will keep you posted as I explore the suggestions. Again - thank you! Belinda
|
||
Belinda
|
||
Junkinpod
Newbie Joined: 04 Jun 2019 Location: ON Online Status: Offline Posts: 18 |
Posted: 14 Jul 2020 at 8:43am | |
Just saw the question about off roading. My trailer was not used off road by me and it had very little use when I purchased it in the spring of 2015.
|
||
Belinda
|
||
StephenH
podders Helping podders - pHp Joined: 29 Nov 2015 Location: Wake Forest, NC Online Status: Offline Posts: 6283 |
Posted: 14 Jul 2020 at 9:07am | |
|
||
StephenH
Happy is the man that findeth wisdom,... ouR escaPOD mods Former RPod 179 Current Cherokee Grey Wolf 24 JS |
||
Wylekiote
Newbie Joined: 29 Dec 2020 Location: TX Online Status: Offline Posts: 1 |
Posted: 01 Jan 2021 at 12:05pm | |
Giving a special shout out of thanks to Belinda for her help with an identical problem on a 2015 179 R Pod. Attached are photos of the broken floor joist approximately mid span of the slide out. This resulted in a downward shift of the sidewall of 1-1/2 inches. I find it hard to believe that Forest River does not have more of these issues with the light weight RVs they manufacture using the same design. Having a composite floor supporting an overhanging outer wall without outrigger support is simply unacceptable.
Not only is the design flawed, but the pitiful excuse for welds is beyond belief. The square tubing itself that make up the floor joists is only 1/16 inch in wall thickness and the Luan plywood is 1/8 inch. I will be using the same remedy as the original post and have outriggers manufactured and welded to the frame. The existing floor will be a mess to clean up with mold present over 40 percent of the floor space. I will go back with a 3/4 inch marine grade plywood. The only alternative I can see is to scrap it and sell it for parts. |
||
SkiPod
Newbie Joined: 21 Jan 2019 Location: TX - Texas Online Status: Offline Posts: 10 |
Posted: 18 Apr 2021 at 8:31am | |
Thank you all for the helpful posts. I have the same issue with my 2016 176 rPod with the left slide sagging. I orginally thought Forest River was going to cover the claim based on what they were telling me, but then did an about face when Lippert apparently denied coverage. They never denied my claim of a structural design problem, but rather stood behind the fact that I was the second owner (even though it was like new when I got it), and also that the trailer is "out of warranty." The video they posted is misleading at best as the trailer is clearly not designed to be with you for "years to come." Mine had a leak caused by a pinhole created by stress on the plumbing from the sagging wall. Now the dealer says there's substantial water damage to be repaired and Forest River is denying the claim. For your information, there are laws that prevent deceptive practices even though a warranty was "waived" or has expired. Depending on the state, this could allow the recovery of three times damages as well as attorney fees.
|
||
lostagain
Senior Member Joined: 06 Sep 2016 Location: Quaker Hill, CT Online Status: Offline Posts: 2583 |
Posted: 18 Apr 2021 at 9:12am | |
There are very few states where consumer protection laws are strong enough to help in this instance. In addition, law suits are very expensive to prosecute. The costs of litigation, including "expert" witnesses, attorneys' fees, and other "costs" could easily exceed the value of the trailer by 5x. [No sane attorney would take this case on a contingent fee in my view.] Texas is not one of the "consumer friendly" states where treble damages and attorney's fees would be likely to be available. Further, the fact that there was an ongoing water leak makes the matter harder to prove. FR would argue that that was a failure of maintenance that should have been addressed. Even in "consumer friendly" states, such as California, this case would probably not go far in the courts.
|
||
Never leave footprints behind.
Fred & Maria Kearney Sonoma 167RB Our Pod 172 2019 Ford F-150 4x4 2.7 EcoBoost |
||
Post Reply | Page <1 345 |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |