-
Posts
1,260 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
33
Geronimo John last won the day on March 14
Geronimo John had the most liked content!
My Info
-
Gender or Couple
Couple
My RV or Travel Trailer
-
Do you own an Oliver Travel Trailer, other travel trailer or none?
I own an Oliver Travel Trailer
-
Hull #
342
-
Year
2018
-
Make
Oliver
-
Model
Legacy Elite II
-
Floor Plan
Twin Bed Floor Plan
Recent Profile Visitors
5,322 profile views
Geronimo John's Achievements
-
Geronimo John started following Well, another problem...this time water , Anode Rod Part Number? and Winterizing without RV Antifreeze
-
-
Newbies taking the plunge - Are we missing anything
Geronimo John replied to Dennis and Melissa's topic in General Discussion
So long as you use at least one (Preferably more) boards on top of wood blocks sort of works. Sort of due to the rough surface of the jack skid plate on the softer board. For other blocks with anti-ski surfaces it is not a reliable slip plane. Here's how I believe the slip interfaces react: (Top To Bottom) The rough jack steel base on top of a board on your block is not reliablek as stated above. Your one really good slip plane is the board bottom surface to the block top surface if it is smooth. If not, it is a gamble. The block to dirt slip plane is also not reliable. In softer grounds it gets pushed into the dirt a bit. On paving, the hard bumps of the paving resist the block from moving. So, as above, this one also is not a reliable slip plane.. So with a block on a single board setup, you have one slip plane of variable reliability. However with three or more boards you have at least 2 reliable slip planes: The jack steel base to the top of board. As above this one does not count. Next you have at least two really good slip planes between the three smooth boards. As above, the board to dirt slip plane is not reliable and does not count. Having at least two good slip planes is very effective. However, if I had already purchased the blocks, I would at least carry three boards to get one effective slip plane. More if I wanted two slip planes per jack...belts and suspenders. GJ -
wow. Yep to both! Glad we got that figured out! GJ
-
Newbies taking the plunge - Are we missing anything
Geronimo John replied to Dennis and Melissa's topic in General Discussion
Blocks or boards are an important and necessary to reduce wear, damage or destruction of your jacks. The wear part has two components. First, is you don't use them as much every time you change camp sites. Less use = less wear. Secondly having the jacks on some sort of blocking reduces the lever arm of the jack to resist lateral movement and the trailer as a result will feel more steady. But MOST importantly is what happens during an OOPs (Driving off with a jack down). On multiple occasions I have seen owners of all experience levels execute the death of a jack by OOPs. If on concrete, it will kill the jack. On softer ground, the jack plate likely will dig in and kill the jack. Either way the odds are you will have a deceased jack. This can be a real PITA. But, with something between the jack and the ground, preferable at least 5" or more high, another engineering concept comes to the rescue. And that concept is called slip. In engineering, slip is a sliding displacement along a plane of one part of a system relative to the rest of the system under the action of shearing forces—that is, forces acting parallel to that plane. To greatly reduce OOPs damage to our jacks we need to add something between them and the ground to take advantage of the slip plane concept. I call thick ones blocks. Thin ones made of sections of lumber I call boards. Blocks can be purchased in lots of different sizes and materials. If I were going to go with a single block for each jack, I personally like TopGuns! Cheap, strong, and not hard to replace. Not as pretty as the Anderson's, but they are way less expensive. Blocks are also most optimal if all of your camp sites are RV Park level. But, alas we are generally boondockers and our camp sites come in all forms of not level. This is one reason why we carry a milk crate full of 2" X 6" X 11" sections of treated boards for our OE2. Here are some of the operational advantages of boards: Comparatively they are real inexpensive. Lose one and you carry on. Should long term storage bring termite damage to the bottom board of the stack, I toss a single board. The others are still useable. I can toss them around with zero worries. I can use more of less of my board sections as needed to offset unlevel camp sites. For real soft ground, I can stack two flat on the ground (side to side) and another on top 90 degrees perpendicular to them to create a double size footprint. They make great axle spacers should you have two flats or break a spring! For reasonably level camp sites, I stack three of them on top of each other to maximize height and (MOST IMPORTANTLY) to create more slip planes of safety for our jacks from an OOPs. Yes, I am also a member of the OTT Jack Drop Club. Good news is when OOPsing, you hear it thud and stop, With three jack drops in six years I have had no jack damage. So whether you use blocks or board sections either way: Slip Planes Saves Jacks! GJ -
The 2" Bulldog Coupler is rated at 7K. The 2 5/16" BD coupler is rated 12,500. The OTT OE2 Springs for years were rated at 7K. The Broke Spring post is suggesting increasing the springs to 8K. Easy to confuse what we say with so many topics in the air right now. 🙂
-
Dave Phelps post got me to thinking. After taking a “Deeper Dive” into this rabbit hole, I have to admit that my salt water/ocean air hypothesis may be all wet. Full disclosure: I am not a metallurgist but with my slide rule, I can still do some structural analysis. But in this case, I think the below interpretation may hold some water. So, this certainly is NOT an official analysis of the cause of the failure. Just the musings of a member of the OTT Rabbit Hole Investigator Team. 😊 As stated in the initial report, the top metal of the Bull Dog (BD) was still somewhat intact after failure. Had this metal also failed, we would be having a discussion about safety chains (Again). But fortunately, that was not the case and there were no injuries. Thank the Lord. Also as reported, and from the below inverted picture, we can see older damaged metal (Rusted), and at time of collapse damaged metal (Shiny white metal). This photo shows us that both sides were well compromised long before the failure event. CURB SIDE OF BD STREET SIDE OF BD But, as evident from the photo from the street side looking at the side of the BD, the street side was predominantly ripped apart during the failure event. Whereas the curb side was damaged long enough in the past to be fully rusted. TV END OF BD OLLIE END OF BD So paraphrasing Dave P's. musing: With or without the horizontal gusset how could this disparity in damage to the side metals happen? But first, let’s “Dig” into what the purpose of "The Gussett" is and likely why BD added it to their 2" couplers. Here is what they look like: The gusset is located near the juncture of the BD round pipe and U-shaped metal attached to Ollie. I believe that the purpose of a horizontal structural member (I.E. Gusset) is to reinforce the round to “U” shaped metals junction from being damaged by side horizontal loads. From the posts, it appears that older BD 2" couplings did not have this reinforcing structural member. I suspect after some lateral failures the design was beefed up to resist lateral loads by adding this gusset. When a box, round or square tube is lateral stressed by an impact load, the impacted side will go into compression and the opposite side will be stressed by tension. So historically for all BD couplers, with or without the gusset, what is the most likely event that would cause side wall cracks with such a disparity as seen above? I think a side impact load. And how would our OE2’s likely incur such an event? By a backing jackknife event where the Oliver aluminum box strikes the bumper thereby bending the BD laterally. So, as a member of the TV dented bumper owners group, I’ll be under my BullDog with a flashlight FOR SURE. For extra points, which bumper would also been damaged? Your thoughts? Geronimo John
-
Duplicate. Sorry.
-
Quite likely. My guess is corrosion ate it alive over time and got to the point of failure under normal driving loads. If it were mine, I would want do know how the failure came about, and that is likely a BD effort. Hopefully we will be an update down the road. GJ
-
LOL. I see you are a wise ole fellow! Great idea. Now if you can figure out a line to get the TV end of the Anderson replaced for free with the larger ball, we'll all stand up and cheer. At least those who are running the 2" versions. :-0 GJ
-
Nope you're spot on. One can dither on the % as it changes for every trailer. Regardless the idea is to have more than you need to prevent bad words. Having the great scale like you have is a wonderful way to check as over time it surely will change based upon so many factors. But knowing what it is compared to past voyages is the "Gold Star" approach. Yep..... virtually 99.998% that I am aware of do. in fact, I have never seen any of those 2/1,000th unicorns, but likely it was a milspec WW2 Jeep product or one of those super cool vintage Dodge Power Wagons. Neither of which would make a very practical TV for a lot of reasons that are irrelevant to your this topic. 🙂 However since OTT has well over 1,000 trailers on the road, there likely is a 1/2 ton that does not need one, and I would bet it's a beautifully restored WW2 machine. I FOR SURE WOULD NOT attempt to do so even with a master welder of the highest skills. And my Grand Pa was one. I for sure do recommend getting with BD and seeing what they say and will do to remedy the situation. I'll bet they want yours and will send you a new one. GJ
-
No disrespect intended, but I do not support the above statement line. The 2" BD is an excellent coupler for long long term use by our OE2's, unless we are exceeding the max gross weght of the trailer plackard (7,000 pounds). 1. The use of the 2 5/16" BD's came about from concern with the ball wear caused by the design of the Anderson WDH. Not out of concern for the need for additional safety margins. 2. BD likely has millions of their 2" couplers in service and has an impecable reputation as being one of the strongest couplers on the market. 3. Yours likely failed form one, or some combination, of these causes: a. Over Loading b. Exposure to salt environment(s) without extensive cleaning after such exposures c. Failure to control rust over long duration d. Factory defect You should contact BD and discuss. I suspect they will replace yours and want yours back for analysis. Gj
-
As you know, I had OTT build our Ollie with the 2 5/16 BD. Glad I did. But if I had not, I would not toss a perfectly good 2" BD until it wore out. The corrosion failure for this 2017 BB had to have occurred over a long period of time. Could have been originated from a single salt exposure (Sea or salted roads) environment. Once the corrosion starts, you would not need such an environment for it to continue to propagate down the weld line. If ignored all the way to failure. Either way, CAREFULLY inspecting our BD's (As well as all other rustable running gear) every couple of years and mechanically eliminating any rust and recoating should be added to our long term maintenance inspections. Especially if our rigs are stored in a salt air environment or are ever used on salted roads. GJ
-
Winterizing without RV Antifreeze
Geronimo John replied to jd1923's topic in Mechanical & Technical Tips
One concern to keep top of mind when using air to purge our plastic lines is water hammer. At 40 PSI you can shoot a slug of water down a mostly purged line very very quickly. All will be fine on straight runs, but when they hit a 90 degree elbow or flat side of a T, it can, and has, blown off many a fitting. Personally I would consider regulating the air pressure down to 25 PSI vs. 40. May take a bit longer, but likely would result in less water leaks in the Spring. GJ -
Well, another problem...this time water
Geronimo John replied to Toby's topic in Mechanical & Technical Tips
A LOT of us have made the same oops! Once. 🙂 -
I have installed similar fans, and am thinking of doing both sides. Purpose obviously is to reduce the bypass of outside air into and then out of the fans so that they pull fresh air in below. I also know that there have been changes in the grills between your and my older OE2. Hard to tell, but it looks like you have blocked off airflow on the aft side of the fans, but maybe not on the fore side. Is that what I'm seeing? IF so, what's your thoughts? Thanks GJ