Like Tree1Likes

ORRCA QLD Updates

Old 03-05-2008, 02:18 PM
  #16  
Tech Master
Thread Starter
iTrader: (37)
 
DirtyDog3375's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Queenslander
Posts: 1,978
Trader Rating: 37 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by Safer SX
2.8.5.1 Must have Lipo sack or other device to contain a destructive failure


Please specify “other device to contain a destructive failure” or is a crock pot suffice???

Also with all the li-po rules and regulations. Why hasn’t there been any instructions in regard to low voltage cut -off units being mandatory if this device isn’t already incorporated in the Esc being used. I am sure all the guru's whom have made all these rules and regulations have over looked this. A li-po is most vulnerable to failure or destructions if it is subjected to full load near to the end of its capacity?? It would also protect the pack from failure.

I cannot comprehend why this hasn’t been mandatory or has it the people lost the plot when they make these stupid rules Perhaps more knowledge could be sort and an understanding of the products undertaken before rules are enforced..

P.S What’s the difference between running a soft case li-po at club levels and then having to run a hard cased li-po at the state titles.

Why would I be penalized running a soft cell lipo in a steel frame.


Hi Rex,

Thank you for your questions and concenrs. The rulebook has been ammended (has been uploaded) to reflect the following:

2.8.5.1 Must have Lipo sack or other device (fire mitigation device able to withstand and contain a destructive failure without showing a flame)
2.8.5.2 Must be used with electronic speed control that has a either a inbuilt cut-off or used with an external cut-off device installed (6volts minimum).
2.8.5.3 Must be charged using a Lipo capable charger only at a maximum rate of 1C.


Soft cased lipos - refer to rule 2.8.5 must be factory sealed in a hard case. (so any soft cased lipo encased with either a hard shell or case not done by the manufacturer would be ineligible for use).

We have not enforced clubs to stop people who have been early adopters of new technology - Lipos, but rather to use these as guidelines and make everyone aware of the possible risks involved and precautions to be considered.

However, at ORRCA QLD sanctioned events (state titles), these rules will be enforced and adhered to.

Hope this clarifies your concerns and questions.

-Leonard.

Last edited by DirtyDog3375; 03-05-2008 at 10:27 PM. Reason: Updated info - rulebook now available
DirtyDog3375 is offline  
Old 03-05-2008, 10:28 PM
  #17  
Tech Master
Thread Starter
iTrader: (37)
 
DirtyDog3375's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Queenslander
Posts: 1,978
Trader Rating: 37 (100%+)
Default Updated and ammended rulebook now available

Ammended rulebook now available from the ORRCA QLD website.

See above post for ammendments.

Regards,

Leonard.
DirtyDog3375 is offline  
Old 03-16-2008, 06:34 PM
  #18  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (5)
 
Swamp Rat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Logan
Posts: 3,774
Trader Rating: 5 (100%+)
Default

Under the terms of our incorporation as “ORRCA Queensland Inc.” the following are our OBJECTS.

To co-ordinate and promote the sport of radio controlled car racing in Queensland

To establish and maintain rules for the sport of radio controlled car racing in Queensland

To organise and host the annual Queensland championships for offroad and onroad radio controlled cars

To organise and host the National championships for radio controlled cars when allocated by ORRCA Australia.

It’s wise to keep in mind that we were exclusively “Offroad Electric” when these objects were written. We have no mandate to operate State or National Titles events for Nitro powered models.

From the above Objectives I have a couple of Questions

1. Does ORCCA Australia still exist. and If so when are the ORCCA Australian Electric On Road Champships Held.

2. When was Orcca Qld given the Mandate for Electric On Road Racing.

3. To Establish / Maintain rules only appear to be Electric ?

Also The Orcca site has 14 current clubs on the books is this
still correct.


PS I think the word is OBJECTIVES

Shane
Swamp Rat is offline  
Old 03-16-2008, 11:19 PM
  #19  
Tech Addict
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 599
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

Hi ORCCA,

Will you be introducing a rule to cater for exploding NiMh cells?

During my brief time in this hobby I've witnessed 3 separate occasions at race meets where NiMh batteries have exploded with quite spectacular results but no-one seems interested in mandating explosion proof charging containers for them. Why is this?

At Logan we have been using LiPo's for approx 12 months now & as yet I've neither witnessed or been told of any batteries burning or exploding, despite the best efforts of some of our more creative drivers.

The "Premium Power" LiPo battery is probably the single most popular LiPo used at Logan at the moment because it is well priced & has proven itself to be quite reliable (no more so than other brands though) but we can't use them at this years titles.

I personally find this very disappointing to think I'm not able to race at the State Titles with the same batteries I'll use with good success at all of this years Club & Interclub events.

I would be very disappointed to miss this years event at Wynnum but thats what will happen I'm afraid if this rule isn't ammended.

That's my 2 cents worth, these views are my own & not intended in any way to represent those of the Logan club.

Regards
Martin Nichols
RC Tragic is offline  
Old 03-17-2008, 12:05 AM
  #20  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (101)
 
vazzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Brisbane, QLD
Posts: 2,731
Trader Rating: 101 (100%+)
Default

I totally agree with Martin. Ive used the premium power 4700 lipo batteries from Harris RC for months and never had an issue with them.

Please reconsider the rule on these particular batteries as there are quite a few racers that use them.

Cheers
Adrian
vazzo is offline  
Old 03-17-2008, 12:55 AM
  #21  
Tech Regular
iTrader: (8)
 
xxblackheartxx2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sunshine Coast
Posts: 479
Trader Rating: 8 (100%+)
Default

totally agree with martin and adrian, most people form seq have brought the premium power lipos, it would be a shame for everyone having to sell them and then go out and buy a new lipo, it owuld be totally out of control.
xxblackheartxx2 is offline  
Old 03-17-2008, 12:57 AM
  #22  
Tech Fanatic
iTrader: (34)
 
SchuMi2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 951
Trader Rating: 34 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by RC Tragic
Hi ORCCA,

Will you be introducing a rule to cater for exploding NiMh cells?

During my brief time in this hobby I've witnessed 3 separate occasions at race meets where NiMh batteries have exploded with quite spectacular results but no-one seems interested in mandating explosion proof charging containers for them. Why is this?

At Logan we have been using LiPo's for approx 12 months now & as yet I've neither witnessed or been told of any batteries burning or exploding, despite the best efforts of some of our more creative drivers.

The "Premium Power" LiPo battery is probably the single most popular LiPo used at Logan at the moment because it is well priced & has proven itself to be quite reliable (no more so than other brands though) but we can't use them at this years titles.

I personally find this very disappointing to think I'm not able to race at the State Titles with the same batteries I'll use with good success at all of this years Club & Interclub events.

I would be very disappointed to miss this years event at Wynnum but thats what will happen I'm afraid if this rule isn't ammended.

That's my 2 cents worth, these views are my own & not intended in any way to represent those of the Logan club.

Regards
Martin Nichols
Originally Posted by vazzo
I totally agree with Martin. Ive used the premium power 4700 lipo batteries from Harris RC for months and never had an issue with them.

Please reconsider the rule on these particular batteries as there are quite a few racers that use them.

Cheers
Adrian
Thats an easy one...run at the AARCMCC meetings this year on the Sunshine Coast, so then you dont have to worry about ORCCA. Maybe you can jump onto the AARCMCC thread as well and express your concerns with them too.
SchuMi2 is offline  
Old 03-17-2008, 01:12 AM
  #23  
Tech Master
iTrader: (55)
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,015
Trader Rating: 55 (100%+)
Default

its a shame that some will be disadvantaged in the short term. however in order for lipo to have the best chance of becoming the standard for racing and to keep racing safer in cheeper in the long run, take a step back and you'll see that these rules are probably for the best.

i've seen alot of cars eject lipo packs in accidents, its inevitable that some of those packs coming out of the cars in collisions will be damaged. once dented/damaged the pack should be thrown out. so the racer is up for a new pack, potentially because of an on track incident that was not his fault.

non-hardcase lipo's will have to be phased out at some point in time - the longer you leave it the more people it will put out.

fun fact- the so called 'rule nazi' of orrca (now retired) has been running lrp lipos (not hardcased) for a while now, so can't really be accused of not being objective.

swamp rat- i think a new, small club has started up out near roma.. making 15 clubs in total.
tones is offline  
Old 03-17-2008, 02:06 AM
  #24  
Tech Master
iTrader: (4)
 
bender's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 1,504
Trader Rating: 4 (100%+)
Default

I'll add my 2c worth and agree with Anthony on this one.

What is often forgotten when it comes to adopting rules is the considerable time and money it costs to test motors, cells etc to make sure they conform to the rules.

Racers often ask why we usually follow ROAR rules and this is one of those reasons - they have the ability to do all the required testing, we (either ORRCA or AARCMCC) usually do not.

It just makes good sense to use a rule set that has been thoroughly tested by another organising body.

Obviously this is an inconvenience to racers who already have purchased the aforementioned cells, however it's at times like these that I always remind drivers that nobody forced them to buy these cells, they could've waited until an "approved" list was produced.

Having said that, most lipo manufacturers will be quick to adapt to the new rules and I'm sure they'll all have their own hard-cased packs out relatively soon.


On an unrelated note..... very disappointing to hear of Leonard's resignation from ORRCA and I'd personally like to offer him my thanks for the work he has put in over the past few years.
bender is offline  
Old 03-17-2008, 02:14 AM
  #25  
Tech Fanatic
iTrader: (4)
 
zacabrandy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 913
Trader Rating: 4 (100%+)
Default

I'd like to wish Leonard all the best.

As for the lipo's situation. I have had a couple of premuim power lipo's and I have also had them come out of the car. No real damage apart from cosmetic but I can see the logic behind the list.

I guess what would have been nice was to accept everyone was running these and to have some sort of phase out period to assist with the cost of changing over.

It is however a great thing that lipo's and brushless has been accepted for the ORRCCA state titles, the real titles will now reflect the greater QLD racing communitties acceptance of newer technology.

Cheers
Aaron
zacabrandy is offline  
Old 03-17-2008, 02:32 AM
  #26  
Tech Fanatic
iTrader: (34)
 
SchuMi2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 951
Trader Rating: 34 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by DirtyDog3375
We have not enforced clubs to stop people who have been early adopters of new technology - Lipos, but rather to use these as guidelines and make everyone aware of the possible risks involved and precautions to be considered.

However, at ORRCA QLD sanctioned events (state titles), these rules will be enforced and adhered to.
Originally Posted by zacabrandy
I guess what would have been nice was to accept everyone was running these and to have some sort of phase out period to assist with the cost of changing over.
I think this answers your concern. From now until the state titles is a fair amount of phase out time.
SchuMi2 is offline  
Old 03-17-2008, 03:47 AM
  #27  
Tech Addict
iTrader: (-1)
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: tamworth ,nsw australia
Posts: 691
Default

Regarding the premium lipos that harris rc sell and many racers have bought and using i honestly cant see danger by using them i had one late last year at the mecca challenge sweel after being advised not to run it in the heat with a 3.5 brushless motor...reason for swelling, the power draw the pack had on it was overkill....
i pulled car off track and once putting car on bench realising the pack had swelled well above the battery tape i quickly removed the lipo and placed it in a rubbish bin,after an hour i was curious as to what had happened to it when i removed it from bin it had regained its shape and still to this day it is in perfect working condition and still run the 3.5 on it but just under geared a bit.hahaha
So to be honest changing the lipo rule to hardened cased lipos maybe a good safety rule but yu honestly need to phase them out over a period 3-12 months cause i believe the premium lipos and no way more dangerous than hard cased ones e.g orion.....


Also it is disheartened to hear of leanard,s resignation, maybe someone better will fill his shoes.... sorry thats nasty...
cheers russell
aussie racer is offline  
Old 03-17-2008, 05:10 AM
  #28  
Tech Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
 
john h's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: brisbane
Posts: 891
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Martin, I will seek advice on the NiMh cells, I've never seen it, only heard about it, If the cells are discharged, equalized, charged and stored correctly you shouldn't have a problem.

I think Adrian, Anthony and Jason explained ORRCA's view on Li Po batteries, clubs will need to make there own decisions about Li Po batteries for race events they hold.

Shane I found some more info about ORRCA Australia, was formed in the late 80's and ran to early 90's, so no there not around anymore.
Supposedly they ran the 3 eastern states, Vortec in Vic, Orrca in Nsw and Qld, this was before AARCMCC.
Orrca Nsw split into 2 groups and then somehow AARCMCC started.
This is from my memory, I was told that Heavy knows all about it, so maybe he can explain all about it.
john h is offline  
Old 03-17-2008, 01:39 PM
  #29  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (5)
 
Swamp Rat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Logan
Posts: 3,774
Trader Rating: 5 (100%+)
Default

I to have premium power lipo's
but to be fair we all should have waited to see what was going to be approved. I agree that hard case is the way forward this rule may be relaxed down the track as lipo's become more wide spead.Premium Lipo can still be used for Club, Interclub & Tamworth.

FOR those looking for a hard case lipo thats fits the Phi SMC 4000 should be OK it's only 20.5 mm high.

Roar has got the Lipo's right ,and it's great to see ORCCA following.

Do'nt forget NO LIPO"S for ARMCCC


JOHN "Shane I found some more info about ORRCA Australia, was formed in the late 80's and ran to early 90's, so no there not around anymore.
Supposedly they ran the 3 eastern states, Vortec in Vic, Orrca in Nsw and Qld, this was before AARCMCC.
Orrca Nsw split into 2 groups and then somehow AARCMCC started."


I was sectuary of BSSRCC Brisbane SouthSide Radio Car Club in the late 70's (1/8th gas) AARCMCC was our Governing Body

I think the 12th scale guys at the time where also AARCMCC (not certain)

PS YOU MAY NEED TO UPDATE YOUR INCORPORATION STATEMENT TO INCLUDE ON ROAD and to remove
"To organise and host the National championships for radio controlled cars when allocated by ORRCA Australia."

Shane
Swamp Rat is offline  
Old 03-17-2008, 04:22 PM
  #30  
Tech Addict
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 599
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

Hi Guys,

Apart from John Hanson's reply (thank you) no-one above appears to realize that the NiMh cells can be quite deadly when they explode.

The most recent & spectacular failure I can quote was Sonny Pearces pack exploding at a Chargers indoor title event at Leo's old track. I was standing just outside the door of the upstairs pit room when it went off & if not for the wall inbetween I'm sure I would have been hit by parts of it. The race meeting was held up while everyone tried to figure out what had happened. Fortunately Sonny wasn't sitting at his pit bench when it went up or he may have lost an eye.

My point is this, so far I am surprised at the histeria surrounding LiPo's. They are far more reliable from my experience than NiMh's & as yet I've not seen anything more serious than swelling, so why are we treating them differently than the existing option, NiMh's.

I have however seen a lot of drivers with NiMh cells "hissing" because they've been overheated during charging & cells damaged from being dislodged from their mounting during race incidents & scraping on the ground. I've even had one example where one of our local juniors managed to short out his pack on the Carbon Fibre chassis plate when it had cut through the plastic shrinkwrap battery covers & burnt the chassis & destroyed the cells.

I also believe that towards the end of last year electric racing in at least one European country was completley shut down while they investigated recent problems with exploding cells. (i'm not completely sure of my facts on that one though)

Despite all of the problems with NiMh's we all soldier on blindly but when it comes to LiPo's everyone breaks into a sweat, all I'm asking is that the two types of cells be treated equally.

Once again these are my own personal observtions & not those of my beloved Logan Club.

Regards
Martin Nichols
RC Tragic is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.