Comedy writes itself

The coil rack might have an effect on that. The coil would have to move up out of the rack before it coupd go forward wouldn't it? The tiedown really only needs to prevent movement in one direction doesn't it?

 

No, tiedowns prevent movement in five directions: up, back, forward, left, right. (Downward motion is prevented by the deck.) Since no tiedown is perfectly vertical from one point in space (as in your hypothetical), they all prevent movement in at least two directions, and generally really in at least three directions. This is simple physics. The math to calculate securement values is simple trigonometry. (Yes, it's simple. They teach it in high school.)

The coil racks are really there just to help keep the boards from spreading or breaking. The boards help prevent forward and backward motion. This is why you don't want to use landscape timbers -- they're soft and weak. The coil racks keep the boards together and keep the coil off the deck (thereby spreading the load across a wider area of the deck so it doesn't fail at any one point.)

My impression is that you just like to play devil's advocate as a learning or maybe teaching method, but the more you persist, the more I'm beginning to think you just don't understand basic physics. That's scary. I really hope you aren't that guy I met at Metal Coaters in Middletown OH who kept insisting that one chain through the bottom of the coil was enough for middle coils, and two on the front and back coils. Or the similar guy at Cargill in Houston who tried to tell me roughly the same thing. I don't care if you've "been hauling them that way for 20 years and haven't had a problem." The day when that fails may or may not come in our lifetime, but the day when proper securement fails will never come.

TL;DR : Don't be lazy. Throw an extra chain if you're not sure. If you're putting at least two chains on a coil (and you should, always), have one pull forward and one pull backward. One pulling down might work but it's not legal, it's stupid, and you might die doing it that way.

 

If the securement fails, what direction does the coil go? Either the rack slides, which is not likely with good friction pads under it, or the coil rolls up and out of the rack, or who coil/rack setup tips forward. In either of those two scenarios, the coil is not moving straight up, it moves forward and upward at an angle. So no, the angled securement that is more in line with the path the coil would travel is going to be the most effective.

 

Just hook it to your fuel tank strap-

 

I did use some termse loosely like "coil racks" as a reference to the whole "bunk" racks and timbers. And I'm not saying to use just one or two chains either....

I'm just not a fan of the "government knows best" theroy.

 

Go back and take another look. It hooked to the fuel tank strap bracket.

 

Lord knows I'm no fan of government, and I don't think all the regs are necessary or even make sense, but the regs for coil securement are a bare minimum. I don't feel sorry for anyone who gets put out of service for failing to meet those minimums.

 

Yes, it would need to move up out of the rack to go anywhere, well, excpt off the side. I don't see why we should sacrifice two of the chains keeping it down in the rack so one of them can prevent it from moving in one direction and the other to be practically useless.

 

Then I'll repeat myself. You aren't preventing movement straight upwards. Go back to your diagrams about the angles, and realize that the coil coming up and forward, at an angle, is best prevented by a chain pulling backward, at an angle.

 

Would you qualify that as legit securement? What about the requirement to have two secures within the first 10 feet?