Do not be lazy with your load securement. You can get cited and fired.

But the full length of the coil rack has contact with the friction mat and creates resistance to sliding through its full bearing properties.

The load slightly lurches forward in braking, lurches backward in accelerations, the whole length of the coil rack needs to be put to use to help anchor this coil down and prevent it from slipping either way.

 

You mean that the friction mat will be narrower if run along the timber and could slide off because it is narrower than it would be if the mat was running parallel with the rack instead?

Yes, true. If a coil can move that much then it's already too late. Grab your ankles.

 

Whatever happened to the automotive steel coils,coil racks? The ones that tilted the 4x's so they didn't dent the coils? No one uses them anymore? If you hauled coils to the car plants,they used to require them.

 

Your way over thinking this. It really is simple.

 

Still around, just a few different styles.
The flat ones you use a beveled timber, the ones your mentioning tend to use square edged timbers.
Just depends on what you buy or make.

 

They are still around but rare. I remeber some place having issue with them because the angle would cause the weight to be carried by more of the rack. To be concentrated on the bevel of the rack.

Someone came along and didn't use enough racks sio the weight exceeded the rating of the rack causing it to break and make a mess. One, or more, bad apples.

Most coil timbers are beveled instead. Which sucks because you can't use the timbers as dunnage. Alot of places fron on bevel dunnage as there is less area for friction with a bevel.

 

What? Play van driver and carry van mats?

C'mon, that's too easy.

 

If a coil rack were that thin, it wouldn't have the structural integrity to do its job, and if a friction mat were thick enough AND soft enough to do as you're assuming, it would create more issues than it solved.

 

They are that thin. Ok, Am I adding confusion by using the term "friction mat"? I was just being lazy with that description. They are usually really thin rubber to save cost right? I think I know where you are coming from.

Lets say a stirp of conveyor belt. at least a 1/4" thick 4-6" wide and 4' long.

 

My coil racks are fabricated with 1/8" steel. For a 1/4" thick friction mat to work as you're describing, it would have to lose over 50% of its thickness under the weight of the coil just to make contact with the timbers.

I use baler belting, since it's readily available and not too terribly expensive...one strip below each coil rack, then lay my timbers on the racks, and then more strips of baler belting on the timbers for coil pads. They're about 1/4" thick, and there is no noticeable squish to them, even under the weight of a 48-50K coil.