![]() |
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
I'm posting this for the normal people in this group who might thing that
this "Morgans" clown actually has some kind of valid point. His remarks make quite clear that he doesn't know the first thing about structures. Yet he comes out with guns blazing and hurling unprovoked insults. What a clown. For example, take his comment about modulus of rupture not being relevant to stress in compression or tension. This is complete gibberish that shows he doesn't understand even the basics. Modulus of rupture is a measure of a material's strength in bending. Bending loads on a piece of wood (or other material) typically produce stress in both compression and tension at the same time. Take a wood yardstick and hold it by the ends; now try to bend it into a U shape. The wood fibers on the inside of the curve will be in compression, while those on the outside will be in tension, simultaneously. If you apply enough bending moment you can break the stick. But what if you bend it as far as you can without breaking it and then let it go? Have you done any damage? It's quite possible tthat you have damaged the wood fibers that were in compression (the top of the stick). Almost certainly you will not have damaged the bottom of the stick, which was under tension. The reason is that wood is about two to three times stronger in tension than in compression. So while you didn't break the stick, you might have caused compression failure on the side of the stick that was on the inside of the curve. This damage would be most acute on the top surface of the stick and would be progressivly less until the neutral axis (middle) of the stick. If you made a saw cut right across the point of bending, you would probably see -- under a magnifying glass -- wood fibers that have failed in compression. If you have ever broken small pieces of wood in half with your hands you would have experienced this first hand. If you take that yardstick and bend it until it starts to break, what happens? It does not just snap at once. The outside part that is under tension will begin to splinter long before it lets go. Then in order to break it, you instinctively bend it back in the opposite direction and what happens? It makes a clean break on the top surface -- the surface that was under compression -- while the bottom surface continues to splinter. This shows you just how much stronger the wood is in tension than in compression. So even bending the stick and letting go befoer it breaks could have caused compression failure on the top surface. The next time you bend that stick in the opposite direction, there will be no strength in the top part -- it will just let go. That's exactly how sticks of wood can get damaged in transit. All it takes is bending the stick enough to cause compression on the inside of the bend. And you would never know by merely looking at it. Idiot's comments about needing 10,000 pounds on top of the wood simply illustrate to everyone what a loudmouth know-nothing he is. All it takes is enough force to bend the plank more than you would normally do. This does not have to be a lot of force. We are talking about small planks less than an inch thick. You could easily cause compression failure on small sticks of wood like this just by bending it forcefully with your bare hands. Is that the kind of massive pressure idiot is talking about? The fact is that this type of damage can and does happen in shipment. It is quite easy as my explanation should make clear. All that needs to happen is for the board to be bent awkwardkly -- and this does not take a whole lot of weight. A couple of humdred pounds acting on the end of a plank could be enough to do it. As to his other objection about modulus of rupture not being "enough" of a measure to determine wood substitution, this is simply not true. This is the most important measure of strength. Fbu (sometimes referred as jut Fu) is the ultimate stress before failure in bending. There are also measurements for stiffness, elasticity, strength in compression and tension both paralell and perpendicular to the grain and a few more. But the undisputed fact is that for structural members, Fbu is the most important measurement. If the substitute wood passes muster in this measurement, then it will pass in all the others -- since these strength properties all tend to vary proportionately across species. For example if pine is 15 percent weaker in bending than spruce, it is also weaker by a similar amount in the other strength measures. In closing, I really have to register my utmost contempt at this pathetic clown for the way in which he is conducting his attacks. He obviously knows nothing, yet he has the brass to call into question factual material I have presented which is 100 percent valid. I challenge this complete moron to point out one mistake in the methodology or math I have presented. I will bet dollars to donuts that he won't even attempt it -- he wouldn't know where to start. Regards to All (Except to Moron in NC) Gordon Arnaut. "Morgans" wrote in message ... "Gordon Arnaut" wrote If you disagree with something I said, then address it in civil terms as I have done when I disagreed with the other poster's point. There is no excusable reason to launch into a personal attack and what I wrote "crap." I am normally a _very_ civil person, but I go off the deep end when someone makes a post retorting to have a command of subject matter, then displays an utter *lack* of grasp on the subject. People who know no better might believe you, and commit a design change/substitution that kills them. this is big stuff, with life ending possibilities. In order to have a compression fracture to take place, the wood has to be compressed past the ultimate failure of the species, in compression, or if it were bent, in rupture on the side of the board that is in the "low" side of the bend. How much force would be required would then depend on the specifics of the size of the stock. I would dare to say, that the loads required would be HUGE; it would be enough to crush the floor, and suspension, and blow the tires of a UPS truck, if it were say, a spar, of unremarkable size. That is not going to happen from having a box, or boxes, or even a V-8 engine sitting on it. How ridiculous! If you purport to write as an expert, dispensing advise, you must be prepared to take your lumps when you blow it. You blew it. Oh, by the way, pot, kettle, black. You seemed to do a pretty good job of not addressing me in a civil manner. I do not have a personality disorder, nor am I odiferous, nor am I an idiot. I was, however, bold enough to call you bluff on a subject you should not be writing about, if you are so far off base from knowing the basic causes of this kind of failure in wood. It seriously makes me wonder how far off base you are on the rest of the figures and concepts you wrote about. I might suggest that other readers also view the previous posts made by you with a *very* large grain of salt. Civil enough? If not, tough. Live with it. -- Jim in NC |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Sensenich Wood Prop Question | [email protected] | Owning | 3 | April 4th 05 03:32 PM |
| wood grain question. | Fred the Red Shirt | Home Built | 1 | December 6th 04 03:13 PM |
| Metal Prop vs. Wood Prop | Larry Smith | Home Built | 21 | September 26th 03 08:45 PM |
| Wood questions - Public Lumber Company, determining species at the lumberyard | Corrie | Home Built | 17 | September 17th 03 07:51 PM |