1369.44.49.110 wrote:
<snip>
> The only reason I'm here is because Tom W. and I found him rather
> knowledgeable, had posted something anti-war and the little rats all got
> excited and started running in their cages.... No respect for
> him<snip>
Tom is intelligent and a good writer. His message you refer to,
however, was not merely anti-war, it was partisan. I suspect even a
mere anti-war message would attract some opponents, but a partisan
message is sure to attract negative attention, especially on a
non-partisan NG. When that anti-war argument is connected to a partisan
attack, it will attract even more negative attention.
Linking anti-war messages with partisan snipes is a difficult
rhetorical task for anyone, but more so in this particular war, since
even the democratic presidential candidate, senator Kerry, voted for
the war along with most other democrats. It seems that both parties are
equally susceptible to the accusation of whoredom, and might therefore
be more reasonable to isolate issues and discuss them one at a time,
then talk of connections to parties.
In this respect, I think you share in Tom's unfortunate decision to use
a "scatter-gun" technique, only you have neither Tom's style, sense of
decorum, nor courage (i.e., posting under his own name). You have made
your argument a very tough sell.
H.
1369.44.49.110 wrote:
> your right I'm not here to finese you morons....
>
> Who the fuck elected you to feel you could tell me who what where I can
> speak or post whateverIfucking want!
As soon as you can show me where I told you "who what where [you] can
speak or post whatever[you] want", then I'll tell you who elected me.
I did point out what a difficult path it is you've chosen, and why. For
you to infer that I was barking orders that compelled you to get so
defensive...well, that's sad.
>
> See Tom is a nice guy! I'm a Prick! Unlike many of you It's the part that
> makes men men.....
See, I always thought it was the brain and the soul. Any male can have
a dick--doesn't make him a man. And I have no idea if Tom is a nice
guy, I've never had the opportunity to make his acquaintance. I did say
he was eloquent and showed decorum and courage. I should also point out
that I have never called you a name. Why would I? I don't know you.
>
> look moron my friends know me..............and so far I haven't met anyone
> here I would consider..................
>
I'm glad you have friends. I wonder if you act or speak towards them as
you write towards others on this NG. I wonder because you use the
metaphor of "meeting" people on a NG, which strikes me as odd. Have you
participated in NGs for long?
> so fuckhead when a moron posts "hylourgos" don't run your ass sucking coward
> shit to me over a real name dickweed!
>
> h.????? Get real!
Ha. Hey, 1369.44.49.110, you're a funny guy....
H, still H.
Hey he catches less shit then I do...........................
"Joe Barta" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Hate Niggers wrote:
>
>> I am going to build some oak shelves and would like to know how to
>> calculate maximum allowable load. The size approximately 15" deep
>> by 45" wide, thickness 3/4". Thanks.
>>
>> HN
>
>
> Get much milage out of "Hate Niggers"? I don't think I could say
> anything to you that you haven't already heard so I suppose I'll try
> to answer your question...
>
> It's not so much about maximum allowable load as it is about
> deflection. Any amount of weight will deflect a shelf. One ounce will
> deflect it an insignificant amount... ten pounds will deflect it a
> little more, but should still be ok... one hundred pounds may well
> hold, but there might be unsuitable deflection. First you must decide
> what would be an acceptable amount of deflection and calculate the
> weight that would cause it.
>
> Another concern is point load, or whether the weight is concentrated
> in one spot or spread out on the shelf. As you can imagine, the shelf
> would have a tougher time supporting a 100 pound bowling ball in the
> middle than 100 pounds of bricks spread over the entire shelf.
>
> Maybe there is someone in the group that you haven't pissed off that
> has some engineering skills and can offer you a better idea of just
> how much weight you could reasonably put on such a shelf and have it
> deflect minimally. You'd have to give an idea of the type of objects
> you'll be putting on that shelf.
>
> Hopefully that's been of some help.
>
> Joe Barta
Hate Niggers wrote:
> I am going to build some oak shelves and would like to know how to
> calculate maximum allowable load. The size approximately 15" deep
> by 45" wide, thickness 3/4". Thanks.
>
> HN
Get much milage out of "Hate Niggers"? I don't think I could say
anything to you that you haven't already heard so I suppose I'll try
to answer your question...
It's not so much about maximum allowable load as it is about
deflection. Any amount of weight will deflect a shelf. One ounce will
deflect it an insignificant amount... ten pounds will deflect it a
little more, but should still be ok... one hundred pounds may well
hold, but there might be unsuitable deflection. First you must decide
what would be an acceptable amount of deflection and calculate the
weight that would cause it.
Another concern is point load, or whether the weight is concentrated
in one spot or spread out on the shelf. As you can imagine, the shelf
would have a tougher time supporting a 100 pound bowling ball in the
middle than 100 pounds of bricks spread over the entire shelf.
Maybe there is someone in the group that you haven't pissed off that
has some engineering skills and can offer you a better idea of just
how much weight you could reasonably put on such a shelf and have it
deflect minimally. You'd have to give an idea of the type of objects
you'll be putting on that shelf.
Hopefully that's been of some help.
Joe Barta
1369.44.49.110 wrote:
> As for jackass I think guy's dying for lies and bullshit with piss
> poor armor and saving money by using humvees instead of APC's is a
> fucking waste of good soldiers! If any of these morons ever seen
> someone blown to shit, they'd be upchucking for a
> week.....................
If you feel so strongly about about these things, why don't you
actually try to DO something about making changes in this country
rather than blowing hard in a woodworking newsgroup of all places?
Bruce T wrote:
> The simple way to do this is to multiply the length by the width
> times the standard load capacity of 10 lbs. per square inch. Of
> course, in your case, since the shelf is only 3/4" thick, you have
> to divide by 0.75. Simple!
15 * 45 * 10 / 0.75 = 9000
9000 pounds?
One of us is missing something here.
Joe Barta <[email protected]> wrote in news:Xns972F1D40A7661jbartaapknet@
207.115.17.102:
> Bruce T wrote:
>
>> The simple way to do this is to multiply the length by the width
>> times the standard load capacity of 10 lbs. per square inch. Of
>> course, in your case, since the shelf is only 3/4" thick, you have
>> to divide by 0.75. Simple!
>
> 15 * 45 * 10 / 0.75 = 9000
>
> 9000 pounds?
>
> One of us is missing something here.
Assuming the rest of the calc is true it should be multiply by 0.75 not
divide?
this is useful; http://www.woodworkersweb.com/sagulator.htm
Ya know, I spent about 10 minutes looking for the web address where they
have an on-line calculator to calculate the amount of load and sag for
shelves. I was just ready to post it until I saw your signature.
Asshole, you are not welcomed here - crawl back into cave.
"Hate Niggers" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>I am going to build some oak shelves and would like to know how to
>calculate maximum
> allowable load. The size approximately 15" deep by 45" wide, thickness
> 3/4". Thanks.
>
> HN
>
Span is the important issue here that is missing. If you add a center
support in the shelf, you can assume that the span is halved and more
than double the load.
9000 lbs is wrong.
My framing book offers the following advise...for 3/4 inch plywood with
48 inch spacing between supports plan for a load of 40 lbs per square
foot.
Now there are several issues with this.
1) this assumes the load is live, not dead.
2) It assumes that the supports are down both sides
3) It assumes that the support offers a resting area of at least 1 inch
on each side
4) It does not assume a constant load
You will see some sag in the shelf boards on a constant load over a long
period of time.
A shelf tab in the center back of the shelf will help a lot.
Doug
In article <[email protected]>,
Joe Barta <[email protected]> wrote:
> Bruce T wrote:
>
> > The simple way to do this is to multiply the length by the width
> > times the standard load capacity of 10 lbs. per square inch. Of
> > course, in your case, since the shelf is only 3/4" thick, you have
> > to divide by 0.75. Simple!
>
> 15 * 45 * 10 / 0.75 = 9000
>
> 9000 pounds?
>
> One of us is missing something here.
Joe Barta wrote:
> Bruce T wrote:
>
>
>>The simple way to do this is to multiply the length by the width
>>times the standard load capacity of 10 lbs. per square inch. Of
>>course, in your case, since the shelf is only 3/4" thick, you have
>>to divide by 0.75. Simple!
>
>
> 15 * 45 * 10 / 0.75 = 9000
>
> 9000 pounds?
>
> One of us is missing something here.
Certainly is. the standard load is not 10 per
square inch. That's higher than the load for a
floor. Shelves would be more like 10-20 pounds
per linear foot.
On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 20:05:17 GMT, [email protected] (Hate Niggers)
wrote:
>I am going to build some oak shelves and would like to know how to calculate maximum
>allowable load. The size approximately 15" deep by 45" wide, thickness 3/4". Thanks.
>
>HN
You might want to change that name of yours to something less
inflammatory. How about Bill or James? You'd get more informative
help that way.
What makes you think I don't? Things are certainly changing!
The only reason I'm here is because Tom W. and I found him rather
knowledgeable, had posted something anti-war and the little rats all got
excited and started running in their cages.... No respect for
him.................... So I have no reason or desire to show any respect to
the morons here who want to bark.
"Joe Barta" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> 1369.44.49.110 wrote:
>
>> As for jackass I think guy's dying for lies and bullshit with piss
>> poor armor and saving money by using humvees instead of APC's is a
>> fucking waste of good soldiers! If any of these morons ever seen
>> someone blown to shit, they'd be upchucking for a
>> week.....................
>
> If you feel so strongly about about these things, why don't you
> actually try to DO something about making changes in this country
> rather than blowing hard in a woodworking newsgroup of all places?
your right I'm not here to finese you morons....
Who the fuck elected you to feel you could tell me who what where I can
speak or post whateverIfucking want!
See Tom is a nice guy! I'm a Prick! Unlike many of you It's the part that
makes men men.....
look moron my friends know me..............and so far I haven't met anyone
here I would consider..................
so fuckhead when a moron posts "hylourgos" don't run your ass sucking coward
shit to me over a real name dickweed!
h.????? Get real!
"hylourgos" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> 1369.44.49.110 wrote:
> <snip>
>> The only reason I'm here is because Tom W. and I found him rather
>> knowledgeable, had posted something anti-war and the little rats all got
>> excited and started running in their cages.... No respect for
>> him<snip>
>
> Tom is intelligent and a good writer. His message you refer to,
> however, was not merely anti-war, it was partisan. I suspect even a
> mere anti-war message would attract some opponents, but a partisan
> message is sure to attract negative attention, especially on a
> non-partisan NG. When that anti-war argument is connected to a partisan
> attack, it will attract even more negative attention.
>
> Linking anti-war messages with partisan snipes is a difficult
> rhetorical task for anyone, but more so in this particular war, since
> even the democratic presidential candidate, senator Kerry, voted for
> the war along with most other democrats. It seems that both parties are
> equally susceptible to the accusation of whoredom, and might therefore
> be more reasonable to isolate issues and discuss them one at a time,
> then talk of connections to parties.
>
> In this respect, I think you share in Tom's unfortunate decision to use
> a "scatter-gun" technique, only you have neither Tom's style, sense of
> decorum, nor courage (i.e., posting under his own name). You have made
> your argument a very tough sell.
>
> H.
>
I bet they won't climb on his ass like they do mine!!!!
"Bob S" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Ya know, I spent about 10 minutes looking for the web address where they
> have an on-line calculator to calculate the amount of load and sag for
> shelves. I was just ready to post it until I saw your signature.
>
> Asshole, you are not welcomed here - crawl back into cave.
>
>
> "Hate Niggers" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>I am going to build some oak shelves and would like to know how to
>>calculate maximum
>> allowable load. The size approximately 15" deep by 45" wide, thickness
>> 3/4". Thanks.
>>
>> HN
>>
>
>
On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 20:05:17 +0000, Hate Niggers wrote:
> I am going to build some oak shelves and would like to know how to
> calculate maximum allowable load. The size approximately 15" deep by 45"
> wide, thickness 3/4". Thanks.
>
The only thing I'd calculate for you is the strength of the beam required
to hold the noose to lynch you.
Go crawl back in your inbred hole....
"Hate Niggers" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>I am going to build some oak shelves and would like to know how to
>calculate maximum
> allowable load. The size approximately 15" deep by 45" wide, thickness
> 3/4". Thanks.
>
> HN
>
That all depends... See you look to help people who for the most part are to
ignorant to help themselves..... We're talking wood here not rocket science.
As for jackass I think guy's dying for lies and bullshit with piss poor
armor and saving money by using humvees instead of APC's is a fucking waste
of good soldiers! If any of these morons ever seen someone blown to shit,
they'd be upchucking for a week.....................
mediocre isn't my speed!
"Joe Barta" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> 1369.44.49.110 wrote:
>
>> Hey he catches less shit then I do...........................
>
> I've seen one post from him lately. You on the other hand seem to be a
> serial jackass. Plus, aside from the inflamatory sig, HE actually had
> somehing useful to say (or ask).
On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 12:46:29 -0500, Doug Houseman <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Span is the important issue here that is missing. If you add a center
>support in the shelf, you can assume that the span is halved and more
>than double the load.
>
>9000 lbs is wrong.
>
>My framing book offers the following advise...for 3/4 inch plywood with
>48 inch spacing between supports plan for a load of 40 lbs per square
>foot.
>
>Now there are several issues with this.
>
>1) this assumes the load is live, not dead.
>2) It assumes that the supports are down both sides
>3) It assumes that the support offers a resting area of at least 1 inch
>on each side
>4) It does not assume a constant load
>
>You will see some sag in the shelf boards on a constant load over a long
>period of time.
>
>A shelf tab in the center back of the shelf will help a lot.
>
>Doug
>
Also, something else I've done in the past is to glue a strip into a
dado which is located not far from the front edge of the shelf. Also,
I further assume that the rear edge of the shelf is fixed to the back
(plywood or somesuch) and the ends are themselves located in dados.
That'll hold up pretty well.
However, the look of the shelf is definitely affected by adding that
strip. It might not be acceptable for his design.
The simple way to do this is to multiply the length by the width times the
standard load capacity of 10 lbs. per square inch. Of course, in your case,
since the shelf is only 3/4" thick, you have to divide by 0.75. Simple!
"Hate Niggers" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>I am going to build some oak shelves and would like to know how to
>calculate maximum
> allowable load. The size approximately 15" deep by 45" wide, thickness
> 3/4". Thanks.
>
> HN
>