James E
Well-known member
They're more similar than you think. They both have their engines in the rear and both were originally designed by Nazis. Just two branches on the same tree!
Happy New Year!
Between 265 & 485 SQ/FT The 12-Gauge Garage
- Thread starter Jack Olsen
- Start date
Workspaces sized between 265 and 485 squarefeet.
They're more similar than you think. They both have their engines in the rear and both were originally designed by Nazis. Just two branches on the same tree!
Happy New Year!
Knyte Tyne
Well-known member
Thank you!
Today, I stumbled on a still from the movie Apollo 13 and discovered another work space with my same color scheme. It's a different sort of mission control for a different kind of rocket -- and theirs had (by one calculation I found) 111,744,000 hp and mine has 272.
We have an area called Boksburg (box-berg) that the guys there with their Ford Cortinas and Toyota Corollas, will swear that their cars make that kind of Horsepower (111,744,000 hp) ... Generally followed by the same cloud of Smoke...
TwoBytes
Well-known member
Hey Jack.
Slider looks great.
Not sure if you've seen this, but I followed the link to Frank Howarth's videos from the front page of GarageJournal a few weeks ago, and found that he's also built a camera slider recently...
It's not motorised, so it's a bit different to yours, but interesting nonetheless.
OP
It's funny you should mention that. Last night, I did a search on 'shop tour' on YouTube to get an idea of how other people shot these things. What I learned was that they generally just have someone walk behind them with a camera while they talk about the equipment in their shops.
But one of the videos was Frank Howarth's 'The Woodshed Tour,' which at least used a tripod. But that led me to his video list, and I actually saved (emailed it to myself) his video about making the dolly. I'm surprised he didn't come up with a way to control its movement. But I'm probably going to steal some of the shots he came up with for my project.
He's got a pretty great wood shop.
But one of the videos was Frank Howarth's 'The Woodshed Tour,' which at least used a tripod. But that led me to his video list, and I actually saved (emailed it to myself) his video about making the dolly. I'm surprised he didn't come up with a way to control its movement. But I'm probably going to steal some of the shots he came up with for my project.
He's got a pretty great wood shop.
bczygan
Well-known member
You could get one of those drones that follows you around taking video of everything you do...
Bill
fergus
Well-known member
Gosh, Frank Howarth is everywhere. I've been following him for about a year. Never even saw the link here on the site. Small world I suppose.
dwysywd
Well-known member
very cool stuff. thanks for sharing
Sent from my quanset hut facsimile machine
Sent from my quanset hut facsimile machine
shortykorte
Well-known member
I just watch several of Frank Howath's video last week too. His special effects is an interesting and useful way to show a project build. Look forward to what you come up with Jack.
Dennis Cavallino
Well-known member
Since Frank's video on the front page I've seen many videos at Youtube and there's one simularity. Most of the woodworking vid's use timelapse, different angles and all these funny noises. It's like all those woodworkers use the same workflow (set up camera gear - work on piece of wood - editing a lot afterwards on the video). I'm hooked and Frank does it best!
Verstuurd vanaf mijn SM-G901F met Tapatalk
Verstuurd vanaf mijn SM-G901F met Tapatalk
Film Guy
New member
Jack -
Why don't you just ask Cassar to pull out the SteadiCam out for old time's sake... I bet he'd love to do a "Cribs" shot!
Why don't you just ask Cassar to pull out the SteadiCam out for old time's sake... I bet he'd love to do a "Cribs" shot!
OP
Here's something I forgot was coming.
The UK magazine Classic Porsche did an article about my car in this month's issue. There's even a garage shot included.
The UK magazine Classic Porsche did an article about my car in this month's issue. There's even a garage shot included.
gabriele82
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 29, 2015
- Messages
- 156
Hello Jack. I want to compliment you for all your creations from your beautiful Porsche. your style your garage, your car have been sources of inspiration for me. thank you so much.
sawduststeve
Well-known member
Ok, I get it, instead of just reading it and then putting it back ,I'll actually buy it this month.
i know you've been told before, but Sir you really do have the coolest garage.
Just my humble opinion.
Regards
Steve.
slik560
Well-known member
You're global. 
Grizz1963
Well-known member
You're global.
Congrats.
Yes, Global for sure.
This Internet thing does make the world smaller, but getting into print is pretty cool too.
dypen
Well-known member
Fantastic garage which gives desire to work, has spent many hours on your videos, website and forum thread. The shed that you built outside is great, very many smart and small footprint solutions in garage. Keep up the good work on the car and garage
oldironfarmer
Well-known member
Great article but your pictures put the professional magazine picture to shame.
sean Buick 76
Well-known member
Congrats on ANOTHER fine article, nice work!
Knyte Tyne
Well-known member
Jack did you ever think that your Workshop... and not your Writing Career, would be the thing to take you global in the way it has? I think its great... I used to read tuner car magazines growing up always thinking... One day Ill put together a car that has the qualities to be a feature article. I've outgrown that somewhat now... but I never thought a humble workshop could ever do the same... Congrats. Well done... Keep up the inspiring awesome!!!
OP
Structural Engineering: Where does this fail first?
This only has to bear about 1,200 pounds for about half an hour. It won't be a dynamic load, and if it failed no one would be endangered. 3" screw from both directions at every juncture.
But I'm curious about where its weak points are, from a design point of view.
This only has to bear about 1,200 pounds for about half an hour. It won't be a dynamic load, and if it failed no one would be endangered. 3" screw from both directions at every juncture.
But I'm curious about where its weak points are, from a design point of view.
mike93lx
ALLIANCE MEMBER
Re: Structural Engineering: Where does this fail first?
Interesting. First thought goes to the minimal fastener count, but i have no real idea. Subscribing to see what i can learn.
Interesting. First thought goes to the minimal fastener count, but i have no real idea. Subscribing to see what i can learn.
mrjaw14
Well-known member
Re: Structural Engineering: Where does this fail first?
What's going on top of it?
What's going on top of it?
Strouty
Well-known member
Re: Structural Engineering: Where does this fail first?
Where is the load going to be? That center section is not supported, if you put a piece of 2 by 4 under it, it will keep the entire thing from trying to pull itself apart.
Where is the load going to be? That center section is not supported, if you put a piece of 2 by 4 under it, it will keep the entire thing from trying to pull itself apart.
OP
Re: Structural Engineering: Where does this fail first?
Two steel beams (think rail road tracks) will span between this and a short wall. The load will sit on the beams. So the force is mostly straight down on it, although the wall is 7" taller than this support. The two tracks will rest about 6" inside of each of those outer uprights.
Two steel beams (think rail road tracks) will span between this and a short wall. The load will sit on the beams. So the force is mostly straight down on it, although the wall is 7" taller than this support. The two tracks will rest about 6" inside of each of those outer uprights.
Strouty
Well-known member
Re: Structural Engineering: Where does this fail first?
What are you up to now? Are you going to make a murphy bed type Porsche holder?
What are you up to now? Are you going to make a murphy bed type Porsche holder?
Mickey O
Well-known member
Re: Structural Engineering: Where does this fail first?
Should be dandy if the load is spread out, weak spots would be the vertical 2x4 in the middle not carrying the load to the ground if all the weight was on it and the top 2x4 rail between the supports but for 1200 lbs temporarily I wouldn't sweat it. If it was more weight lower collar ties and tie together to lowest most outward 2x4's. All this is assuming you didn't use drywall screws, if you have a pneumatic nailer I'd shoot a few nails through.
I've seen a lot less hold up a lot more.
Should be dandy if the load is spread out, weak spots would be the vertical 2x4 in the middle not carrying the load to the ground if all the weight was on it and the top 2x4 rail between the supports but for 1200 lbs temporarily I wouldn't sweat it. If it was more weight lower collar ties and tie together to lowest most outward 2x4's. All this is assuming you didn't use drywall screws, if you have a pneumatic nailer I'd shoot a few nails through.
I've seen a lot less hold up a lot more.
readhead
Well-known member
Re: Structural Engineering: Where does this fail first?
The center post doesn't have bearing if that matters. The vertical connections may be prone to rotational failure. What are you sitting on it?
The center post doesn't have bearing if that matters. The vertical connections may be prone to rotational failure. What are you sitting on it?
bczygan
Well-known member
Re: Structural Engineering: Where does this fail first?
At the connections and then in the center.
Especially if Tampa's ladies are sitting on it!
Two things I would do.
Increase fasteners to three at each connection.
Provide small flat horizontal piece of 2x4 under the middle, to connect that vertical 2x to the ground.
Haven't done any calcs.
Bill
At the connections and then in the center.
Especially if Tampa's ladies are sitting on it!
Two things I would do.
Increase fasteners to three at each connection.
Provide small flat horizontal piece of 2x4 under the middle, to connect that vertical 2x to the ground.
Haven't done any calcs.
Bill
kelpaso1
MEMBER EMERITUS
Re: Structural Engineering: Where does this fail first?
That's quite the interesting design. I don't think I've seen that in even third world country's. Did you happen to help out that guy who built the Shed of Doom?
That's quite the interesting design. I don't think I've seen that in even third world country's. Did you happen to help out that guy who built the Shed of Doom?
Mickey O
Well-known member
Re: Structural Engineering: Where does this fail first?
I see a huge knot in the top crossmember just about where you describe the resting point of the load...I suspect that will be your failure point...
I would add two more vertical 2x's bretween the top and bottom crossmembers under each resting point and then a spacer under the lower cross member to carry the load to the ground. Now your load have a direct path to the ground through a vertical member.
lg
no neat sig line
I see a huge knot in the top crossmember just about where you describe the resting point of the load...I suspect that will be your failure point...
I would add two more vertical 2x's bretween the top and bottom crossmembers under each resting point and then a spacer under the lower cross member to carry the load to the ground. Now your load have a direct path to the ground through a vertical member.
lg
no neat sig line
bczygan
Well-known member
Re: Structural Engineering: Where does this fail first?
If the 1,200# load includes the weight of the beams and the load is either in the middle of the beams or spread out uniformly, then the point load from each beam is only 300#.
Will the whole weight ever be centered over this?
What are you doing?
Bill
If the 1,200# load includes the weight of the beams and the load is either in the middle of the beams or spread out uniformly, then the point load from each beam is only 300#.
Will the whole weight ever be centered over this?
What are you doing?
Bill
Last edited:
signcrafter
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 9, 2012
- Messages
- 12,359
Re: Structural Engineering: Where does this fail first?
I would add some nails to it. Screws don't have a lot of shear strength like nails do.
I would add some nails to it. Screws don't have a lot of shear strength like nails do.
pcmeiners
Well-known member
Re: Structural Engineering: Where does this fail first?
"This only has to bear about 1,200 pounds for about half an hour"
If there is a decent chock under the beam, center between the triangles ( Stouty's concern), I would not worry an iota , as long as all the pieces are screwed together proper, and triangulation is close to perpendicular to the cement slab. Now if you and the family were to have a picnic sitting under it when loaded, I would modify my opinion.
"This only has to bear about 1,200 pounds for about half an hour"
If there is a decent chock under the beam, center between the triangles ( Stouty's concern), I would not worry an iota , as long as all the pieces are screwed together proper, and triangulation is close to perpendicular to the cement slab. Now if you and the family were to have a picnic sitting under it when loaded, I would modify my opinion.
OP
Re: Structural Engineering: Where does this fail first?
Thanks, guys! This stuff is interesting, to me -- even if I've got no business doing it.
I'm moving a big box that actually weighs about 1,000 pounds. This thing I've built will function a little like a railway trestle. It will support two beams (perpendicular to its orientation) about 5-1/2' apart, which is why I wasn't all that concerned about connecting the middle upright to the ground, although that's obviously very easy to do. The primary function for that middle upright was to provide a tie-in point for the two diagonals.
I know nails are stronger, in terms of shear, but this is something I'll be taking back apart later this weekend, so I wanted to make disassembly simple.
I'll add some more screws, I guess. It'll be interesting to see if there's any deflection in the center at all with the load so close to the two supported uprights.
Thanks, guys! This stuff is interesting, to me -- even if I've got no business doing it.
I'm moving a big box that actually weighs about 1,000 pounds. This thing I've built will function a little like a railway trestle. It will support two beams (perpendicular to its orientation) about 5-1/2' apart, which is why I wasn't all that concerned about connecting the middle upright to the ground, although that's obviously very easy to do. The primary function for that middle upright was to provide a tie-in point for the two diagonals.
I know nails are stronger, in terms of shear, but this is something I'll be taking back apart later this weekend, so I wanted to make disassembly simple.
I'll add some more screws, I guess. It'll be interesting to see if there's any deflection in the center at all with the load so close to the two supported uprights.
OP
Re: Structural Engineering: Where does this fail first?
Fair point about that knot. I'll swap in a cleaner 2x4 there.
Fair point about that knot. I'll swap in a cleaner 2x4 there.
petee_c
Well-known member
Re: Structural Engineering: Where does this fail first?
It'll hold. If in doubt, place it near a wall and then have 6 200lb guys stand on it 3 near each upright and have a couple of them bounce up and down.... They can use the wall to put a hand on for balance.
Sent from my LG-D852 using Tapatalk
It'll hold. If in doubt, place it near a wall and then have 6 200lb guys stand on it 3 near each upright and have a couple of them bounce up and down.... They can use the wall to put a hand on for balance.
Sent from my LG-D852 using Tapatalk
