Surely it's the wood that costs? Threaded rod, nuts, and some galvanized plates are less money than your waste?

Make sure to tie the different beams together with noggings so that you distribute the load in the construction.
 
D
Since it is brackish water, I was considering if A4 acid-resistant might be reasonable, then it immediately becomes quite a lot of money for the threaded rod etc.
 
  • Wow
Sernando
  • Laddar…
D Derbyboy said:
It "licks" the cliff, so diagonal supports will be difficult.

4 meters is not set in stone, I can make it shorter as well. The wood comes in lengths of 4.8, so I'll cut it to a length where the sway is acceptable.

I can note that in the mounting, there's a bit of margin with a threaded rod M20.
Ok, and I assume you're avoiding fixtures below the water level because you want to skip a building permit?
 
  • Like
Anonymiserad 618974
  • Laddar…
P
T topmount said:
Ok and I assume you avoid mounts below the water level because you want to avoid building permits?
Uneducated question, is a building permit needed even for a support without anchoring below the water level?
 
D
No, rather that the ice takes what comes too far out.
 
Byurn Byurn said:
You have two meters on both sides of the pivot point.

Your major concern will probably be the deflection in the construction.
And then the self-weight matters...
 
D
Explain then how?

I can't see how it matters if there are 2 meters on each side of the midpoint, at least not for the traction.
 
  • Like
Anonymiserad 618974
  • Laddar…
P
Violina Violina said:
And then the weight matters..
Does it feel good now, when you can explain you were right after all? That you were actually responding to what applies to the deflection, without explaining it when you answered?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Have you considered a floating dock instead? It follows the water level and in the winter you pull it up onto the land.
 
D
I have a floating dock but I want a dock where I can dock the boat.
 
Violina Violina said:
And then the self-weight matters..
No, it does not. Where does the center of mass end up?

In the original question, self-weight is not relevant. And in reality, a more robust construction is less sensitive to deflection. The stiffness will increase faster than the weight.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Derbyboy
  • Laddar…
D Derbyboy said:
I have a floating dock, but I want a dock where I can place the boat.
What is the problem with placing the boat at the floating dock?

Boat docked at a floating pier on calm water, with a clear sky reflecting.
 
  • Like
  • Wow
Cheesen and 1 other
  • Laddar…
D
I can be many things, circumstances. Start your own thread if you're wondering.
 
Den ofrivillige klåparen said:
Does it feel good now, when you can explain that you were right after all? That you actually answered what applies to the deflection, without explaining it when you answered?
Since we had a load case from the beginning with complete data, I wanted it supplemented before I even start calculating it, yes.

And that you cannot neglect the self-weight of a construction that is supposed to be a free-hanging cantilever of two meters, that should be obvious to most..
 
P
Violina Violina said:
Since we had a load case from the start with complete data, I wanted it completed before I even begin to calculate it, yes.

And that one cannot neglect the self-weight of a structure that is intended to be a free-hanging cantilever of two meters, that should be obvious to most people..
Start calculating then. Set up force and moment equilibrium. Make an estimate of the bending stiffness based on the mass TS estimated and the three beams mentioned. Then calculate the deflection at a point load at the far end. Compare it to what you consider an acceptable deflection. Also, report maximum stresses in critical sections and compare with the fracture limit for wood. Alternatively, calculate forces and moments in each construction part and compare with tabulated values, which should be available for free through, for example, Svenskt trä. You should especially study what happens with the attachment forces, which was TS's question. See the thread title.

If you want to impress, also calculate other failure modes, such as fatigue of metallic components in the attachment, buckling, etc.

Or is it that you lack knowledge in this and guessed that the self-weight has a significant impact on the forces in the attachment, and cannot manage to back down when you are wrong?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Vi vill skicka notiser för ämnen du bevakar och händelser som berör dig.