Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
it was Capt Mooron who said that
| cranes never had their booms & rams set up in similar geometry to solid | vangs, and was Scotty who proved they do in fact. Capt. Mooron wrote: **** You Doug.... A little touchy, are we? ... where did he prove that? :Scott Vernon :alt.sailing.asa :8/28/2004 11:10 AM "Capt. Mooron" wrote Quit toying with the damn boom.... look think of it this way... how many lifting devices utilize a support located under the boom at less than 25% of the boom length? NONE! Wrong, kanook. Have you never seen an engine crane? A bascule type draw bridge? Any hydraulic crane with the boom out? An excavator? need more? Scotty I always said the topping lift was better situated to lift a load. And that's wrong. It's not a case for *always*. Did you ever realize that the tension on the topping lift was greater than the weight, and the forces on the mast were also multiples of the weight load? I don't think you tried to understand what I was trying to explain. I am not a particularly good explainer, but your mind seems to be made up regardless of the above facts. DSK |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() DSK wrote: I always said the topping lift was better situated to lift a load. And that's wrong. It's not a case for *always*. Did you ever realize that the tension on the topping lift was greater than the weight, and the forces on the mast were also multiples of the weight load? Did you ever realize the shear and bending forces on the boom are far higher if a vang were used to lift the weight? That the vang attachemnt to the boom is not desined for compression? Cheers |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
GRETTIR'S SAGA (continued) | ASA | |||
Eastman's guide to exposing the 9-11 mass-murder frameup to justify world-domination to an otherwise isolationist American public | ASA | |||
The Bahamas, Key West and back. | Cruising | |||
back with a problem now | General |