Why not leave woodwork to the people who want it to rebuild it?
I get the feeling that this guy wants to do this.
Post pics once it's done, I'd like to see what you make of it.
welcome to the bottom of my post.
What is the effect of rung width?
Wood is an excuse to play with a chain saw… chain saws are fun, ergo wood work is fun!
Out of interest, how do trail dogs manage wooden slats? Id have thought their paws would fall through the gaps.
Disclaimer: I'm no dog owner but I'm curious….
Wood is an excuse to play with a chain saw… chain saws are fun, ergo wood work is fun!
can't argue with that!
Out of interest, how do trail dogs manage wooden slats?
poorly. Their paws fall through the gaps. They usually go around.
or the log starts to bounce a little and your friend's inexperienced dog that is ahead of you freaks out and stops in the middle… excitement! :damn:
poorly. Their paws fall through the gaps. They usually go around.
Rung spacing should take into account the fact that dogs will run your trail and run your bridges. Personally, I'd leave only a minimal gap between rung so you don't have to worry about your bridge breaking some dog's legs.
Also, I have to disagree (strongly) with Syncro's varying rung height hypothesis. By having alternating heights for rung, you're effectively halving the amount of tire contact with your bridge deck. And I'm pretty sure dogs don't really dig that sort of thing either.
3"-4" rung is pretty overkill too, unless you plan on having 4x4s run down your trail.
"It's, like, so much fun."
the height of the rungs wouldn't vary so much that your tire would bridge over top of a rung and even if it did friction is Independent of surface area. varying the rung height is a great way to be able to apply the breaks on woodwork.
the height of the rungs wouldn't vary so much that your tire would bridge over top of a rung and even if it did friction is Independent of surface area. varying the rung height is a great way to be able to apply the breaks on woodwork.
Okee doke. Thanks for reminding me why I don't post here anymore.
"It's, like, so much fun."
also 3" rungs not overkill if you like to build burly. with big stringers it should last longer than pinner rungs. plus it just looks good.
Okee doke. Thanks for reminding me why I don't post here anymore.
is that because your post was meant to be ironic or something and i didn't pick up on it or because you don't like having the blunders of your flawed reasoning pointed out?
is that because your post was meant to be ironic or something and i didn't pick up on it or because you don't like having the blunders of your flawed reasoning pointed out?
Ha! You're right. I have no idea what I'm talking about.
"It's, like, so much fun."
so it was because i dare question you, gods gift to trail building! :damn:
I have no idea what I'm talking about.
apparently not when discussing the concepts of static friction.
Rung spacing should take into account the fact that dogs will run your trail and run your bridges. Personally, I'd leave only a minimal gap between rung so you don't have to worry about your bridge breaking some dog's legs.
Also, I have to disagree (strongly) with Syncro's varying rung height hypothesis. By having alternating heights for rung, you're effectively halving the amount of tire contact with your bridge deck. And I'm pretty sure dogs don't really dig that sort of thing either.
3"-4" rung is pretty overkill too, unless you plan on having 4x4s run down your trail.
i'm only talking like 1/4" to 1/2" and the undulating surface will give the tire more to bit into. if the rungs are wide enough (4" to 6") it works well. however, if the rungs are skinny (like only 2" wide) then what you say is true as the tire will not contact the lower rung. it's a similar idea to how karen makes her rungs with triangular tops - more bite.
as for thickness, 3"-4" is not overkill depending on the length of the rung. as the overall width of the bridge increases then the thickness of the rung should increase proportionally. if you've got say 3 feet between stringers then you shouldn't have a rung that's only a 1.5" to 2" thick as it increases the chance of the rung breaking. besides, why not build a bridge that can hold a motorcycle or atv, there's less chance of it collapsing under a rider that way.
at the end of the day why skimp on rung size?
We don't know what our limits are, so to start something with the idea of being limited actually ends up limiting us.
Ellen Langer
4" is getting pretty fat. 3" thick rungs are pretty good . depends how much material you have access to…….
a 2" thick cedar rung will last quite awhile in most places…..
Forum jump:
