|
Portal | PhotoPost Gallery | Register | Blogs | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||||
|
|||||
Quote:
Sure - ask me a difficult question. There are a couple of ways to look at this. Let's make sure we are talking about the same thing. I believe that you are referring to the fact that the tank sits on Beam B and not Beam A. I did consider this. The first modification I made to support this arrangement was to add an additional brace from front to back. Where splitting the load in two squares (3'x3') should be sufficient, I am splitting the load in three rectangles (3'x2'). I also figure that the two beams together, being only 2.5" apart and welded in 4 places, will collectively have a strength greater than a single beam. Finally, I am counting on the distance to the braced beam (Beam A) being small enough that the load will be almost directly transfered between the two beams. Having said all of that - there's not a lot of science behind it. It's more intuition than anything. If the stand weren't overbuilt, I would be a little more concerned, but I think there is a sufficient safety variable built in to offset the risk of deflection along this beam. This stand design gives me considerably more space underneath the tank. The extra 4.5" makes a big difference. It also will make it easier to hide some of the plumbing when I start panneling the stand. So far, I don't regret the design. Anyway, the question is perfectly reasonable, no need to appologize. - Thanks |
Tags |
custom tank, deep dimension, high end, redundant, reef |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|