Subject:
|
Re: Train3 Updated Layout and Door Dimensions
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto
|
Date:
|
Thu, 17 Jan 2002 19:04:39 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
555 times
|
| |
| |
In lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, Jeff Elliott writes:
> > -I measured the doors today at Lillian H Smith. The max width is 32". So
> > if you use 1x2 framing around the modules for racking, you should be just
> > okay. JeffE suggested bolting an N shape. Probably a good idea!
>
> Ummm, presumably, the MINIMUM width is 32"... ie, the narrowest
> dimension we're forced to deal with. So I don't think putting 1x2s on
> all 4 side will work at all:
I meant maximium available width or maximum module width... But yeah,
minimum width of the door would probably make more sense.
> 30.75" (width of module)
> + 2 x 0.75" (Thickness of 1x2)
> = 32.25"
>
> And then there's the bolt heads. You'll have to leave two opposite
> sides 1x2-free to get thru the door.
Actually the modules are 30.25", so without bolt heads is 31.75. Plus I
left some margin in there.
Calum
|
|
Message has 1 Reply: | | Re: Train3 Updated Layout and Door Dimensions
|
| (...) Actually guys..... The way that calum designed his racking system it WILL fit with no problems... 30.75" (width of module) + 1 x 0.75" (Thickness of 1x2) = 31.5" + bolt head theckness... (one because the 1 x 2 are off set, one in each corner, (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jan-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Train3 Updated Layout and Door Dimensions
|
| (...) Ummm, presumably, the MINIMUM width is 32"... ie, the narrowest dimension we're forced to deal with. So I don't think putting 1x2s on all 4 side will work at all: 30.75" (width of module) + 2 x 0.75" (Thickness of 1x2) = 32.25" And then (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jan-02, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
11 Messages in This Thread:
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|