Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Re\:\s+Gin\s+pole\s+loading\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Re\:\s+Gin\s+pole\s+loading\s*$/: 12 ]

Total 12 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] Re: Gin pole loading (score: 1): Author: mtope@mail1.jpl.nasa.gov (Michael Tope); Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 18:34:22 -0800; Pete, Imagine another scenario - pull the 200 lb load half way up the tower. Now tie the other end of the gin pole rope off to the base of the tower. Now climb the tower to the point where the load i; /archives//html/Towertalk/1999-04/msg00034.html (11,043 bytes)
2. [TowerTalk] Re: Gin pole loading (score: 1): Author: K7NV@contesting.com (Kurt Andress); Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 23:18:04 -0800; Wow! A variety of ideas on this one. How about another one? 1) If the load being lifted is 200#, and the lifting line is vertical, the load on the line is 200# 2) If the tension in the line is 200# o; /archives//html/Towertalk/1999-04/msg00038.html (10,765 bytes)
3. [TowerTalk] Re: Gin pole loading (score: 1): Author: mcduffie@scottsbluff.net (Gary McDuffie, Sr.); Date: Sat, 03 Apr 1999 00:59:13 -0700; You don't add it to either side of the gin pole. You replace the single pulley at the top of the pole with a block and tackle. That's what I originally said also. But, if you revert back to my last d; /archives//html/Towertalk/1999-04/msg00039.html (9,123 bytes)
4. [TowerTalk] Re: Gin pole loading (score: 1): Author: baycock@hiwaay.net (Bill Aycock); Date: Sat, 03 Apr 1999 04:25:20 -0600; Kurt- because you are a professional stress man, I hate to tell you this, but the use of a pulley system DOES reduce the load on the top. Consider the static case of a 400 lb weight hanghing on a thr; /archives//html/Towertalk/1999-04/msg00041.html (8,772 bytes)
5. [TowerTalk] Re: Gin pole loading (score: 1): Author: n4zr@contesting.com (Pete Smith); Date: Sat, 03 Apr 1999 12:30:07 +0100; I think I recall doing this exact experiment in high-school physics with a spring scale substituted for the fixed attachment point. It was a long time ago, but I think we showed that the load on the; /archives//html/Towertalk/1999-04/msg00043.html (9,176 bytes)
6. [TowerTalk] Re: Gin pole loading (score: 1): Author: K7NV@contesting.com (Kurt Andress); Date: Sat, 03 Apr 1999 04:48:03 -0800; I apologize for entering into this discussion. I have my own opinions on the subject! They are my own and I'm happy to live with them! I obviously do not understand the problem! The subject is clearl; /archives//html/Towertalk/1999-04/msg00044.html (9,242 bytes)
7. [TowerTalk] Re: Gin pole loading (score: 1): Author: kd4wiw@ipass.net (Stephen Vinson); Date: Sat, 03 Apr 1999 12:32:53 -0500; Boy ... I hate I stopped reading all the post on this subject. I will inject a comment on safety and hope that it has not been stated before. The dead weight of #200 on the lift side is opposed by th; /archives//html/Towertalk/1999-04/msg00056.html (9,513 bytes)
8. [TowerTalk] Re: Gin pole loading (score: 1): Author: w7ni@teleport.com (Stan Griffiths); Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 01:25:02 -0700; Hi Kurt, Well, I got you to go part way with me at least. If you use a double block at the top and a single block at the load, the load will be supported by three strands of rope, each one supporting; /archives//html/Towertalk/1999-04/msg00116.html (13,273 bytes)
9. [TowerTalk] Re: Gin pole loading (score: 1): Author: w7ni@teleport.com (Stan Griffiths); Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 01:30:49 -0700; Hi Gary, Well, I hate to say this, but I don't fully agree with your analysis of the system you diagramed. I do agree that the down pull tension will only have to be 100#, but it won't reduce the loa; /archives//html/Towertalk/1999-04/msg00117.html (10,396 bytes)
10. [TowerTalk] Re: Gin pole loading (score: 1): Author: w7ni@teleport.com (Stan Griffiths); Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 01:35:20 -0700; Hi Bill, Thank you, thank you, and thank you for this revealing explanation. I can see that we agree on this interesting and, apparently, perplexing problem in pullys and mechanical advantage. Stan w; /archives//html/Towertalk/1999-04/msg00118.html (9,725 bytes)
11. [TowerTalk] Re: Gin pole loading (score: 1): Author: dwindk3bhj@fuse.net (David J. Windisch); Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 07:53:32 -0400; *When* will you fellas try the pulley experiment I limned in an earlier post? Side note to Pete: I told you no one would believe me until he does the hard work himself. This needs to be a laboratory; /archives//html/Towertalk/1999-04/msg00122.html (8,421 bytes)
12. [TowerTalk] Re: Gin pole loading (score: 1): Author: K7NV@contesting.com (Kurt Andress); Date: Wed, 07 Apr 1999 09:21:10 -0700; SNIP Hi Stan, I'd never intentionally start an arguement with you. I was in too big a hurry and did not take time to clearly get it all out. Should not have said anything, my apologies. I don't disag; /archives//html/Towertalk/1999-04/msg00145.html (11,175 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 12
Page: [1]