Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Re: Rolled Wide Flange Beams to Trolley Around Corners

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Actually, trolley wheels are available both for the tapered S-shape
beams, and for the "patented track" systems, which are most commonly 3.5
inches wide and flat.   Both types of runway beams can be fabricated with
a constant radius curve.  Each manufacturer of trolleys and carriers
publishes the minimum radii for their respective systems.

Wheels for the wide flange beams are also readily available.  The
feasibility of using curved wide flange runways is clearly lews than that
for the narrower lower flange systems.

Russ Nester
rnester(--nospam--at)juno.com
_________________________________________________________________
On Wed, 6 Oct 1999 16:01:04 -0500 "Paul Martin"
<paul_martin(--nospam--at)corp.admworld.com> writes:
>Ed:
>
>Trolleys will track a lot easier on S shape than a wide flange.  In 
>fact
>special trolleys are required for wide flange beams.  Standard 
>trolleys are
>made for S shapes.  The thicker tapered flange on an S shape handles 
>the
>wheel loads nicely.
>
>The radius of the track is limited also by the trolley selected.  
>Infact,
>the trolley may prove to be the limiting factor.
>
>I support the track at the center of the curve and near each end of 
>the
>curve.
>
>
>Paul J. Martin, PE, SE
>ADM Design Services
>Decatur, IL
>217-429-4412
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Ed Fasula <tibbits2(--nospam--at)metro.lakes.com>
>To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
>Date: Wednesday, October 06, 1999 3:42 PM
>Subject: Rolled Wide Flange Beams to Trolley Around Corners
>
>
>>
>>I have completed step 1, found a machine shop to roll a wide flange 
>beam
>>with a 3 to 4' radius.  Step 2 is to figure out what's left of the 
>beam
>>afterward.  The point here is to allow a trolley to roll around a 
>corner in
>>a plant.
>>
>>The machine shop cold rolls the beams, and claim they can do it 
>without the
>>flanges buckling.  We only have to support about 5.5 kips, and we can
>>shorten the span to just about anything.  I would think that the beam 
>would
>>become stronger from cold-working.  Lateral stability, I would think,
>>wouldn't be an issue if the beam is supported in the center of the 
>bend.
>>Local buckling of the inside flange, that I would think would be a 
>little
>>wavy from the process, seems to be the bugger.
>>
>>Am I on the right track here (no pun intended)?  Is there some kind 
>of
>>standard practice someone could clue me in on?
>>
>>Thanks.
>>
>>Ed Fasula, E.I.T.

___________________________________________________________________
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.