simple, cheap lumber rack

Page 1 of 3  
OK.. been toiling with this for years.
The other day, in Lowes, I spot 12" x 14" L-bracket shelf supports rated at 100 lbs. So I figure 4 of those mounted to a 2x4, mounted to my shop wall studs and spaced 12" vertically apart or so and that should be adequate. I ran some calcs based on wood density and a stack of 12" oak that is 10" wide would average out to less than 100# per support.
oak 50#/cuft 50 x 8' x 12" x 10" / 4 supports = 83 # / support
What am I missing?
Mount several sets of 4 in-a-row and walla -- instanct lumber rack for $2 a support ($8 per row)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 9/8/2011 6:14 PM, kansascats wrote:

What are you missing? Some one leaning on the rack and it all coming down. IMHO you want to be rated for at least double the load. Also, 4 rows? Loading 320# on eack stud??? I would suggest free standing on the floor 2x6 and anchored to the wall at the top to prevent it falling.
http://www.grizzly.com/outlet/12-Wood-Rack-Shelf-Bracket-Pair-/H2535
http://cdn0.grizzly.com/manuals/h2535_m.pdf
The above 12" brackets support 300# each. That is what I use.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
That is a beefy solution. But I'm just looking to hold a stack of maybe 10" high x 8" wide hardwoods -or- 10" high x 10" wide 2x materials. Even their photo shows the rack 80% unused. For that, the cheap brackets are plenty strong. That's my point -- I only ever want to put at-most 10" of material on them -- because I don't want to sort through 20 boards. With that in mind, each bracket only needs to support 50# or so.
This is for dried lumber. Green would be a different story.. though I could sticker this rack system and probabley keep similar densities as dried.
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/wood-density-d_40.html

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 9/9/2011 10:47 AM, kansascats wrote:

To load a 100# bracket with 8e# is an accident waiting to happen.
83 # is the number you provided. oak 50#/cuft 50 x 8' x 12" x 10" / 4 supports = 83 # / support
50# would be safer.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 9/9/2011 12:14 PM, Leon wrote:

So would 20 be even safer...
The 80lb is assuming a very high density for domestic hardwoods and also a 100% loading w/ a 100% packing factor. It just ain't agonna' happen in reality.
Folks getting awfully carried away here--the worst that happens anyway is he spills a few boards on the floor he gets to pick up and put away again.
Overhead storage or a structural issue, sure, but to stick a few boards on the wall he'll be fine as long as ensures their mounted securely.
--
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 9/9/2011 12:36 PM, dpb wrote:

Or a 30# child pulls up on the boards and they come falling down on him or her.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 9/9/2011 1:26 PM, Leon wrote:

That'll learn 'em not to do that...<joking, just in case net nannies are watching>
But, for at least more real, what's an unattended child of that size doing in the shop to begin with? There's undoubtedly far more dangerous than this will be there.
But, undoubtedly the 100-lb rating of the brackets has a pretty good safety margin in it as well--it certainly won't actually fail under a 100-lb distributed load.
--
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Exactly. And my guess is the 100# rated bracket probably can hold 120# or better.
The point is to get a few doz boards off the floor.
I wish I had the problem of storing a few hundred board feet of hardwood :-(

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 9/9/2011 3:13 PM, kansascats wrote:

Cant say you were not warned..
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 9/9/2011 3:13 PM, kansascats wrote:

I'd venture probably even more to actual failure--but, of course, it would be easy enough to take one and test it to confirm.
Distribute the load or maybe use another one or two and go on...Leon is just being cantankerous apparently for lack of anything better to do.
--
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 9/9/2011 3:13 PM, kansascats wrote:

One thought came overnight...while I'd have no qualms as far as failure given the loading you're talking of as noted; you might find they will sag some with time if loaded near rating.
For that reason you might want to consider upping the number either by filling in more in the same length (altho I'm presuming you were thinking of only using existing wall studs so that would take more effort to add) or, alternatively, space more levels at closer vertical spacing to limit load that way at some (probably minimal?) loss of total storage (altho you might go w/ 5 instead of 4 levels, say)...
Just a thought and just _might_ also take care of the worrier in the crowd... :)
--
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
responding to http://www.homeownershub.com/woodworking/simple-cheap-lumber-rack-523473-.htm compareman1 wrote:
Here is the solution for you if you are looking for the cheapest tools on line, here you will get best of the tools at reasonable price that you can easily compare with others
http://www.comparethebuildingmaterials.com /
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/voila
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Theodore Edward Stosterone wrote:

Thank you. Thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you.
I want to barf everytime I see "walla".
--

dadiOH
____________________________
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 9/9/2011 6:13 AM, dadiOH wrote:

Viola!
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 4/15/2010
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Closer, Mr. Musician! It's "Voil!", with Alt+0224 (grave accent)
-- The problem with borrowing money from China is that thirty minutes later, you feel broke again. --Steve Bridges as Obama
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 9/9/2011 9:07 AM, Larry Jaques wrote:

Tsk tsk ... where's your sense of cacography this morning, C-Less?
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 4/15/2010
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Caca what? I reacted, then realized you were 'making a funny', then sent it anyway, in order that the unwashed masses to incorporate said wisdom into their daily lives. A "Hail Mary"? You bet.
Note to those who know no Spanglish: "caca" is "poop" in Espaol.
-- The problem with borrowing money from China is that thirty minutes later, you feel broke again. --Steve Bridges as Obama
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Close. Caca is the vulgar "shit". Art
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Artemus wrote:

High class folks say "mierda". As in, "vete a mierda" :)
--

dadiOH
____________________________
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.