PDA

View Full Version : Angle Iron-Which Way Is Stronger?



pfire5
02-19-2009, 01:05 PM
Hello: I want to use some scrap angle-iron to act as bracing members for wood running perpendicular on top, for a project, and wondered which would be stronger. Basically you can position angle-iron in different ways, just wondered which was stronger for lack of flexing. Attached Picture is looking at angle iron's position at the end. Any thoughts?

Thanks in advance.

CF1975
02-19-2009, 01:17 PM
I would think #1 in your picture, but I could definitely be wrong. just from handling it, seems that there would be more deflection under load in #2 or #3 orientation than in #1. I would do a test with a known weight and measure deflection in all positions on say, a 10 foot piece over a fixed gap.

Wyoming
02-19-2009, 01:36 PM
Still need a bit more information to answer the question. What direction will the wood be running with relation to the angle? Method of attachment to the angle?

MAC702
02-19-2009, 04:07 PM
#1.

Take a 20' piece of angle and balance it, holding it in the middle. #1 will flex the ends down much less than the others, and be easier to attach at the same time.

usmcpop
02-19-2009, 05:34 PM
Very nice graphic illustration, by the way.

pfire5
02-19-2009, 08:41 PM
Still need a bit more information to answer the question. What direction will the wood be running with relation to the angle? Method of attachment to the angle?

Attached is another picture, showing the layout I was planning. Thanks.

Pangea
02-19-2009, 09:45 PM
#1. MAC702 said all that is necessary.

Wyoming
02-19-2009, 11:03 PM
Bottom line...Mac is right...as per usual.

vicegrip
03-22-2009, 07:19 PM
Bottom line...Mac is right...as per usual.


Mac's right per the question.
The question is based on a miss-applicaton.

Actually angle-iron is not meant to be load-bearing across it's section.
It is made to be used in "tension" situations, providing two surfaces
square to each other at the ends for attachment to the
(object requiring latteral reinforcing).

Channel is the preferred product you may want to considering,
based on structural applicication.
Yes angle is used this way in many applications including bed-frames, but
if you really desire / need good support, channel is a better choice.

usmcpop
03-23-2009, 05:07 PM
Maybe it was originally called dangle iron? :D

SundownIII
03-24-2009, 12:59 AM
I agree with Vicegrip.

Channel would be a much better choice in this application.

hankj
03-24-2009, 08:26 PM
Key reason that commercially built trailiers use channel!;)

Hank

mccutter
03-24-2009, 08:49 PM
If you have angle and want to make use of it, #1 is the best orientation. It will also be easier to attach stuff to. Channel or box could be better in this application BUT I think once the boards are tied into the angles it will stiffen them up just fine. Nice graphics, BTW! :)

vicegrip
03-25-2009, 04:53 PM
two opposed members, are required for load-carying applications.
Example , say a weld-table top.

http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p92/swadge/angle.jpg

cheers
vg

pfire5
03-26-2009, 03:31 PM
Thanks for all your input on this everyone. This website is extremely helpful from very knowledgeable folks!

I definitely agree that channel would be better, but I had a bunch of angle around so thought that would be better.

I went with option #1 and seems to be very stiff.

CF1975
03-31-2009, 04:51 PM
Excellent, got any pics?

Ferntj
04-05-2009, 12:53 PM
You will get arround 50% more deflection (bending) if you use angle as like ^ or V.

If you happen to have some uneqal leg angle (like 2x3x1/4) it is stronder with the long side in the same direction as the load.