Campin LI wrote:
Ron,
Please don't be astounded by anything I say. I'm just a guy who comes to the forum to get advice and I try to reciprocate from time to time by giving some. I meant no disrespect to you, sorry if you took it that way.
I am on the "other side" in construction. I do not have the technical background to analyze and design things but I am very interested in it and I believe I have the ability to follow along. Most of my knowledge is based on trial and error without the math analysis. That is probably why I bounce back and forth between variables within the same paragraph. I also don't have the desire to ponder over the perfect words so that they can't be twisted to mean something I did not intend to say. For instance above, all I meant was usually a factor of safety is used as in sometimes there is not one. I actually don't know what you twisted it into other than saying there is no such thing as usually when determining a factor of safety or something to that effect.
That being said, the only intent of my post was to make people aware that specific to RVing, the variables in the analysis can be under constant change, and nothing more.
My last paragraph was meant to be a joke. Sorry you didn't get it.
Gotta chime in...
This thread is in part why I've taken a break from here and occasionally come
by to check PMs (folks still ask for advice)
Some very poor to dangerous advice on technology based questions or issues by
NON techie folks.
Most times the school of hard knocks did teach the advisors correctly or close
enough...but too often...way off base to argue against engineering principles
which are based on the world's "laws of physics" that we all live in
On designed in safety factor...there are many to anything as complex as automotive.
There are compounding that even some designers of 'that' part of the assembly
does NOT know of (from other components/assemblies within the whole)
Myopia and out of context is often too common here and other Internet freebie
forums
That is only part of 'why' you bounce back and forth between, as
it maybe or is between two different aspects that has their own dialed
in margins (safety factors and design spec)
I dropped out on my last straw thread...how tight should a tow ball
be tightened to. Simple and just a tow ball right?
Missed by the poor advice is that is a key component in the food chain
of towing
Advice from makes not matter...just use a pipe wrench...the designers
over design and that +400ft/lb torque spec is okay to ignor...gluing
on the nut...to just use a cotter pin to hold the nut without much
torque...
Pure danger to anyone who might listen and follow.
This thread is way above that 'torque on the tow ball' thread, as
that ball torque is just a component in the food chain of towing...but
it is a critical link of that food chain.
Again, technology to non technology savevy folks that argue the merits
of technically based advice
Ron has way more patience than I...as I've put this forum off for a
while and just cruise by occasionally...but had to comment on this one
He has put up with way more disingenuousness than I've been able to take
PS...Ron...thanks for the tidbit on your background...me too in an
ancillary way associated with offshore drilling !
Back in the late 70's partner in a small startup that was contracted
to automate the largest automated factory with the largest mobile
robots in the world for US Steel in Alabama...seamless pipe for off
shore drilling.
Learned seamed pipe bursts at those depths.
US Steel became USX during our installation and what mess that created
and found that their strategists missed by a few decades on off shore
drilling...
