180kg on 18mm chipboard floor-castors?

[fraser]

Hi
I have just bought a Sedgwick PT255 for my shed. The shed consists of a tounge and groove floor, the one supplied by the shed company which I dont know how thick it is but guess it isnt that thick. I then screwed 1 x 1 rafters every 300mm apart, length and width wise then insulated in between these with polystyrene. On this is then 18mm t+g chipboard flooring.

Before buying the planer I did get 180kg of lead (equivalent to the planer) and placed it in roughly the area that the planer would take up, left it there for the afternoon, everything was fine. However I do really need to put the planer on castors as I am a bit pushed for space. I wondered whether anyone could advice on the weight on each castor and whether this will have any impact on the floor. I have asked a few people down here for advice but so far have only got 'only one way to find out' type answers. I would like to avoid replacing the floor if possible :lol:

Is this going to cause too much strain on the floor under each castor? (45kg on each) And does anyone have any other ideas on how to do this? I dont want to pay much more money for castors, I have some that would be suitable but if I have to then so be it. The base of the planer is actually quite small, about a third of the length of the planer, would it help to make a larger ply base or is this a waste of time?

Any help would be great

Thanks

 

[kostello]

i reckon it will be fine as long as your shed is on a firm base......

t+g chipboard will easily support 180kgs when supported on 400mm centres so as long as your shed floor is firmly supported

 

[fraser]

Thanks for the reply

The shed floor is on a concrete base with some rafters keeping it off the concrete. How many i can't remember, there are perhaps 6?

 

[fraser]

Thanks for the reply

The shed floor is on a concrete base with some rafters keeping it off the concrete. How many i can't remember, there are perhaps 6? Over 2.4m

 

[Phil Pascoe]

If you're worried about it, just lift it an inch , and stick a couple of boards under the casters to spread the weight.

 

[Noggsy]

I've just put my 150kg bandsaw on 4 x 75mm castors from Axi on an 18mm chipboard base. My floorboards are 22mm t and g and the castors are rated at 50 kg per wheel. No issues whatsoever with spreading the load (which I was obviously concerned about as well) or any noticable dipping in the floor at all, but there is some flex in the castors themselves, even after I re-made the base yesterday with lots of extra bracing.

If I was doing it again from scratch, I would go for the 100mm braked castors as they are more substantial again and give more load per wheel. They are a fiver per wheel and are rated at 70kgs each

http://www.axminster.co.uk/axminster-axminster-castors-and-wheels-prod23187/

Anyway, good luck with it.

 

[Carlow52]

Nice piece of kit

I would be inclinded to make the base a bit longer given the length of the tables as they are really designed to be bolted down.

I put my heavy stuff on 40 0r 50 mm work-top off-cuts and strengthen the longer sides with bed angle or similar.
I use the extra space on the base for boxed tools that I use infrequently such as angle grinders or kango hammers. The space is wasted anyway so why not use it.

I refer the hard nylon wheels to the ones shown above.

Depending on how you load the machine on the base you ned to ensure that the front 2 wheels dont take the full weight

 

[Benchwayze]

Hi Fraser,

If you don't mind two fixed wheels and two swivelling wheels, I have a set of 4" diameter castors specially rated for my Sedgwick 12" planer Thicknesser. When I bought them I thought there were four swivelling castors! You are welcome to them for a few beer tokens and postage cost.

Just PM me if you are interested.
.

 

[fraser]

Hi John

I have already ordered the castors I'm afraid, I will keep it in mind for future stuff if thats OK. Thanks for the offer though..

Carlow, what sort of bed angle do you use? And how do you mean make sure the weight is not all on the front? The base doesnt look too big, I assumed it would be pretty even front to back.

Noggsy, cheers for the heads up, made me feel a bit more confident about it! Although the machine is heavier and the floor thinner than yours! Fingers crossed

 

[Benchwayze]

NP Fraser.

They aren't going anywhere!

 

[Carlow52]

the old metal bed frames had a very strong and light angle 50 mm by 50 mm or so on them. most are drilled at say 150 mm centres for the spring bases. The earlier ones I have from the 1950's are 'hardened' so I don't try and increase the hole size, just use high tensile bolts and a big washer or flat on the other side.
I like the bed angle as its very strong and has little or no radius in the corner

I also have the racking angles shown herehttp://www.google.ie/search?q="shel...l=en&lr=&cr=&safe=images&um=1&tbm=isch&tab=wi

but the wide radius makes a snug finish more difficult.

The key to getting any machine up on a base is not to strain the table(s).

With the planer the temptation is to get two lads to grab it by the tables and lift it up and slide base in underneath. This may strain the tables.

I have a heavy duty sack truck so if I were doing ur planer I would shove it in under the planer from the 'back' side and strap the planer onto the trolly with a proper ratchet tie down, padded as required.

I have a home made ramp which looks like a car ramp http://www.google.ie/search?q="car+...9_mvQ&oq="car+ramps"&aq=f&aqi=g6g-m3g-S1&aql=

And I would push the planer up the ramp, which is the same height as the wheeled base.

The wheel based is held against the ramp and the planer is just eased down onto it.

I did a 200 kg band-saw recently and I used a manual tifor-type winch to ease the sack truck up the ramp.

I normally have at least 2 people around to help but there is no real grunt work so no strained backs etc.

taking it handy is the key.

 

[fraser]

Thanks very much for all the help
How would you get it off a pallet without picking up by the tables? I have no sack truck unfortunately
Also, I take the point about making the base longer, but surely it shouldn't be too long as all the weight will be in the middle, with less support from the wheels? The base is 400 x 500 (wxd). Am thinking about gluing two 19mm pieces together for the base, then using single 19mm ply for the ramps
I will try to look out some angle but pushed for time to order stuff now.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

sorry to irritate - they are casters, not castors.

 

[Teckel]

sorry to irritate - they are casters, not castors.

Sorry to irritate you but it can also be castor aswell as caster

 

[Benchwayze]

Phil.

Encarta English Dictionary

Castor; the name of a star in the constellation of Gemini (The Twins)

castor; a small wheel under furniture.

When you correct spelling and you are right, it will irritate, but will be accepted; probably.
When you correct spelling and YOU are wrong then it annoys.
If you must correct members on their spelling, have a go at those who insist on using

'planning' for planing.
'makeing' for making
'takeing' for taking
there for their
and 'you're' for your.

I've seen them all on the various fora. I say nothing, because to correct them personally would be crass.
So, if you ever feel the need again, please check your facts; and engage the mind before you put fingers to keyboard.
I hope I speak for most people here.

BTW in the Midlands, a 'caster' is a type of maggot (or a type of feeder) beloved of anglers. Except in the USA of course, where it is a small 'swiveling' (Swivelling) wheel. :wink:

 

[Teckel]

Phil.

Encarta English Dictionary

Castor; the name of a star in the constellation of Gemini (The Twins)

castor; a small wheel under furniture.

When you correct spelling and you are right, it will irritate, but will be accepted; probably.
When you correct spelling and YOU are wrong then it annoys.
If you must correct members on their spelling, have a go at those who insist on using

'planning' for planing.
'makeing' for making
'takeing' for taking
there for their
and 'you're' for your.

I've seen them all on the various fora. I say nothing, because to correct them personally would be crass.
So, if you ever feel the need again, please check your facts; and engage the mind before you put fingers to keyboard.
I hope I speak for most people here.

BTW a 'caster' is a type of maggot beloved of anglers. Except in the USA of course, where it is a small 'swiveling' (Swivelling) wheel. :wink:

I'm with you on this one.
We should all be singing from the one hyme sheet not questioning another's intelligence.

 

[Benchwayze]

Well Tek,

I'm not certain it was directed at me, but in this thread, I think I used the word castor first.

Having said that, the American caster can be used I suppose, and there are those who say English words (meaning and spelling) are altered by common acceptance in every-day usage.

However, when you've spent 65 years or more using 'olde-worlde' English, it grates a little when writers and speakers use non-words like 'incentivize', .when they could say encourage. Even the spell-checker underlines incentivise and incentivize :shock:

 

[nanscombe]

In the past, I have wondered about the weight of furniture being too heavy to go on a floor but I then thought about something else...

When I stand on the same floor I am a 13 stone (82.5 Kg) person spreading my weight over the area of my two feet, 42Kg over an area of roughly 30cm x 12 cm. If I stand on tip-toe that 42Kg over 8cm x 12cm. I haven't crashed through any floors .... yet.

And how about when you stand on a chair?

It doesn't sound so bad when you think of it that way.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

My appologies. The O.E.D. gives castor. No doubt I won't resist the temptation to open my mouth again sometime in the future!

 

[Benchwayze]

As long as you leeve me aloane Phil! :lol: