Railway Sleeprs

[David Sim]

Morning all

I'm building a part raised pond - 9' x 6' - hole is dug to 4' & I'm planning
on raising the dges by another 20" or so using railway sleepers. I think new
ones will be better, cleaner & easier to use, but does anyone have any
thoughts on securing them to the ground.

Will a frame of sleepers secured with heavy duty brackets be strong enough
to hold the additional 20" of water?

Cheers

[Andy]

David Sim wrote:
> Morning all
>
> I'm building a part raised pond - 9' x 6' - hole is dug to 4' & I'm planning
> on raising the dges by another 20" or so using railway sleepers. I think new
> ones will be better, cleaner & easier to use, but does anyone have any
> thoughts on securing them to the ground.
>
> Will a frame of sleepers secured with heavy duty brackets be strong enough
> to hold the additional 20" of water?

The sleepers own weight will be more than enough. The water's weight
goes down, not out. My own (8x6x3) pond is 50% above ground and the
frame was made from lengths of 2x2" wood with uprights at 2ft intervals.
I then tacked some thick wire mesh over the inside to add support in
the spaces. Finally I put 1" thick polystyrene insulating sheets all
around the side which was held in place with thick plastic sheeting
stapled to the frame. Strength wise it must be a fraction of the
sleepers but is plenty solid. The outside was "decorated" with fence panels.

--
Andy

[RichToyBox]

If the sleepers are treated wood, with creosote or salt treated, it would
be a good idea to make sue that no runoff from the sleepers can enter the
pond. Wrap the liner over the top.
--
RichToyBox
http://www.geocities.com/richtoybox/pondintro.html

"David Sim" > wrote in message
...
> Morning all
>
> I'm building a part raised pond - 9' x 6' - hole is dug to 4' & I'm
> planning on raising the dges by another 20" or so using railway sleepers.
> I think new ones will be better, cleaner & easier to use, but does anyone
> have any thoughts on securing them to the ground.
>
> Will a frame of sleepers secured with heavy duty brackets be strong enough
> to hold the additional 20" of water?
>
> Cheers
>
>
>

[Disciple]

On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 10:11:06 +0100, David Sim wrote:

> Morning all
>
> I'm building a part raised pond - 9' x 6' - hole is dug to 4' & I'm planning
> on raising the dges by another 20" or so using railway sleepers. I think new
> ones will be better, cleaner & easier to use, but does anyone have any
> thoughts on securing them to the ground.

<snipped - for full text see David's post above>

Like Andy said their weight will pretty much hold them. However if you
really want to make sure they do not shift in any direction go to your
local building/concrete supply store and pick up some rebar, what is used
in poured concrete walls to add strength. The length should extend into the
ground probably the height of the above ground wall, in your case and words
"20" or so". Drill an equal size hole in the sleeper and pound it through.
I would suggest one in each corner where one side over laps the other sides
previous course, this will give the corners added stability. As for the
runs along each side, do what you are comfortable with or ask the people
where you are getting the sleepers.

--
Disciple - Team Z
If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit. Gal.5:25

[Paul]

Disciple wrote:
> On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 10:11:06 +0100, David Sim wrote:
>
>
>>Morning all
>>
>>I'm building a part raised pond - 9' x 6' - hole is dug to 4' & I'm planning
>>on raising the dges by another 20" or so using railway sleepers. I think new
>>ones will be better, cleaner & easier to use, but does anyone have any
>>thoughts on securing them to the ground.
>
>
> <snipped - for full text see David's post above>
>
> Like Andy said their weight will pretty much hold them. However if you
> really want to make sure they do not shift in any direction go to your
> local building/concrete supply store and pick up some rebar, what is used
> in poured concrete walls to add strength. The length should extend into the
> ground probably the height of the above ground wall, in your case and words
> "20" or so". Drill an equal size hole in the sleeper and pound it through.
> I would suggest one in each corner where one side over laps the other sides
> previous course, this will give the corners added stability. As for the
> runs along each side, do what you are comfortable with or ask the people
> where you are getting the sleepers.
>

I have just finished drilling mine :) I am using coach bolts to join at
the corners and then a long rebar stake half way down each side. I have
new sleepers so they were not to bad to drill using a standard spade bit
and 300mm extention bar.

Paul

[mark Bannister]

Y'all keep in mind that creosote is some very nasty stuff. Like
RichToyBox said make sure no run off can reach the pond. Never use
these things around vegetable gardens.
Mark B.

[Paul]

mark Bannister wrote:
> Y'all keep in mind that creosote is some very nasty stuff. Like
> RichToyBox said make sure no run off can reach the pond. Never use
> these things around vegetable gardens.
> Mark B.
New sleepers are tanalised. Still not good for you pond but a lot less
sticky.

Paul

[Reel Mckoi]

"Paul" > wrote in message
...
> I have just finished drilling mine :) I am using coach bolts to join at
> the corners and then a long rebar stake half way down each side. I have
> new sleepers so they were not to bad to drill using a standard spade bit
> and 300mm extention bar.
====================
Creosote is not something you want to breathe! Use CAUTION and some kind of
respirator (you can get them at Lowe's or HomeDepot). Avoid the sawdust
getting on your skin. Wash your clothes when you're finished drilling.
--
McKoi.... the frugal ponder...
EVERYONE: "Please check people's headers for forgeries
before flushing." NAMES ARE BEING FORGED.
My Pond Page http://tinyurl.com/cuq5b
~~~ }<((((o> ~~~ }<{{{{o> ~~~ }<(((((o>

[Derek Broughton]

Andy wrote:

> David Sim wrote:
>>
>> Will a frame of sleepers secured with heavy duty brackets be strong
>> enough to hold the additional 20" of water?
>
> The sleepers own weight will be more than enough.

I wouldn't think so, but...

> The water's weight goes down, not out.

What makes you think that? It's not true. The lateral force is exactly how
these new self-supporting above-ground swimming pools get their stability.
However, the greatest lateral force is at the bottom of that above-ground
section, so maybe it'll work.

> My own (8x6x3) pond is 50% above ground and the
> frame was made from lengths of 2x2" wood with uprights at 2ft intervals.
> I then tacked some thick wire mesh over the inside to add support in
> the spaces
....

David's idea is definitely more sound than yours, so I guess it'll work :-)
--
derek

[Andy]

Derek Broughton wrote:

> What makes you think that? It's not true. The lateral force is exactly how
> these new self-supporting above-ground swimming pools get their stability.
> However, the greatest lateral force is at the bottom of that above-ground
> section, so maybe it'll work.

But the lateral force works in all directions at the same time, which is
why the swimming pools are stable. The lateral force of water at 1 foot
deep is 0.433 psi. Assuming the frame and joints are secure and can cope
with the low psi then the force in one direction is canceled by the same
force in the opposite direction. The lateral force becomes stable,
leaving only the downward force of gravity that needs real support.

--
Andy

[Derek Broughton]

Andy wrote:

> Derek Broughton wrote:
>
>> What makes you think that? It's not true. The lateral force is exactly
>> how these new self-supporting above-ground swimming pools get their
>> stability. However, the greatest lateral force is at the bottom of that
>> above-ground section, so maybe it'll work.
>
> But the lateral force works in all directions at the same time, which is
> why the swimming pools are stable. The lateral force of water at 1 foot
> deep is 0.433 psi. Assuming the frame and joints are secure and can cope
> with the low psi then the force in one direction is canceled by the same
> force in the opposite direction.

That's the big assumption though - the joints are the least stable part,
especially when working with things like railway ties.

Here I start delving into math I haven't used in 30 years... Assuming a
railway tie is 8' x 8", and you want 2' above-ground (3 ties), then (I
think) the lateral force on the top tie is going to be somewhere around 12
pounds. The force on the one below that is higher, but it's also braced by
the weight of the tie above it. I guess 12 pounds isn't nearly enough to
move a tie, except at glacial speed (and if it's a shorter tie, the force
is correspondingly less), but I still think you want to be really careful
about those joints.
--
derek

[Andy]

Derek Broughton wrote:

> the weight of the tie above it. I guess 12 pounds isn't nearly enough to
> move a tie, except at glacial speed (and if it's a shorter tie, the force

No, especically as the ligthest sleepers weigh in at around 120 pounds
and can be more than double that. The lateral force would need to be
even greater to move when friction is taken into consideration. Which
comes back to where I started, the weight of the sleepers alone is
sufficient to make it a non-issue.

--
Andy

[Disciple]

On Wed, 03 Aug 2005 19:05:55 +0100, Andy wrote:

> Derek Broughton wrote:
>
>> the weight of the tie above it. I guess 12 pounds isn't nearly enough to
>> move a tie, except at glacial speed (and if it's a shorter tie, the force
>
> No, especically as the ligthest sleepers weigh in at around 120 pounds
> and can be more than double that. The lateral force would need to be
> even greater to move when friction is taken into consideration. Which
> comes back to where I started, the weight of the sleepers alone is
> sufficient to make it a non-issue.

What about the effect of the natural vibration of the Earth? Even though it
is minimal, except in California :), it is a constant force/movement that
has to be considered. Granted the surface friction would be higher
initially but over time wouldn't that decrease due to wood deterioration
and said vibration/movement?
--
Disciple - Team Z
Thus says the Lord God; "Woe to the foolish prophets, who follow their own
spirit and have seen nothing." Ez. 13:3

[David Sim]

Thanks for all the advice chaps - It looks like although opinions are
divided it's worth a go, so..... I'll build the pond & let you know the
results...... I hadn't taken into account Glacial movement or earth
friction - I was more worried about the (hopefully) large Mirrors & Leathers
being strong enough to nudge the sides !!!!

Thanks again

David

"David Sim" > wrote in message
...
> Morning all
>
> I'm building a part raised pond - 9' x 6' - hole is dug to 4' & I'm
> planning on raising the dges by another 20" or so using railway sleepers.
> I think new ones will be better, cleaner & easier to use, but does anyone
> have any thoughts on securing them to the ground.
>
> Will a frame of sleepers secured with heavy duty brackets be strong enough
> to hold the additional 20" of water?
>
> Cheers
>
>
>

[PlainBill]

Just to throw some numbers on this discussion, using the 8" x 8" x 8'
dimensions for a sleeeper, at the 20" depth there will be 3/4 psi of
STATIC pressure on the side of the sleeper. The AVERAGE pressure on
the bottom sleeper will be 5/8 psi, I'm going to round off to .6 psi.
The TOTAL pressure on the side of the sleeper will be .6 x 8" x 96" or
460 lbs!!! This is NOT a trivial pressure as others have claimed.
Use good, sturdy brackets, and some buttressing wouldn't hurt.

I see two potential problems: There is going to be a lot of water
around, and moisture will collect between the sleepers. Yes, they are
treated, but if any organisms grow in that water you COULD have
problems. In a few years you might have something which closely
resembles two greased pigs stacked upon one another.

The other is more mundane, and may not apply. Are you in an area
where freezing occurs?

PlainBill

On Wed, 3 Aug 2005 21:26:42 +0100, "David Sim"
> wrote:

>Thanks for all the advice chaps - It looks like although opinions are
>divided it's worth a go, so..... I'll build the pond & let you know the
>results...... I hadn't taken into account Glacial movement or earth
>friction - I was more worried about the (hopefully) large Mirrors & Leathers
>being strong enough to nudge the sides !!!!
>
>Thanks again
>
>David
>
>"David Sim" > wrote in message
...
>> Morning all
>>
>> I'm building a part raised pond - 9' x 6' - hole is dug to 4' & I'm
>> planning on raising the dges by another 20" or so using railway sleepers.
>> I think new ones will be better, cleaner & easier to use, but does anyone
>> have any thoughts on securing them to the ground.
>>
>> Will a frame of sleepers secured with heavy duty brackets be strong enough
>> to hold the additional 20" of water?
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>>
>>
>

[David Sim]

Not serious freezing - central southern England - minus 2 - 3 degrees

"PlainBill" > wrote in message
...
> Just to throw some numbers on this discussion, using the 8" x 8" x 8'
> dimensions for a sleeeper, at the 20" depth there will be 3/4 psi of
> STATIC pressure on the side of the sleeper. The AVERAGE pressure on
> the bottom sleeper will be 5/8 psi, I'm going to round off to .6 psi.
> The TOTAL pressure on the side of the sleeper will be .6 x 8" x 96" or
> 460 lbs!!! This is NOT a trivial pressure as others have claimed.
> Use good, sturdy brackets, and some buttressing wouldn't hurt.
>
> I see two potential problems: There is going to be a lot of water
> around, and moisture will collect between the sleepers. Yes, they are
> treated, but if any organisms grow in that water you COULD have
> problems. In a few years you might have something which closely
> resembles two greased pigs stacked upon one another.
>
> The other is more mundane, and may not apply. Are you in an area
> where freezing occurs?
>
> PlainBill
>
> On Wed, 3 Aug 2005 21:26:42 +0100, "David Sim"
> > wrote:
>
>>Thanks for all the advice chaps - It looks like although opinions are
>>divided it's worth a go, so..... I'll build the pond & let you know the
>>results...... I hadn't taken into account Glacial movement or earth
>>friction - I was more worried about the (hopefully) large Mirrors &
>>Leathers
>>being strong enough to nudge the sides !!!!
>>
>>Thanks again
>>
>>David
>>
>>"David Sim" > wrote in message
...
>>> Morning all
>>>
>>> I'm building a part raised pond - 9' x 6' - hole is dug to 4' & I'm
>>> planning on raising the dges by another 20" or so using railway
>>> sleepers.
>>> I think new ones will be better, cleaner & easier to use, but does
>>> anyone
>>> have any thoughts on securing them to the ground.
>>>
>>> Will a frame of sleepers secured with heavy duty brackets be strong
>>> enough
>>> to hold the additional 20" of water?
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>