Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Coop & Run - Design, Construction, & Maintenance' started by Victoria-nola, Jul 12, 2016.
Well, the livestock panels are 16' long.......
....... my hoop coop is about 75" tall at the top of curve and about 81" wide at the bottom.
I chose a narrower base width to attain the head clearance.....
...... was going to go 96" wide at base giving a 68" height, which was fine for me at 5-5, but a little short for a 6' buddy.
Oh, sorry, yes, we were able to get 72" tall on our current temporary hoop coop with about 88" width. We want to make the new permanent coop with a total ceiling height of 9 or 10' to make the guineas happy, but cross-tie supports on the curved ceiling could be as low as 72" and still allow both us humans-in-charge access. Does that make it clearer?
Hope this makes sense, and you can read the numbers...ignore decimal, cad set for machining numbers.
Wow, THANK YOU. Yes, it totally makes sense. Decimals are no problem. So I'm reading the width of the coop at 84", right?
I used an ellipse calculator http://endmemo.com/geometry/ellipse.php (semi-major axis 9, semi-minor axis of 5.19; target circumference 32) to check what width we'd get if we went with a 9' ceiling instead of 10'. I think that would yield a 10.38 feet width for the coop. It makes complete sense to stay with the 16' length to conform with a single cattle panel to each long side, and your original size would yield both the short sides out of a single panel which is incredibly cost effective, but the difference in the square footage is significant and probably worth the extra panel it would require.
If my math is correct, a 10' ceiling would yield 112sf and the 9' would yield 166sf. At 4sf recommended allowance per guinea, that would be 28 vs. 41 birds allowable. We have 25 keets now, and we hope the flock is self-sustaining so we'd like to have comfortable room for it to grow a bit without having to rebuild or having birds move out/fight over space issues.
Would there be other issues that would make the 9' a poor choice? It would require more hardware cloth, for sure.
Yes, base width is 84......sorry, I forgot that dimension.
I laid out a 10.38'(172") base width and I'm not sure you can bend a panel into that shallow of curve and still support a flat against the tposts without making an actual bend to the panel ends....but it would probably work without a bend/flat.
You don't have to worry about snow load in Mississippi and you're already going to need some 'trusses'(cross tie and braces).
No, you put the dimension on there, I just wasn't completely certain that the marking meant the width.
I think you're correct that the 10.38' width would be too shallow a curve. Talked it over with husb and we think going with your original conception would be the best choice-- economical and efficient. If we need to expand it in future conceivably we could actually just lengthen it at that point.
How do you envision the connectivity between the arch and the base, and how would the trusses be constructed?