Caldera Clone--how to make your own
I don't really want to spend the money for a Caldera Cone, especially since it's only good for one pot size. So I think I'll make my own.
Googling got me to a good paper pattern for cutting one out. See the thread here:
http://www.outdoorsmagic.com/forum/f...0/cp/1/v/8/sp/
There's a bit of computer homework involved, but it's not too hard. You can print out a paper pattern after you input the dimensions for your stove & pot. So far I haven't got a full size pattern printed yet--still have to deal with translating from European paper sizes to my printer. But that's part of the diy-ness of this project.
I plan to make what the pattern-program-writer calls a "Caldera Clone" for my old 2-qt pot and one for the AGG 3 cup pot I'm getting.
There's another method here:
http://www.hammockforums.net/forum/s...hlight=caldera
Have fun with them.
Doug
Computers!, I don't need no stinking Computers!
Also made a Caldera Cone over the weekend using the Youtube video.
Came out pretty well.
I work with computers during the week. It was nice to do it the old fashioned way.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VerP7...e=channel_page
I think this is the same link as on hammock forums mentioned above.
How strong does it need to be?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
zelph
It's the engineer in you;)
Indeed... ;-)
> Quick question for you, does a conical have more strength than a cylindrical pot/pan support equal to the largest outside diameter?
Quick answer: It depends...
Long answer:
A Clone is probably more stable, since the conic shape is hard to topple or deform by tipping. A simple cylinder tends to deform much more easily. Think of the cone as a 'round triangle', and then remember that the corners of a triangle cannot move, unlike the corners of a square object.
It terms of loading from the top, that's a tricky one. If you place a load on a Clone, since the sides are angled, it will cause an outward force, as well as a downward force. This may cause the Clone to open up, either by opening a mitre joint, or by tearing a tabbed joint. Even if this doesn't happen, the sides are likely to collapse eventually, since they're only thin foil, and there's only so much strength that the gently curved edge can provide.
If you place a similar load on the Squeezebox, you will only get a vertical loading, since its sides are only vertical. Those folded triangular sections make the sides rigid, and less likely to deform under load. On the other hand, the contact areas that support the pan are quite small, so these will probably collapse first. But, overall, I'd suggest that the SqueezeBox is stronger than a Clone in this respect.
Then there's the issue of side impacts. I'd suggest that a simple cylindrical windshield is weakest, since there's only a simple curve, then a Clone, being profiled in two directions, and finally, the Squeezebox, due to all those folded reinforcements.
However, both the Clone and the Squeezebox are more than strong enough to support a pan of water, and both are stable enough, too. A simple cylinder would have to be made of more robust material to provide equivalent support and stability, I think (stability comes partly from the shape and centre of gravity of the thing, and partly from the stiffness of the material used to make it). If I were trying to optimise the weight of the thing, I'd have to do some proper design analysis, or practical tests, but both items are light enough for me, and I don't like destruction testing things I've made; I prefer to use them instead...
Just don't stand on any of these things, or kick them about your campsite...