On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 20:28:21 GMT, "Tom G"
wrote:


"Mark Lloyd" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 07:24:47 -0500, Nick Hull wrote:

In article ,
Mark Lloyd wrote:

On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 12:47:37 -0500, Nick Hull wrote:

In article xOnoi.79$9A6.12@trnddc01,
"dadiOH" wrote:



Any particular reason why you mentioned only 2 or the FOUR corners?

That flat spot would either block rotation of waste space itself.

I would imagine that the shelves are half shelves and rotate only 90
degrees each, thus the front corners could go all of the ay to the corner
where they meet the door shelves. I think that is the way General Electric
made a refrigerator back in the 50s or 60s. I only saw one once.

Tom G.


I think I follow that (a diagram would have really helped). So, the
shelf can rotate only with the door open?

Considering the interior of my refrigerator, 29*16=464 inches:

Largest full-circle shelf: 8*8*pi=201 square inches. 43.3%

Largest half-circle shelf: (14.5*14.5*pi)/2=330 square inches. 71.1%

The half-circle has some space advantage over the full circle, but is
still wasteful.

BTW, the depth figure here is deducting 6 inches for the door shelves
and 1.5 inches for the rear shelf supports.

BTW, the way I figured the half-shelf width is the lesser of the width
of the refrigerator's interior or twice the depth.
--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"Properly read, the Bible is the most potent
force for atheism ever conceived." -- Isaac Asimov