Additional 2 cents from K9EL:
I REALLY suggest you spend the extra money and buy Rohn 45. Like Bill
says below, it is very nice to sleep at night when a major storm hits.
I decided on 45 over 15 years ago and have always rested easier. The
difference between the two is very significant, and if you keep the
tower up 10 years, the cost difference is minimal over that time period.
I have 70ft ROhn 45, TH7 at top, 15 ft mast with 2 el 40 10 ft up
on the mast, plus assorted VHF antennas.
By the way, I agree - get the Rohn book.
Good luck es 73
Bill W. Cox [AA4NU] wrote:
> > Question for the panel:
> > Heres what I would like to do with my tower project:
> > - Put up 80' 25g
> > - Guy it as a 60' tower (guy at 30' and 60')
> > - Leave the top 20' unguyed and use it as a mast
> > I want to phase two lightning bolt quads, one at 40' and the other
> > at 80'. The quad is about 6 sq ft in wind surface area.
> > Can anyone think of reason why I would not want to use the top 20'
> > of the tower as a mast. Seems to me it would be much stronger than a
> > conventional 2" chrome moly mast, plus I can climb it.
> > These will be the only two antenna's on the tower (a total of 12 square
> > feet). I'd like to put another 40 meter yagi on the tower (another 6 to
> > 7 square feet) but I think that would be pushing it. If the 40 meter
> > yagi goes up it would be installed at the 60' level a few inches above
> > the guy point.
> The 'thing' (or one of them) to watch is the total bending movment
> on the 25-g ... Rohn states something like 5400 ft-lbs MAX for 25g ?
> So a 10 sq ft antenna in a 30psi (70.7mph?-this may be wrong mph)
> mounted 10' up above the guys would be ...
> 10 (sq-ft) x 30 (psi) x 10' = 3000 ft-pounds ... or within
> the Rohn limit ...
> Here's where (other than using a too light mast) many "amateurs" like
> ME get into trouble ....
> Figure a TH7 (say 10 sq-ft) at 80' on a Rohn 25g guyed at the 35' (max)
> spacing for 25g. So it's guyed at 35' and 70' ... FB ... so far ...
> So the TH7's "bending movement" is 3000 ft-pounds ... OK so far ...
> Then Joe (the) Amateur decides he wants to be stronger on 40m ... Up
> goes a 2L 40m CC on top of the TH7 ... and everyone said space it at
> least 10' above the TH7 ...
> Now what do we have sitting out there in the yard ? Is it SAFE ?
> Let's see .... TH7 @ 80' =
> 10 sq ft x 30 psi x 10 ft above guy point = 3000 ft-pounds ...
> AND we must now ADD the CC 40m to this ... CC 40-2-CD @ 90' =
> 6.5 sq ft x 30 psi x 20 ft above the guy point = 3900 ft-pounds ...
> So the TH7's bending movement PLUS the CC 40m bending movement
> now equals a total of 6900 ft-pounds ... well beyond the Rohn
> rating of 5400 ... Yes I know that Rohn has a 'safety factor'...
> but why risk it ? I really like to sleep well at night and not
> have to put things up twice, or be sued IF/WHEN it fell, someone
> or something was hurt or damaged ... Do you want to risk it ?
> Add to the above the fact that most 'hams' don't use the correct
> mast for supporting the TH7/CC40-2 and the risks get higher ...
> As to using "tower for the mast", I seen several folks do that, seems
> CQ mag had an article by a "2-er" showing how to do it a few years
> back.... BUT again watch the bending movement ! Also the "weak spot"
> is whatever is used to HOLD the UPPER "tower mast" in place in the rotor.
> I've asked the locals here who are using "tower masts" the following:
> "Who welded it, and HOW STRONG IS IT ?"
> Answers were such as "He##, I welded it (which is enough to make you
> want to run AWAY from the tower, much less climb it...) and "Who the
> He$$ knows how strong it is, it "feels/looks" PLENTY strong for the job"
> I have yet to climb one or work on any of those towers using them for
> the fear of "the MTBF" occuring the DAY I am on it or near it !
> (MTBF=Mean Time Before Failure)
> The Rohn tower sections I trust, the "thing used to hold it in the rotor,
> I do NOT trust it ... Why should I ? Is it SAFE ? How do you KNOW ???
> BTW *** Always plan on the tower holding your "dream setup", as in WOW
> those 2L quads sure do play well ... Man-o-man (woman-o-woman - PCorrect)
> just think what a PAIR OF FOUR ELEMENTS 30' BOOM QUADS would do up
> on THAT TOWER ... see what I mean ? ... dream AND PLAN ahead NOW ...
> Perhaps you should INVEST in your future and go to 45g now ???
> IF you don't have a Rohn book, get one ... the Commercial one is about
> 2" thick and full of useful info, the other one is about 1" and still
> very useful. Mine are several years old now, but were used to make sure
> all the towers here were to Rohn's spec. That why I don't have to worry
> about them coming down, and IF they might. I can also show how they were
> installed to "Rohn specs", and *IMPORTANT*, I used ROHN turnbuckles and
> harware whereever I could, even if it meant abit more $, just to make
> sure there were no 'weak links' that could cause problems. Why build it
> to 'specs' and then try a save a few bucks by using CHEAP (read UNSAFE)
> hardware ? DO NOT CUT CORNERS WITH TOWER INSTALLATIONS !!!!!
> Well there's my 2.01 cents worth ... Get some paper out and doing some
> figuring on "what is going on out on the dream tower" before you start
> digging the 1st hole. I would on a large piece of graph paper, plot the
> guy points and also study the 'turning radius - out and UP and DOWN' on
> the quads to make sure the guys will clear it FB, again you might want
> to turn the lower quad 'someday' so the guys need to be placed out far
> enough to allow that option.
> Your project sounds worth doing. Using quads does add to the planning
> due to the spreaders going UP and DOWN and around the tower. But it
> can be done safely if you plan well ... I used quads for many years hr.
> When I went to add a 40m yagi, the quads came down because I could NOT
> find a SAFE method to have the 40m yagi stacked ABOVE the quad ... Do
> the 'bending movement math' and you will see why now ...
> 73 Bill AA4NU firstname.lastname@example.org