> > Thanks Frank.
> > I presume that this change is only of interest to those with GUYED
> > towers? I can see no reason to change from #4 solid copper wire, or
> > copper strap to copper clad steel ground rods if the tower is self
> > supporting.
> > The legs of my tower are certainly not corroding away to "pencil"
> > diameter.
> > Is there some other consideration that might apply to self supporting
> > towers?
> > 73 John K1ER
> > Problems: email@example.com
> ANSI/EIA/TIA-222-F applies to ALL steel towers, guyed or self
> supported. The issue is bi-metallic corrosion, not how thick the tower
> legs are.
> Always use what the experts recommend. In this case its the American
> National Standards Institute, the Electronic Industries Association and
> the Telecommunications Industry Association. Why someone would try to
> make assumptions and rationalizations which would put them and their
> installation at odds with these experts is beyond me...
> Bill, N3RR
During my 31+ years in the Navy, most of it in nuclear submarines, I've
certainly seen my share of bimetallic corrosion. However, when the steel
tower is above ground on a 40 ton concrete pad, and there is no corrosion
at the point where the copper is clamped to the steel, and no corrosion
on copper clad, steel 8 ft ground rods pulled up for inspection, and no
corrosion on the self supporting steel tower. (Yes it's easy to tilt and
check inside the legs.)
It appears to me much ado about nothing.
The corrosion along a steel rod in dissimilar soil types is very real,
but I think we are trying to apply the solution to that problem far too
I have seen far to many "Mil-Specs" that were wrongly applied to always
believe the "experts" particularly when the spec should be applied
narrowly not to all cases.
Thanks for the response.
73 John K1ER
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/towertalkfaq.html
Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com