[Top] [All Lists]

[TowerTalk] An Engineering Question

To: <>
Subject: [TowerTalk] An Engineering Question
From: (Rick Mainhart)
Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 13:37:02 EDT
I maintained an 80' guyed tower used for an MF radio beacon in Rochester
NY, and it had a similar problem ... the third set of guys wanted to be
in the middle of the parking lot!

The solution was an I-beam set just off the parking lot. This I-beam was
approximately 12" x 12" (flange width x flange to flange distance) and
was approximately 15 feet tall. The guy angle was the same for the two
conventional ground anchored guys.

This may have been classic overkill, but the tower survived until it was
replaced with a 48' fiberglass whip (the beacon requirements went from a
100 mile sequenced to a 20 mile continuous beacon, thus the required
field strength reduction allowed a minimal maintenance antenna to replace
the higher maintenance tower).

Sounds like the best overall answer ... no lawyers required (real-estate
deals can be a pain), no liability for the horses (unless they jump their
fence and come visit you ... but that's another issue). The one-time cost
of boring a hole, and buying and setting a steel beam or tube is pretty
easy to calculate. 

Don't like that idea?  Take a good look at how the power company guys
poles in restricted areas:                      ||\     
                        ||  \   
                        ||    \
                        ||      \
                        ||       |
                        ||       |

Yes, the ascii-art is lousy ... and not to scale, but the idea still

Hope this helps ... and by all means, engineer the solution, don't wish
or guess it.


Rick, WB3EXR

On Wed, 28 May 1997 00:13:01 -0400 (EDT) writes:
>In a message dated 97-05-27 23:22:52 EDT, (Roger) 
>> Just for the sake of discussion, what if you took a 12 foot piece of
>>  4" pipe,  buried it 4 foot in Cement and then guyed to the top of
>>  the pipe, you would still have basically the same angle.
>>   I have basically the same situation to contend with, that is my 
>>  for asking, I need the info, do we also have the strength if we 
>>  the same angle as before?
>     Yes, the angle is about the same so you do reduce the length of 
>the guy.
>      Big cautions: 1) the 4 inch pipe isn't big enough for your 
>elevated guy and 2) it should probably be back-guyed for maximum 
>73,  Steve  K7LXC
>FAQ on WWW:     
>Administrative requests:

FAQ on WWW:     
Administrative requests:

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>