[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] Q on guyed rotating towers

Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Q on guyed rotating towers
From: K4SAV <>
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 12:13:28 -0600
List-post: <">>
I guess I didn't follow the explaination.  Why would there not be a 
difference in torsional loading between a tower constrained only at the 
bottom versus one constrained at both the top and bottom?

Jerry, K4SAV wrote:

>Comments bottom-postedFrom: "Arthur Trampler" <>Subject: 
>[TowerTalk] Q on guyed rotating towers<snip>From what I understand part of the 
>strength of a guyed tower is that torsional movement is converted into down 
>force by the guy wires tightening as they attempt to cover a greater distance 
>(as the tower twists).With a rotating guyed tower, is there some sort of 
>locking mechanism between the bearings and tower, at least in a given "parked" 
>position to allow this phenomenon to occur?  Otherwise it would seem that this 
>benefit is lost as the guys are not attached to the tower, but to the bearing 
>rings.Help me out...maybe the difference in strength is inconsequential or 
>mitigated by other factors.Art, K?RO-0-The strength of the tower is the 
>strength of the tower, based on the materials and design.  LOADING on the 
>tower comes from mass and surface area, as the wind works on the structure.   
>Loads are transferred into vertical compression by the guy system.  Torsio
 nal loading on a triangular tower indeed does add to the down force somewhat, 
but this is quite small compared to the other loads.   Thus, a tower which 
rotates inside a ring-coupled guy system is simply relieved of whatever torsion 
loading might otherwise be imposed upon it.   It is neither stronger nor weaker 
as a result.Make sense?n2ea
>TowerTalk mailing list


TowerTalk mailing list

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