Mail Archive Search: <+from:k1mk@arrl.net>

Results:

References: [ +from:k1mk@arrl.net: 8 ]

Total 8 documents matching your query.

1. [Towertalk] limitations of stacking (score: 1): Author: k1mk@arrl.net (Michael Keane, K1MK); Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2002 15:59:31 -0500; +3 dB is the maximum array factor for a two element array: the max gain over a single array element that can be realized for an array of two identical, non-interacting radiators having uniform excita; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-03/msg00605.html (10,751 bytes)
2. [Towertalk] Wind pressure calculations (2/3 factor) (score: 1): Author: k1mk@arrl.net (Michael Keane, K1MK); Date: 27 Feb 2002 10:43:03 -0800; No. Part of the reason is there is no really "simple" answer is that at least two "correct" ways exist for answering the question: a pure "physics" answer and an applied "engineering" answer. Either; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-02/msg00659.html (9,981 bytes)
3. [Towertalk] Wind pressure calculations (2/3 factor) (score: 1): Author: k1mk@arrl.net (Michael Keane, K1MK); Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 21:30:30 -0500; Another thing that may not be so obvious is that one should only be using the RS 222-C coefficients (2/3 & 0.004) with basic wind speeds read from a RS 222-C wind zone map, not with basic wind speed; /archives//html/Towertalk/2002-02/msg00671.html (8,387 bytes)
4. [TowerTalk] 4 Square question (score: 1): Author: k1mk@arrl.net (Michael Keane, K1MK); Date: 1 Nov 2001 06:10:33 -0800; Assuming a goal is to match the vertical's feed-point impedance of 30-something ohms to 50 ohms, those two methods don't sound to be equivalent to me. In fact the second method sounds backwards. Odd; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-11/msg00009.html (8,464 bytes)
5. [TowerTalk] 4 Square question (score: 1): Author: k1mk@arrl.net (Michael Keane, K1MK); Date: 1 Nov 2001 07:23:12 -0800; Duhhhhh! Chad's right of course. The 1/4 wave transformers are there to boost the impedance of the individual elements up to something in the vicinity of 200 ohms so that when all four elements are f; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-11/msg00010.html (7,930 bytes)
6. [TowerTalk] Paranoid vs. Overkill (score: 1): Author: k1mk@arrl.net (Michael Keane, K1MK); Date: 11 Sep 2001 05:24:19 -0700; The EIA-222 standard & the Rohn specs are for wind zones that are designated by the speed of the fastest mile of wind at 10 meter height having a 50-year return period on average. The force that resu; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-09/msg00396.html (9,000 bytes)
7. [TowerTalk] guyed tower reference? (score: 1): Author: k1mk@arrl.net (Michael Keane, K1MK); Date: 6 Aug 2001 08:48:42 -0700; Hi Len, A couple of comments: 1) Here is a reference to a study of tower failures due to icing which is one of the common causes for tower failure here in the northeast (and elsewhere): Atmospheric I; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-08/msg00105.html (12,343 bytes)
8. [TowerTalk] thoughts aboutproperty layout (score: 1): Author: k1mk@arrl.net (Michael Keane, K1MK); Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 00:13:08 -0400; That depends on the locality, of course. As a general point of reference the BOCA Model Code (this is the basis for the building codes in most states in New England, Mid-Atlantic & Mid-West (roughly; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-05/msg00621.html (9,471 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 8
Page: [1]