Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+FW\:\s+5000\s+psi\s+vs\s+3500\s+psi\s+concrete\?\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+FW\:\s+5000\s+psi\s+vs\s+3500\s+psi\s+concrete\?\s*$/: 2 ]

Total 2 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] FW: 5000 psi vs 3500 psi concrete? (score: 1): Author: "KM5VI" <km5vi@flukey.cc>; Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 23:13:21 -0500; Hans is right, if the design calls for 5000 psi then it should be adhered to. Crank-up tower foundations function more as ballast (to prevent overturning) than as structural columns. Because of the m; /archives//html/Towertalk/2012-09/msg00396.html (9,578 bytes)
2. Re: [TowerTalk] FW: 5000 psi vs 3500 psi concrete? (score: 1): Author: David Gilbert <xdavid@cis-broadband.com>; Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 22:41:16 -0700; I suspect that the use of 5,000 psi versus the more typical 3,500 psi concrete wouldn't have a huge effect on the reliability of the final installation for such a large foundation, but it's a risk no; /archives//html/Towertalk/2012-09/msg00398.html (11,866 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 2
Page: [1]