Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Re\:\s+Tower\s+Question\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Re\:\s+Tower\s+Question\s*$/: 8 ]

Total 8 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] Re: Tower Question (score: 1): Author: K7LXC@aol.com (K7LXC@aol.com); Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 22:52:24 -0400 (EDT); top 100' tower and antenna Hi, Ken -- I'm posting your quiery to TowerTalk as you are asking some questions with not so obvious answers. First of all, the drawings in the Rohn catalog for 45G and 55G; /archives//html/Towertalk/1997-08/msg00248.html (10,438 bytes)
2. [TowerTalk] Re: Tower Question (score: 1): Author: w2up@itw.com (Barry Kutner); Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 09:25:52 +0000; I always wondered why they didn't have the top guys at the top. But... Does it make more sense to have the top guys near your rotor, to minimize the torquing (is that a word?) of the tower? For examp; /archives//html/Towertalk/1997-08/msg00254.html (8,601 bytes)
3. [TowerTalk] Re: Tower Question (score: 1): Author: K7LXC@aol.com (K7LXC@aol.com); Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 10:10:03 -0400 (EDT); Good question. Since I'm not an engineer, I don't have an answer to that. TowerTalkians? 73, Steve K7LXC -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/towertalkfaq.html Submissions: towertalk@contesting.c; /archives//html/Towertalk/1997-08/msg00256.html (7,966 bytes)
4. [TowerTalk] Re: Tower Question (score: 1): Author: k6ll@juno.com (David O. Hachadorian); Date: Thu, 07 Aug 1997 14:17:41 EDT; I think you're better off putting the guy wires as close to the antennas as possible. Normal three way guying doesn't do much to resist twist anyway, since twist is at right angles to the guy wire, a; /archives//html/Towertalk/1997-08/msg00262.html (9,966 bytes)
5. [TowerTalk] Re: Tower Question (score: 1): Author: w2up@itw.com (Barry Kutner); Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 19:35:31 +0000; Dave - I'm not sure you're correct: mast is not movable in the Y and Z planes as it is pinned at the thrust bearing and the rotor itself (short of extraordinary force moving it vertically, shearing b; /archives//html/Towertalk/1997-08/msg00270.html (10,468 bytes)
6. [TowerTalk] Re: Tower Question (score: 1): Author: CQK8DO@aol.com (CQK8DO@aol.com); Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 17:56:19 -0400 (EDT); The greatest loads that the tower will see are the overturning moments from wind... (We had a recorded 93mph gust in a thunderstorm 3 weeks ago) ... Therefore, you always put the top guy attachment p; /archives//html/Towertalk/1997-08/msg00279.html (7,912 bytes)
7. [TowerTalk] Re: Tower Question (score: 1): Author: k4zw@staffnet.com (Claerbout, Ken); Date: Thu, 07 Aug 97 15:09:15 PDT; It dawned on me last night as I was mowing the lawn that I could probably go with the guying dimensions for 110' tower since that is what I would have in effect. The top guy could be moved down from; /archives//html/Towertalk/1997-08/msg00284.html (8,602 bytes)
8. [TowerTalk] Re: Tower Question (score: 1): Author: donovanf@sgate.com (Frank Donovan); Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 21:24:12 -0400 (EDT); Ken, Yes, your proposed approach will work, but a few additional points to consider: - Pipe is a very non-cost effective structural shape for this application! You would be much better off to find a; /archives//html/Towertalk/1997-08/msg00289.html (9,584 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 8
Page: [1]