Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+bonding\s+to\s+Rohn\s+tower\s*$/: 14 ]

Total 14 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] bonding to Rohn tower (score: 1)
Author: "Pete Stark K4OM" <pstark@suddenlink.net>
Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2009 17:21:11 -0400
What is the best way to bond grounding conductors to Rohn 25,45,or 55? I am ok with cadweld for the rods etc but is cadweld the answer for bonding to the tower section? Pete K4OM pstark@suddenlink.ne
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-08/msg00002.html (6,636 bytes)

2. Re: [TowerTalk] bonding to Rohn tower (score: 1)
Author: John Kemker <john@kemker.org>
Date: Sat, 01 Aug 2009 18:19:14 -0400
Polyphaser has stainless steel hose clamps that have a section that fits underneath the ground strap/wire/braid and protects from bimetallic corrosion. (not the exact term for it, I know, but I can't
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-08/msg00003.html (8,371 bytes)

3. Re: [TowerTalk] bonding to Rohn tower (score: 1)
Author: jimlux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Sat, 01 Aug 2009 16:39:31 -0700
Then why not use what most people use for lightning grounds: stranded or solid copper wire/cable. There's already plenty of inductance in the whole tower, so adding a fraction of a microhenry by goin
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-08/msg00004.html (10,174 bytes)

4. Re: [TowerTalk] bonding to Rohn tower (score: 1)
Author: K7LXC@aol.com
Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2009 16:51:19 EDT
I am ok with cadweld for the rods etc but is cadweld the answer for bonding to the tower section? No. Do not use Cadweld on the tower - it'll just burn a hole in the thin wall of the leg. Use a compr
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-08/msg00011.html (7,909 bytes)

5. Re: [TowerTalk] bonding to Rohn tower (score: 1)
Author: Joe - WDØM <wd0m@wd0m.com>
Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2009 15:09:24 -0600
I use a section of stainless steel (good quality). Wrap it around the leg, then use a stainless steel hose clamp to hold your copper wire in place against the stainless steel "plate". Works well - no
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-08/msg00012.html (8,551 bytes)

6. Re: [TowerTalk] bonding to Rohn tower (score: 1)
Author: John Kemker <john@kemker.org>
Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2009 17:47:47 -0400
Why? Prime Directive: Always follow the Manufacturer's instructions. The manufacturer recommends using strap and clamps. Polyphaser and ICE both, that is. Polyphaser is out to sell things, sure. Howe
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-08/msg00013.html (13,526 bytes)

7. Re: [TowerTalk] bonding to Rohn tower (score: 1)
Author: jimlux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2009 16:39:21 -0700
Hmm... what mfr are we talking about here? I can see using the bolts that the mfr of a tower recommends to hold sections together. But here, we're talking about a system design recommendation. But, t
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-08/msg00014.html (13,379 bytes)

8. Re: [TowerTalk] bonding to Rohn tower (score: 1)
Author: "Scott MacKenzie" <kb0fhp@verizon.net>
Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2009 21:20:25 -0400
One good reason is that copper is anodic to zinc and steel. You will get preferential corrosion of the zinc and eventually of the steel - eventually corroding the steel until it is unable to support
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-08/msg00015.html (14,359 bytes)

9. Re: [TowerTalk] bonding to Rohn tower (score: 1)
Author: "R. Kevin Stover" <rkstover@mchsi.com>
Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2009 21:35:12 -0500
And this is why you don't attach copper anything, strap or wire, directly to a galvanized (zinc) surface. Clamp some stainless sheet to the leg then clamp your strap or wire to to the stainless. -- R
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-08/msg00016.html (8,218 bytes)

10. Re: [TowerTalk] bonding to Rohn tower (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Schafer" <garyschafer@comcast.net>
Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2009 21:56:21 -0500
That comes from the fact that when buying copper, strap gives you more surface area and lower inductance than round wire for a given amount of copper cost. And for those that would advocate copper pi
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-08/msg00017.html (8,769 bytes)

11. Re: [TowerTalk] bonding to Rohn tower (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Schafer" <garyschafer@comcast.net>
Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2009 22:07:05 -0500
Polyphaser was recommending using copper strap long before they were selling it. They only started selling it as a convenience to customers that didn't know where to get it when buying their other pr
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-08/msg00018.html (9,601 bytes)

12. Re: [TowerTalk] bonding to Rohn tower (score: 1)
Author: jimlux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2009 21:11:25 -0700
Or why "listed" clamps for this sort of application have the appropriate metals. Also, this sort of thing is above ground, and the whole corrosion thing is different (like, maybe, covered in paint or
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-08/msg00019.html (8,613 bytes)

13. Re: [TowerTalk] bonding to Rohn tower (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2009 00:29:47 -0500
Yes, and so is stainless steel, and it can be even more anodic depending on the exact composition. So how do you justify putting stainless steel next to the zinc? And while I'm at it, I may as well t
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-08/msg00020.html (9,416 bytes)

14. Re: [TowerTalk] bonding to Rohn tower (score: 1)
Author: jimlux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2009 05:46:20 -0700
For lightning protection, there's several things driving the selection of the conductor. Interestingly, the absolute lowest RF impedance is not one of them. 1) You need to be big enough not to melt.
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-08/msg00022.html (14,007 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu