Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:kr7x1@verizon.net: 20 ]

Total 20 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [TowerTalk] Q on guyed rotating towers (score: 1)
Author: <kr7x1@verizon.net>
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 12:29:59 -0600 (CST)
Jim/Arthur: Rotating towers tubular/cantilevered like berthas or triangular trussed like Rohn with rotating guy rings need to have some point fixed against rotation somewhere in their height to devel
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-02/msg00400.html (10,572 bytes)

2. Re: [TowerTalk] Need some help (score: 1)
Author: <kr7x1@verizon.net>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 11:33:08 -0500 (CDT)
Ruslin: You need to get a copy of TIA-222-G. This is the latest edition of "Structural Standard for Antenna Supporting Structures and Antennas." You will find all you need in this standard which is r
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-03/msg00468.html (8,712 bytes)

3. Re: [TowerTalk] TOWER PERMIT (score: 1)
Author: "Hank Lonberg" <kr7x1@verizon.net>
Date: Sun, 06 Apr 2008 10:44:18 -0700
Tommy: Talk with US Towers they can provide a sealed set for your state for a fixed charge. An alternate route is to go to the ARRL VCE (volunteer consulting engineers) site and see if there are any
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-04/msg00100.html (12,104 bytes)

4. Re: [TowerTalk] Anchor bolts (score: 1)
Author: "Hank Lonberg" <kr7x1@verizon.net>
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2008 18:56:00 -0700
Rick: Actually the concrete code specifies that for concrete cast against and permanent exposed to earth; the minimum clear cover is 3". For concrete cast in forms and subsequently having exterior ex
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-04/msg00223.html (11,831 bytes)

5. Re: [TowerTalk] 18.8ss or 304ss for u-bolts (score: 1)
Author: kr7x1@verizon.net
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 09:49:12 -0500 (CDT)
Dion: Go to this website: http://www.bosunsupplies.com/StainlessInfo2.cfm It has a good explanation of SS alloys. 18-8 is the nickel-chromium alloying of the base metal. Regards Lonberg Design Group,
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-05/msg00402.html (9,334 bytes)

6. Re: [TowerTalk] Dimensions of a tower concrete base (score: 1)
Author: "Hank Lonberg" <kr7x1@verizon.net>
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2008 21:14:37 -0700
Bert: The best answer to your generalized questions is; it depends. Depends if the foundation is supporting only vertical load as in a guyed structure. Depends if the foundation is to support a canti
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-09/msg00013.html (11,778 bytes)

7. Re: [TowerTalk] Dimensions of a tower concrete base (score: 1)
Author: kr7x1@verizon.net
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 11:24:25 -0500 (CDT)
Hi Al: In the case of a cantilever (free standing) structure say like a ham tower, the wind or seismic force developed is horizontal (lateral). This force creates a cantilever moment at the base equa
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-09/msg00017.html (16,931 bytes)

8. Re: [TowerTalk] Fiber reinforcement instead of rebar? (score: 1)
Author: kr7x1@verizon.net
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 09:54:45 -0500 (CDT)
Dan: "For engineering reasons that don't bear explanation" this is the worst type of foundation to try and use fiber reinforcing to eliminate rod reinforcing in a foundation. I have posted to the ref
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-09/msg00166.html (8,647 bytes)

9. Re: [TowerTalk] #10 Rebar vs 1.250 Cold Roll Steel...??? (score: 1)
Author: "Hank Lonberg" <kr7x1@verizon.net>
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 17:04:58 -0700
Bill: readily available. Go with #9's or #11's. Just prorate their spacing base on the area difference. I believe that the foundation calls for #10 bar vertical at the corners, IF that is the case su
/archives//html/Towertalk/2008-10/msg00209.html (9,579 bytes)

10. [TowerTalk] test (score: 1)
Author: "Hank Lonberg" <kr7x1@verizon.net>
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 16:53:53 -0700
_______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ TowerTalk mailing list TowerTalk@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-03/msg00439.html (6,659 bytes)

11. [TowerTalk] DX Engineering 66-Foot Vertical? (score: 1)
Author: "Hank Lonberg" <kr7x1@verizon.net>
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 16:55:21 -0700
All: To give you a different perspective on the amount of overlap that should be considered in slip joint connections, the industry recommended practice for tubular and multi faceted steel transmissi
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-03/msg00440.html (8,755 bytes)

12. [TowerTalk] Test (score: 1)
Author: "Hank Lonberg" <kr7x1@verizon.net>
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2009 20:11:29 -0700
_______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ TowerTalk mailing list TowerTalk@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-06/msg00168.html (6,830 bytes)

13. Re: [TowerTalk] (Repost) Engineering advice on above ground foundation (score: 1)
Author: "Hank Lonberg" <kr7x1@verizon.net>
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2009 20:57:47 -0700
Kevin: You are absolutely correct on this and I have been in e-mail contact with Rudy concerning his foundation and was cc'ing the list but it seems that those didn't get through. Richards post just
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-06/msg00172.html (14,036 bytes)

14. Re: [TowerTalk] Remove Tower Base (score: 1)
Author: "Hank Lonberg" <kr7x1@verizon.net>
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 08:52:40 -0700
Maybe what Mike is looking for is "Bustar" expansive grout. See h**p://www.demolitiontechnologies.com/ There are also mechanical expanders that can be placed into drill holes. Google: chemical concre
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-08/msg00445.html (9,768 bytes)

15. Re: [TowerTalk] W-51 wind load (score: 1)
Author: "Hank Lonberg" <kr7x1@verizon.net>
Date: Sun, 01 Nov 2009 09:11:57 -0800
Neil: The WT-51 is the tower Tashijan sells and the W-51 is the old Triex design. First off the old Triex was designed using "fastest mile" wind velocity and the old UBC. The newer WT-51 design confo
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-11/msg00006.html (8,864 bytes)

16. Re: [TowerTalk] Stainless Steel Mast (score: 1)
Author: "Hank Lonberg" <kr7x1@verizon.net>
Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2009 17:34:51 -0800
Dave: The important number is the yield stress not the tensile stress. 6061-T6 and the stainless, most likely 304 or even 316, have about the same yield of 36,000 psi plus or minus. This is the thres
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-11/msg00044.html (11,569 bytes)

17. [TowerTalk] FW: Guy article in CQ (score: 1)
Author: "Hank Lonberg" <kr7x1@verizon.net>
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 15:32:06 -0800
This is a somewhat long and maybe winded response and violates the concept of snipping the previous posts. If you are not interested you should hit delete now. Tom, good call, as this is the foundati
/archives//html/Towertalk/2010-01/msg00307.html (19,113 bytes)

18. Re: [TowerTalk] tower installation HG52SS (score: 1)
Author: "Hank Lonberg" <kr7x1@verizon.net>
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 08:17:48 -0800
Mike: An engineer wouldn't break your bank, but I digress. You don't say what the plan dimensions are of your 3.5' deep hole are so it is hard to tell you anything but you could have drilled and grou
/archives//html/Towertalk/2010-02/msg00321.html (11,452 bytes)

19. Re: [TowerTalk] wind load (score: 1)
Author: "Hank Lonberg" <kr7x1@verizon.net>
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2010 12:09:23 -0800
Dennis: The correct standard is ANSI/TIA 222-G. See below for url's to both TIA and IHS global where you can buy the standard. Be prepared that it is not cheap. Maybe if you google the tia 222 g you
/archives//html/Towertalk/2010-02/msg00506.html (13,332 bytes)

20. Re: [TowerTalk] Tower Base In Concrete (score: 1)
Author: "Hank Lonberg" <kr7x1@verizon.net>
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 2010 13:01:07 -0700
Steve: First of all why do you want to attach the tower section to the rebar. This would serve no useful function unless you are trying to hold the section up while you pour the base. Just attach som
/archives//html/Towertalk/2010-04/msg00749.html (10,453 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu