Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Fwd\:\s+Square\s+Hole\s+or\s+Round\s+Hole\s+for\s+Self\s+Supporter\?\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] Fwd: Square Hole or Round Hole for Self Supporter? (score: 1)
Author: Hans Hammarquist via TowerTalk <towertalk@contesting.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2018 08:03:41 -0500
I wonder if the old idea of using two 20 foot steel beams in an X configuration anchored to the ground with screw anchors would work.According to the script each anchor has a pull-up rating of 14,000
/archives//html/Towertalk/2018-01/msg00260.html (11,537 bytes)

2. Re: [TowerTalk] Fwd: Square Hole or Round Hole for Self Supporter? (score: 1)
Author: Grant Saviers <grants2@pacbell.net>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2018 07:41:27 -0800
Sure, outriggers work on trailer mounted crank-ups or pneumatic masts. Enough stiffness/strength in the outrigger and long enough and the need for mass or a hole in the ground goes away. Grant KZ1W O
/archives//html/Towertalk/2018-01/msg00261.html (12,342 bytes)

3. Re: [TowerTalk] Fwd: Square Hole or Round Hole for Self Supporter? (score: 1)
Author: Fred Keen via TowerTalk <towertalk@contesting.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2018 17:51:16 +0000 (UTC)
My Ryerson book is not handy, but there is some serious weight in a wide flange, say 8' or 10" web that is 20'0 long. And then there is consideration for the "fixed to ground" part. Fred KC5YN Sure,
/archives//html/Towertalk/2018-01/msg00262.html (13,699 bytes)

4. Re: [TowerTalk] Fwd: Square Hole or Round Hole for Self Supporter? (score: 1)
Author: jimlux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2018 10:39:44 -0800
8" either 18.4 or 23 lb/ft (skinny web or thick web) so 20 ft is on the order of 4000 lb. you might not even need ground anchors<grin> Actually, if your ground anchors are suitable, you could use le
/archives//html/Towertalk/2018-01/msg00263.html (15,661 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu