No. Let's take this topic to a sensible conclusion. Unless we do reach a conclusion this topic will come up again with opinion vs experience vs fact vs manufacturers instructions vs guess vs ..... Do
The only 'sensible' conclusions to this are the following: 1. do what the manufacturer says for 'standard' installations 2. do what a qualified mechanical engineer who has performed the analysis on t
I am willing to give the 'NO Group' a bit more time to present a case before coming to a conclusion. No matter how flat a pancake is - there are still two sides. What do you do in the absence of your
That would be the "sensible" conclusion if one is an engineer or if one believes that only engineers can reach "sensible" conclusions.... and I say that with all due respect. Maybe it's just that I'm
I think one approach to the problem is this... 1) Clearly, it's going to be somewhat design specific. The mechanism and critical loads for failure in a free standing tower (bending) and for a guyed t
It's the difference between "thinking it's strong enough" and "knowing it's strong enough".. And that difference affects the assessment of the risk you want to accept. The former has more risk than t
Count me firmly in the side that approves of guying a self supporting tower. And I can personally attest to VE5RA Doug's experience with guyed Delhi structures - he has been there and done it and the
This is the question I'm interested in. Because if it turns out that it's difficult to design even a ridiculous structure that is weakened by guys, some good light will be shed. It seems to me that a
Just in cae I confused anyone with my reference to VE5RA, I was living in the past. I should have said VA5DX..... tower. with plus a Weather Stations", and lot's more. Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041
I am good at the ridiculous.. just use the example of a very weak tube, like a cardboard paper towel tube. It will stand upright very nicely by itself... but then add a couple of strong cords pullin
Side #1: Do it unless there's proof that it's unwise. Side #2: Don't do it unless there's proof that it's OK. Salient examples of this dilemma where side #1 wins: Jan. 28, 1986; Challenger; seven los
(i.e. fail would without. tube. an and push That's the general idea.. but you need to consider the real question is not static loads, but what happens when you put a side load at the top (and all alo
This has been an interesting discussion. One question comes to mind though. If you've got the room to properly guy a self supporting tower, meaning 80% of total height, why wouldn't you go ahead and
Building a tower is not philosophy, nor is it science experiment. It is an engineering job. The mechanics and materials are well understood. the tools are readily available to engineers to do very s
Of course. But that's not what were on about here. It's a reaction to the oft repeated flat out statement that guying compromises the integrity of a self supporter, without, AFAIK, a single documente
tube. without an Err, no. Keep in mind the concept of "sensible guying" it and a push Again, this isn't sensible guying. Steve K8LX _______________________________________________ See: http://www.msc
At one time I had the 4L 40m KLM at 132 feet on a Delhi guyed tower. At another time I had a wind come through here that broke the boom of the KLM but did no damage to the Delhi tower. That's a 42 fo
I bought my Heights aluminum tower used, and refurbished it myself. Some of the leg holes were a little egged out, so I added new bolts in new holes so it's good and sturdy now. I had no specs and wa
This has been an interesting discussion. One question comes to mind though. If you've got the room to properly guy a self supporting tower, meaning 80% of total height, why wouldn't you go ahead and
One element of this debate is whether or not you can generally say that for any free standing tower structure there exists a specific guy wire configuration that will result in an increase in the ove