Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Lightning\s+protection\s+grounding\s*$/: 27 ]

Total 27 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] Lightning protection grounding (score: 1)
Author: dlleikis@deseretonline.com (David Leikis)
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1999 22:39:44 -0600
Hello, I have seen many recent postings concerning grounding methods and saw one that stated to run a ground conductor up the mast to the final section (and the others as well) to prevent any high re
/archives//html/Towertalk/1999-04/msg00285.html (8,735 bytes)

2. [TowerTalk] Lightning protection grounding (score: 1)
Author: K7LXC@aol.com (K7LXC@aol.com)
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 10:18:01 EDT
Don't forget that a crank-up has cables connecting all the sections. It's one big lump of steel as far as being a conductor is concerned. Cheers, Steve K7LXC -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/
/archives//html/Towertalk/1999-04/msg00297.html (9,002 bytes)

3. [TowerTalk] Lightning protection grounding (score: 1)
Author: mcduffie@scottsbluff.net (Gary McDuffie, Sr.)
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 09:11:04 -0600
But this wouldn't be considered a good bonded ground. I realize there is lots of downward force on it, but technically there is no good electrical connection. I had marked this thread to follow, sinc
/archives//html/Towertalk/1999-04/msg00307.html (9,100 bytes)

4. [TowerTalk] Lightning protection grounding (score: 1)
Author: Dick Green" <dick.green@valley.net (Dick Green)
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 11:21:58 -0400
Yes, but I'd be concerned that the sections are electrically bonded only via the contact area between the steel cables and pulleys. Wouldn't dirt/lubricant on the cable and in the pulley grooves ten
/archives//html/Towertalk/1999-04/msg00310.html (9,452 bytes)

5. [TowerTalk] Lightning protection grounding (score: 1)
Author: K7LXC@aol.com (K7LXC@aol.com)
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 11:57:13 EDT
via I'll bet you a nickel that there is still an adequate electrical connection. If you look at the races of the pulleys, they are generally bare metal. Running the tower up and down with the cables
/archives//html/Towertalk/1999-04/msg00313.html (10,303 bytes)

6. [TowerTalk] Lightning protection grounding (score: 1)
Author: Charles.Constantine@lmco.com (Chuck Constantine)
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 09:16:23 -0700
This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --Boundary_(ID_rrhRxJGoDtfmMvZt7qdIFg) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT If you are loading your tower as an ante
/archives//html/Towertalk/1999-04/msg00316.html (14,023 bytes)

7. [TowerTalk] Lightning protection grounding (score: 1)
Author: k9fd@htc.net (Merv Schweigert)
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 11:33:46 -0500
160M? Been feeding a US HDX72 for years in the N4KG method with no problems. It goes up and down 4 to 6 times a year for heavy wind, in the spring usually.. Thought about using large braid from top
/archives//html/Towertalk/1999-04/msg00318.html (9,715 bytes)

8. [TowerTalk] Lightning protection grounding (score: 1)
Author: n7cl@mmsi.com (Eric Gustafson)
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 09:38:42 -0700
To: <towertalk@contesting.com> I'll bet you two nickels that little if any of the current flows on the support cable anyhow. The tower sections usually make good enough contact (judging by the lack
/archives//html/Towertalk/1999-04/msg00322.html (11,346 bytes)

9. [TowerTalk] Lightning protection grounding (score: 1)
Author: W8JI@contesting.com (Tom Rauch)
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 13:34:12 -0400
That is a waste of time with bolted or pinned masts or towers. Most, if not all, AM BCB stations have abandoned the old idea of welding jumpers around tower joints. With many many thousands of pound
/archives//html/Towertalk/1999-04/msg00323.html (10,808 bytes)

10. [TowerTalk] Lightning protection grounding (score: 1)
Author: Tower1313@aol.com (Tower1313@aol.com)
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 20:42:15 EDT
IMHO overgrounding is not a waste of time if you have the money and the time to do it. For one: when it comes to lightning, there is no such a thing as overgrounding. In the commercial field of commu
/archives//html/Towertalk/1999-04/msg00328.html (10,853 bytes)

11. [TowerTalk] Lightning protection grounding (score: 1)
Author: kb3aug@juno.com (Bill Hinkle)
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 22:22:32 -0400
I have a sloper for 75 Meters on a 54 foot crank-up, plays real well. The best I can get the SWR is about 1.8 to 1.9 to 1. I have 174 worked and 159 confirmed. Wonder what radials would do for it? Do
/archives//html/Towertalk/1999-04/msg00332.html (11,104 bytes)

12. [TowerTalk] Lightning protection grounding (score: 1)
Author: aa0cy@nwrain.com (Bob Wanderer)
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1999 19:50:54 -0700
The conductor running down the inside of the tower to ground is unnecessary. It carries maybe 10~15% of the total current. However, there is higher resistance between two sections of a crankup which
/archives//html/Towertalk/1999-04/msg00407.html (11,189 bytes)

13. [TowerTalk] Lightning protection grounding (score: 1)
Author: aa0cy@nwrain.com (Bob Wanderer)
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1999 19:55:12 -0700
Don't forget that lightning has been known to fuse the cables and pulleys into one big molten mess, so you want to provide an alternative path. 73, Bob AA0CY But this wouldn't be considered a good bo
/archives//html/Towertalk/1999-04/msg00409.html (9,735 bytes)

14. [TowerTalk] Lightning protection grounding (score: 1)
Author: wa3gin@erols.com (Dave Jordan)
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 08:48:29 -0400
Why can't a person simply run a ground wire from the top section/mast of the crank-up down along with the coax and terminate the wire to the ground system at the base? == -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.co
/archives//html/Towertalk/1999-04/msg00418.html (12,456 bytes)

15. [TowerTalk] Lightning protection grounding (score: 1)
Author: n7cl@mmsi.com (Eric Gustafson)
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 11:07:25 -0700
To: <towertalk@contesting.com> You _can_ do that. But until the surface area of the ground wire and coax shield are larger than the surface area of the tower structure, the tower will still be carryi
/archives//html/Towertalk/1999-04/msg00438.html (12,118 bytes)

16. [TowerTalk] Lightning protection grounding (score: 1)
Author: n4zr@contesting.com (Pete Smith)
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 14:23:04 -0400
To: <towertalk@contesting.com> Is that the case, even if the tower has electrical discontinuities such as section-to-section joints? I'd always understood that a lower-resistance, lower-impedance con
/archives//html/Towertalk/1999-04/msg00439.html (10,628 bytes)

17. [TowerTalk] Lightning protection grounding (score: 1)
Author: W8JI@contesting.com (Tom Rauch)
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 16:38:44 -0400
Hi Pete, Yes. It is easy to oversimplify lightning. What you'd need to do is calculate the voltage gradient along the tower, and see what the breakdown voltage of the gaps are. Once those gaps breakd
/archives//html/Towertalk/1999-04/msg00443.html (10,950 bytes)

18. [TowerTalk] Lightning protection grounding (score: 1)
Author: n7cl@mmsi.com (Eric Gustafson)
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 16:16:50 -0700
<3717319D.DFE23C18@erols.com> <199904161807.LAA17332@toontown.mmsi.com> <3717BA82.726BD29D@erols.com> Sender: owner-towertalk@contesting.com Precedence: bulk X-List-Info: http://www.contesting.com/to
/archives//html/Towertalk/1999-04/msg00448.html (13,927 bytes)

19. [TowerTalk] Lightning protection grounding (score: 1)
Author: wa3gin@erols.com (Dave Jordan)
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 18:32:34 -0400
<3717319D.DFE23C18@erols.com> <199904161807.LAA17332@toontown.mmsi.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-towertalk@contesting.com Precedence: b
/archives//html/Towertalk/1999-04/msg00449.html (13,636 bytes)

20. [TowerTalk] Lightning protection grounding (score: 1)
Author: wa3gin@erols.com (Dave Jordan)
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 20:17:13 -0400
<199904162316.QAA19069@toontown.mmsi.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-towertalk@contesting.com Precedence: bulk X-List-Info: http://www.co
/archives//html/Towertalk/1999-04/msg00450.html (10,121 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu