Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Rohn\s+Torque\s+Bars\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Rohn\s+Torque\s+Bars\s*$/: 9 ]

Total 9 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] Rohn Torque Bars (score: 1): Author: "Jack Schuster" <w1wef@intergate.com>; Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 09:21:50 -0400; I am in the process of replacing guys on my 108 ft Rohn 25 tower, and am planning to eliminate the TB25 torque bars. I was told a few years ago that Rohn discontinued them because they decided they w; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-08/msg00018.html (7,447 bytes)
2. Re: [TowerTalk] Rohn Torque Bars (score: 1): Author: "Robert Shohet" <kq2m@earthlink.net>; Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 09:37:30 -0400; Bad idea! Helping to better equalize and spreading out the horizontal and vertical forces over a wider area is usually a good idea. I see little meaningful UPSIDE to be gained from NOT using them. Th; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-08/msg00019.html (8,363 bytes)
3. Re: [TowerTalk] Rohn Torque Bars (score: 1): Author: Cqtestk4xs@aol.com; Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 09:55:56 EDT; Jack I was told the same thing. They ARE unnecessary on the new style because the new style is beefed up and more stiff...a slightly different style than the old two bolt ones. I would stick with the; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-08/msg00023.html (7,255 bytes)
4. Re: [TowerTalk] Rohn Torque Bars (score: 1): Author: "Mark - AA6DX" <aa6dx@pacbell.net>; Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 08:51:00 -0700; In my experience ... ditch the torque bars. I concur with Rohn .. no value in ordinary service. I could go on, but others with a better command of engineering language will comment, I am sure. I used; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-08/msg00027.html (7,836 bytes)
5. Re: [TowerTalk] Rohn Torque Bars (score: 1): Author: Tim Duffy K3LR <k3lr@k3lr.com>; Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 12:50:20 -0500; Hi Jack! Unless you are "Star" guying (6 wires at each level), there is no torque reduction (less twisting of the tower). The "torque bar" name is a poor one as it does nothing for reducing torque an; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-08/msg00033.html (8,689 bytes)
6. Re: [TowerTalk] Rohn Torque Bars (score: 1): Author: "Grillo's" <ah3c@frii.com>; Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 22:02:52 -0600; Bill - Can you explain why you felt it necessary for me to have this feature on my 120' Rohn 55 tower? Sections will soon be going up. If I don't need it, will you take it back? 73, Pete reduction (l; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-08/msg00043.html (10,200 bytes)
7. Re: [TowerTalk] Rohn Torque Bars (score: 1): Author: John Kiesel <yamaha_xs_johnny@yahoo.com>; Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 22:33:37 -0700 (PDT); They sure can't hurt!! for a FEW BUCKS MORE IN THE INVESTMENT. Anything that gives you lateral support can't be bad! I just saw this weekend a 40 foot boom 4 element tri band quad split in two as it; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-08/msg00044.html (9,652 bytes)
8. Re: [TowerTalk] Rohn Torque Bars (score: 1): Author: "Tom Rauch" <w8ji@contesting.com>; Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 05:51:50 -0400; That statement puzzles me. The torque bars I've used had a reasonably tight lateral fit between the bar and bracket. It sure seems to me a bar extending one foot ( as an example) would be exactly li; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-08/msg00045.html (8,977 bytes)
9. Re: [TowerTalk] Rohn Torque Bars (score: 1): Author: Bill Aycock <baycock@direcway.com>; Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 07:26:04 -0500; I'm confused- how could torque bars have made this failure not happen, or less dangerous? Bill At 10:33 PM 8/2/2004 -0700, John Kiesel wrote: They sure can't hurt!! for a FEW BUCKS MORE IN THE INVEST; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-08/msg00046.html (11,283 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 9
Page: [1]