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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+guy\s+rod\s+angle\s*$/: 23 ]

Total 23 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] guy rod angle (score: 1): Author: mikerauh@ic.org (Mike Rauh); Date: Sun, 2 Sep 2001 14:56:01 -0400; Hello TT: How does Rohn compute the guy rod angle? I tried taking the vector sum of the guy pretension. That gives an angle that is too low. I didn't consider sag; if I did, the angle would be even l; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-09/msg00062.html (8,122 bytes)
2. [TowerTalk] guy rod angle (score: 1): Author: k6ll@juno.com (David O Hachadorian); Date: Sun, 2 Sep 2001 16:23:40 +0000; Just a guess: The angle is probably optimized for when the wind is blowing, with much of the windload at the top. Dave Hachadorian, K6LL Big Bear Lake, CA K6LL@juno.com List Sponsored by AN Wireless:; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-09/msg00072.html (8,413 bytes)
3. [TowerTalk] guy rod angle (score: 1): Author: w7ni@easystreet.com (Stan or Patricia Griffiths); Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2001 12:30:44 -0700; Hi Mike, I didn't see any responses to your question so I will offer one. In general, Rohn does not tell anyone how they calculate anything, unless, of course, your are willing to pay for that servic; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-09/msg00180.html (9,998 bytes)
4. [TowerTalk] guy rod angle (score: 1): Author: w5kp@swbell.net (J. Kincade); Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2001 15:48:04 -0500; I totally agree with Stan. The Rohn 7' long 5/8" anchor rods on my 80' 45G had enough flex so they felt like a buggy whip out at the business end anyway, until the guys were attached. A couple of deg; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-09/msg00185.html (9,945 bytes)
5. [TowerTalk] guy rod angle (score: 1): Author: mikerauh@ic.org (Michael Rauh); Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2001 22:25:30 -0400; Jerry, Stan, Dave, Tom, I agree with Jerry and Stan - the angle is probably not critical. Rohn presents the angle to 0.1 degree in their guyed tower drawings. This seems impossibly precise to me - th; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-09/msg00198.html (10,711 bytes)
6. [TowerTalk] guy rod angle (score: 1): Author: w7ni@easystreet.com (Stan or Patricia Griffiths); Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2001 01:21:57 -0700; I took another look at my Rohn Catalog and I now see where they do list the rod angle. Funny, I never noticed that before . . . Still, they don't tell you how they caluculated it . . . I learn someth; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-09/msg00201.html (11,752 bytes)
7. [TowerTalk] guy rod angle (score: 1): Author: n4kg@juno.com (n4kg@juno.com); Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2001 05:40:19 -0600; One more consideration: If the Antenna is above the top guy, then that creates a bending moment about the upper guy point that is transmitted throughout the whole tower. That's where this EE throws u; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-09/msg00202.html (9,423 bytes)
8. [TowerTalk] guy rod angle (score: 1): Author: n2mg@contesting.com (Mike Gilmer - N2MG); Date: 6 Sep 2001 06:37:25 -0700; Having just buried 6 guy anchors in concrete this past Saturday, this issue is still accessible in my brain... A few weeks ago, I sat down and did a quick geometric sketch/calculation and found the a; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-09/msg00212.html (13,723 bytes)
9. [TowerTalk] guy rod angle (score: 1): Author: n4gn@n4gn.com (Tim Totten, N4GN); Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2001 23:14:22 -0400 (EDT); This topic is particularly timely for me. I'm working on tower project Several folks have already mentioned the anchor rod slope tolerance of +/- 1.0 degree, specified by Rohn. I agree that seems arb; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-09/msg00263.html (10,261 bytes)
10. [TowerTalk] guy rod angle (score: 1): Author: n0tt1@juno.com (N0TT@ juno.com); Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 10:16:05 EDT; Hi gents, My barbershop comments... :) I would think that if there were say, 3 guys running to the same anchor, that one would want to line up the anchor with the "middle" guy wire. If there are two; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-09/msg00273.html (13,831 bytes)
11. [TowerTalk] guy rod angle (score: 1): Author: b_bradfield@yahoo.com (Brad Bradfield); Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 08:33:28 -0700 (PDT); Unfortunately, the calculation is not QUITE that simple, but not terribly difficult either, and your assumption is actually pretty close. While your assumption that the guy tensions will all be the s; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-09/msg00277.html (11,540 bytes)
12. [TowerTalk] guy rod angle (score: 1): Author: b_bradfield@yahoo.com (Brad Bradfield); Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 08:46:28 -0700 (PDT); I forgot to mention one thing. While I said that the angle of the anchor rod "probably" wasn't all that critical, I was really referring to a typical tower/guy combination on fairly level ground. The; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-09/msg00279.html (10,036 bytes)
13. [TowerTalk] guy rod angle (score: 1): Author: wa3gin@erols.com (David Jordan); Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 11:46:25 -0400; ...and what happens to those numbers when the wind starts blowing at 50 mph? List Sponsored by AN Wireless: AN Wireless handles Rohn tower systems, Trylon Titan towers, coax, hardline and more. Also; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-09/msg00280.html (12,976 bytes)
14. [TowerTalk] guy rod angle (score: 1): Author: b_bradfield@yahoo.com (Brad Bradfield); Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 09:19:22 -0700 (PDT); Let me tell you, my Statics professor (Is that old fossil still alive??) would be proud that I even remember as much of what he taught me as I've already told you. We're really digging into the dark; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-09/msg00285.html (10,765 bytes)
15. [TowerTalk] guy rod angle (score: 1): Author: w5kp@swbell.net (J. Kincade); Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 11:40:17 -0500; Hmmm. Charlie, my new 45G has about 700 lb on the top guys and about 400 on the bottom guys, according to my trusty Loos Tension Gauge, which is about what Rohn specifies, and is the reason for the e; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-09/msg00286.html (16,922 bytes)
16. [TowerTalk] guy rod angle (score: 1): Author: n2mg@contesting.com (Mike Gilmer - N2MG); Date: 7 Sep 2001 10:18:50 -0700; In older Rohn catalogs, the design for R45 towers utilized all the same sized guy cable (usually 1/4" EHS except in windzone A.) So the pretension would be the same on all the guys. Yet, though the g; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-09/msg00287.html (10,467 bytes)
17. [TowerTalk] guy rod angle (score: 1): Author: wbarby@telus.net (Wilf Barby); Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 11:25:18 -0700; Hey Brad, if your 5 inch rule doesn't give you sufficient significant digits, I can loan you my 'circular' (about 10 inch diameter) slide rule that is equivalent to about 8 or 9 feet! heh heh! Wilf V; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-09/msg00289.html (9,207 bytes)
18. [TowerTalk] guy rod angle (score: 1): Author: K7GCO@aol.com (K7GCO@aol.com); Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 16:41:42 EDT; Let me tell you, my Static's professor (Is that old fossil still alive??) would be proud that I even remember as much of what he taught me as I've already told you. We're really digging into the dark; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-09/msg00290.html (12,334 bytes)
19. [TowerTalk] guy rod angle (score: 1): Author: w7ni@easystreet.com (Stan or Patricia Griffiths); Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 13:39:19 -0700; I suspect that making the statement as a precise + or - 1 degree is exactly HOW Rohn is covering their butt. They know that nobody can or will install any of these guy anchors with that precision so,; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-09/msg00291.html (10,152 bytes)
20. [TowerTalk] guy rod angle (score: 1): Author: nielsen@oz.net (Bob Nielsen); Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 16:27:45 -0700; In my freshman chemistry class at Caltech, the prof (Linus Pauling, no less) used to work out a problem on his 6 in. slide rule and recite the answer to 6 or 7 digits. We all knew he had a sheet with; /archives//html/Towertalk/2001-09/msg00296.html (9,667 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]