Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] Crankup tower safety question... (Crankup

To: "Jim Thomson" <jim.thom@telus.net>, <towertalk@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Crankup tower safety question... (Crankup
From: "Patrick Greenlee" <patrick_g@windstream.net>
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2013 08:20:12 -0500
List-post: <towertalk@contesting.com">mailto:towertalk@contesting.com>
Jim (et al), I intend to make my own locking mechanism and add it to the customized tilt/crank-up tower I mentioned. It has only one moving section (20 ft) but since I intend to use it at various degrees of extension I want to be able to lock it at various heights. I'm just guessing but I don't think I would gain much by having the ability to lock the antenna in positions less than a foot apart so since the bracing on this tower is in one foot increments I will go with that.

I'm thinking a piece of steel welded to a leg every foot on the movable section and a single pivoting piece to engage any of those mounted to the fixed section. I'll start with manual operation but I want to automate it with a solenoid or other actuator. Ideally I will be able to automate it such that I can just raise or lower the telescopic section remotely and the "latch" would release and reengage automatically as required. To avoid slack cable problems I won't try to back off the winch automatically to put all the weight on the latch system but will make the latch system strong enough to easily take a one foot drop if there is a cable failure.

I followed the link to the work platform web site and read that with interest but $400 seems expensive to me since I have a relatively well equipped welding shop and could make my own relatively fast at a much lower cost. Not knocking the product and if you don't weld, buying it is a good option. What luxury to be able to stand on a step large enough to be comfortable instead of pain in the feet and ankles climbing and standing on small or sloping tower braces. Although I have never owned a tower before, I have climbed a significant number of them and I'd just as soon forgo the adrenaline rush and sore feet for a sedate ladder episode.

Patrick AF5CK

-----Original Message----- From: Jim Thomson
Sent: Friday, August 02, 2013 7:41 AM
To: towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: [TowerTalk] Crankup tower safety question... (Crankup

Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2013 20:13:45 -0400
From: Mickey Baker <fishflorida@gmail.com>
To: "towertalk@contesting.com" <towertalk@contesting.com>
Subject: [TowerTalk] Crankup tower safety question... (Crankup
Danger!)

Patrick, AF5CK's thread on his tower raised an issue that I really don't
understand...

Why isn't there a "lock" mechanism on crank up towers?

We spend lots of money on these things, and, basically, they hang there
suspended by a single cable. We all have either known someone or have had
our own tower's cable (or winch) fail and the tower crashes, with great
damage to tower and antennas.

I could thing of a number of gadgets that could be made to work:

  - A solenoid locking bolt
  - A brake mechanism (Electronically controlled?)
  - Stops every few feet requiring a raise then lower like a safety ladder.

But here I am, about to step off into yet another $10k tower project with
another tower hanging by a cable. (I feel like Homer Simpson - Doh!)

I realize that the market is small and price sensitive for these towers,
but certainly this has been recognized as a problem.

Isn't there a better way? If there is, and I can implement it, I'd do so,
simply for the purpose of making the tower safer for me and my antennas.

Thoughts?

--
Mickey Baker, N4MB

## UST already makes an ideal locking device....for their commercial-military versions of crank ups. So does one other manufacturer. It consists of what appears to be 1 inch thick steel plates welded to the tops of the legs...on the bottom section. Mating 1 inch thick steel plates are bolted to the fixed plates... but the mating plates swivel sideways. All 3 are joined via horizontal rods, like a triangle at the top of the bottom section, aprx 20 feet above the ground. Another rod drops
down vertically from one corner..to aprx 4 ft above the concrete.

## When you pull down on the vert rod, the steel plates swivel around, and hook around the legs of the 2nd section from bottom. 2nd section from bottom is now captivated. The 3 steel swivel plates sit below the horizontal bracing, and also diagonal bracing of the 2nd section. But the plates cant be just engaged anywhere. They have to be activated where there is a clear unobstructed portion on all 3 faces. That still allows the tower to safely be locked just about anywhere from fully nested to fully extended. What is being captivated and locked is anywhere along
the lower 17 feet of the 2nd section from the bottom.

## On my old style HDX-689, the upper sections, except the very top section, have a single cable on EACH face, 3 per section. The only way that any upper section can come crashing down is if ALL 3 cables for that section break.... which is extremely unlikely. Why UST didnbt put 3 cables
on the very top section is a mystery.

## Even with the safety plates, the military b commercial versions of UST towers can still come crashing down IF the main lift cable off the drum breaks...but only with plates dis-engaged. The only time the plates are dis-engaged of course, is while raising or lowering the tower. Once the tower is raised or lowered to the desired height, the plates are engaged. If you look
at USTbs  site,  you will see these devices...painted red.

## I forget the name of the 2nd crankup tower manufacturer who also had an identical plate safety feature. Array solutions was selling their towers for a few years, then stopped carrying them, due to lack of sales. So no solenoids. Itbs strictly a mech device. Pull the rod down, and all 3 plates engage. Push the rod up, and all 3 plates dis-engage. Between the triple plates and redundant cables
on the upper sections means the tower can also be guyed if required.

## Why UST doesnbt offer the triple plate safety feature on their ham towers is beyond me. It should come standard. If you have ever seen pix of this device close up, itbs not a big ticket item either. It
would not add much expense to the total cost, maybe $200- $300  tops.

## In my case, the PP rotor is 6 feet down inside the tower. The tower has to be extended to 52-53 ft level....just to gain access to the PP rotor, for removal, or install. That requires stuffing safety steel tubing horizontally, 8 ft above the ground..just below the bottom of the 2nd section from base. The rotor is then fully exposed at the 45 ft level. The tower still has to be climbed to the 45 ft level.

Jim  VE7RF
_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>