Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

[TowerTalk] pier point vs section in concrete

To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
Subject: [TowerTalk] pier point vs section in concrete
From: N8GAN@CONCENTRIC.NET (KENNETH KOCH)
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 1998 16:42:36 -0500
if you would have done your same technique with a buried section and 2 more
sections on it, you would have gotten the same results.
ken/ken's antenna services
n8gan


----------
> From: Bill Long <wlong@wmdc.edu>
> To: towertalk@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] pier point vs section in concrete
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
> Date: Tuesday, March 24, 1998 10:29 AM
> 
> >>What are the pros and cons of using a pier point bottom instead of
> >>burying a 5'
> >>tower section in concrete?  Thanks, Pete
> >
> 
> Sure, Pete.
> 
> I have 100 feet of Rohn 45 that stands on a pier pin.
> 
> I chose that option because:
> 
> 1. it was a recommended installation in the Rohn catalogue, which I trust
> thoroughly.
> 
> 2.  I thought (probably correctly in my case) that inaccuracies in my
> positioning of guy anchors and in the installation of the buried section
> (both vertical and rotational directions) would cause unbalanced forces
on
> the installed tower.
> 
> 3. The ability of the tower to rotate under tension of the guys would
> automatically balance initially unbalanced forces.  You could actually
see
> this happening when we erected the tower.  The whole thing shifted into
> alignment when we tightened the first guys.  I had a surveying engineer
> check the alignment of the tower after it was up, with a transit.  It was
> out of line by only 3/4" at the top when we finished, less than the
> diameter of a tower leg.
> 
> 4. Any accident that occurred during the pouring of the concrete around a
> buried base section (like the base section shifting unexpectedly) would
be
> permanent and potentially disastrous.  I know that this can be guarded
> against with proper technique, but I am not a professional at this, and I
> was worried about my own abilities).  (Remember, once you whip up a batch
> of concrete, you only have a half hour to figure out what to do with it.)
> 
> 5. I saw the problem from #4 actually happen in a tower installation just
a
> few months before I installed mine.  It resulted in a twisted, unbalanced
> tower that scared me to climb.  It was fresh in my mind when I planned my
> own installation.
> 
> 5. Raising the tower with temporary guys was not really a big deal.  We
> bolted three sections together on the ground, added the base and hauled
it
> to the vertical (like we sometimes do at field day).  Then six of us
lifted
> it and set it on the pier pin.  Slick as a whistle.  My bottom set of
> permanent guys is at 28 feet, so we could attach them in advance.  The
> first time I or anyone set foot on my tower, it was 30 feet tall guyed
with
> 1/4" galvanized cable attached to permanent anchors (themselves set in
> concrete).  In that sense, there were never any temporary guys at all.
> 
> I don't mean here to criticize those (the majority, I think) who bury
their
> base sections.  That's undoubtedly a fine way to go.  I just wanted to
> describe my choice.  The tower has been up now since 1990, and I am happy
> as a clam with it.
> 
> Gl es 73, Bill
> 
> Bill Long NY3M
> wlong@wmdc.edu
> 
> 
> 
> --
> FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/towertalkfaq.html
> Submissions:              towertalk@contesting.com
> Administrative requests:  towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
> Problems:                 owner-towertalk@contesting.com
> Search:                   http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search

--
FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/towertalkfaq.html
Submissions:              towertalk@contesting.com
Administrative requests:  towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems:                 owner-towertalk@contesting.com
Search:                   http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search

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