Never personally made calculations like these, but it seems like the antenna
weight would be distributed all along an effective radius from zero to the
turning radius, so aren't these calculations significantly over-stated?
(i.e., all the weight isn't out at the turning radius)
73,
Barry N1EU
>From: k6ll@juno.com
>To: towertalk@contesting.com
>Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] t2x, c31xr and ef240x
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
>Date: Wed, 1 Sep 1999 12:22:19 -0600
>
>
>
>
>On Wed, 1 Sep 1999 13:28:00 -0500 brunet@us.ibm.com writes:
> >
> >
> >
> >It looks like the T2X can't handle a C31XR and a EF240X. The torque
> >spec on the
> >T2X is 3400 ft lbs (weight x turning radius). The turning radius of
> >the EF240X
> >is 25.1' the weight of the two antennas is 120 lbs and a 20' chrome
> >moly is
> >about 140 lbs for a torque of 25.1 x 260 = 6526 ft-lbs. Is this
> >correct logic?
>
>Not really.
>
>turn radius x wt = effective moment
>c31xr 23.8 x 82 = 1952
>ef240 25.1 x 38 = 954
>mast 0.083 x 140 = 12
>total effective moment = 2918 ft pounds.
>The t2x is rated for 3400 ft-lbs, so you are good.
>___________________________________________________________________
>Get the Internet just the way you want it.
>Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
>Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.
>
>--
>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.htm
>
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
--
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.htm
|