Jim Jarvis wrote:
> THAT SAID, a few short comments:
>
> * if you're going to guy it anyway, why bother with a self-supporter?
> save the concrete expense! (WB9CRY's point)
Errr, how about a self supporter that's already installed? Commercial
towers are beefed up all the time when load requirements change. Adding
guys to an existing tower should not be rejected out of hand because
someone heard that guying compromises self supporters, like we hear all
the time on this reflector.
> * Back to the original post...this was a safety and liability question which
> went astray.
> Only a structural engineer can satisfy building code requirements for
> a modified structure as proposed. I have difficulty believing that a
> permit
> would be granted for a tower without safe fall distance to the power
> line.
> I have difficulty, as well, believing that any insurance company would
> cover
> the liability. This has "bad idea" written all over it.
I agree that it's a shame common sense is so distrusted nowadays...
Since I was the one who led it astray (don't they all go astray?) - my
point is that unless I'm mistaken, adding a sensible guy system to a
small self support tower will generally increase load capability by a
large amount - keeping in mind long boom twisting issues of course.
So the oft repeated flat out statements that self supporters are
compromised by guys should not be left unchallenged because it's
a wrong headed thing to say.
You may argue on the insurance and legal issues all you want,
I'm only talking about the strength of the tower.
Steve K8LX
_______________________________________________
See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless Weather
Stations", and lot's more. Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with any questions
and ask for Sherman, W2FLA.
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|