This is a very complicated subject for us non-engineers. One
complication I ran into years ago was that Rohn was quoting their
windload figures by one standard, while most antenna manufacturers were
using quite another, which tended to understate the amount of load when
compared to Rohn's capacity figures. The difference was enough to scare
me off putting a third small tribander on my Rohn 25.
Thee is a good article on the subject at
<http://k7nv.com/notebook/topics/windload.html>. He, too, recommends
the Leeson book, but if you don't have it handy this will get you started
73, Pete N4ZR
The World Contest Station Database, updated daily at www.conteststations.com
The Reverse Beacon Network at http://reversebeacon.net, blog at
reversebeacon.blogspot.com,
spots at telnet.reversebeacon.net, port 7000 and
arcluster.reversebeacon.net, port 7000
On 3/9/2012 4:26 PM, Larry wrote:
> If you access to Leeson's "Physical Design of Yagi Antennas" (or something
> close
> to that) it covers this topic and how to "fix" it.
>
> 73, Larry W6NWS
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Gary Slagel"<gdslagel@yahoo.com>
> To: "Jim Lux"<jimlux@earthlink.net>; "TowerTalk"<towertalk@contesting.com>
> Sent: Friday, March 09, 2012 1:32 PM
> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Wind Surface Area estimates
>
>
> Shoot... using the .707 figure for 45 deg I'm back right at the worst case
> scenario. Where does the .707 come from?
>
> I was using a simplified version of windload calcs from the force 12 web
> site that goes something like '..wind load is either the total element wind
> load OR the boom windload, whichever is the larger resistance to the
> wind....'.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Gary Slagel
> KT0A
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Jim Lux<jimlux@earthlink.net>
> To: towertalk@contesting.com
> Sent: Friday, March 9, 2012 10:24 AM
> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Wind Surface Area estimates
>
> On 3/9/12 6:50 AM, Gary Slagel wrote:
>> Hi guys... more questions!
>>
>> I'm thinking looking at putting an A4S and and some kind of 40M yagi on
>> the same mast. I plan to rotate the 40M yagi 90 deg from the A4S to
>> minimize interaction. I'm thinking somewhere in the future I may even add
>> another A4S somewhere down the tower a ways.
>>
>> The A4S has an advertised windload of 5.5 sq ft. The 40M yagis around the
>> same 5.5 sq ft. But, I'm thinking the 40M yagi is 5.5 sq ft looking at it
>> from the front. Looking at the side of the 40M yagi (2" boom and 22.6 ft)
>> I'd guess more like 2.5 sq ft. Same with the A4S from the side.... a 2"
>> 18' boom should be around 2 sq ft. So... total windload with the yagi's
>> arranged 90 deg from each other should be 5.5 + 2 = 7.5 sq ft from one
>> side and 5.5 + 2.5 = 8 sq ft from the other side.
>>
> A tube looking end on has a drag much more than the cross sectional area
> of the tube.
>
> Also consider what happens when the wind is at a 45 degree angle..
>
> But.. let's for a minute assume that the drag end on is zero, and cross
> ways to the tube it's 1. And when the wind comes at 45 degrees, the drag
> is 0.707 (the projected cross sectional area)
>
> You have two tubes at right angles, one (Tube A) is oriented N-S and the
> other (Tube B) is E-W.
>
> When the wind is from the north, Tube A has no drag and Tube B has a
> drag of 1, for a total load of 1.
>
> When the wind is from the east, Tube A has a drag of 1 and Tube B has a
> drag of 0, for a total load of 1
>
> But, when the wind is from the north east, tube A has a drag of 0.7 and
> tube B has a drag of 0.7, for a total drag of 1.4.
>
>
> So, your calculation is off by a bit (without looking at the end on drag
> of a tube).
>
>
> (I don't recall Cd for flow along a tube.. let's say it's Cd=0.01, since
> this is skin friction, the area is the wetted surface area
> (diameter*pi*length). A 2" diameter tube that is 20 feet long will be
> about 10 square feet. That works out to 0.1 square feet "equivalent
> flat plate area". however, the Cd could easily be 0.05 or 0.1 so you
> could be as big as 1 square foot)
>
> I have a handbook that gives Cd for tubes at various angles and Reynolds
> numbers, but I can't seem to lay my hands on it right now)
>
>
> There's also the practical detail that a lot of the drag will come from
> "interference drag" where the crossing members are.
>
> Maybe there's some charts showing the drag polar diagram of an antenna
> out there. (the Yagi design book might have some?)
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|