Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] Thrust bearing question

To: "Jon Pearl - W4ABC" <jonpearl@tampabay.rr.com>, "K8RI" <K8RI-on-TowerTalk@tm.net>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Thrust bearing question
From: "Gene Fuller" <w2lu@rochester.rr.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 13:59:53 -0500
List-post: <towertalk@contesting.com">mailto:towertalk@contesting.com>

A simple minded, approximate approach to this would be to look at it as a bending moment problem. Making an assumption that the manufacturer's 18 sq ft allowed load is 4 ft above the sleeve, which is also assumed to be the fulcrum and that the wind pressure is "x" lbs. /sq ft. This would give you an allowable 64x ft lbs of "overturning" moment at the fulcrum. Spread this out as you will on the mast, the total would want to be held to 64x ft lbs.
e.g. -

item sq ft lbs/sq ft ft to fulcrum bending moment ----- ----- -------- ------------- ------------------ mast(2" cyl surface) 2 x 6 12x HF tribander 8 x 1 8x 6 meter 4 x 7 28x 2 meter 1 x 12 12x ---- Calculated Total 60x ==== Allowable Total 18 x "4" 64x ====

This crude analysis would indicate that even modest antennas at 1/7/12 feet above the fulcrum would nearly max out the 18 sq ft spec. without accounting for any additional ice loading.

Similar calculations could be a starting point for mast evaluation, when max allowable mast bending moment is given or calculated and the wind speed/pressure is determined.

Last resort, consult the tower manufacturer. If you shared the above type calculations with them it would at least indicate that you had given some consideration to the problem.

Gene / W2LU

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jon Pearl - W4ABC" <jonpearl@tampabay.rr.com>
To: "K8RI" <K8RI-on-TowerTalk@tm.net>
Cc: <towertalk@contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2013 12:10 PM
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Thrust bearing question


Hi Roger and Mike.


On 2/7/2013 10:44 AM, K8RI wrote:


2 points with the first beingm John is correct, a 16' mast putting the antenna 16' above the top of the tower substantially derates the tower below the 18 sq ft original rating.

I've yet to finalize the spacing between the HF, six and two meter antennas but I may well find some economy of space, allowing me to drop the rotator further down into the tower. I can't make it lighter but I can make it stiffer by shortening it's effective length above the top of the tower.


The other is, you already have a thrust bearing in the form of that sleeve.

I guess that's the point I was trying to rationalize between my own two ears. I received another email privately that essentially said the same thing.

It wont support vertical load, but that sleeve will substantially reduce any lateral/side load on the rotator produced by the leverage of the mast.

The M2 OR2800 is rated at 1800# vertical load and it incorporates a Center Guide (cone) for the mast to rest on. It's been a while since I've looked at the slop between the present mast that's on the tower and the sleeve. If it's substantial then a thrust bearing might be of service, if only to cut down on the lateral movement.

the sleeve will serve as a pivot point with 16' above it and 5' below it for a 16:5 ratio for lateral force on the rotator, or slightly less than 4:1 which is a big number. Fortunately the sleeve limits the pivot ability with most of the load showing up as lateral load on the tower. Thats good for the rotator, but for the tower? Not so much.

Yes, I've looked at the same ratio and it may change.


Assuming you install an antenna of 18 sq ft which is the tower rating, with 18' of antenna 16' above the top of the tower that is 18' multiplied by a 16' arm. So the tower is going to see much more than 18 sq ft of load..

The actual numbers from bottom to top are 9.25 sq. ft., 2.5 sq. ft., & 2.7 sq.ft.


The rotator was already designed to support a substantial vertical load so the bearing capable of supporting a vertical load is not necessary, but sure is handy if you need to work on the rotator without taking all the antennas down. OTOH you can build a simple fixture to hold the mast in that case

When it's all horizontal at waist level, it's all much more manageable.


IE "to me" 16' sounds like a bit much.

73 and good luck

Roger (K8RI)



Thanks again and 73,


Jon Pearl - W4ABC


_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
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>