[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] (no subject)

Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] (no subject)
From: jimlux <>
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 07:01:04 -0700
List-post: <>
On 6/13/17 11:23 PM, Kurt Andress wrote:

I am going to make an attempt to present some information and history
that might make this conundrum more understandable for those that follow
this Reflector......
Don't shoot the messenger, I'm rooting for everyone that has a stake in
these matters! If I didn't, I would not have said a word!

So, in summary, sort of:

Tower mfrs cite a "X square feet" as opposed to a "X lbs load"

The X could be either the actual projected area (length x diameter) or some "effective area" (a number that you could plug into F = rho*V^2*A)

Antenna manufacturers gave either actual projected area, or some "effective area" as well.

So nobody really knows whether the tower or antenna is calculating for the coefficient of drag.

And, of course, the Cd approximations in 222C are wrong (not only are the actual numbers off, but they don't allow for change in Cd with respect to Reynolds number regimes)


TowerTalk mailing list

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