[TowerTalk] Why not thicker Stainless cable?

[Marlon Schafer (509-982-2181)]

Back when I was in the Air Force we used stainless for guy wires on utility
poles that were right down on the ocean.  I've never seen one break.

We didn't have all that many of them though.

I brought some home with me and we've used it for years to pull 4x4s out of
the mud for mud racing.  Never broke one there either, only pulled the ends
loose.  As I recall it's 3/8".

Marlon
(509) 982-2181                                   Equipment sales
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)                    Consulting services
42846865 (icq)                                    And I run my own wisp!
64.146.146.12 (net meeting)
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tuva Traveler" <tuvaorbust at hotmail.com>
To: <aa4lr at arrl.net>; <fjx1 at optonline.net>
Cc: <towertalk at contesting.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2004 9:58 PM
Subject: [TowerTalk] Why not thicker Stainless cable?


> Bill Coleman Wrote:
> >Although stainless is more corrosion-resistant than galvanized cable, the
> >alloy isn't as strong as other steel. A stainless cable would have to be
> >larger in diameter to have the same holding strength.
> Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL        Mail: aa4lr at arrl.net
>
> It seems from some past stories that the high strength steel cables, can
> become dangerously weakened without being overtly detectible, sometimes
with
> disasterous results...broken cable, destroyed towers, antennas, etc...I
> think the recommendation was to replace the high strength crank up cable
> every 2 years, independent of visual inspections, in order to be truly
safe.
>
> If the stainless steel cable was suitably matched to the load, it woud be
> thicker, which seems OK...
> Just make it thicker, and use larger pulleys and you may have a vastly
> longer lived cable, that won't die from corrosive weakening.  Are there
> other negatives to Stainless Steel?  (Besides Cost, HI)
> Maybe it fatigues from bending...it must be an expense issue...
>
> 73, de Pat, AA6EG
> aa6eg at hotmail.com
>