[TowerTalk] Rohn 55 vs. Rohn 45
Joe Subich, K4IK
k4ik at subich.com
Thu Jan 13 20:54:54 EST 2005
K7LXC at aol.com writes:
> Tower capacity is directly related to leg strength; the more
> compression it'll take - the more load and wind it'll take.
> 55G is significantly stronger because of the addition wall
> thickness of the legs. Pretty simple.
3 guages of wall thickness (11 vs. 14), 1.5" diameter vs. 1.25"
diameter and 95# per section vs 70# per section...
The additional ultimate strength is fine if one is looking for
maximum load at maximum height. Since I'm looking to put up
a pair of towers in the 100 to 150 foot range over the next
couple of years, I was looking at the tradeoffs.
With the shorter towers, the vertical weight should not come
close to the limit for Rohn 45 even with the vertical component
of the increased guying. With the compressive loads are well
below the limit, increasing the guying to make certain that
the tower remains in column at maximum surface area should
provide do the job.
That said, the direct comments have all been "go with 55 and
don't sweat it."
... Joe, K4IK
More information about the TowerTalk