[TowerTalk] Rebar or no rebar

[Patrick Greenlee]

As our society has become so very much more litigious and jury awards 
have risen toward enormous, the potential cost per failure has risen 
precipitously.  Tower base specs above and beyond any reasonable 
requirement tend to remove the tower company from liability.  If an 
installation fails it will be clear that is was not the fault of the 
tower MFG as their design is easily seen to be more than adequate.

Same reason why medical costs are often much more a product of 
malpractice insurance rates than the actual cost of the goods and 
services.  Anything goes wrong and there is likely going to be a law 
suite, expensive lawyers, and perhaps huge awards.

In the medical instance a reasonable response is expensive high limit 
malpractice insurance. In the tower arena specifying ultra conservative 
bases and guys, where appropriate, is part of the self defense 
preparations of the MFG.  Undoubtedly some of the increase in tower 
prices reflects the MFG's rising cost of liability insurance.

These days if anything bad happens, someone has to be at fault so they 
are identified and sued.

Patrick        NJ5G


On 5/15/2017 4:54 AM, Ken wrote:
> On 5/14/17 7:41 PM, Mike Ricketts wrote:
>> Looking at the plans, the foundation (5x5x6) calls for only the 3 base
>> legs, and no rebar is specified.
>
> In 1972, I put up a used Heights 64' tower.  All their specs at the 
> time required was 4'x4'x4' of concrete, no rebar.  Actually I put it 
> up at two different  locations.  It is amazing to me how the base 
> requirements have increased over the years.  But no one remembers any 
> of the old bases failing.   Now that same tower requires twice as much 
> concrete plus rebar.
>
> Ken WA8JXM
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk