Matt,
Thank you for sharing your experience and stress test data on the Tri-Ex
W-51. I have been given a still erect tower ser. No. 55466 and was in touch
with Ricky Giordano at Tashjian recently about purchasing their TA-51L
Tilt-Over Accessory and Rigid Concrete Base RCB-37/51LT. Unfortunately Karl
decided that they didn't want to offer these pieces to me. I assume this is
due to liability as my tower does not have the ear gussets. Regarding the
tube schedule, I was provided the following for production years around year
2000:
No. 4 .065"
No. 5 .083"
No. 6 .095"
Much appreciated the finding regarding inappropriate 'folding' on the lower
section of No. 5. I believe this is the section I have read about
weaknesses in under severe loading.
Matt, by any chance do you have the fab shop drawings in digital format? If
not, perhaps we can communicate directly. My tower was purchased used by
the now silent key. I have no idea where ser. No. 55466 fits into Tri-Ex
history.
73,
Donn
KW2G
South Kingstown, RI
-----Original Message-----
From: TowerTalk [mailto:towertalk-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
maflukey@gmail.com
Sent: Monday, August 1, 2022 1:43 AM
To: TowerTalk@contesting.com
Subject: [TowerTalk] FW: Tri-Ex W-51
Hi Don,
I have a fabrication shop drawing for a Triex W-51 dated January 1967. I
don't have the installation manual. The shop drawing shows the two upper
section legs are 1" x .065" tubing with 5/16" tie rods. The bottom section
is 1.25" x .093" tubing with 1" x .065" reinforcement tubing inserts in the
lower 10' and 3/8" tie rods. The tube steel specification was ASTM A245
(now obsolete) and did not specify grade. The spec on the tie rods was SAE
1020 with 50 ksi yield strength.
I have performed a finite element structural analysis of a W-51 which
indicated the weakest point on the tower under load is in the bottom portion
of the middle section - just above the overlap region. I have photos of a
W-51 folded over from wind overload at this exact location.
The WT-51 upgrades the middle section legs to 1.25" x ?? tubing and upgrades
the lower section tie rods to 7/16". My guess is that the middle section
upgrade may have been to address the weakness in that section mentioned
above, and the lower section tie rod upgrade may have negated the need for
the inserted stiffener in the lower section allowing more economical
fabrication.
In any event, my W51 has held up for 55 years and formerly supported ~13 sf
of antenna load. The tower is still in use today. It have been re-cabled
once and the winch rebuilt once. I can't recall if I replaced the pulley
bearings or just reconditioned them. On the last install I fabricated an
adjustable fold over mounting plate which was I found to be a worthwhile
improvement.
Hope this helps and good luck.
73
Matt
KM5VI
-----Original Message-----
From: TowerTalk <towertalk-bounces@contesting.com> On Behalf Of Don Tucker
Sent: Saturday, July 30, 2022 1:10 PM
To: Towertalk <towertalk@contesting.com>
Subject: [TowerTalk] Tri-Ex W-51
Does anyone know what the difference is between the W-51 tower of old and
the later nomenclated WT-51 - or - is it just that, a renomenclated tower
with no physical changes?
I have a W-51 (on saw-horses) I was given a few decades back I'm looking at
possibly using as a second tower, but the owner had no documentation (except
for the mounting base and hole details).
All of the manuals I find on-line are WT-51.
Don W7WLL
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|