Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] TowerTalk Digest, Vol 54, Issue 108

To: towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] TowerTalk Digest, Vol 54, Issue 108
From: Martin Staffa <geitaemort@sbcglobal.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 19:04:57 -0700 (PDT)
List-post: <mailto:towertalk@contesting.com>
On regards to the amount of cement to use I have purchased  US tower TX 438 
crank up self supporting 38 foot,the manual that came with it spec was 3x3x5. 
The new spec from US tower is 5x5x6 or 5 I cant remember which.I am going with 
4x4x5 I think that this is plenty. N1KGP 73

towertalk-request@contesting.com wrote:   Send TowerTalk mailing list 
submissions to
towertalk@contesting.com

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
towertalk-request@contesting.com

You can reach the person managing the list at
towertalk-owner@contesting.com

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of TowerTalk digest..."


Today's Topics:

1. Re: TowerTalk Digest, Vol 54, Issue 107 (WarrenWolff@aol.com)
2. Re: [Tower Talk] Was something else - Now Radian specs vs.
Peoria specs ?? (Jim Lux)
3. Re: [Tower Talk] Was something else - Now Radian specs vs.
Peoria specs ?? (Dick, W1KSZ)
4. Re: Redi-mix (john.brewer@us.schneider-electric.com)
5. Re: [Tower Talk] Was something else - Now Radian specsvs.
Peoria specs ?? (Roger (K8RI))
6. Tower ACCIDENT (Richard Joey Fiero II W5TFW)
7. Re: Tower ACCIDENT (Dan Cisson)
8. Re: Tower ACCIDENT (Chet Moore)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 17:09:33 EDT
From: WarrenWolff@aol.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] TowerTalk Digest, Vol 54, Issue 107
To: towertalk@contesting.com
Message-ID: 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"

Twenty Seven Cubic feet = One (1) Cubic Yard.

Warren; W7WY



************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.


------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 15:18:29 -0700
From: Jim Lux 
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] [Tower Talk] Was something else - Now Radian
specs vs. Peoria specs ??
To: "Clint Talmadge" ,

Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20070626151313.02dbc198@mail.earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

At 12:19 PM 6/26/2007, Clint Talmadge wrote:
>Bob, AD5VJ asked a question about a concrete base for a Rohn tower.
>
>When Bob, NA6T posted this reply I thought the amount of concrete 
>sounded a bit high. I checked the Radian site and sure enough that 
>is what is listed. So I drug out my old Peoria Rohn Catalog, circa 
>1983 and researched base dimensions. Peoria Rohn specs call for a 2' 
>X 2' by 4' deep hole for the tower that Bob, AD5VJ is installing. It 
>calls for guy anchors of 2' X 2' by 1' deep.
>
>Which raises the question: Did Radian re-engineer the base 
>dimensions or did the fear of litigation cause Radian to up the numbers?

Purely speculation, but a lot has changed in the last 25 years, 
including how windspeeds are specified (or, more properly, what load 
corresponds to what rated speed), perhaps some assumptions about the 
bearing capacity of soil, perhaps standard construction practices have changed?

One likes to hope that folks aren't motivated by "fear of litigation" 
but, rather, a desire to "do the job right", and if a reanalysis 
shows you need different dimensions, then so be it. I sort of doubt 
they just blindly increased the size in hopes that it would be "safer".


>I've installed two towers for myself, both Rohn 25G, both in the 30' 
>to 40' range ( I use a full section for the base) and both were 
>planted in 2' X 2' X 4' holes. Neither came down (yet).

That's not surprising on a sample of 2. The footing design would 
generally not be designed to fail at 1 mi/hr over the limit, but 
would include some margin for things like variations in soil, 
variations in material properties, etc. Failure is a probability 
thing, not a "exceed the limit and total destruction is certain" sort of thing.

Jim, W6RMK 




------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 18:51:23 -0400
From: "Dick, W1KSZ" 
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] [Tower Talk] Was something else - Now Radian
specs vs. Peoria specs ??
To: Jim Lux 
Cc: towertalk@contesting.com, Clint Talmadge 
Message-ID: <4681986B.5020601@earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

I think they changed the windload from 75 mph to 90 mph.

73, Dick, W1KSZ

Jim Lux wrote:
> At 12:19 PM 6/26/2007, Clint Talmadge wrote:
>> Bob, AD5VJ asked a question about a concrete base for a Rohn tower.
>>
>> When Bob, NA6T posted this reply I thought the amount of concrete 
>> sounded a bit high. I checked the Radian site and sure enough that 
>> is what is listed. So I drug out my old Peoria Rohn Catalog, circa 
>> 1983 and researched base dimensions. Peoria Rohn specs call for a 2' 
>> X 2' by 4' deep hole for the tower that Bob, AD5VJ is installing. It 
>> calls for guy anchors of 2' X 2' by 1' deep.
>>
>> Which raises the question: Did Radian re-engineer the base 
>> dimensions or did the fear of litigation cause Radian to up the numbers?
> 
> Purely speculation, but a lot has changed in the last 25 years, 
> including how windspeeds are specified (or, more properly, what load 
> corresponds to what rated speed), perhaps some assumptions about the 
> bearing capacity of soil, perhaps standard construction practices have 
> changed?
> 
> One likes to hope that folks aren't motivated by "fear of litigation" 
> but, rather, a desire to "do the job right", and if a reanalysis 
> shows you need different dimensions, then so be it. I sort of doubt 
> they just blindly increased the size in hopes that it would be "safer".
> 
> 
>> I've installed two towers for myself, both Rohn 25G, both in the 30' 
>> to 40' range ( I use a full section for the base) and both were 
>> planted in 2' X 2' X 4' holes. Neither came down (yet).
> 
> That's not surprising on a sample of 2. The footing design would 
> generally not be designed to fail at 1 mi/hr over the limit, but 
> would include some margin for things like variations in soil, 
> variations in material properties, etc. Failure is a probability 
> thing, not a "exceed the limit and total destruction is certain" sort of 
> thing.
> 
> Jim, W6RMK 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
> 

-- 
73, Dick, W1KSZ


------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 12:52:24 -0400
From: john.brewer@us.schneider-electric.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Redi-mix
To: towertalk@contesting.com
Message-ID:


Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

I used ~ 35 80 lb sacks in my guyed 40' tower (which is supporting a A4S w/40M 
add-on, and a
Hazer). I mixed it in a small 2 bag mixer, and had no difficulty keeping the 
pour constant
from one set of bags to the next. You need to keep moving though!

Without question, it was hard work, but I ended up with a very strong base, 
which is
undoubtedly overkill for a guyed tower, but did follow Rohns recommendation (2' 
diameter round
hole, 4' deep as I recall...mine ended up being 5' deep)

Guyed it at 40' with 1/4" EHS as Rohn specifies, absolutely no problem .... a 
very very stable
base

John K5MO



------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 19:17:31 -0400
From: "Roger (K8RI)" 
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] [Tower Talk] Was something else - Now Radian
specsvs. Peoria specs ??
To: "Dick, W1KSZ" , "Jim Lux"

Cc: towertalk@contesting.com, Clint Talmadge 
Message-ID: <001301c7b848$30e1f7e0$6400a8c0@shop32>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original

If you have good soil, good guy anchors, and zoning isn't a problem a dirt 
base works just fine with a 40 foot tower. ROHN even used to make one. As an 
educated guess, I'd say that only about one out of ten towers around here of 
60 feet or less has any concrete in the base. Mine has several yards while 
the guy anchors are 4 X 4 X 5' deep.

73

Roger (K8RI)

>I think they changed the windload from 75 mph to 90 mph.
>
> 73, Dick, W1KSZ
>
> Jim Lux wrote:
>> At 12:19 PM 6/26/2007, Clint Talmadge wrote:
>>> Bob, AD5VJ asked a question about a concrete base for a Rohn tower.
>>>
>>> When Bob, NA6T posted this reply I thought the amount of concrete
>>> sounded a bit high. I checked the Radian site and sure enough that
>>> is what is listed. So I drug out my old Peoria Rohn Catalog, circa
>>> 1983 and researched base dimensions. Peoria Rohn specs call for a 2'
>>> X 2' by 4' deep hole for the tower that Bob, AD5VJ is installing. It
>>> calls for guy anchors of 2' X 2' by 1' deep.
>>>
>>> Which raises the question: Did Radian re-engineer the base
>>> dimensions or did the fear of litigation cause Radian to up the numbers?
>>
>> Purely speculation, but a lot has changed in the last 25 years,
>> including how windspeeds are specified (or, more properly, what load
>> corresponds to what rated speed), perhaps some assumptions about the
>> bearing capacity of soil, perhaps standard construction practices have 
>> changed?
>>
>> One likes to hope that folks aren't motivated by "fear of litigation"
>> but, rather, a desire to "do the job right", and if a reanalysis
>> shows you need different dimensions, then so be it. I sort of doubt
>> they just blindly increased the size in hopes that it would be "safer".
>>
>>
>>> I've installed two towers for myself, both Rohn 25G, both in the 30'
>>> to 40' range ( I use a full section for the base) and both were
>>> planted in 2' X 2' X 4' holes. Neither came down (yet).
>>
>> That's not surprising on a sample of 2. The footing design would
>> generally not be designed to fail at 1 mi/hr over the limit, but
>> would include some margin for things like variations in soil,
>> variations in material properties, etc. Failure is a probability
>> thing, not a "exceed the limit and total destruction is certain" sort of 
>> thing.
>>
>> Jim, W6RMK
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> TowerTalk mailing list
>> TowerTalk@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>>
>
> -- 
> 73, Dick, W1KSZ
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk 



------------------------------

Message: 6
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 18:18:57 -0500
From: "Richard Joey Fiero II W5TFW" 
Subject: [TowerTalk] Tower ACCIDENT
To: 
Message-ID: <007001c7b848$5ee8a710$6701a8c0@genrobertelee>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original

to All;

A Fellow ham asked me to drop by here and tell you all my story, you see I 
am in a wheel chair,
because I was on a tower that collapsed,

My Names Joey, My Call is W5TFW, I live just outside of Baton Rouge 
Louisiana, On April 1st
I was disassembling a 100' tower with a mosley tri bander and a 2 meter 
Yagi, etc,....
The owner whos is now a silent key, told me the tower was in fine shape, 3 
sets of guy wires no rust,
seemed strong enough to me upon inspection, so up I went, I first removed 
the antennas, rotor, top section, then 6 10' sections, now at 40' the tower 
legs just BROKE, it snaped the guy wires and down I came, I broke my left 
ankle, My Pelvis, my Back, my Ribs, and I almost bleed to death,

I hope this helps you all not to make the mistakes I made.

ps: the OWNER of the tower, Came to the hospital, He had a Heart attack and 
died.



Regards, Joey
Richard Joey Fiero II
W5TFW EM-40
QSL Manager USS KIDD W5KID
Director 6 Club www.6mt.com




------------------------------

Message: 7
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 20:07:08 -0400
From: "Dan Cisson" 
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Tower ACCIDENT
To: "Richard Joey Fiero II W5TFW" ,

Message-ID: <00df01c7b84f$1a2332b0$01fea8c0@danbklmua4nvzm>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original

Joey,, I rarely make a reply to a post,, but this got my attention...And I 
wanted to reply to the reflector for it could very well help others...
I am a tower professional, I do it for a living..I do a fair amount for 
hams, and I am a ham myself...
I found a couple of things you said that did not add up correctly, obviously 
it happened,, but seems it should not have. You said you had the tower down 
to the 40 ft. level...By the way, is the tower Rohn 25??
When the tower was fully up with the antennas and all the guy cables, that 
tower was at maximum load. Then you added your body weight, your gear to 
take the tower down, and all the movement that comes with getting a 
tri-bander down from 100 ft. That is theoretically when the tower shoud have 
collapsed. The only way I could see any different, is the bottom set of 
wires created some pivot at the failure point. But if that tower was up with 
proper guy cables, with a minimum of 3/16 EHS, 3990 lb break strength, the 
guy should have never broke. I am sure sorry of your accident, I hope what I 
am describing, and what happened to you can foil another tower tragedy...I 
sure feel it should not have happened....Best Wishes,, Good Luck to you,, 
Dan Cisson N4GNR
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Richard Joey Fiero II W5TFW" 
To: 
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 7:18 PM
Subject: [TowerTalk] Tower ACCIDENT


> to All;
>
> A Fellow ham asked me to drop by here and tell you all my story, you see I
> am in a wheel chair,
> because I was on a tower that collapsed,
>
> My Names Joey, My Call is W5TFW, I live just outside of Baton Rouge
> Louisiana, On April 1st
> I was disassembling a 100' tower with a mosley tri bander and a 2 meter
> Yagi, etc,....
> The owner whos is now a silent key, told me the tower was in fine shape, 
> 3
> sets of guy wires no rust,
> seemed strong enough to me upon inspection, so up I went, I first removed
> the antennas, rotor, top section, then 6 10' sections, now at 40' the 
> tower
> legs just BROKE, it snaped the guy wires and down I came, I broke my left
> ankle, My Pelvis, my Back, my Ribs, and I almost bleed to death,
>
> I hope this helps you all not to make the mistakes I made.
>
> ps: the OWNER of the tower, Came to the hospital, He had a Heart attack 
> and
> died.
>
>
>
> Regards, Joey
> Richard Joey Fiero II
> W5TFW EM-40
> QSL Manager USS KIDD W5KID
> Director 6 Club www.6mt.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.8/869 - Release Date: 6/25/2007 
> 5:32 PM
>
> 



------------------------------

Message: 8
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 20:58:37 -0400
From: "Chet Moore" 
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Tower ACCIDENT
To: "Richard Joey Fiero II W5TFW" ,

Message-ID: <03e501c7b856$4b7e86f0$6800a8c0@OFFICE>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original

Yo Joey,

I don't know that I see a lot of mistakes or things that I haven't already 
done? . Could you expand a bit on just what were the mistakes you made? I 
guess it would have been nice to know the age and make of the tower, the 
size of the guy wires, were the guy wires attached to the legs or to a 
guying fixture? I typically have a fall arrest lanyard plus another belt 
around the tower, usually clipped off on different rungs. That doesn't help 
much if you are attached twice to the same section and that section 
collapses . Now that you think back on it, did any of the 6 sections you 
successfully got down have a lot of rust where they were joined together? 
Did the tower collapse in the middle of the section?

A couple of weeks ago the club here went out to take down a 90 footer at 
K1KO. N4BAA who was the climber after looking it over "condemned" the 
tower and said he wasn't climbing it (25G). The end result was that the 
legs were cut at the bottom and the tower was dropped and fell right on the
chosen line. After reading this, I am sure the right choice was made.

I hope you make a speedy recovery.

73

Chet N4FX

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Richard Joey Fiero II W5TFW" 
To: 
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 7:18 PM
Subject: [TowerTalk] Tower ACCIDENT


> to All;
>
> A Fellow ham asked me to drop by here and tell you all my story, you see I
> am in a wheel chair,
> because I was on a tower that collapsed,
>
> My Names Joey, My Call is W5TFW, I live just outside of Baton Rouge
> Louisiana, On April 1st
> I was disassembling a 100' tower with a mosley tri bander and a 2 meter
> Yagi, etc,....
> The owner whos is now a silent key, told me the tower was in fine shape, 
> 3
> sets of guy wires no rust,
> seemed strong enough to me upon inspection, so up I went, I first removed
> the antennas, rotor, top section, then 6 10' sections, now at 40' the 
> tower
> legs just BROKE, it snaped the guy wires and down I came, I broke my left
> ankle, My Pelvis, my Back, my Ribs, and I almost bleed to death,
>
> I hope this helps you all not to make the mistakes I made.
>
> ps: the OWNER of the tower, Came to the hospital, He had a Heart attack 
> and
> died.
>
>
>
> Regards, Joey
> Richard Joey Fiero II
> W5TFW EM-40
> QSL Manager USS KIDD W5KID
> Director 6 Club www.6mt.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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


End of TowerTalk Digest, Vol 54, Issue 108
******************************************

_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: [TowerTalk] TowerTalk Digest, Vol 54, Issue 108, Martin Staffa <=