I am showing my age, Steve. The RS stds became TIA standards quite some
time back, but old habits are hard to break.
I was using it in reference to wind loadings, not structural design details.
The UBC wind load methodology results in somewhat higher loads than those of
the TIA-222 standard of the same vintage.
I have all of the engineering design calculations that were used in the new
vintage Heights tower series, as well as the fold-over design mechanism that
I did for them, and I can assure you the thing meets the wind loads for a
70mph wind zone with significant margins.
The entire structure has been reviewed and stamped off by a reputable local
PE.
73s
Bob. W5LT
From: K7LXC@aol.com [mailto:K7LXC@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, August 31, 2007 12:28 PM
To: towertalk@contesting.com; W5LT@tx.rr.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] fold over towers
In a message dated 8/31/2007 9:03:32 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
towertalk-request@contesting.com writes:
> MY tower is rated at 35 sq ft projected antenna area in a
70mph wind zone. The entire tower and mechanism is designed according to the
UBC97 requirements, which are somewhat more severe than the more recent
versions of the RS-222 standard.
What's the RS-222 standard? Do you mean the TIA-222 Tower Standard? It
doesn't include foldovers or aluminum towers.
Cheers,
Steve K7LXC
TOWER TECH -
Professional tower services for hams
Cell: 206-890-4188
_____
Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL.com
<http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour/?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000982> .
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|