Cool it Rich! I did not mean you or anybody specific.
This was in general terms spoken. Absolutley no need
to get this winded up.
73 SM2EKM
-------------------------------------------------------
RICHARD BOYD wrote:
Well, do I sense some negativism here?
"Dont you guys ever do calculations on things like this?
A little bit of mathematics will figure all this out,
also I´m pritty sure there would be computer software
that can do stress calculations on towers depending
on how much load you put on them etc etc.
Used to do this when I was in the university, however
it was 30 years ago and darn it if I can remember how
to any more, should be able to study up on it I guess.
However these days I guess you do it in computers and
not by hand and brain.
73 Jim SM2EKM"
But at the end you get around to my approach, admitting that though you were
apparently taught such things in university, that was a long time ago and
you can't remember how to do it, so you'd have to go study! I was a history
major and NEVER studied it, and you expecdt me to go find out how to do it??
N4ZR has reinforced this view with his comment that I take it is saying that
it's not an easy calculation but a complicated one.
I try to be realistic in my approach to such things. I was never good at
math and consequently pursued my education in a different direction. And,
I've never seen the sense in "reinventing the wheel," as we say. So, when I
have a technical question I ask around to my friends who know a lot more
about such things than I do. Trying to do it myself would be tantamount
(sorry to use a big word, and it's not even a technical word!) to starting a
new career!
There ARE people who do indeed do calculations on things like this; I am not
one of them.
I remember hearing that Albert Einstein said he didn't believe in memorizing
a lot of things that we're taught in school. He said that's what reference
books are for. In my own case, I use "reference people" a lot, and we're
all experiencing a global explosion of that, the amazing internet reference
tool, where you can Google almost anything and get an answer, and a lot
quicker than going to your book shelf and finding the book that MIGHT have
the answer -- and might not -- and assuming you have an extensive library of
books -- and even if the answer is there it might take you hours to try to
find it. A reflector like this one is a resource to ask the other guys who
know, or who might know, and all it takes is a minute or two to launch your
query.
Bottom line (or down there somewhere), I know that a husky (a relative term)
tower will hold a certain amount of windload at, say, 10', a little less at,
say, 20', and so on to a more useful height of 50-plus feet (we're still not
much into metric here yet) and still have enough capability for a sizable
ham yagi. So, I've asked for "input" from other guys who know more about it
than I do and may even have reference books, or even the mathematical
skills, to calculate it for me.
73 - Rich, KE3Q
_______________________________________________
See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless Weather Stations", and lot's more. Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with any questions and ask for Sherman, W2FLA.
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|