cqtestk4xs@aol.com wrote:
>> A lot has been and is learned from 'trial and error'.
> I've been watching this thread for a while....my two cents.
>
> Trial and error is nice if you are putting up a wire antenna and it falls
> down....no big deal. You're out a few bucks and some time.
>
> Tiral and error for a tower is a whole different deal...big bucks, and a
> possible loss of life...yours or an innocent neighbor's.
Depends on the situation - as has been pointed out, a short tower out on
the back 40 doesn't cry out for quite the same engineering as one next
to the house for example.
> I used to hawk tower and stuff back in FL. I was always amazed what some
> guys did in the name of "trial and error". One so called experimenter had
> 60 ft of unguyed Rohn 25 and swore that since it hadn't come down (yet) it
> was OK.
My favorite is the guy who insists that he had a great tower, even
though it is now lying in a twisted heap, and wants to put the same
thing back up again.
> I wasted my breath for about five minutes saying that it wasn't a
> really good thing to do. Another told me that guying to a tree was a very
> acceptable practice. Another told me it was possible to tell if a wire
> wire was tight enough by listening to the "ping" when you hit it. Uh, I
> prefer anchors and my Loos gauge, thank you. No room for experimentation
> here!
IMO guying to a tree is acceptable in certain cases - short tower, big
tree, done right. I was faced with a situation recently where there
really wasn't an alternative.
And as far as measuring guy tension, the timed pulse method does work
well for continuous strands (not broken up with insulators).
-Steve K8LX
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|