My existing tower base is 7'x5'x4.5'. I also WILL NOT raise tower about
75'.
On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 9:50 PM, Grant Saviers <grants2@pacbell.net> wrote:
> All the numbers are in the 589 "Structural Analysis Report" 12/15/2010.
> Leave out whatever you like AYOR. That's what makes lawyers rich.
>
> Do not presume there are big safety margins in this design for the given
> wind spec. My read of the calcs would indicate otherwise. (nothing
> like 2 to 4x of a bridge, more like an airplane 1.3 to 1.5x).
>
> Grant KZ1W
>
> On 2/23/2011 7:07 PM, Kevin Normoyle wrote:
> > the ability for a solid block foundation to resist overturning is
> > mostly dependent on the area of one side.
> > So comparing volume is misleading, if you are willing to believe you
> > have sufficient soil for the concrete you have.
> >
> > People were willing to make all sorts of compromises for the drilled
> > anchor bolts, so why not compromise (or play it with less margin,
> > basically) on the concrete? If this is a permit situation, and someone
> > asks for calcs, it's obvious the numbers won't work for hardly any of
> > it. So this has to be a no-permit situation, or one where questions
> > aren't really asked.
> >
> > The manufacturer ships what, six 27" anchor bolts for this? Seems like
> > people were perfectly willing to go with less on the anchor bolts.
> >
> > the side area comparison is just 5.5 * 9 vs 3.5*5
> > i.e. 49.5 sq ft vs 17.5..a 2.8x difference. That's within the range of
> > possible overdesign. So you can't say the existing foundation is
> > impossible to use. Just like you can't say any drilled anchor bolt
> > solution is guaranteed to fail.
> >
> > Now we don't know what kind of pullout force the anchor bolts need.
> >
> > But: if you're going to put in weaker anchor bolts (in resisting
> > pullout) than the original manufacturing spec, it makes sense that
> > your foundation only needs to be able to be good enough for your
> > anchor bolt setup.
> >
> > If people want to crank numbers, that's the set of numbers to crank:
> > what do you need for anchor bolts, to be able to overturn his existing
> > foundation. If you don't like that, then you shouldn't like it unless
> > there's a LOT of anchor bolts.
> >
> > What I don't understand, is why people jump on foundation sizes, but
> > easily look the other way when it's convenient or problematic (like
> > deep drilled anchor bolts).
> >
> > It's like we're amazing inconsistent on our engineering...yet we
> > pretend we're not.
> >
> > -kevin
> > ad6z
> >
> > On 2/23/2011 4:15 PM, Grant Saviers wrote:
> >> Actually, the current UST wet stamp calculations for my about to be
> >> installed HDX589 has a base 5'6" sq by 9' deep. (10yds of concrete)
> >>
> >> MA-550 at 3.5 x 3.5 x 5' is 2.3 yds so that is a VERY big difference.
> >>
> >> Grant KZ1W
> >>
> >> On 2/23/2011 4:06 PM, Mike Fatchett W0MU wrote:
> >>> Are you sure about the base?
> >>>
> >>> According to US tower the MA-550 requires a concrete base of: 3'6" x
> >>> 3'6" x 5'
> >>> The HDX-589 requires a base of: 5' x 5' x 8'
> >>>
> >>> That is difference of over 5 cubic yards of concrete.
> >>>
> >>> W0MU
> >>>
> >>> On 2/23/2011 4:35 PM, Richard Zalewski wrote:
> >>>> First, thanks to all for their comments and suggestions. Some details
> >>>> omitted from my post:
> >>>>
> >>>> I will be replacing a Wilson MT61 (US TOWER MA550)that has the tilt
> >>>> base
> >>>> fixture with a US Tower HDX589MDPL. Both of these towers are self
> >>>> supporting. Both will have a SteppIR 3elment w/40m. The existing
> >>>> concrete
> >>>> base is more than adequate for either tower.
> >>>>
> >>>> I will continue to update as more information has been acquired.*
> >>>>
> >>>> HDX-589MDPL
> >>>> **
> >>>>
> >>>> HDX-589MDPL
> >>>> **
> >>>>
> >>>> HDX-589MDPL
> >>>> *
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 7:31 AM, Paul_group<
> >>>> paul_group@greenrover.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On 10/02/2011 13:53, pc2a@pi4cc.nl wrote:
> >>>>>> Richard Zalewski schreef:
> >>>>>>> I will be upgrading my tower and will be using my existing
> >>>>>>> base. This
> >>>>> will
> >>>>>>> require drilling the existing concrete base and epoxing in some new
> >>>>> bolts.
> >>>>>>> I would be interested in exchanging some emails with someone who
> >>>>>>> has
> >>>>> done
> >>>>>>> this.
> >>>>> Been using them for years, holding up masts on top of buildings,
> >>>>> railway
> >>>>> overhead line gantries and all manner of structures.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Take professional advice on the correct type to use - hilti are a
> >>>>> very
> >>>>> good supplier.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> My 80' is attached to the block with them and I sleep soundly at
> >>>>> night....
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> 73 de Paul GW8IZR IO73TI
> >>>>> http://www.gw8izr.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
> >>>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
>
--
Tnx es 73
Richard W7ZR
www.w7zr.com
*WHAT HAVE YOU DONE WITH WHAT YOU HAVE BEEN GIVEN?*
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|