Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] Guyed + self supporting /2 ??

To: towertalk <towertalk@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Guyed + self supporting /2 ??
From: Steve Maki <lists@oakcom.org>
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 07:02:46 -0400
List-post: <towertalk@contesting.com">mailto:towertalk@contesting.com>
On 10/16/2014 2:49 AM, Roger (K8RI) on TT wrote:

After much repeated discussion on this forum over the years I asked a
structural engineer about this, and he confirmed what you are saying -
that basically a guy system could be designed for pretty much any
*self supporter* to favorably affect it's load limits (within a
reasonable footprint), but that it would be silly to start out
designing one that way since it would be a waste of materials. If
you're going to guy a tower, use a *guyed tower*.

But when someone says *you MUST not guy a self supporter*, it makes me
cringe.

Why. A self supporter can be designed for guys, but most are not. If
they are not designed with the guy forces taken into account, you are
just gambling.

Why? Because it's just not true to say that. Note that I'm not recommending anything, other than to speak accurately..


-Steve K8LX
_______________________________________________



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

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>