New (?) tower design
 

Anybody know anything about this one?

http://www.onemantowers.com/index.html

Alan AB2OS

Minnie Bannister wrote:
Anybody know anything about this one?
http://www.onemantowers.com/index.html

A self-supporting 50 foot tower in a 100 mph wind would have to have
a pretty good foundation. Better obtain their foundation cost specs
before buying the tower.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

All that I know about this particular tower is what I've
seen on the website given. I think raising the tower sections
in this way is a pretty 'niffy' idea. As for the rest of the
tower, it seems like just another 'square' tower with something
like the 'hazer' added. Nothing wrong with it as far as I could
see, but also not really anything 'special'.
As Cecil said, any 'free standing' tower needs to have a very
good (and large) base under it. Of course, that depends a lot
on
the type of soil it's in, but compared to a guyed tower in the
same 'dirt', get ready for a suprise when you find out just how
big that base has to be (then hang on to your wallet).
I think the 'unsafe' guys in the advertising is a bit much.
Sure, guys are not something to play on/around, and you do have
to
pay attention so that you don't 'clothes line' your self, but
are
they as 'unsafe' as implied? I doubt it. At least, not if they
are done right.
Can't say it isn't a nice tower, but I think you could do
just
as well with another brand at a much cheaper total price. Then
again,
I didn't see a price...
'Doc

Minnie Bannister wrote:
Anybody know anything about this one?
http://www.onemantowers.com/index.html

A self-supporting 50 foot tower in a 100 mph wind would have to have
a pretty good foundation. Better obtain their foundation cost specs
before buying the tower.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Yea, allow about 6 to 10 yards of concrete for starters.
Not sure how big of a hole that would take right off in dimensions.

On Sat, 24 Jan 2004 23:34:34 -0500, "Ralph Mowery"
wrote:


Minnie Bannister wrote:
Anybody know anything about this one?
http://www.onemantowers.com/index.html

A self-supporting 50 foot tower in a 100 mph wind would have to have
a pretty good foundation. Better obtain their foundation cost specs
before buying the tower.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Yea, allow about 6 to 10 yards of concrete for starters.
Not sure how big of a hole that would take right off in dimensions.

That's in the ballpark of a small concrete house foundation, isn't it?

That would be 162 cu ft (for 6 yards of concrete) or
10 x 10 x 1.6 ft, or
6 x 6 x 4.5 ft.

For reference, 10 yards is the typical capacity of a cement mixer
truck.

For any project, you need to look at the total cost of installation
and all components, not just the primary component.

Happy trails,
Gary (net.yogi.bear)
------------------------------------------------
at the 51st percentile of ursine intelligence

Gary D. Schwartz, Needham, MA, USA
Please reply to: garyDOTschwartzATpoboxDOTcom

On Sun, 25 Jan 2004 11:33:38 -0500, "Ralph Mowery"
wrote:

As you have shown there are many ways to pour the material . I am sure the
tower maker has their recommendations. I doubt it would do much good to
have it only 1.5 feet deep and 10 feet wide. I would think it would be
poured in more of a cubic form but deeper than it is wide. Also there is
all the rebar to install correctly and if it is like some Rohn tower there
is a specification of some rocks and sand at the bottom of the hole.
Towers are not somthing youjust stick up and hope for the best.

Agreed, it is not something to make up as you go along. You should
have something designed by a civil engineer, including off-the-shelf
designs.

This would simplify getting a building permit, especially if your town
engineer is unfamiliar with antenna towers. Might make your next-door
neighbor happier, too.

This includes how the bedding under the foundation is handled.
Adjustment for frostline in your area is needed as well.

A non-guyed tower is especially dependent on the strength of its
foundation, and if you do the math of the windload leveraged from the
top of the tower, some rather impressive forces are generated.

The rebar needs to be tied together both physically and electrically,
and thought needs to be given to grounding, both for lightning/short
circuits and for a radio counterpoise.

Happy trails,
Gary (net.yogi.bear)
------------------------------------------------
at the 51st percentile of ursine intelligence

Gary D. Schwartz, Needham, MA, USA
Please reply to: garyDOTschwartzATpoboxDOTcom

Yea, allow about 6 to 10 yards of concrete for starters.
Not sure how big of a hole that would take right off in dimensions.

That's in the ballpark of a small concrete house foundation, isn't it?

That would be 162 cu ft (for 6 yards of concrete) or
10 x 10 x 1.6 ft, or
6 x 6 x 4.5 ft.

For reference, 10 yards is the typical capacity of a cement mixer
truck.

For any project, you need to look at the total cost of installation
and all components, not just the primary component.

As you have shown there are many ways to pour the material . I am sure the
tower maker has their recommendations. I doubt it would do much good to
have it only 1.5 feet deep and 10 feet wide. I would think it would be
poured in more of a cubic form but deeper than it is wide. Also there is
all the rebar to install correctly and if it is like some Rohn tower there
is a specification of some rocks and sand at the bottom of the hole.
Towers are not somthing youjust stick up and hope for the best.

Just as an example, US Tower specifies a concrete slab of 4 x 4 x 7 for
their 72 foot self supporting crank up. Looking at their chart, the depth is
always more than the width.. Their spec is for 50 mph. So, for 100 mph, the
4x4x7 would be good for around 35 - 40 feet of tower.

Tam/WB2TT
"Ralph Mowery" wrote in message
...

Yea, allow about 6 to 10 yards of concrete for starters.
Not sure how big of a hole that would take right off in dimensions.

That's in the ballpark of a small concrete house foundation, isn't it?

That would be 162 cu ft (for 6 yards of concrete) or
10 x 10 x 1.6 ft, or
6 x 6 x 4.5 ft.

For reference, 10 yards is the typical capacity of a cement mixer
truck.

For any project, you need to look at the total cost of installation
and all components, not just the primary component.

As you have shown there are many ways to pour the material . I am sure
the
tower maker has their recommendations. I doubt it would do much good to
have it only 1.5 feet deep and 10 feet wide. I would think it would be
poured in more of a cubic form but deeper than it is wide. Also there is
all the rebar to install correctly and if it is like some Rohn tower there
is a specification of some rocks and sand at the bottom of the hole.
Towers are not somthing youjust stick up and hope for the best.

Looks like they just have "built-in" gin or or is jin pole capability.
Seems like you could do the same thing with a triangular section tower.
Looks neat, though. Pretty husky too...however...

I wonder about the fact that there is no diagonal bracing. The horiz
bracing is quite heavy looking, but it looks like one giant parallelogram to
me. What would 'ole Octave Chanute say?

--
Steve N, K,9;d, c. i My email has no u's.

"Minnie Bannister" wrote in message
...
Anybody know anything about this one?

http://www.onemantowers.com/index.html

Alan AB2OS

"'Doc" wrote in message ...
All that I know about this particular tower is what I've
seen on the website given. I think raising the tower sections
in this way is a pretty 'niffy' idea. As for the rest of the
tower, it seems like just another 'square' tower with something
like the 'hazer' added. Nothing wrong with it as far as I could
see, but also not really anything 'special'.

The one thing I don't like about it... I don't
see any triangles, anywhere. All square
construction. This causes it to rely on the
material, rather than the design, for strength.

Self-supporting towers should taper... is this
not obvious?
__
Steve
KI5YG
..