Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Dear Jim:
Note the careful wording that I used. One person's 100 mph wind is not what an engineer considers 100 mph wind. If one considers the average density of air at sea level (kg/m^3) and assumes that it is impacting a flat plate while traveling at a steady speed (m/s) one will estimate a resultant pressure (newtons/m^2), which is proportional to the square of the speed. If one then assumes a discounting factor for a round element with respect to the just mentioned flat plate and multiplies the distributed element area times the factor times the pressure one will produce a distribution of force along the element. Making assumptions about the mechanical properties of the element, one can calculate an estimate of when the element will be loaded to the yield point somewhere along the element. The steady-wind-speed-to-yield (suggested by the above scheme) is significantly higher than that suggested by good engineering practice. Good engineering practice applies safety factors to the steps just described. One of two major safety factors is the use of a higher safety factor than one in the pressure calculation. This safety factor takes into account the fact that real world wind is not steady ( it also takes into account the increased likelihood of faster wind on taller antennas). The second major safety factor has to do with the strength of the element material. It is bad engineering to take material to theoretical yield. This is especially inappropriate with antenna elements that are able to flex in wind gusts. It might be true that an antenna element that has been very carefully assembled from selected materials could be placed in a wind tunnel, have the wind speed slowly increased to a laminar 100 mph, and have the element just have a permanent bend. Note that I have said that the LPDAs are competently designed - both electromagnetically and mechanically. They are good value. However, the mechanical ratings, as is common with most antennas sold to radio amateurs, are optimistic. The standard of care for the mechanical design of non-amateur antennas includes the use of safety factors. It is reasonable to expect that most radio amateurs will effect this class of antenna in an urban area to a height of no more than about 70 feet. Under such conditions, the probability of damaging winds is small. Ice, in the North country, is the most likely agent that will kill an antenna. However, antennas of this class that are placed in clear, rural sites at serious heights will be much more likely to fail from wind than their counterparts in town. What I would like to see is a standard to rate amateur antennas in terms of pressure. 73 Mac N8TT -- J. Mc Laughlin - Michigan USA "Jim" wrote in message om... The Tennadyne LPDA was developed in Colorado to withstand 100 MPH winds, snow and ice. They offer T-6, T-8, T-10 and T-12 element models from 12' to 30 booms. They have been in TX about 5 years now. Prices include UPS Ground service in lower 48 states. (The KMA is basically a T-8.) GL, Jim, K4SQR |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Not enough clearance for a Log Periodic - Suggestions? :( | Antenna | |||
Log Periodic 'singing' in the wind...need to suppress | Antenna | |||
WTB; 10M thru 20M log periodic | Antenna | |||
ATN Log periodic | Antenna |