North Dakota tower

Mon Jan 4 23:54:00 EST 2010

Maybe I don't understand--easily possible; although I am an engineer,
I am certainly not a structural engineer. But it seems to me that, as
long as the ratio of height to cross-section of the entire tower as
well as the ratio of the length to cross-sectional area of the
individual structural members and guy cables were held constant, it
appears to me that the tower would be just as strong as a shorter
tower having comparable dimensional ratios. The taller tower would be
much heavier than a shorter one with the same dimensional ratios
(wouldn't the weight increase in proportion to the cube of the linear
dimension?), so it would require a much sturdier foundation. Maybe
the forces that would bring the taller tower down do not scale
linerarly with the dimensional ratios, but it is not obvious to me why
they wouldn't. So if you can explain, I would be appreciative.

Dan Strassberg (
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dave Doherty" <>
To: "Garrett Wollman" <>; "Scott Fybush"
Cc: <>
Sent: Monday, January 04, 2010 4:02 PM
Subject: Re: North Dakota tower

> I don't think there are any standing uniform guyed steel towers
> anywhere that are much higher than 2063'.  When they get that big,
> all it takes is some ice, and maybe a breeze.

More information about the Boston-Radio-Interest mailing list