Wind and Structures

Techno-Press (테크노프레스)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Assessment of capacity curves for transmission line towers under wind loading

  • Banik, S.S. (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Western Ontario) ;
  • Hong, H.P. (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Western Ontario) ;
  • Kopp, Gregory A. (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Western Ontario)
  • Received : 2008.11.05
  • Accepted : 2009.08.27
  • Published : 2010.01.25
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The recommended factored design wind load effects for overhead lattice transmission line towers by codes and standards are evaluated based on the applicable wind load factor, gust response factor and design wind speed. The current factors and design wind speed were developed considering linear elastic responses and selected notional target safety levels. However, information on the nonlinear inelastic responses of such towers under extreme dynamic wind loading, and on the structural capacity curves of the towers in relation to the design capacities, is lacking. The knowledge and assessment of the capacity curve, and its relation to the design strength, is important to evaluate the integrity and reliability of these towers. Such an assessment was performed in the present study, using a nonlinear static pushover (NSP) analysis and incremental dynamic analysis (IDA), both of which are commonly used in earthquake engineering. For the IDA, temporal and spatially varying wind speeds are simulated based on power spectral density and coherence functions. Numerical results show that the structural capacity curves of the tower determined from the NSP analysis depend on the load pattern, and that the curves determined from the nonlinear static pushover analysis are similar to those obtained from IDA.

Keywords

References

  1. AISC (1999), Manual of steel construction: Load and resistance factor design, American Institute of Steel Construction.
  2. ASCE (1991), Guidelines for electrical transmission line structural loading, ASCE manuals and reports on engineering practice No. 74.
  3. Banik, S.S., Hong, H.P. and Kopp, G.A. (2007), "Tornado Hazard Assessment for Southern Ontario", Can. J. Civil Eng., 34, 809-842. https://doi.org/10.1139/l07-007
  4. Chay, M.T., Albermani, F. and Wilson, R. (2006), "Numerical and analytical simulation of downbursts for investigating dynamic response of structures in the time domain", Eng. Struct., 28(2), 240-254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2005.07.007
  5. Computers and Structures, Inc. (2000), Integrated structural analysis and design software, SAP2000 version 7.4. Berkeley, CA.
  6. CSA (2006), Overhead systems, CSA C22.3.1-06, Canadian Standards Association, Toronto, Ontario.
  7. CSA (2006), Design criteria for overhead transmission lines, CSA C22.3 No.606828, Canadian Standards Association, Toronto, Ontario.
  8. Da Silva, J.G.S., Da S. Vellasco, P.C.G., De Andrade, S.A.L. and De Oliviera, M.I.R. (2005), "Structural assessment of current steel design models for transmission and telecommunication towers", J. Constr. Steel Res., 61, 1108-1134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2005.02.009
  9. Davenport, A.G. (1965), "The relationship of wind structure to wind loading", Proc. of the Symp. on Wind Effects on Buildings and Structures, 1. National Physical Laboratory, Teddington, U.K.
  10. Davenport, A.G. (1968), "The dependence of wind load upon meteorological parameters", Proc. of the Int. Research Seminar on Wind Effects on Buildings and Structures, University of Toronto Press, Toronto.
  11. FEMA (2000), Prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings, Publication no. 356, prepared by the American Society of Civil Engineers for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C.
  12. Giovenale, P., Cornell, C.A. and Esteva, L. (2004), "Comparing the adequacy of alternative ground motion intensity measures for the estimation of structural responses", Earthq. Eng. Struct. D., 33(8), 951-979. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.386
  13. Hong, H.P. (2004), "Accumulation of wind induced damage on bilinear SDOF systems", Wind Struct., 7(3), 145-158. https://doi.org/10.12989/was.2004.7.3.145
  14. Kaimal, J.C., Wyngaard, J.C., Izumi, Y. and Cote, O.R. (1972), "Spectral characteristics of surface layer turbulence", Q. J. Roy. Meteorol. Soc., 98, 563-589. https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.49709841707
  15. Krawinkler, H. and Seneviratna, G.D.P.K. (1998), "Pros and Cons of a pushover analysis of seismic performance evaluation", Eng. Struct., 20(4-6), 452-464. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(97)00092-8
  16. Lee, K.H. and Rosowsky, D.V. (2006), "Fragility curves for wood frame structures subjected to lateral wind load", Wind Struct., 9(3), 217-230. https://doi.org/10.12989/was.2006.9.3.217
  17. Lee, P.S. and McClure, G. (2007), "Elastoplastic large deformation analysis of a lattice steel tower structure and comparison with full-scale tests", J. Constr. Steel Res., 63, 709-717. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2006.06.041
  18. Li, C.Q. (2000), "A stochastic model of severe thunderstorms for transmission line design", Probab. Eng. Mech., 15, 359-364. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0266-8920(99)00037-5
  19. Natarajan, K. and Santhakumar, A.R. (1995), "Reliability based optimization of transmission line towers", Comput. Struct., 55(3), 387-403. https://doi.org/10.1016/0045-7949(95)98866-O
  20. Samaras, E., Shinozuka, M. and Tsurui, A. (1985), "ARMA representation of random processes", J. Eng. Mech. ASCE, 111(3), 449-461. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(1985)111:3(449)
  21. Savory, E., Parke, G., Zeinoddini, M., Toy, N. and Disney, P. (2001), "Modeling of tornado and microburstinduced wind loading and failure of a lattice transmission tower", Eng. Struct., 23, 365-375. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(00)00045-6
  22. Simiu, E. and Scanlan, R.H. (1996), Wind effects on structures, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. New York.
  23. Twisdale, L.A. and Dunn, W.L. (1983), "Probabilistic analysis of tornado wind risks", J. Struct. Eng. ASCE, 109, 468-488. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1983)109:2(468)
  24. Vamvatsikos, D. and Cornell, C.A. (2002), "Incremental dynamic analysis", Earthq. Eng. Struct. D., 31(3), 491-514. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.141
  25. Vamvatsikos, D. and Cornell, C.A. (2005), "Direct estimation of seismic demand and capacity of multi-degreeof-freedom systems through incremental dynamic analysis of single-degree-of-freedom approximation", J. Struct. Eng., 131(4), 3-19.
  26. Vickery, B.J. (1970), "Wind action on simple yielding structures", J. Eng. Mech. D. ASCE, 4, 107-120.
  27. Villaverde, R. (2007), "Methods to assess the seismic collapse capacity of building structures: state of the art", J. Struct. Eng. ASCE, 133(1), 57-66. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2007)133:1(57)
  28. Wang, W. (2006), Probabilistic assessment of steel frames designed according to NBCC seismic provisions, PhD Thesis, The University of Western Ontario.
  29. Wyatt, T.A. and May, H. (1971), "Ultimate load behavior of structures under wind loading", Proc. of the 3rd Int. Conf. on Wind Effects on Buildings and Structures, Tokyo, Japan.

Cited by

  1. Collapse mechanisms of power towers under wind loading vol.13, pp.6, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1080/15732479.2016.1190765
  2. Probabilistic characterization of roof panel uplift capacity under wind loading vol.39, pp.12, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1139/l2012-114
  3. Dynamic Responses and Vibration Control of the Transmission Tower-Line System: A State-of-the-Art Review vol.2014, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/538457
  4. Past and future wind climates over the contiguous USA based on the North American Regional Climate Change Assessment Program model suite vol.117, pp.D19, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JD017449
  5. Effect of wind direction on the response and capacity surface of a transmission tower vol.57, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2013.10.004
  6. Probabilistic Capacity Assessment of Lattice Transmission Towers Under Strong Wind vol.1, 2015, https://doi.org/10.3389/fbuil.2015.00020
  7. Nonlinear inelastic responses of transmission tower-line system under downburst wind vol.123, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.05.047
  8. Structural behaviour of lattice transmission towers subjected to wind load vol.13, pp.11, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1080/15732479.2017.1290120
  9. Reliability of Tower and Tower-Line Systems under Spatiotemporally Varying Wind or Earthquake Loads vol.143, pp.10, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001835
  10. Capacity of a transmission tower under downburst wind loading vol.22, pp.1, 2016, https://doi.org/10.12989/was.2016.22.1.065
  11. Nonlinear structural system wind load input estimation using the extended inverse method vol.17, pp.4, 2013, https://doi.org/10.12989/was.2013.17.4.451
  12. Research on Condition Assessment Method of Transmission Tower Under the Action of Strong Wind vol.322, pp.1757-899X, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/322/7/072054
  13. Iterative global-local approach to consider the local effects in dynamic analysis of beams vol.6, pp.4, 2010, https://doi.org/10.12989/csm.2017.6.4.501
  14. Capacity assessment of existing corroded overhead power line structures subjected to synoptic winds vol.27, pp.5, 2018, https://doi.org/10.12989/was.2018.27.5.325
  15. Wind Risk Assessment of Electric Power Lines due to Hurricane Hazard vol.21, pp.2, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)nh.1527-6996.0000363
  16. Performance-based wind design of tall buildings: concepts, frameworks, and opportunities vol.31, pp.2, 2020, https://doi.org/10.12989/was.2020.31.2.103
  17. Stability behavior of the transmission line system under incremental dynamic wind load vol.31, pp.6, 2010, https://doi.org/10.12989/was.2020.31.6.509
  18. Component-based fragility analysis of transmission towers subjected to hurricane wind load vol.242, pp.None, 2010, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2021.112586