PSZ 19:16 (Pind.

1/07)


DECLARATION OF THESIS / UNDERGRADUATE PROJECT PAPER AND COPYRIGHT



Authors full name : ________________________________________________

Date of birth : ________________________________________________

Title : ________________________________________________
________________________________________________
________________________________________________

Academic Session : ________________________________________________


I declare that this thesis is classified as :












I acknowledged that Universiti Teknologi Malaysia reserves the right as follows:

1. The thesis is the property of Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.
2. The Library of Universiti Teknologi Malaysia has the right to make copies for the purpose
of research only.
3. The Library has the right to make copies of the thesis for academic exchange.



Certified by :



SIGNATURE SIGNATURE OF SUPERVISOR


(NEW IC NO. /PASSPORT NO.) NAME OF SUPERVISOR


Date : Date :
NOTES : * If the thesis is CONFIDENTAL or RESTRICTED, please attach with the letter from
the organization with period and reasons for confidentiality or restriction.
UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA

CONFIDENTIAL (Contains confidential information under the Official Secret
Act 1972)*

RESTRICTED (Contains restricted information as specified by the
organization where research was done)*

OPEN ACCESS I agree that my thesis to be published as online open access
(full text)
MOHAMMAD FIRDAUS BIN PASRO RADZI
4
TH
JUNE 1987
2010/2011
P-DELTA ANALYSIS OF TRANSMISSION TOWER
STRUCTURE BY USING STAAD.PRO 2007
870604-02-5567 PM. DR. SUHAIMI ABU BAKAR







DECLARATION





I hereby declare that I have read this final year report and in my opinion this final
year report is sufficient in terms of scope and quality for the award of the degree of
Bachelor of Civil Engineering


Signature : ________________________________
Name of Supervisor : PM. DR. SUHAIMI ABU BAKAR
Date :



























P-DELTA ANALYSIS OF TRANSMISSION TOWER STRUCTURE BY
USING STAAD.PRO 2007





MOHAMMAD FIRDAUS BIN PASRO RADZI





A final year report submitted in fulfilment of the
requirements for the award of the degree of
Bachelor of Civil Engineering


Faculty of Civil Engineering
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia


MEI 2011


i








I declare that this final year report entitled P-Delta Analysis of Transmission Tower
Structure by Using Staad.Pro 2007 is the result of my own research except as cited
in the references.



Signature : ____________________________
Name : MOHAMMAD FIRDAUS BIN PASRO RADZI
Date :











ii























To my beloved parents, sisters, brother and friends for their never ending support.
Thank you for everything.
























iii








ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS




Firstly and foremost, I would like to express my gratitude to Almighty Allah
S.W.T. for giving me the guidance and strength in completing this final year project
with success. I also would like to extent my greatest thank you to all those who gave
me the possibility to complete this project. First and foremost, I would like to express
my sincere gratitude to my supervisor Associate Prof. Dr. Suhaimi Abu Bakar for his
advice, comments, guidance, support and encouragement during the completion of
my study. This work would not have been possible without their utmost capability
and intelligence. Their guidance and support have motivated me to complete this
project confidently.

I also would like to thank all other parties, those who have involved directly
or indirectly in making this research a very great success. Finally, to my beloved
family and friends whose patient and loves enabled me to complete this work. I owe
you all, the heartiest gratitude and thank you for your encouragement, inspiration and
support. Thanks for all the kindness. May the Almighty Allah S.W.T. bless us and be
with us all the time.












iv








ABSTRACT




Transmission tower structures are generally analyzed by linear static analysis
methods and second order analyses are usually neglected. Linear static analysis does
not directly reflect the structural characteristic of transmission towers. Structures that
trend toward more taller and lighter, it will result in potentially more significant to
the P-delta effects. In this study, a several model of transmission tower will be
analyzed by using linear static analysis and p-delta analysis in order to study the
importance of p-delta analysis for transmission tower structure. Eight models of
transmission tower structure were analyzed based on several widths and several
configuration of bracing. The models of transmission tower have been developed and
analyzed by using STAAD.PRO 2007 software. It is found that the effect of p-delta
analysis is significant and should be considered in the design and analysis of
transmission tower structures. The result of p-delta and static analysis show that the
difference is greater than 62%.
















v







ABSTRAK




Struktur menara pencawang umumnya dianalisis dengan menggunakan
kaedah analisis linear elastik dan analisis p-delta atau analisis bukan linear elastik
biasanya jarang di gunakan. Analisis linear elastik tidak mencerminkan ciri-ciri
struktur menara pencawang kerana struktur yang tinggi dan ringan akan lebih
berpotensi mengalami kesan P-Delta. Dalam kajian ini, beberapa model menara
pencawang akan dianalisa dengan menggunakan analisis linear elastik dan analisis
bukan linear elastik. Kedua-dua analisis ini dijalankan untuk mendapatkan pengaruh
analisis p-delta terhadap struktur menara pencawang. Lapan model struktur menara
pencawang akan di analisis dengan mengambil kira faktor kelebaran kaki menara
dan bebarapa jenis konfigurasi anggota struktur kedua. Model struktur menara
pencawang ini telah dibangunkan dengan menggunakan perisian STAAD.PRO 2007.
Hasil daripada analisis, didapati bahawa kesan p-delta mempengaruhi dan harus
dipertimbangkan dalam proses merekabentuk dan menganalisis struktur menara
penghantaran. Keputusan yang diperolehi menunjukkan perbezaan antara analisis
linear statik dan p-delta adalah lebih daripada 62%.










vi






KANDUNGAN




CHAPTER TITLE PAGE
DECLARATION i
DEDICATION ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT iii
ABSTRACT iv
ABSTRAK v
TABLE OF CONTENT vi
LIST OF TABLES x
LIST OF FIGURES xi
LIST OF APPENDICES xiii
LIST OF ABBREVIATION xiv
LIST OF SYMBOLS xiv











vii

1 INTRODUCTION

1.0 Introduction 1
1.1 Problem Statement 3
1.2 Project Objectives 4
1.3 Scope of Study 5


2 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.0 Introduction 6
2.1 Types of Transmission Structures 7
2.2 Transmission Tower Geometry and Function 8
2.3 Design and Analysis Method 11
2.3.1 Frame Method 12
2.4 Stability of Structure 13
2.5 Deformation of Structure 14
2.5.1 What is P Delta Effects? 16
2.5.1.1 P- Effect 16
2.5.1.2 P- Effect 17
2.5.2 Global Element Stiffness Matrix [K] for Second 17
Order Elastic Analysis
2.6 Behaviors and Construction Methods 19
2.6.1 Effect of Connection Rigidity 19
2.6.2 Effect of Secondary Bracing 20
2.7 Loads in a Transmission Line System 20
2.7.1 Special Loads 22
viii

2.7.2 Security Loads 23
2.7.3 Construction and Maintenance Loads 23
2.7.4 Loads on Structure 24
2.7.4.1 Vertical Loads (NESC Code) 24
2.7.4.2 Longitudinal Loads 24
2.7.4.3 Transverse Loads 25


3 PROJECT METHODOLOGY

3.0 Introduction 28
3.1 Flow Chart of the Study 31
3.2 Analysis of Transmission Tower Structure 32
3.3 Specifications and Properties of the Structure 33
3.4 Loadings 34
3.5 Description of Computer Analysis Program 35
3.5.1 Modeling Using STAAD Pro 36
3.3.2 Procedures of Modeling Using STAAD Pro 2007 37


4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.0 Introduction 41
4.1 Preliminary Analysis 42
4.2 First Section Analysis 42
4.3 Second Section Analysis 50


ix

5 CONCLUSIONS

5.0 Conclusions 53
5.1 Recommendations 55


REREFENCES 56
APPENDIX A-B 59



































x

LIST OF TABLES




TABLE NO. TITLE PAGE

3.4 Sizes of Member 33
3.5 Conductor and Ground Wire Specification 33
4.2 Result of Analysis for Displacement and Axial 44
Load at Member Leg Tower
4.3 Percentage Different for Static Analysis and P-Delta 45
Analysis





























xi

LIST OF FIGURES




FIGURE NO. TITLE PAGE

1.0 A Case of Transmission Tower Failure 3
2.0 Types of Transmission Tower Structures 7
2.1 Tower Geometry 9
2.2 Bracing 10
2.3 Beam Element 12
2.4 P- Effect and P- Effect 15
2.8 Schematic Loading 22
2.12 Vertical and Horizontal Design Spans 26
3.1 Four Various Widths of Transmission Towers 29
3.2 Four Various Configurations Bracing of 30
Transmission Towers
3.3 Flow Chart of Study 31
3.6 Procedure for Using STAAD Pro 2007 36
3.7 Creating New File 37
3.8 Creating Geometry of Transmission Tower 38
3.9 Assign Properties 39
3.10 Assign Supports 39
3.11 Assign Loading 40
4.1 Four Various Widths of Transmission Towers 43
4.4 Linear and Non-Linear Graph 46
(Transmission Tower Width 3.5m)
4.5 Displacement at Member Leg Tower 47
xii

4.6 P-Delta Analysis for All Width of Tower 48
4.7 Four Various Configurations Bracing of 50
Transmission Towers Structures
4.8 P-Delta Curves for All Tower with Various 51
Configuration Bracing






















xiii



LIST OF APPENDICES




APPENDIX TITLE PAGE

A Example Calculation Wind Loading On Structure 59
B Report STAAD.PRO 2007 64

























xiv



LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS


LST - Lattice Steel Towers
TSP - Tubular Steel Poles
ASCE - American Society of Civil Engineers
BS - British Standard
NESC - National Electrical Safety Code
CP - Code of practice



LIST OF SYMBOLS


Ke - First Order Elastic Stiffness Matrix
Kg - Geometric Stiffness Matrix
wt

- Weight of Wire
OCF

- Overload Capacity Factor
q - Dynamic Pressure of The Wind
1 S - Topography Factor
2 S - Factor of Ground Roughness, Buildings Size and Height
Above Groud
3 S - Factor of Statistical Concept
V - Wind Speed
C - The Affective Area of The Face
A - Overall Force Coefficient
m/s - Meter per Second
% - Percent
N/m
2
- Newton per Meter Square
L - Length
1






CHAPTER 1




INTRODUCTION




1.0 Introduction


Achievements in the construction industry are the measure of development in
each country. Billions of ringgit were spent each year to ensure that the construction
industry continue to stimulate economic sectors in Malaysia. Basically, there are two
types of development, i.e. development for public purposes and development for
commercial purposes. Development for public purposes involving the construction of
infrastructure, utilities and healthcare. While development for commercial purposes are
commercial and business buildings. Both these developments have caused the electricity
industry in Malaysia has grown rapidly to follow up with the rapid growth of the power
demand.


Electric transmission line plays an important role in the operation of electric
power systems. One of the important components in transmission line is a transmission
tower. Transmission tower is a medium to carry power loads from one station to another
2


station. The interruption in transmission lines system affects the countrys economic
growth. Transmission tower consist of several types and designed accordance with the
tower height and capacity of tower support load from the conductor, compression load,
wind load, vertical load, longitudinal load and uplift load.


Generally, a steel structure is not only design to sustain gravity load, but also
should be capable to resist horizontal load to ensure the stability of the structure.
Regardless of construction methods being applied, one of the important concerns is the
stability of the structure to withstand any possible loadings during its design life.
Therefore, stability analysis must be carried out in order to prevent the failure of
structure in future such as sliding, overturning or lifting off its seating. Besides that,
stability analysis can be used to identify the instability of members where the members
are inability to carry further load due to vanishing of stiffness.


Construction of a transmission tower involves processes for analysis and design.
Both of these processes are vital to ensure that the stability and securities perform at the
best. In analyzing and designing structure of the transmission towers, prediction of
structure failure must be accurate [1]. Figure 1.0 shows a collapsed transmission tower;
when such failure takes place, it is usually a cascading failure involving a number of
adjacent towers along the line. Repair is very costly, in the order of one million dollars
per kilometer off the line.


The process of analysis and design should take into account the type of materials
used, steel is a material commonly used in the construction of transmission towers. Steel
has highest strength to weight ratio. Therefore, for certain structure applications in
which the ratio of strength to weight must be kept high, thus steel offers feasible options
and become superior to any other construction material. Meanwhile, comparing with
other construction materials such as timber, steel is dimensionally stable because it does
3


not expand or contract with moisture or temperature changes. Another feature of steel is
consistent of material quality due to strict production in accordance with national
standards.











Analysis and design process of transmission tower structures using the manual
method is less efficient and less practical. The reason is the process of analysis is very
complex and must be repeated several times in order to create a safe and optimum
design. In addition, these methods also required a lot of time and a lot of computation.
Therefore, computer software is used to compute calculation and make the process more
accurate and precise.




1.1 Problem Statement


Transmission tower structures are generally analyzed by linear static analysis
methods and second order analyses are usually neglected. Linear static analysis does not
directly reflect the structural characteristic of transmission towers. Structures that trend
Figure 1.0 A Case of Transmission Tower Failure [1]
4


toward more taller and lighter, it will result in potentially more significant to the P-delta
effects. Furthermore, if the deformation of the structure is too large, the structure
become unstable and may cause collapse to the structure. It is necessary to determine the
deformation of the structure more accurately so that any failure of the structure can be
avoided.


It has been a tradition to ignore the secondary bracing members from the analysis
of towers. This is due to the assumption that the secondary members are zero force
members [2]. Some researchers found that the secondary bracings help the system to
prevent large displacement by reducing the effective length of the main members and
enhance the buckling capacity. To ensure the stability of the transmission tower
structure, assumption during analysis must be accurate and result must be coherent with
actual test.




1.2 Objectives


The objectives of this study are:
I. To study the significant of p-delta analysis for transmission tower
structure,
II. To study the stability of transmission tower structure based on several
widths and several configuration of bracing,
III. To find the optimal width of leg tower and type of configuration bracing.


5


1.3 Scope of Woks


During this study, several scopes are set to ensure that the objective of this study
can be achieved and eliminate any variables that not considered in the scope of this
study. It is considered that:
I. Elastic analysis using static load only.
II. Analysis will focus on double circuits lattice tower.














6






CHAPTER 2




LITERATURE REVIEW




2.0 Introduction


Literature review contains seven important topics that discuss specifically and
review with past study. The topics are types of transmission tower structures,
transmission tower geometry and functions, design and analysis method, behavior and
construction methods, stability of structure, deformation of structure and loads in a
transmission line system. This topics are most important part when analysis and design
of transmission tower structure.


It is essential to know basic part of transmission tower structure before analysis
and design started. Basically, there are many types of loading acting on transmission
tower structure, but for this study the loading just consider wind loading on structure and
wire, weight of the structure including all wires. Wind loading will reduce the stability
of tower structure; hence this study will focus on p-delta effect on transmission tower
structure.
7


2.1 Types of Transmission Tower Structures


In transmission lines system, transmission tower are one of the most visible
elements and also most expose structure with wind loading. The structure support the
conductor in order to transport electric power from generation sources to customer load.
There are many different designs for transmission tower structures. Two common types
are:
Lattice Steel Towers (LST) consist of a steel framework comprised many
structural components that are bolted or welded together.
Tubular Steel Poles (TSP) are hollow steel poles fabricated either as one piece or
as several pieces fitted together.



a) Single Circuit LST b) Double Circuit
LST
Figure 2.0 Types of Transmission Tower Structures
c) Single Circuit
TSP
d) Double Circuit
TSP
8


Both LSTs and TSPs can be designed to carry either one or two electrical
circuits. Commonly, double circuit structures hold the conductors in a vertical
configuration, whereas single-circuit structures hold the conductors horizontally. Due to
the vertical configuration of the conductors, double circuit structures are taller than
single-circuit structures. For this study, the analysis will focus on double circuits lattice
steel tower.




2.2 Transmission Tower Geometry and Function


Usually, the design of transmission tower structure started with development of
conceptual, which is establishes the geometry of the structure such as cross arm, bracing
panels, slope of leg tower and width of the tower base. There are two function of cross
arm, first to support conductor wires and second to support ground wires for the purpose
of lightning protection. Mostly, peak of tower structure will support ground wires. The
width of the tower base depends on the slope of the tower leg. The overall structure
height is governed by the span length of the conductors between structures.


The transmission tower structure is made up of a superstructure, body extension
and leg extensions as shown in Figure 2.1. Standard designs are developed for these
components for a given type of tower. The superstructure consists of several number of
crossarm. Body and leg extensions are added to the superstructure in order to achieve the
desired tower height.




9



























Leg Extension
Body
Extension
Superstructure
Top Cross Arm
Primary
Bracing
Tower Leg
Secondary
Bracing
Cross Arm
Figure 2.1 Tower Geometry
10


In lattice structural tower, the responsible components to carry and distribute
load is member. There are two types of members which is primary and secondary
member. The primary members of a tower are the leg and the bracing members which
carry the vertical and shear loads on the tower and transfer them to the foundation.
Secondary bracing members are used to provide intermediate support to the primary
members to reduce their unbraced length and increase their load carrying capacity.


The slope of the tower leg has a significant influence on the tower weight and
should be optimized to achieve an economical tower design. A flatter slope results in a
wider tower base which reduces the leg size and the foundation size, but will increase
the size of the bracing.


There are many way bracing member can be designed. Bracing members can be
design as a tension only (a) or tension/compression (b) and (c) system as shown in
Figure 2.2. In a tension only, the bracing members are designed to carry tension forces
only, the compression forces being carried by the horizontal strut. In a
tension/compression system, the braces are designed to carry both tension and
compression. A tension only system may prove to be economical for lighter tangent
towers. But for heavier towers, a tension/compression system is recommended as it
distributes the load equally to the tower legs.







Figure 2.2 Bracing
11


2.3 Design and Analysis Method


Many authors around the world have contributed with theoretical and
experimental investigations in order to access the best strategy to model and analyses the
steel transmission towers. It is a standard practice to model latticed towers as ideal
elastic three-dimensional trusses with pin connection at joint. Bracing members only
carry compression and tension loads. Moment due to eccentricities is assumed to be
small and is not calculated in the analysis [3]. The truss behavior assumption is
appropriate for most of the bracing angles. ASCE-10 states that larger moments can
occur in a leg member when it's bracing is insufficiently stiff as the result of a small
included angle between the leg and the diagonal bracing [4].


However, some towers have experienced premature failure where main leg
members have buckled at a load well below their calculated axial resistance [5]. Short
and Morse based on fourteen years of tower testing at National Tower Testing Station of
the UK reported that moment in the tower members can be as significant as axial stress
[6]. Knight and Santhakumar reached the same conclusion from full-scale segment test.
They suggested the necessity of considering axial load and biaxial moment in predicting
the collapse load [7]. Investigate of the causes of failures of two types of transmission
towers conducted by Al-Mashary et al indicated that the presence of considerable
bending moment in main leg might be the main cause of failure [2].


Referring to paper Robert and Lemelin, they stated when the truss method is in
agreement with tested towers, the frame method also concordant and relevant [5]. Even
though the truss method remains a more practical way to optimize the geometry of the
tower, using the frame method as well as beam elements could be a way of checking and
ensuring that we will not have any premature failure due to flexural consideration.
12


Therefore for analysis transmission tower in this project, towers are modeled with beam
elements which are using frame analysis method.


This study considered as acting vertical loads, transverse loads and longitudinal
load. Vertical load consists of structure self-weight and cables, transverse loads generate
from winds acting on structure and cables, meanwhile longitudinal load occur when
broken condition.


2.3.1 Frame Method


The frame method is characterized by the stiffness of the members with rigid
connections. Axial and shear forces with bending moments and torsion can be developed
in the members. The adopted beam finite elements presented six degrees of freedom per
node associated with translation and rotation displacements in space, respectively, as
illustrated in Figure 2.3.













Figure 2.3 Beam Element

13


2.4 Stability of Structure


The concept of stability as it applies to structures is understood best by
considering equilibrium condition of the structure. Change in geometry of a structure or
structural component under compression resulting in loss of ability to resist loading is
defined as instability. The instability of member also defined as inability to carry further
load due to vanishing stiffness [8]. Instability can lead to catastrophic failure that must
be accounted in design.


It is essential to consider stability in the development of a limit state design
standard BS 5950-1:2000. The requirements for stability assessment have undergone
very significant changes over the past number of years in methods of modeling,
analytical treatment and correlation between physical tests and theoretical computations.
According to Englekirk Stability design of steel structures must satisfy the requirements
from stability limit state [9].


When designed the structure, one of the important concerns is the structure must
be able to resist both vertical and lateral loadings. Although the forces due to wind or
earthquake are dynamic in nature, it can be assumed as equivalent static forces to
simplify the analysis and design process. Values of the static equivalents are given in the
building codes and reference should be made to the appropriate code for specific
information and the design procedures. For example, procedure to obtain static wind
loading and factors affecting the wind loading can refer to NESC loading (National
Electrical Safety Code, 2002) and CP 3: Chapter V: Part 2: 1972 / BS 6399-2:1997 -
Code of practice for wind loads.



14


2.5 Deformation of Structure


When dealing with deformation of the structure, two behaviors must be obeyed
which is elastic and plastic behavior. Hooke law is obeyed by the elastic behavior but for
the plastic behavior Hooke Law is not applicable. In elastic behavior studies, there are
two types of studies which are first-order analysis and second order analysis (non-linear
analysis).


Actually, the linear and non-linear effects can cause deflection to the structure.
Due to minor contribution of non-linear effect for deflection, the second-order elastic
analysis is always neglected. However, in some cases such as structure with high
flexibility, the non-linear effect will be increased to a considered level. Hence, the
second order elastic analysis should not be ignored due to its contribution to the
displacement of structure.


Due horizontal loading acts on structure, the structure will tend to deflect. The
resulting eccentricity of the gravity loading from the inclined axes of the structures
vertical members causes the lateral displacements of the structure and the moments in
the members increase. This effect is the second order elastic affects which also known as
P-delta effect [10].


P-delta effects will various with the dimension of the structures in term of the
structure weights and heights. For structures that the trend toward more taller and
lighter, it will resulted in potentially more significant to the P-delta effects. In heavily
clad low and medium-rise structures, the P-delta effects are small enough to be
neglected. Meanwhile, for a greater flexibility structure with a large gravity loading, it is
15


important to consider P-delta effects which will result the increase in the designed
members sizes to avoid any collapse of structures [11].


Basically, there are two types of P-delta effects which are P- and P-. The P-
also known as Big P-delta effect and is refer to second-order effect due to change of
geometry of the structure meanwhile P- is referring to second-order effect due to
member curvature and change of member stiffness under load and its other name is
Small P-delta effect [12]. The effect of P- and P- to a frame structure will be shown as
Figure 2.4.

















Figure 2.4 P- Effect and P- Effect
16


2.5.1 What is P Delta Effects?


In structural engineering, the P- or P-Delta effect refers to the unexpected
changes in ground shear, overturning moment and the axial force distribution at the base
of a sufficiently tall structure or structural component when it is subject to a critical
lateral displacement. The magnitude of the P-delta effects are related to the magnitude of
axial load P, stiffness or slenderness of the structure as a whole and slenderness of
individual elements [13]. P-Delta is a non-linear effect that occurs in every structure
where elements are subject to axial load. P-Delta is actually only one of many second-
order effects. It is a genuine effect that is associated with the magnitude of the applied
axial load (P) and a displacement (delta).


2.5.1.1 P- Effect


P- effect is one part that should be included in the second-order elastic analysis.
According to Henri Gavin Fall, defined that P- effect is the potential energy function
includes additional terms, which accounts for the interaction between the axial load
effects on the frame element and the lateral deformation of the frame element in finite
deformation analysis.


Meanwhile, Nair stated that P- effect is the effect of loads acting on the
displaced location of points of intersection of members in the structure [14]. The P-
effect destabilizing moment equal to gravity load times the horizontal displacement it
undergoes as a result of lateral displacement.



17


2.5.1.2 P- Effect


P- effect which is the effect of loads acting on the deformed shape of individual
members [15]. It is referred to as the geometrical nonlinearity effect due to the deflection
along a member and the axial force. This force tends to reduce the flexural rigidity of the
member, in the other words; the presence of axial force in a member is detrimental to the
strength of the member. Meanwhile, Mcguire stated that the P- effect is the influence of
the axial on the flexural stiffness of the individual member of the structure [16].




2.5.2 Global Element Stiffness Matrix [K] for Second Order Elastic Analysis


To derive the local element stiffness matrix of the two dimensional frame
elements, the stiffness matrix of a planar element in member in local coordinates
incorporating P-Delta effects can be expressed as in the following (2.5) [15].

[Ke + Kg]{d} = {dP} (2.5)
Where:
[Ke] is first order elastic stiffness matrix
[Kg] is geometric stiffness matrix.

The global element stiffness matrix for first order linear elastic analysis [Ke] can
be obtained from the superposition of various planar elements by considering the end of
the member supports is pinned support and vice versa. The element stiffness matrix for
the two dimensional is recalled as shown in (2.6).
18















For nonlinear, geometric stiffness matrix [Kg] is needed for the analysis. This
included the combination of bending moment and the axial force that act on the
deformed shape of structure [16].


Thus, combining the bending and the axial forces, the geometric stiffness matrix
for planar frame will be as shown in (2.7).













Where L is member length and P is the axial force in the member.
(2.6)
(2.7)
19


2.6 Behaviors and Construction Methods


Simply to say, whole structure of transmission tower construct with primary
bracing and secondary bracing. Each component in transmission tower structure has
their own responsible such as bracing. This bracing is commonly used to resist wind-
induced forces on transmission tower. The bracing is a lateral force-resisting system that
is characterized by high elastic stiffness. The high stiffness is achieved by the
introduction of diagonal bracing members that resist lateral forces on the structural
frame by developing internal axial action and relatively small flexural actions [17].


2.6.1 Effect of Connection Rigidity


Transmission towers typically use bearing type bolted connections. The common
assumption in practical transmission tower design is that the diagonals are continuous
angle beams and are in-plane pin-connected to the legs and the horizontals, but rigidly
connected to them out-of-plane. When more than one bolt is used to connect the
diagonals, the joint is more realistically a rigid joint than a pin joint. Secondary bracing
are usually connected using a single bolt.


S. Kitiporncha et al stated connection rigidity of the main bracing elements to the
main leg has a great effect on the ultimate load capacity [18]. Rigid connection increases
the buckling capacity, but the construction cost should also be taken into account. In
practice, the assumption of connection rigidity should be realistic. Otherwise we will
either overestimate or underestimate the buckling capacity of the structure, which would
be either uneconomical or dangerous.


20


2.6.2 Effect of Secondary Bracing


It has been a tradition to neglect the secondary bracing members from the
analysis of towers. This is due to assumption that secondary members are zero force
members. This assumption might be true if the tower is modeled as ideal truss where the
joints are assumed to be perfect and frictionless pinned joints. Referring to paper S.
Kitiporncha et al. They was analyze of transmission tower with two models. First model,
they was analyze with secondary bracing and second model without secondary bracing.
Result from test, they find secondary bracings help the system to prevent large
displacement by reducing the effective length of the main members and enhance the
buckling capacity. Therefore, secondary bracing should not be neglected in the analysis
although the axial stress in them is small [18].




2.7 Loads in a Transmission Line System


Generally, loads on a transmission system are caused by weather, construction or
maintenance activities and accidental loads. In most cases, transmission structures are
designed for a several number of load cases. This number load cases are combination
between events that produce loads and the resulting loads on the conductors, ground
wires and structures. The events producing the loads can be classified as weather related,
accidental, and construction and maintenance events.


Weather events are one of the importance factors that can contribute loading.
This weather not only can produce static load for structure transmission tower, but also
can create dynamic load for structure transmission tower. Actually, they are many type
21


of weather can happens for instance extreme wind or ice with accompanying wind and
high intensity wind such as tornadoes and downdraft. Coincident temperatures are also
important as they can significantly impact the loading on transmission systems.


Construction-related loads are those that act upon the structures due to the
assembly and erection of the structures and during the installation of conductors, ground
wires, insulators, etc. Similarly, Maintenance loads are those loads that act on the
structures as a result scheduled or emergency inspection and or replacement of all or part
of a structure or all or part of the ground wire, insulator, conductor, and conductor
hardware system.


Accidental loads are caused by events difficult to predict. Accidental events
include component breakage resulting from natural hazards such as hurricanes,
tornadoes, landslides, washouts, man-made hazards such as sabotages. They could also
occur due to material defects, wear, fatigue or impact from motorized vehicles and
machinery.


The forces acting on typical steel structure. As discussed above, they result from
the loads generated by the weather, accidental causes, constructions and maintenance
tasks. For static analysis, forces are defined by their intensity (magnitude) and their
direction of action.


Figure 2.8 is a schematic of loads acting on a double circuit steel lattice
transmission tower. In this case it has been assumed that longitudinal loads due to
conductor tensions in adjacent spans balance each other out and no longitudinal loads act
on the structure.

22


2.7.1 Special Loads


In addition to the weather related loads, transmission line structures are designed
for special loads that consider security and safety aspects of the line. These include
security loads for preventing cascading type failures of the structures and construction
and maintenance loads that are related to personnel safety.



















Horizontal Wind
Force Component
Conductor
Load
Figure 2.8 Schematic Loading
23


2.7.2 Security Loads


Longitudinal loads may occur on the structures due to accidental events such as
broken conductors, broken insulators, or collapse of an adjacent structure in the line due
to an environmental event such as a tornado. Regardless of the triggering event, it is
important that a line support structure be designed for a suitable longitudinal loading
condition to provide adequate resistance against cascading type failures in which a larger
number of structures fail sequentially in the longitudinal direction or parallel to the line.
For this reason, longitudinal loadings are sometimes referred to as anticascading,
failure containment, or security loads. There are two basic methods for reducing the
risk of cascading failures, depending on the type of structure, and on local conditions
and practices. These methods are: (1) design all structures for broken wire loads and (2)
install stop structures or guys at specified intervals.


2.7.3 Construction and Maintenance Loads


Construction loads are those loads that act upon structures due to the assembly
and erection of structure themselves and due to the installation of ground wires,
insulators and conductors. Maintenance loads consist of the effects of workers on the
structure being maintained and loads at adjacent structure due to temporary
modifications to permit the repair or replacement of the structure being maintained.
Workers can be injured seriously if a structure fails; therefore personal safety is
paramount in establishing construction and maintained loads. These are also termed
Safety Requirement.



24


2.7.4 Loads on Structure


Loads are calculated on the structures in three directions: vertical, transverse, and
longitudinal. The transverse load is perpendicular to the line and the longitudinal loads
act parallel to the line.


2.7.4.1 Vertical Loads (NESC Code)


The vertical load on supporting structures consists of the weight of the structure
plus the superimposed weight, including all wires, ice coated where specified. The
vertical load is given by the following equations [19]:

2.12 Figure in indicated
is and spans adjacent of points low between distance the is span design Vertical
Factor Capacity Overload
Wire of Weight
Where,
(2.9) span design vertical structure on load wire Vertical
=
=
=
OCF
wt
OCF wt



2.7.4.2 Longitudinal Loads


There are several conditions under which a structure is subjected to longitudinal
loading, which is Dead end Structures and Longitudinal Unbalanced Load:-

25


Dead end Structures, These structures are capable of withstanding the full
tension of the conductors and shield wires or combinations thereof, on one side of the
structure. Stringing, Longitudinal load may occur at any one phase or shield wire due to
a hang-up in the blocks during stringing. The longitudinal load is taken as the stringing
tension for the complete phase (i.e., all subconductors strung simultaneously) or a shield
wire. In order to avoid any prestressing of the conductors, stringing tension is typically
limited to the minimum tension required to keep the conductor from touching the ground
or any obstructions.


Longitudinal Unbalanced Load, Longitudinal unbalanced forces can develop at
the structures due to various conditions on the line such as broken wire loads. In rugged
terrain, large differentials in adjacent span lengths, combined with inclined spans, could
result in significant longitudinal unbalanced load under ice and wind conditions. Non-
uniform loading of adjacent spans can also produce longitudinal unbalanced loads.


2.7.4.3 Transverse Loads


Transverse loads are caused by wind pressure on wires and structure, and the
transverse component of the line tension at angles.


a) Wind Load on Wires (NESC Code)


For wind on the wires, we should calculate the wind on the overhead
ground wires and the wind on the conductors. The transverse load due to wind on
the wire is given by the following equations [19]:

26


2.12 Figure in shown is and spans
adjacent of midpoints between distance the is Span Horizontal
Factor Capacity Overload
Wind the of Pressure Dynamic
on Wire Load Wind Transverse
Where,
(2.11) Span Horizontal
=
=
=
=
OCF
q
F
OCF d q F
















b) Wind Load on Structures (CP3: Chapter V: Part 2: Sept 1972)


In addition to the wire load, structures are subjected to wind loads acting
on the exposed areas of the structure. The wind force coefficients on lattice
towers depend on shapes of member sections, solidity ratio, angle of incidence of
Figure 2.12 Vertical and Horizontal Design Spans
27


wind (face-on wind or diagonal wind), and shielding. The transverse load due to
wind on the structure is given by the following equations [20]:
Step 1: Determination of design wind speed, V
a


concept l statistica of Factors 3
ground above height and size building roughness, ground of Factor 2
factor Topography 1
) Structure Building
for Loading on Wind Practice of Code - 2002 : 1553 MS from extracted (
m/s 40.0 = speed wind Basic
Where,
(2.13) 3 2 1
=
=
=
=
=
S
S
S
V
S S S V V
a


Step 2: Conversion of design wind speed to dynamic pressure, q


m/s speed, d design win
) m/s and N/m2 ( unit SI in 0.613
Where,
(2.14)
2
=
=
=
a
a
V
k
kV q

Step 3: Conversion of dynamic pressure to force exerted at point of the surface of
a building


t coefficien force Overall
wind the off Pressure Dynamic
face the of area effective The
Where,
(2.15)
=
=
=
=
e
r
e r
A
q
C
qA C F


28






CHAPTER 3



MODELLING OF TRANSMISSION TOWER STRUCTURES BY USING
STAAD.PRO 2007




3.0 Introduction


To achieve the objectives for this final year project, the transmission tower
structure was modeled using STAAD.Pro 2007. The transmission tower structure was
modeled as a three dimensional space. In this study, the stability of transmission tower
structure was analyzed based on several widths and several configurations of bracing.
All model of transmission tower structure will be undergoing with preliminary analysis.
After pass with that analysis, the first and second analysis can be started. The first
analysis, transmission tower structure will be modeled with four various width at the leg
tower, which is 2.5 m, 3.5 m, 4.5 m and 5.5 m. While the second analysis, transmission
tower will be modeled with four types of configuration bracing at the leg tower. Both of
the analysis will determine P-delta effects on transmission tower structures. The support
used and the loading applied were assumed similar throughout the analysis. All model of
transmission tower are shown in Figure 3.1 and 3.2. In order to evaluate the performance
and stability of the lattice steel tower, the related responses had been extracted from
computer software analysis which is STAAD.Pro 2007.
2
9


P
a
n
e
l

4

P
a
n
e
l

3

P
a
n
e
l

2

P
a
n
e
l

1


F
i
g
u
r
e

3
.
1

F
o
u
r

V
a
r
i
o
u
s

W
i
d
t
h
s

o
f

T
r
a
n
s
m
i
s
s
i
o
n

T
o
w
e
r

S
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s

29
3
0


P
a
n
e
l

4

P
a
n
e
l

2

P
a
n
e
l

3

P
a
n
e
l

1


F
i
g
u
r
e

3
.
2

F
o
u
r

V
a
r
i
o
u
s

C
o
n
f
i
g
u
r
a
t
i
o
n
s

B
r
a
c
i
n
g

o
f

T
r
a
n
s
m
i
s
s
i
o
n

T
o
w
e
r

S
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s

30
31


3.1 Flow Chart of the Study


This study will be carried out as the planning that sketch in a flow chart as shown
in Figure 3.1.


























Figure 3.3 Flow Chart of Study
32


3.2 Analysis of Transmission Tower Structure


All the loads acting on the structure were considered as static loading and
therefore the analysis of structure was performed as static analysis. This study consists
of three section analysis. The three sections of analyses are:-


Preliminary Analysis: - Four various widths and four types of configuration bracing at
the leg tower will be analyze based on three types of loading
which is longitudinal, transverse and vertical load. All model
of transmission tower must pass for design and analysis in
order to proceed for another section analysis.

First Section Analysis: -Transmission tower structure will be modeled with four various
widths at the leg tower, which is 2.5 m, 3.5 m, 4.5 m and 5.5
m. Then, the transmission tower will be analyzing by using
static and p-delta analysis. Through the analysis, we will see
the pattern of stability tower when increases the widths of leg
tower. Throughout the analysis, the horizontal loading acting
on every each of cross arm tower are applied in increments
start from 10 kN until reach at 200 kN.

First Section Analysis:- Transmission tower will be modeled with four types of
configuration bracing at the leg tower. All the tower will be
analyze by using p-delta analysis. Through the analysis, we
will see the pattern of stability tower when we modeled with
various configuration bracing. Throughout the analysis, the
horizontal loading acting on every each of cross arm tower are
applied in increments start from 10 kN until reach at 200 kN.

33


3.3 Specifications and Properties of the Structure


The sizing of members and specifications of the lattice steel tower are shown in
Table 3.4 and 3.5. All members of the tower are taken as equal-legged angle sections
and are divided into four different panels as shown in Figure 3.1 and 3.2.


Panel
Sizes (mm)
Main Member Bracing Secondary Bracing
1
2
3
4
125 125 10
100 100 10
65 65 8
45 45 5
125 125 10
75 75 6
65 65 8
45 45 5
45 45 5
45 45 5
-
-


Specification Diameter
(m)
Weight
(N/m)
Conductor
Ground wire
95400 cm 45/7 ACSR (RAIL)
3 No. 6 Alumoweld
0.03
0.009
15.9
2.6


The tower is assumed to be in a transmission line where the span between
successive towers is 300 m and the line angle is assumed to be zero. The specifications
of the conductors and the ground wire are given in Table 3.4. A 1.8 m insulator with 75
kg weight is placed between the conductor and the cross arm.




Table 3.4 Sizes of Member
Table 3.5 Conductor and Ground Wire Specification
34


3.4 Loadings


The loadings carried by structure can be categorized in three directions: vertical,
transverse, and longitudinal. The vertical load on supporting structures consists of the
weight of the structure plus the superimposed weight, including all wires. Meanwhile
longitudinal load is unbalanced forces develop at the structures due to various conditions
on the line such as broken wire loads. In general, Transverse loads are caused by wind
pressure on wires and structure, and the transverse component of the line tension at
angles.

Type of Loading
Preliminary Analysis Self weight :-
1) Wire Conductor
2) Structure Tower
Wind loading :-
1) Wire Conductor
2) Structure Tower
Load Combination = 1.0 G
k
+ 1.4Q
k
First Section Analysis and Second Section
Analysis
Self weight :-
1) Wire Conductor
2) Structure Tower
horizontal loading acting on every each of
cross arm tower are applied in increments
start from 10 kN until reach at 200 kN




35


3.5 Description of Computer Analysis Program (With the Aid of Staadpro)


STAAD.Pro 2007 was the software used to analyze the stability of lattice steel
tower. Structural analysis with computer aided is needed for the study. Therefore, it is
necessary to have a deep understanding on it. The ability and the features of software
should be mastered before the real process is carried out. StaadPro is the structural
analysis and design software. It allows structural engineers to analyses and design
virtually a wide variety of structures through its flexible modeling environment,
advanced features and fluent data collaboration.


In today engineering world, most of the design offices of structural and
Architectural Consultants, Private as well as Government Organizations is switching
over to digital offices with Computer Aided Designing as the primary tool to make the
design fast, efficient and competitive. So it has become essential for every Engineer or
Architect to know the software that is used in their respective fields. StaadPro is the
professional's choice for steel, concrete, timber, aluminum and cold-formed steel design
of low and high-rise buildings, culverts, petrochemical plants, tunnels, bridges, piles and
much more.











36


3.5.1 Modeling Using STAAD Pro


Staadpro is the software used to analyze the response of the structure. The flow
chart of modeling using Staadpro is shown in Figure 3.6.


























Figure 3.6 Procedures for Using Staad.Pro 2007
37


3.5.2 Procedures of Modeling Using STAAD Pro 2007


Step 1: Starting STAAD Pro
Double-click the shortcut on the Windows Desktop.


Step 2: Creating New File (Figure 3.7)
Specify the name of the new file.
Specify the location where the new file will be saved.
Specify types of structure and the default unit system. (For this study the
whole structure had been modeled as three dimensional space frames).












Figure 3.7 Creating New File
38


Step 3: Creating Geometry of Transmission Tower
Create nodes and members.
Use structure wizard to create tower models. (Figure 3.8)
After selecting tower model we must merge models with STAAD Pro
environment.













Step 4: Assign Properties from Standard Library (Figure 3.9)
We need to assign geometric and material properties to the structure models.
Click general, then property bar from sub menu bar (on left screen). Click
database (on right screen) and lastly click British then ok.
Choose the appropriate shape from British Steel database and select the size
of the members. Click Add and Close. This means that the selected material
is a type of steel.
Click one of the selected materials on the list and assign the desired member.




Figure 3.8 Creating Geometry of Transmission Tower
39














Step 5: Assign Supports to the Structure (Figure 3.10)
On sub-page menu, click support. Clicks create (on the right).
Choose type of support and clicks add.
On the selected node, clicks assign and then yes.














Figure 3.9 Assign Properties
Figure 3.10 Assign Supports
40


Step 6: Assign Loading to the Structure (Figure 3.11)
Click load on sub-page menu, type the load title such as dead load.
We can add another load such as wind load.
For combination load, you must click combine.
Clicks new and type the title for combination load such as 1.0DL + 1.2WL.














Step 7: Run the analysis
Click Analysis/Print, Analysis, Perform Analysis, P-delta analysis and No
Print.
Click Analysis on main menu, click Run Analysis.
Click Analysis Option, click STAAD Analysis, and click Run Analysis.






Figure 3.11 Assign Loading
41






CHAPTER 4




ANALYSIS AND RESULT




4.0 Introduction


In order to achieve the objectives of this final project, the model of transmission
tower have been developed using software STAAD.Pro 2007. The software was chosen
because it has ability to analyze transmission tower structure with static and p-delta
analysis. In this study, the transmission tower structures are evaluated with static and p-
delta analysis in order to determine the significant of p-delta effect in transmission
tower.


For preliminary analysis four various widths and four types of configuration
bracing at the leg tower will be analyze based on three types of loading which is
longitudinal, transverse and vertical load. All model of transmission tower must pass for
design and analysis in order to proceed for another section analysis. The first analysis,
transmission tower structure will be modeled with four various width at the leg tower,
which is 2.5 m, 3.5 m, 4.5 m and 5.5 m. While the second analysis, transmission tower
42


will be modeled with four types of configuration bracing at the leg tower. Both of the
analysis will determine P-delta effects on transmission tower structures. Throughout the
analysis, the horizontal loading acting on every each of cross arm tower are applied in
increments start from 10 kN until reach at 200 kN.


As already mention, this study consist of three section of analysis. The three
sections of analyses are:-


4.1 Preliminary Analysis


Four various widths and four types of configuration bracing at the leg tower will
be analyze based on three types of loading which is longitudinal, transverse and vertical
load. All model of transmission tower must pass for design and analysis in order to
proceed for another section analysis.




4.2 First Section Analysis


For the first section analysis, the transmission tower will be analyzing by using
static and p-delta analysis. These analyses are important; because by doing both analyses
we can see the significant of p-delta analysis to the displacement and internal forces
member at transmission tower structure. Furthermore, through this study we will know
either p-delta analysis should be considered when design and analysis transmission
tower. Horizontal loading acting on every each cross arm are applied in increment to
43


make sure the pattern of stability transmission tower structure can be shown in graph
horizontal loading versus displacement.


Transmission towers are modeled with four various widths at the leg of the
tower. The widths start from 2.5 m, 3.5 m, 4.5 m and lastly 5.5 m. Through the analysis,
we will see the pattern of stability tower when increases the widths of leg tower. From
the study, the designer also can choose the optimal width of transmission tower
regarding to the weight and displacement of each tower. The models for various widths
of transmission towers structure are shown in Figure 4.1.



Figure 4.1 Four Various Widths of Transmission Tower Structures
44


Table 4.2 shows the analysis for four various widths of transmission tower
structure at member leg tower, which was analyzed by static and p-delta analysis.


Table 4.2: Result of Analysis for Displacement and Axial Load at Member Leg Tower
45


From the Table 4.2, the displacement and axial load at member leg tower
decrease when widths of the tower become higher. From there we can say, the stability
of the tower is directly proportional with the width of the leg tower. Besides that, the
table also shows total weight of the tower also increase as the increment of width leg
tower. The designer should always bear in mind, eventhough the stability of tower
increase with increment of the width leg tower; but at the same time the total weight of
tower also increase.


For further analysis and discussion, it is necessary to compare the displacement
and axial load for static analysis and p-delta analysis. Table 4.3 was developed based on
the result from Table 4.2 which shows the percentage different for static analysis and p-
delta analysis.


Width
Tower

Weight
(kN)


% Different for P-delta analysis and Static Analysis
Horizontal Load, kN
10 50 100 150 200

2.5 m

66.675
Displacement,
mm
84 96 98 99 -
Axial Load,
kN
1.5 5.5 9.2 18 -
3.5 m 70.866
Displacement,
mm
76 95 97 98 99
Axial Load,
kN
0.87 2.02 5.42 8.3 12.1
4.5 m 71.530
Displacement,
mm
72 94 97 98 98
Axial Load,
kN
0.6 5.3 3.5 5.3 7.8
5.5 m 77.103
Displacement,
mm
62 93 96 98 98
Axial Load,
kN
0.69 1.1 1.9 2.7 3.61
Table 4.3 Percentage Different For Static Analysis and P-Delta Analysis
46


From the analysis of Table 4.3, it is found that there is a major different in
displacement for p-delta analysis and static analysis. Eventhough loading become
higher, the percentage different in displacement between p-delta analysis and static
analysis was slightly changed as the increment of width leg tower. This shows
eventhough the horizontal loading is small; the effect of p-delta analysis is always
significant and should be considered when analysis of transmission tower structures.
From the Table 4.3, it is found the p-delta analysis also affect the value of axial forces at
member structure when loading become higher. Besides that, the percentage different in
axial load between p-delta analysis and static analysis was decrease as the increment of
width leg tower. From there we can say with the increment width of tower, it can reduce
the axial load in the member of transmission tower. In order to show clearly the different
result between both analysis, Figure 4.4 and Figure 4.5 will show the displacement at
member leg tower by using static and p-delta analysis.













Figure 4.4 Linear and Non-Linear Graph (Transmission Tower Width 3.5m)
47


From Figure 4.4, there are two patterns of graph we can see which is linear graph
and nonlinear graph. Linear graph produce by static analysis, while nonlinear graph
produce by p-delta analysis. For static analysis, the loadings are directly proportional to
the displacements. As the loadings increase, there is an increment in displacements.
There did not have much change in the deformation shape of the member and structure.
Meanwhile for p-delta analysis, the gradient will keep change as the value of loading
increases. The nonlinear graph for p-delta analysis is true, this is because when
transmission tower structure experience in horizontal loading and vertical loading. The
additional moment will exist than converted to lateral forces and is added to the existing
lateral forces to obtain a set of new lateral forces. The new lateral forces are applied to
the structure to obtain a new and higher displacement from previous.

Picture 4.5 showed the difference exists between both analyses displacement. It
implied that p-delta analysis had a change in shape of member transmission tower
structure. The displacements for p-delta analysis indicated that p-delta effects have a
great impact for the deformation of the member structure.


Figure 4.5 Displacements at Member Leg Transmission Tower Structures
48


Stability is one of the consideration aspects in analysis transmission tower
structure. One way to enhance the stability of tower structure is increase the width of leg
tower structure. As a designer, they should design the transmission tower structure as
optimal as possible without ignoring the stability of tower itself. Increase the width of
tower means increases the weight of tower. Due that reason, Figure 4.6 was plotted in
order to show the pattern of p delta effect on 2.5 m, 3.5 m, 4.5 m and 5.5 m width at the
leg tower.



















Figure 4.6 P-Delta Analyses for All Width of Transmission Tower Structures
40 KN from 40 m/s wind
speed acting on conductor
49


From the Figure 4.6 above, we can see tower with 5.5 m width at the leg tower
have the highest stability and highest weight. Meanwhile tower with 2.5 m width at the
leg tower produce the lowest stability and lowest weight. From there, we can summarize
stability and weight of tower will increase as the increment of width of leg tower. In
term of cost, for sure price of tower will increase as the increment of width of leg tower.
Due for that reason, Figure 4.6 will be use to select the optimal width of leg tower
without ignoring the stability of tower. Approximately, when wind speed 40 m/s go
through at the conductor of tower. The horizontal loading will generate at the cross arm
tower is around 40 kN. From Figure 4.6 if 40 kN horizontal loading acting at the tower,
the displacement between 2.5 m width and 3.5 m width are very obvious compared to
the displacement between 3.5 m, 4.5 m, and 5.5 m width. Thus, from there we can say
the optimal width of the leg tower is 3.5 m.



















50


4.3 Second Section Analysis


For second section analysis, transmission towers are modeled with four various
configurations bracing at the leg of the tower. All the tower will be analyze by using p-
delta analysis. Through the analysis, we will see the pattern of stability tower when we
modeled with various configuration bracing. The models for various configurations of
transmission towers structure are shown in Figure 4.7.



Figure 4.7 Four Various Configurations Bracing of Transmission Tower Structures
51




The results in Figure 4.8 above shows the p-delta curves for models with various
configuration bracing. The stability of transmission tower structure is measure from
slope gradient at p-delta curves. Thus, from figure above tower two and four produced a
higher stability due to have highest slope gradient. The secondary bracing was added at
tower three in order to create a new tower model, which is tower four. Now, we want
compared the p-delta curves between tower with secondary bracing (tower four) and
tower without secondary bracing (tower three). From the result, the p-delta curves
between both towers are same when horizontal load acting at below 50 kN. But after
horizontal loading become higher, the towers without secondary bracing start to displace
more than tower with secondary bracing. From the figure above, we can prove when
Figure 4.8 P-Delta Curves for All Tower with Various Configuration Bracing
52


transmission tower structures dealing with high horizontal loading. The secondary
bracing can improve the stability of tower and should not be ignored when analyze the
transmission tower structure.


From the Figure 4.8 above, we can see tower two has the highest stability and
highest weight. From that, we can say the number of bracing will affect the stability and
weight of tower. Tower two was designed with more bracing system; indirectly it will
increase the stability and weight of tower. In term of optimal design, tower three is the
most suitable because it just consumes 67.498 kN weight of tower. Besides that, the
gradient slope for graph Horizontal loading versus displacement for all towers is same
below 50 kN. Thus, tower three is the most optimal design.


















53






CHAPTER 5




CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION




5.0 Conclusion


Based on this study, several findings and conclusion is produced after the
analysis of transmission tower structure on 3D frame structure STAAD.Pro 2007. In this
study, the transmission tower structures are evaluated with static and p-delta analysis in
order to determine the significant of p-delta effect in transmission tower. Below are the
several findings and conclusion obtained from this study:

1) P-Delta effect is become more significant as the forces exerted to the
structure increased. This is proven from the result of analysis which the
differences of displacement and axial load at member between linear and p-
delta analysis increased as the forces exerted increases.

2) The effect of p-delta analysis is always significant and should be considered
in the analysis of transmission tower structures. This is proved from the
54


result of analysis where the differences between p-delta and static analysis
are greater than 62 %.

3) P-delta analysis of the model tower shows displacement and axial load at
member leg tower decrease when widths of the tower become higher. Thus,
we can say that the stability of transmission tower is directly proportional
with the width of leg tower.

4) Stability of transmission tower is increased with the weight of tower and the
optimal width of the leg tower is 3.5 m.

5) When transmission tower structures dealing with huge horizontal loading.
The secondary bracing can improve the stability of tower and should not be
ignored when analyze the transmission tower structure.

6) For all various configuration of bracing, the slope gradient for P-Delta
curves for all various configurations bracing towers graph is the same less
than 50 kN. Tower 3 is the most optimal design based on our local
horizontal loading which, i.e. 40 kN.


As a conclusion, it is not recommended to consider linear effect only in the
analysis of stability for a transmission tower structures. The consideration should be
concentrate on p-delta effect as well in order to ensure the safety of the structure
especially for high rise structure.






55



5.1 Recommendation


The present study had shown that the consideration of non-linear effect is
important for an analysis of low stiffness structure. However, there are limitations for
this current study which had ignored some of factors that will affect the deformation of a
structure in reality. Therefore, below are several recommendations for this study to be
extended:

1) Since dynamic loading is usually more critically affect the structures
stability compare to static loading, it should be considered in future study
which is more practical towards reality.

2) Various method of analysis are recommended to be used in order to
obtained and select the most appropriate method of analysis with a reliable
factor of safety.














56






REFERENCES




1. Albermani F. et al (2008). Failure analysis of transmission towers. Engineering
Failure Analysis, Elsevier.
2. Al-Mashary F.A. (1998). Nonlinear Analysis of Transmission Towers. Civil
Engineering Department, College of Engineering King Saud University, Saudi
Arabia.
3. Fan Q.H. et al (2009). Lessons Learned from Design and Test of Latticed Steel
Transmission Towers. Electrical Transmission and Substation Structures
Conference, ASCE.
4. ASCE 10-97. (1997). Design of Latticed Steel Transmission Structures",
American Society of Civil Engineers, New-York.
5. Robert V. and Lemelin D.R. (2002). Flexural Considerations in Steel
Transmission Tower Design. American Society of Civil Engineers, New York.
6. Short J. and Morse J. (1979). The variation between predicted and actual
performance of transmission towers under test conditions. Proceedings
Institution of Electrical Engineers, London, UK.
7. Knight G.M.S. and Santhakumar A.R. (March 1993). Joint Effects on Behavior
of Transmission Tower. Journal Structural Engineering, 119, No.3 p.p 698-712.
8. BS 5950-1:2000. Structural use of steelwork in building. Part 1: Code of practice
for design-Rolled and welded sections.
57


9. Englekirk R. (1994). Steel Structures Controlling Behaviour through Design.
London. John Wiley & Sons. Inc.
10. Galotti R. and Smith B.S. (1989). P-delta effects analysis, Journal of Structural
Engineering, Vol 115, No 4-6.
11. Ir Prof. SL Chan (2009) Guide on Second-order and Advance analysis of
structures, Version 2, NIDA.
12. Christopher M.H, S.E. (September 2008). Stability Analysis: Its not as hard as
you think. Modern Steel Construction pp 44-46.
13. Wilson E. L. and Habibullah A. (1987). Static and Dynamic Analysis of Multi-
Story Buildings Including P-Delta Effects. Earthquake Spectra, Earthquake
Engineering Research Institute, Vol. 3, No.3.
14. Nair R.S, PH.D., P.E., S.E. (May 2007). Stability Analysis and the 2005 AISC
Specification. Modern Steel Construction pp 48-50.
15. Degertekin S.O. and Hayalioglu M.S. (2004). Design of Nonlinear Semi-Rigid
Steel Frames with Semi-Rigid Column Bases. Electronic Journal of Structural
Engineering, 4.
16. McGuire W. (2005). Structural Analysis.
17. Ali M. and Moon K.S (2007). Structural Developments in Tall Buildings:
Current Trends and Future Prospects. Architectural Science Review Volume
50.3, pp 205-223.
18. Kitipornchai S. et al (2005). Some Practical Aspects of Modeling Lattice Towers.
Advance in Steel Structure Elsevier Ltd, Vol. 1.
19. ANSI/IEEE (1993). National Electrical Safety Code, Standard C2. American
National Standard Institute and Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers,
New York.
58


20. CP3:Chapter V: Part 2 (1972). Code of Basic Data for Design of Buildings
Chapter V: Loading Part 2: Wind Loads.



























59












APPENDIX A












60


Example Calculation Wind Loading On Structure

Area = 137382.2262 mm
2

Length Member = 2658.8292 mm
Area Member = 33235.365 mm
2

Solidity Ratio = 0.24
Force Coefficient = 3.1

Va = V*S1*S2*S3
= 40*1.0*0.78*1.0
= 31.2 m/s
q = KV
2

61


= 601.586
F = CqA
= 3.1*601.586*3.32
= 6191.523 N




Example Calculation Wind Loading On Wire Conductor


Conductor = 95400 cm 45/7 ACSR (RAIL)
Diameter = 0.03 m
Weight = 15.9 N/m
Rated Strength = 115209 N
Sag = 4.38 m

Insulator Weight = 75 Kg (1.8 m)
Wind Span = 300 m
Line Angle Assume to Zero
Wind Velocity = 40.0 m/s

Va = V*S1*S2*S3
= 40*1.0*1.0*1.0
62


= 40 m/s

q = KV
2

= 980.80

Wind Loading = 980.80*0.03*300*5
= 45000 N

Vertical Loading = ((15.9 * 300) + (75 * 9.81)) * 3
= 15000 N




Example Calculation Wind Loading On Ground Wire


Ground Wire = 3 No. 6 Alumoweld
Diameter = 0.009 m
Weight = 2.6 N/m
Rated Strength = 45725 N
Sag = 1.83 m

Va = V*S1*S2*S3
63


= 40*1.0*1.0*1.0
= 40 m/s

q = KV
2

= 980.80

Wind Loading = 980.80*0.009*300*5
= 13000 N

Vertical Loading = ((2.6 * 300) + (75 * 9.81)) * 3
= 5000 N










64










APPENDIX B


65




66




67




68




69