Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Structural Dynamics, EURODYN 2014

Porto, Portugal, 30 June - 2 July 2014

A. Cunha, E. Caetano, P. Ribeiro, G. Müller (eds.)
ISSN: 2311-9020; ISBN: 978-972-752-165-4

Dynamic response of guyed towers in transmission lines

submitted to broken conductors
Jennefer Lavor Bentes1, Ruy Carlos Ramos de Menezes2, Jorge Daniel Riera2
1
Faculty of Civil Engineering, Federal University of Amapá, Rod. Juscelino Kubitschek KM-02, Macapá/AP, Brazil
2
Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Av. Osvaldo Aranha 99,
Porto Alegre/RS, Brazil
Email: jenneferlb@unifap.br, ruy.menezes@ufrgs.br, jorge.riera@ufrgs.br

ABSTRACT: The article approaches the numerical structural response of a Transmission Line (TL) section due to an occurrence
of a broken cable. TLs are subjected to various types of dynamic loads. One of these loads is due to the rare event of a broken
conductor or a bundle of sub-conductors. This load case assumes an important role in designing suspension towers, which are
the most frequent structures in TL and, consequently, also play an important role in evaluating structural system reliability. An
incorrect evaluation of such load case may result in a TL weakness causing a cascade failure event. The standard design practice
is to obtain the structural response to a load case which is not more than an equivalent static load, in other words, the residual
load after the cable rupture. Therefore, the actual response of the tower is not taken into account since the dynamic nature of the
load is not modeled nor the restriction of the remaining cables. In this paper, an entire section of the TL is modeled, including
towers, cables and insulator strings. The methodology for the development of the numerical models applied to simulate this
dynamic analysis is presented, considering the discretization of the structural model using the finite element method (FEM) and
the solution of the dynamic problem by direct integration of the motion equations using the Newmark method. Special attention
is devoted to guyed towers, which are very often used in TL due to their relative low installation costs. The dynamic loading due
to cable rupture is simulated by a deactivation of a conductor’s finite element. Dynamic structural responses are shown in terms
of forces acting on tower members, conductors and guys. Finally, they are compared to the responses obtained by static analysis,
which is usually the standard practice.

KEY WORDS: Dynamic analysis; Guyed tower; Broken conductor; Numerical simulations; Newmark’s implicit integration.

1 INTRODUCTION tower, cables and bars. These authors investigated the

Amidst the main causes of electric energy transmission
failure, the collapse of transmission towers is a current
research topic in the last decades, due mainly to a huge
number of accidents occurring in transmission lines (TL)
worldwide. The failure of a tower can be associated, for
example, to wind loadings, or because of special loadings,
which usually cause significantly greater responses than those
estimated in the design phase, leading to TL accidents with
catastrophic dimensions. One action to be considered in the
design phase of these towers results from broken cables,
which, when occurs in TL, are able to trigger a phenomenon
known as cascade effect. Despite cable rupture being
characterized as a dynamic loading, in tower design this is still
considered as an equivalent static load. This simplification is
justified due to the difficulty of representing this kind of
loading in TL and the lack of well-defined normative criteria
for their consideration.
It is common to locate several studies concerning dynamic
loadings for broken cables. However, most of these studies
concern TL systems consisting of self-supporting towers.
Clark et al [1] instrumented a part of TL consisting of self-
supporting towers submitted to a broken cable loading. The
authors show the typical results of the development of a tower
leg loading, the peak loading in the tower bars and the
residual loading reached at the end of the experimental
analysis. Menezes et al [2] numerically analyzed a TL
segment that underwent a conductor cable rupture considering
the physical and geometric non-linearity of the self-supporting
influence of result amplification according to the variation of
the structural damping present in the towers and highlighted
the importance of experimental studies to quantify the
damping of these structures. Vincent et al [3] performed a
series of tests on a TL segment, consisting of self-supporting
towers, both in real structures and numerical models. The
dynamic responses of the tests on the actual structures,
measured using load cells, showed excellent agreement with
the results obtained from the finite element models.
The present study aims to contribute to the understanding
of the behavior of guyed lattice TL towers, when subjected to
dynamic loading from broken cables. The response of these
towers to this kind of load was obtained from the development
of numerical models representative of a complete structural
system of a segment of TL, as well as through static and
dynamic analyses applied with these models due to the
loading from the rupture of a conductor cable.
2 TRANSMISSION LINE MODELING
Representative numerical models of a segment of TL were
developed using the finite elements of the ANSYS software,
which can simulate cable ruptures in a dynamic analysis.
These models were subjected to static and modal analyses
before any dynamic analysis. The static analysis consisted in
checking the models when the towers were subjected only to
gravity (their own weight), and to the cable rupture
concerning the static load equivalent recommended by
Brazilian standard (NBR5422/1985).

3723
Procceedings of the 9tth International Conference
C on Struuctural Dynamicss, EURODYN 20
014

In the dynammic analysis, thhe loading duue to the ruptuure of momment capacity.. There are siix degrees off freedom at each
the conductor waas considered through the deactivation
d o one
of elem
ment node, nam mely three deggrees of translation in x, y and
a z
finite element of the cable inn a given tim me throughouut the axis,, and three deegrees of rotattion around x, y and z. Forr the
analysis. This type of analysis a wass performedd on toweer bars was coonsidered 205 GPa for the elasticity
e moddulus
reprresentative numerical
n moodels of a segment off TL of steel.
commposed of fouur steel guyeed towers andd five cable spans
(Figgure 2). The guyed
g towers have the two pairs of guy wires Tower 1 Tower 2 Tower 3 Tower 4
connnected to the same point, between the body b and the head Co
onductor 2
of thhe tower, as shown
s in the toower view of Figure 1. Thee total Shield 2
heigght of the guyyed tower wass 50.50 m; thee distance bettween
the dipoles was of o 15.14 m; the
t length of the guy wiress was Span 1 S
Span 2 Spa
an 3 n4
Span Span 5
49.55 m and lenngth of the insulator strinng was 7 m. The
segmment of the modeled
m TL waas a straight liine. Shield 1
T cables, twoo were conducctors and the other
Of the four TL Conductor 1
twoo, shield wirees. Each connductor cable in the numerical Brok
ken Point
moddel had prooperties referrring to thee union of four 571 m 5 m
571 571
1m 571 m 571 m
CAA/ACSR typpe conductoors. The shhield wires were
connnected directtly to the towwer, while thee conductors were
connnected througgh the insulaator strings. The length of o all Figure
F 2. TL segment
s with four towers an
nd five spans..
spanns was of 5711 m, totaling a 2855 m of seegment. Regaarding 2.2 Conductors
rs, Shield Wiires, Guy Wiire and Insullator
bouundary conditiions, at the noodes related too the support of
o the String Moddeling
tow
wers, at the beginning (at ( x = 0) and at the end
(at x = 2855 m) ofo the TL, all translational
t d
degrees of freedom In th
he conductor cables,
c shield wires, guy wires
w and insullator
X, Y and Z were restricted. strings modeling, the finite eleement type LINK10 was used. u
The LINK10 elem ment is a tri-dimensional type
t element that
7.57 m has a stiffness maatrix with twoo-dimensionall features, since it
6.3 m
preseents only uniiaxial tensile stiffness or compression. For
correect representaation of cablle behavior onlyo the uniaaxial
tensiile stiffness option waas activated,, with elem ment
comp pressive stiffnness removedd. The elemen nt has no flexxural
7m

rigid
dity and the tension was kept constan nt throughoutt the
elemment. A finitee element foor every 10 m of cable was
conssidered regarding the discretization of thee conductor caables
Gu

3.4 m
and shield
s wires. A length of 499.5 m was disccretized into eight
e
yW

finitee elements forr the guy wirees. The insulattors string of each
ir e

toweer was considdered as a sinngle rigid elem ment, or, in other

o
11

word ds, only ellements withh high rigiidity concerrning

/8"

deformation and capable only of transmitting loadings from f

-
5.5 m

Ra

one extreme
e to thee other of the element were considered.
50.5

ted
Te
ns
ile
St
ren
gth
=
64
7k
N

27
7.12 m Fig
gure 3. Finite Element
E LINK
K 10 (Adapted
d from ANSY
YS).
Figurre 1. Layout of
o the Guyed Tower.
T However,
H for proper modelling of a susp pended cable in a
TL segment,
s one must take innto account th he deformatioon of
2.1 Guyed Tower Modelingg
the cable
c into a caatenary form, the maximum m deflection which
w
Forr the constrruction of the t numericaal models, finite shouuld be achieveed by the actioon of the self--weight and innitial
BEA AM 188-type elements were w used forr representingg the tensiion existing inn the element. The expresssions described by
mettallic tower sttructures. Thee BEAM188 element
e is suiitable ne and Caughey (1974) citeed in Kaminskki (2007) [4] were
Irvin w
for structures with thin elemeents, allows thhe consideration of appliied to determmine the coorddinates of the cable catenarry at
the cross section of the elemennt according too the types off steel the initial time (t = 0) annd after graavity acceleraation
barss and is basedd on the Timosshenko beam element
e theorry. appliication in thee model. The initial tenssion in the cablec
Thee finite elem ment BEAM188 is a 3-D D quadratic beam condductors was related
r to EDDS ("Every DayD Stress") with
elem
ment with tenssion, compresssion, shear, toorsion and bennding 27.5% of the ultim mate tensile ccapacity of thee conductor cable
c

37244
 Prroceedings of the 9th Internationall Conference on S
Structural Dynam
mics, EURODYN 2014

(UTTS - "Ultimatee Tension Streess"). A 20% and 16% UTS S was ysis of the tow
analy wer. The first two angular frequency vallues
connsidered for the shield wiress and guy wirees, respectivelly. he guyed toweer were 15.155 rad/sec and 16.4 rad/sec. The
of th
damp ping ratio (ζ)) considered ffor the first two
t methods was
2.3 Cable Prooperties (Connductors, Shieeld Wires andd Guy
10%
% and the parameters
p w
were calculateed directly from
f
Wire)
equaation (2).
Thee conductor cables were thhe CAA/ACSR type (alum minum
cable with steel core), the shhield wires werew the extra high 2 w1 w2 2
g wires weree Galvanized Wire
streength (EHS) tyype and the guy α =ζ annd β =ζ (2)
w1 + w2 w1 + w2
Roppe 37 Wires EHS
E 1.1/8". Thhe properties of these cablees are
pressented in Tablle 1. 2.6 Broken eleement modelinng
Table 1. Cabble properties. The methodology of applying a load on the analyzed
a struccture
due tot rupture of a conductor caable uses the "Birth and Deeath"
EHS
CAA/ACSR R Guy ANS SYS feature. The loading in the structu ures is due too the
Cable Tyype Shield deacctivation of thhe finite elemeent of the con nductor cable in a
Conductor Wire
Wire
given n time of thee analysis. T The deactivatiion happens aftera
Diammeter (mm) 44.25 12.7 22.2 apply ying the acceeleration of ggravity in the TL system, after a
Areaa (mm²) 1156.73 96.52 642 on of gravity) and
struccture stabilizaation (due to tthe applicatio
Rateed tensile strenngth (kN) 169.96 119.6 647 afterr reaching the final catenaryy coordinates of the cabless and
Masss per unit lenggth (kg/m) 3.159 0.768 3.96 initiaal tensions of the cables andd the towers.
Moddulus of elasticity (GPa) 56.81 127.5 130 The
T deactivatiion of one eelement of th he cable does not
2.4 Static Anaalysis remo ove the elemeent from the system. Insteead, it deactivvates
the element
e multtiplying its sttiffness by a severe reducction
Nonn-linear geoometric static numericall analyses were
factoor of 1 × 100-6. Thus, at the load vecctor, the loaddings
perfformed prior to dynamic testing. Initiaally, models were
assocciated with thhe deactivatedd member are zeroed. Althoough
tested regarding only
o a transmiission tower subjected
s to a static
no siignificant stifffness or any looading occurss, the elementt still
loadd equivalennt accordinng to Brrazilian stanndard
"exissts" in the system,
s althouugh deactivaated, without any
NBR5422/1985. The load wass applied direectly to the tow wer’s
masss, damping, orr any other existing effect.
insuulators string, with a static load amount equivalent too 20%
The
T finite elem ment selected tto deactivate was
w the conduuctor
of the
t tension caapacity of connductor (UTS – Ultimate StressS
cablee located on thet first span and near the tower (see Fiigure
Tennsion). The tennsion concernning the union of four cablees in a
2). Prior
P to the deeactivation off the element, in the first 5 s of
singgle finite elem
ment is considdered in thesee 20%. Besidees the
analy ysis the graduual applicationn of the accelleration of graavity
loadd corresponding to the equuivalent static action, the acctions
ensuued, applied too various loadd steps until reeaching 9.81 m/s².
m
relaating to the weights of the 571 m of adjacent tower cables
c
Betwween 5 s and 15 s of analyysis, the accelleration of graavity
andd gravity weree also considdered, as illusstrated in Errro! A
was kept constantt, being the oonly load actin ng on the sysstem.
origgem da referêência não foi encontrada...
The deactivation of o the elementt occurs at 15 s and the loaading
of broken
b conduuctor on the towers is ob btained from this
deacctivation. Thee dynamic annalysis contin nues until 40 s,
whicch is enough tiime to stabilizze the system response.
2.7 The Newmaark Method
To solve
s the dynnamic probleem in questio on, the Newm mark
methhod was appllied, rated ass a method of o implicit direct
d
integ
gration. This method seeeks to satisfy y the differeential
equaation of motioon, at time t+∆
∆t, using the solution from
m the
previous time (t). The equationn of motion (33) to be solved by
the method
m can bee written as:

Figure 4.
4 Loads applieed in the staticc analysis.
2.5 Damping (3)
Struuctural dampinng is an important parameteer to be considdered Wheere [M], [C] and
a [K] are tthe matrices of
o mass, dam
mping
in dynamic
d anallyses. Therefoore, this was considered in the
softtware dampinng matrix [C C], accordingg to the forrmula and structure sttiffness, &x&t , x& t e x are the nodal
n
propposed by Rayyleigh. Rayleigh damping can c be obtaineed by acceleration, noodal velocitty displacement and  
and
commbining the mass
m matrix [M] and stiffness [K] of o the r
struucture accordinng to equationn (1). F is
i the nodal veector of extern
rnal forces. Th
he coefficientss are
given
n by:
[C ] = α ⋅ [ M ] + β ⋅ [ K ] (1) 1 1 1
a0 = a1 = a2 = ( − 1)
Rayleigh’s α and β parameeters are calcuulated from thee first αΔt 2 αΔt 2α
twoo frequency values (ω1 annd ω2) obtaineed from the modal
m a3 = (1 − δ )Δt a 4 = δΔ t a5 = a 0 a 4

3725
Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Structural Dynamics, EURODYN 2014

a 6 = a 4 a1 − 1 a 7 = a 4 a 2 − a3
These coefficients are defined in terms of Newmark’s α
and δ parameters, receiving values of 1/4 and 1/2,
respectively, according to Bathe [4].
The choice of the time increment should be made
adequately for the convergence of the solution. An advantage
of the Newmark method is that, even with arbitrarily large
values adopted for ∆t, a solution with limited values can be
obtained. However, the adopted ∆t must be sufficiently small,
and also smaller than a maximum time increment chosen from
the fundamental period of the structure T0 according to
equation (4).

T0
Δt ≤ and β = 1/ 6 (4)
π 1 − 4β
3 ANALYSIS RESULTS
In the dynamic analysis of the numerical TL model with four
towers and five spans, axial forces were taken from the main
members monitored in Tower 1 and the guy wires.
Subsequently, the most loaded members in Tower 1 were
compared to the members of the same location in the others
three towers. The same procedure was performed for the guy
wires. The monitored members are illustrated in Figure 6 and
the identification of guy wires of the tower is shown in Figure 6. Identification of the members on the guyed tower.
Figure 5.

0 Member 124
-50 Member 528
Member 473
Axial Force (kN)

-100 Member 425

Member 337
-150
-200
-250
-300
-350
0 10 20 30 40
Time (s)
Figure 5. Identification of the guy wires on the guyed tower. Figure 7. Axial force in the main members of front of
Figure 7 and Figure 8 illustrate axial force in members, Tower 1.
positioned below the guy wire-fixing point in Tower 1. At
100
t = 0s, the bars present an initial compression (approx. Member 126
Member 534
100 kN) due to the application of an initial tension on the guy 50
Member 475
wires. With the application of gravity, early on in the analysis,
Axial Force (kN)

0 Member 427
member compression gradually increases until t = 5s and then Member 383
remains constant until the moment when the rupture occurs -50
(t = 15s). -100
After the rupture, the largest peak occurs next to the guy -150
wire-fixing point (Member 337) at the front members (see
Figure 7), and the compression at the end of the analysis is -200
higher at the members closer to the guy wire-fixing point. -250
At the main members of the lateral of tower (Figure 8), the 0 10 20 30 40
first dynamic peak reaches a strength load (90 kN), unlike the Time (s)
main members of front that are predominantly compressed.
However the final compression on the main bars of front of Figure 8. Axial force in the main members of lateral of
tower is higher. Tower 1.

3726
 Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Structural Dynamics, EURODYN 2014

Figure 9 illustrates the loading on the diagonal members, 600

positioned below the guy wire-fixing point in Tower 1. The
usual loading of these bars is low, even after the rupture, with 500

Axial Force (kN)

no significant dynamic peaks. These bars do not show 400
significant loads from the conductor rupture because the load T1 - Guy
T2 - Guy
Wire
Wire
A
A
is directly transmitted and resisted by the guy wires. 300 T3 - Guy Wire A
T4 - Guy Wire A
10 200 Static
Member 292
8 Member 248
100
Axial Force (kN)

Member 208
6 Member 136
Member 60 0
4 0 10 20 30 40
2 Time (s)
0 Figure 11. Axial force in the Guy Wire A of four towers.
-2
As mentioned previously, the members with the most
-4 loads were the members closest to the guy wire-fixing point.
0 10 20 30 40 Thus, Figure 12 illustrates the axial force of member 337 of
Time (s) the four adjacent towers, as well as the axial force obtained
from the static analysis.
Figure 9. Axial force in the diagonal members of Tower 1. 0 T1 - Member 337
Figure 10 shows the traction force of the guy wires -50
T2 - Member 337
T3 - Member 337
elements in Tower 1. The initial stress on the guy wires was Axial Force (kN) T4 - Member 337
105 kN, the equivalent to 16% of the rupture load of the wire, -100 Static
which was maintained until the time of the conductor rupture. -150
At guy wire A, the first dynamic peak was of 450 kN, lower
than the value of the guy wire rupture load, of 647 kN. It is -200
noteworthy that, even though this dynamic peak was higher -250
than the rated tensile strength (which occurs when the
damping is small), there is no guarantee that there would be a -300
rupture of the guy wire, as the rated tensile strength is -350
determined by static tests. At guy wire B, the axial force drops 0 10 20 30 40
to zero due to the twisting motion of the tower causing this Time (s)
relaxation. The other two guy wires, C and D, were loaded by
traction values higher than the initial value, throughout the Figure 12. Axial force in the main member 337 of four towers.
entire analysis. Figure 13 illustrates the axial force of member 126 located
The traction efforts of guy wire A from the four towers are at the base of the four towers, along with the value of the axial
illustrated in Figure 11. After the cable rupture, only guy force obtained from the static analysis. The values of the
wire A from Tower 1 was significantly loaded. The peaks of dynamic axial force of the final compression in members 337
the guy wire loads did not exceed the load value from the and 126 at Tower 1 are virtually identical to the values
static analysis. These peaks were, in fact, lower. In guy wire A obtained in the static analysis. These same members
from Tower 2, 3 and 4, the loads were significantly smaller positioned on the other three towers presented axial forces
and reached the final values of 164 kN, 130 kN and 116 kN, below the values of the static response.
respectively.
0
500 T1 - Member 126
Guy Wire A T2 - Member 126
400 Guy Wire B -50 T3 - Member 126
Axial Force (kN)
Axial Force (kN)

Guy Wire C T4 - Member 126

Guy Wire D Static
300 -100
200
-150
100
0 -200

-100 -250
0 10 20 30 40 0 10 20 30 40
Time (s) Time (s)
Figure 10. Axial force in the guy wires of Tower 1. Figure 13. Axial force in the main member 126 of four towers.

3727
Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Structural Dynamics, EURODYN 2014

In this analysis with the guyed towers, the only diagonal 0

members that presented significant normal loads were the -20
members positioned above the guy wire-fixing point. Figure

Axial Force (kN)

-40
14 and Figure 15 illustrate the normal loads for members 43
-60
and 39, respectively, positioned at the four towers, alongside
-80
the load values obtained from the static analysis. The highest
-100
loads of these members were those in Tower 1, which is T1 - Member 116
adjacent to the rupture point of the conductor cable. The -120 T2 - Member 116
intensity of the load diminished with the increasing distance -140 T3 - Member 116
T4 - Member 116
of the member from the point of failure. After load ceasing, in -160 Static
this member at Tower 1, the value of the load in the dynamic -180
analysis was almost the same as the value obtained from the 0 10 20 30 40
static analysis. Time (s)

400 Figure 16. Axial force in the main member 116 of four
T1 - Member 43
adjacent towers.
350 T2 - Member 43
T3 - Member 43
Axial Force (kN)

300 T4 - Member 43 400

Static T1 - Member 118
250 T2 - Member 118
300 T3 - Member 118

Axial Force (kN)

200 T4 - Member 118
Static
150 200
100
50 100
0
0
0 10 20 30 40
Time (s) -100
Figure 14. Axial force in the diagonal member 43 of four 0 10 20 30 40
adjacent towers. Time (s)
Figure 17. Axial force in the main member 118 of four towers.
0
-50 100 T1 - Member 13
T2 - Member 13
Axial Force (kN)

-100 0 T3 - Member 13
Axial Force (kN)

T4 - Member 13
-100 Static
-150
-200
-200
T1 -Member 39 -300
-250 T2 -Member 39
T3 -Member 39 -400
-300 T4 -Member 39
Static -500
-350
0 10 20 30 40 -600
Time (s) 0 10 20 30 40
Time (s)
Figure 15. Axial force in the diagonal member 39 of four Figure 18. Axial force in the main member 13 of four towers.
adjacent towers.
700 T1 - Member 16
In the members located below the guy wire-fixing point, T2 - Member 16
there was the predominance of a compression load. However, 500 T3 - Member 16
Axial Force (kN)

T4 - Member 16
the traction load also occurred in Tower 1 and Tower 2 in Static
member 118 located above this point. Figure 16 and Figure 17 300
illustrate the loads on members 116 and 118. The most
tensile-loaded member above the point was member 118 in 100
Tower 1.
After the oscillation of the dynamic load in this member -100
stopped, the value of the dynamic analysis was almost the
same as the value obtained from the static analysis. However, -300
the most loaded bars of the tower were positioned on the 0 10 20 30 40
fixing corbel supporting the broken conductor and the guy Time (s)
wire-fixing point. Figure 18 and Figure 19 illustrate the axial
force on the members located on the top of the tower. Figure 19. Axial force in the main member 16 of four adjacent
towers.

3728
 Prroceedings of the 9th Internationall Conference on S
Structural Dynam
mics, EURODYN 2014

Figure 20 shoows the axial force on member 24, the most The
T dynamic effort amplification facctor is the ratio r
loadded of the guyy wire-fixing point.
p ween the maxiimum axial foorce of a certtain member, in a
betw
dynaamic analysis, and the vallue of this efffort, in the same
s
800 memmber, in a static analysis (Kaaminski et al.,, 2005).
T1 - Member 24
700 T2 - Member 24 Itt is noteworthhy that, for thhe 10% dampiing consideredd for
T3 - Member 24 thesee models, thee effort peak was considerrably reducedd, or
Axial Force (kN)

600 T4 - Member 24
was less than the final effort of the memberr. For these caases,
Sta
atic
500 the dynamic
d ampllification was calculated using the final axial
a
400 forcee value.
300 Table
T 2. Axial Force and Dyynamic Ampliification in thee
200 Members oof Tower 1.
100 Dynamic Analysis
0 Static
0 10 20 30 40 Member Annalysis Dynaamic Residuual
Dynammic
Time (s) (kN) Static
c
Peak (kN) Amplificaation
(kN)
Figuure 20. Axial force in the main
m member 24
2 of four adjacent
tow
wers. Mem
mber 24 5008,61 526,30 508,89
9 1,03
Figure 21 illlustrates the tension on Conductor
C 1. This Mem
mber 118 2005,78 206,10 205,80
0 1,00
figuure shows the results for thhe broken connductor in the span Mem
mber 11 1330,32 250,32 146,21
11 1,92
andd the other sppans that folllow. The tennsion on the cable
droppped to zero immediately after t = 15 sec in the sppan in Mem
mber 13 -4664,54 -4988,47 -464,17 1,07
whiich the break occurred. Thhe conductor in i the second span Mem
mber 337 -2772,79 -2877,08 -268,7
79 1,05
afteer the conduuctor cable rupture
r showed a decreasse in Mem
mber 425 -2256,7 -2855,65 -254,9
93 1,11
tenssion, but thaat did not appproach zero. The values then
osciillated until a final tensionn of approximmately 74% of o the Mem
mber 473 -2445,51 -2666,67 -243,14 1,09
EDS. Mem
mber 124 -2332,88 -1622,50 -226,17 0,97
This same figgure also showws the increassing tension on o the
Mem
mber 528 -2330,43 -2000,07 -227,2
23 0,99
connductor, as thee distance from
m the point off rupture increeases.
This increased conductor tenssion occurs beecause the suupport Mem
mber 126 -217,48 -88,,90 -213,0
08 0,98
on the
t last span represents
r an anchor towerr, which ceasees the Mem
mber 534 -1998,57 -40,,50 -193,9
9 0,98
trannsmission of the
t rupture looad of the coonductor alonng the
linee and causes thhe shockwavee to return to its
i point of ruppture. Mem
mber 475 -1178,4 28,222 -172,9
98 0,97
Theese results arre in agreemeent with the experimentall and Mem
mber 383 -1667,01 87,16 -156,6
65 0,94
nummerical resultss of Vincent et
e al. [3], sincce after the ruupture Mem
mber 427 -1663,72 75,777 157,62
2 0,96
the elastic deformmation in the broken conduuctor is complletely
resttored and, in that momennt, the tensionn becomes allmost Mem
mber 116 -377,217 -67,,77 -46,6
6 1,82
zeroo. Mem
mber 16 3330,15 342,07 322,43
3 1,04
Mem
mber 314 0,6 0,112 0,07 0,20
Mem
mber 136 2
2,03 9,778 2,05 4,82
Mem
mber 209 1,7 4,1 1,83 2,41
Mem
mber 223 -00,18 0,44 -0,2 2,22
Mem
mber 43 2444,6 2499,7 234,09
9 1,02
Mem
mber 39 -2001,47 -2002 -201,5
5 1,00
Mem
mber 292 -1,23 3,99 -1,1 3,17
Mem
mber 151 0,2 0,332 0,26 1,60
Mem
mber 78 2
2,04 2,8 2,02 1,37

Figgure 21. Axiall force at five adjacent spanns of Conductoor 1. Mem

mber 60 0
0,47 8,338 0,55 17,833
Mem
mber 248 1
1,93 8,5 2,03 4,40
All the resultts of the dynnamic analysis are presentted in
mbers, followed by
Tabble 2. The firstt column idenntifies the mem
4 CONCLUSIONS
o the result off the memberr loads in the static
the description of
analysis, the value of the dynnamic peak and a the final axial The modeling meethodology annd software ussed in the preesent
forcce of each meember. This taable also show ws the calculaations studyy were shownn to be adequaate for the num
merical simulaation
of thhe dynamic ammplification. of th
he problem off ruptured cables in TL segmments with guuyed

3729
Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Structural Dynamics, EURODYN 2014

towers. The solution to the dynamic problem was achieved [12] H. J. MIGLIORE AND R. L. WEBSTER. Current methods for
analyzing dynamic cable response 1979 to the present. Shock Vibr.
with the use of a finite element library, applying the Newmark Digest 14, 19-24, 1982.
method and the Rayleigh damping available in the software. [13] INTERNATIONAL STANDARD IEC 60826. Design criteria of
The numerical solutions obtained for the guyed towers overhead transmission lines. 3rd Ed. 2003-10.
were not compared to other experimental results or other [14] IRVINE, H. M., CAUGHEY, T. K., “The Linear Theory of Free
Vibrations of a Suspended Cable”, Proceedings of the Royal Society of
numerical studies due to the unavailability of experimental London, Vol. A341, 299-315, December 1974.
work reported in the literature using this type of tower. [15] KAMINSKI JR. J. Incertezas de Modelo na Análise de Torres Metálicas
The ratio of structural damping considered in the models Treliçadas de Linhas de Transmissão. Thesis of Doctored, PPGEC,
interfered mainly with the intensity of the dynamic peak, and UFRGS, 2007.
[16] KAMINSKI JR. J, MIGUEL L.F.F., MENEZES R.C.R. Aspectos
is of fundamental importance to investigate variations in this Relevantes na Análise Dinâmica de Torres de LT Submetidas à Ruptura
parameter. de Cabos. Seminário Nacional de Produção e Transmissão de Energia
When analyzing the figures that illustrate the dynamic load Elétrica. Curitiba – Paraná. 16 a 21 de Outubro de 2005.
demands of a particular member, along with the response [17] LAPOINTE M. Dynamic analysis of a power line subjected to
longitudinal loads, ME thesis, McGill University, Montréal, Canada,
obtained from the static analysis, it can be observed that the 2002.
value of the dynamic load after the oscillation ceased showed [18] MCDONALD AND PEYROT. Sag-tension calculations valid for any
very close values and, in some members, coincident values as line geometry. J. Struct. Eng. 1990.116:2374-2386. Pág 2374 – 2387.
the values obtained from the static analysis. This response [19] MOZER, J.D.,WOOD, W.A., AND HRIBAR, J.A. Broken wire tests on
a model transmission line system. IEEE Transactions on Power
indicates that applying a longitudinal load on the tower with Apparatus and Systems, PAS-100: 938-947, 1981.
the equivalent of 70% of the EDS tension of the conductor is a [20] NBR 5422/1985 – Projeto de linhas aéreas de transmissão de energia
good design practice for the design of these towers. elétrica. ABNT: Associaçao Brasileira de Normas Técnicas, Rio de
In these towers, the members fixed below the guy wire- Janeiro, 1985.
[21] OLIVEIRA, M.I.R, SILVA,J.G.S, VELLASCO,P.C.G,
fixing point were not as loaded when compared to the guy ANDRADE,S.A.L, LIMA,L.R.O. 2007. Structural Analysis of Guyed
wire loads, since these are the structural elements that most Steel Telecommunication Towers for Radio Antennas. Journal of the
absorb the loads transmitted by cable conductor ruptures. Brazilian Society of Mechanical Science & Engineering. April-June
2007, Vol. XXIX, No. 2 / 195.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS [22] PEABODY, A.B., AND MCCLURE, G. 2002A. Longitudinal design
loads. A historical perspective. ASCE Specialty Conf.: Electrical
The authors acknowledge the work support provided by the Transmission in a new age, Omaha, NE, 9-12 Sept., 8 p.
Post-Graduation Program of Civil Engineering of the Federal [23] PEYROT, A.H., KLUGGE, R.O., AND LEE, J.W. Longitudinal Loads
University of Rio Grande do Sul, PPGEC/UFRGS, Brazil and from Broken Conductors and broken Insulators and Their Effects on
Transmission Lines. IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus Systems,
the financial support provided by CAPES, Brazil. PAS-99: 222-234, 1980.
[24] STAROSSEK, U. Progressive collapse of structures. Thomas Telford,
REFERENCES 153 páginas, 2009.
[1] M. CLARK, D. J. RICHARDS, D. CLUTTERBUCK. Measured
dynamic Performance of Electricity Transmission Towers Following
Controlled Broken-Wire Events. B2 – 313. CIGRE, 2006.
[2] MENEZES, R. C. R, KAMINSKI Jr., MIGUEL, L. F. F., Gerson
Moacyr Sisniegas Alva. Análise Dinâmica da Ruptura de Cabos num
Tramo de LT. XII Encontro Regional Iberoamericano do CIGRÉ. Foz
do Iguaçu – PR. 20 a 24 de Maio de 2007.
[3] VINCENT, P., HUET, C., CHARBONNEAU, M., GUILBAULT, P.,
LAPOINTE, M., AND MCCLURE, G. Testing and numerical
simulation of overhead transmission lines dynamics under component
failure conditions. 40th General Session of CIGRÉ, Paris, France, 29
August- 3 Sept., Paper No. B2-308, 8p, 2004.
[4] BATHE, K.J. Finite element procedures in engineering analysis.
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1996.
[5] AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS (ASCE). ASCE
Manual 74, Guidelines for Electrical Transmission Line Structural
Loading. Manuals and Reports on Engineering Practice, American
Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, Virginia, 2010.
[6] AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS (ASCE). ASCE
Standard 10-97, Design of Latticed Steel Transmission Structures.
Manuals and Reports on Engineering Practice, American Society of
Civil Engineers, New York, NY, 2000.
[7] CIGRÉ B2-12(WG22) Technical Brochure. Mechanical Security of
Overhead Lines. Containing Failures and Mitigating Their Effects.
2012.
[8] CLOUGH, R.W. E PENZIEN, J. Dynamics of Structures. McGraw-Hill,
New York, USA, 634 pages, 2003.
[9] COOK, R.D. - Concepts and Applications of Finite Elements Analysis,
3ª ed., John Wiley&Sons, 1987.
[10] G. MCCLURE , M. LAPOINTE. Modeling the structural dynamic
response of overhead transmission lines. Computers and Structures 81
825–834, 2003.
[11] GROEHS, A. G. Mecânica Vibratória. São Leopoldo, RS: Editora
Unisinos, 2a edição, 2005.

3730