ASCE Practice 74-Rev 2006

ASCE Manuals and Reports on Engineering Practice #74 Guidelines for Electrical Transmission Lines Structural Loads
Frank W. Agnew Terry Burley Michael D. Miller John D. Mozer Mark Ostendorp Alain Peyrot C. Jerry Wong
October 18, 2006 Revised ASCE Manual No. 74 - Section 2 Ice and Wind 1
ASCE Manuals and Reports on Engineering Practice #74

Frank W. Agnew Jim Andersen Mike S. Cheung Harry V. Durden Jim Hogan James M. McGuire John D. Mozer Mark Ostendorp George T. Watson Richard F. Aichinger Terry Burley Habib J. Dagher William Y. Ford Magdi F. Ishac Kishor C. Mehta Robert E. Nickerson Alain Peyrot C. Jerry Wong
Revised ASCE Manual No. 74 - Section 2 Ice and Wind
Carl W. Austin Ron J. Carrington Nicholas J. DeSantis Bruce Freimark Kathleen Jones Michael D. Miller Wesley J. Oliphant David Tennent
October 18, 2006
Transmission Line Structural Loading Guide
First edition was published in 1984 Design Guidelines
Second edition was published in 1991 Manual and Reports on Engineering Practice
October 18, 2006
Forward Section 1 - Introduction to Load Criteria Section 2 - Weather Related Loads Section 3 - Additional Load Considerations Section 4 - Wire System Section 5 - Examples Appendices
October 18, 2006

Appendices Reference Definitions, Notations and SI Conversion Factors Limitations of Reliability Based Design Numerical Coefficient Q Conversion of Wind Speed Averaging Time Supplemental Information on Structure Vibration Equations for Gust Response Factors Supplemental Information on Force Coefficients Supplemental Information on Ice Loading Supplemental Information on Special Loads Investigation of Transmission Line Failures
OVERVIEW OF LOAD CRITERIA Section 1

Introduction (1.0) Principal Systems of a Transmisison Line (1.1) Loads and Relative Reliability (1.2)
Weather Related Events Additional Load Considerations Loads and Load Effects
Wire Systems (1.3) Limit States (1.4)

Component Strength Relative Reliability of Components and Failure Containment Considerations for Special Structures Load and Resistance Factor Design
Revised ASCE Manual No. 74 - Section 2 Ice and Wind 6
October 18, 2006
Introduction (1.0)
This manual addresses transmission line structure design issues that must be considered to provide:
Cost effective structures Reliable structures
October 18, 2006
Key Issues Addressed by the Manual

Uniform procedures and definitions across the industry for calculation of loads. Structure designs with acceptable minimum reliability. Design loads and load factors that are independent of structure materials. Adjustments of load criteria to reduce occurrence of cascading failures. Incentives for developing better local data for weather related phenomena. Inclusion of legislated load.
Principal Systems of a T-Line (1.2)

The Structural Support System.
Towers, poles and foundations. Primary task of supporting the wire system.
The Wire System.

Conductors, ground wires, insulators and attachment hardware. Much of the unusual behavior and most of the problems in a line start on, or are generated by, the wire system.
Loads and Relative Reliability (1.2)

Convenient to distinguish between events that produce loads and the resulting loads in the line components. Load events can be classified as:
Weather-Related Loads. Construction and Maintenance Loads. Secondary Loads.
Loads causing damage to a line component, due to:
Vehicle or aircraft accidents Lightning Ice and/or wind overload Vandalism
May result in a cascading failure. Falls within the designation of Failure Containment (FC).
Weather-Related Events (1.2.1)

Extreme wind. Extreme ice with accompanying wind. High intensity winds
Microbursts Tornados
Coincident temperature
October 18, 2006
11
Return Period (RPN)

For example, an event with a 50-year return period (RP50) represents an extreme event that is reached or exceeded with a probability of 1/50 or 2% every year. Because extreme events are not evenly spaced over time, there will be some 50-year periods with no RP50 events and other 50year periods with 2 or more events equaling or exceeding RP50 values.
Probability Density Function of Load Effect
October 18, 2006
13
Probability of RPN Events in 50 Years

Load Return Period RP (years) 25 50 100 200 500
October 18, 2006
Exceedance Probability of RP Event in 50 Years = 1-(1-1/RP)50 0.87 0.64 0.39 0.22 0.12
14
Return Period Adjustments (1.2.1.1)

Can adjust the relative reliability of a design by changing the RP of the design load. The higher the RP of the design load, the more reliable (lower probability of failure) the design. Using a consistent nominal design strength, the relative probability of failure of two components is inversely proportional to the design load RP. Thus, doubling the design load RP reduces the relative probability of failure by a factor of approximately 2.
October 18, 2006
15
Probability Density Function of R
October 18, 2006
16
Probability Density Functions of Q & R
October 18, 2006
17
Relative Reliability Factor (RRF)
Probability of failure for a RP50 load event RRF Probability of failure for a RPN load event
October 18, 2006
18
Why Use Relative Reliability?

Useful tool to approximately adjust design reliability. Currently very difficult to accurately calculate probability of failure. Powerful mathematical tools are available, but we dont have all of the data necessary to carry out the analysis. For example, consider the uncertainty in predicting the Force Coefficients.
Extreme Wind Load Factors (Table 1.2-1)

Relative Reliability Factor (RRF) 0.5 1 2 4 8
October 18, 2006
Load RP (years)
Wind Load Factor (w) 0.85 1.00 1.15 1.30 1.45

20
25 50 100 200 400

Extreme Ice Factors (Table 1.2-2)

Relative Reliability Factor (RRF) 0.5 1 2 4 8
October 18, 2006
Load RP (years)
25 50 100 200 400
Ice Concurrent Thickness Wind Load Factor Factor (i) (w) 0.80 1.0 1.00 1.0 1.25 1.0 1.50 1.0 1.85 1.0
21
Spatial Influences on Weather-Related Events (1.2.1.2)

Data for the wind and ice maps were collected at points. Appropriate for the design of point structures. A transmission line is a linear system that is exposed to a larger number of extreme load events than a single point structure. Difficult to select load criteria based on length of the line. Result would be structure designs suitable for a line of given length, but not suitable for another line of different length.
Additional Load Considerations (1.2.2)

Failure containment Construction and maintenance loads Legislated loads
October 18, 2006
23
Limit States Design (1.4)

Failure limit state
Condition where component can no longer sustain the load. May lead to failure of the line.
Damage limit state

Condition where the component and line will still function, but permanent damage has been done. Serviceability and performance of line may be compromised.
Load and Resistance Factor Design (1.4.4)

Manual provides suggested load factors and load combinations for transmission line design. Load factors can be based on the selected Relative Reliability Factor, load combination, safety requirements and legislated standards. Strength factors account for the variability of component strength and are applied to nominal strength equations for the components based on strength guides and standards.
LRFD Format
Rn Effect of [DL + Q ]
October 18, 2006
26
Strength Factor to convert to a 5% LEL with 10% COVR (Table 1.4-2)

LEL, e%, of the Nominal Strength Value 0.1 1 2 5 10 20 mean
October 18, 2006
Strength Factor, , for COVR = 0.05 0.10 0.20
1.00 0.97 0.95 0.93 0.92 0.90 0.86
1.16 1.07 1.04 1.00 0.96 0.92 0.85
1.48 1.27 1.21 1.12 1.04 0.95 0.79

27
Selection of Strength Factor (1.4.4.4)

Manual provides typical values of the LEL and COVR for different components used in a line.
Steel components and steel and prestressed concrete poles. Reinforced concrete. Wood poles. Foundations. Conductors and ground wires.
Summary of LRFD Method

I - SELECT RELATIVE RELIABILITY FACTOR (RRF) OR MINIMUM DESIGN LOAD RETURN PERIOD DEPENDING OF TYPE OF LINE (TABLE 1.2-1) II - OBTAIN FACTORS, , from Tables 1.2-1 and 1.2-2 III - DETERMINE DESIGN LOAD EFFECT QD IN EACH COMPONENT:
Weather or Failure Containment Construct & Maint. Legislated Loads
QD = EFFECT OF [DL and Q50 ] QD = EFFECT OF [DL and QRP ]
QD = EFFECT OF [ DL & FC ] QD = EFFECT OF [DL and CM (C&M)] QD = EFFECT OF [ LL ]
IV - OBTAIN STRENGTH FACTOR, , FROM TABLE 1.4-2 V - DESIGN COMPONENT for NOMINAL STRENGTH, Rn SUCH THAT:
Rn > QD
October 18, 2006
29
Extreme Wind Loads Section 2.1
Based on 2% annual probability, 3-second gust wind speed

Wind force equation (Section 2.1.1) Numerical coefficient (Section 2.1.2) Basic wind speed (Section 2.1.3) Velocity pressure exposure coefficient (Section 2.1.4) Gust response factor (Section 2.1.5) Force coefficient (Section 2.1.6) Topography effects (Section 2.1.7) Wind load applications on latticed towers (Section 2.1.8)
3 Second Gust Wind Force
(Section 2.1.1)
F = w * Q * kZ * kzt * (V50)2 * G * Cf * A
Where: F - Wind Force w - Load Factor. Q - Numerical Coefficient. kzt - Topographic Factor. kZ - Velocity Pressure Exposure Coefficient. V50 - Basic Wind Speed, 3-second gust wind speed, miles per hour, at 33 ft. above ground, an annual probability of 2%. G - Gust Response Factor. Cf - Force (Drag) Coefficient. A - Projected Surface Area.
Numerical Coefficient
(Section 2.1.2)
Converts kinetic energy of moving air into potential energy of pressure. Q = 1/2
where = mass density of air. Appendix D
October 18, 2006
32
Basic Wind Speed Map
(Section 2.1.3)
3-SECOND GUST SPEED

Database/Analysis
Continental Winds: 485 weather stations, minimum 5 years of data Data assembled from a number of stations in state-size areas to reduce sampling errors Fisher-Tippett Type I extreme value distribution, annual probability of 2% Insufficient variation in peak gust wind speeds to justify contours 33 ft. above ground, Exposure C
October 18, 2006
34
Database/Analysis
Hurricane Winds: Based on simulations and hurricane model The Atlantic Coastline was divided into discrete points spaced at 50 nautical miles. Hurricane contours over the Atlantic are provided for interpolations and represent values for Exposure C over land. Importance factors are accounted for in the map wind speeds
>1.0 at the coast 1.0 at 100 miles inland.
Velocity Pressure Exposure Coefficients

(Section 2.1.4) Exposure B Urban and suburban Terrain with numerous closely spaced obstructions having the size of single-family dwellings or larger Exposure C Open terrain Open terrain with scattered obstructions having heights generally less than 30 ft Exposure D Coastal Flat unobstructed areas directly exposed to wind flowing over open water
October 18, 2006
36

(Section 2.1.4)
TABLE 2.1.4-1 Power Law Constants Exposure category B C D

October 18, 2006
7.0 9.5 11.5
zg (feet) 1200 900 700

37

(Section 2.1.4)
Velocity Pressure Exposure Coefficient, kZ, modifies the basic wind speed to account for terrain and height effects. Structure or Wire kZ = 2.01*( zh / zg ) (2/) (for 15 ft. h 900 ft.) Effective Height, zh, the height above ground to the center of wind pressure (Section 2.1.4.3).
October 18, 2006
38
Gust Response Factor
(Section 2.1.5)

Structural Responses Wind Characteristics
Horizontal Wind Profile Statistical based Not a significant factor in typical buildings seldom been studied
Structure / Wire Gust Response Factors

(Section 2.1.5.1) Gust Response Factor, G, accounts for the dynamic effects of wind and lack of gust correlation on the transmission line components. Structure GT = (1 + 2.7*E (BT)1/2)/kV2 Wire GW = (1 +2.7 *E (BW)1/2)/kV2 E = 4.9 ()1/2*(33/z
1/ h) fm
Appendix G
E = Exposure Factor B = Dimensionless response term corresponding to the quasi-static background wind load kV = 1.430
40
BT = 1/(1+0.56*zh/Ls) BW = 1/(1+0.8*L/ Ls)

October 18, 2006 Revised ASCE Manual No. 74 - Section 2 Ice and Wind
(Section 2.1.5)
Conversion Factor, kV. (Durst Curve) Relationship between 3-second gust wind and 10-minute average wind
Appendix E
October 18, 2006
41
Gust Response Vs Gust Factors

Accounts for dynamic effects of gusts on the response of transmission line components Gusts may not envelop the entire span between transmission line structures Values can be greater than or less than 1.0 Represents the ratio of peak gust load effect to the selected mean extreme load effect
Gust Factor
The ratio of the gust wind speed at a specified average period, e.g.
2 seconds, to the selected mean speed, e.g. 10 minute Used as a multiplier of the mean extreme wind speed to obtain the gust wind speed. Values greater than 1.0
October 18, 2006
42
Gust Response Factor, G
Davenport Equations, Gust Response Factors for Transmission Line Loading, Proceeding, 5th International Conference on Wind Engineering, 1979 ASCE 74, Guidelines for Electrical Transmission Line Structural Loading, 1991 ASCE 7, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, 2002 IEC 60826, Loading and Strength of Transmission Lines, 2002
Force Coefficient
(Section 2.1.6)
Appendix H
Shape and Size Aspect Ratio Yawed Wind Solidity Shielding
Not a precise science

Revised ASCE Manual No. 74 - Section 2 Ice and Wind 44
October 18, 2006
Topography Effects
(Section 2.1.7)
Funneling of Winds Mountains Wind Speed-up
October 18, 2006
45
Extreme Wind Loads Section 2.1 Wind is a Random Event Equations are not exact Equations are not intended to cover all potential conditions Load factor is generally applied to cover uncertainty With todays technology, these equations are more scientific than most people think
ICE and WIND LOADING Section 2.3
October 18, 2006
47
ICE and WIND LOADING Section 2.3

Introduction (2.3.1) Categories of Icing (2.3.2) Design Assumptions for Ice Loading (2.3.3 Ice Load on Wires due to Freezing Rain (2.3.4)
Using Historical Ice Data Using Ice Map Combined Wind and Ice Loads
Ice Buildup on Structural Members (2.3.5)

Vertical Loads Concurrent Wind Loads Unbalanced Ice Loading
October 18, 2006
48
Introduction (2.3.1)
Ice accretion is often a governing loading criterion

Larger Vertical Loads Larger Exposed Wind Area on Wires Larger Tensions Loading Imbalances
October 18, 2006
49
Categories of Icing (2.3.2)

Freezing Rain (Glaze) In-Cloud (Rime or Glaze) Wet Snow Hoarfrost
October 18, 2006
50
Design Assumptions for Ice Loading (2.3.3)

Equivalent uniform radial thickness
Radial Ice
October 18, 2006
51
Design Assumptions for Ice Loading (2.3.3)

Equivalent uniform radial thickness
Radial Ice
October 18, 2006
52
Ice Load on Wires due to Freezing Rain (2.3.4)
Using Historical Ice Data (Modeling your own Service Area (App. I.3)) new! Using Ice Map new! Combined Wind and Ice Loads new!
October 18, 2006
53
Using Ice Map (2.3.4.2)

ASCE 74 91 Version
50-year return interval ice based on 9 years of data collected by Bennett. Data collected from 1928-1936, and did not differentiate between glaze, rime and accreted snow. Also, did not report the equivalent radial ice thickness. Added a wind-on-ice requirement as a percentage of the 50 year basic wind speed intended to represent the extreme wind which could be expected over a 7 day period

ASCE 74 Maps (New!) Based on work of Kathy Jones from U.S. Armys Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory (CRREL), funded by EPRI, CRREL, FEMA, CEA and a number of individual utilities Same map as presented in ASCE 7-2005 Maps present 50-year values for icing from freezing rain only with concurrent gust speed
October 18, 2006
55

ASCE 74 New Maps
Figure 2.3-1. Extreme Radial Glaze Ice thickness (in.), Western United States 50-year return period with concurrent 3-sec wind speeds
October 18, 2006
56

ASCE 74 New Maps
Figure 2.3-2. Extreme Radial Glaze Ice thickness (in.), Eastern United States, 50-year return period with concurrent 3-sec. wind speed.
October 18, 2006
57

ASCE 74 New Maps
Figure 2.3-3. Extreme Radial Glaze Ice thickness (in.), Lake Superior Detail, 50-year return period with concurrent 3-sec. wind speeds.
Figure 2.3-4. Extreme Radial Glaze Ice thickness (in.), Fraser Valley Detail, 50-year return period with concurrent 3sec. wind speed.
October 18, 2006
58

ASCE 74 New Maps
Figure 2.3-5. Extreme Radial Glaze Ice thickness (in.), Columbia River Gorge Detail, 50-year return period with concurrent 3-sec. wind speed.
Figure 2.3-6. Extreme Radial Glaze Ice thickness (in.), Alaska, 50-year return period with concurrent 3-sec. wind speed.
October 18, 2006
59

Modeling ice accretion from weather data (Appendix I)
Very little data on ice accretions on overhead lines are available; mathematical modeling from weather data is required
Figure I4-1. Locations of weather stations used in preparation of Figures 2.3-1 through 2.3-5.
October 18, 2006
60
Model for the accretion of ice in freezing rain (App. I)

N 1/2 1 2 2 t = (Pj o ) + (3.6VjWj ) , i j =1
where t = equivalent radial ice thickness (mm) Pj = precipitation amount (mm) in jth hour Vj = wind speed (m/s) in jth hour Wj = liquid water content (g/m3) of the rainfilled air in jth hour = 0.067Pj0.846
o = density of water (1 g/cm3) i = density of ice (0.9 g/cm3)

N = duration of the freezing rain storm (hr)
October 18, 2006
61
Superstations for extreme value analysis (App. I) pattern of damaging ice storms
terrain proximity to water latitude
frequency of Octoberice 18, 2006 storms
62
Extreme value analysis (App. I) Peaks-over-threshold method with generalized Pareto distribution
k(x u) F ( x ) = 1 1 (x - u) = 1 exp
1/ k
k 0 k =0
Determine parameters using Probability Weighted Moments

shape parameter k = 4b1 3b0 + u b0 2b1 scale parameter = (b0 u)( 1 + k) 1 b0 = n 1 b1 = n
x
i =1 n
(i )
i =1
i 1 x( i ) n 1
Equivalent ice thickness for return period T: xT = u + 1 ( T ) k

October 18, 2006 Revised ASCE Manual No. 74 - Section 2 Ice and Wind
63
Ice Load on Wires due to Freezing Rain (2.3.4)

Combined Wind and Ice Loads
Ice Load WI = 1.24(d + Iz)Iz Where: WI = weight of glaze ice (pound per foot) d = bare diameter of wire (inches) IZ = design ice thickness (inches) (2.3-3)
Wind on Ice Covered Wires Projected Area, force coefficients 3 sec. gust wind from maps
October 18, 2006
64
October 18, 2006
65
October 18, 2006
66

Vertical Loads Concurrent Wind Unbalanced Ice Loading
October 18, 2006
67
Whats the big deal?

Why are High Intensity Winds different? What are the characteristics of High Intensity Winds?
Narrow front winds Wind speeds are greater than extreme wind loads Affected by local topography
Tornados
Scale Tornado Wind Speed F (mph) Path Length P (miles) Path Width P (feet)
0 1 2 3 4 5
72 73-112 113-157 158-206 207-260 261-318
<1.0 1.0-3.1 3.2-9.9 10-31 32-99 100-315
50 51-170 171-530 531-1670 1671-4750 4751-6,000
TABLE 2.2.1-1. Ranges of Tornado Wind Speed, Path Length, and Path Width for FPP Scale
National Weather Service

October 18, 2006
70
TABLE 2.2.1-2 Tornado Frequencies and F-Scale Classifications for 19161978 in the United States of America (Tecson et al. 1979)
35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 F0 F1
Percentage
October 18, 2006
F2
F3
F4
F5
71
Downbursts
Associated with severe thunderstorm cells Relatively wide gust fronts Elliptical damage pattern
October 18, 2006
72
Micro bursts
Micro Burst: A strong localized downdraft from a thunderstorm with peak gusts lasting 2 to 5 National Weather Service, Missoula, Mt. minutes. Intensity levels up to F2 Tornado strength Gust width 330 660 Elliptical and strip damage patterns
SoWhat should I do now?

Tornado F2 wind speeds (157 mph) result in little additional tower structure weights. Tower designs may require additional shear capacity due to lowering of resultant wind loads. Tornado F2 wind speeds (157 mph) may have no effect on pole type transmission class structures.
APPENDIX K:
Investigation of Transmission Line Failures
October 18, 2006
75
Why investigate failures?

Increase understanding of line behavior Affirmation of existing design and maintenance criteria Improvement of design criteria and maintenance practices
October 18, 2006
Revised ASCE Manual No. 74 Section 2 - Ice and Wind
76
Why address failure investigations in a Loading Manual? Most likely, a utility focuses on restoring power rather than investigating a structural failure. High Load explanation may not be acceptable. A loading case, previously not considered, may be the limiting design condition. Information presented is seldom addressed in other publications.
FAILURE INVESTIGATIONS
Our Goal is to improve future designs, if necessary, or validate existing design based on accurate failure analysis.
October 18, 2006
78
FAILURE INVESTIGATIONS
Our Plan is to establish and separate the failure mechanisms for the various failed structure pieces. Determine the initial failure regardless of cause (ice, narrow or broad front wind, missing structure members or connections, etc.). Determine secondary failures caused by load shift from the initial failure.
Causes of Failure
Natural load conditions that exceed the design criteria Manmade causes Structure deficiencies Wire system deficiencies Construction causes
October 18, 2006
80
Post Failure Containment
Longitudinal Cascade Transverse Cascade
October 18, 2006
81
Failure Investigation Preparation Equipment (a.k.a. bug-out bag) A Plan for priorities Technical preparation
October 18, 2006
82
Failure Investigation Procedure Photography survey Gather evidence from witnesses and those arriving earlier. Develop image of sequence of events Safety first
THE INVESTIGATION
The Field Checklist The Office Checklist Report Preparation
October 18, 2006
84
October 18, 2006
85
Additional Load Considerations Section 3

Introduction Construction & Maintenance Loads (3.1)
General (3.1.1) Construction Loads (3.1.2)
Structure Erection (3.1.2.1) Ground Wire & Conductor Installation (3.1.2.2) Recommended Minimum Loads for Wire Installation (3.1.2.3)
Maintenance Loads (3.1.3)
Fall Protection (3.2) Longitudinal Loads (3.3)

Longitudinal Loads on Intact Systems (3.3.1) Longitudinal Loads & Failure Containment (3.3.2)
Design all Structures for Longitudinal Loads (3.3.2.1) Install Stop Structures at Specified Intervals (3.3.2.2) Install Release Mechanism (3.3.2.3)
October 18, 2006
Structure Vibration (3.4) Conductor Galloping (3.5) Revised Earthquake Load (3.6)ASCE Manual No. 74 - Section 2 Ice and Wind
86
Introduction (3.0)
Section 3 does not address:
Landslides Ice Flows Frost Heave Flooding Other Special Loading Scenarios
October 18, 2006
87
Construction & Maintenance Loads (3.1)

General Construction Loads are directly related to construction methods Personnel Safety is the paramount factor Construction Loads Loads acting on the structure due to the assembly and erection and the installation of ground wires, insulators, conductors & hardware Lifting of Structures
Tilting of ground assembled structure to vertical alignment Pick up of structural section by helicopter Worker Loading (Point Loading on Lattice Members, Etc)
Ground Wire & Conductor Installation
Recognizes IEEE Std. 524-03 as leading standard Addresses common stringing load scenarios Provides recommended minimum installation loads and load factors for ground wires and conductors (3 psf, no ice on wires and structures) Load Factor for transverse wind loading (1.5) Load Factor for vertical loads from dead end condition (1.5) Revised ASCE Manual No. 74 - Section 2 Load Factor for vertical loads from intact condition (2.0) October 18, 2006 Ice and Wind 88
Construction & Maintenance Loads (3.1)

Maintenance Loads Weight of Workers on structure, structural elements and wires Load effects resulting from temporary modifications
Member replacements Guying
Load effects resulting from adjustment or replacement of ground wires, conductors, insulators and hardware Each maintenance operation is recommended to be analyzed in sequence by engineer Load factors not provided
October 18, 2006
89
Fall Protection Loads (3.2)

Dynamic load effects that are created as the result of the fall of a worker from an elevated position Dynamic load effects act on the worker anchorage point Anchorage points are points that provide a secure attachment for a fall protection system Fall protection systems assumed to meet all applicable OSHA and Government requirements Recognizes IEEE Std. 1307-04 as Governing Standard
IEEE Std. provides guidance regarding loads and criteria for anchorages and step bolts
Anchorage locations and climbing devices recommended to be coordinated with operation and maintenance personnel
Number of anchorages Location of anchorages Maximum number of attachments at each anchorage Maximum expected arresting force Type of climbing devices Reviseddevices ASCE Manual No. 74 - Section 2 Number of climbing
Ice and Wind
October 18, 2006
90
Longitudinal Loads (3.3)

Structures may be required to resist longitudinal loads
Loads resulting from inequalities of wind and/or ice on adjacent spans Loads resulting from ground wire, conductor, insulator, or structural and component failure Inability to resist longitudinal loads may result in a cascading failure of a transmission line
Types of Longitudinal Loading

Longitudinal Loads on Intact Systems
Differential loadings on adjacent spans resulting from different wind and ice loading and temperature extremes Unequal wire tensions Wind driven debris and materials
Longitudinal Loads and Failure Containment

Severe load imbalances caused by breakage of ground wires, conductors, insulators, hardware and structural components Addresses designing all structures for longitudinal loads Addresses installation of stop structures at specified intervals Addresses installation of release mechanisms
Longitudinal Loads (3.3)

Structures may be required to resist longitudinal loads
Loads resulting from inequalities of wind and/or ice on adjacent spans Loads resulting from ground wire, conductor, insulator, or structural and component failure Inability to resist longitudinal loads may result in a cascading failure of a transmission line
Types of Longitudinal Loading

Longitudinal Loads on Intact Systems
Differential loadings on adjacent spans resulting from different wind and ice loading and temperature extremes Unequal wire tensions Wind driven debris and materials
Longitudinal Loads and Failure Containment

Severe load imbalances caused by breakage of ground wires, conductors, insulators, hardware and structural components Addresses designing all structures for longitudinal loads Addresses installation of stop structures at specified intervals Addresses installation of release mechanisms
Design all Structures (3.3.2.1)
October 18, 2006
93
Design all Structures (3.3.2.1)
October 18, 2006
94
Structure Vibration (3.4)

Dynamic forces such as wind, conductor motion and earthquakes may in isolated cases cause structure vibrations Majority of problems associated with wind induced vibration of individual structural elements (tubular and structural shapes) In isolated cases wind induced vibration can cause:
Fatigue failures of the member or connection bolts Loosening of bolted connection Vibration of members can be eliminated using recommended design and detailing practices Tubular arms likely to be susceptible to vibration prior to the stringing of the ground wire and/or conductor Use temporary weights on tubular arms to eliminate vibration at or near the resonant frequency
October 18, 2006
95
Conductor Galloping (3.5)

Galloping (the large amplitude motion) of ground wires and conductors may occur with moderate winds blowing across ice coated wires Galloping of wires is a dynamic event that is random in nature and is capable of producing significant wire tension increases Galloping causes mainly vertical large amplitude motions with amplitudes that may reach values approaching the sag of the wires Galloping may cause electrical, structural and mechanical problems including:
Flashovers among wires leading to temporary outages Clashing of wires leading to damaged conductors Permanent increases in ground wire and conductor sag Excessive wear, fatiguing and failure of ground wires, conductors, insulators and hardware (particularly at dead end assemblies) Collapse of structural systems and components
Mitigation alternatives include the use of:

96
Detuning pendulums and inter-phase spacers Airflow spoilers Revised ASCE Manual No. 74 - Section 2 October 18, and Wind 2006 Modification of conductor Ice designs
Earthquake Load (3.6)

Transmission structures need not be designed for ground induced vibrations caused by earthquake motion because:
Historically, transmission structures have performed well in earthquake events (only isolated instances of failures have been recorded) Structural loads caused by wind and/or ice loading combinations and longitudinal loads exceed earthquake loads
Experience has shown that infrequent failures of transmission structures are generally related to soil liquefaction and/or earth fractures
October 18, 2006
97
Structure Vibration Appendix F

Introduction (F.1)
Caused by Environmental and Geographic Exposure Potential for Occurrence Higher than for Typical Civil Engineering Structures Causes of Structural Vibrations
Aeolian Vibration Sub-Conductor Oscillation Galloping Induced Ground Motion (Earthquakes) 3 to 150Hz (Aeolian Vibration) 0.15 to 10Hz (Sub-Conductor Oscillation) 0.08 to 3Hz (Galloping) Dampers & Spacer Dampers Air Foils & Spoilers Sag & Tension Adjustments Specialized Conductor Designs KL/r Ratio (<200 for Double Angle Members) Identifying Critical Vortex Induced Wind Speed Identifying Natural Frequencies (Structure & Cross Arms) Change Mass, Stiffness or Damping (Structure & Cross Arms) Ballasting Tubular Members (Cross Arms)
Structure Vibrations (F.2)
Natural Frequencies (Conductor & Wires)

Mitigation Alternatives (Conductor & Wires)

Mitigation Alternatives (Structure & Members)

October 18, 2006
98
Special Loads Appendix J

Introduction (J.1)
Caused by Load Inequalities Resulting from the Disturbance or Disruption of the Wire System Affects the Magnitude of the Unbalanced Loads at each Support Structure
Weather Related Longitudinal Loads (J.2)

Suspension Supports (J.2.1)
Unequal Wind and/or Ice Loads Cause Differential Tensions Conductor Temperature Variation in Unequal Spans Cause Differential Tensions Unbalanced Loads Generally do not Exceed 10 to 20 Percent of Bare Wire Tension In Cloud Icing can Produce Unbalanced Loads in Excess of 20 Percent of Bare Wire Tension Must Resist Differential Tensions of Adjacent Spans Ground Wire Differential Tensions may be Higher than Comparable Conductor Values Mitigation Alternatives Include Ground Wire Suspension Links, Slip and Release Clamps, Removing the Ground Wire and Designing Ground Wire Supports to Collapse at a Defined Load to Act as a Fuse
Strain Supports (J.2.2)

Failure Related Longitudinal Loads (J.3)

Residual Static Load (J.3.1)
Design each Structure for Bare, Broken Wire Residual Static Load (RSL) RSL Values Approximately Approach 60 to 70% of Everyday Wire Tension RSL Applied to 1/3 of Conductor Support Points or to 1 or All Ground Wire Support Points Provides Unbalanced Loads as a Function of Horizontal Wire Tension for each Design Load Case, Span/Sag Ratio, Span/Insulator Ratio, and Support Flexibility Provides Unbalanced Loads at each Structure Away from Failure Provides Unbalanced Loads in Relation to Risk of Failure Assumes Breakage of a Single Wire or Phase at any one Time Suspension Conductor (67% of EDT for Light, 133% of EDT for Standard & Heavy Suspension Structures, Everyday Loading, No Ice or Wind) Strain Deadend Conductor (Transverse Wind Load (40mph), No Ice, LTV Overload Factor of 1.5, 125% of EDT) Broken Wire Load (70% of EDT
EPRI Method (J.3.2)

Failure Containment (BPA Method) (J.3.3)

Percent of Everyday Wire Tension (J.3.4)
Failure Containment Requirements (J.4) General Rules (J.4.1) Revised ASCE Manual No. 74 - Section 2 Basic Assumption (J.4.2) October 18, Ice and Wind 2006 Special Resistance Structures (J.4.3)
Failure Containment for Icing Events (J.4.4)
99
THE WIRE SYSTEM Section 4

Identify Tension Sections (4.1) Wire conditions (4.2)
Initial, After Creep and After Heavy Load
Wire limits of use (4.3)

Tension limits
The Ruling Span approximation (4.4) Wire tension loads (4.5)

At horizontal line angles At vertical line angles
Identify Tension Section (4.1)
October 18, 2006
101
Wire Conditions (4.2)

Initial (at sagging time) Final After Creep (after several years under ordinary mechanical tension)
Wire will see something close to this condition most of its life unless stretched by an unlikely heavy load
Final After Heavy Load (after severe loading causing very high tension)
Wire may never see this condition
Cable condition After Creep
October 18, 2006
103
Cable condition After Load
October 18, 2006
104
Wire Tension Limits of Use (4.3)
October 18, 2006
105
The Ruling Span Approximation (4.4)
October 18, 2006
106
Wire Tension Loads (4.5)
October 18, 2006
107
Need for alternate to Ruling Span (4.6) (also discuss uneven wind on spans of section)
October 18, 2006
108

ASCE Practice 74-Rev 2006

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

ASCE Practice 74-Rev 2006

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

ASCE Manuals and Reports on Engineering Practice #74 Guidelines for Electrical Transmission Lines Structural Loads

ASCE Manuals and Reports on Engineering Practice #74

October 18, 2006

Transmission Line Structural Loading Guide

First edition was published in 1984 Design Guidelines

October 18, 2006

Revised ASCE Manual No. 74 - Section 2 Ice and Wind

Transmission Line Structural Loading Guide

October 18, 2006

Revised ASCE Manual No. 74 - Section 2 Ice and Wind

Transmission Line Structural Loading Guide

OVERVIEW OF LOAD CRITERIA Section 1

Wire Systems (1.3) Limit States (1.4)

October 18, 2006

October 18, 2006

Revised ASCE Manual No. 74 - Section 2 Ice and Wind

Key Issues Addressed by the Manual

Principal Systems of a T-Line (1.2)

The Wire System.

Loads and Relative Reliability (1.2)

Weather-Related Events (1.2.1)

October 18, 2006

Revised ASCE Manual No. 74 - Section 2 Ice and Wind

Return Period (RPN)

Probability Density Function of Load Effect

October 18, 2006

Revised ASCE Manual No. 74 - Section 2 Ice and Wind

Probability of RPN Events in 50 Years

Revised ASCE Manual No. 74 - Section 2 Ice and Wind

Return Period Adjustments (1.2.1.1)

October 18, 2006

Revised ASCE Manual No. 74 - Section 2 Ice and Wind

Probability Density Function of R

October 18, 2006

Revised ASCE Manual No. 74 - Section 2 Ice and Wind

Probability Density Functions of Q & R

October 18, 2006

Revised ASCE Manual No. 74 - Section 2 Ice and Wind

Relative Reliability Factor (RRF)

October 18, 2006

Revised ASCE Manual No. 74 - Section 2 Ice and Wind

Why Use Relative Reliability?

Extreme Wind Load Factors (Table 1.2-1)

Wind Load Factor (w) 0.85 1.00 1.15 1.30 1.45

25 50 100 200 400

Extreme Ice Factors (Table 1.2-2)

25 50 100 200 400

Revised ASCE Manual No. 74 - Section 2 Ice and Wind

Spatial Influences on Weather-Related Events (1.2.1.2)

Additional Load Considerations (1.2.2)

October 18, 2006

Revised ASCE Manual No. 74 - Section 2 Ice and Wind

Limit States Design (1.4)

Damage limit state

Load and Resistance Factor Design (1.4.4)

October 18, 2006

Revised ASCE Manual No. 74 - Section 2 Ice and Wind

Strength Factor to convert to a 5% LEL with 10% COVR (Table 1.4-2)

Strength Factor, , for COVR = 0.05 0.10 0.20

1.00 0.97 0.95 0.93 0.92 0.90 0.86

1.16 1.07 1.04 1.00 0.96 0.92 0.85

1.48 1.27 1.21 1.12 1.04 0.95 0.79

Revised ASCE Manual No. 74 - Section 2 Ice and Wind

BT = 1/(1+0.56zh/Ls) BW = 1/(1+0.8L/ Ls)