Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Richard F. Aichinger
Carl W. Austin
Jim Andersen
Terry Burley
Ron J. Carrington
Mike S. Cheung
Habib J. Dagher
Nicholas J. DeSantis
Harry V. Durden
William Y. Ford
Bruce Freimark
Jim Hogan
Magdi F. Ishac
Kathleen Jones
James M. McGuire
Kishor C. Mehta
Michael D. Miller
John D. Mozer
Robert E. Nickerson
Wesley J. Oliphant
Mark Ostendorp
Alain Peyrot
David Tennent
George T. Watson
C. Jerry Wong
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
Component Strength
Relative Reliability of Components and Failure Containment
Considerations for Special Structures
Load and Resistance Factor Design
Introduction (1.0)
This manual addresses transmission
line structure design issues that must be
considered to provide:
Cost effective structures
Reliable structures
10
Coincident temperature
11
12
13
Exceedance Probability of
RP Event in 50 Years
= 1-(1-1/RP)50
25
0.87
50
0.64
100
0.39
200
0.22
500
0.12
14
15
16
17
18
19
Load RP
(years)
Wind Load
Factor
(w)
25
50
100
200
400
0.85
1.00
1.15
1.30
1.45
20
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
22
23
24
25
LRFD Format
Rn Effect of [DL + Q ]
26
LEL, e%, of
the Nominal
Strength
Value
0.05
0.10
0.20
0.1
1.00
1.16
1.48
0.97
1.07
1.27
0.95
1.04
1.21
0.93
1.00
1.12
10
0.92
0.96
1.04
20
0.90
0.92
0.95
mean
0.86
0.85
0.79
27
28
Weather
or
Failure Containment
QD = EFFECT OF [ DL & FC ]
Rn > QD
29
30
(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.
October 18, 2006
31
Numerical Coefficient
(Section 2.1.2)
Q = 1/2
where = mass density of air.
Appendix D
32
(Section 2.1.3)
33
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
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.
October 18, 2006
35
36
zg (feet)
7.0
1200
9.5
900
11.5
700
37
38
(Section 2.1.5)
Statistical based
39
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
BT = 1/(1+0.56*zh/Ls)
BW = 1/(1+0.8*L/ Ls)
October 18, 2006
E = Exposure Factor
B = Dimensionless
response term
corresponding to the
quasi-static
background wind load
kV = 1.430
40
(Section 2.1.5)
41
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
42
43
Force Coefficient
(Section 2.1.6)
Appendix H
44
Topography Effects
(Section 2.1.7)
Funneling of Winds
Mountains
Wind Speed-up
45
46
47
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
48
Introduction (2.3.1)
49
50
51
52
53
ASCE 74 91 Version
54
55
Figure 2.3-1.
Extreme Radial Glaze Ice thickness (in.),
Western United States 50-year return period
with concurrent 3-sec wind speeds
56
Figure 2.3-2.
Extreme Radial Glaze Ice thickness
(in.), Eastern United States, 50-year
return period with concurrent 3-sec.
wind speed.
57
Figure 2.3-4.
Extreme Radial Glaze
Ice thickness (in.),
Fraser Valley Detail,
50-year return period
with concurrent 3sec. wind speed.
58
59
60
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
61
terrain
proximity to water
latitude
frequency of
Octoberice
18, 2006
storms
62
k(x u)
F ( x ) = 1 1
(x - u)
= 1 exp
k 0
k =0
4b1 3b0 + u
b0 2b1
(i )
i =1
n
i =1
i 1
x( i )
n 1
63
(2.3-3)
Where:
WI = weight of glaze ice (pound per foot)
d = bare diameter of wire (inches)
IZ = design ice thickness (inches)
64
65
66
67
68
Tornados
Scale
Path Length
P
(miles)
Path Width
P
(feet)
72
<1.0
50
73-112
1.0-3.1
51-170
113-157
3.2-9.9
171-530
158-206
10-31
531-1670
207-260
32-99
1671-4750
261-318
100-315
4751-6,000
TABLE 2.2.1-1. Ranges of Tornado Wind Speed, Path Length, and Path Width for FPP Scale
October 18, 2006
69
70
15
10
5
0
F0
F1
F2
F3
F4
F5
71
Downbursts
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
October 18, 2006
73
74
APPENDIX K:
Investigation of Transmission Line
Failures
75
76
77
FAILURE INVESTIGATIONS
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.
October 18, 2006
79
Causes of Failure
Natural load conditions that exceed the
design criteria
Manmade causes
Structure deficiencies
Wire system deficiencies
Construction causes
80
Longitudinal Cascade
Transverse Cascade
81
82
83
THE INVESTIGATION
The Field Checklist
The Office Checklist
Report Preparation
84
85
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)
86
Introduction (3.0)
Section 3 does not address:
Landslides
Ice Flows
Frost Heave
Flooding
Other Special Loading Scenarios
87
89
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
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
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
Introduction (F.1)
Aeolian Vibration
Sub-Conductor Oscillation
Galloping
Induced Ground Motion (Earthquakes)
98
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
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
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
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108