1

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 GENERAL

Overhead transmission lines play a significant role in the operation

of a reliable electrical power system. Sustained industrial throughput and
efficiency of operations of vital sectors of the national economy depend
enormously on safety and reliability of power lines.

Transmission line towers are used to support the electrical power

conductors at the stipulated clearances from ground and other conducting
media. From the point of power transmission, the tower structure is
considered as non productive. Conductors are considered as productive and
costs 36% of transmission line system. The tower structure and foundation
costs are 33% and 14% respectively. This clearly indicates that the non-
productive costs are much higher than the productive costs and emphasises
the importance of affecting all possible economies in towers and foundations
from design level to erection. Transmission line towers are erected in large
numbers and therefore their designs have to be commercially competitive.
Substantial savings in materials can be achieved through selection of efficient
structural configuration and optimum designs without compromising on the
safety and reliability of towers. The geometry of the tower is mainly governed
by the functional and structural requirements such as

• The line voltage

 2

• Number of circuits to be carried

• The location of the tower in the line

• Arrangement of conductors and earth wires

• Sag-tension properties of the conductors and ground wires

• Electrical clearance requirements

• Arrangement of insulator strings

• Landscape / terrain

Bracing members are used to reduce the slenderness ratio of the

main members thereby increasing their carrying capacity. The force in the
bracing depends on the stiffness of the bracing. The most commonly used
bracing systems in transmission line towers are Single lattice bracings X or
Cross bracing and K- bracing.

A typical transmission line tower, its components and the loads to

which they are subjected are shown in Figure 1.1. The design of transmission
line towers, which are mass-produced, is generally based on minimum weight
philosophy. The towers, in general, are of lattice type consisting of legs,
primary, secondary bracings and cross arm members. The structural design of
the tower is mainly governed by the wind loads acting on the conductor
/tower body, self weight of the conductor /tower and other loads due to line
deviation, broken wire condition, cascading, erection, maintenance, etc. The
towers are also checked for other incidental environmental loads like icing,
wind effect on icing and day to day temperature variations, etc. The tower is
modelled as a pin jointed space truss for the analysis. For the member design,
end restraint (either as pinned or as partially restrained) and end eccentricities
within reasonable limits are considered. Linear static analysis is carried out to
obtain the member forces assuming that all members are subjected to only
 3

axial forces and the deformations are small. The members are designed based
on the prevailing codes of practice. Bearing type bolted connections are used
to connect the tower members with nominal bolts.

GROUND WIRE
PEAK

SINGLE LATTICE
BRACING

TOP CROSS LONGTUDINAL LOAD

ARM DUE TO CONDUCTOR
BREAKAGE

MIDDLE WIND LOAD

CROSS ARM
FROM CONDUCTOR
VERTICAL LOAD
DUE TO CONDUCTOR
BOTTOM
CROSS ARM
LOADS ON CROSS ARMS

SECONDARY
BRACING X BRACED
PANEL

BELT
LEG
TOWER
EXTENSION
A K BRACED PANEL DETAIL A
HIP BRACING

Figure 1.1 Double Circuit Transmission Line Tower (Typical)

Hot rolled steel equal leg angle sections with different grades such
as mild steel, high tensile and super high tensile steels are generally used in
transmission line towers. High and super high tensile steels are normally used
for leg and cross arm members. In a transmission line tower, the leg member
 4

weight is 50 to 60% and the main bracing member is about 20 to 30%. The
weight of secondary bracing member is in the order of 15 to 20%. The load
carrying capacity of the tower, not only depends on the individual member
capacity but, also on the joint detailing, uncertainties in framing eccentricities
of members, force fitting of members, unequal force distribution in bolts and
gusset plate connections, etc.

Proof testing of structures is essential to verify the engineering

aspects of the design process. The proof test demonstrates the efficiency of
the analysis procedures used in calculating the load effects from design loads,
the adequacy of the strength and the detailing of the structural components.
Full scale testing of towers provide an insight into the actual stress
distribution in unique tower configurations, force-fit verification, and action
of the structure in deflected positions, adequacy of connections and other
detailing. Generally, these tests are made on the prototype towers prior to the
manufacturing process or under certain conditions, these tests may also be
made as acceptance test for a batch of towers. In view of the above, most of
the power transmission tower industries all over the world have made proof
testing of transmission line towers mandatory. Study of test results gives an
insight into the behaviour of the system and it also helps in arriving at
appropriate remedial measures in the event of premature failure of towers.

Since towers are vital components of the transmission lines,

accurate prediction of their failure is very important for the reliability and
safety of the transmission system. When failure takes place, direct and
indirect losses are high, leaving aside other costs associated with power
disruption and litigation. The tower may fail due to the failure of any part or
as a consequence of foundation failure. Failure of tower during construction is
one of the common phenomena. Tower body can also fail due to excessive
tensile forces either during the stringing operation or during the life of the
 5

tower due to increase in the tension in the conductor or earth wire. Stringing
accidents have also led to failure of towers. There is always a need to strike a
balance between the economy and reliability. Thus within a given constraint
of desired performance, it is possible to optimize the design. Stringent tests on
the towers increase the reliability of the detailing adopted and help in
optimising and verifying the design.

The data from full-scale tower tests were compared with the
predicted results using current techniques and concluded that the behaviour of
towers under complex loading condition cannot be consistently predicted
using the present techniques. Results from the Tower Testing Stations
reflected that around 23% of the towers failed before reaching 100% design
loads during testing and the location of failure were unpredicted. Further,
available test data showed considerable discrepancies between member forces
computed from linear elastic truss analysis and the measured values from full-
scale tests.

In the Tower Testing and Research Station, Structural Engineering

Research Centre, Chennai, India, out of 157 towers tested so far, around
37 towers failed prematurely much earlier than predicted. There are many
deviations from the standard practice of structural design. Almost all the
Transmission line Towers are invariably fabricated with steel angle sections
with their joints being lapped and are spliced without considering the stresses
developed due to eccentricity in the connections since bracing members are
connected through one leg only. Moreover, economic considerations call for
taller and lighter structures that could support heavier conductors and use less
right of way. Therefore, a more refined analysis that could accurately simulate
transmission tower responses under different loading conditions is needed.
 6

1.2 NEED FOR THE STUDY

Most of the earlier studies have been concentrated on components

such as single angle behaviour, X and K braced panels. Studies on failure of
full scale transmission line towers are carried out by very few researchers.
Literature available on the experimental behaviour of full scale transmission
line towers is scant. Hence detailed investigations were conducted on the
failure of transmission line towers.

Lattice towers consist of primary members like leg and bracing

members. The secondary bracing members are meant to support the main
members at their intermediate length thus reducing their effective length and
increasing their buckling strength. The lattice towers are usually analysed
assuming the members to be concentrically connected using hinged joints so
that the forces in the angle members are only axial. Under this assumption,
the forces in the redundants are negligibly small or zero and hence are not
included in the linear analysis models. However, the main legs and the
bracing members are not axially loaded and the redundant forces are not
negligibly small, due to the following reasons:

• The main legs are usually continuous through the joint.

• Usually more than one bolt is used in the connections and

hence the joints are semi-rigid.

• The angle members are normally bolted through only one of

their legs and hence the force transfer in the member is
eccentric.

• The joints are flexible due to the local deformation of the leg
of the angles under the concentrated bolt forces.
 7

• The towers with high electric ratings tend to be flexible and

hence equilibrium in the deformed configuration has to be
considered.

• The compression member deformation increases the bending

moments (P- effects).

Therefore, the angle members of the tower experience both axial

force and bending moments, even well before the tower fails. This also
produces forces in the redundant members due to overall frame action, which
is not negligible as often assumed in designs.

The Indian Standard IS:802 - Use of Structural Steel in overhead

Transmission line towers – Part 1 gives six buckling curves for computing the
buckling stress of hot rolled angles similar to ASCE 10-97 standard based on
slenderness ratio and end conditions. The permissible stress curves are based
on Euler formula in the elastic range and Structural Stability Research
Council (SSRC) formula in the inelastic range for concentrically loaded
columns. The influence of end fixity is assumed to have negligible effect.
Using the curves, the strength of angle strut is checked for buckling. Local
buckling is accounted for by considering the width to thickness ratio of angle
sections and appropriately reducing the yield stress if the ratio exceeds the
prescribed limit. Allowable width to thickness ratio for local buckling
calculation varies with different codes. The American and Indian Standards
specify the flat width after deducting the thickness and root radius of angle
section. The British Standard considers the full width of the angle section for
b/t calculations.

A transmission tower is a high order indeterminate space

structure. In the current analysis the tower is modelled as a space truss, and all
members are assumed to be an axially loaded and pin jointed by majority of
 8

the designers. In practice, such assumption can hardly be met. The joints in
transmission tower are not hinged joints and main members such as legs
usually retain their continuities at joint which may cause bending moment,
torque and shear in member, thus producing additional stresses that are not
accounted for in the space truss analysis. Recently some of the designers have
moved to frame truss models. However modelling of joints in this case is only
a near accurate prediction. Only primary members such as legs and main
bracings are considered in the analysis. The secondary members which are
redundants are not included in the analysis.

The guyed tower system exhibits significant non-linear behaviour

primarily due to sagging tendency of cables and slenderness of the mast.
Hence, the method of analysis should consider changes in geometry of the
structure, stiffness of the mast and guys for an accurate prediction of tower
response. Finite element solution technique has been adopted for solving the
non-linear problem. The stiffness matrix of the rod element used for modelling
cable is obtained assuming that the cable element is one dimensional, straight
and prismatic between nodal points, nodal points are pin jointed and the
element does not possess flexural rigidity. The mast, horizontal beam and
cross arms are modelled as beam element. The guys are modelled as cable
elements.
Behaviour of transmission towers under complex loading condition
cannot be consistently predicted using the present techniques. Available test
data shows considerable discrepancies between member forces computed
from linear elastic truss analysis and the measured values from full-scale tests.
It becomes important to predict the actual strength and failure mechanism of
towers with reasonable accuracy for failure scenarios in both the static and
dynamic regimes. Post elastic static and non-linear static analysis of lattice
structures may serve to simulate failure scenarios in the existing overhead
lines or to develop new designs of towers.
 9

Even though transmission line towers are designed based on codal

provisions, they fail during testing due to several reasons such as incorrect
design assumptions, improper detailing, defects in material, errors in
fabrication, force fitting during erection, variation in bolt grade etc. The
failures are classified as structural failures of leg, bracing and redundant
members, and failures due to incorrect design assumption, improper detailing,
connection failures, material defects and fabrication errors. Generally leg
members are designed for slenderness ratios of 40 to 60. In this range, the
compression capacity is almost equal to the net tension capacity of the
member. The leg members may fail by inelastic buckling.

Tension member design is based on net sectional area of the

member and hence, they can be designed reliably and safely. The design of
compression leg members is also reliable, since the assumption of concentric
load at both ends of the members is achieved in a real structure due to
geometric symmetry of the structure. High strength steels are used for leg,
bracing and cross arm members. Many failures of towers are caused by
buckling of compression leg or bracing members. It is possible to compute the
load carrying capacities of leg members to an accuracy of 5 to 10%. But in the
case of bracing members the variation can be as high as 30%. The main
reason for this is the eccentricity at the end connections of bracing members
and the non coincidence of centre of gravity line of the bracing member with
the bolt line.

Bracing members are designed with slenderness ratio less than 200
and generally it varies from 60 to 170. However eccentricities in bracing
connections can not be totally avoided. The eccentricities involved in the
member connections are accounted in the form of end-restraint coefficients
and hence, bracing member designs do have certain approximations. The
cross arm member designs are not explicitly covered in many codes of
 10

practice. Further, detailing of cross arm introduces unaccounted eccentricities

in members, which increases the probability of failure.

Linear elastic analysis of lattice towers with secondary bracings,

assuming the member connectivity to be concentric and hinged, would
normally indicate zero or near zero force in the secondary members. Hence,
no force for the design of secondary bracings can be obtained from such
analyses. However secondary bracings should have some minimum strength
and stiffness to perform the intended function. Improper design of redundant
member may cause the failure of leg or main bracing member.

Many redundant member failures are observed during testing.

Different Codes suggest different provisions for the design of secondary
bracings. The British Code (BS 8100 - 3:1999) specifies a detailed procedure
for determining the forces in the redundant members. The American Standard
(ASCE 10- 97) specifies that the redundant member slenderness ratio shall not
exceed 250 and it may be designed for 1 to 2.5% of the load in the supported
member. The Indian Standard (IS: 802 Part 1/Sec 1:1995 & Sec 2: 1992)
specifies that the redundant member slenderness ratio shall not exceed 250
and it shall be designed for 2.5% of the axial force in the main member.

Few theoretical investigations have been reported on the failures of

‘X’, K- bracings and on the failures of full scale tower. It has been observed
that the analytical deformations of transmission line towers are always less
than the experimental deformation. Not much work has been reported on the
second order effects such as geometric and material nonlinearities on tower
behaviour. The eccentrically connected angles are assumed as concentrically
loaded ones and the system analysed as such and the actual effect of
eccentricity is usually ignored. Compound members made of two angle
sections as cruciform and ‘T’ sections are widely used in transmission line
towers for leg and bracing members and their significance is not brought out
 11

in many research papers. Different procedures are given in codes of practice

for their design. Many failures of these compound members are encountered
during testing. Literatures available on the behaviour of these compound
members are very few.

No specific guidelines are available for redundant and hip bracing

pattern to be adopted in the towers. The influences of inaccuracy in structural
fabrication, eccentricities in loading, member crookedness have not been
studied in detail by the earlier researchers.

1.3 SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION

The present investigation was planned with all the above factors in
mind and the following are the scope of this investigation:

• To study the buckling behaviour of angle sections with

different b/t ratios by conducting experiments and
comparisons of these results with various code provisions and
finite element model results.

• To determine the flat width that has to be considered for

determining the allowable b/t ratio.

• To study the behaviour of X and K-bracing system and to

determine the cause of the failure.

• To develop more rational recommendation for the design of

primary and secondary bracings.

• To study the effect of hip bracing pattern in overall

performance of the tower.

• To study the effect of geometric and material nonlinearities on

member forces and overall behaviour of tower.
 12

• To study the effect of shear deformation in intermittently

connected compound members consisting of two angles in the
form of back to back connected ‘T’ section and cruciform
sections.

• To study the various failure patterns and classify them

accordingly as main member, bracing, cross arm, redundant
member failures and connection failures.

• To find the causes for all the above failures and to suggest
suitable revision in codal provisions.

• To develop a methodology for accounting the discrepancies in

the deformations measured in testing and obtained from
analysis.

• To consider the dynamic effects and stability effects on towers

during proto type testing.

1.4 ORGANISATION OF THE THESIS

Chapter 1 gives the general introduction, the need for the study and
the scope of investigation.

Chapter 2 provides the review of literature on the analytical and

experimental investigation on the failures of X-braced, K-braced panels and
failures of transmission line towers.

Chapter 3 discusses the experimental investigation carried out on

full scale transmission line towers and also on individual members for
determining the optimum flat width for calculation of allowable width to
thickness ratio.
 13

Chapter 4 presents the details of the analytical investigations

conducted using finite element method on full scale towers.

Chapter 5 discusses the various codal recommendations for the

design of leg members, main bracing, secondary bracings etc., The American,
the British and the Indian Standards have been considered.

Chapter 6 presents the results and discussion on the experimental,

theoretical and analytical studies carried out.

Chapter 7 summarises the conclusions and suggests

recommendations and scope for future work.