INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAPPLIEDENGINEERINGRESEARCH,DINDIGUL Volume1,No 3,2010 Copyright2010AllrightsreservedIntegratedPublishingAssociation RESEARCHARTICLE ISSN 09764259

WindAnalysisofMicrowaveAntennaTowers
Siddesha.H Lecturer,DepartmentofCivilEngineering,S.I.T.,Tumkur,Karnataka,India. siddeshah@gmail.com ABSTRACT Openlatticedsteeltowersareusedwidelyinavarietyofcivilengineeringapplications.The angle sections are commonly used in microwave antenna towers. This paper presents, the analysis of microwave antenna tower with Static and Gust Factor Method (GFM). The comparison is made between the tower with angle and square hollow section. The displacementatthetopofthetowerisconsideredasthemainparameter.Theanalysisisalso donefordifferentconfigurationbyremovingonememberaspresentintheregulartowerat lowerpanels. Keywords:GFM,panels,configuration,displacement 1.Introduction WhileCommunicationSatellitesareusedforsendingandreceivinginformationsignals,very tall towers are required fortransmission of signalsthrough antennae. Tall towers are being used by different agencies such as television and radio departments, telecommunication industry, defense, railways and police for their communication network. The microwave towers, which are space structures in steel, carry mainly communication antennae. These towers are mostly square in plan, made of standard steel angles and connected together by means of bolts and nuts. Triangular towers attract lesser wind loads compared with square towers. However they are usedonly for smaller heights of towerduetodifficulties in joint detailingandfabricationusinganglesections(Gomathinayagam,S,June2000). Ultimately, the general availability of a wide range of square, rectangular, and round structuraltubingincreased.Theuseoftubularjointsgreatlyimprovedtheaestheticqualities ofthetruss,andthehigherloadcarryingcapacityofthestructuralcapacityofthestructural tube members provided a wide range of applications for a triangular cross section truss. Tubularsectionsareusedfortrussmembers,therangeofdifferentstandardshapesandsizes produced is muchless than wide flange shapes and availability of some standard shapes is stilllimited. Inordertoreducetheunsupportedlengthandthusincreasetheirbucklingstrength,themain legsandthebracingmembersarelaterallysupportedatintervalsinbetweentheirendnodes, using secondary bracings or redundants. These secondary bracings increase the buckling strength of the main compression members (N.Prasad Rao, September 2001), K and X bracingwithsecondarybracingswerecommonlyusinginmicrowavetowers. Optimization is the art of obtaining best results under given conditions. An optimization problemconsistsofafunction,whichistobeoptimized,andwithorwithoutconstraints.The constraints are the conditions to be satisfied during optimization. Optimal design methods assist engineers to evolve the bestpossible designs in terms of cost, weight, reliability ora combination of these parameters. As for as tower and tower like structures are concerned 574

INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAPPLIEDENGINEERINGRESEARCH,DINDIGUL Volume1,No 3,2010 Copyright2010AllrightsreservedIntegratedPublishingAssociation RESEARCHARTICLE ISSN 09764259

limitingthedisplacementandstressestoallowablelimitsoptimizestheweightusingdifferent sections. Many methods have been developed and are in use for design optimization of structural systems. Structural optimization using mathematical programming was very expensive in the early stages of its development and hence applications to problems were limitedinscope.Recentadvancesincomputerhardwarehaveencouragedresearchestogive anewthrusttostructuraloptimization. Thestructuresliketowersandmastsaresensitivetodynamicwindload.Theneedtodesigna latticetowerconsideringresonantdynamicresponsetowindloadsariseswhentheirnatural frequencies are low enough to be excited by the turbulence in the natural wind (J.D. Holmes,1994).These types of structures, which arevulnerable to wind inducedoscillations are required to be examined for dynamic effects of wind. Further, the structural loads producedbywindgustsdependofthesize,naturalfrequencyanddampingofthestructurein addition to the inherent wind turbulence. One of the approaches used for evaluating the dynamicresponseoflatticetowersistheGFM(Abraham,AugustSeptember2005). DynamiceffectsofwindfordesignoflatticetowersareconsideredinGFM.Inthisapproach, theequivalentwindloadingisequaltothemeanwindforcemultipliedbyaGustFactor.This loadisappliedasanequivalentstaticloadingonstructures.Thisfactorisafunctionofwind, terrain and structural characteristics. The Gust present in strong winds are caused by mechanicaldisturbancetotheflowresultingfromtheroughnessofthegroundsurface(T.A. Wyatt,October1984). StewartsandLloydsfirstintroducedthehollowstructuralsectionsin1952,theyhavebecome increasinglypopularasstructuralelements,mainlyduetotheirstructuraladvantagelikehigh torsional capacity, structural efficiency and aesthetic qualities (A.N. Nayak, November 1997).Lessworkhasbeenreportedintheliteratureswithregardstosquarehollowsections usedintowerstructures. Manyofthetowerswerefailedforwindloadswithlegandbracemembersinanglesections. Afewexamplesare:thefailureof101mtallmicrowavetower,duringNov.1989,atkavali, AndhraPradesh,andthecollapseof101mmicrowavetowerduringNov.1996atRavalepalm, AndhraPradesh,duetocyclonicwindforces.InJune1998eightmicrowavetowersofheight 80100m collapsed during cyclone, which ravaged Kutch region of Gujrat. These failures revealedtheimportanceofinvestigatingthestaticanddynamiceffectsofwindoftalltower structureswithanglesections.Itisnecessarytoreplacetheanglesectioninmicrowavetower withdifferentsectionsandconfiguration. 2.Modelingandanalysisoftower The modeling and analysis of tower is done by using ANSYS software. For the present analysis, the members of the tower are modeled by using BEAM 188 element. Several authors have done the experimental (P.Harikrishna, 2003, and K.Hiramatsu, 1988) and analytical investigations by using various finite element softwares (J.G.S. da Silva, 2005, M.J.Glanville,1995andP.J.Murtagh,2004).

575

INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAPPLIEDENGINEERINGRESEARCH,DINDIGUL Volume1,No 3,2010 Copyright2010AllrightsreservedIntegratedPublishingAssociation RESEARCHARTICLE ISSN 09764259

2.1Materialproperties Themostwidelyusedcommercialstructuralmateriallowcarbonsteel(C14)withDensity 3 7870 kg/m , Tensile strength (yield) 415 Mpa, Modulus of Elasticity200 Gpa, has been selectedforthestudy.Thechemicalcomposition ofthesectionusedinthepresentanalysis hasbeenshownin Table1. Table1:ChemicalComposition Composition % C 0.120.18 Fe 99.1399.58 Mn 0.30.6 P <=0.04 S <=0.05

2.2TowerConfigurationandSections Inthisstudy,a40mheighttowerofsquareinplanisconsideredwhichishavingabasewidth of4mandreducesto1.91matthetop.Theanalysishasbeendoneforthefollowingsections inregulartowerconfigurationfortheentiretowerasshownin Figure1.Thesectionsadopted forthisconfigurationareasbelow, AtowerwithLegandbracingmembersasAngleSections(LA&BA) A tower with Leg members as Square Hollow and bracing members as Angle Sections(LS&BA) AtowerwithLegandbracingmembersasSquareHollowSections(LS&BS). Thetotalweightofthetoweriskeptnearlyconstantforallthesesections.Thewindloadhas been calculated using static method and GFM. The calculated values have been applied on thetower. The analysis is alsodone for different configuration with different sections at bottom first, rd th second and both the panels. The remaining bracings in panels (that is from 3 to14 ) are keptconstant intermsofconfigurationandsectionsasinregulartower(thatiscasei).The sectionsadoptedforlegmembersaresimilarasexplainedabove(thatiscaseitoiii),butfor bracing members the sectional dimensions were changed. In the present work X, X and Horizontal and X and M bracing have been used. The configuration of which have been shown inFigure2toFigure4. In this study, the loads calculated from regular tower with angle sections is applied on all configurationandsectionsunderstaticandGFM,inordertoanalysetheperformanceofthe tower.

576

INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAPPLIEDENGINEERINGRESEARCH,DINDIGUL Volume1,No 3,2010 Copyright2010AllrightsreservedIntegratedPublishingAssociation RESEARCHARTICLE ISSN 09764259

Figure1: ViewsofRegularMicrowaveTower,a.3D,b.Front

Figure2: ConfigurationsofthemicrowavetoweratlowerFirstPanel,a.X,b.Xand Horizontalbracing,c.XandMbracing

Figure3: ConfigurationsofthemicrowavetoweratlowerSecondPanel,a.X,b.Xand Horizontalbracing,c.XandMbracing

Figure4: ConfigurationsofthemicrowavetoweratlowertwoPanels,a.X,b.Xand Horizontalbracing,c.XandMbracing

577

INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAPPLIEDENGINEERINGRESEARCH,DINDIGUL Volume1,No 3,2010 Copyright2010AllrightsreservedIntegratedPublishingAssociation RESEARCHARTICLE ISSN 09764259

2.3BoundaryconditionsandLoading Allthetowerconfigurationsusedinthisstudyareassumedasrigidlyconnectedatthebase andalldegreesoffreedomatthebottomnodesarerestrained.Figure5(a)showsthePanels consideredforthecalculationofwindloads.Figure5(b)showsthevariationofwindloadsat differentpanels.InGFM,dampingratiosof0.02(Structural)aspertheIS:875(part3)1987 and0.04(StructuralandAerodynamic)wereconsidered (Abraham,Augustseptember2005). Theaerodynamicdamping forceariseswhenthe relativemotionbetweenthetowerandthe windisconsidered (J.D.Holmes,1996). Forthecalculationofwindloadsbystaticmethodthefollowingparameterswereconsidered asperIS:875(part3)1987.Windspeed55m/s,Riskcoefficient(k1)1.08,Terrain, height and structure size factor (k2) category 2 and class B (assumed), Topography factor (k3)1 (assumed).ForthecalculationsofwindloadsbyGFMfollowingparameterswereconsidered as per IS: 875 (part 3)1987. Wind speed 55m/s, Risk coefficient (k1)1.08, Terrain and heightfactor(k2 )category2(assumed),Topographyfactor(k3)1(assumed). The antenna loads have been calculated as reported in the early literature (Gomathinayagam,S,June 2000 and Sujatha Unnikrishnan.2002) A 3mdiameter paraboloid type antenna without radome is considered in the present analysis. It is assumed that the antennaismountedataheightof40meter(thatistopofthetower)ononeofthelegmember facingnormaltothedirectionofwind.Thewindincidenceanglefortheantennaisassumed aszerodegrees.Thegustfactoristakenasunity.Thewindforcealongthedirectionofthe windisobtainedas25044.06N.ThisantennaloadisusedinboththeMethodsandisapplied forallotherconfigurations.
a

300 00 b 250 00 200 00 150 00 100 00 50 00 0 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 Static Method GFMf or2% damping GFMf or4% damping Loads(N)

Pan e ls

Figure5: Windloadcalculation,a.Panelsofregularmicrowavetower,b.Variation ofloads atdifferentPanels

578

INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAPPLIEDENGINEERINGRESEARCH,DINDIGUL Volume1,No 3,2010 Copyright2010AllrightsreservedIntegratedPublishingAssociation RESEARCHARTICLE ISSN 09764259

3ResultsandDiscussions 3.1Modalanalysisoftower In the present study, the modal analysis of the tower is carried out by Subspace iteration method. The modal analysis helps in computation of natural frequencies and the corresponding mode shapes of the structure, which essentially depends on distribution of stiffness and mass within the structure. The natural frequencies obtained through modal analysisareshown inTable2.Firstthreemodeshapesofthetowerareshown inFigure6. Thefirstmodalfrequencyofthetoweristakenforwindloadcalculation fromGFM. Table 2:NaturalfrequenciesusingModalAnalysis Mode 1 2 3 Frequency(Hz) 0.723542 0.723817 1.82300

Figure6:Modeshapes,a.First, b.Second,c.Third

579

INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAPPLIEDENGINEERINGRESEARCH,DINDIGUL Volume1,No 3,2010 Copyright2010AllrightsreservedIntegratedPublishingAssociation RESEARCHARTICLE ISSN 09764259

3.2DisplacementatthetopofMicrowaveAntennatowerforregularconfigurationwith differentsections. Inthepresentanalysis,thedisplacementofmicrowaveantennatoweratthetop40mlevelhas been considered as the main parameter. Aregular tower with different sections and regular configurationhasbeenstudiedunderstaticandGFM. Figure 7 show the variation of displacement at the top of the regular tower for different sections.WindforcescalculatedbystaticmethodandGFMwereevaluatedearlier.InGFM, theGustFactor(G)hastobemultipliedwiththedesignwindpressure.So,thedesignwind forces in GFM (for 2% and 4% damping) get increased as compared to the static method. However,for4%damping(structuralandaerodynamic),Gvaluesgetreducedascompared to2%(structural)damping.Hence,Figure7(b)illustrates,thedisplacementatthetopofthe towergetsreducedfor4%dampingin GFM.

0.29

a
Displacements(m)
Displacements(m)
0.285

0.36 0.35 0.34 0.33 0.32 0.31 0.3 0.29

2%Damping 4%Damping

0.28

0.275

0.27 LA&BA LS&BA LS&BS

LA&BA

LS&BA

LS&BS

Sections

Sections

Figure7: VariationofDisplacementattopwithdifferentcrosssectionsinregulartower,a. Staticmethod,b.GFM The square hollow sections used in tower shows a maximum reduction of displacement in comparison with angle sections. This is due to, the moment of inertia of square hollow section is larger than angle section. Figure 7 illustrates the regular tower with LS & BS showsmaximumreductionofdisplacementincomparisonwithLS&BAandLA&BA. However,thereisnomuchreductionofdisplacementbetweenthetowerwithLS&BSand LS&BA. 3.3 Displacement at the top of Microwave Antenna tower for different configuration withdifferentsectionsatdifferentpanelsunderStaticandGFM. WindforcescalculatedbystaticmethodandGFMwereevaluatedearlier.InGFM,theGust Factor(G)hastobemultipliedwiththedesignwindpressure.So,thedesignwindforcein GFM(for2%and4%damping)getsincreasedascomparedtothestaticmethod.However, for 4% damping (structural and aerodynamic), G values get reduced as compared to 2% 580

INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAPPLIEDENGINEERINGRESEARCH,DINDIGUL Volume1,No 3,2010 Copyright2010AllrightsreservedIntegratedPublishingAssociation RESEARCHARTICLE ISSN 09764259

(structural) damping. Hence the displacement at the top of the tower will reduced for 4% damping. Figure 8 and Figure 9 show the variation of displacement for different configurationandsectionsbyboththesemethods. As we know, by adding members or changing configuration in the panels stiffness of the tower increases and thereby displacement of the tower gets reduces. From Figure 8 and Figure9,XandMbracingwillshowsthemaximumreductionofdisplacementascompared toXandXandHorizontalbracinginboththemethods. Thebendingmomentincreaseswithincreaseindistancefromthepointofapplicationofthe force.Sinceantennaloadisappliedatthetoppointofthetower,thelowerfirstpanelwithX andMbracingshowsmaximumreductionofdisplacementascomparedtolowersecondand lowertwopanels. The square hollow sections used in tower shows a maximum reduction of displacement in comparison with angle sections. This is due to, the moment of inertia of square hollow sectionis largerthananglesection. FromFigure8andFigure9,thetowerwithLS&BS showsmaximumreductionofdisplacementincomparisonwithLS&BAandLA&BA. The top line in Figure8 shows the regular towerwith angle section, which is taken for the comparison.However,thereisnomuchreductionofdisplacementbetweenthetowerwithL S&BSandLS&BA.
0.295

Displacements(m)

0.29 0.285 0.28 0.275 0.27 0.265 Regular Xbracing Xand XandM tow er Horizontal bracing Configuration bracing 0.295

LA&BA LS&BA LS&BS

Displacements(m)

0.29 0.285 0.28 0.275 0.27 0.265 Regular tow er Xand Horizontal Configuration bracing Xbracing XandM bracing LA&BA LS&BA LS&BS

581

INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAPPLIEDENGINEERINGRESEARCH,DINDIGUL Volume1,No 3,2010 Copyright2010AllrightsreservedIntegratedPublishingAssociation RESEARCHARTICLE

0.295

ISSN 09764259

c Displacements(m)
0.29 0.285 0.28 0.275 0.27 0.265 Regular tow er Xand Horizontal Configuration bracing Xbracing XandM bracing LA&BA LS&BA LS&BS

Figure 8: Displacementattopofthetowerfordifferentsectionswithdifferentconfiguration fromStaticmethod,a.Lowerfirstpanel,b.Lowersecondpanel,c.Lowertwopanels

0.36

a
Displacemetnts(m)
0.35 0.34 0.33 0.32 0.31 0.3 0.29 LA&BA LS&BA LS&BS

Configuration
2%Xbracing 2%XandMbracing 4%XandHorizontalbracing 2%XandHorizontalbracing 4%Xbracing 4%XandMbracing

0.36

b Displacements(m)
0.35 0.34 0.33 0.32 0.31 0.3 0.29 LA&BA LS&BA LS&BS

Configuration
2%Xbracing 2%XandMbracing 4%XandHorizontalbracing 2%XandHorizontalbracing 4%Xbracing 4%XandMbracing

582

INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAPPLIEDENGINEERINGRESEARCH,DINDIGUL Volume1,No 3,2010 Copyright2010AllrightsreservedIntegratedPublishingAssociation RESEARCHARTICLE ISSN 09764259

0.36

Displacements(m)

0.35 0.34 0.33 0.32 0.31 0.3 0.29

LA&BA

LS&BA

LS&BS

Configuration
2%Xbracing 2%XandMbracing 4%XandHorizontalbracing 2%XandHorizontalbracing 4%Xbracing 4%XandMbracing

Figure9: Displacementattopofthetowerfordifferentsectionswithdifferentconfiguration fromGFM,a.Lowerfirstpanel,b.Lowersecondpanel,c.Lowertwopanels 4. Conclusions The analysis of microwave antenna tower with different sections and configurations were done for wind loads. The following conclusions may be drawn from the above analytical results. Square hollow sections can be used more effectively in leg members in comparison withtheanglesectionsinregulartowerunderstaticandGFM. Square hollow Sections used in bracings along with the leg members do not show muchreductionofdisplacementcomparedtotowerwithSquareHollowsectionsused inLegmembersunderstaticandGFMs. X and M bracing in Square hollow Sections for legs and bracings at the lower first panel shows a maximum reduction of displacement compared to the regular tower withanglesectionsunderstaticandGFMs. X and M bracing in Square hollow Sections for legs and bracings at the lower first panelshowsamaximumreductionofdisplacementincomparisonwiththetowerwith SquarehollowSectionsforlegsandbracingsinlowersecond,lowerfirstandsecond panelswithdifferentconfigurationsinbothstaticandGFM. 5.References 1. Gomathinayagam,S., Shanmugasudaram,J., Harikrishna,P., Lakshmanan,N., and Rajasekaran,C. (June 2000). Dynamic Response of Lattice Tower with Antenna under WindLoading.J.ofTheInstitutionofEngineers(India),81, pp 3743.

583

INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAPPLIEDENGINEERINGRESEARCH,DINDIGUL Volume1,No 3,2010 Copyright2010AllrightsreservedIntegratedPublishingAssociation RESEARCHARTICLE ISSN 09764259

2. N.Prasad Rao, V. Kalyanaraman, (September 2001), Nonlinear behaviour of lattice panel of angle towers, J. of Constructional Steel Research, 57, pp 1337 1357. 3. J.D.Holmes,(1994),Alongwindresponseoflatticetowers:partIderivationof expressionsforgustresponsefactors.EngngStruct.,16(4),pp 287292. 4. Abraham, Harikrishna.P, Gomathinayagam.S, and Lakshmanan.N, (August September 2005), Failure investigation of microwave towers during cyclones A casestudy.J.ofStruct.Engg.,32,(3),pp 147157. 5. T.A. Wyatt, (October1984), An assessment of the sensitivity of lattice towersto fatigueinducedbywindguts. J.ofStruct.Engg.,6,pp 262267. 6. A.N. Nayak, Dr.S.K. Bhattacharya, (November 1997), Behaviour of Joints with Rectangular and Square Hollow Sections. J.ofthe institution of Engineers, Civil EngineeringDivision.78,pp 116122. 7. P.Harikrishna, A.Annadurai, S.Gomathinayagam, N.Laxman,(2003), Full scale measurementsofthestructuralresponseofa50mguyedmastunderwindloading. EngngStruct. 25,pp 859867. 8. K.HiramatsuandH.Akagi,(1988),Theresponseoflatticedsteeltowersduetothe actionofwind. J.ofWindEngineeringandIndustrialAerodynamics,30,716. 9. J.G.S. da Silva, P.C.G. da S. Vellasco, S.A.L. de Andrade, M.I.R. de Oliveira, (2005), Structuralassessmentofcurrentsteeldesignmodelsfortransmissionand telecommunicationtowers.J.ofConstructionalSteelResearch,61,pp11081134. 10.M.J. Glanville, K.C.S. Kwok, (1995), Dynamic characteristics and wind induced response of a steel frame tower. J. of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics,54/55,pp 133149. 11.P.J. Murtagh, B. Basu, B.M. Broderick, (2004), Simple models for natural frequencies and mode shapes of towers supporting utilities. Computers and Structures,82,pp17451750. 12.IS: 875 (part 3)1987, Indian Code of Practice for Design Loads (other than Earthquake) for Buildings and Structures, Part 3: Wind Loads. Bureau of Indian Standards,NewDelhi(1989). 13.J.D. Holmes,(1996), Alongwind response of lattice towersII. Aerodynamic damping anddeflections. EngngStruct.,18(7),pp 483488. 14.Sujatha Unnikrishnan.(2002), Dynamic Analysis of Microwave Antenna Tower. M.Techthesis,B.V.B.CollegeofEngineering,Hubli.

584