Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Paper6 PDF
Paper6 PDF
worldwide) recommends the use of GFM or Gust The angle section tower members conform to
effectiveness factor method (GEFM). The structural IS:802 (Part1/Sec1)-1995 and IS:802(Part1/Sec2)-
loads produced by wind gusts depend on the size, natural 1992. The wind effects over the steel towers were
frequency and damping of the structure in addition to the the main horizontal loads considered in the
inherent wind turbulence. These loads are applied as the structural analysis.
equivalent static loading on the structures. The gust
factor is a function of wind, terrain and structural 4. STRUCTURAL SYSTEM
characteristics. IDEALIZATIONS
According to the GFM given in IS: 875(part-3),
1987, the along wind load on a structure on a strip The three models adopted in this study are discussed
area (Ae) at a height (z) is given by [8]: below in brief:
a) Model I or Rigid Space Frame model: In
this case, members were considered as rigid jointed
Where,
members.
= Force coefficient of the
b) Model II or Space Truss model: In this
structure,
model, the tower was idealized as a space truss with
= Effective frontal area
all members taken to be hinged permitting in-plane
considered for the
rotation.
structure at height z,
c) Model III or Combined or Hybrid model:
= Design pressure at height In this model, the main leg members were rigid
z due to hourly mean wind jointed, while the bracings were considered to be
obtained as 0.6Vz2 (N/m2) hinged.
G = Gust factor The member sections and other details are as follows:
All notations are as per IS: 875 (part-III).
The GFM considers wind forces as equi-static 1) Ground Supported Mobile tower (18 m)
forces, therefore not truly accounting for the
dynamic effects of the wind. However, it is well Height of tower 18m
accepted practice to take into account the dynamic Height of straight 15m
effects of the wind for slender and open structures portion at top of tower
like tall mobile towers by adopting GFM. Height of inclined 3m
portion
3. MATERIAL AND METHODOLOGY Base width 1.8m
In this study an 18m and a 40m high ground Top width 1m
supported latticed mobile tower, located at a
No. of 1.5m high panels 2 NOS
highly developed area in New Delhi (NCR) were
modeled in STAAD.Pro 2007 to obtain the No. of 3.0m high panels 5 NOS
structural response of a ground supported latticed Antenna particulars:
mobile tower. The present analysis involves the
a) 6 numbers of 0.26*2.6m2 CDMA antennae
modeling of the tower as
weighing 20 kg each, at a height of 17m from the
a) Rigid frame, base.
b) Truss and b) 2 numbers of 0.3m diameter Microwave
c) Combined truss and frame. antennae weighing 25 kg, at a height of 15m from the
base.
For the calculation of the wind loads by the gust Wind zone = Zone IV, Basic wind speed, Vb =
factor method, the following parameters were 47m/s, Risk Coefficient factor, k1*= 1.07
considered [8]: *Considering design life of 100 years.
Topography factor, k3 = 1.00
5. ANALYTICAL RESULTS
Table 5: Comparison of Joint displacements (mm): 18m tower
Elevation Node Frame Model Truss Model Hybrid Model (III)
No. (I) (II)
18 84 44.05 44.70 44.37
9 48 12.97 13.21 13.20
3 25 0.71 0.70 0.70
Earthquake Loading. Pentech Press Limited, Buildings and Structures, Part 3: Wind Loads.
Devon, 15-27 and 68-89, 1980. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
6) Gucuyen Engin et al. Effect of changes on joint 9) Jiang W.Q. et al. Accurate modeling of joint
connections of steel lattice towers due to effects in lattice transmission towers. Engineering
environmental loads. International Journal of Structures. 33:1817–1827, 2011.
Engineering and Industries. 2(11), 2011. 10) Sullins Eric James. Analysis of radio
7) Harikrishna P. et al. Analytical and Experimental communication towers subjected to wind, ice and
Studies on the Gust Response of a 52m Tall Steel seismic loadings. MS Thesis, (2006) Faculty of
Lattice Tower under Wind Loading. Computers the Graduate School of the University of Missouri,
and Structures, 70:149-160, 1999. Structural Columbia.
Engineering Research Centre, Chennai.
8) IS: 875 (part 3)1987, Indian Code of Practice for
Design Loads (other than Earthquake) for