HBRC Journal (2014) xxx, xxx–xxx

Housing and Building National Research Center

HBRC Journal

http://ees.elsevier.com/hbrcj

Seismic assessment of guyed towers: A case

study combining field measurements and pushover
analysis
A. Ismail

HBRC, Structure and Metallic Institute, Egypt

Received 9 June 2014; revised 28 June 2014; accepted 29 June 2014

KEYWORDS Abstract Telecommunication structures are essential components of communication and

Guyed tower; post-disaster networks that must remain operational after a designlevel of earthquake. This study
Ambient vibration; provides dynamic field measurements of 138 m guyed tower located at Qussia city, Upper Egypt.
Seismic assessment; In situ measurements of ambient tower vibrations are used to determine the dominant natural
Pushover analysis frequencies of the tower. The measurements were made using a LMS SCADAS system and four
wireless vibration sensors for recording the ambient vibrations of the mast. The tension in the
guy wires was measured by mechanical equipment. The dynamic properties of the guyed mast
(natural frequencies and mode shapes) were extracted from these measurements. Results of the
eigenvalue analysis of numerical models of the tower were compared with the natural frequencies
and mode shapes extracted from the in situ measurements. The field measurements were used to
update the finite element model. The nonlinear static analysis based on the updated finite element
model was carried out. Seismic assessment and comparison between the original and updated
models taking into account the deterioration in elements are presented.
ª 2014 Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Housing and Building National Research
Center.

Introduction sensitive to time dependent loading such as wind and earth-

Guyed towers are characterized by their light weight, flexibility
and often large size. All these characteristics make them very
E-mail address: Ayman.m.Ismail@gmail.com
Peer review under responsibility of Housing and Building National
Research Center.
Production and hosting by Elsevier
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hbrcj.2014.06.014
1687-4048 ª 2014 Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Housing and Building National Research Center.
quake loadings. In emergency situations like especially after
a severe earthquake, the access to telecommunication and
broadcast services is one of the main advantages of using tele-
communication masts.
Several published studies have used detailed nonlinear
dynamic analysis of tall guyed masts using finite element mod-
els, either to predict the response of specific structures or to
develop simplified analysis procedures more amenable to
design practice. Amiri [1] applied three-dimensional compo-
nents of the El Centro, Parkfield, and Taft earthquakes to
eight guyed telecommunication masts with heights varying

Please cite this article in press as: A. Ismail, Seismic assessment of guyed towers: A case study combining field measurements and pushover analysis, HBRC Journal
(2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hbrcj.2014.06.014
2 A. Ismail
from 150 m to 607 m. The base shear, vertical force in the
mast, and guy tensions were examined. Amiri et el. [2] analyzed
a 342 m-tall mast with seven guy levels, and a 607 m-tall mast
with nine levels. A single horizontal component from the 1978
Tabas earthquake in Iran was applied. The study included the
spatial effect of the distances between the anchorage points
(multiple-support excitation). Time histories of lateral tip dis-
placement, axial force in the mast, mast base shear and cable
tension were presented. Guevara and McClure [3] considered
a 24 m-tall mast with two guy levels, and a 107 m-tall mast
with six guy levels. A scaled horizontal component from the
El Centro earthquake and one from the Parkfield earthquake
were applied. The time delay between the excitations at differ-
ent anchorage points of the guys and the mast was included in
part of the study. Time histories of guy tensions, shear forces,
vertical forces, and displacements were presented. Madugula
et al. [4] determined the natural frequencies of guyed masts
by modelling the mast as truss elements in one model and as
beam-column elements in another model. Guys were modeled
as cable elements in both the cases. For verifying the models,
two triangular steel latticed scale-modeled guyed masts were
fabricated and tested on a shake table specially designed to test
guyed masts. The experimental results were compared with the
results from the finite element analysis. Then, the finite element
modeling was applied to six existing towers. Meshmesha et al.
[5] introduced an equivalent beam-column analysis based on
an equivalent thin plate approach for lattice structures. A
finite-element modeling, using ABAQUS software, is used to
investigate the accuracy of utilizing the methods in determin-
ing the static and dynamic responses of a guyed tower of
364.5 m subjected to static and seismic loading conditions.
Then, the results are compared to those obtained from a
finite-element modeling of the actual structure using 3-D truss
and beam elements. Fantozzi [6] studied the nonlinear analysis
of a 607 m guyed tower, located in California region, with and
without mass irregularities. The analysis considered both in-
phase and out-of-phase base motion for comparison. The
results of the nonlinear analyses were compared to those
obtained using the equivalent lateral force method introduced
by codes. Hensley [7], developed a finite element model of a
120-m tall mast using ABAQUS. The three-dimensional
response of the mast was modeled when subjected to two
ground motion records, Northridge, and El Centro, with three
orthogonal components. Hensley conducted a parametric
study on the dominant structural parameters, and the results
were used to characterize the trends in the structural response
of guyed masts. The recent work of Oskoei Ghafari and McC-
lure [8,9] proposed a simplified seismic analysis procedure
based on the evaluation of the equivalent horizontal dynamic
stiffness of guy clusters supporting the mast.
In recent years, nonlinear static analyses (pushover analy-
sis) have received a great deal of research attention within
the earthquake engineering community. Their main goal is to
describe the nonlinear capacity of a structure when subject
to horizontal loading with a reduced computational effort with
respect to nonlinear dynamic analysis. Pushover methods are
particularly indicated for assessing existing structures (Ferra-
cuti et al. [10]).
Mara [11] compared the capacity estimates obtained using
the incremental dynamic analysis (IDA) and nonlinear static
pushover (NSP) procedures. The analyses consider both geo-
metric and material nonlinearities. The NSP analysis is used
Please cite this article in press as: A. Ismail, Seismic assessment of guyed towers: A case study combining field measurements and pushover analysis, HBRC Journal
(2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hbrcj.2014.06.014
to estimate the capacity of the tower under various wind pro-
files for the transverse and longitudinal wind directions. Zhang
[12] presented a detailed study of the post-elastic response of
latticed towers combining advanced (highly nonlinear) finite
element analysis and full-scale dynamic testing of four tower
section prototypes. He performed the nonlinear static and
transient dynamic analysis of transmission towers and com-
pared the results with results obtained from the dynamic tests.
Qian et al. [13] checked common software SAP2000 in non-
linear static analysis of complex large span steel structures. The
results showed that it is possible to get a good accuracy of the
highest load that a complex steel structure can reach through
the pushover analysis in SAP2000 [14].
Ambient vibration measurements (AVM) have been widely
touted as a practical modal identification technique, mainly
due to the easy and relatively inexpensive setup required to
perform them, as well as the fact that the dynamic properties
are obtained under the actual operating conditions of the
structure. Many methods have been developed over the years
to extract the dynamic properties of structures from their mea-
sured ambient response. It is a simple yet robust technique,
known as Frequency Domain Decomposition (FDD), which
has gained wide popularity in the last decade (Brincker et al.
[15,16]; Brownjohn [17]; Gentile and Saisi [18]; Lamarche
et al. [19]). Refinements of this method have led to the devel-
opment of the Enhanced Frequency Domain Decomposition
method (EFDD).
Although the ambient vibration measurements (AVM)
have recently been extensively applied to large civil structures
such as bridges, dams, high rise buildings and large grand-
stands, there are a few works concerning dynamic assessment
of guyed towers using field measurements. Oskoei Ghafari et
el. [20] provide a case study of experimental validation using
ambient vibration measurement (AVM) tests for evaluating
the accuracy of numerical studies. These tests were done on
a 111.2-m tall mast owned by Hydro-Québec and located at
St. Hyacinthe, Québec, Canada. The dynamic properties of
the guyed mast extracted from AVM records are compared
with those obtained from nonlinear finite element analysis
models. The first few natural frequencies of the structure
obtained from adjusted finite element models are compared
with those obtained by AVM identification. A series of earth-
quake simulations on the ‘‘verified’’ model explore the influ-
ence of cable tension variability on a few salient tower
response indicators.
In this study, a full scale dynamic test using AVM of a
138 m guyed tower was conducted. An updated 3D finite ele-
ment model was then built taking into consideration the struc-
ture’s parameters and atmospheric corrosion of the steel
sections. Finally, the pushover analysis was carried out for
the tower models, the updated models and the initial design
model according to manufactured requirements. The compar-
ison of the results is presented.
Tower geometry
The latticed steel tower was constructed in 1966. It is squared
with panel dimensions of 1.15 m · 1.15 m. It is supported lat-
erally at five stay levels attached at three ground anchor groups
at distances 18.0 m, 76.8 m and 136.6 m from the tower axis
(Fig. 1a). Each level is held by four guys with interval of 90
Seismic assessment of guyed towers
Fig. 1 Geometrical details of Qussia guyed tower.
degree in plan between them. The tower supports two commu-
nication antennas with 1.2 m in diameter at different elevations
and transmission lines that carry the antenna signal to the tele-
communication base station located in the equipment shelter
adjacent to the tower.
The tower is built-up using two steel UPN sections of size
120 · 7 mm back-to-back as vertical legs. Steel angles of size
L 70 · 7 mm constitute the inclined bracing at 120 cm spacing
on all faces (Fig. 1b). The steel section is made of mild steel
having a Young’s modulus E = 2 · 1011 N/m2, Poisson’s ratio
m = 0.3 and density q = 7850 kg/m3. The structure is modeled
as pinned at the base of the mast. This pinned connection pro-
vides translational restraints (three degrees of freedom), while
it allows rotations.
Urban sprawl near communication installations worsens
the atmospheric climate around the steel towers which
increases the corrosion process with time. Pedro and Hall
[21] suggest a range of loss per surface for steel section about
0.005 mm/year for rural environments. The loss for tower’s
steel sections was calibrated according to the AVM in the
range of 0–0.24 mm. These values are essential to get accurate
FEM update.
Fig. 2 shows the general layout of the structure and the sup-
porting element’s details.
Table 1 shows the structural properties of the cables. The
tension forces in cables were measured using a mechanical
instrument (Tensitron instrument).
Ambient vibration testing procedure
The test was carried out using a LMS SCADAS system and
four wireless vibration sensors attached to the mast only. A
series of measurements was taken in the morning with a
recorded temperature of 24 C. Another series was taken with
a recorded temperature of 32 C.
Please cite this article in press as: A. Ismail, Seismic assessment of guyed towers: A case study combining field measurements and pushover analysis, HBRC Journal
(2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hbrcj.2014.06.014
3
The LMS Test Lab PolyMAX software was used for trans-
ferring the collected data from the sensors to the laptop com-
puters and carrying out data truncation and synchronization
based on the time stamps in the individual data files. Identify-
ing the dynamic characteristic of the structure (natural fre-
quencies and mode shapes) was done using PolyMAX
parameter estimation method. PolyMAX operates on spectra
or half spectra (i.e. the Fourier transform of the positive time
lags of the correlation functions). The main advantage of Poly-
MAX is that it yields extremely clear stabilization diagrams,
making an automation of the parameter identification process
rather straightforward. This enables a continuous monitoring
of the dynamic properties of a structure (Peters et al. [22]).
Fig. 3 shows the recorded time history obtained by AVM.
Using LMS polymax automatic option, the natural frequencies
of the guyed tower were obtained. Due to the limited number
of sensors, the torsion mode and cable natural frequencies
could not be accurately determined. The mode shapes of the
best three lower frequencies of the guyed tower are shown in
Fig. 4. As there are two sets of AVM with different tempera-
tures, the corresponding natural frequencies of the guyed
tower were obtained accordingly. The variation of values of
these natural frequencies was not significant, it was in the
range 0.5–1%. In practice, temperature records would not be
available at various positions in the tower and of each cable.
So, the average temperature between the two records was
taken equal to 28 C when evaluating FEM model.
Finite element model
The finite element analysis software SAP2000 [14] was adapted
to perform the analysis of the guyed tower. The mast is mod-
eled as a three-dimensional truss and the cables as pretension
cable elements. Three cases were carried out: (1) initial
designed stage with initial designed cable tension To (at start
4 A. Ismail

(b) Ground anchor of lower guy

clusters

(c) Foundation of the mast

(a) General view of the tested

telecommunication tower

Fig. 2 Layout of Qussia guyed tower.

From these results, it can be concluded that the ambient

Table 1 Guy specifications.
vibration measurements (AVM) on complex structures like
Cable Area E (N/m2) Tension Tension guyed towers have provided valuable data for the validation
level (cm2) (designed To) (measured Tm) of the detailed finite element models. This helps to have accu-
KN KN
rate nonlinear analysis which is essential for these types of
1 8.0 1.655 · 1011 131.0 101.0 structures.
2 13.61 1.655 · 1011 215.0 189.0 The results also indicate that detailed models provide rea-
3 9.48 1.655 · 1011 128.0 110.0 sonably accurate predictions of fundamental frequencies of
4 7.25 1.655 · 1011 85.0 73.0
the tower itself. The fundamental frequencies of cables were
5 7.25 1.655 · 1011 85.0 68.0
not predicted from AVM due to the limited numbers of sensors
used and the difficulty which arises for attaching sensors along
the cable length.

of using the tower); (2) updated FEM model considering cor-
rosion effects with measured cable tension Tm and the last (3)
updated FEM model with initial designed cable tension To.
The average temperature for all analysis cases was assumed
to be 28 C as mentioned before.
It is also considered a common practice to analyze such
tower like structures as ‘pined’ at their base with no consider-
ation of the foundation–soil interaction.
Updating the finite element model
The finite element model has been updated considering corro-
sion effects with measured cable tension obtained by mechan-
ical field measurements and was calibrated by AVM. The
Eigen problem was solved for both models (original and
updated) and the natural frequencies and the corresponding
mode shapes of the guyed tower were obtained as shown in
Table 2.
Pushover analysis
The inelastic static pushover analysis is a simple option for
estimating the strength capacity in the post-elastic range. This
technique may also be used to highlight potential weak areas in
the structure. This procedure involves applying a predefined
lateral load pattern. The lateral forces are then monotonically
increased in constant proportion with a displacement control
at the top of the tower until a certain level of deformation is
reached. The target top displacement may be the deformation
expected in the design earthquake in case of designing a new
structure, or the drift corresponding to the structural collapse
for assessment purposes. The method allows tracing the
sequence of yielding and failure on the member and the struc-
ture levels as well as the progress of the overall capacity curve
of the structure (Krawinkler and Seneviratna [23]).
The guyed tower structure is loaded first with general
seismic loading as defined in Egyptian code of Loads

Please cite this article in press as: A. Ismail, Seismic assessment of guyed towers: A case study combining field measurements and pushover analysis, HBRC Journal
(2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hbrcj.2014.06.014
Seismic assessment of guyed towers 5

Fig. 3 LMS recorded data and corresponding evaluated natural frequencies.

Fig. 4 Mode shapes of the best three lower frequencies.

will be added at each stage when the cross section yields to the
Table 2 Comparison of guyed tower natural frequencies.
prescribed level defined in FEMA-356 and ATC-40. The per-
Vibration mode Natural frequency (Hz) formance of the structure is determined by hinges formation.
Measured Original FE model Updated FE model The main goal of the upcoming analysis is to develop a
complete pushover analysis up to collapse for the structural
1 1.32 1.68 1.35
2 1.56 1.97 1.61 configurations representing the updated FEM for the guyed
3 1.92 2.25 1.97

(ECP201-2012) [24] and then pushover load is applied mono-

tonically on its deformed configuration. ECP201 states the
design horizontal acceleration as 0.15 g for this site zone.
The footings of the guyed tower are located on medium to
coarse sand, which can be classified as the class type ‘‘C’’
according to the ECP201.
After yielding, plastic hinges will form at different locations
indicating the risk of occupancy as shown in Fig. 5. The per-
formance point is calculated from the guidelines defined in
ATC-40 [25] and FEMA-356 [26] which are well known docu-
ments used to perform pushover analysis. In SAP2000, hinges Fig. 5 Risk indicator curve.

Please cite this article in press as: A. Ismail, Seismic assessment of guyed towers: A case study combining field measurements and pushover analysis, HBRC Journal
(2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hbrcj.2014.06.014
6 A. Ismail

th th
6a. First step 6b. 6 step 6c. Last step (11 )

Fig. 6 Plastic hinge formation of the updated FEM with Tm.

Results and discussion

The deformed shapes and plastic hinges of the guyed tower

shown in Fig. 1 are presented in Fig. 6 for the updated FEM
with Tm. The capacity–demand curve is plotted as shown in
Fig. 7. The behavior of the structure is observed, with unique
indicator until the failure occurs.
The base shear-top displacement relationships obtained by
pushover analysis for the three cases considered are presented
in Fig. 8. It is noted that the maximum base shear for updated
FEM with measured Tm is about 65% of values of initial
design case with initial cable tension To. The top displacement
of updated FEM with initial cable tension To is 15% lower
than the displacement of same point of initial design case with
To. The process of re-tensioning cables to their initial tension
with considering the corrosion of the steel elements with time
enhances the response of the guyed tower to seismic force.
The base shear in this case will be about 50% greater than that
Fig. 7 Capacity/demand spectrum.
of updated FEM with measured Tm. But the effect of corrosion
of steel elements reduces the seismic base shear by about 15%
of the designed values. These results suggest that initially cable
tensions are a very influential parameter on the guyed tower
seismic response.

Conclusions

The ambient vibration measurements (AVM) on complex

Fig. 8 Base shear versus top displacement.
tower. Then a comparison of the pushover capacity curve for
the updated FEM and the initial FEM will be discussed.
structures like guyed towers have provided valuable data for
the validation of the detailed finite element models. Dynamic
field measurements of 138 m guyed tower located at Qussia
city, Upper Egypt have been used to determine the dominant
natural frequencies of the tower. However, there are some lim-
itations in the field measurements. One of them is related to the
limited number of sensors especially for the cable element and
the difficulty of attaching sensors along the cable length.
The finite element model has been updated considering cor-
rosion effect and calibrated by AVM with the measured cable
tension obtained by mechanical field measurements. The

Please cite this article in press as: A. Ismail, Seismic assessment of guyed towers: A case study combining field measurements and pushover analysis, HBRC Journal
(2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hbrcj.2014.06.014
Seismic assessment of guyed towers
detailed models provide reasonably accurate predictions of
fundamental frequencies of the tower itself. Cable tensions
are a very influential parameter on the dynamic characteristic
of the mast. The ambient vibration measurements (AVM) have
a good benefit to perform accurate nonlinear analysis which is
essential for these types of structures.
A complete pushover analysis up to collapse for the struc-
tural configurations representing the updated FEM for the
guyed has been performed. The updated finite element model
leads to evaluate the exact ultimate behavior of seismic resis-
tance. The corrosion of tower’s steel elements has a significant
effect on tower’s seismic resistance. Also, the study proves the
importance of the variability in cable tension on the seismic
response of the structure.
Conflict of interest
None.
References
[1] G.G. Amiri, Seismic sensitivity indicators for tall guyed
telecommunication towers, Comput. Struct. 80 (2002) 349–364.
[2] G.G. Amiri, M. Zahedi, R.S. Jalali, Multiple-support seismic
excitation of tall guyed telecommunication towers, in:
Proceedings of the 13th World Conference on Earthquake
Engineering, 2004. Paper No. 212.
[3] E.I. Guevara, G. McClure, Nonlinear seismic response of
antenna-supporting structures, Comput. Struct. 47 (4/5) (1993)
711–724.
[4] M.K.S. Madugula, Y.M.F. Wahba, G.R. Monforton, Dynamic
response of guyed masts, Eng. Struct. 20 (12) (1998) 1097–1101.
[5] H. Meshmesha, K. Sennah, J.B. Kennedy, Simple method for
static and dynamic analyses of guyed towers, Struct. Eng. Mech.
23 (2006) 635–649.
[6] M.W. Fantozzi, Seismic design of communication towers,
ASCE Report, 2006.
[7] G.M. Hensley, Finite element analysis of the seismic behavior of
guyed masts (Master thesis), Virginia Polytechnic Institute and
State University, USA, 2005.
[8] S.A. Oskoei Ghafari, G. McClure, A novel approach to evaluate
the equivalent dynamic stiffness of guy clusters in
telecommunication masts underground excitation, Eng. Struct.
33 (2011) 1764–1772.
[9] S.A Oskoei Ghafari, G. McClure, A new robust linearized
seismic analysis method for tall guyed telecommunication masts,
ASCE J. Struct. Eng. 138 (4) (2012) 502–513.
[10] B. Ferracuti, R. Pinho, M. Savoia, R. Francia, Verification of
displacement-based adaptive pushover through multi-ground
motion incremental dynamic analyses, Eng. Struct. 31 (2009)
1789–1799.
Please cite this article in press as: A. Ismail, Seismic assessment of guyed towers: A case study combining field measurements and pushover analysis, HBRC Journal
(2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hbrcj.2014.06.014
7
[11] Thomas G. Mara, Capacity assessment of a transmission tower
under wind loading (Ph.D. thesis), The School of Graduate and
Postdoctoral Studies, the University of Western Ontario
London, Ontario, Canada, 2013.
[12] Xiaohong Zhang, Dynamic post-elastic response of transmission
towers (Ph.D. thesis), Department of Civil Engineering and
Applied Mechanics, McGill, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, 2009.
[13] J.R. Qian, W.J. Zhang, X.D. Ji, Application of pushover
analysis on earthquake response predication of complex large-
span steel structures, The 14th World Conference on
Earthquake Engineering, Beijing, China, October 12–17, 2008.
[14] SAP2000, Integrated Software for Structural Analysis and
Design, V. 16.0, Computers & Structures, Inc., Berkeley,
California, USA, 2013.
[15] R. Brincker, P. Andersen, Ambient response analysis modal
analysis for large structures, Sixth International Congress on
Sound and Vibration, Copenhagen, Denmark, 1999.
[16] R. Brincker, L. Zhang, P. Anderson, Modal identification of
output-only systems using frequency domain decomposition,
Smart Mater. Struct. 10 (2001) 441–445.
[17] J.M.W. Brownjohn, Ambient vibration studies for system
identification of tall buildings, Earthquake Eng. Struct.
Dynam. 32 (2003) 71–95.
[18] C. Gentile, A. Saisi, Ambient vibration testing of historic
masonry towers for structural identification and damage
assessment, Constr. Build. Mater. 21 (2007) 1311–1321.
[19] C.P. Lamarche, P. Paultre, J. Proulx, S. Mousseau, Assessment
of the frequency domain decomposition technique by forced-
vibration tests of a full-scale structure, Earthquake Eng. Struct.
Dynam. 37 (2008) 487–494.
[20] M. Osgoie Ghafari, G. McClure, X. Hong Zhang, D. Gagnon,
Assessing the variability of seismic response analysis of tall
guyed telecommunication tower with ambient vibration
measurement, in: Proceedings of the 15th World Conference
Earthquake Engineering (15WCEE), Lisbon, Portugal,
September 24–28, 2012. Paper No. 0733.
[21] Albrecht Pedro, T.T. Hall, Atmospheric corrosion resistance of
structural steels, J. Mater. Civil Eng. (2003) 2–24, January/
February.
[22] B. Peters, F. Vanhollebeke, P. Guillaume, H. Van der Auweraer,
Operational modal analysis for estimating the dynamic
properties of a stadium structure during a football game, J.
Shock Vibr. 14 (2007) 283–303.
[23] Helmut Krawinkler, G.D.P.K. Seneviratna, Pros and cons of a
pushover analysis of seismic performance evaluation, Eng.
Struct. 20 (1998) 452–464.
[24] The Egyptian Code of Loads, ECP-201, HBRC 5 (2012) 108–
158.
[25] Applied Tech Council (ATC), Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit
of Concrete Building, ATC 40, 1996.
[26] Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA-356, Pre-
standard and Commentary for Seismic Rehabilitation of
Buildings, Washington DC, 2000.