CIGRÉ Regional South-East European Conference - RSEEC 2014 (2nd edition)

October 8th - 10th 2014, Timisoara Hotel 4*, Timisoara City, Romania

RSEEC 2014-B113

Fast Restore Guyed Tower

E. MATEESCU, A.COPOIU, D. MARGINEAN, M. GHEORGHE, M. NISTOR

Company: FICHTNER ENGINEERING S.A
Country: Romania

C. DIACONU, I. HATEGAN
Company: TRANSELECTRICA S.A.
Country: Romania

SUMMARY
In most cases, the collapse of the Guyed Towers of the Romanian GRID was caused by unauthorized
intervention on the structure of the towers, especially on the anchorage system. The damage of the system of
anchorage may lead not only to collapse of the affected tower, but also could lead to the collapse of adjacent
towers ("cascade" effect).
In order to fast remedy the damages caused by the collapse of the guyed towers (PAS) of overhead transmission
lines of 220 kV – 400 kV, a solution called “fast restore guyed tower” had to be applied.
For establishing the geometry of the “fast restore guyed tower”, it was necessary a thorough analysis of all
existing overhead transmission lines equipped with these tower types and it required a comprehensive pre-
dimensioning of structures, together with technical and economic analyses, in order to determine the optimal
structure.
The main goals of the study were to provide rapid remediation of the damage, without changes in the line
equipments, without an increase of the land area occupied by the tower and suitable for all operating conditions
existing on overhead lines from Romania (existing equipment, meteorological area, mast height, distance
between foundations, distances between anchors etc.).

KEYWORDS
Overhead Line, Emergency Restoration, Guyed tower, Cross – Rope Suspension, H frame lattice tower

1. INTRODUCTION
The new fast restore tower has to cover all the situations caused by the collapse of the guyed
towers (PAS), of overhead transmission lines of 220 kV – 400 kV.
The structure study considered a variety of commercially available tower types used in the construction of 220-
400 kV transmission lines. Lattice towers are the preferred construction type for the project for 220 kV and 400
kV alternatives. Lattice towers offer a more efficient solution to the long spans and heavy mechanical loadings
for the higher voltage lines. In some instances, tubular steel poles are required. These towers are heavier and
costlier than their lattice counterparts, but they do offer solutions for right of way concerns.


E. Mateescu is with Fichtner Engineering S.A. Bucharest, Romania mateescu59@yahoo.com
 Page 2 / 8

Self supporting lattice towers have been the standard installation for much of the Romanian 220 kV and 400
kV transmission lines. Self-supporting tower configurations are either horizontal or delta. A delta-configured
tower offers a slightly narrower base and taller overall height and a more advantageous electric and magnetic
field profile within the right of way. These fields are focused in the centre of the right way and taper off rapidly
toward the edges while a flat configuration tower's EMF profile will be more uniform throughout the right of
way. A delta tower will weight slightly more than a horizontal configured equivalent tower.

Guyed lattice Tower

The guyed Towers are shaped steel lattice structure, with a horizontal cross arm at the top, and would have a
single or double footing for the masts and four down-guy cables. The foundations for the masts could be either
pre-cast or poured in place concrete. The principal advantages of the guyed structure are they are lighter, more
flexible, and stronger than their self-supporting counterparts. In addition, they have lower installations costs, can
be assembled faster, and are easier to be replaced in case of a line failure.

Pole structures
Some areas of the transmission line may require pole type structures. These structures, although common for
lower voltages, are not as efficient for the long spans and heavy conductors of the 400 kV transmission lines. A
pole structure may be required in agricultural lands for minimum utilization of property, or for environmental
purposes where a pole structure may offer better visual or other environmental advantages. Single poles and H-
frames were reviewed for purposes of this study.

For establishing the geometry of the “fast restore guyed tower,” a thorough analysis, both technically and
economically, has been performed, and it required a comprehensive pre-dimensioning of structures and a
calculation of their weights to determine the optimal structure.
The solution has to provide rapid remediation of the damage, without changes in the line equipments, without an
increase of the land area occupied and suitable for all operating conditions existing on overhead lines from
Romania (existing equipment, meteorological area, mast height, distance between foundations, distances
between anchors etc.).

These structures suitable for our interest are in terms of geometric configuration as follows:
- Self Supporting, horizontal configuration
- Guyed PI, horizontal configuration,
- Guyed V, horizontal configuration
- Cross-Rope Suspension, horizontal configuration
- H frame, horizontal configuration

2. DESIGN CRITERIA
Considering that 95% of lines built on Guyed PI tower are 400 kV lines, to analyse the possibility of
designing a universal pole, fast restore tower type, that can be used for voltages of 220-400 kV, loading
calculation for the voltage of 400 kV have been used for tower dimensioning.
Using ultimate Design Criteria, the loads for universal tower have been determined for equipping lines with
three phase conductors of ACSR 300/69, C meteorological area, for three phase ACSR conductors 450/75 in the
A meteorological area, as well as for the case of equipping lines with two conductors per phase ACSR 450/75,
in area C meteorological area.
It was also considered that for 400 kV fast restore tower would be equipped with fixed-type clamps for
conductor in order to limit the "cascade" effect.

3. PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS CRITERIA

In order to establish the adequate solution the following preliminary criteria were taken into account:

A. The Land area occupied by the foundations (restrictive criteria):

The proposed solution must not occupy a land for the foundations of more than 280 m 2 (the area of land
occupied by the foundations of the existing guyed PI towers)
Obviously, any of the guyed tower configurations take up significant space when installed. If property owners
or governmental land managers are not amenable to guyed configurations, self-supporting towers or even pole
structures are often required.
 Page 3 / 8

B. Reliability (restrictive criteria):

A guyed tower can be structurally advantageous during a catastrophic or major weather event. The guys allow
the tower to deflect much more than a self supporting tower, thus reducing stress on adjacent tower and
dissipating energy. Of the three guyed tower designs, the cross - rope suspension tower is the most structurally
stable due to its wide guying profile. The guyed-V is next and the guyed-PI tower the least reliable of the
structures. The guyed PI tower's configuration can create an unstable structure when one of its guys are broken
or removed.
C. Vandalism
One of the primary reasons guyed towers have not been built recently is their susceptibility to vandalism.
Someone bent on destroying a tower, or simply "having fun,” could do so with a hack saw on a tower guy. This
has been the case with at least two western high voltage lines in the last twenty years. Self-supporting towers are
much less susceptible to vandalism.
D. Anchors
For guyed towers, guy anchors represent the major force resisting component of the tower. Their susceptibility
to corrosion over time is of some concern as some lines have experienced anchor corrosion as determined by
non-destructive evaluation.
E. Construction
Anchoring costs for guyed towers are compared to tower foundation costs for self-supporting equivalent towers.
In typical soils, an anchor will be a less expensive installation. In rocky soils, and particularly lava rock with
many fissures, anchoring will be difficult and may be more expensive than foundations. Guying the towers in
terrain with significant relief can be a significant problem.
Excessively long guy leads coupled with greater right of way requirements will dictate self-supporting towers in
mountainous terrain.
F. Maintenance.
One of the critical factors in tower design is the maintainability of the line. 220-400 kV transmission lines are
responsible for the movement of significant energy and having them out of service is tremendously expensive.
Because of this, the ability to perform live line maintenance on the structures is becoming more important. As
such, a tower should be designed that has sufficient clearances for live line maintenance imposed in 1987 in
Romania.
G. Cost
Guyed towers utilize less steel so save money in material and labour installation costs. For the guyed tower line
design considered for this study (guyed-V and PI), project costs are approximately 10-15% less than for a self-
supporting equivalent line.
For proposed tower types considered, their relative weights to one another are shown below.

Weight off Self-Supporting (%)

 Self Supoting 100%
 Guyed PI 90%
 Guyed V 80%
 Cross-Rope Suspension 50%
 H frame steel/concrete 85% / 115%
For purposes of this evaluation, a triple bundled 450/75ACSR conductor configuration was considered with the
loading criteria described in the design criteria. Estimated tower weights and various characteristics are
discussed below in the table 1.

Table 1 - The towers hierarchy in relation to restrictive and selective criteria

Un =400kV
Tower Type Weight Occupied Installed cost /km Hierarchy Level
(t) land (Euro)
area(m2)
Self supporting, horizontal configuration 9.50 50 105000 2
Guyed PI, horizontal configuration 8.50 250 86,000 1
Guyed V, horizontal configuration Occupied land area bigger
7.50 500 90,000
than imposed condition
Cross- Rope Suspension, horizontal 4.50 2000 75,000 Occupied land area bigger
 Page 4 / 8

configuration than imposed condition

H frame steel, horizontal configuration 8 20 156,000 4
H frame concrete, horizontal
20 20 106,000 3
configuration

*Installed Cost includes only those items included in structure installation - structure, structure attachment
material cost, foundations, and foundation material, guy and anchoring material for guyed structures. This cost
only assumes tangent structure installations.
It can be seen that though the Cross-Rope Suspension Towers and the guyed V Towers represents attractive
solutions in terms of cost in comparison with other solutions, they may not be used to replace the Guyed PI
towers, whereas the land occupied by these structures is higher than that of existing towers that have to be
restored.
It should also be noted that the guyed PI towers, horizontal configuration ranked 1st out of economic
considerations is the surest solution, allows working under voltage potential, ensuring the continuity of
electricity supply. For this reason only the solutions with level 1-4 were qualify for detail analysis.

4. DETAILED TECHNICAL ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED SOLUTIONS

The proposed solutions are:
- SY- U-Self supporting tower, horizontal configuration with: Pre-cast foundation type, Casted
foundation type, Auger Bored foundation type and Helicoidally foundation type
- PAS –U-Guyed PI tower, horizontal configuration with: Pre-cast foundation type and Helicoidally
foundation type
- PS –U-H frame lattice steel tower, horizontal configuration with: Cast with Pad & Chimney
foundation type
- PS –U-H frame concrete tower, horizontal configuration with: Casted concrete foundation type.
The basic criteria followed is that of minimizing the interruption (restore) time (bearing in mind that
restrictive criteria have already been implemented under preliminary analysis), in conjunction with the other
criteria listed.
Whereas 95% of lines built on guyed PI towers are 400 kV lines, analysis was conducted for the voltage of 400
kV and generalized for other voltages.
Technical analysis has been carried out comparative estimation of weights towers, concrete weight; the number
of rods for the foundations is covered, as well as of the restore time. Estimates for the voltage of 400 kV and a
three-conductor's equipment phase are listed in table 2.

Table 2 - Estimating quantities and duration of pause for simple circuit 400 kV
Un =400kV
Weight Concrete Reinforcing OHTL
Foundation Helicoidally
Tower type of tower volume bars weight disconnection Level
type rods number
(t) (mc) (kg) time (days)
Pre-cast from
19.50 1900 - 10 3
two elements
SY-U Casted concrete 19.50 1900 - 31 6
9.50
Self-Supporting Auger Bored 11.00 1100 - 24 5
Helicoidally
7.00 700 8 10 4
rods
Pre-casted 4.00 400 - 4 1
PAS-U
8.50 Helicoidally
Guyed PI tower 3.50 350 4 8 2
rods
PS-U Cast with Pad
8 40.00 3500 - 30 8
H frame lattice & Chimney
PS-U Casted concrete
11 27.50 2750 - 30 7
H frame concrete

As can be seen from table 2 the recommended solution is to install a Guyed PI tower installed on pre-casted
foundations. The advantages of this solution are:
 Page 5 / 8

- Fast restore of the damage

- Minimum quantities of materials.
Note: Of all types of foundations the most efficient in terms of performance, cost and mounting "in situ" is pre–
cast foundation type.

The guyed towers, steel lattice structure, with a horizontal cross arm at the top for flat configuration, would have
double footing for the masts and four down-guy cables. The foundations for the masts should be pre-cast type.
The principal advantages of the guyed structure are that are lighter, more flexible, and stronger than their self-
supporting counterparts. In addition, they have lower installations costs, can be assembled faster, and are easier
to replace in case of a line failure.

The guyed tower have the great advantage that it can be assemble almost completely to the ground, what is safe
in terms of security and minimizes the number of qualified workers for working at height.

A guyed tower can be structurally advantageous during a catastrophic or major weather event. The guys allow
the tower to deflect much more than a self supporting tower, thus reducing stress on adjacent tower and
dissipating energy.
A great disadvantage is that the guyed PI tower's configuration can create an unstable structure when one of its
guys are broken or removed. System of anchorage component retrieval may lead not only to collapse the
affected tower, but also could affect the adjacent Towers ("cascade" effect). For this reason the fast restore
guyed tower will have a new dimensioning condition: anti-cascade condition.

5. DETAILED ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED SOLUTIONS

The aim of the analysis was to present a limit of the costs that resulted from:
- Direct costs (initial investment, installation and maintenance);
- Undelivered energy cost during of the restoration time.
For calculating the initial investment, the costs of tower, foundation, accessories, and installation were
considered in Table 3 for different technical characteristics.

Proposed solutions Initial Direct cost Undelivered Total Cost

investments* C+M energy
Tower type Foundation type (Lei) (Lei) cost** (Lei)
(Lei)
Pre-cast from two
113 000 155 000 120 000 275 000
elements
SY-U Casted concrete 116 000 158 000 372 000 530 000
Self-Supporting Auger Bored 105 000 137 000 288 000 425 000

Helicoidally rods 155 000 180 000 120 000 300 000
PAS-U Pre-casted 84 000 102 000 48 000 150 000
Guyed PI tower Helicoidally rods 110 000 129 000 96 000 225 000
PS-U Cast with Pad &
160 000 235 000 360 000 595 000
H frame lattice Chimney
PS-U Casted concrete
100 000 155 000 360 000 515 000
H frame concrete
Table 3 - Estimating total cost

*( - solutions cost are estimated based on the bidding offers. All cost is given in lei.
**( - for undelivered energy during the collapse, a target value of 250 Lei/MWh was assumed.
 Page 6 / 8

Fig. 4 Direct costs for procuring, installation and maintenance (lei)

Fig. 5 Direct costs for procuring, installation (mii lei) and restore time (days)
 Page 7 / 8

As expected, the guyed tower with pre-cast foundations type offers the lowest total Cost.
For direct costs (which includes procuring, installation and actualized maintenance), the minimum cost is also
for this solution.

6. DESIGN
The Fast Restore Tower, Guyed type, hereinafter referred to as PAS-U, will have conventional cross arm
PI type, with flat configuration of phases.
The Fast Restore Tower PAS-U tower was dimensioned / calculated that it can be equipped with:
- One conductor per phase: 3x1x ACSR 450/75 for A meteorological area.
- Two conductors per phase: 3x2x ACSR 450/75 for A-C meteorological areas.
- Three conductors per phase: 3x3x ACSR 300/69 for A-C meteorological areas.
- Three conductors per phase: 3x3x ACSR 450/75 for A meteorological area.
- Two earth wire conductors: 2x1x ACSR 160/95.
- Insulation string type I for all phases.
The main technical characteristics taking into considerations on tower dimensioning are:
- nominal span Ln = 365(350) m;
- maximum sag at nominal span, 13 m;
- horizontal distance between phases, 12(7,5)m;
- Clearance to the ground:
o 8(7) m for 10 kV/m electrical field zones.
o 14 m for 5 kV/m electrical field zones.
Note: The values between brackets are for 220 kV nominal tensions.

The following spans have been considered for calculus of PAS-U-400 and PAS-U-220:
Table 4 - Calculus data for PAS-U-400
Equipment Meteorological Ln Lm max LWmax LWmin Phase span Line angle
Area (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) Centesimal
grade
3x2x450 mm2 A-C 365-350 550 800 200 500 200
3x3x300 mm2 A-C 365-350 400 550 200 500 200
3x2x450 mm2 A 365 400 550 200 500 200
Calculus data for PAS-U-400PAS – U-220
Equipment Meteorological Ln Lm max LWmax LWmin Phase span Line angle
Area (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) Cente. grade
3x1x450 mm2 A 350 420 525 200 525 200
 Page 8 / 8

Fig. 6 PAS–U-400 and PAS-U-220 configuration

The Fast Restore Tower PAS-U for 220-400 kV could be mounted in 220 kV OHL, by mounting only some
parts of the 400 kV tower.
The Fast Restore Tower PAS-U will have leg extensions every meter, from -6m to +9m, so they can be mounted
in every ground situation.
The phase to phase clearance is 12 m for 400 kV nominal tension and 7,5 m on 220 kV tension.

7. CONCLUSION
The analysis for finding a structure able to be used for fast restoring of collapsed guyed towers without
changes in the line equipment, without an increase of the land area occupied and suitable for all operating
conditions existing on overhead lines from Romania (existing equipment, meteorological area, mast height,
distance between foundations, distances between anchors etc.) has been ended with the recommendation for
using a guyed tower installed on the existing foundations or on new precast foundations (if the existing
foundations are damaged as a result of tower collapse).
This solution could be applied also for fast restoration of self-supported suspension towers located in flat areas,
if a post-acquisition of additional land is accepted.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

[1] Cigré SC22 WG14, Brochure 147 – “High Voltage Overhead Lines Environmental Concerns,
Procedures, Impacts and Mitigations”, 1999.
[2] Pettersson, M. – “Aesthetic in Power Systems” – Helsinki University of Technology, August 2008.
[3] Öbro, H. et al – “New Type of Tower for Overhead Lines”. Cigré Report B2-305, Paris Session 2004.
[4] EDF Brochure - International Competition - Very High-Tension Pylons - An Innovative Spark, April
1995.
[5] Selection Committee’s Report for Competition on High-Voltage Transmission Line Towers – Landsnet,
April 2008.
[6] Paroucheva, E. “Networks into Artworks” – Pamphlet, 2007. 56 [10] Paroucheva, E. “Source” – Des
pylônes se métamorphosent en oeuvres d’Art” – Booklet, 2007.
[7] AG Ajikawa Corporation Catalogue: “Aesthetic Towers & Monopoles”.
[8] Clark, M. – “Innovative Overhead Line Tower Concepts for National Grid Transco”, Edinburgh
Symposium, Paper 17 - 2003.
[9 ] Kauniskangas,M et al – Form and Colour in the Landscape, History of the Finnish Landscape Tower,
Fingrid, 2009.
[10] EPRI – Electric Power Research Institute – “Transmission Line Reference Book 115-138 kV
Compact Line Design” – Palo Alto, 1978
[11] Townsend to Midpoint 500 kV transmission Line – Final Siting and Preliminary Engineering Report.
[12] Alexandrov, G.N.; Nosov, I. M. – “The Increase of Effectiveness of Transmission Lines and Their
Corridor Utilization”, (CIGRÉ Session Paper 38-104, Paris 1996).
[13] Fernandes, J.H.M.; Sganzela, F.; Tannuri, J.G.; Galiano, D.B.; Sato, W.; Takai M.N.; Massuda,
M.; – “500 kV Compact Line of Eletronorte Brazil – Conception, Electrical and Mechanical
Design”, (CIGRÉ Session Paper 22-304, Paris 1990).
[14] IEC 60826 – “Loading and Strength of Overhead Transmission Line’, Second edition, 1991-04;
[15] ANSI/ASCE - Manual 10-90 – “Design of Latticed Steel Transmission Structure”, Edition
December 1991;
[16] IEEE “Guide for Maintenance Methods on Energized Power Lines”, IEEE – std 516 – 2003
(revision of IEEE std 516-1995).
[17] Peyrot, A.H., et al., "Application of Cable Elements Concepts to a Transmission Line with Cross Rope
Suspension Structures.". IEEE PES Winter Meeting, Atlanta, February, 1981.
[18] Ghannoum, E., "A Rational Approach to Structural Design of Transmission Lines". IEEE Transactions
on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS-100, pp. 3506-3511, July, 1981.
[19] Lecomte, D., Meyere, P., "Evolution of the design of 735 kV Lines of Hydro-Quebec", CIGRE, 22-
08,September, 1980.

*.*