See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/356144953

Journal of Technology GOVERNING ISSUES & ITS SOLUTIONS FOR DESIGN OF

TRANSMISSION LINE TOWERS AS PER THE CODAL PROVISIONS IS 800:2007

Article  in  Journal of Technology · November 2021

CITATIONS READS

0 90

2 authors:

P.L. Meyyappan M.Jemimah Jemimah Carmichael

Kalasalingam University Vignan Lara Institute of Technology and Science, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh, India
30 PUBLICATIONS   54 CITATIONS    30 PUBLICATIONS   84 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Governing Issues & Its Solutions For Design Of Transmission Line Towers As Per The Codal Provisions IS 800:2007 View project

Seismic Assessment View project

All content following this page was uploaded by M.Jemimah Jemimah Carmichael on 11 November 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Journal of Technology
ISSN No: 1012-3407
Volume: 35, Issue: 03

GOVERNING ISSUES & ITS SOLUTIONS FOR DESIGN

OF TRANSMISSION LINE TOWERS AS PER THE
CODAL PROVISIONS IS 800:2007
Meyyappan Palaniappan1,Jemimah Carmichael Milton2†
1
Department of Civil Engineering, Kalasalingam Academy of Research and Education, Krishnankoil, India
2
Department of Civil Engineering, Vignan’s Lara Institute of Technology and Sciences, Guntur, India
†jemimahcarmichael@gmail.com

Abstract –The design of mass-produced transmission line (TL) towers is based on minimum
weight philosophy. The members in TL towers are generally subjected to tension or compression
forces caused by external loads. Bearing type bolted connections are used to connect the tower
members with nominal bolt hole clearance. Steel angle sections with different grades are generally
used in towers. Even though IS:800-2007 standard is based on limit state method, it is not being
used for the design of TL towers. To understand the difference in the design philosophy of
compression / tension members based on IS:802 and IS:800 codes., it is proposed to conduct
studies on how to use the general steel code IS:800 -2007 for the design of TL towers by
identifying the problems and suggesting some solutions to the issues. Studies conducted on 400 kV
TL tower to understand the member design philosophy, effective length factors and other issues are
discussed in this paper. The tower weight predicted based on different codal provisions are
compared and issues related to the design of tower have been discussed. Based on the studies
conducted on the design of TL towers the governing issues in IS:800 -2007 and its solutions are
suggested.

Keywords: Transmission line towers, IS:800-2007, Member design philosophy, Governing issues, Steel
sections

1. INTRODUCTION used in TL towers. The load carrying capacity of the tower,

The design of Transmission Line (TL) 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. Structural design of the tower is mainly
governed by wind loads acting on conductor/tower body,
self-weight of conductor/tower and other loads due to icing,
line deviation, broken wire condition, cascading, erection,
maintenance, etc. Generally the tower is modeled as a pin
jointed space truss. Transmission line towers are generally
analyzed by linear static analysis methods and the
maximum member forces are arrived assuming that all
members are subjected to only axial forces after analyzing
for significant load cases. The final member sizes are
determined by assuming the effective lengths. The members
are designed based on the prevailing codes of practice.
Bearing type bolted connections are used to connect the
tower members with nominal bolt whole clearance of
1.5mm. Steel angle sections with different grades such as
mild, high tensile and super high tensile steels are generally
not only depends on the individual member capacity but,
also on other aspects like joint detailing, framing
eccentricities, force fitting of members, unequal force
distribution in bolts and gusset plate connections, etc.
Hence, prototype testing of transmission line towers is
recommended and considered essential to verify the design
and detailing. Most of the power transmission tower
industries all over the world have made proto type testing
of TL towers mandatory. The members in TL towers are
generally subjected to tension or compression forces due to
external loads. Tension member design is based on net
sectional area and stress 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.
However eccentricities in bracing connections cannot be
totally avoided. The eccentricities involved in the member
connections are accounted in the form of end-restraint
coefficients.

Published by: National Taiwan University of Science and Technology 186

 Journal of Technology
ISSN No: 1012-3407
Volume: 35, Issue: 03

2. DESIGN PRACTICE
Table 1. Effective length of members as per end conditions
The tower members are generally made of steel equal
angle sections. Figure.1 shows the cross section of an equal Type of Members Value of KL/r
angle member and the main axes. Buckling strength of the a Leg sections or joint members L/r
member about VV-axis (weak axis) is to be considered in bolted in both faces at
the design. The above member is also restrained by a connections for 0 <L/r< 120
redundant member connected to a relatively rigid member b Member with concentric 30 + 0.75 L/r
at its other end. If a member buckles about its VV-axis, the loading at one end and normal
member has to take one of the displaced positions as shown framing eccentricity at the
by dotted lines after buckling. For this, the redundant other end of the unsupported
member has to undergo axial deformation as well as a panel for 0 <L/r< 120
lateral movement. Redundant are axially stiff and are C Member with normal framing 60 + 0.50 L/r
connected to a relatively rigid member at the other end, the eccentricities at both ends of
displacement of main member along the axis of the the unsupported panel for 0
redundant is prevented. Further, the redundant has less <L/r < 120
bending rigidity, so displacement in the lateral direction d Member unrestrained against L/r
cannot be prevented. A redundant in the plane of the rotation at both ends of the
bracing connected at an intermediate point can thus prevent unsupported panel for 120
VV-axis buckling of full member and increase its buckling <L/r <200
strength. If buckling about VV-axis is prevented using e Member partially restrained 28.6 + 0.762 L/r
redundant member, then the member has to buckle about against rotation at one end of
XX-axis for the same length. This principle is used in the the unsupported panel for 120
general design practice of TL towers. Thus depending on <L/r < 225
the provision of redundant members at a joint in plan f Member partially restrained 46.2 + 0.615 L/r
/elevation, the following buckling modes are feasible. If no against rotation at both ends of
redundant member is provided between two main nodes in the unsupported panel for 120
a panel an angle strut buckles about its weakest axis, <L/r < 250
namely VV axis, and the slenderness ratio (L/rvv) governs
the design. If a redundant member is provided at the middle The limiting value of KL/r shall be
of the strut in one plane, buckling load would be governed  Leg member, ground wire peak member and lower
by the slenderness ratio (L/rxx). If redundant members are member of cross arm in compression – 120
provided at the middle of the strut on two planes, the  Other member carrying computed stress – 200
buckling load would be governed by the slenderness ratio
 Redundant member and those carrying nominal
(L/rvv).
stress – 250
The estimated compressive stress in various members
3. Design of Transmission line towers shall not exceed the allowable unit stress Fa, in MPa on the
gross sectional area of the axially loaded compression
3.1 Based on IS:802-1992 members shall be:
1 kl /r 2 𝑘𝑙
IS:802:1992 Code of practice for use of structural steel 𝐹𝑎 = 1− x Fy when ≤ 𝐶𝑐 (1)
2 Cc 𝑟
in overhead transmission line towers is the specified code 𝐹𝑎 =
𝜋²𝐸
when
𝑘𝑙
≥ 𝐶𝑐 (2)
(𝑘𝑙 /𝑟)² 𝑟
for the design of TL towers. In IS:802(Part1/Sec2):1992,six
equations (curves)are given to predict the effective length
factors based on end condition which can be used to where,
determine the allowable stress depending on the slenderness Cc = π 2𝐸/𝐹𝑦 (3)
ratio for predicting the compression member capacity. For The above formulae’s are applicable only when the largest
slenderness ratio above 120, the curve is based on Eulers width to thickness ratio isnot more than the limiting value
formula. The curves can be differentiated according to the given by:
slenderness ratio below 120 and slenderness ratio above (b/t)lim= 210/ 𝐹𝑦 (4)
120. Effective length of the member depending on the end For the leg member, the tension capacity of the member
condition and loading in IS802 are given below in table 1. can be determined by the total area of the holes to be

Published by: National Taiwan University of Science and Technology 187

 Journal of Technology
ISSN No: 1012-3407
Volume: 35, Issue: 03

deducted from gross sectional area, the full area of the first P<Pd
holes shall be counted, plus a fraction part X, of each
fcd = (𝑓𝑦 /𝛾𝑚𝑜 )/(ф + (ф2− ʎ²)) (5)
succeeding hole cut by the line of holes under consideration.

χ = 1/(ф + ф2 − ʎ 2 ) = χfy ≤ fy/ϒm0;

3.2 Based on IS:800-2007
IS:800-2007Code of Practice for ‘General construction ф=0.5[1+ᾳ(ʎ-0.2)+ʎ²] (6)
in Steel is the specified code for the design of steel
structures based on limit state method. In the present study, fy(kl/r)²
ʎ= fy/fcc = π²E (7)
the designs of compression and tension members are
π²E
studied. In IS: 800-2007, angle members are specified for fcc, Eulers buckling stress = (8)
(kl /r)²
the design of purlins. The limit states considered in the code
χ is the stress reduction factor for different buckling classes.
can be grouped into Ultimate limit states, which deal with
The compression in single angle may be transferred either
strength, sway or overturning, sliding, buckling, fatigue
concentrically to its centroid through end gusset or
fracture and brittle fracture and serviceability limit states,
eccentrically by connecting one leg to its adjacent or leg
which deal with discomfort to occupancy or malfunction,
member. Flexural torsional buckling governs the strength of
caused by excessive deflection, vibration, corrosion, fire
the single angle loaded through one leg, equivalent
resistance, etc.
slenderness ratio can be obtained by,
In this code, different sections subjected to axial
compression are classified under different buckling class a, ʎe = k₁ + k₂ ʎvv + k₃ ʎф (9)
b, c or d. For angle sections most commonly used in TL k₁,k₂,k₃ are constants depending on end condition;
l
towers, the code clearly specifies buckling curve c. The ʎvv= r vv
and ʎф =
(b₁+b₂)/2t
(10)
stress reduction factor ‘χ’ predicted as per this code for ɛ
𝜋 ²𝐸
250
ɛ
𝜋 ²𝐸
250
slenderness ratio between 0-17 is greater than 1 which Tension members are linear members in which axial
results in allowable compressive stress being more than that force act to cause elongation. Such members can sustain
of yield stress. Hence the stress reduction factor shall be load up to ultimate load, at which they may fail due to
taken as 1 for slenderness ratios less than 17. Leg members rupture. Before the rupture load reached, because of the
are generally designed with slenderness ratios less than60. excessive elongation it can be failed due to block shear.
In this code, for the angles connected by single flange
(bracing member) failed because of torsional flexural 3.3 Based on BS 8100-3
buckling mode alone which is not always true. This may be BS 8100-3: 1999 Code of practice for strength
true in the case of purlins and other members where it is assessment of members in lattice towers and masts. In this
subjected to bending. Around 200 TL towers tested at codethe members subjected to axial compression are
CSIR-SERC’s Tower Testing and Research Station have not classified as per buckling curve a, b, c and d. In this code
shown any bracing member failure due to torsional flexural the reduction factor for the various slenderness ratio had
buckling mode. The torsional flexural buckling capacity been directly given. The code governs failure due to
depends upon the equivalent radius of gyration which flexural buckling, and S8100-3 is similar to IS800:2007 for
includes both flexural and torsional radius of gyrations. The the design of compression member. The compressive stress
capacity of bracing member predicted based on IS:800 will difference between both the codes can be shown down
be less compared to the capacity predicted as per IS:802 through the graphical representation.
resulting in heavier member size leading to weight increase. бr = бy if B/t≤ μ
The tension capacity is governed by strength due to бr=бy(2-B/μ*t) if μ < B/t < 1.33μ
yielding of gross section, due to rupture of critical section бr = π²E/(5.1B/t)2 if B/t ≥ 1.33μ
and due to block shear. The tension capacity of angles Design buckling resistance, of a compression member
connected by both flanges is not given specifically in can be taken as; бr is the reference stress, ϒm is the partial
IS:800 code. Hence the formula given for the design of safety factor on strength, appropriate to the quality class of
plates is used. The hot rolled angles designed for axial structure, For angle sections towers, which have been
compression fails by flexural buckling. The buckling successfully been subjected to full scale tests under
strength of these members is affected by residual stresses, equivalent factored loading or where similar configurations
initial bow and accidental eccentricities of load. To account have been tested;
for these factors, the strength of different sections is defined ϒm is 1.0 for class A structures;
by the buckling classes as a, b, c or d. The design
compressive strength Pd, of a member is given by:

Published by: National Taiwan University of Science and Technology 188

 Journal of Technology
ISSN No: 1012-3407
Volume: 35, Issue: 03

1 was proof tested at CSIR-SERC is used for the case study,

χ = ≤1 (11)
ф+[ф2 −ᴧ²eff ]
0.5
the tower is modeled in NE-Nastran and analyzed for the
reliability, normal condition load cases and the maximum
=0.5[1+(ᴧeff-0.2)+ᴧ²eff] (12) member forces was predicted. The tower members are
designed for the analysis predicted forces based on IS:802
The resistance of a member in tension is the product of and IS:800 codal provision by considering buckling curves
yield strength and the net sectional area. The net sectional ‘c’ and ‘b’ , and partial safety factor against yield stress and
area of an angle connected through one leg is taken as the buckling. The tower weight was determined based on the
net area of the connected leg ie., the gross area minus holes, weight of the members and compared in Table -2.
plus half the area of the unconnected leg. The net sectional
area of an angle suitably connected through both legs is
taken as the sum of the net areas of both legs, i.e. gross area
minus holes.

4. Present Study

In this paper, issues related to the design philosophy of

compression / tension members based on different codal
provisions such as IS: 802-1992 Code of practice for use of
structural steel in overhead transmission line towers, IS:
800-2007 Code of Practice on Steel Structures and British
Standard (BS 8100-3: 1999) code of practice for strength
assessment of members of lattice towers and masts are
discussed. Even though IS:800-2007 standard is based on
limit state method, it is not being used for the design of TL
towers. Studies are conducted to find out whether the
general steel code IS: 800 can be used for the design of TL
towers so that the existing code (IS:802) can be replaced
and for identifying the problems in this regard and
suggesting some solutions to the issues. Case study is
conducted on 400 kV TL tower (Figure 1) to understand the
member design philosophy, effective length factors and
other issues. 400 kV TL tower is designed based on
different codal provision; IS:802:1992, IS:800:2007, BS:
8100-3: 1999 and compared. Tension and compression
member capacities predicted based on different codes of
practices are compared in this paper. Tower weight
predicted based on different codal provisions are compared
and various issues related to the design of tower using Fig. 1.FD-2 TYPE TOWER (00-20) (TNEB COIMBATORE)
IS:800 have been discussed. Based on the studies conducted
on the design of TL towers the governing issues in IS:800 - In Table 2, the weight of the 400kV double circuit tower
2007 and solutions to some of them are suggested. predicted based on IS:800-2007 using buckling curves ‘c’
Allowable stresses for concentrically loaded leg and and ‘b’ and considering with or without partial safety
eccentrically loaded bracing members are calculated as per factors are compared with the weight predicted based on
IS:802, BS and IS:800 codes of practice (with partial safety IS:802-1992 codal provision. Table - 2 shows increase in
factor against yield stress and buckling as 1.0) for weight of 400kV FD-2 type tower double circuit tower with
slenderness ratios varying from 0 to 220 and compared in respect to IS802:1992 (Design member weight)
Fig. 2 and 3. The buckling curves indicates that the member Table 2. IS 802:1992 & IS 800: 2007 Comparison of
capacity predicted based on IS:800 ode is the least among design member weight
IS:802 and BS for concentrically loaded members. The Design Total
capacity of eccentrically loaded members lies in between member tower
IS802 and BS code. The 400kV Double circuit tower which weight weight

Published by: National Taiwan University of Science and Technology 189

 Journal of Technology
ISSN No: 1012-3407
Volume: 35, Issue: 03

IS802:1992 Primary Total tower

7668 13429 member weight
IS800:2007 weight
b without ϒ 6.50 % 3.80 % IS802:1992
c without ϒ 11.80 % 6.70 % 21293 31133
b with ϒ 12.30 % 7.00 % IS800:2007
c with ϒ 16.20 % 9.10 % B without 7.20 % 5%
factor
C without 10.30 % 7%
factor
B with factor 11.60 % 7.30 %
C with factor 12.50 % 8.50 %

Fig. 3. 400Kv DB TOWER (00-150)

5. Conclusion
The following conclusions are arrived based on the
following discussions:
1. In IS:802-1992 code, six curves/ equations are
Fig. 2. 400Kv DC TYPE TOWER (00-300) specified for effective length calculations which plays
an important role in finding out the compression
Table - 3 shows increase in weight of 400kV DC type member capacity.Buteffective length specifications
tower double circuit tower with respect to IS802:1992 given in IS:800-2007 is not relevant for tower
(Primary member weight). members.
2. According to IS:800-2007, buckling class C is
Table 3. IS 802:1992 & IS 800: 2007 Comparison of recommended for angle members whereas BS code
primary member weight specifies Buckling class B for angle sections.

Published by: National Taiwan University of Science and Technology 190

 Journal of Technology
ISSN No: 1012-3407
Volume: 35, Issue: 03

3. Even without considering the partial safety factor, the

member capacity based on IS:800 is 5 to 15% less
compared to the capacity predicted based on IS:802
provisions.
4. It is recommended to include the buckling
curves/equations similar to IS:802 in IS:800 code so
that the designers can use the appropriate effective
length factors and achieve economical and reliable
tower designs.
5. Angles connected through both the flanges as leg
members and subjected to tension shall also be
included in IS800:2007.
6. Buckling class b shall be adopted for angles as in the
case of BS8100-3:1999.

References

[1] IS 800: 2007, ‘Code of Practice for General

Construction in Steel’, Bureau of IndianStandards,
New Delhi.

[2] IS:802 (Part 1/Sec 2)-1992, ‘Code of practice

for use of structural steel in overhead transmission line
towers Part 1:Material, loads and permissible stress-
Section 2Permissible stress’, Bureau of Indian
Standards, New Delhi.

[3] BS 8100-3: 1999, ‘Lattice towers and Masts

– Part 3: Code of Practice for strength assessment of
members of lattice towers and masts’, British
Standards Institution, London.

Published by: National Taiwan University of Science and Technology 191

View publication stats