Professional Documents
Culture Documents
2965 DS Ara 31 95 34 65 SD SD 00
2965 DS Ara 31 95 34 65 SD SD 00
*ARAGON*
1 INTRODUCTION 3
2.1 Spacers Dampers positioning for AAC *HAWTHORN* 31,95 mm and ACAR *1400 MCM* 34,65 mm 11
2.2 Stockbridge dampers positioning for AAC *HAWTHORN* 31,95 mm and ACAR *1400 MCM* 34,65 mm 25
3 REFERENCES 36
1. Introduction
Aeolian vibrations caused by the shedding of Von Karman vortices (Error! Reference source not found.) occur
almost on any transmission line, both on single and bundled conductors. They are usually noticed at frequencies
5-60 Hz for low to moderate wind speeds (1-7 m/s) and are characterized by small amplitudes of vibration (up to
one conductor diameter). Aeolian vibrations frequency depends on the wind speed and the conductor diameter.
They can cause the damage and breaking of the conductor due to material fatigue and can significantly shorten
its lifetime. Aeolian vibrations can be controlled by adding damping to the conductor by dampers and spacer-
dampers.
An overhead transmission line conductor with in-line fittings (Stockbridge-type vibration dampers and warning
spheres) is shown in Error! Reference source not found.. Both horizontal and vertical vibrations of the
conductor are induced by the shedding of Von Karman vortices. Given that the vibrations in the vertical plane are
dominant, horizontal vibrations are not taken into account in technical practice.
Figure 2 – Overhead transmission line conductor with in-line fittings (Stockbridge type dampers and
warning spheres)
Overhead transmission line conductors are often modelled as beams of bending stiffness EI and tensile forces T
at the ends [7, 10]. Transverse vibrations of the i th sub-span can be described by a non-homogeneous non-linear
partial differential equation of the fourth order
where wi is the transverse displacement of the conductor at a location xi at time t, EI is the conductor bending
stiffness, T is the conductor tension force, ρA is the conductor mass per unit length, q ( xi , t ) is the wind force
imparted on the conductor due to Von Karman vortex shedding, and d K (wi , w& i , t ) is the member representing
the conductor’s self-damping. The ' signs denote the differentiation with respect to the coordinate x, while dots
denote the differentiation with respect to the time t. The bending stiffness EI of the cable can be determined only
empirically [3, 4] due to the complex structure of the cable. The actual bending stiffness of the conductor lies
between EImax (when there is no movement of one conductor strand in relation to the other) and EImin (when
conductor strands freely glide in relation to one another).
The transverse string vibration model is also often used (the bending stiffness of a string is zero) [6-8]. In that
case, vibrations are described using the following non-homogeneous non-linear partial differential equation of the
second order:
−Twi '' ( xi , t ) + ρ A w
&&i ( xi , t ) = q ( xi , t ) + d K ( wi , w& i , t ) , i = 1, 2,..., N + 1 . (2)
The bending stiffness of the conductor is small and its influence on the resonant frequencies in the observed
frequency range (5-60 Hz) can be ignored, so the resonant frequencies resulting from both models are very
similar [10].
Spacing of the natural frequencies of a typical overhead transmission line is very close, of the order of 0.1 Hz.
Therefore, the frequency range of 5 to 60 Hz corresponds to the interval from the 50th to the 600th mode shape.
When solving the non-linear equations using numerical methods, all these mode shapes must be appropriately
modelled.
The mechanical effects of spacer-dampers couple motions of conductors both in vertical and horizontal direction.
Consequently, vibrations in the horizontal direction should also be taken into account. Due to the mechanical
effect of spacer dampers, spacing of natural frequencies of a typical bundle is of the order of 0.01 Hz, what is a
significant difference compared to single conductors (0.1 Hz). In addition, it should be emphasized that airflow
around the leeward conductor differs significantly with respect to airflow around the windward conductor.
Figure 4 shows a twin bundle which consists of two conductors connected by N spacer-dampers (or spacer-
dampers and Stockbridge dampers). Differential equation of motion for all considered N + 1 sub-spans can be
written as
where n is the direction of vibration in the i th sub-span (for twin bundle M=4), wn ,i is a conductor displacement
inside the i th sub-span in the n th direction, Tn is the conductor tension force, ρA is the conductor mass per
unit length, qn ( xi , t ) is the wind force imparted on the conductor due to Von Karman vortex shedding, and
d ( wn ,i , w& n ,i , t ) is the member representing the conductor’s self-damping.
Figure 4 – Twin bundle with Spacer Dampers and with Spacer Dampers and Stockbridge Dampers
Overhead transmission line Aeolian vibrations are in practice most often estimated by using the Energy Balance
Method (EBM) [4-9]. One must emphasize that this simple and numerically very efficient method can be applied
only on single conductors with Stockbridge dampers spaced near the suspension clamps. This method is based
on an algebraic equation of power balance in the case of stationary conductor vibrations.
PW ( A) = PD ( A) + PC ( A) (4).
PW ( A) is the power of aerodynamic forces brought into the system (for a given wind velocity or the frequency of
Von Karman vortices shedding), PD ( A) is the power dissipated by the vibration damper, while PC ( A) is the
power dissipated by the conductor due to conductor self-damping. The conductor vibration amplitude A is
determined using the algebraic equation (4), for any given frequency or wind velocity.
After the average free-field vibration amplitudes are obtained, the bending strains can be easily determined by
using approximate expressions [6]. Effective amplitude of vibration along the span with Stockbridge dampers
spaced near left and right suspension clamps is shown in Fig. 5.
m/m 0.03
0.025
Effective relative amplitude
0.02
0.015
0.01
0.005
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Span length m
Figure 5 - Effective amplitude of vibration along the span with Stockbridge dampers spaced near left and right
suspension clamps
The frequency of the dynamic force of the wind on the conductor is equal to the frequency of the shedding of Von
Karman vortices.
cS v
(5), f =
D
Where cS is the Strouhal number ( cS ≈ 0,18 − 0, 22 ), D the conductor diameter, and v is the air flow velocity
in the direction perpendicular to the conductor’s longitudinal axis. The ratio A/D is often called the non-
dimensional or relative vibration amplitude. The maximum power brought into the system by aerodynamic forces
with stationary laminar air flow perpendicular to the conductor, is determined using empirically derived equations.
Most of those equations written in the following form:
PW = L f 3 D 4 fnc ( A D ) (6),
where fnc ( A D ) is the reduced power function, i.e. the function of relative vibration amplitude A/D, L is the
span length, and f is the vibration frequency [1,4].
100
Diana & Falco (1971)
Rawlins (1982)
10
4
Wm-1/ Hz 3m
Bate (1930)
Rawlins (1958)
Brika & Lanaville (1995)
1
Carroll (1936)
0.1
0.01
0.01 0.1 1
A/D
Figure 6 – Reduced power function versus relative vibration amplitude [1]
Figure 6 shows fnc ( A D ) obtained based on the research conducted by the most prominent authors in this
field. The depicted reduced power functions vary significantly from author to author (logarithmic scale is used).
The smallest values of power were derived by Carroll (1936), and the largest by Diana and Falco (1971). The
computer program developed by Dalekovod uses the average curve from [1] for the determination of wind power.
The depicted reduced power functions are obtained for ideal laminar air flow, which is rarely seen in nature. In
nature, air flow is always turbulent to some extent, which results in a lesser power entering the system, i.e. lower
vibration amplitudes.
Power dissipated due to conductor self-damping is estimated using the following CIGRE-recommended [1,4]
empirical estimation:
Al f m
PC = L K (7).
Tn
where K is the so called proportionality factor that characterize the self-damping properties of each conductor,
and l , m and n are the exponents of the amplitude, frequency and conductor tension.
The dynamical properties of the Stockbridge-type vibration damper are usually determined using a shaker. The
force on the damper clamp is measured while the damper is in controlled translational (harmonic) motion. The
transfer function connecting the velocity amplitude of the damper clamp and the force acting on it is called
mechanical impedance.
The developed computer program uses data obtained using the standard procedure [11,12] which takes into
account only the translational motion of the damper. According to standard [12], damper properties are
determined for the vibration velocity amplitude 100 mm/s.
Power dissipated in the damper and the strain in the conductor strands are calculated using equations given in
[6].
The use of Modified Energy Balance Method with Using Eigenvalues (MEBM) enables determination of
eigenvalues (natural frequencies and the mode shapes) of a conductor with in-span fittings (Stockbridge
dampers, aircraft warning spheres, spacer-dampers), and therefore, the calculation of bending strains at any point
in the span. Since the natural frequencies and the mode shapes of the conductor must be determined, MEMB is
numerically much more demanding procedure than EMB. Furthermore, since the system matrix of conductors
with in-span fittings is numerically badly conditioned, significant problems can occur during the numerical
procedure of the system matrix eigenvalues determining.
s xi sx
− i
wi ( xi , t ) = Re (( Ai e c
+ Bi e c
) e st ) (8),
conditions at both ends of each sub-span and from the force equilibrium at the clamps of the line fittings, one
obtains a set of equations that leads to the eigenvalue problem
J ( s ) a = 0, (9),
where a = [ A1 , B1 , A2 , B2 ,..., AN +1 , BN +1 ] . Stockbridge dampers are here modelled by means of their complex
T
impedance, while warning spheres can be considered as point masses or as rigid bodies [37]. The spectrum of
this eigenvalue problem is very dense and its numerical solution presents considerable numerical problems [37].
After the complex mode shapes are determined, one can formulate the energy balance by equating the wind
power input over the whole span to the power disipated in all Stockbridge dampers and due to cable’s self-
damping
N +1 N N +1
∑P ( A ) = ∑P ( A ) + ∑P ( A )
i =1
Wi max
i =1
Di max
i =1
Ci max (10).
Amax is here the variable to be determined by scaling the vibration amplitudes Ai inside the all sub-spans. PWi ,
PDi and PCi are determined according to equations (6), (7) and equations given in [6]. Bending strains are
determined according to equations from [37]. Effective amplitude of vibrations along the span with with in-line
Stockbridge dampers and warning spheres is shown in Figure 8.
m/m
0.05
Effective relative amplitude
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Span length m
Figure 8 - Effective amplitude of vibrations along the span with with in-line Stockbridge dampers and warning
spheres
s xi
− i
sx
wn ,i ( xi , t ) = Re An ,i e cn
+ Bn ,i e n e st ,
c
i = 1,2,..., N + 1 , n = 1,..., M . (11)
Equations (2) and (3) are very similar. In contrast to the equation (2) which describes vertical vibrations of single
conductor inside N + 1 sub-spans, equation (3) describes the simultaneous vertical and horizontal vibrations of all
sub-conductors inside the all sub-spans. From the boundary conditions at both ends of the each sub-span and
from the force equilibrium at the clamps of all the line fittings, one obtains a set of equations that leads to the
eigenvalue problem. Stockbridge dampers and spacer-dampers are modelled by means of their complex
impedances. The system matrix J ( s ) is in this case many times larger than in the case of single conductors what
leads to additional difficulties in its eigenvalues determining.
After the natural frequencies and the mode shapes are determined, the vibration amplitudes can be determined
from the power balance equation.
M N +1 M N M N +1
The wind power input should be calculated taking into account only the vertical components of the conductor
motion. The corresponding wind power input differs for windward and leeward conductors. However, this
influence is often disregarded since the reliable data for vibrating bundles of conductors are not available [20].
The power dissipated in the Stockbridge dampers and spacer-dampers can be calculated using their impedance
matrices [22, 38]. Power dissipated in the each sub-conductor inside the each sub-span due to conductor self-
damping is estimated using the CIGRE-recommended [1,4] empirical estimation:
Al f m
PC = L K (13),
Tn
where A is the total vibration amplitude(due to simultaneous vertical and horizontal vibrations) of considered
sub-conductor inside the considered sub-span.
Wake-induced oscillations occur in bundles were at least one downstream conductor is in the wake of the
upstream one. They occur at relatively high wind speeds and are not as common as Aeolian vibrations. The
wake-induced oscillations can be divided in four types (Figure 9): sub-span or breathing mode, vertical galloping,
horizontal galloping and rolling or twisting.
Sub-span oscillations occur at wind speeds 7-20 m/s and are characterized by low frequencies (0.7-2 Hz) and
large amplitudes (up to bundle separation). In sub-span or breathing mode sub-conductors move out of phase
alternately moving closer and then farther from each other what can lead to contact between the sub-conductors
in the bundle. Sub-span oscillations can be controlled by spacers and spacer-dampers. Sub-conductors in rigid
body modes (vertical galloping, horizontal galloping and rolling or twisting) move as a whole either in translation
or in rotation keeping their separation constant.
Sub-span wake-induced oscillation is an aero-elastic phenomenon caused by the interaction between the elastic
system (the conductors) and the fluid. The mechanism that causes the instable motion is very complex; in general
it is influenced by the horizontal and torsional modal frequencies. Torsional modal frequencies are mainly
influenced by the overall length of the span and to some extent by the conditions on the span ends. The
horizontal modal frequencies are mainly influenced by the sub-span lengths.
Sub-span oscillations can be controlled by optimising the locations of spacer-dampers along the span. It is well
known that spans divided in to equal sub-spans are more prone to wake induced sub-span oscillations than the
spans divided in to un-equal sub-spans [31].
It should be emphasized that according to TASK FORCE B2.11.05 [34] ''There is no proven method to predict
sub-span oscillations''. However, according to literature, experimental tests and analytical simulations it is known
that oscillation severity depends on wind characteristics, conductor tension, conductor spacing-to-diameter ratio,
bundle configuration, sub-span ratios and maximum sub-span length.
In contrast to Aeolian vibrations, wake induced oscillations are influenced by wind velocity components both
normal and parallel to the conductor. A wind that flows with an angle that is less than 45° relative to the conductor
doesn’t cause wake induced oscillations. The largest instability is caused by winds that flow perpendicular to the
direction of strands in the outer layer of the conductor.
Conductor resonant frequencies are proportional to the square root of the tension force. By increasing the
conductor tension the whole structure (bundle) becomes more rigid and more stable regarding the wake induced
oscillations, but this has a negative effect regarding the Aeolian vibrations.
The conductor spacing-to-diameter ratio is one of the most important factors that influences the wake induced
oscillations. The higher the ratio, the more stable the bundle [16]. A usual value of the ratio is a d = 15 − 17 . The
ratio a d ≤ 12 is considered as critically low.
It is considered that the larger the share of sub-conductors on the leeward side of a bundle, the larger bundle
sensitivity to wake-induced oscillations. This is due to the fact that leeward conductors drive the whole bundle,
while windward conductors restrain its motion because of aerodynamic damping. As a result, twin bundles and
quad bundles are approximately equally sensitive to wake-induced oscillations, while triple bundles with only one
leeward conductor are less sensitive to wake-induced oscillations.
The number and placement of spacer-dampers have the most important effect on reducing sub-span oscillations.
Consequently, for a given span length the ratio between the lengths of adjacent sub-spans should be optimized.
It is generally agreed (literature, experimental tests and analytical simulations) that a sub-span ratio should be
around 0.85 to 0.9. Good values for the ratio between the lengths of an end sub-span and adjacent one is among
0.55 to 0.65 [32].
Analytical simulations and measurements on real spans lead to limit on the maximum sub-span length. For
example, in non-severe conditions with ratio between bundle separation and conductor diameter of the order 15
to 17, maximum sub-span lengths of 80 m have been used without problems. For a site characterized by
medium/high wind speeds (>20 to 25 m/s) and ratio between bundle separation and conductor diameter of 12,
maximum sub-span lengths should be around 65 m [32].
t w in b u n d l e
The subspan length and the number of spacer for each span are given in the following tables.
Table 1 – Number of Spacer Dampers and positioning (38.77.47.2AB)
SUBSPAN LENGTH
Span [m]
length [m] 1 2 3
80 25 29 26
81 25 30 26
82 25 31 26
83 25 31 27
84 25 32 27
85 25 32 28
86 25 33 28
87 25 34 28
88 25 34 29
89 25 35 29
90 25 36 29
91 25 37 29
92 26 36 30
93 26 37 30
94 26 38 30
95 26 39 30
96 26 40 30
97 26 41 30
SUBSPAN LENGTH
Span [m]
length [m] 1 2 3
98 26 42 30
99 26 43 30
100 26 44 30
101 27 43 31
102 27 44 31
103 27 45 31
104 27 46 31
105 27 47 31
106 27 48 31
107 27 49 31
108 27 50 31
109 27 51 31
110 28 50 32
111 28 51 32
112 28 52 32
113 28 53 32
114 28 54 32
115 28 55 32
116 29 54 33
117 29 55 33
118 30 54 34
119 30 55 34
120 30 55 35
SUBSPAN LENGTH
Span [m]
length [m] 1 2 3 4
121 25 32 35 29
122 25 33 35 29
123 25 33 36 29
124 25 34 36 29
125 25 34 37 29
126 25 35 37 29
127 25 35 38 29
128 25 36 38 29
129 25 36 39 29
130 25 37 39 29
131 25 37 40 29
132 25 38 40 29
SUBSPAN LENGTH
Span [m]
length [m] 1 2 3 4
133 25 38 41 29
134 25 39 41 29
135 25 39 42 29
136 26 39 41 30
137 26 39 42 30
138 26 40 42 30
139 26 40 43 30
140 26 41 43 30
141 26 41 44 30
142 26 42 44 30
143 26 42 45 30
144 26 43 45 30
145 26 43 46 30
146 26 44 46 30
147 26 44 47 30
148 26 45 47 30
149 26 45 48 30
150 26 46 48 30
151 26 46 49 30
152 27 46 48 31
153 27 46 49 31
154 27 47 49 31
155 27 47 50 31
156 27 48 50 31
157 28 47 50 32
158 28 48 50 32
159 28 48 51 32
160 28 49 51 32
161 28 49 52 32
162 28 49 53 32
163 28 50 53 32
164 28 50 54 32
165 28 51 54 32
166 28 51 55 32
167 28 52 55 32
SUBSPAN LENGTH
Span [m]
length [m] 1 2 3 4 5
SUBSPAN LENGTH
Span [m]
length [m] 1 2 3 4 5
168 25 37 41 36 29
169 25 37 41 37 29
170 25 38 42 36 29
171 25 38 42 37 29
172 25 38 42 38 29
173 25 38 42 39 29
174 25 39 43 38 29
175 25 39 43 39 29
176 25 39 43 40 29
177 25 40 44 39 29
178 25 40 44 40 29
179 26 40 44 39 30
180 26 40 44 40 30
181 26 40 44 41 30
182 26 41 46 39 30
183 26 41 46 40 30
184 26 41 46 41 30
185 26 42 47 40 30
186 26 42 47 41 30
187 26 42 47 42 30
188 26 43 48 41 30
189 26 43 48 42 30
190 26 43 48 43 30
191 26 44 49 42 30
192 26 44 49 43 30
193 26 44 49 44 30
194 26 45 50 43 30
195 27 44 49 44 31
196 27 45 50 43 31
197 27 45 50 44 31
198 27 45 50 45 31
199 27 46 51 44 31
200 27 46 51 45 31
201 27 46 51 46 31
202 27 47 52 45 31
203 27 47 52 46 31
204 27 47 52 47 31
205 28 47 52 46 32
206 28 47 52 47 32
207 28 48 53 46 32
SUBSPAN LENGTH
Span [m]
length [m] 1 2 3 4 5
208 28 48 53 47 32
209 28 48 53 48 32
210 28 49 54 47 32
211 28 49 54 48 32
212 28 49 54 49 32
213 28 49 54 50 32
214 29 49 54 49 33
215 29 49 54 50 33
216 30 49 54 49 34
217 30 49 54 50 34
218 30 50 54 50 34
219 30 50 54 51 34
220 30 50 54 52 34
221 30 51 55 51 34
222 30 51 55 52 34
223 30 51 55 53 34
No. 6 spacers
Span SUBSPAN LENGTH [m] – 6 sp.
length [m] 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
269 25 42 47 40 44 42 29
270 25 42 47 40 44 43 29
271 25 42 47 40 44 44 29
272 25 42 47 40 44 45 29
273 25 42 47 40 44 46 29
274 25 43 48 41 46 42 29
275 25 43 48 41 46 43 29
276 25 43 48 41 46 44 29
277 25 43 48 41 46 45 29
278 26 43 48 41 46 44 30
279 26 43 48 41 46 45 30
2. 2 St o c kb ri d g e d am p e rs p o s it io n in g f o r co n d u ct o r s .
Input data is shown in table 2.
Table 2
Data Value
Conductor: AAC *HAWTHORN*
Overall diameter: 31,95 mm
Conductor tension: 22,594 kN
Overall cross section: 604,12 mm2
Ultimate breaking stress: 102,70 kN
Mass of conductor per unit length 1,670 kg/m
Vibration Damper: 66.65.90
Spacer Damper 38.77.47.2AB
Shortest span: 80 m
Longest span: 655 m
Data Value
Conductor: ACAR *∅34,65 mm*
Overall diameter: 34,65 mm
Conductor tension: 32,463 kN
Overall cross section: 709,4 mm2
Ultimate breaking stress: 147,56 kN
Mass of conductor per unit length 1,952 kg/m
Vibration Damper: 66.65.90
Spacer Damper 38.77.47AD
Shortest span: 80 m
Longest span: 655 m
Using the computer program described in the previous section and taking in to account all the influence factors
mentioned we give the following recommendation for the damper positioning. The explanation of the damper
position recommendations is given in the following figures.
Using the program described in the previous chapter a calculation of the conductor bending strain with and
without the Stockbridge vibration dampers was made. The acceptable level of bending strain is 100 µm/m (zero to
peak), according to technical specification the maximum allowed bending strain is 200 microstrains peak-to-peak
and that is equivalent to 100 µm/m (zero to peak).
In the calculations the AAC *HAWTHORN* tension is taken as 22,594 kN. In the received Sag & Tension data the
tension for 10°C (IEEE 1368), initial condition and no wind this is the tension for a 405 m ruling span. The
requirement of technical specification is that the calculation is made for the tension at 10°C, initial condition and
no wind.
The calculated bending strain of the AAC *∅31,95 mm* near the all clamps for a 405 m span with 2 vibration
dampers and 8 spacer dampers is shown bellow.
Figure 13 - Calculated AAC bending strain near the suspension and tension clamps, spacer dampers
clamps and stockbridge damper clamps for a 405 m span
Figure 13A - Calculated AAC max. amplitude per diameter of conductor according to frequency
Figure 13B - Calculated AAC bending stress near the suspension and tension clamps, spacer dampers
clamps and stockbridge damper clamps for a 405 m span
In the calculations the ACAR *∅34,65 mm* tension is taken as 32,463 kN. In the received Sag & Tension data the
tension for 10°C (IEEE 1368), initial condition and no wind this is the tension for a 405 m ruling span. The
requirement of technical specification is that the calculation is made for the tension at 10°C, initial condition and
no wind.
The calculated bending strain of the AAC *∅34,65 mm * near the all clamps for a 405 m span with 2 vibration
dampers and 8 spacer dampers is shown bellow.
Figure 14 - Calculated ACAR bending strain near the suspension and tension clamps, spacer dampers
clamps and stockbridge damper clamps for a 405 m span
Figure 14A - Calculated ACAR max. amplitude per diameter of conductor according to frequency
Figure 14B - Calculated ACAR bending stress near the suspension and tension clamps, spacer dampers
clamps and stockbridge damper clamps for a 405 m span
2.3 The recommendation for the placement of stockbridge dampers is given in the following table (Table 3),
based on the performed calculations.
Table 3
Number of Number of Spacer Distance for Distance for
Span length dampers per span Dampers per span Stockbridge Stockbridge
(m) AAC (one span - Twin (according to Table 1) Damper Damper
∅31,95 Bundle) (Fig. 6 and 7) (Fig. 7 and 8)
X1 [m] X3 [m]
80 - 650 4 2 - 13 0,50 0,50
1 REFERENCES
[1] CIGRE TF 22.11.1 (1998) Modelling of Aeolian Vibration od Single Conductors: Assessment of the
Technology, ELECTRA 181(1998), pp. 53-68.
[2] M. Kraus, P. Hagedorn (1991) Aeolian Vibrations: Wind Energy Input Evaluated from Measurements on
an Energized Transmission Line, IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery 6(1991)3, pp.1264-1270.
[3] R. Claren, G. Diana (1969) Dynamic Strain Distribution on Loaded Stranded Cables, IEEE Transactions
on Power Apparatus and Systems 88(1969)11, pp. 1678-1687.
[4] CIGRE TF 22.01 (1989) Report on aeolian vibration, ELECTRA 124(1989), pp. 41-77.
[5] CIGRE TF B2.11.01 (2005) Modelling of Aeolian Vibrations of a Single Conductor Plus Damper:
Assessment of Technology, ELECTRA 223(2005), pp. 28-36
[6] P. Hagedorn (1980) Ein einfaches Rechenmodell zur Berechnung winderregter Schwinungen an
Hochspannungsleitungen mit dampfern, Ingenieur-Archiv 49 (1980), pp. 161-177.
[7] P. Hagedorn (1982) On the Computation of Damped Wind-Excited Vibrations of Overhead Transmission
Lines, Journal of Sound and Vibration 83 (1982), pp. 253-271.
[9] M. Markiewicz (1995) Optimum Dynamic Characteristic of Stockbridge Dampers for Dead-end-Spans,
Journal of Sound and Vibration 188 (1995), pp. 243-256.
[10] R. Claren, G. Diana (1969) Mathematical Analysis of Transmission Line Vibration, IEEE Transactions on
Power Apparatus and Systems, 88(1969)12, pp. 1741-1771.
[12] IEC 61897, Overhead transmission lines-Requirements and tests for Stocbridge type aeolian vibration
dampers (1998), pp. 25-33.
[13] CIGRE TF 22.11.1 (1998) Modelling of Aeolian Vibration od Single Conductors: Assessment of the
Technology, ELECTRA 181(1998), APPENDIX A
[14] CIGRE TF 22.11.04 (1999) Safe Design Tension with Respect to Aeolian Vibrations, Part 1: Single
Unprotected Conductors, ELECTRA 186(1999), pp. 53-67.
[15] CIGRE TF 22.11.04 (2001) Safe Design Tension with Respect to Aeolian Vibrations; Part 2: Damped
Single Conductors, ELECTRA 198(2001), pp. 10-26.
[16] C. Hardy, P. Van Dyke, Field Observations on Wind-Induced Conductor Motions, Journal of Fluids and
Structures (1995), 9, 43-60.
[17] D. Brika, A. Laneville, The Power Imparted by Wind to a Flexible Circular Cylinder in the Wake of Another
Stationary Cylinder, IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol 12, No 1, January 1997.
[18] CIGRE TF 22.11.04, Safe Design Tension with Respect to Aeolian Vibrations; Part 2: Damped Single
Conductors, ELECTRA No. 198, October 2001.
[19] K. Anderson, P. Hagedorn, On the Energy Disipation in Spacer Dampers in Bundled Conductors of
Overhead Transmission Lines, Journal of Sound and Vibration (1995), 180 (4), 539-556.
[21] R. Claren, G. Diana, F. Giordana, E. Massa, Vibrations of Transmission Line Conductor Bundles, IEEE
Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS-90, No 4, July-August 1971, pp. 1796-1814.
[22] H. Verma, P. Hagedorn, Different Numerical Techniques for the Solution of Transcedental Eigenvalue
Problem in Transmission Line Bundles, ANZIAM Journal, volume 47: Proceedings of EMAC-2005, pp.
C873-C893, 2007.
[23] M. S. Dhothard, N. Ganesan and B. V. A. Rao, Transmission line vibration, Journal of Sound and
Vibration 60 (1978), 217-327.
[24] D. Diana et al., Dynamic Analysis of the Transmission Line Crossing ''Lago de Maricaibo'', Journal of
Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics 74-76 (1998) 977-986.
[26] IEEE T&D Committee, Standardization of Conductor Vibration Measurements, Transactions on Power
Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS-85, No 1, January 1966, pp. 10-20.
[27] C. Hardy, J. Brunelle, Principles of Measurements with the new PAVICA Conductor Vibration Recorder,
Canadian Electrical Association Centennial Conference, Paper #29, Toronto, May 1991.
[28] CIGRE TF 22.11.2, Guide to Vibration Measurements on Overhead Lines, ELECTRA No. 163, December
1995.
[29] P. Van Dyke, C. Hardy, M. St-Louis, J. L. Gardes, Comparative Field Tests of Various Practices for the
Control of Wind Conductor Motion, IEEE Transactions of Power Delivery, Vol. 12. No 2. April 1997.
[30] J.-L. Lilien, D. Snegovski, WAke-Induced Vibration in Power Transmission Line. Parametric Study, Flow
Induced Vibration, Ecole Polytechnique, Paris, 6-9th July 2004.
[31] G. Diana, M. Gasparetto, G. Di Giacomo, P. Nicolini, Analytical Method for Computing Subspan
Oscillation. Analytical and Experimental Results, IEEE Transactions of Power Apparatus and Systems,
VPA93, 1974, P. 1746.
[32] CIGRE TF B2.11.05, State of the Art Survey on Spacers and Spacer Dampers: Part 1-General
Description, ELECTRA No. 209, August 2003.
[33] CIGRE TF B2.11.05, State of the Art Survey on Spacers and Spacer Dampers: Part 2-Technical Aspects,
ELECTRA No. 209, August 2003.
[34] CIGRE TF B2.11.05, State of the Art Survey on Spacers and Spacer Dampers: Part 3-Experience with
Current Practice, ELECTRA No. 209, August 2003.
[35] S. J. Prince, P. Piperni, An Investigation of the Effect of Mechanical Damping to Alleviate Wake-Induced
Flutter on Overhead Power Conductors, Journal of Fluids and Structures 2, 53-76.
[36] J. L. Lilien, K. O. Papailiou, Calculation of Spacer Compression for Bundle Lines Under Short-Circuit,
IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 15, No 2, April 2000, pp.839-845.