-

IEEE Trial-Use Design Guide for

Wood Transmission Structures

IEEE Power Engineering Society

Sponsored by the
Transmission and Distribution Committee

-
PUbhhed by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.. 345East 47th Street, New York, NY 1001Z USA.

IEEE Febnrery20. 1991 SH137lB

 IEEE Trial-UseDesign Guide for Wood
Transmission Structures

Sponsor
andDishibutionco"ittee
dthe
*society
IEEF?,PoWerEt@Emng

Abstract: IEEE S M 761, ZEEE Trial- Use Design Guide for Wood Transmission Structures,
discusses the structural design and application of wood transmission structures. The guide
includes definitions, application of loads, structure application, characteristics of natural wood
and laminated wood members, design stresses, fabrication of laminated wood members,
connections, nonwood members, erection and framing, and quality assurance.

IKeywords: overhead transmission lines, wood transmission structures.

ISBN 166937463-7

Library of Congreee Catalog Number 90-086186

Copyright 8 1991 by

TheInstituteofElectricalandELectronicsEngineers,Inc.
345East 47th Street, New York, NY 10017-2394,USA
No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form,
in an electronic retrieval system or otherwise,
without the prior written permission of the publisher.
 IEEE Standards documents are developed within the Technical
Committees of the IEEE Societies and the Standards Coordinating
Committees of the IEEE Standards Board. Members of the committees
serve voluntarily and without compensation. They are not necessar-
ily members of the Institute. The standards developed within IEEE
represent a consensus of the broad expertise on the subject within the
Institute a s well a s those activities outside of IEEE which have
expressed an interest in participating in the development of the
standard.
Use of an IEEE Standard is wholly voluntary. The existence of an
IEEE Standard does not imply that there are no other ways to produce,
test, measure, purchase, market, or provide other goods and services
related to the scope of the IEEE Standard. Furthermore, the viewpoint
expressed a t the time a standard is approved and issued is subject to
change brought about through developments in the state of the art and
comments received from users of the standard. Every IEEE Standard
is subjected to review a t least every five years for revision or reaffir-
mation. When a document is more than five years old, and has not
been reaffirmed, i t is reasonable to conclude that its contents, al-
though still of some value, do not wholly reflect the present state of the
art. Users are cautioned to check to determine that they have the latest
edition of any IEEE Standard.
Comments for revision of IEEE Standards are welcome from any
interested party, regardless of membership affiliation with IEEE.
Suggestions for changes in documents should be in the form of a pro-
posed change of text, together with appropriate supporting comments.
Interpretations: Occasionally questions may arise regarding the
meaning of portions of standards a s they relate to specific applica-
tions. When the need for interpretations is brought to the attention of
IEEE, the Institute will initiate action to prepare appropriate re-
sponses. Since IEEE Standards represent a consensus of all con-
cerned interests, it is important to ensure that any interpretation has
also received the concurrence of a balance of interests. For this
reason IEEE and the members of its technical committees are not able
to provide an instant response to interpretation requests except in
those cases where the matter h a s previously received formal
consideration.
Comments on standards and requests for interpretations should be
addressed to:
Secretary, IEEE Standards Board
445 Hoes Lane
P.O. Box 1331
Piscataway, N J 08555-1331
USA

IEEE Standards documents are adopted by the Institute of Electrical

and Electronics Engineers without regard to whether their adoption
may involve patents on articles, materials, or processes. Such adop-
tion does not assume any liability to any patent owner, nor does it
assume any obligation whatever to parties adopting the standards
documents.

T I’
 Fed

(This Foreword is not a part of IEEE Std 761,IEEE Trial-Use Design Guide for Wood Transmission Structures.)
This guide was written using United States material references and measurements. The
engineering concepts presented may be applied to the material and measurement system of any
country. The guide has been prepared using input from design engineers, manufacturers, and the
research and testing communities. We are especially grateful for information and input received
from the following organizations: Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), United States
Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Products Lab, and American Wood-Preserver’s
Institute (AWPI).
The Wood Structure Working Group of the Towers, Poles and Conductors Subcommittee that
prepared this guide was comprised of the following individuals:

Robert Peters, C h a m
J a y Altman James R. Goodman Vita Longo
Lee Belfore James S.Graham Arny Milbright
Billy Bohannan Donald G. Heald G. J. Moore
Gary Boos Jack M. Hemstreet Don Osbom
T. Bozeman Bruce Hess Dean Oskvig
Bill Calhoun John Hipke Fred Picciano
Sam Cluts Henry J. Kientz Joe Polhman
John Dulis Robert Kluge Steve Prickett
Frank Eder Hong-To Lam Stephen F. Smith
W. G. Eisinger Bob Lash M. Daniel Vanderbilt
William Finney Nevins Wilburn

The balloting group of the Transmission and Distribution Committee of the IEEE Power
-
Engineering Society that balloted and approved this guide for submission to the IEEE Standards
Board consisted of the following members a t the time of approval:

J. J. Burke I. S.Grant S. Nilsson

M. L. Charest J. W. Hipke R. G. Oswald
V. L. Chartier J. G. Kappenman R. L. Patterson
F. A. Denbrock G. Karady T. A. Pinkham
A. G. Dividson H. Lam W. E. Reid
J. C. Engimann K. E. Lindsey R. L. Retallack
L. H. Fink T. J. McCarthy F. A. M. Rizk
T. Garrity T. J. McDermott L. L. Smith
D. A. Gillies J. H. Mallory J. M. Van Name
D. L. Nickel

When the IEEE Standards Board approved this trial-use guide on September 28, 1990, it had the
following membership:

Marc0 W.Migliaro, Chairman James M.Daly, Vice Chairman

Andrew G. Salem, Secretary
Dennis Bodson Kenneth D. Hendrix Lawrence V. McCall
Paul L. Borrill John W. Horch L. Bruce McClung
Fletcher J. Buckley Joseph L.Koepfingefl Donald T. Michael*
Allen L. Clapp Irving Kolodny Stig Nilsson
Stephen R. Dillon Michael A. Lawler Roy T. Oishi
Donald C. Fleckenstein Donald J. Loughry Gary S. Robinson
J a y Forster* John E. May, Jr. Terrance R. Whittemore
Thomas L. Hannan Donald W. Zipse

*Member Emeritus
SECTION PAGE
1. I n t r o d u c t i o n ............................................................................................... 9
1.1 Scope ............................................................................................... 9
1.2 R e f e r e n c e s ....................................................................................... 13
1.3 Definitions ...................................................................................... 13
1.3.1 G e n e r a l ................................................................................. 13
1.3.2 Glossary of Terms .................................................................... 13
1.3.3 List of Abbreviations ................................................................ 14
2. Structure Application ................................................................................... 15
2.1 General .......................................................................................... 15
2.2 Wood Benefits .................................................................................. 15
2.3 Wood Limitations .............................................................................. 15
3. Characteristics of Wood ................................................................................ 16
3.1 Physical Characteristics ...................................................................... 16
3.1.1 Directional Properties ................................................................ 16
3.1.2 Growth Rings .......................................................................... 16
3.1.3 Earlywood a n d Latewood ........................................................... 16
3.1.4 Density ................................................................................. 17
3.1.5 Slope of Grain ....................................................................... 17
3.1.6 K n o t s .................................................................................... 17
3.1.7 Moisture Content ...................................................................... 18
3.1.8 Heartwood a n d Sapwood ............................................................ 18
3.1.9 Decay ................................................................................... 18
3.1.10 Seasoning .............................................................................. 18
3.1.11 Incising ................................................................................ 19
3.1.12 T r e a t i n g ................................................................................ 19
3.2 Mechanical C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s .................................................................. 20
3.2.1 Wood Poles ............................................................................ 20
3.2.1.1 Deterministic Design ...................................................... 22
3.2.1.2 Probabilistic Design Using ANSI 05.1-1987Pole Dimensions ....... 22
3.2.1.3 Probabilistic Design Using Actual Pole Dimensions ..................23
3.2.2 Crossarms and Braces ............................................................... 23
3.2.2.1 Deterministic Design ...................................................... 23
3.2.2.2 Probabilistic Design ....................................................... 23
3.2.3 Modulus of Elasticity ................................................................. 23
4. Structure Loading ....................................................................................... 24
5. Structural Analysis and Design ...................................................................... 24
5.1 Introduction ..................................................................................... 24
5.1.1 G e n e r a l ................................................................................. 24
5.1.2 Load Resistance Factor Design Format ............................................ 24
5.1.3 Resistance and Load Values (Rand Q)............................................ 24
5.2 Deterministic Design .......................................................................... 24
5.3 Probabilistic Design ........................................................................... 24
5.3.1 Resistance and Load Factors ($ and y). ............................................ 25
5.3.1.1 Reliability Index Method .................................................. 25
5.3.1.2 Exclusion Limit - Return Period Method. .............................. 25
5.3.1.2.1 Load F a c t o r ..................................................... 25
5.3.1.2.2 Resistance Factor .............................................. 25
 SECTION PAGE
..
5.3.2 Material Strength ..................................................................... 26
5.3.3 Example ................................................................................ 26
5.3.4 Probabilistic Design Analysis ...................................................... 2'7
5.4 Analysis and Design of Single-Pole Structures ............................................ 27
5.4.1 G e n e r a l ................................................................................. 2'7
5.4.2 Resisting Moment .................................................................... 2'7
5.4.3 Primary Moment ..................................................................... 27
5.4.4 Deflections and Secondary Moment ................................................ 28
5.4.5 Location of Maximum Stress Point ................................................. 28
5.4.6 Computer Analysis ................................................................... 29
5.5 Analysis and Design of Braced (H-frame) Structures..................................... 29
5.5.1 Available Analysis Techniques .................................................... 29
5.5.2 Statically Indeterminate Structural Analysis .................................... 29
5.5.3 Design of H-frame Members ........................................................ 31
5.5.3.1 General ...................................................................... 31
5.5.3.2 Crossarms ................................................................... 31
5.5.3.3 X-braces ...................................................................... 33
5.5.3.4 Vee-braces ................................................................... 34
5.5.3.5 Connections ................................................................. 34
5.5.4 H-frame Structure Embedment ..................................................... 35
5.6 Analysis a n d Design of Guyed S t r u c t u r e s .............................................. 35
5.6.1 G e n e r a l ................................................................................. 35
5.6.2 Stability and Critical Buckling Load ............................................... 35
5.6.2.1 Gere and Carter Method .................................................... 36
5.6.2.2 REA Method ................................................................. 36
5.6.2.3 Comparison of Methods .................................................... 36
5.6.3 End Conditions of Guyed Poles ...................................................... 36
5.6.4 Axial Loads at Intermittent Locations .............................................. 37
6. Glued Laminated Timber Members .................................................................. 37
6.1 Laminated Veneer Lumber ................................................................... 37
6.2 Structural Glued Laminated Timber (Glulam) ............................................ 38
6.2.1 Species Wood .......................................................................... 38
6.2.2 Equilibrium Moisture Content ...................................................... 38
6.2.3 Moisture Content Readings .......................................................... 38
6.2.4 Strength Test Records ................................................................ 38
6.2.5 Quality Control Records ............................................................ 38
7 . Connections and Hardware ........................................................................... 39
7.1 General .......................................................................................... 39
7.2 Wood Joint Hardware ........................................................................ 39
7.2.1 Grid Gains (Grids. Spike Grids. and Crossarm Gains) ......................... 39
7.2.2 Shear Plates ........................................................................... 39
7.3 Fasteners ........................................................................................ 39
7.3.1 B o l t s ..................................................................................... 39
7.3.2 W a s h e r s ................................................................................ 41
7.3.3 Spring Washers ....................................................................... 42
7.3.4 Locknuts ............................................................................... 42
7.4 Insulator Attachments ......................................................................... 42
7.4.1 Insulator Attachments - Conductor Dead End .................................... 42
7.4.2 Insulator Attachments - Suspension .............................................. 42
7.4.3 Overhead Ground Wire Attachments .............................................. 43
7.5 Guys and Guy Hardware ...................................................................... 43
SECTION PAGE
7.6 Bearingmplift Plates (Pole Anchors) ..................................................... 43
7.7 S p l i c e s ............................................................................................ 43
7.8 End Fittings for X.braces, Knee.braces, and Vee.braces .................................. 43
8. Nonwood M e m b e r s .......................................................................................
8.1 General .......................................................................................... 43
8.2 Strength Characteristics of Nonwood Members ......................................... 44
8.3 Designing for Structure Testing ........................................................... 44
9. Erection and Framing ................................................................................. 44
9.1 General .......................................................................................... 44
9.2 Handling and Storing Poles and Wood Products .......................................... 44
9.2.1 Receiving .............................................................................. 44
9.2.2 Hauling ................................................................................ 45
9.2.3 Unloading ............................................................................. 45
9.2.4 S t o r i n g .................................................................................. 45
9.2.5 Field Modifications .................................................................. 45
9.3 Staking for Wood-Pole C o n s t r u c t i o n ...................................................... 46
9.4 Hole Digging a n d Pole Setting............................................................ 46
9.4.1 Foundations ........................................................................... 46
9.4.2 Structural Alignment ................................................................ 46
9.4.3 Pole Holes .............................................................................. 46
9.4.4 Backfill ................................................................................ 46
9.4.5 Alternate Backfill .................................................................... 47
9.4.6 W e a k Soils ............................................................................ 47
9.4.7 Rock Sockets ........................................................................... 47
9.4.8 C o n c l u s i o n s ............................................................................ 47
9.5 Structure Framing Procedures ............................................................... 47
9.5.1 Rigid F r a m i n g on Ground ........................................................ 48
9.5.2 Modified Rigid Framing After Pole Erection ..................................... 48
9.5.3 Aerial Framing ....................................................................... 48
9.5.4 Choice of Methods ..................................................................... 48
9.6 Anchor and Guy Installation ................................................................. 48
9.6.1 Anchors ................................................................................ 48
9.6.2 Guys .................................................................................... 48
9.7 Construction P e r s o n n e l ....................................................................... 48
10. Quality Assurance and Control ....................................................................... 49
10.1 Quality Assurance ............................................................................. 49
10.1.1 G e n e r a l ................................................................................. 49
10.1.2 Design .................................................................................. 49
10.1.3 M a t e r i a l s ............................................................................... 49
10.1.4 Production and Fabrication ......................................................... 49
10.1.5 Tolerances ............................................................................. 49
10.1.6 Shipping, Handling, and Storing ................................................... 49
10.2 Quality Control ................................................................................. 49
10.2.1 G e n e r a l ................................................................................. 49
10.2.2 Standards .............................................................................. 49
11. Testing ................................................................................................... 51
11.1 General .......................................................................................... 51
11.2 Component Tests ............................................................................... 51
11.2.1 Component Manufacture ............................................................. 51
11.2.2 Testing Procedure .................................................................... 51
 SECTION PAGE
h

11.2.3 Failure - Ultimate Strength ........................................................ 51

11.2.4 Results and Reports ................................................................... 51
11.2.5 Test Evaluation ....................................................................... 51
11.3 Pole Tests ........................................................................................ 51
11.4 Structure Tests .................................................................................. 52
11.4.1 Manufacture ........................................................................... 52
11.4.2 Structure Framing .................................................................... 52
11.4.3 Structure Erection ..................................................................... 52
11.4.4 Structure Foundations ................................................................ 52
11.4.5 Rigging ................................................................................ 52
11.4.6 Structure Loading ..................................................................... 52
11.4.7 Load and Deflection Measurements ................................................ 52
11.4.8 Failure - Ultimate Strength ........................................................ 52
11.4.9 Results and Reports ................................................................... 52
11.5 Pole-Top Assembly Tests ...................................................................... 53
12. Electrical Considerations ............................................................................. 53
12.1 General .......................................................................................... 53
12.2 Electrical Properties of Wood ................................................................. 53
12.2.1 Conductivity/Resistivity Values of Wood ...................................... 53
12.3 Wood Insulation Design ..................................................................... 54
12.3.1 Insulation Design Criteria .......................................................... 54
12.3.2 Crossarm B o n d i n g ................................................................... 54
12.3.3 Insulation for Lightning Performance ............................................ 54
12.3.4 Insulation for Switching Surge and Power-Frequency Voltages ...............54
12.4 Structure Electrical F i r e s .................................................................... 54
12.5 Structure Grounding ........................................................................... 55
12.6 Corona and Electric Effects ................................................................... 55
12.7 Raptor Considerations ......................................................................... 56
12.8 Maintenance a n d S a f e t y ..................................................................... 56

FIGURES
Fig 1 Effective Length Factors. It ...................................................................... 14
Fig 2 The Three Principal Axes of Wood ............................................................. 17
Fig 3 Measurement of Slope of Grain ............................................................. 17
Fig 4 P-Delta Effect ...................................................................................... 27
Fig 5 Flexural Stress Patterns for Uniformly Tapered Poles ...................................... 28
Fig 6 Assumed H-frame Behavior ................................................................... 29
Fig 7 Location of Plane of Contraflexure ............................................................. 30
Fig 8 Assumed Contraflexure Plane Locations for Various Structure Configurations .........32
Fig 9 X-brace Effective L e n g t h ........................................................................ 34
Fig 10 Bisector Guyed Structure ......................................................................... 37
Fig 11 Dead-End Structure ............................................................................... 37
Fig 12 Grid Gains ......................................................................................... 40
Fig 13 Crossarm Shims, Plates, and Assemblies ..................................................... 40
Fig 14 Shear P l a t e s ....................................................................................... 40
Fig 15 B o l t s ................................................................................................. 40
Fig 16 Installation of Arm Stabilizer on Single Wood Crossarm ................................... 41
Fig 17 Grid Gain-Arm Support .......................................................................... 41
Fig 18 W a s h e r s ............................................................................................ 42
Fig 19 Spring Washers ................................................................................... 42
Fig 20 Dead-End Hardware ............................................................................. 43
TABLES PAGE
Table 3 . 1 ANSI 05.1-1987 Designated Fiber Stress ................................................ 20
Table 3.2 Ground-Line Strength and Stiffness Values for New, Green Poles
Less Than 50 R Long .......................................................................... 21
Table 3.3 Ground-Line Strength and Stiffness Values for New, Green Poles.
50 ft and Longer. Used in Unguyed. Single-Pole Structures Only ....................... 21
Table 3.4 Ground-Line Strength and Stiffness Values for New. Green Poles. 50 ft
and Longer. Used in Structures Other Than Unguyed Single-Pole Structures ........22
Table 3.5 Correction Factors for Pole Strength and Stiffness AMORGL and MOE ............... 22
Table 3.6 Height-Effect Correction Factors for AMORGL ........................................... 22
Table 3.7 Characteristics of Wood Crossarms ........................................................ 23
Table 3.8 Modulus of Elasticity Values for Use in Deterministic Design ......................... 23
Table 5.1 Material-Resistance Factor .......................................................... 26
Table 5.2 Correction Factors for Wood Strength Based on Load Duration ......................... 26
Table 5.3 Ratio of Pole Diameters to Plane of Contraflexure ........................................ 31
Table 9.1 Maximum Member Lengths for Single-Point Lifting .................................... 45
Table 9.2 Typical Crushed Rock or Gravel Backfill Material Specification ...................... 46
Table 12.1 Douglas Fir Moisture Content and Resistance Values ................................... 53
APPENDIX

Sample Problems for Section 5 . Structural Analysis and Design .................................... 57

A1 . Single-Pole Analysis and Design .................................................................. 57
A2 . H-frame Structure Analysis and Design .......................................................... 61
A3 . Guyed Pole Analysis a n d Design .............................................................. 82
A4 . Computer Analysis ................................................................................... 85
APPENDIX FIGURES

Fig A1 Single-Pole Structure Analysis ................................................................ 59

Fig A2 H-frame S t r u c t u r e ............................................................................... 62
Fig A3 Bolt Hole Strength Reductions .................................................................. 63
Fig A4 W s e t Bolt Hole Strength Reductions .......................................................... 64
Fig A5 Force Diagram a t Planes of Contraflexure ................................................... 65
Fig A6 Force Diagram at Points G and H .............................................................. 66
Fig A7 Force Diagram Structure Top Assembly ...................................................... 68
Fig A8 Free Body at Joint E .............................................................................. 69
Fig A9 Free Body at Joint A .............................................................................. 70
Fig A10 Free Body Section ABF ........................................................................ 71
Fig A l l Free Body Joint F ................................................................................. 71
Fig A12 Free Body Joint G ................................................................................. 72
Fig A13 H-frame Outline Method B ...................................................................... 73
Fig A14 Planes of Contraflexure ......................................................................... 74
Fig A15 FBD From External Wire Loads (lb/ft) ................................................... 75
Fig A16 FBD From Wind Forces on Pole Only (lb) .................................................... 76
Fig A17 FBD X-brace (lb/ft) ............................................................................... 78
Fig A18 X-brace Details ................................................................................... 79
Fig A19 Double Crossarm Detail ......................................................................... 80
Fig A20 FBD End of Crossarm ........................................................................ 80
Fig A21 Buckling Mode of Crossarm .................................................................... 81
Fig A22 FBD End of Crossarm Heavy Ice ............................................................... 82
Fig A23 Guy Problem Plan View ......................................................................... 83
Fig A24 Guy Problem Profile View ...................................................................... 83
Fig A25 Stress Diagram 65 ft Class 1H Pole ....................................................... 85
 IEEE Trial-Use Design Guide for Wood
Transmission Structures
1. Introduction
1.1 Scope.The purpose of this design guide is to
provide the design engineer with methods for
the design of wood structures for overhead
electric transmission lines.
Wood is one of the most common structural
materials used in the United States and
Canada for high-voltage transmission struc-
tures, especially in the 69 kV through 345 kV
range. To date there has been limited guid-
ance to the design engineer on how to approach
the design of transmission structures using
wood as a structural material. This guide con-
solidates useful information, methods, and
reference materials that define the state-of-
the-art in the design of wood pole transmission
structures into one document.
The guide is intended t o serve a purpose
similar to that of the American Society of Civil
Engineers (ASCE) Guide for Design of Steel
Transmission Towers [4311, and Design of
Steel Transmission Pole Structures 1371. Like
these documents, this guide is meant to provide
the design engineer with good engineering
design practices. Legislated requirements,
such a s the National Electrical Safety Code
(ANSI C2-1990 [51), should be used in
conjunction with this document.
The guide covers application of wood in
transmission structures, characteristics of
wood and recommended stresses, methods of
analysis, loadings, laminated material, con-
nections, nonwood members, erection and
framing, quality assurance, electrical con-
siderations, and testing of wood structures.
The guide discusses both deterministic and
probabilistic (reliability-based) design proce-
dures. In both cases, the guide utilizes the load
and resistance factor design (LRFD) format.
'The numbers in parentheses correspond to those of the
references in 1.2.
The LRFD approach can be summarized by the
following formula:
(Resistance Side) (Load-Effect Side)
n
WIl 2 y0.C Qi
z =1
(Eq 1.1)
$ is the resistance factor or strength-
reduction factor. $ is usually less than 1and is
discussed in detail in Section 5 , Structural
Analysis and Design.
R , is the nominal resistance of the material
used. Recommended values for R , are found
in Section 3, Characteristics of Wood.
yo is an analysis factor that accounts for
inaccuracies associated with the structural
analysis and is greater than or equal t o 1. A
discussion of recommended adjustments to the
load side of this formula is found in Section 5.
The summation in Eq 1.1 represents all
loads Qithat act on the line simultaneously. yi
is the load factor (greater than or equal to 1) to
adjust the loads to account for uncertainties.
This relationship is discussed in E241 through
[261, [%I, and D91.
18References
[ l l AITC 117-87, Design for Laminated
Specifications.2
[21 AITC 117-88, Manufacturing Standard
Specifications for Structural Glued Laminated
Timber of Softwood Species.
131AITC 200-83, Inspection Manual.
'AITC publications can be obtained from the American
Institute of Timber Construction, 11818 SE Mill Plain
Blvd., Suite 415, Vancouver, WA 9 8 W .
IEEE
Std 751
[4] AITC D2559-76, in the 1989 Annual Book of
ASTM Standards, vol. 15.06, Adhesives, p.
161.3
[51 ANSI C2-1990, National Electrical Safety
Code.4
[SI ANSI C135.1-1979, American National
Standard for Galvanized Steel Bolts and Nuts
for Overhead Line Construction.
[71 ANSI C135.4-1987, American National
Standard for Zinc-Coated Ferrous Eyebolts
and Nuts for Overhead Line Construction.
[81 ANSI C135.33-1988, American National
Standard for Galvanized Ferrous Crossarm
Gains.
191 ANSI 05.1-1987, American National
Standard Specifications and Dimensions for
Wood Poles.5
[lo] ANSI 05.2-1983 (Reaff 19891, American
National S t a n d a r d Specifications for
S t r u c t u r a l Glued Laminated Timber
(GLULAM) for Utility Structures.
[113 ANSYAITC A190.1-1983, Wood Products
- Structural Glued Laminated Timber
(formerly PS 56-73 Voluntary Product
Standard).
1121 ANSYASTM D1036-83, Standard Methods
of Static Tests of Wood Poles.
[13] ASTM D2555-88e1, Method for
Establishing Clear-Wood Strength Values.
[141 ASTM D4253-83, Test Methods for
Maximum Index Density of Soils Using a
Vibratory Table.
- Dawalibi, F.
3ASTM publications can be obtained from the American
Society for Testing Materials, 1916 Race Street,
Philadelphia, PA 19103.
4The National Electrical Safety Code can be obtained
from the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers,
Service Center, 445 Hoes Lane, P.O. Box 1331, Piscataway,
NJ 08855-1331.
5ANSI publications are available from the Sales
Department, American National Standards Institute, 1430
Broadway, New York, NY 10018.
10
-7-
IEEE TRIAGUSE DESIGN GUIDE FOR
[15] ASTM D4254-83, Test Methods for
Minimum Index Density of Soils a n d
Calculation of Relative Density.
[16J E P R I EL-0100-3, Project 260,
Transmission Line Reference Book 115-138
kV Compact Line Design, 1978, L. 0 . Barthold,
et al. and EL-3147, Project 1492, Phase-to-
Phase Switching Surge Design, Addendum to
Transmission Line Reference Book: 11 5-138
kV Compact Line Design, 1983.6
1171 EPRI EL-2040, Project 1352-1, Probability-
Based Design o f Wood Transmission
Structures - Volume 1: Strength and Stiffness
of Wood Utility Poles, Final Report, Sept. 1981,
Goodman, J. R., Vanderbilt, M. D., Criswell,
M. E., and Bodig, J.
[181 EPRI EL-2040, Project 1352-1, Probability-
Based Design o f Wood Transmission
Structures - Volume 2: Analysis and
Probability-Based Design o f Wood Utility
Structures, Final Report, Sept. 1981, Goodman,
J. R., Vanderbilt, M. D., Criswell, M. E., and
Bodig, J.
[19] EPRI EL-2040, Project 1352-1, Probability-
Based Design o f Wood Transmission
Structures - Volume 3: User’s Manual
POLEDA-80 - POLE Design and Analysis,
Final Report, Goodman, J. R., Vanderbilt, M.
D., Criswell, M. E., and Bodig, J.
[20] EPRI EL-2500, Project 68, Transmission
Line Reference Book 345 kV and Above, 2nd
ed., Revised, Dec. 1987, La Forest, J. J., Editor.
[211 EPRI EL-2699, Project 1494-1,
Transmission Line Grounding - Volume 1,
Final Report, Oct. 1982, Dawalibi, F.
[22] EPRI EL-2699, Project 1494-1,
Transmission Line Grounding - Volume 2:
Design Curves, Final Report, Oct. 1982,
[231 EPRI EL-4097-CCM, Project 1352,
Reliability-Based Design of Transmission
Line Structures Users Manual: HFRAME-84
6EPRI publications can be obtained from the Electric
Power Research Institute, 3412 Hillview Ave., Palo Alto,
CA94304.

WOOD TRANSMISSION STRUCTURES
- Analysis and Design of Multipole
- Structures, Sept. 1985 (linear analysis, see [211
for nonlinear analysis).
[241 EPRI EL-4109, Project 1352-2, Wood Pole
Properties - Volume 1: Background and
Southern Pine Data, Interim Report, July 1985,
Phillips, G. E., Bodig, J., and Goodman, J. R.
1253 EPRI EL-4109, Project 1352-2, Wood Po2e
Properties - Volume 2: Douglas-Fir Data,
Interim Report, Jan. 1986, Bodig, J., Goodman,
J. R., Phillips, G. E. and Fagan, G. B.
[261 EPRI EL-4109, Project 1352-2, Wood Pole
Properties - Volume 3: Western Red Cedar
Data and Size Effect, Interim Report, Sept.
1986, Bodig, J. and Goodman, J. E.
1271 EPRI EL-4540-CCM, Project 2016-3,
TLWorkstation Code: Version 1.0 - Volume
13: ETAP Manual, May 1986 (nonlinear
analysis, see C171 for linear analysis).
1281 EPRI EL-4793, Project 1352-2, Reliability-
Based Design of Transmission Line
Structures: Final Report - Volume 1:
Methods, Mar. 1987, Criswell, M. E. and
Vanderbilt, M. D.
1293 EPRI EL-4793, Project 1352-2, Reliability-
Based Design of Transmission Line
Structures: Final Report - Volume 2 :
Appendixes, Mar. 1987, Criswell, M. E. and
Vanderbilt, M. D.
[301 IEEE Std 691-1985, IEEE Trial-Use Guide
for Transmission Structure Foundation
Design ( D r a f t American National
Standard).
1311 US Product Standard PS1-83 for
Construction and Industrial Plywood.8
[321 American Wood-Preserver’s Association
Book of standard^.^
‘IEEE publications can be obtained from the Institute of
Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Service Center, 445
Hoes Lane,P.O. Box 1331, Piscataway, NJ 08855-1331.
‘This publication can be obtained from the American
Plywood Association, P.O. Box 11700, Tacoma, WA 98411.
‘ A W A publications can be obtained from the
American Wood-Preserver‘s Association, P.O. Box 849,
Stevensville, MD 21666.
11
r
IEEE
Std 751
C331 Clayton, J. M. and Young, F. S.
“Estimating Lightning Performance of
Transmission Lines,” ZEEE Transactions on
Power Apparatus and Systems, vol. PAS-83,
Nov. 1964, p. 1102.
1341 Darveniza, M. and Holcombe, B. C. “An
Improved Method of Calculating the Impulse
Strength of Wood-Porcelain Insulation,” ZEEE
Transactions on Power Apparatus and
Systems, vol. PAS-98, no. 6, Nov./Dec. 1979,
p. 1909.
1351 Darveniza, M. et al. “Line Design and
Electrical Properties of Wood,” Z E E E
T r a n s a c t i o n s on Power Apparatus and
Systems, vol. PAS-86, no. 11, Nov. 1967,
p. 1344.
C361 Dean, P. S., et al. “Insulation Tests for the
Design a n d U p r a t i n g of Wood-Pole
Transmission Lines,” ZEEE Transactions on
Power Apparatus and Systems, vol. PAS-85,
no. 12, Dec. 1966, p. 1258.
C371 Design of Steel Transmission Pole
Structures, ASCE Manual No. 72, 2nd ed.
Task Committee on Steel Transmission Pole
Structures of the Structural Division of the
American Society of Civil Engineers, 1990.
1381 “Design of Timber H-Frame Structures,”
Unpublished Paper by Tarun R. Naik,
University of Wisconsin-Extension.
[391 Federal Register, vol. 51, no. 7, Jan. 10,
1986,p. 1334.
1401 “Fundamental Principles for the
Insulation of Power Lines,” CIGRE Report No.
222, 1956, Rathsman, B. G. and Sandstrom, U.
1411 Gere, James M. and Carter, Winfred 0.
“Critical Buckling Loads for Tapered
Columns,” ASCE paper no. 3490, Feb. 1962.
1421 G h a n n o u m , E l i a s . “Improving
Transmission Line Design by Using
Reliability Techniques,’’ IEEE, PES 1984,
Winter Meeting, Dallas, Texas, Feb. 1984.
[431 Guide for Design of Steel Transmission
Towers, 2nd ed., American Society of Civil
Engineers Task Committee on Updating
lEEE
U751
Manual 52, ASCE Manuals and Reports on
Engineering Practice, no. 52.1°
1441 Guidelines f o r Transmission Line
Structural Loading, American Society of Civil
Engineers Committee on Electrical Trans-
mission Structures, 1984.
[451 Hespelt, G. G. “Plastic Ground Wire
Fasteners Stop Pole Fires,” Electrical World,
Nov. 1, 1977.
[461 “Impulse Flashover of Combinations of
Line Insulators, Air Gaps a n d Wood
Structural Members,” AIEE Committee Report,
Transactions Part 111, Power Apparatus and
Systems, vol. 75, Apr. 1956, p. 16.
1471 Lusk, G. E. and Mak, S. T. “EHV Wood
Pole Fires: Their Cause and Potential Cures.”
paper F75 512-4 in IEEE Transactions on
Power Apparatus and Systems, vol. PAS-95,
no. 2, MarJAp. 1976, p. 621.
[481 Modern Timber Engineering, Schfield,
W. F. and O’Brien, W. H., Southern Pine
Association.
[491 Nelson, W. R. and Schlinger, W. R.
“Construction Practices for the Elimination
and Mitigation of RI and TVI Sources from
Overhead Power Lines,” included in IEEE
pub. 76 CH1163-5-PWR, “The Location,
Correction and Prevention of RI and TVI
Sources from Overhead Power Lines,” IEEE,
New York, 1976.”
[501 NFPA T901, N a t i o n a l Design
Specification for Wood Construction (1986)
and supplement, Design Values for Wood
Construction (1988).12
[511 Ohio Brass Hi-Tension News, vol. 48, nos.
9, 10, and 11,dated Sept., Oct., and Nov. 1979.
’ O A S C E publications can be obtained from the American
Society of Civil Engineers, 345 East 47th Street, New York,
NY 10017.
“This publication is no longer available for sale from
IEEE. For copies of this paper, contact the Engineering
Societies Library, 345 E. 47th St.,New York, NY 10017.
‘-A publications can be obtained from the National
Forest Products Association, 1250 Connecticut Ave. NW,
Washington, DC, 20036.
IEEE TRIALUSE DESIGN GUIDE FOR
[52] “Properties of Southern Pine in Relation to
Strength Grading of Dimensioned Lumber,”
USFS Research Paper FPL-6V, July 1966,
Doyle, D. V. and Markwardt, L. J.
[531 REA Bulletin 62-1, Design Manual for
High-Voltage Transmission Lines, US Dept.
of Agriculture, Aug. 1980.13
[541 Ross, P. M. “Burning of Wood Structures
by Leakage Currents,” AIEE Transactions,
vol. 66, 1947, p. 279.
[551 SPIB Standard Grading Rules for
Southern Pine Lumber, 1977 ed.14
[561 “Strength of Round Timbers in
Compression Parallel t o the Grain,” Dept. of
Civil, Environmental a n d Architectural
Engineering, Univ. of Colorado, Boulder,
Colorado, Oct. 1983, Goble, G. G., Uvrego, I.,
Stark, C., and Phillips, G.
[571 “Suggested Practices for Raptor Protection
on Power Lines -The State-of-the-& in 1981,
Raptor Research Report No. 4, 1981,”
Olendofl, Richard R. and Miller, A. D.15
[581 “Teco Design Manual for Timber
Connector Construction,” Timber Engineer-
ing Company, Washington, DC 20015.
[591 “Timber Connector Joints, Their Strength
and Design,” Scholten, J. A., Technical Bulle-
tin no.865, Forest Products Laboratory, US
Department of Agriculture.
[601 Timber Construction Manual, 3rd ed.,
American Institute of Timber Construction,
New York: John Wiley 8z Sons, 1985.
[611 Timber Design and Construction
Handbook, Timber Engineering Company,
McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc.
-
13REA publications can be obtained from the Rural
Electrification Administration, Publications, 12th and
Independence Ave., Washington, DC 20250.
14SPIB publications can be obtained from the Southern
Pine Inspection Bureau, 4709 Scenic Hwy., Pensacola, FL
32504.
I5This publication is available from the Department of
Veterinary Biology, University of Minnesota, St. Paul,
MN 55101 or from the Raptor Research Foundation, Inc.,
Department of Zoology - 167 WIBD, Brigham Young
University, h v o , UT 84601.

WOOD TRANSMISSION STRUCTURES
[621 Transmission Line Design Manual,
Farr, Holland H., US Department of the
Interior, Denver, CO, 1980.
1631 WCLIB no. 16, Standard Grading Rules
for West Coast Lumber, 1989 (revised).16
1641 Wood Handbook: Wood As a n
Engineering Material, Forest Products
Laboratory, US Department of Agriculture,
Handbook no. 72,revised August 1974.
[651 Wood Structures: A Design Guide and
C o m m e n t a r y , American Society of Civil
Engineers, 1975.
1.3 Definitions
1.3.1 General. The reader should be aware
of the terms distribution line, transmission
line, and line as used throughout this design
guide. A distribution line is usually consid-
ered t o be a radial line of lower voltage; a
transmission line is usually considered t o be
a line of higher voltage that connects substa-
tions together; and the term line may refer to
either. The design engineer should determine
which are appropriate for each particular ap-
plication. Note that the term overhead ground
wire is used in this document; it is also known
as overhead shield wire or overhead static
wire. These terms are equal.
13.2 Glossary of Terms
anisotropic* Of unequal physical properties
along different axes.
bearing plates. Plates of large surface area
attached to the structure below -
mound surface
to prevent Or to increase the bearing
capability in unstable soils.
bog anchor*A anchor Of large surface
area for use in unstable soils.
bog shoe*A piece of such 8s a section
of pole or railroad tie, attached horizontally
the ground surface t o increase the
bearing area in unstable soils. Usually four
16WCLI13 publications can be obtained from the West
Coast Inspection Bureau, P.O. Box 23145, Portland, OR
97223.
-
-
r-
IEEE
Std 751
shoes are installed, one on each side of the
pole, at ninety degrees to each other.
bole. The main stem of a tree of substantial
diameter. Roughly capable of yielding sawn
timber, veneer logs, o r poles.
bonding. The electrical interconnecting of
conductive parts, designed t o maintain a
common electrical potential.
bunker material. Expendable material used
for protecting commodities during shipping or
hauling.
cambium. A layer of delicate meristematic
tissue between the inner bark and the wood that
produces all secondary growth in plants and is
responsible for the annual rings of wood.
cant hook. A tool similar to a peavey (except
that it has a blunt end) used to turn a pole or
stabilize it if necessary during installation.
check. (1)A separation along the grain of the
wood, the separation occurring across the
annual rings (AWPA Std M5-77,included in
[321),and (2)A lengthwise separation of the
wood that usually extends across the rings of
annual growth and commonly results from
stresses set up in wood during seasoning
(Wood Handbook [641).
cross-grainedwood. Wood in which the fibers
deviate from a line parallel to the ,&des of the
piece. Cross-grain may be either diagonal or
spiral grainor a combination of the two (Wood
Handbook [64]).
dap. To cut and form a in timbers for
making a joint.
davit arm. A rigid upswept cantilever arm
used to support an insulator string.
distribution line. Electric power lines that
distribute power from a main source sub-
station to consumers, usually a t a voltage of
34.5 kV or less.
dunnage material. See bunker material.
gaff* used to and poles*
gaff hook.
IT
IEEE
Std 751 lEEE TRIALUSE DESIGN GUIDE FOR

gain. Flat surface cut into side of pole to facili-

tate connections. Also a connection device to
accomplish the same purpose without cutting P P P
the pole.

isokeraunic map. A map showing equal levels

of thunderstorm activity. Usually shown in
mean annual days of thunderstorm activity.
Also: isoceraunic. See: keraunic level.

keraunic level. Number of thunderstorm days

in a given area for a specified period of time.
Also: ceraunic. See: isokeraunic map.

layup. The preparation of wood strips for P P P

gluing together. (4 (b) (C)
k=l .O k=0.5 k=2.0
plane of contraflexure. The plane of con- P P
traflexure in an H-frame structure locates the
inflection points for each pole. An inflection
point is a point in the pole that separates an
outward pole curvature from an inward pole
curvature. This is also a location of zero
moment.

rake. An inclination from the perpendicular.

raptor. A bird of prey.

resistance-reductionfactor. A number usu- b

ally less than or equal to 1 used in LRFD. (d1
Called strength-reduction factor in this guide. k=0.67

rock socket. A hole drilled in good rock for

installing either expanding or grouted guy
anchors. Fig 1
EEective Length Factors, k
ultimate strength. The rated breaking
strength of a material determined by the re-
sults of tests to destruction. ANSI American National Standards
Institute
undressed timber. Rough unsurfaced lumber. ASCE American Society of Civil
Engineers
unsupported length. Unbraced length of a ASTM American Society for Testing and
column (see Fig 1). Materials
AWPA American Wood-Preserver’s
uplift plates. See: bearing plates. Association
AWPI American Wood-Preserver’s
Institute
1.33 List of Abbmviations DF Douglas Fir
AITC American Institute of Timber EPA Environmental Protection Agency
Construction EPRI Electric Power Research Institute
AMORGL Adjusted Modulus of Rupture at the IEC International Electrotechnical
Ground Line Commission

14

1 I

WOOD TRANSMISSION STRUCTURES
IEEE I n s t i t u t e of Electrical a n d
Electronics Engineers
NDS National Design Specification (see
NF'PA T901[501)
NEC National Electric Code
NESC National Electrical Safety Code
OSHA Occupational Safety and Health
Administration
PS Product Standard
REA Rural Electrification
Administration
SPIB Southern Pine Inspection Bureau
SYP Southern Yellow Pine
USDA United S t a t e s Department of
Agriculture
WCLIB West Coast Lumber Inspection
Bureau
2. strudureApplication
2.1 General. Wood is a highly versatile
structural material that has been used exten-
sively in transmission lines a t voltages up to
and including 345 kV. Wood structures may
be composed of undressed timber for poles or
crossarms, sawn timber for crossarms and
braces, and laminated members for a range of
applications.
2.2 Wood Benefits. The extensive use of wood
in North America for transmission lines is
primarily due to economics. I t may be more
economical to build a transmission line of
wood than to build a line using other materials
for voltages of 345 kV and below. In addition to
its cost-effectiveness, wood has other benefits
that should be considered by a design engi-
neer. Some of these benefits include the fol-
lowing:
(1) Design Benefits. Wood structures pro-
vide flexible mechanical systems. The
effect of impact and vibration loads on
the structure are reduced because of the
high energy-absorption characteristics
of wood. The design engineer may se-
lect wood because it is readily avail-
able. The lead time for replacement of
structures that fail under unexpected
loads can be extremely short. Wood
structures have been used as temporary
replacement structures for lines at 500
and 765 kV because of their avail-
ability.
IEEE
Std 751
Construction Benefits. Although cer-
tain precautions must be taken in the
erection of a wood structure, con-
struction crews find wood to be easy t o
handle. Holes can be field-drilled in
the poles to accommodate assembly.
Most structures can be assembled on the
ground a n d lifted into place.
Foundation preparation is usually sim-
ple and inexpensive.
Environmental and Aesthetic
Considerations. The use of wood need
not deplete natural resources because
wood, if properly managed, is a renew-
able resource. A wood transmission
line may be more acceptable than a line
built of another material t o today's en-
vironmentally aware public. A trans-
mission line using wood structures
generally has a low profile, and the
color of a natural o r stained wood
structure allows it to blend in with its
surroundings.
2.3 Wood Limitations. Wood as a structural
material has certain limitations of which the
design engineer should be aware. Some
limitations can be eliminated by utilizing
wood structure systems composed of laminated
members, which can be custom-fabricated for
the application required. Some of the design
limitations include the following:
(1) Variability of Properties. The strength
and stiffness properties of wood will
vary because wood is biological in
origin. Wood i s anisotropic with
differing properties in the longitudinal,
radial, and transverse directions.
(2) Strength Limitations. Strength is gov-
erned by the physical properties of the
species of trees available for structures.
The strength of wood transmission
structures can be increased and vari-
ability decreased by using laminated
members. Increased strength is accom-
plished mainly by increasing the phys-
ical dimensions of the structural
member. Pole classes greater than H-6
are generally not readily available a t
the heights required for transmission
structures. If large quantities of very
heavy class poles are required to meet
strength requirements, the design
engineer may wish to evaluate

alternative designs such as laminated
or nonwood structures. Crossarm ca-
pacity can be increased by the use of
hanger bracing, knee bracing, double
crossarms, spar arms (poles), or lami-
nated or nonwood crossarms.
Strain Limitation. A consideration
associated with wood is its tendency to
acquire a permanent set (creep) when
subjected to a constant load. Permanent
set can reduce structural capacity, de-
crease clearances, or become visually
objectionable.
Maintenance Considerations. The
strength and cross section of wood dete-
riorates with time. This should be ac-
counted for in the original design.
Continuous a n d carefully planned
maintenance programs are a neces-
si ty.
Guying Requirements. The guying of
wood structures is used primarily to
resist conductor and overhead ground
wire tension loads a t angles and dead
ends. Guying is sometimes needed t o
increase transverse or longitudinal
structure strength and t o prevent pole
uplift and reduced deflections a t road
crossings. Land-use restrictions t h a t
reduce the available guy lead may
preclude the use of guys and require the
designer to use a nonwood structure.
Terrain Requirements. Severe side
slopes restrict the use of wood structures
a t guyed structure locations where the
side slope will not permit installation of
guys and anchors. Areas where poor
soil conditions occur may preclude the
use of direct embedment of wood poles
and may require the need for special
foundations and/or nonwood struc-
tures. Some structural design consid-
erations used to overcome soil restric-
tions include bog shoes, swamp cradles,
and uplift plates.
3. (3macteristia ofwood
3.1 Physical Characteristics. There are more
than 180 species of trees grown in North
America t h a t may be considered commer-
cially important. However, the number suit-
able for structural purposes is relatively
16
JEEE TRIALUSE DESIGN GUIDE FOR
small. Nineteen distinct species have pub-
lished mechanical properties (see [241 through
[261 and [561); these are ash, beech, birch, cedar,
chestnut, cypress, elm, fir, gum, hemlock,
hickory, larch, maple, oak, pecan, pine,
poplar, redwood, spruce, and tupelo. Of these,
three species have the size, durability (when
treated), and the availability necessary to be
used for transmission structures. These are
the southern pine group, which grow in the
Atlantic and Gulf States, and as far north as
West Virginia and Kentucky; western red
cedar; and Coastal Douglas fir (Inland
Douglas fir is not recommended by AWPA for
transmission structures), which grow in the
coastal region of Washington, Oregon,
California, and British Columbia.
It is not necessary for the engineer to know a
great deal about the chemical composition of
wood in using any species in the design of
transmission structures. More important t o
the design engineer are the mechanical prop-
erties and the factors affecting their strength
and stiffness.
3.1.1 Directional Properties. Wood has dif-
ferent mechanical properties with respect to its
three principal axes because of the orientation
of wood cells and the manner in which a tree
grows. These axes, shown in Fig 2, are longi-
tudinal (A,), radial (Ar), and tangential (At).
The differences among properties in the
radial and tangential directions are seldom of
practical importance in most structural
designs; it i s usually sufficient t o
differentiate only between properties that are
parallel and those that are perpendicular to the
grain. Parallel t o grain is along the
longitudinal axis, and perpendicular to grain
is on the radial and tangential axes.
3.13 Growth Rings. The concentric rings,
as shown in Fig 2, start at the center or pith of
the tree and continue outward toward the bark.
Each ring represents the growth of the tree
during one growth period. Growth is in the
cambium (layer just inside the bark) and
tends to push the bark outward. It is possible to
distinguish one growth ring from another
when trees grow in a variable climate, because
the cells formed late in the growing season are
different from those formed early in the
growing season.
3.1.3 Earlywood and Latewood. Each growth
ring is divided into two layers. The inner one,
called earlywood (spring wood), is developed

WOOD TRANSMISSION STRUCTURES
_-
t"' /At
Fig2
The Three Principal Axes of Wood
during the first part of the growing season. It
is composed of large cells with thin walls and
is usually lighter in color than latewood. The
outer layer, called latewood (summer wood),
consists of smaller cells with thicker walls
and is the darker portion of the annual ring. It
is heavier and stronger than earlywood and
h a s an important effect upon the strength
properties. Earlywood and latewood differ
significantly in their preservative treatment
properties.
3.1.4 Density. Density of a particular piece
of wood is influenced by the rate of tree growth
and the amount of latewood present. This
means that the strength of a piece of clear wood
is dependent on the amount and distribution of
the cell walls throughout the cross section.
The number of growth rings per inch
radially and the proportion of latewood in the
cross section are considered as part of the
specification when grading lumber and are
part of the specification in ANSI 05.1-1987 [91.
Material having the specified minimum
number of rings per inch is termed close-
grained, and material that has in addition one
third or more of latewood is termed dense.
3.1.5 Slope of Grain. Where the fibers of a
wood member are not parallel to the edge of the
piece, cross grain exists and the longitudinal
tensile and compressive stress have compo-
nents acting across the grain. Wood is weak-
-- est across the grain, and therefore, limits to the
amount of slope of cross grain have been set.
The slope of grain is expressed as a ratio be-
17
BEE
Std 751
SLOPE OF GRAIN
1 IN 12
Fig 3
Measurementof Slope of Grain
tween a one-inch deviation of the grain from
the side of the piece and the distance within
which this deviation occurs. Figure 3 illus-
trates a 1:12 slope of grain in a crossarm.
When the fibers in wood poles are not paral-
lel with the sides of the pole but twist around the
pole, the condition is called spiral grain.
Spiral grain is limited as specified by ANSI
05.1-1987 [91.
3.1.6 Knots. Knots are the remains of
branches in the trunk or bole of a tree. There
are many types and classifications of knots,
depending on the appearance of the knot on a
sawn surface and whether or not the fibers of
the knot are intergrown with the tree trunk. A
knot on the face of a sawn surface is merely a
section of the entire knot, and its shape de-
pends on the direction in which it is cut.
Round, oval, or spike knots are possible. The
knot is classed as intergrown when the limb of
the tree is alive when it is cut. However, if the
limb dies and the trunk continues to grow, the
dead limb will be enclosed, which means that
the fibers of the knot and the trunk are discon-
tinuous. The result is called an encased knot
and often these knots become loose during sea-
soning.
The occurrence of knots in a structural
member does not necessarily mean that the
piece will not give adequate performance.
Knots do affect the strength because it is neces-
sary for the grain to deviate from its regular
direction in passing around them and because
of the checking that may occur in and around
IEEE
Std 751
them during seasoning. The weakening effect
is greater when the sawn piece is in tension
rather than compression, and the influence on
bending strength is dependent on the location
of the knot and the area it occupies in the cross
section.
Knot limitations for utility poles are set by
the West Coast Lumber Inspection Bureau (see
[631), American Lumber Standards, ANSI
05.1-1987 [91, and the Southern Pine Inspection
Bureau (see 1551).
3.1.7 Moisture Content. A tree develops in
the presence of moisture and throughout its life
it is moist or “green.” The amount of moisture
in a live tree varies among species, in
individual trees, and in different parts of the
same tree.
Moisture Content (MC) is the weight of the
water contained in wood, expressed as a per-
centage of the weight of the oven-dry wood. An
oven-dry condition is reached when no further
loss of weight is experienced in oven drying.
As wood loses moisture, there is a point where
the water in the cell cavity has evaporated but
the cell wall is still saturated. This is known
as the Fiber Saturation Point (FSP). FSP oc-
curs at approximately 27 to 30% MC (this can
vary significantly with different species). As
the MC is reduced below the FSP, shrinkage
occurs at significantly different rates along
the different axis. Also, the strength and stiff-
ness increase with reduction in MC.
Wood gives off or takes on moisture from the
surrounding atmosphere with change in tem-
perature and relative humidity until it attains
a balance relative to the ambient conditions.
The MC a t this point is known a s the
Equilibrium Moisture Content (EMC). Before
preservative treatment (except creosote), the
MC of wood must be brought below the fiber sat-
uration point. Wood is brought below the FSP to
provide space for preservative in the wood, and
t o eliminate favorable growth conditions for
fungi. Wood is also brought to the EMC to fur-
ther reduce checking.
Because of the extreme difficulty of drying
large wood members, only the surface area of
a pole will usually be near EMC. In service, as
the pole dries, the surface dries faster than the
interior and shrinks more, resulting in
checks. These checks often allow fungi to en-
ter the pole in later years.
3.1.8 Heartwood and Sapwood. The central
portion of the trunk and branches of a tree that
IEEE “RIAGUSE DESIGN GUIDE FOR
surrounds the pith is called the heartwood. It
consists entirely of inactive tissue. The sap-
wood, the portion of the trunk between the
heartwood and the bark, contains some living
cells. All wood is formed as sapwood, and, as
the tree continues to grow, the inner portion
gradually becomes heartwood. Usually, the
heartwood is darker in color than the sapwood,
but in some species there is little difference
between them. The heartwoods of the southern
pines and Douglas fir are not stronger than the
sapwoods, but the heartwoods are more resis-
tant to decay. The heartwood of many species,
especially western red cedar, contains extrac-
tives that make it decay resistant.
3.1.9 Decay. Unless wood is given preserva-
tive treatment or unless it contains a high per-
centage of naturally durable heartwood, it will
decay. Cycles of wetting and drying encour-
age the growth of wood-destroying fungi.
In the earliest, or incipient, stage of decay,
the fungi spread through the untreated wood in
all directions from the point of inoculation.
During this state, there is no definite visible
dissolution of the infected piece or measurable
loss of density.
Once decay has progressed beyond the incip-
ient stage to the intermediate stage, the out-
ward appearance of the wood is more percepti-
bly altered. The cell walls are disintegrated
and the wood undergoes marked changes in
strength, color, texture, and continuity.
Fruiting bodies may begin to grow on the sur-
face in the late or advanced stage of decay, and
the wood may become punky, soft and spongy,
pitted, or crumbly.
3.1.10 Seasoning. Well-developed tech-
niques have been established for removing the
large amounts of moisture normally present
in green wood. Seasoning is essentially a dry-
ing process t h a t removes moisture and re-
lieves residual stresses. The four most com-
mon seasoning methods are air seasoning,
kiln drying, Boulton drying, and steaming.
The most common method of preparing
green lumber and timber for treatment is to
stack them out of doors with dry sticks between
the layers and allow them t o air season.
Unseasoned wood that is exposed to the open
air, but protected from rain, will gradually
dry out until it comes into approximate equi-
librium with the average relative humidity of
the air. This process is very time consuming;
therefore, air seasoning is often used in

WOOD TRANSMISSION STRUCTURES
combination with artificial seasoning. In an
,--.
attempt to sterilize the pole from decay, all air-
seasoned poles should be conditioned at time of
treating so that the pith center of the pole is
heated for at least 2 h at a temperature of not
less than 150 OF.
The kiln-drying process consists of placing
green wood in a chamber. Temperature, hu-
midity, and air flow in this chamber are con-
trolled to reduce the moisture content of the
material. This process greatly speeds up the
drying time compared to air seasoning and
produces more constant and reliable results.
The Boulton process places green or par-
tially seasoned wood in the treating cylinder
and submerges it in hot oil. The temperature is
maintained while a vacuum is gradually ap-
plied. Since the boiling point of water is lower
under a partial vacuum than at atmospheric
pressure, drying can proceed rather rapidly
even at temperatures below 212 O F . This
method allows the user to condition wood for
treatment at temperatures considerably below
those required in the steaming-and-vacuum
process. Boultonizing is used primarily for
Douglas fir and is also used to sterilize air-
- seasoned wood.
In the steaming process, also known as ster-
ilization, used primarily for southern pine, the
green wood is steamed in a treating cylinder
for several hours. A vacuum is immediately
applied when the steaming is completed.
During the steaming period, as the tempera-
ture of the outer surface of the wood approaches
212 O F and when the vacuum is applied, the
water is forced out or evaporated. The steam-
ing and vacuum usually reduce the moisture
content of green wood and the heating assists
greatly in getting the preservative to penetrate.
3.1.11 Incising. Incising consists of mak-
ing shallow, slit-like holes in the surface of
material to be treated. These holes allow
deeper and more uniform preservative treat-
ment. Incising should be as required to
achieve the necessary retention and pene-
tra tion.
3.1.12 Treating. Wood can be protected from
the attack of decay fungi by applying selected
chemicals as wood preservatives. Wood
preservatives fall into two general classes: (1)
oil-borne preservatives using creosote, pen-
- tachlorophenol, or copper or zinc naphthenate
and (2) water-borne preservatives ACA,
ACZA, a n d CCA. Treatment should be
IEEE
Std 751
specified with reference to the applicable
American Wood Preserver’s Association
(AWPA) Standard for technical specifications
for the preservatives and standard retentions
(see [321).
Creosote was one of the first substances used
for treatment of poles and railroad ties.
Creosote is a complex mixture of hydrocar-
bons, distilled from coal tar. It is a time-tested
effective preservative that is still widely used.
Creosote h a s some objectionable character-
istics, however - it has a strong odor, it stains
wood a dark color, and creosote-treated wood
cannot be painted. Creosote should conform to
AWPA Std P1 E321.
Pentachlorophenol (penta) contains chlori-
nated phenols and should conform t o AWPA
Std P8 1323.
The hydrocarbon solvents for introduction
of the preservative into the wood should meet
the requirements of AWPA Std P9 [321, Types
A, B, C, D, and E as follows:
(1) Type A. The original heavy oils used as
solvents have behavior and properties
similar to those of creosote products.
The major use has been in poles, where
oil moves down the pole and out into the
soil at the ground line. Creosote also
has this characteristic.
(2) Type B. This process uses Liquified
Petroleum Gas (LPG) a s the solvent for
the penta. After the wood is treated, the
excess solvent is drawn off, leaving
penta in solid form in the wood. This
wood is dry to the touch and can be
painted or stained.
(3) Type C. This process uses lighter oil
solvents with greater evaporation,
leaving the surface fairly dry and
lighter in color.
(4) Type D. Hydrocarbon Solvent.
( 5 ) Type E. Water.
The most commonly used water-borne
treatments are Chromated Copper Arsenate
(CCA) for southern pine, Ammonical Copper
Zinc Arsenate (ACZA), a n d Ammonical
Copper Arsenate (ACA) for Douglas fir. These
treatments should conform to AWPA Std P5
[321.
Copper and Zinc Naphthenate are not under
the restrictive-use provision issued by the
Environmental Protection Agency for cre-
osotes, penta, or water-borne arsenic combina-
tions (see [391).
IEEE
9td 751
Wood treated with water-borne preserva-
tives is clean and paintable after seasoning.
The flammability of wood treated with water-
borne preservatives is less than that of wood
freshly treated with an oil.
Corrosion of fasteners may be a problem
if treating formulations containing con-
stituents that may form ionizing compounds
within the wood are used. These constituents
will react with each other t o form free
ionic compounds on a n d below t h e
surface of the pole and have been associ-
IEEE TRIALUSE DESIGN GUIDE FOR
ated with some corrosion problems on metal
hardware.
3 2 Mechanical Characteristics
38.1 Wood Poles. The major material prop-
erties of interest in the design of wood poles are
bending strength and Modulus of Elasticity
(MOE).
Recommended design strengths currently
used for wood poles are specified in ANSI
05.1-1987 [91. The strengths presented in ANSI
05.1-1987 are tabulated in Tables 3.13.4.

Table 3.1
ANSI 05.1-1987Designated Fiber Stress
Fiber
stress
Treatment Group Genus and Species (psi)

Treatment Group A (air seasoned)

Cedar, northern white (eastern) Thuja occidentalis 4Ooo
Spruce, Englemann* Picea englemannii 5600
Cedar, western red Thuja plicata 6Ooo
Pine, ponderosa Pinus ponderosa 6Ooo
Fir, western (true fir) 6600
California red* Abies magnifica
Grand* Abies grandis
Noble* Abies procera
Pacific silver* Abies amabilis
White* Abies concolor
Pine, jack Pinus banksiana 6600
Pine, lodgepole Pinus contorta 6600
Pine, red (Norway) Pinus resinosa 6600
Red w00 d* Sequoia sempervirens 6600
Spruce, Sitka* Picea sitchensis 6600
Spruce, white* Picea glauca 6600
Cedar, Alaska yellow Chamaecyparis nootkatensis 7400
Hemlock, western* Tsuga heterophylla 7400
Douglas fir, interior north Pseudotsuga menziesii m
Treatment Group B (Boulton drying)
Douglas fir, coastal Pseudotsuga menziesii m
Larch, western Larix occidentalis 8400
Treatment Group C (steam conditioned)
Pine, southern m
Loblolly Pinus taeda
Longleaf Pinus palustris
Shortleaf Pinus echinata
Slash Pinus elliottii
Treatment Group D (kiln drying)
Cedar, western red Thuja plicata 6Ooo
Douglas fir, interior north Pseudotsuga menziesii m
Douglas fir, coastal Pseudotsuga menziesii m
Larch, western Larix occidentalis 8400
Pine, jack Pinus banksiana 6600
Pine, lodgepole Pinus contorta 6600
Pine, ponderosa Pinus ponderosa 6Ooo
Pine, red Pinus resinosa 6600
Pine, southern
Loblolly Pinus taeda m
Longleaf Pinus palustris m
Shortleaf Pinus echinata m
Not i n common use according to Wood Preservation Statistics, Forest Service, US Department of Agriculture, 1961.

20
 EEE
WOOD TRANSMISSION STRUCTURES Std 751

Table 3.2
Ground-LineStrength and Stiffhess Values for New, Green Poles
Less Than 50 ft Long [(U, (2)l

AMORGL (3) MOE ( 5 )

Sample Mean Sample Mean
Species Size (psi) cov (4) Size (106 psi) cov (4)
Northern white cedar 23 4100 0.173 - -
Western red cedar 387 6 310 0.204 1.59 0.224
Pacific silver fir 51 6380 0.173 1.67 0.215
Douglas fir
Coastal 118 96B 0.135 3.35 0.194
Interior 99 8020 0.179 - -
Western hemlock 151 7530 0.180 2.23 0.216
Western larch 48 loo00 0.127 2.94 0.190
Jack pine 189 7x0 0.190 - -
hdgepole pine 218 6650 0.194 1.84 0.223
Red pine (6) 331 6 310 0.174 1.63 0.234
Southern pine (7) 143 10190 0.169 2.68 0.201
White spruce 56 5520 0.208 1.44 0.239

N O T E S (1) Data were adapted from ANSI 05.1-1987 191 and are based on class minimum circumferences (rather t h a n
measured circumferences as provided in ANSI 05.1-1987) a t the tip and at 6 ft from the butt and linear taper between these
points.
(2) Values must be adjusted using the appropriate factors from Table 3.4.
(3) AMORGL = Adjusted Modulus of Rupture a t the Ground Line.
(4) COV = Coefficient of Variation.
( 5 ) MOE = Modulus of Elasticity.
(6) ANSI 05.1-1987. Red pine data were supplemented with Canada Corporation and Michigan Utilities Association test
results.
(7) Longleaf, shortleaf, slash, a n d loblolly pines.

Table 3.3
Ground-LineStrengthand Stiffness Values for New, Green Poles, 50 ft and Longer,
Used in Unguyed, SinglePole Structures Only Nl), (211

AMORGL (3) MOE ( 5 )

Sample Mean Mean
Species Size (psi) cov (4) (lo6 Psi) cov (4)
Southern pine (6) 120 8430 0.206 2.51 0.184
Douglas fir
(Coastal) 165 7860 0.144 2.64 0.182
Western red cedar 100 5200 0.192 1.59 0.229

NOTES: (1)Data are based on class minimum circumferences at the tip and a t 6 ft from the butt and linear taper between
these points.
(2) Values must be adjusted using the appropriate factors from Table 3.5. Height correction is not required for Table 3.3
AMORGL values.
(3) AMORGL = Adjusted Modulus of Rupture at the Ground Line.
(4) COV = Coefficient of Variation.
(5) MOE = Modulus of Elasticity.
(6) Longleaf, shortleaf, slash, and loblolly pines.

21

--r
IEEE
Std 751 IEEE TRIALUSE DESIGN GUIDE FOR

Table 3.4
Ground-LineStrength and Stiffness Values for New, Green Poles, 50 ft and Longer,
Used in !3"sOtherThan Unsuyed SinglePole Structures[(U,(2)l

AMORGL (3) MOE (5)

Sample Mean Mean
Species Size (psi) cov (4) (10' psi) cov (4)
~~~~~

Southern pine (6) 120 9400 0.125 2.51 0.184

Douglas fir
(Coastal) 165 7860 0.144 2.64 0.182
Western red cedar 100 5200 0.192 1.59 0.229

NOTES (1)Data are based on class minimum circumferences at t h e tip and a t 6 ft from the butt and linear taper between
these points.
(2)Values must be adjusted using the appropriate factors from Tables 3.5. and 3.6.
(3)AMORGL = Adjusted Modulus of Rupture a t the Ground Line.
(4) COV = Coefficient of Variation.
(5)MOE = Modulus of Elasticity.
(6)Longleaf, shortleaf, slash, and loblolly pines.

Current design practices require discussion
of these methods for presenting strength char-
acteristics for wood poles:
(1) Deterministic
(2) Probabilistic using ANSI 05.1-1987pole
dimensions
(3) Probabilistic using a c t u a l pole
dimensions
3.2.1.1 Deterministic Design. Table 3.1
lists ANSI 05.1-1987 Designated Fiber Stress
values for use in conjunction with design in
accordance with the National Electrical Safety
Code (ANSI C2-1990[51).This is a determinis-
tic design approach with loads and strength
specified by code.
3.2.1.2 Probabilistic Design Using ANSI
05.1-1987 Pole Dimensions. Tables 3.2,3.3,
and 3.4 list Adjusted Modulus of Rupture at the
Ground Line (AMORGL) values for use with
probabilistic design methods. These values
represent the average breaking strength in
bending of actual wood pole samples adjusted
to a n equivalent breaking strength a t the
ground line as defined in ANSI 05.1-1987[91
and for the minimum dimensions specified
for each pole class in ANSI 05.1-1987.These
values should be adjusted using appropriate 4
values for treatment (Table 3.51,height (Table
3.6),exclusion limit, risk, age and decay, and
other factors, which are discussed in Section 5.

Table 3.5 Table 3.6

CamctionFactorsfor Pole Strength and Height-Ef€ectCormction Factors for
Stiffness AMORGL (1) and MOE (2) AMORGL (1)

Kiln Drying: 0.90 Species Mean cov (2)

Boultonizina: 0.90-1 (3) Southern pine 1-0.176h (3) 1+ 2.07% (3)
Douglas fir 1 1
Steaming (Coastal)
Conditioning: Western red 1 1
(Southern pine cedar
only)
NOTES: (1)AMORGL = Adjusted Modulus of Rupture at
NOTES: (1)AMORGL = Adjusted Modulus of Rupture a t the Ground Line.
the Ground Line. (2)COV = Coefficient of Variation.
(2) MOE = Modulus of Elasticity. (3)h =xIL whereX is the distance above ground line for
(3)ASTM D2555-8&1[13] suggests no correction factor which location of t h e AMORGL is computed, and L is the
required for boultonized Douglas fir poles. total above-ground length of the pole.
 IEEE
WOOD TRANSMISSION STRUCTURES std751

Table 3.7
Characteristics ofWood crossarmS

Modulus of Rupture (psi) Modulus of Elasticity Compression Parallel

(lo6 psi) to Grain (psi)
Mean cov (1) Mean cov (1) Mean cov (1)
Douglas fir (2) 7540 0.160 1.613 0.220 3610 0.180
Southern yellow pine
Grade l ( 3 ) 9020 0.240 1.145(4) 0.231 (4) 5430 0.145
Southern yellow pine
Grade l ( 3 ) 6510 0.316 1.145 (4) 0.265 (4) 4730 0.186

NOTES (1) COV = Coefficient of Variation.

(2) From [52].
(3) From [39].
(4) Average calculated from [52].

32.1.3 ProbabilisticDesign Using Actual 3.2.2.2 Probabilistic Design. Clear

Pole Dimensions. References [241 through [261 sample values are found in [131 and [521. The
list values for Modulus of Rupture (MOR) for values in Table 3.7 are suggested for use in
actual dimensions of wood pole species. These probabilistic design. Corrections should be
values should be used for applications in applied to these values in the same manner as
which actual pole dimensions are required, for wood poles.
- such as pole testing or evaluating the strength 3.2.3 Modulus of Elasticity. The MOE is a
of in situ structures. The design engineer measure of stiffness. Table 3.8 lists
should adjust these values using appropriate I$ recommended MOE values for deterministic
values similar to those used in 3.2.1.2 above, design of wood poles and crossarms. Tables
when using MOR to evaluate the strength of 3.2, 3.3, and 3.7 are used for probabilistic
existing structures for uprating. The design design.
engineer should take special care in deter-
mining the age and decay factor of the pole. In
place nondestructive testing or careful inspec-
tion of each structure should be used to evaluate Table 3.8
the age and decay factor for uprating existing Modulus of Elasticity Values for Use in
lines. Deterministic Design
3.2.2 Crossarms and Braces. Wood
crossarms and braces for transmission MOE*
structures are either Coastal Douglas fir or Pole Species (lo6 psi)
Southern yellow pine. Code values have not Western larch 1.710
been published for transmission crossarm or Southern yellow pine 1.800
wood brace design using either deterministic Douglas fir 1.920
Lodgepole pine 1.340
or probabilistic methods. Characteristics of Jack pine 1.220
concern for crossarms and braces are bending Red (Norway) pine 1.800
strength, MOE, and compression parallel to Ponderosa pine 1.260
Western red cedar 1.120
grain. Northern white cedar 0.800
3.2.2.1 Deterministic Design. It is Crossarm Species
~

recommended that a value of 7400 psi be used

for crossarm and brace strength in bending Douglas fir 1.920
Southern yellow pine 1.800
for NESC loading conditions (see ANSI C2-
7 1990 [51). *MOE = Modulus of Elasticity.
IEEE
Std 751
4.shuctul.el[loading
Loads to be applied in designing transmis-
sion line structures is an entire subject in it-
self, and has been covered in [MI. Users of this
design guide should make themselves famil-
iar with this publication.
Design engineers are further cautioned that
there are legislated codes that specify structure
loads. In the United States, the most familiar
is the National Electrical Safety Code (NESC)
(ANSI C2-1990 [51). Several states have enacted
codes that differ from the NESC, which may
influence the final structure design.
5. Structural Analysis and Design
5.1 Introduction
5.1.1 General. Two design methods are
discussed in this section: deterministic and
probabilistic. The methods differ in how loads
and strengths are determined. The methods of
analysis presented can be applied to either de-
sign method. The most common wood trans-
mission structures encountered are single-
pole structures and H-frame structures with
various crossarm, diagonal bracing, and guy
configurations. This section describes proce-
dures for analyzing and designing these
structures.
5.1.2 Load Resistance Factor Design
Format. The basic objectives of design are to
provide a structure with resistance greater
than the maximum load expected during the
design lifetime, with the desired level of safety
and reliability within acceptable economic
parameters. This objective can be expressed in
an LRFD format as
OR 2 YQ (Eq 5.1)
R is a measure of resistance in this equation.
The strength (capacity) factor, 9, is a multi-
plier usually less than or equal to 1, which
limits R to account for the variability of the re-
sistance property (strength, stiffness) consid-
ered. Q represents either a load or a load effect
(stress, deflection) with the same units as R. y
is a load factor greater than or equal to 1 that
compensates for uncertainty in the definition
of loads and assumptions made in the analy-
sis. The and y factors, and the standard val-
ues of R and Q, are based on judgment, past
practice, and on probabilistic studies.
24
lEEE TRIALUSE DESIGN GUIDE FOR
5.1.3 Resistance and Load Values (Rand
Q).For a wood pole designed in bending, R is
the Adjusted Modulus of Rupture a t the Ground
Line (AMORGL), and Q is the calculated
bending stress at the ground line for a given
load (CQ.
AMORGL is the calculated bending stress
level a t the ANSI 05.1-1987 [91 specified
ground-line location and adjusted to the
minimum dimensions specified in ANSI
05.1-1987. This value is determined a t the
failure load, regardless of where the failure
occurred, and is not the actual stress at the
point of failure on the measured cir-
cumferences of the pole. AMORGL values
shown are valid only when designing new
wood structures assuming minimum pole
dimensions specified by ANSI 05.1-1987. The
design engineer is cautioned t h a t when
analyzing a structure using actual pole
dimensions, the values shown in Tables 3.2
and 3.4 of Section 3 should not be used (see 1243
through [261).
5.2 Deterministic Design. At the time if this
guide’s writing, most wood transmission
structures in the United States are designed to
National Electrical Safety Code (NESC) re-
quirements (see ANSI C2-1990 [ll). Loads are
developed using NESC overload capacity fac-
tors for designated loading areas for wind and
ice loads and extreme wind loads. Strengths
are defined as designated fiber stresses speci-
fied in Table 3.1. The designated fiber stress
should be adjusted by the appropriate NESC
strength factor.
Several states have their own design codes,
which may vary considerably from the cur-
rent edition of the NESC; for example,
California uses CPUC-GO95 in place of the
NESC.
5.3 Probabilistic Design. Probabilistic design
incorporates constantly improved data on
loading conditions and material properties,
and results in design improvements that pro-
vide predictable reliability and possible eco-
nomic benefits. The results obtained from
probabilistic design concepts depend on the ac-
curacy of the data base used. These data can
accommodate local conditions. Current efforts
to better define the probabilities of load occur-
rence, and properties of material, are neces-
sary to improve design.

WOOD TRANSMISSION STRUCTURES
- Load and material resistance factors reflect
the desired level of reliability. They are de-
termined from statistical studies of available
data on loads and resistances, information on
the performance of existing structures, proba-
bilistic concepts, and importance and design
life of the structure.
The accuracy of probabilistic design is
improved a s additional data are accumulated
on the following:
(1) Time-strength data, effects of treatment
processes, moisture content, environ-
ment, service life, etc., on wood
strength
(2) Load occurrence and magnitude
(3) Variabilities in analysis
53.1 Resistance and Load Factors (+ and y).
Two methods are proposed for determining the
+,
resistance factor, and load factor, y.
5.3.1.1 Reliability Index Method. This
method was developed by EPRI's Project 1352-
2. Equations that determine resistance factors
have been developed in [171through 1191,[281,
and [291and are shown below.
(1) Resistance (strength) factors
+ = e(4.75 B V) (Eq 5.2)
where
V = Coefficient of variation
p = Reliability index
Coefficient of variations are provided
for the following variables: material
resistance, modulus of elasticity,
maximum load for wind, ice, and wind
in combination with ice.
(2) Load factors. Corresponding load
factors using the p reliability index are
given in [281.
The design factor values thus depend upon
the variabilities of the quantities involved and
the overall reliability level desired, a s indi-
cated by the value of p, the reliability index.
Higher reliability levels can be obtained by
increasing the reliability index. The coeffi-
cients of variation and the mean values of the
various quantities result from material and
component testing and from load survey pro-
grams. The selected p value must be based
- upon successful past designs (a process called
calibration) and other evidence of design ade-
quacy. Studies to date indicate that a reason-
IEEE
Std 751
able value to use for the reliability index p is
in the range of 2 to 3.5.
5.3.1.2 Exclusion Limit -Return Period
Method. This method is presented in the ASCE
Guidelines for Transmission Lines Structure
L o a d i n g [441. I t is similar to the method
presented in several reports issued by the
International Electrotechnical Commission
(IEC) and is discussed in [421.The method
determines the load factor y using a return
period method, and the resistance factor +
using the exclusion limit concept. (The
reliability index method discussed previously
combines these factors into a reliability in-
dex p.1
5.3.1.2.1 Load Factor. Reference [441
provides a discussion of loads and load factors
for transmission lines.
5.3.1.2.2 Resistance Factor. The design
engineer should determine a reasonable lower
exclusion limit for the particular service area
of from 5 to 15% and apply this to an assumed
normal distribution for wood poles and
crossarms. This range of lower exclusion
limits provides 95 to 85% probability that new
poles and crossarms have actual strengths
greater than the design strength.
The design strength should account for
material-strength distribution, age, decay,
conditioning method, and load duration.
Material-Resistance Factor The
material-resistance factor is dependent
on two variables - the coefficient of
variation (COV) of the strength and the
lower exclusion limit. The values
derived from the Gaussian probability
function are given in Table 5.1. This
table assumes a normal distribution for
strength. The lower exclusion limit is
selected a s explained above. The COV
of strength is obtained from test data of
the materials. Values of COV for round
wood poles loaded in bending are given
in Tables 3.2,3.3,or 3.4.Table 3.7gives
the values for crossarms.
Age and Decay Factor (+2). Age and
decay factors are dependent on the sus-
ceptibility to decay and on the mainte-
nance program of the utility. A good
pole maintenance program allows for a
less conservative strength factor,
whereas, a "replace 'em when they
break" program requires a more con-
servative factor (a lower+ value would
IEEE
Std 751 IEEE TRIALUSE DESIGN GUIDE FOR

Table 5.1
Material-ResistanceFactor (4)

Coeficient of Variation of Strength

(Percent)
Lower Exclusion Limit
(Risk of Not Meeting
Design Strength Percent) 5 7.5 lo 25 33 25 33 35
Material-Resistance Factor (@I)
2 0.90 0.85 0.80 0.69 0.59 0.49 0.39 0.28
5 0.92 0.88 0.84 0.75 0.67 0.59 0.51 0.43
lo 0.94 0.90 0.87 0.81 0.74 0.68 0.62 0.55
25 0.95 0.92 0.90 0.84 0.79 0.74 0.69 0.64

be more conservative than a higher Assume a 15% lower exclusion limit and
one). large transmission size poles. This
(3) conditioning Factor (+3). Conditioning means that 85% of the poles will have
factors are available in Table 3.5. strength exceeding the lower exclusion
(4) Load-Duration Factor ($4). Wood prop- limit.
erties were determined by tests with a From Table 3.3, the mean AMORGL
typical load duration of 5 min. The = 8430 psi, COV = 0.206,
strength properties predicted by 5-min From Table 5.1, a t risk = 15%, and
tests must be modified to account for the COV = 20%, the material-resistance
time-dependent behavior of wood. factor = 0.79,
When loads are applied for different With a good maintenance program, the
periods, the load duration factors given Age and Decay Factor +2 = 0.90 (+2 = 0.70
in Table 5.2 are recommended. is recommended for utilities that have no
5.3.2 Material Strength. Since wood is pole maintenance program),
anisotropic, the engineer should use the From Table 3.5, for steam-treated poles
appropriate fiber stresses for the relationship +3 = 0.85, and
of applied load direction to the direction of the For a wind load, a load-duration factor
wood grain (see [651). Mechanical properties a t +4 = 1,
angle (€3) t o the grain (radial or tangential, The final allowable design strength is
see Fig 2) can be obtained by Hankinson's determined a s
formula: 4& (8430)= 5095 psi
$4 (Eq 5.4)
At A, (Eq 5.3)
'-At Sin2€3 + A,
A -
Cos2 €3 Table 5 2
correctonFactorsfor Wood S h n g t h
where Based on Load Duration

A e = Property a t an angle €3 from the fiber Loading period $4

direction Impact 1.25
At = P r o p e r t y parallel t o grain
Five minutes 1.00
(longitudinal direction) (test values and wind
A, = Property perpendicular to grain and construction or
(radial direction) maintenance loads)
One day (ice) 0.80
5.3.3 Example. An example to determine Two months 0.70
design strengths for a typical Southern Yellow
Ten years 0.60
Pine (SYP)steam-treated pole with wind loads
Dead load (permanent) 0.50
follows:

26

1 1
'
 IEEE
WOOD TRANSMISSION STRUCTURES Std 751

- 5.3.4 Probabilistic Design Analysis. The

design formulas recommended in this guide
use the design loads found in 1441 and the
allowable strengths determined in this guide.
The probability functions for load and
strength are independent. Therefore, an ex- Q
clusion limit of 10 or 15% will result in higher
probability of withstand for a given line be-
cause the probability of having a combined
event of low strength and high load occurring
at any one structure simultaneously is lower
than the probability of any event occurring in-
dependently.
The design engineer’s judgment, based on
past operating experience, importance of the ’ MOMENT = PA
line, the system’s built-in redundancy, etc.,
determines a choice of exclusion limits and
loads.

5.4 Analysis and Design of Single-Pole

SbucturPs
5.4.1 General. The main design consider-
ation for most pole structures is to assure that
the applied loads with appropriate overload
factors do not exceed the designated fiber
stresses with appropriate strength-reduction
factors. For design engineers who do not have
access to computer resources, the analysis pro-
cedure for single unguyed wood poles consists
of idealizing the pole a s a cantilever beam and
computing stresses and deflections with ele-
mentary static formulas. Because this method
neglects the vertical load stresses and non- Fig4
linear effects of secondary moments from P-DeltaEfFect
deflections ( P - A effect; see Fig 4), the
computed response is lower than the actual
value. where
Structural analysis should consider the M = Resisting moment
geometrically n o n l i n e a r P - A effect. f b = Maximum allowable fiber stress in
However, the moment response is difficult to bending
compute manually because the additional S = Section modulus
moment caused by the deflection causes addi-
tional deflection, which increases the mo- For round solid timber sections in bending,
ment. This iterative process is not practical to M = 0.0982fbd3 (Eq 5.5b)
perform by hand. Recently developed com-
puter programs perform this process and pro- where d = Diameter.
vide accurate results. Before computer Moment capacities are reduced a t sections
methods are discussed, a hand method is where bolt holes, notches, etc., exist (see [531 for
described. details).
5.4.2 Resisting Moment. The basic strength 5.4.3 Primary Moment. The primary mo-
formula is as follows: ment is M = QL,where Q is the resultant of the
transverse loads on the overhead ground wire
M and phase wires, and L is the distance between
fb = (Eq 5.5a) the resultant load and the section considered.

27

__ -
T- I
IEEE
Std751 IEEE TRIALUSE DESIGN GUIDE FOR
The moment due to the eccentric vertical load d, = Ground-line diameter in inches
should be included if the conductors are ar- iameter at load in inches
ranged asymmetrically. Then $ 1 :oh1 vertical load in pounds
P,, = Critical buckling load in pounds
M = QL + Pe (Eq 5.54
NOTE: Eq 5.6 contains a multiplication factor to increase
where deflection due to secondary moments.

P = Vertical load The total vertical load is assumed t o act a t

e = Eccentricity
5.4.4 Deflections and Secondary Moment. A
secondary moment results from the lateral de-
flection of the pole at the load point relative to
the point where the moment is calculated. The
additional moment is equal to the vertical load
P multiplied by the lateral deflection A . The
secondary moment can be a significant per-
cent of the total moment and should not be ne-
glected. The deflection at A (the location of the
resultant load) can be approximated by the
equation
6.79 QL3 1 (Eq 5.6)
A = e dg3 dt P stress occurs where the diameter is 1.5 times
1 --
Pcr
where
A = Deflection in inches
Q = Loadin pounds
L = Distance from the load to the section
considered in inches
e = Modulus of elasticity in psi
the same point as the resultant load Q. The pole
is assumed to be plumb and fmed at the ground
line. This assumption is non-conservative.
The effects of movement below ground line
(foundation movement) aggravate the P - A
secondary moment, overall deflection, and
wire clearances. Normally, this is not consid-
ered in design. The design engineer should
consider foundation move-ment where large
vertical wire loads or critical right-of-way
clearances are encountered.
5.4.5 Location of Maximum Stress Point.
The maximum stress for single unguyed poles
supporting only lateral load seldom occurs a t
the ground line. Theoretically the maximum
the diameter a t the point of load (see Fig 5).
Because all data has been adjusted t o the
ground line for ANSI 0.5-1987 pole dimen-
sions, only stress a t the ground line should be
compared with AMORGL values. See the sam-
ple problem in the Appendix for analyzing a
single-pole structure.

Fig5
Flexural Stress Patterns for Uniformly Tapered Poles
10 INFORMATIONON
MAXIMUM STRESS
I I I
09

08

07 1.017

'
P
06
1.116
1.105

5 05
1.350

r
12
w 04
I

03
Mc 32PL
02

01

0
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 1 1 12 13 14 15

STRESS DIVIDED BY STRESS AT GROUND LINE

28

WOOD TRANSMISSION STRUCTURES
6.4.6 Computer Analysis. Consideration of
the nonlinear behavior of the interaction of
vertical loads and lateral deflections (caused
by wind and other lateral loads) can be aided
by the utilization of modem computer software
t o analyze pole structures (see [191, [231, and
[271). The nonlinear response of the pole t o
loads applied on any arrangement of
crossarms, conductors, and overhead ground
wires can be determined. Computer programs
provide a tool for use in the analysis of exist-
ing structures or the design of proposed struc-
tures.
High-speed computer programs are avail-
able to perform wood structure designs. The
choice of software and hardware is subject to
the likes and dislikes of the users, and no at-
tempt is made in this guide to recommend any
specific system.
Computer software provides the design
engineer with a powerful analytical tool for
structural design and analysis. Computer
programs allow the efficient evaluation of
large numbers of design cases and "what-if"
scenarios. They also allow more exact analy-
ses since the computer can account for factors
such a s geometric and material nonlineari-
ties in analysis that would be impractical in
day-to-day design procedures by hand.
It is recommended that a thorough check of
the program's calculations be performed be-
fore using any program. It is also recom-
mended that only design engineers with expe-
rience in structural design calculations use a
program. Computer programs are not a substi-
Fig 6
-
A s m e d H-frame Behavior
OUTSIDE
VEE-BRACES
PLANES OF
CONTRAFLEXURE
CROSSBRACE
(X)-BRACE)
- -
-7'
IEm
Std 751
tute for engineering knowledge; they are only
an aid in performing the calculations.
5.5 Analysis and Design of Braced (H-frame)
!ihudmw
5.5.1 Available Analysis Techniques. The
H-frame structure is a practical tangent wood
structure that utilizes two poles with various
arrangements of crossarm, X-bracing, and
vee-brace connections, making a fairly rigid
structure capable of resisting high transverse
loads. The H-frame structure is statically in-
determinate.
Various techniques available for analysis
of H-frame structures include (1) conven-
tional indeterminate structural analysis, and
(2) structural analysis by matrix methods.
Technical publications are available t h a t
give various methods for analyzing H-frame
structures (e.g., see [531 and [621).Computer
programs utilizing matrix methods of struc-
tural analysis (which can be adopted for H-
frame) are available (see [231, 1271, and [381).
See the sample problem in the Appendix for
analyzing an H-frame structure.
5.5.2 Statically Indeterminate Structural
Analysis. One assumption is made for each
degree of indeterminacy when analyzing a
statically indeterminate structure by approx-
imate methods. These assumptions are based
on logical interpretations of how the structure
will react to a given loading. It is assumed a
fully braced structure will behave as shown in
Fig 6 for H-frame structures with knee and
vee-brace s.
IEEE
W751 IEEE TRIALUSE DESIGN GUIDE FOR

dl
c

n
1
M
- Q

II

i
1-9
ACTUAL MEMBER
4%
-Q

FREE BODY DIAGRAM

Fig 7
Location &Plane of Contraflexure

To locate the planes of contraflexure (see Fig
6) (inflection points or points of zero moment)
it is assumed that
The H-frame structure is fured against
rotation at the ground line.
The rigidity of the structure in the zone
of braces is high compared to that of the
pole.
The shears are equally distributed
between the two poles.
The physical properties of both poles are
the same.
A point of inflection, or zero moment, is
assumed to exist between the crossarm
and the top X-brace connection and be-
tween the bottom X-brace connection
and the ground line on a fully braced
structure. A braced structure is defined
as a structure that has a minimum of
inside vee-bracing and one set of X-
braces.
If the bracing is not adequate, the planes of
contraflexure may not develop, thereby reduc-
ing the capacity of the structure.
Equation 5.7 is a means of determining the
location of the plane of contraflexure (see [531)
and is based on dividing the H-frame into two
multispan tapered circular beams having both
ends fixed:
(Eq 5.7)

30

1
 IEEE
WOOD !I"SMISSION STRUCTURES Std 751

structures showing the expected locations of

Table 5 3 contraflexure planes are shown in Fig 8.
Ratio of PoleDh"to 5 5 3 Design of H - m e Members
Plane of Contraflexure 5.5.3.1 General. Members of a typical H-
frame structure are required to carry either an
axial compressive load (compression member
dl'd2 xdx
of braces, or column), an axial tensile load
0.1 0.946 (tension member of braces), a bending mo-
0.2 0.887
0.3 0.827 ment (crossarm, pole), or an axial load plus a
0.4 0.769 bending moment (pole, crossarm, or vee-
0.5 0.714 brace).
0.6 0.663
0.7 0.616 5.5.3.2 Crossarms. Unbraced crossarms
0.8 0.574 acting as cantilevered beams are designed by
0.9 0.535
determining the section modulus required to
1.0 0.500
limit flexural stress to an acceptable limit for
the desired vertical span. The stress a t an
extreme fiber in bending is given in Eq 5.5.
where For solid rectangular and square beams
X, = Location of plane of contraflexure having width b and depth d and the neutral
measured from the larger diameter axis perpendicular to depth a t the center, the
end moment of inertia is
X = Distance between two ends of the pole;
the plane of contraflexure is assumed z -- 1-bd3
2 (Eq 5.9)
to be between these two ends
dl = Diameter at the smaller end of the pole The section modulus is
d2 = Diameter at the larger end of the pole
Table 5.3 gives the ratio X,/X for various (Eq 5.10)
values of dl/d2for the case shown in Fig 7.
Another accepted method of determining the and
location of the plane of contraflexure, derived
M 6M
from the moment diagram given in [621, is as (Eq5.11)
follows:
f
b -- -S = -b&
Braced crossarms can be subjected t o
(Eq 5.8) combined flexural and axial loading and
should be so designed.
where The combined bending and axial tension
load equation is as follows:
M , = Resisting moment capacity a t the
smaller end MIS PIA
-+-Cl (Eq 5.12)
M2 = Resisting moment capacity a t the @fb @ft -
larger end where
Xand X, are as defined in Eq 5.7 above.
M = Total bending moment
The locations of the contraflexure planes S = Section modulus
found by either method are approximate. The fb= Maximum strength in bending
analysis is based upon a member fned a t both P = Total axial load
ends. H-frame ends will not be truly fixed a t A = Cross-section area
both ends. For a less rigid support, the con- f t = Maximum strength in tension
traflexure plane moves toward the less rigid @ = Strength reduction factor
support and the engineer should adjust accord-
ingly. After locating the plane of contraflex- The Wood Handbook (see [641), Table 4-2,
ure, the indeterminate H-frame structure can recommends the maximum tension strength
- be partitioned and each part analyzed a s a de- ft, be equivalent t o the maximum bending
terminate structure. Some typical H-frame stress, f b .

31

T'
IEEE
Std 751 IEEE TRIALUSE DESIGN GUIDE FOR

The slenderness ratio Lld for crossarms in MIS PIA

(Eq5.14)
compression affects the combined bending $fb - (PIA) + f',
and axial compression formula. For Lld less
than 11, where

MIS PIA f', = Maximum strength in compression,

+-5 1 (Eq 5.13) adjusted for Lld ratio (see Eq 5.18).
$fb $fc

where The design engineer is cautioned when

L = Unsupported length
d = Least lateral dimension
f c = Maximum strength in compression
For Lld greater than 11
using these formulas not to use strength-
reduction factor $ in combination with
allowable stresses (which have built-in safety
factors) per the National Design Specification
for Wood Construction (see NFPA T901 [501).

Fig 8
Assumed ContraflexurePlane Locations for
Various Stru- Configurations

r ASSUMED
CONTRAFLEXURE
PLANE'

TRAFLEXUR E
PLANES

'THIS LOCATION MAY CHANGE WITH THE TYPE

OF FRAMINGAND THE POLE CLASS USED

TRAFLEXURE
PLANES

32
'tt---
1 -- T'

WOOD TRANSMISSION STRUCTURES
It is usually unnecessary t o check the
- strength of crossarms in vertical or cross-
grain shear. The controlling factor may be the
bearing across-grain strength of the wood, or it
may be the horizontal shear induced into the
crossarm by the vertical reaction. This hori-
zontal shear results in a tendency of that part
of the crossarm above the neutral axis to slide
by the part below the axis. The shear resistance
within the wood must equal or exceed the hori-
zontal shear stress induced by the vertical load
t o maintain equilibrium within the crossarm.
The horizontal shear stress in the crossarm fv
is calculated by the equation
M V =I
VQ (Eq 5.15)
where
V = Vertical shear force
Q = First moment of area above or below
the neutral axis
I = Moment of inertia of the section
+ = Strength-reduction factor
For a rectangular member of width b and
depth d , this becomes
3v
w v = g (Eq 5.16)
Reductions of the assigned unit stresses for
horizontal shear are required to allow for
checks, end splits, shakes, notching, and other
joint details.
5.5.3.3 X-braces.The primary purpose of
using X-braces in structures is to redistribute
the loads in a structure in such a manner that
the maximum stress is reduced. This effec-
tively increases the transverse strength of the
structure and also reduces the transverse de-
flection of the structure. As a consequence, X-
braced structures have reduced lateral earth
pressures but increased vertical forces on the
poles and, therefore, the soil around the poles.
One member of the X-brace will be in ten-
sion and the other member in compression for
a transverse wind condition. The X-brace
member size will be determined by the capac-
ity of the wood member in compression.
The basic Euler compression formula for
rectangular long columns pinned a t both ends
-IS-
n2EI n2@A
p a = (kL)2
- - - - -(12kL)Z - fp (Eq 5'17)
33
IEEE
Std 751
or
(Eq 5.18)
where
P,, = Allowable (critical) load
A = Cross-section area
E = Modulus of elasticity (see Table 3.8;
1.6 x lo6 is a commonly used value
for laminated a n d solid-sawn
Douglas fir)
I = Moment of inertia for rectangular
section
L = Unsupported length of the member
k = Effective length factor (see Fig 1)
fJ = Maximum compressive strength
adjusted for Lld ratio
+ = Strength-reduction factor, and
d = The least cross-section dimension
The critical factor in the design of compres-
sive members is the effective slenderness ra-
tio (kLld for rectangular sections or kLlr for
round or other sections). For rectangular sec-
tions, L is the laterally unsupported length
between supports that prevents lateral move-
ment in the direction in which the least di-
mension d or the radius of gyration r is mea-
sured. The unsupported length (L),for an X-
brace that is properly supported at the center
(see Fig 9), is
L'
L=- (Eq 5.19)
Sin 8
where
L' = The dimension from the inside of the
pole to inside of pole (pole spacing less
one foot is normally used)
8 = Included angle between pole and X-
brace
CAUTION
Three- or four-piece X-brace designs may
The length of the column for design should
be multiplied by an effective length factor k ,
where end conditions provide some moment
resistance. There are two basic types of X-
brace end fittings, rigid and pinned. Neither
end-fitting type gives buckling restraint in the
IEEE
std751
L'
I I
Fig9
X-brace EEfective Length
longitudinal direction. From actual test data a
k = 0.52 should be used due to restraint from the
center X-brace clamp. In the transverse
direction the rigid end fitting does offer some
restraint such that a k = 0.78 is justified. The
pinned end fitting requires a k = 1 since it
offers no resistance in this plane.
5.5.3.4 Vee-braces. Vee-braces are in-
stalled on the outside of the poles, the inside of
poles, or in both locations to accomplish the fol-
lowing:
(1) Outside braces increase the vertical
load capacity of the crossarms. The
braces should be analyzed for tension
and the crossarm for buckling.
(2) Inside braces increase the transverse
load capacity of the structure by making
it more rigid. These become a tension-
34
1
IEEE TRIALUSE DESIGN GUIDE FOR
b SHOULD BE 21 .lx d TO AVOID
BUCKLING IN THE VERTICAL PLANE.
SECTION
A-A
compression system similar to the X-
brace. Both tension and compressive
loads should be analyzed when design-
ing these members.
5.5.3.5 Connections. Various material
manufacturers have developed methods of
connecting end fittings and brackets t o the
wood members. Many of these connections
have proven to be very reliable applications
even though some of the above values are not
met. Test and experience data should be
available from the manufacturer. The purpose
of connections in transmission structures is to
transfer forces effectively from one member to
another. Wood members may be sized by the
load-transfer requirements of the connection.
Most connections utilize formed metal brack-
ets, bolts, and shear plates. The following are

WOOD TRANSMISSION STRUCTURES
particular concerns for wood connections: (1)
-.
net section, (2) end distance, and (3) edge dis-
tance.
The net section is the cross-sectional area
of a member, at right angles to the direction
of the load, t h a t gives the maximum stress
after reduction for connector grooves and bolt
holes.
The end distance is the distance from the
end of a bolted timber to the center of the bolt
hole nearest the end. The NDS requirements
(see NFPA T901 [501) are as follows:
(1) For parallel-to-grain loading, the end
distance shall be as follows:
( a ) In tension, seven times the bolt
diameter for softwoods and five
times for hardwoods
(b) In compression, four times the bolt
diameter
(2) For perpendicular-to-grain loading, the
end distance shall be not less than four
times the bolt diameter. When mem-
bers abut at a joint, the strength of the
joint shall be evaluated, not only for the
bolt load, but also as a beam supported by
fastenings.
The edge distance is the distance from the
edge of the timber to the center of the nearest
bolt hole. The NDS requirements are a s
follows:
For parallel-to-grain loading in ten-
sion or compression, the edge distance
shall be a t least 1 U2 times the bolt di-
ameter, except that for Lld ratios more
than six, one-half the distance between
rows of bolts shall be used. There is no
recommended distance between bolt
rows. However, the closest approach
distance should not exceed 2 lJ2 times
the bolt diameter.
For perpendicular-to-grain loading, the
edge margin toward which the load is
acting shall be a t least four times the
bolt diameter and the margin on the
opposite edge shall be a t least 1 U2 times
the bolt diameter.
The NDS minimum requirements may be
modified based on test data.
5.5.4 H-frame Structure Embedment.
Unbraced H-frame structures have foundation
movements similar to single-pole structures
- and should be treated accordingly. Braced H-
frame structures result in high uplift and
compressive loads. The design engineer
35
IEm
Std 751
should determine if embedment is adequate t o
resist these loads, especially for tangent
structures with high transverse loading. In
marsh soils, such a s peat, woodpiles can be
driven and the H-frame structure bolted and
banded to the piles. See IEEE Std 691-1985 1301
for a more complete discussion on foundation
design.
5.6 Analysis and Design of Guyed Structures
5.6.1 General. Transmission lines utiliz-
ing wood-pole tangent structures often have
wood-pole angle and dead-end structures with
various guying arrangements t o transfer the
large transverse loads (angle structures) or
longitudinal loads (dead-end structures) t o a
ground anchor. The guy-wire tension plus
conductor and insulator weight will develop
significant vertical forces in the poles. These
forces necessitate t h a t the compressive
strength of the poles be checked.
Braced H-frame structures experience lon-
gitudinal P-A effects when large unbalanced
conductor and static wire loads occur under
high vertical load conditions. One method of
limiting cascading under these conditions is
to provide dead-end or guyed structures a t con-
venient intervals (e.g., 5 t o 10 mi) in the
transmission line.
5.6.2 Stability and Critical Buckling Load.
Selection of structural members is based upon
strength, stiffness, and stability. The possible
instability of guyed poles (acting a s columns)
must be considered. The column is considered
stable only if the critical elastic buckling load
(or Euler load) is not exceeded. The critical
elastic buckling load is defined a s the axial
load that is just sufficient to keep an initially
straight, perfectly elastic bar in a slightly bent
form. This load is of significance in obtain-
ing working formulas for design of columns
because the elastic critical load is usually
taken as the ultimate load that the column can
support, assuming the column is relatively
slender and buckling occurs in the elastic
range.
The critical buckling load for long slender
columns is determined from Eq 5.17, where
for various end conditions the effective length
factor k, from Fig 1, should be used.
The assumptions made in deriving Eq 5.17
are as follows:
(1) The column is perfectly straight ini-
tially.

The axial load is concentrically applied
at the end of the column (i.e., there is no
bending.).
The column is assumed to be perfectly
elastic and stresses are below the elastic
limit.
The column is uniform in section
properties.
these assumptions are violated for a
guyed wood pole. 'l%e engineer must therefore
use good judgment and apply strength-reduc-
tion factors to account for realistic situations
and wood variability. The combined bending
plus axial force problem presented by a guyed
structure can be analyzed using the Newmark
numerical technique or a computer program
that performs nonlinear analysis.
Two methods for calculating critical buck-
ling loads for guyed structures are the Gere
and Carter method (see [411), and the Euler
(REA) method (see [531).
5.6.2.1 Gem and Carter Method. This
method proposes modification to the critical
buckling equation as follows:
P , = PAP* (Eq 5.20)
where
PA = Critical load for a uniform column
with circular cross sections having
diameter d (at guy attachment)
P* = A multiplier dependent on the end
conditions of the column
or
(Eq 5.21)
where
a = An exponent t h a t is a function of
shape
d , = Diameter a t point of guy attachment
d , = Diameter a t the ground line
Equations for various end conditions for a
tapered guyed pole can be summarized a s
follows (see Fig 1):
End Conditions PA P*
36
IEEE TRIALUSE DESIGN GUIDE FOR
Fixed-Pinned -
Pinned-Pinned -
Fixed-Fixed
z2EIA
.
{ 2 j2.(1(Eq 5.22d)
I
The Gere and Carter method is a theoretical
method verified by limited tests on steel shapes
for calculating P,, for tapered poles subject to
only axial load.
5.6.28 REA Method. This method uses
Eq 5.20 for PA without the Gere and Carter
correction, Eq 5.21. Calculations are made a t a
section of the pole 2/9 the distance from the top.
The American Institute of Timber Con-
struction (see [Sol)recommends a distance U3
from the top. REA (see [531) recommends a
strength-reduction factor of from U2 to U3.
6.62.3 Comparison of Methods. The REA
method is more conservative than the Gere
and Carter method. A comparison shows al-
lowable buckling loads calculated using the
Gere and Carter method over two times those
calculated using the REA method. Un-
fortunately, there are no test results to verify
either method for wood poles. The design
engineer should be aware of the disparity of
results when selecting a strength-reduction
factor.
5.6.3 End Conditions of Guyed Poles. The
end conditions for unbraced guyed single
poles are difficult to evaluate. Poles with bisec-
tor guys (see Fig 10) approximate a condition
of being pinned a t the point of guy attachment
and fixed a t the base in the plane of the guy.
However, 90" to the bisector guy, the structure
appears to be a cantilevered column. Since the
conductors and phase wires offer some con-
straint, the actual end conditions may be be-
tween fixed-free (k = 2) and fixed-pinned (k =
0.7). Therefore, most design engineers using
Gere and Carter assume pinned-pinned (k = 1)
end conditions. The poles appear to be pinned
a t the point of guy attachment and fixed a t the
base in both directions for in-line guyed poles
of a n angle dead-end structure (Fig 11).
However, it is questionable whether the guys
prevent tip motion sufficiently to validate us-
ing an effective length factor (k)of 0.7 to 1. A
value of 1 is recommended.

WOOD TRANSMISSION STRUCTURES
Fig 10
-Guyed*-
5.6.4 Axial Loads at Intermittent Locations.
The static wire and one or more conductors are
guyed a t their respective locations on the same
pole on some structures. Hence, axial loads
are applied intermittently along the pole. In
such instances, the usual engineering practice
is to assume an unbraced length from the
ground line to the lowest guy attachment and
the induced axial load in the pole equal to the
sum of all axial loads incurred by the vertical
component of the guys.
6.Glued Laminated Timber Members
6.1 Laminated Veneer Lumber. Laminated
Veneer Lumber (LVL) and structural mem-
bers fabricated of LVL are manufactured in
- accordance with individual manufacturers’
standards. The material should conform to
AITC D2559-76141 for use under exterior (wet
37
i--1 r’
Em
Std 751
Fig 11
Dead-End S t r u m
use) conditions. Veneers may be of any
species group currently defined in US Product
Standard PS 1-831311.
Manufacturing standards for the products
should be available for each producing mill,
including material specifications and process
controls specifically for veneer drying, grad-
ing, mixing, adhesive application, press op-
eration, and finishing. A quality assurance
program should be maintained to assure com-
pliance with the manufacturing standards.
This quality assurance program should be
monitored by a nationally recognized inde-
pendent third-party inspection agency.
Product qualification and ongoing continu-
ous quality control testing verifying the re-
quired material properties should be specified.
Records of all such testing and verification
should be maintained by the manufacturer for
a minimum of five years from date of produc-
tion.
IEEE
Std 751
6.2 Structural Glued Laminated Timber
(Glulam). Fabrication of laminated struc-
tures and structure members should be in ac-
cordance with ANSI 05.2-1983 1101, and sup-
plemental electric utility specification noting
the specific options required.
Layup of laminating lumber in a structural
member should be such that the finished mem-
ber will adequately support all design loads.
AITC 117-88 [21 should be used for determining
lumber grade and layup.
Laminated structures will be exposed to both
wet and dry conditions in use. Therefore, the
adhesive used for bonding the individual lam-
inates should be a wet-use adhesive conform-
ing to the required American Society for
Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standard.
There are several options available in ANSI
05.2-1983. The utility purchasing laminated
structural members under this specification
should indicate its choice of each option on the
purchase order. The options are as follows: (1)
species of wood; (2) equilibrium moisture
content; (3) moisture content readings; (4) test
assembly; (5) strength test records; and (6)
quality control records. These are discussed
briefly below.
6.2.1 Species Wood. Lumber should be
Coastal Region Douglas fir or Southern pine of
the four principal species: long leaf (pinus
palustris), short leaf (pinus echinata), slash
(pinus elliottii), or loblolly (pinus taeda).
Coastal Region Douglas fir lumber should be
grown in the area defined in and graded ac-
cording to the West Coast Lumber Inspection
Bureau’s (WCLIB) handbook, Standard
Grading Rules for West Coast Lumber 1633.
Southern Pine lumber should be grown in the
area defined in and graded according t o the
Southern Pine Inspection Bureau’s (SPIB)
handbook, Standard Grading Rules for
Southern Pine Lumber [551.
6.2.2 Equilibrium Moisture Content. The
moisture content of lumber a t the time of lam-
inating is very important and should be
specified by the user. The lumber moisture
content should be within a range compatible
with the mean equilibrium moisture content of
lumber in the user’s geographic area. Serious
checking and splitting will occur in the lami-
nated members when they equalize with their
final ambient surroundings if the moisture
content of the laminates changes signifi-
cantly.
38
IEEE TRIALUSE DESIGN GUIDE FOR
The moisture gradient within an individual
laminate and between all the laminates in a
member is also very important.
6.2.3 Moisture Content Readings. The
moisture content of lumber should be deter-
mined by any type of meter that accurately
measures wood moisture content. The use of
dielectric meters will permit the continuous
checking of wood moisture content prior to the
layup process. A resistance meter may also be
used in place of or in conjunction with a di-
electric meter for determining the maximum
moisture content of the lumber. However, only
a resistance-type meter should be used to de-
termine the moisture gradient within a piece
of lumber.
The purchasing utility should review the
moisture content records supplied to them
and/or verify by independent inspection.
The electrical resistance of a board is a
function of the board temperature. Therefore,
when a resistance-type meter is used and the
temperature of the board is significantly dif-
ferent from the temperature for which the
meter is calibrated, the moisture meter read-
ing should be corrected. Correction tables are
available from the meter manufacturer.
6.2.4 Strength Test Records. Physical tests
of face-joint bonding, edge-joint bonding,
end-joint bonding, end-joint configuration
and bonding, glue-bond integrity for wet-use
adhesive, and void-filling compounds are re-
quired according to ANSI/AITC A190.1- 1983
[ l l l , AITC 200-83[31, and individual manufac-
turers’ specifications. The results of all
strength and wood failure tests conducted on
laminated material, for a particular order,
may be requested by the purchaser.
6.2.6 Quality Control Records. The
manufacturer of laminated timber should
keep daily quality control records of produc-
tion. Such items a s work room temperature
and humidity, glue temperature, glue spread,
open assembly time, clamp pressure, etc., are
all important parameters. Copies of the daily
quality control records may be requested by the
purchaser for their respective orders.
Laminated wood members should be treated
with preservatives similar to other wood prod-
ucts used in transmission construction to en-
sure durability and length of service. Incising
may be required to obtain the desired preserva-
tive penetration and retention of laminated
members of some species.

WOOD TRANSMISSION STRUCTURES
Laminated structures can give many years
of satisfactory service. However, adequate
quality control over the entire process is very
critical. Parameters such a s board moisture
content, lumber grade, location of strength-re-
ducing defects, etc., can significantly affect
the the maximum use of the member.
Therefore, i t is important for the purchaser to
ensure that there is adequate quality control
during all phases of the laminating process.
7. Connectiom and Hardwm
7.1 General. Once the wood structure type and
the imposed loads on it have been determined,
hardware is selected t o fasten the structure to-
gether and attach the conductors. Care should
be used in the selection and installation of
hardware, as i t will have a substantial effect
on the operation and maintenance of the line.
Drilling bolt holes or cutting daps in pressure
preservative treated poles for line hardware
may expose untreated wood to the elements and
accelerate decay. This section covers some of
the more commonly used hardware.
7 2 Wood Joint Hardware
78.1 Grid Gains (Grids, Spike Grids, and
Crossarm Gains). Grids are spiked metal
connectors primarily used to strengthen wood-
to-wood and wood-to-metal connections on
transmission lines. Their various shapes (see
Fig 12) make them adaptable for different
parts of transmission line design. They
should meet ANSI C135.33-1988 [81.
Single-curve grids are used to connect rect-
angular crossarms to round wood poles. The
curved surface eliminates the need for pole
gaining. Flat and circular grids are used be-
tween flat wood surfaces, e.g., crossarms,
braces, and laminated poles.
Bonding of the grid gain to the through bolt
with a stainless steel clip a t higher
transmission line voltages should be
considered.
The size and shape of the spikes (teeth) per-
mit them to penetrate the wood surface of the
pole or crossarm, thus resisting movement
both with and across the grain. The gains help
distribute the load over a larger area of the
- wood, thereby strengthening the joint and re-
ducing wood crushing and bolt slotting. The
strength of the joint depends on the type and
39
1--
Em
Std 751
size of the grid gain, bolt diameter, and species
of wood. Most manufacturers have test data
available on the performance or design loads
for their grid gains (see [581,[591, and C611.
There are numerous sizes and shapes of
these grids, which allow matching to various
pole diameters, crossarm sizes, and bolt
diameters. Double-faced gains should be
designed to prevent tearing of wood fiber
during structure assembly or erection. There
are various crossarm shims and support plates
available; for some examples, see Fig 13.
7.2.2 Shear Plates. Shear plates (see Fig 14)
are used for bolted connections in wood
crossarms to increase the shearing strength of
the joint. They are flanged metal plates that
are set in the face of wood members around a
bolt t o increase the shear area and thereby
reduce shear stresses and boltslotting (see 1481,
[501, [581, C601, and [611 for shear plate design
values).
A special tool is required to cut the dap in the
adjacent wood surfaces for the shear plate,
which, when installed, fits flush with the
adjoining surfaces.
Shear plates are used primarily in pre-
assembled crossarms where high shear
stresses occur a t braces, double-arming bolts,
or other hardware attachment points. Their
use eases field connections by allowing the
members to be readily positioned. Reaming of
shear plates to make a connection fit should be
avoided. Reaming will significantly de-
crease the capacity of the plate.
7.3 Fasteners
7.3.1 Bolts. Bolts are the primary connectors
used in the assembly of wood structures. Care
must be exercised in the selection of the type
and size of bolts to be used. Almost all of the
other connection hardware is directly depen-
dent upon the proper functioning of the bolt. All
galvanized steel bolts and n u t s should
conform with ANSI C135.1-1979 161.
Galvanized steel eye bolts should meet the
specifications of ANSI C135.4-1987 [71. There
are several different types of bolts commonly
used for connections in wood structures (see
Fig 15).
Washerhead bolts and shoulder eye bolts are
available for static-proof construction. These
may be used with washer nuts and locknuts.
See 7.3.3 for the use of spring washers to
maintain tight hardware connections.
 lEEE TRIALUSE DESIGN GUIDE FOR

SINGLE CURVE FLAl

POLE SHIM FLAT GAIN PLATE

q-J
CIRCULAR
RIBBED TIE PLATE

SPIKED ON ONE SIDE

POLE ArrACHMENT ASSEMBLY EMBOSSED TIE PLATE

Fig 12 Fig 13
Grid Gains Crossarm Shims,Plates,and Assemblies

MACHINE BOLT DOUBLE-ARMINGBOLT

(FULL THREAD)

FRONT BACK

THREADEDROD
PRESSED STEEL OR DOUBLE-ENDEDBOLT
(SHOWN WITH WASHERHEAD NUT)

FORGED EYE BOLT OVAL EYE BOLT

FRONT BACK

MALLEABLE IRON SHOULDER EYE BOLT W

SHOULDER EYE BOLT WITH
WELDED CURVED WASHER

Fig 14 Fig 15
shearplates Bolts

-
7
 WOOD TRANSMISSION STRUCTURES
I * <----- - - - - 4
-__-- - - _ _ _ /
ELEVATION
Fig 16
InstallationofArm Stabilizeron Single Wood
crossarm
Bolts used for wood structures can be subject
to bending loads, tensile loads, shear loads,
and all combinations of the above. In addition
to sizing the bolts for these load types, care
must be taken to provide a bolt with significant
surface area to minimize crushing of the wood
fiber on the members being connected.
Design values for bolts in wood joints are
given in many wood construction handbooks
(see C481, C501, C591 through C611, and [MI).
The threaded portion of the bolt should not be
in the high-stress area of the connection, par-
ticulary in a shear plane. If this is not possi-
ble, suitable reductions in the joint capacity
should be incorporated into the design.
In single-pole construction, longitudinal
crossarm movement caused by galloping con-
ductors can result in a bending moment on
__ arm attachment through bolts. In addition to
locating the threaded end of the bolt on the side
of the pole opposite to the crossarm, the design
41
-r -7-
W
Fig 17
Grid Gaia-Arm Support
engineer should give consideration t o in-
stalling attachment hardware that will stiffen
the joint and minimize bending of the bolt (see
Figs 16 and 17).
In many cases, it can be advantageous to use
the same diameter bolt for all member-to-pole
connections to reduce the number of miscella-
neous nuts, locknuts, and washers required on
a given project, and t o eliminate a possible
source for human error during construction.
7.32 Washers. Washers are used in wood-
pole construction wherever bolt heads or nuts
come into contact with wood or steel surfaces.
The washers are available in four basic
shapes: square-flat, round-flat, square-
curved, and rectangular-curved (see Fig 18).
Each shape can be obtained in various sizes
and strengths. Flat washers are used primar-
ily against crossarm and other flat surfaces,
while curved washers are used on round pole
surfaces.
IEEE
S d 751
SQUARE WASHERS ROUND WASHERS
SQUARE CURVED
WASHERS
4.1
RECTANGULAR CURVED
WASHERS
Fig 18
Washers
The washer selected to back up a through bolt
should be of sufficient size to reduce the crush-
ing load of the wood to a safe value.
7.3.3 Spring Washers. Spring washers are
normally used in wood-pole construction to
maintain tight hardware connections when
the wood shrinks due to drying. There are sev-
eral types of spring washers used. The
"hairspring"-shaped washer shown as Type A
in Fig 19 is used for most applications. Double-
coil Type B and 2-bolt Type C spring washers
are also available (see Fig 19).
7.3.4 Locknuts. Locknuts are used to lock
standard nuts and other connections to the
bolts on which they are placed. Locknuts
should be used in all locations on wood struc-
tures. Palnuts and M-F locknuts are the two
types generally used on transmission lines.
7.4 InsulatorAttachments
7.4.1 Insulator Attachments - Conductor
Dead End. A conductor dead end is a point in
the line where the full tension in the line
conductor is transferred t o the structure.
42
T
IEEE TRIALUSE DESIGN GUIDE FOR
TYPE A TYPE B
HAIRSPRING DOUBLE COIL
TYPE C
2-BOLT
Fig 19
Spring Washers
Dependent on the conductor line tension, the
most common hardware items suitable for
dead-ending are suspension hooks, eye bolts,
dead-end tees (pole-eye plates) and pole bands
(see Fig 20). When conductors terminate on a
wood structure, the longitudinal load must be
balanced by guying.
7.48 Insulator Attachments - Suspension.
The insulators are attached t o an item of
hardware that is, in turn, connected to the wood
structure. The hardware item should be de-
signed to provide adequate strength in all di-
rections. It should also be able t o accommodate
the type of insulator hardware that is being
used to allow freedom of movement of the insu-
lator attachment hardware.
When a single crossarm is being used, an
eye bolt, shoulder eye bolt, or tee may be used to
connect the insulator string to the crossarm.
Double-arm construction requires the use of
a spacer fitting between the arms. Several
types of spacer fittings are available in both the
adjustable-spacing type and the fixed-spacing
type.

WOOD TRANSMISSION STRUCTURES
SUSPENSION HOOK
POLE-EYE PLATE
(DEAD-END TEE)
7.4.3 Overhead Ground Wire Attachments.
Overhead ground wire attachments should be
designed t o give suspension clamps flexibility
in both the transverse and longitudinal direc-
tions for support of the overhead ground wire.
This may be achieved by use of an overhead
ground wire support, for single-pole and H-
frame, or tie angle for H-frame construction.
Both of these devices come with a chain link,
which is used to attach the suspension clamp
assembly .
Dead-ending overhead ground wires is
usually accomplished with eye bolts or dead-
end tees.
7.5 Guys and Guy Hardware. Guys are used
on wood structures to resist transverse load
components due t o line tension on angle
structures, and longitudinal loads due to full
conductor tension for dead-end structures.
Guys may be required on tangent structures in
high wind conditions or in poor soil condition
areas where assistance is required to resist
uplift for H-frames.
The load in the guy is a function of both the
resultant wire load and the angle between the
guy and the pole. Both of these parameters
should be considered in the design of the guy
connection.
The selection of guy hardware will vary ac-
cording to the line angle, wire size, and ten-
sion. Dependent on the load in the guy, various
- guy hardware items are suitable, including
guy hooks, thimble eye bolts, pole-eye plates,
dead-end and guying tees, and pole bands.
43
IEEE
Std 751
POLE BAND
The design engineer should refer t o the
National Electrical Safety Code (ANSIC2-1990
[51) for allowable stresses on guy wires.
7.6 BearingKJplift Plates (Pole Anchors).
Bearinghplift plates are used to increase the
bearing and uplift capacity of the pole. They
are normally connected to the pole near the butt
on single-pole and H-frame structures.
7.7 Splices. Splices in wood members should be
avoided when possible. When required, the
splices should be located at points of low stress,
and be designed to sustain the maximum
loads specified.
7.8 End Fittings for X-braces, Knee-braces,
and Vee-braces. Most suppliers of these braces
furnish them as an assembly with the end fit-
tings attached. The design engineer should
obtain joint capacity information from the
supplier.
Special attention should be given to the
strength of bolts at some of these joints, such as
a t the ends of X-braces. They can have both
shear and tensile forces acting on them
simultaneously.
8. NonwoodMembers
8.1 General. The typical wood H-frame con-
sists of structural wood members attached to
wood poles with metal hardware. These struc-
tural members, such as X-braces and knee
IEEE
&751
I IEEE "RIAL-USE DESIGN GUIDE FOR
braces, require metal end fittings that will
transfer tensile, compression, and shear
loads. The excellent mechanical properties of
wood usually make i t the economical choice
for members.
Nonwood member substitutions are usually
made for members that do not require the
characteristics of wood in both tension and
compression. The outboard vee-braces, which
are always in tension, can be made of mate-
rial with superior tensile strength such a s
fiberglass or steel strand. The tie between the
tops of poles, which is also in tension, is usu-
ally achieved with steel strand or steel angle
iron. Although wood is used for the vast ma-
jority of crossarms, steel, aluminum, and
fiberglass have been used as substitutes.
Single-pole transmission structures often
use davit arms. Wood davit arms consist of a
laminated wood arm attached to a steel bracket
for attachment to the pole. The steel davit arm
is an alternative to the wood davit arm. The
steel davit arm consists of a steel tube that is
welded to a steel backplate. The davit arm con-
figuration normally uses a suspension insu-
lator. The davit arm and insulator could be
replaced with a single-post insulator.
8 9 Strength Characteristics of Nonwood
Members. The design of composite structures
can cause special problems to the design engi-
neer. The design engineer is often faced with
having t o rely on manufacturer's strength
data in lieu of an industry-wide standard on
nonwood structural members. For this reason,
the design engineer must use some judgment
in designing to maximum ultimate strength
capabilities of nonwood members. When de-
signing porcelain strut-type insulators and
polymer-fiberglass insulators, the manufac-
turer's recommended working load should
match any of the loads imposed on the wood
structures without overload factors. Steel com-
ponents should be designed to maintain the
integrity of the structure for all applied loads.
Designing different components in the
same structure to different safety factors can
cause difficulties when structures are sub-
jected to full-scale structure tests.
8.3 Designing for Structure Testing.
Structural components of a wood structure are
typically designed to the largest overload fac-
tor used for any single component in the
44
I
structure, which is usually 4.0 for National
Electrical Safety Code Grade B wood construc-
tion. This allows the structure to be tested to its
ultimate loads without premature failure of
nonwood components and results in overde-
signing the nonwood components.
Nonwood components should be designed
using resistance factors that reflect the vari-
ability of loads. Specimens of different com-
ponents should be individually tested to ensure
that they meet the desired strength require-
ments. To perform the full structure test, any
nonwood member t h a t will fail before the
structure reaches the ultimate loads for the
wood members should be replaced with a simi-
lar member with the required strength, for test
purposes only. I t is not economically feasible
to overdesign nonwood members just for the
sake of full-scale testing.
9. Erection and Framing
9.1 General. This section covers both H-frame
and single-pole construction. It is intended t o
cover erection and framing of structures dur-
ing construction of a wood pole line and is not
intended to address selection or treatment of
wood products. Construction procedures are of
utmost importance, because inadequate care
exercised during the construction of a wood
pole line can easily offset the reliability and
benefits gained from an optimized design.
The recommendations in this section are in-
tended t o provide maximum reliability and
minimum maintenance expense, to increase
longevity of the line, and to optimize the as-
sumed design concepts.
9 9 Handling and Storing Poles and Wood
Muds
9.2.1 Receiving. Poles should be received in
an orderly manner consistent with construc-
tion scheduling requirements. When shifting
of material during transport is evident, a thor-
ough check of the load for damage should be
made and damages noted and documented.
Poles damaged at the tips due to striking an
idler or poles whose outer layer of sapwood has
been damaged in excess of minimum limits
set forth in ANSI 05.1-1987 [91 should not be ac-
cepted. Receiving personnel should contact the
local railroad agent or other applicable trans-
porting agency and initiate the necessary
 Em
WOOD TRANSMISSION STRUCTURES Std 751
damage claim paperwork before the material material stored for extended periods of time
is unloaded. should be kept a t least one foot above the
9.2.2 Hauling. The hauler should exercise ground, and the ground should be sterilized to
care to prevent damage to the pole during load- prevent vegetation from growing around the
ing, unloading, transportation, and delivery materials. Dead o r decaying wood or
operations. Cant hooks should not have a gaff vegetation should not be allowed to accumulate
greater than 314 in. The hooks should be well in or near a storage area. Potential fire
set before attempting to roll a pole, to prevent hazards should be removed from the storage
the cant hook from tearing out of the pole and area.
seriously damaging the treated sapwood. The 9.2.5 Field Modifications. All cuts, holes,
pole trailer should have two bunks, which and injuries of the surface of treated materials
should be padded with timber that is similar to should be field-protected by brushing, spray-
the wood poles in hardness. For example, an ing, dipping, soaking, o r coating with a
oak or steel bunk would not be desirable unless preservative. Holes bored in pressure-treated
covered with some other material to protect material should be poured full of preserva-
poles during transportation. tives. Horizontal holes should be filled by
It is desirable to match poles of the same pouring the preservative into them with a bent
species with similar physical dimensions for funnel (AWPA M4-84, in [321). Proper
H-frame structures. application of preservatives is essential.
9.2.3 Unloading. Preservative-treated Applicable government regulations should be
material should be handled in a manner that complied with for field application of pre-
will avoid damage of the treated surface. Cant servatives.
hooks, peavies, pickroons, and end hooks
should not be used on side surfaces, and
handling with pointed tools should be confined
to end grain. Materials should not be dragged Table 9.1
along the ground or dropped. Maximum Member Lengths for
Only nylon belt slings should be used to lift Single-PointLifting
laminated or solid members. One inch of
combined sling width is needed for each 1000 When Lifting
lb of weight. Members should be raised or Depth (D) on Edge When Lifting
lowered gradually with no abrupt changes in (inches) (feet) Flat (feet)
motion. 5 69 45
It is recommended that laminated columns 6 76 49
be lifted on edge. For long columns greater 7 a 63
8 88 56
than 120 ft, use a two-point lifting with a 12 ft 9 93 60
spreader bar straddling the center of gravity. lo 98 63
Columns less than 120 ft may be lifted with a U 103 66
I2 107 69
single-point lift. 13 112 72
When lifting laminated members other l4 116 75
than columns that have uniform cross section, I5 120 n
E 124 m
single-point lifts are allowed a t the center of
gravity of the member up t o the maximum NOTE: Use of Table 9.1 is based on depth (D)of member,
shown on Table 9.1. Two-point lifting with a (D)being that dimension parallel with direction of lift as
12 f t spreader bar is recommended for larger indicated in the illustration below.
members.
9.2.4 Storing. Poles placed on bunkers or LIFT
dunnage should remain clear of the ground
and undergrowth at all times. Bunker or dun-
t
nage material should be pressure-treated and
placed so that the unsupported length of pole is
not greater than 20 ft in length. Without this
-
precaution, the poles may sag and obtain an
undesirable curvature. Poles and framing

---
- -r
IEEE
Std 761
Table 9 2
m i d Crushed Rock or Gravel
Back€illMaterial Specification
Percent Passing
Screen Size Minimum Maximum
11/2iIl 100 100
3 4 in Bo 100
114 30 70
118 a0 Bo
11 16 15 50
U 30 lo 40
11200 0 lo
9.3 Staking for Wood-Pole Construction.
Elevation measurements should be taken for
each of the pole locations when staking the
center hub for a tangent H-frame or three-pole
structure. Accurate information is required
for the designer to compare the staked eleva-
tion with the survey elevation, determine pole
heights on side hills, assure adequate ground
clearance, and control pole utilization.
Anchor rod locations should be staked a t angle
structures.
Structure site survey information should be
put in a tabular form for ready reference
during construction.
9.4 Hole Digging and Pole Setting
9.4.1 Foundations. The foundations for
poles are just a s important a s the structure
above ground. The pole backfill should be ca-
pable of withstanding structure reactions.
Pole-setting equipment should be moved clear
of the structure site prior to backfilling.
Differences in ground elevation a t each pole
location, and pole length tolerances permitted
by ANSI 05.1-1987 [91 should be considered to
ensure a level structure. The tops of poles
should not be cut. If cutting is necessary, the
pole top should be covered with a mastic-type
cap. Under no circumstances should the butt of
any pole be cut. The design engineer should
specify a minimum hole depth. The actual
hole depths required to obtain a level structure
are the responsibility of the installing con-
tractor.
Digging operations should not be too far in
advance of the setting operation. Holes open
too long may deteriorate due to ground water
seepage and/or heavy rains and increase the
chance for accidents. Unattended pole holes
46
T
lEEE T R U U S E DESIGN GUIDE FOR
should be temporarily covered. All Local,
State, and Federal safety regulations must be
met.
9.4.2 Structure Alignment. When the
structure is set and the load line completely
released, the structure should remain plumb
and level. If the structure is not plumb or the
crossarm is not level, additional material
will have to be placed under one pole. The
additional material should be approved by the
design engineer.
9.4.3 Pole Holes. All holes should be in the
correct locations and large enough to provide a
minimum of 6 in of space for tamping around
the pole to the full depth of the hole. Pneumatic
tamping equipment is recommended to expe-
dite the setting operation. The poles should be
placed to prevent damage t o the structure
grounding materials. Poles not required to be
raked should be set plumb and in alignment.
Unless otherwise specified, structures a t an-
gles should be set to bisect the line angle. The
holes may be backfilled with earth excavated
from the hole, provided this material can be
properly compacted. Frozen material for back-
fill should not be permitted. The backfill
should be compacted to a dry density not less
than the natural in-place dry density of the
surrounding earth. Since the measurement of
the density may not be practical, no more than
one shoveler should be utilized for three tam-
pers. Front-end loaders are not recommended
during backfilling. Backfill should be
banked and tamped around the poles to a
height of 12 in above the natural ground sur-
face.
Excessive water should be pumped out, leav-
ing not more than 6 in of water in the bottom of
the hole, and 6 in of granular material should
be placed to firm up the bearing surface. Care
should be exercised where pumping will cause
excessive sluffing of the bottom of the hole.
Casing should be used where moving water
and/or gravel is encountered, working the
casing down a s the material a n d o r water is
removed.
9.4.4 Backfill. Where unsuitable backfill
material is encountered, gravel or crushed
rock backfill should be utilized. Table 9.2
shows a typical specification for backfill
material.
Gravel backfill material should be thor-
oughly compacted using air tamps in layers
not more than 6 in thick. If necessary,

WOOD TRANSMISSION STRUCTURES
sufficient water should be added to the backfill
,-
t o ensure adequate compaction. Gravel
backfill should be compacted to 70% relative
density as determined by ASTM D4253-83C141
and D4254-83 [151.Immersion-type vibrators
can be used in lieu of air tampers. Vibrators
should have sufficient operating length to
permit uniform compaction from the bottom of
the hole t o within 2 ft of the original ground
surface. The gravel backfill material should
be vibrated as placed in the hole and the
vibrators slowly withdrawn a s the hole
becomes filled. The upper 2 ft of the hole should
be backfilled with excavated soil and
compacted by tamping. This material should
be banked and tamped around the pole to a
height of 12 in above the natural ground
surface.
When crushed rock is used as backfill, it
should be compacted using air tampers in
layers not exceeding 6 in. The rock backfill
should be crusher run, a maximum of 2 1/2
inches in size, and having a minimum of two
faces fractured and 95% crushed.
9.4.5 Alternate Backfill. Polyurethane foam
may be used as a backfill material, in lieu of
- native or granular backfill, as it develops ex-
cellent uplift and bearing resistance.
Where polyurethane foam is used, the hole
should be sized to provide 1 112 to 2 in around
the pole, so as t o minimize the amount of foam
required and provide better load transfer be-
tween the pole and the soil.
Care should be exercised to assure that the
polyurethane foam does not insulate the
ground conductor from the surrounding soil.
After structures have been set and properly
aligned, polyurethane foam (water-insensi-
tive type), should be installed using the appro-
priate mixing and dispensing machine and
procedures that are in strict accordance with
manufacturer's recommendations. Sufficient
polyurethane should be sprayed on the pole
from 12 in above to 12 in below the ground line
to coat the vertical surface of the pole. The op-
erator should then dispense sufficient
polyurethane t o completely fill all voids and
have expansion of foam to within 6 in of the
ground line. Structures should be held in a
plumb position for approximately 8 to 10 min
(until the polyurethane has hardened sufi-
- ciently to hold the structure).
Polyurethane liquids in the dispensing ma-
chine reservoir should be maintained at a
47
IEEE
Std 751
minimum temperature of 90 O F during normal
operations. Chemicals should be held at a tem-
perature of at least 60 O F for 24 h prior to being
used. In cold weather, heated facilities should
be provided.
9.4.6 Weak Soils. In soils with weak
bearing and/or lateral capacity, the design
engineer should specify a l t e r n a t i v e
foundation designs and/or backfill to obtain
required foundation integrity. Some
alternatives are increased imbedment, uplift
plates with crushed rock or concrete backfill,
concrete backfill with o r without re-bar
through the pole butt, or other designs that
increase bearing area, uplift capacity, or
resistance loads as required. See IEEE Std 691-
1985 [301,for a more thorough discussion of
foundation design for direct embedded
structures.
9.4.7 Rock Sockets. Where rock is encoun-
tered and cannot be removed by the use of a
rock auger, various types of explosives could
be considered. There are many different types
of rock and the procedure for dealing with each
varies greatly. In order to obtain the best re-
sults, the person in charge should be knowl-
edgeable in types and hardness of the various
rocks encountered (i.e., homogenous, frac-
tured, glacial till boulders, and bedrock) as
this will also determine the type of excavation
to be used.
9.4.8 Conclusions. The methods mentioned
above for setting and backfilling of poles or
structures are recommended for soils that are
encountered in most areas of the United States.
It should be recognized that conditions requir-
ing other techniques may be encountered.
Techniques available for special soil condi-
tions are water and air jetting.
9.5 Structure Framing Procedures. Three
methods of framing H-frame X-braced struc-
tures are used. Rigid framing on the ground
provides full assembly and tightening of the
structure components prior t o erection.
Modified rigid framing provides for partial
assembly of the structure prior to erection but
prohibits complete attachment of the X-braces
and knee-braces. Brace attachment is com-
pleted after the structure has been erected.
Aerial framing provides for complete fram-
ing of arms and braces in the air after the
poles have been erected.
IEEE
Std 751 IEEE TRIALUSE DESIGN GUIDE FOR
9.5.1 Rigid Framing on Ground. Complete sions for access t o and within the site. Level
assembly of the structure on the ground allows terrain with good soil-bearing capabilities
complete framing inspection on the ground will favor rigid framing. Rugged terrain
and permits erection as a unit assembly. The generally favors aerial framing. In rolling
structure is completely rigid and can be piv- terrain all framing procedures should be con-
oted on one pole and held in a plumb and level sidered.
position with only one of the poles solidly sup-
ported on the bottom of one hole, causing dif-
ferential settlement after the line is in
9.6 Anchor and Guy Installation
9.6.1 Anchors. Anchor rods should be in-
service. This potential problem can be
eliminated with an inspection program that stalled in line with the guy strain and with the
ensures both poles are set level and on firm length of rod exposed above the ground surface
bearing.
a minimum of 6 in. Under no circumstances
should the eye of the rod be below finished
9.5.2 Modified Rigid Framing After Pole
grade. Plate anchor holes should be backfilled
Erection. Structures to be framed after erection
and tamped in the same manner as pole holes.
have the crossarms attached and bolted se-
Screw anchors should be installed in accor-
curely to the poles, the knee-brace snugged a t
dance with manufacturer’s recommenda-
the crossarm attachment point, and the top of
tions. After installation, anchors should be
the X-brace attached to the poles while on the
pulled to their required working load holding
ground. The top of the knee-brace and bottom
capacity as specified by the design engineer
of the X-brace should be securely tied to the
(usually from 50 to 75% of ultimate). Anchors
poles during erection t o prevent any move-
not meeting load requirements should be re-
ment that may damage the firmly attached
installed.
end fittings. The top of the knee-brace and
bottom of the X-brace are securely attached to
9.6.2 Guys. Guys should be installed before
conductors and overhead ground wires are
the poles after structure erection and prior to
strung. All guys should be tightened to take the
conductor and overhead ground wire string-
slack out of the guy strand, but the tension
ing. Use of this construction procedure will al-
should not cause noticeable deflection of the
low the rotation of the structure during the
poles. When downguys are tightened, the pole
leveling procedure. The crossarm should not
should be held in its final position with a
be out of level more than 3/4 in per 10 ft of
winch truck or with the sagged conductor and
length. This criterion may require one pole to
overhead ground wire t o assure that the guy
be raised. This method may increase erection
adjustments are properly made. Poles at angle
costs due to aerial framing and the greater dif-
structures may be set with a rake in the direc-
ficulty of inspection.
tion of the guy strain but not more than one
96.3 Aerial Framing. Poles are erected and
inch per 10 ft of pole length. After wire instal-
plumbed in holes t h a t have been properly
lation, the guys should be checked for tightness
leveled with backfill material. A crossarm
and the anchors checked for any sign of
through bolt hole is drilled in the air a t the
pulling. Guy-connecting devices should be
proper location on one pole. The crossarms are
properly installed to develop maximum grip-
spread and placed over the pole tops and
ping capacity.
lowered t o their proper position. When one
crossarm through bolt is installed, the
crossarm is leveled and the other through bolt 9.7 Construction Personnel. The aforemen-
hole is drilled using the crossarm through bolt tioned procedures relative t o framing and
hole as a template. Erection and attachment of erecting wood pole structures are applicable
braces, mounting hardware, span guys, and whether the utility uses its own construction
X-braces then proceed to complete the framed crews or those of an outside contractor. When
structure. Aerial framing reduces lifting ca- using an outside contractor, the utility should
pacity and access requirements for t h e consider only qualified reputable contractors
equipment. experienced in electric transmission pole line
9.5.4 Choice of Methods. The choice of the construction. It is recommended that resumes
structural framing procedure depends on eco- of key personnel be considered as part of the
nomics, available equipment, and the provi- contractor’s evaluation.

T

WOOD TRANSMISSION STRUCTURES
10.Quality Assurance and Control
10.1 Quality Assurance
10.1.1 General. Quality assurance is a pro-
gram applying technical and managerial
skills to accomplish the objectives of a particu-
lar design. I t is the responsibility of the owner
to design a program that provides an adequate
design, adequate materials, and adequate
field workmanship to meet the requirements
of the project. In the case of wood structures,
quality assurance is the responsibility of the
purchaser of the wood structure system through
the quality control requirements of the pur-
chase specifications. The goal of a compre-
hensive quality assurance program is t o
secure an economical and reliable transmis-
sion system.
10.1.2 Design. Each design engineer
(purchaser, consultant, or supplier) is respon-
sible for the quality of his or her own work.
Assurance of design quality is effected by a
fixed procedural review of design calculations
including assumptions, criteria, decision pro-
cess, etc. Documentation shall clearly show
that all loading conditions were incorporated
-- in the final design of the structure system.
Design drawings shall show evidence of being
checked for dimensional accuracy, correct
callout of components, compatibility of compo-
nent parts, and constructability.
10.1.3 Materials. Purchase specifications
should require that all materials used in the
wood structure system be identified and con-
trolled in a manner that will allow tracking of
the material from the vendor to the purchaser’s
point of delivery. If requested by the purchaser,
written evidence should be obtained that shows
the established acceptance standards were
used, and that inspection for conformance to
such standards was accomplished. Doc-
umentation of causes for rejection of
nonconforming materials should be made to
identify trends, and to allow for appropriate
corrective actions.
Many of the quality characteristics of wood
materials can be detected, but are difficult to
measure quantifiably. Some of the standards
listed in 10.2.2cover the potential defects and
acceptance criteria. It is generally easier t o
verify the quality of nonwood components used
in wood construction systems; e.g., mill test
reports may be obtained for steel components
that document chemical and physical proper-
49
IEEE
Std 751
ties. The production of materials such as
fiberglass is closely controlled so that chemi-
cal and physical properties are easily pre-
dicted and verified.
10.1.4 Production and Fabrication. Quality
assurance of production and fabrication will
encompass wood poles, sawn timbers, lami-
nated wood members, nonwood components,
wood treatment, and steel coatings. Purchase
specifications should include requirements
for control of each activity.
Before bidding, every supplier should pro-
vide evidence that a quality control program is
implemented and enforced. I t is recom-
mended that the purchaser visit the supplier’s
plant to verify the following:
(1) Machines, tools, and processes will
hold specified tolerances.
(2) Measuring instruments are adequate to
control accuracy.
(3) Production personnel a r e properly
trained.
(4) Packing and shipping is controlled for
quality.
( 5 ) Adequate records are maintained of the
production process.
10.1.5 Tolerances. In general, tolerance
limits are set to provide assurance of compo-
nent fit and process control. Tolerances that
are established too tightly could lead to an un-
necessary expense in the cost of components.
The cost of holding tolerances and their ulti-
mate benefit must be considered.
10.1.6 Shipping, Handling, and Storing.
Purchase specifications should specify the re-
quirements for proper shipping, handling,
and storage. The methods and procedures
specified should be inspected for conformance.
108 Quality Control
10.2.1 General. Quality control is the pro-
cess of comparing the properties and charac-
teristics of the project’s component parts
(design, materials, and labor) with the design
assumptions. This is usually accomplished
through the media of specifications, stan-
dards, and testing. It is the responsibility of
the owner to provide specifications for the com-
ponent parts. It is the component provider’s re-
sponsibility to comply with the owner’s speci-
fication.
10.2.2 Standards. Standards and standard
test methods applicable to wood structure sys-
tem component quality are as follows:
lEEE
9td 751
AITC 111-79, Recommended Practice for Pro-
tection of Structural Glued Laminated Timber
During Transit, Storage, and Erection.
AITC 117-87, Design for Laminated Spec-
ifications.
AITC 117-88, Manufacturing Standard
Specifications for Structural Glued Laminated
Timber of Softwood Species.
AITC 200-83, Inspection Manual.
ANSI C135.1-1979, American National
Standard for Galvanized Steel Bolts and Nuts
for Overhead Line Construction.
ANSI C135.2-1987, American National
Standard for Threaded Zinc-Coated Ferrous
Strand-Eye Anchor Rods and Nuts for
Overhead Line Construction.
ANSI C135.4-1987, American National
Standard for Zinc-Coated Ferrous Eyebolts
and Nuts for Overhead Line Construction.
ANSI C135.5-1987, American National
Standard for Zinc-Coated Ferrous Eyenuts
and Eyebolts for Overhead Line Construction.
ANSI 05.1-1987, American National Stan-
dard Specifications and Dimensions for Wood
Poles.
ANSI 05.2-1983, (Reaff 1989), American
National Standard Specifications for Struc-
tural Glued Laminated Timber (GLULAM)
for Utility Structures.
ANSI 05.3-1990, American National
Standard Specifications and Dimensions for
Solid Sawn-Wood Crossarms and Braces.
ANSYAITC A190.1-1983, Wood Products -
Structural Glued Laminated Timber (former-
ly PS 56-73 Voluntary Product Standard).
ANSUASTM A123-89A, Standard Specifi-
cation for Zinc (Hot-dip Galvanized) Coatings
on Iron and Steel Products.
ANSI/ASTM A153-82 (87), S t a n d a r d
Specification for Zinc Coating (Hot-dip) on
Iron and Steel Hardware.
50
IEEE TRIAL-USEDESIGN GUIDE FOR
ANSYASTM A307-90, Standard Specification
for Carbon Steel Bolts and Studs, 60,000 PSI
Tensile Strength.
ANSVASTM A563-90, Standard Specification
for Carbon and Alloy Steel Nuts.
ANSYASTM D38-79 (89el), Test Method for
Sampling Wood Preservatives Prior to
Testing.
ANSVASTM D390-86, Standard Specifi-
cation for Coal-Tar Creosote for t h e
Preservative Treatment of Piles, Poles, and
Timbers for Marine, Land, and Fresh Water
Use.
ANSYASTM D1036-83, Standard Methods of
Static Tests of Wood Poles.
ANSUASTM D1101-89, Standard Test for
Integrity of Glue J o i n t s i n Struc-
tural Laminated Wood Products for Exterior
Use.
ANSI/ASTM D1184-69 (19861, Standard Test
Method for Flexural Strength of Adhesive
Bonded Laminated Assemblies.
ANSVASTM D1272-56 (861, Standard Spec-
ification for Pentachlorophenol.
ANWASTM D1625-71 (861, Standard Spec-
ification for Chromated Copper Arsenate.
ANSI/ASTM D1760-86A, Standard Spec-
ification for Pressure Treatment of Timber
Products.
ANSUASTM D1858-63 (86), Standard Spec-
ifications for Creosote-Petroleum Solution.
ANSYASTM D3507-86, Standard Test Methods
for Penetration of Preservatives in Wood and
for Differentiating Between Heartwood and
Sapwood.
ANSYASTM D3737-89, Standard Method for
Establishing Stresses for Structural Glued
Laminated Timber (Glulam).
ANSVASTM D4442-84, Test Methods for
Direct Moisture Content Measurement of
Wood and Wood-Base Materials.

WOOD TRANSMISSION STRUCTURES
ANSYASTM D4444-84, Test Methods for Use
-
and Calibration of Hand-Held Moisture
Meters.
AWPA standards. Refer t o the A m e r i c a n
Wood-Preserver’s Association Book of
Standards for all applicable standards.
REA Bulletin 50-17 (DT-5B), REA
Specification for Wood Crossarm (Solid and
Laminated) Transmission Timber and Pole
Keys, 1987.
REA Bulletin 50-24 (DT-191, REA
Specification for Quality Control and
Inspection of Timber Products, 1987.
SPIB Standard Grading Rules for Southern
Pine Lumber, 1977 ed.
WCLIB no. 16, Standard Grading Rules for
West Coast Lumber, 1989 (revised).
11. Testing
11.1 General. After the structure loading has
been determined and the structure designed, a
full-size structure test can be performed to ver-
ify the design. This procedure is especially
important for new designs or unusual loading
conditions,
Preliminary tests on individual structure
components are desirable to discover and cor-
rect problems before a full-size structure test is
made.
11.2 Component Tests. Structure component
tests are often necessary to verify the design
strength of a new component or t o confirm the
ability of an existing component to perform in
a new or altered application.
11.2.1 Component Manufacture.
Components for testing should be obtained
from the same manufacturer as the actual line
material. No special selection of material or
procedures should be allowed. Actual produc-
tion samples, selected randomly, are ideal for
test samples.
11.2.2 Testing Procedure. Loads should be
applied in a manner that accurately simulates
the actual loading configuration that the com-
ponent will experience as part of the structural
system. Dynamometers, load cells, dead
51
- -r-
IEEE
Std 751
weights, hydraulic pressure gages or other
methods should be used to accurately record the
test loads. The load measuring devices should
be calibrated before and after the tests.
Direct observation, deflection measure-
ments, photographs, video tapes, and any other
methods available should be used to record the
results of the testing.
11.23 Failure -Ultimate Strength.Failure
of a component is defined a s that point or load
a t which the component will not sustain
further increased loading or maintain a
given load without excessive increased
deflection or movement. Excessive increased
deflection is considered to be that which would
render the component noneffective during its
intended life. The load at failure is
considered to be the ultimate strength of the
component. The component should be
designed to have an ultimate strength equal to
or larger than the maximum effects of the
design loads, plus all applicable safety and
load factors.
11.2.4 Results and Reports. Results of com-
ponent tests should be recorded. A test report
includes the purpose of the test, test procedure,
test results and conclusion, photographs, test
data sheets, and other pertinent data.
11.2.5 Test Evaluation. Caution should be
emphasized in a precise interpretation of the
results of a single structural test. Variabilities
in material properties and connector perfor-
mance can significantly alter the expected re-
sults. Therefore, statistical probability con-
cepts may be helpful when making an experi-
mental investigation.
11.3 Pole Tests. The Electric Power Research
Institute (EPRI) has sponsored an extensive
wood pole testing program and established a
data bank a t Colorado State University (CSU)
for all such tests performed in North America.
I t is recommended that all future single-pole
tests be performed in a manner t h a t is
comparable with the testing done a t CSU. To
assure that future test data can be integrated
into the data bank, follow ANSYASTM D1036-
83 [121with the following additions:
(1) Use the cantilever method for testing.
(2) For poles 50 f t or longer, the winch
applying the load should be designed to
provide an automatic adjustment of
load direction perpendicular t o the
original long axis of the pole.
IEEE
Std 751
(3) For poles 50 R and longer, the pole tip de-
flection should be adjusted for longitu-
dinal deflection.
(4) In computing the modulus of elasticity,
the crushing of the pole in the crib and
the associated base rotation should be
accounted for.
( 5 ) The use of automatic recording of load
deformation is encouraged over dial
gage and dynamometer readings.
For more details on the testing procedure
and the data bank, refer to [171.
11.4 S t r u m Tests
11.4.1 Manufacture. Structures to be tested
shall be manufactured as actual production
items as much as possible. Special selection of
material or processes should not be allowed.
11.49 Structure Framing. The test structure
should be framed, as nearly as possible, in the
same arrangement and with t h e same
procedures a s the actual line-construction
structures.
11.4.3 Structure Erection. The structure
should be erected as near as possible to the
method t h a t will be used in actual line
construction.
All rigging a n d deflection recording
devices may be attached to the structure prior to
erection. Care should be taken to ensure the
proper rigging configuration still exists after
erection.
11.4.4 Structure Foundations. The founda-
tion used for the structure test should develop
the full strength of the test structure without ex-
cessive movement. Normally this will re-
quire backfill other than soil. Concrete,
crushed rock, and polyurethane foam have all
been used successfully, as well as several me-
chanical clamping devices. Special founda-
tions may be required if the structure failure is
anticipated to be in the foundation area.
11.4.5 Rigging. The rigging t h a t will
transmit the external loads to the structure
should duplicate actual field-loading condi-
tions.
Each conductor support and overhead
ground wire support position should be loaded
individually both in the transverse and verti-
cal directions. Rigging should be used to sim-
ulate the insulator string. It is recommended
that actual insulators should not be used for
this purpose because of the possibility of prema-
ture failure.
52
- -7
E E E TRIALUSE DESIGN GUIDE FOR
All rigging should be of adequate strength to
allow the full test loads to be applied without the
danger of rigging failure. I t is necessary to
exercise care t o ensure t h a t rigging
arrangements do not multiply loads or reduce
loads by friction or binding.
11.4.6 Structure Loading. The test loads
applied t o the structure should simulate the
actual loading the structure will experience
during its service life.
Many different load combinations can be
used to simulate the actual line loading condi-
tions. A sequence of loadings should be se-
lected so the most severe case is completed last.
All loads should be applied in increments no
greater than 25% of the ultimate design load.
Loads should be applied evenly and steadily to
prevent impact loading unless dynamic load-
ing is the desired effect. Each incremental
load should be held for a minimum of 5 min
before proceeding.
11.4.7 Load and Deflection Measurements.
All test loads should be monitored by the use of
dynamometers, load cells, hydraulic pressure
gages, dead weights, or other accurate and
reliable measuring methods.
Deflection of the structure should be mea-
sured at all critical points along the pole and at
the ground line. Uplift and down thrust deflec-
tions should also be measured in the case of
two-pole structures. Measurements should be
made with a transit, reading graduated mem-
bers on the structure or some other suitable
method. Direct observation, photographs, and
load and deflection values should be used to
record the performance of the structure
throughout the entire test sequence.
11.4.8 Failure -Ultimate Strength.Failure
of the structure is defined as that point or load
a t which the structure will not sustain
increased loading or maintain a load without
excessive deflection or ' movement. Excessive
deflection is considered to be that which would
render the component ineffective in its end
use. The ultimate strength of the structure is
equal t o the maximum load at the time of
structure failure.
11.4.9 Results and Reports. Results of a
structure test should be recorded in the form of
test report including the purpose of the test, the
test procedure, test results, and a conclusion.
Photographs, test data sheets, structure infor-
mation, pole sizes and lengths, and any other
pertinent data should be included in the report.
 ..
WOOD TRANSMISSION STRUCTURES
11.5 Pole-Top Assembly Tests. Separate tests
on pole-top assemblies are sometimes made to
verify their performance and capacity. Pole-
top assembly tests are less expensive than full
structure tests and are less dangerous.
Because these tests are run a t ground level, the
engineer can easily observe and inspect the
performance of end fittings and other hard-
ware.
As an example, a test might be required for a
pole-top assembly of an H-frame. The poles
representing the pole-top assembly are usually
embedded in concrete a t the point that corre-
sponds to the top connection of the X-brace. The
poles should be of the same diameter and
species as the base class pole used on the line.
Longitudinal, transverse, and vertical loads
are then applied simultaneously or indepen-
dently of each other depending on the re-
quirements of the test.
12. Electricalconsiderations
12.1 General. Wood structures have electrical
characteristics t h a t need to be considered to
ensure the integrity of the system and optimize
the electrical design of each structure. The de-
sign engineer should consider electrical re-
strictions in each design. For instance, non-
ceramic insulator assemblies may have
different physical measurements t h a n
porcelain insulators with the same electrical
characteristics, which may dictate the location
of structure members such as X-braces.
Operation and maintenance procedures for
each entity should be considered in the overall
design. Barehand and hotstick maintenance
may require special design attention.
Convenient provisions for personal grounds
contribute to the safety of line workers.
Electrical clearances should meet the
minimum values specified by the latest
edition of applicable Federal, State, and Local
codes and regulations. Where provisions for
specialized applications such a s liveline
maintenance a r e planned, meeting the
Occupational Safety and Health Admin-
istration (OSHA) regulations should be
included in design. Proven designs used in
similar environments should be considered
where codes or regulations do not exist, are
vague, or are unclear.
EEE
Std 751
123 Electrical Properties of Wood. This
section discusses electrical properties of wood
that are significant in high-voltage applica-
tions and the design of insulation and clear-
ances, bonding, grounding, prevention of
structural fires, communications interfer-
ence, and raptor protection. Detailed informa-
tion on these topics can be found in a number of
reference publications, some of which are
called out in this section and listed in 1.2.
While a complete discussion of transmission
line electrical design is beyond the scope of
this guide, the subject is well covered in the
various references. The following informa-
tion refers to wood materials, except treated
poles. The type of treatment may have varying
effects on electrical properties. The designer
should refer to Forest Products Laboratory or
literature from suppliers for values on specific
materials.
12.2.1 ConductivityDtesistivity Values of
Wood. The electrical conductivity of wood
varies slightly with applied voltage and ap-
proximately doubles for each temperature in-
crease of 10 "C.The electrical conductivity of
wood or i t s reciprocal, resistivity, varies
greatly with moisture content, especially be-
low the fiber saturation level. The electrical
conductivity increases (resistivity decreases)
by 1Olo to 1013 times a s moisture content in-
creases from oven dry to the fiber saturation
point. The resistivity is about 1014 to 10l6ohm-
meters for oven-dry wood, and 103 to lo4 ohm-
meters for wood at fiber saturation. As the
moisture content increases above fiber satura-
tion, the further increases in conductivity are
smaller and erratic, generally amounting to
less than a hundredfold. For example, the
electrical resistance for Douglas fir varies
with moisture content as shown in Table 12.1.
Table 12.1
Douglas &Moisture Content and
ResistanceValues
Moisture Content Resistance*
(Percent) (megohms)
7 22400
8 478)
12 la0
24 0.6
~~
*The average of the measurements made along the
grain between two pairs of needle electrodes 1 U4 in apart
and driven to a depth of 5/16 in, measured at 80 "F.Specific
values for various woods may be found in [MI.
lEEE
Std 751
125 Wood InsulationDesign
12.3.1 Insulation Design Criteria.
Insulation design of a transmission structure
is usually preceded by selection of design trip-
out rates for outages due t o lightning, switch-
ing surges, and power-frequency voltages.
The decision h a s usually been made as to
which conductor will be used, whether to use
overhead ground wire lightning protection,
right-of-way restrictions, and whether or not to
prepare alternative designs for varying con-
ditions. Wind conditions to accompany the
voltage conditions may be selected, because the
electrical clearances on suspension structures
depend on insulator swing due t o wind.
Structure insulation may then be coordinated
so that flashover of the insulators or air gaps is
equally probable (see C341, [401,[531, and [621).
12.33 Crossarm Bonding. A particularly
important design decision is whether or not to
bond the insulator hanger a t the end of the
crossarm t o the structure down lead on the
pole. This crossarm bonding would provide a
metallic shunt to prevent the wood from con-
ducting lightning o r leakage current t h a t
could cause physical damage. With bonding,
insulation and arc quenching properties of the
wood will be negated. Without bonding, the
wood will be exposed to damage due to light-
ning or leakage currents, but the wood insula-
tion will improve lightning performance.
Operating experience with wood lines in the
region of interest is an important considera-
tion in the bonding decision. The design pro-
cedures for lightning performance in 12.3.3 do
not apply if crossarms are bonded. Bonding
may be advisable for tangent dead ends in
which the leakage currents of two or more in-
sulator strings will enter the crossarm a t a
single fitting. The possibility of minor light-
ning damage (splintering) may be considered
in sizing the crossarm.
12.3.3 Insulation for Lightning
Performance. Design with an unbonded wood
crossarm should determine the equivalent
length of the insulator string that is equal in
impulse flashover voltage to the wood and line
insulation t h a t is proposed. This equivalent
insulator string should be used in a lightning
performance estimating procedure, such as
those given in [201 and [331, to calculate the
outage rate of the proposed design. The cal-
culated performance figure should be com-
pared to known performance of existing wood
IEEE TRIAL-USEDESIGN GUIDE FOR
lines, if available, in a n area of similar
keraunic level. The flashover voltage of wood-
insulator combinations can be estimated by
the method given in 1351 and from the results of
impulse testing of full-scale structure insula-
tion as described in [361 and [461. These
methods may also be used to find the clearance
needed for impulse insulation from the con-
ductor to a wood brace that has one end bonded
t o a down lead. Impulse flashover data for rod
gaps may be used for conductor-to-pole clear-
ances. Impulse insulation can be improved on
many structure types by mounting the down
lead on standoff devices rather than directly
on the pole.
12.3.4 Insulation for Switching Surge and
Power-Frequency Voltages. The required
insulator and air-gap clearances for these
voltages can be determined from data in [l61
and [201. Data approaching rod-gap tables may
be used due to,the low “electrical mass” of a
wood structure as covered in [201 for switching
surge clearances. Unbonded wood members
are assumed to have no insulating value and
are treated as if they were grounded metal in
the process of checking clearances. Phase-to-
structure dimensions may be derived from
consideration of the following: (1) safety
codes; (2) liveline maintenance procedures;
(3) midspan conductor motion; or (4) raptor
protection.
12.4 Structure Electrical Fires. Structural
electric fires may be caused by lightning
strikes, by surface leakage currents, or from
excessive internal Joule losses generated by
internal leakage currents within the pole
wood. Charring or burning can result from
resistive heating when there is sufficient
current flow through a high-resistance wood
section.
Splintering, shattering, or burning may
result from the passage of lightning impulse
current through wood, although in many cases
there is little effect. Serious damage is more
likely if there is an internal wood path with a
higher moisture content t h a t the arc can
follow. A discussion of lightning performance
and keraunic levels may be found in [201.
Surface leakage currents a r e usually
caused by excessive contamination of the in-
sulator surface. A discussion on fires caused
by leakage currents may be found in a three-
part article in [511.

WOOD TRANSMISSION STRUCTURES
Prevention of fires caused by excessive
leakage current can be accomplished by
crossarm bonding, or by use of metal bands
around the wood members or other fittings de-
signed to shunt leakage current around high-
resistance wood sections that may develop a t
the pole-crossarm and crossarm-insulator
connections, as described in [351 and 1541.
Control may also be achieved by added leak-
age distance in the insulators or by cleaning
insulators.
Fires not attributable to lightning stroke or
surface leakage currents are identified as a
result of excessive intemal Joule losses. This
type of fire and its causes are discussed in 1471.
The probability of fire in each case can be re-
duced by adequately bonding and grounding
the structure and its respective metal com-
ponents, and by using sufficient wood preserv-
ing methods to reduce the moisture absorption
characteristics of the wood components. Pole
burning a t the down lead fasteners or guy fit-
tings, caused by currents flowing to ground
from the moist intemal wood that is energized
by capacitive coupling to the phase conductors,
may be avoided by methods presented in 1451
and 1471. One such method is to provide an ad-
equate number of fasteners to reduce the cur-
rent at any one fastener.
12.5 Structure Grounding.Structure ground-
ing practices vary greatly throughout the
transmission industry. Where lightning is a
problem, the designer should plan a ground-
ing system t h a t will provide the required
structure protection for his or her location and
situation. Soft-drawn conductors are usually
used for down leads and bonding. Material
and size selection are based on the potential for
corrosion below grade, the capability to con-
duct expected fault currents, and experience
with material theft. Subsurface connections of
the down lead to grounding elements should
follow successful local practice. Convenient
provision for personnel ground connections
contributes t o maintenance worker safety.
The following criteria, used by various de-
signers, are presented for consideration:
(1) Use of structure grounds for all
transmission voltages.
(2) Consult isokeraunic maps to determine
the need for overhead ground wires. At
higher keraunic levels, static shield
wires are used for the entire length of
55
IEEE
Std 751
lines a t higher voltages. At lower ker-
aunic levels and for lines at lower volt-
ages, overhead ground wires are usu-
ally extended for one-half to one mile
from substations to protect substation
equipment.
Electrically bond all metallic
components on the structure (including
crossarm components) for lines at 345
kV and above.
Electrically bond metal components
that are within 6 in of each other at all
voltages.
Use ground rods when polyurethane
materials are used a s backfill. Butt
plates may be used if enough soil back-
fill is placed at the bottom of the hole to
ensure good electrical contact between
the structure ground and the native soil.
Copper is one of the better grounding
materials. Where there is a problem
with vandalism or theft, copperweld,
alumoweld, soft-drawn aluminum, or
galvanized wire may be used. Some
utilities do not allow aluminum ground
wires.
Structure ground wire staples can be a
source of pole fires due to excessive
internal Joule losses (see 12.4). The
installation of larger quantities of
staples in key areas will reduce the
probability of this type of fire occurring.
In areas where the soil resistivity is a
problem, use of multiple ground rods or
various counterpoising schemes should
be considered. Footing resistances
should be held t o an economical
minimum and should not exceed
specified values (1211 and 1221).
12.6 Corona and Electric Effects. Radio inter-
ference (RI), television interference, audible
noise, corona loss (visible discharge), and
electrical field effects have become more sig-
nificant design issues with the rise in operat-
ing voltages. Although these problems do not
affect structure limits, as presented by this
guide, they should be considered in the total
design. Detailed discussions of these subjects
may be found in 1163 and 1201.
A potential source of RI generation on a
transmission line is sparking across small
gaps between metal fittings t h a t are in the
electric field of the phase conductors or in the
IEEE
Std 751
path of current going to ground. Wood struc-
tures will have a number of potential spark
gaps; typical cases are loose washers caused
by wood shrinkage, gaps between down leads
and their fasteners, lightly loaded insulator
strings, and slack guys. Interference can be
prevented by ensuring good electrical contact
through use of static-proof hardware as noted
in Section 7. Spring washers, washerhead
bolts, grid plates with stainless steel clips to
contact the throughbolt, insulator weights, and
increased number of ground staples are some
methods t h a t are used t o reduce sparking.
Further ideas are given in [491. I t is essential
that workers be aware of the need for tight
contact of hardware.
12.7 Raptor Considerations. Protection of rap-
tors from electrocution should be considered in
design for areas where a problem may exist.
1- --
Conventional lines a t 115 kV and above have
enough phase spacing and energized part to
ground clearance that even the raptors with the
largest wing spans are safe. Electrical clear-
ances, electrical isolation, or devices t o dis-
courage perching should be examined at lower
voltages t o prevent raptor electrocution.
Information on suggested practices for raptor
protection on power lines may be obtained
from [571.
12.8 Maintenance and Safety. Liveline
(hotstick or barehand) maintenance practices
should be considered in design because min-
imum working clearances are, in many
cases, greater t h a n minimum electrical
clearances. It may also be necessary t o in-
crease basic clearances t o provide adequate
safety for workers because of requirements re-
lated to specialized tools or work methods.
56
P
 Appendix

Sample Problems for Section 5-Structural Analysis and Design

Al. Single-Pole Analysis and Design

A2. H-frame Structure Analysis and Design

A2.1 National Electrical Safety Code Method A
A2.2 National Electrical Safety Code Method B

A3. Guyed Pole Analysis and Design

A4. Computer Analysis

NOTE: The examples in Al, A2.1, A2.2, and A4 neglect the weight of the insulators and hardware and the effects of wind on the
insulators and hardware. This was done to allow direct calculation of maximum wind span due to wire load. The design engineer
should recalculate stress using actual span loads including insulator loads to assure that adequate design is provided.

Al. Single-Pole Analysis and Design

NOTES: (1) This solution neglects the wind on insulators and the P-A effects of the insulator weght.
(2) This solution uses the 1990 NESC Method B under Rule 251, which has a load and strength factor applied (see ANSI C2-1990
[All,’ p. 289). This method of analysis is found in [A4].

A l . l References
[All ANSI C2-1990, National Electrical Safety Code?
[A21 EPRI EL-2040, Project 1352-1, Probability-Based Design of Woal Transmission Structures-
Volume 3: User’s Manual POLEDA-80-POLE Design and Analysis, Final Report, Goodman, J. R.,
Vanderbilt, M. D., Criswell, M. E., and Bodig, 53
[A31 REA Bulletin 62-1, Design Manual for High-Voltage Transmission Lines, US Dept. of Agriculture,
Aug. 1980P
[A41 T?-ansmissionLine Design Manual, Farr, Holland H., US Dept. of the Interior, Denver, CO, 1980.

‘The numbers in brackets correspond to those of the references in Al.l.

2The National Electrical Safety Code can be obtained from the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Service Center,
445 Hoes Lane, P.O. Box 1331, Piscataway, N J 08855-1331.
3EPRI publications can be obtained from the Electric Power Research Institute, 3912 Hillview Ave., Palo Alto, CA 94304.
4REA publications can be obtained from the Rural Electrification Administration, Publications, 12th and Independence Ave.,
Washington, D.C. 20250.

57

---
I
IEEE
Std 751 APPENDIX

A1.2 Single-Pole Structure Analysis for the Example Shown in Fig AI

Configuration: Overhead Ground Wire: % inch HS Steel, 7 Strand
Diameter = 0.36 in
Weight = 0.273 lb/ft
Weight with ice = 0.807 lb/ft
Conductor: 954 KCM ACSR, 54/7 Strand
Diameter = 1.196 in
Weight = 1.229 lb/ft
Weight with ice = 2.284 lb/ft
Pole: 75 ft,Class 1
Diameter, Top, dl = 8.59 in
Diameter, Ground, dz = 16.30 in
Load Condition: NESC Heavy, 1990 Method B (see [All)
find: Maximum Allowable Horizontal Wind Span (HS) in feet
solution:

R I = (4 lb/ft2) p = 0.453 lb/ft of span

(El;)

2.196 in
Rz = R3 = R4 = (4 lb/ft2) p = 0.732 lb/ft ofspan
(12 d f t )
P1 = 0.807 lb/ft of span
Pz = P3 = P4 = 2.284 lb/ft of span
Find location of R:
For the summation of MA = 0,
L I R l + ( L 2 + L3 + L 4 ) R 2 = (65)(0.453) + (58 + 53.5 + 49)(0.732) = 146.93 ft-lb/ft of span
R = R1 + R2 + R3 + R4 = 3(0.732) + 0.453 = 2.649 lb/ft of span
MA - 146.93 ft lb/ft of span
L = - - = 55.5 f t
R 2.649 lb/ft of span
Find eccentricity, e :
P = conductor weight + overhead ground wire weight
= 3(2.284) + 0.807 = 7.659 lb/ft of span
(Total weight) (Vertical offset)
e =
P
- (0.807)(0) + (2.284)(7) - (2*284)(7) (2'284)(8)
+ = 2.386 ft
7.659
Total Ground-Line Moment = Mwp (Moment due to wind on pole)
+ Mwc (Moment from wind on conductors.(RL))
+ Mvo (Moment from vertical load eccentric (Pe))
+ MpA (Moment from vertical load in deflected position)
+ M I (Moment due to vertical weight of insulators)
where
FH2(d2 + 2dl)(OCF)
Mwp = ,and F 4 Ib/ft2,
=
72 H Pole height = 65.5 ft, and
=
Horjzontal Overload Capacity Factor (OCF) = 2.5

58

I T'
APPENDIX IEEE
Std 751

-
4 (65.5)2(16.3 + 2 (8.59)) (2.5)
= 7980(2.5)
72
= 19 950 ft-lb
MWc = R(HS)L(OCF),or QL(OCF),where Q = R(HS)
= 2.649 ( H S )(55.5) (2.5) = 367.5 (HS)
Mvo = P(VS)e(OCF),assume Vertical Span ( V S ) = 1.25(HS)
Vertical Overload Capacity Factor (OCF) = 1.5
= 7.659(VS)(2.386)(1.5) = 7.659(1.25HS)(2.386)(1.5)
= 34.26(HS)

Fig AI
Single-PoleStructure Analysis

R1
--t
,
RESULTANT (R)
"1 R2

R4
-&

w,

5 .5' ! 5'

b- -
b AI M A 9 i'

59
IEEE
Std 751 APPENDIX

For fixed-free end conditions (from Eq 5.22a),

PCR = P' (g2),

(2) where P' =
2.7
=
16.3 2.7
( E )= 3.98

= (
3.98 ;2:551920000)
.5)12)2) ( 7~(964.77)4) = 3.98(4777) = 19012 lb

NOTE: E = 1 920 OOO is not a fixed value (from Table 3.8).

where
OCF = 1.5
P = 7.659( V S ) = (7.659)(1.25)(HS)
PcR = 19012
E = 1920000
R = 2.649(HS)
L = 666 in
dR = 9.77in
d2 = 16.3in
Expanding, we get
1.488( (HS)
MpA = 19012 - 9.574(HS)
MR = (0.000264)fc3(SRF), where SRF = Stress Reduction Factor = 0.65
= = 184 340 ft-lb
(0.000264)(8000)(7~16.30)~(0.65)
It follows that
M ~ +AMWC+ Mvo Mwp 5 MR
or
MPA + M W C + MVo + MWp - MR = 0
Expanding, we get
-2.358(10)3(HS)2 + 9.212(10)6(HS) - 3.125(10)9 = 0
(HS)2 - 3.906(10)3(HS) + 1.325(10)6 = 0
HS = 375 ft maximum horizontal span
If P - A stresses are ignored,
(MWC+ Mvo)(HS) = MR - Mwp or
401.76(HS) = 164 390,it follows that HS = 409 ft.
If eccentricity (Pe) stresses are deleted,
Mwc(HS) = MR - Mwp or
367.5(HS) = 164 390,it follows that HS = 447 ft.
If analysis with wind on pole is deleted,
Mwc(HS) = M R or
367.5(HS) = 184 340,it follows that HS = 502 ft.

60
 IEEE
APPENDIX Std 751

Table A1
summary
Difference
Allowable Reduction
Condition Span -feet feet percent * percent +
Analysis with Wind on Wires only 502 - - -
Plus Wind on Pole 447 55 11.0 11.0
Plus Eccentricity of Vertical Load 409 38 7.6 18.5
Plus P-A Stress 375 34 6.8 25.3

Difference
'Percent Difference = 100
502
502 - Span
'Percent Reduction = 100
502

A2. H - h e Structure Analysis and Design

A2.1 National Electrical safety Code Method A
NOTES (1) This solution neglects the effect of insulator weight and wind on the insulators.
(2) This solution uses NESC overload capacity factor Method A design loads [All.

See reference [A41 and Fig A2.

(1) Given and assumed structure data
(a) Wire Sizes
Overhead Ground Wire = YE in Steel Strand
Conductor = Bundled (2 Per Phase) 954 ACSR 45/7
(b) Loading-Grade B (NESC) Construction
Case No. 1 NESC Light Loading
9 lb/ft2 wind on bare conductor
Overload Capacity Factor = 4.0
Case No. 2 NESC Heavy Loading
4 lb/ft2 wind on % in radial ice
Overload Capacity Factor = 4.0
(c) Structured dimensions
(i) Assume 85 ft, Class 1 Douglas fir poles
(ii) Given: CRH = 12.5 ft
Y = 10.5 ft
b = 27.0 f t
= 26.0 ft NOTE: 1.0 ft is allowed for pole thickness
X = 25.5 f t
Setting depth = 10.5 ft
(2) Pole strength calculations
(a) Pole dimensions and moments
Circumference Pole Moment
Location (inches) (ft-lbs)
A 53.4 321 601
B 44.3 183 614
C 35.1 91 330
D 31.4 65 386
NOTE: Circumferences on minimum pole dimensions per
ANSI 05.1-1987.

61
IEEE
Std 751 APPENDIX

Moments = 0.000264 fc3 (ft-lb), where

f = MaximumBending Stress = 8000psi
c = Circumference (in) at each location
(b) Determine the location of the planes of contraflexure using Eq 5.8.

xo = X(MA)
-=
25.5 ft (321 601 ft-lb)
= 16.23 ft
MA+ MB (321 601 ft-lb + 183 614 ft-lb)
Xi = X - Xo = 25.5 ft - 16.23 ft = 9.27 ft

yo =-=Y(MC 1 10.5 ft (91 330 ft-lb)

= 6.12 ft
MC + MD (91 330 ft-lb + 65 386 ft-lb)
U1 = y - yo = 10.5 ft - 6.12 ft = 4.38 ft

Fig A2
€I-fixmeStructure

PLANE OF
CONTRAFLEXURE --

b
m

62

-1
 IEEE
APPENDIX Std 751

(c) Pole strengths

P A = - -MA) - 2(321601 ft-lb) = 39625 lb

XO 16.23ft
~ ( M B -) 2(183 614 ft-lb)
ps = -- = 39625 lb
X1 9.27ft
2(Mc) - 2(91330 ft-lb)
pc= -- = 29 851 lb
YO 6.12ft

pD=~
--
( M D- )2(65 386 ft-lb)
= 29851 lb
Yl 4.38ft
NOTE: Pole strength values are based on not rounding off pole circumferences and planes of contraflexure
locations.
(d) Pole Structure Strength (PSS) is found by reducing the calculated strength by 15% to allow
for bolt hole, ground-line movement, etc. For more exact reductions in pole capacities due to
bolt hole, use the methods outlined in (e) below.
PSS = 29851 lb - 0.15(29851 lb) = 25373 lb
(e) The reduction in strength caused by a bolt hole drilled on the neutral axis of a pole is
neghgible,while a hole perpendicular to the neutral axis may reduce the strength by as much
as 15 to 20%.A method for calculating this reduction in strength is shown below (see Fig A3).

Mx bh2 lb-ft
= -
72
where
M x = Decrease in bending moment due to bolt hole, lb-ft
b = Diameter of hole (inches)
h = Length of hole (inches)
f = Fiber stress in psi
Combining the above term with the equation for bending moment of the pole, the following
equation may be written:
M~ = 0.000264fi3 - -
fbh2 lb-ft
72

Fig A3
Bolt Hole Strength Reductions

63

- 7

i
’
IEEE
Std 751 APPENDIX

MR = Net moment of pole, lb-ft

c = Circumference of pole at point of stress in inches
If the hole is offset from the perpendicular by some angle, the strength is a function of the
angle, and the above equation becomes
fbh(b2Sin20 + h2Cos20)
M~ = 0.000264jii3 - lb-ft
72(b Sin 0 + h Cos 0 )
See Fig A4.
(3) Check the X-brace strength-Assume 6 in X 6% in wood section.
(a) Compression using Euler's buckling equation (Eq 5.17)
(Px)Theoretical X-brace strength

where
L = Unbraced length in inches
E = Modulus of elasticity
For laminated or solid-sawn Douglas fir members,
E = 1 600 000 psi (Table 3.8)
I = Moment of inertia for a rectangular section

- -
bd3
12
where
b = 6.75 in
d = 6.0 in
k = Theoretical coefficient of unbraced length; for pinned-pinned, k = 1.0 (see Fig 1).

Fig A4
Offset Bolt Hole Strength Reductions

- - AXIS
- - - - -NEUTRAL

I l l

64

1 --I--
 IEEE
APPENDIX Std 751

f (6.75 in)(6.00 in)3 \

0 ) ~\
( ~ ~ ( 1 . 6 ) ( 1 psi) 12
Px = = 39440 lb
(18.38 ft(12 h ~ / f t ) ) ~
(b) Tension. Based on test results and/or theoretical data supplied by the supplier, the X-brace
is limited to 35 000 lb per member in tension.
(c) Load to fail the X-brace (see Fig A5)
NOTE: The following calculations start at the top of the structure.

(i) C Vertical Forces = 0

v, = v,
assume the horizontal load is equally divided.
C Moments E = 0
P(L) = Vl(b)

Fig A5
Force Diagram at Planes of Contdlexure

AIv 1-
1
PI2
c--
Vl

PI2 t VI v1 PI2

- PI2

I v2

65
v2

T
IEEE
Std 751 APPENDIX

(ii) Z Moments F = 0
2((P/2)(Yo+ Z + Xi))+ V i ( b ) - V2(b) = 0

v, = P(Y0 + z +X,)+ v,
b
Structure uplift = V , - (?4 structure weight + ?4wire loads)
Structure thrust = V2 + (34 structure welght + ?4wire loads)
(iii) Determine loads at G and H (see Fig A6).
0 = 45"
Z Moments G = 0
(J33r2(Z)Cos0)- ( ( ( W 2 ) ( Y O ) ) ) ((P/2)(Z+
+ Xl))) = 0
(P/2)(Y0 + z + X,)
X3r2 =
Z(C0s 0)
C Moments H = 0

Fig A6
Force Diagram at Points G and H

0-t PI2

66

1 r
 IEEE
APPENDIX Std 751

(XBrl(Z)Sin 0) - ((P/2)(X1) + ((P/2)(Z+ yo))) = 0

(P/2) (Yo + 2 + XI )
XBrl =
Z(Sin 0)
Since 0 = 45"
XBr2 = XBrl
NOTE: Replace XBr, with P , (theoretical X-brace strength from (b) above] and solve for P (load to fail the
X-brace).

2(Px)Z(Sin 0) - 2(35000 lb)(26.0 &)(Sin 45")

P = = 31 093 lb
x1 + 2 +Yo 9.27 ft + 26.0 ft + 6.12 ft

(4) Wind loading

Given
Conductor = bundled two 954 ACSR 45/7
Overhead Ground Wire = % in steel strand
(a) Loading- Grade B Construction Method A
(i) NESC Lght Loading, 9 lb/ft2 wind on bare conductor
Overload Capacity Factor = 4.0
(ii) NESC Heaving Loading, 4 lb/ft2 wind on '/z in radial ice
Overload Capacity Factor = 4.0
(b) Wind on poles ( W )
NOTE: Due to the strength limitation of the poles above X-brace, apply the wind loading above the X-brace.
(i) NESC Light Loading

WL = 2(9 lb/ft2) 2 ( ~ ~ (23.0 ft)

1 4.0 ~= 1364~lb ~ ~ )

(ii) NESC Heavy Loading

27 in + 35.1 in
WL = 2(4 lb/ft2) )(23.0 ft) 4.0 = 604 lb
7r2 (12 in/&)

(c) Wire loads -per foot

(i) NESC Light Loading

Conductor = (9 lb/ft2) 12(

1.165 in
, ) (614.0 = 20.97 Wft

Overhead
Ground Wire = (
0.36 in
(9 lb/ft2) 12 i n / f t ) (2)4.0 = 2.16 lb/ft

Total = 23.13 lb/ft

(ii) NESC Heavy Loading

Conductor = (4 lb/ft2) ( 2*165 in) (6)4.0

12 in/ft
= 17.32 lb/ft

Overhead
Ground Wire = (4 lb/ft2) 12 (
1.36 in
,,,) (2)4.0 = 3.63 lb/ft

Total = 20.95 lb/ft

IEEE
Std 751 APPENDIX

(5) Maximum Spans

(a) NESC Lght Loading
25373 lb - 1364 lb = 1038 ft
Maximumspan =
23.13 lb/ft
(b) NESC Heavy Loading
25 373 lb - 604 lb
MaximumSpan = = 1182 ft
20.95 lb/ft
(6) Structure top analysis (see Fig A7)
Case No. 2 -NESC Heavy Loading Method A
4 lb/ft2 wind on % in radial ice
Overload Capacity Factor = 4.0
(a) Vertical and transverse loading
NOTE: The wind loading on the structure top framing members is neglected due to the minimal loading effect.

(i) Given
Critical loading: Case No. 2 -NESC Heavy Loading
4 lb/ft2 wind on % in radial ice
Overload Capacity Factor = 4.0
Maximum Wind Span = 1200 ft
Maximum Weight Span = 1200 ft
(a) Vertical loads-shield wire and conductor (including insulator weight of 100 lb)
Scw = (0.807 lb/ft)(4)(1200 ft) = 3874 lb
CV = (2.111 lb/ft)(2)(4)(1200 ft) + (100 lb) = 20366 lb
(b) Transverse loads -shield wire and conductor
SWH = (0.4535 lb/ft)(4)(1200 ft) = 2177 lb
CH = (0.7217 lb/ft)(2)(4)(1200 ft) = 6928 lb

Fig A7
Force Diagram Structure Top Assembly

68
 IEEE
APPENDIX Std 751

(ii) Solve for the reactions

C Moments B = 0
RDV(27.0 ft) = (CV(13.5 ft)) + (CV(40.5 ft)) + ((2(SWH)10.75ft)) + (swIr(27.0 ft))
- (CV(13.5 ft))
RDV = 33 156 lb
C Moments D = 0
RBV(27.0 ft) = (CV(13.5 ft)) + (CV(40.5 ft)) + (swIr(27.0 ft)) - (2(SWH)(10.75ft))
- (CV( 13.5 ft)) = 32 689 lb

Assume equal division of horizontal loads between support

RBH = RDH = (SWH) + (3(CH)/2) = 12569 lb
(iii) Solve for forces at joint E (see Fig A8)
I: Vertical Forces = 0
EGV = CV = 20366 lb

EG = lTGV = 32 716 lb tension

Sin 38.5"

EGH = lTGV = 25603 lb

Tan 38.5"
C Horizontal Forces = 0
DE = EGH - CH = 18 675 lb compression
(iv) Solve for forces at joint A (see Fg A9)
C Vertical Forces = 0
AFlr = CV = 203661b

Fig AS
Free Body at Joint E

GV '
I
\
\

f\p
38.53'
~

69

T r
IEEE
Std 751
APPENDIX

@A 38.53'

Fig A9
Free Body at Joint A

AF= AFV = 32 716 lb tension

Sin 38.5"

AFw= AFV = 256041b

Tan 38.5"
C Horizontal Forces = 0
AB = AFH + CH = 32 532 lb compression
(v) Solve for forces Section ABF (see Fig A10)
C Moments C = 0
FG(10.75 ft) = (CV(27.0 ft)) + (SWV(13.5 ft)) - (SWH(10.75 ft))
- (RBV(13.5 ft))

FG = 10 632 lb tension
C Moments F = 0
BC(10.75 ft) = (CV(13.5 ft)) + (CH(10.75 ft)) - (RBH(10.75)
BC = 19 935 lb compression
(vi) Solve for forces at joint F (see F'lg A1 1)
C Horizontal Forces = 0
FCH = AFw-SwH-FG = 127951b
FCV = 12795(Tan 38.5") = 10 178 lb

F C = l2795 lb = 16 349 lb tension

Cos 38.5"
C Vertical Forces = 0
B F = AFV + FCV+ SWV = 34 418 lb compression

70
APPENDIX IEEE
Std 751

QSWV

\
\
\

13.5 FT 13.5 FT

Fig A10
Free Body Section ABF

swv
SWH' FG

AFH I FCH

BF

Fig A l l
Free Body Joint F

(vii) Solve for forces at joint G (see Fig A12)

C Horizontal Forces = 0
CGH = SWH+EGH-FG = 171481b
CGV = 17 148(Tan 38.5') = 13 640 lb

CG = ' lb
l3 6
4 = 17 429 lb tension
Cos 38.5"
C Vertical Forces = 0
DG = SWV+ C G V + EGV = 37880 lb

71

-7
 I

IEEE
Std 751 APPENDIX

swv
FG SWH

CGH
I
DG
EGH

Fig A12
Free Body Joint G

(b) Longitudinal. Due to the inherent resilience and flexibility of wood fiber, the wood H-frame
crossarms can be designed with limited static longitudinal capacity. In this example, a longi-
tudinal load PL = 2000 lb is assumed. It is also assumed that the full moment is resisted by the
crossarm at point A where
MA = PL(13.5ft) = fS
where
f = Maximum Fiber Stress (equals 6000 psi for laminated arms)
S = Required Section Modulus = 54.0 in3
Try double 5%in X 7% in laminated side arms with Ye in mounting bolt:
s= 57.5 in3

A2.2 National Electrical Safety Code Method B

NOTES (1) This solution neglects the effect of insulator welght and wind on the insulator.
(2) This solution uses the 1990NESC Method B under Rule 261,which has a load and strength factor applied (see ANSI C2-1990
[All,p. 289). It also differs from the method of analysis used in Al.This solution uses the method found in (A3].
The H-frame structure outline is shown in Blg A13.

Overhead Ground Wire:

Ye in high strength steel, 7 wire
Diameter = 0.36 in
Weight = 0.273 lb/ft
Conductor:
954 KCM ACSR, 54/7
Diameter = 1.196 in
Weight = 1.229 lb/ft
Insulator:
Weight = 100 lb
Pole:
80 ft, Class 3
Diameter at B = 8.35 in
Diameter at E = 9.70 in
Diameter at D = 11.76 in
Diameter at A = 14.55 in

72

T r
 IEEE
APPENDIX Std 751

I
20'
- pi
1

10'

- !

13'

- E

20'

- c

27'

Fig A13
H-frame Outline Method B

Loading Condition:
NESC Heavy Method B, where:
Overhead Ground Wire:
Pi = 0.807 lb/ft
RI = 0.453 lb/ft
Conductor:
Pz = 2.284 lb/ft
Rz = 0.732 lb/ft
Find maximum allowable Wind Span (HS).
(1) Locate plans of contraflexure:
dl 8.35
For Section BE, - = --
- 0.86
dz 9.70
dl - XO
From Table 5.3, for - - 0.86, - = 0.551
d2 X
Since x = 13 ft for Section BE, xo = 0.551 (13) = 7.16 ft

73

--
I-
IEEE
Std 751 APPENDIX

11.76 = o.81
di = -
Similarly, for Section AD, -
d2 14.55

Then -
xo = 0.571, or xo = 0.571(27) = 15.42 ft
X
Therefore, the contraflexure planes are located as shown in Fig A14.
(2) Apply Overload Capacity Factors (OCF) to vertical and transverse loads:
P I = 0.807(1.5) = 1.21 lb/ft of span
R I = 0.453(2.50) = 1.133 lb/ft of span
P2 = 2.284(1.5) = 3.426 lb/ft of span
R2 = 0.732(2.50) = 1.83 lb/ft of span
(3) Develop the Free Body Diagram (FBD) shown in Figs A15 and A16:
From Fig A15, the moments at critical Sections B, E, D, and A are calculated as follows:
MB = 3.88(5.8) = 22.51 ft-lb/ft
ME = 3.88(7.2) = 27.94 ft-lb/ft
MD = 3.88(11.6) = 45.01 ft-lb/ft
MA = 3.88 (1 5.4) = 59.75 ft-lb/ft

Fig A14
Planes of Contraaexure

PLANES OF
CONTRAFLEXURE

v
74

-
I_--
1 --
 IEEE
APPENDIX Std 751

10' , 20' 10'

- ,,-
I -
I
1.21 i 1.21

1.133 1.133

1.83- 6

4 3.43
t
- 3.88
2.97 t 9.74
3.88

4 12.08 t 24.79
-
3.88 tl2.08 3.88 j24'79

15.4'

A
L 18.06
8 8

Fig A15
FBD From External W
ire Loads (lb/R)

Shear forces at the contraflexure planes (due to wind on pole) from Fig A16 assume poles coated
with ?4in of ice.

(15.8 ft)(lO lb.ft2) = 120.1 lb

9.92 + 13.94
Middle, (38.8 ft)(lO lb.ft2) = 385.8 lb
2(12)
13.94 + 15.55
Bottom, (15.4 ft)(lO lb.ft2) = 189.2 lb
2(W

75

T'
IEEE
Std 751 APPENDIX

10' 20' - ,_ 10'

I-
I d=7.32"

_-
0

120.1 120.1 d=8.92"

4 94.9 t 94.9

7.2'
E E
1, d=9.70"

20.0'

D D
I' d=l 1.76"
11.6
505.9 505.9
d=12.94

-
4

4
d=l4.55"

Fig A16
FBD From Wind Forces on Pole Only (lb)

Reactions at the contraflexure planes:

TOP, 2(120*1)(15'8/2)= 94.9 lb (approximate)

20
2 (385.8 (38.8/2) + 120.1(38.8)) + 94.9 (20)
Middle, = 1309.3 lb (approximate)
20
2(189.2(15.4/2) + 505.9(15.4)) + 1309.3(20)
Bottom, = 2234.1 lb (approximate)
20

76
 IEEE
APPENDIX Std 751

10(5.8)2(9.35+ 2(9.92))
Mw at B = 120.1(5.8) - = 560.2 ft-lb
72

Mw at E = 120.1(7.2) + 10(7.2)2(10.7+ 2(9.92)) = 1084.6 ft-lb

72

Mw at A = 505.9( 15.4) -
10(15.4)2(15.55+ 2U3.94)) = 9221.4 ft-lb
72
Moment capacities (assuming no bolt holes perpendicular to the longitudinal axis) using a Stress
Reduction Factor (SRF) of 0.65 are
MRat B = O.O00264f~~(SRF)= 0.000264(8000)(26.23)3(0.65) = 24 780 ft-lb
Similarly
MR at E = 38 850 ft-lb,
MR at D = 69230 ft-lb, and
MR at A = 131 115 ft-lb.
The X-brace connections usually are made with through bolts perpendicular to the bending axis;
therefore, the flexural strength at E and D has to be reduced accordingly (see Fig A3).
fbh2
MReduction = -(SRF), assume b = 1.0625 (for 1 in bolt)
72
8000(1.0625)(9.7)2
at E, MReduction - (0.65) = 7220 ft-lb
72
8000(1.0625) (11.76)
at D, MReduction = (0.65) = 10 615 ft-lb
72
Then the allowable spans at each of the four critical sections is calculated as follows:
MR - (MW 4- MReduction
Allowable span HS =
per foot
24 780 - 560 = 1075 ft
HSatB =
22.51
38 850 - (1085 + 7220)
HSatE = = 1093ft
27.94
69 230 - (5110 + 10 615)
HSatD = = 1188ft
45.01
131 115 - 9220 = 2040 ft
HSatA =
59.75
As can be seen from the allowable spans at the critical sections, the maximum stresses are
approximately equal at B and D. Therefore, the X-brace is properly positioned. Now check axial
stress at critical Section B. Referring to the FBDs (Figs A15 and A16), the axial load P can be
calculated to be
P = (9.74 lb/ft)(1100 ft span) + 95 lb (wind) = 10809 lb

77

l-
IEEE
Std 751 APPENDIX

MR at B = 0.000264(8000(0.65) - 197)(26.23)3 = 23 836 ft-lb

Allowable span = -
23836 =
22.51
1059 ft

In other words, the axial forces (ignoring pole dead weight) reduced the allowable span by less
than 4%.
(4) X-brace design (NESC Loads with OCF Method B) (see Fig A17)
Use HS maximum = 1100 ft, then
Vi = 9.74(1100) = 10714 lb
V2 = 24.79(1100) = 27 269 Ib
Hi = H2 = 3.88(1100) = 4270 lb
Find F1and F2 and the appropriate size X-brace from the equation X, Horizontal Forces = 0,
3.88 - 0.707F1+ 0.707F2- 3.88 = 0, it follows that F1= F2from the equation C Vertical Forces = 0,
24.79 - 0.707F2 - 0.707F1 - 9.74 = 0, since Fl = F2,
24.79 - 9.74
F2 = F1 = = 10.64 Ib/ft, or
1.414
(10.64 lb/ft)(llOO ft) = 11 710 lb tension and compression.

Fig A17
FBD X-brace (lb/R)

3.88
*1 -
FI

78

T
 IEEE
APPENDIX Std 751

Therefore, compression capability will govern the deslgn of X-brace members.

NOTE: Wind on the X-brace is assumed to be less than 1% of the V, load and is, therefore, ignored.
The pole diameter at the X-braces is assumed to be 10 in, then
1 = (2402 + (240 - = 332.4 in, or
1/2 = 166.2 in
Because the X-braces are center clamped, the unbraced length is considered to be t l 2 in the
transverse direction and 1 in the longitudinal direction (see Fig A18).
Try a 3 in by 6 in X-brace, where 6 in is parallel to the longitudinal axis.
0.82E = 0.82 (1 920 000)
F'c = - = 514 psi
(1/d)2 (166/3)
For areaA of (3 in)(6 in) = 18 in2,
Pmowable= 3(6)(514) = 9252 lb
9252 < 11 710, so the X-brace is too small.
Try a 3%in by 6 in X-brace, then
0.82 (1 920 000) = 699 psi
F% =
(166/3.5)2
Pmowable= 3.5(6)(699) = 14 679 lb
14 679 > 11 710, so the X-brace is good in the transverse direction.
Check the longitudinal direction:
0.82(1920 000) = 513 psi
F'c =
(332.4/6)2
Pmowable= 3.5(6)(513) = 10 773 lb
10 773 < 1 1 710, so the X-brace is too small.

Fig A18
X-brace Details

1 20'

i, 20'
=240"
~

79

T
IEEE
Std 751 APPENDIX

Try a 3% in by 6% in X-brace, then

F% =
o'82 (l 920 Om) = 602 psi
(332.4/6.5)2
P M ~ =~ 3.5(6.5)(602)
& ~ ~ = 13696 lb
13 696 > 11 710, so the X-brace is good in the longitudinal direction.
The minimum X-brace for this example is a Douglas fir 3%in by 6% in member.
(5) Crossarm Design. Assume a double arm configuration as shown in Fig A19.
Using HS = 1100 ft and assuming a desired vertical span VS of 1.3(HS),it follows that VS = 1.3(HS)
= 1430 ft.

Using NESC Loads with OCF (Method B),

The transverse load equals (see Elg A20)
(1.83 lb/ft)(1100 ft) = 2013 lb, and
The vertical load equals
(3.43 lb/ft) (1430 ft) = 4905 lb, then
RI = 4905/Cos 45" = 6937 lb, and
R2 = 4905 + 2013 = 6918 lb.

Fig A19
Double Crosearm Detail

I
SPACER^ I fII

Fig A20
FBD End of Crossarm

f R1 =6937'b

' 4905 Ib

80
 IEEE
APPENDIX Std 751

Try a laminated Douglas fir crossarm with two 5% in ( ( d ) horizontal) by 6in (vertical) beams (see
Fig Ml), then

a -
---=
d
120
2(5.125)
11.7

f ' c = -P=m
--
0.82E 0.82(1 920000)
= 718 psi
A

For both beams,

Pm = 2(5.125)(6))(718)(0.65) = 28 702 lb,
28 702 >> 6937,therefore, the crossarm is overdesigned.
Determine longitudinal load capability of this crossarm arrangement
Since ald = 11.7> 11,use the interaction Eq 5.14:
PIA
+ 7< where
1.0,
d'fb - PIA fc
PIA = 7404 = 120 psi
2(5.125(6))
Inserting the strength-reduction factor = 0.65and the respective numbers, we get
MIS + 120 = 1.0,
or
(0.65(8000))- 120 0.65(718)
MIS = 0.743(5080) = 3775 psi
For a double crossarm,
6(5.125)2
s = (2) = 52.53in3, then
6
M = 3775(52.53) = 198300 in lb
The allowable longitudinal load is
p - - = -198300
= 1652 lb
L- a 120
Check crossarm buckling under heavy ice condition (use 1% in radial ice):
WIce = 0.311(4.1962- 1.1962)= 5.03lb/ft

Fig A21
Buckling Mode of Crossarm

81

T --
 IEEE
Std 751 APPEM)IX

WTotd = W,,, + Wan,juctor = 5.03 + 1.229 = 6.26 lb/ft

For a 1430 ft vertical span,
V = 1430(6.26) = 8952 lb, using an OCF 1.1, then V = 9850 lb = Rz
See Rg A22.
28 702 lb > 9850 lb, so the crossarms are good for these loads.
(6) Vee-bracedesign. Using a maximum tension of 13 923 lb = R I ,
Required Area = R I /ft, where ft = 1140*
*For shear parallel to grain, a typical value of 1140 psi is taken from REA Bulletin 62-1 [A3].This
value should be verified for the specific timber grade used and should be adjusted for the appli-
cable moisture content.
RI / f t = 13930/1140 = 12.2 in2
Assume an area reduction of 4 in2 for the bolt holes, then the total required area is 12.2 + 4 = 16.2 in?
Douglas fir members 3%in by 43/4in have an area of 16.6 in?
16.6 in2 > 16.2 in2, therefore, they will carry the design loads.

A3. Guyed Pole Analysis and Design

The plan and profile views for the guy problem are shown in A23 and A24.
Check to see if a 75 ft Class 2 Pole is stable, given:
Pole weight with ice = 3500 lb
Insulator weight = 250 lb
VS = welght span = 800 ft
Overhead ground wire weght with ice = 0.807 lb/ft
Conductor weight with ice = 2.284 lb/ft
E = 1920000 lb/in2
Overload Capacity Factor (OCF) = 1.5
Use:
PI pz 1
-+-s-
PCRl PCRz ocF
For the Overhead Ground Wire (one side only),

Fig A22
FBD End of C r o s m Heavy Ice

82

-1 -7
 IEEE
APPENDIX Std 751

A
90"
b

GUYS
A

Fig A23
Guy Problem Plan View

+ 4000 Ib
15
+ 12 000 Ib

50

FigM
Guy Problem Prome View

83

1-- - -1'
IEEE
Std 751 APPENDIX

P, = 4000 lb + (800 ft)(O.807 lb/ft) = 4.646 lb

For pinned-pinned (Eq 5.22~)with d A = 7.96 in and dB = 15.15 in,

2.0

~dA4
11=-=-= ~(7.96)~
197.1 in4
64 64
L1 = 12(65 ft) = 780 in
(3.62).rr2(1920000 lb/in2)(197.1 in4) = 22 223 lb
PCRl = (1.O (780 in))
Conductor (one side only, including insulator welght):
Pz = 12 000 lb + (800 ft) (2.284 lb/ft) + 250 lb = 14 077 lb
P$ r 2EI2
PCRl =
(U2I2
For pinned-pinned with d A = 9.62 in and dB = 15.15 in,

Pl = (2) 2.0
= (K)
15.15 2.0
= 2.48

Tdi ~(9.62)~
1 2 = - = - = 420.4 in4
64 64
L2 = 12(50ft) = 600in
(2.48) nZ(1920 000 lb/in2)(420.4 in4)
PCRz = = 54 880 lb
(l.O(S00 in))2
p1
-+-I-
p2 1
PCRl PCRp OCF
4646 lb + 140771b 1
I-
22 223 lb 54880 lb 1.5
0.21 + 0.26 I0.67
0.47 5 0.67
A 75 f t Class 2 Pole is stable in this situation.
For a 90" dead end with both sides intact
At the overhead ground wire:
P I = 2(Sin(9O0/2))(4OO0 lb) + 2(800 ft)(O.807 lb/ft) = 6948 lb
At conductor:
P2 = 2(Sin(9O0/2))(120O0 lb) + 2(800 ft)(2.284 lb/ft) + 500 lb = 21 124 lb
Then:
6948 + 21 124 lb 1
I-
222231b 548801b 1.5

84

1- T'
 IEEE
APPENDIX Std 751

0.31 + 0.38 I0.67

0.69 > 0.67
Since this is an unstable situation, the horizontal span capability must be reduced.

A4. Computer Analysis

NOTE: This solution neglects the effect of insulator weght and wind on the insulator.

See reference [MI. For a detailed discussion of the computer program used in this sample,
Fig A25 shows a stress diagram as generated by POLEDA.

PROGRAM: IPOLEDA - THE ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF SINGLE

POLE TRANSMISSION STRUCTURES
LOCATION: L I N E 3419 FAILURE ANALYSIS
BY: GTJ DATE: 18-13-66 STR. NO.: 36
CHKD. BY: DATE : SHEET NO.: 1 OF

INPUT DATA

WOOD POLE

DENSITY OF WOOD (PCF) -

- 25.0
MODULUS OF ELASTICITY ( P S I ] = 1120000.
ULTIMATE STRESS ( P S I ] - 6000.0

Fig A26
Stress Diagram 66 R Class 1H Pole

6317.916
TOTAL STRESS
(PSI)

85
IEEE
Std 751 APPENDIX

POLE CLASS -
- H1
POLE LENGTH ( F T ) = 65.0
POLE HEIGHT ABOVE GROUNDLINE ( F T ) = 55.0
POLE WEIGHT ABOVE GROUNDLINE ( L E ] = 1436.6
GROUNDLINE CIRCUMFERENCE ( I N ] = 56.5
T I P CIRCUMFERENCE ( I N ] = 29.0
6 FOOT CIRCUMFERENCE = 58.5

NUMBER OF CONDUCTOR TYPES = 4

NAME OF CONDUCTOR TYPE 1 = 110.8 ACSR/AW 1 2 / 7

DIAMETER OF WIRE ( I N ) = - 4 8 1 0
WEIGHT PER FOOT ( L E ] = -2502

NAME OF CONDUCTOR TYPE 2 = 7 9 5 SAC 37

DIAMETER OF WIRE ( I N ) = 1.0260
WEIGHT PER FOOT ( L B ] = . 7 4 6 0

NAME OF CONDUCTOR TYPE 3 = 336.4 ACSR/AZ 18/1

DIAMETER OF WIRE ( I N ] = - 6 8 4 0
WEIGHT PER FOOT ( L E ) = -3653

NAME OF CONDUCTOR TYPE 4 = 118 ACSR/AW 611

DIAMETER OF WIRE ( I N ) = -2980
WEIGHT PER FOOT ( L E ] = -1382

NUMBER UF LOAD LEVELS I N STRUCTURE MODEL = 6

LEVEL 1
HEIGHT OF ATTACHMENT TO POLE ( F T ] = 54.5
EXTRA VERTICAL LOAD ( L E ] - .0
EXTRA HORIZONTAL LOAD ( L B ) - -0
EXTRA MOMENT ( F T - L B ] -
- .0
CONDUCTOR TYPE 1
NUMBER AT T H I S LEVEL = 1
NUMBER THAT ARE UNBALANCED = 1
AVERAGE ECCENTRICITY ( F T ) = .9

PROGRAM: IPOLEDA - THE ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF SINGLE

POLE TRANSMISSION STRUCTURES
LOCATION: L I N E 3 4 1 9 FAILURE ANALYSIS
BY: GTJ DATE: 1 8 - 1 3 - 6 6 STR. NO.: 36
CHI<D. BY: DATE : SHEET NO.: 2 OF

INPUT DA A

LEVEL 2
HEIGHT OF ATTACHMENT TO POLE ( F T
EXTRA VERTICAL LOAD ( L B ]
EXTRA HORIZONTAL LOAD ( L E ]
EXTRA MOMENT ( F T - L E )
CONDUCTOR TYPE 2
NUMBER AT T H I S LEVEL = 2
NUMBER THAT ARE UNBALANCED = 0
AVERAGE ECCENTRICITY ( F T ) = -0

86

1
 IEEE
APPENDIX Std 751

LEVEL 3
HEIGHT OF ATTACHMENT TO POLE ( F T ) = 42.8
EXTRA VERTICAL LOAD ( L E ) - -0
EXTRA HORIZONTAL LOAD ( L B )
-
- .0
EXTRA MOMENT ( F T - L B ) -
- .0
CONDUCTOR 3
NUMBER AT THIS LEVEL = 2
NUMBER THAT ARE UNBALANCED = 0
AVERAGE ECCENTRICITY ( F T ) = .0

LEVEL 4
HEIGHT OF ATTACHMENT TO POLE ( F T ) = 37.7
EXTRA VERTICAL LOAD ( L B ) - .0
EXTRA HORIZONTAL LOA0 ( L E ) - .0
EXTRA MOMENT ( F T - L B ) -
- .0
CONDUCTOR 4
NUMBER AT THIS LEVEL = 2
NUMBER THAT ARE UNBALANCED = 0
AVERAGE ECCENTRICITY ( F T ) .0

LEVEL 5
HEIGHT OF ATTACHMENT TO POLE ( F T ) = 31.7
EXTRA VERTICAL LOAD ( L E ) - -0
EXTRA HORIZONTAL LOAD ( L E ) - .0
EXTRA MOMENT ( F T - L E ) -
- .0
CONDUCTOR 5
NUMBER AT T H I S LEVEL = 3
NUMBER THAT ARE UNBALANCED = 1
AVERAGE ECCENTRICITY ( F T ) = 1.6

LEVEL 6
HEIGHT OF ATTACHMENT TO POLE ( F T ) = 26.9
EXTRA VERTICAL LOAD ( L E ) - .0
EXTRA HORIZONTAL LOAD ( L E ) - .0
EXTRA MOMENT ( F T - L B ) -
- .0
CONDUCTOR 6
NUMBER AT THIS LEVEL = 1
NUMBER THAT ARE UNBALANCED = 1
AVERAGE ECCENTRICITY ( F T ) = 1.0

PROGRAM: IPOLEDA - THE ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF SINGLE

POLE TRANSMISSION STRUCTURES
LOCATION: LINE 3419 FAILURE ANALYSIS
BY: GTJ DATE : 18-13-66 STR. NO.: 36
CHI<D. BY: DATE : SHEET NO.: 3 OF

TOTAL NUMBER OF NODES = 21

NUMBER OF POLE SEGMENTS BELOW LOWEST LOAD LEVEL = a
LENGTH OF POLE SEGMENTS BELOW LOWEST LOAD LEVEL ( F T ) = 3.35

87
IEEE
Std 751 APPENDIX

POLE PROPERTIES AT NODES

1 55.00 9.23 66.92 356.42 77.22 9.23 66.92 356.42 77.22

2 54.75 9.27 67.50 362.61 78.23 9.27 67.50 362.61 78.23
3 54.50 9.31 68.08 368.87 79.24 9.31 68.08 368.87 79.24
4 51.13 9.85 76.17 461.65 93.76 9.85 76.17 461.65 93.76
5 47.75 10.38 84.70 570.92 109.95 10.38 84.70 570.92 109.95
6 45.25 10.78 91.32 663.57 123.08 10.78 91.32 663.57 123.08
7 42.75 11.18 98.18 767.07 137.21 11.18 98.18 767.07 137.21
8 40.25 11.58 105.29 882.23 152.39 11.58 105.29 882.23 152.39
9 37.75 11.98 112.65 1009.90 168.65 11.98 112.65 1009.90 168.65
10 34.75 12.45 121.81 1180.83 189.63 12.45 121.81 1180.83 189.63
11 31.75 12.93 131.33 1372.60 212.29 12.93 131.33 1372.60 212.29
12 29.33 13.32 139.29 1543.95 231.87 13.32 139.29 1543.95 231.87
13 26.90 13.70 147.48 1730.86 252.62 13.70 147.48 1730.86 252.62
14 23.54 14.24 159.23 2017.50 283.39 14.24 159.23 2017.50 283.39
15 20.17 14.77 171.42 2338.35 316.56 14.77 171.42 2338.35 316.56
16 16.81 15.31 184.06 2696.03 352.22 15.31 184.06 2696.03 352.22
17 13.45 15.84 197.16 3093.25 390.47 15.84 197.16 3093.25 390.47
18 10.09 16.38 210.70 3532.83 431.38 16.38 210.70 3532.83 431.38
19 6.73 16.91 224.69 4017.68 475.07 16.91 224.69 4017.68 475.07
20 3.36 17.45 239.14 4550.79 521.60 17.45 239.14 4550.79 521.60
21 -00 17.98 254.03 5135.28 571.08 17.98 254.03 5135.28 571.08

NUMBER OF LOAD CASES = 1

PROGRAM: IPOLEDA - THE ANALYSIS AN0 DESIGN OF SINGLE

POLE TRANSMISSION STRUCTURES
LOCATION: L I N E 3 4 1 9 FAILURE ANALYSIS
BY: GTJ DATE: 1 0 - 1 3 - 8 6 STR. NO.: 36
CHI<D. B Y : DATE : SHEET NO.: 4 OF

LOAD CASE 1

LOAO CASE 1 ANALYSIS FOR 1 1 5 MPH WIND

NUMBER OF LEVELS OF ADDITIONAL LOAO INPUT = 0
MAXIMUM OUTPUT OPTION

ANALYSIS OPTION: SPAN ( F T ) = 201.

WIND DATA

A I R DENSITY (PCF) -- -07650

TRANSVERSE WIND VELOCITY AT REFERENCE HEIGHT (MPH) = 115.000
WINO PRESSURE AT REFERENCE HEIGHT (PSF) = 33.794
REFERENCE HEIGHT ( F T ) = 30.000
POWER LAW EXPONENT -
- -143

88

. -
I --T'-
 IEEE
APPENDIX Std 751

LOAD AND REDUCTION FACTORS

WIND VELOCITY GUST AND/OR LOAD FACTOR = 1.00

DRAG COEFFICIENT FOR WIRES = 1.00
DRAG COEFFICIENT FOR POLE = 1.00
STRENGTH REDUCTION FRCTOR = 1.00
MODULUS OF ELASTICITY REDUCTION FACTOR = 1.00
DEAD LOAD FACTOR = 1.00
WIND AND/OR GUST FACTOR FOR WIRES = 1.00
WIND AND/OR GUST FACTOR FOR POLE = 1.30
I C E THICI<NESS LOAD FACTOR = 1.00
I C E DENSITY LOAD FACTOR = 1.00
HORIZONTAL SPAN FACTOR = 1.00
GUST EXTENT FACTOR = 1.00

I C E DRTR

RADIRL I C E THICI<NESS ( I N ) = -00

I C E DENSITY (PCF) = 57.00

I N I T I A L POLE ROTATION (DEG) = -00

SPAN TOLERANCE RATIO = -0100

DEFLECTION TOLERANCE RATID = -0100

PROGRAM: IPOLEDA - THE ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF SINGLE

POLE TRANSMISSION STRUCTURES
LOCRTION: L I N E 3 4 1 9 FAILURE ANALYSIS
BY: GTJ DATE: 18-13-66 STR. NO.: 36
CHI<D. BY: DATE : SHEET NO.: 5 OF

LORD CASE 1

INFORMATION BELOW APPLIES TO FACTORED LOADS AND MATERIAL PROPERTIES

GROUNDLINE MOMENT DUE TO WIND ON PLUMB POLE ( I N - I < ) = 822.

MOMENT CAPACITY OF POLE AT GROUNDLINE ( I N - I < ) - 3426.

WIND PRESSURE DATA

PRESSURE AT CONDUCTOR LEVEL 1 PSF) = 40.08
PRESSURE AT CONDUCTOR LEVEL 2 PSF) = 38.59
PRESSURE AT CONDUCTOR LEVEL 3 PSF) = 37.39
PRESSURE RT CONDUCTOR LEVEL 4 PSF) = 36.08
PRESSURE AT CONDUCTOR LEVEL 5 PSF) = 34.34
PRESSURE AT CONDUCTOR LEVEL 6 PSF) = 32.75

LOADS BELOW INCLUDE EFFECTS OF I C E

VERTICAL LOAD-ONE CONDUCTOR TYPE 1 ( L B I F T ) = -2502

WIND LOAD-ONE CONDUCTOR TYPE 1 AT LEVEL 1 ( L B / F T ) = 1.6064

89
IEEE
Std 751 APPENDIX

VERTICAL LOAD-ONE CONDUCTOR TYPE 2 ( L W F T ) = -7460

WIND LOAD-ONE CONDUCTOR TYPE 2 AT LEVEL 2 ( L B I F T ) = 3.2995
WIND LOAD-ONE CONDUCTOR TYPE 2 AT LEVEL 3 ( L B I F T ) = 3.1968
WIND LOAD-ONE CONDUCTOR TYPE 2 AT LEVEL 4 ( L B / F T ) = 3.0852

VERTICAL LOAD-ONE CONDUCTOR TYPE 3 ( L B I F T ) = .3653

WIND LOAD-ONE CONDUCTOR TYPE 3 AT LEVEL 5 (LB/FT) = 1.9576

VERTICAL LOAD-ONE CONDUCTOR TYPE 4 ( L B / F T ) = -1382

WIND LOAD-ONE CONDUCTOR TYPE 4 AT LEVEL 6 ( L B I F T ] = -8134

SUMMARY OF OUTPUT
SPAN ( F T ) -
- 201.0
FACTORED MATERIAL STRENGTH ( P S I ) - 6000.0
MODULUS OF ELASTICITY [ P S I ] = 1120000.1
GROUNDLINE BENDING STRESS-LINEAR EFFECTS ONLY ( P S I ] = 6162.6
GROUNDLINE NORMAL STRESS-COMBINED LOADING [ P S I ] - 6317.9
MAXIMUM NORMAL STRESS-COMBINED LOADING [ P S I ) - 6317.9
HEIGHT OF MAXIMUM STRESS POINT ( F T ) - .0
MAXIMUM SHEAR STRESS-LINEAR EFFECTS ONLY ( P S I ] - 49.6
MOMENT AT GROUNDLINE INCLUDING P-DELTA ( I N - I < ] - 3602.3
LATERAL T I P DEFLECTION-COMBINED LOADING ( I N ) - 125.9
VERTICAL T I P DEFLECTION-COMBINED LOADING [ F T ) -
- 1.3

PROGRAM: IPOLEDA - THE ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF SINGLE

POLE TRANSMISSION STRUCTURES
LOCATION: L I N E 3419 FAILURE ANALYSIS
BY: GTJ DATE: 18-13-66 STR. NO.: 36
CHI<D: DATE : SHEET NO.: 6 OF

TRIAL SPAN NUMBER 1

RATIO OF BUCI<LING TO ACTING LOADS = 19.281
NUMBER OF ITERATIONS I N BUCI<LING CALCULATION = 3
NUMBER OF ITERATIONS I N P-DELTA DEFLECTION CALCULATION = 2

LOAD CASE 1

TABLE OF NODAL LOADS-ODD NODES ONLY

LATERAL AXIAL CONCENTRATED

HEIGHT LOAD LOAD MOMENT
NODE ( F T ) (LE) (LE) (FT-LE)
---- ------ -_----- _-----_ ----------
1 55.0 10.4 2.9 -0
3 54.5 472.6 96.4 44.3
5 47.8 1579.9 385.0 .0
7 42.8 1511.4 385.3 .0
9 37.7 1498.0 408.6 .0
11 31.7 1440.8 343.0 116.0
13 26.9 444.6 178.4 27.8
15 20.2 323.7 200.5 .0
17 13.4 308.3 230.5 .0
19 6.7 264.9 262.7 .0
21 .0 96.0 142.6 .0
 IEEE
APPENDIX Std 751

PROGRAM: IPOLEDA - THE ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF SINGLE

POLE TRANSMISSION STRUCTURES
LOCATION: L I N E 3419 FAILURE ANALYSIS
BY: GTJ DATE: 1 8 - 1 3 - 6 6 STR. NO.: 36
CHI<D. BY: DATE : SHEET NO.: 7 OF

LOAD CASE 1

OUTPUT

STRESSES ARE THE MAXIMUM OF THE VALUES ABOVE AN0 BELOW THE NODES
SHEARS AND MOMENTS ARE CALCULATED JUST BELDW THE NODES

OUTPUT FOR LINEAR EFFECTS ONLY

AVERAGE
BENDING SHEAR
HEIGHT DEFLECTION SLOPE MOMENT STRESS SHEAR STRESS
NODE [FT) [IN) [DEG) [IN-I<) [PSI) [LE) [PSI)
____ ______ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ __ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _
1 55.0 123.832 16.87 -0 .0 10.4 .2
2 54.8 122.949 16.87 .0 .4 10.4 .2
3 54.5 122.066 16.86 .6 7.5 482.9 7.1
4 51.1 110.155 16.81 20.2 214.9 482.9 6.3
5 47.8 98.306 16.69 39.7 361.2 2062.8 24.4
6 45.3 89.602 16.51 101.6 825.4 2062.8 22.6
7 42.8 81.020 16.22 163.5 1191.4 3574.2 36.4
8 40.3 72.616 15.82 270.7 1776.4 3574.2 33.9
9 37.7 64.456 15.26 377.9 2241.0 5072.2 45.0
10 34.8 55.073 14.50 560.5 2955.9 5072.2 41.6
11 31.7 46.235 13.61 744.4 3507.1 6513.0 49.6
12 29.3 39.549 12.72 934.1 4028.3 6513.0 46.8
13 26.9 33.319 11.69 1123.9 4449.0 6957.6 47.2
14 23.5 25.499 10.39 1404.7 4956.6 6957 6 .
) 43.7
15 20.2 18.689 8.93 1685.4 5324.1 7281.3 42.5
16 16.8 12.925 7.43 1979.2 5619.2 7281.3 39.6
17 13.4 8.227 5.91 2273.0 5821.2 7589.6 38.5
18 10.1 4.597 4.40 2579.2 5979.0 7589.6 36.0
19 6.7 2.028 2.91 2885.5 6073.9 7854.5 35.0
20 3.4 -503 1.44 3202.4 6139.6 7854.5 32.8
21 .0 .000 .OO 3519.3 6162.6 7950.5 31.3
IEEE
Std 751 APPENDIX

PROGRAM: IPOLEDA - THE ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF SINGLE

POLE TRANSMISSION STRUCTURES
LOCATION: L I N E 3419 FAILURE ANALYSIS
B Y : GTJ DATE: 18-13-66 STR. NO.: 36
CHI<D. BY: DATE : SHEET NO.: 8 OF

LOAD CASE 1

OUTPUT FOR COMBINED LOADING P-DELTA

BENDING A X I A L TOTAL CODE SHEAR

HEIGHT DEFLECTION SLOPE MOMENT STRESS STRESS STRESS CHECK STRESS
NODE ( F T ) (IN) (DEG) (IN-I<) [PSI) (PSI) [PSI) RATIO [ P S I )
---- ------ ---------- ------ --------- -------- ------- -------- ----- -------
1 53.7 125.930 17.33 .0 .0 - .1 .1 -00 -2
2 53.5 125.036 17.33 .0 .4 - .0 .4 -00 .2
3 53.2 124.142 17.32 .6 7.2 - .7 7.9 .OO 7.2
4 50.0 112.088 17.27 20.4 218.0 - -6 218.7 -04 6.4
5 46.8 100.094 17.16 40.3 66.6 -11.6 378.3 .06 25.0
6 44.4 91.281 16.97 103.7 842.8 -1.6 844.4 -14 23.2
7 42.0 82.586 16.67 167.2 1218.3 -10.3 1228.6 -20 37.4
8 39.6 74.066 16.26 277.4 1820.3 -1.7 1822.0 -30 34.9
9 37.2 65.786 15.69 387.7 2298.6 -8.7 2707.3 -38 46.4
10 34.3 56.254 14.91 575.9 3037.0 - .9 3037.9 -51 42.9
11 31.4 47.263 14.00 765.6 3606.2 .4 3606.6 .60 51.1
12 29.1 40.453 13.07 960.9 4144.0 1.1 4145.1 -69 48.2
13 26.7 34.099 12.01 1156.5 4577.8 2.6 4580.5 -76 48.7
14 23.4 26.113 10.68 1446.0 5102.6 3.6 5106.2 -85 45.1
15 20.1 19.148 9.17 1735.1 5481.0 5.3 5486.4 -91 43.9
16 16.8 13.247 7.63 2037.5 5784.8 6.1 5790.8 -97 40.7
17 13.4 8.433 6.07 2338.9 5989.9 7.7 5997.6 1.00 39.6
18 10.1 4.712 4.52 2652.1 6147.9 8.2 6156.1 1.03 36.8
19 6.7 2.078 2.98 2963.6 6238.2 9.7 6247.9 1.04 35.6
20 3.4 .515 1.48 3284.1 6296.3 10.0 6306.3 1.05 33.2
21 -0 -000 -00 3602.3 6307.9 10.0 6317.9 1.05 31.4

92

-T'r
Learn how to Apply Standards at
IEEE Power Standards Seminars and NESC Training Programs
IEEE Seminars -Keeping You Competitive through Industry Standards
With today's trend toward standardization, it's to know what standards effect you and
your industry. But to advance your professional skills and the competitive stature of your
organization, you need to know your standards and how they apply to your organization.
To serve your application needs, IEEE offers specialized seminars and training programs
that provide the fundamentals of using specific standards. Programs currently offered
include:
E Power E n g i n e e a Se-
The IEEE sponsors seminars on the Color Books and other power engineering standards
throughout the yea.
Our seminars include:
Human Factors Engineering at Nuclear Power Plants
Large Storage Batteries for Stationary Use
Protection of CO-GenerationPlants Paralleled with Utility Transmission Systems
Health Care Facilities Power Systems
Planning, Design, Protection, Maintenance, and Operation of Industrial and Commercial
Power Systems
Electric Power Supply Systems for Nuclear Power Generating Stations
IEEE NESC Training Proprams

The new 1990 NESC was published by the IEEE ... and if you're a utility engineer,
manager, or consultant, you'll need to know what the new Code covers. We offer three
training programs to help you:
Applying the NESC and Its Work Rules
NESC Clearance and Grounding Rules
NESC Requirements for Communications Systems -Telephone, Cable TV,
and Railroad
IEEE-sponsored seminars and training program may also be brought to your plant. For
details, write to the IEEE Standards Seminar Manager, 445 Hoes Lane, PO Box 1331,
Piscataway, NJ 08855-1331 USA. Or call us Toll Free in the U S . and Canada at 1-800-
678-IEEE and askfor Standards Seminars and Training Programs. Outside the U.S. and
Canada,please call 908-562-3805.

ISBN 165937463-7