Structural Behaviour of Transmission Tower with Different Bracings under Wind Loading

Abstract

India has a sizable population that is dispersed throughout the nation, and this population\'s high need for energy production results in the need for a sizable transmission and distribution system. The present work for the design of transmission towers with foundations for two distinct zones, each with a different basic wind speed and kind of terrain. The requirement of the members has also been optimised. With the aid of Staad.pro and MS Excel\'s VBA, this present work has completed. Three distinct bracing systems were contrasted based on a number of factors, including deflection, weight, the quantity of joints, and cost. STAAD.pro has used to analyse the tower under various loading conditions, and Excel-VBA interface has used to construct the connections and base. The technological analysis and economic design of transmission line tower constructions have been the main aims of the present work. Under the specified loading conditions scenarios for both zones, the K bracing tower showed the least deflection in terms of the deflection criterion.

Introduction

I. INTRODUCTION

Before the availability of computers and specialized analysis and design programs, towers were often designed by graphical methods. It was considered prudent to test new designs that would be used repeatedly on a transmission line, thereby confirming the design assumptions with a full-scale test. Due to the unparalleled level of design refinement now possible thanks to analysis technologies, many utilities believe testing is unnecessary. Despite significant advancements, there are still discrepancies between analysis results and full-scale tests for latticed steel transmission towers. Modern user interface, visualisation tools, and powerful analysis and design engines with sophisticated finite element and dynamic analysis capabilities are all included in STAAD.Pro. STAAD-Pro is the professional's choice for designing low and high-rise buildings, culverts, petrochemical plants, tunnels, bridges, piles, and much more out of steel, concrete, timber, aluminium, and cold-formed steel. This includes model generation, analysis, and design, as well as visualisation and result verification. The following essential STAAD-Pro tools make previously difficult activities easier: The STAAD-Pro Graphical User Interface incorporates Research Engineers’ innovative tabbed page layout. By selecting tabs, starting from the top of the screen and heading down, you input all the necessary data for creating, analyzing and designing a model. Utilizing tabs minimizes the learning curve and helps insure you never miss a step.

The STAAD-Pro Structure Wizard contains a library of trusses and frames. Use the Structure Wizard to quickly generate models by specifying height, width, breadth and number of bays in each direction. Create any customizable parametric structures for repeated use. Ideal for skyscrapers, bridges and roof structures.

II. LITERATURE REVIEW

Gajjar et al. (2011) Investigated, the design of multi-storeyed steel building is to have great parallel load opposing framework alongside gravity stack framework since it additionally administers the plan . They exhibited  to demonstrate the impact of various sorts of supporting frameworks in multi storied steel structures. For this reason the 20 stories steel structures display is utilized with same setup and diverse bracings frameworks, for example, knee support, X prop and V prop is utilize. A business bundle STADD Pro is utilized for the  investigation and plan and diverse parameters are analyzed.

Amini et al. (2012) studied the effect of bracing arrangement in the seismic behavior of buildings with various concentric bracing by nonlinear static and dynamic analysis. In this study a set of regular multi-story steel building were considered with three kind of x, v and chevron bracing, in two placements of ‘two adjacent bays’  and  ‘two  non-adjacent  bays’  along  the  building height.  Results  show  that  in  all  cases,  bracing arrangement in non-adjacent bays leads to lower stiffness but higher strength than in adjacent bays.

Zandi (2013) discussed on comparison between thin steel plate shear walls with dual system of steel moment frame and cross bracing or chevron with a design method based on performance levels. The study focused and discuss on the dual system comprising with thin steel plate shear wall and bracings. In addition, it is based on steel moment resisting frames and approach on performance based design has been arrogated in this research.

 Parasiya et al. (2013) has showed a review on comparative analysis of brace frame with conventional lateral load resisting frame in rc structure using software. It has been represented that the parameters of bracings, locations & stiffness of bracings have notable effect on the performance of a building.

Siddiqi et al. (2014) has conducted the comparative study of five different types of bracing systems for the use in tall building in order to provide lateral stiffness and finally the optimized design in terms of lesser structural weight and lesser lateral displacement has been exposed. For this purpose a sixty storey regular shaped building is selected and analyzed for wind and gravity load combinations along both major and minor axes.

Rishi et al. (2014) This study's seismic analysis of tall RC building frames was done while taking various bracing techniques into account. A particularly effective and uncompromising lateral load resisting system is the bracing system. In RC structures, bracing systems are one of the components that increase stiffness and strength to protect buildings from damage brought on by natural factors like seismic force. The 10 storey building frame of the suggested problem G+ is examined for various bracing systems under seismic loading. To assess the efficacy of a specific type of bracing system to control the lateral displacement and member forces in the frame, the results of various bracing systems (X bracing, V bracing, K bracing, Inverted V bracing, and Inverted K bracing) are compared with bare frame model analysis. It is discovered that all bracing techniques efficiently control the lateral displacement of the frame. But it's discovered that inverted V bracing is the most cost-effective. The study's key findings are that using steel bracing to resist seismic stresses is helpful. When compared to a bare frame, the bracing system successfully minimises the lateral movement of the structure by up to 80%. The amount of forces in the members is greatly reduced by steel bracing. In comparison to bare frames, the bracing technique is helpful in reducing narrative drift in structures (up to 56%). When bracing members were used as resistive members, the margin of safety against collapse grew.

Chavan and Jadhav (2014) studied seismic analysis of reinforced concrete with different bracing arrangements by equivalent static method using Staad Pro. software. The arrangements considered were diagonal, V-type, inverted V-type and X-type. It was observed that lateral displacement reduced by 50% to 60% and maximum displacement reduced by using X-type bracing. Base shear of the building was also found to increase from the bare Page | 10 frame, by use of X-type bracing, indicating increase in stiffness.

Montuori (2014) Perform analysis on high rise steel diagrid building of 351 m high with H/B ratio of 6.62. The analytical model's steel framing members have a floor area of 53 m x 53 m in accordance with the euro steel table. Using SAP 2000 software, a model was created and then examined for three various brace angles, including 600, 700, and 800 with and without a secondary bracing system. A steel diagrid building needs a secondary bracing system, according to analysis. The 600 angle bracing method is determined to have the lowest local inter-storey drifts.

Gowardhan et al. (2015) review of software-based comparative seismic analysis of steel frames with and without bracing. The effectiveness of steel bracings in steel structures has been a key factor in this research. A comparison of structures with and without seismically resistant steel bracing has been considered. It has been discovered that seismic bracings increase stiffness against lateral loads, and using bracings as a retrofitting strategy may be a smart idea.

Bhosle et al. (2015) One of the structural solutions used to resist earthquake loads in multistory structures is the concrete- and steel-braced reinforced concrete frame. Many existing reinforced concrete structures require retrofitting to address flaws and resist seismic loads. An effective way to increase earthquake protection is to use bracing systems

III.  ANALYSIS AND OPTIMUM DESIGN OF TOWERS

Analysis and optimum design of towers has been done for the following requirements and configuration:

1. Transmission tower for 220 kV-3 phase-single-circuit.
2. Suspension and Tangent tower (0° – 2°)
3. Height = 28.2 m, Base width = 4.72 m
4. Batter width = 1.5 m
5. Deviation angle= 79° (40°-90°)
6. Shielding Angle = 30°
7. Sag = 8 m
8. Wind speed = 39m/s and 47m/s(IS-802 (Part 1)-1995)
9. Conductor Wire ACSR ZEBRA (Properties in Table No.3.1)
10. Earth wire (Properties in Table No. 3.2)

IV. ACKNOWLEDGMENT

This work was completed with the grants and facilities of Lakshmi Narain College of Technology, Bhopal (M.P.). Authors are thankful to this institute and faculties for extending this cooperation.

Conclusion

[1] Amini Moein a. Et al , “The effect of bracing arrangement in the seismic behaviour building with various concentric bracing by nonlinear static and dynamic analysis” 2004; 15wcee,lisboa. [2] Arunroy N S, K Vasugi, “Seismic Performance of Different Bracing for Steel Frames”, International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering, Volume 8, Issue 1, 2019 [3] Bharat Patel , Rohan Mali, Prataprao Jadhav,G. Mohan Ganesh International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET) 2017, pp. 973–981 [4] Bharath, S., Vishal, B.V., Kavitha, S., Mamatha, P. (2021). Seismic Analysis of Irregular Multi-storey Building with Bracing and Shear Wall Using Flat Slab. In: Manik, G., Kalia, S., Sahoo, S.K., Sharma, T.K., Verma, O.P. (eds) Advances in Mechanical Engineering. Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-0942-8_5. [5] Bhosle Ashwini Tanaji, Prof. Shaikh A. N. IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering (IOSR-JMCE) e-ISSN: 2278-1684,p-ISSN: 2320- 334X, Volume 12, Issue 5 Ver. V (Sep. - Oct. 2015), PP 08-12 Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Building with Different Arrangement of Concrete and Steel Bracing system [6] Chavan Krishnaraj R. ,Jadhav H.S. (2014). “Seismic Response of RC Building With Different Arrangement of Steel Bracing System.”, International Journal of engineering Research and Applications (2248-9622). [7] Deulkar, W., Modhera, C., & Patil, H. (2010). “Buckling Restrained Braces for Vibration Control of Building Structures.” IJRRAS 4, 363-372. [8] Dolce, M., Cardone, D., Marnetto, R., Mucciarelli, M., Nigro, D., Ponzo, F.C. and Santarsiero, G. (2004), “Experimental static and dynamic response of a real RC frame upgraded with SMA re-centering and dissipating braces”, Proc. of the 13th World Conf. on Earthquake Engineering, Canada, Paper no. 2878. [9] Ebadi, Parviz & Sabouri-Ghomi, saeid. (2008). Concept improvement of behavior of X-Bracing systems by using Easy-Going Steel. 10.13140/2.1.3275.8408. [10] Gowardhan A. V., Dhawale G.D., Shende N. P. “A Review on Comparative Seismic Analysis of Steel Frame with and without Bracing by Using Software”, International Journal of Engineering Research-Online, Vol.3., S2, 2015,pp 219-225. [11] Haral Amey Sambhaji, Dr. S.L.Hake,” Comparative Analysis Between Various Types of Bracings for RC Building in Different Seismic Zones”, Open Access International Journal of Science and Engineering, Volume 6, Issue 7, 2021. [12] Harsha C. S., Seismic Strengthening of Steel Buildings using Bracings, International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology, 2020 [13] https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2021.11.490. [14] IS 4091 (1979) “Code of Practice for Design and Construction of Foundations for Transmission Line and Poles”, Bureau of Indian Standards code, India. Akbari R.et al. (2014). “Seismic Fragility Assessment of Steel X-Braced and Chevron- Braced RC Frames.”, Asian Journal of Civil Engineering (BHRC), VOL16 No.1 [15] IS 5613 (Part 2/Sec. 1) - 1985: “Code of Practice for Design Installation and Maintenance of Overhead Power Lines, Bureau of Indian Standards code, India [16] IS 802 (Part 1/Sec. 1) – 1995: “Use of Structural Steel in Overhead Transmission line Towers -Code of practice”, Bureau of Indian Standards, India.

Copyright

Copyright © 2023 Priyanka Soni, Deeksha Shirotiya , Abhay Kumar Jha, Barun Kumar. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.