STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF 60M GROUND BASED

TRIANGULAR HYBRID TOWER WITH WIND SPEED 144KMPH

(40M/S) (ANTENNA LOADING AREA 7.0 SQ.M)
Site ID: UEB5508
Site Name: SANDEMA
Structure Height: 60m
Date :24-April-2014
Version :00
Structural Analysis Report
Contents
1. Executive Summary & Recommendations
2. Structure Line Diagram
3. Site Images and Issues
4. Rectification Requirements List
Appendix 1
5. Analysis Introduction
6. Summary of Results
7. Structure Model Showing Sections
8. Assumptions
9. Loading Equipment
10. Structure Model Showing Equipments
11. Loading - Wind
12. Foundation Loads
13. On-Site Test Results
Appendix 2
14. Bill of Materials
Appendix 3
15. Analysis Results Strengthened Tower with Additional Equipment
Executive Summary & Recommendations
Height of Structure 59.745m
StructureType 3LeggedTubular HybridTower
Date of Audit 16
th
August 2013
NGR N10.73195 W1.28541
Structure Capacity:
The structure in current loading position isnot safe and isover stressed. The maximum stress %
observed in various parts of the tower are as below:
Leg Sections 115%
Bracing Sections 125%
Bolts 88%
Members failing in L/R ratio:
Few members are not over stressed but are exceeding L/R (Slenderness ratio) ratio than what
specified in 222G. i.e 200. The maximum L/r ratio observed in the members is as below:
LegSections 76.53
Bracing / horizontal / plans Sections 259.19
Structure Rectification Requirements:
Strengthen sections 1 and 2 legs and 1-2 bracings.
Strengthening of plan members of the sections 1, 2 and 3 is required as the L/R ratio is
exceeding 200.
Full bolt tightening and torque for the FULL TOWER leg splice bolts and bracings.
Replacement and swap out of bolts FULL TOWER. We would propose that
all bolts of indeterminate value [not grade 8.8], or corroded or missing or too
short are replaced.
Tower repainting and cleaning of tower sections is recommended. A corrosion
remedy program needs to be implemented; the existing surface coating of the
tower sections has weathered off.
Structure Condition:
This tower condition as it stands is NOT in good condition. Tower is overstressed in the
legs and main diagonal bracings - failing on buckling at maximum design wind speed. It
is recommended to strengthen the legs and main bracings. The tower also requires
cleaning and repainting. Some bolts are found to be loose or rusted and needs to be
replaced.
Capacity of Strengthened Tower with Existing Equipment
With the tower strengthened -
Leg Sections 94%
Bracing Sections 99.93%
Bolts 88%
Note, if an additional operator to be installed, several other members to be replaced.
L/R limits after strengthening
Leg Sections 76.53
Bracing Sections 196.90
Structure Foundation:
No data regarding foundations is available.
Maximum forces acting on Tower Leg(service load
case) Compression 381kN
Tension/Pull 327kN
Trans shear 24.18kN
Long shear 31.30kN
Structure Line Diagram
Rectification Requirements List
List of members that require replacement.
Item Size
Tower
Quantity Comment
Section
Legs 221*3.7 S235 1 3
Replace
Legs
Legs 221*3.7 S235 2 3
Replace
Legs
Bracings 60*2.3 S235 1 6
Replace
bracings
Bracing 60*2.3 S235 2 6
Replace
bracings
Plans EA50x50x5 S235 1 3
Replace
Plan bracings
Plans
EA50x50x5 S235 2 3
Replace
Plan bracings
Plans
EA50x50x5 S235 3 3
Replace
Plan bracings
This structure requires attention on maintenance:
Strengthen sections 1 and 2 legs and 1-2 bracings.
Strengthening of plan members of sections 1,2 & 3 is required.
Cleaning and repainting of the whole tower and a corrosion remedy program.
Full bolt tightening and torque for the FULL TOWER leg splice bolts and bracings.
Replacement and swap out of bolts FULL TOWER. We would propose that all
bolts of indeterminate value [not grade 8.8], or corroded or missing or too
short are replaced.
Appendix 1
Analysis Introduction
This report covers the structural analysis of Sandema - 3 legged steel Hybrid tower
59.75m high and located in upper east Ghana. The tower is triangular in plan, with a face
width 5.27m at the bottom and tapering to 1.39m at 47.75m level. All dimensions are
center to center between legs, see Figure 1.
The tower consists of tubular steel sections for legs and bracing members of varying
sizes as listed in the table. All other members are angular section. All legs and braces
are shown on the enclosed Figure 1.
The tower and its members are analyzed to design standard code TIA-222-G,
Structural standard for antenna supporting structure and antennas. The tower is
modeled and analyzed using PLS Tower.
The purpose of the analysis is to make an assessment of the structural adequacy of
the steel lattice tower to carry existing equipment and at maximum design wind
speed.
The tower has been checked for a deflection criteria based on a maximum allowable
rotation of the tower by 1 degree at service load case maximum wind condition and 0.5
degrees at service load case survival wind condition, which is the limit generally
accepted by the telecommunications industry.
Tower leg reactions are provided for further checks later from tower overturning and
concrete base capacity when base dimensions/ drawing plans are made available.
Summary of Results
Legs and Bracings Stress Ratios of existing tower before members
replacements:
Section
Angle
Size
Steel
Strength
(MPa)
Max
Use In
Comp.
%
Comp.
Force
(kN)
L/R
Capacity
(kN)
Tension
Force
(kN)
Net
Section
Capacity
(kN)
Maximum
stress
Ratio
Legs
1 221*3.7 235 115.03
-
569.239 494.882 501.974 534.249 1.15
2 221*3.7 235 102.98
-
509.704 494.946 451.498 534.249 1.03
3 169*5.0 235 94.15
-
449.394 477.292 399.797 544.824 0.94
4 169*5.0 235 81.08
-
386.986 477.292 345.544 544.824 0.81
5 169*5.0 235 67.64
-
322.829 477.292 289.146 544.824 0.68
6 140*3.8 235 91.22
-
258.102 282.937 231.936 343.899 0.91
7 140*3.8 235 68.61
-
194.131 282.937 172.42 343.899 0.69
8 140*3.8 235 46.37
-
131.201 282.937 117.379 343.899 0.46
9 115*3.6 235 30.47 -60.165 197.442 52.748 264.375 0.30
10 115*3.6 235 3.74 -7.391 197.442 4.83 264.375 0.04
Bracings
1 60*2.3 235 124.71 -21.546 17.277 20.691 88.195 1.25
2 60*2.3 235 108.84 -20.393 18.737 19.6 88.195 1.09
3 60*2.3 235 99.98 -21.026 21.03 19.677 88.195 0.99
4 60*2.3 235 92.26 -20.887 22.641 19.638 88.195 0.92
5 60*2.3 235 84.67 -19.859 23.454 19.219 88.195 0.85
6 60*2.3 235 79.74 -19.717 24.726 19.151 88.195 0.80
7 60*2.3 235 84.72 -22.229 26.238 21.68 88.195 0.85
8 60*2.3 235 84.67 -23.379 27.61 22.511 88.195 0.85
9 60*2.3 235 84.35 -24.279 28.784 23.76 88.195 0.84
10 60*2.3 235 40.15 -11.556 28.784 11.153 88.195 0.40
Horizontals
1,2 70*70*7 235 31.74 -13.599 42.844 13.619 165.544 0.32
3 to 10 60*60*6 235 32.57 -11.129 34.165 11.072 117.247 0.33
Plans
3 to 10 50*50*5 235 14.72 -8.14 63.516 5.226 79.279 0.13
1 to 3 65*65*5 235 3.43 -0.925 26.984 0.923 108.844 0.03
All members with stress ratios greater than 1.0 are overstressed
The maximum rotation of antenna at service load case and maximum wind is 0.68 degrees.
Structure Model Showing Sections
Figure 1: Tower Section and Elevations
Assumptions
Below is a list of the basis and assumptions used in the analysis of this tower site:
1. The tower is analyzed to TIA-222-G, Structural Standard for Antenna
Supporting Structures
2. All tower members are in good condition and free from any defects.
3. All bolts are assumed to be in the condition that was found during the survey
conducted on site.
4. All bolts have no visible grade markings and are assumed to be Grade 4.6.
5. All bolts marked 8.8 are assumed to be grade 8.8 bolts.
6. Selected sections in the tower (legs and bracing) were tested for grade. Grade
results from these tests were used in the analysis. Though the tensile strength
of the leg members is way below the minimum limit of 360MPa (for S235),
the material grade is considered as S235.
7. Equipment loadings as listed are based on equipment site survey conducted on site.
8. A sample of the tower members were measured on site and it is assumed that all
details of corresponding members at the same level as the surveyed members
have the same detail.
9. All steel is of good quality and has not deteriorated over time.
10. Weights/wind loading of ladders, platforms, antenna support steelwork, cable
ladders and feeders has been approximated.
11. No allowance has been made for weakening of the tower members,
stubs and foundations by corrosive action.
12. The holdings-down bolts are assumed to be Grade 4.6 and are firmly
connected to the foundation.
13. The tower support base was surveyed to be supported on pedestals. The
holding down bolts capacity has been checked and can accommodate the
tower legs if the embedded length of the foundation bolts is of minimum
70mm. The exact details of the length of embedment is not provided in the
report.
14. Bracings of sections 1 and 2 are considered as 60*2.3 as per form9 instead of
88*2.3 as per form 5 for existing tower analysis.
Loading Equipment
List of Surveyed equipment
Size
Elevation
Direction
al
TYPE from the Azimuth
(m)*
base (m)
GSM 0.16x1.3 25.2 50
GSM 0.16x1.3 25.2 170
GSM 0.16x1.3 25.2 280
GSM 0.26x2.6 55.5 50
GSM 0.26x2.6 55.5 170
GSM 0.26x2.6 55.5 290
GSM 0.26x2.6 35.5 205
GSM 0.26x2.6 35.5 360
GSM 0.26x2.6 35.5 100
DISH 1.2 49.5 290
DISH 1.2 44.8 18
* All dish sizes are diameters, all GSM sizes are lengths
Note: For feeder loading: 2 No. 28mm per 1 panel, 1 no. 12mm per dish.
Structure Model Showing Equipment
Figure 2: Computerized tower model showing equipment
Loading - Wind
Wind Loading
Wind loading parameters to suit TIA-222G design code.
The following wind loading values and factors have been assumed:
Wind Speed
Gust wind speed with return period of 50 years is 40 m/s
Partial Safety Factors
Wind load factor 1.6
Terrain Factor
Structure is considered to be a Class 2
The tower is located at exposure category B & Topographic category 1.
Foundation Loads
1. Maximum Support Reaction on existing tower with current loading
Compression 381 kN
Tension/Pull 327 kN
Trans shear 24.18 kN
Long shear 31.30 kN
2. Check for Holding Down bolts
No of Bolts: 4No- M30 each leg, total of 12 No-M30 bolts for all legs; assumed Grade 6.8 Max
Tension Stress Ratio of Bolts: 0.88 <1.0, Safe
On-Site Test Results
A. Material
Thickness Tests
Not applicable
B. Hardness
(Tensile) Tests
Legs S235
Bracings S235
Note: Though the tensile strength values of legs are less than 360 (minimum for S235), the
material is assumed to be S235 as per clients suggestion.
C. Concrete Base Grade Tests
Test 1 43,34,33,36,35,38,32,36,43,30
Test 2 38,36,38,45,45,36,35,40,37,38
Test 3 36,37,38,32,39,45,45,37,41,34
Test 4 36,19,29,26,34,31,29,29,25,29
Recommended cube strength of concrete, 30 N/mm2
Appendix 2 Bill of Materials
List of members that require replacement.
Item Size
Tower
Quantity Comment
Section
Legs 221*3.7 S235 1 3
Replace
Legs
Legs 221*3.7 S235 2 3
Replace
Legs
Bracings 60*2.3 S235 1 6
Replace
bracings
Bracing 60*2.3 S235 2 6
Replace
bracings
Plans EA50x50x5 S235 1 3
Replace
Plan bracings
Plans
EA50x50x5 S235 2 3
Replace
Plan bracings
Plans
EA50x50x5 S235 3 3
Replace
Plan bracings
This structure requires attention on maintenance:
Strengthen sections 1 and 2 legs and 1-2 bracings.
Strengthening of plan members of sections 1,2 & 3 is required.
Cleaning and repainting of the whole tower and a corrosion remedy program.
Full bolt tightening and torque for the FULL TOWER leg splice bolts and bracings.
Replacement and swap out of bolts FULL TOWER. We would propose that all
bolts of indeterminate value [not grade 8.8], or corroded or missing or too
short are replaced.
Appendix 3
Analysis Results Strengthened Tower with
Existing Equipment
Legs and Bracings Stress Ratios of existing tower after members
replacements:
Section
Angle
Size
Steel
Strength
(MPa)
Max
Usage
%
Comp.
Force
(kN)
L/R
Capacity
(kN)
Curve
No.
Tension
Force
(kN)
Net
Section
Capacity
(kN)
Maximum
stress
ratio
Legs
1 219.1*4.8 235 90.2 -570.587 632.551 1 501.106 683.145 0.90
2 219.1*4.8 235 80.59 -509.821 632.633 1 450.972 683.145 0.81
3 169*5.0 235 94.09 -449.07 477.292 1 399.537 544.824 0.94
4 169*5.0 235 81.02 -386.696 477.292 1 345.308 544.824 0.81
5 169*5.0 235 67.59 -322.594 477.292 1 288.954 544.824 0.68
6 140*3.8 235 91.16 -257.916 282.937 1 231.787 343.899 0.91
7 140*3.8 235 68.56 -193.99 282.937 1 172.318 343.899 0.69
8 140*3.8 235 46.33 -131.097 282.937 1 117.311 343.899 0.46
9 115*3.6 235 30.45 -60.128 197.442 1 52.716 264.375 0.30
10 115*3.6 235 3.74 -7.388 197.442 1 4.824 264.375 0.04
Bracings
1 76.1*3.2 235 45.58 -21.897 48.038 4 20.85 154.818 0.46
2 76.1*3.2 235 39.43 -20.541 52.096 4 19.604 154.818 0.39
3 60*2.3 235 99.97 -21.024 21.03 4 19.68 88.195 0.99
4 60*2.3 235 92.17 -20.869 22.641 4 19.624 88.195 0.92
5 60*2.3 235 84.59 -19.841 23.454 4 19.205 88.195 0.85
6 60*2.3 235 79.67 -19.7 24.726 4 19.139 88.195 0.80
7 60*2.3 235 84.66 -22.213 26.238 4 21.658 88.195 0.85
8 60*2.3 235 84.58 -23.352 27.61 4 22.502 88.195 0.85
9 60*2.3 235 84.29 -24.262 28.784 4 23.743 88.195 0.84
10 60*2.3 235 40.12 -11.549 28.784 4 11.148 88.195 0.40
Horizontals
1,2 70*70*7 235 31.64 -13.554 42.844 4 13.972 165.544 0.32
3 to 10 60*60*6 235 32.42 -11.075 34.165 4 11.012 117.247 0.32
Plans
3 to 10 50*50*5 235 14.71 -8.131 63.516 1 5.228 79.279 0.13
1 to 3 65*65*5 235 3.59 -0.969 26.984 4 0.96 108.844 0.04
Note: None of the members are having stress ratio more than 1.
Note: Failed sections were replaced with section available in India. If the assumed sections are not
available at the manufacturers location, then equivalent sections of next available higher size should
be used.
Note: As the bracing of section 3 is having stress ratio very close to 1, it is recommended to once
again check the section dimensions and material strengths. If any reduction in the values
observed than what specified in the initial filed report, then the same should be replaced with
76.1*3.2 tubular section.
Stress ratio of bolts:
Section
Stress
ratio
Legs
1 0.71
2 0.63
3 0.88
4 0.76
5 0.64
6 0.51
7 0.38
8 0.26
9 0.17
10 0.02
Bracings
1 0.25
2 0.23
3 0.37
4 0.37
5 0.35
6 0.35
7 0.39
8 0.41
9 0.43
10 0.20
Horizontals
1,2 0.24
3 to 10 0.20
Plans
3 to 10 0.02
1 to 3 0.14
Maximum Un factored Support Reactions on existing tower with current
loading
3. Maximum Support Reaction on existing tower with current loading
Compression 381 kN
Tension/Pull 327 kN
Trans shear 24.18 kN
Long shear 31.30 kN
4. Check for Holding Down bolts
No of Bolts: 4No- M30 each leg, total of 12 No-M30 bolts for all legs; assumed Grade 6.8 Max
Tension Stress Ratio of Bolts: 0.88 <1.0, Safe
Strengthening recommendation replace bracings
& leg members in sections 1-2 and plans of sections
1,2&3