Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
net
Open Access
1
School of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, 250061, China
2
Faculty of Infrastructure Engineering, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian, Liaoning, 116024, China
3
Sichuan Institute of Building Research, Chengdu, Sichuan, 610081, China
Abstract: Collapses of power transmission towers had usually taken place in previous large earthquake. The collapse
process of a power transmission tower under earthquake excitation is studied in this paper. Using international finite ele-
ment software ABAQUS, the three-dimensional finite element model of the power transmission tower is created based on a
practical engineering. Three typical seismic records are selected. The progress collapse processes of the power transmission
tower under different seismic excitations are simulated using the nonlinear time history method. The collapse paths and
failure positions of the power transmission tower are obtained under different seismic excitations. The results can provide
reference for seismic design of power transmission tower which can prevent the collapse of the power transmission tower.
Keywords: Power transmission tower, seismic loading, finite-element model, the longitudinal and transverse collapse path,
collapse process.
13.3 m
element is discontinuous in the process of collapse. But, the
large-scale application of the method is difficult owing to the
lack of theory, lower efficiency and no professional software
10.6 m
[6-7].
The finite element method is now widely used in the
53.9 m
solution of large scale industrial problems [8]. Based on
whether a new value is related to other new values in each
30 m
increment step, the finite element method can be divided into
explicit finite element method and implicit finite element
method. Compared to implicit finite element method, the
explicit finite element method can easily solve complex
contact problems with low CPU cost.
The combined finite-discrete element method is an 9.36 m
emerging numerical simulation method. Using the method,
total behaviors of structures from zero loading to collapse can (a) Tower size
be followed with reliable accuracy and reasonable CPU time
[9]. But the application of the method is greatly limited due to
the absence of efficient software.
0.0
m/s
S, S11 S, S11
Right, (1−fraction = 1.0) S, S11 S, S11
Right, (1−fraction = 1.0)
(Avg: 75%) Right, (1−fraction = 1.0) Right, (1−fraction = 1.0)
(Avg: 75%)
+2.275e+08 (Avg: 75%) (Avg: 75%)
+3.040e+08
+2.521e+08 +1.871e+08 +2.336e+08 +1.786e+08
+2.003e+08 +1.468e+08 +1.999e+08 +1.473e+08
+1.484e+08 +1.064e+08 +1.662e+08 +1.161e+08
+9.651e+07 +6.597e+07 +1.325e+08 +8.486e+07
+4.464e+07 +2.558e+07 +9.882e+07 +5.362e+07
−7.238e+06 −1.481e+07 +6.512e+07 +2.238e+07
−5.911e+07 −5.520e+07 +3.142e+07 −8.858e+06
−1.110e+08 −9.559e+07 −2.284e+06 −4.010e+07
−1.360e+08 −3.599e+07 −7.133e+07
−1.629e+08 −1.026e+08
−2.147e+08 −1.764e+08 −6.969e+07
−2.168e+08 −1.034e+08 −1.338e+08
−2.666e+08 −1.371e+08 −1.650e+08
−3.185e+08 −2.572e+08
−1.708e+08 −1.963e+08
Fig. (3). Collapse process of tower along longitudinal direction under El Centro seismic wave.
Progressive Collapse Analysis of Power Transmission Tower Under Earthquake Excitation The Open Civil Engineering Journal, 2013, Volume 7 167
The transverse collapse process of power transmission Z=26.80m lost bear-loading capability. At 25.03s, all bracing
tower under El Centro seismic wave is given in Fig. (6). At components of diaphragm destroyed.
4.67s, an element of main leg at Z=32.40m yielded first.
T=4.71s, the vertical load transfer path of the tower lost and In Fig. (8), the transverse collapse process of power
upper structure entered the stage of rapid collapse. At 5.12s, a transmission tower under Northridge seismic wave is illus-
bracing component of diaphragm at Z=26.80m lost trated. Diagonal bracings at Z= 22.875m yielded at 12.94s
bear-loading capability and the entire structure began to and more peripheral diagonal bracing yielded subsequently.
collapse rapidly. An element of main leg at Z=15m lost load-bearing capability
at 14.62s.
Fig. (7) gives the transverse collapse of power transmis-
sion tower under Kobe seismic wave. Elements of main leg at In progressive transverse collapse process of the tower
Z=32.40m yielded at t=23.56s. The vertical load transfer path under El Centro seismic wave and Kobe seismic wave, ele-
of tower was destroyed at 23.68s. Upper structure and cross ments of main leg at Z=32.40m are fracture position. During
arm at Z=30m began to lose bear-loading capability at the progressive transverse collapse process of the tower under
same time. At 26.8s, a bracing component of diaphragm at Northridge seismic wave, diagonal bracings at Z=22.875m
S, S11 S, S11
Right, (1−fraction = 1.0) Right, (1−fraction = 1.0) S, S11 S, S11
(Avg: 75%) (Avg: 75%) Right, (1−fraction = 1.0) Right, (1−fraction = 1.0)
+3.209e+08 +2.411e+08 (Avg: 75%) (Avg: 75%)
+2.667e+08 +2.067e+08 +1.734e+08 +2.474e+08
+2.124e+08 +1.723e+08 +1.390e+08 +2.089e+08
+1.581e+08 +1.380e+08 +1.046e+08 +1.705e+08
+1.038e+08 +1.036e+08 +7.015e+07 +1.320e+08
+4.948e+07 +6.923e+07 +3.571e+07 +9.350e+07
−4.812e+06 +3.486e+07 +1.278e+06 +5.502e+07
−5.911e+07 +4.858e+05 −3.316e+07 +1.653e+07
−1.134e+08 −3.389e+07 −6.759e+07 −2.195e+07
−1.677e+08 −6.826e+07 −1.020e+08 −6.043e+07
−2.220e+08 −1.026e+08 −1.365e+08 −9.891e+07
−2.763e+08 −1.370e+08 −1.709e+08 −1.374e+08
−3.306e+08 −1.714e+08 −2.053e+08 −1.759e+08
−2.398e+08 −2.144e+08
Fig. (4). Collapse process of tower along longitudinal direction under Kobe seismic wave.
S, S11 S, S11
S, S11 S, S11
Right, (1−fraction = 1.0) Right, (1−fraction = 1.0)
Right, (1−fraction = 1.0) Right, (1−fraction = 1.0)
(Avg: 75%) (Avg: 75%)
(Avg: 75%) (Avg: 75%)
+2.900e+08 +2.405e+08 +1.727e+08
+1.589e+08 +1.965e+08 +1.440e+08
+1.287e+08 +2.526e+08
+2.153e+08 +1.525e+08 +1.152e+08
+9.845e+07 +1.086e+08 +8.654e+07
+6.825e+07 +1.779e+08
+1.405e+08 +6.460e+07 +5.783e+07
+3.805e+07 +2.064e+07 +2.912e+07
+7.841e+06 +1.031e+08
+6.572e+07 −2.332e+07 +4.109e+05
−2.236e+07 +2.834e+07 −6.729e+07 −2.830e+07
−5.257e+07 −9.046e+06 −1.113e+08
−8.277e+07 −5.701e+07
−4.643e+07 −1.552e+08 −8.572e+07
−1.130e+08 −8.381e+07 −1.992e+08
−1.432e+08 −1.144e+08
−1.212e+08 −2.431e+08 −1.431e+08
−1.734e+08 −1.586e+08
−2.036e+08 −2.871e+08 −1.718e+08
Fig. (5). Collapse process of tower along longitudinal direction under Northridge seismic wave.
S, S11 S, S11
Right, (1−fraction = 1.0) Right, (1−fraction = 1.0) S, S11 S, S11
(Avg: 75%) (Avg: 75%) Right, (1−fraction = 1.0) Right, (1−fraction = 1.0)
+1.929e+08 +2.274e+08 (Avg: 75%) (Avg: 75%)
+1.539e+08 +1.939e+08 +1.999e+08 +3.041e+08
+1.148e+08 +1.604e+08 +1.692e+08 +2.663e+08
+7.574e+07 +1.268e+08 +1.385e+08 +2.284e+08
+3.668e+07 +9.332e+07 +1.078e+08 +1.906e+08
−2.383e+06 +5.980e+07 +7.710e+07 +1.527e+08
−4.144e+07 +2.628e+07 +4.639e+07 +1.149e+08
−8.050e+07 −7.237e+06 +1.568e+07 +7.704e+07
−1.196e+08 −4.076e+07 −1.503e+07 +3.920e+07
−1.586e+08 −7.427e+07 −4.573e+07 +1.350e+06
−1.977e+08 −1.078e+08 −7.644e+07 −3.650e+07
−2.367e+08 −1.413e+08 −1.072e+08 −7.434e+07
−2.758e+08 −1.748e+08 −1.379e+08 −1.122e+08
−1.686e+08 −1.500e+08
Fig. (6). Collapse process of tower along transverse direction under El Centro siemsic wave.
168 The Open Civil Engineering Journal, 2013, Volume 7 Tian et al.
Fig. (7). Collapse process of tower along transverse direction under Kobe siemsic wave.
S, S11 S, S11
Right, (1−fraction = 1.0) Right, (1−fraction = 1.0) S, S11 S, S11
(Avg: 75%) (Avg: 75%) Right, (1−fraction = 1.0) Right, (1−fraction = 1.0)
+1.934e+08 +1.779e+08 (Avg: 75%) (Avg: 75%)
+1.619e+08 +1.503e+08 +2.020e+08 +1.714e+08
+1.303e+08 +1.228e+08 +1.658e+08 +1.367e+08
+9.876e+07 +9.525e+07 +1.297e+08 +1.021e+08
+6.720e+07 +6.771e+07 +9.348e+07 +6.750e+07
+3.564e+07 +4.018e+07 +5.730e+07 +3.287e+07
+4.089e+06 +1.264e+07 +2.112e+07 −1.754e+06
−2.747e+07 −1.489e+07 −1.506e+07 −3.638e+07
−5.902e+07 −4.243e+07 −5.125e+07 −7.101e+07
−9.058e+07 −6.996e+07 −8.743e+07 −1.056e+08
−1.221e+08 −9.749e+07 −1.236e+08 −1.403e+08
−1.537e+08 −1.250e+08 −1.598e+08 −1.749e+08
−1.853e+08 −1.526e+08 −1.960e+08 −2.095e+08
−2.322e+08 −2.441e+08
[7] X. Q. Zhou, W. Y. Xu, X. Q. Niu and Y. Z. Cui, “A review of distinct [9] K. Meguro and H. Tagel-Din, “Applied element method for struc-
element method researching progress and application”, Rock and tural analysis: theory and application for linear materials”, Structural
Soil Mechanics, vol. 28, pp.408-416, 2007. (in Chinese). Eng. / Earthquake En. JSCE, vol. 17, pp.21-35, 2000.
[8] X. C. Wang, Finite Element Method. Beijing: Tsinghua University [10] GB 50260-96. Code for Design of Seismic of Electrical Installa-
Press, 2003. (in Chinese). tions[S]. Beijing: China Planning Press, 1996. (in Chinese).
Received: May 30, 2013 Revised: August 06, 2013 Accepted: August 07, 2013