Journal of Civil Engineering and Environmental Technology

p-ISSN: 2349-8404; e-ISSN: 2349-879X; Volume 3, Issue 6; April-June, 2016, pp. 549-552
© Krishi Sanskriti Publications
http://www.krishisanskriti.org/Publication.html

Seismic Analysis of Self Supporting

Telecommunication Tower
Chirag P. Chaudhari1 and Sachin B. Kadam2
1
S.Y. M.Tech (Structure), Walchand college of engineering,Sangli.
2
Walchand college of engineering, Sangli.
E-mail: [email protected], 2sachin.kadam@walchand sangli.ac.in
1

Abstract—In this age of communication and networking Previously due to the height of telecommunication tower only
telecommunication towers plays important role in human society. So wind was considered for analysis but from the past
the analysis and design of telecommunication towers for earthquake experiences seismic effect should also be considered in
are the major issues which are playing significant role in recent analysis so that the towers could resist the seismic forces.
decades in the designing. Telecommunication towers with different
configurations behaves differently for lateral loadings. Lot of In some of the first studies conducted on performance of
literature is available which proposes different formulas to determine telecommunication tower, Konno and kimura studied the
seismic parameters. Also previously, designers considered safety of effect of earthquake loading on roof top telecommunication
towers only against overturning. During the seismic event some
tower to obtain the mode shapes, natural frequencies and
members of towers reach its ultimate strength causing failure.
However, performance of the different configurations of
damping properties of structure. Also Mikus investigated the
telecommunication tower against earthquake is not much discussed seismic behavior of six three legged self-supporting
in the literatures. So there is need of in-depth study of behavior of telecommunication tower using accelogram.
telecommunication tower for different configurations and its analysis
AS a part of study, initially efforts have been made to study
for earthquake effect. This paper deals with designing and modelling
of telecommunication towers for different configuration such as amplication factor for base shear and total vertical reaction of
different bracing systems using Structural Analysis Program self-supporting tower based on modal superposition analysis
(SAP2000) software. Linear and non-linear analysis is carried out of performed on 10 existing towers [1}. And leter on the study
different modelled towers and the results are compared based on the was extended to investigated seismic behavior of 4-legged
pushover curve to find the best suitable configuration of towers. self-supporting telecommunication tower under Tabas and
Manjhil earthquake spectra and offered relationship for
Keywords: Telecommunication towers, bracing systems, seismic estimating fundamental time period and base shear [2]. Also
analysis, base shear, Pushover curve, SAP200. on seismic sensitivity of 4-legged telecommunication tower
based on modal superposition analysis shows that in case of
1. INTRODUCTION
rectangular crossection earthquake loading in two orthogonal
The television and telecommunication industry plays a great direction is important [3]. The other efforts study related to
role in human societies and thus communication industries towers, also calculated seismic amplification factor, and
have seen a tremendous increase in last few years which have offered relation for estimating the vertical response of tower
resulted in installation of large number of towers to increase [4]. The other researcher attempted to study both rooftop
the coverage area and network consistency. In wireless tower and ground base towers and compared based on axial
communication network these towers play a significant role forces. In another study conducted, seismic response of ten 4
thus much more attention is now being paid to legged telecommunication tower, the study presented three
telecommunication towers than it was in the past. equations to estimate tower yield base shear and base shear
that corresponds to immediate occupancy level of tower [6].
Besides the need of telecommunication towers in day to day The earthquake response of four towers was also conducted
life, during the events of the earthquake telecommunication with different height considering different bracing system
and TV towers have the crucial task of instant transmission of based on base shear and the displacement for time history of
information from the affected areas to the rescue centers so Bhuj earthquake [7].
that help could reach the needed as early as possible.
Therefore utmost importance should be given in considering Most of these previous studies were carried out to provide
all possible extreme conditions for analysis and designing of various formulae to find out various seismic parameters. Also
these towers. previously the interest of designers was in safety against
overturning of tower. But during the event of earthquake some
550 Chirag P. Chaudhari and Sachin B. Kadam

of the members of tower reaches yield strength and causes consuming process and requires special inputs whereas
failure. Due to this, nonlinear pushover analysis should be nonlinear static analysis is a simplified analysis under a
carried out to study the actual behavior of telecommunication predefined pattern of permanent vertical loads and gradually
tower. increasing lateral loads. This is also known as pushover
analysis. This type of analysis enables weakness in the
Keeping this in view, in this paper, an attempt is made to
structure to be identified. The decision to retrofit can be taken
study the nonlinear seismic analysis of different
in such studies
telecommunication towers with different configurations of
bracing systems.
1.1. Configuration of telecommunication towers
Telecommunication towers are mostly square or triangular in
plan, made of standard steel angles and connected together by
means of bolts and nuts.
There are mainly five types of bracing and horizontal
combinations that are normally adopted in towers as follows;
Fig. 1.2 Nonlinear static analysis curve (ASCE 41, 2007)
1) X-Bracing without horizontals, call it XX-Bracing and it is
statically determinate for each panel.
2) XB-bracing: X-bracing with horizontals is called XB- The range AB is elastic range, IO, LS and CP stand for
bracing and it is statically indeterminate. The horizontal Immediate Occupancy, Life Safety and Collapse Prevention
are the redundant members and carry only nominal forces. respectively.
3) K-bracing: K-bracing is statically determinate and gives 2. SCOPE AND OBJECTIVES
larger head room. Therefore, it is used in the panels next to
ground. In this paper, an attempt is made to study and compare the
4) Y-bracing: The bracing type is statically determinate and effects of earthquake on a 4 legged self-supporting
provides better head room space and so could be used at telecommunication towers with different configuration using
ground or lower panels. SAP2000. The methodology includes analysis of 3D
5) W-bracing: it is a kind of overlapping panels and statically modelling of telecommunication towers of different bracing
determinate. It is suitable for small panels. systems. The non-linear analysis is carried out for the different
6) Arch-bracing: An arch bracing can be adopted in towers to compare the effect of earthquake on it.
wide panels.
3. PROBLEM DISCUSSION AND MODELLING OF
STRUCTURE

In order to evaluate the seismic response of

telecommunication towers dynamic analysis is adopted. The
details of this towers is mentioned in following table.
Details of Models:
In this study, the towers of 50 meter height is considered. This
tower is considered to be situated seismic zone IV and
designed in compliance to the Indian Code of Practice for
Fig. 1.1: Different configuration of bracing system Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures[8]. The tower is
considered to be fixed at the base. The tower is modelled
using software SAP2000. Pushover analysis is carried out on
the same model to obtain pushover curve.
1.2. Analysis of telecommunication tower Model I Telecommunication tower with X-B bracing
Due to ductile behaviour of steel, analysis and design of steel system.
telecommunication tower is difficult task. Different sections of
leg members, bracing members and horizontal members are to Model II Telecommunication tower with X-B-X bracing
be designed considering loads on it. In this study bare system.
telecommunication towers are designed and checked for Model III Telecommunication tower with K bracing
gravity loading. system.
Model IV Telecommunication tower with K bracings with
Nonlinear dynamic analysis which is also known as time additional bracing system.
history analysis, of telecommunication towers is time

Journal of Civil Engineering and Environmental Technology

p-ISSN: 2349-8404; e-ISSN: 2349-879X; Volume 3, Issue 6; April-June, 2016
Seismic Analysis of Self Supporting Telecommunication Tower 551

Model III Model IV

Fig. 3.3 Snapshots of 3-Dimensional models of towers from

Fig. 3.1. Schematic drawing of Mode I and Model II SAP2000

4. RESULT AND DISCUSSION:

The fundamental time period and base shear values using
Uniform building code and from SAP2000 are tabulated
below.
Table 4.1. Comparison of analytical and software results for
Model I

Parameters Uniform Building SAP2000

Code
(1997)
Fundamental Time period 0.658 0.622
(sec)
Base shear 10.8 8.724
(kN)
Fig. 3.2.Schematic drawing of Mode III and Model IV
From Table 4.1 it can be seen that the result obtained from
software and that obtained from Uniform building code 1997
are nearly same. The base shear is decreasing and time period
is increasing in case of software results.
The results of fundamental time period and base shear for
different type of bracings is tabulated below
Table 4.2. Comparison of seismic parameters for different
bracing systems

XB Bracing XBX Bracing

Base Shear 8.724 12.667
(kN)
Model I Model II Fundamental time period 0.66 0.599
(sec)
Table 4.2. Comparison of seismic parameters for different
bracing systems
*
K Bracing K-Add
Base Shear 8.328 10.26
(kN)
Fundamental time period 0.647 0.648
(sec)
*Additional bracing with K bracing

Journal of Civil Engineering and Environmental Technology

p-ISSN: 2349-8404; e-ISSN: 2349-879X; Volume 3, Issue 6; April-June, 2016
552 Chirag P. Chaudhari and Sachin B. Kadam

From pushover analysis, displacement for constant base increasing buckling strength. Hence, at ultimate point,
shear for different bracing system is shown below: base shear for tower with K bracing with additional
bracing system is 956.19 kN which is greater than any
Table 4.3. Variation of displacement for constant base shear for other tower configuration.
different bracing systems  Telecommunication tower with K bracing system with
additional bracing system is better for the tower
Type of bracing Base Shear Displacement
configuration considered in this study.
system (kN) (mm)
XB Bracing 575 1.85 6. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
XBX Bracing 575 1.55
K Bracing 575 0.9 The writers wish to acknowledge the support of Prof. S. N.
*
K-Add 575 0.8 Tande, Head of the Department, and Department of Applied
*Additional bracing with K bracing Mechanics for providing necessary facilities. Also the writers
are greatful to Walchand College of Engineering for
The above table shows the variation of displacement of towers supporting this study and making available the software aids
with different configurations for constant base shear. It is required for study.
observed that tower having K bracing system with additional REFERENCES
bracing system shows minimum displacement whereas XB [1]Amiri. Mcclure, "Earthquake amplification factors for self-
bracing tower shows maximum displacement. supporting telecommunication towers," Canadian Journal Of
For comparison purpose the pushover curve has been Civil Engineering, vol. 26: 208–215, 1999.
converted to its equivalent bilinear form as shown below; [2]Amiri, Boostan "Dynamic Response Of Antenna-Supporting
Structures," 4th Structural Specialty Conference of the
Canadian Society for Civil Engineering, 2002.
[3]Amiri, Massah, "Seismic Response Of 4-Legged Self-Supporting
Telecommunication Towers," International Journal of
Engineering, vol. Vol. 20, No. 2, 2007.
[4]Barkhurdari, Amiri, Massah and Vafaei, "Earthquake
Amplification Factors for Self-supporting 4-legged
Telecommunication Towers," World Applied Sciences Journal
2, 2007.
[5]Rajasekharan, Vijaya, "Analysis Of Telecommunication Tower
Subjected To Seismic & Wind Loading," International journal
of Advancement In Engineering Technology, Management and
Applied Science, vol. Volume 1, 2014.
[6]Soltanzadeh, Vafaei, "Seismic performance of 4-legged Self-
supporting Telecommunication Towers," International Journal
Fig. 4.1 Comparison of bilineared nonlinear static pushover of applied sciences and engineering Research, vol. Volume 3,
curves of different bracing systems 2014.
[7]Shah, Desai, "Seismic Analysis Of Tall Tv Tower Cosidering
Different Bracing Systems," International Journal of
5. CONCLUSION Engineering, Business and Enterprise Applications, vol. 14-
178, 2014.
The telecommunication tower is designed and checked under [8]Indian Standard Criteria for earthquake resistant design of
gravity loading and depending upon observations following structures part 1 general provisions and buildings, IS 1893 (Part
conclusions are drawn; 1): 2002.
[9]International conference of Building Officials: Uniform building
 From linear analysis, the time period for tower with X-B- code :1997, Volume II, California 90601, USA.
X bracing system is minimum and respective base shear is [10]Indian standard general construction in steel — code of practice
maximum over other towers with different bracing system. IS 800:2007
 At yield point during pushover analysis the tower with K [11]Punmia B.C. and Jain, "Design of steel structure", Laxmi
bracing (Model III) shows better results than other three publication, 2006.
models with XB, XBX and K bracing with additional [12]Konno T, Kimura E "Earthquake effects on steel tower
bracing system. structures atop buildings". Proceedings of the 5th World
Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Rome, Italy, Vol. 1973.
 Considering 2 meters as ultimate displacement, tower p. 184-193, 1973
having K bracing with additional bracing system perform [13]ASCE 41-06(2007),”Seismic Rehabitation of Existing
better at ultimate point than other towers with additional Buildings”. American society of Civil Engineering, Virginia,
bracing systems. USA 2007.
 Additional bracing system provided with K bracing system [14]Structural Analysis Program (SAP 2000), Computer and
reduces the unsupported length of bracing members thus Structures, Inc., Berkeley, CA 94704, USA.

Journal of Civil Engineering and Environmental Technology

p-ISSN: 2349-8404; e-ISSN: 2349-879X; Volume 3, Issue 6; April-June, 2016