WHITE PAPER

TIA 222 Codes and Dielectric Antenna Design

March, 2021

Author:

James Butts
State of Maine PE# 9855

Dielectric l 22 Tower Road l Raymond, ME USA

 Introduction
The following is an overview of how Dielectric applies the Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA) 222
Structural Standard for Antenna Supporting Structures and Antennas code to the design of top mounted pylon
antennas. The TIA 222 code has changed over the last 30 years becoming more closely aligned with the data used
and standard practices found in higher level structural codes such as the American Institute of Steel Construction
(AISC), American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), and International Building Code (IBC). Some of these changes have
made antenna designs more conservative. The Dielectric design approach has always been to follow the current
code as written, maintain continuity with historical company design practices, and to leverage new design tools
wherever possible. The effort to maintain continuity is largely centered on maintaining a consistent level of
conservatism. Over the years this has prevented overly slender designs from being produced and has allowed safe
and reliable methods to assess designs.

Loading, Assessment, and Design

It is Dielectric’s responsibility to structurally evaluate the antenna mechanical design, and to generate an accurate
set of loads for the tower Engineer of Record (EOR) to use to assess the tower or mounting structure. Antennas are
checked per the designated code requirements and by limits set by Dielectric design requirements. The designated
design code and the associated parameters are called out by EOR. A revision of the TIA 222 code is used in most
cases. The Dielectric design requirements are based on antenna design experience. An antenna design must pass
both these criteria to be submitted for proposal or released for production.
The current revision of the TIA 222 Code is H. This is referred to here as simply H Code. The previous revisions G, F,
and C are referred to in the same manner. A rough comparison of the F, G, and H Codes is given in Table 1. C Code
is not presented because it is essentially obsolete and is currently used only in extremely rare cases. Most of the
antennas designed and built during the recent Re-pack period were designed to G Code. G Code was a significant
departure from F Code in that it adopted the Load Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) approach. LRFD is based on
reliability and requires a larger set of site specific parameters pertaining to the level of risk, location, and local
topography to calculate the wind pressures, ice thicknesses, and allowable loads. G Code had a significant impact on
antenna design. Wind and particularly ice loads generally went up. The basis for the basic wind speed was changed
from fastest mile to 3 second gust measurements. Wind pressure was made a function of risk, location, and
topography. The gust factor for tubular masts mounted on lattice structures changed from 1.25 to 1.35. The drag
coefficient calculations were changed to better capture the relative effects of pairs of tubular appurtenances
mounted on monopole structures. The result for top mount antennas was the sub critical (higher) drag coefficient
was applied to the larger supporting mast while the lower transitional or super critical drag coefficient was applied
to the smaller appurtenance. This had a significant effect on bottom of stack antennas and side mount antennas
mounted on support poles. Ice thickness was made a function of a minimum ice thickness, risk, topography, and
elevation. The thickness of the ice at the antenna increased dramatically. Ice thicknesses 1.5 inches are now
common. This placed additional emphasis on evaluating the ice loading case when designing antenna mounts and
antennas with many small members such as VHF/FM panels with back screens.
H Code is very similar to G Code with a few exceptions. H Code uses the ASCE 7-16 environmental loading tables for
wind speed and ice thickness. The county based listing of wind speeds and ice thicknesses found in G Code is no
longer given and has been replaced by contour maps for each of the risk categories. The maps are extremely hard
to read so the user is directed to the on line ASCE-7 Hazard Tool. H Code uses ultimate wind speeds instead of Basic
Wind Speed. The difference is ultimate wind speeds were calculated using much longer return periods. The return
periods are now a function of the Risk Category. The higher the Risk Category, the longer the return period, and the
higher the wind speed. Annex L of the H Code gives a conversion table to show the relationship of the H Code
Ultimate wind speeds to the previous edition basic wind speeds which used a 50 year return period. It can be seen
the G Code 3 second gust 50 year return period wind speed is related to the H Code ultimate wind speed by;

2
Dielectric l 22 Tower Road l Raymond, ME USA
 𝑉𝑉𝐻𝐻 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 = √1.6 ∗ 𝐼𝐼 ∗ 𝑉𝑉𝐺𝐺 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶
Where: I -the G Code Importance Factor.
The H Code ultimate wind speeds include the G Code 1.6 wind load factor. The wind pressure calculations do not
impose a significant change in antenna design except in locations where the wind speed maps have changed, or the
new factors are used. H Code includes two new factors in the wind pressure calculation. Ks is the Roof Top Speed-
Up Factor and is used for building mounted structures. The Ks factor can be as high as 1.3. This would be significant
for antennas mounted on tall buildings. Ke is Ground Elevation Factor and is used to account for the change in air
density with altitude above sea level. Ke is less conservative. Lower air density means a lower resultant wind pressure
for a given wind speed. Antennas mounted at extreme altitudes will see reductions in the wind pressure.
H and G Code use a LRFD. LRFD is based on reliability and compares factored load cases against factored structural
resistances. The previous revision, F Code, used the Allowable Stress Design (ASD) approach which compares
unfactored load cases to structural resistances with a factor of safety applied. LRFD uses fully plastic section bending
as the assessment criterion for bending failure whereas ASD used a maximum allowed stress level based on a
percentage of the material yield strength. Top mounted antennas are essentially steel mast structures and although
there is compression due to weight and shear loads from the wind, the primary loading is bending. H Code includes
a section requiring openings in tubular structures be reinforced to essentially put back all the area of cutout material.
This would allow the section to be assessed in compression without accounting for the cutout. This requirement is
difficult to meet for most slotted antenna designs, as reinforcements adversely affect antenna performance. Top
mount pylon antennas are tubular masts with layers of circumferentially arrayed 1 to 2 inch wide longitudinal slots,
starting 1 to 5 feet above the base flange and continue up to 1 foot below the top of the antenna. The slots are the
radiating feature on the antenna, and any changes to the pipe outer surface around the slots will affect the electrical
performance. Antennas by necessity must be assessed using reduced slotted cross section properties with their
associated stress concentrations. Antenna mast slotted cross sections meet the definition of a non-compact section
given in section F-2 of the AISC Manual of Steel Construction. Fully plastic bending gives the maximum allowable
bending moment, Mn as;
𝑀𝑀𝑛𝑛 = 𝐹𝐹𝑦𝑦 𝑍𝑍

Where: Fy -the material yield strength

Z -the plastic section modulus (in3)
The maximum allowable stress, Fb for F Code (AISC ASD Manual) is based on the onset of yielding;
𝐹𝐹𝑏𝑏 = 0.6𝐹𝐹𝑦𝑦

Or in terms of maximum applied moment

𝑀𝑀𝑏𝑏 = 0.6𝐹𝐹𝑦𝑦 𝑆𝑆

Where: S -the elastic section modulus (in3)

The plastic section modulus is approximately 1.5 times greater than the elastic section modulus. This has been
confirmed by calculation and from measurements of CAD drawings of slotted cross sections. The maximum allowable
bending moment derived from the plastic section modulus must be divided by the 1.6 load factor in here order to
fairly compare the two criteria. Then, assuming the same importance factor, gust factor, and wind pressure is used;
𝐹𝐹𝑦𝑦 𝑍𝑍 1.5𝐹𝐹𝑦𝑦 𝑆𝑆
𝑀𝑀𝑛𝑛′ = ≈ ≈ 0.94𝐹𝐹𝑦𝑦 𝑆𝑆
1.6 1.6
The maximum allowable bending moment from plastic bending will always be approximately 1.5 times greater than
the maximum allowable bending moment based on the onset of yielding. Plastic bending is an assessment criterion

3
Dielectric l 22 Tower Road l Raymond, ME USA
that is checked on all Dielectric designs, but it is never the limiting factor. This by itself would allow longer smaller
diameter pipes than have been historically used and possibly cause excessive deflection and vibration problems.
Dielectric still uses the maximum allowable stress criteria at the slots. The slots are treated as stress concentrations
and the stresses are calculated using the slotted section properties. Finite Element Analysis (FEA) of slotted pipes in
bending has shown the stress concentration factor to be on the order of 1.16 at the start of the radius at the ends
of the slots. The maximum stress assessment criteria for slotted and un-slotted for F, G, and H Code are given below;
F Code
(1.16)𝜎𝜎𝐹𝐹 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶
2 ≤1 Slotted
(0.9) 𝐹𝐹𝑌𝑌
3
𝜎𝜎𝐺𝐺 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶
2 ≤1 Un-Slotted
(0.9) 𝐹𝐹𝑌𝑌
3

G Code
(1.6)(1.16)𝜎𝜎𝐺𝐺 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶
(0.9)𝐹𝐹𝑌𝑌
≤1 Slotted

(1.6)𝜎𝜎𝐺𝐺 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶
(0.9)𝐹𝐹𝑌𝑌
≤1 Un-Slotted

H Code
(1.16)𝜎𝜎𝐻𝐻 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶
(0.9)𝑆𝑆𝑌𝑌
≤1 Slotted

𝜎𝜎𝐻𝐻 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶
(0.9)𝐹𝐹𝑌𝑌
≤1 Un-Slotted

G and H Code limit the deflection of top mounted mast structures to 1.5% of the mast height under service loading
conditions. The deflection is measured from the top to the bottom of the mast. Service loading is defined as a basic
wind speed of 60 mph without load factors applied. Calculations show antenna masts designed to this requirement
will still fail the above maximum allowable stress criterion unless higher yield strength material (Sy≈ 50 ksi) is used.
Dielectric uses either ASTM A53, ASTM A106 Grade B, ASTM Grade C, or Dual Certified ASTM A519 1025 seamless
pipe materials. These are all prequalified materials. Flanges are made from ASTM A350 LF2 forgings or ASTM A516
Grade 70 material with special Charpy requirements for toughness (15 ft-lbs @ -20oF). The maximum yield strength
pipe material used by Dielectric is 40 ksi.
Wind driven vibration issues are difficult to predict. It does not always happen when it is predicted to occur. It can
be caused by periodic unsteady airflow, shedding vortices, tower driven excitations, or a combination of these
factors. There is no methodology in the current TIA Codes to assess potential antenna vibration issues. H Code does
give a section on Small Wind Turbines (SWT) that provides a fatigue analysis method based around calculating
constant amplitude stresses using SWT loads and comparing with crack initiation threshold stress levels for common
structural detail and load combinations. Unfortunately, the loads are specific to SWT’s and are not useful for anything
else. The Canadian code for Antennas, Towers, and Antenna Supporting Structures, CSA-S37-18, annex N gives
procedures for wind gust and vortex shedding assessment. CSA-S37-18 uses a 10 year return wind pressure (q10) to
check a structure’s ability to withstand repeated wind gusts. It is not clear what the basis for selecting a 10 year
return period as representative value to calculate an effective alternating wind gust pressure. This means there is a
10% yearly chance of exceeding this wind speed. This most likely tied to a reliability target. The analysis method
proposed in CSA-S37-18 applies the unfactored q10 pressure to the antenna with the appropriate drag coefficients
and a gust factor of 1. The resulting stresses are compared with the fatigue crack initiation threshold stresses

4
Dielectric l 22 Tower Road l Raymond, ME USA
associated with common design features (stress concentrations) such as fillet welds, and geometric discontinuities.
This is like the H Code method for assessing the stresses on SWT’s. Dielectric does not use this method at the present
time but is considering it as a possible additional check. The basis for the selection of the 10 year return period would
have to be fully understood and consultations with recognized experts in this field would be necessary before this
could be implemented as a design criterion.
The CSA-S37-18 approach for assessing vortex shedding is like the method currently used by Dielectic. The critical
wind speeds for vortex shedding to occur are calculated using a Strouhal number of 0.2, the first mode natural
frequency of the antenna mast, and the outside diameter of the antenna. Slotted pylon antenna outside diameters
are usually the diameter of the antenna radome. This is typically less than 30 inches. Natural frequencies are
normally less than 1.5 Hz. This result is that critical wind speeds are usually less than 15 mph and sub critical Reynolds
numbers. The approach in this case is to apply a uniform pressure to the top 3rd of the antenna perpendicular to the
wind direction and calculate the maximum stresses. The uniform pressure is calculated using the equations found in
would be equal to the following;
1
𝑞𝑞𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣 = 𝜌𝜌𝐷𝐷 𝑉𝑉 2 𝐶𝐶 sin(2𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋)
2 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝐿𝐿
𝐶𝐶𝐿𝐿 = 0.707
This can be done using either a simplified beam model with known stress concentration factors, or with an ANSYS
FEA model using the ANSYS fatigue tool for more complicated designs with unknown stress concentrations.

Summary
The TIA Design codes and antenna designs will most likely continue to change in the coming years. Dielectric will
keep pace with changes and apply new tools and additional design limits to continue building antennas that meet
the code requirements and provide continuity with historical company practices. Dielectric has had good experience
with maximum stress as a conservative limit and will continue to use this limit as a supplement to the code
requirements. It is anticipated that new requirements in future releases of the TIA code may be enacted to address
the risk of fatigue in non-typical structures such as antennas. Dielectric currently checks for vortex shedding and is
working on a wind gust based fatigue criteria like that found in CSA-S37-18 and other references. This combination
of designing to code requirements and applying additional Dielectric developed criteria has resulted in excellent field
experience with the installed base of antennas. It is expected that by continuing to examine the structural limits of
existing and new antennas designs it will ensure compliance with future code changes. Dielectric is confident that,
by continuing to examine the structural limits of existing and new antennas designs, it will ensure compliance with
future code changes and extend its performance record in the field.

5
Dielectric l 22 Tower Road l Raymond, ME USA
Table 1 F, G, and H Code Comparison
F Code G Code H Code
Load Cases Dry D+Wo 1.2D+1.6Wo 1.2D+Wo
with Ice D+Di+.75*Wo 1.2D+Di+Wi 1.2D+Di+Wi
Service 70 mph at antenna D+W60 mph D+W60 mph
Parameters Wind Speed Basic Wind Speed, Fastest Basic Wind Speed, 3 second Ultimate Wind Speed, 3
Specified Mile, 33 ft (10 m) above gust, 33 ft (10 m) above second gust, 33 ft (10 m)
by the ground level, 50 year ground level, 50 year above ground level,
Engineer of reoccurrence interval (0.02 reoccurrence interval (0.02 reoccurrence interval based
Record probability) probability) on the structure risk
(EOR) for category
the main
supporting
structure.
Wind Speed 75% of the dry wind Tabularized ASCE-7 Hazard Tool
with Ice pressure is used
Minimum Thickness at Antenna Tabularized Minimum ASCE-7 Hazard Tool
Ice Elevation given by EOR Value, Thickness at
Thickness Elevation from formula
Structural N/A I,II, or III I, II, III, or IV
Class/Risk
Category
Exposure N/A B, C, or D B, C, or D
Category
Topographic N/A 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5
Category
Wind 75% of Dry Wind Pressure Tabularized ASCE-7 Hazard Tool
Speed with
Ice

6
Dielectric l 22 Tower Road l Raymond, ME USA