A robust protocol to compute wind load coefficients of telecommunication towers and antennas using numerical simulation for risk and resilience assessment

Abstract

An accurate estimation of wind loads on telecommunication towers is crucial for design, as well as for perform-ing reliability, resilience, and risk assessments. In particular, drag coefficient and interference factor are the most significant factors for wind load computations. Wind tunnel tests and computational fluid dynamics (CFD) are the most appropriate methods to estimate these parameters. While wind tunnel tests are generally preferred in practice, they require dedicated facilities and personnel, and can be expensive if multiple configurations of tower panels and antennas need to be tested under various wind directions (e.g., fragility curve development for system resilience analysis). This paper provides a simple, robust, and easily accessible CFD protocol with widespread applicability, offering a practical solution in situations where wind tunnel testing is not feasible, such as complex tower configurations or cases where the cost of running experiments for all the tower-antennas configurations is prohibitively high. Different turbulence models, structural and fluid boundary conditions and mesh types are tested to provide a streamlined CFD modeling strategy that shows good convergence and balances accuracy, computational time, and robustness. The protocol is calibrated and validated with experimental studies available in the literature. To demonstrate the capabilities of the protocol, three lattice tower panels and antennas with different configurations are analyzed as examples. The protocol successfully estimates the drag and lateral wind loads and their coefficients under different wind directions. Noticeable differences are observed between the esti-mated wind loads with this protocol and those computed by a simple linear superposition used in most practical applications, indicating the importance of tower-antenna interaction. Also, as expected, the wind loads recom-mended by design codes overestimate the simulated results. More importantly, the telecommunication design codes inadequately identify the most favorable wind directions that are associated with the lowest wind loads, while the results of the proposed protocol align with observations from experimental studies. This information may be used to select the tower orientation before construction. The findings of this study are of importance for the telecommunication industry, which seeks reliable results with minimal computational efforts. In addition, it enhances the fragility analysis of telecommunication towers under strong winds, and the portfolio risk and resilience assessment of telecommunication systems.

Keywords

Generalized CFD protocol Lattice tower / Tower panel / Microwave antenna Wind coefficients / Tower-antenna interaction

References

[1] Tapia-Hernández E, Cervantes-Castillo JA. Influence of the drag co-efficient on communication towers. Int J Civ Eng 2018;16:499-511. doi: 10.1007/s40999-017-0157-z.

[2] Martín P, Elena VB, Loredo-Souza AM, Camaño EB.Experimental study of the effects of dish antennas on the wind loading of telecommunication towers. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 2016;

[3] 149:40-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jweia.2015.11.010.

[4] SMITH B. 50 years in the design of towers and masts. From IASS recommendations to current procedures. in: Symp. int. assoc. shell spat. struct. 50th 2009 valencia evol. trends des. anal. constr. shell spat. struct. proc.. Editorial Universitat Politècnica de València;; 2009.

[5] Travanca R, Varum H, Real PV. The past 20 years of telecommunication structures in Portugal. Eng Struct 2013;48:472-85.

[6] Yanda M, Abejide OS, Ocholi A. Evaluation of collapse mechanism of telecommuni-cation tower. Niger J Technol 2020;39:1035-42.

[7] Banipal K. Strategic approach to disaster management: lessons learned from Hurri-cane Katrina, Disaster Prev. Manag. Int J 2006.

[8] Gao S, Wang S. Progressive collapse analysis of latticed telecommunication towers under wind loads. Adv Civ Eng 2018. doi: 10.1155/2018/3293506.

[9] Tian L, Zhang X, Fu X. Collapse simulations of communication tower sub-jected to wind loads using dynamic explicit method. J Perform Constr Facil 2020;34:04020024. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0001434.

[10] Ma L, Khazaali M, Bocchini P. Component-based fragility analysis of transmis-sion towers subjected to hurricane wind load. Eng Struct 2021;242:112586. doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2021.112586.

[11] ANSI/TIA-222-G, Structural standard for antenna supporting structures and anten-nas, (2005).

[12] ASCE07, Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures., Standard asce/sei 7-10., 2010.

[13] ASCE-74 Guidelines for electrical transmission line structural loading, fourth edition. Reston, VA: American Society of Civil Engineers; 2020. doi: 101061/9780784415566.

[14] Bayar DC. Drag coefficients of latticed towers. J Struct Eng 1986; 112:417-30. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1986)112:2(417).

[15] Calotescu I, Torre S, Freda A, Solari G. Wind tunnel testing of telecommuni-cation lattice towers equipped with ancillaries. Eng Struct 2021;241:112526. doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2021.112526.

[16] Holmes JD, Banks RW, Roberts G. Drag and aerodynamic interference on microwave dish antennas and their supporting towers. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 1993;50:263-9. doi: 10.1016/0167-6105(93)90081-X.

[17] Li L, He S, He X, Jing H. Experimental study on wind force coefficient of a truss arch tower with multiple skewbacks. Adv Struct Eng 2020;23:2614-25. doi: 10.1177/1369433220916935.

[18] ESDU,ESDU 81028: lattice structures. Part 2: mean fluid forces on tower-like space frames., (1993). https://www.esdu.com/cgi-bin/ps.pl?sess=unlicensed_1210825160241lfc&t=doc&p=esdu_81028d (accessed August 25, 2021).

[19] COMSOL v.5.4, COMSOL Multiphysics® software, (2021). www.comsol.com. COM-SOL AB, Stockholm, Sweden.

[20] P. Martín, V.B. Elena, Personal communication, (2021).

[21] Carril CF, Isyumov N, Brasil RMLRF. Experimental study of the wind forces on rect-angular latticed communication towers with antennas. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 2003;91:1007-22. doi: 10.1016/S0167-6105(03)00049-7.

[22] Cell Reception. CellReception Find a better signal 2021.

[23] China Tower Co., Drawing collection of telecommunication steel tower, (2014). http://www.jianbiaoku.com/webarbs/book/86043/2508281.shtml (accessed September 2, 2021).

[24] Chapman JA, Wilson BN, Gulliver JS. Drag force parameters of rigid and flexible veg-etal elements. Water Resour Res 2015;51:3292-302. doi: 10.1002/2014WR015436.

[25] Gao S, Pan S, Wang H, Tian X. Shape deformation and drag variation of a cou-pled rigid-flexible system in a flowing soap film. Phys Rev Lett 2020;125:034502. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.125.034502.

[26] W. Frei, Which turbulence model should I choose for my CFD appli-cation?, COMSOL multiphysics. (2017). https://www.comsol.com/blogs/which-turbulence-model-should-choose-cfd-application/ (accessed September 1, 2021).

[27] Clannachan GH, Lim JB, Bicanic N, Taylor IJ, Scanlon TJ. Practical application of CFD for wind loading on tall buildings. In:in: 7th Int. Conf. TallBuild; 2009. p. 767-76.

[28] Daemei AB, Darvish A, Aeinehvand R, Razzaghipour A. Large-eddy simulation (LES) on the square and triangular tall buildings to measure drag force. Adv Civ Eng 2021;2021:1-11. doi: 10.1155/2021/6666895.

[29] Katopodes ND. Chapter 8 -channel bed resistance. In: Katopodes ND, editor. Free-Surf. flow. Butterworth-Heinemann; 2019. p. 416-63. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-815487-8.00008-1.

[30] J. Nikuradse, Strömungsgesetze in rauhen Rohren. VDI-Forsch, (1933).

[31] Spalart P, Allmaras S. A one-equation turbulence model for aerodynamic flows. in: 30th Aerosp. sci. meet. exhib.. Reno, NV, USA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics; 1992. doi: 102514/61992-439.

[32] B.S. Paul,Numerical Analysis of the LCS2 airwake to understand po-tential interactions during helipcopter operations, in: Day 2 thu novemb. 05 2015, SNAME, Providence, Rhode Island, USA, 2015: p. D021S007R012. https://doi.org/10.5957/WMTC-2015-104.

[33] Yang F, Dang H, Niu H, Zhang H, Zhu B. Wind tunnel tests on wind loads acting on an angled steel triangular transmission tower. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 2016;156:93-103. doi: 10.1016/j.jweia.2016.07.016.

[34] Deodatis G. Simulation of ergodic multivariate stochastic processes. J Eng Mech 1996;122:778-87.

[35] Liu X, Gui N, Wu H, Yang X, Tu J, Jiang S. Numerical simulation of flow past a triangular prism with fluid-structure interaction. Eng Appl Comput Fluid Mech 2020;14:462-76. doi: 10.1080/19942060.2020.1721332.

[36] T.G. Mara, R.H. Behncke, Examination of yawed wind loading on transmission tow-ers, (2015) 522-37. https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784479414.042.

[37] T.G. Mara, R.H. Behncke, Updating ASCE manual No. 74: guide-lines for electrical transmission line structural loading, (2015) 154-65. https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784479414.013.

[38] Calis HPA, Nijenhuis J, Paikert BC, Dautzenberg FM, Van Den Bleek CM. CFD mod-elling and experimental validation of pressure drop and flow profile in a novel struc-tured catalytic reactor packing. Chem Eng Sci 2001;56:1713-20.

[39] Motlagh AA, Hashemabadi SH. 3D CFD simulation and experimental validation of particle-to-fluid heat transfer in a randomly packed bed of cylindrical particles. Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 2008;35:1183-9.

[40] Giaccu GF, Caracoglia L. Wind-load fragility analysis of monopole towers by Lay-ered Stochastic-Approximation-Monte-Carlo method. Eng Struct 2018;174:462-77. doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.07.081.

[41] RFS A.W.S. Microwave antenna system relocation kit -key products for 18GHz point-to-pointapplications, (2006). https://docplayer.net/21041363-Aws-microwave-antenna-system-relocation-kit.html (accessed September 6, 2021).