See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228611798

Optimal Design of Lattice Towers Made Up of

Solid Round Steel Bars

Article January 2010

CITATIONS READS

0 752

3 authors, including:

Donatas Jatulis Povilas Vaininas

Vilnius Gediminas Technical University Vilnius Gediminas Technical University
14 PUBLICATIONS 30 CITATIONS 9 PUBLICATIONS 101 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate, Available from: Donatas Jatulis
letting you access and read them immediately. Retrieved on: 14 October 2016
 OPTIMAL DESIGN OF LATTICE TOWERS MADE UP
OF SOLID ROUND STEEL BARS
Donatas Jatulis1, Algirdas Juozapaitis2 , Povilas Vaininas3
Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Saultekio ave. 11, LT-10223 Vilnius, Lithuania.
E-mail: 1donatas.jatulis@vgtu.lt; 2algirdas.juozapaitis@vgtu.lt; 3 povilas.vainiunas@vgtu.lt

Abstract. The article discusses rational design, considering the mass criterion, of a lattice steel tower made up of
solid round steel bars affected by the static load. The spacing between the tower truss chords and the inclination of
the bracing members are set as the main variables. A mathematical model of tower structure was prepared using
MathCad 14.0 software. The conditions of the marginal safety state of the towers members were assessed. The nu-
merical experiment was used as a basis to present the dependence of the towers optimum width and the optimum in-
clination of its struts on the towers height, wind load intensity and steel strength. Recommendations were provided
as well.

Keywords: lattice steel tower, compositional parameters, static load, optimal design, numerical analysis.

Introduction variant analysis in order to reduce the mass of structures

Steel towers are among the most popular load-
bearing structures in high-rise construction works. Their
efficiency is determined by their relatively simple con-
struction and low production and assembly costs (Smith,
2007; , 1998). A large portion of such con-
struction works are towers of a low and medium height
(Petersen, 1993; , 1998). Due to their small
overall dimensions and mass they can be not only fixed
but also portable. They can be installed on roofs of build-
ings as well. It must be noted that such towers are used
not only in telecommunication facilities but also in con-
struction works for other purposes (Petersen, 1993;
et al. 2007; , 1998). The behaviour et al. 2007; STR 2.05.04:2003.). Therefore,
of and calculations for typical steel tower structures are
broadly analysed in numerous studies (Clio et al., 2003;
Smith, 2007; Petersen, 1993; , 1998). Some
studies asses their dynamic behaviour (Holmse et al.
1993; , 1998). The analysis of fatigue is cer-
tainly important for such structures (Kala, Z. 2008).
Technical efficiency and durability of such tower
structures is lately increasingly relevant (Farkas, Jarmai,
1997). Improvement of the structural solutions of towers
is often related to selection of a rational scheme of
towers lattices and optimal cross-sections of its mem-
bers. There are some solutions which develop new forms
of structures for towers and other high-rise construction
works (Wang, B. B. 2004; Juozapaitis et al., 2009). The
designing practice often makes use of the so-called multi-
(Jasim, Galeb 2002; , 1998). However, various
optimisation approaches and methods for such bar sys-
tems give a better result (Kalanta et al., 2009; eok,
Beleviius, 2008; Venanzi, Materazzi, 2007). Generally,
the mass or volume of steel in tower structures is selected
as the main criterion of quality when solving the optimi-
sation problem (Yokota et al. 1998; Jasim, N. A.; Galeb
A. C. 2002; Kalanta et al., 2009). It must be noted that
the production and assembly costs of tower structures is
directly related to the mass of its structures (Farkas, Jar-
mai, 1997; , 1998).
Wind pressure is known as the predominant loading
of tower structures (Smith, 2007; Clio et al., 2003;
chords and bracing members in towers most often are of a
round cross-section (Smith, 2007; , 1998).
Considering the steel corrosion, it is recommended to use
solid round bars. When members of such cross-section
are selected, it is also possible to discard flats in connec-
tions.
The article analyses rational design of a low and
medium lattice tower of round steel bars affected by static
load. The minimal mass criterion is applied. The spacing
between the chords of a tower and the inclination of the
bracing members are set as the main variables. A numeri-
cal experiment is used to present the dependencies be-
tween the main optimal parameters of a tower and the
towers height, wind load intensity and steel strength.

641
Research Object
The article analyses relatively low fixed or portable
steel towers used as the load-bearing structures in tele-
communication facilities, outdoor advertisements, street
lighting, traffic light supports, etc. Some of them may be
installed both on the ground and on roofs of buildings.
Solid steel bars are often used in construction of
such towers due to their favourable anti-corrosive proper-
ties. Considering the technological conditions of produc-
tion and assembly, all members of the lattice in such tow-
ers usually have the same cross-sections and the struts
have a fixed inclination along the entire tower height.
Such low structures also typically maintain the same
width throughout their height.
Designing of such towers usually brings about an is-
sue of rational design. The width of structures a (spacing
between the chords) and the inclination of the bracing
members are deemed the main design parameters in
such towers. The latter variable defines the vertical pro-
jection of a strut h, which divides the tower or its section
into n equal parts/panels (see Fig 1).
a) b)
H=n x h
w wind blows perpendicularly to one the towers planes.
h
a
a M' V'
Fig 1. Design parameters of the tower
a) wind is directed towards the towers plane
b) wind is directed towards the towers edge
Following the mass criterion, the buckling conditions,
instead of the strength conditions, are the key factor in
selection of the cross-sections for towers members. The
number of panels n is increased (i.e. the lattice is made
denser) in order to reduce the length of bar buckling, but it
brings about a increase of the total length and mass of the
lattice. In order to reduce the action-effects in the bracing
members, the towers are constructed wider, but then the
bars of the lattice must be longer, their buckling length
increases and, in turn, their weight.
Rational design seeks to find a solution when the se-
lected towers width and the inclination of the lattice struts
642
would ensure the smallest possible mass of the tower. The
common analysis of structural variants is inefficient be-
cause, depending on the number of selected variants, it
involves numerous calculations. Yet, even a relatively
large sample of analysed structural variants cannot ensure
an optimal result in terms of the mass criterion.
It must be noted that towers mass is affected not only
by the ratio of the towers optimal height and width and the
optimal inclination of the struts but also by the intensity of
the load acting on the tower and the steel strength of its
members.
The predominant loading in case of the towers in
question is the wind load that causes the biggest action-
effects in towers members (bracing members and struts).
Since the towers are rather low, it is expedient to consider
this load equally distributed throughout the entire height
to simplify the solution. It must be noted that any external
load can be replaced by an equivalent equally distributed
load that causes a maximum bending moment of the same
value at the supports (see Fig 1).
In a single-axis model of a tower, the wind load
causes a bending moment and a transverse force. The
bending moment, in turn, causes axial action-effects in
the bracing members and the transverse force causes axial
action-effects in the struts. Two cases of load are distin-
guished: a) when the wind is directed towards the towers
plane (then it causes the highest action-effects in the lat-
tice members), and b) when the wind is directed towards
the towers edge (then it causes the highest action-effects
in the towers bracing members). It must be noted that the
wind pressure on the tower when the wind blows to the
edge is about 1.2 times higher than the pressure when the
a) b)
V' M' V' V' M'
w M 1.2w M
a
V V
V' M'
V'
M' 2 a
a
Fig 2. Action-effects in the towers plane trusses
The action-effects caused in a single-axis model of a
tower by the wind load can be, depending on the wind
direction, divided into plane trusses of the actual spatial
structure of the tower (see Fig 2):
V
V '=
2 (1)
M
M '=
2 (2)
V
V '= (3)
2 2
 M '=
M
(4)
br 210 60abr , (13)
2 2 here
Separate axial forces of the truss members (bracing N ch
members and lattice bars) are calculated using the formu- ch = , (14)
ch Ach f y ,d c
las (5) and (6) (see Fig 3)
N ch
br = ; (15)
br Ach f y ,d c

ch and br are the buckling coefficients of chords and

M' the bracing members. They are calculated following the
guidelines of (STR 2.05.08:2005).
V' N ch The optimisation started by setting of the towers
N br initial parameters, which correspond to one of the possi-
ble design variants. Then, the programme and its algo-
rithm were used to optimise the towers structure follow-
ing the condition (1). The optimal parameters that
a correspond to the minimal mass of the structure were
obtained as a result. It must be noted that formulas (3)
Fig 3. Action-effects in members of the towers truss (6) were used to recalculate the action-effects of the
towers members for each changing parameter in each
M'
N ch = iteration of the process related to solution of the optimisa-
a (5) tion problem.
V'
N br = Results of the Numerical Analysis
cos (6)
Towers heights varying between H = 5m and
H = 45m were selected for the numerical analysis. The
Mathematical Rational Design Model following values of the equally distributed wind load
were set: w = 0,4; 0,8; 1,2 kN/m . Towers elements
A mathematical model using MathCad 14.0 software were designed using three different steel grades (S235,
was developed in order to solve the problem of ra- S275, S355).
tional/optimal design of a tower. The towers weight was Fig 4, 5 and 6 show the dependence between towers
minimised using the following variable parameters: optimal width and the towers height considering the steel
towers width a, towers lattice density (number of grade and the wind load intensity. The charts show that
panels) n, cross-sections of chords and bracing members increasing towers height also causes an increase of the
Dch and Dbr: towers optimal width. This dependence is non-linear.
min Mass(a, n, Dch , Dbr ) Higher wind load demands for bigger spacing between
(7) the chords. The optimal width of a tower from S235 steel
Restricting conditions: 1 1
makes up of the towers height.
n>0, a>0 (8) 17 48
The spacing between the bracing members of a
The cross-section of a chord was assumed not to be tower decreases with increasing steel strength. With steel
smaller that the bracing element: S275, the towers optimal width is
Dch Dbr > 0 aopt = (1 / 18 1 / 51) H , and it decreases to
(9)
aopt = (1 / 19 1 / 55) H with steel S355.
Conditions of the marginal safety state (buckling) of a
bracing element and lattices members: The results of the numerical analysis revealed that the
optimal inclination of towers struts is virtually inde-
N ch pendent of the towers height and its average value is
1,0 (10)
ch Ach f y , d 35.3 (see Fig 7). It means that, if solid round members
are used, the inclination of towers struts is smaller than
N br the inclination recommended for hollow (tube) structural
1,0 . (11)
br Abr f y , d elements. The chart shows that the wind load intensity
does not affect the value of the struts inclination, too. It
The slenderness conditions were also considered in de- may be stated that increasing spacing between the bracing
signing of the towers elements: members a causes a proportional increase of the bracing
elements panel length h . The calculations revealed that
ch 180 60 ch (12)

643
the optimal inclination for towers from other steel grades
(S275, S355) is also basically equal to 35.
Fig 4. The dependence between the optimal towers
width a opt and the towers height (steel grade S235)
Fig 5. The dependence between the towers optimal
width a opt and the towers height (steel grade S275)
Fig 6. The dependence between the towers optimal
width a opt and the towers height (steel grade S355)
Due to certain technological or operational require-
ments, rational design parameters are not always possible
in designing of the towers in question. The designer in
such case could make use of the knowledge about the
increase of the towers mass caused by the deviations of
644
the spacing between bracing members and the inclination
from their optimal values.
Fig 7. The dependence between the optimal inclina-
tion of struts and the towers height (steel grade
S235)
Fig 8. The dependence between the towers mass in-
crease and the deviation of the towers actual width
from the optimal width a / a opt (steel grade S235)
Fig 8 shows the relative chart of the dependence be-
tween the towers mass increase and the changes of the
spacing between chords. The chart shows that the devia-
tion of towers width from its optimal value in both direc-
tions (increase/decrease) makes the tower heavier. How-
ever, such increase of the mass is not proportional to the
change of the spacing. If the relative spacing between
chords decreases by 20 %, the towers mass increases by
only about 5 %, but a decrease of such spacing by 30 %
already causes a mass increase of about 13%. Equivalent
results are observed when the towers width increases
compared to the optimal value. If the relative spacing
between the chords increases by 20 %, the towers mass
increases by about 5 % as well, and when such spacing
increases by 30 %, the mass increases by about 10 %. The
chart shows that a relative deviation of the towers width
from the optimal value exceeding 30 % causes an even
higher increase of its mass.

Fig 9. The dependence between the towers mass in-
crease and the deviation of the strut inclination from
the optimal value / opt (steel grade S235)
When we change the inclination of towers bracing
members making them deviate from the optimal values,
the effect of such changes on the mass increase is slightly
different. The chart in Figure 9 shows that a deviation of
10 % of the inclination of towers bracing members
from its optimal value has virtually no effect on the mass
increase. If the inclination values decrease from the opti-
mal value up to 30 %, the towers mass increases by only
about 4 %. However, if the inclination values deviate
from their optimal value with an increase of 12 % and
above, the total mass of a tower increases faster. An in-
crease of the inclination by about 30 % causes an increase
of the towers mass by 30 % as well. Apparently, the
designed inclination of struts should not exceed 39 in
towers with round solid members.
Conclusions
1. The presented mathematical model for rational
design of a tower from round solid steel bars facilitates
calculation of optimal values of the towers width and the
inclination of its bracing members considering the
towers height, the steel grade and the wind load inten-
sity.
2. The numerical analysis of the rational design pa-
rameters of a steel tower revealed that the towers optimal
width varies between 1 / 17 H and 1 / 55H . An increase of
the towers height also causes an increase of the values of
the towers optimal width. Higher wind load intensity
demands for increased spacing between the chords. If the
steel strength increases, the towers optimal width de-
creases.
3. It has been determined that the optimal inclination
of bracing members in a tower of round solid bars is vir-
tually independent of the towers height and the wind
load intensity; its average value is 35. The inclination of
struts in designs of such towers should not exceed 39.
References
Clio, F.; Carril, Jr.; Nicholas, Isyumov; Reyolando M. L. R. F.
2003. Experimental study of the wind forces on rectangu-
645
lar latticed communication towers with antennas, Journal
of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics 91(8):
10071022. doi:10.1016/S0167-6105(03)00049-7
Farkas, J.; Jarmai, K. 1997. Analysis and Design of Metal Struc-
tures. Roterdam, A. A. Balkema. 339 p.
Holmes, J. D.; Banks, R. W.; Roberts, G. 1993. Drag and aero-
dynamic interference on microwave dish antennas and
their supporting towers, Journal of Wind Engineering and
Industrial Aerodynamics 50: 263269.
doi:10.1016/0167-6105(93)90081-X
Yokota, T.; Taguchi, T. A; Gen, M. 1998. A solution method
for optimal weight design problem of 10 bar truss using
genetic algorithms, Computers & Industrial Engineering
35(1-2): 367372. doi:10.1016/S0360-8352(98)00096-5
Jasim, N. A.; Galeb A. C. 2002. Optimum design of square free-
standing communication towers, Journal of Construc-
tional Steel Research 58(3): 413425.
doi:10.1016/S0143-974X(01)00055-4
Juozapaitis, A.; Jatulis, D.; apalas, A. 2009. Kombinuoto
plieninio plokiojo bokto-stiebo konstravimas ir skaiia-
vimas (Design and analysis of combined plane steel guyed
tower-mast), Statybins konstrukcijos ir technologijos
1(4): 157165.
Kalanta, S.; Atkoinas, J.; Venskus, A. 2009. Discrete optimi-
zation problems of the steel bar structures, Engineering
Structures Elsevier SCI LTD 31(6): 12981304.
Kala, Z. 2008. Fuzzy probability analysis of the fatigue resis-
tance of steel structural members under bending, Journal
of Civil Engineering and Management 14(1): 6772.
doi:10.3846/1392-3730.2008.14.67-72
Petersen, Ch. 1993. Stahlbau [Petersen, Ch. Steel Structures].
Braunschweig, Wiesbaden: Vieweg1451 p.
Smith B. W. 2007. Communication structures. London, Thomas
Telford. 338 p. doi:10.1680/cs.34006
STR 2.05.08:2005. Design of Steel Structures. General rules.
Lithuanian Department of Environment. Vilnius, 2005.
128 p.
STR 2.05.04:2003. Technical Regulation of Building Construc-
tion. Actions and loads. Vilnius: Ministry of Environment.
Vilnius, 2003.
eok, D.; Beleviius, R. 2008. Global optimization of trusses
with a modified genetic algorithm, Journal of Civil Engi-
neering and Management 14(3): 147154.
doi:10.3846/1392-3730.2008.14.10
Venanzi, I.; Materazzi, A.L. 2007. Multi-objective optimization
of wind-excited structures, Engineering Structures 29(6):
983990. doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2006.07.007
Wang, B. B. 2004. Free-standing Tension Structures. London:
Taylor and Francis. 234 p.
, .B., , .., , .. 2007.
.( Atamanchuck, A.V. ,
Kholopov, I.S., Chernyshev, D.D. Wind loads on the tri-
hedral tower elements and ventilation pipe packages),
1(13): 1724.
, . . 1999. [Kuzne-
cov, V. V. Steel Structures]. . 3.
. : . 576 .