FOUNDATION INTERFACE LOADS

AND ROOF MOUNTING CONSIDERATIONS

FOR
GENERAL DYNAMICS SATCOM TECHNOLOGIES
1.8/2.4 METER O3B KA-BAND
MODIFIED POLAR MOUNT SATELLITE EARTH STATION ANTENNA

700-0751

Revision A
Feb. 25, 2016

SATCOM Technologies
2600 N. Longview St., Kilgore, TX USA 75662-6842
Phone (903) 984-0555  FAX (903) 984-1826
www.gdsatcom.com

"EXPORT CONTROL WARNING - the disclosure of this document or its contents to non-U.S. persons, or
the transmission of its contents outside the United States must be in compliance with U.S. Export Laws
and Regulations. The bearer of this document is under obligation to know the applicable restrictions for
the dissemination of its contents that relate to U.S. Export Laws and Regulations or any other U.S.
government approvals."
 SATCOM TECHNOLOGIES CONFIDENTIAL AND PROPRIETARY

All computer software, technical data or other information pertaining to the equipment covered
by this document is considered proprietary by SATCOM Technologies. Such information
transmitted in this document or related documents is for the benefit of SATCOM Technologies
customers and is not to be disclosed to other parties verbally or in writing without prior written
approval of SATCOM Technologies. Additionally, this document may not be reproduced in
whole or in part without written consent from SATCOM Technologies.

A ADDED COUNTERWEIGHT VALUES 2/25/2016 JWL RF RF

1 PRELIMINARY RELEASE 08/09/12 JRM RMF CLV
REV. DESCRIPTION DATE WRITER CHK. APPR.

700-07511 i
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................1
2.0 LOAD CONDITIONS......................................................................................................1
3.0 CRITICAL LOADS .........................................................................................................1
4.0 RESOLUTION OF FORCE COMPONENTS ..................................................................1
5.0 GENERAL REMARK .....................................................................................................1
6.0 CONSIDERATIONS FOR ROOF MOUNT INSTALLATION OF SATELLITE EARTH
STATION ANTENNA ..................................................................................................................2
6.1 OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................... 2
6.2 ORIENTATION.............................................................................................................. 2
6.3 STRENGTH .................................................................................................................. 3
6.4 STIFFNESS .................................................................................................................. 3
6.5 INTEGRATION AND INSTALLATION ........................................................................... 6
6.5.1 LOGISTICS....................................................................................................................6
6.5.2 STRUCTURAL INTERFACES .......................................................................................6
6.5.3 ELECTRICAL/CONTROL SYSTEMS .............................................................................7
6.5.4 ACCESS ........................................................................................................................7
7.0 CONCLUSION ON ROOF MOUNT CONSIDERATIONS ...............................................7
8.0 ALLOWABLE RF POINTING ERROR FOR ROOF FRAME..........................................7
8.1 1.8M Ka-Band Antenna ................................................................................................. 7
8.2 2.4M Ka-Band Antenna ................................................................................................. 7
9.0 FOUNDATION LOADS INTERFACE ANALYSIS ..........................................................8

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Typical Antenna Pattern ..............................................................................................5

Figure 2. Top View, 2.4M Modified Polar Mount Antenna w/Coordinate System and Hour Axis . 8
Figure 3. Side View, 2.4M Modified Polar Mount Antenna w/Coordinate System and Declination
Axis ......................................................................................................................................9
Figure 4. Side View 2.4M Modified Polar Mount Antenna with Counter Weight ........................10

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. 35 MPH Wind Gusting to 45 MPH ..............................................................................11

Table 2. 35 MPH Wind Gusting to 45 MPH with Counter Weight...............................................12
Table 3. 100 MPH Wind ...........................................................................................................13
Table 4. 100 MPH Wind with Counter Weight...........................................................................14
Table 5. Dead Weight Only ......................................................................................................15
Table 6. Dead Weight Only with Counter Weight........................................................................16

700-07511 ii
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This document provides foundation interface loads and roof frame mounting
considerations for the General Dynamics SATCOM Technologies 1.8M/2.4M modified
polar mount, offset feed satellite earth station antenna. The antenna also is available
with a counter weight system as an option. Loads are provided for two wind speed
scenarios, 35 MPH gusting to 45 MPH including dead weight and 100 MPH in
combination with dead weight. As an aid to the structural analyst, the corresponding
loads for dead weight only are also provided. Use the 35 MPH gusting to 45 MPH wind
loads to evaluate the antenna support system for adequate rigidity as required by
General Dynamics SATCOM Technologies specified in Section 8.0 of this document.
The loads for 100 MPH wind combined with dead weight are maximum antenna
survival loads; they should be used to evaluate the antenna support system for
adequate strength as required by the governing building and/or construction codes.

2.0 LOAD CONDITIONS

All wind loads presented in this document were derived from the results of extensive
wind tunnel studies of parabolic antenna structures. Load conditions are defined by
specific combinations of wind speed, antenna orientation (azimuth and elevation) and
wind direction. Each condition is represented by two angles (elevation and wind
approach). X, Y, Z cartesian coordinate axes have been defined to facilitate the
description of load vectors and antenna orientations. Sign conventions for the X, Y, Z
coordinate axes, azimuth angle and elevation angle are shown on pages 2 and 3. Using
the right hand sign convention, wind approach angle (wind angle) is measured about the
Z-axis from the azimuth heading of the antenna. A 0° wind angle represents a head
wind or frontal wind approach. A 180° wind angle represents a tail wind. Antenna
symmetry precludes the need to consider wind angles between 180° and 360°.

3.0 CRITICAL LOADS

Design loads acting on each foundation interface have been tabulated according to load
condition and interface location. Each row represents a specific load condition with all
forces acting concurrently. Forces that are critical design loads are shown in highlighted
print. Note that due to antenna structural configuration, varying wind direction and the
antenna's steerability, all maximum interface component forces do not occur
simultaneously under a single load condition.

Sign conventions for the pedestal post pipe bottom loads correspond to those of the X,
Y, Z coordinate axes. Tensile loads are positive; compression is negative.

4.0 RESOLUTION OF FORCE COMPONENTS

During the course of structural analysis it is often desirable to resolve forces into
orthogonal vector components that correspond to convenient coordinate axes. Any
orthogonal vector components of the loads can be easily resolved by applying
appropriate trigonometric functions to the geometry (angles).

5.0 GENERAL REMARK

The foundation design shall meet or exceed the published values over the entire
foundation interface. Specifically the three primary interfaces: front mast and each
support foot.

700-07511 1
 Reference GDST document number 300-2107 as the parent document for Sections 6-7.

6.0 CONSIDERATIONS FOR ROOF MOUNT INSTALLATION OF SATELLITE EARTH

STATION ANTENNA

6.1 OVERVIEW
The purpose of this section is to assist any individual considering the installation of a
General Dynamics SATCOM Technologies 1.8M/2.4M O3b satellite antenna on an
elevated or roof mount structure. It is highly recommended that a frequency
coordination and a site investigation be conducted to determine if clear access to the
orbital arc is available prior to any other considerations. This document section
discusses the structural design considerations required to achieve the desired final
system performance.

A properly designed roof mount framing system satisfies the following four general
requirements:

• Orientation
• Strength
• Stiffness
• Integration

Each of these requirements is discussed in this section relative to how it affects the final
design.

6.2 ORIENTATION
The antenna system must be properly positioned with respect to true north to take full
advantage of the antenna travel. Improper orientation of the antenna axis could limit the
useful travel of the system. Limiting travel will prevent program reception from all
accessible satellite locations.

The hour heading of the antenna system centerline is typically oriented to provide full arc
coverage. This system center line corresponds to a true north-south line. The system
center line does not typically coincide with the building axes. This is to say the antenna
system orientation might not match the orientation of the structural framing of the
building.

A properly designed roof mount frame will orient the antenna and provide a structural
system that interfaces the building frame. This creates a unique design consideration,
requiring some unusual framing to translate the forces from antenna coordinates into
structural frame coordinates.

Depending on the antenna site longitude and latitude and the intended present and
future use of the antenna, proper orientation could become extremely critical. The
antenna heading (hour axis) is to be parallel with respect to the site latitude.

700-07511 2
 6.3 STRENGTH
The antenna system must be properly supported to provide transfer of all antenna forces
into the structural frame of the building. The roof mount frame must distribute loads from
the antenna interface locations to the building roof beams and columns.

The objective of a consulting engineer should be to provide adequate structural framing

members to properly transfer all forces through efficient load paths. The structural
framing, connections and welds should be designed to support antenna forces for
survival conditions. Survival conditions shall be as specified by governing building code
requirements or a minimum of 125 mile per hour winds. Tabulated antenna system
loads for standard wind conditions can be requested from SATCOM Technologies.

Listed below are several structural concepts that might be incorporated to achieve an
effective frame configuration.

• At each foundation interface location, provide a direct load path for each load vector
component.
• Where feasible, align axes of framing members to the vector direction of the applied
loads. This can reduce bi-axial bending and torsional effects. This will simplify the
subsequent system deflection analysis required to verify performance criteria.
• Eccentricity between the applied load vector and the framing member centroid can
produce large torsion forces. These torsional effects require more complex joint
details to transfer forces properly and introduce increased structural deflections.
• At locations where an antenna structure bolts to a beam, reinforcing with gussets is
typically required. Gussets should be designed to prevent flange bending and web
crippling under concentrated forces.
• Avoid the use of "red head" type shallow anchors in concrete surfaces.
• Avoid the use of double-nutting (one nut top and bottom of plate) to provide leveling.
This will induce undesirable anchor bolt bending conditions.
• Use friction type connections where possible to provide 100% load reversal
capability.

6.4 STIFFNESS
Historically, satellite earth stations have been ground mount structures. These antennas
have typically been bolted to a rigid concrete foundation for survivability and stability. It
is relatively inexpensive to build a massive, stiff ground foundation. It is impractical to
attempt to design a steel roof frame with the equivalent stiffness of a reinforced concrete
foundation. Consequently, the deflections of a roof frame are greater than deflections of
a concrete foundation. Also, including all design, fabrication and installation expenses, a
roof mount frame typically cost significantly more than a concrete pad.

The mounting of a satellite earth station on the roof of an existing structure requires
special care to insure satisfactory system performance. System performance
requirements dictate that the earth station provide a defined performance level or gain
under prescribed operational conditions. Pointing error occurs when the radio frequency
(RF) axis of the earth station angularly rotates from the line of site to the satellite orbit
location. Pointing error results in a reduction in signal strength or gain.

700-07511 3
 Figure 1 represents a typical receive pattern as an earth station is rotated through the
coincident RF axis. The plot indicates the antenna gain measured in decibels (dB)
versus the angular rotation of the antenna. Insert A is an enlarged portion of the main
beam peak. As the signal drops three decibels (3 dB) on the logarithmic scale the actual
power is reduced by one half. Thus we arrive at the term "Half Power Beam Width", or
the beam width at one half the peak power. The allowable beam deviation or pointing
error is a small fraction of the half power beam width.

The total pointing error is caused by several contributing sources. Each contributor is
budgeted to the total allowable based on cost, manufacturing and design constraints.
The exact height and width of the main beam and sidelobes is a function of the antenna
size and operating frequency. Beam width decreases as the frequency and antenna
aperture increase. Therefore a 3.5-meter antenna would have a larger total pointing
error budget than a 9-meter antenna operating at the same frequency. Similarly the total
pointing error budget of a 3.5-meter antenna would be larger for C-band frequencies
than the same size antenna at the higher Ku-band frequency range.

This creates a unique challenge for a designer. As the antenna size increases, the
loads increase due to larger areas subjected to wind exposure, yet the allowable
deflections are reduced. Therefore the framing member sizes must increase with
antenna size to reduce the structural deflections as well as maintain acceptable stress
levels. For a given roof installation the framing member size to antenna size ratio could
be considered to be a cubic function.

Small rotational errors are budgeted to the foundation or roof frame structure. The
actual budgeted value for a desired antenna size and frequency can be found at the end
of this report. This rotational error is typically stated for the operational condition of 35
mile per hour winds gusting to 45. The spring stiffness of the roof frame and the
supporting columns is the primary deflection consideration. Transient live loads, soil
conditions, and top floor building translations are generally second order effects under
the operational wind criteria. It should be noted that the rotational error is with respect to
the total antenna axis and not an individual roof frame member axis.

For tall buildings the differential shear displacements at the roof level are not detrimental
and do not contribute to the pointing error summation. However, the combined pitching,
rolling, and yawing moments are critical. If the structure is a relatively flexible structure,
these rotations could produce some antenna signal degradation.

700-07511 4
 Figure 1. Typical Antenna Pattern

700-07511 5
 6.5 INTEGRATION AND INSTALLATION
Proper considerations must be made for installation and electrical integration. These
design considerations will facilitate system placement, leveling and wiring for both power
and RF cabling.

Depending on the type and size of antenna, the structural interface locations vary in size
and number. When considering antennas with multiple interface locations (i.e. legs,
azimuth pintle, and azimuth jack trunnion), the base of each of these antenna
components might not be co-planar. Reviewing the top assembly drawing for the
desired antenna will indicate a grout thickness under each location for a standard ground
installation. Typically a ceramic grout is not used in steel-to-steel applications. Alternate
leveling techniques must be considered. Epoxy grouting, and shim plates have been
used successfully. Double-nutting for leveling can produce some undesirable effects
and should be avoided.

Examination of the top assembly drawing and the typical foundation design will illustrate
some typical electrical conduit locations. These details should be coordinated with the
actual customer as to the direction the cabling should exit the antenna area. The
particular details as to where the conduit and cabling stubs up at the antenna should be
held as close as possible. This will facilitate integration to the electrical connections on
the antenna unit.

Proper concern for logistics, structural design, installation and required interfaces will
insure minimum difficulties and delays during erection of the frame and antenna.

6.5.1 LOGISTICS
• How will the frame and antenna be lifted to the roof, i.e. hoist, crane, helicopter lift?
• Are any special permits required to block the street(s) below during the lifting
procedure?
• Are there adequate staging areas to erect the antenna subassemblies?
• What type of installation equipment will be required, i.e. power tools, welding
equipment, etc.?

6.5.2 STRUCTURAL INTERFACES

• Confirm that the structural interface bolt locations are exactly per the SATCOM
Technologies foundation design for the desired antenna.
• Confirm any height difference at multiple interface locations. The interfaces are not
always co-planar and designed leveling shims may be required.
• Confirm the load frame design includes structural hardware for attachment of the
antenna to the load frame. For these antenna mounting locations the structural
hardware shall be of equal diameter, and material properties shall be equal to or
better than that specified on SATCOM Technologies drawings. The length of the
antenna attachment hardware should consider all material stack up or total grip,
including the antenna base plate, shims, washers, grout, and frame structure.

700-07511 6
 6.5.3 ELECTRICAL/CONTROL SYSTEMS
• If applicable, confirm electrical wiring and conduit have been considered and located
per the SATCOM Technologies supplied layout, (i.e. antenna control system, deicing
control system). Also confirm that a means for mounting the antenna control system
outside unit and deicing control system have been supplied. If these units are not at
their standard location, coordinate their new position with SATCOM Technologies to
insure proper lengths of wire and conduit.

6.5.4 ACCESS
• If applicable, confirm proper mounting and access to antenna stairways and ladders
have been considered.

7.0 CONCLUSION ON ROOF MOUNT CONSIDERATIONS

It should be noted that although the section on strength was placed before the section
on stiffness in this report, this is not an indication of their relative importance. This order
was chosen to help introduce architects and engineers to the antenna design criteria
through a subject with which they are well acquainted. Although these professionals
also have a thorough knowledge of deflection and stiffness, antenna design imposes
new more stringent criteria on the deflection limits.

Generally, a roof frame should first be designed for stiffness then strength. A frame that
is designed first for strength (allowable stress levels), will probably require extensive
modification of sections to provide the required stiffness. A frame designed for stiffness
first, meanwhile, will probably require only minor modifications to the sections such as
local gussets to provide strength. This is not to say that both the strength and stiffness of
the frame should not be investigated and documented, but presented to allow a time
savings in the design approach.

If each of the four general requirements of orientation, strength, stiffness and integration
are satisfied, the frame will contribute to a successful operational antenna system. If
limitations prohibit the total satisfaction of any one or all of these requirements, the
customer or end-user has the prerogative to accept such an installation, accepting the
full consequences, limitations and liabilities of such an installation.

8.0 ALLOWABLE RF POINTING ERROR FOR ROOF FRAME

8.1 1.8M Ka-Band Antenna

The rotational beam deviation pointing error budgeted to a roof frame for a 1.8-meter
Ka-Band antenna is 0.014° maximum.

8.2 2.4M Ka-Band Antenna

The rotational beam deviation pointing error budgeted to a roof frame for a 2.4-meter
Ka-Band antenna is 0.012° maximum.

700-07511 7
9.0 FOUNDATION LOADS INTERFACE ANALYSIS

Figure 2. Top View, 2.4M Modified Polar Mount Antenna w/Coordinate

System and Hour Axis

700-07511 8
 Figure 3. Side View, 2.4M Modified Polar Mount Antenna w/Coordinate
System and Declination Axis

700-07511 9
 Counter Weight
System

Figure 4. Side View, 2.4M Modified Polar Mount Antenna w/Counter

Weight Option

700-07511 10
 FOUNDATION INTERFACE LOADS
General Dynamics SATCOM Technologies 1.8/2.4 Meter Modified Polar Mount Antenna

Table 1. 35 MPH Wind Gusting to 45 MPH - Without Counter Weight

35 MPH Wind Gusting to 45 MPH; Ant and Dead Weight Included

LOAD CONDITIONS FORCES (lb) MOMENTS (in-lb)
Elevation Angle (deg) Wind Angle (deg) Px Py Pr Pz Mx My Mr Mz
0 135 -75 -121 142 -736 20377 -16,727 26363 -2257
20 30 27 312 313 -863 -9955 13,807 17022 427
0 180 -2 -204 204 -741 26279 -11,971 28877 120
0 15 11 337 337 -744 -10986 12,586 16706.27 465
80 150 -37 -64 74 -663 7857 -14,743 16706 83
60 0 2 176 176 -1015 -5275 11,890 13008 -39
40 120 -72 -60 94 -708 13990 -17,710 22569 -1135
0 120 -73 -79 107 -736 17547 -16,557 24125 -2293
0 60 -14 301 301 -740 -8999 -12,463 15372 1888

Notes: 1) Pr is the Vector Resultant of Px and Py.

2) My includes max overhung dead weight as the antenna is rotated to its hour limit.
3) Mr is the Vector Resultant of Mx and My.
4) Minimum and maximum loads for each interface are highlighted.

700-07511 11
 FOUNDATION INTERFACE LOADS
General Dynamics SATCOM Technologies 1.8/2.4 Meter Modified Polar Mount Antenna

Table 2. 35 MPH Wind Gusting to 45 MPH - With Counter Weight

Notes: 1) Pr is the Vector Resultant of Px and Py.

2) My includes max overhung dead weight as the antenna is rotated to its hour limit.
3) Mr is the Vector Resultant of Mx and My.
4) Minimum and maximum loads for each interface are highlighted.

700-07511 12
 FOUNDATION INTERFACE LOADS
General Dynamics SATCOM Technologies 1.8/2.4 Meter Modified Polar Mount Antenna

Table 3. 100 MPH Wind Without Counter Weight

100 MPH Wind; Ant and Dead Weight Included

LOAD CONDITIONS FORCES (lb) MOMENTS (in-lb)
Elevation Angle (deg) Wind Angle (deg) Px Py Pr Pz Mx My Mr Mz
0 135 -522 -836 986 -723 69378 -46,961 83777 -15631
20 30 190 2159 2167 -1602 -135843 26,737 138449 2958
0 180 -14 -1415 1415 -758 110250 -14,020 111138 832
0 15 74 2331 2332 -776 -147819 18,281 148945 3218
80 150 -256 -446 514 -216 44442 -33,217 55484 574
60 0 17 1221 1221 -2658 -70568 13,457 71840 -268
40 120 -500 -417 651 -533 43079 -53,764 68894 -7859
0 120 -504 -547 743 -723 49775 -45,783 67629 -15881
0 60 -95 2083 2085 -750 -134057 -17,428 135185 13072

Notes: 1) Pr is the Vector Resultant of Px and Py.

2) My includes max overhung dead weight as the antenna is rotated to its hour limit.
3) Mr is the Vector Resultant of Mx and My.
4) Minimum and maximum loads for each interface are highlighted.

700-07511 13
 FOUNDATION INTERFACE LOADS
General Dynamics SATCOM Technologies 1.8/2.4 Meter Modified Polar Mount Antenna

Table 4. 100 MPH Wind With Counter weight

Notes: 1) Pr is the Vector Resultant of Px and Py.

2) My includes max overhung dead weight as the antenna is rotated to its hour limit.
3) Mr is the Vector Resultant of Mx and My.
4) Minimum and maximum loads for each interface are highlighted.

700-07511 14
 FOUNDATION INTERFACE LOADS
General Dynamics SATCOM Technologies 1.8/2.4 Meter Modified Polar Mount Antenna

Table 5. Dead Weight Only Without Counter Weight

Ant and Dead Weight Only - No Wind

LOAD CONDITIONS FORCES (lb) MOMENTS (in-lb)
Elevation Angle (deg) Wind Angle (deg) Px Py Pr Pz Mx My Mr Mz
0 0 0 0 0 -738 12108 11,625 16785 0
20 0 0 0 0 -738 11291 11,625 16206 0
40 0 0 0 0 -738 9081 11,625 14751 0
60 0 0 0 0 -738 5744 11,625 12967 0
80 0 0 0 0 -738 1683 11,625 11746 0
90 0 0 0 0 -738 -468 11,625 11634 0

Notes: 1) Pr is the Vector Resultant of Px and Py.

2) My includes max overhung dead weight as the antenna is rotated to its hour limit.
3) Mr is the Vector Resultant of Mx and My.
4) Minimum and maximum loads for each interface are highlighted.

700-07511 15
 FOUNDATION INTERFACE LOADS
General Dynamics SATCOM Technologies 1.8/2.4 Meter Modified Polar Mount Antenna

Table 6. Dead Weight Only With Counter Weight

Notes: 1) Pr is the Vector Resultant of Px and Py.

2) My includes max overhung dead weight as the antenna is rotated to its hour limit.
3) Mr is the Vector Resultant of Mx and My.
4) Minimum and maximum loads for each interface are highlighted.

700-07511 16