Bo Li1, Xiaofei Li This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.1, Lei Zhao1, and Pengfei Dang2,3
1College of civil engineering and architecture, Binzhou University, Binzhou 256600, China 2School of Civil Engineering, Guangzhou University, Guangzhou 510006, China 3Earthquake System Science Programme, Faculty of Science, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, 999077, Hong Kong, China
Received: August 6, 2022 Accepted: October 23, 2022 Publication Date: March 9, 2023
Copyright The Author(s). This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are cited.
Different site classifications and pile-soil-structure interaction (PSSI) would have significant influence on the seismic dynamic response of lattice communication tower (SDRLCT), the relevant studies on which are quite limited so far. A three-dimensional finite element model on the basis of a typical 50m high lattice communication tower (LCT), considering PSSI, was developed in this paper to study this scientific issue. The dynamic analysis was conducted with respect to site conditions: class I to IV. The maximum horizontal displacements (MHD) between top and bottom and the maximum acceleration (MA) at the top of tower were taken as dynamic response indexes. The results were compared with that of the analysis of rigid foundation tower (RFT) without considering PSSI effect. It was found that the performances of SDRLCT, such as displacement ratio and main material axial force, varied under different site conditions, to be specific, soil getting softer, the dynamic response is more strong. In addition, under the condition of site class I, PSSI had no apparent effects on the results, while significant effects in terms of site class II, III and IV. Furthermore, the position of weak points of LCT, with respect to different site condition, remained at the place where the structural form of diagonal bracing changed. As a result, the PSSI effects should be involved in the engineering design, and the weak points should be strengthened. The results would provide valuable theoretical basis and reference to practical engineering design.
Keywords: lattice communication tower; pile-soil-structure interaction; seismic response analysis; site classification; seismic design
REFERENCES
[1] L. K. Ruan ZZ Chen SN, (2017) “Study on aluminum alloy three-tube communication tower" Light metals 54: 42–54.
[2] L. H. [2] Liu AWXia S, (2012) “Typical damage analysis for mobile communication base stations in the extremely damage area of Wenchuan earthquake" Telecom Engineering Technics and Standardization 25: 82–86.
[3] J. Liu, J. Lin, R. Liu, E. Guo, F. Ye, and D. Yan, (2013) “Seismic damage investigation and analysis of the communication system in Lushan M S 7.0 earthquake" J Nat Disasters 22(5): 91–97.
[4] M. C. Li B Guo ED, (2020) “Seismic damage investigation and analysis of communication system in ChangNing Ms 6.0 earthquake" World earthquake engineering 36(2): 172–179.
[5] Y. S. [5] Liu JL Huang Y, (2016) “Investigation and analysis of seismic damage to communication system in Nepal Ms 8.1 earthquake" Journal of natural disasters 25(2): 146–151. DOI: 10.13577/j.jnd.2016.0217.
[6] K. MA. “Seismic analysis of lattice towers". (phdthesis). McGill University, 1998.
[7] M. Khedr and G. McClure, (1999) “Earthquake amplification factors for self-supporting telecommunication towers" Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering 26(2): 208–215. DOI: 10.1139/l98-059.
[8] M. S. Amiri GG and B. A, (2007) “Seismic Response of 4- Legged Self-Supporting Cell towers" 20(2): 107–126.
[9] P.-S. Lee and G. McClure, (2007) “Elastoplastic large deformation analysis of a lattice steel tower structure and comparison with full-scale tests" Journal of Constructional steel research 63(5): 709–717. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcsr.2006.06.041.
[10] M. Sadeghi, F. Mohajeri, and E. Khalaghi, (2010) “Seismic performance and communication failure of cell phone towers in Iran’s seismic zones, case study: developing structural and communicational fragility curves for 24M monopole tower" Proceedings of 7CUEE & 5 (5ICEE2010): 643–648.
[11] B. Li, Q. Lai, E. Guo, C. Mao, and X. Li, (2022) “Determining the Optimal Scalar Intensity Measure of Floor Communication Towers" Shock and Vibration 2022: DOI: 10.1155/2022/6347334.
[12] L. G. Soil-structure dynamic interaction.World Earthquake Engineering, 1991.
[13] H.-N. Li, S.-Y. Xiao, and S.-Y. Wang. “Model of transmission tower-pile-soil dynamic interaction under earthquake: In-plane”. In: ASME Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference. 46563. 2002, 143–147. DOI: 10.1115/PVP2002-1439.
[14] T. Li, L. Xing-jian, Y. Si-yin, et al., (2018) “Response analysis of transmission tower-line system considering pile-soil-structure interaction under earthquake loading" World Information on Earthquake Engineering 34(3): 1–11.
[15] H. Pan, C. Li, and L. Tian, (2021) “Seismic fragility analysis of transmission towers considering effects of soil structure interaction and depth-varying ground motion inputs" Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 19(11): 4311–4337. DOI: 10.1007/s10518-021-01124-x.
[16] T. Cakir, (2013) “Evaluation of the effect of earthquake frequency content on seismic behavior of cantilever retaining wall including soil–structure interaction" Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 45: 96–111. DOI: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2012.11.008.
[17] Y. Qing-xia, Y. Lie-ping, and L. Xin-zheng, (2014) “Research on the influence of soil-structure interaction on the collapse of frame structure" Engineering mechanics 31(3): 87–92. DOI: 10.6052/j.issn.1000-4750.2012.09.0638.
[18] R. Fares, A. Deschamps, et al., (2019) “Soil-structure interaction analysis using a 1DT-3C wave propagation model" Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 120: 200–213. DOI: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2019.02.011.
[19] X. J. Seismic Response Analysis of Transmission Tower Line System Considering SSI. Dalian University of Technology. 2008.
[20] G. X. Collapse Mechanism of Transmission Tower-line System under Multi-support and Multi-dimensional Ground Motions. Shandong University. 2017.
[21] P. 6. FEMA et al. Quantification of building seismic performance factors. 2009.
[22] C. S. D. Code, (2001) “Code for seismic design of buildings (GB50011-2001)" China Architecture and Building Press, Beijing (in Chinese):
We use cookies on this website to personalize content to improve your user experience and analyze our traffic. By using this site you agree to its use of cookies.
