The Open Civil Engineering Journal




ISSN: 1874-1495 ― Volume 13, 2019
RESEARCH ARTICLE

A Comparative Study of Distribution Structure Cross Arms



Ramana Pidaparti1, Sriram Kalaga2, *
1 School of Engineering, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, USA
2 Ulteig Engineers, Inc., St. Paul, Minnesota, USA

Abstract

Background:

The structural performance of cross arms used on distribution poles is studied in this paper. Tangent and Dead End configurations involving conventional (wood) and composite (fiber glass) cross arms are analyzed. Strength-to-Stiffness and Weight-to-Stiffness ratios associated with study cases are determined and evaluated.

Results and Conclusion:

It is observed that although initial costs are higher, composite cross arms offer long-term advantages in terms of strength, stiffness, performance and durability.

Keywords: Composite, Cross arms, Dead ends, Distribution lines, Stiffness, Strength, Tangent, Wood.


Article Information


Identifiers and Pagination:

Year: 2017
Volume: 11
Issue: Suppl-2, M4
First Page: 757
Last Page: 767
Publisher Id: TOCIEJ-11-757
DOI: 10.2174/1874149501711010757

Article History:

Received Date: 03/01/2017
Revision Received Date: 15/03/2017
Acceptance Date: 05/05/2017
Electronic publication date: 15/10/2017
Collection year: 2017

Article Metrics:

CrossRef Citations:
0

Total Statistics:

Full-Text HTML Views: 1758
Abstract HTML Views: 587
PDF Downloads: 844
ePub Downloads: 778
Total Views/Downloads: 3967

Unique Statistics:

Full-Text HTML Views: 1026
Abstract HTML Views: 318
PDF Downloads: 286
ePub Downloads: 190
Total Views/Downloads: 1820
Geographical View

© 2017 Pidaparti and Kalaga.

open-access license: This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Public License (CC-BY 4.0), a copy of which is available at: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.


* Address correspondence to this author at the Ulteig Engineers, Inc., 4285 North Lexington Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota 55126, USA, Tel: (651) 415 3873, Fax: (888) 858 3440; E-mail: sriram.kalaga@ulteig.com




1. INTRODUCTION

In the electrical utility industry, lines of voltages 35 kV and below are generally termed distribution lines. Cross arms are horizontal elements used on distribution line structures to support insulators and conductors of various configurations. Figs. (1a and 1b) show a typical tangent (suspension) and a dead end cross arm configuration, respectively. Wood cross arms are traditionally used by utilities, although during the past decade, composite (fiber-reinforced) poles and cross arms are increasingly becoming popular [1S. Kalaga, "Composite transmission and distribution poles – A new trend", Energy Cent., Grid Operations, . October]. Some of the advantages of composite cross arms include lighter weight, excellent strength and stiffness, low conductivity, moisture and corrosion resistance, ease of installation, minimum maintenance and durability.

Wood distribution cross arm sizes and design are standardized by the Rural Utilities Service (RUS) of United States Department of Agriculture [2Bulletin 1728F-803, “Specifications and Drawings for 24.9/14.4 kV Line Construction., Rural Utilities Service, United States Department of Agriculture: Washington, DC, .-4Bulletin 1724E-200, “Design Manual for High Voltage Transmission Lines., Rural Utilities Service, United States Department of Agriculture: Washington, DC, .] on the basis of length and pattern/location of insulator attachments. RUS Bulletin 1724E-151 [5Bulletin 1724E-151, “Mechanical Loading on Distribution Cross Arms., Rural Utilities Service, United States Department of Agriculture: Washington, DC, .] discusses the structural loading and analysis of distribution cross arms. The design of composite utility poles and structures is governed by ASCE Manual 104 [6ASCE Manual of Practice 104, Recommended Practice for Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Products for Overhead Utility Line Structures, .] and the NESC [7National Electrical Safety Code, ANSI-C2., Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, .]; however, the Manual does not address cross arms specifically. NESC specifies load and strength factors required for design.

From strength perspectives, allowable loads per load point for wood arms are derived simply on the basis of designated ultimate bending stress and recommended strength reduction factors. For composite arms, allowable loads per load point are obtained on the basis of test loads and deflections. NESC recommends a strength factor of 1.00 for composite cross arms. Most composite materials possess high strength-to-stiffness ratios thus permitting poles to be designed to be as flexible as needed. However, there is no information available on this flexibility aspect as it refers to composite cross arms.

Fig. (1a)
Typical tangent cross arm with 4 post insulator attachment points.


Fig. (1b)
Typical dead end cross arm with 4 strain insulator attachment points.


To the best of our knowledge, there is little information in literature regarding the relative performance of wood and composite distribution cross arms. Parameters such as strength-to-stiffness ratios and weight-to-stiffness ratios are useful for engineers in making design choices. This study is a small step in this direction.

The objectives of this paper are to:

  1. Derive relationship between wire loads and strength for wood cross arms based on ultimate design bending stress.
  2. Derive relationship between wire loads and strength for composite cross arms based on test deflections.
  3. Propose definitions of Strength-to-Stiffness and Weight-to-Stiffness ratios.
  4. Evaluate the strength and stiffness performance of various wood and composite cross arms in both tangent and dead end configurations.
  5. Compare Strength-to-Stiffness and Weight-to-Stiffness ratios of all study cases.

This study is limited to linear, elastic behavior of the structural elements. For tangent cross arms, only vertical or gravity loads are considered. For dead end cross arms, whose design is controlled by longitudinal loads, only wire tension loads are considered. Ice loads and transverse loads due to wind and line angles are not considered here but will be included in future studies.

2. TANGENT AND DEAD END CROSS ARMS

The six (6) configurations of tangent and dead end distribution cross arms studied in this paper are shown in Figs. (2 and 3). The selected configurations are standard designs which are commonly used by utilities [8Hughes Brothers Inc., Transmission Product Catalog., Hughes Brothers: Seward, Nebraska, USA, .]. Both Douglas Fir and Southern Yellow Pine are popular materials for wood cross arms [4Bulletin 1724E-200, “Design Manual for High Voltage Transmission Lines., Rural Utilities Service, United States Department of Agriculture: Washington, DC, .]; however, Douglas Fir is selected in this study for its superior strength in terms of Modulus of Elasticity.

Fig. (2a)
Tangent cross arm 8T (2.44 m).


Fig. (2b)
Tangent cross arm 10T (3.05 m).


Fig. (2c)
Tangent cross arm 12T (3.66 m).


2.1. Connection to Pole

Composite cross arms are firmly attached to the pole with a metal mounting bracket and multiple bolts. This connection is almost a fixed joint. Wood cross arms are generally connected to the pole with a single machine bolt, washer and a lock nut. This situation is closer to a pinned joint than a fixed joint. In fact, wood cross arms often have V-braces underneath to provide additional support against bending. However, in order to have consistency and facilitate a one-on-one comparison in this study, the connection at pole in both cases is considered fixed thus enabling modeling as a simple cantilever in both.

3. MATERIAL PROPERTIES

For cross arms made of Douglas Fir material, the designated ultimate bending stress is 51 MPa (7.4 ksi). Modulus of Elasticity ‘E’ is 13.24 GPa (1920 ksi) [4Bulletin 1724E-200, “Design Manual for High Voltage Transmission Lines., Rural Utilities Service, United States Department of Agriculture: Washington, DC, .]. The dressed sizes of wood cross arms used in the study are 88.9 mm x 114.3 mm (3½ in. x 4½ in.). Material dry density for calculation purposes is taken as 6.28 kN/m3 (40 pcf).

For cross arms made of composite materials, Table 1 gives the elastic properties used in the study [9Geotek Inc, PUPI Cross Arm Technical Manual., Geotek: Stewartville, Minnesota, USA, .]. Density of composites varies with type of manufacture but standard cross arms weigh about 0.0054 to 0.0068 kN/m (4 to 5 plf). Typical composite cross arms are similar to wood cross arms in cross sectional dimensions.

Fig. (3a)
Dead end cross arm 8D (2.44 m).


Fig. (3b)
Dead end cross arm 10D (3.05 m).


Fig. (3c)
Dead end cross arm 12D (3.66 m).


Table 1
Material properties for composite cross arms [9Geotek Inc, PUPI Cross Arm Technical Manual., Geotek: Stewartville, Minnesota, USA, .].


4. LOAD CAPACITY DERIVATIONS

Figs. (4a and 4b) show the cantilever models of the cross arms analyzed. Since symmetry is available, only one half of the total cross arm is modeled.

4.1. Load and Strength Factors

All loads used in the analyses include appropriate load factors. Capacities include recommended strength (reduction) factors. The values used in this study are given below [4Bulletin 1724E-200, “Design Manual for High Voltage Transmission Lines., Rural Utilities Service, United States Department of Agriculture: Washington, DC, .].

Load Factor γ        Vertical Load        1.50

               Longitudinal Load        1.65 (Wire Tension)

Strength Factor ψ       Wood Cross Arm        0.65 (Applied to designated bending stress fr)

               Composite Cross Arm     1.00

4.2. Wood Cross Arms

The derivation of the relationship between applied loads, insulator locations, deflections and cross arm bending strength is shown in Appendix A. The equations are applicable to both tangent and dead end cross arms.

Fig. (4a)
Wood cross arm cantilever model with two (2) load points.


Fig. (4b)
Composite cross arm cantilever model with two (2) load points.


Tables 2 and 3 show the results of application of the equations to various tangent cross arms. Three (3) wood cross arms and eleven (11) composite cross arms are studied.

Table 2
Calculations for wood tangent** cross arms.


Table 3
Calculations for composite tangent ** cross arms.


4.3. Composite Cross Arms

The derivation of the relationship between test loads, insulator locations, deflections and cross arm bending strength is shown in Appendix B. The equations are applicable to both tangent and dead end cross arms.

Tables 4 and 5 show the results of application of the equations to various dead end cross arms. Three (3) wood cross arms and eight (8) composite cross arms are studied.

Table 4
Calculations for wood dead end ** cross arms.


All four tables also show the relative weights and costs of the cross arms modeled.

5. STIFFNESS RATIOS

We propose two (2) ratios here with reference to cross arm strength, stiffness and weight.

Strength-to-Stiffness Ratio RSS = No. of Load Points * Ultimate P per Load Point / Lateral Flexural Stiffness = (np) (PU)/ kL (1)
Weight-to-Stiffness Ratio RWS = Total Weight of the Arm / Lateral Flexural Stiffness = W / kL (2)

The lateral flexural stiffness kL is given by finite element method as 12 EI / L3 where EI is the flexural rigidity of the cross section and L is the length of the element.

Evaluated lateral flexural stiffness of all cases are shown in the tables. The units of both RSS and RWS are 1/mm (1/in).

6. DISCUSSION

As seen in Table 1, average bending stress capacities for composites are 5 to 14 times than those of wood. The modulus of elasticity, E, which controls stiffness and thereby deflections, is about 1.9 to 2.9 times larger for composites than for wood. These two parameters govern the behavioral differences between the two materials.

Tables 2 to 5 show the main differences between wood and composite arms. While the composite arms exhibited larger strength-to-stiffness ratios, there is little difference between the two materials with reference to weight-to-stiffness ratios. However, from deformation point of view, composite arms sustained deflections 4 to 5 times larger than wood arms.

Tables 2 to 5 also show the allowable loads on cross arms computed considering nominal NESC load and strength factors. As expected, composite cross arms showed larger load bearing capacity than wood arms of the same length and configuration.

Cost-wise, composite cross arms are about 2 to 2¼ times costlier than wood arms based on nominal market prices. But, the additional cost is offset by superior load-deflection performance and flexibility while subject to large loads.

Table 5
Calculations for composite dead end ** cross arms.


CONCLUSION

A total of 25 distribution cross arms made of wood and composites are analyzed. Both tangent and dead end configurations are studied using specially derived load-deflection relationships. Though the study comprised only of a small set of data, the following main conclusions can be drawn.

  1. Composite arms consistently showed large strength-to-stiffness ratios relative to wood arms. On an average, the RSS ratios of composite arms are over 4 times than those of wood.
  2. Composite arms sustained deflections 4 to 5 times larger than wood arms at ultimate load levels.
  3. Composite arms showed larger load carrying capacity than wood arms of similar configurations.
  4. However, composite arms are more than twice as expensive as wood arms. This additional expense is however offset by their superior performance and flexibility at higher load levels.

LIST OF NOTATIONS

a  = Diameter of Bolt Hole
b  = Width of Cross Section
d  = Depth of Cross Section
E  = Modulus of Elasticity
fr  = Designated Bending Stress for Wood (MOR)
I  = Moment of Inertia
kL  = Lateral Flexural Stiffness of Beam
L  = Length of Cross Arm as Shown
Ma  = Applied Moment
Ms  = Moment Capacity Based on Designated Bending Stress fr
np  = Number of Load Points
P  = Load
PU  = Ultimate or Maximum Load
PALL  = Allowable Load = ψ PU / γ
PT  = Test Load
RSS  = Strength-to-Stiffness Ratio
RWS  = Weight-to-Stiffness Ratio
W  = Weight of Cross Arm
x, x1  = Load Point Locations as shown in Figure 4
y  = Distance to Extreme Fiber of Wood Cross Section
1-wire  = Deflection of Cross Arm at Free End for One Load Point
2-wire  = Deflection of Cross Arm at Free End for Two Load Points
T1  = Test Deflection of Cross Arm at Free End for One Load Point
T2  = Test Deflection of Cross Arm at Free End for Two Load Points
γ  = Load Factor for Given Load
Ψ  = Strength Reduction Factor for Cross Arm Material
η1, η2  = Parameters as Defined

CONSENT FOR PUBLICATION

Not applicable.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The authors declare no conflict of interest, financial or otherwise.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors wish to acknowledge the assistance of Geotek Inc., of Stewartville, Minnesota during work on this article.

APPENDIX A

Wood Cross Arms - Correlation between Strength and Applied Loads

Referring to Fig. (4a):

Moment at fixed end due to applied loads P = PU:

Ma = PU * x + PU * (L-x1) = PU * (L+ x - x1) (A-1)

Moment capacity based on designated bending stress, fr [9Geotek Inc, PUPI Cross Arm Technical Manual., Geotek: Stewartville, Minnesota, USA, .]:

Ms = fr * (b * d3) / (12 * y) (A-2)

Modifying depth ‘d’ to account of bolt hole ‘a’ at the pole-arm connection [6ASCE Manual of Practice 104, Recommended Practice for Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Products for Overhead Utility Line Structures, .]:

Ms = fr * b * (d3 – a3) / 6 * d (A-3)

Equating the applied moment and ultimate capacity:

PU * (L+ x - x1) = fr * b * (d3 – a3) / 6 * d (A-4)

or

PU = fr * b * (d3 – a3) / (6 * d)*(L+ x - x1) for 2 wires (A-5)
PU = fr * b * (d3 – a3) / (6 * d)*(L - x1) for 1 wire (A-6)

For the single-wire case, only the load at the far end of the cantilever beam is considered.

Deflections

From basic statics, we have deflection at the arm free end as [10]:

1-wire = PU * (L – x1) 2 * (2L + x1) / (6 * E * I) (A-7)
2-wire = PU * (L – x1) 2 * (2L + x1) / (6 * E * I) + PU * x2 * (3L - x) / (6 * E * I) (A-8)

Allowable Load PALL

Recommended strength reduction factor = ψ

PALL = ψ * PU / Load Factor γ (A-9)

Note: Standard bolts used on wood cross arms are 15.88 mm (5/8 in.) in diameter and the corresponding bolt holes are 17.46 mm (11/16 in.).

APPENDIX B

Composite Cross Arms - Correlation between Test Results and Applied Loads

Referring to Fig. (4b) and Appendix A, the deflections at the arm free end in general are:

1-wire = P * (L – x1) 2 * (2L + x1) / (6 * E * I) (B-1)
2-wire = P * (L – x1) 2 * (2L + x1) / (6 * E * I) + P * x2 * (3L - x) / (6 * E * I) (B-2)

Evaluating these deflections with load values PT determined in tests:

T1 = PT * (L – x1) 2* (2L + x1) / (6 * E * I) (B-3)
T2 = PT * (L – x1) 2* (2L + x1) / (6 * E * I) + PT * x2 * (3L - x) / (6 * E * I) (B-4)

or

T1 = PT * η1 / (6 * E * I) 1-wire (B-5)
T2 = PT * η2 / (6 * E * I) 2-wire (B-6)

where:

η1 = (L – x1) 2 * (2L + x1) (B-7a)
η2 = [(L – x1) 2 * (2L + x1) + x2 * (3L - x)] (B-7b)

For the single-wire case, only the load at the far end of the cantilever beam is considered.

Allowable load

Recommended strength reduction factor = ψ

Allowable Load PALL = ψ * PT / Load Factor γ (B-8)

REFERENCES

[1] S. Kalaga, "Composite transmission and distribution poles – A new trend", Energy Cent., Grid Operations, . October
[2] Bulletin 1728F-803, “Specifications and Drawings for 24.9/14.4 kV Line Construction., Rural Utilities Service, United States Department of Agriculture: Washington, DC, .
[3] Bulletin 1728F-804, “Specifications and Drawings for 12.5/7.2 kV Line Construction., Rural Utilities Service, United States Department of Agriculture: Washington, DC, .
[4] Bulletin 1724E-200, “Design Manual for High Voltage Transmission Lines., Rural Utilities Service, United States Department of Agriculture: Washington, DC, .
[5] Bulletin 1724E-151, “Mechanical Loading on Distribution Cross Arms., Rural Utilities Service, United States Department of Agriculture: Washington, DC, .
[6] ASCE Manual of Practice 104, Recommended Practice for Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Products for Overhead Utility Line Structures, .
[7] National Electrical Safety Code, ANSI-C2., Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, .
[8] Hughes Brothers Inc., Transmission Product Catalog., Hughes Brothers: Seward, Nebraska, USA, .
[9] Geotek Inc, PUPI Cross Arm Technical Manual., Geotek: Stewartville, Minnesota, USA, .
[10] I. Mikhelson, Structural Engineering Formulas., McGraw-Hill: New York, New York, .

Endorsements



"Open access will revolutionize 21st century knowledge work and accelerate the diffusion of ideas and evidence that support just in time learning and the evolution of thinking in a number of disciplines."


Daniel Pesut
(Indiana University School of Nursing, USA)

"It is important that students and researchers from all over the world can have easy access to relevant, high-standard and timely scientific information. This is exactly what Open Access Journals provide and this is the reason why I support this endeavor."


Jacques Descotes
(Centre Antipoison-Centre de Pharmacovigilance, France)

"Publishing research articles is the key for future scientific progress. Open Access publishing is therefore of utmost importance for wider dissemination of information, and will help serving the best interest of the scientific community."


Patrice Talaga
(UCB S.A., Belgium)

"Open access journals are a novel concept in the medical literature. They offer accessible information to a wide variety of individuals, including physicians, medical students, clinical investigators, and the general public. They are an outstanding source of medical and scientific information."


Jeffrey M. Weinberg
(St. Luke's-Roosevelt Hospital Center, USA)

"Open access journals are extremely useful for graduate students, investigators and all other interested persons to read important scientific articles and subscribe scientific journals. Indeed, the research articles span a wide range of area and of high quality. This is specially a must for researchers belonging to institutions with limited library facility and funding to subscribe scientific journals."


Debomoy K. Lahiri
(Indiana University School of Medicine, USA)

"Open access journals represent a major break-through in publishing. They provide easy access to the latest research on a wide variety of issues. Relevant and timely articles are made available in a fraction of the time taken by more conventional publishers. Articles are of uniformly high quality and written by the world's leading authorities."


Robert Looney
(Naval Postgraduate School, USA)

"Open access journals have transformed the way scientific data is published and disseminated: particularly, whilst ensuring a high quality standard and transparency in the editorial process, they have increased the access to the scientific literature by those researchers that have limited library support or that are working on small budgets."


Richard Reithinger
(Westat, USA)

"Not only do open access journals greatly improve the access to high quality information for scientists in the developing world, it also provides extra exposure for our papers."


J. Ferwerda
(University of Oxford, UK)

"Open Access 'Chemistry' Journals allow the dissemination of knowledge at your finger tips without paying for the scientific content."


Sean L. Kitson
(Almac Sciences, Northern Ireland)

"In principle, all scientific journals should have open access, as should be science itself. Open access journals are very helpful for students, researchers and the general public including people from institutions which do not have library or cannot afford to subscribe scientific journals. The articles are high standard and cover a wide area."


Hubert Wolterbeek
(Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands)

"The widest possible diffusion of information is critical for the advancement of science. In this perspective, open access journals are instrumental in fostering researches and achievements."


Alessandro Laviano
(Sapienza - University of Rome, Italy)

"Open access journals are very useful for all scientists as they can have quick information in the different fields of science."


Philippe Hernigou
(Paris University, France)

"There are many scientists who can not afford the rather expensive subscriptions to scientific journals. Open access journals offer a good alternative for free access to good quality scientific information."


Fidel Toldrá
(Instituto de Agroquimica y Tecnologia de Alimentos, Spain)

"Open access journals have become a fundamental tool for students, researchers, patients and the general public. Many people from institutions which do not have library or cannot afford to subscribe scientific journals benefit of them on a daily basis. The articles are among the best and cover most scientific areas."


M. Bendandi
(University Clinic of Navarre, Spain)

"These journals provide researchers with a platform for rapid, open access scientific communication. The articles are of high quality and broad scope."


Peter Chiba
(University of Vienna, Austria)

"Open access journals are probably one of the most important contributions to promote and diffuse science worldwide."


Jaime Sampaio
(University of Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro, Portugal)

"Open access journals make up a new and rather revolutionary way to scientific publication. This option opens several quite interesting possibilities to disseminate openly and freely new knowledge and even to facilitate interpersonal communication among scientists."


Eduardo A. Castro
(INIFTA, Argentina)

"Open access journals are freely available online throughout the world, for you to read, download, copy, distribute, and use. The articles published in the open access journals are high quality and cover a wide range of fields."


Kenji Hashimoto
(Chiba University, Japan)

"Open Access journals offer an innovative and efficient way of publication for academics and professionals in a wide range of disciplines. The papers published are of high quality after rigorous peer review and they are Indexed in: major international databases. I read Open Access journals to keep abreast of the recent development in my field of study."


Daniel Shek
(Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong)

"It is a modern trend for publishers to establish open access journals. Researchers, faculty members, and students will be greatly benefited by the new journals of Bentham Science Publishers Ltd. in this category."


Jih Ru Hwu
(National Central University, Taiwan)


Browse Contents



Webmaster Contact: info@benthamopen.net
Copyright © 2019 Bentham Open