Computers& StrucrwesVol. 49, No. 5. pp. 797405.

1993
(T, 1994ElsevierScienceLtd
Printed in Gnat Britain.
0045.7949/93$6.00+ 0.00

MODELING, LOADING, AND PRELIMINARY DESIGN

CONSIDERATIONS FOR TALL GUYED TOWERS
C. GANTES,~‘]~ R. KHOURY,$ J. J. CONNORSand C. POUANGAREDII
tP.0. Box 31830, 100 35 Athens, Greece
$Engineering Information Technology, 545 Concord Avenue, Cambridge, MA, U.S.A.
$Xonstructed Facilities Division, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, U.S.A.
19 Nikokleous Street, Ayia Zoni, Limassol, Cyprus

(Received 17 September 1992)

Abstract--The inherent nonlinearity in the structural behavior of guyed towers leads to difficulties in their
structural analysis, and prevents the formulation of a general-purpose design methodology. As a result,
simplifying analysis assumptions regarding the loading and the modeling of structural behavior have to
be made, and approximate design methods are used, that are often unjustified, and can lead to disastrous
failures.
In this paper, the authors fhst summarize the results of an investigation they carried out on the collapse
of a 1900 ft tall guyed tower under ice and wind loads. Based on this investigation, they then proceed to
present some structural analysis recommendations relating to loading and modeling concerns. Special
emphasis is placed on the importance of ice loading, and on the level of accuracy required in modeling
the nonlinear response behavior. Finally, the conclusions drawn from this study are used to formulate
preliminary design guidelines. This facilitates a systematic approach for the design of tall guyed towers.

1. INTRODUCIION the members of the tower in a completely different

During recent years there has been an increasing
tendency in the structural engineering community for
savings in material that result in lightweight, slender
structures. Guyed towers supporting telecommunica-
tion antennas belong to this general class of struc-
tures. They consist of a slender, tall mast laterally
supported at several levels along its height by sets of
inclined pretensioned guys spaced at equal angles
around the mast.
The actual structural behavior of guyed towers is
extremely complicated. The guys exhibit, in general,
a nonlinear behavior, especially at low values of
pretension. Increasing the pretension of the guys
lessens the nonlinearity and improves the lateral
stiffness, however, it also leads to larger compressive
loads, and therefore, to a higher buckling probability
for the mast itself. The behavior of the mast is also
nonlinear due to its slenderness, and to the large
displacements it experiences under substantial wind
loading. Moreover, decisions that have to be taken in
the design phase regarding loads are also not straight-
forward. Guyed towers have traditionally been de-
signed for wind loading. However, wind forces are of
a dynamic nature, and consideration of equivalent
static loads is not always adequate. In addition to
wind load, there is also ice load. This load stresses
IlFormerly with the Civil Engineering Department,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA,
U.S.A.
manner than wind, and can therefore be potentially
critical. Simultaneous ice and wind loads can fre-
quently occur, and have been found to be responsible
for several catastrophic failures of guyed towers in
the past. And with the inability of analysts or design-
ers to model accurately this complicated behavior, the
attention of investigators has been focused on identi-
fying reasonable simplifications in the required load-
ing and the structural modeling for guyed towers.
A number of researchers have investigated the
structural behavior of cables. A fairly complete de-
scription of cable behavior under several types of
load can be found in [l, 21. A commonly used tech-
nique to take into account the nonlinearity due to sag
is that of the equivalent cable modulus [3]. Design
expressions for the response of cables under concen-
trated and uniform loads are given in [4]. Interesting
contributions have also been made by designers of
cable-stayed bridges [S, 61 who face similar difficulties
in modeling cable behavior. The advent of digital
computers and the finite element method has led to
the formulation of a series of numerical methods for
cable treatment [7-91. Some very recent work pub-
lished in [lo] gives what could be considered to be
state-of-the-art for cable modeling today, comparing
more accurate numerical to approximate analytical
solutions.
Other investigators have dealt more specifically
with behavior and design issues of guyed towers. In
[ll] analytical expressions for the simpler problem
of ‘short’ towers with a single set of guys are given.

797
798
Finite element methods for the analysis of guyed
towers are described in [ 12-151. The Electronic Indus-
tries Association [ 161,and the German DIN 413 1 [ 171
provide guidelines for minimum design requirements,
while optimum sizing recommendations are pub-
lished in [18]. A number of papers [19,20] deal with
the effect of wind loading on towers, while [21,22]
stress the potential danger induced by ice formation.
Although a considerable amount of research has
been done on the behavior of guyed towers, the
problem of finding a commonly accepted method-
ology for their design remains unsolved. Currently
used design approaches can lead to unsafe or unstable
towers, as indicated by investigations of several fail-
ures that occurred in the recent past.
In this paper, the authors first summarize the
conclusions drawn from their investigation of a tower
collapse under combined ice and wind loading. Then,
they try to use these conclusions to formulate some
general recommendations pertaining to the analysis
and design of guyed towers. Considerations related to
the types of load that have to be accounted for and
how they should be modeled are presented. This is
followed by a discussion of several modeling tech-
niques for the mast and cables, and the level of
accuracy achieved by each one of them. And finally,
some guidelines for the preliminary design of guyed
towers are given.
2. CONCLUSIONS DRAWN FROM GUYED
TOWER COLLAPSE
The mast of the tower, shown in Fig. 1, was a space
truss in the shape of a triangular prism with strong
columns at the three corners, horizontal members at
regular intervals of 5 ft, and diagonal X-bracing. It
was 1900 ft tall, 9 ft per side, and supported a TV
antenna. It was supported laterally by three planes of
guys equally spaced at 120” intervals.
The tower collapsed under heavy ice and light wind
loads. The wind direction and the location of the
Fig. I. Perspective view of the collapsed tower.
C. GANTFS et al.
TOWER
DIRECTION
Fig. 2. Post-collapse situation
debris after the collapse are illustrated in Fig. 2.
According to the meteorological data, the wind vel-
ocity was around 15 mph, and the ice was distributed
triangularly along the height of the tower with a
maximum thickness of loin at the top.
An investigation of the response of the tower under
these two loads indicated that it had been sufficiently
designed for lateral wind loads much stronger than
those that occurred at time of collapse. However, the
vertical load bearing capacity was inadequate. No
allowance for ice load was considered in the initial
design since there was no such code requirement.
Ice had a triple effect on the behavior of the
tower. It not only created a substantial axial load in
the mast, but also increased the projected exposure
area for the wind and the sag of the guys, thus
reducing their lateral stiffness. The effect of ice on the
structural response is indicated by the deflected
shapes of the mast shown in Fig. 3. The cantilever
type behavior that is observed for wind loads only
changes as ice is applied. Similar deflection patterns
were observed by Williamson [22].
Axial stresses in the legs of the tower under com-
bined ice and wind loads revealed that local buckling
wind and ice : uniform distribution
I wind and Ice : triangulardistribution
Fig. 3. Influence of ice distribution on deflected shape.
 Modeling considerations of tall guyed towers
initiated in a vertical member on the leeward side
between the sixth and seventh guy levels. Once this
member buckled, the guys at the seventh and eighth
level, highly tensioned due to the combined loading,
pulled the upper tower section down causing the
lower five guy levels to behave out-of-phase with one
another. A push-pull mechanism instantly developed
between these remaining five clusters of guys causing
the collapse of the entire tower in a ‘domino-effect’
manner.
Location of the debris relative to the tower base
and to the direction of wind at time of collapse
strongly corroborated this failure mechanism. A large
pile of broken members along with chunky ice for-
mations near the base of the tower in the up-wind
direction was the final post-collapse scene. Due to the
extreme pulling and pushing of the guy cables, several
of them had their concrete foundations upheaved.
In conclusion, the tower collapsed although no
evidence of obvious design or construction errors was
found. The cause for collapse was the lack of accurate
loading information, and, more specifically, the lack
of consideration for possible ice formation. While
investigating this failure the authors made several
observations regarding analysis and design practice
for tall guyed towers. Besides emphasizing the main
lesson drawn from this collapse, which refers to the
importance of ice loading, in the next sections of this
paper it will be attempted to provide a review of the
state-of-the-art in tall guyed tower design, and rec-
ommendations for its improvement.
3. MODELINGCONSIDERATIONS
This section will address the issue of modeling of
the mast and cables of guyed towers. Towers like the
one investigated in the previous section will be exam-
ined, since they constitute a fairly common and quite
representative class of guyed towers. A typical mast
is a space truss with the shape of a triangular
pyramid. The three corner columns are connected at
regular intervals by horizontal beams and diagonal
bracing. The tower is laterally supported by a
series of three guys spaced around the mast at angles
of 120” and distributed along the height of the
mast.
Several methods are used in practice for modeling
both the mast and the cables. They vary in the level
of accuracy they can provide, as well as in the cost
associated with their use. The selection by the de-
signer of one model versus another should be based
on the available resources and on the particular
design stage, i.e. preliminary versus final design. The
most common alternatives for modeling the mast and
guys and their corresponding virtues and handicaps
are presented here.
3.1. Modeling of the mast
The simplest way to model the mast is by using
an equivalent beam. Referring to Fig. 4, the cross-
799
a
A
d 1
d
I
aed%
I
t
2
A d
A
Fig. 4. Schematic mast section.
sectional properties of the equivalent beam can be
obtained as follows:
A, = 3A (1)
and
These expressions neglect the contributions of both
the horizontal and diagonal members of the mast to
the axial and bending stiffness of the equivalent
beam. More exact calculations performed as part of
this study indicated that this contribution increases Z,
only by approximately 5%, and is therefore indeed
negligible.
The number of beam elements required to model
the equivalent beam for a finite element analysis
should be sufficiently high to accurately represent the
variation in column size or A, along the height of the
mast. In addition, a number of about ten elements
between successive guy attachment levels was shown
to be adequate to capture nonlinear effects and
buckling of the mast.
Regarding the boundary conditions at the base of
the mast, both pinned and fixed supports have been
used in the past. The actual behavior is somewhere in
between, and can be modeled by using a rotational
spring, an element widely available in commercial
finite element programs. This issue should not bc of
major concern anyway, since the boundary con-
ditions only affect the tower locally, in the neighbor-
hood of the base.
A more detailed mast modeling involves idealizing
every single member, vertical, horizontal, and diag-
onal, with a corresponding element. Treating each
member as a beam element would be the most
accurate approach. However, the more conservative
solution of using truss elements has proven to provide
sufficient accuracy, and is considerably more econ-
omical, since it cuts in half the active degrees of
freedom.
A comparison of the results obtained when
using the two different mast models indicated the
800 C. GANTES et al.

sufficiency of the equivalent beam model in pre-

dicting the global tower behavior for preliminary
calculations. This is illustrated in Fig. 5 where
the horizontal displacement at the top of the
tower is plotted against a scale factor for wind
load corresponding to 75 mph. Use of the more
exact model however, is necessary for final design,
and when we are interested in the response of individ-
ual members, or in investigating the influence individ-
ual member defects could have on the global
structural response. It should be noted that the
performance of the equivalent beam model could
be improved by taking shear deformations into ac-
count.
Another alternative is to use techniques of discrete
field analysis as proposed in [23]. Then, a closed form
solution can be obtained for the space truss that is
accurate and avoids the high computational effort
of a member by member analysis. In addition, bar
forces can then be obtained through back-substi-
tution.

3.2. Modeling of the guys

The modeling of the guys is more complex than
that of the mast due to the inherent nonlinearity of
cable structures. The behavior of cables is presented
in detail in [l, 21, where interested readers can be
referred to for more information. Here, only issues
of interest for the modeling of guys will be
addressed.
There are two phases of behavior in the life of cable
structures. The first phase includes the deployment
and initial pretensioning of cables and is character-
ized by being highly nonlinear. The second phase is
the so called in-service phase during which various
Wind Load
Normalized
,__ wrt 75mph
Displacement
Fig. 5. Comparison of P-u graphs for the mast models.
+
-a-
Fig. 6. Tower with single cluster of cables.
static and dynamic loads are superposed on the
pretensioned configuration. The response in this sec-
ond phase can be either linear or nonlinear depending
on the relative magnitudes of the pretensioning and
service loads.
Both straight and curved cable elements have been
developed and incorporated in finite element pro-
grams [7-lo]. Having access to such a program, the
designer can use either element type to model the
guys. A study presented in [lo] indicates that five
curved elements or ten straight elements per guy
provide satisfactory accuracy.
The present study, however, addresses situations
where such cable elements are not available. This is
often the case, since many widely used finite element
codes do not include cable elements, but instead
recommend the use of nonlinear truss elements for
the modeling of cable structures. Furthermore, re-
liable simple models can be very useful during the
preliminary design stage, even if cable elements are
available.
The simplest model is the one where each set of
three guys connected to the mast at a given level is
substituted by a spring. Consider the simple case of
a mast supported laterally by a single set of three
cables with initial prestressing tension T, (Fig. 6). The
approach introduced in [ 1, pp. 135-l 391, based on the
concepts of force equilibrium, deformation compati-
bility, and linear elastic material behavior, was fol-
lowed. Then, the horizontal component of the
resultant of the tension forces in the three guys due
to a horizontal displacement u and a vertical displace-
 Modeling considerations of tall guyed towers 801

ment w in the directions shown in the figure, is given where mg is the dead weight of the cable per unit
by length.
This approximate approach is well known and
2
provides satisfactory results, especially for high initial
F,=3T, ; +;@A,-T,) ;
0 0 pretensioning and small additional in-service dis-
placements [lo]. Note that in reality the tension along
a guy is not constant due to sag and dead weight
x (;){I -$)(;)}. (4)
effects. Use of an average initial guy tension T,, is
recommended. Then, the expressions for the horizon-
This result is based on the assumptions that w is of
tal component of tension becomes
order u2, and that terms of order u3 or higher are
negligible. For the opposite horizontal displacement
direction we have
U
F, = N _
(12)

F,=3T, : +$A,-T,) ; ’ z 0c
0 00

x { 1 +;(;)(g}. (5) Hence, the cluster of guys can be modeled by a linear

spring in the direction of wind, and a vertical concen-
trated load. Ths stiffness of the spring is
The vertical component of the resultant is the same
for both horizontal displacement directions

k,, = N

(6)
The vertical load is given by eqn (10).
This model is adequate for initial approximations
For small displacements the terms of order (u/c)~ can and for low in-service loads in comparison to the
be neglected. In addition, it is assumed that T, < EA,. pretensioning forces. For a more refined analysis, and
Then, we obtain the same horizontal force com- given the lack of cable elements, the guys can be
ponent regardless of displacement direction modeled as a linkage of nonlinear truss elements. To
avoid having an unstable stiffness matrix due to zero
stiffness of all degrees of freedom associated with
displacement perpendicular to the cable, the initial
pretensioning strains have to be introduced. A
The vertical component is
method that has been used in the past consists of
modeling the cable as a straight series of truss
Fw=3Tp b . elements with the initial pretensioning, and then
0C applying the dead weight of the cable incrementally
Taking advantage of the isotropic nature of the to obtain the deformed configuration at the beginning
results for small displacements we can generalize of the in-service phase. This model however, over-
expressions (7) and (8) for the case of a cluster of N estimates the lateral stiffness provided by the guys,
guys arranged symmetrically around the mast because the stresses due to dead weight are added to
those due to mechanical pretensioning, which is not
an accurate simulation of the real pretensioning
process.
Alternatively, one can use this model of a straight
and for the vertical component truss linkage with the initial pretensioning, but use a
reduced axial stiffness EA, according to Dishinger’s
F,= NT, b . formula (11). This accommodates for softening of the
0C cables due to their dead weight. Then, the service
loads are applied directly on the configuration with
These results can be modified using Dishinger’s for- straight cables. This approach gives satisfactory re-
mula to take into account the nonlinearity due to sults for cases of high initial pretensioning.
sag [31 A more general approach is to calculate analyti-
cally the sagged cable shape, and to start the finite
(EA& = EAg (11) element analysis from that deformed configuration.
,+y2E&’
( > P P
The sagged geometry can be modeled with a series of
straight truss elements (Fig. 7). Either a continuous
802 C. GANTFS et al.

this approach, to the corresponding linear spring

a beam was used to model the mast. As expected, the
Fig. 7. Inclined cable under lumped dead load
or lumped representation of the dead load can be
used for the analytical calculations. Discretization of
each cable into 12 straight two-node truss elements
and lumping of the dead load on the correpsonding
nodes has shown sufficient accuracy in our calcu-
lations. The caluclation of the deformed shape is
based on the known initial tension. A more general
formulation concerning cables under multiple con-
centrated loads given in [l 1, pp. 25-341, can be used
here. This approach consists of calculating the mo-
ments at all points of application of concentrated
loads, and setting them equal to zero. Then we obtain
the following element sag
stiffnesses.
The accuracy of the spring model for small dis-
placement analyses is evident. Its effectiveness is
decreased at higher altitudes where the sag is rela-
tively large. Figure 8 illustrates the range of validity
of the equivalent spring model. The horizontal dis-
placement at the top of the tower is plotted against
the scaling factor of wind load corresponding to a
wind speed of 75 mph. In both cases an equivalent
stiffening of the guys at increased deformation is
modeled effectively by the truss linkages but not
by the springs. The performance of the equivalent
spring model can be improved if iterations are carried
out during which the calculated spring reactions
are used to update the values of spring constants in
order to account for the nonlinearity of the re-
sponse [23].
In conclusion, the simple equivalent spring model
is an acceptable solution for preliminary design pur-
poses, especially for large initial cable pretensioning
and small in-service loads. For more detailed analysis
and final design, the modeling of the guys in their
sagged position as linkages of pretensioned straight
truss elements provides an acceptable solution when
cable elements are not available.

i(J-4
d=a

’ 0p

H 2J2 ’
4. LOADING CONSIDERATIONS

As rather flexible structures, guyed towers exhibit

where P is the total weight of the cable, H is the dynamic response under turbulent wind load. The
horizontal component of the known initial tension T, connecting guy cables also behave dynamically, and
a is the horizontal projection of the cable, and J is the are very susceptible to galloping, especially when
number of elements. This formula assumes discretiza- their pretensioning is low. Galloping is an unstable
tion in elements of equal horizontal projection. Then,
the tension in each element can be obtained since the
geometry is known and the horizontal component H
Wind Load
remains constant along the cable. Since the slope at Normalized
the base is changed due to sag, some iterations are wrl75mph
P
required to match H and T. The starting configur- ,
Truss model ,’
ation for the finite element analysis of the in-service I
i I
phase consists of using this deformed shape, and
applying the calculated initial tension in all elements
and the lumped dead weight on all nodes. This system
is self-equilibrating except for the influence of the
,
,m ’ Spring model
discretization error. /
Table 1 compares the tangent stiffness of the eight
cable clusters of the collapsed tower calculated with

Table 1
Level Truss model Spring model
I 1215.1 1215.5
2 575.9 579.1
3 399.4 411.7
4 252.1 263.3
5 180.4 193.3
6 158.2 175.0
7 178.9 203.3
Fig. 8. Comparison of P-u graphs for truss and spring
8 101.2 117.5
model.
 Modeling considerations of tall guyed towers
condition triggered by self-excited vibrations that
result in a single degree of freedom motion [21].
As long as the designer can avoid unstable behav-
ior of both the tower and the cables, the dynamic
nature of the wind load can be accounted for by
applying a gust factor on the equivalent static loads.
All available preliminary design approaches, includ-
ing the methodology proposed in this paper, are
based on the behavior of towers under equivalent
static loads using height and gust factors.
The combination of the wind loads with the accu-
mulated ice loads complicates the response further.
As discussed earlier, accumulated ice formation on
the tower and the cables has a multiple effect. The
dead load increases considerably. The projected area
of the members increases, and therefore, the wind
loads become larger. The sag in the cables also
increases and, as a result, their lateral stiffness de-
creases. In addition, the distribution of ice along the
height of the tower is not uniform. Usually, there is
more ice at the top than at the bottom. This worsens
the effect of the combined ice and wind action on the
tower. This effect is illustrated by both our studies
(Fig. 3), and those of Williamson [22].
The most recent guidelines for the design of guyed
towers are the ones given by the ANSI/EIA-222-D
code [16], and our studies have been carried out in
accordance with them. The design wind load on the
tower and the guys is determined using the ex-
pressions provided by this code. The expressions for
the drag and lift forces on the guys involve the angle
between the wind direction and the cable direction.
Three angles of attack for the wind relative to the
vertical plane of a series of guys have been taken into
consideration. These angles are O”, 60”, and 90”, with
respect to one of the three symmetry axes of the
triangular mast basis.
The load combinations used are
D + W,
D +0.75W,+Z,
where D is the dead load, W, is the wind load on the
structure without ice, Wi is the wind load on the
structure with ice, and I is the ice load.
Again, the effective area taken into account for
wind loads on the structure without ice, is smaller
than the one used to calculate wind loads on the
structure with ice. As a genera1 rule, the projected
area of the members is increased by 6A = 2tL, where
t is the accumulated ice thickness and L is the length
of the member. Based on weather reports, it is also
reasonable to assume a linearly varying ice thickness
from a low value at the bottom of the tower to a
maximum value at the top.
It should be noted, however, that the assumption
of triangular ice distribution along the height of the
tower, although an improvement in comparison to
uniform distribution, is not a satisfactory represen-
803
tation of reality. The critical ice formation will be of
‘in cloud icing, and the deposits on guy wires will be
influenced not only by altitude, but also by wind
direction relative to guy cable direction. Significantly
different cable tensions at each of the three guys at a
level can be expected because of irregular ice deposits.
The overall tower safety will ultimately be ensured
only if these unsymmetric loading cases are taken into
consideration. Further research on statistical aspects
of these irregular deposits is necessary before rec-
ommendations for their consideration on design
practice can be formulated. Until then application of
higher factors of safety is recommended.
5. PRELIMINARY DESIGN GUIDELINES
Due to the complicated behavior of guyed towers,
their design is today still a trial-and-error procedure.
Our conclusion, both from an extensive literature
survey, and from discussions with experienced de-
signers, is that the selection of initial trial sizes for
member cross-sections and level of pretensioning is
largely based on past experience. To our knowledge,
no systematic procedure exists in the literature that
actually comes up with recommendations for initial
dimensioning. In this section a simple but systematic
methodology for this initial selection is proposed. The
procedure is based on the observations made in the
preceding sections.
Several simplifying assumptions have been adopted
in order to obtain analytical expressions for the
response. The main assumption is that the mast will
remain approximately straight in the deformed pos-
ition and will just rotate about its base by an angle
4. This assumption is based on the so-called ‘straight-
ness constraint’[6], according to which the defor-
mations at all guy attachment points must be less
than 6 in from a line joining the tower base to its top.
The physical meaning of this constraint is to reduce
individual member deformations and overall buck-
ling probability.
The deformed configuration of the model used for
preliminary design is shown in Fig. 9. The equivalent
spring model is used for the guys and the equivalent
beam model for the mast. The tower is subjected to
3 (Y)
1
Fig. 9. Model used for preliminary design.
804 C. GANTFS et al.

vertical loads q,,(y) including, in general, dead load Hence

of the mast, ice on the mast, and concentrated loads
from the cables due to their own dead weight, ice, and
k, = k, ; . (18)
wind, and horizontal loads y,(y) resulting from wind I
on the mast and the guys.
Moment equilibrium about the base gives
5.1. Preliminary design of the guys
The design strategy for the preliminary design of
the guys is based on the following criteria:

The working stresses in all cables should be very

close to their allowable stress so that full advan- M,,, is known for 4 = &,,. In addition, F,, = F,, Vi.
tage of the material used is taken. Then.
All guy clusters should provide equal lateral resist-
ance to the tower. This leads to a relatively uni-
form distribution of forces along the height of the
mast.
Applying this relation for the nth guy, we get
Hence, the proposed preliminary design methodology
is based on a clear philosophy regarding the desired Kx,
k,b, tan r$ = 2 -k, = (21)
behavior, consisting of satisfaction of the straightness b, tan 4 Cb,
constraint, stressing of the guys at all levels to their
full capacity. and uniform lateral resistance. The other k,s can then be obtained from (18). For the
The critical wind direction for the guy design is the cross-sections A,,. eqn (13) gives
one shown in Fig. 6. The calculation of the required
pretensioning is based on the first criterion. The c,k,
(22)
tension T, in the ith guy is given by

+O(u2), (15)

where T,, is the initial pretension, &,, is calculated
from Dishinger’s formula, A, is the cross-section area
of the guy, and a,, h,, L’,, u, refer to the notation of
Fig. 6. For the working stresses we have
where y is the density of the material of the cable.
Assuming that the geometry of the guys is known, cr,
is equal to the allowable stress call, and 4 is specified
as the maximum allowable rotation &,,, we can
solve the above equation numerically for o,,,. The
method of successive iterations can be used for the
numerical solution starting with the trial value
CP, = 0.40,,, . as recommended in [ 181. Hence, the
initial trial values for the pretensioning stresses can be
calculated. It is interesting to observe that these
values depend only on geometry and material proper-
ties. and not on the intensity of applied external
loads. Variations in this intensity is accommodated
by appropriate scaling of cross-sections as explained
below.
The calculation of the cross-sections of the guys is
based on the second criterion. In order to have equal
lateral resistance by all springs, it is required that
F,,=F,-k,u,=k,u,-k,h,tan&=k,b,tan$. (17)
Hence, the initial trial sizes for the required cross-
sectional areas of the guys can also be calculated.
5.2. Preliminary design oj’ the mast
The design of the mast is quite straightforward.
Knowing the guy reactions, equilibrium consider-
ations at any desired mast level can provide the axial
force F and the bending moment M for the corre-
sponding cross-section. Keeping eqn (2) in mind, and
choosing d, we can obtain the required section area
A of the columns
It should be stressed here again that the procedure
proposed in this section can serve only as a method-
ology for the preliminary initial sizing of the basic
components of a guyed tower. Using these results as
a starting point the designer should proceed and carry
out a more refined analysis taking nonlinear and
dynamic effects into account.
6. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The first part of this paper investigates the collapse
of a tall guyed tower under ice and wind loads. The
observations of previous investigators about the
importance of ice loads are verifed. Then, several
 Modeling considerations of tall guyed towers
approaches for the modeling of the mast and the guys
are evaluated. An equivalent beam model appears to
be a simple and acceptable solution for the mast,
while equivalent springs are satisfactory for modeling
of the guys for preliminary analysis. A nonlinear truss
representation in the sagged configuration is possible
for a more exact finite element analysis when cable
elements are not available. Considerations about
the calculation of wind and ice loads are also
presented.
Finally, a methodology for preliminary design is
proposed as a first step towards a more systematic
approach for the design of guyed towers. It is believed
that this methodology constitutes an improvement to
today’s state of the art by introducing a clear design
philosophy as outlined in Sec. 5.1, and by recom-
mending specific initial trial values for member cross-
sections and guy pretensioning. This approach is
intended to improve the current trial and error tower
design practice.
REFERENCES
1. H. M. Irvine, Cable Structures. MIT Press (1981).
2. J. W. Leonard, Tension Structures: Behavior and Analy-
sis. McGraw-Hill (1988).
3. A. G. Davenport and G. Steels, Dynamic behavior of
massive guy cables. J. Struct. Div., AXE 91, 43-70
(1965).
4. A. J. Wilson and R. J. Wheen, Inclined cables under
load-design expressions. J. Struct. Div., ASCE 103,
1061-1078 (1977).
5. M.-C. Tang, Analysis of cable-stayed girder bridges.
J. Struct. Div., ASCE 97, 1481-1496 (1971).
6. Task Committee on Cable-Suspended Structures of the
Committee on Special Structures of the Committee on
Metals of the Structural Division of ASCE, Commen-
tary on the tentative recommendations for cable-stayed
bridge structures. J. Struct. Div. ASCE 103, 941-959
(1977).
I. R. L. Huston and J. W. Kamman, Validation of finite
segment cable models. Comput. Struct. 15, 653-660
(1982).
805
8. H. B. Jayaraman and W. C. Knudson, A curved element
for the analysis of cable structures. Comput. Struct. 14,
325-333 (1981).
9. J. W. Leonard and J. H. Nath, Comparison of finite
element and lumped parameter methods for oceanic
cables. Engng Struct. 3, 153-167 (1981).
lo. D. Bruno, F. Maceri and R. S. Olivito, Analysis of the
elastic response of stays and stayed systems. IABSE
Periodica i, 29-44 (19%). _ _
11. A. Chaies and W.-S. Chen. Stabilitv of euved towers.
J. Struit. Div., ASCE 105,‘163-174-(197$.-
12. N. V. Raman, G. V. Surya Kumar and V. V. Sreedhara
Rao, Large displacement analysis of guyed towers.
Comput. Struct. 28, 93-104 (1988).
*3. F. Rosenthal and R. A. Skop, Guyed towers under
arbitrary loads. J. Struct. Div., ASCE 106, 679492
(1980).
14. F. Rosenthal and R. A. Skop, Method for analysis
of guyed towers. J. Struct. Div. ASCE 108, 543-558
(1982).
15. B. A. Schrefler, S. Odorizzi and R. D. Wood, A total
Lagrangian geometrically nonlinear analysis of com-
bined beam and cable structures. Comput. Struct. 17,
115-127 (1983).
16. Electronic Industries Association, Structural standards
for steel antenna towers and antenna supporting struc-
tures. American National Standard, ANSI/EIA-222-D-
1986 (1986).
17. DIN 4131, Antennentragwerke aus Stahl (1988).
18. W. H. Greene, Minimum weight sizing of guyed an-
tenna towers. J. Struct. Engng, ASCE 111, 2121-2137
(1985).
19. R. T. Nakamoto and A. N. L. Chiu, Investigation of
wind effects on tall guyed tower. J. Struct. Engng, ASCE
111, 232&2332 (1985).
20. J. W. Vellozzi, Tall guyed tower response to wind
loading. Proceedings of the 4th International Con-
ference on Wind Effects on Buildings and Structures,
(Edited by K. J. Eaton) pp. 735-743, Heathrow,
London (1975).
21. M. Novak, A. G. Davenport and H. Tanaka, Vibration
of towers due to galloping of iced cables. J. Engng
Mech. Div. ASCE 104, 457473 (1978).
22. R. A. Williamson, Stability study of guyed towers under
ice loads. J. Struct. Div., ASCE 99, 2391-2408 (1973).
23. R. R. A. Issa and R. R. Avent, Microcomputer analysis
of guyed towers as lattices. J. Struct. Engng, ASCE 117,
1238-1256 (1991).