LICENCE

for
HB 331-2012 Overhead line design

Licensee: Mr David Tombling

Date: Wednesday, April 04, 2012 7:33 PM

Licence Agreement

This is an agreement between the end user of the Product ("Licensee") and SAI Global Limited, 286 Sussex Street, Sydney
NSW 2000 AUSTRALIA, ABN 67 050 611 642.

1. Definitions and Interpretations

Australian Standards means Australian Standards and includes Joint ISO/Australian Standards, Joint NZ/Australian Standards,
current Draft Australian Standards, and amendments to Australian Standards.

Concurrent Users means the maximum number of people able to access the Product at any one time, and is limited to the
number of Licences purchased.

ISO Standards means Standards published by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), for which SAI Global is
an authorised distributor.

IEC Standards means Standards published by the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), for which SAI Global is an
authorised distributor.

Internal use means use of the Product within the Licensee’s organization.

Licence means the right to access and use the Product.

Licensee means the purchaser and user of the Product.

Product means Australian Standards, ISO Standards and IEC Standards ordered and purchased through the InfoStore, and
downloaded as electronic PDF files.
Click on the red box above to activate the Licence Agreement scroll bar.
2. Product Availability

See publications
2.1. The Product is available via the World covering the same
Wide Web through Subject
the use of a web Area
browser. Documents are provided as PDF files,
viewable through the use of Adobe ® Acrobat ® Reader Version 7 and above.
Subscribe to our Free Newsletters about Australian Standards® in
3. Licence Agreement
Legislation; ISO, IEC, BSI and more
Learn
3.1. By using the Product thehow to Manage
Licensee Standards
agrees to be bound by theCollections Online
Licence Agreement for the Product.

3.2. The Licensee isLearn

grantedabout LexConnect,
a non-exclusive All Jurisdictions,
and non-assignable Standards
Licence to use referenced
the Product. in
Australian legislation
3.3. Licensees are permitted to use the Product the following extent:
Know when a Standard has changed
3.3.a. Purchasers of personal user Licences for the Product may locally install and use the Product on the number of individual
computers corresponding
Become to thean
number
SAIofGlobal
personalStandards
users specified in the Affi
Sales SAI liate
Global Infostore order. Licensees are permitted to
make paper copies of the Product for Internal use limited to the number of personal users specified in the SAI Global Infostore
order only ( excludes electronic pads of forms ). Licensees are permitted to make one electronic copy of the Product for backup
purposes. Representing hundreds of Standards bodies including:

3.3.b. Purchasers of network Licences for the Product may install and use the Product on a network with the number of
Concurrent Users permitted corresponding to the number of users specified in the SAI Global Infostore order. Licensees are
permitted to make paper copies of the Product for Internal use limited to the number of network users specified in the SAI Global
Infostore order only. Licensees are permitted to make one electronic copy of the Product for backup purposes.

3.4. SAI Global will not in any way provide the Licensee with an updating service for the Product. The Licensee agrees that SAI
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

HB 331—2012

Handbook

Overhead line design

HB 331—2012
 This Australian Handbook was prepared by Committee EL-052, Electrical Energy Networks,
Construction and Operation. It was approved on behalf of the Council of Standards Australia
on 28 February 2012.
This Handbook was published on 4 April 2012.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

The following are represented on Committee EL-052:

• Electrical Engineers Association New Zealand

• Electrical Regulatory Authorities Council Australia
• Energy Networks Association Australia
• Engineers Australia
• Transpower New Zealand

Standards Australia wishes to acknowledge the participation of the expert individuals that
contributed to the development of this Handbook through their representation on the
Committee.

Keeping Standards up-to-date

Australian Standards® are living documents that reflect progress in science, technology and
systems. To maintain their currency, all Standards are periodically reviewed, and new editions
are published. Between editions, amendments may be issued.

Standards may also be withdrawn. It is important that readers assure themselves they are
using a current Standard, which should include any amendments that may have been
published since the Standard was published.

Detailed information about Australian Standards, drafts, amendments and new projects can
be found by visiting www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia welcomes suggestions for improvements, and encourages readers to

notify us immediately of any apparent inaccuracies or ambiguities. Contact us via email at
[email protected], or write to Standards Australia, GPO Box 476, Sydney, NSW 2001.
 HB 331—2012
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Handbook

Overhead line design

First published as HB 331—2012.

COPYRIGHT
© Standards Australia Limited
All rights are reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced or copied in any form or by
any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, without the written
permission of the publisher, unless otherwise permitted under the Copyright Act 1968.
Published by SAI Global Limited under licence from Standards Australia Limited, GPO Box
476, Sydney, NSW 2001, Australia
ISBN 978 1 74342 061 4
 HB 331—2012 2

PREFACE
This Handbook was prepared by a working group of Subcommittee EL-052-05, Design of
Overhead Electrical Lines for Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand Committee
EL-052, Electrical Energy Networks, Construction and Operation. After consultation with
stakeholders in both countries, Standards Australia and Standards New Zealand decided to
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

develop this Handbook as an Australian Handbook rather than an Australian/New Zealand

Handbook.
This Handbook is the second in the Overhead Line Design Standard suite of documents and
is a companion to AS/NZS 7000, Overhead line design—Detailed procedures.
The application guidelines in the Handbook will apply to both transmission and distribution
lines. Typical distribution voltages are at 33 kV, 22 kV, 11 kV and 400/230 V, commonly
referred to as low voltage. Typical sub-transmission voltages are; 66 kV and 110/132 kV
and transmission voltages are; 220 kV, 275 kV, 330 kV and 500 kV.
Legal Disclaimer
The support data for this Handbook were collected from a great number of sources, and are
believed to be reliable and accurate. Care has been taken during the compilation and writing
to prevent error or misrepresentations. The working group makes no warranty with respect
to the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of the information contained in this Handbook,
nor assumes any liabilities with respect to the applicability or use of any information,
method, or process presented in this Handbook.
 3 HB 331—2012

CONTENTS

Page

PART 1 GUIDELINES FOR THE APPLICATION OF THE OVERHEAD LINE DESIGN

Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

STANDARD

SECTION 1 SCOPE AND GENERAL

1.1 Scope ........................................................................................................................... 8
1.2 Differences between AS/NZS 7000 and ENA C(b) 1 ................................................... 8
1.3 Structure ...................................................................................................................... 8
1.4 Reference documents ................................................................................................... 9

SECTION 2 DESIGN PHILOSOPHIES

2.1 Basic methodology .................................................................................................... 10
2.2 Reliability levels ........................................................................................................ 10
2.3 Design working and service life ................................................................................. 10
2.4 Security levels............................................................................................................ 10
2.5 Limit state design principles ...................................................................................... 11
2.6 Guidelines on strength coordination (Clause 2.7 of AS/NZS 7000:2010) .................. 12
2.7 Commentary on Appendix D of AS/NZS 7000—Guidelines on service life of
overhead lines ............................................................................................................ 13

SECTION 3 ELECTRICAL REQUIREMENTS

3.1 Clearance and spacing for overhead lines .................................................................. 14
3.2 Electric and magnetic fields ....................................................................................... 14
3.3 Hand reach clearance ................................................................................................ 14

SECTION 4 CONDUCTORS AND OVERHEAD EARTHWIRES (GROUND WIRES)

4.1 Selection of conductor ............................................................................................... 15
4.2 Electrical requirements .............................................................................................. 16
4.3 Mechanical strength ................................................................................................... 17
4.4 Economic considerations ........................................................................................... 18
4.5 Selection of conductors for hostile environments ....................................................... 20
4.6 Conductor thermal limits ........................................................................................... 20
4.7 Conductor permanent elongation ............................................................................... 22
4.8 Conductor fault ratings .............................................................................................. 26
4.9 Selection of conductor tension ................................................................................... 27

SECTION 5 INSULATORS
5.1 Insulator design .......................................................................................................... 28
5.2 Design for pollution ................................................................................................... 28
5.3 Mechanical design of insulators ................................................................................. 28

SECTION 6 BASIS OF STRUCTURAL DESIGN

6.1 Determination of height ............................................................................................. 29
6.2 Loading on structures ................................................................................................. 29
6.3 Limit state design ....................................................................................................... 29

SECTION 7 ACTION ON LINES

7.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 31
7.2 Wind loading ............................................................................................................. 31
7.3 Conductor tension governing conditions .................................................................... 33
 HB 331—2012 4

7.4 Establishment of load cases ....................................................................................... 33

7.5 Simplified wind loading application table .................................................................. 40
7.6 Commentary on Appendix B—Wind loads ................................................................ 40
7.7 Local effects ............................................................................................................. 46
7.8 References ................................................................................................................. 47

SECTION 8 SUPPORTS
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

8.1 Pole strength and deflection design ............................................................................ 48

8.2 Serviceability limits ................................................................................................... 48

SECTION 9 FOUNDATION DESIGN

9.1 General ...................................................................................................................... 49
9.2 Geotechnical parameters of soils and rocks................................................................ 49
9.3 Footing design of directly embedded overhead line poles for lateral loads and
moments .................................................................................................................... 49
9.4 Additional comment on foundation capacity of direct buried poles ........................... 59
9.5 Foundation design for lattice steel towers .................................................................. 80
9.6 Failure rate of structures ............................................................................................ 80
9.7 Commentary of Appendix F—Timber poles .............................................................. 80
9.8 Commentary on Appendix I—Concrete Poles............................................................ 83

SECTION 10 EARTHING
10.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 87
10.2 Design for touch and step potential for conductive structures .................................... 87
10.3 Replacing a non-conductive pole with a conductive pole ........................................... 87
10.4 SWER earthing .......................................................................................................... 88
10.5 Risk based approach to earthing for Australia ............................................................ 88
10.6 Risk based approach to earthing for New Zealand ..................................................... 89

SECTION 11 LINE EQUIPMENT—OVERHEAD LINE FITTINGS ..................................... 95

PART 2 OVERHEAD LINE DESIGN PROCESS

SECTION 12 STEPS IN THE DESIGN PROCESS ................................................................. 96

SECTION 13 DESIGN INPUTS/PARAMETERS ................................................................... 97

SECTION 14 ROUTE SELECTION PROCESS

14.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 98
14.2 Risk management principle ........................................................................................ 98
14.3 Prudent avoidance principle ....................................................................................... 98
14.4 Aesthetic considerations ............................................................................................ 98
14.5 Electric and magnetic fields ....................................................................................... 99

SECTION 15 SEEK ROUTE APPROVALS .......................................................................... 124

SECTION 16 CONDUCT ROUTE SURVEY

16.1 General .................................................................................................................... 125
16.2 Determination of transmission line easement width ................................................. 125
16.3 Vegetation clearances .............................................................................................. 128

SECTION 17 ELECTRICAL DESIGN

17.1 Conductor and earthwires ........................................................................................ 131
17.2 Determination of conductor rating ........................................................................... 131
17.3 Design for lightning performance ............................................................................ 132
17.4 Transpositions .......................................................................................................... 133
 5 HB 331—2012

17.5 RFI and TVI............................................................................................................. 134

17.6 Electrical and mechanical design for insulators ....................................................... 134
17.7 Earthing systems ...................................................................................................... 138
17.8 Earthing structures for step and touch potential ....................................................... 140
17.9 Earth potential rise ................................................................................................... 143

SECTION 18 STRUCTURE SUITE

Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

18.1 General .................................................................................................................... 147

18.2 Tower top geometry ................................................................................................. 147

SECTION 19 LAYOUT DESIGN PROCESS

19.1 General .................................................................................................................... 149
19.2 Structure placement (spotting) ................................................................................ 149
19.3 Actual weight span to wind span ratio ..................................................................... 149
19.4 Allowable weight span to wind span ratio ................................................................ 150
19.5 Weight span to wind span ratio variation with conductor tension ........................... 151
19.6 Compliance under all design wind conditions .......................................................... 152
19.7 Using computer programs for layout design............................................................. 153
19.8 Terrain ..................................................................................................................... 153
19.9 Clearances ............................................................................................................... 153
19.10 Terrain model .......................................................................................................... 153
19.11 Survey information .................................................................................................. 154
19.12 Alignment ................................................................................................................ 154
19.13 Triangulating an XYZ terrain ................................................................................... 155
19.14 Break lines ............................................................................................................... 155
19.15 Using break lines to describe existing or planned facilities ...................................... 155
19.16 The profile (PFL) terrain model ............................................................................... 155
19.17 Using scanned raster drawings to create PFL terrain model ..................................... 155
19.18 Design criteria.......................................................................................................... 156
19.19 Modelling of wire system ........................................................................................ 156
19.20 Layout design output................................................................................................ 160
19.21 List of available line design programs...................................................................... 160

SECTION 20 STRUCTURAL AND MECHANICAL DESIGN ............................................ 161

SECTION 21 DESIGN VERIFICATION .............................................................................. 162

SECTION 22 DETAIL DESIGN DOCUMENTATION ......................................................... 163

SECTION 23 CONSTRUCTION APPROVALS ................................................................... 164

SECTION 24 DESIGN SUPPORT FOR CONSTRUCTION ................................................. 165

SECTION 25 AS-CONSTRUCTED DOCUMENTATION ................................................... 166

PART 3 OVERHEAD DESIGN PROCESS FOR SINGLE CIRCUIT 132 kV OVERHEAD

LINE

SECTION 26 SCOPE OF PROJECT

26.1 General .................................................................................................................... 167
26.2 Line layout ............................................................................................................... 169
26.3 Performance and design inputs ................................................................................ 169
26.4 Selection of conductor ............................................................................................. 172
26.5 Electrical design....................................................................................................... 176
26.6 Mechanical design of insulator—Transmission line insulators................................. 185
 HB 331—2012 6

26.7 Structural design ...................................................................................................... 189

26.8 Earthing design for 132 kV concrete and wood poles .............................................. 198

PART 4 MISCELLANEOUS WORKED EXAMPLES USING AS/NZS 7000

SECTION 27 WORKED EXAMPLES FOR VARIOUS LINE COMPONENTS

27.1 Electrical clearances between conductors ................................................................ 201
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

27.2 Insulator and crossarm worked examples ................................................................. 206

27.3 Limit state design worked examples ........................................................................ 215
27.4 Multiple span calculations ....................................................................................... 218
27.5 Distribution worked—Example 1............................................................................. 219
27.6 Distribution worked—Example 2............................................................................. 223
27.7 Seismic loads worked examples ............................................................................... 225

PART 5 SPECIAL TOPICS

SECTION 28 SPECIAL CONDUCTORS

28.1 Aerodynamic conductors ......................................................................................... 234
28.2 High temperature low sag conductors ...................................................................... 235
28.3 ‘Special’ conductors—Special care .......................................................................... 237
28.4 References ............................................................................................................... 237

SECTION 29 CONDUCTOR CLASHING

29.1 General .................................................................................................................... 238
29.2 Primary conductor clashing...................................................................................... 238
29.3 Secondary conductor clashing .................................................................................. 238

SECTION 30 LOW VOLTAGE AERIAL BUNDLED CABLE

30.1 General .................................................................................................................... 240
30.2 Supports ................................................................................................................... 240
30.3 Cable tension ........................................................................................................... 240
30.4 Clearances................................................................................................................ 240
30.5 Facade cable ............................................................................................................ 240
30.6 Mechanical design ................................................................................................... 241
30.7 Clearances................................................................................................................ 241
30.8 References ............................................................................................................... 242

SECTION 31 HIGH VOLTAGE AERIAL BUNDLED CABLE

31.1 General .................................................................................................................... 244
31.2 Mechanical............................................................................................................... 244
31.3 Electrical .................................................................................................................. 244
31.4 Clearances................................................................................................................ 245
31.5 References ............................................................................................................... 245

SECTION 32 COVERED CONDUCTOR SYSTEMS

32.1 General .................................................................................................................... 246
32.2 Covered conductor (CC) .......................................................................................... 246
32.3 Covered conductor thick (CCT) ............................................................................... 246
32.4 Clearances................................................................................................................ 246
32.5 References ............................................................................................................... 247
32.6 Spacer covered conductor system ............................................................................ 247
32.7 Clearances................................................................................................................ 249
32.8 Design Guidelines for Covered Conductors ............................................................. 249
32.9 References ............................................................................................................... 250
 7 HB 331—2012

SECTION 33 OVERHEAD LINES IN TRAFFIC CORRIDORS OR PROXIMITY TO OTHER

SERVICES
33.1 Pole locations in traffic corridors ............................................................................. 252
33.2 Railway and tramway crossings ............................................................................... 252
33.3 Waterway crossings ................................................................................................. 253
33.4 Co-ordination with other services ............................................................................ 255
33.5 Aerial lines in the vicinity of aircraft ....................................................................... 255
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

33.6 Marking of powerlines in proximity to airstrips ....................................................... 256

33.7 Rural activities in proximity to line .......................................................................... 256
33.8 Country line road crossings ...................................................................................... 257

SECTION 34 APPLICATION OF SURGE ARRESTERS ..................................................... 201

SECTION 35 LINE EQUIPMENT—OVERHEAD LINE FITTINGS

35.1 Fittings ..................................................................................................................... 259
35.2 Twisted connectors .................................................................................................. 264
35.3 Tongues and thick tongues ....................................................................................... 265
35.4 Round pins and hexagonal pins ................................................................................ 266
35.5 Yoke plates and Y-clevises ...................................................................................... 266
35.6 Security devices ....................................................................................................... 266
35.7 Arcing horns and holes ............................................................................................ 267
35.8 Sag/sector links ........................................................................................................ 267
35.9 The effect on tensile load of maintenance loads ....................................................... 267

SECTION 36 CLIMBING AND WORKING AT HEIGHTS

36.1 General overview ..................................................................................................... 269
36.2 Reference standards for climbing and working at heights ........................................ 269
36.3 Methods for accessing work positions...................................................................... 269
36.4 Fall arrest systems .................................................................................................... 270
36.5 Use of static lines .................................................................................................... 270
36.6 Double lanyard restraint ........................................................................................... 270
36.7 Specific structure design provisions ......................................................................... 271

APPENDIX A REFERENCED DOCUMENTS.................................................................... 273

 HB 331—2012 8

STANDARDS AUSTRALIA

Handbook
Overhead line design—Guide to the application of AS/NZS 7000

PART 1 GUIDELINES FOR THE APPLICATION OF THE

Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

OVERHEAD LINE DESIGN STANDARD

S E C T I O N 1 S C O P E A N D G E N E R A L

1.1 SCOPE
This Handbook is a companion to and is intended to be read in conjunction with the
Overhead Line Design Standard, AS/NZS 7000, Overhead line design—Detailed
procedures (referred to as AS/NZS 7000 in this Handbook), which is a comprehensive
treatment on the design of overhead power lines and which supersedes the ENA C(b)1
Guidelines for the Design and Maintenance of Overhead Distribution and Transmission
Lines.

1.2 DIFFERENCES BETWEEN AS/NZS 7000 AND ENA C(b) 1

ENA C(b) 1 covered limited aspects of overhead line design. The main enhancements from
ENA C(b) 1 to AS/NZS 7000 are:
(a) Application of limit state design to all components on an overhead power line
(structural, electrical, mechanical).
(b) Revised approach to line security and reliability.
(c) Risk based approach to earthing.
(d) Expanded structural design load cases and combinations.
(e) Revised wind loading for all regions in Australia and New Zealand.
(f) Snow and ice loading (for some parts of New Zealand and Australia).
(g) Additional guidance on conductor selection and performance.
(h) A number of informative Appendices were included on selected topics (e.g.
foundations, service life, etc.).

1.3 STRUCTURE
This Handbook comprises 5 parts as follows:
Part 1 is a guideline and commentary on the application of AS/NZS 7000 including
commentary on some of the more complex Appendices.
Part 2 is a guide to the line design process with key areas covered in more detail.
Part 3 provides a worked example of the line design process for a 132 kV single circuit pole
line.
Part 4 contains a number of miscellaneous worked examples for a range of line components.
Part 5 covers particular topics such as special and covered conductors, line fittings and
climbing structures.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 9 HB 331—2012

In Part 1, the Section headings (up to Section 11) in the Handbook align with the Section
headings in AS/NZS 7000, but the Clause numbers do not necessarily align.

1.4 REFERENCED DOCUMENTS

See Appendix A for a list of documents referenced in this Handbook.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 10

S E C T I O N 2 D E S I G N P H I L O S O P H I E S

2.1 BASIC METHODOLOGY

The design methodology involves the development of a suite of appropriate structures,
insulation and constructions for use at the various voltage levels to comply with
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

AS/NZS 7000. The overhead line has to perform with suitable levels of reliability and
security for the weather loads expected in the region for its intended life.

2.2 RELIABILITY LEVELS

AS/NZS 7000 requires that all overhead lines be designed for a selected reliability level
relevant to the lines importance to the system (including consideration of system
redundancy), its location and exposure to climatic conditions, and with due consideration
for public safety.

2.3 DESIGN WORKING AND SERVICE LIFE

The design life, or target nominal service life expectancy, of the line is dependent on its
exposure to a number of variable factors such as solar radiation, temperature, precipitation,
wind, ice, and seismic effects.
The service life of an overhead line is the period over which it will continue to serve its
intended purpose safely, without undue maintenance or repair disproportionate to its cost of
replacement and without exceeding any specified serviceability criteria.
Structural components of the support must be able to withstand the ultimate design loadings
without failure within this period. This may include providing allowance for a reducing
load factor over time due to progressive degradation such as soft rot in timber pole elements
and corrosion of steel elements.

2.4 SECURITY LEVELS

Clause 6.2.1 of AS/NZS 7000 provides a framework for the designer to evaluate and select
a standard of design to suit a relevant security level appropriate to a particular line or a line
construction class or type.
In this evaluation, consideration is given to the lines importance to the system (including
any system redundancy), its location, exposure to extreme climatic conditions, public safety
and design working life.
Initially a generic Line Security Level is selected (as set out in Clause 6.2.2 of
AS/NZS 7000) to reflect the importance of the line within the network.
Table 6.1 of AS/NZS 7000 provides return period winds for each Line Security Level
relative to a range of design working life options.
The design wind loads for an overhead line should be based on return period wind speeds as
defined in AS/NZS 1170.2. As the design working life or security level increase so do the
wind return periods.
While three specific Line Security Levels have been set out in Table 6.1 of AS/NZS 7000 it
would be acceptable practice to select values in between in order to align with other
existing design standards to which the new design work connects or to meet possible
localized climatic exposure levels, (e.g. Level 2.5).
AS/NZS 1170.2 provides regional design wind velocities VR for a number of wind regions
and design return periods.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 11 HB 331—2012

AS/NZS 7000 also refers in Notes to Table 6.1 to giving consideration to the line length,
number of circuits and proximity to other lines or infrastructure, special exposed locations
such as long span water or valley crossings, or line locations where access is difficult
(where time and cost to restore the construction can be high). In these cases a higher
security level could be adopted for a particular structure or short sections of the line, or the
whole line.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Clause 6.2.4 of AS/NZS 7000 sets out additional security requirements.

AS/NZS 7000 requires that security requirements be provided in all designs to prevent or
limit progressive or cascading structure failures in the event of collapse or failure of a
support structure resulting from any external cause.
In general, on major transmission lines, longitudinal design loads relevant to residual loads
for broken or terminated and aerial phase conductors are provided to meet these
requirements. This is an important consideration as restoration costs and disruption to
supply in the event of structure failure can be considerable.
On distribution overhead pole lines, pole deflection (usually rotational and lateral or
longitudinal) combined with partial foundation deformation, will occur when abnormal
longitudinal loads are applied.
When a single pole structure fails and conductors are broken (due to, say, vehicle impact or
storm debris overload), the adjacent pole structures deflect such that they may provide
sufficient release of load in the conductors to limit the extent of damage, particularly when
there is localized failure of the overhead line. When a single pole fails due to ground line
failure, the conductor system will most probably restrain the pole from falling to the
ground. However, the conductor tensions in the adjacent spans will increase dramatically
and pose a maintenance work safety issue. Where more extensive overload occurs due to
major wind storm with extensive wind-blown debris, or major flooding occurs, the
containment potential provides some benefit in conserving major structure elements,
whereas the aerial conductors most probably will be brought down.

2.5 LIMIT STATE DESIGN PRINCIPLES

Limit state design approach takes into account statistical variations in loads and material
properties to achieve a desired level of reliability.
Limit states design is carried out by calculating the design action effects (including
deflections for limit states) resulting from the appropriate load combinations. The limit
state loads include variable factors (load multipliers) which account for the uncertainty in
the magnitude of the load from various effects. Guidance on appropriate load combinations
is given in Clause 7.4 of AS/NZS 7000. The loads associated with each individual action
(i.e. wind, dead, etc.) is calculated using the guidance in this Handbook.
The calculated design action effects are compared with the design strength (or deflection
limit if appropriate) of the component/element on which they act. The design strength
considers modification factors for durability, processing effects, fatigue, load sharing,
temperature effects, duration of load, creep, etc. as appropriate, as well as the more general
strength factor ( φ). The design strength needs to be greater than the design action effect for
each load combination. The design deflection limits need to be greater than the deflection
effects at all times.
Since around 1980 some design standards moved from a working stress to a limit state
design philosophy basis. The limit state philosophy considers not only the failure limit state
but also better manages the important serviceability limit states.
Section 2 of AS/NZS 7000 covers the relevant application of these limit states into the
overall design of overhead lines.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 12

The same limit state principles apply to other components of an overhead power line (e.g.
conductor, insulator and electrical clearance). Electrical components have properties which
vary with manufacturing and weather conditions. In the electrical design, there are many
empirical relationships which have been developed from testing and experience.
AS/NZS 7000 specifies minimum requirements for electrical design. However in some
instances where higher reliability is required additional measures will need to be applied.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

2.6 GUIDELINES ON STRENGTH COORDINATION (Clause 2.7 of

AS/NZS 7000:2010)
Overhead line components can have different component strength characteristics and the
designer may utilise these to provide a controlled sequence of failure in the event of any
severe overload occurring.
When the line is subjected to loads approaching the ultimate design loads, failure of
components in series could occur whenever the component load exceeds the strength in any
component.
The main objective of having a controlled sequence of failure is to limit the extent of
damage in the event of severe loading events occurring.
This enables any consequential reconstruction and restoration of supply to be expedited at a
much reduced cost and effort.
The application of this principle would generally prove beneficial in regional areas subject
to severe thunderstorms and storm fronts, tropical cyclone coastal areas, alpine areas
subject to ice accretion, areas subject to potential snow avalanches, and to lines constructed
through difficult terrain with limited access.
In order to decide on the appropriate strength coordination, the following provides guidance
on application:
(a) The first component to fail should be chosen so as to introduce the least secondary
load effect (dynamic or static) on other components in order to minimize the
probability of a propagation of failure to other structures (cascading effect).
(b) Repair time and costs following a failure should be kept to a minimum.
(c) The first component to fail should ideally have a ratio of the damage limit to the
failure limit near 1.0. It should be noted that some materials strength characteristics
do have a large COV that needs to be considered.
(d) A low cost component (line hardware fittings) in series with a high cost component
(conductors) should be designed to be at least as strong and reliable as the major
component if the consequences of failure are as severe as failure of that major
component.
If line components such as suspension supports, tension supports, conductors, foundations
and insulator strings are analysed using the above, it can be concluded that the following
should not be the weakest component:
(i) Conductors because of (a), (b) and (c);
(ii) Fittings because of (d);
(iii) Tension supports because of (a) and (b):
(iv) Foundations because of (b) and (c).
The logical consequence of the considerations above is that the suspension supports should
constitute the component with the lowest strength or security. When a line designed
according to these principles is subjected to climatic loads exceeding design values the
suspension supports would fail first.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 13 HB 331—2012

Despite the adoption of the above criteria there could be situations where conductors could
fail because of its wires being severed during the collapse of a support such as a tall lattice
tower.
The above strength coordination generally will only be applied to high security overhead
lines (e.g. transmission) in specific locations where the probability of exposure to severe
events is high and damage needs to be minimised.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

2.7 COMMENTARY ON APPENDIX D OF AS/NZS 7000—GUIDELINES ON

SERVICE LIFE OF OVERHEAD LINES
While this is an informative appendix, the information presented is drawn from a number of
industry reference groups and research experts and reflects best estimates for general
application in design of overhead lines for a range of construction types.
Table 6.1 of AS/NZS 7000 sets out security levels and design working life combinations for
the selection of security load multipliers to be applied to design loadings.
The selection of the appropriate design working life for each design suite of supports and
type of support can have a significant influence on the reliability of the structure and public
safety.
The information provided is considered conservative for each exposure condition assumed.
Paragraph D1 of AS/NZS 7000 defines the design working life or service life of a structure
as the period (generally in years) over which it will continue to serve its intended purpose
safely, without undue maintenance or repair disproportionate to its cost of replacement and
without exceeding any specified serviceability criteria. This recognizes that cumulative
deterioration of the structure over time will occur, due to ‘wear and tear’ or environmental
effects. Therefore, in order to maintain structural integrity within adequate design margins
adequate maintenance and possible minor repairs will be required from time to time to
maintain the structure in a safe and useable condition over its service life.
The design life, or target nominal service life expectancy, of a structure is dependent on a
number of variable factors. The information contained in this Appendix is given as a
reasonable basis for the economic evaluation of alternative support systems; the selection of
a particular structure type for given site conditions; the detail design of a particular
structure; or the selection of suitable materials or protective treatment.
Structures and fittings located close to the sea typically within 1.0 km of the sea will be
subjected to more severe exposure and would normally require either special protection or a
shorter service life. Experience in these coastal regions suggests that metallic fittings will
be the weakest link over time and may need to be replaced more than once during the
economic life of the structure.
Paragraph D2 and Tables D2 and D3 of AS/NZS 7000 provide recommended nominal
service lives for steel, concrete and timber pole structures and lattice steel towers based on
a range of ‘above-ground’ exposure classes as set out in Tables D1, D2 and D4 of
AS/NZS 7000.
These service life expectancies are indicative ranges and should be used in conjunction with
local service experience and exposure in order to provide a basis for design.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 14

S E C T I O N 3 E L E C T R I C A L R E Q U I R E M E N T S

3.1 CLEARANCE AND SPACING FOR OVERHEAD LINES

From safety considerations, overhead conductors are required to maintain requisite
clearances to ground, over roads, rivers, railways, tracks, telecommunication lines, other
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

existing power lines.

The ground clearances for different voltages at maximum design temperature are given in
Table 3.6 of AS/NZS 7000.
Other clearances given in AS/NZS 7000 are as follows:
(a) Clearances to earthed structures—Table 3.4 of AS/NZS 7000.
(b) HV AC live line approach distances—Table 3.5 of AS/NZS 7000.
(c) Clearances from structures—Table 3.8 of AS/NZS 7000.
(d) Vegetation clearances are given in Clause 16.5 of AS/NZS 7000.
The spacing of conductors is determined by considerations that are partly electrical and
partly mechanical. Usually conductors will swing synchronously (in phase) with the wind,
but with long spans and small conductor size, there is always the possibility of the
conductors swinging non-synchronously. The size of the conductor and the maximum sag at
the centre of the span are factors, which should be taken into account in determining the
phase distance at which they should be strung. As a rule of thumb, minimum horizontal
spacing between conductors should not be less than 1% of the span length in order to
minimize the risk of phases coming into contact with each other during swing.
The conductor separation is given by Equation 3.1 of AS/NZS 7000.

3.2 ELECTRIC AND MAGNETIC FIELDS

The electric field is proportional to the voltage on line and magnetic field proportional to
the current flow. Refer to Clause 14.5 for a discussion on magnetic fields. Electric field
strengths may be an issue for live line workers on high voltage lines at 330 kV and above.

3.3 HAND REACH CLEARANCE

The hand reach clearance is stipulated in Clause 3.5.3 of AS/NZS 7000.
Appendix FF of AS/NZS 7000 indicates a hand reach clearance of 1700 mm is applicable
for poles. However, on pole structures the body of the person may be constrained in the
body of the pole and a hand reach clearance of 1300 mm from the centre-line of the
climbing aide may be used (refer to Figure 26.1).

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 15 HB 331—2012

S E C T I O N 4 C O N D U C T O R S A N D O V E R HE A D
E A R T H W I R E S ( G R O U N D W I R E S )

4.1 SELECTION OF CONDUCTOR

Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Bare conductor selection consists of consideration of wire size, shape and material,
electrical, mechanical, environmental and economic factors. Conductor selection involves
the consideration of the following:
(a) Electrical requirements for steady state and transient current ratings, corona
discharge, audible noise, radio and televisions interference and joule losses.
(b) Mechanical requirements including annealing, drag coefficient, operating
temperature, constructability (no birdcaging or unravelling), permanent elongation,
fatigue endurance, conductor diameter, sag and strength relationship.
(c) Environmental requirements for corrosion and lightning damage.
(d) Economic requirements for cost of losses, capital costs, load profile, interest rate,
load growth, inventory costs and construction costs (ratio of tension to suspension
structures).
The conductor selection process is described in Figure 4.1.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 16

O ve r h e a d Powe r L i n e
M VA R a t i n g
S h o r t T i m e M VA R a t i n g
Fa u l t M VA R a t i n g
Vo l t a g e R a t i n g

Vo l t a g e R a t i n g Thermal Rating
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Select Select
1. A n n e a l i n g c r i te r i a
1. C o r o n a d i s c h a r g e c r i te r i a
2. S te a d y s t a te c u r r e n t
2. A u d i b l e n o i s e c r i te r i a
3. S h o r t c i r c u i t c u r r e n t t i m e c r i te r i a
3 . R adio & television interference criteria
4. S te a d y s t a te o p e r a t i n g te m p e r a t u r e

Determine Determine
1. C o n d u c to r d i a m e te r 1. C o n d u c to r e q u i va l e n t e l e c t r i c a l c s a
2. N o. of c o n d u c to r s i n b u n d l e 2. N o of c o n d u c to r s
3 . B u n d l e d i a m e te r 3. Cost of losses

Mechanical Design

Select
1. Ty p e of c o n d u c to r s u p p o r t i n g c l a m p
2. C o n d u c to r v i b r a t i o n c o n t r o l
3. O ve r h e a d l i n e te r r a i n c a te r g o r y
4. M a x i m u m w i n d c r i te r i a

Determine
1. C o n d u c to r eve r yd ay te n s i o n
2. C o n d u c to r m a x i m u m s t r e s s
3 . S a g te n s i o n r e l a t i o n s h i p s

E nv i r o n m e n t a l D e s i g n

1. D e te r m i n e e nv i r o n m e n t a l ex p o s u r e
2. S e l e c t c o n d u c to r t y p e

FIGURE 4.1 CONDUCTOR SELECTION

In addition, to the bare conductor selection methodology, consideration should also be

given to covered or insulated conductors such as aerial bundled HV and LV Aerial Bundled
Conductors (ABC) and covered thick and standard covered conductors (CC).

4.2 ELECTRICAL REQUIREMENTS

4.2.1 Steady state thermal current rating
The steady state thermal current rating of a conductor is described in Clause 4.2.1 of
AS/NZS 7000.
4.2.2 Short-circuit thermal current rating
The short-circuit thermal current rating should be based on adiabatic heating, i.e. due to the
transient nature of the current flow the conductor heat gain and loss at the surface of the
conductor should be ignored. The rating is a function of the conductor cross sectional area,
the thermal conductivity of the conductor, the specific heat capacity of the conductor, the
conductor resistivity, the conductor temperature coefficient of resistance, the duration of
the transient current, the conductor initial temperature, the magnitude of the current and the
maximum permissible temperature.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 17 HB 331—2012

4.2.3 Corona effect

For high voltage lines generally above 100 kV, the conductor size may be determined on
the corona performance which can cause adverse impacts such as Radio Interference
Voltage (RIV), and Audible Noise. The surface voltage gradient on the conductor should be
around 16 kV/cm or less to limit the generation of corona discharges.
AS/NZS 7000 is applicable to a.c. systems. D.C. corona effects are different to a.c. In
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

New Zealand, the applicable standard for audible noise levels is NZS 6802. In Australia, the
relevant state and federal noise levels limits from the Environmental Protection Agency
apply.
4.2.4 Conductor long term electrical performance
The long term performance of a conductor is dependent on the degree of electrical and
mechanical overload and the weathering effects. Conductors will suffer some degree of
annealing (loss of mechanical strength) and this is dependent on the operating and overload
temperature on the conductor.

4.3 MECHANICAL STRENGTH

4.3.1 General
The mechanical strength of the conductor is one of the major parameter during the selection
of the conductor of the line.
4.3.2 Conductor limit states
The overhead line is considered intact when its conductors and or tension fittings are used
at stresses below their damage limit.
When subjected to increasing loads, conductors and or tension fittings may exhibit at some
level, permanent deformation particularly if the failure mode is ductile; or for wind induced
Aeolian vibration, conductors may exhibit wire and or whole conductor fracture. This level
is called the damage limit and conductors and or tension fittings will be in damaged state if
the conductors and or tension fittings have exceeded the damage limit.
If the load is further increased, failure of the conductor or tension fittings occurs at a level
called the failure limit. The conductors or tension fittings will be in a failed state if the
conductors or tension fittings have exceeded the failure limit.
The state of system and the damage and failure limits are illustrated in Figure 4.2.

S t ate of sys te m IInt

n t a c t s t ate
a te Damaged sta
ate
te Fa il e d s t ate

C o n d u c to r D a m a g e d li m i t Fa il e d li m i t
s t r e n g th li m i t s

FIGURE 4.2 LIMIT STATES OF CONDUCTOR DESIGN

Indicative damage and failure limits of conductors and tension fittings are illustrated in a
typical conductor stress strain characteristic illustrated in Figure 4.2 of AS/NZS 7000.
Table 4.1 of AS/NZS 7000 gives the damage and failure limit for a bare conductor.
4.3.3 Conductor fatigue and conductor everyday load horizontal tension
Conductor fatigue performance is a function of the conductor static stress and the conductor
dynamic stress. Factors that influence these stresses are illustrated in Figure 4.3.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 18

Fa t i g u e f r e e a l u m i n i u m s t r e s s
Static stress

Te n s i l e s t r e s s - c o n d u c t o r e v e r y d a y t e n s i o n

C o n d u c to r c o n s t r u c t i o n
Bending stress

S p a n we i g h t l o a d
C o n d u c to r d i a m e te r
C o n d u c to r we i g h t
C o n d u c to r f l ex u a l s t i f f n e s s
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Compressive stress

C o n d u c to r we i g h t
Suppor t clamping forces

D y n a m i c s t r e s s - w i n d e xc i t a t i o n

Te r r a i n
Span length
Conductor self damping characteristic

C o n d u c to r c o n s t r u c t i o n
C o n d u c to r d i a m e te r
C o n d u c to r we i g h t

Damping control

FIGURE 4.3 FACTORS INFLUENCE CONDUCTOR FATIGUE

The risk of conductor fatigue is reduced by appropriate selection of conductor supporting

clamp, if required the application of vibration control, consideration of the terrain and the
selection of appropriate conductor everyday load horizontal tension levels.
The strength limit state is based on either a simple conductor stress strain linear model or a
complex polynomial conductor stress strain model. The complex conductor stress strain
model can be determined by conductor test.

4.4 ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS

4.4.1 General considerations
For large investment decisions such as for transmission projects, a complete life cycle Net
Present Value (NPV) will normally be undertaken to determine the appropriate conductor.
To undertake this NPV study a range of conductor types and sizes should be considered and
the associated capital, operating, losses and maintenance costs considered over the
economic life of the asset.
In general, a consolidated range of conductor types and sizes will be considered.
4.4.2 Kelvin’s law for conductor selection (distribution conductors)
A simplified method for economic conductor selection is to use Kelvin’s law. Kelvin’s law
states, for system voltages below the extra high voltage range, that ‘the most economical
conductor size is that for which the investment costs are equal to the cost of energy losses’.
That is:
Total (lifetime) investment cost = Total (lifetime) energy losses
We can calculate lifetime energy losses from annual losses, by using an appropriate
‘capitalization’ factor (e.g. multiplier of 12.4 based on 7% discount rate in perpetuity).
Annual losses can be calculated from peak losses using Loss Load Factor (LLF). Cost of
losses can be approximated from energy costs (peak, shoulder and off-peak).

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 19 HB 331—2012

As a first approximation only, assume the investment cost is the Capital Construction
(CC = cost/km), and look at ‘resistive’ losses only of the conductor (i.e. Ohm’s law
P = I2R).We can then construct the following formulae:
CC = (Peak losses) × (LLF) × (Average cost of losses/kWh) ×(h/year) × (Cap. Factor)
where
= I2Rac/km
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Peak losses
Average losses = (Peak losses) (LLF)
LLF = 0.7 LF2 + 0.3 LF (and if we assume a typical load factor of 0.65)
= 0.7 (0.652) + 0.3 (0.65)
= 0.491
Assume Avg. cost of losses = (15% Peak) + (25% Shoulder) + (60% Off Peak)
And using a typical residential time of use (TOU) tariff of:
Peak = 35.64 cents/kWh
Shoulder = 14.08 cents/kWh
Off peak = 8.14 cents/kWh
The average cost of losses = (15% peak at $0.3564/kWh)
+ (25% shoulder at $0.1408/kWh)
+ (60% off peak at $0.0814/kWh)
= $0.1375/kWh
Hours per year = 8760
Cap Factor = 12.4 (based on a 7% discount rate in perpetuity)
Therefore:
CC/km = (I2Rac/km).(0.491).($0.1375/kWh).(8760 hrs).(12.4)
And solving for the ‘break-even’ peak current under Kelvin’s law:

⎡⎛ $CC ⎞ ⎤
⎢⎜ km ⎟ × 1000 watt hours⎥
I = ⎣⎝ ⎠ ⎦
⎡⎛ Rα ⎞ ⎤
⎢⎜ ⎟ × ($0.1375) × (8760 hours) × (0.491) × (12.4) ⎥
⎣⎝ km ⎠ ⎦
All the ‘units’ cancel out in the above equation, leaving us with peak current in amps. We
can then construct Table 4.1 for some standard overhead conductors.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 20

TABLE 4.1
APPLICATION OF KELVIN’S LAW TO SOME STANDARD CONDUCTORS

Breakeven current above

Construction Rac from conductor
Standard OH conductor which you should select
cost/km data
a larger conductor
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

3/2.75 Steel $35 000 9.7 Ω/km 22 A

3/4/2.5 ACSR Raisin $45 000 1.99131 Ω/km 56 A
7/3.00 AAAC Fluorine $55 000 0.70735 Ω/km 103 A
7/4.50 AAAC Hydrogen $65 000 0.31505 Ω/km 168 A
19/3.75 AAAC Neon $75 000 0.17123 Ω/km 244 A

The ‘real world breakeven’ currents are considerably lower (up to half) those calculated in
Table 4.1, because we have:
(a) Ignored reactive components.
(b) Ignored the ‘cumulative’ effect of losses arising from upstream losses.
(c) Used a very low ‘cost of losses’ figure.
(d) Ignored reliability benefits of ‘heavier’ lines which have a greater resistance to
lightning, through faults, wind-blown debris etc.
A similar calculation can be carried out for LV ABC, which demonstrates that the Industry
should have selected 150 mm2 cables as the standard, rather than 95 mm 2. Generally, a
single 95 mm2 cable is suitable for villages etc., but for most urban applications, either a
single 150 mm2 cable or twin 95 mm2 cables is the ‘economic’ choice.

4.5 SELECTION OF CONDUCTORS FOR HOSTILE ENVIRONMENT

Appendix Y of AS/NZS 7000 provides an indication of the relative corrosion performance
of various conductor types. The recommendations should be modified by local experience,
for example, for salt spray pollution the relative distances from the source depend upon the
prevailing winds and the terrain. Special circumstances such as crop dusting, which has
been known to produce severe effects, should also be taken into account. Table Y2 of
AS/NZS 7000 provides a guide to the selection of conductors for hostile environments.
When selecting a conductor for a hostile environment the following factors should be
considered:
(a) Full or partial greasing of the conductor significantly improves corrosion resistance.
(b) Ensure that all fittings are compatible so that electrolytic corrosion does not occur.
(c) Insulated/covered conductor systems may provide protection against corrosion
provided the conductors are completely sealed by the insulation/covering and do not
provide traps for corrosive solutions nor allow ingress of moisture.
(d) The aluminium coating on SC/AC is very soft and should be treated carefully if it is
to provide adequate corrosion protection. The corrosion resistance of SC/AC is very
dependent on the thickness of the coating.

4.6 CONDUCTOR THERMAL LIMITS

4.6.1 General
Knowledge of the behaviour of conductors when subjected to various heating conditions is
essential when designing and operating overhead lines.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 21 HB 331—2012

4.6.2 Maximum design operating temperatures

The design maximum operating temperature is a function of the acceptable level of
permanent loss of tensile strength (annealing) of the conductor.
Annealing is caused by the heating of a material generally followed by a cooling period.
During the annealing process, the material experiences a change in its microstructure and
for metals, this not only results in a loss in tensile strength but also an increase in
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

conductivity. In general, changes of conductivity will be insignificant compared with the

changes of tensile strength.
Isothermal annealing curves are illustrated in Figures BB1, BB2 and BB3 of AS/NZS 7000
for AAC 1350, AAAC/1120 and AAAC/6201 respectively. These curves demonstrate the
permanent loss of tensile strength when a conductor operates at an elevated temperature.
The loss of tensile strength results in increased sag. It is appropriate to establish the
maximum design temperature at which a conductor can operate while maintaining
acceptable levels of degradation of tensile properties.
More recent research indicates that the annealing characteristics of a conductor depend not
only on temperature and time of exposure but also on the diameter of the wires in the
conductor. Typically the loss of strength curves shown in Figures BB1, BB2 and BB3 of
AS/NZS 7000 will comprise a range of values for a given period with the smallest wire size
suffering the greatest loss in strength and the largest size the least. The magnitude of this
wire size dependence is considered, at this stage, to be of a lower order than the effect of
temperature.
The following comments are applicable for aluminium conductors. Copper has similar
annealing properties which are not as well documented as those for aluminium, but it has
less loss of strength for the same temperature.
The recommended maximum temperature limit for normal operation of AAC, AAAC, and
ACSR is 100°C. This permits an approximate loss of strength of 3% of the original tensile
strength after 1000 h operation at this temperature. Figures BB1, BB2 and BB3 of
AS/NZS 7000 show that the heating period is not a major factor until this temperature is
exceeded.
For ratings for emergency conditions (e.g. when one circuit has to carry more than normal
current for a short time), both the maximum temperature and the duration of the emergency
load should be taken into account in determining the annealing of the aluminium wires. The
annealing effect is cumulative. For example, if a conductor is heated to 150°C under
emergency conditions for 24 hours per year for 30 years, it is much the same as heating the
conductor continuously at that temperature for 720 h. For this example the loss of ultimate
strength in AAC would be approximately 15%. For 30/7 ACSR the ultimate tensile strength
would be reduced by approximately 7%. The effect is less significant for ACSR where an
increase in temperature results in a load transfer from the aluminium to the steel. The steel
provides most of the strength of the conductor and is essentially unaffected by the
temperature.
If ratings for emergency conditions are to be applied then the combined effects of elevated
temperature and sustained high conductor tension on the sag of the line should be taken into
account. Practically, the tension in a line reduces with increasing temperature so the effect
is less severe.
For main grid transmission lines, where it is possible to control the loads in the lines to a
great extent, the emergency condition rating concept may be applied. For radial
transmission lines and sub-transmission lines, the maximum temperature limit of 100°C
should be applied.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 22

For distribution lines where a lower standard of load control and monitoring usually applies
it is recommended that an additional margin be applied. Maximum design temperatures of
50°C to 65°C are commonly used.

4.7 CONDUCTOR PERMANENT ELONGATION

4.7.1 General
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Conductor permanent elongation is non recoverable or inelastic material plastic deformation

that is logarithmic in behaviour and a function of conductor stress, conductor temperature
and exposure duration. Permanent elongation begins at the instant of applied axial tensile
load and continues at a decreasing rate providing tension and temperature remain constant.
In the short term, permanent elongation consists of wire radial and tangential movement
during the early loading period and in the longer term, primary metallurgical logarithmic
creep. Conductor permanent elongation will result in conductor sag and tension changes
with time. These changes are illustrated in Figure 4.4 for a typical transmission line.

T 8 5 C ≈ 20% CBL
l o g (e l o n g a ti o n)

έ3
d e
έ2 b
c T 2 0 C ≈ 20% CBL
έ1
a

t3 t1 t4 t2 t5
l o g (ti m e)

FIGURE 4.4 TYPICAL CHANGES OF TENSION AND SAG OVER TIME

The best example of permanent elongation, or in metallurgical terms, material creep is lead
sheeting on historical churches which slowly ‘creeps’ towards the eaves and requires
replacement every few hundred years. Textbook metallurgical creep is described
schematically in Figure 4.5. Logarithmic creep, the lower curve, occurs between about
0.3Tm and 0.4Tm, where T m is the melting point in Kelvin. For aluminium this is about the
design operating temperature for conductors as indicated in Table 4.2. The upper curve
describes creep behaviour normally encountered above about 0.4Tm. The period of
secondary creep is significantly greater than the primary and tertiary creep phases. ‘High
temperature’ creep may occur at less than 0.4Tm as the transition to 0.4Tm is not definitive.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 23 HB 331—2012

O l i v e AC S R /G Z
I n i t i a l s t r i n g i n g te n s i o n 25% C B L @ 5 d e g C
F i n a l c o n d i t i o n 120 d e g C
E l o n g a t i o n c o n d i t i o n c o n s t a n t 20 d e g C f o r 3 0 ye a r s

Te n s i o n ( k N )
Sag(metres)
Sag
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

I n e l a s t i c a l l owa n c e
= 0 .76 m
Te n s i o n c h a n g e
= 2 kN

Te n s i o n

Time (years)

FIGURE 4.5 TEXTBOOK METALLURGICAL CREEP

TABLE 4.2
ALUMINIUM CONDUCTOR MELTING AND
OPERATING TEMPERATURES

Aluminium and aluminium alloy melting temperature

Temperature (T) Temperature 0.4(T)
Alloy
Kelvin Kelvin
1350 917 367
1120 917 367
6201 887 355
Conductor maximum operating temperature
Maximum operating
Alloy Melting temperature
temperature

Kelvin Kelvin
1350 323 50
1120 358 85
6201 393 120

Conductor permanent elongation expressed as a function of time, temperature, stress and

conductor constants is given as:
( θ − 20 )
ε = A × tn × sn × en 1 2 3

where
ε = permanent elongation %
t = time in hours
s = conductor stress in Pa
θ = conductor temperature in °C
A,nn = conductor constants

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 24

In most cases the conductor exposure period at elevated temperatures is very small relative
to an everyday exposure temperature assessed to be 20°C hence the Equation may be
reduced to:

ε = A × tn × sn 1 2

Conductor constants are determined by conductor creep tests as described in AS 3822.

Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Typical creep test results are illustrated in Figure 4.6 and yield the creep constants A, n1, n2
and n3.

Pr i m a r y Secondar y Te r ti a r y

Hi g h te m p e r atu r e c r e e p
Elongation

(0.4T m )

Low te m p e r atu r e c r e e p
( l o g a r i th m i c c r e e p r ate)

Initial
creep

Time

FIGURE 4.6 TYPICAL CONDUCTOR CREEP TEST RESULTS

The cumulative conductor permanent elongation is dependent on the aggregation of

permanent elongation intervals characterized by differing conductor stresses and
temperatures. Graphically, a conductor may be subjected to a number of differing stress
levels and temperatures each with a given time interval as illustrated in Figure 4.7. In
Figure 4.4, the initial exposure is at 20% CBL and 20°C with a duration, t1 to t2 which will
result in creep accumulation of ε2 – ε1 as the conductor behaviour moves from a to b.
l o g (e l o n g a t i o n)

T 8 5 C = 20% CBL

T 2 0 C = 4 0% CBL

T 2 0 C = 3 0% CBL

T 2 0 C = 20% CBL

initial creep

l o g ( t i m e)

FIGURE 4.7 TYPICAL CONDUCTOR PERMANENT ELONGATION ACCUMULATION

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 25 HB 331—2012

At c, the conductor experiences an elevated temperature at say 16% CBL and 85°C with
duration, t3 to t4 which will result in creep accumulation of ε3 – ε2 as the conductor
behaviour moves from c to d. At d, the conductor may return to the original condition and
hence the original creep curve and transition to point e.
Thus, conductor permanent elongation may be determined for the predicted operating duty
of the transmission line. Whilst this has been illustrated as a graphical representation of the
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

creep accumulation, the application of the elongation equation knowing the conductor stress
history, exposure duration and conductor temperature allows a mathematical determination
of the creep accumulation. AS/NZS 7000, Appendix V provides a mathematical cumulative
creep equation.
Also illustrated in this example is that—
(a) the creep at a low temperature is much less than that at an elevated temperature; and
(b) the creep from one creep curve may be translated to another creep curve (i.e. from
point b to point c and also from point d to point e).
One of the most important aspects of understanding conductor permanent elongation is
determining design allowances for the long term conductor behaviour. The design
allowance for conductor elongation is necessary to account for the changes in conductor sag
and hence ground clearance over time. Design and or construction allowance generally
consists of short term prestressing conductors followed by long term design criteria by
either providing a ground clearance margin or over tensioning conductors after final
sagging. Many designers have found that a combination of these methods to compensate for
conductor permanent elongation yield a practical approach and result in the best overall
long term predictability of conductor behaviour.
Firstly, conductor prestressing takes advantage that significant wire radial and tangential
movements may be eliminated during the initial installation and loading periods. The
fundamental basis of conductor prestressing may be determined by examination of
Figure 4.6 and applying the principles of Figure 4.4. The selection of an appropriate
prestressing tension is a balance between a practical prestressing duration and a practical
prestressing tension. Significant over tensioning with small prestressing durations may
result in conductor fatigue and the over stressing of conductor fittings, insulators and
support structures. Typical and practical prestressing duration of about 3 h at about 30%
CBL may eliminate approximately 25% of the total predicted permanent elongation. During
any period of elevated prestressing care should be taken to ensure excessive conductor
vibration is controlled.
Temperature allowance is one of the longer term compensation methods. In this method,
conductor permanent elongation is equated to an equivalent conductor thermal elongation.
A temperature is determined which may be subtracted from the conductor stringing
temperature which results in the conductor being finally tensioned at a slightly elevated
conductor tension. For example, the final stringing temperature may be 15°C and 40%
permanent elongation compensation is required which may equate to a thermal elongation
of 6°C. Thus, the final sagging temperature would be 15°C – 6°C = 9°C. The selection of a
temperature allowance is limited by the allowable conductor fittings, insulators and support
structures ratings with appropriate consideration given to the possibility of longer term
conductor fatigue. Typical temperature allowances are approximately 40% of the total
predicted permanent elongation.
Sag allowance is the other long term and most common compensation method and is
illustrated in Figure 4.4.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 26

Conductor permanent elongation is equated to a change in conductor sag over the design
life of the transmission line and a sag allowance is aggregated to the specified ground
clearance. For example, the predicted change in sag maybe 0.76 m and the specified ground
clearance is 6.7 m. Hence, the design ground clearance would be 6.7 + 0.76 = 7.46 m.
Typical sag allowances range between 40% to 100% of the total predicted permanent
elongation.
4.7.2 Empirical guidelines for temperature compensation for creep
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Typical temperature allowances for a range of conductor are shown in Table 4.3 or as
nominated by the network operator. This assumes new conductor and no pre-tensioning.

TABLE 4.3
CREEP TEMPERATURE COMPENSATION
FOR RANGE OF CONDUCTORS
AAC AAAC ACSR
Conductor tension
conductor conductor conductor
<5% CBL 0 0 0
5% CBL < and <10% CBL 5 to 10 5 to 10 0 to 5
10% CBL < and <20% CBL 10 to 20 10 to 20 5 to 10
>20% CBL 20 or higher 20 or higher 10 to 15
NOTES:
1 ACSR conductor assumes approximately 7% steel content.
2 There is no allowance needed for SC/GZ conductor.
References:
[1] Permanent Elongation of Conductors Predictor Equations and Evaluation Methods.
CIGRE Electra 75, pp 63-98, March 1981.
[2] Brennan, GF. Methodology for Assessment of Serviceability of Aged Transmission Line
Conductors. Postgraduate Thesis, Wollongong University, 1989.
[3] Drury, MD. The Effect of Prestressing on Inelastic (Creep) Behaviour of Australian
Mode Base Overhead Conductor. Postgraduate Thesis, Wollongong University, 1993.

4.8 CONDUCTOR FAULT RATINGS

4.8.1 General
The main factors to consider when determining the fault rating of a line are—
(a) the annealing of the conductor resulting from overheating due to the magnitude and
duration of the fault current; and
(b) the sagging of the conductor into another conductor below it; and
(c) movement of conductors due to electromagnetic forces leading to conductor clashing,
arcing, conductor damage, secondary faults, etc.
4.8.2 Annealing
It is assumed that the electrical protection for the line will operate and that the duration of
the fault will be short, in the order of a few cycles to a number of seconds for distribution
feeder protection comprising initial clearance plus reclose clearance times. For such periods
it may be assumed that no heat will be dissipated from the conductor. A reasonable
approximation of the final temperature of the conductor is given by Equation AA1 of
AS/NZS 7000.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 27 HB 331—2012

4.8.3 Sag-tension calculation

The sag and tension of a conductor are subject to variations due to the changes in
temperatures and loading. For spans of the order of 300 m and less, the sag and tension
calculation can be carried out by parabolic formula with sufficient degree of accuracy. For
the case of very long spans, catenary formula gives more accurate results than parabolic.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Parabolic formula:
wL2
SAG =
8T
Catenary formula:
⎛ L ⎞
SAG = c ⎜ cosh − 1⎟
⎝ 2c ⎠
where
L = horizontal length (m)
T
c = = catenary constant (m)
w
T = horizontal tension (N)
w = weight of conductor (N/m)

4.9 SELECTION OF CONDUCTOR TENSION

Table Z1 of AS/NZS 7000 provides the maximum everyday tension for a range of terrain,
clamping and damping conditions for the conductor. These are typical for long spans,
generally greater than 200 m. For shorter spans, lower tensions are recommended so that
lower strength and cost strain components and structures can be used.
The following are situations requiring special consideration:
(a) Locations prone to vibration (e.g. open terrain or waterways).
(b) Short spans at low temperature.
(c) Adjacent span ratio creating differential loading on supports.
(d) Poles in uplift.
In general, reduction in tension may overcome these special issues, however lower tensions
may result in mid-span clashing, affect helical splice performance, and spiral set on
conductor.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 28

S E C T I O N 5 I N S U L A T O R S

5.1 INSULATOR DESIGN

Insulation is required to withstand the electrical and mechanical stresses applied to it during
its lifetime. The electrical stresses include power frequency; switching and lightning
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

overvoltages and the mechanical stresses include the tensile, compressive or cantilever
loadings from conductor tension and weight.
Air gap clearance refers to the minimum distance which should be maintained between the
live conductor and earthed metal parts of the support to avoid flashover. The minimum air
clearance has to be maintained even under the conditions of system over-voltages with the
insulator strings in the deflected position due to the action of wind pressure. The three types
of over voltages which can occur on overhead lines are:
(a) Lightning induced.
(b) Switching surges.
(c) Power frequency over voltages.

5.2 DESIGN FOR POLLUTION

For medium to high voltage lines, the pollution performance of the insulator usually
dictates the amount of insulation is required for the particular voltage. When determining
the insulation requirements in a contaminated environment, the following criteria need to be
considered:
(a) Creepage (or leakage) distance.
(b) The ability of the material to endure the electrical activity without being degraded.
(c) The shape of the insulator to assist in reducing the likelihood of contamination
collection and facilitate washing.
AS 4436 provides guidance on the selection of insulators for polluted conditions. The basic
concept is to increase the surface creepage distance so that it is long enough to prevent a
pollution flashover across the surface.

5.3 MECHANICAL DESIGN OF INSULATORS

There are three states for the mechanical design of insulators identified in the Detailed
Procedure, these being the—
(a) everyday load;
(b) serviceable wind load; and
(c) ultimate strength or failure containment load.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 29 HB 331—2012

S E C T I O N 6 B A S I S O F S T R U C T U R A L D E S I G N

6.1 DETERMINATION OF HEIGHT

The factors governing the height of structure are:
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

(a) Minimum permissible ground clearance, h1.

(b) Maximum sag, h2.
(c) Vertical spacing between conductors, h3.
(d) Vertical clearance between earth wire and top conductor, h4.
The total height of structure will be determined by:
HT = h1 = h2 + h3 + h4

6.2 LOADING ON STRUCTURES

6.2.1 General
The loads on a structure consist of three mutually perpendicular systems of load acting
vertical, normal to the direction of line, and parallel to the direction of the line. These loads
can be described as:
(a) Vertical load.
(b) Transverse load.
(c) Longitudinal load.
6.2.2 Vertical loads
Vertical loads include the weight of conductors, earth wire, cross arms and pole mounted
plant.
6.2.3 Transverse loads
Transverse loads are caused by wind on conductor and structure and horizontal tension from
deviation angle in the line.
A complete coverage of wind loading is given in Appendix B of AS/NZS 7000.
6.2.4 Longitudinal loads
Longitudinal loads are caused by difference in conductor tension on either side of
termination structures, adjacent spans being of different lengths and an abnormal (broken
wire) load on the structure.

6.3 LIMIT STATE DESIGN

Structure design should be such that under the ultimate limit state design loads the structure
will reach or exceed the failure condition. This means that under the influence of these
loads that the structure can be expected to be deformed to a point where it has significant
plastic deformation and failure can be expected.
In the case of timber pole construction it would be expected that at this point the crossarms
would be significantly bowed, pole element would significantly deflected, and surface
tension cracks and longitudinal cracks would have developed. Deformation of the footing
should also be expected.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 30

In the case of concrete pole construction any steel crossarms would be expected to have
been discernibly deformed; concrete pole elements would have developed a series of open
tension cracks along the tension face of the pole, and some spalling of concrete could occur
on the compressive pole face.
In the case of lattice steel towers significant deflection of the total structure should be
evident, and localised buckling of the compression leg members and compression face
braces and some panels of bracing should become very evident.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

The design should therefore be suitably proportioned to only reach this condition if the
limit state loads are exceeded. This means that the loads and loading combinations should
be determined such that the probability of this occurring is appropriately selected
considering material strength characteristics and acceptable low probability of exceeding
based loadings.
Clause 6.3 of AS/NZS 7000 sets out the approach to be adopted in design.
The limit state design approach uses a reliability based (risk of failure) approach to match
component strengths (modified by a factor to reflect strength variability) to the effect of
loads calculated on the basis of an acceptably low probability of occurrence.
φRn > effect of loads (Wn + ∑ γ x X )
where
X = the applied loads pertinent to each loading condition
are load factors which take into account variability of loads, importance of
γx =
structure, stringing, maintenance and safety considerations etc.
Wn = wind load based on selected return period wind
the strength factor which takes into account variability of material,
φ =
workmanship etc.
Rn the nominal strength of the component
Clause 6.3.4.2 of AS/NZS 7000 sets out the strength reduction factors ( φ ) to be applied for
the range of materials to be used in the various forms of construction. These factors are
based on current experience and material test characteristics.
Loads, load combinations, and load factors are provided in Clause 6.4 and Section 7 of
AS/NZS 7000 and as referred to in Section 7 of this Handbook.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 31 HB 331—2012

S E C T I O N 7 A C T I O N O N L I N E S

7.1 INTRODUCTION
Clause 6.4 of AS/NZS 7000 sets out the philosophy and approach to be adopted in
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

determining the design loads and load combinations applied to the design of a line.
In Section 6 of AS/NZS 7000 actions (force or loads) are considered under two categories:
(a) A direct action of any force (load) applied to the supports, conductors, foundations,
and other line components.
(b) An indirect action of any imposed or constrained deformation, caused by temperature
changes, ground water variation or uneven settlement.
Actions may also be classified by their variation in time:
(i) Permanent action (G) such as self-weight of supports including foundations, fittings
and fixed equipment.
(ii) Imposed actions (Q) such as wind loads, ice loads or other imposed conductor loads.
(iii) Accidental actions (A) such as failure containment loads, flood debris loads,
avalanches, that relate to the security of the line.
Section 7 of AS/NZS 7000 then covers the more detailed derivation and application of
various load and load combinations

7.2 WIND LOADING

Clause 7.2 of AS/NZS 7000 sets out the wind loading requirements for wind storm types as
they impact on the structure.
A complete coverage of wind loading is given in Appendix B of AS/NZS 7000.
Some simplification of wind loads can be made and the following sets out an approach that
could be adopted for the various wind regions.
Based on information contained in Appendix B of AS/NZS 7000 the design site wind speed
is taken as—
Vz = VRPMdMz,catMsMt
where
Gust winds speed multiplier for terrain category at height z. Refer
Mz,cat =
AS/NZS 1170.2 for all regions use Table 4.1(A)
Md = Wind direction multiplier
Ms = Shielding multiplier
Mt = Topographic multiplier for gust wind speed
Basic regional wind velocity for the region corresponding to the selected
VRP
return period wind. Refer AS/NZS 1170.2
The design pressure qz for different types of equipment has been calculated below as
follows:
q z = 0.6Vz2 Cd
Table 7.1 sets out wind pressures that may be adopted for a 50 year return period wind
speed in the various wind regions as defined in AS/NZS 1170.2.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 32

The wind pressures provided in Table 7.1 can be used for the majority of designs however a
detailed assessment of the design wind pressure should be undertaken in the event that:
(a) The structure height above ground is greater than 20 m. (for structures with loading
dominated by wind on the structure and its ancillaries, detailed wind calculations
should be performed if the height above ground is greater than 15 m).
(b) The average conductor height is greater than 20 m.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

(c) The line or structure is located in ‘Exposed open terrain with few or no obstructions
and water surfaces at serviceability wind speeds’ (the description provided for terrain
category 1 in AS/NZS 1170.2 Section 4.2.1).
(d) Local topography may accelerate winds acting perpendicular to the line (e.g. where
the line runs along, or along the windward side of, the crest of a hill).
(e) The design requires a security level greater than security level I (e.g. for sub-
transmission and transmission lines).
(f) An asset design life greater than 50 years is being designed for.
(g) The designer wishes to maximise the efficiency of the design. A detailed design
approach may be a preferable when developing standard structure designs for generic
application. Designs using Table 7.1 may be conservative if; the required design life
is less than 50 years; terrain categories 3 or 4 are applicable; or the design has large
spans (over 250 m).
(h) Span reduction factors should not be applied to the wind pressures provided in
Table 7.1.
TABLE 7.1
WIND PRESSURES FOR TYPES OF EQUIPMENT
(FOR 50 YEAR RETURN PERIOD WIND)

Region A1–A7 W1 B C D
Base wind
39 45 44 52 60
speed (m/s)
Base wind
913 1215 1162 1622 2160
pressure (Pa)
Suggested Cd Common wind pressures for types of
Equipment Comment factor equipment (Pa)
Round Poles Smooth 1.0 913 1215 1162 1622 2160
Round Poles Rough 1.3 1186 1580 1510 2109 2808
‘I’ Section prestressed Wide face 1.6 1460 1944 1859 2596 3456
concrete pole (or Stobie)
with chamfered edges Narrow face 1.0 913 1215 1162 1622 2160
Octagonal pole 1.4 1278 1701 1626 2271 3024
Transformers 1.5 1369 1823 1742 2434 3240
Regulators 1.2 1095 1458 1394 1947 2592
Conductors Assumed SRF = 1 1.0 913 1215 1162 1622 2160
Crossarms End 1.2 1095 1458 1394 1947 2592
Wide face 1.6 1460 1944 1859 2596 3456
Insulators Post/pin 1.2 1095 1458 1394 1947 2592
Stain/string 1.2 1095 1458 1394 1947 2592

NOTE: A factor of 1 has been used for M z,cat , M d , M s , M t and depending on the location of the line, these factors
may vary.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 33 HB 331—2012

7.3 CONDUCTOR TENSION GOVERNING CONDITIONS

The recommended weather cases used in design of overhead line conductor tensions are
given in Table 7.2

TABLE 7.2
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

CONDUCTOR TENSION GOVERNING CONDITIONS

Condition Temp Wind Maximum tension Initial/Final
Fatigue endurance Average temperature Design at Refer Table Z1 of
Final
conditions for coldest month 0.5 to 7 m/s AS/NZS 7000
Design everyday Average ambient Refer Table Z1 of
0 Pa Final
condition temperature for year AS/NZS 7000
0.5 CBL for linear
Average ambient
Ultimate wind Regional design value 0.7 CBL for non- Final
temperature for year
linear
Servicability Average ambient
500 Pa Final
wind—electrical temperature for year
0.5 × CBL for linear
Coldest day of year
Cold condition 0 Pa 0.7 × CBL for Final
based on design life
non-linear
Ice Loading— Coldest day of year 1 to 5 year return period
Final
12 mm thickness based on design life (360 Pa nominal)
Snow loading—
up to 100 mm 0°C 30 Pa Final
thickness
Temperature at time of
Conductor run-out 0 Pa 0.3 × CBL Initial
run out
Conductor Temperature at time of
0 Pa 0.3 × CBL Initial
pre-tension pre-tension
Temperature at time of
Everyday tension plus
Sagging sagging minus creep 0 Pa Initial
creep factor
correction factor
Maintenance 100 Pa Final
Failure Average ambient
0.25 × Ult wind Final
containment temperature for year
NOTE: The relevant temperatures for a selection location are available from the Australia Bureau of
Meteorology (BOM) website or NIWA for New Zealand.

7.4 ESTABLISHMENT OF LOAD CASES

7.4.1 Objective
This Clause provides guidelines for selection of appropriate loading combinations for the
design of overhead power lines.
Typical load combinations for all structures are described in Section 7 of AS/NZS 7000.
However, the designer may need to consider credible loading scenarios caused by local
conditions (terrain, topography or meteorological exposures) affecting a specific line or
structure location, or that may arise from ‘special’ construction/maintenance activities,
other than those listed.
A description of each load combinations is discussed further below such that the designer
can determine the relevant cases appropriate to the overhead power line in question.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 34

7.4.2 Load combinations

7.4.2.1 General
Standard load combinations generally comprise design dead loads and one or more of the
following:
(a) Wind loading cases (normal operating condition and high intensity winds).
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

(b) Failure containment condition.

(c) Snow and ice loads.
(d) Personnel access, fall-arrest, and construction and maintenance loads.
Other less common load scenarios that may require inclusion in the load combination are:
(i) Patch wind on adjacent spans that cause differential conductor tensions.
(ii) Galloping or conductor uplift due to wind actions.
(iii) Short circuit forces.
(iv) Earthquake.
(v) Differential foundation settlement.
Serviceability loads need to be considered in particular to set electrical clearances i.e. the
insulator position on a flying angle structure will vary with temperature and wind load and
thus the deflection with load of the structure is important. Wind Loading
7.4.2.2 Line security and wind return period
The fundamental normal synoptic and high intensity wind loading criterion for overhead
power lines, namely design wind speed, is defined by the wind return period selected for
any wind region.
To establish the wind return period, the designer should ascertain the line security level and
service life. Typically, these should be nominated by the asset owner based on empirical
records of historical performance of the network. Otherwise, it may be necessary for the
designer to recommend appropriate parameters with due regard for economic cost of lost
energy, disruption to customers or property damage based on a selected probability of
failure.
NOTES:
1 The wind return period is based on a nominal 5% probability of exceeding the design wind
speed for the duration of the specified service life for a single structure site. The actual
probability of exceeding the wind speed of an overhead line comprises many structures, and
hence the risk of structural failure of that line, is far greater. The wind return period provides
only a ‘relative’ probability of failure with which to compare likely performance of similar
lines.
2 The security level applied when considering refurbishment of an existing line may be
modified based on the remaining service life required. Such an approach may assist in
reducing scope of work and project costs if upgrading structures would otherwise have been
deemed necessary.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 35 HB 331—2012

The wind load condition comprises maximum ultimate design wind speed at minimum
design ambient temperature in the particular location or region of concern. Combination of
the maximum wind and minimum temperature gives rise to the structure and conductor
design wind forces plus conductor tensions.
The most common wind load combinations are:
(A) Maximum wind and maximum conductor weight span.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

(B) Maximum wind and minimum conductor weight span.

(C) Maximum wind and conductor uplift (negative weight span).
It is important to note that in regions prone to downdraft winds that the span reduction
factor as provided in Appendix B will result in higher wind loads than those derived on the
assumption of only synoptic winds occurring.
Further detail commentary on wind loadings is provided in Clause 7.6.
7.4.3 Failure containment
7.4.3.1 General
The primary purpose of the failure containment load condition is to prevent cascade should
excessive unbalanced longitudinal tensions occur due to failure of the conductor or other
cause.
Failure containment can be achieved by a number of means:
(a) Ensuring supporting structures have sufficient longitudinal strength.
(b) Install stop structures at regular intervals.
(c) Make use of crossarm, structure or footing permanent deformation to allow relief of
the unbalanced tension to such an extent that structure collapse is prevented.
7.4.3.2 Failure containment condition
The minimum requirements specified in the O/H lines Standard requires derivation of wind
generated forces based on 25% of ultimate wind pressures and relevant number of failed
conductors dependant on structure duty. Conductor tensions derived under a residual static
load basis are nominated.
7.4.3.3 RSL—Residual static load
The overhead lines Standard permits the use of an RSL = 0.7 for phase conductors fitted to
suspension strings (i.e. I-strings) that allow significant swing upon application of the
unbalanced force. This value is based on suspension insulator string lengths in the range of
2000–2500 mm. Where greater string lengths are used on higher voltage lines this value
should be increased due to the increased dynamic effects. Typical values used at 500 kV are
0.8 or 0.9.
For other insulator types, the designer may need to consider higher RSL values where
deflection is insufficient to achieve significant relief of the tension (e.g. rigid post
insulators). Also, components such as conductor ties are likely to be subjected to a force
exceeding the nominal conductor tension due to the effect of the load impulse (impact)
immediately following a conductor fracture.
For major transmission lines in Australia and New Zealand, investigation of tower failure
events over the past 60 years has revealed that provided a RSL loading condition is
included in the design that failures can generally be expected to be contained to within 5
structures.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 36

7.4.4 Snow and ice loading

Snow and ice weather conditions create a number of effects to be considered by the
designer including—
(a) increased wind loads due to larger projected area of structure and conductor;
(b) increase conductor tension (due to weight of ice) that may cause additional
metallurgical creep;
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

(c) increase conductor sag that may compromise clearance to ground;

(d) differential ice loading on conductor that may compromise mid-span phase-phase and
phase-earthwire clearances;
(e) impact loading due to sudden release of ice loading from conductor.
(f) Differential loads on structures due to adjacent spans having different snow and ice
loading.
Appendix EE of AS/NZS 7000 sets out a detailed approach for the derivation of snow and
ice loadings for the regions impacted by these conditions
7.4.5 Personnel access, construction and maintenance loads
7.4.5.1 General
Loads should be determined for every day temperature (EDT) conditions. Maintenance and
construction loads are unlikely to affect the overall design, but may impose critical
localised loadings on crossarms and earth wire peaks, and horizontal bracing members of
tower structures.
Load action effects caused by maintenance and construction work procedures are deemed
live loads and should be magnified by a load factor of 2.0 unless otherwise specified
Maintenance and construction loads are additive to loads generated by maintenance wind
and differential conductor tensions under nominal service conditions.
Structure loads due to maintenance wind are generally insignificant; and the designer may
deem it reasonable to disregard it from maintenance and construction load cases to simplify
calculations provided a nominal allowance is provided in member capacity.
7.4.5.2 Construction and maintenance loading types
Live loads arise from:
(a) Structure erection.
(b) Conductor stringing.
(c) Maintenance access.
(d) Replacement of components using de-energised or live maintenance procedures.
(e) Temporary termination or lowering of conductors.
Typical loads for erection and maintenance procedures are given in Table 7.3.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 37 HB 331—2012

TABLE 7.3
TYPICAL MAINTENANCE LOADS

Conductor vertical load Personnel access live Conductor tension

Load case
(GC) load (Q) (TM)
Actual duty or Not applicable for
Dropped conductor on
1.5*nominal design standard load case Differential tension
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

adjacent structure
weight span (see Note 1)
Line worker + hook
General access and Actual duty or nominal ladder (or jury
Differential tension
maintenance design weight span mast) + rescue kit
(See Note 2)
Differential horizontal
Line worker + hook tension and vertical
Actual duty or nominal ladder (or jury component of conductor
Conductor stringing
design weight span mast) + rescue kit stringing tension
(See Note 2)
(See Note 3)
NOTES:
1 Dropped conductor:
If a conductor is lowered from the crossarm and does not reach the ground, a substantial increase in
weight span can be generated on adjacent structures. Before line workers are permitted to work on the
crossarm of adjacent structures, loads should be checked to ensure safe limits are not exceeded.
A dropped conductor should be considered a live load applied to crossarm to be accessed by personnel;
resulting weight span should be magnified by AS/NZS 7000 live load factor of 2.0 unless otherwise
approved.
Square rigging ultimate loads should be derived using a live load factor of 2.0 at the crossarm
maintenance attachment point and sheave attachment point on the tower superstructure.
2 Standard personnel access live loads for steel tower construction:
A maximum of two line workers working on a tower phase conductor crossarm/ earth wire peak is
generally assumed. A third line worker (less tools) may be located only on phase conductor crossarm to
assist rescue operation.
Working loads arising from personnel access:
(a) Live load on suspension crossarm = 2 × (line worker + tools) + hook ladder + rescue kit;
(b) Live load on earth wire crossarm = 2 × (line worker + tools) + rescue kit or jury mast and line
worker;
where:
(i) Standard line worker (including PPE, harness and tools) = 100 kg;
(ii) Standard hook ladder = 30 kg (vertically hung from end of crossarm apex) = 45 kg (used as bridge
from superstructure to crossarm apex);
(iii) Rescue kit = 10 kg;
(iv) Standard jury mast +line worker + tools = 200 kg;
(v) Standard dead weight of gondola + 2 × (line worker + tools) = 9 kN (applied load is doubled to allow
for balance of opposing force).
3 Conductor stringing:
Unbalanced conductor tensions arising from winching/stringing operations are applicable only to terminal
or section structures unless special measures are taken to strengthen suspension structures. If personnel
are required to access the crossarm during stringing operations, a live load factor of 2.0 should be applied
to conductor stringing tensions and resultant vertical component.
In general, it is expected that winches should be positioned a distance from the structure at least 4 × height
to crossarm from ground line on flat terrain and make due allowance for ground slope.
In addition consideration needs to be taken for imbalanced loads by any square rigging due to the position
of anchorage of rigging on the side points of a crossarm and the vertical component of the rigging on this
same point.
Generally square rigging loads applied at node points of the structure body by the purchase cable to the
winch are small and can be neglected.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 38

7.4.5.3 Man-standing loads

Man-standing loads should comprise 100 kg concentrated load multiplied by a live load
factor of 1.5 acting at any location on any member inclined <45° slope.
7.4.5.4 Fall-arrest loads
The designer should consider fall arrest loads resulting from the use anchorage of fall arrest
devices to the structural element in combination with appropriate maintenance conditions
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

for design of crossarm chord and bracing members. Fall arrest loads occurring on crossarm
apex should be additive with other maintenance conditions. Otherwise, fall arrest loads are
not coincidental with man-standing loads.
Minimum ultimate fall-arrest load (including LF) for a single line worker is 15 kN (see
AS/NZS 1891). The designer may need to consider the case of a simultaneous fall of two
line workers from ladders. In such cases, an ultimate fall-arrest load (including LF) of
21 kN applies.
Fall arrest loads may occur at the mid-span on other bracing members (including crossarm
top chord) if use is allowed for anchors or tie-off points. Such members will be permitted to
suffer limited damage (bending) provided connection capacity (bolt shear and member
bearing) is sufficient to withstand loads without fracture.
Fall arrests anchorages should be connected to dedicated anchorage points or to nodal brace
connections points. The designer should provide appropriate notes on structure drawings to
provide instruction to the contractor regarding approved fall arrest attachment points and
warnings of members that should not be used for anchorage.
7.4.6 Short-circuit forces
Short-circuit forces are only applicable to structures supporting very short spans and in
close proximity of a fault current source.
Typically, short-circuit forces are not critical to standard line structures. Susceptible
structures may include landing or substation yard structures or distribution support
structures and single phase support structures outside of switchyards.
Short-circuit forces may be the result of a fault occurring under a high wind are generally of
very short duration and should be added in combination with 0.25 maximum wind load.
7.4.7 Earthquake loads
Appendix C of AS/NZS 7000 sets out specific design provisions for assessing seismic
loads.
Structures of high mass or those supporting an elevated concentrated mass such as pole-
mounted transformers are susceptible to the effect of earthquake loads.
Pile foundation systems embedded in soils susceptible to liquefaction may be subjected to
lateral forces. This may then lead to excessive differential foundation movement and
distortion of the structure. Accordingly, the design should be compatible with design
foundation settlement limits.
Typically, earthquake loading is not additional to other loading events.
7.4.8 Differential settlement of structure foundations
The designer should consider potential action effects from differential settlement and
reactive clays.
In susceptible conditions, differential settlement may need to be considered in combination
with the normal operating wind load case.
The designer should consider action effects that may arise from differential settlement of
structure footings.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 39 HB 331—2012

In general, poles and lattice towers with bolted connections are not prone to damage from
differential settlement. Structures that may be susceptible to this action affect are towers of
welded construction or those with footprints <7 m square.
Good foundation design practice is to specify <10 mm maximum differential settlement of
foundation elements for all structure types during construction and service life of the
structure.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

7.4.9 Fatigue
Fatigue should be considered for structural components subject to a high number of stress
reversals or susceptible to resonance due to high frequency wind gust effects.
Fatigue is not generally a significant design consideration for poles or free-standing towers.
Other structures and components that may require consideration of fatigue include:
(a) Fluttering of guy ropes or slender structure bracing with l/r > 250.
(b) Tall, slender masts with natural frequency <1 Hz.
(c) Guyed structures.
Common design practice to manage fatigue is to apply a lower stress limit to the component
or make provision to prevent resonance by use of stiffer members.
7.4.10 Serviceability loads
7.4.10.1 General
Under serviceability loading limit state conditions the overhead line supports should have
no discernible deflections over the life of the structure. Pole structures subject to sustained
load and bending will deflect over time due to creep within the material. Stress levels need
to be limited to the values set out in the relevant sections of AS/NZS 7000.
7.4.10.2 Load factors and tolerances
The purpose of load factors and material capacity factors is to provide a ‘design tolerance’
to account for uncertainties in the magnitude of resultant member stresses arising from
nominal design actions and variations in materials and detailing of structural components.
Factors affecting the forces applied to a structure vary from actual service loading
conditions due to construction tolerances arising from:
(a) Fabrication and construction variations.
(b) Misfit and eccentricities of structural members and connection.
(c) Over-tension of conductor at installation to compensate for long-term creep.
(d) Stringing procedures.
(e) Instrument and field measurement errors of as-built conductor tension.
(f) Conductor material variations.
(g) Equipment.
The new Standard has allowed for the reduction of unbalanced conductor tension load
factor from 1.5 to 1.25. This provision will give rise to a significant reduction in the cost of
angle and strain structures.
However, a substantial proportion of the load factor can be ‘consumed’ by conductor
over-tension for long-term creep allowance alone (10%–12% or more increase in tension
over the nominal maximum design tension is typical for large conductor sizes).

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 40

Accordingly, the designer should ensure adequate controls are implemented to manage all
potential errors or variations arising throughout the design and construction phases (e.g.
field measurement errors of as-built conductor tension) within the specified allowance.
Otherwise, a higher load factor may need to be adopted.

7.5 SIMPLIFIED WIND LOADING APPLICATION TABLE

Table 7.4 sets out simplified summary of wind loads for various line components and limit
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

states.

TABLE 7.4
WIND LOADS FOR COMPONENT LIMIT STATES

Overhead line Line component or Applicable wind loads

system parameter Ultimate Serviceability Everyday
Support system Structures—detailed
(structures and Ultimate wind
procedure
foundations)
Deflection limit at
Pole—detailed procedure Ultimate wind
serviceable wind
900 Pa in Region Deflection limit at
Pole—simplified method 0 Pa
A and B 300 Pa
Electrical system Clearances—low wind 60 to 100 Pa
Clearances—moderate wind 100 to 300 Pa
Clearances—high wind 500 Pa
Clearances—maintenance 60 to 100 Pa
Conductors Ultimate or 900 Pa 500 Pa 0 Pa
Insulators—tension Ultimate or 900 Pa 500 Pa 0 Pa
Insulators—vee string Ultimate wind
Insulators—post or pin Ultimate wind
Fittings Ultimate wind

7.6 COMMENTARY ON APPENDIX B—WIND LOADS

7.6.1 Australia
The provisions in this Clause are a major departure from the previous C(b)1 and
AS/NZS 1170.2 in the definition of wind regions. It acknowledges that most wind damage
in Australia and New Zealand to the overhead line networks occur during severe
thunderstorms and provides a more reasonable interpretation of wind regions based
performance of overhead line networks over a number of years.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 41 HB 331—2012

M cD o nne l Cre e k
DARWIN Weip a Moreton

Co ok tow n
Cairns
Bro ome 20 0 k m
20 0 k m Tow ns v ille
B owen
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Croydon Mack ay
Ro ck hampton
O nslow Bundab erg
Zone II - Conve c tive dow ndraf t s only
Mar y b orough
Carnar von 25°
B R ISBAN E
G r af ton
G eraldton Coff s Harb our
PER T H
SYDNE Y
20 0 k m
AD EL AID E
MELBOURNE
Zone III - Sy noptic and conve c tive

Zone I - Sy noptic winds only H O BAR T

FIGURE 7.1 WIND REGIONS FOR AUSTRALIAN DESIGN WIND GUST TYPES

Figure 7.1 (Figure B1 of AS/NZS 7000) shows a zoning map to determine which storm type
should be considered in design for wind. On the mainland, the regions on this map are
delineated by a boundary 200 km from the smoothed coastline. This contrasts to the
multiple narrow 50 km wide zones in AS/NZS 1170.2 for the near coastal areas. Wind
velocities are selected from AS/NZS 1170.2 as appropriate to the security level selected for
the relevant location and wind zone required in AS/NZS 7000, Figure B1.
This leaves some latitude to the designer to select the V50 value for a selected Security
Level as required in Section 6 of AS/NZS 7000.
For example in Zone 1 for Australia where cyclonic events occur AS/NZS 1170.2 provides
for wind zones C, D and B. Recent experience suggests that these arbitrary 50 km zones are
not relevant to severe Category 4 and Category 5 cyclonic events as the storm damage paths
have been observed to extend 100 km inland over a width of some 20 km. In these cases it
would be appropriate to select a V50 value from region C.
For the remainder of the non cyclonic regions within Zone 1 such as New South Wales
coastal area, only one V50 value is provided, but a higher return period value may be
adopted in some local areas where regular storm damage occurs.
For example in the coastal area immediately north of Sydney or the south east Queensland
regions, it might be prudent to adopt a V100 value or a higher security level as appropriate,
in view of the relatively high frequency of severe thunderstorms.
It should be noted that the selection of the regional wind speed is relevant to the line’s
location, and care needs to be exercised where standard designs are applied to multiple
sites. Where an overhead line is of significant length, variations in wind loading may be
required as the line passes through differing wind exposure situations.
For example, a line emanating from a coastal substation in a cyclonic region passing inland
over a coastal range to an inland supply point could pass through three significant design
wind climates that should be incorporated in the line design.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 42

7.6.2 New Zealand

Apart from the probability in some areas of turbulent effects near large mountains the
majority of New Zealand is within Region A7 of AS/NZS 1170.2. Some caution needs to be
applied to locations on hills in close proximity to sea coasts.
7.6.3 Synoptic wind regions
In Clause B3 of AS/NZS 7000 reference is made to wind direction multipliers Md as
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

provided in Table 3.2 of AS/NZS 1170.2 being taken as 1.0 to provide for multiple changes
in direction of the route of overhead lines. In some cases it could be argued that where a
line route is in a predominate direction for its entire route and the line design is unique for
that line only, that consideration be given for a lower value direction multiplier. However,
line designs once created, usually have repeat applications on other line projects which
could have multidirectional characteristics and extreme caution is required if reduced
values of Md are used.
Cyclonic wind amplification factors Fc and Fd provided in AS/NZS 1170 are to be taken as
1.0 for all overhead lines, based on performance of overhead lines in cyclonic areas over
time. These factors are provided in AS/NZS 1170.2 to apply additional security due to some
uncertainty with wind velocities in the light of the recent incidence of several major
Category 5 events.
Performance of major transmission lines in these regions over the last 50 years has been
very good, despite some structure failures occurring. Distribution line network failures in
such extreme events occur regardless of magnitude of wind velocities primarily as a result
of airborne vegetation and building debris. Hence the value of 1.0 has been applied for all
lines in these areas.
7.6.4 Downdraft wind regions (Australia Zone II and New Zealand Region A7)
AS/NZS 7000 provides for all structures to be designed for a minimum design wind return
period. The wind return periods are selected from Table 6.1 based on the design working
life and line security level. The wind return periods are used to select applicable 3s gust
regional wind speeds from AS/NZS 1170.2.
Downdraft winds are the predominate wind that governs the design of overhead lines in
Australia with the exception of cyclonic coastal regions. The wind velocities provided in
AS/NZS 1170.2 include this type of event.
The important aspect that is different is the span reduction factor when compared to that
applicable to the larger scale synoptic wind gust events. Downdraft wind gusts are
relatively narrow and when they strike the ground observations of vegetation damage
suggests a burst swath varying from 100 m up to 1000 m in width being common
occurrences during more severe thunderstorms and hence the wind can envelop one or more
spans simultaneously.
Figure B6 of AS/NZS 7000 provides a Span Reduction Factor (SRF)
Terrain Height Multiplier Mz, cat for the common range of structure in open terrain and
heights <50 m is 1.0.
7.6.5 Tornadoes
AS/NZS 7000 identifies that these events do occur in some parts of the country but that
they are relatively rare random events and of low intensity <F2 strength when compared to
those in United States of America and Argentina. Unless a line has a very high security
requirement, it is recommended that no special loadings be generally considered.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 43 HB 331—2012

7.6.6 Wind pressures

7.6.6.1 General
For distribution overhead lines a simplified approach to wind loadings can be applied
particularly as most lines are located in Category 3 or Category 4 exposure and significant
shielding from vegetation and structures occurs.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

The basic regional wind pressure (pb) as selected from Table 7.5 below for the relevant
wind region from AS/NZS 1170.2 and limit-state being considered and ps and pu represent
the corresponding basic pressures for the serviceability and strength limit-states,
respectively.

TABLE 7.5
BASIC REGIONAL PRESSURES

Geographic region Basic regional pressures (kPa) for limit states

Country
(See Note 1) ps (see Note 2) pu (see Note 2)
I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII 0.7 1.2
New Zealand
W 0.7 1.4
A 0.9 1.5
Australia
B 0.9 2.2
NOTES:
1 Geographic regions are shown separately for New Zealand and Australia, the symbols for each region
being those given in the respective wind-load Standards.
2 The basic regional wind speeds, from which the basic pressures are derived, do not differ greatly from
one region to the next in New Zealand. To simplify this, the regions have been grouped around two
values, namely 45 m/s and 48 m/s.

7.6.6.2 Wind pressures on lattice steel towers

AS/NZS 7000 provides detailed guidance on the derivation of wind loadings on structures.
An important issue to consider is the angle of incident of the wind. Studies have shown that
for a square based tower an angle of incidence of 22.5° to the plane at right angles to the
direction of the line will be critical for the design of main tower leg members.
Drag factors for a range of Solidity Ratios are provided in Table B1 of AS/NZS 7000. Care
needs to be taken in calculation of these rations to ensure adequate allowance is made for
connection gusset plates and actual member sizes used, particularly on compact tower
superstructures and beams on horizontal configuration single circuit towers.
7.6.6.3 Wind pressure on poles
Many utility poles have ancillary items attached to them either in a temporary or permanent
capacity. This can include banner support brackets, banners, cable television boosters, and
communications cables.
Where these items are added at some time after the initial overhead line was constructed,
support structures need to be reviewed to ensure that public safety margins are not
jeopardised.
7.6.6.4 Wind pressures on conductors
The Span Reduction Factor for each wind climate region is a significant issue for design of
structures. In Australia in wind Zones II and III and most parts of New Zealand the
designer needs to consider both downdraft SRF as well as synoptic SRF.
When downdraft conditions apply a SRF of 1.0 is recommended for spans less than 200 m.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 44

7.6.6.5 Wind pressures on insulators and fittings

While this is standard design consideration, allowance needs to be made for any other
devices and apparatus that may be provided on conductors. Items such as aerial markers at
regular intervals along a conductor or earth wire spans near feeder and waterway crossings
and airports, temperature transponders, and surge arrestors, need to be considered.
Retrospective installation or aerial markers may justify design checks particularly where
placed on earth wires.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

7.6.7 Topographical effects

The following information is provided for guidance in the design layout of overhead lines.
Reference should be made to CIGRE TB 256 [1] for detailed design methods where
required.
AS/NZS 1170.2 provides general rules for speed-up of winds over hills and escarpments.
There are however limitations for the application of these general rules for treating extreme
terrain roughness, predominate hill forms and high mountainous escarpments, that can be
encountered in the siting of an overhead line route.
In particular closer attention needs to be given to the effects on wind speeds in more
varying terrain where the roughness characteristics change significantly over short
distances, down to the scale of an overhead line span; topographic generated features such
as corner effects along the foot of mountains and hills; funnelling effects in valleys or in
between hills; vortex formation behind steep terrain as well as other effects that may cause
significantly increased wind speeds in the local terrain.
Such topographic features may have length scales ranging from a hundred metres up to
several kilometres.
Experiences from overhead line collapses and damage to buildings and other structures
during the last fifty years, have revealed that many of these effects were neither known of at
that time nor taken into account by designers.
Local wind speeds can be reduced or increased due to the topography.
In fluid dynamics when the wind is reduced in some places, it will likewise be increased in
other places in order to comply with the Equation of continuity. Such increases are often
found in places like—
(a) over hill crests;
(b) near sharp edges (escarpments) exposed to high level winds over surrounding terrain;
(c) on the side of hills and mountains ‘corner effect’;
(d) in valleys or fjords where the airflow may be compressed locally ‘funnelling effect’;
(e) motor formation behind a mountain; and
(f) behind steep mountain sides (or edges) where particular turbulence may be formed
‘vortex streets’.
(g) turbulence generation behind steep hills and ridges.
In complex terrain, it is often experienced that wind speeds on the leeward side of a steep
mountain or hill may be significantly higher than they are on the windward side. This may
occur both on—
(i) the leeward side of a rounded mountain ridge perpendicular to the wind; and
(ii) behind singular hills with steep slopes on the windward side.
Typical areas for such phenomena are within and on the downwind side of high mountain
ranges.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 45 HB 331—2012

The same effects are also frequently found on the downwind side of a major mountain or
isolated hill ridges of even smaller scale.
The occurrence of the second phenomenon, see Item (b), is not as well-known as the first,
mainly because of more limited extensions of each hill, and the possible lack of recent
reported wind damage. Effects of this kind are generally known as ‘rotors’ and ‘vortex
streets’.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

The distribution of wind velocity with height is known to be significantly different in

narrow windstorms such as severe thunderstorms than in fully developed gales or cyclones.
Physical and numerical modelling of thunderstorm downdrafts have shown that there is a
maximum wind speed developed between 0.3 and 0.6 delta above ground. Where delta is
the height at which the velocity reaches half its maximum value. Above this height the
velocity has been found to drop off markedly.
These studies indicate that a structure approximating a 50 m–70 m tower will be fully
loaded over its height if impacted by these high wind gusts.
These studies have also examined the speed up effect that occurs over hills and ridges. This
speed up is usually accounted for by using a topographical multiplier Mt, which is the ratio
of speed at a height over the feature to the speed at the same height in flat terrain. Holmes,
(See Paragraph A3, reference [20]) investigated a single hill of slope 0.25 and found that
the speedup on the crest was a maximum of 1.2 near ground and decreased linearly to an
effective height of 100 m above the crest of the hill.
Studies by Letchford, (see AS/NZS 7000 Paragraph A3, reference [21]) on embankments
with slopes from 0.2 to 0.6 found similar results with a slight increase for the steeper
ridges. This later work recommends, in the absence of further data, a value of
Mt = 1 + slope to be adopted and be applied at a height of 10 m above the ridge where the
slope exceeds 0.10.
7.6.8 Escarpments
Observations of high wind damage during tropical cyclones in Northern Queensland
indicate that speed up effects can also occur during high winds on the upper slopes of
coastal mountain range escarpments, crest of escarpments. Analysis of damage patterns
suggest a speed up of 1.2 × basic gust wind velocities can frequently occur. The upper level
of amplification of this speedup is dependent on the escarpment slope profile, height and
basic wind velocity. AS/NZS 1170.2 provides for values up to 1.71.
Overhead lines traversing an escarpment need to be carefully evaluated and have structures
positioned to avoid as far as possible, these potential extreme gust zones immediately below
the escarpment edge, and in the zone immediately behind the crest. If siting cannot be
avoided then stronger structure types should be assessed.
Structures located on the slopes of escarpments and subject to the speed up effects also
need to accommodate the potential for resonance caused to the structure by localised wake
turbulence from terrain variations. Tower failure investigations carried out by Prof A.
Davenport, (see AS/NZS 7000 Paragraph A3, references [23] and [24]) in Hong Kong
confirmed that earthwork benching to enable towers to be constructed created vortex
shedding during a Typhoon wind storm that resulted in severe resonance of tower members
and resultant fatigue failure of towers.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 46

7.7 LOCAL EFFECTS

7.7.1 Channelling effects
Where windstorms have the potential to track within a frontal weather system over
relatively flat to undulating land, they normally travel in a predominate direction.
However, thunderstorm winds generated from such systems occur as outflow winds or as
isolated wind phenomena such as down bursts or severe downdrafts, and are normally
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

characterized by narrow damage paths with widths up to 2000 m at ground level.

When these high intensity wind gusts (with velocities ranging from 30–60 m/s) approach
local mountains, the wind flow patterns may be significantly modified and can be
channelled and redirected.
Placement of structures within predominate features such as gaps between mountain ridges,
in narrow river valleys through mountainous zones, and on low ridges and plateaus within
higher mountain zones can be severely affected.
Velocity speedup, local turbulence and wind eddies can have complex effects on structure
wind loadings.
Evidence from transmission line tower failures within a narrow valley between 500 m high
mountain ridges in Queensland, during a severe thunderstorm downburst has indicated
speedup effects of 30% at 10 m reference wind velocities and possible high turbulent
effects at 30 m height above the valley floor. Wind gust directional changes of 45° were
also observed.
7.7.2 Funnelling effects
High intensity wind flows along valleys provide directional control of wind flow patterns.
Where there is a narrowing of these valleys, such as towards and at the valley head, there is
the potential for wind speed up effects to occur. Studies for wind turbine sites indicate
velocity speeds can increase typically up to 20% above the crest.
In a similar way to the channelling effects of valleys, converging mountain ranges and
passes have a similar effect on wind velocities. Structure sites located within narrow passes
need to be carefully considered.
7.7.3 Katabatic wind effects
In many high mountainous regions, down drafts of cold air from high plateaus, ice and
snow regions, and from high altitude airflows because of large scale temperature inversion
or draw down effects from weather systems, can occur.
These are sometimes more pronounced in some falling valleys from these mountainous
regions and wind velocities up to 60 m/s have been recorded.
These valley areas are in most cases denuded of vegetation and have normally never been
used for residential purposes. Where vegetation has survived over time, evidence usually
exists of wind effects to plant growth.
Generally this type of wind occurs for extended periods with the potential to significantly
damage any structure placed within its path.
7.7.4 Extensive fetch distances
Overhead line structure placement often needs to occur on elevated positions where the line
route passes over low ranges or around other significant topographical features.
Such positions are more exposed to any approaching significant windstorm and in some
cases the terrain at the elevated site may be Category 2 even though the immediate local
terrain could appear to be Category 4. (Reference AS/NZS 1170.2.)

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 47 HB 331—2012

Consideration should be given to providing increased structure design wind loadings, or

strength for such situations or reducing its wind span utilisation. Air turbulence near
airports
Overhead lines located in close proximity to the flight paths of major airport runways may
be subject to wind turbulence effects from some types of aircraft during take off. Rotating
vortexes have been found to spin off the wingtip zones of the aircraft and cause clashing of
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

conductors as these turbulent effects impact lines. Measures to address these effects include
an increase of phase spacing or shortening of span lengths.
This is an informative section of Appendix B and is based on localised performance of lines
over time, and these details provide application guidelines to be considered during the line
layout process in particular to minimise potential risks of wind overload due to
topographical influences. In locations where a structure position cannot be relocated to
avoid a high risk situation then a higher duty/strength structure is usually the simplest
option.

7.8 REFERENCES
[1] Current Practices regarding Frequencies and Magnitude of High Intensity Winds
CIGRE TB 256.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 48

S E C T I O N 8 S U P P O R T S

8.1 POLE STRENGTH AND DEFLECTION DESIGN

The recommended limit state wind pressures for distribution designs for a typical life of
50 years in Region A are:
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Ultimate Loads (WN):

(a) 900 Pa to conductor.
(b) 1200 Pa for round rough pole with other attachments (Cd = 1.3).
(c) 900 Pa for narrow face of I section column (Cd = 1.0).
For other regions and for other type poles and equipment with other drag co-efficients, refer
to Appendix E of AS/NZS 1170.2.
These wind pressures allow for span reduction factors, drag factors and terrain Categories 2
to 4.
For stayed poles, the vertical loads due to the stay reaction forces need to be taken into
account.
φ Rn > Wn + 1.25Gc + 1.1Gs + 1.25 Ft
For stayed poles with long length and small diameter, the buckling failure mode of the pole
should be considered. Consideration should also be given to the P delta effects should they
occur. The Euler buckling failure equations can be found in the relevant codes (e.g.
AS 1720).

8.2 SERVICEABILITY LIMITS

Sustained Everyday tension loads on angle and termination poles
(a) 0 Pa for conductors.
(b) 0 Pa for round surfaces such as poles.
Deflection limits for maintenance and clearances
(i) 100 Pa for conductors.
(ii) 300 Pa for round surfaces such as poles.
A deflection serviceability limit will apply to concrete poles which may crack under load.
The maximum crack width is typically in the range 0.1 mm–0.3 mm (refer to AS/NZS 7000,
Paragraph D3.7).
A maximum deflection limit of 5% of the above ground pole length applies for all poles.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 49 HB 331—2012

S E C T I O N 9 F O U N D A T I O N D E S I G N

9.1 GENERAL
AS/NZS 7000 establishes some important principles for acceptable design methods
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

associated with overhead line footings and their foundations.

While several alternative approaches can be used for the design of footings and the
interpretation of the foundation conditions, the designer should exercise sound engineering
judgment in determining which method is most appropriate for AS/NZS 7000 of
construction required.
When designing overhead line foundations, the designer also has the option to design each
footing for site-specific loadings and actual subsurface conditions or to develop standard
designs that can be used at sites within application guidelines for various possible sub soil
conditions.
Reference is also made in AS/NZS 7000 to relevant references for design methods such as
IEEE Std 691-2001 ‘Guide for Transmission Structure Foundation Design and Testing’.
Reference could also be made to American Society of Agricultural Engineers
ANSI/ASAE EP486.1.

9.2 GEOTECHNICAL PARAMETERS OF SOILS AND ROCKS

AS/NZS 7000 provides some typical detailed information on a range of soil types that may
be encountered on any overhead line in Tables L1 to L4.
On major transmission lines it can be expected that a higher level of specialist engineering
will be applied to the geotechnical design of footings and their foundations and hence some
form of subsurface investigation could be expected to be carried out along the easement of
transmission lines, to obtain geotechnical parameters required to design the transmission
structure footings. However this may not always be practical and some simplified
assessments may be required to establish some indicative yet conservative parameters.
Table L4 of AS/NZS 7000 can be used in the absence of more detailed site information as a
conservative guide. The values in Table L4 are based on research data and pull out tests on
test piles, and their use should be assessed against any known properties from soil tests for
a particular region or site.
The method that is adopted for design and the application of assumed soil properties ,
should take into consideration the expertise and experience of the on-site construction
supervisor, boring machine operator and any full time network owner inspector utilised on
site.
In distribution line construction simple subsurface application design guidelines are
commonly applied, except for the heavier steel or concrete pole construction sometimes
used on special aesthetic lines and sub transmission type lines. In the latter case a higher
level of engineering design usually can be expected.

9.3 FOOTING DESIGN OF DIRECTLY EMBEDDED OVERHEAD LINE POLES

FOR LATERAL LOADS AND MOMENTS
9.3.1 General
The Brinch Hansen methodology provided in this Clause and other methods referenced such
as Broms ASCE 1964, while theoretically applied in some areas for major pole or single
bored pier footings they are not commonly used for directly embedded pole type
distribution overhead line construction, as they require a level of engineering that is not

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 50

always available to that sector of the electricity supply industry and in particular to
distribution lines.
In addition simple design methods have been in use for distribution pole overhead lines
throughout Australia and New Zealand and overseas for many years and these overhead
lines have performed well over time. This suggests that either the design loadings have not
generally reached the failure limit state at a particular structure such as to cause failure or
that the footing design methods adopted have been conservative.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

There are three commonly used methods as follows:

(a) American Society of Agricultural Engineers ANSI/ASAE EP486.1.
For the simple unrestrained top pole, see Figure 9.1.

P
Ma
G ro un d sur f a ce Va

S o il fo r c e s
do
d

R ot atio n a x is
Pos t
Z X

S o il fo r c e s Y

Fo oti n g

FIGURE 9.1 PRESSURE DIAGRAM

This design method utilizes two soil assumptions. First, it is assumed that the soil
resistance to deformation is proportional to displacement for the range of
deformations used in design. Secondly, it is assumed that the resistance to
deformation increases linearly with depth below the ground surface. This increasing
resistance to deformation is due to the confining pressure of the soil overburden. For
each case, the maximum soil pressure is limited to the allowable lateral pressure.

⎛ 8Ma ⎞
6Va + ⎜ ⎟
⎝ D ⎠
Sb
where
b = effective width of the pole in the soil perpendicular to the direction of
movement, (m)
d = minimum pole embedment depth to resist applied forces with a
maximum soil pressure of S, (m)
Ma = moment applied to foundation at ground surface, (kN.m)

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 51 HB 331—2012

S = allowable lateral bearing soil pressure, per unit of depth including

increases, (kPa/m)
Va = shear force applied to foundation at ground surface, (kN)
(b) Empirical Design Formula
This method is based purely on the height above ground for a given pole diameter at
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

ground level and has no direct relationship with the loads applied to the pole.

T ip
dt
Assumed
tip l oa di n g
p o s i ti o n

hr L
A s s u m e d c r i ti c a l c r o s s s e c ti o n fo r
d e s i g n d gl

G r o u n d l eve l R efe r t a b ul ate d Ul ti m ate b e n di n g

20 0 m m m o m e nt c a p a c i ti e s Ta b l e s F4.1,
dg
F4. 2 a n d F4. 3 of AS / NZS 70 0 0.
LGL
Po l e p l a nti n g d e pth s e e c o m m e nt s o n
Butt A p p e n di x L of AS / NZS 70 0 0.
db

FIGURE 9.2 FOUNDATION DESIGN BY EMPIRICAL BASIS

The embedment lengths LGL are based on a simplified method, as defined in the two
Equations below and relate purely to pole height above ground hr, see Figure 9.2.
For poles where the height from the ground line (GL) to the conductors is less than
18 m, the embedment length is calculated by Equation 9.2.1, with a maximum of
3.6 m. For longer poles, up to 21 m in height, the embedment length is calculated by
Equation 9.2.2, with a maximum of 4.8 m.
LGL is determined as follows:
LGL = Min[(1 + 0.1 × hr) × (dg/250),3.6] for hr < 18 …9.2.1
LGL = Min[(1 + 0.1 × hr) × (dg/330),4.8] for hr ≥ 18 …9.2.2
where
LGL = min. embedment depth, in metres
hr = height from the ground line to the conductors, in metres
dg = diameter of the pole at the ground line (GL), in metres
Table 9.1 gives numerical values for the planting depths for the common range of pole
dimensions.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 52

TABLE 9.1
MINIMUM EMBEDMENT DEPTH (LGL), m

Pole
diameter Height from GL (ground line) to conductor, m
at GL
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

mm 6 7.5 9 10.5 12 13.5 15 16.5 18

150 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.3
175 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.8 1.9 1.5
200 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1 1.7
225 1.4 1.6 1.7 1.8 2.0 2.1 2.3 2.4 1.9
250 1.6 1.8 1.9 2.1 2.2 2.4 2.5 2.7 2.1
275 1.8 1.9 2.1 2.3 2.4 2.6 2.8 2.9 2.3
300 1.9 2.1 2.3 2.5 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 2.5
325 2.1 2.3 2.5 2.7 2.9 3.1 3.3 3.4 2.8
350 2.2 2.5 2.7 2.9 3.1 3.3 3.5 3.6 3.0
375 2.4 2.6 2.9 3.1 3.3 3.5 3.6 3.6 3.2
400 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.3 3.5 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.4
425 2.7 3.0 3.2 3.5 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6
450 2.9 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.8
475 3.0 3.3 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 4.0
500 3.2 3.5 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 4.2
550 3.5 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 4.7
600 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 4.8

(c) ASCE Method (The method is outlined in AS/NZS 4676)

This method also assumes soil pressures increasing linearly below ground surface and
calculation of embedment depth is based on ultimate limit design principles, see
Figure 9.3.
The assumptions made are:
(i) The centre of rotation of the footing as located at two thirds of embedment
depth below the ground surface.
(ii) The vertical distribution of bearing pressure above the centre of rotation is in
the form of symmetrical parabola with its axis of symmetry located at one third
of the embedment depth below the ground surface with its maximum value
taken as 1.5 fb.
(iii) The vertical distribution of the bearing pressure below the centre of rotation is a
skewed parabola for which the resultant horizontal reaction force is located at
eight ninths of the embedment depth below ground level. The method relies
primarily on varying the embedment depth and its projected area to engage the
required resistance of the foundation to overturning and sliding.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 53 HB 331—2012

Hr

hp
hr
fbv
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

D/3
2D/3
R1
D
D/9 
Pivot d e pth
R2

(a) Fo r c e s a n d r e a c ti o n s ( b) Pr e s s u r e di s tr ib u ti o n

FIGURE 9.3 FORCES ON FOOTINGS AND FOUNDATIONS (VARIABLE EMBEDMENT)

9.3.2 Serviceability limit state

Table 9.2 has been prepared using a simple broad classification of soil types, with bearing
strengths based on degree of firmness or resistance to indentation. This can be readily
assessed on site by simple standard penetrometer test (AS 1289.6.3.1) at the appropriate
depth. The boundaries between the classes are in fact quite arbitrary but correlate well with
permissible bearing stress values quoted in the technical literature.

TABLE 9.2
BEARING STRENGTH OF SOILS AT THE SERVICEABILITY LIMIT STATE

Class Very soft Soft Firm Very firm Hard

Silty clays and Wet clays; silty Damp clays; Dry clays; clayey
Soil Gravels; dry
sands; loose loams; wet or sandy clays; sands; coarse sands;
description clays
dry sands loose sands damp sands compact sands
Strength
f b ≤ 60 60 < f b ≤ 100 100 < f b ≤ 150 150 < f b ≤ 240 240 < f b
(f b ) kPa
NOTE: The above values are based on foundation deformations of approximately 12 mm under serviceability
loads on building structures. For poles supporting services that are sensitive to displacements at their supporting
points (e.g. microwave antennas), this degree of deformation might be inappropriate. Therefore, suitable
reduction of these values may be necessary. This may be achieved by increasing the embedment depth, or the
footing diameter, or both, which will reduce the bearing pressures and, consequently, the deformations.

9.3.3 Strength limit state

The behaviour of soils under high levels of stress can vary from plastic for very soft soils to
brittle for very hard materials such as rock.
Consequently ultimate compressive strengths can be reliably determined only for some
rocks and certain very stiff cohesive soils.
In these circumstances, it is more practicable to adopt the ‘permissible’ bearing strength
concepts used for the serviceability limit state and extend them by suitable factoring.
Therefore, the bearing strength for the strength limit state (fbu) should be taken as 1.5 times
the value obtained from Table 9.2.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 54

9.3.4 Shear strength

For soils with fb less than 150 kPa, the shear strength may be determined directly in a
laboratory shear-box test or by the vane test in the field. The values obtained from such
tests indicate an average shear strength value of about half the bearing strength value
obtained from a bearing plate test. Because there are a large number of variables involved,
there is a wide scatter of results although the soils may exhibit the same bearing strength.
Consequently, the shear strength of a soil should be taken as not greater than 0.4 fb where fb
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

is the value obtained from Table L1 of AS/NZS 7000 (fb. is sometimes represented as C u).
9.3.5 Design method
9.3.5.1 General
Based on the above assumptions, the embedment depth (D) may be determined from the
following equation:

3.6 H R + 12.96 H R2 + 16.2 CM

D= …9.2.3
2C
where
C = fbu.b for ultimate limit state, or fb.b for serviceability limit state
fb = the nominal maximum bearing strength of the foundation material (kPa)
fbu = 1.5fb
B = the effective width of the footing, projected on a plane perpendicular to
the direction of the resultant horizontal force acting on the pole (m)
M = the overturning moment acting on the pole at ground level (kNm)
= HR × hr
HR = the resultant of the horizontal forces acting on the pole (kN)
hr = the height above ground level at which HR acts (m)
Embedment support is most commonly achieved by boring an oversize hole to the required
depth and after installing the pole, backfilling the space between the pole and the perimeter
of the hole. Hence the nature and condition of the backfilling material becomes an
important consideration in the choice of an appropriate value for the parameter b.
The following are recommended:
(a) If the backfill is properly prepared concrete, b may be taken as the diameter of the
bored hole.
(b) If the backfill is the excavated material, b should be taken as the diameter of the pole
and, unless full recompaction of the fill can be assured, the value of fb should be
reduced from its ‘undisturbed’ value.
(c) If the backfill is cement-stabilized soil, b may be taken as the diameter of the bored
hole.
(d) If the backfill is compacted gravel or road base material b may be taken as the
diameter of the bored hole.
The physical representation of the assumptions and the relevant equation parameters are
illustrated in Figure 9.4.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 55 HB 331—2012

Hr

hp
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

hr

0. 8 5 f b u
0. 3 m

R b1

D (= k h p )

R b2

0.1 m p < 0. 8 5 f b u

FIGURE 9.4 FORCES ON FOOTING AND FOUNDATIONS (FIXED EMBEDMENT)

For poles, particularly guyed or stayed poles, the minimum plan area of the footing required
at its lowest extremity (Afb) is calculated from the following equation:
( Fv + Fgt )
A fb = …9.2.4
Fb
where
Fgt = the sum of the vertical components of the guy or stay tensions
Fv = the sum of the vertical forces acting on the pole from loads other than Fgt
fb = the nominal maximum bearing strength of the foundation material (kPa)
Fixed embedment depth:
For this arrangement, the following assumptions are made:
(i) The embedment depth (D) is a fixed proportion (k) of the height of the top of the pole
above ground level (hp) i.e. D = khp.
(ii) The centroid of area of the upper (breast) bearer is located at 0.3 m below ground
level.
(iii) The centroid of area of the lower (toe) bearer is located at 0.1 m above the bottom of
the footing.
(iv) The foundation pressure acting on the bearers is distributed uniformly over their
contact surfaces with a maximum magnitude of 0.85 fb.
Based on the above assumptions, the reaction force on upper bearer (Rb1) is given by—
( K hp + hr − 0.1) …9.2.5
Rb1 = HR
(khp − 0.4)

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 56

the reaction force on the lower bearer is given by—

R b2 = R b1 − H R ; and …9.2.6

the face areas of the bearers (Ab) are calculated from—

Ab = Rb / 0.85 f bu …9.2.7
Where the symbols are illustrated in Figure 9.4.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

9.3.5.2 Derivation of embedment formula

Referring to Figure 9.3 for static equilibrium:
(a) The sum of the horizontal forces is zero—
i.e. HR + R2 – R1 = 0
Reaction R1 = Projected width of pole times the area of the upper pressure
distribution
= ⎡4 ⎛ D⎞ ⎤ …9.2.8
b ⎢ ⎜ f bu × ⎟ ⎥
⎣3 ⎝ 3⎠⎦
4 b f bu D
=
9
(b) The sum of the moments about any point in the vertical plane containing HR and the
reactions is zero. Taking moments about the line of action of R2.
8D
HR(hr + ) – R1 (5D/9) = 0
9
Expanding and multiplying throughout by 9—
9HRhr + 8HRD –5R1D = 0
Substituting the value from (a) for R1 gives—
(4b f bu D)
9 H R hr + 8H R D − 5 D =0
9
Multiplying throughout by –9/20 and rearranging gives—

b f bu D 2 − 3.6 H R D − 4.05 H R hr = 0
Which is a simple quadratic of the form ax2 + bx + c = 0
Solving for D—

12.96( H R ) 2 + 16.2 b f bu H R h r
D = 3.6 H R +
2b f bu

Substituting C for bfbu and M for HRhr—

3.6 H R + 12.96(H R ) 2 + 16.2 CM

D= …9.2.9
2C

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 57 HB 331—2012

9.3.5.3 Tables of minimum embedment depths

Table 9.3 has been prepared from Equation 9.2.9 of for an fb value of 150 kPa and various
values of H, b and hr. Note that the tabulated depths include the additional 0.2 m to allow
for soil shrinkage in the ground line zone. As can be seen from the equation, linear
interpolation or extrapolation cannot be used for values different from those tabulated;
however, the tabulated values will be conservative for foundation materials with fb greater
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

than 150 kPa but should not be taken as less than 0.5 m.
Embedment depths for materials with a bearing strength less than 150 kPa should be
calculated directly from Equation 9.2.9 to which a further 0.2 m has to be added. Practical
considerations of foundation materials and available excavating equipment will determine
which combination of hole diameter and embedment depth that will be economically viable
at each location.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

© Standards Australia

HB 331—2012
TABLE 9.3
POLE EMBEDMENT DEPTHS FOR SOILS WITH fb = 150 kPa

Embedment depth (D) (Note 1) m, for horizontal force (H) kN

Effective height
H = 1.5 H = 3.0 H = 6.0 H = 10
h (m)
b=0.3 0.45 0.60 0.30 0.45 0.60 0.3 0.45 0.6 0.75 0.9 0.3 0.45 0.6 0.75 0.9
3.0 0.8 0.7 0.6 1.0 0.9 0.8 1.4 1.2 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.8 1.5 1.3 1.2 1.1
4.5 0.9 0.7 0.7 1.2 1.0 0.9 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.1 1.0 2.1 1.7 1.5 1.4 1.2
6.0 1.0 0.8 0.7 1.3 1.1 1.0 1.8 1.5 1.3 1.2 1.1 2.4 1.9 1.7 1.5 1.4
7.5 1.1 0.9 0.8 1.4 1.2 1.1 2.0 1.7 1.4 1.3 1.2 2.6 2.1 1.8 1.7 1.5
9.0 1.1 1.0 0.9 1.6 1.3 1.1 2.2 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.3 2.8 2.3 2.0 1.8 1.6
10.5 1.2 1.0 0.9 1.7 1.4 1.2 2.3 1.9 1.7 1.5 1.4 3.0 2.4 2.1 1.9 1.7
12.0 1.3 1.1 1.0 1.8 1.5 1.3 2.4 2.0 1.8 1.6 1.5 3.2 2.6 2.2 2.0 1.8

58
13.5 1.3 1.1 1.0 1.8 1.5 1.3 2.6 2.1 1.8 1.7 1.5 3.3 2.7 2.4 2.1 1.9
15.0 1.4 1.2 1.0 1.9 1.6 1.4 2.7 2.2 1.9 1.7 1.6 3.5 2.8 2.4 2.2 2.0
16.5 1.5 1.2 1.1 2.0 1.7 1.5 2.8 2.3 2.0 1.8 1.7 3.6 3.0 2.6 2.3 2.1
18.0 1.5 1.3 1.1 2.1 1.7 1.5 2.9 2.4 2.1 1.9 1.7 3.8 3.1 2.7 2.4 2.2
19.5 1.6 1.3 1.2 2.2 1.8 1.6 3.0 2.5 2.2 1.9 1.8 3.9 3.2 2.8 2.5 2.3
22.0 1.6 1.4 1.2 2.3 1.9 1.6 3.2 2.6 2.3 2.1 1.9 4.1 3.4 2.9 2.6 2.4
NOTES:
1 Tabulated depths include 0.2 m additional depth added because it should be assumed that for foundation materials softer than rock the top 200 mm of material
provides no resistance to the applied forces.
2 The embedment depth should be not less than 0.5 m in any soil.
www.standards.org.au
 59 HB 331—2012

9.4 ADDITIONAL COMMENT ON FOUNDATION CAPACITY OF DIRECT

BURIED POLES
9.4.1 Introduction
In setting a pole in the ground, consideration should be given to pole loadings. Pole
loadings impose both vertical and horizontal stresses on the supporting soil. The vertical
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

soil stresses result from compression loadings in the pole due to hardware and pole weight.
The horizontal soil stresses result from bending in the pole through wind and conductor
tension. For the purpose of assessing the strength of the foundation for a pole these two
components of soil stress are assumed to be acting independently.
The pole foundations should be designed to ensure adequate performance under all
reasonable loading situations including wind, snow, ice or earthquake loads.
The pole should have:
(a) Sufficient embedment depth and width to develop the horizontal resultant design load
in the soils encountered.
(b) Sufficient end bearing area to develop the vertical design load in the soils.
In addition, in some situations the designer may wish to impose a maximum deflection
requirement (e.g. urban road crossings to limit clearance reductions or poles with lines
attached to rigid structures like buildings or substations).
9.4.2 Background
History has shown that during ‘design events’, lateral pole movements have been up to
1.5 m and require significant remedial works to be carried out for many years afterwards.
The problems include:
(a) Continually creeping/moving poles (as foundations ‘yield’).
(b) Conductor clearances to ground level compromised.
(c) Damage to service lines to customers (particularly at building connection point).
(d) Damage to adjacent poles (due to redistribution of loading) and hardware (twisting).
Inadequate pole foundations are generally not obvious until some years after pole
installation (or for existing poles, after a change in pole loading).
9.4.3 Foundation limit states
For consistency with Australian Standards, the determination of design loads and the
assessment of pole capacities should be in limit state format, i.e. the poles and components
are designed using a reliability based (risk of failure) approach. The selection of load
factors (particularly for weather related loads) and component strength is based on an
acceptable risk of failure for the loading condition being considered.
There are two limit states which are applicable for the design of overhead lines:
(a) Ultimate (strength) limit state The design capacity of the pole (including its
foundations) and components exceeds the design load.
(b) Serviceability limit state The performance of the structure or components under
commonly occurring (everyday) loads or conditions will be satisfactory e.g. excessive
pole deflection, cracking of concrete poles and vibration.
This is shown below in Figure 9.5.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 60

25
Ulti mate L i mit S tate ( R H )

Fo u n d a t i o n C a p a c i t y ( k N )
20

“ Y ie ld”
l d” p oint
15
Damage Limit State (ØRH )

10
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

S e r v i c e a b i l i t y L i m i t S t a t e ( R H /3 )

0
0 200 400 600 800 10 0 0

H o r i z o n t a l D e f l e c t i o n ( m m)

FIGURE 9.5 FOUNDATION LIMIT STATES

Evaluation of foundation capacity using traditional methods gave values near the ultimate
(asymptotic) limit state, resulting in unacceptably large displacements.
9.4.4 General philosophy
For distribution poles (direct buried)—foundations fail before the pole structure (i.e. the
foundation soils will deform before the pole capacity is reached).
For transmission structures—the foundation is generally designed stronger than the pole
structure (i.e. the structure will fail first). In some cases, the strength co-ordination of pole
and foundations should be considered.
9.4.5 Methods of assessment
All of the available methods of calculating pole foundation capacity were developed for
laterally loaded piles with a relatively small amount of load eccentricity (i.e. height above
ground level of load application). Distribution poles, by contrast (refer Figure 9.6), have a
very high level of load eccentricity and so the reliability of the method of calculation
needed to be verified by a programme of measuring pole displacements and, possibly, full-
scale load tests.

GL

GL

FIGURE 9.6 LOADING ON PILE AND DISTRIBUTION POLE

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 61 HB 331—2012

The available methods of calculation are based on a condition of limiting equilibrium in the
soil (i.e. the soil is yielding everywhere), a condition that is generally reached only after
large foundation displacement and rotation, i.e. the ultimate limit state usually adopted for
design. However, most utilities desired design limit states of relatively small pole
displacements and so it was necessary to determine capacity reduction factors (0.65) to
reduce the calculated foundation capacities from limiting equilibrium criteria to the desired
limit state displacements.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

9.4.6 Site and geotechnical investigations

It is recommended for all new overhead lines to conduct appropriate geotechnical and
geological investigations, sufficient to ensure a safe, economical and practical design can
be built.
The investigations should develop the characteristics of the soils, the water table and effect
on construction and long term performance when loaded. Stability of the ground slopes also
should be considered.
Investigations could involve:
(a) A walkover survey, general data of route, the surface soils, and identification of land
stability issues and observable water tables, e.g. drains.
(b) Use of soil maps highlighting areas requiring specific investigations.
(c) Field investigations involving test pits to determine subsoil soil properties.
Any site investigations should include recommendations as to the design parameters and
any further work required (e.g. proof loading, laboratory testing etc.).
The suggested requirements for investigation are listed in Table 9.4.

TABLE 9.4
FOUNDATION INVESTIGATION REQUIREMENTS

Line importance
Foundation investigation requirements
Level I Level II Level III
Drive over route   
Walk over each site   
Test pits/scala penetrometer —  
Specific geotechnical advice required — — 

When investigation tests are required, there should be a minimum of 3 soil tests per soil
type or 1 test per 5 km of line, whichever is the greater.
Site specific foundation investigations should be undertaken in the following circumstances
when—
(i) the line importance is high; or
(ii) there are known foundation problems and a history of failures; or
(iii) there are land instability issues; or
(iv) poles are supporting aerial plant weighing more than 1000 kg.
The water table should be based on site investigations with allowance for seasonal
fluctuations. If the water table has not specifically been determined, a level of 1 m below
the ground surface could be used.
Any site investigations should include recommendations as to the design parameters and
any further work required (e.g. proof loading, laboratory testing etc.).

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 62

9.4.7 Soil testing

If little reliable soil data is not available, a programme can be put in place to map the
surface soils and measure soil properties. One method to perform this testing is the shallow
Cone Penetration Test (CPT).
Test sites are generally randomly selected across the area, approximately evenly spaced
(such as adjacent to existing poles either in the roadside verge or in the footpath). At each
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

site, a CPT penetration was conducted to a depth of 3 m (or until refusal) using a purpose
made rig.
A typical CPT plot is illustrated in Figure 9.7, which shows cone tip resistance (qc), friction
ratio and inferred soil type profile.

q C ( M PA ) D r (%) S u ( K P a)

pe

q
Ty

0
0 0

0
0
Li
0

60
80

80
40

40
4 8 12 16 20

20

20
10

16
12
0
0.0

0.6

1. 2

1. 8

2.4

3.0
10 5 0
Fr i c t i o n R a t i o (%)

FIGURE 9.7 TYPICAL CPT PLOT

The left-most trace is the tip resistance (qc) which is a measure of resistance to penetration
and thus soil shear strength. The second trace is the friction ratio (Rf) or ratio of sleeve
friction to penetration resistance which is useful for determining soil type (e.g. sandy soils
have a low friction ratio while clays and peats have a high ratio).
The first colour stripe indicates the soil type:
(a) Red ..................................................................................................................... Sand.
(b) Yellow .......................................................................................................... Silt-sand.
(c) Green .................................................................................................................... Silt.
(d) Aqua ............................................................................................................. Silt-clay.
(e) Blue .................................................................................................................... Clay.
(f) Black ................................................................................................................... Peat.
The second colour strip indicates susceptibility of the soil to liquefaction during
earthquakes
(i) Green ............................................................................................. Low susceptibility.
(ii) Red ............................................................................................... High susceptibility.
(iii) Orange .................................................................................................... Intermediate.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 63 HB 331—2012

The third trace indicates relative density (Dr) for sands and silt-sands and the fourth trace
indicates the undrained shear strength (Su) for silts and clays.
9.4.8 Soil classification and mapping
For some CPT profiles, the classification is simple. Other profiles are much more complex
with inter-bedded silts, clays, sands, and silty sands. For complex soil profiles, the
classification is based on a combination of predominant soil type and computed foundation
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

capacity (taking into account the contribution of the various layers identified in the CPT
log).
Table 9.5 gives an example of 5 types of soil classifications on a soil mapping project.

TABLE 9.5
SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS AND DESCRIPTIONS
Soil classification Description Strength group
P Peat 1
P/SC Soft silts and clays 2
SC Silts and clays 3
S Sand 3
G Gravel 4

The soil classification for each site can then be marked up on a scale map and soil class
zones and boundaries can be identified using interpolation where necessary. An example is
given in Figure 9.8.

FIGURE 9.8 SOIL MAPPING OF AN AREA

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 64

9.4.9 Foundation capacity using Brinch-Hansen (1961)

The Brinch-Hansen method* is more rigorous than the much simpler and more commonly
used method of Broms (1964)* and has the ability to consider soils with both cohesion and
friction which the method of Broms does not. A computer program developed by the ENA
called BH Pile can be used for the analysis. This program allows layered soil properties to
be considered as well as the depth to the water table.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

There are various methods used for direct buried pole foundation design and these are
covered in Table 9.7.
The Brinch-Hanson method is regarded as the superior method for pole structures, however
more simple techniques, such as that outlines in AS/NZS 4676 have been found to be
suitable for intermediate poles in firm soil and with small conductors.
Two basic types of lateral foundation analysis
(a) Coefficient of horizontal sub-grade reaction.
(b) Maximum stress method.
These methods do not allow for significant vertical loads (which reduce the lateral
capacity).
9.4.10 Foundation strength factors
The strength reduction factors used for ultimate design should meet the values shown in
Table 9.6 unless specific investigations are undertaken to justify a different value.

TABLE 9.6
STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTORS FOR
METHODS OF SOIL ASSESSMENT

Method of soil assessment Strength factor

Soil maps 0.40
Visually assessed soils from bore logs or test pits 0.50
Geotechnical analysis of soils, including
0.65
laboratory or in situ testing

The final choice of strength factor should reflect the following:

(a) Extent of redundancy in the structure.
(b) Variability of site conditions.
(c) Mode of failure.
(d) The accuracy of the design methods used.
(e) The level of construction control.
(f) Consequences of failure.

* See footnotes to Table 9.7 for details.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

www.standards.org.au

TABLE 9.7
COMPARISON OF FOUNDATION DESIGN METHODOLOGIES
Foundation design Formula Failure criteria Advantages Disadvantages Comment
Brinch-Hansen* Precise calculation 0.5°C at tip Considers: Complex, requires soil Strength factor of 0.65 appropriate.
modelling. Iterative analysis
• Multi layered soil
approach required.
properties
Considers free head
• Soils with both friction situation only. Stiff clays.
and cohesion
• Variable water table
• Variable bearing widths
Based on the ultimate lateral
soil resistance of the soils
Broms† Precise calculation 0.002–0.006 rad Relatively simple Cannot be used in complex Appropriate for non-cohesive and

65
at ultimate soils or variable shaft sizes cohesive soils. Broms suggested
Based on the ultimate lateral
capacity (i.e. non-uniform soils, strength factor of 0.7
soil resistance of the soils
water table). Not
Applicable for short and appropriate for high
long piles. eccentricity situations.
Considers both fixed and Very conservative.
free head restraint
* Based on short rigid piles, refer to paper ‘Brinch-Hansen, J. and Christensen, N. H. (1961). ‘The Ultimate Resistance of Rigid Piles against Transversal Forces,
Bulletin No 12, Geoteknisk Institut, Copenhagen, 16p’
† Based on short rigid piles, refer to paper ‘Broms, B.B. (1964) ‘Lateral resistance of Piles in Cohesive Soils.’ Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division,
ASCE Vol 90, No SM2, p27-63.
© Standards Australia

HB 331—2012
 Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

HB 331—2012
© Standards Australia

TABLE 9.7 (continued)

Foundation design Formula Failure criteria Advantages Disadvantages Comment

AS/NZS 4676* Empirical formula Unknown Relatively simple related to Caters for uniform soils and Need to assess soil prior to
Appendix L Scala penetrometer. specific configurations (i.e. calculating depth. Based on
directed buried and blocked simplifying assumptions.
only).
C(b) 1—pre 1992 1/10 pole 2D or 12 mm at Simple Based on working stress Applies to firm soil and medium
[Working Stress length + 0.6m† ground line method and FOS=4 sized conductors (≈18 mm) associated
Design] with free standing intermediate poles
up to 150 m spans, 24 m long poles.
FOS = 4.0
C(b) 1—2006 1/12 pole 2D or 12 mm at Simple Based on working stress Applies to loose sands and larger
[Limit States] length + 1.4 m (loose ground line method and FOS = 3. conductors associated with
sands)‡ intermediate poles up to 150m spans.
1/10 pole
length + 0.8 m§

66
New Zealand Pole length/6 Unknown Simple Not appropriate for weak Applies to firm soil and medium,
soils. Based on working sized conductors (≈15 mm) associated
stress method. with intermediate poles up to 120 m
spans
EPRI Unknown Simple Need to assess soil prior to
calculating depth.
CAISSON
PFAP
* Based on ASCE Manual
† Origin trace to the USA where it is used predominantly with firm clay soil types and with an original safety factor of 4. Referenced in ANSI 05.1-1979 ‘Specification
and Dimensions for Wood Poles’. Also Effect of Depth of Embedment on Pole Stability,’ Wood Preserving News, Vol X, No. 11, November 1932.
‡ Developed by Western Power for loose sand situations around Western Australia.
§ Depth increased to allow 200 mm for disturbed ground at surface.
www.standards.org.au
 Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

www.standards.org.au

TABLE 9.7 (continued)

Foundation design Formula Failure criteria Advantages Disadvantages Comment

ASCE Manual XX Unknown Simple Need to assess soil prior to
calculating depth. Based on
simplifying assumptions.
TRADA Empirical formula Unknown Simple Need to assess soil prior to
calculating depth.
RUS bulletin* Empirical formula Unknown Simple Based on working stress Need to assess soil prior to
1724E-200 method and FOS = 3 calculating depth. Based on
simplifying assumptions.
ANSI/ASAE Precise calculation
EP486.1†
Terzaghi spring Coefficient of Able to model lateral Need to use a structural Very conservative as does not
method horizontal sub-grade movement. analysis package. Too consider increasing stiffness as
reaction cumbersome increasing pile diameter.
Winkler method Able to model lateral Need to use a structural

67
movement. For large analysis package.
diameter/deep concrete pile
situations
P-y Method
* Formula from ‘Effect of Depth of Embedment on Pole Stability,’ Wood Preserving News, Vol X, No. 11, November 1932’
† ANSI/ASAE EP486.1 Shallow Post Foundation Design.
© Standards Australia

HB 331—2012
 HB 331—2012 68

9.4.11 Comparison of different methods

Previous work undertaken by others (Mayne et al, 1992) indicated that the computed
capacity of pole foundations using traditional methods varied somewhere between true
ultimate (asymptotic) limit state and what might be considered as a serviceability limit state
(refer Figure 9.9).
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Ul ti m ate L i m i t S t ate
25
Fo u n d a t i o n C a p a c i t y ( k N )

Brinch-Hansen
20 U
Ull ti
t i m ate
a te Ca p a c i t y
“ Y i e l d” p o i nt
R a n g e of
15 U
Ull ttii m a te
ate
Ca p a c i t y of Po l e

10
S e r v i c e a b i l i t y L i m i t S t a te

0
0 200 400 600 800 10 0 0

H o r i z o n t a l D e f l e c t i o n ( m m)

FIGURE 9.9 TYPICAL LOAD DISPLACEMENT PLOT

9.4.12 Brinch-Hansen method

This method has the ability to consider soils with both cohesion and friction and the effect
of the water table. This method can also be readily adapted to cover the effect of the
footpath and foundation improvements such as:
(a) Blocking (breast and/or heel blocks).
(b) Concrete collars.
(c) Gravel collars.
The effective width can be assumed as follows:
(i) Gravel backfill around pole—the pole diameter at ground line.
(ii) Gravel backfill with cement stabilisation—the average of the pole diameter at ground
line and width of the cement stabilized backfill around the pole.
(iii) Concrete—the width of the buried concrete around the pole.
(iv) Blocking—the dimensions of the blocking bearing against the soil.
The critical load case for pole structures depends on the overhead line geometry. Generally,
the critical load case for inline poles is a short term wind gust perpendicular to the line
involving ‘undrained’ soil conditions. For termination poles and deviation poles the critical
load case is associated with along line tension which is a long term loading involving
‘drained’ soil conditions.
Using the Brinch-Hansen Method, the computed ultimate capacity occurs at an equivalent
foundation rotation of 2° (a lateral displacement of about 250 mm typically).

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 69 HB 331—2012

9.4.13 Full scale testing

The procedures for estimating soil properties and computing pole foundation capacities can
be checked against a number of ‘full scale’ load tests undertaken on ‘in-service’ poles
(shown in Figure 9.10).
The purpose of full scale testing is to:
(a) Refine soil parameters.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

(b) Confirm calculated capacities.

(c) Provide statistical information on capacities (for determining probabilistic values
based on risk).
(d) Evaluate strengthening methods.
(e) Provide base information for new foundation design standards.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

HB 331—2012

© Standards Australia
70

FIGURE 9.10 TYPICAL FULL SCALE TEST RIG

www.standards.org.au
 71 HB 331—2012

8 .0

7.0

6 .0
Applied load (KN)

5.0
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

4.0

3.0

2.0

1.0

0.0
0 20 0 400 600 800 10 0 0 120 0 14 0 0
L o a d d i s p l a c e m e n t f r o m s o i l m ov e m e n t ( m m)

FIGURE 9.11 LOAD DISPLACEMENT PLOT

A typical load displacement plot is shown in Figure 9.11. This plot shows that:
(i) The pole behaves linearly up to the ‘yield’ point i.e. there is no permanent offset after
the pole is unloaded.
(ii) There is significant post-elastic deformation above the yield load until the ultimate
capacity is reached.
(iii) There is a large reserve post-elastic capacity i.e. ultimate load/yield load greater
than 2. This results in unacceptably large pole deflections before the ultimate
foundation capacity of the pole is reached.
9.4.14 Stayed poles
The designer should take into account the flexibility of the stays and ground anchors and
the effects of the likely deformation on the pole structure. The ground anchors will move to
develop the full passive pressure wedge. If the amount of soil movement has not been
specifically determined, a value of 200 mm should be assumed.
The minimum embedment depth for poles with stays should be at least 2 m.
An anchor assembly should be capable of developing an ultimate strength equal to the
working load of the stay multiplied by a factor of safety of 2.5.
In difficult terrain, such as swampy or marshy ground conditions, special provision needs to
be made for anchoring. A swamp type anchor should be used which provides a large cross
sectional area blade. Alternatively where this does not provide sufficient ground purchase
then stay rods with reinforced concrete block and bulk concrete should be employed.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 72

9.4.15 Limits of simple embedment depth ‘rules of thumb’

Areas where the designer needs to consider additional embedment depths include (but are
not limited to):
(a) Low areas near streams, rivers, or other bodies of water where a high water table or a
fluctuating water table is probable. Poles in a sandy soil with a high water table may
‘kick’ out. Due to the lubricating action of water, frictional forces along the surface
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

area of embedded poles are reduced. The legs of H-frames may ‘walk’ out of the
ground if neither sufficient depth nor bog shoes are provided to resist uplift. Guy
anchors may fail if the design capacity does not consider the submerged weight of the
soil.
(b) Areas where the soil is loose such as soft clay, poorly compacted sand, pliable soil, or
soil which is highly organic in nature.
(c) Locations where higher safety is desired. This may be at locations of un-guyed small
angle structures where a portion of the load is relatively permanent in nature, or at
river, line, or road crossings.
(d) Locations where poles are set adjacent to or on steep grades.
(e) Locations where poles are set adjacent to excavations, drains, retaining structures etc.
(f) Locations where more heavily loaded poles are used.
(g) Locations where underground utilities such as water or sewer are located next to the
pole.
9.4.16 Rigid pole rotation
Assumes a rigid pole (i.e. failure is a soil bearing failure) and not a flexible pile situation
(where the critical failure occurs in the foundation itself).
A rigid pole situation can be assumed to occur when:
(a) L/D ≤10 timber.
(b) L/D ≤5 concrete.
9.4.17 Pole shape
The pole embedment depth assumes a circular section below ground level. AS/NZS 7000
embedded section width should be modified by the values shown in Table 9.8 where
excavated soils are used for backfill with minimal compaction. Where well compacted
granular and imported granular material, or cement stabilised materials are used no
modification factor applies.

TABLE 9.8
MODIFICATION FACTOR FOR POLE SHAPE

Shape Modification factor

Circular 1.00
Square/rectangular 1.18
Octagonal 1.09
12 sided polygon 1.05

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 73 HB 331—2012

9.4.18 Acceptable lateral deflection

9.4.18.1 For lattice towers
There is no limitation for deflection in ASCE MANUAL No. 72 and 52, but there is a rule
in DIN VDE 1985 for deflection limitation:
(a) (LandH) suspension towers .................................................................. 4.5% of height.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

(b) Tension and D.E. towers ...................................................................... 2.5% of height.

9.4.18.2 For poles
The poles should be designed to withstand the specified tip loading without exceeding a
pole deflection of 15% of the pole length above the point of fixity when tested in
accordance with ASCE Manual No. 72 [under short term ultimate loading conditions, this
can be expected to be less than 10% of the height above ground].
It is expected that the deflection of a standard class pole under this serviceability loading
condition (i.e. electrical clearances at 500 Pa) will be less than 3% to 5% of the height
above ground
9.4.19 Loading duration
Designers should consider the effect of loading duration on the foundation capacity,
otherwise excessive deflections may result.
(a) Earthquake and ultimate wind ........................... short term, un-drained soil conditions.
(b) Everyday conditions, snow and ice loading .............. long term, drained soil conditions
The effect of load duration on foundation capacity is difficult to assess.
Generally, long term loading on foundation soils, such as for termination poles, will cause
greater displacement for a given load then short-term loading such as wind gusts. Table 9.9
gives reduction factors for poles subject to loading.

TABLE 9.9
REDUCTION FACTORS FOR POLES SUBJECT TO LOADING

Pole top configuration Soil loading condition Reduction factor

Inline poles
Short term (<3 s) undrained 1.0
Deviation poles ≤15°
All termination poles
Deviation poles >15° Long term, drained 0.6
Poles supporting transformers

9.4.20 Foundation strengthening methods

9.4.20.1 General
Various methods have been adopted for increasing the load capacity of pole foundations
where necessary. The simplest method for increasing pole foundation capacity is to increase
the embedment depth and diameter of the pole, especially for new installations.
Other possible strengthening options include:
(a) A gravel collar around the pole.
(b) A concrete collar or a cement stabilised gravel collar around pole.
(c) Blocking about 500 mm below ground level and at the base of the pole.
(d) Blocking about 500 mm below ground level only.
(e) A combination of any of above.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 74

9.4.20.2 Grass verge

This has been taken as the Bench mark situation.
Note that poles installed in areas containing organic or very soft soils, should not be
backfilled using the existing ground.
9.4.20.3 Effect of asphaltic concrete footpath
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Pavement at the ground surface is generally not considered when calculating foundation
capacity. However, a nominal force of 1 kN can be applied at the ground line for all poles
to recognise the likely contribution from the soil surface crust.
9.4.20.4 Concrete footpath
A nominal force of 5 kN can be applied at the ground line for poles to recognise the
contribution from the concrete surfacing.
9.4.20.5 Blocking
For heavily loaded poles breast blocks (near surface) and heel blocks (near pole base) may
be added to give a substantial increase in capacity. This can be further improved by adding
cement stabilized backfill around the pole.

Po l e

G r ass ve rge
or ashphalt
To p S o il o r ashp halt

1.6 x 0. 25Ø 0. 8
B ack f ill with ( AP4 0 ) tho ro ughl y
co mp ac te d in laye r s not
e xce e do ng 150 mm
EL Breast block

AP4 0 with ce me nt r atio of 12-1

( dr y mi x ) ap p rox . 1 x 4 0 kg b ag
0. 5 x 0. 25Ø Heel

0. 23
0.6

Bk N HW

DIMENSIONS IN METRES

FIGURE 9.12 STANDARD BLOCKING DETAIL

9.4.20.6 Blocking at top only

For existing poles, it is impractical to increase the depth of embedment of the pole or add
blocking at the pole base, hence only top blocks can be added.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 75 HB 331—2012

Po l e

0. 5
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

To p S o il o r ashp halt
Reblock
B ack f ill with ( AP4 0 ) tho ro ughl y
co mp ac te d in laye r s not
e xce e do ng 150 mm

DIMENSIONS IN METRES

FIGURE 9.13 BLOCKING AT TOP ONLY

9.4.20.7 Gravel collar

For existing poles, it is impractical to increase the depth of embedment of the pole or add
blocking so gravel collars can be added, with typical details given in Figure 9.14. The
gravel collar increase the pole foundation capacity by replacing relatively weak soil near
the ground surface with higher strength material, effectively increasing the diameter of the
pole.

Po l e Po l e

0.15 M a x
Grass verge or ashphalt
Kerb
0. 8

To p S o il o r ashp halt

B ack f ill with clay s t ab ilis e d

( SAP4 0 ) thoroughly co mpac te d
in layer s not e xce e do ng 150 mm

DIMENSIONS IN METRES

FIGURE 9.14 FOUNDATION STRENGTHENING USING GRAVEL COLLAR

This can be further improved by replacing the SAP40 backfill with cement stabilized AP40
backfill around the pole.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 76

9.4.20.8 Cement stabilized backfill

A simple improvement method for new pole installations is to use cement stabilized AP40
backfill as shown in Figure 9.15. This effectively increases the diameter of the pole.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Po l e

To p S o il o r ashp halt
2.0 m AP4 0 with cem ent r atio of 12 :1 ( dr y mi x )
( app rox . 20 kg ½ b ag )

0.6 m

FIGURE 9.15 FOUNDATION STRENGTHENING USING CEMENT STABILIZED

BACKFILL

In the case of concrete backfill, any in ground services within the concrete should be
sleeved to ensure services are not trapped.
9.4.20.9 Comparison of improvement types
Strengthening methods are compared against standard construction in Figure 9.16 and
Table 9.10.

30
Fo o t h p a t h
G r a s s Ve r g e
25
Foundation Capacit y (kN)

B l o c k i n g E x i s t i n g (13 272 /4)

B l o c k i n g N e w S t a n d a r d (13 272 / 2)
20 G r ave l C o l l a r (13 272 /1)

15

10

0
0 200 400 600 800 10 0 0

Horizontal Deflection (mm)

FIGURE 9.16 LOAD DISPLACEMENT PLOT

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 77 HB 331—2012

TABLE 9.10
COMPARISON OF STRENGTHENING METHODS
Configuration Improvement method Typical load at 300 mm Typical
displacement at pole tip strength factor
Free standing Grass verge 4.0 1.0
Pole, short
Sealed footpath—chip seal AP40
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

term loads 6.0 1.2

75 mm thick
Concrete footpath 17.5 MPa,
10.0 1.5
75 mm thick
Gravel collar AP40
7.0 1.3
[1 m 2 × 0.8 m deep]
Gravel collar AP40 cement
8.0 1.4
stabilized [0.8 m deep]
Angle and Full blocking 8.0 1.0
termination
Full blocking with AP40 cement
poles, long 12.0 1.3
stabilized
term loads
Top block only 10.0 1.1

The above Table shows several significant trends:

(a) The footpath offers an improvement of 30% over poles in the grass verge.
(b) The gravel collar strengthening improves the capacity by 40% for poles in the grass
verge.
(c) The new blocking standard offers about 30% improvement over existing construction
practices.
(d) The benefit of improvements was found to decrease with increasing levels of pole
displacement.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 78

9.4.21 Sloping ground

The lateral embedment values in Table 9.3 apply only to relatively flat conditions.
If sloping ground is present, some special considerations in determining the foundation
depth are needed. Always evaluate whether or not the local geometry will affect the
foundation design. For all foundations placed in a slope or where the centre-line of the
foundation is less than 1B for the shoulder of the slope (B = width or diameter of
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

AS/NZS 7000 foundation), AS/NZS 7000 foundation depths should be increased as follows:

Slope Angle e
3 H:1V o r f l at te r < 15 d e g 0
Up to 2H:1V < 25 d e g 0. 5B
U p to 1. 5H:1V < 35 deg 1.0 B
G r e ate r th a n 1. 5H:1V > 35 deg X

GL

FIGURE 9.17 ADJUSTMENT OF EMBEDMENT VALUES FOR SLOPING GROUND

Interpolation between the values is acceptable. These types of foundations should not be
placed on slopes steeper than 1.5H:1V.
9.4.22 Trenches and excavations
The lateral embedment values in Table 9.3 apply only to relatively flat conditions. Where
poles are located near trenches and open excavations, some special considerations in
determining the foundation depth are needed.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 79 HB 331—2012

X /D e
0.0 1. 3 D
0. 5 1.0 D
1.0 0. 8 D
1. 5 0.6 D
2 .0 0. 4D
2.5 0. 2 D
3.0 0
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

X
X ≤ 3D

GL

D
L L

FIGURE 9.18 ADJUSTMENT OF EMBEDMENT VALUES FOR POLES LOCATED NEAR

TRENCHES AND EXCAVATIONS

For example:
A standard pole with 2 m embedment depth is located 2 m from a drainage ditch which is
1 m deep—
L = 2, X = 2, D = 1, then X/D = 2, from table, e = 0.4 and D = 0.4 m
New embedment depth = 2 + 0.4 = 2.4 m.
If the foundation is located on a slope that is part of a drainage ditch, the top of
AS/NZS 7000 foundation can be located at or below the bottom of the drainage ditch.
9.4.23 Land instability
Where there is potential for subsidence of the ground due to ground water changes, mining
etc., the effects on the pole and the line should be taken into consideration in the design of
the line including any mitigation measures.
Line routes over hilly areas prone to slips should be avoided.
9.4.24 Liquefaction
Liquefaction of loose saturated, cohesion-less soils (sands, silts and loose sandy gravels)
during strong earthquake shaking should be taken into consideration in the route selection
of lines.
The consequences of liquefaction should be considered, including:
(a) Foundation failure.
(b) Loss of pole or pile lateral or vertical capacity.
(c) Subsidence.
(d) Lateral spreading of slopes, embankments and ground towards river banks.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 80

The risk of liquefaction should be consistent with the other performance requirements for
the pole or line section.
9.4.25 References
Bulletin No. 12 issued by the Geoteknisk Institut (The Danish Geotechnical Institute—
Copenhagen 1961) Topics: BRINCH HANSEN, J. The ultimate resistance of rigid piles
against transversal forces, CHRISTENSEN, NH. Model tests with transversally loaded
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

rigid piles in sand.

9.5 FOUNDATION DESIGN FOR LATTICE STEEL TOWERS

Section 9 of AS/NZS 7000 provides basic design methods that have been used around the
world over many years. These methods for the most part have been the subject of
investigation and research over many years by CIGRE, EPRI and post graduate research
projects.
The design methods provided in AS/NZS 7000 are simple, conservative and provide a
reasonable minimum standard for adoption. The basic methods have been in use for many
years and have performed well and are supported by full scale and scale model load tests.
There are however other methods and refinements that have evolved based on research
reports. Not all are adequately supported by exhaustive testing programs due to the variable
nature of the soil conditions modelled and the nature of the loads being considered. Some
also imply a higher level of engineering interpretation that may have some practical
difficulty in being able to be applied during construction.
Such methods should be used with caution and should be correlated with the assumed soil
characteristics of where the research was carried out.

9.6 FAILURE RATE OF STRUCTURES

The best practice for the failure of transmission structures is 1 in 80 000 to 100 000 per
annum and for distribution structures (wood, concrete and steel poles) is 1 in 30 000 to
1:40 000 per annum.

9.7 COMMENTARY OF APPENDIX F—TIMBER POLES

9.7.1 Paragraph F1, General
This Paragraph sets out the design properties and design methods for timber poles and
components in accordance with AS 1720.1 or AS/NZS 1328.
9.7.2 Paragraph F3, Characteristic strengths and elastic moduli
Strength groups for timber poles are as given in AS 2878 and as summarised in Table 9.11.
Those in parenthesis have provisional status as specified in AS 2878.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 81 HB 331—2012

TABLE 9.11
TIMBER SPECIES, STRENGTH GROUPS, NATURAL DURABILITY RATINGS
AND BRAND MARKS

Natural
Softwood (S) or Strength group Species
Standard trade common name durability
hardwood (H) (Unseasoned) brand
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

ratings
box, coast grey H S1 1 CB
gum, grey H S1 1 GG
ironbark, broad- leaved red H S1 1 BU
ironbark, grey H S1 1 GI
Blackbutt H S2 2 BB
box, grey H S2 1* GB
box, white H (S2) 2* WX
box, white topped H S2 2* WT
gum, poplar H (S2) 3* PG
gum, salmon H (S2) 3* SA
gum, spotted H S2 2 SG
ironbark, narrow-leaved red H S2 1 NI
ironbark, red H S2 1 RI
mahogany, red H (S2) 2 RM
mahogany, southern H S2 2 SM
mahogany, white H S2 1 WM
stringybark, blue-leaved H S2 3* SL
stringybark, silvertop H S2 3 SS
tallowwood H S2 1 TW
ash, silvertop H S3 3 ST
blackbutt, New England H S3 2 NA
bloodwood, brown H S3 2* BD
bloodwood, red H S3 1* RW
box, brush H S3 3 BH
box, red H S3 2* RX
box, yellow H S3 1 YB
gum, southern blue H S3 3 BG
gum, forest red H S3 2 FR
gum, maiden's H S3 3* MG
gum, mountain grey H S3 3 MT
gum, rose H S3 3 RO
gum, Sydney blue H S3 3* SY
peppermint, broad-leaved H S3 3 BT
Satinay H S3 1 S
stringybark, brown H S3 3 BS
stringybark, messmate H S3 3 MS
(continued)

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 82

TABLE 9.11 (continued)

Natural
Softwood (S) or Strength group Species
Standard trade common name durability
hardwood (H) (Unseasoned) brand
ratings
stringybark, red H S3 3 RS
stringybark, white H S3 2 WS
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

stringybark, yellow H S3 2 YS
turpentine H S3 1 TP
ash, alpine H S4 4 AA
ash, mountain H S4 4 MA
brownbarrel H S4 4 BL
gum, manna H S4 4 MN
gum, mountain H S4 4 MO
gum, yellow H (S4) 1 YG
peppermint, narrow-leaved H S4 3 NL
peppermint, Sydney H (S4) 3 SP
gum, river red H S5 2 RR
peppermint, black H (S5) 3* BP
pine, cypress white S S5 1* WC
pine, slash S S5 4 PS
fir, Douglas (Oregon)—North America S S5 4 DF
fir, Douglas (Oregon)—elsewhere S S6 4 DF
pine, Caribbean S (S6) 4 PB
pine, hoop S S6 4 HP
pine, loblolly S S6 4 PL
pine, maritime S (S6) 4 PM
pine, radiate S S6 4 PR
pine Corsican S (S7) 4* PC
pine, patula S (S7) 4* PP
pine, ponderosa S (<S7) 4* PW
pine, Canary Island S — 4* PI
pine, long-leaf S — 4* PF
* These durability ratings are not listed in AS 5604 and have been assigned the classification in
AS 2209.
NOTES:
1 See AS 5604 for definitions of timber natural durability ratings.
2 The strength groups assigned in the above Table are those given in AS 2878 for unseasoned timber.
Provisional strength groups are shown in brackets. These are assigned in those cases where the evidence
was inadequate to allow positive grouping at the time AS 2878 was published.
3 For information on species not listed refer to CSIRO, Forest Products or state forestry authorities.

The characteristic strengths and elastic moduli for untrimmed poles that conform in quality
to the grade requirements specified in AS 2209 are as specified in Tables 9.11 and F1 of
AS/NZS 7000 unless verified by testing of samples from the same grade.
Strength groups and joint group classifications are assigned to species in accordance with
AS 1720.2.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 83 HB 331—2012

9.7.3 Clause F2, Design capacity

Using the design method set out in AS/NZS 7000 and timber pole characteristic properties
as indicated above, the following design bending strength capacities result for each strength
group and assumed ground line pole diameter.
It should be noted that the maximum bending moment will occur at a point around 200 mm
below ground level in average soil backfill conditions. This is due to several factors. Clayey
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

soils will shrink away from the pole as they dry out; the sub soil requires some distance to
provide fixity to develop restraint, and significant degradation in the zone 300 mm below
ground surface level will occur over time. In deep cracking/ reactive clays this 200 mm
allowance could be deeper unless breast logs or stabilized backfill is used.

9.8 COMMENTARY ON APPENDIX I—CONCRETE POLES

9.8.1 Design of concrete poles
Concrete poles produced in Australia and New Zealand are either designed as a normal
reinforced concrete cast product based on calculated design or as a centrifugally spun cast
product that has a proprietary design correlated and supported by extensive testing.
Some pole designs have prestressed tendons or partially prestressed tendons that provide
permanent compression of the pole element under most loading conditions and result in
most cases in a more durable pole product.
The design provisions of AS/NZS 7000 are general application clauses covering all types of
design, but more specifically to poles designed by calculation as set out in Paragraph I6.3 of
AS/NZS 7000.
The most important requirements for concrete pole designs apart from strength are concrete
durability and control of deflections and related crack widths.
Paragraph I4.2 of AS/NZS 7000, identifies the potential problem but it is a significant issue
on stayed poles or poles subjected to permanent bending moments. Even though bending
stresses may be low, concrete strain/creep over time can result in crack widths that may not
effectively autogenously self-seal. This type of cracking may take 6–9 months of exposure
to permanent load to develop discernible creep related cracking, and field experience
indicates that the creep will continue and cracks widen further with time, with the potential
for corrosion of exposed steel reinforcement. Deflection of pole elements with permanent
bending stresses should be checked and assessed for potential cracking that may exceed the
specified limits.
Paragraph I4.3 of AS/NZS 7000 requires that crack widths at the serviceability limit state
should not exceed 0.25 mm.
All concrete will develop barely measurable minute cracks and most self-seal. Crack widths
from handling stains and construction or other flexural loadings <0.25 mm are acceptable
for average exposure conditions
In addition Appendix D of AS/NZS 7000 also sets out the following crack width
recommendations in relation to design service life requirements for a range of general
exposure classifications:
(a) Width <0.3 mm .................................................. Exposure Classifications A1, A2, B1.
(b) Width <0.2 mm .................................................................Exposure Classification B2.
(c) Width <0.1 mm .................................................................. Exposure Classification C.
The crack width limit of 0.25 mm is therefore set to provide a conservative but important
serviceability standard for concrete poles. In more severe exposure sites (Classification C
particularly) other design considerations need to be taken as set out in Appendix D.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 84

Concrete cover is the other important consideration for providing concrete durability.
Paragraph I5 of AS/NZS 7000 sets out minimum cover requirements for varying exposure
conditions, reinforcing bar, concrete aggregate sizes and water absorption limits.
With the high characteristic compressive strengths that can be achieve through mix design,
concrete compaction (particularly by centrifugal spinning), the provision of high and
consistent standards of initial concrete curing will greatly enhance long and durable service
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

life of pole elements.

Water absorption testing (Appendix O) on prototype pole is essential where concrete cover
of 19 mm and less is provided. Keep in mind that with all dimensions there should be an
acceptance tolerance and ±2 mm is sometimes difficult to achieve during high mechanical
compaction of concrete and it is more than likely that at some locations on a pole element it
could result in tolerances of ±3 mm occurring, i.e. 19 mm nominal cover could be reduced
to possibly 15 mm and durability then becomes a significant issue. This means that if
concrete cover is expected to be on dimensional tolerance limit or greater, then additional
effort needs to be placed on the curing process once the pole product is stripped from the
moulds.
As an example there is some standard prestressed concrete pole products produced in Japan
that have characteristic strength of typically 60 MPa and 9 mm cover over tendons and they
are cured by full immersion in water for 10 days.
Service experience in Europe with some of the earliest centrifugally spun poles has shown
that even in cold climates with ice and snow exposure that there are some poles still in
excellent service condition after over 90 years.
9.8.2 Testing of concrete poles
Clause 8.5.2 of AS/NZS 7000 sets out load testing requirements for pole type structures.
Where large volumes of similar type/length/strength poles are in mass production these
tests form a very important check on design and consistency of manufacturing standards. In
particular it sets out the following requirements:
(a) Load testing of prototype poles may be used as an acceptable alternative to strength
calculations to verify flexural bending and shear capacity strengths for pole type
elements.
(b) Routine Sample poles should be tested to determine whether structurally similar poles
are deemed to comply with the requirements for strength and serviceability of this
Standard. Deflection characteristics of repetitive sample pole tests compared to
prototype test deflections provides a useful tool for monitoring quality of pole
product manufacture.
Prototype testing is the most important test in ensuring flexural and shear strength
characteristics of any pole and it is important in these tests to model the design loading
assumptions as close as possible.
P-delta (load/deflection) considerations are very important for concrete pole testing due to
their inherent flexibility, and if load tests are carried out in the horizontal mode then
additional loading in the longitudinal plane should be considered in order to reflect
deflected vertical self-weight mass eccentric loading stresses.
Vertical prototype load tests, see Figure 9.19, if possible, are preferred to enable
realistically model loading characteristics, but should also be accompanied by a horizontal
test if horizontal routine testing, see Figure 9.20, is carried out, so that a comparative base
line test deflection characteristic is established for production control through further
routine sample tests.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 85 HB 331—2012

Pulling
Safety/deflection poles
structure

Load cell

A
A
B C
B

C
D
D
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Distribution E
E Load cells
beams

F F
Deflection
To winch tapes

Test pole
Pulley

FIGURE 9.19 VERTICAL POLE TESTING FACILITY

Winch
Winch
R e a c to r b e a m
Anchor block
Load cell
Suppor t trolley Te s t p o l e

G r a d u a te d b e a m
for deflection Jaws
measurement Suppor t trolley

Stay? Anchor block

H e av y a n c h o r b e a m
i n s o c ke t Stay anchorage

FIGURE 9.20 HORIZONTAL POLE TESTING FACILITY

Crack development during load testing should be carefully monitored and significant or
accelerated crack width development with small load increase could signify structural
design weakness at loads below 50% of ultimate capacity.
Cracks in non-prestressed poles above 40% load capacity most likely will not close up after
release of load on test, however if the pole were to experience this level of loading in
service, the self-weight load will most likely close resultant cracks.
It should be noted that the advantage of prestressing and partial prestressing tendons in pole
designs provides control of cracking under all normal service loading conditions likely to
be experienced.
For testing of concrete poles, refer to Appendix K of AS/NZS 4676.
9.8.3 Pole manufacture related design issues
9.8.3.1 General
It is most important in the production control for concrete pole manufacture to not only
ensure consistency of the concrete mix but also in the measured volume of concrete batched
and added to the moulds to ensure design wall thickness is provided. In spun poles the
internal wall can have in part minimum fines in the surface zone and hence durability of the
internal concrete may need to be enhanced by sealing off the butt to prevent ground water
ingress.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 86

If the total internal void in circular concrete poles is sealed off top and bottom and with
through tubes for bolting, significant thermal differentials from air temperature variations
during the day will cause pressure variations internally and can cause ground water to be
pumped inside the void if any below ground opening exists.
Butt sealing of hollow poles is recommended for most applications, particularly where high
ground water tables are known to exist, or can be expected to occur after seasonal rainfall.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

9.8.3.2 Handling stresses

While AS/NZS 7000 does not cover the area of handling stresses, the normal approach
adopted is for construction and transport induced stresses be restricted to be less than
normal design stresses.
However on cross country lines, particularly in through difficult terrain and where longer
pole elements are used, transport and handling stresses can result in pole damage can easily
occur. On such line projects, flexural stresses from off road transporters, possible snagging
along the ground at very difficult sites, and lifting and erection stresses, need to be included
as a specific design loading case.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 87 HB 331—2012

S E C T I O N 1 0 E A R T H I N G

10.1 INTRODUCTION
An earthing system of overhead earth wires, earth down leads, grading rings and
counterpoise earthing addresses the following objectives:
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

(a) Ensure protective equipment will operate in faulted situations.

(b) Provide acceptable reliability (lightning performance) on the line.
(c) Control touch and step potentials around the base of the structure.
(d) Provide a conductive path for fault current.
(e) Avoid damage to properties and equipment.
The dimensioning of earthing systems considers the following requirements:
(i) To ensure mechanical strength and corrosion resistance.
(ii) To withstand, from a thermal point of view, the highest fault current as determined by
calculation.
(iii) Limit lightning induced voltages on earth down leads.
The transfer of potential by nearby metallic objects may occur due to fault currents flowing
in the earth system.
It is a desirable goal to achieve an average structure footing resistance for the line of less
than 10 Ω. This can ensure the lightning performance of a line is acceptable and ensure
touch and step potentials are at an acceptable level. The structure footing resistance can be
controlled during the construction phase of the line by installing additional earth rods or
counterpoise wires in the soil away from the structure.

10.2 DESIGN FOR TOUCH AND STEP POTENTIAL FOR CONDUCTIVE

STRUCTURES
The range of mitigation measures to address touch and step potentials are:
(a) Installation of overhead and underslung earth wire.
(b) Installation of grading ring.
(c) Reduction of footing resistance.
(d) Installing high conductivity earth wires.
(e) Installation of high resistivity surface layer (e.g. asphalt).
(f) Installation of NER or NEX on zone transformer to limit earth fault current.
(g) Connection to CMEN earthing system.
(h) Insulating base of pole.
(i) Installing a fence around conductive structure.
(j) Appropriate insulation of low voltage circuits.
For further information see AS/NZS 7000.

10.3 REPLACING A NON-CONDUCTIVE POLE WITH A CONDUCTIVE POLE

When replacing a non-conductive pole with a conductive pole, due consideration needs to
be taken to address step and touch potentials.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 88

10.4 SWER EARTHING

For public safety, a SWER high voltage earth needs to be restricted to around 20 V or less
(Queensland Code of Practice for Works – Earthing)

10.5 RISK BASED APPROACH TO EARTHING FOR AUSTRALIA

The risk based approach is covered in the ENA EG-0. Two risk based earthing examples are
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

given as follows:
Example 1: HV Distribution Earth (e.g. Pole mounted transformer, recloser, and air break
switch) in a CMEN urban area:
(a) Description:
Voltage = 11 kV
Fault current = 5000 A
Fault clearing time = 1s
Fault rate = 2 × 100 m span without earth wire at 40 faults per
100 km per year
Contacts per year = 40 for 4 s
Footwear = Standard distribution
Earthing resistance = 1Ω
Soil resistivity = 100 Ω/m
Prospective touch voltage = 1000 V (refer to ENA EG-0 and use an impedance
model of footwear and soil resistivity)
Prospective touch voltage
curve DU for 1 s clearing = 800 V
(b) Mitigation Options:
(i) Insulate earth (this is standard practice for HV earth down leads but may not be
practical for air break switches with exposed metal operating rod and handle).
(ii) Installation of NER or NEX to limit fault current to typically 1000 A.
(iii) Installation of grading ring—this would lower prospective touch voltage.
(iv) Reduce protection clearing times—at 0.5 s, the prospective touch limit is
4000 V.
Example 2: Conductive distribution pole in an urban area:
(i) Description:
Voltage = 33 kV
Fault current = 5000 A
Fault clearing time = 1s
Fault Rate = 2 × 100 m span without earth wire at 40 faults
per 100 km per year
Contacts per year = 40 for 4 s
Footwear = Standard distribution
Earthing resistance = 10 Ω
Soil resistivity = 100 Ω/m

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 89 HB 331—2012

Prospective touch voltage = 10 000 V (derived by impedance model of

footwear and soil resistivity)
Prospective touch voltage
curve DU for 1 s clearing = 800 V
(ii) Mitigation Options:
(A) Insulate pole (there have been trials on networks but no proven product is
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

available).
(B) Installation of NER or NEX to limit fault current to typically 1000 A—
prospective touch voltage reduces to 2000 V. This is still above limit.
(C) Installation of grading ring—this would lower prospective touch voltage to
around 5000 V. This is still above limit.
(D) Reduce protection clearing times—at 0.5 s, the prospective touch limit is
4000 V. The prospective touch voltage is above limit.
(E) Combination of (B) and (C)—still above limit.
(F) Combination of (B) and (D)—meets limit.
(G) Installation of underslung earth wire—this reduces prospective touch voltage to
less than 800 V (underslung earth wire is expected to reduce fault current on
stricken pole to range of 5% to 8% of previous value). This meets limits.
(H) Bond to the neutral conductor in a MEN earthing area to become a CMEN
earthed system.
(I) The installation of underslung earth wire is also effective in addressing touch
hazards on all conductive poles on the feeder.

10.6 RISK BASED APPROACH TO EARTHING FOR NEW ZEALAND

In New Zealand the risk based approach is covered in the EEA Guide to Power System
Earthing Practice and a case study is given as follows:
This case study, which involves an existing 11 kV transformer mounted on a concrete pole
located near a bus stop (see Figure 10.1), illustrates the principles of risk based earthing
design following the simplified method presented in Clause 10.6 of AS/NZS 7000. For the
purposes of this case study, transferred EPR issues have been ignored.
This pole was identified as possibly carrying an EPR risk for people using the bus stop.
The bus stop is typically used by children going to school and it can therefore be assumed
that footwear is worn around the pole.
People would typically be standing on a concrete footpath when touching the pole.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 90
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

FIGURE 10.1 LOCATION OF POLE MOUNTED TRANSFORMER

This case study follows the risk management method as detailed in the flowchart from
Figure 10.4 of AS/NZS 7000.
(a) Step 1: Basic data
(i) The prospective earth fault current at the source substation is 7 kA.
(ii) The resistance to earth of the 11 kV transformer (including the associated MEN
system) is 10 Ω.
(iii) The resistivity of wet concrete is assumed to be 50 Ω.m.
(iv) The earth fault clearing time is 0.5 s.
(v) The earth fault frequency for the line is 5 per year.
(vi) The line consists of 200 poles and does not have an overhead earth wire.
(b) Step 2: Functional requirement
The pole meets the functional requirements.
(i) All exposed metalwork is bonded.
(ii) The prospective earth fault current is more than twice the feeder pickup setting
to ensure the protection will operate.
(iii) No nearby telecommunication asset.
(c) Step 3: Calculate Maximum Earth Potential Rise (EPR)
Using parameters associated with the earth fault current path for an earth fault at the
pole, the EPR on the pole was calculated as approximately 5 kV. The parameters are:
(i) 1.2 km Dog ACSR between site and source substation.
(ii) 7 kA earth fault level at source substation.
(iii) 2 Ω source substation earth grid resistance.
(iv) 10 Ω site grid resistance.
(d) Step 4 : Prospective tolerable step and touch voltage limits
The touch voltage limit was determined from Figure 9 of the EEA Guide To Power
System Earthing Practice (also included as Figure 10.6 of AS/NZS 7000) for a fault
clearing time of 0.5 s and for a wet concrete resistivity of 50 Ω-m (footwear
included).

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 91 HB 331—2012

The step voltage limit was determined from Figure 10 of the EEA Guide to Power
System Earthing Practice for a fault clearing time of 0.5 s and for a wet concrete
resistivity of 50 Ω.m (footwear excluded).
VT (limit) = 410 V
VS (limit) = 2155 V
(e) Step 5: Is EPR ≤ VT (limit) and VS (limit)?
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

The EPR on the pole is greater than the step and touch voltage limits.
VT (limit) = 410 V
EPR = 5000 V > {
VS (limit) = 2150 V
(f) Step 6: Calculate touch and step voltages
For this case study, the step and touch voltage limits were calculated using CDEGs
modelling software.
A plot of touch voltages on the pole is shown in Figure 10.2.The plot shows that the
maximum touch voltage on the pole is calculated to be 2023 V.

L EG EN D:
M a x i m u m va l u e: 20 23.14 8
M i n i m u m t h r e s h o l d: 410.0 0 0
2.0
< 20 23.15
< 18 61. 8 3
Y A X I S, m

< 170 0. 52
0. 5 < 15 3 9. 20
< 1377. 8 9
< 1216. 57
-1.0 < 10 5 5. 26
< 8 9 3.9 4
< 732.6 3

-2. 5 < 571. 31

-2. 5 -1.0 0. 5 2.0
X A X I S, m

FIGURE 10.2 TOUCH VOLTAGES ON THE POLE

A plot of step voltages around the pole is shown in Figure 10.3. The plot shows that the
maximum step voltage around the pole is calculated to be approximately 1900 V.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 92

L EG EN D:
M a x i m u m va l u e: 18 9 9.474
Minimum th re s h ol d: 77.18 0
3.8 < 18 9 9.47
< 1717. 24
Y A X I S, m

< 15 3 5.0 2
< 13 52.79
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

< 1170. 56
-1. 2
< 9 8 8. 3 3
< 8 0 6.10
< 6 23. 87
< 4 41.6 4
< 259.41
- 6. 2
- 6. 2 -1. 2 3. 8

X A X I S, m

FIGURE 10.3 STEP VOLTAGES AROUND THE POLE

(g) Step 7: Are actual touch and step voltages ≤ VT (limit) and VS (limit)?
The calculated touch voltage exceeds the touch voltage limit but the maximum step
voltage is less than the step voltage limit.
(h) Step 8: Risk assessment
The risk assessment consists of:
(i) Identify the risk by identifying all hazards and extent of hazard zones;
(ii) Compare voltage limits with calculated or measured voltages;
(iii) Estimate people exposure to the hazards. Carry out sensitivity analysis where
required.
The hazards of concern at the pole are the touch voltages onto the concrete pole. The
risk can be assessed by calculating the coincidence probability, Pc.
Pc = EFFF ...
where
EF = total duration of exposure per year (in hours)/number of hours in a year
FF = average number of hazardous EPR events per year on a pole
The frequency of earth faults for the line with 200 poles is 5 faults per year.
Therefore:
FF = 5/200 = 0.025
If, for the purpose of this case study, we assume that the pole is being touched once a
day for 5 minutes (i.e. someone leaning against the pole) for five days of the week
(i.e. λE = 260 days per year), the total duration of exposure per year will be:
Total duration of exposure = 5 minutes per day × 260 days per year/60 minutes
per hour = 21.7 hours per year
As there are 8,760 hours in a year the exposure factor will be:
EF = 21.7/8760 = 2.5 × 10−3
The coincidence probability is therefore:
Pc = 2.5 × 10-2 × 2.5 × 10-3 = 6 × 10-5

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 93 HB 331—2012

Since only one person is typically affected, N = 1 and the equivalent probability is:
Pe = NPc = 1 × 6 × 10-5 = 6 × 10-5
The risk is therefore ‘intermediate’ and should be minimised unless the risk reduction
is impractical and the costs are grossly disproportionate to the safety benefit. A cost
benefit analysis should be carried out to determine whether the costs of risk treatment
options are disproportionate to the safety benefit.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Calculate the present value (PV) of the liability:

Value of Statistical Life (VoSL) = $10 000 000
Liability per year = 10 000 000 × 6 × 10-5 = $600
PV = $13 000 (assuming an asset lifespan of 50 years and a discount rate of
4%)
(i) Step 9: Risk treatment options
A number of risk treatment options can be considered. Examples of risk treatment
options are:
(i) Installing an underslung earth wire on the line.
(ii) Installing a gradient control conductor and an asphalt layer around the pole.
(iii) Installing an insulating barrier around the pole to prevent people from touching
the pole.
(iv) Replace the concrete pole with a wood pole.
A few of the above risk treatment options are detailed below to illustrate the
principles.
(j) Installing an underslung earth wire on the line
A study has shown that an underslung earth wire would reduce the EPR on the pole to
600 V. The resulting touch voltage on the pole would then reduce to approximately
300 V which is below the tolerable touch voltage limit. The cost of this risk treatment
option has been determined to be approximately $100 000. Comparing the cost of risk
treatment to the present value of the liability indicates that the cost of this risk
treatment option is grossly disproportionate to the safety benefit.
(k) Installing a gradient control conductor and an asphalt layer around the pole
With a gradient control conductor installed at a distance of one metre around the pole,
the touch voltage reduces to 900 V. This touch voltage exceeds the touch voltage
limit. However, if asphalt is also installed around the pole, the touch voltage limit
increases to 2000 V with the result that the touch voltage is lower than the limit. The
cost of this risk treatment option is $5000 and is below the present value of the
liability. There may be some additional ongoing costs associated with maintenance of
the asphalt that should also be considered.
(l) Installing an insulating barrier around the pole to prevent people from touching the
pole
An insulating barrier could be installed around the pole to prevent people from being
able to touch the pole. Such an insulating barrier could take the form of a wooden
enclosure or a fibreglass jacket. The cost of this risk treatment option is $2000 and is
significantly below the present value of the liability. There may be some additional
ongoing costs associated with maintenance of the insulating barrier.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 94

(m) Replacement of the concrete pole with a wood pole

By replacing the concrete pole with a wood pole, touch voltage hazards on the pole
can be eliminated. If the transformer earthing conductor is insulated from touch,
touch voltage hazards associated with the transformer and pole can be completely
eliminated. The cost of this risk treatment option is $4500 and is significantly below
the present value of the liability.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

(n) Installation of a Ground Fault Neutralizer

This involves the installation of a self-tuning Peterson Coil which reduces the earth
fault levels at the site, and indeed at all poles fed from the same Substation, to a very
low value, well below the step and touch voltage limits. A key benefit of this
approach is that it effectively mitigates the risk for all poles fed from the same
Substation, hence avoiding the need for risk assessments to be done on the other pole
structures in the area. Moreover, there are some significant collateral benefits through
reduced outages due to earth faults.
The approximate cost for installing such a device is of the order of $250 000. There
may also be some network upgrades for components such as surge arresters and
underground terminations.
Although the cost is significant, when spread across say a total number of 1000 poles
supplied off the substation, the costs are not grossly disproportionate to the benefits.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 95 HB 331—2012

S E C T I O N 1 1 L I N E E Q U I P M E N T — O V E R H E A D
L I N E F I T T I N G S
Coverage of overhead line fittings is given in Clause 36. The topics covered include:
(a) Hardware fittings (including rules of mating and special fittings).
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

(b) Maintenance loads (including cart loading and live line fittings).
(c) Vibration dampers.
(d) Bolt tensioning.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 96

PART 2 OVERHEAD LINE DESIGN PROCESS

S E C T I O N 1 2 S T E P S I N T H E D E S I G N
P R O C E S S
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

An overview of the steps in the overhead line design process is given in the flowchart
below.

D e te r m i n e d e s i g n i n p u t s / p a r a m e te r s

S e l e c t r o u te

S e e k r o u te a p p r ova l s

C o n d u c t r o u te s u r vey

Pe r fo r m e l e c t r i c a l d e s i g n (s e l e c t c o n d u c to r s /
e a r t hw i r e s , i n s u l a to r s a n d e a r t h i n g)

D e te r m i n e s t r u c tu r e s u i te

D e te r m i n a t i o n of l o a d o n s t r u c tu r e s

S t r u c tu r a l a n d m e c h a n i c a l d e s i g n

Fo u n d a t i o n d e s i g n

Document detail design

Ve r i f i c a t i o n of d e s i g n

O b t a i n c o n s t r u c t i o n a p p r ova l s

Pr ov i d e d e s i g n s u p p o r t d u r i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n

D e s i g n va l i d a t i o n

D o c u m e n t a s - c o n s t r u c te d r e c o r d s

FIGURE 12.1 FLOWCHART OF THE OVERHEAD LINE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION

PROCESS

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 97 HB 331—2012

S E C T I O N 1 3 D E S I G N I N P U T S / P A R A M E T E R S
The design inputs/parameters may be determined by the electricity utility/project owner and
other situations may be determined by the designer for a proponent. These may consist of
the following:
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

(a) Design working life.

(b) Reliability performance.
(c) Power transfer.
(d) Voltage level.
(e) Line route including beginning and end points.
(f) Number of circuits.
(g) Environmental constraints/considerations.
(h) Budgets.
(i) Timeframes.
(j) Overvoltages (power frequency, switching surges and lightning).

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 98

S E C T I O N 1 4 R O U T E S E L E C T I O N P R O C E S S

14.1 INTRODUCTION
The aim of the route selection process is to select the lowest cost solution that meets the
technical requirements and minimises community impacts.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Appropriate consideration should be given at the route selection stage to the use of the land
proposed for the power line corridor. There are zoning maps available from local
government authorities which describe the land usage in the region.
Local jurisdiction planning instruments, particularly those regulating the clearing of trees,
may also influence the selection of the most appropriate route for the power line. Some
areas may be of high environmental significance such as aboriginal and cultural heritage or
sensitive vegetation (mangroves) and the line route will need to avoid these areas where
possible.
Where power lines traverse private property the approval of the property owner is required.
This would normally take the form of a negotiated easement detailing any restrictions on
land use necessary for reliable operation of the line.
On public land the agreement of the management agency should be obtained for the
proposed line.

14.2 RISK MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLE

The layout design process should include the identification and assessment of risks
associated with the construction, maintenance and operation of the proposed line leading to
the evaluation and implementation of risk treatment options which ensure that the residual
risk is acceptable to the organization.
The risk management process used should align with AS/NZS 31000 and companion
handbook HB 158.

14.3 PRUDENT AVOIDANCE PRINCIPLE

Where potential risks with unproven consequences are involved, a prudent avoidance
approach is recommended.
The original recommendation related to electric and magnetic field exposures where
prudent avoidance was defined as ‘doing what can be done without undue inconvenience
and at modest expense to avert the possible risk’.

14.4 AESTHETIC CONSIDERATIONS

Visual amenity is now playing a major role in the selection of structures and other
components on an overhead power line to gain community acceptance. Visual amenity can
be improved by applying the following design principles:
(a) Locate power lines in corridors screened by vegetation or natural landscape.
(b) Install ‘like with like’ structures (if there is an existing tower line, select towers for
the second line in the corridor).
(c) Use of low height and compact structures.
(d) Avoid placing structures which dominate the skyline.
(e) Use of non-specular finish conductor.
(f) Painting of structures (in particular poles) to match the existing landscape.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 99 HB 331—2012

Compacting the phase conductors will improve visual amenity but will increase the surface
voltage gradient on the conductors and the noise (radio interference and audible). To offset
the increase in electric field strength, a larger diameter conductor may need to be selected
to ensure the surface voltage gradient is below the corona threshold level.
Non specular conductor will reduce the initial glare of the conductors and the high corona
noise produced when the line is initially energized. Non specular conductor will make the
conductor more hydrophilic to water and minimise the water drop corona effects.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

14.5 ELECTRIC AND MAGNETIC FIELDS

14.5.1 General
Magnetic field strengths associated with a wide range of overhead lines from low voltage to
500 kV are given in this Clause. The magnetic field strengths are modelled or measured at a
recognised standard height of 1 m above the ground. The magnetic field strengths have been
modelled using an Excel spread sheet developed by D Crawford of Hydro Electric
Corporation.
A magnetic field is an invisible force that is produced by the flow (current) of electricity
through a wire. This effect is known as electromagnetism and magnetic fields are only
present when the power is on and a current is flowing. The strength of a magnetic field
depends on the size of the current (amps). Field strength rapidly reduces as distance from
the source of the current increases. AS/NZS 7000 unit for measurement is the Tesla,
however magnetic fields from normal electricity use are much smaller than the Tesla and
the milligauss (mG) is common, and is used exclusively in this report. A milligauss is
10 million times smaller than a Tesla.
The guidelines are intended to give designers and others information regarding magnetic
field strengths associated with standard overhead constructions. While national (interim)
EMF guidelines are well above the levels commonly encountered from overhead lines, there
is no intention to restrict magnetic field strengths generally to the low levels (i.e. 4 mG)
which have been implicated but not proven as a possible cause of childhood leukaemia and
other diseases.
In the construction and subsequent operation of its facilities, in response to community
concern regarding health aspects of EMF in the face of ongoing scientific uncertainty,
electricity utilities have generally adopted a policy of ‘prudent avoidance’. The suggested
steps which might be taken to comply with this general policy are detailed in Clause 14.5.2.
14.5.2 Prudent avoidance
The concept of prudent avoidance was first suggested in 1989 by Professor M. Grainger
Morgan (USA) as a sensible response to community concern regarding health aspects of
EMF in the face of ongoing scientific uncertainty. Sir Harry Gibbs also addressed this
uncertainty in relation to exposure to EMFs in a wide ranging inquiry into community needs
and high voltage transmission line development in Australia. In his March 1991 Report he
said:
‘It has not been established that electric fields or magnetic fields of power frequency are
harmful to human health but, since there is some evidence that they may do harm, a policy
of prudent avoidance is recommended.’
Since 1991, a succession of major inquiries including a further two in Australia has
recommended prudent avoidance but the term has not been, and by its nature, cannot be
defined with precision.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 100

Prudent avoidance involves taking reasonable steps in any particular circumstance, and
although a precise definition cannot be given, it is possible to provide general guidance.
The aim of this Clause is to outline a range of options which may be applied in the context
of prudent avoidance for transmission and distribution situations. It remains the
responsibility of the designers to apply the principles appropriately to particular situations.
The Energy Networks Association has recommended to its members that a policy of
prudence (incorporating prudent avoidance) be applied in relation to EMF from supply
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

industry assets.
Clause 14.5.3 describes a number of specific options for prudent avoidance which may be
applied to transmission facilities.
14.5.3 Transmission
14.5.3.1 Distance
The most common method of reducing peoples’ exposure to EMFs is by selecting line
routes (i.e. siting) to avoid population centres or areas where people gather. Particular
attention should be paid to schools, child care centres and other areas where children
congregate.
Although a matter for developers/planning authorities, increased separation needs also to be
considered when new residential development is proposed adjacent to existing transmission
lines. This could involve either the sacrificing of land within the development site or the
relocation of some parts of the line.
Figure 14.1, illustrates how magnetic field strength reduces with distance from the line.
Raising the height of the supporting structures or towers, and thus the height of the
conductors, can also reduce the magnetic field strength below the line. However, the cost
and visual impact associated with the increased structure height may limit this technique to
selected portions of a line. Structure raising may be more practical for wood pole lines than
for steel tower lines, due to the cost factor.
14.5.3.2 Conductor configuration
Different arrangements of phasing can produce different magnetic field strengths for the
same line current. In general, triangular arrangements tend to provide more field
cancellation than horizontal arrangements, with lower resultant field strengths. The effect of
line geometry on magnetic field profile for a typical HV line is shown in Figure 14.1. For
the purposes of convenience, the magnetic field strengths in the graphs of this Clause are
shown in microtesla, where 1 microtesla = 10 mG.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 101 HB 331—2012

1.4
1

M i c r o t e s l a p e r 10 0 A m p s
1. 2
2

total current
1.0 3
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

4
0. 8

0.6

0.4

0. 2

0
-50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50

D i s t a n c e f r o m c e n t r e l i n e (m)
NOTES:
1 Single circuit with horizontal flat configuration of phases.
2 Single circuit with triangular configuration of phases.
3 Single circuit with vertical configuration of phases.
4 Double circuit with vertical configuration of phases and with favourable phase sequence (acting to reduce
field strength).

FIGURE 14.1 MAGNETIC FIELD PROFILE AT 1 M ABOVE GROUND FOR A TYPICAL

HIGH VOLTAGE OVERHEAD TRANSMISSION LINE FOR VARIOUS CONDUCTOR
CONFIGURATIONS

14.5.3.3 Line compaction

Line compaction can also reduce the resultant EMFs by enhancing the field cancellation
effect between the phases. Although the ability to achieve compaction is limited by factors
relating to the electrical performance of the line, it can be an attractive option as compact
lines offer some other advantages. These include reduced visual impact and reduced
easement width.
14.5.3.4 Phase arrangement
For double circuit lines, it is possible to arrange each three phase circuit with a different
vertical phase arrangement in space, such that some cancellation of magnetic fields occurs.
Figure 14.2, illustrates this effect, with Option 3 being the most favourable phase
arrangement from the viewpoint of field reduction assuming current flow is in the same
direction. This is usually a relatively low cost option in the case of an existing line, and
often a no cost option for a new line.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 102

0.6

M i c r o t e s l a p e r 10 0 A m p s
1
0. 5 2

total current
3
0.4

0. 3
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

0. 2

0.1

0
-30
-26
-2 2
-18
-14
-10

10
14
18
22
26
30
-6
-2
2
6
D i s t a n c e f r o m c e n t r e l i n e (m)
1: B B 2: B B 3: B R

W W W R W W

R R R W R B

FIGURE 14.2 MAGNETIC FIELD PROFILE AT 1 M ABOVE GROUND FOR A TYPICAL

HIGH VOLTAGE DOUBLE CIRCUIT TRANSMISSION LINE WITH VERTICAL
CONDUCTOR CONFIGURATION BELOW

Selection of the proper phasing arrangement is usually the most effective way to reduce
magnetic fields for two circuits on the same structure or two or more circuits on the same
easement for minimal cost, if re-routing is not possible.
14.5.3.5 Split phasing
A single circuit line can be constructed as two parallel circuits with a phase arrangement
designed to achieve maximum field cancellation. This is known as the split-phase technique
and may be considered if only one circuit exists on a route. Although this form of
construction is significantly more expensive than conventional single-circuit construction, it
could be used for short sections of a line where it is desired to reduce fields within the
suggested 4% cost limitation.
14.5.3.6 Current reduction
A reduction in current will generally reduce magnetic field strengths. The reduction in field
strength is approximately proportional to the reduction in current. For a given load transfer
requirement, the only way to reduce the current is to increase the voltage. However,
because line voltage is generally fixed by system stability considerations, increasing line
voltage will seldom be feasible within the 4% cost constraint, and other design options are
likely to be preferable.
14.5.3.7 Shielding and cancellation loops
Shielding is the erection of a barrier between an EMF source and a subject to reduce the
field strength at the subject. A simple shielding barrier can substantially reduce electric
fields from transmission lines but has little effect on magnetic fields. Any object between
the source (line) and the point of interest will provide shielding or distortion of the electric
field. Common examples are buildings, trees or any other structure.
For all practical purposes there are no means to significantly reduce or screen magnetic
fields from overhead lines. In special applications, screening of individual pieces of
equipment is possible, using structures or enclosures made from special metals.
‘Cancellation’ or ‘degaussing’ loops are conducting wires suspended between adjacent
structures, above or below the phase conductors to provide both shielding and cancellation
effects.
© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au
 103 HB 331—2012

They may be either ‘active’ (energised) or ‘passive’ (non energised) and rely on a current
flow in the opposite direction to cancel or reduce the overall field produced by the line. The
use of shielding or cancellation loops is still in the research phase and, while being
theoretically possible, this option is often regarded as complex, unsightly and of little
practical significance.
14.5.3.8 Undergrounding
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Because undergrounding is usually far more expensive than overhead construction, it does
not often fall into the category of prudent avoidance, with its ‘minimum cost/minimum
inconvenience’ criteria. There will be occasions, however, when partial undergrounding
may be consistent with prudent avoidance on a total cost basis, and accordingly this option
is discussed briefly below.
In underground cables, phase conductors are insulated from earth and from each other by a
relatively thin layer of solid insulation, as compared to a much larger dimension of air
insulation in the case of overhead lines. Accordingly, underground phase conductors can be
placed much closer together, providing a more effective field cancellation effect.
On the other hand, underground cables are normally buried 1 m or less below ground and
can be closer to people than an equivalent overhead line. Nevertheless, due to the
cancellation effect, the use of underground cables usually reduces the effective level of the
magnetic field at the point of interest. An exception to this might be the situation of cables
in a street area where the point of interest is the footpath or roadway immediately above the
buried cable where the field strength is still significant.
When considering undergrounding, it should be noted that, contrary to popular belief, the
ground has no magnetic field shielding property and plays no part in further field reduction.
Figure 14.3 illustrates the difference between the magnetic field profiles of overhead
transmission, distribution lines and the underground cable assuming perfect symmetry of
the phase currents in all three systems.

1.4
1. 2 1
Microtesla per
10 0 A m p s

1.0
2
0. 8
0.6 3

0.4
0. 2
0
- 50

-40

-30

-20

-10

10

20

30

40

50
0

D i s t a n c e f r o m c e n t r e l i n e (m)
NOTES:
1 Under a HV transmission line with horizontal phase configuration.
2 Under an 11 kV distribution line with horizontal phase configuration.
3 Above an underground three phase, single-core cable circuit with horizontal phase configuration and
100 mm phase separation.

FIGURE 14.3 MAGNETIC FIELD PROFILES AT 1 M ABOVE GROUND FOR TYPICAL

OVERHEAD AND UNDERGROUND LINES

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 104

A three phase underground cable in one sheath will produce a lower magnetic field than the
same capacity line constructed from three single-core cables because the conductors are
closer together and provide more effective field cancellation than three single-core cables,
especially if the latter are in flat formation.
14.5.4 Land development and easements
Land development adjacent to transmission lines often occurs after the transmission line has
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

been built. It has been suggested in some quarters that the prospect of future land
subdivision and development may create an argument for utilities adopting wider easements
in the first place. This suggestion was considered by Sir Harry Gibbs in his 1991 report. He
found no support for such a move, which would alienate additional land and increase costs
to the community. He said:
‘It would be particularly undesirable at the present time to prescribe standards or
guidelines with regard to exposure to the fields created by transmission lines or the width
of easements acquired or used for such lines.’
All transmission line easements would be affected while any potential benefit would be
restricted to a few isolated developments. Furthermore, because of the variation in magnetic
field strength profiles for the various design objectives as noted in Clause 2.1, of
AS/NZS 7000, it would be impractical to attempt to prescribe easement widths which result
in a consistent magnetic field outcome. It is suggested that the application of prudent
avoidance to land development should follow similar principles to those outlined for
transmission line development. In deciding what particular prudent option to adopt, the
developer may consult with the relevant utility in order to identify the most cost-effective
measures available for the particular circumstance.
14.5.5 Distribution lines
14.5.5.1 Siting
Due to the need to provide supply to customers, the options available to designers in siting
distribution infrastructure are limited. Distribution lines, by their very nature and function
are normally located in road reserves to provide supply to customers on both sides of the
road, although in some instances, they are located at the rear boundary of residential
properties.
Where practicable:
(a) Distribution lines should be located on the opposite side of the road from areas such
as schools, kindergartens, child-care centres and the like
(b) Distribution lines should be sited away from the walls of multi-storey buildings or
areas where children congregate
(c) Distribution lines should be located on the side of the road bordered by open spaces
where applicable
(d) Substations should be located at the electrical centre of their low voltage network, i.e.
current flows in all directions should be balanced.
(e) As with transmission lines, the benefits of community consultation and the sharing of
information should not be overlooked in the siting of distribution lines. This is
particularly relevant when high voltage overbuilds are being considered.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 105 HB 331—2012

14.5.5.2 Design
Prudent design options which may be considered subject to their economic viability could
include:
(a) Use of aerial bundled conductor (ABC) for low voltage reticulation to provide more
effective field cancellation
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

(b) Use of offset construction (i.e. with all phases constructed on the same side of the
pole) to increase horizontal separation from the point of interest
(c) Use of underground cable in place of overhead conductors where economically
justified
(d) Use of three phase cable instead of 3 single phase cables
(e) Balancing of load across all phases to reduce neutral currents
(f) Use of insulated twisted service cable instead of open wire services to provide more
effective field cancellation
(g) For new double circuit lines, adoption of low reactance (RWB/BWR) phasing when
current flow in both circuits is in the same direction
When installing electrical facilities which involve both low voltage and high voltage, the
following options apply:
(i) When overbuilding (or underbuilding) existing facilities, the phasing on the existing
circuits should be determined and the new circuit or circuits phased to minimise the
combined magnetic field strength.
(ii) Where new or reworked subtransmission facilities are being considered on the same
structure with distribution circuits, the most effective field reduction measures may
be applied to the distribution circuits.
14.5.6 Magnetic field calculations
The magnetic field strengths for overhead (OH) lines have been modelled for a range of
standard designs for each construction. This manual has been used to determine the relative
position of conductors (conductor configuration) in relation to a reference point at ground
level (i.e. centre of the pole) for each construction. Each standard OH construction has been
modelled as a balanced 100 A per phase system at various conductor configuration heights.
The actual magnetic field strength is then found by multiplying the field strength profile by
the ratio of Actual Current per 100 A. The actual current used for the calculation should be
based on the long term average loading on the line. This is typically 50% to 75% of the
continuous current rating.
The program has been used to determine the magnetic field strength normal to the
conductors (i.e. 90°), at 1 m intervals up to 20 m either side of the centre of the pole, at a
height 1 m above the ground. A profile for each construction can then be generated from the
magnetic field strength results.
The relative position of conductors will not vary for each type of construction, but the
height of the conductor configuration above ground will vary according to the size of the
pole and the distances between poles. As the magnetic field strength is directly proportional
to the current, each standard construction i.e. (conductor configuration) is modelled and
graphed at 100 A. However field strength is not linearly proportional to the height of the
conductor configuration for each construction. Thus the field strengths have been modelled
at various conductor configuration heights above the ground at 100 A.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 106

Interpolation between graphs for each type of standard construction is required to establish
a field strength profile at a certain conductor configuration height above ground. Due to the
variation in conductor heights above ground a minimum vertical clearance was used in
accordance with Schedule 1 below.
14.5.7 Schedule 1—Clearance of overhead electric lines
14.5.7.1 Part 1—Low voltage conductor clearance from ground
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

The minimum vertical clearance from ground should be 5.5 m

14.5.7.2 Part 3—High voltage conductor clearance from ground
The minimum vertical clearance from roads should be—
(a) more than 1000 V but not more than 33 kV ......................................................... 5.5 m
(b) more than 33 kV but not more than 66 kV ........................................................... 6.7 m
(c) more than 66 kV but not more than 132 kV ......................................................... 6.7 m
NOTE: All the graphs illustrating the magnetic fields strengths of standard overhead
constructions are from left to right respectively, Real Property Alignment (RPA) to Roadway.
14.5.8 LV Standards
The magnetic field strength profiles for the LV flat constructions have been modelled at
heights of 5.5 m, 6 m, 7 m and 9 m per 100 A, with the constructions having the Neutral
and then the phases from left to right. The vertical construction has been modelled having
the Neutral then the phases from top to bottom. See Figures 14.4 to 14.19.
Typically the LV network is not a balanced three phase system, due to the single phase
services being supplied along the length of the overhead mains. The single phase services
are generally evenly distributed over the three phases along the length of the LV network to
minimize the unbalance at any given point. However between single phase services
connection points on the LV mains there will always be some unbalance due to the even
number of single phase services connected at this point (i.e. 4 single phase services). The
loads at any given time may also vary introducing unbalance in the LV OH mains.
For the purposes of this study, all LV overhead standard constructions have been modelled
as balanced three phase systems.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 107 HB 331—2012

M a g n et i c f i e l d s t r e n g t h p r of i l e
LV ove r h e a d f l a t c o n t r u c t i o n

14
Magnetic field strength

5. 5 m
p e r 10 0 A m p s (m G )

12
6.0 m
7.0 m
10
9.0 m
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

0
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20
H o r i zo n t a l p e r p e n d i c u l a r d i s t a n c e f r o m c e n t e l i n e (m)
H e i g h t o f l owe s t c o n d u c t o r t o g r o u n d

75 750 375 4 50 750 75

75 75
125

PR O PE R T Y
SIDE N

DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETRES

FIGURE 14.4 LV FLAT CONDUCTOR CONFIGURATION

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 108

M ag n et i c Fi e l d S t r e n g t h Pr of i l e
LV A BC Co n s t r u c t i o n

1.1
Magnetic Field Strength

1.0
5. 5 m
p e r 10 0 A m p s ( m G )

0.9
6.0 m
0.8
7.0 m
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

0.7 9.0 m
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20

H o r i zo n t a l p e r p e n d i c u l a r d i s t a n c e f r o m c e n t r e l i n e (m)
H e i g h t o f l ow e s t c o n d u c t o r t o g r o u n d

300 min

Suspension clamp

DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETRES

FIGURE 14.5 LV AERIAL BUNDLED CONDUCTOR CONFIGURATION

14.5.9 11 kV Standards
The magnetic field strength profiles for the 11 kV constructions have been modelled at
heights of 5.5 m, 6 m, 7 m and 9 m per 100 A.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 109 HB 331—2012

Magnetic Field Strength Profile

11 kV Overhead Flat Construction
20

18
5. 5 m
Magnetic Field Strength

16 6.0 m
per 100 Amps (mG)

14 7.0 m
12 9.0 m
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

10

0
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20

Horizontal perpendicular distance from centreline (m)

Height of lowest conductor to ground

150 775 425 1200 150

150

DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETRES

FIGURE 14.6 11 kV FLAT CONDUCTOR CONFIGURATION

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 110

M ag n et i c Fi e l d S t r e n g t h Pr of i l e
11 k V O ve r h ea d Tr i a n g u l a r Co n s t r u c t i o n

20
Magnetic Field Strength

18 5. 5 m
6.0 m
p e r 10 0 A m p s (m G )

16
7.0 m
14
9.0 m
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

12
10
8
6
4
2
0
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20

H o r i zo n t a l p e r p e n d i c u l a r d i s t a n c e f r o m c e n t r e l i n e (m)
Height of lowest conductor to ground

150 775 425 525 675 150

150

160 0

DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETRES

FIGURE 14.7 11 kV TRIANGULAR CONDUCTOR CONFIGURATION

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 111 HB 331—2012

M ag n et i c Fi e l d S t r e n g t h Pr of i l e
11 k V O ve r h ea d E x p a n d e d Tr i d e nt Co n s t r u c t i o n
16
Magnetic Field Strength

14 5.5m
6.0 m
p e r 10 0 A m p s (m G )

12
7.0 m
10 9.0 m
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

0
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20

H o r i zo n t a l p e r p e n d i c u l a r d i s t a n c e f r o m c e n t r e l i n e (m)
H e i g h t o f l ow e s t c o n d u c t o r t o g r o u n d

5 32

8 82

DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETRES

FIGURE 14.8 11 kV OVERHEAD EXPANDED TRIDENT CONDUCTOR

CONFIGURATION

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 112

S t a n d a r d 11k V Ve r t i c a l D e l t a - Ru r a l Co n s t r u c t i o n
M a g n e t i c f i e l d s t r e n g t h v s Tr a n s v e r s e d i s t a n c e f r o m p o l e

M a g f i e l d p e r 10 0A p e r c c t (m G )
12
6.7m
10 7.7m
9.7m
8 13.7m
21.7m
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

0
-30

-24

30
-18

-6
-12

24
18
12
0

6
Tr a n s ve r s e d i s t a n c e f r o m c e n t r e o f p o l e (m)
H e i g h t of l owe s t c o n d u c to r to g r o u n d

525

10 50

Insulator

305

120 0

DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETRES

FIGURE 14.9 11 kV VERTICAL DELTA CONSTRUCTION

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 113 HB 331—2012

S t a n d a r d 11kV Ve r t i c a l O f f s et - Ru r a l Co n s t r u c t i o n
M a g n e t i c f i e l d s t r e n g t h v s Tr a n s ve r s e d i s t a n c e f r o m p o l e

M a g f i e l d p e r 10 0A p e r c c t (m G )
8

7 6.7m
7.7m
6 9.7m
13.7m
5 21.7m
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

0
-30

-24

-18

-12

30
24
12

18
-6

6
Tr a n s ve r s e d i s t a n c e f r o m c e n t r e o f p o l e (m)
H e i g h t of l owe s t c o n d u c to r to g r o u n d

Po r c e l a i n
i n s u l a to r

10 50

305

10 50

305

DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETRES

FIGURE 14.10 11 kV VERTICAL OFFSET CONSTRUCTION

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 114

14.5.10 33 kV Overhead Standards

The magnetic field strength profiles for 33 kV overhead constructions have been modelled
at heights of 6.7 m, 7.7 m, 9.7 m and 13.7 m per 100 A.

M ag n et i c Fi e l d S t r e n g t h Pr of i l e
3 3 k V O ve r h e a d Fl a t c o n s t r u c t i o n
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

14

12 6.7m
Magnetic Field Strength

7.7m
p e r 10 0 A m p s ( m G )

10
9.7m
8 13.7m

0
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20

H o r i zo n t a l p e r p e n d i c u l a r d i s t a n c e f r o m c e n t r e l i n e (m)
H e i g h t o f l ow e s t c o n d u c t o r t o g r o u n d

150 775 425 120 0 150

150
150

DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETRES

FIGURE 14.11 33 kV FLAT CONDUCTOR CONFIGURATION

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 115 HB 331—2012

M ag n et i c Fi e l d S t r e n g t h Pr of i l e
3 3 k V O ve r h ea d Tr i a n g u l a r Co n s t r u c t i o n

14
Magnetic Field Strength

12 6.7m
p e r 10 0 A m p s ( m G )

7.7m
10
9.7m
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

8 13.7m

0
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20

H o r i zo n t a l p e r p e n d i c u l a r d i s t a n c e f r o m c e n t r e l i n e (m)
H e i g h t o f l ow e s t c o n d u c t o r t o g r o u n d

150 775 425 120 0 150

150

800

150

DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETRES

FIGURE 14.12 33 kV TRIANGULAR CONDUCTOR CONFIGURATION

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 116

Standard 33kV Vertical Delta - Rural Construction

Magne tic fie ld stre ngth vs Transve rse distance from pole

9
Mag field per 100A per cct (mG) 8 6.7m
7.7m
7 9.7m
13.7m
6
21.7m
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

0
-30

-24

-18

-12

30
24
12

18
-6

6
Tr a n s ve r s e d i s t a n c e f r o m c e n t r e o f p o l e (m)
Height of lowest conductor to ground.

E a r thwi r e 150

1200

25° 900
1200
S hi e l di n g
angle

150

600

1400

Po r c e l a i n
600
i n s u l a to r
560 nominal

305

1600 nominal

DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETRES

FIGURE 14.13 33 kV VERTICAL DELTA CONFIGURATION

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 117 HB 331—2012

Standard 33kV Vertical Offset - Rural Construction

Magn e ti c fi e l d stre n gth vs Tran sve rse di stan ce from pol e

Mag field per 100A per cct (mG)

8 6.7m
7 7.7m
9.7m
6 13.7m
21.7m
5
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

4
3
2
1
0
-30

-24

-18

-12

12

18

24

30
-6

6
Transverse distance from centre of pole (m)
Height of lowest conductor to ground

E a r thwi r e 150

1200

25° 900
1200
S hi e l di n g
angle

150

Po r c e l a i n
1400 i n s u l a to r
1200

560 nominal

305

1200

DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETRES

FIGURE 14.14 33 kV VERTICAL OFFSET

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 118

14.5.11 110 kV Standards

The magnetic field strength profiles for the 110 kV constructions have been modelled at
heights of 6.7 m, 7.7 m, 9.7 m, 13.7 m and 21.7 m per 100 A.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 119 HB 331—2012

M a g n et i c Fi e l d S t r e n g t h Pr of i l e
110 k V Co n c r et e Po l e S i n g l e C i r c u i t t r i a n g u l a r

16
Magnetic Field Strength

14 6.7m
7.7m
p e r 10 0 A m p s ( m G )

12 9.7m
10 13.7m
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

21.7m
8

0
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20

H o r i zo n t a l p e r p e n d i c u l a r d i s t a n c e f r o m c e n t r e l i n e (m)
Height of lowest conductor to ground

100

2000

2305

4000

4305

6000

6305

DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETRES

FIGURE 14.15 110 kV CONCRETE POLE SINGLE CIRCUIT CONDUCTOR

CONFIGURATION

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 120

M a g n e t i c F i e l d Pr o f i l e (C a l c u l a t e d )
110 k V C o n c r e t e G a i n B a s e Po l e D o u b l e C i r c u i t - s a m e p h a s e d

20
Magnetic Field Strength 18 6.7m
16 7.7m
9.7m
p e r 10 0 A (m G )

14 13.7m
12 21.7m
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

10

0
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20
H o r i zo n a l Pe r p e n d i c u l a r D i s t a n c e f r o m C e n t r e l i n e (m)
H e i g h t o f L owe s t C o n d u c t o r t o G r o u n d

E a r th

20 0 0

A A

19 0 0 23 0 0

B B

19 0 0

C C

DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETRES

FIGURE 14.16 110 kV CONCRETE BASE GAIN POLE DOUBLE CIRCUIT

CONSTRUCTION—SAME PHASED

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 121 HB 331—2012

M ag n et i c Fi e l d Pr of i l e (Ca l c u l a te d )
110 k V Co n c r ete G a i n B a s e Po l e Do u b l e Cc t - r eve r s e p h a s e d
Magnetic Field Strength 20

18 6.7m
7.7m
16
9.7m
p e r 10 0 A (m G )

14 13.7m
21.7m
12
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

10

8
6

4
2

0
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20

H o r i zo n a l Pe r p e n d i c u l a r D i s t a n c e f r o m C e n t r e l i n e (m)
H e i g h t o f L owe s t C o n d u c t o r t o G r o u n d

E a r th

20 0 0

A C

19 0 0 23 0 0

B B

19 0 0

C A

DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETRES

FIGURE 14.17 110 kV CONCRETE BASE GAIN POLE DOUBLE CIRCUIT

CONSTRUCTION—REVERSE PHASED

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 122

M a g n et i c Fi e l d S t r e n g t h Pr of i l e
110 k V S t e e l Towe r D o u b l e C i r c u i t - s a m e p h a s e d

25
Magnetic Field Strength

6.7m
p e r 10 0 A m p s ( m G )

20 7.7m
9.7m
13.7m
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

15
21.7m

10

-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20

H o r i zo n t a l p e r p e n d i c u l a r d i s t a n c e f r o m c e n t r e l i n e (m)
Height of lowest conductor to ground

4000 Earth
210 0
6550
A A
3800
6725
B B
3800
7020
C C

25750
23 9 6 2

4750

DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETRES

FIGURE 14.18 110 kV D1S2 STEEL TOWER DOUBLE CIRCUIT CONSTRUCTION—

SAME PHASED

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 123 HB 331—2012

M a g n et i c Fi e l d S t r e n g t h Pr of i l e
110 k V S t e e l Towe r D o u b l e C i r c u i t - r eve r s e p h a s e d

25
Magnetic Field Strength
6.7m
20
p e r 10 0 A m p s ( m G )
7.7m
9.7m
13.7m
15
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

21.7m

10

0
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20

H o r i zo n t a l p e r p e n d i c u l a r d i s t a n c e f r o m c e n t r e l i n e (m)
Height of lowest conductor to ground

4000 Earth
210 0
6 5 50
A C
3800
6725
B B
3800
70 20
C A

25750
23 9 6 2

4750

DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETRES

FIGURE 14.19 110 kV D1S2 STEEL TOWER DOUBLE CIRCUIT CONSTRUCTION—

REVERSE PHASED

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 124

S E C T I O N 1 5 S E E K R O U T E A P P R O V A L S
There are many stakeholders which may need to be consulted for the overhead line. Formal
approvals may be required from some stakeholders. The stakeholder list may include:
(a) Road authorities (main roads and councils).
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

(b) Waterways authorities.

(c) Rail and tram authorities.
(d) Aviation authorities.
(e) Environmental authorities.
(f) Land owners.
(g) Indigenous groups.
(h) Other utilities (gas, electricity, water, telecommunication).
Obtaining route approval can be a timely process and should generally commence early in
the line process. There may need to be a preliminary step where stakeholders provide
approval in principle and then a formal approval given after detailed designs are submitted.
Design approvals will be required before construction approvals.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 125 HB 331—2012

S E C T I O N 1 6 C O N D U C T R O U T E S U R V E Y

16.1 GENERAL
In the route survey the following information is typically identified:
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

(a) Plan view.

(b) Ground profile.
(c) Deviation angles.
(d) Obstructions (rail crossings, waterway crossings, buildings, vegetation.
telecommunication pits, and gas and water pipelines).
(e) Access tracks.
(f) Geotechnical survey.
(g) Archaeological study.
(h) Existing structures.

16.2 DETERMINATION OF TRANSMISSION LINE EASEMENT WIDTH

16.2.1 General
An easement is legally described as an encumbrance on the title of land limited in width
and height above or below the land conferring a right to construct, operate and maintain an
electricity power line, cable, or apparatus.
Easements are usually obtained or created to ensure the safety of persons living, working or
playing near power lines. They are also created to ensure electricity utilities can gain ready
access to assets for maintenance, repair and upgrading the power lines.
A designated minimum easement width can be established to accommodate an overhead
energised transmission line asset which ensures adequate safe electrical and mechanical
spatial clearances are provided.
This coverage of easement width in the section will only consider the electrical clearances
that primarily dictate minimum easement width.
Two cases will be outlined to highlight the procedure for deriving minimum overhead line
easement width. These cases consist of:
(a) Conductors on a common structure.
(b) An easement with multiple parallel circuits positioned on multiple adjacent structures
across the easement.
16.2.2 Case 1—Common structure on easement
16.2.2.1 General
Figure 16.1 shows conductors on a common structure.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 126

C o n d u c to r i n n o r m a l
p o s i ti o n d u r i n g s till C o n d u c to r i n b l ow n
wi n d c o n di ti o n s o u t p o s i ti o n a t
n o m i n a te d w i n d
pressure
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Ws1 W b1 Wc W b1 Ws 2

Easement boundar y
Tr a n s m i s s i o n s t r u c tu r e

Minimum easement width

FIGURE 16.1 CLEARANCES ASSOCIATED WITH SINGLE TRANSMISSION

LINE EASEMENT

Minimum easement width is therefore defined as:

Weasement = Ws1 + 2 ⋅ Wb1 + Wc + Ws2 . . . 16.1
where the individual terms in Equation 16.1 and Figure 16.1 are defined as follows:
Ws1 and Ws2 = Horizontal electrical safety clearance blown out conductor to
easement edge.
As development cannot be controlled by the Utility off the easement, the required electrical
safety clearance Ws1 and Ws2 are determined by the location of present obstacles on the
edge of the easement, or possible development of future obstacles by others on the edge of
the easement.
Depending on the State or Territory in which the line is built and operated, varying
statutory requirements, or suggested industry guidelines exist that nominate minimum
horizontal safety clearances to foreign structures.
16.2.2.2 Wb1—Maximum conductor blowout
Maximum conductor blowout is calculated as a function of conductor diameter to weight
ratio, maximum span, and serviceable wind pressure.
Wind speed or wind pressure at which maximum conductor blowout is calculated is
nominated in the design parameters by the Utility, and usually represents sustained wind
speed or pressure which causes maximum horizontal blow out of the phase conductors.
Wind speed and pressure varies geographically (e.g. cyclonic vs. non cyclonic wind
pressure) across Australia, and assumptions vary between states and utilities. A typical
condition for blowout is a serviceable wind pressure of 500 Pa on the conductors at
conductor temperature relevant to the wind pressure.
16.2.2.3 Wc—Circuit/phase spacing
Circuit/phase spacing is dictated by the structure body width. This dimension is set in the
electrical design of the structure, and takes account of required horizontal phase to phase, or
circuit to circuit clearance, and clearances for conductor to structure steelwork.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 127 HB 331—2012

16.2.2.4 Wi—Insulator swing

Insulator swing needs to be included when there are insulator strings on suspension towers
and is calculated as a function of conductor diameter to weight ratio, maximum span, and
wind pressure.
16.2.3 Case 2—Multiple circuits across easement
Figure 16.2 shows two double circuit transmission lines, with structures on one
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

transmission line out of alignment with structures on the parallel transmission line.

C o n d u c to r i n b l ow n
C o n d u c to r i n n o r m a l o u t p o s i ti o n a t
p o s i ti o n d u r i n g s till n o m i n a te d w i n d
wi n d c o n di ti o n s pressure

Wp 2 Wb2 Wc 2 Wb2 Ws 2

Easement
boundary

Easement boundar y Ws1 W b1 Wc1 W b1 Wp1

Tr a n s m i s s i o n
s tr u c tu r e

Minimum easement width

FIGURE 16.2 CLEARANCES ASSOCIATED WITH MULTIPLE TRANSMISSION LINES

ON EASEMENT

As adjacent transmission lines can be of differing voltages, the minimum easement width
adopted is therefore the greater of the two calculations defined by Equation 16.2 or 16.3:
Weasement_1 = Ws1 + 2 Wb1 + Wc1 + Wp1 + Wc2 + Wb2 + Ws 2 . . . (16.2)

Weasement_2 = Ws1 + Wb1 + Wc1 + Wp1 + Wp2 + 2 Wb2 + Ws 2 . . . (16.3)

Where the individual terms in Equations 16.2, 16.3 and Figure 16.2 are defined as follows:
Ws1 and Ws2 = Horizontal electrical safety clearance blown out conductor to
easement edge
These dimensions represent the required safety clearance from blown-out conductor
to easement edge.
Wb1 and Wb2 = Maximum conductor blowout
These dimensions represent the maximum conductor blowout for both Transmission
Line 1 and Transmission Line 2.
Wc1 and Wc2 = Circuit/phase spacing
These dimensions represent the circuit/phase spacing that is dictated by the structure
body width.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 128

Wp1 = Parallel circuit clearance blown—Out Line 1 to structures or

phases on Line 2
The minimum required electrical clearance for safe and reliable operation of both
parallel transmission lines when conductors on Line 1 blow-out towards structures or
phases on adjacent Line 2.
Wp2 = Parallel circuit clearance blown–Out Line 2 to structures or
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

phases on Line 1
The minimum required electrical clearance for safe and reliable operation of both
parallel transmission lines when conductors on Line 2 blow-out towards structures or
phases on adjacent Line 1.
Wi = Insulator swing
Allowance for insulator swing.
To determine an adequate spacing between adjacent transmission circuits, consideration
needs to be given to maintenance activities performed on one circuit, while the adjacent
circuits are energised. Maintenance work can utilise equipment such as cranes, large
elevated work platforms and helicopters and these also need to be accounted for in
determining appropriate centre-line separation and electrical clearances between adjacent
circuits.

16.3 VEGETATION CLEARANCES

16.3.1 General
There are situations where there are conflicts with trees and powerlines. Trees, shrubs and
other vegetation enhance our lifestyles by providing shade and privacy around our homes,
offer a habitat for birds and wildlife, and add aesthetic value to our gardens. However,
vegetation interfering with powerlines is a proven risk to public safety, the environment and
one of the main causes of power supply problems.
16.3.2 Vegetation management principles
The basis for undertaking vegetation clearing is covered in the following principles:
(a) To achieve a balance between environmental responsibilities and ensuring a safe,
reliable and economical electricity supply to our customers.
(b) Recognize that there are sites with vegetation of significance located near powerlines
requiring special consideration and treatment because of their importance to the
community and the environment.
(c) When selecting line routes, establish the most economical, technically acceptable
option, taking into account the ongoing costs of vegetation management, the
objectives of environmental policy, and maintenance of the overhead network.
16.3.3 Vegetation clearance zones
Figure 16.3 shows the vegetation zones surrounding an overhead powerline. These zones
are described as:
(a) Clearance Zone is the space that should be clear of vegetation at all times, including
the period between trimming cycles.
(b) Regrowth Zone is a space beyond the clearance zone that should be trimmed so that
the regrowth does not enter the clearance zone within the trimming cycle
(c) Risk Management Zone is a space in which trees or limbs may pose a risk in adverse
weather conditions due to factors such as instability and weakness. Clearance in this
zone is discretionary.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 129 HB 331—2012

(d) Low Growth Zone is the space below the clearance zone where vegetation is allowed
which will not have a height of more than a specified distance, depending on the
circumstance

R i s k m a n a g e m e n t zo n e
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

AP
AA

Risk management Clearance AB Risk management

zo n e zo n e zo n e

L ow g r ow t h
zo n e
BP BV

FIGURE 16.3 VEGETATION CLEARANCE ZONES SURROUNDING OVERHEAD

DISTRIBUTION LINE

Clearances to vegetation are generally established by regulations and industry guidelines in

various jurisdictions. Additional clearing may be needed to improve the reliability of the
overhead line. Typical clearance distances for a high reliability lines operating up to 33 kV
are shown in Table 16.1.

TABLE 16.1
URBAN AREAS—BARE WIRE CONDUCTOR CLEARANCE TO VEGETATION
Clearance zone Low growth zone
Type of powerline Vertical above Horizontal Vertical below Max vertical
conductor above conductor conductor above ground
1.0 m (urban)
Bare low voltage 2.0 m 1.0 m
2.0 m (rural)
4.0 m
2.0 m (urban)
Bare 11 kV, 33 kV 3.0 m 2.0 m
3.0 m (rural)

Typical clearance distances for low voltage Aerial Bundled Cable and Insulated Service
Cable are shown in Table 16.2.

TABLE 16.2
URBAN AND RURAL AREAS—LVABC AND INSULATED SERVICE CABLE
CLEARANCE TO VEGETATION
Clearance zone Low growth zone
Type of powerline Vertical above Horizontal above Vertical below Max vertical
conductor conductor conductor above ground
0.5 m (urban)
Aerial bundled cable 0.5 m 1.0 m
1.0 m (rural) 4.0 m
Insulated service cable 0.5 m 0.5 m 0.5 m

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 130

In New Zealand, the statutory requirements for the safe distance requirements between
vegetation are defined in the Electricity (Hazards from Trees) Regulations 2003. Vegetation
Growth Limit Zones are specified in Tables 1 and 2 of these regulations. The distances
should be measured under still air, everyday temperatures.
16.3.4 Special considerations for high reliability lines (e.g. transmission lines) or lines
with long spans
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

On high reliability lines (e.g. transmission lines), special consideration should be given to
extend the vegetation clearing to meet the higher levels of security and reliability for the
line. The extended clearance may include clearing to the sky (refer Figure 16.4) and
allowance for blow out of the conductors in the mid sections of the line. Allowance for
blowout will also apply for powerlines with long spans.

Cl e a r to s k y

AP AP

Risk management Risk management

zo n e Clearance zo n e
zo n e

C C

Low g r ow th
BW zo n e BV

Easement (typical 20-100 metres) - as appropriate

FIGURE 16.4 VEGETATION CLEARANCE ZONES SURROUNDING TRANSMISSION

LINE

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 131 HB 331—2012

S E C T I O N 1 7 E L E C T R I C A L D E S I G N

17.1 CONDUCTOR AND EARTHWIRES

This is a list of the selection criteria for conductors and earthwires.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Maximum operating temperature:

(a) Current rating.
(b) Voltage drop.
(c) Corona (RIV, audible noise)/bundled conductors.
(d) Design working life (corrosion, fatigue endurance, annealing).
(e) Economics (line losses, spares, rationalization of conductor types).
(f) Span capability.
(g) Environmental factors (bushfire areas, wildlife, insulated conductors).
(h) Strength to mass ratio.
(i) Lightning resilience (minimum strand size).
(j) Fault current rating (number of earthwires).
(k) Mechanical load requirements (cyclonic wind, snow and ice).
(l) Aesthetics (non specular).
(m) Damping design.
(n) Conductor attachment (AGSU, armour rods, markers, spacers, tap-offs, joints).
(o) Construction aspects (jointing, terminations, stringing, maintenance).

17.2 DETERMINATION OF CONDUCTOR RATING

Once a conductor and its maximum operating temperature have been chosen, the conductor
rating can be calculated. The method is based on the heat balance equations where Heat In
(Solar Radiation Current Heating) = Heat Out (Convection Cooling from Wind and
Radiated Losses). Coverage of the method is given in Reference [1]. Should further detail
be required refer to Reference [2].
Transmission Network Services Providers have agreed on a common method for conducting
conductor ratings. Reference [3].
Conductor ratings are usually calculated for a combination of ambient temperatures and
wind speeds. Guidelines for the use of these parameters are given in Table 17.1.

TABLE 17.1
AMBIENT TEMPERATURES AND WIND SPEEDS FOR CONDUCTOR RATINGS

Rating type Ambient temperature (°C) Wind speed (ms -1 )

Summer noon normal Maximum summer temperature at location 0.5 to 1.0
Summer noon emergency Maximum summer temperature at location 1.0 to 2.0
Winter evening normal Mild winter evening temperature at location 0.5 to 1.0
Winter evening emergency Mild winter evening temperature at location 1.0 to 2.0

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 132

References
[1] Electricity Supply Association of Australia, D(b)5 (1998), Current Rating of Bare
Overhead Line Conductors published by Standards Association of Australia.
[2] MORGAN, VT. Thermal Behaviour of Electrical Conductors, Steady, Dynamic and
Fault-Current Ratings. Published in Brisbane by John Wiley and Sons Inc, 1991.
[3] ‘Standard Line Ratings Methodology for Transmission Network Services Providers’.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

[4] IEEE 738, Calculating the Current-temperature of Bare Overhead Conductors

[5] IEC 60909, Short-circuit currents in three-phase a.c. systems
[6] EN 60865-1, Short-circuit currents—Calculation of effects, Part 1: Definitions and
calculation methods.

17.3 DESIGN FOR LIGHTING PERFORMANCE

17.3.1 General
Lightning induced outages are one of the major causes of outages on overhead lines in areas
of moderate to high ceraunic activity. A moderate ceraunic level is between 30 and 50
thunderdays per year, and high level above 50 thunderdays per year.
The acceptable outage rate due to lightning is therefore one of the most dominant design
parameters for an overhead line. In a low to moderate ceraunic activity area, an acceptable
outage rate from lightning for overhead lines with overhead earthwires is typically 2 to 5
outages per 100 km per year.
17.3.2 Estimation of line outages due to lightning
There are 3 types of outages caused by lightning; shielding failure/direct strike, back
flashover and induced voltage.
A shielding failure occurs when the overhead earth wire fails to intercept the lightning
stroke and the voltage developed by the surge current (1/2 stroke current × surge impedance
of conductor) exceeds the insulation strength of the insulation. The electrogeometric model
developed by IEEE (and incorporated in lightning prediction programs, like Flash or T-
Flash) can be used to determine the probability of a shielding flashover.
Back flashovers are the predominant cause of lighting induced flashovers on overhead lines
protected by an earth or shield wire. The mechanism of a back flashover is that the
lightning current flowing in the overhead earth wire couples inductively and capacitively
with the phase conductor and induces a voltage in it. A portion of current also flows down
the conductive structure (or earth down lead) to ground and develops a voltage on the
structure. The magnitude of the voltage is dependent on the structure surge impedance and
the ground footing resistance. The lower the footing resistance, the smaller is the reflection
co-efficient and this results in a lower voltage on the structure.
Distribution lines are generally unshielded and the major causes of lightning outages are
direct strikes and induced voltages from nearby lightning strikes.
The prediction of lightning outages is not an exact science and the methods adopted in one
Authority may not be appropriate in others. It has been found that the parameters which can
be varied to achieve the largest influence on the lightning performance of overhead lines
are—
(a) installation of earth wire;
(b) having wood in the flashover circuit (cross arm or pole);
(c) critical Flashover voltage (CFO) of the insulators; and
(d) pole footing resistance.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 133 HB 331—2012

Overhead earth wires are used to shield the line from lightning strikes and are usually
installed on high reliability lines operating at sub-transmission and transmission voltage
levels. They are also installed on overhead distribution lines for short distances (typically
800 m) out of a substation to protect the substation equipment from damaging over
voltages. One earth wire is usually sufficient to cater for shielding flashovers on structures
below 20 m, but higher structures will need two earth wires to achieve effective shielding.
With a single earth wire, the shielding angle is usually in the range of 30° to 40°.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

The lightning performance of a shielded overhead line is complex and requires

mathematical modelling to determine the optimal shielding and back flashover rates.
The arc quenching properties of wood has been used by Authorities to reduce lightning
induced outages on the network. When wood is added to the insulation path, the combined
insulation strength of the insulator and wood is increased. The higher the impulse strength
of the insulator and wood combination, the higher the resistance to flashover. Refer to
DARVENIZA, M. Electrical Properties of Wood and Line Design published by University
of Queensland 1978 for the electrical properties of wood. The effective impulse strength of
a series wood and insulator path can be calculated as follows:
2
(
l total = l wood 2
+ linsulator )
1/ 2
. . . (17.1)

where
lwood = Impulse strength of wood
linsulator = Impulse strength of insulator
When an overhead earth wire is installed on powerlines, generally a down lead is run to
earth to provide a low resistance path to ground. A low pole footing resistance not only
reduces the probability of lightning induced back flashovers but also offers the following
advantages:
(i) Reduces risk of injury to persons or animals due to rises in earth potential at the
structure and the surrounding soil.
(ii) Provides a low impedance path for earth faults to ensure there is sufficient fault
current to operate protection relays

17.4 TRANSPOSITIONS
Transpositions may be required on long power lines or heavily loaded lines to reduce the
level of negative sequence voltage unbalance and reduce the interference in adjacent
telecommunication circuits.
The receiving end voltage imbalance on high voltage lines is affected by the geometry of
the phase conductors and electrical loading on these conductors. The geometry of the phase
conductors will affect the reactance (inductive and capacitive).
The voltage unbalance is generated by high current loading in the unbalanced impedances.
Over long distances (typically greater than 20 km), this may lead to significant voltage
imbalance and lead to overloading of certain types of electrical equipment (e.g. motors).
To balance this effect, lines are transposed (electrically moved in their physical position) at
intervals along the line. A complete barrel roll consists of 2 transposition structures to break
the feeder into 3 approximately equal sections where each phase conductor occupies each
position. There may need to be 2 or more transpositions in a very long feeder.
Transpositions may reduce the electrical interference in adjacent metallic
telecommunications circuits.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 134

17.5 RFI AND TVI

The relevant standard for New Zealand is NZS 6869.
The relevant standard for Australia is AS/NZS 2344. Some of the ways in which RFI are
generated are:
(a) Loose pins on insulator strings.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

(b) Sharp edges on hardware.

(c) Broken conductor strands.
(d) Pollution on insulators.
(e) Raindrops on conductor (generally only for transmission voltages).
(f) Grease leaching from conductor.

17.6 ELECTRICAL AND MECHANICAL DESIGN FOR INSULATORS

17.6.1 Insulator selection
The selection process for insulators involves:
Electrical design (power frequency, impulse, contamination)
(a) Mechanical design (pins, post, suspension, tension, end fittings).
(b) Consideration of fittings (corona rings, arcing horns, hardware).
17.6.2 Design for pollution
When determining the insulation requirements for an overhead power line or an outdoor
substation in a contaminated environment, the following criteria need to be considered:
(a) Creepage (or leakage) distance.
(b) The ability of the material to endure the electrical activity without being degraded.
(c) The shape of the insulator to assist in reducing the likelihood of contamination
collection and facilitate washing.
There are two approaches which can be used to select the appropriate creepage distance for
various levels of contamination severity. The recommendations are given in Table 5.1 of
Reference [1] (titled Relationship between severity of pollution at site to various
parameters). Table 17.2 reproduces the guidelines in Reference [2]. The basic concept is to
increase the surface creepage distance so that it is long enough to prevent a pollution
flashover across the surface.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 135 HB 331—2012

TABLE 17.2
GUIDE FOR SELECTING INSULATORS IN
CONTAMINATED ENVIRONMENTS
ESDD range Minimum nominal specific
Contamination (see Note 1) creepage distance (see Note 2)
severity
g/mm 2 mm/kV
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Light 0 to 1.2 16
Medium 1.2 to 2.0 20
Heavy 2.0 to 3.0 25
Very heavy Above 3.0 31
NOTES:
1 ESDD is the equivalent salt deposit density.
2 Ratio of leakage distance measured between phase and earth over the r.m.s phase to
phase voltage of the highest voltage of the equipment.
3 Consideration should be given to increasing the creepage distances is areas where there
are long periods without rainfall or very close to the marine coast.

References
[1] AS 1824.2—1985, Insulation coordination, Part 2: Application guide.
[2] IEC TS 60815-1, Selection and dimensioning of high-voltage insulators intended for
use in polluted conditions, Part 1: Definitions, information and general principles.
[3] IEC TS 60815-2, Selection and dimensioning of high-voltage insulators intended for
use in polluted conditions, Part 2: Ceramic and glass insulators for a.c. systems.
[4] IEC TS 60815-3, Selection and dimensioning of high-voltage insulators intended for
use in polluted conditions, Part 3: Polymer insulators for a.c. systems.
[5] AS 4436, Guide for the selection of insulators in respect of polluted conditions.
17.6.3 Design for power frequency voltages (wet withstand requirement)
The line insulation should be designed to withstand the maximum voltage expected on the
line. Overhead powerlines usually operate at 1.1 per unit voltage to take into account the
effects of voltage drop with loading and there is the possibility that with capacitors on the
line, the powerline could operate up to 1.4 per unit which can be regarded as the maximum
dynamic overvoltage.
Maximum dynamic overvoltage can occur during faults and load rejection. (1.4 per unit is
for a three phase power system that is effectively earthed e.g. the neutral is earthed). The
wet power frequency withstand voltage of the line insulation should be selected to exceed
this maximum dynamic overvoltage.
17.6.4 Design for switching surge voltages
Switching surge over voltages up to 3 per unit peak voltage can arise when overhead lines
are switched. The extent of this overvoltage is dependent on (1) the point of voltage wave
when the line is switched, (2) the capacitance or amount of trapped charges on the line and
(3) other equipment connected to the line. When high speed auto reclosing is installed,
overvoltage can exceed 3 per unit voltage, particularly on transmission lines. In these cases,
it would be common to install surge arresters on the line to limit the over voltages to the
designed line insulation.
A good coverage on the design for switching surge is given in AS 1824.2. When designing
for switching surges, one of the parameters which is difficult to obtain is the switching
surge impulse voltage. There are 2 main types of electrical tests conducted on insulators;
one being the lightning impulse and the other the power frequency flashover (wet and dry).

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 136

Switching tests have been conducted in laboratories and the flashover voltages have been
inconsistent and found to be dependent on the shape of the surge, the type of electrodes and
the presence of earth planes.
In lieu of adequate test data on switching surges a good approximation for the switching
surge flashover voltage is 0.8 times the lightning impulse flashover voltage.
The insulator parameter that determines the insulator impulse performance (i.e. switching
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

surge and lightning), is the arc distance across the insulator.

Line insulation is usually selected independent of substation insulation. It is necessary to
check substation insulation impulse performance and install surge arresters, especially when
the line insulation is longer than the substation insulation.
17.6.5 Selection of insulators to meet electrical performance
Tables 17.3 and 17.4 list common 11 kV and 33 kV insulator types and their mechanical
and electrical parameters.

TABLE 17.3
11 kV INSULATOR TYPES AND PERFORMANCE
Wet power
Minimum failing Minimum creepage Dry lightning
String insulator units frequency
load, kN distance, mm impulse, kVp
withstand, kVp
Clevis tongue—Normal 70 280 95 40
Clevis tongue—Fog 70 360 95 40
Ball socket—Normal 70 280 95 40
Ball socket—Fog 70 360 95 40
11 kV insulators
Pin—Normal 7 180 95 30
Pin—Fog 7 360 95 30
Shackle type SH.11 22 180 95 30
18 (cantiliver)
Line post—Tie top 425 150 38
6 (axial)
12 (cantiliver)
Line post—Clamp top 425 150 38
18 (axial)
Standoff line post with 12 (cantiliver)
425 150 38
Trunnion clamp 18 (axial)
8 (cantiliver)
Station post 360 95 38
1.2 (kNm torsional)
8.25 Ordinary
Mechanical
Load (OML)
Composite long rod 360 95 38
25 Maximum
Mechanical
Load (MML)

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 137 HB 331—2012

TABLE 17.4
33 kV INSULATOR TYPES AND PERFORMANCE
Wet power
Minimum failing Minimum creepage Dry lightning
33 kV insulator units frequency
load, kN distance, mm impulse, kVp
withstand, kVp
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Pin—Two part 11 534 200 65

Standoff line post with 9 (cantiliver)
785 200 95
tie top 11 (axial)
Standoff line post with 9 (cantiliver)
785 200 95
clamp top 11 (kNm torsional)
5 (cantiliver)
Station post 760 200
1 (kNm torsional)
8.25 (OML)
Composite long rob 900 200 70
25 (MML)

Example:
Select a suitable disc insulator string for a 33 kV line subject to extreme contamination.
Normal disc profiles have a creepage length of 300 mm and fog discs of 400 mm.
System highest voltage = 36 kV
Minimum nominal specific creepage distance = 31 mm/kV for extreme contamination
Required creepage distance for 36 kV = 1116 mm
Number of normal discs = 1116/300 = 3.72 → 4 discs
Number of fog discs = 1116/400 = 2.79 → 3 discs
Select a suitable disc insulator string for a 275 kV line subject to heavy contamination. Use
normal or fog disc profiles where the creepage length is 300 mm normal and 400 mm for
fog.
System highest voltage = 300 kV
Minimum nominal specific creepage distance = 25 mm/kV for heavy contamination
Required creepage distance for 300 kV = 7500 mm
Number of normal discs = 7500/300 = 25 discs
Number of fog discs = 7500/400 = 18.75 → 19 discs
17.6.6 Insulator mechanical design
The loads on an insulator can be calculated using the Limit State methodology outlined in
Section 2 of AS/NZS 7000. There are three states for the mechanical design of insulators
identified in AS/NZS 7000, these being the—
(a) Everyday load;
(b) Serviceable wind load; and
(c) Ultimate strength or failure containment load.
The guidelines for the strength factor for insulators are given in Table 6.2 of AS/NZS 7000.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 138

17.7 Earthing systems

17.7.1 General
Earthing requirements will vary depending on the type of structure (conductive or non-
conductive) and the soil resistivity. A risk based approach using ENA EG0 and EEA (NZ)
is outlined in AS/NZS 7000.
The earthing design covers the following areas:
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

(a) Earthing downleads.

(b) Bonding of conductive equipment.
(c) Butt earthing.
(d) Multiple rod and counterpoise earth systems.
(e) Deep drilling.
(f) Common or separate earthing.
(g) Touch and Step potential.
(h) Overhead or underslung earthwire.
(i) Lightning performance (surge arrester, arcing horns).
(j) Earthing enhancement.
For additional guidance on earthing, refer to EG0 and EEA.
17.7.2 Distribution earthing systems
Distribution earthing systems comprise of multiple earthed neutral, common multiple
earthed neutral and separately earthed systems. These are described in more detail below.
17.7.3 Multiple earthed neutral (MEN)
In a low voltage MEN system of earthing the elements of an installation that require
earthing are commonly connected to earth, and in addition are connected to the neutral
conductor of the supply system. This results in a well distributed, low impedance earthing
system with many connections to the general mass of the earth. A well connected MEN
system has a resistance of less than 1 Ω.
17.7.4 Common multiple earthed neutral (CMEN)
This is where) the HV and LV earthing systems are commonly bonded together with the LV
MEN customer installation. With this type of system special consideration should be given
to protection against HV earth faults and EPR. Where CMEN systems are installed, an
MEN value of <1 Ω is desirable.
17.7.5 Separate earthed system
A separated earthing system is implemented with a pole top transformer by providing high
voltage (HV) and low voltage (LV) earths on opposite sides of the pole and installing a
non-conductive covering for the earthing conductors within 2.4 m of the ground. Again,
earth electrode separation should be kept to the length of the electrode or 4 m at a
minimum.
Where a separate earthed system is installed, a resistance of 30 Ω or less is desirable.
17.7.6 Earthing and insulation of stay wires
Stay wires on lines should have insulators installed to limit the chance of an energised stay
wire coming into contact with the public or staff. There are two possible mechanisms that
may energize a stay wire; a conductor falling and energizing the stay wire and a broken stay

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 139 HB 331—2012

wire coming in contact with live conductors. Mitigations methods for either scenario are
given below:
(a) Conductor failure protection
Stay wires within 2.4 m of the ground should be earthed in accordance with Clause 11
10 of AS/NZS 7000 unless they are insulated by means of an insulator placed in the
stay wire.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

The stay wire insulator should be placed so its lowest point is not less than 2.4 m
above the ground. The stay wire insulator should also be placed so it is lower than the
lowest conductor, excluding any underslung earth wire.
The wet flashover voltage of the insulator should be 50% greater than the highest
conductor on the pole phase to earth voltage.
(b) Broken stay wire protection
A failed stay wire can fall onto live conductors and bring an energized stay wire
closer than 2.4 m in height from the ground. Figure 17.1 shows various broken stay
wire scenarios.
To protect for these scenarios, more than one stay wire insulator may be required.

21. 5 m p o l e 21. 5 m p o l e

B r o ke n s t ay w wii r e c o u
ull d B r o ke n s t ay wwii r e 8.5
p ote nti a ll llyy b e live a n d u l ate d - s afe
i n s ul
a c c e s s iib
b l e to tthh e p u b lilic

Single pole stay Single ground stay

18. 5 m p o l e 18. 5 m p o l e

B r o ke n s t ay wwii r e
B r o ke n s t ay wwii r e i n s u
ull a
ate
te d 5.9 5.5
i n s ul ate d - s afe
th e r efo r e a l ow r i s k to th e p u b li c

Single pole stay Single ground stay

DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETRES

FIGURE 17.1 BROKEN STAY SCENARIOS

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 140

17.8 EARTHING STRUCTURES FOR STEP AND TOUCH POTENTIAL

17.8.1 General
When a hazard created by earth fault currents requires mitigation, one solution is to modify
the potential rise of the surface of the ground by means of buried electrodes (grading rings).
17.8.2 Definitions
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Conductive structure—a structure made from conductive materials e.g. steel and steel
reinforced concrete. The structure may be a stay wire and stay anchor where no stay
insulator is used (or where an electrically inadequate stay insulator is used).
Non-conductive structure—a structure made from non-conductive materials e.g. timber and
fibre reinforced polymer.
Earth potential rise (EPR)—the rise in potential (voltage) of an earthing system used to
dissipate fault currents to remote earth, also known as ground potential rise (GPR) in
Britain.
17.8.3 Non-conductive structures
A non-conductive pole does not need to be earthed, in which case there is no step or touch
problem. When a non-conductive pole is earthed then the down lead is usually insulated so
that the touch potential problem is mitigated. Insulation need only extend from below
ground to 2.4 m above ground. The level of insulation should be adequate to withstand the
prospective touch potential that exists under fault conditions. A step potential hazard may
still exist but this can be mitigated by extending the insulation below the surface as
indicated in Table 17.5 for uniform soil resistivity.

TABLE 17.5
MAXIMUM STEP POTENTIAL FOR 2.5 m VERTICAL
ELECTRODE—PARTIALLY INSULATED
Depth of insulation below ground Max. step potential (%EPR)
0.0 m 68%
0.3 m 16%
0.6 m 9%
0.9 m 5%

17.8.4 Conductive structures

For conductive poles and for non-conductive poles with non-insulated down leads the
prospective touch potential should satisfy the requirements of Section 10 of AS/NZS 7000.
Conductive poles are inherently earthed via their foundations; however additional earthing
measures may be required to reduce the value of the footing resistance.
Where an overhead (or underslung) earth wire is used, the earthing system can be
represented by a ladder network as depicted in Figure 17.2.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 141 HB 331—2012

RS RS RS

RP RP RP
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

FIGURE 17.2 LADDER NETWORK

For an infinite number of poles with identical footing resistance and an infinite number of
equal span lengths, the equivalent resistance of the earthing system (ladder network) is:
2
RS ⎛R ⎞
R EQ = + ⎜ S ⎟ + RS R P . . . (17.2)
2 ⎝ 2 ⎠
where
RS = the resistance of each span of overhead earth wire (series)
RP = the footing resistance of each pole (parallel)
The earth fault current IF is split as shown in Figure 17.3. The current flowing to earth via
the faulted pole of footing resistance RP is given by Equation (17.3).

IF

RA If RP RB

FIGURE 17.3 DISTRIBUTION OF FAULT CURRENT

⎛ RAB ⎞
I f = I F ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟
⎝ RP + RAB ⎠
. . . (17.3)
R R
RAB = A B
RA + RB
where
IF = the fault current
If = the portion of fault current flowing to ground via the pole earthing
RA, RB = the equivalent resistance of the earthing network either side of the faulted
pole
For an earth fault at the first pole outside a substation, RA is assumed to be the resistance of
the substation earth grid and RB can be estimated using the equivalent resistance (REQ ). The
first pole may be within the influence zone of the substation grid and its resistance may be
lower than predicted and difficult to measure.
For an earth fault several spans away from a substation, RA and RB can be estimated using
REQ.
Figure 17.4 shows that the size of the overhead earth wire can significantly influence REQ.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 142

Figure 17.5 is based on the assumption that the fault occurs remotely from the ends of the
line and that RAB = REQ/2. In this instance, the portion of the fault current (If/IF) conducted
to ground via the faulted pole is influenced by the resistance of the overhead earth wire, the
span length and the footing resistance of each pole. Sizing the overhead earth wire is the
single most important decision for mitigating the step and touch potential hazard created by
high fault currents in a conventional network. Neutral earthing resistors and other
techniques mentioned in U8.6 of AS/NZS 7000 may be used to limit earth fault currents.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

1.4
Ladder
Resistance
1. 2
R S - r e s i s t a n c e o f s p a n o f O H E W (Ω )

20 Ω
1.0
18 Ω
16 Ω
0.8
14 Ω

12 Ω
0.6
10 Ω
8 Ω
0.4
6 Ω
4 Ω
0.2
2 Ω

0.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 10 0
R P - p o l e f o o t i n g r e s i s t a n c e (Ω)

FIGURE 17.4 EQUIVALENT RESISTANCE OF INFINITE LADDER NETWORK

20.0

30 %

25 %
16.0
R E Q - l a d d e r r e s i s t a n c e ( )

20 %

15 %
12.0

10 %

8.0

5%
4.0
If / I F

0.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

R P - p o l e f o o t i n g r e s i s t a n c e ( )

FIGURE 17.5 PORTION OF FAULT CURRENT CONDUCTED TO GROUND VIA POLE

EARTHING (REMOTE FROM ENDS)

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 143 HB 331—2012

17.9 EARTH POTENTIAL RISE

17.9.1 General
The relevant standard for earth potential rise is AS/NZS 3835.
The earth potential rise (EPR) of an earthing system is measured with respect to remote or
true earth. It is calculated by the formula:
EPR = If × RP
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

where
If = the portion of the fault current flowing to ground via the pole earthing
RP = d.c. or low frequency footing resistance of the pole earthing system
The proportion of the fault current flowing to ground (If) via any pole may be determined
by any of the following methods:
(a) A field measurement (most accurate).
(b) A detailed computer model.
(c) An estimate such as given by Equation (17.3) (least accurate).
The footing resistance requires:
(i) A field measurement (most accurate when done correctly).
(ii) An estimation based on electrode geometry and soil resistivity (least accurate).
The value of the footing resistance can be measured using the fall-of-potential method.
Erroneous measurements are possible so it is important that competent personnel are used
where required. Seasonal variations in measurements will occur depending upon ground
moisture and these need to be considered when assessing the hazard.
The fault current (IF) is usually calculated from a computer model of the network which
includes future capacity increases. The fault impedance is the parallel resistance of RA, RP
and RB plus the arc resistance however assuming zero impedance will give higher fault
currents. Single phase to ground faults and double phase to ground faults should be
investigated. Whilst a three phase to ground fault or a phase to phase fault may result in a
higher fault current, it does not flow to ground.
It is also possible to measure step and touch potentials using a four terminal earth tester.
Refer to Figure 17.6 and Figure 17.7. The current probe needs to be outside the influence of
the pole earthing system and away from uninsulated buried metallic objects. Any overhead
earth wire should be disconnected for testing unless specialised equipment is employed.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 144

C o n d u c tive p o l e o r d ow n l e a d

V
R A PPA R E N T = V
I
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

V TO U C H = I f x R A PPA R E N T
1m

LEGEND:
R APPARENT = apparent resistance as measured using an earth tester
V TOUCH = prospective touch potential with current If flowing to earth
V STEP = prospective step potential with current If flowing to earth
V = voltage measured internally by the earth tester
I = current measured internally by the earth tester

FIGURE 17.6 PROSPECTIVE TOUCH POTENTIAL MEASUREMENT

C o n d u c tive p o l e o r d ow n l e a d

V
V R A PPA R E N T =
I

V S T E P = I f x R A PPA R E N T
1m

FIGURE 17.7 PROSPECTIVE STEP POTENTIAL MEASUREMENT

17.9.2 Comparison of grading ring configurations

Various grading ring configurations and their effectiveness at mitigating the step and touch
potential hazard are tabulated in Table 17.6. For comparative purposes the step and touch
potentials are expressed as a percentage of the earth potential rise (EPR) which can be
calculated using Equation (17.3). This enables the step and touch potentials to change with
the magnitude of the fault current and with the value of the footing resistance which is
dependent upon the soil resistivity and grading ring geometry.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 145 HB 331—2012

TABLE 17.6
STEP AND TOUCH POTENTIALS FOR VARIOUS DESIGNS
Design type* Depth to horizontal Circumscribing Max. touch Max. step
electrodes circle radius potential potential
m m %EPR %EPR
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Single rod N/A N/A 73% 68%

4-Spokes 0.3 1.0 48% 46%
4-Spokes 0.3 2.0 34% 32%
4-Spokes 0.6 1.0 50% 46%
4-Spokes 0.6 2.0 36% 32%
4-Spokes 0.9 1.0 54% 49%
4-Spokes 0.9 2.0 39% 35%
Equilateral triangle 0.3 1.0 41% 42%
Equilateral triangle 0.6 1.0 42% 40%
Equilateral triangle 0.9 1.0 47% 43%
Square 0.3 1.0 34% 39%
Square 0.3 1.5 19% 36%
Square 0.3 2.0 20% 34%
Square 0.6 1.0 38% 35%
Square 0.9 1.0 43% 39%
Hexagon 0.3 1.0 26% 39%
Hexagon 0.3 1.5 21% 36%
Hexagon 0.3 2.0 23% 33%
Hexagon 0.6 1.0 34% 31%
Hexagon 0.6 1.5 25% 26%
Hexagon 0.6 2.0 23% 24%
Hexagon 0.9 1.0 40% 36%
Concentric squares 0.3 and 0.3 1.0 and 2.0 12% 34%
Concentric squares 0.3 and 0.6 1.0 and 1.5 18% 32%
Concentric squares 0.3 and 0.6 1.0 and 2.0 14% 26%
Concentric squares 0.3 and 0.9 1.0 and 2.0 16% 24%
* Figure 17.8 illustrates electrode geometries.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 146
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

FIGURE 17.8 ELECTRODE GEOMETRIES

Each design has a vertical electrode to a depth of 2.5 m to simulate either the butt earth of a
non-conductive pole or the foundation depth of a conductive pole. The soil is assumed to be
of uniform resistivity. The touch distance and the step distance are taken as 1 m.
Any attempt to improve the footing resistance should be directed vertically and not
horizontally otherwise there will be a transfer of unwanted potential that will alter the
tabulated results. This can be achieved by using earth stakes at the vertices of the grading
ring.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 147 HB 331—2012

S E C T I O N 1 8 S T R U C T U R E S U I T E

18.1 GENERAL
A suite of structures need to be selected or developed appropriate for the line route and
conductor. The structure suite would generally consist of in-line, small angle, heavy angle,
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

tee-off and termination structures. The duty of the structures may be determined by:
(a) Design working life.
(b) Material type.
(c) Number of circuits.
(d) Economics.
(e) Environmental (termite, acid sulphate soils).
(f) Height (underbuild, clearances, vegetation).
(g) Conductor tension.
(h) Wind and weight span (corridor width).
(i) Terrain.
(j) Stayed structures.
(k) Constructability.
(l) Maintenance (live line or dead line).
(m) Structure top geometry (electrical clearances, lightning performance, EMF and the
crossarm).
(n) Line equipment (electrical and mechanical design of insulators, hardware).

18.2 TOWER TOP GEOMETRY

There are a number of electrical clearances which determine the tower top geometry. These
clearances are:
(a) Maintenance approach and live line working under 100 Pa wind.
(b) Switching and lightning impulse flashover under 300 Pa wind.
(c) Power frequency flashover under 500 Pa wind.
(d) Hand reach under 100 Pa wind.
These clearances are shown in Figure 26.1. To determine the swing angle from the wind
pressure Appendix R of AS/NZS 7000 can be used with the following guidelines:
(i) The transverse force is derived from the conductor diameter and wind span.
(ii) The vertical force is derived from the conductor weight (N/m) times the weight span.
(iii) The minimum recommended weight to wind span ratio is 0.7.
(iv) In general the weight and wind area of the insulator can be ignored.
The vertical clearance between earth wire and top conductor is governed by the desired
lightning performance and angle of shielding. The shield angle generally varies from about
25°–40°, depending on the configuration of conductors.
Blowout clearance calculations are useful to determine clearances along the span to
structures along the route.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 148

The recommended conditions for calculating blowout are:

(A) 500 Pa wind on conductor.
(B) 15°C or ambient temperature applicable to the location of line.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 149 HB 331—2012

S E C T I O N 1 9 L A Y O U T D E S I G N P R O C E S S

19.1 GENERAL
The layout design process involves the survey of the line route and capture of all features
adjacent to the proposed centreline of the line; selection of a suitable suite of structure
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

types, the location of these structures on a line centre-line , the profiling of the conductors
and the calculation of wind, weight and ruling spans and structure heights. The layout
design should ensure the following outcomes are met:
(a) Acceptable electrical clearances to structures and ground for the voltage of line.
(b) Maximum adjacent span ratio selected to ensure longitudinal loading on insulators
and supports do not cause failures under adverse environmental conditions. The
adjacent span ratio is typically less than 3:1 (where there is free movement of
conductors on insulators) or 2:1 (where there is no free movement of conductors on
insulators)
(c) Weight to wind span ratio greater than 0.7 to ensure there are acceptable electrical
clearances on structures under wind conditions.
(d) Acceptable clearance of structures and conductors alignment to objects (e.g.
buildings, swimming pools, billboards).
(e) Set back on roads appropriate to the speed of the road. These set backs can be
reduced where there are kerbing or natural barriers (drain or mounds).
(f) Suitable foundation integrity (e.g. avoid excessive side slopes).
(g) Co-ordination with other authorities and services (road, rail, water,
telecommunication and aerial operations).
(h) Provide data files and profile details of the line construction details sufficient to
enable the construction of the line.
Designers need to ensure that the ground and environmental conditions are factored into the
layout process and need to consider for example the existence of steep slopes, existing and
future services, heritage sites, sensitive environmental areas, etc.

19.2 STRUCTURE PLACEMENT (SPOTTING)

In the structure placement process the following actions are typically taken:
(a) Identify end points and deviation angles.
(b) Select an appropriate structure for each location.
(c) Locate other obvious structure sites (e.g. tee-offs, switching points, high points).
(d) Locate in-line structures (first iteration, wind and weight span capability).
(e) Check of external and internal clearances.

19.3 ACTUAL WEIGHT SPAN TO WIND SPAN RATIO

The ratio of the weight span to the wind span is used for spotting suspension structures that
use ‘I’ strings or longrods. It serves no purpose for intermediate structures that use
horizontal or vertical post insulators (or pins), horizontal or vertical ‘V’ strings (except
when it is a requirement to maintain tension in both legs of the ‘V’ for RIV reduction under
certain wind conditions). Nor is it required for strain or termination structures.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 150

The weight span Lv and the wind span Lh can be measured from the longitudinal profile
drawing (Figure 19.1) and the ratio Lv/Lh calculated. Another method of determining Lv/Lh
for structure B (in Figure 19.1) is:
Lv 2bCv
R= =1+ (Based on the parabola) . . . (19.1)
Lh L1 L2
where
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

R = actual ratio of weight span to wind span

Cv = catenary constant at the maximum operating temperature (layout temperature)
b = the conductor support elevation above the chord joining adjacent supports
(dashed line in Figure 19.1) and is negative when below the chord
Lh wind span given by Lh = L1 + L2
2

When the conductor supports of three consecutive structures are co-linear i.e. b = 0 then
Lv/Lh = 1. When b < 0 then Lv/Lh < 1 and this is the situation where insulator swing may
violate electrical clearances under transverse wind. Deciding whether Lv/Lh is greater than
or less than one is easily checked by using a ruler on the profile drawing to determine
whether ‘b’ is positive or negative.

C
B

Lv
L1 L2

2Lh

FIGURE 19.1 WEIGHT AND WIND SPANS

19.4 ALLOWABLE WEIGHT SPAN TO WIND SPAN RATIO

Clause 3.8.2 of AS/NZS 7000 considers electrical clearances to the structure at three wind
conditions—light, moderate and high wind. Each of these conditions produces an allowable
swing angle for a suspension insulator. Consideration is given to the transverse wind
blowing from either direction. By neglecting the effects of insulator weight, wind on the
insulator and conductor deviation angle; the transverse swing angle Equation (Equation R1
of AS/NZS 7000) can be rearranged to give—
Lv Wh
R′ = ≥ . . . 19.2
Lh Wv tan ϕ
where
allowable ratio of weight span to wind span for the light, moderate or high
R′ =
wind

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 151 HB 331—2012

Lv = weight span under the light, moderate or high wind condition

Lh = wind span
distributed wind load on the conductor for the light, moderate or high wind
Wh =
(See Equation S5 of AS/NZS 7000)
Wv = distributed gravitational load of the conductor (Equation S6 of AS/NZS 7000)
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

maximum allowable insulator string swing angle from vertical for the light
φ =
moderate or high wind condition
Weights, which effectively increase the weight span, can be added to the conductor to limit
the swing angle, however consideration needs to be given to their effect on electrical
clearances. The weights may be placed on the conductor but away from the structure to
preserve original clearances to the superstructure. In this case damper placement will be
relative to the outboard weight clamp instead of the conductor suspension clamp. Except
when used on bridging strings, weights are usually used to remedy layout errors.
A minimum allowable ratio (R′) of weight to wind span will be generated for each wind
condition, typically three. This is done for each suspension structure type and conductor
combination used on the line. When spotting suspension structures manually, it is
impractical to calculate the weight span under three wind conditions and check the spotted
ratio (R) against the allowable ratio (R′) for each trial structure location. To alleviate the
effort, it is much simpler to define a single, minimum ratio for each structure type and
conductor combination. For convenience, the weight span at the maximum operating
temperature is used because this condition is used to ensure adequate ground clearance
during the layout phase. In some instances an ice condition may govern the design.

19.5 WEIGHT SPAN TO WIND SPAN RATIO VARIATION WITH CONDUCTOR

TENSION
If the weight span to wind span ratio R1 is known for a given tension H1 then the weight
span to wind span ratio R2 at any other tension H2 is:
C v2
R2 = 1 + (R1 − 1)
C v1
where
L
R1 = v1
Lh
Lv 2 . . . (19.3)
R2 =
Lh
H1
C v1 =
Wv1
H2
Cv2 =
Wv 2
where
R1, R2 = weight span to wind span ratio for condition 1 and 2
Lv1, Lv2 = weight span for condition 1 and 2
Cv1, Cv2 = vertical component of catenary constant for condition 1 and 2
H1, H2 = horizontal component of conductor tension for condition 1 and 2
distributed gravitational load for condition 1 and 2 (Equation S6 of
Wv1, Wv2 =
AS/NZS 7000)

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 152

Condition 1 is the maximum operating temperature condition

Condition 2 is the light, moderate or high wind condition
This formula can be used to calculate the ratio of weight span to wind span at any other
condition of temperature, ice, wind or creep. The weight span is calculated in the vertical
plane and not the inclined plane.
The ratio Cv2/Cv1 varies with ruling span and stringing tension, however the variation is
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

usually small. The smallest ratio can be used for a given layout design. This will lead to
slightly conservative insulator swing angles.

19.6 COMPLIANCE UNDER ALL DESIGN WIND CONDITIONS

For all design wind conditions, the actual ratio (R) of weight span to wind span should be
greater than the allowable ratio (R′) dictated by structure geometry and conductor size.

R2 ≥ R2′
Cv2
1+ (R1 − 1) ≥ R2′
C v1 . . . (19.4)
C v1
R1 ≥ 1 + (R2′ − 1)
Cv2
where
the spotted weight span to wind span ratio at the maximum operating
R1 =
temperature
R2 = the allowable weight span to wind span ratio under the design wind condition
Since there may be up to three wind conditions to check, then the spotted weight span to
wind span ratio (R) should be greater than the maximum value derived using Equation 19.4
for all of the design wind conditions.
C max
Rmax, light ≥ 1 +
Clight
(
′ −1
Rlight )
C max
Rmax, moderate ≥ 1 + (Rmoderate
′ − 1)
C moderate . . . (19.5)
C max
Rmax, high ≥ 1 +
C high
(
′ −1
Rhigh )
R = max ( Rmax, light , Rmax, moderate , Rmax, high )

where
C max = catenary constant at the maximum operating condition
Clight vertical component of catenary constant at the light, moderate and
C moderate = high wind conditions for the layout section based on the design
Chigh tension and assumed ruling span
R′light minimum allowable ratio of weight span (at light, moderate or high
R′moderate wind) to wind span required for the suspension structure and
=
R′high conductor combination to limit insulator swing angles
(Equation 19.2)
R max, light minimum layout ratio of weight span (at maximum operating
R′max, moderate = temperature) to wind span required to limit the suspension insulator
R′max, high swing angles at light, moderate and high winds

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 153 HB 331—2012

minimum layout ratio of weight span to wind span that satisfies the
R = suspension insulator swing requirements under all design wind
conditions
When manually spotting, this simple check is performed for each trial location of a
suspension structure that has no deviation angle. Modern layout software checks the
insulator swing for all phases and their respective deviations, for several weather cases and
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

conductor ages. The software can be used for asymmetrical structures (e.g. wishbone and
flying angle) where a minimum and a maximum swing angle are specified. In these cases
the orientation of the structure is important. Calculations are performed with the transverse
wind direction from both sides of the line.
During the spotting phase the conductor system is modelled using the ruling span
assumption, i.e. equal tensions in all spans. However analysis (checking) can be done using
a finite element model with either stiff or flexible structures. Suspension insulator weight,
wind area and length are also accounted for.

19.7 USING COMPUTER PROGRAMS FOR LAYOUT DESIGN

Modern computer programs can be used to spot structures, check clearances to obstacles
and provide a line layout more efficiently than previous traditional methods. Clauses 19.8
to 19.21 describe the common features of a typical layout design computer program.

19.8 TERRAIN
A 3-dimensional GIS-type (Geographic Information System) terrain model is normally used
to provide flexibility and compatibility with modern electronic surveying equipment and
mapping techniques.
Terrain and longitudinal profile data is normally collected electronically (total station,
photogrammetry, lidar, etc.) and subsequently downloaded into ASCII terrain files. A
terrain model normally includes information about the location and type of surface terrain
or above-terrain points. Above terrain points are normally referred to as ‘obstacle’ points.
There are two ways to describe an obstacle point, either—
(a) by its height above a ground point and the coordinates of that ground point; or
(b) locate the top of the obstacle directly with its own coordinates.
Before generating a terrain, one should decide on broad categories of terrain or obstacle
points which have unique requirements. These requirements include minimum code
clearances to be met above or to the side of the points as well as symbols to be used to
display these points on the final drawings.

19.9 CLEARANCES
If a point is an obstacle described by its height above the ground, clearances is determined
by the distance between that point and the ground. If a point is an aerial obstacle, vertical
clearances are required both above and below that point.
If the feature code is a ground point that will be used to draw a ground profile or a point
that should be by-passed when drawing the ground profile (for example the top of an
obstacle), minimum required vertical clearances above (and below for aerial points) and
minimum horizontal clearances are required to the side of these points for the voltages
selected.

19.10 TERRAIN MODEL

The three dimensional XYZ model includes points described by their global coordinates X,
Y and Z.
www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia
 HB 331—2012 154

19.11 SURVEY INFORMATION

The survey requirements for an overhead line design may include:
(a) Width of the line corridor to be surveyed (which may be different than the easement
width).
(b) Contour interval.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

(c) Key features to be surveyed (fences, gates, roads, trees, railway lines, existing
services).
(d) Land use and limitations/constraints.
(e) Centreline and line deviations.
(f) Coordinate system and height datum.
(g) Vegetation height/type.
(h) Side slope constraints.

19.12 ALIGNMENT
The centreline alignment (or alignments) of a typical line project need to be defined before
any layout design can be performed. In the plan view, the alignments consist of straight line
segments between PI points (points of inflection). With an XYZ terrain model, the
alignments are defined in the plan view by selecting the PI points.
Once there is at least one alignment defined, it is possible to create—
(a) other independent unconnected alignments;
(b) alignment branches; or
(c) alignment loops.
When multiple alignments have been obtained, it is then possible to build lines on all.
Values for the maximum offset for profile view (MOPV) and the maximum offset for
centre-line ground profile (MOCGP) are then selected. All ground or obstacle points within
the MOPV (measured from the centre-line) are displayed with the appropriate symbols in
the various profile views, whether on screen or on a sheet of paper. Points outside the
MOPV are not displayed in the profile views. In addition, any structure or wire with an
offset greater than MOPV will not be shown in the profile view.
The centre-line is defined in the plan view as the collection of straight line segments
connecting alignment corners. The centre-line ground profile is theoretically the
intersection of vertical planes going through the centre-line and the ground. However,
because the terrain data may be defined at discrete points within the line corridor, there is a
need for rules to define how the profile is displayed on drawings. The ground profile line
displayed is a line that joins all ground points within a specified offset from the centre-line.
That offset (MOCGP), is for two widths. The points are joined in ascending order of
stations. For example, if one selects a MOCGP of 3 m, then the profile line will pass
through all the points within 3 m of the centre-line.
If there is significant side slope (perpendicular to the line) the line profile may look jagged
when it joins points of significantly different elevations on alternate sides of the centre-line.
If the jaggedness of the profile line is objectionable, one may draw separate side profiles.
One may also generate additional interpolated centre line and side profile points using a
Triangulated Irregular Network (TIN) model of the terrain or by using breaklines.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 155 HB 331—2012

19.13 TRIANGULATING AN XYZ TERRAIN

The XYZ terrain model consists of individual points with coordinates and feature codes.
The Triangulated Irregular Network (or TIN) model of the XYZ terrain is a surface made up
of triangles having the terrain points at apexes using Delauney triangles.
The primary advantage of a TIN model over the basic XYZ model is that it is a surface and
not a collection of points. That surface can be used to generate accurate centre line and side
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

profiles, to find the elevations of arbitrary points or to locate points at the intersection of
latticed tower legs or guys with the ground.

19.14 BREAK LINES

Break lines (or break line segments) can be used to enhance XYZ terrain models.
A break line or break line string consists of break line segments. Each segment is a straight
line with known origin and end points. The location of each segment in 3-dimensions is
fully known from the global coordinates X, Y and Z of its two end points. Break line
segments which have one end in common are said to be part of the same break line string.

19.15 USING BREAK LINES TO DESCRIBE EXISTING OR PLANNED

FACILITIES
Surveyors can provide data on sections of a larger terrain described by many thousands of
break line segments and an even larger number of XYZ points. Some of the break lines
correspond to yet unbuilt but planned road improvements.

19.16 THE PROFILE (PFL) TERRAIN MODEL

The PFL terrain model requires that the centre-line of the power line be defined first. The
locations of terrain or obstacle points are then described relative to that centre-line. The
station of a point is the cumulative distance from an arbitrary reference point on the centre-
line to the projection of the point on the centre-line and its offset is its lateral distance to
the centre-line. Positive offsets and positive line angles are defined as follows; in the
direction of increasing stations, positive offsets are to the right and positive line angles are
clockwise.
Prior to electronic surveying and computers, the PFL terrain representation was used almost
exclusively in power line work. Therefore, many of the early line design programs used this
form of representation. However the XYZ model is more powerful as it allows the designer
to easily change a line route and to move a structure in the plan view without being
constrained by the existing centre-line.
The data for a ground point in a PFL model include the feature code, an optional label or
description, the point station, its offset and elevation, the line angle at the location of the
point (if the point is on the centre-line) and a zero obstacle height.
For an obstacle described by its height above a ground point, the data include the obstacle
feature code, an optional label or description, the station, offset and elevation of the ground
point directly below the obstacle, the line angle at the ground point (if on centre-line), and
the height of the obstacle above the ground.
For an obstacle described by its own coordinates, the data include the obstacle feature code,
an optional label or description, the station, offset and elevation of the top of the obstacle, a
zero line angle and a zero obstacle height.

19.17 USING SCANNED RASTER DRAWINGS TO CREATE PFL TERRAIN

MODEL
There are basically two approaches to building models of existing lines. The preferred
approach is to resurvey the terrain, the structure locations and the positions of the
www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia
 HB 331—2012 156

conductors with modern equipment, i.e. to create a XYZ terrain model. A limited and less
accurate alternative is to obtain the locations of terrain, structure and conductor points from
existing drawings or from scanned images of these drawings. These drawings can be
displayed in the background of the profile view. Once the drawings are properly positioned
in the profile view, PFL location points can then be digitized.
It is generally not recommended to use existing drawings as templates for building models
of older lines because of the potential accumulation of errors at each step of the process.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

The original survey may have been inaccurate. The nature of the terrain below and in the
vicinity of the line may have changed over the years. The as-built locations of the conductor
attachment points may not be well reflected by the drawing. The catenary curves showing
the positions of the conductors at a stipulated temperature may have been based on crude
assumptions not reflecting actual sagging conditions and creep effects. These curves may
have been drawn with templates not adjusted to the actual ruling spans in the lines. The
digitizing process itself, through scaling and clicking on lines of finite thicknesses, will also
add errors.
However, there are cases where one would want to quickly build a line model on top of a
raster drawing. Care should be taken so that the scanned drawing clearly shows labelled
station and elevation axes, with the station axis ideally labelled with true stations, as well as
line angle locations.

19.18 DESIGN CRITERIA

The design criteria often vary between countries and in different utilities within the same
country. The criteria can also change over time. However, there are still similarities in
design values and general design check functions can easily be applied to a wide variety of
design practices, from very simple requirements for distribution lines to the most highly
engineered processes for extra high voltage lines.

19.19 MODELLING OF WIRE SYSTEM

19.19.1 General
There are several modelling levels available to determine the response of the wire system to
a given loading criteria.
The simplest modelling level is based on the concept of the Ruling Span (RS) and it is
sufficient in most cases.
The most advanced modelling level (finite element) is based on a full structural analysis of
the entire tension section, including detailed models of all supporting structures and all
conductors. Because it is computer time intensive and is not justified in most situations, FE
should only be used in special cases where a very accurate representation of the interaction
between the structures and the wires needs to be considered.
Between RS and FE, there are some intermediate modelling levels. These are defined as
real span (because it works with actual real lengths of wires in each span) or finite element
(FE) modelling. The general assumptions used at these different levels are discussed in this
Clause.
19.19.2 Ruling span method (RS) modelling—Usefulness and practicality of method:
This is by far the most practical method and it is applicable to the overwhelming majority
of line design situations. It should be used in all preliminary design situations. This method
works well with legislated design loads which are generally applied uniformly over a
tension section.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 157 HB 331—2012

Assumptions:
(a) The analysis involves a single wire (conductor), in one or more spans, between dead
ends, i.e. it is assumed that there is no interaction between the wire and other phases
of the same electrical circuit or conductors in other circuits.
(b) The horizontal component of tension along the conductor in all the spans of the
tension Section between dead ends is constant, i.e. all intermediate supports are
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

assumed to be perfectly flexible in the longitudinal direction. This may not be very
accurate in the case of rigid post insulators and short suspension insulators subjected
to large vertical loads. It is usually considered sufficiently accurate in view of all the
other uncertainties and approximations associated with line design.
(c) Based on the horizontal component of its tension, the geometry of each span is
determined as the equilibrium configuration of a span is always a ‘catenary’. The
catenary lies in the plane defined by the chord length of the span and the resultant
wire load per unit length, UR, which is assumed to have constant magnitude and
direction at any point along the conductor in a given span. UR is based on the
direction of the chord (a straight line), even though actual points along the conductor
are below the chord. Without wind, UR is vertical and oriented downward. With
wind, UR is not vertical and it defines the swing angle of the span plane.
The catenary constant is the ratio H/UR, where H is the horizontal component of tension
and UR the load per unit length of conductor. H is constant throughout the span.
The ruling span is calculated using:
For level spans—

n
∑ L3i
i =1
Lr = . . . 19.6
n
∑ Li
i =1

For inclined spans—

n
∑ L4i
i =1
Lr = . . . 19.7
n
∑ Ii
i =1
where

Ii = L2i + hi2
the chord length between the supports of span i
Li = the horizontal span length of span i
hi = the support height difference of span i
n = the number of spans in the section between strain structures

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 158

For a single level, dead-end span the ruling span is Lr = L. However, for a single inclined
dead-end span, Lr = L2/I.
Limitations:
(i) All the spans need to be subjected to the same loading, i.e. this level of modelling is
not capable of analysing situations with different ice thicknesses in various spans.
(ii) There is no way to study the effect of slack re-allocation due to moving a conductor
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

attachment point or cutting/adding some wire length in a span.

(iii) There is no way to account for support displacements in a system where there is a
fixed length of wire, for example inserting or raising a structure to fix a clearance
problem without re-sagging the conductors.
(iv) This level of modelling cannot be used to model an existing line where unequal
tensions have been surveyed in various spans of a given tension section.
Finite Element (FE) modelling ignoring interaction between wires—Usefulness and
practicality of method:
With this method, all supports (towers, poles and frames) are assumed infinitely rigid
unless fictitious springs are chosen between the supports and the insulators.
For conductors supported by lattice towers with suspension insulators, the FE method
should provide more accurate sags at very high temperature than the RS method and very
good approximations of unbalanced loading situations.
Assumptions:
(A) As with RS, the analysis involves a single wire at a time between terminations, i.e. it
is assumed that there is no interaction between different wires (other phases).
(B) An accurate finite element model of the conductor in all the spans between
terminations is used. This model is assumed in longitudinal equilibrium (i.e. the
horizontal component of tension is assumed to be the same in all the spans) for the
sagging condition, i.e. for a specified weather case and conductor condition or
unstressed lengths can be specified. Strain and suspension insulators are modelled as
structural elements. Attachment points at the tips of post insulators and at the
structure ends of strain, and suspension insulators are assumed fixed in the vertical
direction, but can optionally be allowed to move in the transverse and longitudinal
directions. The transverse and longitudinal movements of the attachment points
depend on the assumed transverse and longitudinal flexibilities (or stiffnesses). With
zero flexibility, the supports are fixed.
(C) Once the tensions in all the spans of the tension section are determined (unlike with
Ruling Span, there will be different tensions in different spans), the corresponding
design loads are calculated using the same procedures as used with RS.
Limitations:
With this model, different loads can be applied in different spans (unbalanced ice, broken
conductor, etc.), slack can be reallocated between spans and attachment points can be
moved.
However:
(1) There is still no accounting of the possible mechanical coupling between conductors
in different phases.
(2) In the case of post insulators, it is difficult to know what value of longitudinal
stiffness should be used.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 159 HB 331—2012

19.19.3 Finite Element (FE) modelling accounting for interaction between wires
This modelling is similar to modelling above, except that all the wires between two limiting
infinitely rigid dead end structures (the ends of the model) are analysed simultaneously,
thus accounting for the possibility of some longitudinal interaction between the phases. If a
termination structure is being checked for strength with potentially different loads on each
side, the limiting termination structures are at the ends of the tension sections to the left and
to the right of the structure being checked. If not a limiting dead end, a termination
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

structure is treated as any other structure as far as its flexibility is concerned. The
interaction between the conductors is accounted for through the flexibility matrices of the
supporting structures between the limiting terminations. With the above model, it is not
necessary to consider structure flexibility (unless two flexibility numbers are specified at
each support).
With this level, software determines a flexibility matrix at each structure. A flexibility
matrix is just a device to represent the behaviour of a flexible structure without having to
model it in its entirety when it is connected to supported wires (Peyrot and Goulois, 1978).
Structure flexibility matrices may be determined automatically for Finite Element
structures. Therefore, there is no additional complexity required if already using FE
structures. Flexibility matrices include flexibility coefficients. Consider two insulator
attachment points, I and J. These points can arbitrarily be located in space, for example ‘I’
could be a ground wire attachment point and ‘J’ the structure attachment point of the
insulator supporting the lower left phase of a double circuit tower. If a single unit
longitudinal load is applied at point I, the corresponding longitudinal displacement J, I at
point J is the flexibility coefficient F.
For a transmission structure with N attachment points, the I, J N × N symmetrical matrix
that includes all the coefficients F is called the structure longitudinal flexibility matrix. If,
instead, there is a restriction to longitudinal loads and longitudinal displacements, and
consideration given to both transverse and longitudinal unit loads and their corresponding
displacements, a flexibility matrix of size 2N × 2N is generated. This is in fact the
flexibility matrix used by the computer software at each structure location when the wire
system is modelled at FE considering wires.
Usefulness and practicality of method:
This method only works with FE structures, as the flexibility matrices for all the structures
are automatically re-calculated by programs when needed. FE with conductors has all the
advantages of FE without conductors without its limitations: it accounts for the interaction
between the conductors and does not require an assumption of a flexibility value.
However, there will be an order of magnitude more computer time when using FE as
compared to RS. This modelling is the recommended method when there are longitudinal
load issues in lines supported by flexible poles and frames.
Assumptions and limitations:
If a termination structure is being checked for loads or is part of a tension section for which
tensions are calculated, its flexibility matrix, if available, is taken into account.
(a) Interaction between the conductors is modelled through structure flexibility matrices
which are inherently linear. Thus the nonlinear effects of extremely flexible poles and
frames (which may account for 10% to 20% of the stresses) cannot be accounted for.
Guyed structures, which are also highly nonlinear, may not exhibit the correct
behaviour.
(b) The effect on the equilibrium of the system of the wind load applied directly to the
structures cannot be taken into account.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 160

19.20 LAYOUT DESIGN OUTPUT

The output from a typical state of the art layout design process is the generation of drawing
and data files showing the following:
(a) A plan view of the corridor that indicates:
(i) The centerline of the line.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

(ii) All terrain features captured by surveys and mapping scans.

(iii) All structure locations, structure types and heights.
(iv) All roads, tracks, water courses, fences, clearance obstructions etc.
(b) A longitudinal profile of the centerline of the line that indicates:
(i) All structure locations, structure types and heights.
(ii) Conductor and overhead earthwire sag profiles for maximum and minimum
temperature conditions.
(iii) Side slope constraints.
(iv) Vegetation clearances where preservation measures are applied.
(c) Schedules of data for the purpose of construction of the line that indicates:
(i) Structure chainage positions.
(ii) Structure type and height data.
(iii) Span length, wind span, weight span.
(iv) Conductor and earth wire tensions, spacer spacing, vibration damper positions.
(v) Earthing and foundation requirements.

19.21 LIST OF AVAILABLE DESIGN PROGRAMS

The following list of programs are used by various electricity utilities but have not been
verified for compliance with AS/NZS 7000. Other programs may be available.
Layout Programs:
(a) PLS Cadd.
(b) Catan.
(c) TL Pro.
(d) Livewire.
(e) Poles ‘n’ Wires.
(f) SagTen.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 161 HB 331—2012

S E C T I O N 2 0 S T R UC T U R A L A N D
M E C H A N I C AL D E S I G N
The layout design will provide the appropriate wind spans and tensions required by the
structures.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

The structure strength is determined by the limit state loads—the loading conditions and
load factors are contained in Table 7.3 of AS/NZS 7000.
For distribution poles, the relevant loading conditions are:
(a) Maximum loading (wind, snow and ice).
(b) Everyday condition sustained load.
(c) Failure containment.
(d) Maintenance.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 162

S E C T I O N 2 1 D E S I G N V E R I F I C A T I O N
The line design process is an iterative process and requires final technical review and
verification. The main items include:
(a) Electrical clearances.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

(b) Adjacent span ratio.

(c) Uplift on structures (cold condition).
(d) Structure ultimate and serviceability limit states.
(e) Special locations (exposure to EPR and EMF).

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 163 HB 331—2012

S E C T I O N 2 2 D E T AI L D E S I G N
D O C U M E N T AT I O N
The documentation submitted as part of the detail design package may include:
(a) Structure schedule.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

(b) Conductor schedule (ruling span, sags, tensions).

(c) Material and plant list.
(d) Single line diagram.
(e) Geographical plan.
(f) Design calculations.
(g) Route plan and profile.
(h) Crossing details.
(i) Construction plans (limitations, archaeological sites, outages).
(j) Vegetation clearing.
(k) Legal approvals (Property and Easements).

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 164

S E C T I O N 2 3 C O N S T R U C T I O N A P P R O V A L S
The local network project owner may need to certify that the design is acceptable for
construction. This may include checking that the detail design documentation is complete.
The construction approvals may include:
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

(a) Payment of appropriate fees (e.g. workplace health and safety, EPA).
(b) Obtaining traffic and road closure permits.
(c) Obtaining vegetation permits.
(d) Specific site induction training.
(e) Engagement of Authority inspectors to supervise the work.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 165 HB 331—2012

S E C T I O N 2 4 D E S I G N S U P P O R T F O R
C O N S T R U C T I O N
The designer may need to provide support during construction. This may include:
(a) Structure relocation.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

(b) Re-pegging of structures.

(c) Approval and assistance with design changes.
(d) Stringing charts or complex sagging.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 166

S E C T I O N 2 5 A S - C O N S T R U C T E D
D O C U M E N T AT I O N
The designer may need to provide assistance for as-constructed documentation. This may
include:
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

(a) As-constructed plans.

(b) Finalisation of legal requirements including easements.
(c) Erection of warning signs (e.g. water crossings).
(d) Network data requirements (plant numbers, asset numbers, switching numbers, test
results, actual conductor rating).

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 167 HB 331—2012

PART 3 OVERHEAD DESIGN PROCESS FOR SINGLE CIRCUIT 132 kV

OVERHEAD LINE

S E C T I O N 2 6 S C O P E O F P R O J E C T

26.1 GENERAL
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

A new single circuit 132 kV line is required to be designed and constructed in a coastal area
in Australia in Region A (1 to 7 according to AS/NZS 1170) for a 50 year design working
life and line security level of 1. The line route goes across 10 km of private property on a
30 m wide easement and a further 1 km along a council road to a new substation. Concrete
poles are proposed for the section along the easement and wood poles along the road
reserve. The intermediate concrete poles utilize a steel crossarm construction (refer
Figure 26.1) with suspension insulators and provide a climbing corridor. The wood poles
utilize line post construction with no climbing corridor (refer Figure 26.2).
10
Ear thwire shielding angle 40°

28 0 0
1910

110 0

Crossarm A

20 º low wind 28 0 0
swing 10 0 Pa
9 fog t ype
insulator s = 1715
3
ine 0
el 0
Liv n 11
o
R
A/ Crossarm C
M
370 0 8 ap ai
p r n te
oa na
Live line ch nc
A / R of f 9 0 0 12 e
4 00

9
7 1
950
Hand reach 50 0
Crossarm B 130 0

Live line 0 20 º low wind

maintenance 50 swing 10 0 Pa
equipment 1
in extreme Powe r fre quency
position 2 withstand
1300 switching and
lightning impulse Pole centre line

35º moderate
wind swing 300Pa
70º high wind
swing 500Pa

6 1000 Square 700 live line 6

climbing corridor 700 Live line
working corridor 500 500
working corridor
5 Climbing corridor R1300

ELEVATION

11

1000 R1700
6 1000 Square
7
climbing corridor
Hand-reach
clearance 1000 Square
6 climbing
envelope corridor
7
R1700
Hand-reach
PL A N - L AT T I C E TO W E R clearance PL A N - P O L E
envelope

DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETRES

FIGURE 26.1 POLE TOP GEOMETRY FOR 132 kV CONCRETE POLE

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 168

100

2000
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

2305

4000

4305

6000

6305

DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETRES

FIGURE 26.2 POLE TOP GEOMETRY FOR 132 kV WOOD POLE

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 169 HB 331—2012

26.2 LINE LAYOUT

Figure 26.3 shows a section of the line route where it transitions from concrete to wood
poles.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

C o n c r e te Po l e s

1 2 3

C o n d u c to r
4
15C 5% CBL

Wo o d Po l e s
5
C o n d u c to r
15C 5% CBL
6

Substa
ati
ti o n

FIGURE 26.3 LAYOUT OF 132 kV SINGLE CIRCUIT LINE

26.3 PERFORMANCE AND DESIGN INPUTS

26.3.1 Environmental conditions
The structures, insulators and line materials to be used on the line needs to be suitable for
the following environmental conditions:
(a) Temperatures—
(i) 40°C summer day time.
(ii) –5°C winter night time, nil ice conditions.
(b) Solar Radiation
(i) Level ................................................... 1000 W/m 2 with high ultraviolet content
(ii) Precipitation ............................................. Annual rainfall in excess of 2000 mm
(iii) Humidity ..................... High relative humidity for prolonged periods in summer
(iv) Pollution.................................................................................. Coastal pollution

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 170

26.3.2 Relevant mechanical and electrical design Standards

The line is designed in accordance with the following standards and guides: AS 1531,
AS 1154, AS 1222, AS 2209, AS 4435, AS 60305, AS/NZS 1170, AS/NZS 2947,
AS/NZS 3835, AS/NZS 4065, AS/NZS 4680, AS/NZS 7000, ESAA D(b) 5,
HB 101 (CJC5), IEC 60815, NZS 3101, NZS 3404 and NZS 3603.
This is not a complete list and other relevant Australian, New Zealand standards and guides
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

are used in the design of the overhead line.

26.3.3 Conductor rating
Conductor ratings are determined by the methodology outlined in ESAA D(b) 5 Current
rating of bare overhead line conductors. The required conductor ratings are given in
following table.

Summer noon Summer emergency Winter evening

MVA MVA MVA
170 200 220

The summer noon conductor ratings are based on the following parameters:
(a) Ambient temperature 35°C (this is a probabilistic value and may differ from the
temperature used for line components).
(b) Wind speed 1.0 m/s.
(c) Wind Direction 90° to the line.
(d) Emissivity 0.85 (industrial weathered).
(e) Absorptivity 0.85.
To calculate the summer emergency rating, increase the wind speed from 1.0 m/s to 2.0 m/s.
26.3.4 Maximum conductor temperatures
The maximum conductor temperature for the conductor is:
For ACSR and AAAC conductor—90°C
AS 1531 specifies requirements for aluminium conductors.
26.3.5 Fault current and clearing times
26.3.5.1 General
The maximum 3 phase and phase to ground fault current on the line is 20 kA. The Circuit
Breaker (CB) fail clearing time is 250 ms. In this project, there is auto-reclose facility on
the CB.
26.3.5.2 Earthwires
The earthwires will be an OPGW with a conductor diameter of 14.3 mm. This is a standard
size with a fault current rating of 100 kA2s.
26.3.6 Lightning performance
The desired lightning performance of the single circuit line is 2 outages per 100 km per
year. The keraunic level to be used in the calculations is 30 thunderdays per year.
26.3.7 Earthing resistance
The footing resistance distribution for the line will be:
(a) 90% less than 10 Ω.
(b) 98% less than 20 Ω.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 171 HB 331—2012

(c) No structure more than 30 Ω.

(d) 5 Ω within 2.5 km of substation.
The required footing resistances can be achieved by installing earth electrodes and
counterpoises.
26.3.8 Power frequency performance
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

The line is situated in a moderately contaminated area, being coastal where the required
creepage length is 25 mm/kVp-p (IEC 60815).
The insulation must also withstand a maximum dynamic overvoltage of 1.4 pu.
26.3.9 Switching surge performance
The maximum design switching surge is 3.0 pu. The design outage rate is 1 outage every
1000 switching operations.
26.3.10 Insulation
The insulation for the concrete pole section is ceramic disc insulation and in accordance
with the requirements of AS 4398 and AS 1154.
The insulation for the wood pole section is composite line post insulation.
26.3.11 Maximum surface voltage gradient
The maximum surface voltage gradient on the conductor to ensure RIV and audible noise
will not cause annoyance to the public is 16.0 kV/cm.
26.3.12 Maximum electric and magnetic field levels
Electric field calculations is calculated using a voltage of 145 kV and lowest conductor
height of 11 m.
Magnetic fields should be minimised where possible with the lowest conductor height
assumed to be 11 m.
26.3.13 Electrical clearances
Electrical clearances for 132 kV are found in AS/NZS 7000 as detailed below:
(a) Impulse and switching clearance under moderate wind (Table 3.4) .............. 1300 mm.
(b) Power frequency clearance under low wind (Table 3.4) ................................. 500 mm.
(c) Maintenance approach (autoreclose on) under low wind (Table 3.5) ............ 1100 mm.
(d) Live line working (autoreclose off) under low wind (Table 3.5) ..................... 900 mm.
(e) Hand reach, centre of pole to power frequency envelope (Appendix FF) ...... 1300 mm.
The minimum air gap separation from conductor to earth must be 1.4 m. The minimum
phase to phase separation must be 1.9 m. No live line or maintenance approach clearances
are required on the pole.
26.3.14 Mechanical design
The line is located in a coastal area in Region A according to AS/NZS 1170. The design
working life is 50 years and the relevant wind speeds are given in Table 7.1. The design
wind loading (ultimate wind load) on the concrete and wood poles to be a minimum of
1300 Pa, and on the conductors, 900 Pa.
Appropriate component strength factors must be used to size the structural components.
26.3.15 Corrosion resistance of structures and materials
For this project all steelwork to be hot dipped galvanised to AS/NZS 4680 with a minimum
coverage of 600 g.m-2. The concrete poles can be non-prestressed or prestressed. Stays to

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 172

use a galvanized stay rod and be installed with a guy insulator. In soils regarded as
corrosive additional protection must be provided to the stay rod. (such as concrete
encasement and anticorrosive wrapping). All earthing ground material is copper for the
concrete and timber poles.
26.3.16 Foundations and stays
The foundations to be designed to relevant Standards or Codes to meet the static and
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

dynamic loads placed on the structures.

The stays to have stay insulators installed to overcome electrolytic corrosion and have
adjustment to allow for retensioning.
26.3.17 Vibration damping
The damaging effects of Aeolian vibration on the conductor and earthwire to be minimised
by selecting suitable tensions, hardware attachments and dampers in accordance with the
guidelines provided in AS/NZS 7000. Vibration dampers to be manufactured and tested in
accordance with AS 1154.
26.3.18 Joints and terminations
For all conductor types, the joints to be made by suitable compression sleeves. For ACSR
and AAAC conductors, the terminations to be compression dead ends.
26.3.19 Design within easements
Blow out calculations to be based on a wind pressure of 500 Pa and a conductor
temperature of 30°C. The 132 kV transmission line to be designed such that the conductor
blow out plus a safety clearance of 4.6 m (statutory requirements) does not encroach on
private property which is not covered by an easement.
26.3.20 Step and touch potentials
The structure earthing to be designed to minimise touch and step potential hazards to the
public. The allowable levels of touch and step potentials are outlined in Section 10 of
AS/NZS 7000. Remedial measures can include the installation of grading rings around the
base of the structures and insulating the base of conducting structures.
26.3.21 Low frequency induction
Where the transmission line runs in parallel with other metallic objects (such as pipelines,
telecommunication cables and fences, the electromagnetic induced voltages under steady
state and fault conditions to be below acceptable limits set in the low frequency induction
code.
26.3.22 Other design considerations
Vehicle impact barriers to be provided on poles which are at high risk from collisions.
Access tracks to be provided to all structures for heavy vehicles such as cranes and
elevating platform vehicles.
The route must have all of the necessary approvals from Government Bodies and other
Service Providers such as Telstra, Optus, and AGL etc.
All design drawings must be provided in hard copy and approved electronic format.

26.4 SELECTION OF CONDUCTOR

26.4.1 General
Clause 4.5 of AS/NZS 7000 outlines the considerations for conductor selection. The main
types of conductor used on 132 kV transmission lines in Australia are:
(a) All aluminium ............................................................................................ AAC1350.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 173 HB 331—2012

(b) All aluminium alloyed ............................................................................. AAAC1120.

(c) Aluminium conductor steel reinforced ........................................................ ACSR/GZ.
26.4.2 Conductor ratings
The required summer noon normal and emergency ratings for the line are:
170 MVA and 200 MVA respectively
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

A conductor ratings program has identified the following conductors which achieve this
rating with the following maximum temperatures.
(a) 19/4.75 AAC Taurus at 80°C.
(b) 19/4.75 AAAC Oxygen at 80°C.
(c) 30/7/3.50 ACSR/GZ Lime at 85°C.
The characteristics of these conductors are given in Table 26.1.

TABLE 26.1
CHARACTERISTICS OF CONDUCTOR TYPES

AAAC1120 ACSR/GZ
Characteristic AAC Taurus
Oxygen Lime
Mass (kg/m) 0.925 0.925 1.32
Diameter (mm) 23.8 23.8 24.5
CBL (kN) 50.9 73.6 121.0
Modulus E (GPa) 56 65 80
2
CSA (mm ) 336.7 336.7 356
DC Resistance (ohms/km) 0.0857 0.0884 0.10

26.4.3 Conductor sags and tensions

Transmission conductors are typically strung around 20% of the Conductor Breaking Load
(CBL) at an everyday temperature of 15°C. Table Z1 of AS/NZS 7000 provides
recommended maximum horizontal tensions for the various conductor types. Distribution
tensions will vary depending on the spans and the conductor type. For the transmission line
project, the maximum span lengths for the concrete pole section is 300 m, and for the wood
pole section is 120 m. The conductor tension is assumed as 20% CBL for the concrete pole
section and 10% CBL for the wood pole section.
Table 26.2 gives a comparison between sags for the various conductors.

TABLE 26.2
SAGS FOR VARIOUS SPANS AND TENSIONS

Span Length AAC AAAC1120 ACSR/GZ

300 m span at 20% CBL (15°C) 10.05 6.94 6.02
300 m span at 20% CBL and
12.19 9.62 8.46
max. operating temperature (80°C or 85°C)
120 m span at 5% CBL (15°C) 6.45 4.45 3.86
120 m span at 5% CBL and
7.05 5.27 4.66
max. operating temperature (80°C or 85°C)

26.4.4 Calculation of pole height

The height of the poles above ground can be calculated as follows:

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 174

Hp = Hg + Mg + Msag + Dp + De
where
Hg = is required ground clearance
Mg = ground clearance margin (allow for errors)
Msag = maximum sag at mid span
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Dp = distance between bottom and top conductors

De = distance between earthwire attachment and top conductor
For concrete and wood pole, the assumed values are given in Table 26.3.

TABLE 26.3
ASSUMED PARAMETERS FOR DETERMINING POLE HEIGHT
Parameter Concrete pole Wood pole
Hg 6.7 m 6.7 m
Mg 0.5 m 0.5 m
Dp 3.7 m 2.0 m
De 3.7 m 2.0 m

The calculated height of poles is given in Table 26.4 for the concrete and wood pole
sections.

TABLE 26.4
HEIGHT OF POLES ABOVE GROUND FOR CONCRETE
POLE AND WOOD POLE SECTIONS
Section AAC AAAC1120 ACSR/GZ
Concrete pole 27.6 24.2 23.0
Wood pole 18.0 16.3 15.7
NOTE: Maximum sag is taken at maximum operating temperature.

The length of pole needs to allow for the embedment depth. As an approximation, the
embedment depth = 10% of pole length +0.8 m
The estimated length of pole is given in Table 26.5.

TABLE 26.5
APPROXIMATE LENGTH OF POLES FOR CONCRETE POLE
AND WOOD POLE SECTIONS
Section AAC AAAC1120 ACSR/GZ
Concrete pole 31.5 28.0 26.5
Wood pole 21.0 19.0 18.4

26.4.5 Concrete pole selection

Single piece concrete pole can be produced up to approximately 24 m. For pole lengths
above this value, two modules will have to be manufactured and jointed together. This
considerably increases the cost of the pole. It may be desirable in this project to limit the
span length to keep the concrete poles to single piece. The maximum span lengths for the
various conductor types to keep the concrete poles to a single piece are:

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 175 HB 331—2012

(a) AAC ................................................................................................................. 200 m.

(b) AAAC .............................................................................................................. 225 m.
(c) ACSR ............................................................................................................... 250 m.
26.4.6 Wood pole selection
Wood poles can generally be supplied up to 21.5 m in length but the taller the pole, the
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

lower the availability. It is therefore necessary to keep the spans sufficiently short to keep
the pole heights to below this length.
26.4.7 Overall comparison between conductors
Table 26.6 gives an overall comparison between the various conductors.

TABLE 26.6
COMPARISON BETWEEN CONDUCTORS
Design Parameter AAC AAAC1120 ACSR/GZ
Capital cost of
Lowest Marginally higher Significantly higher
conductor
Resistance and losses Lowest Marginally higher Marginally higher
Diameter (mm)
23.8 23.8 24.5
(See Note 1)
Surface voltage
gradient (kV/cm) 10.9 10.9 10.7
(See Note 2)
Horizontal tension at
20% CBL (kN) 10.18 14.72 24.2
(see Note 3)
Concrete and timber
Highest cost for Moderate cost for all Highest cost for angle
pole cost
intermediate structures and terminations
(See Note 4)
Highest cost for
Moderate cost for all Highest cost for angle
Foundation cost intermediate
structures and term foundations
foundations
Single compression Single compression 2 Part compression
Jointing cost
sleeve sleeve sleeve
Long term performance Good in most Good in most Moderate in coastal
(See Note 5) environments environments environments
NOTES:
1 The larger the diameter the higher wind span and wind loading on intermediate and suspension structures.
2 The Surface voltage gradients were calculated using an electromagnetic field program. An acceptable level
is <16 kV/cm.
3 The higher the conductor tensions, the higher the loads on angle and termination structures and
foundations.
4 Concrete pole cost can increase considerably above 24 m. Timber poles are scarce above 21.5 m in length.
Large concrete poles are considerably heavier than timber and steel.
5 Table Y2 of AS/NZS 7000 provides guidance for the long term performance.

26.4.8 Final selection of conductor

The comparison would indicate that the preferred conductor is AAC Taurus for the shorter
span wood pole section and AAAC/1120 Oxygen for the longer span concrete pole section.
It is recommended to select one conductor for the project, being AAAC/1120 Oxygen
because the concrete pole section is the predominant section and the Oxygen is a common
conductor used at 132 kV in Australia. Some utilities may select the ACSR conductor

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 176

because of previous good long term performance and because the introduction of a new
conductor like AAAC in their network may introduce additional deployment and spare
costs.
It is common practice for utilities to select ACSR conductor in cyclonic areas to mitigate
potential cascade failures from broken conductor conditions.

26.5 ELECTRICAL DESIGN

Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

26.5.1 Electrical clearances between conductors

Example 1:
Single circuit 19/4.75 AAAC at 132 kV 3 phase on disc insulators for spans of 300 m. What
is the mid span vertical separation required between phases.
Sag at 50°C is 8.45 m and sited in Region A
where
U = 145 (assume 1.1 pu operating voltage)
k = 0.4
D = 8.45
li = 1.71
U
S≥ +k D + li
150
145
S ≥ + 0.4 8.45 + 1.71
150
S ≥ 2.25
The electrical clearance diagram shown in Figure 26.1 gives a phase to phase clearance of
3.7 m which exceeds this minimum value.
Example 2:
Single circuit 19/4.75 AAAC at 132 kV 3 phase on line post insulators spans of 100 m.
What is the mid span vertical separation required between phases.
Sag at 50°C is 2.2 m and sited in Region A
where
U = 145 (assume 1.1 pu operating voltage)
k = 0.4
D = 2.2
li = 0
U
S≥ +k D + li
150
145
S ≥ + 0.4 2.2 + 0
150
S ≥1.6
The electrical clearance diagram shown in Figure 26.2 gives a phase to phase clearance
which exceeds this minimum value.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 177 HB 331—2012

26.5.2 Swing angle calculations at structure

26.5.2.1 General
Swing angle calculations combined with electrical clearances (maintenance approach, live
line and power frequency flashover) are used to determine tower top geometry. Figure 26.4
shows a typical suspension insulator swing. The weight and wind effects on the insulators
have been ignored for simplicity.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

E a r th e d s tr u c tu r e

Windloading FT

Minimum phase/
ground clearance
We i g ht l oa di n g F W

FIGURE 26.4 SUSPENSION INSULATOR SWING

26.5.2.2 Swing angle for low wind condition

FT F
tan θ = and θ = tan −1 T
FV FV
Assumptions—
(a) conductor is Oxygen with diameter of 23.8 mm.
(b) maintenance approach wind loading FT of 100 Pa.
(c) wind span of 200 m.
(d) weight span of 150 m, (weigh to wind span ratio = 0.75).
(e) conductor weight of 0.925 kg/m.
Then—
⎛ 100 × 0.0238 × 200 ⎞
θ = tan −1 ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ = 19.2 o
⎝ 150 × 0 . 925 × 9 . 8 ⎠
The swing angle at low wind on the structure is 20°. The minimum weight to wind span
ratio is approximately 0.75.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 178

26.5.2.3 Swing angle for high wind condition

For high wind condition, a wind pressure of 500 Pa is assumed for power frequency
flashover clearance.
⎛ 100 × 0.0238 × 200 ⎞
θ = tan −1 ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ = 60.2 o
⎝ 150 × 0. 925 × 9 .8 ⎠
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

26.5.3 Blow out calculations

Blow out calculations are performed to determine the swing out of the conductors in the
span. This then determines either—
(a) the maximum span in an existing easement; or
(b) the width required for an easement.
Blow out calculations use a finite element process to determine the horizontal swing of the
conductor. The assumptions used in the blow out calculations are:
(i) Conductor is oxygen with diameter of 23.8 mm.
(ii) Conductor EDT is 20% CBL at 15°C.
(iii) Wind pressure of 500 Pa.
(iv) Level spans.
Table 26.7 gives the input parameters and the horizontal swing of the Oxygen conductor.
The maximum horizontal displacement is 6.58 m at mid span.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 179 HB 331—2012

TABLE 26.7
BLOW OUT CALCULATIONS FOR 300 m SPAN OF OXYGEN
CONDUCTOR AT 500 Pa WIND
Conductor Type Oxygen
Actual span length 300 m
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Ruling span length 300 m

Initial tension 20% UTS
Initial temperature 15°C
Wind pressure 500 Pa
Final temperature 30°C
RL first POA 30 m
RL second POA 30 m
Final tension 20352 N
X Coord Y Coord Z Coord
0 30 0
21.43 28.67 1.75
42.86 27.54 3.23
64.29 26.62 4.44
85.71 25.90 5.38
107.14 25.39 6.05
128.57 25.08 6.45
150.00 24.98 6.58
171.43 25.08 6.45
192.86 25.39 6.05
214.29 25.90 5.38
235.71 26.62 4.44
257.14 27.54 3.23
278.57 28.67 1.75
300.00 30.00 0.00

The easement width can be determined as follows:

Easement width = (Dc + Di + Blowout swing + Electrical clearance to structures) × 2
where
Dc = Horizontal distance of conductors from pole centre = 2.5 m
Di = Horizontal swing of insulators at 500 Pa wind
= 1.7 × sin 60 m = 0.9 m
Blowout = 6.6 m
Clearance to structures = 4.6 m
Easement width = 30 m (this may be increased for prudent avoidance refer
magnetic field calculations below)

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 180

In the road corridor, the maximum span lengths are assumed to be 120 m. The blow out
calculation is given in Table 26.8.

TABLE 26.8
BLOW OUT CALCULATIONS FOR 120 m SPAN OF OXYGEN
CONDUCTOR AT 500 Pa WIND
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Conductor Type Oxygen

Actual span length 120 m
Ruling span length 120 m
Initial tension 10% UTS
Initial temperature 15°C
Wind pressure 500 Pa
Final temperature 30°C
RL first POA 20 m
RL second POA 20 m
Final Tension 9893 N
X Coord Y Coord Z Coord
0 20 0
13.33 19.35 0.86
26.67 18.86 1.50
40.00 18.53 1.93
53.33 18.37 2.14
66.67 18.37 2.14
80.00 18.53 1.93
93.33 18.86 1.50
106.67 19.35 0.86
120.00 20.00 0.00

The road authority would normally provide an alignment for a pole in the road reserve. This
is typically 3 m. The conductors will in the still air condition be located in the road reserve.
The options for the line designer to secure the line are as follows:
(i) Acquire an easement which covers the excursion into private property. This is
estimated to be:
Easement width = (Dc + Di + blowout swing + Electrical clearance to
structures – 3)
where
Dc = Horizontal distance of conductors from pole centre
= 2.5 m
Di = Horizontal swing of insulators
= 0.0 m
Blowout = 2.1 m
Clearance to structures = 4.6 m
Easement width = 6.2 m (pole deflection has not been included)

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 181 HB 331—2012

(ii) Accept the conductors will blow into private property under wind conditions and that
there are no structures existing or likely to be constructed in the 6 m of the front
boundary. Councils normally have development conditions on building applications.
26.5.4 Lightning outage predictions
A lightning prediction program such as ‘Flash’ or ‘T-Flash’ can be used to estimate the
shielding failure and backflashover outages on the 132 kV powerline.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

The ‘Flash’ program was used to predict the performance of the concrete pole line. The
parameters used in the calculation were as follows:
(a) Earthwire and Conductor geometry as per Figure 26.1.
(b) Thunderday level of 30 (design parameter from above).
(c) Ground flash density of 1.5 strokes per sq km (based on 30 thunderday level).
(d) Average ground footing resistance = 10 Ω.
(e) Earthwire sagged at 80% of conductor sag.
The results from the program were:
(i) Backflashover rate = 0.62 outages/100 km/year
(ii) Shielding failure flashover rate = 0.05 outages/100 km/year
(iii) Total flashover rate = 0.67 outages/100 km/year
(iv) A desirable outage rate for a 132 kV line is up to 2.0 outages per 100 km/year.
Some of the critical parameters (average ground resistance and ground flash density) were
varied to assess how the outage rates would change. These studies are given in Table 26.9

TABLE 26.9
LIGHTNING OUTAGE PREDICTIONS (CHANGING PARAMETERS)

Shielding failure
Backflashover Total flashover
Changed parameter flashover rate
rate 100 km/year rate 100 km/year
100 km/year
Base case 0.62 0.05 0.67
Ave ground resistance = 20 Ω 2.13 0.05 2.18
Ave ground resistance = 5 Ω 0.24 0.05 0.29
2
GFD = 3.0 strokes/km 1.23 0.11 1.34
NOTE: The lightning outage rate will vary depending on—
(a) the lightning prediction program;
(b) the parameters chosen for ground flash density, structure and earth surge impedances; and
(c) the method for calculating shielding failure flashovers.

Some transmission utilities stipulate a ground footing resistance of 5 Ω or less for the first
2.5 km out of a substation for insulation coordination and to achieve a virtual lightning
proof zone. Based on an outage rate of 0.29 per 100 km/year for a ground resistance to 5 Ω,
the probability that a lighting strike will cause a flashover of a 2.5 km section of line is
estimated at 1 in 140 years (100/2.5/.29).
26.5.5 Magnetic field calculations
A magnetic field program was used to plot the magnetic field under the 132 kV power line.
The geometry used was in accordance with Figure 26.1 and the assumed height of the
lowest conductor was 10 m. Magnetic field calculations are normally performed at 1 m
above ground.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 182

Figure 26.5 shows the magnetic field under the power line for a current of 100 A in the
conductors for an easement width of 40 m. The magnetic fields will vary in proportion with
line current and the normal current loading (not emergency) should be used for assessing
magnetic fields for the line. For example, although the 132 kV line has a normal rating of
170 MVA, a 132 kV network is normally designed with N-1 contingency so the normal
current loading on the 132 kV line would be less than half of the 170 MVA rating i.e. 85
MVA (370 A). The values in Figure 26.5 need to be scaled up by a factor of 3.7 to derive
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

the magnetic fields at 85 MVA rating.

S ingle Circuit 13 2 kV Line

9.0 0
M a g n et i c Fi e l d (m G)

8 .0 0

7.0 0

6 .0 0

5.00

4.0 0

3.00

2.0 0

1.0 0

0.0 0
9 0
8. 0
7 0
6. 0
5 0
4 0
3. 0
2 0
1 0
0. 0
-9 00
-8 00
-7 0 0
-6 00
-5 00
-4 00
-3 00
-2 00
-1 0 0
0. 0
1. 0
2. 0
3. 0
4. 0
5. 0
00

7. 0
8. 0
9. 0
10 0 0
11 0 0
12 . 0 0
13 . 0 0
14 . 0 0
15 . 0 0
16 . 0 0
17 0 0
18 0 0
19 . 0 0
20.00
0
-1 . 0
-1 . 0
-1 0
-1 . 0
-1 0
-1 . 0
-1 . 0
-1 0
-1 . 0
-1 . 0

.0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0

.0
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

6.

.
.
0
-2

D i s t a n c e (m)

FIGURE 26.5 MAGNETIC FIELDS ON SINGLE CIRCUIT 132 kV LINE (PER 100 A)

26.5.6 Electrical design of transmission line insulation. pollution, clean and wet
Constant definitions
kV ≡ V 103 kiloVolt
puV ≡ 1 per unit voltage
Input data
Spac ≡ 146 mm Unit spacing between insulator discs
Creeplf ≡ 432 mm Creepage distance for disc. 292 mm for normals, 432 mm for fogs
Lh ≡ 400 mm Length of hardware in suspension string
Pollution
CreeperkVhp ≡ 25 mm kV–1 Pollution requirement. mm/kV line to line. IEC 60815-16
light, 20 medium, 25 heavy, 31 very heavy
Environment
273 + 20
δ ≡ 0.95 Relative air density. 0.95 for sea level and 35°C = 0.951
273 + 35
Humidity correction factor. For 20% rel humidity and 35°C moisture
H0 ≡ 1.025
content of air is 8 g/m3 and H0 is 1.025
Exponent for air correction factor. For 9 discs, spacing is 1314 mm
n ≡ 0.93
and n is 0.88
© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au
 183 HB 331—2012

Electrical—Voltage
σss ≡ 10% Standard deviation for switching surge
σins ≡ 5% Standard deviation for insulator string
Switching surge flashover rate. Expected number of switching
SSFR ≡ 104
surges between flashovers
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Conversion factor. Switching surge divided by k gives equivalent

k ≡ 0.8
impulse. 0.8
Flashover rate strength/stress ratio. From EPRI ‘red’ book
R ≡ 1.34
Figure 11.15.2. Suggest 1 + 3.4ss
R −1
Vφφnom ≡ 132 kV Nominal RMS phase to phase voltage = 3.4
σ ss
OVcont ≡ 1.1 puV Maximum continuous 50 Hertz system voltage. 1.1 puV
OVdyn ≡ 1.4 puV Maximum dynamic 50 Hertz voltage. 1.4 puV
OVsw ≡ 3.0 puV Maximum switching surge voltage
Insulator, electrical design
Vφφrms = Vφφnom OVcon Maximum continuous 50 Hz phase to phase RMS voltage
Vφφrms = 145.2 kV
Pollution
Creephpr = Vφφrms CreeprkVhp Required creepage length
Creephpr = 3630 mm
⎛ Creephpr ⎞ Required number of suspension and bridging insulator
Nhpsus = ceil ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟
⎝ Creeplf ⎠ discs, no allowance for one broken disc in string

Nhpsus = 9
Required number of tension insulator discs allowing for one
Nhptens = Nhpsus + 1
broken disc in string
Nhptens = 10
Lhpstring = Nhpsus Spac + Lp Length of insulator string including hardware
Lhpstring = 1714 mm
Power frequency clean and wet conditions
Determine insulation for wet conditions then no correction is required for humidity.
Vφφnom
VφGrms = OVcon Maximum continuous 50 Hertz phase to ground RMS voltage
3
VφGrms = 83.8 kV
VφG max = VφGrms OVdyn Maximum dynamic 50 Hertz phase to ground RMS voltage
VφG max = 117.4 kV
n
VφGwith ⎛H ⎞
= VφGmax ⎜ 0 ⎟ R Required 50 Hertz wet withstand RMS voltage
⎝ δ ⎠

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 184

VφGwith = 168.8 kV
Switching surge
VφGss = VφGrms 2 OVsw Peak switching surge phase to ground voltage

VφGss = 355.7 kV
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

r Peak switching surge phase to ground voltage for one

VφGssc ⎛H ⎞
= VφGss ⎜ 0 ⎟ insulator string and corrected to standard pressure and
⎝ δ ⎠ humidity
VφGssc = 382 kV

VφGssl Peak switching surge phase to ground voltage for insulator string
= VφGssc R
taking into account number of strings in the line
VφGssl = 511 kV
VφGssl
VφGsseqi = Equivalent impulse phase to ground for peak switching surge
k
VφGsseqi = 639 kV

Results
Vφφrms = 145.2 kV
Pollution
Creephpr = 3630 mm Minimum required creepage length
Required number of suspension insulator discs, no allowance for
Nhpsus = 9
one broken disc in string
Required number of tension insulator discs—allow one disc
Nhptens = 10
extra to ensure flashover is across suspension/bridging string
Lhpstring = 1714 mm Length of insulator string including hardware
Power frequency clean and wet conditions
VφGrms = 84 kV Maximum continuous 50 Hertz phase to ground RMS voltage
VφGmax = 117 kV Maximum dynamic 50 Hertz phase to ground RMS voltage
VφGwith = 169 kV Required 50 Hertz wet withstand RMS voltage
4 normal discs or 5 fog discs required for this wet power frequency voltage
Switching surge
VφGss = 356 kV Peak switching surge phase to ground voltage

VφGssc Peak switching surge phase to ground voltage for one insulator
= 382 kV
string & corrected to standard pressure and humidity

VφGssl Peak switching surge phase to ground voltage for insulator string
= 511 kV
taking into account number of strings in the line
VφGsseqi = 639 kV Equivalent impulse phase to ground for peak switching surge
7 normal discs or 7 fog discs are required for this lightning impulse.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 185 HB 331—2012

In summary, based on the pollution requirements there are 9 discs required for suspension
and bridging strings. In practice, 10 discs are installed in strain positions to ensure any
flashover on tensions structures are across the bridging string.
For the wood pole section, the electrical specification for the long rod and line post
insulators are as follows:
(a) Wet power frequency withstand voltage = 175 kV.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

(b) Lightning impulse voltage = 650 kV.

(c) Creepage length = 3630 mm.

26.6 MECHANICAL DESIGN OF INSULATOR—TRANSMISSION LINE

INSULATORS
Example 1:
Calculate the strength of a tension ceramic disc insulator used for oxygen conductor strung
on a 300 m span and at everyday tension of 20% CBL (refer Table Z1 of AZ/NZS 7000).
Based on Appendix CC, the state to determine the mechanical design is the ultimate
strength state.
Limit state condition—ultimate load at 900 Pa (Security class 1)
Conductor tension at EDT = 14 720 N
Conductor tension at 900 Pa = 30 688 N
Tension load Multiplier = 1.25
Limit State Tension Design Load = 38 360 N
Component strength factor for ceramic insulator = 0.95 (Table 6.2 of AS/NZS 7000 and
verified from statistical testing)
Minimum insulator ultimate strength = 38 360/0.95 = 40 380 N
Select a disc insulator with a standard strength of 70 kN or higher
Example 2:
Calculate the strength of a long rod composite insulator used for pawpaw conductor strung
on a 400 m span in cyclonic region and at of 20% CBL (refer Table Z1 of AS/NZS 7000).
Based on Appendix CC, the state to determine the mechanical design is the ultimate
strength state.
Limit state condition—ultimate load at 1200 Pa (Security class 3)
Conductor tension at EDT = 35 800 N
Conductor tension at 1200 Pa = 66 486 N
Tension load multiplier = 1.25
Limit state tension design load = 83 108 N
Component strength factor for long rod insulator = 0.7 (Table 6.2 of AS/NZS 7000 and
using 1 minute short term ultimate strength)
Minimum insulator ultimate strength = 83 108/0.7 = 118 725 N
Select a disc insulator with a specified mechanical load of 160 kN. Transmission utilities
tend to standardise tension insulator strength ratings at 70 kN and 160 kN for disc insulators
and 112 kN and 160 kN for composite long rod insulators.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 186

Example 3:
Calculate the strength of a composite line post insulator used to support Oxygen conductor
in a clamp top with a weight of 0.925 kg/m, weight span of 200 m, and strung to everyday
tension of 20% CBL.
Limit state load condition—everyday load
Conductor weight force = 0.925 × 9.806 × 200 = 1814 N
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Conductor load multiplier = 1.25

Limit state vertical load = 2270 N
Longitudinal load for 3:1 adjacent span ratio, and max operating temperature of
75°C = 5200 N
Conductor tension multiplier = 1.25
Limit state longitudinal design load = 6500 N
Resultant bending moment load = (2270 2
)
+ 6500 2 = 6900 N
Component strength factor for composite post insulator = 0.9 (Table 6.2 of AS/NZS 7000)
Insulator ultimate design cantilever load = 6900/0.9 = 7650 N
NOTE: The maximum design cantilever load of a post insulator is typically 40 to 50% of the
ultimate strength.
Limit state condition—serviceable wind load at 500 Pa
Conductor weight force = 0.925 × 9.806 × 200 = 1814 N
Conductor load multiplier = 1.25
Limit state vertical load = 2270 N
Longitudinal load for 3:1 adjacent span ratio, and max operating temperature of
75°C = 5200 N
Conductor tension multiplier = 1.25
Limit state longitudinal design load = 6500 N
Resultant bending moment load = (2270 2
)
+ 6500 2 = 6900 N
Component strength factor for composite post insulator = 0.9 (Table 6.2 of AS/NZS 7000))
Insulator ultimate design cantilever load = 6900/0.9 = 7650 N
Transverse compressive load = 0.0238 × 500 × 200 = 2380 N
Compression load multiplier = 1.0
Limit state transverse compressive load = 2380 N
Combining bending and compressive loads—simplified method:
Compressive strength of 2.5 inch line post = 50 kN
Need for derating for combined bending and compression loads
Derating factor = 1 − (2380/50 000) = 0.95
Insulator ultimate design cantilever load with transverse load = 7650/0.95 = 8050 N
Limit state condition—failure containment or ultimate load at 1300 Pa
Conductor weight force = 0.925 × 9.806 × 200 = 1814 N
Conductor load multiplier = 1.25
Limit State Vertical Load = 2270 N
© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au
 187 HB 331—2012

Longitudinal load for 3:1 adjacent span ratio, and max operating temperature of
75°C = 5200 N
Conductor tension multiplier = 1.25
Limit state longitudinal design load = 6500 N
Resultant bending moment load = (2270 2
)
+ 6500 2 = 6900 N
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Component strength factor for composite post insulator = 0.9 (Table 6.2 of AS/NZS 7000)
Insulator ultimate design cantilever load = 6900/0.9 = 7650 N
Transverse compressive load = 0.0238 × 1300 × 200 = 6188 N
Compression load multiplier = 1.00
Limit state transverse compressive load = 6188 N
Combining bending and compressive loads—simplified method:
Compressive strength of 2.5 inch line post = 50 kN
Derating factor = 1 – (6188/50 000) = 0.88
Insulator ultimate design cantilever load = 7650/0.88 = 8690N
Comments:
The determining state is the failure containment load where the factored ultimate design
cantilever load is 8690 N.
A 2.5 inch post insulator is typically rated at 12.5 kN ultimate cantilever strength and is
recommended for this ultimate load
For spans much higher than 200 m, the combined loads may exceed the 12.5 kN ultimate
design cantilever strength. Design options to support the failure containment load for the
long spans include:
(a) Brace 2.5 inch post with a long rod insulator
(b) Limit the line layout to an adjacent span ratio of 2 or less
(c) Use a 3 inch post which has a MDCL of around 9 kN
Example 4:
Calculate the strength of a suspension composite long rod used to support oxygen conductor
with a weight of 0.925 kg/m, weight and wind span of 400 m, and strung to everyday
tension of 20% CBL. For broken conductor condition assume a wind of 0.25 of ultimate
wind (900 Pa).
Limit state condition—everyday load
Conductor weight load = 0.925 × 9.806 × 400 N = 3628 N
Conductor weight multiplier = 1.25
Limit state conductor weight load = 4535
Assume no longitudinal load due to free swinging insulator
Component strength factor for long rod insulator = 0.5 (Table 6.2 of AS/NZS 7000) and
long term strength)
Insulator specified mechanical load = 4535/0.5 = 9070 N
Limit state condition—ultimate strength state under 1300 Pa wind
Conductor weight = 0.925 × 9.806 × 400 N = 3628 N
Conductor weight multiplier = 1.25
www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia
 HB 331—2012 188

Limit state conductor weight load = 4535

Assume no longitudinal load due to free swinging insulator
Transverse load = 0.0238 × 1300 × 400 = 12376 N
Tension load multiplier = 1.25
Limit state transverse load = 15470 N
(4535 )
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

2
Resultant load = + 15470 2 = 16120 N
Component strength factor for long rod insulator = 0.7 (Table 6.2 of AS/NZS 7000) and
short term strength)
Insulator specified mechanical load = 16120/0.7 = 23028 N
Limit state condition—failure containment load under broken conductor
Longitudinal load = 16 800 N (at 225 Pa wind)
Residual Static Load = 0.7
Longitudinal load with load relief = 11760 N
Tension load multiplier = 1.25
Limit state tension load = 14700 N
Component strength factor for long rod insulator = 0.7 (Table 6.2 of AS/NZS 7000) and
short term strength)
Insulator specified mechanical load = 14700/0.7 = 21000 N
Comments:
(a) The determining state is the ultimate strength state under 1300 Pa wind
(b) The minimum recommended size for the suspension insulator is 111 kN (specified
mechanical load). The SML is a one minute withstand load.
(c) If a ceramic disc insulator would be used, then the recommended minimum size is
70 kN (minimum breaking load).
(d) The minimum recommended strengths are based on the requirement to achieve a
design life comparable to other line components
Example 5:
This example applies a more rigorous approach to the application of AS/NZS 7000 to check
the strength capacity of tension ceramic disc insulator string for a terminal tower. The
string is made up of 11 × 70 kN normal disc insulators.
The design criteria as follows:
Zone 1, Wind region A4, Md = 1.0, Mt = 1.0, Ms = 1.0, Terrain category 2
Line security level = 1 and design working life = 50 years
Oxygen conductor strung at everyday tension of 20% CBL (refer Table Z1 of
AS/NZS 7000)
Wind span = 200 m, weight span = 400 m
Ruling span = 330 m, tension section = 4000 m
Average height of conductor = 20 m
Wind direction orthagonal to line direction.
Find load components for maximum transverse wind condition (refer Table 7.3 of
AS/NZS 7000), note that this may not be the governing condition)
© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au
 189 HB 331—2012

Find Ftw
Conductor tension at EDT = 14.72 kN
Wind pressure = 1.065 kPa
SRF = 0.59 for tension span of 4000 m
Wind pressure on conductor = 0.628 kPa
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Conductor tension at 0.628 kPa = 25.13kN = Ftw

Find Fc
SRF = 0.65 for span of 400 m (terminal tower wind span is 200 m actual span is 400 m)
Wind pressure on conductor = 0.692 kPa
Fc = 0.692 kPa × 0.0238 m × 200 m = 3.29kN
Find Fi
Projected wind area = 0.25 m2 estimated
Fi = 1.065 kPa × 0.25 m2 × 1.2 = 0.32 kN
Find Gc
Gc = 9.064 N/m × 400 m = 3.63 kN
Find Gs
Insulator string weight assume 0.55 kN
Gs = 0.55 kN
Using general Equation (See Clause 6.3) and Table 7.3 of AS/NZS 7000) find design load
φRn > effect of loads (Wn + ∑ γ x X )
Vertical load = 1.1Gs + 1.25Gc = 5.14 kN
Horizontal in line load = 1.25Ftw = 31.41 kN
Horizontal transverse to line load = Wn = Fc + Fi = 3.61 kN
Therefore tension in string (vectorial sum) = (5.142 + 31.412 + 3.612)1/2 = 32.03 kN
Using general Equation (See Clause 6.3 of AS/NZS 7000) find component strength
φRn > effect of loads (Wn + ∑ γ x X )
Component strength factor for ceramic insulator = 0.8 (Table 6.2 of AS/NZS 7000))
φ Rn = 0.8 × 70 kN = 56 kN > design load of 32.0 kN therefore satisfies general equation.

26.7 STRUCTURAL DESIGN

26.7.1 Pole tip load calculation for structure 3 (unstayed angle on concrete pole)
Calculate the tip load on a 132 kV monopole with an OPGW earthwire and Oxygen phase
conductors vertically configured on the pole. There is also a line deviation of 4°. See
Figure 26.6.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 190

F1 ( Lo a d f r o m e a r thwi r e)
1.9 m
F2 ( Lo a d f r o m A Ph a s e)
1. 8 5 m
F3 ( Lo a d f r o m B Ph a s e)
1. 8 5 m
F4 ( Lo a d f r o m C Ph a s e)
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

d1 F w
( Lo a d o n p o l e)
d2
d3
d4

4°
d ev i a t i o n

FIGURE 26.6 BENDING MOMENTS ON POLE

Bending Moment Loads

Second order effects have been neglected
Input Parameters:
Pole height = 24.0 m
Earth wire = 14.3 mm OPGW
Earth wire EDT = 18% CBL
Conductors = Oxygen AAAC
Conductor EDT = 20% CBL
Conductor Dia. = 23.8 mm
Live deviation = 4°
Wind span = 300 m
Average pole OD = 0.6 m
Wind pressure = 900 Pa on conductor/OHEW; and
1300 Pa on pole

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 191 HB 331—2012

Earthwire and Conductor tensions at 900 Pa can be found with a sag tension program to be:
Tx earthwire = 22 900 N
Tx conductor = 30 700 N
⎛ d + d 3 + d 4 ⎞ Fwφ
Tip load = F1 + F2,3, 4 ⎜⎜ 2 ⎟⎟ +
⎝ d1 ⎠ 2
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

where
F1 = θ
PW × OD × Wd + 2 Tx sin
2
= 900 × 0.143 × 300 + 2 × 1.25 × 22900 × sin 2
= 5859 N
F2, F3, F4 = 900 × 0.238 × 300 + 2 × 1.25 × 30700 × sin 2
= 9103 N
Fwφ = Pwφ × OD × d1

= 1300 × 0.6 × 24
= 18720 N
Ultimate tip load = 38.1 kN
Axial Loads:
Self weight of 24 m/30 kN pole assumed to be = 2500 kg
3 × Conductor + Earthwire weight for 300 m weight span = 1000 kg
Crossarm, insulators and associated hardware = 500 kg
Limit state axial load = 1.1 × 4000 kg or 44 kN
26.7.2 Selection of pole
26.7.2.1 General
The general steps in the structural design process are:
(a) Apply design loads and incorporate component strength factor to determine ultimate
strength of structure
(b) Select pole strength and length (based on estimated foundation depth) that exceeds
the ultimate factored loads (in this example, a 30 kN pole)
(c) Check deflections for serviceability limit state loads:
(i) short duration (electrical clearances).
(ii) sustained (creep/crack control).
(d) Check combined axial and bending moment loads using formula:
⎛ M * ⎞ ⎛ N C* ⎞
⎜ ⎟+⎜ ⎟ ≤1
⎜ φM ⎟ ⎜ φN ⎟
⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠
Axial loads which consist of self-weight of structure and conductor weight loads are
considered to be negligible (less than 10% of the compressive capability of pole) and
can therefore be neglected.
(e) Check bending stresses on pole critical sections.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 192

Bending strength of concrete poles under sustained loading conditions should be

limited to be generally less that 40% of the ultimate strength capacity to control long
term creep and cracking.
26.7.2.2 Selection of concrete pole strength
Select a pole with a limit state design load of 38.3 kN
Concrete pole component strength factor = 0.9 (Table 6.2 of AS/NZS 7000 for range)
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Ultimate strength of concrete pole = 38.3/0.9 = 42.5 kN

Considerations for un-stayed Pole.
For an un-stayed pole, deflection limits need to be considered to ensure electrical
clearances are met and complaints are minimized from the public. The recommended
deflection limits are:
Serviceable wind loads (typically 750 Pa wind on pole and 500 Pa on conductors) –5% of
the pole length out of ground
26.7.3 Pole tip load calculation for structure 1 and 3 (stayed termination on concrete
pole)
26.7.3.1 General
Design assumptions for stayed pole (1 and 3) are:
(a) All longitudinal loads are transferred to ground through stays.
(b) Transverse loads (including the tee-off load) are withstood by the pole in bending.
(c) Multiple level stays installed to ensure bending moment capacity not exceeded.
(d) Poles should be self-supporting under every day load conditions with loss of critical
stay.
Consider initially an unstayed pole—assuming transverse wind (90° to line)
(i) Ultimate tip load = 94 kN.
(ii) Everyday tip load = 47.5 kN.
(iii) Component strength factor for concrete pole = 0.9.
(iv) Ultimate strength of pole to meet ultimate load = 104 kN.
(v) Serviceability strength of pole to meet everyday load = 52 kN.
(vi) Select 60 kN ultimate strength pole with 2 stays as initial trial.
(vii) First Iteration:
(A) Ultimate tip load due to wind load = 94 kN.
(B) Angle of stay = 45°.
(C) Tension in stays at tip = 94 × 1.414 = 133 kN.
(D) Component strength factor φ for transmission stay = 0.7 (Table 6.2 of
AS/NZS 7000).
(E) Ultimate strength of stays = 190 kN.
This strength will require a large non-standard single stay and will result in excessive
bending moment and deflection of the pole.
A practical solution would be to install 2 stays (refer Figure 26.7).
Therefore consider a ground stay based design assuming pin joint on the pole at ground
level and no shear

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 193 HB 331—2012

E
FE

A
FA

B
FB
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

R1
FC C

L1
4 5°
LC R2

L2

FIGURE 26.7 BENDING MOMENT DIAGRAM FOR POLE

26.7.3.2 Design for 2 stays

Moments around G (ground line):
FC × LC + FB × LB + FA × LA + FE × LE = R1 sin 45 × L1 + R2 sin 45 × L2
Resolving forces horizontally:
FA + FB + FC + FE = R1 sin 45 + R2 sin 45
Solving these equations gives:
R1 = 85 kN
R2 = 78 kN
Select stay for highest value of tension load taking into account the strength reduction
factor of 0.7.
Strength of stay = 85/0.7 = 121 kN
Stay options at each level are:
(a) A single19/2.75 SC/GZ stay (CBL = 141 kN)
(b) Double wrap 19/2.00 SC/GZ stay (CBL = 74.4 kN)
(c) 2 × 19/2.00 SC/GZ stays in splayed arrangement (this would require 2 anchorage
points)
At the stay attachment points (L1 and L2) need to check the combined effect of bending
moment and axial loads.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 194

26.7.3.3 Pole design checks

Assuming the ground stays shown in Figure 26.7 are coplanar and the single anchorage per
stay is used. This means that for this example that the transverse wind loads on the pole and
the aerial spans of conductors must be carried by the pole as a cantilever in bending.
Assuming a 30 kN pole with a planting depth of 2.7 m
Transverse wind load on earthwire and fittings WE = 3.86 kN
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Transverse wind load on conductor and insulators Wc = 6.55 kN

Transverse wind load on stay wires and fittings Ws = 0.207 kN
Transverse bending moment of wind on pole BMp = 176.9 kNm
Transverse bending moment of wind on wires BM wires = 428.06 kNm
Total transverse BM at GL = 604.96 kNm
This equates to an equivalent pole tip load = 28.76 kN
i.e. 30 kN (ultimate) rated pole would appear to be satisfactory
26.7.3.4 Check critical sections of the pole for bending stress
Check longitudinal bending strength at top stay support and at the maximum BM point
between the stay attachment positions on the pole
(a) Cantilever pole tip—Assume critical section at the top stay attachment point:
(i) Longitudinal BM at top stay attachment = 66.41 kN/m.
(ii) BM capacity for 30 kN pole at top stay attachment point 87.0 kN/m.
(b) Pole section between stay restraint points—Assume critical section at mid conductor
attachment point:
(i) Longitudinal BB at the middle phase attachment point assuming the pole as a
continuous beam supported at stay attachment points = 44.32 kN/m.
(ii) BM capacity for 30 kN pole at middle phase attachment point = 112.5 kN/m.
NOTE: In the case of (a) the stress level will result in long term deflection of the pole tip and
possible cracking.
In the case of (b) the stress levels are approximately 40% of design capacity and would be
satisfactory.
This would suggest that the top stay position should be lifted approximately 500 mm.
26.7.3.5 Consideration of compressive load in stayed concrete pole
Consider maximum axial load in pole due to stay = 94 kN
For a 24/30 kN pole, the compressive strength of concrete pole 785 mm dia at GL is
typically around 529 kN.
Ratio of compressive load to compressive strength = 17.7%
NOTE: If using an angle of stay less than 45°, the tension in the stay and compressive load in the
pole will increase.
26.7.3.6 Pole footing design
The design overturning moments at ground level equate to a 30 kN (ultimate) rated tip load
pole capacity.
For an assumed firm soil this would result in a planting depth of 2.7 m with cement
stabilised backfill.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 195 HB 331—2012

Vertical load at base of pole = vertical component of stays + self-weight of pole + vertical
load of conductors and fittings = 121 kN.
Assuming a base disc or biscuit 1100 diameter is used to distribute the compression load
and control settlement under the axial load.
Resulting bearing pressure under base = 127 kPa.
This would be satisfactory in firm soils.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

26.7.3.7 Stay anchor design

The staywire selection indicated above suggests a stay selection of a double wrap 19/2.00
SC/GZ stay (CBL = 74.4 kN) capacity to best meet loading requirements and utilize
standard staywire materials.
This would suggest the use of single staywire anchor with a capacity of 140 kN with the
twin staywires connected to an anchor rod by a single sheave wheel arrangement.
A standard 140 kN buried deadman anchor with either a precast concrete block or a cast in-
situ concrete block would be suitable.
26.7.3.8 Use of stay insulators
It is essential that where a stay is installed on a pole that a stay or guy insulator is also
installed towards the top of the pole to ensure the lower stay section does not become
inadvertently energised and to prevent leakage currents in the overhead earthwire flowing
to ground via the stay wire. There have been instances where stays have been installed
without a stay insulator and the steel rod has completely corroded at ground line after a
short time.
Currents can flow on an overhead earthwire and to ground via a stay due to:
(a) Unbalance in the phase currents.
(b) Different separations of the phase currents to the earthwire.
(c) Leakage current on the insulators.
The leakage current can be significant particularly when the insulators are polluted and wet.
The current has a direct current (d.c.) component which accelerates the corrosion of a steel
rod at ground line.
Other measures to address the corrosion of the steel rod at ground line include coating with
a corrosion inhibitor (e.g. anticorrosive tape) or encasing in concrete. AS/NZS 7000 stay
insulators comes in 3 types as follows:
GY2 – 70 kN
GY3 and GY4 – 222 kN
26.7.4 Pole tip load calculation for structure 5 (unstayed timber pole)
Bending moment loads.
Second order effects have been neglected.
Input Parameters:
Pole height = 16.5 m
Earth wire = 14.3 mm OPGW
Earth wire EDT = 18% CBL
Conductors = Oxygen AAAC
Conductor EDT = 5% CBL

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 196

Top conductor height = 14.5 m

Bottom conductor
= 12.5 m
height
Conductor diameter = 23.8 mm
Live deviation = 4°
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Wind span = 300 m

Average pole OD = 0.6 m
Wind pressure = 900 Pa on conductor/OHEW; and
1300 Pa on pole
⎛ d + d 3 + d 4 ⎞ Fwφ
Tip load = F1 + F2,3, 4 ⎜⎜ 2 ⎟⎟ +
⎝ d1 ⎠ 2

where
θ
F1 = PW × OD × Wd + 2 Tx sin
2
= 900 × 0.143 × 120 + 2 × 1.25 × 8193 × sin 20
= 8573 N
F2, F3, F4 = 900 × 0.238 × 120 + 2 × 1.25 × 9010 × sin 20
= 10275 N
Fwφ = Pwφ × OD × d1

= 1300 × 0.4 × 16.5

= 8580 N
Ultimate tip load = 38.3 kN
Axial Loads:
Self-weight of 24 m/30 kN pole assumed to be = 2500 kg
3 × Conductor + Earthwire weight for 300 m weight span = 1000 kg
Crossarm, insulators and associated hardware = 500 kg
Limit state axial load = 1.1 × 4000 kg or 44 kN
Earthwire and Conductor tensions at 900 Pa can be found with a sag tension program to be:
Tx earthwire = 8193 N
Tx conductor = 9010 N
Ultimate tip load = 38.0 kN
Design loads at no wind and serviceable wind (500 Pa on conductors and 750 Pa on pole)
are:
No wind tip load = 10.9 kN
Serviceable wind tip load = 20.8 kN

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 197 HB 331—2012

Wood pole selection:

Select a pole with a limit state design load of 38.0 kN
Preserved wood pole component strength factor = 0.75 (Table 6.2 of AS/NZS 7000)
for range)
Ultimate strength of wood pole = 38.0/0.75 = 50.0 kN.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

This strength is at the limit for wood poles and as poles degrade overtime, the ultimate
strength will reduce. The designer has a number of options to address this as follows:
(a) Reduce the conductor tensions.
(b) Reduce the span length (this will however increase the deviation angle).
(c) Install a concrete pole with a minimum ultimate strength 40 kN (38 kN/0.95 CSF).
(d) Install a ground stay in longitudinal road direction to meet the 5% tension loads and
install a slack span between Poles 4 and 5.
Considerations for un-stayed pole:
For an un-stayed pole, deflection limits need to be considered to ensure electrical
clearances are met and complaints are minimized from the public. The recommended
deflection limits are:
Serviceable wind loads (typically 750 Pa wind on pole and 500 Pa on conductors) –5% of
the pole length out of ground
26.7.5 Pole tip load calculation for structure 7 (stayed timber pole)
(a) Consider at first an unstayed pole—assuming transverse wind (90° to line)
(i) Ultimate tip load = 30.9 kN.
(ii) Everyday tip load = 12.8 kN.
(iii) Component strength factor for wood pole = 0.75.
(iv) Ultimate strength of pole to meet ultimate load = 41.2 kN.
(v) Servicability strength of pole to meet everyday load = 17.0 kN.
(vi) Select 20 kN ultimate strength pole with stay.
(b) Ground stay design assuming pin joint and no shear at ground level
(i) Ultimate tip load due to wind load = 30.9 kN.
(ii) Angle of stay = 45°.
(iii) Tension in stay at tip = 30.9 × 1.414 = 43.8 kN.
(iv) Component strength factor φ for transmission stay = 0.7 (Table 6.2 of
AS/NZS 7000).
(v) Ultimate strength of stay = 62.5 kN.
(vi) Select 19/2.0 SC/GZ staywire (CBL = 74.4 kN).

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 198

26.8 EARTHING DESIGN FOR 132 kV CONCRETE AND WOOD POLES

26.8.1 General
The earthing system comprises of an overhead earthwire/OPGW, earth downleads and
ground earthing (counterpoise and rods). The main purposes of an earthing system are to:
(a) Intercept direct lightning strikes and shield the phase conductors.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

(b) Provide return path for fault current to ensure protective devices (relays, circuit
breakers and fuses) operate to isolate the faulted circuit.
(c) Minimise Earth Potential Rise (EPR) hazards—by connecting all non-current carrying
metallic conductors together and to earth.
(d) Telecommunication bearer—with optical fibres (OPGW).
26.8.2 Selection of overhead earthwires
Earthwires do not necessarily need to be made from high conductivity materials, and where
fault currents are low are commonly made from galvanized or aluminium clad steel.
The earthwire size is determined by the assuming a maximum acceptable temperature that
causes minimum permanent damage to the metallic strands or the fibres. As outlined in
AS/NZS 7000, the effect of cumulative heating of the earthwire when the line is reclosed
under short circuit conditions should be considered.
The cross-sectional area of the earthwire conductor is primarily determined by the
prospective earth fault or power follow fault current, rather than lightning currents, as the
duration of power fault currents will generally be much longer. The maximum operating
temperature for various conductors subjected to short circuit currents are shown in
Table 26.10

TABLE 26.10
CONDUCTOR MAXIMUM OPERATING TEMPERATURE
(10% LOSS OF STRENGTH)

Conductor type Area (mm 2) Maximum temperature

HDCu 60 200°C
ACC, AAAC/1120, ACSR/GZ 100 160°C
ACSR/AZ, ACSR/AC 300–500 150°C
AAAC/6201A 100 220°C
SC/GZ, SC/AC All 400°C
OPGW All Typically 180°C or 200°C

The earthwire specified for the 132 kV line is 14.5 mm diameter OPGW with a minimum
outer strand of 3 mm. The OPGW contains an inner aluminium tube and metallic wires of
aluminium clad steel and aluminium alloy. A typical 14.5 mm OPGW has a fault current
rating of 20 kA for 0.3 s.
26.8.3 Ground earthing design
The desired average earthing resistance for the 132 kV is 10 Ω. This provides an acceptable
lightning performance for the line. A conductive pole such as concrete can be part of the
earthing system coupled with various other ground earthing methods such as:
(a) Earth rods including deep drilled electrodes.
(b) Counterpoise wires.
(c) Grading ring (generally at a distance of 1 m around the pole).

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 199 HB 331—2012

(d) A combination of all of the above.

In normal soils with resistivity of between 100 and 200 Ω/m, a value of 10 Ω can be
achieved by a combination of conductive pole (or butt earth on wood pole), earth rods and
up to 10 m of counterpoise wires. In poor resistivity soils (which can by above 100 Ω/m), it
may be impractical to achieve the 10 Ω because of the terrain or length of counterpoise wire
or deep driven electrodes required. It is however desirable to aim for an earth resistance on
all structures of 30 Ω or less. In some isolated instances, such as installing earths on rocky
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

outcrops, a value above 30 Ω will need to be accepted.

26.8.4 Design for step and touch potentials
Figure 26.8 shows an overhead line with an earthwire subjected to a fault. The prospective
flow of earth fault current into the structure footing resistance is in the range of 5% to 10%
depending on the earthwire resistance and the structure footing resistance.

I E/W I E/W

If

I p = 5 - 10% I f

Vo l t a g e p r of il e
To u c h Pote nti a l

R e S te p Pote nti a l
I x p R pe
GPR = p

FIGURE 26.8 EARTH FAULT CURRENT AND TOUCH AND STEP POTENTIALS

Given that the overhead 132 kV pole line has an overhead 14.5 mm OPGW earthwire of
resistance 0.35 Ω/m and the assumed footing resistance is 10 Ω, the expected fault current
down the structure is around 5% (See Clause 17.8.4). For a 20 000 A fault current, the
prospective ground potential rise is therefore 10 000 V (1000 A × 10 Ω).
If a person stands 1 m away from the conductive pole, the prospective touch potential is in
the range of 25% to 50% of the ground potential rise. The maximum expected touch
potential is therefore 5000 V.
Using the EG0 Risk Basked Approach to Earthing outlined in Section 10 of AS/NZS 7000,
the applicable touch voltage curve from Figure 10.1 of AS/NZS 7000 is TU (contact with
transmission asset in urban interface location). For a 0.2 s clearing (which is typical for a
132 kV line), the allowable touch voltage is 7000 V.
Given that the expected touch potential of 5000 V is less than the allowable touch voltage
of 7000 V, the earthing design is acceptable.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 200

There may be specific pole locations where mitigation may be required as outlined in EG0,
such as:
(a) Adjacent to public meeting places.
(b) Adjacent to water recreation areas.
(c) Adjacent to metallic fences.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

For mitigation measures, refer to Appendix U of AS/NZS 7000.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 201 HB 331—2012

PART 4 MISCELLANEOUS WORKED EXAMPLES USING AS/NZS 7000

S E C T I O N 2 7 W O R K E D E X A M P L E S F O R
V A R I O U S L I N E C OM P O N E N T S

27.1 ELECTRICAL CLEARANCES BETWEEN CONDUCTORS

Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Example 1:
Single circuit 19/3.25 AAC at 33 kV 3 phase on pin insulators in a delta configuration with
a span of 200 m. What is the mid span vertical separation required between phases if a cross
arm with a separation of 2.1 m between outer phases is used?
Sag at 50°C is 6.07 m and sited in Region A.
U
X 2 + (1.2Y ) 2 ≥ + k D + li
150
36
1.05 2 + (1.2Y ) 2 ≥ + 0.4 6.07 + 0
150
where
∴X = 1.05
U = 36 (assume 1.1 p.u. operating voltage)
k = 0.4
D = 6.07
li = 0
Y ≥ 0.55
Therefore required minimum vertical separation for centre phase is 0.55 m.
Example 2:
Upper circuit 19/3.25 AAC at 33 kV 3 phase on pin insulators in a delta configuration with
a span of 200 m located directly above the lower circuit. The lower circuit conductor is
19/.064 copper at 11 kV. The lower circuit has a 120° phase differential to the upper circuit.
What is the mid-span vertical separation required between circuits if a cross arm with a
separation of 2.1 m between outer phases is used?
Sag at 50°C is 6.07 m for 19/3.25 AAC and 5.81 m for 19/.064 copper sited in Region Type
A.
Because the circuits are located vertically above each other, the horizontal component is
taken as zero; and

U = Va2 + Vb2 − 2 Va Vb cos φ from ‘U’ above

2 2
⎛ 33 ⎞ ⎛ 11 ⎞ 33 11
= ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ + ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ − 2 × × cos120°
⎝ 3⎠ ⎝ 3⎠ 3 3

= 22.9 kV
where
∴X = 0
U = 22.9 (the difference in the vector r.m.s. potential of the circuit voltages)

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 202

k = 0.4 (Region A)
D = 6.07 (greater of the two sags)
li = 0 (Pin insulators)
U
X 2 + (1.2Y ) 2 ≥ + k D + li
150
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

22.9
0 + (1.2Y ) 2 ≥ + 0.4 6.07 + 0
150

(1.2Y ) 2 ≥ 0.153 + 0.985

1.2Y ≥ 1.138
1.138
Y≥
1. 2
Y ≥ 0.948
Example 3: Separation where conductors go from vertical to flat or triangular
For similar geometric configurations (horizontal to horizontal or vertical to vertical) the
radial spacing formula below is a good formula to use as the closest conductor separation at
mid span

X 2 + (1.2Y ) 2 Radial separation formula

However, for dissimilar geometric configurations, the closest separation may not be at mid
span.
In order to determine the point of minimum separation, the separations must be iterative
checked along the line by determining the X and Y coordinates and then calculating the
spacing.
Determining the minimum separation between conductors for a delta to vertical
construction arrangement 1 given in Figure 27.1

0.900

0.9 0 0
0.320
0.9 0 0

DIMENSIONS IN METRES

FIGURE 27.1 THREE DIMENSIONAL DRAWING FOR THE ARRANGEMENT OF

CONDUCTORS FOR DELTA TO VERTICAL ARRANGEMENT 1

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 203 HB 331—2012

Figure 27.1 can be simplified to X and Y plane view as shown Figure 27.2 and Figure 27.3,
respectively.

0.9 0 0
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

0.4 50
0.9 0 0

DIMENSIONS IN METRES

FIGURE 27.2 X VIEW OF CONDUCTORS FOR VERTICAL TO

DELTA CONSTRUCTION ARRANGEMENT 1

0.9 0 0
0.0 29
0. 320

0.9 0 0

DIMENSIONS IN METRES

FIGURE 27.3 Y VIEW OF CONDUCTORS FOR VERTICAL TO

DELTA CONSTRUCTION ARRANGEMENT 1

Using the radial separation formula, the spacing can be determined as per Table 27.1 for
construction arrangement 1. Table 27.1 shows the minimum separation is no longer at the
midpoint, but at 46% of the length from the delta end of the line.

TABLE 27.1
RADIAL SPACING BETWEEN CONDUCTORS FOR CONSTRUCTION
ARRANGEMENT 1
Location
10 20 25 30 40 46 50 60 70 80 90 100
(% of span)
Radial
0.84 0.73 0.68 0.63 0.58 0.566 0.57 0.61 0.70 0.81 0.94 1.08
Separation (m)
X Separation (m) 0.81 0.72 0.675 0.63 0.54 0.486 0.45 0.36 0.27 0.18 0.09 0
Y Separation (m) 0.198 0.076 0.015 0.046 0.168 0.2412 0.29 0.412 0.534 0.656 0.778 0.9

Interestingly, the spacing between the conductors can be increased by simply changing the
attachment points to construction arrangement 2 as shown in Figures 27.4 and 27.5 below.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 204

The middle phase on the delta structure moved from the middle phase to the top attachment
on the vertical structure.

0.900
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

0.9 0 0
0.320
0.9 0 0

DIMENSIONS IN METRES

FIGURE 27.4 THREE DIMENSIONAL DRAWING FOR THE ARRANGEMENT OF

CONDUCTORS FOR DELTA TO VERTICAL ARRANGEMENT 2

The X view stays the same as in Figure 27.2, but the Y view is significantly changed.

0.9 0 0
0.610
0. 320

0.9 0 0

DIMENSIONS IN METRES

FIGURE 27.5 Y VIEW OF CONDUCTORS FOR DELTA TO VERTICAL

ARRANGEMENT 2

Re-calculating the conductor radial separation from construction arrangement 2 shows the
closest point of separation has changed to be at 42% of the length from the delta end, as
shown in Table 27.2. However, more importantly the separation has increased from 0.566 m
to 0.8524 m for the same size poles, cross arms and insulators.
Table 27.2 Radial spacing between conductors for construction arrangement 2 with the
middle phase on the delta structure moved from the middle phase to the top attachment on
the vertical structure

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 205 HB 331—2012

TABLE 27.2
RADIAL SPACING BETWEEN CONDUCTORS FOR CONSTRUCTION
ARRANGEMENT 2
Location
10 20 25 30 40 42 50 60 70 80 90 100
(% of span)
Radial
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

0.93 0.89 0.88 0.87 0.8546 0.8543 0.8593 0.88 0.91 0.96 1.01 1.08
Separation (m)
X Separation
0.81 0.72 0.675 0.63 0.54 0.522 0.45 0.36 0.27 0.18 0.09 0
(m)
Y Separation
0.378 0.436 0.465 0.494 0.552 0.5636 0.61 0.668 0.726 0.784 0.842 0.9
(m)

Comparing the above construction arrangements and standard mid span formula, as shown
in Table 27.3 below, it can be shown that using the mid span formula the calculation would
have shown the radial separation would have been adequate for either construction 1 or 2
arrangements. However, construction 1 would not have achieved the minimum separation
46% along the length of the line. Construction 2 would though have always had adequate
separation
Using the formula in AS/NZS 7000, inserting the calculated X and Y values at the point of
minimum separation and varying the k factor the following results are evident.

TABLE 27.3
SEPARATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION 1 AND 2
Meets
I
(X ) + (1.2Y )
X Y U Tensioning D
2 2 k +k ( D + li ) C(b)1
150
m m kV % CLB m Y/N
Midpoint separation for construction 1 and 2
0.45 0.29 0.570 22 0.4 25 1.69 0.667 Y
0.45 0.61 0.860 22 0.4 25 1.69 0.667 Y
Minimum separation for construction 1
0.486 0.2412 0.566 22 0.4 25 1.69 0.667 N
Minimum separation for construction 2
0.522 0.5636 0.854 22 0.4 25 1.69 0.667 Y

Measures to improve on radial separation:

(a) Increase phase to phase separation at pole—vertical is more effective.
(b) Reduce span.
(c) Increase tension.
(d) Replace suspension insulator with pin or post insulator.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 206

27.2 INSULATOR AND CROSSARM WORKED EXAMPLES

27.2.1 Transmission line insulator
Refer worked example of 132 kV overhead line for the mechanical design of tension, line
post and suspension insulators for 19/4.75 AAAC Oxygen conductor (See Clause 26).
Distribution Line Insulator Examples
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

(a) Calculate the strength of a tension ceramic disc insulator used for moon conductor,
spanning 100 m and strung to everyday tension of 20% CBL.
Limit state condition—failure containment load at 900 Pa
Conductor tension at 900 Pa = 8617 N
Multiplier for tension loads = 1.25
Limit state design tension load = 10 770
Component strength factor for ceramic insulator = 0.8 (refer Table 6.2 of
AS/NZS 7000) and unverified strength)
Minimum insulator ultimate strength = 10 770/0.8 = 13460 N
Refer to Note 1 in Appendix CC which states insulator strength to be greater than
conductor CBL or coordination of strength between conductor, insulator, fittings,
crossarm and structure.
Historically, the industry has used a ceramic disc insulator with a minimum standard
of 70 kN to provide a suitable reliability and life.
(b) Calculate the strength of a ceramic line post insulator used to support moon conductor
in a clamp top with a weight of 0.34 kg/m, weight span of 100 m, and strung to
everyday tension of 20% CBL.
Limit state condition—everyday load
Conductor weight = 0.34 × 9.806 × 100 N = 333 N
Conductor weight multiplier = 1.25
Limit state vertical design load = 416 N
Longitudinal load for 2:1 adjacent span ratio (75 m and 150 m spans), and max
operating temperature of 75°C = 890 N
Tension load multiplier = 1.25
Limit state tension design load = 1109 N
Resultant bending moment load = (416 2
)
+ 1109 2 = 1184 N
Component strength factor for ceramic post insulator = 0.8 (Table 6.2 of
AS/NZS 7000)
Insulator minimum failing load = 1184/0.8 = 1480 N
Limit state condition—serviceable wind load at 500 Pa
Conductor weight = 0.34 × 9.806 × 100 N = 333 N
Conductor weight multiplier = 1.25
Limit state vertical design load = 416 N
Longitudinal load for 2:1 adjacent span ratio, and max operating temperature of
75°C = 890 N
Tension load multiplier = 1.25

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 207 HB 331—2012

Limit state tension design load = 1109 N

Resultant bending moment load = (416 2
)
+ 1109 2 = 1184 N
Transverse compressive load = 0.0143 × 500 × 100 = 715 N
Compressive load multiplier = 1.25
Limit state compressive design load = 893 N
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Combining bending and compressive load—simplified method:

Compressive strength of ceramic post = 100 kN (from manufacturer)
Since the transverse compressive load is insignificant compared to the compressive
strength of the ceramic post, this can be ignored.
Component strength factor for ceramic post insulator = 0.8 (Table 6.2 of
AS/NZS 7000)
Insulator minimum failing load = 1184/0.8 = 1480 N
Limit state condition—failure containment load at 900 Pa
Conductor weight = 0.34 × 9.806 × 100 N = 333 N
Conductor weight multiplier = 1.25
Limit state vertical design load = 416 N
Longitudinal load for 2:1 adjacent span ratio, and max operating temperature of
75°C = 890 N
Tension load multiplier = 1.25
Limit state tension design load = 1109 N
Resultant bending moment load = (416 2
)
+ 1109 2 = 1184 N
Transverse compressive load = 0.0143 × 900 × 100 = 1287 N
Compressive load multiplier = 1.25
Limit state compressive design load = 1608 N
Combining bending and compressive load—simplified method:
Compressive strength of ceramic post = 100 kN
Since the transverse compressive load is insignificant compared to the compressive
strength of the ceramic post, this can be ignored.
Component strength factor for ceramic post insulator = 0.8 (Table 6.2 of
AS/NZS 7000)
Insulator minimum failing load = 1184/0.8 = 1480 N
Select ceramic post with ultimate cantilever strength of 6 kN or higher
(c) Calculate the strength of a ceramic pin insulator used to support saturn conductor
with a weight of 0.72 kg/m, wind span of 92.4 m, and strung to everyday tension of
5% CBL. Secondly select a suitable crossarm to support the insulator loads.
Pin-type insulator mechanical strengths are usually quoted as cantilever strengths.
The cantilever load is the horizontal load applied at the top of the pin insulator.
Limit State Loads
Check failure containment limit state in accordance with the simplified approach in
Appendix CC of AS/NZS 7000.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 208

For pin insulators, determine the resultant horizontal load at the conductor connection
point.
Insulator mass = 50 kg
Vertical load on insulator = 50 × 9.81 = 490 N
For the sustained load case (see Figure 27.6):
Transverse load = 2 × Fte × sin(20°/2) = 750 N
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Estimated projected area of insulator A = 0.02 m2

Drag coefficient of insulator Cd = 1.2
For the maximum wind load case (see Figure 27.7):
Refer to Table 7.3 of AS/NZS 7000 for load condition.
1.0Wn + 1.1Gs + 1.25GC + 1.25 Ftw
For horizontal loads at the top of the insulator, this can be simplified to:
1.0Wn + 1.25 Ftw
Ultimate wind load on insulator = 900 Pa
Ftw from sag tension program at 900 Pa wind = 5352 N
Load on insulator
= 1.0 × wind span × diameter × 900 Pa + 1.0 × 900 Pa × Cd × A + 1.25 × 2 ×
Ftw sin (10)
= 1.0 × 92.4 × 0.216 × 900 + 1.0 × 900 × 1.2 × 0.02 + 1.25 × 1858
= 4140 N

F te = 216 0 N

750 N

20 °
D evi ati o n

F te = 216 0 N

S u s t a i n e d Loa d Ca s e ( N o W i n d )
T = 5°C

FIGURE 27.6 SUSTAINED WIND LOAD CASE

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 209 HB 331—2012

F t w = 5 3 52 N
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

9 0 0 Pa wi n d 2 X F t w X s i n (10 °)

= 18 58 N

F t w = 5 3 52 N

Maximum Wind Load Case

T = 15°C

FIGURE 27.7 MAXIMUM WIND LOAD CASE

27.2.2 Component strength

The cantilever strength quoted by the supplier for pin insulator is 7 kN (7000 N). From
Table 6.2 of AS/NZS 7000, the insulator strength factor = 0.8. Now
φ Rn = 0.8 × 7 = 5.6 kN >4.1 kN The proposed insulator is suitable, from a mechanical
strength viewpoint, as the component strength exceeds the strength limit state loads.
The insulator utilisation is 4.1/5.6 = 73%

FIGURE 27.8 TYPICAL CROSSARM

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 210

27.2.3 Crossarm analysis

For the analysis of a crossarm (Figure 27.8 shows a typical crossarm), check loads and
strength under the maximum wind load case:
1.0Wn + 1.1GS + 1.25GC + 1.25Ftw
where
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

1818 N from previous calculations. Horizontal load at top of

1.0Wn =
insulator
1.1GS = 1.1 × 20 kg × 9.81 = 216 N (Factored weight of insulator.)
1.1GS = 1.1 × 1.35 × 0.1 × 0.1 × 1000 kg/m3 × 9.81 = 145 N
(Factored weight of half-length of crossarm.)
1.25GC = 1.25 × 490 N = 612 N (Factored weight of conductor.)
1.25Ftw = 2322 N from previous calculations. (Horizontal load on top of
insulator.)
The above limit state loads are shown on the elevation.
Determine the reactions, R1, R2 and R3, so that static equilibrium exists:
i.e. Σ Horizontal Forces = 0 N
where
Σ Vertical forces = 0N
Σ Moments about kingbolt = 0 Nm
Units = kN m
Σ Moments about kingbolt = 4.14 × 3 × 0.35 + 0.828 × (1.2 × 0.6) + 0.145 × 0.675 –
0.145 × 0.675 × 0.828 × 1.2 – 0.325 × R1 = 0
φ R1 = 14.9 kN
NOTE: If weight of x-arm and insulators were ignored, R1 = 14.5 kN (3% variation)
Σ Horizontal Forces = –4.14 × 3 – 10.54 + R3 = 0
φ R3 = 23.0 kN
Σ Vertical Forces = –0.828 × 3 – 0.145 × 2 – 10.54 + R2 = 0
φ R2 = 13.3 kN
The reactions are shown on the elevation.
Determine the axial forces, bending moments and shear forces within the crossarm:
(Maximum bending moment, maximum axial force and maximum shear occur at the same
location; just to the right of the kingbolt.)

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 211 HB 331—2012

+8.18
Te n s i o n

+ 4.14

A x i a l Fo r c e
Diagram (kN)
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

- 4.14
Compression

-14.72

Te n s i o n o n U p p e r
S u r fa c e
4.49
3. 3 9
1.4 5
1.9 5
Bending Moment
0. 8 4 D i a g r a m ( k N m)
1.4 5

1. 8 0
0. 8 3

0.97 0. 8 3
S h e a r Fo r c e D i a g r a m
(kN)

11. 5

FIGURE 27.9 AXIAL FORCE, BENDING MOMENT AND SHEAR FORCE DIAGRAMS

27.2.4 Selection of timber crossarm

Large size natural timbers are not readily available in a seasoned state and so design would
generally be for unseasoned natural timers.
If the timber species for the cross arm is known, the strength and joint group classification
can be obtained from AS 3818.1.
The stress grade for the timber can then be determined by reference to AS 3818.4.
For this example, an S2 species (unseasoned) of Grade 2 quality (to AS 3818.4) has been
selected. This results in a timber stress grade of F17. With reference to AS 1720.1 for F17
stress grade:
f b′ = 50 MPa

f c′ = 40 MPa
Design of Timber to AS 1720.1
A reference for the design of timber is the Standards Australian Timber Design Handbook,
HB 108.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 212

While unseasoned timber is specified by its nominal size, e.g. 100 × 100, for design
purposes, the convention is to subtract 3 mm from the cross-sectional dimensions as a
manufacturing tolerance. For design purposes, the size is therefore 97 × 97.
The maximum design actions at the strength limit state are (see Figure 27.9):

Bending Moment, M x* = 4.49 kNm

Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Axial Force, N c* = 14.72 kN (compression)

Shear Force = 11.5 kN
The cross-section size is 97 × 97 and consequently there is no clearly defined major and
minor axes as there would be for a rectangular cross-section. Consequently, adopt the
horizontal axis as the major axis and the vertical axis as the minor axis. In this case, the
cross arm is bent about its major (horizontal) axis.
Clause 3.5 of AS 1720.1:2010 deals with the design of timber subjected to combined
bending and axial forces. For bending and compression, Equations 3.5(1) and 3.5(2) of
AS 1720.1:2010 must be satisfied.
Determine the strength limit state in flexure—Equation 3.2(2) AS 1720.1—2010:
φ Mx = φ × k1 × k4 × k 6 × k9 × k11 × k12 × [ f b′ × Zx]
= 0.65 × 1.0 × 1.0 × 1.0 × 1.0 × 1.0 × 1.0 × [50 × 97 × 972/6]
= 4.94 × 106 Nm/m
= 4.94 kN/m
Determine the strength limit state in compression (See AS 1720.1):
φ Nc = φ × k1 × k4 × k 6 × k11 × k12 × [ f c′ × Ac ]
= 0.65 × 1.0 × 1.0 × 1.0 × 1.0 × k12 × [40 × 97 × 97]
= 244 × k12 kN

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 213 HB 331—2012

High Compression
Zo n e = 4 6 0 m m
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

FIGURE 27.10 BUCKLING ABOUT THE MAJOR AXIS

For buckling about the major axis (see Figure 27.10):

S3 = g13 × L/d = 1.0 × 460/97 = 4.7
pc = 1.33, pcS3 = 6.3
k12 = 1.0 for major axis buckling
φ Ncx = 244 kN (major axis)
For buckling about the minor axis (see Figure 27.11):
S4 = 2.0 × 1200/97 = 24.7
pcS4 = 1.33 × 24.7 = 32.9
k12 = 0.184
φ Ncy = 45 kN (minor axis)

Buckled Shape

C o m p r e s s i o n Le n g th = 120 0 m m

FIGURE 27.11 BUCKLING ABOUT THE MINOR AXIS

Combined bending and axial compression

Equation 3.5(1) of AS 1720.1:2010—Major axis bending combined with buckling about
minor axis:
(M x* /ø Mx)2 + N c* /ø Ncy
= (4.49/4.94)2 + 14.72/45
= 1.15
(Exceeds 1.0 and consequently, section size is inadequate.)

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 214

Equation 3.5(2) of AS 1720.1:2010—Major Axis Bending Combined With Buckling About

Minor Axis:
(M x* /ø Mx)2 + N c* /ø Ncx
= (4.49/4.94)2 + 14.72/244
= 0.97
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Equation 3.5(1) of AS 1720.1:2010 governs and the section size exceeds the code
requirements by 15%.
Thus, the timber cross arm utilization is 115%.
27.2.5 Selection of steel crossarm
The proposed steel section is a 100 × 100 × 6 SHS, grade C350.
For a 100 mm high cross arm, the previously calculated bending moments, axial and shear
forces are suitable. Bending moments are calculated by using the vertical distance between
the centreline of the cross arm and the conductor at the top of the insulator. The maximum
design actions are:
Bending moment = 4.49 kNm
Axial force = 14.72 kN (compression)
Shear force = 11.5 kN
(a) Simplified Method (See Figure 27.12):
The bending moment induces an extreme fibre stress of:
(4.49 × 106 Nm/m)/(60.7 × 103 mm3) = 74 MPa
The axial force induces a uniform stress of:
(14.72 × 103 N)/(2130 mm2) = 7 MPa

+ 74 + 67

+ =

Ma ximum Compre s s ive

Stre s s
- 74 - 7 - 81 MPa

FIGURE 27.12 FORCES ON THE CROSSARM

The maximum stress that the section can tolerate is equal to:
Capacity Factor × Yield Stress = 0.9 × 350 = 315 MPa. The section utilization
is 81/315 = 26%

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 215 HB 331—2012

(b) AS 4100 Method:

AS 4100 covers bending combined with axial force. For compact sections, such as
hollow sections, the requirement is that the limit state design moment (4.49 kN/m)
must be less than the section capacity reduced by axial force ( φ M rx).
For hollow sections with wall thicknesses greater than 5 mm, the factor, kf, would
generally be 1.0, and the calculation for φ Mrx becomes:
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

φ Mrx = 1.18 × φ Msx × (1 – N*/ φ Ns) ≤ φ Msx

From the AISC design capacity Tables for structural steel, for a 100×100×6 SHS
(grade C350):
φ Mrx = 23.2 kNm
φ Ns = 72 kN
φ Mrx = 1.18 × 23.2 × (1 – 14.7/672) = 26.7 kN/m [ ≥23.2 kN/m]
Thus, in this example, the small axial force does not reduce the section bending
capacity.
M* = 4.49 kNm
φ Mrx = 23.2 kNm
The section utilization = 4.49/23.2 = 19%
Summary:
Various elements have been checked for their limit state strength, and the results were:

Component Utilization
description %
Pin insulator 73
Timber crossarm 115
Steel crossarm 19

Utilizations less than 100% indicate some reserve capacity, i.e. can accommodate load
increase or a smaller element could be considered.
Utilizations greater than 100% indicate that the element is overloaded and has a reduced
safety factor, i.e. a larger element or a reduction of loads could be considered.
Further items that should be checked are:
(i) Shear strength of timber cross arm.
(ii) Shear strength of bolts in timber.

27.3 LIMIT STATE DESIGN WORKED EXAMPLES

27.3.1 General
Transverse load on a structure is given as Pz = 2Tsin θ/2 (refer Figure 27.13).

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 216

TX PZ TX

/2 /2
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

FIGURE 27.13 DIAGRAM OF FORCES ON CONDUCTOR

27.3.2 Pole tip load calculation

Calculate the tip load on a 33 kV monopole with a Libra earthwire and Pluto phase
conductors vertically configured on the pole. There is also a line deviation of 20°. (See
Figure 27.14).

F1 ( Lo a d f r o m e a r thwi r e)
2.4 m
F2 ( Lo a d f r o m A Ph a s e)
1. 5 m
F3 ( Lo a d f r o m B Ph a s e)
1. 5 m
F4 ( Lo a d f r o m C Ph a s e)

d1 F w
( Lo a d o n p o l e)
d2
d3
d4

20 °
d ev i a t i o n

FIGURE 27.14 FORCES ON A POLE

Input:
Pole height = 17.4 m
Earth wire = Libra AAC (Tx = 5000 N)
Conductors = Pluto AAC (Tx = 13000 N)
Line deviation = 20°
Wind span = 180 m
Average pole OD = 0.4 m
Wind pressure = 900 Pa on conductor/OHEW, and
= 1300 Pa on pole

⎛ d + d 3 + d 4 ⎞ Fwφ
Tip load = F1 + F2,3,4 ⎜ 2 ⎟⎟ +
⎜ d1 2
⎝ ⎠
© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au
 217 HB 331—2012

θ
F1 = Pw × OD × Wd + 2T sin
2
Ultimate tip load = 28.4 kN
27.3.3 Selection of pole
27.3.3.1 Wood pole
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

27.3.3.1.1 General
Select a pole with a limit state design load of 28.4 kN
Preserved wood pole component strength factor = 0.72 (Table 6.2 of AS/NZS 7000 for
range)
Ultimate strength of wood pole = 28.4/0.72 = 39.4 kN
Wood poles typically decay during their life and designers may choose a pole with a higher
strength to achieve a longer design life.
27.3.3.1.2 Considerations for un-stayed wood pole
For an un-stayed pole, deflection limits need to be considered to ensure electrical
clearances are met and complaints are minimized from the public. The recommended
deflection limits are:
Serviceable wind loads (typically 750 Pa wind on pole and 500 Pa on conductors) –5% of
the pole length out of ground
27.3.3.1.3 Consideration for stayed pole
A stayed pole should be designed to meet the following conditions:
(a) Poles should be self-supporting under every day load conditions without stay (should
not suffer failure due to loss of stay)everyday load = 16 kN
Component strength factor for wood pole = 0.72
Ultimate strength of pole to meet everyday load = 22 kN
(b) If ground stay used and attached to top of pole
Ultimate tip load due to wind load = 28.4 kN
Angle of stay = 45°
Tension in stay = 28.4 × 1.414 = 40 kN
Multiplier for tension loads = 1.25
Limit state tension load in stay = 50 kN
Component strength factor for distribution stay = 0.8 (Table 6.2 of AS/NZS 7000)
Ultimate strength of stay = 62.5 kN – select SC/GZ stay wire of 19/2.00
(CBL = 74.4 kN)
Compressive load in pole due to stay = 28.4 kN
Compressive strength of wood pole with 300 mm dia is typically around 250 kN
Ratio of compressive load to compressive strength = 11%
Ultimate strength of pole to allow for stay load = 20 × 1.11 = 22 kN
NOTE: If using an angle of stay larger than 45°, the tension in the stay and compressive load in
the pole will increase.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 218

27.3.3.2 Steel pole

Steel pole component strength factor = 1.0
Ultimate strength of steel pole = 28.4/1.0 = 28.4 kN

27.4 MULTIPLE SPAN CALCULATIONS

At a strain structure where the loads from both sections are combined at a single point e.g.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

pointed crossarms, the orthogonal components of conductor load (relative to the structure
geometry shown in Figure 27.15) are:
FL = (H1 cosθ1 – N1 sinθ1) – (H2 cosθ2 – N2 sinθ2)
FT = (H1 sinθ1 + N1 cosθ1) + (H2 sinθ2 + N2 cosθ2)
Fv = V1 + V2
At a structure with square crossarms, the load contribution from each span should be
assessed independently so that torsional loading on the crossarm can be considered.
Dir pon
co
ec
m

C o n d u c to r s u p p o r t
tio nt o
n o
e
f tr wind
an
f
sve
rse

1 2

rt H
po H2
sup 1
N2 N1
n ex t
To

t or
uc
nd
co
t
ou
n
w Pl a n V i ew
lo
B

FIGURE 27.15 CONDUCTOR LOADS

At the conductor attachment point of a suspension insulator H1 = H2 = H (assuming tension

equalisation in the ruling span section). This assumption is valid if the transverse wind
pressure is the same in both adjacent spans.
If the conductor deviation angle is 20° and the structure is constructed with its transverse
axis on the bisect of the deviation angle then, θ1 = θ2 = θ. Thus for a flying angle or
suspension angle–
FL = (N2 –N1) sinθ
FT = 2H sinθ + (N1 + N2) cosθ
Fv = V1 + V2
If the deviation angle is 0°, which is typical for most suspension structures, then —
FL = 0

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 219 HB 331—2012

FT = N1 + N2
Fv = V1 + V2
The transverse and vertical components of tension are calculated using —
N1 = Lh1Wh1
N2 = Lh2Wh2
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

V1 = Lv1Wv1
V2 = Lv2Wv2
where
FL, FT, FV = longitudinal, transverse and vertical (to the structure) component
of conductor load at the conductor support
H1, H2 = left and right longitudinal (to the span) component of conductor
tension
N1, N2 = left and right transverse (to the span) component of conductor
tension
V1, V2 = left and right vertical component of conductor tension
Lh1, Lh2 = left and right partial wind spans such that Lh = Lh1 + Lh2
Lv1, Lv2 = left and right partial weight spans such that Lv = Lv1 + Lv2
Wh1, Wh2 = left and right transverse (to the span) component of distributed
conductor load
Wv1, Wv2 = left and right vertical component of distributed conductor load

27.5 DISTRIBUTION WORKED—EXAMPLE 1

27.5.1 General
This input data has been taken from ENA C(b) 1 but the worked examples are based on
AS/NZS 7000.
Determine the required pole loads and foundation size for an 11 kV/415 V line in an urban
area. Consider a 12.5 m wood pole on a 15° line deviation with a ruling span (RS) of 45 m.
Neighbouring spans are 40 m and 55 m on level ground. The LV ABC conductor is strung
to a tension to approximate the conductor sag in a span of 45 m at 15°C.
NOTE: Although the example is based on a timber distribution pole, the structural design
principles are similar for other materials or support types.
27.5.2 Design data
11 kV Conductor type:
19/3.75 AAC (Pluto) to AS 1531 strung at 5% of CBL at 15°C.

Diameter Mass Area Mod of E Exp. Coef. CBL

Conductor 2 -1
mm kg/m mm MPa °C kN
Pluto 18.8 0.576 209.8 65000 0.000023 31.9

11 kV Conductor positions: (See Figure 27.16):

(a) Conductor 1 .............................................................. 1.2 m left, 10.2 m above ground.
(b) Conductor 2 .................................................. above top of pole, 10.6 m above ground.
(c) Conductor 3 ............................................................ 1.2 m right, 10.2 m above ground.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 220

415 V Cable type:

4 × 95 mm2 LV Aerial Bundled Cable (ABC) to AS/NZS 3560 and strung at 7% of
CBL at 15°C.

Diameter Mass Area Mod of E Exp Coef CBL

Conductor
mm kg/m mm 2 MPa °C -1 kN
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

4/95 ABC 38.4 1.35 380 56000 0.000023 53.2

415 V Cable position:

0.225 m left, 8.7 m above ground

120 0 120 0

400
20 0

LV B r a cke t - AB C
10 20 0

870 0

23 0 0

DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETRES

FIGURE 27.16 LINE DIMENSIONS

Pole details:
Mixed Australian hardwood classified to AS 1720.1—1997 as strength group S4—
stress grade F17 (i.e. Jarrah, Ash type eucalypts)
Unseasoned, unpreserved and unshaved timber
Top diameter 300 mm
Ground line diameter 400 mm
Height above ground 10.2 m (i.e. depth in ground 2.3 m)
Crossarm size: 100 × 150 mm
11 kV insulators are ALP 11/275
The soil conditions are specified in three layers: 0-0.5 m of loose gravel with sand,
0.5–1.0 m of firm cohesive soil and 1.0 m or more of very stiff cohesive soil.
Calculations:
Use the approximate wind pressures based on Clause 3.4.1 of AS/NZS 7000 .

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 221 HB 331—2012

Conductor tensions are abbreviated as follows: for everyday load condition—EDT (i.e.
everyday tension) and for short duration load condition—MWT (i.e. maximum wind
tension).

11 kV Conductor load conditions (RS = 45 m) Temperature Wind Load

Everyday load condition 15°C 0 kPa (EDT) F t = 1.60 kN

Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Sustained load condition 5°C 0 kPa F t = 1.79 kN

Short duration load condition 15°C 0.9 kPa (MWT) F t = 4.58 kN

Intact conductor tension (F t ) under average wind 15°C 0.5 kPa F t = 2.96 kN

Failure containment loads (F c ) 15°C 0.24 kPa F c = 2.01 kN

415 V Cable load condition (RS=45 m)

Every day load condition 15°C 0 kPa (EDT) F t = 3.72 kN

Sustained load condition 5°C 0 kPa F t = 4.16 kN

Short duration load condition 15°C 0.9 kPa (MWT) F t = 9.32 kN

Intact conductor tension (F t ) under average wind 15°C 0.5 kPa F t = 6.23 kN

Failure containment loads (F c ) 15°C 0.24 kPa F c = 4.47 kN

Ultimate strength limit state:

Maximum wind load (from any direction) is given by—
φ Rn >Wn + 1.1Gs + 1.25Gc + 1.25Ft
Capacity of 11 kV conductors:
Determine φ Rn
Strength factor φ = 0.7 from Table 6.2 of AS/NZS 7000.
Rn = 31.9 kN
φ Rn = 22.3 kN
Conductor short duration load (MWT) = 6.87 kN, therefore for each 11 kV conductor,
Capacity: 22.3 >6.87, i.e. φ Rn >load is satisfied.
Capacity of 415 V cable:
Determine φ Rn
Strength factor φ = 0.7 from Table 6.2 of AS/NZS 7000.
Rn = 53.2 kN from AS/NZS 3560.1 (CBL for 4 × 95)
φ Rn = 37.24 kN
ABC Short Duration Load Condition (MWT) for 415 V cable = 13.98 kN
Capacity: 37.24 >13.98, i.e. φ Rn >load is satisfied.
Pole capacity:
Determine φ Rn
Strength factor φ = 0.5 (from Table 6.2 of AS/NZS 7000) to be applied on modulus
of rupture determined from AS 1720.1
′ ] (all other kmod factors taken as 1.0)
φ M = φ k1[ f bz
Using—

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 222

k1 = 1.15 for MWT, i.e. φ × k1 = 0.575; and

k1 = 0.57 for, EDT i.e. φ × k1 = 0.285
NOTE: Capacity factor depends on grading methodology and support importance.
Pole capacity in bending taken as equivalent tip load:
φ Rn MWT = (0.575 × 50 × 103 × Z)/10.2 = 17.71 kN and
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

φ Rn EDT = (0.285 × 50 × 103 × Z)/10.2 = 8.78 kN

where
Z = π D3/32 = 0.0063 m3
Modulus of rupture = 50 MPa
Ultimate transverse wind load Wn will comprise wind loads on pole, conductor/cable and
hardware:
Wind on pole = 1.3 kPa (Clause 7.5)
Pole wind load =1.3 × 0.5 × (0.3 + 0.4) × 10.2 = 4.64 kN acting 4.8 m above ground
Wind on cross arm = 2.1 kPa (Clause 7.5)
Crossarm load = 0.1 × 0.15 × 2.1 = 0.032 kN acting at 10 m above ground
Wind on insulators = 1.4 kPa (Clause 7.5)
Insulator load = 1.4 × 0.152 × 0.136 = 0.029 kN each, two acting at 10.2 m above
ground and one acting at 10.6 m above ground
Wind load on 11 kV conductors = 0.9 × 47.5 × 0.0188 = 0.8 kN each, two acting at
10.2 m above ground and one acting at 10.6 m above ground
Wind load on 415 V ABC = 0.9 × 47.5 × 0.0384 = 1.64 kN acting at 8.7 m above
ground
Therefore, taking moments about ground line—
BM = 4.64 × 4.8 + 0.032 × 10 + 2 × 0.029 × 10.2 + 0.029 × 10.6 + 2 × 0.8 × 10.2
+ 0.8 × 10.6 + 1.64 × 8.7 = 62.5 kNm
Gs will comprise vertical loads due to weight of pole, weight of crossarms, insulators and
other ancillary hardware. This load is small in relation to the compressive strength of the
pole and will be ignored for this example.
Gc will vary for non-level terrain and unequal adjacent pole attachment heights, however
for equal height poles on flat terrain the conductor vertical loads are—
For each 11 kV conductor: Gc = 0.27 kN
For 415 V cable: Gc = 0.63 kN
Transverse load due to Ft for each 11 kV conductor = 2 × T15C, 0.9 kPa × sin(15/2)
= 1.2 kN
Transverse load due to Ft for 415 V cable = 2 × T15C,0.9kPa × sin(15/2) = 2.1 kN
The total pole base moment:
The equivalent ultimate load at the top of pole:
BMtot = 62.56 + (1.25 × 0.134 × 0.63) + 1.25 × (2 × 1.2 × 10.2 + 1.2 × 10.6 + 2.1 ×
8.7)
= 132 kNm
The equivalent ultimate pole tip load = 132/10.2 = 12.9 kN

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 223 HB 331—2012

Capacity: 17.71 >12.9, i.e. φ Rn >load is satisfied

Similar loads can be calculated for failure containment, maintenance and serviceability
conditions.
NOTE: It is advisable where designers use standard supports containing stay(s) that the structural
behaviour is confirmed through the use of a non-linear design program.
Foundation capacity:
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Assuming that the pole met the design criteria the foundation can be designed using the
ESAA Brinch Hansen Pile program.
Using a foundation strength factor φ = 0.5 for foundations relying on empirical assessment
from Table 3.1 , the ultimate ground line moment as calculated above is—
BMult = 132 kNm and the ultimate shear load at ground line is:
Hult = Wn + 1.1Gs + 1.25Gc + 1.25 Ft
= 4.64 + 0.032 + 3 × 0.029 + 0.8 × 3 + 1.64 + 1.2 × 3 × 1.25 + 2.1 × 1.25
= 15.92 kN
By entering the ultimate loads and soil properties for each soil layer, the ESAA BH Pile
program delivers a minimum depth requirement of …. m for a foundation diameter of
0.8 m.
Once a satisfactory pole and footing design for the maximum wind load condition is
achieved, a similar calculation may be followed for failure containment, maintenance and
serviceability conditions as appropriate.

27.6 DISTRIBUTION WORKED—EXAMPLE 2

27.6.1 General
This input data has been taken from ENA C(b) 1 but the worked examples are based on
AS/NZS 7000.
A limited number of conductor loads are calculated in this example to illustrate the
development of conductor tensions.
Determine the conductor loads for a suspension structure in a rural area on level ground.
Consider an average conductor height of 8 m above ground with no line deviation and a
ruling span of 300 m. Use wind and weight spans of 285 m within a tension section of
2400 m.
The conductor is AAAC (Fluorine) with diameter = 9 mm, weight = 0.135 kg/m and
CBL = 11.8 kN. The line is in terrain category 2.5 of Region B and the wind non-
directional.
Use a RP of 50 years.
Conductor tensions for 7/3.00 AAAC (FLUORINE) strung at 20% CBL at 15°C
(Ruling span of 300 m)

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 224

Load condition Load

Everyday load condition (Clause 3.3.2.3) Temperature = 15°C, Wind = 0 kPa F t = 2.36 kN
Sustained load condition (Clause 3.3.2.2) Temperature = 5°C, Wind = 0 kPa F t = 2.55 kN
Short duration load condition (Clause 3.3.2.1) Temperature = 15°C, Terrain category = 2.5, F t = 7.00 kN
mean conductor height = 8 m, Height multiplier Mz,cat = 1.06, M t = 1, M d = 1
(AS/NZS 1170.2, Section 3)
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Regional wind speed V50 = 44 m/s

Design site wind speed = 44 × 1.06 = 46.64 m/s
Dynamic wind pressure = 1.305 kPa
SRF = 0.5 (for a tension section of 2400 m)
Ultimate wind pressure on conductor for tension calculation = 1.305 × 0.5 = 0.653 kPa
Failure containment loads (Clause 7.2.7.1 of AS/NZS 7000) Temperature = 15°C, Wind F c = 3.79 kN
pressure= 0.24 kPa
F t = 3.79 kN
NOTE: The conductor loads below exclude the weight of insulators and ancillaries.

27.6.2 Ultimate conductor loads

The ultimate strength limit state the maximum wind load is given by—
Wn + 1.1Gs + 1.25Gc + 1.25Ft
For each conductor the contribution is:
Wn = 1.305 × 285 × 0.009 × 0.666 = 2.23 kN
(where 0.666 is the SRF for a 285 m span)
1.25Gc = 1.25 × 0.135 × 285 × 9.81/1000 = 0.47 kN
1.25Ft = 1.25 × 7.00 = 8.75 kN
27.6.3 Failure containment loads
From Clause 7.2.7.1 of AS/NZS 7000 failure containment limit state is given by—
0.25Wn + 1.25Ft + 1.1Gs + 1.25Gc + 1.25Fb
For each conductor the contribution is—
0.25Wn = 0.25 × 1.305 × 285 × 0.009 × 0.666 = 0.557 kN
1.25Ft = 1.25 × 3.79 = 4.74 kN
1.25Gc = 1.25 × 0.135 × 285 × 9.81/1000 = 0.47 kN
1.25Fb = 1.25 × 3.79 × 0.45 = 2.13 kN
(The 0.45 factor is due to tension reduction resulting from insulator string swing where
span/sag = 45 and span/string length = 195 and derived from RSL figure)
Using the above approach, all the relevant loads for the ultimate, maintenance and
serviceability load cases can be calculated in a similar fashion to those in previous
distribution example 1.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 225 HB 331—2012

27.7 SEISMIC LOADS WORKED EXAMPLES

27.7.1 Example of a typical distribution pole mounted transformer station

Vc
11 k V
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

24 0 0
Vc
LV
800

Vs
315 KvA Tr a n s fo r m e r
M a s s = 15 4 0 kg
50 0

6000
Vtran

11 k V a n d LV

DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETRES

FIGURE 27.17 CONSTRUCTION DETAILS

27.7.1.1 Design parameters

The principal design parameters are given in Table 27.4.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 226

TABLE 27.4
PRINCIPAL DESIGN PARAMETERS
Item Detail Reference
Line Location Coastal plain North Island—
near Palmerston North
Soil Type Soft/Firm clays max depth Table 3.2 NZS 1170.5
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

<20 m Subsoil Class C Table 3.1 NZS 1170.5

Cd(T) = 0.66 for T = 2.0 s
Hazard Factor (Z) Distance to Z = 0.38 D = 20km Table 3.3 and Figure 3.3
major fault zone NZS 1170.5
Design life 50 years Table 6.1, AS/NZS 7000
Design security level Level 1 Table 6.1, AS/NZS 7000
Return Period Factor Ru 0.35 Table 3.5, NZS 1170.5
Near Fault Factor N (T,D) for 1.0 Clause 3.1.6.2, NZS 1170.5
D = 20 km
Ice load Nil Appendix EE, AS/NZS 7000

The line design parameters are given in Table 27.5

TABLE 27.5
LINE DESIGN PARAMETERS
Component Detail Reference

Pole type 11.0 m Prestressed

concrete
Conductor ‘Dog’ ACSR LV and 11 kV
Earthwire Nil

Wind span 100 m

Weight span 100 m

Deviation angle 0 degrees

The pole details are given in Table 27.6

TABLE 27.6
POLE DETAILS
Item Assumed pole details

Pole type 11 m PSC Rectangular I Section

Embedment depth 1.8 m
Conductor attachment Height 9.2 m
Transverse base width @ GL 430 mm
Longitudinal base width @ GL 150 mm
Transverse tip width 160 mm
Longitudinal tip width 150 mm
Pole tip load longitudinal capacity 8.0 kN
Pole tip load transverse capacity 22.0 kN
Pole mass 1290 kg = 12.65 kN

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 227 HB 331—2012

27.7.1.2 Frequency and Modal Response of PSC Poles:

Based on full scale load testing we can assume PSC poles have a first order single mode of
response when acting as a clamped base cantilever and any sudden release of tip load is
dampened within about 2 seconds. The fundamental frequency is assumed to be 0.5 Hz with
an equivalent Ti = 2.0 sec.
With PSC poles this damping characteristic is quite pronounced and the poles are
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

characteristically flexible and ductile. In addition pole footings also demonstrate ability to
absorb any overload with soil deformation.
27.7.1.3 Conductor vertical load
The maximum vertical load from the conductor is calculated as follows:

Vc = Span × weight per m

= 100 × 0.00388 × 1.3 (Load Factor 1.3 from Table 7.3
AS/NZS 7000)
= 0.504 kN/conductor
Vc total: = 3 × 0.504
= 1.513 kN

27.7.1.4 Structure vertical load

The maximum vertical load from the structure is calculated as follows:

Vs = Mass of Pole + crossarms + fittings

= (1.290 + 0.30 + 0.45) × 9.806 × 1.1
= 22.00 kN

27.7.1.5 Transformer vertical load

The maximum vertical load from the transformer is calculated as follows:

Vtran = Mass of transformer + mounting brackets

= (1.54 + 0.20) × 9.806 × 1.3
= 22.18 kN

27.7.1.6 Seismic load

The seismic load is determined using the equivalent static method (Clause 6.2 of
NZS 1170.5):

Horizontal seismic = V = Cd. (T1) Wt

shear
Now Cd.(T1) = 0.66
Wt = (1.513 × 2) + 22.0 + 22.18 =
47.20 kN
Then, V = 0.66 × 47.20 = 31.15 kN
Equivalent static =
force Fi:
Ft = 0.08 × V = 2.49 kN

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 228

Fi = Ft + (0.92V × 1) (assuming a single

level)
= 2.49 + (0.92 × 31.15)
= 31.14 kN
Assuming normal I section PSC poles this force is to be resisted at the level of the
transformer mounting bracket with 100% in X axis and 30% simultaneously applied in the
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

transverse Y axis:
AND
100% in Y axis and 30% simultaneously applied in the X axis. (C1 5.3.1.2 NZS 1170.5)
27.7.1.7 Equivalent tip loads
The equivalent simultaneous tip loads are calculated as follows:
Equivalent Pole tip capacity X axis = 6.0/9.2 × 31.14 = 20.30 kN
Equivalent pole tip capacity Y axis = 0.30 × 20.30 = 6.0 kN
Assumed section properties X axis tip load rated capacity = 8 kN
Assumed section properties Y axis tip load rated capacity = 22 kN
This would indicate:
For this site a single pole would be OK if rotated 90 degrees for one load direction
combination but grossly inadequate in the other simultaneous load combination direction.
Solution here would be to use twin poles with shear bolts to provide a composite pole.
Therefore because of the significant increment in vertical mass of the additional pole we
need to refine calculations for a twin pole solution:

Vs = Mass of Pole + crossarms + fittings

= (1.290)2 + 0.30 0.45) × 9.806 × 1.1
= 35.92 kN
Now, Wt = (1.513 × 2) + 35.92 + 22.18 = 61.126 kN
Then, V = 0.66 × 61.126 = 40.34 kN
Equivalent static force =
Fi:
Ft = 0.08 × V = 24.2 KN
Fi = Ft + (0.92V × 1) (assuming a single level)
= 24.2 + (0.92 × 40.34)
= 61.31 kN
Equivalent Pole tip capacity X axis = 6.0/9.2 × 61.31 = 40.87 kN
Equivalent pole tip capacity Y axis = 0.30 × 40.87 = 12.26 kN
Assumed section properties X axis tip load rated capacity of a single pole = 8 kN
We now have a twin pole section connected by bolts that provide clamp the twin sections
together. This in effect develops a frictional shear transfer along the butting flanges of the
‘I’ sections and the twin poles have a composite action.
Moment capacity is approximately the equivalent of 3 × the single pole capacity = 24 kN

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 229 HB 331—2012

Assumed section properties Y axis tip load rated capacity of a single pole = 22 kN
Capacity of twin composite poles in Y axis = 2 × Single pole = 44 kN
This indicates that solution is satisfactory for the one direction but not for the X axis and
we would need to increase the tip load capacity of the pole element to say 12 kN in X axis.
NOTES:
1 The composite action of twin poles can be increased by providing higher shear transfer
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

capability between the sections.

2 If twin poles are used the pole is still ductile but becomes a very rigid element and not as
flexible. I.e. some superficial pole top damage could be expected.
3 In other regions of lower seismic activity, it may be advisable to have single but more
‘ductile’ poles to assist in dissipation of seismic actions in order to minimize damage.
27.7.1.8 Seismic displacements
Clause C4.12 of AS/NZS 7000 sets out the following method of determining seismic
displacements.
For poles structures the seismic displacement at the centre of mass can be taken as follows:

μC (T )gZRS pT12
Δ=
4π 2
where
Δ = the seismic displacement at centre of mass (m)
μ = ductility coefficient
g = 9.81 ms-2
T1 = the fundamental period of the structure (s)
C(T), Z, R, Sp are factors in NZS 1170.5
Now
Δ = the seismic displacement at centre of mass (m)
μ = ductility coefficient = 1.25
g = 9.81 ms-2
T1 = the fundamental period of the structure (s) = 2.0 s
C(T) = 0.66
Z = 0.38
R = 0.35 for 50 year return period
Sp = 1.3 – 0.3 m = 1.65 (NZS 1170.5, Clause 4.4.2)

μC (T )gZRS pT12
Δ=
4π 2
= (1.25 × 0.66 × 9.806 × 038 ×0.35 ×1.65 × 4)/(4 × 3.1416 × 3.1416)
= 0.179 m (179 mm)
This is a significant horizontal displacement that reflects peak expected movement.
Local subsoil strata may however dissipate or reduce or amplify this displacement.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 230

27.7.2 Example of seismic evaluation of a back stayed pole.

27.7.2.1 Locality
The pole is assumed to be an 11 kV termination pole in the same locality as for the example
in Clause 27.7.1.
27.7.2.2 Design parameters
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

The pole arrangement and force diagram are as given in Figures 27.18 and 27.19.

Line En d p o l e

Pull di r e c ti o n

S t ay

9.2 m

Ground line

1.8 m

Single circuit

FIGURE 27.18 POLE ARRANGEMENT

Vc

TC TH

TS Stay
TV

VS

Seismic actions

FIGURE 27.19 FORCE DIAGRAM

The pole is a PSC concrete pole with the details given in Table 27.7.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 231 HB 331—2012

TABLE 27.7
POLE DETAILS
Item Assumed Pole Details
Pole type 11 m PSC Rectangular I
Section
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Embedment depth 1.8 m

Conductor attachment Ht 9.2 m
Transverse base width @GL 430 mm
Longitudinal base width @GL 150 mm
Transverse tip width 160 mm
Longitudinal tip width 150 mm
Pole tip load longitudinal 8.0 kN
capacity
Pole tip load transverse 22.0 kN
capacity
Pole mass 1290kg = 12.65 kN

The line design parameters are given in Table 27.8.

TABLE 27.8
LINE DESIGN PARAMETERS
Component Detail Reference
Pole type 11.0 m Prestressed
concrete
Conductor ‘Dog’ ACSR LV and 11 kV
Earthwire Nil
Wind span 100 m
Weight span 100 m
Deviation angle 0 degrees
Conductor every day 3.29 kN
tension
Conductor self weight 0.396 kg/m

27.7.2.3 Vertical loads

The conductor vertical load is calculated as follows:
Assuming a single 19/2.0 SCGZ stay wire allow V c staywire = 0.15kN
The maximum vertical load from structure is calculated as follows:

Vs = Mass of pole + crossarms + fittings

= (1.290 + 0.30 + 0.45) × 9.806 × 1.1
= 22.00 kN
27.7.2.4 Conductor applied loads
The conductor termination load is calculated as follows:
Tc = 3 × 3.29 = 9.87 kN

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 232

Assuming a 45 degree stay angle

TH = 9.87 kN
Ts = 13.96 kN
Tv = 9.87 kN
27.7.2.5 Seismic load
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

The seismic load is determined using the equivalent static method (Clause 6.2 of
NZS 1170.5).

Horizontal seismic shear = V = Cd.(T1) Wt

Now Cd.(T1) = 0.66
Seismic Wt = 1.513 + 0.15 + 22.0 + 9.87 = 33.533 kN
then V = 0.66 × 33.533 = 22.13 kN
Ft = 0.08 × V = 1.77 kN
Fi = Ft + (0.92V × 1) (assuming a single level)
= 1.77 + (0.92 × 22.13)
= 22.13 kN

Assuming normal I section PSC poles this force is to be resisted at the level of the
transformer mounting bracket with 100% in X axis and 30% simultaneously applied in the
transverse Y axis;
AND
100% in Y axis and 30% simultaneously applied in the X axis. (C1.5.3.1.2, NZS 1170.5).
27.7.2.6 Equivalent tip loads
The equivalent simultaneous tip loads are calculated as follows:
These forces need to be applied at the tip attachment
Equivalent pole tip capacity X axis = 22.13 kN
Equivalent pole tip capacity Y axis = 0.30 × 22.13 = 6.6 kN
Assumed section properties X axis tip load rated capacity = 8 kN
Assumed section properties Y axis tip load rated capacity = 22 kN
27.7.2.7 Conclusions from review of analysis:
For this site a single pole with its major strength axis at right angles to the line and
restrained in the weaker longitudinal axis by a back stay on one side and aerial conductors
on the other – would be assumed to have adequate capacity.
Keep in mind that with the seismic displacement Δ at centre of mass of almost 200 mm as
previously estimated, there may be some concern if differential movements occurred
between the stay anchorage and the pole. This would have a low probability of occurrence,
and if it occurred the weaker element would be most probably the staywire and would result
in the pole leaning into the conductor span with the soil foundation yielding.
The total overhead line system (foundation, pole structure, conductors, stays) is in fact, a
very flexible and elastic system and experience has shown that seismic force impacts
generally have minimal effect on the structural security of overhead lines.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 233 HB 331—2012

However, there is always a risk that isolated structures may be subjected to seismic forces
and effects that will cause them to sink vertically in liquefaction areas, be vertically or
horizontally displaced, lean or to be structurally damaged.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 234

PART 5 SPECIAL TOPICS

S E C T I O N 2 8 S P E C I A L C O N D U C T O R S

28.1 AERODYNAMIC CONDUCTORS

Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Conventional conductors induce a large wind pressure wake load whereas low drag
conductor induce a narrower wake and thus a lower wake load as illustrated in Figure 28.1.
The narrower wake is achieved by designing the wire shape to shift the air flow separation
point towards the wake shadow region of the conductor surface.

FIGURE 28.1 CONDUCTOR WAKE INDUCED WIND LOAD

The drag coefficient of conventional conductor is shown in blue in Figure 28.2. Also shown
in Figure 28.2 in red is the drag coefficient of a specially designed ‘low drag aerodynamic
conductor.’ Furthermore, the typical range of Australian wind speeds between 30 m/s and
40 m/s is shown.

1. 3

1. 2

1.1

1.0
CX

0. 9

0. 8

0.7

0.6

0. 5
5 15 25 3 5 4 5 5 5 65
W i n d s p e e d s ( m /s )

FIGURE 28.2 CONDUCTOR WIND LOAD RELATIONSHIP

In this example, at 40 m/s the ratio of the conductor drag coefficient for a conventional
conductor and a low drag aerodynamic conductor is about 1.5.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 235 HB 331—2012

Thus, the conventional conductor may be replaced with a low drag aerodynamic conductor
with about a 50% increase in diameter and this allows an increase in conductor csa of about
200% without any increase in conductor wind load. Thus single conductors may be replaced
with either single larger conductors or perhaps with multiple smaller conductors. Smaller
conductors are more efficient in dissipating heat by natural convection than larger
conductors. This may also influence the selection of smaller bundled conductors rather than
single larger conductors particularly for sub transmission line applications.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

28.2 HIGH TEMPERATURE LOW SAG CONDUCTORS

Conventional overhead line thermal ratings based on typical load factors and 10% loss of
strength due to annealing are—
(a) transmission lines where the load is controlled, typical maximum operating
temperatures are up to 100°C with emergency ratings are up to 120°C;
(b) sub transmission lines where there may be a different standard of load controlled,
then typical maximum operating temperatures are up to 85°C and emergency ratings
are up to 100°C; and
(c) distribution lines where minimal load controlled is applied then maximum operating
temperatures are typically 50°C or 65°C.
In more recent times, for ACSR, some utilities have developed a comprehensive
understanding of conductor operating temperature excursions and have either rerated
overhead lines or designing lines with maximum operating temperature of 120°C and
emergency ratings up to 150°C.
In general, operating temperatures beyond 120°C require different or ‘special’ conductors.
The designs of these conductors use thermal resistant aluminium compared to the traditional
aluminium and aluminium alloys. The various types of aluminium are outlined in
Table 28.1. Also illustrated are some typical operating temperatures.

TABLE 28.1
COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT ALUMINIUM
Typical operating temperature
Conductivity Min. tensile strength
Type of aluminium °C
%IACS MPa Continuous Emergency
Aluminium 1350 61 160–200 100 120
Aluminium alloy 1120 59 230–250 90 120
Aluminium alloy 6201A 54 315–325 90 120
Thermal resistant TAL 60 165–190 150 180
High strength thermal resistant KTAL 60 190–250 150 180
Ultra thermal resistant ZTAL 60 165–190 200 240

In designing a non homogenous or a reinforced conductor particularly for a ‘special’

applications, a variety of reinforcing core wires may be used and these are illustrated in
Table 28.2.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 236

TABLE 28.2
COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT CORE WIRES

Minimum tensile strength Modulus of elasticity Coefficient of linear expansion

Type of reinforcing wires
MPa GPa ×10 –6
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

GZ steel HS 1230–1320
205 11.5
GZ steel EHS 1770

Al clad (AC) 1100–1340 160 13.0

Mischmetals std 1380–1450
185 11.5
Mischmetal HS 1520–1620
GZ invar alloy 1030–1080 160 2.8–3.6
Al oxide matrix (cr) 1310 215 6.0
Carbon Fibre (cc) 4295 125 1.6

Of particular interest are the invar or nickel based steel, the aluminium oxide matrix and the
carbon fibre all of which have very low coefficient of linear expansion and present
additional options for consideration in uprating existing overhead lines. The aluminium
oxide matrix and the carbon fibre also have a low mass and thus the strength to mass ratio is
much greater than that of an equivalent steel wire.
Given the variety of aluminium and steel wires, Table 28.3 details some of the types of
conductor constructions, the associated nomenclature and an indicative comparative rating
for a given conductor sag and span criteria.

TABLE 28.3
COMPARISON OF ‘SPECIAL’ CONDUCTORS
≈400 mm 2 Comparison operating current A Ratio
acsr 1020 1
tacsr 1630 1.6
accc 1650 1.62
ztacsr 1960 1.93
tacir 2060 2.02
ztacir 2110 2.07
accr 2550 ≈ 2.5

Compared to an ACSR, ‘special’ high temperature low sag conductors allow significant
increases in thermal rating and this is perhaps best illustrated in Figure 28.3 for some of the
conductors mentioned.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 237 HB 331—2012

11

10

Sag (m)
9
AC S R
8 Z TAC I R
X TAC I R
7
AC C F
6
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

50 10 0 15 0 20 0 25 0 300
Conductor temperature (ºC)

FIGURE 28.3 COMPARISON OF ‘SPECIAL’ CONDUCTOR OPERATING

TEMPERATURES AND SAG

Thus, it may be concluded that replacing existing conductors with ‘special’ conductors will
allow significant increases in the thermal rating of existing lines without any increase in
conductor wind load.

28.3 ‘SPECIAL’ CONDUCTORS—SPECIAL CARE

Gap type conductors have low strength weight ratio, are very complex and expensive to
install and require special consideration for installation lengths. Gap conductors are
generally not suitable for uprating existing overhead lines.
Al oxide matrix core (ACCR) has excellent strength weight ratio with a relatively high
brittle core and thus requires special installation considerations.
Carbon fibre (ACCC) has the best strength weight ratio, best aluminium to total area ratio
with a relatively stiff but not brittle core.
Invar alloy has similar characteristics to ACSR without the thermal limitations and offers
one of the easiest installation alternatives.

28.4 REFERENCES
[1] Guidelines for increased utilization of existing overhead transmission lines. CIGRE
TB 353; WG B2.13, August 2008.
[2] BRENNAN, GF. ‘Overhead Line Conductors’ An eleven part series, Australian
Transmission and Distribution Issue 4, 2005 to Issue 6, 2007 inclusive.
[3] BRENNAN, GF. ‘Uprating Existing Overhead Lines’ A four part series, Australian
Transmission and Distribution 2010 to 2011 inclusive.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 238

S E C T I O N 2 9 C O N D U C T O R C L A S H I N G

29.1 GENERAL
Under short circuit conditions, conductors experience forces of attraction and repulsion due
to electromagnetic force from the fault current in the conductors. If the fault current is large
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

and experienced for a long enough time the movement can be substantial and cause
conductor clashing (particularly on distribution lines). For phase-to-phase faults the
conductor movement is more pronounced as the fault current is very high and the protection
clearance times are typically long.

29.2 PRIMARY CONDUCTOR CLASHING

Primary conductor clashing may occur when there is a phase to phase fault on one of two
overhead lines connecting the same substations. When a phase to phase fault occurs, one
end of the faulted line will usually trip first and fault current will then increase significantly
on the other unfaulted line. The increase in fault current may then cause the conductors on
this line to clash, resulting in the loss of two overhead lines. Constructions which are prone
to conductor clashing are underslung or suspension, flat pin and transitions from flat to
vertical.

29.3 SECONDARY CONDUCTOR CLASHING

Secondary conductor clashing may occur on a distribution feeder when a recloser trips and
isolates an initial fault and the live oscillating conductors upstream of the recloser
subsequently clash together. When the initial phase-to-phase fault occurs the faulted phase
conductors repel each other due to the current in the phase conductors. When the recloser
trips the fault current and thus the repulsion forces between the conductors is removed the
conductors pendulum back into equilibrium. Both phase conductor’s pendulum
simultaneously towards each other and if they get close enough they cause a secondary
conductor clashing fault. Figure 29.1 below shows diagrammatically the feeder, recloser
and fault positions.

Fe e d e r CB tr ip s d u e to
th e s e c o n d a r y fa ul t of th e
c l a s h i n g c o n d u c to r s
R a di a l
d i s t r ib u t i o n
fe e d e r
Recloser
trips due
S u b s t a ti o n to d ow n - Initial shor t
b u s b a r S e c o n d a r y fa u l t d u e to stream circuit fault -
c l a s h i n g c o n d u c to r s fault d ow n s t r e a m
of r e c l o s e r

FIGURE 29.1 FAULT CONDITIONS CAUSING BOTH FEEDER CIRCUIT-BREAKER AND

RECLOSER TO TRIP

The repulsion forces can be great enough to exceed wind force design limits.
Conductor clashing has a higher probability of occurrence when the fault occurs on two
adjacent conductors at the same height and the conductor has low weight. Conductor
clashing can be avoided or mitigated by the following measures:
(a) Introduce a vertical spacing between conductors.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 239 HB 331—2012

(b) Increase the horizontal spacing between conductors.

(c) Insert additional poles midspan between conductors.
(d) Install midspan spacers between conductors.
(e) Reduce protection clearing times.
To determine whether a line is susceptible to conductor clashing the calculations can be
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

performed with formula provided in the following EPRI publication, Bathold L.O., Clayton
R.E., Grant I.S., Longo V.J., Stewart J.R and Wilson D.D., Transmission Line Reference
Book: 115-138 kV Compact Line Design, EPRI, 1978.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 240

S E C T I O N 3 0 L O W V O L T A G E A E R I A L
B U N D L E D C A B L E

30.1 GENERAL
LVABC may be used as—
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

(a) an aerial cable suspended between two or more supports; or

(b) a cable attached to the facades of buildings.

30.2 SUPPORTS
Mechanical support fittings, including pole fittings, strain clamps and suspension clamps,
should comply with the requirements of AS 3766.
(a) The first element to fail should be the suspension support by failure of the suspension
clamp or the pole hardware supporting the suspension clamp. The cable should not be
allowed to slip through the suspension clamp as this causes insulation damage,
especially if an insulation piercing connector is fitted near the support.
(b) The second element to fail should be mains and service tee connections to minimize
the number of live cables lying on the ground.
(c) The third element to fail should be the pole hardware supporting the strain clamp.
(d) This should be followed by pole footing failure, cable failure and pole failure.

30.3 CABLE TENSION

In addition to the requirements of Section 4 of AS/NZS 7000, the following considerations
apply:
(a) Under the short duration load, the tangential tension in the cable should not exceed
28% CBL. This is based on a maximum working conductor stress of 40 MPa on
95 mm2 LVABC. This is the limit for transferring the conductor tension through the
insulation to the strain clamp and is based on French experience with heavily filled
XLPE compounds.
(b) The highest horizontal tension used for the everyday load should take into account the
working ratings of cable tensioning equipment such as lugalls, comealongs, etc. Also
for 3 or 4 core cables experience has shown that the cores are difficult to separate to
fit Insulation Piercing Connectors at cable tensions exceeding 4.5 kN.

30.4 CLEARANCES
The clearance requirements of Section 3 of AS/NZS 7000 for Insulated Conductor,
U ≤1000 V apply to LVABC.

30.5 FAÇADE CABLE

The mounting of LVABC on the facades (frontages) of buildings was the original and still
the most common method of using LVABC in France. Its initial use was in narrow
laneways and streets where poles could not be used. Australia’s capital and provincial cities
have many such laneways and narrow streets.
Before LVABC is attached to the facade agreement on the following issues should be
reached with all the building owners:
(a) Liability for all expenses resulting from the attachment of the cable to the facade.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 241 HB 331—2012

(b) Conditions relating to building owners painting the LVABC and any attachments to
further harmonize the cable with the facade.
(c) Liabilities for damage to the cable system resulting from failure of the building or its
facade.
(d) Liabilities for any damage done to the facade resulting from the attachment of the
cable system.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

(e) Supply authority access to the cable and fittings.

(f) Notification to the supply authority in advance of modification or demolition of the
facade.

30.6 MECHANICAL DESIGN

Care should be taken to protect the building fabric from damage due to external influences
on the cable.
The cable on the facade may be either ‘tensioned’ or ‘non-tensioned’. The choice is
dependent on the type of facade, the strength of the fittings and the length of straight runs.
(a) ‘Non-tensioned’ construction is used in most installations and the cable is only tight
enough to remove any twists. The cable is lifted onto the wall brackets and has
sufficient tension so that there are no unsightly sags between supports.
(i) Strain clamps are recommended for all runs but should be used to terminate
cable for all runs over 10 m. In-line strains are used so that no run between
strain clamps is more than 60 m.
(ii) Intermediate wall supports are spaced at 500 mm to 700 mm intervals.
(b) ‘Tensioned’ construction is seldom used but is applicable where the facade cable
crosses over laneways or other discontinuities. An everyday tension of 1.4 kN is
recommended for 4 × 95 mm2. Tensions for other sizes should be chosen to give
equivalent sag to this.
(i) Strain clamps are used for all runs and in-line strains are used so that no run
between strain clamps is more than 60 m.
(ii) Intermediate wall supports are spaced at 3 to 6 m intervals.

30.7 CLEARANCES
Where the cable is in excess of 300 mm from the facade of the building which supports it,
the requirements of Section 3 of AS/NZS 7000 apply.
The minimum clearance from any part of the facade of the building which supports it, to
any position the cable may assume due to the influence of load current and solar radiation,
should be as specified in Table 30.1. Mechanical barriers or enclosures may be used to
reduce these clearances.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 242

TABLE 30.1
CLEARANCES FOR FACADE SYSTEMS
Clearance
Minimum permissible
(see Facade situation Comments
clearances, m
Figure 30.1)
This should be increased
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Clearance vertically from if local conditions make it

A 2.5
ground or path level possible for bundle to be
touched or damaged
This may be reduced to
Above windows and 0.2 m only where it is
B 0.3
doors physically impossible to
obtain 0.3 m
Each side of and below
C 0.5
windows
Each side of doors and
D 1.0 Whichever is wider
balconies
From metallic parts of
E 0.05
buildings, e.g. downpipes

C
D
C

B
B

FIGURE 30.1 MINIMUM PERMISSIBLE CLEARANCES FOR TABLE 30.1

30.8 REFERENCES
[1] SEBIRE, J and GEELAN, G. Mechanical Design and Co-ordinated Mechanical
Failure of Low Voltage ABC Lines. Distribution 2000, May 1991, Sydney Australia.
[2] MORGAN, VT. The Current Rating of Aerial Bundled Cables. Distribution 2000,
May 1991, Sydney Australia.
[3] SEBIRE, J. The Facade Mounting of Low Voltage ABC. Distribution 2000, May
1991, Sydney Australia.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 243 HB 331—2012

[4] MCLEOD, D, DEMKO, M and GRIFFIN, M. Design of Low Voltage Networks

Using LVABC. Distribution 2000, May 1991, Sydney Australia.
[5] MURRAY, T and KREMER, H. Design Aspects of LVABC Lines in Severe
Environments. Distribution 2000, November 1993, Melbourne Australia.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 244

S E C T I O N 3 1 H I G H V O L T A G E A E R I A L
B U N D L E D C A B L E

31.1 GENERAL
HVABC is fully insulated for the service voltage. There are three types, as follows:
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

(a) Metallic Screened High Voltage Aerial Bundled Cable (to AS/NZS 3599.1)—
MSHVABC.
(b) Non-metallic Screened High Voltage Aerial Bundled Cable (to AS/NZS 3599.2)—
NMSHVABC.
(c) Self-supporting High Voltage Aerial Bundled Cable (not currently covered by an
Australian Standard).
In Self-supporting High Voltage Aerial Bundled Cable the mechanical load has to be
transferred to the insulated conductors and is supported at intermediate structures on line
insulators rated for the nominal operating voltage. Cables at low tension are tensioned with
clamps similar to LVABC strain clamps but at higher tensions the bundle is opened out and
bare conductor terminations are fitted to the core conductors.
The rest of this Clause covers MSHVABC and NMSHVABC only, which use a support
conductor to carry the mechanical load.

31.2 MECHANICAL
MSHVABC and NMSHVABC consist of three cores wrapped around a support conductor.
In both types the support conductor mechanically supports the cable bundle and in
NMSHVABC it also provides electrical earthing.
The cable bundle is supported at intermediate supports on suspension clamps with the
support conductor firmly clamped and the cores clamped sufficiently to prevent the cores
slipping relative to the support conductor. Measures should be taken to maintain the
insulation screens of the three cores of NMSHVABC and the metallic screens of
MSHVABC within the prospective touch voltage limits in Section 10 of AS/NZS 7000 by
earthing at appropriate intervals.
On strain or tension structures the support conductor is separated from the bundle and
terminated using standard bare conductor fittings. In both cable types measures should be
taken to prevent the cores slipping relative to the support conductor and again measures
should be taken to maintain the insulation screens or metallic screens within appropriate
potentials.
At intermediate supports consideration may also be given to using line fittings specifically
designed to cause the cable to separate from its support at a predetermined load, such as
that caused by a falling tree or limb.

31.3 ELECTRICAL
In MSHVABC the fault return path is provided by the metallic screens in each core, but
measures should be taken to ensure that the support conductor is not damaged by the
passage of fault current to the extent that it cannot support the cable for mechanical loading
and ground clearance considerations.
In NMSHVABC the support conductor should be effectively earthed to ensure that it—
(a) maintains the outer semi-conducting insulation screen potentials at acceptable levels
under all operating conditions; and

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 245 HB 331—2012

(b) provides a defined path for any fault current.

Also, measures should be taken to ensure that the support conductor is not damaged by the
passage of fault current to the extent that it cannot support the cable for mechanical loading
and ground clearance considerations.

31.4 CLEARANCES
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

The clearance requirements of Clause 3 for U >1000 V, Insulated with Earthed Screen,
apply to HVABC.

31.5 REFERENCES
[1] WILLIAMSON, CE, CHEALES, JA, and MCLEOD, D. Overview of Insulated HV
Overhead Systems and Applications. Distribution 2000, May 1991, Sydney Australia.
[2] COULTER, R, SEBIRE, J and MCLEOD, D. Some Design Aspects of High Voltage
Non-metallic Screened Aerial Bundled Cable Systems. Distribution 2000, May 1991,
Sydney Australia.
[3] KENT, H, CLAY, J, RICHTER, K and MCLEOD, D. Economic and Technical
Considerations of High Voltage Insulated Overhead Lines. Distribution 2000,
November 1993, Melbourne Australia.
[4] SEBIRE, J, PIASENTIN, S and SOUPROUNOVICH, K. The Development,
Introduction and Experience with HVABC in the State Electricity Commission of
Victoria. Distribution 2000, November 1993, Melbourne Australia.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 246

S E C T I O N 3 2 C O V E R E D C O N D U C T OR
SYSTE MS

32.1 GENERAL
Covered conductor manufactured to AS/NZS 3675 may be used in a similar manner to an
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

open wire 11 to 33 kV bare overhead system, except that the following should apply:
(a) The system should include adequate protection to prevent burn down at support
points. Such matters as lightning surge protection, fault clearing times and the need
for fault current limitation should be considered.
(b) When attaching covered conductors to insulators, special measures should be taken to
manage radio interference voltage and leakage currents, particularly in high pollution
areas.
(c) Clearance between phases may be reduced (see Clause 3.7.3 Note 3 of
AS/NZS 7000).
(d) Clearance to trees may be reduced.
(e) Consideration may be given to reducing the permissible limits of approach for safe
working conditions.
Covered conductor to AS/NZS 3675 contains a water blocking compound to prevent the
migration of water under the covering and between the wires. Covered conductors have
previously been used in Australia without water blocking. These conductors suffered
corrosion of the conductor under the covering and eventual failure. The corrosion also
contributed to conductor burn down.

32.2 COVERED CONDUCTOR (CC)

CC can withstand intermittent contact with conductive material between phases or to
ground, e.g. trees and branches, but should not remain in permanent contact.

32.3 COVERED CONDUCTOR THICK (CCT)

CCT has the following additional features:
(a) Clearance between phases and to trees may be further reduced compared with CC
(b) CCT has electrical and mechanical characteristics which permit it to remain in contact
with tree limbs for an extended period of time. In determining the period, account
should be taken of—
(i) abrasion due to the species of tree and its growing pattern.
(ii) frequency and strength of prevailing winds.
(iii) operating temperature.
(iv) Better performance in polluted environments.
(v) Suitable for use in the Insulated Unscreened Conductor (IUC) system.
(vi) Suitable for use in ‘spacer cable’ systems, however, consideration should be
given to using CCT which has an outer layer of tracking resistance material,
especially at nominal voltages of 22 kV and above.

32.4 CLEARANCES
The clearance requirements of Clause 3 for U ≥1000 V, Bare or Covered, apply to CC.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 247 HB 331—2012

The clearance requirements of Clause 3 for U ≥1000 V, Insulated without earthed screen,
apply to CCT, providing that the covering thickness is appropriate to the operating voltage.

32.5 REFERENCES
[1] WILLIAMSON, CE, CHEALES, JA, and MCLEOD, D. Overview of Insulated HV
Overhead Systems and Applications. Distribution 2000, May 1991, Sydney Australia.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

[2] ELFORD, R.F, KATO, K, NAGASAKA, H, and MATSUMOTO, J. Development and

Introduction of Aerial Insulated Unscreened Conductor (IUC) in South Australia.
Distribution 2000, May 1991, Sydney Australia.
[3] KENT, H, CLAY, J, RICHTER, K and MCLEOD, D. Economic and Technical
Considerations of High Voltage Insulated Overhead Lines. Distribution 2000,
November 1993, Melbourne Australia.
[4] HINKKURI, A, LEHTINEN, I and NOPONEN, K. On the Design and Experience
with High Voltage Covered Conductor Systems. Distribution 2000, November 1993,
Melbourne Australia.
[5] MCLEOD, D, KATO, K and MCPHEE, A. Development of 22 kV Covered
Conductor for SECV. Distribution 2000, November 1993, Melbourne Australia.
[6] ELFORD, R. Design Considerations for Covered Conductor (CC) Distribution.
Distribution 2000, November 1993, Melbourne Australia.
[7] RICHTER, K. An Overview on Overhead Insulated Systems in South Australia.
Distribution 2000, November 1993, Melbourne Australia.

32.6 SPACER COVERED CONDUCTOR SYSTEM

A spacer covered conductor system is a patterned cover conductor system that supports the
insulated phase conductors with an overhead catenary (messenger) galvanized steel wire.
The stringing arrangement of the conductors is as shown in Figure 32.1

FIGURE 32.1 SPACER COVERED CONDUCTOR SYSTEM

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 248

The insulated phase conductors are supported on specially designed insulated spacer
brackets as shown in Figure 32.2. There is a single phase bracket for single phase systems.

N
M e s s e n g e r wi r e
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Ph a s e c a b l e
C A
E

(a) Ph a s e c o nf i g u ati o n

T S -1 s t i r r u p

Straight Structure A nt- sway b a r

0 º to 6º

( b) In s t a ll s ti r r ip a n d a nti - sway b a r

FIGURE 32.2 INSULATED SPACER BRACKETS

The spacer brackets supporting the phase conductors, which means virtually no tension is
on the phase conductors. The low tension on the phase conductors means the spans can be
considerable and are only limited by the strength of the catenary wire. The Hendrix system
of construction allows long spans in heavily treed areas.
The covered conductor has three layers of insulation, as shown in Figure 32.3. The inner
core is a stranded and compacted aluminium conductor. The next layer is a semi-conductive
layer laid on the stranded conductor for stress relief. A low density polyethylene LDPE is
the laid over the semi conductive layer, which has high insulation properties and to improve
flexibility. A tough outer layer of high density polyethylene is laid over the HDPE for
protection against rubbing against hard and sharp objects impinging on the surfaces e.g. tree
branches and bird attack.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 249 HB 331—2012

4
3
2
1
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

FIGURE 32.3 INSULATED COVERED CONDUCTOR

The advantages of the spacer covered conductor system are the same as those given for
CCT plus:
(a) Span lengths are virtually only limited to the strength of the catenary wire and height
of the poles.
(b) It has a natural lightning protection shield provided by the overhead catenary wire.
(c) Should the conductor insulation be damaged the circuit can remain in service as the
phase conductors are strung on insulators and insulated spacer brackets.
(d) The system has a breakaway failure system, like that used for HVABC, however it
will withstand a greater force before breaking away.
The disadvantage with all covered conductor systems is that an earth fault may be difficult
to see by conventional IDMT type earth fault relays. When covered conductor systems are
used as a minimum sensitive earth fault relays should be deployed. However, there are
some more exotic relays that can be used that use harmonics to detect low grade earth
faults. It could be argued that the likelihood of a fully screen HVABC system is less likely
to experience undetected earth faults due to the proximity of the screen, though non
detection can still occur.

32.7 CLEARANCES
The clearance requirements of Section 3 of AS/NZS 7000 for U > 1000 V, Bare or Covered,
apply to CC.
The clearance requirements of Section 3 of AS/NZS 7000 for U > 1000 V, insulated without
earthed screen, apply to CCT, providing that the covering thickness is appropriate to the
operating voltage.

32.8 DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR COVERED CONDUCTORS

A good coverage on the general details, design and construction of CCT is given in Energy
Australia NS126—‘Specification for Design and Construction of High Voltage Overhead
Mains’. To ensure a high performance of the CCT system for a design life of around 40
years, the following design measures need to be considered:
(a) Provision of internal water blocking compound to prevent migration of water and an
outer covering layer which has good Ultraviolet (UV) and brush resistance
(b) In high polluted conditions, where erosion of the CCT material may occur when
installed on ceramic insulators, consider the use of composite or cycloaliphatic
insulators which maintain hydrophobicity under wet conditions. When using CC in
high polluted conditions, consider the use of additional insulating layers on the
covered material at the insulator support
(c) Install surge arresters at regular intervals (typically in range from 100 m to 500 m) to
address CCT burn down. CCT is normally installed amongst vegetation and this
provides some degree of screening. Where lines sections have more than 90%
shielding, the distance between surge arresters may be up to 500 m.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 250

(d) Surge arresters may be of the gap (refer Figure 32.4 for Current Limiting Arching
Horn—CLAH) or gapless type and may have a disconnection isolator at the base of
the arresters to protect the arrester against internal failure (refer Figure 32.5). This
also aids in fault detection.

D i s c h a r g e c o n n e c to r
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

A i r g a p 20 m m

A d j u s t a b l e n otc h e d h o m

Cu r r e nt- li m i ti n g e l e m e nt

FIGURE 32.4 CURRENT LIMITING ARCING HORN

Bird cap
Line
c o n n e c ti o n
Po l y m e r i c cable
s u r g e a r r e s te r
Support
B r a c ke t

I n s u l a te d
b r a c ke t
Disconnect
d evi c e E a r th
cable

FIGURE 32.5 POLYMERIC SURGE ARRESTER WITH DISCONNECT DEVICE

32.9 REFERENCES
[1] WILLIAMSON, CE, CHEALES, JA, and MCLEOD, D. Overview of Insulated HV
Overhead Systems and Applications. Distribution 2000, May 1991, Sydney Australia.
[2] ELFORD, RF, KATO, K, NAGASAKA, H, and MATSUMOTO, J. Development and
Introduction of Aerial Insulated Unscreened Conductor (IUC) in South Australia.
Distribution 2000, May 1991, Sydney Australia.
[3] KENT, H, CLAY, J, RICHTER, K and MCLEOD, D. Economic and Technical
Considerations of High Voltage Insulated Overhead Lines. Distribution 2000,
November 1993, Melbourne Australia.
[4] HINKKURI, A, LEHTINEN, I and NOPONEN, K. On the Design and Experience
with High Voltage Covered Conductor Systems. Distribution 2000, November 1993,
Melbourne Australia.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 251 HB 331—2012

[5] MCLEOD, D, KATO, K and MCPHEE, A. Development of 22 kV Covered

Conductor for SECV. Distribution 2000, November 1993, Melbourne Australia.
[6] ELFORD, R. Design Considerations for Covered Conductor (CC) Distribution.
Distribution 2000, November 1993, Melbourne Australia.
[7] RICHTER, K. An Overview on Overhead Insulated Systems in South Australia.
Distribution 2000, November 1993, Melbourne Australia.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 252

S E C T I O N 3 3 O V E R H E A D L I N E S I N T R A F F I C
C O R R I D O R S O R P R O X I M I T Y T O O T H E R
S E R V I C E S

33.1 POLE LOCATIONS IN TRAFFIC CORRIDORS

Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

33.1.1 General
Pole locations in traffic corridors are influenced by factors including traffic speed, traffic
volume, road deviation and traffic calming devices (roundabouts, chicanes, etc.),
embankments (cut or fill slopes) next to the road, frangibility of the pole, road kerbing and
parking.
Poles can be positioned closer to the road where there is a permanent barrier between the
poles and the road. Barriers can take the form of natural items such as kerbs, trees, rocks,
and crash barriers such as walls, wire rope, W-barrier, etc.
Frangible poles can typically be positioned closer to the road because they absorb the
impact of the vehicle to a greater extent than non-frangible poles.
Setback requirements will vary with the jurisdiction and various Codes of Practice exist at
both local and state government level. Supply Authorities should endeavour to work with
relevant road transport authorities, such as Councils, Shires and Main Roads Departments,
to position poles in mutually acceptable positions.
Guidance to setbacks and barriers is provided in:
(a) AS/NZS 1158.1.2.
(b) Austroads publications and guidelines for rural and urban road design.
(c) AS/NZS 3845.
33.1.2 Special considerations for slip based poles
Slip based poles should not be used in areas with high pedestrian based activity. The slip
based poles are unsuitable for these areas as these poles are deliberately designed to fall
over after vehicle impact to lessen the damage to the vehicle occupants. Having these poles
fall over in high pedestrian areas introduces an unacceptable risk. High pedestrian areas are
schools, shopping centres, major entrances/exits to sporting or entertainment venues, and
train or bus stations entrances/exits.

33.2 RAILWAY AND TRAMWAY CROSSINGS

Due to the potential for disruption to the community, for the installation and ongoing
maintenance, overhead power-lines that cross railways should be minimized where
practical.
Crossings of railway and tramway tracks and property are subject to the requirements and
approval of the controlling authority. Special constructions, increased clearances and higher
safety factors generally apply in these areas. These conditions will vary with the
jurisdiction and should be ascertained prior to commencing the design layout.
Where railway power-lines crossings are required the installation should be designed to
minimize the impact of any future maintenance on the community. For example, the support
conductor structures and fittings should be of high integrity with a long life expectancy.
When designing railway crossings AS 4799 should be referred to in addition to
requirements by local rail authorities.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 253 HB 331—2012

33.3 WATERWAY CROSSINGS

Navigable waterways that are traversed by overhead power lines must allow for the
potential for boat with masts and eliminate this risk of the masts coming in contact with the
power lines.
AS 6947 and Crossing of NSW Navigable Waters—Electricity Industry Code provide
requirements for crossings of navigable waterways. In New Zealand the relevant reference
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

documents are: EEA Guide to Safety Management of Power Line Waterway Crossings and
Maritime New Zealand: New Zealand System of Buoys and Beacons. The design process
includes liaison with the local maritime jurisdiction to ascertain likely vessel heights and
determination of maximum water levels prior to layout design in order to achieve the
required safety clearances. Guidance on appropriate signage and marking is also provided
in AS 6947.
A worked example using the risk based NSW guide is given below.
EXAMPLE 3—NEW CROSSINGS KOOLKHAN TO MACLEAN #2 66kV
This is a worked example to assist in assessing three new 66 kV (overhead or submarine)
crossings in accordance with the Crossings of NSW Navigable Waters: Electricity Industry
Code.
Aim:
Essential Energy is planning to construct three new river crossings and wishes to determine
the appropriate type of crossing to construct (overhead or submarine) and, if an overhead
crossing is appropriate, the minimum design height as well as the signage requirements.
The Situation:
Three new 66 kV electrical crossings are proposed for a section of the Koolkhan to Maclean
overhead line on the South Arm of the Clarence River near Tyndale. The three crossings are
located within 5 km of each other.
Two fixed road bridges exist in this section of waterway, one located at Maclean and the
other at Brushgrove prevent large sailing vessels from entering from the main arm of the
Clarence River.
Communicate and Consult:
Consultations are required with NSW Maritime as navigation safety regulator. Consultation
is also required with the local Council, Manly Hydraulics Laboratory, property owners,
users of the river including the charter vessel industry, local marina operators, local sailing
clubs, commercial vessel operators, etc. If work involves state road infrastructure the
RTA’s involvement, prior to the work commencing is required. The RTA’s asset
section will need to be contacted where a river bed will be disturbed adjacent to state road
infrastructure. The RTA’s Bridge Maintenance Planner will need to be notified in regards to
sign posting on bridges with state significance.
Results of the Consultations:
The major issue from consultation is that Maritime agreed in principle that a maximum
vessel height of 12m for all necessary new overhead work was appropriate for this
section of waterway.
Risk Analysis:
Step 1—Establish risk context:
Some issues arising from consultations include:
The section of river is deemed navigable and is sufficiently deep and wide enough
(typically 100 m–200 m in parts) to attract both motorised vessels and trailerable yachts

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 254

Trailerable yachts may well navigate parts of the river with or without sail. The majority of
this section of the Clarence River is mostly orientated North South.
The distance of navigable water between the two low level bridges is approximately 21 km
with two boats ramps apparent.
(a) Small sailing boats e.g. a trailer sailer would be able to navigate on the section of
river between Brushgrove and MacLean
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

(b) There are several private jetties along the river where small power vessels are located
(c) There are two existing LV, eight 11 kV and one existing 66 kV crossings. Signage
indicating safe navigable heights from 7.9 m through to 12.2 m
(d) In major flood conditions, that frequently occur in the Clarence, this section of river
is used by motorised SES. vessels.
Incident History: There are no recorded incidents in this section of the Clarence River.
Code Compliance: For the crossings to comply with the Code:
Manly Hydraulics (MHL) Sydney provided a Highest Astonomical Tide (HAT) Figure for
this crossing of 0.67 m Australian Height Datum (AHD) ±0.05 m. (November 18 2009).
The majority of vessels that could possibly navigate this section of the Clarence River
would have a maximum vessel height of 12 m. It would be considered very rare for a vessel
with a mast height exceeding 12 m to navigate in the South Arm section of the Clarence
River between the Maclean and Brushgrove bridges.
Maximum expected water level above AHD: = HAT + Wave effects
= 0.67 + 0.05 + 0.3
= 1.02 m
Maximum height of vessels expected: =12 m
Electrical Clearance for 66 kV (from AS 6947): = 0.8 m
Safety margin: =2.2 m
Initial height calculations: = 1.02 + 12 + 0.8 + 2.2
Minimum design height of crossing above AHD: = 16.02 m
Maximum vessel height indicated on signs for this crossing
example: =12 m
Step 2—Categorize risk likelihoods and consequences:
Likelihood: Given the crossing’s location, limited sailboat use and no previous incidents
reported in the area it is considered from Essential Energy’s corporate risk management
procedure = Rare.
Consequence: A range of consequences are possible but the most significant of these would
range from extensive injuries requiring hospitalisation to a fatality or multiple fatalities, i.e.
from Essential Energy’s corporate risk management procedure= Major/Catastrophic.
Risk Rating: from Essential Energy’s corporate risk management procedure the risk
rating= Moderate (Tolerable) therefore the crossings may be constructed as an overhead
crossings.
Step 3—Determine residual risk and appropriate action:
From Step 2 above it can be seen that the risk rating is tolerable if the minimum height of
the overhead crossing is designed to 16.02m above AHD.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 255 HB 331—2012

Conclusion:
The crossings can be installed as overhead construction with minimum design height of
16.02 m above AHD.
NOTE: Crossing heights will require checking after 4 weeks of operation to verify that the
assigned crossing heights have been obtained.

33.4 CO-ORDINATION WITH OTHER SERVICES

Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

In order to better utilize service corridors and improve visual amenity joint use of
infrastructure with other utilities should be considered where it can be effectively
implemented.
It is important to coordinate with nearby utility services to avoid both physical and
electrical interference. Overhead power-lines can electrically interfere with other utility
services by creating Earth Potential Rise (EPR) and Low Frequency Induction (LFI)
hazards. EPR may occur where high voltage earths are installed in the vicinity of these
services. LFI can occur where overhead power lines are run in parallel and in close
proximity with utility services that are conductive (i.e. oil, gas and water pipelines,
telecommunications equipment and road control equipment).
Prior to commencement of line construction, arrangements should be made with the
relevant utilities to locate assets (in order to avoid damage during construction) and
coordinate joint use arrangements where agreed.
Particular consideration should be given to step and touch potentials and induced voltages
associated with the line which could impact on the operation of other services.
Publications relevant to the coordination of power and telecommunication circuits include:
AS/NZS 3835.1, AS/NZS 3835.2, and Standards Australia Handbooks: HB 87, HB 88,
HB 100, HB 101, HB 102, HB 103, and HB 219.

33.5 AERIAL LINES IN THE VICINITY OF AIRCRAFT

33.5.1 General
Where overhead lines are located near takeoff and landing areas for aircraft, special
precautions need to be considered in the overhead design process. Regulatory authorities
require that for fixed wing aircraft the poles do not enter the obstacle restricted area or the
obstacle limitation surfaces (OLS) and for helicopter landing areas the poles do not enter
final approach and takeoff (FATO) areas.
OLS and FATO limits may be ignored where there are other permanent taller structures in
the vicinity of the new line, such as trees or radio masts.
OLS limits are defined in Civil Aviation Safety Regulations (CASR) Part 139—
Aerodromes.
FATO limits are defined in Civil Aviation Advisory Publication 92–2 (1) Guidelines for the
establishment and use of helicopter landing sites.
Military sites have take off and landing restrictions that are different to civilian
requirements. The take off and landing restrictions can be obtained from the relevant site.
AS/NZS 7000 does not have limitations on pole placements near hot air balloon take off
and landing area.
33.5.2 Aerial lines in areas other than takeoff and landing areas
In areas, other than takeoff and landing areas, overhead lines are located to avoid possible
interference with normal aircraft flight paths. In areas where overhead lines may be
significantly higher than the pole height, which are known flight areas, permanent markers

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 256

should be fitted. Areas that may have conductors higher than some of the poles are in
valleys, across water ways and near hills.

33.6 MARKING OF POWERLINES IN PROXIMITY TO AIRSTRIPS

33.6.1 General
Marking of power lines is required in close proximity to airstrips and on spans with
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

exceptionally high ground clearance across deep valleys. Consideration should also be
given to the marking of power lines in areas where regular low-level flying operations take
place.
Guidance on the marking of power lines in Australia for the purposes of air navigation is
provided in AS 3891, Parts 1 and 2:
In general aerial lines should not be installed so as to cause a hazard with aircraft.
33.6.2 Types of markers
Conductors and structures in locations susceptible to aerial strike or inadvertent contact in
the vicinity of the line can be marked to improve their visibility and reduce the risk of
contact.
Marking may take the form of reflective or brightly coloured discs, flags or marker balls
attached to the cables or structures. Care should be taken to ensure that markers do not
compromise circuit clearances and overload structures.
33.6.3 Permanent markers
The fitting of permanent makers is the responsibility of the line owner. Permanent makers
may be in the form of spheres attached to the conductors as described AS 3891.
Where spheres are used, account must be taken of their weight and resistance to wind when
determining swing, sag and tension. In simple cases, the performance of the conductor may
be determined by approximating the point load of the sphere to a distributed load, but
software packages, which more accurately reflect actual condition, are available and should
be used where practicable.
33.6.4 Temporary markers
Where aircraft operations such as crop dusting are carried out in the vicinity of overhead
lines it is the responsibility of the aircraft operator to mark the location and direction of the
lines. Such markers may be attached to the conductors or supports (subject to approval of
the line owner) or placed on the ground in the vicinity of the overhead line.
33.6.5 Over crossing markers
Where inspection of overhead lines by aircraft is conducted, supports should be marked
each side of any over crossing.

33.7 RURAL ACTIVITIES IN PROXIMITY TO LINE

The layout design process should identify activities which are likely to occur in proximity
to the line and which might impact on the safe and reliable operation of the line. Risk
assessment should be undertaken and risk treatments applied to ensure that the residual risk
is acceptable to the organization.
It may be necessary to place restrictions on activities which might impact on line reliability
(including those involving high machinery, propagation of trees or irrigation under or near
the line) or to design for additional clearances to accommodate them. Where possible, a line
route should be selected which avoids areas likely to be affected by such activities.
Where usage of land is such that it is reasonable to expect that agricultural activities
involving the handling, movement or storage of large lengths of conductive material, take

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 257 HB 331—2012

place or may take place, the positioning of structures may need to be considered to
minimise the risk of contact.
This may require consideration of:
(a) Design layouts that position structures away from regular agricultural activities e.g.:
(i) Along fence lines instead of across paddocks.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

(ii) Away from material and equipment storage areas.

(iii) away from vehicle, machinery and plant storage areas.
(b) The use of underground cables and covered conductor.
(c) Underground services.
(d) Designs that achieve maximum practical clearances.
Where there is a significant bushfire risk designers may need to take precautions to ensure
that there is low risk of conductor clashing such as increased conductor separation, use of
covered or insulated conductors and mid span spacers.
In areas of sensitive vegetation, covered or insulated conductors may be considered to
reduce the environmental impact.

33.8 COUNTRY LINE ROAD CROSSINGS

It is not uncommon in country areas for lines to fall and the line to be left suspended above
the ground. That is, the line is left suspended on a fence or held up with part of the failed
pole. There is also a risk that this situation could be in place for longer time periods than in
metropolitan areas. The longer time periods can be caused by a line patrol worker taking
longer to find the fault due to distance or terrain or the general public not being in the
vicinity of the fault to be able to see and report the problem.
When a suspended line is in a remote area, across a high-speed road and the line is of low
visibility, the consequences could be catastrophic for the occupants of a vehicle impacting
the wires.
Strain poles either side of the road would increase the security of the line but it would not
eliminate the possibility of the line falling and being left suspended above the road.
Low visibility lines are typically SWER one and two bare wire systems.
To reduce the chance of a collision between a motorist and a suspended line, consideration
should be given by the designer to increase the visibility of bare single-phase overhead
lines that cross remote high speed roads. Increased visibility devices should be used on
roads where speed limits are equal to or above 90 km/h.
Increased visibility can take the form of pre-form fluorescent wraps or marker balls.
The above practice is not intended to be applied retrospectively to existing SWER and
single phase country lines.
The above practice is not required for three phase bare, ABC, CC or CCT installations as
they are more visible.
The above practice is not required on low speed country roads, as these tend to be near
populated areas or where the driver will have a greater opportunity to break in time to avoid
collision with the wire. The above practice is not required in metropolitan areas.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 258

S E C T I O N 3 4 A P P L I C A T I O N O F S U R G E
A R R E S T E R S
Surge arresters can be applied to an overhead line to improve the lightning performance.
Surge arresters have been used in the following applications:
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

(a) Protection of pole mounted plant.

(b) Protection of underground terminations.
(c) Protect covered conductor from failure.
(d) To improve lightning outage rate.
(e) Where it is difficult or costly to install an overhead earth wire (e.g. retrofitting an
existing line).

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 259 HB 331—2012

S E C T I O N 3 5 L I N E E Q U I P M E N T — O V E R H E A D
L I N E F I T T I N G S

35.1 FITTINGS
Fittings are used in suspension and tension string designs to attach the conductors, through
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

the insulators to the support.

Fittings which come into contact with the conductor are known as ‘software’. Other fittings
are known as ‘hardware’.
Hardware fittings provide degrees of freedom or articulation that allow latitude for
conductor and support movement, thermal expansion and vibration.
The use of hardware fittings is kept to a minimum for suspension strings because each
centimetre in length means a centimetre in height of the support.
Hardware forged and cast string fittings provide socket, ball, clevis, tongue, eye, Y-Clevis
and clamp ends. The general rules of mating these are:
(a) Balls mate with sockets (two axes of freedom).
(b) Tongues mate with clevises (one axis of freedom).
(c) Eyes mate with bow shackles (two axes of freedom).
(d) Y-Clevis mates with eyes or bow shackles (two axes of freedom).
Acceptable hardware arrangements are shown in Figure 35.1.

FIGURE 35.1 ACCEPTABLE HARDWARE ARRANGEMENTS

Not recommended for high tension connections are: those arrangements shown in Figures
35.2 to 35.6.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

HB 331—2012

© Standards Australia
260

FIGURE 35.2 EYES MATING WITH BOLTS (NOT RECOMMENDED)

www.standards.org.au
 Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

www.standards.org.au
261

FIGURE 35.3 CLEVIS WITH CLEVIS (NOT RECOMMENDED)

© Standards Australia
HB 331—2012
 Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

HB 331—2012

© Standards Australia
262

FIGURE 35.4 CLEVIS WITH BOW SHACKLE (NOT RECOMMENDED)

www.standards.org.au
 Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

www.standards.org.au
263

FIGURE 35.5 EYE WITH BALL (NOT RECOMMENDED)

© Standards Australia
HB 331—2012
 HB 331—2012 264
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

FIGURE 35.6 Y-CLEVIS WITH TONGUE (NOT RECOMMENDED)

Fittings are designed in Australia and New Zealand in accordance with AS/NZS 1154 and
AS/NZS 2947 with the strength ratings of 70 kN, 120 kN and 160 kN. Other international
ratings are 45 kN (railways), 125 kN (20 mm), 187 kN (old AS/NZS 1154), 210 kN, and
400 kN (AS/NZS 4435.2).
Fittings are made of forged steel or ductile cast iron. Some applications require cold
temperature forging steels but this does not apply to ductile cast iron.

35.2 TWISTED CONNECTORS

The orientations of fittings such as shackles cause the bolt axes to rotate through 90°.
Therefore from the axis of the attachment plate/eyebolt on the support, in a suspension
string, the orientation to the axis of the conductor must be maintained so that the clevis of a
suspension clamp lines up with a tongue of the string arrangement. Some other fittings
assist with this such as twisted clevis tongue, twisted shackle, twisted eye tongue and
twisted socket tongue.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 265 HB 331—2012
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

FIGURE 35.7 TWISTED CONNECTORS

With regards to a twisted socket tongue, the socket allows rotation within the socket, (see
Figure 35.7), however the security device in the socket is often required to be in a position
to be easily removed from the tower live line (see Clause 35.6).

35.3 TONGUES AND THICK TONGUES

Tongues are not to be confused with thick tongues. See Figure 35.8.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 266
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

FIGURE 35.8 THICK AND NORMAL TONGUES

35.4 ROUND PINS AND HEXAGONAL PINS

For some applications such as sub-transmission or distribution lines where mechanical
loads are light, radio interference and or corona discharge can occur when round pins are
used. To overcome this, a hexagonal pin can be used, as shown in Figure 35.8.

35.5 YOKE PLATES AND Y-CLEVISES

A yoke plate normally couples with a clevis or double plate link. For a yoke plate to accept
a Y-clevis, the yoke plate holes must be concave countersunk so that a radius is formed of
the hole.

35.6 SECURITY DEVICES

Two types of security device prevent the strings from coming undone:
(a) Split pins in bolts These may be either stainless steel straight split pins or humpback
split pins. These are used in bolts and clevis pins to ensure that the bolt or pin does
not come out of the clevis.
(b) Socket security clips These can be either SS clip in the shape of ‘R’ or phosphorous
bronze clips in the shape of ‘W’. These clips dictate their socket design.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 267 HB 331—2012

35.7 ARCING HOLES AND HORNS

Arcing horns are required in some utility specifications to provide acceptable performance
for high keraunic areas. The arcing horns need mounting holes. Some fittings that assist in
this are ball eye for arcing horn, socket tongue for arcing horn.
The arcing horn has to have fixity and stability by providing either two holes or one hole
and a ridge.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

35.8 SAG/SECTOR LINKS

To adjust the sag of the conductor of tension strings on tower supports sag links (See
Figure 35.9) or sector plates may be used.

T
B A

FIGURE 35.9 SAG LINK

35.9 THE EFFECT ON TENSILE LOAD OF MAINTENANCE LOADS

The tension in an aged conductor system is likely to be in the range of 15% to less than
25% of the conductor’s rated strength. Exceptions are likely to be on very long spans where
the tension may be higher than this range. Such long span installations are usually well
documented and understood. Smaller diameter earth wire and OPGW wires may have
tensions at slightly higher percentages of their rated strength. The load sharing between the
conductor’s core material and its aluminium is likely to be such that the core carries the
majority of the load but not necessarily all of it.
So, on average, the factor of safety in the systems will generally be in the range of 4 to near
7 but occasionally less than 4. The factor of safety as represented by the core alone may be
less but it should be clear to say that the definition of a factor of safety is not a simple
exercise. Thus, calculating a revision to a factor of safety after the application of a weight
to the span is equally complex and the result is arguable.
There are rules in the moving cable industry—cranes, elevators, mining, etc. industries
which we are not part of—that require a factor of safety for about 5 when people are riding
on the cables. Overhead conductor systems are stationary. While overhead conductor
systems naturally offer appropriate factors of safety, they are typically less than used in the
moving cables industry. In the electricity industry, it is typical to accept a factor of safety
of 2 with humans present at the support structures. This includes cable rigging point
strengths.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 268

All of these calculations are made on new materials with assumed ‘manufacturer-declared’
strengths. The interest is accommodation of the possibility that the strength of some line
component has degraded. The degradation is both difficult to discover and very difficult to
quantify. Coupling these problems with the unclear ability to describe an acceptable factor
of safety underscores the point that a definitive solution does not exist.
It is noted above that the placement of a point load in the form of a cart or person on a span
of conductor increases the conductor’s tension and that the increase is greater in shorter
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

spans as depicted in Figure 35.10.

T EN S I O N IN CR E AS E D E V ELO PED BY CA R T
T EN S I O N IN CR E AS E, (% of c a r t we i g ht)

4 0 0%

3 5 0%

3 0 0%

250%

20 0%

150%
18 0 m s p a n
10 0%
305 m span
50%
425 m s p a n
0%
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
CA R T P O S I T I O N , (% of s p a n)

FIGURE 35.10 TENSION VERSUS POSITION ON SPAN

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 269 HB 331—2012

S E C T I O N 3 6 C L I M B I N G A N D W O R K I N G A T
H E I G H T S

36.1 GENERAL OVERVIEW

There have been significant changes in legislation and work practices in the building and
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

construction industries to make work sites safer and this has necessitated changes in work
practices.
The following sets out an approach for construction and maintenance work practices on
overhead lines, in an effort to enhance safety.

36.2 REFERENCE STANDARDS FOR CLIMBING AND WORKING AT HEIGHTS

AS/NZS 1891 (all parts) should be referenced in regard to climbing or working at heights.

36.3 METHODS FOR ACCESSING WORK POSITIONS

36.3.1 General considerations
A risk assessment should be performed to establish the best method for accessing the
structure. Consideration should be given to the following:
(a) Ground access—access tracks, side slopes, adverse ground (water course).
(b) Height and type of structure.
(c) Frequency of access.
(d) Skill set of personnel.
The typical range of options for accessing overhead line structures are:
(i) Elevating Work Platform (EWP) e.g. bucket truck or crane box.
(ii) Climbing with appropriate fall protection (ladders or step bolts).
(iii) Helicopters.
36.3.2 Use of elevating work platforms (EWP)
In general, there is a lower risk to use EWPs but it may not be practical in all situations. For
example, some sites are inaccessible and the structures are higher than available reach of
the plant.
36.3.3 Climbing pole structures
On pole structures it is required to provide fittings and devices to assist with the safe access
and positioning of workers on the pole. There are situations where poles are placed in
difficult terrain or not accessible in all weather conditions by EWPs. A portable ladder is
acceptable to access fixed climbing aids on the pole. These aids should be installed at a
height to prevent un-authorized access.
36.3.4 Climbing lattice steel tower structures
Lattice steel structures are usually fitted with facilities to allow climbing access to any
work position to permit both de-energized and energized maintenance work. There are
situations where towers are placed in difficult terrain or not accessible in all weather
conditions by EWPs. A portable ladder is acceptable to access fixed climbing aids on the
tower. These aids should be installed at a height to prevent un-authorized access.
Some live line maintenance techniques on high voltage lines require the placement of
workers on the structure as well as in the bucket of an EWP. This may require the transfer

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 270

of personnel from an EWP or helicopter to a structure superstructure in order to provide

access.

36.4 FALL ARREST SYSTEMS

36.4.1 General
Where any climbing or working at height is likely to be required the structure is to be
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

designed to provide for linepersons to use a portable fall-arrest system in accordance with
AS/NZS 1891. Consideration may be given to installing a permanent static line or rail fall-
arrest system in accordance with AS/NZS 1891.4.
For overhead line construction and maintenance activities this requires the provision of the
following to minimize risk of potential injury with attachment at all times to provide either
‘restrained fall’, ‘limited free fall’, or ‘free fall’ restraint.
36.4.2 ‘Restrained fall’ fall arrest
A combination of anchorage placement and fixed length restraint line or pole strap length,
which will permit only a restrained fall. This also requires a 12 kN ultimate strength
anchorage for the restraint devices. Any structural element used for the attachment of the
restraint lanyard or pole strap should be capable of supporting this load as a single point
load application, in a deformed state but without failure.
36.4.3 ‘Limited free fall’ fall arrest
A combination of anchorage placement and fixed restraint line or length of pole strap which
will permit only a limited free fall to <600 mm.
This requires the anchorage point to have a 12 kN ultimate strength capacity for a single
person.
36.4.4 ‘Free fall’ fall arrest
A combination of anchorage placement and fixed restraint line or length of pole strap which
will permit only a limited free fall to <2000 mm.
This requires the anchorage point to have a 15 kN ultimate strength capacity for a single
person.

36.5 USE OF STATIC LINES

Where multiple workers are required to ascend or descend a structure, the use of a static
line may be used as a means of restraint. Where static lines are to be used by two people at
any one time a top anchorage capacity of 21 kN is required.
This can be achieved by attachment of a fibre sling around a climbing leg-bracing node
point or other structural member node points.

36.6 DOUBLE LANYARD RESTRAINT

In order to provide for ‘limited free fall’ or ‘free fall’ a double lanyard or double pole strap
restrain arrangement should be used to provide for the worker to be attached at all times
while climbing or while in a work position or moving while in a work area.
In all cases of restrained work, the attachment/detachment of lanyard or pole strap is to be
always above the waist position.
Where the above is not possible due to the structural framing arrangement in relation to the
required work position then an alternative restraint technique should be used and considered
in the design with anchorage above the work position. This may require the provision of
anchorage points to support devices such as inertia reels and static lines.

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 271 HB 331—2012

36.7 SPECIFIC STRUCTURE DESIGN PROVISIONS

Where pole steps or step bolts are required they should be in accordance with the provision
of AS/NZS 1559.
Attachment to any bracing node points on a vertical face of a lattice steel tower in general
should provide an anchorage ultimate capacity of 15 kN.
Once a work position is reached, the worker is required to use a work positioning restraint
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

pole strap, in a ‘restrained fall’ position, and this requires the selection of anchorage points
with at least 12 kN ultimate capacity. Any structural load carrying or redundant brace
member fixed with a single 16 mm diameter bolt at each end can provide this load restraint
capacity in a non-deformed or deformed state.
In general, attachment should be at bracing node points wherever possible in order to
provide containment of any potential lanyard movement, and afford more secure anchorage.
The following anchorage capacities are required to be provided by the structure design:
(a) Inertia reel attachment points for work on cross-arm tips—15 kN.
(b) Attachment to bracing node points for work on E/W peak—15 kN.
(c) Attachment to bracing node points—15 kN.
(d) Typical static line attachment point above climbing step bolts—21 kN (2 persons).
Figure 36.1 provides a typical arrangement of anchorage points for work on lattice steel
structures.
In climbing in an attached mode, the location of anchorage points should always be selected
above the waist position, in order to control inadvertent potential fall/slip height and
consequential injury and to avoid potential pendulum effects in the event of a fall. Hence on
crossarms with a sloping top chord there is a limit to how far a person can translate towards
the crossarm tip before he needs to use an alternative restrain device such as an inertia reel
as indicated in Figure 36.1.
It has become a practice in some areas to attach lanyards to step bolts. It must be
understood that step bolts less than 20 mm diameter have strength limitations. In particular
16 mm diameter step bolts have exhibited low ductility and strength and should not be used
for attachment purposes.

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 272

In e r ti a r e e l at t a c h m e nt p o i nt s fo r
wo r k o n c r o s s a r m tip s - 15 k N

At t a c h m e nt to b r a c i n g n o d e p o i nt s
fo r wo r k o n E / W p e a k - 15 k N

Ty p i c a l s t ati c li n e at t a c h m e nt
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

p o i nt a b ove c li m b i n g s te p b o l t s

At t a c h m e n t to b r a c i n g
n o d e p o i nt s - 15 k N

At t a c h m e n t to 20 m m s te p
b o l t s , o r a n c h o r l o o p s -12 k N

D O N OT AT TAC H TO 16 m m
S T E P B O LT S

L i m i t of l a nya r d at t a c h m e nt a n c h o r a g e
r e s tr a i nt - In e r ti a r e e l m u s t b e u s e d
b eyo n d thi s p o i nt

L i m i t of l a nya r d at t a c h m e nt a n c h o r a g e
r e s tr a i nt - at t a c h m e nt p o i nt m u s t b e
a b ove wa i s t p o s i ti o n o n c r o s s a r m s

( E xc e pt fo r live li n e a c c e s s i n c r o u c h e d
p o s i ti o n to c r o s s - a r m tip b u t wi th
at t a c h m e nt a lways a b ove wa i s t)

FIGURE 36.1 TYPICAL STEEL TOWER CLIMBING ATTACHMENT POINTS AND

ANCHORAGE CAPACITIES

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 273 HB 331—2012

APPENDIX A
REFERENCED DOCUMENTS
AS
1154 Insulator and conductor fittings for overhead power lines
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

1154.1 Part 1: Performance, material, general requirements and dimensions

1154.3 Part 3: Performance and general requirements for helical fittings
1222 Steel conductors and stays—Bare overhead
1222.1 Part 1: Aluminium clad (SC/AC)
1222.2 Part 2: Galvanized (SC/GZ)
1289 Methods of testing soils for engineering purposes
1289.6.3.1 Method 6.3.1: Soil strength and consolidation tests—Determination of the
penetration resistance of a soil—Standard penetration test
(SPT)
1531 Conductors—Bare overhead—Aluminium and aluminium alloy
1604 Specification for preservative treatment
1720 Timber structures
1720.1 Part 1: Design methods
1720.2 Part 2: Timber properties
1746 Conductors—Bare overhead—Hard-drawn copper
1824 Insulation co-ordination
1824.2 Part 2: Application guide
2067 Substations and high voltage installations exceeding 1 kV a.c.
2209 Timber—Poles for overhead lines
2878 Timber—Classification into strength groups
3766 Mechanical fittings for low voltage aerial bundled cables
3818 Timber—Heavy structural products—Visually graded
3818.1 Part 1: General requirements
3818.4 Part 4: Cross-arms for overhead lines
3891 Air navigation—Cables and their supporting structures—Marking and safety
requirements
3891.1 Part 1: Permanent marking of overhead cables and their supporting
structures for other than planned low-level flying
3891.2 Part 2: Marking of overhead cables for planned low-level flying operations
3822 Test methods for bare overhead conductors
4398 Insulators—Ceramic or glass—Station post for indoor and outdoor use—
Voltages greater than 1000 V a.c.
4398.1 Part 1: Characteristics
4398.2 Part 2: Tests (IEC 60168, Ed.4.2 (2001) MOD)
4435 Insulators—Composite for overhead power lines—Voltages greater than
1000 V a.c
4435.1 Part 1: Definitions, test methods and acceptance criteria for string insulator
units
4435.2 Part 2: Standard strength classes and end fittings for string insulator units
4435.4 Part 4: Definitions, test methods, acceptance criteria for post insulator units

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 274

AS
4436 Guide for the selection of insulators in respect of polluted conditions
4799 Installation of underground utility services and pipelines within railway
boundaries
5604 Timber—Natural durability ratings
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

6947 Crossing of waterways by electricity infrastructure

60305 Insulators for overhead lines with a nominal voltage above 1000 V—Ceramic
or glass insulator units for a.c. systems—Characteristics of insulator units of
the cap and pin type
HB 87 Joint use of poles: The placement on poles of power lines and paired cable
telecommunications lines
HB 88 Unbalanced high voltage power lines: Code of practice for the mitigation of
noise induced into paired cable telecommunications lines from unbalanced
high voltage power lines
HB 100 Coordination of power and telecommunications—Manual for the
establishment of safe work practices and the minimization of operational
interference between power systems and paired cable telecommunications
systems
HB 101 Coordination of power and telecommunications—Low Frequency Induction
(LFI): Code of practice for the mitigation of hazardous voltages induced into
telecommunications lines
HB 102 Coordination of power and telecommunications—Low Frequency Induction
(LFI): Application Guide to the LFI Code
HB 103 Coordination of power and telecommunications—Crossings Code: The
arrangement of overhead power and telecommunications lines, pole stay
wires, and suspension wires
HB 108 Timber Design Handbook—In accordance with the Australian Limit State
Timber Design Code, AS 1720.1—1997
HB 158 Delivering assurance based on ISO 31000:2009, Risk management—
Principles and guidelines
HB 219 Earth potential rise—Protection of telecommunications network users,
personnel and plant—Worked examples for the application guide
AS/NZS
1158 Lighting for roads and public spaces
1158.1.2 Part 1.2: Vehicular traffic (Category V) lighting—Guide to design,
installation, operation and maintenance
1170 Structural design actions
1170.2 Part 2: Wind actions
1559 Hot-dip galvanized steel bolts with associated nuts and washers for tower
construction
1891 Industrial fall-arrest systems and devices
1891.1 Part 1: Harnesses and ancillary equipment
1891.2 Part 2: Horizontal lifeline and rail systems
1891.3 Part 3: Fall-arrest devices
1891.4 Part 4: Selection, use and maintenance

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

 275 HB 331—2012

AS/NZS
2344 Limits of electromagnetic interference from overhead a.c. powerlines and
high voltage equipment installations in the frequency range 0.15 to 1000
MHz
2947 Insulators—Porcelain and glass for overhead power lines—Voltages greater
than 1000 V a.c.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

2947.1 Part 1: Test methods—Insulator units

2947.4 Part 4: Test methods—Insulator strings and insulator sets
3560 Electric cables—Cross-linked polyethylene insulated—Aerial bundled—For
working voltages up to and including 0.6/1(1.2)kV
3560.1 Part 1: Aluminium conductors
3599 Electric cables—Aerial bundled—Polymeric insulated—Voltages
6.35/11(12) kV and 12.7/22(24) kV
3599.1 Part 1: Metallic screened
3599.2 Part 2: Non-metallic screened
3675 Conductors—Covered overhead—For working voltages 6.35/11(12) kV up to
and including 19/33(36) kV
3835 Earth potential rise—Protection of telecommunications network users,
personnel and plant
3835.1 Part 1: Code of practice
3835.2 Part 2: Application guide
3845 Road safety barrier systems
4065 Concrete utility services poles
4676 Structural design requirements for utility services poles
4680 Hot-dip galvanized (zinc) coatings on fabricated ferrous articles
7000 Overhead line design—Detailed procedures
AS/NZS ISO
31000 Risk management—Principles and guidelines
NZS
3101 Concrete structures
3404 Steel structures standard
3603 Timber structures standard
6802 Acoustics—Environmental noise
6869 Limits and measurement methods of electromagnetic noise from high voltage
a.c. power systems, 0.15—1000 MHz
NZCCPTS Noise Investigation Guide
IEC
60815 Selection and dimensioning of high-voltage insulators intended for use in
polluted conditions (series)
60909 Short-circuit currents in three-phase a.c. systems (series)
ANSI/ASAE
EP486.1 Shallow Post Foundation Design
IEEE
691 Guide for Transmission Structure Foundation Design and Testing
738 Calculating the Current-temperature of Bare Overhead Conductors

www.standards.org.au © Standards Australia

 HB 331—2012 276

ENA
EG-0 EG-0 Power system earthing guide
Part 1: Management principles
ESAA
D(b) 5 Current rating of bare overhead line conductors
ASCE MANUALS No. 72 and 52
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

NENS
05 National Fall Protection Guidelines for the electricity industry
EEA
EEA Guide to Safety Management of Power Line Waterway Crossings and
Maritime New Zealand: New Zealand System of Buoys and Beacons
EEA Guide to Power System Earthing Practice
EEA/NZ
Use of personal fall arrest systems
Guide—Operation and maintenance of elevating work platforms
EN
50341 Overhead Electrical Lines Exceeding Ac 45 Kv (series)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The EL-052 Committee would like to acknowledge the contributors to this Handbook from
the following working group members.
Grant Bailey
Gary Brennan
Jim Brooks
Greg Bruce
Greg Chapman
Bart Clulow
Chris Dalitz
Peter Dulhunty
David Eccles
Leith Elder
Robert Fairweather
John Giles
Tony Gillespie
Henry Hawes
Angus Ketley
Colin Lee
Ross McLennan
David Morato
Dennis Munn
Colin Nye
Carl Rathbone
Robert Rogerson
Bryan Symmonds

© Standards Australia www.standards.org.au

Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

Standards Australia
Standards Australia develops Australian Standards® and other documents of public benefit and national interest.
These Standards are developed through an open process of consultation and consensus, in which all interested
parties are invited to participate. Through a Memorandum of Understanding with the Commonwealth Government,
Standards Australia is recognized as Australia’s peak non-government national standards body. Standards Australia
also supports excellence in design and innovation through the Australian Design Awards.

For further information visit www.standards.org.au

Australian Standards®
Committees of experts from industry, governments, consumers and other relevant sectors prepare Australian
Standards. The requirements or recommendations contained in published Standards are a consensus of the views
of representative interests and also take account of comments received from other sources. They reflect the latest
scientific and industry experience. Australian Standards are kept under continuous review after publication and are
updated regularly to take account of changing technology.

International Involvement
Standards Australia is responsible for ensuring the Australian viewpoint is considered in the formulation of
International Standards and that the latest international experience is incorporated in national Standards. This role is
vital in assisting local industry to compete in international markets. Standards Australia represents Australia at both
the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC).

Sales and Distribution

Australian Standards®, Handbooks and other documents developed by Standards Australia are printed and
distributed under license by SAI Global Limited.
Licensed to Mr David Tombling on 4 April 2012. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited (10287015).

For information regarding the development of Standards contact:

Standards Australia Limited
GPO Box 476
Sydney NSW 2001
Phone: 02 9237 6000
Fax: 02 9237 6010
Email: [email protected]
Internet: www.standards.org.au

For information regarding the sale and distribution of Standards contact:

SAI Global Limited
Phone: 13 12 42
Fax: 1300 65 49 49
Email: [email protected]

ISBN 978 1 74342 061 4