Improved Fatigue Life Assessment of Lighting Poles

Abstract:

Fatigue cracking reported in a lighting pole on an elevated bridge structure near Wellington raised the question of how to better design for and predict the fatigue life of lighting poles subject to wind induced fatigue. There have been concerns as to the reliability and currency of the methods commonly used in New Zealand. The paper therefore reviews current international design methods and describes the development of an improved fatigue design method for lighting poles in New Zealand. The new method uses fracture mechanics based crack growth formulations in conjunction with a modified J.D. Holmes Method for wind response analysis of the pole to varying wind speeds. Cumulative crack growth is calculated iteratively rather than using an S-N curve based Palmegran-Miner summation. Wind spectra used in the method are developed from long term meteorological records at representative locations. Software has been prepared to enable quick assessment of the expected fatigue life of lighting poles, and associated gear openings and holding down bolts The method and software has been calibrated with reference to full scale laboratory fatigue proof testing of representative base stubs and natural wind response testing of a 12 m high lighting pole.

• Periodical: Advanced Materials Research (Volumes 891-892)
• Pages: 149-154
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.891-892.149
• Online since: March 2014
• Authors: Clark W.K. Hyland, W. George Ferguson, Katalin Csikasz
• Keywords: Crack Growth, Fatigue, Fatigue Life Prediction, Lighting Poles, Wind Response

References

[1] Ivanov, V. Oclyte Column Failure Analysis. SGS NZ Ltd. Auckland, CSP Pacific, (2009).

[2] Brown, B. J. and E. W. Vautier. HERA Report R4-36 Design of Unstiffened Baseplates for Steel Towers. N.Z. Heavy Engineering Research Association, Manukau, (1985).

[3] Bayley, C. and P. J. Haagensen. HERA Report R8-22 Fatigue in Welded Structures Workshop, NZ Heavy Engineering Research Association, Manukau, (2000).

[4] NZS 3404: 1997 Steel Structures Standard. Standards New Zealand, Wellington, (1997).

[5] AS/NZS 4676: 2000 Structural Design Requirements for Utility Service Poles. Standards Australia / Standards New Zealand, Sydney / Wellington, (2000).

[6] AASHTO Standard Specification for Structural Supports for Highway Signs, Luminaires and Traffic Signals, AASHTO, (2007).

[7] BD94/07 Design of Minor Structures. Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, British Department of Transport, (2007).

[8] White, P., L. Molent, et al. Interpreting Fatigue Test Results Using a Probabilistic Fracture Approach., International Journal of Fatigue 27: (2005) pp.752-767.

DOI: 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2005.01.006

[9] Kuhn, B., M. Lukic, et al. Assessment of Existing Steel Structures: Recommendations for Estimation of Remaining Fatigue Life. JRC Scientific and Technical Reports. European Convention for Constructional Steelwork, Luxembourg, (2008).

[10] Holmes, J. D. Fatigue Life under Along-wind Loading - Closed-form Solutions., Engineering Structures 24 (2002): pp.109-114.

DOI: 10.1016/s0141-0296(01)00073-6

[11] Robertson, A. P., J. D. Holmes, et al. Verification of Closed-Form Solutions of Fatigue Life Under Along-Wind Loading., Engineering Structures(26), (2004): pp.1381-1387.

DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2004.05.004

[12] Taplin, G., G. Sanders, et al. Fatigue Failures of Light Poles. (2005).

[13] AS/NZS 1170. 2: 2002 Structural Wind Loadings. Standards Australia / Standards New Zealand, Sydney / Wellington, (2002).

[14] Holmes, J. D. Along-wind Dynamic Response, Louisiana State University, (2003).

[15] BS7910: 2000 Guide on Methods for Assessing the Acceptability of Flaws in Metallic Structures. BSI, (2000).