127 tayangan

Diunggah oleh Qvixote Eléctrico

lineas

- 4 Temp & Resistance
- EGU2017-12266
- IEEE-691 Guide for Transmission Structure Foundation
- Limitations of Ruling Span Method at HiTemp
- SAG-TENSION 324.pdf
- Design of Stub for Transmission Line Towers
- Geophysics ( Electric Method )
- Solid State Physics
- Eee
- Corona HVDC
- 1.2mku Manual
- Corrosometer ER Probe Selection Guide
- -536932345
- Design of 132KV DC Tower Type DA
- Tower SpottingData All
- Ab Cable Gtp
- TDMCQ.pdf
- Chapter14 Electric Current
- Copper Bus Bars Property Chart
- Basic Creep Modelling of Aluminium 7075

Anda di halaman 1dari 12

2, April 1999

549

CONDUCTORS AT HIGH OPERATING TEMPERATURES.

Report of the IEEE Task Force "Bare Conductor Sag at High Temperature".

Members of the JEEE Task Force of the WG "Thermal Aspects of Overhead Conductors", of the Towers,

Poles and Conductors Subcommittee are: Y. Motlis (Chairman),J.S. Barrett, G.A.Davidson, D.A. Douglas,

P.A. Hall, J.L. Reding, T.O. Seppa, F.R. Thrash, Jr., and H.B. White.

to review the accuracy of the ruling span method for

conductors operated at high temperatures. The basics of the

ruling span approximation method have been examined. The

traditional ruling span approach can be used with little or no

error for a typical overhead line crossing a rolling terrain to

predict sags in suspension spans for conductor operating

temperatures in the range of 5@C to 7OOC. Sensitivity studies

were performed using conductors "Lapwing" and "Tern" in

order to quantify such ruling span assumptions as the effect of

the longitudinalswing of suspension and line post insulators on

conductor sags at high temperatures, and the effect of the

suspension insulator string length on the equalization of

conductor tensions in adjacent spans. Significant errors in

estimating the sag at conductor temperature above lOOOC may

occur if the tension differences are not taken into consideration

in line sections consisting of a series of spans of non-equal

lengths, It was confirmed that the ruling span method is the

most practical way to string conductors in multi-span line

sections.

tension, insulator swing.

The objective of this paper is to describe the widely accepted

"ruling span" method of sag-tension calculation for multiple

suspension spans between dead-end structures where the spans

are nearly level but unequal of length. Errors due to operation

of the conductor at high temperatures and due to imperfect

tension equalization at supports is studied and several

calculation corrections are noted.

In this paper, the high temperature operation means conductor

temperature above IOOOC (212F).

PE-I 97-MD-0-12-1997 A paper recommended and approved by

the IEEE Transmission and Distribution Committee of the IEEE Power

Engineering Society for publication in the IEEE Transactions on Power

Delivery. Manuscript submitted July 16, 1997; made available for

printing December 12, 1997.

ct =

coefficient of elongation

D = conductor sag

D, = ruling span sag

= modulus of elasticity

H = horizontal tension

Lo = initial conductor length

L = conductor length

RS = "local" ruling span

S, = ruling span length

S, = suspension span length

To = initial conductor temperature

= conductor temperature

w = weight of conductor per unit length

A. The basics.

The well known parabolic and hyperbolic equations defining

the relationship between span, sag, and tension apply to

single level dead-end spans. For a series of spans of unequal

length and nearly level elevations, a simple method is needed

to determine a theoretical level span length for which the sag

and tension characteristics can be applied to determine the

sag and tension behaviour of all spans. The solution of this

problem was published in 1924 by E.S. Thayer, an electrical

engineer in Seattle [11. The solution is now called the Ruling

Span method.

A common definition of ruling span is a level dead-end span

that gives the same change in tension from changes in

loading, creep, and/or temperature as that in a series of

suspension spans between two dead-end structures [2]. This

span "rules" the conductor's sag and tension behaviour for

the line section. The ruling span method permits correct

sagging of conductors and provides prediction of conductor

behaviour with creep, loads and temperatures within the

usual operating ranges of 5oOC to 7OOC.

The tension variations due to load or temperature changes

550

will depend on the lengths of the spans in the section, and the

section as a whole will react to load and temperature changes

in the same way as a single "ruling" span [3]. It is a fictitious

span with a rate of slack equal to the average rate of slack of

the line section.

The equation for the ruling span length (S,) of a line section

of (Si>suspension spans is:

equation.

suspension points (allowing unrestrained longitudinal

movement of attachment points). Full tension equalization is

unlikely at such points even for small longitudinal

movements.

0 at suspension structures supporting a large weight span,

tension equalization may not occur even for modest

longitudinal movement of the insulator attachment point.

for post insulators, tension equalization depends on the

combined flexibility of the suspension hardware (if any), the

insulator, its attachment to the pole, and the pole.

response of strain or suspension structures to varying

loads. This can be significant, for example, when tubular

steel structures or davit type arms are used.

C. The accuracy.

section is determined in the following manner:

0 sag-tension calculations are made for a single dead-end span

with length equal to the ruling span (Eq. 1 and Eq.2).

the tension in all of the suspension spans of the line section

is assumed to be the same and equal to that of the ruling span

under all loading and conductor temperature conditions.

0 once the sag @,) of the ruling span has been calculated, the

sag @) of any other span (S) is calculated as:

D = ( -s

)

=D,

(3)

enough to analyze the operation of a line, although it was

used for the design of the line. This is especially true if

there is a need to operate the line above the original design

temperature.

Sag errors caused by incomplete tension equalization

between suspension spans result in inaccurate calculations

using Eq.1 and Eq.2. This is the main scope of this paper.

Sag errors caused by temperature variation along the line

section generally cause lesser errors than those due to

incomplete tension equalization, and it is outside of the scope

of this Task Force.

Errors in sag estimates caused by the present methods of

modeling of conductor's sag vs temperature relationship

(which also affects the sags in individual dead-end spans)

may be a future task of this Task Force.

B. The assumDtions.

The ruling span method is called an approximate method

because of a number of unwritten assumptions made such as:

span lengths are large compared to the difference in

elevation of supports.

the load per unit length is equal for all suspension spans in

the line section.

conductor temperature is the same along the line section.

the suspension points between adjacent spans are free to

move longitudinally without restraint. This is the fundamental

assumption of the traditional ruling span method. When

circumstances prevent or unduly restrict this free movement

and tension equalization, sag predictions based on the ruling

span method may be inaccurate.

Other errors resulting from the ruling span approach may be

caused by:

angle suspension insulators, running angle insulators and

inverted "V" strings are neither true strain points (allowing no

the existing methods of sag-tension calculations, it has

identified situations where line engineers should be aware of

the limitations of traditional calculation methods.

Sag-tension calculations can be complex even for single

spans with fixed end points. The conductors' non-linear

elasticity, thermal elongation, plastic creep elongation, and

the various combinations of ice, wind, and temperature

conditions may need to be considered.

Useful information can be obtained from the tensiontemperature relationship in a level dead-end span,

considering only the elastic properties and thermal expansion

of the composite conductor, and making simplifying

approximations.

551

using the parabolic approximation, by:

(S)can be calculated

(4)

conductor (I,)relative to the span length (S)and is given, in

the parabolic approximation, by:

(5)

temperature changes from T, to T, accompanied by a change

in tension from H, to H, is:

&-Lo- H-Ho

---

Lo

As

+a (T-To)

that the change of slack is euual to the change of strain. Using

this assumption we can combine Eq.5 and Eq.6 to obtain

Eq.7:

The ruling span method assumes that complete equalization

is achieved, thus overstating the insulator swing. Suspension

point movement is usually, but not always, less than that

calculated using the ruling span method. Depending on the

specific spans lengths, there may be a difference in

horizontal tension between any two adjacent uneven spans.

The ruling span inaccuracies are largest for lines with short

insulator strings [5], since the ruling span approximation

assumes an infinite string length. The shorter the insulator's

length, the greater is the restriction on movement. High

operating temperatures (over l W C ) further degrades the

accuracy of this approximation. A complete analysis of

multi-span line sections should take into account conductor

properties, spans, line profile, line angles, insulator string

properties, support stiffness, original sagging and clampingin procedures, weather loading history, creep, and a

reasonably good knowledge of the existing condition of the

line section under study.

The basic assumption for the numerical examples is that the

initial position of the insulators is vertical, either without or

after offset clipping.

f

i

This cubic equation in H describes the approximate tensiontemperature relationship for a single dead-end span. If H, and

H may be computed for any given temperature.

Real overhead lines are not limited to spans with fixed endpoint supports. In a typical transmission line, most spans are

"suspension" whose end-point supports move, coupling each

span with adjacent spans.

Transmission lines are usually sagged to maintain the

insulators plumb. With temperature rise, creep and permanent

strain from weather loads, the conductor elongates. When a

line section has spans of differing lengths, the conductor

elongation causes the insulators to depart from their vertical

position. As temperature increases, the suspension point moves

toward long spans and away from short spans to equalize

horizontal tension. Figure 1, Appendix I, shows an insulator

string and the forces acting at the suspension point. In general,

at a suspension point between two spans, the movement of the

suspension point caused by tension difference is restrained by

the vertical load at the suspension point. The larger the load

conductor "Lapwing", ACSR, 4517, total area = 1590 kcmil

(1.249 in2 or 805.8 mm2); weight=1.792 lblft (26.2 N/m),

RTS=43780 lb (194.7 kN), E,=9.5*1@ psi (65.5*103

MPa), a= 11.6*10-6 1PF (21*10-6 lPC), E,,=27.5*106 psi

(189.6*1@ MPa). Initial condition: ?,=8440 lb (37.5 kN)

@lO"C; S,= lo00 ft (305 m); final condition: Td, = l W C .

Suspension insulator string is 5 ft (1.52 m) long; and its

weight is 120 lb (534 N).

Since the six computer programs used by the Task Force to

calculate sag, tension, and swing at high temperatures

showed very close results, Table 1, Appendix I, lists the

average values of those calculations. As can be seen, the sag

in the longest span of 1500 ft (457.2 m) is 4.9 ft (1.5 m)

smaller when the tension differences are taken into account.

In the span of 1150 ft (350.5 m), the sag @lOoOC is 1.4 ft

(0.4 m) larger when the tension differences are considered.

The explanation of these results is very important for line

engineers and is given below.

It has been noted that short and long spans react differently

to changes of temperature. Short spans are more sensitive to

temperature changes than long spans. For the 1150 ft (350.5

m) span in our example, the positive sag error (when the

552

actual sag is larger than the sag calculated using the ruling

span method) depends on the span's length, the tension

differences in adjacent spans, and insulator string lengths.

Only for the idealized ruling span method, stiffness is

independent of insulator string length. The tensions in the

1150 ft (350.5 m) span are modeled by the ruling span method

to follow those of the lo00 ft (304.8 m) ruling span, but the

restraints of the insulator strings cause the span to behave

more like an 912 ft (278 m) span. The resulting behaviour is

described later in this paper as a "local" ruling span which

differs from the traditional ruling span method.

complete tension equalization. This confirms the significant

effect of the length of the insulators.

ERRORS.

High temperature sags can be modeled with alternative

techniques such as "local" ruling span and fits to tensiontemperature behaviour.

A better understanding of these techniques may be beneficial

for the users of the real time line monitoring systems.

Analysis using the case described below shows that the

current practice can lead to sag errors, because although

flexible, a polymer line post insulator is still a magnitude

stiffer than a suspension insulator for a similar span.

Calculations were made using conductor "Tern", 795 kcmil

(403 mm?, ACSR, RTS=22100 lb (98.3 kN); w=0.8958

lb/ft (13.1 N/m); diameter = 1.063 in (27 mm); total

area=0.6674 in2 (430.6 mm?. The ruling span = 500 ft

(152.4 m). Initial tension is 15% RTS, i.e., 3315 lb (14.75

kN) @lOOC. Line post insulator is 4.36 ft (1.33 m) long, and

has a stiffness of approximately 2500 lb/ft (3728 kg/m). Table

2, Appendix I, shows the effect of deflection of line post

insulators on sag at high temperatures.

The sag errors with the 2500 lb/ft line post insulators are

approximately 1/2 of the difference between the ruling span

and individual span cases. Stiffer line post insulators would

cause the line section behave more like individual spans. For

comparison, seven units insulator strings in the same span

would have spring constant of about 120-150 lb/ft (1750-2190

N/m). The sag errors would be much larger if the spans

lengths were increased.

The basic assumption of the traditional ruling span method

was verified i.e., as the insulator string length increases to

infinity, the tension @lOSC approaches the ruling span

tension.

Calculationsperformed for Case I assumed an insulator string

length of 5 ft (1.5 m). Similar calculations and comparison

were made using the insulator string lengths of 2.5 ft (0.8 m),

14 ft (4.3 m), and 200 ft (61 m). The later can be considered

as an insulator of infinite length.

At conductor temperature of lOoOC, the 5 ft (1.5 m) long

insulator string swing results in a tension difference of 182 lb

(0.8 kN) between spans of 750 ft (228.6 m) and of 1150 ft

(350.5 m). For the same conditions, the swing of the 2.5 ft

(0.76 m) long insulator string results in tension difference of

339 lb (1.5 kN). For the assumed 200 ft (61 m) insulator

A. "Local"ruling man.

The concept of a "local" ruling span ( R S ) is to find a deadend span that has the same tension-temperature relationship

as each actual span. In order to define such a local ruling

span, rewrite Eq.7:

If (To,

H,) and (T, H)are known for a particular span, its

"local" ruling span is obtained using this equation. This is a

single-parameter fit to the tension-temperature relationship

to two known points and is only valid to the accuracy to

which the line section can be modeled (e.g. angle structures,

elastic response of structures or uncertainties of elastic

modulus and coefficient of thermal expansion).

Alternatively, if (H,) and (H) are determined by measuring

the conductor tension directly [6] or derived from the

measured sag at two known temperatures, an accurate single

parameter fit can be established between the two fitted

points. In both cases, the "local" ruling span's tensiontemperature behaviour will differ from the actual ruling span

except between and near the two fitted points. If necessary,

this second order deviation can be calculated using a multispan program and fitting "local" ruling spans for each span

of interest. However, it may not be practical to have ruling

spans which vary with temperature and location.

The "local" ruling span length was calculated using Eq.8

for Case 1. The calculation was performed for a temperature

change from To= 10C to T= 100C, and the corresponding

tension change is from &=8440 lb (37.54 kN) to

H=5886 Ib (26.18 kN).

553

behaviour of a span shorter than lo00 ft (304.8 m), the sag in

the 1150 ft (350.5 m) span was actually larger than that

estimated using the traditional ruling span equation,

temperatures the spans can interact in such a way that a multispan sag-tension program may be necessary to predict the line

section sag-temperature behaviour more accurately. In some

cases it may be practical to run a multi-span program once and

fit the results. One way to fit the tension-temperature of each

span is to rewrite Eq.7 as:

(9)

C

T=a +bB+-

Si1

be fitted by linear regression to either the results from a multispan sag-tension program or to observed values of (T)and

(H). The fitting of (a) takes into account the constant terms

involving (H,J and (To); the fitting of (b) takes into account

the "springiness" of all the other spans either increasing or

decreasing the effective spring constant of the conductor and;

the fitting of (c) is similar to fitting a "local" ruling span. If

is required as a function of (T),either a closed-form

solution of the cubic equation or an iterative solution may be

used. Once (H) has been obtained for a given span, the sag

may be computed using the actual span lengths and Eq.3.

VIII. CONCLUSIONS.

1. The traditional equations describing the relationship

between temperature and span length, sag, and tension are

fully valid for dead-end spans only. A multi-span line section

can be analyzed as an equivalent single dead-end "ruling"

span.

2. The traditional ruling span method can be used with

acceptable error margins for lines which are operated below

l@C and have relatively equal and near level spans.

3. When old lines, originally rated for low operating

temperatures, are uprated for operation at higher temperatures,

the magnitude of sag errors should be evaluated using one of

the available computer programs. The main source of errors

is the longitudinalinsulator swing in line sections with unequal

spans.

operation, it is recommended to add a buffer of about 1 m

to the vertical clearance at maximum thermal sag.

5. Line post insulators can cause errors if the sag

calculations are made using traditional ruling span equations

when the span lengths vary significantly. In many cases, post

insulators can cause individual spans to behave as if they

were dead-ended at every structure.

6. The ruling span concept remains the most practical

method to string overhead line conductors. The ruling span

effects are not dependent on the type of conductor but rather

on the amount of tension change per degree of conductor

temperature change.

IX. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.

Task Force members would like to thank the following

persons and organizations for their contributions to the

success of this task, namely: D.E.Koonce, C.B. Rawlins,

N.P. Schmidt, W.A. Chisholm; for providing the results of

calculations using the following computer programs:

STRING, Power Technologies Inc.; SAGSEC, Power Line

System Inc.; NIP & TUCK, Linesoft Inc; SPRING, The

Valley Group; SWING, Ontario Hydro; and

RECONSTRUCTION, Dr. L.M. Keselman.

X. REFERENCES

[ 11. E.S. Thayer, "Computing Tensions in Transmission

Lines", "Electrical World", no.2, pp.72-73, 1924.

[2]. C.O.Boyse, N.G. Simpson, "The Problem of Conductor

Sagging on Overhead Transmission Lines", Journal AIEE,

Vol.91,Part 11, pp.219-231, Dec. 1944.

[3]. P.F.Winkelman, "Sag-Tension Computations and Field

Measurements of Bonneville Power Administration", Journal

AIEE, Vo1.78, pp. 1532-1548, February 1960.

[4]. Theodor Vamey, ACSR Graphic Method for SagTension Computations (Book), Aluminum Company of

America, Pittsburg, Pennsylvania, 1927.

[5]. W.A. Chisholm, J.S. Barrett, "Ampacity Studies on

49OC-Rated Transmission Line", IEEE Transactions on

Power Delivery, Vo1.4, no.2, pp. 1476-1485, April 1989.

[6].T.O.Seppa,

"Accurate Ampacity Determination;

Temperature-Sag Model for OperationalReal Time Ratings",

IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol.10, No.3,

pp. 1460-1470, July 1995.

554

Appendix I.

tan 8 = H / (wi/2+we),

where:

8 = angle of insulator swing

- 7

a\d

(conductor

'

*.

wi

weight of insulator

conductor

component of tension due to line angle

I4

Fig. 1. Suspension Insulator Swing

700

1150

m

213.4

350.5

Sag@lOOC

18.1

48.8

basedon s,

5.5

14.9

Sag@100"C

19.1

50.2

5.8

15.3

w/swing effect

Sag error

1.1

1.4

span,

ft

0.3

0.4

750

450

900

750

950

1500

850

228.6

137.2

274.3

228.6

289.6

457.2

259.1

20.7

7.5

29.8

20.7

33.3

83.1

26.6

6.3

6.3

10.1

25.3

2.3

9.1

8.1

8.1

31.7

22.2

21.7

33.4

78.2

26.9

6.8

2.5

6.6

10.2

23.8

8.2

9.7

1.5

1.9

0.6

0.96

0.2

0.3

-4.9

0.5

0.2

0.6

0.3

0.1

-1.5

0.1

650

198.1.

15.6

4.8

16.2

4.9

0.6

0.2

~~~~~

span,

,

ft

m

Sag@lOOC

based on S,

Sag@ 100C

w/deflection

Sag@ 100C

individual span

Sag error

Sp500 ft (152.4 m): @lo0 "C, sae21.12 ft (6.44 m), tension=1328 lb (5.9 kN)

575

430

530

390

600

5 10

3 90

5 80

350

106.7

175.3

131.0

161.5

118.9

182.9

155.5

118.9

176.8

7.3

19.8

11.1

9.1

21.6

16.8

15.6

9.1

20.2

2.2

6.0

3.4

5.1

2.8

6.6

4.8

2.8

6.2

8.6

19.2

11.6

16.8

9.8

20.1

9.9

15.5

19.4

2.6

5.9

3.6

5.1

3.0

6.1

4.7

3.0

5.9

9.4

18.2

12.3

16.2

10.8

19.3

15.4

10.8

18.4

2.9

5.5

3.7

4.9

3.3

5.9

4.7

3.3

5.6

1.2

-0.6

0.6

-0.09

0.66

-1.5

-0.12

0.7

-0.8

0.4

-0.2

0.2

-0.03

0.20

-0.5

-0.04

0.2

-0.2

400

121.9

9.6

2.9

10.5

3.2

11.1

3.4

0.6

0.2

555

Discussion

AEP recognizes the errors associated with the traditional

Ruling Span method. but we have not found a better procedure, nor does this paper suggest a better procedure, other

than to "add a buffer amount of 1 meter (3.3 feet) to the

vertical clearance" at the maximum operating temperature.

In the example of a series of unequal (tangent) suspension

spans preseiited in Case 1, the general trend is for spans

shorter than and approximately equal in length to the Ruling

Span to have adjusted sags approximately 37 cm (1.2 feet)

more than anticipated, and spans significantly longer to have

sags up to 1.5 meters (5 feet) less than anticipated.

Regarding the reduction in sag in the longer spans of the line

section, in my experience when an overhead line has significant variations in span length (other than when crossing a

specifichnique geographic feature such as a major river). the

line is traversing very rugged terrain and "jumping" from

ridge-to-ridge. For longer spans, the minimum clearance

usually does not occur near the mid span (where the valley

''drops" away) but nearer the supporting structures (approximately at the quarter points of the span). Therefor. the larger

sag at the mid-span (where the clearance is large) has a

minimal effect on the final structure heights. and excess

structure height is generally not occurring.

Since 1986, we have included the effects of elevated temperature creep in the design of new lines and the review of older

lines for operation at elevated temperatures. For the conditions outlined in Case 1, this increases the design sag of the

Ruling Span by approximately 30 cm (1 foot).

Not mentioned in the paper is the effect of "room temperature" creep due to the time lag between putting the conductor

in the stringing blocks and actually sagging and clipping in

the conductor. If the conductor's NESC-Heavy design

tension were a conservative 40% of its rated strength and the

wire was pulled-in and hanging in the stringing blocks at

70% of the sagging tension for 12 hours (overnight). 20% of

the 10-year room temperature creep would occur, increasing

to 25% after 48 hours and to 30% after 120 hours (Creep

being a log function.). For the conditions specified for Case

1 in the paper, the difference between the Initial and Final

sags At 16C (60F) is approximately 1.5 meters (5 feet).

Therefor: if the creep is ignored (as is normally the case) and

the wire is then sagged to "Initial" sadtension values. the

"Final" sags would be less than the design values by approximately 30 cm (1 foot). which. again, is generally considercd

to be conservative.

Additionally, since 1978 at AEP, we have added a 61 cm

(2.0 foot) buffer to the NESC required clearances at the

conductor maximum operating temperatures (to account for

errors in surveying, structure setting, conductor sagging.

etc.).

Therefor. AEP has effectively been adding more than the "1

meter" (3.3 foot) buffer recommended in the paper: 30 cm (1

foot) from elevated temperature creep +30 cm (1 foot) from

room temperaturG creep before sagging + 61 cm (2 foot) AEP

buffer = 1.2 meters (4 feet).

paper is the relationship of insulator string length to unbalanced tension. As the insulator string becomes longer, the

differences in tension in adjacent spans decreases (generally

inversely to the increase in the length of the insulator string

moment arm). Thus the sags will be closer to the Ruling

Span based predictions. Therefor. this issue is of greater

concern at lower line voltages and less of a concern at higher

Line voltages.

Manuscript received February 13, 1998.

R. 0. Kluge (Wisconsin Power and Light Co., Madison, WI

53701): The IEEE Task Force on "Bare Conductor Sag at

High Temperature" have presented a very timely and useful

paper for utilities desiring to operate their transmission lines at

maximum the capacity. By comparing sag calculations using

both a ruling span and what the authors call a "multi-span"

approach, they demonstrate the limitations of the ruling span

method. They also explain that this limitation is inherent in the

definitions of ruling span method, that is, the ruling span

method assumes an idealistic support that has no horizontal

restraint where as the multi-span method considers partial

restraint of the insulators. The authors then show that, if the

line is operating at elevated temperatures, the conductor may

not have uniform tension because there is horizontal restraint

at the insulators.

Table I and I1 contain the premise that the conductors had

uniform tension between dead ends, at the time of installation.

Since this premise may not always be true on a real line, the

sag differences could be greater or smaller than shown in these

tables. To account for this, the authors adeptly explain that a

"second order deviation can be calculated using a multi-span

program and fitting 'local' ruling spans for each span." They

add, however, that this "may not be practical."

As impractical as it may seem, at times, it is necessary. From

my experience analyzing the sag of actual lines, there are

numerous events that can cause the conductor tension to be

different between individual spans even when at normal

ambient temperatures. These include:

1) The conductor may not have uniform tension when

clamped at the time of installation.

3) Prior heavy ice loading on the conductors.

4) Line alterations including structure height increases or

relocation of structures (unless the conductor is reclamped or

sliced to restore the balance tension condition).

556

segment of conductor from a critically low span.

Any of these conditions may result in either an increase or

decrease in conductor tension for a portion of a line that could

result in unbalance tension. A sufficient number of spans

should be measured to obtain actual field conditions and

knowledge of any unbalanced tension. Of course, if unbalance

tensions exist, multi-span methods as recommended by the

authors are even more necessary.

Item 3) presents special problems because the utility may not

know the ice loading history for the conductor. The magnitude

of a heavy ice loading e\ ent is important because it may cause

additional inelastic strain in the conductor that exceeds the

long term creep. The obvious result of this strain is increased

sag. However, since, at icing temperatures, the strain will

generally be greater in the aluminum, the steel will thenceforth

support a greater share of the conductor weight. At high

operating temperatures, this is significant because steel has a

smaller coefficient of thermal expansion than aluminum and,

therefore, the change in conductor sag with temperature will

be less. In other words, after a heavy ice loading event, the

ACSR conductor will behave more like SSAC (steel supported

aluminum conductor).

multiple sadtension measurements must be taken at differing

temperatures. Tension monitors, as suggested by the authors to

measure conductor tensions when operating at elevated

temperatures, possess an addition feature, that is, they readily

provide multiple tension measurements. This can be extremely

valuable not only to calculate the long term conductor strain

but also record ice loading data to determine retum intervals

of local ice loading events.

Utilities should be aware that many of these field conditions I

have mentioned can have a greater effect on the conductor

sags than the choice of a numerical method of evaluation. This

is not to say, that utilities should not use a more precise

method of evaluating conductor sags. Conversely, the

experiences I have identified above provide additional reasons

for using one of the multi-span programs referenced by the

authors.

Two final questions: If one does not know the ice loading

history, would you comment on the number of additional sag

measurements required to back calculate the strain level of the

conductor? Since the paper did not provide a comparison of

the programs, are all of the programs equally capable of

handing imbalanced initial tensions or span specific tension

modifications?

1 R. J. Carrington, New Technologies for Transmission Line

Upgrading, IEEE-TP&C ESMO Conference paper, March

1998.

Real Time Ratings, Ice Loads and Other Environmental

Effects, CIGRE, 1998.

Manuscript received February 13, 1998.

provides a useful commentary on the ruling span

approximation and draws attention to a problem that is not

well-recognised among many practising line designers. With

the active uprating of lines taking place in many parts of the

world, driven by the increasing need to make the maximum

use of existing right-of-way, the paper is both timely and

germane.

In one or two places, however, the explanation of the role of

suspension insulators seems a little confusing. The

fundamental assumption of the ruling span (also known as the

equivalent span) approximation for a multi-span section is

stated in Section I11 A: that the tension in all of the spans is

equal and changes by the same amount, as temperature or

loading changes. In practice, this is only true either if all the

spans are identical or if the suspension insulators are infinitely

long. In the latter case, the insulators are required to swing

only an infinitesimally small amount to achieve tension

equalisation across the insulators.

It is self-evident from Figure 1 that a finite length insulator

can sustain a swing only if there is a tension difference

between the adjacent spans, thereby conflicting with the ruling

span assumption. The ruling span approximation is therefore

likely to be accurate only where both the true solution requires

very small insulator swings and the suspension points are free

to allow them to take place. Subsequent statements, such as in

Section V: The ruling span method assumes that complete

equalisation is achieved, thus overstating the insulator swing

are therefore confusing.

NGC are currently uprating a number of their AAAC circuits

from a rated temperature of 75C to 90C. The procedure that

has been adopted is to check the clearances of the line at 90C

using standard software, based on the ruling span

approximation. If this procedure leads to predicted clearances

that are within 0.5 m or less of the design value, then the

corresponding sections are checked using the NGC program,

GenCat, which allows for insulator swing and for the

reduction of EA with increased temperature. 0.5 m is typical

of the maximum differences that have been found between

ruling span and GenCat calculations. Where necessary these

checks are combined with surveys of critical spans, during

which direct measurements are made of conductor

temperature.

Manuscript received February 13, 1998.

The authors have done a fine job of helping focus attention

on a most important subject. The numerical example

presented in Case 1 is a set of unequal spans with the

conductor support points all at the same elevation. It is

preferable that the authors use a numerical example with

the point of support points at different elevations so that the

reader could see the effects of differences in elevations as

well as unequal span lengths. The authors suggest that all

six computer programs showed very close results which

leads the reader to believe that any of the six programs are

adequate for this type analysis. The software programs

557

and representing that they are all produce equivalent results

is misleading the reader. A numerical example with

conductor support points not all at the same elevation

would present a more realistic example of typical lines

found in the field.

Item 5. in section VIII. CONCLUSIONS, recommends a

clearance buffer of 1 m for high temperature operation. This

paper has presented insufficient evidence to support this

recommendation. The clearance buffer, whether used for

design or analysis should take into account how well all of

the input parameters and calculation methods are known.

Examples could be presented where the appropriate

clearance buffer should be less than 1 m and examples

could also be presented where the appropriate clearance

buffer should be far in excess of 1 m. The clearance buffer

should be established for a particular transmission line after

careful engineering study. Providing this rule of thumb in

this paper is inappropriate, misleading and potentially

dangerous.

In paragraph C. The Accuracy, the authors state that sag

errors caused by temperature variation along the line

section are generally less than the sag errors caused by

incomplete tension equalization. This is also a very

important topic particularly for rerating and real-time

rating. Since this statement has been included in this report

without documentation or reference, the authors are

encouraged to support this claim in this report or a

subsequent document.

Hudson, Quebec, Canada :

While being an active member of the Task Force we

expressed and maintained some opinions contrary to those

of the majority on several issues discussed in the document.

It was suggested that we present our views after

presentation of the document which we do at this time.

One theme runs throughout the document and that is

that the Ruling Span (RS) method is somewhat deficient in

fulfilling its purpose, a concept mentioned in the abstract

and also in item 6 of the conclusions where it states that the

RS concept remains the most practical method etc. Except

when dealing with an absolutely level series of even spans,

the RS method is the only method for deriving necessary

sag tension data for spotting the structures, an iterative

process (usually one iteration is sufficient) that provides the

sag tension data for stringing and obtaining vertical strings

. .

at clipping in if supplemented by apphation of offsets; the

offsets being needed to compensate for the unequal

horizontal tensions that exist in the mix of long and short

spans or in spans at different elevations while in the

stringing blocks. Neglect of offsets is quite rational and

common if they are small but their omission will certainly

complicate the process of trying to predict the sag

distortions that will occur at higher temperatures.

Assuming correct installation with offsets so that

insulator strings are vertical at clipping in, the entire system

begins to distort as soon as creep enters the picture.

Our second item of concern relates to the subject of

buffers, and ,specifically, the recommended buffer of about

IEEE Task Force should be recommending such an

important parameter without much more intensive

discussion.

For a new line planned for high temperature

operation, we suggest that RS method be applied to derive

sagging data and to spot the structures and that the

structure heights then be adjusted by means of one of the H.

T. programs or equivalent as mentioned in this paper. Then

the sagging in can be done with due consideration given to

application of offsets. The needed buffer should then be no

more than and probably less than anything used in the past

for normal temperature operation.

For HT operation of an existing line, the first

imperative is to determine the position of the existing wire,

clamps and insulator string inclinations and with this

knowledge, almost all need for a buffer such as I m has

been removed. The step to HT operation will contain some

small areas of doubt regarding wire properties but not

warranting a buffer of 1m.

We look forward to more detailed discussion of this

question of necessary and sufficient buffers.

J. Stephen Barrett (Ontario Hydro, Toronto, Canada):

Although a member of the Task Force on Bare Conductor

Sag at High Temperature, I would like to add a discussion to

clarify how to fit Eqn. 9 to the multi-span tension-temperature

relationship. The three-parameter fit of Eqn. 9 is best

determined by a least-squares fit to all the data points, but a

simple fit to three points may be more convenient. Given

three points, (To,Ho), (T1,Hi) and (T2,H2),define:

d=T,-T,

e=H,-H,

f =1/H:-1/H:

p = T2 - T,

q = H , - H , r = 1I H ; - 1I H:

z=er-qf

Then

b = (dr - p f ) I z

c = (ep - q d ) I z

a=T,-bH,-clH~

To provide an example of the accuracy of the local ruling

span fit of Eqn. 8 and the 3-parameter fit of Eqn. 9, they

were applied to the 450 ft. (137.2 m) span of Case 1 in the

paper.

The first tension column provides the actual tensions,

Ha,, in the 450 ft. (137.2 m) span, based on a multi-span

program. The second column of tensions, H,,, is based on the

ruling span method, where the ruling span is 999.93 ft

(304.8 m). The tension error increases significantly with

temperature.

The third column of tensions, H,,, is based on the local

ruling span fit of Eqn. 8. In the papers example

computation of the local ruling span, the spring constant AE

is given as 1.249.9.5.106. which is the aluminum component

alone. The total spring constant, including the steel, is given

by 1.249.9.5.106 + 0.086.27.5.106. Based on H, at 10C and

100C from Table I, the local ruling span for the 450 ft.

(137.2 m) span is 860.88 ft. (262.4 m). In this case, the

local ruling span fit is within 67.5 lb. (300 N) of the

actual values.

558

of L:ipwing ACSR in Case 1

H,,

1L-J

(W

8440.0

37.541

7999.6

35.582

7600.9

33.809

7240.2

32.204

6913.7

30.752

6617.8

29.436

6349.0

28.240

6104.4

27.152

5881.1

26.159

5676.8

25.250

appeared in 1994 with an installation at a 100 kV line section

consisting of only four spans, 1183 ft., 975 ft., 300 ft. and

1787 ft. The tension variation measured at the 1183 ft. span

indicated a local7Ruling Span of 1 160-1 190 ft., compared to

the classical Ruling Span of 1399 ft. The multi-span tension

program calculated local Ruling Span value of 1180 ft, i.e.

in close agreement with the measured values. The outline of

this procedure which we call Ruling Span Calibration was

presented at IEEE-PES WPM-95 in a report at TPC

subcommittee meeting.

The importance of the local Ruling Span concept and its

experimental determination is that it is a fundamental tool for

accurate determination of sags in sag-critical spans of the

line section from tensions or sags measured somewhere else in

the line section. The formula (8) of the report and a

description of its use for real time ratings was first published

in [3].

[l] Tapani 0. Seppa: A Practical Approach for Increasing

the Thermal Capabilities of Transmission Lines ZEEE

Transact. on Power Delivery, Vol. 8, No. 3, July 1993, pp.

1536-1550.

[2] Tapani 0. Seppa: Accurate Ampacity Determination:

Temperature - Sag Model for Operational Real Time Ratings

IEEE Transact. on Power Delivery, Vol. 10, No. 3, July 1995.

The last column of tensions, H,,, is based on the 3- [3] Tapani 0. Seppa: Power Transmission Line Monitoring

parameter fit of Eqn. 9, using the 3-point fit method described System. U.S. Patent 5,5 17,864, May 2 1, 1996.

above. Using the values of Ha,, at 10C, 5OoC and 100C Manuscript received February 13, 1998.

from Table I, the resulting values of a, b and c are:

a = 29.07051, b = -0.008712633 and c = 3.879675.109.

In this case, the 3-parameter fit is within 6 lb. (27 N) of the Y. Motlis:

actual values.

The authors would like to thank Mr. Freimark for his

comments regarding buffers. AEPs experience in using

Manuscript received February 23, 1998.

buffers and with the effect of the insulator string length on

sags is consistent with our paper findings and

recommendations. We would like to emphasize that the whole

T. 0. Seppa (The Valley Group Inc., Ridgefield, CT): issue of sags and tensions in significantly inclined spans like

Although a member of the above Task Force, and in complete in high mountains is very different than for level spans and,

agreement with the TF document, I would like to add a therefore, is not addressed in our paper. Buffers are normally

discussion to clarify the concept of the local Ruling Span.

added to predicted sag values to take into account possible

computation

errors and effects that have not already been

The data from tension monitoring systems [l] indicated as

considered

in

the sag calculations. Although creep was not

early as 1992 that in some cases the measured tension

discussed

in

the

paper, it is normally included in both ruling

variation as a function of conductor temperature was not that

span

and

multi-span

analysis, and so a buffer for creep is not

expected from Ruling Span calculations. Report [2] describes

one method of experimental determination of local Ruling usually required. In ACSR conductors, elevated-temperature

Span length which is applied for determining the conductor creep is often less than creep at lower temperatures because

temperature from the measured tension of a line section. The the aluminum stress decreases with temperature. We would

report also points out that there are other factors than the therefore question why a buffer for elevated-temperature

insulator swing, such as line angles, structure response, creep has been specified. A buffer for creep before sagging-in

deadend insulator properties, elevation differences and the is also not required, firstly because the effect can be computed

uncertainty of conductor properties which affect the and secondly, because creep before sagging-in, like prestressing, is actually beneficial in reducing long-term creep

calculation.

and sag. Normally, a 61 cm (2 ft) buffer is adequate. But in

In 1992 we developed the earliest complete multi-span sag cases where is a mixture of short and long spans with short

model, which allowed analysis the effect of all the above insulators and the ruling span method is being used, we have

factors for tension variation within line sections of up to 24 suggested a 1 m (3.3 ft) buffer.

559

that can result in unbalanced tensions between spans.

Although these were not dealt with in the paper, he points out

that they can be included in multi-span methods. Mr. Kluge

also discusses the problems associated with not knowing the

conductors loading history, and the benefits of monitoring

tensions or clearances. If the conductors loading history is

unknown , the permanent strain can be inferred from a few

sag and temperature measurements along the stringing

section, assuming that the stringing conditions are known

(from old line layout drawings, for example) . Although we

are not familiar in detail with all six computer programs

referenced in our paper, we believe that at least some of the

multi-span programs can handle initial tension imbalances.

In response to Dr. Tunstalls comments, the authors agree

that tension equalization is always imperfect for insulator

strings of finite length. This does not, however, render the

ruling span approximation less useful since, as Dr. Tunstall

notes, field measurements of sag are typically within 0.5

meters of calculated values (though he does not indicate the

spans, sags, or tension levels used). The point of the paper is

that the assumption of tension equalization through insulator

swing is seldom perfect but often adequate. We thank Dr.

Tunstall for pointing out an area of possible confusion in our

paper. The source of the confusion appears to be that

swing has been interpreted to mean swing angle, whereas

the authors intended it to mean the distance that the bottom of

the insulator string moves. The tension at which equalization

occurs at support points is a direct function of the horizontal

displacement and not of the swing angle. On another hand,

the swing angle is a function of the insulator length and not

of the horizontal displacement of the support point. As

insulator lengths increase, the swing angles decrease for the

same horizontal displacement; or the horizontal displacement

increase for the same swing angle. The ruling span method,

therefore, overestimates the horizontal displacement.

Mr. Carrington raises the qucstion of the effect of

elevation differences of structures on the results of the study.

We have compared the 10-span test case of level terrain to

another situation, in which the first five spans are in a +lo%

slope, followed by the last five spans in a -10% slope. In

effect, this means that the 1.6 mile (2.6 km) line section

would climb over a 400 A (120 m) ridge. The difference in

sag errors @lOOC conductor temperature to the values

shown in the Table 1 of the report (level span) and non-level

spans is from +O. 1 ft to -0.1 ft (3 cm) in all spans but in span

no. 5 where the difference is 0.3 R (9 cm). It indicates,

though, that in most cases the eKcct of relatively small

slopes on tension equalization is much less than the error

caused by the longitudinal inclination of suspension

insulators. Obviously, in a truly mountainous terrain a multispan sag-tension program is rcquired for accurate

calculations. The purpose of the paper, however, was not to

promote any or all of the multi-span programs, but to

illustrate the limitations of the ruling span method for lines

crossing average rolling terrain in accordance with the

Terms of References of this Task Force supported by all of its

members.

Mr. Carrington inquires about the sources of the statement

section are generally less than sag errors caused by

incomplete tension equalization. This is based on several

published reports which indicate that the temperature

variation within a single span is gcnerally larger than the

variation of the average tempcrature of spans in a line section

[1,2]. [2] states: We discovercd.. that if a temperature

sensor is placed each mile on a 20-mile transmission line, the

variations in the measured tcrnpcrature within the span was

greater than the variation among the spans. .

We are pleascd to note that Mr. Carrington and Mr. White

do agree with us that, in gencral, it is essential to specify a

clearance buffer. However, thcy are questioning the Task

Force recommendation of about 1 111 (3.3 ft) buffer for

overhead lines planned for high temperature operation. The

written discussions to this papcr by Mr. Freimark and Dr.

Tunstall, as well as verbal discussions (Mr. W. Peters) during

the presentation of the Task Force Report in Tampa, Florida,

February 1998, are in support of that use of buffers is a

prevailing practice. A recent survey of 47 North American

utilities, conducted in conjunction with a CIGRE survey,

indicated that the average clcarance buffer used by these

utilities for 115-138 kV lines is -3.2 ft (-1 m), and slightly

larger for lines at 230 kV and above... If the recommended in

our paper about 1 m buffer is intcrpreted as a rule of

thumb, we would like to use thc opportunity to clarify for all

readers that it is rather a typical value for design of new lines

and for the existing lines that have not had a condition

survey. Our reply to Mr. Freimark illustrates the point that

the buffer needs not be a fixed value. A careful engineering

study mentioned by Mr. Carrington means to us evaluation

of the condition survey of an existing line. The above

discussions imply that for high temperature operation of

existing lines, an accurate survey and subsequent analysis

could be used to reduce buffers. This assumption is not

generally warranted. For example, data in [4] to Mr.

Carringtons discussion describes line uprating to 95C based

on sag measurements using laser. The line section is very

uniform and in level terrain, with little variation in the span

lengths. Even then, the results show a sag error range of 1.4

ft (0.43 m) at 95OC, depending on which of the measured data

and what calculation method is used.

Mr. White is suggesting including offset clipping as a part

of this report. The Task Force members have agreed that

offset clipping is a very involving topic by itself and,

therefore, should not be a part of this task. We agree with Mr.

White that the initial position of the suspension clamp is

very important to perform longitudinal swing analysis at high

operating temperatures. To address this issue, the following

sentence is included in the paper: The basic assumption for

the numerical examples is that the initial position of the

insulators is vertical, either without or after offset clipping.

That is, during the design stage, if the suspension clamp is

deflecting along the line, it should be brought back to the

vertical position using offset clipping, then, to perform

swing analysis. Prior to the emerged issue of sags at high

temperature operation, many experienced line engineers were

adding a vertical clearance buffer to compensate for well

known inaccuracies in survey, design, drafting, tower

560

conductor stringing etc. Additional problems surfaced with

operating line conductors at high temperatures.. We do not

agree with Mr. Whites statement that because of the

application of offsets ..the needed buffer should then be no

more and probably less than anything used in the past for

normal temperature operation... When designing a new line,

due to the above mentioned inaccuracies or combinations of

them, a clearance buffer should be added no matter offset

clipping is applied or not.

Mr. Carringtons statement that providing in our paper this

rule of thumb, e.g. 1 m buffer, .. is inappropriate,

misleading and potentially dangerous. . could be addressed

to the Mr. Whites statement that knowing the position of the

existing wire, clamps and insulator string inclinations results

in that .. almost all need for a buffer such as 1 m has been

removed... We would like to re-assure Mr. White that the

ruling span method will be used as the most practical and the

only method to design and string new lines.

Dr. Barretts comparison of the local ruling span and the

3 parameter fit methods should be helpful to readers who

arc trying to decide bctwccn thc two methods. It does occur

to the authors that the diffcrcncc between the two methods is

much smaller than the differcnce bctween actual sags and

those found by either approach. It also seems to the authors

that sag errors at conductor tcrnpcratures (e.g. 5OOC) well

below the maximum (lOOCO are of limited interest to line

designers since thcy do not impact the vertical clearance at

high temperature opcration.

Mr. Seppa is to be thanked for providing additional

comments on the concept of local ruling span. As pointed

out in his references, it is possible to improve the accuracy of

high temperature sag calculation by calculating the tension

variation between suspension spans. It should be pointed out,

however, that the cases whcrcin this is necessary are limited

to those where the ratio of suspension span lengths is quite

large. In the example that Mr. Scppa cites, the ratio of the

certainly an unusual line dcsign wherein the use of the d i n g

span approximation quite rcasonably lcads to large errors in

calculated sags.

The local ruling span concept is useful for the evaluation

of data logged by a real tinic line monitoring system.

However, it should be seen in a propcr pcrspcctive. It is not

fbndamental in the sense that it can be computed from the

span lengths in a line section. Thc starting point is to make

the approximation that the changc of arc elongation in a

single dead-end span is equal to the change of strain, as

expressed in Eq. 7 of our paper. This is the basis of the

Graphic Method by T. Varncy, dcveloped in 1927. The

formula appears in Winkclmans paper of 1960 and has been

used in various sag-tension programs. The local ruling span

formula, Eq. 8 of our papcr, is simply a rearrangement of the

same old formula, Eq. 7. Thc local ruling span concept is

to use this formula to fit a span to the tension-temperature

relationship, which is either computed by a multi-span

program or observed on an actual line. In the example in our

paper, the long span of intcrest has the tension-temperature

relationship of a short span, lcading to a short fitted local

ruling span. So, the short local ruling span does not

explain the unexpected bchavior; it is the unexpected

behavior that explains why thc local ruling span is short. It

should be pointed out that most utilities with lines in

mountainous terrain have had complete multi-span sagtension programs for dccadcs.

References.

[ 11 T.O. Scppa, A practical approach for increasing the

thermal capabilities of transmission lines, E E E

Transactions on Power Delivcry, vol. 8, no. 3, July 1993.

[Z]M Davis, Discussion rccord , Panel on Dynamic Thermal

Ratings, IEEEPES SPM, 1982, San Francisco, Ca.

Manuscript received August 13, 1998.

- EGU2017-12266Diunggah olehIrwansyah
- IEEE-691 Guide for Transmission Structure FoundationDiunggah olehjohntptorres
- Limitations of Ruling Span Method at HiTempDiunggah olehbaybars
- SAG-TENSION 324.pdfDiunggah olehmagoico
- 4 Temp & ResistanceDiunggah olehAdwin Anil Saldanha
- Design of Stub for Transmission Line TowersDiunggah olehDebjyoti Das
- Geophysics ( Electric Method )Diunggah olehVaqas Ali Khan
- Solid State PhysicsDiunggah olehapi-26349602
- EeeDiunggah olehhari6krishnan
- Corona HVDCDiunggah olehashishdce
- 1.2mku ManualDiunggah olehJuan Hernan Huaringa Bejarano
- Corrosometer ER Probe Selection GuideDiunggah olehHenny Casanova
- -536932345Diunggah olehDaniel Aceituno
- Design of 132KV DC Tower Type DADiunggah olehtanujaayer
- Tower SpottingData AllDiunggah olehBADRI VENKATESH
- Ab Cable GtpDiunggah olehNaresh Ch Mahapatra
- TDMCQ.pdfDiunggah olehNishant Singh
- Chapter14 Electric CurrentDiunggah oleheltytan
- Copper Bus Bars Property ChartDiunggah olehMukesh Padwal
- Basic Creep Modelling of Aluminium 7075Diunggah olehSubash Jain
- ELT_235_3Diunggah olehSatyam Mehta
- NEE 512 (Elec'l Trans. & Dist. Lecture)Diunggah olehJessica Laine Tumbaga
- Important Points About ResistanceDiunggah olehVermashasha
- Translate B IIIDiunggah olehBagus Tri Ardaya Ardaya
- Research MethodsDiunggah olehchichi
- PhysRevLett.41.428Diunggah olehDaniela Tanase
- CP289Diunggah olehusmaniqbal15
- Why is My Structure FailingDiunggah olehpakbilal1
- estocapio michael 1 9 mhDiunggah olehapi-230330590
- 2000,Glass Fibre Life CycleDiunggah olehkanagarajc12

- Prasad Rao 2001Diunggah olehQvixote Eléctrico
- Tension and Sag 07-25-06Diunggah olehQvixote Eléctrico
- Impulse Time Method of Sag MeasurementDiunggah olehQvixote Eléctrico
- As NZS 7000-2010 Overhead Line Design - Detailed ProceduresDiunggah olehQvixote Eléctrico
- API Steel Pipelines Crossing Railroads and Highways RP_1102Diunggah olehQvixote Eléctrico
- Construction Exe 09 August SR I 2010 Module StringingDiunggah olehQvixote Eléctrico
- SP71_05Diunggah olehQvixote Eléctrico

- mechsem7Diunggah olehAmit Singh
- Finite Element Analysis of Automobile ChassisDiunggah olehGRD Journals
- HSW-GE_7-09_loDiunggah olehAlex Zaharia
- 2013+Mazda3+Specs+and+Features (1)Diunggah olehPablo Araya Orellana
- Adams ChassisSuspensionDiunggah olehMariusChristopherLechowski
- suspensionDiunggah olehNamit Srivastava
- Mcp Gis Chain HoistsDiunggah olehjohovitch
- Design analysis of Rocker Bogie Suspension System and Access the possibility to implement in Front Loading VehiclesDiunggah olehIOSRjournal
- Murray Parts Manual PDF - Model 52100x92A Garden TractorDiunggah olehBarry Fain
- HCB Tools Patents catalogueDiunggah olehHCB
- Recruitment-Selection-Hero-Motors.docxDiunggah olehPrabhat Sharma
- IntruderDiunggah olehsasavujisic
- Bb Instructions Trakker My2013_enDiunggah olehPedrosCristina
- Fuzzy Control of Semi-Active Automotive SuspensionsDiunggah olehshkiayi
- Marketplace - February 2010Diunggah olehPrime Creative Media
- baes_046303.pdfDiunggah olehRafael Granado
- ijmtah 109Diunggah olehlucas
- Vehicle Specifications - Deeptha.m.s - Roll No-15008515ts07fDiunggah olehprashant chouhan
- ome_cat_export_no.27_june_2011[1].pdfDiunggah oleh1977jul
- 740 BDiunggah olehEric Keller
- Car Steering and Suspension HistoryDiunggah olehAnonymous QiMB2lBCJL
- Nissan Almera N16Diunggah olehKostas10
- Module 6Diunggah olehsebin
- Hitachi AH500-DDiunggah olehForomaquinas
- 2002 Cavalier transmission dropDiunggah olehAlex Hirzel
- Tavera leafletDiunggah olehapi-3746810
- SS Sports Chassis Saab 9-3Diunggah olehsplod
- Airsuspensionrdso 2009 Cg Cmi 01 140912134756 Phpapp01Diunggah olehRickson Viahul Rayan C
- VW Eos Rear BrakeDiunggah olehNick P
- ADA170798.pdfDiunggah olehOmar José Rojas Rueda