Bhutan Power Corporation Limited

400 /220kV Substation Project Oflice-Division IV

JIGMELING SARPANG.

COMMENTS:
A. Tower T-7
1.
a. Wind pressure on various Components: On exposed Area( Str Ht=11.2).
Reply: Noted. The wind pressure on various components revised in Rev-01.
b. Wind on flexible conductors: Moose ACSR (page 6): the value of gust response factor
from table 7 should be 1.8648, not 2.355. Therefore, the wind pressure on exposed area
will be 135 kg/m2.
Reply: the Gust Response factor is revised from table 7 and it is
1.8956 and the
corresponding wind pressure is 149 kg/m2.
c. Wind on shield wire (Ground Wire): the diameter of the shield wire is taken as 0.01098
in the wind calculation, but has been taken as 0.01295m in the load calculation sheets
C3-0 and C4-0. Please confirm the correct values and change wherever required.
Reply: corrected, the diameter of shield wire is 0.01098 as per specification.
d. Wind on pipe structure & all tubular bus bar ( smooth rigid surface): the value of gust
response factor from table 6 should be 1.9536, not 2.335. Therefore, wind pressure on
exposed area will be 169kg/mm2.
Reply: Corrected in Rev-01.
e. Wind on string Insulator; post insulator, switchyard equipments etc: the value of gust
response factor from table 6 is 1.9536, not 2.355. therefore the wind pressure on exposed
are will be 169 kg/m2
Reply: Corrected in Rev-01.

2. Loads on Gantry Beam:

a. The diameter of MOOSE ACSR conductor has been used as 0.03177 m in wind load
calculation has been adopted as 0.036 m in the data. Please change it to 0.03177 m as
appropriate.
Reply: Corrected in Rev-01
b. Design data: The load has been calculated for left side (51m span), however the
considered span is for right side (66 m span).
Reply: the tower is designed for 66 m span as the difference in SCF between 51 m & 66 m is
quite high. So considering 66 m as worst case the tower T-7-E has been designed.

c. Deviation angle (right/left): Angle in plan considered as 0; whereas in actual, angle of

4 degrees exist. Therefore consider 4 degrees for angle in plan for left span.
Reply: As discussed there are Two T-7 towers, one is T-7-E which only has deviation angle of
4 degrees in elevation and the 2nd T-7 tower named T-7-N having deviation angle 4 degrees in
plan as well in elevation. So this submitted tower is T-7-E in which only 5 degrees deviation
in plan considered. In Rev-01 5 degrees considered as per discussion with BPC.
d. Wind on Insulator String is not considered in transverse face (wind perpendicular to
wire), which is not true in actual. Therefore, please consider wind load on insulator
string.
Reply: wind Load on Insulator String is considered in Rev-01.
e. Factor of Safety for SCF Condition (wind parallel to wire) is taken as 2. Change this
to 1.5.
Reply: Corrected in Rev-01
f. Line men weight is not considered for the Beam. The same shall be included in the
load calculation.
Reply: line men weight is considered in PLS Analysis @ 150kg.
g. COS Component is ignored in Longitudinal and transverse load calculation.
Reply: the deviation angle is very less, the value of COS 5 are 0.9967 where as value of COS
0 is 1 which is considers in the design. But as per comments the COS component is added for
better understanding the analysis.
h. Weight of pilot string in vertical load is multiplied by factor 2 for SCF, change the
factor to 1.5.
Reply: Corrected in Rev-01.

B. TOWER-T8 & T10

a. Wind pressure on various Components: On exposed Area( Str Ht=18.0 m).
Reply: Noted. The wind pressure on various components revised in Rev-01.
b. Wind on flexible conductors: Moose ACSR (page 6): the value of gust response factor
from table 7 should be 2.062, not 2.355. Therefore, the wind pressure on exposed area
will be 149 kg/m2.
Reply: Corrected in Rev-01
c. Wind on shield wire (Ground Wire): the diameter of the shield wire is taken as 0.01098
in the wind calculation, but has been taken as 0.01295m in the load calculation sheets
C3-0 and C4-0. Please confirm the correct values and change wherever required.
Reply: corrected, the diameter of shield wire is 0.01098 as per specification.
d. Wind on pipe structure & all tubular bus bar (smooth rigid surface): the value of gust
response factor from table 6 should be 2.14, not 2.335. Therefore, wind pressure on
exposed area will be 185kg/mm2.
Reply: Corrected in Rev-01.the actual wind pressure calculated is 187 kg/m2

e. Wind on string Insulator; post insulator, switchyard equipments etc: the value of gust
response factor from table 6 is 2.144, not 2.355. therefore the wind pressure on exposed
are will be 185 kg/m2
Reply: Corrected in Rev-01. The actual wind pressure calculated is 194 kg/m2.
f. Wind on solid members- flat sided: the value of gust response factor from table 6 should
be 2.16, not 2.355. Therefore, the wind pressure on exposed area will be 311 kg/m2.
Reply: Corrected in Rev-01.

2. Loads on Gantry Beam:

a. The diameter of MOOSE ACSR conductor has been used as 0.03177 m in wind load
calculation has been adopted as 0.036 m in the data. Please change it to 0.03177 m as
appropriate.
Reply: Corrected in Rev-01
b. Wind on Insulator String is not considered in transverse face (wind perpendicular to
wire), which is not true in actual. Therefore, please consider wind load on insulator
string.
Reply: wind Load on Insulator String is considered in Rev-01.
c. Factor of Safety for SCF Condition (wind parallel to wire) is taken as 2. Change this to
1.5.
Reply: Corrected in Rev-01
d. Line men weight is not considered for the Beam. The same shall be included in the load
calculation.
Reply: line men weight is considered in PLS Analysis @ 150kg.
e. COS Component is ignored in Longitudinal and transverse load calculation.
Reply: the deviation angle is very less, the value of COS 5 are 0.9967 where as value of COS
0 is 1 which is considers in the design. But as per comments the COS component is added for
better understanding the analysis.

C. TOWER-T9
a. Wind pressure on various Components: On exposed Area( Str Ht=28.5m).
Reply: Noted. The wind pressure on various components revised in Rev-01.
b. Wind on flexible conductors: Moose ACSR (page 6): the value of gust response factor
from table 7 should be 2.098, not 2.355. Therefore, the wind pressure on exposed area
will be 155 kg/m2.
Reply: Corrected in Rev-01. The actual GC=2.2135 and the actual pressure is 160 kg/m2.

c. Wind on shield wire (Ground Wire): the diameter of the shield wire is taken as 0.01098
in the wind calculation, but has been taken as 0.01295m in the load calculation sheets
C3-0 and C4-0. Please confirm the correct values and change wherever required.
Reply: corrected, the diameter of shield wire is 0.01098 as per specification.
d. Wind on Shield Wire (Ground Wire): the value of gust response factor from table 7
should be 2.2135, not 2.355. Therefore, the wind pressure on exposed area will be 191
kg/m2.
Reply: Corrected in Rev-01.
e. Wind on pipe structure & all tubular bus bar (smooth rigid surface): the value of gust
response factor from table 6 should be 2.14, not 2.335. Therefore, wind pressure on
exposed area will be 185kg/mm2.
Reply: Corrected in Rev-01.the actual wind pressure calculated is 187 kg/m2
f. Wind on string Insulator; post insulator, switchyard equipments etc: the value of gust
response factor from table 6 is 2.144, not 2.355. therefore the wind pressure on exposed
are will be 185 kg/m2
Reply: Corrected in Rev-01. The actual wind pressure calculated is 194 kg/m2.
g. Wind on solid members- flat sided: the value of gust response factor from table 6 should
be 2.16, not 2.355. Therefore, the wind pressure on exposed area will be 329 kg/m2.
Reply: Corrected in Rev-01.

2. Loads on Gantry Beam:

a. The diameter of MOOSE ACSR conductor has been used as 0.03177 m in wind load
calculation has been adopted as 0.036 m in the data. Please change it to 0.03177 m as
appropriate.
Reply: Corrected in Rev-01
b. Wind on Insulator String is not considered in transverse face (wind perpendicular to
wire), which is not true in actual. Therefore, please consider wind load on insulator
string.
Reply: wind Load on Insulator String is considered in Rev-01.
c. Factor of Safety for SCF Condition (wind parallel to wire) is taken as 2. Change this to
1.5.
Reply: Corrected in Rev-01
d. Line men weight is not considered for the Beam. The same shall be included in the load
calculation.
Reply: line men weight is considered in PLS Analysis @ 150kg.
e. COS Component is ignored in Longitudinal and transverse load calculation.
Reply: the deviation angle is very less, the value of COS 5 are 0.9967 where as value of COS
0 is 1 which is considers in the design. But as per comments the COS component is added for
better understanding the analysis.

f. Elevation angle (right/left):Angle in elevation is considered as 1 degree ; whereas in

actual , angle of 3 degrees exist. Therefore consider 3 degrees for angle in elevation for
left span.
Reply: Corrected. All the deviation angles are rounded up to 5 degrees wherever required as
per discussion with BPC.