×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Telecom Wind Design section 1609.1.1

Telecom Wind Design section 1609.1.1

Telecom Wind Design section 1609.1.1

(OP)
I just wanted to confirm that I am correctly interpreting the code for the wind design of antenna supporting structures.

Nearly all building codes call out section 1609.1.1 determination of wind loads where they state that it is calculated in accordance with ASCE 7. It is then followed by exceptions which state 5. Design using TIA/EIA-222 for antenna supporting structures and antennas.

My interpretation is that any antenna supporting structure is to be designed in accordance with the methods and wind speeds outlined in TIA-222 and wind speeds as described within there.

This is how I have always went about design/analysis in telecom. However, I have had someone come back to me in a case in NY where they are saying that the NYC building code (Section 1609.3) states The basic wind speed for NYC 3-second gust speed is 98mph. The NYC building code additionally has the similar building code section 1609.1 as stated above. Several counties under the NYC code have wind speeds at 105, 110, ect. in accordance with the TIA 222 county look up.

My interpretation remains that due to the statements and exceptions in section 1609.1.1 you would immediately go to TIA-222 and use the wind speeds and calculations as stated in it.

I just wanted to see if others agreed with my interpretation or disagreed with it.

I have also contacted the jurisdiction and am waiting for them to return my call but wanted to get other engineers input on this subject matter.

RE: Telecom Wind Design section 1609.1.1

I ran into a similar case where a short 40 foot tall antenna was mounted on top of an old two story wood warehouse in Tacoma, WA. The tower was analyzed using the wind loads of TIA-222G-05, but the building framing analysis used the tower reactions and was analyzed according to the IBC and ASCE7. I factored the wind pressures applied to the tower, and the associated reactions from the tower, to bring them in line with those of ASCE7 for the building framing check.


Got it to pass... But not before I factored the loads.

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering

RE: Telecom Wind Design section 1609.1.1

(OP)
Seems to be some "grey area" to what defines the antenna supporting structure. In your case it sounds like the antenna tower was defined as the antenna supporting structure which were analyzed in accordance with TIA 222. Even though it seems the building is a antenna supporting structure you had to analyze it in accordance with IBC/ASCE 7 and only the antennas and antenna tower were analyzed in accordance with TIA 222. This makes some sense that at least the tower, mounts, and antennas were analyzed in accordance with TIA 222.

In my case they are trying to tell me that the antenna frame and antennas that are connected to the building should be analyzed in accordance with the 98mph wind speeds and not in accordance with TIA 222. I still believe the antennas and antenna frames should be analyzed in accordance with TIA-222 in my case but I could be wrong. Additionally, I think this is a good example where section 102.1 governs that the most restrictive of the two should govern (in this case TIA-222).

I guess in the end the governing AHJ's opinion is all that really matters.

Appreciate you sharing your experience Mike! Would love to hear more examples, experiences, feelings, or interpretations on this issue.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members! Already a Member? Login



News


Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close