Concrete Poles

Guide for the
Design and
Use of
CONCRETE
POLES
Prepared by the
Concrete Pole Task Committee of the
Committee on Electrical Transmission Structures
of the Structural Division of the
American Society of Civil Engineers
April 1987
Published by the
American Society of Civil Engineers

345 East 47th Street
New York, New York 10017-2398
PREFACE
A Task Committee of the Committee on Electrical Transmission Structures was

formed in
1984 to prepare a concrete pole design and use guide. The Task Committee has
produced this
Guide which brings together in one document, as much information as time and the
collective
knowledge of the Task Committee permits. No claim is made that this document is
complete as
it stands. Through future use, additional thoughts and ideas will be identified
that should be
included. Hopefully this will be a living, working document that will be updated
as additional
knowledge becomes available.
The potential exists for the proliferation of Design Guides and Standards
written under the
auspices of various organizations. There are already documents relating to
concrete poles that
have been published by IEEE, ASTM and PCI and all of them refer to ACI-318. Now
comes
ASCE with its document. Such a proliferation soon becomes both confusing and
counterproductive if there is no coordinating force.
This Task Committee was chosen carefully to include people that were not only
knowledgeable in the field of concrete poles, but who were also active in IEEE,
ASTM, PCI and
AC1. Indeed, not all of the Task Committee members are members of ASCE. It is
the hope of
the Task Committee that this Guide will be jointly endorsed by all of these
organizations as a
focal point for information on concrete poles. The intent is not to usurp the
prerogatives and
responsibilities of the other organizations, but for this committee to serve as
a coordinating
group to insure that other documents do not become overlapping and
contradictory.
The Task Committee recognizes that there are areas in which information is
lacking or
incomplete. There is certainly work that needs to be done under the auspices of
ASTM. We hope
to be able to work with that committee to develop the necessary techniques and
knowledge to be
able to write testing standards associated with the manufacture of concrete
poles. The committee
also recognizes the need for research into some areas in which there is an
abysmal lack of
knowledge. It is hoped that somewhere in the industry, this research can be
funded and
undertaken with the results being available for the good of the industry.
Users of this Design and Use Guide are encouraged to ask questions or send
comments and
information that should affect the content of the Guide. Since neither the
chairman nor the
committee as a whole intend to abandon the project, comments and questions may
be addressed
to the chairman for consideration in future meetings. Anyone with a strong
interest in becoming
a committee member should contact the chairman.
Respectfully Submitted.
Concrete Pole Task Committee

Steven Bull Dennis Mize
William Ford Tarun Naik
Fouad Fouad Robert Roane
Tim Hardy Thomas Rodgers, Jr.
Samuel Hogg Vincent Schuster
Michael McCafferty Jerry Tang
William Mickley
William Howard. Chairman
Committee on Electrical Transmission Structures
William M. Howard Ronald E. Randle
John D. Mozer Gene M. Wilhoite
Anthony M. DiGioia, Jr., Chairman
CONCRETE POLE DESIGN AND USE GUIDE
William M. Howard
Committee Chairman
INTRODUCTION
This guide presents the generally accepted procedures for the

design, fabrication, inspection, testing and installation of concrete
poles. It addresses poles which are either spun cast or statically cast
and which are prestressed, partially prestressed or conventionally rein-
forced. The primary emphasis is on spun, prestressed poles which are
widely recognized as the ultimate in light weight and durability. Most
prestressed poles are of the pretensioned variety and, therefore, post
tensioned poles receive little attention in this guide. Also, although
many uses for concrete poles are recognized, the guide is heavily
weighted toward electric utility uses.
Other new types of concrete poles, such as fiber reinforced poles,
will be developed in the future and must be addressed by later updates
of this guide.
Many portions, but certainly not all, of ACI-318 and ACI-318R
are applicable to concrete poles and various references to ACI— 318 will
be made. It is intended that the definitions and notations used in this
guide are consistent with those used in ACI-318. (See Appendix B of this
Guide for Notations used herein.)
This guide is performance oriented. It presents certaip theories
and methods that are generally recognized as good practice, but allows
for innovative and unique circumstances to be fully acceptable upon
presentation of sufficient test data to demonstrate that proper perfor-
mance can be achieved. The fundamental premise is that where strength,
durability and aesthetics can be equalled or improved upon through new
methods, nothing should stand in the way of implementing such methods.
This philosophy is consistent with Commentary on ACI 318-83 in which
paragraph 18.4.3 states, "This section provides a mechanism whereby
development of new products, materials, and techniques in prestressed
concrete construction need not be inhibited by limits on stress which
represented the most advanced requirements at the time the code
provisions were adopted".
*
President, Power Line Systems, Inc., 6701 Seybold Road, Madison, WI
53719
2 CONCRETE POLES DESIGN
1.0 INITIAL DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
This section is written especially for the user. It specifically
details the information which users should include in their specifi-
cation to allow the structure designers to properly and efficiently
accomplish their tasks.
1.1 General
The structure design requires consideration of many aspects
including loading, fabrication techniques, method of shipment, con-
struction and maintenance methods, terrain, types of foundations,
corrosion, structural and electrical geometry and clearances, local
restrictions and codes.
The user is to select the necessary structure design loading
criteria. Structure loading may use /d^ta furnished in the ANSI C2
"National Electrical Safety Code" (NESC)'-' the ASCE "Guidelines for
Transmission Line Structural Loading" , AASHTO "Standard Specifica-
tions fofcStructural Supports for Highway Signs, Luminaires and Traffic
Signals" , Electronic Industries Association (EIA) Standards or
independent selections based on known local environmental conditions
(such as high winds or heavy ice conditions).
When using the ASCE "Guidelines for Transmission Line Structural
Loading" an exclusion limit is required for pole strengths. Each manu-
facturer should conduct a full scale testing program to develop its own
values for the exclusion limit. (The exclusion limit is simply the per-
centage of poles that fail at less than nominal design strength.) In the
absence of adequate test data, an exclusion limit of 35 shall be used.
1.2 Load Expression
It is recommended that loading conditions be expressed as load
trees, using an orthogonal coordinate system as shown in Figure 1-1 on
the next page. Conductor and shield wire loads should be shown at the
conductor and shield attachment points. The weight of the hardware and
insulators should be included in these loads. Wind on structure should
be expressed in psf (pounds per square foot). Loads should be ultimate
including all safety and overload factors.
1.3 Determination of Performance Requirements
Poles are designed by the ultimate strength method, to resist the
largest factored load. It is the user's responsibility to determine if
the word "resist" means to resist the maximum loads without permanent,
unacceptable deformation (damage) to the pole, or if it means to resist
the loads without failure (collapse) of the pole, recognizing that it
requires a stronger pole to resist damage than to resist collapse. In
the case of a damaged pole, the steel will have been stretched beyond
its elastic limit and/or some concrete will have spalled off the pole.
The pole will be permanently deformed, will no longer perform as it was
designed to, and will need to be replaced; but it is still maintaining
the conductors in such a configuration that the line remains energized.
A pole which has collapsed is one which has reached such a state that
the line can no longer carry power.
1.4 Determination of "Normal Everyday" (Frequent Condition) Loads
For unguyed angle or deadend pole structures, it is desirable to
consider deflections under "normal everyday" loads. A pole with large
deflections under such conditions is undesirable. User should specify
what loads are to be considered "normal everyday".
1.5 Longitudinal Loading
Because of the possibility of catastrophic cascading failure, the
most important loading condition to be evaluated for any transmission
line is that caused by the simultaneous loss of tension on all condu-
tors. For pole type self-supporting structures, the deflection of the
structure itself, will provide a significant tension reduction in the
wires. The length of suspension insulator strings can also greatly
influence the structure loading under unbalanced longitudinal loading
conditions since the decrease in tension caused by the swing of long
insulator strings can be significant. Both of these factors should be
included in the unbalanced loading condition as long as proper consid-
eration is given to any impact loading imposed on the structure. For
longitudinal loading calculations, spans used should approximate actual
line spans.
A longitudinal analysis is particularly essential when comparing
alternate designs and materials because it is necessary to be sure that
the alternates being considered are, indeed, equivalents. For example, a
lattice tower, being a much more rigid structure than a pole structure,
must be designed significantly stronger in order to provide the same de-

gree of protection against cascading failures. The combination of flex-
ibility, mass and mode of failure that are inherent in concrete poles
make them more resistant to cascading failures than are structures made
of other materials.
Under individual broken conductor conditions, restraint will be
offered to the structures by the intact wires. Calculations should
properly reflect the structure deflection and insulator swing, and the
resulting change in wire spans and tensions.
Proper evaluation of the effects of broken conductors requires the
use of sophisticated computer programs. From such an analysis, an equiv-
alent static load can be established for the design and testing of the
structure. If testing of the structure does not confirm the expected
deflections, additional evaluations should be made.
1.6 Geometry
The basic pole structure configuration, conductor and shielding
geometry (i.e., horizontal, vertical, delta, single poles, H-frames,
etc.), insulation assembly length, swing angles, electrical clearances
CONCRETE POLES DESIGN 5
and shielding angle should be made clear to the structure designer.
However, the structure designer should be allowed as much latitude as
possible to determine the design details of the structure.
1.7 Foundations
Consider the type of foundation, foundation rotational allowance
and soil parameters (e.g. evaluate bearing and uplift criteria and
strength of both natural soil and backfill).
When specifying the maximum value for foundation rotation and de-
flection for all load cases, the user should establish the performance
requirements for the combined pole and foundation installation. In
determining this value, the user may consider aesthetics, phase-to-
structure clearances, phase-to-ground clearances, structure to ob-
struction clearances or even the ability to replumb a structure.
The specifying of a rotation and deflection for each load case is a
refinement in analysis and design which allows the user to match types
and probability of loads with foundation response. For instance, under
rarely occurring conditions such as a 50-year extreme wind load, one
might allow more foundation deflection and rotation than under more
common loads with the expectation that the cost of occasionally
straightening a structure will be less than the cost of stronger, more
expensive foundations.
In the case where foundation rotation-deflection is specified, the
manufacturer should include such effects in the calculations of final
deflected pole stresses. The rotation and deflections, when specified,
should be for the respective loads with overload factors.
1.8 Design Restrictions
Examples of design restrictions are length, weight, deflection or
other limitations imposed due to local codes or conditions.
1.9 Deflection
1.9.1 General
Structures must be analyzed for deflection to insure that they
have adequate strength. The large deflections frequently observed in
pole structures under horizontal loads cause additional stress due to
the vertical loads being applied while the pole is in the final deflect-
ed position. The stress analysis for this is covered in Section 2.0.
1.9.2 Clearances
Clearances from conductors to supporting structures, ground,
or edge of right-of-way are usually not affected significantly by pole
deflections except, perhaps, on special long span or line angle condi-
tions. The user must be aware of this possibility and must compensate
for reduced clearances where they can occur. Clearances to the structure
itself may be maintained by specifying certain combinations of conductor
down drop and line angle at the structure and the required clearance.
This clearance should be maintained to the deflected structure under the
specified loading condition.
1.9.3 Appearance
Deflections can play an important part in the appearance of a
structure. At line angles or where all vertical conductors are on one
side of a pole structure, the constant load in one direction will cause
the structure to bow and, if the pole was originally set vertically, it
may appear to be near failure. There are several methods that can be
used to compensate for this. One method is to rake the pole when setting
it. The deflection at the top of the pole is determined for the everyday
loading and the pole is tilted this predetermined amount so that, under
the everyday loading, the top of the pole is vertical. In this case, the
pole will be curved, but because the top portion is vertical, the curva-
ture is unlikely to be noticeable.
Designing the structure to limit deflection is a possibility,
but this can be expensive because of the extra heavy pole that will be
required.
Precambered poles are another possibility. It should be recog-
nized, however, that the predictability of results in precambering
concrete poles is poor, at best, and few manufacturers are prepared to
precamber at all.
Finally, guys may be used to limit deflections.
1.10 Transportation and Erection
The design should consider equipment or access limitations and
loads caused by methods of loading, unloading, hauling, assembly, erec-
tion and stringing (including longitudinal load due to line snagging in
traveller).
It should be kept in mind that the largest stress level a concrete
pole may see in its lifetime can occur by lifting it clear of the ground
while it is in a horizontal position, as is common in loading and un-
loading. Indeed, the induced stresses can be so great that it may
sometimes be necessary to require the use of multiple point picks to
avoid damaging the poles.
Experience suggests that transportation and erection loads gener-
ally should not be controlling among the various construction loads.
Transportation loads can be controlled by using adequate support under
the poles (i.e. do not allow long overhangs or unsupported lengths).
Erection with single point picks is not a problem as long as much of the
weight of the pole is supported on the ground until the pole is in an
upright position. Since poles and structures are normally erected by
lifting at a point well above the center of gravity, the pole butts
remain on the ground until the pole is erect and excessive bending loads
during erection are thus avoided.
It is the manufacturer's responsibility to clearly indicate on the
erection drawings, any restrictions to be observed by the contractor in
the handling, transportation and erection processes. However, both users
and manufacturers should realize that restrictions add to the cost of
installation and should be kept to a minimum. For example, it may be
desirable to additionally-reinforce those guyed poles which would other-
wise require little prestressing steel to handle the service loads, so
that the pole can be handled in a normal manner during construction,

because the cost of the extra steel will likely be less than the cost of
unusual handling procedures during construction.
Poles most likely to be susceptible to damage during transportation
and erection are poles designed for light loading conditions, guyed
poles, unusually long poles, poles with substantial weights in attached
accessories and poles that must be lifted at or near their center of
gravity. Unless the poles have been designed to withstand a single point
pick at the center of gravity after complete assembly (including a 1.5
overload factor), special handling instructions should be clearly
indicated on the erection drawings.
In general, then, it is usually the lifting of the entire pole
weight while the pole is in the horizontal position that is the control-
ling handling condition. This load is caused by the weight of the pole
itself (plus the weight of any items that may be attached to the pole).
To allow for shock loads that may occur while the pole is being lifted,
an overload factor of 1.5 should be appled to the dead weight of the
pole and attached accessories. It is also necessary for the user to
specify whether the pole is to withstand a single point pick or whether
multiple point picks can be required by the manufacturer.
1.11 Attached Items
User is responsible for informing the manufacturer what accessories
are to be mounted on the poles as well as the weight of those accessor-
ies so that the poles may be properly designed.
1.12 Guying
It is important to define as many knowns as possible, such as re-
strictions, right-of-way limitations, use of particular guy wire or
anchor types, guy angles, quantity of guys, placement tolerances and
terrain considerations. The structure designer should be allowed as much
latitude as possible in determining the details of the guying scheme to
be used.
1.13 Climbing and Maintenance
Identify climbing, working and hot line maintenance provisions
required.
The primary means of climbing concrete poles is with the same
removable ladder system used to climb steel poles. This system is
available from all pole manufacturers. Many other options are available
if the user prefers. The particular method to be used will need to be
discussed with the individual manufacturers since not all producers are
prepared to offer all options.
1.14 Grounding
Pole grounding can best be accomplished by utilizing one or more of
the prestressing strands as the electrical path to ground. In addition,
a separate ground wire may be attached to the exterior surface of the
pole or it may be placed in the cavity in the center of the pole. In
either case, it should be bonded to the prestressing steel to avoid
lightning damage to the pole. User should specify the desired method of
grounding.
1.15 Other Considerations
Any other special conditions that may affect the design should be
considered (e.g. reverse wind on bisector guyed light angle structure
may control design or environmental conditions may suggest special
concrete mixes).
Finally, it should be remembered that, like wood poles, concrete
poles lend themselves to use under standardized design conditions using
a strength/length classification system. In fact, concrete poles can be
designed so as to meet the same loading conditions as the wood pole
heights and classes. As more users and designers begin to treat concrete
poles conceptually like wood poles for design purposes, the costs of
both design and manufacturing will decrease substantially.
2.0 - DESIGN
2.1 General
For each loading condition considered, it is necessary to analyze
the effects of the loads on the structure to determine the tensions,
compressions, moments, shears and torsions that the structure must re-
sist at its different locations and the resultant deflections.
The reason for using reinforced concrete as a construction material
is to take advantage of the best attributes of both concrete and steel.
Concrete is relatively inexpensive, excellent in compressive strength
and, when properly made, is relatively unaffected by the environment.
The primary disadvantage is its low tensile strength. Steel, on the
other hand, is excellent in tension but it is more expensive than con-
crete and is also readily attacked by the environment. Thus the objec-
tives are to use as little steel as possible, to place it in the tension
zones of the member and to use the concrete to protect the steel from
the elements. In some ordinary reinforced applications, steel may, on
occasion, be used to resist compression.
2.2 Design Theory
2.2.1 General
As outlined in paragraph 1.3, concrete poles are designed by
the ultimate strength method wherein the applied service loads are
multiplied by overload factors and the pole is designed to resist the
largest factored load.
A pole Section should also be designed -so that normal everyday
(frequent condition) unfactored loads will not cause the concrete to. go
into tension. (See paragraph 1;.4)
2.2.2 Bending
The most common loading conditions for poles result in the
pole being called upon to resist bending moments. When the bending
moments are large enough, the concrete on the outside curvature of the
pole will go into tension and, perhaps, crack.
Tangent poles (the most common case) designed according to
NESC light, medium or heavy loading are unlikely to ever crack under
service loads. The 2.5 overload factor used in these cases to determine
the required ultimate strength, means that the service load is 40% of
the ultimate load. Concrete in a prestressed concrete pole normally does
not go into tension until the load is around 40% to 50% of the ultimate
load. Thus the service load is about equal to or less than the load
which causes the concrete to go into tension.
Where very low overload factors are used (such as are common
in the 1.0 to 1.1 range for high winds), the poles will crack under the
unfactored loads. However, since loads of such a great magnitude are
applied to the pole seldom, if ever, opening of cracks under such loads
will not occur often enough to be detrimental to the long term
durability of the poles. Indeed, for tangent structures which have been
properly designed for ultimate strength under factored loads, it is
difficult to imagine any set of circumstances where a pole would be in a
cracked condition even 0.017. of its life. Unguyed angle or dead-end
poles do, however, require careful attention to insure that they are not
in a cracked state under "normal everyday" (frequent condition) loads.
The detailed methodology for determining the bending strength of a
reinforced concrete section is well documented in various text books on
Reinforced Concrete. However the fundamental assumptions bear repeating
here:
2.2.2.1 The section must satisfy the basic test of static
equilibrium (i.e. the tension loads and the compression loads must be
equal; and the summation of the internal moments about the neutral axis
must be equal to the external moment applied to the section).
2.2.2.2 Strains for both concrete and steel shall be assumed
to be directly proportional to the distance from the neutral axis.
2.2.2.3 Tensile strength of concrete shall be neglected in
flexural calculations except for the express purpose of determifling when
the first cracks are expected to appear, (i.e. determining the cracking
moment). This is done to account for the fact that once the pole has
cracked (and poles are expected to crack), the concrete no longer has
any tensile strength. Some have suggested that poles might be designed,
handled and used in such a manner that they never crack. Such an ap-
proach is impractical, unnecessarily restrictive and, ultimately, it
cannot be guaranteed that the pole did not crack anyway.
2.2.2.4 The stress/strain relationships must be determined
for the specific materials used. A balanced design is one in which the
yield strain of the steel and the limit strain of the concrete are
reached simultaneously. A balanced design produces the most efficient
section.
2.2.2.5 When designing to allow damage but resist collapse,
the concept of balanced design is not valid since some of the steel may
be intentionally allowed to exceed its elastic limit. Except in a rare
case of a highly under reinforced section, the failure will occur in the
concrete, and the steel will not rupture. This is due to the steel going
into a plastic state, thereby picking up an ever increasing load; while
the neutral axis moves toward the compression side of the section, which
must balance the increasing steel load on a decreasing concrete area,
until the concrete strain reaches the point where the concrete ruptures.
2.2.3 Column Loading
Buckling is seldom a limiting factor in the design of concrete
poles. However, when unusually large vertical loads are encountered
(e.g. large guyed loads or guys with short guy leads) it is necessary to
check for a buckling condition, particularly on taller poles.
2.2.4 Shear
Shear is seldom a consideration in concrete pole design. For
normal direct burial conditions, soil strengths dictate that the pole
must be buried deeply enough to preclude shear problems. Normal burial
depths will equal or exceed 10% of the pole length plus 2 feet and poles
with such burial depths need not even be checked for shear. The critical
conditions that bear checking occur when very large moments are applied
near either end of the pole. For example, poles set into solid rock or
buried into a concrete foundation socket, may not be buried very deeply,
in which case, it is necessary to check for shear to ensure that the
pole does not split lengthwise along the neutral axis due to exceeding
the concrete shear stress limits.
2.2.5 Torsion
Good theory for the design of concrete poles to resist tor-
sional loads does not exist. Furthermore, the combined effect of the
stresses occurring in a prestressed concrete pole which is subjected to
simultaneous bending, column loading, prestress loading and torsional
loading is so complex as to defy reasonable mathematical modeling. Only
after extensive research will it be possible to develop mathematical
formulas and prove them out to the point where they can be used with
confidence. In the meantime, little can be done to assure proper per-
formance under torsional loads other than to test a pole for those
conditions that suggest the liklihood of significant torsional loads
being applied.
2.3 Concrete Properties
2.3.1 Stress/Strain Relationships
Curves showing the relationship between stress and strain for
concrete vary widely depending primarily upon the strength of the con-
crete. For normal strength concrete, the curves are distinctly non-
linear and allowable strain is usually limited to 0.003 inches/inch.
However as the strength of the concrete is increased to the ultra-high
strength level, the curves become very linear all of the way to rupture,
which may occur at strains considerably less than 0.003 inches/inch.
For those manufacturers who prefer not to perform the neces-
sary testing to develop their own curves, the provisions of ACI 318
provide a satisfactory basis for design parameters for concrete in the
ordinary strength ranges. For higher strength concretes, ACI provisions
may or may not provide acceptable results. According to ACI 318-83 par-
agraph 10.2.6, "Relationship between concrete compressive stress distri-
bution and concrete strain may be assumed to be rectangular, trapezoid-
al, parabolic, or any other shape that results in prediction of strength
in substantial agreement with the results of comprehensive tests". Manu-
facturers are, therefore, expected to conduct "comprehensive tests" to
develop their own stress/strain curves for any concrete with strengths
beyond the applicability of ACI provisions.
2.3.2 Concrete Compressive Strengths - f
The specified compressive strength of the concrete (f ) is
determined by the manufacturer based on a number of considerations (see
discussion under 3.0 Fabrication) but should not be less than 5000 psi
and preferrably 7000 psi or more.
Although concrete compressive strengths are conventionally
determined at 28 days, it is not required that strengths be measured at
that time, and the manufacturer should be allowed to specify strengths
at later times to utilize the continuing growth in concrete strength
which occurs over time. The use of longer times should, however, be
clearly indicated at the time of bidding and on the drawings so that a
pole is not fully loaded before the time that the concrete reaches its
specified compressive strength.
2.4 Reinforcing Steel
2.4.1 Stress/Strain Relationships
Stress/Strain curves for steel do not vary as much as they do
for concrete. These curves are provided to the pole manufacturers by the
steel suppliers and from the curves can be determined Modulus of Elast-
icity (E ), Yield Stress (f ), and Ultimate Stress (f ).
For purposes of determining the strength of the section at the
moment of collapse, ACI 318-83 paragraph 10.2.4 states that for non-
prestressed reinforcing steel, the stress in the reinforcement that is
below yield stress level shall be taken as E times steel strain. For
s
strains greater than that corresponding to f , stress in reinforcement
shall be considered independent of strain and equal to f . Since
prestressing sttand behaves differently than reinforcing steely the PCI
Design Handbook suggests the following formulas for the stress/strain
relationships of the prestressing steel:
When using a combination of prestressed and non-prestressed

steel in a member, the provisions of ACI 318 shall apply.
2.4.2 Longitudinal Reinforcement
The primary purpose of longitudinal reinforcement is to resist
the tension forces in the pole caused by bending moments applied to the
pole and, in the case of prestressing steel, to impart prestressing
loads into the concrete. The steel must be properly held in place during
the placement, consolidating and curing of the concrete, so that proper
concrete cover and steel to steel clearance is achieved. The methods
used should be left to the manufacturer who may be called upon by the
user to demonstrate the adequacy of its methods.
Longitudinal reinforcement is normally placed uniformly
throughout a symmetrical cross section. It is possible to obtain some
degree of increased strength about one bending axis, even though the
cross section has a symmetrical shape, by placing the steel as far as
possible from the axis about which the bending occurs. Such a technique
is rare, however, because the additional strength which can be generated
about a particular axis is not large, and handling problems may be en-
countered due to the resultant weakness about the weaker axis.
2.4.3 Circumferential Reinforcement
In order to control longitudinal cracking from several poten-
tial sources and to improve the shear and torsional strength of the
pole, circumferential reinforcing is required throughout the full length
of the pole. Theories to allow for good design practice are not well
developed, particularly for prestressed pole sections. However, drawing
upon common practice that generally provides satisfactory results, the
ratio of the volume of circumferential steel to the volume of the con-
crete shall not be less than 0.1%. The spacing between the circumferen-
tial reinforcements shall not be greater than 4 inches or the radius of
the pole. Because of prestressing loads near the ends of poles and
possible shear or torsion loads, additional circumferential steel may be
required. A spacing greater than 4 inches may be allowed if the manufac-
turer presents evidence of satisfactory performance and user agrees.
2.5 Concrete Cover Over Steel
In addition to structural requirements, the purpose of concrete
cover over steel is to protect the steel from corrosion. The thickness
of cover required, may vary according to the degree of corrosiveness of
the environment in which the pole will be used as well as the quality of
the concrete and its ability to protect against the hostile environment.
More cover provides greater protection only to the point where the steel
cannot be attacked. Excess cover adds nothing to the durability of the
pole but does add unnecessary weight and cost.
For static cast, ordinary reinforced concrete the provisions of ACI
318 apply for determining cover requirements.
In the case of static cast, prestressed concrete poles, ACI.g318-83
and the PCI "Guide Specification for Prestressed Concrete Poles" both
call for 1 inch of cover. This appears to be consistent with other
generally accepted practices and provides satisfactory results in most
cases.
A review of specifications for spun concrete poles from widely
differing parts of the world where they have many years of experience
shows that required cover varies between 13mm (approximately 1/2 inch)
to 19mm (approximately 3/4 inch). As an average for the standard prac-
tices both domestic and abroad, it is recommended that design cover be
3/4 inch over the primary steel with 5/8 inch being allowed over the
spiral reinforcement. Lesser covers should be allowed if the manufac-
turer can demonstrate through tests that its concrete is of extremely
low porosity so as to protect the steel and develop structural strength
with less cover and that the steel can be placed with sufficient accur-
acy to provide adequate cover under reasonable fabrication deviations.
2.6 Concrete/Steel Bond
Due to the fact that large moments are seldom applied near the ends
of poles, the analysis of the development of the bond between concrete
and steel is largely ignored. In circumstances where there are large
moments near the ends of poles (e.g. a davit arm at the top of a pole, a
joint connecting parts of a multi-piece pole or a pole set shallow into
a rock hole) it is necessary to examine the bond development. It is also
important to consider bond development in the event that some of the
steel is cut by drilling holes in a part of the pole in which the steel
is highly stressed.
ACI 318 covers bond development. In addition to normal bond devel-
opment, end anchorages of various descriptions can be used.
It is possible that, because of high prestress forces, longitudinal
cracks may develop at the ends of the pole. If this occurs, it may be
necessary to increase the concrete cover or the amount of spiral rein-
forcement or both.
2.7 Prestress Loads
2.7.1 Steel
ACI 318 provides guidance as to allowable tensile stress in
the prestressing tendons both at the time of application of the jacking
force and immediately after prestress transfer. At jacking it allows
0.94 f but not greater than 0.85 f or maximum value recommended by
the manufacturer. Immediately after pres'tress transfer the maximum al-
lowable stresses are 0.82 f but not greater than 0.74 f .
2.7.2 Concrete
ACI 318-83 paragraph 18.4.1(a) states that stresses in the
concrete immediately after prestress transfer (before time-dependent
prestress losses) shall not exceed 0.60 f . where f. is the compres-
sive strength of concrete at time of initial prestress. However para-
graph 18.4.3 states that the permissible stresses in the concrete may be
exceeded if shown by test or analysis that performance will not be
impaired.
2.7.3 Loss of Prestress
In the Commentary on ACI 318-83 paragraph 18.6.1 several
references are cited which indicate how "reasonably accurate estimates
of prestress losses can be easily calculated". It also points out that
the accuracy of the calculations have little effect on the ultimate
strength of the member. It does, however, have some effect on the crack-
ing load and the deflections of the member.
Loss of prestress requires calculations that consider anchorage
seating, elastic shortening of the concrete, creep of the concrete,
shrinkage of the concrete and relaxation of the tendons.
2.8 Direct Burial Considerations
Because no special treatment is required for the portion of the
pole that is buried, the poles can be buried any convenient depth. The
rule—of-thumb, which many engineers use as a left-over from their wood
pole experience, is to bury the pole 10% of its length plus 2 feet. For
lower strength concrete poles this may provide satisfactory results.
However, since concrete poles are, in general, much stronger than wood
poles, it follows that stronger (and presumably deeper) foundations
would be in order. It is also necessary to determine whether it is more
cost effective to use a conservative foundation design or to plan to
straighten an occasional leaning pole. There is a tendency (which should
be avoided) to penalize the cost of a concrete pole line in comparison
to a wood pole line by using more stringent foundation criteria for
concrete poles while using the old rule-of-thumb criteria for the wood
poles.
As far as the integrity of the pole is concerned, any type of
backfill is satisfactory. Many people use either native soil or crushed
rock backfill. Some use concrete backfill but it is doubtful that the
results are any different than with a well compacted granular backfill
since either backfill is likely to be considerably stiffer than the
surrounding natural soil. Concrete backfill has the advantage that it
need not be compacted, but that advantage is likely to be more than
offset by the disadvantage of having to temporarily support the struc-
ture while the concrete sets.
When designing the pole, there are two items to be considered in
relation to the foundation. The most common is to realize that the
maximum moment in the pole occurs below ground and not at the ground
line. Since most poles are tapered and their strength continues to
increase below ground line, it appears quite safe and common to ignore
the additional below ground moment and design the pole based on the
moment at the ground line.
The other consideration comes up only rarely. If a pole is set in
an unusually shallow manner (e.g. in a rock excavation or in a barrelled
hole) the shear forces developed along the longitudinal neutral axis
need to be considered to avoid having the pole split longitudinally at
the butt.
In the case of spun poles which have thin walls and a large void,
consideration should be given to the magnitude of the down load and the
ability of the soil to keep the pole from being forced further into the
ground. In general, unguyed single poles do not need to have the bottoms
of the poles plugged. Guyed poles either need the bottoms plugged or may
need large bearing plates placed under the butt to resist the down load.
For unguyed H-frames, uplift shoes that are commonly used may provide
enough down load capability as well, to avoid the need for plugging the
pole bottom. When uplift shoes are not used, plugging or bearing plates
may be necessary in poor soil conditions.
2.9 Guyed Structures
To properly analyze a guyed structure, certain assumptions must be
made regarding guy tensions and pole deflections. In the absence of
clear directives to the contrary, it should be assumed that the axis of
the pole will be straight under normal, everyday loads. This means that
once the conductors are sagged, the guys will be adjusted so that the
pole top is returned to the position in which it was originally set
(regardless of whether or not the pole was raked when it was set). For
design purposes it will be assumed that there is no moment in the pole
under a no wind condition at the specified temperature (60 degrees
Farenheit if no other temperature is specified).
2.10 Grounding
It is apparent that concrete poles are sufficiently good conductors
that current will travel through the pole on its way to the ground.
Therefore the question is not whether to use the pole as a ground, but
how to best protect the pole, the operating system and people.
The reasonable choices are to use the steel in the pole as the
exclusive path to ground or to place a separate ground wire down either
the interior of a hollow pole or the exterior of any pole to carry some
of the current to ground. If a separate wire is used, it should be
bonded by any of several available alternatives to the steel within the
pole.
Bonding of hardware to concrete poles may or may not be necessary.
The two primary reasons for bonding hardware on wood structures is to
prevent pole fires and to control radio noise. Obviously pole fires are
not a concern with concrete poles and, since the hardware does not
loosen on concrete poles as it does on wood poles, radio noise is not a
problem. Some are concerned about damage to the pole if lightning should
travel through unbonded hardware and seek a path to ground through the
pole. Although there are recorded instances of small areas of concrete
being knocked loose due to lightning travelling this route, the damage
has always been minor, repairable and extremely rare. Most users appar-
ently find that the cost of bonding far outweighs any possible savings
in cost of repairing damage.
2.11 Bolted Connections
Most hardware is bolted to concrete poles with galvanized through
bolts.Good practice dictates that the bolts not overload the concrete
and that they be properly tightened. Also, low strength machine bolts
should be used. Bolts such as ANSI C135.1 or AS1M A307 are the types
commonly used in power line construction. Designing for use of lower
strength bolts helps to insure that the bolt loads do not exceed the
concrete bearing strength, and, since the low strength bolts are com-
monly available, lost bolts will be replaced with bolts of the correct
strength.
Recognizing that, in certain cases, higher strength bolts may be
required to carry the loads, the designer should check bolt to concrete
bearing loads. Sleeving of holes may be necessary as a means of reducing
concrete bearing stress.
To spread the concentrated loads under the head of the bolt and
under the nut, a square curved washer or other similar plate should be
placed between the head or nut and the pole. For A 307 bolts over 1 inch
in diameter or A 325 bolts over 3/4 inch in diameter, use either two 1/4
inch thick washers or a single 3/8 inch washer. Use of cast washers is
not recommended.
The turn-of-the-nut method for tightening bolts is superior to
torquing bolts and nuts, particularly when they are galvanized. In most
cases the bolt will be properly tightened if the nut is first tightened
snugly (snugly is defined as the degree of tightness caused by the
first impacting of an impact wrench) and then the nut receives an addi-
tional turn depending on bolt length as follows: Short bolts (length
less than 4 times the diameter) - 1/3 turn; Medium length bolts (length
between 4 and 8 diameters) - 1/2 turn; and long bolts (length greater
than 8 diameters) - 3/4 turn. Except near the ends of a spun pole that
does not have the end plugged, the strength of the pole is sufficient to
withstand any reasonable degree of bolt tightness. If a hollow spun pole
shows signs of cracking longitudinally when the bolts are tightened, a
decision can be made to tighten the bolts less or to use a steel sleeve
in the hole or to plug the end of the pole if that is where the cracks
are occurring.
It is recognized that low strength bolts are not usually preten-
sioned. However, this recommended tightening procedure will both keep
the bolts tight and protect the pole from damage by over tightening.
For shear connections in which the bolt will bear against the side
of the through hole, the maximum bolt bearing load will be determined by
multiplying the diameter of the bolt times the wall thickness times f .
In the absence of confirming tests, it is assumed that the bolt to
concrete interface carries all of the load and none of it is carried
through friction. For solid poles (or hollow poles with very thick
walls), a maximum effective wall thickness for calculating the bearing
load is 3 inches.
2.12 Climbing Attachments
The primary means of climbing concrete poles is with the same
removable ladder system used to climb steel poles. This system is
available from all producers. Many other options are available if the
user prefers. Per paragraph 1.13, the particular method to be used
should be discussed with the individual producers if it is other than
normal ladders since not all producers are prepared to offer all
options.
It is recommended that every individual part of the climbing system
where a lineman could conceivably place his foot should be able to with-
stand a static load of 750 pounds without permanent deformation. In
addition, any part of the climbing system which is considered to be a
safety attachment point should be able to withstand without breaking, a
load of 500 pounds dropped 18 inches.
2.13 Inserts
Inserts should be made of materials which will not deteriorate in
the environment in which they are placed. Care should be taken to insure
that the materials in the concrete, the insert and the bolt do not react
unfavorably with each other.
The anchorage of the inserts in the concrete should be such that
they do not pull loose under the design load or any unusual loads that
could conceivably be applied. Preferrably they are designed and anchored
in such a fashion that the bolts will break before the inserts pull
loose.
It is necessary to insure that bolts do not bottom out in the
insert. This may require coordination between user and/or one or more
suppliers.
2.14 Pole Splices
There are occasions in which it is desirable to connect two or more
pole parts together into a single pole. This is accomplished with some
form of a splice. Many different versions are available but they all
have one thing in common that needs to be addressed in the design. Since
large moments are generated at the mating ends of the pole sections, it
is necessary to insure that the reinforcing steel and the connection ap-
paratus are properly anchored as a part of the pole (see discussion in
section 2.6 Concrete/Steel Bond). Since the connections are made of
steel, reference to ASCE Steel Pole Design Guide for design and fab-
rication practices is recommended.
2.15 Pole Identification Data
All poles (including each piece of two piece poles) will have cer-
tain data indicated on a data plate or cast into the pole itself. At a
minimum, data to be shown will include:
Manufacturer's name.
Weight of pole (or weight of pole section).
Ultimate design moment (at ground line except for the top sec-
tion of a two piece pole where ultimate design moment will be
that at the connection).
Length of pole (or length of pole section).
Date of manufacture.
Identification number (to allow manufacturer to match a
specific pole with the manufacturing data records).
2.16 Attachments and Accessories
An almost unlimited variety of attachments and accessories are
appropriate for use with concrete poles. The design of steel attach-
ments, accessories and guys should follow applicable provisions of the
ASCE Steel Pole Design Guide. Pieces made of wood, fiberglass, aluminum
or other materials should be designed to meet established standards for
those materials as appropriate to the intended end use.
3.0 FABRICATION
3.1 General
Since one of the primary reasons for using concrete poles is to
achieve a long, maintenance free life as a support structure, it follows
that the concrete and other materials should reflect the use of the
finest available materials and workmanship. The design and manufacturing
techniques should make use of the latest and best thinking in terms of
producing durable and high strength concrete. Not only does the emphasis
on high strength produce lighter poles, the various techniques and pro-
cedures that produce high strength concrete also make for more durable
concrete.
The particular mix to be used is at the discretion of the manufac-
turer and should be considered as proprietary information. The manu-
facturer is responsible to the purchaser to demonstrate that finished
concrete is being provided that meets the strength, durability and aes-
thetic requirements of the specifications.
Only materials that are certified for specified properties shall be
used. Certification of all materials shall be checked and in-house labo-
ratory tests shall be performed on concrete ingredients before material
is used. Traceability of material tests and certifications shall be
maintained a minimum of 15 years after fabrication has been completed.
3.2 Concrete
3.2.1 Cement
Portland cement shall conform to the requirements of ASTM C150
or shall be portland blast-furnace slag cement or portland-pozzolan ce-
ment conforming to the requirements of ASTM C595.
The provisions of ACI 318 address situations where sulfate
resistant concrete is desirable. The use of Type II or Type V cements
are sometimes specified. It is important to recognize that sulfate
resistance is obtained in ways other than use of the two special types
of cement. A low C.,A content in the cement is required. Type II is
specified at less than 87. while Type V is specified at less than 57..
Cement with up to 10% of C^A can be used where the w/c ratio is 0.40 or
less. Many Type I cements meet these requirements. Also, the use of fly-
ash can make Type I cements more sulfate resistant than the special
types.
The user should specify the type of environment in which the
pole is to be used and allow the manufacturer to determine the best
mixes to be used.
3.2.2 Aggregates
The aggregates shall conform to ASTM C33 or C330 except that
the requirements for grading shall not apply. The manufacturer will
establish the gradation requirements for aggregates used in its own
concrete, based on testing and experience. However, the maximum size
aggregate shall be 3/4 of the clear spacing between reinforcing steel
and the surface of the pole or between individual bars or wires.
Certain aggregates have undesirable reactions with alkali
compounds. Tests and requirements to insure that aggregates are not
alkali reactive are covered by ASTM C227, C289 and C295.
3.2.3 Water
Mixing water shall be free of oils, organic matter and other
substances in amounts that may be harmful to concrete or reinforcement.
It shall not contain chloride ions in excess of 500 PPM or sulfate ions
in excess of 1000 PPM. In general, water from normal drinking supply
will meet the requirements necessary to produce quality concrete.
3.2.4 Admixtures
Chemical admixtures shall conform to ASTM C494. Air-entraining
agents shall conform to ASTM C260 and fly-ash or other pozzolanic admix-
tures shall be in accordance with ASTM C618. Admixtures shall not con-
tain chloride ions in quantities that will cause the total water soluble
chloride ion content of the concrete to exceed 0.06% of the weight of
the cement.
Other additives have been and will continue to be developed
which are desirable to use for various reasons such as combatting chlor-
ide attack or to color the concrete or to increase the strength and
durability of the pole. Use of such additives should be permitted as
long as the manufacturer submits satisfactory evidence to indicate that
proper testing has been done to insure adequate performance in the envi-
ronment in which the pole is to be used.
3.3 Reinforcing Steel
3.3.1 Prestress Steel
Uncoated 7 wire, stress relieved (including low relaxation)
strand will be in accordance with ASTM A416.
Uncoated, stress relieved wire will conform with ASTM A421.
For uncoated high strength steel bar the provisions of ASTM
A722 will apply.
Both galvanized and epoxy coated strands are manufactured but
experience is limited and it is likely that for properly
manufactured concrete poles, little, if any, benefit would
accrue from the use of coated strand in pole applications.
3.3.2 Reinforcing Bars
Deformed billet steel will be according to ASTM A615.
Deformed axle steel will comply with ASTM A617
Deformed low alloy steel will meet the provisions of ASTM
A706.
3.3.3 Spiral Wire
Cold drawn steel for the spiral wire will meet the provisions
of ASTM A82.
Deformed steel wire shall meet the provisions of ASTM A496
CONCRETE POLES DESIGN21
3.3.4 Welding
Welding of prestress strand is not permitted except at exposed
ends and only after the pretension has been released.
Mild steel reinforcing may be welded only near the ends of the
pole.
Circumferential steel may be welded as long as sufficient
strength remains after welding to meet design requirements.
Where welds are to carry structural loads, they must meet the
provisions of AWS Dl.l and develop suitable strength.
3.4 Accessories
Many accessories are available to be cast into or attached to
concrete poles. Materials should meet the provisions of the following
specifications:
Structural steel - ASTM A36, A572, A588, A633GrE.
Bolts and nuts - ANSI C135.1 or ASTM A307, A325
Welding - AWS Dl.l and D1.4
Malleable iron - ASTM A47
Zinc Alloy AC41A - ASTM B240
Plastic - ASTM D2133
Stainless steel - ASTM A666
PVC conduit - ASTM D2729
Alluminum alloy 355 - ASTM B26
Almag - ASTM B108
Hot dipped galvanizing - ASTM A123, A153 and A385. It shall
meet the provisions of A143 for the prevention of em-
brittlement. No double dips will be allowed.
Zinc-rich coating - MIL-P-2135, self curing, one component,
sacrificial.
3.5 Bolt Holes And Block-Outs
At the manufacturer's option, bolt holes and or block-outs may be
either cast, drilled or otherwise cut into the pole. Cutting of the
steel in the pole is acceptable as long as the manufacturer warrants
that the remaining strength in the pole meets or exceeds the design
requirements. When steel is cut, it is not necessary to provide any
particular protection from corrosion (except in the severe case where
the pole will be placed in or immediately adjacent to salt water) since
the probability of a detrimental level of corrosion occuring inside the
holes is very small.
3.6 Finishing
The manufacturer's basic responsibility is to provide poles that
meet or exceed the design strength requirements, that have a pleasing
and workmanlike appearance and that have smooth, dense and hard surfaces
that will not deteriorate in the elements. Patching will be acceptable
provided that the structural adequacy and the appearance of the product
are not impaired.
Many other custom services are available at a price. Items in this
category include but are not limited to such things as plugging either
or both ends of a hollow pole, providing a rain cap for the pole, cre-
ating a special textured finish for the pole, installing hardware items
on the poles in the factory, painting the pole, etc.
3.7 Fabrication Tolerances
Following is a list of tolerances that manufacturers usually meet
in the normal course of business. Stricter tolerances can usually be met
if that should be necessary, but tighter tolerances have a cost.
Length - Plus 12 inches and minus 6 inches.
Cross Section - Plus or minus 5% with a minimum 1/4 inch.
Wall Thickness - Plus 20% and minus 10% with a minimum of 1/4
inch. Note that the wall thickness requirements are nor-
mally determined for some critical section such as the
groundline. Other areas of the pole may not require as
much thickness. Therefore, greater minus tolerances are
acceptable in some areas of the pole where calculations
and/or tests indicate that the pole will perform satis-
factorily.
Weight - Plus 20% and minus 10% except that, with the approval
of the purchaser, poles heavier than 20% over the esti-
mated weight may be used. (Caution: Be certain that poles
are marked with actual or greater than actual weights to
avoid accidents during construction.)
Sweep - 1/4 inch per 10 feet of length.

Bolt Holes - Plus or minus 1/8 inch for holes within a bolting
group and plus or minus 1 inch for the centerline of the
group from the end of the pole. Bolt hole diameters will
be 1/8 inch greater than the bolt diameter.
Blockouts - Plus or minus 1 inch.
End Squareness - Plus or minus 1/2 inch per foot of diameter.
Reinforcement Placement - Plus or minus 1/4 inch for indi-
vidual pieces and plus or minus 1/8 inch for the centroid
of a group. Spacing of individual circumferential rein-
forcements may vary plus or minus 25% as long as the
total required quantity per foot is maintained.
3.8 Quality Control
3.8.1 General
The best assurance of a quality product is a consistent,
thorough testing program. It begins with testing the raw materials,
continues through the manufacturing process and finally includes tests
on the finished product. Mill certifications, test data and manufactur-
ing data should be filed and saved for a period of 15 years or longer.
3.8.2 Raw Materials
3.8.2.1 Cement
With each new load of cement, the mill certifications
should be checked to insure that the cement is not only within the ASTM
standards, but that the new load is similar to previous loads. Varia-
tions in the cement, even within the ASTM tolerances, can produce dif-
fering end results in the finished concrete.
3.8.2.2 Aggregate
Daily, the aggregate should be checked for moisture
content (ASTM C566) and a seive analysis should be run (ASTM C136).
Weekly, Specific Gravity (ASTM C127) and Absorption (ASTM C128) tests
should be performed.
3.8.2.3 Reinforcement
Mill certifications for the reinforcing steel should be
checked even though it is seldom that any problems are found.
3.8.3 Concrete
3.8.3.1 Wet Samples
Two primary tests are run on wet concrete. One of these
is Air Content (ASTM C231). For static cast poles this test should be
run on a daily basis. Since for spun poles most of the air is spun out
anyway, the test is of lesser importance and can probably be run on a
weekly basis as a means of keeping track of the uniformity of the
concrete
The other test for wet concrete is Unit Weight (ASTM
C138). This test should be run daily.
3.8.3.2 Cured Samples
ASTM C39, C172 and C192 as well as ACI 318 outline most
of the requirements for taking, curing and testing concrete samples.
(Note: Pad capping of samples will be acceptable if the manufacturer
presents satisfactory data correlating the results with standard ASTM
results.) These methods are very adequate for statically cast concrete,
but need some modifications for spun concrete.
In order to be most representative of the concrete in a
spun pole, the test samples must be spun and cured similarly to the pole
itself (i.e. spun with the same G forces, for the same time and cured
for the same times at the same temperatures). The manufacturer should be
prepared to demonstrate through full scale testing, that the strength of
the spun concrete samples are representative of the strength of the con-
crete in the pole.
If the manufacturer wishes to take advantage of the
higher strength of spun concrete in the pole, but still wishes to use
static cast samples as the primary manufacturing control, he may choose
to statistically correlate the static samples to pole strengths through
full scale testing. Thereafter, the static samples may be the primary
control, even though the sample test results are less than both the de-
sign strength and the actual concrete strength in the pole. The val-
idation process must be repeated at least every six months and upon the
request of the user.
The manufacturer may use the results of static cast
samples directly, without any correlation, but design strength may not
exceed the test results achieved according to the ASTM specifications.
In summary, it is recommended that the foregoing ASTM and
ACI specifications be followed with the exception that the samples
should be spun. Tests should be run either daily or for each 25 cubic
yards of concrete, whichever occurs more often. Each test should consist
of 4 cylinders. One is tested at the time of application of the pre-
stress, one at 7 days and one at the age at which f is determined. The
remaining sample is a spare in the event there is a^roblem with one of
the tests, or it can be saved for long term strength and durability in-
vestigations .
3.8.3.3 Meeting the Requirements of f
There is variability in the strength of both the concrete
and the concrete samples from batch to batch. In order to insure that
the concrete in the pole is almost always at least as strong as the
design strength (f ) it is necessary to manufacture concrete at an
average strength Chat is greater than the desired design strength. In
general, those manufacturers whose concrete has less variability can
manufacture to a lower average strength than can those with greater
variability. Determining the specific answers is a statistical problem
which is covered well in ACI 318. It should also be noted that in the
Commentary for ACI 318, it states that if the standard deviation is
determined using cement from only one source, the data is valid only for
cement from that source.
It should be pointed out that although concrete strengths
are usually determined and specified at 28 days, there is no hard and
fast rule that this particular age must be adhered to. Any other
reasonable time such as 56 days or 90 days may be specified by the
manufacturer but, per ACI 318, the test age shall be indicated in the
design drawings or specifications.
3.8.3.4 Use of Core Tests
In the case of spun poles which have thin walls and large
amounts of steel, it is not usually possible to take a core sample that
meets the ASTM requirements for overall size and dimensional ratios.
Therefore the use of core samples to determine concrete strength in spun
poles is inappropriate.
3.8.3.5 Requirements for Tensioning Steel
Most prestressing steel is tensioned with hydraulic rams
and the tension in the steel can be directly related to the hydraulic
pressure in the ram. Under the provisions of ACI 318 and PCI MNL 116
the rams must be calibrated with a direct measurement of the tendon
elongation and any differences in excess of 57. must be ascertained and
corrected.
3.9 Inspection
The purpose of the manufacturer's pole inspections is to insure
that the pole that is delivered to the construction forces has been
properly fabricated and shipped. The inspection is largely visual,
although a Schmidt Rebound Hammer can be utilized to give a rough idea
as to the uniformity of the strength of the concrete within a pole or
among a group of poles. It should not be expected to provide information
as to the absolute strength of the concrete.
A complete visual inspection would include:
Check the appearance of the surfaces of the pole for soundness
of the concrete and possible spalling of the concrete as well
as the color. Minor honey-combing, surface spalling and mold
seam-line bleeding is normally acceptable if the structural
strength is not impaired.
Check the straightness of the pole.
Be sure that the holes are properly located.
Insure that all items that are supposed to be attached to the
pole are indeed there and in good condition.
Note the existence of cracks, if any, and determine the
significance of such cracks.
The most common question to arise during inspections is the
significance of different types of cracks. It should be pointed out that
not all cracks are detrimental to the product and, indeed, poles are
expected to crack under certain conditions.
Hairline cracks, although they may be quite visible during times
when the pole has been wet and is surface dry, will probably not cause a
problem with long term durability. It is not likely that oxygen or
moisture will enter hairline cracks to cause degradation of either the
concrete or the steel.
If a crack is opened wide enough to accept an ordinary sheet of
paper (approximately 8 mils), it should be sealed to keep moisture out.
Wide cracks are unacceptable except within one or two feet of the bottom
of the pole which will be buried.
Cracks within one or two feet of the ends of poles may occur during
the detensioning process. Unless they are open cracks, they will not
cause structural problems. Those cracks that are buried will never be a
problem. If there is concern about sufficient moisture penetrating
cracks near the top of the pole to cause freeze/thaw damage, those
cracks can be waterproofed. Structurally, they are not a problem unless
a very large moment is to be applied to the end of the pole.
Longitudinal cracks (other than hairline cracks) are generally
undesirable. Circumferential cracks that do not close generally indicate
that the steel has been stretched beyond its elastic limit. If that is
determined to be the case, the pole will no longer perform the job for
which it was intended and should not be used.
4.0 LOAD TESTING
4.1 General
The ultimate check on the adequacy of the entire design and
manufacturing process is the full scale test. Poles may be tested in
either a horizontal or an upright position. If only the pole is being
tested, a horizontal test is entirely satisfactory and easier than an
upright test. In instances where the pole is being tested as a part of
an entire structure, it is likely that the entire assembled structure
will need to be tested in the vertical position.
A pole structure test should be considered a guide to good struc-
tural design practice. The contract documents shall designate the
organization that is responsible for the structural design specifica-
tions set forth in the contract. Overall responsibility for the struc-
ture testing should lie with one person representing this organization.
This person should be totally familiar with the structure's design and
approve the proposed procedure for structure testing. Also, this person
should be present at all times during the testing sequence and approve
each decision made during the process. The single person having these
responsibilities shall be called the Responsible Test Engineer.
In a traditional proof test, the test set up is made to conform to
the design conditions (i.e. only static loads are applied), the struc-
ture has level, well-designed foundations and the restraints at the load
points are the same as in the design model. This kind of test will
verify the adequecy of the main components of the structure and their
connections to withstand the static design loads specified for that
structure as an individual entity under controlled conditions. Proof
tests provide insight into actual stress distribution of unique config-
urations, fit-up verification, performance of the structure in a de-
flected position and other benefits. The test cannot confirm how the
structure will react in the transmission line where the loads may be
more dynamic, the foundations may be less than ideal and there is some
restraint from intact wires at the load points.
Paragraphs 4.2 through 4.14 present guidelines based on performing
a proof test using a test frame that has facilities to install a single
structure in an upright position, to load and monitor pulling lines in
the vertical, transverse and longitudinal directions and to measure
deflections.
Guidelines for a horizontal test are presented in Paragraph 4.15.
4.2 Foundations
It is unlikely that soil conditions at the test site will match
those at the installation site. Fortunately, if a few precautions are
taken, it will make very little difference to the test results.
4.2.1 Single Pole Structures
The primary consideration in designing and installing a single
pole foundation is to be able to control the ground line rotation so as
not to exceed the allowable design rotation. For test purposes, the
actual amount of rotation makes very little difference within a wide
range except under very heavy vertical loads where secondary moments can
be significant.
4.2.2 H-Frame Structures
Normally for an H-Frame, the critical point in the structure
is at the top of the cross brace. The magnitude of the ground line ro-
tation has very little effect on the structure at the top of the cross
brace. It is important, however, that the uplift and down-thrust be
adequately contained so that the structure does not suffer premature
failure due to unanticipated loads as a result of twisting the
structure.
4.3 Material
The test structure should be made of materials that are repre-
sentative of the materials that will be used in the production struc-
tures. Mill test reports and other test results should be available for
each important member in the test structure. All test structure material
should conform to the minimum requirements of the material specified in
design.
4.4 Fabrication
Fabrication of the prototype structure for testing shall be done
in the same manner and to the same tolerances and quality control as
will be done for the production structures.
4.5 Stress Determination
Stress determination methods, primarily strain gauging, may be used
to monitor the loads in individual components during testing.
4.6 Assembly and Erection
The test structure should be assembled in accordance with the manu-
facturer's recommendations. It may be desirable to specify detailed
methods or sequences for the test structure to prove the acceptability
of proposed field erection methods. Pick-up points designed into the
structure should be used during erection as part of the test procedure.
The completed structure should be set within the tolerances permitted in
the construction specification.
After the structure has been assembled, erected and rigged for
testing the user or his designated representative should review the
testing arrangement for compliance with the contract documents.
Safety guys or other safety features may be loosely attached to the
test structure and used to minimize consequential damage to the struc-
ture or to the testing equipment in the event of a premature failure,
especially if an overload test to failure is specified.
4.7 Test Loads
The loads to be applied to the test structure shall be the loads
specified for design and should include all appropriate overload fac-
tors. Wind-on-structure loads are normally applied in a test as concen-
trated loads at selected points on the structure in a pattern to make a
practical simulation of the in-service uniform loading. The magnitudes
and points of application of all design loads should be developed by the
structure designer and approved by the user before the test.
4.8 Load Application
Load lines shall be attached to the load points on the test struc-
ture in a manner that simulates the in-service load application as much
as possible. The attachment hardware for the test shall have the same
degrees of movement as the in-service hardware.
V-type insulator strings shall be loaded at the point where the
insulator strings intersect. If the insulators for the structures in
service are to be a style that will not support compression, it is
recommended that wire rope be use for simulated insulators in the test.
If compressed or cantilever insulators are planned for the structures,
members that will simulate those conditions should be used.
As the test structure deflects under load, load lines may change
their direction of pull. Adjustments must be made in the applied loads
so that the vertical, transverse and longitudinal vectors at the load
point in the deflected shape are the loads specified in the structure
loading schedule.
Test rigging should be designed with an adequate safety factor for
the specified test loads.
4.9 Loading Procedure
The number and sequence of load cases tested shall be specified by
the structure designer and approved by the user. It is recommended to
test first those load cases having the least influence on the results of
successive tests. Secondly, the sequence should simplify the operations
necessary to carry out the test program.
Loads are normally incremented to 50, 75, 90 and 100 percent of the
maximum specified load and to the load at which the concrete first
cracks (usually in the range of 50 to 60 percent). If the test facility
does not have the capability for continous recording of loads, an ad-
ditional increment to 95 percent may be added. After each increment is
applied there shall be a hold to allow time for reading deflections and
to permit the engineers observing the test to check for signs of struc-
tural distress. The maximum load for each load case shall be held for
five minutes.
Loads should be removed between load cases except that in some non-
critical situations, with the permission of the Responsible Test
Engineer, the load may be adjusted as required for the next load case.
Unloading shall be controlled to avoid overstressing any members.
4.10 Load Measurement
All applied loads shall be measured as close to the point of
application to the test structure as possible. Loads shall be measured
through a suitable arrangement of strain devices or by predetermined
dead weights. The effects of pulley friction should be minimized. Load
measurement by measuring the load in a single part of a multi-part block
and tackle arrangement should be avoided. Strain devices shall be used
in accordance with manufacturer's recommendations and calibrated prior
to, and after the conclusion of the testing sequence.
4.11 Deflections
Structure deflections under load shall be measured and recorded.
Points to be monitored shall be selected to verify the deflections
predicted by the design analysis. Deflection readings shall be made for
the before-load and load-off conditions as well as at all intermediate
holds during loading. All deflections shall be referenced to common base
readings, such as the initial plumb positions, taken before any test
loads are applied.
Upon release of test loads after a critical load case test, a
structure will normally not return fully to its undeflected starting
position. The testing specifications should state how much deviation is
acceptable.
4.12 Failures
Following the provisions of Paragraph 1.3, the decision will have
already been made as to whether failure occurs when there is a per-
manently deformed structure or when the structure collapses.
If a premature structural failure occurs, the cause of the failure
mechanism shall be determined and corrected. Failed and damaged members
shall be replaced. The load case that caused the failure shall be re-
peated. Load cases previously completed need not be repeated.
After the structure has successfully withstood all load cases, and
assuming that the structure was not tested to destruction, the structure
shall be dismantled and all members inspected.
4.13 Disposition of Test Structure
The test specification should state what use, if any, may be made
of the test structure after the test is completed. Undamaged components
are usually accepted for use in the line. If an overload test to failure
has been performed, caution should be exercised in accepting the parts
that appear to be undamaged since they may have been overloaded.
4.14 Report
The testing agency shall furnish a test report in the number of
copies required by the job specifications. The report should include:
a. The designation and description of the structure tested.
b. The name of the utility that will use the structure.
c. The name of the organization that specifed the loading and test
arrangement of the structure.
d. The name of the Responsible Test Engineer.
e. The name of the fabricator.
f. A brief description and the location of the test facility.
g. The names and affiliations of the test witnesses.
h. The dates of testing each load case.
i. Design and detail drawings of the structure including any
changes made during the testing program.
j. A rigging diagram with detail of the point of attachment to the
structure.
k. Calibration records of the load measuring devices.
1. A loading diagram for each load case tested.
m. A tabulation of deflections for each load case tested.
n. In the case of a failure:
Photographs of the failure.
Loads at the time of failure.
A brief description of the failure.
The remedial actions taken.
The physical dimensions of the failed members.
Test coupon reports of failed members, if required.
o. Photographs of the overall testing arrangement and rigging.
p. Air temperature, wind speed and direction, any precipitation and
other pertinent meteorological data.
q. Mill test reports.
r. Additional information specified by the Purchaser.
4.15 Horizontal Testing
4.15.1 General
Horizontal testing is primarily used to test free standing
single pole structures. A majority of the previous paragraphs of this
section apply also to horizontal testing. A full scale nondestructive
horizontal test should verify the structural integrity of the pole to
withstand the maximum design stresses. All critical points along the
pole shaft should be tested to maximum design load.
4.15.2 Test Arrangement
The structure is normally placed in a horizontal position as
shown in Figure 4.1 or 4.2. One or more locations along the shaft will
be selected as the load pulling points. The purpose of the load pull(s)
will be to duplicate maximum design stress at all critical points in the
pole shaft based on the cross sectional geometry of the shaft and yield
strength of the materials. (Critical points are those points on the
shaft with the highest stress.) The design moment for the shaft will be
less than the test moment. Additional bending moment is needed to
account for axial, shear and torsional stresses that cannot be applied
due to the test configuration.
4.15.3 Equipment Used in the Test
The load(s) are pulled at predetermined point(s) along the
shaft by crane(s) or other suitable pulling structures. Loads shall be
determined with calibrated load cell(s) located in the pulling line. A
transit should be set up away from the test structure and used to make
the deflection measurements.
4.15.4 Test Procedure for Pole Test - Vertical Pull (Fig. 4-1)
4.15.4.1 Dead Load Pickup
Before the test begins, the actual weight of the
structure should be known. When in a horizontal position, the dead
weight of the structure will cause a bending moment in the pole shaft.
The procedure should consist of picking the structure up
at the pull point(s) to determine loads while the other end just rests
on the compression pad. The calculated reaction(s) at the pull point(s)
should correspond fairly closely to the actual load cell reading in
order for the remainder of the test to be considered accurate.
4.15.4.2 Design Load Test
With the structure in a horizontal position and the dead
load pickup completed, loading should continue to engage the hold down
strap. Incremental loads should then be pulled, as indicated in the test
requirements, with deflection readings being taken at predetermined
points along the structure and the uplift and compression points. Each
incremental load will be held for the required time before proceeding to
the next load increment. After testing the structure, it should be
unloaded to "Dead Load Pickup" so that final deflection readings can be
taken. A final inspection will be made on the shaft for any damage.
4.15.5 Test Procedure for Pole Test - Horizontal Pull (Fig. 4-2)
The pole is placed between the reaction blocks and locked in
place. One or more wheeled support devices shall be used to support the
weight of the free end of the pole. An initial load of at least 10% of
the maximum test load should be applied to "set" the pole into the
blocking. When the "setting" load is removed, the zero position is then
established from which to measure subsequent deflections.
It is very important for obtaining accurate results, that the
wheeled support device operate with a minimum of friction. Ideally the
set-up includes steel wheels with bearings or steel rollers, either of
which roll on steel plate. All of the rolling surfaces must be kept free
of debris.
5.0 Assembly and Erection
5.1 General
As a point of reference, spun, prestressed concrete poles are
handled during construction very similarly to wood poles. As with poles
of other types, they can be damaged or broken if they are abused, but
they will withstand much more abuse than steel poles and roughly the
equivalent abuse of wood poles. One advantage of concrete poles is that
if they are damaged during construction, it is usually obvious, whereas
there is the possibility of cracking a wood pole and never knowing that
it is cracked. Be sure to check construction drawings for any special

handling instructions.
5.2 Handling
One of the most critical handling phases for any pole is lifting it
clear of all supports while it is in the horizontal position because the
moment generated by its own weight may be significant. Since concrete
poles tend to be heavier than other types, more attention must be paid
to the manner in which they are lifted.
Some poles are designed to be lifted with a single point pick at
the center of gravity and some require multiple point picks. It is the
manufacturer's responsibility to provide the user with lifting instruc-
tions for their particular poles and it is the user's responsibility to
insure that those instructions are relayed to the construction forces.
5.3 Hauling
Common sense is important in determining good hauling practices. A
particular set-up that may be highly acceptable for hauling over a
smooth paved highway may be entirely inappropriate for hauling the same
load over a plowed and frozen field. In general, no more than 1/3 of the
length of the pole should be unsupported and, if the terrain conditions
indicate that the pole will be handled roughly, the unsupported length
should be less than that.
In those instances where hauling equipment cannot be driven ad-
jacent to the setting location, it may be necessary to drag the pole
along the ground. Concrete poles will withstand this abuse as well as
wood poles. If hardware is already attached to the pole, it will be
necessary to secure the pole in such a manner as to keep it from rolling
around its longitudinal axis as it is dragged. As is expected with the
dragging of any pole, common sense is required to avoid damage to the
pole.
The construction forces are responsible for the proper handling of
poles and if they do not have any handling instructions or if the in-
structions are unclear, they are responsible for contacting the user for
the necessary information.
5.4 Framing
Concrete poles are generally framed like wood poles, (i.e. with the
use of through bolts) but they will be easier to frame than wood poles
because the holes can be more accurately drilled. Bolts should be tight-
ened according to the assembly drawings but in the absence of any tight-
ening instructions, reference to paragraph 2.11 of this guide and some
common sense will work well. In most cases, the bolts will generally
break before any damage is done to the poles. Near the ends of the pole,
however, it is possible to tighten the bolts to the point where longitu-
dinal cracks develop. If this occurs, loosen the bolts slightly but be
sure they are still snug.
Again, normal construction techniques such as raising the pole
with a single choker at the erection pick point will present no pro-
blems. The primary caution is that if the pole has to be moved and the
entire pole is lifted clear of the ground, the same procedures used in
unloading must be followed again.
5.5 Field Drilling
Most concrete poles will be sent from the factory with the neces-
sary holes already in place. Occasionally, however, it will be necessary
to drill one or more holes in the field. This can be easily accomplished
with a rotary hammer drill, a carbide tipped bit of the appropriate size
and a cutting torch. First determine which of the following two types of
poles is to be drilled and then follow the appropriate set of instruc-
tions .
5.5.1 Full Length Reinforcing Steel
Some manufacturers determine the amount of steel required by
the ground line design moment capacity and carry that quantity of ten-
dons throughout the entire length of the pole even though less steel
could be used in the upper parts of the pole. Since holes are normally
drilled in the upper parts of a pole where there is a considerable
excess of steel, it is permissible to cut limited numbers of strands in
the drilling process. CAUTION - DO NOT DRILL HOLES NEAR THE GROUND LINE
FOR POLES USED IN SINGLE POLE TANGENT APPLICATIONS. DO NOT ERILL NEAR
THE LOWER END OF THE TOP SECTION OF A TWO PIECE POLE AND DO NOT DRILL
NEAR A CROSSBRACE ATTACHMENT IN H-FRAME CONSTRUCTION. These are the
areas for which the steel requirements were determined and cutting the
steel in these areas may weaken the pole below its design requirement.
If there is any question as to the advisability of cutting tendons,
contact the pole manufacturer for guidance. By referring to the manufac-
turer's drawings, it may be possible to find areas where drilling can
occur without cutting prestressing steel.
Once it has been determined that it is permissible to drill
the pole, mark the location and drill with a rotary hammer drill and a
carbide tipped bit. If steel is struck, stop drilling and burn the steel
with the cutting torch. Then continue drilling. For best accuracy, mark
the pole on both sides and drill both sides toward the middle. Mold
marks, which are usually visible on the pole, make handy reference
points from which to locate the hole on the opposite face of the pole.
5.5.2 Drop Out Reinforcing Steel
As the need for steel decreases toward the top of the pole,
some manufacturers stop a portion of the steel by dropping the tendons
out through the side wall of the pole or they may install additional
steel in critical areas by the use of post tensioned strand. In these
methods, there is not the excess of steel near the pole tops and the
steel should not be cut. This does not preclude drilling these poles. It
means, however, that care should be used to insure that steel is not
cut. Since there is less steel in pole tops of this type, there is more
space between the tendons and it is easier to miss the tendons during
the drilling process but cutting a strand means that the pole may be
weakened below its design strength.
The actual drilling of these poles is accomplished in the same
manner as for the previous poles. A cutting torch will still be neces-
sary because even though the tendons are to be avoided, there is still a
high probability of having to cut through the spiral steel.
5.5.3 Circumferential Steel
Cutting of circumferential steel is difficult to avoid, but is
acceptable at any time unless the pole is to be subjected to severe tor-
sional loads.
5.6 Field Cutting
There will be occasions in which it is desirable to shorten a pole
in the field. This can be accomplished without damage to the pole by
cutting with a small, hand held concrete saw and an abrasive cut off
blade. The blade will cut both the concrete and the steel. For hollow
spun poles, carefully mark a straight line around the circumference and
saw along the mark.
5.7 Erection
Concrete poles are erected in the same manner as other poles.
Assuming that the poles were properly placed before they were framed, a
single point pick with a choker is usually permissible. The choker
should be placed well above the center of gravity unless the drawings
indicate that the pole can be single point picked at the center of gra-
vity. This means that as the pole is raised from the horizontal, much of
the weight stays on the ground until the pole is nearly in the vertical
position. Once it reaches the vertical position, it will not be damaged
by lifting its full weight with a single point pick.
Because the surface of a concrete pole is smooth and hard, safe
operations require use of the same choker techniques as for steel poles.
IMPROPER USE OF CHOKERS CAN RESULT IN THE POLE SLIPPING AND CAUSING
INJURY OR PROPERTY DAMAGE. Chokers must be tight around the pole. If the
chokers are slippery, they may be padded with a sticky material. A
positive stop against sliding can be provided by attaching the choker
below a solid piece of hardware (Note that a ladder clip does NOT
qualify as solid hardware).
Guyed poles, whether or not they are raked, should be initially set
in what ever positions they will be under normal every-day loads. This
means that regardless of what ever bending and flexing occurs during
construction and long term use, once the conductor installation is com-
plete and the guys are adjusted under normal everyday loads, the top of
the pole should be in the same location as it was originally set.
5.8 Climbing
Concrete poles are climbed in the same manner as steel poles. Just
as most steel poles are climbed with the standard climbing ladders, all
of the manufacturers provide attachments to concrete poles to accomodate
the same ladders. Other climbing arrangements are also available and may
have been selected by the user.

5.9 Field Inspections
Questions about cracks in concrete poles are frequent. It should be
realized that although some types of cracks may be detrimental, concrete
poles are expected to crack under certain conditions.
Circumferential cracks that do not close when the pole is either
properly supported on the ground or is erected, indicate a pole in which
the steel has been stretched beyond its elastic limit and it should be
rejected. Circumferential cracks may open during construction or during
severe service conditions but they usually all close once the severe
loads are removed, and the pole has not been harmed as long as they do
close. Due to the process of releasing the tension on the steel in
prestressed poles, circumferential cracks may develop within a few
inches of either end of the pole. Those at the bottom end may be ig-
nored. Those near the top should be weatherproofed with epoxy or other
coatings, if they are not tightly closed.
Longitudinal cracks are less common. At either end, they may have
been caused by the application of prestress loads. If longer longitu-
dinal cracks occur near the bottom of the pole, they have likely been
caused by stacking the poles. Longer longitudinal cracks near the top
may be caused by over tightening of the through bolts. As long as the
cracks are only hairline cracks, as opposed to open cracks, they are not
detrimental to the long life of the pole.
Any open cracks should be investigated for the cause and a deter-
mination should be made as to the structural adequacy of the pole. If it
is decided that the pole is to remain in service, the cracks should be
filled and sealed from the weather to prevent further degradation of the
pole.
6.0 Quality Assurance
6.1 General
Quality assurance is the responsibility of the user. At the time of
bidding, user should specify the degree of perfection he desires in de-
sign, fabrication, structure testing and field construction. The extent
of the quality assurance program may vary based on initial investiga-
tions, the user's experience, the manufacturer's experience and past
performance, and the degree of reliability required for the specific
job.
The following guidelines may serve in preparing specifications
which include a quality assurance program.
6.2 Design and Drawings
The quality assurance specification should indicate the degree of
involvment by user, and the procedure for review of the design concept,
detailed calculations, stress analyses and the manufacturer's drawings.
Stress analyses of the main structure and all of its component parts,
including all attachments and connections, should be considered. The
fabricator's drawings need checking to ensure they contain proper and
sufficient information for fabrication and erection in accordance with
the requirements of the user's specification. (Refer to Section 2.0
Design.)
6.3 Fabrication
6.3.1 Materials
The specification should include the requirement for review
and agreement on the manufacturer's material specifications, his sources
of supply, material identification, storage, traceability procedures and
acceptance of certified mill test reports. (Refer to Sections 3.2 Con-
crete and 3.3 Reinforcing Steel.)
6.3.2 Material Preparation
The user may specify that either he or his agent inspect the
manufacturer's equipment and process facility to ascertain that the
procedures are satisfactory, the tolerances are within specified limits
and the existing quality control program is satisfactory. (Refer to
Section 3.8 Testing.)
6.3.3 Nondestructive Testing
The specification should indicate the requirements for ac-
ceptance of the type and procedure of all nondestructive testing and
inspection programs employed during each step in the fabrication
process.
The user may specify that the manufacturer furnish copies of
testing and inspection reports. The user may also perform independent
random sample testing to verify results of manufacturer's testing.
(Refer to Section 3.9 Inspection.)
6.3.4 Tolerances
It is necessary that acceptable fabrication tolerances be
specified and agreed upon by the purchaser and manufacturer. Good
fabrication quality is an important factor in minimizing field con-
struction and performance problems. (Refer to Section 3.7 Fabrication
Tolerances.)
6.3.5 Surface Coatings
Where painting or other coloring is required, the system,
procedures and methods of application should be acceptable to both the
user and the manufacturer. Also the system should be suitable for both
the product and its intended exposure.
If galvanizing of accessories is required, the procedure and
facilities should be agreed upon by the user and the manufacturer. After
galvanizing, nondestructive testing may be specified to ensure that
there have been no adverse changes to the finished product.
When metallizing is required, the procedures and facilities
should be in accordance with coating supplier's recommendations and
acceptable to both user and manufacturer.
6.3.6 Shipping
Prior to the start of fabrication, the user should review the
fabricator's methods and procedures for packaging and shipping.
When receiving materials, all product should be inspected for
shipping damage prior to accepting delivery. If damage is apparent, the
user should immediately notify the delivering carrier. If the shipments
are FOB destination, making the manufacturer responsible for correcting
damages, the user should notify the manufacturer of any damage and co-
operate with him in filing damage claims with the carrier.
User is also responsible for checking to see that all mater-
ials listed on the accompanying packing lists are accounted for. Where a
discrepancy exists, both the carrier and the manufacturer should be
notified.
6.3.7 Quality Control
A review should be made and agreement reached on all quality
control programs, organizational setups and procedures. It is necessary
that rejection criteria be established and agreed upon prior to the
start of any fabrication. (Refer to Section 3.8 Quality Control.)
6.4 Structure Testing
Structure tests may be specified. The specification should indicate
the position of the structure in the test, the test procedures, methods
of load application, the load for each loading condition, and who is to
be the Responsible Test Engineer. Agreement is necessary on all testing
equipment and metering devices used for calibration.
All post-testing inspection, nondestructive testing and evaluation
procedures should be acceptable to the user. The report of the structure
testing should determine the acceptability of the structure as speci-
fied.
6.5 Field Construction
The user should review proposed construction quality control pro-
grams and procedures to determine that all phases of field construction
will comply with the requirements as specified in the user's specifi-
cations and the manufacturer's designs and drawings; and to assure that
adequate records are being maintained during construction such that
there will be sufficient data provided to accept the completed work.
Appendix A
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1) ACI Committee 318, "Building Code Requirements for Reinforced
Concrete (ACI 318-83)", American Concrete Institute, Detroit, 1983,
111 pp.
2) ACI Committee 318R, "Commentary on Building Code Requirements for
Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318R-83)", American Concrete Institute,
Detroit, 1983, 155 pp.
3) National Electrical Safety Code, 1987 Edition, American National
Standards Institute ANSI C2, Institute of Electrical and Electronic
Engineers, Inc., New York, NY.
4) Guidelines for Transmission Line Structural Loading, Committee on
Electrical Transmission Structures, American Society of Civil
Engineers, New York, 1984, 166 pp.
5) Standard Specifications for Structural Supports for Highway Signs,
Luminaires and Traffic Signals, AASHTO Subcommittee on Bridges and
Structures, 1986.
6) EIA-RS-222-C, Electronic Industries Association Standard, March
1960.
7) PCI Design Handbook, Precast and Prestressed Concrete, Third
Edition. Prestressed Concrete Institute, Chicago, 1985.
8) PCI Committee on Prestressed Concrete Poles, "Guide Specification
for Prestressed Concrete Poles", PCI Journal, V. 27. No. 3, May-
June 1982, pp. 18-29.
9) PCI Committee on Prestressed Concrete Poles, "Guide for Design of
Prestressed Concrete Poles", PCI Journal, V. 28, No. 3, May-June
1983. pp. 22-87.
10) Task Committee on Steel Transmission Poles, "Design of Steel
Transmission Pole Structures", Committee on Analysis and Design of
Structures, ASCE Structural Division, 1978.
11) Manual for Quality Control for Plants and Production of Precast and
Prestressed Concrete Products, MNL-116-85, Prestressed Concrete
Institute, Chicago, 1985.
12) "State of the Art - Prestressed Concrete Poles", PCI Journal, Vol.
29, No. 5, Sept-Oct 1984.
41
Appendix C
DEFINITIONS
CASTING METHODS
Precast Member - A member which is cast in some location other than
the location in which it is to be used. All poles are likely to be pre-
cast.
Spun Cast Member - A member cast in a mold that spins during the
consolidation phase. The resulting centrifugal force causes the pole to
be hollow and the concrete to be highly consolidated. Since this force
is very large, dry (low water/cement ratio) concrete can be consolidated
in this manner, usually with some of the water spinning out to reduce
the water/cement ratio even further. Because spun concrete has a lower
than normal water/cement ratio and a higher than normal density it is
much stronger and more durable than static cast concrete. The end result
is that the member can be lighter because less concrete is required when
it is stronger. The concrete is much more impermeable and, therefore,
more durable.
Static Cast Member - A member which is cast in a mold that does not
move during the casting and consolidating of the concrete (except for
the possibility of vibrating the mold as an aid in consolidating the
concrete).
LOADINGS
Maximum (Ultimate) Design Load - The load that the pole is designed
to resist. This load is the maximum service load multiplied by some
overload factor. The user must select not only the load and the load
factor, but also must determine whether the pole is to resist the maxi-
mum design load without permanent unacceptable deformation (damage) or
without failure (collapse). A stronger pole is required to resist
without permanent deformation than without collapse.
Maximum Service Load - The maximum load that the pole is ever
expectedto encounter (exclusive of overload factors). This load may be
used for checking deflections and clearances.
Normal Everyday (Frequent Condition) Load - A load that a pole may
be expected to encounter on a frequent basis. User should specify the
normal everyday load.
MOMENTS
ultimate Moment - Depending on the user's choice as to whether the
pole must resist permanent deformation or collapse, this is the moment
at which the chosen one of these events occurs. The moment capacity at
each section must be equal to or greater than the ultimate moment pro-
duced in the section by the maximum design loads.
45
Damage Moment - The maximum allowable moment at a section without
creating permanent, unacceptable deformation in the section. Note that
under one of the possible assumptions in the previous definition, damage
moment and ultimate moment may be the same.
Cracking Moment - The moment at a section when the concrete first
cracks. Although this moment is of little significance from a design and
use standpoint, it is useful in helping to determine the overall accu-
racy of the design and manufacturing processes. During testing of a
completed pole, the concrete should not crack earlier than the antici-
pated cracking moment.
No Concrete Tension Moment - The maximum moment a section can
withstand without allowing the concrete to go into tension. The magni-
tude of the pretensioning forces is the primary controlling factor
affecting this moment. The No Concrete Tension moment capacity of any
section must be equal to or greater than the moment caused at that
section by the normal everyday loads.
REINFORCEMENT
Ordinary Reinforced Concrete - Concrete in which the reinforcing
steel(normallymildsteelrebar) is simply placed in its designed
location. It is not used to impart a compressive force across the con-
crete section.
Partially Prestressed Concrete - Concrete in which some of the
reinforcing steel is conventionally placed and some of it is stretched
in such a manner as to impart a compressive stress in the concrete. This
results in a member in which the concrete has some compressive force
under a no-load condition, but not as much as a fully prestressed mem-
ber, with the end result that cracks will appear at a larger moment than
in an ordinary reinforced member but at a smaller moment than in a fully
prestressed member.
Prestressed Concrete - Concrete in which all of the primary rein-
forcing steel is used to impart a compressive stress to the concrete
before the member is subjected to the loads it was designed to handle.
Thus, under bending loads, a much larger load must be applied to the
member before the internal compressive stress in the concrete is over-
come and the concrete finally goes into tension and cracks. Since larger
loads are required to open cracks, the cracks are open less often (if at
all) during the life of the member and the member does not deteriorate
due to the elements. Further, when the loads are removed from the mem-
ber, the cracks close tightly due to the tension in the steel. Prestres-
sing steel is special, very high strength steel (either strand or wire)
which is stretched before it is bonded to the concrete. After it is
bonded to the concrete, it is the spring action of the steel that
squeezes the concrete and causes its initial compressive stress (pre-
stress).
DEFINITION 47
TENSIONING
Post Tensioned Member - A prestress member in which the concrete is
poured and cured without tensioning the steel. Usually ducts are cast
into the concrete to keep the steel from bonding to the concrete or to
provide a space for placement of the steel after the concrete is cured.
In this method, the steel is initially stretched against the cured con-
crete itself rather than against the molds or bulkheads. The advantage
of post tensioning is that bulkheads or heavy stressing molds are not
required. The disadvantage is that it requires more work in manufac-
turing.
Pretensioned Member - A member in which the prestressing steel is
stretched against bulkheads or the mold while the concrete is cured and
forms its bond with the steel. When the steel is cut loose from the end
supports, the bond between the concrete and steel allows the steel to
impart the prestressing load to the concrete.

Concrete Poles

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Concrete Poles

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Guide for the

American Society of Civil Engineers

A Task Committee of the Committee on Electrical Transmission Structures was

Concrete Pole Task Committee

This guide presents the generally accepted procedures for the

must be designed significantly stronger in order to provide the same de-

that the pole can be handled in a normal manner during construction,

When using a combination of prestressed and non-prestressed

Sweep - 1/4 inch per 10 feet of length.

it is cracked. Be sure to check construction drawings for any special

have been selected by the user.

You might also like