Telecommunication Cell Tower Most Common Alternatives Overview

Al-jassani Azhar Abdulkareem Majeed; Al-suraifi Inam Jabbar Hraba

doi:doi:10.11648/j.ajce.20170505.12

| Peer-Reviewed

Telecommunication Cell Tower Most Common Alternatives Overview

Al-jassani Azhar Abdulkareem Majeed, Al-suraifi Inam Jabbar Hraba

Published in American Journal of Civil Engineering (Volume 5, Issue 5)

Received: 24 June 2017 Accepted: 3 August 2017 Published: 25 August 2017

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

The main goal of this review is to decide which alternatives could be the most proper structural system type for 36 m tower height and practical specified deflection limit “Torsional Effect” at the tower top less than 0.5 degree to be used in a rural zone near of Budapest City, Hungary based on the most common control aspects (Aesthetical, Economical and Statical aspect) which influences the decision making and the selection process. According to that purpose a different tower types have been reviewed in detail (Lattice towers, Monopole and Guyed mast) in order to decide which alternatives could be selected for further investigations based on the limitations and requirements of the present case of study, where every alternative has it features, benefits and Specific limits of application. The resulted decision based on the presented study was that the most proper alternatives according to the specified information are the lattice towers (Square & Triangular) and the Monopole which deserve to be selected for further investigations.

Published in	American Journal of Civil Engineering (Volume 5, Issue 5)
DOI	10.11648/j.ajce.20170505.12
Page(s)	268-281
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2017. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Cell Tower, Lattice, Monopole, Telecommunication, Antenna, Guyed Tower

References

[1]	Abdulaqder M. Tah, Kamiran M. Alsilevanai, Mustafa Özakça (4^th February 2017), “Comparison of Various Bracing System for Self-Supporting Steel Lattice Structure Towers”, Turkey. American Journal of Civil Engineering. Vol. 5, No. 2, 2017, pp. 60-68, ISSN: 2330-8729 (Print); ISSN: 2330-8737 (Online).
[2]	Siddesha H., 2010, “Wind Analysis of Microwave Antenna Towers”, India. International Journal of applied engineering research, Dindigul ISSN-0976-4259.
[3]	Riya Joseph & Jobil Varghese, November 2015, “Analysis of Monopole Communication Tower”, International Journal of Engineering studies and technical approach ISSN – 2395-0900 Volume 01, No. 11.
[4]	Marcel Isandro R. de Oliveira, José Guilherme S. da Silva, April-June 2007, “Structural Analysis of Guyed Steel Telecommunication Towers for Radio Antennas", Vol. XXIX, No. 2.
[5]	Roy Butler, July 2014, “Choosing a Wind Turbine Tower”, Issue #161.
[6]	Haiyan Long, Geir Moe and Tim Fischer, December 2011, “Lattice Towers for Bottom-Fixed Offshore Wind Turbines in the Ultimate Limit State: Variation of Some Geometric Parameters” J. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng 134(2), 021202.
[7]	Prof. S. R. Satish Kumar and Prof. A. R. Santha Kumar, “Design of Steel Structures”, India. Indian Institute of Technology Madras.
[8]	American tower. Collocation Considerations & Best Practices for Financial Services Orgs. A structural engineering perspective. Available at: http://www.americantower.com/Assets/uploads/files/PDFs/American_Tower_Financial_Services_Collocation_Best_Practices.pdf. Accessed 2017.
[9]	European Committee for Standardization, 2005. “Eurocode 3 design of steel structures part 3–1: towers, masts and chimneys towers and masts”, Brussels.
[10]	TIA/EIA-222-G, (Draft). Structural Standards for Antenna Supporting Structures and Antennas.
[11]	Silva, J. D., Vellasco, P. D. S., Andrade, S. D., & Oliveira, M. D. (2002). “An evaluation of structural steel design systems for transmission and telecommunication towers”. In Proceedings of International IASS Symposium «Lightweight Structures in Civil E».
[12]	Oliveira, M., Silva, J., Vellasco, P., Andrade, S., & Lima, L. (2007). “Structural analysis of guyed steel telecommunication towers for radio antennas”, Journal of the Brazilian Society Of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering, 29, 185-195.
[13]	Monopole Towers Manufacturer - Monopoles Tower Manufacturer from Delhi. 2016. Available: http://www.galvanisedstore.com/monopole-towersmanufacturer.html Accessed 28.12.2016.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Al-jassani Azhar Abdulkareem Majeed, Al-suraifi Inam Jabbar Hraba. (2017). Telecommunication Cell Tower Most Common Alternatives Overview. American Journal of Civil Engineering, 5(5), 268-281. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajce.20170505.12

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Al-jassani Azhar Abdulkareem Majeed; Al-suraifi Inam Jabbar Hraba. Telecommunication Cell Tower Most Common Alternatives Overview. Am. J. Civ. Eng. 2017, 5(5), 268-281. doi: 10.11648/j.ajce.20170505.12

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Al-jassani Azhar Abdulkareem Majeed, Al-suraifi Inam Jabbar Hraba. Telecommunication Cell Tower Most Common Alternatives Overview. Am J Civ Eng. 2017;5(5):268-281. doi: 10.11648/j.ajce.20170505.12

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ajce.20170505.12,
  author = {Al-jassani Azhar Abdulkareem Majeed and Al-suraifi Inam Jabbar Hraba},
  title = {Telecommunication Cell Tower Most Common Alternatives Overview},
  journal = {American Journal of Civil Engineering},
  volume = {5},
  number = {5},
  pages = {268-281},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ajce.20170505.12},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajce.20170505.12},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ajce.20170505.12},
  abstract = {The main goal of this review is to decide which alternatives could be the most proper structural system type for 36 m tower height and practical specified deflection limit “Torsional Effect” at the tower top less than 0.5 degree to be used in a rural zone near of Budapest City, Hungary based on the most common control aspects (Aesthetical, Economical and Statical aspect) which influences the decision making and the selection process. According to that purpose a different tower types have been reviewed in detail (Lattice towers, Monopole and Guyed mast) in order to decide which alternatives could be selected for further investigations based on the limitations and requirements of the present case of study, where every alternative has it features, benefits and Specific limits of application. The resulted decision based on the presented study was that the most proper alternatives according to the specified information are the lattice towers (Square & Triangular) and the Monopole which deserve to be selected for further investigations.},
 year = {2017}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Telecommunication Cell Tower Most Common Alternatives Overview
AU  - Al-jassani Azhar Abdulkareem Majeed
AU  - Al-suraifi Inam Jabbar Hraba
Y1  - 2017/08/25
PY  - 2017
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajce.20170505.12
DO  - 10.11648/j.ajce.20170505.12
T2  - American Journal of Civil Engineering
JF  - American Journal of Civil Engineering
JO  - American Journal of Civil Engineering
SP  - 268
EP  - 281
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2330-8737
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajce.20170505.12
AB  - The main goal of this review is to decide which alternatives could be the most proper structural system type for 36 m tower height and practical specified deflection limit “Torsional Effect” at the tower top less than 0.5 degree to be used in a rural zone near of Budapest City, Hungary based on the most common control aspects (Aesthetical, Economical and Statical aspect) which influences the decision making and the selection process. According to that purpose a different tower types have been reviewed in detail (Lattice towers, Monopole and Guyed mast) in order to decide which alternatives could be selected for further investigations based on the limitations and requirements of the present case of study, where every alternative has it features, benefits and Specific limits of application. The resulted decision based on the presented study was that the most proper alternatives according to the specified information are the lattice towers (Square & Triangular) and the Monopole which deserve to be selected for further investigations.
VL  - 5
IS  - 5
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Al-jassani Azhar Abdulkareem Majeed

Department of Structural Engineering, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Budapest, Hungary
Al-suraifi Inam Jabbar Hraba

Department of Structural Engineering, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Budapest, Hungary

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Al-jassani Azhar Abdulkareem Majeed, Al-suraifi Inam Jabbar Hraba. (2017). Telecommunication Cell Tower Most Common Alternatives Overview. American Journal of Civil Engineering, 5(5), 268-281. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajce.20170505.12

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Al-jassani Azhar Abdulkareem Majeed; Al-suraifi Inam Jabbar Hraba. Telecommunication Cell Tower Most Common Alternatives Overview. Am. J. Civ. Eng. 2017, 5(5), 268-281. doi: 10.11648/j.ajce.20170505.12

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Al-jassani Azhar Abdulkareem Majeed, Al-suraifi Inam Jabbar Hraba. Telecommunication Cell Tower Most Common Alternatives Overview. Am J Civ Eng. 2017;5(5):268-281. doi: 10.11648/j.ajce.20170505.12

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ajce.20170505.12,
  author = {Al-jassani Azhar Abdulkareem Majeed and Al-suraifi Inam Jabbar Hraba},
  title = {Telecommunication Cell Tower Most Common Alternatives Overview},
  journal = {American Journal of Civil Engineering},
  volume = {5},
  number = {5},
  pages = {268-281},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ajce.20170505.12},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajce.20170505.12},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ajce.20170505.12},
  abstract = {The main goal of this review is to decide which alternatives could be the most proper structural system type for 36 m tower height and practical specified deflection limit “Torsional Effect” at the tower top less than 0.5 degree to be used in a rural zone near of Budapest City, Hungary based on the most common control aspects (Aesthetical, Economical and Statical aspect) which influences the decision making and the selection process. According to that purpose a different tower types have been reviewed in detail (Lattice towers, Monopole and Guyed mast) in order to decide which alternatives could be selected for further investigations based on the limitations and requirements of the present case of study, where every alternative has it features, benefits and Specific limits of application. The resulted decision based on the presented study was that the most proper alternatives according to the specified information are the lattice towers (Square & Triangular) and the Monopole which deserve to be selected for further investigations.},
 year = {2017}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Telecommunication Cell Tower Most Common Alternatives Overview
AU  - Al-jassani Azhar Abdulkareem Majeed
AU  - Al-suraifi Inam Jabbar Hraba
Y1  - 2017/08/25
PY  - 2017
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajce.20170505.12
DO  - 10.11648/j.ajce.20170505.12
T2  - American Journal of Civil Engineering
JF  - American Journal of Civil Engineering
JO  - American Journal of Civil Engineering
SP  - 268
EP  - 281
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2330-8737
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajce.20170505.12
AB  - The main goal of this review is to decide which alternatives could be the most proper structural system type for 36 m tower height and practical specified deflection limit “Torsional Effect” at the tower top less than 0.5 degree to be used in a rural zone near of Budapest City, Hungary based on the most common control aspects (Aesthetical, Economical and Statical aspect) which influences the decision making and the selection process. According to that purpose a different tower types have been reviewed in detail (Lattice towers, Monopole and Guyed mast) in order to decide which alternatives could be selected for further investigations based on the limitations and requirements of the present case of study, where every alternative has it features, benefits and Specific limits of application. The resulted decision based on the presented study was that the most proper alternatives according to the specified information are the lattice towers (Square & Triangular) and the Monopole which deserve to be selected for further investigations.
VL  - 5
IS  - 5
ER  -

Copy | Download