This study aims at clarifying the factors that cause transmission line galloping and the conditions influencing it, and at determining response evaluation indices of gallopings in turbulent flows. This is done using a three‐dimensional analytical method considering a large deformation. The analysis is based on four‐bundle transmission lines. Obtained results are as follows:
The occurrence of galloping in the smooth flow is limited by the combination of the following parameters: the initial angle of wind attack, the initial icing angle, and the wind speed. The galloping predominates mainly with one or two of the lowest in‐plane, out‐of‐plane, and torsional modes for the free vibration under the conditions that the transmission line is subject to dead load as well as static wind force. However, the galloping always occurs with torsional vibration.
The shape of the Lissajous figure for displacement depends on the initial angle of wind attack and the initial icing angle, as well as wind speed. The main shapes are vertically elliptic, horizontally elliptic, and a configuration having the shape of a horizontally rotated figure of eight.
The predominant frequency components of gallopings in turbulent flows are amplified and controlled by the turbulence intensity. Vibration frequency components unrelated to galloping increase linearly with rise in turbulence intensity.
There is a time lag of 30 s between galloping vibration and the fluctuating wind speed. The relationships between mean wind speeds and both trend components and standard deviations of galloping in turbulent flows closely correspond to those relationships during the smooth flow, and they can be obtained using the average time of 10 times the shortest vibration period of the transmission line. That is, the response values of transmission lines in the smooth flow can be utilized to estimate gallopings in turbulent flows. To estimate the maximum amplitude of a galloping, a peak factor of approximately 2.5 can be used. © 2000 Scripta Technica, Electr Eng Jpn, 131(3): 19–33, 2000