It is known in the art of pole manufacturing that the suitability of a pole for a given purpose depends upon the materials from which it is constructed. Pole designs have been restricted by the fact that selection of the material for construction previously required a tradeoff with respect to a number of certain key desirable characteristics of the pole. Among the key characteristics are strength, resilience, weight, length, durability, resistance to environmental conditions, and the ease of transportation and erection. Optimal pole design has been confounded because materials which provide superiority in one characteristic generally have corresponding disadvantages in other characteristics.
Perhaps the oldest known method in the art of pole construction is the use of wooden poles, such as those commonly used for telephone lines. However, many modern pole uses require longer lengths than are practical, or even possible, with wood. While shorter length poles constructed of wood are relatively inexpensive and easy to erect, wood poles become increasingly more expensive as the desired length increases. Furthermore, wood poles are highly susceptible to rot, insect infestation, and bird attack. Known methods of preventing these latter problems present their own difficulties in that the chemicals used to treat the wood may leach out into the surrounding soil, causing environmental hazards. Finally, optimal construction of wooden poles requires that the pole be of one piece of uncut wood. This creates difficulties in transporting and erecting long poles, and it obviously limits the maximum pole length to the height of available trees from which the poles are made.
Metal pole construction has also long been known in the art. However, metal poles also have disadvantages. Although relatively strong and capable of being constructed in sections for ease of transportation and erection, metal poles have limited durability in that they are susceptible to rusting and other chemical deterioration. This is primarily because the moisture, chemicals, and abuse that a typical pole receives at its base abrade any resistant coatings and lead to rapid rusting and deterioration of the metal structure. Metal poles experience an acute problem in locations near roadways, marine environments, industrial plants, and aggressive soils. For example, the salt used to prevent ice accumulation on the roads inevitably comes into contact with the pole, accelerating its deterioration. Other chemicals commonly spilled onto roadways can easily be splashed onto metal poles, accelerating the deterioration. Marine environments are also very aggressive and substantially limit the life of a metal pole.
Further, metal poles implanted directly into the ground or with closely surrounding vegetation are subjected to constant moisture accumulation both underground and within the first few feet of the base. While separately preparing a foundation onto which a metal pole may be secured addresses the underground deterioration, this does not solve the problem of salt and chemical splash, abuse, or moisture at the ground line vicinity of the pole. Further, such foundations built on site have the disadvantage of being of variable quality depending on the skill of the designer, the worker, and the actual soil conditions. Likewise, the necessity for the design and construction of a separate foundation structure adds significantly to the time and expense required to erect such a pole. Attachment to such foundation presents a critical structural weak point. Bolts used for attachment of the pole to the base are themselves subject to environmental degradation. Additionally, the bolts and mechanical fasteners represent a weak point because of the imposed fatigue loads and thus the potential for failure in shear or tension. The bolts may also pull out under stress if they are not adequately embedded in the foundation.
The use of concrete poles has also been known in the prior art. The strength and durability of concrete poles is superior to other materials. Concrete poles also solve the problem of susceptibility to roadside conditions and moisture. However the greater weight of concrete poles precludes the use of very long poles. The weight causes problems both for transportation and for ease of installation. Methods have been devised for transporting concrete poles to the construction site in sections to address the weight problem. See, for example, U.S. Pat. No. 5,285,614 issued to Fouad, which is hereby incorporated by reference, and which describes a splicing mechanism for concrete poles to address the weight and length restrictions. However, the greater weight of concrete poles has significantly impeded their widespread use.
A new improvement in the art is the use of hybrid pole construction, where the advantages of two different types of poles can be utilized. However, a hybrid pole approach has engendered its own set of problems, not the least of which is the method for securing the upper steel or other lightweight material pole to the concrete base pole and the method for manufacturing the pole in a manner that permits the pole to support high loads while reducing pole weight. The most efficient way to manufacture a strong concrete pole is by centrifugally casting the pole. The centrifugal action compacts the concrete mix, making it denser and thus stronger. The hollow core results in a lighter weight pole as well as saving on the cost of raw materials. The smooth, circular cross-section of the concrete base pole makes it easier to embed into the ground, is the most efficient shape for wind-loading minimization, and is the easiest to centrifugally cast. A lightweight, hollow steel or other lightweight material upper pole, on the other hand, generally is stronger and provides greater torsion resistance if it has a multisided cross-section than if it has a circular cross-section. So far, there has been no pole design that takes advantage of all the most favorable characteristics of both types of materials in a hybrid construction.
It is an object of one preferred embodiment of this invention to provide a centrifugally-cast concrete pole base that is reinforced, prestressed, and post-tensioned and that has two different cross-sectional shapes in order to permit it to readily receive a multi-sided upper pole section. This permits the mounting of much taller metal, fiberglass, or other material poles on the concrete pole base in one or more pole sections so as to reach the desired height while utilizing all the best design characteristics of each individual material.
It is also an object of the present invention to provide for taller poles that are economical to manufacture and install, in terms of time, labor, and materials.
The concrete base pole 102 is manufactured by centrifugally casting, using the hardware assembly 114 shown in
The sleeve inserts 122 have an outer surface 124 and an inner surface 126. In this preferred embodiment, the inner surface 126 defines a multisided, polygonal shape which, in this case, is a dodecagon or twelve-sided figure. End plates 128, 130 lie adjacent to the respective ends 118, 120 of the mold. As shown in
The casting assembly 114 is, then, essentially a tapered, cylindrical shape, a multisided insert at the narrow end, and end anchor plates at both ends, which are secured to the cylindrical shape with reinforcing strands 139 extending along the interior of the mold and projecting out at the ends.
In the manufacture of the centrifugally-cast concrete pole 102, the cage of reinforcing spiral wires and prestressing strands is prepared as is shown in
The reinforcing strands 139 form a cylindrically-shaped bundle, with each strand 139 extending through its respective opposed holes in the end plates 128, 130. As is best shown in
The reinforcing wire 137 (which is now no longer in a coil but is rather in a spiral) is secured to the reinforcing strands at several points along the length of the mold. The end result is a cage, formed of reinforcing strands 139 running lengthwise and inside of a spiral of reinforcing wire 137, with the reinforcing strands 139 and the reinforcing wire 137 being secured to each other (preferably with wire ties) along the length and circumference of the cage.
Once the bottom mold half 116, the end plates 128, 130, and the cage made up of spiral wire 137 and straight strands 139, some with casing 132, is assembled, some of the strands 139 are pre-tensioned (preferably the strands that are not encased by sheaths 132) by fastening one end relative to the mold with a chuck 142, pulling the other end with a certain desired amount of tension, and then fastening the other end relative to the mold using another chuck 142, as is well known in the art. Once the chucks 142 are in place, the tensioning holds the end plates 128, 130 onto the ends of the mold, and the C-clamps (not shown) are removed. Concrete is then placed along the entire length of the mold half 116, through the wire cage, such that the concrete mix fills the trough formed by the mold half 116 and the end plates 128, 130. Additional concrete is placed toward the narrower end 120 of said trough such that the concrete level actually crowns above what would be a full-trough level. The trough is now closed by assembling the other half of the sleeve insert 122 to the upper mold half 116, installing the upper mold half 116 over the lower mold half 116, and bolting the side flanges 119 together.
At this point, there is an entire cylinder assembly consisting of mold halves 116 with sleeve inserts 122, and inside these is a reinforcing strand cage made up of a cylindrical bundle of strands 139, in which some strands have a plastic sheath 132 at the narrower end 120 of the assembly, and a spiral wound reinforcing wire which has been secured to the axially aligned reinforcing strands. Concrete has been placed into the horizontal cylinder assembly so it is approximately half full as the cylinder lies on its side (with its longitudinal axis perpendicular to the force of gravity). End plates 128, 130 have been installed at the first and second ends 118, 120 of the cylinder assembly, and the desired strands 139 have been prestressed.
This entire assembly is then placed on a spinner that rotates the assembly around its longitudinal axis until the concrete material has been evenly distributed by the centrifugal forces along the walls of the assembly, forming an interior void, and the concrete mix has hardened due to consolidation. The centrifugal action will also cause a slight migration of the concrete along the longitudinal axis of the assembly, from the narrower end to the wider end of the tapered cylinder. It is in order to counter the effects of this migration that concrete was placed to a higher level (until it actually crowned over what would be the flush level) in the narrower end of the trough.
The spinning of the assembly around its longitudinal axis accomplishes the centrifugal casting, wherein centrifugal forces acting on the concrete sling the concrete against the walls of the assembly and at the same time compact the concrete, resulting in a denser, stronger concrete than one simply statically poured but not subjected to centrifugal action. The entire assembly is then removed from the spinner and is allowed to remain undisturbed for a desired curing period. Once the concrete has cured sufficiently, the chucks 142 securing the pre-tensioned strands to the end plates 128, 130 are then removed; this releases the steel mold and transfers the tension in the pre-tensioned strands to apply a compression force along the entire length of the concrete pole 102, thus applying the prestress forces to the concrete to increase its load carrying capacity and reduce its susceptibility to cracking.
Once the end plates 128, 130 have been removed, the mold halves 116 and the sleeve inserts 122 are also removed, and the ends of all pre-tensioned strands (those which did not have a sheath) extending out at the narrow top end 120 of the assembly are cut off. All ends of all the strands extending out the bottom end 118 are cut off. A ring-shaped bearing plate 134 (see
As may be understood by anyone skilled in the art, the specific configuration of the reinforcing cage, the number, relationship, and ratio of sheathed-to-unsheathed strands, and the pre-tensioning and post-tensioning forces applied, if any, may vary, depending on the specific requirements and design calculations of the application. While the bearing plate 134 is shown here as a single plate, it could also be made in various configurations, such as providing a smaller, individual plate for each strand to be post-tensioned, for example.
In the manufacture of the centrifugally-cast concrete pole 202, the inner cage 204 of reinforcing wires and prestressing strands is prepared very much in the same manner as has already been described with reference to the first embodiment 102, as is shown in
Once the chucks 142 are in place, the tensioning holds the end plates 128, 130 onto the ends of the mold, and the C-clamps (not shown) are removed. Concrete mix is then placed along the entire length of the mold half 116, through the wire cages 204, 206, such that the concrete mix fills the trough formed by the mold half 116 and the end plates 128, 130. Additional concrete mix is placed toward the narrower end 120 of said trough such that the concrete level actually crowns above what would be a full-trough level. The trough is now closed by assembling the other half of the sleeve insert 122 to the upper mold half 116, installing the upper mold half 116 over the lower mold half 116, and bolting the side flanges 119 together.
This entire assembly is then placed in a spinner that rotates the assembly around its longitudinal axis until the concrete has been distributed by the centrifugal forces along the walls as described earlier. Immediately after an initial spin cycle, which is usually a few minutes, the wall thickness is measured. If the measured cast concrete wall thickness is short of the targeted wall thickness, then additional concrete is added to the assembly via an opening 208 (See
As described earlier, the entire assembly is then removed from the spinner and is allowed to remain undisturbed. Thereafter, the pre-tensioned strands may be released from their chucks and cut off, and the strands within sleeves may be post-tensioned as described earlier. The procedure for using this heavier-wall-thickness cast concrete base 202 is similar to that described for the original cast concrete base 102 of the first embodiment, including the procedure for post-tensioning, if required, with the only added complexity being that there are now more strands. This heavier-walled concrete base 202, with its more extensive metal reinforcing, results in a structurally stronger concrete base.
While a 12-sided polygonal shape has been shown here as a preferred embodiment, other similar shapes could be used, such as a six-sided (hexagon), eight-sided (octagon), ten-sided, twelve-sided, 18-sided, or other polygons. Also, the casting methods and reinforcement arrangements shown here may be used for other cross-sectional shapes of poles as well, such as for a base that has a circular cross-section throughout its height. It will be obvious to those skilled in the art that many other modifications may be made to the embodiments described above without departing from the scope of the present invention.
This application is a divisional of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/977,565, filed Oct. 15, 2001 now U.S. Pat. No. 6,705,058, which is a continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/450,871, filed Nov. 29, 1999 now abandoned, which claims priority from U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 60/119,871, filed Feb. 2, 1999.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
301108 | Furness | Jul 1884 | A |
411204 | Short | Sep 1889 | A |
595600 | Buck | Dec 1897 | A |
689387 | Crossland | Dec 1901 | A |
732223 | Rhoades | Jun 1903 | A |
839272 | Crow | Dec 1906 | A |
976879 | Hughs | Nov 1910 | A |
1244652 | Southgate | Oct 1917 | A |
1329026 | Snyder | Jan 1920 | A |
1542575 | Perry | Jun 1925 | A |
1567301 | Ross | Dec 1925 | A |
1679297 | Ehrler | Jul 1928 | A |
1712757 | Erskine | May 1929 | A |
1819733 | Castelli | Aug 1931 | A |
2036771 | Pfistershammer | Apr 1936 | A |
2040010 | McMahon | May 1936 | A |
2764670 | Van Dusen, Jr. | Sep 1956 | A |
2792947 | Weedman | May 1957 | A |
3403520 | Goodman | Oct 1968 | A |
3429129 | Johansson et al. | Feb 1969 | A |
3592243 | Fukushima et al. | Jul 1971 | A |
3638433 | Sherard | Feb 1972 | A |
3713262 | Jatcko | Jan 1973 | A |
3738786 | Van Buren | Jun 1973 | A |
3838547 | Meisberger | Oct 1974 | A |
3865498 | Okuto et al. | Feb 1975 | A |
3911548 | Perry | Oct 1975 | A |
3958381 | Meyer | May 1976 | A |
3991532 | Buxbom | Nov 1976 | A |
4033080 | Fukushima | Jul 1977 | A |
4092079 | Swanson | May 1978 | A |
4166347 | Pohlman et al. | Sep 1979 | A |
4246732 | Frehner | Jan 1981 | A |
4492496 | Arnold | Jan 1985 | A |
4522579 | Rotondo et al. | Jun 1985 | A |
4617768 | Gebelius | Oct 1986 | A |
4673157 | Wells | Jun 1987 | A |
4751804 | Cazaly | Jun 1988 | A |
4779389 | Landers | Oct 1988 | A |
4813199 | Lewis, Jr. | Mar 1989 | A |
4930270 | Bevacqua | Jun 1990 | A |
5055987 | Ellson et al. | Oct 1991 | A |
5076032 | Lehman | Dec 1991 | A |
5249112 | Bray | Sep 1993 | A |
5285614 | Fouad | Feb 1994 | A |
5398478 | Gordin et al. | Mar 1995 | A |
5667744 | Valle et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5761875 | Oliphant et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5784851 | Waugh | Jul 1998 | A |
6092341 | Yamashita et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6167673 | Fournier | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6408590 | Cote | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6453636 | Ritz | Sep 2002 | B1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
426 074 | Mar 1926 | DE |
705891 | May 1941 | DE |
2 255 713 | May 1974 | DE |
3440531 | Mar 1986 | DE |
876891 | Nov 1942 | EP |
1162522 | Sep 1958 | EP |
82 20352 | Nov 1982 | EP |
717699 | Nov 1954 | GB |
862350 | Mar 1961 | GB |
2-295705 | Dec 1990 | JP |
5-16130 | Jan 1993 | JP |
6-63672 | Mar 1994 | JP |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20040211148 A1 | Oct 2004 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60119871 | Feb 1999 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 09977565 | Oct 2001 | US |
Child | 10768543 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 09450871 | Nov 1999 | US |
Child | 09977565 | US |