| Literature DB >> 36207434 |
Long-Bin Zhang1, Bo Tang2,3, Kai Li4, Zhi-Yu Shang1, Yue Wang1, Heng-Bo Li1.
Abstract
The traditional construction monitoring methods of suspended pole-mounted decomposed towers are mostly manual monitoring. The monitoring personnel has multiple blind spots, and the possibility of misjudgment based on personal experience is relatively large. It is difficult to ensure the construction safety of the suspended pole decomposing tower. For this reason, combined with the current power Internet of Things technology, this paper develops an intelligent monitoring system for suspended pole-mounted decomposing towers. According to the construction technology and its safety requirements of inner suspension derrick for transmission tower erection in sections, this system is classified into intellisense layer, wireless transport layer and information integration layer. According to the physical characteristics of the seven major risk points of the inner suspension pole group tower, the intellisense layer developed corresponding sensing equipment to obtain risk information. In the wireless transport layer, the ZigBee and 4G communication technologies are selected to interconnect self-constituted LAN and 4G wide area networks, to complete on-site data interaction and long-distance transmission. In the information integration layer, the force of cable, the inclination and height of derrick, and the distance between derrick and tower are determined. The system has been verified by the 500 kV delivery project of Fujian Zhouning Pumped Storage Power Station. The average error of critical monitoring point data is 4.14%, and the average data transmission delays in the far and near fields of the system are 18 ms and 176 ms.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36207434 PMCID: PMC9546914 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-21395-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.996
Figure 1Schematic diagram of system monitoring point setting.
Figure 2Overall structure diagram of the system.
Figure 3Working principle diagram of data processing unit.
Performance comparison of various communication modes.
| Communication mode | Main frequency band | Transmission distance | Transmission delay | Power consumption |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bluetooth | 2.4 GHz | Dozens of meters | Second level | Normal |
| Wi-Fi | 2.4 GHz | Hundred meters | Millisecond level | High |
| Lora | 470 ~ 510 MHz | Up to 20 km in the suburbs | Second level | Very low |
| ZigBee | 2.4 GHz | Up to 2 km in the suburbs | Millisecond level | Low |
Figure 4The calculation of the distance between the holding derrick and steel pylon.
Figure 5The layout of the monitoring system on the project site.
Comparison of measured data and calculated data of the system.
| Parameter | Actual value | Monitoring value | Relative error/% |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cable tension | 5.85 kN | 6.02 kN | 2.91 |
| Lifting rope tension | 21.34 kN | 20.47 kN | − 4.08 |
| Derrick inclination | 4.7° | 4.9° | 4.26 |
| Derrick height | 38.48 m | 40.1 m | 4.21 |
| Tower material height | 18.48 m | 19.89 m | 7.63 |
| The distance between the derrick and the assembled tower | 3.24 m | 3.56 m | 9.88 |
Data transfer delay test situation.
| Construction site data transmission delay | Remote data transfer delay | |
|---|---|---|
| Location 1 | 15 ms | 162 ms |
| Location 2 | 18 ms | 174 ms |
| Location 3 | 22 ms | 187 ms |
| Location 4 | 20 ms | 180 ms |
| Location 5 | 15 ms | 177 ms |
| Average value | 18 ms | 176 ms |