Construction of transmission line catenary from

survey data
Stephen J. Sugden
School

of Information

Technology,

Bond

University,

Gold Coast,

Australia

Precise survey data from observations of actual overhead transmission lines are commonly used to confirm
theoretical predictions of sag-tension calculations, based on the standard catenary model. An algorithm is
presented for determining the catenary of best fit to a set of data points in the usual Cartesian coordinates.
The method described employs the least-squares criterion for curve fitting,
and uses the iterative
Newton-Raphson
algorithm to solve for the required catenary parameters. A FORTRAN 77 subroutine
implementation
of the algorithm is used in a conductor profile program by the South East Queensland
Electricity Board, and a PC version coded in Borland Pascal is available from the author. The program uses
the subroutine to generate the equation of a transmission line catenary from survey data, thus allowing rapid
calculation of low-point (vertex) coordinates and conductor relative levels at arbitrary points along the span.
Experimental results are presented, which indicate typical accuracy of computed conductor height to within
approximately a conductor diameter.
Keywords: transmission

survey data, Newton-Raphson,

line, catenary,

1. Introduction
Survey departments
associated with electricity transmission and distribution
authorities
are often given the task
of accurately
determining
the position of an overhead
conductor.
The reasons for acquiring
this information
are usually related to the requirement
of maintaining
a
nominated
statutory clearance either from ground level
or some structure
located
near a conductor.
Line
tensions are calculated at the design stage, and this information is usually translated
into a sag at some specific
ambient conditionPusually
a series of sags for different
ambient temperatures
is given. A simple parabolic
or
more accurate catenary approximation
to the line is used.
Errors
introduced
by inelastic
deformation
of the
conductor
will result in further inaccuracies
in the
determination
of the vertex or any other point of the
catenary. In addition to these variations, daily variations
in load current, wind velocity, and solar radiation make
the accurate heighting of a conductor
from design data
very difficult.
From the line design engineers point of view, the
general
theory
of transmission
line design is well
developed
and the standard
methods
based on the
approximate
catenary or parabola give adequate results
for the customary
sag-tension
calculations.
Many
authors rightly focus attention
on the economical
and
Address reprint requests to Dr. Sugden at the School
Technology,
Bond University, Gold Coast, Australia.
Received
1993

274

30 June 1993; revised 5 October

Appl. Math.

Modelling,

of Information

1993; accepted

1994,

25 October

Vol. 18, May

curve-fitting, least squares

reliable design of power transmission

structures,
with
emphasis
on mathematical
formulas
of practical
computational
value, rather than inordinate emphasis on
theoretical
exactness. Lummis and Fischer point out
that the basic assumptions
used to mathematically
derive
the catenary
shape (the present equation
(1)) for a
suspended cable are, in fact, only approximately
correct.
Nevertheless,
the hyperbolic function so obtained gives
results that are sufficiently
accurate
for sag-tension
calculations,
and in many cases even the quadratic
approximation
to the hyperbolic
form is adequate for
engineering design purposes (see, for example, Boyse and
Simpson) and certainly within the required accuracy for
line construction.

1.1 Generality

of approach

We are concerned here with an algorithm to fit survey

data to a standard
catenary
which, it is assumed,
reasonably approximates
the shape of a transmission
line
under normal
steady-state
operating
conditions.
The
method
is independent
of any physical
model
of
sag-tension,
which of necessity must take into account
such quantities
as electrical
load, mechanical
load,
conductor
weight, temperature,
and perhaps
other
non-steady-state
variables
such as wind velocity and
direction.
Simply stated, the present
method
is an
exercise in nonlinear
least-squares
curve fitting, and the
only assumption
made is that the transmission
line has
a shape reasonably
approximating
that of a catenary.
In view of the above, the method gives important
feedback on any catenary model of the transmission
line.

1994 Butterworth-Heinemann

Construction

of transmission

For a reasonably accurate survey, the present algorithm

generates the catenary of best fit, which then enables
residuals to be calculated. These are just the differences
between
observed
and
predicted
ordinates.
Large
discrepancies
will then indicate either (a) poor survey or
(b) poor mathematical
model of the transmission
line.
In either case, useful information
is gained. The
method frees the surveyor from accurate observation
of
low point (vertex), and frees the surveyor or line design
engineer from manual interpolation
to find the low point
or any other point along the span. It gives the surveyor
an idea of the accuracy of the observations,
and field
units can calculate the catenary on site and bring to light
some doubtful observations.
These may be redone on
the same day, thus reducing or eliminating
the need for
further
field trips. Because the algorithm
is easily
implemented
on small hand-held
calculators
or notebook-style portable computers, this suggestion is entirely
practical.
It should be noted that no claim is made that the
mathematics
of the method is new; however a rather
extensive computer-based
literature search failed to find
any application
of catenary interpolation
of survey data
for transmission
lines. The technique described in this
paper provides useful information
to both surveyor and
transmission
line engineer, so that a description
of the
details of the algorithm and a SEQEB case study form
the bulk of this paper. The approach to be described is
intended to alleviate some of the tedium associated with
converting survey data for an overhead conductor profile
into something
useful. Once the catenary is generated,
the line engineer can then relate it to any theoretical
model of choice.
It could be said that the approach
described herein
borrows from traditional
models of overhead transmission lines only in the sense that it assumes that the
transmission
line shape is sufficiently close to that of a
mathematical
catenary
to justify using this family of
curves as approximants
in a least-squares
fit of the
observed data; however, the interpolation
technique is
otherwise independent of any such model.
1.2

Motivation

Motivation
for development
of the method came from
a SEQEB requirement
for a conductor
profile program
to generate the remainder of the curve on being given
observed points on an arc formed by a single span of a
transmission
line catenary. Cases in which precise (to
within
1 cm) determination
of overhead
conductor
position
is especially
important
include (a) costly or
specialized
redesign
projects
and (b) those in which
confirmation
of conductor
clearances
over navigable
waterways is required.
In recent SEQEB instances of (a), involving transmission lines energized
at 110 kV or 132 kV, a system
upgrade
program
was associated
with significant
increase in electrical load and therefore greater line sag.
This increased sag often exceeded the previously allowed
design limits, thus necessitating
line retensioning.
In
other cases existing tower or pole structures or their line

line catenary

from survey

data:

S. J. Sugden

attachment
hardware
needed
to be either
shifted
vertically or relocated to a new position entirely.
Precise surveys help to determine the actual conductor
tension and therefore the degree to which the initially
specified tension has been maintained.
It has been noted
above that theoretical
predictions
of conductor
profile
are not in complete accord with physical reality, so that,
especially
in cases of close approach
to statutory
clearances,
it is essential for the design engineer
to
obtain confirmation
of sag-tension calculations
from an
accurate field survey. The present algorithm allows rapid
calculation
of a catenary from field data, thus allowing
immediate calculation
of the low point of the span.
Recent SEQEB examples
of (b) have a generally
involved
11 kV to 132 kV lines above
navigable
waterways
in South East Queensland.
Here, specific
statutory
clearances determined
by the Department
of
Harbours and Marine must be maintained.
In particular,
for litigation
cases involving
boating
accidents
and
high-voltage lines, it is clearly essential that the electricity
authority
have highly accurate information
as to the
precise location of its overhead lines under all conditions
of weather, tide levels, and electrical and mechanical
load.
Finally, from the surveyors point of view, the method
presented here provides a useful means of determining
several important
quantities.
Having observed the two
attachment
points plus a number of others along the
span usually concentrated
around the estimated vertex,
the surveyor needs to do the following:
1. determine the general accuracy of observations;
2. locate and eliminate
bad observations
and gross
errors;
3. calculate
the (x, y) coordinates
of the low-point
(vertex) and hence determine clearance of this point
with respect to a specified level datum.
All of these requirements
are met by the present
algorithm/program,
which has been coded in FORTRAN
77 for SEQEB and also in Borland Pascal for a PC. It
will be a simple matter to recode it in say, BASIC or c, if
this is desired (both languages being commonly available
on personal
computers).
It is recommended
that
notebook-style
PCs be used in the field so that the
desired catenary can be quickly computed. Gross errors
would then become
obvious
and further
verifiable
observations
could be made on the same job.
2.

2.1

Mathematical

theory

General

Mathematically,
the requirement
is for a curve-fitting
algorithm that will apply standard techniques to search
for a member of the known family of catenaries that in
some sense best fits the observed
data. The best-fit
criterion to be used will be that of least squares. It is
recognized of course that experimental
error is present
in all observations,
and the algorithm
takes this into
account; however, the two points of attachment
of the
transmission
line are assumed to be without error. This

Appl. Math. Modelling,

1994, Vol. 18, May

275

Construction

of transmission

line catenary from survey data: S. J. Sugden

means geometrically
that they lie exactly on the final
catenary. Such an assumption
is reasonable, because the
points of attachment
are almost always accessible and
can be determined
very accurately
with modern
laser-based
theodolites.
On the other hand, the interior
points need not be accessible (e.g., the transmission
line
may span a river or gorge).
For a canonical catenary with vertex I/ at (a, b) and
parameter c, we have

2.2

Statement

of problem

Given the set {(xi, Y,): i = 1 . . . II - l}, it is necessary

to choose, from among
those curves described
by
equations (6) and (7), one which most closely fits these
data points.
As outlined
earlier,
the least-squares
criterion is to be used to implicitly determine a value of
/z to satisfy our requirement.
More precisely, defining
sinh (Lx) sinh (2(x - x,) + 8
f(x, 1) =

(8)

/z

Y-,=c(coshre)-1)
and
n-l

We consider the left-hand point of attachment

to be
the (x, Y) origin, i.e., the curve described by (1) passes
through (0,O). This leads to

s(n)

(ftxi,

i)

i=l
we seek 3, which minimizes

Y=2csinh(g)sinh(y)

(9)

S(1).

(2)

Our data points

are (O,O),(xl, YA, (x2, y2), . . . (x,,, y,)
where (0,O) is the left point of attachment
and (x,, Y,) is
the right point of attachment.
Comparison
of equation
(2) with equation (1) reveals that, by a suitable choice of
origin, we have now reduced a three-parameter
family
(a, b, c) of catenaries to a two-parameter
(a, c) family. It
is also possible to eliminate the parameter a by requiring
that the curve pass through
the right-hand
point of
attachment,
which we have designated
(x,, y,) in our
coordinate
system.
Because equation (2) contains only one reference to
the parameter
a, we solve it for a when (x,, y,) is
substituted
for (x, Y). This process yields

2.3

Algorithm

development

In order to minimize S(1) we solve dS/dL = 0 because

S(n) is a positive definite continuous
function of 1 and is
only zero if every data point lies precisely on the curve.
Differentiation
of (9) with respect to I gives
n- 1 df(x,, 2)
c 7
wi,

dS@)
---=2
dA

s(4 =

n- l af(xi, A)

ai,

A)-

(ftxi2

i3 = sinh-

it is required

to solve
(12)

s(l) = 0

Yll
2c sinh (xJ2c) >

n- 1 a2f(xi, A)

g(l) = C

d12

i=l

[aft+;

and

we obtain

for the equation

of the catenary

Rn+1-

Modelling,

1994,

Vol. 18, May

(13)
iteration

4) -

(f(xi2

CL 1

Math.

Cf(xi3A)- Yil

4y)

X1=:
n

is used to solve

to search

for

48

where 8 is given by

Appl.

method

Therefore, the Newton-Raphson

I such that g(n) = 0 is

;ly = sinh (Lx) sinh (R(x - x,) + 8)

It will be noted that 8 is a function of the catenary shape

parameter I only, because the supplied parameters x,, y,
are regarded as constants.
In equations
(6) and (7) we
now have a one-parameter
(1) family of catenaries,
all
passing through (0,O) and (x,, y,)-the
two points of
cable attachment.
Further interior data points, from the
set {(x, yi): i = 1 . . . n - 11, are also supplied
from
survey. We are now in a position to formulate a precise
statement of the problem.

(11)

Yi)

i=l

The Newton-Raphson
iterative
(12). For this, we need g(A):

Writing

(10)

4 - Yi)

i=l

Defining

(3)

276

YJ2

a%,4
822

Yi)af(Xi,

&I -

(ftxi,

Yi)

n,)ian
(af EiT 4>)
(14)

and the partial

2.4

Derivation

derivatives

are evaluated

of expressions

at 2 = i,.

for the partial derivatives

The Newton-Raphson
iteration
defined
by (14)
requires the values of af(x,, n)/an and a2f(xi, A)/aL ViE
{L&3,.
. . , n - l}. These values must of course be
recomputed
at each iteration because, although
the xi

Construction

of transmission

are fixed, A will change at each step. In this section, closed

expressions obtained by the usual rules of differentiation
are derived for df(x,, A)/82 and a2f(xi, /2)/aA2. Because
differentiation
of sums is easier than differentiation
of
products, we convert equation (8), which defines f(x, A),
to the equivalent
sum of hyperbolic
cosines using a
standard identity:
21f(x, 2) = cash ((2x - x,)1 + 0) - cash (x,2 - 0)
(15)
Partial

differentiation

of (15) with respect

- (x, - 0,) sinh (x,2 - 0)

(16)

+ 4fL = (2x - x, + Q2 cash ((2x - x,)2 + 0)

+ 28,, sinh (x/z) cash ((x - x,)3. + 0)
- 0)

(17)

From a computational
point of view, because x = xi and
x,, 1 are supplied, it will be seen from equations (8), (16),
and (17) that the required partial derivatives fL, fni may
be computed as soon as the values of 6,, OIL are available.
These are obtained
by implicit
differentiation
of a
rearranged form of equation (8).
Ly, = sinh (6) sinh (x, 1.)
Partial differentiation
solving for Bn yields

(18)

of (18) with respect

to 1. and then

8 = y, - x, sinh (0) cash (x,2)

A^
cash (0) sinh (1,x)
Further

differentiation

following

two requirements:

1. n22,
2. 0 <

<

X1

X2

<

Xi

<

Xi+l

<

<

J. Sugden

X,

(19)

The algorithm
is straightforward,
and may be
expressed in a Pascal-like
pseudocode
in its top-level
form as follows. Note that the initial approximation
to
i is that obtained in Appendix B. The functions g(A) and
g(1) are defined by equations (11) and (13), respectively.
Newton search for catenary parameter 2
read(e)
read(MaxIts)
read(n)
for i := 1 to n do read (xi, yi) endfor
NumIts := 0
A:= (Y,& - x,.Y,)l(x1x?l(x, - %I))
while Ig(/L)I2 E and (Numlts I Maxlts) do
compute sinh (x,n) cash (x,2) from data
compute sinh 8 from (7)
compute cash 8 using cash = 1 +sinh2
compute 6 using sinh-
compute 8, from (19)
compute 8,, from (20)

g:=o
g:= 0
fori:=

0 = BAi cash ((3)sinh (x,1) + (fl: + x,) sinh (0)

cash (0) cash (x,1)

It is evident that 8,, 0,, are now

equations (7), (19), and (20).

S.

Details of the algorithm

gives

x sinh (x,2) + 2x,8,

<

data:

i.e., that {xi} is a strictly positive, strictly increasing

sequence of at least two terms. These conditions
are
checked and enforced by the FORTRAN subroutine
by
returning
an error flag, indicating
the nature of any
violation.
This flag is also used to indicate
convergence/divergence
of the iteration scheme.
3.2

where the subscript I denotes a/al, i.e., af/aJ. = fL, and

the arguments of f have been omitted for simplicity. In
like fashion we denote the second partial derivative with
respect to 1 by subscript 11. Differentiation
of (16) with
respect to 1 gives

- (x, - 8J2 cash (x,i

from survey

to 2 yields

2f + 2J_fA= (2x - x, + 0,) sinh ((2x - x,)2 + 0)

2&,

line catenary

computable

1 do
f(xi, 2) from (15)
fJxi, 2) from (16)
&(xi, 2) from (17)
g,:= g + fn(Xi, )*)(f(Xi, 3.) - Yi)

c+o;I~(~ ,, = 9 + _hl(xiT /2)(f(xi,

(20)
from

1 toncompute
compute
compute
compute
AX,>

A) -

Yi)

endfor
i := A - g(A)/g(A)
inc(NumIts)

endwhile
3. Development
3.1

of the computer algorithm

if Ig(A)l < E then

failure endif

indicate

success

else

indicate

Preconditions assumed

We require that n 2 2, that all data points be distinct,

and further that no two data points share the same value
of x (abscissa).
In addition,
for the initial
value
approximation
of Appendix
B to be most useful, it is
desirable that the data points are stored in order of
increasing abscissa. This will of course also be necessary
for any external tabulation
of the data points. Finally,
no Xi is permitted to be zero because (0,O) is the assumed
extreme left-most point of the catenary arc. It is clear
that some of the foregoing conditions
are subsumed by
others, and in fact their conjunction
is equivalent to the

4. Limitations

of the algorithm

The method is completely general, but is subject of course

to the standard
conditions
for convergence
of the
Newton-Raphson
algorithm, namely the existence of a
neighborhood
of the solution in which the derivative of
the objective function is bounded away from zero. The
input data are also assumed to satisfy the conditions
of 3.1. As stated in the conclusion, no case of divergence
has yet been found; rapid quadratic convergence
for 2
being observed in all test cases. Some analysis of the
denominator
term g(i) appearing
in equation
(14)

Appt. Math. Modelling,

1994, Vol. 18, May

277

Construction

of transmission

line catenary from survey data: S. J. Sugden

may show divergence to be unlikely or even impossible

for some comparatively
mild assumption
about the input
data. This does not seem unreasonable,
because the term
non-negative,
and the term
(dflan)2 is of course
a2fla12 is small for data that are not too wild. It
must be remembered
of course that a least-squares
curve-fitting
algorithm will generate a curve for any set
of data with distinct abscissas, so that examination
of
calculated residuals is always advisable.

engineering issues mentioned in the introduction.

Thanks
also to Dr Wilson Sy, School of Mathematical
Sciences,
University
of Technology,
Sydney, and to Dr Bernard
Duszczyk,
School of Information
Technology,
Bond
University,
for their useful comments on various drafts
of this paper.

References
Lummis, J. and Fischer, H. D. Practical Application
of Sag and
Tension Calculations
to Transmission
Line Design. Trans. Amer.
Inst. Electrical Eng. Part III (Power Apparatus & Systems)
1955,
74, 402-4 16.
Boyse, C. 0. and Simpson, N. G. The Problem
of Conductor
Sagging on Overhead Transmission
Lines. J. Inst. Electrical Eng.
1944, 91, Part 2, in press.

5. Conclusion
A general method has been presented for least-squares
fitting of (x, y) data points to a mathematical
catenary.
The two endpoints
are assumed to lie precisely on the
curve and the interior points-of
which there must be at
least one-are,
according
to the usual assumptions,
taken to be without error in abscissa, but subject to
experimental
error in the ordinate. It is anticipated
that
the method will be of most value to engineering
studies
such as transmission
line profile calculations.
The
algorithm
has been
implemented
as a FORTRAN
subroutine,
and this, along with driver program and test
data, is available from the author.
The algorithm
has been observed to converge very
rapidly for all test cases used; no case of zero or small
derivative leading to divergence or floating division error
having yet been found. The reader is referred to the
previous section for limitations
of the method. Experimental
results indicate
accuracy
of conductor
levels
computed
from the generated catenary to be within a
conductor
diameter of the levels obtained from survey.
Numerical
details are to be found in Appendix B.
As stated elsewhere in this paper, the least-squares
method
will fit virtually
any set of data, however
unreasonably,
to a member of the family of approximating curves-in
this case, catenaries.
The physical
validity of such an approximation,
however, remains a
matter for careful determination
by an experienced
professional,
i.e., a line design engineer or perhaps a
surveyor with appropriate
experience. Examination
of
the magnitude of residuals at each of the observed points,
with due regard for the physics of the problem, is usually
the most effective means of carrying out this task.

Thanks are extended to Steven Pryor of the Surveying

Department,
South East Queensland
Electricity Board,
as the person who first indicated the need for a computer
program
to solve the interpolation
problem,
for his
advice on the practical surveying aspects of the problem,
and also for his many helpful suggestions throughout
the
development
of the method. His colleague, Robert Battle,
also provided some very useful assistance. The author is
indebted to John Gudgeon of the School of Mathematics,
Queensland
University
of Technology,
for his useful
comments regarding the general nature of the algorithm
to be employed, and also to Charles Williamson of Mains
Development
Department,
The South East Queensland
Electricity Board for his helpful advice on the practical

Appl.

Math.

Three test cases are given below. Case 1 contains data

points
generated
by the computer
from a perfect
catenary. The points in Case 2 are as for those of Case
1, except that a sinusoidal
noise component
has been
superimposed
on the generated
ordinates.
It was
considered
desirable
to observe the behavior
of the
subroutine
by simulating
errors in the y values. The
relative amplitude chosen (20%) is rather high, but it can
be safely assumed that the subprogram
will perform at
least as well on bona fide field data obtained from survey.
Such data are unlikely to contain errors quite as gross
as this. In any event, field data obtained from a South
East Queensland
Electricity Board survey are supplied
as Case 3, and the results are very encouraging.
It is to be expected that residuals, i.e., the discrepancies
between
ordinates
computed
from
the generated
catenary and those observed, will be of the order of a
few centimeters in typical cases of observation
of transmission lines such as that reported in the present Case
3. Residuals of this order have in fact been observed, as
will be noted from the results below. Typical error in
vertical level is of the order of 1 cm, with the maximum
being approximately
2.4 cm or 1 inch. These accuracies
are of the order of a cable diameter, as claimed in the
abstract. All quantities
are expressed in meters in the
computer output.
Table 1.

6. Acknowledgment

278

Appendix A: Test data and results

Modelling,

1994,

Vol. 18, May

Results

part A for perfect catenary (case 1)

x(i)

Y(i)*

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1 .o
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0

-0.205646
-0.357615
- 0.462008
-0.523014
-0.543081
- 0.523014
-0.462008
-0.357615
- 0.205646
0

Empirical
abscissa.
b Empirical ordinate.
Computed
ordinate.
d Difference between

empirical

ycomp(i)c
- 0.205646
- 0.357615
- 0.462008
-0.523014
-0.523081
-0.523014
- 0.462008
-0.357615
- 0.205646
0

and computed

ordinates

residual(i)d
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0

Construction
Table

Results

2.

part

B for perfect

catenary

(case

of nonorigin

aTh~s

tolerance

Table

was

reached

Results

3.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

iterations.

part A for perfect

x(i)

in five

catenary

-0.240255
-0.422651
- 0.475048
-0.44385
-0.438926
-0.493786
-0.522715
-0.428377
-0.222596
0

(case

2)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

abscissa.
ordinate.

c Computed

ordinate.

d Dtfference

between

empirical

Table

Results

part B for perfect

4.

and

tolerance

was

ordinate.

Computed

ordinate.

d Difference

between

empirical

Table

Results

part B for SEQEB

in six

and

-0.0368131
-0.0687431
-0.0177127
0.0739531
0.0987718
0.0240171
-0.0653796
-0.0744693
-0.0744693
0

Number of nonorigin
points
Convergence
tolerancea
Relative noise amplitude
Computed
value of a
Computed
value of b
Computed
value of c
Maximum
absolute
residual
Mean absolute
residual
STD DEV of residual vector

computed

ordinates.

catenary

points

reached

-0.051553
- 5.676
-8.10731
-9.00096
-8.57065
- 6.87291
-5.13744
~ 1.80966
2.65014
2.708

-0.203442
- 0.353908
-0.457335
-0.517803
-0.537698
-0.517803
- 0.457335
- 0.353908
-0.203442
0

+ noise

(case

2)

10
0.00000000010
0.199999988
1 .ooooooooooo
-0.54308063482
1 .ooooooooooo
1 .ooooooooooo
-0.53769782012
1.00860489830
0.09877181986
0.04790142076
0.03072120388

Convergence
tolerancea
Relative noise amplitude
Exact value of a
Exact value of b
Exact value of c
Computed
value of a
Computed
value of b
Computed
value of c
Maximum
absolute
residual
Mean absolute
residual
STD DEV of residual vector
aTh~s

-0.057
- 5.688
-8.119
-8.999
-8.575
-6.849
-5.131
- 1.822
2.636
2.708

Quantity

Value

of nonorigin

0.355
48.593
84.894
124.875
151 ,157
184.349
205.295
234.87
265.057
265.406
abscissa.

tolerance

computed

data

i)

ycomp(

Empirical

6.

survey

y(i)b

residual(i)d

Quantity
Number

part A for SEQEB

data:

x(i)

a Empirical

aTh~s

a Empirical
b Empirical

Results

from survey

ycomp(i)c

y(i)b

0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2

+ noise

5.

10
0.00000000010
0.0
1 .ooooooooooo
-0.54308063482
1 .ooooooooooo
1 .ooooooooooo
- 0.54308063482
1 .ooooooooooo
0.00000000000
0.00000000000
0.00000000000

points

Convergence
tolerance=
Relative noise amplitude
Exact value of a
Exact value of b
Exact value of c
Computed
value of a
Computed
value of b
Computed
value of c
Maximum
absolute
residual
Mean absolute
residual
STD DEV of residual vector

line carenary

Table

1)
Value

Quantity
Number

of transmission

S. J. Sugden
(case 3)
residual(i)d
- 0.005447
- 0.0120029
- 0.01169
0.00195692
- 0.0043505
0.0239106
0.00644239
- 0.0123438
-0.0141385
0

ordinates.

survey

data

(case 3)
Value

was

reached

10
0.00000001000
0.0
124.00728267588
-9.00139688372
855.68602456075
0.02391056077
0.00922825148
0.00668603082

in four

Iterations

Experimental
results with the algorithm have shown that
simple linear approximations
used in equations (6) and
(7) give good starting
values.
The details
follow.
Equations (6) and (7) are, respectively
2y = sinh (2x) sinh (2(x - x,) + 0)
sinh (0) =

smh (Ax,)

(Al)
642)

Using sinh (t) zz t, we obtain

(j

sinh

(0)

Y, = !A!
2,x,

(A3)

x,

Applying the same approximation

to (Al) and setting
.

A = A,, the initial value, we arrive at:

2,y =

i,x

iterations.

/l,(x - xn) +

Jf!!
X, >

Finally:
should be further noted that the same rapid convergence is obtained with actual experimental
data as with
machine-generated
dummy data.
It

Appendix B: An initial estimate for the Newton

iteration
The Newton-Raphson
iterative scheme, which forms the
heart of the catenary curve-fitting
algorithm, requires a
reasonable
starting value for I. in order to converge.

j. _ YX - XY,
0-

xX,(x - xn)

for some (x, y).

Assuming that the data points are reasonably
uniformly spaced in x, we choose (x, y) to be a point near
the middle of the span. Tests have consistently
shown
that such a choice, which allows the linear approximation to be based essentially
on the full span of the
catenary, gives the best results.

Appl.

Math.

Modelling,

1994,

Vol. 18, May

279

Construction
Accordingly,
j

of transmission

line catenary from survey data: S. J. Sugden

our final expression

for & is

From equation
and only if

= YUG - X,Y,
(46)

0
~,X,~X,

xn)

where CI= Ln/2_J. The author is indebted to an anonymous referee for pointing
out a flaw in the original
scheme for estimating 2,.
In view of the preconditions
imposed on the data-see
3.1 and Appendix A-it is apparent that Lo is always well
defined. In computing
parlance, nopoating divide error
is possible as all xi are distinct, and none is zero. These
restrictions guarantee that a starting value, I,, is always
provided by equation (A6); however it should be realized
that a starting
value of &, = 0 is disastrous
for the
iterative algorithm.
From the equation
it is clear that
A0 = 0 is not permitted; indeed it corresponds
to c = cc
for the catenary, i.e., physically infinite tension or zero
weight of suspended cable, and therefore a linear arc for
the span.

280

Appl.

Math. Modelling,

1994,

Vol. 18, May

Y,
-=-

Yn

x,

XII

(A6), it is clear that A0 will be zero if

(A7)

As noted above, this corresponds

to the case of an
infinitely tensioned cable and cannot occur in practice.
What can occur, however, is that poor experimental
data
may contain such a pair of points (x,, y,) and (x,, y,).
For the application
motivating
the present work, i.e.,
construction
of transmission
line catenary from survey
data, this is virtually impossible. However, in the general
case of fitting arbitrary points to a catenary, this situation
could occur, and it is recommended
that in the computer
implementation,
a statement such as
if 121 I l.Oe - 6 then il:=
appear after the assignment
to equation (A6).

1.0
statement

corresponding