## 4 Results and Discussion  
Figure 6a shows a displacement nephogram of the whole model under a westerly, level-6 wind. Figure 6b shows the displacement nephogram of the whole model with a length of 1000 mm at the outlet of the tension clamp. The middle section of the mid-phase jumper swung back and forth along the east-west direction. The swing of the mid-phase jumper in this direction caused a greater bending moment at the lower area of the mid-phase jumper.  
It was assumed that the deflection of the conductor with the maximum displacement at the lower area of the whole model under wind load was Y\({}_{\text{b}}\) at 89 mm away from the outlet of the tension clamp. When Y\({}_{\text{b}}\) corresponding to different wind loads was imported into the local model, the maximum equivalent stress (\(\sigma_{\text{a}}\)) corresponding to the outlet position of the tension clamp of the local model under different wind loads could be obtained. As shown in Figure 6c, Y\({}_{\text{b}}\) changed with the swing of the whole model. When the displacement of the middle part of the mid-phase jumper along the negative X direction reached the maximum, Y\({}_{\text{b}}\) also reached the maximum (\(t=3\) s). This maximum value of Y\({}_{\text{b}}\) (0.258 mm) was imported into the local model to obtain the stress distribution at the outlet of the tension clamp under the level-6 wind, as shown in Figure 6d. It is seen that the stress concentration appeared near the fixed end of the local model, that is, the stress concentration appeared near the outlet of the tension clamp and the maximum stress appeared here. This explains why the actual mid-phase jumper breakage occurred at the outlet of the tension clamp.  
As shown in Figure 6e, with an increase in the wind load, Y\({}_{\text{b}}\) increased, accelerating rapidly after a level-4 wind, which was due to the rapid increase in the wind load applied to the whole model. As shown in Figure 6f, with an increase in the wind load, the value of \(\sigma_{\text{a}}\) of the outermost, third, and second layers of the aluminum conductor increased, where the \(\sigma_{\text{a}}\) of the third layer was the largest. The \(\sigma_{\text{a}}\) of the outermost and third layers were higher than the yield strength of the conductor under the level-6 wind. The difference between \(\sigma_{\text{a}}\) of the outermost layer and \(\sigma_{\text{a}}\) of the third layer increased gradually with the wind load increases, and the difference was approximately 10 MPa under the level-6 wind load. As shown in Figure 6g, the steel layers had not reached their yield strength (275 MPa) when all three aluminum layers yielded under the level-7 wind load, although \(\sigma_{\text{a}}\) on the first layer was the largest at this time. This was because the Young's modulus of the first layer was much larger than that of the aluminum because of its steel material, which resulted in a larger stress on the first layer of the steel core.  
Figure 5: (**a**) F \(-\) Y\({}_{\text{a}}\) of the whole microsegment model and the local model, and (**b**) the error of the whole model.  
Figure 6: **(a)** Swing mode of the mid-phase jumper under the wasesterly wind, (**b**) the displacement nephogram of the whole model with a length of 1000 mm at the outlet of the tension clamp, (**c**) \(Y_{\rm b}\) value of the whole model under the level-6 wind, (**d**) stress nephogram of the local finite element model, (**e**) value of \(Y_{\rm b}\) corresponding to different wind loads, (**f**) \(\sigma_{\rm a}\) of three aluminum conductor layers corresponding to different wind loads, and (**g**) \(\sigma_{\rm a}\) of the corresponding steel layer under different wind loads.