A6.2 Wind Force Coefficients and Wind Pressure Coefficients

C6-42
Recommendations for Loads on Buildings
A6.2 A6.2.1
Wind force coefficients and wind pressure coefficients Procedure for estimating wind force coefficients
Wind force coefficients and wind pressure coefficients depend on building shape, building surface condition, terrain condition and local topography at the construction site. Therefore, they should be determined from wind tunnel experiments that properly simulate full-scale conditions. However, the coefficients for buildings with regular shapes can be estimated from the procedure described in this section. The coefficients are divided into two categories, one for the design of structural frames and the other for the design of building components/cladding, because the wind effects on structural frames and components/cladding are quite different from each other. Wind force coefficients and wind pressure coefficients are generally defined in terms of the velocity pressure qH evaluated at the reference height H . For lattice structures and members, the wind force coefficients are defined in terms of the velocity pressure q Z evaluated at the height Z where the members under consideration are placed. The aspect ratio H / B is generally large for tall buildings, such as H > 45 m, for example, while
it is generally small, smaller than 1.0 in many cases, for lower buildings. The flow field around a building changes with the aspect ratio, which results in a significant change in the wind force and pressure coefficients. Therefore, two different procedures are provided for estimating the wind force coefficients for buildings with H > 45 m and those with H 45 m. The sign of the wind pressure coefficient indicates the direction of the pressure on the surface or element; positive values indicate pressures acting towards the surface and negative values pressures acting away from the surface (suction). In the case of curved roofs, the direction of wind pressure varies with location, as shown in Fig. A6.2.1. The wind forces on buildings and structures are the vector sum of the forces calculated from the pressures acting on surfaces such as walls and roofs or on structural elements. Wind force coefficients C D for estimating horizontal wind loads on structural frames are generally given by the difference between the wind pressure coefficients, C pe1 and C pe2 , on the windward and leeward faces, as shown in Eq.(A6.13); the exception is that for buildings with circular sections, where the resultant wind force coefficients are provided. Similarly, the wind force coefficients C R for estimating roof wind loads on structural frames are generally given by the difference between the external and internal pressure coefficients, C pe and C pi , on the roof, as shown in Eq. (A6.14), except for open roofs. The wind pressure coefficients are space- and time-averaged values where the averaging duration is 10 minutes. The averaging area depends on the building shape. The wind force coefficients C D for estimating horizontal wind loads on lattice structures are given as a function of the solidity . The wind force can also be calculated by using the wind force coefficients for individual members provided in A6.2.4(5). The peak wind force coefficients C C for the design of components/cladding are generally given * by the difference between the peak external pressure coefficient C pe and the factor C pi for the
CHAPTER 6
WIND LOADS C6-43
effect of fluctuating internal pressures, except for open roofs, in which the value of C C is provided. The values of C pe (and C C in the open roof case) are determined from the most critical positive
* and negative peak values irrespective of wind direction. Note that the factor C pi for the effect of fluctuating internal pressures is not the actual peak internal pressure coefficient C pi but an equivalent value producing the peak wind force coefficient C when combined with the peak external pressure C
coefficient C pe . The wind force coefficients and wind pressure coefficients given in this section are all for isolated buildings and are obtained from the results of wind tunnel experiments. When nearby buildings are expected to influence the wind forces and pressures, it is necessary to carry out wind tunnel experiments or other special researches to determine the coefficients12).
Figure A6.2.1
External pressure on a building with a vaulted roof in a wind parallel to the gable walls
A6.2.2 External pressure coefficient for structural frames (1) External pressure coefficients C pe for buildings with rectangular sections and heights greater than
45m External pressure coefficients on the windward and leeward walls of buildings with rectangular sections have the following features: 1) External pressure coefficients on windward walls are nearly proportional to the velocity pressure of the approach flow, except for areas near the top and bottom of the building. In the top and bottom areas, the external pressure coefficient is almost independent of height. 2) External pressure coefficients on leeward walls are negative and almost independent of height. Based on these features, the vertical distribution of external pressure coefficients on windward walls are assumed to be proportional to the factor for vertical profile ( k Z ) provided in Table A6.8, while those on leeward walls are assumed constant regardless of height. The external pressure coefficients on leeward walls decrease with increase in side ratio D / B . This feature is related to the behavior of the separated shear layer from the windward edge and is reflected in the value of C pe2 . The aspect ratio H / B of high-rise buildings with H > 45 m is in the range from 1 to 8 in most cases. In this range, the effect of H / B on the wind pressure coefficients is not significant. Therefore, the pressure
C6-44
coefficients are provided independently of H / B . The external pressure coefficients on roofs are determined from the results of various wind tunnel experiments20),
28)
as well as on the provisions of international codes and standards. Although
flat-roofed buildings have parapets in many cases, their effect on the pressure coefficients is not considered here. A reduction factor for external pressure coefficients on roofs with parapets is provided in Eurocode28). (2) External pressure coefficient C pe for buildings with rectangular sections and heights less than or equal to 45m 1) Buildings with flat, gable and mono-sloped roofs External pressure coefficients are influenced by many factors, such as roof shape, roof angle and flow condition. The coefficients in this section are estimated from the results of wind tunnel experiments on buildings with rectangular sections and reference heights less than or equal to 45m. The roof shapes under consideration are flat, gable and mono-sloped. When the roof angle is less than or equal to 10 degrees, the roof can be regarded as a flat roof. The roof and walls are divided into several zones, and the external pressure coefficients for these zones are provided in Table A.6.9(1) as a function of building configuration parameters ( B / H , D / H and ). The external pressure coefficient for each zone is estimated from the spatially averaged pressure over the zone for a range of wind directions, the center of which is normal to the wall. Both positive and negative values are provided for the external pressure coefficient for zone Ru , because the pressure coefficient becomes both positive and negative due to a small change in experimental conditions. It is necessary to combine these values with those for the other zones when the stresses in the members are calculated. The net wind forces on windward eaves become very large, because negative pressures act on the top surface and positive pressures on the bottom surface of the eaves. In this case, the external pressure coefficient on the bottom surface is approximately equal to that on the windward wall just bellow the eaves. 2) Buildings with vaulted roofs The external pressure coefficient for a building with a curved surface generally depends on the shape and surface roughness of the building, the flow conditions and the Reynolds number. Buildings with vaulted roofs, however, are immersed in very turbulent flows. Furthermore, such buildings have walls in most cases and therefore the flow tends to separate at the windward edge. These features suggest that the external pressure coefficients on vaulted roofs are less sensitive to surface roughness and the Reynolds number than those on circular cylindrical structures, as shown in A6.2.4(1). The external pressure coefficients C pe in Table A6.9(2) are determined from the results of a wind tunnel eperiment32),
33)
that focuses on medium-scale buildings in urban areas. The effects of surface
roughness are not considered in the experiment. For a wind normal to the gable wall (wind direction W1 ), the building shape is represented by the rise/width ratio f / B and the eaves-height/width ratio h / B . However, for a wind parallel to the
CHAPTER 6
WIND LOADS C6-45
gable wall (wind direction W2 ) it is represented by the rise/depth ratio
f / D and the
eaves-height/depth ratio h / D . In both cases, the roof is divided into three zones. However, the zone definitions vary because of the difference between the flow patterns of the two wind directions. For wind direction W1 , the definition of zones is similar to that for flat, gable and mono-sloped roofs. For wind direction W2 , however, the definition is similar to that for spherical domes. The external pressure coefficient corresponds to the area-averaged value and the design wind load is assumed constant over each zone. When h / B = 0 and f / B = 0 or when h / D = 0 and f / D = 0 , roof level coincides with ground level. The coefficients for these cases, which have no physical meaning, are provided to make interpolation possible. The external pressure coefficients on walls are determined in the same way as for buildings with flat, gable and mono-sloped roofs. 3) Spherical domes In the same manner as for buildings with vaulted roofs, the external pressure coefficients for spherical domes are determined from the results of a wind tunnel experiment34). Since the counter lines of mean pressure coefficients on a spherical dome are almost perpendicular to the wind direction, the dome surface is divided into four zones ( Ra to Rd ), as shown in Table A6.10, and the external pressure coefficient C pe for each zone is given by spatially averaging the mean external pressure coefficient over the zone. The building shape is represented by the rise/span ratio f / D and the eaves-height/span ratio h / D . The values of C pe for five f / D ratios and three h / D ratios are provided in Table A6.10. Linear interpolation can be used for values of f / D and h / D other than shown. Both positive and negative values of C pe are provided for zone Ra . The value for h / D = 0 and f / D = 0 are again provided for interpolation. The wind force coefficients for walls can be obtained from Table A6.12 by substituting h for H .
A6.2.3
Internal pressure coefficients for structural frames
Internal pressures are significantly influenced by the following factors: a) distribution of external pressures b) openings and gaps in building envelope c) internal volume of building d) openings and gaps in internal partitions e) operation of air-conditioners f) distortion of walls and/or roofs g) air temperature h) damage to building envelope In general, buildings have many gaps and openings, such as ventilating openings, etc., in their envelopes. Air leaks through these gaps and openings due to differences between external and internal pressures. The internal pressure is determined by applying the mass conservation principle to the air in the internal volume. For instance, a dominant opening in the windward wall may produce positive
C6-46
internal pressures, whereas one in a side or leeward wall may produce negative internal pressures. Moreover, the internal pressure fluctuates and its characteristics depend on the relationship between the size of the openings and the internal volume of the building. In this section, internal pressure coefficients for buildings without dominant opening are provided based on the results of a series of computations, in which it is assumed that the internal pressures are significantly influenced by factors a) and b) mentioned above. That is, the values of Cpi in Table A6.11 are provided based on the calculations of the mean internal pressures for various building configurations, assuming that the gaps and openings are uniformly distributed over the external walls and the internal pressure is caused by external pressures acting at the locations of the gaps and openings. When the influence of other factors is assumed to be significant, it should be taken into account for evaluating the internal pressure coefficient. For instance, when the internal volume is divided by airtight partitions, the influence of factor d) is significant. When powerful air-conditioners are in operation, the influence of factor e) is significant. In buildings with flexible roofs and/or walls, such as membrane structures, the influence of factor f) is significant. When glass windows on the windward face are broken by wind-borne debris in strong winds, the internal pressure is suddenly increased by winds blowing into the building. This often results in failures of roof structures. h) should be considered appropriately.
A6.2.4
In such cases, factor
Wind force coefficients for design of structural frames
(1) Wind force coefficients C D for buildings with circular sections Wind force coefficients for cylinders are affected by the Reynolds number, flow condition, aspect ratio H / D , surface roughness of the cylinders, and other factors. Figure A6.2.236) shows the variation of drag coefficient C D on a two dimensional smooth cylinder in a uniform flow with Reynolds number Re ( = UD / , where U , D and are wind speed, cylinder diameter and kinematic viscosity coefficient of flow, respectively). For wind, the Reynolds number is approximately given by
Re 7UD 10 4 , where U and D are expressed in units of m/s and m, respectively. It is found from Fig. A6.2.2 that C D changes significantly with Re in the range from 2 105 to 5 106. The flow around a cylinder is usually classified into four regimes, i.e. subcritical, critical, supercritical and transcritical, as shown in Fig. A6.2.2. Since the Reynolds number of the flow around buildings in strong winds is in the transcritical regime, the provision of C D in A6.2.4(1) is based on the values of the drag coefficients in this regime. The aspect ratio and surface roughness of the cylinder also affect the drag coefficient. aspect ratio and surface roughness are represented by k1 and k 2 , respectively37). The external pressure coefficients C pe on roofs are given in Table A6.10 assuming that f / D = 0 and h / D = 1 . In particular, the effect of surface roughness is significant in the transcritical regime. In Table A6.12 the effects of
CHAPTER 6
WIND LOADS C6-47
Figure A6.2.2
Plots of drag coefficient C D on a two-dimensional cylinder with very smooth surface as a function of Reynolds number Re 36)
(2) Wind force coefficients C R for free roofs with rectangular base For free roofs where strong wind can flow under the roof, high fluctuating pressures act on both the top and bottom surfaces. It is reasonable to evaluate the net wind force coefficients directly, not from the wind pressure coefficients on the top and bottom surfaces, because the correlation between fluctuating wind pressures on both surfaces is higher than that for enclosed buildings. The wind force coefficients in Table A6.13 can be used for small-scale buildings, to which the simplified method (A6.11) is applied, because the coefficients are determined from the results of wind tunnel experiments on free roofs with H < 10 m. For gable ( > 0 ) and troughed roofs ( < 0 ), previous studies have shown the most critical peak wind force coefficients on the windward and leeward areas irrespective of wind direction. Since the tested roof angle is limited to the range of | | 30 , the provision is also limited to that range. The wind force coefficients are regulated for a clear flow case where there are no obstructions under the roof. The flow pattern around a roof is significantly affected by obstructions under it. If there is any obstruction whose blockage ratio is larger than approximately 50%, the wind pressure on the bottom surface may increase significantly, resulting in a significant increase in the net wind force on the roof. In such a case, it is necessary to evaluate the wind force coefficients from wind tunnel experiments and so on. (3) Wind force coefficients C D for lattice structures The size of individual lattice structure members is generally much smaller than the width of the structure, and they are arranged symmetrically. Therefore, it is assumed that the only wind force acting on a plane of the structure is drag. Total drag can be estimated as the summation of the drags on each member of the structure. Since the flow around a member depends only on the characteristics of the local flow around it, drag is proportional to the velocity pressure at the height of the member. Based on these features, the following two methods are often used for estimating the wind force on lattice
C6-48
structures. One is to multiply the wind force coefficient, given as a function of the solidity of the plane, by the projected area of the plane. The other method39) is to sum the wind forces on all members, which is given by the product of the wind force coefficient C D of each member and its projected area. For any method, the solidity should be small. In the Recommendations, the former method is used and the wind force coefficient C D is provided only for 0.6 . The wind force coefficient is represented as a function of the solidity , the plan of the structure and the cross section of the member. The solidity is defined as the ratio of the projected area AF of the plane to the whole plane area A0 = ( Bh) of the structure. The value of is calculated for
each panel of the lattice structure when the wind direction is normal to the plane. In the calculation, the areas of the leeward lattice members and the appurtenances are not included. The wind forces on the appurtenances can be estimated from the provision of C D for members (Table A6.16) or from wind tunnel experiments and they are added to the wind force on the structure. Table A6.14 provides the wind force coefficients C D for lattice structures with square and triangular plan shapes, which consist of angles or circular pipes. The wind force coefficient C D for the triangular shape in plan is the same for the two wind directions shown in the table. When the members are circular pipes, the wind force coefficients C D for the members are affected by the Reynolds number. The provisions are based on the value in the subcritical Reynolds number regime. In strong winds, the value of C D may become smaller than that given in the provisions due to the effect of the Reynolds number. However, this effect is not considered here. When the plan of the structure and/or the cross section of the member are different from those in Table A6.14, the wind loads on the structure can be estimated by using the wind force coefficients of the members given in Table A6.16 together with the local velocity pressure. However, the solidity of the structure is required to be less than 0.6. (4) Wind force coefficients C D for fences on ground Wind force coefficients C D for fences on the ground are defined as a function of the solidity in the same manner as those for lattice structures. The value of C D for = 0 in Table A6.15 is introduced to obtain intermediate values of C D for 0 < < 0.2 . Wind load for a fence can be calculated according to the simplified procedure using C D and the projected area A, which is defined as the whole area multiplied by . (5) Wind force coefficients C for components Wind force coefficients C for components are determined from wind tunnel experiments with two-dimensional models in a smooth flow. The values of C can be applied to line-like members less than approximately 50cm wide, but should not be applied to ordinary buildings. In some cases, the value of C in the across-wind direction becomes relatively large when the wind direction deviates only a little from the normal direction. In such cases, two values of C ( 0.6) are provided in Table A6.16. Wind force coefficients for components may also be used for calculating the wind loads on lattice structures, together with the local velocity pressure q Z at height Z of the member under
CHAPTER 6
WIND LOADS C6-49
consideration. The wind load on a component is given by the product of q Z , C , (1 + 7 I Z ) and bl ( bl for nets), where I Z is the turbulence intensity at height Z (see Eq.(A6.7)). Peak external pressure coefficients for components/cladding (1) Peak external pressure coefficients C pe for buildings with rectangular sections and heights
A6.2.5
greater than 45 m Peak external pressure coefficients for components/cladding correspond to the most critical positive and negative peak pressure coefficients irrespective of wind direction. Positive pressures occur on windward walls, and their characteristics are affected by the vertical profile of the approach flow. On the other hand, negative pressures (suctions) occur on side and leeward walls, and their characteristics are not significantly affected by the vertical profile of the approach flow; that is, the vertical distribution is nearly uniform. Large negative pressures occur near the windward edges of sidewalls due to flow separation from the edge. The peak external pressure coefficients provided in Table A6.17 are determined from the results of wind tunnel experiments41)-44). These coefficients are given by the product of the external pressure coefficients influenced by the profile of the mean wind speed and the gust effect factor influenced by the profile of the turbulence intensity. Therefore, the positive external peak pressure coefficients are affected by the terrain category. However, negative external peak pressures are almost independent of terrain category. For tall buildings with recessed or chamfered corners, the negative peak pressures are influenced by the size of the recess or chamfer. The values of C for such buildings are also determined from the
pe
results of wind tunnel experiments42), 43). The values in Table A6.17 can also be used for buildings with more than one recessed or chamfered corner. Peak external pressure coefficients for roofs are provided only for flat roofs. For diagonal wind directions, very large suctions are induced near windward corners due to the generation of conical vortices. However, the large suction zone is limited to a relatively small area45). Therefore, the use of such large peak pressure coefficients for large components may overestimate the design wind loads. In order to consider the subject area of components/cladding in zone Rc , an area reduction factor kC for roofs is introduced. The provisions are applicable to buildings with aspect ratios H / B less than or equal to 8, because the values are based on wind tunnel experiments on such buildings. When a building is constructed on an escarpment or a ridge-shaped topography, the approach wind is affected by the local topography, and therefore the positive peak pressure coefficients may change significantly. Since wind speeds near the ground are increased by such local topography, the vertical distribution of positive peak external pressure coefficients becomes nearly uniform. In such cases, positive peak external pressures can be calculated by using the values of k Z and I Z at the reference height H . This simplified method overestimates the wind loads to some degree in most cases. However, for terrain category I, it may underestimate the positive peak external pressures. In this case, investigations by wind tunnel experiments are recommended.
C6-50
(2) Peak external pressure coefficient C pe for buildings with rectangular sections and heights less than or equal to 45 m 1) Buildings with flat, gable and mono-sloped roofs For estimating peak pressure coefficients for components/cladding of low-rise buildings, the subject area is assumed to be 1 m2 as a typical value. Positive peak external pressure coefficients are given as a function of the turbulence intensity, because the pressures depend significantly on the turbulence of the approach flow. The positive peak external pressure coefficient on a roof is evaluated by using the positive external pressure coefficient C pe for zone Ru in Table A 6.9(1). If no positive value of
C pe is provided for small roof angles, it is not necessary to evaluate the positive wind pressures.
Negative peak external pressure coefficients in the edge and corner regions are significantly influenced by vortices related to flow separation at the edge. Negative peak pressure coefficients tend to increase in magnitude as the turbulence intensity of the approach flow increases. However, the influence of turbulence on negative peak pressure coefficients is smaller than that on positive peak pressure coefficients on windward walls. Consequently, the provision of negative peak pressure coefficients is determined from the values for terrain category IV and are independent of turbulence intensity. High suctions are induced in the edge and corner regions of walls and roofs, whose widths are affected by building dimensions such as height and width. For gable roofs, very high suctions are induced near corners (zone Rb ) when the roof angle is less than or equal to 10 and in the ridge corner (zones Rb and Rg ) when 20 . For mono-sloped roofs, very high suctions are induced near the higher eaves corners (zone Rd ); the suctions are larger and the high suction area is wider than that for gable roofs. Consequently, the peak external pressure coefficient for zone Rd is larger than that for gable roofs. In such high suction zones, the wind load can be reduced by using the area reduction factor k C when the subject area AC of components/cladding is greater than 1 m2 (up to 5 m2). 2) Buildings with vaulted roofs The peak external pressure coefficients C pe are determined from the results of wind-tunnel experiments33), focusing on medium-scale buildings in urban areas, in which the h / B1 ratio is varied from 0 to 0.7 and the f / B1 ratio from 0.1 to 0.4. When the f / B1 ratio is small, the corner and edge regions of a roof are significantly affected by vortex generation as in the flat roof case. This results in larger peak suctions in zones R a and Rd . When the f / B1 ratio is relatively large, large peak suctions are induced in zone Rd for winds nearly perpendicular to the gable edge and in zone Rc for winds nearly perpendicular to the eaves. Taking these wind pressure features into account, the roof is divided into several zones and positive and negative peak external pressure coefficients are provided for these zones, as shown in Table A6.18(2). When the f / B1 ratio is lower than 0.1, the roof is subjected to higher suctions similar to gable and mono-sloped roofs. Therefore, it is not necessary to evaluate the positive peak external pressure coefficients. The values for walls can be determined from Table A6.18(1). (3) Peak external pressure coefficients C for buildings with circular sections
pe
CHAPTER 6
WIND LOADS C6-51
For buildings with circular sections, the maximum positive peak external pressure coefficient occurs at the stagnation point on the windward face, whereas the maximum negative peak external pressure coefficient occurs near the point of maximum negative mean external pressure. The vertical distribution of positive peak pressure coefficients depends strongly on the mean velocity profile of the approach flow in the same manner as that for buildings with rectangular sections. On the other hand, negative peak external pressure coefficients are influenced by the aspect ratios H / D and surface roughness of buildings. The factor k1 considers the effect of aspect ratio, and the factor k 2 the effect of surface roughness in the transcritical Reynolds number regime. Negative peak external pressure coefficients become larger in magnitude near the top of the building because of the flow separation from the top (i.e. end effect). The factor k 3 considers this effect47). The values in Table A6.19 are applicable to buildings with aspect ratios H / D less than or equal to 8, because the provision is based on wind tunnel experiments using such models. Only negative peak pressures are considered for roofs. The values of C pe for domes with
f / D = 0 provided in Table A6.20 can be used. (4) Peak external pressure coefficients C for buildings with circular sections and spherical domes
pe
Peak external pressure coefficients in Table A6.20 are determined from the results of wind tunnel experiments34). External pressures on domes fluctuate significantly due to the effects of turbulence of approach flow as well as of vortex generation. Therefore, both positive and negative peak pressure coefficients are provided. Because the geometry of spherical domes is axisymmetric, they are divided into three zones ( R a , Rb and Rc ) by coaxial circles. When the rise/span ratio ( f / D) is small, negative peak external pressures become large in magnitude near the windward edge (zone R a ) due to the flow separation at the windward edge. On the other hand, when the f / D ratio is large, large positive peak external pressures are induced near the windward edge due to the direct influence of the approach flow. Therefore, positive peak external pressure coefficients for zone R a are provided as a function of the turbulence intensity I uH at the reference height H of the approach flow when
f / D 0.2 .
A6.2.6
Factor for effect of fluctuating internal pressures
Peak wind force coefficients for components/cladding shall be determined from the maximum instantaneous values, both positive and negative, of the pressure difference between the exterior and interior surfaces. However, there are few data on these pressure differences. In the Recommendations, it is assumed that the peak wind force coefficient C is represented by Eq.(A.6.15), because the peak
C
external pressure coefficients C pe are usually obtained from wind tunnel experiments and a large amount of data is available. Figure A6.2.3 shows a schematic illustration of fluctuating external and internal pressures. The frequency of internal pressure fluctuations is lower than that of external pressure fluctuations, and the
* peak external and internal pressures are not induced simultaneously. The factor C Pi for the effect of
fluctuating internal pressures in Eq.(A6.15) does not represent the peak internal pressure coefficient
C6-52
itself but an equivalent value that provides the actual peak wind force when combined with the peak external pressure coefficient C pe . The value of CC is evaluated from a series of computations for the peak wind force coefficients using wind tunnel data on C for various building configurations.
pe
The following assumptions are made in the computations: 1) Gaps and openings in the external walls are uniformly distributed, and the internal pressures are generated from the external pressures at the locations of the gaps and openings. 2) The fluctuating internal and external pressures are independent of each other. When the building has intentionally designed openings or when glass windows on the windward face are broken by flying debris, the size of the openings may be very large compared with ordinary gaps and openings. The values in Table A6.21 cannot be used for such cases. It is necessary to estimate the peak wind force coefficients appropriately by using the data on the external and internal pressures obtained from wind tunnel experiments. Some international codes and standards20), 50) provide internal pressure coefficients for buildings with dominant openings.
Wind force coefficient, wind pressure coefficient ^ CC C*pi ^ Cpe
wind force coefficient external pressure coefficient internal pressure coefficient ^ CC ^ C peak wind force coefficient peak external pressure coefficient peak internal pressure coefficient
pe
Time
Cpi
Cpi
Fig.A6.2.3 A6.2.7
Example of fluctuating external and internal pressures acting on components/cladding
Peak wind force coefficient for components/cladding
For free roofs, it is necessary to directly evaluate the net wind force represented by the pressure difference between the top and bottom surfaces. Regulation of peak wind force coefficients is based on previous wind tunnel experiments for the most critical peak wind forces irrespective of wind direction38). When the roof angle is relatively large, large peak wind forces are induced along the roof edges as well as along the ridge, because large suctions are induced by conical vortices on either the top or bottom surface of the roof. The roof is divided into two zones ( Ra and Rb ), and positive and negative peak wind force coefficients are provided for each zone as a function of roof angle . Larger net wind forces are induced in zone Rb . When any obstruction whose blockage ratio is larger than approximately 50% is placed under the roof, it is necessary to evaluate the peak wind force coefficients from an appropriate wind tunnel experiment and so on.
CHAPTER 6
WIND LOADS C6-53
A6.3 A6.3.1
Gust Effect Factors
Gust effect factor for along-wind loads on structural frames
(1) Fundamental consideration In this recommendation, gust effect factor is based on overturning moment as described by the following equation. M M + g D MD g GD = Dmax = Dmax = 1 + D MD MD MD MD
(A6.3.1)
where M Dmax , M D , MD are maximum value, mean value and rms of overturning moment at the base of the building, respectively. M Dmax and MD involve load effect due to the dynamic response of the building. If MD is expressed as composition of background component MDQ and resonance component MDR , Eq.(A6.3.1) becomes as follows.
2 2 GD = 1 + g D MDQ + MDR M D 1 + g D
MDQ
MD
2 1 + D
f D S MD ( f D ) 2 4 D MDQ
(A6.3.2)
where S MD ( f D ) is power spectrum density of overturning moment at natural frequency for the first mode f D and D is the mode correction factor. MDR is considered for only the first mode vibration, and MDR is inertia force by vibration as described in the following equation.
MDR = a ( Z )m( Z ) ZdZ = a ( H ) ( Z )m( Z ) ZdZ

0 0
(A6.3.3)
where a ( Z ) , m(Z ) and (Z ) are rms of acceleration at height Z , mass per unit height and vibration mode, respectively. The parameters of Eq.(A6.3.2) are expressed by aerodynamic force coefficients as follows. M D = q H BH 2 C MD (A6.3.4) (A6.3.5) (A6.3.6)
MDQ = qH BH C ' MD
f D S MD ( f D )
2 MDQ
* * f D S CMD ( f D )
C '2 MD
' where C MD is overturning moment coefficient, C MD is rms overturning moment coefficient and * * S CMD ( f D ) is power spectrum of overturning moment coefficient at non-dimensional frequency f D .
If these equations are taken into consideration, Eq.(A6.3.2) becomes as follows.

GD 1 + g D C ' MD C MD
2 1 + D * * f D S CMD ( f D ) 4 D C ' 2 MD
(A6.3.7)
Additionally, in this formula non-dimensional frequency is defined by turbulence scale,

* fD * = f D LH / U H , but, in the wind tunnel test breadth of the building it is used usually f D = f D B / U H .
(2) Model of wind force The model of wind force is based on the assumption that wind velocity fluctuation is directly changed into the wind pressure on the wall of the building. In this model, mean wind velocity, turbulence intensity, power spectrum of wind velocity and co-coherence are described by Eqs.(A6.8),
C6-54
(A6.11), (A6.1.3), (A6.1.4), respectively. Additionally, wind force coefficient is expressed by a difference of the wind pressure coefficient of the windward side and the wind pressure coefficient (constant) of a lee side as described by the following equation.
Z CD = CPA H
CPB
(A6.3.8)
' * C MD , C MD and S CMD ( f D ) are expressed using the parameter of the recommendation equations as
follows.
CMD = CH Cg
' ' C MD = C H Cg
* * f D S CMD ( f D ) = C ' 2 FD MD
(A6.3.9) (A6.3.10) (A6.3.11)
where CH is wind force coefficient at the top of the building, Cg is a factor relevant to overturning
' moment in the along-wind direction, Cg is a factor relevant to rms overturning moment in the
along-wind direction and FD is a spectrum factor of windward force. Spectrum factor of wind velocity F , size reduction factor S D , factor expressing correlation of wind pressure of a windward side and a leeward side R are considered for FD . Characteristics of overturning moment expressed by Eqs.(A6.3.9)(A6.3.11) are shown in Fig.A6.3.1 in comparison with those obtained from wind tunnel tests. The recommendation values of overturning moment and rms overturning moment are slightly greater than the test values, and the spectrum is mostly in agreement with the test values.
recommendation value/test value
1.0
recommendation value/test value
1.5
1.5
10 -2 10 -3 10 -4
1.0
0.5
0.0 0
category II III IV
1 2 3
category
0.5 II III IV 0 1 2
fSCMD(f)
test recommendation
10 -2 10 -1 10 0
0.0
10 -5 -3 10 3
side ratio D/B

(a) mean overturning moment coefficient
side ratio D/B

(b) rms overturning moment coefficient
fB/UH
(c) power spectrum density of over turning moment
Figure A6.3.1
Along-wind force in comparison with those obtained from wind tunnel tests ( H / BD = 4 )52)
(3) Fluctuating component of overturning moment When the vibration mode is = Z / H , the relation between spectrum of overturning moment due to the wind force S MD ( f ) and spectrum of overturning moment due to the load effect by vibration
CHAPTER 6
WIND LOADS C6-55
' S MD ( f ) is expressed by the following equation.
S 'MD ( f ) = m ( f ) S MD ( f )
(A6.3.12)
where m ( f )
is mechanical admittance as expressed by the following equation. 1 2 m ( f ) = 2 2 2 1 ( f / fD ) + 4 D ( f / f D ) 2
(A6.3.13)
2 The variance of overturning moment due to the load effect by vibration MD is the integral of 2 Eq.(A6.3.12), and the variance consists of back ground component MDQ and resonance component 2 MDR as expressed by the following equation.
2 2 2 MD = S ' MD ( f )df MDQ + MDR 0
S MD ( f )df + S MD ( f D )
2 m ( f ) df = MDQ +
f D S MD ( f D ) 4 D
(A6.3.14)
In this equation, resonance component is estimated approximately as a response to white noise
S MD ( f D ) .
Therefore, overturning moment for maximum load effect is expressed by following equation.
2 2 M Dmax = M D + g D MDQ + MDR
(A6.3.15)
where g D is called peak factor, and is the ratio of maximum fluctuating component to standard deviation. This is expressed by the following equation, based on the theory of stationary stochastic process.
g D = 2 ln( DT ) +
0.577 2 ln( DT )
2 ln( DT ) + 1.2
(A6.3.16)
where T is time for evaluation and D is level crossing rate calculated from power spectrum density as in the following equation.
D =
f 2 S ' MD ( f ) df
0 S 'MD ( f )df
fD
RD 1 + RD
(A6.3.17)
Additionally, in some foreign wind loading standards, M Dmax is expressed by the following formula. In this equation, the background component and the resonance component are distinguished.
2 2 2 2 M Dmax = M D + g Q MDQ + g R MDR
(A6.3.18)
where g Q is peak factor of background component (=3.4) and g R is peak factor of resonance component calculated from Eq.(A6.3.16) as D = f D . (4) Vertical distribution of equivalent static wind load In the gust effect factor method, the vertical distribution of wind load is given by mean wind load multiplied by gust effect factor. This wind load is an approximate value based on the assumption that vibration mode is close to mean wind load distribution and the building has uniform density. Actually, the mean, background and resonance components of wind load distribution are different. The mean component is expressed by Eq.(A6.3.8), and the resonance component is expressed by Eq.(A6.3.3). Therefore, if the vertical distribution of building mass is remarkably uneven, the resonance component
C6-56
should be estimated carefully. In that case, the distribution of resonance component for the fundamental vibration mode could be estimated from the following equation.
2 2 WD = W D + WDQ + WDR
(A6.3.19)
where
W D = qH CD A
WDQ = g DQ q H C D
C'g Cg
WDR = a Dmax ( Z )m( Z )

where
A B
WD , WDQ , WDR (N): mean, background and resonance component of wind load, respectively aDmax (cm/s2): maximum acceleration at top of building as defined in A6.10.2 g DQ : peak factor of background component In this recommendation, it is assumed that the background component has a similar distribution to mean component. The following methods may also be used. 1) Shear force or overturning moment at a certain building height may be obtained from the integral of pressure on area over the height20). 2) Load distribution can be defined by LRC formula53). (5) Example of calculation of gust effect factor Figure A6.3.2 shows the variation of gust effect factor by terrain category and building height for H / B = 4 , D / B = 1 and U 0 = 35 m/s. The gust effect factors become large with terrain category and building height.
3.8
gust effect factor G D
3.6 3.4 3.2 3.0 2.8 2.6 2.4 2.2 2.0

0 0 50 50 100 100 150 150
category
V IV III II I
height of building (m)
200 200
250 250
300 300
Figure A6.3.2 A6.3.2
Variation of gust effect factor with terrain category and building height
Gust effect factor for roof wind loads on structural frames
Gust effect factor for roof wind loads on structural frames is influenced by external pressure and internal pressure. It can be assumed that there is no correlation between fluctuation of external
CHAPTER 6
WIND LOADS C6-57
pressure and fluctuation of internal pressure for a building without dominant openings. Furthermore, Helmholtz resonance, the phenomenon of varying internal pressure at a specific frequency by external pressure, can be disregarded. Fluctuating internal pressure coefficient is derived from the theory for buildings with uniform openings54). Therefore, external pressure fluctuation, which is slower than response time of internal pressure, is transmitted as internal pressure, and it is assumed that quicker pressure fluctuation is not transmitted as internal pressure. Furthermore, fluctuating internal pressures act on all parts of a roof simultaneously for more safety. Generally, response time of internal pressure is long enough, compared with the natural period for the first mode of the roof structure. Therefore, resonance of the roof structure for internal pressure can be disregarded. Under these conditions, gust effect factor for roof wind loads is given by the following equation.
GR = 1
2 2 2 2 g Re rRe (1 + RRe ) + g Ri rRi rc2
1 rc
(A6.3.21)
where g Re and g Ri are peak factors for generalized external pressure and generalized internal pressure, and these value are g Re = 3.5 , g Ri = 3 from the results of test and measurement. rRe and rRi are the generalized fluctuating external and internal pressures divided by the generalized mean wind pressure coefficient. rc is the generalized mean internal pressure divided by the generalized mean external pressure coefficient. RRe is resonance factor, which is calculated from the non-dimensional power spectrum density at the frequency of the first mode of the roof and the critical damping ratio.
wind load
time
Figure A6.3.3
Fluctuation of roof wind loads when wind force coefficient is small
An equation of gust effect factor is expressed for two cases of internal pressure coefficient, C pi = 0.4 and C pi = 0 , given by Table A6.11. If wind force coefficient is small, roof wind loads act in the upward direction and in the downward direction as shown in Fig.A6.3.3. When combinations with other loads are considered, downward wind load can be dominant even if the absolute value is small. Therefore, downward wind load can be calculated. In Eq.(A6.17), GR for +corresponds to load in the same direction as given by wind load coefficient, and GR for is opposite. The above is the same for Eq.(A6.18) and Eq.(A6.19). However, wind force coefficients are given as positive or negative in A6.2.2, and gust effect factor should be calculated from Eq.(A6.17) with +. Furthermore,
C6-58
the equation, f R 0.57
( is deformation at center due to weight), can approximately evaluate
the natural frequency for the first mode of the roof beam, and the document55) is useful for estimating the critical damping ratio, R . (1) Case for C pi = 0.4 Roof wind loads can be calculated for roof beams parallel to the wind direction and for roof beams normal to the wind direction. If external pressure coefficient C pe is 0.4 over the whole subject area as center beam shown in Fig.A6.3.4(a), the wind force coefficient becomes C R = 0 . In this case, roof wind loads can be calculated from Eq.(A6.18), which is the product C R G R of wind force coefficient C R and gust effect factor GR . However, when the wind force coefficient becomes partially C R = 0 as shown in Fig.A6.3.4(b), the wind loads can be calculated from Eq.(A6.17).
-0.2 -0.4 -0.4
-1.0 -0.6
-0.8
-0.4
external pressure coefficient
external pressure coefficient
internal pressure coefficient
-0.4 -0.6 -0.2
+0.2 beam
-0.4 0 beam
internal pressure coefficient -0.4 -0.4 wind force coefficient beam
0 coefficient
wind force
wind direction
(a) beams normal to the wind direction

Figure A6.3.4
Relation between wind force coefficient and external or internal pressure coefficient (for C pi = 0.4 )
beam
wind direction
(b) beams parallel to the wind direction
(2) For C pi = 0 Wind force coefficient is equal to external pressure coefficient for C pi = 0 . In this case, gust effect factor can be calculated from Eq.(A6.19). The equation considers the mean and fluctuating components of external pressure, and the fluctuating component of internal pressure.
A6.4 A6.4.1 Across-wind Vibration and Resulting Wind Load
Scope of applications
The procedure described in this section applies to the equivalent static wind load with consideration of across-wind forced vibration at a design wind speed lower than the non-dimensional critical wind speed for vortex-induced vibration or aeroelastic instability. For a design wind speed expressed by
CHAPTER 6
WIND LOADS C6-59
U H /( f L BD) > 10 , aeroelastic instability may well occur and wind load will need to be calculated from the wind force and the response in wind tunnel tests. Along-wind vibration is caused by turbulence in natural wind, but across-wind vibration is caused by wind turbulence as well as by the vortex in the wake of the building. Although there are many study examples with regard to the behavior of a vortex in the wake of a building, unclear points remain. Furthermore, since the behavior is greatly affected by building shape, it is difficult on the whole to theoretically estimate across-wind vibrations in the same manner as for along-wind vibrations. With consideration of the first mode, an estimation equation for across-wind load has been derived from data of across-wind fluctuating overturning moment obtained from wind tunnel tests. Subjects for this estimation equation are structures with rectangular planes (side ratio D / B = 0.2 ~ 5 ) from which many experimental data have been obtained. Moreover, by taking into account the fact that experimental data for buildings with an aspect ratio H / BD exceeding 6 are insufficient, and that aeroelastic instability easily occurs in these buildings, the scope of application is limited to aspect ratios of 6 or less. Furthermore, data of across-wind fluctuating overturning moment for buildings with plane shapes other than rectangular planes can be obtained from wind tunnel tests. Where it is unnecessary to consider aeroelastic instability, across-wind wind loads can be calculated using the method indicated in the recommendations.
A6.4.2
Procedure
(1) Concept of wind load estimation Since a fundamental mode usually predominates in across-wind vibration, across-wind loads are calculated using the spectral modal method considering only to the first translational mode, in the same manner as for along-wind loads. For the non-resonance component, the profile of fluctuating across-wind force is set to be vertically uniform and the magnitude of the fluctuating wind force is decided to agree with the fluctuating overturning moment. The resonance component estimates the inertia force due to vibration and the vertical profile is determined using L in Eq.(A6.33) so as to be proportioned to the first translational mode. It is recommended that the critical damping ratio be estimated with reference to Damping in buildings 7). (2) Modeling of overturning moment The overturning moment varies with building shape and wind characteristics, but in the subjective scope the breadth-depth ratio has the greatest effect on the overturning moment: the effects of other parameters are slight. Therefore, in the recommendations, the fluctuating overturning moment is set as a function of only the breadth-depth ratio of a building based on wind tunnel test data 52, 56). (3) Buildings with circular planes Across-wind responses of buildings with plane shapes other than rectangular planes can be estimated with the same concept. This section details buildings with circular planes. The parameter
C6-60
' values used in Eq.(A6.20) need to be set to C L = 0.06 , m = 1 , 1 = 0.9 , f S1 = 0.15U H / B ,
1 = 0.2 . These parameter values are in the transcritical critical region of Reynolds number
( U H D 6 (m2/s)).
A6.5 A6.5.1 Torsional Vibration and Resulting Wind Load
Scope of application
The procedure described in this section applies to the equivalent static wind load with consideration of torsional vibration with a design wind speed lower than the non-dimensional critical wind speed for vortex-induced vibration or aeroelastic instability. For the design wind speed expressed by U H /( f T BD ) > 10 , aeroelastic instability may well occur and the wind load needs to be calculated from the wind force or the response in wind tunnel tests. Torsional vibration is caused by asymmetric wind pressure distribution on the windward face, side faces and leeward face. This is due to both wind turbulence and the vortex in the buildings wake. The torsional moment induced wind force is subject to the effects of building shape and wind behavior. Therefore, the method for assessing the torsional wind load is derived from the fluctuating torsional moment data obtained from wind tunnel tests as for the across-wind direction. Subjects for this estimation equation are buildings with rectangular planes (side ratio D / B = 0.2 ~ 5 ) and aspect ratio H / BD of 6 or less, from which many experiment data have been obtained. Furthermore, data of torsional moment for buildings with plane shapes other than rectangular planes can be obtained by carrying out wind tunnel tests. Where aeroelastic instability does not need to be considered, torsional wind loads can be calculated using the method indicated in the recommendations.
A6.5.2
Estimation equation
(1) Concept of wind load estimation Since the effects of pressure acting on both sides on the torsional moment are complex, it is difficult to formulate the power spectral density as a simple algebraic function. However, it is relatively easy to collect experimental data of the response angle acceleration. Therefore, the equation for computing the torsional wind load is based on the estimate of the response angle acceleration. With regard to the non-resonant component, the profile of fluctuating torsional moment is set as vertically uniform and the magnitude of the fluctuating torsional moment is decided to agree with the fluctuating torsional moment at the base of the building. The resonant component estimates the inertia force due to vibration and the vertical profile is determined using L in Eq.(A6.33) so as to be proportioned to the first translational mode. Buildings with an eccentric factor (eccentric distance / radius of rotation) of 0.2 or less for which any effect of eccentricity can be ignored are subject to the formulation of the estimation equation. The wind load on a building for which the eccentricity cannot be ignored needs to be calculated by carrying out wind tunnel tests.
CHAPTER 6
WIND LOADS C6-61
It is recommended that the critical damping ratio be estimated with reference to Damping in buildings 7). (2) Modeling of torsional moment The torsional moment varies according to building shape and wind characteristics, but in respect of buildings in the subjective scope the breadth-depth ratio exerts the greatest effect on the torsional moment and the effects of other parameters are slight. Therefore, in the recommendations, the fluctuating torsional moment is set as a function of only the breadth-depth ratio of a building based on wind tunnel test data 52, 56).
A6.6 A6.6.1 Horizontal Wind Loads on Lattice Structural Frames
This procedure has been prepared for estimating horizontal wind loads on lattice structures built directly on the ground, and whose members all have small enough sections in comparison with the width of the structure for the flow field around a member to be dominated by the local wind speed. The procedure for estimating wind loads on lattice structures is basically the same as that described for horizontal wind loads on buildings in Section 6.2, and can be applied to lattice structures of varying widths and solidity ratios in the vertical direction. In addition, the effects of accessory ladders are considered by the evaluation of wind force coefficients of those obtained from wind tunnel tests and so on.
A6.6.2
Procedure for estimating wind loads
Horizontal wind loads are estimated by a gust effect factor method. The wind loads are calculated from the local design velocity pressure because lattice structures often have varying widths and solidity ratios in the vertical direction. The projected area in Eq.(A6.22) is the total projected area of all elements on one face normal to the wind. The area per panel is usually calculated.
A6.6.3
Gust effect factor Solidity ratios in the vertical direction are uniform, that is to say, wind force coefficients of each panel are uniform. A fundamental mode shape can be given by Eq.(A6.6.1) where = 2 , and vibration modes higher than the fundamental one are neglected.
In deriving Eq.(A6.23), it is assumed as follow: i) ii)
Z (A6.6.1) H According to the above assumptions, the peak response x max,Z at height Z is given as a function
of the generalized stiffness K of the fundamental mode by:
C6-62
x max,Z = g D
q H C D HB0 2I H K 0.95 + +
BD (1 + RD )
(A6.6.2)
However, the mean response X Z at height Z is given by:

XZ = where qH , I H qH CD H K B0 B0 BH (A6.6.3) 1 + 2 + 2 + 2 + are the velocity pressure and the turbulence intensity, respectively, at H height,
and is the exponent of the power law in the wind speed profile. g D , RD and BD are the peak factor, the resonance factor and the back ground excitation factor, respectively. Gust effect factor is given by Eq.(A.6.23).
Figure A6.6.1 A6.7 A6.7.1 Vortex Induced Vibration
Definition of B0 , BH , H
This section describes vortex-induced vibration, which can occur in tall slender buildings, chimneys, and structural components with circular sections.
A6.7.2
Vortex induced vibration and resulting wind load on buildings with circular sections
Shear layers separated from windward corners of both sides of buildings roll up alternately to shed into wake and form Karman vortex streets behind the buildings. According to the alternate shedding, the periodic fluctuating wind loads act on the buildings in the across-wind direction. When the natural frequency of the building coincides with the vortex shedding frequency, the vibration of the building can be resonant with the periodic fluctuating wind loads, causing the building to vibrate at large amplitude in the across-wind direction. This is vortex-induced vibration, which is a problem for many structures, particularly chimneys. The critical wind speed of the resonance is larger than the design wind speed for most buildings, so these phenomena are not normally important. However, as the critical wind speed is smaller than
CHAPTER 6
WIND LOADS C6-63
design wind speed for very slender buildings with small natural frequency and damping like steel chimneys, tall buildings and building components, the effect of vortex induced vibration should be checked carefully in the wind resistance design stage. A lot of research has been done on vortex-induced vibration and a number of methods have been developed in the past decade for estimating vibration amplitude and its equivalent static wind loads, particularly for structures with circular sections. The equivalent wind loads described in the recommendation are based on the spectral modal method in which the Strouhal number of vortex shedding is 0.2, and the power spectrum of the fluctuating wind loads depends on the vibration amplitude6) and the Reynolds number. The effects of structural density, damping and Reynolds number are included in the resonant wind force coefficient C r , which is shown in Table A6.2.3 for three categories of Reynolds number region and for two types of structures with various density and damping. The rows in the table show the effect of Reynolds number, that is, U r Dm < 3 is the subcritical region, 3 U r Dm < 6 is critical region and 6 U r Dm is super/trance critical Reynolds number region. s L in Table A6.23
depends on the amplitude at the resonant condition. s L < 0.5 corresponds with the large amplitude, and s L 0.5 corresponds with the small amplitude.
A6.7.3
Vortex induced vibration and resulting wind load on building components with circular
sections Occurrence of vortex induced vibration of building components with circular section can be checked by Eq.(A6.26). Most design wind speeds for components like members of truss towers are larger than the critical wind speed, so the effect of vortex induced vibration should be checked carefully. In particular, the vibration amplitude can be very large for components like steel pipes whose mass and damping are small. The equivalent wind loads described in Eq.(A6.27) are introduced in the sub-critical Reynolds number region based on wind tunnel tests59). The equation is applicable for various boundary conditions at the ends of components.
A6.8 A6.8.1 Combination of Wind Loads
Scope of applications
This section defines the combination of horizontal wind loads and roof wind loads on structural frames. These wind loads are evaluated separately, but this does not mean that each wind load acts on the building independently. However, maximum wind loads do not occur at the same time. Therefore, if they are applied to the building at the same time, the combination of wind loads overestimates actual loads. This section shows the formula for combination of wind loads considering correlations of wind force and response. The formula is divided in two ways: for buildings not satisfying the conditions of Eq.(6.1) and for buildings satisfying the conditions of Eq.(6.1). Combination of horizontal wind loads and roof wind loads is also described.
C6-64
A6.8.2
Combination of horizontal wind loads for buildings not satisfying the conditions of Eq.(6.1)
Buildings not satisfying the conditions of Eq.(6.1) have a small resonance component. For such cases, it is considered that wind load of times of the windward loads act in the across-wind direction, as shown in figure 6.8.1. tends to increase with building height according to the stress analysis for buildings with rectangular columns using wind load from wind tunnel tests. Therefore, an approximate equation of for an 80m-high building is defined as per the recommendation.
wind
quasi-static wind load considered resonance plan of building
Figure A6.8.1
Windward load and combined load for across wind direction
Figure A6.8.2
Relation between side ratio (D/B) and combination factor
A6.8.3
Combination of horizontal wind loads for buildings satisfying the conditions of Eq.(6.1)
Buildings satisfying the conditions of Eq.(6.1) have a large resonance component. For such cases, it is assumed that response probability is expressed by a normal distribution. If the overturning moments in two directions, M x , M y , are expressed by a 2-dimensional normal distribution, the equivalence line of probability becomes an eliptical line using correlation coefficient of response, , as shown in Figure A6.8.3. Every point on the eliptical line (solid line) can be considered as a load combination, but it is not practical to consider a lot of them. Therefore, load combinations can be defined as the apexes of an octagon enveloping the oval. In other words, y-direction overturning moment M yc , which should be combined with maximum x-direction overturning moment M xmax , is defined by the following equation using mean y-direction overturning moment M y and maximum fluctuating component of y-direction overturning moment m ymax .
M yc = M y + mymax
2 + 2 1
(A6.8.1)
Table A6.24 shows the combination of loads according to the upper equation considering following characteristics of along-wind, across-wind and torsional wind loads.
Co-coherence (correlation coefficient for each frequency) is negligible between along-wind force
and across-wind force, and between along-wind force and torsional wind force. Therefore, = 0 as co-coherence of response is negligible.
Because the co-coherence between across-wind force and torsional wind force is not zero, the
absolute value of the correlation coefficient of response LT , shown in Table A6.25, is defined by calculation based on wind tunnel tests.
LT is calculated by a statistical analysis method61) under the conditions that the critical damping
CHAPTER 6
WIND LOADS C6-65
ratios for across-wind vibration and torsional vibration are 0.02, and the building has no coupling vibration mode. Therefore, if the critical damping ratio differs greatly from 0.02 or the buildings vibration mode is significantly coupled, it is necessary to carry out special research.
My
mx max
point A
M y max my max
My
M yc
considered point of combination load
M y0
my max
m y max ( 2 + 2 1) m y max (1 2 2 )
Mx
Mx
M x max
Figure A6.8.3 A6.8.4
Schema of load combination in consideration of response correlation
Combination of horizontal wind loads and roof wind loads
Combination of horizontal wind loads and roof wind loads can be considered theoretically as in A6.8.2 or A6.8.3. However, because the relation between horizontal wind loads and roof wind loads is not well enough understood, it is defined that horizontal wind loads and roof wind loads act at the same time.
A6.9 A6.9.1 Mode Shape Correction Factor
The mode shape correction factor can be used in calculating the gust effect factor, the across-wind load and the torsional wind load for a conventional building, as described in A.6.3.1, A6.4.2 and A6.5.2, respectively, if the first translation mode shape function is different from = Z H and the vertical distribution of mass per height of a building over the ground is not regarded as almost constant. The mode shape correction factor can be used in calculating the gust effect factor for a lattice structure, as described in A.6.3.3, if the first mode shape function is different from = (Z / H )2 and the mass per height of a lattice structure is not regarded as almost constant. The mode shape correction factor can be applied with ranging from 0.2 to 4 for a conventional building, and with ranging from 1 to 3.5 for a lattice structure when the mode shape function can be approximated by the function = (Z / H ) .
A6.9.2
Procedure
The mode shape correction factor is specified by Eq.(A6.32). This corrects the gust effect factor for
C6-66
an along-wind load on a building according to its vibration mode. The vibration mode shape correction factors for the resonance components of across-wind load and torsional wind load are specified by Eqs.(A6.33) and (A.6.34), respectively. given by Eq.(A6.35) is the ratio of the resonance component of the generalized wind force for its first vibration mode to 1 for the reference vibration mode shape (the power index of a first vibration mode = 1 for a conventional building and = 2 for a lattice structure).
(A6.9.1)
The values of for a conventional building in Eq.(A6.35) are approximations that fit the results obtained from a wind tunnel test for rectangular cross section buildings, in which the power index indicating the vibration mode shape between 0.2 and 4 are taken into consideration. The mode shape correction factor can be derived by multiplying the correct factor of the generalized wind force by the correct factor of the generalized mass or the generalized inertial moment of the building. The vertical distributions of the along-wind load are taken into consideration by the vertical distribution of the mean wind load, but the resonance component of the across-wind load or the torsional wind load is proportional to the vibration mode, because the mean load is not considered in the recommendation. As a result, the mode shape correction factor of the across-wind load or the torsional wind load involves a variable for height. The mode shape correction factor for a lattice structure is derived from the buffeting theory. This is to deal with the lattices of varying widths in the vertical direction. The mode shape correction factor can be set to 1 if the vibration mode shape agrees with the reference vibration mode shape and the vertical distribution of mass per unit height of a building over the ground is regarded as almost constant. If the vibration mode shape agrees with the reference vibration mode shape and the vertical distribution of mass per unit height can not be regarded as constant, the mode shape correction factor can be replaced by the ratio of the generalized mass or the generalized inertia moment of a building to that with a uniform mass distribution in the vertical direction. Furthermore, if the vertical distribution of mass per unit height of a building over the ground is regarded as almost constant, the mode shape correction factors for the along-wind load, the across-wind load and the torsional wind load can be simplified by Eqs.(A6.9.2), (A6.9.3) and (A6.9.4), respectively.
1.1 0.1 D = BH (0.16 + 0.4 ) 0.5 B 0.3( 2 ) + 1.4 0 conventional building lattice structure (A6.9.2)
L = (0.27 + 0.73)
Z H
(A6.9.3)
CHAPTER 6
WIND LOADS C6-67
Z (A6.9.4) H In addition, the generalized mass M D , M L and the generalized inertial moment I T of a
T = (0.27 + 0.73)
building can be calculated according to Eqs.(A6.9.5) and (A6.9.5), respectively.
M D (L ) = IT =
where mZ
A6.10 A6.10.1
Z mZ H
2
dZ
(A6.9.5) (A6.9.6)
Z I Z dZ 0 H and I Z are the mass and the inertial moment at height Z , respectively.
Response Acceleration
This section defines the maximum along-wind response acceleration for ordinary buildings, the maximum across-wind response acceleration for buildings with rectangular plan satisfying the conditions of A6.4.1 and the maximum torsional response acceleration for buildings with rectangular plan satisfying the conditions of A6.5.1. Each formula considers only the first vibration mode. If a building has a large dynamic response in higher modes or partial vibration, other special research should be carried out.
A6.10.2
Maximum along-wind response acceleration
Rms of generalized response acceleration aD is given by the following equation.

2 aD
0 S g ( f )(2f )
m( f )
2 Kg
df
(A6.10.1)
where aD is rms of generalized acceleration, S g ( f ) is power spectrum density of generalized wind force, m ( f ) 2 is mechanical admittance as described in Eq.(6.3.13), f is frequency and K g is generalized stiffness as described in the following equation.
K g = M D (2f D ) 2
(A6.10.2)
where M D is generalized mass. Because the resonant component is dominant in acceleration,
S g ( f ) can be substituted by white noise having power spectrum density at natural frequency f D , as
described in the following equation.
S g ( f D ) = ( qH BHCH C 'g ) 2
FD fD
(A6.10.3)
where FD is along-wind force spectrum factor, as shown in A6.3.1. If Eqs.(A6.10.2) and (A6.10.3) are incorporated in Eq.(A6.10.1), the equation become the following.
aD = qH BHCH C 'g
RD MD
(A6.10.4)
C6-68
Furthermore, aD is multiplied by the peak factor in the recommended equation for the acceleration at the top of the building. Because the resonant component is dominant in acceleration, level crossing rate D for calculating peak factor is approximated by the natural frequency f D .
A6.10.3
Maximum across-wind response acceleration
The equation consists of coefficients according to across-wind direction as a development in the along-wind direction, A6.10.2.
A6.10.4
Maximum torsional response acceleration

admax = aTmax d
(A6.10.5)
A6.11 A6.11.1
Simplified Procedure
A simplified procedure is used for estimating wind load for small buildings. This procedure can be applied to buildings that have regular shapes and structural systems, such as detached houses. The reference height and the projected breadth shall be less than 15m and 30m, respectively.
A.6.11.2
Procedure
The simplified procedures are derived from the results of calculation for buildings with reference heights of 5 - 15m and projected breadths of 5 - 30m, assuming that the wind directionality factor K D is 1.0 and the terrain category is III. Therefore, this procedure can be applied to terrain categories IV and V with some overestimates in wind loads. For terrain categories less than III, the exposure factor
Ce is introduced. When wind speed is expected to increase due to local topography, the wind loads
shall be increased appropriately, for example, by multiplying by the square of the topography factor Eg .
A6.12 Effects of Neighboring Tall Buildings
When groups of two or more tall buildings are constructed in proximity, the fluid flow through the group may be significantly deformed and have a much more complex nature than is usually acknowledged, resulting in enhanced dynamic pressures and motions especially on neighboring downstream structures. Therefore, study of mutual interference among closely-located tall buildings is an important problems not only in wind resistant structure design but even in minimizing wind-motion discomfort to building occupants. Wake-induced oscillation in the downstream structure is considered to be affected by interference from upstream buildings of various sizes placed in various locations and also by the turbulence of incident flows. Figure A6.12.1 shows contours of the increase or decrease ratios for the maximum along/across
CHAPTER 6
WIND LOADS C6-69
wind responses of the downstream building exposed to interference from an upstream building at various locations to those of an isolated building where the maximum responses including mean deflection are estimated at near the design wind speeds of 4060m/s by a modal-spectrum method (1,2). The contours are illustrated for an identical pair of square tall buildings with aspect ratio
H / BD = 4 where two coordinate axes are normalized by the non-dimensional distance using the
reference building breadth
BD .
The response ratios in the across-wind direction are usually larger than those in the along-wind direction. Interfering positions producing response ratio contours higher than 1.2 are generally restricted to regions of 12 BD in the x-direction and 6 BD in the y-direction, whereas interfering positions higher than 1.1 exceed the regions indicated in the figure. When the flat terrain subcategories increase from Category II to Category IV, the dynamic responses of the downstream building are relatively independent of mutual interference effect. This is closely related to the fact that when turbulence is added to an incident flow, shedding vortices from an upstream building and the alternately deformed wake surrounding the vortices are not clearly formed in the wake owing to increased entrainment and diffusive action, and the production of additional turbulence by the introduction of the upstream building is unlikely because of the sufficiently high turbulence in the incident flow (3).
y
y
6 BD
1.1 1.2
6 BD 4
1.2 1.3 1.3 1.1 1.2
BD
1.1 1.2
1.1
2
1.0
x
12 BD
1.0
1.0
x
0.8
12
1.1
2 1.3
(a) Terrain category II, along-wind direction
(b) Terrain category II, across-wind direction

1.2
y
6 BD 4
1.4
1.2
1.1 1.2 1.2
1.1
1.2 1.2 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.1
x
12
1.0
BD
2 0.8
(c) Terrain category IV, across-wind direction

Figure A6.12.1
Contours of response ratios
C6-70
A6.13
1-Year-Recurrence Wind Speed
1-year-recurrence wind speed U 1H is used to calculate the acceleration of wind response for the evaluation of the habitability, defined in Eq.(A6.41). Figure A6.5 is smoothing of the wind speed map based on the 1-year-recurrence wind speed at the metrological offices, from which the wind speed U1 at any locations can be estimated. The 1-year-recurrence wind speeds at the metrological offices are established based on the daily-maximum wind speed data regardless of wind directions collected from 1991 to 2000. On the other hand, because the wind response characteristic is not the same for the wind direction, the wind speed, which becomes the same acceleration is also different for the wind direction. Therefore, if the wind direction characteristic, that is, the frequency of exceedance of each wind speed can be understood, a reasonable design becomes possible. This wind direction characteristic in the range of the wind speed to evaluate the habitability is generally clarified. When the maximum acceleration a max is approximated as a function of wind speed U shown in Eq.(A6.13.1), the return period t a max for maximum acceleration
a max
is calculated by
Eq.(A6.13.2). The probability at the right side of Eq.(A6.13.2) is expressed as the total sum of the occurrence probability of the wind speed in every 16 azimuths shown in Eq.(A6.13.3). amax = f (U ) 1 t a max = 1 Fa ( amax )
Fa ( amax ) = pi FU {
16
(A6.13.1)
(A6.13.2) (A6.13.3)
f i 1 (amax )
i =1
where
Fa ( a max ) : probability that maximum acceleration does not exceed a max pi : occurrence frequency for wind direction i FU f i 1 (amax ) : probability that the wind speed does not exceed the wind speed that the
maximum acceleration is equal to a max for wind direction i The occurrence frequency at each wind direction pi , parameters ai and bi in Eq.(A6.13.4), which are the parameters to calculate the right side of Eq.(A6.13.3), are shown in Table A6.13.1. These parameters are estimated based on the daily maximum wind speed at 30 cities, with the least square method applied for the data at Naha where typhoon is dominant, and the Gumbels moment method for other cities. These parameters ai and bi should be used for the return period less than 1 year. where U i : 10-minute mean wind speed at 10m above ground over a flat and open terrain for wind direction i ai , bi : parameters estimated based on the daily maximum speed for wind direction i FU ( U i ) = exp[ exp{ ai (U i bi )}] (A6.13.4)
CHAPTER 6
WIND LOADS C6-71
In addition, the wind direction factor in A6.1.4 should be used for 100-year-recurrence wind speed, and it is not possible to use it here.
Table A6.13.1
ai 0.58 0.52 0.54 1.45 1.05 0.76 0.55 0.54 0.48 0.59 0.49 0.63 0.65 0.68 0.86 0.83
parameters ai , bi and occurrence frequency pi for each wind direction at 30 cities

Sapporo bi pi(%) 3.59 0.4 3.76 0.5 3.80 1.6 4.93 4.0 5.52 6.2 7.49 8.1 8.86 13.5 7.94 3.2 7.31 1.8 7.96 2.1 8.41 3.9 8.53 5.1 9.28 5.2 8.63 19.5 7.05 23.3 4.78 1.6 Kanazawa ai bi pi(%) 0.76 5.11 5.8 0.81 5.38 3.0 0.99 5.02 10.5 0.93 4.62 9.9 0.87 3.56 0.9 1.35 3.32 1.2 2.15 3.26 1.6 0.17 4.11 0.5 0.42 7.62 8.2 0.43 9.16 8.5 0.45 8.65 9.7 0.36 7.49 12.1 0.37 6.62 9.1 0.44 5.36 7.4 0.38 5.82 3.7 0.66 4.89 7.9 Yokohama ai bi pi(%) 0.58 7.52 1.8 0.81 6.50 0.1 0.64 7.58 1.4 1.04 5.62 9.1 1.19 5.00 1.9 0.71 5.81 0.9 0.76 5.48 7.5 0.63 5.85 4.2 0.40 9.60 5.8 0.38 8.74 15.8 0.40 8.42 3.4 0.48 8.68 0.2 0.65 8.27 0.3 0.36 8.39 0.5 0.32 6.95 2.5 0.46 7.21 44.5
ai 1.58 1.23 1.30 0.94 0.72 0.59 0.47 0.43 0.45 0.44 0.47 0.53 0.45 0.46 0.59 0.83
NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N
Asahikawa bi pi(%) 4.26 3.3 4.32 0.8 3.63 0.2 2.28 0.7 2.74 0.7 4.44 6.4 5.61 17.1 4.34 3.9 6.37 3.3 6.72 1.2 7.58 10.1 6.45 17.6 5.80 19.4 4.78 8.8 5.66 4.7 4.92 1.8 Niigata ai bi pi(%) 1.07 4.61 14.4 1.78 3.66 6.6 0.85 3.72 0.3 1.24 4.17 0.2 0.64 7.39 0.2 0.69 8.05 6.6 0.98 5.69 4.4 1.65 4.38 1.7 1.19 4.78 3.0 0.45 6.84 3.2 0.40 8.65 14.4 0.44 7.29 18.8 0.38 8.39 7.7 0.48 8.40 6.9 0.52 7.43 6.7 0.66 5.56 4.9 Chiba ai bi pi(%) 0.73 6.38 6.2 0.89 6.10 6.1 0.97 5.46 6.7 1.02 4.85 2.5 1.41 4.08 6.9 1.27 4.26 9.9 0.68 4.96 3.8 0.77 4.62 2.2 0.35 9.90 4.8 0.45 7.69 13.4 0.74 4.95 8.8 0.59 4.84 0.7 0.42 8.33 0.6 0.46 7.68 7.0 0.48 6.26 15.1 0.61 5.46 5.3
Aomori ai bi pi(%) 1.22 3.57 4.6 0.82 4.03 4.0 0.76 5.84 3.7 0.90 5.46 7.9 0.60 6.09 1.1 0.64 7.71 0.7 0.58 4.61 0.5 1.58 2.79 0.2 0.54 5.27 2.8 0.47 6.47 12.6 0.48 7.56 10.2 0.50 9.11 14.0 0.55 8.43 15.7 0.66 6.00 8.6 1.00 4.20 6.7 0.84 3.49 6.7 Utsunomiya ai bi pi(%) 0.70 4.47 18.5 0.88 4.43 8.8 1.01 4.52 2.3 1.13 3.81 3.5 1.37 3.85 7.1 1.33 3.76 9.2 1.00 4.26 9.1 0.78 4.68 6.0 0.75 4.48 6.4 0.81 4.12 2.8 0.68 4.79 1.5 0.59 6.99 2.2 0.53 7.17 3.1 0.47 5.14 1.6 0.50 5.67 3.6 0.58 4.49 14.3 Shizuoka ai bi pi(%) 0.83 4.75 2.9 0.77 5.74 9.5 0.94 5.74 23.7 0.88 5.51 1.8 0.80 4.50 1.8 0.75 3.95 1.3 0.92 4.96 6.1 0.81 5.46 17.6 0.50 6.50 4.1 0.42 8.63 12.4 0.57 9.01 4.0 0.51 10.1 5.3 0.39 7.05 3.8 0.55 4.96 1.8 1.28 4.07 2.9 0.59 3.81 1.0
Akita bi pi(%) 4.79 0.4 5.88 0.1 3.17 0.2 4.77 0.3 6.57 7.2 6.25 17.0 4.70 0.2 6.27 0.1 8.91 2.2 7.44 9.9 6.98 12.5 7.91 17.7 9.68 11.9 9.56 9.2 7.87 3.8 5.86 7.3 Maebashi ai bi pi(%) 0.28 9.56 0.1 0.0 1.20 4.78 0.1 0.71 4.32 1.4 0.81 5.19 22.7 0.99 4.83 8.7 1.21 3.84 2.0 1.17 3.76 1.2 0.57 2.88 0.3 0.49 3.30 0.3 0.50 4.65 1.3 0.44 6.78 1.5 0.34 6.86 3.5 0.45 6.82 26.0 0.47 8.43 26.7 0.51 11.0 4.2 Hamamatsu ai bi pi(%) 0.80 4.59 0.4 1.25 3.20 3.0 0.56 6.29 7.1 0.59 6.69 7.8 0.74 6.59 2.5 1.03 5.35 5.5 0.80 5.06 6.7 0.93 4.93 2.5 0.67 5.94 0.6 0.58 5.77 3.2 0.68 6.00 13.8 0.66 7.30 16.7 0.49 9.15 23.6 0.39 8.27 5.9 0.55 4.18 0.5 1.69 4.88 0.2
ai 0.73 0.56 0.73 0.63 0.65 0.63 1.25 0.72 0.38 0.46 0.38 0.36 0.37 0.45 0.60 0.75
ai 0.82 0.61 0.56 0.66 0.74 1.14 0.76 0.75 0.87 0.77 0.46 0.42 0.39 0.43 0.56 0.75 ai 0.87 1.04 1.05 1.10 1.22 1.37 0.94 0.83 0.56 0.53 0.64 0.45 0.50 0.45 0.47 0.64 ai 1.10 1.80 2.25 2.46 0.47 0.47 0.51 1.16 1.26 1.14 0.88 0.59 0.70 0.53 0.50 0.89
Sendai bi pi(%) 4.40 1.7 3.72 1.1 5.86 0.8 5.09 0.7 4.97 0.8 3.89 16.7 4.58 13.3 4.66 6.4 5.06 1.8 5.55 0.9 8.02 1.6 8.75 7.7 9.42 16.9 8.62 10.1 5.44 7.9 5.17 11.6 Tokyo bi pi(%) 5.46 4.2 5.43 6.2 5.58 6.6 5.47 3.3 5.67 3.6 6.02 1.9 4.99 0.3 6.53 20.2 7.61 2.0 7.80 9.8 5.84 0.4 7.83 0.2 7.23 0.2 8.28 4.9 7.37 25.8 5.85 10.4 Nagoya bi pi(%) 3.61 1.6 2.92 0.7 2.29 0.8 3.82 0.1 6.21 0.4 6.03 3.8 6.54 13.5 4.85 11.0 4.67 2.0 4.78 1.1 3.81 1.3 5.61 1.4 6.49 18.8 7.29 19.0 5.49 16.2 4.10 8.3
C6-72
Table A6.13.1(continued)
Kyoto bi pi(%) 4.05 5.6 4.01 5.1 4.97 6.1 5.15 6.6 4.80 3.9 4.64 1.5 4.06 3.3 4.99 8.9 5.76 10.3 6.03 2.5 6.56 4.6 6.83 3.8 6.74 4.7 7.53 3.1 6.55 10.0 5.49 20.0 Matsue bi pi(%) 5.15 1.6 5.77 8.2 6.07 7.1 5.25 10.0 3.90 8.0 5.22 1.7 5.62 0.5 5.75 0.2 8.19 1.8 6.61 1.5 6.91 12.1 7.72 28.3 7.10 5.9 5.91 8.6 5.93 3.4 6.08 1.1
parameters ai , bi and occurrence frequency pi for each wind direction at 30 cities

Osaka bi pi(%) 4.24 17.6 5.23 4.4 5.95 4.4 5.80 1.7 4.80 1.3 5.16 0.5 4.96 0.5 6.42 0.5 7.86 1.8 5.75 14.4 5.57 19.0 6.47 12.7 6.80 1.9 6.32 3.6 6.66 7.4 5.73 8.3 Hiroshima ai bi pi(%) 1.26 4.40 31.5 0.58 5.18 0.9 0.42 7.43 0.3 1.48 5.93 0.4 0.68 5.19 0.5 1.39 5.13 0.2 0.23 5.84 0.6 0.49 4.66 5.7 0.84 5.28 8.2 1.05 4.60 10.8 0.67 5.11 0.5 0.69 7.13 3.3 0.64 7.44 3.2 0.70 6.54 0.9 0.79 6.65 3.7 0.99 4.54 29.3
ai 0.88 0.72 0.56 0.63 0.89 0.57 0.68 0.51 0.31 0.64 0.80 0.46 0.39 0.63 0.77 0.77 ai 0.57 0.32 0.48 0.59 1.01 1.71 0.95 1.56 0.60 1.05 0.65 0.50 0.51 0.72 0.56 0.72
ai 0.75 0.73 0.93 0.85 0.78 0.84 0.95 0.92 0.80 0.58 0.72 0.69 0.61 0.58 0.85 0.75 ai 0.72 0.64 0.59 0.78 1.35 0.61 0.45 0.68 0.40 0.55 0.45 0.41 0.42 0.59 0.67 0.64
Kobe bi pi(%) 6.22 1.4 5.41 1.2 6.50 12.1 5.67 3.3 4.06 0.5 3.33 0.7 3.56 0.3 3.84 1.6 5.27 6.9 5.54 5.9 5.89 13.7 7.15 11.8 7.17 7.2 5.91 3.9 6.72 13.2 5.78 16.3 Takamatsu ai bi pi(%) 1.29 3.65 2.5 0.79 3.39 1.2 1.17 3.90 12.7 1.10 3.86 9.8 0.70 4.24 6.2 0.87 3.71 2.2 0.93 3.88 0.2 0.77 2.89 0.4 0.69 5.39 0.6 0.61 4.48 3.2 0.57 6.10 13.0 0.57 6.90 19.4 0.49 7.19 5.6 0.50 6.53 2.9 0.87 4.32 11.4 0.98 4.41 8.7
ai 0.82 1.28 1.90 1.63 0.29 0.64 0.39 0.35 0.43 0.94 0.61 0.38 0.54 0.61 0.77 0.80
Wakayama bi pi(%) 5.92 8.9 4.44 5.3 3.99 10.3 4.19 1.4 4.96 0.3 7.04 0.5 8.26 1.0 7.97 5.3 7.32 9.0 4.71 10.7 4.44 9.0 6.58 4.0 8.19 5.3 6.99 7.7 5.48 9.3 5.61 12.0 Kochi ai bi pi(%) 0.82 7.11 6.7 1.04 6.95 1.0 0.96 4.78 2.4 0.75 3.85 4.2 0.57 4.99 6.9 1.38 4.02 21.7 1.93 4.19 6.0 1.11 4.50 8.5 0.71 5.18 2.4 0.80 6.32 1.2 0.78 4.55 4.0 0.55 4.62 19.9 0.55 4.30 7.2 0.59 7.03 1.7 0.56 7.08 1.4 0.66 7.22 4.8
ai 0.47 0.89 1.13 0.67 0.56 0.73 1.26 1.35 1.01 0.60 0.62 0.45 0.40 0.58 0.62 0.51 ai 0.91 0.74 0.96 1.57 0.91 0.87 0.47 0.42 0.89 0.79 0.91 0.66 0.66 0.99 0.92 0.69
Okayama bi 5.61 3.61 4.17 5.30 5.13 4.27 3.72 3.43 4.37 5.24 5.34 7.01 8.07 6.09 5.24 5.60 Matsuyama bi 6.61 6.15 4.74 3.26 3.50 4.45 6.18 6.40 4.59 5.48 5.31 5.92 5.99 5.09 5.04 6.99
pi(%) 4.2 2.3 7.6 5.2 4.3 7.9 1.8 5.3 5.7 14.1 6.0 5.9 5.8 6.5 8.6 8.8 pi(%) 3.4 2.6 3.6 4.5 4.7 2.7 2.6 2.0 2.1 2.2 6.8 20.7 20.1 13.0 6.6 2.4 pi(%)
ai 0.67 0.95 0.87 1.18 1.03 0.77 0.40 0.37 0.63 0.65 0.62 0.55 0.56 0.63 0.63 0.69
Fukuoka bi pi(%) 5.37 3.2 5.61 1.6 5.82 0.5 5.42 0.2 5.01 0.7 5.41 9.7 7.33 4.5 7.29 2.2 8.48 3.1 6.43 0.7 8.56 0.6 7.92 3.1 8.60 6.3 6.15 3.1 5.84 31.7 5.82 28.8
ai 0.78 0.95 1.54 0.80 0.47 0.37 0.60 0.97 0.52 0.56 0.56 0.57 0.63 0.65 0.71 1.62
Oita bi 4.67 4.27 3.91 3.71 5.92 5.99 5.39 3.42 4.11 6.41 6.86 8.41 8.08 7.36 6.66 3.64
pi(%)
8.7 7.3 11.3 3.3 0.6 2.1 6.4 7.9 4.1 2.0 2.6 7.1 2.7 10.3 17.8 5.8
Kumamoto ai bi pi(%) 1.52 3.06 1.5 0.56 5.42 2.1 0.60 6.28 3.7 0.50 6.42 2.9 0.59 5.74 2.5 0.34 3.88 1.2 0.72 3.69 1.5 0.38 3.71 3.3 0.57 5.09 6.0 0.83 5.15 17.7 0.65 6.35 9.8 0.52 5.52 4.9 0.52 6.14 7.6 0.64 5.23 18.5 0.70 4.89 13.8 0.77 4.86 3.0
Kagoshima ai bi pi(%) 0.56 5.50 9.7 0.52 6.03 7.0 0.36 5.95 0.9 0.42 6.55 0.9 0.31 5.67 1.7 0.46 5.17 5.0 0.50 4.48 7.5 0.43 4.28 4.7 0.57 6.88 0.9 0.39 7.90 2.0 0.52 7.37 4.0 1.03 5.41 11.6 0.67 6.23 18.1 0.56 7.25 8.5 0.71 5.52 13.2 0.75 5.23 4.3
ai 0.54 0.63 0.79 0.30 0.43 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.39 0.16 0.09 0.39 0.46 0.22 0.52 0.72
Naha bi 4.98 5.75 6.17 -0.27 3.63 -4.53 3.93 -1.73 2.01 -9.17 -25.88 5.35 4.52 -5.84 7.13 7.89
11.2 2.6 7.2 8.9 8.6 6.7 4.1 5.2 9.8 4.4 2.5 1.1 1.3 1.9 7.3 17.2
CHAPTER 6
WIND LOADS C6-73
Appendix 6.6
Dispersion of Wind Load
1. Factors influencing wind loads
The horizontal wind load for structural frames is obtained from Eq.(6.4), and the roof wind load for structural frames is based on this equation. WD = qH C D GD A along-wind load and A is projected area at height Z . The wind load for components/cladding is obtained form Eq.(6.6). W =q C A
C H C C
(6.4)
where qH is velocity pressure, C D is wind force coefficient, GD is gust effect factor for
(6.6)
where qH
is velocity pressure, CC is peak wind force coefficient and A is subject area.
The velocity pressure qH is expressed as Eq.(Appendix 6.6.1) form Eq.(A6.1) and Eq.(A6.2)
1 1 2 U H = (U 0 K D EH k rW ) 2 (Appendix 6.6.1) 2 2 where is air density, U H is design wind speed, U 0 is basic wind speed, K D is wind qH = directionality factor, EH is wind speed profile factor at the reference height H and k rW is return period conversion factor. The factors influencing dispersion of horizontal wind load for structural frames WD and wind load for components/cladding WC are air density , basic wind speed U 0 , wind directionality factor K D , wind speed profile factor EH at reference height H according to the surface roughness, return period conversion factor k rW , wind force coefficient C D and gust effect factor GD or peak wind force coefficient C .
C
The gust effect factor GD is influenced by design wind speed U H , turbulence intensity I H , turbulence scale LH , reference height H , building breadth B , building natural frequency f D , building critical damping ratio D and so on. The dispersion of these factors must be evaluated when estimating the wind load on the frame for limit state design.
2. Dispersion of each factor
(1) Air density The air density varies with temperature, atmospheric pressure and humidity, but the influence of humidity can usually be ignored. In these recommendations, = 1.22 (kg/m3) at 15 and 1013hPa can be used. The difference between this value and that for the range of 0, 1013hPa to 25, 960hPa is within 10%. (2) Basic wind speed U 0 and return period conversion factor k rW For allowable stress design, the wind load can be obtained from Eq.(6.4) or Eq.(6.6) and Eq.(Appendix 6.6.1) based on basic wind speed U 0 , wind directionality factor K D , wind speed profile factor E and return period conversion factor k rW . For limit state design, however, the maximum wind speed occurs during the buildings service life T years (T -year maximum value) and its coefficient of variation is required. These recommendations provide maps for
C6-74
100-year-recurrence basic wind speed U 0 and 500-year-recurrence wind speed U 500 based on the annual maximum wind speed approximated by a Gumbel distribution. The mean value and the standard deviation of the T -year maximum value can be obtained from these values based on the method described in chapter 2. A calculated example for the mean value, the standard deviation and the coefficient of variation of 50-year maximum values is shown in appendix Table 6.6.1. The difference between U 500 and U 0 is 4m/s and the coefficient of variation is about 0.08 to 0.11 in most areas other than the Okinawa Islands.
Appendix Table 6.6.1
Mean value, standard deviation and coefficient of variation for 50-year maximum values of wind speed 50-year maximum value
city Sapporo Aomori Sendai Niigata Tokyo Nagoya Osaka Hiroshima Kochi Fukuoka Kagoshima
U 0 (m/s) 30.5 31.0 30.5 37.0 36.0 32.5 34.5 30.0 39.0 33.5 42.0
U 500 (m/s) 34.5 35.0 34.5 41.0 40.0 36.5 38.5 34.0 43.0 37.5 46.0
mean (m/s) 30.2 30.7 30.2 36.7 35.7 32.2 34.2 29.7 38.7 33.2 41.7
standard deviation (m/s) 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2
coefficient of variation 0.11 0.10 0.11 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.09 0.11 0.08 0.10 0.08
(3) Wind directionality factor The wind directionality factor is decided in order to make the load effect using the wind directionality factor equivalent to the load effect considering the wind direction. When the wind directionality factor is considered, the standard deviation of the design wind speed is about 1m/s to 2m/s and its coefficient of variation is about 0.03 to 0.05 for each wind direction. However, considering phenomena such as down-bursts, which cannot be caught enough, its lower limit of 0.85 and pitch of 0.05 are adopted. Furthermore, considering various uncertain parts, the maximum wind directionality factor for adjacent wind directions is employed. (4) Wind speed profile factor Five flat terrain subcategories and wind speed profile factor EH corresponding to these flat terrain subcategories are prescribed based on the observed data and the results calculated from computational fluid dynamics. It is difficult to estimate differences between the actual values and the prescribed values in consideration of the condition for the flat terrain subcategories of used data. When the flat terrain subcategories entrusted to designer's judgment varies by one classification, the value of wind
CHAPTER 6
WIND LOADS C6-75
speed profile factor EH deviates 25% at H = 5 m, 15% at H = 100 m and 10% at H = 200 m, and the coefficients of variation can be estimated as half their values as follows; 0.13 at H = 5 m 0.08 at H = 100 m 0.05 at H = 200 m (5) Wind force coefficient, wind pressure coefficient The case for a rectangular plan building is introduced here as an example for wind force coefficients of horizontal wind load for structural frames of a building whose reference height is greater than 45m. Wind tunnel test results obtained from reference papers and so on vary with aspect ratio and side ratio of the building, and the wind force coefficients shown in Table A6.8 are their mean. For the vertical distribution of wind force coefficient, test values at heights from 0.2 H to 0.9 H are mostly within the range of 10% of these recommendation values. For the overturning moment coefficient at the building base, most test results are within the range of 20% of these recommendation values. If a building has a corner recess, the wind force coefficient generally takes a safe value. Therefore, if these recommendations are adopted for such a building, its design is generally safe. Horizontal wind force coefficients for structural frames of a rectangular plan building whose reference height is 45m or less are influenced not only by building shape but also by many other parameters such as wind characteristics. The values shown in Table A6.9(1) are simplified so that they represent the results under various conditions. Therefore, their values are 10-30% greater than actual ones, and 50% greater in some parts. They exceed 30% in part Lb when the roof slope is 30 or less, but about 10-20% in parts WU and La . Furthermore, they may exceed 30% in part RLb when the roof slope is less than 30 but about 10-20% in part RU on negative pressure parts and positive pressure parts. For the external pressure coefficient C pe , to calculate the roof wind load on structural frames around the leading edge of the eave, for example, for B / H 6 and D / H > 1 , the spatial mean value of the test results deviates within the range of 30% of these recommendation values of -1.0. The positive and negative peak external pressure coefficients of the roof wind load for components/claddings are determined from the maximum and minimum peak external pressures on each part of the building for all wind directions. These values vary with wind profile, wind tunnel test condition (such as sampling frequency, measuring position), side ratio and size reduction rate of the test model and so on. Their coefficients of variation are about 0.2. (6) Gust effect factor GD The parameters that influence the gust effect factor GD of the horizontal wind load for structural frames, excluding the height and the width of the building, are the natural frequency f D of the first translational mode in the along-wind direction, the critical damping ratio D of the first translational mode in along-wind direction, the design wind speed U H , turbulence scale LH , turbulence intensity I H and the exponent of the power law in the wind speed profile. The influence of these parameters on the gust effect factor varies with the flat terrain subcategory, the assumed building
C6-76
shape and so on. Here, the reference height H = 80 m, the width B = 40 m, the natural frequency for the first translational mode f D = 0.5 Hz, the critical damping ratio for the first translational mode
D = 2 %, the basic wind speed U 0 = 39 m/s and the flat terrain subcategory III are assumed. The
increase of the gust effect factor GD when each parameter is increased by 1% individually is shown in appendix Table 6.6.2.
Appendix Table 6.6.2
Increase of gust effect factor GD when value of each parameter is increased by 1% individually parameter increase of gust effect factor GD 0.29% 0.16% 0.34% 0.55% 0.07% 0.02%
natural frequency f D critical damping ratio D design wind speed U H turbulence intensity I H turbulence scale LH exponent of power law
For example, if the coefficient of variation of the critical damping ratio is 20%, that for the gust effect factor caused by the critical damping ratio is estimated as 0.160.20=0.032. Although the gust effect factor of the roof wind load for structural frames is influenced by various parameters, the difference between the maximum loading effect for roof structural frames obtained from these recommendations and the wind tunnel test results is within 15% and mostly around 30%. (7) Natural frequency and critical damping ratio of first mode Damping in Buildings7) proposed an estimation formula for the natural frequency and the critical damping ratio of the first mode. When the dispersion of the values calculated from these proposed formula is evaluated as the coefficient of variation of the difference between these recommendation values and the field measurement values, the coefficient of variation of the natural frequency for the first mode is about 0.1-0.5 for reinforced concrete structures, steel reinforced concrete structures and steel structures, and that of the critical damping ratio for the first mode is about 0.2 for reinforced concrete structure and steel reinforced concrete structures, about 0.3 for steel structures. (8) Turbulence intensity I H Fig.A6.1.17 compares the turbulence intensities of these recommendations and field measurements. The coefficient of variation of the difference between these values can be estimated as about 0.2 for flat terrain subcategory III where many field measurement data have been obtained. (9) Turbulence scale LH Fig.A6.1.21 compares the turbulence scales of these recommendations and field measurements. The coefficient of variation of the difference between these values can be estimated as about 0.5.
CHAPTER 6
WIND LOADS C6-77
3. Coefficient of variation of wind load
The coefficient of variation of horizontal wind load for structural frames and of wind load for components/claddings can be obtained from Eq.(Appendix 6.6.2) or Eq.(Appendix 6.6.3).
2 2 2 Horizontal wind load for structural frames: VWD = V2 + 4VU H + VCD + VG D
(Appendix 6.6.2)
(Appendix6.6.3)
Wind load for components/cladding

where
2 2 : VWC = V2 + 4VU H + VC
VWD : coefficient of variation of horizontal wind load for structural frames WD VWC : coefficient of variation of wind load for components/cladding WC V : coefficient of variation of air density VU H : coefficient of variation of design wind speed U H VCD : coefficient of variation of wind force coefficient C D VG D : coefficient of variation of gust effect factor GD VC : coefficient of variation of peak wind force coefficient CC
C
When a building with reference height H = 80 m, width B = 40 m, natural frequency for first translational mode f D = 0.5 Hz, and critical damping ratio for first translational mode D = 2 % is constructed in a region of flat terrain subcategory III in each city of appendix Table 6.6.1, the coefficient of variation VWD can be estimated as around 0.3 to 0.33 for wind load on structural frames and the coefficient of variation VWC can be estimated as around 0.32 to 0.35 for wind load on components/claddings.
References
1) Nishimura, H. and Taniike, Y: Aeroelastic Instability of High-Rise Building in a Turbulent Boundary Layer, Journal of Structural and Construction Engineering AIJ, No.456, pp.31-.37, 1994 No.482, pp.27-32, 1996 (in Japanese) 2) Katagiri, J., Ohkuma, T., Marukawa, H. and Shimomura, S: Motion-induced wind forces acting on rectangular high-rise buildings with side ratio of 2 Characteristics of motion-induced wind forces during across-wind and torsional vibrations , Journal of Structural and Construction Engineering AIJ, No.534, pp.25-32, 2000 (in Japanese) 3) Ohkuma, T., Katagiri, J., Marukawa, H. and Shimomura, S: Motion-induced wind forces and coupled across-wind torsional unstable aerodynamic vibrations of rectangular high-rise buildings with various side-ratio, Journal of Structural and Construction Engineering AIJ, No.560, pp.43-50, 2002 (in Japanese) 4) Fujimoto, M., Ohkuma, T: A theoretical study on evaluation of wind-induced vibrations of towers with a circular cross section, Part I, Transactions of Architectural Institute of Japan, No.185,
C6-78
pp.37-44, 1971 (in Japanese) 5) Ohkuma, T: A theoretical study on evaluation of wind-induced vibrations of towers with a circular cross section, Part II, Transactions of Architectural Institute of Japan, No.187, pp59-67, 1971 (in Japanese) 6) Ohkuma, T: A theoretical study on evaluation of wind-induced vibrations of towers with a circular cross section, Part III, Transactions of Architectural Institute of Japan, No.188, pp25-32, 1971 (in Japanese) 7) Damping in Buildings, AIJ, 2000 (in Japanese) 8) Davenport, A. G.: The application of statistical concepts to the wind loading of structures, Proceeding of Institution of Civil Engineers, Vol.19, pp.449-472, 1961 9) Zhou, Y., Kareem, A: Gust loading factor: new model, Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, pp.168-178, 2001 10) Ohkuma, T. , Marukawa, H: Mechanism of aero-elastically unstable vibration of large span roof, Journal of Wind Engineering, No.42, January, pp.35-48, 1980 11) Matumoto, T: Wind tunnel study of self-excited oscillation of one-way type suspension roofs in a smooth flow, Journal of Structural and Construction Engineering (Transactions of AIJ), No.384, pp.90-96, 1988 (in Japanese) 12) Guide book for engineers on wind tunnel test of buildings: The building center of Japan, 1994 13) Ishihara, T., Hibi, K., Kato, H., Ohtake, K. and Matsui, M: A Database of Annual Maximum Wind Speed and Corrections for Anemometers in Japan, Wind Engineers, No. 92, July, 2002 14) Ohtake, K. and Tamura, Y: Study on estimation of flat terrain for each wind direction, Summaries of Technical Papers of Annual Meeting Architectural Institute of Japan 2002, B-1, pp. 119-120, 2002 (in Japanese) 15) Gomes, L., Vickery, B. J: Extreme wind speeds in mixed climates, Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, Vol.2, pp.331-334, 1978 16) Cook, N. J: Improving the Gumbel analysis by using M-th highest extremes, Revision of ANSI/ASCE 7-95, 2000 17) ASCE 7-98: Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures, Revision of ANSI/ASCE 7-95, 2000 18) Matsui, M., Tamura, Y. and Tanaka, S: Wind load of Tall Buildings Considering Wind Directionality Effects, Proceedings of 17th National Symposium on Wind Engineering, pp. 499-504, 2002 (in Japanese) 19) BS6399-2: British Standard, Loading for buildings, Part 2. Code of practice for wind loads, 1997 20) AS/NZS 1170.2: Australian/New Zealand Standard, Structural design actions, Part 2 : Wind actions, 2002 21) Melbourne, W. H: Designing for directionality, 1st Workshop on Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, Highett, Victoria, pp.1-11, 1984 22) Suda, K., Sasaki, A., Ishibashi, R., Fujii, K., Hibi, K., Maruyama, T., Iwatani, Y., Tamura, Y:
CHAPTER 6
WIND LOADS C6-79
Observation of wind speed profiles in Tokyo city area using doppler soda, Proceedings of 16th National Symposium on Wind Engineering, pp.13-18, 2000 (in Japanese) 23) Kondo, K., Kawai, H., Kawaguchi, A: Topographic multipliers for mean and fluctuating wind velocities around up-slope cliffs, Summaries of Technical Papers of Annual Meeting, Architectural Institute of Japan, pp.105-106, 2001 (in Japanese) 24) Kawai, H., Kondo, K: Topographic multipliers around micro-topography, Summaries of Technical Papers of Annual Meeting, Architectural Institute of Japan, pp.103-104, 2003 (in Japanese) 25) Tsuchiya, M., Kondo, K., Kawai, H., Sanada, S: Effect of micro-topography on design wind velocity, Summaries of Technical Papers of Annual Meeting, Architectural Institute of Japan, pp.119-120, 1999 (in Japanese) 26) Meng, Y., Hibi, K: An experimental study of turbulent boundary layer over steep hills, Proceedings of 15th National Symposium on Wind Engineering, pp.61-66, 1998 27) Goto, S., Suda, K. Miyashita, K: Profiles of turbulence intensity on the basis of full scale measurements, Summaries of Technical Papers of Annual Meeting Architectural Institute of Japan B-1, pp.111-112, 2002 (in Japanese) 28) Eurocode ENV 1991-2-4: 1997 29) Kamei, I. and Maruta, E: Wind Tunnel Test for evaluating wind pressure coefficients of buildings with a gable roof -Part 2-, Summaries of Technical Papers of Annual Meeting Architectural Institute of Japan, Structures, 1981, pp.1041-1042 (in Japanese) 30) Kanda, M. and Maruta; E: Study on design wind pressure coefficient of low rise buildings with a flat roof or a gable roof -Part 3- Averaging wind pressure coefficient and wind direction, Summaries of Technical Papers of Annual Meeting Architectural Institute of Japan, Structures , 1992, pp.119-120 (in Japanese) 31) Ueda, H., Tamura, Y. and Fujii; K: Effect of turbulence of approaching wind on mean wind pressures acting on flat roofs -Part 1- Study on characteristics of wind pressure acting on flat roofs, Journal of Structural and Construction Engineering, No. 425, pp.91-99, 1991 (in Japanese) 32) Ueda, H., Hagura, H. and Oda, H: Characteristics of stress generated by wind pressures and wind loads acting on stiff two-dimensional arches supporting a barrel roof, Journal of Structural and Construction Engineering, AIJ, No. 496pp.29-35, 1997 (in Japanese) 33) Kikuchi, T., Ueda, H. and Hibi, K: Characteristics of wind pressures acting on the curved roofs, Summaries of Technical Papers of Annual Meeting Architectural Institute of Japan, Structures , 2003, pp.147-148 (in Japanese) 34) Nogichi, M., Uematsu, Y: Design wind pressure coefficients for spherical domes, Journal of Wind Engineering, JAWE, No.95, 2003, pp.177-178 (in Japanese) 35) Chino, N. and Okada, H: Wind-induced internal pressures in buildings, Part 1 mean internal pressures, Journal of Wind Engineering, JAWE, No.56, 1993, pp.11-20 (in Japanese) 36) Schewe, G: On the force fluctuations acting on a circular cylinder in crossflow from subcritical up to transcritical Rynolds numbers, Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol.133, pp.265-285, 1983
C6-80
37) Uematsu, Y., Yamada, M: Aerodynamic forces on circular cylinders of finite height, Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, Vol.51, pp.249-265, 1994 38) Uematsu, Y: Design wind force coefficients for free-standing canopy roofsJournal of Wind Engineering, JAWE, No.95, 2003, pp.181-182 (in Japanese) 39) JEC-127, The Institute of Electrical Engineers of Japan 1979 (in Japanese) 40) Nishimura, H: Aerodynamic Characteristics of Shapes yielding Stagnated Flow, GBRC, No.106, 2002, pp.19-24 (in Japanese) 41) Nishimura, H, Asami, Y, Takamori K. and Okeya M: A wind tunnel study of fluctuating pressures on buildings Part4 Pressure coefficient and drag coefficient, Summaries of Technical Papers of Annual Meeting Architectural Institute of JAPAN, Structures I, 1992, pp.57-58 (in Japanese) 42) Katagiri, J, Kawabata, S, Niihori, Y, and Nakamura, O: Pressure Characteristics of Rectangular cylinders with Cut Corner, Summaries of Technical Papers of Annual Meeting Architectural Institute of Japan, Structures , 1992, pp.47-48 (in Japanese) 43) Ohtake, K: Peak wind pressure coefficients for cladding of a tall building - Part 1 Characteristics of peak pressure, Summaries of Technical Papers of Annual Meeting Architectural Institute of Japan, Structures , 2000, pp.193-194 (in Japanese) 44) Ohtake, : Peak wind pressure coefficients for cladding of a tall building - Part 2 Stretch of Peak Wind Pressure, Summaries of Technical Papers of Annual Meeting Architectural Institute of Japan, Structures , 2001, pp.143-144 (in Japanese) 45) Maruta, E., Ueda, H. and Kanda, M: Local wind pressure on gable roofs, Summaries of Technical Papers of Annual Meeting College of Industrial Technology Nihon University, 1991, pp.33-36 (in Japanese) 46). Uematsu, Y: Peak gust pressures acting on low-rise building roofs, Proceedings of the 8th East Asia-Pacific Conference on Structural Engineering and Construction, Singapore, 2001 47) Uematsu, Y, Yamada, M: Fluctuating wind pressures on buildings and structures of circular cross-section at high Reynolds numbers, Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Wind Engineering, New Delhi, 1995, pp.358-368 48) Okada, H. and Chino, N: Wind-induced internal pressures in buildings, Part 2 gust response factor of internal pressure, Journal of Wind Engineering, JAWE, No.58, 1994, pp.43-53 (in Japanese) 49) Chino, N, Okada, H. and Kikitsu, H: On a new way to estimate wind load on cladding considering correlation between external and internal pressures, Summaries of Technical Papers of Annual Meeting Architectural Institute of Japan, Structures , 2000, pp.197-198 (in Japanese) 50). International Standard ISO4354, 1997 51) Asami, Y, Nakamura, O: A proposal for alongwind load model, Summaries of Technical Papers of Annual Meeting, AIJ, Structures I, pp.195-196, 2002 (in Japanese) 52) Asami, Y, Kondo, K, Hibi, K: Experimental research of aerodynamic force on rectangular prism, Journal of Wind Engineering, JAWE, 91, pp.83-88, 2002 (in Japanese) 53) Holmes, J. D: Effective static load distributions in wind engineering, Journal of Wind Engineering
CHAPTER 6
WIND LOADS C6-81
and Industrial Aerodynamics, Vol.90, pp.91-109, 2002 54) Harris, R. I: The propagation of internal pressures in buildings, Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, Vol.34, pp.169-184, 1990 55) Uematsu, Y, Sone, T, Noguchi, M: Geometric and structural characteristics and wind resistant design method of spatial structures constructed in Japan, Journal of Wind Engineering, JAWE, 96, pp.107-116, 2003 (in Japanese) 56) Marukawa, H. and Ohkuma, T: Formula of fluctuating wind forces for estimation of across-wind and torsional responses of prismatic high rise buildingsJournal of Structural and Construction Engineering AIJ, No.482, pp.33-42, 1996 (in Japanese) 57) Holmes, J. D: Along-wind response of lattice towers: Part I Derivation of expressions for gust response factors, Engineering Structures, Vol.16, No.4, pp.33-42, 1996 58) Marukawa, H., Tamura, Y., Sanada, S., Nakamura, O: Lift and across-wind response of q 200m concrete chimney, Journal of Wind Engineering JAWE, pp.37-52, 1984 (in Japanese) 59) Tamura, Y., Amano, A: Vortex induced vibration of circular cylinder Part III, Transactions of AIJ, 337, pp.65-72, 1984 (in Japanese) 60) Hibi, K., Tamura, Y., Kikuchi, H: Peak normal stresses and wind load combinations of middle-rise buildings, Summaries of Technical Papers of Annual Meeting, AIJ, Structures I, pp.113-114, 2003 (in Japanese) 61) Asami, Y: Combination method for wind loads on high-rise buildings, Proceedings of the 16th National Symposium on Wind Engineering, pp.531-534, 2000 (in Japanese) 62) Marukawa, H., Sasaki, A., Itou, J: Mode correction factor for modal wind forces, Summaries of Technical Papers of Annual Meeting, AIJ, Structures I, pp.251-252, 1999 (in Japanese) 63) Takamori, K., Nishimura, H., Taniike, Y., Okazaki, M. Taniguchi, T: Aerodynamic interference effect between twin tall buildings Part1 Square sectioned buildings, Summaries of Technical Papers of Annual Meeting, Architectural Institute of Japan, pp.249-250, 2000 (in Japanese) 64) Takamori, K., Nishimura, H., Taniike, Y., Okazaki, M: Aerodynamic interference effect between twin tall buildings Part2 Study of influences on the wind load, Summaries of Technical Papers of Annual Meeting, Architectural Institute of Japan, pp.173-174, 2001 (in Japanese) 65) Taniike, Y: Interference effect between tall buildings with square section in a high-turbulent boundary layer, Proceedings of 10th National Symposium on Wind Engineering, pp.247-252, 1988 (in Japanese) 66) Structural Design Concepts for Earthquake and Wind, Architectural Institute of Japan, 1999 (in Japanese)

A6.2 Wind Force Coefficients and Wind Pressure Coefficients

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

A6.2 Wind Force Coefficients and Wind Pressure Coefficients

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

C6-42

Recommendations for Loads on Buildings

WIND LOADS C6-43

Recommendations for Loads on Buildings

as well as on the provisions of international codes and standards. Although

that focuses on medium-scale buildings in urban areas. The effects of surface

WIND LOADS C6-45

gable wall (wind direction W2 ) it is represented by the rise/depth ratio

Internal pressure coefficients for structural frames

Recommendations for Loads on Buildings

In such cases, factor

Wind force coefficients for design of structural frames

WIND LOADS C6-47

Recommendations for Loads on Buildings

WIND LOADS C6-49

Recommendations for Loads on Buildings

WIND LOADS C6-51

Factor for effect of fluctuating internal pressures

Recommendations for Loads on Buildings

Example of fluctuating external and internal pressures acting on components/cladding

Peak wind force coefficient for components/cladding

WIND LOADS C6-53

Gust Effect Factors

Gust effect factor for along-wind loads on structural frames

MDR = a ( Z )m( Z ) ZdZ = a ( H ) ( Z )m( Z ) ZdZ

If these equations are taken into consideration, Eq.(A6.3.2) becomes as follows.

Additionally, in this formula non-dimensional frequency is defined by turbulence scale,

Recommendations for Loads on Buildings

(A6.3.9) (A6.3.10) (A6.3.11)

recommendation value/test value

recommendation value/test value

side ratio D/B

side ratio D/B

WIND LOADS C6-55

' S MD ( f ) is expressed by the following equation.

is mechanical admittance as expressed by the following equation. 1 2 m ( f ) = 2 2 2 1 ( f / fD ) + 4 D ( f / f D ) 2

In this equation, resonance component is estimated approximately as a response to white noise

Recommendations for Loads on Buildings

WDR = a Dmax ( Z )m( Z )

gust effect factor G D

3.6 3.4 3.2 3.0 2.8 2.6 2.4 2.2 2.0

height of building (m)

Figure A6.3.2 A6.3.2

Gust effect factor for roof wind loads on structural frames

WIND LOADS C6-57

Fluctuation of roof wind loads when wind force coefficient is small

Recommendations for Loads on Buildings

the equation, f R 0.57

( is deformation at center due to weight), can approximately evaluate

external pressure coefficient

external pressure coefficient

internal pressure coefficient

-0.4 -0.6 -0.2

internal pressure coefficient -0.4 -0.4 wind force coefficient beam

(a) beams normal to the wind direction

(b) beams parallel to the wind direction

WIND LOADS C6-59

Recommendations for Loads on Buildings

' values used in Eq.(A6.20) need to be set to C L = 0.06 , m = 1 , 1 = 0.9 , f S1 = 0.15U H / B ,

WIND LOADS C6-61

Procedure for estimating wind loads

In deriving Eq.(A6.23), it is assumed as follow: i) ii)