Proc. lnstn Cio. Engrs,Part 2, 1982,73, Sept.

, 653-666

8560

Assessment of wind loading

on
the
claddings of high-rise buildings
R . P. LAM, BSc(Eng),
L. c. H. LAM,

PhD, MICE, MIStructE*

BSc(Eng), PhD, MICE*

Wind damage to the cladding of high-rise buildings is not uncommon in areas subject to
typhoon winds. The consequences of failure are not only material losses, but also possible
loss of life and injury caused by flying debris. This Paper deals with the assessment of wind
loads on the claddings of high-rise buildings, and concludes that design based on wind
tunnel model tests alone is often inadequate; it must be supplemented by experienE gained
in full-scale tests, good engineering judgement and further research in the response of cladding elements to dynamic wind forces.
Notation

C,
C,
C,,
CJi
C,,
G
g

g
I,
p

P,
q
q,
p

exposure factor
gust factor
external pressure coefficient
internal pressure coefficient
mean external pressure coefficient
gust factor
peak factor
average peak factor
intensity of turbulence
peak local wind pressure
maximum wind pressure averaged over a period oft S
gust velocity pressure
mean velocity pressure
maximum wind pressure averaged over a period o f t S
air density

Introduction

For aesthetic and other reasons the use of curtain walls has become very popular
in recent years. In Hong Kong themajority of prestige tall buildings completed in
the pastfive years or so are cladded with curtain walls. As this type of construction
requires large-size glass panels and high quality metallic surface finish, its cost is
often a fairly significant portion of the total cost of the building. Being the external
surface of a building, the glass cladding of curtain walls is subjected to adverse
environmental effects such as rain-water penetration, heat loss/absorption, and
buffeting of wind gusts. Among these effects, windloading is the one which causes
Written discussion closes 15 November 1982, for publication in Proceedings, Part 2.
* University of Hong Kong.
653

LAM A N D LAM

the most severe damage. Hence appropriate assessment of loadings and proper
detailing of the cladding units are essential in order to produce a safe, durable and
economical design.
2. This Paper deals with the assessment of local wind loads on tall buildings
standing in areas where the occurrence of strong winds or tropical cyclones is
frequent. Typical current design methods are reviewed and appraised in the light of
full-scale experimental results.
Current design methods

3. Wind turbulence causes dynamic loading on structures. In considering failure of cladding materialsunder dynamic wind loads, Allen and Dalgliesh' showed
that the design wind load for metal cladding failing primarily byyield can be
determined by assuming that the panel is a static structure which fails when the
wind pressure exceeds the standard plastic resistance. Less is known about glass
which is a brittle material, and its strength depends on the panel size, existence of
flaws and the rate of loading. By applying the damage criterion determined from
glass manufacturers' loading tests to a sustained random wind pressure of duration
T , they suggested that glass cladding, like metal cladding, can be considered as
statistically loaded structures in which failure occurs when wind pressure exceeds
the structural capacity as determined by standard tests. It follows that both types
of cladding should be designed to resist peak wind loads.
4. Current cladding design methods are normally on a static basis. The net
design wind pressure on cladding units is usually taken to be the algebraic difference of the external pressure or suction and the internal pressure or suction. The
latter is estimated by considering whether or not the claddings are airtight, and if
not, by the location and size of the openings. The external pressure or suction is
more directly related to windspeed and direction, shape of the building and
location of the cladding unit under consideration.
5. Similar to thestatic wind load design of the structure as a whole, the
calculation of wind loads on cladding units is based on either the mean wind' or
peak gusts3. The mean wind approach to calculate the design local wind pressure
is generally expressed by
P = G(Cpe (1)

cpi)q
4

in which the design mean velocity pressure is calculated from the design mean
The external pressure coefficient C,,-which is the ratio of the mean
speed
external pressure to the mean velocity pressure q, is usually determined by wind
tunnel model experiments in the absence of adequate field data. The internal
pressure coefficient depends on the permeability of the building and whether the
openings are experiencing external pressure or suction. The gust effect is accounted
for by the gust factor, G, which is the ratio of peak to mean effects.
6. In a comparative study the Authors have shown4 that mean pressure coefficients obtained in a wind tunnel with a correctly simulated velocity profilecan be
used to predict quite accurately the time-averaged wind loads on a building.
Equation (1) can therefore provide an accurate assessment of the design load
provided that a suitable gust factor G is adopted. Research work5e6on gust effects
are carried out both in wind tunnels and full-scale experiments'-''
in order to
study the peak distribution of wind pressure or suction at critical locations on
buildings of different shapes under different wind directions.
7. It is simple to assume that wind loading is a stationary random Gaussian

v.

654

WINDLOADINGONCLADDINGS

OF HIGH-RISEBUILDINGS

process such that the gust factor G may be written as

G = 1 +gZ,

(2)

and a further assumption that the peak distribution is narrow enables the average
value g of the Deak factor g to be used for designpurposes.' However, more recent
work in wind tunnel^^.^ and full-scale experiments'* have shown that the wind
pressures do not quite follow the Gaussiandistribution.
8. As an alternative to the mean wind approach, calculation of the local external pressure or suction can be on a gust speed basis. For instance the British code3
employs the following expression
in which the gust velocity pressure q is defined in a similar manner to the mean
replaced by a design
velocity pressure q , but with the design mean velocity
three-second gust speed V having a certain probability of occurrence. Although it
is desirable to determine maximum wind loads on small units of cladding using
gusts with shorter averaging times, it is not at present possible because available
meteorological data can only provide maximum gust speed averaged over about
three seconds as aresult of the characteristics of the type of anemometers used.
9. The external pressure coefficient C,, is the ratio of the local maximum gust
loading to the design gust velocity pressure q. As external pressures and suctions
on building surfaces vary considerably with wind direction, velocity profile and
building shape, pressure Coefficients are of necessity obtained from measurements
on models in wind tunnels, and the great majority of data available have been
obtained in conditions of relatively smooth flow. It is therefore suggested3 that
where full-scalemeasurement data areavailable, values of the pressure coefficients
should be adjusted to allow for turbulence and wind tunnel model scale effects.
10. The accuracy of the design wind load calculated from equation (3) depends
on the pressure coefficient C,, for short duration gusts. In a study13 of force
coefficients on a multi-storey building obtained from full-scale measurements the
authors have found that the force coefficients are not constant but vary with the
averaging period. The general trend is that the force coefficient increases with the
averaging period, implying that gust loading on the building as a whole decreases
with its duration. This phenomenon is expected because short duration gusts are
smaller in spatial extent. However, this variation does not necessarily apply to
local gust loadings, in particular where the gust is spatially large enough to engulf
a cladding element.
11. It would therefore be enlightening to study the characteristics of the gust
factor G and the gust pressure coefficient C in full-scale buildings in order to
obtain abetter understanding of the nature o&st loads on cladding.
Full-scale experiment
12. The full-scale measurements were carried out at the experimental building
of the Centre of High Building Research in the Department of Civil Engineering,
University of Hong Kong. The experimental building is situated on a piece of
lowland in an open area where it isexposed to winds blowing from all directions. It
is a ten-storey steel-framed building measuring 18.29 m by 9.15 m in plan and
30.48 m in height, and is enclosed on all sides to its full height with steel-framed
glass curtain walls (Fig. 1). A site plan is shown in Fig. 2.
655

LAM AND LAM

Fig. 1. Experimental building of the Centre of HighBuilding

D'Aguilar, Hong Kong

Research at Cape

(a)
Fig. 2. (a) Site planof experimental building; (b) layout plan of experimental station

656

WIND LOADING ON CLADDINGS O F HIGH-RISE BUILDINGS

13. Wind velocities in the vicinity of the building are measuredby anemometers mounted on four latticed steel masts, each 54.86 m high and spaced
equally at 15.24 m intervals in a straight line parallel to the north-east side of the
building at a distance of approximately 60 m. Anemometers are positioned at four
levels on each mast, at 7.62, 22.86, 38.10 and 54.86 m above the common base
levelof the masts, which is about 5.5 m above mean sea level. Mean
and gust
velocity profiles are obtained and the
roof levelof the experimental building (about
40 m above mean sea level) is selected as the reference level.
14. Wind pressure fluctuations on the four vertical faces of the building are
measured by 72 pressure transducers flush-mounted at selected points (Fig. 3) in
the glass wall panels at 9.1, 15.2, 21.3 and 27.4 m above ground floor level. The
pressure transducers are of the strain gauge type designed by the Building Research StationI4 to measure the difference between the external pressure and that
within its body cavity which serves as
a reference or datum pressure. For the
measurement of local gust loading oncladdings the reference or datum pressure is
ideally the internal pressure inside the building so that the measured load is the
total load acting on the cladding, and this is achieved by vertingthe bodycavity of
each transducer through asmall opening to theinside of the building. Openings in
the curtain wall are kept closed to create a more stable internal
pressure inside the

S
A

Latticed towers

/
\
32

Guyed

ma

Experimental building
( b)

Fig. 2 continued

657

LAM AND LAM

P
-

91 44 mm.

18 288 mm

23243098
!riimlmm

T-r

-____I

6731 30982324
mm ;mmimAl

N.///

mm

mm

///7

Location of pressure transducers on the full-scale building

elevation Side elevationFront

(Y

I p2324

18 288 mm

mm
NE1

3098
'
mm
'NE2

6731 mm

3098

, 2324

mm
NE4 NE$- N E5'

'NE3

mm

j
:E

E
m

0
N
p.

E
E

N
W--

p.

E
E

.r

0
.F*
W

,SW2
--?SW1

, SW3

sw4,

v)

SW6j-r
SW5,

ib)
Fig. 3. (a) Location of pressure measuring points on full-scale building; (b) floor plan
showing locationof pressure transducers

658

WIND LOADING O N CLADDINGS O F HIGH-RISEBUILDINGS

building during measurement.

15. Analogue signals from the anemometers and pressure transducers are
scanned and digitized by a 240-channel high-speed data logger at a rateof ten data
points a channel per second, and the digital data are recorded on magnetic tape.
Description of other experimental facilities at the building are given in references
4 and 15.
Results
16. Wind pressure data obtained insix occasions of typhoon with different
wind speeds and directions were analysed. Gust factors and local pressure coefficients definedby the following expressions were computed:

G=

maximum instantaneous pressure

mean pressure*

(4)

where P, is the maximum pressure averaged over a period of t seconds, q, is

1/2(pV;), and ?( is the maximum gust speed averaged over a period o f t seconds.
It is observed that there are marked differences between the characteristics of
pressures and suctions. Typical results of the gust factor and pressure coefficients at
selected transducer positions are shown in Tables 1 and 2 for face-on and glancing
winds respectively. The selected positions are: points of maximum windward
pressureypoints near the leading edge of windward face or side walls, and points of
Table 1 (a). Pressure coefficients and gust factorsat selected transducer positions under a wind at 7"to the normal of a major building face
Transducer

CPC

0.1 S
9NE3
9SE1
9sw5
9NW2
7NE3
7SE1
7sw5
5NE3
5sw5
5NW2
3SE1
3sw5
3NW2

1s

0.97
0.95
-0.35
-0.52
-0.38
-0.39
-0.74
-0.78
0.98
0.96
-0.70 - 0.50
-0.37
-0.37
- 1.20 7NW2
- 1.13
1.04
1.04
-0.97 5SE1
- 0.59
-0.45 -0.46
-0.64
- 0.68
0.94
0.92 3NE3
- 1.00 -0.72
-0.50
-0.52
-0.84 -0.82
-

C,,
3s
0.94
- 0.28
-0.37
- 0.64
0.95
- 0.46
-0.35
- 1.05
1.03
-0.53
- 0.42
- 0.54
0.9 1
-0.58
- 0.47
- 0.70

PIG

30 min.
0.92
-0.19
- 0.20
-0.25
0.96
-0.25
0.14
- 0.65
1.05
- 0.27
-0.13
- 0.22
0.90
-0.27
0.13
-0.32

2.02
5.36
3.82
6.12
1.96
5.49
-5.18
3.62
1.94
7.04
6.78
6.06
2.00
7.26
- 7.84
5.15

1.9
- 1.0
- 0.8
- 1.5
1.9
- 1.4
- 0.7
- 2.4
2.0
- 1.9
- 0.9
- 1.3
1.8
- 2.0
- 1.0
- 1.6

Mean wind speed averaged over 30 minutes at roof level = 23.7 m/s.
Mean wind direction = N 38"E.

* averaged over

30 minutes unless noted otherwise.

659

LAM AND LAM

maximum suction on the leeward face and side walls.

17. O n examining the gust factors, it is apparent that large values (up to33.18)
are associated with suctions on the leeward and side walls, whereas gust factors for
pressures seldomexceed three. It is also observed that these large values of the gust
factor actually resulted from small values of the mean local pressure/suction
averaged over 30 minutes.
18. With regard to the local pressure coefficients, the results show that different
patterns ofvariationwith the averaging period Iexist. In general, the local pressure
coefficient decreases with the averaging period at locations where suctions occur,
irrespective of the angle ofincidence ofthe wind on the building. On the other hand,
variation of positive pressure coefficientswith the averaging period depends on the
angle of attack.
19. For winds actingalmostnormal to a major building face (aspect ratio
width/depth = 2) the windward pressure coefficients are rather constant, i.e. C,,
Table 1 (b). Pressure coefficients and gust factors at selected transducer positions under a wind at 1 1 to the normal of a major building face

Transducer

9NE 1
9NE3
9NE5
9NE6
9NW3
9SE1
9sw3
7NE1
7NE3
7NE5
7NE6
7NW3
7SE1
7sw3
5NE1
5NE3
5NE5
5NE6
5NW3
5SE1

5sw3

3NE1
3NE3
3NE5
3NE6
3NW3
3SE1
3sw3

CPC

0.1 S

1s

0.85
0.84
0.66
0.57
-0.92
- 0.43
-0.50
0.92
0.93
0.78
0.62
-0.67
- 0.49
-0.52
0.95
0.93
0.66
0.54
- 0.8 1
-0.77
-0.49
0.86
0.84
0.55
- 0.28
-0.71
0.40
-0.36

0.91
0.89
0.71
0.61

- 0.90
-0.37
- 0.54
0.96
0.97
0.83
0.64
-0.67
- 0.40
-0.55

0.99
0.96
0.69
0.55
- 0.80
-0.60
-0.52
0.89
0.85
0.58
-0.29
-0.65

0.41
-0.37

3s
0.92
0.90
0.69
0.60
- 0.90
- 0.30
- 0.54
0.93
0.96
0.86
0.63
-0.69
-0.31
-0.52
1.03
0.95
0.70
0.56
- 0.79
- 0.40
- 0.49
0.89
0.87
0.58
- 0.27
-0.56
0.40
-0.36

G
30 min
0.96
1.15
0.55
0.52
-0.61

-0.12
- 0.43
1.05
1.26
0.82
0.60
-0.50
0.05
- 0.37
0.97
1.17
0.62
0.53
- 0.63
-0.11

-0.35
0.86
1.02
0.58
0.46
-0.38
0.48
- 0.41

2.28
1.90
3.12
2.85
3.93
9.45
3.47
2.26
1.91
2.47
2.68
3.48
-25.15
4.15
2.53
2.06
2.76
2.65
3.35
17.47
4.48
2.59
2.04
2.46
- 4.54
4.90
2.15
8.50

Mean wind speed averaged over 30 minutes at roof level = 20.5 m/s.
Mean wind direction = N 34"E.
660

2.2
2.2
1.7
1.5
- 2.4
- 1.1
- 1.5

2.4
2.4
2.0
1.6
- 1.7
- 1.3
- 1.5
2.5
2.4
1.7
1.4
-2.1
- 1.9
- 1.6
2.2
2.1
1.4
- 0.7
- 1.9
1.0
-0.9

WIND LOADING ON CLADDINGS OF HIGH-RISEBUILDINGS

Table 1 (c). Pressure coefficients and gust factors at selected transducer positions under a wind normal to a minor building face

Transducer

l-

c,

CPe

0.1 S

1s

-0.78
0.69
0.7 1
0.74
-0.46
0.82
0.74
0.80
- 0.70
0.7 1
0.78
0.71
0.67
-0.7 1
0.70
-0.63

0.44
0.74
0.77
0.77
0.44
0.88
0.80
0.82
-0.57
0.77
0.84
0.77
0.69
- 0.65
0.76

3s

30 min

0.36
0.81
0.83
0.82
0.41
0.87
0.87
0.82

- 0.06
1.10
1.16
I0 4
-0.13
1.08
1.39
0.97
- 0.28
1.14
1.27
1.05
0.84
-0.29
1.04
-0.06

pi4

9SW6
9SE1
9SE2
9SE3
7SW6
7SE1
7SE2
7SE3
5SW6
5SE1
5SE2
5SE3
3SW6
3SE1
3SE2
3SE3

0.55

0.82
0.90
0.8 1
0.71
-

0.60

0.79
-0.46

-0.55

33.18
1.63
1.59
1.85
8.92
1.96
1.39
2.12
6.35
160
1.59
1.75
2.06
6.42
1.73
25.38

- 2.0
1.8
1.8
1.9
- 1.2
2.1
1.9
2.1
- 1.8
1.8
2.0
1.8
1.7
- 1.9
1.8
- 1.5

Mean wind speed averaged over 30 minutes at roof level = 333 m/s.
Mean wind direction = S 45"E.

Table 2(a). Pressure coefficients and gust factors at selected transducer positions under a wind at 22"
to thenormal of a major building face

Transducer
9NE2
9NE6
9sw3
9SE2
7NE2
7NE6
7sw3
7SE2
5NE2
5NE6
5sw3
5SE2
3NE2
3NE6
3sw3
3SE2

G
0.1 S
1.13
0.62
-0.45
-0.56
1.29
-0.37
0.57
1.27
0.72
-0.30
1.16
0.44
-0.27

l
I

1S
1.19
0.63
-0.45
-0.58
-0.37
0'60
1.32
-0.35
-0.29
0.46
0.23
-0.29

3s
1.25
0.63
-0.42
-0.59
1.41
0.77
-0.35
0.59
1.38
0.72
-0.35
-0.32
-0.28
1.26
0.40
0.230.2 1
-0.27

30 min
1.18
0.54
-0.36
-0.57
1.35 1.32
0.75 0.66
0.72
-0.30
0,48
1.25
0.73 0.6 1
- 0.27
-0.18
1.20 1.15
0.30
0.14
-0.19

2.39
2.87
3.12
2.45
2.44
2.72
3.08
2.96
2.54
2.95
3.24
. 4.16
2.52
3.66
4.10
3.55

Mean wind speed averaged over 30 minutes at roof level = 14.9 m/s.
Mean wind direction = N 23"E.
661

LAM A N D LAM

c,

for gusts are approximately equalto the mean pressure coefficient

at locations
near the central portion of the building face. Elsewhere on the windward face the
coefficient tends to increase with theaveraging period. However, when the wind is
normal to a minorbuilding face (i.e.the aspect ratio changes to 0 5 ) ,the windward
pressure coefficients are not constant but rapidly increase with the averaging
period. Under glancing winds the pressure coefficients at the leading edge of the
windward face are fairly constant, but others tend to increase with the averaging
period (except at points which are very close to the trailing edge).
20. It should be noted that windward pressures are greater in magnitude than
leeward suctions and therefore have a greater influence on the properties of the
total load on the building as a whole. This explains why the total force
coefficient increases with the averaging period13 despite the fact that suctions
decrease with that period.
21. As the gust factor and the pressure coefficient are dependent on the
averaging time, a suitable averaging time has therefore to be determined before
using appropriate values ofthe gust factor, the pressure coefficient and thereference
velocity to calculate a design wind load.
22. In order that the experimental results may be compared with design wind
loads given by codes of practice, it is necessary to make adjustments for the
difference in height of the reference mean or gust velocity pressures.
23. Using a power law mean velocity profile with an exponent of 0.19 which
the mean velocity
has been determined for the site of the experimental
pressure q l 0 at 10 m could be related to the mean velocity pressure q at 30 m
(roof level) by
q l 0 = 0.66 4
(6)

24. The three-second gust profiles obtained simultaneously with the pressure
Table 2(b). Pressure coefficients and gustfactors at selectedtransducer
positions undera wind at 22" to the normal of a major building face
c

Transducer

CPC

0.1 S

9sw4
9sw5
9SE3
9NW3
7sw4

7sw5

7SE3
7NW3
5sw4

5sw5

5SE3
5NW3
3sw4

3sw5

3SE3
SNW3

1.17
0.83
- 0.70
-0.86
0.96
0.96
- 0.93
-0.87
0.99
0.97
- 0.99
- 1.19
0.92
0.85
- 0.45
-0.72

Is

1.17
0.83

-0.57
- 0.69
0.99
0.98
-0.71
-0.63
1.11
1 .W

-0.82
-0.90
1.01
0.95
- 0.49
- 0.64

3s
1.16
0.82
- 0.47
- 0.55
0.96
0.94
- 0.56
-0.55

14 0
0.97
-0.58

- 0.69
0.93
0.88
- 0.45
- 0.49

1.27
0.90
- 0.41
- 0.46
1.06

1 a4
- 0.50
- 0.48
1.10
1.02
- 0.43
-0.57
1.02
0.88
-0.34
- 0.40

1.84
1.85

3.42
3.73
1.82
1.83
3.72
3.62
1.80
1.90
4.65
4.18
1 .so
1.95
2.61
3.62

Mean wind speed averaged over 30 minutes at roof level = 24.9 m/s.
Mean wind direction = S 23"W.
662

WINDLOADINGONCLADDINGS

O F HIGH-RISEBUILDINGS

measurements indicated that there was no significant variation of the maximum

three-second gust with height at the levels ofthe pressure transducers. Therefore no
reduction to the three-second velocity pressure q at the respective height of the
transducers was considered necessary.
25. The nondimensional ratios of the observed local maximum wind pressure
P to the mean velocity pressure 4 based on the mean wind velocity at roof level of
the experimental building are also given in the last columns of Tables 1 and 2.
Table 2(c) reveals an unexpectedly high local suction at transducer position 3NE6
which is very close to the leading edge of the windward face, when the mean wind
direction was inclined at about58 degrees to the normal of this face. The observed
peak suction of 3.6 4 is equivalent to 5.5 times the mean velocity pressure at 10 m
or 1.7 times the three-second gust velocity pressure at roof level. As other nearby
transducers recorded positive pressures (with the exception of transducer 5SE3
which recorded a mean positive pressure but a peak suction) it is very likely that
the wind loads at bothtransducer positions (3NE6 and 5SE3) are localized effects.
Table 2(c). Pressurecoefficients and gustfactorsatselectedtransducer
positions under a wind at 32" from the normal of a minor building face

-r

Transducer

9NE2
9NE3
9NE5
9NE6
9NW1
9SE3
9SW1
7NE2
7NE3
7NE5
7NE6
7NW1
7SE3
7SW1
5NE2
5NE3
5NE5
5NE6
5NW1
5SE3
5SW1
3NE2
3NE3
3NE5
3NE6
3NW1
3SE3
3SW1

CV

c,,

0.1s

1s

3s

5 min

0.48
0.68
0.87
0.8 1
-0.76
1.09
- 0.44
0.8 1
0.96

0.45
0.66
0.90
0.83
- 0.64
1.12
- 0.44
0.83
0.99
- 0.70
1.13
- 0.46
0.6 1
0.78
0.84
0.91
- 0.64
- 0.8 1
-0.63
0.54
0.68
0.74
- 0.96
-0.86
0.65
- 0.29

0.43
0.6 1
0.89
0.83
- 0.62
1.12
- 0.46
0.82
1.01

0.50
0.70
1.20
1.07
- 0.80
1.05
-0.35
1.14
1.47

1.02
- 0.74
1.09
- 0.49
0.66
0.83
0.79
0.89
- 0.69
- 0.97
- 0.64
0.57
0.73
0.77
- 1.45
- 1.10
0.71
-0.32

1.65
- 0.65
1.18
- 0.44
0.67
0.96
1.08
1.25
- 0.45
0.26
-0.61
0.54
0.85
0.98
-0.91
- 0.87
0.78
- 0.24

-0.61
1.19
- 0.52
0.62
0.79
0.84
0.91
- 0.49
-0.78
- 0.66
0.56
0.73
0.74
- 0.86
-0.73
0.62
-0.28

2.40
2.43
1.82
1.88
2.37
2.58
2.49
1.77
1.63
1.45
1.54
2.83
2.3 1
2.78
2.46
2.16
1.83
1.77
3.89
-9.26
2.62
2.64
2.15
1.96
3.98
3.14
2.27
3.33

1.2
1.7
2.2
2.0
- 1.9
2.7
- 0.9
2.0
2.4
2.5
- 1.8
2.7
- 1.2
1.7
2.1
2.0
2.2
- 1.8
- 2.4
- 1.6
1.4
1.8
1.9
- 3.6
- 2.7
1.8
- 0.8

Mean wind speed averaged over5 minutes at roof level = 18.3 m/s.
Mean wind direction = S 77"E.

663

LAM AND LAM

26. Another interesting feature is shown in Table l(c) in the results obtained
under a wind blowing in a direction normal to the minor face.All windward
transducers recorded positive pressures, except 3SE1 and 3SE3 which recorded
suctions. This phenomenon has been confirmed in a wind tunnel model test in
which the surrounding topographic features are also modelled, and it is believed
that this localized effectis caused by the rock mass upstream of the building
(Fig. 2). The height of this rock mass is almost half that of the building, and it
produces a shielding effect on the pressures on the windward minor face.
21. Adverseeffects dueto the influence of nearby objects, buildings and
structures are bound to exist in a congested built-up environment. Such effects,
including high local suctions caused by channelling of flow and wake-induced
building vibrations, are difficult to codify. In these situations the designer has to
rely on experience gained in field observations and exercise his engineering
judgement to decide the acceptable level of safety against wind damage.

Comparison of experimental results with design wind loads

28. In view of the wide range of variation of the gust factor G and the local
pressure coefficients C,, over the building surfaces, suitable choice of these two
parameters for use in codes of practice has to rely on a substantial amount of
research in full-scale as well as wind tunnel measurements. For a building of given
shape and size, the design wind load for claddings and walls at critical locations
should be assessed under the worst possible conditions (speed and direction) of
wind attack. Although the full-scale experimental results reported in this Paper
may not have revealed the worst conditions of loading, comparison with design
wind pressures calculated from some codes of practice could still provide a valuable basis for appraisal of the codes. Magnitudes of the design and observed wind
pressures can be compared in terms of a reference velocity pressure after suitable
adjustment of reference heights has been made. Comparison with the design wind
pressures calculated from two codes of practice, the Canadian code and the British
code, is made in $2!?-32.
29. It is both stated in the codes of practice and observed experimentally that
when the wind acts at an angle to the windward face of a building, high local
suctions will occur at the leading edge of the wall which is at a small angle to the
windwhereflow separation takes place. The results in Table l(b), at pressure
transducer locationsNW3, clearly show this effect and aretaken for comparison.
30. The Canadian code which adopts a mean wind approach specifies a gust
factor of 2.5 for cladding or window design, a local pressure coefficient of - 1.5 for
flat-roofbuildings ofheightgreater than twice the width, and anexposure factor of
1.3 appropriate to the dimensions, shape and site conditions of the experimental
building. The exposure factor which accounts for the height of the structural
element above the adjacent groundlevel is required because the reference (design)
velocity pressure is based on hourly mean speeds measured at a height of 30 ft
(about 10 m) in an open exposure. The design local wind pressure is given by the
algebraic difference of external and internal pressures :

where C, = exposure factor = 1.3, Cb = local gust factor = 2.5, C, = external

pressure coefficient = - 1.5, Cei = factor for internal pressure = 1.1, CPi=
internal pressure coefficient for openings uniformly distributed in all four walls =
664

WIND LOADING ON CLADDINGS OF HIGH-RISE BUILDINGS

-0.3, and ql0 = reference velocity pressure basedon hourly mean wind speeds at
a height of 30 ft.
31. Referring to Table l(b), themaximum local suction at transducer positions
9NW3, 7NW3, 5NW3 and 3NW3 are 2.4 q, 1.7 q, 2.1 q and 1.9 4 respectively.
Using equation (6), these observed peak suctions can be expressed in terms of the
meanvelocitypressure
at 10m, q l 0 , as 3.6 q l 0 , 2.6 q l 0 , 3.2 ql0 and 2.9 q l 0
respectively, which are smaller than the design wind pressure calculated by equation (7).
32. The British code3 adopts agust-speed approach. The design wind pressure
on claddings is calculated based on a gust speed averaged over a period of three
seconds at theheight of the claddingelement (useof the factor S , in calculating the
design gust speed). For the experimental building the design local wind pressure is
given by
P = (Cpe - C,& = -0.9 q
(8)
where C,, = external pressurecoefficient
= - 1.2, CPi= internal pressure
coefficient = -0.3 and q = design velocity pressure based
on the three-second
gust atthe height of the cladding element.
33. It has been reported in $24that there was no significant difference between
thethree-secondgustvelocities
at rooflevel and at the levels of the pressure
transducers. Therefore the observed peak suctions at transducer positions NW3 of
Table l(b) can be expressed in terms
of the three-second gust velocity pressureq at
roof level for comparison purpose. These observed peak suctions are 1.1 q, 0.8 q,
1.0 q and 0.9 q respectively, varyingfrom the highest(9NW3) to the lowest
(3NW3) level. Apparently the observed peak suctions can be regarded as reasonably closeto thedesign value givenby equation (8).
34. Considering that local wind loads are momentary in nature because they
are caused by gusts of very short duration(small eddiesin the turbulent flow of air
around thebuilding), the gust speed approach provides a direct and sound method
of assessing wind loads for cladding design in high-rise buildings. However, ithas
been
that
this
approach
tends
to result in unduly high total wind
loads on a building or structure as a whole, and that the mean wind approach is
more suitablefor assessingthe overall wind effectson a building or structure.
Conclusion

35. In thedesign ofthe cladding for a multi-storey building it wouldappear that

the gust-speed method of the British codeis likely to provide lower pressure values
than the mean wind approach of the Canadian code. These lower pressure values
are likely to be close to the actual average values of local pressure or suction
applied to thecladding.
36. Higherpressurevaluesmayoccur
at isolatedpositions in thecladding
caused by the influence of nearby buildings or other obstacles. These localized
higher values are of the order of magnitude predicted by the Canadian code. For
the present, a design method based on CP33 would seem to be suitable on the
understanding that isolated positions of higher pressure represent a modest encroachment on thefactor of safety inherent in the design of the cladding.
Acknowledgement

37. The Authors wish to thank the Centre of High Building Research of the
University of Hong Kong for providing the full-scale test facilities. The Centre of
665

LAM AND LAM

High Building Research is sponsored by the Hong Kong Government, the

Nuffield
Foundation, the British Iron and Steel Federation, the Ministry of Overseas Development of H.M. Government, a local Hong Kong benefactor and the University of Hong Kong.
References
1. ALLEND. E. and DALCLIESH
W. A. Dynamic wind loads and cladding design. Division of
Building Research, National Research Council, Canada, Research paper no.61 1.

2. NATIONAL
BUILDING
CODE OF C A N A DPart
~ 4 Design.
3. BRITISHSTANDARDS
INsTIwnoN. Code of basic data for the design of buildings. British
Standards Institution, London, 1972. CP3: Ch. V, Part 2.
4. LAMR. P. and LAM L. C. H. Mean wind pressure distribution on a multi-storey
building. Proc. lmtn Civ. Engrs, Part 2, 1981, 71, Mar., 119-129.
5. PETERKA J. A. and CERMAK J.E. Peak pressure duration in separated regions on a
structure. Proc. US-Japan researchseminar on wind effects on structures, Kyoto, Japan,
1974.
J. E. Separation-induced pressurefluctuations on buildings. Colorado State Uni6. CERMAK
versity, 1970, Report CEP70-71 JEC19, Fluid Mechanics Programme.
l . MACKEY
S. et al. Gust factors. Proc. semin. on wind loads on structures, Hawaii, 1970.
8. NEWBERRY
C. W. et al. Wind pressure on the Post Office Tower, London. Proc. int.
con5 on wind efects on bldgs and structs, Tokyo, 1971.
9. NEWBERRY
C. W. et al. Wind loading on tall buildings-further results from Royex
House. Building Research Station, 1973.
10. DALCLIESH
W. A. Statistical treatment of peak gusts on cladding. J. Struct Diu. Am. Soc.
Ciu. Engrs.Sept., 1971.
1 1 . DAVENPORT
A. G. Note on the distribution of the largest value of a random function
with application to gust loading. Proc. lnstn Ciu. Engrs., 28, June, 1964, 187-196.
12. WONCK. Y.Some aspects of wind loading effects on the design of multistorey buildings.
University of Hong Kong, PhD Thesis, 1976.
13. MACKEY
S. et al. A full-scale and wind tunnel study of wind loading on a building. Proc.
of ASCE-IABSE regional conference on tall buildings, Bangkok, Jan.1974.
14. MAYNE J.R. A wind pressure transducer. Building Research Establishment, 1970, BRS
Current paper 17/70.
15. LAML.C. H. and LAMR. P. An experimental study of the dynamic behaviour of a
multistorey steel-framed building. Proc. Instn Ciu. Engrs., Part 2, 1979,67, Sept. 707720.
S. et al. A basis for estimation of wind pressures on high-rise buildings in areas
16. MACKEY
subject to typhoon winds. The Structural Engineer, 1973,51, Dec., No. 12, p. 453.
A. G. and DALCLIESH
W.A. Commentary No. l-wind loads. National
17. DAVENPORT
Building Code of Canada, 1970, Supplement No. 4.
18. TAYLORR. G . Blow, blow, thou winter wind, thart not so unkind as Chap. V: Part 2.
The Structural Engineer, 1973.51, Dec., No. 12, p. 449.
19. Discussion on Blow, blow, thou winter wind, thart not so unkind as Chap. V: Part 2.
The Structural Engineer, 52, Sept., 1974, No. 9, p. 347.

666