See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/261363511

Wind Load Reductions due to Building Corner

Modifications

Conference Paper · June 2014

CITATIONS READS

6 1,477

3 authors:

Ahmed Elshaer G. T. Bitsuamlak

The University of Western Ontario The University of Western Ontario
17 PUBLICATIONS 76 CITATIONS 116 PUBLICATIONS 827 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Ashraf El Damatty
The University of Western Ontario
209 PUBLICATIONS 1,520 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Reinforced Concrete Conical Tanks under Hydrostatic Pressure View project

Wind tunnel testing/procedure View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ahmed Elshaer on 03 June 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Wind Load Reductions due to Building Corner
Modifications
Ahmed Elshaer1, Girma Bitsuamlak2, Ashraf El Damatty3
1,2,3
Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Western
Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada
Email: aelshae@uwo.ca
ABSTRACT
With the development of new building materials and
techniques, the new generation of buildings is
becoming more flexible and of lower damping and
lighter weight. As a result super tall buildings are
becoming more sensitive to the dynamic effect of wind
load. Thus, aerodynamic modification has become an
important aspect of tall building design process.
Various aerodynamic modifications on building could
be made in order to improve the aerodynamic
performance. For example, higher level openings,
tapering, twisting the structure around its vertical axis
or modifying the building corner details can be
beneficial. The latter is the focus of the present
numerical study. The main objective of the present
study is to evaluate the suitability of low-dimensional
steady Computational Fluid Dynamics “CFD”
modelling for aerodynamic modification performance
assessment. Five corner details that have been
previously studied in boundary layer wind tunnel from
literature have been adopted for the numerical
simulation. The comparison between the two is
expected to help in evaluating the performance of the
low dimensional CFD based methods for such an
application. Low dimensional approaches were opted
due to computational efficiency requirement, which is
an important consideration for applications that
involve various iterations to achieve optimum
aerodynamic modifications.
1. INTRODUCTION AND MOTIVATION
For most buildings projects the shape and orientation
are driven by architectural considerations, functional
requirements and site limitations, rather than by
aerodynamic considerations, as a result these
structures are bluff bodies characterized by high wind-
structure interaction induced loads. The aerodynamic
modifications of a building’s cross-sectional shape,
variation of its cross section along the height, or even
its size, can significantly reduce building response in
along-wind as well as across-wind direction by
altering the wind flow characteristics (drag + vortex
shedding) around the building. Most previous
aerodynamic modifications studies were carried out
for civil structures including but not limited to high-
rise buildings, low-rise buildings and bridges.
The various aerodynamic modifications applied to the
tall buildings to mitigate the wind excitations cab
grouped into major and minor modifications [1] Major
modifications that have considerable effects on the
structural and architectural concept, for examples
setbacks along the height, tapering, openings at top,
varying the shape of buildings, setbacks, twisting of
building. Minor modifications that have limited effects
on the structural and architectural concept, for
examples corner modifications like slotted corners,
chamfered corners, corner recession, roundness of
corners and orientation of building in relation to the
most frequent strong wind direction. The latter is the
focus of the present numerical study.
Corner modifications and their impact on aerodynamic
forces were studied by Dutton and Isyumov [2], Kawai
[3], Irwin and Breukelman [4], Tamura and Miyagi
[5], and Kareem et al. [6]. Kwok et al. [7] [8] studied
the effects of chamfered corners and slotted corners of
prismatic tall buildings on the wind-induced responses
of such buildings. They reported that chamfers on the
order of 10% of the building’s width may result in 30%
to 40% reduction in both alongwind and crosswind
induced motions of tall buildings. The corners on
(Taipei 101) were stepped in order to reduce across-
wind respond and drag, resulting in a 25% reduction
in base moment [9].The corner roundness is another
effective means of improving the aerodynamic
behavior of tall buildings against the wind excitation.
This corner shape was studied by Karim [6], Kawai
[3], and Melbourne and Cheung [10].
Experimental methods, using wind tunnel, provide the
basis of the traditional “trail-and-error” approach for
the design of new aerodynamic shapes. This approach
is too expensive, which has motivated the continual
development of sophisticated computational methods
for flow simulation. Therefore, with the advances in
CFD and computing power of modern computers,
aerodynamic design optimization methods utilizing
CFD codes are more important than ever [11]. As an
alternative to wind-tunnel tests, CFD has recently
gained interest in civil engineering applications. Due
to the resources and time necessary for performing
each wind tunnel test, geometric form definition can
only be carried out as a trial-and-error procedure, in
which a limited number of possible configurations,
chosen based on experience, can be examined.
To ensure the realization of the true best design, the
ultimate goal of computational simulation methods
should not just be the analysis of prescribed shapes,
but the automatic determination of the true optimum
shape for the intended application. This is the
underlying motivation for the combination of
computational fluid dynamics with numerical
optimization methods [12]. Although this constitute
the long term objective of the ongoing research, the
present study is aiming to assess the low dimensional
flow CFD approach as a simplified method for the
aerodynamic mitigations based on few predetermined
building corner modifications.
2. MODEL SETUP
2.1 Geometric properties
The model setup for this study is mostly similar to the
one used by Tamura et al. [5] experimental work, but
more shapes have been examined. The studied
building cross sections (plan view) are shown in
Figure 1. They include sharp, recessed, double
recessed, chamfered and rounded square cross-
sections. The dimensions of the normal square cross
section is 50 * 50 mm. The modification length used
is 8.33 mm. The computational domain length was
3000 mm, its width is 500 mm, and its height is 300
mm. The studied body was located at a distance of
1000 mm from the computational domain inlet.
Figure 1 Cross section shape for the studied shapes
2.2 Aerodynamic properties
The analysis was carried out using “STAR CCM+”
software [13] using k-є turbulence model. A two-
dimensional flow was used to assess the efficacy of
typical corner modifications. As shown in Figure 2 the
inlet was assigned to be a velocity inlet. The outlet was
considered to be a pressure outlet. Top, bottom, and
the two sides were assigned as symmetric plane, and
all the body faces were considered to be a “No-slip”
walls. The k-epsilon turbulence model was used to
simulate turbulence. Base mesh size was set to be 25
mm, and the mesh size was lowered to 20% of its size
on the body surfaces, and 50% at the areas in front and
behind the studied body, as shown in Figure 3. The
used inlet uniform velocity was 10 m/sec, turbulence
intensity was 14%, and the turbulence length scale was
0.18 meters.
Figure 2 Three dimensional view for the studied
model
Figure 3 Three dimensional scene for the meshes
2.3 Model Verification.
The numerical model was verified by calculating the
drag force for the sharp edge square cylinder. It was
calculated using Eq. 1, and it was found to be equals
to 1.88. Comparing the drag coefficient obtained from
the CFD model to that of Lee [14], Otsuki [15], and
Tamura [5], it was found that the drag force is within
the acceptable range, as could be concluded from
Table 1.
2𝐹𝐷
𝐶𝐷 = … Eq. 1
𝜌𝑣 2 𝐴
CFD
Lee Otsuki Tamura model
Drag 1.88
2.05 2.00 1.95
Coefficient
Table 1 Drag coefficients obtained from CFD model
and other references
 3. ANALYSIS RESULTS Sharp Double
Recessioned

3.1 Velocity Profile

Studying the velocity profile for different corner
Recessioned Chamfered
shapes from Figure 4, it was found that the sharp edges
square has the widest and longest wake compared to
other shapes, which will lead to higher velocities at the
sides of the body. These values are lowered for
recessioned edges square corners then the double Rounded
recession one followed by the chamfered and the
rounded corners. From these observations we could
deduce that the rounded shape is considered the best
among the studied corner shapes from the
aerodynamic perspective.
Figure 5 Velocity field for different corner shapes
Sharp smaller turbulent region.

3.3 Drag coefficient

Recessioned
The drag coefficient was calculated using the Equation
1. As shown in Figure 6 the drag coefficient had been
reduced for recessed, double recessed, chamfered and
Double rounded corners listed in order of more reductions.
Recessioned
That matches the same order for the wake zone sizes
as the body of larger wake size gives higher values for
Chamfered drag coefficient since it is bluffer. It was observed that
the drag coefficient could be reduced by up to 40 % by
rounding the corners. This will consequently decrease
Rounded the straining actions developed by the structure, which
will give more economic and less bulky cross sections.

2 1.88

Figure 4 Velocity Profile for rounded edges square 1.46 1.41

1.5
cylinder 1.20 1.18
CD

3.2 Velocity field 1

Figure 5 shows the velocity field around for the tested 0.5
corner shapes. We could notice the turbulent region of
the wake just behind the body that forms some eddies.
The turbulent region is bigger in the sharp edges 0
Sharp Recessioned Double Chamfered Rounded
square as it is the bluffest body among the examined Recissioned

shapes, while the rounded shape has smaller turbulent

Figure 6 Drag coefficient for different corner
region. Also the flow appears to be symmetric about a
shapes
vertical plan across the middle of the examined body
in flow direction that is due to the symmetry of the
geometry of the used body and the uniformity of the
flow.
3.4 Wind pressure coefficient distribution
The flow appears to be symmetric about a vertical plan
across the middle of the examined body in flow
direction that is due to the symmetry of the geometry
of the used body and the uniformity of the flow. Also,
pressure coefficient values on the front face has
positive values as it is directly subjected to the
upcoming wind. Figure 7 shows that rounded corners
have lower values for pressure coefficient on the front
face of the studied body than other shapes.
Sharp Rounded
Figure 7 Pressure coefficient distribution on front
face for sharp and rounded edges
Sharp Rounded
Figure 8 Pressure coefficient distribution on lee
face for sharp and rounded edges
While the sharp corners shape is of the highest values
for pressure coefficient. Figure 8 shows that the
pressure coefficient for the back face of the studied
body is about a vertical plan across the middle of the
examined body in flow direction that is due to the
symmetry of the geometry of the used body and the
uniformity of the flow. Also, pressure coefficient
values on the back face have negative values as this
face is located at the wake zone formed behind the
studied body. It was also noticed that the rounded
corners shape has less absolute values for pressure
coefficient on the back face than other shapes. While
the sharp corners shape is of the highest absolute
values for pressure coefficient.
3.5 Re number effect assessment
Different levels of velocity were examined in order to
study the effect of different velocities and
consequently different Reynolds number on the
velocity profile and the drag force. The examined
velocities were as listed in Table 2. As shown in
Figures [9, 10] the velocity profile and the wake size
were very similar among the studied velocity range.
Also the variation in the drag coefficient did not
exceed 6%.
Velocity Corresponding Reynolds Number
10 m/sec 25,000
20 m/sec 50,000
40 m/sec 100,000
Table 2 The examined velocities to study the effect
of variation in Reynolds number.
1.5
1.118 1.061 1.045
1.0
CD
0.5
0.0
10 m/sec 20 m/sec 40 m/sec
Figure 9 Drag coefficient for different velocities
10 m/sec., Re = 25000
20 m/sec., Re = 50000
40 m/sec., Re = 100000
Figure 10 Velocity profile for different Reynolds
number values of the rounded corner square cylinder
 4. CONCLUSIONS
A numerical aerodynamic modification study had
been carried out for various corner modifications and
the following preliminary conclusions were made:
1) Low-dimensional CFD modelling using
steady flow can be considered useful for
aerodynamic modification of tall buildings,
specially for comparing different shapes.
2) By modifying the corner shape, the drag
coefficient could be lowered to up to 40 % of
that of sharp edge square cylinder.
3) Among the studied corner modifications, the
corner roundness is the most effective shape
in reducing drag, followed by the
chamfering, and then the recessed shapes.
4) For better corner modification, a smaller
wake zone is produced, and lower absolute
value of pressure coefficient is acquired on
the front and back faces of the body.
5) The present study examined only mean drag
forces. For assessing peak drag and lift
forces, conducting transient simulations will
be necessary.
5. REFERENCES
[1] J.A. Amin, A.K. Ahujab, aerodynamic
modifications to the shape of the buildings: a
review of the state-of-the-art, “Asian journal of
civil engineering (building and housing) vol. 11,
no. 4 (2010), pages 433-450.
[2] Dutton, R., and Isyumov, N. (1990). “Reduction
of tall building motion by aerodynamic
treatments.” Journal of Wind Engineering and
Industrial Aerodynamics, 36, 739-47.
[3] H. Kawai, “Effect of corner modifications on
aeroelastic instabilities of tall buildings”,
Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial
Aerodynamics 74-76 (1998) 719-729.
[4] Irwin, P., Breukelman, B., Williams, C., and
Hunter, M. (1998). "Shaping and orienting tall
buildings for wind." 1st World Structures
Congress, San Francisco, CA.
[5] Tetsuro Tamura, Tetsuya Miyagi, The effect of
turbulence on aerodynamic forces on a square
cylinder with various corner shapes, Journal of
Wind Engineering and Industrial
Aerodynamics, Volume 83, Issues 1–3,
November 1999, Pages 135-145.
View publication stats
[6] Kareem, A., Kijewski, T., and Tamura, Y.
(1999). "Mitigation of motions of tall buildings
with specific examples of recent applications."
Wind and Structures, 2(3), 201–251.
[7] K.C.S. Kwok, P.A. Wilhelm, B.G. Wilkie,
Effect of edge configuration on wind-induced
response of a tall buildings, Eng. Struct. 10
(1988) 135-140.
[8] Kwok, K. C. S., Bailey, P. A. (1987).
“Aerodynamic devices for tall building and
structures.” Journal of Engineering Mechanics,
ASCE, 111(4), 349-65.
[9] Irwin, P. A. (2009). “Wind engineering
challenges of the new generation of super-tall
buildings.” Journal of Wind Engineering and
Industrial Aerodynamics, 97, 328–334.
[10] Melbourne, N. H., Cheung, J. C. K. (1988).
“Designing for serviceable accelerations in tall
buildings.” 4th International Conference on Tall
Buildings, Hong Kong and Hanghai,148-155.
[11] Kim, H. J., Nakahashi, K. (2004).
“Aerodynamic design optimization using
unstructured Navier-Stokes adjoint method.”
24th International Congress of the aeronautical
sciences.
[12] Jameson, A. (2003), “Aerodynamic shape
optimization using adjoint method”, Department
of Aeronautics & Astronautics, Stanford
University, Lectures at the Von Karman
Institute, Brussels.
[13] STAR-CCM+, v.8.06.005, CD-ADAPCO
Product, <http://www.cd-
adapco.com/products/star-ccm>, (accessed
20.11.13), 2013.
[14] B.E. Lee, The effect of turbulence on the surface
pressure field of a square prism, J. Fluid Mech.
69 (1975) 263-282.
[15] Y. Otsuki, K. Fujii, K. Washizu, A. Ohya, Wind
tunnel experiments on aerodynamic forces and
pressure distribution of rectangular cylinders in
a uniform flow, Fifth Symposium on Wind
Effects on Structures, 1978, 169-176.