1st International Conference on Concrete and Steel Technology Engineering and Design (CASTED2018)

May 24-26, 2018, Manila Marriott Hotel, 2 Resorts Drive, Pasay City, Philippines

COMPARATIVE ASSESSMENT ON SUSCEPTIBILITY OF HIGH-RISE

REINFORCED CONCRETE BUILDINGS TO WIND-INDUCED MOTIONS BASED
ON VARIOUS INTERNATIONAL CODES

Germar S. Porqueriño
Senior Structural Design Engineer, Sy^2 + Associates, Inc.

ABSTRACT: Generally, design of low-rise buildings to mid-rise buildings are commonly governed by strength limit
states and, to some extent, by serviceability limit states such as drift restrictions to ensure both structural and non-
structural safety under lateral loadings. However, in the case of high-rise structures, human discomfort due to building
vibrations had become a primary concern for several years back. Past studies on the inherent and complex dynamic
behavior of tall structures recognized that these concerns were caused by induced motions which resulted from high
wind exposures. By that time, international structural committees including ASCE, SESOC, etc., realized the need to
consider such criterion as a significant code requirement. Several methodologies to estimate expected intensity of such
wind effects on high-rise buildings were established. This paper focused on the evaluation of a high-rise reinforced
concrete building specimen for its intrinsic characteristics to develop wind-induced floor motions using these available
international code guidelines. To proceed, first, a three-dimensional elastic finite element model of the specimen was
developed. Next, from the results of its modal analysis, dynamic properties were quantified and were incorporated with
the most recent codes’ calculation procedures. Then, individual code assessments were compared. Consequently, a
reasonable range of critical results were determined. Finally, the specimen’s susceptibility to human discomfort under
the Philippines ambient wind conditions was assessed and verified if compliant with the established global acceptance
criteria for both residential and office occupancies.

KEYWORDS: Wind-Induced Building Motion, Floor Acceleration, Modal Analysis, Normalized Mode Shapes, Damping
Ratio, Resonant Response Factor, Occupancy Category, Human Perception Threshold

For more than a century, structural engineers were well

1. INTRODUCTION
The fast advancement in the construction of tall and
super-tall buildings not only in the developed but also in
the developing countries across the globe has resulted to
furthering of the complexities of the structural design
methodologies.
It has been established that buildings, whether low-rise,
mid-rise or high-rise, shall be designed under two
prevalent criteria of strength-limit states and
serviceability limit states against gravity and
environmental effects from load events such as
earthquake and wind. However, to what comprises these
criteria is still a continuous learning from experience up
to the present time.
aware that wind excitation can induce low-frequency
building vibration. In the 19th century, studies and
simulations were conducted and performed to develop
knowledge on the building’s susceptibility to wind
dynamic effects. Although, most efforts on this period has
provided good data in establishing criteria on strength
evaluation and deflection limits of buildings to render
buildings habitable, it was all just physical manifestation
without consideration of the physiological perception of
the actual occupants to what actually “feels safe” and not
only to the bounds of what “looks safe”. It was until the
early 1970’s that structural engineers conducted dedicated
studies on occupant comfort.
In the early stage, the concept of wind tunnel study was
recognized to provide an accurate quantification of such
 1st International Conference on Concrete and Steel Technology Engineering and Design (CASTED2018)
May 24-26, 2018, Manila Marriott Hotel, 2 Resorts Drive, Pasay City, Philippines

wind-induced motions. However, a disadvantage of these
simulations and physical modelling in terms of time, cost
and resources became a major challenge to the end of the
building owners and developers. The schematic design
phase of any building project required several structural
configurations as possible choices. Among these, the final
system would be selected based on the cost-effectiveness
as well as what was most aerodynamically favorable.
Doing a wind tunnel study of all these selections might
not be feasible to building owners.
Clearly, alternative methodologies in assessing wind
vibrations must be created. This led to the formation of
various code provisions from different countries like US,
Canada, New Zealand, Japan, etc., on the permitted
minimal wind induced vibration; the determination of
levels of motion with corresponding occurrence rates;
and, the empirical relationships to estimate them.
Considering several variance and criticality of a precise
estimate, it must be examined the accuracy of these
building codes: - individually in terms of their treatment
of the wind dynamic effects; and, -collectively in terms of
how good their consolidated results compare to actual
measured data based on the collection of wind tunnel
studies from several high-rise reinforced concrete
buildings as test specimens.
2. DYNAMIC NATURE OF WIND AND TALL
BUILDING RESPONSE.
Wind can be considered as a phenomenon of prodigious
complexity because of different flow patterns coming
from its interaction to buildings. The development of
eddies as the continuous stream of wind flow passes the
building constitutes its gusty characteristics around the
building envelope. Thus, two components of building
motion are created. First, a sustained motion coming from
the static nature of the continuous wind flow affects more
on the building displacement that is not apparent to the
occupants. Second, the oscillatory or vibratory motion
coming from dynamic nature of the local turbulent
(varying) wind actions due to the developed smaller and
frequent eddies.
In mathematical language, the wind effect or the total
wind vector at any point on the building envelope may be
observed as the sum of the mean wind vector (static
component) and the fluctuating wind vector (dynamic
component). In equation, it can be written as:
V (z,t) = Vmean (z) + v (z,t) (1)
In simple words, the function ‘v (z,t)’ gives the time-
dependent parameter to the over-all wind effect which can
amplify the inherent vibration of buildings causing its
lumped mass in the floor diaphragm to accelerate. Since
inherent vibration can be assumed to be directly
proportional to the the natural frequency of a specific
building, structures with higher natural periods tend to
exhibit higher risk of wind-induced motions. Thus, tall
buildings are of great concern to perform well under such
serviceability criterion.
3. FACTORS INFLUENCING THE DEVELOPMENT
OF CODAL PROCEDURE FOR OCCUPANT
COMFORT CRITERIA
As discussed earlier, alongside the development of
understanding to wind- induced motions (WIM), various
countries developed code provisions to define the
threshold of what is acceptable in terms of the expected
WIM for buildings based on relevant factors. In the
following sections, wind-induced motion can be
quantitatively regarded in terms of forced storey
acceleration of any habitable floor along the height of the
building.
First, it is important to acknowledge that perception is
subjective in theory. For instance, a normal family staying
at home with limited indoor activities are more
psychologically sensitive to disturbances such a floor
acceleration than a group of office employees in a more
active working environment. Thus, for most standards,
permitted vibrations are relatively lower for residential
buildings that office buildings. Figure 1 shows the typical
ISO Standard chart presenting the acceptable limits of
wind-induced motion. Two lines can be noticed in the
chart. The upper line represents the threshold for Office
Buildings while the lower line corresponds for the
Residential Buildings.
 1st International Conference on Concrete and Steel Technology Engineering and Design (CASTED2018)
May 24-26, 2018, Manila Marriott Hotel, 2 Resorts Drive, Pasay City, Philippines
32
Acceleration (milli g)
16
8
4
2
1
0.04 0.2
fn (Hz)
Fig. 1 A sample floor acceleration versus natural frequency
chart based from the International Organization of
Standardization (ISO)
Second, it is common from standard code provisions
covering WIM to consider several building motion
behavior. Wind excitation in tall buildings causes
complex patterns of motion: the along-wind, resulting to
motions parallel to prevailing wind direction; cross-wind,
for the perpendicular motion relative to the prevailing
wind; and, the torsional twisting motion with respect to
the structure’s vertical axis as shown in the figure below:
Fig. 2 Top view of a building plan showing simplified
illustration of the three components of wind-induced motions
with respect to the prevailing wind direction.
(http://researchdirect.uws.edu.au/islandora/object/uws%3A38
686/datastream/PDF/view)
It could be noted that these components of the floor
acceleration roots from different wind phenomenon. For
instance, the along-wind response was greatly influenced
by wind buffeting while the cross-wind response occurs
from vortex shedding depending of the “bluff”-ness of the
building envelope that causes the wind flow to separate
from its surface rather than trail the body contour (see Fig.
3)
1 5
Fig. 3 Illustration of vortex shedding. In the wake region of a
bluff building, vortices develop.
(https://www.inti.gob.ar/cirsoc/pdf/accion_viento/200704.pdf)
Also, another factor to consider is the application of wind
gustiness. Since the dynamic component of the wind
effect is time-dependent, an appropriate and reasonable
time duration where expected turbulent disturbances will
occur shall be selected. However, gust factors are also
influenced by spatial characteristics of buildings. For
small to medium structures, a small gust duration might
be enough to engulf the building and accurately account
the effect of gustiness. However, it might be not
appropriate for tall buildings of relatively larger spatial
volume resulting to overly conservative dynamic
amplification. Nevertheless, allowing longer gust
duration the averaged wind might underestimate the
fluctuations happening in the time domain. Therefore, a
good balance of spatial and time factor should be
considered in the quantification of wind-induced motions.
Lastly, obviously, human discomfort to building motions
is greatly affected on the actual frequency or occurrence
of the disturbance. Higher wind return periods give higher
magnitude of wind loading that might cause larger
calculated floor accelerations. Nevertheless, it also means
that such event has lesser probability of occurrence
throughout the occupant’s usage of the building. Lower
return periods give significantly lesser wind loading as
well as floor acceleration but in a more frequent
recurrence. Such relation provides insight that proper
engineering judgement on the level of wind to be used -
as the baseline of the quantification- shall be considered.
 1st International Conference on Concrete and Steel Technology Engineering and Design (CASTED2018)
May 24-26, 2018, Manila Marriott Hotel, 2 Resorts Drive, Pasay City, Philippines

4. SELECTION OF CODAL PROCEDURE IN a. Occupancy Type: Residential Building

QUANTIFICATION OF WIND-INDUCED FLOOR b. Total Building Height = 166.45 m
ACCELERATIONS c. Effective Building Width Normal to Wind
coming from X direction = 29.0 m
The paper based its comparative study from five major
d. Effective Building Width Normal to Wind
guidelines covering the quantification of wind-induced
coming from Y direction = 39.0 m
motions in terms of floor accelerations. The author
selected the following codes in interest:
a. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) 7-10
b. National Building Code of Canada (NBCC) 2005
c. Architectural Institute of Japan (AIJ) Recommendation 166.45 m
d. Standards Australia/ Standards New Zealand (AS/ZN)
e. Eurocode (EN) 1-04
It is evident from the comparison of the assumption used
by the five selected codes that a variance between the
estimation of the gust factor- to account the dynamic wind
effect- exist.
In terms of assumed gust duration to be considered in the Fig. 4 Perspective physical model of the specimen building
calculation of gust factor: ASCE 7-10 and AS/ZN 1170.2
considered 3 seconds as compared to the EN 1-04/ AIJ,
and the NBCC which used a time duration of 10 minutes
(600 seconds) and 1 hour (3600 seconds), respectively.
Moreover, the selected provisions provide a wide range
of theoretical assumptions to account the physical
characteristics of the building under consideration such as
the effect of building plan aspect ratios, wind pressure
distribution along the building height and the along-

29.0 m
wind/across-wind/torsional empirical relationships.
Most standards provide good amount of aid charts and
table to balance the simplification of the calculation
method to the risk of human error in determining
significant parameters.
Also, to provide a comparative reference on the degree of 39.0 m
compliance of the specimen building to wind-induced Fig. 5 Plan view of the specimen building
motion criteria, a singular acceptance code will be used
specifically the latest ISO Floor Acceleration Limit Chart
5. COMPARATIVE SUSCEPTIBILITY ASSESSMENT 5.2. Specimen Building Modal Analysis
OF SPECIMEN BUILDING TO WIND-INDUCED Based from the finite element model of the specimen
MOTIONS building considering stiffness assumption expected for a
5.1 Specimen Building Physical Characteristics maximum of 10-year wind, a modal analysis was
conducted and the following modal properties were
The comparative susceptibility assessment will be based summarized in the table below. Illustration of the
from a specimen building with the following descriptions:
 1st International Conference on Concrete and Steel Technology Engineering and Design (CASTED2018)
May 24-26, 2018, Manila Marriott Hotel, 2 Resorts Drive, Pasay City, Philippines

fundamental modes were also presented the following

figures:

Table 1 Summary of Natural Frequency (fN) for the first

3 fundamental modes

Fundamental
Mode Description
frequency

First Translation along Y 1 /6.17 s =

0.162 Hz
Fig.8 Third Mode (Primary Torsion)
Second Translation along X 1/ 4.37 s =
0.2288 Hz
Also, the story mass, normalized mode shapes for
Third Torsion 1/ 3.61 s = translation along X, Y and Torsion were presented in the
0.277 Hz Appendix A of this paper.
5.3 Wind Load Assumptions
Two return periods are considered in the determination of
floor accelerations as summarized in the table 2, below
based from the basic 50-yr wind speed of 200 kph at 10 m
height at 3-sec, 600-sec and 3600-sec gust duration
Table 2 Wind Return Period and Wind Speed

Return Basic Wind Speed

Period
3-sec* 600-sec** 3600-sec***

1-year 33.81 m/s 29.44 m/s 27.26 m/s

5-year 42.74 m/s 37.23 m/s 34.47 m/s

Fig. 6 First Mode (Primary Translation along Y)
*For the calculation under ASCE 7-10 and AS/ZN 1170.2
** For the calculation under EN 1-04 and AIJ
*** NBCC 2005

5.4 Damping Ratio Assumption

Fig. 7 Second Mode (Primary Translation along X)
Damping ratio to be used for all code standards will be
limited to 1.0% to minimize the variability of the results
and imposed a controlled comparison.
5.5 Wind Tunnel Results
A wind tunnel study was conducted for the building
specimen as shown below:
 1st International Conference on Concrete and Steel Technology Engineering and Design (CASTED2018)
May 24-26, 2018, Manila Marriott Hotel, 2 Resorts Drive, Pasay City, Philippines

Fig.9 Calculated peak acceleration were plotted in the ISO

Limit Chart

Fig.8 It was conducted by RWDI firm based in Canada. Their

findings and assumptions were considered in the calculations of 6. CONCLUSION
code-specific floor acceleration. Also, their own quantification Wind-induced building motion is now a major challenge
of peak floor acceleration was included in the summary of
in the design of tall buildings to satisfy occupant comfort
results as the primary measure data.
criteria. Wind tunnel test is an accurate method to
5.6. Code-Specific Peak Acceleration Results determine the precise floor acceleration of a specific
Based on the above mentioned assumptions and the building. However, for preliminary designs where many
formulas, graphs and tables from the code-specific configurations are being considered, wind tunnel study of
provisions, a summarized table, below, showing the peak every configuration is costly and time-consuming which
accelerations on the along-wind and across-wind motion: became a setback in the end of the building owners and
developer. Hence, the development of various empirical
formulations to provide good estimation of floor
Table 3 Peak Acceleration of the Building Specimen acceleration has been developed through the past decades.
based from Various Codes and Wind Tunnel Study Nevertheless, the variance in the assumption in terms of
the significant factors affecting wind-induced motions
Return Along Wind Acceleration (milli-g's)
used by these codes does not guarantee that one code is
Period ASCE 7-10 AS/ZN 1170.2 EN 1-04 NBCC 2005 AIJ WT governing than the others considering different wind
1-yr 3.10 4.79 2.90 3.73 2.66 2.9 effect motion pattern such as along-wing, across-wind
5-yr 5.05 7.17 4.93 6.52 4.49 - and torsion. The following observations has been made:

Return Across Wind Acceleration (milli-g's) 1. Since the selected codes used different gust
Period ASCE 7-10 AS/ZN 1170.2 EN 1-04 NBCC 2005 AIJ WT durations, significant differences in their gust
1-yr - 7.64 - 5.89 4.84 6.6 factors - which account for the dynamic
5-yr 12.30 10.83 9.00 - amplification of mean wind effect - is evident
2. The results of peak acceleration from ASCE 7-10
Calculated peak accelerations were also plotted in the ISO and AIJ considering the Along Wind Motion
Chart as shown in figure 9 below: were the nearest upper and lower bound to the
wind tunnel test results. The EN 1-04 value was
almost equivalent to that of the wind tunnel
results.
3. NBCC2005 and AIJ falls below the wind tunnel
results in terms of Across-Wind Motions with
 1st International Conference on Concrete and Steel Technology Engineering and Design (CASTED2018)
May 24-26, 2018, Manila Marriott Hotel, 2 Resorts Drive, Pasay City, Philippines

10.75% and 26.7% margin. While a conservative

estimation was provided by the AS/ZN 1170.2
4. Estimations provided by ASCE 7-10 and EN 1-
04 are the closest in terms of Along-Wind
Accelerations.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Germar S. Porqueriño is a member of the Performance-
Based Design (PBD) Department of Sy^2 + Associates,
Inc. located at the Sy^2 Campus, 9801 Kamagong cor.
Baticulin, San Antonio Village, Makati City. In 2015, he
received his Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering
degree as summa cum laude from the National University
– Manila. Currently, he is continuously undergoing
professional training under the supervision of the Asian
Institute of Technology Solutions.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The author of this paper expresses his gratitude to the Sy2
and Associates Inc. for providing significant resources in
terms of the necessary analysis software and models as
well as viable wind tunnel results.

APPENDIX
See attached appendix.

REFERENCES
Simiu, E. and Scanlan, R. (1996). Wind Effects on
Structures: Fundamentals and Applications to Design,
3rd Ed., Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York.
ASCE Standard, ASCE7-10: Minimum Design Loads for
Buildings and Other Structures (2010), American Society
of Civil Engineers, New York.
AIJ Recommendations for Loads on Buildings (1993),
Architectural Institute of Japan, Japan. (in English)
Burton M., Kwok K.C.S., Abdelrazaq A. (2015). Wind-
Induced Motion of Tall Buildings: Designing for Human
Comfort. International Journal of High-Rise Buildings,
March 2015, Vol 4, No 1, 1-8
Mendis P, B. Samali, et. al. (2007). Wind Loading on Tall
Buildings. EJSE Special Issue.