Wind Load Combinations Including Torsion for Medium-Rise Buildings

M. Elsharawy, T. Stathopoulos and K. Galal

Faculty of Engineering and Computer Science, Concordia University, Montréal, Québec, Canada
m_els@encs.concordia.ca

1 Introduction and background

Appropriate design of a building depends significantly on the success in predicting the actual effects
of turbulent wind forces in order to account for the most critical design scenarios which may occur
during a certain return period. Along-wind force fluctuations to large extent are mainly generated by
approaching flow turbulence, but the fluctuations in across-wind force and torsion are generally
dominated by vortex shedding causing asymmetric pressure distributions around building envelope
(Tamura et al. 2003). During the past decades, much has been learned about the variation of local
wind pressures on building cladding and the total effective wind forces (along- and across-wind) on
the main structural building systems of medium-rise buildings (Stathopoulos & Dumitrescu, 1989,
Sanni et al., 1992). Recently, Elsharawy et al. (2012) found significant discrepancies and differences
among the current wind codes and standards in evaluating wind-induced torsion on medium-rise
buildings. On the other hand, examining peak torsion and its correlation with peak along- and across-
wind forces are of utmost importance for achieving adequate building design. Wind load combinations
(i.e. along-wind force associated with across-wind forces and vice versa) for medium-rise buildings
(i.e. 18m < height < 60m and the lowest natural frequency > 1Hz) have been simplified in the current
ASCE 7-10 standard and NBCC 2010 by applying 0.75 of the full wind loads in both along- and
across-wind directions simultaneously. In another load combination case including torsion, ASCE 7-
10 requires applying 0.563 of the full wind loads with equivalent eccentricity 15% of the facing
building width in both along- and across-wind directions simultaneously. However, a similar torsional
load case in NBCC 2010 applies 0.75 of the full wind load on half of building face and 0.38 of the full
wind load in both along- and across-wind directions on the other half simultaneously. Tamura et al.
(2008) and Keast et al. (2012) studied wind load combinations including torsion for medium-rise
buildings. Although the latter study concluded that for rectangular buildings the peak overall torsion
occurs simultaneously with 30-40% of the peak overall shear, this conclusion was based on testing
limited number of building models. Additional experimental results for testing different building
configurations are still required to confirm and generalize these results.
In this study, seven flat-roofed buildings and five others with gabled-roof angle 45o, having the same
horizontal dimensions but different heights, were tested in a simulated open terrain exposure for
different wind directions (i.e. from 0o to 90o every 15o). The fluctuating pressures were integrated over
all the surfaces and results were obtained for along-wind force, across-wind force, and torsional
moment. The horizontal quasi-static wind load combinations were also examined for the tested
buildings. The maximum wind force component and the other simultaneously observed wind force
components were investigated, as well as torsion and shear load cases were evaluated to reflect the
maximum actual wind load effects in X- and Y-directions.

2 Experimental procedure
The experiments were carried out in the boundary layer wind tunnel of Concordia University. The
working section of the tunnel is approximately 12.2 m length x 1.80 m width x 1.80 m height. An
1
6th European and African Conference on Wind Engineering 2

open-country exposure was simulated in the wind tunnel. The wind velocity at free stream was 13.6
m/sand the power law index α of the mean wind velocity profile was α = 0.15. Although it is not
common for medium height buildings to be situated in open terrain, this exposure was used as a kind
of conservatism since higher loads are expected to act on buildings. All measurements were
synchronized with a sampling rate of 300Hz on each channel for a period of 27 sec (i.e. about 1 hour
in full scale). Two building models used for the experiments were made of plexiglass and scaled at
1:400 (see Figure 1). The models were tested at different building heights, by sliding them down in the
appropriate slot of the turntable, representing seven actual flat-roofed buildings with heights (20, 25,
30, 35, 40, 50 and 60 m) as well as five gabled roof buildings with heights (20, 30, 40, 50 and 60 m).
Each wind direction was tested four times. This was not only to monitor the variation of the peaks
from one test to another but also to examine the corresponding values for the other simultaneous force
and torsion components (for example: Maximum torsion and corresponding shears in X and Y
directions).

Figure 1: Wind tunnel models: A) Building with a flat roof, B) Building with 45 o roof slope

The shear and torsional coefficients were estimated respectively, as follow

Shear Force
CS  (1)
q H B2

Torsional Moment
CT  (2)
q H B2 L

Where qH= dynamic wind pressure at building mean roof height, B= smallest building horizontal
dimension, and L= longest building horizontal dimension

3 Results
3.1 Effect of building height
Figure 2 shows the variation of the peak torsion (CT Max.) and shear coefficients (Csx Max. and Csy Max.),
for the flat-roof buildings tested with different heights. The peak values were considered herein as the
average of the maximum 40 values opted from the four data samples collected for each wind direction.
As expected, peak shear coefficient in x-axis decreases when incident wind angle varied from 0o to 90o.
On the other hand, for the same wind range, peak shear coefficient in y-axis increases. The maximum
torsional moment occurs for wind directions from 15o to 30o for buildings with height lower than 30 m
 6th European and African Conference on Wind Engineering 3

while two peaks appear at wind directions 30o and 75o for the taller buildings. The peak torsion and
shear coefficients increase by about 3 times in the x- and y-directions, with increasing building heights
form 20 to 60 m.

0.4 5

a b
Max.) )

(CSx Max.) )
H = 20 m H = 20 m

Sx Max.
(CTTMax.

4H = 25 m H = 25 m
0.3 H = 30 m H = 30 m
coeff. (C

H = 35 m H = 35 m

coeff. (C
H = 40 m H = 40 m
Torsional coefficient

3H = 50 m H = 50 m

Shear coefficient
H = 60 m H = 60 m
0.2
2 Y
Torsional

Y X
X

Shear
0.1
1 0o
90 o 0o 90 o
Wind dir. Wind dir.
Wind dir. Wind dir. Range II Range I
Range II Range I
o
450 o 45
0
0 15 30 45 60 75 90 0 15 30 45 60 75 90

Wind direction
Wind (deg.)
direction (deg.) Wind direction
Wind (deg.)
direction (deg.)

55 2.5

c
) )

H = 20 m
Max.

2.0 H = 25 m
HH==20
20mm Y
Sy Max.

H = 30 m X
(CSy

H = 35 m
HH==25
25mm
Sx Max.)

44
Max.)

H = 40 m
coeff. (C

1.5 H = 50 m HH==30
30mm
Shear coefficient

H = 60 m
HH==35
35mm
(CSx

90 o 0o
coefficient (C

1.0 Y HH==40
40mm
33 X
HH==50
50mm Wind dir. Wind dir.
Shear coefficient

Shear

Range II Range I
HH==60
60mm o
0.5 90 o
Wind dir. Wind dir.
0o 45
Range II Range I

22 0.0
45 o
YY
XX
Shear

0 15 30 45 60 75 90

Wind direction
Wind (deg.)
direction (deg.)
11 0o0o
5 90
90 o o
Figure 2: Effect of building height on peak shear and torsion
Wind
Wind
Range
Range
dir. coefficients
dir.
II II
Wind
Wind dir.dir.
Range
a) CT Max., b) CSx Max., and c)
Range I I
CSy Max. 45 o o
45 H = 20 m
00 H = 25 m
Shear coefficient (CSx Max.)

4
00 153.2
15 30 of roof
30
Effect 45 slope 60
45 60 75
75 90
90 H = 30 m
H = 35 m
Winddirection
Wind direction(deg.)
(deg.) H = 40 m
3 3 shows the effect of changing roof angle from 0o to 45o on the
Figure coefficient peakHtorsion
= 50 m
H = 60 m
measured on building with different heights (20, 30, 40, 50, and 60m). It is clear that roof slope has a
significant
2 effect on the generated torsion and in some cases may double torsion coefficient. In the full
Y
paper, more experimental results will be present to discuss characteristicsX of generated torsion and
shear1forces as well as the load combinations for building with roof angle 45o.
90 o 0o
Wind dir. Wind dir.
Range II Range I
Y 45 o
0 X
Torsional coeff. (CT Max.)

0 15 30 45 60 75 90
90 o 0o
Wind direction (deg.) Wind dir. Wind dir.
Range II Range I
o
45
Building I

Y
X

Building I (Roof angle 0o)

90 o 0o
Building II (Roof angle 45o) Wind dir.
Range II
Wind dir.
Range I
o
45
Building II
Building height (m)

Figure 3: Effect of roof slope on peak torsion coefficient (CT Max.) for buildings with eave heights (20,
30, 40, 50, and 60m)
6th European and African Conference on Wind Engineering 4

4 Conclusions
Seven flat-roofed buildings and five others with gabled-roof angle 45o, having the same horizontal
dimensions but different heights, were tested in a simulated open terrain exposure for different wind
directions (i.e. from 0o to 90o every 15o). The horizontal quasi-static wind load combinations were
examined for the tested buildings. For rectangular buildings, maximum torsion generated in wind
direction range of 0o to 45o (measured from an axis perpendicular to the long side of the building) is
associated with 60 to 80 % of the overall peak shear in x-axis and 40 to 60% of the overall peak shear
in y-axis. For the other wind direction range, the maximum torsion is associated with 20 to 40 % of
the overall peak shear in x-axis and 60 to 80 % of the overall in y-axis. Also, it has been observed that
increasing roof slope from 0o to 45o increases torsion and shear coefficients significantly.

5 References
ASCE 7-10, 2010. Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures. Structural Engineering
Institute of ASCE, Reston, Va.

Elsharawy, M., Stathopoulos, T., & Galal, K. 2012. Wind-induced torsional aerodynamic loads on
low- and medium-height buildings. Seventh International Colloquium on Bluff Body Aerodynamics &
Applications, September 2-6, Shanghai, China

Keast, D.C., Barbagallo, A., & Wood, G.S. 2012. Correlation of wind load combinations including
torsion on medium-rise buildings. Wind and Structures, An International Journal, 15(5), 423-439

NBCC 2010, 2010. User’s Guide – NBC 2010, Structural Commentaries (part 4). Issued by the
Canadian Commission on Buildings and Fire Codes, National Research Council of Canada

Sanni, R. A., Surry, D., & Davenport, A. G. 1992. Wind loading on intermediate height buildings.
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 19,148-163

Stathopoulos, T., & Dumitrescu-Brulotte, M., Design recommendations for wind loading on buildings
of intermediate height. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 1989, 16, 910-916

Tamura, Y., Kikuchi, H., & Hibi, K. 2003. Quasi-static wind load combinations for low- and middle-
rise buildings. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 91, 1613-1625

Tamura, Y., Kikuchi, H., & Hibi, K. 2008. Peak normal stresses and effects of wind direction on wind
load combinations for medium-rise buildings. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial
Aerodynamics, 96, 1043-1057