wind tunnel vs analytical procedure
wind tunnel vs analytical procedure
(OP)
at what point do you justify the use of a wind tunnel study as opposed to the asce7 analytical procedure for determining the lateral wind forces for a high-rise building?
RE: wind tunnel vs analytical procedure
RE: wind tunnel vs analytical procedure
Thanks Ron
RE: wind tunnel vs analytical procedure
I used a wind tunnel study a few years ago on a domed stadium where the forces were quite a bit smaller. Both of these projects used a firm up in Guelph, Ontario (spelling?)
Colorado State University also has a wind tunnel for this purpose also.
For our stadium, going to a wind tunnel was based on the unique shape of the structure (it had stay-cables) as well as the desire to economize the design for such a large structure in a non-seismic zone.
It is possible that your tunnel study could produce lower wind forces that would make seismic loads a more important consideration.
RE: wind tunnel vs analytical procedure
Ontario seems to be popular for this work!
RE: wind tunnel vs analytical procedure
Steel, Concrete and Composite Design of Tall Buildings
2nd ed
Bungale S. Taranath
Mc Graw Hill
Section 2.6
By the way one of the finest books as pertains to wind forces.
There it is stated that prismatic forces are candidate to such studies when the height exceeds 40 or 50 stories.
RE: wind tunnel vs analytical procedure
RE: wind tunnel vs analytical procedure
Remember the CitiCorp Building in NYC and the Hancock building in Boston.