Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here


Deflections due to Wind Loads, Reduced Wind?

Deflections due to Wind Loads, Reduced Wind?

Deflections due to Wind Loads, Reduced Wind?

Dear pals

Someone discussed with me in SEAOC forum some years ago, and mentioned that wind loads for deflections should be taken as 10yr wind, which comes roughly to 0.75 times the 50yr wind

I need a code item for that(citing from any code), can not find it in the codes I use.



RE: Deflections due to Wind Loads, Reduced Wind?

What codes do you use?

If you convert 50-year wind from the ASCE to 10-year wind, the velocity will be multipled by 0.74 (Table C6-3 p308 of the 7-02).  Pressure depends on the square of the velocity, so the pressure going from 50-year to 10-year will be multiplied by (0.74)2, or approximately 0.55.  Even so, most sources I've seen do not account for this and use a factor of 0.75 or 0.7 instead.  

In the FBC 2004, which is based on the IBC 2003, Table 1604.3 footnote f allows the use of 0.7 times the C&C wind for checking deflection.  I would imagine a similar note is in the IBC since the FBC is based on that.

The use of 10-year wind for deflection is an option.  You may use full load if you want.

RE: Deflections due to Wind Loads, Reduced Wind?

See my response below to another similiar question a while back which has a bit more information as to the origination of the 0.7 factor:

"Back on the wind load issue, I believe it is helpful to think of the wind loads provided by ASCE in terms of their recurrence intervals rather than stamping them with a "service" or "ultimate" level.  The VELOCITY levels provided by the code maps are in terms of a 50 year recurrence interval.  This can be verified using the velocity recurrence interval multiplier in the commentary:  Fc = 0.36 + 0.1 ln(12T).  With T=50yrs, Fc = 1.0.  Keep in mind this is a velocity multiplier and force levels are equal to velocity levels squared.  In this case, 1.0 squared = 1.0.  

Therefore if you used a 1.0 load factor you would have a 50 year wind.  As demonstrated in the commentary, you can back calculate the return period for a certain load factor by plugging in the square root of the load factor as Fc and solving for T.  Keep in mind that the return intervals are referring to wind VELOCITY and that force levels are based on velocity squared.  So by removing the directionality factor from the typical 1.3 load factor = 1.3/0.85 = 1.53.  And taking the square root of this to make it in terms of force: Fc =  1.23.  Back solving for T results in a return period of approximately 500 years.  Therefore using a 1.3 load factor with the directionality factor results in a 500 year "ultimate" return period which is in line with seismic design.  

As an end note, the code recommends using 0.7W for "service" level deflection checks.  This is based on bringing the 50 year map speeds down to 10 year speeds.  By plugging T=10 into the Fc equation you get Fc = 0.838.  Fc is the wind speed multiplier so to get the force multiplier you must square 0.838 = 0.7.  "

RE: Deflections due to Wind Loads, Reduced Wind?

Willis V

Nice answer for the reduced wind indicated for serivceability checks.

Can we check the reduced wind with dead load alone?
Code says D + 0.5L + 0.7W (including live load)


RE: Deflections due to Wind Loads, Reduced Wind?


Typically Dead and Live load would only affect the lateral deflection of the building when considering second order P-Delta effects.  It is fairly common to check servicability concerns with a first order effects, therefore only the 0.7W portion would be of concern.  If you feel like secondary affects are of a major concern, then I would go with Dead plus 50% live as you have shown.  

RE: Deflections due to Wind Loads, Reduced Wind?

That combination(D+0.5L+0.7W) is defined as follows in the commentary

"Service load with a probability of exceedence of 0.05"

hinting that for serviceability checks with wind involved, that probability is just sufficient, or is a reasonable criterion


RE: Deflections due to Wind Loads, Reduced Wind?


Thanks for your input. We used to check for wind with 50 yrs recurrence for deflection and 10 yr recurrence for accleration.

Can we conclude like this

For design Load Factor * W (with 50 yrs recurrence)

For Serviceability Check

W (with 10yrs recurrence)

Thanks again


Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close