You are on page 1of 18

62 ()

99~116 2007 12
Journal of Architecture, No.62, Special Issue on Technology, pp.99~116, Dec. 2007

1 2**

TTU

(POD)POD

A Study on the Wind Effects on the Low-rise Industrial Buildings with


Gable Roofs
Ming-Gin Ho 1

Jwo-Hua Chen 2**

KEYWORDS: Wind Tunnel Test, Design Wind Loadings, Low-rise Buildings

ABSTRACT
A series of aerodynamic experiments of low-rise building models with gable roofs are conducted to
investigate the wind loading characteristics under wind action. The pressure measurements were made by
the electronic scani-valves system. The depth-to-height ratio, slope of roof and angle of attack of
approaching flow were controlled conditions in these experiments. In the first stage of study, the data that
collected from experiments was compared with the TTU real field data for validation. The results shown,
the distributions of pressures on the roofs of each model are quite similar. The pressure characteristics on
the upstream zone are high fluctuation and large peak, and the downstream zone are uniform relatively.
The variation of angle of attack for approaching flow will increase the peak in the upstream corner of
buildings. With the fluctuation distribution on the surface of model, taking the height of building as
characteristic of zone scale is suitable. The proper orthogonal decomposition method (POD) is adopted to
analysis the eigen-modes and eigen-values of fluctuating pressure fields. The results shown, the POD is a
suitable method to identify the most likely mode shape of the high fluctuating pressure fields. The
moment coefficients of beam-column connections of frames were estimated by the covariance integration
method. We found that the maximum moment coefficients of frames will appear on the upstream corner.
Especially with a small angle of approaching flow, the moment coefficients of frames will be increased
for the asymmetric flow field actions.
1

Chairman of The Architecture and Building Research Institute, Ministry of The Interior
2
** (corresponding author)
Associate Professor, Department of Space Design, Chien Kou Technology University, Taiwan

2007 7 6 2007 10 25

99

62 ()2007 12

2-1 95
( 95 )

18

7 27 45 18

2-2
Texas Tech University Wind Engineering Research Field
Laboratory(WERFL) 1990 ( 1)
(Levitan, 1991, 1992a, 1992b; Tieleman, 1996)(Cochran, 1992; Cheung,
1997)

1Tieleman(1997, 1998)

()(z0)
TTU

2-3

100


(reattachment
phenomenon)

1 TTU (Levitan, 1991)


Cook and Mayne (1979)
(Type I extreme value distribution)
mode (U0) dispersion (1/a0)

C P * = U 0 + 1.4(

1
)
a0

(1)

Delville(1999)(POD)
(POD)

(POD) Rij ui(x, t)(correlation


tensor)

Rij = u i ( x, t )u i ( x ' , )

(2)

x Rij

ij

( x, x ' , t , ) j ( x ' , )dx ' d = i ( x, t )

(3)

Rij ( x, x' , t , ) = n in ( x, t )

(4)

101

62 ()2007 12

in ( x, t ) n
ui ( x, t ) = anin ( x, t )

an =

(5)

u ( x, t ) ( x, t )dxdt
[ ( x, t )] dxdt
n
i

n
i

(6)

(frame)Ginger(2000)

x = [ i j p p p p Ai A j ]1 / 2
i =1 j =1

(7)

Pi Pj p Ai

g x = [ i j g pi g p j P' i (t ) Pj ' (t )]1 / 2 / x

(8)

i =1 j =1

3-1
3-1-1

( 4 m 2.6 m 6 m 2.6 m)
36.5 m 30 m/s
( spire )
( roughness element )
0.22 10 cm ( turbulence intensity ) 18% 2
TTU

102

250

250

200

200

150

Height (cm)

Height (cm)

100

50

150

100

50

10

Wind Speed (m/s)

15

20

(a)

10

15

20

25

Turbulence Intensity (%)

30

35

40

(b)

2 (a)(b)
3-1-2
TTU 1/50
TTU

1 10cm 20 cm
20
168~236 1mm 20 PVC
(white noise) 35Hz
scanivalve module 64
64
1

1:1
1:2
1:4
1:8

10cm
(=1)
A10
B10
C10
D10

h=10cm
20cm 30cm 40cm
(=2) (=3) (=4)
A20
A30
A40
B20
B30
B40
C20
C30
C40
D20
D30
D40

60cm
(=6)
A60
B60
C60
D60

3-1-3

( U ) 14.5 m/s 250 Hz 264


264 61500
0( 3) 11.25 90
3

103

62 ()2007 12
USB

wind

3-2

C P =

P
1
2

C P =
CM =

U 2
P 2
2
1
2 U
M

1
2

U 2 B 2

(9)

(10)
(11)

U B P
M
(POD)

104


3-3
1/50 TTU
TTU TTU Ham(1998)
4(a)
(50101)

4(b)

1.2

10

Tap 50101

Tap 50101
1

EXP.

EXP.
TTU

0.8
6

CP (rms)

-CP (mean) , CP (peak)

TTU

0.6

0.4
2

0.2

0
90

120

150

180

ANGLE

(a)

210

240

270

90

120

150

180

210

240

270

ANGLE

(b)

4 TTU Tap 50101 (a) CP (mean, peak)(b) CP (rms)

4-1

1:1
5

-0.8 ~ -0.6
-0.6 (0.5h)

105

62 ()2007 12

1:1 4 6
45

1:8 7

3
2h 0 3h
2h 0
1

4-2
8

9
45~68
0.5 (0.5h)

(vortex shedding) 0

2h

106

MODEL : A10

0.0

MODEL : A30

0.0

CP (mean)
-0 .2

-0.2

0 .0

0 .0
0 .0

-0.2
.4
-0

-0.2

0
0.
-0 .4

0 .4

-0.6

-0.6

-0 .2

-0.2

-0.2
-0.4

0.0

-0 .4

-0.6

0.6

0.

-0.6
0.

ANGLE : 0

0 .6

0 .4

0.4

ANGLE : 0

0.2

MODEL : A40

0.6
02

0.4

(b)

(a)

MODEL : A60

CP (mean)

CP (mean)

0.0

0.

-0.2

-0.6

0.0

0.0

0.
0

-0.2

-0 .

-0.4
-0.6

0 .0

-0 .4
-0 .6

-0 .2

-0.8

-0 .4
-0.6

ANGLE : 0

(c)

0.4

0 .6

0 .6

0.4

ANGLE : 0

0 .6

0 .6

0 .8

0.2

(d)
5 0 1:1
(a) 1.0(b) 3.0(c) 4.0(d) 6.0

107

62 ()2007 12
MODEL : D40

MODEL : A40

- 0 .2

CP (mean)

CP (mean)

-0.2

-0.6

0 .2

-0 .2
0.0

0
0.

-0.2

4
0.

0.6

-0 .

-0.4

-0 .4

-0 .2

-0 .2

-0

.6

0 .4

-0.4

0.2

0.0

-0

ANGLE : 68
.4

0 .0

6
( 1:1 4.0 68)

-0.2
-0.8

0 .4

0 .0

.2

-0 .4
-0.6
8
-0 . -1 .2

0 .2

-0

-1-0 .
- 0 .0 4 - 0
.8
.4

0.6

0.6

ANGLE : 45

0.6

7
( 1:8 4.0 45)
MODEL : D40

MODEL : A20

0.1

CP (rms)

CP (rms)

0.1
0.1

0.2
0.3

0.3

0.3

0.1

0.

0.3

0.

0.5

0 .3

0.3

0.2

0.3

ANGLE : 0

0 .4

0.2

0 . 0 .5
3

0.3

0.1

0.3

0 .3

0.2

0.1

0.1

0 .2

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.3

0 .2

0.3

ANGLE : 45

0.1
0.1

0.2

0.1

( 1:1 2.0 0)

( 1:8 4.0 45)

4-3

1:1 1.0 10 11~23

108

MODEL : A10

MODEL : A10

CP (PEAK)

-2 .

-1.0
-2.0

CP (PEAK)

-3.0

-4 .

.0
-3

-4.0

-2.

1.0

0 .0
1.0

1 .0

0
2.0

2.

2.0

2.

0
4.

-2 .

.0
-2 -3.0

-4.0

-3 .0

-1.0

-3 .0
-3 .0

.0

-3 .0

-3 .0
-3

-3.0

-1.0

-1

.0

-1.0

ANGLE : 0

ANGLE : 45

2 .0

2.0

1.0

2.0

1.0

(a)

(b)

10 1:1 1.0 (a) 0 (b)


45

0 90
0 90
45
0 90
MODEL : D30

MODEL : D30

-2.0

1.0

-1.0

1.0

0.0
-1 .0

1.0

-2.0
.0 4 .0
-3 --5.0

-4 .0 -5.0

2.0

ANGLE : 45
2.

1 .0

ANGLE : 0

2.0

-3 .0

-2 .0

-1.0

.0

-3

.0
-3

-3 .

1.0

.0

-3 .

-2.0

-3.
-4

-4.0

.0

-2 .0

-3
.0

-3 .0

-4

-1.0

-2 .0

-4.0

-2 .0

-2.

-1 .0

-3 .0

-1 .0

-1.0

0.0

0.0
-1.0

.0

-3.0

0.0

0 .0

-1

CP (PEAK)

0.0

-2.0

CP (PEAK)

2.

1.0

(a)

0.0

2 .0

1.0

1.0

(b)

11 1:8 3.0 (a) 0 (b)


45

109

62 ()2007 12

D 45 11
( 95 ) 1:50
(zone) 12
2

12 ( 95 )
2 ( 95 )(GCP)
Zone (1)
Zone (2)
Zone (3)

(m)
(m)
(m2)
(m2)
(m2)

A
14.14
5
33.73
-1.7
30.5
-2.05
6.48
-2.15
B
11.18
5
24.26
-1.7
25.16
-2.5
6.48
-4.5
C
10.3
5
21.44
-1.7
23.58
-2.5
6.48
-4.5
D
10.1
5
20.73
-1.7
23.16
-2.5
6.48
-4.5
10 11

-5.0

4-5

13

110


frame1frame2frame3

(POD)
A30 frame 1 3 88%
95% 14

M2
wind
AOA

M1
Frame 3
Frame 2
Frame 1

13
3 0 1:1 3.0
12
Mode no.
Eigen values

8.754494

88.15%

0.395528

3.98%

0.223865

2.25%

0.15321

1.54%

0.11362

1.14%

0.061698

0.62%

0.044136

0.44%

0.036054

0.36%

0.029305

0.30%

10

0.02232

0.22%

11

0.017677

0.18%

12

0.016745

0.17%

111

62 ()2007 12
A30 frame 1 AOA=0
0.5

0.25

m ode

mode 1
0

mode 2
1

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

mode 3

10

15

-0.25

R oof s lope = a : b
: pre s s ure ta p
1

-0.5

18

tap no.
2B

14 0 1:1 3.0
4-6

4 1:1 frame 1

CM2 90
4 1:1 CM1 CM2

A10
CM1
CM2
0.796 1.177

A20
CM1
CM2
0.651 0.978

A30
CM1
CM2
0.592 0.914

A40
CM1
CM2
0.764 1.022

A60
CM1
CM2
0.512 0.974

11.25

0.496

0.785

0.512

0.773

0.516

0.774

0.709

0.811

0.483

0.722

22.5

0.709

0.898

0.746

0.673

0.731

0.542

0.932

0.586

0.795

0.616

33.75

0.828

0.603

0.661

0.249

0.698

0.216

0.837

0.217

0.663

0.257

45

0.670

0.295

0.775

0.296

0.776

0.223

0.776

0.119

0.578

0.194

56.25

0.851

0.271

0.782

0.256

0.740

0.221

0.826

0.171

0.621

0.225

67.5

0.890

0.313

0.824

0.316

0.714

0.248

0.804

0.236

0.559

0.254

78.75

0.882

0.331

0.746

0.341

0.624

0.260

0.636

0.191

0.476

0.331

90

0.769

0.368

0.613

0.308

0.607

0.324

0.534

0.169

0.385

0.244

frame

1:8
5 CM1 CM2 1:1
0 ~ 22.5

11 ~ 23

112


5 1:8 CM1 CM2

D10

frame

D20

D30

D40

D60

CM1

CM2

CM1

CM2

CM1

CM2

CM1

CM2

CM1

CM2

0.423

0.501

0.408

0.395

0.392

0.426

0.320

0.365

0.217

0.266

11.25

0.318

0.356

0.454

0.352

0.412

0.339

0.370

0.322

0.393

0.130

22.5

0.430

0.400

0.538

0.363

0.411

0.315

0.441

0.324

0.496

0.026

33.75

0.374

0.248

0.293

0.249

0.263

0.160

0.237

0.109

0.446

-0.131

45

0.350

0.151

0.342

0.177

0.308

0.166

0.310

0.109

0.587

-0.139

56.25

0.413

0.172

0.407

0.191

0.407

0.220

0.327

0.153

0.575

-0.228

67.5

0.458

0.201

0.395

0.159

0.391

0.177

0.340

0.212

0.675

-0.234

78.75

0.434

0.213

0.353

0.172

0.334

0.182

0.273

0.122

0.677

-0.233

90

0.372

0.192

0.342

0.177

0.269

0.166

0.273

0.169

0.661

-0.289

(CM1)
1:1 3.0 CM1
15
2.0
CM1

A30 frame 1, CM1 max equivlent loadings


3
2

Cp

AOA=0 deg.

0
-1

AOA=22.5 deg.
1

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

AOA=45 deg.
AOA=90 deg.

-2
-3
-4
tap no.

15 1:1 3.0 CM1


16

113

62 ()2007 12
A20, AO A=0, t=0.068 s e c
0
-0 .5

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

Cp

-1
-1 .5
-2
-2 .5
-3

ta p

(a)

A20, AO A=0, t=0.24 s e c


0
-0 .5

10

11

Cp

-1
-1 .5
-2
-2 .5
-3

ta p

(b)

A20, AO A=0, t=0.5 s e c


0
-0 .5

10

11

Cp

-1
-1 .5
-2
-2 .5
-3

ta p

(c)

A20, AO A=0, t=0.768 s e c


0
-0 .5

Cp

-1
-1 .5
-2
-2 .5
-3

(d)

ta p

16 1:1 2.0
4-7

(POD)
90%

114

1.

2.

3. (POD) 90%

4.
(11 ~ 23 )

5.

6.

2.0

115

62 ()2007 12


(095301070000G3328)

(2006)

Cheung, J.C.K., J.D. Holmes, W.H. Melbourne and N. Lakshmana (1997) Pressures on a 1/10 scale
model of the Texas Tech Building, Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, Vol.
69-71: 529-538.
Cochran, L.S., J.E. Cermak (1992) Full- and model-scale cladding pressures on the Texas Tech University
experimental building, Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, Vol.43: 1589-1600.
Cook, N.J. and J.R. Mayne (1979) A Novel Working Approach to the Assessment of Wind Loads for
Equivalent Static Design, Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, Vol.4: 149-164.
Delville, J., L. Ukeiley, L. Cordier, J.P. Bonnet and M. Glauser (1999) Examination of large-scale
structures in a turbulent plane mixing layer. Part I. Proper orthogonal decomposition, Journal of Fluid
Mechanics, Vol.391: 91-122.
Ginger, J.D., G.F. Reardon and B.J. Whitbread (2000) Wind load effects and equivalent pressures on
low-rise house roofs, Journal of Engineering Structures, Vol.22: 638-646.
Ham, Hee J., Bogusz Bienkiewicz (1998) Wind tunnel simulation of TTU flow and bulding roof
pressure, Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, Vol.77 & 78: 119-133.
Levitan, M.L., J.D. Holmes, K.C. Mehta and W.P. Vann (1991) Field measurements of pressures on the Texas
Tech building, Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, Vol. 38, No. 2-3: 227-234.
Levitan, M.L., K.C. Mehta (1992a) Texas Tech field experiments for wind load. Part I : building and pressure
measuring system, Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, Vol.41-44: 1565-1576.
Levitan, M.L., K.C. Mehta (1992b) Texas Tech field experiments for wind load. Part II : meteorological
instrumentation and terrain parameters, Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics,
Vol.41-44: 1577-1588.
Tieleman, H.W., D. Surry and K.C. Mehta (1996) Full/model-scale comparison of surface pressures on
the Texas Tech experimental building, Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics,
Vol.61: 1-23.
Tieleman, H.W., T.A. Reinhold and M.R. Hajj (1997) Importance of turbulence for the prediction of
surface pressure on low-rise structures, Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics,
Vol.69-71: 519-528.
Tieleman, H.W., M.R. Hajj and T.A. Reinhold (1998) Wind tunnel simulation requirements to assess
wind loads on low-rise buildings, Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics,
Vol.74-76: 675-685.

116

You might also like