ARTICLE IN PRESS

Journal of Wind Engineering

and Industrial Aerodynamics 92 (2004) 11471165
www.elsevier.com/locate/jweia

Across-wind loads of typical tall buildings

M. Gu, Y. Quan
State Key Laboratory for Disaster Reduction in Civil Engineering, Tongji University, Siping Road 1239,
Shanghai 200092, China
Received 18 August 2003; received in revised form 19 April 2004; accepted 24 June 2004
Available online 25 August 2004

Abstract
Previous studies have indicated that the across-wind dynamic responses of super-tall
buildings are usually larger than the along-wind ones. With the increase of heights, the acrosswind dynamic response of super-tall buildings has been a problem of great concern. In this
paper, 15 typical tall building models are tested with high-frequency force balance technique in
a wind tunnel to obtain the rst-mode generalized across-wind dynamic forces. New formulas
for the power spectra of the across-wind dynamic forces, the coefcients of base moment and
shear force are then derived. Parametric analyses of the effects of factors on the across-wind
loads of the buildings are performed. Besides, a SDOF aeroelastic model of a square tall
building with an aspect ratio of 6 is selected from the above buildings and is tested to
investigate its across-wind dynamic response and aerodynamic damping characteristics. The
power spectrum of the across-wind force of the square building is employed to compute its
across-wind dynamic responses with and without considering the effect of the aerodynamic
damping. The computed responses are then compared with the corresponding responses from
the aeroelastic model test to verify the present formulas of the across-wind loads of buildings.
r 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Tall building; Across-wind force; Aerodynamic damping; Across-wind dynamic response

Corresponding author. Tel.: +86-21-65981210.

E-mail address: minggu@mail.tongji.edu.cn (M. Gu).

0167-6105/$ - see front matter r 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jweia.2004.06.004

ARTICLE IN PRESS
1148

M. Gu, Y. Quan / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 92 (2004) 11471165

1. Introduction
Numerous tall buildings have been built or are being constructed in China and all
over the world. More than 3000 tall buildings have been built in recent years in
Shanghai, among which the Jin Mao Building with a height of 420 m is the
representative one. Previous wind tunnel tests and analyses have indicated that the
across-wind dynamic response of super-tall buildings is usually larger than the alongwind one. For instance, the wind tunnel test of the Jin Mao Building showed that its
maximum acceleration in across-wind direction at its design wind speed is about 1.2
times of that in along-wind direction [1].
Across-wind loads of tall buildings are generally obtained from wind tunnel tests
with some special techniques, mainly including aeroelastic model test technique [2,3],
wind pressure model test technique [46] and high-frequency force balance technique
[79]. Obtaining the wind loads from an aeroelastic model test is essentially an
identication process; while both of the others are direct techniques. Because
aerodynamic damping is difcult to be accurately estimated and then removed from
the identied wind loads, and moreover, an aeroelastic building model is difcult to be
designed and manufactured, the aeroelastic model test technique for the wind loads is
now seldom used. The other two direct techniques, namely the wind pressure model
test technique and high-frequency force balance technique, especially the latter, are
now the main tools for obtaining across-wind loads of tall buildings for practical
purpose. Marukawa et al. [9], Kareem [8] and Katagiri et al. [10] have provided
valuable testing results of across-wind loads of tall buildings with typical cross sections.
In this paper, 15 tall building models of typical cross-sections and different aspect
ratios are tested in TJ-1 Boundary Layer Wind Tunnel in Tongji University to obtain
the across-wind aerodynamic loads of these buildings. New formulas for the acrosswind force spectra, the coefcients of base moment and shear force are given. A
SDOF aeroelastic model of a square tall building with an aspect ratio of 6 is selected
from the buildings for the across-wind load test to investigate its across-wind
dynamic response and across-wind aerodynamic damping, and to further verify the
reliability of the across-wind aerodynamic forces obtained from the present test.

2. Brief introduction of the wind tunnel test

2.1. Simulations of wind characteristics
The test is carried out in TJ-1 Boundary Layer Wind Tunnel, whose working
section is 1.8 m in width and 1.8 m in height, and the wind speed ranges from 3 to
32 m/s. Four kinds of wind conditions, corresponding to terrain categories A, B, C
and D, are simulated in the wind tunnel at a length scale of 1/500 in accordance with
the Chinese code [11]. The exponents of the mean wind proles for the terrain
categories A, B, C and D are 0.12, 0.16, 0.22 and 0.30, and the corresponding
gradient heights are 300, 350, 400 and 450 m, respectively. The wind characteristics
are achieved by a combination of turbulence generating spires, a barrier at the

ARTICLE IN PRESS
M. Gu, Y. Quan / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 92 (2004) 11471165

1149

entrance of the wind tunnel, and roughness elements along the wind tunnel oor
upstream of the model. Fig. 1 shows the simulated mean wind speed proles, the
longitudinal and lateral component proles of turbulence intensities and the power
spectra of lateral uctuating wind speeds for the terrain categories B and D. The
longitudinal turbulence intensities at the height of 300 m (0.6 m in the wind tunnel)
are about 6.8%, 7.3%, 10% and 14% for the four categories of terrain, respectively,
and the lateral turbulence intensities at the same height are somewhat lower than the
corresponding longitudinal components.
1.2

1.2
Results from test
Theoretical results (=0.3)

Results from wind tunnel

Theoretical results (=0.16)

1.0

0.9
Height (m)

Height (m)

0.8
0.6

0.6

0.4
0.3
0.2
0.0

0.0
10

12

14

Mean wind speeds in terrain category B (m/s)

Longitudinal
Lateral

1.0

10

11

12

13

14

Longitudinal
Lateral

1.0
0.8

0.8

Height (m)

Height (m)

1.2

1.2

0.6

0.6

0.4

0.4

0.2

0.2

0.0

0.0
0.04

0.06

0.08

0.10

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.08

0.12

0.16

0.20

0.24

0.28

Longitudinal and lateral wind turbulence

intensity profiles in terrain category D

Longitudinal and lateral wind turbulence

intensity profiles in terrain category B

0.1

0.1
nSu / u

nSu / u

Mean wind speeds in terrain category D (m/s)

0.01
test

0.01
test

fitted

fitted

1E-3

1E-4
1E-3

1E-3

0.01

0.1

nZ/Uz
PSD of lateral component of turbulence
at height of 60 cm in terrain B

10

1E-4
1E-3

0.01

0.1

nZ/Uz
PSD of lateral component of turbulence
at height of 60 cm in terrain D

Fig. 1. Simulated wind parameters of the terrain categories B and D.

10

ARTICLE IN PRESS
M. Gu, Y. Quan / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 92 (2004) 11471165

1150

2.2. Building models

The cross-section shapes of the building models for the test are shown in Fig. 2.
The models have three kinds of basic cross-section shapes, i.e., square, rectangular
and corner-modied square cross-section shapes (concave corner and bevel corner).
The heights of all the models are 60 cm, meaning that the square models have
different aspect ratios of 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9. Meanwhile, 60 cm high models represent
1
300 m high prototype buildings in terms of the scale ratio of 500
: The side ratios
1 1 2 3 2
3
(D=B) of the rectangular buildings are 3; 2; 3; 2; 1 and 1: The ratios of the corner-cut
size to the breadth (breadth means width) of the cross section, b=B; of the cornermodied square models are 5%, 10% and 20%; and the aspect ratios of all the
corner-modied square models are 6.
In order that the frequencies of the model-balance systems are high enough for the
test, the models should be light, and all of the models are thus built with foamed
plastics as the cores and light wood plates of 1 mm thickness as their clothes. A vecomponent force balance is used for the test. The lowest frequency among these modelbalance systems is about 80 Hz. The testing wind speeds are selected to be 6 and 9 m/s.

3. Across-wind forces
3.1. Power spectra of across-wind forces
The base moments of the building models under the four simulated wind
conditions are obtained from the test. Although the ranges of the models parameters

10

13

11

14
Fig. 2. Cross sections of the building models.

12

15

ARTICLE IN PRESS
M. Gu, Y. Quan / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 92 (2004) 11471165

1151

cover wider ranges than those in AIJ [12], this paper still attempts to derive a unied
formula of the power spectra of across-wind loads. The formula similar to the nondimensional power spectrum density of the across-wind loads of buildings in AIJ [12]
is considered to describe the present results. After a lengthy derivation, a proper
format of the formula is nally selected for the curve tting of the across-wind loads:
Sp bn=f p a
fS Mx f

;
f0:5rU 2H BH 2 g2 f1  n=f p 2 g2 bn=f p 2

where S Mx f is the rst generalized across-wind force spectrum; f is the frequency;

n fB=U H ; U H is the mean wind speed at the top of the buildings; f p is the location
parameter, deciding the peak frequency of the spectrum; b is the band width
parameter; Sp is the amplitude parameter; and a is the deection parameter. All the
four parameters, which are functions of the aspect ratio, height ratio and wind eld
condition, can be identied by curve tting technique.
The curve tting process of the four parameters is complex due to their wide
variable ranges. To cover wider frequency and amplitude ranges as well as to
improve the precision of the peak, the following error function is adopted in the
present curve tting:
d

n
X

lnyi  lnyA; ni 2 =lnyA; ni 2 ;

i1

where A denotes the four parameters, i.e., f p ; b; Sp and a:

As the rst step of the tting process, letting the error function take minimum
value, one can obtain the tted results of the four parameters in Eq. (1) of every
model under four kinds of wind eld conditions, some of which are listed in Table 1.
The data of the four parameters listed in the table are obviously too jumbled to be
conveniently used for practical purpose and thus need to be summed up for
simplication. Therefore, the second step of the curve tting is to derive the
equations of the four parameters individually based on the data in Table 1, which are
shown as follows:
f p 105 191  9:48aw 1:28ahr ahr aw 68  21adb 3a2db

2
Sp 0:1aw0:4  0:0004eaw 0:84ahr  2:12  0:05a2hr 0:422 a1
db  0:08adb

4
b 1 0:00473e1:7aw 0:065 e1:260:63ahr e1:73:44=adb

ahr
a 0:8 0:06aw 0:0007ecw a0:34
hr 0:00006e

;
0:414adb 1:67a1:23
db

ARTICLE IN PRESS
M. Gu, Y. Quan / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 92 (2004) 11471165

1152

Table 1
Fitted results of parameters in Eq. (1)
Variables

Fitted values of the parameters

aw

p
ahr H= BD

adb B=D

fp

Sp

1
1
2
2
3
3
4
2
2
3
3
4
4
1
1
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
4
4
4
2
2
3
3
4
4
2
2
3
3
4
4
1
2
2
3
3
4
1
2
3
3

4
4
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
8
8
8
8
8
8
4.24
4.24
4.24
4.24

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5

0.0958
0.09302
0.09145
0.09031
0.08817
0.08671
0.09011
0.09462
0.09407
0.09471
0.09438
0.09235
0.08754
0.09864
0.09898
0.09527
0.09591
0.09632
0.09502
0.09339
0.0966
0.094
0.09069
0.0887
0.08868
0.09745
0.09646
0.09834
0.09617
0.09321
0.09354
0.101
0.0992
0.1014
0.1003
0.1009
0.09813
0.09975
0.09901
0.1007
0.1015
0.1005
0.09863
0.1087
0.106
0.1095
0.1085

0.04724
0.04775
0.03745
0.04084
0.04006
0.0392
0.02414
0.05992
0.05952
0.07821
0.06385
0.03386
0.03433
0.1606
0.1727
0.09175
0.09878
0.09949
0.1098
0.06841
0.0995
0.07829
0.0433
0.04952
0.04449
0.1163
0.1067
0.1242
0.1091
0.03649
0.05061
0.08685
0.07902
0.1135
0.1075
0.06925
0.05803
0.1513
0.1153
0.142
0.1162
0.08939
0.04592
0.02029
0.03185
0.05104
0.06015

a
0.06765
0.06763
0.1113
0.07054
0.1028
0.1414
0.2832
0.06104
0.05699
0.0411
0.05811
0.2395
0.2304
0.01154
0.00994
0.0341
0.02598
0.02644
0.02318
0.05653
0.02925
0.0409
0.1297
0.09213
0.1529
0.02114
0.02774
0.02149
0.02347
0.1372
0.09357
0.02346
0.03602
0.02156
0.02398
0.05817
0.08661
0.01321
0.01765
0.01486
0.01872
0.02865
0.09939
0.00693
0.00745
0.00451
0.00351

2.399
2.509
2.054
2.566
2.212
2.189
1.791
2.036
2.319
2.099
2.267
1.703
1.804
2.671
2.871
2.204
2.511
2.735
3.114
2.046
2.249
2.482
1.869
2.21
2.138
2.327
2.36
2.142
2.467
1.505
1.971
2.188
2.464
2.132
2.411
1.987
2.105
2.412
2.221
2.423
2.029
2.173
1.499
4.088
3.846
3.835
4.07

ARTICLE IN PRESS
M. Gu, Y. Quan / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 92 (2004) 11471165

1153

Table 1 (continued )
Variables

Fitted values of the parameters

aw

p
ahr H= BD

adb B=D

fp

Sp

1
1
2
3
3
1
2
2
2
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4

4.89
4.89
4.89
4.89
4.89
4.89
4.89
4.89
4.89
4.89
4.24
4.24
4.24
4.24
4.24
4.24
3.46
3.46
3.46
3.46
3.46
3.46
3.46
3.46

0.667
0.667
0.667
0.667
0.667
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
0.333
0.333
0.333
0.333

0.108
0.1091
0.1074
0.1076
0.1063
0.07911
0.07804
0.07961
0.07938
0.07859
0.0756
0.07801
0.07045
0.06978
0.06912
0.07357
0.1978
0.01198
0.01305
0.05012
0.112
0.1096
0.1164
0.1212

0.07523
0.1392
0.1453
0.09316
0.1162
0.05197
0.03649
0.03386
0.03505
0.02529
0.02231
0.01589
0.01849
0.02175
0.02112
0.02032
0.0021
0.01053
0.01865
0.01312
0.00132
0.00317
0.00445
0.01089

0.00679
0.00209
0.00267
0.00781
0.00556
0.2446
0.3356
0.3075
0.5189
0.7842
0.5441
0.576
0.5826
0.5593
0.4389
1.023
3.273
131.5
229
0.518
0.02256
0.01214
0.01043
0.01607

3.56
4.13
3.804
3.101
3.403
1.362
1.492
1.423
1.187
1.18
1.728
1.745
2.125
1.92
2.264
1.574
0.04738
1.694
1.364
2.82
4.526
4.526
4.347
3.929

where
p
ahr H= BD

adb D=B

8
1
>
>
>
<2
aw
>3
>
>
:
4

A
B
C
D

For majority building models and the testing conditions, the tted formulas match
with the testing results very well, and some typical comparisons are shown in Fig. 3.
From the above discussions and Fig. 3, it might be seen that the tted formulas are
suitable for estimating the across-wind loads of square buildings with aspect ratios
between 4 and 9, and rectangular buildings with side ratios between 0.5 and 2.0
under the four categories of terrain. More detailed comparisons with other results in
the literature will be performed below.

ARTICLE IN PRESS

1E-3

1E-3

2 2

Model 8(H/B/D=6/2/1)
Terrain C
Testing result
Fitted result

0.1

fB/UH

2 2

Model 8(H/B/D=6/1/2)
Terrain C
Testing result
Fitted result

(b)

fSMx(f)/(0.5UH BH )

fB/UH

0.1
fSMx(f)/(0.5UH BH )

0.01

0.1

0.1

0.01

1E-3

0.01

1E-3

1E-4

1E-4
0.1

(c)

Model 6(H/B=9)
Terrain B
Testing results
Fitted results

1E-4

1E-4

(a)

0.1

2 2

fSMx(f)/(0.5UH BH )

0.01

fSMx(f)/(0.5UH BH )

Model 1(H/B=6)
Terrain B
Testing results
Fitted results

0.1

2 2

M. Gu, Y. Quan / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 92 (2004) 11471165

1154

0.1
fB/UH

(d)

fB/UH

Fig. 3. Comparison between the testing results and the corresponding tted ones.

As for the square buildings with corner modications, the formula of nondimensional power spectrum density of across-wind force, S Mm f ; derived also by
curve tting technique with the testing data, is suggested to have the following
format:
SMm f C m f SM0 f ;

10

where S M0 f is the power spectrum of across-wind force of the square building with
an aspect ratio of 6, i.e., SMx f in Eq. (1); and C m f is a non-dimensional ratio
between S Mm f and S M0 f ; which is listed in Table 2.
3.2. Coefficients of base moment and shear force
The RMS coefcient of the base moment and the base shear force are dened,
respectively, as
C M sM =0:5rU 2H BH 2

11

C s ss =0:5rU 2H BH

12

and

ARTICLE IN PRESS
M. Gu, Y. Quan / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 92 (2004) 11471165

1155

Table 2
Value of C m f
Cross section

Wind condition

Category B
Bevel corner
Category D

Category B
Concave corner
Category D

b=B

5
10
20
5
10
20
5
10
20
5
10
20

Non-dimensional frequency fB=U H

0.100

0.125

0.150

0.175

0.200

0.225

0.250

0.183
0.070
0.106
0.368
0.256
0.339
0.106
0.033
0.042
0.267
0.091
0.169

0.905
0.349
0.902
0.749
0.504
0.974
0.595
0.228
0.842
0.586
0.261
0.954

1.250
0.568
0.953
0.922
0.659
0.977
0.980
0.450
0.563
0.839
0.452
0.659

1.296
0.653
0.819
0.955
0.706
0.894
1.106
0.565
0.451
0.955
0.567
0.527

1.297
0.684
0.743
0.943
0.713
0.841
1.125
0.610
0.421
0.987
0.613
0.475

1.216
0.670
0.667
0.917
0.697
0.805
1.072
0.604
0.400
0.991
0.633
0.447

1.167
0.653
0.626
0.897
0.686
0.790
1.034
0.594
0.400
0.984
0.628
0.453

They are derived by curve-tting technique as

C M 0:002a2w  0:017aw  1:4
0:056a2db  0:16adb 0:030:03a2ht  0:622aht 4:357

13

and
C s 0:018a2w 0:0006aw  2:4
0:0375a2db  0:11adb 0:01170:04a2ht  0:928aht 6:7;

14

where
aht H=T; T minB; D:

15

The above formulas are also suitable for square buildings of the aspect ratios
between 4 and 9, and rectangular buildings of side ratios between 0.5 and 2.0 under
the four categories of terrain.
3.3. Comparisons with previous works
The Japanese code [12] suggests a formula of non-dimensional
power spectrum of
p
across-wind loads of rectangular tall buildings of H= BDp6 and 0:2pD=Bp5;
where H is the reference height of the building; D and B the projected width and
depth of the cross section of the building, respectively. The formula has the following
format as
N
4K j 1 0:6bj bj
f =nsj 2
fS Mx f X

;
p
s2Mx
f1  f =nsj 2 g2 4b2j f =nsj 2
j1

16

ARTICLE IN PRESS
M. Gu, Y. Quan / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 92 (2004) 11471165

1156

where

N

ns2

1; D=Bo3;
2; D=BX3;

0:56
;
D=B0:85

K 1
0:85; K 2
0:02;

b1

ns1

0:12
;
f1 0:38D=B2 g0:89

D=B4
0:12
;

4
2
D=B
1:2D=B  1:7D=B 21

b2 0:28D=B0:34 :
As mentioned above, the above equation is only applicable to the buildings of
aspect ratios smaller than or equal to 6, and it does not take different terrain
conditions into account.
Obviously, Eq. (16) is different from Eq. (1) in format, and thus is re-written for
the convenience of possible comparison. In the Japanese code, the RMS value of the
base bending moment is expressed as
C M 0:0082D=B3  0:071D=B2 0:22D=B;
where C M is dened as
q
s2Mx
CM
:
0:5rU 2H BH 2

17

18

Substituting Eq. (18) into (16) leads to

fS Mx f
f =ns 2
2 4K1 0:6bb

C
:
M
p
0:5rU 2H BH 2 2
f1  f =ns 2 g2 4b2 f =ns 2

19

Equations (19) and (1) now have the same format, and thus are easy for
comparison. Fig. 4 shows comparisons of the present results with the corresponding
results from the Japanese code and Saunders [2] and others. It is seen from Fig. 4
that the non-dimensional spectra of the across-wind loads of the square building
with aspect ratio of 4 in the terrain category C from different sources agree well; but
the present across-wind force spectra of the buildings of larger aspect ratios, such as
9, are different from those of the Japanese code. From the gure, a signicant
difference can also be seen between the present power spectrum of the square
building with aspect ratio of 6 in terrain A and that from AIJ, but the present acrosswind force spectrum in terrain category D matches well with those from other
literatures, including AIJ. The above comparisons indicate that terrain condition has
un-negligible effects on the across-wind loads of tall buildings.
3.4. Effects of factors on the forces
(1) Effects of terrain condition: Fig. 5 shows the variation of non-dimensional
power spectra of across-wind loads of the square building with aspect ratio of 6 for
different terrain conditions. It can be seen that with the variation of terrain category
from A to D, the peak of the spectrum of across-wind load becomes wider and the

ARTICLE IN PRESS
M. Gu, Y. Quan / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 92 (2004) 11471165

1E-3

2 2

2 2

fSMx(f)/(0.5UH BH )

0.01

Model 1(H/B=6)
Terrain A
Testing value
Present formulum
AIJ(1996)

0.1

fSMx(f)/(0.5UH BH )

Model 3(H/B=4)
Terrain C
Testing value
Present formulum
AIJ(1996)

0.1

1157

0.01

1E-3

1E-4
1E-4

0.1

(a)

fB/U H

0.1

(b)

fB/U H
0.1

2 2

from Saunders
from AIJ (1996)
0.01

fS(f)/qH
1E-3

1E-3

1E-4

1E-4
0.1

(c)

H/B=6
Terrain D

0.01

fSMx(f)/(0.5UH BH )

Present formulum

Model 6(H/B=9)
Terrain C
Testing value
Present formulum
AIJ(1996)

0.1

0.1
fB/U H

(d)

fB/UH

Fig. 4. Comparison among the present spectra and those from other sources.

peak amplitude becomes lower, and the peak frequency moves left slightly. Not only
this building but also the others in the test have this trend of variation.
(2) Effects of aspect ratio: The effects of the aspect ratio on the across-wind loads
are experimentally investigated using the square and rectangular building models,
but only those of the square buildings are shown in Fig. 6. As can be seen from the
gure that, in general, larger aspect ratio will result in higher frequency and
amplitude of the peak. When the aspect ratio varies from 4 to 9, the non-dimensional
frequency of the peak varies from about 0.09 to 0.1; and the non-dimensional
amplitude from about 0.04 to 0.1. Besides, from the gure it also can be seen that the
variations of the peak frequencies and amplitudes of the spectra of the buildings with
aspect ratios larger than 6 tend to alleviate compared with the buildings with aspect
ratios smaller than 6 .
(3) Effects of side ratio of the cross section: Fig. 7 presents the non-dimensional
power spectra of the across-wind loads of the rectangular buildings with different
side ratios. Signicant differences between these non-dimensional spectra can be seen
from the gure. For the buildings with the side ratios from 13 to 23; the peaks are much
narrower than those of the other buildings. Moreover, their peak frequencies are
almost the same; and their peak amplitudes become large with the increase of the
side ratio. As for the buildings with side ratios larger than unity, their peaks become

ARTICLE IN PRESS
1158

M. Gu, Y. Quan / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 92 (2004) 11471165

0.1

fSMx(f)/(0.5UH BH )

2 2

Model 1(H/B=6)
Terrain A
Terrain B
Terrain C
Terrain D

0.01

1E-3

0.1
fB/U H

Fig. 5. Effect of terrain condition.

0.1

0.01

fSMx(f)/(0.5UH BH )

2 2

Terrain B
H/B=
4
5
6
7
8
9

1E-3

1E-4
0.1
fB/U H

Fig. 6. Effect of aspect ratio.

much wider; the amplitudes become smaller; and the peak frequencies become much
lower. Furthermore, their second peaks with higher frequencies may appear due to
ow re-attachment.
(4) Effects of modified corner: Figs. 8 and 9 describe the non-dimensional power
spectra of the across-wind loads of the square buildings with modied corners. It is
seen that both of these two types of corner-modications have large effects on the
across-wind forces. The modications, generally speaking, decrease dramatically the
peak amplitudes of across-wind force spectra. Moreover, among these models, the
peak amplitudes in the across-wind force spectra of the buildings with side ratio of
10% are the lowest.

ARTICLE IN PRESS
M. Gu, Y. Quan / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 92 (2004) 11471165

Terrain B
D/B=
1/3
1/2
2/3
1/1
3/2
2/1
3/1

2 2

0.1

0.01

fSMx(f)/(0.5 UH BH )

1159

1E-3

1E-4

0.1

fB/U H
Fig. 7. Effect of side ratio of the cross section.

0.1

Terrain B
(b/B)=
0.%
5.%
10%
20%

fSMx(f)/(0.5UH BH )

2 2

0.01

1E-3

1E-4

0.1

fB/UH

Fig. 8. Effect of corner-cut size (bevel corner model).

4. Across-wind dynamic responses of an aeroelastic building model and comparison

with computed ones
The above comparison between the present formulas of non-dimensional power
spectra of across-wind forces and those in the Japanese code and other literatures
has proven the reliability of the present formulas to a certain extent. In order to

ARTICLE IN PRESS
M. Gu, Y. Quan / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 92 (2004) 11471165

1160

0.1

Terrain B
(b/B)=
0.%
5.%
10%
20%

fSMx(f)/(0.5UH BH )

2 2

0.01

1E-3

1E-4

0.1

fB/U H

Fig. 9. Effect of corner-cut size (concave corner model).

make further verication, one of the above 15 buildings is selected and tested using
aeroelastic model technique to obtain its across-wind dynamic responses and then
compared with the computed ones based on the present across-wind loads. Because
aerodynamic damping will be included in the dynamic responses from the aeroelastic
model test, the aerodynamic damping ratio of the building should be rst identied.
4.1. Aeroelastic model
The selected building has a square cross section and an aspect ratio of 6, i.e.,
Model 1 in Fig. 2. According to the structural characteristics of a typical building of
300 m in height, the parameters of the model are rstly determined. Tamura et al.
[13] and Suda et al. [14] suggested an equation (Eq. (20)) to estimate the rst
frequency of general super-tall buildings after their investigations of a great number
of tall buildings in Japan.

1=0:015H : RC&SRC BuildingsLow  Amplitude;
f s1
20
1=0:020H : Steel BuildingsLow  Amplitude:
Thus a building with a height of 300 m will have the rst frequency ranging from
0.167 to 0.222 Hz. The rst frequency of the prototype building adopted in the
present study is thus determined to be 0.19 Hz. Such buildings usually have a mass
density between 130 and 230 kg=m3 ; and a typical value of 180 kg=m3 is taken in this
study.
To cover the concerned wind speeds for the real buildings, the wind speed scale is
selected to be 18 based on the available wind speed range in the wind tunnel.
Accordingly, the other scales, such as structural density scale, frequency scale, etc.,
for the design of the model can be determined, in terms of the above two basic scales.

ARTICLE IN PRESS
M. Gu, Y. Quan / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 92 (2004) 11471165

1161

Fig. 10. Base of SDOF aeroelastic building model.

Finally the generalized mass and stiffness of the model are determined, respectively,
to be M 0:36 kg and K 2009 kg=s2 ; corresponding to the rst frequency of
12 Hz. Four kinds of structural damping ratios are adopted for the test: zs =0.6%,
1.2%, 1.88% and 2.17%. In addition, the testing wind speed at the top of the models
ranges from 4 to 16 m/s, with the increment of 1 m/s in non-vortex-excitation zones
and 0.5 m/s in vortex-excitation zone.
Fig. 10 shows the specially designed base for the aeroelastic building model, on
which the rigid building model can move in two perpendicular directions under wind
actions. The required rst-mode generalized stiffness and mass can be achieved
respectively by selecting proper springs and mass blocks; and the required damping
ratios can be achieved through selecting damping plates with different size. Two
mini-accelerometers are perpendicularly mounted on the top of the model to
measure the across- and along-wind responses, respectively.
4.2. Aerodynamic damping
In order to ensure the reliability of the identied results, two different techniques
are adopted in the present study. The rst one is time-averaging random decrement
technique, a popular one in previous studies on identication of aerodynamic
damping; and the other is covariance-driven stochastic subspace identication
technique, which was just newly introduced for identication of aeroelastic
parameters of exible structures [15]. The applicability of these two techniques has
been veried in [15] and [16], respectively, and are not discussed here. The identied
results from these two techniques are almost the same [17], thus only those from the
time-averaging random decrement technique are shown below.

ARTICLE IN PRESS
M. Gu, Y. Quan / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 92 (2004) 11471165

1162

0.02

s = 0.6%

Terrain A
Terrain B
Terrain C
Terrain D

0.01

0.00

10

12

14

UH /(f 1 B)

Fig. 11. Variations of aerodynamic damping ratio with different terrain conditions.

Fig. 11 presents the across-wind aerodynamic damping ratios for different terrain
conditions. As can be seen from the gure, under the conditions of terrain categories
A, B and C, when non-dimensional wind speed is lower than about 9, the acrosswind aerodynamic damping ratios are all positive and increase with wind speed; and
with the further increase of wind speed the aerodynamic damping ratios suddenly
decrease and change from positive to negative values at non-dimensional wind speed
between 10 and 11. However, for the terrain category D, the aerodynamic damping
ratio is always positive for all the tested wind speeds, and the maximum aerodynamic
damping ratio is much smaller than those under the other terrain conditions. Fig. 12
shows the effect of structural damping on the aerodynamic damping. Generally
speaking, the absolute values of the aerodynamic damping decrease with the increase
of the structural damping. The above results have the same trend as those obtained
by Marukawa et al. [18].
4.3. Comparison between the responses from aeroelastic model test and computation
The power spectrum of the across-wind force is then employed in computation of
the across-wind dynamic responses of the building with the same parameters as the
aeroelastic model with and without considering the effect of the aerodynamic
damping. The computed responses are then compared with those from the
aeroelastic model test. Generally speaking, when the aerodynamic damping is taken
into account, the computed across-wind dynamic responses of the building are closer
to the responses from the aeroelastic model test. Fig. 13 shows the non-dimensional
dynamic displacements of the building with structural damping ratio of 0.61% and
located in terrain category A; and Fig. 14 presents the results for the condition of
structural damping ratio of 1.2% and terrain category C. As can be seen from Fig.
13, the maximum dynamic displacement from the computation without considering

ARTICLE IN PRESS
M. Gu, Y. Quan / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 92 (2004) 11471165

1163

0.020

0.015

Terrain C
s = 0.60%
s = 1.20%
s = 1.88%

0.010

s = 2.17%

0.005

0.000

-0.005

10

12

14

U/(f 1 B)
Fig. 12. Variations of aerodynamic damping ratio with different structural damping.

0.12

Terrain A, s = 0.61%
With a
Without a
Testing results

0.10

y /B

0.08

0.06

0.04

0.02

0.00
2

10

12

U/(f 1B)
Fig. 13. Comparison of computed RMS displacements with those from aeroelastic model test (terrain
category A and structural damping ratio of 0.61%).

the effect of aerodynamic damping is only about 75% of that from the aeroelastic
model test; while the maximum response considering the effect of aerodynamic
damping is almost the same as the corresponding value from the aeroelastic model
test. Moreover, Fig. 14 indicates that the effect of aerodynamic damping on the
across-wind responses is much less for a building that has higher structural damping
and is situated in a rougher area. The comparison results shown in the above two

ARTICLE IN PRESS
M. Gu, Y. Quan / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 92 (2004) 11471165

1164
0.08
0.07

Terrain C
s =1.20%
With a
Without a
Testing

0.06

y /B

0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0.00
2

10

12

U/(f 1B)
Fig. 14. Comparison of computed RMS displacements with those from AE model test (terrain category C
and structural damping ratio of 1.2%).

gures indicate not only the effect of aerodynamic damping on across-wind dynamic
response of the building but also the reliability of the present formulas of the acrosswind loads.

5. Concluding remarks
In this paper, 15 typical tall building models of basic cross-sections and aspect
ratios from 4 to 9 are tested with high-frequency force balance technique in a wind
tunnel to obtain their rst-mode generalized across-wind dynamic forces. The effects
of terrain condition, aspect ratio and side ratio of cross section and modied corner
of the building models on the across-wind forces are investigated in detail. New
formulas of the power spectra of the across-wind dynamic forces, the coefcients of
base moment and shear force are derived. The reliability of these formulas is veried
through detailed comparisons between the present formulas and those from the
literature. Moreover, a SDOF aeroelastic model of the square building with an
aspect ratio of 6 is tested to obtain its across-wind dynamic responses and
aerodynamic damping characteristics. The across-wind dynamic responses of the
square building are nally computed with the power spectra of the across-wind force
in terrain categories A and C with and without considering the effect of the
aerodynamic damping and then compared with the corresponding responses from
the aeroelastic model test. The comparison results indicate not only the effect of
aerodynamic damping on across-wind dynamic response of the building but also the
reliability of the present formulas of the across-wind loads.

ARTICLE IN PRESS
M. Gu, Y. Quan / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 92 (2004) 11471165

1165

Acknowledgements
The author would like to gratefully acknowledge the support of the National
Natural Science Foundation of China (50321003, 50308022) and Foundation for
University Key Teacher by the Ministry of Eductaion of China.
References
[1] M. Gu, Y. Zhou, H.F. Xiang, Dynamic responses and equivalent wind loads of Jinmao Building, in:
A. Larsen, G.L. Larose, F.M. Livesy (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on
Wind Engineering, Balkema, Rotterdam, 1999, pp. 14971504.
[2] J.W. Saunders, W.H. Melboune, Tall rectangular building response to cross wind excitation, in:
Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Wind Effects on Buildings and Structures,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 1975, pp. 369375.
[3] K.C.S. Kwok, Cross wind response of tall buildings, Eng. Struct. 4 (1982) 256262.
[4] A. Kareem, Fluctuating wind loads on buildings, J. Eng. Mech. ASCE 108 (6) (1982) 10861102.
[5] S.G. Liang, S. Liu, L. Zhang, M. Gu, Mathematical model of acrosswind dynamic loads on
rectangular tall buildings, J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 90 (2002) 17571770.
[6] S.G. Liang, Q.S. Li, S.C. Liu, L.L. Zhang, M. Gu, Torsional dynamic wind load on rectangular tall
buildings, Eng. Struct. 26 (1) (2004) 129137.
[7] N.J. Cook, A sensitive 6-component high-frequency-range balance for building aerodynamics, Phys.
E. Sci. Instrum. 116 (1983) 390393.
[8] A. Kareem, Dynamic response of high-rise buildings to stochastic wind loads, J. Wind Eng. Ind.
Aerodyn. 4142 (1992) 11011112.
[9] H. Marukawa, T. Ohkuma, Y. Momomura, Across-wind and torsional acceleration of prismatic high
buildings, J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 4142 (1992) 11391150.
[10] J. Katagiri, H. Marukawa, O. Nakamura, A. Katsumura, Evaluation of wind responses of a building
gained from wind tunnel tests, in: Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Wind
Engineering, New Delhi, India, 1995, pp. 14081419.
[11] Chinese Code for Loading on Buildings and other Structures, GB50009-2001, 2001 (in Chinese).
[12] Architectural Institute of Japan, Recommendations for Loading on Buildings and Commentaries
1996 (in Japanese).
[13] Y. Tamura, K. Suda, A. Sasaki, Damping in Buildings for Wind Resistant Design, in: International
Symposium on Wind and Structures for the 21st Century, 2628 January, Cheju, Korea, 2000,
pp. 115130.
[14] K. Suda, N. Sataka, J. Ono, A. Sasaki, Damping properties of buildings in Japan, J. of Wind Eng.
Indust. Aerodyn. 59 (1996) 383392.
[15] X.R. Qin, M. Gu, Determination of utter derivatives by stochastic subspace identication technique,
Wind Struct. 7 (3) (2004) 173186.
[16] Y. Quan, M. Gu, Y. Tamura, Experimental evaluation of aerodynamic damping of square super
high-rise buildings, in: Third International Conference on Advances in Structural Engineering and
Mechanics (ASEM04), Seoul, Korea, 24 September 2004.
[17] X.R. Qin, Determination of aerodynamic parameters of long-span bridges and sper high-rise
buildings by stochastic system identication techniques, A Dissertation for Post-doctoral Research,
State Key Laboratory for Disaster Reduction in Civil Engineering, Tongji university, 2003.
[18] H. Marukawa, N. Kato, K. Fujii, Y. Tamura, Experimental evaluation of aerodynamic damping of
tall buildings, J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 59 (1996) 177190.