DRAFT REPORT

AL MULLA TOWER
KUWAIT CITY

WIND-INDUCED STRUCTURAL RESPONSES

RWDI # 1901537
July 4, 2019

SUBMITTED TO SUBMITTED BY

SUBMITTED TO Vivek Kanti

Dmitri Jajich Technical Coordinator
Director vivek.kanti@rwdi.com
Dmitri.jajich@som.com
Vishnu Raveendranathan
Skidmore, Owings & Merrill Europe Technical Coordinator
The Broadgate Tower vishnu.raveendranathan@rwdi.com
20 Primrose Street
London, EC2A, 2EW, Cini Anoop
UK Technical Coordinator | Associate
T +44 020 7798 1068 cini@rwdi.com
M +44 078 2432 8001
Chiara Pozzuoli
Senior Project Manager
chiara.pozzuoli@rwdi.com

RWDI
Unit 1 Tilers Road
Milton Keynes, MK11 3LH, UK
T: +44 (0)1908 776970
F: +44 (0)1582 470259

rwdi.com

This document is intended for the sole use of the party to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged and/or
confidential. If you have received this in error, please notify us immediately. Accessible document formats provided upon request.
® RWDI name and logo are registered trademarks in Canada and the United States of America
WIND-INDUCED STRUCTURAL RESPONSES
AL MULLA TOWER
RWDI #1901537
July 4, 2019

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
RWDI was retained to study the wind-induced structural responses of the proposed Al Mulla Tower
development in Kuwait City. The development consists of a tower approximately 274 m tall.

Key points

• The wind tunnel test procedures met or exceeded the requirements set out in the ASCE 7.

• The wind tunnel study was carried out using the High Frequency Force Balance (HFFB) technique. Images of
the model for Crown options 1 and 2 are shown in Figures 1a and 1b, respectively.

• A basic wind speed of 41 m/s 3-second gust at 10 m height in open terrain was adopted for the wind
loading predictions for strength design. All predictions were derived using a statistical wind climate model
developed for the area.

• The results are based on the structural dynamic properties received from the structural engineer on May
31, 2019. Damping ratios of 2.0% and 1.5% were used for loads and accelerations, respectively.

• Wind loading information for structural design for the two crown options is provided in Tables 2a to 4b
corresponding. The magnitudes are high due to strong crosswind response in both directions.

• The wind loads provided in this report do not contain safety or load factors and are to be applied in the
same manner as would wind loads calculated by code analytical methods.

• The predicted accelerations, shown in Figures 6a and 6b for the two crown options, are well within the
criteria for an office building for both the 1- and 10-year return periods and as such the proposed tower is
expected to have no issues with human comfort. Torsional velocities, shown in Tables 5a and 5b, were also
found to be acceptable.

• The sensitivity of wind loads to variations in damping and periods of vibration for Crown option 1 and 2 are
illustrated in Figures 7a and 7b respectively. Note that these curves assume that modal coupling remains
consistent while the other parameters are varied.

• The sensitivity of accelerations for 1 year and 10-year return period to variations in damping and periods of
vibration for Crown option 1 and 2 are illustrated in Figures 8a to 9b. Note that these curves assume that
modal coupling remains consistent while the other parameters are varied.

rwdi.com