A Critical Assessment of the Driving-Rain Wind Pressures

Used in CSA Standard CAN\CSA-A440-M90

by
Peter Felix Skerli

Faculty of Engineering Science

Subrnitted in partial fulfillment

of the requirements for the degree of
Master in Engineering Science

Faculty of Graduate Studies

The University of Western Ontario
London, Ontario
January 1999

O Peter Felix Skerlj 1999

I+I National Library
,",fo
Bibliothèque nationale
du Canada
Acquisitions and Acquisitions et
Bibliographie Services services bibliographiques
395 Wellington Street 395. nie Wellington
Ottawa ON K I A ON4 Ottawa ON K1A ON4
canada canada

The author has granted a non-
exclusive licence allowing the
National Library of Canada to
reproduce, loan, distribue or sell
copies of this thesis in microform,
paper or electronic formats.
L'auteur a accordé une licence non
exclusive permettant à la
Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de
reproduire, prêter, distriiuer ou
vendre des copies de cette thèse sous
la forme de microfiche/film. de
reproduction sur papier ou sur format
électronique.

The author retains ownership of the L'auteur conserve la propriété du

copyright in this thesis. Neither the
thesis nor substantial extracts fiom it
may be printed or otherwise
reproduced without the author's
permission.
droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse.
Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiek
de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés
ou autrement reproduits sans son
autorisation.
Abstract

Strong winds coinciding with heavy rainfall provide a formidable challenge in the
design of safe and serviceable building envelope systems. Rain penetration through the
outer layer of a wall c m not oniy Iead to great econornic Iosses associated with structurai
repair or replacement but may aiso compromise the hedth and comfoa of the building's
occupants.

In Canada, use has been made of the airport weather records archived by the
Atmospheric Environment Service of Environment Canada to develop ciimatologicai
inputs to the design of waterproof wails. The climatoIogicaI input parameters are five-
and ten-year extreme wind pressures derived from wind data reported during hours with
rainfail totals equal to or greater than 1.8 mm. The Canadian Standard CANKSA-A440-
Mg0 lists the drïving-rain wind pressures for 637 Canadian sites and outiines their usage
in the window selection criteria. Documentation on the derivation of the driving-rain
wind pressures is provided in a report written by Welsh, Skinner and Morris (1989)
entitled A Clirnnrology of Driving Rain Wind Pressures for Canada-

A detailed review of the anaiysis methodology and of the weather data used in the
denvation of the driving-rain wind pressures was conducted and three main areas for
improvement were identified. First, conventional order statistics on observed annual
extreme wind pressures was performed using hourly observed one- or two-minute mean
speeds, Le. non-continuous observations, giving rise to uncertainty in the representative
averaging time of the extreme wind pressure estimates. Second, prior to about the rnid
19603, anemometers at Canadian airports were often Iocated on rooftops of airport
buildings at heights greater than 10 m, which is the reference height implied in the
building standard. No attempt was made to standardize the wind data for use in the
analysis. Third, one-hour rainfail totals were estimated from six-hour precipitation (rain.
freezing rain, snow, etc.) measurements and hourly present weather observations as
opposed to using the actuai measured one-hour rainfalls from automatic rain gauges when
..-
111
availabIe and the estimates o d y as necessary.

Weather data fkom fourteen Canadian airport sites were examined to address the
above uncertainties and to quanti@ the associated errors. For this, a technique was
developed to predict extrerne one-hour mean wind pressures From hourly observed short-
duration mean wind speeds using a database comprising continuous one-minute average
wind speeds. The method was applied to re-evaiuate the driving-rain wind pressures at
the fourteen airport sites considering at the sarne time the non-stationary aspects of the
wind records and the available one-hour rainfall measurements. Using the ten-year
driving-rain wind pressure as the reference, the resuits of the analysis show that, for the
fourteen stations examined, the design pressures currentiy used in the standard are on
average 55 3 higher than the one-hour mean pressures denved in this study and range
from 20 to 97 % higher.

It is recommended that the Canadian driving-rain wind pressures be re-evaluated

on a national scale, taking advantage of techniques descnbed in this work and of more
than ten years of additionai weather data now available.

Keywords: wind-driven rain, cirivingrain wind pressures, driving-rain index, extreme

wind speeds, extreme wind pressures, CAMCSA-A440-Mg0
Acknowledgements

I would like to thank several people for helping me during my joumey to

cornpleting this research paper.

To Dr. Dave Surry, for your support, insight. advice and ~ b o v ed l your patience
and understanding-

To Atmospheric Environment Service, for supplying the data which was key to
my research, and especially to Mr. Stapf for your help with the high frequency database
and to Mr. Morris and Mr. Welsh for your help with the interpretation of Canada's
national weather archives.

To Anna, for your constant s ~ p p o r and

t for being a sounding board without even
really understanding what my thesis was about.

To my colleagues, in particular Rob, Darryl and Jim Bob Ray for providing me
with the necessary distractions to reenergize myself and keep my sanity.

To my parents, for your financial support. for keeping my freezer stocked hl1 of
home cooked rneals, for your unending encouragement. and for keeping the empty
picture frame dusted in the hopes that one day it would be filled with my Masters degree.
Table of Contents

Certificate of Examination

Abstract

Table of Contents

List of Figures

List of Tables

Nomenclature

Chapter 1.0 Introduction

1.1 Background
1.2 Scope of Research

Chapter 2.0 Published Research

2.1 Introduction
2.2 Driving-Rain
2.3 Extreme Wind Speeds During Rainfali

Chapter 3.0 Description of the Meteorological Data

3.1 Introduction
3 -2 One-Minute Database
3.2.1 Brevoort Island Station
3 - 2 2 St. John's Station
3.2.3 Downsview Station
3 -3 One-Hour Database
3.3.1 Wind Data
3.3.2 Rainfall Data
Chapter 1.0 On the Uses of Hourly Observed Short-Duration Mean Wind 95
S P ~
4.1 Introduction 95
4.2 Time Series of Mean Wind Speed 97
4.3 Dependence of Spot Wind Speeds on One-Hour Means 100
4.4 Parent Distribution 107
4.5 Extreme Value Distribution 115
4.5.1 Epochd Extremes 116
4-52 Extrernes fiorn the Parent Population 128
4.6 Concluding Rernarks 134

Chapter 5.0 Evaluation of Canadian Driving-Rain Wind Pressures

5.1 Introduction
5.2 Andyses of Canadian DRWPs
5.2.1 Base Analysis - Welsh, Skinner and Moms ( 1989)
5 - 3 2 Analysis 1 - Use of Fitered Wind Records
5.2.3 Analysis 2 - Use of Modified Spot Wind Data
5-24 Analysis 3 - Use of Rainfall Measurements
5.2.5 Analysis 4 - Use of Lieblein's BLUE
5.3 Cornparisons of Canadian DRWPs
5.4 Concluding Remarks

Chapter 6.0 Conclusions and Recommendations 185

References 188

Appendix A Relationship Between Wind Speed, Rainfall Intensity 193

and Driving-Rainfall Intensity

Appendix B Parent Wind Speeds During Rainfail 197

Appendix C Extreme Wind Speeds During Rainfdi 213

Vita
List of Figures

Orientation of reference area for rainfd intensity and driving-raiddl

intensity

Annual mean driving-rain index (m2!s) for the British Isles, from Lacy
(1971)

Annual mean driving-rain index (m2/s) for Canada, from Boyd (1963)

Twelve-point compass roses showing annual mean simultaneous drivuig-

rain index (m2/s) for 22 locations in the Bntish Mes, from Lacy (197 1)

Sixteen-point compass roses for Toronto International Airport showing a)

relative frequency (%) of wind during rainfdl b) sixteen-year
simultaneous driving-rain index (% of total) c) relative frequency (%) of
wind during all hours, from Robinson and Baker (1975)

Annual mean simultaneous driving-rain index and three-year return period

simultaneous drïving-rain spell index (logarithrnic units, scale indicated
on figure) for 12 wind directions, from Pnor (1985)

Illustration of the correspondence between precipitation and wind speed

data used by Murakami et al. ( 1987) in the case of a) wind speeds
recorded every one hour and b) wind speeds recorded every three hours

Annual extrerne wind speeds ( d s ) during rainfall for Tokyo based on a)

the Type4 extreme value distribution and b) Equation 2.5, after Murakami
et ai. ( 1987)

Reference 10 m ten-year return period Driving Rain Wind Pressures (Pa),

from Welsh et al. (1989)

AnnuaI extreme wind speeds ( d s ) during rainfall for Mascot based on the
Type-LU extreme value distribution, afier Choi (1992)

Annual extreme wind speeds (m/s) during rainfail for Singapore based on
'.
the Tme-1 extreme value distribution with V after Choi ( 1994)
3.1 Station locations of the One-minute Canadian Data Base

3.2 Photograph of the POSS Doppler radar, after Sheppard (1990)

3.3 Photograph of Brevoort Island Station

3.4 One-hour mean wind speeds at Brevoon Island Station for the month of
September, 1994

3.5 One-hour mean wind speeds at Brevoort Island Station for the seven-hour
period beginning on A u p s t 27, 1994

3.6 One-hour mean wind speeds at Brevoort Island Station for the seven-hour
period beginning on October 15, 1994

3.7 Distribution of absent wind data by month at Brevoort Island Station

3.8 Photograph of St. John's Station

3.9 One-hour mean wind speeds at St. John's Station for the month of
November, 1994

3.10 One-hour mean data at St. John's Station for the seven-hour period
beginning on March 0 1, 1994

3.1 1 One-hour mean data at St. John's Station for the seven-hou period
beginning on March 26, 1995

3.12 Distribution of absent data by month at St. John's Station

3.13 One-hou mean wind speeds at Downsview Station for the month of July,
1994

3.14 Distribution of absent data by month at Downsview Station

3.15 Station locations of the One-hour Canadian Data Base

3.16 Sixteen-point compass roses of mean wind speed for Ottawa Int'l. A.

3.17 Sixteen-point compass roses of mean wind speed normalized by that over
the filtered wind record (1970-92) for Ottawa Int'I. A-
3- 18 Sixteen-point compass roses of mean wind speed for Montreal Int'l. A.

Sixteen-point compass roses of rnean wind speed normalized by that over

the fdtered wind record ( 1964-92) for Montreal int71.A,

Sixteen-point compass roses of mean wind speed for Victoria Int'l. A.

Sixteen-point compass roses of mean wind speed normalized by that over

the filtered wind record (1965-92) for Victoria Int'l. A,

Cornparison of the average temporal distribution of measured and

estimated one-hour rainfalls for continuous penods of rairifail lasting two,
four and six hours

Idealized power spectmm of wind speed, from Davenport (1994b)

One-minute mean wind speeds and corresponding s?ot factors

Two-minute mean wind speeds and corresponding spot factors

Ten-minute mean wind speeds and corresponding spot factors

Histogams of the spot factor - St. John's Station

Histograrns of the spot factor - Brevoort Island Station

Histogams of the spot factor - Downsview Station

Coefficients of variation - St. John's Station (10699 data points per plot)

Coefficients of variation - Brevoort L Station (6497 data points per plot)

Coefficients of variation - Downsview Station (6925 data points per plot)

Coefficients of variation from Equation 4.1 I

Weibuli distributions of parent one-hour mean wind speed

H i s t o g m s of parent one-hou rnean wind speed

Mean and r.m.s. values of parent wind speed - result from the alternative
measurement normalized by uiat from one-hour means

Weibull parameters for parent wind speed - resdt from the alternative
measurement normalized by that from one-hour means

Changes in the Weibuii exponent tbrough the use of spot wind data

Extreme one-hour mean wind pressures based on the epochal model - St.
John's Station

Extreme one-hour mean wind pressures based on the epochal model -

Brevoort Island Station

Extreme one-hour mean wind pressures based on the epochai model -

Downsview Station

iMean and r.m.s. values of extreme wind pressure - St. John's Station -
result from the alternative measurement normalized by that from one-hour
means

Mean and r.m.s. values of extrerne wind pressure - Brevoort Island Station
- result from the alternative measurement normalized by that from one-
hour means

Mean and r.m.s. values of extreme wind pressure - Downsview Station -

result from the alternative measurement normalized by that from one-hour
rneans

Type4 parameters for extreme wind pressure - St. John's Station - result
from the aiternative measurement normalized by that from one-hour
means

Type-1 parameters for extreme wind pressure - Brevoort Island Station -

result from the alternative measurement normalized by that from one-hour
means

Type-I parameters for extreme wind pressure - Downsview Station - result

from the alternative measurement normaiïzed by that from one-hour
4. M a Extreme wind pressures based on the epochal mode1 - St. John's Station - 161
result from the alternative measurement normaiized by that from one-hour
means

4-14b Extreme wind pressures based on the epochal mode1 - Brevoort Island 162
Station - result from the aiternative measurement normalized by that from
one-hour means

4.14~ Extreme wind pressures based on the epochal model - Downsview Station 163
- result from the alternative rneasurernent normalized by that from one-
hour means

4.15 Mean cycling rate and parameter N - result from the alternative
measurement nomalized by that from one-hour means

4.16 Extreme one-hour rnean wind pressures based on the parent mode1 for
fourteen-day epochs

4.17 Extreme wind pressures based on the parent model for fourteen-day
epochs - result from the alternative measurernent normalized by that from
one-hou means

5.l a DRWPs for the 1.8 mm/hr rainfall threshold expressed as a fraction of that 182
derived in the Base Analysis

5. lb DRWPs for the 3.0 mm/hr rainfall threshold expressed as a fraction of that 183
derived in the Base Analysis

5.1c DRWPs for the 5.1 mmhr rainfd1 threshold expressed as a fraction of that 184
derived in the Base Analysis

xii
List of Tables

Annual wall penetration indices for 10 stations in Canada, from Morris

( 1975)

Window ratings and associated standard test pressures, from Canadian

Standards Association CANKS A-A440-M90

Station information of the one-minute database

Available one-minute wind data at Srevoort Island Station during the

period of Jan. 27/94 to Nov. 06/94

Statistics of the difference in simultaneous one-minute mean wind speeds

measured from the Rosemount and Hydrotech anemometers

Available one-minute wind data at St. John's Station during the penod of
Jan. O 1/94 to Apr. 30195

Statistics of the difference in simultaneous one-minute mean wind speeds

measured from the 78D #2 and Hydrotech anemometers

Available one-minute wind data at Downsview station during the penod

of Jan. O 1/94 to Nov. 27/94

Station information of the one-hour database

Anemometer heights above ground level for Ottawa Int'l. A.

Typical precipitation rates associated with present weather observations,

from AES ( 1984)

Worked example for estimating one-hour rainfalls

Cornparison of the number of threshold exceedences indicated by the

measured and estimated one-hour rainfails

Number of time senes constructed from the one-minute database for each
of the three stations
Parameters for obtaining representative values of the coefficient of
variation from one-hour mean wind speed in rn/s

Averages of Nsover the indicated number of observations based on the

one-minute peak factor

Estimates of parameter p
Influence of the reIevant parameters on changes in the mode and
dispersion evduated fiom Equations 4-42

Summary of the anaiysis methods used to evaluate the DRWPs

Comparison of the ten-year D R W s evaluated by Welsh, Skinner and

Morris (1989) and by the Base Andysis; statistics from ai1 fourteen
stations

Influence of the filtered wind records on the ten-year DRWPs; statistics 175
from all fourteen stations

Influence of the modified spot wind data on the ten-year DRWPs; 177
statistics from dl fourteen stations

Influence of using estimated one-hour rainfalls on the ten-year DRWPs: 178

statistics from aU fourteen stations

Distribution of rainfdl data over the filtered wind records 179

Influence of using Lieblein's BLUE on the ten-year DRWPs; statistics 179

from all fourteen stations

Cornparison of the ten-year DRWPs evaluated by Analysis 4 and by the 180

Base Analysis; statistics fiom al1 fourteen stations

Cornparison of the ten-year DRWPs evduated by Welsh, Skinner and 181

Moms (1989) and by Analysis 4; statistics from ail fourteen stations
Nomenclature

Type-1 distribution parameter; inverse of dispersion

nth amplitude in a Fourier Analysis
parameter of Equation 4. i 1 for defining the coefficient of variation, v, { s }
coefficient for estimating Type4 mode from Lieblein's BLUE
parameter of Equation 4.1 1 for defining the coefficient of variation, v, { r }
coefficient for estimating Type-I dispersion from Lieblein's BLUE
Type-IIi distribution parameter and Weibull distribution pararneter
parameters of extreme value distribution given in Equation 2.5
factor relating dispersion of the Type-I distribution derived from spot wind
speed rneasurements to that derived from one-hour mean wind speeds
factor relating inverse of parameter k of the Weibull distribution derived
from spot wind speed measurements to that denved from one-hour mean
wind speeds
factor relating pararneter c of the Weibull distribution derived frorn spot
wind speed measurements to that derived from one-hour mean wind speeds
factor relating upcrossing rate parameter N derived from spot wind speed
rneasurements to that derived from one-hour mean wind speeds
spot factor parameter, see Equation 4.3 1
factor relating mode of the Type-1 distribution derived frorn spot wind speed
measurements to that derived from one-hour mean wind speeds
probabiiity density function of variable X
joint probability density function of variables X and Y
cumulative distribution function of variable X
wind speed spot factor
wind speed peak factor
wind pressure peak factor for continuous z -minute averages
wind pressure peak factor for spot z -minute averages
total nurnber of sarnples
Type-III distribution parameter and W e i b d distribution parameter
ascending order rank of wind speed sample
one-hour mean dynamic wind pressure
one-hour mean wind speed
nurnber of wind speed samples
upcrossing rate pararneter, see Equation 4.38
upcrossing rate of variable X
number of one-hour mean dynamic wind pressures within one peak factor of
an epochal extreme one-hour mean dynamic wind pressure
probability mass hnction of variable X
precipitation total
mean dynamic wind speed
return period or recurrence interval
tirne

Type4 distribution pararneter; mode

mean wind speed
time series of consecutive r -minute average wind speeds
time senes of modified spot T -minute average wind speeds
time series of spot r -minute average wind speeds
time series of the average of two t -minute wind speeds dunng saine h o u
Type-III distribution pararneter
number of upcrossings
dummy variable
epochal extreme of variable X
first time derivative of variable X
reduced variate of Type4 distribution
dumrny variable
height above ground
roughness length

xvi
Subscripts

i ith minute
i jth hour
k ktti z - minute period
rn mth Largest wind speed sample
P pth extreme one-hour rnean wind pressure
rfir threshold amount

Greek Letters

Type4 distribution parameter; inverse of dispersion

upcrossing rate parameter, see Equation 4-38
rainfali coIlection efficiency
standard deviation of variable X
standard deviation of r -minute mean wind speeds over an hour
wind speed averaging interval in minutes
angle between wali normal and approaching wind
coefficient of variation of r -minute mean wind speeds over an hour
nth frequency in a Fourier Andysis
nth phase shifi in a Fourier Anaiysis
mean cycling rate, see Equation 4.38
Euler's Constant (= 0.577)
pi (= 3.14)

average
root mean square
maximum
minimum
driving-rain wind pressure
best Iinear unbiased estimators

xvü
Chapter 1.0
Introduction

1.1 Background

The primary hnction of the building envelope (i-e. the roof, walls, windows,
doors, etc. that make up the outer shell of the building) is to provide a cornfortable
environment within the interior of the building, one w k c h is independent of outside
conditions. Ln order to satisQ this requirement, the building envelope must be able to
remain intact and functional under the impact of naturd elernents such as high wind
speeds, precipitation (rain, snow and hail) and extreme air temperatures. The
consequences of rain penetration through the building envelope include material
corrosion, material saturation (potentialiy leading to a reduction in the thermal insulating
properties of the wall system), staining of interior finishes and damage to the building's
contents, among others. Thus, isolated or persistent functional failures of a building
envelope over its lifetime can not only lead to great economic losses but may aiso
compromise the comfort and health of the occupants.

One form of environmentai loading that is, arpably. at the forefront of building
envelope damage is the combined action of wind and min. It is a complex probiem.
Aside from the need to define the characteristics of wind and rain themselves, on which
this thesis focuses, there are further significant factors affecting the building envelope
performance. These include the wind-driven min's interaction with the flow field around
the building, Ieading to preferred areas of rain impact (Inculet and Surry, 1994; Choi,
) ~ way in which water runs off the building surfaces, and the aerodynamic
1 9 9 4 ~ the
pressures produced that rnay act to drive the rain through the envelope. These pressures
Vary si,gnificantly both in tirne and spatially (Skerlj and Surry, 1994; Inculet et ai., 1994)
and depend on the building's environment and wind direction.
 In general, rain penetration through the builcihg envelope can occur in one of two
ways. The € n t pertains to wall systems that comprise an outer layer made of a porous
materiai, such as brick or block rnasonry, that when exposed to prolonged periods of
wetting becorne saturated- This may result in rainwater present d o n g the inside face
should sipificant wetting persist following saturation. The waII thickness. absorption
properties and initial moisture content will play key roles into the arnount of wetting
required for saturation. The second way in which rainwater c m penetrate the building
envelope is by being forced through an opening, such as a poorIy sealed joint in the
exterior finish or an intentional wail vent that is not properly shielded from the rain.
Capillary forces can be sufficient to move water through very small openings while wind
pressure can cause leakage through openings larger than about O. f mm (Lacy, 1976). The
pressure drop required to rnove water through an opening is inversely proportional to the
size of the opening and can be severai times lower for openings completely bIocked with
water compared to those only partidly blocked (Surry et d., 1994a).

Much work has been performed to date on analyzing the meteoroIogical data
collected at weather stations and putting them in a form that is useful to building
designers. The key rneteorological parameters are wind speed, wind direction and rainfd
intensity. Rainfall intensity, as it is typicaüy measured in the field and presented in
weather reports, is defined as the volume of rainwater collected on the ground per unit
time per unit area, where the orientation of the collection area is parallel to the earth's
surface. Under calm wind conditions, raindrops travel dong vertical paths and, in theory,
do not directly impinge on to vertical building surfaces. However, when rainfall
coincides with a mean airfIow, the raindrops will follow paths having an angle to the
vertical (termed the driving-rain angle), owing to the force applied to them by the wind,
and impinge ont0 walls facing or partially facing in the upwind direction. RainfaiI carried
dong by the wind is referred to as wind-driven rain or driving-rain. Driving-rainfal1
intensity is defined as the volume of rainwater per unit t h e per unit area, where, in this
case, the orientation of the collection area is perpendicular to the earth's surface and
 facing in the upwind direction. The reference areas associated with rainfdl intensity and
driving-rainfall intensity are depicted in Fi,we 1- 1.

Whde dnving-rainfall intensity is an important meteorologicai parameter with

respect to rain penetration through vertical building surfaces, its measurement is not
cornmoniy made at standard meteorologicai stations. Some research facilities. however,
have developed special directional rain gauges to measure driving-rainfall intensity (for
example, Lacy, 1951; Rose and Farbrother, 1960; and Sankaran and Peterson, 1995b).

The two most common design parameters that have been developed fYom standard
rneteorolo~caidata for use in the design of rainproof building envelopes are the driving-
rain index and the dnving-rain wind pressure. The driving-rain index is the product of
mean wind speed and mean rainfall intensity over a cornmon time period. This product is
approximately proportional to the mean omni-directionai driving-rainfall intensity or, in
other words, the driving-rain index is proportional to the intensity of rainfaü crossing an
imaginary vertical surface facing the wind (see Appendix A). For exarnple, during a ten-
minute penod when the mean wind speed is 10 mk and the mean rainfail intensity is 2
mm/hr. you could expect roughly half the amount of driving-rain cornpared to a ten-
minute period when the mean wind speed and rainfail intensity are 20 mis and 2 rnrdhr or
10 mls and 4 rnm/hr. As the driving-rain index relates to the intensity of rainfall with
respect to vertical surfaces, it has found its application in the design of permeable
facades, since these types of wall systems are susceptible to rain penetration after
prolonged wetting through material saturation. The dnving-rain index has evolved in its
method of calculation over about the past thirty years or so. When detailed
meteorologicai data were not abundantly available, the index has been calculated as the
product of annuai mean wind speed and annual mean rainfall and used as a simple
indicator to the potential of driving-rain (Lacy and Shellard, 1962a; Boyd, 1963). More
recent studies utilize hourly data to predict extreme values of the surnrnation of hourly
dnving-rain indices over individual spells of rainfall for specified wind directions (Prior,
1985). The work descnbed by Pnor (1985) has been used in the developrnent of the
British Standard BS 8104 entitled Assessing the exposure of walls to wind-dnnvenruin
(British Standards Institution, 1992)-

The second meteorolo@cal parameter used in the design of rainproof building

envelopes is the driving-rain wind pressure. The driving-min wind pressure is an extreme
value dynarnic wind pressure derived from wind speed data associated with rainfail
intensities exceeding a specified threshold. For example, from a data set comprising
mean wind speed and mean rainfall intensity per ten-minute period, ten-minute mean
driving-rain wind pressures associated with a raidal1 threshold of 2 mmmi- can be denved
by considering in the extreme value analysis only the wind speeds coinciding with rainfail
intensities equd to or greater than 2 mm/hr. From a design standpoint, this conditional
extreme value dynamic wind pressure is relevant to the forrn of rain penetration caused by
pressure differences across openings in the building envelope. Openings in the building
envelope can include poorly sealed joints in the exterior finish, intentional wall vents
exposed to rainwater and gaps resuiting from excessive deflections in building envelope
components such as windows, doors and other fenestrations. Studies on driving-rain
wind pressures (or wind speeds) have been conducted over different parts of the world,
including Japan (Murakami et al., 1987), Canada (Welsh et ai., 1989), Australia (Choi,
l992b) and Singapore (Choi, 1994b). The work conducted by Welsh, Skinner and Morris
(1989) has been utilized in the Canadian Standard CAN/CSA-A440-Mg0 entitled
Windoivs (Canadian Standards Association, 1990) which gives procedures for designing
window systems to resist water leakage.

Several items are worth discussing about the driving-rain index. For a particular
time interval, the driving-rain index represents a quantity approximately proportional to
the volume of rainwater that will cross a unit area of imaginary vertical surface facing the
wind. The relating factor varies somewhat with rainfall intensity and, to a lesser extent,
with mean wind speed (see Appendix A). For a mean wind speed of 10 mls and a mean
rainfall intensity of 2 mm/hr, the driving-rahfall intensity is approximately 4 rnm/hr (this
assumes a proportionality constant of 0.2 dm). Now if a building is introduced such that
one of its walls is perpendicular to the upwind direction and if the influence of the
building on the airflow is neglected, the wall facing the wind will be irnpacted with
rainwater at a rate of 4 mrnfhr- In redity. of course, the building will force the air to
travel around it and in turn the air will impart forces to the raindrops such that the rauifall
intensity ont0 the walI will be reduced on the whole (as some drops will miss the building
altogether) and unevenly distributed over its surface. Edge regions of the wall will tend
to receive the most rainfail while central regions will tend to receive the least. Many
studies have verïfied this behavior including numerical approaches (Choi, 1991, l992a,
1993, 1994% 1994b, 1994c, 1995; Sankaran and Paterson, 1995a; Karagiozis and
Hadjisophocleous, 1995; Rodgers et ai., 1974), wind tunnel simulations (Inculet and
Surry, 1994; lnculet et ai., 1994) and full scale measurements (Lacy. 1964, 1965, 1977:
Schwarz and Frank, 1973; Couper, 1972; Ishizaki et al., 1970: Hens and Mohamed,
1994)-

The design rnethodology a v e n in the British Standard BS 8104 estimates the

rainfdl received by a verricd building wail in a one-hour period fiom the hourly driving-
rain index value, a factor of 0.2 s/m for estimating the unobstmcted mean driving-rainfall
intensity and a collection efficiency term which reflects the influence of the building flow
aerodynamics on the total wetting. In the above exarnple, the 4 mm/hr driving-rainfall
intensity would be reduced to 2.4 mm&r (i.e. a collection efficiency of 60 %), which can
be interpreted as the walI receiving an average of 2.4 liters per square meter of its area
during the one-hour period. Glancing wind angles are dedt with by considering only the
component of mean wind speed normal to the particular wall orientation in the
calculation of the driving-rain index. Further, the driving-min indices, which are derived
from b'airf~eld"wind speeds (open level terrain, 10 m height), are locally adjusted to the
maximum building height considering the terrain and topographical features present at the
site. The wetting estimation rnethodology does not consider the influences of either the
building geometry or the temporal variations in the wind and rainfall over an hour and
discounts any significance associated with the spatial variation of rainfall intensity over a
wall.
 The methodology outlined above reflects the construction practice and the climate
of the United Kingdom. That is. r a b penetrauon most ofien o c c m as a result of the
Iarge-scale, slow-rnoving mid-latitude cyclones that frequent the United Kingdom from
the Atlantic Ocean. These systerns, o r muitiple systems in a weather sequence, cm brïng
wet and windy weather to a particular location for up to several days and longer (Pnor,
1985). With masonry construction dominating many parts of the United Kingdom, a
primary cause of rain penetration during the prolonged spells of "bad" weather is waiI
saturation. This is reflected in the fact that the key design parameter used in the building
provisions is an estimate of the one in three year quantity of rainwater received by a wali
during a single spell of r a i n f d , with no regard given to the coincident wind loading on
the wall.

In contrast to the driving-rain index, the driving-rain wind pressure used in the
Canadian Standard C M S A - A 4 4 0 - M g 0 addresses a different form of rain penetration.
Narnely, pressure-driven water penetration through walls. As stated above, the driving-
rain wind pressure is an extreme value dynamic wind pressure associated with r a i n f d s
exceeding a specified threshold. Welsh, Skinner and Morris (1989) analyzed historical
weather data from 188 stations across Canada and constructed maps of the one in five
year and one in ten year drivinp-rain wind pressures associated with a rainfall threshold of
1.8 mrn/hr. The standard requires that the driving-rain wind pressure read from the map
(using the five- and ten-year values for residential and commercial buildings respectively)
is less than the window system's capacity to resist rain penetration as prescribed by a
standard water ùghtness test. The test involves applying a spatially uniform pressure drop
across the window system for four penods of five minutes each separated by one-minute
intervals of zero pressure while water is continuously sprayed ont0 the window. Tests are
repeated with a higher pressure until water penetration is observed and the capacity is
then chosen as the applied pressure of the last successful run (see Table 2.2 for test
pressure increments).
 The premise of using a rainfall threshold in the derivation of the dnving-rain wind
pressures is to iden- wind events d e n g which the windward facade will become
sufficientiy wet so as to provide an ample amount of water at window locations (for
example, along window sills) for leakage to be possible. The spatial and temporal
variations in the rainfd intensity impinging the particular envelope cornponent is likely
not very si,&ïcant in this context so long as water is present, whether it impinges
directiy or collects from surface flows, during the extreme wind ioading. Welsh, Skinner
and Morris (1989), through discussions with the technical cornmittee of the building
standard, assessed that a threshold of 1.8 m r n h is appropriate in this application.

Accepting that an ample arnount of water will be present at a particular window

location during the design event (Le. the clirnatological drïving-rain wind pressure). the
following factors dl ment consideration when detemiining the in situ pressure loading
that can be cornpared to the laboratory test conditions:

the upwind terrain chancteristics defining the vertical profiles of mean wind
speed and turbulence intensity,

the presence and proximity of nearby structures and topographical features.

the building geometry and the location of the window system on the building,
and

the building envelope air-leakage characteristics.

Items 1 and 2 couid be used to estimate a local value of the driving-rain wind pressure at
the roof height of the building for use in assessing an extemai pressure load at the
window location given Item 3 and an internai building pressure given Item 4. The net
pressure across the window modified by an appropriate gust factor could then be
compared to the pressure rating of the window to ensure a sufficient design. The
National Building Code of Canada includes provisions to perform this type of assessment
as it pertains to the design of cladding elements against pressure fclure.
 The rnethodology outIined in the Canadian Standard CAN/CSA-A~~O-LM~O
addresses the problem in a different manner than that described above. For "small
buildings", as defined in Part 9 of the National Building Code of Canada, the window
selection is based on a direct cornparison between the ciimatological drivinprain wind
pressure and the window pressure rating For "other buildings", as defined in Part 4 of
the National BuiIding Code of Canada, the climatologicd driving-rain wind pressure is to
be adjusted from 10 rn above ground to the building height using a 217'~power law
velocity profile (representative of open and flat terrain) and otherwise the same window
selection criteria is used. Considering the technologies currently in use for other building
envelope design applications in Canada and abroad, there is room for improvement in the
rnethodology currentiy in use in Canada for assessing the risk of pressure assisted rain
penetration through windows.

In order to be able to begin to improve on the window design cnteria outlined in

the Canadian Standard CAN/CSA-A440-M90, several uncertainties about the driving-
rain wind pressures themselves need to be addressed. In review of the analysis performed
by Welsh, Skinner and Moms (1989), two uncertainties stand out. First, the
representative averaging time of the driving-rain wind pressures is not readily apparent
owing to the use of non-continuous wind records in their analysis. The wind data, from
which conventional order statistics on the annuai extremes was performed, compnsed
nominal one-minute or two-minute mean speeds observed on the h o u . The authors
acknowledge this uncertainty. Secondly, no attempt was made to ensure standardized
wind records. That is, measurements made by an anemometer located on the rooftop of
an airport control tower, for example, were treated one and the same as measurements
made by an anernometer fixed to the ground on a ten-meter pole away from any
irnmediate obstructions. Clearly, the estimates of the driving-rain wind pressures are
subject to errors since they are currently interpreted in the building provisions as to be
representative of the standard meteorological exposure (Le. 10 rn above open and level
terrain).
 The impetus of this research is to address the above uncertainties in the driving-
rain wind pressures currentiy in use in the Canadian Standard CAN/CSA-A440-M90. It
is hoped that the outcome of this snidy wiil prompt a re-evaluation of the Canadian
driving-min wind pressures and, in turn,allow for advancements to be made in the design
of waterproof building envelopes.

1.2 Scope of Research

Chapter 2 reviews much of the research done to date regarding the development of
wind-driven rain parameters and describes, when applicable, tiow these climatological
statistics are used by the engineering cornmunity in the design of rainproof building
envelopes. Many of the studies described are outside the direct scope of this thesis but
are included as a potential information source for other researchers and as a matter of
completeness.

Chapter 3 describes the two meteorologicai data sets employed in this study and
the procedures used for quality assurance. For three stations across Canada, the frrst data
set includes continuous records of one-minute mean wind data for periods ranging from
about nine to sixteen months, The second data set comprises historical weather data
recorded at fourteen airports stretched across the southern portions of Canada. The
fourteen stations are part of the larger network of 426 weather reporting Canadian airports
whose data are maintained and archived by the Atmospheric Environment Service of
Environment Canada. The wind data recorded at the fourteen weather stations are
examined in terms of changes in the anemorneter's exposure over the penods of record
(which are mostiy from 19534992). From this andysis, portions of the record that are
suitable for use in developing wind related design parameters are found. One-hour
rainfall totals are continuously recorded at many of the weather stations using automatic
rain gauges. However, the automatic rain gauges are taken out of service during the co1d
season at many of the stations. This can be a significant deficiency of the weather records
for coastal stations as a substantial portion of the annual rainfail is experienced during the
Iate fa11 through early spring. The procedure used by Weish, Skinner and Moms (1989)
to estimate one-hour rainfaii amounts from meteorological data available year-round is
aiso evahated in Chapter 3-

In Chaptcr 4, the hi& frequency continuous wind data (one-minute means) are put
to use to explore the representative averaging times of extreme wind pressures derived
from wind records of hourly observed short-duration mean wind speeds. Wind speed
averaging times of one, two and ten minutes are considered and two statisticai approaches
for estimating extreme values are examined. A technique is deveioped for estimating
extreme one-hou mean wind pressures from these types of non-continuous wind records.

In Chapter 5, the drïving-rain wind pressures are estimated at the fourteen airport
sites in a systematic manner that highlights the influences of three andysis issues
applicable to the driving-rain wind pressures derived by Welsh, Skinner and Moms
( 1989). The issues are:

the errors associated with using wind measured over non-standard exposures,

the influence of using hourly observed one- or two-minute mean wind speeds
on the representative averaging time of the resulting extreme wind pressures,
and

the errors associated with using the estimated one-hour rauif.1 arnounts
compared to using the one-hour rainfalI measurements when available and the
estimates only as necessary.

The final driving-rain wind pressure estimates are compared with the estimates given by
Wekh, Skinner and Morris (1989) for the same fourteen stations-

Chapter 6 gives conclusions of the study and recommends areas for future study.
 Rainf" Intensity: I = Rainwater Volume/Area/Time
Driving-Rainfall Intensity: I,, = Ralnwater VolumdAredTirne

Figure 1.1 Orientation of reference area for rainfall intensity and dnving-rainfall
intensity
Chapter 2
Published Research

2.1 Introduction

Wind and rainfall measurernents made at standard meteorologïcal stations provide

a means for studying the CO-occurrenceof wind and rain. These standard data have been
used in different ways over the years for assessing geographicdly the relative severity of
wind-driven rain. This chapter reviews the different ways in which wind and rainfd data
have been employed and, when applicable, how results may relate to the degree of
exposure of buildings to rain penetration. Section 2.1 reviews general studies on the
severity of wind-dnven rain. Most of these studies have been performed in the United
Kingdom. Section 2.2 focuses on the studies involving extreme wind speeds during
rainfall.

2.2 Driving-Rain

hterest in wind-driven rain began from as eariy as the 1950's when Hoppestad
(1955) produced five maps of annual average driving-rain for Norway - one representing
total driving-min and the others representing driving-rain from each of the four cardinal
directions. The maps were developed by correlating measured vdues of driving-min
(which had been collected ;Ji free-standing cirivingrain gauges consisting of four vertical
apertures facing North, East, South and West) with simultaneous measured vdues of
wind speed, wind direction and rainfd at four locations in Norway. Hoppestad utilized
the relationship to evaluate annual driving-rain totals for the four cardinal directions at 70
locations throughout Norway.

Lacy and Shellard (1962a) consmicted a map showing the geographical variation
of the severity of dnving-rain over the British Isles. In the onset of their work, the rainfall
impinging a vertical building surface was shown to be proportional to the product of
rainfall and the component of wind speed perpendicdar to the building surface. For this,
a direct cornparison was made between measured values of rainfall dnven ont0 a building
wail in Glasgow and measured values of wind and rainfall at a nearby site. For each hour
in which rainfall occurred, the component of the mean wind speed perpendicular to the
wall was multiplied by the horizontal rainfall arnount and their daily sums were found to
be proportional to the corresponding daily catches of the wall-rnounted rain gauge. Based
on this result, Lacy and Shellard felt that values of annual mean rainfail multiplied by
annual mean wind speed during rainfall could serve as a simple index to compare the
severity of driving-rain between different locations. This proposed empirical extension is
vaiid provided one-hour rainfall totals and one-hour mean wind speeds are not temporally
correlated,

At the time of their study, wind speeds during rainfall were not widely available
and, as a result, overall average wind speeds were used to cornpute values of the index for
use in the map- This was rationaliz~dby showing that the ratio of annual mean wind
speed during rainfall to that of d l hours remained approximately constant across the
British Isles (ratios evaluated at three well separated locations varied €rom 1.20 to 1.40).
They ielt, therefore, that the contours denved with overall mean wind speeds would
produce a sirnila. picture to those derived with mean wind speeds during rainfall. The
term adopted for the product of annual mean wind speed and annual mean rainfall was
driving-rain index. To ensure the values were comparable, "basic" wind speeds (i-e.
representative of 10 m above ground in open and fîat surroundings) were employed. The
preparation of the map was accomplished by simply combining previously established
contour maps of annual mean wind speed and annual mean rainfall. The contours were
given in units of m% corresponding to wind speed in m/s and rainfall in m. The map is
shown in Figure 2.1 (this being a more detailed version with additional contours prepared
later by Lacy (1971) as described above). Driving-rain is shown to be most severe dong
the West coast of Scotland with index values in excess of 20 m2/s while values below 5
m2/s are typical d o n g the east coast and throughout the majority of Enpland. Three
exposure gradings, indicated on the map by the shaded areas, were suggested by Lacy and
Shellard (1962b) according to the index as follows: sheltered, < 3 rn2/s: moderaie, 3 to 7
m2/s; and heavy, > 7 m2/s. These roughiy divided the British Mes into areas
corresponding to different levels of building performance with respect to rain penetration.

Boyd (1963) prepared a similar rnap showing the distribution of the driving-rain
index across Canada. The map is shown in Figure 2.2. Contours were drawn from the
products of annuai mean wind speed and annual mean rainfall evaluated at 141 stations.
Index values larger than 5 m2/s occur in Pacific and Atlantic coastal regions only.
Vancouver Island is shown to have the largest degree of exposure to driving-min with
indices up to 13 &/S. The three exposure gradings descnbed above were also adopted in
this study and are indicated on the map.

Lacy and ShelIard noted that the dnving-rain index pertains to a vertical surface
which is always facing the wind. Also considered relevant was the wall orientations most
susceptible to driving-rain and how these varied from location to location and, further,
whether the critical directions coincided with the prevailing wind direction in a given
area. A further study was undertaken by Lacy and Shellard ( 1962a) to gain sorne insight
into these factors for 20 stations across the British Isles- The data available were ten-year
records of wind force, wind direction and present weather observed ihree or four urnes
daily depending on the station. The present weather information described the
precipitation intensity in broad categories of slight, moderate or heavy and the wind force
was given in terms of the Beaufort Scaie. At each location, the frequency of occurrence
was determined for the different combinations of wind force and precipitation class which
were then multiplied by a weighting factor approximately proportionai to the product of
mean wind speed and mean rainfail rate for the paaicular category. The weighted
frequencies were separately totaled for eight ranges of wind direction (centered on N, NE,
E, etc.) and then expressed as a percentage of the &-direction total. The ratios
approximated the portion of the driving-rain index attributable to winds from the different
directions. Aithough this analysis was only very approximate due to the limitations of the
data base, the results for three of the stations were in reasonable agreement with the
directional distributions derived directly from hourly instrumental observations of wind
and raïnfall over a ten-year period- The results indicated that buiiding walis facing the
prevaiiing wind direction in a &en area were not necessariiy the most exposed in terms
of driving-rain.

The pioneering work by Lacy and Shellard has served as a major reference for
research in the area of wind-driven min. A more detailed version of the driving-rain
index map for the British Mes was prepared by Lacy (1971) (see Figure 2.1). As the
indices were denved with "basic" mean wind speeds, Lacy proposed ,&delines for
locally adjusting the exposure grading obtained on the map for local site conditions which
may increase the "basic" wind speed. Adjustment rules were provided for sites near
coasts, sites on isolated hills and for high buildings relative to the local surroundings. A
conservative approach was thus taken where exposure gradings obtained from the map
could be changed Iocally only to a higher grade (Le- slight to moderate, slight to severe, or
rnoderate to severe) under specified conditions or combinations thereof. This work was
employed by the British Standards Institution ( 1973) in a publication entitled Walling
(PanI Brick and block rnasonry) as a general guideline for assessing exposure to wind-
driven rain.

Lacy (1971) aiso utilized hourly instrumental observations of wind and rainfall
recorded from the pied 1957 to 1966 at 22 stations across the British Ides to further
investigate the directional aspects of the annual driving-rain index. For this, annuai totds
of the product of hourly r a i n f d and coincident wind speed were deterrnined separately
for twelve directional sectors of wind and then averaged over the ten-year period. To
distinguish between the product of the annuai means (Le. the dnving-rain index) and the
annual total of hourly products, the latter is defined here as the simultaneous driving-rain
index ("simultaneous" indicating that only wind speeds dtuing rainfall are considered).
The results for each station were then surnmarized using a twelve-point compas rose,
each "petal" representing the simultaneous driving-rain index attributable to wind from
the indicated direction, and plotted on a rnap of the British Mes (see Figure 2.3). In
contrast to the previous study by Lacy and Shellard (1962a), the directional indices were
not normaiized by the total index of the particular location (this being done previously
since their absolute values were not considered reliable) so as to aUow cornparisons to be
made between stations. Results indicate that building walls facuig south through West are
likely to experience the most wetting, this being especially me dong the West coast, and
values of the total simultaneous dnving-rain index (sumation of ail twelve "petals") are
generaiiy larger dong the West coast. The latter observation is also indicated in the omni-
directionai rnap of driving-rain index shown in Figure 2.1.

Directional aspects of dnving-rain in Canada were studied by Morris (1975) in a

different marner. He suggested that rain penetration through building wails primarily
occurs during prolonged penods of rain (twelve hours or more) where the wind direction
remains approximately constant over its duration. Presumably, the fonn of rain
penetration considered in this study is that resulting from saturation of permeable facades.
For ten locations, using hourly wind and rainfali data available between 1953 and 1972,
ail such "storms" were identified for the eight cardinal wind directions and their duration
and mean wind speed were determined. Moms considered the rainfail intensity during
the "storrn" not an important factor so long as a sufficient quantity of rainwater was
provided to saturate the wall, although a reasonable minimum threshold was not set as a
cnteria for checking this. For each "storm", the duration (hr) was multiplied by the
square of the mean wind speed (km2&) and the annuai averages of this quantity,
referred to as the annual wall penetration index (krn2/hr), were determined for the eight
cardinal wind directions for aii ten stations. Moms considered the wind pressure during
the storm an important factor and therefore used the square of the wind speeds in the
index. Results are shown in Table 2.1. Clearly walls k i n g South are not subject to the
prolongd wetting events while for walIs facing Northeast and East the opposite is
consistently true for al1 10 stations. Maritime locations show high waii penetration
indices relative to the other locations and for a wide range of directions.
 Station Period Annuai indices ( * LOO krn'lhr)

Victoria, J3.C. 1953-1972 3 2334 611 O 13 24 15

Vancouver, B C 1953-1972 O 191
972 218 O O 6 LO
Calgary, Alta. 1953-1972 246 1526 26 O O 41 377
Winnipeg, Man. 1953-1972 302 208
114 85 O O 34 81
Toronto, Ont, 1953-1972 124 88 229 50 O 5 1 21
Montreal, Que. 1953-f972 141 399 44 151 O 78 37 16
Quebec City, Que. 1957-1966 13 959 761 O O 70 50 O
Halifax, N S 1953-1972 327 947 1474 226 O 103 15 35
Sydney, N S - 1953-1972 642 423 9 18 753 O 243 1 90
St.John's,Nfld- 1953-1972 1403 1350 815 749 O 696 127 528

Table 2.1 Annual wdl penetration indices for ten stations in Canada, from Morris
( 1975)

Robinson and Baker (1975) explored the directionai aspects of the driving-rain
index for 16 compass points using data recorded at the Toronto International Airport.
The data included the frequency of occurrence of wind for specified ranges of speed and
direction during rainfall for a sixteen-year period ending in 1968. The frequency of
occurrence of wind for 16 directions during rainfall is shown in Figure 2.4a dong side the
directional distribution of the simultaneous driving-rain index (expressed as a percentage
of the dl-direction total) shown in Figure 2.4b. The frequency of occurrence of wind
during al1 hours is aiso included in Figure 2.4~. Wind directions during rainfail are
shown to have trends different than those during ai1 hours.

The Building Research Establishment Report written by Lacy in 1976 provided a

large-scale map (1:625000) of the annual mean driving-rain index for the British Mes. It
was prepared similarly to those prepared by Lacy and Sheilard ( l962a) and Lacy (197 1)
with the exceptions that more recent wind and rainfall data were used and that an altitude
correction was applied to the "basic" mean wind speeds. The altitude correction accounts
for the generd increase in wind speed over large land masses. The report was introduced
as follows:
 "To meet the urgent need for a more precise detemination
of the driving-rain index at individual localities, a new
large-scale rnap of the m u a 1 mean index has been
prodziced, with proposed niles for adjrsting the 'rnap
vnl~ie'to allow for local topogruphic variation and terrain
roughness. These are intended tu give local vnl~iesof the
inde-r which correspond to the behnviour in practice of
cavily w a hfilled with insulating foam- ", Incy ( 1976)

The proposed guidelines for iocally adjusting the indices taken from the map were to a
large extent more thorough than those given by Lacy (1971). Rules were provided to
adjust the index numerically, as opposed to simpiy rnodifying the exposure gading, and
accounted for non-level terrain, surface roughness, altitude and building height. With this
new system of corrections, Lacy re-defined the limits of the three exposure gradings (Le.
sheltered, < 3 rn2/s; moderate, 3 to 7 m%; and heavy, > 7 rn2/s) to correspond with local
index values. This was done by considering a house in a suburban environment with a
7.5 rn high gable-end wall as being the most comrnon situation and applying the
appropriate corrections to the previous limits of 3 and 7 m2/s to obtain the new limits of
1.3 and 3.1 m2/s. Consider, for exarnple, a large city in a flat part of the country where
the dnving-rain index read from the rnap has a value of 4 m2/s. A house ( 5 m high)
located in the center of the city would be classified as having a "sheltered exposure
(local index = 1.2 rn2/s) while a simiiar house located in open farmiand some few
kilometers from the city would be classified as having a "moderate" exposure (local index
= 2.9 m2/s). The more conservative approach outlined by Lacy (1971) would have
classified both houses as having a "moderate" exposure.

This work was intended to provide a more practical use of the index as it allowed
designers to compare a location where the performance of a wall design was known to the
location of a proposed building. Lacy was careful to outiine the type of wall whose
susceptibility to rain penetration could be related to the index; narnely, cavity walls with
an outer layer made of a porous material. Their performance largely relates to the
quantity of rainwater reaching the outer surface, since the more rainwater the more likely
the outer absorbent wall will become saturated and result in water present dong the inside
face. Lacy proposed that the adjusted values of the index be used specificdly to assess
whether cavity-fil1 is to be employed in such a wall design, the significance k i n g that
cavity-fill may provide a "bridge" for water to cross the cavity and produce undesirable
darnpness of the inner layer (see, for example, Newman (1988) where potential routes of
rain penetration across masonry cavity walls have been outiined for three types of
insulation fiII). This work was utilized by the British Standards Institution (1978) in a
publication entitled Thennal insulation of cavity waiis (with masonry inner and outer
Zenves) b y j Z i n g with urea-fomaldehyde foarn.

The ornni-directional maps of driving-rain index descnbed to this point are based
on the product of annual mean rainfdl and annual mean wind speed (dihours). Caton of
the UK Meteorological Office (whose work was reported by Prior (1982) and M e r
described by Pnor (1985)) analyzed the simuitaneous driving-rain index roses prepared
by Lacy (1971) to compare the total simultaneous index with the conventional dnving-
rain index used in the then current national map of the British Mes. He found that the
ratio of the former to the latter ranged from 0.8 1 to 1.54 at 22 locations (the locations are
those seen in Figure 2.3). The ratio in effect gives the ratio of mean wind speed during
rainfall to that of al1 hours, thus, values Iarger than 1-00 (which was the case for 18 of the
22 stations) indicate mean wind speeds during rainfdl to be higher. The more significant
result was the variabiIity in the ratio, which indicated that the national map presented a
"distorted" picture of the relative severity of driving-rain across the country. Caton noted,
however, that the overall characteristics of the variations were similar for both annual
indices. Caton felt that improvements could be made to the then current representation of
the annual driving-rain index through the use of hourly data so consideration would only
be given to the wind speeds during rainfall and, in addition. the directional aspects could
also be assessed more generally. His work is now described.

At the onset of Caton's work, one-hour mean wind velocities and one-hour
ninfall amounts were available at 20 UK airport stations over the period 1959 to 1973.
For twe1ve wall orientations, Caton determined annual totals of hourly PVcosû values
where P is rainfall, V i s rnean wind speed and 8 is the deviation of the mean wind
direction frorn the normal of the wdI orientation considered, Values of 8 iess than 90"
were only used and thus V cos 6 represents the component of wind speed approachîng the
given watt. The simultaneous driving-rain index was taken as the average of the 15
annuai totals, which resulted in twelve directional indices for each of the 20 stations. At
an additional 32 stations over the same period, one-hour mean wind velocities were
available together with annuai rainfall and present weather observed every three hours
(these, again, indicating precipitation intensity in categories of slight, moderate or heavy).
In order to simulate hourly rainfalls, use was made of the 20 stations initidly andyzed,
which also recorded present weather on a bee-hourly basis- Each present weather
observation made in the 15-year record was associated with the correspondhg measured
three-hour rainfall amount and these rainfalls were then averaged separately for each
present weather category and used as a calibration factor. This procedure was performed
separately at al1 20 stations for different seasons and wind directions. For the 32
additional stations, the three-hou penod associated with each present weather
observation was allotted the appropriate three-hour "calibrated" rainfall arnount (a third
given to each hour) from the nearest topographically sirnilar "calibrated" station. Caton
then used the approximated hourly minfails to evaluate the simultaneous index for the 12
wall orientations, as described above, together with total annuai rainfall. The directional
indices were then multiplied by the ratio of measured annual mean rainfall to that
approxirnated fiom the present weather code. Prior ( 1985) later showed that the indices
derived frorn hourly wind and rainfall data from 2974 to 198 1 for five of the stations were
within about 15 % of those estimated by Caton.

Economic reasons necessitated that a single map be used to present the results of
al1 twelve wail orientations. As a guide for interpolation, Caton assumed that the derived
indices were proportional to the product of mean annual rainfall and wind speed exceeded
25 5% of the time. This percentile value was chosen since it roughly equals 1.4 times the
overail mean wind speed and thus fell in the range of the ratios discussed above
(established UK maps were available for both quantities). Geographicai variations
applicable to ail directions were fust established by preparing separate maps for each waH
orientation showing the directional index relative to a standard level, The UK was
divided into 28 regions, each having at least one meteorologicai station. and a map
showing the geographical corrections were prepared for each. The regional maps
comprised sub-regions that roughly exhibited uniform directional distributions and thus a
single simultaneous index rose was provided for each sub-region. An exarnple of a
regional rnap is shown in Fiawe 2.5. The dashed lines indicate sub-regional boundaries
(this particular map having five sub-regions - PB 1 through PB5) and solid lines separate
the various geographical corrections. Taking a West-facing wall in Boston, for example,
the sub-region is indicated as PB 1 and its driving-rain rose (left side of Figure 2.5) shows
an index of 6 units. The geographical correction indicated on the map for Boston is + 1
unit, thus the driving-rain index for a West-facing wall in Boston becornes 7 units or 1-12
m2/s. A logarithmic scale was used so the corrections could simply be added or
subtracted and to avoid decirnd vaIues in the map.

In addition to preparing irnproved (directionai) annual driving-rain indices, a

second objective of Caton was to derive annual extreme driving-rain indices associated
with individual spells of rainfall. This statistic was considered more appropriate for
assessing the risk of rain penetration and Caton suspected that it might not be
proportional to the annual rnean index. Caton's original work on the driving-rain speIl
index was slightly rnodified by Prior (1985) and the latter is presented here. The
definition adopted for a spell of driving-rain was a penod less than 96 hours where the
summation of hourly EPV cos 0 vdues exceeded a pre-defined threshold (ex. 0.012 m2/s)
for a given wall orientation together with dl successive periods of no more than 96 hours
where the threshold was again exceeded for the sarne wall orientation. The variable & is
a collection eficiency term that accounts for the reduction in the total wetting of a wall
caused by raindrops being deflected by the wind to miss the building. A spell of driving-
rain was thus bounded by periods of 96 hours where the threshold was not exceeded and
the driving-rain spell index was determined as the sum of @Vcose vaiues over the spell.
The 96-hour period was considered appropriate to capture al1 the depressions in a weather
sequence. Based on results kom various full scale studies (as those descnbed by Lacy
1965, 1977), E was taken to be a function of perpendicular wind speed as follows:
E = 0 2 - (V cos6 - 2), O I E 5 0.6,where V is to be specified in m/s- Pnor determined al1
driving-rain spells at 16 UK sites over a 15 or 23 year penod for 12 wall orientations and
then used a graphical technique to predict the one-, three- and ten-year return period
values. The three-year return period spell indices were mapped and corrections were
provided to convert these to one- or ten-year r e m period values. The mapping was
achieved by developing a relationship between the annual mean index and the one in
ihree year spell index considering both geographicai and directional variations. Spell
index roses were prepared for each sub-region (shown on the right side of Fiapure 2.5) and
it was found possible to use the same geographical corrections as those used for the
annuai mean index. A different logarithmic scale was used since the spell indices were
significantly smailer. Considering Boston again as an exarnple. a West facing wall is
shown to have a one in three year driving-rain spell index of 15 + 1 units or 0.089 m2/s.

Prior considered the annuai mean indices "relevant to the weathering and staining
of building facades" and considered the three-year return period spell indices "usehl for
assessing the risk of rain penetration through masonry wails and building features". This
work was utilized by the British Standards Institution (1984) in the Draft for
Development Methods for assessing exposure tu wind-driven min which included rules
for locally adjusting the values read from the map for terrain roughness and topography.
This Iater developed into the British Standard Code of Practice Assessing rhe exposure of
~vnilstu cvind-driven rain (British Standards Institution, 1992).

2.3 Extreme Wind Speeds During Rainfall

The ftrst study of extreme wind speeds during rainfall, to the author's knowledge,
was reported by Murakami, Iwasa, Monkawa and Chino in 1987. Data from six
meteorological stations in Japan (located at Sapporo, Sendai, Tokyo, Nagoya, Osaka and
Fukuoka) over a twenty year period ending in 1980 were used to estimate annual extreme
wioc: speeds o c c d n g during rainfalls exceeding selected threshold rainfall rates. The
data base comprised ten-minute average wind speeds recorded every one or three hours,
one-hour precipitation totals recorded every hour and daily maximum values of both the
above.

Due to the variable averaging periods and recording rates of the data, Murakarni et
al. made the hourly precipitation amounts correspond to the largest ten-minute average
wind speed recorded within 30 or 60 minutes of the precipitation occurrence for wind
speeds recorded every one or three hours respectively. As an example, a six hour
segment of data during which precipitation occurred in four consecutive hours is
illustrated in Figure 2.6. Figure 2.6a depicts wind speeds recorded every one hour and
Figure 2.6b every three hours. The wind speeds, V, and the precipitation totals, P, are
subscnpted with their time of observation and the averaging periods are approximately
indicated by the bar heights. The arrows in the illustration indicate the ten-minute
average wind speeds which fail within the necessary time frame of the particular one-hour
precipitation arnount. Refemng to Figure 2,6a, PI? would have been made to correspond
to the largest wind speed observed between 10:30 and 1230 (Le. the iarger of VII and
Vl2), while in Figure Lob, P l ? would have been made to correspond to the largest wind
speed observed between LO:OO and 13330 (Le. the larger of Vlo and V13). The daily
maximum ten-minute average wind speed (in this example averaged over about 7:35 and
7:45 and denoted as V,) would have been made to correspond to P9 for both of the wind
speed recording rates since it would be larger than the other wind speeds considered in
either case. In addition to these, each daily maximum one-hour precipitation total, which
may have occurred over any continuous one-hour period, was also made to correspond to
a ten-minute average wind speed according to the sarne requirements.

Resulting wind speeds were then sorted based on their associated one-hour
precipitation total into the following categories: 1 5, 7, 11, 21, 31, 41 and 51 mm.
Annuai extremes were extracted from the data in each precipitation category and
converted to wind speeds at a height of 10 m for d l six locations, Murakami et al. used
the series of annual maximum wind speeds to estirnate the parameters of the Type4
extreme value distribution, wtiich has the following cumulative f o m ;

where rr is the mode of the distribution and 1/ a is a measure of the dispersion. Solving
for V in Equation 3.1 gkes the following Linear form;

in which the reduced variate, y, is given by:

The cumulative probabilities were approximated using;

where V', is the mth largest annuai extreme wind speed and M is the totai number of years
in which the annual extremes were extracted. The mode and dispersion were estimated
for each precipitation category based on the least squares fit of the data in the form shown
in Equation 2.2.

Results for the Tokyo station are shown in Figure 2.7a where the estimated
regression iines have been plotted for each precipitation threshold category. The plot
indicates physical impossibilities when a line representing a certain precipitation
threshold yields a higher annual extreme wind speed than a line representing a lower
precipitation threshold at an equai probability level. As an example, the annuai
maximum wind speeds for return periods longer than about 50 years are shown to be
higher during hourly precipitations 2 3 1 mm than during hourly precipitations h 21 mm.
This should not be possible since the wind speeds experienced during the higher
precipitation threshold would ais0 be experienced during the Iower precipitation threshold
and, therefore, the annual extreme wind speeds would have been as ieast as high in the
latter as they were in the former.

To rectie this problem, Murakami et al. employed a new mode1 in which the
annual extreme wind speeds were assumed to be proportional to both the reduced variate
and the one-hour precipitation threshold, Pk. The relationship is;

where Co, Ci and C2 are constants- In cornparison to the Type-1 distribution in the form
shown in Equation 3.2, Co+C,Ph,is equivdent to the mode and Ci to the dispersion, the
latter now being equal for all precipitation thresholds, thus eliminating the anomaly
shown in the previous simple regession andysis. The least squares criterion was used to
estimate the mode1 constants for each station and the results for Tokyo are shown in
Figure 2.7b- Murakami et al. found that the multiple correlation coefficient exceeded
0.95 at d l six locations.

Welsh, Skinner and Morris (1989) studied annual extreme wind pressures during
rainfall for Canada. Available data from 188 meteorological stations, mosdy from 1957
to 1985, were used to predict annual extrerne wind pressures dunng rainfalls exceeding
threshold rates of 1.8, 3.0 and 5.1 m r n h . These have been given the term driving-rain
wind pressures (DRWPs). The data base included one-minute average wind speeds
recorded hourly (or two-minute averages beginning in 1985), six-hour precipitation totals
recorded four times daily and hourly notes regarding precipitation type (rain, rain
showers, freezing min, snow, etc.) and intensity (light, 4 2.5 mrn/hr: moderate, 2.6 to 7.5
mm/hr; and heavy, 2 7.6 mm/hr). The six-hou precipitation totals were used to estimate
one-hour average rainfall rates based on the hourly notes and typical relative precipitation
rates of the different precipitation types and intensities. The simultaneous wind speed for
a particular one-hour rainfdl was taken as the one- or two-minute average wind speed
obsenred at the beginning of that hour.
 Three series of annual maximum wind speeds were extracted at each station from
the hours in which the rainfalls exceeded the three chosen threshold rates and then
converted to wind pressures. The method of moments was used to estimate the
parameters of the Type-1 extreme value distribution for each series and annual maximum
wind pressures were then evaluated for retum periods of 2, 5, 10 and 30 years.

The DRWPs associated with rainidls exceeding 1.8 mm/hr are currentiy used in
the Canadian Standards Association CANKSA-A44O-Mg0 as a guide for selecting the
appropriate performance Ievel of windows with regard to water tightness. The
performance level is based on a standard test which cails for a constant pressure applied
for four consecutive five minute penods, separated by one-minute intervals of zero
pressure, while water is continuously sprayed ont0 the outside surface. The test pressure
is incremented as showo in Table 2.2 until water penetration occurs and the window
rating is then chosen according to the applied pressure of the last successful nin. Five-
and ten-year return period DRWPs, applicable for residential and commercial buildings
respectively, are directly cornpared with the test pressures in order to select the
appropriate performance level of windows. Welsh et al. expanded the available data for
use in the cornparison by plotting the results of the five- and ten-year return penod
DRWPs frorn the 188 Canadian sites on maps and drawing in contours, from which,
suitable values for 637 sites have been codified. The nationd map of ten-year return
period DRWPs is shown in Figure 2.8. Values taken from the map (or from the data
tables) require adjustment for buildings higher than 10 m above the ground as follows:

design DRWP = reference DRWP - (building heightIl0 m)'" (2-6)

A 40 m high commercial building in London, for example, should have windows with at
least a B4 rating. The logic is as follows: the ten-year retum period reference DRWP in
London at 10 rn is 220 Pa which results in a design DRWP at 40 m of (220) - (40/10)'" =
330 Pa. In contrat, the test pressure associated with the B4 rating is 400 Pa and is the
firsst vdue larger than that required.
 Window rating Pressure differential, Pa
For use in small buildings For use in other buildings
StorrIl - O
l3L B1 150
B2 B2 300
B3 B3 250
- B4 400
- BS 500
- B6 600
- B7 700

Table 2.3 Window ratings and associated standard test pressures, from Canadian
Standards Association CAN/CSA-A4440-M90

Choi (I992b) analyzed annuai maximum wind speeds from four Australian
stations located in Sydney, Mascot, Richmond and Bankstown. The available record
lengths dated back to 1913 for the Sydney station, 1930 for the Mascot station and 1968
for both the Richmond and Bankstown stations. The wind speed records provided ten-
minute average values recorded every three hours and the rainfall records gave
cumulative amounts at time intervals of at least one hour and more frequently during
"heavy" periods of rainfall, One-hour average rainfall intensities were evaluated and
made to coincide with an appropriate ten-minute average wind speed (no hrther
information was provided in the report). Series of annual maximum wind speeds were
then assembled for each station considering al1 hours and those hours during which the
average rainfall intensity matched or exceeded the following threshold values: 10, 20. 30,
40 and 50 rnmh.

Initially, each data set was fitted separately to the Type-I extreme value
distribution. The resulting regression lines (Le. V plotted as a hnction of y) were not
pardel which indicates the contradiction discussed earlier when the lines cross one
another. As a result of this, Choi adopted the mode1 used by Murakami et ai. (Le-
Equation 2.5) to produce a series of paralle1 straight tines with different intercepts to
represent the annual extreme wind speeds of each data set. It was found that the data
poorly fit the resulting muItiple regression lines and, in addition, it was observed that the
data formed curves with slopes that decreased with increasing values of the reduced
variate. This prornpted Choi to use the Type-III extreme value distribution which is
suitable for a random variabte that is iimîted by an upper bound, as was indicated by the
flattening of the curves. The Type-III cumulative distribution function is;

(:I:T].
F ( V ) = exp - - Vslv

where k, c and ,v are constants. The constants were evaluated separately for each data set
using a ciwi-linear curve fitting technique and the results from the Mascot station are
s h o w in Fieme 2.9. Choi found that the data were well represented by the Type-III
distribution,

More recentiy, Choi (1994b) studied annual extreme wind speeds at a site located
in the east-central portion of Singapore Island. The available data were used to consmct
simultaneous pairs of hourly mean wind speed and hourly rainfall intensity. The annual
extreme wind speeds were extracted for hourly rainfaii thresholds ranging from 2 5
rnrn/hr to 2 110 rnm/hr together with the annual extremes based on a i l hours. The series
of wind speeds again indicated curved lines when plotted with V a s the abscissa and y as
the ordinate. Based on this observation, Choi fitted the square of the wind speeds to the
Type-I extreme value distribution and converted the resulting extremes to wind speeds
(see Figure 2.10). Annual extreme values of V ' as opposed to V have been shown to
converge much quicker to the Type-I asymptote due to the difference in the form of the
upper tails of the parent distributions (Cook, 1985).

A common feature seen in the four studies reviewed in this section is that the
wind data available for developing statistics on extreme wind speeds during rainfdl were
non-continuous observations. The frequency of observation was either one hour or three
hours, while the averaping times ranged from one to ten minutes. Since each of the
studies employed conventional order statistics on the observed annuai extremes, the
representative averaging times of the resulting extreme value estimates are not readily
apparent but certainly lower than that over which the wind speed observations were made.
This problem is often avoided when derïving overall extreme wind speeds since use c m
be made of the observed daily peak speeds (usually gusts) that are often archived in the
meteorologicd records maintained at airports. The use of non-continuous wind data,
which is the form most commonly available in the weather records maintained at morts,
for developing extremes is partiy the impenis for this research.
Figure 2.1 Annual mean dnving-raùi index (m2/s) for the British Mes, frorn Lacy
(1971)
Figure 2.3 Twelve-point compas roses showing annual mean simultaneous ciriving-
rain index (m2/s) for 22 locations ùi the British Lstes, fiom Lacy (197 1)
=E
en-
-- 3
3 O
'CI=
 /one-hour
; ten-minute
4
1 one-hou ten-minute
i precipitation average ; precipitation average
j total wind speed 1 total wind speed
hour MC hour 1
7 . 7 .

Figure 2.6 Iitustration of the correspondence between precipitation and wind speed
data used by Murakami et al. (1987) in the case of a) wind speeds
recorded every one hour and b) wind speeds recorded every three hours
 r e t u r n period (years)
2 5 10 20 50 100 200 500
1 I l l I I 1 I

1
altype-1 extreme valuedistribution
P13lmm

-2 -1 O 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
reduced variate, y

return period (years)

2 5 10 20 50 IO0 200 500

1 b) mode1 s h o w n in E a u a t i o n 2.5

a
a
al
g 20-
u
C
.C.

E
e,
L
4 10-
a PZ21mm
-.
ta ~ r 3 1 m r n
3
C
C
@s P 2 51 mm
O I 1 l I I I I
-2 -1 O L 2 3 4 5 6 7
reduced variate. y

Figure 2.7 Annual extreme wind speeds (mk) during rainfaii for Tokyo based on a)
the Type4 extreme value distribution and b) Equation 2.5, after Murakami
et al. (1987)
 r e t u r n period (years)
2 5 10 20 50 100
I I I I
30

i
& ~ e - I I I e x t r e m e value distribution

reduced variate, y

Figure 2.9 Annual extreme wind speeds ( d s ) during r a i n f d for Mascot based on the
Type-III extreme value distribution, afier Choi (1992)
 return period (years)

t y ~ e - le x t r e m e value distribution w i t h v2

I I i l

-2 -1 O 1 2 3 4
reduced variate, y

Figure 2-10 Annual extrerne wind speeds ( d s ) d u ~ rainfail

g for Singapore based on
',
the Type4 extreme value distribution with V after Choi (1 994)
Chapter 3
Description of the Meteorological Data

3.1 Introduction

This chapter descnbes the meteorological data employed in this study and the
procedures used for their quality assurance.

The Atmospheric Environment Service (AES) of Environment Canada Iocated in

Downsview, Ontario provided two databases for use in this research. The first was
provided by the Test and Evaiuation Section of the Technology Division and comprises
wind and precipitation data rccorded each minute for two sites and wind data recorded at
the same frequency for an additional site. This database will be referred to as the one-
minute database and is described in Section 3.3. The second database was extracted frorn
the Digital Archive of Canadian Climatological Data rnaintained by AES and includes 40
years of hourly wind and rainfall information for fourteen stations. These data are
described in Section 3.3 and will be referred to as the one-hour database.

3.2 One-Minute Database

The Test and Evduation Section of AES currently record meteorological data at a
one-minute frequency at several stations in Canada. The data have been used to study the
effects of king on the performance of a variety of commercially available anemorneters
(Redekopp, 1994). In the present study, meteorological data h-orn three of the Canadian
sites have been used. Table 3.1 Lists the site locations together wiih their record periods
and the type of meteorological data available. Figure 3.1 shows the site locations on a
map of Canada.
Location Record period vai il able data
Start End Duration Wind Precipitation
Brevoort 1, Jan, 27/94 Nov. 06/94 9.4 months X
St. John's Jan. 0 1/94 Apr. 30/95 16 months X X
Downsview Jan. 0 1/94 Nov, 27/94 10.9 months X X

Table 3.1 Station information of the one-minute database

The meteorological data were remrded each minute and describe the weather
during the one-minute penod preceding the time of observation. The wind data comprise
the following:

1. rnean wind speed,

2. mean wind direction and

3. peak f'ïve-second p s t speed.

The peak gust for a particuiar one-minute penod is the largest of the twelve five-second
rnean wind speeds (i.e. averaged from O to 5 seconds, 5 to 10 seconds. etc.) as opposed to
being the largest mean speed during any continuous five-second period within the minute.
The precipitation data include:

1. mean precipitation intensity and

2. precipitation type.

In addition to these data, the air temperature was also recorded at St. John's and
Downsview during the minutes precipitation occurred. The mean wind speed, wind
direction and precipitation intensity were di averaged over the fuIl minute.

The wind data were recorded with eleven anemometers in total for ail three
stations and of these four different models were used:

1- AES 78D anemometer (78D),

 2. Hydro-Tech ice-resistant anemometer (Hydrotech),

3. Rosemount ice-resistant anemometer (Rosemount) and

4. Metrex Instruments de-iceable mernometer (Dragsphere).

The 78D comprises a direction vane and a three-cup rotor speed sensor. Based on pre-
defrned cdibrations, wind speeds are deterrnined from the number of revolutions
experienced by the cupwheel. The Hydrotech also consists of a rotor anemometer (six
radial cups) and direction vane. The Hydrotech sensors are elecuically heated and thus
suited for colder climates where exposed rneteorological instruments are susceptible to
ice accretion. The remaining two anemometers listed above are also ice-resistant. The
Rosemount is a pressure anemometer that measures mean dynamic pressures in both the
North-South and East-West directions from which corresponding wind velocities are
caiculated. The Dragsphere operates on the force-balance principle where a vertical shaft
is free to pivot about its center of gravity in the two orthogonal directions and has
attached to it a sphere openly exposed to the wind. The motion of the lower end of the
sh&, resulting from wind-induced drag force applied to the sphere, triggers an intemal
mechanism that rapidy generates balancing forces to oppose the motion. The measured
forces are used to calculate a resultant wind vector.

The precipitation data were measured using a s m d l Doppler radar system

developed by AES known as the Precipitation Occurrence Sensor System (POSS) and is
descnbed in detail by Sheppard and Wu (1985). This automated system measures the
Doppler velocity spectrum of scatterers in a smaU volume of air immediately above the
sensor from which the spectral mode and the spectral density are used to determine
precipitation type and intensity respectively. A photograph of the POSS is shown in
Figure 3 2 Sheppard (1990) compared POSS rainfdl measurements with measurements
made by two conventional gauges: a tipping bucket and a Belfort Weighing Rain Gauge-
For a seven-hour period of rainfall in King City, Ontario, ten-minute average rainfall rates
measured with the POSS were found to be in reasonable ageement with those measured
by the conventiooal gauges; the differences being of the same order as those exhibited
between the two conventional gauges. The total rainfali measured in the seven-hou
period was 22.2 mm, 22.3 mm and 20.1 mm for the POSS, tipping bucket and Belfort
Weighing Rain Gauge respectively.

The POSS divides precipitation type into one of the foilowing categories:

2. rain,

3. snow,

5. precipitation.

When the requirements of the fvst four categones are not met, category 5 is indicated.
This category may represent periods when the precipitation comprised a mixture of both
liquid and frozen States. Another possibility is that the Doppler radar was erroneously
stimulated and, for exarnple, the signal was generated by the passage of debris or by
human activity in close proximity to the equipment. The POSS is aiso instrumented to
measure air temperature. In the present database, air temperatures were available during
the minutes precipitation was detected.

The next three sub-sections describe the data for each individual station in tenns
of availability and quality. The procedures used to develop a single wind record from the
data of ail available anemometers at a particular site are ouùined.

3.2.1 Brevoort Island Station

Brevoort Island is located in the Northwest Territories just off the Coast of Baffin
Island at approximately 63"N latitude and 64"W longitude (see Figure 3.1). A
photograph of the site is provided in Fi,we 3.3 where the topography of the surrounding
terrain is shown to be moderately sloped and otherwise generally level. The wind
instruments are shown to be openly exposed to the wind from ail directions.

The database for Brevoort Island Station comprises measurements of wind data
fiom four instruments. Refemng to Figure 3 3 , these include a Hydrotech anemometer
(direction sensor lower lefi and speed sensor lower right), a Dragsphere anemometer
(rniddle left), a Rosemount anemometer (rniddle right) and a 78D anemometer
(background). The instrument Iocated at the top of the pole in the foreground is a U2A
anemometer and its measurements were not part of the database used in the present study.
The 78D memorneter is fixed to a pole 10 m above gound and is roughly 50 m from the
other instruments. The Dragsphere and the Rosemount anemometers are approxirnately 4
rn above ground level and the Hydrotech sensor is roughly 1 m lower. The logging
equipment comprises a single timer and thus the measurements from al1 four instruments
were simultaneous,

The relative completeness of the four wind records over the period of observation
is shown in Table 3.2. The Dragsphere anemometer was not functioning properly &ter
the original installation and it was not until towards the end of A u p s t that the necessary
repairs were made. The Hydrotech anemometer expenenced technical problems for about
a four-month stretch beginning in late April resulting in a loss of more than 40 % of its
data. The wind records of the remaining two anemometers are more than 90 % complete.
The last row in Table 3.2 shows the maximum attainable level of completeness if the data
recorded by each instrument were considered interchangeable.

Liemorneter Available winddata

78D 97.0 9%
Rosemount 91.5 %
Hydrotech 57.5 %
Dragspbere 26.4 %
at least one of the above 97.1 %

Table 3.3 Available one-minute wind data at Brevoort Island Station during the
period of Jan. 27/94 to Nov. 06/94
 As there are up to four wind observations for each minute, it was necessay to
decide which data would be used to construct a single time senes. An important
consideration was to minimize the arnount of missing data while at the same time it was
desirable to use data from a single instrument so as to have a wind record which is
representative of uniform conditions - i.e. a constant height, location and instrument
calibration, Refemng to Table 3.2, data from the 78D anemometer alone provides a time
history which is 97.0 % complete, compared to the maximum of 97.1 % when d l four
instruments are considered, and thus adheres to the above stipulations. However, another
important consideration was the quality of the data. In Brevoort Island the winters are
typically long and cold and the summers short and cool. Thus, for a large portion of the
year exposed anemometers are susceptible to ice accretion. The Rosemount, Hydrotech
and Dragsphere anemorneters are designed to prevent ice buildup through interna1 heating
and therefore are more suited, in cornparison to the 78D anemometer, for colder climates
such as that of Brevoort Island.

To assess whether the performance of the 78D anernometer was adversely affected
by ice accretion and, at the sarne time, to obtain an overall picture of the relative wind
speeds recorded by the four instruments, one-hour mean wind speeds were calculated and
plotted on similar axes. Figure 3.4 shows the plot for the month of September (note that
the plotting algorithm discontinued lines when data were not available - i.e- data were
absent from al1 instruments for a period of severd hours during the last day of the month).
For roughly the last ten and a h d f days and for several shorter penods earlier in the
month, the 78D anemometer showed Lttie to no wind while the speeds measured by the
three ice-resistant sensors remained sia~ficantlyhigher. The 78D anemometer did not
report wind speeds larger than O d s until roughly one week into October. This type of
behavior was observed in eight of the eleven months. Redekopp (1994) analyzed the
sarne wind data up to mid-June together with data frorn two ice accretion sensors. It was
found that during "icing conditions" the 78D anemometer would significantly under-
report the wind speed compared to the other instruments and often stop running al1
together. To avoid the difficult task of detennining which perïods the 78D anemometer
was affected by icing, it was decided to onIy use the data from the ice-resistant sensors.

The Rosemount data, being the most complete of the ice-resistant anemometers,
were chosen for the wind record at Brevoort Island Station. The t h e history is 9 1.5 %
complete- During the periods when data were not available from the Rosemount sensor
(excluding the times when al1 four instruments were not functioning), data from the
Hydrotech anemometer were present and utilized to increase the compteteness of the time
history to the maximum level of 97.1 96- The Rosemount and Hydrotech anemometers
are fixed to the s m e pole at approximately 4 and 3 rn above ground level respectively
(see Fiapre 3.3). Provided the instruments were equally calibrated, the Rosemount wind
speeds should, on average, be marginally higher than the Hydrotech wind speeds based on
their relative heights. An increase of 4 to 5 % c m be expected if a power law profide is
assumed with an exponent of 0.15; this exponent being representative of open country
terrain. Table 3.3 shows the average and standard deviation of the difference in
corresponding measured one-minute mean wind speeds (Rosemount speed - Hydrotech
speed) for seven wind speed and four wind direction categories based on the Hydrotech
data The number of observations in each category is also shown.

The first row of data in Table 3.3 shows that when the Hydrotech memorneter
indicated no wind the Rosemount anernometer indicated. on average, a wind speed of
1.76 d s . This is likely a result of the wind speed threshold associated with overcoming
the frictionai forces in the Hydrotech rotor anernometer to initiate rotation. For lighter
winds (5 10 d s ) , as indicated by the Hydrotech data, the mean speed differences show
the Rosernount anemometer to indicate higher wind speeds and as the winds become
stronger, again as indicated by the Hydrotech data, the opposite is shown to be
increasingly m e . These resuits s u g e s t that simple ratio relating the two wind speeds
may not be appropriate. It is unknown to the author as to the reason(s) for this apparent
trend since detaiied information on the calibration of both wind instruments was not
available and thus no explanation is offered. It is, however, noted that Redekopp (1994)
d s o found that the Hydrotech anemometer at Brevoort Island under-predicted the wind
speed during "Light winds" by comparïng measurements with the 78D anemometer. No
trends in the relative measured wind speeds appear to be associated with wind direction
as indicated by the last four rows of Table 3.3.

--

Hydrotech wind speed ( d s ) Wind speed difference (Rosemount - Hydrotech)

> <
- Average ( d s ) St- Dev. (mis) No. of obs.
- O 1.76 0.9 1 37568

- - -

~ y d r o t ehc wind dirëction

North 0.59 1.92 59414
East O. 14 1.53 39202
South 0-96 1.23 342 17
West 0.68 1.O9 420 17

Table 3.3 Statistics of the difference in simultaneous one-minute mean wind speeds
measured from the Rosemount and Hydrotech anemometers

The approach taken to relate the measured Hydrotech one-minute mean wind
speeds with those of the Rosemount anemometer was to assume a Iinear relationship (the
measured Hydrotech speeds being the independent variable). A least squares fit was
performed on the simultaneous one-minute mean speeds and the coefficient of correlation
was found to be 0.96. The resulting regression Iine is:

-
Rosemount wind speed = 0.906 Hydrotech wind speed + 1.196 ( m l s ) (3.1)

Data not considered in the fit were the large number of occasions that the Hydrotech
anemometer indicated no wind and the Rosemount sensor indicated wind to be present.
This was the case for ail but 25 of the observations shown in the fü-st row of Table 3.3.
hcluding these events would have increased the y-intercept and decreased the slope
compared to values shown in Equation 3.1 and result in a less representative fit to the
data for wind speeds > O mls. When the Hydrotech wiiid speeds were available to
increase the wind record provided by the Rosemount sensor, they were adjusted according
to the regression line shown in Equation 3.1 but not taken to be lower than 1-76d s (Le.
the average difference shown in Table 3.3 for Hydrotech speeds = O mk). The latter
stipulation only came into effect when the Hydrotech anemometer indicated wind speeds
less than about 0.6 d s .

As an example, roughiy a four day penod begm towards the end of A u p s t where
the Rosemount sensor did not provide wind data- Fi-we 3.5 shows the time series of
one-hour mean wind speed (caiculated from the one-minute means) for the seven day
penod approximately centered on this event The vertical dashed lines identify the period
when the Rosemount data were not available and the adjusted Hydrotech wind speeds
were used. The plot at the top of the figure shows ail available wind data and the one
below shows the single wind record used in the present study. In addition to increasing
the available data, the Hydrotech data were used on one other occasion. In mid-October,
the Rsemount data were not available for about a one-day period and directly foilowing
this. for roughly a fourteen-hour penod, the Rosemount anemometer significantly under-
predicted the wind speed compared to the three other anemometers (one-hou mean wind
speeds were up to 10 d s lower). During this event, adjusted Hydrotech wind speeds
were used in place of the Rosemount speeds. A seven-day period comprising the event is
shown in Figure 3.6.

In surnrnary, the wind record at Brevoon Island Station was taken as the data
measured by the Rosemount ice-resistant anemometer which was located roughly 4 m
above gound level. During the occasions when these data were not available (and for the
additional penod described above), the adjusted Hydrotech wind speeds and the
Hydrotech wind directions were used. This resulted in a wind record which was 97.1 %
complete during the penod begiming on Jan. 27/94 and ending on Nov. 06/94. The
adjusted Hydrotech data were used for less than 6 % of the total period. From this point
forward, references to the wind record at Brevoort Island Station will refer to these data,
The distribution of absent wind data by month is shown in Fiapre 3.7. Notable periods
were roughiy a three and one day stretch occurrîng in July and a two day event in Aupst.

3.2.2 St. John's Station

The meteorolo@cal station in St. John's, Newfoundland is situated in open and

level terrain. A p h o t o p p h of the site that shows four wind instruments is provided in
Fiawe 3.8. Mounted on the same structure roughly 4 to 5 m above ground Ievel, the
instruments are (front to back) a 78D anemometer, a Dragsphere anemometer, a
Rosemount anemometer and a Hydrotech anemometer. In addition to these, not shown in
the photograph, is a 78D anemometer fixed to a pole 10 m above gound. To distinguish
between the two 78D anemometers, the former w i l be referred to as 78D #l and the latter
as 78D #2. One-minute precipitation data were also available at this station via the POSS
Doppler radar.

The database comprises observations made from January, 1994 through April,
1995 inclusive. The relative compIeteness of the wind records from the five
anemometers is shown in Table 3-4 together with the maximum level of completeness
indicated in the last row. Bath of the 78D anernorneters provided data for more than 90
% of the record period, The Rosemount anemometer only provided wind information for

roughly four and a half months enciing in mid-June. Hydrotech data were available for
the sarne penod and additionally for about the last six months of the record. The
Dragsphere anemometer provided data for most of the record starting approximately one
week into March.

It was observed from rnonthly plots of one-hour mean wind speed that,
intermittently throughout the record, the Dragsphere anemometer would become
unresponsive to changes in wind strength, as was indicated by the other anemometers.
Wind speeds were often under-predicted during strong winds and over-predicted during
light winds. On severd occasions the Dragsphere anemometer indicated a near constant
wind speed for periods up to a few days and longer. An example of this behavior is
shown in Figure 3.9 where one-hour rnean wind speeds have been plotted for the month
of November (during this month Rosemount data were not available and the Hydrotech
anemometer began to hinction towards the end of day 9). On two separate occasions
during the first week, each lasting about thirty hours, the wind speeds measured by the
Dragsphere anemometer remained near constant. Aiso shown on this plot is the tendency
of the Dragsphere anernometer to over-predict and the Hydrotech anemometer to under-
predict the wind speed during light wïnd conditions compared to the wind speeds
indicated by the 78D anemometers (i.e. d u ~ day
g 14 and on severai occasions
proceeding day 26).

Anemometer Available wind data

78D #1 93.4 %
78D #2 96.8 %
Rosemount 27.5 %
Hydrotech 62.8 %
Dragsphere 83.7 %
at least one of the above 96.8 %

Table 3.4 Availabie one-minute wind data at St. John's Station dunng the period of
Jan. 0 1/94 to Apr. 30/95

The data chosen to represent the wind record at St. John's Station was that of the
78D #2 anemometer. Favorable characteristics of this data set are that, first, it alone
provided the maximum attainable level of completeness and, secondly, the wind speeds
were observed at a standard. 10 m height. In terms of quality, however, the 78D
anemometer is more likely to expenence problems due to ice accretion than are the ice-
resistant sensors. The alternative of only considering data from the three ice-resistant
anemometers would allow for a wind record which is roughly 92 % complete. Roughly
one-third of this wind record would have had to be supplied by the Dragsphere
anemometer which, as described above, occasionally provided suspect data. It was felt
that the use of wind data from the 78D #2 anernometer was a better choice with the
provision that an attempt be made to identim conditions of icing during which wind data
from a more suitable instrument could be used; this task being more manageable at St.
John's than it would have been at Brevoort Island since the winters at St. John's are
milder and shorter and thus, in a given year, fewer occasions are likely to occur where the
78D anemometer is susceptible to ice accretion.

Redekopp (1994) analyzed the wind data at St. John's for March and April
together with data from an ice accretion sensor. During this period, it was observed that
"si,pificant" events of ice buildup were a result of freezing drizzle or fieezing rain. It
was also noted that the 78D anemorneter continued to nin dunng these penods but often
recorded lower wind speeds compared to the ice-resistant sensors. Unfortunately,
Redekopp did not explicitly identiS the dates during which the 78D anemometer was
adversely influenced by ice accretion.

The first step taken to identify periods where the 78D #2 anemometer was
affected by icing was to examine plots of one-hou mean wind speed and visually identib
the occasions during which wind speeds were under-predicted by the 78D #2 sensor
relative to the availabie ice-resistant instruments. For most of the record period, the wind
speeds rneasured by the 78D #2 anemometer were as Least as high as those rneasured by
the other instruments, this being expected since measurements of the former were made
roughly 5 to 6 m higher above ground. The plot shown in Figure 3.9 is representative of
what was most comrnonly observed in this respect (not including, of course, the two
penods where the Dragsphere anemometer indicated near constant wind). It is likely that
using this method may result in shorter periods, perhaps of an h o u or less, being rnissed.
However, it was the intention to identiQ periods of several hours or more where the 78D
#2 anemometer under-predicted speeds to the extent that the varïability of the instruments
could be ruled out as a cause of the event. Tentative thresholds were set at a duration of 3
hours and a differential speed of 3 to 4 m/s. An additionai requirement was that at least
two ice-resistant sensors were present and indicating comparable speeds.

Eight periods were identified during which it was suspected that the 78D #2
anemometer was under-predicting the wind speed due to ice accretion- For seven of the
eight events data were also available from the 78D #I anernometer. A common feature
found was that both of the 7SD mernometers, for the most part, were infiuenced at
similar tirnes and under-predicted the wind speed to a comparable extent- This fact lends
credence to the assurnption that the periods were a resdt of ice buildup; the reason being
that similar instruments exposed to similar temperature and precipitation events would
likely expenence comparable intensities of ice accretion. During these periods, the
available precipitation and temperanire data measured by the POSS were also indicative
of conditions during which ice accretion may potentially occur. Two examples are given
in Fiawes 3.10 and 3.1 1-

Fiame 3.10 shows one-hour mean data for the seven day period beginning on
Mar. 01/94 during which both of the 78D anemometers under-predicted the wind speed
compared to the Rosemount and Hydrotech sensors for about a seven hour period
(indicated by the two vertical dashed lines). At the top of the fiapre, one-hou mean wind
speeds have been plotted from ai1 avaiIable data (the Dragsphere anernometer was not
functioning during this time). The one-hour mean wind speeds measured by both of the
78D anemometers were as much as 5 m / s lower than those indicated by the ice-resistant
sensors. The middie plot shows the precipitation and temperature data measured by the
POSS. Temperatures were only available for those minutes that the POSS detected
precipitation and thus, in a given h o u , the temperature indicated on the plot is an average
of al1 available one-minute observations during that hour. One-hour precipitation totals
are shown with three different symbols; each representing a different precipitation type
observed by the POSS (see the top three items in the legend of the middle plot). ' n e
symbols were chosen such that they would remain identifiable when plotted al1 on a
single point. ln a given hour, the symbols were used done or in any combination to
represent the composition of the precipitation occurring in that hour. When both of the
78D anemometers began to show slower winds compared to the two ice-resistant sensors
and for severai hours pnor, both rain and snow were detected and the air temperatures
ranged from about -3 to O O C . When the temperature increased to above O OC,the 78D
anemometers retumed to recording comparable wind speeds. It is likely that the event
was a result of ice buildup ont0 the 78D anemometers. The plot located at the bottom of
the figure shows the single wind record chosen for this study (see more details below).

Fiawe 3.11 shows another example of a period where it was suspected that the
78D #2 anemometer was adversely influenced by ice accretion- Towards the end of
Mach, the 78D #2 anemometer stopped running for roughly three days and during this
time plus about an additional day and a half, the 78D #1 anemometer showed sirnilar
behavior. The temperature and precipitation data, shown in the middle plot, were
indicative of icing conditions. The scatter shown in the relative wind speeds during day 6
and about half of day 7 was typical during light winds. As mentioned previously, the
Dragsphere anemometer normally indicated the strongest wind speeds followed by the
78D sensors and then by the Hydrotech anemometer. In this case, however, the 78D #1
cupwheel was likely stilI af5ected by icing and thus was showing little to no wind.

The cumulative duration of the eight periods where icing was suspected is
approximately 17 days. Wind data were available from the Hydrotech anemometer in al1
cases. To improve the quality of the data and, at the same time, maintain the maximum
level of completeness, Hydrotech wind speeds were adjusted and used in place of the 78D
#2 wind speeds for these occasions. Table 3.5 shows the mean and r.m.s. of the
difference in measured one-minute mean speeds (78D #2 speed - Hydrotech speed) with
the same format used in Table 3.3. Data from the eight periods during which icing
conditions were suspected were not included in the analysis. The results are sirnilar to
those found when the Rosemount and Hydrotech sensors at Brevoort Island were
cornpared. The Hydrotech anemometer, being a newer mode1 than was at Brevoort
Island, frequently indicated no wind whiIe the wind speeds measured by the 78D #2
anemometer were on average 1.55 m/s. This result is likely due to the high starting
threshold apparent with the Hydrotech sensor combined with the fact that the 78D #2
anemometer measured wind speeds 5 to 6 m higher above ground level. The overail
tendency was for the 78D #2 speeds to be higher except when wind speeds larger than
about 20 m/s were indicated by the Hydrotech anemometer.
Hydrotech wind speed ( d s ) Wind speed difference (78D #2 - Hydrotech)
> -
c Average ( d s ) St- Dev. ( d s ) No. of obs.
- O 1.55 0-66 16839

Hydrotech wind direction

North 0.88 0.85 96676
East 0.88 0-95 60 144
South 1.26 0.88 8828 1
West 0.63 1-10 150639

Table 3.5 Statistics of the difference in simultaneous one-minute mean wind speeds
measured from the 78D #2 and Hydrotech anemometers

A least squares fit of the simultaneous measured data was again used to relate the
two wind speeds. The resulting regession Iine is;

78D #2 wind speed = 1.014 - Hydrotech wind speed t 0.774 ( d s )

with a correlation coefficient of 0.97. Sirnilar to the previous analysis, the data not used
in the fit were the large number of observations where the Hydrotech anemometer
indicated a speed = O m/s and the 78D #2 anemometer indicated a speed > O d s . The
adjusted one-minute rnean wind speeds were not taken to be lower than 1.55 mls as this
was the average wind speed recorded by the 78D #3 anemometer dunng the times the
Hydrotech sensor indicated no wind. The plots located at the bottom of Figures 3.10 and
3.1 L show the one-hour mean wind speeds calculated from the adjusted Hydrotech one-
minute mean wind speeds.

It was found that of the eight occasions where icing was suspected, the 78D #2
direction vane appeared to be influenced oniy once; measured directions remained
constant for several days and thus it was Likely that ice buiidup prevented any movement
of the direction vane during this period. The wind directions measured by the Hydrotech
anemometer were used in their pIace for this event.

in surnmary, the wind record at St- John's Station was taken as the data measured
by the 78D #2 anemometer. The cupwheel and direction vane were located 10 m above
the ground in open and level surroundings. Adjusted Hydrotech wind speeds were used
in place of those rneasured by the 78D #2 anemometer on eight separate occasions
(adding to about 17 days of data) when wind speeds were under-reported by the latter.
Corresponding temperature and precipitation data suggest the events to be a result of ice
buildup. Hereafier the St. John's wind record will refer to these data. The wind record is
96.8 % cornpiete for the 16-month record period. Data were absent for scattered perïods
no longer than a day in lena& with two exceptions: nearly a four day period in December
and roughly a five day period spanning April and May. Figure 3.12 shows separately the
amount of wind and precipitation data absent during each month together with the
amount of time that one or both of the above were not available. Clearly, begiming in
November, sipificant portions of the precipitation data were not available. Most of these
absent data occurred in long continuous perïods. The more significant are about seven
days in November, four days in December and 25 days spanning January and Febmary.

3.2.3 Downsview Station

The station in Downsview, Ontario is located at AES headquarters. Unlike the

previous stations, which were set up to study the performance of various anemometers
with respect to ice accretion, only wind data from two 78D anemometers were available.
The fnst, which will be referred to as 78D #1, is located on a 10 rn pole to the south of
the AES office building. The second, which will be referred to as 78D #2, is situated on
top of the three-storey office building fixed to a pole about 7 m above the roof line. The
nearby surroundings consist mainly of one and two-storey commercial buildings. In
addition to the wind data, precipitation data were available from the POSS Doppler radar.
 The penod of record for the Downsview Station spans from Jan. 01/94 to Nov.
27/94, The relative completeness of the two wind records is shown in Table 3.6. Data
from the 78D #l anemometer were not available for about the first four months and for
the last month of the record period. An exarnple the relative wind speeds measured by
the MO anemometers is shown in Figure 3-13 where the one-hour mean wind speeds have
been plotted for the month of July.

Anemometer Available wind data

78D # l 53.3 9%
78D #2 96.8 %
at Ieast one of the above 96.8 %

Table 3.6 Available one-minute wind data at Downsview Station during the period
of Jan, O 1/94 to Nov. 27/94

The data from the 78D #2 anemometer were chosen for the wind record. This
data set provided the maximum attainable level of completeness on its own (see last row
of Table 3.6) and therefore data from the 78D # f anemometer were not considered.

As shown in the previous sections when compared to various ice-resistant

anemometers, 78D anemometers are likely to slow and sometimes stop when subject to
icing. The present database onIy inchdes data from two 78D anemometers and thus it is
difficult to assess the frequency and degree of such behavior. With the anernorneters
being located at AES headquarters, as opposed to the more remote sites described above,
prolonged icing is likely minimized since the instruments are more accessible to those
responsible for their maintenance. Plots of one-hour mean wind speed show that only on
one occasion did the 78D #2 anemometer stop ninning for a significant period of time
(severai periods of less than a few hours were observed but these occurred when the
temperatures were well above the freezing point). During the last two days of the record,
there was roughly a one day period where the 78D #2 anemometer showed Little to no
wind and, at the sarne t h e , light precipitation was observed intermittently and
temperatures were fluctuating around O S C . It is possible that the 78D #2 anemometer
was under-predicting the wind speed during this occasion (data from the 78D #I

anemometer was not available dilring this period for cornparison).

More si-gnificant than the potential effects of k i n g at this station, the

rneasurements taken from both the mernometers may be biased due to Local influences on
the arnbient wind by the AES office building and other nearby obstructions. These data
are recognized as being limited in this respect.

Hereafier the Downsview wind record will refer to the data measurec! by the 78D
#2 anemometer. The wind record is 96.8 % complete and the available precipitation data
at this station comprises 9 1 3 8 of the observation period. The disuibution of absent data
by month is shown in Figure 3.14. Wind data were mostly absent for the fmt three
months and during the frfih month of the record. The s i p i f k a n t penods of absent
precipitation data are a four-day span in March and a nine-day stretch towards the end of
June.

3.3 One-Hour Database

Wind data and other meteorological information are observed across Canada at
426 airport sites (Yip et al.. 1995). The rnajority of the stations fall south of 55" N. The
network includes 3 14 sites that record wind data on an hourly basis. Digital archives of
these meteorological data are maintained by AES. In the present study, hourly data were
extracted from the AES archives for the fourteen stations listed in Table 3.7 (the stations
are shown on a map of Canada in Fi-pre 315). The penods over which the data were
available are also shown (see Section 3.3.1 regarding the filtered record periods for the
wind data). The wind and rainfail data are described below together with the procedures
used for their quality assurance.
Station Acronym Wind record Rainfall record
Original Filtered (rain gauge data)
Victoria Int'l, A., BC WC 1953-92
Vancouver Int'I, A-, BC VAN
Calgary Int'I- A., ALTA CAL
Regina A-, SASK REG
Winnipeg Int'l. A., MAN WIN
London A-, ONT LON
Toronto Int'l. A., ONT TOR
Ottawa Int'l. A., ONT OTT
Montreal Int'l. A.. QUE MON
Saint John A., NB STJ
Halifax Int'l. A., NS HAL
Charlottetown A., PEI CFA
Port Aux Basque, NFLD POB
St. John's A., NFLD SJS
* rainfdl data only available during the warm season

Table 3.7 Station information of the one-hour database

The meteorological data employed in the present snidy include:

one or two-minute mean wind speed observed on the hour,

one or two-minute mean wind direction observed on the hour,

consecutive one-hou rainfall totais,

present weather observed on the hour (qualitative),

consecutive six-hour precipitation totals and

consecutive daily rainfall totals.

The Iast three items listed were used to estimate one-hour rainfali totais when the direct
measurements frorn automatic rain gauges (Item 3) were not available. This is described
further below.
33.1 Wind Data

Missing wind data in the AES archives are very few- Of the fourteen stations
listed in Table 3.7, no single year of record had more than 1 % of the hourly wind
observations missing with the exceptions of 1979 for Charlottetown and 199 1-92 for Pon
Aux Basque. Missing data for these three years were roughly 3 , 6 and 4 % respectively.

HourIy wind velocities observed at airport sites across Canada (archived as

HLYOl wind by AES) represent a nominal one-minute average. Starting in 1985, the
averaging interval was increased to two minutes. The instrument typicdIy in use before
about the mid 1960's was the 45B anemometer with a flashing light indicator. Observers
counted the number flashes in a minute to determine the mean wind speed. During the
mid 1960's, most stations began using the U2A anemometer. Observers assessed one-
minute mean wind speeds (or two-minute means starting in 2985) directiy from dial or
digital indicators or from analog chart output, depending on what was in use at the
particular station. In practice, however, variabiiity in the averaging interval arises due to
the different habits of observers (Moms, 1996). The one and two-minute averaging
intervals rnay be better thought of as upper bounds to the actuai periods over which the
archived wind velocities were averaged. A lower bound, perhaps, may be of the order of
30 seconds. n i e ability to derive statistics of tme one-hour mean wind speeds from this
type of data set is explored in Chapter 4.

Anemorneters are ideally located over open and level terrain with no immediate
obstructions nearby which rnight influence the arnbient wind velocity. N s o , open and
level terrain extending in al1 directions for an adequate distance is necessary in order for
the mean boundary layer fiow to be developed at the point where the rneasurements are
taken. When the above holds m e , mean wind speeds measured at 10 m above ground
level reflect (the so-cailed) standard conditions. Meteorological records, however, often
reflect conditions which deviate from those described above and, particularly for long
records, reflect conditions which change over tirne. To correctly assess the clirnatoIogical
properties of wind frorn such a record, the data wouid fnst need to be adjusted to refiect
standard conditions. The analysis wodd otherwise lead to less meaningful results.

For the present database, and for the majority of the stations in the AES archives,
there are two sources of inforrnation kept by AES describing site conditions. The fxst
Iists changes in anemometer height and instrument type over the station's history. The
second describes general surroundings of the instrument site and changes thereof over the
record period; references to nearby obstructions, such as buildings or trees, that may have
infiuenced the wind measurements are occasionaily made. The site descriptions,
depending on the station, Vary in both detail and completeness. Based on the two
information sources, the qudity of the wind data for the initial portion of the records is
typically poor in that the anemometers at (at ieast) ten of the fourteen stations were
Iocated on the rooftops of aircraft hangars. control towers or other airpoa buildings. The
measured velocities, therefore, may be biased due to building influences. Nso, early in
the wind records, the anemometers were typically about 15 to 20 m above ground level.
During the mid 1960's, corresponding to the movement towards the U2A anemometer,
most stations reiocated their wind sensor to an exposed area on a standard 10 rn pole. On
the whole, the site descriptions indicate that the wind records as archived require some
form of adjustment to account for the variable anemometer exposure. Using Ottawa's
wind record by way of example, the approach taken here is now descnbed.

An excerpt from the AES site description of Ottawa Int'I- A. is as follows:

"The instrzment site is located 152 rn north of the

Administration ~ u i l d i n gin a grassed triangle borrnded by
roads. The area is free of obstntctions except for a few
ornamental rrees. There is a row ofaircrafi hangars 600 rn
to the West northwest, with single hangars 600 rn to rlze
north and 326 m northeast- The anemometer is at the
standard height of IO rn and is locared between rrlnways at
a distance of 816 rn south of the Administration Building."
This particular description ody indicates the current site conditions and not those
effective earlier in the station's history. The listed anemometer heights over the station's
history are @en in Table 3.8.

Hei-ht Date Effective

18.8 m May 19, 1944
19-5m Feb. 10, 1951
9.9 m May 18, 1960
10 rn May 14, 1969

Table 3.8 Anemorneter heights above g o u n d level for Ottawa Int'l. A.

The fmt step taken was to identiQ ail periods when the anemometer height and
location remained unchanged according to the available information. These will be
defined here as stationary penods. According to Table 3.8, over Ottawa's record penod
of 1953 to 1992, there were tLhreedifferent anemometer heights- Also, as can be seen
frorn the excerpt above, information regarding anemometer relocations was not given for
this station (the changes in height, however, may be an indication to changes in the
anemometer location). Thus, this station was identified as having three stationary periods
with the transition dates given in Table 3.8. The Iast stationary period (Le. May 14, 1969
and forward) corresponds to the description given above.

The next step was to calculate the mean wind speed for sixteen compass
directions (22S0 sectors centered on N, NNE, NE, etc.) separately for each stationary
period. The results of this analysis, shown is Figure 3.16 for Ottawa Int'l- A., were used
to visuaily assess whether or not the anemometer exposures were comparable over the
different periods. The calculations were performed on the archived wind speeds and on
adjusted wind speeds. The adjustments were made according to the anemometer height
by factoring the speeds to be representative of 10 m above ground levei using the
logarithmic Iaw with a roughness lena& of 0.03 m. In absence of the detailed
information required for anaiyticat estimations, this roughness length was chosen as an
average value for the class of terrain typically found at meteorolopical stations.
According to the generd classifications given by Cook (L985),a roughness length of 0.0 I
m corresponds to 'Vat gassland, parkland or bare soil, without hedges and with very few
isolated obstmctions" whiie a roughness Iene@ of 0.1 rn is appropriate for "fannland with
fiequent high boundary hedges, occasional srnall farm structures, houses or trees".
Assurning that the surrounding terrain of the meteorologicd stations f d s within these
two categones, the choice of 0.03 m as the roughness length would approximateiy split
the difference in terms of the height correction factors. For example, errors of the order
of t 7 4o of the mean wind speed would apply to speeds adjusted from 20 to 10 m above
gound level.

The results for Ottawa's wind record (see Fiame 3.16) indicate differences
between the exposures for the three periods. The fact that ten of the fouteen site
descriptions explicitiy stated that anemometers were initiaily located on rooftops would
possibly suggest the sarne to be m e for Ottawa- This would explain the differences
between the wind speed roses since the 80w around a building can be significantly
different than the unobstructed upstrearn flow. Depending on the location relative to the
building, the dimensions and shape of the building and the wind direction, the mean flow
may be faster, slower or from a different direction than that at a sirnilar height upstream.
If the only difference between the exposures during the three stationary periods were the
memorneter height, the shapes of the mean wind speed roses would be comparable and,
depending on the accuracy of the roughness length used to account for the height
differences, the adjusted mean wind speeds would be comparable in magnitude. Since
t h k clearly is not the case, the assessrnent made at this point was to only use the data
from 1970 forward - i.e. ai1 the full years within the last stationary period. These data
will be referred to as the fdtered wind record,

The Iast step was to constmct wind speed roses, this time normalizing the
directional mean wind speeds by those calculated from the filtered wind record, for
consecutive intervals of time over the record period. The intervals were mostly four years
in lena@, however, to accornrnodate the starting year of the filtered wind record, they
 were sometimes five or three years long. The intention was to identiq any significant
changes in exposure, other than those assessed from the two sources of information, and
to h i m g h t any graduai changes possibly due to urbanization in areas around the sites.

The latter, however. would be more difficult to disiinguish from reai ciimatological
trends. The height corrected wind speeds were used for this andysis. The plots for
Ottawa ht'L A. shown in Figure 3.17 reved the fdtered wind record ( 1970-92) to be
quite stationary over its entire duration. Also, based on this perspective, the variations in
the mean wind speed from 1953 to 1969 clearly appear ta be a result of non-
clirnatological factors. The final assessment was to oniy use the data from 1970 to 1992
for Ottawa's wind record.

This type of subjective analysis was performed on the data from each station to
arrive at the filtered wind records shown in Table 3.7.

At each rneteorological site, the anemometer during the final stationary period was
fixed to a 10 m pole located on the ground surface (at Port Aux Basque the anemometer
was marginally higher at 10.7 m). For eight of the fourteen stations, only the wind data
from the final stationary penods were used as the earlier portions of the wind records
qualitatively showed sirnilar discrepancies to that illustrated above for Ottawa. For the
six other stations, additional data were utilized in the filtered wind records, This is
illustrated in Figures 3.18 and 3.19 for the Montreal station where the data from 1964 to
1992 were taken as the filtered wind record. Afier applying the height correction, the
measurements made at 18.9 m above ground compare quite favorably to those over the
final stationary period.

The procedures described above were employed simply to arrive at wind records
that are more suitable for analysis. That is, the intention was to elirninate, for example,
the cornparison between wind speeds measured within an accelerated flow region over a
building with those measured under conditions comparable to the meteorological
standard. The degree by which the resulting filtered wind records represent standard
conditions, on the other hand, is a rnatter that would require more detailed information to
assess. A likely scenario applicable to many meteorological sites is a gradua1 change in
the character of the upstrearn surroundings due to the encroachment of buildings, trees
and other obstructions- This would have the effect of decreasing the mean wind speed
over time for the applicable range of wind directions.

The trend of decreasing rnean wind speed with time was evident at several of the
stations, but was most pronounced at Victoria Int'l. A. (mean wind speed roses simiIar to
those previously presented are given in Figures 3.20 and 3.21 for this station). The
instrument site is located about 26 km north of the city of Victoria. The anemometer was
initidiy on the roof of a hangar at a total height of 2 1.8 rn above ground level until early
in 1964 when it was relocated to an area about 600 m from the instrument site at a
standard 10 rn height- The filtered wind record was taken as the data from 1965 to 1992.
Over this period, the shape of the mean wind speed roses remained somewhat stable but
their average magnitude tended to decrease with the totd range beinp approximately 1 2 0
% of the overall mean (see Figure 3 -2 1). If this trend were a result of a gradua1 increase
in surface roughness, then it would appear that the changes were directionally uniform.
For stationq gradient winds, an increase in roughness length from 0.0 1 to 0.1 m would
result in roughly a 20 % decrease of the mean wind speed at 10 m above ground level (Le.
about half of the observed range). However, without knowledge about the character of
the terrain and changes thereof over time, long-term changes in the wind clirnate cannot
be ruled out as a cause, in fact, the filtered wind record for Vancouver Int'l. A., a close
neighbor, showed simi1a.r trends but to a lesser extent. This wodd possibly support the
idea that some portion of the decrease in mean wind speed was due to climatological
factors. No corrections were made for the slowly changing mean wind speed observed at
some of the stations-

An alternative method for arriving at a filtered wind record under the above
circumstances is to start at the end of the record and move backwards in time until an
unacceptable degree of stationarity is observed based on the computed mean wind speed
roses. However, unless the filtered wind record c m be justified through historical site
information, this method is considered to be overly subjective and inappropriate from a
scientific point of view. The technique described above was thus adhered to for ali
stations.

3.3.2 Rainfall Data

Hourly rneasurements of one-hour rainfall arnounts are available at many of the

airport sites across Canada from automatic rain gauges, The standard instrument is the
Tipping Bucket Rain Gauge. Often, however, the gauges are only in service during the
warm season which, depending on the region, would typically be from April or May
through October or November. For the present database, hourly rainfall data were
available for the penods indicated in Table 3.7. Missing data over these periods ranged
from roughly 1 to 15 % with an average of about 6 %.

As cm be seen from Table 3.7, the houriy rainfail measurements were generally
not available until about the 1960's and, for several of the stations, were not available
during the cold season for al1 or part of the record periods- The latter is a sib@ficant
deficiency, particularly for coastal regions, since substantial rainfdls may occur during
the Iate fa11 through the early spring. Welsh. Skinner and Moms (1989) developed a
method to estimate one-hour rainfall totals from data that are available year-round and are
available from early on in the records with very few missing observations. Following
their method, time senes of one-hour rainfall amounts were constructed for each station
and used to fil1 in the missing portions of the time series of measured amounts. The
technique is described below,

Present weather observations are routinely made on the hour at Canadian weather
stations. When precipitation is present at the time of observation, the type and intensity
are reported. The intensities are reported as either light, moderate or heavy. The rates of
faU corresponding to the three intensity categones depend on the precipitation type. For
exarnple, in the case of rain or rain showers, the following divisions are used (AES,
1996):
 1. 1- 1 to 2.5 mm/hr for light,

2, 2.6 to 7.5 mm/tir for rnoderate and

3, 7.6 mm/hr or greater for heavy-

Liquid precipitation f i i n g at a rate of 1.0 mm/hr or Iess is classified as drizzle. The

divisions in this case are:

1. less than 0.2 m m h for light,

2. 0.2 to 0-4mm/hr for moderate and

3. 0.5 to 1.O m r n h for heavy.

In the event of rain or rain showers, the observer chooses an intensity category according
to instrument data if available or based on qualitative observations otherwise. When
instrument measurements are available, the mean rainfall rate over a short period (five
minutes, for example) prior to the time of observation is used to choose the intensity level
according to the ranges shown above. Qualitative guidelines, such as how fast puddes
form or how individuai drops are perceived, are followed in order to c1assiQ the intensity
when a rain gauge is not present at the site. The intensity class for frozen precipitation
and drizzle, on the other hand, are mostly assessed through visibility criteria. A light
intensity, for example, is reported when the visibility is 5/8 mile or greater. Direct
measurements (considering the water equivalent of frozen precipitation), as described
above, are used when the visibility is influenced by other factors such as fog.

The typical relative precipitation rates are listed in Table 3.9 for the thirteen
different precipitation types reported. The method ernployed by Welsh et al. (1989) to
estirnate one-hour rainfall arnounts utilizes the present weather observations described
above, the precipitation rates shown in Table 3.9 and six-hour precipitation arnounts. The
latter are routinely rneasured at the meteorologicai stations year-round and represent the
total precipitation amount regardless of the composition (Le. liquid, freezuig and/or
 frozen). In addition to the three items used by Welsh et al., the procedure outlined here
also utilizes 24-hour rainfd amounts, which are d s o routinely measured year-round.

Intensity Precipitation rate (mdhr), equivaient water values

Rain Rrùn Drïzzie Freezing FmPng Snow Snow Ice Icr Ice Snow Snow Hail
showen rain dnzzic g a i n s cryst;ils Pellets pellet showcrs pellets
Light i-8 1.8 0.1 1.8 0.1 0-6 0.6 0.0 1.8 1.8 0.6 0.6 1.8
Moderate 5-1 5-1 0.3 4.0 0.3 1.3 1.3 0.0 5.1 5.1 1.3 1.3 5.1

Table 3-9 Typical precipitation rates associated with present weather observations,
fiorn AES (1984)

The method for estimating one-hour rainfdl amounts will be ilustrated by way of
the worked example s h o w in Table 3.10. The table shows one day of data where the
o d y two precipitation types obsewed were rain and snow. The first column shows the
h o u of the day. the second shows the 24-hou rainfall, the third shows the six-hour
precipitation and the fourth and fifth show the present weather codes for rain and snow
respectively (codes 1, 2 and 3 represent the Light, Moderate and Heavy intensities
respectively while O indicates the precipitation type was not observed) together with their
associated rates of fdl taken from Table 3.9. The first five colurnns are the archived data
from which the estimated one-hour rainfalls shown in the Iast coiurnn are denved.

The first step was to divide the six-hou precipitation amounts into six one-hour
amounts via the precipitation factors shown in Colurnn 6, which are based on the typical
intensities associated with the present weather code. For exarnple, the precipitation factor
for hour 0 1 was calculated as 1.8/(1.8+1.8t5.1+1.8+0+0) = 0.17 1 while for hour 17 ic
was calculated as 1.2/(0+0+ 1.8+1.8+ 1.2+ 1.3) = 0.197. The value of 1.2 associated with
hour 17 is the average intensity of the two precipitation types observed for that hour - i-e.
(1.8+0.6)/2 = 1.2. The next factor applied to the six-hour precipitation amounts is the
rain factor shown in Column 7 which again is based on the typical intensities associated
with the present weather code. For a given hour, this factor will be unity when only
Hour 24hour Six-hour Eksent weather code/ Precip. Rain Tord One-hour
rainfdl P ~ P - t y p i d prm'pitacion factor factor rain rainfdl
imm) (mm) intensity (rnmlhr)from factor atimre
Table 3.9 (mm)
Rain Snow

Total 35

Table 3-10 Worked exarnple for estimating one-hour rainfalis

liquid precipitation is observed, zero when only frozen precipitation is observed and
somewhere in between when both types are observed. In the above example, the rain
factor for hour 17 is 1.8/(1.8+0.6) = 0.750. This factor reflects the portion of the one-
h o u precipitation which feil as liquid and is based on the assumption that al1 the
precipitation types observed in a given hour occur for an equai portion of the time.
Findly, the total rauifall factor shown in Colurnn 8 is applied so the total estimated
rainfail matches the 24hour measured amount It is o d y applied to the estimates within
the six-hour periods where both liquid and frozen precipitation occurred. in the above
example, the estimated rainfall during hours 13 through 18 added to 1 1.1 mm before the
total rainfall factor was applied and to 10 mm afier it was applied, thus making the total
estimated rainfdl(25t10 mm) match the 34-hour measured amount (35 mm). During the
fxst six-hour period, the total rain factors are unity since the 25 mm of precipitation was
ody composed of rain a s indicated by the present weather code.

In the report by Welsh, Skinner and Morris (1989), the procedure oudined for
estimating the one-hour rainfall amounts was illustrated through a simple exarnple
comparable to the first six-hour penod shown in Table 3.10. It is therefore not known
how the mixed precipitation events were treated in their analysis and whether the 24-hour
rainfall measurernents were used in a similar or aiternative manner compared to that
described above.

The performance of the rainfall estimating technique was assessed by comparing

the number of times the estimated rainfall exceeded four pre-chosen threshold amounts
with the number of times the rneasured rainfall exceeded the same four thresholds. Data
were only considered in a given hour if both the estimate and measurement were
available, thus, due to the sparseness of the hourly measurements, the results given in
Table 3.1 1 are presented as overall totals as opposed to annual averages. In cornparison
to the results from the rneasured rainfall, it c m be seen from the last row of Table 3.11
that the estimated one-hour rainfdl amounts predict on average approximately 12 % more
hours with rainfall regardless of the intensity and approximately 18, 22 and 18 % Iess
hours with at least 1.8, 3.0 and 5.1 mm of rainfd respectively. These results prompted
further study as described below.
Station Number of hours with total rainf'l exceedin~threshold
Measured rainfdls Estimated rainfails
>Omm 21.8mrn 23.0m1-n 1 5 - l m >Omm 21.8mm L 3 . 0 m 15.Imm
VIC
VAN
CAL
REG
UrIN
LON
TOR
OTT
MON
STJ
HAL
CHA
POB
SJS
Average 15779 3784 1795 667 17673 3105 1399 548

Table 3.1 1 Cornparison of the nurnber of threshold exceedences indicated by the

meaured and estirnated one-hour rainfalls

The series of plots in Figure 3.22 show the average temporal distribution of the
measured and estimated one-hour rainfalls over storms with durations of two, four and
six hours. Here, stoms are defined as continuous penods of rainfall, as indicated by the
measured one-hour arnounts, followed and preceded by at least four dry hours. Al1
storms occurring at the fourteen stations were identified and sorted according to their
duration. Then, both the measured and estimated one-hour rainfalls for a particular storm
were normalized by the Iargest one-hour rainfall measurement during the sarne storm.
The normalized one-hour rainfalls were then averaged for al1 stoms having a similar
duration separately for the measured and estimated data Clearly apparent in the plots is
that the rainfall estimating technique tends to spread out and skew towards the right the
distribu~onof the one-hour rainfalls over a stonn relative to the distribution based on the
measured amounts. The former tendency would explain why the rainfd estimates
predict more wet hours overall than indicated by the measurements on the one hand and
Iess hours for the higher rainfaii thresholds on the other hand (see Table 3.1 1).

The tendency for the total rainfd over a storm to be spread over a larger number
of hours through the use of the estimating technique results because the estimated
rainfalls are based on -'spot" observations. For example, if Light-intensity rainfall was
observed at a particular hour (or within, say, + 5 minutes of the hour, depending on the
practice of the observer) when the bulk of the rainfall occurred outside the corresponding
one-hour period, an erroneous amount of rainfall would be allotted to that hou. In hm,
this would lead to a reduction in the total rainfdl during @e period over which it actually
occurred.

The tendency for the temporal distribution of estimated one-hou rainfalls to be

skewed to the right relative to that of the measured r a i n f d s follows frorn allotting the
rainfall estimate to the hour following (or to the right of) the time of the present weather
observation. For example, if rain had fallen h-om 06: 15 to 07:05, the rainfall estimate
based on the present weather observation made at 07:00 would be placed between hours
07:OO and 08:OO while most of the rainfall would have occurred between hours 06:OO and
07:OO. One way to avoid this would be to base the rainfall estimate for a particular hour
on the average of the nominal intensities (those associated with the present weather
codes) at the top and bottom of that hour and otherwise perform a similar analysis to that
illustrated above. While this technique would eliminate the rightward skew in the
temporal rainfall distributions, it would d s o spread the one-hour rainfall amounts over
even more hours. A cornparison of the two estimating techniques showed that the
approach outiined in Table 3.10 gives better estimates of the number of hours with
rainfall exceeding the threshold amounts shown in Table 3.1 1.

In summary, the strength of the one-hour rainfall amounts estimated from the
measured six-hour precipitation totals and the hourly present weather observations is that
they are derived fiom data that are available year round with very few missing
observations, However, the inherent deficiencies associated with the estimation
methodology give good reason to only rely on the estimates in absence of the more
accurate measured one-hour rainfail totals-
Figure 3.2 Photograph of the POSS Doppler radar, after Sheppard (1990)
Figure 3.3 Photograph of Brevoort Island Station
(s/ur) paads pu!^
(s/u) p a a d s pu!& (s/ur) paads purA
 -
in-

(s/ur) p a a d s pu!& (s/ur) paads p u t ~

Figure 3.8 Photograph of S t John's Station
(s/w) paads pu^^
(S/UI) paads p u p ~( w u ) u o ! ~ e t ! d ! s a ~ d(s/u~) paads pu!^
(s/ur) paads PUFM
 height (m): 19.5 9.9 10.0
date(yy/mrn): 53/01 60/05 69/05
.-.-*--...--.

Figure 3.16 Sixteen-point compas roses of mean wind speed for Ottawa Int'l. A.
Fi,we 3-17 Sixteen-point compas roses of mean wind speed normaiized by that over
the fdtered wind record (1970-92) for Ottawa Int'l. A.
 h e i g h t (m): 23.2 18.9 10.0
date (yy/mm): 53/01 63/02 78/07
....
--..*--.-

Figure 3-18 Sixteen-point compass roses of mean wind speed for Montreal Int'l. A.
Figure 3.19 Sixteen-point compass roses of mean wind speed normaiized by that over
the filtered wind record (1964-92) for Montreai Int'l. A.
 height (m): 21.8 10.0
date (yy/mm): 53/01 64/02

Figure 3.20 Sixteen-point compas roses of mean wind speed for Victoria Int'l. A.
Figure 3.21 Sixteen-point compass roses of mean wind speed normalized by that over
the fdtered wind record (1965-92) for Victoria Int'l. A.
 1.0
two-hour s t o r r n d u r a t i o n

?
f 1 four-hour storm duration

-
i 1 six-hour storrn duration

tirne (hours)

Figure 3.22 Comparison of the average temporal distribution of measured and

estimated one-hour rainfalls for continuous periods of rainfall lasting two,
four and six hours
Chapter 4
On the Uses of Hourly Observed Short-Duration
Mean Wind Speeds

4.1 Introduction

The AES Digitai Archive of Canadian Climatoiogical Data includes wind data
observed at 426 airport sites. A total of 3 14 of the stations make observations each hour
of the day (Yip et al., 1995). The wind data include one-minute mean speed and direction
observed each hour for periods up to and including 1984 and two-minute mean speed and
direction observed each hour thereafter. The wind observations are primarily used for
weather forecasting and for aviation purposes.

From a wind engineering standpoint, this particular statistic does not lend itself to
easy appiication. A cornmon representation of the wind for engineering purposes is given
in terms of a mean velocity together with superimposed gusts- The retationship of the
latter to the former is often given in terms of a gust factor which allows the peak p s t
speed to be estimated from the representative mean wind speed. An example of the
scaling-up of the rnean wind speed c m be found in the National Building Code of Canada
(1990) wtiere procedures are outlined with various degrees of complexity to account for
the faster winds over shorter periods as it pertains the design of structures. For structures,
this is Eurther complicated by the spatial structure of gusts. Nonetheless, the statisticd
description of the mean wind speed alone is often adequate. The choice of a suitable
averaging period for descnbing mean wind speeds is customarily ten minutes to one hour.
The reason for this can be iliustrated through the idealiled wind speed spectrurn given in
Figure 4.1 which shows a low energy region for the range of penods mentioned above.
The significance of the so-called spectral gap is that its location represents periods during
which the wind can be considered adequately stationary (stationarity being an important
assumption when reIating peak gus& to mean wind speeds) and therefore provides an
appropriate duration for defining mean winds. A suitable wind record wodd therefore be
a senes of consecutive one-hou means or a series of consecutive ten-minute means-
From such series. extreme value theory can be employed to estimate rnean design wind
speeds for appropriate retum periods to be used as the foundation to many engineering
problems-

Assurning the statistical properties of one-hour mean wind speeds are of interest,
the obvious shortcornin,o with a data set comprising wind speeds averaged over the last
one or two minutes of each hour (referred to here as spot wind speeds) is that it is an
incompIete wind record. In a piven hour the prevalent wind speed is not captured with a
reasonable level of certainty based on a one- or two-minute spot measurement. Refeming
again to the ideaiized wind speed spectrum s h o w in Figure 4.1, this is iiiustrated by the
distribution of high frequency energy which shows a somewhat broad peak at penods in
the range of about three minutes to about h d f a minute. Physically, this implies that
consecutive one or two-minute sarnples will fluctuate at a relatively significant Ievel and
therefore any one sample is not necessarily representative of the mean speed over the
given hour. Naturaily this effect becomes less pronounced as the averaging time of the
spot wind speed is increased. Ofien wind archives comprise hourly sarnples of ten-
minute averages: such a wind record is stiU incomplete but the ten-minute mean wind
speeds are certainly more representative of the corresponding one-hou values.

It should also be noted that deriving, for example, statistical distributions (or other
forms of statistical properties) of one-minute mean wind speeds from a database
comprising one-minute means observed hourly should not be taken for granted,
particularly when extremes are of interest. In the case of the parent distribution, the
derived fit is likely to be representative of that which would be obtained if al1 sixty one-
minute means were available for each hour provided the database covered an adequate
period of time. However, when one is concerned with the distribution of extreme one-
minute mean wind speeds, a database containing only one measurement per hour is far
from ideal. In a parricular hour, the one observation has a one i n sixty chance of being
the largest in that hou. It foliows that. if the short-duration wind speeds are observed
hourly, they be considered to paralle1 one-hour mean wind speeds so as to emulate a
complete wind record. The increased variability uitroduced by this will likely move the
predicted extreme by an unknown distance from that averaged over one-hour towards that
averaged over one-minute in keeping with the same example.

It is the intent of this chapter to assess, in an exploratory fashion, the abiiity to

estimate statistical distributions of one-hour mean wind speed from hourly observed
short-duration spot samples. As rnentioned above, spot wind speeds are defined here as
hourly observed wind speeds that are averaged over a penod of much less than an hou.
The motivation of this chapter stems from the fact that the aviation sites of the AES
digital archive presently record two-minute spot wind speeds and pnor to 1985, one-
minute sarnples were observed hourly. In order to take advantage of this large Canadian
database in t e m s of deriving statistics for one-hour mean winds, these averaging times
are the focus of this chapter. In addition, ten-minute spot wind speeds are aIso considered
as this averaging period is often utilized in other national weather archives.

The one-minute database descnbed in Section 3.3 was used for this portion of the
study. The varîous time senes of mean wind speed constructed from this database are
described in Section 4.2. Section 4.3 describes the dependence of spot wind speeds on
their corresponding one-hour means. The performance of predicting the parent
distribution of one-hour mean wind speeds from spot measurernents is investigated in
Section 4.4 and similarly, the extreme distribution in Section 4.5. Sumrnary remarks are
presented in the final section,

4.2 Time Series of Mean Wind Speed

The one-minute database comprises consecutive measurements of one-minute

mean wind speed for three locations. Record lengths range from about nine to sixteen
months. Three different types of time series of mean wind speed have been constructed
from these data and f o m the b a i s of this chapter.

First, time senes comprising consecutive and non-overlapping measurements of

mean wind speed have been consmcted- These will be referred to as the '"full'' time
senes and denoted as V , {r}where represents the duration in minutes over which the
speeds were averaged. For each station, three full time series were constnicted
corresponding to two-. ten- and sixty-minute averaging intervals; rnaking a total of four
upon inclusion of the original one-minute mean data. As an example, V, {Oz}represents
a time senes of consecutive and non-overlapping two-minute mean wind speeds.

The second type of data series derived was that of hourly observed wind speeds
averaged over one, two and ten minutes or, in other words, one-, two- and ten-minute
spot wind speeds. The notation used to represent the "spot" tirne series is V, (z) where r
is similarly defined as above. Three separate series of spot wind speeds were constructed
for each averaging interval corresponding to observation times of on the hou, at the two-
thirds hour point and at the one-third hour point. Defining y-, as the wind speed
averaged over the ith minute in the jth hour, the three spot time series were constructed as
follows:

1
1. spot dataseries 1, V'{r], = - x y + ,
i=6 1-r

1
2. spot data series 2, V, {r}, = -
i
r
'-

v
'-1
.

3. spot dataseries 3, V,{s), =-

1
ZV.
ri=zl-r
t-J
.

each for 7 equal to one, two and ten minutes. The corresponding one-hour mean wind
speed for the jth h o u was simply the average of al1 sixty one-minute means.
 The purpose of constructing three spot data series for each averagïng interval was
to better assess their performance in predicting statistical properties of one-hour mean
wind speed. The idea is that the three measurements in a particular hour represent
independent fluctuations about the same one h o u mean wind speed and the results korn
each of the time senes can therefore be used as an indication of the possible variability
involved when analyzing this type of data,

The third type of data set consuucted will be referred to as the "modified spotT'
time senes and denoted as V'{r}. As indicated by the narne, the wind speeds of this
series are fomiulated directly fmm the spot measurements by averaging consecutive
values. That is, for the jth hour V,, {T} = (V, {T} +, +V, {z 1 ) / 2 . The modified spot time
series were constmcted from each of the spot time senes described above. As will 5e
shown. the modified data result in better estimates of the statistical propertïes of one-hour
mean wind speed compared to those estimated from the original data senes of spot
rneasurements, particularly for the one- and two-minute averaging intervals.

Table 4.1 s u m a r i z e s the 22 different time senes constnicted from the one-
minute database for each of the three locations. As on occasion wind observations were
missinp from the original data sets, one-hour mean wind speeds were only accepted if a
minimum of 54 observations were present and sirnilady ten-minute means if a minimum
of 9 observations were present (i.e, a threshold of 90 %). Two-minute mean wind speeds
were used only when both of the one-minute averages were available. AH of the 66 wind
speed time series are between 95.4 and 97.1 % complete.

Type of data set Nurnber of time series

z = 60 min. r = 10 min. z = 2 min. .r: = 1 min.
hl1 data series, V , {s} 1 1 1 1
spot data series, V, { r } - 3 3 3
modified spot data series, V,, { r } - 3 3 3

Table 4.1 Number of time series constructed from the one-minute database for each
of the three stations
 The statistical properties derived from the senes of one-hour mean wind speed
will be used as the reference by which the related properties derived from the other time
series will be cornpared. As mentioned above, the record lengths of the three stations
range from about nine to sixteen months and are not particularly long. At a given station.
the statistics and estirnated distribution parameters for the one-hou mean winds are
representative for the record period and not necessarily for the station in general owing to
the short sarnple. Results from the other time senes are compared to indicate the
ramifications of their use when the statistics of one-hour mean speeds are of interest. The
fact that the record lengths do not extend over a long penod of thne is less of a sia+ficant
factor in this regard since fnst, it is common to al1 the time series for a particular station
and secondly, this portion of the study is airned at exploring trends.

4.3 Dependence of Spot Wind Speeds on One-hour Means

Consider a single hour of wind where V; represents the average wind speed over
the ith minute. The non-dimensional variable g, can be defined as:

where m, and O,, are respectively the average and standard deviation of over the one-
hour penod (m, will be used hereafter in place of V, ( 6 0 ) ) . It follows that the average of
g, is;

and the standard deviation is:

Normalking the wind this way on an hour by hour basis, using always the local values of
results in g being a stationary random variable of time with an average and
m, and q,,
standard deviation as indicated above- This representation is certainly not new and has
ofien been used for predicting peak short-duration wind speeds, mostly p s t s of the order
of a few seconds, in relation to the mean wind and intensity of turbulence (see, for
example, Davenport, 1964).

Here the variable g is given the term spot factor and represents the number of
standard deviations a randomly observed short-duration wind speed m e r s fiom the one-
h e d the so called peak factor (often denoted as g,)
hour mean. This c m be d i ~ t i n ~ ~ s from
which relates the average number of standard deviations the Iargest short-duration wind
speed (or other quantities such as the response of structures to wind) will differ from the
mean. An example of the transformation of a time senes of one-minute rnean wind
speeds to a tirne series of one-minute spot factors is shown in Figure 4.2a. The sarnple of
wind used in the figure was taken from St. John's station and covers a period of ten hours
during which one-hour rnean wind speeds were in the range of about 6 to 12 d s . Several
items are shown on the upper plot dong with the tirne series of one-minute mean wind
speed. Firstly, one-hour mean wind speeds are shown by thickened horizontal lines and
secondIy, above or below the right end of each of these Iines are solid circles highlighting
the one-minute spot wind speeds (these emulate the data available from aviation sites of
the AES digital archive prior to 1985). The latter are also represented on the lower plot
which shows the one-minute spot factors resulting from the transformation described
above.

of the spot factors, it is apparent from the upper

Before discussing the ~i~gnificance
plot in Figure 4.2a that the differences between one-minute spot wind speeds and their
corresponding one-hour means are significant and random. In o d y this ten-hour period,
the differences (expressed as a percentage of the corresponding one-hour mean) range
fiom roughly + 27 % to - 30 %. Sùnilar plots are shown in Figures 4.2b and 4 . 2 ~for two-
minute mean wind speeds and for ten-minute mean wind speeds over the same ten-hour
period. In both cases the spot factors were refomulated based on the new hourly values
of o, (Le. calcuiated frorn the thirty samples of two-minute means and from the six
sarnpIes of ten-minute means respectively for each hour). In this short sample of wind,
the use of two-minute spot wind speeds o d y shows a marginal improvement in terms of
better representing the corresponding one-hou means. In the case of ten-minute spot
wind speeds, the differences sirnilar to those expressed above are si,pïficantly smailer
and range from about + 10 % to - 15 %.

The ~ i ~ g i f i c a n of
c e the spot factor becomes more apparent when Equation 4.1 is
rearranged into the foilowing general hm;

where u,(T) is the coefficient of variation given by:

and:

With the expression given in Equation 4.4 we can relate, in terms of probabilities, spot
wind speeds to coincident one-hour means. The assumptions involved and the relevant
parameters are now descnbed.

Assuming the coefficient of variation to be a known function of the mean wind

speed for a given value of T , Equation 4.4 involves two random variables: narnely the
one-hour mean wind speed and the spot factor. The assumption made here is that the two
variables are independent. The time series of the spot factors presented in Figures 4.2,
being derived from one-hour mean wind speeds ranging from about 6 to 12 d s , are
certainiy in support of tiis assumption. Accepting the variables to be independent, it
follows that their joint probability can be given by;

where f (m,) and f (g ) are the individual probability density functions. Thus, the
probability that a spot wind speed will fa11 within a smail interval centered on V, {r}is
simply the sumrnation of the right-hand-side of Equation 4.7 for a i l the values of m, and
g which satisfy Equation 4.4. As such, the probability distribution of the spot factor and
representative values of the coefficient of variation need to be defined. in the above
order, these two items are now discussed-

To this point the spot factor has been shown to be a stationary random variable
with a mean of O and a standard deviation of 1- To be able to relate a spot measurement
of wind to its one-hour mean in terms of probabilities, the statisticd distribution of g is
required. For this. consider a continuous record of wind over a one-hour penod that is
non-dimensionalized as in Equation 4.1 so V, becomes V ( r ). Using a Fourier analysis,
V ( t ) c m be represented by the following sumrnation;

where a,, onand #n are corresponding values of the amplitude, angular frequency and
phase respectively. It follows from the Centra. Lirnit Theorem that if N is large and the
phases are random, the probability density function of V ( t ) is Gaussian (Davenpon,
1994a) and given by:
From Equations 4.1 and 4.9, the probability density function of g ( t ) is also Gaussian and
given by:

If V ( r ) is replaced with V, (t), , the kth short-dr ration wind speed averaged over duration
T in a @en hour, the above will be strictiy tnie as tends to zero. L q e r vdues wiZl
result in the extent of the relevant frequencies of the spectral representation to diminish,
hence decreasing N and the applicability of the Central Limit Theorem.

To investigate the distribution of g associated with various wind speed averaging

intervals, histograms were constructed for T = 1, 2 and 10 minutes. For this, the full time
series of V , {Ol}, V, (02) and V, (10) were each transformed to a time series of spot
factors in the manner previously described. Only the hours in which al1 wind speeds were
greater than zero were considered to ensure no lower bound o n the fluctuations. The
histograms are presented in Figures 4.3 for the three stations. The standardized normai
distribution given in Equation 4.10 is also presented in a similar discrete fashion for
comparison. Results show diat the distribution of one- and two-minute spot factors
closely resembles that of the normal distribution for al1 three locations. In the case of the
ten-minute spot factors, however, the distribution is more uniform for central values and
drops off more rapidly comprising a smaller range. The calculated rnean and standard
deviation of the spot factors in ail cases were O and 1 respectively as this fact is inherent
in their definition,

Another requirernent for relating a short-duration wind speed to its corresponding

one-hou mean is the local value of the standard deviation or, in its norrnalized form, the
coefficient of variation. Scatter plots of the latter versus one-hour mean wind speed are
shown in Figues 4.4 for the three stations examined. Values were determined again for
z = 1, 2 and 10 minutes and ploned separately on logaritiimic axes, each data point
representing one hour of wind. Again, hours comprising only non-zero short-duration
wind speeds were considered and otherwise no attempt was made to filter out any of the
data according to either wind speed or directional aspects. The employment of these data
is with respect to parent winds (see the following section) and it was felt thar the full
range of data shouId be considered. In contrast, ofien great care is taken in choosing
appropriate averaging penods for the mean wind speed in order to minunize trends in
both the speed and direction so as to ensure a reasonable level of stationarity (Wieringa,
1973)- This is in the interest, however, of fine tuning the relationship between peak gusts
and mean winds.

The general tendency is for the coefficient of variation to decrease with increasing
mean wind and, at a given wind speed, to be spread over a range of up to an order of
magnitude in size and larger. The latter is more evident in the case of ten-minute mean
wind speeds compared to the one- and two-minute averaging intervals. The coefficients
of variation presented are, in effect, a coarse representaûon of turbulence intensity at a
single point within the atmospheric boundary layer. The data most relevant from a
practical standpoint are those cdculated for St. John's station since the height of the wind
instrument and the surrounding terrain at this site are consistent with the standard present
at most meteorological stations, which are typicdy located in open airfields 10 m above
ground Ievel. Some general cornparisons will, however, be made on the results of the
other stations-

The wind measurements at Brevoort Island were made at about 4 m above ground
Ievel in open surroundings. Apart from the scatter at low mean wind speeds, the
coefficients of variation cdculated at this site were the lowest on average of the three
stations, With al1 else being equal, turbulence intensity in the atmospheric boundary Iayer
increases as the ground is approached provided its origin is predominantly mechanical, as
opposed to being thermally induced. The fact that this is not reflected in the results for
St. John's and Brevoort Island suggests a difference in surface roughess at these sites.
Referring to Figures 3.3 and 3.8, the ground at St. John's comprises mostly coarse grave1
while at Brevoort Island snow cover is likely dominant for most of the year. According to
the six roughness classifications gïve by Cook (1985), the latter is rated with a smoother
surface- It is aIso seen by comparing Figure 4-4b with Figures 4.4a and 4.42 that the
coefficients of variation rneasured at Brevoort Island exhibit a larger degree of scatter
compared to the other stations. Possible factors are again with respect to the snow cover
at Brevoort Island station in that the ground snow Ievel rnay Vary in depth over the course
of a season and intermittently local snowdrifis rnay develop, possibly causing
peculiarities to the fiow field.

On average the coefficients of variation computed at Downsview are the highest

of the three stations- The anemometer at Downsview is frxed to a pole at about 7 m
above the roof iine of a three-storey office building and is higher than its nearby
surroundings, which consist mainly of one and two-storey commercial buildings. Apart
from the greater surface roughness characterized by the terrain, the increased standard
deviation for a given rnean wind speed is possibly a result of local influences by the
building on which the anemometer resides.

The apparent linearity seen in the data plotted in Fi--es 4.4 suggest that
representative values of the coefficient of variation can be given by;

where a { r } and b { r ) are positive constants for a given value of r. Based on the least
squares criteria, the constants have been derived and are presented in Table 4.2. The
corresponding cuves are plotted on linear axes in Figure 4.5 for reference- The
dependence of the coefficients of variation on the wind speed averaging interval is clearly
indicated in the plots.

The assumptions and relevant parameters presented in this section are utilized in
the subsequent section in a numencal approximation of the parameters for describing
parent spot wind speeds from those applicable to one-hou means.
 -. . - - .- -

Station Parameters for Equation 4-11

St- John's 0.309 0.3 12 0-286 O-453 0.525 0.698

Brevoort 1. 0.43 1 0.413 0.3 12 0.74 1 0.788 0.845
Downsview 0.28 1 0.270 0220 0-28 1 0.34 1 0.5 15

TabIe 4.2 Parameters for obtaining representative values of the coefficient of

variation from one-hour mean wind speed in m/s

4.4 Parent Distribution

In t e m of the probability density function appropnate for omni-directional mean

wind speed. the folIowing Weibdi distribution has long been accepted;

or, in its cumulative forrn;

where k and c are the distribution's parameters. From Equation 4.13, it can be shown that
the parameter c represents the wind speed that is exceeded about 37 % of the time and is
therefore indicative of the tocation of the distribution. The exponent k reflects the spread
in that lowering its value results in probabilities that extend over a wider range of mean
wind speed.

Equation 4.13 can be rearranged to the foiiowing form:

This would allow similarly transformed data to be compared with a straight line.
Estimates of F ( m , ) can been obtained through an analysis of order statistics. This
involves sorting the observed wind speeds in ascending order and applying the following
expression;

where (m,), is the mth largest wind speed and M is the total number of observations in
the record.

Based on Equation 4.15, cumulative probabilities were estimated for each of the
22 time series for the three stations. Estirnates of the Weibull parameters were made by
transforrning the data into the form shown in Equation 4.14 and applying the least squares
criteria to define a representative straight line. For a particular case, only 50 of the data
points were used in the fit corresponding to equal increments of wind speed starting at 1
m/s and ending rit the extent of the data.

Plots showing the observed data in comparison to the Weibull fit are given in
Figure 4.6 for the one-hour mean wind speeds. The observed wind speeds at Downsview
are well represented by the straight Line while those for Brevoort Island do not conform as
well and tend to form an S-shaped curve. The quality of the fit at St. John's fdls
somewhere between in comparison. Histogams for the same three cases are presented in
Figure 4.7 showing also the mean and r.m.s. values of the parent populations. The
Weibuli parameters and population statistics given in the two figures will be used as the
reference by which similar results frorn the other time series are compared. The
comparative results from the spot and modified spot data sets are given in Figures 4.8 and
4.9. The mean and r.rn.s. values are sumrnarized in the array of nine plots shown in
Figure 4.8 and the estimated Weibull parameters are similarly presented in Figure 4.9.
Al1 values are expressed as a ratio of the corresponding result denved from the one-hou
mean wind speeds at the saine station. Also shown in Figure 4-9 are estimates of the
variation in the Weibull parameters associated with spot rneasurements using an
analytical approach described later in this section.

Consider, for example, if the histograrn @en at the top of Fiame 4.7 was
constnicted from one-minute spot wind speeds as opposed to the corresponding one-hour
means. Assurning that each frequency bin would loose a constant portion of its
observations to adjacent bins as a resdt of the increased scatter, the net effect would be
for the central bins to decrease in size and for the outer bins to increase, thus spreading
out the distribution and at the sarne time not significantly altering the central Iocation. In
terms of the parameters of the fitted Weibull distribution, this scenario would decrease
the exponent k and likely have little effect on the parameter c.

The resuits shown in Fiapre 4.8 support the above ideas. Focusing only on the
statistics derived from the spot data series (symbol "x"), the tendency is for the
population mean to rernain close to that derived from one-hou mean wind speeds and for
the population r.m.s. to be comparatively larger. As expected, the latter is shown to be
increasingly true as the averaging intervd of the spot measurement decreases since this
corresponds to larger fluctuations about the one-hour rneans. Now, refening to Figure 4.9
and again only to the resuIts from the spot data series, similar tendencies are seen. That
is, changes in the pararneter c are typically small and changes in the exponent k
consistently tend to the negative and increasingly so for shorter spot wind speed
averaging intervals.

The consistent increase in the r.m,s. values (which translates to a decrease in the
Weibull exponent k) is a result of the scatter associated with spot wind speeds about
corresponding one-hour means. It was s h o w in the previous section that the deviations
from the one-hour rnean wind speed can be related to the coefficient of variation through
the spot factor (Le. Equation 4.4). To justifjr the use of the modified spot data series over
the spot data series consider, for exmple, if two short-duration wind speeds were
available for each hour where the observation times were adequately separated such that
their deviations from the one-hour mean wind speed could be regarded as independent. It
foüows from Equation 4.4 that the average of the two rneasurements in a given hour
(denoted here as VS2{I)) can be represented by the foilowing expression:

where g , and g, are individual values of the spot factor. Based on the assumption that
the two spot factors are independent, it is easily shown that probability density function of
the new variable. (g, + g, ) / 2, is also Gaussian with a mean of O and a standard deviation
of L / fi,the latter being reduced by roughiy 30 %. It follows that a senes comprising
hourly observations of V,, { s ) would exhibit less scatter about corresponding one-hour
mean wind speeds than an othemise sirnilar series compnsing hourly observations of
V, {s} and, in tum, the former would resdt in a better prediction of the Weibull exponent
applicable to one-hou mean wind speeds.

From a series of hourly observed spot wind speeds. a time series of V,, {r}c m be
constructed in effect by simpiy averaging consecutive observations (as was done in the
Formu1ation of the modified spot tirne series, V,, {z})- in a given hour, the fact that the
spot measurement is averaged with that occurring at the end of the previous hour (as
opposed to using another sarnple from the hour in question) is likely insignificant,
particularly when dealing with averaging intervais of one and two minutes. Another
difference between a time series of Vs2 { s } and a tirne senes of V,, { s ) is that consecutive
values of the latter are correlated. That is, V, {T),is used in calculating both V, (T},and

V { Noting the two differences, the argument presented in the previous paragraph

is likely applicable, at least in a qualitative sense, to the modified spot data senes.

Refemng back to Figure 4.8, it can be seen that the performance of the modified
spot wind speeds (symbol "O") is si,@icantly better in terms of predicting the population
r.m.s. applicable to one-hour mean wind speeds and that the averaging interval is less of a
significant factor. The population means are no different than those determined frorn the
spot data sets (however, since one missing data point in the spot t h e series leads to two
missing points in the modified version, the results show smdI differences). The modified
spot data series d s o favorably influence the predicted Weibull exponents compared to the
estimates frorn the spot data series as is seen in Figure 4.9. The ratios of the parmeter c,
which tended to be marginally Iess than unity for the spot data senes, likewise show
improvements through the use of the modified spot data sets.

At each of the three Locations, the time series of modified ten-minute spot wind
speed consistently resulted in population r.m.s. values which were Iower (although only
marginally) than the respective value computed from the one-hour mean wind speeds
(this, in tum, resulted in higher Weibull exponents for seven of the nine data sets). This
is probably a result of using the ten-minute mean wind speed occurring in the previous
hour as opposed to using another observation from the hour in question. To this end, a
time series of V,, (IO) was consmcted for each station by averaging the ten-minute mean
at the beginning of the hour with that at the end of the hour. The population r.m.s. in
each of the three cases was found to be nearly equal but slightly higher than the respective
vdue computed from the one-hour mean wind speeds (Le. the ratios were slightly greater
than unity as opposed to being slightly smaller). It appears that a tirne series of V,,, {IO)
parallels that of hourly observed mean wind speed averaged over a penod of slightly
longer than an hour thus leading to the varïability being reduced beyond that exhibited by
the one-hour mean wind speeds.

On the whole, the discrepancies involved when predicting Weibull parmeten

appropriate for one-hour mean wind speed from a database comprising hourly observed
spot measurements are small for the parameter c and more sipificant in the case of the
exponent k. The results clearly indicate that estimates of the Weibull exponent obtained
from spot wind speeds are lower than those appropriate for one-hour means and that
irnproved estimates can be obtained through the use of modified spot wind data that are
probably within the other uncertainties. Significant factors in this respect are
measurement errors associated with anernometers, the variabiiity introduced through the
data analysis, the degree by which the data conforms to the mode1 and how the outcome
will differ in terms of the eventud use of the parameter estimates.

To be able to assess the differences arising through the use of spot data more
generally, a simple analytical exercise was undertaken based on the ideas presented in the
previous section. The mode1 is outlined below and results are compared with those from
the spot data of the three stations.

The cumulative distribution function of parent spot wind speeds can be estimated
by the following expression;

where the region of integration represents all values of m, and g that result in a spot
wind speed greater than V,[z) according to Equation 4.4, Taking m, and g to be
independent and placing in the appropriate limits, the above expression becomes:

Based on Equations 4.4 and 4.1 1, the Iower lirnit of the integral in braces is given by the
solution of m, from the foliowing expression:

In words, the integral in braces represents the probability that the one-hour mean wind
speed takes on a value greater than q,(V,(71, g) and thus, its solution foilows from the
cumulative distribution function a v e n in Equation 4.13. Upon expansion, Equation 4.18
becornes;
where k and c are the Weibull parameters for the one-hour mean wind speeds. In the
above expression f (g) was taken to be Gaussian with a mean of O and a standard
deviation of 1. By evaluating numerically Equation 4.30 for an m a y of vaiues of V, ( r ) ,
probabilities c m be generated for estimating the Weibull pararneters associated with spot
wind speeds given those associated with one-hour means.

To test the expression, Weibull parameters were estimated for one-, two- and ten-
minute spot wind speeds for the three locations. The input data in each case were the
Weibull pararneters denved fiom the time series of one-hou- mean wind speed (Le. those
shown in Figure 4.6) together with the constants a { z ) and b { z ) given in Table 4.2, In
each case, Equation 4.30 was evaiuated for fifty equally spaced wind speeds. The
maximum was determined from the given Weibull distribution of one-hour means by
setting the probability of exceedence to 0.001 and solving for the corresponding wind
speed- This method ensured that the data points covered the bulk of the distribution. In
al1 cases exarnined. the least squares correiation coefficient for the generated data was
found to be unity to f o u signifiant digits.

Results are shown in Figure 4.9 by the dashed lines and compare quite favorably
to the trends exhibited by the Weibull parameters derived directly from the spot data sets.
More often than not, it is shown for both the Weibull parameters thac the predictions from
the model fall within the range of the estimates from the three spot data senes in a given
case. The cornparisons lend support to the anaificd approach and the inherent
assumptions.

To assess how the use of spot data wilI influence different parent populations of
one-hou means, a similar analysis was performed for a range of k and c values
comprising those typicaily found in practice. The constants air) and b ( ~for
) relathg
the coeEcient of variation to mean wind speed were taken as the values determined from
the database of St- John's station. As described above, this station is consistent with rnost
standard meteorologicd stations in tenns of anemorneter height and surrounding terrain,
namely 10 rn above ground in open and level surroundings (see photograph in F i p e
3.8). The Weibull panmeters used as input to the anaiysis were 3 to 15 m/s for c (with a
step size of 1 d s ) and 1.3 to 2.7 for k (with a step size of O. 1). Corresponding values
were generated in each case for one-, two- and ten-minute spot wind speeds.

Some aspects of the results are best described in terms of the straight-line
representation of the cumulative distribution h c t i o n (see Equation 4.14). The line
defining the probabilities of the one-hour mean wind speeds is influenced through the use
of spot data by an increase in the dope, llk. The change in the parameter c depends on
this and on the point of intersection of the two lines. For larger fluctuations and ail else
being equai, the point of intersection moves away from the tail and towards the y-
intercept (which defines the parameter c ) and the change in dope is greater. The former
of the two would explain why the change in the parameter c was most sibcrIUficant for the
Brevoort Island data (see Figure 4.9) since there the fluctuations were least pronounced
and therefore the point of intersection tended to be W e s t from the y-intercept. In al1 the
cases considered in the simulation, the absolute difference in corresponding values of the
parameter c was found to be less than 0.1 m/s with the fractionai values ranghg from
0.97 to 1.00. The point of intersection in these instances tended to be near but to the right
of the y-intercept.

The changes in the Weibull exponent simulated in the analysis are summarized
graphicaily in Figure 4.10. For clarïty, o d y curves corresponding to the input values of c
= 3 , 4 , 7 and 15 m/s have been included and, for the same reason, the curves for the two-
minute spot wind speeds were not included as they were only margindy higher than
those for the one-minute interval (about half the thickness of each curve would overlap
for a given value of c). Results show larger percent decreases when one-hour mean wind
speeds are distributed with either a higher k or a lower c. With d l else constant, one or
both of the above will change the distribution to a more peaked c w e compared to the
given originai shape. It foiiows that one-hour mean wind speeds which exhibit Little
variance in the fust place are more susceptible to the scatter introduced through the use of
spot data and. in tum, are more susceptible to discrepancies in the Weibull exponent. The
influence of the averaging interval T is aiso clearly indicated on the plot.

Consider, for example, a database comprising hourly observed one-minute mean

wind speeds measured 10 m above ground in open Ievel surroundings- If the Weibull
parameters were estimated to be 1.9 and 7.0 d s , an estimate of the Weibull exponent
associated with one-hour mean wind speeds could be obtained from Figure 4- 10 based on
the assumption that the parameter c would not significantly change. The procedure would
be to simply locate the above point on the plot (interpolate where necessary) and read the
corresponding Weibull exponent associated with one-hour means from the horizontai
axis. In the above example, the Weibull exponent for one-hour mean wind speeds is
estirnated to be roughly 2.0. The figure, more simply, could be used as an aid in deciding
whether modified spot data need be applied according to an estimated error. It should be
kept in mind that larger errors are probable for spot wind speeds observed over rougher
terrain where the fluctuations about the mean are greater.

For engineering purposes, more significant than the parent population of one-hour
mean wind speeds, aithough not unrelated, is the population of extremes. The following
section deals with predicting extreme one-hou mean wind speeds from a database, again,
consisting of hourly-observed spot measurements.

4.5 Extreme Value Distribution

Two different methods for predicting extreme one-hour mean wind speeds from
spot measurements are assessed in this section, The fxst is the traditional approach of
fitting epochal extremes to the Type4 extreme value distribution (Gumbel, 1958) and the
second involves the parent distribution and an expression for the average upcrossing rate
of a stationary random variable (Rice, 1954). The latter approach has been studied by
Davenport (1967),Gomes and Vickery (1977), and Twisdale and Vickery (1992, 1993).
The two approaches are dealt with separately in the following two sections. The theory of
each approach is frrst o u t h e d and then resuits of the relevant parameters and predicted
extremes from the various time series are presented and differences among them

4.5.1 Epochal Extremes

Provided the parent distribution of wind speed is of the exponential f o m , which is

the case for the Weibdl distribution, the statistical distribution of the largest wind speed
occurring in a fmed interval of time (or an epoch) follows the Type4 extreme value
distribution (Gumbei, 1954). The cumulative form of this distribution is of the double
exponential type;

F (ri&, ) = exp[- exp[-a(&, - cr)]]

where fi, denotes the epochal extreme and a and 14 are the distribution parameters. The
parameter rc is the mode (that is, the expected or most frequent value) and the inverse of
the parameter a is termed the dispersion. The latter, as suggested by its name, reflects the
spread of the distribution in that larger values (or smaller values of a) resuït in the bulk of
the distribution being spread over a wider range of the variate.

Conforrnity of observed data to the mode1 can be indicated by the degree of

linearity after taking the double natural logarïthm of Equation 4.21 and rearranging as
follows:
Cumulative probabiLities can be derived through an anaiysis of order statistics on the
observed extremes (see Equation 4.15). The mode1 panmeters may then be estimated by
applying the least squares cntena to the transformed data. Another approach. which
produces estimates that are unbiased and exhibit minimum variance, is that outlined by
Lieblein (1974). In general, the method involves estimating the parameters through a
Linear combination of the order statistics which reflects the unequal confidence in the data
based on the rank (as opposed to the least squares method where each data point is 0 ven
equal weight). Errors are thus rninirnized in the instances, for exarnple, when a 50-year
wind speed is found in a set of 30 annuai maxima; in which case the exceedence
probability of the "high" value would be over-predicted. The form of the estimators is:

where rn is the rank and M is the total number of epochal extremes. Lieblein's estimators
are termed the Best Linear Unbiased Estimators (BLUE). The coefficients A, and B,
depend on the nurnber of extremes. Lieblein (1974) tabulates values appropriate for
sample sizes up to and including sixteen and provides a rnethod for their determination
Otherw ise.

Extreme wind speeds are often associated with a mean recurrence interval, R,
measured in epochs (also referred to as the renirn period). It is the wind speed which is
expected to be exceeded on average once every R epochs or in any one epoch with a
probability of 1/R. Therefore. 1-1/R may be equated to the cumulative probability to
obtain;

which, for R greater than about ten, can be approximated by:

 The extreme value theory requires that (Gumbel, 1958):

1. the maxima are drawn from identicaily distributed sampies of equd size,

2. the maxima are independent, and

3. the epochs are suffrciently large so as to dlow convergence to the extreme

value distribution.

In the case of wind, the above requirements are usually met for epochs equd to one year.
With respect to item 1, one-year epochs are appropriate in order to enclose the trends
associated with different seasons. The criterion of independence (item 2) will be met
from one-year to the next unless, on the rare occasion, adjacent annual extrernes both
result from an intense storm occurring through the New Year. The last criterion has been
tested by Cook (1982) for two cases of the Weibuil distribution (see Equation 4.13).
Namely the Rayleigh distribution (k = 2) and the Exponential distribution (k = 1). The
first is often appropriate for representing wind speed and thus it follows that the second is
appropriate for the square of the wind speed, or dynarnic pressure. The results showed
that the Rayleigh distribution converged at a rnuch slower rate than did the Exponentiai
distribution. The result was justified by making reference to the fact that both the
Exponential and Type-I extreme value distributions have upper tails of similar form.
Cook (1982) assessed that in the case of an epoch size equal to one year, extrernes drawn
from a parent Exponentid distribution will have converged fully while those taken from a
parent Rayleigh distribution will have not converged and be in ertor to the consenrative
(in t e m s of wind ioading, the Rayleigh distribution over-estimates the 50-year extreme
by roughly 10 %). The faster convergence of the Exponential distribution is a good
reason for fitting the square of the extreme wind speeds or the dynamic pressures to the
Type4 distribution and is the approach adopted here.
 In light of the above review and the task at hand, the question arises as to how
would the annuai extremes extracted fiom a time series of one-hour mean wind speed
differ from those extracted fiom a time series of short-duration spot wind speed- ClearIy,
if it were assumed that both maxima occurred in the same hour from year to year, then
differences would likely be sirnilar to those found with respect to the parent population in
the previous section- That is, the annual extremes wouid be comparable on average but
those associated with the spot measurements would exhibit more variance. The fact is,
however, that the two maxima are not necessarily from the sarne hour. Consider. for
exampie, if in a gven year the largest one-hour mean wind speed was 25 m / s and that
there were nine other hours (independent or otherwise) over which the mean wind speed
was within, say, 10 % of this value. Odds are that the largest spot wind speed would
come from the same hour over which the average was the highest but it is not necessarily
the case. It is likely, however, that the largest spot measurement in the ten hours would
be greater than 25 m/s. It is best to think of this scenario in terms of the distribution of
the spot factors which was shown to follow that of the standard normal distribution. It
can be shown that the mean value of the largest of ten independent samples taken from
the standard normal distribution is roughiy 1.5. Taking the coefficient of variation
appropriate for the short-duration measurements to be 0-1for the "high mean wind
speeds then, through Equation 4.4, it follows chat during one of the ten hours the spot
measurement will be 15 % (Le. 1+1.5*0.1) higher on average than the corresponding one-
hour mean. Thus, regardIess of which h o u the peak spot factor occurs, the corresponding
spot measurement would be greater than 25 mis. It is hypothesized that epochal extremes
taken from a time senes of spot wind speeds will not only exhibit more variance but aIso
show a higher average than otherwise sirnilar extremes taken from a time series of one-
h o u means.

Owing to the shortness of the data series for the three locations, the hypothesis
could not be tested with regard to m u a l extremes. hstead, an analysis was performed
for epochs of 7, 14 and 21 days in length, For each location, the extreme wind speeds
were extracted from al1 the time series for epochs with at l e s t 85 % of the data present.
The extreme wind speeds were subsequently converted to dynamic pressures using the
retationship given in The National Building Code of Canada (1990). That is;

q [Pa] = 0-65.(V [rn/ SI)'

where q is the dynamic pressure. For each senes of extrerne wind pressures, the mean
and r.m.s. were cdculated and the mode and dispersion of the Type4 extrerne value
distribution were estimated using Lieblein's BLUE- The results for the one-hour means
are given in Figures 4.1 1, Relevant parameters are shown within each of the plots,

It is noted here that the Type4 extreme value distribution may not be appropriate
for the extreme wind pressure data owing to the short epoch durations (see the
requirements for the theory listed above together with the subsequent discussion) but the
results should still serve to hdicate trends associated with the use of spot data. The fact
that the epoch sizes and the record periods are common to the analysis of each time series
at a given location and that the o d y difference is the type of wind observation, the results
and trends among them will provide qualitative insight in this respect. Quantitatively,
however, an analysis performed on otherwise similar series of annual extreme wind
pressures (i-e. epochs equal to one year) may lead to different results. This is m e r
discussed below.

The mean, rems. and Type4 parameters shown in Figures 4.1 1 are the reference
by which the corresponding resuits from the other time series are compared. Figures 4.12
summarize the rnean and r.m.s. values resulting from the other time series as fractions of
the corresponding value derived from the one-hour means. Ratios of the estimated mode
and dispersion are similarly presented in Figures 4.13. In addition to showing the results
from the three spot and three modifïed spot data sets, each plot also shows the resdts
from the full data senes (Le. consecutive measurements of r -minute average wind speed)
for a further reference.
 Both the mean and r.m.s. of the epochal extreme wind pressures taken from the
spot data sets (symbol "x" in Figures 4.13) are shown in nearly al1 cases to be higher than
those taken from the one-hour mean data sets, the few exceptions being for the r.m.s.
value. For either of the two quantities, the relative increase tends to be greater for shorter
averaging intervals of the spot wind speed measurement. This result is expected since the
same phenornenon is taking place in each case but to a larger scale for the shorter
averaging intervals. Fwther, the mean and r.m.s. values resulting from the analysis of the
M l data series tend to act as upper bounds to the increases experienced by those resulting
from the spot data sets.

Refemng to the results from the modified spot data sets (symbol "O" in Figures
4-12)? both the mean and r.rn,s. values are shown to be consistently Iower than the
corresponding values from the spot data sets and often result in ratios nearer unity. It
should be noted that the frrst symbol "O" in each half of a given plot corresponds to the
fust symbol "x" in the same half and sirnilarly for the second and third syrnbois (by
"correspond" it is meant that they both represent the same spot data series; one as is and
the other as the modified version). Cornparisons as such show the modified spot wind
pressures to consistently result in lower mean and r.m.s. values. The result is necessary
for the means since the highest spot rneasurement in a given epoch will aiways be
averaged with a comparatively lower adjacent value to make up the modified spot
measurement, For St- John's and Brevoort Island, most often for the ten-minute
averaging interval, the mean and r.m.s. values from the modified spot pressures show
ratios less than unity to a comparable extent by which they are Iarger based on the spot
data. This is not apparent at Downsview station as the ratios on the whole are somewhat
shified upward owing to the higher level of fluctuations of the spot measurements as
indicated in Figure 4.5.

The ratios resulting from the three spot data sets in a given plot are quite scattered
in the case of the r.m.s- values and are somewhat more stable for the means- The
variability, in peneral, scales with the level of the fluctuations (which corresponds to the
averaging interval and the characteristic surface roughness of the recording station). The
scatter in the ratios from the three modified spot data series in a given plot qualitatively
show similar trends but often to a lesser scale. With regards to changes in epoch size, it
shouId f r s t be noted that the number of extreme pressure data decrease considerably for
the longer epochs (see Figures 4.11) and thus any indicated trends may be questionable
due to the lack of control of the number of epochs available in each case. With this in
mind, the larger epochs tend to a m p w the scatter associated with r.m.s. ratios in a given
plot and appear to have little influence over the mean ratios on the whole.

In the interest of understanding how the above trends will influence predicted
extreme wind pressures, we tum to the estimated Type4 parameters shown in Figures
4.13. Generally, the changes in the mode and dispersion are similar to those found for the
mean and r.m.s. values respectively. By taking, moments of the Type4 extreme value
distribution, it can be shown that the mean and r.m.s. are a v e n by;

where y is Euler's constant (= 0.577). The close correspondence in the ratios presented
in Fibiges 4.12 and 4.13 follow from the above relationships together with the fact that
the percent increases in the mean and r.m.s. values were typically close in magnitude.

Several exceptions to the above trend were found for the data at Brevoort Island
station (see, for example, the lower nght plot in Fiowes 4.12b and 4.13b where the r.m.s.
ratios are shown to be sipificantIy higher than those of the dispersion) and are briefly
discussed here to illustrate the effectiveness of Lieblein's BLUE in elirninating bias due
to outliers found in extreme data. The beginning of the record period at Brevoort Island
comprised a severe wind stonn where the Iargest one-hour mean wind speed was in
excess of 25 m/s and the largest one-minute mean speed was slightly Iess than 33 m/s.
The short-duration extremes found in this event are likely associated with a return penod
Ionger than the record lena@ as they significantly faIl outside the range of the other
epochd extremes. The r.m.s. vaiues were more influenced by the extreme wind pressures
in this event than were the dispersion vaiues since they were a v e n less weight in the case
of the latter- This wodd help explain the discrepancies seen between the ratios.

Moving fonvard, we find that both the mode and dispersion tend to increase
through the use of spot data compared to those appropriate for one-hou mean data and
thus, noting Equation 4.24, predîcted extremes wili similarly increase. If the mode and
dispersion appropriate fcr one-hour mean wind pressures are IL and l/a and if those for the
alternative wind pressure measurement differ by a factor of Cu and C i l , respectively, the
ratio of the predicted extremes c m be a v e n by;

(4-28)

The above expression has been plotted for al1 the data sets (Le. ? = F, S and MS) for R
ranging from 5 to 100 epochs (see Fiagres 4.14). The first observation is that the wind
pressure ratios appear for the most part to be only marginally influenced by R to the
extent that a proportional relationship with the mean would appear to be appropriate (the
relating constant, of course, would depend on the intensity of the fluctuations), This is to
be expected in the case of the extrernes from the fui1 data sets since the highest short-
duration speeds in a given h o u in relation to the mean are typically charactenzed by
peaked distributions (Davenport, 1964). In the case of the spot wind pressures, the
variability among the results of the three data sets in a given plot is quite si,dficant
(typically 10 and as high as 20 7%) and in general increases for the shorter duration spot
measurements. Some of this variability may be attributable to the srnall sampIe sizes in
the cases of the larger epochs. The scatter among the modified spot wind pressures
shows sirnilar trends but often to a lesser scale. Quantitatively, the use of spot data
clearly leads to significant errors and it appears that extreme one-hour mean wind
pressures are better assessed through the use of modified spot data. Although, for the ten-
minute averagîng interval, the over-predictions from the spot data tend to be of the sarne
order as the under-predicûons from their rivai; the former may be preferred in the interest
of conservatism.

The question arïses as to how would the above results be different if the anaiysis
were performed on a set of annual extreme spot wind pressures. The qualitative picture is
Iikely the sarne but the percent differences so presented rnay or rnay not be comparable.
The relevant factors are the Ductuating process (descnbed by the coefficient of variation
of the short-duration rneasurement about the mean) and the nature of the extreme one-
hour means. The latter is important because consideration must be given to al1 the "high"
winds occurring over the year; whether they result frorn the same event o r an independent
one. The more mean wind speeds occurring in a given epoch which are comparable to
the overall extreme will result in the largest spot rneasurement being higher on average
than if there were fewer comparatively high wind speeds (Le. there would be more
opportunity to measure a "high" spot sarnple). Since the fluctuating process is the same
regardless of the epoch size, the difference in the results presented here to those
appropriate for one-year epochs couid be assessed based on the relative number of "high
winds. To this end, the number of hours over which the mean wind pressure was within a
certain percentage of the extreme one-hour mean was determined for various epoch sizes.
The average peak factor for wind pressures;

) 4 F @}
G F { 2 =-
fi,

determined from Type-1 fits of the previous analysis was used to define the percentage
threshold for each station. Thus, the number of one-hour mean wind pressures, Ns, larger
than the given epochal extreme divided by G,{r} was d e t e d n e d on an epoch to epoch
basis. %y way of example, the anaiysis was performed for epochs ranging fkom half a
month to twelve months based on the one-minute peak factor, GF{O l} .
 Results are presented in Table 4.3. The values of N' for a a v e n epoch size and
station are averages of those obtained from al1 available epochs over the record period.
The results are quite different behueen the three stations. Firstly, the values of N' for
Brevoort Island are smallest for the Iongest two epochs (Le. six and nine months) since
the record period compnsed a single stonn which was dominant over dl others. In this
cype of circurnsrance Ns is certain to be small and the largest spot rneasurement wiIl likely
not significandy bias to the high side of the largest one-hour mean. At St. John's, the
number of mean wind pressures within one peak factor of the extrerne was quite stable
and only increased marginaily for the twelve-month epoch duration. If this was typical
over the long run then results presented in Figure 4.14a would likely apply to annual
extremes. Lastly, the results at Downsview show a good correlation between epoch size
and Ns,in which case, the largest spot measurement would tend to move further away
from the peak one-hour mean for longer epochs and closer to the overall extreme short-
duration wind pressure. A possible indication to the nature of N' would be the mode of
the distribution of the pth extreme one-hour mean wind pressure, M,, which relates to the
Type-I parameten of the overall extreme by (Gumbel, 1958):

Thus, when the dispersion is smail relative to the mode (those for the o v e r d extreme) we
could expect more wind pressures nearer the overail maxima since the relative decrease in
u,,would be faster otherwise.

A distinct picture presented in Figure 4.14 is that the predicted spot wind
pressures correlate well with those resuiting from the full data sets. That is, they typicaily
fa11 in between the predicted one-hour mean and the predicted o v e r d short-duration
mean at roughly the one-third point (Le. they lie roughly one-third of the distance between
the unity line and the uppermost line). In this regard, the following parameter is relevant:
From the data shown in the 27 plots of Fiame 4.14, the mean and standard deviation of
Cswas calculated to be 0.30 and 0.18 respectively. The thickened vertical line shown in
each plot is centered vertically on this mean value and extends one standard deviation in
either direction. In t e m s of their location. the extreme spot wind pressures appear to
correlate weii with the locations of the vertical bars for ail the various scales of
fluctuation.

Station Quantity Epoch statistics

0.5 mo, 1 mo. 3 mos. 6 mos. 9 mos. 12 mos.
St. John's No. of obs, 30 16 5 2 1 1
Ns 13 15 14 12 15 22
Brevoort 1, No. of obs. 17 9 3 1 1 O
Ns 18 15 23 9 9 -
Downsview No- of obs. 20 11 3 L 1 1
Ns 21 30 46 105 108 132

Table 4-3 Averages of Ns over the indicated number of observations based on the
one-minute peak factor

If the statistical distribution of Cs could be established more generally as it rnight

apply to one-year epochs, it would provide a simple means for estimating the errors
associated with the use of spot data. That is, substituting;

and G, {rJ into Equation 4.3 1 gives;

Thus, we couid predict the expected value of Gs {r) , analogous to the peak factor but for
spot wind pressures, given that of GF{c) , the latter of which has been established more
generally. For example, expressions from which GF{r} could be estimated are:

and:

where 2 and are the height above ground and roughness length respectively. Equation
4.35 (modified here sornewhat ro match terrns) was proposed by Cook (1985) and gives
the average factor for relating the peak short duration wind speed to the coincident one-
hour mean. The relationship is qualitatively based on the work of Wieringa (1973) but
modified empiricaily in the interest of simplification. The predictions based on Equation
4.35 were found to be in excellent agreement with the anaiytical approach presented by
Greenway ( 1979).

The use of Equation 4.33 is only speculative and would require a Iarger database
to establish foundation. The present results from the lirnited database do support such an
idea however, It makes intuitive sense in well-behaved climates, where the rate of
occurrence of intense depressions is reasonably constant, that the parameter Cs would be
somewhat stable from one epoch to the next. This is more likely m e in the case of one-
year epochs so as to encompass seasonai trends and have a more constant distribution
from which the extremes are taken. Further, some of the inevitable scatter associated
with spot data is suppressed, in effect, through the process of ordering the extremes and
estimating the parameters of the Type-1 distribution according to Lieblein's BLUE. In the
end, it appears reasonable that estimated extreme spot wind pressures would correlate
well relative to the one-hour mean value and the overall short-duration value. However,
until this can be expressed in more definitive terms, the use of modified spot data
provides a practicd means for obtaining reasonabie estimates of extreme one-hou mean
wind pressures based on a set of epochd extremes.

An alternative approach to establish more generally the behavior of extremes is to

utilize the parent distribution in a manner as descnied below.

4.5.2 Extremes from the Parent Population

The Iink between parent wind speeds and extremes foIIows from the expression of
the average upcrossing rate of a stationary rmdom process a v e n by Rice (1954).
Regarding the process to be one-hour mean wind speed, the mean upcrossing rate of r n is~
given by;

where ri+, is the derivative of mean wind speed with respect to time and f (ni,,+) is the
joint probability function of the two variables. If the mean speed and accelention are
independent and if the former fol10ws the W e i b d distribution then Equation 4.36
becornes:
 Regarding the above parameters to be known (see more details below), extreme
wind speeds can be estimated from Equation 4.37 in severai ways. The fxst, as suggested
by Davenport ( 1967). would be to regard the upcrossings of very high mean wind speeds
as rare events that follow the Poisson distribution. This gives the probability of s
upcrossings in a period of duration Tas:

n i e cumulative distribution of the largest mean wind speed in penod T c m be equated to

the probability of zero upcrossings - Le. p(x = O). Setting T = 1 year and the cumulative
probabiiity to 1-UR, where R is the r e m penod in years, gives:

Another approach, employed by Gomes and Vickery (1977), is to set the upcrossing rate
given in Equation 4.37 to 1/R (Le. one upcrossinp in R years). This leads to a sirnilar
relations hip:

The above two expressions are approximately the same for R larger than about ten. The
difficulty with either of them is that they require some type of numencal or iterative
scheme to obtain a solution for the extreme wind speed and thus lack practicai usability.
Equation 4.4 1 was simplified by Gomes and Vickery by assuming that 4 (R) was a
linear function of InR with a slope as evduated at R = 1 epoch. The solution for & (R)
was thus analogous to that from the Type-1 extreme value distribution (see Equation 4.25)
where estimates of the mode and dispersion ate given by:
 -
a k [
1 = -c( l n ~ ) I M - ' l+-- k-l
XlnN
k-lz1n(ln~)
( )
-
k lnN ]
Resulting extreme wind speeds from the above approximation were found to be in
excellent agreement with those determined directly frorn Equation 4.41 for the Austraiian
data analyzed by Gomes and Vickery-

The employment of the above theory requires estimates of the parameters shown
in Equations 4.38. Estimates of k, c and C, can be obtained from a record of rnean wind
speed (see Section 4.4 with regard to the Weibull parameters) while V , termed the mean
cycling rate, and P require additional knowledge on the statistics of acceleration. riz,. An
alternative approach for deriving the mean cycling rate would be to utilize the Iong-term
power spectnim of wind speed (see, for exarnple, Davenport, 1967 or Gomes and
Vickery, 1977)-

In the present study, the time series of one-hour mean wind speed for the three
locations were transformed to a tirne series of acceleration by way of the eighth-order
centered finite-divided-difference formula (which is developed from the Taylor senes
expansion and c m be found in most text books describing standard numericd
procedures). From the transformed time series, the relevant statistics were determined as
follows:

where J is the total number of sarnples in the particular time series. The above
expressions are based on the assumption that the statisticai distribution of rir, is
symrnetrïcal about zero. The second expression above was evaluated over the full range
to account for any slight asymmetries due to the short record periods. The estirnates so
determined were used together with those of k, c and o, obtained in Section 4.4 to arrive
at values for p. v and N (see Equations 4.38) appropriate for one-hou mean wind speeds
at the three stations. An identical analysis was perforrned on the time series of spot and
modified spot wind speed for the three averaging intervals.

The estimates of parmeter p were generally not influenced by the type of hourly
wind observation. This is s h o w in Table 4.4 where the value resulting from the time
series of one-hour mean wind speed are compared with the average and r.m.s. of those
resulting from the other time series. A value of 0.37 would appear appropriate for al1
three stations. This can be compared with 0.36 which was the estimate obtained by
Gomes and Vickery (1977) in their analysis of Aus~aliandata and with 1I (= 0.40)

which would be the value if the accelerations were taken as normally distributed.

Station Parameter B
From time series of m, from al1 remaining tirne series
mean r.ms.
St. John's 0.369 0.376 0.003
Brevoort 1, 0.367
Downsview 0.373

Table 4.4 Estimates of parameter P

The mean cycling rates based on the one-hour mean wind speeds were found to be
roughly 440, 300 and 510 cycles/year for St. John's, Brevoort Island and Downsview
respectively. In contrat to the parameter P , the cycling rates were significantly
influenced by the type of wind observation as is shown in Figure 4.15. Firstly, the fact
that the cycling rates are higher for the spot measurements is not surprising since the
changes in wind speed from one observation to the next ofien become amplified for
measurements taken over shorter durations. We find at St. John's that the increases range
from about 20 to 4 0 % for the ten, two and one-minute averaging intervals respectively.
At Brevoort Island the increases are comparable and at Downsview they are somewhat
higher as the upper range increases to about 50 %. The modified spot data sets typically
result in ratios near unity for the one and two-minute averaging intervals and show
roughly a 10 % decrease in the case of the modified ten-minute spot wind speeds. The
quantitative results should be indicative to those which would be obtained from an
othenvise sirnilar analysis perfomed on I q e r databases since they reflect the parent
process.

The changes in the parameter N (shown in the nght half of each of the plots given
in Figure 4.15) generally mirror those previously discussed for the cycling rate. This
results from the fact that both the parameter P and the ratio ko,/c are quite stable for the
different type of wind observations- With regard to the latter, this can be seen by taking
the second central moment of the Weibull distribution and then muitiplying the result by
Mc. This would give the following relationship;

where r denotes the gamma function. Thus, for k rangïng from 1.5 to 2.5 the ratio is
found to only change marginaiiy from about 0.92 to 0.95.

Predicted extreme wind speeds based on the mode and dispersion given in
Equations 4.42 are influenced by N, llk and c. If the factors by which the three
parameters change are CN,CIRand Cc, the ratio of the mode resulting from the alternative
measurement to that from one-hour mean wind speeds, Cu,c m be adequately represented
by;

while the similar factor for the dispersion c m be given by:

The above expressions c m be used to assess the degree by which the parameters
influence the estimates of the mode and dispersion and therefore of the predicted
extremes, Typical values are shown in Table 4.5. Firstiy, the actual value of N over the
relevant range does not ~i~gnificantiy
influence the ratios of either the mode or dispersion
and was teft constant while the WeibuiI exponent k has some influence and was varied as
shown in the table. Cc was taken as just less than unity (as was found most often the case
in Section 4.4) and was not varied as its influence on both ratios is readily apparent from
the above expressions. We see from Table 4.5 that a 6 % increase in I/k has more of a
impact on the predicted mode and dispersion than a 40 % increase in N; these being
typical variations found at St. John's for the one-minute spot wind speeds. Their
combined effect is perhaps more relevant, since both changes should exist in the case of
spot wind speeds; this is shown in the last row.

c c cm CN Changes in the mode and dispersion

k = 1.5, N = 900 /year k = 2.5, N = 900 /year

Table 4.5 Influence of the relevant parameters on changes in the mode and
dispersion evduated from Equations 4.42

The mode and dispersion has been evaiuated from Equations 4.42 for the entire lot
of data sets. The mean cycling rates. given in cycles/year, were first converted to
represent fourteen-day epochs to allow the cornparison of results with observed values.
The derïved speeds were converted to dynamic pressures using Equation 4.26 to maintain
a consistent presentation with that previous. Results are shown in Fi,we 4.16 for the
one-hour mean datz. The estimate of the mean cycling rate is shown in each of the plots.
In ail cases the model appears to represent the data quite well with the exception of St-
John's where the dispersion appears to be somewhat low.

Extreme wind pressure ratios based on the Type4 parameters for fourteen-day
epochs are shown in Fi,we 4-17 for the spot and modified spot data sets. The ratios
show sirniiar trends to those presented in Figures 4.14 (note that the vertical scales are
diffèrent). This simply follows from the fact that the parent model fits well the sarne data
that were used to calibrate the Type4 parameters in the previous analysis. With regard to
the scatter among the results of three spot data sets in a given plot (or modified spot data
sets), the parent method is found to render a more consistent result in cornparison to the
method of epocfial extremes. It is clear that, for either type of analysis, however, the
ernployment of modified spot wind data would be advantageous when the interest is in
predicting one-hour mean extremes-

The parent mode1 c m be used to assist in a n s w e ~ gthe question posed earlier.

Narnely, how would the results given in Section 4.5.1 be different if an othenvise sirnilar
analysis was performed on a set of annual extreme spot wind pressures. The parent
model would suggest that there would be a marginal increase in the ratios, That is, if the
plots in Fi,pre 4.17 were constructed for one-year epochs, as opposed to fourteen-day
epochs, the ratios so presented would be slightly higher on the whole (in terms of the
percentage value, the typical increase wouId be about 1 %).

4.6 Concluding Remarks

This chapter has shown that use can be made of national weather archives
comprising hourly spot measurements for estimating parent and extreme value statistics
of one-hour mean speeds or pressures. The procedure is to generate a new wind speed
time series by simply averaging the adjacent spot measurernents. This has the effect of
reducing the variability of the houriy speed about the one-hour mean value.
 The results from the wind speed data recorded at St. John's, which were measured
over open and flat terrain at a height of IO m, showed that the direct use of one-minute
mean spot wind speeds leads to extrerne wind pressures that are typicaiiy about 15 to 20
% hïgher than one-hou rnean vaiues. Using Equations 4.34 and 4-35, this translates to
roughly a 10- to 20-minute mean pressure assuming a roughness len,~ of the order of
0.01 m. The use of the modified spot wind data increased the averaging times of the
resulting extreme wind pressures, which are estimated to range from about 40 to 60
minutes assurning the same roughness length. The use of the modified spot hvo-minute
speeds in the extreme value anaiysis resuited in wind pressures that correspond to roughly
a 50- to 70-minute average. These averaging times c m be compared to the 20- to 30-
minute wind pressures resulting from the direct use of two-minute spot wind speeds.
I I
O ln O in C
CU 4 c.

(s/ru) paads p u ~ ~
(S/UI) paads pu^^
 0.20
1 based o n one-minute m e a n wind soeeds
I

0.20
based o n two-minute mean wind speeds

0.20
based o n ten-minute m-ean wind speeds
- normal d i s t -

-4.0 -3.2 -2.4 -1.6 -0.8 0.0 0.8 1.6 2.4 3.2 4-0
s p o t factor, g

Figure 4.3a Histogarm of the spot factor - St. John's Station

 1
- - I based on one-minute mean w i n d speeds

0.20
based o n two-minute rnean w i n d s p e e d s

0.20
based on ten-minute m e a n w i n d speeds
- normal dist.

s p o t factor, g

Figure 4.3b Histograrns of the spot factor - Brevoort Island Station

 based o n one-minute mean w i n d s ~ e e d s

based on two-minute mean w i n d s ~ e e d s

0.20
based on ten-minute mean w i n d speeds
- normal dist,
I

s p o t factor, g

Figure 4 . 3 ~ Histograms of the spot factor - Downsview Station

 1 based o n one-minute mean w i n d s ~ e e d s

1 based o n two-minute mean wind s ~ e e d s

1 4

0.01 , 6 1 i I l i 1 1 1 t I 1 .
1
1 1
0.3 0.6 1 3 6 10

i based o n ten-minute mean wind s ~ e e d s

one-hour mean wind speed ( 4 s )

Figure 4.4a Coefficients of variation - St. John's Station (10699 data points per plot)
 3
- based on one-minute m e a n wind speeds

-1 based o n two-minute rnean wind speeds

0.01 ! 1 1 i 1 1 4 1 1 i 1 1 1
1
1 i

based o n ken-minute m e a n wind speeds

0.3 0.6 3 - . _ 3O
1 10- - _. -
one-hour mean w i n d speed (m/s)

Figure 4.4b Coefficients of variation - Brevoort Island Station (6497 data points per
p w
 1 based o n one-minute m e a n w i n d s ~ e e d s

t
0.01 l i 1 , I I ' I t i 1 1 . 1 I
O.3 0.6 1 3 6 10 3

1 based o n two-minute m e a n w i n d speeds

1
0.01 i 1 1 1 8 I l i I I i I 1 ! 1 L
0.3 O. 6 1 3 8 10 3O

c
1 based o n ten-minute m e a n wind speeds

0.01 1
O. 3
1 I L
O. 6
i [ i
1
l

1
l I

3
1 L 1

6
I l i
1
1

10
1
3

one-hour rnean w i n d speed (rn/s)

Figure 4 . 4 ~ Coefficients of variation - Downsview Station (6925 data points per plot)
 0.3
St. John's

one-minute m e a n s
two-minute m e a n s
ten-minute means

1 Brevoort Island 1

ten-minute m e a n s

0.3
f
Downsview

I I 1
4 1

10 1G 20 25
one-hour mean w i n d speed (m/s)

Figure 4-5 Coefficients of variation fiom Equation 4.1 1

 c = 4-72 rn/s
d
-

-
-
-
x Data

I I I
- Weibull fit
0.0 1 0.1 0 0 -50 O .'99
probability of n o n - e x c e e d e n c e

Figure 4.6 Weibull distributions of parent one-hour mean wind speed

 0-4
St. John's
mean = 7-11
r-ms. = 3.53

Brevoort Island
mean = 6.19
0.3
r.m.s- = 4.57

0 -4
Downsview

4 8 12 16 20 24
one-hour mean wind speed (m/s)

Figure 4.7 Histograms of parent one-hour rnean wind speed

 Weibull exponent k f o r one-hour mean w i n d speeds

Figure 4.10 Changes in the Weibull exponent through the use of spot wind data
 600
7-dav e ~ o c h s
mean = 153.0
r-rns. = 65-7
400- m o d e = 123-6

600
14-dav epochs
mean = 181.3
r - m s . = 67.7
4 0 0 1 m o d e = 149.1

,600
a 21 -day e p o c h s
P.
w
rnean = 202.6Pa
2
3 r-m-S.= 67.4 Pa
$ 400- m o d e = 169.4Pa
al
L
a d i s p . = 57.8 Pa
T
l
C
*d

5 200-
UJ
E
al
L
4 x Data
X - vpe-1 fit
a 1 0 1 I l I l
1 2 5 10 20 50 1C
return period (epochs)

Figure 4.1 la Extreme one-hour mean wind pressures based on the epochal mode1 - St.
John's Station
 600
7-day e ~ o c h s
rnean = 174.9
r-rns. = 84-6
mode = 133.8

'"1
X
mode = 178.1
d i s p . = 75.8

i
/
,600
(Q

V
CL 21 -day epochs
Q)
S.
mean = 248.7 Pa
3 r . m s = 73.7 Pa

X
xData
-v p e - 1 fit
1 1 1 l
1 2 5 10 20 50 1C
return period (epochs)

Figure 4.1 1b Extreme one-hour mean wind pressures based on the epochal mode1 -
Brevwrt Island Station
 7-day ,epochs
mean = 66-1
r-m-S. = 24.6
mode = 54.3
= 20.8

14-day e ~ o c h s
m e a n = 77.8
r-m-S.= 25.0
mode = 65.6
disp. = 21.3

a
a
-
P)
L
3
l 21 -dav epochs
m e a n = 87.5 Pa
1 r.rn.s. = 22-8 Pa
mode = 75.8 Pa
disp. = 21.0 Pa

X
o ! I I I
- vpe-1
, fit
2 5 10 20
return period (epochs)

Figure 4.1 lc Extrerne one-hour mean wind pressures based on the epochal mode1 -
Downsview Station
 ten-minute spceds

14-day
epochs

2î-dsy
epochs 1
lp4

moan

Figure 4 . 1 2 ~ Mean and r.m.s. values of extreiiie wind pressure - Downsview Station - result froin the alternative ineüsureinent F
normalized by thut from one-hour means u
m 1:::
i 1:::
I t:::
r 1:::
n 1:::
n I ::y
n I :::
a r :::
U 1 :::
Il 1 1::
Il 1 :::
T=
l

1
1 3 :

1 3 -

1
O
.Y
1 1 5 .

Ki/
I I I

LI/
1I 1I 1I N
:::i
tIci
I I I

:::[ --
O

1 1 1:
I I a:
I1 lt 1:L i

Ili:: -
O

_I
Ill ::
III ::
Ill ::
1 1 1 1:
III ::
.Y

I I ::
I I ::
I I ::
1 l::
1 I ::
1 l::
l t ::
1 c::
l c::
1 i::
1 t:::
1 c::
l 11:
P 1: ::
t 1: ::
1 1: ::
1 1:
I 1:
1 1:
I 1:
1 1:
1 1::
l 1::
1 :
I :
1 ,
I
-
O
 1 I L :
1 lt .:
I li ::
1 IL ::
l IL ::
l 11: :: -
l 11: ::
1 11:::
l 11:::
1 11:::
1 Il: ::
1 11:::
1 II: ::
w ::
111:::
-
l Il: ::
111:::
1 Il::r
141::
111::
1
in::
u:: 1 -
I I ::
r i ::
1 r ::
I I ::
..
1 1 1 b 1 1

1 Il :#
Ill :
Ill :
III I
III :
Ill :
Ill :
Ill :
Ill :
rrr:
:
Ill
:
III
:
Ill
:
111
:
lit
:
&il
Ill 5
Ill r
Ili I
Ill :
11 1
1I
II
l
9
 600
Brevoort Island
m e a n cycling rate = 297

,300 1
a Downsview
P.
w

0 m e a n cycling rate = 508 cycles/year

L
I
VI
rn 200-
cl
L
a
-a
E:
.-
100-

E
QI
x x X x x x
L
-4 xData
X
0 o I 1 i 1
- Eqns. 4.42
L
l 2 5 10 20 50 1I
r e t u r n period (epochs)

Figure 4.16 Extreme one-hour mean wind pressures based on the parent mode1 for
fourteen-day epochs
 1 111 .I
i r i t
l i t
::
::
1 III
III
::
r:
:: -
I Ill
III :I
I Ill
III
::
::
::
j Ill
118 ::
i III
III
::
- --
.1:-
I III
-
1
!
!
1 11
1 11
III
Ilt
-.

i.-.i-
-.--
1
.- --
1
II1

f II1
1 11 ..--
- * -
1 11
! 1 11
t 1 11
.-
j ,
l Il
1 II
r Il
1 I

1 Il :::
111 :: :
III :: :
tll :::
Ill :::
f II :::
iIr :::
Ill :::I

I il
III
IIl
III
1 Il
I Il
lII
1 II
1 Il
III
1 11
1t l
IIl
111
1 11
1 11
1 11
4 II
IU
IO
In
Ia
Iu
1I
Chapter 5
Evaluation of Canadian Driving-Rain Wind
Pressures

5.1 Introduction

Welsh, Skinner and Moms (1989) constructed maps showing the geographicd
variation of drivingrain wind pressures (DRWPs) across Canada for use in the CSA
Standard CANKSA-A440-M90. The Standard requires that a DRWP read from the
design map is less than the window's capacity to resist rain penetration as prescnbed by
the water tightness test. The test involves applying a spatially uniform pressure drop
across the window for four periods of five minutes each separated by one-minute
intervals of zero pressure while water is continuously sprayed onto the window. Tests are
repeated with a higher pressure until water penetration is observed and the window
capacity is then chosen as the applied pressure of the Iast successful run. The test
pressure increments are shown in Table 2.2.

An essential requirement for relating the water penetration test conditions to in-
situ driving-rain conditions is knowledge of the extreme wind climate during rainfalI for
the patticuiar site Iocation. The wind events of interest are those that occur during
rainfails that sufflciently wet the windward building surface s o as to provide an ample
arnount of water at window Iocations or at the Iocations of other envelope components
prone to water penetration. In this context, the spatial and temporal variations in the
intensity of r a i n i d impinging ont0 a building surface over a storm may not be of
importance so long as water continues to reside at the locations of the envelope
susceptible to rain penetration (for exarnple, dong window sills o r construction joints).
Welsh, Skinner and Moms (1989), through discussions with the technicd comrnittee of
the CSA Standard, suggested that a minimum one-hour mean rainfall intensity of 1.8
mm/hr could be used as a tbreshold for identifying the wind events during which
suffrcient water would be avaiiabIe on the windward facade for infiltration to be possible.

To be of practical use and to allow for their interpretation, the D R W s wouid

have to represent a known averaging time and be based on a common terrain exposure
and height above ground. This would dlow for the mean values to be rnodified for
different exposures and heights above ground. Also, appropriate gust factors could then
be applied to adjust the mean D R W s to represent an averaging tirne comparable to the
duration of the applied pressure used for the window test, for exarnple, o r to other
durations as seen fit for different applications.

In review of the analysis performed by Welsh, Skinner and Morris (1989), two
uncertainties in their DRWP estimates were evident. Fust, the representative averaging
time of the DRWPs were not readily apparent owing to the use of non-continuous wind
records in their analysis. The wind data, from which conventionai order statistics on the
annual extrernes was performed, comprised nominal one-minute or two-minute mean
speeds observed on the hour. The authors acknowledged the uncertainty in the averaging
time of their DRWP estimates. Secondly, no attempt was made to ensure standardized
wind records. That is, measurements made by an anemorneter located on the rooftop of
an airport control tower, for exarnple, were treated one and the same as measurements
taken from an anemorneter hxed to a ten-meter pole on the gound surface away from any
imrnediate obstructions. To be able to compare results from one location to the next
would require that al1 measurements be based on a similar exposure and height above
ground. It appears from the fourteen stations examined in this study that about the fust
five to ten years of the records andyzed by Welsh, Skinner and Moms (1989), which
were mostly 29 years long, were to various extents incompatible with data refiecting a
standard exposure (i.e- 10 meters above open and flat terrain).

The two items discussed above are addressed through a re-evaluation of the
DRWPs for fourteen of the stations examuied by Welsh, Skinner and Moms (1989). The
averaging time issue is dealt with through the use of the modified spot data technique
presented in the previous chapter and the non-stationary aspects of the AES wind records
are dedt with by using the fdtered wind records developed in Section 3.3.1. In addition,
several other andysis issues that may give rise to errors are considered and will be
discussed in the following section.

5.2 Analyses of the Canadian DRWPs

Five different methods were used to evaluate DRWPs for the fourteen stations
listed in Table 3.7. The first method emulates the andysis performed by Welsh, Skinner
and Moms (1989) whiie each of the following four methods rnodiQ a certain aspect of
the analysis. The issues are addressed separateIy in order to highiight each of their
influence on the resuiting D R W s . In the opinion of the author, the final analysis leads to
DRWPs that are more readiIy interpretable in terms of averaging time and terrain
exposure and thus more suited to a wider range of applications.

5.2.1 -
Base Analysis Welsh, Skinner and Morris (1989)

The first method for estimating DRWPs foiiowed that used in the work of Welsh,
Skinner and Morris ( 1989). One-hour rainfall amounts were estimated from six-hour
precipitation (rain, freezing rain, snow, etc.) totds and hourly present weather
observations as described in Section 3.3.2. The wind speed associated with a given one-
hour rainfall total was taken as the nominal one-minute or nominal two-minute rnean
observed at the beginning of that hour. For example, if 3 mm of rainfall were estimated
between hours 1200 and 13:00, the associated wind speed would be that averaged over
the one or two minutes ending at hour 12:OO. The wind speeds associated with one-hour
rainfdls 2 1.8 mm, 2 3.0 mm and 2 5.1 mm were then collecteà and the annual extremes
from each subset were extracted and converted to dynamic pressures using Equation 4.26.
The Method of Moments (Equations 4.27) was then applied to determine the mode and
dispersion of the Type4 extreme value distribution and the DRWPs were evaluated for a
a v e n return penod using Equation 4.24.
 The record penods of this analysis are the same as those anaiyzed by Welsh,
Skinner and Moms (1989) for each of the fourteen stations. The penods of record for the
HAL and POB stations are 196 1-1985 and 1966-1985 respectively. For the remaining
ttveive stations, the record penods are 1957-1985. Also, similar to their analysis, the
archived wind speeds were used directiy with no modification for the different
memorneter heights and exposures.

5.2.2 Anaiysis 1 - Use of Filtered Wind Records

In Canada, it was not recognïzed until about the mid 1960's the importance of
locating anemometers away from the immediate influence of nearby obstructions. At this
time, the anemometers located at many Canadian airports were relocated (often from the
rooftops of airport buildings) to open areas on standard ten-meter poles. The wind
records used in the Base Analysis and by Welsh, Skinner and Moms (1989) spanned this
transition period and, at the same time, al1 measurements were ueated equal in the
analyses. Here, the method is comparable to that described in the previous section with
the exception that the filtered wind records developed in Section 3 . 3 2 were used. The
periods of the tiltered wind records (see Table 3.7) start on average about 8 years later
and extend 7 years longer compared to those used in the Base Analysis.

5.2.3 -
Analysis 2 Use of Modifed Spot Wind Data

Here, the modified spot wind data were incorporated into the analysis, which is
othenvise sirnilar to Analysis 1. For example, if 3 mm of rainfali were estimated between
hours 1200 and 13:00, the associated wind speed in this case would be the average of the
short-duration means observed at hour 12:OO and at hour 13:OO. A s shown in Section 4.5,
this process leads to extreme value estimates that better represent one-hour means
compared to the extrerne values derived from a record comprising one short-duration
observation per hour.
5.2.4 -
Analysis 3 Use of Rainfaii Measurements

The issue addressed through this analysis is how the accuracy of the DRWPs is
infIuenced through the use of thz raiddl estirnates as opposed to the more accurate
rainfall measurements. The premise for using the estimated amounts is that the
meteorological data from which they are based are consistently avaiiable year round. On
the other hand, the rainfall rneasurements from the automatic rain gauges are often only
available during the warm season. Rainfalls during the Late fa11 through early spring,
which are not uncomrnon for coastal regions, may coincide with strong winds and thus
need to be considered in the analysis. In review of fourteen stations lisced in Table 3.7, it
is seen that ten stations have rainfdl rneasurements year round, two stations have rainfall
measurements year round over most of the record penod and four stations have rainfall
measurements during the w a n i season ody. In this analysis, the rainfall estimates were
only used when the measurements were not available and otherwise the measurements
were used. Apart from this difference, this analysis is sirnilar to Analysis 2.

5.2.5 -
Analysis 4 Use of Lieblein's BLUE

In this Analysis, the Type-1 parameters were estimated with Lieblein's BLUE
(Lieblein, 1974) as opposed to the Method of Moments. Lieblein's approach gives the
correct weight to each of the extrema according to their rank. This andysis is otherwise
sirnilar to Analysis 3.

5.3 Cornparisons of Canadian DRWPs

A summary of the five different methods described above is given in Table 5.1.
The changes in the analyses are highlighted in the table. The DRWP estimates are plotted
in Fiewes S.la, 5.lb and 5.k for the 1.8 mm, 3.0 mm and 5.1 mm one-hour rainfall
thresholds respectively. All DRWPs are expressed as fractions of the corresponding
value denved using the Base Analysis. Aiso shown on the plots are the DRWP estimates
obtained by Welsh, Skinner and Morris (1989). Appendùt D plots results of Analysis 4.
Andvsis Record Period Wind Data Rain Data Analvsis
Base Welsh, Skinner Spot Estirnated Method of
and Morris ( 1989) observations Moments
1 Fiitered Spot Estimated Method of
- --
observations Moments
2 ~iltered Modified spot Estimated Method of
observations Moments
3 Filtered Modified spot Measured Method of
observations Estimated Moments
4 Fiitered Modified spot Measured/ LieMein's
observations Estimated BLUE

Table 5-i Surnmary of the analysis methods used to evaluate the DRWPs

The fxst result that stands out in Figures 5.1 is the large differences between the
DRWPs estimated in the Base Analysis (shown as un@ on the plots) and the DRWPs
estimated by Welsh, Skinner and Morris (1989). For example, for the 1.8 mm/hr rainfd
threshold, the 30-year DRWP estimated by Welsh, Skinner and Moms ( 1989) at SJS is
55 % higher and, at MON, their D R W s are at l e s t 30 % higher for al1 the return periods
pIotted. In contrast, their values are about 5 % Iower at VAN and practically equal at
VIC, CAL and HAL. The overall trend is that the DRWPs estimated by Wekh et al. are
higher than those derived in this study using the Base Analysis with the differences
decreasing for the higher rainfall thresholds. This trend is highiighted in Table 5.2 where
the ratios of the ten-year DRWPs have been summarized.

Rainfall Ten-year DRWPs -

Threshold Welsh et ai. / Base Analysis
avg. r.m.s. max. min.
1 . 8 m m k 1-15 0-15 1.42 0-94
3.0mm/hr 1.10 0.12 1.38 0.90
S.lmm/hr 1-04 0.06 1.19 0.94

Table 5.2 Cornparison of the ten-year DRWPs evaluated by Welsh, Skinner and
Morris (1989) and by the Base Analysis; statistics from al1 fourteen
stations
 The above discrepancies are disturbing because both of the analyses were based
on the same elements of the AES digital archives. Assuming, therefore, that the wind
data used in both analyses were the same, the dii-ferences wouid have to be attributed to
differences in the rainfall estimates between the two studies; the estimates being based on
hourly present weather obsenrations, six-hour precipitation arnounts and 24-hour rainfall
arnounts (see Section 3-32). For exarnple, if one of the procedures lead to an average of
400 hours per year during which the raidal1 exceeded 1.8 mm and the other procedure
Iead to an average of 500 hours per year during which the same threshold was exceeded,
the mnuai extremes would tend to be higher in the Iatter case due to the increased
population size (assurning that the statistics of each population were not si-eficantly
different), Further, if the average number of hours per year were 40 and 50 respectively
for the 5.1 mm one-hour rainfall thresholdTan increase in the annual extreme would also
be applicable but to a Iesser extent. This idea would explain the differences shown in
Table 5.3 if the rainfall estimating procedure used by Welsh, Skinner and Morris (1989)
tended to produce a larger number of rainfall events than in this study.

An example of where the rainfail estimating procedures may have been different
is in the treatment of mixed precipitation events. In this study, care was taken to
distinguish between the different precipitation types over a given six-hour period and to
adjust the rainfail estimates accordingly to match the measured 24-hour rainfall arnount.
This is illustrated in the exarnple calculations given in Table 3.10. This modification
tended to decrease the one-hou rainfall estimates. If this adjustment was not used in the
analysis performed by Welsh, Skinner and Moms (1989), then their estimated rainfalls
would tend to be higher for the mixed precipitation events, which would lead to a larger
number of rain-fali threshold exceedences compared to this study.

Several different variations in the rainfall estimating technique were exercised in

an attempt to arrive at DRWPs similar to those derived by Welsh, Skinner and Moms
(1989). One of these did not include the modification factor to resolve the mixed
precipitation events as described above. Another variation in the anaiysis included
matching the one-hour rainfaii arnounts with the short-duration mean wind speeds
observed at the bottom of the hour as opposed to matching them with the speeds
measured at the top of the hour. However, the differences in the DRWPs codd not be
resolved as none of the alternative analyses produced DRWPs ~ i , ~ c a n t idifferent
y than
those derived in the Base &aiysis.

Another possible explmation of the differences between the DRWPs developed

by Welsh, Skinner and Morris (1989) and those derived in this study using the Base
Analysis is that the wind databases were different in the two studies. This is indicated
based on the wind record at POB- Welsh, Skinner and Morris (1989) only utilized annuai
extremes if more than 90 9% of al1 the relevant data were available over the aven year.
The same provision was foIlowed in this study. Of the 20 years of data analyzed for
POB, 19 years were found to have a sufficient amount of data in this study whiie al1 20
years apparently passed the criteria in their study. The annual extremes from 1966 were
not considered in this study since more than 40 % of the wind data during this year are
missing from the database.

Unfortunately, despite direct dialogue with L. E. Welsh, the differences between

the two sets of DRWPs could not be resolved. This issue needs to be resolved and it is an
area recornmended for future research.

Moving forward, the influence of using the fdtered wind records to denve the
DRWPs can be gauged by comparing the results from Analysis 1 and Analysis 2 in
Figures 5.1 (see also Table 5.3 where the ratios for the ten-year recurrence interval have
been summarized). The results show that the overaii trend is for the DRWPs to decrease
through the use of the filtered wind records and that the amunt in which they decrease
c m be related to the extent and duration that the anemometer exposures deviated from
standard conditions. At REG, for example, the fust ten years of wind data were measured
from an anemometer located on a rooftop at a height of 20.4 m above ground (1957-
1960/09) and from an anemometer fixed to the Control Tower at a height of 26.8 m above
ground (1960/10- 1966). Beboinning in 1967, the measurements were taken from an
anexnometer Iocated more than 0.5 km from the Tenninal Building and fixed to a pole at
a height of 9.1 m. The height was later increased to 10 m. The record periods used in the
Base Analysis and in Analysis 1 were 1957-1985 and 1967-1992 respectively- The
omission of the fust ten years of wind data resulted in DRWPs that were about 20 5%
Iower for this station. In contrat to this example, the results for WIN show only small
differences (< 5%) between the two sets of D R W s for ali three rainfall thresholds. The
anemometer at this station was moved to a standard pole (10 m above ground) towards
the end of 1963 from the roof of a hangar, where it was a total of 9.8 rn above ground
level. The data from 1957 through to 1963 were not used in the filtered wind record as a
directionai analysis of the rnean wind speeds indicated that the measurements were
somewhat biased due to the flow aerodynarnics around the aircraft hangar. However, the
extent and duration of the non-standardized portion of the wind record were much Iess for
WIN than they were for REG. This is reflected by the much smaller change between the
DRWPs derived in the Base Anaiysis and in Analysis 1.

Rainfdl Ten-year DRWPs -

Threshold Analysis 1 / Base Analysis
avrr- rems, max. min.

Table 5.3 Influence of the filtered wind records on the ten-year DRWPs; statistics
from al1 fourteen stations

Anoth~rfactor that may have contributed to the differences between the two sets
of DRWPs is that an additionai seven years (19864993) of data were used in the filtered
wind records. This effect is Likely srnail in cornparison to the impact of discarding
potentidiy biased wind data and may have produced either an increase or decrease in the
estimates of the DRWPs. On the whole, the results for the fourteen stations examined
illustrate that it is very important to investigate the memorneter's exposure over the
station's history and to use only those data representative of standard conditions-
 As discussed above, the DRWPs evaluated by WeIsh, Skinner and Morris (1989)
are based on records comprising hourly-observed one- or two-minute mean wind speeds
(the transition for the AES hourly wind archives was at the start of 1985). Using the one-
minute averaging interval by way of example, it was shown in the previous chapter that
extreme wind pressures denved from such non-continuous records would typically f d in
between a one-hour mean and a peak one-minute mean at roughly the one-third point. It
was also shown that by averaging the consecutive one-minute mean wind speeds to create
a new time senes, the predicted extreme wind pressures would approach a one-hour rnean
within about 5 % for an open exposure at 10 m above ground (see Figure 4.14a or the
results for St. John's in Figure 4-17], and be generaily on the conservative side.

To assess the influence of ernploying the modified spot data, the DRWPs derived
fiom Analysis 2 can be compared with those derived from Analysis 1 in Figures 5.1. A
summary of the ratios of the two sets of ten-year DRWPs is presented in Table 5.4. The
clear trend is for the DRWPs denved from the modified spot data to decrease relative to
those derived from the original hourly spot data. The decrease does not appear to be
sipnificantly influenced by the rainfdl threshold nor does it appear to depend on the
r e m penod. As c m be seen in Table 5.4, the ten-year DRWPs decrease on average by
14 % for the two Iower rainfdl thresholds and by 17 % for the 5.1 mrn/hr rainfall
threshold. These percent decreases can be compared with both 10 % and 12 % which are
the average decreases for the one- and two-minute mean wind pressures respectively for
the St. John's data analyzed in Chapter 4. The lower percentages indicate that the surface
roughness at the St. John's memorneter site (see Figure 3.8: anemometer height = 10 m)
is less than the average or typical surface roughness at the fourteen airpon sites
considered in this chapter.

Overall, the DRWPs derived through the use of the modified spot data compared
to those derived from the original spot data are significantly lower as shown in Table 5.4.
In no case was an increase observed since a decrease is inherent in the averaging
technique. The D R W s denved from the modified spot wind data c m be interpreted as
siightly consenrative estimates of one-hour rnean D R W s . Depending on the surface
roughness characteristics of the site and the averaging intervals of the hourly observed
speeds, which are nominally one or two minutes but may vary due to the actual practice
of the weather observers, it is estimated that the DRWPs derived from the modified spot
data may be up to 10 % higher than a one-hour mean DRWP but more typicaily less than
5 % higher. Either a greater surface roughness or a shorter wind speed averaging time
will make the DRWPs denved from modified spot wind data Iarger relative to a tme one-
hour mean DRWP.

RainfalI Ten-year DRWPs -

Threshold Anaivsis 2 / Analvsis 1

Table 5.4 Influence of the modified spot wind data on the ten-year DRWPs; statistics
from al1 fourteen stations

The DRWPs examined to this point have been derived using the one-hour rainfall
estimates. As was shown in Section 3.3.2, the time series of one-hour rainfall derived
through the estirnating technique consistently indicated a fewer nurnber of hours during
which the rainfall thresholds were exceeded compared to the nurnber of hours indicated
by the time series of one-hour rainfail measurements. For the 1.8, 3.0 and 5.1 mmhr
thresholds, it was shown that the number of threshold exceedences decreased by an
average of about 20 % for the fourteen stations exarnined.

An evaluation of how the use of the estimated rainfalls influences the DRWPs can
be made by comparing the DRWPs derived by Analysis 2 and Analysis 3 in Figures 5.1.
A summary of the ratios for the ten-year recurrence interval is siiown in Table 5.5, where
it c m be seen that the tendency is for the DRWPs to increase by about 4 to 5 % when the
rainfall measurements are utilized in the analysis. Based solely on the fact that the
number of exceedences of a particular rainfall threshold is higher when the rainfaIl
measurements are used, an increase in the DRWPs wouid be expected since extremes
increase when the size of the population from which they are extracted increase (i-e. there
is more opporninity for an extreme to occur). .However, in view of the range of ratios
gïven in the last two columns of Table 5.5, this effect does not always dorninate as the
DRWPs based on the rainfaii measurements sometimes decrease compared to those based
on the estimated rainfalls. ClearIy, in addition to their size variation, there can be
si,dficant differences between the two conditional wind speed populations that give rise
to the differences shown in Table 5.5-

Rainfall Ten-year DRWPs -

Threshold Analysis 3 1 Andysis 2
avg. r-m.s. max. min.
1-8 m m h 1-04 0-11 1.32 0.89
3.0mm/hr 1.04 0.08 1.18 0.91
5-lmm/hr 1-05 0.12 1.18 0.73

Table 5.5 influence of using estimated one-hou rainfds on the ten-year DRWPs;
statistics frorn al1 fourteen stations

In ail, the results show that it is important to utilize the measured rainfalls from
the automatic rain gauges since the accuracy of the DRWPs may otherwise be
compromised. The measured vaiues, however, are not consistently available year-round
and the estimates must therefore be used to fil1 in the rnissing data, meaning that some
degree of error may still exist in the DRWPs derived in Analysis 3 (and in Analysis 4).
The distribution of estirnated and measured rainfalts for the fourteen stations is shown in
Table 5.6 over the penods of the filtered wind records. Note that for CAL, REG, WIN
and CHA. the large percentage of estimated rainfdls are for the winter months.

In the final analysis, the technique used to estimate the mode and dispersion of the
Type4 extreme value distribution was changed from the Method of Moments to
Lieblein's BLUE. The latter approach gives estimates of the Type4 parameten, in the
form of a Iinear combination of the order statistics, that are unbiased and have minimum
variance (Lieblein, 1974). As can be seen in Figures 5.1 and Table 5.7, the differences
between the DRWPs resulting fkom Analyses 3 and 4 are generally small and tend to be
more variable for the higher rainfdl thresholds. Among the other uncertainties, the
method for estimaUng the Type-1 parameters is likely not very sipificant.

Station Record Available rainfd data (%)

Period Measured Estimated
WC
VAN
CAL
REG
WIN
LON
TOR
OTT
MON
STJ
HAL
CHA
POB*
SJS
* 0.5 % of the rainfall data is missing
Table 5.6 Distribution of rainfall data over the filtered wind records

Rainfall Ten-year D R W s -
Threshold Analysis 4 / Anaiysis 3
avg. r.m.s. m m . min.
1.8 rnm/hr 1-00 0.04 1.06 0.94
3.0mmkr 1-00 0.05 1.06 0.91
5.1 mm/hr 0.98 0.07 1.09 0.85

Table 5.7 Influence of using Lieblein's BLUE on the ten-year DRWPs; statistics
from a i l fourteen stations

5.4 Concluding Remarks

The Canadian Standard CANKSA-A440-Mg0 currently u t i k e s both five and

ten-year DRWPs associated with a one-hour rainfall threshold of 1.8 mm as critena for
selecting windows and other cladding components to resist rain penetration. The
derivation of these DRWPs is reported by Welsh. Skinner and Morris (1989). The results
presented in this chapter, which are based on data from fourteen of the stations examined
in their study, show that the D R W s currently used in the building standard are subject to
errors associated with the use of non-standardized wind records and the use of one-hour
rainfall estimates. Also, the DRWPs lack interpretation with respect to their
representative averaging time owing to Ihe use of hourly observed wind speeds that are
nominaily averaged over one or two minutes.

The finai analysis (Analysis 4) c m be compared with the Base Analysis, which
emuiates that used by Welsh, Skinner and Moms (1989), to gauge the overall impact of
the issues listed above (see Figures 5-1 and Table 5.8). The overall tendency is for the
DRWPs derived in Analysis 4 to be significantly lower than those derived in the Base
Analysis. In review of the results for the ten-year r e c u e n c e interval shown in Table S A 1
the average decrease is about 25 % for each of the three rainfall tiiresholds- The variation
between the ratios for the fourteen stations, as indicated by the last three columns in
Table 5.8. is also very significant; showing more than a 40 % drop in some cases and
more than a 5 % rise in others.

Rainfall Ten-year DRWPs -

Threshold Analvsis 4 / Base Analysis
avo- r.m.s. max, min.

Table 5.8 Cornparison of the ten-year DRWPs evaluated by Analysis 4 and by the
Base Analysis: statistics from d l fourteen stations

The final comparison that wiLI be made, which is perhaps the most relevant, is
between the DRWPs evaluated by Welsh, Skinner and Morris (1989) and by the final
analysis conducted in this study (Analysis 4). The DRWPs derived in Analysis 4 are
considered to be the best possible estimates of one-hour mean DRWPs that are obtainable
frorn the data availabIe in the Canadian weather archives, The results shown in Table 5-9
cleady indicate that it w o d d be a worthwhile effort to re-evaiuate the DRWPs that are
currently uçed in the Canadian Standard CANKSA-A440-Mg0 using the techniques
summarized in this chapter. This wodd gîve the engineering community a design wind
pressure that is more readily interpetable in ternis of averaging time and exposure and
thus more suited for a wider range of design applications involving wind, rain and the
building envelope.

ThreshoId Welsh et al. / Anaiysis 4

avg. r.m.s. max, min,

Table 5.9 Cornparison of the ten-year DRWPs evaiuated by Welsh, Skinner and
Morris (L989)and by Anaiysis 4; statistics frorn al1 fourteen stations
Chapter 6.0
Conclusions and Recommendations
This thesis evaluates dnving-min wind pressures (DRWPs) at fourteen airport
stations stretched across Southem Canada and compares them with the DRWPs currently
in use by the Canadian Standards Association as a ,pide for desi,~ng waterûght
windows in residentiai and commercial buildings located in Canada (CSA Standard
CANKSA-A440-M90). Results tiom this study lead to the foilowing conclusions:

1. The DRWPs given in the current building standard are not necessarily
representative of the standard meteorologïcal exposure (Le. a height of 10 m
above open and flat terrain). From the fourteen stations considered in this
study, the ten-year DRWPs (associated with the 1.8 mm one-hour rainfall
threshold) are estimated to be on average 16 % higher than those
representative of the standard rneteorologicai exposure. The errors, however,
are station dependent and are estimated to range from O to 47 90 for the
fourteen stations examined-

The DRWPs given in the current building standard are subject to errors owing
to the use of estimated one-hou rainfalls in their derivation. The technique
used to estimate the one-hour rainfalls consistently leads to fewer hours during
which the rainfall total exceeds thresholds of 1-8, 3.0 and 5.1 mm and does not
necessarily capture the wind climate associated with these rainfdl thresholds.
From the fourteen stations considered in this study, the ten-year DRWPs
(associated with the 1.3 mm one-hour raidail threshold) are estimated to have
errors approxirnately ranging From + 12 to - 24 % with an average error of
approximately - 4 9%.

3. The representative averaging time of the DRWPs given in the building

standard is not known with great certain@owing to the use of non-continuous
wind data in their denvation (i.e. hourly-observed speeds averaged over
nominally one or two minutes). From the fourteen stations considered in this
study, the ten-year DRWPs (associated with the 1.8 mm one-hour rainfd
threshold) are estimated to be 2 to 32 Z higher than one-hou mean values and
on average 16 % higher than one-hour mean values. These percentages are
o d y approximate since the estimates of the one-hour mean DRWPs used as
the reference for cornparison are only a p p r ~ ~ a t The
e . stated percentages are
considered to be slightly low.
 4. The DRWPs given in the buiiding standard are subject to apparent errors of
unknown or@n The reference DRWPs taken as the "correct7' values are
estimated in this study through an anaiysis that emdates that described by
Welsh, Skinner and Morris (1989), who give details on the derivation of the
DRWPs that are used in the building standard. From the fourteen stations
considered in this study, the ten-year D R W s (associated with the 1.8 mm
one-hour rainfall threshold) are estimated to have apparent errors ranging from
t 42 to - 6 % with an average error of + 15 7%.

First and foremost, a recommended area of future research would be to resolve the
differences in the DRWPs discussed in the fourth conclusion above. The differences are
disturbing because the archived weather elements, the record periods and the analysis
techniques are apparently the same in this study as they were in the study conducted by
Welsh, Skinner and ~Moms(1989). This has been c o n f i ï e d to a reasonable level
through direct discussions with L. E. Welsh.

Based on the four conclusions Iisted above, it is considered to be a worthwhile

effort to re-evaluate the DRWPs for the entire network of Canadian airports that maintain
weather records. The analysis should employ the modified spot wind data described in
Chapter 4 so as to arrive at extreme wind pressures that c m be interpreted as (nominal)
one-hour rneans, which could then be factored to represent different averaging times as
seen fit for different applications. Further, the anemometer's exposure history should be
carefutly examined to identiS portions of the wind record that are incompatible with
standardized data, should they exist. When information about the station's history is
lirnited to the short descriptions available in this study, an analysis similar to that
described in Section 3.3.1 c m be used to fdter incompatible data. Finaily, use should be
made of the one-hour rainfall measurements from the automatic rain gauges when
available to ieduce the potential errors associated with using the one-hour rainfall
estirnates (see Section 3.3.2)-

It is recognized that the translation of estimated DRWPs into design practice is

itself an approximate process. Tests on building envelope components are typicaily
carried out with steady, spatiaily uniform pressures and a basic threshold quantity of
water- Nevertheless. given that the DRWPs so detennined could be more accurately
interpreted as standardized one-hou mean values, improvements made with respect to
acctual design issues couId then be justified. Potential areas of improvement in the
window selection criteria outlined in the CSA Standard CANKSA-A440-Mg0 are
discussed in Chapter 1 (see Pages 7 and 8).

Another area worthy of future research is the study of the directional

characteristics of the DRWPs- For the fourteen weather stations considered in this thesis,
plots are included in Appendix B and AppendYc C which show the directional aspects of
the overall wind climate and the directional aspects of the wind climate associated with
rainfall intensities equal to or greater than 1.8 rnmh. Referring to the lower right hand
polar plot in Figure C.3, it can be seen that at Caigary International Airport the DRWPs
approaching from the NNW are approximateiy three times larger than those approaching
from the SW through S to SE. From an engineering standpoint, this type of information
c m lead to economicaiiy efficient building envelope designs.

Surry et al. (1994b) suggested that, for a particdar region, the extreme wind
climate dunng rainfdl might be predicted based on the overail extrerne wind climate and
the mean nurnber of hours during a year that rainfail occurs. The approach assumes that
the underlying parent distribution of wind speed during rainfall is reasonably comparable
to that of the overall wind clirnate (Le. wind speed is not significantly correlated with
rainfall). The results presented in Appendix B show that during rainfall the parent
distribution of O&-directional wind speed differs significantly from the o v e r d parent
distribution of omni-directional wind speed. For example, for the fourteen stations
examined, the Weibull parameters k and c are on average 26 and 34 % higher when
derived from the wind speed data associated with the 1.8 mm/hr rainfall threshold
compared to when derived from al1 the wind speed data. Thus, this attractive proposd
appears unlikely to succeed in practice.
References
(1973), "Walling Part 1: Brick and Block Masomy", British Standard Code of
Practice CP 121, British Standards Institution, United Kingdom.
(1978). "Thermal hsulation of Cavity Walls (with Masonry b e r and Outer
Leafs) by Filling with Urea-formaldehyde F o a m , British Standard BS 5618, British
Standards Institution, United Kingdom.
(1984), "Methods for Assessing Exposure to Wind-Driven Rain", Draft for
Development DD 93, British Standards Institution, United Kingdom.
(1984). "Software Implementation for CIirnatological Ice Accreuon Modeliing
Project", Intemal Report to Energy and Indusuial Applications Section, Aunosphenc
Environment Service, Canadian Climate Centre, Toronto, Canada,
(1990). 'Supplement to the National Building Code of Canada7'. Issued by the
Associate Cornmittee of the National Building Code, National Research Council of
Canada, Ottawa, Canada.
( 2 WO),
"User Selection Guide to CSA Standard CA N K S A-A440-M90,
Windows", Special Publication A440.1 -M 1990, Canadian Standards Association,
Canada,
(1992), "Assessing the Exposure of Wails to Wind-Driven Rain", British Standard
BS 8 104, British Standards Institution, United Kingdom.
Best, A.C. (1950), "The Size Distribution of Raindrops", Quarterly Journal of the Royal
Meteorological Society, 76, pp. 16-36.
Boyd, D.W. (1963), "Driving-Rain Map of Canada". Technical Note No. 398, National
Research Council of Canada, Division of Building Research, Ottawa, Canada.
Choi. E.C.C. (1991), 'Numericd Simulation of Wind-Driven Rain Falling ont0 a 2-D
Building". Proceedings of the Asian Pacific Conference on Computationai Mechanics,
Hong Kong, December 11-13, pp. 1721- 1727.
Choi, E.C.C. (1992a), "Simulation of Wind-Driven-Rain Around a Building", Journal of
Wind Engineering, Japan, 52, pp. 60-65.
Choi, E.C.C. (1992b), "Extreme Wind Speeds During Rainfall", Australian Wind
Engineering Society 2nd Workshop, Melbourne, Australia.
Choi, E.C.C. (1993), "Simulation of Wind-Dnven-Rain Around a Building", Journal of
Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 46 & 47, pp. 72 1-729.
Choi, E.C.C.(1994a), "Detennination of Wind-Driven-Rain Intensity on Building Faces",
Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 51, pp. 55-69.
Choi, E-CC. (1994b), "Wind-Driven Rain Characteristics and Criteria for Water
Penetration Test", Proceedings of the International Conference on Building Envelope
Systems and Technoiogy, Singapore. December, pp. 119- 134-
Choi, E.C.C. ( 1 9 9 4 ~ ''Parameters
)~ Affecting the Intensity of Wind-Driven Rain on the
Front Face of a Building", Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 53,
pp. 1-17.
Choi, E.C.C. (1995), "Numerical Modeling of the Gust Effect on Wind-Driven Rain7',
Proceedings of thc 9" International Conference on Wind Engineering, New Delhi. India,
pp. 72 1-729.
Cook, N.J. (1982), "Towards Better Estimation of Extreme Winds", Journal of Wind
Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics. 9, pp. 295-323.
Cook. N.J. (1985), "The Designers Guide to Wind Loading of Building Structures", Part
1, British Research Establishment Report, The University Press, Cambridge.
Couper, R.R. (1972), "Drainage frorn Vertical Faces", Symposium on Wind-Driven Rain
and the Multi-Storey Building, Division of Building Research, Commonwealth Scientific
and Industriai Research Organization, Australia, Paper 4.
Davenport, A.G. (1964), "Note on the Distribution of the Largest Value of a Random
Function with Application to Gust Loading", Proceedings of the Institution of Civil
Engineers, 28, pp. 187-196-
Davenport, A.G. (1967), 'The Dependence of Wind Loads on Meteorological
Parameters", Proceedings of the International Research Seminar on Wind Effects on
Building and Structures, Ottawa, Canada, September 11- 15, Volume 1, pp. 19-82.
Davenport, A.G. (1994a), "Engineering Statistics and Reliability", E.S. 520 Course
Notes, Faculty of Engineering Science, The University of Western Ontario, London,
Canada.
Davenport, A.G. ( 1994b), "Wind Engineering", E.S . 526 Course Notes. FacuIty of
Engineering Science, The University of Western Ontario, London, Canada.
Gomes, L. and Vickery, B.J. (1977), "On the Prediction of Extreme Wind Speeds from
the Parent Distribution", Journal of Industrial Aerodynamics, 2, pp. 21-36.
Greenway, M.E. (1979), "An Analytical Approach to Wind Velocity Gust Factors",
Journal of Industriai Aerodynamics, 5, pp. 6 1-9 1.
Gumbel, E.J. (1954), "Statistical Theory of Extreme Values and Sorne Pratical
Applications", Applied Mathematics Series No. 33, National Bureau of Standards,
Washington, USA.
Gumbel, E.J. (1958), "Statistics of Extremes7', Columbia University Press, New York,
USA.
Hens, H. and Moharned, F.A. (1994). "Preliminary Results on Driving Rain Estimation7',
International Energy Agency. Annex 24, T2-B-94/02.
Hoppestad, S. (1955), "Slagregn i Norge", Norge Byggforskningsinstitutt Rapport Nr. 13,
OsIo, Norway.
Inculet, D.R. and Surry, D. (1994), "Simulation of Wind-Driven Rain and Wetting
Patterns on Buildings", BLWTL-SS30-1994, The Boundary Layer Wind Tunnel
Laboratory, The University of Western Ontario.
Inculet, DR., Surry, D. and Skerlj, P.F. (1994), 'The Expenmental Simulation of Wind
and Rain Effects on the Building Envelope", Proceedings of the International Conference
on Building Envelope Systems and Technology, Singapore, December, pp. 125-130.
Ishizaki, H., Mitsuta, Y. and Sano, Y. (1970)- "Raidail Deposit on a Wall of a Building
in a Storm", Bulletin of the Disaster Prevention Research Institute, 20Df 174, pp. 95-103,
Kyoto University.
Karagiozis, A. and Hadjisophocleous, G. (1995), "Wind-Driven Rain on High-Rise
Buildings", Proceedings of the Conference on Themal Performance of the Exterior
Envelopes of Buildings VI, Clearwater Beach, Florid9 USA, Decernber 4-8, pp.399-405.
Lacy, R.E. (195 l), "Observations with a Directional Raingauge", Quarterly Journal of the
Royal Meteorological Society, 77, pp. 283-292.
Lacy, R.E. (1964), "Driving Rain at Garston, United Kingdom", Building Resevch
Current Papers, No. 50, Building Research Estabiishment, Ganton, England (Reprinted
from: CIB (Conseil International du Batiment) Bulletin, 4, pp. 6-9, 1994).
Lacy, R.E. (1965). "Dnving-Rain Maps and the Onslaught of Rain on Buildings",
Proceedings of the EULEM/CLB Symposium on Moisture Problems in Buildings,
Helsinki, Paper 3-4,
Lacy, R.E. (1971), "An Index of Exposure to Dnving Rain", Building Research Station
Digest No. 127, Building Research Establishment, Garston, England.
Lacy, RE. ( 1976), "Driving-Rain Index", Building Research Establishment Report,
Building Research Establishment, Garston, England.
Lacy, R.E. (1977), "Climate and Building in Britain", Building Research Establishment
Report, Building Research Establishment, Garston, England.
Lacy, R.E. and Shellard, H.C. (1962a). "An Index of Driving Rain", The Meteorological
Magazine, 9 1, pp. 177-184.
Lacy, R.E. and Shellard H.C. (1962b), "An Index of Exposure to Driving Rain",
Building Research Station Digest No. 23, Building Research Establishment, Garston,
England.
Lieblein, J. (1974). "Efficient Methods of Extreme-Value Methodology", Report No.
NBSIR 74-602. National Bureau of Standards, Washington, USA.
Morris, R.I. (1996). personal communication, Environment Canada, Atmospheric
Environment Service, Downsview, Ontario, Canada
Morris, S. (1975), "A Wall Penetration Map of Canada", CDS No. 3/75, Environment
Canada, Atmosphenc Environment Service, Canada.
Murakami, S., Iwasa, Y., Morikawa, Y. and Chino, N. (1987). "Extreme Wind Speeds for
Various R e m Periods During Rainfali", Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial
Aerodynamics, 26, pp. 105-135.
Newman, A.J. (1988), "Rain Penetration Through Masonry WalIs: Diagnosis and
Remediai Measures", Building Research Establishment Report, Building Research
Establishment, Garston, England-
Newton, .l-R.H. (1983). "Wind Effects on Buildings - Recent Studies at the Redand
Wind Tunnel", Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, L 1, pp. 175-
186.
Prior, M.J. (1982), "Improved (Directional) Driving Rain Indices for the United Kingdom
- Cornputation, Mapping and Applications", Proceedings of the CIB Symposium on
Building Climatology, Moscow, pp. 187499.
Prior, M-J- (1985), "Directional Driving Rain Indices of the United Kingdom -
Computation and Mapping (Backgroud to BSL Draft for Development DD 93)", Building
Research Establishment Report, Building Research Establishment, Garston, England.
Redekopp, K. (1994), "king Effects on MeteorologÏcal instruments in the Arctic",
Department of National Defence, Air Comrnand Headquarters, Westwin, Canada.
Rice, S.O. (1954), "Mathematical AnaIysis of Random Noise", In Selected Papers on
Noise and Stochastic Processes (N. Wax, ed,), Dover Publications, New York, USA-
Robinson, G . and Baker, M.C- (1975), Wind-Driven Rain and Buildings", Technicai
Paper No. 445, National Research Council of Canada, Division of Building Research,
Ottawa, Canada,
Rodgers, G.G., Poots, G.. Page, J.K. and Pickering, W.M. (1974), "Theoretical
Predictions of Raindrop Impaction on a Slab Type Building", Building Science, 9, pp.
18 1-190.
Rose, C-W- and Farbrother, H.G. (1960), "A Method for Obtaining Average Bearing and
Incidence of Rainfall", Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, 86, pp.
408-4 1 1.
Sankaran, R. and Peterson, D.A- (1995a), "Computation of Rain Falling on a Tail
Rectan,dar Building", Proceedings of the gh International Conference on Wind
Engineering, New Delhi, india, pp. 2 127-2 137.
Sankaran, R. and Peterson, D.A. (1995b), "Wuid Driven Rain: Data Collection Facility at
CSIRO, Sydney, Australia", Proceedings of the 9& International Conference on Wind
Engineenng, New Delhi, India, pp. 2023-2033.
Schwarz, F. and Frank, W. (1973), "Schlagregen", Benchte aus der Bauforschung, Hefi
86, Berlin.
Sheppard, B.E. ( IWO), "Measurements of Raindrop Size Distributions Using a Srnail
Doppler Radai', Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology, 7 (2), pp. 255-268.
Sheppard, B.E. and Wu, K.K. (1985). "An Improved AES Precipitation Occurrence
Sensor System", Prepnnt of the Third WMO Technical Conference on Instruments and
Methods of Observation, Ottawa. Canada, July 8- 12.
Skerlj, P.F. and Suny, D. ( 1994), "A Study of Mean Pressure Gradients, Mean Cavity
Pressures, and the Resulting Residual Mean Pressures Across a Rainscreen for a
Representative Building", BLWTL-SS23- 1994, The B o u n d q Layer Wind Tunnel
Laboratory, The University of Westem Ontario.
Surry, D.. hculet, D.R., Skerlj, P.F., Lin, J-X., and Davenport, A.G. (1994a), "Wind,
Rain and the Building Envelope: A Status Report of Ongoing Research at the University
of Westem Ontario", Journal of Wind Engineenng and Indusuial Aerodynamics, 53, pp.
19-36.
Surry, D., Skerlj, P-F- and Mikitiuk, M.J. ( 1994b), "An Exploratory Study of the CIimatic
Relationships Between Rain and W i n d , BLWTL-SS22-1994, The Boundary Layer Wind
Tunnel Laboratory, The University of Westem Ontario.
Twisdale, L.A. and Vickery. P.J. (1992), "Research on Thunderstom Wind Design
Panmeters", Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 41, pp. 545-556.
Twisdaie, L A . and Vickery, P.J. (1993), "Anaiysis of Thunderstom Occurrences and
Windspeed Statistics", Proceedings of the 7h US. National Conference on Wind
Engineering, Los Angeles, USA.
Welsh, L.E., Skinner, W.R. and Morris, R.J. (1989), "A CIimatoIogy of Driving Rain
Wind Pressures for Canada", Climate and Atmospheric Research Directorate Drafi
Report, Environment Canada, Atmosphenc Environment Service, Canada.
Wiennga, J. (1973), "Gust Factors Over Open Water and Built-up Country", Boundary-
Layer Meteorology, 3, pp. 424-44 1.

Yip, T C , Auld, H. and Dnes, W. (19951, "Recomrnendations for Updating the 1995
National Building Code of Canada Wind Pressures", Proceedings of the 9" International
Conference on Wind Engineering, New Delhi, India, pp. 18714877
Appendix A
Relationship Between Wind Speed, Rainfall
Intensity and Driving-Rainfaii Intensity
Rainfdl intensity, as it is typicdy measured in the field and presented in weather
reports, is a measure of the volume of water that irnpinges the e d ' s surface per unit
time per unit area, where the orientation of the reference plane is horizontai (Le.
perpendicular to the force of gravity). This measure d o n g with a measure of the mean
wind speed can be used to esùmate the intensity of wind-drïven rain. The intensity of
wind-driven rain is defined as the volume of water per unit time per unit area, where, in
this case, the reference plane is orîented vertically and facing in the upwind direction. An
example of the relationship between the two rainfail intensities and the mean wind speed
will be given below for the case of a steady and uniform flow field-

Under calm wind conditions, raindrops wiil fall vertically and vavel at a speed
equal to their terminal velocity. The tenninal velocity is reached when the gravitational
force acting on the raindrop is equal to the sum of the buoyancy and aerodynamic forces.
As each of the above forces depends on the size of the raindrcp, so to does the temiinal
velocity. The stagnant air rainfall intensity can thus be given as the summation of the
contributions from each drop radius as follows;

where r is the drop radius, G(r)is the volume of water comprîsed of drops with radii Iess
than and equal to r per unit volume of air and V[(r)is the temiinal velocity of draps with
radii equal to r.
 Gum and Kinzer (1948) have measured the terminal velocities of water droplets
in stagnant air. They found that drops having radii less than 0.04 mm obey Stokes' Law.
which yields the following expression for terminal velocity;

V,(r)=
2 d (P- - Pu,
9 ~ u i r

where p and p denote densiry and viscosity respectively and g is gravity- Markowitz
(1976) developed an expression for terminal velocity that matches the data of Gunn and
Kinzer for drops having radii Iarger thm 0.15 mm (Inculet and Suny, 1994). The
reIationship is;

where r is to be specified in mm. For the purpose of the analysis, the above two models
will be used over the indicated ranges in r and a straight Iine joining the two models at
their limits will be used for drop radii between 0.04 and 0.15 mm.

The distribution of raindrop sizes within a given rainfd1 has been studied by Best
(1950). It was found that the portion of drops having a radius iess than or equal to r c m
be expressed in terrns of a Weibull distribution where the location parameter is
proportionai to the rainfail intensity raised to the power 0.232. Et was also found that the
totd volume of water per unit volume of air scdes to the intensity of rainfall raised to the
power of 0.846.The Best mode1 leads to the following expression for G(r);

where r and 1, are to be specified in mm and mm/hr respectively.

 Setting arbitrarily I, to 1, 5, 10 and 50 mmlhr, the numerical evaluation of
Equation A.1 yields values of I . equal to 1.01.5.12, 10.2 and 47.7 mm/hr respectively, aU
of which are within 5 % of their target; proving the consistency of the above rnodels.

If a uniform and steady flow is introduced, the horizontal movement of air past the
raindrops will Iead to forces on the drops and accelerate thern in the direction of the wind.
When equilibnum is reached (i.e. when the relative speed between the drops and the wind
is zero), the raindrops will move at a horizontal speed equai to the wind speed and at a
vertical speed equal to their terminal velocity. The straight-line path followed by the
raindrops can be defined by the driving rain angle;

where U is the wind speed. The rainfall intensities relative to a horizontal plane, I, and
relative to a vertical plane facing the wind, Idr, can be given by:

These expressions have been solved numerically to produce the plot shown in Figure A. 1.

The cirivingrain index has often been used as a meteoroIogicd indicator to the
intensity of wind-driven min. It is defined as the mean wind speed rnultiplied by the
coincident mean rainfall intensity. The calculation of the driving-rain index is typically
performed using a one-hour rainfall arnount and the mean speed over the same hour, but
this mîy vary depending on the available meteorologicd data. The premise of the
driving-min index is that it will represent a quantity that is roughly proportional to the
dnving-rain intensity, and therefore wiii reflect the potentid of rain impacting vertical
building surfaces. For the case of uniform and steady flow, the resuits given in Figure
A.1 indicate that the driving rain index, I U , relates to the dnving rain ktensity, Idr, by a
factor that depends on the rainfalI intensity. These results suggest that a map showing the
geographical variation in the driving-rain index (perhaps in the form of annual extreme
one-hour mean values) might represent a somewhat distorted picture compared to one
that represents drivinprainf' intensity.

Figure A.1 Driving-rainfall intensity, Idr, nonnalized by the dnving-rain index, lu,
versus rainfall intensity, I
Appendix B
Parent Wind Speeds During Rainfail
This appendix presents plots of omni-directionai wind speed versus exceedence
probability and plots of wind direction versus frequency of occurrence. Plots are
presented for each of the fourteen stations of the one-hour database. The wind data used
in the analysis are the modified spot wind speeds over the filtered wind records. The
rainfall data are a combination of the measured and estimated one-hour totals; the latter
were only used when the former were not available.

The omni-directional parent wind speed distributions are shown on the left sides
of the figures. For a given location, the analysis was perfonned using the entire wind
speed population and the populations associated with one-hour rainfail totals equd to or
greater than 1.8, 3.0 and 5.1 mm. The fitted Weibull distribution is also shown in each
case together with the estimates of the distribution parameters (Le. c and k). The rnean
number of hours per year that a particular one-hour raïnfail threshold was exceeded
(denoted as &) is d s o given where appropriate. The wind roses (Le. wind direction
versus frequency of occurrence) for the entire wind speed population and the population
associated with the 1.8 mm rainfaiI threshold are shown on the right sides of the figures.
The directional plots show the chances that wind will approach from 22.5" sectors
centered on N. NNE,NE, ENE, E, etc,

For the conditional populations (Le. those associated with a one-hour rainfall
threshold), the tme probability of exceeding a given wind speed or of the wind
approaching from a particular directionai sector can be obtained b y multiplying the
probabilities shown in the plots by the probability of exceeding the rainfall threshold. For
exarnple, at Victoria International Airport (Fi,we BA), the probability that the mean
wind speed will be greater than 4 m/s and the one-hour rainfall total wiii be at least 1.8
mm is approximately:
Also, at the same location, the probability that the mean wind will approach from the
south (k1 1.25O) during an hour with at least 1.8 mm of rainfd is approximately:
 :,c H P=4
=d3.,610.9 hours/yoar

*Data
1
- Weibull fi
0.8 e O .'O O o:ao o h
exceedence probability

Figure 8 . 2 Oinni-directional wind speed versus exceedence probiibility (left) und probabiliiy of wind approaching frorn 22.5"
directional sectors (right) for Vancouver Int'l A. (VAN) - conditional probiibilities are presented for the rainfall cases
 r: data
E 1 I --
- Weibui! f i t 1
k
O .'O 9 O .'9 O 0.01
exceedence probabilily directional variation

Figure 8 . 3 Omni-directional wind speed versus excecdence probiibility (Iell) iind probabiliiy of wind iippmüchiiig Irom 22.5"
directional sectors (right) for Calgary Int'l. A. (CAL) - condiiional probabilities are presented for the rainfnll cases O
w
O
CI -
O n -O
m
' -
O O -0
n -
O n -0
O -
O O d

(s/ur) paads p a ~ wuaaur

(s/nr) p a a d s pu!& uaatu
(s/m) paads pu!& uaam
@/KI) paads pu!^ uearrr
(s/ur) p a a d s p n ! uaaru
~
(s/u) paads p a u e~ a u~
(s/m) paads pu!m u e a u
(s/u~) p a a d s palfi uvaux
(s/ru) p a a d s p u l n uwaur
IO.?,
N a -

(s/ur) paads pu!& uaaur

( s p ) p a a d s pu!& uuaaru
Appendix C
Extreme Wind Speeds During Rainfall
This a p p e n h presents plots of omni-directionai wind speed and directional wind
speeds versus retum period. Plots are presented for each of the fourteen stations of the
one-hour database. The wind data used in the analysis are the rnodified spot wind speeds
over tbe fdtered wind records- The rainfall data are a combination of the measured and
estimated one-how totals: the Iatter were o d y used when the former were not available.

The omni-directional extreme wind speed distributions are shown on the left sides
of the fiopres. For a given location, the analysis was performed using the entire wind
speed population and the populations associated with one-hour rainfall totals equd to or
greater than 1.8, 3.0 and 5.1 mm. Three distributions are compared to the observed
annual extreme wind speeds in each case. The solid line shows the distribution derived
from fitting the observed annual maximum wind pressures to the Type-I extreme value
distribution using Lieblein's BLUE (Le. Analysis 4 of Chapter 5). The resulting mode
and dispersion (denoted as u and lia respectively) are a v e n in each of the plots. Note
that since wind pressures were used, the mode and dispersion have units of Pa. The
dotted Lines represent the distributions derived using the parent approach descnbed in
Section 4.5.2 (Le. Equations 4.42). The upcrossing rate parameter N is given in each of
the plots. It was observed from this analysis that the mode and dispersion estimated using
Equations 4.42 are highiy erratic for N smaller than about 10 per year. This prompted the
direct use of Equation 4.41 for estimahg the extreme speeds according to the parent
model. The resulting distributions are shown with dashed lines. The solutions of
Equation 4.4 1 are plotted in Figure C.15 for reference.

The directional anaiysis was performed using both the overall wind population
and the population associated with one-how rainfalls e q u d to or larger than 1.8 mm. The
directional extreme wind speeds were denved using the Type-1 distribution with the
distribution parameters estirnated fkom Lieblein's BLUE.
 1 ~ q n s4. , 4 2 t
I
2
I
b 10
relurn period (years)
20 I
return periods - 6, 10 a n d 30 y e a r s

Figure C. 1 Omni-directionül wind speed versus return period (left) und five-, [en-, and thirty-yeür wind specds upprouching from
td
22.5" directional sectors (right) for Victoria Int'l A. (VIC) I;
(s/m) p a a d s p n ~ muaaur

(S/LU) paads pu!^ uaaur

(s/ru) p a a d s p a t m u e a u

(s/m) paads p a ! u
~s a u
( s p ) paads p u f u~e a u t

(s/ur) p a a d s pu!& uoaur

(S/UI) p a a d s uaaur
~ U I M

(s/u.I) p a a d s pu!^ ueam

( s p ) p a a d s pu!& u a a t u

($/ut) p a a d s pu!& u e a u
 t
( s p ) p a a d s p u ~ n ruaaur
 I I
1 ~ q n s 4. , 4 2 t
2 6 10 20
return period (years) return p e r l o d s = 6, I O and 3 0 y e a r s

Figure C.8 Oinni-directional wiiid speed versus reiurn period (lefi) and rive-, ten-, and thiriy-yeür wind speeds approuching fro~n
22.5' directionul sectors (right) for Ottawa Int'l. A. (OTT)
( s p ) p a a d s P U ~ Mu n a m

(S/UI) p a a d s pu+ uaaar

(s/ur) p a a d s pu!^ uaaru

(s/ar) p a a d s pa!M uuaaar

(s/m) paads pur^ rreaur

O w
N -
<O m O

(s/ar) p a a d s pu!& uaarrr

(s/ur) p a a d s purfi ueaut
(s/u) p a a d s put.* u e a m

(s/ru) p a a d s pu!^ uearu

(s/ur) paads putw u e a u

(s/u~) p a a d s p u l uaam
~
Figure C.15 SoIutions to Equation 4.4 1