AERODYNAMIC MODIFICATION ON SHAPE OF BUILDINGS

SEMINAR REPORT
Submitted by

SRUTHILAYA M
NSS15CE115

In partial fulfillment of requirement for the degree

of

BACHELOR OF TECHNOLOGY IN CIVIL ENGINEERING

Guided by

DR.RESMI .G

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

N.S.S.COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING

PALAKKAD 678008

2018
 DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

N.S.S.COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING

PALAKKAD 678008

2018

CERTIFICATE

Certified that this is the bonafide report of the seminar entitled “AERODYNAMIC
MODIFICATION ON SHAPE OF BUILDINGS” done by ‘SRUTHILAYA M’ in partial
fulfillment of the requirement for the award of Degree of Bachelor of Technology in Civil
Engineering under APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University.

Dr. Praseeda .K.I Dr. Resmi. G Dr. A.K. Raji

Staff in charge Guide Head of the Department

 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would like to reserve my gratitude to my guide, Dr.Resmi.G, Professor, Department of
Civil engineering, NSS College of Engineering, Palakkad, staff in charge Dr.Prasseeda.K.I,
Professor, Department of Civil engineering, NSS College of Engineering, Palakkad whose
wholehearted encouragement and advice helped me in the successful completion of this seminar
report

I also express my thanks to Dr.A.K.Raji, Professor& Head of the Department of Civil

Engineering, for her help and coordination during the course of this seminar work

I thank all my teachers and friends for their encouragement and assistance for the successful
completion of my seminar report and last but not least I thank the Almighty for his blessings
which made this seminar a successful one.

SRUTHILAYA.M
 ABSTRACT
The development of high strength concrete, higher grade steel, new construction
techniques and advanced computational technique has resulted in the emergence of a new
generation of tall structures that are flexible, low in damping, slender and light in weight. These
types of flexible structures are very sensitive to dynamic wind loads and adversely affect the
serviceability and occupant comfort. For a typical tall building, oscillations have been observed
in the along wind and crosswind directions as well as in the torsional mode. To ensure the
functional performance of tall flexible structures and to control the wind induced motion of the
tall buildings, generally different design methods, various types of passive as well as active
control devices and various types of aerodynamic modifications to the shape/geometry of the
buildings are possible. This review paper presents an overview and a summary of past/recent
work on various aerodynamic modifications to the shape of the buildings like corner cuts,
chamfering of corners, rounding of corners, horizontal and vertical slots, dropping of corners,
tapering etc. to reduce the wind excitation of tall flexible buildings and its application in some of
the tall buildings across the world
 CONTENTS

TITLE PAGE.NO:
1. INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………………....1

2. NATURE OF WIND…………………………………………………………………....2

3. WIND EXCITATION……………………………………………………………….....2

3.1.Along wind motion…………………………………………………………………..3

3.2.Across wind direction………………………………………………………………..3

3.2.1. Vortex-shedding phenomenon…………………………………………….............4

3.3. Torsional motion…………………………………………………………………….5

4. GENERALISED WIND LOADS……………………………………………………….5

5. SERVICEABILITY REQUIREMENT………………………………………………...6

6.WIND TUNNEL TEST………………..............................................................................6

7.AERODYNAMIC MITIGATION TECHNIQUE FOR BUILDINGS………………..9

8.MINOR MODIFICATION………………………………………………………..........10

8.1. Shaping corners of buildings………………………………………………………10

8.1.1. Effects of fins and vented fins……………………………………………….…..10

8.1.2. Effects of slotted corners, chamfered corners and corner recession………….....12

8.1.3. Effects of roundness of corners……………………………………………...…..15

9.MAJOR MODIFICATIONS……………………………………………………………..17

9.1. Optimizing the cross sectional shapes of building……………………………….....17

9.2. Addition of openings through buildings…………………………………………….19

9.3. Effects of twisting or rotating of buildings……………………………………….....22

10.LOW RISE BUILDINGS………………………………………………………………..24

10.1.Parapets…………………………………………………………………………......25
 10.2.Passive aerodynamic passive device……………………………………………...26

11. AERODYNAMIC SHAPE OPTIMIZATION……………………………………...28

12. CONCLUSION………………………………………………………………….…....29

13.REFERENCES………………………………………………………………………..30
 LIST OF FIGURES

FIG NO: DESCRIPTION PAGE.NO:

1. Simplified Two-Dimensional Flow of Wind 3
2. Simplified Wind Flow 5
3. Vortices in Different Wind Speed Conditions 5
4. The anatomy of a wind tunnel 8
5. Fins 11
6. Aerodynamic Modifications 11
7. Corner Modifications 13
8. MHI Yokohama Building 15
9. Taipei 101 Building 15
10. Roundness of Corner 17
11. Millennium Tower 17
12. Shreepati Skies 17
13. Marina City Towers 17
14. Transamerica pyramid 19
15. Jin Mao Building 19
16. Petronas Towers 19
17. Burj Dubai 19
18. Sears Tower 19
19. Shanghai World Financial Center 20
20. Through Opening 20
1. INTRODUCTION
Modern tall buildings go higher and higher with the advances in structural
design and high strength materials. However, every advance in height comes with
a new difficulty. Efficient structural systems, high strength materials, and
increased height, result with decrease in building weight and damping, and
increase in slenderness. On the other hand, as the height and slenderness increase,
buildings suffer from increased flexibility, which has negative effects in wind
loading.
Flexible structures are affected by vibration under the action of wind
which cause building motion, and plays an important role in the structural and
architectural designs. Under the action of wind and excessive vibration,
serviceability and occupant comfort are under a great threat. Even though the
structure still carries satisfactorily all the lateral loads, it must satisfy the
serviceability requirements as occupants’ discomfort feeling - like dizziness,
headaches, nausea - resulting from the lateral motion of the building.
Understandably, contemporary tall buildings are much more vulnerable to
wind excitation than their predecessors. Hence, different design methods and
modifications are possible in order to ensure the functional performance of
flexible structures and control the wind induced motion of tall buildings.
An extremely important and effective design approach among these
methods is aerodynamic modifications in architecture. This context classifies
these aerodynamic modifications in architecture for resisting the lateral loads.
Wind safe tall building design begins with the architect, and the influence of the
wind action must be taken into consideration from the very beginning of the
architectural design process by considering building aerodynamics.
Some aerodynamic modifications in architectural design are one of the
effective design approaches which can significantly reduce the effect of the lateral
wind force and thus, the building motion. Basically, these modifications are the
tapered cross section, setback, sculptured top, modifications to corner geometry,
and addition of openings through building .By changing the flow pattern around
the building, aerodynamic modifications in building shape, i.e. an appropriate
choice of building form, moderates wind responses when compared to original

1
building shape. As far as wind loading and resulting motions are concerned, for
tall and slender buildings, the shape is critical and a governing factor in the
architectural design. Understandably, tall building design requires a unique
collaboration particularly between the architect and the engineer. This
interdisciplinary approach to resolving building planning, construction, and usage
issues plays a vital role. Moreover, wind safe tall building design begins with the
architect, and so, the influence of the wind action must be considered from the
very beginning of the architectural design process. Therefore, skyscrapers of the
next generation will be the products of collaboration, in particular between the
architectural, structural and aerospace engineering fields without victimizing the
architectural design.

2. NATURE OF WIND
It is important to understand the nature of wind and its impact on tall
buildings. Herein, a brief overview of the nature of wind is provided. As we all
know, wind is the motion of air. This motion can be divided into two directions:
vertical and horizontal. When air moves vertically, it is named as current, which
results in lifting force. In structural engineering current is not a major concern in
the designs. On the other hand, when air moves horizontally, it is often named as
wind. In general, when wind passes around a building, it is separated into three
perpendicular directions, usually denoted as X, Y and Z. They are sometimes
known as along wind, crosswind and lift direction respectively.

3. WIND EXCITATION
The motion of tall buildings occurs primarily in three modes of action:
along wind, across wind, and torsional modes. For a rectangular building with one
face nearly perpendicular to the mean flow, the motion is measured in the along
wind and across wind directions as well as in the torsional mode. In this context,
along wind motion, across wind motion, and vortex-shedding phenomenon
resulting from these motions were discussed and aerodynamic modifications
against these motions were investigated.
 Along wind motion

2
  Across wind motion
 Torsional motion
3.1. Along wind motion
Along wind or simply wind is the term used to refer to drag forces. Under
the action of the wind flow, structures experience aerodynamic forces including
also the drag (along wind) force acting in the direction of the mean wind as shown
in figure 1. The structural response induced by the wind drag is commonly
referred to as the along wind response. The along wind motion primarily results
from pressure fluctuations on windward (building’s frontal face that wind hits)
and leeward face (back face of the building).

Fig 1: Simplified Two-Dimensional Flow of Wind

3.2. Across wind motion
The term across wind as shown in figure 1 is used to refer to transverse
wind. The across wind response, is a motion in a plane perpendicular to the
direction of wind. In the design of most modern tall buildings, the across wind
response often dominates over the along wind response. For instance, the wind
tunnel test of the Jin Mao Building showed that its maximum acceleration in
across wind direction at its design wind speed is about 1.2 times of that of the in
along wind direction .Buildings are very sensitive to across wind motion, and this
sensitivity may be particularly apparent as the wind speed increases. Wind
induced instabilities of modern tower-like structures with excess slenderness,
flexibility and lightly-damped (insufficient mechanical preventions against side
sway such as use of tuned mass dampers) features could cause considerably larger
across wind responses. Besides, while the maximum lateral wind loading and
deflection are usually observed in the along wind direction, the maximum

3
acceleration of a building loading to possible human perception of motion or even
discomfort may occur in across wind direction. Across wind motion is mainly due
to a phenomenon called vortex shedding.

3.2.1. Vortex-shedding phenomenon

When a building is subjected to a wind flow, the originally parallel wind
stream lines are displaced on both transverse sides of the building as shown in
figure 2, and the forces produced on these sides are called vortices. At low wind
speeds, the vortices are shed symmetrically (at the same instant) on either
transverse side of the building as shown in figure 3a, and building does not vibrate
in the across wind direction. On the other hand, at higher wind speeds, the vortices
are shed alternately first from one and then from the other side. When this occurs,
there is an impulse both in the along wind and across wind directions. The across
wind impulses are, however, applied alternatively to the left and then to the right.
Thus, the building vibrates in the excitation frequency due to a net force. This
excitation frequency is given by,
f =VxS/D
Where,
F=frequency of vortex shedding (Hz)
V=mean wind speed at the top of the building (m/s)
S=Strouhal number
D=Diameter of the building (m)
This kind of shedding which causes structural vibrations in the flow and
the across wind direction is called ‘vortex-shedding’, a phenomenon well known
in fluid mechanics. This phenomenon of alternate shedding of vortices for a
rectangular tall building is shown schematically in figure 3b.

4
 Fig 2: Simplified Wind Flow

`
(a) (b)
Fig 3: Vortices in Different Wind Speed Conditions
(a)Vortices in low speed of wind: there is no vibration in the across wind
direction. (b)Vortices in high speed of wind– vortex-shedding phenomenon: there
is vibration in the across wind direction.
3.3. Torsional motion
The torsional motion is developed due to imbalance in the instantaneous
pressure distribution on each face of the building. In other words, if the distance
between elastic center of the structure and aerodynamic center is large, the
structure is subjected to torsional moments that may significantly affect the
structural design.

4. GENERALISED WIND LOADS

Basic parameters that describe sectional wind loads acting at level z of a
building include: Wind pressure:
Qz=1/2ρUz2=q0Vq(z)

5
where q0 is the reference wind pressure at site and Vq is the variation function of
q0 with building height.
Building width:
Bz=B0VB(z)
Building twisting angle:
θz=θ0Vθ(z)
where the subscript 0 indicates a reference value.

5. SERVICEABILITY REQUIREMENTS
A structure may have a good strength in terms of its capacity to stand safe
against dead loads and live loads but it does not ensure the occupants comfort
against excitation. Therefore, along with the strength design, this primary issue
should also be resolved in the earlier design stage for its better aerodynamic
performance. Wind induced serviceability includes structure’s envelops response
under the deformation and the human perception of discomfort against the motion
of the structure.
Serviceability limit state design of structures includes factors such as
durability, overall stability, fire resistance, deflection, cracking, and excessive
vibration. At present most of the studies are being done adopting peak and root
mean square value of acceleration for governing the comfort threshold. According
to the Chinese code JGJ3–2002, the acceptable level of acceleration for along
wind and across wind must be 15 m-g for apartments and 25 m-g for hotels and
offices. 35 m-g to 40 m-g range of building motion is the extreme case which if
prevailed may turn out to be inconvenient for the occupants to balance. In the
wind-resistant design of super-tall buildings, a damping ratio of 1% is
recommended for safety design, and 70–80% of that damping ratio is
recommended for serviceability design including habitability check.

6. WIND TUNNEL TEST

A wind tunnel is a tool used in aerodynamic research to study the effects of
air moving past solid objects. A wind tunnel consists of a tubular passage with the
object under test placed in the middle. Air is made to move past the object by a

6
powerful fan system or other means. The test object, often called a wind tunnel
model, is instrumented with suitable sensors to measure aerodynamic forces,
pressure distribution, or other aerodynamic-related characteristics.
In wind engineering, wind tunnel tests are used to measure the velocity
around, and forces or pressures upon structures. Very tall buildings, buildings with
complicated shapes (such as a tall building with a parabolic or a hyperbolic
shape), cable suspension bridges are analyzed in specialized atmospheric
boundary layer wind tunnels. These feature a long upwind section to accurately
represent the wind speed and turbulence profile acting on the structure. Wind
tunnel tests provide the necessary design pressure measurements in use of the
dynamic analysis and control of tall buildings.
Air is blown or sucked through a duct equipped with a viewing port and
instrumentation where models or geometrical shapes are mounted for study.
Typically the air is moved through the tunnel using a series of fans. For very large
wind tunnels several meters in diameter, a single large fan is not practical, and so
instead an array of multiple fans are used in parallel to provide sufficient airflow.
The air moving through the tunnel should be relatively turbulence-free and
laminar. But the airflow created by the fans that is entering the tunnel is itself
highly turbulent due to the fan blade motion. To correct this problem, closely
spaced vertical and horizontal air vanes are used to smooth out the turbulent
airflow before reaching the subject of the testing.
Due to the effects of viscosity, the cross-section of a wind tunnel is typically
circular rather than square, because there will be greater flow constriction in the
corners of a square tunnel that can make the flow turbulent. A circular tunnel
provides a smoother flow.
The inside facing of the tunnel is typically as smooth as possible, to reduce
surface drag and turbulence that could impact the accuracy of the testing. Even
smooth walls induce some drag into the airflow, and so the object being tested is
usually kept near the center of the tunnel, with an empty buffer zone between the
object and the tunnel walls. There are correction factors to relate wind tunnel test
results to open-air results.

7
 The lighting is usually embedded into the circular walls of the tunnel and
shines in through windows. If the light were mounted on the inside surface of the
tunnel in a conventional manner, the light bulb would generate turbulence as the
air blows around it. Similarly, observation is usually done through transparent
portholes into the tunnel. Rather than simply being flat discs, these lighting and
observation windows may be curved to match the cross-section of the tunnel and
further reduce turbulence around the window.
Various techniques are used to study the actual airflow around the geometry
and compare it with theoretical results, which must also take into account the
Reynolds number and Mach number for the regime of operation.
Pressure measurements
Pressure across the surfaces of the model can be measured if the model includes
pressure taps. This can be useful for pressure-dominated phenomena, but this only
accounts for normal forces on the body.
Force and moment measurements
With the model mounted on a force balance, one can measure lift, drag, lateral
forces, yaw, roll, and pitching moments over a range of angle of attack.

Fig 4 : The anatomy of a wind tunnel

8
7. AERODYNAMIC MODIFICATION

In recent years there have been many tall buildings being constructed
around the world. As the height of those buildings increase, the dominant lateral
load is caused by wind instead of earthquake. For instance, although the 328.8 m
tall Burj Dubai Tower which is currently being constructed is located close to an
earthquake active fault line, the seismic force is not the dominating lateral load.
Instead wind load is the controlling factor in structural design in those buildings
and other skyscrapers of similar heights. Because of that many research have been
done on lateral systems that resist wind loads. They can be grouped in to 3 main
categories.
 The first category is the approach to alter the dynamic properties, such as
stiffness and damping of a structure.
 The second category is the use of damping devices in buildings. This can
be subcategorized into passive and active damping method.
 The third category is the use of aerodynamic modifications to reduce the
dynamic response caused to the buildings by wind loads.
Wind-induced motion of a tall building can be controlled either by
reduction at the source or by reducing the response. An appropriate choice of
building shape and aerodynamic modifications can result in the reduction of
motion by altering the flow pattern around a building. The aerodynamic concern
for wind-induced responses has prompted many researchers to study the
relationship between the aerodynamic characteristics of a structure and the
resulting wind–induced excitation level The aerodynamic modifications of a
building’s cross-sectional shape, variation of its cross section along the height, or
even its size, can significantly reduce building response in along wind as well as
across wind direction by altering the wind flow pattern around the building.
Aerodynamically efficient plan shapes are shown to be an effective means of
suppressing wind-induced loads, and hence construction cost, but may come at the
cost of reducing both the size and value of saleable/rentable floor area. The
various aerodynamic modifications applied to the tall buildings to mitigate the
wind excitations may be classified in two groups:

9
Minor modifications: Aerodynamic modifications having almost negligible
effects on the structural and architectural concept, for examples corner
modifications like fitting of fins, fitting of vented fins, slotted corners, chamfered
corners, corner recession, roundness of corners and orientation of building in
relation to the most frequent strong wind direction.
Major modifications: Aerodynamic modifications having considerable effects on
the structural and architectural concept, for examples setbacks along the height,
tapering effects, opening at top, sculptured building tops, varying the shape of
buildings, setbacks, twisting of building etc.
This can be subcategorized into 3 main sections, namely
 Optimizing the cross-sectional shapes of buildings
 Addition of openings through buildings
 Twisting and rotation of building

8.MINOR MODIFICATION
8.1. Shaping corners of buildings
When one looks at buildings in a commercial area, there is an interesting
fact that can be observed-there are buildings that have sharp corners while there
are others that have rounded, chamfered or slotted corners.In fact, most of the
buildings that have sharp corners are relatively shorter than those with rounded,
chamfered or slotted corners. The reason is mainly due to the impact of wind load
on buildings.
8.1.1. Effects of fins and vented fins
The aerodynamic modifications to basic square cross-sectional shape of
buildings by using small fins or vented fins have significant effects on the along
wind and crosswind response characteristics. The fins and vented fins are shown
in figure 5 and figure 6. Small fins/vanes fitted to the corners of a prismatic
building with a gap between the vanes and the corner can help to alleviate
negative pressures under the separated shear layers on the side faces. However,
the added drag introduced by these vanes increases the along wind responses.

10
 Fig 5: Fins

(a) Basic (b) Fins (c) Vented

Fins
Fig 6: Aerodynamic Modifications

Investigations were done on the effects of fins and vented fins using aero
elastic testing of building models of dimension 60 mm x 60 mm x 540 mm with
10 mm wide vertical fins fitted to corners and with 5 mm wide vertical fins and 5
mm gap between fins and corners at reducing velocities ranging from 4 to 24 in
wind tunnel. The fitting of fins to the corners increases the projected area normal
to wind direction, causing an increase in the drag force, and the resulting mean
and standard deviation along wind responses compared with plain square tower.
Venting of fins, however, caused increases in response of smaller magnitudes. The

11
fitting of fins and vented fins to square tower model causes significant reductions
in the crosswind response at the lower range of reduced wind velocities up to
about 10. The fitting of fins served only to increase the critical wind speed without
any noticeable disruption to vortex shedding process. At the high range of reduced
velocities, there was an apparent reduction in galloping response when vented fins
were fitted. The fitting of fins or vented fins is acceptable for general usage only
for certain range of reduced wind velocities.
The aerodynamic modifications to buildings like fitting of fins and vented
fins causes noticeable increase in the along wind response due to an increase in
the projected area normal to wind direction. The aerodynamic modifications,
which in general increase the projected area or the effective width of a building,
would not be beneficial.

8.1.2. Effects of slotted corners, chamfered corners and corner recession

Investigations have established that corner modifications such as slotted
corners, chamfered corners/corner cut, corner recession are in general effective in
causing significant reductions in both the along wind and crosswind responses
compared to basic building plan shape. The modification of windward corners is
very effective to reduce the drag and fluctuating lift through changing the
characteristics of the separated shear layers to promote their reattachment and
narrow the width of wake. This type of modifications is also effective to suppress
the aero elastic instability.
Investigations were done on the effects of slotted corners and chamfered
corners through wind tunnel tests on aero-elastic square and rectangular models of
dimension 60mmx60mmx540mm and 112.5mmx75mm x450mm respectively
with and without slotted and chamfered corners. The modifications to the building
corners ranged from 9% to 16% of building breadth. Slotted corners and
chamfered corners were causing noticeable reductions in both the dynamic along
wind and crosswind responses as compared to plain rectangular shape building.

12
 (a) Slotted Corners (b) Corner Cut/Chamfered Corners

(b) Corner Recession (d) Corner Recession(Double)

Fig 7: Corner Modifications

Venting through the slotted corners appears to be effective in reducing the

drag force without undesirable effect of using vented fins. With chamfered
corners, the reductions in responses were more substantial, with up to a 40%
reduction in the along wind response compared with the plain rectangular shape
building within a tested reduced velocity range of 3 to 20. The magnitude of the
response reduction was not significantly affected by the change in terrain
category. With wind normal to the wide face of the rectangular building, the
wake-excited crosswind responses of the modified buildings were found to be up
to 30% smaller than that of the plain building at the low range of reduced wind
velocities. The critical reduced wind velocity changed from a value of

13
approximately 10 for the plain building to the 9 and 8 for the building with slotted
corners and chamfered corners respectively. With the incident wind normal to the
narrow face of the building, the crosswind response was found to be wake excited.
Building modifications such as horizontal slots, slotted corners and chamfered
corners causes major disruption of the vortex-shedding process and result in a
30% or more reduction in the crosswind response.
Studies on the effect of plain shape on the crosswind responses of tall
building through wind tunnel aero elastic test were done. For normally
symmetrical or square plan shape, modest chamfering of corners up to 10% does
not significantly reduce the crosswind response at low values of reduced
velocities. However significant reductions in the ultimate limit state design loads
can be achieved at higher reduced velocities. The crosswind force spectrum was
found to reduce at both lower and higher ranges of reduced velocities, in the case
of more substantial chamfering of corners such that building plan shape
approaches that of an octagonal or hexagonal shape.
Investigations were done on the effects of corner cut and corner recession
on aero elastics instabilities such as vortex induced excitation and galloping
oscillation by wind tunnel tests on square and rectangular prisms with aspect ratio
of 10.Small corner cut and recession of 5% of breath are very effective to prevent
aero elastics instability for a square prism by increasing the aerodynamic
damping, but the large corner cut and recession promote the instability at low
velocity to reduce the onset velocity of the instability when damping is small
enough. The suppression of aero elastic instability by smaller cut and recession
does not come from the suppression of the vortex shedding but from the increase
of the aerodynamic damping. The motion-induced vibration occurs for a deep
depth rectangular prism, and it is little affected by the corner modifications.
Still, there is no definitive consensus on the benefits of corner geometry
modifications, since studies have also shown that modifications to building
corners, in some cases, were ineffective and even had adverse effects.
This type of corner modifications (corner recession) had been applied to
the 150 m high Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Yokohama Building as shown in
Figure 7, which was located in a water front area in the wake of peripheral tall

14
buildings. To reduce the wind-induce responses, all the four corners were
chamfered, which consequently reduced the wind forces. The double step corner
recession modifications had been applied to the cross section of 508 m high, 101
storey, Taipei101 building, Taiwan as shown in Figure 8. A corner modification
applied to the Taipei101 building reduces the base moment by 25% as compared
to building of basic square section.

Fig 8: MHI Yokohama Building Fig 9: Taipei 101 Building

8.1.3. Effects of roundness of corners

The corner roundness is one of the effective means of improving the
aerodynamic behaviors of the tall buildings against the wind excitation. The
response of six buildings of identical height and dynamic properties, but with
different cross sections to develop an optimum building shape for the U.S. steel
building, Pittsburgh. The results showed that circular cross-section produces the
lowest response and an equilateral triangular cross-section the highest. From
geometrical point of view, rectangular plan shape rather susceptible to lateral drift.
However other building shapes like cylindrical, elliptical and crescent are not as
vulnerable to lateral force action as rectangular shape. These types of building
shape offers improved aerodynamic behaviors and allow the greater building
height at comparatively lower cost. The wind pressure design loads for circular
and elliptical building shape can be reduced by 20% to 40% as compared to
similar sized rectangular buildings .Studies on the effects of corner roundness on

15
the crosswind response of tall buildings through wind tunnel aero elastic test were
done.
For normally symmetrical or square plan shapes, modest rounding or
chamfering of corners up to 10% does not significantly reduce the crosswind
response at low values of reduced velocities. However significant reductions in
the ultimate limit state design loads can be achieved at higher reduced velocities.
The crosswind force spectrum was found to reduce at the both the lower and
higher ranges of reduced velocities, in the case of more substantial rounding of
corners such that building plan shape approaches that of a roughly circular shape.
Excessive rounding of the structure’s corners, approaching a roughly circular
shape in the cross section or cylindrical shape of building, significantly improve
the response of building against wind forces .However, the building plan shapes
which are elliptical or elongated octagonal with a major to minor axis ratio of
about 3:2, the critical reduced wind velocities were found to be significantly
lower. The resultant high crosswind response and acceleration level makes it more
difficult to meet occupancy comfort criteria. Furthermore, these plan shapes were
found to exhibit significant torsional response about the vertical axis.
The effects of corner roundness on aero elastic instabilities such as vortex-
induced excitation and galloping oscillation by wind tunnel tests on square and
rectangular prisms with aspect ratio of 10.The corner roundness is the most
effective to suppress the aero elastic instability for a square prism as compared to
corner cut and corner recession/chamfered corners. The amplitude of the wind-
induced vibration reduces as the extent of the corner roundness increases. In case
of rectangular prism of side ratio (depth/breath) 1/2, the corner roundness has no
or a little effect on the instability when the damping ratios are 0.2 to 1.2%,
whereas corner roundness is effective to prevent the instability at damping ratio of
4%. The Millennium Tower in Tokyo shown in Figure 10 exploits the use of
circular plan shape to mitigate the wind excitation. The top portion of proposed
301 m high Shreepati Skies Tower, Mumbai, India as shown in Figure 11 and
Marina City towers in Chicago, USA shown in Figure12 had also utilized the
advantage of cylindrical plan shape and/ or roundness of corners.

16
 Fig 10: Roundness of Corners

Fig 11: Millennium Fig 12: Shreepati Fig 13: Marina

Tower Skies City Towers

9.MAJOR MODIFICATIONS

9.1. Optimizing the cross sectional shapes of building

The aerodynamic modification of a building shape like changing the cross-
section of building with height through tapering, reducing their upper level plan
areas by cutting corners or dropping off corners progressively as the height
increases, which alters the flow pattern around the building, could reduce the wind
induced excitation of tall buildings. Buildings with tapered and non uniform cross-
section along the height would inhibit any formation of coherent wake
fluctuations resulting in a reduction of transverse periodic loading. Changing the
cross-sectional shape of tall building along the vertical axis, along with effective
tapering, might spread the vortex-shedding over a broad range of frequencies, can
be especially effective in reducing the crosswind forces . More sculptured building

17
top, in this case a triangular pyramid shape for the top 15% of the building, can
moderate both the along wind and crosswind response .Studies on the unsteady
wind loads acting on a super-tall building with a tapered cross-section and
chamfered corners were measured as functions of reduced velocity and motion
amplitude using aero elastic model tests were done. The tapered model with
beveled/chamfered corners showed much lower levels of unstable aerodynamic
damping due to vortex shedding than measured on a model having a constant
square cross section.
Investigations were done on the effect of tapering in reducing the rms
across wind displacement responses of a tall building using an aero elastic test on
three tapered tall building models with taper ratios of 5%, 10% and 15%, and one
basic model of a square cross-section without a taper in a wind tunnel which
simulated the suburban environment. The tapering effect appeared, when the
reduced velocity was high and the structural damping ratio had a moderate value
of 2–4%. However, the increase in tapering could have an adverse effect,
increasing the rms across wind displacement responses when the structural
damping ratio is very low.
The Millennium Tower in Tokyo, Japan shown in Figure 10 exploits the
use of circular plan shape and tapering effects along the height of the building.
The Transamerica pyramid, San Francisco shown in Figure 13 had utilized the
advantage of tapering effects along the height to reduce the surface area and plan
areas at top and thus mitigating the wind forces. The advantages of tapering
effects and cutting corners were also integrated into the design of 421 m high Jin
Mao building, china shown in Figure 11 and 450m high Petronas tower in
Malaysia shown in Figure 15. The Jin Mao building exploits the use of setbacks
and tapering up to its 421 m façade and is crowned by ornate tiers shifted from the
major axis of the structure creating an effect reminiscent of the ancient pagoda.
The advantages of reducing the plan area along the height effects and roundness
of corners were integrated into the design of 421m high Burj Dubai Tower, UAE
shown in Figure 16.The Sears Tower in Chicago, USA shown in Figure 17
exploits the advantage of reducing the plan area along the height to minimize the
wind-induced motion at the top of the building. The 551 m high Doha Convention

18
Center in Qatar exploits the use of square plan shape and tapering effects along
the height to reduce the plan area of building at top, which helps in mitigating the
wind forces.

Fig.14: Transamerica Fig 15:Jin Mao Fig 16: Petronas

Pyramid Building Towers

Fig 17: Burj Dubai Fig 18: Sears Tower

9.2. Addition of openings through buildings
The addition of openings to a building provides yet another means of
improving the aerodynamic behaviors of the structure against wind forces by
reducing the vortex shedding forces particularly at top, which cause the across
wind motion. Open passages in the building would allow the air to bleed into the
wake and separated regions thereby increase the base pressure and consequently
reduce aerodynamic forces. However this approach, as true of any aerodynamics
modification, must be used with care to avoid adverse effects.

19
 Fig 19: Shanghai World Financial Center
Studies on the effects of different vertical gap widths on the crosswind
response of a square cross-section tall building with a height to breadth ratio of 1
to 9 using wind tunnel test were done. The building’s aerodynamics are modified
by the introduction of openings in the upper half of the buildings and information
is presented in the form of effects of these gaps on overall forces, responses and
on the time-varying pressures. Providing the along wind through building opening
and in particular combined along wind and crosswind openings, particularly near
the top can be effective in reducing vortex- shedding induced forces, and hence
the crosswind dynamic response of the tall buildings, but that effectiveness varies
with the gap width. The provision of across wind gaps alone is not as effective as
comparable along wind gaps. The level of disruption to the vortex-shedding
process varied with the width of opening and large reductions were observed for
opening of 4% of building width. The critical reduced wind velocity shifted to a
slightly higher value, which implied that resonant vibrations of the building would
be postponed to a higher wind speed with a longer return period. The effectiveness
of these gaps may be influenced by the level of turbulence in approach flow.

Figure 20: Through Opening

20
 Studies on the potential beneficial effects of a through buildings opening
in a 390 m high office tower project were done using force balance and aero
elastics model technique in a wind tunnel. A more sculptured building top, in this
case a triangular pyramid shape for the top 15% of the building, can moderate
both the along wind and crosswind responses. A venting or bleeding of the
building wake provided by through building opening near the top resulted in
additional reductions in these responses.
Investigations on the effects of openings of 25% of breadth on
characteristics of wind forces acting on square prisms of dimension 13 cm x 13
cm x 79 cm using force balance technique in a wind tunnel were done. The
through building opening reduces the across wind fluctuating wind force
coefficients of a model as compared to square plan at normal wind incidence. In
particular the through opening along both directions, i.e. along wind and
crosswind direction is significantly reduces the across wind fluctuating wind force
coefficients as well as responses of a model as compared to square plan of through
opening along one direction at normal wind incidence. Investigations were done
on the effects of open passage for reducing the wind dynamic responses of tall
buildings resulting from the periodic vortex-shedding of building corners using
dynamic balance wind tunnel test on a model of square cross section at aspect
ratio of 8. The results show that very small opening of 1.5% on its four walls
significantly reduces the across wind dynamic deflection by about 20-25%. The
results also indicate that the arrangement with open passages on all its four walls
is the more effective as compared to the arrangement of open passages either only
on the side and front walls or on front and back walls.
Investigations were done on the effects of open passage configurations
and its vertical position on across wind aerodynamic responses using dynamic
models. Sections with along wind open passages tend to obtain relatively more
aerodynamic damping effect, while across wind open passages have an adverse
influence on the separated shear layer, which results in having less aerodynamic
damping coefficient. The aerodynamic responses are the most reduced in the case
of open passages introduced on 0.8-0.9 of reference height, whereas the across

21
wind aerodynamic responses tend to be not so conservative in the case of open
passages introduced on 0.6 of reference height.
However, the effectiveness of this modification diminishes if the openings
are provided at lower levels of the building. Provision of opening and other such
type of changes adversely affect the habitability if they reduce the resonant vortex
frequency. The benefits of providing opening at top were integrated into the
design of 460 m high Shanghai World Financial Centre as shown in Figure 18,
featuring a 54 m square shaft and diagonal face that is shaved back with the
opening of 51 m provided at the top of the building to relieve pressure at this
location. The design exploits not only the benefits of through-building openings
but also those provided by shifting and decreasing the cross-section with
increasing height, essentially tapering the 460 m tower. The Kingdom Center in
Riyadh shown in Figure20 also employs a large through building opening at the
top combined with a tapered form to reduce the wind-induced forces.

Fig 21: Kingdom Center

9.3. Effects of twisting or rotating of buildings

A twisted form is an interesting approach to be employed for today’s tall
buildings. Twisted forms are effective in reducing vortex-shedding induced
dynamic response of tall buildings by disturbing vortex shedding. Twisting or
rotating of building minimize the wind loads from prevailing direction and avoid

22
the simultaneous vortex shedding along the height of the building. Rotating the
building can be very effective because its least favorable aspect does not coincide
with the strongest wind direction. The crosswind sensitive buildings can see their
peak responses change by 10 to 20% within a 10-degree wind direction change.
But to our knowledge, no specific study to investigate the effects of
twisting of building is available in literature till date. This twisted form can be
found in today’s tall building designs such as the 190 m high Turning Torso, in
Malmo, Sweden and proposed Chicago Spire Project in Chicago, USA designed
by Santiago Calatrava. Chicago Spire Project shown in Figure 21 would be
constructed along the Chicago lakefront west of navy pier. The structure of the
Chicago Spire will benefit greatly from its design, because curved designs tend to
add strength to the structure, and in addition the curved face of the exterior will
minimize wind forces, which is important in the windy city. The curved design
will not completely negate wind forces, so a tapering concrete core and 12 shear
walls emanating from it will also be installed to counteract these forces.
The benefits of twisting of building are integrated into the design of 632 m
high Shanghai Centre as shown in Figure 22 and Infinity tower, currently under
construction in Dubai, UAE which is twisted by 90°.

Fig 22: Chicago Fig 23: Shanghai

Spire Center

23
10.LOW RISE BUILDINGS

The roof is the most vulnerable part of a low rise building as it is

often affected in the event of high winds that produce high suctions or uplift
forces on the edges and corners. When wind passes over a roof of a low-rise
building, flow separation occurs. As a result, negative pressures form on the
roof, producing uplift forces that can cause damage s to the building. Negative
pressures are usually experienced at the corners of the windward edges. Wind
affects buildings by pressures causing significant loads that can lead to
damage. Windstorms cause significant negative pressures on roofs of domestic
homes and industrial/commercial buildings that can initiate failure. Once part
of the roof failed, the building becomes vulnerable and may be subject to
cascade failure of the whole envelope. The uplift force caused by negative
pressure on roof is an important consideration for the design of the main force
resisting system of a building. Wind loads on bluff bodies are dominantly
governed by their shapes, among other factors. Accordingly, an aerodynamic
mitigation approach should rely on the shape modification as a way by which
aerodynamic loads can be greatly reduced.

Shingles, tiles, or pavers placed on roofs are most vulnerable to being

dislodged and becoming wind-borne debris. Loose roofing components could
lead to rainwater intrusion and losses to interior appliances and building
contents.

Simple modifications to the shape of the roof edge and utilizing roof
accessory structures can change the flow pattern on the roof and can lead to
reductions in the wind loads and consequently damage to low-rise buildings.
These methods are appropriately entitled “vortex suppression” techniques
since they mainly aim at disrupting and deflecting the conical vortices from
the roof which are the main causes of extreme roof suctions. These methods
are mainly in form of using parapets with various shapes and configurations or
passive aerodynamic edges that suppress vortex generation on the roof. Vortex

24
suppression techniques can be classified in the following four categories based
on their aerodynamic mechanism:

1. Methods aiming at eliminating straight sharp edges which create the

vortices

2. Methods aiming at disrupting the vortex formation (like partial or porous

parapets)

3. Methods aiming at disturbing the vortices (like porous fence or screen, roof
top cylinders and splitters)

4. Methods aiming at displacing the formed vortices (like high parapets)

10.1.Parapets

Parapets lift the separated shear layers clear of the roof surface and
thus dissipate the high local corner or edge suctions over a larger area.
However, this can result in increased loads on interior regions, thus
influencing the overall effectiveness of parapets According to the studies, high
parapets generally reduce the high suctions on roof corners while low parapets
may increase the roof suctions at the edges and corners. Generally the
perimetric parapets have a more significant effect on reducing corner pressure
coefficients than a parapet present on only one side of the roof. The
effectiveness of parapets is also a function of the parapet configuration.
Different parapet configurations include saw-tooth partial parapets, semi-
cylindrical parapets, solid and porous roof corner splitters and isolated porous
parapets. The isolated porous parapets were shown to be the most effective
alternative in reducing suctions near the roof corner. Koppetal studied the
effects of various parapets in decreasing area averaged loads under the corner
vortices. The spoilers and porous continuous parapets performed best with
44% and 56% maximum reductions in peak pressure coefficients near roof
corners. Conical Vortex Disrupter gives significant reductions on both local
and area averaged wind loads near the roof corners on a flat roof building.

25
10.2.Passive aerodynamic passive device

Due to high efficacy of parapets in reducing roof suctions, recent

studies are concentrated on modifying the roof corners or edges and adding
various aerodynamic edge elements to mitigate the extreme negative pressures
caused by conical vortices. These elements can be permanent or attached
during high winds. The effectiveness of roof edge configuration on mitigating
wind loadings was checked using wind tunnel testing or field measurements.

A variety of roof edge devices have been developed that can be

attached to roof eaves (e.g. semicircular gutters, cantilevered spoilers, etc.).
These devices facilitate the reduction of extreme wind pressures on the roof
with varying degrees of aerodynamic effectiveness and architectural
practicality. Huang carried out field measurements to examine the efficacy of
three types of aerodynamic mitigation plates, including full length roof edge
plate, roof corner plate, and discrete roof edge plates with different spaces on
pitched roofs. Results showed that these plates could significantly reduce the
mean and fluctuating pressure coefficients in the windward corner. Bitsuamlak
investigated the effectiveness of simple architectural elements including gable
end and ridge line extensions, trellis, and wall extensions for the reduction of
roof and wall corner suctions. The wind loading mechanism of aerodynamic
mitigation devices were also investigated using CFD. Aerodynamic mitigation
devices with relatively high lift and drag forces can become wind born debris
impacting other structures downwind or they may introduce excessive loads to
the main structure. The slope-in aerodynamic mitigation devices which could
be replaced by solar panels were relatively effective in reducing roof induced
suctions.

26
 Solid parapet Porous parapet
Discontinuous parapet

Partial parapet Perimetric spoiler

Aerodynamic edge

Discontinuous perforated Full length roof-edge plate Trellis

(pergola)
parapets
Fig 24: Various aerodynamic mitigation techniques for reducing wind
loads on roof of low rise buildings

27
11. AERODYNAMIC SHAPE OPTIMIZATION

Optimization is to find the best solution to a certain designated

problem. For optimization two different methods are used. They are (1)
Gradient based methods and (2) Non Gradient based methods. Gradient based
methods are computationally faster than non-gradient based methods. The
basic principle of this technique is that a given function reaches its extremes in
the direction of the gradient. Their main drawback is that they might converge
to local minima, and their convergence to global minima depends mainly on
the chosen starting point by the user. Gradient based methods are:

i. Steepest Descent
ii. Conjugate Gradient
iii. Newton-Raphson
iv. Quasi- Newton Methods
v. Levenberg- Marquardt

In case of non-gradient based methods, they do not rely on the gradients.

They work on the function evaluation alone. The principle of the technique is
that they mimic nature in order to find optimum solution. Non gradient
method, in some cases, requires thousands of function valuation and it may
become impractical. Thus this method is computationally slower compared
with gradient based methods. Non Gradient methods are:

i. Genetic Algorithms
ii. Differential Evolution
iii. Particle Swarm
iv. Simulated Annealing

Optimization can be single objective or multi objective. For multi-

objective optimization problems, there exist a set of compromised solutions,
known as the Pareto-optimal solutions or non-dominated solutions, which are
based on the competing objectives. Non Gradient methods are suitable for
multi objective optimization. Gradient method uses weighing method to
combine different objectives into one .

28
 12. CONCLUSION

On the basis of wind tunnel studies on tall building available in

literature, it is clearly noticed that aerodynamic modification to the building
shape like, slotted and chamfered corners, horizontal and vertical through
building openings, roundness of corners, tapering and dropping of corners can
significantly reduce the wind excitation of tall buildings. The aerodynamic
modifications can significantly mitigate wind excitation of tall buildings, but
cannot eliminate them totally, and additional passive preventative measures
like tuned mass damper, tuned liquid damper may be provided.

Engineers may achieve significant reduction in wind excitation by providing

aerodynamic modifications, which do not increase the projected area or breadth of
a building.
Modifications to the building corners such as slotted or chamfered corners
need to be applied to the corner region greater than about 10% of the building
breadth to be beneficial. The plan shape, which has a lower Strouhal number, is
beneficial and it is a parameter, which can offer significant benefit when correctly
selected. The corner roundness is the most effective to suppress the aero elastic
instability for a square building. The amplitude of the wind induced vibration
reduces as the extent of the corner roundness increases. Tapering effect has a more
significant effect in across wind direction than that in along wind direction. The
through opening along the along wind and crosswind direction, particularly at top
significantly reduces the wind excitation of the building

29
13.REFERENCES

[1]. Amin.J.A, Ahuja.A.K “Aerodynamic modifications to the shape of the

buildings: A review of the state of art” Asian Journal of Civil
Engineering (Building and Housing), 2010, Vol-11, Pg.433-450.
[2]. Emre ILGIN.H, Halis GUNEL.M, “The role of aerodynamic
modifications in the form of tall buildings against wind excitation”
METU JFA, 2007,Vol-24, Pg.17-25
[3]. Jomir Hossain, Quamrul Islam, Mohammad Ali “An Experimental
Investigation of Wind Load on Tall Buildings with Octagonal Cross-
Section” International Journal of Renewable Energy Reaserch,2013,
Vol-3, Pg.192-200
[4]. Mandal.A.C, Faruk.G.M.G “An experimental investigation of static
pressure distributions on a group of square or rectangular cylinders
with rounded corners” Journal of Mechanical Engineering, June
2010,Vol-41,Pg.42-49
[5]. Young-Moon Kim, Ki-Pyo You, “Dynamic responses of a tapered tall
building to wind loads”, Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial
Aerodynamics ,Vol- 90,Pg. 1771-1782
[6]. Yin Zhou, Tracy Kijewski , Ashan Kareem “Aerodynamic loads on tall
buildings-Interactive database” ASCE Journal, March 2003,Vol-
129,Pg.394-404

30
31
32
33