A numerical study on the aerodynamic performance of building cross-sections using corner modifications

Abstract

A numerical investigation is performed in this work in order to evaluate the aerodynamic performance of building cross-section configurations by using corner modifications. The CAARC tall building model is utilized here as reference geometry, which is reshaped considering chamfered and recessed corners. The numerical scheme adopted in this work is presented and simulations are carried-out to obtain the wind loads on the building structures by means of aerodynamic coefficients as well as the flow field conditions near the model's location. The explicit two-step Taylor-Galerkin scheme is employed in the context of the finite element method, where eight-node hexahedral finite elements with one-point quadrature are used for spatial discretization. Turbulence is described using the LES methodology, with a dynamic sub-grid scale model. Predictions obtained here are compared with experimental and numerical investigations performed previously. Results show that the use of corner modifications can reduce significantly the aerodynamic forces on the building structures, improve flow conditions near the building locations and increase the Strouhal number, which may have an important influence on aeroelastic effects.

Effect of Wind-Structure Interaction on Longitudinal Response of Tall Buildings

“…Also, numerical problems in the corresponding calculations of fluids flow turbulence can be eliminated using Large Eddy Simulation (LES) (Smagorinsky, 1963). The fundamental equations are addressed as follows (Alminhanaa et al, 2018):…”

“…Where, is velocity vector component; is Kronecker delta function component; and are fluid's volumetric and dynamic viscosity, respectively; is eddy viscosity; is thermodynamic pressure; is the fluid's specific volume; is sound velocity inside the fluid and is the fluid's spatial domain limited by boundary conditions (Alminhanaa et al, 2018).…”

“…Where, is the average wind pressure coefficient at the i th point, is the pressure at the i th point, is the wind's static pressure at upper level of CAARC structure and is wind velocity at the upper height of the structure, equivalent to 12.7m/s. ρ is also the density of air, which is equivalent to 1.225kg/m 3 . The mean time and r.m.s.…”

Bilateral Interference of Wind Loads Induced on Duplicate Building Models of Various Shapes

“…Because of the many flow situations originating from the interaction of the wind with the structures, wind analysis is a task of high unconventionality if the building's plan is unusual. A collection of experimental and numerical work has been carried out to investigate wind-induced effects on isolated objects with various indifferent external shaped tall buildings, like Chakraborty et al (2014) and Raj and Ahuja (2013) have explored "+" shape buildings, Paul and Dalui (2016) investigated "Z" shape buildings, Gomes et al (2005) investigated "L" and "U" shape buildings, Mallick et al (2019) have studied "C" shape buildings, Li et al (2017) have examined "L" shaped buildings, Bhattacharyya et al (2014) have investigated "E" shape buildings, Nagar et al (2020) have analysed "H" shape buildings, Alminhana et al (2018) have considered "CAARC tall building model" with corner modifications, Bandi et al (2013) have investigated "Triangular" shape building with diverse configurations and Pal et al (2021) have investigated "Fish-plan Shape" model. The majority of researchers' interference studies, according to the existing literature, are aimed to determine the most useful configuration settings and/or interspacing among the obstructing models of rectangular or square plan shape buildings, as mentioned in the studies by Lam et al (2011), Hui et al (2012, Zu and Lam (2018a,b), Yu et al (2015), and Mara et al (2014).…”

Mitigating wind induced effects on tall buildings through aerodynamic modifications

“…An ABL inlet condition was used and a CD value of 2.55 was reported (de Macêdo Wahrhaftig & da Silva, 2018). Alminhana, et al, (2018) also studied a rectangular building with a 1.5 B/D ratio but with different building dimensions. Uniform boundary conditions were used and there were no balconies, just a plain rectangular building.…”