Wind-tunnel modelling of the Silsoe Cube

Richards, P.J.; Hoxey, R.P.; Connell, BD; Lander, D. G.

doi:10.1016/j.jweia.2007.02.005

Cited by 117 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The spectra are presented in the dimensionless form nS uu (n,H)/U 2 and nH/U after Irwin (1998) and Richards et al (2007). The Von Kármán (1948) spectrum found in ESDU 83045 (1983) was fitted to the measured spectra using equivalent fullscale z 0 values from …”

Section: Experimental Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Freestream Turbulence on the Pressure Acting on a Low-Rise Building Roof in the Separated Flow Region

Fernández-Cabán

Masters

2018

Front. Built Environ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents the experimental design and subsequent findings from a series of experiments in a large boundary layer wind tunnel to investigate the variation of surface pressures with increasing upwind terrain roughness on low-rise buildings. Geometrically scaled models of the Wind Engineering Research Field Laboratory experimental building were subjected to a wide range of turbulent boundary layer flows, through precise adjustment of a computer control terrain generator called the Terraformer. The study offers an in-depth examination of the effects of freestream turbulence on extreme pressures under the separation "bubble" for the case of the wind traveling perpendicular to wall surfaces, independently confirming previous findings that the spatial distribution of the peaks is heavily influenced by the mean reattachment length. Further, the study shows that the observed peak pressures collapse if data are normalized by the mean reattachment length and a non-Gaussian estimator for peak velocity pressure.

show abstract

Section: Experimental Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Freestream Turbulence on the Pressure Acting on a Low-Rise Building Roof in the Separated Flow Region

Fernández-Cabán

Masters

2018

Front. Built Environ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The comparison with the wind tunnel data also illustrates that it is very difficult to judge quantitatively on the precision of the numerical simulations. As discussed by Richards et al (2007), there are big differences in the inflow conditions in the wind tunnel experiments with respect to the field experiments. In the wind tunnel experiments, there is almost no variation in the wind direction, while in the field experiment the variation is very strong.…”

Section: Magnitude Of the Error On The Pressure Coefficientmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…The figure also shows the differences for wind tunnel experiments. The wind tunnel data are from Richards et al (2007) for the vertical section and by Hölscher and Niemann (1998) for the horizontal section. We observe that the maximum difference between field experiments and wind tunnel experiments is of the order of 20% for both the vertical and horizontal sections.…”

Section: Magnitude Of the Error On The Pressure Coefficientmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prediction of the pressure distribution on a cubical building with implicit LES

Köse

Dick

2010

Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a numerical study of the flow around a cubical building in an atmospheric boundary layer. The Reynolds number of the flow is Re = 4.10 6 . Different types of turbulence models, steady state RANS, hybrid RANS/LES and LES, are used and the simulation results are compared to field measurement data of the mean pressure distribution. The objective is to build an approach to perform simulations on coarse grids with low computational cost. The outcome is that the Implicit LES (ILES) method is the most accurate for coarse grid simulations. In order to verify the sensitivity of the results to the Reynolds number, also simulations of a wind tunnel experiment at Reynolds number 4.10 4 are performed. We demonstrate that also for lower Reynolds numbers, although not optimal, the ILES approach leads to quite good results.

show abstract

“…A graph from the paper by Long et al (2006) is given as Figure 1.4 which shows the pressure coefficient differences between wind tunnel and full-scale data. Figure 1.5 from Richards et al (2007) shows that there is a reasonable agreement between the full-scale and wind-tunnel mean pressure coefficients, but the full-scale peak pressure coefficients are markedly larger than those obtained from the wind-tunnel.…”

Section: Problem Statementmentioning

confidence: 73%

“…For low-rise buildings wind tunnel test results can significantly deviate from full-scale data because of: (1) the differences in the relative pressure-tap hole size between model and full-scale, (2) model Reynolds number effects, (3) differences in angular standard deviation of wind direction, (4) stability effects in the atmosphere, and (5) viscous dissipation in the smallest eddies of the modeled flow (Peterka et al, 1998). Recently, some comparisons between wind tunnel results and fullscale measurements in natural wind show that the pressure predicted by wind tunnel tests can be lower by as much as half of their full-scale counterparts (Long et al, 2006;Richards et al, 2007). A graph from the paper by Long et al (2006) is given as Figure 1.4 which shows the pressure coefficient differences between wind tunnel and full-scale data.…”

Section: Problem Statementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Architectural Features of Air-Permeable Roof Cladding Materials on Wind-Induced Uplift Loading

Li¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Widespread damage to roofing materials (such as tiles and shingles) for low-rise buildings, even for weaker hurricanes, has raised concerns regarding design load provisions and construction practices. Currently the building codes used for designing low-rise building roofs are mainly based on testing results from building models which generally do not simulate the architectural features of roofing materials that may significantly influence the wind-induced pressures. Full-scale experimentation was conducted under high winds to investigate the effects of architectural details of high profile roof tiles and asphalt shingles on net pressures that are often responsible for damage to these roofing materials. Effects on the vulnerability of roofing materials were also studied. Different roof models with bare, tiled, and shingled roof decks were tested.Pressures acting on both top and bottom surfaces of the roofing materials were measured to understand their effects on the net uplift loading. The area-averaged peak pressure coefficients obtained from bare, tiled, and shingled roof decks were compared. In addition, a set of wind tunnel tests on a tiled roof deck model were conducted to verify the effects of tiles' cavity internal pressure. Both the full-scale and the wind tunnel test vii results showed that underside pressure of a roof tile could either aggravate or alleviate wind uplift on the tile based on its orientation on the roof with respect to the wind angle of attack. For shingles, the underside pressure could aggravate wind uplift if the shingle is located near the center of the roof deck. Bare deck modeling to estimate design wind uplift on shingled decks may be acceptable for most locations but not for field locations; it could underestimate the uplift on shingles by 30-60%. In addition, some initial quantification of the effects of roofing materials on wind uplift was performed by studying the wind uplift load ratio for tiled versus bare deck and shingled versus bare deck. Vulnerability curves, with and without considering the effects of tiles' cavity internal pressure, showed significant differences. Aerodynamic load provisions for lowrise buildings' roofs and their vulnerability can thus be more accurately evaluated by considering the effects of the roofing materials.

show abstract

Wind-tunnel modelling of the Silsoe Cube

Cited by 117 publications

References 7 publications

Effects of Freestream Turbulence on the Pressure Acting on a Low-Rise Building Roof in the Separated Flow Region

Effects of Freestream Turbulence on the Pressure Acting on a Low-Rise Building Roof in the Separated Flow Region

Prediction of the pressure distribution on a cubical building with implicit LES

Effects of Architectural Features of Air-Permeable Roof Cladding Materials on Wind-Induced Uplift Loading

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About