EquivalentStaticWindLoadingonBuildings:

ANewPerspective
XinzhongChenandAhsanKareem
NatHazModelingLaboratory,UniversityofNotreDame,156FitzpatrickHall,
NotreDame,IN,USA
ABSTRACT:Aframeworkforevaluatingtheequivalentstaticwindload(ESWL)foranygiven
peakresponseofbuildingscharacterizedbyuncoupledmotionsinthethreeprimarydirectionsis
presented.Thisincludesanewdescriptionofthebackgroundloadingbasedonthegustloading
envelope, whereas the resonant component is described in terms of the inertial loading. The
ESWL for the total peak response is then expressed as a linear combination of the background
and resonant components. A closed-form formulation of the ESWL based on this framework
utilizing an analytical wind loading model is presented. The gust response factors and ESWLs
for various alongwind response components at different building elevations are discussed to
highlightadvantagesoftheproposedscheme.
KEYWORDS:Windloads,Windeffects,Gustresponsefactor, Buildings,Structuraldynamics,
Randomvibration.
1 INTRODUCTION
In current design practice, spatiotemporally varying wind loads on buildings are modeled as
equivalent static wind loads (ESWLs). Traditional gust response factor (GRF) approach
(Davenport1967)iswidelyusedinmostbuildingdesigncodesandstandardsforthealongwind
responsethatresultsinaloaddistributionsimilartothemeanwindload(e.g.,ZhouandKareem
2001). The GRF concept has been extended to the acrosswind and torsional response
components (Piccardo and Solari 1996; Kareem and Zhou 2002). However, the GRFs may
exhibit wide variations for different response components of a structure and may have
significantly different values for structures with similar geometric profiles and associated wind
loadcharacteristics,butdifferentstructuralsystems.Fortheacrosswindandtorsionalresponses,
which are typically characterized by the low values of mean wind loading and associated
response, particularly, for symmetric buildings, the corresponding GRFs may not project the
samephysicalmeaningasthetraditionalGRFforthealongwindresponse.
AnESWLdescriptionbasedonthepeakdynamicpressure/windload(includingthemean
load)hasbeenadoptedinsomebuildingdesign codessuchasthedraft Eurocode(ENV-1991),
ASCE7-02 and the new Australian/New Zealand Standards (Holmes 2002). This format
describestheESWLasthepeakdynamicloadmultipliedbyaconstantcoefficientreferredtoas
dynamicresponsefactor(DRF)(Holmes2002).InSolariandRepetto(2002),anidenticalESWL
distribution for all response components was suggested. They utilized a polynomial expansion,
which was obtained on the premise that the selected ESWL resulted in accurate estimates of a
limitednumberofpre-selectedpeakresponsecomponents.
Separation of wind loads and their effects and the associated ESWLs into background
(quasi-static) and resonant components provides not only an efficient response prediction
framework but also a physically meaningful description of the loading (Davenport 1985;
Kasperski1992;Holmes2002;Isyumov1999;Zhouetal.2000;ZhouandKareem2001;Chen
andKareem2001).Accordingly,theresonantESWL(RESWL)canbeexpressedintermsofthe
inertial load (e.g., Davenport 1985). Whereas thebackground ESWL (BESWL) depends on the
external wind load characteristics and can be determined using a Load-Response-Correlation
(LRC)approach(Kasperski1992),whichprovidesamostprobableloaddistribution(Kasperski
1992 and Tamura et al. 2002). Based on the BESWL and RESWL, the corresponding peak
resonant and background responses can be calculated using a simple static analysis. These are
thencombinedusingthecompletequadraticcombination(CQC)approachorthesquarerootof
thesumofsquares(SRSS)schemeforthetotalpeakresponse(excludingthemeancomponent).
Alternatively,anESWLforthetotalpeakresponsecanbeexpressedasalinearcombinationof
thebackgroundandresonantloadingcomponents(ChenandKareem2001;Holmes2002).
In this paper, a framework is presented for evaluating the ESWL for any given peak
response componentof wind-excitedbuildings characterized byuncoupledmotionsinthethree
primary directions. A new description of the BESWL is presented based on the gust loading
envelope(peakdynamicloadingwithoutthemeancomponent).TheRESWLisgivenintermsof
the inertial load in each fundamental mode. The ESWL for the total peak response is then
expressed as a linear combination of the BESWL and RESWL. Based on this framework, a
closed-formformulationoftheESWLusingananalyticalwindloadingmodelispresented.The
GRFs and ESWLs for various alongwind response components at different building elevations
arediscussedtohighlightadvantagesoftheproposedESWLdescription.
2GENERALFORMULATIONS
The response of a wind-excited building with one dimensional uncoupled mode shapes in the
two orthogonal translational and torsional directions at a given wind speed and direction is
considered. The wind loads per unit height at elevation z above the ground have mean
components of ) (z P
x
, ) (z P
x
and ) (z P
u
, and fluctuating components of ) , ( t z P
x
, ) , ( t z P
y
and ) , ( t z P
u
,inthetranslationalaxesxandyandabouttheverticalaxisz.Thediscussionhereis
focusedontheresponsewithonedimensionalinfluencefunctionsinthethreeprimarydirections.
The uncoupled class of response in the three primary directions permits treatment of wind
loading and building response in each direction independently. Without loss of generality, the
followingdiscussionwillfocusontranslationalresponseinthexdirectionatagivenwindspeed
andorientation;asimilartreatmentinotherdirectionsisimmediate.
For a specific response of interest (displacement, bending moment, shear force and other
memberforces)atabuildingelevationz
0
,R(z
0
, t),themean(static)andbackgroundcomponents
canbecalculatedbythestaticandquasi-staticanalysis.Theresonantcomponentcanbeanalyzed
usingmodalanalysisrestrictedtothefundamentalmode.Themeanresponse,rootmeansquare
(RMS)backgroundandresonantresponsesandthepeakdynamicresponse(excludingthemean
response)areexpressedas
} } }
= =
H H
P x x R
H
x x
dz dz z z R z z dz z z P R
xx b
0 0
2 1 2 1 2 1
0
) , ( ) ( ) ( ; ) ( ) ( o (1)
2 2 2 2
max 1 1
1
0
2
0
; ) (
4
) ( ) (
) ( ) ( ) (
r b x r
R r R b Q H
x
H
x x
R
g g R f S f
dz z z m
dz z z z m
o o

o + =
O
O
=
}
}
(2)
} }
O O =
H H
P x x Q
dz dz f z z S z z f S
xx x
0 0
2 1 , 2 1 2 1
) , ( ) ( ) ( ) ( (3)
where H= building height;
x
(z)= influence function indicating the response R(z
0
,t) under unit
load acting at the elevation z in x direction;
x
(z)= fundamental mode shape; f
1
and
1
=
fundamentalfrequencyanddampingratio(includingaerodynamicdamping),respectively;m(z)=
massperunitheight; ) , (
2 1
z z R
xx
P
and = ) , , (
2 1
f z z S
xx
P
covarianceandcrosspowerspectraldensity
(XPSD)betweenP
x
(z
1
,t)andP
x
(z
2
,t); = ) ( f S
x
Q
powerspectraldensity(PSD)ofthegeneralized
modal force; g
b
and g
r
= peak factors for the background and resonant responses, respectively,
typicallyranginginvaluebetween3and4.
FollowingtheLRCapproach(Kasperski1992),theBESWLforpeakbackground
response,
b
R b
g o ,isgivenby
}
=
H
P x
R
b
eR
dz z z R z
g
z F
xx
b
b
0
1 1 1
) , ( ) ( ) (
o
(4)
which depends on the influence function of the response under consideration. Accordingly, the
BESWLhasadifferentspatialdistributionfordifferentresponsecomponents,whichmaynotbe
veryattractiveforcodeapplications.
For the purpose of simplifying the background load description, it is proposed here to
express the BESWL as the gust loading envelope (GLE), ) ( ) (
'
z R g z F
x
P b ebx
= , multiplied by a
backgroundfactor,B
z
,
}
= = =
H
ebx x R R R z ebx z eR
dz z F z B z F B z F
b b b b
0
' ' ' '
) ( ) ( ; / ); ( ) ( o o o (5)
where ) , ( ) ( z z R z R
xx x
P P
= ;
'
b
R b
g o = peak background response under the loading envelope that
does not include the influence of loss in spatial correlation of wind loading over the building
height; B
z
represents the reduction effect with respect to the response R(z
0
,t) due to loss of
correlation of wind loading. In cases where the wind loads are fully correlated, i.e.,
) ( ) ( ) , (
2 1 2 1
z R z R z z R
x x xx
P P P
= , B
z
becomesunityandtheBESWLsbasedontheLRCandGLE
schemesconvergetothegustloadingenvelope, ) (
'
z F
ebx
.
TheRESWLforthepeakresonantresponse,
r
R r
g o ,isgivenintermsoftheinertialload:
) (
4
) ( ) (
) ( ) (
) (
1 1
1
0
2
f S f
dz z z m
z z m g
z F
x
Q H
x
x r
erx

t
}
O
O
= (6)
which can also be expressed in terms of the distribution of the peak base bending moment or
base shear force over the building height following the inertial load distribution. When the
torsionalresponseisunderconsideration,theRESWLisobtainedbydistributingthebasetorque
overthebuildingheight.
The ESWL for the total peak dynamic response, R
max
, can be provided as a linear
combination of the background and resonant loads (Chen and Kareem 2000 and 2001; Holmes
2002):
( )
max max
'
/ ; / ; ) ( ) ( ) ( R g W R g W z F W z F B W z F
r b
R r r R b b erx r ebx z b eR
o o = = + = (7)
When the peak response includes the mean component, the ESWL is given
as ) ( ) ( z F z P
eR x
.
3CLOSED-FORMFORMULATION
For the sake of illustration, the mass per unit height, m(z), the first mode shape,
x
(z), and the
influencefunctionoftheresponseR(z
0
,t),
x
(z),areexpressedas

<
>
|
.
|

\
|
=
|
.
|

\
|
= O =
) ( 0
) (
) ( ; ) ( ); 1 ( ) (
0
0
0
0
0
0
z z
z z
H
z z
z
H
z
z
H
z
m z m
x x
|
|

(8)
wherem
0
=themassperunitheightatthebottomofthebuilding;=aconstantparameter(0
1);and=modeshapeexponentrangingbetween1.0and1.5fortypicalbuildings;
0
and
0
=
constantparameters.Forthetopdisplacement,
0
=i
0
,z
0
=0,and
0
='(wherei
0
isthedeflection
at the top of the building under a unit load at that point; '= a constant parameter); for the
bendingmomentatheightz
0
,
0
=Hand
0
=1;andfortheshearforceatheightz
0
,
0
=1and
0
=0.
TheXPSDandcovarianceofwindloadperunitheightareassumedas
) exp(
) (
) , , (
2 1 2 1
2 2 1
H
z P
P
U
z z f k
H
z
H
z
H
f S
f z z S
xx

|
.
|

\
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
o o
(9)
) exp( ) , (
2 1
2 1
2
2
2 1 z
x
P
P
L
z z
H
z
H
z
H
z z R
b
xx

|
.
|

\
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
o o
o
(10)
where
} }

~ =
'
0 0
2
) ( ) (
f
P P P
df f S df f S
b
o ) (
1
'
f f s ; ) ( f S
P
= PSDofwindloadatthebuildingtop
normalized by H
2
; U
H
= mean wind speed at thebuilding top; = wind load profile coefficient;
z
x
L =integrallengthscaleofthefluctuatingwindload;k
z
=decayfactorintheverticaldirection.
TheBESWLbasedontheGLEapproachandtheRESWLareexpressedas
o
o
| o | o
|
.
|

\
|
= =
H
z
H
g
H
z
B z F
H
z
B z F
b
b
P b
z ebx z eR
) , , ( ) ( ) , , ( ) (
0
0
' 0
0
(11)
|

t
| o
| o
| |
| |
|
.
|

\
|

+ + + +
+ +
=
H
z
H
z
f S f
H
g
f J
z F
P
r
z
erx
) 1 ( ) (
4 ) 1 (
) , , (
)] 1 2 ( ) 2 2 [(
) 2 2 )( 1 2 (
) (
1 1
1
(12)
where ) / , , (
0 0
2
H z B
z
| o and
2
| ) , , ( | f J
z
| o are the background factor and joint acceptance
functionthatrepresenttheloadreductioneffectsduetothelossofverticalspatialcorrelationin
windloads,andcanbeapproximatedby
) 5 . 2 /( / 1
1
) , , ( ;
) 5 . 2 /( / ) ( 1
1
) , , (
2
0 0
0 2
|
| o
|
| o
+ +
~
+ +
~
H z
z z
x
z
U fH k
f J
L z H H
z
B (13)
It is noted that both
2
z
B and |J
z
|
2
become unity when wind loads are fully correlated over the
building height, i.e., 0 /
z
x
L H and 0 /
H z
U fH k , and decrease with decrease in the
correlation/coherence.
4 ALONGWINDLOADINGANDRESPONSE
InordertohighlighttheadvantageoftheESWLbasedontheexternalwindloadingandmodal
inertial loads in comparison with that based on the traditional GRF approach, the following
discussionisfocusedonthealongwindresponse,i.e.,theresponseinthetranslationaldirection,
x, for wind approaching at zero angle of incidence. Assuming that the mean wind speed varies
accordingtothepowerlawasU(z)=U
H
(z/H)

,andthedragcoefficient,aerodynamicadmittance
function and turbulence intensity are uniform over the building height, the mean wind load per
unitheightisgivenby
o 2
) / ( / ) ( H z H q z P
H x
= .TheXPSDandcovarianceofwindloadperunit
height are given by Equations (9) and (10) with = =
z
u
z
x
L L integral length scale of alongwind
fluctuationand
2 2 * 2 2
| ) ( | | ) ( | ) ( 4 ) ( f J f f S I q f S
y D u u H P
_ = (14)
where ; 5 . 0
2
BH C U q
D H H
= = air density; B= building width; C
D
= drag coefficient;
= =
2
0 0
*
/ ) ( ) (
u u u
f S f S o normalizedPSDofwindfluctuationwithrespecttoitsmeansquarevalue
}

=
0
0
2
0
; ) ( df f S
u u
o = =
H u u
U I /
0
o turbulence intensity at the top of the building; |
D
(f)|
2
=
aerodynamicadmittancefunction;and|J
y
(f)|
2
=jointacceptanceinthehorizontaldirectiongiven
by |J
y
(f)|
2
=(2/
y
)[1-1/
y
+(1/
y
)exp(-
y
)] and
y
=k
y
fB/U
H
; and k
y
= decay factor in horizontal
direction.
Detailed closed-form expressions for the top displacement, bending moment and shear
force at a given elevation z
0
can be obtained. The background and resonant GRFs (BGRF and
RGRF)foranyresponsecomponentatanybuildingelevationcanbecalculatedastheratioofthe
peak background and resonant components with respect to its mean value. For example, the
BGRF and RGRF for the top displacement (z
0
=0 and
0
='), base bending moment (z
0
=0 and

0
=1)andbaseshearforce(z
0
=0and
0
=0)aregivenbythefollowinggeneralexpressions:
}
+ +
+ +
+ +
= =
1
0
2
2
*
0
0
0
) ( ) ( ) (
) 5 . 2 /( / 1
2
) 1 (
) 2 1 (
f
y D u
z
u
u b
R b
b
df f J f f S
L H
I g
R
g
G
b
_
|
| o
| o
o
(15)
2
1
2
1 1
*
1
1 1
0
0 0
0 0
) ( ) ( ) (
4 ) 5 . 2 /( / 1
2
) 1 (
) 2 1 (
)] 1 2 ( ) 2 2 [(
) 1 2 )( 2 2 (
) 1 )( 2 (
)] 1 ( ) 2 [(
f J f f S f
U H f k
I g
R
g
G
y D u
H z
u r
R r
r
r
_

t
|
| o
| o
| |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
o
+ +
+ +
+ +
+ +
+ +
+ + + +
+ + + +
= =
(16)
5 DISCUSSION
In order to highlight the dependence of GRF on the response under consideration, Figure 1(a)
showstheratioofBGRFsforthetopdisplacement('=
0
=1.5asanexample)andthebaseshear
to the BGRF for base bending moment. Figures 1(b) and (c) compare BGRFs for shear and
bending moment at different elevations, respectively, normalized by the BGRF for base shear
and base bending moment, respectively. Figure 2 shows the corresponding comparison results
fortheRGRFs.
ItisnotedthatthedifferencesamongtheBGRFsforbasebendingmoment,baseshearand
top displacement are marginal and are within 5%. Their influence on total peak responses will
become less significant when the resonant components are included. However, the BGRFs for
shearforceandbendingmomentincreasemarkedlywithincreasingelevation.Thisisduetothe
rapidincreaseintheequivalentloadsforresponsesathigherelevationsascomparedtothemean
load. It is obvious that using the BGRF based equivalent loading associated with either base
bending moment, base shear or top displacement, which follows a distribution similar to the
meanwindload,willsignificantlyunderestimatethebackgroundresponsesathigherelevations.
On the other hand, as indicated in Figure 2(a), the RGRF for the base shear force is
remarkably different from those for the base bending moment and the top displacement. As
showninFigures 2(b)and2(c),thevariationsinRGRFswithelevationmaybesignificant.This
is due to the fact that the actual equivalent load distribution in terms of the inertial load may
significantly deviate from the mean load distribution. Again, using the RGRF based equivalent
loadassociatedwiththebasebendingmomentorbaseshearortopdisplacementwillintroduce
noteworthyerrorsinpredictingotherresonantresponsesatdifferentelevations.
(a) (b) (c)
Figure1.ComparisonoftheBGRFs,(a)baseshearforce,basebendingmomentandtopdisplacement,
(b)shearforcesatdifferentelevations,(c)bendingmomentsatdifferentelevations
(a) (b) (c)
Figure 2.ComparisonoftheRGRFs,(a)baseshearforce,basebendingmomentandtopdisplacement,
(b)shearforcesatdifferentelevations,(c)bendingmomentsatdifferentelevations
(a) (b) (c) (d)
Figure 3.BESWLsbasedontheLRCapproach,(a)baseshearforce,basebendingmomentandtop
displacement,(b) shearforcesatdifferentelevations,(c)bendingmomentsatdifferent
elevations,(d)basebendingmomentwithdifferentturbulencescales
0 2 4 6 8 10
0.9
0.95
1
1.05
1.1
H/L
x
z
G
b
R
(
0
)
/
G
b
M
x
(
0
)
0
=1.5
0
=0
=0.2
0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
z
0
/
H
G
bF
x
(z
0
)
/G
bF
x
(0)
H/L
x
z
=2
H/L
x
z
=4
H/L
x
z
=6
=0.2
0
=0
0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
z
0
/
H
G
bM
x
(z
0
)
/G
bM
x
(0)
H/L
x
z
=2
H/L
x
z
=4
H/L
x
z
=6
=0.2
0
=1
0.5 1 1.5 2
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
1.1
G
r
R
(
0
)
/
G
r
M
x
(
0
)
0
=1.5
0
=0
=0.2, =0
1 1.5 2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
z
0
/
H
G
rF
x
(z
0
)
/G
rF
x
(0)
=1.0
=1.2
=1.5
=0
=0.2
0
=0
1 1.2 1.4 1.6
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
z
0
/
H
G
rM
x
(z
0
)
/G
rM
x
(0)
=1.0
=1.2
=1.5
=0
=0.2
0
=1
0 0.5 1 1.5
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
z
/
H
F
eR
b
(z)/(g
b P
b
)H
0
=0
0
=1
0
=1.5
(z/H)
=0.2
H/L
x
z
=4
z
0
/H=0
0 0.5 1 1.5
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
z
/
H
F
eR
b
(z)/(g
b P
b
)H
H/L
x
z
=1
H/L
x
z
=2
H/L
x
z
=4
(z/H)
=0.2
0
=1
z
0
/H=0
0 0.5 1 1.5
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
z
/
H
F
eR
b
(z)/(g
b P
b
)H
z
0
/H=0
z
0
/H=0.4
z
0
/H=0.8
(z/H)
=0.2
H/L
x
z
=4
0
=0
0 0.5 1 1.5
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
z
/
H
F
eR
b
(z)/(g
b P
b
)H
z
0
/H=0
z
0
/H=0.4
z
0
/H=0.8
(z/H)
=0.2
H/L
x
z
=4
0
=1
Figure3presentsBESWLsbasedontheLRCapproach.Figure 3(a)providesBESWLsfor
baseshearforce(z
0
=0and
0
=0),basebending moment(z
0
=0and
0
=1)andtopdisplacement
(z
0
=0and'ischosenas'=
0
=1.5asanexample).Figures 3(b)and3(c)showthoseforshear
forceandbendingmomentatdifferentelevations.Thegustloadingenvelopeisalsoshownthat
describes the envelope of the BESWL distribution. The variations in the background loads
correspondtothereductioneffectsfordifferentresponsecomponentsresultingfromthelossof
correlation in wind loads over the building height. As indicated by the load distributions for
shearforceandbendingmomentatz
0
=0.8Hwithzz
0
inFigures 3(b)and3(c),thebackground
loadsassociatedwithhighlycorrelatedlocalizedwindloadeffectsareclosetothe gustloading
envelope. As suggested by Figure 3(d), with an increase in wind load correlation that
corresponds to the decrease in parameter
z
x
L H / , the BESWLs based on the LRC approach are
closetothegustloadingenvelope.
(a) (b) (c) (d)
Figure 4.BESWLsbasedontheGLEapproach,(a)baseshearforce,basebendingmomentandtop
displacement,(b)shearforcesatdifferentelevations,(c)bendingmomentsatdifferent
elevations,(d)basebendingmomentwithdifferentturbulencescales
As expected, while LRC approach based BESWLs provide a physically meaningful load
distribution, the dependence of their spatial distribution on the response being considered may
precludethisloaddescriptionforpossibleadoptionbyabuildingcodeorstandard.Ontheother
hand,theloaddistributionsbasedontheGLEapproachproposedinthisstudyaresimilartothe
gustloadingenvelopeforallresponsecomponentswhicharescaledbythebackgroundfactoras
indicated in Figure 4. This is similar to the traditional GRF approach, but the load distribution
dependsontheexternal fluctuatingloadratherthanthemeanload. Inaddition,thebackground
factor,B
z
,hasaclearerphysicalmeaningthantheBGRF,G
b
.
TheadvantageofexpressingtheRESWLintermsoftheinertialloadingisthatitobviously
leads to a single load distribution for all responses. However, significantly different GRFs and
RESWLs are required for different response components when the traditional GRF approach is
utilizedwithaloaddistributionsimilartothemeanload.TheESWLforthetotalpeakresponse
based on external wind loads and modal inertial loads is particularly suited for the acrosswind
and torsional responses in which the mean windloads and responses are generally small which
renders the ESWL based on the traditional GRF approach less appropriate for practical
applications.
6CONCLUSIONS
A framework for evaluating the equivalent static load for any peak response component of
buildingswithuncoupledresponsesinthethreeprimarydirectionswaspresented.Inthisscheme,
0 0.5 1 1.5
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
z
/
H
F
eR
b
(z)/(g
b P
b
)H
0
=0
0
=1
0
=1.5
=0.2
H/L
x
z
=4
z
0
/H=0
(z/H)
0 0.5 1 1.5
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
z
/
H
F
eR
b
(z)/(g
b P
b
)H
z
0
/H=0
z
0
/H=0.4
z
0
/H=0.8
(z/H)
=0.2
H/L
x
z
=4
0
=0
0 0.5 1 1.5
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
z
/
H
F
eR
b
(z)/(g
b P
b
)H
z
0
/H=0
z
0
/H=0.4
z
0
/H=0.8
(z/H)
=0.2
H/L
x
z
=4
1
=1
0 0.5 1 1.5
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
z
/
H
F
eR
b
(z)/(g
b P
b
)H
H/L
x
z
=1
H/L
x
z
=2
H/L
x
z
=4
(z/H)
=0.2
0
=1
z
0
/H=0
theproposedbackgroundloadbasedonthegustloadingenvelopeofferedaverysimplifiedload
descriptionincomparisonwiththeload-response-correlationapproachwhosespatialdistribution
exhibitsacleardependenceontheresponsecomponentofinterest.Italsoprovidedaphysically
more meaningful and efficacious description of the loading as compared to the gust response
factorapproach.
The gust response factors for various alongwind response components at various building
elevations were presented in closed-form and compared to highlight the variations in the gust
responsefactorsfordifferentresponsecomponents.Itwaspointedoutthatusingtheequivalent
staticloadassociatedwithbasebendingmoment,baseshearortopdisplacementthatfolloweda
distributionsimilartothemeanwindloadmayintroducenoteworthyerrorsintheestimationof
other responses at different elevations. The proposed equivalent static load in terms of the
external fluctuating wind load and the inertial load description provided a convenient and
meaningfulloaddescriptionforpotentialapplicationstobuildingcodesandstandards.
7 ACKNOWLEDGMENT
TheauthorsaregratefulforthefinancialsupportprovidedinpartbytheNationalScience
FoundationgrantCMS00-85109.
8REFERENCES
AmericanSocietyofCivilEngineers(2002),ASCE7-02,Minimumdesignloadsforbuildingsandotherstructures,
ASCE,NewYork.
Chen,X.andKareem,A.(2001).Equivalentstaticwindloadsforbuffetingresponseofbridges.J.ofStruct.Eng.,
ASCE,127(12),1467-1475.
Davenport,A.G.(1967).Gustloadingfactors.J.ofStruct.Eng.Div.,ASCE,93,11-34.
Davenport, A. G. (1985). The representation of the dynamic effects of turbulent wind by equivalent static wind
loads.AISC/CISCInt.Symp.onStruct.Steel,Chicago.
C.E.N (European Committee for Standardization). (1994) Eurocode 1: basis of design and actions on structures.
Part2-4:Windactions,ENV-1991-2-4,C.E.N.,Brussels,1994.
Holmes, J. D. (1994). Along-wind response of lattice towers: Part I - Deviation of expression for gust response
factors.Eng.Struct.,16,287-292.
Holmes,J.D.(2002).Effective staticloaddistributionsinwindengineering.J.ofWind Eng.andInd.Aerodyn.,
90,91-109.
Holmes, J. D. (2002). Gust loading factor to dynamic response factor (1967-2002). Symposium Preprints,
Engineering Symposium to Honor Alan G. Davenport for His 40 Year of Contributions, the University of
WesternOntario,June20-22,2002,London,Ontario,Canada,A1-1-A1-8.
Isyumov, N. (1999). Overview of wind action on tall buildings and structures. Proc. of the Tenth Int. Conf. on
WindEng.,Copenhagen,Denmark,15-18.
Kareem, A. and Zhou, Y. (2002). Gust loading factors - past, present and future. Symposium Preprints,
Engineering Symposium to Honor Alan G. Davenport for His 40 Year of Contributions, the University of
WesternOntario,June20-22,2002,London,Ontario,Canada,A2-1-A2-28.
Kasperski,M.(1992).Extremewindloaddistributionsforlinearandnonlineardesign.Eng.Struct.,14,27-34.
Piccardo, G. and Solari, G. (1996). A refined model for calculating 3-D equivalent static wind forces on
structures.J.ofWindEng.andInd.Aerody.,65,21-30.
Solari, G. and Repetto, M. P. (2002). Equivalent static wind actions on structures. Symposium Preprints,
Engineering Symposium to Honor Alan G. Davenport for His 40 Year of Contributions, the University of
WesternOntario,June20-22,2002,London,Ontario,Canada,A3-1-A3-20.
Tamura,Y.,Kikuchi,H.andHibi,K.(2002).ActualextremepressuredistributionsandLRCformula.J.ofWind
Eng.andInd.Aerodyn.,90,1959-1971.
Zhou,Y.,Kareem,A.andGu,M.(2000).Equivalentstaticbuffetingloadsonstructures.J.ofStruct.Eng.,ASCE,
126(8),989-992.
Zhou,Y.andKareem,A.(2001).Gustloadingfactor:newmodel.J.ofStruct.Eng.,ASCE,127(2),168-175.