1. 江苏开放大学 建筑工程学院,南京,210000
2. 河北建筑工程学院 土木工程学院,张家口,075000
3. 海南大学 土木建筑工程学院,海口,570228
钟旻(1988—),女,江西新余人,讲师,研究方向:建筑结构抗风. E-mail:zhongmin@jsou.edu.cn
黄斌*(1989—),男,博士,副教授,博士生导师,研究方向:结构风工程与风沙工程. E-mail:huangbin@hainanu.edu.cn
纸质出版:2025
移动端阅览
钟旻, 林明慧, 黄斌, 等. 典型山体地形下低矮房屋风荷载受周边建筑群干扰效应研究[J]. 空气动力学学报, 2025, 43(10): 59−69.
ZHONG Min, LIN Minghui, HUANG Bin, et al. Study on the wind load of low-rise buildings under typical mountainous terrain and the interference effects of surrounding buildings[J]. 2025, 43(10): 59-69.
钟旻, 林明慧, 黄斌, 等. 典型山体地形下低矮房屋风荷载受周边建筑群干扰效应研究[J]. 空气动力学学报, 2025, 43(10): 59−69. DOI: 10.7638/kqdlxxb-2024.0151
ZHONG Min, LIN Minghui, HUANG Bin, et al. Study on the wind load of low-rise buildings under typical mountainous terrain and the interference effects of surrounding buildings[J]. 2025, 43(10): 59-69. DOI: 10.7638/kqdlxxb-2024.0151.
海岛山体地形下,低矮房屋在强风作用下受损严重,目前低矮房屋的抗风研究主要针对单体建筑,考虑周边环境影响的研究较少,关于山体地形下的低矮房屋风荷载受建筑群干扰效应的研究更是鲜有涉及。基于刚性模型测压风洞试验,对山坡地形下低矮房屋风荷载在受两个施扰房屋(位于试验房屋前方对称布置)干扰时的变化规律进行研究,讨论山坡间距和房屋高度的比值
S/H
= 0.2、0.4和1.0时,不同风向角下房屋表面平均风压分布和体型系数的变化规律。结果表明:当风向角为0°~90°时,
S/H
= 0.4的房屋墙面负压绝对值大于另外两种间距下的负压绝对值;当风向角为90°时,间距变化对墙面A和D的影响更明显;当风向角大于90°时,3种间距下的试验房屋的墙身约2/3以上区域受到较强风吸力作用。此外,依据《建筑结构荷载规范》(GB50009-2022)对试验房屋表面进行区域划分,各区域的最不利风向角为105°~150°,对应的体型系数均在
S/H
= 0.2时取得最小值,与规范值相比差异显著,且山坡地形对试验房屋的影响要大于前方的施扰房屋。
Currently
there is still a significant lack of understanding regarding the effects of wind load on low-rise buildings situated in mountainous terrain
especially when considering the interference caused by building clusters. This paper presents a wind tunnel experimental study on the interference effects of wind load on low-rise buildings in mountainous landscapes
focusing on scenarios where two disturbance buildings are symmetrically positioned in
front of the test building. The distribution of surface average wind pressure and the variations of shape coefficients are discussed for the distance-to-height ratio
S/H
= 0.2
0.4
and 1.0 (
S
is the distance between a building with height
H
and the hillside) across a range of wind direction angle spanning from 0° to 180°. The results indicate that as the wind direction angle increases
the areas of wind suction on the surfaces of the experimental house expand. When the wind direction angle is between 0° and 90°
the absolute value of negative pressure on the wall with
S/H
= 0.4 is larger than that of the other two spacings. When the wind direction angle is 90°
the impact of spacing changes on walls A and D is more pronounced. When the wind direction angle exceeds 90°
the area with a wall height of about 2/3 or more of the test house is subjected to strong wind suction force
irrespective of the distance between the test house and the hillside. The surface of the test house is divided into more areas than standard buildings
and the obtained shape coefficients are significantly different from the specified values. The unfavorable wind direction angle is found to be in the range of 105°~150°
and the influence of the hillside terrain on the test house is more significant than that of the two buildings in its front. When the wind direction angle is 180°
the hillside first comes into contact with the incoming wind
but due to the influence of the hillside airflow
the absolute value of the test house's body shape coefficient decreases compared to its previous state. The shape coefficient of each area on the roof reaches its minimum value at
S/H
= 0.2 under the most unfavorable wind direction angle.
DONG X, YE J H, DING J M. Review of destructive vortices and vortex-induced wind pressures on low-rise buildings[J]. Journal of Building Structures, 2018, 39(1): 1−10(in Chinese).
LIU X, QIAN C Z, CHEN C P, et al. Research on wind pressure distribution and interference effect of complex tall buildings[J]. Structural Engineers, 2022, 38(1): 93−101(in Chinese).
CHEN B, CHENG W H, MA H R, et al. Wind interference effects from one high-rise building and similar low-rise flat-roof buildings[J]. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2021, 147(9). doi: 10.1061/(asce)st.1943-541x.0003121
CHEN B, SHANG L X, QIN M Y, et al. Wind interference effects of high-rise building on low-rise building with flat roof[J]. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 2018, 183: 88−113. doi: 10.1016/j.jweia.2018.10.019
ALINEJAD N, KIM S, JUNG S. Wind-tunnel testing of low- and midrise buildings under heterogeneous upwind terrains[J]. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2024, 150(5): 04724001. doi: 10.1061/jsendh.steng-12684
WANG X J, LI Q S, YAN B W. Full-scale measurements of wind pressures on a low-rise building during typhoons and comparison with wind tunnel test results and aerodynamic database[J]. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2020, 146(10). doi: 10.1061/(asce)st.1943-541x.0002769
LI Q S, HU S Y. Monitoring of wind effects on a low-rise building during typhoon landfalls and comparison to wind tunnel test results[J]. Structural Control and Health Monitoring, 2014, 21(11): 1360−1386. doi: 10.1002/stc.1650
LI J C, LI Q S, HU S Y. Monitoring of wind pressures on gable roof of a low-rise building during tropical cyclones and comparisons with wind tunnel test results[J]. Structural Control and Health Monitoring, 2019: e2380. doi: 10.1002/stc.2380
ZHANG X W, LI Z N, WANG C Q, et al. Experimental and numerical analyses of multi-DBD plasma actuators to reduce wind loads and modify local flow on the roofs of low-rise buildings[J]. 2018, 8(9): 095314. doi: 10.1063/1.5048686
WANG S X, LI L J, ZHAO S A, et al. Wind tunnel experiment of air velocity profile in the boundary layer induced by environment wind[J]. Journal of China Institute of Water Resources and Hydropower Research, 2021, 19(3): 329−334(in Chinese).
LI Z N, ZHONG M, HU L M, et al. Wind tunnel test on low-rise buildings influenced by spacing between hillside and building in typical mountain terrain[J]. Journal of Building Structures, 2015, 36(7): 67−74(in Chinese).
ZHONG M, LI Z N, QIU M, et al. Wind tunnel test on wind load of low-rise buildings in typical mountain landform: analysis of hillside slope effects[J]. Acta Aerodynamica Sinica, 2016, 34(5): 687−695(in Chinese). doi: 10.7638/kqdlxxb-2014.0135
ZHONG M, LIN M H, ZHOU Z X, et al. Wind tunnel test on low-rise buildings influenced by hillside height in typical mountain terrain[J]. Advances in Aerodynamics, 2024, 6(1): 10. doi: 10.1186/s42774-024-00174-4
LI Y X, LI G, GAN S. Study on wind-induced mean interference effects between low-rise buildings[J]. Journal of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation Engineering, 2017, 37(6): 1023−1029(in Chinese).
LI M X, WANG G X. Destructive characteristics of envelope structures for group residential buildings under strong wind[J]. Journal of Shenyang University of Technology, 2020, 42(2): 218−225(in Chinese). doi: 10.7688/j.issn.1000-1646.2020.02.18
HOXEY R P, ROBERTSON A P, BASARA B, et al. Geometric parameters that affect wind loads on low-rise buildings: full-scale and CFD experiments[J]. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 1993, 50: 243−252. doi: 10.1016/0167-6105(93)90079-4
WANG H, WU J Y, LI N, et al. Numerical simulation study on wind load characteristics of buildings with hip roof under tornado[J]. Journal of Hefei University of Technology (Natural Science), 2021, 44(3): 370−376,388(in Chinese).
ZHAO L, LI Y X. The influence of multi/high-rise building on the surface wind load of low-rise building[J]. Alexandria Engineering Journal, 2022, 61(12): 11979−11991. doi: 10.1016/j.aej.2022.05.053
SINGH J, ROY A K. Wind loads on roof of low-rise buildings[J]. Disaster Advances, 2021, 14(5): 83−98.
SHARMA D, RAJ R, PAL S. Effects of different types of roofs under wind loads for low-rise structures[C]// AIP Conference Proceedings, THE IV INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC FORUM “NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGIES”, Almaty, Kazakhstan. Maryland : AIP Publishing, 2024. doi: 10.1063/5.0192953
中华人民共和国住房和城乡建设部. 《建筑结构荷载规范》(GB50009-2012)[M]. 中国建筑工业出版社, 2012.
0
浏览量
0
下载量
0
CSCD
关联资源
相关文章
相关作者
相关机构
京公网安备11010802024621