Draft Report – Tower B1 - Maslak...

This document is intended for the sole use of the party to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged and/or confidential. If you have received this in error, please notify us immediately.

® RWDI name and logo are registered trademarks in Canada and the United States of America

Reputation Resources Results Canada | USA | UK | India | China | Hong Kong | Singapore www.rwdi.com

RWDI Anemos Ltd Unit 4 Lawrence Industrial Estate Lawrence Way Dunstable, Bedfordshire LU6 1BD United Kingdom Tel: +44 (0)1582 470250 Fax: +44 (0)1582 470259

Agaogla Maslak EGYO Project Istanbul, Turkey

Draft Report – Tower B1

Cladding Pressures RWDI # 1300132 January 8, 2014

SUBMITTED TO

Murat Akbas [email protected]

Yapi Teknik Ins.San. Proje Ve Taah Ltd.Sti

Kisikli Cad. No.4 Sarkuysan Ak Plaza Altunizade-Uskudar

Istanbul t +90 216 651 85 80

SUBMITTED BY

Samantha Fowler Project Engineer

[email protected]

Matteo Pavarini Project Engineer

[email protected]

Gary Clarke Project Manager

[email protected]

Anton Davies Project Director

[email protected]

http://www.rwdi.commailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


Agaogla Maslak EGYO Project – Istanbul, Turkey Cladding Pressures – Tower B1 RWDI#1300132 January 8, 2014

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 1 2. WIND TUNNEL TESTS ................................................................................................................. 2

2.1 Study Model and Surroundings ............................................................................................. 2 2.2 Upwind Profiles ...................................................................................................................... 2

3. WIND CLIMATE ............................................................................................................................ 2 4. DETERMINING CLADDING WIND LOADS FROM WIND TUNNEL TEST RESULTS ............... 2 5. RECOMMENDED CLADDING DESIGN WIND LOADS .............................................................. 3 6. APPLICABILITY OF RESULTS .................................................................................................... 4

6.1 The Proximity Model .............................................................................................................. 4 6.2 Study Model ........................................................................................................................... 4

Tables Table 1: Drawing List for Model Construction

Figures Figure 1: Wind Tunnel Study Model Figure 2: Site Plan Figure 3: Directional Distribution of Local Wind Speeds Figure 4: Recommended Wind Loads for Cladding Design, Peak Negative Pressures, B1 –

Rear (Inside Wall) Figure 5: Recommended Wind Loads for Cladding Design, Peak Negative Pressures, B1 –

Left Side, A1 – Right Side Figure 6: Recommended Wind Loads for Cladding Design, Peak Negative Pressures, B1 –

Front (Inside Wall) Figure 7: Recommended Wind Loads for Cladding Design, Peak Negative Pressures, B1 –-

Rear (Exterior Wall) Figure 8: Recommended Wind Loads for Cladding Design, Peak Negative Pressures, B1 –-

Front (Exterior Wall) Figure 9: Recommended Wind Loads for Cladding Design, Peak Negative Pressures, B1 –

Roof Plan, Roof Plan at 35 KAT, Roof Plan at 33 KAT Figure 10: Recommended Wind Loads for Cladding Design, Peak Negative Pressures, B1 –

Roof Plan at 2 KAT, Soffit Figure 11: Recommended Wind Loads for Cladding Design, Peak Positive Pressures, B1 –

Rear (Inside Wall) Figure 12: Recommended Wind Loads for Cladding Design, Peak Positive Pressures, B1 –

Right Side, Left Side Figure 13: Recommended Wind Loads for Cladding Design, Peak Positive Pressures, B1 –

Front (Inside Wall) Figure 14: Recommended Wind Loads for Cladding Design, Peak Positive Pressures, B1 –

Rear (Exterior Wall) Figure 15: Recommended Wind Loads for Cladding Design, Peak Positive Pressures, B1 –

Front (Exterior Wall) Figure 16: Recommended Wind Loads for Cladding Design, Peak Positive Pressures, B1 –

Roof Plan, Roof Plan at 35. KAT, Roof Plan at 33 KAT. Figure 17: Recommended Wind Loads for Cladding Design, Peak Positive Pressures, B1 –

Roof Plan at 2 KAT, Soffit

http://www.rwdi.com


Agaogla Maslak EGYO Project – Istanbul, Turkey Cladding Pressures – Tower B1 RWDI#1300132 January 8, 2014

Appendices Appendix A: Wind Tunnel Procedures

http://www.rwdi.com


Agaogla Maslak EGYO Project – Istanbul, Turkey Cladding Pressures – Tower B1 RWDI#1300132 January 8, 2014.

Page 1

1. INTRODUCTION Rowan Williams Davies & Irwin Inc. (RWDI) was retained by Yapi Teknik to study the wind loading on the proposed Agaogla Maslak EGYO Project in Istanbul, Turkey. The Agaogla Maslak EGYO Project is a multi-tower development comprised of four phases, with hotel, residential, office, retail and conference facilities. The objective of this study was to determine the wind loads for design of the exterior envelope of tower B1.

The following table summarizes relevant information about the design team, results of the study and the governing parameters:

Project Details: Architect Leach Rhodes Walker Architects Key Results and Recommendations: Recommended Cladding Design Wind Loads

Negative Pressures Positive Pressures

Figures 4 to 10 Figures 11 to 17

Range of Negative Pressures Range of Positive Pressures

-1.0 kPa to -2.25 kPa +1.0 kPa to +1.5 kPa

Selected Analysis Parameters: Internal Pressures +0.21 kPa, -0.21 kPa Basic Wind Speed per FBC 2001 36m/s 3-second Gust Speed at 10m in open terrain Importance Factor on Wind Speed 1.0

The wind tunnel test procedures met or exceeded the requirements set out in Chapter 31 of the ASCE 7-10 Standard. The following sections outline the test methodology for the current study, and discuss the results and recommendations. Appendix A provides additional background information on the testing and analysis procedures for this type of study. For detailed explanations of the procedures and underlying theory, refer to RWDI’s Technical Reference Document - Wind Tunnel Studies for Buildings (RD2-2000.1), which is available upon request.

http://www.rwdi.com



Page 2

2. WIND TUNNEL TESTS

2.1 Study Model and Surroundings

A 1:400 scale model of the proposed development was constructed using the architectural drawings listed in Table 1. The model was instrumented with 670 pressure taps and was tested in the presence of all surroundings within a full-scale radius of 460 m, in RWDI’s 2.4 m × 2.0 m boundary layer wind tunnel facility in Dunstable, Bedfordshire.

Photographs of the scale model in the boundary layer wind tunnel are shown in Figure 1. An orientation plan showing the location of the study site is given in Figure 2.

2.2 Upwind Profiles

Beyond the modeled area, the influence of the upwind terrain on the planetary boundary layer was simulated in the testing by appropriate roughness on the wind tunnel floor and flow conditioning spires at the upwind end of the working section for each wind direction. This simulation, and subsequent analysis of the data from the model, was targeted to represent the following upwind terrain conditions. Wind direction is defined as the direction from which the wind blows, measured clockwise from true north.

Upwind Terrain Wind Directions (Inclusive)

Urban/Suburban terrain – varying lengths of suburban and urban fetch immediately upwind of the surrounding model, with open terrain or water beyond.

10° to 360°

3. WIND CLIMATE In order to predict the full-scale wind pressures acting on the building as a function of return period, the wind tunnel data were combined with a statistical model of the local wind climate. The wind climate model was based on local surface wind measurements taken at Ataturk International Airport, Istanbul.

The magnitude of the wind velocity for the 50 year return period corresponded to a 3-second gust wind speed of 36m/s at a height of 10 m in open terrain. This value is consistent with that identified for Istanbul in the TS498 Turkish Standard.

The wind climate for Istanbul is illustrated by the plots in Figure 3. The upper two plots show, based on the wind climate model, the strength of the wind versus wind direction. The lower plot shows the wind speeds from the data set as a function of return period.

http://www.rwdi.com



Page 3

4. DETERMINING CLADDING WIND LOADS FROM WIND TUNNEL TEST RESULTS For design of cladding elements, the net wind load acting across an element must be considered. The results provided in this report include the contributions of the wind loads acting on both the external surface (measured directly on the scale model during the wind tunnel test) and internal surface of the element (determined through analytical methods and the wind tunnel test data).

For elements exposed to wind on the external surface only, an internal pressure allowance must be applied to the measured external pressure in order to determine the net pressure applicable for design. In strong winds, the internal pressures are dominated by air leakage effects. Important sources of air leakage include uniformly distributed small leakage paths over the building’s envelope.

The wind loads provided are net pressures which include an allowance for wind-induced internal pressure based on a building without any large or significant openings. The resulting internal pressure allowance values were ±0.21 kPa. Note that this allowance doesn’t include any consideration of pressures induced by auxiliary mechanical systems.

To obtain the net peak negative pressure on the building's cladding, the negative exterior pressures were augmented by an amount equal to the positive internal pressure. Likewise, the net peak positive pressures were obtained by augmenting the exterior positive pressure by an amount equal to the magnitude of the negative internal pressure.

For elements exposed to wind on opposite surfaces such as parapets, fins and canopies, the net pressure acting on the element was determined by measuring the instantaneous pressure difference across the element.

5. RECOMMENDED CLADDING DESIGN WIND LOADS It is recommended that the wind loads presented in Figures 4 through 17 be considered for the 50-year return period. The drawings in these figures have been zoned using 0.25 kPa increments so that the pressure indicated is the maximum pressure in that particular zone. For example, a 1.5 kPa zone would have pressures ranging from 1.26 kPa to 1.5kPa.

Wind loads have been provided for the elevation walls of the tower and separately for the external wall fin features (figures 7 and 8, 14 and 15). In these cases the local recommended pressures shown are differential pressures measured across the external walls.

Note that the recommended wind loads are for cladding design for resistance against wind pressure, including an allowance for internal pressures. Design of the cladding to the provided wind loads will not necessarily prevent breakage due to impact by wind borne debris.

Note that the wind loads provided in this report include the effects of the directionality in the local wind climate. These loads do not contain safety or load factors and are to be applied to the building's cladding system in the same manner as would wind loads calculated by code analytical methods.

"Negative pressure" or suction is defined to act outward normal to the building's exterior surface and "positive pressure" acts inward. The largest recommended negative cladding wind load was -2.25 kPa, which occurred on the B1 Rear (External Wall) in Figure 9 and on the Roof Plan in Figure 9. The majority of the negative wind loads were in the range of -1.0kPa to -1.5kPa. The largest recommended positive cladding wind load was +1.5kPa, which occurred at many locations across the

http://www.rwdi.com



Page 4

envelope (Figures 12, 13, 15 and 16). The majority of the positive wind loads were in the range of +1.0kPa to +1.25kPa.

6. APPLICABILITY OF RESULTS

6.1 The Proximity Model

The cladding design wind loads determined by the wind tunnel tests and aforementioned analytical procedures are applicable to the particular configuration of surroundings modeled. The surroundings model used for the wind tunnel tests reflected the current state of development at the time of testing and include, where appropriate, known off-site structures expected to be completed in the near future. If, at a later date, additional buildings besides those considered in the tested configuration are constructed or demolished near the project site, then some load changes could occur. To make some allowance for possible future changes in surroundings, our final recommended cladding design wind loads do not go below a minimum of ±1.0kPa.

6.2 Study Model

The results presented in this report pertain to the scale model of the proposed development, constructed using the architectural information listed in Table 1. Should there be any design changes that deviate substantially from the above information; the results for the revised design may differ from those presented in this report. Therefore, if the design changes, RWDI should be contacted and requested to review the impact on the wind loads.

http://www.rwdi.com

TABLES


Page 1 of 1

TABLE 1: DRAWING LIST FOR MODEL CONSTRUCTION The drawings and information listed below were received from Leach Rhodes Walker Architects and were used to construct the scale model of the proposed Agaogla Maslak EGYO Project. Should there be any design changes that deviate from this list of drawings, the results may change. Therefore, if changes in the design area made, it is recommended that RWDI be contacted and requested to review their potential effects on wind conditions.

File Name File Type Date Received

AgaogluAyazaga-10 .dwg 13/01/03

AgaogluAyazaga-10 .skp 13/01/03

http://www.rwdi.com

FIGURES

Wind Tunnel Study Model Tower B1 Agaogla Maslak EGYO Project – Istanbul, Turkey Project #1300132

Figure: 1

Date: January 8, 2014

Directional Distribution of Local Wind Speeds

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0

45.0

50.0

1 10 100 1000 10000Mean Recurrence Interval (years)

Predicted Wind Speed TS-498 Code Wind Speed

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35N

10 2030

40

50

60

70

80

E

100

110

120

130

140150

160170S

190200210

220

230

240

250

260

W

280

290

300

310

320330

340 350

Extreme WindsCorresponding to a 50-year return period

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35N

10 2030

40

50

60

70

80

E

100

110

120

130

140150

160170S

190200210

220

230

240

250

260

W

280

290

300

310

320330

340 350

Common WindsCorresponding to a 1-month return period

APPENDIX A

Reputation Resources

APP

OVERVIECLADD

A.1

A.1.1

RWDI'snaturaand specspireswaterrepresentScalingbetweensimulatedpredictexamupwindwater

Windfrom tany wThe w

It is psurroundTheseand/o

A.1.2

This studPredictresistwindbuildingpressupressushortbasedsimultanean inst

1 W1984

2 LongIn

esources Resu

PPENDI

OVERVIEWCLADDING

Wind

Wind Tunnel Tes

RWDI's boundaal wind appspecially

es have beenr, to built

esent theng factors

between the eated in thecting theple, this

nd of ther in the distance.

directiontrue north.

wind directThe wind tunne

prudent toounding bu

These may incand/or lower lim

Measuremen

study addctions ofthe windpressureng with p

essure, theessures are

as 0.5 tobased on the

taneousnstrumented w

Wind speed p1984 with am

Longitudinalnternational

esults

NDIX A:

W OF WWIND LOADS

d Tunne

Wind Tunnel Tes

boundary layeapproachi

designedbeen selectedilt-up urban

most apps are alsoexpected

the wind tunneeffect of changesprocedursite, versusstance.

on is definedth. The test

ection to betunnel test is typ

o take stepsbuildings fonclude requmits on the

Measurement

addressesthese loads

nd loads. Thee study.pressureroot-meameasured

to 1 secondmeasuredpressures

umented wind tunne

profiles overamendments

turbulenceLondon, 1984

Canada

WIND

WIND TUNNELD LOADS

el Test a

Wind Tunnel Tests

r wind tung the mode

d turbulenceected to s

ban terrainappropriate

so introducedwind spe

tunnel. Thechangesre distingsus a sho

ed as theest mode

be simulats typically conducted fo

eps to ensufor shelte

equirementhe reduct

Techniques

the locaoads are r

The techThe bastaps tha

ean-squareed at each tapond at fulled upperes are alsotunnel stu

er terrain witto 1993.

ence intensities1984 with amend

anada | USA

ND TU

TUNNELD LOADS

t and Ana

unnel facilimodeled aence gene

simulaten. During

of theseoduced at thespeed andThe full-sca

in the eaguishes be

short fetch o

the directionmodel (study mode

ted by rotaty conducted fo

ensure thatter. Build

ements to teseduction that is

Techniques

l wind prequirednique thatis of the

that adequatee of pressu

each tap usingscale. The

level meanso recordeddy mode

th roughness

es over terraamendments

SA | UK |

NNEL

TUNNEL PROCEDURES

nalysis M

ility simularea by hav

generators, ofour bas

ng the tests,four bas

the analysturbulence

scale propeearth’s surfac

between theof suburban

on from whmodel andotating the

y conducted for 36 w

the safetyding codes

test with thes permitted c

ressuresin order

that is usedapproach

adequately coveessure fluctuatng a systeThe measu

mean dynamded for post

l is provided

hness changes

errain with roughness to 1993.

India | C

EL PRO

PROCEDURES

Methods

lates thehaving a longor spires,

basic terraintests, the upw

basic profiles,ysis stage

ence properoperties are

face roughnessthe flowsban terrai

which the wand surroundthe model to

36 wind direct

safety of a strcodes often conta

the moretted compa

that actthat the c

used to makeoach is to instcover the ex

uctuationssystem capabmeasured data

dynamic pressupost-test pr

ded in Figu

s for flat or h

oughness ch

China | H

ROCEDUR

PROCEDURES FOR

thods

mean speedong workat the u

n conditions,upwind pes, for direct

to accountrties, andderived us

oughness onows generated

in immed

wind blowsoundings) is

to the appections at 10°

ructure iscontain specsignificant

mpared to the code a

on thecladding

make these pnstrumentxterior areasand the

pable of responddata are conve

essure in therocessinggure 1.

hilly sites. It

hanges for

ong Kong

DURES

FOR TH

speed profking sectiupwind end.ons, rangrofile inections w

unt for remand the bas

using theon the planetaated by a

mmediately upw

ows in degrs mounted

appropriatet 10° interv

s not entirspecific pnt surrouhe code a

exteriorsystem credictions

nt a rigideas exposedpeak negat

esponding toconvertedhe wind tunneg if requir

tem No. 8401

flat or hilly

| Singapore

ES

E PRE

ofile and tuon with a

end. Flooanging from

the windwith similamaining m

asic upwindESDU methodo

anetary boundauniform open

upwind of the

grees measumounted on a tu

e angle invals.

rely deperovisionsnding bu

he code analytical

envelopecan be des

ns consistswind tunn

osed to wnegative and

to pressuinto pres

tunnel. Tred. A typ

84011, ESDU

y sites. Item

ngapore

Page

PREDICTION

turbulencea roughen

oor roughnessopen te

nd tunnel iar upwindminor diffe

nd flow condmethodology

boundary layeopen wate

the site w

measured cturntable,n the wind

dependent onns to addressbuildings removed

approach.

e of thedesigned tos of conduct

tunnel modewind. Theand peak

essure fluctuatessure coeffTime seriestypical examp

Internationa

m No. 84030

www.r

A1 of 3

ICTION OF

ence of theoughened floor

ghness andterrain, or

is set tod terrain.fferences

conditionsogy1, 2 forayer. For

water fetchwith open

lockwiseallowing

nd tunnel.

on specificess this.emoved,

oach.

building.to safely

conducting amodel of the

The meanpositive

uctuations ascoefficients

es of theample of

nal London,

030, ESDU

rwdi.comwdi.com


A.1.3

Carrypressulikelihdifferentlocal wcladdthe desrequirperiodsfactorsafety fact

Windwindtypicalocation,analyseachopenwind tunn

In ordeintegrthis integwindrecordedthroughpeakvalid p

The secondtermsmathematThe tload studand lsmoothrobust.

A.1.4

In strongbut areffect

3 Irw29

4 IrwAerodynam

esources Resu

Consider

ying out theessure coeff

hood of dent directwind climateing loads,

design liferements

ods of 50rs are app

safety factors, a

records takenclimate

cally usedon, typica

ysed to deteof 36 windterrain.

nd tunnel.

der to prrated withntegration.record isded wind

ough the wpressure

d peak responses fo

second methodms, this can

mathematicalime histostudies whelower qua

smoothing of eobust.

Internal P

ong winds,re usually

effect. Important

win, P.A., “29 (1988), pg

win, P.A. aAerodynamics

esults

Consideration o

the proceduoefficients ex

ifferent wections, the

mate to prads, it is app

fe of thethat consor 100 yea

applied. Fos, are used to

taken frommodel.to gener

cally providedeterminend sectorsThis coinc

redict theth the wind

on. In ones used to

nd speed andind speed

e is geneesponses fo

method iscan be thought

model ofstory method

where thequality reco

erratic behav

ernal Pressure All

nds, air leakagey of less stant sources

Pressure Modpg. 69-78.

and Sifton,cs, 77 & 78

Canada

ion of the Local Wi

edures dexpected fowind directe measurroduce pre

ppropriatee structur

consider theyears areFor Limit

used to repre

om one orIn areas

erate a betde an inathe probab

s at an upncides wit

the claddingnd climate

method,to determand direct

ed and dirrated. Then,

esponses for any des

the Upcrossought of aof the wind

thod (first mthe extent andecords RWDI

ehaviour of

essure Allow

akage effesignificances of ai

Model Techn

V. L., “Risk(1998), pg.

anada | USA

Local Win

describedfor a given w

ections andred pressuredicted pto conside

re. Theintended

re often useStates Dessent the u

r more locateas affectedbetter databanadequateobabilitiesupper leve

th the he

g wind lomate model.

the histoine the fu

ection andrection dat

Then, through any desired retu

ossing Methodas an anad statistics

method desand quality

RWDI typicaof the wind

wances Considering Localized Breac

ects dominance, are the

r leakage

Techniques for Cl

sk Considera. 715-723.

SA | UK |

nd Clima

in the prven wind diand the var

essure coeffpeak pressuder peak

choicentended use of

used for cDesign, re

ent the ultimate stat

ocations nead by hurr

database sincesample foof exceedl reference

height used

oads forThere a

storical (or sfull-scale

the winddata on anough the

eturn period a

Method asanalytical r

cs is useddescribed

ty of thecally revend statisti

Considering Localized Breac

nate the ithe operat

eakage include

Cladding Loads”

derations for

India | C

d Climate

revious sectrection. Howeverying strengths

coefficients aessures as

loads assocof returnthe build

ladding desreturn peri

mate state load

near to therricanes o

nce full scafor statist

eding varience height, typ

d to measu

a givenare two methodssimulatedcladding

nd tunnelan hour-by

use of exod are dete

describedrepresentat

used in placeabove) iswind reco

everts to thecs to be


internal pation of mechan

ude uniforml

Loads”, Jour

Internal Pres

China | H

sections deteHowever

engths ofare integr

as a functiassociated

n periodding. Fodesign, toiods of 700ding.

e study sior typhoons,

scale measustical purposes.ious hou

ght, typicallyeasure the

return pemethods typ

ated as is theng wind pr

predictioby-hour bas

xtreme vae determined.

bed by Irwinesentation of

ace of thes typically

ecords perthe Upcross

more read


pressures.mechanica

ly distributed

rnal of Wind

Pressures”, Journa

ong Kong

determines, in orderwinds that

rated withon of retuwith retuwill be

For Allowato which app700 or 1700

ite are getyphoons, Monte

surementsposes. Therly mean

y taken toreference

period, thetypically used

the case wressuresns for tha

asis, a timevalue fitting

in3 and Irwthe firstdetailedy used byrmit it. In

ossing Methodeadily imple

Considering Localized Breaches in

es. Other fcal ventilatiobuted sma

nd Engineeri

Journal of W

| Singapore

nes the peakr to accoun

that may beth statistica

eturn periodeturn periods

governedble Stressappropriat

1700 years,

enerally usMonte Carlo

ements, if avahe data iwind sp

o be 600 mence dynami

the wind tunused by RWDIith hurricanfor each

that directime historyng techniq

win and Smethod,wind recoy RWDI fo

In areas ofMethod sin

emented

es in the Building F

factors thation systems

small leakag

ing and Indu

Wind Engineer

ngapore

Page

peak localaccount for the

be expectedcal recordsod. In theods compa

ned by locaess Designate load os, without

used to deo simulatiilable forn either cas

peeds fromm (2000 ftc pressu

tunnel resuRWDI to

canes or typhoonseach hour, g

on. By steppy of theques, stat

Sifton4. Iin which

ecords themsefor cladd

of shorternce it enaand is thus

uilding F

that influensystems and the

eakage paths

ndustrial Aerodynam

neering and

www.r

A2 of 3

externale varying

pected fromds of the

the case ofcomparable to

ocal codegn, returnor safety

thout load or

derive theions arer a givencase are

om withinft) abovere in the

esults areperform

typhoons)iven thesteppingresulting

statistically

n simplech a fitted

themselves.ing wind

r recordsenables athus more

açade

uence them,the stackover the

odynamics

and Industrial

rwdi.com

)

hem,

wdi.com


buildindue toThe intepotentDuringThererocks to

To evasimultanelocatedmeasugenerconsideUsingthat maoccurrareas)or foropenithe ex

For buwindows,an openconside

The ifailurescladddebris.

esources Resu

ng’s enveto airbornenternal pr

potential glassng a majoe are many

ocks to tree b

evaluate thetaneous

ocated on bumeasurements

rated atdered since

ng an in-housemay occurring. Lowe

eas), and higher buildingsng probabxternal pr

buildings thatows, the potent

opening isderations of a nom

nternal pes due toing to thes.

esults

envelope andne debrisressure a

ass breakage,or storm

many typesranches. La

the internameasurements

building waements taken i

the cornence multi

house appoccur at selectedLower probab

gher probabngs that have

obabilities, interessures.

that usepotential fos also ve

ons of a nom

pressureto pressue provided

Canada

and larger leakagein a winds

allowanceeakage, the in

event, glof project

. Larger p

nal pressements arwalls than areas

ners of thple leaka

approach, theseected op

obabilities aobabilitieshave a lanternal pr

large missfor breakagevery low,

ons of a nominally se

allowancessure increa

ded wind loa

anada | USA

eakage paths.ndstorm and

wances can benternal compaass breakage

ectiles that projectiles

essures resure taken

that sharewhere la

he floor pkage sourceshese datapening locare usedare usedrge numberessures

ssile impaeakage due tow, and the

y sealed build

ces are apases causads will not

SA | UK |

paths. Theseand open doobe influencedcompartmentaeakage can

that typicallyes impacting th

esulting frduring thethe same

arge pressuplate. Aces tend

data are anacations andin lower w

used in highenumber of ope

are deter

mpact resistanto windbor

the internading.

applied tocaused by

not necessa

India | C

These largedoors or w

uenced by manytmentalizationcan be diffe

y cause gng the bu

rom domthe wind tunne

same interessure diffe

A single opto reduce

analyzed toand for awind speed

gher wind speedoperable wrmined fo

stant glaziborne debrnal pressu

to help reducelocalized

necessarily prevent

China | H

ger leakagewindows,

many factoron of the

fferent sizesglass breakage,

building wou

ominant opentunnel testrnal volume.

fferences canopening

educe the magnto determinea range of

speed areasspeed area

windowsfor the same

ing everywheris is very

essures used

educe thezed breaches

event breakage

ong Kong

eakage pathsin cases

rs includinbuilding

zes and occueakage, raould be ra

openings itest betweenume. Ofcan occu(worst case

magnitudene the rangeof probab(i.e., – n

as (i.e., –or doors

same level of

ywhere, andy low. As

used are a

the possibilhes in theeakage du

| Singapore

include wcases where they

ng the sizand the

occur at vranging inare events.

n the bubetween pairs

Of particuoccur such as

ase) scenae of the iange of inbilities of

non-hurrican– hurricane/typhoons. Usingof risk as

and do nots a result,at or nea

lity of subsequente facade.ue to impact

ngapore

Page

window bthey are opeze and locatinternal vovarious locn size from

e events.

building enveof pressu

cular interas those

scenario isnternal pnternal pr

of these opencane/non-

cane/typhoonng these dom

that assumed

not have opethe probab

near the m

subsequentfacade. Design

mpact by wind

www.r

A3 of 3

breakageoperable.ocation ofvolumes.ocations.om small

envelope,essure taps

rest arethat aretypically

pressure.ressuresopenings-typhoon

cane/typhoon areas)dominant

assumed for

operableobability of

minimum

subsequent facaden of thend borne

rwdi.comwdi.com

Draft Report – Tower B1 - Maslak...

Documents

Transcript of Draft Report – Tower B1 - Maslak...