Extreme wind load

distributions for linear and

nonlinear design
M. Kasperski

But/ding Aerodynamics Zaboratory, Ruhr-Umversitat Bochum, 1)-4630 Bochum 1, Germany

(Recezved November 1989, revised April 1991

Ever increasing demand for economical design and construction has

led to the use of more sophisticated design methods which take into
account nonlinear effects. Strictly speaking, for these design
methods the known procedures to estimate the wind-induced reactions fail since their applicability is limited to linear systems. A new
method, the load-response-correlation (LRC) method, which is
presented in this paper, helps to bridge this gap, and enables the
designing engineer to take into account a realistic spatial distribution
of the wind loads which produce accurate peak structural responses
for the linear design and a good approximation for nonlinear effects.
Although the identification of the critical load distribution is based on
the assumption of Gaussian properties of the load process, the
method gives a very close approximation of the real load pattern for
non-Gaussian load processes so that, for practical purposes, the confinement to Gaussian properties will be sufficient.

Keywords: load-response-correlation (LRC) method, extreme load

distribution, wind loading, nonlinear analysis, non-Gaussian properties

The gusting process of the natural wind can be described

as a combination of eddies of different sizes. An intmtive model classifies these eddies by their influence on
the wall pressures of a buildmg. Large eddies - - those
with a size several rimes the typical size of the building
- - will influence the whole mean flow field around the
building. All pressures will change nearly simultaneously, so that the instantaneous pressure distribution
is similar to the mean distribution. Medium-sized eddies
will be distorted by the mean flow field, so they will
reach different parts of the budding with a time lag and
a change m their characteristics. Small eddies will be
damped by the mean flow field and will have no significant influence on the wall pressures. In nature, a random
combination of differently sized eddies hits the building,
leading to a general pressure distribution at arbitrary
time t which differs considerably from the mean
pressure.
Nevertheless, in current design practice, the wind
load Is estimated using the mean pressure distribution.
This is done in the case of the theory of an enveloping gust
with an averaging time of five seconds - - as suggested
in many Design Codes and Codes of Practice - - and in
the case of the method based on the concept of the gust
response factor. The load patterns obtained by these two
methods do not represent a realistic load pattern under

wind action, but they can be used in the sense of an

equivalent static load for safe and economic design of a
structure.
Due to the rapid development of microcomputers and the increasing demand for economy,
more sophisticated design methods which take into
account geometrical imperfections of the structure and
nonlinear effects of the material have become used in
design. Strictly speaking, the conventional methods for
determining wind load may not be used for these design
methods. Combining the new realistic design methods
and the more simplified load concepts leads to uncertainty about the reliability of the structure. Thus, the
designing engineer needs a method to estimate a wind
load distribution which may be applied to a nonlinear
analysis.
Identification o f e x t r e m e l o a d distributions - the l o a d - r e s p o n s e - c o r r e l a t i o n m e t h o d
To obtain these wind load distributions, a new method
has been worked out to identify extreme load distributions, which are defined here as the load pattern which
causes a specified maximum response of a quasi-static
linear system. The maximum response rmax is described
as a multiple of the standard deviation of r added to the

0141-0296/92/01027-08
1992 Butterworth-Hememann Ltd

Eng. Struct. 1992, Vol. 14, No 1 27

Extreme wind load dtstrlbuttons for hnear and nonlinear design: M. Kasperskt
mean_

where

r ~ x = r gr

(1)

" Or

where r is the mean value, or is the standard deviation

and gr IS the peak factor required for a given reliability.
The peak factor m equation (l) can be obtained from
the probability distribution of the random response r and
can be expressed convemently in terms of the reduced
varlate, I.e., the number of standard dewations by which
the peak exceeds the mean value For design purposes,
it has become common practice to define a specific value
of this reduced varlate, e g., g = 3.7 in the Australian
Standard AS 1170.2-1989 or g = 3 5 m the Eurocode 8
(draft February 1990). The latter value of g will be used
in this paper
The gust response factor (GRF) of a specffic response
r is defined as:

[crOp] = load-response covarlance matrix (n, m) ot

elements ,~: covariance of response ~ and
load k
For the response, r, now becomes, from equation (1).

r ...... = ~

a,kpk+g

a,*
,~=1

art

(YPkl

I=1

Rewriting as follows
m

GRF -

Fmax

(2)

r .... = E

a'k'P*+g

,I.=1
m

An equivalent static wind load po may be defined by

multiplying the mean wind load by the GRF:

k=l

aa

a , i . trp,~

I=1

(8)

Or,
p~,= GRF p

(3)

The mean value and the standard deviation of the

responses of a system - - J . e , deflections, support reactions, internal forces hke bending moments or axml
forces as well as resulting stresses - - may be calculated
using the following equations:

one can substitute the sum m the numerator using the

covarlance between the load Pk and the response r, and
their correlation respectively
m

Or,p, =

E a,l" 0~,~-~ Or,p,

Or,

~Pk

(9)

/=l

[el = [A] [ r l

(4)
into equation (8) and obtain:

where

[ r] = vector (n, 1) of mean responses,

[A] = matrix (n, m) of influence coefficients a,,.
response o f / to umt load k,
IPl = vector (m, 1) of mean wind loads.

r ..... = E

a,,pk+g,

k=l
m

= ~

[tr~] = [A] " [a2e] [ A ] T

(5)

where
[o~] = covarlance matrix (n, n) of the response
elements 0 covarlance of response i and
response j,
[o~] = c o v a r i a n c e matrix (m, m) of the load
elements ,t covanance of load k and load
l,
[A] 7 = transpose of matrix A
On the diagonal of matrix o2
responses, whose square roots
deviations of the responses.
As an intermediate step,
response t and the load k may

are the variances of the

are the needed standard
the covariance of the
be derived from"

[a~p] = [A] [o~]

28

Eng Struct. 1992, Vol

(6)

14, No 1

a,k'Pr, p,op,
k=l

a,," [ P k + g ' P p , ~ , ' % , ]

(10)

/.=I

The term m parenthesis in equation (10) now describes

a load pattern which can be used for the accurate design
of the structure to the peak response by a simple static
calculation in the sense of an equivalent static load
Assuming Gausslan properties, the load pattern
obtained in equation (10) is the most probable extreme
load pattern for the specified m a x i m u m responseS In
Figure 1, the probability function of the response r, and
the load pj IS plotted in normalized coordinates. The
probability density of the load event (pjlg) reaches its
m a x i m u m at the pj coordinate where the straight line
r, = g ~s tangential to one of the elliptic contour curves
of the joint distribution The latter are given for a
Gausslan process as follows:

a2 + ~

= 1

(11)

Extreme wind load distributions for linear and nonlinear design: M. Kasperski
For the tangent r, = g, the slope in transformed coordinates becomes - 1 , leading to:
6 Pj/9,

b 2 _ I/o
a2

(13)

G0

With b 2 / a 2 = (1 - p)/(1 + p) it follows, for the coordinates of the normalized load and response

t (~,/a,)
7

g~

1 -

p _

1+ p

r,o -Pko

(14)

r,0 + Pk0

and, consequently:
Pko = P " r,0

Figure 1 Ident=f=cat;on of the cntmal load pj for a hm=t gr of

response r from the joint probability density f(r, Pl)

In non-normalized form, with r,o = g, the equation of

the most frequent point for the load Pk of a specific
maximum response becomes:
P k = P k = g " Pr, p, " % ,

where
a, b are the principal axes

a 2 =2"(1

+p)

I(

'

In - 2 ' lr~/ 1 - - 0 2.

-- In f(r,., Pk.)]

[(

b2=2"(1-p)

In 2 . ~ x /

1-o 2

- Inf(r,., Pk.)]

f(r,.,

r,.,

Pk,)
Pk,.

is the probability distribution

are the normalized coordinates, given by

r, - f,

r,. -

- - ,

Pk - Pk
Pk. -

Oq

Opt

O IS the correlation between load k and response i

~, 7/are the transformed coordinates, given by
= l/z~/2 (r,. +Pk.), T/ = V2x/2 (r,. --Pk.)
The tangent can be described as follows:

~~o+,1~_ 1
a2

b2

with slope given by

b2 " ~0
mt --

a 2 " ~o

(12)

(15)

(16)

Hence, the load pattern obtained in equation (10) is a

load pattern which really occurs.
Unlike the identification in the time domain by means
of conditional sampling - - as used, for example, by
Holmes: - - the load event (pklrm~,) IS obtained in the
new method by means of a correlation analysis of loads
and responses. Thus, the new method is called the loadresponse-correlation (LRC) method. The experimental
effort involved in obtaining the extreme load pattern is
reduced considerably.
Determination of the peak factor g depends on the
time period T, for which the average largest value is required, and on the probability distribution of the
response. The method described in this paper will not
enable g to be determined. For practical purposes, a
peak factor g of a least 3.5 should be used, relating to
an averaging time of l0 min.
Analogous consideration for the time history of the
extreme gust pressure distribution leads to replacing the
correlation p by the correlation function p(r) 3, so time
series of the loads are obtained. The understanding as to
which flow characteristics lead to unfavourable effects is
greatly enhanced, since the correlation analysis
eliminates the parts of the process which do not contribute to the extreme response. Unlike the gust response
factor method, the new method gives a solution for cases
with zero mean response. Whereas the equivalent static
wind loads defined by the GRF method need further
comments concerning the problem of which load is to be
used for which response, the new method defines
equivalent static loads for n design variables leading to
an extreme response only for the corresponding load
pattern. For all other load patterns the response will be
smaller. This makes the new equivalent static load concept more comprehensible for the designer.
The main advantage of the new method will become
obvious when it IS applied. For the same geometry of a
building, but differing static systems, the GRF method
generally defines differing equivalent static loads for
each system. These loads will strongly differ from each
other, with the gust response factors ranging from minus
lnfimty to plus infinity. The new method identifies ex-

Eng. Struct. 1992, Vol. 14, No 1

29

Extreme wind load dlstrtbutlons for hnear and nonhnear design: M. Kasperskt
treme load distributions which will be more or less
similar for varying static systems. In many cases, one
enveloping load distribution can be obtained for several
static systems, e g., for the equivalent static wind load
for the design of the reinforcement of cooling towers 4
or for the design of a portal frame 5
In most loading situations, the load processes are not
Gaussian, thus an extension of the new method to nonGaussmn processes seems necessary. In principle, it is
possible to obtain expressions for the higher moments,
which are analogous to equation (10) However, the
non-Gaussian properties of the loads are generally not
well correlated; so the confinement of the LRC method
to Gausslan processes ~s sufficient for cases in which the
extreme reaction results from an integral influence of
different pressure components over larger areas (central
limit theorem) The response will be more or less Gaussian even for load processes with marked non-Gaussian
properties. So, the identified load pattern will be a very
close approximation to the real load pattern, as will be
shown by an example of practical application at the end
of this paper
On the other hand, an extension of this method to
nonlinear and non-rigid systems will turn out to be less
effective, since nonlinear effects just like resonant vibrations will reducg the load-response correlation. Fortunately, most engineering structures can be described
as weakly nonlinear systems like the system in F i g u r e 2 ,
where the nonlinearity is due to the deformation of the
system. A stepwise solution of this problem starts with
the solution of the linear system (theory of first order):
M l = MI(w)

XI = g I ( w ) 1 ' f

(17)

where f , the flexibility of the spring is equal to 1/c. For

the first step, an additional moment AM and an additional deflection Ax become:
AM

"X I =

Ax = AM"

" I "f

"

MI(w)

I " f = G " 12 . f 2 . M I ( w )

(18)

E/

Cd

I
I

El

~oo

-I

Ftgure 2

30

...~ : -

~ X

S=mple nonhnear system

Eng. Struct. 1992, Vol. 14, No 1

For the second step, one obtains

AAM = G Ax
AAx = AAM

G 2 "

" I "f

l -~ " f-~ " MJ(w)

G 2 " 13

"f ~ " M ~ ( w )

(19)

The moment for the nonlinear system is finally obtained

as follows
M H = MI(w)

" (1 + q + q2 + q3 + . . .)

(20)

with q = G " 1 f ( q < 1, otherwise the system wil] be

unstable)
For this example, the nonhnear response M H is the
linear response M I times a constant factor. So, the
m a x i m u m nonlinear response of this system due to a
random wind load is the m a x i m u m linear moment times
a constant factor, Le., the m a x i m u m nonlinear moment
can be obtained by calculating the response due to the
extreme load distribution for the linear moment by a
second-order theory. An analogous relation between the
nonlinear response and the linear response can be found
for other simple, nonlinear mechanisms. Thus the
nonlinear analysis using the load pattern identified by
the LRC method will be a very close approximation to
the nonlinear reality_

Practical application
To show the efficiency of the method presented m this
paper, a special structure with systematic non-GaussIan
pressure characteristics was used as an example of a
practical application, an arch of an industrial buildmg's
roof. The roof spreads over an industrial waste disposal
site and is supported by 13 arches with a span of
262 5 m and a height of about 50 m ( F i g u r e 3). For the
design, dead load and wind pressures have to be taken
into account Since the bending moments o f an arch are
very sensitive to geometrical imperfections, it is
necessary to take the deformations into account. So, the
traditional concept using gust response factors will not
work, since the mean pressure distribution will not be
equal to the extreme distribution which physically leads
to the extreme deformations.
The flow characteristics have been investigated in the
boundary layer wind tunnel of the InstltUt for
Konstruktlven Ingenieurbau at the Ruhr-Universit,'it
Bochum Internal and external pressures were measured
simultaneously along one of the arches. By a static
calculation, the responses - - the bending moments of the
arch and the support reactions as described in F i g u r e 3
- - are obtained for each time step, both for the linear and
nonlinear systems. With the results obtained it is possible to make a direct comparison between the load
pattern gained by the LRC method and the load pattern
occurring in the time domain. Furthermore, the
accuracy of the approach for the nonlinear analysis can
be verified_
For the design, the extreme support reactions and the
maximal bending moment of the arch are needed.
Especially for the bending moment, there will be a great
effect of the geometrical nonlinearities. The calculation
of the linear quasi-static response leads to a gust
response factor of about 1.9 for the support reactions

Extreme wind load distributions for linear and nonlinear design: M. Kasperski

M9
~

M7

262 50

M11
78

M14
1

48 1C

I ___,i K

t_

2O 5
-d

E-

vB

vA

_~ ~.1o ,1'

494s

,1'

s270

52 70

,,

49 50

262,5~

,I

Ftgure 3 Geometry of roof supporting arch and investigated reactions (all d=menmns m m)

eqmvalent static load for the bending moment M4

(3.0 times the mean load) would he outside these
boundaries.
(2) Unlike the mean load distribution, for the bending
moment, a region of positive load effects is found
on the windward side of the roof. These loads will
considerably enlarge the response M4n, i.e., the
response obtained by second-order theory.

45J

'~'

I;~'~~=~: !1 Stat,st,cal w,dthof

wind load's fluctuattons
D=35
I
Mean w=nd load distnbut=on
2 . . . . . Extreme load dmtnbut~on for the support reachon
3
Extreme load dlstnbutlon for the bending moment

Ftgure 4 Identified load pattern for the support reactions and the
critical bending moment M4

and of 3.0 for the critical bending moment M4 for the

flow direction 0 = 45 .
In Figure 4 the extreme resulting load patterns -- i.e.,
the added effects of external and internal pressure -identified using the LRC method (see also Appendix:
Worked example of application) are compared with the
mean load. There are two main features to be mentioned.
(1) Since the identified load distributions are patterns
that actually occur, they are within the boundaries
of the probable loads, while, for example, the

As mentioned above, the estimation of the c~'itical load

pattern assuming Gaussian properties leads to satisfactory results, even if the load processes show marked
non-Gaussian properties. This can be shown by a comparison of the identified distribution and the pattern
really occurring in the time domain. In Figure 5, the
observed positive and negative peak factors of the wall
pressures during a time interval of duration T = 12 s m
the wind tunnel (i.e., about 40 min in full scale) are
shown. They can be interpreted as evidence of nonGaussian properties. For a Gaussian process, for one
and the same experiment, the moduli of the positive and
negative peak factors ought to be identical for all
pressures. However, this is not the case. In fact, it is
found that either the positive or the negative peak factor
is greater, depending on the sign of the mean value of
the pressure. For suction, typically, the negative peak
factor is greater, thus, we will have a left-handed
skewness; for positive pressures, we find a right-handed
skewness. Comparison of the peak factors shows that
their values vary from 3.5 to 7. Obviously, systematic
non-Gaussian properties of the load process have to be
dealt with.
The response process itself can be expected to be more
Gaussian, e.g., the peak factors for the bending moment
M4 vary from 4.6 for the positive side to 3.8 for the

Eng. Struct. 1992, Vol. 14, No 1 31

Extreme wind load distnbuttons for hnear and nonhnear design: M. Kasperski
4

~x
Location of pressure taps
8 r-

Outer pressure

Pos,t,vepeak

Innerpressure

Negatwepeak

8
t~

4 -

tO
0.

3 -

10

11

12

Pressuretap
Ftgure 5

Comparison of the observed peak factors for the pressures

negatwe part. Nevertheless, in the joint probablhty of

the responses and the loads (Figure 6), the non-Gaussian
properties are present too. For a Gaussian process, the
joint probability density (JPD) function should be symmetric with respect to both diagonals; the contour lines
should be elliptic. In this example of the JPD function
of the moment M4 and the load Pa, there is a certain
non-symmetry, e.g., there is just one sample in sector
VIII and a cluster of samples in the corresponding sector III. The prediction by the LRC method (i.e.,
Ps = P " M4 in normalized coordinates) is marked as a
straight hne: near this line extreme joint samples are
found
This convenient behavlour of the process can be ascertained for all loads and reactions. At the time to, where
the maximum response in the interval T occurs, the
simultaneous pressures Pk (to) are observed. Analogously to equation (16), we can define a factor fpk.r:
Pk(to) =,Ok + g " fr, p, " %,

(16)

m~

32

Eng. Struct. 1992, Vol. 14, No 1

~,ctlO"

~m

0
-2
-4

-6
-E
-6

In an ideal case, this factor f should be the correlation

between the reaction r, and the load Pk" In F i g u r e 7,
these factors gained during one experiment are compared with the correlation which was used for the identification of the extreme load pattern. The agreement is
extremely good So for practical purposes, it will be sufficient to assume Gaussian properties.
The hnear and nonlinear time-domain calculations
prove that application of the LRC method to the

-4

-2

I IV \

Figure 6 H,stogram of the extreme loint samples M4 and Ps for

g > 3 5 (I to VIII are sector numbers)

nonlinear problem leads to a realistic estimation of the

response: the peak responses of the linear and the
nonlinear system occur at the same time.
The results of the calculations for M~ and M [ due to
the equivalent static load and the identified load pattern

Extreme wind load distributions for linear and nonlinear design: M. Kasperski
1
0.75

Acknowledgement
l

The author is indebted to Professor H -J. Nlemann, who

encouraged this work, and to Dipl -Ing N. H61scher,
who carried out the experiments. Also the author wishes
to thank Dr J. D. Holmes for a steady and helpful
discussion on the LRC method Part of the work was
sponsored by the Deutsche Forschungsgememschaft,
which is gratefully acknowledged

0.5
025
o

~c~-025
-0 5

~xpe iment

-0 75

10

11

12

References

Pressure
Ftgure 7 Comparmon between the predmted weighting factor
(the correlat,on) and the observed welghtm 9 factor

Table 1 Bending moment M4 (m kN rn) due to wind load and

dead load
~/lo (kN/m 2)

M~, (GRF)
M~ (GRF)
M=J (LRC)
M~ (t,me)

O 30

0 40

0 50

0 65

12900
20 380
24 945
24 985

17070
26 080
32 535
32 620

21
31
39
40

27465
38 670
50 405
50 645

220
365
795
005

1 Kasperskl, M 'Idenhfikation bemessungskrtttscher Lastantede aus

stochasttschen Prozessen am Betspml der Naturzugkuhlturme unter
Wmdbelastung', Techmsch wtssenschafihche Mzttedungen des lnstttuts
KIB, Nr 88-6, Ruhr-Umversltat Bochum, FRG, 1988
2 Holmes, J D 'DtstnbuUon of peak wind loads on a row-rise budding',
Proc 7th lnt Conf_ on Wind Engng, Aachen. FRG, 1987
3 Kasperskt, M and Ntemann, H J 'Identtficatton of crlttcal load
distributions for wind loading', Proc 5th Int_ Conf. on Structural
Safety and Rehabdlty, ICOSSAR '89. San Franctsco. CA. USA. 1989
4 Kasperski, M and Niemann, H J 'Refined equ,valent static wind
loads for cooling towers', Proc 3rd Int Syrup on Natural Draught
Coohng Towers, 1ASS, Parts, France, 1989
5 Kasperski, M 'Non-hnear destgn to wind load using the L R C method', Structural Dynamtcs, Proc Eurodyn '90. Bochum, FRG,
1990 (Eds W B Kratzlg et al) A A Balkema, Rotterdam,
1991

Appendix
Worked example of the apphcatton of the LRC method

respectively are summarized in Table 1 for wind action

and dead load, assuming different mean velocity
pressures at 10 m height. For the comparison, the
response for the time domain ~s normalized to the
uniform peak factor of 3.5; a more correct peak factor
can be determine experimentally.
The agreement between the results of the LRC method
and the time domain calculation Is almost perfect (differences less than 0.5 %). The realistic extreme bending
moment ~s about 20% to 30% higher for the identified
load pattern than that obtained using the GRF method.
Defining the mean pressure in line 1 of Table I as corresponding to a return period of 50 years, a nonlinear
design of the building using the GRF method will reduce
the return period considerably, to about 10 years. So,
the design with the concept of the gust response factor
leads to underestimating the reliability due to
underestimating the nonlinear responses.

Conclusions
There are two important conclusions to be mentioned as
a result o f this work.

The practice of using the mean load pattern times the

gust response factor for a nonlinear design of the
structure may lead to overestimation of the
rehabihty.
The introduced identification method - - based on a
very simple correlation analysis - - leads to an instantaneous load pattern which actually occurs and
can be used for a safe and economic design, including nonlinear effects.

This worked example of identifying extreme load

d~strlbutions should enhance easy apphcation of the
LRC method by gwing a step-by-step description of the
procedure. The structure under consideration is the arch
of Figure 3.

Step 1. Choose the reactions r, which are important

for the design, e . g , the support reactions, bending
moments, axial forces, resulting stresses, deflections,
etc.
Step 2. Choose the number n of the load processes Pk,
k = 1, n which are able to characterize the pressure
d~stribuuons, e.g., eight points for the field of outer
pressure and four points for the field of inner pressure,
l e . , n = 12.
Step 3. Obtain the statisucal parameters of the load:
the vector of mean values p, here (12,1)
the vector of standard deviations %, here (12,1)
the matrix of covanances o~, here (12,12)
either from the literature, a wind tunnel experiment in a
simulated atmospheric boundary layer or field
measurements.

Step 4. Calculate the influence factors a,k for each

response r, due to each load Pk = unity using, for example, a finite element program.
Step 5.

Calculate the mean value of each response r,.

n

I=1

Eng. Struct. 1992, VoI. 14, No 1

33

E x t r e m e w m d l o a d d t s t r i b u t t o n s f o r h n e a r a n d n o n h n e a r d e s i g n : M. K a s p e r s k i
6
Calculate the standard
response r ,

Step

a,~

or, =
,~=I

a,i "

devzat]on of each

8.
Choose the peak factor g. For example, this
may be done globally m accordance w]th a code of practice or with a special analysis for each response r
Step

ff~,,,

I1=1

9.
Calculate the extreme load distribution Pe for
each response r, (max and mln respecuvely).
Step

7. Calculate
response r ,
Step

Pr, e, =

the correlation of load Pk and

a , ~'p,,

- [ % , a~, ] -

/=1

34

Eng. Struct. 1992, Vol. 14, No 1

p,(max r,) = p ~ + g - %, - Pr, v,

pC, (min r,) = Pk - g " Op, Or, p,