[3]
when simulating the atmospheric boundary layer flow field, it reaches self-modeling area, just at magnitude of Renault number greater than 104. The magnitude of Reynolds number in this test is up to 105, which is carried out in a turbulent flow field, the surface of model is intently producted very crude.
Google Scholar
[4]
and the external walls are bars steel closing to bluff body profile, so the effects of Reynolds number on this model should be small. Wind field simulation. There is atmospheric boundary layer flow field passive simulation device in test section of 12m×16m, and produces the desired turbulent flow field by installing wedges + roughness, etc. This test is complete atmospheric boundary layer flow field simulation in class A (flow indices α =0. 12). The major findings and treatment. Pressure measurement system uses DSM3400 electronic scanning pressure measurement system. Flow field measurement uses CSAT3 three-dimensional ultrasonic anemometer of United States CSI companies. Results analysis of pressure measuring test. sing the results of pressure measuring test can directly get the average wind pressure coefficient and fluctuating wind pressure coefficient of each measuring point. In order to easy compare and analyze the test results, we plotted graphs of the wind pressure coefficient of pressure measuring points in the same profile. Figure 2 shows the comparison of typical results of the 240m physical models in turbulent wind speed 15m/s, 17M/s. From the figure we can see that the wind pressure coefficient distribution of monitoring sites in two-wind speed are close to each other. Fig. 2. The mean wind pressure coefficient of points on the first section of column 1# (turbulence, β=00) Conclusions In this article, we studied wind tunnel experimental of the four tubes self-supporting steel chimney and did theoretical analysis, mainly coming to the following conclusions: A). Wind pressure coefficient in two kinds of wind speed changes very little; except for some jump points, pressure coefficient value is reasonable, according to symmetry analysis of the test state, results also reveal regular symmetric change. B). The change rules of wind pressure coefficient and fluctuating wind pressure coefficient of the two models are similar; Fluctuating wind pressure coefficient of leeward points is relatively small, but points are the more on bottom the more bigger. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This investigation is funded by the Emphases Project of Hubei Education Dept (Grant no. D20101604), Key Laboratory of Concrete and Pre-stressed Concrete Structure of Ministry of Education, Southeast University. *Corresponding author: School of Civil Engineering & Mechanics, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430073, China E-Mail: whuyzh@163. com REFRENCES.
Google Scholar
[1]
Li Q S, Xiao Y Q, Wong C K. Full-scale monitoring of ty-phoon effect on super tall building [J]. J. Wind Eng. Indust. Aerodyn, 2005, (20): 697-717.
Google Scholar
[2]
Ministry of Education Novelty station (Z07). Science and Technology Novelty Search (No: 201036000Z070203-GJD).
Google Scholar
[3]
J.E. Cermak, Development of wind tunnels for physical modeling of the atmospheric boundary layer (ABL), in: State of the Art Volume, Ninth International Conference on Wind Engineering, New Delhi, India, 1995, p.1～5.
Google Scholar
[4]
GU Ming1, MA Wen-yong1; HUANG Peng1, ZHOU Xuan-yi1, FAN Zhong2. Testing study on wind load on group towers. ACTA Aerodynamic sinica, Vol. 27, No. 2, p.141～146. (2009).
Google Scholar
