numerical simulation of wind interference effect for a stadium and a ...

NUMERICAL SIMULATION OF WIND INTERFERENCE EFFECT 

FOR A STADIUM AND A GYMNASIUM 

Gang Xu 1 , Xing-qian Peng 2 , Li Wu 1 , Hai Zhu 1 

1 Graduate student, College of Civil Engineering, Huaqiao University, Quanzhou, Fujian, 

China, 362021, xugang20080309@126.com 

2 Professor, College of Civil Engineering, Huaqiao University, Quanzhou, Fujian, China, 

ABSTRACT 

362021, pxq@hqu.edu.cn 

The wind load of the long-span roof of a stadium and a gymnasium in Quanzhou was calculated by CFX10.0 

software and the SST k − ω turbulence model. The numerical simulation of wind pressure on the surface of 

the roof of the gymnasium was carried on. A comparison between the wind pressure from the test and the 

simulation was made and the result showed that the two match quite well. The results in this paper verify the 

feasibility of numerical simulation of large roofs in wind engineering. Then, the wind interference analysis 

between the stadium and gymnasium was carried on. The effect to wind load in different relative positions of 

the long-span roof complex and their interference mechanisms were explored. An overall evaluation of the 

construction planning for the stadium and the gymnasium has been delivered. The difference of the interference 

effect on closer and farther covering is distinguished. 

KEYWORDS: LARGE-SPAN STRUCTURE, NUMERICAL SIMULATION, LIFT COEFFICIENT, 

INTERFERENCE EFFECT 

1 Introduction 

The wind load characteristics of large-span roof structure lies on not only its 

structural shape, but also its position on the built environment. Distribution of modern 

architecture is very intricate. Generally, there are other buildings or structures around. The 

aerodynamic interference of such buildings or structures can not be ignored, particularly 

when the two buildings are very close to each other. The interference will be quite significant 

[Shen (2004) and Chen (2005)]. Of course, such interference are closely related with the 

position, shape, and many other factors of the interference buildings, so giving a universal 

significance of the conclusions is very difficult, but some meaningful conclusions are drawn 

through an analysis of specific examples [Katarzyna et al. (2000)]. 

In this paper, according to long-span projects of a stadium and a gymnasium in 

Quanzhou, the numerical simulation of wind loads and wind interference effects of the large 

sports complex were calculated by CFX10.0 - a computational fluid dynamics software and 

the SST k − ω turbulence model. Firstly, the numerical simulation of wind pressure on the 

surface of the roof of the gymnasium was carried on; its aim is to verify the accuracy of the 

numerical simulation methods by the comparisons of the simulation results with the wind 

tunnel test results [wind-tunnel test research report (2005)]. Finally, the wind interference

The Seventh Asia-Pacific Conference on Wind Engineering, November 8-12, 2009, Taipei, Taiwan 

analysis between the stadium and gymnasium was carried on. The effect to wind load in 

different relative positions of the long-span roof complex and their interference mechanisms 

were explored. An overall evaluation of the construction planning for the stadium and the 

gymnasium has been delivered. 

2 The CFD numerical simulation of the average wind pressure and data processing 

2.1 Numerical simulation and geometric trellis 

The large cross-building complex in Quanzhou is composed by the stadium (open 

cantilevered structure) and the gymnasium (closed structure). The distance between the 

stadium and the gymnasium is about 30m. The overall layout of stadium is made of an oval 

shell and a semi-cylindrical shell structure. The plane is uni-axial symmetry oval, the long 

axis is 218m and the short axis is 109.8m. The height of the highest roof is 32.5m. The 

structure of the gymnasium is novel and unique. The overall layout of the gymnasium is 

composed by four independent cantilevered roofs. The style of the gymnasium is curved 

reticulated shell structure with the distance between east and west is about 92m, north and 

south is about 220m. The height of the roof is 45.5m with a largest span of 48m. The model 

position, wind direction and the layout of measuring point of numerical simulation model are 

shown in Figure 1. In this paper, the world's leading computational fluid dynamics software 

CFX10.0 is selected to do the calculation. The full-scale model of the stadium is established 

according to the actual construction plans, neglecting the torch column ancillary components, 

the final domain for calculating is 6000m × 4000m × 250m by calculated many times, basin 

set to meet the blocking probability is less than 3% of the requirements under the valley 

stadium model front 1/3, the entire computational domain is divided into a domain I and 

domain II, the region is sufficient to simulate the whole atmospheric environment of the 

building. The non-structural hexahedral grid is used in domain I with 408,744 unstructured 

hexahedral elements divided. The 1,108,692 tetrahedral units and hexahedral elements of 

non-slip near the wall are divided in domain II, the total of elements are 1,517,436 units. The 

model grid is shown in Figure2. 

Fig1. Model position, wind direction 

and the layout of measuring point 

Fig2. The trellis of a stadium and a gymnasium 

2.2 The physical model of turbulence 

The Reynolds stress model is used to calculate and the near wall function is used to 

simulate the complex flow phenomenon near the wall. The Reynolds stress model is a closed 

equation which includes 11 partial differential equations that consist of the average 

movement of three momentum equations and a continuity equation, six Reynolds stress 

equations and an ω equation [B. P. Hoxey et al. (1997)]. 

2.3 Boundary Conditions


Inlet: the wind speed [Huang (2002)]: 

Z 

( 

α 

U Z 

= U 

0 

, which 0 

Z 

0 

) 

Z is the reference 

height andU 0 

is wind speed of reference height, Z 

0 

=200m and U 

0 

=14m/s in accordance 

with the wind tunnel tests method B-type surface roughness coefficient of 0.16 [Richartson et 

al. (1997)], the turbulence intensity in Inlet, when Z ≤ 5m, I 

z 

=0.23; when 5m


compared, considering the length, the paper presents the roof block wind pressure coefficient 

deduced from numerical simulation under the wind direction of 0 and 90 degrees. The roof 

block wind pressure coefficient deduced from the test and the numerical simulation 

respectively under the wind direction of 0 and 90 degree are in fig 3. 

Fig3.a tested at 0 ° Fig 3.b simulated at 0 ° 

Fig3.c tested at 90 ° Fig 3.d simulated at 90 ° 

Figure3. The wind pressure coefficient of composition force of the coving roof block 

tested & simulated at some wind direction 

As can be seen from the fig, as regards the more complex geometry and large-span 

cantilevered roof structure of the stadium, the numerical simulation with the experimental 

results is still relatively close, with an average error of about 33 percent in the overall 

accuracy which could satisfy the project accuracy requirement basically. The average error in 

0 and 90 degree are 33.28% and 33.65% respectively. Since the complex geometry of the 

stadium and gymnasium, numerical modeling of the wind load value is difficult, and the 

computer's computing power is limited, so the number of the grid could not be demarcated 

fine enough, what’s more, the roof block demarcating error, boundary conditions the entrance 

of the wind profile, roughness, etc. can not be completely coincide with the wind tunnel test 

environment, so there are some differences compared to the wind tunnel test, such as the 

vortex and separation around the construction objects generated by fluid, leading more 

difficult in numerical simulation. In general, the trend between the result of the numerical 

simulation and the result of the wind tunnel test is generally the same. The numerical


simulation value is greater than the wind tunnel test on the windward edge, trail edge and the 

corner. The two results basically inosculate and the simulation result is feasible. 

3.2 The gymnasium to the stadium aerodynamic disturbance 

It can be seen from the position of the stadium and the gymnasium that the 

gymnasium will have a greater aerodynamic disturbance to the east and west cantilevered 

roof. The paper mainly selects the east cantilevered roof interference effects to carry on the 

analysis. The results from the numerical simulation of the stadium itself and both are 

analyzed, the lift coefficients of the east cantilevered roof under different wind directions are 

worked out. The lift coefficients of wind pressure of the upper surface and the under surface 

are in Fig 4, the total lift coefficients of wind pressure are in Fig 5. Line-a shows no disturbed 

case and line-b shows disturbed case. 

(1) The lift coefficient is smaller than that when the gymnasium did not exist. When 

the gymnasium is in the lower reaches, for that the lower reaches of gymnasium slowed the 

flow of wind to some extent, resulting in the sub-pressure becoming smaller, but the range of 

variation is not wide, because the stadium do not have much effect on preventing the flow of 

wind owing to the higher beam with overhanging. The lift coefficient is larger when the 

gymnasium is at the parallel position than that when the gymnasium did not exist. It mainly 

due to the funneling when the wind through them, the wind speed increased, resulting in the 

sub-pressure of the surface becoming larger. When the gymnasium is in the upper reaches, 

because the airflow is blocked by the gymnasium, the speed of the airflow will be reduced to 

a certain extent, while the airflow in the building is separated and reattached, the flow 

turbulence of the roof the lower reaches become higher, the separation of the flow in the 

front roof reduced, resulting in negative pressure becoming smaller, so the lift coefficient is 

smaller than that when the gymnasium did not exist. 

(2) To the lift coefficient of the wind pressure under the surface, when the 

gymnasium is in the lower reaches, the lift coefficient become larger, That explains that the 

lower reaches of gymnasium slowed the flow of wind to some extent ,resulting in the drive 

effect obvious, but the range of variation is not wide, because the east cantilever roof is 

located in the wake zone of the west cantilever roof, the upper and lower surface pressure are 

smaller; when the gymnasium is in the parallel position, as the Gap tube effect, the wind 

speed increased, the rapid outflow of the wind reduced the negative pressure under the 

surface, resulting in the lift coefficient becoming small; when the gymnasium is the upper 

reaches, because the east coving is located in the wake zone of the stadium, the flow 

separated in the front of the gymnasium and attached to the east cantilever roof, resulting in 

negative pressure under the surface becoming smaller, so the lift coefficient becomes smaller. 

(3) To the wind force, when the gymnasium is in the lower reaches, since the airflow 

is blocked by the interference of the gymnasium, the total lift force coefficient of gymnasium 

is little smaller than that when it does not have gymnasium. But cantilever roof is higher, the 

flow blocked that is not obvious, so the lift coefficient on the surface and under the surface 

decreased slightly; when the gymnasium is in the parallel position, the total lift force 

coefficient of gymnasium is larger than that when it does not have gymnasium. The total lift 

force of the east cantilever roof increased because the gap tube effect when the gymnasium is 

in the upper reaches, the total lift coefficient is smaller than that when the gymnasium did not 

exist. Due to the existence of the upper reaches of the gymnasium and the downstream flow, 

the lift coefficient of the east become smaller, in the 90 ° wind direction, the total lift force of 

the east cantilever roof is the largest.


0.2 

0.1 

CF 

0 

0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 

-0.1 

-0.2 

-0.3 

-0.4 

Wind direction 

-0.5 

a up b up a under b under 

CF 

0 

0 

-0.05 

30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 

-0.1 

-0.15 

-0.2 

-0.25 

-0.3 

-0.35 

-0.4 

-0.45 

Wind direction 

a total force b total force 

Fig 4.The lift coefficients of wind pressure Fig 5.The total lift coefficients of wind pressure 

of the upper surface and the under surface of the upper surface and the under surface 

3.2 The stadium to the gymnasium aerodynamic disturbance 

In order to reflect the quantitative interference effect of the stadium to the gymnasium, 

interference factor IF is employed: 

C 

Pi 

IF = (4) 

CPi 

is the average wind pressure interfered and C PA 

is the average wind pressure 

non-interfered. The gymnasium is composed by the Training Hall and the Competition Hall, 

the middle set up a 90mm wide joints, the roof block wind pressure coefficient of Training 

Hall is 1-15 and the roof block wind pressure coefficient of Competition Hall is 16-62, the 

numerical simulation of the gymnasium and the stadium is analyzed respectively ,because the 

gymnasium and the stadium are central axis symmetrical structures, here only to analyze the 

0° ~ 90° and 270° ~ 360°, the roof block interference factor of gymnasium is calculated 

under different wind direction, the roof block interference factor distribution maps under 

different wind direction is shown in Figure 6. 

(1) At the 0° wind direction, the interference factor of roof block 1-15of the training 

hall is larger, the maximum is 2, the biggest negative is -4, the geopolitical interference factor 

is smaller, most interference factors of the competition hall Roof is about 1.2. Because the air 

flow accelerated in a passage between the stadium and the gymnasium, resulting in Gap tube 

effect, the roof block 1-15 interference factor of the training hall is larger. The interference 

effect is obvious near the stadium, the wind pressure of block 1 and 2 turned into negative 

and interference factor is negative too. As the roof of Competition Hall roof is far from the 

stadium, the interference factors of roof block 16-62 are smaller. 

(2) At the 45° wind direction, the interference factors of roof block 1-15 of the 

training hall is smaller, the minimum is 0.48, the geopolitical interference factor is greater, 

the roof block interference factor of the competition hall is smaller, most of the roof block16 

-62 interference factors of the competition hall ’s Roof is about 1.0 because of the existence 

of the stadium and the gymnasium is higher than the stadium, the flow blocked by the 

training hall and wind speed decreased, the wind pressure of the training hall ’s roof reduces, 

so the interference factor is smaller. 

(3) At the 90° wind direction, the wind pressure trends of the gymnasium is similar to 

the 45° wind direction case, the roof block 1-15 interference factor of training hall is smaller, 

the minimum is 0.20, and interference effect is more obvious, the roof block interference 

factor of Competition Hall is smaller and most of roof block interference factor is about 1. 

(4) At the 270° wind direction, the roof block 1-15 interference factor of the training 

hall is smaller, the minimum is 0.18, interference effects are obvious, the geopolitical 

C 

PA


interference factor is smaller, most of the interference factors of roof block 1-62 of the 

competition hall is 0.8 ~ 1.0 of which the roof block 22-32 is smaller, most interference 

factors are about 0.6. Because of the stadium in the upper reaches of the gymnasium and its 

block the airflow, resulting in a significant shielding effect. The flow speed will be reduced 

to a certain extent, the wind pressure of the roof reduce, so the interference factor is smaller. 

Since the competition hall in the wake flow district, the shielding effect is not very obvious, 

the wind pressure of competition hall is affected a little and the interference factor is bigger. 

(5) The shape and position of the interfere affected the average wind pressure of the 

tested buildings, the stadium and gymnasium is a central axis symmetrical streamlined 

structure and the covering of the gymnasium is higher then the stadium which is benefit to 

the wind load of the stadium and gymnasium. When the stadium is in the lower reaches of 

the gymnasium, the flow blocked by the stadium, wind speed slows down, the wind pressure 

of gymnasium’s roof reduces. When the stadium is in the upper reaches of the gymnasium, 

the gymnasium is blocked by the stadium, the wind pressure of gymnasium’s roof reduces. 

Consequently, the architecture planning of the stadium and gymnasium is quite reasonable. 

3 

IF 

2 

1 

0 

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 

-1 

-2 

-3 

1.25 

1 

0.75 

0.5 

0.25 

IF 

-4 

-5 

0 

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 

Fig.a. 0 °roof block 1-62 Fig.b. 45 °roof block 1-62 

IF 

1.2 

1 

0.8 

0.6 

0.4 

0.2 

0 

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 

IF 

1 

0.9 

0.8 

0.7 

0.6 

0.5 

0.4 

0.3 

0.2 

0.1 

0 

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 

Fig.c. 90 °roof block 1-62 Fig.d. 270 °roof block 1-62 

Fig 6.The roof block interference factor distribution of 

gymnasium at some wind direction 

4 Conclusions 

In this paper the wind loads of the long-span roof of the stadium and gymnasium in 

Quanzhou were calculated and the wind interference analysis between the stadium and 

gymnasium was carried. Some conclusions are as follows: 

(1) The wind loads was studied comparatively by wind tunnel test and CFD 

simulation and the law of wind pressure distribution is similar. The results in this paper 

verify the feasibility of numerical simulation of large-span roof buildings. 

(2) The stadium that in the upper reaches reduces the lift force of the approach 

cantilevered roof of the gymnasium, increases the lift force when in parallel position, reduces 

the lift force when in the lower reaches. 

(3) The wind pressure of the stadium's roof is affected by the gymnasium. When the 

stadium is in the upper reaches of the gymnasium, the flow blocked by the stadium, the wind 

pressure of gymnasium’s roof reduces, shielding effect is not very obvious. When the


stadium is in the lower of the gymnasium, the flow is reduced by the stadium, the wind 

pressure of gymnasium in the training hall roof reduces. When the stadium is in parallel 

position, the wind speed increases between the stadium and the gymnasium, gap tube effect 

is obvious, the wind pressure of gymnasium’s roof increases. 

(4) The shape and position of the complex affects the average wind pressure of the 

tested buildings, the stadium and gymnasium is a central axis symmetrical streamlined 

structure and the covering of the gymnasium is higher than the stadium which is benefit to 

the wind load of the stadium and gymnasium. Consequently, the architecture planning of the 

stadium and gymnasium is quite reasonable. 

Acknowledgements 

This research is supported by the following projects: the National Natural Science 

Foundation of China under Grant No. 50708040, the Fujian’s Science and Technology signal 

special project under Grant No. 2005YZ1016, the Xiamen’s Science and Technology 

university innovation project under Grant No. 3502Z20083039, the Quanzhou’s Science and 

Technology planned project under Grant No. 2007G7. 

References 

Chen X. C. (2005), “the theoretical study and application of wind-induced response and equivalent wind load of 

large-span roof structure”, Zhejiang University doctoral dissertation. 

Huang B. C. (2002), “Wind Resistance Analysis theory and Application for Structure”, 2 rd Edition, Tongji 

University Press, Shanghai, 31-32. 

Khanduri, ACStathopoulos and T.Bedard C. (1998), “Wind-induced interference effects on Buildings-a review 

of the state-of-the-art ”, Engineering Structure, 20 (7), 617-630. 

Lin B. (2005), “The wind tunnel test and CFD numerical simulation of the wind load of Daqing Petroleum 

Institute gymnasium roof”, Xi'an: the structure of the twelfth National Conference on Wind Engineering, 

724-730. 

Katarzyna Klemm,Wojciech Marks, Agnieszka J. Klemm. (2000), “Multicriteria optimization of the 

building arrangement with application of numerical simulation. Building and Environment, 35(1): 537-544. 

Richartson G.M., Hoxey R.P., Robertson A.P., Short L.J. (1997), “The silsoe structures Building Com- parisons 

of pressures measured at full scale and in two tunnels”, Journal of wind engineering and Industrial 

Aerodynamics, 72: 187~197. 

Shen G. H. (2004), “large-span roof structure of wind resistance studies”, Zhejiang University doctoral 

dissertation. 

Suggestion of Japan. (1996), AIJ Recommendations for Loads on Buildings. 

wind-tunnel test research report. (2005), “The Civil Engineering State Key Laboratory of Disaster Prevention of 

Tongji University”, The study of wind tunnel tests, wind-induced response and equivalent static wind load of 

Quanzhou Straits Sports Center Stadium.

numerical simulation of wind interference effect for a stadium and a ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?