Analytical expressions are proposed to obtain the critical frequencies of the towers for which these interactions arise, and recommendations are given to define the tower geometry in order to avoid such problematic scenarios.
Open image in new window Figure 2 Tower geometry (a) and cross section (b) of steel tower of cable-stayed bridge.
The comparison is based on an extensive parametric study of the tower geometry in order to access the structural tower ultimate and serviceability limit states.
Evaluations of the cooling tower geometry and performances are based on an adaptive version of Merkel's method.
This extrapolation results in an uncertainty which often leads to insufficiently accurate drag force predictions, because of a lack of agreement between the basis of the design codes and their use for tall and complex tower geometries.
This experiment investigated the effects of tower "shadowing" on cup anemometer wind speed readings in the wake of common met tower geometries.
Experiments were conducted in a wind tunnel tested by dynamic similarity between real and scaled building-wind tower geometries.
Despite this fact, the most commonly used tower geometries possess structural mechanisms that could compromise the assumed structural behaviour.
Recommendations for tower internals, tray spacing, and tower diameter are tabulated.
The analytical technique for tower mass savings employed herein was validated and used to show that 33%50%% of the tower mass may be saved through decreased tower thickness.
