DG 436-1

Revised 2015

Digest

Determining wind actions using Eurocode1

Part 1: Guidance on the use of BS EN 1991-1-4

Paul Blackmore

Eurocode 1 for wind actions, BS EN 1991-1-4 [1] , replaces

BS 6399-2[2] , which was withdrawn in 2010. The scope
of BS EN 1991-1-4 is much wider than BS 6399-2: where
BS 6399-2 was limited to building structures and mildly
dynamic response, BS EN 1991-1-4 includes buildings
and civil engineering works and a more comprehensive
approach to dynamic response, including vortex
shedding and other aerodynamic instabilities. There
are a number of significant differences between these
standards, particularly with respect to dynamic response,
which will be unfamiliar to UK engineers. It was therefore
felt that some additional background information and
worked examples would be beneficial.

This three-part Digest will help the user to understand

the new approach to wind loading used in the
Eurocode. It is aimed at engineers, architects and other
professionals who need to understand how to calculate
the effect of wind on buildings and design options to
interpretation of some clauses and additional pressure coefficient
minimise it. Wind loads on bridges are not covered in this
data for building forms outside of the scope of the standard.
Digest.
It also includes Annex A (Vortex shedding and aerodynamic
instabilities), which replaces Annex E in BS EN 1991-1-4.
Part 1 of this Digest gives guidance on the use of
PD6688-1-4 does not have the status of a British Standard.
BSEN1991-1-4, its UK National Annex[3] and the non-
conflicting complementary information published in
In this Digest we will refer to BS EN 1991-1-4 as the EN, the UK
PD6688-1-4 [4]. Parts 2 and 3 give worked examples of the
National Annex to BS EN 1991-1-4 as the NA and PD 6688-1-4
Eurocode methodology, including dynamic response. This
as the PD.
update to Part 1 replaces the guidance published in 1999.

Using BS EN 1991-1-4 Structural factor cscd

The structural factor cscd accounts for the dynamic response
In the UK, BS EN 1991-1-4 must always be used in conjunction
of the structure and the correlation of the wind gusts over the
with the UK National Annex. There are over 60 nationally
surface of the structure. The factor cscd may be taken as 1.0 in
determined parameters (NDPs) in the standard. Member states
the following cases:
may provide alternative procedures or values for each of these
NDPs. The National Annex gives guidance on these NDPs and all buildings with a height < 15 m
their application in the UK. The Eurocode system also allows framed buildings < 100 m high with structural walls and
non-conflicting complementary information (NCCI) to be with height/crosswind breadth < 4
used; in the UK this is found in PD 6688-1-4. This published circular chimneys < 60 m high and with height/diameter
document includes background information, commentary on <6.5.
 DG 436-2
Revised 2015

Digest

Determining wind actions using Eurocode 1

Part 2: Worked examples wind loads on a two-storey house and 128 m tower

Paul Blackmore

This is the second part of a three-part Digest giving

guidance on the use of Eurocode 1 (BS EN 1991-1-4).
This Digest is aimed at engineers, architects and other
professionals who need to understand how to calculate
the effect of wind on buildings and design options to
minimise it. Wind loads on bridges are not covered in this
Digest.

Part 2 of this Digest demonstrates the calculation

procedure for determining wind loads and includes
example calculations for a two-storey house and a 120m
residential tower on an 8 m podium. Part 1 gives advice
and guidance on the use of BSEN1991-1-4 and Part 3
gives an example calculation of dynamic response using
the full dynamic method given in BSEN1991-1-4 AnnexB
for inwind response in the fundamental mode. This
update to Part 2 replaces the guidance published in 1999.

In this Digest we will refer to BS EN 1991-1-4 [1] as the EN,

the UK National Annex to BS EN 1991-1-4 [2] as the NA
and PD6688-1-4 [3] as the PD.

Example 1: Two-storey house

This example demonstrates the approach to be used for
the principal dimensions of the house and its orientation
determining the peak velocity pressure and the cladding and
and location in relation to nearby buildings are shown in
overall loads on a typical two-storey house. For this example
Figures 1 and 2
it has been assumed that the site lies on the outskirts of
the season factor cseason = 1.0 and the probability factor
Sheffield. This site has been chosen because it is typical of inland
cprob = 1.0 (values applicable for a permanent building)
towns and illustrates the typical conservatism arising from the
the distance to the edge of the town and the distance to the
simplified options for determining peak velocity pressure. For
shore vary as shown in Table 1.
sites close to the west coast there will be less conservatism and
for sites near the east coast there will be more conservatism.
In this example three options for determining the peak velocity
Assumptions for this example are: pressure are considered:
the site altitude A is 120 m Option 1: taking 12 wind directions (least conservative)
the site is less than halfway up a hill so orography is not Option 2: taking four orthogonal wind directions (best
significant (NA Figure NA.2) compromise)
the map wind speed vb,map (NA Figure NA.1) for the site is Option 3: taking the single worst case irrespective of
22m/s direction (most conservative).
 DG 436-3
Revised 2015

Digest

Determining wind actions using Eurocode 1

Part 3: Worked example calculation of forces on a tower using the full dynamic
method

Paul Blackmore and Gordon Breeze

This is the third part of a three-part Digest giving

guidance on the use of Eurocode 1 (BS EN 1991-1-4).
This Digest is aimed at engineers, architects and other
professionals who need to understand how to calculate
the effect of wind on buildings and design options to
minimise it. Wind loads on bridges are not covered in this
Digest.

Part 3 of this Digest demonstrates the calculation

procedure for determining wind loads using the full
dynamic method from Annex B of BS EN 1991-1-4. It
includes an example calculation for determining the
dynamic response of a 128 m tall building (referred to as
Example 3 to differentiate from the examples referred
to in Part 2).

Part 1 gives advice and guidance on the use of

BS EN 1991-1-4 and Part 2 demonstrates the calculation
procedure for determining wind loads and includes
example calculations for a two-storey house and a
120m tall tower on an 8 m podium. This update to Part 3
replaces the guidance published in 1999.

In this Digest we will refer to BS EN 1991-1-4 [1] as the EN,

the UK National Annex to BS EN 1991-1-4 [2] as the NA
and PD6688-1-4 [3] as the PD.
well as crosswind buffeting. The incident wind can also generate
crosswind (or lift) forces depending on the approaching wind
angle and the cross-sectional shape of the building. Torsional
Introduction dynamic response can be amplified by the centre of twist of the
building being offset from its centre of mass, ie a rectangular
The wind-induced dynamic response of a building can be building with the lifts and stairwells concentrated at one end
broken down into alongwind response, crosswind response of the building. It can also be caused by non-symmetrical wind
and torsional response. These responses can be analysed forces, or where an upwind building shelters one-half of the
independently and the overall response determined by building. Non-symmetrical wind forces can also be produced
combining together each of the components. The alongwind if there is a nearby adjacent building at one end that creates a
dynamic response is dependent on the scale, magnitude and localised region of accelerated or sheltered flow.
frequency of the turbulence in the approaching wind. The
overall alongwind response includes the static (or quasi-static) The EN provides calculation procedures for the alongwind
response due to the approaching mean wind speed. The dynamic response of the first fundamental mode of bending
crosswind dynamic response is more complex and can include a and for vortex shedding response. It does not consider torsional
number of excitation mechanisms such as vortex shedding and dynamic response, crosswind buffeting response or response
aeroelastic instabilities such as galloping and flutter (Box2), as from higher modes of vibration (Box 3). For particular designs