Randomized trial investigates wind load impact on coupled shear wall systems, highlighting performance improvements in tall buildings.
Coupled shear wall systems are widely used in tall buildings due to their high lateral stiffness and effectiveness in controlling wind-induced serviceability responses. Reliable assessment of their behavior under realistic wind loading requires accurate load representation and properly calibrated numerical modeling. This study investigates the performance of coupled shear wall systems under wind loads derived from wind tunnel testing, where surface pressure time histories were extracted from the TPU Aerodynamic Database and used to generate equivalent full-scale, time-varying wind loads. The preliminary design of a 20-story building was established in ETABS based on current design codes. Detailed nonlinear time-history analyses were subsequently performed in OpenSees to assess the performance under three different wind hazards for the original and refined design, where shear walls were modeled using the Multiple-Vertical-Line-Element Model (MVLEM). Several wind demand indicators, including drift ratios, floor accelerations, and component and cladding performance were evaluated. The results demonstrate that the performance-based design framework enables the identification of critical vulnerabilities that may not be fully captured by conventional code-based drift and strength checks, particularly regarding localized damage accumulation and serviceability-related demands. Additionally, the refined configuration, while requiring only a 4.33% increase in total baseline concrete volume, effectively reduced peak roof drift by 60%, allowing reliable control of dynamic behavior and prevention of structural yielding, as well as ensuring the maintenance of both structural integrity and operational serviceability for the investigated high-rise configuration during severe wind events. Nevertheless, the findings are limited to the investigated building configuration and aerodynamic conditions considered in this study.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bashour et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: