This study presents a historical overview on the wind design for the tallest structures built in Romania, namely the reinforced concrete chimneys used for both thermoelectrical powerplants and for industrial purposes, as well. The evolution of the design and construction practices of these structures are briefly presented and discussed. A historical overview of the procedures for wind design applied in Romania is briefly shown in the paper. Subsequently, a case-study involving two RC chimneys located in Bucharest and Iasi is presented. The wind force determined according to the various design regulations employed in Romania and the reliability to wind action are evaluated for two chimneys. The results show that the failure probability due to wind action as compared to the one associated to the seismic action is 10 larger for the chimney located in Iasi, while in the case of the chimney form Bucharest, the failure probabilities are almost identical (6–8·10−3).

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Historical Evolution of Wind Design for Tall RC Chimneys in Romania

  • Florin Pavel

摘要

This study presents a historical overview on the wind design for the tallest structures built in Romania, namely the reinforced concrete chimneys used for both thermoelectrical powerplants and for industrial purposes, as well. The evolution of the design and construction practices of these structures are briefly presented and discussed. A historical overview of the procedures for wind design applied in Romania is briefly shown in the paper. Subsequently, a case-study involving two RC chimneys located in Bucharest and Iasi is presented. The wind force determined according to the various design regulations employed in Romania and the reliability to wind action are evaluated for two chimneys. The results show that the failure probability due to wind action as compared to the one associated to the seismic action is 10 larger for the chimney located in Iasi, while in the case of the chimney form Bucharest, the failure probabilities are almost identical (6–8·10−3).