Asian Journal of Civil Engineering

, Volume 19, Issue 5, pp 535–551 | Cite as

CFD simulation of hemispherical domes: structural flexibility and interference factors

  • Hossein Sadeghi
  • Mahmoud Heristchian
  • Armin Aziminejad
  • Hoshyar Nooshin
Original Paper


The computational fluid dynamics (CFD) method is widely used today for determining the wind action on structures. Along with the CFD method the wind tunnel experiments are also employed to achieve this purpose. The cost and effort required for a wind tunnel test, however, is much higher than that of the CFD method; therefore, it is beneficial to extend and validate the use of CFD method to various classes and types of structures. This paper firstly compares the results of CFD method with the results of three series of wind tunnel tests available in the literature. Then, numerically the effect of structural flexibility and the neighbourhood of the objects on the wind pressure distribution coefficients are studied. Two and three half spheres are arranged sequentially and transversally. According to the CFD analysis, at a clear distance greater than 2.5 times the diameter of the (obstructing) dome, the wind dynamic interference effects on the reference hemisphere are diminished.


Wind load CFD modelling Hemispherical dome Wind tunnel Wind interference factor Flexibility factor 


  1. Baker, C. J. (2007). The past, present and future of wind engineering. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 95, 843–870.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Blocken, B. (2014). 50 years of computational wind engineering: Past, present and future. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 129, 69–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cheng, C. M., & Fu, C. L. (2010). Characteristic of wind loads on a hemispherical dome in smooth flow and turbulent boundary layer flow. Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 98, 328–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Kateris, D. L., Fragos, V. P., Kotsopoulos, T. A., Martzopoulou, A. G., & Moshou, D. (2012). Calculated external pressure coefficient on livestock buildings and comparison with Eurocode 1. Wind and Structures, 6, 481–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Lin, C. S. H., Chua, C. K., & Yeo, J. H. (2014). Aerodynamics of badminton shuttlecock: Characterization of flow around a conical skirt with gaps, behind a hemispherical dome. Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 127, 29–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Michalski, A., Kermel, P. D., Haug, E., Ohner, R. L., Uchner, R. W., & Bletzinger, K. (2011). Validation of the computational fluid-structure interaction simulation at real-scale tests of a flexible 29 m umbrella in natural wind flow. Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 99, 400–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Montaazeri, H., & Blocken, B. (2013). CFD simulation of Wind-induced pressure coefficient on buildings with and without balconies: Validation and sensitivity analysis. Building and Environment, 60, 137–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Nieto, F., Hernández, S., Jurado, J. A., & Baldomir, A. (2010). CFD practical application in conceptual design of a 425 m cable-stayed bridge. Wind and Structures, 13, 309–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Qiu, Y., Sun, Y., Wu, Y., & Tamura, Y. (2014). Modelling the mean wind loads on cylindrical roofs with consideration of the Reynolds number effect in uniform flow with low turbulence. Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 129, 11–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ramponi, R., & Blocken, B. (2012). CFD simulation of cross-ventilation flow for different isolated building configuration: Validation with wind tunnel measurements and analysis of physical and numerical diffusion effects. Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 104, 408–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Rizzo, F., D’Asdia, P., Lazzari, M., & Procino, L. (2011). Wind action evaluation on tension roofs of hyperbolic paraboloid shape. Engineering Structures, 33(2), 445–461. Scholar
  12. Sadeghi, H., Heristchian, M., Aziminejad, A., & Nooshin, H. (2017). Wind effect on grooved and scallop domes. Engineering Structures, 148, 436–450. Scholar
  13. Sun, Y., Qiu, Y., & Wu, Y. (2013). Modelling of wind pressure spectra on spherical domes. International Journal of Space Structures, 28(2), 87–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Uematsu, Y., et al. (1997). Wind loads and wind-induced dynamic behaviour of a single-layer latticed dome. Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 66, 227–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Vizotto, I., & Ferreira, A. M. (2015). Wind force coefficient on hexagonal free form shells. Engineering Structures, 83, 17–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Yang, A.-S., Wen, C. Y., Juan, Y. H., Su, Y. M., & Wu, J. H. (2014). Using the central ventilation shaft design within public buildings for natural aeration enhancement. Applied Thermal Engineering, 70, 219–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hossein Sadeghi
    • 1
  • Mahmoud Heristchian
    • 2
  • Armin Aziminejad
    • 1
  • Hoshyar Nooshin
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Civil Engineering, Science and Research BranchIslamic Azad UniversityTehranIran
  2. 2.Department of Civil Engineering, South Tehran BranchIslamic Azad UniversityTehranIran
  3. 3.Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringUniversity of SurreyGuildfordUK

Personalised recommendations