The impact of urban construction on pedestrian level wind (PLW) has been extensively studied, which has mainly focused on ideal structures rather than real multiplex building layouts. Therefore, a series of wind tunnel tests were conducted on a real building complex to investigate the impacts of a newly built nearby high-rise building, added floors, passage width and a novelty zigzag building shape on the PLW. The findings showed that in converging layouts, PLW velocity can be increased up to 2.75 times by a nearby 230 m high-rise building, and it is reduced by 30% with a 30 m passage compared to a 10 m passage. Adding 38 m to a 65 m high building would increase PLW velocity by 1.95 times when compared to an isolated building and 2.4 times when compared to a building surrounded by others. Additionally, a modest impact on PLW velocity was observed with zigzag building shapes. This study highlights the PLW velocity that can be increased to a large extent with newly built high-rise buildings and adding floors, while increasing the passage width has the opposite effect. This study also offers insights into urban planning and building design to enhance wind comfort.
HeBJDingLPrasadD. Relationships among local-scale urban morphology, urban ventilation, urban heat island and outdoor thermal comfort under sea breeze influence. Sustain Cities Soc2020; 60: 102289.
2.
KuCATsaiHK. Evaluating the influence of urban morphology on urban wind environment based on computational fluid dynamics simulation. ISPRS Int J Geo-Inf2020; 9: 399.
3.
LiuYXuYZhangFShuW. A preliminary study on the influence of Beijing urban spatial morphology on near-surface wind speed. Urban Clim2020; 34: 100703.
4.
YangJShiBShiYMarvinSZhengYXiaG. Air pollution dispersal in high density urban areas: research on the triadic relation of wind, air pollution, and urban form. Sustain Cities Soc2020; 54: 101941.
5.
CocciaM. The effects of atmospheric stability with low wind speed and of air pollution on the accelerated transmission dynamics of COVID-19. Int J Environ Stud2021; 78: 1–27.
6.
ShiXZhuYDuanJShaoRWangJ. Assessment of pedestrian wind environment in urban planning design. Landsc Urban Plan2015; 140: 17–28.
7.
CammelliSStanfieldR. Meeting the challenges of planning policy for wind microclimate of high-rise developments in London. Procedia Eng2017; 198: 43–51.
8.
BritterREHannaSR. Flow and dispersion in urban areas. Annu Rev Fluid Mech2003; 35(1): 469–496.
9.
TseKTZhangXWeerasuriyaAULiSWKwokKCSMakCMNiuJ. Adopting ‘lift-up’ building design to improve the surrounding pedestrian-level wind environment. Build Environ2017; 117: 154–165.
10.
StathopoulosT. Wind environmental conditions around tall buildings with chamfered corners. J Wind Eng Ind Aerod1986; 21(1): 71–87.
11.
UematsuYYamadaMHigashiyamaHOrimoT. Effects of the corner shape of high-rise buildings on the pedestrian-level wind environment with consideration for mean and fluctuating wind speeds. J Wind Eng Ind Aerod1992; 44(1-3): 2289–2300.
12.
MittalHSharmaAGairolaA. Numerical simulation of pedestrian level wind flow around buildings: effect of corner modification and orientation. Environ Fluid Mech2020; 22: 314–326.
13.
ChenLMakCM. Numerical evaluation of pedestrian-level wind comfort around “lift-up” buildings with various unconventional configurations. Build Environ2021; 188: 107429.
14.
RafailidisS. Influence of building areal density and roof shape on the wind characteristics above a town. Bound-Layer Meteorol1997; 85(2): 255–271.
15.
HuangYHuXZengN. Impact of wedge-shaped roofs on airflow and pollutant dispersion inside urban street canyons. Build Environ2009; 44(12): 2335–2347.
16.
TakanoYMoonenP. On the influence of roof shape on flow and dispersion in an urban street canyon. J Wind Eng Ind Aerod2013; 123: 107–120.
17.
TominagaYAkabayashiSKitaharaTArinamiY. Air flow around isolated gable-roof buildings with different roof pitches: wind tunnel experiments and CFD simulations. Build Environ2015; 84: 204–213.
18.
KimJWBaikJJHanBSLeeJJinHGParkKYangHParkSB. Tall-building effects on pedestrian-level flow and pollutant dispersion: large-eddy simulations. Atmos Pollut Res2022; 13(8): 101500.
19.
HuangTLKuoCYTzengCTLaiCM. The influence of high-rise buildings on pedestrian-level wind in surrounding street canyons in an urban renewal project. Energies2020; 13(11): 2745.
20.
YamamuraSKondoY. Numerical study on relationship between building shape and ground-level wind velocity. J Wind Eng Ind Aerod1993; 46: 773–778.
21.
XuXYangQYoshidaATamuraY. Characteristics of pedestrian-level wind around super-tall buildings with various configurations. J Wind Eng Ind Aerod2017; 166: 61–73.
22.
MittalHSharmaAGairolaA. Numerical simulation of pedestrian level wind conditions: effect of building shape and orientation. Environ Fluid Mech2020; 20(4): 663–688.
23.
OkeTR. Street design and urban canopy layer climate. Energy Build1988; 11(1-3): 103–113.
24.
ShishegarN. Street design and urban microclimate: analyzing the effects of street geometry and orientation on airflow and solar access in urban canyons. J Clean Energy Technol2013; 1(1): 52–56.
25.
StathopoulosTStormsR. Wind environmental conditions in passages between buildings. J Wind Eng Ind Aerod1986; 24(1): 19–31.
26.
HangJLiYSandbergMBuccolieriRDi SabatinoS. The influence of building height variability on pollutant dispersion and pedestrian ventilation in idealized high-rise urban areas. Build Environ2012; 56: 346–360.
27.
KuoCYTzengCTHoMCLaiCM. Wind tunnel studies of a pedestrian-level wind environment in a street canyon between a high-rise building with a podium and low-level attached houses. Energies2015; 8(10): 10942–10957.
28.
BlockenBStathopoulosTCarmelietJ. Wind environmental conditions in passages between two long narrow perpendicular buildings. J Aero Eng2008; 21(4): 280–287.
29.
PancholyPPClemensKGeogheganPJermyMMoyers-GonzalezMWilsonPL. Numerical study of flow structure and pedestrian-level wind comfort inside urban street canyons. J Roy Soc N Z2021; 51(2): 307–332.
30.
AllegriniJLopezB. The influence of angular configuration of two buildings on the local wind climate. J Wind Eng Ind Aerod2016; 156: 50–61.
31.
DobreAArnoldSJSmalleyRJBoddyJWDBarlowJFTomlinASBelcherSE. Flow field measurements in the proximity of an urban intersection in London, UK. Atmos Environ2005; 39(26): 4647–4657.
32.
CarpentieriMRobinsAGBaldiS. Three-dimensional mapping of air flow at an urban canyon intersection. Bound-Layer Meteorol2009; 133(2): 277–296.
33.
SoulhacLGarberoVSalizzoniPMejeanPPerkinsR. Flow and dispersion in street intersections. Atmos Environ2009; 43(18): 2981–2996.
34.
MaTChenT. Classification and pedestrian-level wind environment assessment among Tianjin's residential area based on numerical simulation. Urban Clim2020; 34: 100702.
35.
ZhangXWeerasuriyaAULuBTseKTLiuCHTamuraY. Pedestrian-level wind environment near a super-tall building with unconventional configurations in a regular urban area. Build Simulat2020; 13: 439–456.
36.
AsfourOS. Prediction of wind environment in different grouping patterns of housing blocks. Energy Build2010; 42(11): 2061–2069.
37.
ZakiSAHagishimaATanimotoJIkegayaN. Aerodynamic parameters of urban building arrays with random geometries. Bound-Layer Meteorol2011; 138(1): 99–120.
38.
GuZLZhangYWChengYLeeSC. Effect of uneven building layout on air flow and pollutant dispersion in non-uniform street canyons. Build Environ2011; 46(12): 2657–2665.
39.
JiangDJiangWLiuHSunJ. Systematic influence of different building spacing, height and layout on mean wind and turbulent characteristics within and over urban building arrays. Wind Struct2008; 11(4): 275–289.
40.
KubotaTMiuraMTominagaYMochidaA. Wind tunnel tests on the relationship between building density and pedestrian-level wind velocity: development of guidelines for realizing acceptable wind environment in residential neighborhoods. Build Environ2008; 43(10): 1699–1708.
41.
YimSHLFungJCHLauAKHKotSC. Air ventilation impacts of the “wall effect” resulting from the alignment of high-rise buildings. Atmos Environ2009; 43(32): 4982–4994.
42.
HangJLiY. Ventilation strategy and air change rates in idealized high-rise compact urban areas. Build Environ2010; 45(12): 2754–2767.
43.
HangJLiYBuccolieriRSandbergMDi SabatinoS. On the contribution of mean flow and turbulence to city breathability: the case of long streets with tall buildings. Sci Total Environ2012; 416: 362–373.
44.
ChenLHangJSandbergMClaessonLDi SabatinoSWigoH. The impacts of building height variations and building packing densities on flow adjustment and city breathability in idealized urban models. Build Environ2017; 118: 344–361.
45.
HeYTabladaAWongNH. Effects of non-uniform and orthogonal breezeway networks on pedestrian ventilation in Singapore’s high-density urban environments. Urban Clim2018; 24: 460–484.
46.
MaingM. Superblock transformation in Seoul Megacity: effects of block densification on urban ventilation patterns. Landsc Urban Plan2022; 222: 104401.
47.
NgEYuanCChenLRenCFungJC. Improving the wind environment in high-density cities by understanding urban morphology and surface roughness: a study in Hong Kong. Landsc Urban Plan2011; 101(1): 59–74.
48.
YuanCNorfordLNgE. A semi-empirical model for the effect of trees on the urban wind environment. Landsc Urban Plan2017; 168: 84–93.
49.
TsichritzisLNikolopoulouM. The effect of building height and façade area ratio on pedestrian wind comfort of London. J Wind Eng Ind Aerod2019; 191: 63–75.
50.
IrwinHPAH. A simple omnidirectional sensor for wind-tunnel studies of pedestrian-level winds. J Wind Eng Ind Aerod1981; 7(3): 219–239.
51.
Code of Practice on Wind Effects in Hong Kong. Kowloon, Hong Kong, China: Building Department, 2004.
