Non-Applicable.
1. Field of Invention
This invention relates to an aerodynamic means that mitigate wind generated vortices and wind loads in the wall edge areas of a building, in a simple, effective, and economical way, applicable for both new constructions and retrofits of existing buildings.
2. Discussion of Prior Art
Conventional wall construction practices normally result in a wall edge configuration that tends to generate strong edge vortex and subjects the wall edge area to severe outward suction loads and high risk of wind induced damage. Traditionally, structural strengthening methods have been relied upon, to counter this severe suction force and mitigate damage risk. The wall edge vortex suppressor disclosed herein functions to reduce the suction force and thus mitigates wind damage risk, through passive flow control techniques that eliminate or suppress the wall edge vortex, which is the prime cause for the high suction force.
This invention discloses an aerodynamic means that mitigate strong vortices and high loads induced by wind on the wall edge area of a building, in a simple, effective, and economical way, applicable and convenient for both new constructions and retrofits of existing buildings. This is achieved by using elongated devices of appropriate configurations mounted along a wall edge, therefore to intervene with the wind flow and suppress edge vortex. Examples of such configurations include wall edge cap, windscreen and wind spoiler. These devices primarily comprise of elongated members mounted to a wall edge and defining a new exterior configuration of a building corner, and appropriate means to attach and secure the elongated member to a building corner.
Herein wall edge refers to an edge at which two terminating wall surfaces intersect at an approximately right angle and form a convex corner of a building. Vortex formation and extreme wind load are inherent around a building corner, where abrupt change in wall surface orientation occurs along the flow path such that the accelerated wind flow around a corner severely separates from the downstream wall surface. A wall edge vortex suppressor intervenes and modifies the wind flow around the corner of a building. It mitigates flow separation, prevents vortex formation or suppresses its strength, and ultimately reduces the wind force exerted on the wall area adjacent to the edge where most initial wind damages to a wall system occur.
Several objects and advantages of the present invention are:
to provide wall edge devices which suppress edge vortex formation and reduce wind loads on wall cladding in a building corner area;
to provide wall edge devices which reduce wind loads generally on a wall system that are transferred from the wall cladding;
to provide wall edge devices which stabilize wind flow around wall corners and minimize cyclic loads on wall components resulting from recurring winds, reducing the chances of damage due to material fatigue;
to provide wall edge devices which possess the desired aerodynamic performance for a more wind resistant building structure while maintaining aesthetic and waterproofing functionality under both extreme and recurring weather conditions.
Further objects or advantages are to provide wall edge devices which protect a wall system from wind and rain damage, and which are still among the simplest, most effective and reliable, and inexpensive to manufacture and convenient to install. These and still further objects and advantages will become apparent from a consideration of the ensuing description and drawings.
Any appropriate means to attach and secure the devices to wall surfaces are allowable if it does not significantly affect or alter the exterior shape of the device in a way that detriments the vortex-suppressing function. For example, a set of cleats and fasteners 80 as illustrated in
The devices can be made of any durable materials that provide mechanical strength and stiffness sufficient to sustain high winds and other weather elements over time. These include, but are not limited to, sheet metal, acrylic, and for the edge cap treated solid wood, etc. Extrusion, or cold form where applicable or other appropriate methods, can be used to manufacture the devices. A generally symmetric shape is preferred for a wall edge vortex-suppressing device in that wind can come from either side of a building corner. However, deviation from a symmetric configuration is allowable for any practical purposes as far as the alteration does not deviate from the spirit of this disclosure for wall edge vortex-suppressing devices.
Any appropriate means to attach and secure the devices to wall surfaces are allowable if it does not significantly affect or alter the exterior shape of the device in a way that detriments the vortex-suppressing function. For example, a set of cleats and fasteners can be used for securing the apparatus to the wall, as illustrated in the above figures.
An embodiment of this invention is a passive flow control device for wall edges. Once configured and installed properly, it stays functioning in such a way that it mitigates vortex formation around a wall edge and reduces wind loads on the wall, whenever the wind blows towards a building bearing such wall edge devices, and requires no active operational intervention.
It is apparent that wall edge vortex suppressors of this invention provide advantageous devices for mitigating wall edge vortex and wall suction, and are still among the simplest, most effective and reliable, inexpensive to manufacture and convenient to install, with little, if any, maintenance required.
The present invention provides a simple and unique method for improving building wind resistance, not only suitable for new constructions but also for retrofit on existing buildings.
Although the description above contains many specifications, these should not be construed as limiting the scope of the invention but as merely providing illustrations of some of the presently preferred embodiments of this invention. Various changes, modifications, variations can be made therein without departing from the spirit of the invention. Wall edge vortex suppressors can be made of any reasonably durable material with any appropriate means of fabrication as long as a configuration according to the spirit of this invention is accomplished to support the described working mechanism and to provide the associated functionality. Any appropriate conventional or new mounting method can be used to secure a wall edge vortex suppressor to a building corner without departing from the spirit of this invention. Thus the scope of the invention should be determined by the appended claims and their legal equivalents, rather than by the examples given.
This application is entitled to the benefit of Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 60/636,083, filed Dec. 15, 2004.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
397534 | Carroll | Feb 1889 | A |
417270 | Nelson | Dec 1889 | A |
1316968 | Neill et al. | Sep 1919 | A |
2021929 | Voigt | Nov 1935 | A |
2123967 | Richter | Jul 1938 | A |
2206040 | Ludington | Jul 1940 | A |
2270537 | Ludington | Jan 1942 | A |
2270538 | Ludington | Jan 1942 | A |
2473400 | Waara | Jun 1949 | A |
2968128 | Pelican | Jan 1961 | A |
3012376 | Reddy et al. | Dec 1961 | A |
3024573 | McKinley | Mar 1962 | A |
3187464 | Sharp | Jun 1965 | A |
3280524 | Hull | Oct 1966 | A |
3717968 | Olsen et al. | Feb 1973 | A |
3742668 | Oliver | Jul 1973 | A |
4005557 | Kramer et al. | Feb 1977 | A |
4233786 | Hildreth | Nov 1980 | A |
4461129 | von Platen | Jul 1984 | A |
4549376 | Hickman | Oct 1985 | A |
4598507 | Hickman | Jul 1986 | A |
4665667 | Taylor et al. | May 1987 | A |
4672781 | Pichon | Jun 1987 | A |
4780999 | Webb et al. | Nov 1988 | A |
4830315 | Presz et al. | May 1989 | A |
4858406 | Lane et al. | Aug 1989 | A |
4957037 | Tubbesing et al. | Sep 1990 | A |
5016404 | Briggs | May 1991 | A |
5031367 | Butzen | Jul 1991 | A |
5050489 | Mankowski | Sep 1991 | A |
5189853 | Braine | Mar 1993 | A |
5414965 | Kelley et al. | May 1995 | A |
D361138 | Moore et al. | Aug 1995 | S |
5813179 | Koenig et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5918423 | Ponder | Jul 1999 | A |
6044601 | Chmela et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6128865 | Din | Oct 2000 | A |
6212829 | Webb | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6212836 | Larson | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6325712 | Lawless, III et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6360504 | Webb et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6539675 | Gile | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6601348 | Banks et al. | Aug 2003 | B2 |
6606828 | Lin et al. | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6786015 | Wilt | Sep 2004 | B2 |
6786018 | Webb et al. | Sep 2004 | B2 |
7137224 | Rasmussen et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7487618 | Lin | Feb 2009 | B2 |
20020083666 | Webb et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020124485 | Pulte | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20030061771 | Kintop | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20050210759 | Austin et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20060248810 | Ewing | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20070113489 | Kaiser et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
5-133141 | May 1993 | JP |
6-307122 | Nov 1994 | JP |
6-336860 | Dec 1994 | JP |
7-158318 | Jun 1995 | JP |
8-49448 | Feb 1996 | JP |
8-218683 | Aug 1996 | JP |
2000-8326 | Jan 2000 | JP |
2003-206606 | Jul 2003 | JP |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20080005985 A1 | Jan 2008 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60636083 | Dec 2004 | US |