桂順治氏の討論に対する回答

概要

論文の詳細を見る
The author thanks Dr. Junji Katsura for his questions, and he answers as follows; Firstly, the authors made clear that their point of view on the method for evaluating fluctuating wind pressure was different from Dr. Katsura's. Secondly, we replied to comments made by Dr. Katsura 1)The time period of ten minuets for evaluating wind fluctuation was chosen to correspond to the weather data measured by the meteoro- logical agency. 2)The method of measuring atmospheric static pressure was determined by taking into account the technical problem with the reference static pressure box and the limited extent of the owner's cooperation. 3)There was not a significant difference in term of coefficient of variation for the mean wind-induced internal pressures between the low and high wind velocities though a dispersion in mean wind-induced internal pressures was found in the high wind velocities. 4)It was thought to be sufficient that results of wind tunnel tests correspond to the average statistic value derived from fluctuating wind pressure. It is impossible to model every detail of full-scale conditions in a wind tunnel test.
社団法人日本建築学会の論文
1997-08-30