1

Comparison of Five Major Wind Codes with Sri Lankan

Context
Weerasuriya A.U.
a
, Lewangamage C.S.
b
, Jayasinghe M.T.R.
c


a
Research Assistant, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Moratuwa, Sri Lanka
b
Senior Lecturer, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Moratuwa, Sri Lanka
c
Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Moratuwa, Sri Lanka

ABSTRACT: The design manual Design building for high winds Sri Lanka is the only
mandatory document available for wind load design in Sri Lanka. This document extensively
covers the design and construction of low rise buildings. However, the evolution of tall
building construction requires advances for Sri Lankan wind loading standards, which cannot
be prepared yet due to lack of available data and technology. Therefore, designers have
used different international standards for wind design for medium and high rise buildings
without understanding the impact of many different standards in a particular design fully.
Hence, some of these common international wind standards such as CP 3 Chapter V Part
2:1972, BS 6399.2:1997, AS 1170.2:1989, AS/NZS 1170.2:2002 and EN 1991-1-4:2005 are
evaluated in this paper by considering loads exerted at ultimate limit state on the structural
members such as beam and column members, shells such as shear walls and supports of a
building by wind loads to understand the suitability of these codes for Sri Lankan context.
The serviceability limit state behavior of a building is also evaluated according to the me-
thods given in wind loading standards. The effective increase of the return period due to the
use of load factors for wind loads is also important in order to achieve adequate risk level for
different type of buildings. Finally conclusions have been drawn about the selected wind
loading standards, which can be used with Sri Lankan context until country could produce its
own wind code.
KEYWORDS: Design manual, Wind loading standards, Return period.

1 INTRODUCTION

Wind engineering is not an advance branch of engineering in Sri Lanka compared to the other
engineering works. The only available mandatory document on wind engineering in Sri
Lanka is design manual Design Building for High Winds Sri Lanka, which is primarily
based on CP 3 Chapter V Part 2:1972. This useful document only covers the design and
construction of low rise buildings with enhanced wind resistant abilities by using simple
techniques that can be practiced even in today. Apart from design manual, CP 3 Chapter V
Part 2:1972 is the most common practice for designing buildings against wind loads.
However, like in many other countries in Asia- Pacific region, there is a national trend to
build tall buildings at city centres in Sri Lanka since last two three decades (Karunarathne,
2008). Due to inadequate provisions given in both design manual and CP 3 Chapter V
Part 2: 1972 for designing tall buildings, many Sri Lankan designers and engineers are using
various international wind loading standards. However, use of these standards without fully
understanding methods and factors, may lead to arise some problems like inconveniences
about understanding and comparing wind load calculations, lack of harmonization among
wind load design of structures etc,. Therefore, Sri Lankan researchers (Premachandra, 2008,
Wijerathne, 2001) have done some comparative studies about international wind loading
standards to select most suitable wind codes for Sri Lanka.
However, some issues like the use of load factors with different standards, effective in-
crement of return period resulted from use of load factors, appropriate wind velocity values
for designing tall buildings and low rise buildings, most suitable wind loading standards for
the Sri Lankan context etc. are still need to be addressed. In this study above issues are be-
ing discussed through a comparative study of five major wind codes; with special refer to tall
building design with prevailing conditions in Sri Lanka.
2 PRESENT CONDITIONS IN SRI LANKA
According to the Design manual, Sri Lanka was divided in to three wind zones (Figure 1).
Two types of wind speeds are defined which can be named as wind speeds for normal struc-
tures and wind speeds for post disaster structures as shown in Table 1. All these wind
speeds are 3 second gust wind speeds with 50 years return period. These wind speeds were
not derived from the proper collection of data or by using proper statistical analysis. Thus,
they would not have sound theoretical basis. However, wind speeds were derived by using
some alternative measurements such as damages sustain along the cyclone path, historical da-
ta and Australian practices instead of using proper statistical methods (Clarke et al, 1979).




































Figure 1: Wind Zones in Sri Lanka (Design manual Design building for high winds, 1978)
3


Table 1. Three second gust velocities used for different areas of Sri Lanka (Design manual Design building
for high winds, 1978)





3 SELECTING CODES AND STANDARD FOR THE STUDY

Due to the lack of information in the design manual to address the issues of tall building de-
sign, many Sri Lankan engineers have used different international wind loading standards as
their preferred options. These preferred options may vary from some old code of practise
like CP 3 Chapter V Part 2 to newest codes like Euro code. By considering all of current
practises recently found in Sri Lankan civil engineering sector, following codes and standards
were chosen for the comparison purpose; CP 3 Chapter V Part 2:1972, BS 6399.2:1997, AS
1170.2:1989, AS/NZS 1170.2:2002 and EN 1991-1-4:2005.
CP 3 Chapter V-Part2:1972 uses quasi-static method to calculate wind loads on a building.
This quasi static approach more suitable for evaluating wind loads on low rise buildings
rather than to evaluate the performance of a high rise building. Many like to continue to CP
3 Chapter V- 1972 because of its simplicity and familiarity about the code. BS 6399.2:1997
is the newer version of the British standard and capable of handling both static and dynamic
behaviour of a building. Gust Load factor is a more popular method to calculate wind load
by considering both fluctuating wind speeds and dynamic behaviour of a structure. AS
1170.2:1989 use this method and it generally uses 3 second gust velocity as basic wind speed.
AS/NZS 1170.2:2002 has changed some factors and methods used in previous Australian
standard and make it as a simple document to use. Apart from these reasons, Australian
standards cover wide spectrum of wind including cyclones and it can be more suitable for
small island nations like Sri Lanka that may face devastating actions of high winds. EN
1991-1-4:2005 is the newest code and not only it compromise many aspects present in other
codes such as BS 6399.2:1997, AS/NZS 1170.2:2002 but also it allows to adjust methods and
factors which are suitable for own country by means of a national annex.
4 BASIC WIND SPEED VALUES WITH DIFFERENT AVERAGING TIMES

Wind loading standards use different averaging time wind speeds to calculate wind induced
loads on structures. When it comes to Sri Lankan context, available wind speed data is only
the 3 second gust wind speed. Therefore, it is needed to convert 3 second gust wind speed
values into wind speeds based different averaging times by using some conversion factors.
The value of 1.06 was used as conversion factor to convert mean hourly wind speeds to 10
minute mean speed, as proposed by the Institute of Civil Engineers in United Kingdom
(ICEUK). The method proposed by Cook (1999) was used to convert 3 second gust wind
speeds to mean hourly wind speed. The wind speeds in all three zones with different aver-
age times are shown in Table 2.







Wind
Zone
Post disaster
structures (ms
-1
)
Normal structures
(ms
-1
)
Zone 1 54 49
Zone 2 47 42
Zone 3 38 33
Table 2. Basic wind speeds with different averaging time

Zone 1 (ms
-1
) Zone 2 (ms
-1
) Zone 3 (ms
-1
)
N
o
r
m
a
l

s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e

P
o
s
t

d
i
s
a
s
t
e
r

s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e

N
o
r
m
a
l

s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e

P
o
s
t

d
i
s
a
s
t
e
r

s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e

N
o
r
m
a
l

s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e

P
o
s
t

d
i
s
a
s
t
e
r

s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e

CP 3 : Chapter V - Part 2 : 1972
(3 second gust wind speed)
49 54 43 47 33 38
BS 6399 - 2:1997
(Mean hourly wind speed)
27 30 24 26 18 21
BS EN 1991-1-4:2005
(10 minutes mean wind speed)
28 32 25 28 19 22
AS 1170.2 -1989
(3 second gust wind speed)
49 54 43 47 33 38
AS/NZS 1170.2:2002
(3 second gust wind speed)
49 54 43 47 33 38

5 A CASE STUDY FOR COMPARISON

A 183 m high rectangular shaped building modelled and analysed by using SAP 2000 soft-
ware, in order to determine dynamic behaviour of a tall building and the effect of using vari-
ous standard to calculate the wind induced behaviour. The plan dimensions of the building
are 46 m x 30 m (Figure 3(a)). The building is typical column - beam frame structures with
service core of shear walls. Within the service core, all lifts, ducts and toilets are located.
The hard zoning lift system was used for the building to simulate a more actual scenario.
The diaphragm constraint was used for slabs to move all points of the slabs together. Other
than the dead load of the structural members, super imposed and live loads were applied in
the model according to the BS6399: Part 1: 1996. Wind loads on the building were calcu-
lated for all three wind zones as given in design manual and applied with respect to two or-
thogonal directions as joint loads at the column - beam junctions on the wind ward and lee-
ward faces separately as shown in Figure 3 (b).
Wind forces were calculated as provisions given in different wind loading standards by
encountering different factors and methods. For British and Euro codes, wind loads were
calculated according to the division by parts rule. Only for wind zone 1, importance fac-
tor 1.1 used with special terrain height multiplier as given in AS 1170.2:1989, but to calcu-
late wind loads according to the AS/NZS 1170.2:2002 only higher terrain height multiplier
for cyclonic region was used








5













































Figure 3: (a) Finite element 3 D model of 183 m high building (b) Wind loads applied in windward and lee-
ward side of the 183 m high building
6 RETURN PERIOD VS LOAD FACTORS

Various return period values are used for design of different types of buildings that are vul-
nerable for different levels of risk. These levels of risk can varying from country to country
for the same type of building, due to various country specific factors. According to the
(a)
(b)
Building Code of Australia, recommended values of annual probability of exceedence for dif-
ferent types of structures are shown in Table 3.

Table 3: Importance level of buildings and structures (Building Code of Australia, 2007)

To compare the effective increment in return period for the factored wind load combinations
as defined in British standards, arisen from 50 year return period wind, un-factored wind
loads, which were arisen from a higher return period wind, were used. Wind speeds for dif-
ferent return periods were obtained by using probability curve from BS 6399.2:1997 and
wind velocities are shown in Table 4.

Table 4: 3 second gust wind speeds for different return periods, obtained from probability curve for BS
6399.2:1997
Zo
ne
Wind Speed (ms
-1
)

Normal
Structure
Post Disaster
Structure
100 years
return period
500 years
return period
1000 years
return period
1 49 54 51 55 74
2 42 47 44 47 63
3 33 38 34 37 50

All the above wind speeds values were calculated according to the following Equation (1).
The factors in this equation other than the probability factor (S
p
) were assumed to be con-
stant.

Where,
V
b
Basic wind speed in ms-1(10 minutes mean wind speed)
S
a
Altitude factor which is given as
- Site altitude
S
d
Directional factor; if the orientation unknown or ignored S
d
= 1.0
S
s
Seasonal factor; for permanent building S
s
= 1.0
S
p
Probability factor; with standard risk
Therefore, the wind loads, which were arisen from higher wind speeds corresponding to
different return periods, are directly proportional to square of the probability factor
2
p
S .
According to the Table 2, wind speeds for post disaster structures are approximately equal
to the 500-years return period wind speeds values. However, these wind velocities cannot
relate to each other by using load factors unless they yield same load effects with and without
load factors. Therefore, finite element analysis was used to determine the existence of the
Importance levels of buildings and structures
Annual probability of
risk exceedence at ULS Level Building type
1 Building with low degree of hazard 1:200
2 Houses 1:500
3 Building with large number of people 1:1000
4
Essential to post disaster recovery / associated with hazardous
facility
1:2000
(1)
7

relationship between load factor and
2
p
S

values of wind speed with different return pe-
riods.
The results were compared for eight cases such as 1.2G+1.2Q+1.2W, 1.0G+1.4W,
1.4G+1.4W 1.2G+1.2Q+Wu, 1.0G+Wu, 1.4G+Wu and the wind load cases W and Wu alone.
The Wu denotes the ultimate wind speed at different return periods like 500 years and 1000
years return period. Each case was compared for two orthogonal wind directions named as
X and Y. The results were compared with 50 years return period wind speeds for both normal
structures and post disaster structures, together with load factors as defined in British Stan-
dards. The results are displayed in Figure 4 to 7. WOLF1 / WLF is the ratio between 500
years return period wind load without load factors and 50 years wind load with load factors,
calculated for normal structures. WOLF2 / WLF is the ratio between 1000 years return pe-
riod wind load without load factors and 50 years wind load with load factors, calculated for
post disaster structures.

Figure 4: Comparison of results obtained for 1.2G+1.2Q+1.2W load combination with and without load factor
Figure 5: Comparison of results obtained for 1.0G+1.4W load combination with and without load factor
Figure 6: Comparison of results obtained for 1.4G+1.4W load combination with and without load factor
Figure 7: Comparison of results obtained for 1.0G+1.4W load combination with and without load factor

It can be seen from the above graphs that there is close relationship for 50 years return period
wind speeds for normal structures and post disaster structures with 500 years return periods
and 1000 years return periods respectively. The results obtained for load combinations with
load factors and without load factors are approximately the same. The variations of the re-
sults are varying in the order of +5% to -5%. However, the ratios for the wind load cases
are much greater than the predicted values of
2
p
S and the load factor value 1.4. Hence, it
is noticeable that a relationship among
2
p
S values and load factor 1.4 and the actual load ef-
fects on the structural members derived from wind loads are an unlikely event. Therefore,
by using load factors with 50-years return period wind speeds for normal structures and post
disaster structures, a designer can achieve wind speeds with 500 years return period and 1000
years return periods respectively.
According to Table 3 and results shown in Figures 4 - 7, dwellings should be designed to
withstand against wind loads derived from 50-years wind speed for normal structures with
load factors as defined in British standard or for the loads that are directly obtain from 500-
years return period wind speeds, without any load factors. This is applicable for all three
wind zones. For high-rise office buildings, which accommodate large number of people,
designs should be based on wind loads derived from wind speed for post disaster structures
with load factors or 1000 -years return period wind speeds.
7 WIND INDUCED FORCES

Wind loading standards only facilitate to calculate wind pressures at different heights of the
building. Multiplying these values by contributory areas will available the calculation of wind
forces at a particular height. However, it is not the actual force experienced by the structural
members such as beam, columns, etc. due to the various behaviours of a structure like load
sharing among structural members. These actual member forces are necessary to design
structural members against lateral loads such as wind load. Actual member forces can be
obtained by using finite element 3-D model by applying forces derived from different stan-
dards. For the purpose of comparison, the results, obtained are shown as normalised forces.
This is a ratio obtained by dividing the force obtained by using any standard divided by same
kind of force obtained by using CP 3 Chapter V- Part 2:1972 most common practice in Sri
Lanka.
The member forces used for comparison in this study are maximum values of axial forces,
shear forces and bending moments in columns, shear forces and bending moments in beams,
base moment and base shear at the support level and maximum compressive stresses in shear
wall.
Wind induced forces in columns, beams, supports and walls on 183 m high building in all
three zones are shown in Figure 8 to 15. The member forces are calculated for the following
load combinations:

9

1. 1.2(Dead loads) +1.2(Live load) +1.2(Wind load)
2. 1.0 (Dead loads) + 1.4(Wind load)
3. 1.4 (Dead loads) + 1.4(Wind load) and
4. Wind load only.



Figure 8: (a) Column loads (b) beam loads for load combination 1.2G+1.2Q+1.2W (wind flow perpendicular to
46 m side)



Figure 9: (a) Column loads (b) beam loads for load combination 1.0G+1.4W (wind flow perpendicular to 46 m
side)


Figure 10: (a) Column loads (b) beam loads for load combination 1.4G+1.4W (wind flow perpendicular to 60 m
side)
(a)
(b)
(a)
(b)
(a)
(b)
(a)
(b)


Fig-
ure
11:
(a)
Col
umn
load
s (b)
bea
m
loads for wind load only (wind flow perpendicular to 60 m side)














Figure 12: (a) Column loads (b) beam loads for load combination 1.2G+1.2Q+1.2W (wind flow perpendicular to
30m side














Figure 13: (a) Column loads (b) beam loads for load combination 1.0G+1.4W (wind flow perpendicular to 30m
side)







(a)
(b)
(a)
(b)
(a)
(b)
11



Figure 14: (a) Column loads (b) beam loads for load combination 1.4G+1.4W (wind flow perpendicular to 30m
long side)













Figure 15: (a) Column loads (b) beam loads for wind loads only (wind flow perpendicular to 30m long side)

The 183 m tall building is more susceptible to wind loading due to its exceptional height.
However, the governing load can be observed for load combination of 1.2G+1.2Q+1.2W.
The variation in the zone 1 is much larger due to higher wind loads derived from Australian
standards, especially for AS 1170.2:1989, which uses an importance factor. Normalised
bending moment has maximum variation about 35% in column and about 48% for the beams.
However, column maximum axial load variation is in the range of 10%. This value is as
high as 17% when wind load is governing as in load combination 1.0G+1.4W. The bending
moment value is higher as 50% for the column and more than 55% for beam bending mo-
ments for load combination 1.4G+1.4W, higher normalised bending moments can be ob-
tained for column such as value of a 1.8 for wind in both directions in zone 1. However, for
the other zones normalised forces are very close to 1. When wind flow perpendicular to 46
m side, normalised forces for Australian standards are higher as 2.0-2.4 in zone 1. These
higher values are getting lesser from zone 2 to zone 3. When wind flow perpendicular to 30
m side, normalised forces in zone 1 are as high as 2.5








(a)
(b)
(a)
(b)
8 BASE REACTIONS














Figure 16: Base moment and base shear of the 183m building (a) wind flow perpendicular to 46 m side (b) wind
flow perpendicular to 30 m side.

In zone 1, maximum base moment and base shear can be observed for Australian codes, be-
cause of their higher wind speeds resulting from special terrain-height multiplier used in
zone1. These values are almost twice the valued derived from CP 3 Chapter V: Part2:1978.
However, these codes have a difference for the building due to importance factor used by AS
1170.2:1989. In the zone 2 and zone 3, Euro codes yield higher base moment as well as
base shear values. The maximum value 1.6 can be observed in zone 2 for wind flow per-
pendicular to 30 m side for both 48 m and 183 m building. BS 6399.2:1997 has almost
same values for base moment and base shear for 183 m building when wind flow perpendicu-
lar to 46 m long side.

9 MAXIMUM SHELL STRESS IN SHEAR WALLS














Figure 17: Maximum shell stress in shear wall of the 183m building (a) wind flow perpendicular to 46 m side
(b) wind flow perpendicular to 30 m side

Maximum shell stresses can be observed in reinforced concrete shear walls for wind load de-
rived by using AS 170.2:1989 for building. The maximum normalized value is 1.7 in 183 m
high building. For 183 m high building wind loads derived from Euro code exert maximum
shell stress in zone 2 and 3.

(a) (b)
(a) (b)
13

10 DRIFT LIMIT

Wind loading standards and design codes limit the allowable wind drift of the buildings in
order to prevent damage to the cladding, partition and interior finishes, to reduce effect of
motion perceptibility and to limit the PDelta or secondary loading effects (Mendis et al,
2007). Therefore, drift limit is checked for 183 m height building in order to determine the
buildings would exceed the drift index limit or not. The maximum values of deflection in
serviceability limit condition were obtained by wind loads applying to the finite element 3-D
model for all three zones. According to the BS 8110-Part 2: 1985, the maximum allowable
deflection is calculated as h
s
/500, where h
s
is the storey height for single storey building.
Therefore, maximum allowable deflection value calculated for 183 m height building is 366
mm. The average drift index is defined as a ratio between maximum deflections to total
height of the building. The calculated drift index values are shown in Table 5.

Table 5: Drift index for 48m and 183 m height buildings in zone 1, 2 and 3
Wind loading standard Average drift Index
Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3
CP 3 Chapter V - Part 2:1972 1/961 1/1250 1/1785
BS 6399.2:1997 1/935 1/1219 1/1754
AS 1170.2:1989 1/425 1/862 1/1471
AS/NZS 1170.2:2002 1/565 1/1020 1/1562
BS EN 1991-1-4:2005 1/561 1/1010 1/1538

The generally acceptable average drift index limit for the high rise building is 1/500 (Mendis
et al., 2001). By reference to Table 2, only the building model with wind loads derived
from AS 1170.2:1989 in zone 1 exceeds the generally accepted drift limit because of it uses
both importance factor and the cyclonic terrain-height factor. However, rest of the cases sa-
tisfies the drift index requirement. In zone 3, all models have lower drift values, which are
approximately half of the threshold value.
11 ALONG WIND AND CROSS WIND ACCELERATION

Only Australian and Euro code facilitate the calculation of the acceleration at top of the
building. Euro code provides a method to calculate only along wind acceleration, while both
Australian standards provide methods to calculate both along wind and cross-wind accelera-
tions. Australian standards use 5 years return period wind speeds for calculate serviceability
limit state conditions, which is obtained by using probabilistic method proposed in BS
6399.2:1997 as shown in Table 6.

Table 6: Wind speeds used for acceleration calculations
Return period
Wind speed (ms
-1
)
Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3
50 years 54 47 38
5 - years 46 40 32

According to Table 6, it is clear that the service wind speed values of 5 years return period
are closer to wind speed proposed for normal structures in design manual Design building
for high winds-Sri Lanka. Five years return period wind speed values for zones 2 and 3
have good agreement with values proposed in AS/NZS 1170.2:2002. However, the derived
value for zone 1 is higher than the value suggested in Australian standard.

The acceleration values obtained from the calculations are shown in Table 7.
Table 7: Acceleration values at 183 m height in zone 1, 2 and 3
Zone Wind direction Acceleration
type
Acceleration (ms-2)
AS 1170.2:
1989
AS/NZS
1170 .2:
2002
BS EN
1991-1-4:
2005
Zone 1 Normal to 46 m side Along wind 0.155 0.156 0.134
Cross wind 0.239 0.233 -
Normal to 30 m side Along wind 0.109 0.107 0.094
Cross wind 0.227 0.221 -
Zone 2 Normal to 46 m side Along wind 0.076 0.078 0.080
Cross wind 0.173 0.166 -
Normal to 30 m side Along wind 0.051 0.052 0.058
Cross wind 0.168 0.159 -
Zone 3 Normal to 46 m side Along wind 0.034 0.034 0.033
Cross wind 0.118 0.116 -
Normal to 30 m side Along wind 0.024 0.026 0.025
Cross wind 0.106 0.093 -

Euro code yields higher along wind acceleration values than predicted by Australian
standards. However, these along wind acceleration values are much less than across wind
acceleration values due to slenderness of 183 m height building. Most of the cases, these
across-wind acceleration values are exceed the threshold value set for human comfort that is
0.15 ms
-2
. Due to higher wind speed value in zone 1, along wind acceleration values exceed
the threshold value set for human comfort.

12 CONCLUSION

For the governing load case 1.2G + 1.2Q + 1.2W, all wind loading standards gave almost the
same wind load except wind loads for the Australian standards in zone 1. Australian Stan-
dards gave higher wind loads in zone 1 because of the use of higher terrain-height multiplier
and an importance factor for cyclonic region, zone 1. The use of higher terrain height mul-
tiplier in cylconic region can be justified because of higher risk level are required to design
buildings in cyclonic regions. However,the use of importance factor 1.1 may leads to more
conservative wind load design and thus it is recommended not to use it with higher terrain
height multiplier. Euro code also derived higher wind loads due to higher pressure coeffi-
cient values used by the code.
Neither Design manual Design buildings for high winds in Sri Lanka nor CP 3 Chapter
V:1972 is adequate to addressed wind loads design for tall buildings. By considering facts
like available wind speed data, Australian standards are more suitable than other standards.
Between two Australlian standards, newer version AS/NZS 1170.2:2002 is much more con-
15

venient due to the simplicity. Therefore, Australian standard AS/NZS 1170.2:2002 can be
used with the Sri Lankan context until Country produce its own wind loading standard. As
an interim measure, Sri Lanka can prepare a national annex for Euro code , which has ade-
quate flexibility to adjust to country specific factors, which facilitates the adoption to real
condition prevailing in Sri Lanka while adhering to an international wind code.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT

Authors of this paper like to express their gratitude towards National Disaster Management
Center (NDMC), who provided financial support in throughout of this study. They also
wish to thank the Civil Engineering Department of University of Moratuwa for facilitating
their research.
REFERENCE

1. Australian standard for wind loads ; AS 1170.2:1989, Standards Australia

2. Australian and New Zealand standards: Structural design actions Part 2: wind actions; AS/NZS
1170.2:2002, Standards Australia.

3. British Standard: Eurocode 1: Actions on Structures Part1- 4: General actions - wind actions; BS
EN 1991-1-4:2005 , British Standard Institution, London

4. British Standard: Loading for building- Part 2: Code of Practice for wind loads; BS 6399- 2:1997,
British Standard Institution, London

5. Clarke, A.G., Swane, R.A., Schneider, L.M, Shaw, P.J.R., Technical assistance to Sri Lanka on
Cyclone Resistant Construction, Vol 1, Part 1 -4, 1979

6. Cook, N. J., Wind loading, A practical guide to BS 6399-2 Wind loads for buildings, Thomas Telford,
1999

7. CP 3 Chapter V: 1972, Code of Basic data for the design of buildings chapter V. Loading, Part 2
Wind Loads, British Standard Institution, London

8. Karunaratne, S.A., High rise buildings in Colombo (Structural Engineers View), Proceedings of the
international conference on Advances in Continuum Mechanics, Materials Science, Nano science and
Nano technology: Dedicated to Professor Munidasa P. Ranaweera, University of Peradeniya, Sri
Lanka, 2008. pp 291- 302

9. Mendis, P., Ngo, T., Hariots, N., Hira, A., Samali, B., Cheung, J., Wind Loading on Tall buildings,
EJSE special issue; Loading on structures, 2007. pp 41-54

10. Premachandra, W.R.N.R., Study of new wind loading code to be adopting on Sri Lanka, M.Sc Thesis,
Graduate school, Kasetsart University, 2008

11. Report on the Calibration of Euro code for wind loading (BS EN 1991 - 4) and its UK National Annex
against the current UK wind code (BS 6399: Part 2:1997)

12. Wijeratne, M.D., Jayasinghe, M.T.R., Wind loads for high-rise buildings constructed in Sri Lanka,
Transactions Part 2- Institution of Engineers, Sri Lanka, 1998, pp 58-69