buildings

Article
Wind Resistance Performance of Large-Scale Glass Curtain
Walls Supported by a High-Rise Building
Bo Chen 1 , Linfei Jiang 1 , Lu Zhang 1, * , Weiliang Yue 2 , Handi Yang 3 and Hongliang Yu 4

1 School of Civil Engineering, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400044, China

2 China State Decoration Group Co., Ltd., Beijing 100000, China
3 China Zheshang Bank Co., Ltd., Hangzhou 310006, China
4 Zhejiang Jiangnan Project Management Co., Ltd., Hangzhou 310013, China
* Correspondence: louis_zhang96@163.com

Abstract: A large-scale glass curtain wall (LGCW) attached to a high-rise building is analyzed using
the finite element method to investigate the wind resistance performance of the LGCW with and
without the high-rise building. The results show that without the high-rise building, the peak wind-
induced response occurs in the center of each glass panel of the LGCW, and it gradually decreases
away from the center towards the edges of each glass panel. When the high-rise building is included
in the finite element model, the additional wind-induced response on the LGCW caused by the
deformation of the high-rise building is large at the upper and lower glass panel edges, and gradually
decreases toward the panel center. The high-rise building produces great effects on the displacements
of the LGCW but weak effects on the stresses, where the peak displacement of the whole LGCW
is increased by 40.5%. The influences of key structural parameters, including the lateral stiffness
of the high-rise building and the connection stiffness between the large glass curtain wall and the
high-rise building, on the wind resistance performance of the LGCW are further investigated. The
results demonstrate that the smaller the lateral stiffness of the high-rise building is, the greater the
additional responses caused by the deformation of the high-rise building on the LGCW are, and the
greater the total load responses of the LGCW are. The smaller the connection stiffness between the
Citation: Chen, B.; Jiang, L.; LGCW and the high-rise building is, the greater the responses of the independent LGCW are, while
Zhang, L.; Yue, W.; Yang, H.; Yu, H. the additional responses induced by the deformation of the high-rise building on the LGCW are
Wind Resistance Performance of not significant.
Large-Scale Glass Curtain Walls
Supported by a High-Rise Building. Keywords: large-scale glass curtain wall; high-rise building; wind loads; elastic connection;
Buildings 2023, 13, 636.
connection stiffness
https://doi.org/10.3390/
buildings13030636

Academic Editor: Theodore

Stathopoulos 1. Introduction
Glass curtain walls have been widely used in building envelopes due to its aesthetic
Received: 15 December 2022
Revised: 20 February 2023
and utility, especially in high-rise buildings [1]. In order to meet aesthetic needs and the
Accepted: 24 February 2023
functional requirements of day lighting, a single glass panel with an area exceeding the
Published: 27 February 2023
safety size limit of 8 m2 [2] is used more and more widely in LGCWs of modern high-rise
buildings, such as Hong Kong Taikoo Place and the Beijing Taikang Center. Not only
the wind loads on the LGCW produce load effects on glass panels, but the wind-induced
deformation of the supporting main load-bearing structure also imposes additional load
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors. effects on the glass panels. The glass panels need to bear the wind loads on themselves
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. and adapt to the deformation of the high-rise building [3]. Glass is a brittle material and
This article is an open access article the additional response caused by the deformation of the high-rise building easily leads to
distributed under the terms and glass damage. Since the dimensions of the LGCW are huge, the load effects on the LGCW
conditions of the Creative Commons caused by the wind loads directly acting on it and the additional load effects caused by
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// the deformation of the high-rise building are larger than those of the normal size glass
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
curtain walls, which leads to greater security risks of the LGCWs [4]. However, there are
4.0/).

Buildings 2023, 13, 636. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13030636 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/buildings

Buildings 2023, 13, 636 2 of 15

few studies on the wind resistance performance of the LGCW with the additional effects of
the high-rise building.
At present, there are lots of studies on the response characteristics and the failure
modes of single normal size glass panels subjected to wind loads [4–7]. The glass curtain
wall system is composed of glass panels and adhesive constraints such as frame supports,
silicone adhesive, etc., and such connections cannot be oversimplified [8]. Nečasová et al. [9]
and Van Lancker et al. [10] studied the influences of silicone adhesive aging on its strength
and stiffness in different environments. Belis et al. [11] conducted an experimental study
on the stability of the glass rib in the glass curtain wall system. Huveners. [12] and
Antolinc et al. [13] studied the mechanical properties of glass curtain wall systems with
different kinds of adhesives and connections between the support frames and glass panels.
Yuan et al. [14] studied the coupling deformation of glass panels with complex constraints,
which is caused by the interaction between the connections and the supporting components
of the glass curtain wall system. Gonçalves et al. [15] and Ilter et al. [16] conducted wind
resistance tests of the full-scale glass curtain wall system consisting of glass panels, support
frames, and silicone adhesives. In addition to the above studies on the commonly used
frame-supported glass curtain walls, some scholars have also studied the wind resistance
performance of other types of glass curtain walls, such as point-supported, suspension-
supported, all-glass, and hollow double-layer glass curtain wall systems [17–20].
Several scholars have investigated the effects of the deformation of the high-rise
building on the responses of the glass curtains walls, but they have mainly focused on
seismic action rather than wind loads. Huang et al. [3] pointed out that the seismic demand
parameters of glass curtain walls are closely related to the inter-story responses of the high-
rise building, and that the effects of the high-rise building on the mechanical performance
of glass curtain walls should be carefully considered. Lu et al. [21,22] conducted a series of
shaking table tests for different types of high-rise buildings and measured the responses of
the glass curtain walls considering the deformation of the high-rise building. At present,
the effects of the high-rise building on the wind resistance performance of glass curtain
walls are rarely investigated. Yu et al. [19] and Pomaranzi et al. [23] studied the wind
resistance performance of glass curtain walls attached to high-rise buildings through wind
tunnel tests and the finite element (FE) method, respectively, but they did not further
compare the response of glass curtain walls with and without the high-rise building. Ren
et al. [24,25] analyzed the criteria of the falling of glass panels in the glass curtain wall
supported by a high-rise building subjected to wind and seismic loads. But they did not
systematically analyze the influence of the structural and joint parameters on the wind
resistance performance of the glass curtain wall with high-rise buildings.
Based on the above summary, it is found that current studies mainly focus on the wind
resistance performance of normal size glass curtain walls and ignores the effects of the
deformation of the high-rise building on the glass curtain walls. Thus, this study establishes
the FE models of the independent LGCW and the LGCW attached to the high-rise building.
Then, the parameter analysis is conducted to investigate the effects of the deformation of
the high-rise building on the wind resistance performance of the LGCW, varying the lateral
stiffness of the high-rise building and the connection stiffness between the LGCW and the
high-rise building.

2. Wind Resistance Performance of the LGCW without the High-Rise Building

2.1. FE Model and Wind Loads of the LGCW
The bottom of the high-rise office building is a public area, and LGCWs are often used
in order to achieve good light transmission. Thus, to study the wind resistance performance
of the LGCW, a high-rise building with the steel frame–concrete tube hybrid structure in
Zhejiang Province, China is selected as an example. The building has 54 floors on the
ground, with a total height of 249.9 m and each floor height is 4.5 m. The height of the
central hall at the building’s bottom is 18 m, and a 15-meter-tall LGCW is utilized around
Buildings 2023, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 16
Buildings 2023, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 16

structure in Zhejiang Province, China is selected as an example. The building has 54 floors
Buildings 2023, 13, 636 on the ground,
structure with aProvince,
in Zhejiang total height of 249.9
China m and
is selected aseach floor height
an example. The is 4.5 m. The
building 3 ofof
height
has 54 floors 15
thethe
on central
ground,hallwith
at the building’s
a total bottom
height of 249.9 is
m 18
andm,each
andfloor
a 15-meter-tall
height is 4.5LGCW
m. Theisheight
utilized
of
around
the thehall
central central
at thehall. The typical
building’s bottomstory
is 18and
m, elevation layout of LGCW
and a 15-meter-tall the building, the
is utilized
coordinate
around the definition,
the central central
hall. The and
hall. the story
The
typical wind direction
typical
andstory settings
and
elevation are shown
elevation
layout in Figure
of layout of the 1.
the building, building,
the the
coordinate
coordinate
definition,definition,
and the windanddirection
the windsettings
directionaresettings
shown are shown1.in Figure 1.
in Figure

90°
90° X
X

Y
21# Y 1#
21# 1#
0° LGCW
0° LGCW
(a) Typical story (b) Elevation layout
(a) Typical story (b) Elevation layout
Figure 1. The structural layout and wind direction.
Figure
Figure1.1.The
Thestructural
structurallayout
layoutand
andwind
winddirection.
direction.
A simplified FE model of the independent LGCW is established in ANSYS according
AAstructural
to the simplifieddesign
simplified FEmodel
FE model ofofthe
theindependent
parameters. independent
SHELL 63LGCW LGCW
is usedisistoestablished ininANSYS
simulate glass
established ANSYS
panels, according
silicone
according
totothe
thestructural
structural
adhesive, designparameters.
and columns,
design parameters.
and BEAM 44 SHELL
is used
SHELL 6363to
isissimulate
usedtotosimulate
used simulate
crossbeams. glass
glass Thepanels, silicone
independent
panels, silicone
adhesive,
LGCW
adhesive, andcolumns,
employs
and columns,
the hollowandBEAM
and BEAM44
double-layer44isisused
used
glasstoto simulate
panels,
simulate crossbeams.
thecrossbeams.
inner and outerTheindependent
The independent
glass panels
LGCWemploys
LGCW
(SHELL employs thehollow
63) are the hollowwith
connected double-layer
double-layer
the silicone glass
glass panels,the
panels,
adhesive theinner
(SHELL inner and
and
63), outer
outer
and glass
theglass
inner panels
panels
glass
(SHELL
panels are
(SHELL 63) are connected
63)connected with
to steel
are connected with the silicone
columns adhesive
(SHELL
the silicone (SHELL
63) with
adhesive 63), and
the silicone
(SHELL the inner
adhesive.
63), and glass
the inner panels
Figure
glass2
are connected
displays
panels arethe to steel to
connection
connected columns
joint (SHELL
steelofcolumns 63)
the independent with the
(SHELL LGCW
63) silicone
withandtheadhesive.
the Figure
corresponding
silicone 2 displays
adhesive. Figurethe
simplified 2
connection
FE model.
displays the joint of the independent
connection LGCW andLGCW
joint of the independent the corresponding simplified FE
and the corresponding model.
simplified
FE model.

Steel column
Steel column
Silicone adhesive
Silicone adhesive
Inner glass panel
Inner glass panel

Outer glass panel

(a) Actual connection joint
Outer glass(b) FE model of the connection joint
panel
(a) Actual connection joint (b) FE model of the connection joint
Figure2.
Figure Theconnection
2. The connectionjoint
jointof
ofthe
theLGCW.
LGCW.
Figure 2. The connection joint of the LGCW.
In the
In the actual
actual structure,
structure,the thetoptopand
and bottom
bottomof the LGCW
of the LGCW are connected to thetocross-
are connected the
beams (BEAM 44) with the silicone adhesive, the crossbeams are connected to steel columns
crossbeams (BEAMstructure,
In the actual 44) with thethe silicone
top andadhesive,
bottom the crossbeams
of the LGCW are are connected to to steel
the
through bolts, and the steel columns are connected to the high-rise building through bolts.
columns through
crossbeams (BEAMbolts, andthe
44) with thesilicone
steel columns
adhesive, arethe
connected
crossbeams to the high-rise building
are connected to steel
In the FE model of the independent LGCW, the silicone adhesive and crossbeams are
through through
columns bolts. In bolts,
the FEand model of thecolumns
the steel independent LGCW, the
are connected silicone
to the adhesive
high-rise and
building
established at the top and bottom edges of the inner and outer glass panels, and the nodes
crossbeams
through areIn
bolts. established at the top
the FE model andindependent
of the bottom edgesLGCW,
of the inner and outer
the silicone glass panels,
adhesive and
of the silicone adhesive are coupled with the nodes of the crossbeams to simulate the elastic
and the nodes
crossbeams of the silicone
are established adhesive
at the top andare coupled
bottom edges with theinner
of the nodes andof outer
the crossbeams
glass panels, to
constraints between the crossbeams and glass panels, as shown in Figure 3. The crossbeams
simulate
and the elastic
the nodes of theconstraints between
silicone adhesive arethe crossbeams
coupled with theandnodes
glassofpanels, as shown to
the crossbeams in
and columns use the same node at the intersection points. The top and bottom of the steel
Figure 3. the
simulate Theelastic
crossbeams and columns
constraints betweenuse thethe same nodeand
crossbeams at the intersection
glass panels, aspoints.
shownThe in
columns are sliding and fixed hinges, respectively, where the rotation degrees are restrained
top and3.bottom
Figure of the steel
The crossbeams columns
and columns areuse
sliding and fixed
the same nodehinges, respectively,
at the intersection whereThe
points. the
for each hinge. The dimensions of the independent LGCW are 15 m in height, 3 m in width
rotation
top degreesofare
and bottom therestrained for each
steel columns are hinge.
slidingThe
anddimensions
fixed hinges, of the independent
respectively, LGCW
where the
between two columns, and 20 mm in thickness for both outer and inner glass panels.
rotation degrees are restrained for each hinge. The dimensions of the independent LGCW
The thicknesses of the silicone adhesives are 27 mm between outer and inner glass panels,
37 mm between inner glass panels and columns, and 20 mm between inner glass panels and
crossbeams. The dimensions of the rectangular columns are 580 mm × 130 mm × 20 mm.
 are 15 m in height, 3 m in width between two columns, and 20 mm in thickness for both
outer and inner glass panels. The thicknesses of the silicone adhesives are 27 mm between
Buildings 2023, 13, 636 outer and inner glass panels, 37 mm between inner glass panels and columns, and 20 4mm of 15
between inner glass panels and crossbeams. The dimensions of the rectangular columns
are 580 mm × 130 mm × 20 mm. Table 1 shows the material parameters of the glass, silicone
adhesive, and the steel. The FE model of the independent LGCW with a total span of 63
Table 1 shows the material parameters of the glass, silicone adhesive, and the steel. The FE
m is established, including 21 sets of inner and outer glass panels, as shown in Figure 3.
model of the independent LGCW with a total span of 63 m is established, including 21 sets
The meshing independent check of the model has been conducted, and when the grid
of inner and outer glass panels, as shown in Figure 3. The meshing independent check of
number of glass
the model panels
has been exceeds 2520,
conducted, the change
and when of number
the grid the peakofout-of-plane
glass panelsdisplacement
exceeds 2520,
(the normal direction of each glass panel) and of the peak von
the change of the peak out-of-plane displacement (the normal directionMises stress
of eachofglass
the glass
panel)
panels are less than 1%. Thus, to ensure the calculation accuracy and efficiency,
and of the peak von Mises stress of the glass panels are less than 1%. Thus, to ensurethis study
the
adopts the glass panel model of 2520 grids.
calculation accuracy and efficiency, this study adopts the glass panel model of 2520 grids.

Glass panel 1# Column Glass panel 11# Glass panel 21#

Crossbeam

TheFE
Figure3.3.The
Figure FEmodel
modelofofthe
theLGCW.
LGCW.

Table
Table1.1.Material
Materialparameters.
parameters.

Material
Material ElasticModulus
Elastic Modulus (N/mm
(N/mm2 ) 2) Poisson’s
Poisson’s Ratio Mass
Ratio Mass Density (kN/m
Density (kN/m3 )3)

Glass
Glass 72,000
72,000 0.20.2 25.6
25.6
Silicone adhesive
Silicone 2 0.499 15
2 0.499 15
adhesive
Steel 200,000 0.3 78
Steel 200,000 0.3 78
The independent LGCW belongs to the building envelopes, and the wind loads on
envelopes are calculatedLGCW
The independent according to thetoLoad
belongs Code for envelopes,
the building the Design of andBuilding
the wind Structures
loads on
GB50009-2012
envelopes are [26], as shown
calculated in Equation
according (1). ItCode
to the Load is assumed
for the that theof
Design wind loadsStructures
Building on each
glass panel of all
GB50009-2012 21 as
[26], setsshown
in theinLGCW are (1).
Equation uniform, and the middle
It is assumed that theheight 7.5 mon
wind loads of each
the
LGCW is regarded
glass panel as sets
of all 21 the reference
in the LGCWheight.
are uniform, and the middle height 7.5 m of the
LGCW is regarded as the reference height.
Wk =  gz sl z w0 (1)
Wk = β gz µsl µz w0 (1)
where  gz is the gust loading factor at height Z.  sl is the local shape coefficient of wind
where β gz is the gust loading factor at height Z. µsl is the local shape coefficient of wind
loads, which are usually determined by wind tunnel tests. The experimental model of the
loads, which are usually determined by wind tunnel tests. The experimental model of the
LGCW is regarded as an ideal closed structure and the inner pressure is ignored during
LGCW is regarded as an ideal closed structure and the inner pressure is ignored during the
the tests.  z is the height coefficient of wind pressures at the reference height. w0 is the
tests. µz is the height coefficient of wind pressures at the reference height. w0 is the basic
basic
windwind pressure
pressure with with a 50-year
a 50-year return
return period,
period, and w andis 0.45
w0 iskN/m
0.45 kN/m 2 in this study.
2 in this study.
0
For
For the hollow double-layer glass panels, the wind loads on the LGCWdirectly
the hollow double-layer glass panels, the wind loads on the LGCW directlyact
act
on
on the outer glass panels firstly and then transfer to the inner glass panels. Theinner
the outer glass panels firstly and then transfer to the inner glass panels. The innerand
and
outer
outerglass
glasspanels
panelsinteract
interactwith
witheach
eachother
otherandandbear
bearwindwindloads
loadstogether.
together.According
Accordingtotothe the
Technical
TechnicalCode
CodeforforApplication
Applicationof ofArchitectural
ArchitecturalGlass GlassJGJ/113-2015
JGJ/113-2015[2], [2],the
thewind
windloads
loadson on
the
thehollow
hollowdouble-layer
double-layerglassglasspanels
panelsare
aredirectly
directlydistributed
distributedtotothetheinner
innerandandouter
outerglass
glass
panels,
panels,asasshown
shownininFigure
Figure4,4,and
andthe
thewind
windloads
loadsdistribution
distributionisiscalculated
calculatedby: by:
3
× t13 t1
Wk1k1= 1.1 Wk 3 k 33
W = 1.1 W 3
(2)
(2)
t1 + tt12 + t2
and
t32
Wk2 = 1.0 × Wk (3)
t31 + t32
where Wk1 and Wk2 are the wind loads on the outer and inner glass panels, respectively. Wk
is the standard value of wind loads calculated by Equation (1). t1 and t2 are the thickness
of the outer and inner glass panels, respectively.
 Wk 2 = 1.0  Wk 2
and t13 + t23
t23 (3)
where Wk 1 and Wk 2 W
are the wind = 1.0  W
loadsk on
t13 +thet23 outer and inner glass panels, respec
k2

Buildings 2023, 13, 636

Wk is the standard value of wind loads calculated by Equation (1). 5t1of 15 and t 2
where Wk 1 and Wk 2 are the wind loads on the outer and inner glass panels, respectively.
thickness of the outer and inner glass panels, respectively.
W is the standard value of wind loads calculated by Equation (1). t and t are the
k 1 2

thickness of the outer and inner glass panels, respectively.

Wk
Wk

WWk1k1 WW
k2 k2

t1 t2
t1 t2
Figure 4. Wind load distribution of the hollow double-layer glass panel.
4.Wind
Figure 4.
Figure Windload distribution
load of theof
distribution hollow double-layer
the hollow glass panel.glass panel.
double-layer
The pressure measurements of the target high-rise building were conducted in a
The pressure measurements of the target high-rise building were conducted in a
boundary wind tunnel,
The pressure as shown in Figure
measurements 5. Since
of the targetthere are few surrounding buildings
boundary wind tunnel, as shown in Figure 5. Since therehigh-rise
are few surroundingbuilding buildings
were conducte
around the target high-rise building in most wind directions, the power law exponent of
boundary
around the windtarget tunnel,
high-rise as showninin
building Figure
most wind5. Since there
directions, are few
the power lawsurrounding
exponent bu
the
of mean
the mean wind
wind speed profile
speed is
profile determined
is determined to 0.15
to conservatively.
0.15 conservatively. The scale
The ratio
scale is 1:320
ratio is
around the target high-rise building in360°,
mostwith wind directions, the◦ power law expo
and the
1:320 and wind
the winddirections range
directions from
range from0° to
0◦ to 360◦ , with anan interval 15 . µslsl of
intervalofof15°. of each
each
the meantap
pressure
pressure
wind
tap speed
at each
at each windprofile
wind direction
direction
is were
determined
were obtained. to
obtained. The 0.15 conservatively.
The µslsl atatthetheheight 7.5The
heightofof7.5 m mof ofscale
each ratio i
each
and
glassthe
glass panelwind
panel at directions
attypical
typical wind range are
wind directions
directions from
areshown0° to
shown in 360°,2.2.with
inTable
Table an interval
ItItisisworth
worth noting
notingthat,
that, 15°.  sl o
ofsince
since
there are interference
there are tap
pressure interference effects
at eacheffects of
wind of surrounding
surrounding
direction buildings,
were buildings, as
obtained. shownThe 
as shown in Figure 5,
inslFigure
at thethethesl  slthe
5, height
µ of of 7.5 m
of
glass
the panels
glass #1–3 #1–3
panels are negative,
are whichwhich
negative, meansmeans
that the
thatwind
the loads
wind are
loadssuctioning
are and much
suctioning and
glass panel
different
at typical
from those
wind directions are shown in Table 2. It is worth noting tha
much different fromon an isolated
those building.
on an isolated building.
there are interference effects of surrounding buildings, as shown in Figure 5, the
the glass panels #1–3 are negative, which means that the wind loads are suctioni
much different from those on an isolated building.

Figure5.5.Pressure
Figure Pressuremeasurements
measurementsofofthe
theLGCW.
LGCW.

Table2.2.µ of of the LGCW.

Table sl sl the LGCW.

Number
Number of Glass Panels of Glass Panels
Wind Direction Wind Direction
#1 #2–3 #4–5 #6–8 #9–13 #14–16 #17–18 #19–20 #21
#1 #2–3 #4–5 #6–8 #9–13 #14–16 #17–18 #19–20 #21
Figure 5. 0°
Pressure −0.62 −0.21
measurements 0.32
of the 0.74
LGCW. 0.9 1.05 1.05 1 0.98
0◦ −0.62 −0.21 0.32 0.74 0.9 1.05 1.05 1 0.98
90◦ −0.49 −0.46
90° −0.34
−0.49 −0.46
−0.34
−0.34
−0.33
−0.34 −0.33
−0.29
−0.29
−0.19
−0.19
−0.1
−0.1 −0.24
−0.24
180◦ −0.44 −0.42 180° −0.41 −0.44−0.42
Table 2.  sl of the LGCW.
−0.42 −0.41
−0.42 −0.42−0.41−0.42 −0.41
−0.41 −0.41
−0.41−0.41 −0.41
−0.41
270◦ −0.5 −0.48 −0.44 −0.35 −0.41 −0.47 −0.45 −0.44 −0.52

Number of Glass Panels

Wind
2.2. Direction
Wind Resistance Performance of the LGCW
#1 #2–3 #4–5 #6–8 #9–13 #14–16 #17–18 #19–20
The static analysis of the independent LGCW subjected to wind loads at the wind
0° −0.62 −0.21 0.32 0.74 0.9 1.05 1.05
directions of 0◦ , 90◦ , 180◦ , and 270◦ is conducted. Figure 6 displays the out-of-plane
1
90° and the −0.49
displacements von Mises−0.46
stresses−0.34 −0.34 −0.33
of the independent LGCW −0.29
at the wind−0.19
directions −0.1
180° −0.44 −0.42 −0.41 −0.42 −0.42 −0.41 −0.41 −0.41
 location with slight differences. The response distribution of each inner glass panel at 90°
is similar to that at 0°, and the response magnitudes reach the maximum at the center of
each glass panel and gradually decrease away from the center towards the panel edges.
Moreover, the response magnitudes of each glass panel at 90° are about half of those at 0°.
Buildings 2023, 13, 636 6 of 15
Table 3 displays the peak and mean values of the out-of-plane displacements and von
Mises stresses of the whole LGCW at 0°. The mean and peak responses of outer glass
panels, including the of 0◦out-of-plane displacements
and 90◦ . It can be andthe
seen in Figure 6 that von Mises
stresses and stresses,
deformation are 1.1 times
in magnitude
higher than those ofreach
the inner glass panels,
the maximum andofsuch
at the center multiple
each glass panel relationships of theaway
and gradually decrease response
from
the center towards the panel edges. The response magnitudes of the glass panels #1–5
are the same as the atproportion of the loads acting on the outer and inner glass panels, as
the edge of the LGCW are different from those of other glass panels because there are
shown in Equationsinterference
(2) and (3).
effectsSince the high-rise
of surrounding building
buildings. isbedirectly
It can also concludedconnected
from Figure to the
6 that
inner glass panels, the following discussion focuses on the inner glass panels of the
the response distributions of the inner and outer glass panels are similar; both the peak
out-of-plane displacements and the von Mises stresses occur at the same location with
LGCW. ◦
slight differences. The response distribution of each inner glass panel at 90 is similar to
that at 0◦ , and the response magnitudes reach the maximum at the center of each glass
Table 3. Statistical response
panel andvalues of glass
gradually panels
decrease awayat 0°. the center towards the panel edges. Moreover, the
from
response magnitudes of each glass panel at 90◦ are about half of those at 0◦ . Table 3 displays
Typethe peak and mean values of Outer Inner and vonOuter/Inner
the out-of-plane displacements Mises stresses of
the whole LGCW at 0◦ . The mean and peak responses of outer glass panels, including
Out-of-plane Peak 12.6 11.4 1.1
the out-of-plane displacements and von Mises stresses, are 1.1 times higher than those of
displacements (mm) Mean
the inner glass 4.38
panels, and such multiple relationships3.92
of the response are the1.1
same as the
Von Mises stresses proportion of
Peakthe loads acting on
6.47the outer and inner glass
5.78 panels, as shown in Equations
1.1
(2) and (3). Since the high-rise building is directly connected to the inner glass panels, the
(MPa) following Mean
discussion focuses on2.94
the inner glass panels2.64
of the LGCW. 1.1

Outer Inner

0.0126 0.0083 0.004 0.0003 0.0046 0.0114 0.0075 0.0036 0.0002 0.0041
0.0105 0.0062 0.0019 0.0024 0.0067 0.0094 0.0056 0.0017 0.0022 0.006

(a) Out-of-plane displacements at 0°(m)

Outer Inner

36878.6 1.47×106 2.9× 106 4.33×106 5.75×106 22713.4

22713.4 1.3× 1066
1.3× 10 2.58× 106 6
2.58× 10 6
3.86×1010
3.86×
6
5.14× 106 6
5.14× 10
751640 2.18×106 3.61×106 5.04×106 6.47×106 662911
662911 1.94× 1066
1.94× 10 3.22× 106 6
3.22× 10 4.5× 1066
4.5× 10 5.78× 106 6
5.78× 10

(b) Von Mises stresses at 0°(Pa)

Inner Inner

0.00013 0.00102 0.00216 0.0033 0.00445 9610.04 619024 1.23×106 1.84×106 2.45×106
0.00045 0.00159 0.00273 0.00387 0.00502 314317 923732 1.53×106 2.14×106 2.75×106

(c) Out-of-plane displacements at 90°(m) (d) Von Mises stresses at 90°(Pa)

Figure 6. Response distribution of thedistribution

Figure 6. Response independent LGCW at LGCW
of the independent 0◦ and 90◦ .
0° andat 90°.
Table 3. Statistical response values of glass panels at 0◦ .
Figure 7 displays the peak out-of-plane displacements and von Mises stresses of each
inner glass panel, and the ratios ofType
them to the allowableOuter Inner
limits of glass Outer/Inner
displacement and
Out-of-plane Peak 12.6 11.4 1.1
displacements (mm) Mean 4.38 3.92 1.1
Peak 6.47 5.78 1.1
Von Mises stresses (MPa)
Mean 2.94 2.64 1.1

Figure 7 displays the peak out-of-plane displacements and von Mises stresses of each
inner glass panel, and the ratios of them to the allowable limits of glass displacement and
stress, 50 mm and 40 MPa, respectively [2]. It can be found that the peak out-of-plane
displacement of each inner glass panel appears at the wind direction of 0◦ , except the inner
glass panels #1–5. Due to the interference effects of surrounding buildings on the inner
 displacement of each inner glass panel appears at the wind direction of 0°, except the inner
glass panels #1–5. Due to the interference effects of surrounding buildings on the inner
glass panels #1–5, the direction of the out-of-plane displacements for the inner glass panels
#1–5
Buildings 2023, is opposite to that of other panels. The maximum displacement ratio is about 22%
13, 636 7 of 15at

the wind direction of 0°. Besides, the peak von Mises stress distribution of the LGCW at
each wind direction is similar to the out-of-plane displacement distribution, and the
glass panels #1–5, the direction of the out-of-plane displacements for the inner glass panels
maximum von Mises #1–5stress ratio
is opposite to is about
that 15%
of other at the
panels. The wind
maximum direction of 0°.ratio
displacement The responses
is about 22%
of glass panels #6–21 at theatwind
0° are
direction ◦
significantly greater
of 0 . Besides, the peak than thosestress
von Mises at other windofdirections,
distribution the LGCW
which makes the wind at each wind direction
direction of 0°isbe similar to the unfavorable
the most out-of-plane displacement
one. Besides,distribution, and the
the responses
maximum von Mises stress ratio is about 15% at the wind direction of 0◦ . The responses
of glass panels #1–5ofare glassaffected seriously
panels #6–21 at 0◦ areby the interference
significantly greater than effects
those atatother
270°,wind
anddirections,
the glass
panels #6–21 have which the minimum
makes the wind magnitudes
direction of 0of◦ bethe
the out-of-plane
most unfavorabledisplacements and von
one. Besides, the responses
of glass panels #1–5 are affected seriously by the interference effects at 270 ◦ , and the glass
Mises stresses at the wind direction of 90°. Since the responses of the inner glass panels
panels #6–21 have the minimum magnitudes of the out-of-plane displacements and von
change severely with Misesthe number
stresses at theof glass
wind panels
direction at◦0°,
of 90 where
. Since the response
the responses magnitudes
of the inner glass panelsof
panel #16 are six times change higher thanthethat
severely with of panel
number of glass #3,
panelstheat 0LGCW
◦ is separated
, where the into three
response magnitudes of
panel #16 are six times
zones according to the responses at 0° in order higher than that of panel #3, the LGCW is separated
to facilitate the response comparison with into three zones
according to the responses at 0◦ in order to facilitate the response comparison with and
and without the main withoutload-bearing structures.
the main load-bearing structures. Zone
Zone 1 includes
1 includes panelspanels #1–6,
#1–6, Zone Zone 2
2 includes
includes panels #7–13, panelsand Zone
#7–13, 3 includes
and Zone 3 includespanels #14–21.
panels #14–21.

Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone1 Zone2 Zone3

10 20 8 20
0° 90° 180° 270° 0° 90° 180° 270°
Out-of-plane displacement (mm)

5 10
Von-mises stress (MPa)
Displacement ratio (%)

6 15

Stress ratio (%)

0 0
4 10
−5 −10

2 5
−10 −20

−15 −30 0 0
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21
Number of glass panels Number of glass panels
(a) Peak out-of-plane displacement (b) Peak von Mises stress

Figure 7. Peak responses

Figureof
7. inner glass panels.
Peak responses of inner glass panels.

3. Wind Resistance Performance of the LGCW with the High-Rise Building

3. Wind Resistance3.1.Performance of thewith
FE Model of the LGCW LGCW withBuilding
the High-Rise the High-Rise Building
Basedwith
3.1. FE Model of the LGCW on the
theFEHigh-Rise
model of the independent LGCW in Section 2.1, the FE model of
Building
the LGCW with the high-rise building is established, as shown in Figure 8a. To simplify
Based on the FEthe model of theconnection
actual complex independent betweenLGCW in Section
the LGCW 2.1, thebuilding,
and the high-rise FE model of the
coupling
LGCW with the high-rise building is established, as shown in Figure 8a. To simplifythe
constraints are utilized to connect the columns of the LGCW with the floor slabs of the
high-rise building, where the displacement degrees of X, Y, and Z are coupled. It should
actual complex connection
be mentionedbetween the LGCW
that the silicone and thethehigh-rise
adhesive between LGCW and building,
the crossbeams coupling
helps
constraints are utilized to connect the columns of the LGCW with the floor
the LGCW to easily adapt to the deformation caused by the building, while crossbeamsslabs of the
high-rise building,and columns
where the are connected by joint
displacement nodes of
degrees andX,the
Y,latter
andisZcoupled to floor slabs.
are coupled. The
It should
interaction effects between the high-rise building and the LGCW are transmitted through
be mentioned that the siliconeconstraints.
the coupling adhesive Modalbetween the isLGCW
analysis carried and the
out for thecrossbeams
overall modelhelps
and the the
LGCW to easily adaptformertonine
thevibration
deformation caused
modes are shown by the building,
in Figure whiletwo
8b–j. The former crossbeams
modes (b–c) are and
translational and the third mode (d) is torsional. The
columns are connected by joint nodes and the latter is coupled to floor slabs. Theformer six modes are dominated
by the vibration of the high-rise building, and the LGCW has almost no vibration. In the
interaction effects between
eighth and the
ninthhigh-rise
modes, the building and the
high-rise building andLGCW
the LGCW are transmitted
vibrate together. through
the coupling constraints. Modal analysis is carried out for the overall model and the
former nine vibration modes are shown in Figure 8b–j. The former two modes (b–c) are
translational and the third mode (d) is torsional. The former six modes are dominated by
the vibration of the high-rise building, and the LGCW has almost no vibration. In the
eighth and ninth modes, the high-rise building and the LGCW vibrate together.
Buildings 2023, 13, 636 8 of 15
Buildings 2023, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 16

Figure 8. FE model and former nine modes of the LGCW with the high-rise building.
Figure 8. FE model and former nine modes of the LGCW with the high-rise building.

3.2.3.2.
WindWind ResistancePerformance
Resistance Performance of
of the
theLGCW
LGCWAttached
Attachedto the High-Rise
to the Building
High-Rise Building
According to Section 2.2, the most unfavorable wind direction of the independent
According to Section 2.2, the most unfavorable wind direction of the independent
LGCW is◦0°. Meanwhile, the minimum wind-induced responses of the LGCW appear at
LGCW is 0 . Meanwhile, the minimum wind-induced responses of the LGCW appear at
the wind direction of 90°, the cross-wind vibration of the high-rise building is obvious,
theand
wind direction of 90◦ , the cross-wind vibration of the high-rise building is obvious, and
the deformation of the high-rise building may produce a larger increase of the
theresponses
deformation of LGCW
of the the high-rise
at this building may produce
wind direction a larger
than at other wind increase of the
directions. responses
Thus, the of
thewind-induced
LGCW at this wind direction than at other wind directions. Thus, the wind-induced
responses of the LGCW with the high-rise building subjected to wind loads
responses ◦ and 90◦
at 0° andof90°
theare
LGCW with
analyzed, the high-rise
including building
three cases: subjected
(a) only to wind
wind loads loads
on the at 0and
LGCW,
arethese
analyzed, including
wind loads are thethree cases:
same as those(a) only wind
in Section loads
2.1; (b) onlyon theloads
wind LGCW,
on theand these wind
high-rise
loads are thewhere
building, samethe as equivalent
those in Section 2.1; (b)
static wind only
loads wind loads
(ESWLs) on thebyhigh-rise
determined building,
wind tunnel
tests are acting on the high-rise building, including down-wind and cross-wind
where the equivalent static wind loads (ESWLs) determined by wind tunnel tests are acting ESWLs;
on (c)
thewind loads on
high-rise both theincluding
building, LGCW anddown-wind
the high-rise and
building, where the
cross-wind wind loads
ESWLs; from loads
(c) wind
the former two cases are used.
on both the LGCW and the high-rise building, where the wind loads from the former two
cases areThe out-of-plane displacements and von Mises stresses of the LGCW at 0° and 90°
used.
are shown in Figures 9 and 10, respectively. In case (a), the distributions of the ◦out-of- ◦
The out-of-plane displacements and von Mises stresses of the LGCW at 0 and 90 are
plane displacements and von Mises stresses of the LGCW with the high-rise building are
shown in Figures 9 and 10, respectively. In case (a), the distributions of the out-of-plane
displacements and von Mises stresses of the LGCW with the high-rise building are similar
to those without the high-rise building, and the responses reach the maximum at the
center of each glass panel and gradually decrease away from the center towards the glass
panel edges. In case (b), the distributions of the out-of-plane displacements and von Mises
 Buildings 2023, 13, 636 9 of 15

stresses of the LGCW are significantly different from those of case (a). Since the column
top of the LGCW is connected to the second floor slab of the high-rise building, and the
column bottom is connected to the first floor slab, the deformation of the high-rise building
transmits firstly to the top edge of the LGCW, which makes the out-of-plane displacements
and von Mises stresses of the LGCW decrease away from the top edge towards the bottom
edge of the glass panels. It is worth to mention that the stress magnitudes of the glass9panels
Buildings 2023, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW of 16
are small, less than 1 MPa, and this may be attributed to the elastic connections between the
LGCW and the high-rise building, which release the in-plane and out-of-plane constraints
on the LGCW, and decrease the influence of the high-rise building on the LGCW. In case
similar
(c), theto those without
magnitudes of thetheout-of-plane
high-rise building, and theofresponses
displacements the LGCW reach the maximum
increase significantly at
the center oftoeach
compared thoseglass panel
of case (a),and
whilegradually
the vondecrease away seldomly
Mises stresses from the center
change. towards the
The reason
glass panel
is that the edges.
additionalIn case (b), the
stresses ofdistributions
the LGCW caused of the out-of-plane
by the deformationdisplacements
of the and von
high-rise
Mises
buildingstresses
in case of(b)
theare
LGCW are significantly
small and relatively large different from those
values appear on theoftopcase (a).and
edge Since the
bottom
column top of the LGCW is connected to the second floor slab
edge of the glass panels, but the von Mises stresses of the LGCW in case (a) reach their of the high-rise building,
and the column
maximum bottom
at the center is of
connected
each glass to the first and
panel, floorthe
slab, the deformation
superposition of theof the
twohigh-rise
kinds of
building transmitsthe
stresses changes firstly
stresstodistribution
the top edge of of
thethe LGCW,
LGCW whichThe
slightly. makes the out-of-plane
response distribution
displacements
and peak responses and von of theMises
whole stresses
LGCWofatthe 90◦ LGCW decrease
are similar to those at 0◦from
away , and the top edge
the additional
towards
out-of-planethe bottom edge of
displacements the LGCW
of the glass panels.
inducedItbyisthe worth to mention
high-rise buildingthat the stress
are large, while
magnitudes
the additional of the
vonglass
Misespanels
stressesareare
small,
small.less than 1 MPa, and this may be attributed to
the elastic
Figure connections
11 displaysbetween
the peakthe LGCW of
response and theglass
each high-rise at 0◦ andwhich
panelbuilding, 90◦ , and
release the
the peak
response of each glass panel appears at different locations
in-plane and out-of-plane constraints on the LGCW, and decrease the influence of the of each glass panel. In case
(b), the peak
high-rise additional
building on the out-of-plane
LGCW. Indisplacements
case (c), the and von Misesofstresses
magnitudes induced by
the out-of-plane
the high-rise building
displacements of the LGCW of each glass panel
increase are almost
significantly the same,
compared and the
to those magnitudes
of case (a), whileofthe the
peakMises
von out-of-plane
stresses displacements
seldomly change. at 0◦The
are reason
larger than
is thatthose 90◦ . In case
the atadditional (c), the
stresses of peak
the
out-of-plane
LGCW causeddisplacements
by the deformation of glassof panels increase significantly
the high-rise building in case in comparison
(b) are small to those
and
of case (a), and the peak out-of-plane displacement of the whole LGCW at 0 ◦ (the peak
relatively large values appear on the top edge and bottom edge of the glass panels, but
out-of-plane
the von Mises displacement
stresses of the of LGCWglassinpanel
case #18) increases
(a) reach from 11.1 mm
their maximum at thetocenter
15.6 mm,of eachi.e.,
by 40.5%, while the peak out-of-plane displacement of the whole LGCW at 90 ◦ (the peak
glass panel, and the superposition of the two kinds of stresses changes the stress
out-of-planeofdisplacement
distribution the LGCW slightly. of glassThe panel #3) increases
response from and
distribution 4.5 mmpeaktoresponses
7.1 mm, of i.e.,the
by
57.4%. LGCW
whole Since theatpeak 90° additional
are similar vontoMises
thosestresses
at 0°,ofandthe whole 0◦ and 90◦ in
LGCW at out-of-plane
the additional
case (b) are very
displacements of small,
the LGCWthe peak von Mises
induced by stresses of the whole
the high-rise building LGCW changes
are large, a little
while thein
comparison to case (a).
additional von Mises stresses are small.

Out-of-plane displacement (m) Von Mises stress (pa)

0.0111 0.0074 0.0037 0.001 0.0036 25378.4 1.31×106 2.59×106 3.87×106 5.15×106
0.0093 0.0056 0.0019 0.0018 0.0055 666212 1.95×106 3.23×106 4.51×106 5.79×106

(a) Response of the LGCW induced by the wind loads on the LGCW
Out-of-plane displacement (m) Von Mises stress (pa)

0.007 0.0056 0.0043 0.0029 0.0016 4741.63 33537.3 62333.1 91128.8 119925
0.0063 0.005 0.0036 0.0023 0.0009 19139.5 47935.2 76730.9 105527 134322

(b) Response of the LGCW induced by the wind loads on the main structure
Out-of-plane displacement (m) Von Mises stress (pa)

0.0156 0.0116 0.0076 0.0035 0.005 28465.6 1.31×106 2.59×106 3.87×106 5.15×106
0.0136 0.0096 0.0055 0.0015 0.0026 668915 1.95×106 3.23×106 4.51×106 5.79×106

(c) Response of the LGCW induced by two kinds of wind loads

Figure
Figure9.9.Response
Responsedistribution
distributionofofthe
theLGCW 0◦ .
LGCWatat0°.
 Out-of-plane displacement (m) Von Mises stress (pa)

0.0004 0.0011 0.0018 0.0025 0.0032 3124.8 32193.1 61261.3 90329.6 119398
0.0007 0.0015 0.0022 0.0029 0.0036 17658.9 46727.2 75795.5 104864 133932
Buildings
Buildings 12,13,
2023,
2023, 636 PEER REVIEW
x FOR 10 16
10 of of 15
(b) Response of the LGCW induced by the wind loads on the main structure
Out-of-plane displacement (m) Von Mises stress (pa)

Out-of-plane displacement (m) Von Mises stress (pa)

0.0004 0.0019 0.0034 0.0049 0.0064 20620.9 628158 1.24×106 1.84×106 2.45×106
0.0011 0.0026 0.0041 0.0056 0.0072 324389 931926 1.54×106 2.15×106 2.75×106

(c) Response of the LGCW induced by two kinds of wind loads

0.0001 0.0009 0.0019 0.003 0.004 9587.52 619164 1.23×106 1.84×106 2.45×106
0.0004 0.0014 0.0024 0.0035 0.0045 314376 923953 1.53×106 2.14×106 2.75×106

Figure 10.
(a)Response
Responsedistribution
of the LGCW of the LGCWbyatthe
induced 90°.wind loads on the LGCW
Out-of-plane displacement (m) Von Mises stress (pa)
Figure 11 displays the peak response of each glass panel at 0° and 90°, and the peak
response of each glass panel appears at different locations of each glass panel. In case (b),
the peak additional out-of-plane displacements and von Mises stresses induced by the
high-rise building of each glass panel are almost the same, and the magnitudes of the peak
0.0004
0.0007
0.0011
0.0015
0.0018
0.0022
0.0025
0.0029
0.0032
0.0036
3124.8
17658.9
32193.1
46727.2
61261.3
75795.5
90329.6
104864
119398
133932

out-of-plane
(b) Responsedisplacements
of the LGCW at induced
0° are largerby the than
wind those at 90°.
loads on In case
the main (c), the peak out-of-
structure
plane displacements Out-of-planeof glass panels
displacement (m) increase significantly inVon comparison
Mises stress to (pa)those of case
(a), and the peak out-of-plane displacement of the whole LGCW at 0° (the peak out-of-
plane displacement of glass panel #18) increases from 11.1 mm to 15.6 mm, i.e., by 40.5%,
while the peak out-of-plane displacement of the whole LGCW at 90° (the peak out-of-
0.0004 0.0019 0.0034 0.0049 0.0064 20620.9 628158 1.24×106 1.84×106 2.45×106
1.54×106 2.15×106 2.75×106
plane displacement of glass panel #3) increases from 4.5 mm to 7.1 mm, i.e., by 57.4%.
0.0011 0.0026 0.0041 0.0056 0.0072 324389 931926

(c) Response of the LGCW induced by two kinds of wind loads

Since the peak additional von Mises stresses of the whole LGCW at 0° and 90° in case (b)
are 10.
Figure
Figure very
10. small, distribution
Response
Response the peak von
distribution of of Mises
thethe LGCW
LGCW at at 90◦ .of the whole LGCW changes a little in
stresses
90°.
comparison to case (a).
Figure 11 displays the peak response of each glass panel at 0° and 90°, and the peak
8 16 8 16
response of each Caseglass
(a) panel
Case (b) appears
Case (c) at different locations Case of
(a) each glass
Case (b) panel.
Case (c) In case (b),
and von Mises stresses induced 14
Out-of-plane displacement (mm)
Out-of-plane displacement (mm)

the peak4 additional out-of-plane displacements 8 7 by the

Displacement ratio (%)

Displacement ratio (%)

high-rise
0
building of each glass panel are almost
0
6 the same, and the magnitudes of the 12 peak

out-of-plane displacements at 0° are larger than 5 those at 90°. In case (c), the peak out-of- 10

plane−4displacements of glass panels increase −8

significantly
4
in comparison to those of
8 case

(a), and
−8 the peak out-of-plane displacement −16 of the whole LGCW at 0° (the peak out-of- 6
3
plane displacement of glass panel #18) increases from 11.1 mm to 15.6 mm, i.e., by 440.5%,
−12 −24 2
while the peak out-of-plane displacement of the whole LGCW at 90° (the peak out-of- 2
Buildings 2023, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW−16 −32 1 11 of 16
plane displacement
1 3 5 7 9of 11
glass13 panel
15 17 #3) 19 increases
21 1 from
3 54.57 mm 9 to
11 7.113 mm,15 17 i.e.,19 by2157.4%.
Number of glass panels Number of glass panels
Since the peak additional von Mises stresses of the whole LGCW at 0° and 90° in case (b)
(a) Peak out-of-plane displacement at 0° (b) Peak out-of-plane displacement at 90°
are very small, the peak von Mises stresses of the whole LGCW changes a little in
7 17.5 3.0 7.50
comparison toCase case
(a) (a). Case (b) Case (c) Case (a) Case (b) Case (c)
6 15.0 2.5 6.25
Von-mises stress (MPa)

Von-mises stress (MPa)

8 5 16 12.5 8 16
Case (a) Case (b) Case (c) 2.0 Case (a) Case (b) Case (c) 5.00
Stress ratio (%)

Stress ratio (%)

14
Out-of-plane displacement (mm)
Out-of-plane displacement (mm)

4 4 8 10.0 7
1.5 3.75
Displacement ratio (%)
Displacement ratio (%)

6 12
0 3 0 7.5
5 1.0 10 2.50
2 5.0
−4 −8
8 1.25
1 2.5 4 0.5
−8 −16 6
0 0.0 3 0.00
0.0
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 4 21
−12 Number of glass panels −24 2 Number of glass panels
(c) Peak von Mises stress at 0° (d) Peak von Mises stress at 90° 2
−16 −32 1
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21
Figure 11. Peak responses
Number of inner glass panels.
of glass panels Number of glass panels
Figure 11. Peak responses of inner glass panels. (b) Peak out-of-plane displacement at 90°
(a) Peak out-of-plane displacement at 0°
Figure 12 displays the responses at the location of each glass panel where the peak
Figure 12 displays the responses at the location of each glass panel where the peak
additional response appears at 0◦ and 90◦ in case (b), which is shown in Figure 11. It
additional response appears at 0° and 90° in case (b), which is shown in Figure 11. It can
can be found that the out-of-plane displacements of case (a) are very small, but after
be superposition
the found that theofout-of-plane
the additionaldisplacements
out-of-planeof case (a) are very
displacements inducedsmall, but high-rise
by the after the
superposition of the additional out-of-plane displacements induced by
building, the peak out-of-plane displacement of the whole LGCW in case (c) at 0◦ (the the high-rise
building, thedisplacement
out-of-plane peak out-of-plane displacement
of glass panel #18)of the whole
increases LGCW
from 1.7 mmin case (c) mm,
to 7.6 at 0° (the
and out-
the
of-plane displacement of glass panel #18) increases from 1.7 mm to 7.6
◦ mm,
peak out-of-plane displacement of the whole LGCW in case (c) at 90 (the out-of-plane and the peak
out-of-plane of
displacement displacement ofincreases
glass panel #4) the whole
fromLGCW
0.7 mminto case (c) but
3.9 mm, at the
90°von
(theMises
out-of-plane
stresses
displacement of glass panel #4) increases from 0.7 mm to
are still small after the superposition of the additional stresses. 3.9 mm, but the von Mises
stresses are still small after the superposition of the additional stresses.
2 4 5 10
Case (a) Case (b) Case (c) Case (a) Case (b) Case (c)
lacement (mm)

acement (mm)

0 0 4 8
t ratio (%)

ratio (%)

3 6
−2 −4
 be found that the out-of-plane displacements of case (a) are very small, but after the
superposition of the additional out-of-plane displacements induced by the high-rise
building, the peak out-of-plane displacement of the whole LGCW in case (c) at 0° (the out-
of-plane displacement of glass panel #18) increases from 1.7 mm to 7.6 mm, and the peak
out-of-plane displacement of the whole LGCW in case (c) at 90° (the out-of-plane
Buildings 2023, 13, 636 11 of 15
displacement of glass panel #4) increases from 0.7 mm to 3.9 mm, but the von Mises
stresses are still small after the superposition of the additional stresses.
2 4 5 10
Case (a) Case (b) Case (c) Case (a) Case (b) Case (c)

Out-of-plane displacement (mm)

Out-of-plane displacement (mm)

0 0 4 8

Displacement ratio (%)

Displacement ratio (%)

3 6
−2 −4
2 4
−4 −8
1 2

−6 −12
0 0

−8 −16 −1 −2
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21
Number of glass panels Nmuber of glass panels
(a) Out-of-plane displacement at 0° (b) Out-of-plane displacement at 90°

5 12.5 2.0 5.00

Case (a) Case (b) Case (c) Case (a) Case (b) Case (c)

4 10.0
1.5 3.75

Von-mises stress (MPa)

Von-mises stress (MPa)

Stress ratio (%)

Stress ratio (%)
3 7.5
1.0 2.50
2 5.0

0.5 1.25
1 2.5

0.0 0.00
0 0.0
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21
Number of glass panels Number of glass panels
(c) Von Mises stress at 0° (d) Von Mises stress at 90°

Figure 12. Responses

Figure12. Responsesat
atthe
thelocation
locationof
ofeach
eachglass
glasspanel
panelwith
withpeak
peakadditional
additionalresponse.
response.
The responses of the LGCW induced by the wind loads on the LGCW reach peak
valuesThe responses
at the of each
center of the LGCW induced
glass panel, bythe
while thepeak
windvalues
loads of
onthe
theadditional
LGCW reach peak
response
values at the center of each glass panel, while the peak values of the additional
of the LGCW caused by the deformation of the high-rise building appear at the top edge response
ofeach
of the LGCW caused
glass panel. bydeformation
The the deformation
of theofhigh-rise
the high-rise building
building appear at
significantly the top edge
influences the
of each glass displacements
out-of-plane panel. The deformation of theespecially
of the LGCW, high-rise building
in the top significantly
area of eachinfluences the
glass panel,
out-of-plane displacements of the LGCW, especially in the top area of each
but slightly influences the stresses of the LGCW. Based on the above, the effects of the glass panel,
but slightly influences
deformation the stresses
of the high-rise of the
building LGCW.
on the Based ondisplacements
out-of-plane the above, theofeffects of the
the LGCW
should be considered, especially the responses at the top edge of the LGCW.

4. Parameter Sensitivity Analysis of the Effects of the High-Rise Building on

the LGCW
The lateral stiffness of the high-rise building and the connection stiffness between the
LGCW and the high-rise building are two parameters that affect the interaction between the
high-rise building and the LGCW. This section conducts the parameter sensitivity analysis
to investigate their influences on the responses of the LGCW.

4.1. Wind Loads on the High-Rise Building

The gust loading factor used in the ESWL mainly depends on structural character-
istics. According to the calculation method of ESWLs utilized by GB50009-2012 [26],
the along-wind and cross-wind ESWLs of the high-rise buildings are determined by
Equations (4) and (5), respectively:

WDK = β z µs µz w0 (4)

and q
WLK = gw0 µz CL 1 + R2L (5)
where µs is the shape coefficient of wind loads. µz is the height coefficient of wind pressures
at the reference height. w0 is the basic wind pressure with a 50-year return period. g is the
peak factor. β z is the response vibration factor for the along-wind response and is closely
related to the natural frequency of the first mode with the along-wind vibration. R L is the
Buildings 2023, 13, 636 12 of 15

cross-wind resonance factor and is closely related to the natural frequency of the first mode
with the cross-wind vibration. CL is the cross-wind force coefficient.
During the investigation of the effects of the stiffness of the high-rise building on
the response of the LGCW, this study assumes that the geometric shape of the high-rise
building remains unchanged. Thus, all parameters in Equations (4) and (5), except the
response vibration factor β z and the cross-wind resonance factor R L , remain unchanged.
When the natural frequency changes due to the change in the structural stiffness, the ESWLs
of the high-rise building with frequency f1 are calculated as follows:

0 β z1
WDK = WDKT (6)
β z0

and q
1 + R2L1
0
WLK = q WLKT (7)
0
1 + R2L0

where β z1 and β z0 are the response vibration factors of the high-rise building with frequency
f1 and of the high-rise building with frequency f0 shown in Figure 8, respectively. R L1
and R L0 are the cross-wind resonance factors of the high-rise building with frequency
f1 and of the high-rise building with frequency f0 , respectively. WDKT and WLET are the
along-wind and cross-wind ESWLs of the standard building, respectively, and are obtained
from wind-tunnel tests and dynamic analysis.

4.2. Effects of the Lateral Stiffness of the High-Rise Building on the LGCW
To study the effects of the lateral stiffness of the high-rise building on the LGCW, the
fundamental frequency is changed by changing the concrete elastic modulus. Similar to
Section 3, three cases (a), (b), and (c) subjected to the wind loads calculated in Section 4.1 at
the wind direction of 0◦ are analyzed for each high-rise building.
Table 4 shows the peak out-of-plane displacements and the peak von Mises stresses of
the whole LGCW with the high-rise building with different fundamental frequencies for
each case. It can be seen from Table 4 that with the increase in the fundamental frequency,
the peak responses of the whole LGCW in case (a) change a little, and the peak out-of-plane
displacements of the whole LGCW decrease in case (b). When the fundamental frequency
equals 0.085 Hz, the peak out-of-plane displacement and the peak von Mises stress of the
whole LGCW are 29 mm and 0.78 MPa, respectively, which are 4.1 and 6.0 times those of
the original fundamental frequency 0.162 Hz. When the fundamental frequency equals
0.452 Hz, the peak out-of-plane displacement and the peak von Mises stress of the whole
LGCW are 0.8 mm and 0.02 MPa, respectively, which are 0.1 times and 0.15 times those
of 0.162 Hz. In case (c), the peak out-of-plane displacement decreases gradually with the
increase of the fundamental frequency of the high-rise building. The peak out-of-plane
displacements at the frequency of 0.085 Hz and 0.452 Hz are 2.12 times and 0.74 times
those of 0.162 Hz, respectively. The peak out-of-plane displacements of three fundamental
frequencies for case (c) are 2.9, 1.41, and 1.04 times those for case (a), while the peak von
Mises stresses seldomly change.

Table 4. Peak responses of the LGCW for different fundamental frequencies.

Peak Out-of-Plane Displacements (mm) Peak Von Mises Stresses (MPa)

Fundamental Frequency
Case (a) Case (b) Case (c) Case (a) Case (b) Case (c)
0.085 11.4 29 33.1 5.79 0.78 5.81
0.162 11.1 7 15.6 5.79 0.13 5.79
0.452 11.1 0.8 11.5 5.79 0.02 5.79
Buildings 2023, 13, 636 13 of 15

The changes of the fundamental frequency produce great effects on the additional
responses of the LGCW in case (b). The smaller the fundamental frequency of the high-rise
building is, the greater the deformation of the high-rise building is and the greater the
additional responses of the LGCW are.

4.3. Effects of the Connection Stiffness on the LGCW

The LGCW is connected to the top and bottom crossbeams with silicone adhesive,
and the crossbeams are connected to the high-rise building. The bending stiffness of
the crossbeams varies with the cross section of the crossbeam, which will affect the load
transformation and deformation of the high-rise building and the LGCW. The silicone
adhesive between the crossbeam and the LGCW is elastic. When the silicone adhesive
is aged, its elastic modulus changes and will affect the connection stiffness between the
high-rise building and the LGCW. Thus, this section analyzes the influences of the varying
crossbeam sections and the varying stiffness of the silicone adhesive on the peak responses
of the whole LGCW for each case.
Table 5 displays the peak responses of the whole LGCW for different crossbeam
sections and elastic modulus of silicone adhesive. It can be found that the peak out-of-
plane displacements of the whole LGCW in case (a) decrease with the increase of the
crossbeam section. When the crossbeam width equals 0.04 m and 1 m, the peak out-of-
plane displacements are 1.12 and 0.89 times those of the original crossbeam width 0.2 m,
respectively. In case (b), the peak von Mises stresses of the whole LGCW decrease a little
with the increase of the crossbeam section. When the crossbeam width equals 0.04 m and
1 m, the peak von Mises stresses are 1.11 and 0.98 times those of 0.2 m, respectively. In case
(c), the peak out-of-plane displacements of the whole LGCW also decrease with the increase
of the crossbeam section. When the crossbeam width equals 0.04 m and 1 m, the peak
out-of-plane displacements in case (c) are 1.09 and 0.92 times those of 0.2 m, respectively.
The peak out-of-plane displacements of the whole LGCW in case (c) are 1.37, 1.41, and
1.47 times those of case (a), and the peak von Mises stresses seldomly change.

Table 5. Peak responses of the LGCW.

Peak Out-of-Plane Displacements (mm) Peak Von Mises Stresses (MPa)

Variables Values
Case (a) Case (b) Case (c) Case (a) Case (b) Case (c)
0.04 12.4 7 17 5.8 0.149 5.8
Crossbeam width (m) 0.2 11.1 7 15.6 5.79 0.134 5.79
1 9.8 7 14.4 5.79 0.131 5.79
2 × 105 15 7 19.7 5.9 0.08 5.9
Elastic modulus of silicone
2 × 106 11.1 7 15.6 5.79 0.134 5.79
adhesive (N/mm2 )
2 × 107 9.7 7 14.2 5.23 0.55 5.22

With the increase of the elastic modulus of the silicone adhesive, the peak responses of
the whole LGCW decrease in case (a). In case (b), the peak out-of-plane displacements of
the whole LGCW change a little while the peak von Mises stresses increase a lot with the
increase of the elastic modulus of the silicone adhesive. In case (c), the peak out-of-plane
displacements of the whole LGCW decrease with the increase of the elastic modulus of the
silicone adhesive. The peak out-of-plane displacements of the whole LGCW in case (c) are
1.31, 1.41, 1.46 times those of case (a), while the peak von Mises stresses seldomly change.
It is worth noting that the crossbeam width and the elastic modulus of the silicone
adhesive are related to the connection stiffness which influences the wind-induced response
of the LGCW. A smaller stiffness of the crossbeam and the silicone adhesive means a smaller
connection stiffness between the LGCW and the high-rise building, and smaller out-of-
plane constraints of the high-rise building on the LGCW. A smaller connection stiffness
leads to greater responses of the LGCW induced by the wind loads on the LGCW itself,
and greater total responses after considering the effects of the deformation of the high-rise
Buildings 2023, 13, 636 14 of 15

building on the LGCW. Since the additional von Mises stresses caused by the high-rise
building are small, the effects of the high-rise building on the total von Mises stresses of the
LGCW are also small.

5. Conclusions
This study constructed FE models of the independent LGCW and of the LGCW
with the high-rise building to investigate the wind resistance performance of the LGCW
considering the deformation of the high-rise building. Then, the parameter sensitivity
analysis of wind effects on the LGCW was conducted varying the lateral stiffness of the
high-rise building and the connection stiffness between the high-rise building and the
LGCW. The main conclusions are as follows:
(1) The wind-induced out-of-plane displacements and von Mises stresses of the LGCW
decrease away from the center towards the glass panel edges. The additional out-of-plane
displacements and von Mises stresses of the LGCW caused by the deformation of the
high-rise building decrease away from the glass panel’s top and bottom edges towards the
center of the LGCW.
(2) Since elastic connections are used between the LGCW and the high-rise building,
the effects of the deformation of the high-rise building on the out-of-plane displacements
of the LGCW are considerable, while those on the von Mises stresses of the LGCW are
slight. When the deformation of the high-rise building is included, the peak out-of-plane
displacement of the whole LGCW is increased by 40.5%.
(3) The lateral stiffness of the high-rise building and the connection stiffness between
the LGCW and the high-rise building have significant effects on the displacements of
the LGCW. The smaller the lateral stiffness of the high-rise building is, the greater the
additional responses caused by the deformation of the high-rise building in the LGCW are.
The smaller the connection stiffness is, the greater the responses of the independent LGCW
are, but the additional responses induced by the deformation of the high-rise building on
the LGCW are not significant.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, B.C., L.J. and H.Y. (Hongliang Yu); methodology, L.J.;
software, L.J. and H.Y. (Handi Yang); validation, L.Z., L.J. and B.C.; investigation, L.J.; writing—
original draft preparation, L.J.; writing—review and editing, B.C. and L.Z.; supervision, B.C.; project
administration, W.Y. and H.Y. (Handi Yang); funding acquisition, H.Y. (Hongliang Yu). All authors
have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: The research is funded by Zhejiang Jiangnan Project Management Co., Ltd. (Grant number:
H20200924).
Data Availability Statement: Data will be made available on request.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Lu, W.; Wang, Y.; Chen, H.D.; Jiang, L.; Duan, Q.L.; Li, M.; Wang, Q.S.; Sun, J.H. Investigation of the thermal response and
breakage mechanism of point-supported glass facade under wind load. Constr. Build. Mater. 2018, 186, 635–643. [CrossRef]
2. China Architecture and Building Press. Technical Code for Application of Architectural Glass; JGJ/113-2015; China Architecture and
Building Press: Beijing, China, 2015.
3. Huang, B.F.; Chen, S.M.; Lu, W.S.; Mosalam, K.M. Seismic demand and experimental evaluation of the nonstructural building
curtain wall: A review. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 2017, 100, 16–33. [CrossRef]
4. Tsai, C.R.; Stewart, R.A. Stress analysis of large deflection of glass plates by the finite-element method. J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 1976, 59,
445–448. [CrossRef]
5. Gavanski, E.; Kopp, G.A. Glass breakage tests under fluctuating wind loads. J. Archit. Eng. 2011, 17, 34–41. [CrossRef]
6. Shetty, M.S.; Dharani, L.R.; Stutts, D.S. Analysis of laminated architectural glazing subjected to wind load and windborne debris
impact. ISRN Civil. Eng. 2012, 2012, 949070. [CrossRef]
7. Quaglini, V.; Cattaneo, S.; Pettorruso, C.; Biolzi, L. Cold bending of vertical glass plates: Wind loads and geometrical instabilities.
Eng. Struct. 2020, 220, 110983. [CrossRef]
Buildings 2023, 13, 636 15 of 15

8. Bedon, C.; Zhang, X.H.; Santos, F.; Honfi, D.; Kozłowski, M.; Arrigoni, M.; Figuli, L.; Lange, D. Performance of structural glass
facades under extreme loads—Design methods, existing research, current issues and trends. Constr. Build. Mater. 2018, 163,
921–937. [CrossRef]
9. Nečasová, B.; Liška, P.; Šimáčková, M.; Šlanhof, J. Test of adhesion and cohesion of silicone sealants on facade cladding materials
within extreme weather conditions. Adv. Mater. Res. 2014, 1041, 23–26. [CrossRef]
10. Van Lancker, B.; Dispersyn, J.; De Corte, W.; Belis, J. Durability of adhesive glass-metal connections for structural applications.
Eng. Struct. 2016, 126, 237–251. [CrossRef]
11. Belis, J.; Bedon, C.; Louter, C.; Amadio, C.; Van Impe, R. Experimental and analytical assessment of lateral torsional buckling of
laminated glass beams. Eng. Struct. 2013, 51, 295–305. [CrossRef]
12. Huveners, E.M.P. Circumferentially adhesive bonded glass panes for bracing steel frames in facades; Eindhoven University of Technology:
Eindhoven, The Netherlands, 2009.
13. Antolinc, D.; Rajčić, V.; Žarnić, R. Analysis of hysteretic response of glass infilled wooden frames. J. Civ. Eng. Manag. 2014, 20,
600–608. [CrossRef]
14. Yuan, Y.; Zhou, Y.F.; Wang, L.X.; Wu, Z.R.; Liu, W.B.; Chen, J.B. Coupled deformation behavior analysis for the glass panel in
unitized hidden-frame supported glass curtain wall system. Eng. Struct. 2021, 244, 112782. [CrossRef]
15. Gonçalves, M.D. Patenaude-Trempe and Robert Jutras, Air-Ins. Evaluating the field performance of windows and curtain walls
of large buildings. In Proceedings of the BEST2 Conference—Building Enclosure Science & Technology, Portland, OR, USA, 12–14
April 2010.
16. Ilter, E.; Tavil, A.; Celik, O.C. Full-scale performance testing and evaluation of unitized curtain walls. J. Fac. Des. Eng. 2015, 3,
39–47. [CrossRef]
17. Wai So, A.K.; Chan, S.L. Stability and strength analysis of glass wall systems stiffened by glass fins. Finite Elem. Anal. Des. 1996,
23, 57–75. [CrossRef]
18. Di, P.; Yu, C.L. Safety analysis of point supported glass curtain wall panels. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on
Sustainable Energy and Environmental Engineering, Shenzhen, China, 30–31 December 2016; pp. 1140–1144. [CrossRef]
19. Yu, Y.; Liu, T.; Zhang, Q.L.; Yang, B. Wind-induced response of an l-shaped cable support glass curtain wall. Shock. Vib. 2017,
2017, 4163045. [CrossRef]
20. Zasso, A.; Perotti, F.; Rosa, L.; Schito, P.; Pomaranzi, G.; Daniotti, N. Wind Pressure Distribution on a Porous Double Skin Façade
System. In Proceedings of the XV Conference of the Italian Association for Wind Engineering, Naples, Italy, 9–12 September 2018; Springer:
Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; pp. 730–741.
21. Lu, W.S.; Huang, B.F.; Chen, S.M.; Mosalam, K.M. Shaking table test method of building curtain walls using floor capacity
demand diagrams. Bull. Earthq. Eng. 2016, 15, 3185–3205. [CrossRef]
22. Lu, W.S.; Huang, B.F.; Mosalam, K.M.; Chen, S.M. Experimental evaluation of a glass curtain wall of a tall building. Earthq. Eng.
Struct. Dyn. 2016, 45, 1185–1205. [CrossRef]
23. Pomaranzi, G.; Daniotti, N.; Schito, P.; Rosa, L.; Zasso, A. Experimental assessment of the effects of a porous double skin façade
system on cladding loads. J. Wind. Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 2020, 196, 104019. [CrossRef]
24. Ren, C.C.; Li, J.H.; Tang, Y.; Liu, J.J.; Yan, Y.L.; Hao, W.; Sun, C. Performance study of main structure and glass curtain wall of
high-rise building under combined action of wind and earthquake. Eng. Mech. 2022, 39, 58–69. (In Chinese) [CrossRef]
25. Ren, C.C.; Liu, J.J.; Li, J.H.; Tang, Y.; Yan, Y.L.; Wang, C. Study on structural damage and falling of glass curtain wall of super
high-rise building under coupling action of wind and earthquake. J. Build. Struct. 2022, 43, 129–140. (In Chinese) [CrossRef]
26. China Architecture and Building Press. Load Code for the Design of Building Structures; GB 50009; China Architecture and Building
Press: Beijing, China, 2012.

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.