ARTICLE IN PRESS

J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 98 (2010) 1020

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Wind Engineering

and Industrial Aerodynamics
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jweia

A comparison of different methods to evaluate the wind induced forces on a

high sided lorry
M. Sterling a,, A.D. Quinn a, D.M. Hargreaves b, F. Cheli c, E. Sabbioni c, G. Tomasini c, D. Delaunay d,
C.J. Baker a, H. Morvan e
a
School of Civil Engineering, The University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK
b
School of Civil Engineering, The University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2RD, UK
c
Mechanical Department, Politecnico di Milano, Italy
d
Meteodyn, 75 bd A.Oyon, 72100 Le Mans, France
e
School of Mechanical Engineering, The University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2RD, UK

a r t i c l e in f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This paper examines the wind induced forces and moments experienced by a high sided lorry. Full-scale
Received 30 May 2008 measurements are combined with wind tunnel and CFD simulations in order to gain an insight into the
Received in revised form ow eld around the vehicle. Differences and similarities between the three techniques are noted. It is
22 July 2009
shown that the rolling moment coefcient obtained from full-scale measurements and CFD simulations
Accepted 21 August 2009
Available online 23 September 2009
agree consistently across a wide range of yaw angles. With respect to the side force coefcient, good
agreement between the wind tunnel and full-scale data are achieved. Pressure distributions over
Keywords: selected sections of the lorry reveal that despite good agreement with the overall forces, the localised
Vehicle aerodynamics pressure eld can be signicantly different.
Cross winds
& 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Lift force
Side force
Rolling moment

1. Introduction
The effect of cross winds on the stability of high sided vehicles
is a signicant issue. For example Snbjornsson et al. (2007) state
that in the developing world, road accidents cause more injuries
and casualties than any other man-made or natural hazard. In
addition, earlier work undertaken by Baker and Reynolds (1992)
illustrated that during the storms on the 25th January 1990 there
were around 400 wind-induced accidents involving either death
or injury in the UK. As such the impacts of high winds on
transportation has risen up the research agenda in many
countries.
Weather warning systems have traditionally existed for long
span bridges and in some cases are even automated. However, for
long stretches of road, where the wind velocity can change
signicantly due to local topographical effects, their success has
been questionable. Recent signicant developments have been
made in the rail industry. For example Delaunay et al. (2003)
discuss an automated procedure, based on a scientic probabil-
istic approach that is used for the TGVMe diterrane e in France.
Despite this and other advances in the rail industry, the same level
 Corresponding author. Tel.: + 44 121 414 5065; fax: + 44 121 414 3675.
E-mail address: m.sterling@bham.ac.uk (M. Sterling).
of attention has not been focused on the road sector. In order to
address this issue a research project was funded by the European
Union through the Sixth Framework Program (FP6). Within this
programme, a CRAFT project was supported whose aim was to
develop an innovative Wind Early Alarm system for Terrestrial
transportation (WEATHER).
The WEATHER project started in October 2004 and ran for just
over two years. In total six SMEs where involved (Meteodyn,
France; Atmos, France; EMI, France; Nublia, Italy; Geonica, Spain
and Campbell Scientic, UK). In addition to the SMEs, the
fundamental research aspects of the project where undertaken
by the Politecnico di Milano (Italy), the University of Nottingham
(UK) and the University of Birmingham (UK).
One of the key elements of this research was the determination
of the aerodynamic forces and moments acting on a typical high
sided vehicle, and it is with this that the current paper is
concerned. In calculating the wind induced forces or moments, it
is important to consider both the wind velocity relative to the
vehicle (Vr) in addition to the angle that this velocity makes with
respect to the vehicle velocity (Vv), i.e. the yaw angle (y) (see
Fig. 1). With reference to Fig. 1, it is relatively straightforward to
obtain the following expressions:
q
Vr Vw2 Vv2 2Vw Vv cosa 1

0167-6105/$ - see front matter & 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jweia.2009.08.008
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
M. Sterling et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 98 (2010) 1020
Fig. 1. A simple sketch illustrating how the wind velocity (Vw), wind direction (a), vehicle velocity (VV) combine to form the wind velocity relative to the vehicle (Vr). y is the
yaw angle.
 
Vv Vw cosa
y cot1
Vw sina
where Vw is the velocity of the wind and a is the wind direction
relative to the vehicle velocity. Hence, with reference to Eqs. (1)
and (2), and Fig. 1 it can be appreciated that for a xed cross wind
(Vw and a constant), then the wind velocity relative to the vehicle
is a direct function of the vehicles speed. Implicit in the derivation
of Eqs. (1) and (2) is the assumption that the vehicle is moving in a
straight line. If this is not the case then additional factors need to
be taken into account (e.g. slide slip angle). However, for the
purposes of the current work it is reasonable to disregard these
factors.
If a quasi-steady hypothesis is assumed, (i.e. that uctuations
in the wind induce corresponding forces and moments on the
vehicle), then the following equations can be written:
S 12 rACS Vr2 ; L 12 rACL Vr2 ; R 12rAhCR Vr2
where S is the instantaneous side force, L is the instantaneous lift
force, R is the instantaneous rolling moment, r is the density of
air, A is the side area of the vehicle, h is the height of the vehicle, CS
is the mean side coefcient, CL is the mean lift coefcient and CR is
the mean rolling moment coefcient. Hence, provided details of
these parameters are known, in addition to the relative wind
velocity, the wind induced forces and moments on a given vehicle
can be obtained and an assessment of vehicle stability can be
made. In theory, such analysis enables warnings to be given to
drivers during periods of high winds encouraging them to reduce
their speed.
Section 2 of the paper outlines the experiments that were
undertaken in order to evaluate the forces and moments acting on
a typical light weight ( o7 ton) lorry. Full-scale, wind tunnel and
CFD experiments were undertaken in order to build an extensive
database of information for a variety of environmental conditions.
The results of these experiments are examined in Section 3. The
results are interpreted in terms of mean aerodynamic coefcients
and mean pressure coefcients. Finally, Section 4 draws appro-
priate conclusions from the work presented in the paper.
2. Description of experiments
For most commercial and research projects it is common to use
either a wind tunnel or a CFD package in order to gain an insight
into the wind induced forces and moments acting on a vehicle.
Such experiments are rarely undertaken at full-scale mainly due
to the cost of the initial experimental set-up and maintenance of
the equipment. In addition, there is no guarantee that the
appropriate environmental conditions will occur at the required
time. Hence, for short term projects (ca. 2 years) such experiments
can be risky to undertake. This project offered the rare
opportunity to compare the results of CFD and wind tunnel
simulations with data measured at full-scale. This approach was
adopted since it was envisaged that once a successful comparison
had been achieved with the full-scale data, the CFD and wind
tunnel simulations could be used to rapidly investigate a variety
of environmental conditions and provide additional information
11
concerning the aerodynamic forces and moments acting on the
2
lorry.
2.1. Full-scale experiments
A full description of the experimental set-up is given in Quinn
et al. (2007). However, in order to aid with interpretation of the
results, brief details are presented in this section. Fig. 2 illustrates
the high-sided lorry which was used for the purposes of the full-
scale work. The lorry in question was a Leyland DAF 45-130 and
was obtained from a well-known UK publication dedicated to
selling used vehicles. This particular lorry was chosen since it was
similar to those which typically blow over during periods of high
cross winds. The vehicle box was 6.1 m long, 2.5 m wide and 2.5 m
tall on a chassis which raises it approximately 1 m off the ground.
The importance of the wind relative to the vehicle was briey
3
discussed in the previous section. However, in addition to the
vehicle motion affecting the relative velocity, it can also modify
the vehicle induced turbulence which in turn can affect the forces
and moments acting on the vehicle. In order to investigate if such
phenomena was of importance in the current work a series of
transient (moving vehicle) experiments (phase 1) were under-
taken. In addition, a second series of experiments (phase 2) were
also undertaken on a stationary vehicle. During the phase 1
experiments, the pressures on the sides and roof of the cargo
space were made using pressure tappings. These tapping points
connected to a differential pressure transducer using exible
tubing (full details given in Quinn et al., 2007). Integration of the
pressures around the vehicle enabled an evaluation of the rolling
moment for a number of yaw angles. Fig. 2(a) also illustrates the
ultrasonic anemometer and direction vane which were xed the
lorry in order to measure the wind speed and direction relative to
the vehicle. In phase 2, the rolling moment was measured using
four weigh-pad type load cells placed beneath the vehicle and the
supporting the vehicle chassis directly through four steel posts.
The length of these posts was chosen to provide a clearance of
approximately 0.05 m between the wheels and the ground.
Finally, the posts were placed on a solid concrete slab in order
to isolate any ground movement effects on the experiments.
One of the main ndings of Quinn et al. (2007), was that the
results obtained from the transient experiments (phase 1) were
comparable to those obtained from stationary experiments
(phase 2). This indicated that the structure of the ow around
the vehicle did not signicantly alter with vehicle motion. Hence,
at full-scale sensible data could be obtained from the stationary
experiments and it is this data which will be presented and
discussed subsequently. In the analysis that follows the lift force
and rolling moment have been obtained directly from load cell
data. The data from the pressure coefcients is used to examine
the ow structure around the vehicle but is not used to determine
the mean coefcients at full-scale. However, the results of Quinn
et al. (2007) indicate that the results obtained from the load cell
and pressure data are comparable with one another.
One of the benets of undertaking full-scale experiments
relates to the atmospheric boundary layer (ABL). Providing that
there is a sufcient fetch and no upstream obstacles then the
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
12 M. Sterling et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 98 (2010) 1020
Fig. 2. Photographs illustrating the commercial vehicle used for the full-scale experiments: (a) phase 1moving experiments; (b) phase 2static experiments.
experimental situation is an accurate representation of reality.
The phase 2 experiments were undertaken at the University of
Birminghams Wind Engineering eld site in Bedfordshire, UK.
This is a well documented site (Richards et al., 2000; Sterling et al.,
2006; Scarabino et al., 2007) and is orientated to face the
prevailing west-southwesterly winds and has a large unob-
structed fetch. The site has been proven to have repeatable wind
conditions and can be characterised by a log-law prole with a
roughness length of zo E0.01 m.
The full-scale velocity data were obtained using a three
component ultrasonic anemometer (Gill Instruments, Lymington,
UK) which recorded data every 0.1 s. Fig. 3(a) illustrates a typical
velocity prole for this site. In Fig. 3(a) the reference height (zref is
taken as 3 m). Also shown in Fig. 3(a) are data corresponding to
the wind tunnel and CFD simulations which will be discussed
later. A logarithmic velocity prole is shown in Fig. 3(a) where it
has been assumed that a surface roughness length of 0.01 m is
applicable. The agreement between the full-scale data and
logarithmic prole is encouraging.
Fig. 3(b) illustrates the vertical prole of the streamwise
turbulence intensity and highlights the rapid increase in this
parameter as the ground is approached. Also shown in Fig. 3(b)
are the wind tunnel data (which will be discussed subsequently)
and an empirical curve. The latter assumes that the turbulence
intensity is inversely proportional to the natural logarithm of
height above ground divided by the roughness length, (i.e. IVw =1/
ln(z/zo)), and zo is taken as E0.01 m.
Finally, Fig. 3(c) illustrates the streamwise velocity (SVwVw)
spectra at 6 m above the ground, i.e. approximately twice the lorry
height. In Fig. 3(c) the spectra has been normalised by the square
of the streamwise velocity component (Vw = 9.5 m/s) and is plotted
against the non dimensionalised frequency ( = nz/Vw, where n is
the actual frequency and z is the height above the ground). This
normalisation has been adopted in order to highlight the
differences between the full-scale and simulation data and will
be discussed later.
2.2. Wind tunnel experiments
The wind tunnel experiments were undertaken at the
Politecnico di Milano on a 1:10 scale model of the lorry shown
in Fig. 4. Measurements were undertaken on a scaled model of a
viaduct, on a scaled model of an embankment and on at terrain
corresponding to the full-scale site outlined in the previous
section. Although, all of the experiments are relevant to the
overall research programme, it is with the latter that this paper is
concerned. The aerodynamic forces and moments were measured
using a six component dynamometric balance, positioned under
the lorry and connected to its wheels. The wind speed was
measured at lorry height (full-scale equivalent of 3 m) using both
a Pitot and a Cobra probe (Turbulent Flow Instrumentation).
Further details relating to the experimental set-up can be found in
Cheli et al. (2005).
Fig. 3(a) illustrates the good level agreement between the
streamwise velocity data of the wind tunnel data and the
corresponding full-scale measurements over the range 0.5 oz/
zref o2.5. There is also a similar level of agreement with respect to
the turbulence intensity data (Fig. 3b). At low values of z/zref
(o0.5) the turbulence intensities in the wind tunnel rapidly
decrease. Although unfortunate, this behaviour is not unexpected
and is a direct consequence of the difculties of simulating the
appropriate turbulence conditions at small distances above the
ground. As will be shown later this will affect the ow under
the van and have implications for the lift force. However, it will
also be shown that in terms of the current project such effects are
sufciently small as to be considered negligible. The streamwise
velocity spectra at a full-scale equivalent height of 6 m above the
ground is shown in Fig. 3(c). The spectra has been normalised by
the square of the mean streamwise velocity (Vw (wind tun-
nel)= 6.27 m/s). It has become common place to normalise the
spectra by the variance. However, since the variance is directly
R1
related to the spectra (i.e. s2i 0 Sii n dn) it cannot be
considered as an independent parameter and as such tends to
mask any differences that exist. Fig. 3(c) illustrates that at values
of normalised frequencies greater than  0.4 there is a good
agreement between the wind tunnel simulation and the full-scale
data. Below these frequencies the agreement is less convincing,
which given the physical constraints of the wind tunnel is to be
expected. However, in the wind tunnel, the streamwise turbulent
length scale is approximately  1.4 m which is greater than the
dimensions of the van and as such any deciencies in the velocity
spectra can be considered unimportant for the current analysis. It
is perhaps worth noting that if the spectra had been normalised
by the variance, then such deciencies would not be apparent.
Fig. 3(c) also illustrates the von-Karman spectrum for both the
full-scale (FS) and wind tunnel (WT) data. The inclusion of these
curves also illustrate that both sets of data possess the appropriate
spectral characteristics and enable further condence to be placed
in these measurements.
2.3. CFD calculations
The CFD experiments that will be described in this paper were
undertaken using an unsteady RANS, ke model and implemented
using the software package CFX version 10. The simulations were
run as unsteady with a time step of 0.05 s, which was considered
small enough to be able to resolve the unsteady aerodynamic
forces. Default wall functions were used and within each time
step a convergence criteria of 10  4 was selected. The wind
conditions were assumed to follow a logarithmic prole with a
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
M. Sterling et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 98 (2010) 1020 13

3.5
full-scale Wind tunnel CFD log-law
3

2.5

z/zref
1.5

0.5

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
Vw /Vw-ref

3.5
full-scale Wind tunnel log-law
3

2.5

2
z/zref

1.5

0.5

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
IVw (%)

0.025
full-scale wind tunnel Von Karman (FS) Von Karman (WT)

0.02
fSVwVw(f)/Vw2

0.015

0.01

0.005

0
0.01 0.1 1 10 100
f

Fig. 3. Velocity data corresponding to full-scale, wind tunnel and CFD simulations: (a) normalised streamwise velocity prole. zref taken as 6 m and Vw  ref = 6.645, 6.645 and
13.89 m/s for the full-scale data, wind tunnel data and CFD data respectively; (b) normalised turbulence intensity with respect to height; (c) normalised streamwise velocity
spectra at 6 m above the ground.

roughness length of 0.01 m. As illustrated in Fig. 3(a), the velocity
prole closely matches the full-scale data for values of z/zref o2.0.
For values of z/zref 42.0 the departure between the full-scale data
and that of the CFD simulation is still considered to be within
acceptable limits.
All force, moment and pressure coefcients presented here are
time-averages of the CFD results obtained after all start-up
transients had disappeared and the simulations had entered a
stationary state. Fig. 5 provides an insight into the structure
surface mesh adopted. A full description of the simulation can be
found in Hargreaves and Morvan (2007). However, for the
purposes of the current paper it is sufcient to note that
boundary layers were grown from the main surfaces of the
trailer and size functions were implemented to grow the mesh
away from detailed features such as the mirrors. Non-conformal
interfaces were used to transition from the unstructured mesh
around the cab and chassis to the structured mesh around the
trailer. A mesh of 3.5 million hexahedral, tetrahedral and
triangular prism cells was created using the aforementioned
techniques.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
14 M. Sterling et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 98 (2010) 1020
Fig. 4. Scale model of the lorry in the Politecnico di Milanos wind tunnel: (a) vidaduct; (b) at terrain.
Fig. 5. A photograph of the full-scale lorry compared to the surface mesh of the equivalent section of the CFD model.
The domain around the truck consisted of two parts, i.e. the
turntable which mimicked the turntable in the wind tunnel and
the fetch. The vertical axis of the turntable was coincident with
the centre of the truck enabling any yaw angle to be achieved.
Similar to the wind tunnel experiments, simulations were also
undertaken for the case of an embankment and viaduct. However,
for the purposes of this paper these are not reported.
As outlined above, full details of the full-scale experiments,
wind tunnel tests and CFD simulations can be found elsewhere
(Quinn et al., 2007; Cheli et al., 2005; Hargreaves and Morvan,
2007, respectively). However, the following section undertakes a
comparison between the three different techniques and analyses
new data which cannot be found in any of the above references,
i.e. in particular the pressure distributions.
3. Results
3.1. Comparison of mean coefcients
At low yaw angles a vehicle is more likely to undergo a course
deviation as a result of a high cross wind, whereas at high yaw
angles, stability issues are of paramount importance, i.e. a lorry is
more likely to overturn. With this in mind, we will initially
consider the variation of rolling moment coefcient (CR) with
respect to yaw angle (Fig. 6). It must be stressed at this point that
the data presented relate to mean values of this parameter, and in
the case of the full-scale data, the experimental scatter can be
signicant, (see Quinn et al., 2007). The experimental errors in the
wind tunnel data are assumed to be of the order of 5%.
The general behaviour of the rolling moment coefcient (Fig. 6)
is consistent across all three of the techniques employed, i.e. a low
yaw angles the coefcient tends towards zero and there is an
almost linear increase of coefcient with respect to yaw angles for
values of up to 401. Beyond 401 the rate of increase in rolling
moment reduces and peaks around 601 for the wind tunnel
measurements and 801 for both the CFD and full-scale measure-
ments. Intuitively one may expect the maximum value of CR to
occur at 901, however, the formation of unsteady ow structures
over the roof and leading edge of the vehicle result in regions of
high suction, which in turn effects the rolling moment. This
behaviour is in keeping with the results of previous studies on
trains (Baker et al., 2004; Bocciolone et al., 2003, 2008).
Overall the agreement between the CFD and full-scale data is
remarkable and will be examined further shortly. However, it is
noticeable that the wind tunnel results are signicantly higher
than both the full-scale and CFD results. At this stage, it is perhaps
worth noting that two sets of wind tunnel experiments were
undertaken, one in July 2006 and one in September 2006. A close
agreement between both sets of data was found but for the
purposes of clarity only the data relating to the September
experiments are shown. This close agreement indicated a good
repeatability in the wind tunnel experiments but does not explain
the differences between the wind tunnel data and the full-scale/
CFD data.
Unfortunately, due to the setup of the full-scale experiments it
was not possible to obtain any information with respect to the
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
M. Sterling et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 98 (2010) 1020 15

1.4
Full Scale
1.2 Wind Tunnel
CFD

Rolling moment coefficient

1

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Yaw angle

Fig. 6. Mean rolling moment with respect to yaw angle.

1.40

Wind Tunnel
1.20
CFD

1.00
Side force coefficient

0.80

0.60

0.40

0.20

0.00
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Yaw angle

Fig. 7. Mean side force with respect to yaw angle.

side force. Hence, Fig. 7 presents information relating to only the
wind tunnel and CFD simulations. It is interesting to note that in
this case a good agreement between the wind tunnel and CFD
data is found.
Since both the CFD and wind tunnel data agree with respect to
the side force coefcient but disagree with respect to the rolling
moment coefcient, it is reasonable to assume that there will be a
disagreement in terms of the lift force coefcient, since both the
lift and side forces contribute to the rolling moment. Fig. 8
illustrates that this is indeed the case. From the CFD simulations,
the lift force coefcient appears to gradually rise to a maximum
value at a yaw angle of 451 and then gradually decreases for
higher yaw angles; the trend is almost symmetrical about a yaw of
451. Full-scale and wind-tunnel data illustrate a gradual increase
in the lift force coefcient for yaw angles greater than 351 and 401
respectively, whereas below these values the lift coefcient is
small and predominately negative.
The lack of disagreement between the trend of the CFD data
and that obtained from the other experimental methods perhaps
suggests an inability of the CFD simulation to reproduce the
correct form of the pressure distribution over the roof of the
vehicle, since it is assumed that the ow over the roof inuences
the lift force more than the oor under the vehicle. However, since
the lift force, side force and rolling moment are interrelated such
statements are tentative at best. These relationships will be
examined further in the following section.
3.2. Comparison of pressure distributions
In order to understand the differences in force and moments
coefcients obtained from the different simulations outlined
above, attention will now be focused on the distribution of
pressure over the vehicle. Due to the nature of the full-scale
conditions experienced during phase 2 only pressure data
corresponding to yaw angles of 501, 701 and 851 were obtained.
For the purposes of the current work the mean pressure
coefcient (Cp) is dened as:
Pi  P
Cp 4
0:5rVw 32
where Pi is the pressure at tap i, P is the ambient (reference)
pressure, r is the density of air and Vw(3) is the mean streamwise
velocity at 3 m above the ground. Fig. 9 illustrates a sketch of the
vehicle illustrating the coordinate system adopted in the current
analysis and will aid in the discussion that follows.

16
1.4
1.2
1
Lift force coefficient
1.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
-0.2
0 10
z experiments over the leading edge of the roof. However, over the
x
y L
Fig. 9. A sketch illustrating the coordinate system adopted: (a) 851 yaw; (b) 701
yaw; (c) 501 yaw.
Fig. 10 illustrates the pressure coefcient data corresponding to
a variety of yaw angles. In this gure, y is the distance along the
roof of the trailer (y=0 corresponding to the back of the cab) and L
is the length of the trailer (6.1 m), x corresponds to the distance
from the leading edge of the windward face of the trailer and W is
the overall width of the trailer (2.5 m). Data corresponding to
measurements obtained at the centre line of the trailer (CL) are
shown in addition to those at the leading edge (LE). It should be
noted that the LE data are not necessarily located at the same
position. For example, the full-scale measurements, wind tunnel
measurements and CFD simulations take a values of x/W= 0.16, 0.1
and 0.1 respectively. Notwithstanding these differences, the
location of the pressure taps are considered sufciently close
together in order to enable comparisons to be made.
Fig. 10(a) illustrates data corresponding to a yaw angle of 851.
The full-scale data illustrates that the CL measurements are
consistently lower than the corresponding values at the leading
edge, indicating a higher degree of suction. This suggests that at
full-scale the separation zone associated with the ow over the
roof of the vehicle extends beyond the CL. In reality such a zone
would be highly unsteady, but the values of Cp suggest that on
average this zone is relatively large. The LE data illustrates a slight
downwards trend with increasing values of y/L, whereas the same
trend is true for the CL data for values of y/L o0.4, after Cp
remains reasonably constant. The increased values of Cp at low
values of y/L can possibility be attributed to the cab exerting a
small inuence on the local ow eld.
At the two ends of the trailer the trend illustrated in the full-
scale data can also be observed in the wind tunnel experiments.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
M. Sterling et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 98 (2010) 1020
Full Scale
Wind Tunnel
CFD
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Yaw angle
Fig. 8. Mean lift force with respect to yaw angle.
W However, over the majority of the trailer, i.e. 0.3 oy/Lo0.8, the CL
and LE measurements are similar indicating that the ow of the
roof of the vehicle results in a reasonably uniform pressure
H distribution at these two locations. It is interesting to note that CL
measurements are less negative over this region (0.3oy/Lo0.8)
whereas the opposite is true for the LE data.
The pressure coefcient obtained from the wind tunnel
experiments is consistently smaller than that of the full-scale
centre line of the vehicle for values of 0.4 oy/Lo0.7, the
agreement is reasonable. Fig. 8, illustrates that the mean lift
coefcient corresponding to this particular yaw angle obtained
from the full-scale data has a larger magnitude that that
corresponding to the equivalent wind tunnel data. This appears
to be contradictory to the results of Fig. 10(a), i.e. lower values of
Cp would imply a greater lift force. There are a number of possible
reasons which may explain this contradiction. Firstly, Fig. 10(a)
illustrates data corresponding to two locations and as such does
not give an indication of the pressure eld over the entire roof.
However, it is not unreasonable to assume that these two
locations give a reasonable indication of the respective differences
between the pressure eld in the two experiments. Therefore, it is
unlikely that additional data would provide a signicant insight.
The second, and perhaps more likely explanation relates to the
ow under the vehicle. By the very nature of the two experiments
and the difculties in correctly generating the appropriate
turbulence conditions close to the ground it is unlikely that the
pressure eld underneath the vehicle would be the same in both
simulations. Since the ow under the vehicle as well as over it
contributes the lift force, it perhaps explains why the differences
occur. Hence, this is thought to be the major reason for the
differences between outlined above.
The CFD simulations illustrate a reasonably uniform distribu-
tion along the leading edge and centre line of the roof for both the
851 yaw angle. In general, the CFD results illustrate larger values of
Cp than either the full-scale or wind tunnel simulations. These
differences between the CFD data and those of the other
experiments begin to explain the differences in lift coefcient
observed in Fig. 8.
Figs. 10(b) and (c) illustrate the mean pressure coefcient over
the roof of the vehicle for the full-scale and wind tunnel
experiments. For the 701 yaw case similar trends to those
illustrated in Fig. 10(a) are apparent, i.e. the wind tunnel centre
line values are lower than corresponding full-scale values. Also
over a large proportion of the roof of the vehicle the wind tunnel
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
M. Sterling et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 98 (2010) 1020 17

85 yaw
0

-0.5

-1

Cp
-1.5

full-scale (LE) wind tunnel (LE) CFD (LE)

-2
full-scale (CL) wind tunnel (CL) CFD (CL)

-2.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y/L

70 yaw
0

-0.5

-1
Cp

-1.5

full-scale (LE) wind tunnel (LE) CFD (LE)

-2
full-scale (CL) wind tunnel (CL) CFD (CL)

-2.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y/L
50 yaw
0

-0.5

-1
Cp

-1.5

-2 full-scale (LE) wind tunnel (LE) CFD (LE)

full-scale (CL) wind tunnel (CL) CFD (CL)
-2.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y/L

Fig. 10. Pressure distributions over the roof of the vehicle. (LE: full-scale, x/W = 0.16, wind tunnel, z/W= 0.1; W = 2. 5m and 262 mm at full-scale and wind tunnel scale
respectively): (a) 851 yaw; (b) 701 yaw; (c) 501 yaw.

CL and LE data are similar. The full-scale measurements along LE
are reasonably uniform along the entire length of the trailer
whereas the corresponding CL measurements appear to have a
local minimum at approximately half way along the trailer. It is
interesting to note, that unlike the 801 yaw angle case the
agreement between the full-scale and CFD LE results for values of
0 oy/Lo0.4 is encouraging. As the yaw angle reduces to 501, the
agreement between the full-scale and the CFD simulations
increases over a wider range of y/L values.
The inuence of the cab can clearly be seen in the CL
measurements corresponding to the wind tunnel. This effect can
be more clearly illustrated in Fig. 10(c) where the yaw angle is 501.
The wind tunnel data corresponding to the CL, clearly illustrates
evidence of a high suction zone extending over a large proportion
of the trailer. It is hypothesised that these low values of Cp arise as
a result of a delta-wind type vortex which is known to exist at
these yaw angles (Cook, 1985; Coleman and Baker, 1994).
Interestingly, this behaviour is not observed at full-scale. The
data corresponding to the full-scale CL and LE measurements
illustrates similar trends and magnitudes, i.e. a slight increase for
small values of y/L, remaining reasonably constant across a large
proportion of the roof (y/L40.2).
Fig. 11 illustrates a selection of pressure coefcient data
corresponding to the windward face of the trailer. In Fig. 11, CL
corresponds to the horizontal centreline on the face of the van and
UE represents the upper edge. Similar to the results presented in
Fig. 10 the pressure data corresponding to the UE are not
coincident, i.e. for the full-scale data, wind tunnel data and CFD
data z/H is equal to 0.83, 0.88 and 0.88 respectively. Also, it is
worth noting that the wind tunnel data corresponding to CL was
measured at z/h =0.63 as opposed to 0.5. Notwithstanding these
differences, the location of the pressure taps are considered
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
18 M. Sterling et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 98 (2010) 1020

85 yaw
1

0.8

0.6

Cp 0.4
full-scale (UE, z/H=0.83) wind tunnel (UE, z/H=0.88)
0.2 CFD (UE, z/H = 0.83) full-scale (CL, z/H=0.5)
wind tunnel (CL, z/H=0.63) CFD (CL, z/H = 0.63)

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y/L

70 yaw
1

0.8

0.6
Cp

0.4
full-scale (UE, z/H=0.83) CFD (UE, z/H=0.88)
0.2 wind tunnel (UE, z/H=0.88) full-scale (CL, z/H=0.5)
wind tunnel (CL, z/H=0.63) CFD (CL, z/H=0.63)

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y/L
50 yaw
1
full-scale (UE, z/H=0.83) wind tunnel (UE, z/H=0.88)
0.8 CFD (UE, z/H=0.88) full-scale (CL, z/H=0.5)
wind tunnel (CL, z/H=0.63) CFD CL, z/H=0.63)

0.6
Cp

0.4

0.2

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y/L

Fig. 11. Pressure distributions over the windward face the vehicle: (a) 851 yaw; (b) 701 yaw; (c) 501 yaw.

sufciently close together in order to enable comparisons to be
made.
The data in Fig. 11(a) illustrate the same general trend for all of
the results, i.e. a reasonably uniform distribution across the
majority of the windward face with a reduction at either end of
the trailer. The full-scale values are generally larger than the
corresponding wind tunnel data. The CFD results corresponding to
the CL are larger than both the wind tunnel and full-scale data.
However, with respect to the UE, the CFD results illustrate good
agreement with the wind tunnel data over a wide range of y/L
values.
As would be expected, the values of CL across all of the
experiments are larger than their counterpart values of UE. This
trend is also observed for two yaw angles shown in Figs. 10(b) and
(c). However, as the yaw angle reduces from 851 to 701, the
difference between full-scale data and wind tunnel data reduces
and over a large proportion of the trailer similar values of Cp are
obtained (Fig. 11(b)). However, in contrast the difference between
the CL and UE values for the CFD results remains almost constant.
As the yaw angle decreases further to 501 (Fig. 11(c)), the values
of Cp obtained from the wind tunnel are larger than their
corresponding full-scale and CFD counterparts. Fig. 11(c) illus-
trates that irrespective of which experiment is considered, there is
a general of decrease Cp with increasing y/L.
The pressures on the windward face of the vehicle directly
contribute to the wind induced side force. For a yaw angle of 501,
the wind tunnel pressures are larger than those predicted by CFD
and support the ndings illustrated in Fig. 7. However, for yaw
angles of 701 and 801, the same ndings are not apparent which
would suggest behaviour contradictory to that illustrated in Fig. 7.
To explore this issue further would require a detailed analysis of
the pressure distribution over the entire windward and leeward
faces of the vehicle. Unfortunately, such data was not obtained at
the time of the experiments and as a result it is difcult to
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
M. Sterling et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 98 (2010) 1020 19

85 yaw
1
full-scale (y/L=0.13)
0.8
Wind tunnel (y/L=0.81)
full-scale (y/L=0.94)
0.6
CFD (y/L=0.19)

z/H
Wind tunnel (y/L=0.19)
0.4
CFD (y/L=0.81)

0.2

0
0.7 -0.6 -0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0
CP

70 yaw
1

0.8

0.6 full-scale (y/L=0.13)

z/H

Wind tunnel (y/L=0.81)

0.4 full-scale (y/L=0.94)
CFD (y/L=0.19)
0.2 Wind tunnel (y/L=0.19)
CFD (y/L=0.81)
0
0.7 -0.6 -0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0
Cp
50 yaw
1
full-scale (y/L=0.13)
0.8 Wind tunnel (y/L=0.81)
full-scale (y/L=0.94)
0.6 CFD (y/L=0.19)
z/H

Wind tunnel (y/L=0.19)

CFD (y/L=0.81)
0.4

0.2

0
0.7 -0.6 -0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0
Cp

Fig. 12. Pressure distributions over the leeward face the vehicle. (a) 851 yaw; (b) 701 yaw; (c) 501 yaw.

speculate as to why Figs. 7 and 10(a) and (c) appear to illustrate
contradictory information.
Fig. 12 illustrates the pressure distributions over the leeward
face of the vehicle. Data is only available for a selected number of
locations since the experimental resource was focused on
obtaining data relating to the windward side and roof of the
vehicle. With respect to the leeward face data it is worth noting
that the location of each set of pressure taps are similar to one
another but not identical (with the exception of the wind tunnel
and CFD results). For example, data relating to the front of the
vehicle was collected at normalised distances of y/L equal to 0.13
and 0.19 corresponding to full-scale and wind tunnel/CFD
respectively. Whereas the rear pressure taps were positioned at
a normalised distances of 0.94 and 0.81 (full-scale and wind
tunnel/CFD respectively). Despite these differences the locations
are considered close enough together to enable general
comparisons to be made.
Fig. 12(a) illustrates that the pressure distribution between the
front and rear of the vehicle is reasonably consistent across the
height of the vehicle in the wind tunnel. Similarly the CFD results
illustrate an almost uniform distribution at the front of the vehicle
and a reasonably uniform distribution at the rear of the vehicle for
values of z/H40.4. The magnitude of the pressure coefcients are
self consistent with respect to the wind tunnel and CFD results, i.e.
both the front and rear coefcients are similar in magnitude with
respect to location but differ with respect to the simulation
technique. However, although the full-scale data illustrate self
consistent trends there is a larger degree of scatter between the
results obtained for the front and rear of the vehicle. In the full-
scale experiments, the pressure at the rear of the vehicle is
consistently more negative than that predicted by either the wind
tunnel or CFD experiments. However, as the yaw angle decreases
this observation does not hold, and for the 501 case (Fig. 12(c)) the
full-scale data are bounded by the wind tunnel results. It is
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
20 M. Sterling et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 98 (2010) 1020
interesting to note that in general the CFD results tend to be
consistently less negative than the either the full-scale or wind
tunnel results at the same location. Overall, the results illustrated
in Figs. 11(b) and (c) highlight that as the yaw angle decreases the
variation of pressure coefcient with respect to z/H tends to
become more uniform, irrespective of location.
The pressures on the windward face and roof of the vehicle
combine to contribute to the wind induced moment experienced
by the vehicle. The differences observed in Fig. 6 can also be better
understood with reference to Figs. 9 and 10, i.e. the differences
between the wind tunnel and full-scale data arise as a result of
differences in the simulation of the ow over and under the vehicle.
It is unlikely that these differences could be resolved, given the
fundamental restrictions imposed by scale model testing.
Examining the mean coefcient data obtained in Figs. 69
together with that obtained from Figs. 1012 it is clear that the
ow over the vehicle is complex. Furthermore, it appears as if
there are signicant disagreements between the wind tunnel and
CFD simulations. However, it transpires that if these pressure
distributions are area averaged (in order to calculate the mean
force/moment coefcients) then in general, the disagreements
between the simulations are reduced. In other words it is perhaps
not unreasonable to say that the agreement between the CFD and
full-scale data in terms of the rolling moment is somewhat
fortuitous.
4. Conclusions
This paper has examined the wind induced forces and
moments experienced by a high sided lorry using three different
approaches: full-scale measurements (FS); wind tunnel measure-
ments (WT) and CFD simulations. The main conclusions arising
from the work can be summarised as follows:
 All three techniques illustrate that the mean streamwise
velocity prole is correctly simulated.
 There is reasonable agreement between the WT and FS
turbulence intensities across a wide range of heights. However,
as the ground is approached differences in the data are
noticeable. Although these differences exists, they can be
considered negligible in terms of evaluating the overall force
and rolling moment coefcients on the lorry.
 An excellent agreement between the FS and CFD results are
obtained across a wide range of yaw angles for the rolling
moment coefcient, while the WT data are larger than that of
either the FS or CFD data.
 The side force coefcient illustrates similar trends between the
WT and CFD data. When interpreted in conjunction with the
rolling moment coefcient this implies that there are differ-
ences in the lift force simulation between the two methods.
 There are large differences in the trend of lift force coefcient
between the CFD data and the WT/FS data. Although the trends
for FS and WT agree, they differ in magnitude at a number of
yaw angles. It is likely that these differences arise as a result of
the difculties in correctly simulating the near ground ow
conditions.
 An investigation of the pressure coefcients along four sections
illustrate differences in the results obtained from the three
simulation methods. These results give an indication of the
differences in ow eld that exist around the lorry.
Acknowledgements
Funding for the research outlined in this paper was provided
by the EU under the auspices of the Sixth Framework programme
for European research contract CT-2004-512862. The nancial
support is gratefully acknowledged.
References
Baker, C.J., Reynolds, S., 1992. Wind-induced accidents of road vehicles. Accident
Analysis & Prevention 24 (6), 559575.
Baker, C.J., Jones, J., Lopez-Calleja, F., Munday, J., 2004. Measurements of the cross
wind forces on trains. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aero-
dynamics 92 (78), 547563.
Bocciolone, M., Cheli, F., Corradi, R., Diana, G., Tomasini, G., 2003. Wind tunnel tests
for the identication of the aerodynamic forces on rail vehicles. In: 11th
International Conference on Wind Engineering, Lubbock, Texas, USA, 25 June.
Bocciolone, M., Cheli, F., Corradi, R., Muggiasca, S., Tomasini, G., 2008. Crosswind
action on rail vehicles: wind tunnel experimental analyses. Journal of Wind
Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics 96 (5), 584610.
Cook, N.J., 1985. The designers guide to wind loading of building structures. Part 1,
background, damage survey, wind data and structural classication. Butterworths
(for) Building Research Establishment, Department of the Environment, London.
Coleman, S.A., Baker, C.J., 1994. The reduction of risk for high sided road vehicles in
cross winds. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics
44 (13), 401429.
Cheli, F., Belforte, P., Melzi, S., Sabbioni, E., Tomasini, G., 2005. A numerical-
experimental approach for evaluating cross wind aerodynamic effects on
heavy vehicles. In: XIX IAVSD International Association for Vehicle System
Dynamics, 29 August2 September, Milano, Italy.
Delaunay, D., Cle on, L.M., Sacre , C., Sourget, F., Gautier, P.E., 2003. Designing a wind
alarm system for the TGV-Me diterrane e. In: 11th International Conference on
Wind Engineering, Lubbock, Texas, USA, 25 June.
Hargreaves, D.M., Morvan, H.P., 2007. Towards the validation of crosswind effects on
a static high-sided vehicle. NAFEMS International Journal of CFD Case Studies 7.
Quinn, A.D., Sterling, M., Robertson, A.P., Baker, C.J., 2007. An investigation of the
wind induced rolling moment on a commercial vehicle in the atmospheric
boundary layer. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part D,
Journal of Automobile Engineering 221 (11), 13671379.
Richards, P.J., Hoxey, R.P., Short, J.L., 2000. Spectral models for the neutral
atmospheric surface layer. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial
Aerodynamics 87 (23), 167185.
Scarabino, A., Sterling, M., Richards, P.J., Baker, C.J., Hoxey, R.P., 2007. An
investigation of the structure of ensemble averaged extreme wind events.
Wind and Structures 10 (2), 135151.
Snbjornsson, J.Th., Baker, C.J., Sigbjornsson, R., 2007. Probabilistic assessment of
road vehicle safety in windy environments. Journal of Wind Engineering and
Industrial Aerodynamics 95 (911), 14451462.
Sterling, M., Baker, C.J., Richards, P.J., Hoxey, R.P., Quinn, A.D., 2006. An
investigation of the wind statistics and extreme gust events at a rural site.
Wind and Structures 9 (3), 193215.