Advertisement

Environmental Modeling & Assessment

, Volume 16, Issue 2, pp 169–181 | Cite as

Numerical Model Inter-comparison for Wind Flow and Turbulence Around Single-Block Buildings

  • Sotiris VardoulakisEmail author
  • Reneta Dimitrova
  • Kate Richards
  • David Hamlyn
  • Giorgio Camilleri
  • Mark Weeks
  • Jean-François Sini
  • Rex Britter
  • Carlos Borrego
  • Michael Schatzmann
  • Nicolas Moussiopoulos
Article

Abstract

Wind flow and turbulence within the urban canopy layer can influence the heating and ventilation of buildings, affecting the health and comfort of pedestrians, commuters and building occupants. In addition, the predictive capability of pollutant dispersion models is heavily dependent on wind flow models. For that reason, well-validated microscale models are needed for the simulation of wind fields within built-up urban microenvironments. To address this need, an inter-comparison study of several such models was carried out within the European research network ATREUS. This work was conducted as part of an evaluation study for microscale numerical models, so they could be further implemented to provide reliable wind fields for building energy simulation and pollutant dispersion codes. Four computational fluid dynamics (CFD) models (CHENSI, MIMO, VADIS and FLUENT) were applied to reduced-scale single-block buildings, for which quality-assured and fully documented experimental data were obtained. Simulated wind and turbulence fields around two surface-mounted cubes of different dimensions and wall roughness were compared against experimental data produced in the wind tunnels of the Meteorological Institute of Hamburg University under different inflow and boundary conditions. The models reproduced reasonably well the general flow patterns around the single-block buildings, although over-predictions of the turbulent kinetic energy were observed near stagnation points in the upwind impingement region. Certain discrepancies between the CFD models were also identified and interpreted. Finally, some general recommendations for CFD model evaluation and use in environmental applications are presented.

Keywords

CFD Wind flow Turbulent kinetic energy Building microclimate Pollutant dispersion Model evaluation 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was carried out within the framework of the ATREUS research network operated under the European Commission Training and Mobility of Researchers Programme (Project Reference: HPRN-CT-2002-00207). We would like to thank all researchers within ATREUS for their support and collaboration. Complete computer support was given to the French team (ECN) by the Scientific Council of Institut de Développement et de Recherche pour l’Informatique Scientifique (IDRIS), Orsay, France. Dr Rex Britter acknowledges the support of the Singapore National Research Foundation through the Singapore-MIT Alliance for Research and Technology (SMART) Center for Environmental Sensing and Modeling (CENSAM).

References

  1. 1.
    Niachou, K., Livada, I., & Santamouris, M. (2008). Experimental study of temperature and airflow distribution inside an urban street canyon during hot summer weather conditions. Part II: airflow analysis. Building and Environment, 43(8), 1393–1403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Papadopoulos, A. M. (2001). The influence of street canyons on the cooling loads of buildings and the performance of air conditioning systems. Energy and Buildings, 33(6), 601–607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Milner, J. T., ApSimon, H. M., & Croxford, B. (2006). Spatial variation of CO concentrations within an office building and outdoor influences. Atmospheric Environment, 40(33), 6338–6348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chu, A. K. M., Kwok, R. C. W., & Yu, K. N. (2005). Study of pollution dispersion in urban areas using computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and geographic information system (GIS). Environmental Modelling and Software, 20(3), 273–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Solazzo, E., & Britter, R. E. (2007). Transfer processes in a simulated urban street canyon. Boundary-Layer Meteorology, 124(1), 43–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Neofytou, P., Haakana, M., Venetsanos, A., Kousa, A., Bartzis, J., & Kukkonen, J. (2008). Computational fluid dynamics modelling of the pollution dispersion and comparison with measurements in a street canyon in Helsinki. Environmental Modeling and Assessment, 13(3), 439–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Yang, Y., & Shao, Y. P. (2008). Numerical simulations of flow and pollution dispersion in urban atmospheric boundary layers. Environmental Modelling and Software, 23(7), 906–921.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kassomenos, P., Karayannis, A., Panagopoulos, I., Karakitsios, S., & Petrakis, M. (2008). Modelling the dispersion of a toxic substance at a workplace. Environmental Modelling and Software, 23(1), 82–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lin, Z., Jiang, F., Chow, T. T., Tsang, C. F., & Lu, W. Z. (2006). CFD analysis of ventilation effectiveness in a public transport interchange. Building and Environment, 41(3), 254–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chow, W. K. (1996). Application of computational fluid dynamics in building services engineering. Building and Environment, 31(5), 425–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Stamou, A., & Katsiris, I. (2006). Verification of a CFD model for indoor airflow and heat transfer. Building and Environment, 41(9), 1171–1181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Stathopoulou, O. I., & Assimakopoulos, V. D. (2008). Numerical study of the indoor environmental conditions of a large athletic hall using the CFD code PHOENICS. Environmental Modeling and Assessment, 13(3), 449–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gao, N., & Niu, J. (2004). CFD study on micro-environment around human body and personalized ventilation. Building and Environment, 39(7), 795–805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gosman, A. D. (1999). Developments in CFD for industrial and environmental applications in wind engineering. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 81, 21–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kim, S. E., & Boysan, F. (1999). Application of CFD to environmental flows. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 81, 145–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Grawe, D., Cai, X. M., & Harrison, R. M. (2007). Large eddy simulation of shading effects on NO2 and O3 concentrations within an idealised street canyon. Atmospheric Environment, 41(34), 7304–7314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cai, X. M., Barlow, J. F., & Belcher, S. E. (2008). Dispersion and transfer of passive scalars in and above street canyons—Large-eddy simulations. Atmospheric Environment, 42(23), 5885–5895.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Smith, W. S., Reisner, J. M., & Kao, C. Y. J. (2001). Simulations of flow around a cubical building: comparison with towing-tank data and assessment of radiatively induced thermal effects. Atmospheric Environment, 35(22), 3811–3821.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sahm, P., Louka, P., Ketzel, M., Guilloteau, E., & Sini, J.-F. (2002). Intercomparison of numerical urban dispersion models—Part I: Street canyon and single building configurations. Water, Air, & Soil Pollution: Focus, 2, 587–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Richards, P. J., & Quinn, A. D. (2002). A 6 m cube in an atmospheric boundary layer flow Part 2. Computational solutions. Wind and Structures, 5(2–4), 177–192.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lakehal, D., & Rodi, W. (1997). Calculation of the flow past a surface-mounted cube with two-layer turbulence models. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 67–8, 65–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Murakami, S. (1998). Overview of turbulence models applied in CWE-1997. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 74–6, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Meroney, R. N., Leitl, B. M., Rafailidis, S., & Schatzmann, M. (1999). Wind-tunnel and numerical modeling of flow and dispersion about several building shapes. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 81, 333–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ketzel, M., Louka, P., Sahm, P., Guilloteau, E., Sini, J.-F., & Moussiopoulos, N. (2002). Intercomparison of numerical urban dispersion models—Part II: Street canyon in Hannover, Germany. Water, Air, & Soil Pollution: Focus, 2, 603–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Vardoulakis, S., Fisher, B. E. A., Pericleous, K., & Gonzalez-Flesca, N. (2003). Modelling air quality in street canyons: a review. Atmospheric Environment, 37(2), 155–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sini, J.-F., Anquetin, S., & Mestayer, P. G. (1996). Pollutant dispersion and thermal effects in urban street canyons. Atmospheric Environment, 30(15), 2659–2677.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Louka, P., Vachon, G., Sini, J.-F., Mestayer, P. G., & Rosant, J.-M. (2002). Thermal effects on the airflow in a street canyon—Nantes ‘99 experimental results and model simulations. Water, Air, & Soil Pollution: Focus, 2, 351–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Schatzmann, M., & Leitl, B. (2009). Evaluation of numerical flow and dispersion models for applications in industrial and urban areas. Chemical Engineering and Technology, 32, 241–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sagrado, A. P. G., van Beeck, J., Rambaud, P., & Olivari, D. (2002). Numerical and experimental modelling of pollutant dispersion in a street canyon. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 90(4–5), 321–339.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wright, N. G., & Easom, G. J. (2003). Non-linear k-epsilon turbulence model results for flow over a building at full-scale. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 27(12), 1013–1033.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Richards, P. J., Hoxey, R. P., & Short, L. J. (2001). Wind pressures on a 6 m cube. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 89(14–15), 1553–1564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Hoxey, R. P., Richards, P. J., & Short, J. L. (2002). A 6 m cube in an atmospheric boundary layer flow Part 1. Full-scale and wind-tunnel results. Wind and Structures, 5(2–4), 165–176.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Papadopoulos, A. M., & Moussiopoulos, N. (2004). Towards a holistic approach for the urban environment and its impact on energy utilisation in buildings: The ATREUS project. Journal of Environmental Monitoring, 6(10), 841–848.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Schatzmann, M., Donat, J., Hendel, S., & Krishan, G. (1995). Design of a low-cost stratified boundary-layer wind tunnel. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 54–55, 483–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Richards, K., Schatzmann, M., & Leitl, B. (2006). Wind tunnel experiments modelling the thermal effects within the vicinity of a single block building with leeward wall heating. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 94(8), 621–636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    MIHU (2010). Environmental Wind Tunnel Laboratory Facilities Meteorological Institute. Hamburg University, http://www.mi.uni-hamburg.de/Facilities.311.0.html. Accessed 28 May 2010.
  37. 37.
    Ehrhard, J., Khatib, I. A., Winkler, C., Kunz, R., Moussiopoulos, N., & Ernst, G. (2000). The microscale model MIMO: Development and assessment. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 85(2), 163–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Assimakopoulos, V. D., ApSimon, H. M., & Moussiopoulos, N. (2003). A numerical study of atmospheric pollutant dispersion in different two-dimensional street canyon configurations. Atmospheric Environment, 37(29), 4037–4049.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Moussiopoulos, N., Barmpas, P., Ossanlis, I., & Bartzis, J. (2008). Comparison of numerical and experimental results for the evaluation of the depollution effectiveness of photocatalytic coverings in street canyons. Environmental Modeling and Assessment, 13(3), 357–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Borrego, C., Tchepel, O., Costa, A. M., Amorim, J. H., & Miranda, A. I. (2003). Emission and dispersion modelling of Lisbon air quality at local scale. Atmospheric Environment, 37(37), 5197–5205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Chan, T. L., Dong, G., Leung, C. W., Cheung, C. S., & Hung, W. T. (2002). Validation of a two-dimensional pollutant dispersion model in an isolated street canyon. Atmospheric Environment, 36(5), 861–872.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Hamlyn, D., & Britter, R. (2005). A numerical study of the flow field and exchange processes within a canopy of urban-type roughness. Atmospheric Environment, 39(18), 3243–3254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Di Sabatino, S., Buccolieri, R., Pulvirenti, B., & Britter, R. E. (2008). Flow and pollutant dispersion in street canyons using FLUENT and ADMS-Urban. Environmental Modeling and Assessment, 13(3), 369–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    EIONET (2010). Model documentation system. European Topic Centre on Air and Climate Change. European Environment Information and Observation Network. http://air-climate.eionet.europa.eu/databases/MDS/. Accessed 28 May 2010.
  45. 45.
    Jones, W. P., & Launder, B. E. (1972). Prediction of laminarization with a 2-equation model of turbulence. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 15(2), 301–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Patankar, S. V., & Spalding, D. B. (1972). Calculation procedure for heat, mass and momentum-transfer in 3-dimensional parabolic flows. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 15(10), 1787–1806.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    FLUENT (2005). FLUENT 6.2 version. User's manual. Fluent Inc.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Launder, B., & Spalding, D. (1974). The numerical computation of turbulent flows. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 3, 269–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Britter, R., & Schatzmann, M. (2007). Model evaluation guidance and protocol document. COST Action 732, ISBN 3-00-018312-4.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Li, X. X., Liu, C. H., Leung, D. Y. C., & Lam, K. M. (2006). Recent progress in CFD modelling of wind field and pollutant transport in street canyons. Atmospheric Environment, 40(29), 5640–5658.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Ehrhard, J., & Moussiopoulos, N. (2000). On a new nonlinear turbulence model for simulating flows around building-shaped structures. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 88(1), 91–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Yakhot, V., & Orszag, S. A. (1986). Renormalization-group analysis of turbulence. Physical Review Letters, 57(14), 1722–1724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Chen, Y. S., & Kim, S. W. (1987). Computation of turbulent flows using an extended k-ε turbulence closure model. NASA CR-179204.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Laslandes, S., & Sacre, C. (1998). Transport of particles by a turbulent flow around an obstacle—A numerical and a wind tunnel approach. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 74–6, 577–587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Leitl, B. M., & Meroney, R. N. (1997). Car exhaust dispersion in a street canyon. Numerical critique of a wind tunnel experiment. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 67–8, 293–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Vardoulakis, S., Fisher, B. E. A., Gonzalez-Flesca, N., & Pericleous, K. (2002). Model sensitivity and uncertainty analysis using roadside air quality measurements. Atmospheric Environment, 36(13), 2121–2134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Vardoulakis, S., Valiantis, M., Milner, J., & ApSimon, H. (2007). Operational air pollution modelling in the UK—Street canyon applications and challenges. Atmospheric Environment, 41(22), 4622–4637.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Schatzmann, M., & Leitl, B. (2002). Validation and application of obstacle-resolving urban dispersion models. Atmospheric Environment, 36(30), 4811–4821.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Hefny, M. M., & Ooka, R. (2009). CFD analysis of pollutant dispersion around buildings: Effect of cell geometry. Building and Environment, 44(8), 1699–1706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Franke, J., Hellsten, A., Schlünzen, H., & Carissimo, B. (2007). Best practice guideline for the CFD simulation of flows in the urban environment. COST Action 732, ISBN 3-00-018312-4.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Xie, X. M., Huang, Z., & Wang, J. S. (2005). Impact of building configuration on air quality in street canyon. Atmospheric Environment, 39(25), 4519–4530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Bartak, M., Beausoleil-Morrison, I., Clarke, J. A., Denev, J., Drkal, F., Lain, M., et al. (2002). Integrating CFD and building simulation. Building and Environment, 37(8–9), 865–871.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Solazzo, E., Cai, X., & Vardoulakis, S. (2008). Modelling wind flow and vehicle-induced turbulence in urban streets. Atmospheric Environment, 42(20), 4918–4931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Oxizidis, S., Dudek, A. V., & Papadopoulos, A. M. (2008). A computational method to assess the impact of urban climate on buildings using modeled climatic data. Energy and Buildings, 40(3), 215–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Murena, F., Favale, G., Vardoulakis, S., & Solazzo, E. (2009). Modelling dispersion of traffic pollution in a deep street canyon: Application of CFD and operational models. Atmospheric Environment, 43(14), 2303–2311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sotiris Vardoulakis
    • 1
    • 7
    Email author
  • Reneta Dimitrova
    • 2
  • Kate Richards
    • 3
  • David Hamlyn
    • 4
  • Giorgio Camilleri
    • 6
  • Mark Weeks
    • 1
  • Jean-François Sini
    • 2
  • Rex Britter
    • 5
  • Carlos Borrego
    • 1
  • Michael Schatzmann
    • 3
  • Nicolas Moussiopoulos
    • 6
  1. 1.CESAM, Department of Environment and PlanningUniversity of AveiroAveiroPortugal
  2. 2.Laboratoire de Mécanique des Fluides, Ecole Centrale de NantesNantes Cedex 3France
  3. 3.Meteorological Institute, University of HamburgHamburgGermany
  4. 4.Department of EngineeringUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeUK
  5. 5.Senseable City LaboratoryMassachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridgeUSA
  6. 6.Laboratory of Heat Transfer and Environmental EngineeringAristotle University of ThessalonikiThessalonikiGreece
  7. 7.Centre for Radiation, Chemical and Environmental Hazards, Health Protection AgencyOxonUK

Personalised recommendations