Numerical modelling of the turbulent flow developing within and over a 3-d building array, part iii: a istributed drag force approach, its implementation and application

Author： Lien Fue-sang Yee Eugene

Publisher： Springer Publishing Company

ISSN： 0006-8314

Source： Boundary-Layer Meteorology, Vol.114, Iss.2, 2005-02, pp. : 287-313

Disclaimer: Any content in publications that violate the sovereignty, the constitution or regulations of the PRC is not accepted or approved by CNPIEC.

Previous Menu Next

Abstract

A modified k-ε model is used for the simulation of the mean wind speed and turbulence for a neutrally-stratified flow through and over a building array, where the array is treated as a porous medium with the drag on the unresolved buildings in the array represented by a distributed momentum sink. More specifically, this model is based on time averaging the spatially averaged Navier–Stokes equation, in which the effects of the obstacle-atmosphere interaction are included through the introduction of a distributed mean-momentum sink (representing drag on the unresolved buildings in the array). In addition, closure of the time-averaged, spatially averaged Navier–Stokes equation requires two additional prognostic equations, namely one for the time-averaged resolved-scale kinetic energy of turbulence, $$overline kappa $$, and another for its dissipation rate, ε. The performance of the proposed model and some simplified versions derived from it is compared with the spatially averaged, time-mean velocity and various spatially averaged Reynolds stresses diagnosed from a high-resolution computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulation of the flow within and over an aligned array of sharp-edged cubes with a plan area density of 0.25. Four different methods for diagnosis of the drag coefficient C_Dfor the aligned cube array, required for the volumetric drag force representation of the cubes, are investigated here. We found that the model predictions for mean wind speed and turbulence in the building array were not sensitive to the differing treatments of the source and sink terms in the $$overline kappa $$ and &egr; equations (e.g., inclusion of only the `zeroth-order' approximation for the source/sink terms compared with inclusion of a higher-order approximation for the source/sink terms in the $$overline kappa $$ and &egr; equations), implying that the higher-order approximations of these source/sink terms did not offer any predictive advantage. A possible explanation for this is the utilization of the Boussinesq linear stress–strain constitutive relation within the k–&egr; modelling framework, whose implicit omission of any anisotropic eddy-viscosity effects renders it incapable of predicting any strong anisotropy of the turbulence field that might exist in the building array.