Comparison of wind pressure measurements on Silsoe experimental building from full-scale observation, wind-tunnel experiments and various CFD techniques

Abstract

The paper is the result of extensive research concentrated on analyzing the accuracy and numerical stability to assess the various turbulence models available widely and the state of the art techniques for the numerical simulation of turbulent fluid flow with a view of finding the most appropriate models for computational wind engineering. These investigations suggest that a turbulence model, suitable for wind engineering applications, should be able to model the anisotropy of turbulent flow while maintaining the ease of use and computational stability. Keeping this in mind five turbulence models such as Standard k ε − , RNG k ε − , Realizable k ε − , Reynolds Stress Method and Large Eddy Simulation have been tested in an attempt to account for anisotropic turbulence and curvature related strain effects and the same have been compared with the full-scale and wind-tunnel data for the present study. Better turbulence models that will be more accurately predict bluff body flow fields and that are numerically stable for complex geometries are of paramount importance if the uses of CFD techniques are to gain wide acceptance by the wind engineering community. .

CFD Evaluation of Philippine Detached Structure with Different Roofing Designs

“…Equations ( 1)-( 4) show the parameters used in the inflow conditions in the computational domain. Equation (1) is the inlet velocity gradient used in the model to replicate the inlet velocity gradient of the wind tunnel and full scale measurement conducted by Irtaza et al [11]. Based on the result of the developed model, the result of the inlet gradient velocity replicated the full scale and wind tunnel results as shown in Figure 3.…”

“…In this modeling, validation and evaluation, the value of the velocity profile constant (A) is 0.15. At the 0.15 value, the inlet velocity profile follows the velocity profile shown by Irtaza et al [11] as presented using Equation (1). The value of the turbulence model constant (Cu) is 0.09.…”

“…Different turbulence models are used to determine the most appropriate turbulence model that can replicate the results of both the full scale and wind tunnel measurements of the wall-mounted cubic bluff body [11]. The different turbulence models implemented are the k-ε, RNG k-ε, Realizable k-ε, k-ω SST (Shear Stress Transport) and Spalart-Allmaras available in OpenFOAM [7].…”

CFD Evaluation on the Pre- and Post- Renovation, and Windows and Doors Opening, of a Typical, Walled, Detached Family House in the Philippines

“…In this modeling and simulation, the value of the velocity profile constant (ɑ) is 0.15. At the 0.15 value, the inlet velocity profile follows the velocity profile, as shown by Enteria [17] and Irtaza et al [28], as presented using Equation (1). The result of Equation (1) is shown in Figure 4a (2) is determined according to the relationship between roughness height ( ), constant ( ) and aerodynamic roughness length ( ), shown by Abohela et al [29] based on the study of Blocken et al [30].…”

A Comparative Study of Turbulence Model Effects in Numerical Analyzing Flow around the Buildings Having Various Aspect Ratios / Farklı En-Boy Oranlarına Sahip Binaların Etrafındaki Akışın Sayısal Çözümünde Türbülans Modellerinin Etkisinin Karşılaştırmalı Araştırılması

“…Irtaza ve ark. [5] Uygulamadaki çoğu akımda olduğu gibi bu çalışmadaki akım da türbülanslıdır. Bu çalışmada türbülans modeli olarak Standart k-ε, RNG k-ε ve Realizable k-ε modelleri ayrı ayrı kullanılmıştır [12] ve kullanılan modellerin açıklamaları aşağıda verilmiştir.…”