Evaluation of Various Turbulence Models in Predicting Airflow and Turbulence in Enclosed Environments by CFD: Part 2—Comparison with Experimental Data from Literature
- 1 November 2007
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Taylor & Francis Ltd in HVAC&R Research
- Vol. 13 (6), 871-886
- https://doi.org/10.1080/10789669.2007.10391460
Abstract
Numerous turbulence models have been developed in the past two decades, and many of them can be used in predicting airflows and turbulence in enclosed environments. It is important to evaluate the generality and robustness of the turbulence models for various indoor airflow scenarios. This study evaluated the performance of eight turbulence models, potentially suitable for indoor airflow, in terms of accuracy and computing cost. These models cover a wide range of computational fluid dynamics (CFD) approaches, including Reynolds averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) modeling, hybrid RANS and large-eddy simulation (or detached-eddy simulation [DES]), and large-eddy simulation (LES). The RANS turbulence models tested include the indoor zero-equation model, three two-equation models (the RNG k-∊, low Reynolds number k-∊, and SST k-ω models), a three-equation model ( model), and a Reynolds-stress model (RSM). The investigation tested these models for representative airflows in enclosed environments, such as forced convection and mixed convection in ventilated spaces, natural convection with medium temperature gradient in a tall cavity, and natural convection with large temperature gradient in a model fire room. The air velocity, air temperature, Reynolds stresses, and turbulent heat fluxes predicted by the models were compared against the experimental data from the literature. The study also compared the computing time used by each model for all cases. The results reveal that LES provides the most detailed flow features, while the computing time is much higher than for RANS models, and the accuracy may not always be the highest. Among the RANS models studied, the RNG k-ω and a modified model perform the best overall in four cases studied. Meanwhile, the other models have superior performance only in particular cases. While each turbulence model has good accuracy in certain flow categories, each flow type favors different turbulence models. Therefore, we summarize in the conclusions and recommendations both the performance of each particular model in different flows and the best suited turbulence models for each flow category.Keywords
This publication has 11 references indexed in Scilit:
- Evaluation of Various Turbulence Models in Predicting Airflow and Turbulence in Enclosed Environments by CFD: Part 1—Summary of Prevalent Turbulence ModelsHVAC&R Research, 2007
- Computations of transonic flow with the v2–f turbulence modelInternational Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow, 2001
- MODEL EXPERIMENT OF FLOW AND TEMPERATURE FIELD IN ROOM FOR VALIDATING NUMERICAL SIMULATION ANALYSIS OF NEWLY PROPOSED VENTILATION EFFECTIVENESS : Study on evaluation of ventilation effectiveness of occupied space in roomJournal of Architecture and Planning (Transactions of AIJ), 2000
- A zero-equation turbulence model for indoor airflow simulationEnergy and Buildings, 1998
- Two-equation eddy-viscosity turbulence models for engineering applicationsAIAA Journal, 1994
- A proposed modification of the Germano subgrid-scale closure methodPhysics of Fluids A: Fluid Dynamics, 1992
- A one-equation turbulence model for aerodynamic flowsPublished by American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) ,1992
- A dynamic subgrid-scale eddy viscosity modelPhysics of Fluids A: Fluid Dynamics, 1991
- Renormalization group analysis of turbulence. I. Basic theoryJournal of Scientific Computing, 1986
- Ground effects on pressure fluctuations in the atmospheric boundary layerJournal of Fluid Mechanics, 1978