The Seventh Asia-Pacific Conference on

Wind Engineering, November 8-12, 2009,

Taipei, Taiwan

AIJ COOPERATIVE PROJECT FOR PRACTICAL

APPLICATIONS OF CFD TO URBAN VENTILATION
Ryuichiro Yoshie1, Akashi Mochida2, Yoshihide Tominaga3,
Taichi Shirasawa4, Hideyuki Tanaka5
1
Professor, Department of Architecture, Tokyo Polytechnic University, 1583, Iiyama Atsugi,
Kanagawa, Japan, yoshie@arch.t-kougei.ac.jp
2
Professor, Department of Architecture and Building Science, Tohoku University, Aoba-ku
6-6-11-1202, Sendai, Japan, mochida@sabine.pln.archi.tohoku.ac.jp
3
Professor, Department of Architecture, Niigata Institute of Technology, Kashiwazaki 1719,
Japan, tominaga@abe.niit.ac.jp
4
Researcher, Graduate School of Eng. , Tokyo Polytechnic University, Iiyama 1583, Atsugi,
Japan, taichi@arch.t-kougei.ac.jp
5
Researcher, Takenaka Research and Development Institute, Otsuka 1-5-1, Inzai, Japan,
tanaka.hideyuki@takenaka.co.jp
ABSTRACT
AIJ guidelines for practical applications of CFD to pedestrian wind environment around buildings were
recently published, which were mainly targeted for strong wind problems around high-rise buildings. However,
urban heat island phenomenon and air pollution problem become serious in weak wind regions such as behind
buildings and within the street canyons. Urban ventilation is now broadly recognized as one of the effective
countermeasures to tackle these problems, thus it is becoming extremely important to ensure adequate air
ventilation in weak wind regions. In order to apply CFD techniques to estimate the air ventilation, thermal and
pollutant dispersion in urban areas, it is important to assess the performance of turbulence models that to be
adopted for simulating these phenomena. Thus, a new working group was organized by the Architectural
Institute of Japan (AIJ) to implement this validation. As the first step of the work, wind tunnel experiments and
CFD simulations for gas and thermal dispersion behind a high-rise building in unstable non-isothermal turbulent
flow were carried out. Standard k- model andtwo-equation model for heat transfer were used as the
investigated turbulence model in this study. The calculated results of these two models showed that there was
little difference between these models, and both models overestimated the size of the recirculation region behind
the building and underestimated the lateral dispersion of the gas.
KEYWORDS: URBAN VENTILATION, POLLUTANT DISPERSION, NON-ISOTHERMAL FLOW, CFD

Introduction
AIJ (Architectural Institute of Japan) guidelines for practical applications of CFD to
pedestrian wind environment around buildings were published in 2007 and 2008 (AIJ, 2007
(Japanese version(Figure 1)), Tominaga et al. 2008 (English version)). During the process of
preparing the guidelines, many comparative and parametric studies on various building
configurations were investigated by the CFD Working Group of AIJ. The purpose was aimed
to elucidate the problems on setting or selecting calculation conditions and the choice of
turbulence models for CFD simulation of the pedestrian wind environment. These
investigations mainly targeted for strong wind problems around high-rise buildings. However,
the importance of air ventilation in urban areas is now broadly recognized as a

The Seventh Asia-Pacific Conference on Wind Engineering, November 8-12, 2009, Taipei, Taiwan

countermeasure to urban heat island phenomenon and air pollution problem, so it is becoming
extremely important to ensure adequate air ventilation in weak wind regions. In order to apply
CFD techniques to estimate the air ventilation, thermal dispersion and pollutant dispersion in
urban areas, it is essential to assess the performance of turbulence models for these
phenomena which occur in non-isothermal flows. However, such validation of CFD for the
non-isothermal flows has rarely been conducted thus far in the field of wind engineering. One
of the reasons is that there are few reliable experimental data to validate the CFD results,
because wind velocity measurement by hot wire anemometer is difficult in the non-isothermal
flows and in the weak wind regions such as behind buildings or within the street canyons. In
the non-isothermal flow fields, output voltage from the hot wire are affected by temperature
fluctuation, and in the weak wind regions where both positive and negative (reverse) flows
exist, the hot wire cannot distinguish them.
Thus, a new working group was organized by the AIJ to provide the reliable
experimental data and conduct the CFD validation for air ventilation, thermal dispersion and
pollutant dispersion in urban areas. As the first step of the work, wind tunnel experiments and
CFD simulations for gas dispersion behind a high-rise building in both isothermal and nonisothermal flows were carried out. The results of the isothermal flow were already reported by
the present authors (Shirasawa et al. 2007). In that study, various RANS models (Standard k-
model, RNG k- model, realizable k- model, Reynolds stress model) and LES were
examined. The results of the LES analysis gave a good agreement with the experimental data
in terms of size of recirculation region behind the building and lateral dispersion of the gas,
while every RANS model overestimated the size of the recirculation region and
underestimated the lateral dispersion of the gas. This was mainly because the periodic
motions caused by the vortex shedding were not reproduced by the RANS models, in spite of
the unsteady calculation.
The present article presents the results of the unstable non-isothermal turbulent flow.
Calculation results obtained from standard k- model and two-equation model for heat
transfer were compared with those of the wind tunnel experiment. The symbols used in this
paper are defined on the last page.

Figure 1: AIJ guide book for numerical simulation of wind environment in urban areas
Wind Tunnel Experiment
Figure 2 shows experimental setup. A building model (a square cylinder:
0.80.80.16m) was placed in an unstable turbulent boundary layer. The experiment was

The Seventh Asia-Pacific Conference on Wind Engineering, November 8-12, 2009, Taipei, Taiwan

conducted in a thermally stratified wind tunnel of Tokyo polytechnic university. The size of
the cross section at measuring part was 1.2m (width)1.0m (height). Surface temperature of
the wind tunnel floor f was uniformly controlled to be 45 . Wind velocity and air
temperature at the building height, UH, H were 1.4m/s and 11 respectively. The vertical
profile of inflow mean wind velocity, mean temperature, and turbulent kinetic energy at
X1/H=-2.5, X2/H=0 are shown in Figure 3. Tracer gas (5%C2H4, 30) was released from a
hole with diameter =5mm on the floor behind the building. The C2H4 gas flow rate was
9.1710-60.05m3/s (0.05 means 5%). For the measurement of velocity, temperature, and
concentration, measuring technique developed by the present authors (Yoshie et al. 2007) was
used. The measuring system was composed of a split film, a cold wire, and a high speed flame
ionization detector, which enabled the following.
1) Simultaneous measurement of instantaneous wind velocity, temperature, and concentration.
Therefore turbulent heat flux and turbulent concentration flux can be measured.
2) Distinction between positive flow and negative (reverse) flow.
3) Appropriate temperature compensation to the output voltage of the split film in a flow with
a large temperature fluctuation.
The sampling frequency was 1000Hz to obtain 90,000 data in 90sec for each measuring point.

H=0.16m

Wind velocity at the

height of building, UH
U
H

(5mm)
Gas discharge
hole

X3 X
2

(5mm

C 2 H4
5

X1

<u1>/UH

Figure 2: Experimental set up

<>-f /

k/UH2

Figure 3: Vertical profiles of mean wind velocity,

mean temperature, and turbulent kinetic energy
(X1/H=-2.5, X2/H=0)

Outline of CFD Simulation

For turbulence modeling, the standard k- model and the two-equation model for heat
transfer proposed by Nagano and Kim (1988) were examined. Both of the models evaluate
the turbulent heat fluxes <ui> by eddy-diffusivity approach as follows.
u i' ' t xi
(1)
The standard k- model determines the eddy diffusivity for heat transfer t by using kinematic
eddy viscosity t and constant turbulent Prandtl number Prt as t= t /Prt. In the present
research Prt was set to be 0.9. On the other hand, the two-equation model for heat transfer
evaluates t by the functions of temperature variance <'2> and dissipation rate of half the
temperature variance , together with k and as follows.

t C k k 1 / 2 ' 2

1/ 2

(2)

The k/ and the <'2> / are the time scale for velocity field and temperature field
respectively, and the (k/)1/2(<'2> /)1/2 expresses the mixed time scale. Cis the numerical
constant of 0.11. As shown in Eq. (2), this model does not require any assumptions for
turbulent Prandtl number. This model was chosen for the present work because it was
reported that a very good agreements with experimental results were achieved for wall heat
transfer on heated horizontal plate and inner surface of heated pipe (Nagano and Kim 1988).

The Seventh Asia-Pacific Conference on Wind Engineering, November 8-12, 2009, Taipei, Taiwan

For both models, constant turbulent Schmidt number of 0.9 was given in the transport
equation of the gas concentration. Table 1 summarizes the calculation conditions, and Figure
4 illustrates computational domain and grid arrangement. Unsteady calculations were
performed for both of the two models, but periodic fluctuations due to the vortex shedding
were not reproduced.
Table 1 Calculation conditions
Computational
domain
Grid discretization
Inflow boundary
Downstream
boundary
Floor and Building
surfaces
Lateral and upper
boundaries
Scheme for
Convection terms

The computational domain covers 12.5H in the stream-wise (x1), 7.5H in the lateral (x2)
directions and 6.25H in the vertical (x3) direction. The computational domain has the same
lateral width and height as those of the wind tunnel.
69(x1)68(x2)44(x3)
<u1> , <>, and k from the experimental data were imposed. <u2>=0, <u3>=0.
The inflow value of was obtained from the relation of Pk+Gk. Pk=<u1u3>(d<u1>/dx3) and
Gk =-g<u3> were estimated from the experimental data.
<'2> from the experimental data were imposed for the two-equation model for heat transfer.
Zero gradient condition was used.
The logarithmic law for a smooth wall was adopted for wall shear stress.
Floor surface temperature and building surface temperature from the experimental data were
prescribed, and the logarithmic low for a smooth wall was adopted for surface heat flux.
Symmetry boundary conditions (slip walls).
The QUICK scheme was applied to all convection terms.

6.25H
(height of wind tunnel)

building

building

7.5H
(width of wind tunnel)

2H

10H
0.5H

(a) Vertical section

(b) Horizontal Plane
Figure 4: Computational domain and grid arrangement.
Results and Discussions
Comparison of two turbulence models
Fig. 5 compares the vertical distribution of eddy diffusivity for heat transfer t
calculated by the standard k- model and the two-equation model for heat transfer. The t
by the two-equation model for heat transfer showed about 20% larger than that of the
standard k- model in the region around X1/H= 0.7-1.5 behind the building. However, mean
temperature distribution of the two models revealed little difference, as shown in Fig. 6. It
seemed that the heat transport by advection was much larger than that of turbulent diffusion in
this region. The differences between the results of these two models in velocity and gas
concentration were also not significant. Thus, the results of the two-equation model for heat
transfer were only shown hereafter.

The Seventh Asia-Pacific Conference on Wind Engineering, November 8-12, 2009, Taipei, Taiwan
1.7

1.7

0.009

1.5

1.5

0.009

0
-1.0

X3/H

0.5

-0.5

0.003 0.006

0.5

1.0

0.003

0.024

X3/H

1.0

0 X1/H0.5

0
-1.0

1.5

1.0

1
18
0.00 0.002

-0.5

0 X1/H0.5

1.0

1.5

(b) Two-equation model for heat transfer

(a) Standard k- model
Fig. 5 Vertical distribution of eddy diffusivity for heat transfer t (X2/H=0)
-0.975

X3/H

1.0

-0.95
-0.925

-1
-0.975
-0.925
-0.9
-0.6
-0
-0.8 .875
5
-0.825
-0.8

1.0

-0.9
-0.875
-0.6 -0.85
-0.8
1.5
0.5
1.0
X1/H

0.5
0
-0.5

1.25
X3/H

1.25

0.5
0
-0.5

0.5

X1/H

1.0

1.5

(a) Standard k- model

(b) Two-equation model for heat transfer
Fig. 6 Vertical distribution of mean temperature (<>f )/ (X2/H=0)
Comparison of experiment and CFD

Mean wind velocity

Scalar wind velocity and velocity vector of the experiment and the calculation are
shown in Fig. 7 (vertical distribution) and Fig.8 (horizontal distribution). The result of the
CFD showed an overestimation of the recirculation size behind the building. The
reattachment lengths on the ground behind the building were 1.13 and 2.38 for the experiment
and the calculation respectively. The calculated downward flow in the region around X1/H=
0.7-1.5 was weaker than the experimental one. On the other hand, calculated reverse flow
near the ground and rising flow along the rear surface of the building are stronger than that of
the experiment. These tendencies were quite similar to those of the isothermal case
(Shirasawa et al. 2007).

0.9

X3/H

1.0

0.1

0.5

X1/H

0.8
0.6
0.5
0.4

0.2

0
-0.5

0.1

0.5

1.25

1.0

1.0

1.0
X3/H

1.25

0.5

1.5

0
-0.5

0.1

0.2
0.5

0.8
0.6
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1

1.0
X1/H

1.5

(a) Experiment
(b) Two-equation model for heat transfer
Fig. 7 Vertical distribution of scalar wind velocity Us/UH & vector (X2/H=0)

The Seventh Asia-Pacific Conference on Wind Engineering, November 8-12, 2009, Taipei, Taiwan

1.0

X2/H

0.5

0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3

0.7

0.8

0
-0.5

0.5

X1/H

1.0

1.5

1.0

0.9

0.5
X2/H

1.0

0
-0.5

0.1

0.3

0.5

0.7
0.5
0.2

X1/H

1.0

1.5

(a) Experiment
(b) Two-equation model for heat transfer
Fig. 8 Horizontal distribution of scalar wind velocity Us/UH & vector (X3/H=0.025)

Mean temperature
Figs. 9 and 10 illustrate vertical and horizontal distributions of mean temperatures
respectively. Although the calculated vertical distribution of the mean temperature was almost
similar to the experiment, the calculated temperature along the rear surface of the building
was higher and contour lines show vertical shape. The conceivable reason was that the strong
rising flow along the rear surface of the building transported the hot air near the ground upper
along the rear surface. In the experiment and the calculation, the area of the highest
temperature was located just behind the building (Fig. 9).

X3/H

1.0
0.5
0
-0.5

-0.950.975
-0.9
-0. 25
9
-0.8
75
-0.85
-0.825
-0.625
0
0.5
1.0
X1/H

1.25

-1
-0.975
-0.925
-0.9
-0.6
-0.875
-0.8
5
-0.825
-0.8

1.0
X3/H

1.25

0.5

1.5

0
-0.5

0.5

X1/H

1.0

1.5

(b) Two-equation model for heat transfer

(a) Experiment
Fig. 9 Vertical distribution of mean temperature (<>f )/ (X2/H=0)

X2/H

0.5
0
-0.5

25
-0.7 5 -0.625 -0.75
-0.7
-0.8
-0.775
-0.7 -0.75
25

0.5 1.0
X1/H

1.0
0.5

775
-0 .
1.5

X2/H

1.0

0
-0.5

-0.75
-0.725
-0.6
0

-0.725

0.5 1.0
X1/H

-0.7

-0.75
-0.775
1.5

(b) Two-equation model for heat transfer

(a) Experiment
Fig. 10 Horizontal distribution of mean temperature (<>f )/ (X3/H=0.025)

Mean gas concentration

Figs. 11 and 12 show the distribution of mean gas concentration. In the calculation
results, the high concentration area near the ground did not spread downwind of the gas
emission point (marked as black triangle). Similar to the temperature distributions, shown
previously, calculated gas concentration along the rear surface of the building was higher due
to the rising flow from the ground. The calculation did not reproduce the periodic fluctuations
due to vortex shedding, and as a result the dispersion in the X2 direction was inhibited, and
the gas was transported toward the rear surface of the building near the ground with the
recirculation flow. These tendencies were also quite similar to those of isothermal case
(Shirasawa et al. 2007).

The Seventh Asia-Pacific Conference on Wind Engineering, November 8-12, 2009, Taipei, Taiwan
1.25

1.25

1.0

1.0
X3/H

2.5

0.5

0.5
0
-0.5

20 10
40
80 320
160 640

0.5

X1/H

1.0

1.5

0
-0.5

2.5

10
20
40

X3/H

80
160

320
640
0.5
1.0
X1/H

1.5

(b) Two-equation model for heat transfer

(a) Experiment
Fig. 10 Vertical distribution of s mean concentration (X2/H=0)
1.0

1.0

0
-0.5

2
160 40 0

0.5

20 10

X2/H

X2/H

0.5

1
2.5
5

10
640
1.5

0.5 1.0
X1/H

0
-0.5

2.5

640
0

1.5

0.5 1.0
X1/H

(a) Experiment
(b) Two-equation model for heat transfer
Fig. 11 Horizontal distribution of mean concentration (X3/H=0.025)

Turbulent heat flux

Fig. 13 illustrates the vertical distribution of turbulent heat flux <u3>. In the
experimental result, the largest <u3> was located in the downward flow region around
X1/H=0.7-1.5. The distribution pattern of the calculation was rather different from the
experiment, but the order of the value was similar.

0.5 1.0
X1/H

025

1.5

0.001

0.002

0
0.5
0
-0.5

0.002

01

0 .0

0.006

1.0

X3/H

X3/H

01

0
-0.5

0.002
0.003

0.0

0.5

0 -0.00
1

1.0

1.25

0.001

0.0

1.25

0.005

0.0

03

1.5

0.5 1.0
X1/H

(b) Two-equation model for heat transfer

(a) Experiment
Fig. 13 Vertical distribution of turbulent heat flux <u3>/(UH) (X2/H=0)

Turbulent concentration flux

Fig. 14 shows the horizontal distribution of turbulent concentration flux <u2c> near
the ground surface. The shape of the lateral turbulent concentration flux of the calculation was
narrower than that of the experiment because of the lack of periodic fluctuations due to vortex
shedding.
1.0

1.0

0
-0.5

2
160 40 0

0.5

10
640

0.5 1.0
X1/H

20 10

X2/H

X2/H

0.5

1
2.5
5

1.5

0
-0.5

2.5

640
0

0.5 1.0
X1/H

1.5

(a) Experiment
(b) Two-equation model for heat transfer
Fig. 14 Horizontal distribution of turbulent concentration flux <u2c>/(UHC0) (X3/H=0.025)

The Seventh Asia-Pacific Conference on Wind Engineering, November 8-12, 2009, Taipei, Taiwan

Conclusions
In this study, wind tunnel experiments and CFD simulations for gas and thermal
dispersion behind a building in unstable non-isothermal turbulent flow were carried out. The
standard k- model and the two-equation model for heat transfer were adopted in the CFD
calculation. The both models did not reproduce the vortex shedding, in spite of the unsteady
calculation. The calculated results of these two models showed little difference from each
other, and both models overestimated the size of the recirculation region. The calculated
reverse flow near the ground and rising flow along the rear surface of the building were
stronger compared with the experimental result. These flows affected the distributions of
temperature and gas concentration.
Symbols
f : instantaneous value of a quantity
<f> : time-averaged value of f
f : fluctuation from time-averaged value f=ff
xi : three components of space coordinates (i = 1,2,3: stream-wise, lateral, vertical) [m]
ui : three components of velocity vector [m/s]
c : gas concentration [m3/m3]
: temperature []
H : building height (0.16 [m])
<UH>: inflow stream-wise velocity at height H (1.4[m/s])
H: inflow temperature at height H (11 [])
f: floor temperature (45 [])
: f -H (34 [])
q : gas emission rate (9.1710-60.05 [m3/s] )
C0: reference gas concentration (q/<UH>H2)
k : turbulent kinetic energy [m2/s2]
dissipation rate of turbulent kinetic energy [m2/s3]
: dissipation rate of half the temperature variance [2/s]
References
Architectural Institute of Japan (2007), Guide book for numerical simulation of wind environment in urban
areas
Tominaga, Y., Mochida, A., Yoshie, R., Kataoka, H., Nozu, T., Yoshikawa, M., and Shirasawa, T.(2008), AIJ
guidelines for practical applications of CFD to pedestrian wind environment around buildings, Journal of
Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 96, 1749-1761.
Shirasawa, T., Yoshie, R., Tanaka, H., Kobayashi, T., Mochida, A., Endo, y., (2008), Cross comparison of
CFD results of gas diffusion in weak wind region behind a high-rise building, Proceedings of The 4th
International Conference on Advances in Wind and Structures (AWAS08), Jeju, Korea, May, 1038-1050.
Yoshie, Y., Tanaka, H., and Shirasawa, T. (2007), Technique for Simultaneously Measuring Fluctuating
Velocity, Temperature and Concentration in Non-isothermal Flow, Proceedings of the 12th International
Conference on Wind Engineering, Cairns, Australia, July, 1399-1406.
Nagano, Y. and Kim, C. (1988), A two-equation model for heat transport in wall turbulent shear flows, Trans.
ASME, J. Heat Transfer, 110, 583-589.