CFD Forum 2005

Bad Nauheim, Deutschland

- 1 -
Comparison of different turbulence models to compute wall
affected room airflows
Comparison of different turbulence models to compute wall
affected room airflows
Ch. Heschl
1
, W. Sanz
2
, P. Klanatsky
1
and F. Madou
1
Fachhochschulstudiengnge Burgenland GmbH
1
Steinamangerstrae 21, A-7423 Pinkafeld
TU Graz, Institute for Thermal Turbomachinery and Machine Dynamics
2
Inffeldgasse 25, A-8010 Graz
Abstract
It is well-known that the turbulence anisotropy has a remarkable influence on the flow
distribution of three dimensional wall jets. So it can be expected that accurate simulations of
room airflows with air supplies mounted just below the ceiling demands a higher level
turbulence closure.
In this paper detailed three dimensional PIV measurement results of the velocity distribution in
a symmetrical model room with air inflow at an angle =15 towards the wall are presented.
The experimental data are compared with the velocity distributions computed by different
turbulence models. The potential of the improvement of the simulation by using different
nonlinear eddy viscosity, pressure strain and hybrid Reynolds stress models is discussed.
Key Words:
v2f turbulence model, nonlinear v2f turbulence model, cubic pressure strain model, wall
reflection effect, two component closure, TCL, hybrid RSM turbulence model, wall affected room
airflows, UDF, PIV

Introduction
One of the most used air supply systems
are inlet grilles mounted just below the
ceiling. An accurate prediction of their flow
characteristics in ventilated rooms requires
that the governing influence of Coanda-
effect and anisotropic Reynolds stress
induced secondary motion can be exactly
modelled.
In the last years both flow phenomena
were discussed by different authors in
separate investigations. For example, the
Coanda-effect was discussed by Lai and Lu
(1992 and 1996), Newman (1961) and Nasr
and Lai (1998). The studies included
CFD Forum 2005
Bad Nauheim, Deutschland
- 2 -
Comparison of different turbulence models to compute wall
affected room airflows
investigations about the mean velocity and
the turbulence field for two dimensional
offset jets. Three dimensional effects
affected by anisotropic Reynolds stresses
were not investigated. But this
phenomenon was investigated for a three
dimensional wall jet by Craft and Launder
(2001), Lbcke et al. (2003) and
Abrahamsson (1997). The room airflow
induced by a wall jet without an offset
mounted below the ceiling was discussed
by Schlin and Nielsen (2004). The authors
concluded that the spreading rate parallel
to the surface is too small when the linear
eddy viscosity concept is used to compute
the turbulence quantities. It is also well
known that three dimensional effects arise
when the air inlet system is mounted with
an offset from the ceiling and the side
walls. For example this flow phenomenon
was investigated by Heschl et al. (2002a
and 2002b). The principle used in their
experimental and numerical setup is shown
in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Investigated full scale test
room, inlet (purple) and outlet
(yellow)
In order to evaluate the thermal comfort
and the indoor air quality with CFD
simulations all primary and secondary flow
mechanism must be reproduced. In this
paper detailed three dimensional PIV
measurement data of the velocity
distribution in a symmetrical room are
presented. The experimental data is
compared with the velocity and turbulence
distribution computed with many different
turbulence models as presented by Heschl
et al. (2005).
Experimental setup
The test bench for the experimental
investigations consists of an air supply
system with mass flow measurement
facilities, a scale down model made of
plexiglass, an air-conditioned test room and
a PIV measurement system. The PIV
system was assembled for two dimensional
measuring. To record a larger
measurement field two cameras were used.
The geometrical data of the plexiglass
model is described in the appendix. The
experimental arrangement is also shown in
the appendix (Figure 14).
The test bench was equipped with a fan
unit with frequency control, which takes the
air over the orifice plate, rectifier, flow
measurement unit, temperature sensors,
seeding mixing chamber into the plexiglass
test model. To get a better illumination the
plexiglass model was implemented in a
black coated test room. To minimize the
thermal influences the laser energy supply
and the computer equipment were placed
outside of the test room. To ensure
isothermal conditions the test room was
additionally ventilated. The inlet air
temperature, the outlet air temperature and
the surface temperature of the surrounding
walls of the plexiglass model were
monitored by 10 Pt100 temperature sensors
over the whole measurement time. Also the
CFD Forum 2005
Bad Nauheim, Deutschland
- 3 -
Comparison of different turbulence models to compute wall
affected room airflows
ambient pressure and the inlet mass flow
were monitored. The used plexiglass model
and the traverse system are shown in
Figure 2.

Figure 2: Plexiglass model
The light sheet optic and the two cameras
were mounted on a two dimensional
traverse system, so that only one
calibration for the PIV-measurements was
necessary. The measured planes were
defined in such way that the whole flow
area in the x-y plane could be measured by
changing the lightsheet and camera
positions. The field of view of one camera
was 155 x 200 mm, so that the complete
height of the model room was measured in
every position. In the z-direction the x and
y velocity components were also measured
by traversing the lightsheet and cameras in
steps of 20 mm. The interrogation areas
were defined with 32x32 pixels and an
overlapping of 25%, so that in the x-y
planes every 3.6 mm one velocity vector
was measured and in the z-direction every
20mm.
The inlet was defined by an air supply duct
which consists of evenly distributed 222
holes with a diameter of 2mm. The supply
duct was fed from both end sides over a
flow rectifier (see Fig. 3). The geometrical
data of the air supply duct are described in
the appendix. The mean inlet velocity was
14.84 m/s (air change rate 84) and the inlet
angle was 15 towards the ceiling wall.

Figure 3: Seeding mixing chamber and
air supply duct
In order to eliminate the fluctuations due to
the turbulence the measuring data were
averaged over a measuring time of 30
seconds with a sample rate of 4 Hz.
For the accurate determination of the
density during the measurement the
temperatures, the relative humidity and the
ambient pressure were logged.
Numerical setup
All computational results presented in this
paper were obtained with the commercial
CFD code FLUENT 6.1.21 by using the
turbulence models described in Heschl et al.
(2005). For the momentum equation and
the transport equation of turbulence
parameters the second order upwind
discretization was applied.

CFD Forum 2005
Bad Nauheim, Deutschland
- 4 -
Comparison of different turbulence models to compute wall
affected room airflows
Table 1: Used turbulence models (cp. Heschl et al. 2005)
turbulence model designation short cut remark
Standard k model
ske standard model in Fluent
k model with enhanced wall treatment
ske-et standard model in Fluent
Reynolds stress model with linear pressure
strain model and wall reflection term
IP standard model in Fluent
Reynolds stress model with linear pressure
strain model, wall reflection term and
enhanced wall treatment
IP-et standard model in Fluent
Reynolds stress model with quadratic
pressure strain model
SSG standard model in Fluent
v2f model v2f in Fluent implemented via UDF
v2f model modified by Davidson v2f-dav in Fluent implemented via UDF
nonlinear v2f model by Pettersson Reif (1999) v2f-pet in Fluent implemented via UDF
nonlinear v2f model by Pettersson Reif
(1999), the v2f turbulence is modified by
Davidson et al. (2003)
v2f-pede in Fluent implemented via UDF
nonlinear k model by Ehrhard (1999)
ske-ehr in Fluent implemented via UDF
nonlinear k model by Lbcke (2003)
ske-lue in Fluent implemented via UDF
Reynolds stress model with cubic pressure
strain model
CUBIC in Fluent implemented via UDF
Reynolds stress model with two component
closure pressure strain model
TCL in Fluent implemented via UDF
Reynolds stress model with linear pressure
strain model, standard wall function and wall
reflection effect model by Craft and Launder
(1992)
IP-cl in Fluent implemented via UDF
Hybrid Reynolds stress model with linear
pressure strain model and wall reflection term
IP-hyb in Fluent implemented via UDF
Hybrid Reynolds stress model with quadratic
pressure strain model
SSG-hyb in Fluent implemented via UDF
Reynolds stress model with quadratic
pressure strain model and and wall reflection
effect model by Craft and Launder (1992)
SSG-cl in Fluent implemented via UDF

The exact determination of the flow
situation in the model room requires an
accurate reproduction of the boundary
conditions. One of the key parameters is
the inlet flow. Because the inlet consists of
222 holes a simplification of the inlet
geometry is necessary. In the present study
the holes were replaced by an inlet slot of
the same area. The mean inlet velocity
distribution was determined using the
CFD Forum 2005
Bad Nauheim, Deutschland
- 5 -
Comparison of different turbulence models to compute wall
affected room airflows
procedure described by Heschl et al. (2004)
for the flow distribution in air supply ducts.
For the computations two different grids
a fine and a coarse grid were used. The
coarse grid was designed with a 30
+
y
for turbulence models with standard wall
functions. The first grid line had a wall
distance of 1.5mm, and a grading ratio of 1
and a total number of 8 lines inside the
boundary layer region (see Figure 4). The
number of grid cells for the whole
computational domain was about 600000.

Figure 4: Coarse grid (15 inlet angle)
The fine grid was designed for the low-Re
turbulence models (e.g. v2f turbulence
model) with a 1
+
y . In this case the first
grid line had a wall distance of 0.25mm, a
grading ratio of 1 and a total number of 30
lines inside the boundary layer region (see
Figure 5). The number of grid cells for the
whole computational domain was about
2000000.
A hybrid mesh was used for the
discretization of the computational domain.
The inlet region was meshed with
hexahedron cells and the main flow domain
with tetrahedron cells. The used meshes at
the inlet region are shown in the Figure 5
and Figure 4. Because a round inlet supply
duct is used the inlet regions were meshed
with coppered triangles. To achieve a
reasonable skewness parameter it was
necessary to mesh the boundary layer of
the inlet regions differently from the rest of
the computation domain.

Figure 5: Fine grid (15 inlet angle)
At the end of the outlet channel a pressure
outlet boundary condition was used.
All presented results showed good
convergence behaviour. But the nonlinear
eddy viscosity turbulence models did not
achieve the residual criteria for the
continuity of 0.1%.
No stationary solution were achieved for
the coarse grid using the realizable (rke),
rng, ske-ehr, ske-lue and the hybrid
Reynolds stress turbulence models. The
Reynolds stress models ske-lue and IP-et
CFD Forum 2005
Bad Nauheim, Deutschland
- 6 -
Comparison of different turbulence models to compute wall
affected room airflows
did also not achieve stationary solutions for
the fine grid.
Results and discussion
The incoming air forms a jet in the room
and the ambient air is entrained by
turbulent mixing processes (Fleischhacker,
G. and Schneider, W. 1980). Because of the
ceiling not enough air is entrained from
above. In order to meet the continuity and
momentum balance low pressure arises
forcing the jet towards the ceiling (Coanda-
effect). Due to this attachment a three-
dimensional wall jet forms which is to a
large extent reflected by the opposite wall.
There is an interaction between the wall jet
on the ceiling and the back flow air by a
turbulent mixing process (entrainment).
The distance s (see Figure 1) allows a side
entrainment of the air which induces cross
flows. On the one hand the entrainment
occurs due to the turbulent mixing and on
the other hand due to pressure differences.
For the demonstration of this effect Figure
6 presents the velocity vectors computed
by the SSG model (coarse grid) in a yz-
plane at x/H=2.0).

Figure 6: Velocity vectors in the yz-
plane x/ H=2.0
The solid line represents the isoline for the
x-component of velocity Ux=0. It can be
interpreted as a fictitious jet boundary. In
this case the jet did not reach the floor. The
air is forced by the entrainment process to
recirculate near floor level and induce
thereby secondary motion. This process is
mainly influenced by turbulent mixing
process which can well predicted by the
linear eddy viscosity concept.
But the secondary flow induced by the
turbulent mixing process will be
superimposed by the secondary motion
caused by the stress induced axial vorticity.
This axial vorticity is generated by the
anisotropic Reynolds normal stresses and
can only in contrast to the entrainment
process be modelled with nonlinear eddy
viscosity turbulence models and pressure
strain models which ensure the wall
reflection effect (cp. Heschl et al., 2005).
The influence of the entrainment and
normal shear stress induced secondary
motion can be identified by the comparison
of numerical results predicted with the
linear eddy viscosity turbulence model and
the IP-hyp Reynolds stress model.
The IP-hyb model determines only the
turbulent shear stresses with the
Boussinesq assumption, whereas the
turbulent normal stresses use transport
equations (see Heschl et al. 2005). So the
difference between both calculations is
caused by the way the normal stresses are
modelled. The so induced axial vorticity
generates an additional secondary motion
near the wall.
For the investigated plexiglass model the
computed contours of velocity magnitude
are shown in Figure 7 and Figure 8. The
inlet angle was defined with 15. The
coarse grid with the standard k
CFD Forum 2005
Bad Nauheim, Deutschland
- 7 -
Comparison of different turbulence models to compute wall
affected room airflows
turbulence model and with the RSM with
hybrid IP pressure strain model was used to
compute the velocity distribution.

Figure 7: Computed velocity
magnitude (used turbulence model:
ske)

Figure 8: Computed velocity
magnitude (used turbulence model:
I P-hyb)
In Figure 7 and Figure 8 the differences in
the velocity distributions between the linear
eddy viscosity and the RSM turbulence
model with the IP-hyb pressure strain
model are obvious. Corresponding to the
three dimensional wall jets the anisotropic
turbulent normal stresses have an
important influence on the flow prediction.
Especially the penetration of the wall jet
into the occupied zone is deeper predicted
by the ske turbulence model. But in
contrast to the investigation from Schlin
and Nielsen (2004) the differences are not
so significant. This can be explained by the
different geometric dimensions of the used
model as summarized in Table 2.
Table 2: Confrontation of the
geometrical parameters
Parameter Schlin and
Nielsen
(2004)
Presented
investigation
0.0 15.0
b/B 0.2 0.8325
H
M
/H 1.0 0.9025
L/H 12.0 3.0
B/H 4.7 2.0
H 128mm 400mm
The investigations by Schlin and Nielsen
(2004) were based on a scale down model
with a small inlet area directly mounted
below the ceiling. Therefore the inlet air
forms directly a three dimensional wall jet
and a lateral distribution will be not
inhibited by the side walls. In contrast the
present study investigates an air supply
duct which is mounted just below the
ceiling with an inlet angle =15 . An
essential difference can be expected by the
ratio b/B. Because in this study the inlet air
will be supplied nearly over the whole room
width, the lateral spreading is inhibited by
the side walls, so that the influence of the
near wall redistribution effect will be
reduced.
To get further information about the
computed flow distribution near the
occupied zone the velocity magnitude in the
y-z plane at x/H=2.0 is compared with
experimental data in the Figure 9 to Figure
10. Also the secondary motion in the y-z
CFD Forum 2005
Bad Nauheim, Deutschland
- 8 -
Comparison of different turbulence models to compute wall
affected room airflows
plane is demonstrated with velocity vectors
in the Figure 11.
All linear eddy viscosity models predicted
too small lateral spreading rates and no
correct secondary motions. Among them
the linear v2f turbulence model provides
the best result. Also the backflow behaviour
near the floor and the side walls cannot be
predicted correctly. Especially the deep
penetration of the jet leads to too high
velocities in the occupied zone and
therefore to significant deviations.
The nonlinear models proposed by Lbcke
et al. (2003) and Ehrhard (1999) predicted
similar results as the linear eddy viscosity
models.
In the comparison between the different
pressure strain models the SSG model
provides the best results. Also the predicted
secondary motion agrees well with the
experimental data, so that this model is the
most promising one for further applications.
The use of the SSG model with the wall
reflection term by Craft and Launder (1992)
shows a minor improvement. Though the
cubic and the TCL models are higher order
pressure strain models as the SSG model,
they cannot achieve better results. The
hybrid models deliver also better results as
the linear and nonlinear eddy viscosity
models. The additional computational effort
for the two transport equations seems
justified.


CFD Forum 2005
Bad Nauheim, Deutschland
- 9 -
Comparison of different turbulence models to compute wall
affected room airflows
Figure 9: Velocity magnitude in the y-z plane - x/ H=2.0 (inlet angle 15, coarse grid):


Experimental data

ske model

rke model

rng model

ske-ehr model

ske-lue model

IP model

IP-cl model

SSG model


SSG-hyb model

SSG-cl model

CUBI C model

0.0 m/ s 0.5 m/ s 1.0 m/ s 1.5 m/ s 1.8 m/ s
CFD Forum 2005
Bad Nauheim, Deutschland
- 10 -
Comparison of different turbulence models to compute wall
affected room airflows
Figure 10: Velocity magnitude in the y-z plane - x/ H=2.0 (inlet angle 15, fine grid):


Experimental data

ske-et model

ske-lue model

IP-et model

SSG-hyb model TCL model CUBI C model

v2f model

v2f-pet model








0.0 m/ s 0.5 m/ s 1.0 m/ s 1.5 m/ s 1.8 m/ s
CFD Forum 2005
Bad Nauheim, Deutschland
- 11 -
Comparison of different turbulence models to compute wall
affected room airflows
Figure 11: Principle y and z velocity vectors in the y-z plane - x/ H=2.0 (inlet angle 15, fine and coarser grid):



Experimental data

ske - coarse mesh

IP coarse mesh

I P-hyb coarse m.

SSG coarse mesh

SSG-hyb coarse m.

ske-ehr coarse m.

ske-lueb - coarse m.

ske-ewt fine mesh

v2f-lin. fine mesh

v2f-nonlin. - fine m.

TCL - fine mesh


CFD Forum 2005
Bad Nauheim, Deutschland
- 12 -
Comparison of different turbulence models to compute wall
affected room airflows
Summary
Linear eddy viscosity turbulence models are
widely used to predict air flows in ventilated
rooms. In many air supply configurations
an important interaction between the air
flow and the surrounding walls arises.
Especially the anisotropic Reynolds stresses
near walls can produce secondary motions
which obviously influence the room airflow
behaviour. Hence, an extensive
investigation about the accuracy of
standard and higher order turbulence
models was performed in order to test their
capability in predicting this flow
phenomenon.
Several linear as well as nonlinear eddy
viscosity models and higher order pressure
strain as well as hybrid pressure strain
models were implemented into Fluent via
compiled User Defined Functions (UDF). A
complex hybrid mesh was used to test the
numerical stabilities. For the used grid the
implemented models were stable but all
nonlinear eddy viscosity models had poor
convergence behaviour.
Comparing the investigated linear and
nonlinear turbulence models the v2f model
agreed best with PIV measurements. If
Reynolds stress turbulence models are
used, the SSG pressure strain model
provides the best results. The hybrid RSM
models achieve similar good results with
less computational effort, so that they are a
promising alternative. The quality of the
flow prediction of the SSG pressure strain
model could not be improved using the
cubic and two component closure models.
It can be concluded, that the turbulence
models available in Fluent are a good
compromise between stability and
accuracy.
Acknowledge
The experimental and numerical
investigations were partly accomplished by
the impulse program FHplus funded by the
BMVIT and BMBWK.
References
Abrahamsson H. (1997): On Turbulent Wall J ets. PhD thesis, Department of Thermo and Fluid
Dynamics, Chalmers University of Technology, Gteburg Sweden. ISBN 91-7197-491-1
Heschl Ch., Sanz W., Kelz A. (2004): Validation of determined pressure loss and discharge
coefficient of air supply ducts. FLUENT Anwenderkonferenz 2004, 29.-30. September 2004 in
Bingen
Craft T.J ., Launder B.E., (2001): On the spreading mechanism of the three-dimensional
turbulent wall jet. J ournal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 435, Pages 305-326.
Craft T.J ., Launder B.E., (1992): New wall-reflection model applied to the turbulent impinging.
jet. AIAA J ournal, Vol. 30, Pages 2970-2972.
Davidson L., Nielsen P.V. and Sveningsson A. (2003): Modification of the v2f model for
computing the flow in a 3D wall jet. Turbulence, Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol. 4, Pages 577-584
CFD Forum 2005
Bad Nauheim, Deutschland
- 13 -
Comparison of different turbulence models to compute wall
affected room airflows
Ehrhard J . (1999): Untersuchung linearer und nichtlinearer Wirbelviskosittsmodelle zur
Berechnung turbulenter Strmungen um Gebude. VDI Verlag Dsseldorf, Fortschrittsbericht
VDI Reihe 7 Nr. 367ISBN 3-18-336707-6
Fleischhacker G. and Schneider W. (1980): Experimentelle und theoretische Untersuchungen
ber den Einfluss der Schwerkraft auf isotherme turbulente Freistrahlen. Gesundheitsingenieur
101-5, 129-140.
Heschl Ch., Fesharaki M., Geyer J . (2002b): Calculation of turbulent flow for building ventilation
by means of jet profiles with regard to wall influences. EPIC 2002 AIVC Conference 23-26
October, Lyon France, ISBN 2-86834-118-7
Heschl Ch., Fesharaki M., Steinkellner M. (2002a): Validation der CFD-Analyse von
Raumluftstrmungen mittels Messungen. Fluent Anwender Konferenz, 25.-26. September in
Frankenthal, Deutschland
Heschl Ch., Sanz W., Klanatsky P. (2005): Implementation and comparison of different
turbulence models for three dimensional wall jets with Fluent. Fluent CFD Forum 2005, 19.
Oktober in Bad Nauheim, Deutschland
Lai, J .C.S. & Lu, D. (1992): An inclined two-dimensional wall jet. Proc. 5th Asian Congress of
FluidMechanics, 1, pp. 195-98.
Lai, J .C.S. & Lu, D. (1996): Effect of wall inclination on the mean flow and turbulence
characteristics in a two-dimensional wall jet. Int. J . Heat & Fluid Flow 17(4), pp. 377-385
Lbcke, H.M., Rung Th., Thiele F. (2003): Prediction of the spreading mechanism of 3D
turbulent wall jets with explicit Reynolds-stress closure, International J ournal of Heat and Fluid
Flow, Vol. 24, Pages 434-443
Nasr, A., and Lai, J .C.S.(1998): A turbulent plane offset jet with small offset ratio. Experiments
in Fluids, 24,pp. 47-57.
Newman, B.G. (1961): The deflection of plane jet by adjacent boundaries - Coanda effect, in
Boundary Layer and Flow Control (ed. G.V. Lachmann), Pergamon Press 1: pp. 232 265
Pettersson Reif B.A. (1999): A nonlinear constitutive relationship for the v2f model. Center for
Turbulence Research, Annual Research Briefs, Pages 267-276
Pope S.B. (1975): A more general eddy-viscosity hypothesis. J . Fluid Mech. Vol. 72; Pages 331-
340
Schlin A., Nielsen P.V. (2004): Impact of turbulence anisotropy near walls in room airflow.
Indoor Air 2004, Vol. 14, Pages 159-168
CFD Forum 2005
Bad Nauheim, Deutschland
- 14 -
Comparison of different turbulence models to compute wall
affected room airflows
Appendix

Figure 12: Geometrical dimension of the used plexiglass model (quantities in mm,
the thickness of the plexiglass model is 6mm)
CFD Forum 2005
Bad Nauheim, Deutschland
- 15 -
Comparison of different turbulence models to compute wall
affected room airflows


Figure 13: Geometrical dimension of the used air supply duct

CFD Forum 2005
Bad Nauheim, Deutschland
- 16 -
Comparison of different turbulence models to compute wall
affected room airflows
f
l
o
w
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
m
e
n
t
A
/
D
-
c
o
n
v
e
r
t
e
r
T
o
r
i
f
i
c
e
i
n
s
t
a
l
l
a
t
i
o
n
p
r
i
m
a
r
y
r
e
c
t
i
f
i
e
r
A
/
D
-
c
o
n
v
e
r
t
e
r
S
e
e
d
i
n
g

g
e
n
e
r
a
t
o
r
M
i
x
i
n
g

c
h
a
m
b
e
r
T
T
s
e
c
o
n
d
a
r
y
r
e
c
t
i
f
i
e
r
m
o
i
s
t
u
r
e
s
e
n
s
o
r
p
T
a
b
s
T
s
e
c
o
n
d
a
r
y
r
e
c
t
i
f
i
e
r
I
n
l
e
t

p
i
p
e
T
e
s
t

M
o
d
e
l
T
T
T
(Experiment 2, 3 and 4)
L
a
s
e
r

s
u
p
p
ly

1
P
I
V




P
C
T
e
s
t

r
o
o
m
L
a
s
e
r

s
u
p
p
ly

2
P
I
V




P
C
L
a
s
e
r

s
u
p
p
ly

2
L
a
s
e
r

s
u
p
p
ly

1
(Experiment 1)

Figure 14: Experimental arrangement (in the present study the laser supply and the
PIV-Workstation were outside the test room)