AND

6UILDII IG
ELSEVIER Energy and Buildings 23 (1995) 33-39

CFD modelling of the air and contaminant distribution in rooms

Youchen Fan
VTT Building Technology, Indoor Environment and Systems, Box 1804, 02044 VT"T, Espoo, Finland
Received 12 August 1994; in revised form 18 December 1994; accepted 26 December 1994

Abstract

The k-E model is a wid!ely used model in engineering practice in handling indoor air quality problem. However, difficulties
may arise when using the high Reynolds number k-e model to simulate air flow patterns close to the boundaries of air and
the stagnant component as well as the low air flow fluctuation elsewhere in a room. When using the k-E model for low
Reynolds number cases, the correlations between turbulent coefficients and turbulent Reynolds number must also be defined.
By using the so-called Kolmogorov micro scale method, a new set of turbulent coefficient functions was deduced in this paper
for the k-e model in a case of low Reynolds number flow. Using the standard wall function leads to large differences between
the measured and calculated heat transfer coefficient. A special wall function valid for a viscous sublayer, a buffer zone and
a fully turbulent log-law zone is recommended in this paper. In addition, the modelling of air terminal devices in CFD
simulations is summarized by using a literature collection.

Keywords: Computational fluid dynamics modelling; Air contaminants; Indoor environment

1. Introduction
Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) modelling and
scale (or physical) modelling are, in principle, the two
alternative approaches for evaluating the global indoor
environments with the .aim to obtaining a proper design
of building service systems. Both approaches have their
advantages and limitations. CFD has, nevertheless, be-
come a widely accepted alternative to the scale modelling
in recent twenty years for predicting the air motion in
buildings and indoor air quality. The main obstacles
in using CFD modelling', for HVAC research are assumed
to be on how to handle the mix-forced (momentum
and buoyancy) air flow and simulate the occupant-
behaviour-related (OER) factors. Numerical problems
relating to the boundary layer flow are of secondary
importance in CFD application of HVAC engineering.
This is due to the fact that the CFD models were
originally developed by assuming the flow to be of a
high Reynolds number (HRN) type. This is not the
case particularly in modern buildings. Although a few
low Reynolds number (LRN) models already exist,
there is still a need to develop these models. For
simulating the OBR factors, wider use of statistical
mathematics will be required. At the moment, the
simulation research of OBR factors based on statistical
mathematics is totally missing.
The k-e model has been used worldwide since it was
created. However, for the H R N model, the so-called
wall function must be properly designed to correlate
the physical parameters between the LRN and H R N
flow zones. It has so far been believed that the wall
function has a large influence on the heat transfer near
to the solid boundaries. Thus, the problem is now to
find the correct wall function if it is needed. In addition,
for the LRN model, the relationship between turbulent
coefficients and turbulent Reynolds number was not
totally known until now. Another consideration with
respect to the LRN model for room air flow is that
these kinds of models, in fact, are trying to handle the
low turbulent Reynolds number effect both on the
boundary flow and on low fluctuation flow elsewhere
within the room. New findings for the above problems
will be addressed in the following sections. The research
method involved theoretical analysis and literature col-
lections.
2. Theoretical analysis of the LRN model
The specific property of the k-e model refers to its
closure equations of Reynolds stress, i.e., the turbulence
kinetic energy and its dissipation rate transportation
equations. The general form of transportation equations
of k and e which are derived from Navier-Stokes (N-S)

0378-7788/95/$09.50 © 1995 Elsevier Science S.A. All rights reserved

SSDI 0378-7788(95)00916-L
34 Y. Fan I Energy and Buildings 23 (1995) 33-39

equations are as follows [1]: Substituting Eqs. (6) and (7) into Eq. (5), gives
k-equation K2
Dk
--
1_0
r(
/x, +/~ + . , 0u, o il C1 = C2 ¢r,C,f 2 (8)
Dt p axj I_\Cr~ in which K= Karman constant ( = 0.4), p, = 1.3 [3] and
/3 ~, OH 2.0 > C2 > 1.71 [2].
+ -- --gi-- e (1) By considering the influence of the turbulent Reynolds
ar,
number R,, the coefficient C2 has been interpreted as
e-equation a function of Rt [4] as follows
C2 = C20[1 - 0.3 exp( -Rt2)] (9)
D--7 = p ~ ~+/x ax,j Substituting Eq. (9) into Eq. (8), Ca can then be
where expressed by
K2
Ca=C2o o.C~a -0.3C2o exp(-R, 2) (10)

or
d /3 e iz, OH
-c2 +c3 p--C k g' (3) C~ = C~o- 0.3(72o exp( - R , 2) (11)

Each modified k-E model is concentrated on the se- If the turbulent constants in Eqs. (9) and (10) or (11)
are selected to be K=0.41, or,= 1.3, C~,= 0.09, Cm= 1.85,
lection of a set of turbulence parameters, i.e., C,, Ca,
then, we can have the following expressions of Ca and
Cz and C3. These modified models are called the LRN
model, which are developed mainly for phasing out the C2 modified with respect to R,
wall functions. By analysing the calculation of these Ca = 1.42 - 0.56 exp( - n t 2) (12)
parameters, some observations can be drawn.
Ca = 1.85 - 0.56 exp( - R t 2) (13)

2.1. Turbulentcoefficients Some researchers [5] have introduced stronger non-

linear modification functions as follows
For the case of the boundary layer, the e transportation [ (Acl'~ 3] (14)
CI=Clo
equation of the k-e model has the form [2] as follows 1 + \ f~, ] 3

-
C2 = C2o[1 + exp(-Rt) z] (15)
where

+Ca-~ -C2 ~ (4) At

f ~,= [1- exp( -A~,Rk)]2(l + -l~,) (16)

In the region close to a wall, the shear stress is uniform It can be easily found that the derivatives of C~ with
and the length scale increases linearly with distance respect to e and k are
from the wall (fully turbulent log-law region). The
convective terms can be omitted [3], which follows that aCl aCl
Eq. (4) reduces to
a-~"(~(f/'L)--4; "~ ~(f~)--4 (17)

Thus, even a small variation in R t will produce

dramatic changes in the damping function value, which
increases the numerical stiffness of the model. Moreover,
By considering equilibrium turbulence, the term
the damping function for C2 will be effective only in
m(au/ay)2/p can be expressed as
the region of y+ <5, which means that the distance
between the first grid node and the wall surface will
/L'
P (~)z= e (6) be only of the order of a millimeter. The foregoing
consideration could explain the reason why some re-
and searchers [6,7] have obtained diverging results by using
= C~, k2 this model.
(7) Through the model test, Fujisawa [8] found that for
p e
the LRN model, the damping function of turbulent
by using the Boussinesq assumption. coefficients which contain the wall parameter y+ are
 Y. Fan / Energy and Buildings 23 (1995) 33-39
not suitable for reproducing the laminar behaviour or
laminarization.
In addition, the production term of the e-equation
(see Ref. [1]) should include three parts, which are
shear, gradient and turbulent production. By using the
Kolmogorov micro scale theory, the shear and gradient
production parts were dropped under the consideration
of high turbulent Reynolds number R,. Their relations
are as follows
Ps = C~R,- ~z2p,
P~=C~2R,-S/4P,
Eqs. (18) and (19) can be interpreted in a way that
if R, is not very high, then, P~ and Pg should not be
neglected. In this case, the turbulent coefficient C~ can
be expressed as
C1 ~--C1 + f l i R t -1/2 + C l 2 R t -5/4
Constants Cm~ and C~2 are difficult to determine. Never-
theless, the coefficient C~ should be a function of Rt,
when the turbulent Reynolds number is not sufficiently
high.
Based on the foregoiing analysis, it can be concluded
that the turbulent 'constants' have to be expressed as
a function of R, in the, air flow simulation of room(s)
where R, will not be very high. The difficulties caused
by near wall regions may be solved by the wall function
method even in the LRN model if the computation
time and computer memory are primitive issues.
3. Calculation of the partial differential equations
For solving the governing equations of air and con-
taminant motion in room(s), Baker et al. [9] recently
presented a new method, called the Taylor weak state-
ment (TWS). The basis of the method is similar to the
method of weighted residuals. The typical partial dif-
ferential equation (PDE) has been expressed by:
L(q) = 0
Using Taylor's expansion technique, a PDE companion
was defined in the form of
LC(q)-L(q)- [3 At -~j { A/I~
Further, an approximate solution qN which contains a
number of undetermined parameters Qj(t) was assumed,
the solution is then expressed by Baker et al. [9] as:
N 4. Modelling of air terminal devices (ATD) in rooms
qfv(y, t) = ~ ~.(xOQj(t)
j--1
Substituting the approximate solution into Eq. (21)
leaves a residual. Then let the sum of the residual
(TWS) over a sub-domain (control volume or element)
of interest be minimized as follows
35
TWS = |~bi(x~)LC(qN) d r = 0 (24)
i¢
fl
From the foregoing introduction of the TWS method,
it can be found that the weighted residual method was
executed to a resultant PDE by introducing an artificial
diffusive term to the governing PDEs (see Eq. (22)).
It was found by Baker et al. [9] that the stability of
the solution can be improved by this diffusive term.
This term causes a filtering effect to the high frequency
(18) fluctuation of air flow, because the low frequency fluc-
(19) tuation is dropped first (Eq. (22)). After that, the
resultant governing equation which contains high order
fluctuation is minimized with respect to the approximate
solution (Eq. (24)).
In the TWS method, two problems arise. One is to
determine the/3 values and the other one is to choose
(20) the 'known' functions of ~i and ~ in Eqs. (22)-(24).
It is obvious from the definition of Eq. (22) that the
13value should be tightly connected with the grid-point
distribution. Each problem must have its own/3 value,
which can handle the physical phenomenon properly.
In the case of selected or known functions, q~i and ~ ,
considerations must be made to avoid the physically
unrealistic. Linear interpolation would result in a similar
problem as in the central-difference scheme. When the
Peclet number is large for convection-diffusion prob-
lems, unrealistic results may be obtained [10]. Patankar
[10] has proposed the following exponential function
for a two-dimensional case:
pUX
• = A + B exp - - ~ +CY (25)
The proper selection of 'known-functions' for three-
dimensional cases still needs further model tests and
demonstrations.
The bench mark analysis made by Baker and co-
workers [9,11,12] using the TWS method as limited to
the LRN (in the order of 9 X 108) and large air change
(21) rate (30 ach) flow which is far from that found in
practice. The reason for the good agreement of their
results was because the air flow can be identical in the
whole domain except for the region near the solid
boundaries. But this is not the case in reality. Most
(22) difficulties in modelling room air flow reside in the
handling of multi-state (laminar, turbulent and tran-
sition flow) flow and transformation from one flow state
to another.
(23)
In fact, both CFD simulation and scale modelling
are procedures of similarity. It is not difficult for a
CFD model to guarantee thermal and momentum sim-
ilarity within the fluid domain. This is not the case
when considering the momentum similarity on bound-
36 Y. Fan / Energy and Buildings 23 (1995) 33-39

aries, particularly the ATD. The momentum similarity

on boundaries can mainly embody at the air supply
and exhaust devices in a ventilated space. This is because
the influence of air leakage (e.g. through windows) on
air flow similarity is limited typically. And on the other
hand, the momentum similarity is automatically satisfied
for impermeable walls due to the no slip law. Modelling
of air terminal devices has been becoming increasingly
important. In the following, the approaches in modelling
ATD will be summarized and discussed based on a
literature review. (a) (b)

4.1. Momentum similarity at A T D 1.00

0.80

In this method, a complicated diffuser is modelled 0.40

by a simple opening which lets the supply air have the
0.20
same momentum and same direction as reality.
Two versions to the basic approach exist. In the first, 0. I(
0.0(
a simple opening has the same effective area as the •1

real diffuser, then the same velocity as each nozzle (if 0.0, * Full s c a l e . Diffuser type D •~
• Model. Nozzle
the diffuser has many nozzles). This version has been
0.02
used by Heikkinen [13], and Skovgaard and Nielsen
[14]. From Nielsen's results [15], it can be found that 0.00'1 ~ ,; ; ;/o 20 do~o6'o8o
a simple opening can fairly simulate a complicated
diffuser, especially the jet decay far from the ATD.
(c)
The measurements made by Heikkinen [13] also con- Fig. 1. Modelling of ATD [15]. (a) End wall mounted diffuser; (b)
firmed Nielsen's conclusion. However, the jet spread nozzle directed against the ceiling in 45; (c) velocity decay in wall
jet along the ceiling in a room and in a model.
in horizontal and thickness in vertical obtained by this
simplified ATD model can be very different in com- X0
parison to the measured air jet generated by a com- r

plicated diffuser (see Ref. [13]).

The second version lets the momentum force defined
by Eq. (26) and the supply air direction be the same
between the simple opening and the complicated dif-
fuser. The opening area can, somewhat freely, be chosen.
Y b
C .e-

F = J p U z dA (26)
-~y'0
This version has been used earlier by Chen et al. [16].
Fig. 2. Modelling of ATD [17].

4.2. Momentum similarity in front of the A T D
This approach is based on well-developed wall-jet
techniques. The air velocity field within a small space
in front of a diffuser is self-similar. Thus, the momentum
similarity of the ATD can be defined away from the
ATD by using the well-developed wall-jet technique.
The approaches developed in the above way were
referred by Nielsen [17] as the Box method and the
prescribed velocity method. These are sketched in Figs.
1 and 2. At surface b there is no flux. In addition,
universal or dimensionless physical parameters' (~b)
profiles for a given diffuser at surface a must be pre-
defined. This method is more difficult than the method
described above. However, it was believed that better
results could be achieved by using it [17].
All the above methods have been used in CFD
simulation. The first one seems to be more user-friendly,
particularly in assessing a system design. Whereas, for
the second one, measurements are normally required.
5. Wall function
The wall function was originally a method to deal
with the boundary conditions for the HRN model. The
HRN model was based on the assumption that the g t
value is so high that the turbulent parameters C1, C2,
C~, and C3 could be treated as constant. This assumption
does not hold in the region near the solid boundaries
at any time. Hence, a 'known' function (so-called wall
function), is needed to connect the boundary conditions
with the physical parameters in the domain where the
 Y. Fan / Energy and BuiMings 23 (1995) 33-39 37

influence of Rt on turbulent parameters is negligible.
The velocity and temperature distributions (VTD) of
the fiat plate boundary layer flow or the Couette flow
have been selected as the wall function. In a model
test, Chen [1] found that if the VTD within the boundary
layer were expressed by linear and logarithmic equations,
the computed convective heat transfer coefficient near
a wall of a ventilated room could be about 40-50%
lower than the measured one. Later he improved the
wall function by dividing the boundary layer into three
regions, the viscous sublayer, buffer zone and fully
turbulent log-law zone then evaluated the VTD by
using different formulas for each region. It was con-
cluded [1] that modified wall function could reduce
the differences between computed and measured con-
vective heat transfer coefficient to about 20%, but it
is still high. The velocity distribution in the whole
boundary layer over a flat plate had been deduced by
Spalding [18] more than 30 years ago, which is expressed
by Eq. (27). Unfortunately, Spalding's equation seems
to have not been noticed by researchers of CFD mo-
delling. A comparison of different wall functions is
shown in Fig. 3.
y+ = u + +0.1108
(0.4u+) 2
X [ exp °'4" + - 1 - 0 . 4 u - 2!
+ turbulent coefficients which contain the wall parameter
u + - u(p/rw)lr2; y + -y(,r,,, p//z) ' a
The air flow over the walls is seldom in parallel to
the wall surface. Therefore, each wall function, in fact,
is based on the assumption that the flow is similar.
Hence, any model plus the wall function has more or
less the same difficulties as the mixing-length model.
The LRN model has phased out the usage of the
wall function. Though it still has some problems that
have not yet been solved, it offers an opportunity to
handle the room air flow.
6. C o n c l u d i n g r e m a r k s
The k-e model in simulating the room air flow was
reviewed. It was concluded that the turbulent parameters
should be functions of the turbulent Reynolds number
even in the case where the wall function was to be
used. It is evident that the air flow in modem buildings
is very slow. Thus, the basic assumption of fully turbulent
flow in the region far from the walls for the H R N
model will no longer hold. The recommended corre-
lation, Eq. (20), is based on the exact time-averaged
N-S equations and Kolmogorov micro scale theory. If
the constants in this equation could be defined by CFD
analysis or by experiments, better results could be
(0.4~+)3] expected. It was found that the damping function of
y+ fails to handle the room air flow. The damping
(27) function of turbulent coefficients should affect not only

2,0

2:8

26
°.~
./
f
24

22

20

',8 u + = 0.25 In(y ) + 5.5 j ~

U÷ 16

14

~2

10

8
// y+= 1;y~

6
U +- U
4

0 I !

0 2 4 6 8 10
In (y*)
Fig. 3. Comparison of different wall functions.
38 Y. Fan / Energy and Buildings 23 (1995) 33-39

the near wall region air flow but also the air flow in gk turbulent Reynolds number ( = kl/2yp/lz) (-)
the central zones of the room. U time-averaged velocity (m/s)
To predict the momentum and heat energy distri- u velocity near wall (m/s)
bution over a finite cell will form the basis of a calculation X coordinate (-)
method of the partial differential equations. These kinds Y coordinate normal to X (-)
of distributions are typically considered to be linear. Y distance from the wall (m)
Patankar has proposed an exponential distribution in
his two-dimensional convection--diffusion simulation Greek
[10]. If this function works for three-dimensional cases,
further model tests and demonstration will be needed. coefficient of thermal expansion (l/K)
Each method mentioned in Section 4 shows the benefit p6 dynamic viscosity (N s/m2)
from evaluating the jet decay, but the prediction on IZt turbulent viscosity (=C~pkZ/E) (N s/m2)
jet spread and thickness may be far from reality. This P density (kg/m3)
could be indicated by unbelievably uneven computed Ok, O"H equivalent turbulent Prandtl number (-)
temperature and contaminant distributions. Further ¢w shear stress at the wall surface (Pa)
research is required. resultant variable which connects velocity
The k-e model (LRN and HRN models) together field and pressure through continuity equa-
with wall function has more or less the same problem tion (-)
as the mixing length model. This point can be proved O temperature (K)
by using the von Karman's similarity hypothesis [19]. known function (-)
In order to improve the ability of the k-6 model in ¢,(x) known function (-)
handling the circulated flow, the wall function must be
phased out. It is true that the use of the LRN model
without wall function will increase computational cost. Acknowledgement
Each turbulent model, which includes the k-e model,
Reynolds stress model and vortex model may be an- The author thanks Professor Dr Markku Virtanen
alogized by the Taylor's expansion. The differences of our laboratory for his intelligent comments and
between them are in how many terms have been kept editorial help with this paper.
in the expansion. The k-e model is the simplest one.
If the turbulent coefficients can be correlated correctly
to the turbulent Reynolds number, then use of the
model in engineering will be more promising. References

[1] Q. Chen, Indoor airflow, air quality and energy consumption

of buildings, Ph.D. Thesis, Delft Technical University, Neth-
7. Nomenclature erlands, 1988.
[2] V.S. Arpaci and P.S. Larsen, Convective Heat Transfer, Prentice-
A constant (-) Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1984.
kinematic flux vector jacobian (J/m2) [3] B.E. Launder and D.B. Spalding, The numerical computation
Aj
of turbulent flow, Comput. Methods Mech. Eng., 3 (1974) 269-289.
Acl. A., A t constants (-) [4] W.P. Jones and B.E. Launder, The calculation of low-Reynolds-
B constant (-) number phenomena with a two-equation model of turbulence,
C constant (-) Int. Z Heat Mass Transfer, 16 (1973) 1119-1130.
C1, C2, C3 turbulence parameters (-) [5] C.K.G. Lam and K. Bremhorst, A modified form of the k-E
model for predicting wall turbulence, J. Fluids Eng., 103 (1981)
C~o turbulence parameters (-)
456--460.
constant (-) [6] P.L. Betts and A.A. Dafa'Alla, Turbulent buoyant air flow in
C. turbulence parameter (-) a tall rectangular cavity. Significant questions in buoyancy
F momentum force (N) affected enclosure or cavity flows, in J.A.C. Humphrey, C.T.
gi gravitative acceleration vector in direction Avedisian, B.W. Le Tourneau and M.M. Chen (eds.), ASME,
i (m/s2) New York, 1986, pp. 83--91.
[7] H. Nguyen, A Petrov-Galerkin least-squares finite element
H time-averaged enthalpy (J/kg) algorithm for predicting of room air motion, Proc. Indoor Air
k kinetic energy (J/kg) "93, HelsinM, Finland, 1993, Vol. 5, pp. 325-330.
P pressure (Pa) [8] N. Fujisawa, Calculations of transitional boundary-layers with
es shear production (J/kg s2) a refined low-Reynolds number version of a k-e model of
turbulent production (J/kg s2) turbulence, in W. Rodi and E.N. Gani6 (eds.), Engineering
Pt Turbulence Modelling and Experiments, Elsevier Science, 1990,
P, gradient production (J/kg s2) pp. 23-32.
q(xj, t) a vector (={u 1, 19, ~b, p}T, j = 1, 2, 3) (--) [9] A.J. Baker, P.T. Williams and R.M. Kelso, Development and
R, turbulent Reynolds number (=k2p/lze) (-) validation of a robust CFD procedure for predicting indoor
 Y. Fan / Energy and BuiMings 23 (1995) 33-39
room air motion, Proc. Indoor Air '93, HelMnki, Finland, 1993,
Vol. 5, pp. 183-188.
[10] S.V. Patankar, Numerical Heat Transfer and Fluid Flow, Hem-
isphere, Washington, I)C, 1980.
[11] R.M. Kelso, S. Roy and A.J. Baker, A CFD prediction of
thermal comfort distribution in a 3-D space with high ventilation
rates, Proc. Indoor Air "93, Helsinki, Finland, 1993, Vol. 5, pp.
313-318.
[12] S. Roy, A.J. Baker and R.M. Kelso, Airborne contaminant
CFD modeling studies for two practical 3-D room air flow
fields, Proc. Indoor Air '93, Helsinki, Finland, 1993, Vol. 5, pp.
349-354.
[13] J. Heikkinen, Modelling of a supply air terminal for room air
flow simulation, 12th AIVC Conf., Ottawa, Canada, 1991, Vol.
3, pp. 213-230.
39
[14] M. Skovgaard and P.V. Nielsen, Modelling complex inlet ge-
ometries in CFD -- Applied to air flow in ventilated rooms,
12th A1VC Conf., Ottawa, Canada, 1991, Vol. 3, pp. 183-200.
[15] P.V. Nielsen, Model experiments for the determination of airflow
in large spaces, Proc. Indoor Air '93, Helsinki, Finland, 1993,
Vol. 5, pp. 253-258.
[16] Q. Chen, A. Moser and P. Suter, A numerical study of indoor
air quality and thermal comfort under six kinds of air diffusion,
ASHRAE Trans., 98 (1) (1992) 203-217.
[17] P.V. Nielsen, Description of supply openings in numerical
models for room air distribution, ASHRAE Trans., 98 (1) (1992)
963-971.
[18] D.B. Spalding, A single formula for the 'law of the wall', J.
AppL Mech., (1961) 455-458.
[19] L.C. Burmeister, Convective Heat Transfer, Wiley, New York,
1983, Ch. 9.