Abstract
Abstract
Large Eddy Simulation (LES) undeniably has the potential to provide more accurate and more reliable results than simulations based on the Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) approach. However, LES entails a higher simulation complexity and a much higher computational cost. In spite of some claims made in the past decades that LES would render RANS obsolete, RANS remains widely used in both research and engineering practice. This paper attempts to answer the questions why this is the case and whether this is justified, from the viewpoint of building simulation, both for outdoor and indoor applications. First, the governing equations and a brief overview of the history of LES and RANS are presented. Next, relevant highlights from some previous position papers on LES versus RANS are provided. Given their importance, the availability or unavailability of best practice guidelines is outlined. Subsequently, why RANS is still frequently used and whether this is justified or not is illustrated by examples for five application areas in building simulation: pedestrian-level wind comfort, near-field pollutant dispersion, urban thermal environment, natural ventilation of buildings and indoor airflow. It is shown that the answers vary depending on the application area but also depending on other—less obvious—parameters such as the building configuration under study. Finally, a discussion and conclusions including perspectives on the future of LES and RANS in building simulation are provided.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Energy (miscellaneous),Building and Construction
Reference363 articles.
1. Abdalla IE, Cook MJ, Rees SJ, Yang Z (2007). Large-eddy simulation of buoyancy-driven natural ventilation in an enclosure with a point heat source. International Journal of Computational Fluid Dynamics, 21: 231–245.
2. Adamek K, Vasan N, Elshaer A, English E, Bitsuamlak G (2017). Pedestrian level wind assessment through city development: A study of the financial district in Toronto. Sustainable Cities and Society, 35: 178–190.
3. AIAA (1998). Guide for the verification and validation of computational fluid dynamics simulations. AIAA-G-077-1998. Reston, VA. USA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
4. Alamdari F, Hammond GP, Melo C (1984). ‘Appropriate’ calculation methods for convective heat transfer from building surfaces. In: Proceedings of the 1st National Conference on Heat Transfer, Leed, UK. Published in 1ChemE Syrup. series no. 86(2): 1201–1211.
5. Allegrini J, Kubilay A (2017). Wind sheltering effect of a small railway station shelter and its impact on wind comfort for passengers. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 164: 82–95.
Cited by
385 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献