Scholarlink

In wind engineering simulations, Large Eddy SimulationsLarge Eddy Simulation (LES) (LES) can generate more accurate results than simulations based on Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) models. However, inflow boundary conditions for LESLarge Eddy Simulation (LES) are more challenging than for RANS. This study applies LESLarge Eddy Simulation (LES) to flow around an isolated building to investigate the effect of various inflow conditionsInflow conditions. Four methods are used to produce inflows at the boundary inlet: precursor simulation, digital filter method (DFM), Prescribed Wavevector Random Flow Generator (PRFG \(^3\) ), and turbulenceTurbulence-free mean profile. Overall, all methods with turbulenceTurbulence generation at the inflow produced accurate results for mean flow and Reynolds stresses. The turbulenceTurbulence-free inflow case was accurate downstream of the building, indicating that turbulenceTurbulence generated by the building is sufficient for accurate wake predictions. The DFM inflow increased computational time by 172% compared to the turbulenceTurbulence-free inlet, while the precursor and PRFG \(^3\) increased the time by 20% and 33%, respectively.

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Inflow Condition Effects on Large-Eddy Simulation of Flow Around an Isolated Building

  • 会议论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年

查看全文
  • Usman Shaukat,
  • Knut Erik Teigen Giljarhus

摘要

In wind engineering simulations, Large Eddy SimulationsLarge Eddy Simulation (LES) (LES) can generate more accurate results than simulations based on Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) models. However, inflow boundary conditions for LESLarge Eddy Simulation (LES) are more challenging than for RANS. This study applies LESLarge Eddy Simulation (LES) to flow around an isolated building to investigate the effect of various inflow conditionsInflow conditions. Four methods are used to produce inflows at the boundary inlet: precursor simulation, digital filter method (DFM), Prescribed Wavevector Random Flow Generator (PRFG \(^3\) ), and turbulenceTurbulence-free mean profile. Overall, all methods with turbulenceTurbulence generation at the inflow produced accurate results for mean flow and Reynolds stresses. The turbulenceTurbulence-free inflow case was accurate downstream of the building, indicating that turbulenceTurbulence generated by the building is sufficient for accurate wake predictions. The DFM inflow increased computational time by 172% compared to the turbulenceTurbulence-free inlet, while the precursor and PRFG \(^3\) increased the time by 20% and 33%, respectively.