Air ventilation assessment under unstable atmospheric stratification — A comparative study for Hong Kong

Air ventilation assessment under unstable atmospheric stratification — A comparative study for... In most current air ventilation assessment (AVA) studies, a simple neutral assumption that does not consider thermal effects is adopted, particularly for numerical simulation practices. With statistics of daytime observations during summer in Hong Kong as an example, this study demonstrates that neutral atmospheric boundary conditions occur with a very low probability, which implies that current practices are indeed far away from reality. This study is devoted to addressing this knowledge gap by cross-comparisons of field measurements, wind tunnel tests, and large-eddy simulations (LES) under neutral and unstable conditions. It is found that LES-computed velocity ratios under unstable conditions are in line with field measurements, while results of simulations under neutral conditions are close to those of wind tunnel tests. Enhanced vertical mixing due to surface heating produces improved ventilation performance in the unstable case. The neutral assumption tends to underestimate pedestrian-level velocity ratios compared to a diabatic condition; hence it is deemed conservative when it is adopted in AVA practices. Moreover, stronger wind direction variance under unstable conditions results in weaker correlation between velocity ratios and frontal area indices than neutral conditions, which implies that street orientations become less important in ventilation under unstable conditions. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Building and Environment Elsevier

Air ventilation assessment under unstable atmospheric stratification — A comparative study for Hong Kong

Loading next page...
 
/lp/elsevier/air-ventilation-assessment-under-unstable-atmospheric-stratification-a-vkX24MuU1X
Publisher
Elsevier
Copyright
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd
ISSN
0360-1323
D.O.I.
10.1016/j.buildenv.2017.12.018
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

In most current air ventilation assessment (AVA) studies, a simple neutral assumption that does not consider thermal effects is adopted, particularly for numerical simulation practices. With statistics of daytime observations during summer in Hong Kong as an example, this study demonstrates that neutral atmospheric boundary conditions occur with a very low probability, which implies that current practices are indeed far away from reality. This study is devoted to addressing this knowledge gap by cross-comparisons of field measurements, wind tunnel tests, and large-eddy simulations (LES) under neutral and unstable conditions. It is found that LES-computed velocity ratios under unstable conditions are in line with field measurements, while results of simulations under neutral conditions are close to those of wind tunnel tests. Enhanced vertical mixing due to surface heating produces improved ventilation performance in the unstable case. The neutral assumption tends to underestimate pedestrian-level velocity ratios compared to a diabatic condition; hence it is deemed conservative when it is adopted in AVA practices. Moreover, stronger wind direction variance under unstable conditions results in weaker correlation between velocity ratios and frontal area indices than neutral conditions, which implies that street orientations become less important in ventilation under unstable conditions.

Journal

Building and EnvironmentElsevier

Published: Feb 15, 2018

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 12 million articles from more than
10,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Unlimited reading

Read as many articles as you need. Full articles with original layout, charts and figures. Read online, from anywhere.

Stay up to date

Keep up with your field with Personalized Recommendations and Follow Journals to get automatic updates.

Organize your research

It’s easy to organize your research with our built-in tools.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

Monthly Plan

  • Read unlimited articles
  • Personalized recommendations
  • No expiration
  • Print 20 pages per month
  • 20% off on PDF purchases
  • Organize your research
  • Get updates on your journals and topic searches

$49/month

Start Free Trial

14-day Free Trial

Best Deal — 39% off

Annual Plan

  • All the features of the Professional Plan, but for 39% off!
  • Billed annually
  • No expiration
  • For the normal price of 10 articles elsewhere, you get one full year of unlimited access to articles.

$588

$360/year

billed annually
Start Free Trial

14-day Free Trial