4.6 Article

CFD-based analysis of urban haze-fog dispersion-A preliminary study

Journal

BUILDING SIMULATION
Volume 14, Issue 2, Pages 365-375

Publisher

TSINGHUA UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1007/s12273-020-0641-2

Keywords

air pollution residual time; urban environment; high-rise building; wind direction; computational fluid dynamics

Funding

  1. special fund of the State Key Joint Laboratory of Environment Simulation and Pollution Control (2015), Tsinghua University, China [15K09ESPCT]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper proposes a CFD model for evaluating local haze-fog dispersion, using APRT as a measure of ventilation effectiveness. The study found that the orientation of building groups has a significant impact on APRT, and future urban designs can reduce APRT by adjusting orientation.
This paper proposes a computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model, along with dimensionless quantitative assessment standard-air pollution residual time (APRT) for the evaluation of local haze-fog (HF) dispersion in a built environment. A low APRT value ensures good ventilation. A building group model that comprises high-rise business building, mid-rise office buildings, low-mid-rise residential buildings (at the center of the building group), a mid-rise recreational center, and a local road (open terrain), was scaled down (1:100) to simulate the HF dispersion process. The orientation of the building group was numerically modified to generate a wind incidence normal to the high-rise building, mid-rise buildings, recreational center, and road. The results showed that the orientation of the building group largely determines the APRT. The most favorable orientation can reduce APRT by more than 50%. Our results strongly suggested that in order to reduce the consequential negative effect of air pollution, future urban designs should undergo a comprehensive ventilation assessment to ensure a low APRT value.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available