The use of CFD vs. wind tunnel testing in wind microclimate assessments

Abstract eng:
As Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) tools become more powerful and widely available, their use for the assessment of the wind microclimate around buildings has become more prevalent. The key question for wind consultants and planning authorities to understand: is CFD appropriate for this assessment, and what are its limitations in comparison to wind tunnel testing? In collaboration with the Development Division of the City of London, UK, we have conducted a comparative assessment of the wind microclimate around the “Eastern Cluster” of the City using the two tools. An understanding of the limitations of each method tool is crucial to the successful use of either tool in wind microclimate assessments. Additionally, we will show how the consideration of parameters beyond the choice of wind modelling tool - such as the background wind climate - are at least as influential on the outcome as the choice of tool itself. The conclusion is that while steady-state CFD cannot currently replace established wind tunnel methodology in all scenarios (notably where strong, gusty winds occur) it can nevertheless provide a good match in terms of wind comfort. This allows for consultants to use steady-state CFD qualitatively, i.e. in early stage designing, or quantitatively for buildings not anticipated to being susceptible to strong, gusty winds (with necessary application of professional judgement to determine the likelihood of strong winds causing distress). Additionally, the advantages of CFD (notably its spatial resolution and the ability to easily visualize wind effects) make it a powerful consulting tool, both in its own right and in combination with wind tunnel data.

• Export as: BibTeX | MARC | MARCXML | DC | EndNote | NLM | RefWorks
• Add to your basket