ELSEVIER Energy and Buildings 28 ( 1998) 137-144

A zero-equation turbulence model for indoor airflow simulation

Qingyan Chen *, Weiran Xu
Building Technology Program, Department of Architecture, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Room 5-418, 77 Massachusetts Avenue,
Cambridge, MA 02139-4307, USA

Received 8 January 1996

Abstract

At present, Computational-Fluid-Dynamics (CFD) with the standard k-8 model is a popular method for numerical simulation of room
airflow. The k-c model needs a lot of computing time and large a computer. This paper proposes a new zero-equation model to simulate three-
dimensional distributions of air velocity, temperature, and contaminant concentrations in rooms. The method assumes turbulent viscosity to
be a function of length-scale and local mean velocity. The new model has been used to predict natural convection, forced convection, mixed
convection, and displacement ventilation in a room. The results agree reasonably with experimental data and the results obtained by the
standard k-c model. The zero-equation model uses much less computer memory and the computing speed is at least 10 times faster, compared
with the k-c model. The grid size can often be reduced so that the computing time needed for a three-dimensional case can be a few minutes
0naK. 0 1998 Elsevier Science S.A. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Computational-fluid-dynamics; Convection; Concentration

1. Introduction
Proper design of indoor environment requires detailed
information of indoor air distribution, suchasairflow pattern,
velocity, temperature, and contaminant concentrations.The
information can be obtained by experimental measurements
and computational simulations.Experimental measurements
are reliable but need large labor-effort and time. Therefore,
the experimental approachis not feasible asa generaldesign
tool. A popular approachof computational simulationsis the
computational-fluid-dynamics (CFD) method. However,
popular modelsusedin the CFD method to calculate turbu-
lenceneed a fast computer with a large memory.
On the other hand, mostbuilding energy analysisprograms
assumeuniform distributions of room air temperature and
calculate convective heat exchange coefficient by empirical
formulas for simpleflows. The energy programscannot accu-
rately predict energy usedby HVAC systemsif there is tem-
perature stratification in a space,suchasa room with radiant
heating/cooling systems,with convective andradiative heat-
ing systems,and with displacementventilation systems.In
addition, airflow on room enclosuresurfacesis not the same
as that in an infinite long heated or cooled surface asoften
* Corresponding author. Tel.: + 1 617 2537714;
e-mail: qchen@mit.edu
usedto obtain empirical formulas for heat transfer. The heat
transfer on room enclosuresurfaceis muchmore complicated
becauseit can be a combination of forced and natural con-
vection and jet flows. The empirical formulas often fail to
calculate accurately heat transfer on the surfaces.Therefore,
the temperaturedistributions of room air andheat transfer on
room enclosuresurface are important input parametersfor a
building energy program. A CFD program can calculate the
heat transfer.
The CFD methods solve the Navier-Stokes equationsfor
flows. For laminar flows the computed results are accurate
and reliable. However, it is difficult to predict turbulent flows.
Very fine numerical resolution is required to capture all the
details of the indoor turbulent flow. This type of simulation
is direct numerical simulation. The direct numerical simula-
tion for a practical flow needsa huge computer systemthat
is not available [ 11.
Indoor airflow simulations use turbulence models in the
CFD approach to compute the mean values. This type of
simulationcan be donewith the capacity and speedof present
computers. Eddy-viscosity modelsare the most popular tur-
bulence models.A typical example of the modelsis the stan-
dard k-.s model [ 21. Most of the modelsrequire solving one
fax: + 1 617 2536152; or more additional differential equations.The computing cost
is still large at present.Most HVAC designersand architects

0378-7788/98/$19.00 0 1998 Elsevier Science S.A. All rights reserved.

PUSO378-7788(98)00020-6
138 Q. Chen, W. Xu /Energy
may not have a larger computer. Therefore, in predicting
indoor air distribution, designing a comfortable indoor envi-
ronment, and analyzing building energy, application of the
turbulence models is limited.
Some other turbulence models, such as zero-equation tur-
bulence models, do not solve additional differential equa-
tions. They can be used to compute turbulent flows without
extensive computing power. This paper presents a new zero-
equation model for room airflow prediction.
2. Reviews on zero-equation turbulence models
The development of zero-equation turbulence models
dates back to 1925, when Prandtl [ 31 postulated the mixed-
length hypothesis. In analogy to the molecular transport with
fluid lump motions, the mixing-length model assumes a
relationship:
where lmix is the mixing length, U is the main stream velocity
and y is the direction normal to the main flow. Although the
mixing-length model is not theoretically sound, it has yielded
quite plausible results for some flows. For example, the mix-
ing length model gives excellent agreement with measure-
ment in free shear flows with proper calibration.
Many efforts had been made to extend the applicability of
the mixing length model. van Driest [ 41 devised a damping
function to include the wall-damping effects. The van Driests
damping function was formulated as:
lmi.=Ky[ l-e%] (2)
where K ( = 0.41) is von Karman constant.
Clauser [5] and Escudier [ 61 made modifications to
extend the model to the defect layer. Corrsin and Kistlter [ 71
and Klebanoff [8] made an important modification on the
model to include the intermittent phenomena in the boundary
layer. The most important contributions to zero-equation
models are due to Cebeci and Smith [ 91, who proposed a
two-layer, zero-equation model that include almost all above
modifications. Their model enjoyed a wide popularity during
the 1960s to early 1980s. Wilcox [ IO] described this model
as especially elegant and easy to implement. Baldwin and
Lomax [ 111 proposed a similar two-layer model. Their
model does not need to determine boundary-layer edge in
Cebeci-Smiths model.
Both models have been widely applied to many engineer-
ing applications [ 12-141. Although satisfactory results were
obtained in channel and pipe flow, Cebeci-Smith and Bald-
win-Lomax models perform poorly in boundary-layer and
separated flows, as most of the assumptions do not hold in
these flows [ IO]. It is also found difficult for zero-equation
models to calculate turbulent heat transfer with variableprop-
erty problems [ 15 1. While most engineers and scientists are
and Buildings 28 (1998) 137-144
turning to more sophisticated turbulence models, such as two-
equation models and Reynolds-Stress models, zero-equation
models still deserves some attentions since they are simple,
cost-effective and once calibrated, can predict the mean-flow
quantities fairly well.
However, none of the above zero-equation models are
developed for room airflows, especially buoyancy-driven
flows. It is therefore necessary to develop a zero-equation
model for room airllows.
3. Justification of need
Many HVAC design engineers and architects do not have
the access to a large computer. It is important to develop a
simple model to simulate indoor airflow on a personal
computer. The model can calculate airflow pattern and the
distributions of air velocity, temperature, contaminant con-
centrations, and pressure. The flow program should then be
coupled with an energy analysis program to simulate simul-
taneously airflow, thermal comfort, and energy consumption
of HVAC systems. The program will also allow the temper-
ature of interior walls to be predicted. The program would
serve as a tool to accurately provide design information and
to properly size HVAC systems and assure comfort condi-
tions at all important locations within the space.
The goal of the present investigation is to develop a simple
but reliable turbulence model that can provide design infor-
mation to establish acceptable comfort conditions through
the interior space. With the model, one can simulate indoor
airflow with a minimum of training and modest desktop per-
sonal computers. Section 4 describes the new model.
4. A new zero-equation model
4.1. Governingflow equations
Most indoor airflows are turbulent. This is true even for
flow in a clean room where it is often called laminar. Indoor
airflow calculations use the Buossinesq approximation for
thermal buoyancy. The approximation takes air density as
constant in the momentum terms and considers the buoyancy
influence on air movement by the difference between the local
air weight and the pressure gradient. With an eddy-viscosity
model, the indoor airflow is described by the following time-
averaged Navier-Stokes equations for the conservation of
mass, momentum, energy, and species concentration.
0 Mass continuity.
%-
-0
axi
where Vj= mean velocity component in x,-direction; xi =
coordinate (for i = 1,2, 3, xi correspondsto three perpendic-
ular axes).
 Q. Chen, W. Xu/Energy and Buildings 28 (1998) 137-144 139

0 Momentum. 0 Speciesconcentrations.
For determination of pollutant or water vapor concentra-
apvi apvivj tion distribution the equation for conservation of massmust
at' axj be combined with the equation for the species.

apt apvjc- a
at+ axj
z Geff g +s, (10)
J( J 1

where p = air density; Vj = velocity component in xi-direc-
tion; p = pressure; perf= effective viscosity; p = thermal
expansioncoefficient of air; To= temperatureof a reference
point; T= temperature; gi = gravity acceleration in i-direc-
tion.
The last term on the right sideof the equation is the buoy-
ancy term.
The turbulent influencesare lumped into the effective vis-
cosity as the sum of the turbulent viscosity, Pi, and laminar
viscosity, p:
CLeff=k+EL
where C = speciesconcentration; rc,eff = effective turbulent
diffusion coefficient for C; SC= sourceterm of C.
Similar method to the energy equationis usedto determine
the effective diffusive coefficient for speciesconcentrationin
Eq. ( 10) 9rc,eff:
Geff= 2 (11)
eff
where effective Schmidt number, Sceff,is 1.O.
Solving Eqs. (3)-( 11) except Eq. (6)) one could obtain
flow information.
(5)

In the Prandtl-Kolmogorov assumption,the turbulent vis- 4.2. Boundary conditions

cosity is the product of turbulence kinetic energy, k, and
turbulent macroscale,1, that is a proper length scalefor tur- Boundary conditions are necessaryfor the mathematical
bulence interactions: solution of the governing flow equations. There are three
types of boundariesof practical importance: free boundary,
(6)
symmetry surface,and conventional boundary.
where C, = 0.5478, an empirical constant.Dependingon how 0 Free boundary.
to solve the unknown parametersk and1,eddy-viscosity mod- The boundary surface may be adjacent to an inviscid
elshave different forms. The simplestmodel is probably the stream.Examples are air supply and return. For a supply, the
Prandtls [ 31 mixing-length model andcomplicatedonesuse boundary conditions are:
multi-equations for turbulence transport. The standard k-g
vi=vsupply
model [ 21 is the most widely usedtwo-equation model.
In this paper, we use a single algebraic function (a zero- T=Tsupply
equationmodel) to expressthe turbulent viscosity asa func-
tion of local meanvelocity, V, and a length scale,I: c=cpply (12)
where subscripts supply are the parameter values at the
,+=0.03874 pV1 (7) supply outlet.
This equation has no adjustableconstantsbetween different Pressureis normally given for a return and zero gradients
flow conditions. normal to the surfaceare assumedasother parameters:
0 Energy.
P=Preturn
To determine the temperaturedistribution and the buoy-
ancy term in Eq. (4), the equation for energy conservation se -0
must be solved. axi

apT ap?T a aT
-=
y- + - - &ff E ++ (8) 0
ax, ax, ( ,1 P axi
where rrefi - effective turbulent diffusion coefficient for T, ac
z=O (13)
q = thermal source; C, = specific heat.
In our work we have estimatedthe effective diffusive coef-
ficient for temperaturein Eq. (8)) rTeff, by: where prerum is the pressureat a return and xi the coordinate
normal to the surface.
0 Symmetry surface.
G,,eff= pf If the xi coordinate is normal to the symmetry surface,the
eff
following equationsdescribethe boundary conditions of the
where the effective Prandtl number, Preff, is 0.9. surface:
140 Q. Chen, W. Xu / Energy and Buildings 28 (1998) 137-144

av,--0 5.1. Natural convection

axi

dT For natural convection, the experimental data of Olson and

Glicksman [ 181as shown in Fig. 1 are used.
,,=O
Fig. 2 comparesthe airflow patterns obtained by the zero-
ac equation model, the Lam-Bremhorst [ 191 k-8 model, and
-= 0
axi smoke visualization. The zero-equation model predicts the
main streamreasonablywell although the boundary layers of
Conventional boundary.
l the ceiling and floor are thicker. Note that the zero-equation
This type of boundary surfacesincludeswall, ceiling, and modelaswell asthe k-c model predictsthe observedreversed
floor surfacesand the surfacesof furniture, appliance, and flow found beneaththe ceiling layer and above the floor layer.
occupants. If xi coordinate is parallel to the surface, the The layer thickness are not correct for the zero-equation
boundary conditions are:
Adiabatic ceiling
-
I 1

q=h(T,-T)

&=CSOUTCe (15)
where r=shear stress;h=convective heat transfer coeffi-
cient; C,,,,, = speciesconcentration source. Adiabaticfloor
7.9 m
The convective heat transfercoefficient is determinedfrom I I

the following equation, which is similar to the Reynolds Fig. 1. Sketch and boundary conditions of the natural convection case.

analogy:

h=&& (16)
Preff Ax,
-.+--+--+-,---a-.-+

where bj is the distance between the surface and the first _ - - - _ - _ - - c c - - - ,

grid closeto the surface. ____ _ _ - _ _ - _ ---.

,._-_ - _ - - - -v-e--

\....

4.3. Numerical procedure

A CFD program, PHOENICS [ 161, is used to solve the

conservation equations together with the corresponding
boundary conditions. The program discmtizesthe spaceinto
non-uniform computational cells, and the discretized equa-
tions are solved with the SIMPLE algorithm [ 171.The inves-
tigation usesupwind-scheme.

5. Application examples

This sectiondemonstratesthe new zero-equation modelby

applying it to predict indoor airflows of:
0 Natural convection
0 Forced convection
0 Mixed convection
l Displacementventilation
Natural, forced, and mixed convection represent the basic
elementsof room airilows. For simplicity, two-dimensional
casesare selectedto demonstratethe zero-equation model.
The displacementventilation caseusedis three-dimensional (4
with more complicated boundary conditions. The displace- Fig. 2. Comparison of the airflow patterns for natural convection: (a) zero-
ment ventilation caseis a test of the overall performanceof equation model, (b) the Lam-Bremhorst k-c model, (c) smoke
the new model. visualization.
 Q. Chen, W. Xu/Energy and Buildings 28 (1998) 137-144 141

model due to the large cell size used. However, we found

only the Lam-Bremhorst model could predict the reversed
flow when we tested quite a few eddy-viscosity models [ 201,
Fig. 3 presents the dimensionless temperature profiles in
the vertical center line. The zero-equation model predicts the
temperature profile better than the k-8 model in this particular
case.

5.2. Forced convection

The forced convection case uses the experimental data

from Nielsen et al. [21] shown in Fig. 4. The Reynolds Fig. 3. Comparison of temperature profile in vertical line at the middle of
the room with natural convection.
number is 5000 based on bulk supply velocity and the height
of air supply outlet. The air supply outlet h = 0.056 H, and -
=
exhaust inlet h = 0.16 H. h
Fig. 5 compares the airflow patterns by the zero-equation
I Isothermal forced convection H
model and the standard k-E model [ 21. Since, the standard Y

k-E model has been used extensively in the past and detailed _ x - h
information of the model is widely available, this paper will
not repeat all the information. The computed velocity profiles
Fig. 4. Sketch of the forced convection case.
are compared in Fig. 6 with experimental data in two vertical
sections x/H = 1 and x/H = 2 respectively and two horizontal
sections, y/H = 0.972 (through the air supply outlet) and yl
H = 0.028 (through the air exhaust inlet). The results of the
zero-equation model show a jet decay that is too strong.
Hence, the primary flow near the ceiling and the return flow ,._......4----/;
: 1
near the floor are smaller than the data. In this case, the k-g . .
.
.
.
.4---.-c&-/,
. -cc--t-cccc r ,
,

_ _ _ - . - - cccccccc /
model predicts a satisfactory result. Nevertheless, the zero-
equation model could predict the secondary recirculation on (a)

the upper right comer, though the recirculation is too large.

However, the k-E model fails to predict the recirculation.

5.3. Mixed convection

The mixed convection case uses the experimental data

from Schwenke [ 221. The case is similar to the forced con-
vection but the room length is 4.7 H and the height of the air
supply outlet h = 0.025 H. The right wall is heated but the
ceiling and floor are adiabatic. Schwenke conducted a series
measurements with different Archimedes numbers, Ar, rang-
ing from 0.001 to 0.02.
Fig. 7 compares the computed airflow pattern by the zero-
equation model with the standard k-E model. The two results
are similar. The airflow pattern is very sensitive to the Ar.
The computed and measured penetration depths, x,, vs. dif-
ferent Ar numbers are compared in Fig. 8. The x, is the
horizontal distance of air movement along the ceiling before
it falls to the floor. The zero-equation model works better in
high Ar but the k-E model better in low Ar.
5.4. Displacement ventilation
Fig. 9 shows the application of the zero-equation model
and the standard k-E model for the prediction of room airflow
with a displacement ventilation system. The room dimension
is 5.6 m long, 3.0 m wide, and 3.2 m high. A convective heat
(b)
Fig. 5. Comparison of the airflow patterns for the forced convection: (a)
zero-equation model, (b) the standard k-8 model.
source of 530 W on the window was used to simulate a
summer cooling condition. The supply airflow rate was five
air-changes per hour. The corresponding supply air temper-
ature was 19C. A box placed near the table was heated by a
25 W lamp to simulate a person sitting next to the table. The
heat strength is considerably lower than that generated from
an occupant. However, a helium source was also introduced
in the box as a tracer gas to simulate contaminant from the
occupant, such as CO, or tobacco smoke. The helium flow
rate was 0.5% of the air supply rate. Since helium is much
lighter than the air and the helium source was relatively strong
in the room, the combined buoyant effect from the thermal
source (heat from the lamp) and the mass source (helium)
was as strong as that generated from an occupant.
The computations were carried out with different grid num-
bers with the zero-equation model: 3 1 X 28 X 26 (the same
asthek-&model), 16X14X12, lOXlOXlO,and6X7X6.
142 Q. Chen, W. Xu / Energy and Buildings 28 (1998) 137-144

x/H=2
1.0 I

0-q mode4
_____...__--.. L-E model r::*
0.5 - . data .,.,
.I 0,

I I... 0.25I.. .&.... 0.75I I

-6!00 0.50
YM
1.00 -so 0.25 0.50
YM
0.75 1.00

(a) (3)

ynGo.972
T 0.50 / , YM=!.o?8
O-eq. model
____
___________-._ &tie,
1 o-e.q.model f
--. .
.a

cj*; ~~~~~~

% . :----

-O4.0 1.0 ~ 2.0 3.0 4.50.o 1.0 x/H 2.0 3.0

w (4
Fig. 6. Comparison of velocity profiles in different sections of the room with forced convection: (a) at x/H = 1, (b) at x/H= 2, (c) at y/H =0.972, and (d)
at yl H = 0.028.

__---____--.
cFDModel Simplified Model

(b)
Fig. 7. Comparison of the airflow patterns for the mixed convection: (a) the
zero-equation model, (b) the standard k-e model.

Fig. 8. Comparison of the penetration length vs. Archimedes number for the
A grid number of 16 X 14 X 12 is minimum in order to rep- mom with mixed convection.
resent the room geometry, such as the inlet, outlets, window,
and table. Fig. 9 shows similar airflow patterns and the dis- the computed and measured results is reasonably good. The
tributions of air temperature and helium concentration com- results are nearly identical between the two models if the grid
puted by the zero-equation model with 16 X 14 X 12 grids and number is the same. This implies that the new zero-equation
the k-8 model with 3 1 X 28 X 26 grids. model is as good as the k-8 model for displacement ventila-
Fig. 10 further compares the computed results with the tion. However, the model performance depends on flow type.
experimental data. The velocity and temperature profiles are In a separated study to examine the performance of five dif-
at the center of the room and helium concentration profile at ferent k-E models, we found that a model may work better in
a line near the center of the room. The agreement between one type of flow but poorer in another type [ 231. Therefore,
 Q. Chen, W. Xu /Energy and Buildings 28 (1998) 137-144 143

(c) 0-l
Fig. 9. Comparison of the airflow patterns and distribution of air temperature
(C) and helium concentration (%): (a), (b), and (c) the zero-equation
model and (d) , (e) , and ( f) the k-e model. Fig. 10. Comparison of the profiles of air velocity, air temperature, and
helium concentration in a vertical line of the room.
we cannot say that the zero-equation model is better than the
k-E model. The main advantage of the zero-equation model Table 1
is its simplicity and less computing time required, compared Comparison of computing performance of the zero-equation and k-e models
with the k-e model.
Case Model Grid number Core CPU
It is possible to use a minimum grid number of 6 X 7 X 6
memory time
with which the table in the room cannot be represented. The (bytes) (s)
accuracy of the results is relaxed but it does predict the main
features of displacement ventilation, such as temperature gra- Natural convection Zero-equation 20x 10 15,006 18
dient, non-uniform distribution of contaminant concentra- k-e 96X60 158,OcHl 3238
Forced convection Zero-equation 20x 18 25,000 9
tion, and higher risk of draft near the inlets at the floor level. k-e 50x45 177,000 593
The minimal grid number is less than that used in zonal Mixed convection Zero-equation 25X18 31,000 33
models. Therefore, the zero-equation model has a great poten- k-e 70x45 263,000 1438
Displacement ventilation Zero-equation 31 x28X26 555.000 5400
tial to be used in an hour-by-hour energy simulation program
16X14X12 75,000 311
to take into account the impact of non-uniform temperature 10x10x10 27,CQO 119
distribution on energy consumption. 6~7x6 9ooo 33
Note in all of the cases, the zero-equation model, Eq. (7), k-s 31X28X26 770,000 58,163
is exactly the same. No adjustable constants were used in the
computations. The zero-equation model is universal for room ing because the basis of the k-E model is more solid. The
airflow simulation. reason to use a zero-equation model is to reduce the comput-
ing time used by the k-E model.
6. Discussion Table 1 shows the total grid number used in the four cases
by the zero-equation model and the k-s models. It also shows
The results show that the k-E model may predict better the memory needed and CPU time used. The convergence
results than the new zero-equation model. This is not surpris- residuals, R, are the same for the zero-equation model and
144 Q. Chen, W. Xu /Energy and Buildings 28 (1998) 137-144

the k-E models. The present investigation uses R < 0.001 of References
the mass inflow, for mass continuity and R <O.Ol of energy
exchange for temperature. [ 1] F.T.M. Nieuwstadt, J.G.M. Eggles, R.J.A. Hanssen, M.B.J.M.
The computations were conducted on a 486 personal com- Pourquie, Direct and large-eddy simulations of turbulence in fluids,
Future Generation Comput. Syst. 10 (1994) 189-205.
puter. The zero-equation model uses much less memory than
[ 21 B.E. Launder, D.B. Spalding, The numerical computation of turbulent
the k-e model and is at least 10 times faster than the k-E flows, Comp. Meth. Appl. Mech. Energy 3 (1974) 269-289.
model. This is because the k-E model solves two more trans- [ 31 L. Prandtl, Uber die ausgebildete Turbulenz, ZAMM 5 ( 1925) 136-
port equations and the non-linear interaction in all the equa- 139.
tions makes it difficult to converge. The results show that [4] E.R. van Driest, On turbulent flow near a wall, J. Aeronaut. Sci. 23
(1956) 1007.
most room airflow simulation can be done with a personal
[5] F.H. Clauser, The turbulent boundary layer, Advances in Applied
computer and the computing time for each case is on the order Mechanics: IV, Academic Press, New York, 1956, pp. l-51.
of a few seconds for a two-dimensional problem and a few [6] M.P. Escudier, The distribution of mixing-length in turbulent flows
minutes for a three-dimensional case. near walls, Heat Transfer Section Report TWF/TN/ 12, Imperial Col-
lege, 1966.
[7] S. Corrsin, A.L. Kistlter, The free-stream boundaries of turbulent
flows, NACA TN 3133 (1954)
[ 81 P.S. Klebanoff, Characteristics of turbulence in a boundary layer with
7. Conclusions zero pressure gradient, NACA TN 3178 (1956)
[9] T. Cebeci, A.M.O. Smith, Analysis of turbulent boundary Layers,
This paper proposes a new zero-equation for the prediction Series in Applied Mathematics and Methods: XV, Academic Press,
of room airflow patterns and the distribution of air tempera- 1974.
[ 101 D.C. Wilcox, Turbulence modeling for CFD. DCW Industries, 1993,
ture and contaminant concentrations. The model is derived
p. 51.
from the Navier-Stokes equations. Using the concept of [ 111 B.S. Baldwin, H. Lomax, Thin-layer approximation and algebraic
eddy-viscosity, turbulent viscosity is approximated by a models for separated turbulent flows, AIAA Paper, Huntsville, AL,
length scale and mean velocity. The main difference between 1978, pp. 78-257.
the zero-equation model and the k-8 model is that the former [ 12 ] A.A. Ameri, A. Amone, Prediction of turbine blade pass heat transfer
using a zero and a two-equation turbulence model, ASME Proceedings
does not solve transport equations for turbulent quantities.
of the International Gas Turbine and Aeroengine Congress and Expo-
The zero-equation model determines turbulent quantities by sition, Paper 94-GT- 122, June 13-16, Hugus, Neth ASME, New York,
an algebraic equation. 1994, pp. l-8.
The study demonstrates the capability of the zero-equation [ 131 D.E. Nikitopoulos, E.E. Michaelides, Phenomenological model for
dispersed bubbly flow in pipes, AIChE J. 41 (1) (1995) 12-22.
model by applying it to predict the airflow with natural
[ 141 H. Liu, M. Ikehata, Computation of free surface waves around an
convection, forced convection, mixed convection, and dis-
arbitrary body by a Navier-Stokes solver usingpseudocompressibility
placement ventilation in rooms. The predicted results are technique, Int. J. Numerical Methods Fluids 19 (5) (1994) 395413.
compared with experimental data and the results with the [ 151 S.-W. Chyou, C.A. Sheicher, Can one- and two-equation models be
standard k-8 model. The zero-equation model can predict modified to calculate turbulent heat transfer with variable properties?,
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 31 (3) ( 1992) 756-759.
indoor airHow patterns and the distributions of air tempera-
[ 161 PHOENICS Reference Manual, CHAM, London, 1996.
ture and contaminant concentrations with reasonable [ 171 S.V. Patankar, Numerical Heat Transfer and Fluid Flow, Hemisphere
accuracy. Publishing, New York, 1980.
Since the zero-equation model does not solve transport [ 181 D.A. Olson, L.R. Glicksman, Transient natural convection in enclo-
equations for turbulence, the computer memory needed is sures at high Rayleigh number, ASME J. Heat Transfer 113 ( 1991)
635-642.
much smaller, and the convergence speed is 10 times faster
[ 191 C.K.G. Lam, K. Bremhorst, A modified form of the k-c model for
than that of the k-E model. With the zero-equation model, predicting wall turbulence, ASME J. Fluid Eng. 103 ( 1981) 456-460.
simulation of a three-dimensional, steady-state flow in a room [20] W. Xu, Q. Chen, Numerical simulation of air flow in a room with
can be made in a personal computer. differentially heated vertical walls, ASHRAE Trans. 104 ( 1) (1998)

[21] P.V. Nielsen, A. Restivo, J.H. Wbitelaw, The velocity characteristics

of ventilated rooms, J. Fluid Eng. 100 (1978) 291-298.
Acknowledgements [ 221 H. Schwenke, Ueber das Verhalten elener horizontaler Zuluftstrahlen
im begrenzten Raum, Luft- und Kaltetechnik 5 ( 1975) 241-246.
[23] Q. Chen, Comparison of different k-smodels for indoor airllow com-
The investigation is supported by the US National Science putations, Numerical Heat Transfer, Part B: Fundam. 28 ( 1995) 353-
Foundation Grant No. CMS-9623864. 369.