the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
A conservative immersed boundary method for the multi-physics urban large-eddy simulation model uDALES v2.0
Abstract. uDALES is an open-source multi-physics microscale urban modelling framework, capable of performing large-eddy simulation (LES) of urban airflow, heat transfer, and pollutant dispersion. We present uDALES v2.0, which has two main new features: 1) an improved parallelisation that prepares the codebase for conducting exascale simulations; and 2) a conservative immersed boundary method (IBM) suitable for an urban surface that does not need to be aligned with the underlying Cartesian grid. The urban geometry and local topography are incorporated via a triangulated surface with a resolution that is independent of the fluid grid. The IBM developed here includes the use of wall functions to apply surface fluxes, and the exchange of heat and moisture between the surface and the air is conservative by construction. We perform a number of validation simulations, ranging from neutral, coupled internal-external flows and non-neutral cases. Good agreement is observed, both in cases in which the buildings are aligned with the Cartesian grid and when they are at an angle. We introduce a validation case specifically for urban applications, for which we show that supporting non grid-aligned geometries is crucial when solving surface energy balances, with errors of up to 20 % associated with using a previous version of uDALES.
- Preprint
(6300 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 01 Jun 2024)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-96', Anonymous Referee #1, 30 Mar 2024
reply
This paper presents enough materials to describe the upgraded key features from uDALES v1.0 to uDALES v2.0 (LES), as well as the crucial technique details. Four cases were tested and validated against the data in the literature, showing the success of the upgrading. I am very pleased to see that the authors have published the uDALES v2.0 codebase and user manual for open access.
The MS is concise and is well prepared. I would recommend ‘accept’ for publication, subject to addressing some minor comments below:
- Lns 8-9. Please rephrase this sentence ‘Good agreement …’
- 2, in the convection term u_i to change to u_j. Give a bit more details about K_h (it should be SGS eddy diffusivity).
- Ln 112, change ‘transported’ to ‘convected’.
- 5, define RH, q_{sat}
- Lns 142-144. “Note that the surface energy balance is generally evolved using a larger timestep than the LES, therefore these fluxes are time averaged”. This is not clear enough. These fluxes are constant during the LES, or vary slowly in a quasi-steady manner?
- Section 3 title ‘Improvements’ to change to ‘Upgraded key features from uDALES v1.0 to v2.0
- 3.2. As in the inlet-outlet direction (streamwise), only the Neumann BC can be used. Therefore, the constant pressure boundary condition cannot be used. Given all boundary conditions for pressure are Neumann, any specific treatment is given to settle down a unique solution?
- Ln 228. Non-slip boundary condition means non-zero shear, which is wall-normal momentum flux. Please comment.
- Lns 245-246. Please describe a bit more of the interpolation here, is it a 2nd-order accuracy linear interpolation?
- Lns 335-338. The ‘real’ turbulence generated by the driver simulations using periodic lateral boundary conditions is governed by the upper and lower boundaries, which are just a simplified condition (but not 100% ‘real’). Please comment.
- Ln 374. ‘These differences are most likely caused by differences in the inflow conditions above z/hm = 5 (Fig. 8c)’. The upper boundary conditions in the LES might be one more reason to cause the discrepancy? Please comment.
- Section 4.2. Please give the dimensions of the LES domain in the text, although they are shown in Fig. 9.
- Section 4.3. The Ri number is kept the same as in Richards et al (2006) and Boppana et al (2013), whereas the Reynolds number is increased by 100 times (or kept the same as Richards et al (2006))? If not, please comment on this.
- Section 4.4. Please give the Ri number in the current problem, with a discussion on the capability of uDALES for larger Ri flows.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-96-RC1 -
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-96', Anonymous Referee #2, 09 Apr 2024
reply
I found the presentation to be clear, and the topic is definitely appropriate. I am not qualified to review the technical aspects of the manuscript.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-96-RC2
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
222 | 58 | 17 | 297 | 9 | 10 |
- HTML: 222
- PDF: 58
- XML: 17
- Total: 297
- BibTeX: 9
- EndNote: 10
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1