Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 46 & 47 (1993) 327-338 327

Elsevier

Volume-fraction techniques: powerful tools for wind

engineering

C. W. HIRT
President, Flow Science, Inc., 1325 Trinity Drive, Los Alamos,
New Mexico, USA

Abstract
In this presentation we summarize the foundation and prac-
tical details of fractional-volume modeling methods. In par-
ticular, we shall demonstrate that these methods offer
powerful computational approaches to a variety of physical
phenomena in wind engineering.
Use of volume-fraction methods is efficient because they
typically require much less computer memory and less computa-
tional time than other techniques for modeling geometries. To
be effective, however, these methods need to be supplemented
with special considerations for boundary conditions and for
numerical stability. A variety of examples will be used to
demonstrate how fractional area/volume methods work.

i. INTRODUCTION: OVERVIEW OF FAVOR CONCEPT

This presentation is primarily concerned with a modeling

technique that is powerful and relatively simple, yet is not
widely used. We shall use the acronym FAVOR to refer to the
basic technique for ~ractional-~rea-~olume Qbstacle Bepresen-
tation. There are other kinds of useful volume-fraction meth-
ods as well, e.g., the Volume-of-Fluid (VOF) method, about
which little will be said here. All examples in this
presentation were computed with the FAVOR method as used in
the commercial FLOW-3D computer program developed by Flow Sci-
ence, Inc. [i].
Although the FAVOR technique was originally developed as a
means of defining obstacles of general shape within a grid of
block elements, the practical usefulness of the technique is
only limited by the imagination of the user. In the area of
wind engineering, the technique is also useful for modeling
geometric situations in which there are distributions of flow
obstructions too small to individually resolve (e.g., many
small buildings, trees or equipment within an enclosed space).
Furthermore, time-dependent versions of FAVOR may be used to
model both small and large motions of obstacles. It is even
possible to devise simple models of fans, paddles or other
types of flow mixers using volume fractions with fluid dynamic
drag forces based on relative flow velocities.

Elsevier Science Publishers B.V.

328

I.i H i s t o r y
This w r i t e r ' s e a r l i e s t e x p o s u r e to F A V O R - t y p e m e t h o d s was
in the w o r k of Gentry, M a r t i n and Daly [2]. These a u t h o r s
d e v e l o p e d a c o m p u t a t i o n a l model for the c o m p r e s s i b l e E u l e r
e q u a t i o n s that u s e d v o l u m e f r a c t i o n s and flow areas at the
faces of t w o - d i m e n s i o n a l r e c t a n g u l a r g r i d elements. Zero face
areas w e r e u s e d to b l o c k off s e l e c t e d grid e l e m e n t s to p r o d u c e
r e c t a n g u l a r ducts or c h a n n e l s w i t h i n a s t r u c t u r e d grid.
A l t h o u g h a m o r e g e n e r a l m o d e l i n g c a p a b i l i t y e x i s t e d in t h e i r
code, the a u t h o r s n e v e r p u b l i s h e d e x a m p l e s that used area
f r a c t i o n s o t h e r than zero or one.
One r e a s o n for this c o n s e r v a t i s m was that t h e i r n u m e r i c a l
f o r m u l a t i o n was s u b j e c t to c o m p u t a t i o n a l i n s t a b i l i t i e s u n l e s s
s u f f i c i e n t l y small t i m e - s t e p sizes were used. A n o t h e r reason
m a y h a v e b e e n t h e i r lack of some a u t o m a t e d m e a n s of d e f i n i n g
the n e c e s s a r y area f r a c t i o n s for m o r e general types of g e o m e -
try. For example, e v e n a m o d e s t g r i d of i000 e l e m e n t s
r e q u i r e s the s p e c i f i c a t i o n of 3000 fractional v a l u e s in two
d i m e n s i o n s and 4000 f r a c t i o n s in three d i m e n s i o n s (i.e., each
cell needs a v o l u m e fraction plus one area f r a c t i o n for each
flow direction).
P r o b a b l y the g r e a t e s t interest in area and v o l u m e f r a c t i o n
m e t h o d s was g e n e r a t e d in the 1970s w h e n large r e s e a r c h e f f o r t s
w e r e a s s e m b l e d to n u m e r i c a l l y model n u c l e a r p o w e r r e a c t o r flow
processes. The g e o m e t r i c c o m p l e x i t y of n u c l e a r r e a c t o r cores,
steam g e n e r a t o r s and c o n t a i n m e n t b u i l d i n g s r e q u i r e d m o d e l e r s
to invent n e w a p p r o x i m a t i o n methods. In particular, the w i d e
range of g e o m e t r i c sizes e n c o u n t e r e d in these a p p l i c a t i o n s
n e c e s s i t a t e d some kind of " h o m o g e n i z a t i o n " p r o c e s s in w h i c h
m a n y small d e t a i l s could be s m o o t h e d into some sort of a v e r a g e
flow blockage.
An e a r l y e x a m p l e of this type of m o d e l i n g can be found in
the C O M M I X code d e v e l o p e d at the A r g o n n e N a t i o n a l L a b o r a t o r y
[3].
A m o r e r e c e n t example, d e v e l o p e d for fast and i n e x p e n s i v e
m o d e l i n g of n u c l e a r r e a c t o r c o n t a i n m e n t structures, was u s e d
in the CAP code [4]. In particular, a F A V O R - t y p e m e t h o d was
u s e d to a p p r o x i m a t e the c o m p l i c a t e d g e o m e t r i c conditions,
w h i l e a L a g r a n g i a n m a r k e r - p a r t i c l e m e t h o d was u s e d to t r a c k
c o n t a m i n a n t s w i t h a m i n i m u m amount of n u m e r i c a l diffusion.

1.2 F o r m a l i s m
In the e x a m p l e s cited, little effort was e x p e n d e d in t r y i n g
to put the use of fractional a r e a / v o l u m e m e t h o d s on a formal
basis. E a r l y r e s e a r c h e r s u s u a l l y r e s o r t e d to simple p h y s i c a l
a r g u m e n t s or to m a k i n g s i m i l a r i t i e s w i t h flow in p o r o u s m e d i a
(thus, this m e t h o d is s o m e t i m e s r e f e r r e d to as a p o r o s i t y
method). In r e f e r e n c e [5] a m o d e s t a t t e m p t was m a d e to "de-
rive" e q u a t i o n s for the F A V O R method. The d e r i v a t i o n was
b a s e d on the t h e o r y of g e n e r a l i z e d f u n c t i o n s [6] and p r o c e e d e d
by m u l t i p l y i n g the b a s i c c o n s e r v a t i o n e q u a t i o n s for fluid flow
by a H e a v i s i d e f u n c t i o n (i.e., a f u n c t i o n t h a t is equal to 1.0
in fluid r e g i o n s and 0.0 in solid regions). This p r o d u c t w a s
t h e n i n t e g r a t e d over r e c t a n g u l a r control v o l u m e s in space and
 329

over a small interval of time. The integration process intro-

duces a homogenization over physical scales equal to the sizes
of the integration intervals in space and time.
Using generalized-function relations, e.g., the derivative
of a Heaviside function is equal to a Dirac Delta function,
greatly simplifies the analysis (see Ref. 5 for details). For
instance, fluid-solid boundary contributions are easily iden-
tified and the composition of fluxes as combinations of spa-
tial and time averages are clarified. Unfortunately, the
derived equations involve several undefined quantities that
make the equations useless without further assumptions. In
reference [5] the recommended assumptions were based on numer-
ical accuracy requirements and on an adherence to certain sep-
aration properties of the original partial differential
equations.
For an incompressible, inviscid fluid the FAVOR equations
take the form:

av
--+V.Au=O (1)
at

v[ = -iv;, + ! v (a)
at v 9 pv

where

Au=(Axux. Ayuy. A~u~)

a a a

In these equations Ai is the open area fraction associated

with the flow in the ith direction, V is an open volume frac-
tion, ui is the ~th velocity component and T~j is the viscous
stress tensor. The notation is not in a consistent tensor
form because we have limited the area fractions to three prin-
cipal directions.
Of special note in Eq. (i) is the time rate of change of
the volume fraction. When obstacles move, this term becomes a
source or sink of fluid volume corresponding to the volume
displaced by the obstacle. Such a simple way to represent
obstacles moving through a grid is one reason why the FAVOR
method is so powerful.

2. A SIMPLE EXAMPLE AND ITS IMPLICATIONS

To illustrate how fractional areas/volumes can be used to

define flow regions, consider a straight, two-dimensional
channel aligned at an angle to a orthogonal grid, Fig. IA.
Although it would be most natural to align the channel walls
with the grid, the question here is how well can flow in the
330

channel be c o m p u t e d w h e n the channel is s k e w e d in the grid?

The s i m p l e s t case is to d e f i n e u n i f o r m inflow c o n d i t i o n s at
the left b o u n d a r y and c o n t i n u a t i v e o u t f l o w c o n d i t i o n s at the
right. We shall also assume the fluid in the c h a n n e l is
inviscid. If the F A V O R f o r m u l a t i o n works, then the flow
w i t h i n the channel should remain p e r f e c t l y uniform.
R e s u l t s of a first computation, u s i n g s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d
f i n i t e - d i f f e r e n c e e q u a t i o n s b a s e d on the F A V O R scheme, are
shown in Fig. lB. We see that a type of n u m e r i c a l b o u n d a r y
layer has d e v e l o p e d a l o n g the w a l l s of the channel. It is
e a s y to locate the o r i g i n of this effect, w h i c h comes from
a p p r o x i m a t i o n s to the v e l o c i t y a d v e c t i o n terms in Eq. (2).
N e a r l y all a p p r o x i m a t i o n m e t h o d s c o m p u t e a d v e c t i o n c o n t r i b -
u t i o n s at a s p e c i f i c l o c a t i o n u s i n g v a l u e s of n e i g h b o r i n g
v e l o c i t i e s on the u p s t r e a m side of that location. In the
p r e s e n t case, if the u p s t r e a m g r i d cell is w i t h i n the solid
wall of the channel, w h e r e the v e l o c i t y is zero, it c o n t r i b -
utes a r e t a r d a t i o n to the flow.
E v e n t h o u g h there is a n u m e r i c a l b o u n d a r y layer, the result
in Fig. IB is c l e a r l y an i m p r o v e m e n t over a " s t a i r - s t e p "
a p p r o x i m a t i o n in w h i c h the channel is a p p r o x i m a t e d by fully
o p e n or fully b l o c k e d g r i d cells, Fig. iC. In this case t h e r e
are large local p e r t u r b a t i o n s to the flow n e a r each step cor-
ner.
A n o t h e r f i n d i n g is that the t i m e - s t e p size n e c e s s a r y for
c o m p u t a t i o n a l s t a b i l i t y is s m a l l e r t h a n w h a t w o u l d n o r m a l l y be
e x p e c t e d in terms of the flow v e l o c i t y and the size of the
g r i d cells, e.g., e x p l i c i t a p p r o x i m a t i o n s to the a d v e c t i o n of
u m o m e n t u m in the x d i r e c t i o n are t y p i c a l l y s u b j e c t to the
restriction,

6t < 6 x / u (:3)

R e f e r r i n g to Eq. (2), we note that t h e r e is a c o e f f i c i e n t on

the x - d i r e c t i o n a d v e c t i o n t e r m equal to the ratio of the frac-
tional area to fractional volume. W h e n this f a c t o r is t a k e n
into a c c o u n t in a s t a b i l i t y analysis, the usual restriction,
Eq. (3), is r e p l a c e d by,

8t < 6 x l ( A u l V ) (4)

If f r a c t i o n a l areas and v o l u m e s are a l l o w e d to be as low as

1%, the ratio A / V can be as large as the r e c i p r o c a l of that
value, or i00. This m e a n s that t i m e - s t e p sizes m i g h t h a v e to
be s m a l l e r t h a n the usual step size by a f a c t o r of up to I00.
S u c h r e d u c t i o n s in 6t can e a s i l y m a k e some c a l c u l a t i o n s too
slow or too e x p e n s i v e for p r a c t i c a l a p p l i c a t i o n s .
In summary, then, the F A V O R scheme seems to o f f e r a m e a n s
of d e f i n i n g g e n e r a l g e o m e t r i c flow r e g i o n s w i t h i n a r e c t a n g u -
lar grid, but there are p r o b l e m s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h a r t i f i c i a l
b o u n d a r y layers and r e d u c e d t i m e - s t e p sizes. In the n e x t
s e c t i o n w e d e s c r i b e h o w those l i m i t a t i o n s can be o v e r c o m e to
p r o d u c e a v e r y useful c o m p u t a t i o n a l method.
 331

3. MAKING THE CONCEPT A PRACTICAL TOOL

As is often the case with new computational techniques, it

is necessary to overcome some shortcomings before the tech-
nique can become a practical tool. In the preceding section
two such shortcomings were identified. Here we show how
simple algorithm changes can eliminate these problems.

3.1 Improved Wall Boundary Conditions

A simple and expedient method to eliminate the numerical
boundary layer effect seen in Fig. IB is to not use velocity
values located within solid regions when evaluating advection
approximations. Instead, one should set to zero any velocity
that uses a velocity located within a wall in its
evaluation. Advection, viscous and other processes must then
be evaluated in terms of local velocities or their modified
derivatives.
The zero derivative prescription is consistent with the
assumption of free-slip solid boundaries. This assumption is,
in fact, implied by the derivation of the FAVOR method as can
be deduced from the viscous contribution (last term) in Eq.
(2). To see this, note the appearance of a fractional area
factor inside the divergence operator. If one integrates this
viscous term over a small control volume, Gauss' Theorem may
be used to transform the volume integration to a surface inte-
gration. Wherever the integration surface coincides with a
wall, the viscous contribution along that wall will vanish
because the fractional area is zero at a wall.
Using this prescription, then, the numerical boundary layer
problem is completely eliminated from the diagonal-channel
test problem, Fig. ID.

3.2 Improved Numerical Stability

The only way to relax the inhibiting effect of large A / V
ratios on time-step size, Eq. (4), is to change the value of
the ratio. The principal geometry definition of the FAVOR
method is associated with area fractions, which control volu-
metric flow rates (including the extreme case of no flow when
A is zero). It is natural, therefore, to consider modifying
only the fractional volumes.
A simple scheme consists in defining a tolerance value, £,
such that no values of A / V should exceed this value. Then for
each grid cell one would test each A / V ratio; and if it
exceeds E, the volume fraction would be increased until the
ratio equals E, i.e.,

V = Maximum(A/g,V) (s)

Typical tolerance values range from 2 to 5.

332

The adjustment of V, but not A, in a grid cell has a simple

physical interpretation. Referring to Fig. 2, we see an exam-
ple in which an increase in V can be interpreted as the poking
of holes in the boundary of the solid. The average boundary
remains the same, but the open volume within the grid cell has
been increased. This increase means that the cell has a
larger volume capacity to absorb volume changes caused by
fluxes occurring across the boundaries of the cell. It is
this ability to absorb change that is the essence of the sta-
bility condition expressed by Eq. (4).
With these simple additions to the basic FAVOR idea the
scheme is transformed into a highly useful and efficient com-
putational technique. In the next section we illustrate this
with some simple examples.

4. ORDINARY AND NOVEL USES OF THE FAVOR METHOD

Several types of flow problems will be used to illustrate

the basic flexibility of the FAVOR method. Because of space
limitations, only a few selected results will be shown in each
case.

4.1 Flow around a Truncated Ellipsoid

An ellipsoid having major and minor axes of 1.0 and 0.75
units is placed on a flat plate. The ellipsoid has a vertical
height of 1.0 units. A steady incident flow of incompressible
fluid is directed at the ellipsoid, parallel to its major
axis. This flow is assumed to have a power-law profile above
the flat plate with exponent 0.25, such that the incident
velocity at the top of the ellipsoid is equal to 1.0.
The computing region extends upstream 1.5 units from the
leading edge of the ellipsoid and downstream 1.5 units from
the trailing edge. Because of symmetry, only one half of the
flow region is modeled. The half width of the modeled region
is 1.5 units and the height extends upward 1.5 units. A grid
consisting of 50 by 20 by 25 cells (or 31482 total cells with
boundaries) was used for computations.
Figure 3 clearly shows how the FAVOR method cuts the ellip-
soidal obstacle out of the grid of rectangular cells. A full
cylinder is shown here even though calculations were
restricted to one symmetric half of the cylinder.
Selected computational results after steady flow conditions
have been reached are shown in Fig. 4. The occurrence of a
"horse-shoe" vortex at the base of the leading edge is appar-
ent from the velocity vector plot adjacent to the ground
plane. A large wake region can be seen in the perspective
plot (Fig. 4B). The lowest pressures are computed at the top
leading edge of the cylinder where a large streamwise vortex
is generated. Somewhat low pressure values appear in the
"horse-shoe" vortex region and in portions of the wake.
 333

4.2 Critical Flow over a Cylinder-Disk Combination

Computational models of wind engineering processes are not
always believed by engineers having to deal with "real world"
problems. One suggestion to make believers out of skeptics
was made by Prof. Mark Morkovin at a conference on bluff body
aerodynamics [7] several years ago. His idea was to demon-
strate that computational models could predict critical drag
phenomena as well as shed light on how such phenomena occur.
A simple example of critical drag presented at the same
conference, [7], is provided by the flow over a thin disk
mounted in front of a circular cylinder as indicated in Fig.
5A. The drag on the combination disk and cylinder is very
sensitive to the gap spacing between the disk and cylinder
face. At small gaps (say 0.1D, where D is the diameter of the
cylinder) the drag is close to that expected for the cylinder
alone, Fig. 5B. As the gap is increased up to a value of
about 0.375D, the drag decreases to very small value. Further
increases in the gap size exhibit an increasing drag, so the
gap of 0.375D is a critical value for minimum drag on this
system.
Computations (and experiments) show that the reduction in
drag is closely tied to the separation of flow off the edge of
the disk and how it interacts with the cylinder. Separated
flow induces a circulation in the gap and entrains fluid into
the fast moving external flow. These processes cause a
reduced pressure region inside the gap region, which is
responsible for the reduced force on the system. The most
important region controlling drag variations is the outer edge
of the cylinder face outside the shadow of the disk. Produc-
ing a low (with respect to ambient) pressure in this area
causes a low net drag.
Individual "snapshot" calculations can and have been used
to investigate the critical drag phenomena. However, for
present purposes it is interesting to make use of the moving
obstacle capability of the FAVOR method to explore with a
single calculation the occurrence of critical behavior. For
this purpose we initialized the disk-cylinder system with a
gap of 0.1D and then carried out a calculation to the point
where steady conditions had been reached (t=15.0 units). The
computation was then continued with the cylinder moving away
from the disk at the rate of 0.01D per time unit (all units
were non-dimensional). This rate of withdrawal was considered
slow enough for quasi-steady conditions to exist at each stage
of the calculation, although further studies should be per-
formed to confirm this assumption. The computed results are
shown in Fig. 5B as solid squares. Although the minimum drag
is not as low as that observed in the experiments, the exis-
tence and location of critical drag is clearly shown. Calcu-
lations further show that the reduction in drag is caused by a
nearly uniform reduction in pressure in the gap region, Fig.
6.
334

4.3 F l o w o v e r O p e n and O b s t r u c t e d R o a d b e d s
A n o t h e r useful feature of the FAVOR t e c h n i q u e is its abil-
ity to r e p r e s e n t d i s t r i b u t e d o b s t r u c t i o n s . We d e m o n s t r a t e
this w i t h a simple e x a m p l e of flow o v e r a r e c e s s e d highway.
In Fig. 7 (lower left) the flow is shown w i t h s m o o t h g r o u n d
c o n d i t i o n s on e i t h e r side of the highway. F i g u r e 7 (top and
lower right), on the o t h e r hand, has p o r o u s o b s t r u c t i o n s on
the c r e s t s and u p p e r sides of the h i g h w a y cut that r e p r e s e n t
trees or o t h e r plantings. The p r e s e n c e of the trees has a
s i g n i f i c a n t i n f l u e n c e on the air flow patterns, c a u s i n g a m o r e
q u i e s c e n t flow in the r o a d b e d region.

4.4 Fans and M i x e r s

Still a n o t h e r v a r i a t i o n of the FAVOR scheme is to use m o v -
ing p o r o u s b o d i e s as m o d e l s for fans or flow mixers. For
example, a p a d d l e m i x e r p l a c e d at the s u r f a c e of a c o n t a i n e r
of l i q u i d c a n be a p p r o x i m a t e d by a p o r o u s b o d y c o v e r i n g the
r e g i o n swept out by the mixer. C i r c u l a r m o t i o n of the m i x e r
is m o d e l e d by i n t r o d u c i n g a d r a g m e c h a n i s m into the flow
m o m e n t u m e q u a t i o n s that tries to m a k e the flow c o n f o r m to that
of the mixer, e.g.,

Drag= -k(u-u.~) (6)

w h e r e u ~ is the v e l o c i t y of the m i x e r b l a d e s in a d i r e c t i o n
normal to the blades. In some a p p r o x i m a t e sense, the c o e f f i -
cient k in Eq. (6) is p r o p o r t i o n a l to the f r a c t i o n a l time that
fluid v e l o c i t y m u s t equal the v e l o c i t y of the b l a d e s as they
s w e e p p a s t a g i v e n location.
One e x a m p l e of this use of the F A V O R m e t h o d is g i v e n in
Fig. 8. The c i r c u l a r p a d d l e wheel is r o t a t i n g in a c l o c k w i s e
f a s h i o n and has induced a large c o u n t e r c l o c k w i s e e d d y flow in
the liquid. N o t e that the induced flow is far from s y m m e t r i c
w i t h r e s p e c t to the paddle; there is r a p i d l y m o v i n g flow at
the s u r f a c e on the left side of the p a d d l e but s l o w m o v i n g
flow on the right. This feature is easy to d e m o n s t r a t e in the
h o m e kitchen.

5. A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S

T h a n k s are due Mr. J o h n D i t t e r for s u p p l y i n g some of the

computational e x a m p l e s h a v i n g g o o d i l l u s t r a t i v e features.
T h a n k s are also due to Dr. H i r o s h i T s u k i y a m a for h e l p i n g to
promote FAVOR m e t h o d s in J a p a n and e s p e c i a l l y for several use-
ful e x t e n s i o n s of the b a s i c t e c h n i q u e u n d e r the name F A V O R I T E
method.
 335

REFERENCES

i. J.M. Sicilian, C.W. Hirt and R.P. Harper, "FLOW-3D: Compu-

tational Modeling Power for Scientists and Engineers,"
Flow Science report, 1987 (FSI-87-00-1).

2. R.A. Gentry, R.E. Martin and B.J. Daly, "An Eulerian Dif-
ferencing Method for Unsteady Compressible Flow Problems,"
J. Comp. Phys. Vol. I, 87, 1966.

3. H.M. Domanus, et al, "COMMIX-1A: A Three-Dimensional Tran-

sient Single-Phase Computer Program for Thermal-Hydraulic
Analysis of Single and Multicomponent Systems," Vol.l:
User's Manual, NUREG/CR-2896 and ANL-82-25 (1983).

4. J.M. Sicilian and C.W. Hirt, "An Efficient Computation

Scheme for Tracking Contaminant Concentrations in Fluid
Flows," J. Comp. Phys. Vol. 56, 428, 1984.

5. C.W. Hirt and J.M. Sicilian, "A Porosity Technique for the
Definition of Obstacles in Rectangular Cell Meshes,"
Fourth Int. Conf. Ship Hydro., Washington, DC, Sept. 1985.

6. M.J. Lighthill, Fourier Analvsis and Generalised Func-

tions, Cambridge Uni. Press, Cambridge, 1958.

7. G. Sovran, T. Morel and W.T. Mason, Eds., Aerodvnamic Draa

Mechanisms of Bluff Bodies and Road Vehicles, Pienum
Press, New York, NY, 1978.
336

i. Flow in diagonal duct: (A) Setup, (B) Numerical boundary

layer in uncorrected method, (C) Stairstep results and
(D) Computed results with corrected method.
igR||B|H|inualililigl Ilnllnnn
mnigii|Hi|lilaaililllilllngnni
UliniiRlilalUilna|nlnililnili
NimllP"-- --~qnnm|iniR|ini
IlillO~..[ . . . . . . :~ql|lRlnanim
iamlnv . . . . ~lllllliail
iOill[ . . . . . . ;1111lUll
iIIVZ , ' lllilll
Ililr: " llllill
Hill Illlll
ll~., . . . . IIIIll
l i e [ ,illllll
lik :illUmining
mI l l h ~
,-.it.
lURID i''--.
.dillinnl
~lllllllil
,411111InUlin
illlll~...._ _....,~illlllllllllll
'
Large A/V Adjusted A N
IiIRllIli ilIlll B
illHlllllllllllllllllll
l l l lN
mi im
l l lN
l l l lIl Il lIl lIl Il lIl l|l Il I I I I I I l l U l l
D ~ ! i l !l ~ lI R I BI IBHIIIR I IIRHI!II I ! 1i l1
2. Schematic picture of volume- 3. Elliptic cylinder embedded
fraction adjustment to in a rectangular grid.
improve numerical stability.

. . . . . . . . . i - , . . ~ ' t " ~ ~ / / ~ / / . . . . I -
. . . . . . . . . ~-~'.-"~'.1~.~,~i'4r/f~/~/,~ ~'" - ~. . . . . . .Z]-

4A. Velocities in ground plane around cylinder. Note

reverse flow in horseshoe vortex at leading edge of
cylinder.
 337

: : . . . . . . . . . ..... _.,

. . . . ~'~==
"~'~<
"E_
" ~ "~. ~"-~~ "% -~--.
"~- ~.~_~_%'
~- ~- - ~ --~_'
3 ~c~. ..~.
a ~/ _~ _~ ~. ~~ ~z-----

4B. Perspective view of flow (right to left) around

elliptic cylinder.

aE Blunt - foced Cyl(nde r

A B
0.1
,/.-- Cylinder al/dz • @ "'~-.~
0.E

O.5
Diameterd2/
C O 0.4

Gap 0.3

Diameterdl J ~ Disk 0.5

f
IncidentFlow
025
.
0.50
,,

0.75
....~i000T
1.00 1.25 1.5o
g/d2

5. Schematic of cylinder and disk in (A); comparison of

experimental and computed results using moving obstacle
method in (B).
338

A B

i /
i /

6. Computed pressure contours (A) about cylinder and disk

system. Closeup of velocities in gap region shown in (B).

!i

7. Flow over roadbed with and without trees. Pressure

contours collect at tree locations (top); velocities
in roadbed region without trees (lower left) and with
trees (lower right).

Ii .................

8. Paddle mixer driving flow circulation in l i ~ i d with a

free surface.