Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation of LES sub-grid scale models and time discretization schemes for prediction of convection effect in a buoyant pool fire

  • Original
  • Published:
Heat and Mass Transfer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The identification of the type of regime has an essential effect on the selection of sub-grid scale and discretization methods, regarding the accuracy and computational time. In order to investigate the role of sub-grid scale and time discretization method in a pool fire modeling by the Large Eddy Simulation (LES), three sub-grid scales Smagorinsky, one-equation and Wall-Adapting Local Eddy-Viscosity (WALE) and three time discretization methods of first-order Euler method, second-order Crank Nicolson and backward second-order were investigated. The results indicate that WALE and one-equation sub-grid scale have an acceptable prediction, while Smagorinsky has a significant error with the experimental results. Different time discretization methods have little effects on the results of mean velocity and mean turbulent parameters of the pool fire. By considering the instantaneous distribution of parameters, all three methods perform similar results where the kinetic energy is less than 5 m2/s2. In areas where the perturbation is aggravated, the two second-order discretization methods have the same error with a little difference by the first-order Euler method. The accuracies of second-order methods are about 10% for the velocity prediction, compared to the experimental results, while the error of the Euler method is 15%.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

c p :

specific heat, J/kg.K

C s :

Smagorinsky constant

C w :

WALE constant

CFD:

computational fluid dynamic

D :

Derivative

dt :

time step, s

g :

Gravity, m/s2

k :

Turbulence kinetic energy, m2/s2

LES:

large eddy simulation

p :

Pressure, kPa

Pr :

Prandtl number

q i :

Diffusion/flux vector

S :

source term

S ij :

Rate of strain tensor, s−1

sgs :

subgrid-scale

Sc :

Schmidt numbers

T :

Temperature, K

t :

Time, s

u :

Velocity, m/s

x :

Coordinate, m

z :

mixture fraction

Δ :

sub-grid length scale, m

δ ij :

Dirac delta function

μ :

Molecular viscosity, kg/m.s

ν :

kinematic viscosity, m2/s

ρ :

Density, kg/m3

τ ij :

Viscous stress tensor, kg/m.s

\( {\tau}_{u_iT} \) :

Turbulent diffusion/flux vector, kg/s3

\( {\tau}_{u_i{u}_j} \) :

Turbulent viscous stress tensor, kg/m.s

\( {\tau}_{u_i\varphi } \) :

Turbulent mass flux, kg/m2.s

φ :

scalar quantity such as species

ω T :

Combustion heat release rate,

i, j, k :

space index

Ref :

reference

t :

Turbulence

w :

WALE index

˜:

Favre Filtering

d :

resolve scale

sgs :

Sub-grid scale

References

  1. Assad M (2014) Improved fire modelling. The University of Manchester (United Kingdom)

  2. Vasanth S, Tauseef S, Abbasi T, Abbasi S (2014) Multiple pool fires: occurrence, simulation, modeling and management. J Loss Prev Process Ind 29:103–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Yeoh G-H, Yuen KK (2009) Computational fluid dynamics in fire engineering: theory, modelling and practice. Butterworth-Heinemann

  4. Ramírez-Camacho JG, Pastor E, Amaya-Gómez R, Mata C, Muñoz F, Casal J (2019) Analysis of crater formation in buried NG pipelines: a survey based on past accidents and evaluation of domino effect. J Loss Prev Process Ind 58:124–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. McGrattan K, Rehm R, Baum H (1994) Fire-driven flows in enclosures. J Comput Phys 110(2):285–291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Wimer NT, Day MS, Lapointe C, Makowiecki AS, Glusman JF, Daily JW, Rieker GB, Hamlington PE (2019) High-resolution numerical simulations of a large-scale helium plume using adaptive mesh refinement. arXiv preprint arXiv:190110554

  7. Maragkos G, Beji T, Merci B (2019) Towards predictive simulations of gaseous pool fires. Proc Combust Inst 37(3):3927–3934

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Yuen A, Yeoh G, Timchenko V, Cheung S, Chen T (2016) Study of three LES subgrid-scale turbulence models for predictions of heat and mass transfer in large-scale compartment fires. Numeric Heat Trans Part A: Appl 69(11):1223–1241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Yuen AC, Yeoh GH, Timchenko V, Cheung SC, Chan QN, Chen T (2017) On the influences of key modelling constants of large eddy simulations for large-scale compartment fires predictions. Int J Computation Fluid Dynamics 31(6–8):324–337

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Ahmadi O, Mortazavi SB, Pasdarshahri H, Mohabadi HA (2019) Consequence analysis of large-scale pool fire in oil storage terminal based on computational fluid dynamic (CFD). Process Saf Environ Prot 123:379–389

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Robertson E, Choudhury V, Bhushan S, Walters D (2015) Validation of OpenFOAM numerical methods and turbulence models for incompressible bluff body flows. Comput Fluids 123:122–145

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  12. Dhuchakallaya I, Rattanadecho P, Watkins P (2013) Auto-ignition and combustion of diesel spray using unsteady laminar flamelet model. Appl Therm Eng 52(2):420–427

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Zhiyin Y (2015) Large-eddy simulation: past, present and the future. Chin J Aeronaut 28(1):11–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Choi H, Moin P (1994) Effects of the computational time step on numerical solutions of turbulent flow. J Comput Phys 113(1):1–4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Pierce CD, Moin P (2004) Progress-variable approach for large-eddy simulation of non-premixed turbulent combustion. J Fluid Mech 504:73–97

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  16. Edin E, Ström M (2019) Comparing a full scale test with FDS, FireFOAM, McCaffrey & Eurocode

  17. Maragkos G, Merci B (2017) Large Eddy simulations of CH4 fire plumes. Flow Turbulence Combustion 99(1):239–278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Moukalled F, Mangani L, Darwish M (2016) The finite volume method in computational fluid dynamics. An Advanced Introduction with OpenFOAM and Matlab:3–8

  19. Lee SB (2017) A study on temporal accuracy of OpenFOAM. Int J Naval Architect Ocean Eng 9(4):429–438

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Versteeg HK, Malalasekera W (2007) An introduction to computational fluid dynamics: the finite volume method. Pearson Education,

  21. Pasdarshahri H, Heidarinejad G, Mazaheri K (2012) Large eddy simulation on one-meter methane pool fire using one-equation sub-grid scale model. In: MCS. pp 11–15

  22. Maragkos G, Beji T, Merci B (2017) Advances in modelling in CFD simulations of turbulent gaseous pool fires. Combustion Flame 181:22–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Yuen A, Yeoh G, Cheung S, Chan Q, Chen T, Yang W, Lu H (2018) Numerical study of the development and angular speed of a small-scale fire whirl. J Computation Sci 27:21–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Mitsopoulos E, Lytras I, Koutmos P (2019) Large eddy simulations of premixed CH4 bluff-body flames operating close to the lean limit using quasi-global chemistry and an algebraic chemiluminescence model. Theoret Computation Fluid Dynamics:1–16

  25. Yeoh G, Cheung S, Tu J, Barber T (2011) Comparative large Eddy simulation study of a large-scale buoyant fire. Heat Mass Transf 47(9):1197–1208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Poinsot T, Veynante D (2005) Theoretical and numerical combustion. RT Edwards, Inc

  27. Cintolesi C, Petronio A, Armenio V (2019) Turbulent structures of buoyant jet in cross-flow studied through large-eddy simulation. Environ Fluid Mech 19(2):401–433

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Xiao Y, Huai W, Gao M, Yang Z, Ji B (2019) Evaluating the hydrodynamics of a round jet in a vegetated crossflow through large eddy simulation. Environ Fluid Mech 19(1):181–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Yuen A, Yeoh G, Timchenko V, Barber T (2015) LES and multi-step chemical reaction in compartment fires. Numeric Heat Trans Part A: Appl 68(7):711–736

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Shukla AK, Dewan A (2019) OpenFOAM based LES of slot jet impingement heat transfer at low nozzle to plate spacing using four SGS models. Heat Mass Transf 55(3):911–931

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Echekki T, Mastorakos E (2010) Turbulent combustion modeling: advances, new trends and perspectives, vol 95. Springer Science & Business Media

  32. Demarco R (2012) Modelling thermal radiation and soot formation in buoyant diffision flames. Aix-Marseille

  33. da Costa PPS (2016) Validation of a mathematical model for the simulation of loss of coolant accidents in nuclear power plants

  34. Tieszen S, O’hern T, Schefer R, Weckman E, Blanchat T (2002) Experimental study of the flow field in and around a one meter diameter methane fire. Combustion and Flame 129(4):378–391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Fancello AA (2014) Dynamic and turbulent premixed combustion using flamelet-generated manifold in openFOAM. BOXPress

  36. Shen G-s, J-c J, K-b Z, Zhang S-j WF, M-y Z (2018) Analysis for fire plume temperature in developing area and radiation heat flux distribution in small-scale Pool fire. Procedia Eng 211:606–613

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Marchand A, Verma S, White J, Marshall A, Rogaume T, Richard F, Luche J, Trouvé A Simulations of a Turbulent Line Fire with a Steady Flamelet Combustion Model and Non-Gray Gas Radiation Models. In: Journal of Physics: Conference Series (2018) vol 4. IOP Publishing, p 042009

  38. de Ris JL (2013) Mechanism of buoyant turbulent diffusion flames. Procedia Eng 62:13–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Maynard T, Princevac M (2012) The application of a simple free convection model to the pool fire pulsation problem. Combust Sci Technol 184(4):505–516

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Khrapunov E, Chumakov Y (2018) Unsteady processes in a natural convective plume. In: Journal of Physics: Conference Series. vol 1. IOP Publishing, p 012132

  41. Yan ZH (2007) Large eddy simulations of a turbulent thermal plume. Heat Mass Transf 43(6):503–514

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Turns SR (1996) An introduction to combustion, vol 287. McGraw-hill New York

  43. Heskestad G (1984) Engineering relations for fire plumes. Fire Saf J 7(1):25–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Tarbiat Modares University, P.O.Box 14115-143, Tehran, Iran

    Mohammad Safarzadeh, Ghassem Heidarinejad & Hadi Pasdarshahri

Authors
  1. Mohammad Safarzadeh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ghassem Heidarinejad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hadi Pasdarshahri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hadi Pasdarshahri.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Safarzadeh, M., Heidarinejad, G. & Pasdarshahri, H. Evaluation of LES sub-grid scale models and time discretization schemes for prediction of convection effect in a buoyant pool fire. Heat Mass Transfer 57, 631–646 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00231-020-02952-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00231-020-02952-4

Search

Navigation