CFD Analysis of Urban Canopy Flows Employing the V2F Model: Impact of Different Aspect Ratios and Relative Heights

<div>Comparison among the simulated vertical profiles of <svg height="12.5612pt" id="M48" style="vertical-align:-3.27287pt" version="1.1" viewbox="-0.0498162 -9.28833 32.1013 12.5612" width="32.1013pt" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,0,0)"><path d="M697 650H468L461 623L492 619C539 613 547 605 518 546C481 471 367 264 278 116H276C239 278 197 500 186 567C180 604 185 613 226 619L252 623L260 650H24L17 623C78 617 92 613 108 533L216 -11H247C365 200 515 462 560 529C616 612 624 615 689 623L697 650Z" id="g113-87"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,9.224,0)"><path d="M368 703H309L44 -163H104L368 703Z" id="g113-48"></path></g><rect height="0.65243" width="7.02021" x="14.5852" y="-8.52081"></rect><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,14.585,0)"><path d="M515 96L502 119C471 88 431 62 423 62C416 62 411 70 417 101C440 223 469 341 497 448H486L412 422L380 277C330 188 210 57 152 57C137 57 126 69 139 124L195 366C210 431 205 448 182 448C155 448 89 413 23 350L36 326C73 354 103 376 112 376C118 376 118 365 113 340L61 118C54 90 52 68 52 51C52 0 75 -12 98 -12S151 -3 181 17C242 58 305 119 362 193H364L345 104C323 3 339 -12 359 -12C390 -12 464 35 515 96Z" id="g113-118"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,21.605,3.132)"><path d="M181 342V451C133 431 89 419 40 411V388C98 381 102 377 102 311V104C102 38 95 32 33 26V0H263V26C186 32 181 38 181 104V287C203 343 235 372 261 372C277 372 289 366 304 352C310 346 318 345 330 350C349 359 362 379 362 399C362 422 338 449 304 449C256 449 213 393 183 342H181Z" id="g190-115"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,24.863,3.132)"><path d="M380 106C343 72 306 56 265 56C195 56 116 112 115 248C235 252 361 262 377 265C396 269 400 277 400 297C400 374 333 449 250 449H249C198 449 144 421 103 376S37 269 37 201C37 88 109 -12 232 -12C263 -12 332 6 395 84L380 106ZM225 412C281 412 315 364 314 312C314 297 308 292 290 292C232 290 176 289 120 289C135 370 180 412 225 412Z" id="g190-102"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,28.73,3.132)"><path d="M54 437L27 408L31 397H101V103C101 37 94 32 30 26V0H266V25C187 33 180 36 180 110V397H288C299 404 304 428 298 437H180V477C179 562 190 610 203 630C214 647 230 659 256 659C289 659 318 641 337 622C346 612 355 612 364 619C374 627 380 635 383 643C388 655 387 667 378 678C362 697 333 710 299 712C260 707 225 689 189 659C135 613 119 563 112 541S101 490 101 458V437H54Z" id="g190-103"></path></g></svg> passing through the center of the canyon for AR = 4, AR = 2, AR = 1.33, AR = 1, and AR = 0.5.</div>

Advances in Meteorology

fig10

Figure 10

Figure 10: CFD Analysis of Urban Canopy Flows Employing the V2F Model: Impact of Different Aspect Ratios and Relative Heights 