The Effect of Obstacle Shape on the Turbulent

Component of Fluid Velocity

Octavian Strashun
MIE 1207F
Prepared for: Prof. P. Sullivan
December 16, 2018
 Table of Contents
Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... 4
1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 5
1.1 Objective of Investigation ..................................................................................................... 5
1.2 Present Task .......................................................................................................................... 5
1.3 Survey of Previous Investigations ........................................................................................ 6
2. Experimental Methods ......................................................................................................... 8
2.1 Overview ............................................................................................................................... 8
2.2 ERFOTAC Database Case 42: Flows Over 3-D and 2-D Hills ............................................ 8
2.2.1 3-D Hill Model ............................................................................................................... 9
2.2.2 2-D Ridge Model ......................................................................................................... 10
2.2.3 Data Acquired .............................................................................................................. 11
2.3 ERFOTAC Database Case 43: Vortex Shedding Past Square Cylinder ............................. 12
2.3.1 Experimental Setup ...................................................................................................... 12
2.3.2 Data Acquired .............................................................................................................. 13
3. Results and Discussion........................................................................................................ 13
3.1 Results ................................................................................................................................. 13
3.1.1 Flow Over a 3-D Hill ................................................................................................... 14
3.1.2 Flow Over a 2-D Ridge ................................................................................................ 16
3.1.3 Flow Over a Square Cylinder ...................................................................................... 19
3.1.4 Maxima and Minima .................................................................................................... 22
3.2 Discussion ........................................................................................................................... 23
3.2.1 Upstream Flow Region ................................................................................................ 23
3.2.2 Flow at x/H = 0 ............................................................................................................ 24
3.2.3 Downstream Flow Region ........................................................................................... 25
3.2.4 Maxima and Minima .................................................................................................... 26
4. Conclusion ........................................................................................................................... 27
References .................................................................................................................................... 28
 List of Figures
Figure 1 Shape of modeled 3-D hill ................................................................................................. 9
Figure 2 Shape of modeled 2-D Ridge .......................................................................................... 11
Figure 3 Cross-Section of Square Cylinder in Flow ....................................................................... 12
Figure 4 3-D hill turbulent fluctuations at x/H=-1 ........................................................................ 14
Figure 5 3-D hill turbulent fluctuations at x/H=0 .......................................................................... 15
Figure 6 3-D hill turbulent fluctuations at x/H=1 .......................................................................... 15
Figure 7 3-D hill turbulence fluctuations at x/H=5 ....................................................................... 16
Figure 8 2-D ridge turbulence fluctuations at x/H=-1 ................................................................... 17
Figure 9 2-D ridge turbulence fluctuations at x/H=0 .................................................................... 17
Figure 10 2-D ridge turbulent fluctuations at x/H=1 .................................................................... 18
Figure 11 2-D ridge turbulent fluctuations at x/H=5 .................................................................... 18
Figure 12 Square cylinder turbulent fluctuations at x/H=-0.5 ...................................................... 19
Figure 13 Square cylinder turbulent fluctuations at x/H=0 .......................................................... 20
Figure 14 Square cylinder turbulent fluctuations at x/H=0.5 ....................................................... 20
Figure 15 Square cylinder turbulent fluctuations at x/H=1 .......................................................... 21
Figure 16 Square cylinder turbulent fluctuations at x/H=2 .......................................................... 21
Figure 17 Maximum turbulent fluctuations for 3-D hill, 2-D ridge, and square cylinder ............. 22
Figure 18 Minimum turbulent fluctuations for 3-D hill, 2-D ridge, and square cylinder.............. 23
Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the effect of obstacle shape on the turbulent

intensity of a fluid’s flow. Three different obstacles were chosen these being an axisymmetric

3-D hill, a 2-D ridge, and a square cylinder. Raw data providing measurements of the two

components of turbulent velocity, u’ and v’, were taken from the ERFOTAC database. This

data was then analyzed and compared to see if there was any difference or similarity between

the varying obstacle shapes. It was found that indeed the shape of the obstacle does affect the

turbulence intensity in both the upstream and downstream regions. There were notable

differences between the geographical features and the square cylinder as well as slight

differences between the two types of hills.

1. Introduction

1.1 Objective of Investigation

The way fluids flow around obstacles has been an area of interest for engineers for many

years, and in particular, the effects of turbulence on this process. Up to the present, there

have been a number of experiments that focus on simpler obstacles such as circular cylinders.

However, in the real-world obstacles are much more varied and complex. For example, an

item of interest for engineers is how turbulent winds affect the dispersion of exhaust gases

from a tall stack (such as a cooling tower or a boiler chimney) around nearby buildings.

Engineers are not only investigating this in large cities with many buildings; pollution

dispersion is also an area of concern over open terrain with geographical features such as

hills, valleys, or ridges. The objective of this paper to investigate how obstacle shape affects

the turbulent components of fluid velocity. The three objects considered are a square

cylinder, a 3-D hill, and a 2-D ridge.

1.2 Present Task

The axial velocity of a turbulent fluid can be described the following equation,

̅(𝑥, 𝑡) + 𝑢′(𝑥, 𝑡)
𝑈(𝑥, 𝑡) = 𝑈

Where,

𝑈(𝑥, 𝑡) − 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑓𝑙𝑢𝑖𝑑

̅(𝑥, 𝑡) − 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑛 𝑣𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑓𝑙𝑢𝑖𝑑

𝑈
 𝑢′ (𝑥, 𝑡) − 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑏𝑢𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑓𝑙𝑢𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑣𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑓𝑙𝑢𝑖𝑑

The form of Eq. 1 can be applied to the velocity of the fluid in any spatial direction. The

purpose of this paper is to investigate how the turbulent fluctuation of the velocity changes

with obstacle shape. Non-dimensionalized values will be analyzed in order to be able to

compare different experiments with varying setups.

1.3 Survey of Previous Investigations

Many efforts have been made up to the present to investigate turbulence around different

obstacles. Wang et al. [1] simulated the turbulent flow around a surface mounted finite

square cylinder. The CFD study used Fluent software, and a Re = 13,041 (Re = Reynolds

criteria). Using the RMS turbulence model, they were able to acquire detailed information

about the flow structure around a square cylinder in order to establish a suitable turbulent

model. The experiment was successfully able to reproduce this primary flow over an

obstacle. It also produces the 3-d large scale cortex structure of the wake past the square

cylinder. The results from this investigation showed the existence of a spanwise vortex, tip

vortex, and a horseshoe vortex. This was consistent with previous experiments done by

Martinuzzi and Tropea [2] of turbulent flow over a surface mounted obstacle. Turbulent flow

around a square cylinder was also studied by Triasa et el. [3]. They completed a direct

numerical solution (DNS) study at a Re = 22,000. The results from this study were statistics

of the time averaged flow and the turbulent fluctuations. These results were consistent with

the data from the experiment being investigated in this paper by Lyn and Rodi [4]. Triasa et
al. [3] found that peak values of turbulent velocity components were in good agreement with

previous experiments, but they were slightly shifted from the wall.

Past experiments have not only looked at the flow past square cylinders. Liu et al. [5]

investigated the turbulent flow fields over a smooth 3-D hill and a smooth 2-D ridge. This

study consisted of a computer simulation using the LES (large eddy simulation) turbulence

model. The performance of this model was compared to data obtained from an experimental

study by Ishihara and Hibi [6]. Using the same type of hills described in the experimental

study, the simulation found that at the foot of the upwind side of the 3-D hill, the profiles of

the turbulent velocity fluctuations were validated by experimental data. At the other side of

the hill, the lee side, the simulated predictions were comparable to the experimental data

except for v’ and w’ in the range of 2.5 < x/H < 3.75. In this range the LES model

overestimated the experimental results. The velocity profiles of v’ showed the existence of a

second local maximum in the wall layer of the wake. This was in good agreement with

Ishihara et al [7] who proposed that these second maxima occur from a low frequency motion

of the fluid in the wall layer behind the hill. It was also observed that u’ reaches its peak

value at the crest of the 3-D hill. This is in agreement with previous simulations done by

Tamura et al [8]. For the 2-D ridge, good agreement with the experimental results was

achieved, however there were some overestimations by the LES model observed. When

comparing the two types of hills, it was shown that u’ in the far wake region was much larger

for the 2-D ridge compared to the 3-D hill. This is due to the face that in the 3-D model, there

is spanwise mixing between flow with lower turbulence density and flow with higher

turbulence. This in turn reduces the overall level of the turbulence fluctuations. In the case of
the 2-D hill, the vertical distributions of turbulence did not change with the spanwise

direction, therefore no mixing occurred.

This study will investigate data from two previous experiments. The first being a study done

by Lawson and Thompson [9] and the second being a study done by Lyn et. al [4]. The

turbulent components of velocity, u’ and v’, will be analyzed and compared to see if there is

a difference, if any, between the different type of obstacles in question.

2. Experimental Methods

2.1 Overview

This section will provide a description of the experiments that were analyzed. It will discuss

their experimental setups and procedures as well as what kind of data was acquired.

2.2 ERFOTAC Database Case 42: Flows Over 3-D and 2-D Hills

This database provides data from experiments done by Lawson and Thompson [9]. This was

a wind tunnel study done to determine the maximum ground level concentrations of different

source positions. The flow was examined over two types of hills, a 3-D axisymmetric hill and

2-D ridge. The wind tunnel used for this study was a low-speed, open return tunnel with a

test section of 2.1 m high, 3.7 m high, and 18.3 m long.

2.2.1 3-D Hill Model

The model used for the axisymmetric hill was based on Cinder Cone Bute, an isolated hill

located in south-western Idaho. The model had a height of 155 mm and a diameter of 1550

mm. The shape of the hill can be described by the following fourth order polynomial,

ℎ+𝑐
𝑓(𝑟) = −𝑐
𝑟 4
1 + (𝐿)

Where,

ℎ = 155 𝑚𝑚

𝐿 = 388 𝑚𝑚

𝑐 = 10 𝑚𝑚

𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑟 ≤ 755 𝑚𝑚 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑓(𝑟) = 0 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑟 > 755 𝑚𝑚

3-D Hill Shape Function

180

160

140
Vertical Distance [mm]

120

100

80

60

40

20

0
-1000 -800 -600 -400 -200 0 200 400 600 800 1000
-20
Axial Distance [mm]

Figure 1 Shape of modeled 3-D hill

The shape of the model 3-D hill used in this study is shown above in Figure 1. The hill had a

relatively flat plateau at the top with a diameter of about 400 mm. The maximum slope of

this hill was 24.

2.2.2 2-D Ridge Model

The model used for the 2-D ridge was identical to “Hill 5” described by Khurshudyan et al

[10]. The model had a height of 118 mm and a chord of 1180 mm. The shape of the ridge

was represented by the following parametric equation,

𝐹𝑜𝑟 − 𝑎 < 𝜁 < 𝑎 𝑎𝑛𝑑 |𝜁| < 𝑎:

1 𝑎2
𝑥 = 𝜁 [1 + 2 ] 𝑎𝑛𝑑,
2 𝜁 + 𝑚2 (𝑎2 − 𝜁 2 )

1 2 2
𝑎2
𝑧 = √𝑎 − 𝜁 [1 − 2 ]
2 𝜁 + 𝑚2 (𝑎2 − 𝜁 2 )

𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒,

𝑚 = 1.22

𝑎 = 590 𝑚𝑚
 2-D Ridge Shape Function
120

100
Vertical Distance [mm]

80

60

40

20

0
-800 -600 -400 -200 0 200 400 600 800
Axial Distance [mm]

Figure 2 Shape of modeled 2-D Ridge

2.2.3 Data Acquired

For different heights and fixed x positions, different concentrations measurements were

taken. However, the scope of this paper was only the turbulent velocity fluctuation

measurements. For both the 3-D hill and the 2-D ridge measurements were taken at

incremental x positions. At each axial position, the mean velocity, U, the angle, the raw

turbulent velocities, u’(raw) and v’(raw), the raw Reynold’s stresses u’v’, and their

respective corrected values were measured. Non-dimensionalized values of u’ and v’ were

also presented.
2.3 ERFOTAC Database Case 43: Vortex Shedding Past Square Cylinder

This database provides data based on experiments done by Lyn et. al [4]. The data included

ensemble averaged statistics at constant phase of the turbulent near-wake flow around a

rectangular cylinder. The experiment was performed in a channel with a cross section of 39

cm x 56 cm. Measurements were confined to the upper half of the flow region with the

assumption that the flow in the lower region could be mirrored.

2.3.1 Experimental Setup

The square cylinder was placed in a closed water channel supplied by a constant-head tank.

Flow was supplied with a velocity resulting in a criteria of Re = 21,400.

Figure 3 Cross-Section of Square Cylinder in Flow

Figure 3 above shows a cross section of the square cylinder as it would look placed in the

closed channel. The dimension of the square cylinder was D = 4 cm. The origin of the

coordinate system was exactly as it’s shown in Figure 3, at the center of the cylinder.

2.3.2 Data Acquired

Measurements in this experiment were performed using LDV (laser doppler velocimetry).

The time of when an LDV velocity measurement was realised was marked in relation to the

pressure signal, allowing the association of the velocity data with a particular phase of the

vortex shedding cycle. A total of 20 different phases were used with each phase having a

time period of 28 ms. For each phase, and at fixed positions of x/H and different y/H

positions, the values of Umean, Vmean, u’, v’, and u’v’ were recorded. All values were presented

as non-dimensionalized by the incoming flow velocity, U. The data was then averaged over

all the phases.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1 Results

The following section will present the results of these experiments. The scope of this paper is

only the turbulent components of velocity, u’ and v’, and as such these were the only values

of interest. Since there was a plethora of data acquired from these experiments these results
will concisely present this data. To achieve this, data for only selected x/H positions will be

presented. Regarding the two hills, the data that was analyzed was that of the averaged phase.

3.1.1 Flow Over a 3-D Hill

The fluctuations of u’ and v’ were analyzed for different x/H positions. The positions

presented in this section are x/H = -1, 0, 1, and 5. These are shown in the figures below.

Turbulent Velocities at x/H = -1

1.60E-01
Non-dimensionalized Turbulent Velocity

1.40E-01

1.20E-01

1.00E-01

8.00E-02
U'/U
6.00E-02 V'/V

4.00E-02

2.00E-02

0.00E+00
0.00E+001.00E+002.00E+003.00E+004.00E+005.00E+006.00E+007.00E+008.00E+009.00E+00
Vertical Distance from Surface [mm]

Figure 4 3-D hill turbulent fluctuations at x/H=-1

 Turbulent Velocities at x/H=0
2.00E-01

1.80E-01

1.60E-01
Non-Dim. Turbulence Velocity

1.40E-01

1.20E-01

1.00E-01
U'/U
8.00E-02
V'/V
6.00E-02

4.00E-02

2.00E-02

0.00E+00
0.00E+001.00E+002.00E+003.00E+004.00E+005.00E+006.00E+007.00E+008.00E+009.00E+001.00E+01
Height Above Surface [mm]

Figure 5 3-D hill turbulent fluctuations at x/H=0

Turbulent Velocities at x/H=1

2.50E-01
Non-dimensionalized Turbulent Velocity

2.00E-01

1.50E-01

U'/U
1.00E-01
V'/V

5.00E-02

0.00E+00
0.00E+00 1.00E+00 2.00E+00 3.00E+00 4.00E+00 5.00E+00 6.00E+00 7.00E+00 8.00E+00 9.00E+00
Vertical Distance from Surface [mm]

Figure 6 3-D hill turbulent fluctuations at x/H=1

 Turbulent Velocities at x/H=5
Non-dimensionalized Turbulent Velocity 7.00E-01

6.00E-01

5.00E-01

4.00E-01

U'/U
3.00E-01
V'/V
2.00E-01

1.00E-01

0.00E+00
0.00E+00 1.00E+00 2.00E+00 3.00E+00 4.00E+00 5.00E+00 6.00E+00 7.00E+00 8.00E+00 9.00E+00
Vertical Distance from Surface [mm]

Figure 7 3-D hill turbulence fluctuations at x/H=5

Figure 4 shows the turbulent velocities upstream of the hill. Figure 5 shows the turbulent

velocities at the middle of the crest of the hill. Figure 6 and 7 show the turbulence velocities

at two positions downstream of the hill. It can be interpreted directly from these figures that

the velocity fluctuations were lower in the upstream section and then amplify downstream of

the hill.

3.1.2 Flow Over a 2-D Ridge

As with the 3-D hill, the turbulence velocities, u’ and v’, were analyzed for different axial

positions. For the same selected x/H positions of -1, 0, 1, and 5, the velocity fluctuations are

presented in the figures below.

 Turbulent Velocities at x/H=-1
Non-dimensionalized Turbulent Velocities 1.20E-01

1.00E-01

8.00E-02

6.00E-02
U'/U
V'/V
4.00E-02

2.00E-02

0.00E+00
0.00E+00 2.00E+00 4.00E+00 6.00E+00 8.00E+00 1.00E+01 1.20E+01
Vertical Distance from Surface [mm]

Figure 8 2-D ridge turbulence fluctuations at x/H=-1

Turbulent Velocities at x/H=0

1.80E-01
Non-dimensionalized Turbulent Velocities

1.60E-01

1.40E-01

1.20E-01

1.00E-01

8.00E-02 U'/U
V'/V
6.00E-02

4.00E-02

2.00E-02

0.00E+00
0.00E+00 2.00E+00 4.00E+00 6.00E+00 8.00E+00 1.00E+01 1.20E+01
Vertical Distance from Surface [mm]

Figure 9 2-D ridge turbulence fluctuations at x/H=0

 Turbulent Velocities at x/H=1
Non-dimensionalized Turbulent Velocity 2.00E-01

1.80E-01

1.60E-01

1.40E-01

1.20E-01

1.00E-01
U'/U
8.00E-02
V'/V
6.00E-02

4.00E-02

2.00E-02

0.00E+00
0.00E+00 2.00E+00 4.00E+00 6.00E+00 8.00E+00 1.00E+01 1.20E+01
Vertical Distance from Surface [mm]

Figure 10 2-D ridge turbulent fluctuations at x/H=1

Turbulent Velocities at x/H=5

7.00E-01
Non-dimensionalized Turbulent Velocity

6.00E-01

5.00E-01

4.00E-01

U'/U
3.00E-01
V'/V
2.00E-01

1.00E-01

0.00E+00
0.00E+00 2.00E+00 4.00E+00 6.00E+00 8.00E+00 1.00E+01 1.20E+01
Vertical Distance from Surface [mm]

Figure 11 2-D ridge turbulent fluctuations at x/H=5

Figure 8 shows the fluctuations upstream of the hill. Figure 9 shows the fluctuations at the

crest of the ridge. Figure 10 and 11 show the fluctuations at two positions downstream of the

ridge. As with the 3-D hill, the turbulent fluctuations were lower in the upstream region and

then increase downstream.

3.1.3 Flow Over a Square Cylinder

In the case of the square cylinder there was also a substantial amount of data points. As such,

the chosen positions to be presented are x/H = -0.5, 0, 0.5, 1, and 2. The turbulence

fluctuations at these positions are shown in the figures below.

Turbulent Velocities at x/H=-0.5

0.1
Non-dimensionalized Turbulent Velocity

0.09
0.08
0.07
0.06
0.05
u'/U
0.04
v'/V
0.03
0.02
0.01
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
Vertical Distance from Origin [cm]

Figure 12 Square cylinder turbulent fluctuations at x/H=-0.5

 Turbulent Velocities at x/H=0
Non-dimenionalized Turbulent Velocity 0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3
u'/U
v'/V
0.2

0.1

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Vertical Distance from Origin [cm]

Figure 13 Square cylinder turbulent fluctuations at x/H=0

Turbulent Velocities at x/H=0.5

0.7
Non-dimensionalized Turbulent Velocity

0.6

0.5

0.4

u'/U
0.3
v'/V
0.2

0.1

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
Vertical Distance from Origin [cm]

Figure 14 Square cylinder turbulent fluctuations at x/H=0.5

 Turbulent Velocities at x/H=1
Non-dimensionalized Turbulent Velocity 0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

u'/U
0.3
v'/V
0.2

0.1

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Vertical Distance from Origin [cm]

Figure 15 Square cylinder turbulent fluctuations at x/H=1

Turbulent Velocities at x/H=2

1

0.9
Non-dimensionalized Turbulent Velocity

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5
u'/U
0.4
v'/V
0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Vertical Distance from Origin [cm]

Figure 16 Square cylinder turbulent fluctuations at x/H=2

Figure 12 shows the turbulent fluctuations upstream of the square cylinder. Figure 13 shows

the turbulent fluctuations at the center of the cylinder, which is where the origin is. Figures

14, 15, and 16 show the turbulent fluctuations at various axial distances downstream of the

cylinder. As with the previous two models, turbulence intensity is much less in the upstream

regions compared to downstream. However, it was evident for the square cylinder that

further downstream the vertical component of velocity, v’, surpasses the axial, u’ in intensity.

3.1.4 Maxima and Minima

The maxima and minima of all three cases was determined with their respective axial x/H

position. They are presented in the figures below.

Turbulent Veloctity Maxima

6

4
Square Cylinder Peak U'/U
Square Cylinder Peak V'/V
x/H

3
3-D Hill Peak U'/U
3-D Hill Peak V'/V
2
2-D Ridge Peak U'/U

1 2-D Ridge Peak V'/V

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Maximum Non-Dimensionalized Turbulent Velocity

Figure 17 Maximum turbulent fluctuations for 3-D hill, 2-D ridge, and square cylinder
 Turbulent Velocity Minima
0
0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03
-2

-4
Square Cylinder Min. U'/U
-6
Square Cylinder Min. V'/V
x/H

-8 3-D Hill Min. U'/U

3-D Hill Min. V'/V
-10
2-D Ridge Min. U'/U
-12 2-D Ridge Min. V'/V

-14

-16
Minimum Non-Dimensionalized Turbulent Velocity

Figure 18 Minimum turbulent fluctuations for 3-D hill, 2-D ridge, and square cylinder

3.2 Discussion

3.2.1 Upstream Flow Region

When examining the region of flow before the each of the obstacles a pattern can be seen.

The nature of the pattern is that turbulence intensity is present but relatively low in the far

upstream region. As expected, when the flow approaches the body the turbulence begins to

increase. Moving up in the vertical region, this intensity begins to drop. This is because the

further one moves away from the obstacle in the vertical direction the closer the velocity is to

the mean free stream velocity. One major difference between the three obstacles is at which

distance away from the obstacle the turbulence intensity begins to decrease. For the 3-D hill,

it can be seen in Figure 4, that the magnitude of both u’ and v’ begin to decrease at around 2

mm from the model’s surface. However, in Figure 8, it can be seen that u’ and v’ begin to
decrease at around 4 mm from the model’s surface. This could be due to the fact that in the

case of the 3-D hill, the fluid is able to flow around the obstacle. Hence, areas where the

turbulence intensity is high are able to mix faster with the surrounding fluid where the

turbulence intensity is lower. For the 2-D ridge, the fluid can only flow forward and over the

obstacle and hence the turbulence takes more time to dissipate. In the upstream region of the

square cylinder the first notable trend is that the axial turbulence fluctuations, u’, decrease

instantly with vertical distance. On the contrary, the vertical turbulence fluctuations, v’,

decrease slightly but then increase above u’ and stay relatively constant. This is evidence that

flow is already beginning to recirculate and produce eddies as it approaches the obstacle. The

increasing magnitude of v’ prove that the turbulent fluid velocity is moving more in the

vertical direction than in the axial.

3.2.2 Flow at x/H = 0

For the two model hills, the location of x/H = 0 is the peak of each respective hill. For the

square cylinder x/H = 0 is not the peak, since the surface is flat, but it is still located in the

middle of the object, and hence still comparable. The first noticeable trend is that magnitude

of both u’ and v’, for the 3-D hill and 2-D ridge, both experience a sudden spike at this

measurement location. This is in general agreement with the results obtained by Liu et. al [5],

who observed that u’ peaks at the crest of the 3-D hill. However, since this is just a spike and

not the peak, which will be discussed in a later section, it cannot be said that the results

coincide absolutely. Once spiking, the intensities of u’ and v’ decrease slightly, plateau for a

short distance, and then decrease with vertical distance. In contrast, the square cylinder does

not completely follow the same trend as the two hills. The spike in the turbulence is intensity
is present but following it, both directions of turbulent velocity decrease rapidly. This is in

agreement with Wang et. al [1] who showed in figures that the flow at the top of the cylinder

reattaches with the free stream flow in a short vertical distance.

3.2.3 Downstream Flow Region

This region includes everything past the position of x/H = 0. When examining the 3-D hill

model it can be seen from Figure 6 that at x/H = 1, the intensity of u’ and v’ have increased

even further. The trend is however similar to that observed at x/H = 0 where the turbulence

decreases slightly, plateaus, and then decreases again with vertical distance. At this point in

the downstream region, the intensity for both u’ and v’ begin to decrease at around 3 mm

from the surface. The 2-D ridge actually followed a similar pattern at this axial position. The

only difference is that the turbulence intensity required a larger distance before it began to

decrease. This is in agreement with Wang et. al [1] who observed that u’ in the wake region

was larger for the 2-D ridge. Figure 7, which shows the turbulence even further downstream

provides another interesting trend for the 3-D hill. As expected, u’ peaks even further but

decreases right away with no plateau. In contrast, v’ actually increases until about 0.5 mm,

where it begins to decrease. This is evidence of the 2nd local maximum of v’ observed by

Ishihara et. al [7] in the downstream region of the flow. Comparing the turbulence at the

same axial position for the 2-D ridge, it is obvious that this 2nd local maximum does not exist

since both u’ and v’ decrease rapidly with distance. For the square cylinder experiment

different trends were observed. Figure 14, shows that v’ decreases slower than u’. This is

evidence of the recirculation zone behind the cylinder also observed by Wang et. al [1]. This

is because the fluctuations are moving the fluid upwards with a greater intensity than moving
it forwards. Figure 15, further proves this observation as even at the midline, v’ has a greater

intensity than u’. However, as you move in the vertical direction, u’ begins to increase and

surpasses v’. This is evidence that the recirculation zone is confined to a space closer to the

midline and as one moves away, the axial turbulence fluctuations begin to dominate. As

expected, the further one moves away both u’ and v' begin to decrease in intensity. This

recirculation zone continues even as one moves further along the axial direction. This is

shown in Figure 16, where v’ is initially much higher than u’. Moving away in the vertical

direction, v’ decreases as expected, but u’ stays relatively constant before beginning to

decrease.

3.2.4 Maxima and Minima

This section will discuss the similarities and differences between the maximum and

minimum values of turbulence for the three obstacles. It is interesting to note that for the 3-D

hill both u’ and v’ peaked at x/H = 3. This is contrast with Liu et. al [5] who observed that u’

peaks at the crest of the hill. The 2-D ridge had its turbulence intensity peak at axial positions

further downstream. U’ for the 2-D ridge peaked at x/H = 4 while v’ peaked at x/H = 5. This

is again in agreement with the results obtained by Liu et. al [5] who observed that the

turbulence intensity is greater in the far wake region for the 2-D ridge when compared to the

3-D hill. On the other hand, in the case of the square cylinder, the maximum values of

turbulence were reached at a much closer axial position. U’ peaked at x/H = 0.375, while v’

peaked at x/H = 1.75. This is expected as the wake region for both the 3-D hill and 2-D ridge

are much larger than the square cylinder. An important observation was that all three values

had the relatively non-dimensionalized value for their maximum axial turbulence fluctuation,
u’. The 2-D ridge and the square cylinder both peaked at u’ = 0.645 while the 3-D hill peaked

at u’ = 0.643. This is surprising because although each obstacle had a different axial position

where turbulence intensity was at a maximum, the magnitude of the maximum intensity was

almost the same. The two hills also had relatively close maximum v’ values while the square

cylinder had a drastically higher value. This proves that the recirculation is more evident on a

square object with sharp corners.

When looking at the minimum turbulence intensity values the main similarity between all

three models is that it occurs in the upstream flow region. There is a stronger resemblance in

minima between the two types of hills. However, this resemblance is only seen for the

intensity of v’ where the 3-D has a minimum value of v’ = 0.00559 and the 2-D ridge has a

minimum value of v’ = 0.00593. The reason why the hills have a much lower value for both

u’ and v’ is because the upstream region extends much further for the two hill types. This

region is measured all the way to x/H = -15 for both, while in the case of the square cylinder,

the upstream flow region is only measured up until x/H = -3.

4. Conclusion
The effect of turbulence on fluid flow around obstacles has been an ever-growing area of

interest for engineers. In particular, obstacles that simulate real world structures which vary

from tall buildings in large cities to geographical features such as hills, valleys, or ridges.

This paper found that the turbulent velocity components of a fluid behaves differently over

obstacles of different shape. The sharp corners on the square interacted differently on the

turbulence intensity compared to an axisymmetric hill and a 2-D ridge. Even between the two

geographical features, the contrast in shape actually lowered the overall turbulence intensity
of the 3-D hill. Results obtained from the analysis of this paper were in fairly good

agreement with previous investigations.

References
[1] Wang, Y. Q., Jackson, P. L., & Sui, J. (2013). Simulation of turbulent flow around a surface-
mounted finite square cylinder. Journal of Thermophysics and Heat Transfer, 28(1), 118-132.

[2] Martinuzzi, R., & Tropea, C. (1993). The flow around surface-mounted, prismatic obstacles
placed in a fully developed channel flow (data bank contribution). Journal of Fluids
Engineering, 115(1), 85-92.

[3] Trias, F. X., Gorobets, A., & Oliva, A. (2015). Turbulent flow around a square cylinder at Reynolds
number 22,000: A DNS study. Computers & Fluids, 123, 87-98.

[4] Lyn, D. A., Einav, S., Rodi, W., & Park, J. H. (1995). A laser-Doppler velocimetry study of
ensemble-averaged characteristics of the turbulent near wake of a square cylinder. Journal of Fluid
Mechanics, 304, 285-319.

[5] Liu, Z., Ishihara, T., Tanaka, T., & He, X. (2016). LES study of turbulent flow fields over a smooth
3-D hill and a smooth 2-D ridge. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 153, 1-12.

[6] Ishihara, T., Hibi, K., 1998. An experimental study of turbulent boundary layer over steep hills. In:
Proceedings of the 15th Japan National Symposium on Wind Engineeringpp. 61–66.

[7] Ishihara, T., Hibi, K., & Oikawa, S. (1999). A wind tunnel study of turbulent flow over a three-
dimensional steep hill. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 83(1-3), 95-107.

[8] Tamura, T., Cao, S., & Okuno, A. (2007). LES study of turbulent boundary layer over a smooth
and a rough 2D hill model. Flow, Turbulence and Combustion, 79(4), 405-432.

[9] Lawson Jr, R. E., Snyder, W. H., & Thompson, R. S. (1989). Estimation of maximum surface
concentrations from sources near complex terrain in neutral flow. Atmospheric Environment
(1967), 23(2), 321-331.

[10] Khurshudyan, L. H., Snyder, W. H., & Nekrasov, I. V. (1982). Flow and dispersion of pollutants
over two-dimensional hills: summary report on joint Soviet-American study. US Environmental
Protection Agency, Environmental Sciences Research Laboratory.