Computers & Fluids 105 (2014) 28–38

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Computers & Fluids

j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : w w w . e l s e v i e r . c o m / l o c a t e / c o m p fl u i d

Simulation of construction ventilation in deep diversion tunnels

using Euler–Lagrange method
Zhen Liu, Xiaoling Wang ⇑, Zhengfei Cheng, Ruirui Sun, Aili Zhang
State Key Laboratory of Hydraulic Engineering Simulation and Safety, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072, China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Removal of harmful components is a major concern in the construction ventilation of deep diversion tun-
Received 12 March 2014 nels with heat exchange. The intersecting tunnels and air leakage along the long duct system increase the
Received in revised form 25 August 2014 difficulty of smoke extraction. A 3D unsteady Euler–Lagrange two-phase turbulence model is utilized
Accepted 4 September 2014
with the aim of understanding the pollutant discharge problem caused by the storage heat effects, the
Available online 16 September 2014
intersecting tunnels and air leakage along the long duct system. The effects of air leakage, the gas–solid
heat exchange, the gas–solid interaction forces and the particle collision are considered. A grid-sensitivity
Keywords:
study was performed to obtain a reasonable mesh resolution. The model is validated based on the in-situ
Deep diversion tunnels
Construction ventilation
ventilation test data. The construction ventilation for the diversion tunnels of the Jinping Second-cascade
Euler–Lagrange turbulence model Hydropower Station in China is taken as a case. The air field distribution, the distribution of heat transfer
Heat exchange coefficient, the air leakage rate per 100 m, the particle collision force and dust particles migration tracks
Dust migration are analyzed. The dust particles collisions have a negative influence on ventilation and dust exhaust. Most
dust particles move toward the tunnel outlet along the tunnel bottom with the effects of airflow and den-
sity flow, whereas part of the dust particles move upwards under the effect of buoyancy.
Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction developed. The numerical simulation of ventilation can be divided

Construction ventilation is the ventilation during the under-
ground engineering construction, which is directly related to con-
struction efficiency, construction schedule and the health of
constructors [1–3]. Because of the smoke extraction difficulties
caused by the storage heat effects and the pollutant discharge dif-
ficulties occurring with the intersecting tunnels and air leakage
along the long duct system, the construction ventilation of deep
diversion tunnels remains a difficult task. CO and dust are the
primary contaminants during the drill-blasting construction of
underground tunnels. Compared with dust, CO is easier to
discharge because its density is similar to air [4]. The limit for dust
(2 mg/m3) is stricter than that of CO (30 mg/m3) in construction
[1]. In addition, dust seriously affects the health of the construc-
tors, especially respirable dust [1,5]. Because of the cross distribu-
tion of diversion tunnels, contaminant discharge can be more
difficult to manage. Therefore, the removal of harmful dust in deep
diversion tunnels is vital to construction ventilation.
With the development of computers, numerous investigations
using computer simulation ventilation technology have been
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +86 022 27890738; fax: +86 022 27890910.
E-mail address: wangxl@tju.edu.cn (X. Wang).
into the aboveground building and the underground cavern in the
civil engineering field. Past studies have mainly focused on the nat-
ure ventilation and contaminant dispersion [6–9] for the above-
ground building portion. For the underground cavern portion,
ventilation simulation can be divided into a construction period
and an operation period. Greater attention has been paid to the
construction ventilation in mine tunnels, whereas because of the
difficulty and complexity of gas–solid two-phase study on under-
ground tunnels, most studies have been focused on single-phase
flow. Without considering the effects of contaminants, Parra
et al. [10] simulated the steady 3D isothermal incompressible flow
in mine tunnels. Hargreaves and Lowndes [11] constructed a series
of steady-state models to replicate the ventilation flow patterns at
the head end of a drivage. The simulated results were compared
against the data of a series of full-scale ventilation experiments,
which were conducted within a rapid development drivage of a
representative UK deep coal mine. Diego et al. [12] calculated the
losses in 138 circular tunnel situations (varying tunnel diameter,
air velocity and surface characteristics), using both traditional
and CFD (computational fluid dynamics) methods. The traditional
methods mean using the three traditional calculation formulas to
estimate an airway resistance in mining applications [13–15].
Torno et al. [16] adopted experimental mathematical models and

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compfluid.2014.09.016
0045-7930/Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 Z. Liu et al. / Computers & Fluids 105 (2014) 28–38
CFD models to analyze and compare the behavior of gas dilution
after blasting in underground mines. Fewer studies have focused
on construction ventilation in hydropower engineering. Wang
et al. [2] proposed a 3D unsteady quasi-single phase model to opti-
mize the ventilation time with different tunneling lengths. The
model was confirmed by the experimental values reported by
Nakayama [17] and was applied to simulate diversion tunnel con-
struction ventilation for the Xin Tangfang power station in China.
Wang et al. [3] used a three-dimensional renormalization-group
(RNG) model for forced ventilation to the working face of a long
diversion tunnel, taking into account the effects of air leakage
and the frictional resistance along the tunnel. The case study
involved the working face during TBM construction of the Xinjiang
81 Daban long diversion tunnel in China.
Because of the smoke extraction difficulties caused by the
storage heat effects and the pollutant discharge difficulties with
cross distribution of tunnels, the lack of knowledge about gas–solid
two-phase construction ventilation for deep tunnels remains an
obstacle. There are few two-phase flow investigations focused on
underground construction ventilation in mine tunnels. Klemens
et al. [18] established a two-dimensional laminar model to simu-
late the dust deposition in a rectangular coal mine roadway with
upper obstacles. The influence of gas–solid two-phase convective
diffusion was not considered in the model. Cannoo [19] used a
Eulerian approach to simulate the dust and methane distribution
in a mine tunnel. Toraño et al. [20] performed a two-phase numer-
ical simulation of airflow and dust in mining roadways with the
Euler–Lagrange method. There are few existing studies examining
construction ventilation simulation of a single tunnel in hydro-
power projects. Zhang et al. [21] employed a three-dimensional
transient two-phase Eulerian model to simulate velocity fields
and dust diffusion of the heading face in a diversion tunnel.
Overall, most of the aforementioned studies of diversion tun-
nels have primarily concentrated on the single-phase flow simula-
tion of a single diversion tunnel. Only a small number of them have
analyzed construction ventilation by focusing on the isothermal
two-phase flow construction ventilation process itself. In this
paper, to examine smoke extraction difficulties caused by storage
heat effects, pollutant discharge difficulties with cross distribution
of tunnels and air leakage along a long duct system, an
Euler–Lagrange model is utilized for deep diversion tunnels. The
heat transfer coefficient and dust migration are analyzed. A
grid-sensitivity study was performed to obtain a reasonable mesh
resolution. In addition, the model was verified by the on-site
ventilation test data.
2. Governing equations
In the construction ventilation of deep diversion tunnels, dust
particles are convected and diffused, forming a dispersion system
suspended in the air medium. Therefore, an Euler–Lagrange model
is applied. The 3D unsteady RANS equations in conjunction with
energy equation and the standard k  e turbulence model are
solved [22]. The standard k  e turbulence model proposed by
Jones and Launder [23] has been largely validated by the scientific
community. For brevity, only the model constants are given here:
Cl = 0.09; C1e = 1.44; C2e = 1.92; rk = 1.0, re = 1.3 [24]. They are
the default values in Fluent 6.3.
The viscous dissipation terms are included in the energy equa-
tion, which describe the thermal energy created by viscous shear in
the flow [22]. The Boussinesq model is used to solve the thermal
buoyancy in the tunnels. This model treats density as a constant
value in all solved equations, except for the buoyancy term in
the momentum equation [22]:
ðq  q0 Þg ffi q0 bDTg
29
where q0 is the density of the flow (kg/m3), b is the thermal expan-
sion coefficient (K1), and DT is the temperature difference (K).
The trajectory of a discrete phase particle is predicted by inte-
grating the force balance on the particle, which is written in a
Lagrangian reference frame. This force balance equates the particle
inertia with the forces acting on the particle, and can be written as
dup gðqp  qÞ
¼ F D ðu  up Þ þ þ F p þ F ss ð2Þ
dt qp
where FD(u  up) is the drag force per unit particle mass and Fp is
the force acting on the particles, including the drag force, the ther-
mophoretic force, the pressure gradient force, and the virtual mass
force. The relevant equations can be found in the Fluent manual
[22].
The influence from collision force between particles is taken
into account in the force balance equation of the particle, which
is based on molecular kinetic theory. The particle collision force
Fss can be determined as follows [25]:
2
F ss ¼ rJ ¼ ð1 þ eÞrðC s qs hv 02
s iÞ ð3Þ
3
where e is the collision restitution coefficient, set to 1.0; Cs is the
volume coefficient of the particles; v 0s is the particle fluctuating
velocity given by hv 02
s i ¼ jks =ms ; ms is the particle mass (kg); ks is
instantaneous kinetic energy (N m); j is Boltzmann constant,
1.3806504  1023 J K1. The particle turbulent dispersion is only
scarcely caused by fluid pulsation [25]. ks can be expressed as
follows:
 
srs 1
ks ¼ 1 þ  kl ð4Þ
st
rffiffiffi 3=4
2 C l kc
st ¼ ð5Þ
3 ec
qs d2s
srs ¼ ð6Þ
18l
where srs is the particle dynamic response time (s); st is the air-
phase pulsation time (s); ds is particle diameter (m); qs is the parti-
cle density (kg/m3); l is the air dynamic viscous coefficient (N m/s);
kc is the air turbulent kinetic energy (m2/s2); ec is the dissipation
rate of turbulent kinetic energy (m2/s3).
3. Computational model
3.1. Computational geometry and grid
The construction ventilation of the Jinping Second-cascade
Hydropower Station deep diversion system, with four diversion
tunnels and a length of approximately 16.7 km from intake slope
to upper tank, is taken as a case study. The design section is a
horseshoe with a diameter of 13 m. The maximum burial depth
of the diversion system is approximately 2525 m. Therefore, the
diversion tunnels have the characteristics of deep cover, long dis-
tances and large diameter, which lead to the pollutant discharge
difficulty. Forced ventilation is adopted. The construction ventila-
tion of the western No. 1 and No. 2 diversion tunnels is simulated.
A transverse passageway is excavated every 500 m between the
No. 1 and No. 2 diversion tunnels. To avoid a contaminated air
cycle among the transverse passageways and diversion tunnels,
the former transverse passageway is sealed off after the next trans-
fixion. The actual distance of the drilling and blasting construction
is 7000 m, which we obtained from the construction data. CFD
technology is used for the simulation of the construction ventila-
tion at locations 550 m, 1500 m, 3000 m, 4000 m, 5000 m,
ð1Þ
6000 m and 7000 m along the No. 1 and No. 2 diversion tunnels.
30 Z. Liu et al. / Computers & Fluids 105 (2014) 28–38

Fig. 1. The geometrical model and the calculation grid model of the diversion tunnels.

Fig. 1(a) shows the geometrical model of the diversion tunnels. The
lengths of the No. 1 and No. 2 construction branch tunnels are
664 m and 820 m, respectively. Two axial flow fans are located at
the exit of the No. 1 construction branch tunnel. An air duct, with
a diameter of 2 m, is located at the top of the tunnel. After the air-
flow arrives at the working face, it reverses to the tunnel outlet.
Small holes are open as air leakage ports at 100 m intervals along
the air duct. To reduce grid size, the blocked transverse passage-
ways are not built into the geometrical model. The total number
of cells is 1,662,283 for tunneling lengths of 550 m. The grid model
of the diversion tunnels is shown in Fig. 1(b).
A grid-sensitivity analysis of 550 m length diversion tunnel is
performed by conducting simulations on the fine grid with
1,662,283 cells (grid B), a coarser grid with 765,810 cells (grid A)
and a finer grid with 3,044,521 cells (grid C). The grids were
obtained by coarsening the fine grid with twice about a factor 2.
Because the overall grid model is so big that it is difficult to show
the grid resolution, the detailed view near the working face of the
three grids are illustrated in Fig. 2. The three grids are compared
based on the jet axial velocity from air duct outlet to the working
face, and the results are shown in Fig. 3(a). The average difference
between the coarser grid (grid A) and the fine grid (grid B) is 9.98%,
while it is only 2.81% between the fine grid (grid B) and the finer
grid (grid C). For uniform reporting of the grid-convergence study,
we adopted the concept of the grid-convergence index (GCI) by
Roache [26,27]. The result on selected grid with indication of band
of 1.25  grid-convergence index [28] is shown in Fig.3(b). The
results show that grid sensitivity is most obvious within
10–30 m away from air duct outlet. Above analysis also shows that
the fine grid is a suitable grid. Therefore, the fine grid was selected
for further analysis with the calculation accuracy and the compu-
tational efficiency consideration.
 Z. Liu et al. / Computers & Fluids 105 (2014) 28–38 31

the diameter (m) [29,30]. The pressure outlet boundaries are con-
sidered to be in the tunnel outlet (see Fig. 1). The gauge pressure is
set to 0. The outlet temperature is equal to the external
temperature.
The standard wall functions by Launder and Spalding [29] are
used with the sand-grain based roughness modification by Cebeci
and Bradshaw [31]. Because of the heat storage effect of the deep
tunnels and the strong heat exchange between the tunnel wall
and heat flow in the tunnel, the convective heat transfer boundary
conditions are considered. The thermal wall function is introduced
to determine the heat exchange coefficient [22].
In the construction ventilation gas–solid two-phase flow Euler–
Lagrange simulation of deep diversion tunnels, the dust particle
source is set in the working face. Dust particles escape to the tun-
nel outlet, so capture boundary conditions are set for the solid-
phase outlet boundary. In addition to the tunnel outlet, the rest
Fig. 2. View near the working face of the three grids for grid-sensitivity analysis.
of the walls are provided with reflecting boundary conditions.
Assuming that particle collision is elastic, the wall collision elastic
recovery factor is set to 1.
The initial discrete dust is mainly distributed near the working
face. The initial dust concentration is 400 mg/m3 [1]. The working
face is set as the dust injection source (see Fig. 1), the parameters
are shown in Table 1. The mass flow rate is calculated by cvA,
where c is the dust concentration (kg/m3); v is the air velocity in
the tunnel (m/s); A is the tunnel sectional area (m2).
The CFD model has been implemented in the commercial finite-
volume CFD code FLUENT. The time-dependent terms are handled
through an implicit second-order backward differentiation in time.
The second-order upwind scheme is used to approximate the con-
vective terms at the faces of the control volumes. The pressure-
implicit with splitting of operators (PISO) algorithm is employed
as the pressure velocity coupling method [32]. Convergence is
assumed to be obtained when the scaled residuals [22] reach
103 for all equations except the energy, for which the criterion
is 106.

4. Validation with the in-situ ventilation test data

The in-situ ventilation test data of the Jinping Second-cascade

Hydropower Station deep diversion system is used as a validation
case [33]. The monitoring of airflow velocity and temperature on-
site was measured with an AVM-05/AVM-07 thermometer and
anemograph (Fig. 4). According to in-situ ventilation test data, a
200 m long tunnel model is built. A spiral duct with a diameter
of 2 m is installed at the tunnel top. Five monitoring points,
P1–P5 (Fig. 5), are arranged at various distances of the blasting
working face at 25 m, 45 m, 65 m, 85 m and 105 m. The grid model
for validation is established by using the non-structured body-fit-
ted grid, as shown in Fig. 5. To meet the need, the local grid such
as near the air duct inlet is refined. The grid count is 198,400.
Fig. 6 shows the temperature distribution of the five monitoring
points. With the increasing distance from the working face, the
temperature of the tunnel is lower. The simulated data were com-
Fig. 3. CFD simulation results for the grid-sensitivity analysis. pared to the measured values (Table 2). The maximum relative
error of the temperature is 14.1%, whereas the minimum is 5.7%.
3.2. Boundary conditions A good agreement was achieved, with the average relative error

Given the assumptions that the inlet velocity is well-distrib-

Table 1
uted, velocity inlet boundary conditions are applied to the air duct Parameters of the particle injection source.
inlets (see Fig. 1). The inlet temperature is set to the external
temperature. The turbulence kinetic energy and turbulence Particle injection source Parameters

dissipation rate are given by the equations kin ¼ 3=2ðU in Iin Þ2 and Particle distribution Uniform
ein ¼ C 0:75 1:5 Particle diameter (m) 5.0  106
l kin =lm . The turbulence intensity Iin is equal to
Initial particle velocity (m/s) 0
0.16(Re)1/8, the mixing length lm is lm = 0.07L, where Cl is an Particle mass flow rate (kg/s) 0.0098
empirical constant, 0.09; Re the Reynolds number, 1.06  105; L
32 Z. Liu et al. / Computers & Fluids 105 (2014) 28–38

Fig. 4. The layout of the deep diversion system.

Table 2
Comparison of the temperature simulated values and the measured values.

Measurement position P1 P2 P3 P4 P5
Measured values (m/s) 18.5 18.4 17.7 17.4 17.5
Simulation values (m/s) 21.1 20.3 19.4 19.0 18.5
Average relative error value (%) 14.1 10.3 9.6 9.2 5.7

Table 3
Comparison of the simulation values of average airflow velocity and the measured
values.

Measurement position P1 P2 P3 P4 P5

Fig. 5. The grid model for validation. Measured values (m/s) 0.498 0.791 0.577 0.474 0.453
Simulation values (m/s) 0.466 0.766 0.617 0.459 0.413
Average relative error value (%) 6.4 3.2 6.9 3.2 8.8

value of the temperature being 9.78%. Moreover, the simulation

values of the average airflow velocity in the tunnel are in good
agreement with the measurements (Table 3). The average relative
error value of the airflow velocity is 5.7%. The validation results
indicate that the mathematical model can be used for construction
ventilation simulation of deep diversion tunnels.
5. Results and discussion
In this section, the air field taking into account the effect of air
leakage, the distribution of heat transfer coefficient, the particle
collision and dust particle migration are analyzed.
Fig. 6. The simulated temperature distribution of the five monitoring points (unit:
K).
5.1. Velocity and pressure distribution
As the airflow distribution trends near the working face are
similar at tunneling lengths of 550 m, 1500 m, 3000 m, 4000 m,
5000 m, 6000 m and 7000 m, the construction ventilation at loca-
tion 550 m is mainly analyzed. The airflow velocity distribution
near the working face at different times is shown in Fig. 7. At the
ventilation initial time (t = 5 s), the airflow develops according to
the free turbulent jet law without the influence of working face.
The mass, momentum and heat exchanges emerge continuously
between the jet and the surrounding air under the effect of velocity
difference and turbulent fluctuation. An eddy zone forms with the
entraining effect of jet, as shown in the red frame of Fig. 7(a). At the
15 s ventilation time, the longitudinal velocity of the jet reduces
along with the tunnel. The eddy zone enlarges as the jet length
increases. When the ventilation time reaches 60 s, airflow reaches
the working face, and the airflow filed is basically stable.
The basically stable airflow distribution is shown in Fig. 8(a).
With jet velocity reduction, airflow velocity is approximately
1.5 m/s when the jet reaches the working face. The radius of the
jet cross section increases first and then decreases, reaching a
maximum 4.5 m at the eddy center section A-A. The downward
movement airflow attaches to the working face and forms a
wall-attached jet under the effect of pressure difference, before
producing backflow. The backflow velocity reaches a maximum
 Z. Liu et al. / Computers & Fluids 105 (2014) 28–38
Fig. 7. Distribution of airflow field near the working face for different time (y = 0 m,
unit: m/s).
3.0 m/s near the section A-A. The airflow streamline distribution is
shown in Fig. 8(b), which clearly displays the eddy zone under the
jet zone.
5.2. Analysis of air leakage
The distribution of the airflow velocity near the air leakage
points along the tunnel is shown in Fig. 9. As the tunnel is so long
that it is hard to display the airflow velocity distribution of the air
leakage areas along the whole tunnel clearly, the tunnel is trun-
cated and the air leakage areas are enlarged. The enlarged air leak-
age areas are spliced together as shown in Fig. 9. The airflow
velocity at the air leakage point is high near the outlet and is low
near the working face. The leakage amount decreases gradually
from the outlet to the working face. With the distance between
the leakage port and the tunnel outlet increases, the influence of
air leakage to the airflow field distribution decreases, as shown
in Fig. 9(a) and (b).
The air volumetric flow rate along the air duct at different tun-
nel lengths is shown in Fig. 10. With increasing tunnel length, the
air volumetric flow rate decreases gradually. The air volumetric
flow rate at the working face and the end of air duct are similar
for different tunnel lengths. The air from the fan enters the air duct
and the amount of air decreases gradually because of air leakage
while flowing toward the working face. The air volumetric flow
rate at the duct outlet is approximately 43 m3/s for different tunnel
lengths, which satisfies the ventilation demand of the working face
(40.55 m3/s).
33
Fig. 8. Distribution of the basically stable airflow near the working face (unit: m/s).
Distributions of the leakage rates per 100 m for different tunnel
lengths are shown in Fig. 11. The distribution of the leakage rate
per 100 m along the tunnel displays a decreasing trend. The max-
imum leakage occurs near the air duct inlet, and the minimum
leakage occurs near the working face, as shown in Fig. 11. The leak-
age rate per 100 m is defined as follows [3]:
Qm  Q
P¼  100% ð7Þ
Q m  Lf
where P is air leakage rate; Q is air flux on the section of air leakage
point, m3/min; Qm is the air flux of fan, m3/s; Lf is the length of air
duct, m.
5.3. Analysis of heat exchange
For deep diversion tunnels, temperature differences form from
the heat storage and the heat from drilling and blasting. There is
strong convective heat exchange between the air outside tunnel
and the hot airflow in the tunnel as well as between the tunnel
wall and the airflow under the effect of temperature difference.
The strength of convective heat exchange can be represented by
the heat transfer coefficient.
The distribution of surface heat transfer coefficient near the
working face is shown in Fig. 12. At the initiation of ventilation,
the surface heat transfer coefficient of working face is larger,
whereas that at other zones of tunnel is almost zero, as shown in
Fig. 12. At the beginning of ventilation, the airflow does not reach
the working face, the airflow velocity in the tunnel is smaller and
the heat from drilling and blasting aggregates at the working face
without diffusion. Hence, the surface heat transfer coefficient of
the working face is maximal. With increasing ventilation time, air-
flow reaches the working face and accelerates the air movement.
There is strong convective heat exchange between the air from
duct and inside the tunnel. In addition, the heat of the working face
diffuses toward the surrounding with the entrainment effect of jet,
and the temperature in the tunnel increases, which causes convec-
34 Z. Liu et al. / Computers & Fluids 105 (2014) 28–38

Fig. 11. Distributions of the leakage rates per 100 m for different tunnel lengths.

Fig. 9. The air velocity distribution near the air leakage points at different locations
(unit: m/s).

Fig. 10. The air volumetric flow rate along the air duct at different tunnel lengths.

tive heat exchange between the tunnel wall and thermal airflow
under the effect of temperature difference. At a ventilation time
of 1800 s, the heat transfer coefficient of the tunnel wall increases,
as shown in Fig. 12(b). The heat and temperature difference at the
working face is maximal, which results in convective heat
exchange, a maximal heat transfer coefficient (10.1 W/(m2 K)). As
the partial enlarged area shows in Fig. 12(b), the heat transfer coef-
ficient inside the tunnel (y = 6 m to 6 m) is basically lower than
1 W/(m2 K) as well as that near the tunnel wall (y = 6 m to
6.5 m and y = 6 m to 6.5 m) is 4 W/(m2 K), which indicates stron-
ger convective heat exchange between the tunnel wall and airflow.
With existing empirical formulas, it is difficult to obtain the law
of convective heat transfer. There are presently few reports on the
Fig. 12. Distribution of surface heat transfer coefficient near the working face
(unit: W/(m2 K)).
field measurement of convective heat transfer coefficient in deep
diversion tunnels. The heat transfer coefficient is solved using
the method of thermal wall function. The reliability of simulation
results are proved by comparing with the empirical values that
are obtained using the empirical formula of tunnel wall heat trans-
fer coefficient from the measured data. The empirical formula [34]
is as follows:
 Z. Liu et al. / Computers & Fluids 105 (2014) 28–38 35

0:045k Re0:8
h¼ ð8Þ
Lf

where k is the thermal conductivity of air, W/(m K); Lf is the section

hydraulic diameter, m; Re is the Reynolds number.
The comparison between the calculated results and simulated
results of the surface average heat transfer coefficient for the tun-
nel wall at location 550 m is shown in Fig. 13. The trend found in
the numerical simulations agrees well with the calculated results
near the working face. The maximum relative error between the
simulated results and calculated results is 9.3%, and the average
relative error is 5.8%. It is feasible to use the method of tempera-
ture wall functions for solving the heat transfer coefficient of deep
diversion tunnel for construction ventilation numerical simulation.
The distribution of the surface average heat transfer coefficients Fig. 14. The distribution of surface average heat transfer coefficient near the
working face.
near the working face for different tunnel lengths is shown in
Fig. 14. The distribution trends of the surface average heat transfer
coefficient for different tunnel lengths are identical, initially
increasing then decreasing within 50 m from the working face.
The distance between the air duct outlet and the working face is
30 m. The air velocity at the air duct outlet is maximal, which
results in stronger convective heat exchange near the air duct out-
let. The maximal surface average heat transfer coefficient is
approximately 7 W/(m2 K).

5.4. Analysis of dust migration

5.4.1. The influence of particle collision

For the gas–solid two-phase flow, the collisions among the dust
particles will affect the space distribution and movement track of
the dust particles. Fig. 15 is the space distribution of the dust par-
ticles near the working face. The lines indicate the moving track of
the dust particles, and the colored dots on the line indicate the res-
idence time. Area A in the red dashed frame is the area 0–10 m
away from the working face. Area B in the red dashed frame is
the area 20–30 m away from the face. When collisions are not
taken into account, the concentration of the dust particles is small
(Area A in the red dashed frame of Fig. 15(a)), 22.7 mg/m3 (average
value). When affected by the eddy rotation, dust particles are more
concentrated. In regards to particle collisions, the concentration of
the dust particles around the working face is higher than when not
taking particle collisions into consideration. This can be shown by
comparing the space distributions in Area A in the red dashed
frames between Fig. 15(a) and (b). The dust concentration in Area
A is 24 mg/m3, which is 1.3 mg/m3 higher than when not taking Fig. 15. The space distribution of the dust particles near the working face (unit: s).
into collision, a 5.73% increase. In addition, dust particles around
the eddy zone are also affected by the collisions with each other.
Hence, the concentration degree of dust particles in Area B in the not considering collisions, an increase of 10.3%. When not consid-
red dashed frame of Fig. 15(b) is higher than it in Fig. 15(a), ering collisions, the dust particles persist for approximately 300 s
48.4 mg/m3 (average value), which is 4.5 mg/m3 higher than when on average around the working face, whereas when taking it into
consideration they persist for approximately 500 s on average
around the working face, which is approximately 200 s longer.
Thus, this paper assumes that dust particles collisions have a neg-
ative influence on ventilation and dust exhaust.

5.4.2. Particle trajectory

Fig. 13. Comparison between calculated results and simulated results.
With the effect of uplift action caused by density difference, the
dust particles at the working face form density flow. In addition,
the dusty airflow sinks to the bottom of the working face and
aggregates there. At the same time, because of the heat produced
by drilling and blasting, the airflow temperature and the dust ini-
tial temperature are relatively high. Affected by the interaction of
cold and hot airflow, the temperature gradient around working
face is large. Dust particles are intermixed under the actions of
temperature difference and form thermal buoyancy. In addition,
because of the effect of thermophoresis, dust particles move
36 Z. Liu et al. / Computers & Fluids 105 (2014) 28–38

toward the opposite direction of the temperature gradient of the the No. 2 transverse passageway is low. Thus, dust particles are
tunnel section, which causes thermophoresis and goes against detained here and hard to discharge, which causes dust in the
the effects of ventilation and dust exhaust. No. 2 transverse passageway to be retained for a longer time, and
The tracks of the dust particles near the working faces are the mean retention time is 1300 s (t = 21.67 min), as shown in
shown in Fig. 16. As affected by both the attached jet and density
flow, the dust around the working face travels along the wall
toward the tunnel bottom and moves forward in the control of air-
flow in a backflow zone. When arriving at the eddy zone, rotation-
ally entrained by eddy, part of the dust moves back and the
phenomenon of secondary suspension occurs. At the same time,
because of the high speed of airflow near the eddy zone, which
accelerates the dust movement, the movement of the dust particles
is accelerated, as shown in Fig. 16 (Area C and D red dashed frame).
Because of the carrying role of airflow, most dust moves toward the
tunnel outlet, except some dust moves back. When the dust arrives
near the No. 2 transverse passageway, the buoyancy greatly affect
the dust, instead of the airflow in the jet zone. As the partial
enlarged area E shows in Fig. 16(b), most dust particles move along
the bottom of the channel under the effect of density gravity flow,
but a portion of the dust particles move upwards under the effect
of buoyancy.
The distribution of dust particle trajectories and residence time
are shown in Fig. 17. The dust particle residence time increases
successively from the working face to tunnel outlet. Dust particles
move from the working face to tunnel outlet with the effect of air-
flow, the retention time near the working face is short, and the
mean value is 300 s (t = 5 min). Some of the dust particles move
to the No. 2 transverse passageway, and the airflow velocity in

Fig. 16. The tracks of the dust particles near the working faces (unit: m/s). Fig. 17. Distribution of dust particle trajectories and residence time (unit: s).
 Z. Liu et al. / Computers & Fluids 105 (2014) 28–38
Fig. 18. The relationship between the diversion tunnel length and the ventilation
time.
partial enlarged area F in Fig. 17(b). Area G is the No. 1 transverse
passageway. Based on the partial enlarged area G, the dust parti-
cles in No. 1 diversion tunnel move to No. 1 branch tunnel, mean-
while those in No. 2 diversion tunnel mainly move to No. 2 branch
tunnel. Part of the dust particles stayed in the transverse
passageway.
The relationship between the diversion tunnel length and the
ventilation time is shown in Fig. 18. The dust particles move from
the working faces to the tunnel outlet with the carrying action of
airflow. For the diversion tunnel length of 550 m, when the venti-
lation time is 1800 s, the dust discharge rate is 98%. The dust mean
mass flow rate at the tunnel outlet is 4.11E05 kg/s, the dust mean
velocity is 0.3 m/s, so the dust concentration is 1.4 mg/m3, which
meets the standard (not more than 2 mg/m3). The ventilation time
gradually increases with the increasing tunnel length, as shown in
Fig. 18.
6. Conclusions
Most existing studies have focused on the single-phase flow iso-
thermal construction ventilation simulation of single diversion
tunnel. In this paper, aiming at the construction ventilation of deep
diversion tunnels with construction branch tunnels and transverse
passageways, a three-dimensional unsteady Euler–Lagrange two-
phase turbulence model was utilized with consideration of the
air leakage, the gas–solid heat exchange, the gas–solid interaction
forces and the particle collision. The construction ventilation for
the diversion tunnels of the Jinping Second-cascade Hydropower
Station in China was used as an example.
 The air field with the effect of air leakage is obtained. The
airflow structure can be divided into a jet zone, wall-
attached jet zone, backflow zone and eddy zone near the
working face. The airflow velocity is smaller in the trans-
verse passageway, which is not beneficial to contaminant
discharge. With increasing tunnel length, the air volumetric
flow rate and the leakage rate per 100 m decrease
gradually.
 The distribution of heat transfer coefficient is discussed.
There is strong convective heat exchange between the air
from duct and inside the tunnel. The heat transfer coeffi-
cient of the tunnel wall increases first and then tends to
stabilize with increasing ventilation time. The distribution
trends of surface average heat transfer coefficient for differ-
ent tunnel lengths are identical, which initially increases
first and then decreases within 50 m from the working face.
The simulated results are in good agreement with the
empirical values.
37
 The particle collision force and dust particles migration
tracks are analyzed. The dust particles collisions among
each other have a negative influence in ventilation and dust
exhaust. Most dust particles move toward the tunnel out-
let along the tunnel bottom with the effects of airflow
and density flow, whereas part of the dust particles move
upwards under the effect of buoyancy. A small part of dust
particles are detained in the transverse passageway and
hard to discharge.
The simulation method based on CFD can be theoretically
generalized for these underground projects that require the drill-
blasting construction and excavation operations. In the future, to
improve the prediction of gas–solid two-phase in the deep diver-
sion tunnel, future work should focus on taking various fan types
account during construction ventilation simulation. CFD is a
sophisticated tool for better understanding the detailed interac-
tions between fluid mechanics, mass transfer and heat transfer.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the Foundation for Innovative
Research Groups of the National Natural Science Foundation of
China (Grant no. 51021004), the Natural Science Foundation of
China (Grant no. 51179121) and the Specialized Research Fund
for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education of China (Grant no.
20120032110045).
References
[1] Ministry of China National Water Resources and Hydropower Engineering
Corporation. Handbook of construction planning of hydraulic and
hydroelectric projects. Construction technique, vol. II. Beijing: China Water
Resources and Hydropower Press; 1997.
[2] Wang XL, Liu XP, Sun YF, An J, Zhang J, Chen HC. Construction schedule
simulation of a diversion tunnel based on the optimized ventilation time. J
Hazard Mater 2009;165(1):933–43.
[3] Wang XL, Zhang ZQ, Zhou ZY, Chen HC. Numerical simulation of TBM
construction ventilation in a long diversion tunnel. Tunn Underground Space
Technol 2011;26(4):560–72.
[4] Zhang J. Comprehensive optimization for construction scheme of the
underground diversion pipe. Ph.D. thesis.. Tianjin University; 2007.
[5] Mody V, Jakhete R. Dust control handbook for minerals processing. New
Jersey: Noyes Publications; 1987.
[6] van Hooff T, Blocken B. On the effect of wind direction and urban surroundings
on natural ventilation of a large semi-enclosed stadium. Comput Fluids
2010;39(7):1146–55.
[7] Blocken B, van Hooff T, Aanen L, Bronsema B. Computational analysis of the
performance of a venturi-shaped roof for natural ventilation: venturi-effect
versus wind-blocking effect. Comput Fluids 2011;48(1):202–13.
[8] Gousseau P, Blocken B, Van Heijst GJF. CFD simulation of pollutant dispersion
around isolated buildings: on the role of convective and turbulent mass fluxes
in the prediction accuracy. J Hazard Mater 2011;194:422–34.
[9] Gousseau P, Blocken B, Van Heijst GJF. Quality assessment of large-eddy
simulation of wind flow around a high-rise building: validation and solution
verification. Comput Fluids 2013;79:120–33.
[10] Parra MT, Villafruela JM, Castro F. Numerical and experimental analysis of
different ventilation systems in deep mines. Build Environ 2006;41(2):87–93.
[11] Hargreaves DM, Lowndes IS. The computational modeling of the ventilation
flows within a rapid development drivage. Tunn Underground Space Technol
2007;22(2):150–60.
[12] Diego I, Torno S, Toraño J, Menéndez M, Gent M. A practical use of CFD for
ventilation of underground works. Tunn Underground Space Technol
2011;26(1):189–200.
[13] Potter MC, Wiggert DC, Hondzo M, Shih TI. Mecánica de fluidos. Thomson;
2002.
[14] McPherson MJ. Subsurface ventilation and environmental
engineering. Springer; 2007.
[15] Luque VC, Pedeca SE. Manual de ventilación de minas. Madrid: Pedeca S. Coop.
Ltda.; 1988.
[16] Torno S, Toraño J, Ulecia M, Allende C. Conventional and numerical models of
blasting gas behaviour in auxiliary ventilation of mining headings. Tunn
Underground Space Technol 2013;34:73–81.
[17] Ichinose M, Nakayama S, Uchino KI, Inoue M. In-situ measurement and
simulation by CFD of methane gas distribution at a heading faces. Shigen-to-
Sozai 1998;114(11):769–75.
38 Z. Liu et al. / Computers & Fluids 105 (2014) 28–38
[18] Klemens R, Kosinski P, Wolanski P, Korobeinikovb VP, Markovb VV, Menshov
IS, et al. Numerical study of dust lifting in a channel with vertical obstacles. J
Loss Prevent Proc 2001;14(6):469–73.
[19] Cannoo B. STAR-CD digs miners out of trouble. In: CD adapco dynamics,
fall. New York: CD Adapco Group; 2004. p. 27–8.
[20] Toraño J, Torno S, Menendez M, Gent M. Auxiliary ventilation in mining
roadways driven with roadheaders: validated CFD modelling of dust behavior.
Tunn Underground Space Technol 2011;26(1):201–10.
[21] Zhang J, Wang XL, Chen HC, Liu XP, Sun YF. Simulation on ventilation and dust
diffusion on heading face of the diversion tunnel. J Hydroelectr Eng
2008;27(1):111–7.
[22] Fluent Inc.. Fluent 6.3 user’s guide. Lebanon: Fluent Inc.; 2006.
[23] Jones WP, Launder BE. The prediction of laminarization with a two-equation
model of turbulence. Int J Heat Mass Tran 1972;15:301–14.
[24] Launder BE, Spalding DB. Lectures in mathematical models of
turbulence. London: Academic Press; 1972.
[25] Wu YL, Tang XL, Liu SH. Hydraulic machinery cavitations and solid-liquid two-
phase hydrodynamics. Beijing: China Water Resources and Hydropower Press;
2007.
[26] Roache PJ. Perspective: a method for uniform reporting of grid refinement
studies. J Fluids Eng 1994;116:405–13.
[27] Roache PJ. Quantification of uncertainty in computational fluid dynamics.
Annu Rev Fluid Mech 1997;29:123–60.
[28] Ramponi P, Blocken B. CFD simulation of cross-ventilation for a generic
isolated building: impact of computational parameters. Build Environ
2012;53:34–48.
[29] Launder BE, Spalding DB. The numerical computation of turbulent flows.
Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 1974;3:269–89.
[30] Rodi W. Influence of buoyancy and rotation on equations for the turbulent
length scale. In: 2nd symposium on turbulent shear flows, vol. 1; 1979. p. 10.
[31] Cebeci T, Bradshaw P. Momentum transfer in boundary layers. Hemisphere
Publishing Corporation; 1977.
[32] Issa R. Solution of implicitly discretized fluid flow equations by operator
splitting. J Comput Phys 1986;62:40–65.
[33] The Co., Ltd. of the 13th Bureau Group of China Railway, Southwest Jiaotong
University. Application research and in-situ report on construction
coordination ventilation technology of the Jinping second-cascade
hydropower station extra long tunnels. China; 2011.
[34] Mou LQ. Computation and application of air through tunnel
cooling. Beijing: China Building Industry Press; 1982.