Fixing Sensor Position Using Computational

Fluid Dynamic Analysis

M.V. Shyla1 , K.B. Naidu2 , G. Vasanth Kumar3
1

Department of Mathematics, Sathyabama University, Chennai-600119, India.

Department of Mathematics, Sathyabama University, Chennai-600119, India.
3
Department of Aeronautical Engineering, Sathyabama University, Chennai-600119, India.
2

shylamv@yahoo.com, 2kbnaidu999@gmail.com, 3vassa.aero@gmail.com

Abstract:
This paper aims at fixing an optimal sensor position in indoor environment using
Computational Fluid Dynamic (CFD) technique, Finite volume method. CFD Simulation of hydrogencyanide is performed around circular sensors fixed at different locations under steady state condition with
laminar and turbulent boundary conditions. The CFD model is generated using Gambit software. CFD
Analysis is done using Fluent software to compute velocity profile, pressure distribution, and streamline
pattern. The effect of hydrogen-cyanide on the circular sensors is studied using which optimal sensor
placement can be determined. This information can be used in fixing sensors in an optimal position in
industries and indoor environment to increase the efficiency of sensing.
Key words:
1.

computational fluid dynamic analysis, laminar; turbulent, steady flow, sensor position, Finite
volume method

Introduction

In indoor environment, the chemical and biological agent dispersion is very fast. The sensors are used to
give early warning in order to escape dangerous situations in case of a terrorist attack or accidents. Early
warning before the contaminant reached an occupant in the room is possible only if the sensors are fixed in a
suitable position inside the room. Optimal placement of sensors increases the efficiency of sensing.
Computational fluid dynamic simulations are much effective and cheaper when compared to the
experimental study. A modified multizone model (Arvelo et al., 2002) was used to analyze the suitable
placement of chemical and biological toxic sensors in a building. The contaminant flow time in a zone was not
considered since the model assumed instantaneous mixing in each zone. The multizone model was not able to
give clear and complete information about the sensor position. To obtain more accurate and detailed results
researchers (Zhenzhang liu, 2000) prefer CFD modeling. Researchers have also developed different search
strategies to localize the source of the leak (Mohamed S. Awadallai et al., 2012) .
CFD analysis of spherical gas sensor array ( Ishida et.al., 2003) was studied in a two dimensional flow
field with laminar main flow. But optimal sensor position was no analyzed. Later the optimal sensor
position for chemical and biological agent releases in buildings were studied (Zhai et al., 2003). Their study
revealed that CFD simulation can be used to find the sensor deployment location. Optimal sensor placement
during a chemical and biological contaminant threat in a city was studied (Obenschain et al., 2004) with CFD
modeling. The contaminant transport details were pre-computed, stored, and interpreted with a nomograph
technique. Their analysis depended on the assumed weather conditions. CFD studies also concentrated on
optimal sensor placement for hazardous material transports (Lhner and Camelli , 2005) around buildings.
Identification of contaminant sources in enclosed environments by inverse CFD modeling (Zhang et.al., 2006)
was done. CFD program were used (Zhang et.al., 2007) to monitor cabin air quality, infectious disease
transmission, and intentional airborne contaminant releases in commercial aircraft cabins. CFD model for

indoor plume propagation (Liu and Lu, 2008) was analyzed using Fluent software to predict a two
dimensional plane flow field in a building. CFD model was developed for search strategy to localize the
source of leak using robots (Mohamed et.al., 2012). Optimal sensor position on different surfaces like
spherical, cylindrical, cubical, and prism using CFD analysis (Shyla et al., 2013) for reducing accidents caused
by emission of toxic gas in industries.
Hydrogen cyanide gas in air at concentration over 5.6% is an explosive. It is listed among the chemical
warfare agents. It was used during the world war II in the German concentration camp mass killing. In this
paper, we study two dimensional flow field with laminar and turbulent flow at low cost to simulate flow of
hydrogen cyanide around circular gas sensors used for indoor plume tracing. CFD simulation is performed by
fixing sensors at different positions in different models in an indoor set up and the models are compared. The
information on the flow pattern can be used in identifying and fixing the optimal sensor position in an indoor
environment to sense efficiently.
The paper is organized as follows. The governing differential equations and boundary conditions are given
in the first part. The second part discusses the methodology . The third part explains the results of this study
in detail. The concluding remarks are presented in the last part.
2. Mathematical Formulation
A. Governing Differential Equation
The governing differential equation for a steady, incompressible flow is given by Navier-Stokes system of
equations namely the equation of continuity and the momentum equations.

.q 0
Equation of continuity:
x-momentum equation:

. u q

p
. u
x

(1)

(2)

y-momentum equation:

. v q

p
. v
y
(3)

q =u i + v j+w k q u i v j
is the velocity vector where u & v are the velocity components in the x &
y directions respectively, p is pressure, is density, and is coefficient of viscosity (M. Pontiggia et al., 2009;
H. Versteeg and W. Malalasekra, 2011).
B. Boundary Conditions:
The circular sensors are placed at different positions in different models in an indoor environment. When
airflows, it brings a gas cloud from the inlet which flows along the circular sensor before it is being carried
away into the wake. A two dimensional flow of hydrogen cyanide is simulated around circular sensors under
steady state conditions. The operating pressure is kept at 101325 pascals. Body forces are all ignored. The
inlet velocity of 0.01m/s and 0.5m/s is taken for laminar flow and turbulent flow respectively. The walls are

considered to be rigid. No slip boundary condition is assumed. The physical properties of hydrogen cyanide is
taken for analysis with density =1kg/m3 and coefficient of viscosity =1.72e-05 kg/m-s.

Fig.1a Grid of Model1

Fig.1b Grid of Model2 generated by Gambit Software.

Fig.1c Grid of Model3

Fig.1 (d). Grid of Model4

Fig.1 (e). Mesh generated using Gambit software

3. Methodology
The computational fluid dynamic model geometry is developed using the CFD software, Gambit as
presented in Fig.1a, Fig.1b, Fig.1c, Fig.1d and Fig.1e. The dimensions of the building section are taken as
100m and 50m in the x and y directions respectively with circle radius 1 m. Computational fluid dynamic
technique namely finite volume method is applied. It consists of 3 steps. In the first step, discretization of the
entire domain into finite number of control volumes is done. In the next step analysis is performed followed
by the post processing of the results.
A. Discretization:
The quadrilateral pave mesh with interval size 0.25 was generated for the entire domain under consideration
for all the models. The number of nodes and quadrilateral cells for each model is presented in Table 1. The
two dimensional mesh is exported to Fluent software for analysis.
Table 1. Discretization
No.
No. of
Minimum Maximu
of
Quadrilatera
Volume
m Volume
Node
l cells
e-002 (m3)
e-001 (m3)
s
1
82613
81976
1.543551 1.430841
2
82859
82210
1.269687 1.310677
3
81929
81292
1.711116 2.608564
3
4
81862
81225
1.810986 2.194254
The partial differential system of equations is discretized by upwind differencing scheme over each control
volume and is reduced to algebraic system of equations as follows:
Mode
l

uA e uA w vA n vA s 0
uA e u e uA w u w

p w pe V

x
vA n vn vA s vs p s pn Vv
y

(4)

(5)

V
The RHS represents the pressure gradient integrated over the control volume

. The above equations

represents discretized Navier Stokes equation along the x direction where

is the volume, A is the area, e
is the node to the east and w is the node to the west of of u-cell, n is the node to the north and s is the node to
the south of v-cell.
For laminar flow, the equation of continuity and momentum equations are solved. For turbulent flow, k-
model is used to indicate the effects of the turbulence. The k- model introduces two transport equations for
turbulent kinetic energy k and turbulent kinetic energy dissipation rate in addition to the equation of
continuity and momentum equations, given by following equations.

[( ) ]

( k ) +
k ui ) =
+ t
+ M k + M bY m
(
t
xi
xj
k xj

(6)

2
( k +C 3 M b)C 2 (7)
k
k

( ) +
ui ) =
+ t
+C 1
(
t
xi
xj
xj

[( ) ]

where ui is the velocity component along x direction, is the viscosity, t is the turbulent viscosity,

M k is t h

Mk is the shear stress-related turbulent kinetic energy production,

Mb

is the buoyancy-

related turbulent kinetic energy production, Ym is the compressibility related kinetic energy production.
C1=1.44; C2=1.92; C3=1.0; k=1, =1.3, and C=0.09 are empirical constants (M. Pontiggia et al., 2009).
Discretized equations are iteratively solved by segregated solver using Semi-Implicit Method for Pressure
Linked Equations known as SIMPLE algorithm in Fluent software where values u 0, v0, and p0 are initial guess
values. The flow equations are solved using guessed pressure field to obtain velocity components u 0, and v0.
The correction p is defined as the difference between the correct pressure field p and the guessed pressure field
p0 . The correction velocity fields are also similarly defined.
P=p0 + p ; u=u0 + u ;v=v0 + v
(8)
The iteration stops if the solution converges. If not, then p, u, and v are used as initial guess values in the next
iteration and the whole process is repeated till the solution converges (John F. Wendt, 2009). In the case of
problems involving complex geometries, the entire domain under consideration in physical space with
Oartesian coordinates (x,y) is transformed to computational space with curvilinear coordinates (, ) and then
solved. When the solution is obtained, it is transferred back to physical space (Joel Guerrero, 2012; Shyla
M.V., 2013).
In computational space, the governing differential equations in compact form become

e^i h^i e^v h^v

+
=
+

Where

1
e^i= ( x
e i+ y
hi )
J
1
h^i= ( x
ei + y hi)
J

(9)

1
e^v = ( x
e v + y
hv )
J
1
h^v = ( x
e v + y
hv ) (10)
J
^
(Q)
is the vector containing the primitive variables.
e^i & h^i are the vectors containing the inviscid fluxes in the and directions.
e v & h^v are the vectors containing the viscous fluxes in the & directions respectively.

[] [ ] [ ]

U
V
0
^ 1 u ; e^i= 1 uU + p x ; h^i = uV + p x ;
Q=
J
J
v
vU + p y
vV + p y
U=u x + v y ; V =u x +v y

[
[

0
1
e^v =
( . ) u + ( . ) u ;
J L
( . ) v +( . ) v
0
1
^
h v=
( . ) u +( . )u
J L
( . ) v +( . )v
xx =

2
2
( x u + x u ) ; yy= ( y v + y v ) ;
L
L

xy =

1
( u + u + v + v ) ; = (11)
L y y x x xy yx

B. Validation:
Grid validation is done. Differerent grids have been tried. Perfect mesh combination has been performed
to identify the flow pattern by varying the no. of nodes and shape of the mesh. The mass flow rate at the inlet
and outlet is measured. Conservation of mass is ensured. Convergence of the solution correct to three decimal
places is checked.
Table 2. Mass flow rate(kg/s)
Model
Inlet
1
0.61249
2
0.6125
3
0.6125
4
0.6125
C. Error Analysis:

Discretization error (d) and round off error(r) are the errors done by the computer during each iteration
F. Wendt, 2009) .
d = A S1; r = N- S1
A is the analytical solution of the partial differential equation.S1 is the exact solution of the difference
equation. N is the Numerical solution from a computer with finite accuracy. The solution is unstable if the r is
grow bigger during the progression of the solution from nth step to (n+1)th step. The solution is stable if
(John

ri n1
1
ri n
(12)
D. Limitation:
If the Space mesh size is reduced, then more amount of memory and time computation is required.
E. Future Scope:
This study can be extended to unsteady state with turbulent flow conditions. Single and multiple flow of
various toxic chemicals can be considered. Many other shapes of sensors and geometry of different indoor
environments can be studied for CFD analysis.
4. Analysis of Results
In this study, viscous flow of hydrogen cyanide on the circular sensors has been considered. The flow
pattern around the circular sensors placed at different locations are visualized for laminar flow conditions from
Fig.2a, Fig.2b, Fig.2c, Fig.2d, Fig.2e, Fig.2f, Fig.2g, Fig.2h, and Fig.2i. The turbulent flow pattern around the
circular sensors in different models can be viewed from Fig.4a, Fig.4b, Fig.4c, and Fig.4d. The velocity on
and around the circular sensors can be visualized with the help of different contours starting from blue to red.
Red colour indicates very high velocity and blue colour for very low velocity . The velocity values
corresponding to different contours are shown in the figures. Red contours are observed on the region
perpendicular to the circular sensors which indicates very high velocities ( Ishida et.al., 2003). This indicates
that the contaminants are not captured by the sensors at the region perpendicular to the sensors and the gas
cloud keeps moving with high velocity. Blue contours observed at the upstream and downstream sides of the
sensors is an indication of low velocity. Stagnation points are identified in the region of low velocity and
hence it is an implication of sensing. The contaminants are captured by the sensors at these stagnation points.
Comparing the velocity magnitudes of low velocity region in various models, a variation in velocity magnitude
is observed in model2, model3 and model4. But the magnitude of velocity around the three sensors in model 1
remains the same. This variation reveals the fact that the flow is disturbed by the placement of sensors in all
models except model1.
For model1, the velocity magnitude corresponding to the green contour lies between 5.40e-03m/s and 6.07e03m/s in the fore section of the sensor, the velocity magnitude in laminar flow corresponding to the blue
contour lies between 1.35e-03m/s and 2.02e-03m/s in the aft section of the sensor, and the velocity magnitude
corresponding to the red contour lies between 1.15e-02m/s and 1.21e-02m/s in the perpendicular section of the
sensor. Similarly for turbulent flow pattern in model1, the velocity magnitude corresponding to the green
contour lies between 2.02e-01m/s and 2.35e-01m/s in the fore section of the sensor, the velocity magnitude in
laminar flow corresponding to the blue contour lies between 3.36e-02m/s and 6.73e-02m/s in the aft section of
the sensor, and the velocity magnitude corresponding to the red contour lies between 5.72e-01m/s and
6.73e-02m/s in the perpendicular section of the sensor. These values remain the same for all the 3 sensors
used in model1. It is important to place the sensors in appropriate locations such that the flow remains
undisturbed. Hence the placement of sensors given in model1 is considered as as an optimal sensor position.
When the flow is undisturbed, the sensing efficiency increases.
Pressure distribution at different points on and around the circular sensors are presented in Fig.6a, Fig.6b
and Fig.6c. High pressure region is an implication of sensing. The high pressure value in model1 for turbulent

flow is found to lie between 8.50e-02pascals and 1.07e-01pascals and the low pressure lies between-2.07e-01
and -1.85e-01.
Streamline pattern given in Fig.5a, Fig.5b, Fig.5c, and Fig.5d, gives the direction of flow of fluid particles.
Small length of the vector indicates low velocity. Convergence of the solution correct to 3 decimal places are
ensured as given in Fig.3a and Fig. 3b. The solution converges at 264 th iteration for model1, 301st iteration for
model2, 741st iteration for model3, and 265 th iteration for model4 for laminar flow and the solution converges
at 272nd iteration for model1, 266th iteration for model2, 331 st iteration for model3, and 236 th iteration for
model4 for turbulent flow conditions. The wall shear stress for laminar flow around circular sensors is
calculated as seen in Fig.7a, Fig.7b, Fig.7c and Fig.7d.

Fig.2 (a). Laminar flow pattern around circular sensors in Model1

Fig.2 (b). Velocity Magnitude plot for laminar flow in Model1

Fig.2 (c). Laminar flow pattern around circular sensors in Model2

Fig.2 (d). Velocity Magnitude plot for laminar flow in Model2

Fig.2 (e). Laminar flow pattern around circular sensors in Model3

Fig.2 (f). Velocity Magnitude plot for laminar flow in Model3

Fig.2 (g). Laminar flow pattern around circular sensors in Model4

Fig.2 (h). Velocity Magnitude plot for laminar flow in Model3

Fig.2 (i). Contours of Velocity Magnitude for laminar flow in Model1

Fig.3 (a). Velocity iteration plot for laminar flow around circular sensor in Model1

Fig.3 (b). Velocity iteration plot for turbulent flow around circular sensor in Model1

Fig.4 (a). Turbulent flow pattern around circular sensors in Model1

Fig.4 (b). Turbulent flow pattern around circular sensors in Model2

Fig.4 (c). Turbulent flow pattern around circular sensors in Model3

Fig.4 (d). Turbulent flow pattern around circular sensors in Model4

Fig.5 (a). Streamline pattern for laminar flow around circular sensor in Model1

Fig.5 (b). Streamline pattern for laminar flow around circular sensors in Model2

Fig.5 (c). Streamline pattern for laminar flow around circular sensors in Model3

Fig.5 (d). Streamline pattern for laminar flow around circular sensors in Model4

Fig.6 (a). Pressure distribution for laminar flow around circular sernsors in Model1

Fig.6 (b). Pressure distribution for laminar flow around circular sernsors in Model2

Fig.6 (c). Pressure distribution for laminar flow around circular sernsors in Model4

Fig.7 (a). Wall Shear Stress plot for laminar flow around circular sensors in Model1

Fig.7 (b). Wall Shear Stress plot for laminar flow around circular sensors in Model2

Fig.7 (c). Wall Shear Stress plot for laminar flow around circular sensors in Model3

Fig.7 (d). Wall Shear Stress plot for laminar flow around circular sensors in Model4

5. Conclusion
A two dimensional, viscous, incompressible flow field around circular sensors has been analyzed with
laminar and turbulent flow pattern under steady state conditions. The flow pattern of hydrogen-cyanide around
the sensor has a great impact on the sensitivity of sensors. The placement of circular sensors in Model1
shows good response in terms of sensing when compared to other models. It is because the flow is not
disturbed due to the arrangement of sensors in model1. Hence it increases the efficiency of sensing and
thereby give an early warning about the contaminants before it reaches the occupants. This information has
been obtained based on the velocity, pressure and streamline pattern of hydrogen-cyanide. Hence the results of
this study can be considered in fixing the optimal sensor position to sense effectively and get early warning
about the contaminants.

References

1. Arvelo, J., Brandt, A., Roger, R.P., Saksena, A., 2002. An enhancement multizone model and its
application to optimum placement of CBW sensors. ASHRAE Transactions , 108(2):818-825.
2. Ishida, H., Tsuruno, M., Yoshikawa, K., Moriizumi, T., 2003. Spherical gas sensor array for three
dimensional plume tracking. 11th International Conference on Advanced Robotics Coimbra, Portugal,
p.369-374.
3. Joel Guerrero, 2012. Numerical Simulation of the unsteady Aerodynamics of flapping flight, Thesis
chapter3, pp, 34-51.
4. John F. Wendt Editor,(2009), Computational Fluid
Dynamics An Introduction, with contributions by
John D. Anderson Jr., Joris Degroote, Gerard Degrez, Erik Dick, Roger Grundmann and Jan Vierendeels,
Third Edition, ISBN: 978-3-540-85055-7.
5. Liu, Z. and Lu (2008), Odor source localization in complicated indoor environments, 10th Int. Conf. on
Control, Automation, Robotics and Vision, December 17-20, pp. 371-377.
6. Lhner, R., and F. Camelli,(2005), Optimal placement of sensors for contaminant detection based on
detailed 3D CFD simulations, Engineering Computations, vol.22, No.3, pp. 260-273.
7. Mohamed S. Awadallai, Tien-Fu Lui, Zhao F. Tiani and Bassam Dalli P , (2012), CFD Modeling of 3D
Indoor Gas Contaminant Plumes for Testing Search Algorithms of Mobile Robot , Ninth International
Conference on CFD in the Minerals and Process Industries, CSIRO, Melbourne, Australia pp. 17.

8. Obenschain, K., J. Boris, and G. Patnaik (2004), Using CT-ANALYSTTM to optimize sensor placement,
Proceedings of SPIE, Orlando, Florida, 5416, pp. 14-20.
9. M. Pontiggia, M. Derudi, V. Busini and R. Rota (2009), Hazardous gas dispersion: A CFD model
accounting for atmospheric stability classes, Journal of Hazardous Materials, Volume 171, Issues 1-3, pp.
739-747
10. Shyla M.V., Naidu K.B., Vasanth Kumar G. (2013), Optimization of sensor position on Different surfaces
using CFD Analysis for reducing accidents caused by emission of toxic gas in Industries, in IEEE
conference International conference on Advance Computing-2013, ICOAC-13, conducted by Anna
University, pp. 1-8.
11. H. Versteeg and W. Malalasekra,(2011), An introduction to
Computational Fluid Dynamics, The
Finite Volume Method, second edition, ISBN 978-81-317-2048-6.
12. Zhai, Z., J. Srebric, and Q. Chen. (2003), Application of CFD to predict and control chemical and
biological agent dispersion in buildings International Journal of Ventilation , vol.2, No. 3, pp. 251-264.
13. Zhang, T., and Q. Chen (2006), Identification of contaminant sources in enclosed environments by inverse
CFD modeling, Indoor Air.
14. Zhang, T., and Q. Chen (2007), Novel air distribution systems for commercial aircraft cabins, Building and
Environment, vol.42, No.4, pp. 1675-84.
15. Zhenzhang liu , (2000) Odour source Localization using multiple plume tracing mobile robots, thesis
submitted by, University of Adelaide, Australia, pp. 1-33.
16. Shyla M.V., Naidu K.B., A Computational Fluid Dynamic Model of Human Sniffing, International
Journal of Mathematical Science and Engineering, ISBN 0976-5166, vol.7, no.1, pp. 1243-1247, 2013.