5
the coarse mesh configuration deviates from the others.
Consequently, the decision was made to adopt the medium
mesh size for conducting CFD modeling of airflow in the
study mine.
To validate the established CFD model, a compre-
hensive analysis was performed by comparing it with data
gathered from a mine ventilation survey. Figure 5 illustrates
the correlation between the mass-weighted average velocity
magnitude as calculated by the CFD model and the actual
air velocity measured during the first survey at 33 different
locations. The analysis revealed a good correlation, with an
R-square value of 0.83, affirming the adequacy of the CFD
model’s results in comparison to field measurements.
Figure 3. Velocity profiles derived from the CFD model
at various stations located at z =1.67 m, corresponding to
entry 93
Figure 4. Velocity profiles derived from the CFD model
at various stations located at z =4.9 m, corresponding to
entry t93
the coarse mesh configuration deviates from the others.
Consequently, the decision was made to adopt the medium
mesh size for conducting CFD modeling of airflow in the
study mine.
To validate the established CFD model, a compre-
hensive analysis was performed by comparing it with data
gathered from a mine ventilation survey. Figure 5 illustrates
the correlation between the mass-weighted average velocity
magnitude as calculated by the CFD model and the actual
air velocity measured during the first survey at 33 different
locations. The analysis revealed a good correlation, with an
R-square value of 0.83, affirming the adequacy of the CFD
model’s results in comparison to field measurements.
Figure 3. Velocity profiles derived from the CFD model
at various stations located at z =1.67 m, corresponding to
entry 93
Figure 4. Velocity profiles derived from the CFD model
at various stations located at z =4.9 m, corresponding to
entry t93