Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Technical Reference
Software Version 14
Rev. 03052015
2015 Mentor Graphics Corporation
All rights reserved.
This document contains information that is proprietary to Mentor Graphics Corporation. The original recipient of this
document may duplicate this document in whole or in part for internal business purposes only, provided that this entire
notice appears in all copies. In duplicating any part of this document, the recipient agrees to make every reasonable effort
to prevent the unauthorized use and distribution of the proprietary information.
This document is for information and instruction purposes. Mentor Graphics reserves the right to
make changes in specifications and other information contained in this publication without prior
notice, and the reader should, in all cases, consult Mentor Graphics to determine whether any
changes have been made.
The terms and conditions governing the sale and licensing of Mentor Graphics products are set
forth in written agreements between Mentor Graphics and its customers. No representation or
other affirmation of fact contained in this publication shall be deemed to be a warranty or give
rise to any liability of Mentor Graphics whatsoever.
MENTOR GRAPHICS MAKES NO WARRANTY OF ANY KIND WITH REGARD TO THIS
MATERIAL INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
MENTOR GRAPHICS SHALL NOT BE LIABLE FOR ANY INCIDENTAL, INDIRECT, SPECIAL,
OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES WHATSOEVER (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO LOST
PROFITS) ARISING OUT OF OR RELATED TO THIS PUBLICATION OR THE INFORMATION
CONTAINED IN IT, EVEN IF MENTOR GRAPHICS CORPORATION HAS BEEN ADVISED OF
THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.
RESTRICTED RIGHTS LEGEND 03/97
U.S. Government Restricted Rights. The SOFTWARE and documentation have been developed
entirely at private expense and are commercial computer software provided with restricted
rights. Use, duplication or disclosure by the U.S. Government or a U.S. Government
subcontractor is subject to the restrictions set forth in the license agreement provided with the
software pursuant to DFARS 227.7202-3(a) or as set forth in subparagraph (c)(1) and (2) of the
Commercial Computer Software - Restricted Rights clause at FAR 52.227-19, as applicable.
Contractor/manufacturer is:
Mentor Graphics Corporation
8005 S.W. Boeckman Road, Wilsonville, Oregon 97070-7777.
Telephone: 503.685.7000
Toll-Free Telephone: 800.592.2210
Website: www.mentor.com
SupportNet: supportnet.mentor.com/
Send Feedback on Documentation: supportnet.mentor.com/doc_feedback_form
TRADEMARKS: The trademarks, logos and service marks ("Marks") used herein are the
property of Mentor Graphics Corporation or other third parties. No one is permitted to use these
Marks without the prior written consent of Mentor Graphics or the respective third-party owner.
The use herein of a third-party Mark is not an attempt to indicate Mentor Graphics as a source of
a product, but is intended to indicate a product from, or associated with, a particular third party.
A current list of Mentor Graphics trademarks may be viewed at: www.mentor.com/trademarks.
Contents
General Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The Discrete Ordinates Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Monte Carlo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
General Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The Monte Carlo Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Absorption and Transmission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Reflection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Radiation Spectrum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Radiative Surface and Radiation Source Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Radiative Surfaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Radiation Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Simultaneous Use of Radiative Surface and Radiation Source Conditions . . . . . .
Viewing Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Combustion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Limited Combustion Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Rotation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Global Rotating Reference Frame . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Local rotating region(s) (Averaging) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Local rotating region(s) (Sliding) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Flows in Porous Media . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
General Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Perforated Plates in Boundary Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Two-phase (fluid + particles) Flows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
HVAC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Tracer Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Local Mean Age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Comfort Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Boundary Conditions and Engineering Devices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Internal Flow Boundary Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
External Flow Boundary Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Wall Boundary Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Periodic Boundary Conditions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Heat Pipes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Thermal Joints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Two-resistor Components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Printed Circuit Boards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Light Emitting Diodes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Thermoelectric Coolers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
ii
1-33
1-34
1-35
1-35
1-35
1-36
1-38
1-41
1-43
1-43
1-44
1-45
1-45
1-46
1-47
1-49
1-49
1-49
1-50
1-52
1-52
1-54
1-55
1-57
1-57
1-59
1-59
1-64
1-64
1-65
1-65
1-66
1-66
1-67
1-67
1-68
1-70
1-71
1-74
1-75
1-77
1-78
1-79
1-79
1-80
1-80
1-80
1-80
1-81
iii
iv
2-119
2-123
2-127
2-131
2-135
2-137
2-139
1
Technical Reference
1-1
Various types of thermal and electrical3 conductivity in solid medium, i.e. isotropic,
unidirectional, biaxial/axisymmetrical, and orthotropic
Fluid flows and heat transfer in porous media
Flows of non-Newtonian liquids
Flows of compressible liquids
Real gases
Cavitation in incompressible water flows
Equilibrium volume condensation of water from steam and its influence on fluid
flow and heat transfer
Relative humidity in gases and mixtures of gases
Combustion in gas-phase mixtures4
Two-phase (fluid + particles) flows
Periodic boundary conditions.
Governing Equations
The Navier-Stokes Equations for Laminar and Turbulent
Fluid Flows
FloEFD solves the Navier-Stokes equations, which are formulations of mass, momentum
and energy conservation laws for fluid flows. The equations are supplemented by fluid
state equations defining the nature of the fluid, and by empirical dependencies of fluid
density, viscosity and thermal conductivity on temperature. Inelastic non-Newtonian
fluids are considered by introducing a dependency of their dynamic viscosity on flow
shear rate and temperature, and compressible liquids are considered by introducing a
dependency of their density on pressure. A particular problem is finally specified by the
definition of its geometry, boundary and initial conditions.
FloEFD is capable of predicting both laminar and turbulent flows. Laminar flows occur
at low values of the Reynolds number, which is defined as the product of representative
scales of velocity and length divided by the kinematic viscosity. When the Reynolds
number exceeds a certain critical value, the flow becomes turbulent, i.e. flow parameters
start to fluctuate randomly.
Most of the fluid flows encountered in engineering practice are turbulent, so FloEFD was
mainly developed to simulate and study turbulent flows. To predict turbulent flows, the
Favre-averaged Navier-Stokes equations are used, where time-averaged effects of the
flow turbulence on the flow parameters are considered, whereas the other, i.e. large-scale,
time-dependent phenomena are taken into account directly. Through this procedure, extra
terms known as the Reynolds stresses appear in the equations for which additional
information must be provided. To close this system of equations, FloEFD employs
transport equations for the turbulent kinetic energy and its dissipation rate, the so-called
k- model.
FloEFD employs one system of equations to describe both laminar and turbulent flows.
Moreover, transition from a laminar to turbulent state and/or vice versa is possible.
Flows in models with moving walls (without changing the model geometry) are computed
by specifying the corresponding boundary conditions. Flows in models with rotating parts
are computed in coordinate systems attached to the models rotating parts, i.e. rotating with
them, so the models' stationary parts must be axisymmetric with respect to the rotation
axis.
1-3
Governing Equations
The conservation laws for mass, angular momentum and energy in the Cartesian
coordinate system rotating with angular velocity about an axis passing through the
coordinate system's origin can be written in the conservation form as follows:
+
(ui ) = 0
t
xi
(1.2.1)
ui
+
( ui u j ) +
=
( ij ijR ) Si i 1,2,3
t
x j
xi x j
(1.2.2)
u
H ui H
p
=
u j ( ij ijR ) qi ijR i Si ui QH ,
xi
xi
t
x j
t
(1.2.3)
H h
u2
,
2
(Siporous),
p
u i E
E
= u ( R ) q R u i S u Q , (1.2.4)
j
ij
ij
i
ij
i i
H
x j
xi
x i
t
E e
u2
,
2
ui u j 2 uk
x j xi 3 ij xk
ij
1-4
(1.2.5)
Following Boussinesq assumption, the Reynolds-stress tensor has the following form:
ui u j 2 uk 2
k ij
x j xi 3 ij xk 3
ijR t
Here
(1.2.6)
i j is the Kronecker delta function (it is equal to unity when i = j, and zero
otherwise),
properties, namely, the turbulent kinetic energy k and the turbulent dissipation ,
t f
Here
C k 2
(1.2.7)
20,5 ,
2
f 1 exp 0.0165R y 1
RT
(1.2.8)
2
where R k , R k y
T
y
and y is the distance from the wall. This function allows us to take into account
laminar-turbulent transition.
Two additional transport equations are used to describe the turbulent kinetic energy and
dissipation,
u i k t k
k xi
t
xi
xi
Sk ,
u i t
xi
t
xi
xi
S ,
(1.2.9)
(1.2.10)
1-5
Governing Equations
Sk ijR
S C1
Here
ui
t PB
x j
f1 ijR
(1.2.11)
2 .
ui
t CB PB C 2 f 2
k
x j
(1.2.12)
P B represents the turbulent generation due to buoyancy forces and can be written as
PB
where
gi 1
B xi
(1.2.13)
0.05 ,
f 2 1 exp RT2
f1 1
f
The constants
P B 0 , and 0 otherwise;
(1.2.14)
k = 1
(1.2.15)
Where Lewis number Le=1 the diffusive heat flux is defined as:
q i
t
c
Pr
h , i = 1, 2, 3.
xi
(1.2.16)
Here the constant c = 0.9, Pr is the Prandtl number, and h is the thermal enthalpy.
These equations describe both laminar and turbulent flows. Moreover, transitions from
one case to another and back are possible. The parameters k and
laminar flows.
1-6
y m
t
xi
xi
xi
Here Dmn,
(1.2.17)
(1.2.18)
The following obvious algebraic relation between species concentrations takes place:
ym 1 .
(1.2.19)
1-7
f P,T,, y ,
(1.3.1)
where y =(y1, ... yM) is the concentration vector of the fluid mixture components.
Excluding special cases (see below subsections concerning Real Gases, Water vapor
condensation and relative humidity), gases are considered ideal, i.e. having the state
equation of the form
P ,
RT
(1.3.2)
where R is the gas constant which is equal to the universal gas constant Runiv divided by
the fluid molecular mass M, or, for the mixtures of ideal gases,
R Runiv
m
ym ,
Mm
(1.3.3)
M m is the
Specific heat at constant pressure, as well as the thermophysical properties of the gases,
i.e. viscosity and thermal conductivity, are specified as functions of temperature. In
addition, proceeding from Eq. (1.3.2), each of such gases has constant specific heat ratio
Cp/Cv.
Excluding special cases (see below subsections Compressible Liquids, Non-Newtonian
Liquids), liquids are considered incompressible, i.e. the density of an individual liquid
depends only on temperature:
f T
(1.3.4)
y
m
m m
1
(1.3.5)
In FloEFD the specific volume, i.e. reciprocal to the density, is used in defining the state
of the liquid.
1-8
The specific heat and the thermophysical properties of the liquid (i.e. viscosity and
thermal conductivity), are specified as functions of temperature.
Real Gases
The state equation of ideal gas (1.3.2) become inaccurate at high pressures or in close
vicinity of the gas-liquid phase transition curve. Taking this into account, a real gas state
equation together with the related equations for thermodynamical and thermophysical
properties should be employed in such conditions. At present, this option may be used
only for a single gas, probably mixed with ideal gases.
In case of user-defined real gas, FloEFD uses a custom modification of the
Redlich-Kwong equation, that may be expressed in dimensionless form as follows:
1
aF
Pr Tr
c
)
r
r
(1.3.6)
where Pr = P/Pc, Tr = T/Tc, r = VrZc, Vr=V/Vc, F=Tr-1.5, Pc, Tc, and Vc are the
user-specified critical parameters of the gas, i.e. pressure, temperature, and specific
volume at the critical point, and Zc is the gas compressibility factor that also defines the a,
b, and c constants.
A particular case of equation (1.3.6) with Zc=1/3 (which in turn means that b=c) is the
original Redlich equation as given in Ref. 1.
Alternatively, one of the modifications (Ref. 1) taking into account the dependence of F
on temperature and the Pitzer acentricity factor may be used:
the Wilson modification
(1.3.7)
F 1 0 .9 1.21 Tr1.5 1
(1.3.8)
1
1 0.48 1.574 0.176 2 1 Tr0.5
Tr
(1.3.9)
The specific heat of real gas at constant pressure (Cp ) is determined as the combination of
the user-specified temperature-dependent "ideal gas" specific heat (Cpideal) and the
automatically calculated correction. The former is a polynomial with user-specified order
and coefficients. The specific heat at constant volume (Cv ) is calculated from Cp by
means of the state equation.
Likewise, the thermophysical properties are defined as a sum of user-specified "basic"
temperature dependency (which describes the corresponding property in extreme case of
low pressure) and the pressure-dependent correction which is calculated automatically.
FloEFD FE14 Technical Reference
1-9
The basic dependency for dynamic viscosity of the gas is specified in a power-law form:
= a T n . The same property for liquid is specified either in a similar power-law form
a 1 T 1 n
. As for the correction, it is given
= a T n or in an exponential form: = 10
Pr Tr
r b r ( r c )
(1.3.10)
where Pr = P/Pc, Tr = T/Tc, r = VPc/(RTc) are the reduced pressure, temperature, and
specific volume respectively, V is the molar volume, Pc and Tc are the critical pressure and
temperature respectively, and R is the gas constant.
1-10
When the calculated (p, T) point drops out of the region bounded by the temperature and
pressure limits (zones 1 - 8 on Fig.1.3.1) or gets beyond the gas-liquid phase transition
curve (zone 9 on Fig.1.3.1), the corresponding warnings are issued and properties of the
real gas are extrapolated linearly.
Supercritical
Liquid
Vapor
Fig.1.3.1
If a real gas mixes with ideal gases (at present, mixtures of multiple real gases are not
considered), properties of this mixture are determined as an average weighted with mass
or volume fractions:
N
v yi vi
(1.3.11)
i 1
where is the mixture property (i.e., Cp, , or ), N is the total number of the mixture
gases (one of which is real and others are ideal), yi is the mass fraction (when calculating
Cp) or the volume fraction (when calculating and ) of the i-th gas in the mixture.
The real gas model has the following limitations and assumptions:
1-11
Tmin for user-defined real gas should be set at least 5...10 K higher than the triple
point of the substance in question.
Hypersonic flows
This feature is available for the Advanced module users only.
If a hypersonic flow of air is considered (at Mach numbers of 5 < M < 30, air density
> 0.001 kg/m3, i.e. the flight altitude of H < 50 km), the effects of high-temperature air
dissociation and ionization on the air properties are accounted in accordance with the
equilibrium model.
Compressible Liquids
Compressible liquids whose density depends on pressure and temperature can be
considered within the following approximations:
obeying the logarithmic law:
BP
,
B P0
0 / 1 C ln
(1.3.12)
where o is the liquid's density under the reference pressure Po, C, B are
PB
0
P0 B
(1.3.13)
0 e a P P
(1.3.14)
1-12
Non-Newtonian Liquids
FloEFD is capable of computing laminar flows of inelastic non-Newtonian liquids. In this
case the viscous shear stress tensor is defined, instead of Eq. (1.2.5), as
u i
ij &
x j
u j
,
xi
(1.3.15)
& d ij 2 d ii d jj , d ij
ui u j
x j xi
(1.3.16)
and for specifying a viscosity function & the following five models of inelastic
non-Newtonian viscous liquids are available in FloEFD:
Herschel-Bulkley model:
& K & n1
o ,
&
(1.3.17)
where K is the liquid's consistency coefficient, n is the liquid's power law index, and
& K & n1
(1.3.18)
in contrast to the Herschel-Bulkley model's special case, the values are restricted:
min max;
1-13
Carreau model:
o 1 Kt & 2
n1 / 2
(1.3.19)
where:
is the liquid's dynamic viscosity at infinite shear rate, i.e., the minimum
dynamic viscosity;
is the liquid's dynamic viscosity at zero shear rate, i.e., the maximum
dynamic viscosity;
This model is a smooth version of the power law model with the restrictions.
In all these three models described above, all parameters with the exception of the
dimensionless power law index can be temperature-dependent.
Cross-WLF model (Cross-William-Landel-Ferry) is another modification of the
power-law model for shear-thinning liquids. It takes into account the effects of the
temperature T:
T , &, p
0 T , p
T , p &
1 0
1 n
(1.3.20)
where:
0 T D 1 e
A1 T T*
A 2 T T*
1-14
(1.3.21)
The six coefficients Ci can be found by taking the two input viscosity sets
&i , i
determined automatically as the point where & reaches its maximum value.
The minimum shear rate can also be manually specified by user. The maximum
shear rate, after which the viscosity is considered constant, can be specified by user
also.
The Viscosity table model defines the liquid's viscosity
&, T by linear
&
Coefficients of the 2nd and 3rd order polynomials are automatically determined with
the least squares method.
The 3rd order polynomials are preferable for shear-thickening liquids which viscosity
rises intensively when the shear rate approaches zero.
In addition, the user can specify the minimum and maximum shear rates, outside of
which the viscosity is constant. The minimum shear rate for 2nd order polynomials
can be determined automatically as the point where
&
1-15
Film Condensation
This feature is available for the Advanced and LED modules users only.
In addition to an equilibrium volume condensation of water vapor, FloEFD can predict
film condensation on the cooled surfaces or evaporation of the condensate film by using
the Fluid film option. The film condensation model also allows you to consider heat
transfer along the condensate film, ice forming and melting.
The model has the following limitations and assumptions:
During condensation, the liquid (water) condensate wets the surface and a
continuous film is collect, referred to as filmwise mode of condensation.
The condensate film is collect on the wettable surface only.
The employed model allows to simulate the film movement.
The mass fraction of the condensable vapor in the gas-vapor mixture is much less
than the mass fraction of the non-condensable gas.
The employed model is available for ideal gas flows only. Ideal gases or their
mixture must be selected as a Project fluid.
The model is available for an equilibrium volume condensation analyses only (the
Humidity option must be enable).
The model is available for transient analyses only (the Time-dependent option
must be enable).
Film thickness is much less than computational mesh cells size.
Film is transparent for radiation (no absorption, dispersion and reflection of the light
at the film).
The surface tension effects and the influence of particles are not considered.
1-16
r l 2 r
r
g
,
U
3 l
2 l
(1.3.22)
r
r
where U is the film velocity averaged over the film thickness, f is the shear stress at the
r
film surface, g is the total acceleration vector of a field of mass forces projected onto the
wall (now this vector includes gravitational or centrifugal components only),
is
the film thickness calculated using known values on the previous time-level, l , l and
m are the liquid density, viscosity and the film mass per unit area, respectively.
The equation that describes the mass transfer in liquid film can be written as:
r
m
U m m& Y
t
(1.3.23)
The film mass flux (i.e. the condensate mass passing locally through a unit area of the
surface per unit time) is defined as follows:
m& Y
Y
1 Yw
(Yw Y f )
(1.3.24)
where Yf is the mass fraction of the condensate in the fluid, Yw is the mass fraction of the
condensate at the wall that assumed to be equilibrium and can be expressed as:
Yw
peq Twf M Y
f RTwf
(1.3.25)
is the mass transfer coefficient, calculated using the boundary layer model.
The conservation law for energy can be written as follows:
h m
Uh m q f qs ,
t
(1.3.26)
1-17
where qf is the heat flux from the film to the fluid (including the latent heat flux), qs is the
heat flux from the wall to the film and h is the enthalpy averaged over the film
thickness. The heat fluxes can be obtained as a result of the conjugate heat transfer
equations solving. Also the balanced equations are used to close the system of equations
mentioned above.
Cavitation
A liquid subjected to a low pressure below some threshold ruptures and forms vaporous
cavities. More specifically, when the local pressure at a point in the liquid falls below the
saturation pressure at the local temperature, the liquid undergoes phase transition and form
cavities filled with the vapor with an addition of gas that has been dissolved in the liquid.
This phenomenon is called cavitation.
If the characteristic time-scale of the vapor formation process is much less than the
characteristic time-scale of the liquid flow, the cavitation process occurs in conditions
close to thermodynamic equilibrium. Therefore, the equilibrium approach can be used to
simulate the liquid-vapor phase transition.
The following models of cavitation are available in FloEFD:
Equilibrium cavitation model (for pre-defined water only):
This model is based on a homogeneous equilibrium model of cavitation, which
provides a simple technique for analyzing two-phase flows, and is available for
pre-defined water only. It has the capability to account the thermal effects (for
example, localized boiling of water due to intense heating).
Isothermal cavitation model (for user-defined liquids only):
This model is based on the approach considering isothermal, two-phase flows.
1
,
v
v yg
RunivT
R Tz (T , P)
(1 yg yv )vl (T , P) yv univ v
P g
Pv
(1.3.27)
where v is the specific volume of the gas-liquid mixture, vl is the specific volume of
liquid, zv (T,P) is the vapor compressibility ratio, Runiv is the universal gas constant, P
is the local static pressure, T is the local temperature, yv is the mass fraction of vapor, v
is the molar mass of vapor, yg is the mass fraction of the non-condensable gas; g is the
molar mass of the non-condensable gas. The properties of the dissolved non-condensable
gas are set to be equal to those of air. By default, the mass fraction of non-condensable gas
is set to 10-4. This is a typical model value appropriated in most cases but it can be
modified by the user in the range of 10-310-5.
The mass fraction of vapor yv is computed numerically from the following non-linear
equation for the full enthalpy gas-liquid mixture:
2
I v 5
H yg hg (T, P) (1 yg yv )hl (T, P) yv hv (T, P) C k
2
2
(1.3.28)
where temperature of the mixture T is a function of pressure P and yv. Here hg, hl, hv are
the enthalpies of non-condensable gas, liquid and vapor, respectively, k is the turbulent
energy,
1-19
Ideal gas
PEV
PEL
Pressure
P PE T0 g
,
Runiv T0
yg
PEV P PEL
(1.3.29)
where Runiv is the universal gas constant, P is the local static pressure, T0 is the local
L
temperature, PE is the saturation pressure of liquid at T0, PE is the local static pressure
V
at which the vapor appears, PE is the local static pressure at which the liquid turns into
the vapor completely, yg is the mass fraction of the non-condensable gas; g is the molar
mass of the non-condensable gas.
1-20
When the pressure is below PE , a liquid disappears from the mixture and the fluid is
treated as an ideal gas with the molar mass 0. In this case the density of the gas mixture
is calculated as:
yg 1 yg
Runiv T0 g
0
P
(1.3.30)
P PEV
L
When the pressure is above the saturation pressure PE , the fluid density equals the
compressible liquid density:
P PEL
,
a2
L
E
where
P PEL
(1.3.31)
EL is the liquid density at the saturation pressure PEL , a is the sonic velocity.
In the Isothermal Cavitation Model, the mass fraction of the dissolved (noncondensable)
gas (yg) is a variable value. The four gases can be used as a dissolved gas: Air, Carbon
dioxide, Helium and Methane, in the Equilibrium Cavitation Model Air is used as a
dissolved gas. By default, the mass fraction of the dissolved gas is set to 10-4. This is a
typical value under normal conditions and appropriate in most cases but it can be modified
by the user in the range of 10-2...10-6.
The following additional assumptions and limitations are made in this model:
The process temperature is constant and the thermal effects are not considered.
In the Isothermal Cavitation Model, cavitation is currently available only for the
user-defined liquids.
This model requires a minimal number of setting fluid parameters, such as density, molar
mass, saturation pressure, and dynamic viscosity at the local temperature T0. The required
data are available in the literature for the most industrial liquids, such as gasolines, diesel
fuel, mineral and synthetic oils.
1-21
t xi
T
i
QH ,
x
(1.4.1)
where e is the specific internal energy, e = cT, c is specific heat, QH is specific heat
release (or absorption) per unit volume, and i are th1e eigenvalues of the thermal
conductivity tensor. It is supposed that the heat conductivity tensor is diagonal in the
considered coordinate system. For isotropic medium 1 = 2 = 3 = In presence of
electric current, QH may include the specific Joule heat release QJ. For isotropic materials
it is defined as QJ = rj2, where r is the electrical resistivity and j is the electric current
density (see "Joule Heating by Electric Current in Solids" on page 4-23).
If a solid consists of several solids attached to each other, then the thermal contact
resistances between them (on their contact surfaces), specified in the Engineering database
in the form of contact conductance (as m2K/W), can be taken into account when
calculating the heat conduction in solids. As a result, a solid temperature step appears on
the contact surfaces. In the same manner, i.e. as a thermal contact resistance, a very thin
layer of another material between solids or on a solid in contact with fluid can be taken
into account when calculating the heat conduction in solids, but it is specified by the
material of this layer (its thermal conductivity taken from the Engineering database) and
thickness. If the contact electric resistance is imposed between materials, the
corresponding Joule heat is released at the contact surface (see "Joule Heating by
Electric Current in Solids" on page 4-23). The surface heat source (sink) due to Peltier
effect may also be considered (see "Thermoelectric Coolers" on page 11-71).
The energy exchange between the fluid and solid media is calculated via the heat flux in
the direction normal to the solid/fluid interface taking into account the solid surface
temperature and the fluid boundary layer characteristics, if necessary.
If a solid medium is porous with a fluid flowing through it, then a conjugate heat transfer
problem in this porous-solid/fluid medium can be solved also in the manner described
below (see "Flows in Porous Media" on page 8-52).
1-22
(1.4.2)
where r is the solids' electrical resistivity [m] (it can be temperature-dependent) and i is
the electric current density [A/m2].
The electric current density vector
1 1 1
,
i
,
,
r
x
r
x
r
x
11
1
22
2
33
3
(1.4.3)
is determined via the electric potential [V]. To obtain the electric potential , FloEFD
utilizes the steady-state Laplace equation
x i
rii x i
(1.4.4)
Here rii is the temperature-dependent electrical resistivity in the i-th coordinate direction.
Transient electric problems with boundary conditions depending on time are considered as
quasi-steady-state. In this case the steady-state problem for potential is solved at each time
step, not taking into account transient electrical processes in solids.
The Laplace equation is solved numerically in the computational subdomain (it may be a
part of the overall computational domain) of electroconductive materials. This
computational subdomain automatically excludes dielectric solids and fluid areas inside.
The total electric current in normal direction over a surface In [A] or electric potential
[V] may be specified by user as boundary conditions for the problem. These conditions
may be imposed on surfaces between fluid/electroconductive solid, electroconductive
solid/electroconductive solid, dielectric solid/electroconductive solid, and outer solid
surfaces. If no electrical boundary conditions are specified by user, the In = 0 boundary
condition is automatically specified by default on bounding surfaces.
A surface between electroconductive solids in the computational subdomain is either
considered zero-resistance (default) or the electric contact resistance is specified on it. The
resistance value is either given explicitly or calculated from the given material and its
thickness.
1-23
A contact resistance specified on a surface implies that the current passing through it
produces the corresponding Joule heating, which yields the following surface heat source
QJS [W/m2]:
QJS = in
(1.4.5)
where in is the electric current density normal to the surface and is the electric
potential drop at this surface.
The anisotropic electrical resistivity of electroconductive solids can be anisotropic, i.e.
specified by its components in the coordinate system's directions ri , i = 1, 2, 3. The
isotropic/anisotropic type of material is specified for electrical resistivity and thermal
conductivity simultaneously, i.e. so that their main axes coincide.
1-24
surface element in a certain range of solid angles can be approximated by a single ray.
The radiation heat is transferred along a series of rays emanating from the radiative
surfaces only. Rays are then traced as they traverse through the fluid and transparent
solid bodies until it hits another radiative surface. This approach, usually called "ray
tracing", allows "exchange factors" to be calculated as the fractions of the total
radiation energy emitted from one of the radiative surfaces that is intercepted by other
radiative surfaces (this quantity is a discrete analog of view factors). "Exchange
factors" between radiative surface mesh elements are calculated at initial stage of
solver, it allows to form matrix of coefficients for a system of linear equations which is
solved on each iteration.
Discrete Ordinates. This model solves the radiative transfer equation for a finite
number of discrete solid angles, each associated with a vector direction. This method
allows the solution of radiation in absorptive (semi-transparent) media and to model
spectral dependencies. The accuracy of the solution depends on the number of discrete
directions used.5
Monte Carlo. The Monte Carlo ray-trace method is a statistical approach in which the
Discrete
Ordinates
Monte Carlo
Reflection
o1
o2
Refraction
o2
Spectral dependencies
(wavelength dependency)
Absorption in semi-transparent
solids
v3
o2
o4
o4
Quadratic
dependence on
View factor
resolution level
Quadratic
dependence on
Discretization
level;
Linear
dependence on
Number of
bands
Linear
dependence on
Number of
rays;
Number of
bands-independ
ent
v supported
o supported with limitations
not supported
1
2
1-26
Discrete Transfer is capable for simulating only diffusive reflection or 100% specular
reflection if defined by the Radiative Surface of Symmetry type.
Discretization of space with the ordinates is applicable for majority of tasks though
the method is known as one providing moderate solution for cases where geometric
optics is strong and essential, for example the solar radiation focusing on lenses.
Geometric optics (focusing on lenses, sharp shadows) is accurately simulated with a
directional radiation source (i.e. Solar radiation source) in case the Forward Solar
ray tracing is used. By default the Backward Solar ray tracing is used. For the difference between Forward and Backward ray tracing see Exchange Factor Calculation on page 32.
Increasing number of rays makes distribution of fluxes less noisy often at the expense
of longer computational time.
r
r
r
r
S E sin s N cos s cos s Z sin s
(1.5.1)
where
r r r
r
r
Z is the zenith direction, N is the north direction, E N Z is the east direction;
s is the solar elevation angle. That is, the angle between the direction of the geometric
center of the sun's apparent disk and the (idealized) horizon;
s is the solar azimuth angle. That is, the angle from due north in a clockwise direction.
1-27
The solar elevation angle s can be calculated, to a good approximation, using the
following formula:
(1.5.2)
t
2 is the hour angle of the present time t[s] (for example, at solar noon
86400
12:00AM, t = 43200 s and h = 0).
h
The solar azimuth angle s can be calculated, to a good approximation, using the
following formulas:
sin s
cos s
sin h cos
cos s
(1.5.3)
360
N 10
365
23.44 cos
(1.5.4)
where N is the day of the year beginning with N=0 at midnight Coordinated Universal
Time as January 1 begins (i.e. the days part of the ordinal date -1). The number 10, in
(N+10), is the approximate number of days after the December solstice to January 1. The
number 23.44 is the Earth's axial tilt.
The solar radiation intensity can be calculated using the following formula:
q s s
Qs0
1 n
1 C m m1
(1.5.5)
1.029
are empirical values;
sins 0.029
n is the cloudiness, i.e. the presence of clouds in the sky and ranges from 0 (no clouds in
the sky) to 1 (all the sky is covered by clouds);
Qs0 = 1360 W/m2 is the solar constant (i.e. the energy reaching the Earth from the Sun at
the top of the atmosphere).
1-28
Discrete Transfer
The Discrete Transfer model is a method that has its origin in the flux model but also
exhibits features of the Hottel zone and Monte Carlo techniques.
General Assumptions
The heat radiation from the solid surfaces, both the emitted and reflected, is assumed
diffuse (except for the symmetry radiative surface type), i.e. obeying the Lambert law,
according to which the radiation intensity per unit projected source area per unit solid
angle is the same in all directions.
The radiative solid surfaces which are not specified as a blackbody or whitebody are
assumed an ideal graybody, i.e. having a continuous emissive power spectrum similar
to that of blackbody, so their monochromatic emissivity is independent of the emission
wavelength. For certain materials with certain surface conditions, the graybody
emissivity can depend on the surface temperature.
The solar radiation is absorbed and reflected by surfaces independently from thermal
without any absorption. A solid can be specified as transparent to the solar radiation
only, or transparent to the thermal radiation from all sources except the solar radiation,
or transparent to both types of radiation, thermal and solar.
QTin is the
and
is the radiation
1-29
The net radiation Qnet being the difference between the heat radiation Qout leaving this
surface and the incident heat radiation Qin arriving at it:
resources, the computational mesh cells containing faces approximating the radiative
surfaces are joined in clusters by a special procedure that takes into account the face
area and angle between normal and face in each partial cell. The cells intersected by
boundaries between radiative surfaces of different emissivity are considered as
belonging to one of these surfaces and cannot be combined in one cluster. This
procedure is executed after constructing the computational mesh before the calculation
and after each solution-adaptive mesh refinement, if any.
For each of the clusters, the hemisphere governed by the rays origin and the normal to
the face at this origin is evenly divided into several nearly equal solid angles generated
by several zenith (latitudinal) angles (at least 3 within the 0...90 range, including
the zero zenith angle of the normal to the face) and several azimuth (longitudinal)
angles (at least 12 within the 0...360 range).
A radiation ray is emitted in each of the solid angles in a direction that is defined
randomly within this solid angle. Each ray is traced through the fluid and transparent
solid bodies until it intercepts the computational domains boundary or a cluster
belonging to another radiative surface, thus defining a target cluster. Since the
radiation heat is transferred along these rays only, their number and arrangement
govern the accuracy of calculating the radiation heat coming from one radiative surface
1-30
to another (naturally, the net heat radiated by a radiative surface does not depend on
number of these rays).
Polar ray
N m 1 n 1,
where m is the number of different latitude values for the rays (including the polar
ray), n is the number of different longitude values (n = 2 for 2D case).
The value of m is defined directly by the View factor resolution level which can be
changed by the user via the Calculation Control Options dialog box. The value of n
depends on m as follows: n m 4 . The higher the View factor resolution level, the
better the accuracy of the radiation heat transfer calculation, but the calculation time
and required computer resources increase significantly when high values of View
factor resolution level are specified.
To increase the accuracy of heat radiation calculation, the number of radiation rays
emitted from each cluster can be increased automatically during the calculation,
depending on the surface temperature and emissivity, to equalize the radiation heat
emitting through the solid angles.
When a radiation ray intercepts a cluster of other radiative surfaces, the radiation heat
carried by this ray is evenly distributed over the area of this cluster. The same
procedure is performed if several radiation rays hit the same cluster. To smooth a
possible non-uniformity of the incident radiation heat distribution on a radiative
surface, a fraction of the radiation heat arriving with rays at a cluster can be transferred
to the neighboring clusters also. In addition, small fluctuations are smoothed by the
heat conduction in solid regions.
1-31
Q Tiin
F Q
ij
out
Tj
Q Siin
ij
out
reflected portion of Q i
QTiout 1 i QTiin i Ti 4 Ai
, is calculated as:
QSisource QSray N i
"Backward" means that rays are emitted from the radiative surfaces. Each solar radiation
source produces one ray that follows the directional vector backward. After it reaches the
outer boundary or the surface having appropriate radiation boundary condition, the
r r
FSki nk , ni Ai . The ISk is the solar radiation
intensity of the k-th solar source. The value ki equals 1 if the i-th cluster is visible for the
1-32
"Forward" means that the rays are emitted from the radiation source. The radiation emitted
by all solar radiation sources can be distributed evenly over all rays traced from radiation
ray
sources. The radiation transferred by each ray, QS , can be estimated by summing up the
source
QSray
source
Sk
N rays
The value Ni is the number of rays intercepted the i-th cluster. The forward method is
recommended in case of refraction and reflection radiative surfaces.
The solar ray tracing method and the number of rays traced from radiation sources can be
changed by the user via the Calculation Control Options dialog box.
Please note that for the sake of simplicity the set of equations described here defines the
radiation heat transfer between clusters only and does not take into account the outer
boundaries radiation and diffusive radiation sources. In the full set of equations these
sources are also considered.
Discrete Ordinates
This feature is available for the HVAC and LED modules users only.
General Assumptions
The whole 4 directional domain at any location within the computational domain is
accordance with the specified solid material absorption coefficient. Scattering is not
considered.
Surfaces of opaque solids absorb the incident heat radiation in accordance with their
accordance with the specified refraction indices of the solid and adjacent medium
(another radiation absorptive solid, or a transparent solid or fluid, which refraction
index is always considered as equal to 1). The refraction index value cannot exceed 4.
1-33
r
s
discrete directions
computational domain defined by the position vector r . The directional domain is broken
down into the specified number of equal solid angles or directions. The total number of
directions is defined as:
N ord 8
RL RL 1
2
(1.5.6)
where RL is the Discretization level specified by the user. Within each direction the
radiation intensity is considered constant.
In the absence of scattering the radiation transfer equation can be written as:
r r
r
r r
dI s , r
n 2 I b r I s , r
ds
(1.5.7)
Ib
T 4
1-34
Monte Carlo
This feature is available for the LED module users only.
The Monte Carlo ray-trace method is a statistical approach in which the analytical solution
of a problem is bypassed in favor of a numerical simulation whose outcome may be the
same as that of the analysis but is easier to carry out. In case of a thermal radiation
problem, it allows to know about the behavior of a particular radiation surface in a
particular environment by numerically simulate the behavior of the radiation surface or
absorptive media. To do this photons are emitted from the radiation surface or absorptive
media and then track of where the photons go are kept.
General Assumptions
Quality of results is increased with number of photon traced. For some cases valuable
which it "dies".
1-35
dI x
I x
dx
(1.5.8)
The radiation intensity continuously decreases with distance x that the light traverses:
I x I 0 e x
(1.5.9)
where I0 is the initial intensity of radiation and , the absorption coefficient, is the
characteristic of particular material.
At the interface between two transparent or semi-transparent media with different
refractive indices the incident radiation changes its direction in accordance with the
Snells law:
sin2 n1
sin1 n2
(1.5.10)
where n1 and n2 are the refractive indices of the first and second medium (n is always
equal to 1 for a fully transparent solid or fluid) and 1 and 2 are the incident and
refraction angles correspondingly.
I0
IR
medium 1
medium 2
2
IT
Fig.1.5.2 Radiation reflection and transmission at the interface of absorptive media.
1-36
1 tan 2 sin 2
2 1 2 2 1 2
2 tan 1 2 sin 1 2
(1.5.11)
(1.5.12)
n n
1 2
n1 n2
4 n1 n 2
(1.5.13)
n1 n 2 2
The phenomena of absorption, reflection, and transmission may be applied to the passage
of light through a semi-transparent solid plate. In case of the incident light is normal to the
solid surface, the transmitted intensity can be estimated as shown in Fig.1.5.3.
I0
IR=I0
IT=I0(1-)
IA=I0(1-)e-l
I"R=I0(1-)e-l
IT=I0(1-)2e-l
Fig.1.5.3 Radiation transmission through a transparent medium.
I T I 0 1 e l
2
(1.5.14)
Thus, the fraction of incident light that is transmitted through a semi-transparent material
depends on the losses that are incurred by absorption and reflection.
1-37
IT
I0
1
ln
l 1 2
(1.5.15)
Reflection
At the surfaces of opaque solids the incident heat radiation is absorbed depending on the
specified emissivity coefficient, the rest of the incident radiation is reflected by one of the
following ways or their combination:
diffusive (Lambertian) reflection,
diffusive and specular (ideal) reflection which available for the Discrete Ordinates
and Monte Carlo models only,
diffusive, specular (ideal) and Gaussian reflection which available for the Monte
Carlo model only.
The reflection can be expressed as a transfer function that records for a given incoming
direction, the amount of light that is reflected in a certain outgoing direction. The function
is called BRDF (bi-directional reflectance distribution function). This is function of four
angles, two incident (i,i) and two reflected (r,r).
ht
t lig
n
ide
Inc
c te
lig
di=sinididi
fl e
Re
ht
dr
i
r
Fig.1.5.4 Radiation reflection at the surface.
1-38
Lr r , r
2 2
L , , ,
i
bd
, r cos i sin i d i d i
(1.5.16)
0 0
where:
n
Reflected light
1-39
bd i , i , r , r
(1.5.17)
Incident light
Reflected light
So the BRDF is zero everywhere except where: r=i and r=i+. Thus the
BRDF is a delta function at direction of ideal mirror reflection:
i r i r
(1.5.18)
bd i , i , r , r s
cos i sin i
where s is the specular reflectance.
In case of diffusive and specular (ideal) reflection the BRDF is defined as follows:
i r i r
(1.5.19)
bd i , i , r , r d s
cos i sin i
Gaussian reflection model for non-ideal specular reflection: it is
physically-based reflection model which uses the Gaussian distribution for the
BDRF definition (for a large number of rays):
bd i ,i , r , r
G
A
tg 2
2tg 2
1-40
(1.5.20)
A is the normalization factor, which can be calculated from the following equation:
2 2
0 0
tg 2
2
e 2 tg
cos i sin i d i d i 1
A r , r
(1.5.21)
.
n
Reflected light
n
Incident light
rr
efl
cu
la
sp
e
Ide
al
ec
tio
i r G 2tg
bd i ,i ,r ,r d s i r
A
cosi sini
tg 2
2
(1.5.22)
The surface specularity (s) defines the fraction of ideal specular reflected radiation, the
Gaussian coefficient (G) defines the fraction of Gaussian reflected radiation, and the
Radiation Spectrum
This feature is available for the HVAC and LED modules users only.
Spectrum can be specified for radiation from the computational domain boundaries and
for radiation sources set on surfaces of opaque solids (representing openings). This option
is available for the Discrete Ordinates and Monte Carlo models only.
In case of using the Discrete Ordinates model, a multiband (Discrete Bands) approach is
used to model spectral dependencies in radiative heat transfer.
1-41
The radiation spectrum is considered as consisting of several bands, which edges are
specified by the user. Properties of radiation sources, surfaces and materials are
considered constant within each band. The wavelength-dependent properties of solid
materials are averaged over the specified spectrum bands, so it is recommended to specify
the band edges at the wavelengths, at which the material properties change substantially.
If the radiation spectrum is considered, the equation (1.5.7) takes the following form:
rr
dIi s, r
ds
r
rr
ki n2 Ib i r I i s, r
(1.5.23)
Ii is the heat radiation intensity in the i-th spectrum band, Ib i is the intensity of
the blackbody radiation in the i-th spectrum band, ki is the specified the medium
where
In case of using the Monte Carlo model, in addition to the multiband approach, similar to
one implemented for the Discrete Ordinates method, the "no-band" (Rays) approach can
be used to model spectral dependencies in radiative heat transfer.
In accordance with this approach each emitted photon has each own wavelength defined
by wavelength distributions corresponding to the radiation spectra of the radiation sources
and surfaces, from which it has been emitted. So the equation (1.5.23) takes the same
form, but the index i corresponds to the photon wavelength instead of spectrum band.
And as opposed to the multiband approach, properties of radiation sources, surfaces and
materials are considered in accordance with their specified wavelength dependencies
without averaging.
1-42
Specified values
Dependent values
Wall
T, , solar, sG
= 1-, =
solar = 1-solar
d = 1-s-G
Wall to ambient
No parameters
No parameters
No parameters
4
Q T 4 Tout
where
(1.5.24)
When a ray reaches the surface of a radiation source or the Wall to ambient surface, it
disappears. All energy carried by this ray also dies away.
The Wall to ambient surface type of radiative surfaces is not consistent with the
Discrete ordinates or Monte Carlo method, and is substituted in the calculation with
the Wall.6
The Symmetry boundary condition forces the walls to which it is applied to reflect rays as
an ideal mirror.
Surfaces with the specified Absorbent wall boundary condition are taken into account
during the calculation but they can act as absorptive surfaces only. This wall type takes all
heat from the radiation that reaches it and does not emit any heat.
Non-radiating boundary condition removes specific surfaces from the radiation heat
transfer analysis, so they do not affect the results.
The Absorbent wall and Non-radiating surface types of radiative surfaces are not
consistent with the Discrete ordinates or Monte Carlo method, and are substituted
in the calculation with Whitebody wall, which emissivity is considered equal to 0
(i.e. to that of whitebody), so that the surface fully reflects all the incident radiation
(in accordance with the Lamberts law) and does not emit any heat by itself.7
Radiation Sources
Diffusive radiation source
a. The spectrum definition is available for the HVAC module users only.
b. The spectrum of a solar radiation source is always the pre-defined Daylight
Spectrum (available for the HVAC module users only).
A radiation source can only be specified on the surface of an opaque solid. Note that when
calculating net radiation rate on such surface, radiation source is not accounted. All the
incident radiation disappears without absorption or reflection on the radiation source
surface, unless there is a radiative surface condition defined on the same surface.
The solar radiation source makes the wall to emit radiation like the outer solar radiation. It
is specified by the direction vector and power or intensity or temperature. The solar
radiation at the computational domain boundaries can be specified not only by the
direction vector and intensity, but also by the location (on the surface of the Earth) and
time.
q 1 qi T 4 q source
(1.5.25)
where: is the emissivity of the radiative surface, qi is the incident heat radiation arriving
on the surface, T is the surface temperature and qsource is the heat radiation emitted by the
radiation source. Please note that the radiative surface emissivity coefficient and
temperature do not influence the heat radiation emitted by the radiation source defined on
the same surface - the radiation source properties are specified independently.
Viewing Results
The main result of the radiation heat transfer calculation is the solids surface or internal
temperatures. But these temperatures are also affected by heat conduction in solids and
solid/fluid heat transfer. To see the results of radiation heat transfer calculation only, the
user can view the Leaving radiant flux and distribution of Net radiant flux over the
selected radiative surfaces at Surface Plots. User can also see the maximum, minimum,
and average values of these parameters as well as the Leaving radiation rate and Net
radiation rate as an integral over the selected surfaces in Surface Parameters. All these
parameters can be viewed separately for the solar radiation and radiation from solar
radiation sources (solar radiation) and the radiation from all other heat radiation sources
(thermal radiation).
When the absorptive (semi-transparent) solids are considered, the additional parameters
such as Absorption volume radiant flux, Net volume radiant flow and Net volume
radiant flux become available both for the solar and thermal radiation, as well as for the
total radiation and heat flux.
If the spectral dependencies are specified in terms of discrete bands, the distribution of
radiant heat fluxes (Net and Leaving) over the selected radiative surfaces can be shown in
each band.
1-45
Combustion
This feature is available for the Advanced module users only.
Under certain conditions a mixture consisting of the several substances can react. If
energy is released in the reaction, it is referred to as combustion. FloEFD can account for
the thermal effects of chemical reactions related to the combustion of gas-phase mixtures.
A model implemented in FloEFD refers to the equilibrium approach to consideration of
combustion products, where the several substances mixed up to the molecular level react
instantly until the chemical equilibrium is achieved. Final composition of the reacting
mixture in equilibrium determines the resultant temperature of mixture. Both the
temperature and composition of the resulting mixture at given pressure are obtained from
the initial composition and enthalpies of the components.
If an isolated system is considered, the amount of substances entered into the reaction after
an infinite period of time depends on the reacting ability (valence) of atoms of the
electrically neutral mixture. Introducing the binary mixture ratio Km as the ratio of the
oxidiser mass to the fuel mass allows to determine the stoichiometric mixture ratio
Kmst
at
which reacting components entirely change into products of combustion, i.e. the situation
when there is no vacant maximal valences among all atoms in the mixture. In accordance
with this assumption the mixture can be considered as lean ( Km > Kmst ) or rich ( Km < Kmst )
and amount of residual fuel or residual oxidiser can be calculated.
Method of calculation of the equilibrium state of an isolated volume of mixture bases on
finding the maximal entropy of the system. Entropy can be expressed as:
k
k
R Tn
S S i( pi ) n i S i0 R0 ln 0 i n i
v
i 1
i 1
(6.1)
where: ni is the mole per mass unit; S i( pi ) is the entropy of the i-th component at the
partial pressure
Si0
The following additional conditions are required to find the extremum of given functional:
Total internal energy for the isolated system does not change;
Mass of chemical elements in the isolated system does not change;
Entire system is electrically neutral;
Equation of state establishes the relations between thermodynamic state and
composition of the system.
1-46
Thus, the problem of finding the maximal entropy S reduces to the problem of conditional
extremum (Ref. 5, Ref. 6, Ref. 7, Ref. 8).
Using the solution of the equilibrium problem mentioned above, the thermodynamic
closure of the transport equations in the form provided in Eq. (1.3.1) is constructed.
Accordingly, all substances in the mixture are divided into two conventional groups, one
is called Fuel, and another is Oxidiser. Each of these groups can consist of several
substances (arbitrary in general case). For each group the transport equation (1.2.17) is
solved, and transport properties apply to the entire group. Mixing occurs between both
groups as well. Thus, the conservation of atoms is ensured for the fluid/oxidiser pair. Such
procedure requires limited number of transport equations. The equation of state is
calculated once before the start of solver and is stored in tabular form. The table contains
thermodynamic and thermophysical properties of mixture within user-defined ranges of
operational temperature and pressure.
(6.2)
where: M0, MF, MP are the pseudo molecules of oxidiser, fuel and product respectively;
K2(T) is the reaction rate parameter, which depends on temperature.
Parameter K2 determines the dependency of reaction rate on temperature. The combustion
rate is high where the temperature overcomes the ignition temperature specified by user,
and zero otherwise. Particularly,
K2
1
Rign 1 tanh C ign T Tign ,
2
(6.3)
where: Rign = 1105 [mol], Cign = 0.2 are the coefficients of the model, T is the current
temperature, Tign is the ignition temperature.
1-47
The product that appears in the reaction is transferred over a fluid region in accordance
with the following equation:
t Z P
1 Z P 2 1 Y Y K
Z P
u
Z
m
i P
P
F
F 2
Sc Sc x
mO mF
t
xi
t
i
(6.4)
where: ZP is the mass fraction of the combustion product; YF is the mass fraction of the
fuel, is the density; , t are the laminar and turbulent viscosities; Sc, Sct are the
Schmidts laminar and turbulent numbers; mO, mF, mP are the molar masses of the
oxidiser, fuel and product respectively; K2 is the reaction rate parameter.
In this model the equation of state has the following form:
h(T , p,YF , Z p ) yO hO y F hF y P hP
y
y
y
(T , p,YF , Z p ) O F P
O F P
(6.5)
where: hO, hF, hP are the enthalpies of the oxidiser, fuel and product; O, F, P are the
densities of the oxidiser, fuel and product at given pressure and temperature;
yO = (1 - YF)(1 - ZP), yF = YF (1 - ZP), yP = ZP are the mass fractions of the oxidiser
residue, fuel residue and product.
Under certain conditions this model requires simulation of an igniter to start the
combustion.
1-48
Rotation
Global Rotating Reference Frame
The rotation of the coordinate system is taken into account via the following
mass-distributed force:
S irotation 2 eijk j u k ,2 ri
(1.7.1)
where eijk is the Levy-Civita symbols (function), is the angular velocity of the
rotation, r is the vector coming to the point under consideration from the nearest point
lying on the rotation axis.
1-49
To connect solutions obtained within the rotating regions and in the non-rotating part of
the computational domain, special internal boundary conditions are set automatically at
the fluid boundaries of the rotating regions. To correctly set these boundary conditions and
the rotating coordinate system, a rotating region must always be a body of revolution. The
rotating regions boundaries are sliced into rings of equal width as shown on the Fig.1.7.1.
Then the values of flow parameters, transferred as boundary conditions from the adjacent
fluid regions, are averaged circumferentially over each of these rings.
Computational domain or fluid subdomain
Flow parameters are calculated in the inertial Global Coordinate System
Rotation axis
To solve the problem, an iterative procedure of adjusting the flow solutions in the rotating
regions and in the adjacent non-rotating regions, therefore in the entire computational
domain, is performed with relaxations.
Please note that even in the case of time-dependent (transient) analysis the flow
parameters within the rotating regions are calculated using a steady-state approach and
averaged on the rotating regions' boundaries as described above.
1-50
In the Sliding technique rotor and stator cells zones are connected with each other through
"sliding interface". During the calculation, zones linked through "sliding interface" remain
in contact with each other (i.e., the rotor cells slide relative to stator cells along the
interface boundary in discrete steps as shown in Fig.1.7.2).
1-51
S iporous k ij u j ,
(1.8.1)
QHporosity TP T,
(1.8.2)
where k is the resistance vector of the porous medium (see below), is the user-defined
volumetric porous matrix/fluid heat transfer coefficient which can dependent on the flow
velocity, Tp is the temperature of the porous matrix, T is temperature of the fluid flowing
through the matrix, and the other designations are given in Section 1. In addition, the fluid
density in Eqs. (1.2.1)-(1.2.3) is multiplied by the porosity n of the porous medium, which
is the volume fraction of the interconnected pores with respect to the total medium
volume.
In the employed porous medium model turbulence disappears within a porous medium
and the flow becomes laminar.
If the heat conduction in porous matrix is considered, then, in addition to solving
Eqs. (1.2.1)-(1.2.3) describing fluid flow in porous medium, an Eq. (1.4.1) describing the
heat conduction in solids is also considered within the porous medium. In this equation the
source QH due to heat transfer between the porous matrix and the fluid is defined in the
same manner as in Eq. (1.8.2), but with the opposite sign. The values of and c for the
porous matrix may differ from those of the corresponding bulk solid material and hence
must be specified independently. Density of the solid material is multiplied by the solid
volume fraction in the porous matrix, i.e. by (1-n).
Thermal conductivity of the porous matrix can be specified as anisotropic in the same
manner as for the solid material.
The conjugate heat transfer problem in a porous medium is solved under the following
restrictions:
heat conduction in a porous medium not filled with a fluid is not considered,
porous media are considered transparent for radiation heat transfer,
1-52
heat sources in the porous matrix can be specified in the forms of heat generation
rate or volumetric heat generation rate only; heat sources in a form of constant or
time-dependent temperature can not be specified.
To perform a calculation in FloEFD, you have to specify the following porous medium
properties: the effective porosity of the porous medium, defined as the volume fraction of
the interconnected pores with respect to the total medium volume. Later on, the
permeability type of the porous medium must be chosen among the following:
isotropic (i.e., the medium permeability is independent of direction),
unidirectional (i.e., the medium is permeable in one direction only),
axisymmetrical (i.e., the medium permeability is fully governed by its axial and
transversal components with respect to a specified direction),
orthotropic (i.e., the general case, when the medium permeability varies with
direction and is fully governed by its three components determined along three
principal directions).
Then you have to specify some constants needed to determine the porous medium
resistance to fluid flow, i.e., vector k defined as k = - gradP V , where P, , and V are
fluid pressure, density, and velocity, respectively. It is calculated according to one of the
following formulae:
k = D2 , where and are the fluid dynamic viscosity and density, D is the
1-53
The specified reference pore size is also used to calculate the turbulence dissipation after
the porous medium. In case of the two first formulae, the specified pore size is used to
calculate the turbulence dissipation after the porous medium only. By default, it is set to
0.00001 m.To define a certain porous body, specify both the body position in the model
and, if the porous medium has a unidirectional or axisymmetrical permeability, the
reference directions in the porous body.
1
p u 2
2
(1.8.3)
where is the fluid density, u is the fluid velocity inside the plate's holes, and is the
perforated plate's hydraulic resistance, calculated according to Ref. 2 from the plate
porosity and the Reynolds number of the flow in the holes:
Re = uDh/,
(1.8.4)
where Dh = 4F is the hole hydraulic diameter defined via the area of a single hole F
and its perimeter , and is the fluid's dynamic viscosity. Please note that the (Re, )
dependence taken from Ref. 2 and employed in FloEFD is valid for non-swirled,
normal-to-plate flows only.
1-54
en
V2 ,n
V1,n
V2 ,
V1,
(1.9.1)
As a result of particles impingement on a solid surface, the total erosion mass rate,
Rerosion, and the total accretion mass rate, Raccretion, are determined as follows:
R erosion
K i V pb i f1 i ( p i ) f 2 i ( d p i )dm& p i
(1.9.2)
i 1 M p i
R accretion
M pi
(1.9.3)
i 1
where:
N is the number of fractions of particles specified by user as injections in FloEFD (the user
may specify several fractions of particles, also called injections, so that the particle
properties at inlet, i.e. temperature, velocity, diameter, mass flow rate, and material, are
constant within one fraction),
i is the fraction number,
Mp i is the mass impinging on the model walls in unit time for the i-th particle fraction,
FloEFD FE14 Technical Reference
1-55
Ki is the impingement erosion coefficient specified by user for the i-th particle fraction,
Vp i is the impingement velocity for the i-th particle fraction,
b is the user-specified velocity exponent (b = 2 is recommended),
f1 i (p i) is the user-specified dimensionless function of particle impingement angle p i,
f2 i (dp i) is the user-specified dimensionless function of particle diameter dp i.
1-56
HVAC
Tracer Study
This feature is available for the HVAC module users only.
If a gaseous (or liquid) substance (e.g. a contaminant) diffuses in a gaseous (or liquid)
fluid (if this fluid flows and carries this substance, this fluid is usually named the carrier
fluid) and this substances mass fraction y in the carrier fluid is too small, i.e. y<<1, so it
can not influence the carrier fluid flows properties (velocity, pressure, temperature), then
distribution of this substance over the computational domain due to carrying it by the fluid
flow and its diffusion in this fluid can be calculated with the Tracer Study option.
According to this option, this substances diffusion is calculated in the previously
calculated steady-state or unsteady carrier fluid flow by solving the following Tracer
Study equation taking the substances concentration non-uniformity and the carrier fluid
flows pressure gradient (for gaseous fluids only) into account:
RT
y
t
yui
pm Pr Le Prt Let xi
t xi
t p
m1m2 yv1 y
2
xi m p Pr Le Prt Let xi
(1.10.1)
where
is the carrier fluid and the substances mixture density (since y<<1, can be
considered as the carrier fluids density),
t is time,
xi is the i-th component of the used coordinate system,
ui is the i-th component of the carrier fluids velocity (the substance has the same
velocity),
p is the carrier fluids static pressure,
R is the universal gas constant,
m is the carrier fluid and the substances mixture molar mass,
m1 is the substances molar mass,
m2 is the carrier fluids molar mass,
v1 is the substances specific volume,
is the carrier fluids laminar viscosity,
t is the carrier fluids turbulent viscosity,
Pr, Prt are the carrier fluids laminar and turbulent Prandtl numbers,
Le, Let are the carrier fluids laminar and turbulent Lewis numbers.
FloEFD FE14 Technical Reference
1-57
The Tracer Study equation is solved after finishing the carrier fluid flow calculation, i.e. in
the postprocessor, either as steady-state or as unsteady (time-dependent, with its own
time).
The substances physical properties required to solve the Tracer Study equation are
specified in the Engineering Database as the substances molar mass (m1), binary (this
substance in the carrier fluid) diffusion coefficient D
t
( Dt
D is
Pr Le
Prt Let
assumed) or Lewis number Le (Let = Le, Prt =Pr, t = are assumed), and saturation
1-58
i
x
t
i
i
x
i 1
(1.10.2)
where xi is the i-th coordinate, is the density, ui is the i-th velocity component, is the
dynamic viscosity coefficient, t is the turbulent eddy viscosity coefficient, and t are
the laminar and turbulent Schmidt numbers. The equation is solved under the = 0
boundary condition on the inlet opening.
Dimensionless LMA is the LMA divided by the V/Q ratio, where V is the computational
domain fluid volume, Q is the volume flow rate of the air entering this fluid volume.
LACI (Local Air Change Index) is equal to 1/(Dimensionless LMA), i.e. reciprocal to the
Dimensionless LMA.
By default, the calculation of these parameters is disabled. You can enable the calculation
of LMA, Dimensionless LMA and LACI in the Calculation Control Options.
Comfort Parameters
These parameters are available for the HVAC module users only.
FloEFD has the capability to predict the general thermal sensation, degree of discomfort
(thermal dissatisfaction) of people exposed to moderate thermal environments and
estimate air quality by calculating comfort criteria (Ref. 9, Ref. 10, Ref. 11). These criteria
are used when designing occupied spaces and their HVAC systems and are intended to
determine whether environmental conditions are acceptable in terms of general thermal
comfort and air quality or represent discomfort. The calculation of the comfort criteria
assumes that the analyzed fluid is Air.
Mean Radiant Temperature (MRT) is the uniform surface temperature of an imaginary
black enclosure in which an occupant would exchange the same amount of radiant heat as
in the actual non-uniform space.
Tr4
1
1
I diffuse ()d
4
4
sun
(1.10.3)
where Idiffuse is the intensity of the diffuse (thermal) radiation (W/m2/rad), Isun is the
intensity of the solar radiation (W/m2), is the Stefan-Boltzmann constant.
To calculate the Mean Radiant Temperature, it is assumed that the emissivity of all the
surfaces within the computational domain equals to unity.
1-59
Tc
Tr T 10V
(1.10.4)
1 10V
where Tr is the mean radiant temperature (C), T is the fluid temperature (C), V is the
fluid velocity (m/s).
Predicted Mean Vote (PMV) is an index that predicts the mean value of the votes of a
large group of persons on the 7-point thermal sensation scale, based on the heat balance of
the human body. Thermal balance is obtained when the internal heat production in the
body is equal to the loss of heat to the environment. In a moderate environment, the
human thermoregulatory system will automatically attempt to modify skin temperature
and sweat secretion to maintain heat balance (Ref. 11).
cold
cool
slightly
cool
neutral
slightly
warm
warm
hot
-3
-2
-1
+1
+2
+3
5
0.42M W 58.15 1.7 10 M 5867 pa 0.0014M 34 Ta
4
4
8
3.96 10 f cl Tcl 273 Tr 273 f cl hc Tcl Ta
(1.10.5)
where
m2
1
.
00
1
.
29
,
0
.
078
I
for
I
cl
cl
kW
f cl
2
1.05 0.645I , for I 0.078 m
cl
cl
kW
1-60
(1.10.6)
(1.10.7)
where
M is the metabolic rate (W/m2 of the body area). It is the rate of transformation of
chemical energy into heat and mechanical work by metabolic activities within an
organism (by default it is set to 70 W/m2);
W is the external work (W/m2 of the body area). It accounts for the effective
mechanical power (by default it is set to 0 W/m2);
Icl is the clothing thermal resistance (m2K/W). It is the resistance to sensible heat
transfer provided by a clothing ensemble. The definition of clothing insulation
relates to heat transfer from the whole body and, thus, also includes the uncovered
parts of the body, such as head and hands. The typical values of thermal resistance
for a certain clothing ensemble can be found in Ref. 11 (by default it is set to
0.11 m2K/W);
fcl is the ratio of clothed surface area to nude surface area;
Ta is the air temperature (C);
Tr is the mean radiant temperature (C);
V is the relative air velocity (m/s);
pa is the water vapor partial pressure (Pa) calculated in accordance with the
saturation curve, the air temperature Ta and the Relative humidity (see "Water
vapor condensation and relative humidity" on page 3-15);
hc is the convective heat transfer coefficient (W/m2/K);
Tcl is the clothing surface temperature (C).
Predicted Percent Dissatisfied (PPD) is an index that provides information on thermal
discomfort or thermal dissatisfaction by predicting the percentage of people likely to feel
too warm or too cool in a given environment (Ref. 11). It can be obtained from the PMV
using the following equation:
(1.10.8)
DR 34 T a ,l v a ,l 0 .05
0 . 62
0 .37 v
v a ,l 0 .05 m / s
T a ,l 34 C
For DR 100 % :
DR 100 %
a ,l
Tu 3 .14
(1.10.9)
where
Ta,l is the local air temperature (C), 20 C to 26 C;
va,l is the local mean air velocity (m/s), < 0.5 m/s;
1-61
(1.10.10)
where:
T is the local fluid temperature (C);
Tm is the average fluid temperature within the control space (C);
V is the local fluid velocity (m/s).
Air Diffusion Performance Index (ADPI) is the percentage of the space in which the air
speed is less than 0.35 m/s and the Draft Temperature falls between -1.7 C and 1.1 C
(Ref. 9).
If the Draft Temperature or ADPI are calculated in Volume Parameters, then the control
space will correspond to the specified volume region. In all other cases the control
space corresponds to the whole computational domain.
Contaminant Removal Effectiveness (CRE) is an index that provides information on the
effectiveness of a ventilation system in removing contaminated air from the whole space.
For a perfect mixing system CRE=1. Values above 1 are good, values below 1 are poor.
This parameter is only available if more than one fluid is present in the control space.
Its value is defined as follows:
CRE
Ce
C
(1.10.11)
where:
Ce is the bulk average mass fraction of the contaminant calculated over all faces
through which the fluids outflow from the computational domain;
<C> is the bulk average mass fraction of the contaminant calculated over the whole
computational domain.
1-62
Local Air Quality Index (LAQI) is an index that provides information on the effectiveness
of a ventilation system in removing contaminated air from a point. For a perfect mixing
system LAQI =1. For other systems, the higher the value at a point, the better the
capability of the ventilation system in removing contaminated air from that point. This
parameter is only available if more than one fluid is present in the control space. Its value
is defined as follows:
LAQI
Ce
C
(1.10.12)
where:
Ce is the bulk average mass fraction of the contaminant calculated over all faces
through which the fluids outflow from the computational domain;
C is the mass fraction of the contaminant at a point.
The Flow Angle shows the flow deviation from the design flow direction. Consider one of
the axis of selected coordinate system as the design flow direction, the results can then be
viewed as the deviation from the design. Typically, flow angles of less than 15 might be
considered as good.
The flow angle components are defined as follows:
(1.10.13)
where Vx, Vy, Vz are the X, Y, and Z components of the fluid velocity and V is the
absolute value of the fluid velocity vector.
1-63
1-64
With the second option, you specify the boundary conditions by transferring the results
obtained in another FloEFD calculation in the same coordinate system. If necessary, the
calculation can be performed with another model, the only requirement is the flow regions
at the boundaries must coincide. At that, you select the created boundary conditions type:
either as for external flows (so-called "ambient" conditions, see the next Section), or as for
"pressure" or "flow" openings, see above. If a conjugate heat transfer problem is solved,
the temperature at the part of the boundary lying in a solid body is transferred from the
other calculation.
Naturally, the flow boundary conditions specified for an internal flow problem with the
first and/or second options must be physically consistent with each other, so it is expedient
to specify at least one "pressure"-type boundary condition and at least one "flow"-type
boundary condition, if not only "ambient" boundary conditions are specified.
If one or several non-intersecting axisymmetric rotating regions (local rotating reference
frames) are specified, the flow parameters are transferred from the adjacent fluid regions
and circumferentially averaged over rotating regions boundaries as boundary conditions.
1-65
If conjugate heat transfer in fluid and solid media is not considered, one of the following
boundary conditions can be imposed at solid walls: either the wall temperature
T Tw ,
(1.11.1)
q qw
(1.11.2)
being positive for heat flows from fluid to solid, equal to zero for adiabatic
(heat-insulated) walls, and negative for heat flows from solid to fluid.
When considering conjugate heat transfer in fluid and solid media, the heat exchange
between fluid and solid is calculated by FloEFD, so heat wall boundary conditions are not
specified at the walls.
Heat Pipes
This feature is available for the Electronics Cooling module users only.
"Heat Pipe" is a device (of arbitrary form: a tube, a plate, etc.) transferring heat from its
hotter surface to its colder surface due to evaporating a liquid (water, etc.) and condensing
its vapor in this device's inner hollow. This liquid evaporates near this hollows hotter
surface and its vapor condensates near this hollows colder surface. The condensed liquid
then returns to the hotter end due to gravity or by a wick. If such a device operates under
its design conditions, the heat transfer rate provided by this device exceeds substantially
any value achievable by a solid body of similar dimensions.
In FloEFD a "Heat Pipe" is modeled simplistically as an extremely heat-conducting body.
To model real efficiency of a heat pipe, a non-zero thermal resistance can be assigned to it.
1-66
Thermal Joints
A thermal joint model implemented in FloEFD can be used to simplify the heat transfer
simulation from one (hot) surface S1 to the other (cold) surface S2 with the actual thermal
joint geometry excluded from the analysis. Here, to simulate heat transfer between these
surfaces, the value of contact resistance (or its reciprocal, heat transfer coefficient ) is
used. The resulting heat transfer rate from the hot surface to the cold surface is calculated
as Q T1 T 2 , where T1 and T2 are the temperatures of the surfaces S1 and S2.
Notice that once you select the faces to specify thermal joint between them, these faces
become thermally insulated in respect to the surrounding medium and only participate in
the heat exchange between each other.
Two-resistor Components
This feature is available for the Electronics Cooling module users only.
A two-resistor model implemented in FloEFD can be used for simplified solving of heat
transfer problems in an electronic device with small electronic packages (chips, etc.). A
small package is considered as consisting of two flat solid plates: Junction and Case,
which are mounted on the Board (see Fig.1.11.1). The junction represents a die or a chip.
The case represents the die's case. The heat conduction through the chip is calculated
using the user-specified junction-to-case Qjc (from the junction to the top surface of the
package) and junction-to-board Qjb (from the junction to the board on which it is
mounted) thermal resistances (in K/W in SI). The Junction and Case plates are modeled as
a high conductivity bodies with heat-insulating side walls, so the only Case's top and
Junction's bottom transfer heat to the surroundings.
Package
Adiabatic walls
Case
Adiabatic walls
JC
JB
Junction
Board (PCB)
Fig.1.11.1FloEFD representation of the two-resistor model.
1-67
Kin
A
A
KC 1
KD ,
100
100
1
K thro
A
A
1
100
100
KC
KD
(1.11.3)
The effective density and the effective specific heat C of the board are calculated
as follows:
C VC D VD
V
CC C VC CD D VD
V
(1.11.4)
A
is the volume of the dielectric
100
C
100
C D
(1.11.5)
1-68
M
V
(1.11.6)
The in-plane (planar) conductivity Kin and the through-plane (normal) conductivity
Ai
nC
Ai
K
1
Ci
C
D t tCi K D
100
100
i 1
i 1
Kin
t
nC
K thro
t
nC
Ai
Ai
t
tCi
nC
100 i 1
tCi 100
K
KD
KD
i 1
C
(1.11.7)
(1.11.8)
The effective density and the effective specific heat C of the board are calculated
as follows:
Ai
nC
Ai
Ci
C
D t tCi D
100
100
i 1
i 1
t
nC
Ai
nC
Ai
C
1
Ci
C
C
D
D t tCi D CD
100
100
i1
i1
C
t
(1.11.9)
nC
(1.11.10)
t
i 1
Ci
Ai
100
100
(1.11.11)
1-69
PH V F I F e
(1.11.12)
This power together with the LED thermal resistance Rth determine the junction
temperature:
TJ PH Rth Tamb
(1.11.13)
The simple model based on a two-resistor model and the exact dissipated heating power
PH allows to predict the junction temperature TJ only.
The luminaire detailed model uses the exact forward current IF and LED thermal
characteristics and light output measured by T3Ster TeraLED.
The following assumptions are made:
the forward voltage VF0 linearly depends on the junction temperature at fixed,
VF VF 0 SVF TJ T0
(1.11.14)
the emitted optical power e and "hot lumens" V also linearly depends on the
e e0 Se TJ T0
(1.11.15)
V V 0 SV TJ T0
(1.11.16)
where:
1-70
Thermoelectric Coolers
Thermoelectric cooler (TEC) is a flat sandwich consisting of two plates covering a circuit
of p-n semiconductor junctions inside. When a direct electric current (DC) i runs through
this circuit, in accordance with the Peltier effect the a i Tc heat, where a is the Seebeck
coefficient, Tc is the TEC's "cold" surface temperature, is pumped from the TEC's "cold"
surface to its "hot" surface (the "cold" and "hot" sides are determined from the DC
direction). This heat pumping is naturally accompanied by the Joule (ohmic) heat release
at both the TEC surfaces and the heat transfer from the hotter side to the colder (reverse to
the Peltier effect). The ohmic heat release is defined as R
i2
, where R is the TEC's
2
electric resistance, while the heat transfer is defined as kT, where k is the TEC's thermal
conductivity,
Qc a i Tc R i 2 / 2 k T
(1.11.17)
Correspondingly, the net heat released at the TEC's "hot" surface, Qh, is equal to
Qh a i Th R i 2 / 2 k T
(1.11.18)
1-71
In FloEFD a TEC is specified by selecting a flat plate (box) in the model, assigning its
"hot" face, and applying one of the TECs already defined by user in the Engineering
Database.
Heat Sink
Hot Side
TEC
Cold Side
Object being cold
1-72
All of these characteristics are specified for two Th values, in accordance with the
information usually provided by the TEC suppliers. Proceeding from these characteristics,
the a(T), R(T), and k(T) linear functions are determined. The functional boundary
conditions are specified automatically on the TEC's "cold" and "hot" surfaces, which must
be free from other boundary conditions.
The temperature solution inside the TEC and on its surfaces is obtained using a special
procedure differing from the standard FloEFD calculation procedure for heat conduction
in solids.
The TEC's "hot" face must be in contact with other solids, i.e it must not be in contact with
any fluid. In addition, it is required that the obtained TEC solution, i.e. Th and T, lie
within the TEC's operating range specified by its manufacturer.
1-73
1-74
Computational Mesh
FloEFD computational approach is based on locally refined rectangular mesh near
geometry boundaries. The mesh cells are rectangular parallelepipeds with faces
orthogonal to the specified axes of the Cartesian coordinate system. However, near the
boundary mesh cells are more complex. The near-boundary cells are portions of the
original parallelepiped cells that cut by the geometry boundary. The curved geometry
surface is approximated by set of polygons which vertexes are surfaces intersection
points with the cells edges. These flat polygons cut the original parallelepiped cells. Thus,
the resulting near-boundary cells are polyhedrons with both axis-oriented and arbitrary
oriented plane faces in this case (see Fig.1.12.1). These cut cells are named partial. The
original parallelepiped cells containing boundary are split into several control volumes
that are referred to only one fluid or solid medium. In the simplest case there are only two
control volumes in the parallelepiped, one is solid and another is fluid.
1-75
1-76
To describe boundary layers on a fine mesh (the number of cells across a boundary layer is
6 or greater) the thick-boundary-layer approach is used. In this approach the
calculation of parameters of laminar boundary layer is doing via Navier-Stokes equations
and for the turbulent boundary layer is performed by modification of well known wall
function approach. However instead of the classical approach where the logarithmic
velocity profile is used in EFD technology the full profile proposed by Van Driest (Ref.
15) is used. All other assumptions are similar ones to the classical wall functions
approach.
The thin-boundary-layer approach is used to describe flow on a coarse mesh (the
number of cells across a slot is 4 or less). In this approach the Prandtl boundary layer
equations already integrated along the normal to the wall from 0 (at the wall) to the
dynamic boundary layer thickness are solved along a fluid streamline covering the
walls. If the boundary layer is laminar these equations are solved with a method of
successive approximations based on the Shvetz trial functions technology (Ref. 14). If the
boundary layer is turbulent or transitional between laminar and turbulent, a generalization
of this method to such boundary layers employing the Van Driest hypothesis about the
mixing length in turbulent boundary layers is used (Ref. 15).
In intermediate case the compilation of two above mentioned approaches is used.
To describe flow through narrow slots (including flow in pipes, plane and circular Couette
flows) on a coarse mesh (the number of cells across a slot is 4 or less) the thin-channel
approach is used. According to this approach, the shear stress and heat flux near the wall
are calculated by using the approximations based on the experimental data.
All of these approaches provide the good accuracy on a coarse mesh.
Note, moreover, that when the computational mesh is rather fine, the solution accuracy
may fall off. The reasons for the accuracy falloff are that the mesh is excessively fine to
apply the approaches mentioned above but it is insufficiently fine to resolve boundary
layers or narrow slots. The further refinement of the computational mesh improves the
accuracy gradually.
Spatial Approximations
The cell-centered finite volume (FV) method is used to obtain conservative
approximations of the governing equations on locally refined grid that consists of
parallelepipeds and more complex polyhedrons near boundary. Following the FV method,
the governing equations are integrated over a control volume which is a mesh cell, and
then are approximated. All basic variables are referred to mass centers of control volumes.
These cell-centered values are used for approximations.
1-77
The integral conservation laws may be represented in the form of the cell volume and
surface integral equation:
Udv F ds Qdv
t
(1.12.1)
Uv
t
F S Qv
(1.12.2)
cell faces
The fluxes F are approximated in accordance with a type of the related faces. The faces
are classified and divided into two groups in accordance with their properties: if they are
axis-oriented and common for two adjacent control volumes or they are arbitrary oriented
boundary faces. Approximations are constructed in different way for these two cases.
Second order approximations are used for the faces that are common for two adjacent
control volumes. For convective fluxes the upwind approach is used. Nonlinear
approximations with limiters (Ref. 12) are used to provide monotonic discrete solutions.
For diffusive terms the central approximation is used. The approximations are treated
implicitly.
In FloEFD, especially consistent approximations for the convective terms, div and grad
operators are employed in order to derive a discrete problem that maintains the
fundamental properties of the parent differential problem in addition to the usual
properties of mass, momentum and energy conservation.
1-78
Temporal Approximations
Time-implicit approximations of the continuity and convection/diffusion equations (for
momentum, temperature, etc.) are used together with an operator-splitting technique (Ref.
16, Ref. 17, and Ref. 18). This technique is used to efficiently resolve the problem of
pressure-velocity decoupling. Following the SIMPLE-like approach (Ref. 19), an elliptic
type discrete pressure equation is derived by algebraic transformations of the originally
derived discrete equations for mass and momentum, and taking into account the boundary
conditions for velocity.
U* - U n
Ah U n , p n U* S n ,
t
Lhp
divh u*
1 * n
,
t
t t
(1.12.3)
(1.12.4)
* = (pn+p,T*,y*),
u n 1 u* t gradh p ,
(1.12.5)
pn 1 pn p ,
(1.12.6)
T n1 T * , n1 * , n1 * , yn1 y* ,
(1.12.7)
n 1 p n 1 , T n1 , y n 1 .
(1.12.8)
Here U = (u,T, , , y)Tis the full set of basic variables excluding pressure p,
u=(u1,u2,u3)T is the velocity vector, y = (y1, y2, ..., yM)T is the vector of component
concentrations in fluid mixtures, and p = pn+1 - pn is an auxiliary variable that is called
a pressure correction. These parameters are discrete functions stored at cell centers. They
are to be calculated using the discrete equations (1.12.3)-(1.12.8) that approximate the
governing differential equations. In equations (1.12.3)-(1.12.8) Ah, divh, gradh and
Lh = divhgradh are discrete operators that approximate the corresponding differential
operators with second order accuracy.
1-79
Equation (1.12.3) corresponds to the first step of the algorithm when fully implicit discrete
convection/diffusion equations are solved to obtain the intermediate values of momentum
and the final values of turbulent parameters, temperature, and species concentrations.
The elliptic type equation (1.12.4) is used to calculate the pressure correction p. This
equation is defined in such a way that the final momentum field un+1 calculated from
(1.12.3) satisfies the discrete fully implicit continuity equation. Final values of the flow
parameters are defined by equations (1.12.5)-(1.12.8).
Multigrid Method
The multigrid method is a convenient acceleration technique which can greatly decrease
the solution time. Basic features of the multigrid algorithm are as follows. Based on the
given mesh, a sequence of grids (grid levels) are constructed, with a decreasing number of
nodes. On every such grid, the residual of the associated system of algebraic equations is
restricted onto the coarser grid level, forming the right hand side of the system on that
grid. When the solution on the coarse grid is computed, it is interpolated to the finer grid
and used there as a correction to the result of the previous iteration. After that, several
smoothing iterations are performed. This procedure is applied repeatedly on every grid
level until the corresponding iteration meets the stopping criteria.
The coefficients of the linear algebraic systems associated with the grid are computed
once and stored.
1-80
References
1 Reid R.C., Prausnitz J.M., Poling B.E. (1987). The properties of gases and liquids, 4th
Physical Quantities.
11 ISO 7730:2005, Ergonomics of the thermal environment - Analytical determination
and interpretation of thermal comfort using calculation of the PMV and PPD indices
and local thermal comfort criteria.
12 Roache, P.J., (1998) Technical Reference of Computational Fluid Dynamics, Hermosa
Russian).
15 Van Driest, E.R. On Turbulent Flow Near a Wall. Journal of the Aeronautical Science,
Washington, D.C.
1-81
References
20 Saad, Y. (1996). Iterative methods for sparse linear systems, PWS Publishing
Company, Boston.
21 Hackbusch, W. (1985). Multi-grid Methods and Applications, Springer-Verlag, NY,
USA.
1-82
2
Validation Examples
Introduction
A series of calculation examples presented below validate the ability of FloEFD to predict
the essential features of various flows, as well as to solve conjugate heat transfer problems
(i.e. flow problems with heat transfer in solids). In order to perform the validation
accurately and to present clear results which the user can check independently, relatively
simple examples have been selected. For each of the following examples, exact analytical
expression or well-documented experimental results exist. Each of the examples focus on
one or two particular physical phenomena such as: laminar flow with or without heat
transfer, turbulent flows including vortex development, boundary layer separation and
heat transfer, compressible gas flow with shock and expansion waves. Therefore, these
examples validate the ability of FloEFD to predict fundamental flow features accurately.
The accuracy of predictions can be extrapolated to typical industrial examples
(encountered every day by design engineers and solved using FloEFD), which may
include a combination of the above-mentioned physical phenomena and geometries of
arbitrary complexity.
2-1
2-2
Fig. 2.1.1. The cone valve under consideration: D = 0.206 m, Dax = 1.515D, = 1340.
The corresponding model used for these predictions is shown in Fig. 2.1.2.. The valves
turning angle is varied in the range of 055 (the valve opening diminishes to zero at
= 8230).
Inlet velocity
profile
Fig. 2.1.2. The model for calculating the 3D flow in the cone valve.
2-3
The flow predictions performed with FloEFD are validated by comparing the valves
hydraulic resistance v, and the dimensionless coefficient of torque M (see Fig. 2.1.1.)
acting on the valve, m, to the experimental data of Ref.13 (Ref.2).
Since Ref.13 presents the valves hydraulic resistance (i.e. the resistance due to the flow
obstacle, which is the valve) v, whereas the flow calculations in the model (as well as the
experiments on the rig) yield the total hydraulic resistance including both v and the tubes
hydraulic resistance due to friction, f , i.e. = v + f , then, to obtain v from the flow
predictions (as well as from the experiments), f is calculated (measured in the
experiments) separately, at the fully open valve ( = 0); then v = - f .
In accordance with Ref.13, both and f are defined as (Po inlet - Po outlet)/(U2/2), where
Po inlet and Po outlet are the flow total pressures at the models inlet and outlet, accordingly,
2-4
v
100
Experimental data
Calculation
10
0,1
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
Fig. 2.1.3. Comparison of the FloEFD predictions with the Ref.13 experimental data on the cone
valves hydraulic resistance versus the cone valve turning angle.
m
0,16
Experimental data
0,14
Calculation
0,12
0,1
0,08
0,06
0,04
0,02
()
0
15
25
35
45
55
Fig. 2.1.4. Comparison of the FloEFD predictions with the Ref.13 experimental data on the cone
valves torque coefficient versus the cone valve turning angle.
2-5
Fig. 2.1.6. The cone valves velocity contours and vectors at = 45.
2-6
uaverage or m
Since the Reynolds number based on the channel height is equal to about Re2h=100, the
flow is laminar.
As for the liquids, let us consider water as a Newtonian liquid and four non-Newtonian
liquids having identical density of 1000 kg/m3, identical specific heat of 4200 J/(kgK) and
identical thermal conductivity of 10 W/(mK), but obeying different non-Newtonian liquid
laws available in FloEFD.
The considered non-Newtonian liquids' models and their governing characteristics are
presented in Table 3:. These models are featured by the function connecting the flow shear
stress () with the flow shear rate ( & ), i.e. f & , or, following Newtonian liquids,
the liquid dynamic viscosity () with the flow shear rate ( & ), i.e.
& & :
n 1
o = 0;
2-7
& , o 1 K1 & 2
n 1 / 2
, where
is the liquid dynamic viscosity at infinite shear rate, i.e. the minimum dynamic
viscosity, o is the liquid dynamic viscosity at zero shear rate, i.e. the maximum
dynamic viscosity, K1 is the time constant, n is the power-law index (this model is a
smooth version of the power-law model).
Table 3:
Non-Newtonian liquid No.
Herschel-Bulkley
Bingham
Power law
Carreau
0,001
1,5
0,001
1
0,001
0,6
0,4
0,001
0,001
10-4
10-3
(Pas)
Maximum dynamic viscosity,
o
(Pas)
Time constant, K 1 (s)
In accordance with the well-known theory presented in Ref.1, after some entrance length,
the flow profile u(y) becomes fully developed and invariable. It can be determined from
the Navier-Stokes x-momentum equation
dP d
const w corresponding to
dx dy
h
this case in the coordinate system shown in Fig. 2.2.1. (y = 0 at the channel's center plane,
du
dP
is the longitudinal pressure gradient along the channel, &
in the flow under
dx
dy
consideration).
As a result, the fully developed u(y) profile for a Newtonian fluid has the following form:
u(y) = -
1 dP 2
(h y 2 ) ,
2 dx
where is the fluid dynamic viscosity and is the half height of the channel,
3uaverage
dP
,
dx
h2
where uaverage is the flow's mass-average velocity defined as the flow's volume flow rate
divided by the area of the flow passage cross section.
For a non-Newtonian liquid described by the power-law model the fully developed u(y)
profile and the corresponding pressure gradient can be determined from the following
formulae:
2-8
u y uaverage
n 1
2n 1 y n dP
K
1
,
n 1 h dx
h
uaverage 2n 1
.
h
n
For a non-Newtonian liquid described by the Herschel-Bulkley model the fully developed
u(y) profile can be determined from the following formulae:
u y umax
n 1
n
w o n at y o h ,
K w n 1
w
1/ n
n 1
y
n
w o
at y o h ,
u y umax 1 h
w
w o
nonlinear equation
u average
h
K 1/ n w
n 1
n
n w o
,
w o n 1
n 1
2n 1 w
e.g. with the Newton method, as described in this validation. The corresponding pressure
gradient is determined as
dP w
.
dx h
For a non-Newtonian liquid described by the Carreau model the fully developed u(y)
profile can not be determined analytically in an explicit form, so in this validation example
it is obtained by solving the following parametric equation:
p ( 0 ) 1 2 p 2
u umax
( n 1) / 2
h 2 ( 0 ) h
p
1 2 p2
2 w
(n 1) w
( n 1) / 2
2 1 ( 0 )h
,
np 2
(n 1) w 2
w pmax ( 0 ) 1 2 p max 2
( n 1) / 2
2-9
umax
( )h
h 2
2
pmax 0
1 2 pmax
2 w
(n 1) w
huaverage udy
0
1 ( 0 )h
2
npmax 2
(n 1) w 2
( n 1) / 2
pmax
dy
dp .
dp
dP w
.
dx h
The model for the 2D calculation is shown in Fig. 2.2.1.. The boundary conditions are
specified as mentioned above and the initial conditions coincide with the inlet boundary
conditions. The results of the calculations performed with FloEFD at result resolution
level 5 are presented in Figs.2.2.2 - 2.2.7. The channel exit u(y) profile and the channel
P(x) profile were obtained along the sketches shown by green lines in Fig. 2.2.1..
Fig. 2.2.1. The model for calculating 2D flow between two parallel plates with FloEFD.
U, m/s
0,016
Water, theory
0,014
0,012
Water, calculation
0,01
0,008
Power-law, calculation
0,006
0,004
0,002
0
-0,005
-0,003
-0,001
0,001
0,003
0,005
Y, m
Fig. 2.2.2. The water and liquid #3 velocity profiles u(y) at the channel outlet.
2-10
P, Pa
101325,3
Water, theory
101325,25
Water, calculation
101325,2
101325,15
Power-law,
calculation
101325,1
101325,05
101325
0
0,05
0,1
0,15
X, m
0,2
Fig. 2.2.3. The water and liquid #3 longitudinal pressure change along the channel, P(x).
U, m/s
0,016
0,014
Herschel-Bulkley,
theory
0,012
Herschel-Bulkley,
calculation
0,01
Bingham, theory
0,008
Binham, calculation
0,006
0,004
0,002
0
-0,005
-0,003
-0,001
0,001
0,003
0,005 Y, m
Fig. 2.2.4. The liquids #1 and #2 velocity profiles u(y) at the channel outlet.
From Figs.2.2.3, 2.2.5, and 2.2.7 you can see that for all the liquids under consideration,
after some entrance length of about 0.03 m, the pressure gradient governing the channel
pressure loss becomes constant and nearly similar to the theoretical predictions. From
Figs.2.2.2, 2.2.4, and 2.2.6 you can see that the fluid velocity profiles at the channel exit
obtained from the calculations are close to the theoretical profiles.
2-11
P, Pa
101325,6
Herschel-Bulkley,
theory
101325,5
Herschel-Bulkley,
calculation
101325,4
Bingham, theory
101325,3
Binham, calculation
101325,2
101325,1
101325
0
0,05
0,1
0,15
0,2
X, m
Fig. 2.2.5. The liquids #1 and #2 longitudinal pressure change along the channel, P(x).
U, m/s
0,014
Carreau, theory
0,012
Carreau, calculation
0,01
0,008
0,006
0,004
0,002
0
-0,005
-0,003
-0,001
0,001
0,003
0,005 Y, m
Fig. 2.2.6. The liquid #4 velocity profile u(y) at the channel outlet.
In the case of compressible liquids the channel has the height of 2h = 0.001 m and the
length of 0.5 m, the liquids at its inlet had standard ambient temperature (293.2 K) and a
uniform inlet velocity profile corresponding to the specified mass flow rate of
P, Pa
101325,14
Carreau, theory
101325,12
Carreau, calculation
101325,1
101325,08
101325,06
101325,04
101325,02
101325
0
0,05
0,1
0,15
0,2 X, m
Fig. 2.2.7. The liquid #4 longitudinal pressure change along the channel,
Let us consider two compressible liquids whose density obeys the following laws:
the power law:
, where , P , B and n are specified: is the liquid's density
0
0
P B under the 0reference
pressure
P
,
B
and
n
are constants,
0
B
0
0
0
1 C *ln
BP
B P0
In this validation example these law's parameters values have been specified as 0=103
kg/m3, P0 = 1 atm, B = 107 Pa, n = 1.4, C = 1, and these liquids have the 1Pas dynamic
viscosity.
Since this channel is rather long, the pressure gradient along it can be determined as
P
3 m& , where is the liquids' dynamic viscosity, m& is the liquid mass
2
x
h S flow rate, S is the channel's width, is the liquid density.
Therefore, by substitution the compressible liquids' (P) functions, we obtain the
following equations for determining P(x) along the channel:
for the power-law liquid:
2-13
1/ n
3 m& P0 B
P
2
x
h S 0 P B
its solution is
1 1
P B
1
n
3 m&
2
( P0 B) n x C1 ,
n 1 h S 0
ln
C
Both the theoretical P(x) distributions and the corresponding distributions computed
within FloEFD on a 5*500 computational mesh are presented in Figs.2.2.8 and 2.2.9. It is
seen that the FloEFD calculations agree with the theoretical distributions.
P, Pa
Logarithmic law,
theory
18000000
16000000
Logarithmic law,
calculation
14000000
12000000
10000000
8000000
6000000
4000000
2000000
0
0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5 X, m
Fig. 2.2.8. The logarithmic-law compressible liquid's longitudinal pressure change along the channel,
P(x).
2-14
P, Pa
35000000
30000000
Power law,
calculation
25000000
20000000
15000000
10000000
5000000
0
0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5 X, m
Fig. 2.2.9. The power-law compressible liquid's longitudinal pressure change along the channel,
2-15
2-16
uinlet
Fig. 2.3.2. The model for calculating 3D flow in a pipe with FloEFD.
According to theory (Ref.1), the pipe flow velocity profile changes along the pipe until it
becomes a constant, fully developed profile at a distance of Linlet from the pipe inlet.
According to Ref.1, Linlet is estimated as:
2-17
Linlet =
100 d ,
Red 2500...6000
40 d ,
Red 6000...106
where Red = Ud/ is the Reynolds number based on the pipe diameter d, U is the
mass-average flow velocity, is the fluid density, and is the fluid dynamic viscosity.
Therefore, to provide a fully developed flow in the pipe at Red under consideration, we
will study the cases listed in Table 3:. Here, Lpipe is the overall pipe length. All the FloEFD
predictions concerning the fully developed pipe flow characteristics are referred to the
pipe section downstream of the inlet section.
uinlet, m/s
0.1
Linlet, m
Lpipe, m
0.3
0.45
100
10-6
0.001
0.3
0.45
1000
0.01
4.5
104
0.1
4 (5)*
6 (10)*
105
4 (5)*
6 (10)*
106
10
4 (5)*6
6 (10)*
u( y )
1 dP 2
(R y2 ) ,
4 dx
where R is the pipe radius, and dP/dx is the longitudinal pressure gradient along the pipe,
which is also invariable and equal to:
dP
8 uinlet .
dx
R2
The FloEFD predictions of dP/dx and u(y) of the laminar fully developed pipe flow at Red
= 100 performed at result resolution level 6 are presented in Fig. 2.3.1. and Fig. 2.3.2. The
presented predictions relate to the smooth pipe, and similar ones not presented here have
been obtained for the case of the rough tube with relative sand roughness of
k/d=0.20.4 %, that agrees with the theory (Ref.1).
2-18
Pressure (Pa)
101325,0020
Theory
101325,0018
Calculation
101325,0016
101325,0014
101325,0012
101325,0010
101325,0008
101325,0006
101325,0004
101325,0002
101325,0000
0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5
X (m)
Fig. 2.3.1. The longitudinal pressure change (pressure gradient) along the pipe at Red 100.
Velocity (m/s)
0,0025
Theory
Calculation
0,002
0,0015
0,001
0,0005
0
0
0,01
0,02
0,03
0,04
0,05
Y (m)
Fig. 2.3.2. The fluid velocity profile at the pipe exit for Red 100.
From Fig. 2.3.1. one can see that after an entrance length of about 0.15 m the pressure
gradient predicted by FloEFD coincides with the one predicted by theory. Therefore, the
prediction of pipe pressure loss is excellent. As for local flow features, from Fig. 2.3.2.
one can see that the fluid velocity profiles predicted at the pipe exit are rather close to the
theoretical profile.
2-19
The velocity profile and longitudinal pressure distribution in a smooth pipe at Red = 105,
i.e., in a turbulent pipe flow regime, predicted by FloEFD at result resolution level 6 are
presented in Figs.2.3.3 and 2.3.4 and compared to theory (Ref.1, the Blasius law of
pressure loss, the 1/7-power velocity profile).
Pressure (Pa)
102400
Theory
Calculation
102200
102000
101800
101600
101400
101200
0
10
X (m)
Fig. 2.3.3. The longitudinal pressure change (pressure gradient) along the pipe at Red = 105.
Then, to stand closer to engineering practice, let us consider the FloEFD predictions of the
pipe friction factor used commonly and defined as:
P
d
,
2
u
L
inlet
2
where L is length of the pipe section with the fully developed flow, along which pressure
loss P is measured.
2-20
Velocity (m/s)
1,4
Theory
1,2
Calculation
1
0,8
0,6
0,4
0,2
0
0
0,01
0,02
0,03
0,04
0,05
Y (m)
Fig. 2.3.4. The fluid velocity profile at the pipe exit at Red = 105.
In Figs. 2.3.5 and 2.3.6 (scaled up) you can see the FloEFD predictions performed at result
resolution level 5 for the smooth pipes in the entire Red range (both laminar and
turbulent), and compared with the theoretical and empirical values determined from the
following formulae which are valid for fully-developed flows in smooth pipes (Refs.1, 2,
and 4):
64
Re d 2300 laminar flows,
Re ,
d
2
1.8 log Red , Re 105 turbulent flows
d
6.9
It can be seen that the friction factor values predicted for smooth pipes, especially in the
laminar region, are fairly close to the theoretical and empirical curve.
As for the friction factor in rough pipes, the FloEFD predictions for the pipes having
relative wall roughness of k/d=0.4% (k is the sand roughness) are presented and compared
with the empirical curve for such pipes (Refs.1, 2, and 4) in Fig. 2.3.6.. The
underprediction error does not exceed 13%.
Additionally, in the full accordance with theory and experimental data the FloEFD
predictions show that the wall roughness does not affect the friction factor in laminar pipe
flows.
2-21
Friction factor
1,E+03
1,E+02
Smooth pipes,
theoretical and
empirical data
1,E+01
Calculation
1,E+00
1,E-01
1,E-02
1,E-03
1,E-01
1,E+00
1,E+01
1,E+02
1,E+03
1,E+04
1,E+05
1,E+06
Re d
Fig. 2.3.5. The friction factor predicted by FloEFD for smooth pipes in comparison with the
theoretical and empirical data (Refs.1, 2, and 4).
Friction Factor
0,100
Smooth wall,
theoretical and
empirical data
Smooth wall,
calculation
Rough wall,
k/d=0.4%, empirical
data
Rough wall,
k/d=0.4%,
calculation
0,010
1,E+03
1,E+04
1,E+05
1,E+06
Re d
Fig. 2.3.6. The friction factor predicted by FloEFD for smooth and rough pipes in comparison with
the theoretical and empirical data (Refs.1, 2, and 4).
2-22
Water
Ideal wall
Inlet
Outlet
Fig. 2.4.2. The model for calculating the flow over the flat plate with FloEFD.
2-23
To solve the problem, an incoming uniform water flow of a certain velocity (see below),
temperature of 293.2 K, turbulence intensity of 1%, and turbulence length of 0.01 m is
specified at the channel inlet, whereas the water static pressure of 1 atm is specified at the
channel outlet.
The flow computation is aimed at predicting the flat plate drag coefficient, defined as (see
Refs. 1 and 4):
Cd
F
V 2 ,
A
2
where F is the plate drag force, A is the plate surface area, is fluid density, and V is the
fluid velocity.
According to Refs.1 and 4, the plate drag coefficient value is governed by the Reynolds
number, based on the distance L from the plate leading edge (ReL = VL/, where is the
fluid density, V is the incoming uniform flow velocity, and is fluid dynamic viscosity),
as well as by the relative wall roughness L/k, where k is the sand roughness. As a result,
Refs.1 and 4 give us the semi-empirical flat plate CD (ReL) curves obtained for different
L/k from the generalized tubular friction factor curves and presented in Fig. 2.4.3.
(here, k). If the boundary layer is laminar at the plate leading edge, then the wall
roughness does not affect CD until the transition from the laminar boundary layer to the
turbulent one, i.e., the CD (ReL) curve is the same as for a hydraulically smooth flat plate.
The transition regions boundaries depend on various factors, the wall roughness among
them. Here is shown the theoretical transition region for a hydraulically smooth flat plate.
The transition region's boundary corresponding to fully turbulent flows (i.e., at the higher
ReL) is marked in Fig. 2.4.3. by a dashed line. At the higher ReL, the semi-empirical
theoretical curves have flat parts along which ReL does not affect CD at a fixed wall
roughness. These flat parts of the semi-empirical theoretical curves have been obtained by
a theoretical scaling of the generalized tubular friction factor curves to the flat plate
conditions under the assumption of a turbulent boundary layer beginning from the flat
plate leading edge.
To validate the FloEFD flat plate CD predictions within a wide ReL range, we have varied
the incoming uniform flow velocity at the model inlet to obtain the ReL values of 105,
3105, 106, 3106, 107, 3107, 108, 3108, 109.To validate the wall roughness influence on
CD, the wall roughness k values of 0, 50, 200, 103, 5103, 104 m have been considered.
The FloEFD calculation results obtained at result resolution level 5 and compared with the
semi-empirical curves are presented in Fig. 2.4.3..
As you can see from Fig. 2.4.3., CD (ReL) of rough plates is somewhat underpredicted by
FloEFD in the turbulent region, at L/k 1000 the CD (ReL) prediction error does not
exceed about 12%.
2-24
CD
0,014
L/k=1e3
L/k=2e3
0,012
L/k=1e4
L/k=5e4
L/k=2e5
0,01
Smooth
0,008
0,006
0,004
0,002
0
1,00E+05
1,00E+06
1,00E+07
1,00E+08
1,00E+09
Re
Fig. 2.4.3. The flat plate drag coefficient predicted with FloEFD for rough and hydraulically smooth
flat plates in comparison with the semi-empirical curves (Refs.1 and 4).
2-25
2-26
Fig. 2.5.1. The 90-bend square duct's configuration indicating the velocity measuring
stations and the dimensionless coordinates used for presenting the velocity profiles.
z
r ro
and
,
z1/ 2
ri ro
where z1/2 = 20 mm. The dimensionless velocity isolines (with the 0.1 step) at the duct's
= 60 and 90 sections, both measured in Ref.8 and predicted with FloEFD, are shown in
Figs.2.5.4 and 2.5.5.
It is seen that the FloEFD predictions are close to the Ref.8 experimental data.
2-27
Fig. 2.5.2. The duct's velocity profiles predicted by FloEFD (red lines) in comparison with the Ref.8
experimental data (circles).
2-28
z/z1/2=0.5
z/z1/2=0.5
z/z1/2=0
z/z1/2=0
Fig. 2.5.3. The duct's velocity profiles predicted by FloEFD (red lines) in comparison with the
Ref.8 experimental data (circles).
2-29
Fig. 2.5.4. The duct's velocity isolines at the = 60 section predicted by FloEFD (left) in
comparison with the Ref.8 experimental data (right).
Fig. 2.5.5. The duct's velocity isolines at the =90 section predicted by FloEFD (left) in
comparison with the Ref.8 experimental data (right).
2-30
Water
inlet
outlet
1 m/s
30 mm
h = 15
Y
0
recirculation
Lr
20 mm
X
400 mm
2-31
In accordance with Ref.2, the local hydraulic loss coefficient of a bilateral sudden
expansion (the so-called total pressure loss due to flow) for a turbulent (Re > 104) flow
with a uniform inlet velocity profile depends only on the expansion area ratio and is
determined from the following formula:
2
P0 P1
A0
,
1
A
u02
1
where A0 and A1 are the inlet and outlet cross sectional areas respectively, P0 and P1 are
the inlet and outlet total pressures, andu 2/2 is the inlet dynamic head.
0
In a real sudden expansion the flow hydraulic loss coefficient is equal to = f + s, where
f is the friction loss coefficient. In order to exclude f from our comparative analysis,
we have imposed the ideal wall boundary condition on all of the channel walls.
In this validation example the channel expansion area ratios under consideration are: 1.5,
2.0, 3.0, and 6.0. To avoid disturbances at the outlet due to the sudden expansion, the
channel length is 10 times longer than its height. The 1 atm static pressure is specified at
the channel outlet.
The s values predicted by FloEFD at result resolution level 8 for different channel
expansion area ratios A0/A1 are compared to theory in Fig. 2.6.3.
From Fig. 2.6.3., one can see that FloEFD overpredicts s by about 4.5...7.9 %.
ss
1
Theory
0,9
Calculation
0,8
0,7
0,6
0,5
0,4
0,3
0,2
0,1
0
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
A0/A1
Fig. 2.6.3. Comparison of FloEFD calculations to the theoretical values (Ref.2) for the sudden
expansion hydraulic loss coefficient versus the channel expansion area ratio.
2-32
The model used for the unilateral-sudden-expansion channel's flow calculation is shown
in Fig. 2.6.4. The channel's inlet section has a 30 mm height and a 20 mm length. The
channel's expanded section (downstream of the 15 mm height back step) has a 45 mm
height and a 400 mm length (to avoid disturbances of the velocity field compared to the
experimental data from the channel's outlet boundary condition). The velocity profile
measured in the Ref.13 at the corresponding Reh = 125 (the Reynolds number based on
the step height) is specified as a boundary condition at the channel inlet. The 105 Pa static
pressure is specified at the channel outlet.
The flow velocity field predicted by FloEFD at result resolution level 8 is compared in
Figs.2.6.5, 2.6.6, and 2.6.7 to the values measured in Ref.13 with a laser anemometer. The
flow X-velocity (u/U, where U = 8.25 mm/s) profiles at several X = const (-20 mm, 0,
12 mm, 150 mm) cross sections are shown in Fig. 2.6.5. It is seen that the predicted
flow velocity profiles are very close to the experimental values both in the main stream
and in the recirculation zone. The recirculation zone's characteristics, i.e. its length LR
along the channel's wall, (plotted versus the Reynolds number Reh based on the channel's
step height h, where Reh =125 for the case under consideration), the separation streamline,
and the vortex center are shown in Figs.2.6.6 and 2.6.7. It is seen that they are very close
to the experimental data.
2-33
Fig. 2.6.5. The unilateral-sudden-expansion channel's velocity profiles predicted by FloEFD (red lines)
in comparison with the Ref.13 experimental data (black lines with dark circles).
LR/h
12
10
Reh
50
100
150
200
250
Fig. 2.6.6. The unilateral-sudden-expansion channel's recirculation zone length predicted by FloEFD
(red square) in comparison with the Ref.13 experimental data (black signs).
15
separation streamlines,
calculation
10
0
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
Fig. 2.6.7. The unilateral-sudden-expansion channel recirculation zone's separation streamlines and
vortex center, both predicted by FloEFD (red lines and square) in comparison with the Ref.13
experimental data (black signs).
2-34
As one can see, both the integral characteristics (hydraulic loss coefficient) and local
values (velocity profiles and recirculation zone geometry) of the turbulent and laminar
flow in a 2D sudden expansion channel under consideration are adequately predicted by
FloEFD.
2-35
2-36
Fig. 2.7.1. Flow past a cylinder at low Reynolds numbers (4 < Re < 60).
At higher Reynolds numbers the flow becomes unstable and a von Karman vortex street
appears in the wake past the cylinder. Moreover, at Re > 60100 the eddies attached to
the cylinder begin to oscillate and shed from the cylinder (Ref.3). The flow pattern is
shown schematically in Fig. 2.7.2..
To calculate the 2D flow (in the X-Y plane) with FloEFD, the model shown in Fig. 2.7.3.
has been created. The cylinder diameter is equal to 0.01 m at Re 104 and 1 m at Re >104.
The incoming stream turbulence intensity has been specified as 0.1%. To take the flows
physical instability into account, the flow has been calculated by FloEFD using the
time-dependent option. All the calculations have been performed at result resolution level
6.
2-37
In accordance with the theory, steady flow patterns have been obtained in these
calculations in the low Re region. An example of such calculation at Re=41 is shown in
Fig. 2.7.4. as flow trajectories over and past the cylinder in comparison with a photo of
such flow from Ref.9. It is seen that the steady vortex past the cylinder is predicted
correctly.
Fig. 2.7.4. Flow trajectories over and past a cylinder at Re=41 predicted with FloEFD (above) in
comparison with a photo of such flow from Ref.9 (below).
2-38
The unsteady vortex shedding from a cylinder at Re > 60..100, yields oscillations of both
drag and lateral forces acting on the cylinder and a von Karman vortex street is formed
past the cylinder. An X-velocity field over and past the cylinder is shown in Fig. 2.7.5. The
FloEFD prediction of the cylinder drag and lateral force oscillations' frequency in a form
of Strouhal number (Sh = D/(tU), where D is the cylinder diameter, t is the period of
oscillations, and U is the incoming stream velocity) in comparison with experimental data
for Re103 is shown in Fig. 2.7.6..
Fig. 2.7.5. Velocity contours of flow over and past the cylinder at Re=140.
Sh
0,4
0,35
0,3
0,25
0,2
0,15
0,1
0,05
0
1,E+01
1,E+02
1,E+03
1,E+04
1,E+05
1,E+06
1,E+07
Re
Fig. 2.7.6. The cylinder flow's Strouhal number predicted with FloEFD (red triangles) in comparison
with the experimental data (blue line with dashes, Ref.4).
2-39
CD
FD
1
U 2 DL
2
where FD is the drag force acting on the cylinder, U2/2 is the incoming stream dynamic
head, D is the cylinder diameter, and L is the cylinder length. The cylinder drag
coefficient, predicted by FloEFD is compared to the well-known CD(Re) experimental
data in Fig. 2.7.7..
CD
100
10
0,1
1,E-01
Re
1,E+00
1,E+01
1,E+02
1,E+03
1,E+04
1,E+05
1,E+06
1,E+07
Fig. 2.7.7. The cylinder drag coefficient predicted by FloEFD (red diamonds) in comparison with the
experimental data (black marks, Ref.3)
2-40
Air flow
M=3
A uniform supersonic stream of air, having a Mach number M=3, static temperature of
293.2 K, and static pressure of 1 atm, is specified at the channel inlet between two parallel
walls. In the next convergent section (see Fig. 2.8.2.) the stream decelerates through two
oblique shocks shown schematically in Fig. 2.8.1. as lines separating regions 1, 2, and 3.
Since the convergent section has a special shape adjusted to the inlet Mach number, so the
shock reflected from the upper plane wall and separating regions 2 and 3 comes to the
section 3 lower wall edge, a uniform supersonic flow occurs in the next section 3 between
two parallel walls. In the following divergent section the supersonic flow accelerates thus
forming an expansion waves fan 4. Finally, the stream decelerates in the exit channel
section between two parallel walls when passing through another oblique shock.
Fig. 2.8.2. Dimensions (in m) of the 2D convergent-divergent channel including a reference line for
comparing the Mach number.
2-41
Fig. 2.8.3. The model for calculating the 2D supersonic flow in the 2D convergent-divergent
channel with FloEFD.
To obtain the most accurate results possible with FloEFD, the calculations have been
performed at result resolution level 6. The predicted Mach number at the selected channel
points (1-5) and along the reference line (see Fig. 2.8.2.), are presented in Table 3: and
Fig. 2.8.1. respectively.
Table 3: Mach number values predicted with FloEFD with comparison to the
theoretical values at the reference points.
P oint
X coordinate of point, m
Y coordinate of point, m
Theoretical M
1
0,0042
0,0175
3,000
2
0,047
0,0157
2,427
3
0,1094
0,026
1,957
4
0,155
0,026
2,089
5
0,1648
0,0157
2,365
FloEFD prediction of M
P rediction error,%
3,000
0,0
2,429
0,1
1,965
0,4
2,106
0,8
2,380
0,6
From Table 3: and Fig. 2.8.1. it can be seen that the FloEFD predictions are very close to
the theoretical values. In Fig. 2.8.1. one can see that FloEFD properly predicts the abrupt
parameter changes when the stream passes through the shock and a fast parameter change
in the expansion fan.
2-42
M
3,1
3
2,9
2,8
2,7
2,6
2,5
2,4
2,3
2,2
2,1
2
1,9
Theory
Calculation
4
3
0,02
0,04
0,06
0,08
0,1
0,12
0,14
0,16
0,18 x, m
Fig. 2.8.1. Mach number values predicted with FloEFD along the reference line (the reference
points on it are marked by square boxes with numbers) in comparison with the theoretical values.
To show the full flow pattern, the predicted Mach number contours of the channel flow are
shown in Fig. 2.8.2..
This example illustrates that FloEFD is capable of capturing shock waves with a high
degree of accuracy. This high accuracy is possible due to the FloEFD solution adaptive
meshing capability. Solution adaptive meshing automatically refines the mesh in regions
with high flow gradients such as shocks and expansion fans.
2-43
2-44
x
a
2-45
To compare the FloEFD predictions with the experimental data of Ref.5, the calculations
have been performed for the case of incoming flow velocity of Mach number 1.7. The
undisturbed turbulent incoming flow has a static pressure of 1 atm, static temperature of
660.2 K, and turbulence intensity of 1%. The flow Reynolds number of 1.7x106 (defined
with respect to the body frontal diameter) corresponds to these conditions, satisfying the
Ref.5 experimental conditions.
Fig. 2.9.3. The model for calculating the 3D flow over the 3D segmental conic body with
FloEFD.
To compare the flow prediction with the experimental data of Ref.5, the calculations have
been performed for the body tilted at = 0, 30, 60, 90, 120, 150 and 180 angles. To
reduce the computational resources, the Z = 0 flow symmetry plane has been specified in
all of the calculations. Additionally, the Y = 0 flow symmetry plane has been specified at
= 0 and 180.
The calculations have been performed at result resolution level 6.
The comparison is performed on the following parameters:
longitudinal aerodynamic drag coefficient,
Ct
Ft
,
1
U 2 S
2
where Ft is the aerodynamic drag force acting on the body in the t direction (see Fig.
2.9.1.), U2/2 is the incoming stream dynamic head, S is the body frontal cross section
(being perpendicular to the body axis) area;
2-46
Cn
Fn
,
1
U 2 S
2
where Fn is the aerodynamic drag force acting on the body in the n direction (see Fig.
2.9.1.), U2/2 is the incoming stream dynamic head, S is the body frontal cross section
(being perpendicular to the body axis) area;
on the longitudinal (with respect to Z axis) aerodynamic torque coefficient,
mz
Mz
1
,
U 2 SL
2
where Mz is the aerodynamic torque acting on the body with respect to the Z axis (see Fig.
2.9.1.), U2/2 is the incoming stream dynamic head, S is the body frontal cross section
(being perpendicular to the body axis) area, L is the reference length.
The calculation results are presented in Figs.2.9.4 and 2.9.5.
Ct, Cn
1,6
1,4
1,2
1
0,8
0,6
0,4
0,2
0
-0,2
-0,4
-0,6
-0,8
-1
Ct experiment
Ct calculation
Cn experiment
Cn calculation
30
60
90
120
150
180
Attack angle
(degree)
Fig. 2.9.4. The longitudinal and lateral aerodynamic drag coefficients predicted with FloEFD and
measured in the experiments of Ref.5 versus the body tilting angle.
From Fig. 2.9.4., it is seen that the FloEFD predictions of both Cn and Ct are excellent.
2-47
As for the longitudinal aerodynamic torque coefficient (mz) prediction, it is also close to
the experimental data of Ref.5, especially if we take into account the measurements error.
mz
0,08
Experiment
0,06
Calculation
0,04
0,02
0
-0,02
-0,04
0
30
60
90
120
150
180
Attack angle
(degree)
Fig. 2.9.5. The longitudinal aerodynamic torque coefficient predicted with FloEFD and measured in
the experiments (Ref.5) versus the body tilting angle.
To illustrate the quantitative predictions with the corresponding flow patterns, the Mach
number contours are presented in Figs. 2.9.6, 2.9.7, and 2.9.8. All of the flow patterns
presented on the figures include both supersonic and subsonic flow regions. The bow shock
consists of normal and oblique shock parts with the subsonic region downstream of the
normal shock. In the head subsonic region the flow gradually accelerates up to a supersonic
velocity and then further accelerates in the expansion fan of rarefaction waves. The subsonic
wake region past the body can also be seen.
2-48
As the forward part becomes sharper, the normal part of the bow shock and the
corresponding subsonic region downstream of it become smaller. In the presented
pictures, the smallest nose shock (especially its subsonic region) is observed at a = 60o.
2-49
2-50
The plate over its whole length (within the computational domain) is 10C warmer than
the incoming air (303.2 K), both the hydrodynamic and the thermal boundary layer begin
at the plate's leading edge coinciding with the computational domain boundary;
Case #2
The upstream half of the plate (i.e. at x 0.15 m) has a fluid temperature of 293.2 K, and
the downstream half of the plate is 10C warmer than the incoming air (303.2 K), the
hydrodynamic boundary layer begins at the plate's leading edge coinciding with the
computational boundary;
Case #3
Plate temperature is the same as in case #1, the thermal boundary layer begins at the inlet
computational domain boundary, whereas the hydrodynamic boundary layer at the inlet
computational domain boundary has a non-zero thickness which is equal to that in case #2
at the thermal boundary layer starting.
The calculation goal is to predict the local coefficient of heat transfer from the wall to the
fluid, as well as the local skin-friction coefficient.
Computational domain
Air flow
Heated plate
V = 1.5 m/s
T = 303.2 K
T = 293.2 K
2-51
The model used for calculating the 2D flow over the heated flat plate with FloEFD is
shown in Fig. 2.10.2.. The problem is solved as internal in order to avoid the conflict
situation when the external flow boundary with ambient temperature conditions intersects
the wall with a thermal boundary layer.
To avoid any influence of the upper wall on the flow near the heated lower wall, the ideal
wall boundary condition has been specified on the upper wall. To solve the internal
problem, the incoming fluid velocity is specified at the channel inlet, whereas the fluid
static pressure is specified at the channel exit. To specify the external flow features, the
incoming stream's turbulent intensity is set to 1% and the turbulent length is set to 0.01 m,
i.e., these turbulent values are similar to the default values for external flow problems.
Ideal wall
Inlet velocity Ux
Heated wall
Fig. 2.10.2. The model used for calculating the 2D flow over heated flat plate with FloEFD.
The heat transfer coefficient h and the skin-friction coefficient Cf are FloEFD output flow
parameters. The theoretical values for laminar flow boundary layer over a flat plate, in
accordance with Ref.6 can be determined from the following equations:
kNu x
x
where
k is the thermal conductivity of the fluid,
x is the distance along the wall from the start of the hydrodynamic boundary layer,
Nux is the Nusselt number defined on a heated wall as follows:
2-52
for a laminar boundary layer if its starting point coincides with the thermal
boundary layer starting point, and
Nu x
0.332 Pr 1 / 3 Re 1x / 2
3
1 ( x0 / x )3 / 4
for a laminar boundary layer if the thermal boundary layer begins at point x0 lying
downstream of the hydrodynamic boundary layer starting point, in this case Nux is
defined at x>x0 only;
Cp
---------- is the Prandtl number, is the fluid dynamic viscosity, Cp is the
k
Vx
fluid specific heat at constant pressure, R e x = ----------- is the Reynolds number
where
Pr
C fx
As for the hydrodynamic boundary layer thickness needed for specification at the
computational domain boundary in case #3, in accordance with Ref.6, it has been
determined from the following equation:
, so = 0.00575 m in this
4.64 x / Re0.5
x
case. For these calculations all fluid parameters are determined at the outer boundary of
the boundary layer.
The FloEFD predictions of h and Cf performed at result resolution level 7, and the
theoretical curves calculated with the formulae presented above are shown in Figs.2.10.3
and 2.10.4. It is seen that the FloEFD predictions of the heat transfer coefficient and the
skin-friction coefficient are in excellent agreement with the theoretical curves.
2-53
h (W/m^2/K)
25
20
15
10
5
0
0
0,05
0,1
0,15
0,2
0,25
0,3
X (m)
Fig. 2.10.3. Heat transfer coefficient change along a heated plate in a laminar boundary layer:
FloEFD predictions compared to theory.
Cf
0,02
0,018
0,016
0,014
0,012
0,01
Case#3, calculation
0,008
0,006
0,004
0,002
0
0
0,05
0,1
0,15
0,2
0,25
0,3
X (m)
Fig. 2.10.4. Skin-friction coefficient change along a heated plate in a laminar boundary layer:
FloEFD predictions compared to theory.
2-54
Y
P = 1 atm
Q1 or T1
U, T
Q2 or T2
X
1m
0.4m
1.2m
1.4 m
Fig. 2.11.2. A model created for calculating 3D flow within a heated annular tube using
FloEFD.
2-55
To validate the FloEFD capability for solving conjugate heat transfer problems both with
and without radiation, let us solve the following three problems: 1) a conjugate heat
transfer problem with convection only, 2) radiation heat transfer only problem, and 3) a
conjugate heat transfer problem with both convection and radiation.
In the first problem we specify Q2 = -Q1, so the convective heat fluxes at the tube inner
and outer walls are constant along the tube. The corresponding laminar annular pipe flow's
fully developed velocity and temperature profiles, according to Ref.6, are expressed
analytically as follows:
r 2 r 2 ln(r / r )
2
1
1 ,
u(r) = 1
ln(r1 / r2 )
r2 r2
T(r)= T2
r
q2
r2 ln ,
k
r2
2u
where = r1
r2
r
1 / ln( r1 / r 2 ) 1
r2
u is the volume-average velocity, defined as the volume flow rate divided by the tube
cross-section area,
q2 is the the heat flux from the fluid to the tubes central body,
k is the fluid thermal conductivity,
T2 is the surface temperature of the central body.
The heat flux from the fluid to the tube's central body (negative, since the heat comes from
the fluid to the solid) is equal to
Q2
T
=
r r r2 2 r2 L
q2 = k
2-56
Let Q1 = - Q2 = 107.235 W and u 13.59 m/s ( = -10 m/s), the fluid has the following
properties: k = 0.5 W/(mK), Cp = 500 J/(kgK), = 0.002 Pas, = 0.1 kg/m3. Since the
corresponding (defined on the equivalent tube diameter) Reynolds number Red 815 is
rather low, the flow has to be laminar. We specify the corresponding velocity and
temperature profiles as boundary conditions at the model inlet and as initial conditions,
and Pout = 1 atm as the tube outlet boundary condition.
To reduce the computational domain, let us set Y=0 and X=0 flow symmetry planes
(correspondingly, the specified Q1 and Q2 values are referred to the tube section's quarter
lying in the computational domain). The calculation have been performed at result
resolution level 6.
The fluid temperature profile predicted at 0.75 m from the tube model inlet is shown in
Fig. 2.11.3. together with the theoretical curve.
T
500
Theory
475
Calculation
450
425
400
375
350
325
300
275
250
0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5
0,6
0,7
Y, m
Fig. 2.11.3. Fluid temperature profiles across the tube in the case of convection only, predicted with
FloEFD and compared to the theoretical curve.
It is seen that this prediction practically coincides with the theoretical curve.
Before solving the third problem coupling convection and radiation, let us determine the
radiation heat fluxes between the tube's outer and inner walls under the previous problem's
wall temperatures. In addition to holding the outer shell's temperature at 450 K and the
central body's temperature at 300 K as the volume sources, let us specify the emissivity of
1 = 0.95 for the outer shell and 2 = 0.25 for the central body. To exclude any convection,
let us specify the liquid velocity of 0.001 m/s and thermal conductivity of 10-20 W/(mK).
2-57
Let J2 denote the radiation rate leaving the central body, and G2 denotes the radiation rate
coming to the central body, therefore Q2r = J2 - G2 (the net radiation rate from the central
body). In the same manner, let J1 denote the radiation rate leaving the outer shell's inner
surface, and G1 denote the radiation rate coming to the outer shell's inner surface,
therefore Q1r = J1 - G1 (the net radiation rate from the outer shell's inner surface). These
radiation rates can be determined by solving the following equations:
J2 = A22T24 + G2(1-2),
G2 = J1F1-2 ,
J1 = A11T14 + G1(1-1),
G1 = J2F2-1 + J1F1-1 ,
where =5.66910-8 W/m2K4 is the Stefan-Boltzmann constant, F1-2, F2-1, F1-1 are these
surfaces' radiation shape factors, under the assumption that the leaving and incident
radiation fluxes are uniform over these surfaces, Ref.6 gives the following formulas:
F1-2=(1/X) - (1//X){arccos(B/A) - (1/2/Y)[(A2 + 4A - 4X2 + 4)1/2arccos(B/X/A) +
+ Barcsin(1/X)-A/2]},
F1-1=1-(1/X)+(2//X)arctan[2(X2-1)1/2/Y]-(Y/2//X){[(4X2+Y2)1/2/Y]arcsin{[4(X2-1)+
+ (Y/X)2(X2-2)]/[Y2+4(X2-1)]}-arcsin[(X2-2)/X2]+(/2)[(4X2+Y2)1/2/Y-1]}
Table 3: Radiation rates predicted with FloEFD with comparison to the theoretical
values.
Parameter
Q2 r
J2 r
Q1 r
J1 r
Theory (Ref.6), W
-383,77
1728,35
4003,68
8552,98
FloEFD predictions
Value, W
Prediction error,%
-388,30
1,2%
1744,47
0,9%
3931,87
-1,8%
8596,04
0,5%
It is seen that the prediction errors are quite small. To validate the FloEFD capabilities on
the third problem, which couples convection and radiation, let us add the theoretical net
radiation rates, Q1 r and Q2 r scaled to the reduced computational domain, i.e., divided by
4, to the Q1 and Q2 values specified in the first problem. Let us specify Q1 = 1108.15 W
and Q2 = -203.18 W, so theoretically we must obtain the same fluid temperature profile as
in the first considered problem.
2-58
The fluid temperature profile predicted at 0.75 m from the tube model inlet at the result
resolution level 6 is shown in Fig. 2.11.1. together with the theoretical curve. It is seen that
once again this prediction virtually coincides with the theoretical curve.
T, K
475
Theory
450
Calculation
425
400
375
350
325
300
275
0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5
0,6
0,7
Y, m
Fig. 2.11.1. Fluid temperature profiles across the tube in the case coupling convection and radiation,
predicted with FloEFD and compared to the theoretical curve.
2-59
2-60
Smoke inlet
Enclosure
under study
(plexiglass)
External
enclosure
(plexiglass)
Insulation
Opening (S = 0, 0.4)
Substrate
Heat sink
Heat source lcpxlcpxhcp
(d) internal enclosure
Fig. 2.12.1. The pin-fin heat sink nestled within two plexiglass boxes: lcp=Ls=25.4 mm, hcp=0.861 mm,
Hp=5.5 mm, Hb=1.75 mm, Sp=1.5 mm, Sps= Ls/8, L=127 mm, H=41.3 mm, Hw=6.35 mm (from Ref.19).
2-61
The corresponding model used in the calculations is shown in Fig. 2.12.2.. In this model's
coordinate system the gravitational acceleration vector is directed along the X axis. The
computational domain envelopes the outer surface of the external box, and the Z=0
symmetry plane is used to reduce the required computer resources.
Fig. 2.12.2. A model created for calculating the heat transfer from the pin-fin heat sink through the two
nested boxes into the environment: (a) the internal (smaller) box with the heat sink; (b) the whole model.
According to Ref. 14, both the heat sink and the substrate are coated with a special black
paint to provide a surface emissivity of 0.95 (the other plexiglass surfaces are also opaque,
diffuse and gray, but have an emissivity of 0.83).
The maximum steady-state temperature Tmax of the thermofoil releasing the heat of
known power Q was measured. The constant ambient temperature Ta was measured at the
upper corner of the external box. As a result, the value of
Rja = (Tmax - Ta)/Q (12.1)
was determined at various Q (in the 0.1...1 W range).
2-62
The ambient temperature is not presented in Ref. 14, so, proceeding from the suggestion
that the external box in the experiment was placed in a room, we have varied the ambient
temperature in the relevant range of 15...22C. Since Rja is governed by the temperature
difference Tmax - Ta, (i.e. presents the two boxes thermal resistance), the ambient
temperature range only effects the resistance calculations by 0.6C/W at Q = 1W, (i.e. by
1.4% of the experimentally determined Rja value that is 43C/W). As for the boundary
conditions on the external boxs outer surface, we have specified a heat transfer coefficient
of 5.6 W/m2 K estimated from Ref. 15 for the relevant wind-free conditions and an
ambient temperature lying in the range of 15...22C (additional calculations have shown
that the variation of the constant ambient temperature on this boundary yield nearly
identical results). As a result, at Q = 1W (the results obtained at the other Q values are
shown in Ref. 16) and Ta =20C we have obtained Rja = 41C/W, i.e. only 5% lower than
the experimental value.
2-63
The flow streamlines visualized in Ref. 14 using smoke and obtained in the calculations
are shown in Fig. 2.12.3.
Fig. 2.12.3. Flow streamlines visualized by smoke in the Ref.19 experiments (left) and
obtained in the calculations (colored in accordance with the flow velocity values) (right).
2-64
2-65
The model of heat sink is made of solid aluminum (thermal conductivity 200 W/(mK)). It
is heated by MINCO ThermofoilTM electrical heater with a heat load of 10 W. The bottom
of the heated foil is insulated with a 25 mm Polystyrene brick (thermal conductivity 0.033
W/(mK)). The heat sink is placed in a rectangular wind tunnel duct with the walls made
of Plexiglass (thermal conductivity 0.2 W/(mK)). It is mounted in such a way that the fin
base is flush with the duct wall as shown in Fig. 2.13.2..
Electrically heated foil
Heat sink
Thermocouple
Insulation
Rth
Ths T0 ,
q
where Ths is the temperature of the heat sink base, T0 is the temperature at the wind tunnel
inlet and q is the total power input of the heat source (10 W). In Ref. 17, the Ths value was
measured by averaging the reading of four thermocouples (two of them can be seen in Fig.
2.13.2.) placed symmetrically at the corners of the heat sink base.
Table 3: shows air inlet flow conditions specified for the calculations, inlet temperature is
constant and equal 20C. To perform the calculations, five cases are considered, each with
a different inlet velocity uin that was determined as follows:
uin V& / A ,
where A = 24 cm2 is wind tunnel cross sectional area;
standard conditions defined as
2-66
w d h
V&
, Redh
A A front
where w is average air velocity; Afront = 1.4 cm2 is front area of the fins; Redh is the
Reynolds duct number; dh is hydraulic diameter of the wind tunnel; is dynamic viscosity
of air; is density of air.
uin, m/s
Redh
0.903
1740
1.287
2480
1.583
3050
1.899
3660
3.633
7000
2-67
The values of thermal resistances predicted by FloEFD and the corresponding values
measured experimentally are shown in Fig. 2.13.2.. According to this plot, the difference
between the calculations and the experimental measurements is less than 10%.
Rth, K/W
4,5
4,0
3,5
3,0
2,5
Experi ment
Ca lcu lati on
2,0
1,5
1,0
0,5
Re
0,0
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
Fig. 2.13.2. Thermal resistance of the Heat Sink versus Reynold number in
comparison with the experimental data (Ref. 17).
This indicates that the sufficient accuracy of the results is maintained even on a coarse
mesh generated inside the narrow channels.
2-68
Tw = 300 K
Tw = 300 K
Fig. 2.14.1. A warm solid rod cooling down from an initial temperature to the temperature at
the ends of the rod.
2T C T ,
x 2
k
where , C, and k are the solid material density, specific heat, and thermal conductivity,
respectively, and is the time, with the following boundary condition: T=T0 at x = 0 and
at x = L.
In the general case, i.e., at an arbitrary initial condition, the problem has the following
solution:
2
nx ,
T T0 Cn e ( n / L) k /( C ) sin
L
n 1
where coefficients Cn are determined from the initial conditions (see Ref.6).
With the uniform initial temperature profile, according to the initial and boundary
conditions, the problem has the following solution:
T 300 50
nx (K).
4 1 n / L2 k /( C )
e
sin(
)
n 1 n
L
2-69
Fig. 2.14.2. The model used for calculating heat conduction in a solid rod with FloEFD (the
computational domain envelopes the rod).
The evolution of maximum rod temperature, predicted with FloEFD and compared with
theory, is presented in Fig. 2.14.3.. The FloEFD prediction has been performed at result
resolution level 5. One can see that it coincide with the theoretical curve.
355
Theory
Calculation
345
335
T (K)
325
315
305
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
Fig. 2.14.3. Evolution of the maximum rod temperature, predicted with FloEFD and compared to
theory.
The temperature profiles along the rod at different time moments, predicted by FloEFD,
are compared to theory and presented in Fig. 2.14.4.. One can see that the FloEFD
predictions are very close to the theoretical profiles. The maximum prediction error not
exceeding 2K occurs at the ends of the rod and is likely caused by calculation error in the
theoretical profile due to the truncation of Fourier series.
2-70
325
t=5000s/theory
t=5000s/calculation
320
t=10000s/theory
t=10000s/calculation
315
T (K)
310
305
300
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1 X (m)
Fig. 2.14.4. Evolution of the temperature distribution along the rod, predicted with FloEFD and
compared to theory.
2-71
2-72
Polystyrene
e = const
Liquid
Laminar flow
In accordance with Ref. 6, a laminar tube flow with a fully developed velocity profile has
a self-consistent fully developed temperature profile if the following two conditions are
satisfied: the fluid's properties are temperature-independent and the heat flux from the
tube inner surface to the fluid (or vise versa) is constant along the tube. These conditions
provide the following fully developed tube flow temperature profile:
q R
T(r, z) = T(r=0, z=zinlet) - w i
k
r 2 1 r 4 4q z z
inlet
w
,
C p umax Ri
Ri 4 Ri
where
T is the fluid temperature,
r is a radial coordinate (r = 0 corresponds to the tube axis, r = Ri corresponds to the tube
inner surface, i.e., Ri is the tube inner radius),
z is an axial coordinate (z = zinlet corresponds to the tube inlet),
qw is a constant heat flux from the fluid to the tube inner surface,
k is the fluid thermal conductivity,
2-73
umax is the maximum fluid velocity of the fully developed velocity profile
u r = umax 1 .
Ri
Since the tube under consideration has no heat sinks and is cooled by surrounding fluid
medium, let us assume that the fluid medium surrounding the tube has certain fixed
temperature Te, and the heat transfer between this medium and the tube outer surface is
determined by a specified constant heat transfer coefficient e.
inlet
4k
) q w Ri
R 4 q w z zinlet
1
1
ln i
C p u max Ri
e Ro k s
R o
dynamic viscosity = 0.001 Pas, = 1000 kg/m3 (these fluid properties provide a
laminar flow condition since the tube flow Reynolds number based on the tube diameter is
equal to Red = 100). The T(r, zinlet ) and u(r) profiles at the tube inlet, the Te(z) distribution
along the tube, e = 5 W/(m2K), and tube outlet static pressure Pout = 1 atm have been
specified as the boundary conditions.
The inlet flow velocity and temperature profiles have been specified as the initial
conditions along the tube.
To reduce the computational domain, the calculations have been performed with the Y=0
and X=0 flow symmetry planes. The calculations have been performed at result resolution
level 7.
The fluid and solid temperature profiles predicted at z = 0 are shown in Fig. 2.15.3.
together with the theoretical curve. It is seen that the prediction practically coincides with
the theoretical curve (the prediction error does not exceed 0.4%).
2-74
Outlet static
pressure opening
Computational
domain
Inlet velocity
opening
Fig. 2.15.2. The model used for calculating the 3D flow and the conjugate heat transfer in the tube
with FloEFD.
T, K
370
Theory liquid
360
Theory solid
350
Calculation
340
330
320
310
300
290
0
0,01
0,02
0,03
0,04
0,05
0,06
0,07
R, m
Fig. 2.15.3. Fluid and solid temperature profiles across the tube, predicted with FloEFD and
compared with the theoretical curve.
2-75
2-76
Based on experimental data for the average coefficient of heat transfer from a heated
circular cylinder to air flowing over it (see Ref. 6), the corresponding Nusselt number can
be determined from the following formula:
NuD C Re D n Pr1 3 ,
where constants C and n are taken from the following table:
ReD
0.4 - 4
0.989
0.330
4 - 40
0.911
0.385
40 - 4000
0.683
0.466
4000 - 40000
0.193
0.618
40000 - 400000
0.0266
0.805
2-77
Here, the Nusselt number, NuD = (hD)/k (where h is the heat transfer coefficient averaged
over the cylinder, and k is fluid thermal conductivity), the Reynolds number,
ReD = (UD)/ (where U is the incoming stream velocity, and is fluid dynamic
viscosity), and the Prandtl number, Pr= Cp/k (where is fluid dynamic viscosity,
Cp is fluid specific heat at constant pressure, and k is fluid thermal conductivity) are based
on the cylinder diameter D and on the fluid properties taken at the near-wall flow layer.
According to Ref. 6, Pr = 0.72 for the entire range of ReD.
To validate the FloEFD predictions, the air properties have been specified to provide Pr =
0.72: k = 0.0251375 W/(mK), = 1.810-5 Pas, specific heat at constant pressure Cp =
1005.5 J/(kgK). Then, the incoming stream velocity, U, has been specified to obtain ReD
= 1, 10, 100, 103, 104, 5104, 105, 2105, and 3105 for a cylinder diameter of D = 0.1 m
(see Table 3:).
This validation approach consists of specifying the heat generation source inside the
cylinder with a power determined from the desired steady-state cylinder temperature and
the average heat transfer coefficient, h = (NuDk)/D. NuD is determined from the specified
ReD using the empirical formula presented above. The final cylinder surface temperature,
that is also required for specifying the heat source power Q (see Table 3:) is assumed to be
10C higher than the incoming air temperature. The initial cylinder temperature and the
incoming air temperature are equal to 293.15 K. The cylinder material is aluminum. Here,
the heat conduction in the solid is calculated simultaneously with the flow calculation, i.e.,
the conjugate heat transfer problem is solved.
As a result of the calculation, the cylinder surface has acquired a steady-state temperature
differing from the theoretical one corresponding to the heat generation source specified
inside the cylinder. Multiplying the theoretical value of the Nusselt number by the ratio of
the obtained temperature difference (between the incoming air temperature and the
cylinder surface temperature) to the specified temperature difference, we have determined
the predicted Nusselt number versus the specified Reynolds number. The values obtained
by solving the steady-state and time dependent problems at result resolution level 5 are
presented in Fig. 2.16.1. together with the experimental data taken from Ref. 6.
2-78
consideration.
R eD
U , m /s
Q ,W
1.5 10
-4
10
1.5 10
-3
10
0 .015
0 .04 1
10
0 .15
0 .12 1
10
1.5
0 .40 5
10
15
1 .99 4
0 .00 7
0 .01 6
From Fig. 2.16.1., it is seen that the predictions made with FloEFD, both in the
time-dependent approach and in the steady-state one, are excellent within the whole ReD
range under consideration.
Nu D
1000
C alc ulatio n,
s te ady-sta te
C alc ulatio n,
tim e-d epend ent
100
10
0,1
1,E-01
1,E+01
1,E+03
1,E+05
Re D
Fig. 2.16.1. Nusselt number for air flow over a heated cylinder: FloEFD predictions and the
experimental data taken from Ref. 6.
2-79
2-80
g
Adiabatic walls
T1=305 K
T2=295 K
L
Fig. 2.17.1. An enclosed 2D square cavity with natural
The square cavity's side dimension, L, is varied within the range of 0.0111...0.111 m in
order to vary the cavity's Rayleigh number within the range of 103106. Rayleigh
number descibes the characteristics of the natural convection inside the cavity and is
defined as follows:
Ra
where
g 2C p L3T
k
1
2-81
Fig. 2.17.2. The model created for calculating the 2D natural convection
flow in the 2D square cavity using FloEFD.
Due to gravity and different temperatures of the cavity's vertical walls, a steady-state
natural convection flow (vortex) with a vertical temperature stratification forms inside the
cavity. The Ra = 105 flow's prediction performed with FloEFD is shown in
Fig. 2.17.3..
Fig. 2.17.3. The temperature, X-velocity, Y-velocity, the velocity vectors, and the streamlines,
predicted by FloEFD in the square cavity at Ra = 105.
2-82
Nuav qwav L /(T k ) , where qw av is the heat flux from the wall
Refs.10, 11
Ref.12
Calculation
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
1,E+03
1,E+04
1,E+05
1,E+06
Ra
Fig. 2.17.4. The average sidewall Nusselt number vs. the Rayleigh number.
The dimensionless velocities of the natural convection flow in the X and Y directions,
x and
L
presented in Fig. 2.17.6.. One can see that the FloEFD predictions of the natural
convection flow's local parameters are fairly close to the benchmark data at Ra 105.
FloEFD FE14 Technical Reference
2-83
Dimensionless
U max, V max
1000
Vmax, Re fs.10, 11
Vmax, c alcula tion
Umax , Refs. 10, 1 1
Umax , cal culation
100
10
1
1,E+03
1,E+04
1,E+05
1,E+06
Ra
Dimensionless
X Vmax, YUmax
Y Umax, Refs.10 , 11
0,9
X Vmax , Refs. 10, 1 1
0,8
X V ma x, ca lculation
0,7
0,6
0,5
0,4
0,3
0,2
0,1
0
1,E+03
Ra
1,E+04
1,E+05
1,E+06
2-84
dV p
dt
f (V f V p ) V f V p
2
Cd A Fg
where m is the particle mass, t is time, Vp and Vf are the particle and fluid velocities
(vectors), accordingly, f is the fluid density, Cd is the particle drag coefficient, A is the
particle frontal surface area, and Fg is the gravitational force.
Particles are treated as non-rotating spheres of constant mass and specified (solid or
liquid) material, whose drag coefficient is determined from Hendersons semi-empirical
formula (Ref. 18). At very low velocity of particles with respect to carrier fluid (i.e., at the
relative velocitys Mach number M 0) this formula becomes
Cd
24
4.12
0.38
Re 1 0 .03 Re 0 .48 Re
Re
f V f Vp d ,
Particle injection
Fig. 2.18.1. Injection of a particle into a uniform fluid flow.
2-85
Due to the same reason as in the previous validation examples with flow over flat plates,
we will solve this validation as an internal problem. The corresponding model is shown in
Fig. 2.18.2.. Both of the walls are ideal, the channel has length of 0.233 m and height of
0.12 m, all the walls have thickness of 0.01 m. We specify the uniform fluid velocity Vinlet,
the fluid temperature of 293.2 K, and the default values of turbulent flow parameters with
the laminar boundary layer at the channel inlet, and the static pressure of 1 atm at the
channel outlet. All the fluid flow calculations are performed at a result resolution level of
5.
Ideal Wall
Inlet
Outlet
the low maximum Reynolds number of Re max = 0.1 (air flow with Vinlet =
0.002 m/s, gold particles of d = 0.5 mm, injected at the velocity of 0.002
m/s perpendicularly to the wall),
b) the high maximum Reynolds number of Re max = 105 (water flow with
Vinlet = 10 m/s, iron particles of d = 1 cm, injected at the velocities of 1, 2,
3 m/s perpendicularly to the wall),
c) a particle trajectory in the Y-directed gravitational field (gravitational
acceleration gy = -9.8 m/s2, air flow with Vinlet = 0.6 m/s, an iron particle of
d = 1 cm, injected at the 1.34 m/s velocity at the angle of 63.44o with the
wall).
a)
In the first case, due to small Re values, the particle drag coefficient is close to Cd=24/Re
(i.e., obeys the Stokes law). Then, neglecting gravity, we obtain the following analytical
solution for the particle trajectory:
X (t ) X
V fx t
t 0
d 2 p
18
(V px
t 0
V fx ) exp(
18
t) ,
d 2 p
d 2 p
18
Y (t ) Y t 0 V fy t
(V py t 0 V fy ) exp( 2 t ) ,
18
d p
2-86
where Vfx, Vpx, Vfy, Vpy are the X- and Y-components of the fluid and particle velocities,
accordingly, p is the particle material density. The FloEFD calculation and the analytical
solution are shown in Fig. 2.18.3.. It is seen that they are very close to one another. Special
calculations have shown that the difference is due to the CD assumptions only.
Y (m)
0,035
Analytical
solution
0,030
Calculation
0,025
0,020
0,015
0,010
0,005
0,000
0,00
0,05
0,10
0,15
0,25 X (m)
0,20
Fig. 2.18.3. Particle trajectories in a uniform fluid flow at Re max = 0.1, predicted by FloEFD and
obtained from the analytical solution.
In the second case, due to high Re values, the particle drag coefficient is close to Cd=0.38.
Then, neglecting the gravity, we obtain the following analytical solution for the particle
trajectory:
Y (t ) Y
t 0
X (t ) X
V fy t
t 0
pd
0.285
V fx t
(V py
pd
0.285
t 0
(V px
V fy ) ln(1
t 0
0.285
t)
pd
V fx ) ln(1
0.285
t) .
pd
The FloEFD calculations and the analytical solutions for three particle injection velocities,
Vpy(t=0) = 1, 2, 3 m/s, are shown in Fig. 2.18.4.. It is seen that the FloEFD calculations
coincide with the analytical solutions. Special calculations have shown that the difference
is due to the CD assumptions only.
In the third case, the particle trajectory is governed by the action of the gravitational force
only, the particle drag coefficient is very close to zero, so the analytical solution is:
2
1 X X t 0 .
Y Y t 0 V py t g
t 0
y 2 V px
2-87
The FloEFD calculation and the analytical solution for this case are presented in Fig.
2.18.5.. It is seen that the FloEFD calculation coincides with the analytical solution.
Y (m)
0,08
0,07
Vp = 1 m/s,
analytical solution
0,06
Vp = 1 m/s,
Calculation
0,05
Vp = 2 m/s,
analytical solution
0,04
Vp = 2 m/s,
Calculation
0,03
Vp = 3 m/s,
analytical solution
0,02
0,01
0,00
0,00
Vp = 3 m/s,
Calculation
0,05
0,10
0,15
0,20 X (m)
Fig. 2.18.4. Particle trajectories in a uniform fluid flow at Re max = 105, predicted by FloEFD and
obtained from the analytical solution.
I
Y (m)
0,08
Calculation
0,07
Theory
0,06
0,05
0,04
0,03
0,02
0,01
0
0,00
0,03
0,06
0,09
0,12
0,15 X (m)
Fig. 2.18.5. Particle trajectories in the Y-directed gravity, predicted by FloEFD and obtained from the
analytical solution.
2-88
Air
Porous screen
The model used for calculating the 2D (in XY-plane) flow is shown in Fig. 2.19.2.. The
channel has height of 0.15 m, the inlet (upstream of the porous screen) part of the 0.3 m
length, the porous screen of the 0.01 m thickness, and the outlet (downstream of the
porous screen) part of the 0.35 m length. All the walls have thickness of 0.01 m.
Fig. 2.19.2. The model used for calculating the 2D flow between two parallel plates and through the
porous screen with FloEFD.
2-89
2 P
V 2
where P is the pressure difference between the screen sides, V2/2 is the dynamic
pressure (head) of the incoming stream.
Since in FloEFD a porous mediums resistance to flow is characterized by parameter k = gradP/V, then for the porous screens k = V /(2L), where V is the fluid velocity, L is the
porous screen thickness. In FloEFD, this form of a porous mediums resistance to flow is
specified as k = (AV+B)/, so A = /(2L), B = 0 for the porous screens under
consideration. Therefore, taking L = 0.01 m and = 1.2 kg/m3 into account, we specify A
= 57, 72, 168, and 246 kg/m-4 for the porous screens under consideration. In accordance
with the screens nature, their permeability is specified as isotropic.
According to the experiments presented in Ref.2, the step-shaped velocity profiles V(Y)
presented in Fig. 2.19.3. have been specified at the model inlet. The static pressure of 1
atm has been specified at the model outlet.
25
20
15
V (m/s)
10
5
0
0
0,02
0,04
0,06
0,08
0,1
0,12
0,14
Y (m)
Fig. 2.19.3. Inlet velocity profiles.
The air flow dynamic pressure profiles at the 0.3 m distance downstream from the porous
screens, both predicted by FloEFD at result resolution level 5 and measured in the Ref. 2
experiments, are presented in Fig. 2.19.4. for the = 0 case (i.e., without screen) and
Figs.2.19.5-2.19.8 for the porous screens of different .
2-90
It is seen that the FloEFD predictions agree well, both qualitatively and quantitatively,
with the experimental data both in absence of a screen and for all the porous screens
(gauzes) under consideration, demonstrating the leveling effect of the gauze screens on the
step-shaped incoming streams. The prediction error in the dynamic pressure maximum
does not exceed 30%.
Dynamic Pressure
(Pa)
350
Calculation
Experiment
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
0,02
0,04
0,06
0,08
0,1
0,12
0,14
Y (m)
Fig. 2.19.4. The dynamic pressure profiles at = 0, predicted by FloEFD and compared to the Ref. 2
experiments.
Dynamic Pressure
(Pa)
Calculation
Experiment
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
0,02
0,04
0,06
0,08
0,1
0,12
0,14
Y (m)
Fig. 2.19.5. The dynamic pressure profiles at = 0.95, predicted by FloEFD and compared to the
Ref. 2 experiments.
2-91
Dynamic Pressure
(Pa)
Calculation
200
Experiment
150
100
50
0
0
0,02
0,04
0,06
0,08
0,1
0,12
0,14
Y (m)
Fig. 2.19.6. The dynamic pressure profiles at = 1.2, predicted by FloEFD and compared to the
Ref. 2 experiments.
Dynamic Pressure
(Pa)
Calculation
120
Experiment
100
80
60
40
20
0
0
0,02
0,04
0,06
0,08
0,1
0,12
0,14
Y (m)
Fig. 2.19.7. The dynamic pressure profiles at = 2.8, predicted by FloEFD and compared to the Ref.
2 experiments.
2-92
Dynamic Pressure
Calculation
(Pa)
Experiment
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0
0,02
0,04
0,06
0,08
0,1
0,12
0,14
Y (m)
Fig. 2.19.8. The dynamic pressure profiles at = 4.1, predicted by FloEFD and compared to the Ref.
2 experiments.
2-93
2-94
U
U
1
Uwa
U
2
Fig. 2.20.1. The 2D triangular (left) and trapezoidal (right) cavities with the moving walls (the
motionless walls are shown with dashes).
As shown in Ref. 21 and Ref. 20, the shear-driven recirculating flows in these cavities are
fully governed by their Reynolds numbers Re = Uwallh/, where is the fluid density,
is the fluid dynamic viscosity, Uwall is the moving wall velocity, h is the cavity height.
So, we can specify the height of the triangular cavity h = 4 m, the height of the trapezoidal
cavity h = 1 m, Uwall = 1 m/s for all cases under consideration, the fluid density = 1
kg/m3, the fluid dynamic viscosity =0.005 Pas in the triangular cavity produces a Re =
800, and = 0.01, 0.0025, 0.001 Pas in the trapezoidal cavity produces a Re = 100, 400,
1000, respectively.
2-95
The cavities models are shown in Fig. 2.20.2.. The FloEFD calculation of flow in the
triangular cavity has been performed on the 48x96 computational mesh. The results in
comparison with those from Ref. 21 are presented in Fig. 2.20.3. (streamlines) and in Fig.
2.20.4. (the fluid velocity X-component along the central vertical bisector shown by a
green line in Fig. 2.20.2.). A good agreement of these calculations is clearly seen.
Moving wall
Moving wall
Fig. 2.20.2. The models for calculating the lid-driven 2D flows in the triangular (left) and trapezoidal
(right) cavities with FloEFD.
Fig. 2.20.3. The flow trajectories in the triangular cavity, calculated by FloEFD (right) and compared
to the Ref. 21 calculation (left).
2-96
Vx/Uwall
1,2
Calculation
1
0,8
0,6
0,4
0,2
0
0
-0,2
Y, m
-0,4
Fig. 2.20.4. The triangular cavitys flow velocity X-component along the central vertical bisector,
calculated by FloEFD (red line) and compared to the Ref. 21 calculation (black line with circlets).
The FloEFD calculations of flows in the trapezoidal cavity with one and two moving walls
at different Re values have been performed with the 100x50 computational mesh. Their
results in comparison with those from Ref.16 are presented in Fig. 2.20.5.-2.20.10
(streamlines) and in Fig. 2.20.11. (the fluid velocity X-component along the central
vertical bisector shown by a green line in Fig. 2.20.2.). A good agreement of these
calculations is seen.
Fig. 2.20.5. The flow streamlines in the trapezoidal cavity with a top only moving wall at Re = 100,
calculated by FloEFD (right) and compared to the Ref. 20 calculation (left).
2-97
Fig. 2.20.6. The flow streamlines in the trapezoidal cavity with a top only moving wall at Re = 400,
calculated by FloEFD (right) and compared to the Ref. 20 calculation (left).
Fig. 2.20.7. The flow streamlines in the trapezoidal cavity with a top only moving wall at Re =
1000, calculated by FloEFD (right) and compared to the Ref. 20 calculation (left).
Fig. 2.20.8. The flow streamlines in the trapezoidal cavity with two moving walls at Re = 100,
calculated by FloEFD (right) and compared to the Ref. 20 calculation (left).
2-98
Fig. 2.20.9. The flow streamlines in the trapezoidal cavity with two moving walls at Re = 400,
calculated by FloEFD (right) and compared to the Ref. 20 calculation (left).
Fig. 2.20.10. The flow streamlines in the trapezoidal cavity with two moving walls at Re = 1000,
calculated by FloEFD (right) and compared to the Ref. 20 calculation (left).
Vx/Uwall
1
Calculation
0,8
0,6
0,4
0,2
0
-0,2
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
-0,4
-0,6
-0,8
-1
Y, m
Fig. 2.20.11. The flow velocity X-component along the central vertical bisector in the trapezoidal
cavity with two moving walls at Re = 400, calculated by FloEFD (red line) and compared to the
Ref. 20 calculation (black line).
2-99
2-100
rotating cover
h
R
Due to the cover rotation, a shear-driven recirculating flow forms in this vessel. Such
flows are governed by the Reynolds number Re = R2/, where is the fluid density,
is the fluid dynamic viscosity, is the angular velocity of the rotating cover, R is the
radius of the rotating cover. In the case under consideration the 70/30% glycerol/water
mixture has = 1180 kg/m3, = 0.02208 Pas, the cover rotates at = 15.51 rpm, so Re
= 1800.
The FloEFD calculation has been performed on the 82x41x82 computational mesh. The
formed flow pattern (toroidal vortex) obtained in this calculation is shown in Fig. 2.21.2.
using the flow velocity vectors projected onto the XY-plane. The tangential and radial
components of the calculated flow velocity along four vertical lines arranged in the
XY-plane at different distances from the vessel axis in comparison with the Ref. 21
experimental data are presented in Figs.2.21.3-7 in the dimensionless form (the
Y-coordinate is divided by R, the velocity components are divided by R). There is good
agreement with the calculation results and the experimental data shown.
2-101
Fig. 2.21.3. The vessel's flow tangential and radial velocity components along the X = 0.6 vertical,
calculated by FloEFD (red) and compared to the Ref. 21 experimental data.
2-102
Fig. 2.21.4. The vessel's flow tangential and radial velocity components along the X = 0.7 vertical,
calculated by FloEFD (red) and compared to the Ref. 21 experimental data.
Fig. 2.21.5. The vessel's flow tangential and radial velocity components along the X = 0.8 vertical,
calculated by FloEFD (red) and compared to the Ref. 21 experimental data.
2-103
Fig. 2.21.6. The vessel's flow tangential and radial velocity components along the X = 0.9 vertical,
calculated by FloEFD (red) and compared to the Ref. 21 experimental data.
2-104
22 Flow in an Impeller
Let us now validate the FloEFD ability to perform calculations in a rotating coordinate
system related to a rotating solid. Following Ref. 23, we will consider the flow of water in
a 9-bladed centrifugal impeller having blades tilted at a constant 60 angle with respect to
the intersecting radii and extending out from the 320 mm inner diameter to the 800 mm
outer diameter (see Fig. 2.22.1.). The water in this impeller flows from its center to its
periphery. To compare the calculation with the experimental data presented in Ref.22, the
impeller's angular velocity of 32 rpm and volume flow rate of 0.00926 m3/s are specified.
Since the impeller's inlet geometry and disk extension serving as the impeller's vaneless
diffuser have no exact descriptions in Ref. 23, to perform the validating calculation we
arbitrarily specified the annular inlet as 80 mm in diameter with an uniform inlet velocity
profile perpendicular to the surface in the stationary coordinate system.The impeller's
disks external end was specified as 1.2 m diameter, as shown in Fig. 2.22.2..
Fig. 2.22.2. The model used for calculating the 3D flow in the impeller.
The above-mentioned volume flow rate at the annular inlet and the potential pressure of 1
atm at the annular outlet are specified as the problem's flow boundary conditions.
2-105
The FloEFD 3D flow calculation is performed on the computational mesh using the result
resolution level of 5 and the minimum wall thickness of 2 mm (since the blades have
constant thickness). To further capture the curvature of the blades a local initial mesh was
also used in the area from the annular inlet to the blades' periphery. As a result, the
computational mesh has a total number of about 1,000,000 cells.
Following Ref. 23, let us compare the passage-wise flow velocities (ws, see their
definition in Fig. 2.22.3., = 60) along several radial lines passing through the channels
between the blades (lines g, j, m, p in Fig. 2.22.4.) at the mid-height between the impeller's
disks.
Pressure
Side (PS)
Suction
Side (SS)
Fig. 2.22.3. Definition of the passage-wise flow velocity.
Fig. 2.22.4. Definition of the reference radial lines along which the passage-wise flow
velocity was measured in Ref. 23 (from a to s in the alphabetical order).
2-106
The passage-wise flow velocities divided by xr2, where is the impeller's angular
velocity and r2 = 400 mm is the impeller's outer radius, which were measured in Ref. 23
and obtained in the performed FloEFD calculations, are shown in Fig. 2.22.5., 6, 7, and 8.
In these figures, the distance along the radial lines is divided by the line's length. The
FloEFD results are presented in each of these figures by the curve obtained by averaging
the corresponding nine curves in all the nine flow passages between the impeller blades.
The calculated passage-wise flow velocity's cut plot covering the whole computational
domain at the mid-height between the impeller's disks is shown in Fig. 2.22.9.. Here, the
g, j, m, p radial lines in each of the impeller's flow passages are shown. A good agreement
of these calculation results with the experimental data is seen.
0,75
calculation
experiment
relative
passagewise
velocity
(averaged)
0,5
0,25
0
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
2-107
0,75
calculation
experiment
0,5
relative
passagewise
velocity
(averaged)
0,25
0
0
0,5
0,75
calculation
experiment
relative
passagewise 0,5
velocity
(averaged)
0,25
0
0
0,5
2-108
0,75
calculation
experiment
relative
0,5
passagewise
velocity
(averaged)
0,25
0
0
0,5
Fig. 2.22.9. A cut plot of the impeller's passage-wise flow velocity calculated by FloEFD.
2-109
2-110
AIR
The experimental data consist of drag and lift forces as functions of the ratio of peripheral
to translation speed:
U D 60
U0
U0
CL
L
qS
CD
D
qS
where U is the peripheral speed, U0 is the airspeed, is the rotation speed, L is the "lift"
or the cross-wind force, D is the "drag" force, q is the dynamic pressure and S is the
projected area of the cylinder.
For the calculation, a time-dependent analysis with the constant time step from 1/160 of
the rotation period for 1000 rpm up to 1/80 of the rotation period for > 1000 rpm
has been performed on the 100x80x1 computational mesh.
2-111
The flow fields at = 300 rpm and = 2000 rpm are shown in Fig.2.23.3.
= 300 rpm
= 2000 rpm
Fig. 2.23.2. Flow fields at =300 rpm and =2000 rpm.
2-112
The aerodynamical coefficients, which were predicted by FloEFD and compared against
the experimental data (see Ref. 24), are shown in Fig.2.23.3.
C L vs r
4 ,5
Experiment
Calculation
3 ,5
3
2 ,5
C
2
1 ,5
1
0 ,5
0
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0 ,8
1 ,2
1,4
1,6
1,8
C L vs C D
4,5
4
Experiment
3,5
Calculation
3
2,5
C
2
1,5
1
0,5
0
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1,2
1,4
1,6
CD
Fig. 2.23.3. The aerodynamical coefficients predicted by FloEFD and measured experimentally.
Comparison of the aerodynamical coefficients shows that FloEFD predicts the rotation
effects with good accuracy.
2-113
2-114
24 Cavitation on a hydrofoil
When the local pressure at some point in the liquid drops below the liquid's vapour
pressure at the local temperature, the liquid undergoes phase transition and form cavities
filled with the liquid's vapor with an addition of gas that has been dissolved in the liquid.
This phenomenon is called cavitation.
In this validation example we consider FloEFD abilities to model cavitation on the
example of water flow around a symmetric hydrofoil in a water-filled tunnel. The
calculated results were compared with the experimental data from Ref. 25.
The problem is solved in the 2D setting. A symmetric hydrofoil with the chord c of
0.305 m is placed in a water-filled tunnel with the angle of attack of 3.5. The part of the
tunnel being modelled has the following dimensions: length l = 2 m and height
h = 0.508 m. The calculation is performed four times with different values of the
cavitation number defined as follows:
P Pv
1
U 2
2
where P is the inlet pressure, Pv is the saturated water vapor pressure equal to 2340 Pa at
given temperature (293.2 K), is the water density at inlet, and U is the water velocity at
inlet (see Fig. 2.24.1.).
The inlet boundary condition is set up as Inlet Velocity of 8 m/s. On the tunnel outlet
an Environment Pressure is specified so that by varying it one may tune the cavitation
number to the needed value. The project fluid is water with the cavitation option switched
on, and the mass fraction of non-condensable gas is set to 510-5. A local initial mesh was
created in order to resolve the cavitation area better. The resulting mesh contains about
30000 cells.
2-115
The qualitative comparison in a form of cut plots with Vapor Volume Fraction as the
visualization parameter are shown on Fig. 2.24.2.
=1.1
=0.9
=0.97
=0.88
Fig. 2.24.2. A comparison of calculated and experimentally observed cavitation areas for different
2-116
The calculated length of the cavitation area was derived from the distribution of the
Vapor Volume Fraction parameter over the hydrofoils surface as the distributions
width at half-height. The results are presented on Fig. 2.24.3.
According to Ref. 25, the "clear appearance" of the cavity becomes worse for larger cavity
lengths. The experimental data also confirm that the amount of uncertainty increases with
increasing cavity extent. Taking these factors into account together with the comparison
performed above, we can see that the calculated length of the cavitation area agrees well
with the experiment for a wide range of cavitation numbers.
Pressure measurements were performed on the hydrofoil surface at x/c = 0.05 in order to
calculate the pressure coefficient defined as follows:
Cp
P Px / c 0.05
1
U 2
2
2-117
2-118
Inlet
symmetry
plane
Outlet
Diesel fuel at 30C is supplied to the inlet under the pressure (Pin) of 100 bar. The outlet
pressure (Pout) varies from 10 to 70 bar. The properties of the analyzed fuel for the given
temperature are presented in Table 3:.
Density (kg/m )
836
0,198
0,0025
2000
It is assumed that fuel contains dissolved air. The mass fraction of dissolved air is set to
0.001 to conform with the experimental data.
2-119
Fig. 2.25.2. shows the distribution of the vapour volume fraction at different pressure
drop. This figure provides a view of the initiation and development of the cavitation area.
P = 67 bar
P = 75 bar
Fig. 2.25.2. Cavitation fields at symmetry plane.
2-120
P = 90 bar
The dependency of the pressure drop on the mass flow rate both predicted by FloEFD and
determined experimentally are shown on Fig. 2.25.3.. The difference between the
calculations and the experimental measurements is less than 5%. Also, as it can be seen
from the Fig. 2.25.2. and Fig. 2.25.3., the critical cavitation point corresponds to the
pressure drop of about 70 bar. This point defines the transition from a pressure-dependent
mass flow to choked mass flow that is induced by cavitation.
G, kg/s
0,0 09
Expe rime nt
C alcula tion
0,0 08
0,0 07
0,0 06
0,0 05
dP, bar
0,0 04
20
40
60
80
10 0
Fig. 2.25.3. Mass flow rate versus pressure drop at 100 bar inlet pressure in
comparison with the experimental data (Ref. 26).
The comparison of the FloEFD calculations with the experimental data shows that the
application of the Isothermal cavitation model that employs a limited set of fluid
properties allows to predict cavitating flow characteristics with the sufficient accuracy.
2-121
2-122
26 Thermoelectric Cooling
FloEFD has the ability to model the work of a thermoelectric cooler (TEC), also known as
Peltier element. The device used in this example has been developed for active cooling of
an infrared focal plane array detector used during the Mars space mission (see Ref. 27).
According to the hardware requirements, the cooler (see Fig. 2.26.1.) has the following
dimensions: thickness of 4.8 mm, cold side of 8x8 mm2 and hot side of 12X12 mm2. It
was built up of three layers of semiconductor pellets made of (Bi,Sb)2(Se,Te)3-based
material. The cooler was designed to work at temperatures of hot surface in the range of
120-180 K and to provide the temperature drop of more than 30 K between its surfaces.
To solve the engineering problem using FloEFD, the cooler has been modelled by a
truncated pyramidal body with fixed temperature (Temperature boundary condition) on
the hot surface and given heat flow (Heat flow boundary condition) on the cold surface
(see Fig. 2.26.3.).
Part of Infrared Focal Plane Array Detector
Qh to heat sink
Part of Heat Sink
2-123
The TEC characteristics necessary for the modelling, i.e. temperature dependencies of the
maximum pumped heat, maximum temperature drop, maximum current strength and
maximum voltage, were represented in the FloEFD Engineering Database as a linear
interpolation between the values taken from Ref. 27 (see Fig. 2.26.4.).
As it can be seen on Fig. 2.26.5., the temperature drop between the coolers hot and cold
surfaces in dependence of current agrees well with the experimental data.
50
45
40
35
30
dT, K
25
Th=1 60 K - E xpe rime nta l
20
15
10
5
0
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
I, A
2-124
0,8
The dependency of T against heat flow under various Th (see Fig. 2.26.6.) is also in a
good agreement with the performance data, as well as the coefficient of performance COP
(see Fig. 2.26.7.) defined as follows:
Q
Qc
COP = -------c = -----------------Pin
Qh Qc
where Pin is the coolers power consumption, and Qc and Qh are the heat flows on the cold
and hot faces, respectively.
50
Th= 1 60 K - P er fo rma nce Cu rve
45
40
35
30
dT, K
25
20
15
10
5
0
0,0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5
0,6
Qc , W
2-125
0,16
Th=160 K - Performance Curve
0,14
Th=160 K - Simulation
0,12
Th=180 K - Performance Curve
0,10
Th=180 K - Simulation
COP
0,08
0,06
0,04
0,02
0,00
0,0
10,0
20,0
30,0
40,0
50,0
Delta T, K
2-126
27 Buice-Eaton 2D Diffuser
To validate the performance of the FloEFD enhanced k- turbulence model, let us consider
a flow through the Buice-Eaton diffuser. This problem was a test-case for the 8th
ERCOFTAC/IAHR/COST Workshop on Refined Turbulence modeling in Espoo, Finland,
17-18 June 1999. The flow includes a smooth-wall separation due to an adverse pressure
gradient, reattachment and redevelopment of the downstream boundary layer. The results
of its experimental study are given in Ref. 28. The data include mean and fluctuating
velocities at various stations in the diffuser and skin friction data on both walls.
The Buice-Eaton diffuser, illustrated in Fig.2.27.1, is an asymmetric 2D diffuser in which
incompressible, fully developed turbulent flow undergoes smooth wall separation and
reattachment. The lower wall of the diffuser slopes down at 10 and opens the diffuser up
to 4.7 times the entrance height, H=0.59055 in. The inlet channel flow is turbulent and
fully-developed with a Re=20,000 based on the centreline velocity and the channel height.
For the calculation, 2D computational domain was considered. As the Fully developed
flow boundary condition was specified at the inlet, so a short entrance was used. A large
outlet was used so that the flow had time to stabilise before reaching the outlet, to avoid
causing any upstream effects. The basic initial mesh was 495x100x1 cells (in the X-Y
plane).
2-127
The skin friction along lower and upper walls of Buice-Eaton diffuser is shown in
Fig.2.27.2.
Lower wall
Cf
Upper wall
Cf
0,007
0,007
experiment
experiment
0,006
0,006
calculation
0,005
calculation
0,005
0,004
0,004
0,003
0,003
0,002
0,002
0,001
0,001
0,000
-0,001
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
0,000
-10
10
30
50
70
x/H
x/H
Fig. 2.27.2. Skin friction along lower and upper walls predicted by FloEFD and measured experimentally.
The mean velocity and turbulent kinetic energy profiles for the FloEFD simulation, along
with experimental results can be seen in Fig.2.27.3.
Mean Velocity Profiles
y/H
Exper x/H=-5.87
5,0
4,5
4,0
3,5
3,0
2,5
2,0
1,5
1,0
0,5
0,0
-10
Calculation
Exper x/H=2.59
Calculation
Exper x/H=5.98
Calculation
Exper x/H=13.56
Calculation
Exper x/H=16.93
Calculation
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
10U/Ub+x/H
Calculation
Exper x/H=23.71
y/H
-10
Exper x/H=20.32
Calculation
5,0
4,5
4,0
3,5
3,0
2,5
2,0
1,5
1,0
0,5
0,0
Exper x/H=27.09
Calculation
Exper x/H=30.48
Calculation
Exper x/H=33.87
Calculation
Exper x/H=60.17
Calculation
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
500k+x/H
Fig. 2.27.3. Velocity and turbulent energy profiles predicted by FloEFD and measured experimentally.
2-128
Comparison of the experimental and calculated results shows that FloEFD predicts the
separation point and the extent of the recirculation region with good accuracy.
2-129
2-130
Wall
Bluff-Body
Dia (44.45 mm)
Hot
Products
Turbulent
Flame Front
Bluff
Body
Premix CH4-air
2-131
The temperature field (combined with velocity vectors) in the symmetry planes, which
was predicted by FloEFD, is shown in Fig. 2.28.2..
Fig. 2.28.2. Temperature field and velocity vectors on the symmetry planes of the Combustor
Figs. 2.28.3-2.28.5 show temperature profiles in the planes placed downstream the bluff
body at the distance of x=0.1D, x=0.6D and x=6D, which were predicted by FloEFD and
compared against the experimental data (see Ref. 29).
2-132
1600
1200
T (K)
800
400
Calculation
Experimental measurement 1
Experimental measurement 2
0
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
R/D
Fig. 2.28.3. Temperature profiles at x/D=0.1 predicted by FloEFD and measured experimentally
1600
1200
T (K)
800
400
Calculation
Experimental measurement 1
Experimental measurement 2
0
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
R/D
Fig. 2.28.4. Temperature profiles at x/D=0.6 predicted by FloEFD and measured experimentally
2-133
1600
1200
T (K)
800
400
Calculation
Experimental measurement 1
Experimental measurement 2
0
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
R/D
Fig. 2.28.5. Temperature profiles at x/D=6.0 predicted by FloEFD and measured experimentally
Comparison of the temperature profiles shows that FloEFD predicts the combustion
thermal effects with good accuracy.
2-134
29 Surface evaporation
This feature is available for the Advanced and LED modules users only.
To validate the capability of FloEFD to simulate the film condensation or evaporation of
the condensate film, let us consider an evaporation of water in a horizontal rectangular
duct and estimate the convective mass transfer coefficient between air flowing in the duct
and a pan of water that forms the bottom surface of the duct. The results of its
experimental study are given in Ref. 30.
The considered duct is a part of a transient moisture transfer (TFT) facility (shown in
Fig.2.29.1). The temperature of water is 12 C. The temperature of the air upstream of the
test section is 23 C. The laminar (ReD=1500) and turbulent (ReD=6000) flow regimes are
considered. The air relative humidity is 16.2 % in case of laminar flow and 22.9 % in case
of turbulent flow.
Fig. 2.29.1. Schematics of the test facility showing a side view of test section (according to Ref. 30).
2-135
The evolution of evaporation rate, which was predicted by FloEFD and compared against
the experimental data (see Ref. 30), is shown in Fig.2.29.2.
Exp. ReD=1500
Exp. ReD=6000
50
40
Calc. 3D ReD=1500
m, g/h
30
Calc. 2D ReD=1500
Calc. 3D ReD=6000
20
Calc. 2D ReD=6000
10
0
0
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
Time, h
Fig. 2.29.2. Evaporation rate of water predicted by FloEFD and measured experimentally.
Comparison of the evaporation rates shows that FloEFD predicts the evaporation effects
with good accuracy.
2-136
30 Filmwise condensation
This feature is available for the Advanced and LED modules users only.
To validate the capability of FloEFD to simulate the film condensation on the cooled
surface, let us consider a condensation of water vapour from humid air on a horizontal flat
plate of small size (area 25 cm2), in a controlled air flow conditions (flow regime,
hygrometry, temperature). The results of its experimental study are given in Ref. 31.
The temperature of this plate is kept constant in order to induce a steady flow of
condensation on the air at the air/plate interface, and the produced condensate is regularly
monitored by weighing the whole system. The weight of condensate is recorded every 30
minutes. The system consists of a square shaped Peltier module sandwiched between a
square shaped aluminium flat plate of dimension5x5 cm2 with thickness of 3 mm, which
is used as an active surface for the condensation, and a heat exchanger device, and a
temperature regulator that controls the power supply of the Peltier module. The overall
arrangement (shown in Fig.2.30.1) was placed in a vein of a wind tunnel in which the
hydrodynamics, temperature and hygrometry were regulated.
AIR
Axis
Regulation controller
Balance
Rail
Trolley
Thermocouple
Alluminium plate
Peltier module
Heat sink
Fig. 2.30.1. Schematics of the whole condensation unit (according to Ref. 31):
(a) front view, (b) side view of the upper part, which faces the airflow.
2-137
For the comparison with experimental results the CEI-1 experiment is considered in this
study (see Ref. 31). This experiment was performed for the mean entrance velocity of
1.0 m/s and the mean relative humidity of 57.2 %, the ambient temperature and pressure
far from the condensing plate were 23.2 C and 926 mbar respectively, the mean surface
temperature of the plate was kept at 11.4 C.
For the calculation, 3D computational domain was considered and a time-dependent
analysis was performed. To simulate a film condensation, the top surface of the plate is
considered as wettable and the condensed water film with the Initial Film Thickness of
0 mm was specified as the initial condition at the top of the plate.
The experimental rate of condensation in grams per hour has been calculated in two ways:
1
Rate of condensati on g / h
Increment in mass m 2 m1 ( g )
Time taken for increment in that mass t 2 t1 ( h )
The second method seems more accurate because the experimental conditions were not
constant during the whole time. The variation in an environmental parameter affected the
rate of condensation for that particular time, which is better taken care of in the second
method, as the first method only produces the global data.
The amount of condensate, which was predicted by FloEFD and compared against the
experimental data (see Ref. 31), is shown in Fig.2.30.2.
3 ,0
E x p e r im e n t
E x p a v e ra g e ( I)
2 ,5
E x p a v e ra g e ( II)
C a l c u l a t io n
2 ,0
A m ount of
Conde nsate ,
1 ,5
g
1 ,0
0 ,5
0 ,0
0
T im e , h
Fig. 2.30.2. Amount of condensate as a function of time predicted by FloEFD and measured
experimentally.
Comparison of the condensation rate shows that FloEFD predicts the condensation effects
with good accuracy.
2-138
References
1 Schlichting, H., Boundary Layer Theory. 7th ed., McGraw Hill, New York, 1979.
2 Idelchik, I.E., Handbook of Hydraulic Resistance. 2nd ed., Hemisphere, New York,
1986.Version 6
3 Panton, R.L., Incompressible Flow. 2nd ed., John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1996.
4 White, F.M., Fluid Mechanics. 3rd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, 1994.
5 Artonkin, V.G., Petrov, K.P., Investigations of aerodynamic characteristics of
segmental conic bodies. TsAGI Proceedings, No. 1361, Moscow, 1971 (in Russian).
6 Holman, J.P., Heat Transfer. 8th ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, 1997.
7 Humphrey, J.A.C., Taylor, A.M.K., and Whitelaw, J.H., Laminar Flow in a Square
California, 1982.
9 Davis, G. De Vahl: Natural Convection of Air in a Square Cavity: a Bench Mark
Numerical Solution. Int. J. for Num. Meth. in Fluids, v.3, pp. 249-264 (1983).
10 Davis, G. De Vahl, and Jones, I.P.: Natural Convection in a Square Cavity: a
Comparison Exercise. Int. J. for Num. Meth. in Fluids, v.3, pp. 227-248 (1983).
11 Emery, A., and Chu, T.Y.: Heat Transfer across Vertical Layers. J. Heat Transfer, v. 87,
p. 110 (1965).
12 Denham, M.K., and Patrick, M.A.: Laminar Flow over a Downstream-Facing Step in a
Two-Dimensional Flow Channel. Trans. Instn. Chem. Engrs., v.52, pp. 361-367 (1974).
13 Yanshin, B.I.: Hydrodynamic Characteristics of Pipeline Valves and Elements.
Components Using Pin-Fin Heat Sinks. Int. J. of Heat and Mass Transfer, v.45, p.p.
4957-4966 (2002).
15 Kuchling, H., Physik, VEB FachbuchVerlag, Leipzig, 1980.
16 Balakin, V., Churbanov, A., Gavriliouk, V., Makarov, M., and Pavlov, A.: Verification
and Validation of EFD.Lab Code for Predicting Heat and Fluid Flow, In: CD-ROM
Proc. Int. Symp. on Advances in Computational Heat Transfer CHT-04, April 19-24,
2004, Norway, 21 p.
17 Jonsson, H., Palm B., Thermal and Hydraulic Behavior of Plate Fin and Strip Fin Heat
Sinks Under Varying Bypass Conditions, Proc. 1998 Intersociety Conf. On Thermal
and Thermomechanical Phenomena in Electronic Systems (ITherm 98), Seattle, May
1998, pp. 96-103.
18 Henderson, C.B. Drag Coefficients of Spheres in Continuum and Rarefied Flows.
2-139
19 Jyotsna, R., and Vanka, S.P.: Multigrid Calculation of Steady, Viscous Flow in a
centrifugal impeller passage. J. Fluid Dynamics Research, 24, pp. 275-292 (1999).
24 Elliott G. Reid Tests of rotating cylinders, NACA Technical Notes 209. December,
1924.
25 Wesley, H. B., and Spyros, A. K.: Experimental and computational investigation of
Bibring, J-P., and Soufflot, A.: Thermoelectric Cooling for Low Temperature Space
Environment. Proceedings of 7th European Workshop on Thermoelectrics, Pamplona,
Spain, 2002.
28 Buice, C. U. and Eaton, J. K., Experimental Investigation of Flow Through an
Asymmetric Plane Diffuser, J. Fluids Engineering, Vol. 122, June 2000, pp. 433-435.
29 Nandula, S.P., Pitz, R.W., Barlow, R.S., and Fiechtner, G.J. Rayleigh/Raman/LIF
2-140
IIMPORTANT INFORMATION
USE OF ALL SOFTWARE IS SUBJECT TO LICENSE RESTRICTIONS. CAREFULLY
READ THIS LICENSE AGREEMENT BEFORE USING THE PRODUCTS. USE OF
SOFTWARE INDICATES CUSTOMERS COMPLETE AND UNCONDITIONAL
ACCEPTANCE OF THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS SET FORTH IN THIS
AGREEMENT. ANY ADDITIONAL OR DIFFERENT PURCHASE ORDER TERMS AND
CONDITIONS SHALL NOT APPLY.
1.3. All Products are delivered FCA factory (Incoterms 2010), freight prepaid and invoiced to
Customer, except Software delivered electronically, which shall be deemed delivered when
made available to Customer for download. Mentor Graphics retains a security interest in all
Products delivered under this Agreement, to secure payment of the purchase price of such
Products, and Customer agrees to sign any documents that Mentor Graphics determines to be
necessary or convenient for use in filing or perfecting such security interest. Mentor Graphics
delivery of Software by electronic means is subject to Customers provision of both a primary
and an alternate e-mail address.
2.
3.
4.
BETA CODE.
4.1. Portions or all of certain Software may contain code for experimental testing and evaluation
(which may be either alpha or beta, collectively Beta Code), which may not be used without
Mentor Graphics explicit authorization. Upon Mentor Graphics authorization, Mentor
Graphics grants to Customer a temporary, nontransferable, nonexclusive license for
experimental use to test and evaluate the Beta Code without charge for a limited period of time
specified by Mentor Graphics. This grant and Customers use of the Beta Code shall not be
construed as marketing or offering to sell a license to the Beta Code, which Mentor Graphics
may choose not to release commercially in any form.
4.2. If Mentor Graphics authorizes Customer to use the Beta Code, Customer agrees to evaluate
and test the Beta Code under normal conditions as directed by Mentor Graphics. Customer will
contact Mentor Graphics periodically during Customers use of the Beta Code to discuss any
malfunctions or suggested improvements. Upon completion of Customers evaluation and
testing, Customer will send to Mentor Graphics a written evaluation of the Beta Code,
including its strengths, weaknesses and recommended improvements.
4.3. Customer agrees to maintain Beta Code in confidence and shall restrict access to the Beta
Code, including the methods and concepts utilized therein, solely to those employees and
Customer location(s) authorized by Mentor Graphics to perform beta testing. Customer agrees
that any written evaluations and all inventions, product improvements, modifications or
developments that Mentor Graphics conceived or made during or subsequent to this
Agreement, including those based partly or wholly on Customers feedback, will be the
exclusive property of Mentor Graphics. Mentor Graphics will have exclusive rights, title and
interest in all such property. The provisions of this Subsection 4.3 shall survive termination of
this Agreement.
5.
RESTRICTIONS ON USE.
5.1. Customer may copy Software only as reasonably necessary to support the authorized use. Each
copy must include all notices and legends embedded in Software and affixed to its medium and
container as received from Mentor Graphics. All copies shall remain the property of Mentor
Graphics or its licensors. Customer shall maintain a record of the number and primary location
of all copies of Software, including copies merged with other software, and shall make those
records available to Mentor Graphics upon request. Customer shall not make Products
available in any form to any person other than Customers employees and on-site contractors,
excluding Mentor Graphics competitors, whose job performance requires access and who are
under obligations of confidentiality. Customer shall take appropriate action to protect the
confidentiality of Products and ensure that any person permitted access does not disclose or
use Products except as permitted by this Agreement. Customer shall give Mentor Graphics
written notice of any unauthorized disclosure or use of the Products as soon as Customer
becomes aware of such unauthorized disclosure or use. Except as otherwise permitted for
purposes of interoperability as specified by applicable and mandatory local law, Customer
shall not reverse-assemble, reverse-compile, reverse-engineer or in any way derive any source
code from Software. Log files, data files, rule files and script files generated by or for the
Software (collectively Files), including without limitation files containing Standard
Verification Rule Format (SVRF) and Tcl Verification Format (TVF) which are Mentor
Graphics proprietary syntaxes for expressing process rules, constitute or include confidential
information of Mentor Graphics. Customer may share Files with third parties, excluding
Mentor Graphics competitors, provided that the confidentiality of such Files is protected by
written agreement at least as well as Customer protects other information of a similar nature or
importance, but in any case with at least reasonable care. Customer may use Files containing
SVRF or TVF only with Mentor Graphics products. Under no circumstances shall Customer
use Software or Files or allow their use for the purpose of developing, enhancing or marketing
any product that is in any way competitive with Software, or disclose to any third party the
results of, or information pertaining to, any benchmark.
5.2. If any Software or portions thereof are provided in source code form, Customer will use the
source code only to correct software errors and enhance or modify the Software for the
authorized use. Customer shall not disclose or permit disclosure of source code, in whole or in
part, including any of its methods or concepts, to anyone except Customers employees or onsite contractors, excluding Mentor Graphics competitors, with a need to know. Customer shall
not copy or compile source code in any manner except to support this authorized use.
5.3. Customer may not assign this Agreement or the rights and duties under it, or relocate,
sublicense or otherwise transfer the Products, whether by operation of law or otherwise
(Attempted Transfer), without Mentor Graphics prior written consent and payment of
Mentor Graphics then-current applicable relocation and/or transfer fees. Any Attempted
Transfer without Mentor Graphics prior written consent shall be a material breach of this
Agreement and may, at Mentor Graphics option, result in the immediate termination of the
Agreement and/or the licenses granted under this Agreement. The terms of this Agreement,
including without limitation the licensing and assignment provisions, shall be binding upon
Customers permitted successors in interest and assigns.
5.4. The provisions of this Section 5 shall survive the termination of this Agreement.
6.
SUPPORT SERVICES. To the extent Customer purchases support services, Mentor Graphics will
provide Customer with updates and technical support for the Products, at the Customer site(s) for
which support is purchased, in accordance with Mentor Graphics then current End-User Support
Terms located at http://supportnet.mentor.com/about/legal/.
7.
LIMITED WARRANTY.
7.1. Mentor Graphics warrants that during the warranty period its standard, generally supported
Products, when properly installed, will substantially conform to the functional specifications
set forth in the applicable user manual. Mentor Graphics does not warrant that Products will
meet Customers requirements or that operation of Products will be uninterrupted or error free.
The warranty period is 90 days starting on the 15th day after delivery or upon installation,
whichever first occurs. Customer must notify Mentor Graphics in writing of any
nonconformity within the warranty period. For the avoidance of doubt, this warranty applies
only to the initial shipment of Software under an Order and does not renew or reset, for
example, with the delivery of (a) Software updates or (b) authorization codes or alternate
Software under a transaction involving Software re-mix. This warranty shall not be valid if
Products have been subject to misuse, unauthorized modification, improper installation or
Customer is not in compliance with this Agreement. MENTOR GRAPHICS ENTIRE
LIABILITY AND CUSTOMERS EXCLUSIVE REMEDY SHALL BE, AT MENTOR
GRAPHICS OPTION, EITHER (A) REFUND OF THE PRICE PAID UPON RETURN OF
THE PRODUCTS TO MENTOR GRAPHICS OR (B) MODIFICATION OR
REPLACEMENT OF THE PRODUCTS THAT DO NOT MEET THIS LIMITED
WARRANTY. MENTOR GRAPHICS MAKES NO WARRANTIES WITH RESPECT TO:
(A) SERVICES; (B) PRODUCTS PROVIDED AT NO CHARGE; OR (C) BETA CODE;
ALL OF WHICH ARE PROVIDED AS IS.
7.2. THE WARRANTIES SET FORTH IN THIS SECTION 7 ARE EXCLUSIVE. NEITHER
MENTOR GRAPHICS NOR ITS LICENSORS MAKE ANY OTHER WARRANTIES
EXPRESS, IMPLIED OR STATUTORY, WITH RESPECT TO PRODUCTS PROVIDED
UNDE R T HIS AGREE ME NT. MEN TOR G R A P H I C S A N D I TS L I CE N S O R S
SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY,
FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NON-INFRINGEMENT OF
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY.
8.
12.1. If a Software license was provided for limited term use, such license will automatically
terminate at the end of the authorized term. Mentor Graphics may terminate this Agreement
and/or any license granted under this Agreement immediately upon written notice if Customer:
(a) exceeds the scope of the license or otherwise fails to comply with the licensing or
confidentiality provisions of this Agreement, or (b) becomes insolvent, files a bankruptcy
petition, institutes proceedings for liquidation or winding up or enters into an agreement to
assign its assets for the benefit of creditors. For any other material breach of any provision of
this Agreement, Mentor Graphics may terminate this Agreement and/or any license granted
under this Agreement upon 30 days written notice if Customer fails to cure the breach within
the 30 day notice period. Termination of this Agreement or any license granted hereunder will
not affect Customers obligation to pay for Products shipped or licenses granted prior to the
termination, which amounts shall be payable immediately upon the date of termination.
12.2. Upon termination of this Agreement, the rights and obligations of the parties shall cease except
as expressly set forth in this Agreement. Upon termination, Customer shall ensure that all use
of the affected Products ceases, and shall return hardware and either return to Mentor Graphics
or destroy Software in Customers possession, including all copies and documentation, and
certify in writing to Mentor Graphics within ten business days of the termination date that
Customer no longer possesses any of the affected Products or copies of Software in any form.
13. EXPORT. The Products provided hereunder are subject to regulation by local laws and United
States (U.S.) government agencies, which prohibit export, re-export or diversion of certain
products, information about the products, and direct or indirect products thereof, to certain countries
and certain persons. Customer agrees that it will not export or re-export Products in any manner
without first obtaining all necessary approval from appropriate local and U.S. government agencies.
If Customer wishes to disclose any information to Mentor Graphics that is subject to any U.S. or
other applicable export restrictions, including without limitation the U.S. International Traffic in
Arms Regulations (ITAR) or special controls under the Export Administration Regulations (EAR),
Customer will notify Mentor Graphics personnel, in advance of each instance of disclosure, that
such information is subject to such export restrictions.
14. U.S. GOVERNMENT LICENSE RIGHTS. Software was developed entirely at private expense.
The parties agree that all Software is commercial computer software within the meaning of the
applicable acquisition regulations. Accordingly, pursuant to U.S. FAR 48 CFR 12.212 and DFAR
48 CFR 227.7202, use, duplication and disclosure of the Software by or for the U.S. government or
a U.S. government subcontractor is subject solely to the terms and conditions set forth in this
Agreement, which shall supersede any conflicting terms or conditions in any government order
document, except for provisions which are contrary to applicable mandatory federal laws.
15. THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARY. Mentor Graphics Corporation, Mentor Graphics (Ireland)
Limited, Microsoft Corporation and other licensors may be third party beneficiaries of this
Agreement with the right to enforce the obligations set forth herein.
16. REVIEW OF LICENSE USAGE. Customer will monitor the access to and use of Software. With
prior written notice and during Customers normal business hours, Mentor Graphics may engage an
internationally recognized accounting firm to review Customers software monitoring system and
records deemed relevant by the internationally recognized accounting firm to confirm Customers
compliance with the terms of this Agreement or U.S. or other local export laws. Such review may
include FlexNet (or successor product) report log files that Customer shall capture and provide at
Mentor Graphics request. Customer shall make records available in electronic format and shall
fully cooperate with data gathering to support the license review. Mentor Graphics shall bear the
expense of any such review unless a material non-compliance is revealed. Mentor Graphics shall
treat as confidential information all information gained as a result of any request or review and shall
only use or disclose such information as required by law or to enforce its rights under this
Agreement. The provisions of this Section 16 shall survive the termination of this Agreement.
Corporate Headquarters
Mentor Graphics Corporation
8005 SW Boeckman Road
Wilsonville, Oregon 97070-7777
United States of America
503-685-7000
Sales and Product Information
800-547-3000 or 503-685-8000
North American Support Center
800-547-4303
For support locations outside of the US, please refer to the following
website: http://www.mentor.com/supportnet/support-offices.html
www.mentor.com/supportnet