CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
Home > Forums > Software User Forums > ANSYS > CFX

comparison with analytical results (1D)and(3D) CFX

Register Blogs Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old   October 18, 2008, 19:21
Default comparison with analytical results (1D)and(3D) CFX
Rogerio Fernandes Brito
Posts: n/a
Hello, folks!

Im making a comparison between ANSYS CFX-v11.0 SP1 software and analytical results from an 1D simulation from the periodical: [Z. Shijun, and L. Zhanqiang, Analytical and numerical solutions of transient heat conduction in monolayer-coated tools, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 2008, Article in Press, doi:10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2008.05.028]. Id like to have others opinions about my simulations. Anything wrong? The deviation that i had is about 40 %, using Al2O3 (= this is the coating) and ISO K10 (this is the cutting tool) materials (thus, there are two solids as my domains). Please, see the figure 4 "Fig. 4 " Influences of different coatings on temperature distribution in monolayer-coated tools" on this paper.

The files of my simulations and the paper in PDF format are at:


I will thank you for the helping.

Rogerio - MSN: - Skype: rogeriofbrito

Abstract of this paper:

The heat generation during metal cutting processes affects accuracy of the machined surface and strongly influences tool wear and tool life. Knowledge of the ways in which the tool material affects the temperature distribution is therefore essential for the study of thermal effects on tool life and workpiece quality. Many studies have been done on simulation temperature distribution in coated cutting tools by means of the finite element method or the finite difference method. In this study, a thermal analytical model is firstly developed to determine temperature distribution in monolayer-coated cutting tools during orthogonal metal cutting. In the analytical model one equivalent heat source applied on the coating layer boundary substitutes for the heat generation introduced fromthe primary deformation zone, the secondary deformation and the frictional zone along the tool"chip interface as well as the tertiary or the sliding frictional zone at tool"workpiece interface. A mathematical model of the transient heat conduction in monolayer-coated tools is then proposed. The temperature distribution formulations in monolayer-coated tools are obtained using Laplace transform. The influence of different parameters including thermophysical properties of tool coating and tool substrate and thickness of the coating layer on temperature distribution in monolayer-coated tools is lastly discussed and illustrated.


A thermal model of one-dimensional heat transfer in monolayer-coated tools has been developed to investigate temperature distribution in orthogonal metal cutting. An analytical methodwas used to solve the transient heat conduction problem of monolayer-coated tools subjected to an equivalent constant heat flux thermal loadings of several heat sources applied on the coating boundary surface. By using the Laplace transform technique and a Taylor series expansion, analytical solutions for temperature were presented in an explicit form. The numerical solutions have shown the thermophysical parameters of coated and substrate materials have huge influences on temperature distribution in monolayer-coated tools. The analytical solution method has demonstrated that Al2O3 coating has a thermal barrier effect in heat conduction in coated tools. The coating thickness has a certain extent influence on temperature distribution in coated tools.

  Reply With Quote

Old   October 23, 2008, 10:15
Default Re: comparison with analytical results (1D)and(3D)
Rogerio Fernandes Brito
Posts: n/a
I used FEMLAB software to make an 1D simulation and i had the same results of the ansys cfx-v11.0:

  Reply With Quote

Old   October 28, 2008, 20:26
Default Re: comparison with analytical results (1D)and(3D)
Rogerio Fernandes Brito
Posts: n/a
FEMLAB and ANSYS CFX v11.0 had the same results, but these results were totally different from this paper. The temperature for the coordinate x = 0, was about 2,700 [K] and for x = 10 microns, the temperature had been decreased about 11 [C].

Any ideas or anything wrong with my 2 simulations using these 2 commercial softwares?
  Reply With Quote


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Centrifugal Fan Case Study Results Required using CFX kambireddy CFX 0 October 8, 2010 05:46
Comparison between turbulent parameters with analytical or experimental results fareedmangi FLUENT 0 June 2, 2009 10:41
Comparison of 2D simulation results with 3D Mohit Gupta Main CFD Forum 0 September 29, 2008 13:04
Comparison among CFX, STARCD, FLUENT, etc ? Jihwan Main CFD Forum 13 October 12, 2004 12:02
Suitability of OpenDX for viewing CFX 4.3 results Jonathan Wall CFX 3 April 4, 2000 08:09

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 21:06.