wall heat flux 2D to 3D

Mat_fr · April 3, 2013, 06:35

Dear all,

I'm doing unsteady 2D computations of a heat transfer from a wall to my fluid, with a imposed heat flux. It is natural convection, with fluid density varying with temperature. I got relevant wall temperature (in comparison to theory).

In order to pursue my study, I tried a 3D case with the same numerical settings (cells size, controls, schemes). However, the temperature is here meaningless (10 times higher and osciallting a lot). The residuals are not as good as the 2D case, but it still seems to converge.

Of course the heat flux is the same in both cases. I computed the total power on the wall surface in Fluent, which is 120W.

Do you have any idea for the reason of the bad result with the 3D case ? If the mesh is enough fine in 2D, it should be ok for 3D !

Best,

Mat

vasava · April 3, 2013, 06:53

Is your 2D case axisymmetric?

Mat_fr · April 3, 2013, 13:39

No, its not 2D axisymmetric.
There is a plane of symmetry in the real geometry, and the 2D case is computed in this plane.

Mat_fr · May 2, 2013, 14:06

I'm really stuck with this problem.
Why I get different temperatures for the 2D and 3D cases, with the same power ? (160W) Knowing that for the 3D case, the temperatures are meaningless (really too high).

Thanks in advance for your help.

April 3, 2013, 06:35	wall heat flux 2D to 3D	#1
Mat_fr Member Mat Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 60 Rep Power: 15	Dear all, I'm doing unsteady 2D computations of a heat transfer from a wall to my fluid, with a imposed heat flux. It is natural convection, with fluid density varying with temperature. I got relevant wall temperature (in comparison to theory). In order to pursue my study, I tried a 3D case with the same numerical settings (cells size, controls, schemes). However, the temperature is here meaningless (10 times higher and osciallting a lot). The residuals are not as good as the 2D case, but it still seems to converge. Of course the heat flux is the same in both cases. I computed the total power on the wall surface in Fluent, which is 120W. Do you have any idea for the reason of the bad result with the 3D case ? If the mesh is enough fine in 2D, it should be ok for 3D ! Best, Mat

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Radiation interface	hinca	CFX	15	January 26, 2014 18:11
An error has occurred in cfx5solve:	volo87	CFX	5	June 14, 2013 18:44
how to export "wall heat flux" to tecplot?	victor	CFX	3	November 27, 2008 10:45
CFX - wall heat flux	divarano	CFX	2	December 4, 2006 17:14
Basic question: UDF for wall heat flux	Carl	FLUENT	1	August 5, 2006 20:01

April 3, 2013, 06:53		#2
vasava Senior Member Paritosh Vasava Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Lappeenranta, Finland Posts: 732 Rep Power: 24	Is your 2D case axisymmetric?

April 3, 2013, 13:39		#3
Mat_fr Member Mat Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 60 Rep Power: 15	No, its not 2D axisymmetric. There is a plane of symmetry in the real geometry, and the 2D case is computed in this plane.

May 2, 2013, 14:06		#4
Mat_fr Member Mat Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 60 Rep Power: 15	I'm really stuck with this problem. Why I get different temperatures for the 2D and 3D cases, with the same power ? (160W) Knowing that for the 3D case, the temperatures are meaningless (really too high). Thanks in advance for your help.