natural and forced convection

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

 November 29, 2005, 11:30 natural and forced convection #1 Jan Guest   Posts: n/a Sponsored Links Hello, we are trying to model heat transfer appearing at heat sinks for electronic equipment (both, natural and forced convection). As reported in the literature, for correct heat transfer calculation the boundary layer has to be modeled with a certain number of nodes within the layer. This leads to huge grids if many sinks participate in the calculation. How many grid points are enough for sufficient heat transfer calculation (e.g. depending on the Reynolds or Rayleigh number)? Is there any other way to keep the grid small while having good heat transfer results? Our calculations were carried out in Fluent and CFX but this question seems to be more general since the convection models do not differ that much for different CFD codes. Thanks in advance.

 November 29, 2005, 23:13 Re: natural and forced convection #2 Edward Cruz Guest   Posts: n/a Hi, Jan; If you already have an initial simulation, you already have the answer. You just have a geometry problem. All you need to do is remesh the geometry where you need a large number of nodes and elements. I know TGrid will do this. I'm not sure about Gambit. Or you can use another meshing program and just export it to Gambit. -Edward

 November 30, 2005, 08:57 Re: natural and forced convection #3 Jan Guest   Posts: n/a Hello Edward, thanks for your answer. Yes, the answer ,in principle, is written down in all textbooks. But correct boundary layer resolution means many grid points. This is not applicable to complex geometries. So the question should be updated as follows: Does anyone have any experience in the resulting errors comming from insufficient resolutions of the boundary layer? I dont know exactly, but any flow inside enclosures containing electronic components should have this problem. How do they solve it? Are there any models (like turbulent wall treatment) to get correct or nearly correct heat transfer? Thanks. Jan

 November 30, 2005, 09:12 Re: natural and forced convection #4 ramp Guest   Posts: n/a The courser grid spacing then the thermal boundary layer thickness affects the results significantly, specially at high Prandtl/Peclet numbers where the thickness goes to very low. I think there is no relation available for the thermal boundary layer thickness for complex geometries. A simple assumption of the heat transfer from a flat plate can give a rough estimate of the thermal boundary layer thickness and refine the result. The correlation relating the thermal BL thickness and Prandtl number can be found in any std. textbooks. I think 10-15 grid points inside the thermal BL will do a good job with not so high grid elements.

 November 30, 2005, 23:44 Re: natural and forced convection #5 Edward Cruz Guest   Posts: n/a Hi, Jan; The geometry refinement is the only thing I can suggest to you to resolve the boundary layer(quickly solve and yet tedious). I think it can be done on your geometry. As for the residuals of your simulation, that is just a check of how good your model is. You could try another CFD model(LES?) in your case which is like opening a new can of worms. -Edward

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 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 OffTrackbacks are On Pingbacks are On Refbacks are On Forum Rules

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post braennstroem OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 3 May 1, 2011 12:33 Daniel_Jung OpenFOAM 0 September 22, 2010 05:02 max91 CFX 1 July 29, 2008 20:28 Alex Siemens 5 December 12, 2007 05:58 Venu Gopal FLUENT 0 August 29, 2004 10:59