one dimensional unsteady heat conduction

vijeshjoshi23 · July 10, 2009, 12:26

Dear friends,
how to decide time step to solve one dimensional unsteady heat conduction through a slab by implicit scheme ?? I am writing a code in matlab to solve this. I am facing numerical oscillations. Plz help...

RenardP · July 10, 2009, 21:22

You can test your code by marching in time to a steady solution ( for which you can find an exact analytical solution ). Since you use an implicit scheme for your time integration the time step for a steady solution should not be a concern. If your code does not converge to the steady solution you should check again the implementation.

July 10, 2009, 12:26	one dimensional unsteady heat conduction	#1
vijeshjoshi23 New Member Vijesh Joshi Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 10 Rep Power: 17	Dear friends, how to decide time step to solve one dimensional unsteady heat conduction through a slab by implicit scheme ?? I am writing a code in matlab to solve this. I am facing numerical oscillations. Plz help...

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
calculating unsteady heat release due to comb	James	FLUENT	1	February 27, 2014 20:03
Conduction heat not balanced?	Nepal	CFX	7	May 31, 2005 11:51
Convective Heat Transfer - Heat Exchanger	Mark	CFX	6	November 15, 2004 15:55
Heat conduction through solid rib in periodic duct	Dieter Fauconnier	FLUENT	0	October 7, 2004 08:22
Unsteady Heat Transfer Modeling	Muller	FLUENT	5	June 7, 2003 01:28

July 10, 2009, 21:22		#2
RenardP Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 62 Rep Power: 17	You can test your code by marching in time to a steady solution ( for which you can find an exact analytical solution ). Since you use an implicit scheme for your time integration the time step for a steady solution should not be a concern. If your code does not converge to the steady solution you should check again the implementation.