Scribd
Upload
33 views2 pages

sm5 124

1) The document presents a problem involving the transient heat transfer through a plane wall using explicit and implicit finite difference methods. 2) For the explicit method, unrealistic results are obtained because the stability criterion is not satisfied. 3) For the implicit method, the temperature distributions are found to be dependent on the time step size, even though the method is inherently stable. Smaller time steps yield different solutions than larger time steps.

Uploaded by

Sadie Hnatow
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
33 views2 pages

sm5 124

1) The document presents a problem involving the transient heat transfer through a plane wall using explicit and implicit finite difference methods. 2) For the explicit method, unrealistic results are obtained because the stability criterion is not satisfied. 3) For the implicit method, the temperature distributions are found to be dependent on the time step size, even though the method is inherently stable. Smaller time steps yield different solutions than larger time steps.

Uploaded by

Sadie Hnatow
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

PROBLEM 5.

124
KNOWN: Thickness and thermal diffusivity of a plane wall. Initial and boundary conditions.
FIND: (a) Temperature distribution at t = 30 min using an explicit finite difference technique with a
time step of 600 s and a space increment of 30 mm. (b) Temperature distribution at t = 30 min using
an implicit finite difference technique with a time step of 600 s and a space increment of 30 mm.
SCHEMATIC:
ASSUMPTIONS: (1) One-dimensional heat transfer, (2) Constant properties.
PROPERTIES: Thermal diffusivity, o = 1.5 10
-6
m
2
/s (given).
ANALYSIS: (a) The finite-difference equations for the interior points, nodes 0, 1, 2 and 3, can be
determined from Eq. 5.81,
( )
1
1 1
(1 2 )
p p p p
m m m m
T Fo T T Fo T
+
+
= + + (1)
The Fourier number is
2 6 2 2
/ 1.5 10 m / s 600s /(0.03m) 1 Fo t x o

= A A = = (2)
Note that the stability criterion of Eq. 5.82 is not satisfied. Nonetheless, we will combine Eqs. (1) and
(2) to yield
1
1 1
p p p p
m m m m
T T T T
+
+
= +
Since the adiabatic surface at x = 0 can be treated as a symmetry plane, we note that T
m-1
= T
m+1
for
node 0. The finite-difference solution is shown in the table below.
p t (min) T
0
T
1
T
2
T
3
T
4
= T
L
(C)
0 0 85 85 85 85 20
1 10 85 85 85 20 20
2 20 85 85 20 85 20
3 30 85 20 150 -45 20 <
Continued
1
0

h
T

= T4
2 3 4
Ax = 30 mm
L = 120 mm
1
0

h
T

= T4
2 3 4
Ax = 30 mm
L = 120 mm
PROBLEM 5.124 (Cont.)
(b) Note that for this solution, the conditions at the right face have been incorporated by specifying a
very large convection coefficient at the right face so that T
4
~ T

. The IHT code is shown in the


COMMENTS section. The following results were obtained.
p t (min) T
0
T
1
T
2
T
3
T
4
= T
L
(C)
0 0 85 85 85 85 20
1 10 82.2 80.9 75.3 60.1 20
2 20 77.3 74.8 66.3 48.8 20
3 30 71.4 68.5 59.1 42.7 20 <
COMMENTS: (1) The IHT Code for part (b) is shown at the end of the Comments. (2) Note the
thermal response of part (a) is unrealistic. This unrealistic result is expected since the stability criterion
is not satisfied. (3) Part (b) was repeated with a smaller time step of At = 300 s yielding the following
results. Note that these results differ from those associated with the larger time step. Just because the
implicit finite-difference method is inherently stable, the solutions may still be dependent upon the
time step and, as such, are incorrect.
p t (min) T
0
T
1
T
2
T
3
T
4
= T
L
(C)
0 0 85 85 85 85 20
1 10 82.8 81.2 74.8 57.5 20
2 20 77.7 74.8 65.3 46.9 20
3 30 71.3 68.1 58.1 41.4 20
/* Node 0: surface node (w-orientation); transient conditions; e labeled 1. */
rho * cp * der(T0,t) = fd_1d_sur_w(T0,T1,k,qdot,deltax,Tinf,h1,qfla0)
/* Node 1: interior node; e and w labeled e and 0. */
rho*cp*der(T1,t) = fd_1d_int(T1,T2,T0,k,qdot,deltax)
/* Node 2: interior node; e and w labeled 3 and 1. */
rho*cp*der(T2,t) = fd_1d_int(T2,T3,T1,k,qdot,deltax)
/* Node 3: interior node; e and w labeled 4 and 2. */
rho*cp*der(T3,t) = fd_1d_int(T3,T4,T2,k,qdot,deltax)
/* Node 4: surface node (e-orientation); transient conditions; w labeled 3. */
rho * cp * der(T4,t) = fd_1d_sur_e(T4,T3,k,qdot,deltax,Tinf,h2,qfla4)
Tinf = 20 //Initial Conditions are T = 85 everywhere (C)
h1 = 0 //Insulated left wall
h2 = 1e10 //Right wall at Tinf since h2 is nearly infinite
qfla0 = 0 //Zero applied heat flux at left wall
qfla4 = 0 //Zero applied heat flux at right wall
deltax = 30/1000 //meters
qdot = 0 //W/m^3
// Set k, rho and cp values so that alpha = 1.5*10^-6 m2/s
k = 1.5e-6 //W/m-K
rho = 1 //kg
cp =1 //J/kg-K

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy