0
THERMAL ISSUES IN EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES

Generalization of the Heat Transfer Coefficient Concept for System Simulation

[+] Author and Article Information
Mohamed-Nabil Sabry

 Mansoura University, 35516, Mansoura, Egypt

J. Heat Transfer 133(6), 060905 (Mar 07, 2011) (9 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4003452 History: Received February 03, 2010; Revised January 07, 2011; Published March 07, 2011; Online March 07, 2011

Large progress has been realized in modeling conduction heat transfer problems over the past decade by the introduction of high performance compact thermal models (CTMs) mainly developed for thermal design of complicated electronic systems. The objective of this paper is to generalize these advances to convective heat transfer. A new convective CTM is proposed, which offers many advantages over the traditional approach using the heat transfer coefficient (HTC). The latter is simply a zeroth order CTM. The HTC is quite handy and simple, but with unpredictable errors. It can be suitable for hand calculations of simple systems giving rather crude estimates. For a higher precision, users have no other option than time consuming 3D simulations. For large systems, in terms of number of components, 3D simulations can be rapidly impractical. The CTM bridges the gap between both approaches going gradually from “HTC” levels (low precision and calculations time) at the zeroth order, to 3D simulation precision and computing time levels at large orders. Fortunately, like for conduction, a CTM of order of few tens quickly approaches 3D simulation precision levels, while keeping computation time significantly lower than 3D simulation. Moreover, the CTM approach solves conjugate heat transfer problems in a quite elegant way. A “black box” model, developed for fluid domain alone, can be easily combined with classical CTM conduction models to generate good precision predictions for any combination of fluid/solid domains.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2011 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Schematic of a thermal system, composed of many elements

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Impossibility to model convection by pure resistive elements (heat flow arrows are for the case where walls are hotter than the fluid)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Schematic of the 2D channel

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Temperatures of Test Case 1

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Inlet fluid temperature (°C) versus x (m)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Wall temperature (°C) versus z (m); FP CTM (solid) versus numerical (dashed)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Outlet fluid temperature (°C) versus x (m); FP CTM (solid) versus numerical (dashed)

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In