You are on page 1of 4

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 6, Issue 6, June-2015 105

ISSN 2229-5518

Alternating-Direction Implicit Finite-Difference
Method for Transient 2D Heat Transfer in a Metal
Bar using Finite Difference Method
Ashaju Abimbola, Samson Bright

Abstract— Different analytical and numerical methods are commonly used to solve transient heat conduction problems. In this problem,
the use of Alternating Direct Implicit scheme (ADI) was adopted to solve temperature variation within an infinitesimal long bar of a square
cross-section. The bottom right quadrant of the square cross-section of the bar was selected. The surface of the bar was maintained at
constant temperature and temperature variation within the bar was evaluated within a time frame. The Laplace equation governing the 2-
dimesional heat conduction was solved by iterative schemes as a result of the time variation. The modelled problem using COMSOL-
MULTIPHYSICS software validated the result of the ADI analysis. On comparing the Modelled results from COMSOL MULTIPHYSICS
and the results from ADI iterative scheme graphically, there was an high level of agreement between both results.

Index Terms— ADI, Iteration, Metal Bar, Transient Heat Transfer

——————————  ——————————

1 INTRODUCTION
Analytical solutions are difficult to arrive at, due to the in- od.The Alternating Direction Implicit scheme was first devel-
creasing complexities encountered in the development of oped and employed by Peaceman and Rachford in 1955 [3] for

IJSER
technology. For these problems, numerical solutions are very the computation of two dimensional parabolic and elliptic
useful, most notably when the geometry of the object is irregu- Partial differential equations.
lar and the boundary conditions are non-linear. Thomas et al [1] determined the ADI scheme as a cost effective
The number of numerical methods and versions of each, avail- technique with stability and accuracy, as compared with other
able for use in tackling a given heat-flow problem, has in- standard Finite-element method for the analytical solutions for
creased rapidly; however, the comparative advantages of the two problems approximating different stages in steel ingot
different techniques with respect to accuracy, stability, and processing.
cost remain unclear [1]. Afsheen [2] used ADI two step equations to solve an Heat-
Numerical methods can be used to solve many practical prob- transfer Laplace 2D problem for a square metallic plate and
lems in heat conduction that involve – complex 2D and 3D used a Fortran90 code to validate the results. Finally, the re-
geometries and complex boundary conditions. sults show the effect of Neumann boundary conditions and
Alternating Direction implicit (ADI) scheme is a finite differ- Dirichlet boundary conditions on the scheme.
ence method in numerical analysis, used for solving parabolic, ADI has found application in diffusion, Ad𝑒́ rito et al [3] em-
hyperbolic and elliptic differential equations. ADI is mostly ployed ADI to solve a two-dimensional hyperbolic diffusion
used to solve the problem of heat conduction. The equations problem, where it is assumed that both convection and diffu-
that have to be solved with ADI in each step, have a similar sion are responsible for flow motion. They established the sta-
structure and can be solved efficiently with theTridiagonal bility of the method using discrete energy method. Their result
Matrix Algorithm. showcased the accuracy of the Alternating direction implicit
method.
Dehghan [4] used ADI scheme as the basis to solve the two
dimensional time dependent diffusion equation with non-local
boundary conditions.
1.2 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND In this work, we used an Alternating direction implicit scheme
to solve a transient conduction heat problem within an infini-
———————————————— tesimal long bar of a square cross-section. We also modelled
• Ashaju Abimbola is currently pursuing masters degree program in Me- the problem using COMSOL multiphysics and compared its
chanicalengineering in University of Ibadan, Nigeria,. E-mail: sam-
uelashaju@gmail.com
result with that of the ADI scheme numerical result.
• Samson Bright is currently pursuing masters degree program in Mechani-
calengineering in University of Ibadan, Nigeria. E-mail: sam-
bright044@gmail. com 2.0 ALTERNATING DIRECTION IMPLICIT METHOD
FOR 2D TRANSIENT HEAT TRANSFER
A lot of trends have occurred in the application of ADI meth-
IJSER © 2015
http://www.ijser.org

At When 𝒊 = 𝟎 𝒂𝒂𝒂 𝒎 = 𝟏 and 𝒏 = 𝟏 (1) (1) (1) (1) (0) (0) 2.𝑛 + 3𝑇𝑚.𝑛 ] + [𝑇𝑚.𝑛−1 (3. both equations yields a 2.𝑛+1 − 2𝑇𝑚.𝑛+1 𝑖 − 2𝑇𝑚.1 ITERATION ONE (𝝉 = 𝟏) 𝜏 > 0: 𝑇 = 1 Along the sides 𝑋 = 1 𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑌 = 1.1) Dimensionless distances.1) ∆𝑋 2 (3) 𝑇𝑚.𝑛+1 𝑇1.1.3) 3.2 ITERATION TWO (1) Equation (a) was used in computing 𝑇1.2. Volume 6.1.𝑛−1 � (3. and temperature are defined by 3. It’s direction was alternated and used in computing the func- (2) tion value for 𝑇1.𝑛 − 𝜏𝜏𝑚.4) 𝑖+2 −𝑇𝑚−1.𝑛 𝑖+1 + 𝑇𝑚.2) 2.2.𝑛 𝑖 + 𝑇𝑚−1.1 COMPUTATION OF MESH FUNCTION ALONG 𝑥 𝑦 ᾳ𝑡 𝜃 − 𝜃∘ ROWS 𝑋= .1 − 𝑇2.𝑛+𝑇𝑚+1.1 Initial Boundary Condition −𝜏𝑇1.1.1 = 𝑇1. June-2015 106 ISSN 2229-5518 2.𝑛+𝑇𝑚.1 + 3𝑇1.3 Elliptic equation [1 + 2𝜏]𝑇1.3 Figure 1.𝑛 + 𝑇𝑚.1 + 𝜏𝑇2.𝑛−2𝑇𝑚.𝑛 + 𝜏𝜏𝑚+1.2.1 PROBLEM FORMULATION But τ = ∝∆𝑡 ∆2 An infinitely long bar of thermal diffusivity ᾳ has a cross sec- tion of side 2a. 𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑇 = 𝑎 𝑎 𝑎 𝜃1 − 𝜃∘ 𝑖+2 𝑖+1 𝑖+2 𝑖+2 𝑖+2 𝑖+1 𝑖+1 𝑖+1 𝑇𝑚. m=1 and j=1 (3) 2.5) (4) 𝑇1.1.𝑛 𝑖 � + �𝑇𝑚.n-1 .3.𝑛 𝑖 − 𝑇𝑚.𝑇𝑚.𝑛 𝑖 ∝∆𝑡 𝑖 = 2 [𝑇𝑚+1. Issue 6.4) 𝜃°= 10° 𝐶 When i=2.ijser.3 ITERATION THREE equation (a) and (c) yields 𝑖+1 𝑖+1 𝑘+1 𝑖 𝑖 𝑖 −𝜏𝜏𝑚.𝑛 𝑖 − 2𝑇𝑚.𝑛−1 ] (2.3 𝑇𝑥𝑥 = (2.0.2 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS tridiagonal system of equations.1 − 𝑇2. n = 1 and m = 1 (2) (2) (2) (1) (1) (1) −𝑇0.3.3) When i = 0 .𝑛−1 = 𝜏𝜏𝑚−1.𝑛 − 2𝑇𝑚..𝑛 + 𝒘𝒘𝒘𝒘 𝒊 = 𝟐 .𝑛 =τ[𝑇𝑚+1.International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research.1 + 3𝑇1.3.𝑛 + [1 − 2𝜏]𝑇𝑚.1 + 𝑇1.𝑛 𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐞 (𝐛) 𝐚𝐚𝐚 (𝐟) 𝐚𝐚𝐚 𝐝𝐝𝐝𝐝𝐝𝐝𝐝 𝐚𝐚 𝑇𝑚.1 − 𝜏𝑇1.1 + 𝑇1.𝑛 𝑖+2 + 3𝑇𝑚.𝑛+𝑇𝑚+1.𝑛+1 ∆𝑋 2 + ∆𝑌 2 =0 (2.n-1 and j = 1.1 = 10 + 10 + 50 + 50 + [1 − 2]33. COLUMNS The subsequent temperatures 𝜃(𝑥.2.3….0 (2) 𝑇1. 𝒏 = 𝟏 𝒂𝒂𝒂 𝒎 = 𝟏 ∆ (4) (4) (4) (3) (3) (3) −𝑇0.𝑛−1 ] 𝜕2𝑇 𝜕2𝑇 𝜕𝑇 Unsteady state conduction is governed by 2 + 2 = (3.𝑛+1 𝑖+1 − 𝑇𝑚.3 (𝝉 = 𝟏) (3) 𝑇𝑚−1.𝑛 𝑖+2 − 𝑇𝑚+1.𝑛 𝑖 + 𝑇𝑚−1.0: Initial temperature distributions of the sectioned bar 3.𝑛 − 𝑇𝑚+1.5) 2 2 2 ∆𝑋 = ∆𝑌 = ∆𝑍 𝑖+1 𝑇𝑚.0 COMPUTATION OF MESH FUNCTION ALONG then suddenly has its surface maintained at a temperature 𝜃1. 𝑡) inside the bar are to be solved and computed at various time-steps.1 = 28.𝑛+𝑇𝑚.𝑛 + 𝑇𝑚.1 = 𝜏10 + 𝜏10 + 𝜏50 + 𝜏50 + [1 − 2𝜏]33. 𝜏 = 2 .0 = 𝜏𝑇0.𝑛−2𝑇𝑚.𝑛−1 −2𝑇𝑚.𝑛+1 − 𝑇𝑚.𝑛 − 𝑇𝑚. (1) −𝜏50 + [1 + 2𝜏]𝑇1.3….𝑛 𝑖 − 2𝑇𝑚.4 IJSER © 2015 http://www.2 − 𝑇1.𝑛−1 (3.1 = 𝑇1.2 Final Boundary Condition 3.3.3.2) ∆𝑌 2 𝑇𝑥𝑥 + 𝑇𝑦𝑦 = 0 (2.𝑛 𝑖 = 𝜏�𝑇𝑚+1.1 + [1 − 2𝜏]𝑇1.org . 𝑦. using equation (b) 𝑖+2 𝑖+2 𝑖+2 𝑖+1 𝑖+1 𝑖+1 −𝑇𝑚−1. It is initially at a uniform temperature 𝜃∘ and 3.𝑛−1 −2𝑇𝑚.𝑛 = 𝑇𝑚.𝑛 𝑖+1 = 𝑇𝑚. 𝑌 = .𝑛 .𝑛 3𝑇1.1.1 = 33.9 𝑇𝑦𝑦 = (2.1 = 30.1.𝑛 Where 𝜃1 = 50° 𝐶 (3.4 ITERATION FOUR 𝑇𝑚−1..1 = 20 Along the sides 𝑋 = 0 𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑌 = 0 respectively.2 + [1 + 2𝜏]𝑇1.1 .𝑛+1 + [1 + 2𝜏]𝑇𝑚.𝑛 +𝑇𝑚.𝑛 + 𝑇𝑚−1.𝑛 𝑖 + 𝑇𝑚.1. 3.0 𝑖 𝑇𝑚.2 − 𝑇1.1 − 1 0 = 0 + [1 − 2𝜏]0 + 0 IJSER 𝜕𝑇 𝜕𝑇 = 0 And =0 𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑌 (1) 𝑇1.𝑛+1 𝑖 𝑖 − 2𝑇𝑚.1) 𝜕𝑋 𝜕𝑌 𝜕𝜏 For i = 1. time. 𝑖+1 𝑇𝑚.1 on the row.1.1.1 𝜏 = 0: 𝑇 = 0 Throughout the region (3.

K) The result which was in graphical user interface form is shown below as .0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Table 5: Tempertaure distribution at 105.International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research.K) Density( ρ) = 1kg/𝑚 3 10 50 50 Heat capacity (𝐶𝜌 =1 J/kg.3 ITERATION THREE Time (Δt) = 79. Issue 6. After Iteration two (time=52.1 TEMPERATURE DISTRIBUTIONS IJSER 10 10 10 Table 1.45m 10 20 50 Thermal conductivity (K) = 1W/(m.2.2 VALIDATION OF RESULTS BY COMSOL MULTIPHYSICS After Iteration one.4 .4 50 10 10 10 10 50 50 10 10 10 10 10 10 4.1 ITERATION ONE Time (Δt) = 26. values were Table 3: Temperature distribution at 52.org .1.54 After Iteration Four (time =105. values were Using Comsol Multiphysics.2) values were 3.8s 10 10 10 IJSER © 2015 http://www.ijser. June-2015 107 ISSN 2229-5518 10 33.8) . The metal bar was modelled Table 2: Temperature distribution at 26.54) values were 4.6) Δ Δ2 Where ∝= 0.2 ITERATION TWO Time (Δt) = 52.15s 10 50 50 3.3.54s 4.2.38s Table 4: Temperataure distribution at 79.2. to achieve the temperature distribution within the metal bar. Δ = 4 .16m Width=0.4 ITERATION FOUR Time (Δt) = 105. Δt = ∝ After Iteration three (time=79. (𝐭𝐭𝐭𝐭 = 𝟐𝟐. 10 10 10 Length=1. Volume 6.1516 .0: Initial Temperature distribution.2. 𝜏 = 1.77s 10 28.2.9 50 3.3 50 3. 10 30.38s with. 𝟑𝟑) .2s 10 10 10 3. with the following parameters assumed.2 COMPUTATIONS OF THE VARIOUS TIME STEPS ( 𝚫𝚫 ) FOR EACH ITERATION 10 50 50 ∝Δt 𝜏= 2 (3.

Groth. Comparison of Numerical Modeling Techniques for Complex. 9. : Overseas Publishers Association. 61-68. 307-318. NUCLEAR INSTRUMENTS AND METHODS. 5. 𝑇1. G. 3. M. s. the ADI finite differ- ence method is cost-effective with stability and accuracy similar to the Figure 2: Temperature distribution within the metal bar finite-element methods. Mathematical and Computational Applications. SAMARASEKERA. Adérito. bution within the metal bar M.ijser.International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research.l. notably if one observe closely the results for node 𝑇1.. 𝑇1. For problems with a simple geometry. Vol. Volume 6.1=28. Vol. Applied Mathematics and Computation. pp. : ELSEVIER.4 with the temperature distribution of the 3 4 Mid-section of the Metal Bar with COMSOL MULTIPHYSICS. Cidália.. Cengel. LAHORE : s. K. On comparing the Modelled results from COMSOL MUL- TIPHYSICS and the results from ADI iterative scheme. 2OO9. there was an high level of agreement between both results . 2014. B and PETTERSSON. A. Heat and Mass Transfer: A practical ap- results proach. ACKNOWLEDGMENT The authors are grateful to Dr.n. Yunus. pp. Vol. Zahran. International Journal of Comput- er Mathematics. Sousa. Araújo. 349-366. A FORMULATION OF PEACHMAN AND RACHFORD Figure 3: Isothermal contour showing temperature distri. [ed. Olsen. Neves and Ercília. 4. IJSER Thomas. Ismail. REFERENCES 1. 1998. s. 17-28. 1984. Falana for guidance and as- sistance on this work. 15B. 6. ALTERNATING DIRECTION IMPLICIT METHODS FOR TWO-DIMENSIONAL DIFFUSION WITH A NON-LOCAL BOUNDARY CONDITION.1 1 =20. G.l. T. A.. Figure 4: A comparison of ADI results with COMSOL 7. 72. Issue 6. ARIF. J. pp. I. AFSHEEN.9 . The ADI iterative scheme was highly effective in determin- ing the nodal temperatures within the sectioned metal bar. 239. pp.3 . June-2015 108 ISSN 2229-5518 tion of temperature within the metal and a graph showing the convergence of the finite difference iterative scheme. : NORTH-HOLLAND PUB- LISHING CO. DEHGHAN.l.1 2 =33. V and BRIMACOMBE. 2004. 1967. Vol. pp. 1-90. ADI METHOD FOR THE THREE-DIMENSIONAL HEAT DIF- FUSION EQUATION. CONCLUSIONS The two Dimensional Heat problem was modelled using COMSOL MULTIPHYSICS which gave a graphical distribu- IJSER © 2015 http://www.org . H and Shehata. pp. METALLURGICAL TRANSACTIONS B.] 56. 183-189. B. I. An alternating direction implicit method for a second-order. 𝑇1. 2. s. E. a large level of conformity exists. ALTERNATING DIRECTION IMPLIC- IT METHOD FOR TWO-DIMENSIONAL HEAT TRANSFER PROBLEM. AN ALTERNATING DIRECTION IMPLICIT METHOD APPLIED TO THE CALCULATION OF A MAGNETIC FIELD FROM A MEASURED BOUNDARY.1 =30. National College of Business Administration& Economics. 2006.