Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Finite Element Analysis To Predict Temperature and Velocity Distribution in Radiator Tubes
Finite Element Analysis To Predict Temperature and Velocity Distribution in Radiator Tubes
2
Corresponding Author: smg_sam2009@yahoo.com
102 This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
International Journal of Engineering and Management Research e-ISSN: 2250-0758 | p-ISSN: 2394-6962
Volume- 9, Issue- 4 (August 2019)
www.ijemr.net https://doi.org/10.31033/ijemr.9.4.16
observed that the heat transfer and the performance of a StarCCM+. In all the literature reviewed mathematical
radiator are parameters that strongly affected by air and model for temperature and velocity distributions were not
coolant mass flow rate; that as air and coolant flow developed using finite element analysis (FEA)
increases cooling capacity also increases; and that when air method(Pang et al., 2012; Pathade et al., 2017; Gangireddy
inlet temperature increases, heat transfer and cooling and Kishore, 2017: Ng et al.,2005). Therefore in this study,
capacity decreases. According to Romanov and Khozeniuk finite element analysis method is used to develop
(2016), thermal load on an engine can be reduced by mathematical models that will predict temperature and
controlling the convective component of heat flows using velocity distributions in a car radiator.
the changing flow pattern of the coolant in the cooling
system. II. MODEL GEOMETRY
The dynamics of flow in a radiator are known to
be governed by sets of partial differential equations (PDEs) In this study 1-dimensional flow at inlet and outlet
along with boundary conditions which are usually hoses of the radiator as well as through the radiator tubes
formulated to simplify the PDEs. By similarity from top to bottom, down-flow radiator are considered (Fig.
transformations, the PDEs are transformed into ordinary 1).
differential equations (ODEs) which can then be solved The fluid is assumed to enter the tube at inlet (x,
numerically when the boundary conditions are applied yi) with uniform inlet velocity (ui = 0), where it comes in
(Reddy, 1998). contact with the inlet tube surface with viscous reaction
One major problem of radiator is low rate of heat between fluid and the tube thus assumed to set up a one
transfer which usually results in low efficiency challenges. dimensional (1-D), steady, uniform inward flow. The
This low heat flow rate depends on the distribution of viscous force between the tube surface and the adjacent
temperature and the manner of velocity distributions in the fluid layer tends to slow down the fluid velocity, which
radiator. These have prompted a lot of numerical models results in developing velocity gradient in the flow field. As
being developed to predict the cooling air flow, either in 2D the fluid is set in motion, pressure differential (drop) is also
or 3D using off-the-shelf commercial Computational Fluid set up in the direction of flow.
Dynamics (CFD) software like Fluent, Vectis, StarCD and
Qx
Qy
U,ṁ
element
L
nodes
Ai
t
Di
Do
Fig. 1: Radiator tube geometry
103 This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
International Journal of Engineering and Management Research e-ISSN: 2250-0758 | p-ISSN: 2394-6962
Volume- 9, Issue- 4 (August 2019)
www.ijemr.net https://doi.org/10.31033/ijemr.9.4.16
Fig. 2 shows the flow characteristic of an ideal as the case may be, it sustains a uniform flow at this point
fully-developed viscous flow profile in the flexible hose but becomes laminar and fully-developed significant
tubes and radiator tubes. As the fluid enters at inlet xi or yi, distance from the inlet with parabolic flow profile.
1 Nod
2 e
Length (L)
2
3 elements
Element (e) (L)
Radiator 3
tube 4
4
5
Thickness
Fluid flow field (S) (L)
(a) (b)
Fig. 3: (a) Radiator tube flow field (b) Radiator thickness meshes
III. MATHEMATICAL For this study, flow of fluid in the flexible tube
FORMULATIONS and radiator tube cores are governed by the continuity,
Navier-Stokes and energy partial differential equations.
3.1 Governing Equations
104 This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
International Journal of Engineering and Management Research e-ISSN: 2250-0758 | p-ISSN: 2394-6962
Volume- 9, Issue- 4 (August 2019)
www.ijemr.net https://doi.org/10.31033/ijemr.9.4.16
Continuity equation:
u u u
0 (1)
x y z
x-momentum equation:
u u u u p 2u 2u 2u (2)
u v w 2 2 2 gx
t x y z x x y z
y-momentum equation:
v v v v p 2v 2v 2v (3)
u v w 2 2 2 gy
t x y z y x y z
z-momentum equation:
w w w w p 2 w 2 w 2 w (4)
u v w 2 2 2 gz
t x y z z x y z
Energy equation
T T T T 2T 2T (5)
Cp u v w k 2 2
x y z x x y z
3.2 Relevant Assumptions (ix) Heat conduction is steady with no heat
The following assumptions are applied to simplify generation,
continuity, Navier-Stokes and equations: (x) Heat conduction is one dimensional, along the
(i) One dimensional in the hose and radiator (the y-axis only,
flow in the radiator is in y-direction with the (xi) Thermal conductivity is constant (isotropic
flow in x-axis direction assumed material),
insignificantly negligible), (xii) Element length is uniform over domain region,
(ii) Incompressible (i.e. density is assumed (xiii) Heat transfer by radiation negligible
constant), By modeling the radiator this way is to enable us to
(iii) Steady, know how temperature varies in the direction of heat
(iv) Laminar and fully-developed, transfer and to develop a simple approximate mathematical
(v) Newtonian and isotropic fluid flow, model to predict the temperature distribution in one
(vi) Body forces (gravitational and inertia ) are dimension in the radiator.
negligible, 3.3 Initial inlet and Boundary Conditions
(vii) No-slip condition exists at tube inner surfaces, The following initial inlet and essential boundary
(viii) Elements are linear and uniformly spaced conditions are specified at the tube-fluid and radiator-fluid
between nodes, boundary interfaces as well as at inlet and outlet as follows:
105 This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
International Journal of Engineering and Management Research e-ISSN: 2250-0758 | p-ISSN: 2394-6962
Volume- 9, Issue- 4 (August 2019)
www.ijemr.net https://doi.org/10.31033/ijemr.9.4.16
u ( x 1) u ( x 1) 0;
To 80o C , TL 150o C ;
To 30o C , TS 150o C
By applying the assumptions and boundary conditions to equations (1), (2), (3), (4) and (5) reduce them to the followings
governing equations (6), (7) and (8):
d dT
kA qA 0 (9)
dy dy
m N
T y 0 1500 C; T y L 800 C;Vx 0.20 ; p y 18 2 (10)
s m
Finite element models for 3,4 and 6 elements mesh are (see Appendix A):
106 This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
International Journal of Engineering and Management Research e-ISSN: 2250-0758 | p-ISSN: 2394-6962
Volume- 9, Issue- 4 (August 2019)
www.ijemr.net https://doi.org/10.31033/ijemr.9.4.16
d dT
kA qA 0 (12)
dx dx
m N
T x 0 150o C; T x S 30o C;Vy 0.018 ; px 23 2
s m
Finite element models for 3,4 and 5 elements mesh are (see Appendix A):
d 2 v Py
0 (13)
dx 2
subject to the following initial inlet and boundary conditions:
m N
v( y 1) 0; v( y 1) 0;Vx 0.20 ; p y 18 2
s m
Finite element models for 3and 4 elements mesh are (see Appendix A):
107 This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
International Journal of Engineering and Management Research e-ISSN: 2250-0758 | p-ISSN: 2394-6962
Volume- 9, Issue- 4 (August 2019)
www.ijemr.net https://doi.org/10.31033/ijemr.9.4.16
For 3 elements:
Py h 2 Py h 2
v1 0; v2 2 ; v3 2 ; v4 0
2
2
For 4 elements:
Py h 2 Py h 2 Py h 2
v1 0; v2 3 ; v3 4 ; v4 3 ; v5 0
2
2 2
d 2 u Px
0 (14)
dy 2
subject to the following initial inlet and boundary conditions:
m N
u ( y 1) 0; u ( y 1) 0;Vx 0.018 ; p y 23 2
s m
Finite element models for 3and 4 elements mesh are (see Appendix A):
For 3 elements
P h2 Px h 2
u1 0; u2 2 x 3
; u 2 ; u4 0
2 2
For 4 elements
Px h2 Px h2 Px h 2
u1 0; u2 3 ; u3 4 ; u4 3 ; u5 0
2 2 2
V. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 150oC (red portion) to approximately 80oC (blue portion),
which agrees with the result obtained by analysis. Fig. 6is a
The results and discussion presented here are for graph of temperature against tube length comparing finite
temperature distributions along radiator tube length (L) and element temperature distribution pattern (diamond) with
thickness (S) as well as velocity distributions along radiator heat flow distribution pattern (triangle) along the tube
tube length (L) and in the radiator inlet hose. length respectively. In Fig. 6, temperature is seen to
For temperature distribution in the radiator tube decrease with increase in length while heat flow increases
length, Fig. 4 is a graph of temperature against tube length with increase in length. For temperature distribution along
comparing finite element solutions for 3 (diamond), 4 the tube thickness, Fig. 7 is a graph of temperature against
(square) and 5 (triangle) elements with analytical solution tube thickness comparing finite element solutions for 3
(cross); the graph reveals that the more the number of (diamond), 4 (square) and 5 (triangle) elements with
elements is increased the more the finite element solution analytical solution (cross); the graph reveals that the more
approximates the analytical solutions. Fig. 5 shows the number of elements is increased the more the finite
temperature distribution long tube length using ANSYS element solution approximates the exact solutions. Fig. 8is
R16.2 software. Temperature is seen to decrease from a graph of temperature against tube thickness comparing
108 This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
International Journal of Engineering and Management Research e-ISSN: 2250-0758 | p-ISSN: 2394-6962
Volume- 9, Issue- 4 (August 2019)
www.ijemr.net https://doi.org/10.31033/ijemr.9.4.16
finite element temperature distribution pattern (diamond) boundary conditions are satisfied with velocity increasing
with heat flow distribution pattern (triangle) along the tube from the wall velocity = 0 to the midsection with velocity =
thickness respectively with temperature shown to decrease 50.195m/s. While for velocity distribution in inlet hose
with increase in length while heat flow increases with diameter, in Fig.10 a graph of velocity against inlet hose
increase in length. diameter, 2 elements solutions (triangle), 3 elements
For velocity distribution in the radiator tube solutions (diamond) and 4 elements solutions (circle) are
diameter, Fig. 9 is a graph of velocity against tube length compared with the analytical solution (square).The graph
comparing finite element solutions for 3 (square) and 4 reveals the finite element solution approximates the
(diamond) elements with analytical solution (cross); the analytical solution as the number of elements is increased
graph reveals that more the number of elements is increased with the no-slip boundary conditions being satisfied at the
the more the finite element solution approximates the exact walls as velocity increases from 0 to the maximum at the
solutions. From Fig. 9, at the tube walls the no-slip midsection with velocity = 669.269m/s.
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
1 2 3 4 5 6
tube length (L)
3 elements 4 elements
5 elements Analytical solution
Fig. 4: Finite element and analytical temperature distribution along tube length
109 This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
International Journal of Engineering and Management Research e-ISSN: 2250-0758 | p-ISSN: 2394-6962
Volume- 9, Issue- 4 (August 2019)
www.ijemr.net https://doi.org/10.31033/ijemr.9.4.16
150
100
50
0
1 2 3 4 5 6
tube length (L)
100
80
60
40
20
0
1 2 3 4 5 6
tube thickness (S)
Fig.7: Finite element and analytical temperature distribution along tube thickness
110 This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
International Journal of Engineering and Management Research e-ISSN: 2250-0758 | p-ISSN: 2394-6962
Volume- 9, Issue- 4 (August 2019)
www.ijemr.net https://doi.org/10.31033/ijemr.9.4.16
150
100
50
0
1 2 3 4 5 6
thickness (S)
50
velocity(m/s)
ue( y ) 40
u3( y )30
u4( y )
20
10
0
1 0.667 0.333 0 0.333 0.667 1
y
111 This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
International Journal of Engineering and Management Research e-ISSN: 2250-0758 | p-ISSN: 2394-6962
Volume- 9, Issue- 4 (August 2019)
www.ijemr.net https://doi.org/10.31033/ijemr.9.4.16
For radiator tube, Table 1 shows temperature distribution for 5 (5E) elements, the corresponding
distribution at the element nodes for 3 (3E), 4(4E) and analytical (AS) values and the heat flux values.
5(5E) elements and the corresponding analytical (AS) Temperature distribution values are seen to decrease with
values. In Table 1, the 5 elements nodal values approximate tube length as the heat flux increases.
with those of the analytical nodal point values. Table 2 For radiator tube, Table 5 shows velocity
shows temperature distribution for 5 (5E) elements, the distribution at the element nodes for 3 (3E) and 4(4E)
corresponding analytical (AS) values and the heat flux elements and the corresponding analytical (AS) values. In
values. Temperature distribution values are seen to decrease Table 5, the 4 elements nodal values approximate with
with tube length as the heat flux increases. For tube those of the analytical nodal point values. For inlet hose,
thickness, Table 3 indicates temperature distribution values Table 6 shows velocity distribution at the element nodes for
at element nodes for 3 (3E), 4(4E) and 5(5E) elements and 3 (3E) and 4(4E) elements and the corresponding analytical
the corresponding analytical (AS) values. In Table 3, the 5 (AS) values. In Table 6, the 4 elements nodal values
elements nodal values approximate with those of the approximate with those of the analytical nodal point values.
analytical nodal point values. Table 4 shows temperature
Table 1: Radiator tube length finite element and analytical temperature nodal values
Nodes 3E (oC) 4E (oC) 5E (oC) AS (oC)
0.00 150.000 150.000 150. 000 150.000
0.20 127.000 134.000 138.000 138.488
0.40 103.000 117.000 126.000 125.733
0.60 95.000 99.000 112.000 111.733
0.80 88.000 90.000 96.000 96.488
1.00 80.000 80.000 80.000 80.000
3E: 3 elementssolution; 4E: 4 elementssolution; 5E: 5 elements solution;AS: analytical solution
Table 2: Finite element and analytical temperature distribution and heat flow values
Nodes 5E (oC) AS (oC) Q(J/m2)
0.00 150. 000 150.000 30.545
0.20 138.000 138.488 34.035
112 This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
International Journal of Engineering and Management Research e-ISSN: 2250-0758 | p-ISSN: 2394-6962
Volume- 9, Issue- 4 (August 2019)
www.ijemr.net https://doi.org/10.31033/ijemr.9.4.16
Table 4: Finite element, analytical temperature and heat flow nodal values
Nodes 5E (oC) AS (oC) Q(J)
0.00 150. 000 150.000 58.595
0.20 128.000 128.488 62.085
0.40 106.000 105.733 65.575
0.60 82.000 81.733 69.056
0.80 56.000 56.488 72.555
1.00 30.000 30.000 76.045
5E: 5 elements solution;AS: analytical solution; Q: heat fluxes
1.000 0 0 0
0.875 0.056 0.113 0.113
0.750 0.105 0.210 0.210
0.625 0.146 0.293 0.293
0.500 0.180 0.361 0.361
0.375 0.207 0.413 0.413
0.250 0.225 0.451 0.451
0.125 0.237 0.473 0.473
0.000 0.240 0.481 0.481
113 This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
International Journal of Engineering and Management Research e-ISSN: 2250-0758 | p-ISSN: 2394-6962
Volume- 9, Issue- 4 (August 2019)
www.ijemr.net https://doi.org/10.31033/ijemr.9.4.16
114 This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
International Journal of Engineering and Management Research e-ISSN: 2250-0758 | p-ISSN: 2394-6962
Volume- 9, Issue- 4 (August 2019)
www.ijemr.net https://doi.org/10.31033/ijemr.9.4.16
Appendix A
(1) Transformation of governing equation into Weak form
The derivation of element equations for typical element e in the mesh follows these steps (Reddy, 1995):
d dT
kA qA 0 (A1)
dy dy
dy L
dy j 1 dy
(A6)
d d j
0h
dT
n h ee h
T j kA
e i
dy Aq ie dy kA ie
j 1 0 dy dy 0 dy L
In matrix form the finite element model is written as:
K e T e f e Qe (A7)
qL2 y y y
2
y
T y TL T0 To (A)
2k L L L L
dT ( y ) qLA y y kA
Q( y ) kA 1 2 TL T0 To (A9)
dy 2 L L L
115 This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
International Journal of Engineering and Management Research e-ISSN: 2250-0758 | p-ISSN: 2394-6962
Volume- 9, Issue- 4 (August 2019)
www.ijemr.net https://doi.org/10.31033/ijemr.9.4.16
Appendix B
Problem data
Empirical values
Observed parameters Symbols Quantity Unit
116 This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.