Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Classical Solutions: Heat Transfer Concepts, Part 3
Classical Solutions: Heat Transfer Concepts, Part 3
(Draft 1, 9/30/06)
Classical Solutions
There are a few well know thermal problems that have known simple solutions that give you some
insight into the phenomenon and are easily verified with a CosmosWorks analysis. The first of these
is a planar wall with a temperature difference on each side. This is often approximated as a semi-
infinite wall, which reduces the problem to a one dimensional study. The solution [2] shows that the
temperature through the wall is linear in space. Therefore, the heat flux, per unit area, will be
constant. Any finite element model should give the exact result everywhere.
Planar wall
The heat transfer through a wall will be illustrated by a CosmosWorks model. It could be solved with
a single layer of elements through the wall. Here it is assumed that the analytic solution is not known,
so several thousand unknowns are used to clearly illustrate the response. The wall in this case is five
inches thick and made of alloy steel. A unit cross-sectional area is used. The outer (left) side is kept
at 100 F while the inner side is at 0 F. Those two restraints must be explicitly applied. The other four
faces of the body are planes of symmetry and are automatically treated as insulated. The mesh is
shown in Figure 1 (top) along with the resulting uniform temperature drop distribution. The
temperature distribution is more easily seen with a graph along one edge of the mesh. The linear
Another well known heat transfer problem with a simple analytic solution is that of radial conduction
through an infinite pipe, or curved wall. In that case, the temperature difference varies in a logarithmic
manner through the wall thickness [2]. That means that the heat flux must also vary through the wall,
since it passes through more material as the radius increases.
The example here [4], will be for an alloy steel pipe with an inner radius of 10 inches and with a
thickness of 5 inches. Thus it is very similar to the previous example having inner and outer
temperatures of 100 F and 0 F, respectively. In this case, each of those restraints are applied to
cylindrical faces. The other four faces are insulated and do not require specific action. The geometry,
a very fine mesh, and the resulting temperature contours are given in Figure 4.
The radial variation of the temperature in the contour plot of Figure 3 might appear to again be linear,
but a graph of the temperature along a radial edge (see Figure 5) is actually logarithmic. Compared
to Figure 2, you see that at a distance of 40 % through the wall the temperature has dropped more
Most conduction problems also involve free convection. That usually gives a steeper change in
temperature over a region. Here a segment of a circular rod (Figure 12) is examined where the length
is only two times the diameter. That is near the lower limit where you might want to expect a one-
dimensional approximation to be accurate. Convection occurs on the outer surface while one end is
kept at 100 F. The other three symmetry surfaces in the model are insulated. Any wedge angle could
have been used, but a value of 30 degrees was picked to give good element aspect ratios.
Centerline Surface
It is not uncommon for the user supplied convection coefficient to be in error due to measurement
errors or errors occurring in a units conversion. As an example, the above study was re-run with the
convection coefficient increased by a factor of 10. That is, the convection heat transfer mode was
increased relative to the conduction mode (m was approximately tripled). The new temperatures, in
Figure 15, are significantly different from those of Figure 13. The surface and centerline temperature
graphs are still about the same and still follow the hyperbolic cosine change given by Myers.
However, the temperatures in the distal half of the bar have dropped to rapidly approach, or match the
temperature of the surrounding air.
The convection coefficient has lower and upper bounds, of 0 and ∞, respectively. They have different
physical effects in a study. A low value of h causes the surface to approach an insulated state, while
a high value causes the surface to approach a restraint of a specified temperature. The latter state is
what is seen in Figure 15. The distal end of the part is responding as if it had a restraint temperature
of 0 F applied to it.
These two limits on h are also reflected in terms of the temperature contour lines. The lower limit
causes the contour lines to approach being perpendicular to the surface as they do for insulated
boundaries. Likewise, the upper limit causes the temperature contours to approach being parallel to
the surface as they would if it was subjected to a constant temperature restraint.
Closure
These examples illustrate the value of using analytic approximations to estimate and validate the
results from a finite element study. The first example also shows that if an analytic solution is not
available for validating a solid study sometimes an independent two-dimensional finite element study
can be useful. You always should estimate the expected results before you start a study and to
validate the study results when finished.
References
1. Akin, J.E., Finite Element Analysis with Error Estimates, Elsevier, 2005.
2. Chapman, A.J., Fundamentals of Heat Transfer, Macmillan, 1984.
3. G.E. Myers, Analytical Methods in Conduction Heat Transfer, McGraw, 1971.
4. Tuba, I.S., Wright, W.B. (Eds), Pressure Vessel and Piping Computer Programs Verification,
ASME, 1972.