FLUINT
is the 1D thermohydraulic (fluid network modeling, or FNM)
companion to SINDA,
which is a thermal network analyzer (applicable to 1D/2D/3D finite
element, finite difference, and/or lumped parameter models). FLUINT
can be used in standalone fashion, but more often is accessed using
the nongeometric SinapsPlus sketchpad interface. With the recent advent
of FloCAD, FLUINT solutions are now even
easier to apply from within Thermal Desktops geometric (CAD-based)
modeling environment. The result is a unique combination of 3D thermal/structural
modeling plus 1D fluid modeling with which many engineers are unfamiliar
compared to the many commercial CFD (computational fluid dynamics)
packages available.
Indeed,
engineers unfamiliar with the FloCAD approach often ask How
is it different from CFD? This document seeks to answer
that question. It does not seek to advocate universal use of
one method over the other. It does, however, seek to demonstrate
why correlation-based methods such as FLUINT/FloCAD have important
advantages that will persist even as CFD methods continue to
improve in the future.
3D
Finned Heat Exchanger with 1-D Air Flow
Advantages
of the FLUINT/FloCAD Approach
FLUINT/FloCAD
uses a fast-to-build, fast-to-solve empirical approach: the exact
details of the geometry are avoided by applying heat transfer and
pressure drop correlations, such that a one dimensional flow field
is adequate. Simply put, the FLUINT/FloCAD approach eliminates the
need for extra meshing. This choice has many repercussions:
Cost: The
purchase price of the FLUINT/FloCAD suite of tools is much less
than that of comparable CFD software. In addition, the time required
to learn and retain FLUINT/FloCAD is reduced, as is the time required
to build and change models.
Speed: The
solution speed of FLUINT is orders of magnitude faster than that
of CFD approaches: meaningful results can be obtained within minutes
on a single PC, rather than hours on networked workstations. This
means being able to ask bigger questions at either
higher levels of assembly or what-if and sensitivity studies using
parametric modeling and Advanced Design Modules (for optimizing,
calibrating to test, statistical design including tolerancing,
etc.).
Phenomena:
Transient analyses are not a problem for the FLUINT/FloCAD approach,
and it makes quick work of systems that are poorly suited for
3D CFD methods, including ducted air or coolant flows, heat pipes,
and two-phase flow.
FNM
Condenser Model
Less accuracy?
There is a common presumption that CFD methods assume less than
correlation-based approaches, and are therefore more accurate.
Indeed, correlation-based methods like FLUINT/FloCAD make assumptions
such as fully developed flow profiles that are inappropriate in
some instances and such discrepancies must be overcome by additional
guidance from the user. However, it is less commonly recognized
that CFD methods struggle with heat transfer solutions because
heat transfer is estimated based upon the flow field estimation:
errors in heat transfer coefficients on the order of 20% are not
uncommon. Resolutions of this problem include use of even more
fine meshes near the walls (causing even less flexibility and
slower solution speeds) and, ironically, application of empiricisms.
Parametric Study of Heat Pipe Degradation
Advantages
of the CFD approach
The main advantage
of CFD over FLUINT/FloCAD FNM methods is that certain
classes of 2D/3D flow problems that are simply not amenable to 1D
methods, or at least require too much user involvement (e.g., correcting
for entrance length effects or specifying losses influencing flow
splits) to exploit 1D flow solution methods and available heat transfer
correlations.
Nonetheless,
many engineers continue to use both methods for such problems. Essentially,
they use a CFD solution to develop a correlation for use in codes
such as FLUINT: using CFD runs to define a flow split, a pressure
or velocity boundary condition, an effective loss or heat transfer
coefficient, etc. Using these as inputs to FLUINT enables modeling
of transients, parametric solutions, optimization, calibrations
to test data, two-phase flow solutions, etc.
Perhaps the
greatest drawback of FLUINT/FloCAD methods is the lack of postprocessed
3D flowfields and streamlines, which certainly have tremendous appeal
in presentations and technical papers. Because flow networks are
visually more abstract, some engineers have even created CFD graphics
for presentations after completing their design work using FLUINT
methods.