University of New Orleans

ScholarWorks@UNO

University of New Orleans Theses and Dissertations and Theses

Dissertations

8-6-2009

A Numerical Study of Unsteady Natural Convection in a

Rectangular Enclosure -- The Effect of Variable Thermodynamic
and Transport Properties
Manohar Chidurala
University of New Orleans

Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.uno.edu/td

Recommended Citation
Chidurala, Manohar, "A Numerical Study of Unsteady Natural Convection in a Rectangular Enclosure -- The
Effect of Variable Thermodynamic and Transport Properties" (2009). University of New Orleans Theses
and Dissertations. 973.
https://scholarworks.uno.edu/td/973

This Thesis is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been brought to you by ScholarWorks@UNO with
permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this Thesis in any way that is permitted by the copyright
and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-
holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/or on the
work itself.

This Thesis has been accepted for inclusion in University of New Orleans Theses and Dissertations by an
authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UNO. For more information, please contact [email protected].
A Numerical Study of Unsteady Natural Convection in a Rectangular
Enclosure – The Effect of Variable Thermodynamic and Transport
Properties

A Thesis

Submitted to the Graduate faculty of

University of New Orleans
in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of

Master of Science
in
Mechanical Engineering
Thermal Fluids Science

by

Manohar Chidurala

B.Tech., JNTU College of Engineering, 2006

M.S., University of New Orleans, 2009

August, 2009
Copyright 2009, Manohar Chidurala

ii
To my Mom, Dad, Srinivas, Premalatha and Ambika

iii
 Acknowledgment

I would like to attribute the success of this thesis project to Dr. Kazim M. Akyuzlu,

Professor of Mechanical Engineering. Dr. Akyuzlu with his strong intellect and motivating

personality inculcated a positive attitude in me. The present thesis would not have been possible

without his elaborate guidance and full encouragement. I would also like to thank Dr. Carsie A.

Hall, Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering, for serving on my thesis committee. I have

gained his esteemed guidance and help throughout my graduate studies.

I would like to express my sincere thanks to Dr. Ting Wang, Professor of Mechanical

Engineering, and Dr. Dongming Wei, Professor of Mathematics for serving on my thesis

committee and their help in courses and projects. I would like to thank Dr. Paul D. Herrington,

Chair of Mechanical Engineering Department, and Dr. Martin J. Guillot, Associate Professor of

Mechanical Engineering, for readily accepting to serve on my thesis committee. I would also

like to thank the Department of Mechanical Engineering at the University of New Orleans for

providing financial assistance.

I am extremely grateful to my seniors Antoniou and Pavri. They are responsible for the

development of the code used in this study. I would like to thank my friends Manas, Dinesh and

Rama Chandra for their encouragement and support throughout my studies. I would also thankful

to my friends and roommates Rajesh, Rohit, Rakesh, Nitin, Prashant, Sharath, Murali and

Sridhar for being so understanding and supportive of me during this journey.

I feel indebted to my family for their never ending support and encouragement. I would

like to thank especially to my love Ambika and my brother Srinivas, without them, this part of

journey would be inevitable.

iv
 Table of Contents

Nomenclature ............................................................................................................................ vii

List of Figures ............................................................................................................................ xi

List of Tables .......................................................................................................................... xvii

Abstract .................................................................................................................................... xx

1. Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1

2. Literature Survey ............................................................................................................. 4

3. Description of the Physical Model ................................................................................. 10

4. Description of the Mathematical Model ......................................................................... 13

4.1.Assumptions for Mathematical Model...................................................................... 13

4.2.Dimensional Formulation......................................................................................... 14

4.3.Sub-models for Thermodynamic and Transport Properties ....................................... 15

4.4.Non-dimensional Formulation ................................................................................. 15

5. Numerical Formulation and Solution Technique ............................................................ 20

5.1.Discretization of the Governing Differential Equations ............................................ 21

5.2.Linearization of the Governing Differential Equations ............................................. 23

5.3.Solution Technique .................................................................................................. 25

5.4.Solution Algorithm .................................................................................................. 29

6. The Validation of the Mathematical Model and Computer Codes .................................. 31

6.1.First Order Accurate in Time Model ........................................................................ 31

6.2.Second Order Accurate in Time Model .................................................................... 38

v
 7. Parametric Study of Natural Convection Using

the First Order Accurate in Time Model ........................................................................ 45

8. The Study of Effects of Variable Fluid Properties in Natural Convection Inside a Square

Enclosure....................................................................................................................... 51

9. The Study of Effects of Inclination of the Enclosure on Natural Convection .................. 93

10. Parametric Study of Natural Convection Using

the Second Order Accurate in Time Model ................................................................... 99

11. The Study of Unsteady Natural Convection in Square Enclosures ................................ 131

12. Calculations of Wall Heat Flux and Nusselt Number ................................................... 145

13. Conclusions ................................................................................................................. 152

14. Recommendations ....................................................................................................... 154

List of References ................................................................................................................... 155

Appendices ............................................................................................................................. 160

I. Vector Form of the Governing Differential Equations ............................................ 161

II. Dimensional form of Governing Differential Equation ........................................... 163

III. Sub-models of Thermodynamic Properties and Transport Properties ...................... 165

IV. Non-dimensional Formulation of Governing Differential Equations ....................... 167

V. Formulas for Calculate the Lower [L] and Upper [U] Matrices

for CMSIP Method ................................................................................................ 169

VI. Flow Chart for the Computer Program ................................................................... 172

VII. List of Program Parameters .................................................................................. 183

VIII. Specifics of each Run .......................................................................................... 184

Vita ......................................................................................................................................... 185

vi
 Nomenclature

Symbols

AR Aspect ratio (H / L)

cp Specific heat at constant pressure

p Non-dimensional specific heat at constant pressure

cv Specific heat at constant volume

v Non-dimensional specific heat at constant volume

Et Total energy per unit volume

e Internal energy per unit mass

Velocity vector

Force per unit mass

Stress tensor

Heat transfer by conduction

Q Heat transfer by external agencies

Fr Froude number (uref2/g H)

g Gravitational acceleration

g Body force vector per unit volume

Gr Grashof number

H Height of the cavity

Non-dimensional height of the cavity

L Characteristic length

vii
 Non-dimensional width of the cavity

k Thermal conductivity

p Thermodynamic pressure

Non-dimensional thermodynamic pressure

Pr Prandtl number

R Gas constant

Non-dimensional gas constant

Ra Rayleigh number (g TH3 / )

h Heat transfer coefficient

Nu Nusselt number

T Temperature

Non-dimensional temperature

t Time

Non-dimensional time

u Horizontal velocity

Non-dimensional horizontal velocity

Non-dimensional horizontal velocity (u H/ )

uref Reference velocity (Gr1/2

v Vertical velocity

Non-dimensional vertical velocity

Non-dimensional vertical velocity (v H/ )

x Horizontal spatial coordinate

Non-dimensional horizontal spatial coordinate

viii
y Vertical spatial coordinate

Non-dimensional vertical spatial coordinate

Greek Symbols

Thermal diffusivity; co-efficient of auxiliary matrix, P

Coefficient of thermal expansion

Isentropic constant

Non-dimensional time increment

T Temperature difference between hot and cold walls (Th-Tc)

Non-dimensional increment in the horizontal direction

Non-dimensional increment in the vertical direction

Convergence criterion for SIP algorithm

Convergence criterion for pressure

Absolute viscosity

Non-dimensional absolute viscosity

Kinematic viscosity

Non-dimensional kinematic viscosity

 Density

Kronecker delta function

Angle of inclination of the enclosure

Subscripts

c Cold

h Hot

w Wall

ix
i Index for space increment in x direction

j Index for space increment in y direction

ref Reference

Superscripts

k Index for number of iterations ( kth iteration in the CMSIP)

n Index for time increment

x
 List of Figures

Figure 1- Schematic of Physical Model (Square and Inclined Enclosure) in the

Dimensional domain
Figure 2- Schematic of Physical Model in the Non-dimensional domain

Figure 3- Indexing of the Discretized Non-dimensional domain (Inner Nodes)

Figure 4- Computational Molecule for the Elements of A Matrix
Figure 5- Comparison of Steady State Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity Distribution
along the Half of the Horizontal Centerline for ∆ = 1.0E-5, ∆ = 5.0E-6 and
∆ = 1.0E-6 at Ra = 105
Figure 6- Comparison of Steady State Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity Distribution
along the Half of the Horizontal Centerline for Grid Sizes of 21 x 21 and 41 x 41
at Ra = 105
Figure 7- Steady State Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity Distribution along the Horizontal
Centerline for ∆ = 1.0E-5, ∆ = 5.0E-6 and ∆ = 1.0E-6 at Ra = 105 in Second
Order Time Accurate Approximation
Figure 8- Steady State Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity Distribution along the Horizontal
Centerline for Grid Sizes of 21 x 21, 41 x 41 and 81 x 81 at Ra = 105 in Second
Order Time Accurate Approximation

Figure 9- Comparison of Steady State Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity Distributions

along the Horizontal Centerline of the Enclosure for Ra= 104, Ra=5 x 104, Ra=
105, Ra= 5x105 at H=0.0254m
Figure 10- Comparison of Steady State Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity Distributions
along the Horizontal Centerline of the Enclosure for ∆T= 64.8K, ∆T= 356.6K and
∆T= 648.4K at Ra= 105
Figure 11- Comparison of Steady State Non-dimensional Horizontal Velocity Distributions
along the Vertical Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid
Properties at Ra= 105 ( = 64.8 K, H = 0.0144m)
Figure 12- Comparison of Steady State Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity Distributions
along the Horizontal Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid
Properties at Ra= 105 ( = 64.8 K, H = 0.0144m)
Figure 13- Comparison of Steady State Non-dimensional Temperature Distributions along
the Horizontal Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid
Properties at Ra= 105 ( = 64.8 K, H = 0.0144m)

xi
Figure 14- Comparison of Non-dimensional Horizontal Histograms of Constant and Variable
Properties for Ra= 105 at =0.05 and =0.5

Figure 15- Comparison of Vertical Velocity Histograms of Constant and Variable Properties
for Ra= 105 at =0.05 and =0.5
Figure 16- Computational Mesh of the Non-dimensional domain for the Natural Convection
Case for Variable Properties
Figure 17- Non-dimensional Horizontal Velocity Histogram for Ra=105 at = 0.05 and =
0.5 for Variable Properties (21 x 21, ∆ = 1.0E-5)

Figure 18- Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity Histogram for Ra=105 at =0.05 and =0.5
for Variable Properties (21 x 21, ∆ = 1.0E-5)
Figure 19- Steady State Non-dimensional Temperature Contours for Ra=105 for Variable
Properties (21 x 21, ∆ = 1.0E-5)
Figure 20- Steady State Non-dimensional Velocity Vectors for Ra=105 (21 x 21, ∆ = 1.0E-5)
for Variable Properties

Figure 21- Steady State Non-dimensional Velocity Streamlines for Ra=105 for Variable
Properties (21 x 21, ∆ = 1.0E-5)
Figure 22- Steady State Non-dimensional Horizontal Velocity Distribution along the Vertical
Centerline of the Enclosure for Ra=105 for Variable Properties
(21 x 21, ∆ = 1.0E-5)
Figure 23- Steady State Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity Distribution along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Enclosure for Ra=105 for Variable Properties
(21 x 21, ∆ = 1.0E-5)

Figure 24- Steady State Non-dimensional Temperature Distribution along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Enclosure for Ra=105 for Variable Properties
(21 x 21, ∆ = 1.0E-5)
Figure 25- Comparison of Steady State Non-dimensional Horizontal Velocity Distributions
along the Vertical Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid
Properties at Ra= 105 ( = 356.6 K, H = 0.0115m)
Figure 26- Comparison of Steady State Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity Distributions
along the Horizontal Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid
Properties at Ra= 105 ( = 356.6 K, H = 0.0115m)
Figure 27- Comparison of Steady State Non-dimensional Temperature Distributions along
the Horizontal Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid
Properties at Ra= 105 ( = 356.6 K, H = 0.0115m)

xii
Figure 28- Comparison of Steady State Non-dimensional Horizontal Velocity Distributions
along the Vertical Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid
Properties at Ra= 5x 104 ( = 356.6 K, H = 0.0115m)
Figure 29- Comparison of Steady State Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity Distributions
along the Horizontal Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid
Properties at Ra= 5 x 104 ( = 356.6 K, H = 0.0115m)

Figure 30- Comparison of Steady State Non-dimensional Temperature Distributions along

the Horizontal Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid
Properties at Ra= 5 x 104 ( = 356.6 K, H = 0.0115m)
Figure 31- Comparison of Steady State Non-dimensional Horizontal Velocity Distributions
along the Vertical Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid
Properties at Ra=104 ( = 356.6 K, H = 0.0067m)
Figure 32- Comparison of Steady State Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity Distributions
along the Horizontal Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid
Properties at Ra= 104 ( = 356.6 K, H = 0.0067m)
Figure 33- Comparison of Steady State Non-dimensional Temperature Distributions along
the Horizontal Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid
Properties at Ra= 104 ( = 356.6 K, H = 0.0067m)

Figure 34- Comparison of Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity Profiles along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Enclosure between = 64.8 K and = 356.6 K (Ra = 105)
for Variable Properties.
Figure 35- Comparison of Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity Profiles along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Enclosure between Ra = 104, Ra = 5 x 104, and Ra = 105
( = 356.6 K) for Variable Properties.
Figure 36- Steady State Non-dimensional Horizontal Velocity Distributions along the
Vertical Centerline of the Inclined Enclosure for Constant Fluid Properties at Ra =
105
Figure 37- Steady State Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity Distributions along the
Horizontal Centerline of the Inclined Enclosure for Constant Fluid Properties at
Ra= 105

Figure 38- Steady State Non-dimensional Temperature Distributions along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Inclined Enclosure for Constant Fluid Properties at Ra= 105
Figure 39- Computational Mesh of the Non-dimensional domain for the Natural Convection
Case in Second Order Time Accurate Approximation (21 x 21, Ra = 105)
Figure 40- Non-dimensional Horizontal Velocity Histogram for Ra=105 at =0.2 and =0.5
(21 x 21, ∆ = 1.0E-5) in Second Order Time Accurate Approximation

xiii
Figure 41- Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity Histogram for Ra=105 at =0.2 and =0.5
(21 x 21, ∆ = 1.0E-5) in Second Order Time Accurate Approximation

Figure 42- Steady State Non-dimensional Temperature Contours for Ra=105

(21 x 21, ∆ = 1.0E-5) in Second Order Time Accurate Approximation
Figure 43- Steady State Non-dimensional Velocity Vectors for Ra=105 (21 x 21, ∆ = 1.0E-5)
in Second Order Time Accurate Approximation
Figure 44- Steady State Non-dimensional Velocity Streamlines for Ra=105
(21 x 21, ∆ = 1.0E-5) in Second Order Time Accurate Approximation

Figure 45- Steady State Non-dimensional Horizontal Velocity Distribution along the Vertical
Centerline of the Enclosure for Ra=105 (21 x 21, ∆ = 1.0E-5) in Second Order
Time Accurate Approximation
Figure 46- Steady State Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity Distribution along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Enclosure for Ra=105 (21 x 21, ∆ = 1.0E-5) in Second Order
Time Accurate Approximation
Figure 47- Steady State Non-dimensional Temperature Distribution along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Enclosure for Ra=105 (21 x 21, ∆ = 1.0E-5) in Second Order
Time Accurate Approximation
Figure 48- Computational Mesh of the Non-dimensional domain for the Natural Convection
Case in Second Order Time Accurate Approximation (81 x 81, Ra = 105)
Figure 49- Steady State Non-dimensional Velocity Vectors for Ra=105 (81 x 81, ∆ = 1.0E-6)
in Second Order Time Accurate Approximation
Figure 50- Steady State Non-dimensional Velocity Streamlines for Ra=105
(81 x 81, ∆ = 1.0E-6) in Second Order Time Accurate Approximation
Figure 51- Steady State Non-dimensional Temperature Contours for Ra=105
(81 x 81, ∆ = 1.0E-6) in Second Order Time Accurate Approximation
Figure 52- Comparison of Steady State Horizontal Velocity Distribution along the Vertical
centerline of the Enclosure between First Order and Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation for Ra= 105
Figure 53- Comparison of Steady State Vertical Velocity Distribution along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Enclosure between First Order and Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation for Ra= 105
Figure 54- Comparison of Steady State Temperature Distribution along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Enclosure between First Order and Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation for Ra= 105

xiv
Figure 55- Comparison of Steady State Horizontal Velocity Distribution along the Vertical
Centerline of the Enclosure between First Order and Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation for Ra= 104
Figure 56- Comparison of Steady State Vertical Velocity Distribution along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Enclosure between First Order and Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation for Ra= 104
Figure 57- Comparison of Steady State Temperature Distribution along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Enclosure between First Order and Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation for Ra= 104
Figure 58- Comparison of Steady State Horizontal Velocity Distribution along the Vertical
Centerline of the Enclosure between Ra= 104 and Ra= 105 in Second Order Time
Accurate Approximation
Figure 59- Comparison of Steady State Vertical Velocity Distribution along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Enclosure between Ra= 104 and Ra= 105 in Second Order Time
Accurate Approximation
Figure 60- Comparison of Steady State Temperature Distribution along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Enclosure between Ra= 104 and Ra= 105 in Second Order Time
Accurate Approximation

Figure 61- Non-dimensional Temperature Histogram for Ra = 105 at = 0.05 and = 0.5
(41 x 41, ∆ = 5.0E-6) in Second Order Time Accurate Approximation
Figure 62- Unsteady State Non-dimensional Velocity Vectors for Ra=105 at Non-
dimensional Time, = 1 (41 x 41, ∆ = 5.0E-6) in Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation
Figure 63- Unsteady State Non-dimensional Velocity Vectors for Ra=105 at Non-
dimensional Time, = 5 (41 x 41, ∆ = 5.0E-6) in Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation
Figure 64- Unsteady State Non-dimensional Velocity Vectors for Ra=105 at Non-
dimensional Time, = 10 (41 x 41, ∆ = 5.0E-6) in Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation
Figure 65- Unsteady State Non-dimensional Velocity Vectors for Ra=105 at Non-
dimensional Time, = 15 (41 x 41, ∆ = 5.0E-6) in Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation
Figure 66- Unsteady State Non-dimensional Velocity Vectors for Ra=105 at Non-
dimensional Time, = 20 (41 x 41, ∆ = 5.0E-6) in Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation

Figure 67- Unsteady State Non-dimensional Velocity Vectors for Ra=105 at Non-
dimensional Time, = 50 (41 x 41, ∆ = 5.0E-6) in Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation

xv
Figure 68- Unsteady State Non-dimensional Temperature Contours for Ra=105 at Non-
dimensional Time, = 1 (41 x 41, ∆ = 5.0E-6) in Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation
Figure 69- Unsteady State Non-dimensional Temperature Contours for Ra=105 at Non-
dimensional Time, = 5 (41 x 41, ∆ = 5.0E-6) in Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation
Figure 70- Unsteady State Non-dimensional Temperature Contours for Ra=105 at Non-
dimensional Time, = 10 (41 x 41, ∆ = 5.0E-6) in Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation
Figure 71- Unsteady State Non-dimensional Temperature Contours for Ra=105 at Non-
dimensional Time, = 15 (41 x 41, ∆ = 5.0E-6) in Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation
Figure 72- Unsteady State Non-dimensional Temperature Contours for Ra=105 at Non-
dimensional Time, = 20 (41 x 41, ∆ = 5.0E-6) in Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation
Figure 73- Unsteady State Non-dimensional Temperature Contours for Ra=105 at Non-
dimensional Time, = 50 (41 x 41, ∆ = 5.0E-6) in Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation
Figure 74- Dimensional Temperature Distribution along the Horizontal Distance for Constant
Properties (ΔT = 64.8 deg K)

Figure 75- Dimensional Temperature Distribution along the Horizontal Distance for Variable
Properties (ΔT = 64.8 deg K)
Figure 76- Dimensional Temperature Distribution along the Horizontal Distance for Constant
Properties (ΔT = 356.6 deg K)
Figure 77- Dimensional Temperature Distribution along the Horizontal Distance for Variable
Properties (ΔT = 356.6 deg K)

xvi
 List of Tables

Table 1- Steady State Non-dimensional values of Vertical Velocity along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Enclosure for ∆ = 1.0E-5, ∆ = 5.0E-6 and ∆ = 1.0E-6
(Ra = 105 and 21 x 21)

Table 2- Steady State Non-dimensional values of Vertical Velocity along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Enclosure for 21 X 21 and 41 X 41 (Ra = 105 and 21 x 21)

Table 3- Comparison of the Results of the Constant Properties and the Benchmark Case
(de Vahl Davis) for Different Rayleigh Numbers

Table 4- Steady State Non-dimensional values of Vertical Velocity along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Enclosure for ∆ = 1.0E-5 and ∆ = 5.0E-6 at Ra = 105 in
Second Order Time Accurate Approximation

Table 5- Steady State Non-dimensional values of Vertical Velocity along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Enclosure for 21 X 21 and 41 X 41 at Ra = 105 in Second Order
Time Accurate Approximation
Table 6- Comparison of the Results of the First Order and the Second Order Time
Accurate CMSIP Models using Constant Properties for Different Rayleigh
Numbers
Table 7- Steady State Non-dimensional values of Vertical Velocity along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Enclosure for Ra= 104, Ra= 5 x 104, Ra = 105, Ra= 5 x 105 at
H=0.0254m

Table 8- Steady State Non-dimensional values of Vertical Velocity along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Enclosure for ∆T= 64.8K, ∆T= 356.6K, ∆T= 648.4K at Ra= 105
Table 9- Comparison of Predicted Non-dimensional values of Horizontal Velocity along
the Vertical Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid
Properties at Ra = 105 ( = 64.8 K, H=0.0254m and 21 X 21)
Table 10- Comparison of Predicted Non-dimensional values of Vertical Velocity along the
Horizontal Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid Properties
at Ra = 105 ( = 64.8 K, H=0.0254m and 21 X 21)

Table 11- Comparison of Predicted Non-dimensional values of Temperature along the

Horizontal Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid Properties
at Ra = 105 ( = 64.8 K, H=0.0254m and 21 X 21)

xvii
Table 12- Steady State Non-dimensional values of Primitive Variables along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Enclosure for Ra = 105 (∆ = 1.0E-5 and 21 X 21)

Table 13- Steady State Non-dimensional values of Primitive Variables along the Vertical
Centerline of the Enclosure for Ra = 105 (∆ = 1.0E-5 and21 X 21)
Table 14- Comparison of Predicted Non-dimensional values of Horizontal Velocity along
the Vertical Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid
Properties at Ra = 105 ( = 356.6 K, H=0.0144m and 21 X 21)

Table 15- Comparison of Predicted Non-dimensional values of Vertical Velocity along the
Horizontal Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid Properties
at Ra = 105 ( = 356.6 K, H=0.0144m and 21 X 21)
Table 16- Comparison of Predicted Non-dimensional values of Temperature along the
Horizontal Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid Properties
at Ra = 105 ( = 356.6 K, H=0.0144m and 21 X 21)
Table-17- Comparison of Predicted Non-dimensional values of Horizontal Velocity along
the Vertical Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid
Properties at Ra =5 x 104 ( = 356.6 K, H=0.0115m and 21 X 21)
Table 18- Comparison of Predicted Non-dimensional values of Vertical Velocity along the
Horizontal Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid Properties
at Ra = 5 x 104 ( = 356.6 K, H=0.0115m and 21 X 21)

Table 19- Comparison of Predicted Non-dimensional values of Temperature along the

Horizontal Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid Properties
at Ra =5 x 104 ( = 356.6 K, H=0.0115m and 21 X 21)
Table 20- Comparison of Predicted Non-dimensional values of Horizontal Velocity along
the Vertical Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid
Properties at Ra = 104 ( = 356.6 K, H=0.0067m and 21 X 21)
Table 21- Comparison of Predicted Non-dimensional values of Vertical Velocity along the
Horizontal Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid Properties
at Ra = 104 ( = 356.6 K, H=0.0067m and 21 X 21)

Table 22- Comparison of Predicted Non-dimensional values of Temperature along the

Horizontal Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid Properties
at Ra = 104 ( = 356.6 K, H=0.0067m and 21 X 21)
Table 23- Steady State Non-dimensional values of Vertical Velocity along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Inclined Enclosure at Various Angles for Ra = 105
(∆ = 1.0E-5 and 21 X 21)
Table 24- Steady State Non-dimensional values of Horizontal Velocity along the Vertical
Centerline of the Inclined Enclosure at Various Angles for Ra = 105
(∆ = 1.0E-5 and 21 X 21)

xviii
Table 25- Steady State Non-dimensional values of Primitive Variables along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Enclosure for Ra = 105 in Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation (∆ = 1.0E-5 and 21 X 21)
Table 26- Steady State Non-dimensional values of Primitive Variables along the Vertical
Centerline of the Enclosure for Ra = 105 in Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation (∆ = 1.0E-5 and 21 X 21)
Table 27- Comparison of Non-dimensional values of Horizontal Velocity along the Vertical
Centerline between First Order and Second Order Time Accurate Approximations
(Ra = 105, ∆ = 1.0E-5 and 21 X 21)
Table 28- Comparison of Non-dimensional values of Vertical Velocity along the Horizontal
Centerline between First Order and Second Order Time Accurate Approximations
(Ra = 105, ∆ = 1.0E-5 and 21 X 21)
Table 29- Comparison of Non-dimensional values of Temperature along the Horizontal
Centerline between First Order and Second Order Time Accurate Approximations
(Ra = 105, ∆ = 1.0E-5 and 21 X 21)
Table 30- Comparison of Non-dimensional values of Horizontal Velocity along the Vertical
Centerline between First Order and Second Order Time Accurate Approximations
(Ra = 104, ∆ = 1.0E-6 and 21 X 21)
Table 31- Comparison of Non-dimensional values of Vertical Velocity along the Horizontal
Centerline between First Order and Second Order Time Accurate Approximations
(Ra = 104, ∆ = 1.0E-6 and 21 X 21)
Table 32- Comparison of Non-dimensional values of Temperature along the Horizontal
Centerline between First Order and Second Order Time Accurate Approximations
(Ra = 104, ∆ = 1.0E-6 and 21 X 21)
Table 33- Comparison of the Results of the Present Study (Variable properties) and
Constant Properties for Different Wall Temperature differences at Ra=10 5

xix
 Abstract

A two-dimensional mathematical model is adopted to investigate the development of

buoyancy driven circulation patterns and temperature contours inside a rectangular enclosure

filled with a compressible fluid where one of the vertical walls of the enclosure is kept at a

higher temperature than the opposite one. Fluid thermodynamic and transport properties are

assumed to be functions of temperature. The governing equations are discretized using second

order accurate differencing for spatial and temporal derivatives and then linearized using

Newton’s linearization method. The resulting set of algebraic equations is solved using the

Coupled Modified Strongly Implicit Procedure for the unknowns of the problem. The results of

this study show that the variable property model predicts lower values for wall heat fluxes and

Nu number than the constant property one for Rayleigh numbers between 104 and 105.

Keywords: Natural convection, CMSIP, Buoyancy Driven flows with Variable Properties

xx
 Chapter 1

Introduction

Natural convection within enclosures has been widely studied by many authors. Some of

the applications of natural convection within enclosures include heat removal from electronic

components, cooling of nuclear reactors, climate control in rooms, and crystal growth in liquids.

Numerical studies of buoyancy driven flows have been carried out using finite difference, finite

volume, and finite element techniques. Experimental studies have also been carried out utilizing

PIV (Particle Image Velocimetry), LDA (Laser Doppler Anemometry), smoke visualization, and

interferometry. A comprehensive literature survey is provided in Chapter 2.

The main objective of this thesis is to study the steady state and transient natural

convection phenomenon of a compressible fluid (an ideal gas with Pr=0.72) inside a square

enclosure with differentially heated vertical walls and to determine the effect of variable

thermodynamic and transport properties on circulation patterns, wall heat flux, and Nusselt

number. A more detailed description of the physical problem is given in Chapter 3.

A physics based mathematical model is developed to obtain numerical solutions for the

above problem by assuming the thermodynamic and transport properties of the fluid to be

functions of temperature. The mathematical model comprises of conservation of mass,

momentum, and energy equations. Formulation of conservation equations in terms of the

primitive variables of the problem (u, v, p, and T) together with the appropriate boundary

conditions and assumptions are provided in Chapter.4. All the dimensional variables are

1
transformed into non-dimensional form. These variables are then used to transform the

conservation equations and boundary conditions into their corresponding non-dimensional forms.

The discretization and linearization of the non-dimensional conservation equations are

given in Chapter.5. This chapter also includes the numerical solution and algorithm employed to

predict the values of the primitive variables of the problem. A detailed description of the

Coupled Modified Strongly Implicit Procedure (CMSIP) used in the solution algorithm, which is

second order accurate in time differencing is also given in this chapter.

The accuracy of the numerical code is verified by applying the developed code to predict

the results of a benchmark case study. Grid independence and time convergence studies were

carried to verify the solution algorithm is presented in Chapter 6. The study of the second order

accurate in time model is also provided including the grid independence and time convergence

studies and then compared to the first order accurate in time model in Chapter 6. A parametric

study was carried out to determine the effect of various parameters such as Rayleigh number and

wall temperature difference and the size of the enclosure on circulation patterns and heat transfer

in Chapter 7.

The accuracy of the results achieved by variable properties is compared to those results of

constant properties in Chapter 8. The orientation of the enclosure is also studied in the Chapter 9.

In Chapter 10, the results of various case studies to verify the accuracy of the solution algorithm

for second order accurate in time model are presented. Transient development of circulations and

stratification patterns are provided in Chapter 11. The wall heat flux and Nusselt number

calculations are presented in Chapter 12.

The conclusions drawn from the results of the present study are presented in Chapter 13.

Recommendations to improve the mathematical and solution procedure proposed in this study

2
are given in Chapter 14. A list of references used in the literature survey is provided in the “List

of References” section of the thesis.

3
 Chapter 2

Literature Survey

Natural convection within enclosures has been widely studied by many researchers. An

excellent review of the developments in understanding and modeling of these studies natural

convection in enclosures can be found in the review paper by Ostrach [1]. This article discussed

the complexities of the natural convection phenomenon that arise due to the inherent interaction

between the boundary layer near the walls and the outer core region. Suggestions for different

variable scaling are also made. Use of experimental results to support numerical predictions was

strongly advocated. Moreover, enclosures with different geometries such as horizontal cylinders,

high and low aspect ratio rectangular enclosures, and annuli were also reviewed.

Kimura and Bejan [4] have studied natural convection in a rectangular cavity with uniform

heat flux imposed at the sides of the cavity. They specifically studied the heating of the cavity

from the top and from the sides. Their results showed that the convection driven by the

horizontal temperature gradients persists even when the vertical stabilizing gradient is larger than

the horizontal gradient. Buoyancy induced flows subjected to partially heated flows studied by T.

H. Chen and L. Y. Chen [5] and also by Nithyadevi [6]. Cormack et al. [7] have considered the

effect of the upper surface conditions on the buoyancy driven flow in a shallow cavity.

The natural convective heat transfer with varying boundary conditions studied by many authors

such as Sathiyamoorthy et al. [8], Calcagni [9], Ganzarolli [10], Le Peutrec and Lauriat [11],

Mariani [12], Aydin[13], and Basak [14]. They have concluded that the surface boundary

conditions have an important influence on the temperature and flow structure within a cavity.

4
Nonlinear variations in liquid density with respect to temperature and its effect on buoyancy

driven flow has been studied by Lin and Nansteel [15]. They have identified a dimensionless

density distribution parameter which characterizes the distribution of the buoyancy force and

how it determines the possible variations in flow structure. The effect of thermal stratification on

natural convection in a vertical porous insulation layer has been studied by Rees and Lage [16].

Previous research indicates that the circulation patterns and thermal stratification in

buoyancy driven flows are dependent on two-dimensional parameters: Prandtl and Rayleigh.

Many researchers have carried out their studies for air (Pr=0.7). The results for low Pr number

fluids (liquid metals) are reported by Viskanta et al. [17]. Fluid with high Pr numbers was

studied by Hiller et al. [18]. Moh [19] studied the simulations of two-dimensional, low Prandtl

number natural convection in harmonically oscillated, differentially heated enclosures. Buoyancy

driven flows can be laminar or turbulent depending on the value of the Rayleigh number. The

mathematical models proposed by Henkes et al. [20] can handle both types of flow regimes.

Simulation of Laminar Buoyancy driven Flows in an Enclosure carried out by Evern Selamet et

al. [21]. Numerical investigations have been conducted of flow transitions in Deep Cavities by

Xia and Murthy [22]. Numerical investigation of turbulent natural convection in a square

enclosure with localized heating from below and symmetrical cooling from the vertical side

walls were carried out by Anil kumar Sharma et al. [23]. A numerical procedure to solve

turbulent flow which makes use of k-ε model has been developed by Elkaim et al [24]. Laminar

and turbulent natural convection in irregular shaped enclosures has been investigated by Coulter

and Guceri [25]. An experimental and numerical investigation is presented concerning the

natural convection of water near its density in a differentially heated rectangular enclosure at

high Rayleigh numbers by Ho and Tu [26], in which an oscillatory convection regime may arise.

5
 The unsteady, compressible effects were studied numerically by Akyuzlu et al. [27]. Their

model included incompressible flow equations together with Boussinesq approximation and it

was used to predict the transient circulation patterns and resulting thermal stratification of the

propellant in a cryogenic storage tank for the constant heat flux boundary conditions. Steady,

compressible effects were studied in closed cavities by Mazumder [28]. However, most of the

researchers of natural convection in cavities and enclosures assume the density to be function of

temperature only in the buoyancy term in the momentum equation (Boussinesq approximation.)

According to Gray [29] a temperature difference less than 28.6 deg C between the hot and cold

walls of the enclosure ensures the validity of this approximation.

There are many natural convection processes in various fields, and it is still a hot topic to

investigate the fluid dynamics and heat transfer of natural convection. The analytical solutions

are meaningful in both theoretical investigation and practical applications. Specially, they are

very useful to computational fluid dynamics and heat transfer as benchmark solutions to check

the numerical solutions and to develop numerical differencing schemes, and grid generation

methods and so forth. An analytical study has been conducted for natural convection in a cavity

of different aspect ratios with uniform volumetric heat generation by Joshi et al. [30]. Two

explicit analytical solutions of 2-D steady laminar natural convection along a vertical porous

plate and between two vertical plates were derived by Cai and Zhang [31]. The numerical study

of natural convection in a differentially heated cavity with internal heat generation for different

aspect ratios has been carried out by Fusegi et al. [32].

Most of the researchers have carried out their studies in two-dimension as it is done in the

present study. This approach is being justified when the depth aspect ratio of the enclosure is

greater than 5 [33]. Also, a three-dimensional approach may be the right choice when

6
multicellular, transient flow characteristics are expected as in the case of high Grashof number

flows where three-dimensional effects are important. Researchers like Viskanta [17], Hiller [18],

Fusegi [33], and Wakitani [34] have addressed this problem by proposing three-dimensional

mathematical models which required a new method of solution then the previously adopted ones.

(See publications by de Vahl Davis [35] and Kublbeck [36]). The effect of wall thermal

boundary conditions on the development of three-dimensional and unsteady natural convective

flows was studied by Oosthizen et al. [37]. In 1997, multicellular solutions for air filled

enclosure were developed by Wakitani [38]. A high aspect ratio (AR =16) enclosure was

considered in his study. A numerical study is conducted to investigate the effect of subcooling on

natural convection in a densified cryogenic propellant by Akyuzlu et al. [39].

Validation of a proposed model can be done by comparing the predicted values of velocity

and temperature fields to those obtained in experiments. Although limited, there are published

experimental data in the literature. (See work done by Viskanta [17], Nicolette [40], Kirkpatrick

[41], Hiller [18], and Linthorst [42]). The experimental analysis through 2D-PIV system was

provided by Corvaro and Paroncini in 2009 [43]. The same authors developed interferometry

techniques in 2007 [44]. Natural convection of air in a tall vertical cavity was studied using a

smoke patterns and interferometry by Wright et al. [45]. An experimental study of high

Rayleigh number natural convection in an enclosure was conducted by Giel and Schmidt [46].

The experimental benchmark data for turbulent natural convection to validate a proposed CFD

code is presented in a publication by Ampofo et al. [47]. Akyuzlu, Nemani, and Chakravarthy

[48] used the Particle Velocimetry (PIV) system to experimentally investigate the effect of

different heat transfer boundary conditions on natural convection inside a rectangular storage

tank. Water was used as the working fluid. Another method of validation of a newly proposed

7
mathematical model or solver is to predict the results of the benchmark case (heating of a square

enclosure by isothermal walls.) In 1983, De Vahl Davis [2] numerically investigated the natural

convection of air in a square enclosure. This study has widely been accepted as the benchmark

case. The study used the non-dimensional stream function-vorticity formulation of the governing

equations. The well known Boussinesq approximation was also incorporated.

Natural convection flows were also studied numerically inside rectangular cavities with

inclination. Two dimensional natural convection flows in titled cavities for porous media and

homogeneous fluids has been studied by Baez and Nicolas [49]. Natural convection in two

dimensional enclosures with three flat and one wavy wall is numerically investigated by Dalal

and Das [50]. In this study, one wall is having a sinusoidal temperature profile and other three

walls including the wavy wall are maintained at constant cold temperature. A numerical study of

the effect of a hot wavy wall of laminar natural convection in an inclined square cavity,

differentially heated, was carried out by Adjlout et al. [51]. Flow visualization observations are

described for natural convection flows in rectangular inclined enclosures by Linthorst et al. [42].

Variable property mathematical models were also developed to study natural convection in

cavities and enclosures. The transient version of the classical differentially heated square cavity

problem, considering fluid properties as functions of temperature has been studied by De Souza

et al. [52]. Same problem with constant and variable fluid properties has been also studied by

Leal et al. [53]. Variable property effects in laminar natural convection in a square enclosure

were studied by Zhong et al. [54] and Emery et al. [55]. They indicate that the variable properties

produced observable changes in the temperature and velocities, however, the overall heat transfer

was found to be unaffected by it. The effects of combined temperature dependent

thermodynamics and transport fluid properties on the heat transfer rate, heat function fields and

8
profiles in a fluid filled square enclosure was quantitatively studied by Waheed [56]. The

variations in fluid properties were also considered in the numerical studies conducted by

Markatos and Pericleous [57].

Present study is a continuation of an effort undertaken in the Cryogenics Laboratory at the

University of New Orleans in collaboration with the Advanced Programs division of LMMO in

New Orleans and NASA Stennis Space Center to study the transient heating of densified liquid

propellants in a cryogenic storage tank. Previous studies conducted by one of the authors of this

paper [58 and 59] has indicated the importance of predicting, accurately, the circulation patterns

that develop inside the propellant due to natural convection. This process dominates the heating

of the propellant and is driven by the heat leak at the walls of the storage tank which leads to

unwanted thermal stratification in the tank. This fact led our research group in the Cryogenics lab

to adopt a compressible flow model (without Boussinesq assumption) with constant properties to

study natural convection in square enclosures [27]. i.e., a two-dimensional rectangular enclosure

with insulated top and bottom and with vertical walls kept at a prescribed temperature difference.

To solve the governing equations of the proposed mathematical model, an in-house

numerical solver based on an implicit finite difference technique, a modified version of the SIP

algorithm [60] called Coupled Modified Strongly Implicit Procedure (CMSIP) [61], was

developed by our group. (See reference 35 for the details of this algorithm.) In the first set of

numerical experiments using this solver, the fluid was assumed to be an ideal gas with Pr =1

[27]. In the present study, the mathematical model has been improved by assuming the

thermodynamic and transport properties of the fluid to be functions of temperature. The solution

algorithm had to be modified accordingly. Furthermore, the present study uses a second order

accurate time differencing for the CMSIP solution algorithm (see references [76] and [77]).

9
 Chapter 3

Description of the Physical Model

A two dimensional square enclosure is considered for this present study. The left wall of

enclosure is maintained at a constant but higher temperature than the right wall. The top and

bottom walls of the enclosure are assumed to be perfectly insulated. The enclosure is filled with

air, which is considered to be a compressible ideal gas. Initially, the fluid inside the tank is

assumed to be at an average temperature of the hot and cold walls. This temperature is called the

reference temperature. The aspect ratio (ratio of height to width) is determined by the geometry

of the enclosure. In this study, since the length of the enclosure is taken to be equal to the height,

the aspect ratio is computed to be unity. No slip conditions are assumed on all the walls of the

enclosure and the walls are presumed to be impermeable. Orientation of the enclosure is depends

on direction of gravitational force. Refer to Figure 1 for more details of the physical model.

The driving mechanism behind the natural convection phenomenon is buoyancy. In this

case, the buoyancy is associated with gravity. Heat is transferred from the hot wall to the

adjacent air particles resulting in a decrease in the density of the air near the hot wall. The less

dense air begins to rise while the heavier (more dense) air starts falling downward near the cold

wall consequently introducing a clockwise circulation. This type of buoyancy induced flow can

be seen in heating or cooling of rooms and in cooling of transistors and transformers.

10
 y

T
u  0, v  0, 0
y

u 0 u  0
g v  0
H v 0

T  Th T  Tc

T
u  0, v  0, 0
y x

Figure 1- Schematic of the Physical Domain (Dimensional) and the Boundary Conditions

Depending on the Rayleigh number, the flow within the enclosure can be categorized as

laminar, transitional, or turbulent. In this study, only laminar flows are considered. The Rayleigh

numbers are kept below the transition limit (less than 1 x 10 7). The Rayleigh number is

dependent on the properties of the working fluid, temperature differential between the vertical

walls, and the characteristic length of the enclosure.

All the dimensional variables are transformed into a non-dimensional domain. The non-

dimensional physical model is shown in Figure 2.

11
 y

T
u  0, v  0, 0
y

u  0 u  0

v  0
g v  0
1
T  Th T  Tc

T
u  0, v  0, 0
y
x
(0, 0)

Figure 2- Schematic of the Physical Domain (Non- dimensional) and the Boundary Conditions

12
 Chapter 4

Description of Mathematical Model

The mathematical formulation of the conservation equations together with the initial and

boundary conditions in first order and second order accurate in time models are given below. The

dimensional governing equations were derived from the respective vector form (refer to

Appendix I) and together with the initial and boundary conditions were then transformed into

non-dimensional form. The non-dimensional forms of these equations as well as the assumptions

made in the derivation of these equations are presented in this chapter.

4.1. Assumptions of Mathematical Model

The following assumptions were made for the present study.

1. The physical domain is two-dimensional and the equations are in Cartesian co-

ordinates

2. The working fluid forms a continuum

3. The flow is unsteady, laminar, and viscous

4. The working fluid (air) is compressible (the density of the fluid is a function of

temperature and pressure) and can be treated as an ideal gas.

5. The working fluid behaves like a Newtonian fluid with stokes assumptions

6. Pressure work term is negligible in the energy equation

7. Effects of viscous dissipation in the energy equation are insignificant

8. The kinetic and potential energy terms in the energy equations are neglected

9. Radiation heat transfer is ignored

13
 10. There are no internal heat sources

11. Heat conduction within the fluid follows Fourier’s law

12. The physical properties of the fluid are assumed to be constant

13. Thermodynamic and transport properties are assumed to be function of temperature

4.2. Dimensional Formulation

After making the necessary assumptions given in section 4.1, each individual

conservation equation was then derived from the respective vector form of that equation. The

dimensional form of governing differential equations in conservative form can be referred to

Appendix IIA. Then the equation of state was substituted in the conservational equations. The

dimensional formulations of the governing equations for the four primitive variables (u, v, p and

T) of the present problem are given as follows

Continuity equation

  p    pu    pv 
      0 (4.1)
t  T   x  T   y  T 

Momentum equation in the x-direction

  pu    puu    puv   ( R p)  2 u v 
        R (2  )
t  T   x  T   y  T  x x  3 x  y 
(4.2)
  u v   p 

y  R  ( y  x )   T  g sin   0
   

Momentum equation in the y-direction

  pv    puv    pvv   ( R p )
     
t  T   x  T   y  T  y
  u v    2 v u   p 
  R (  )   R (2  )    g cos  0
x   y x  y  3  y x   T 

(4.3)

14
Energy equation

    T  T
(c p p )  (c p pu)  (c p pv)  (R k )  ( Rk )  0 (4.4)
t x y x x y y

In both momentum equations, assumed to be zero for square enclosure with variable

thermodynamic and transport properties, and also orientation of the enclosure was studied at

different angles of .

4.3. Sub Models for Variable Thermodynamic and Transport Properties

Specific heat at constant pressure and viscosity are assumed to be functions of

temperature in the present study of natural convection. That is,

C p  f (T ) and   f (T )

The specific heat at constant pressure is function of temperature for an ideal gas, C p 0 ,

can be given as (refer to appendix III)

C p 0  C 0  C1  C 2 2  C3 3 (4.5)

The viscosity function of temperature for an ideal gas can be given as (refer to appendix III)
3
  T  2 T0  S
 
 0  T0  T  S (4.6)

4.4. Non-dimensional Formulation

The non-dimensional conservation equations were transformed from the dimensional form

of the equations given in the previous section 4.2 for present study of natural convection. The

definitions of non-dimensional variables used in these governing differential equations are given

below. In this study ρref was determined at T and P . Reference characteristic length, Lref, is

then to be the initial height of the cavity, H; i.e. Lref = H and also Tref = T

15
 gT H 3
Ra 


gTH 3
Gr 
2


u ref  Gr
H

t
t
Lref / uref

x
x
Lref

y
y
Lref

u
u
uref

v
v
uref

p
p
 ref uref

T
T
Tref



 ref



 ref

R
R 2
u ref / Tref

16
 cp
cp  2
u ref / Tref

cp 
Pr 
k

u ref
Fr 
gH

Using the above parameters, the dimensional forms of equations were transformed into their

non-dimensional forms.

Continuity Equation

  p    pu    p v 
     0 (4.7)
t  T  x  T   y  T 

Momentum equation in x-direction

  pu    pu u    pu v  
       R p 
t  T  x  T  y  T  x
1  2 u v  1   u v  1  p 
  R  (2  )  1 2  R  (  )    sin 0
Gr x  3
12
x  y  Gr y   y x  Fr  T 
(4.8)

Momentum equation in y-direction

  pv    p u v    p v v  
      R p 
t  T  x  T  y  T  y
1   v u  1   2 v u  1  p 
  R  (  )  1 2  R  (2  )    cos 0
Gr x 
12
x  y  Gr y  3  y x  Fr  T 

(4.9)

17
Energy equation


c p p    c p pu    c p pv   1 1 2   R c p  T 
t x y Pr Gr x  x 
(4.10)
1   T 
  R c p  0
Pr Gr y 
12
y 

4.4.1. Boundary Conditions

To complete the mathematical formulation, the following boundary conditions were used.

a. No slip condition was imposed on all the walls of the cavity

v (0, y)  0 at x 0

v (1, y)  0 at x 1

u ( x, 0)  0 at y 0

u ( x,1)  0 at y 1

b. All the walls of the cavity were considered to be impermeable

u (0, y)  0 at x 0

u (1, y)  0 at x 1

v ( x, 0)  0 at y 0
v ( x,1)  0 at y 1

c. All the walls of the cavity were assumed to be perfectly insulated. The walls were

considered to be adiabatic i.e., no heat flux

T (0, y )  Th at x 0

T (1, y )  Tc at x 1

18
 T
( x , 0)  0 at y0
y

T
( x ,1)  0 at y 1
y

4.4.2. Initial Conditions

Initially, the fluid within the enclosure was assumed to be motionless and isothermal. The

initial temperature was assumed to be the reference temperature. The initial pressure distribution

was calculated such that the steady state momentum equations were satisfied everywhere in the

computational domain.

u ( x, y)  0 at t  0

u ( x, y)  0 at t  0

T ( x , y )  T ref at t  0

19
 Chapter 5

Numerical Formulation and Solution Technique

The governing differential equations for the comprehensive mathematical model are

coupled therefore the Coupled Modified Strongly Implicit Procedure (CMSIP) was used to solve

them in terms of the primitive variables.

The descretization method used for the inner points of the computational domains, which

are represented by a uniform orthogonal structured mesh, will be given in the next section. The

discretization method used for boundary conditions are different and described in section 5.2

separately. The Newton’s Linearization technique was developed to linearize the resulting non-

linear discretized governing differential equations in the section 5.3. The computational cell used

for the discretization is shown below in figure 3.

y
(i-1, j+1) (i, j+1) (i+1,j+1)

(i-1, j) (i, j) (i+1, j)

y (i-1, j-1) (i, j-1) (i+1, j-1)

x
(0, 0) x

Figure 3- Computational Cell used for the Discretization of the Governing Differential Equations

20
5.1 Discretization of the Governing Differential Equations

The governing differential equations are discretized using second order accurate central

differencing for spatial derivatives and second order (based on Taylor Expansion) finite

differencing for time derivatives.

Second order accurate approximation for the time term in the inertial term becomes

pu n1 pu t  pu  pu
( ) i , j  ( ) in, j  [ ( ) in. j  ( ) in,j1 ]  O (t 2 , x 2 , y 2 )
T T 2 t T t T (5.1)

 pu n 1 2 pu n1 pu  pu
( ) i , j  [ ( ) i , j  ( ) in. j ]  ( ) in, j (5.2)
t T t T T t T

 pu n
( )i , j was derived from the Navier-Stokes equation at nth time.
t T

A central differencing was used for the first derivative of convection term in the axial

direction:

 pu u pu u n 1 pu u n 1
( ) [( ) i 1, j  ( ) i 1, j ] / 2x (5.3)
x T T T

The diffusion term in the vertical direction was descritized using central differencing as

given below:

n 1 n 1 n 1
  v   v   v 
 R    [  R     R   ] / y (5.4)
y  y  i , j  y  i  1 , j  y  i  1 , j
2 2

The term evaluated at the i + ½ nodal point is evaluated by taking the average value at

i+1 and i nodes.

(R ) 1  [ ( R  ) i, j  ( R  ) i 1, j ] / 2 (5.5)

i
2

The term evaluated at the i - ½ nodal point is evaluated by taking the average value at i-1

and i nodes.

21
 ( R ) 1  [ ( R  ) i, j  ( R  ) i 1, j ] / 2 (5.6)
i
2

The first order derivative at plus half nodal point is evaluated as it shows below

n 1
 v 
   [ vin1,1j  vin, j 1 ] / y (5.7)

 i , j
y 1
2

and the same way the first order derivative for the minus half nodal point was evaluated

n 1
 v 
   [ vin, j 1  vin1,1j ] / y (5.8)

 i , j
y 1
2

The second order mixed derivative was evaluated using central differencing as follows

n 1 n 1
  u   u   u 
 R    [  R    R  ] / (2y ) (5.9)
y  x   x  i , j 1  x  i , j 1

and

n 1
 u 
   [ uin1,1j 1  uin1,1j 1 ] / (2x ) (5.10)
 x i , j 1

n 1
 u 
   [ u in1,1j 1  u in1,1j 1 ] / (2x ) (5.11)
 x  i , j 1

5.1.1 Finite Difference Approximation for Boundary Conditions

The first order derivative for the temperature gradient at the bottom and top boundaries

was approximated by the four point forward and backward difference formulas, respectively. The

elevation of the temperature gradient at the bottom wall is presented below as an example.

T
0
y (5.12)

The approximation of the non-dimensional temperature at the all as given by the four point

formula can be given by:

22
 1
T1  (18T2  9T3  2T4 )
11 (5.13)

5.2 Linearization of the Governing Differential Equations

After discretization the non-linear equations are linearized for the unknown variables by

Newton’s method using the following general formula

uv... k 1 k uv... k 1 k
   
k k
uv... k 1
 uv... 
k
u u  v  v  ..... (5.14)
u v

As an example the application of the above formula to various terms in the transform equation is

presented below.

pu n1
Consider the non-linear term ( ) i , j from the discritazation of the time term in the x-
T

momentum equation, where the primitive variables are p, u , T application of Equation

5.14 results in:

n 1, k
 pu 
 
u 
n 1, k
pin, j 1u n 1i , j  pu   T  i, j n  1 , k 1 n 1 , k
     ui, j
u
i, j
Ti , j  T  i, j
n 1, k n 1, k
 pu   pu 
   

 T  i, j
v
v n 1 , k 1

i, j
n 1 , k
 vi , j  
 T  i, j
T
T n 1 , k 1

i, j
n 1 , k
 Ti , j 
n 1, k n 1, k
 pu 
 
 p
   u n 1, k 1
i, j  u in, j 1,k 
(5.15)
 T  i, j T  i, j
n 1, k n 1, k
u 
   p n 1, k 1
i, j p n 1, k
i. j    pu2  T n 1, k 1
i, j  Ti.nj1,k 
T  i, j  T  i, j

n 1, k n 1, k n 1, k

 p
   u n 1, k 1
i, j   Tu  p n 1, k 1
i, j    pu2  T n 1, k 1
i, j 
T  i, j   i, j  T  i, j

23
where n stands for a discrete time step and k for the number of iteration. In Equation (5.15),

pin, j 1, k 1 , uin, j 1, k 1 , and Ti ,nj1, k 1 are the unknown and the rest are known coefficients from the

previous iteration.

pu v n1
Another example of anon-linear term with four variables is ( ) i , j 1 which is one of
T

the convective terms in the y-momentum equation. Application of the linearization formula as

given by Equation 5.14 yields:

n 1, k
 pu v 
 
 
n 1, k
pin, j 11uin, j 11vin, j 11  pu v   T  i , j 1 n 1, k 1 n  1, k
  T   pi , j 1  pi , j 1
Ti , j 1   i , j 1 u
n 1, k n 1, k
 pu v   pu v 
   

 T  i , j 1 n 1, k 1
u
n  1, k
ui , j 1  ui , j !  
 T  i , j 1 n 1, k 1
v

n  1, k
vi , j 1  vi , j 1  
n 1, k
 pu v 
 

 T  i , j 1 n 1, k 1
T

n  1, k
Ti , j 1  Ti , j 1 
n 1, k n 1, k n 1, k
 pu v 
   
uv 
T  
p ni , j 11, k 1  pin. j 1!, k   pv 
T  
u ni , j 1!, k 1  uin, j 1,!k 
 T  i , j 1   i , j 1   i , j !
n 1, k n 1, k
 pu 
 T  
v in, j11, k 1  vin. j1!, k    pu v 
 T 2  
Ti ,nj 11, k 1  Ti.nj 1!, k 
  i , j 1   i , j !
n 1, k n 1, k n 1, k
uv 
    pv 
pin. j 11, k    u ni , j 11, k 1     pu 
T  
v in, j1!, k 1 
  i , j 1
T  T  i , j 1   i , j 1
n 1, k n 1, k


 pu 
 T 2    pu v 
Ti ,nj 11, k 1   
  i , j !  T  i , j 1 (5.16)

24
5.3 Solution Technique

A modified version of the Coupled Strongly Implicit Procedure (CSIP) developed by

Zedan and Schneider [60] was used to solve for the primitive variables of the non-dimensional

conservation equations. This modified version was proposed by Chen and Pletcher [67] and is

called the Coupled Modified Strongly Implicit Procedure (CMSIP).

The descritized non-dimensional conservation equations after linearized are put into the

following form for any nodal point (i, j) of the computational domain

Ai6, j xi 1, j 1  Ai5, j xi , j 1  Ai4, j xi 1, j 1  Ai7, j xi 1, j  Ai9, j xi , j

(5.17)
 Ai3, j xi 1, j  Ai8, j xi 1, j 1  Ai1, j xi , j 1  Ai2, j xi 1, j 1  bi , j

In the present study, where we have four primitive variables, the x in Equation 5.17 is 4

element vectors and A is a 4 by 4 matrix.

The computational molecule for A1 , Ai2 , A3 , . . and A9 in Equation 5.17 is shown

in Figure 4.
Ai8, j Ai1, j Ai2, j
j+1

Ai7, j Ai9, j Ai3, j

j

Ai6, j Ai5, j Ai4, j

j-1

i-1 i i+1

Figure 4- Two Dimensional Computational Molecules for the Elements of the A Matrix

25
 Similar equations are generated for the rest of the inner nodal points of the computational

domain. The resulting sets of algebraic equations (as many as the number of the unknowns) are

then put into block matrix in the following form:

A x=b (5.18)

where [A] is the coefficient matrix , x is the unknown vector to solve for and b is the known

vector. Except for boundaries with no slip condition, all boundary conditions were treated

implicitly by writing the governing differential equations on the boundary points and then

discretized and linearized before incorporating them into the block matrix form. The unknown

vector has as many elements as the number of inner nodes in the computational domain. The [A]

matrix is a block matrix and is defined as shown below:

 A19,1 A13,1 A11,1 A12,1 

 
      
       
 
  
  
 
        
 
A   Ai6, j Ai5, j Ai4, j Ai7, j Ai9, j Ai3, j Ai8, j Ai1, j Ai2, j1 
          
 
  
 
  
       
 
       
 Aim6
A 5
A 7
A 9 
 , jm im , jm im , jm im , jm 

26
 The vectors x and b are also of block form are presented below:

 bu  
 u     
    bv  
 v    bp  
 p    
    bT 1,1 
 T  1,1   
   bu  
 u    b  
 v    v  
    bp  
 p    
 T    bT  2,1 
 2 ,1
  
.   . 
x    b
.  . 
 u    
    bu  
 v    b  
 p   v  
    bp  
 T  jn ,kn 1    
   bT  jn, kn 1 
 u    
 v    bu  
    bv  
 p    
    bp  
 T  jn ,kn   b  
  T  jn, kn 

The coefficient matrix [A] is decomposed into upper and lower diagonal matrices [U] and

[L] to solve the equation 5.18 and to make this possible an auxiliary matrix [P] was added to

both sides of the equation.

A  P x k 1  b  P x k (5.19)

where transcript k is for iteration

setting

 k 1  x k 1  x k

and

27
 R k  b  A x k

in equation (5.19) becomes

A  P   k 1  R k (5.20)

Replacing the matrix [A+P] with the product of Lower-block triangular matrix [L] and Upper-

block triangular matrix [U] in equation 5.20 (see appendix V), it becomes

LU  δ k 1  R k (5.21)

Defining the vector W by

W k  1  U  k  1 (5.22)

then equation (5.22) can be written as

L W k 1  R k (5.23)

The solution of equation 5.19 is as follows:

The vector Wk+1 is calculated from equation (5.23) by forward substitution procedure and

then vector k+1 is computed from equation (5.22) by backward substitution. This procedure was

repeated for the calculation of the new residual vector R followed by direct calculation of the W

and  until the convergence of X is attained.

The convergence depends upon the following criterion:

0.5
 im, jm n  4  k 1   k 2

 
 i  n n

, j 1 n 1  k 1 
 n , rms
   (5.24)
 4 im jm 
 
 
 

where,

k is the iteration level,

28
im is the number of grid points in the x-direction

jm is the number of grid points in the y direction

n is the variable index

 n is the component of the unknown vector 

 n,rms is the root mean square value of 

The value of  was set to 1 x 10-7. This value of  was chooses by numerical experimentation.

A separate criterion for pressure was also considered.

p nk 1  p nk   p (5.25)

Its convergence value was set to 1 x 10-7.

Second order time accuracy approximation was stabilized by adding pressure smoothening

function as shown below.

im1, jm1
 w w 
pi , j    pi , j 
2x
( pi 1, j  2 pi , j  pi 1, j ) 
2y
( pi , j 1  2 pi , j  pi , j 1 )   (5.26)
i  2, j  2  

where

w is small constant assigned as 0.0005

5.4. Solution Algorithm

The solution was developed to implement the solution procedure (presented in previous

section) used to solve the governing equations of this study.

The steps of this algorithm are given below.

1. All the necessary variables were defined and the corresponding arrays were

dimensioned

29
 2. The input parameters such as non-dimensional computational, geometrical, and

operational parameters were defined

3. The initial conditions were imposed, the velocities were set to zero and the temperature

was assumed to be uniform with a value of unity. For natural convection, a hydrostatic

pressure distribution was assumed in the vertical direction while the pressure

distribution in the horizontal direction was assumed invariant.

4. The appropriate boundary conditions were imposed on all the walls of the enclosure.

The velocities were set to zero. The temperatures on the left and right vertical walls

were set to the corresponding non-dimensional hot and cold values.

5. The matrices for the corresponding inner nodes were generated

6. The Coupled Modified Strongly Implicit Procedure was implemented as explained in

the previous section and counter for linearization is activated.

7. Values of the primitive variables were computed for the future time step. This was an

iterative process. The iteration was stopped when the difference between the predicted

values at iteration level k+1 and k was smaller than a given criteria. The separate

criterion was also verified for pressure.

8. Steps 5 through 7 were repeated for each time step until the final simulation time was

reached.

9. Steady state was verified for all the nodal points in the domain.

The above solution algorithm was implemented into a computer code in Fortran by Akyuzlu

and Antoniou [62]. This code was executed to generate the simulations of natural convection of

an incompressible fluid inside an enclosure with differentially heated side walls.

30
 Chapter 6
The Validation of the Mathematical and Computer Codes

In this study, various numerical studies have been carried out to establish the validity of

the natural convection phenomenon. When numerical methods are used to solve differential

equations, getting a numerical stable solution does not immediately imply that this is the correct

one. A time convergence study and grid independence study requires that there are not

significant changes in the results when the computational time increment and grid size are

varied. Furthermore, the computer code developed for the present study was tested for accuracy

using benchmark studies. These case studies are presented in this chapter.

6.1. First Order Accurate in Time Model

Time convergence and grid independent studies were presented for first order accurate in

time model in the following section.

6.1.1. Time Convergence Study

A time convergence study was carried out using three different non-dimensional time

steps 1 x 10-5, 5 x 10-6 and 1 x 10-6 for the present study. Once the grid size is set, the time

computational time convergence is determined by satisfying the diagonal dominance condition

of the coefficient matrix. For the present code validation study, the biggest non-dimensional

computational time step is 1 x 10-5. It was found that a time increment smaller than this did not

result in any significant changes in qualitative and quantitative results. To illustrate this point,

non-dimensional vertical velocity distribution along the horizontal centerline of the enclosure

were compared for different time increments such as ∆ = 1 x 10-5, ∆ = 5 x 10-6 and ∆ = 1 x

31
10-6 for Ra = 105 and 21 x 21 mesh points. The quantitative comparison is presented in Table 1

and the comparison of predicted non-dimensional vertical velocity profiles is presented in Figure

5.

Table 1- Steady State Non-dimensional values of Vertical Velocity along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Enclosure for ∆ = 1.0E-5, ∆ = 5.0E-6 and ∆ = 1.0E-6
(Ra = 105 and 21 x 21)

Non-dimensional Non-dimensional Non-dimensional

Non-dimensional
Vertical Vertical Vertical
Horizontal
Velocity, Velocity, Velocity,
Distance,
( = 1.0E-5) ( = 5.0E-6) ( = 1.0E-6)
1.00 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000000
0.95 -0.2465031 -0.2405049 -0.2455756
0.90 -0.2011154 -0.2007765 -0.2008536
0.85 -0.1036450 -0.1085817 -0.1036823
0.80 -0.0343976 -0.1489494 -0.0347446
0.75 -0.0019368 -0.0411735 -0.0023072
0.70 0.0096405 0.0066313 0.0093005
0.65 0.0114227 0.0093207 0.0111182
0.60 0.0103105 0.0085196 0.0100377
0.55 0.0077418 0.0060819 0.0074892
0.50 0.0049455 0.0033997 0.0047312
0.45 0.0020850 0.0008425 0.0019073
0.40 0.0001912 -0.0005219 0.0000633
0.35 0.0011802 0.0012908 0.0010889
0.30 0.0084302 0.0096339 0.0083634
0.25 0.0281221 0.0306583 0.0280601
0.20 0.0667380 0.0706031 0.0666712
0.15 0.1275761 0.1322839 0.1275338
0.10 0.1938100 0.1977258 0.1938031
0.05 0.2009478 0.2019970 0.2009947
0.00 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000000

32
 0.225

0.2 Time Increment = 1.0E-5

Time Increment = 5.0E-6
Time Increment = 1.0E-6
Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity, v

0.175

0.15

0.125

0.1

0.075

0.05

0.025

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 5- Comparison of Steady State Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity Distribution along the
Half of the Horizontal Centerline for ∆ = 1.0E-5, ∆ = 5.0E-6 and ∆ = 1.0E-6 at
Ra = 105

33
6.1.2. Grid Independence Study

In order to validate the accuracy and convergence of the computer code, a grid

independence study for the present study (Ra = 105) was also conducted. The grid size chosen for

the present study was 21 x 21. To verify that the converged solutions were independent of the

grid chosen one more study was carried out with grid size of 41 x 41. Steady state results using

uniform, orthogonal 21 x 21 and 41 x 41 meshes were obtained using the present computer code.

The Comparison of the predicted non-dimensional vertical velocity profiles along the x-axis for

grid independence study at Ra = 105 is presented in Figure 6 and the quantitative comparison is

presented in Table 2.

34
Table 2- Steady State Non-dimensional values of Vertical Velocity along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Enclosure for 21 X 21 and 41 X 41 (Ra = 105 and 21 x 21)

Non-dimensional Non-dimensional Non-dimensional % Deviation

Horizontal Vertical Vertical in
Distance, Velocity, Velocity,
(21 x 21) (41 x 41)
1.00 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000000
0.95 -0.2440615 -0.2412806 -1.1525584
0.90 -0.2006345 -0.2090486 4.0249492
0.85 -0.1048553 -0.1148455 8.6988170
0.80 -0.0364389 -0.0460759 20.915360
0.75 -0.0036786 -0.0116106 68.316591
0.70 0.0081803 0.0014213 -475.55753
0.65 0.0103389 0.0043900 -135.50819
0.60 0.0093217 0.0034348 -171.38688
0.55 0.0069599 0.0011907 -484.48458
0.50 0.0042331 -0.0013476 414.12458
0.45 0.0016037 -0.0037290 143.00665
0.40 -0.0001891 -0.0053963 96.496226
0.35 0.0010085 -0.0050037 120.15436
0.30 0.0082728 0.0007297 -1033.7072
0.25 0.0281219 0.0187185 -50.235167
0.20 0.0668939 0.0602751 -10.981119
0.15 0.1284077 0.1349891 4.8755048
0.10 0.1954522 0.2255438 13.341798
0.05 0.2031731 0.2394256 15.141447
0.00 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000000

35
 0.25
21 x 21
41 x 41
Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity, v

0.2

0.15

0.1

0.05

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 6- Comparison of Steady State Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity Distribution along the
Half of the Horizontal Centerline for Grid Sizes of 21 x 21 and 41 x 41 at
Ra = 105
It is evident in these comparisons that the accuracy of the results increased with finer grid
sizes, as expected.

36
6.1.3. Benchmarking of the Developed Code

After verifying the time convergence and grid dependence studies, the computer code

was developed for this study was tested for the accepted benchmark case provided by de Vaul

Davis [2] (for incompressible flow with Boussinesq approximation). A quantitative comparison

of maximum velocities in the horizontal and vertical directions as predicted by this study and de

Vaul Davis is presented below in Table 3 where .

Table 3- Comparison of the Results of the Constant

Properties [27] and the Benchmark Case (de Vahl
Davis, [2]) for Different Rayleigh Numbers

Constant Benchmark %
Rayleigh
Properties Case Deviation
Number
max max in max
104 15.772 16.178 - 2.509
105 37.241 34.730 + 7.230

Constant Benchmark %
Rayleigh
Properties Case Deviation
Number
max max in max
104 18.927 19.617 - 3.517
105 68.629 68.590 + 0.057

A comparison of the results of this study (which is based on compressible flow with

constant properties assumption) and that of de Vahl Davis’s study [2] indicates observable

differences. The absolute value of maximum computed horizontal velocity underestimated

corresponding benchmark value by 2.5 % for Ra = 104. However, for Ra = 105, same value

overestimated by 7.2 %. Similarly, the maximum difference between the benchmark vertical

value and the present value is 3.5 % for Ra = 104, and almost negligible difference in the same

value for Ra = 105.

37
6.2. Second Order Accurate in Time Model
A numerical study was carried out to determine the differences between the predicted

unsteady velocity and temperature profiles, while the circulation patterns were developing after a

step change in wall temperatures using the first order and second order accurate in time CMSIP

algorithms. Time convergence and grid dependence studies were conducted to verify the

accuracy of the second order accuracy in time model.

6.2.1. Time Convergence Study

A time convergence study was carried out for the present study which is second order

accurate in time. As presented in section 6.1.1, once the grid size is set, the time computational

time convergence is determined by satisfying the diagonal dominance condition of the

coefficient matrix. For the present code validation study, a non-dimensional computational time

increment of 1 x 10 -5 was considered. It was found that a time increment smaller than this did not

result in any significant changes in qualitative and quantitative results. To illustrate, non-

dimensional vertical velocity distribution along the horizontal centerline of the enclosure were

compared for different time increments such as ∆ = 1 x 10-5 and ∆ = 5 x 10-6 for Ra = 105 and

21 x 21 mesh points. The quantitative comparison is presented in Table 4 and qualitative

comparison is presented in Figure 7.

38
Table 4- Steady State Non-dimensional values of Vertical Velocity along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Enclosure for ∆ = 1.0E-5 and ∆ = 5.0E-6 at Ra = 105 in
Second Order Time Accurate Approximation

Non-dimensional Non-dimensional
Non-dimensional
Vertical Vertical
Horizontal
Velocity, Velocity,
Distance,
( = 1.0E-5) ( = 5.0E-6)
1.00 0.0000000 0.0000000
0.95 -0.2440447 -0.2461275
0.90 -0.2002889 -0.2023205
0.85 -0.1043035 -0.1047269
0.80 -0.0357540 -0.0352146
0.75 -0.0031484 -0.0024742
0.70 0.0086785 0.0092366
0.65 0.0106349 0.0110582
0.60 0.0095869 0.0099664
0.55 0.0070514 0.0074107
0.50 0.0043028 0.0046463
0.45 0.0015101 0.0017887
0.40 -0.0003056 -0.0001617
0.35 0.0007269 0.0006464
0.30 0.0079743 0.0075860
0.25 0.0276678 0.0269726
0.20 0.0664488 0.0656514
0.15 0.1278468 0.1274489
0.10 0.1949693 0.1957688
0.05 0.2027110 0.2048181
0.00 0.0000000 0.0000000

39
 Dt = 1.0E-5
0.2 Dt = 5.0E-6
Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity, v

0.1

-0.1

-0.2

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 7- Steady State Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity Distribution along the Horizontal
Centerline for ∆ = 1.0E-5, ∆ = 5.0E-6 and ∆ = 1.0E-6 at Ra = 105 in Second
Order Time Accurate Approximation

40
6.2.2. Grid Independence Study

In order to validate the accuracy and convergence of the previous published results in the

first order accurate in time, a grid independence study for the present study (Ra = 105) was also

conducted. Steady state results using uniform, orthogonal 21 x 21 and 41 x 41 meshes were

obtained using the present computer code. The centerline non-dimensional vertical velocity

profiles for are presented in Figure 8 and in Table 5, quantitative comparison is presented. It is

evident in these comparisons that the accuracy of the results increased with finer grid sizes.

41
Table 5- Steady State Non-dimensional values of Vertical Velocity along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Enclosure for 21 X 21 and 41 X 41 at Ra = 105 in Second Order
Time Accurate Approximation

Non-dimensional Non-dimensional Non-dimensional % Deviation

Horizontal Vertical Vertical Velocity, in
Distance, Velocity,
(21 x 21) (41 x 41)
1.00 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000000
0.95 -0.2440447 -0.2408513 -1.3258803
0.90 -0.2002889 -0.2085564 3.9641554
0.85 -0.1043035 -0.1143165 8.7590155
0.80 -0.0357540 -0.0455260 21.464604
0.75 -0.0031484 -0.0110939 71.619711
0.70 0.0086785 0.001856 -367.35998
0.65 0.0106349 0.0047221 -125.21089
0.60 0.0095869 0.0036587 -162.02546
0.55 0.0070514 0.0013085 -438.88896
0.50 0.0043028 -0.0013337 422.59862
0.45 0.0015100 -0.0038197 139.53328
0.40 -0.0003056 -0.0055958 94.538590
0.35 0.0007269 -0.0053183 113.66860
0.30 0.0079743 0.0002984 -2571.8144
0.25 0.0276678 0.0181909 -52.097092
0.20 0.0664488 0.0597164 -11.273841
0.15 0.1278468 0.1345171 4.9587004
0.10 0.1949693 0.2252853 13.456714
0.05 0.2027110 0.2394137 15.330242
0.00 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000000

42
 0.3

Gride size = 21 x 21
Gride size = 41 x 41
0.2
Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity, v

0.1

-0.1

-0.2

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 8- Steady State Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity Distribution along the Horizontal
Centerline for Grid Sizes of 21 x 21, 41 x 41 and 81 x 81 at Ra = 105 in Second
Order Time Accurate Approximation

43
6.2.3. Base Model Comparison with First Order Accurate in Time Model

The present study employs a second order accurate in time CMSIP procedure [74, 75, and 76]

to solve the unsteady governing equations of the problem. This new algorithm uses Taylor

expansion based second order accurate differencing of temporal terms and a second order accurate

central difference approximations for all the spatial terms in the governing equations. Previous

CMSIP algorithm used by Akyuzlu [27] and also by Chen and Pletcher [67] are first order accurate

in time. The comparison of maximum values of horizontal and vertical velocities in first order and

second order accurate in time models are presented in the Table 6.

Table 6- Comparison of the Results of the First Order and

the Second Order Time Accurate CMSIP Models using
Constant Properties for Different Rayleigh Numbers

%
Rayleigh Second Order First Order
Deviation
Number max max
in max
104 0.154 0.155
- 0.649
(Location) ( = 0.782) ( = 0.780)
105 0.109 0.110
- 0.909
(Location) ( = 0.840) ( = 0.838)

%
Rayleigh Second Order First Order
Deviation
Number max max
in max
104 0.900 0.900
+0.000
(Location) ( = 0.125) ( = 0.125)
105 0.220 0.220
+ 0.000
(Location) ( = 0.070) ( = 0.070)

The results of the second order accurate in time model has almost negligible difference with

that of first order accurate in time model. The maximum computed values of horizontal velocity

(non-dimensional), corresponding first order accurate in time model are deviated by 0.6 % for Ra =

104 and 0.9 % for Ra = 105. However, these differences in vertical velocities are negligible.

44
 Chapter 7

Parametric Study of Natural Convection using the First Order

Accurate in Time Model

A parametric study was conducted using the constant property model to investigate how

the flow fields are affected by different Rayleigh numbers and wall temperature differences. In

this chapter two case studies are presented.

7.1. The Effects of Variations in Rayleigh Numbers

In the first case of parametric study, the effects of variations in Rayleigh number was

observed by changing the wall temperature difference at constant size of the enclosure. In this

study, for different Rayleigh numbers (104, 5 x 104, 105, and 5 x 105) the non dimensional

vertical velocity distribution along the horizontal centerline of the enclosure was compared and it

is concluded that there was a notable difference in magnitudes of velocities for higher Rayleigh

numbers. As Rayleigh number increases the location of the maximum velocity point moves

towards the hot side of the enclosure with increase in magnitude. The results are presented

quantitatively and qualitatively in Table 7 and Figure 9, respectively.

45
 Table 7-Steady State Non-dimensional values of Vertical Velocity along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Enclosure for Ra= 104, Ra= 5 x 104, Ra = 105, Ra= 5 x 105 at
H=0.0254m

Non- Non-dimensional Non-dimensional Non-dimensional Non-dimensional

dimensional Vertical Vertical Vertical Vertical
Horizontal Velocity, Velocity, Velocity, Velocity,
Distance, (Ra = 1.0E4) (Ra = 5.0E4) (Ra = 1.0E5) (Ra = 5.0E5)
1.00 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000000
0.95 -0.1453714 -0.2379227 -0.2465031 -0.2087094
0.90 -0.2075329 -0.2362243 -0.2011154 -0.0919643
0.85 -0.2082459 -0.1565491 -0.1036450 -0.0152543
0.80 -0.1759759 -0.0801576 -0.0343975 0.0045337
0.75 -0.1342380 -0.0316080 -0.0019367 0.0073687
0.70 -0.0945000 -0.0380077 0.0096405 0.0087798
0.65 -0.0614451 0.0038054 0.0114227 0.0097664
0.60 -0.0348230 0.0069824 0.0103105 0.0107504
0.55 -0.0129692 0.0067456 0.0077417 0.0109685
0.50 -0.0129692 0.0058315 0.0049454 0.0102460
0.45 0.0259200 0.0056771 0.0020850 0.0080060
0.40 0.0471586 0.0081480 0.0001911 0.0037837
0.35 0.0720149 0.0158039 0.0011802 -0.0022495
0.30 0.1011022 0.0318961 0.0084302 -0.0085098
0.25 0.1340680 0.0610267 0.0281221 -0.0087953
0.20 0.1668373 0.1055469 0.0667380 0.0085259
0.15 0.1915537 0.1621978 0.1275761 0.0582169
0.10 0.1922468 0.2081509 0.1938100 0.1449731
0.05 0.1453591 0.1878341 0.2009478 0.2161246
0.00 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000000

46
 0.225
Ra = 1.0E4
0.2
Ra = 5.0E4
Ra = 1.0E5
Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity, v

0.175 Ra = 5.0E5

0.15

0.125

0.1

0.075

0.05

0.025

0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 9- Comparison of Steady State Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity Distributions along the
Horizontal Centerline of the Enclosure for Ra= 104, Ra=5 x 104, Ra= 105, Ra=
5x105 at H=0.0254m

47
7.2. The Effects of Variations in Wall Temperature Differences
In the second case of the parametric study, the effects of variations in wall temperature

difference were observed by changing the size of the enclosure at constant Rayleigh number 10 5.

In this study, for different wall temperature difference (64.8 K, 356.6 K, and 648.4 K) the non

dimensional vertical velocity distributions along the horizontal centerline of the enclosure were

compared and it is concluded that there is notable difference in velocity magnitudes for higher

temperature difference. As wall temperature difference increases the location of the maximum

velocity moves towards the cold side of the enclosure with increase in magnitude. The results are

presented quantitatively and qualitatively in Table 8 and Figure 10, respectively.

48
Table 8- Steady State Non-dimensional values of Vertical Velocity along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Enclosure for ∆T= 64.8K, ∆T= 356.6K, ∆T= 648.4K at Ra= 105

Non-dimensional Non-dimensional Non-dimensional Non-dimensional

Horizontal Vertical Vertical Vertical
Distance, Velocity, Velocity, Velocity,
(∆T= 64.8K) (∆T= 356.6K) (∆T= 648.4K)
1.00 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000000
0.95 -0.2465031 -0.2084725 -0.2020537
0.90 -0.2011154 -0.1727811 -0.1657409
0.85 -0.1036450 -0.0984031 -0.1009974
0.80 -0.0343975 -0.0445509 -0.0577585
0.75 -0.0019367 -0.0179709 -0.0366760
0.70 0.0096405 -0.0078904 -0.0281754
0.65 0.0114227 -0.0064076 -0.0281754
0.60 0.0103105 -0.0077848 -0.0229883
0.55 0.0077417 -0.0099892 -0.0192403
0.50 0.0049454 -0.0113427 -0.0120143
0.45 0.0020850 -0.0107910 0.0017215
0.40 0.0001911 -0.0066578 0.0244202
0.35 0.0011802 0.0042894 0.0606051
0.30 0.0084302 0.0266349 0.1129162
0.25 0.0281221 0.0673053 0.1836736
0.20 0.0667380 0.1305537 0.2656362
0.15 0.1275760 0.2118118 0.3355243
0.10 0.1938100 0.2762716 0.3393019
0.05 0.2009478 0.2377315 0.2282922
0.00 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000000

49
 0.35
Temp. Diff. = 64.8 K & H = 0.0254m
0.325 Temp. Diff. = 356.6 K & H = 0.0144m
Temp. Diff. = 648.4 K & H = 0.012m
0.3
Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity, v

0.275
0.25
0.225
0.2
0.175
0.15
0.125
0.1
0.075
0.05
0.025
0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 10- Comparison of Steady State Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity Distributions along
the Horizontal Centerline of the Enclosure for ∆T= 64.8K, ∆T= 356.6K and ∆T=
648.4K at Ra= 105

50
 Chapter 8
The Study of Effects of Variable Fluid Properties in Natural
Convection inside a Square Enclosure

In this chapter, the results of the constant property model are compared to that of variable

property model. Then the variable property model was proposed as a base model in the present

study. Also, the effects of variations in Rayleigh number for variable property model inside a

square enclosure are presented in this chapter.

8.1. The Study of Base Model

In this study, the results of the constant property and variable property models are

compared for Ra = 105 ( = 64.8 K). There is notable difference in the predicted values of

velocity and temperature. These differences are presented quantitatively in Tables 9 through 11.

The comparisons between these models are presented in terms of velocity and temperature

distributions in Figure 11 through 13. From Figure 11, the predicted values of non-dimensional

horizontal velocities along the vertical centerline of the enclosure are observed higher for

variable property model at cold side of the enclosure and lower at hot side of the enclosure

compared to constant property model. However, non-dimensional vertical velocity and

temperature values along the horizontal centerline of the enclosure are predicted higher at hot

side of the enclosure and lower at cold side of the enclosure for variable property model as

shown in Figure 12 and 13. Horizontal and vertical velocity histograms are also compared in

Figure 14 and 15, respectively. Horizontal velocities are predicted higher for variable property

model and vertical velocities are predicted higher for constant property model.

51
 The variable property model is proposed as the base model and is considered for Ra 10 5

with uniform, orthogonal mesh of 21 x 21, in which wall temperature difference is 64.8 K. The

predicted primitive variables along the horizontal centerline and vertical centerline of the

enclosure are presented in Table 12 and Table 13, respectively. The computational domain used

in the present study is shown in Figure 16. The velocity (u and v) histograms at a point closer to

the high temperature wall where = 0.05 and = 0.5 are presented in Figures 17 and 18. The

temperature stratification is shown in Figure 19. Temperature gradients are higher bear the walls

and are close to zero near the center. This fact is easily illustrated by the isotherms being almost

horizontal in the center of the enclosure. The formation of the two vertices can be seen in Figure

20. The flow is not unicellular; instead, it separates into boundary layer and core flow. The core

flow is more stagnant relative to the boundary regions. This characteristic is also observed in the

streamlines shown in Figure 21. The non-dimensional horizontal velocity distribution along the

vertical centerline, vertical velocity distribution along the horizontal centerline and temperature

distribution along the horizontal centerline are presented in Figure 22, 23 and 24, respectively.

52
Table 9- Comparison of Predicted Non-dimensional values of Horizontal Velocity along the
Vertical Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid Properties at Ra = 105
( = 64.8 K, H=0.0254m and 21 X 21)

Non-dimensional Non-dimensional Non-dimensional % Deviation

Vertical Horizontal Horizontal in
Distance, Velocity, Velocity,
(Constant) (Variable)
1.00 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000000
0.95 0.0535207 0.0571390 6.3324524
0.90 0.0810651 0.0876302 7.4917753
0.85 0.1004595 0.1072624 6.3422970
0.80 0.1009580 0.1071562 5.7842663
0.75 0.0929973 0.0981868 5.2853213
0.70 0.0789586 0.0821039 3.8308866
0.65 0.0645284 0.0656531 1.7130632
0.60 0.0495355 0.0484717 -2.1946804
0.55 0.0381889 0.0351714 -8.5795203
0.50 0.0241282 0.0201633 -19.663835
0.45 0.0125497 0.0079409 -58.039436
0.40 -0.0046300 -0.0088292 47.559387
0.35 -0.0228675 -0.0268213 14.741480
0.30 -0.0460588 -0.0497550 7.4286760
0.25 -0.0767948 -0.0800412 4.0558706
0.20 -0.1056613 -0.1087645 2.8531368
0.15 -0.1387613 -0.1398505 0.7788316
0.10 -0.1406555 -0.1405555 -0.0711462
0.05 -0.0878570 -0.0882356 0.4290444
0.00 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000000

53
Table 10- Comparison of Predicted Non-dimensional values of Vertical Velocity along the
Horizontal Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid Properties
at Ra = 105 ( = 64.8 K, H=0.0254m and 21 X 21)

Non-dimensional Non-dimensional Non-dimensional % Deviation

Horizontal Vertical Vertical in
Distance, Velocity, Velocity,
(Constant ) ( Variable)
1.00 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000000
0.95 -0.2502395 -0.2475826 -1.0731368
0.90 -0.1944804 -0.1971463 1.3522445
0.85 -0.0930081 -0.1008293 7.7567929
0.80 -0.0257422 0.0334961 176.85118
0.75 0.0031427 -0.0018893 266.33759
0.70 0.0122860 0.0094903 -29.458318
0.65 0.0130391 0.0111882 -16.543233
0.60 0.0117409 0.0099772 -17.677062
0.55 0.0092661 0.0073344 -26.337007
0.50 0.0065152 0.0045396 -43.518607
0.45 0.0034166 0.0018026 -89.540905
0.40 0.0008496 0.0001795 -373.20101
0.35 0.0005829 0.0016220 64.059846
0.30 0.0059338 0.0095263 37.710790
0.25 0.0231456 0.0300361 22.940638
0.20 0.0591808 0.0693695 14.687566
0.15 0.1184252 0.1299771 8.8876425
0.10 0.1861128 0.1934348 3.7852547
0.05 0.1988817 0.1948903 -2.0480239
0.00 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000000

54
Table 11- Comparison of Predicted Non-dimensional values of Temperature along the
Horizontal Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid Properties
at Ra = 105 ( = 64.8 K, H=0.0254m and 21 X 21)

Non-dimensional Non-dimensional Non-dimensional % Deviation

Horizontal Temperature, Temperature, in
Distance, (Constant ) (Variable )
1.00 0.8907647 0.8907647 0.0000000
0.95 0.9560220 0.9560723 0.0000005
0.90 1.0042400 1.0029240 -0.0000131
0.85 1.0271800 1.0256300 -0.0000113
0.80 1.0341910 1.0331320 -0.0000102
0.75 1.0347690 1.0340560 -0.0000068
0.70 1.0339310 1.0332200 -0.0000068
0.65 1.0333490 1.0324500 -0.0000087
0.60 1.0331680 1.0320330 -0.0000110
0.55 1.0332070 1.0318370 -0.0000132
0.50 1.0331700 1.0315720 -0.0000155
0.45 1.0327950 1.0309780 -0.0000176
0.40 1.0318170 1.0298150 -0.0000194
0.35 1.0300450 1.0279460 -0.0000204
0.30 1.0275110 1.0255040 -0.0000196
0.25 1.0247950 1.0232280 -0.0000153
0.20 1.0236580 1.0230580 -0.0000059
0.15 1.0276350 1.0285710 0.0000091
0.10 1.0420280 1.0445690 0.0000243
0.05 1.0709450 1.0736000 0.0000247
0.00 1.1092350 1.1092350 0.0000000

55
 1

0.9
Constant Viscosity & Cp
0.8 Variable Viscosity & Cp
Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity, y

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
-0.1 0 0.1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 11- Comparison of Steady State Non-dimensional Horizontal Velocity Distributions along
the Vertical Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid
Properties at Ra= 105 ( = 64.8 K, H = 0.0144m)

56
 0.25

0.2 Constant Viscosity & Cp

Variable Viscosity & Cp
0.15
Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity, v

0.1

0.05

-0.05

-0.1

-0.15

-0.2

-0.25
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 12- Comparison of Steady State Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity Distributions along
the Horizontal Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid
Properties at Ra= 105 ( = 64.8 K, H = 0.0144m)

57
 1.1
Constant Viscosity & Cp
Variable Viscosity & Cp
Non-dimensional Temperature, T

1.05

0.95

0.9
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 13- Comparison of Steady State Non-dimensional Temperature Distributions along the
Horizontal Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid Properties
at Ra= 105 ( = 64.8 K, H = 0.0144m)

58
 0.014

0.012
Non-dimensional horizontal velocity, u

0.01

0.008

0.006

0.004

0.002
Constant Viscosity & Cp
0 Variable Viscosity & Cp

-0.002
0 10 20 30 40
Non-dimensional time, t

Figure 14- Comparison of Non-dimensional Horizontal Histograms of Constant and Variable

Properties for Ra= 105 at =0.05 and =0.5

59
 0.3

Constant Viscoisty & Cp

0.25 Variable Viscosity & Cp
Non-dimensional vertical velocity, v

0.2

0.15

0.1

0.05

0
0 10 20 30 40
Non-dimensional time, t

Figure 15- Comparison of Vertical Velocity Histograms of Constant and Variable Properties for
Ra= 105 at =0.05 and =0.5

60
Table 12- Steady State Non-dimensional values of Primitive Variables along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Enclosure for Ra = 105 (∆ = 1.0E-5 and 21 X 21)

Non-dimensional
Non-dimensional Non-dimensional Non-dimensional
Vertical
Horizontal Pressure, Temperature,
Velocity,
Distance,

1.00 0.0000000 1622.1422 0.8907647

0.95 -0.2475826 1622.1422 0.9560722
0.90 -0.1971463 1622.1422 1.0029243
0.85 -0.1008293 1622.1422 1.0256303
0.80 -0.0334962 1622.1422 1.0331324
0.75 -0.0018894 1622.1422 1.0340564
0.70 0.0094903 1622.1422 1.0332203
0.65 0.0111883 1622.1422 1.0324496
0.60 0.0099773 1622.1422 1.0320333
0.55 0.0073344 1622.1422 1.0318368
0.50 0.0045396 1622.1422 1.0315717
0.45 0.0018026 1622.1422 1.0309784
0.40 0.0001795 1622.1422 1.0298149
0.35 0.0016221 1622.1422 1.0279456
0.30 0.0095263 1622.1422 1.0255036
0.25 0.0300361 1622.1422 1.0232275
0.20 0.1299771 1622.1422 1.0230579
0.15 0.1299770 1622.1422 1.0285707
0.10 0.1934348 1622.1422 1.0445688
0.05 0.1948903 1622.1422 1.0736002
0.00 0.0000000 1622.1422 1.1092353

61
Table 13- Steady State Non-dimensional values of Primitive Variables along the Vertical
Centerline of the Enclosure for Ra = 105 (∆ = 1.0E-5 and21 X 21)

Non-dimensional Non-dimensional Non-dimensional Non-dimensional

Vertical Horizontal Pressure, Temperature,
Distance, Velocity,

1.00 0.0000000 1622.1400 1.0854359

0.95 0.0571390 1622.1401 1.0853203
0.90 0.0876302 1622.1404 1.0843379
0.85 0.1072624 1622.1406 1.0815360
0.80 0.1071562 1622.1409 1.0778722
0.75 0.0981868 1622.1410 1.0720498
0.70 0.0821039 1622.1413 1.0663142
0.65 0.0656531 1622.1415 1.0585184
0.60 0.0484717 1622.1417 1.0510841
0.55 0.0351714 1622.1420 1.0410634
0.50 0.0201634 1622.1422 1.0315717
0.45 0.0079409 1622.1424 1.0192259
0.40 -0.0088292 1622.1426 1.0082883
0.35 -0.0268214 1622.1429 0.9951756
0.30 -0.0497550 1622.1431 0.9846475
0.25 -0.0800413 1622.1434 0.9729092
0.20 -0.1087645 1622.1436 0.9638571
0.15 -0.1398505 1622.1439 0.9534625
0.10 -0.1405555 1622.1440 0.9461181
0.05 -0.0882356 1622.1444 0.9393139
0.00 0.0000000 1622.1446 0.9363195

62
 1

0.9
Non-dimensional Vertical Distance, y

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 16- Computational Mesh of the Non-dimensional domain for the Natural Convection
Case for Variable Properties

63
 0.016
0.015
0.014
Non-dimensional Horizontal Velocity, u

0.013
0.012
0.011
0.01
0.009
0.008
0.007
0.006
0.005
0.004
0.003
0.002
0.001
0
0 10 20 30 40
Non-dimensional Time, t

Figure 17- Non-dimensional Horizontal Velocity Histogram for Ra=105 at =0.05 and =0.5
for Variable Properties (21 x 21, ∆ = 1.0E-5)

64
 0.25
Non-dimensional Vertical velocity, v

0.2

0.15

0.1

0.05

0
0 10 20 30 40
Non- dimensional time, t

Figure 18- Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity Histogram for Ra=105 at =0.05 and =0.5 for
Variable Properties (21 x 21, ∆ = 1.0E-5)

65
 1 T
1.096
8
0.9 09
55 1.082
1.

93
1.068
Non-dimensional Vertical Distance, y

81
0.8 1.0

6 82
7 1.055
1.0

0.7 1.05462
1.041

1.027
0.6 1.04096

1.014
1.02731
0.5 1.000
1.013
65
0.986
0.4 1
0.973

0.3 0.986346 0.959

0.972691
0.945
0.2
0.959037 0.932
9
44 1

0.1 0.945
382
74
0.918
0 .9 0

1 80
0.931728 0.9
0.904
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance. x

Figure 19- Steady State Non-dimensional Temperature Contours for Ra=105 for Variable
Properties (21 x 21, ∆ = 1.0E-5)

66
 1

0.9
Non-dimensional Vertical Distance, y

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 20- Steady State Non-dimensional Velocity Vectors for Ra=105 (21 x 21, ∆ = 1.0E-5) for
Variable Properties

67
 1

0.9
Non-dimensional Vertical Distance, y

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 21- Steady State Non-dimensional Velocity Streamlines for Ra=105 for Variable
Properties (21 x 21, ∆ = 1.0E-5)

68
 1

0.9
Non-dimensional Vertical Distance, y

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
-0.15 -0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Velocity, u

Figure 22- Steady State Non-dimensional Horizontal Velocity Distribution along the Vertical
Centerline of the Enclosure for Ra=105 for Variable Properties
(21 x 21, ∆ = 1.0E-5)

69
 0.2

0.15
Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity, v

0.1

0.05

-0.05

-0.1

-0.15

-0.2

-0.25
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 23- Steady State Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity Distribution along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Enclosure for Ra=105 for Variable Properties
(21 x 21, ∆ = 1.0E-5)

70
 1.1
Non-dimensional Temperature, T

1.05

0.95

0.9
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 24- Steady State Non-dimensional Temperature Distribution along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Enclosure for Ra=105 for Variable Properties
(21 x 21, ∆ = 1.0E-5)

71
8.2. The Effects of Variable Fluid Properties in Square Enclosures

The comparison of the present model with variable thermodynamic and transport properties

to that with constant properties shows noticeable differences when the temperature difference

between the enclosure walls is high. These differences can be seen when one compares the

velocity and temperature profiles in horizontal and vertical directions. The quantitative

comparisons of the results of constant and variable properties are presented for Rayleigh

numbers 105, 5 x 104 and 104 with ΔT = 356.6 deg K in Table 14 through 22 respectively. These

results are compared graphically as shown in Figures 25 through 33, respectively. The non-

dimensional velocity values of the variable property model are predicted lower than the constant

property model and these differences are increasing as the Rayleigh number decreases. However,

the non-dimensional temperature values are predicted higher for variable property model than the

constant property model and these differences are also increasing as the Rayleigh number

decreases.

The comparison of the vertical velocity profiles for the different temperature differences (ΔT

= 64.84 deg K and ΔT = 356.6 deg K) at Ra number 105 are also presented in this chapter. As

wall temperature difference increases the maximum velocity in vertical direction increases in

magnitude and moves towards the cold side of the enclosure as shown in Figure 34. For

different Rayleigh numbers 104, 5 x 104 and 105 at same wall temperature difference ΔT = 356.6

deg K, the same comparison is presented in Figure 35. In this case, the maximum value of the

vertical velocity higher as increases Rayleigh numbers and the location of this point moves

towards the hot side of the enclosure.

72
Table 14- Comparison of Predicted Non-dimensional values of Horizontal Velocity along the
Vertical Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid Properties at
Ra = 105 ( = 356.6 K, H=0.0144m and 21 X 21)

Non-dimensional Non-dimensional Non-dimensional % Deviation

Vertical Horizontal Horizontal in
Distance, Velocity, Velocity,
(Constant) (Variable)
1.00 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000000
0.95 0.0936828 0.0838684 -11.702097
0.90 0.1488197 0.1341210 -10.959283
0.85 0.1716902 0.1341210 -28.011422
0.80 0.1652194 0.1595315 -3.5653773
0.75 0.1426628 0.1461648 2.3959256
0.70 0.1111090 0.1217983 8.7762308
0.65 0.0794429 0.0934810 15.017077
0.60 0.0512550 0.0639186 19.811995
0.55 0.0290225 0.0372387 22.063447
0.50 0.0118728 0.0144168 17.646169
0.45 -0.0025051 -0.0047551 47.316622
0.40 -0.0157795 -0.0207039 23.784529
0.35 -0.0313873 -0.0365194 14.053032
0.30 -0.0475436 -0.0509674 6.7175475
0.25 -0.0669880 -0.0677428 1.1142725
0.20 -0.0828617 -0.0808987 -2.4264911
0.15 -0.0962331 -0.0929094 -3.5773448
0.10 -0.0923184 -0.0889011 -3.8439314
0.05 -0.0646962 -0.0638143 -1.3819460
0.00 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000000

73
Table 15- Comparison of Predicted Non-dimensional values of Vertical Velocity along the
Horizontal Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid Properties
at Ra = 105 ( = 356.6 K, H=0.0144m and 21 X 21)

Non-dimensional Non-dimensional Non-dimensional % Deviation

Horizontal Vertical Vertical in
Distance, Velocity, Velocity,
(Constant ) ( Variable)
1.00 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000000
0.95 -0.2093566 -0.2203230 4.9774195
0.90 -0.1630863 -0.1482642 -9.9970862
0.85 -0.0850964 -0.0773353 -10.035699
0.80 -0.0337917 -0.0353622 4.4411213
0.75 -0.0113363 -0.0141749 20.025142
0.70 -0.0043228 -0.0075802 42.972368
0.65 -0.0045029 -0.0060678 25.789552
0.60 -0.0066290 -0.0078408 15.455837
0.55 -0.0092771 -0.0088425 -4.9148134
0.50 -0.0112224 -0.0094607 -18.620428
0.45 -0.0117948 -0.0069627 -69.400468
0.40 -0.0096178 -0.0008446 -1038.7143
0.35 -0.0017328 0.0132710 113.05706
0.30 0.0165154 0.0388702 57.511265
0.25 0.0526970 0.0820472 35.772274
0.20 0.1129559 0.1426556 20.819161
0.15 0.1957559 0.2091187 6.3900550
0.10 0.2702196 0.2412191 -12.022472
0.05 0.2444604 0.1800874 -35.745421
0.00 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000000

74
Table 16- Comparison of Predicted Non-dimensional values of Temperature along the
Horizontal Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid Properties
at Ra = 105 ( = 356.6 K, H=0.0144m and 21 X 21)

Non-dimensional Non-dimensional Non-dimensional % Deviation

Horizontal Temperature, Temperature, in
Distance, (Constant ) (Variable )
1.00 0.4005175 0.4005175 0.0000000
0.95 0.6880814 0.8184327 15.926941
0.90 0.8781839 0.9827196 10.637388
0.85 0.9661263 1.0501240 7.9988363
0.80 0.9919955 1.0705230 7.3354332
0.75 0.9937108 1.0724990 7.3462259
0.70 0.9900559 1.0697560 7.4503064
0.65 0.9867782 1.0664140 7.4676251
0.60 0.9838625 1.0631580 7.4584868
0.55 0.9801099 1.0588480 7.4362042
0.50 0.9741970 1.0527800 7.4643325
0.45 0.9652914 1.0442670 7.5627784
0.40 0.9531033 1.0338590 7.8110941
0.35 0.9384271 1.0233100 8.2949350
0.30 0.9243982 1.0176280 9.1614814
0.25 0.9186205 1.0261480 10.478751
0.20 0.9359822 1.0637710 12.012811
0.15 0.9999081 1.1468870 12.815464
0.10 1.1384730 1.2812960 11.146760
0.05 1.3570710 1.4443730 6.0442835
0.00 1.5994830 1.5994830 0.0000000

75
 1

0.9
Constant Viscosity & Cp
Non-dimensional Vertical Distance, y

0.8
Variable Viscosity & Cp
0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
-0.1 0 0.1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Velocity, u

Figure 25- Comparison of Steady State Non-dimensional Horizontal Velocity Distributions along
the Vertical Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid
Properties at Ra= 105 ( = 356.6 K, H = 0.0115m)

76
 0.3

0.25 Constant Viscosity & Cp

Variable Viscosity & Cp
0.2
Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity, v

0.15

0.1

0.05

-0.05

-0.1

-0.15

-0.2

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 26- Comparison of Steady State Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity Distributions along
the Horizontal Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid
Properties at Ra= 105 ( = 356.6 K, H = 0.0115m)

77
 1.5
Constant Viscosity & Cp
1.4 Variable Viscosity & Cp
Non-dimensional Temperature, T

1.3

1.2

1.1

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 27- Comparison of Steady State Non-dimensional Temperature Distributions along the
Horizontal Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid Properties
at Ra= 105 ( = 356.6 K, H = 0.0115m)

78
Table-17: Comparison of Predicted Non-dimensional values of Horizontal Velocity along
the Vertical Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid
Properties at Ra =5 x 104 ( = 356.6 K, H=0.0115m and 21 X 21)

Non-dimensional Non-dimensional Non-dimensional % Deviation

Vertical Horizontal Horizontal in
Distance, Velocity, Velocity,
(Constant) (Variable)
1.00 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000000
0.95 0.1010880 0.0842762 -19.948369
0.90 0.1608237 0.1356474 -18.560105
0.85 0.1867887 0.1616705 -15.536662
0.80 0.1832999 0.1652628 -10.914192
0.75 0.1625545 0.1544248 -5.2645041
0.70 0.1307763 0.1320511 0.9653838
0.65 0.0965233 0.1042924 7.4492772
0.60 0.0635012 0.0735256 13.633982
0.55 0.0353098 0.0439724 19.700226
0.50 0.0122669 0.0172566 28.914988
0.45 -0.0068705 -0.0058550 -17.344015
0.40 -0.0233795 -0.0251376 6.9936982
0.35 -0.0407417 -0.0433361 5.9866850
0.30 -0.0581902 -0.0596543 2.4543729
0.25 -0.0785703 -0.0780983 -0.6044561
0.20 -0.0957358 -0.0932317 -2.6859203
0.15 -0.1085417 -0.1062663 -2.1412244
0.10 -0.1023104 -0.1009673 -1.3302326
0.05 -0.0692979 -0.0701084 1.1561509
0.00 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000000

79
Table 18- Comparison of Predicted Non-dimensional values of Vertical Velocity along the
Horizontal Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid Properties
at Ra = 5 x 104 ( = 356.6 K, H=0.0115m and 21 X 21)

Non-dimensional Non-dimensional Non-dimensional % Deviation

Horizontal Vertical Vertical in
Distance, Velocity, Velocity,
(Constant ) ( Variable)
1.00 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000000
0.95 -0.2079249 -0.2181263 4.6768317
0.90 -0.1805588 -0.1735712 -4.0257830
0.85 -0.1105591 -0.1065565 -3.7563170
0.80 -0.0555643 -0.0564429 1.5565636
0.75 -0.0254680 -0.0274957 7.3747006
0.70 -0.0122137 -0.0132682 7.9472724
0.65 -0.0085119 -0.0080180 -6.1597252
0.60 -0.0085827 -0.0067362 -27.411106
0.55 -0.0098464 -0.0066076 -49.015896
0.50 -0.0102490 -0.0053554 -91.375590
0.45 -0.0082766 -0.0009993 -728.21051
0.40 -0.0019325 0.0087003 122.21279
0.35 0.0122559 0.0273276 55.151703
0.30 0.0386824 0.0584576 33.828290
0.25 0.0833502 0.1055321 21.019045
0.20 0.1483615 0.1650306 10.100611
0.15 0.2259767 0.221059 -2.2246097
0.10 0.2786205 0.2356686 -18.225550
0.05 0.2286864 0.1671887 -36.783407
0.00 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000000

80
Table 19- Comparison of Predicted Non-dimensional values of Temperature along the
Horizontal Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid Properties
at Ra =5 x 104 ( = 356.6 K, H=0.0115m and 21 X 21)

Non-dimensional Non-dimensional Non-dimensional % Deviation

Horizontal Temperature, Temperature, in
Distance, (Constant ) (Variable )
1.00 0.4115081 0.4115081 0.0000000
0.95 0.6617610 0.7668620 13.705334
0.90 0.8384050 0.9422544 11.021375
0.85 0.9328032 1.0257650 9.0626800
0.80 0.9688077 1.0578800 8.4198869
0.75 0.9757017 1.0652240 8.4040821
0.70 0.9720609 1.0628410 8.5412681
0.65 0.9660809 1.0577420 8.6657332
0.60 0.9598690 1.0521630 8.7718347
0.55 0.9532482 1.0462480 8.8888867
0.50 0.9453675 1.0394670 9.0526683
0.45 0.9356530 1.0315640 9.2976296
0.40 0.9243249 1.0232780 9.6702069
0.35 0.9131055 1.0171590 10.229816
0.30 0.9065261 1.0188430 11.023965
0.25 0.9133821 1.0377910 11.987856
0.20 0.9482343 1.0867650 12.747070
0.15 1.0301340 1.1763090 12.426581
0.10 1.1754250 1.3047870 9.9144151
0.05 1.3757300 1.4503020 5.1418256
0.00 1.5884920 1.5884920 0.0000000

81
 1

0.9

Constant Viscosity & Cp

Non-dimensional Vertical Distance, y

0.8
Variable Viscosity & Cp
0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
-0.1 0 0.1 0.2
Non-dimensional Horizontal Velocity, u

Figure 28- Comparison of Steady State Non-dimensional Horizontal Velocity Distributions along
the Vertical Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid
Properties at Ra= 5x 104 ( = 356.6 K, H = 0.0115m)

82
 0.3

0.25 Constant Viscosity & Cp

Variable Viscosity & Cp
0.2
Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity, v

0.15

0.1

0.05

-0.05

-0.1

-0.15

-0.2

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 29- Comparison of Steady State Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity Distributions along
the Horizontal Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid
Properties at Ra= 5 x 104 ( = 356.6 K, H = 0.0115m)

83
 1.5 Constant Viscosity & Cp
Variable Viscosity & Cp
1.4
Non-dimensional Temperature, T

1.3

1.2

1.1

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 30- Comparison of Steady State Non-dimensional Temperature Distributions along the
Horizontal Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid Properties
at Ra= 5 x 104 ( = 356.6 K, H = 0.0115m)

84
Table 20- Comparison of Predicted Non-dimensional values of Horizontal Velocity along the
Vertical Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid Properties at
Ra = 104 ( = 356.6 K, H=0.0067m and 21 X 21)

Non-dimensional Non-dimensional Non-dimensional % Deviation

Vertical Horizontal Horizontal in
Distance, Velocity, Velocity,
(Constant) (Variable)
1.00 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000000
0.95 0.1083175 0.0862691 -25.557658
0.90 0.1756615 0.1418459 -23.839673
0.85 0.2116735 0.1744832 -21.314544
0.80 0.2217043 0.1879760 -17.942875
0.75 0.2141084 0.1879882 -13.894595
0.70 0.1926927 0.1765157 -9.1646238
0.65 0.1629599 0.1569659 -3.8186637
0.60 0.1272570 0.1303389 2.3645281
0.55 0.0889332 0.0988132 9.9986813
0.50 0.0497051 0.0637028 21.973478
0.45 0.0108663 0.0265779 59.115146
0.40 -0.0264220 -0.0105711 -149.94404
0.35 -0.0627750 -0.0475411 -32.043747
0.30 -0.0961872 -0.0818469 -17.520782
0.25 -0.1268682 -0.1145173 -10.785182
0.20 -0.1486439 -0.1396459 -6.4434401
0.15 -0.1578665 -0.1546874 -2.0551770
0.10 -0.1419982 -0.1439025 1.3233265
0.05 -0.0931065 -0.0969537 3.9680692
0.00 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000000

85
Table 21- Comparison of Predicted Non-dimensional values of Vertical Velocity along the
Horizontal Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid Properties
at Ra = 104 ( = 356.6 K, H=0.0067m and 21 X 21)

Non-dimensional Non-dimensional Non-dimensional % Deviation

Horizontal Vertical Vertical in
Distance, Velocity, Velocity,
(Constant ) ( Variable)
1.00 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000000
0.95 -0.1823712 -0.2083991 12.489449
0.90 -0.2134350 -0.2101146 -1.5802804
0.85 -0.1835589 -0.1661266 -10.493382
0.80 -0.1361653 -0.1167885 -16.591359
0.75 -0.0923559 -0.0752924 -22.662900
0.70 -0.0569510 -0.0426731 -33.458736
0.65 -0.0304331 -0.0179429 -69.610304
0.60 -0.0094573 0.0021489 540.08904
0.55 0.0083900 0.0200227 58.097265
0.50 0.0263901 0.0386682 31.752292
0.45 0.0469496 0.0603234 22.170256
0.40 0.0727090 0.0869015 16.331734
0.35 0.1055913 0.1189967 11.265354
0.30 0.1459709 0.1546759 5.6278967
0.25 0.1914424 0.1888658 -1.3642491
0.20 0.2335142 0.2121595 -10.065398
0.15 0.2573774 0.2139577 -20.293590
0.10 0.2404851 0.1834930 -31.059549
0.05 0.1609832 0.1140888 -41.103421
0.00 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000000

86
Table 22- Comparison of Predicted Non-dimensional values of Temperature along the
Horizontal Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid Properties
at Ra = 104 ( = 356.6 K, H=0.0067m and 21 X 21)

Non-dimensional Non-dimensional Non-dimensional % Deviation

Horizontal Temperature, Temperature, in
Distance, (Constant ) (Variable )
1.00 0.4048320 0.4048320 0.0000000
0.95 0.5606439 0.6564321 14.592248
0.90 0.6961532 0.8109570 14.156582
0.85 0.7969056 0.9066408 12.103492
0.80 0.8610080 0.9619112 10.489866
0.75 0.8953147 0.9905590 9.6152071
0.70 0.9093859 1.0029400 9.3279857
0.65 0.9116908 1.0064310 9.4134818
0.60 0.9082556 1.0060100 9.7170405
0.55 0.9031278 1.0051570 10.150573
0.50 0.8991418 1.0065670 10.672434
0.45 0.8988663 1.0128870 11.257001
0.40 0.9052760 1.0271490 11.865172
0.35 0.9222708 1.0528780 12.404780
0.30 0.9548032 1.0936110 12.692611
0.25 1.0082650 1.1516130 12.447584
0.20 1.0870050 1.2264310 11.368434
0.15 1.1917150 1.3141070 9.3137012
0.10 1.3177410 1.4085590 6.4475822
0.05 1.4555180 1.5036310 3.1997877
0.00 1.5951680 1.5951680 0.0000000

87
 1

0.9

Constant Viscosity & Cp

Non-dimensional Vertical Distance, y

0.8
Variable Viscosity & Cp
0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
-0.1 0 0.1 0.2
Non-dimensional Horizontal Velocity, u

Figure 31- Comparison of Steady State Non-dimensional Horizontal Velocity Distributions along
the Vertical Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid
Properties at Ra=104 ( = 356.6 K, H = 0.0067m)

88
 Constant Viscosity & Cp
Variable Viscosity & Cp
0.2
Non-dimensional Temperature, T

0.1

-0.1

-0.2

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 32- Comparison of Steady State Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity Distributions along
the Horizontal Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid
Properties at Ra= 104 ( = 356.6 K, H = 0.0067m)

89
 1.5 Constant Viscosity & Cp
Variable Viscosity & Cp
1.4
Non-dimensional Temperature, T

1.3

1.2

1.1

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 33- Comparison of Steady State Non-dimensional Temperature Distributions along the
Horizontal Centerline of the Enclosure for Constant and Variable Fluid Properties
at Ra= 104 ( = 356.6 K, H = 0.0067m)

90
 0.25 Variable Viscosity & Cp , DT= 64.8 K
Variable Viscosity & Cp , DT= 356.6 K
0.2
Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity, v

0.15

0.1

0.05

-0.05

-0.1

-0.15

-0.2

-0.25

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 34- Comparison of Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity Profiles along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Enclosure between = 64.8 K and = 356.6 K (Ra = 105)
for Variable Properties.

91
 0.3
Variable Viscosity & Cp , Ra=1.0E4
0.25 Variable Viscosity & Cp , Ra=5.0E4
Variable Viscosity & Cp , Ra=1.0E5

0.2
Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity, v

0.15

0.1

0.05

-0.05

-0.1

-0.15

-0.2

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 35- Comparison of Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity Profiles along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Enclosure between Ra = 104, Ra = 5 x 104, and Ra = 105
( = 356.6 K) for Variable Properties.

92
 Chapter 9

The Study of Effects of Inclination of the Enclosure on Natural

Convection

The effects of inclination of the enclosure are presented for the laminar natural

convection phenomenon in this chapter. The velocity fields and temperature distributions were

observed at different angles of the enclosure.

In this study, primitive variables are predicted for different angles (0 deg, 30 deg, 45 deg,

60 deg and 90 deg) of the enclosure. The predicted non-dimensional values of horizontal and

vertical velocities are presented for various angles of the enclosure in Table 23 and 24,

respectively. As the inclination of the enclosure increases, the magnitudes of the horizontal and

vertical velocities are increasing. When inclined angle becomes 90 deg, the velocity profile is

observed in opposite direction to the previous cases as shown in Figure 36 and 37. The predicted

temperature distribution is presented in Figure 38 for different angles of the enclosure. This

shows that as angle of the enclosure increases, the magnitudes of the temperature are decreasing.

93
Table 23- Steady State Non-dimensional values of Vertical Velocity along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Inclined Enclosure at Various Angles for Ra = 105
(∆ = 1.0E-5 and 21 X 21)

Non- Non- Non- Non- Non- Non-

dimensional dimensional dimensional dimensional dimensional dimensional
Horizontal Vertical Vertical Vertical Vertical Vertical
Distance, Velocity, Velocity, Velocity, Velocity, Velocity,
(Angle 0) (Angle 30) (Angle 45) (Angle 60) (Angle 90)
1.00 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000
0.95 -0.24602 -0.26058 -0.25779 -0.24928 0.21951
0.90 -0.20141 -0.24630 -0.27096 -0.28980 0.30641
0.85 -0.10434 -0.16668 -0.21887 -0.26821 0.34053
0.8 -0.03502 -0.10694 -0.17004 -0.22956 0.31293
0.75 -0.00233 -0.07122 -0.13153 -0.18897 0.26161
0.70 0.00942 -0.04878 -0.09502 -0.14116 0.19542
0.65 0.01127 -0.03580 -0.06627 -0.09980 0.13691
0.60 0.01016 -0.02174 -0.03761 -0.05934 0.08114
0.55 0.00757 -0.01251 -0.01921 -0.03202 0.03820
0.50 0.00476 -0.00042 0.00002 -0.00343 -0.00849
0.45 0.00190 0.00849 0.01290 0.01678 -0.04752
0.40 0.00004 0.02114 0.03239 0.04633 -0.09612
0.35 0.00109 0.03349 0.05384 0.07773 -0.14396
0.30 0.00842 0.05287 0.08696 0.12320 -0.20211
0.25 0.02823 0.07945 0.12814 0.17658 -0.26020
0.20 0.06702 0.12094 0.17873 0.23593 -0.31358
0.15 0.12808 0.18484 0.23919 0.29394 -0.33307
0.10 0.19448 0.25241 0.29254 0.33381 -0.31983
0.05 0.20148 0.25950 0.27693 0.29038 -0.22554
0.00 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

94
Table 24- Steady State Non-dimensional values of Horizontal Velocity along the Vertical
Centerline of the Inclined Enclosure at Various Angles for Ra = 105
(∆ = 1.0E-5 and 21 X 21)

Non- Non- Non- Non- Non- Non-

dimensional dimensional dimensional dimensional dimensional dimensional
Vertical Horizontal Horizontal Horizontal Horizontal Horizontal
Distance, Velocity, Velocity, Velocity, Velocity, Velocity,
(Angle 0) (Angle 30) (Angle 45) (Angle 60) (Angle 90)
1.00 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000
0.95 -0.08853 -0.22133 -0.28419 -0.31367 0.31299
0.90 -0.14139 -0.28811 -0.34372 -0.37180 0.37906
0.85 -0.14126 -0.24311 -0.28114 -0.30926 0.33793
0.80 -0.11099 -0.15650 -0.18309 -0.21767 0.27140
0.75 -0.08158 -0.08556 -0.10562 -0.14397 0.21131
0.70 -0.05042 -0.03216 -0.05050 -0.09015 0.16028
0.65 -0.02672 -0.00095 -0.01738 -0.05259 0.11681
0.60 -0.00818 0.01021 -0.00296 -0.02824 0.07712
0.55 0.00879 0.01594 0.00743 -0.00613 0.03956
0.50 0.02091 0.01190 0.00873 0.00929 0.00203
0.45 0.03566 0.01725 0.01842 0.03015 -0.03673
0.40 0.04859 0.02441 0.02831 0.04963 -0.07771
0.35 0.06550 0.04901 0.05506 0.08079 -0.12216
0.30 0.08214 0.08378 0.09221 0.11902 -0.17037
0.25 0.09846 0.13280 0.14878 0.17484 -0.22378
0.20 0.10825 0.18676 0.21675 0.24286 -0.27964
0.15 0.10867 0.22557 0.27849 0.31166 -0.33096
0.10 0.08889 0.22107 0.29699 0.34198 -0.34849
0.05 0.05825 0.15283 0.22115 0.26664 -0.27077
0.00 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

95
 1

0.9
Non-dimensional Veritical Distance, y

0.8

0.7
Angle 0
Angle 30
0.6 Angle 45
Angle 60
Angle 90
0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
-0.25 0 0.25
Non-dimensional Horizontal Velocity, u

Figure 36- Steady State Non-dimensional Horizontal Velocity Distributions along the Vertical
Centerline of the Inclined Enclosure for Constant Fluid Properties at Ra= 105

96
 0.3
Non-dimensional Veritical Velocity, v

0.2

0.1 Angle 0
Angle 30
Angle 45
Angle 60
Angle 90
0

-0.1

-0.2

-0.3
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 37- Steady State Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity Distributions along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Inclined Enclosure for Constant Fluid Properties at Ra= 105

97
 1.1
Angle 0
Angle 30
Angle 45
Angle 60
Angle 90
Non-dimensional Temperature, T

1.05

0.95

0.9
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 38- Steady State Non-dimensional Temperature Distributions along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Inclined Enclosure for Constant Fluid Properties at Ra= 105

98
 Chapter 10
The Study of Natural Convection Using the Second Order Accurate
in Time Model

The study of natural convection phenomenon is also conducted using the second order

accurate in time model. The results of the second order accurate in time model are presented in

this chapter. Also, these results are compared to the first order accurate in time model to verify

the accuracy of the second order accurate in time model for different Rayleigh numbers.

10.1. Results of the Second Order Accurate in Time Model

For, Ra = 105, the temperature between the vertical walls of the enclosure was taken to be

64.8 K. A uniform and orthogonal mesh of 21 x 21 was utilized. The predicted primitive

variables along the horizontal centerline and vertical centerline of the enclosure are presented in

Table 25 and 26 respectively at steady state. The qualitative results of general characteristics of

computational mesh, vectors, streamlines, temperature contours are presented in Figure 39, 42,

43 and 44. The flow inside square enclosure is not unicellular. Two secondary vortices formation

is evident from Figure 43. The core flow is more stagnant relative to the boundary regions. The

velocity (u and v) histograms at a point closer to the high temperature wall where = 0.05 and

= 0.5 are presented in Figures 40 and 41. The non-dimensional horizontal velocity distribution

along the vertical centerline, vertical velocity distribution along the horizontal centerline and

temperature distribution along the horizontal centerline are presented in Figure 45, 46 and 47

respectively. The maximum non-dimensional vertical velocity is observed as 0.25 at near the hot

wall and the maximum non-dimensional horizontal velocity is observed as 0.11 at near the cold

wall. The temperature gradients are higher near the walls and equal to zero at the center of the

99
enclosure. This fact is easily illustrated by isotherms being almost horizontal in the center of the

enclosure. The qualitative results of general characteristics of computational mesh, vectors,

streamlines, temperature contours are also presented in Figure 48, 49, 50 and 51 for grid size of

81 x 81.

Table 25- Steady State Non-dimensional values of Primitive Variables along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Enclosure for Ra = 105 in Second Order Time Accurate Approximation
(∆ = 1.0E-5 and 21 X 21)

Non-dimensional
Non-dimensional Non-dimensional Non-dimensional
Vertical
Horizontal Pressure, Temperature,
Velocity,
Distance,
1.00 0.0000000 1605.1374 0.8919274
0.95 -0.2440447 1605.1374 0.9541405
0.90 -0.2002889 1605.1374 0.9988405
0.85 -0.1043035 1605.1374 1.0214050
0.80 -0.0357540 1605.1374 1.0290520
0.75 -0.0031484 1605.1374 1.0300350
0.70 0.0086785 1605.1374 1.0291910
0.65 0.0106349 1605.1374 1.0283880
0.60 0.0095869 1605.1374 1.0279430
0.55 0.0070514 1605.1374 1.0277350
0.50 0.0043028 1605.1374 1.0274820
0.45 0.0015100 1605.1374 1.0269280
0.40 -0.0003056 1605.1374 1.0258250
0.35 0.0007269 1605.1374 1.0240220
0.30 0.0079743 1605.1374 1.0216240
0.25 0.0276678 1605.1374 1.0193210
0.20 0.0664488 1605.1374 1.0189950
0.15 0.1278468 1605.1374 1.0242100
0.10 0.1949693 1605.1374 1.0399920
0.05 0.2027110 1605.1374 1.0697490
0.00 0.0000000 1605.1374 1.1080730

100
Table 26- Steady State Non-dimensional values of Primitive Variables along the Vertical
Centerline of the Enclosure for Ra = 105 in Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation (∆ = 1.0E-5 and 21 X 21)

Non-dimensional Non-dimensional Non-dimensional Non-dimensional

Vertical Horizontal Pressure, Temperature,
Distance, Velocity,

1.00 0.0000000 1605.1353 1.0821941

0.95 0.0595109 1605.1354 1.0821070
0.90 0.0905230 1605.1357 1.0811453
0.85 0.1101803 1605.1358 1.0782586
0.80 0.1092251 1605.1361 1.0745235
0.75 0.0986764 1605.1363 1.0685488
0.70 0.0816850 1605.1365 1.0627430
0.65 0.0644987 1605.1367 1.0548044
0.60 0.0472117 1605.1370 1.0472641
0.55 0.0340867 1605.1372 1.0370585
0.50 0.0192216 1605.1374 1.0274822
0.45 0.0071675 1605.1376 1.0151296
0.40 -0.0096449 1605.1379 1.0043528
0.35 -0.0278360 1605.1381 0.9916311
0.30 -0.0510775 1605.1383 0.9815297
0.25 -0.0815223 1605.1386 0.9703938
0.20 -0.1101736 1605.1388 0.9618196
0.15 -0.1394019 1605.1391 0.9521419
0.10 -0.1390995 1605.1393 0.9454112
0.05 -0.0867933 1605.1396 0.9394930
0.00 0.0000000 1605.1398 0.9369507

101
 1

0.9
Non-dimensional Vertical Distance, y

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 39- Computational Mesh of the Non-dimensional domain for the Natural Convection
Case in Second Order Time Accurate Approximation (21 x 21, Ra = 105)

102
 0.016
0.015
0.014
Non-dimensional Horizontal Velocity, u

0.013
0.012
0.011
0.01
0.009
0.008
0.007
0.006
0.005
0.004
0.003
0.002
0.001
0
0 10 20 30 40
Non-dimensional Time, t

Figure 40- Non-dimensional Horizontal Velocity Histogram for Ra=105 at =0.2 and =0.5
(21 x 21, ∆ = 1.0E-5) in Second Order Time Accurate Approximation

103
 0.25
Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity, v

0.2

0.15

0.1

0.05

0
0 10 20 30 40
Non- dimensional Time, t

Figure 41- Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity Histogram for Ra=105 at =0.2 and =0.5
(21 x 21, ∆ = 1.0E-5) in Second Order Time Accurate Approximation

104
 1 T
1.095

0.9 1.081
56
94
1.0

1.068
5
10
Non-dimensional Vertical Distance, y

0.8
08
1.

5 1.054
67 5
1.0

04 1.041
0.7 1.0
54

1.04053 1.027
0.6
1.02702
1.014

0.5 1.000
1.01351

0.986
0.4 1
0.973
0 .986491
0.3 0.959
0.972982
0.946
0.2 73
0.9594 0.932

0.1 596
4 0.919
36

6
0.94 94
05 4

8
91
0.932455 0.
0.9

0.905
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 42- Steady State Non-dimensional Temperature Contours for Ra=105

(21 x 21, ∆ = 1.0E-5) in Second Order Time Accurate Approximation

105
 1

0.9
Non-dimensional Vertical Distance, y

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 43- Steady State Non-dimensional Velocity Vectors for Ra=105 (21 x 21, ∆ = 1.0E-5) in
Second Order Time Accurate Approximation

106
 1

0.9
Non-dimensional Vertical Distance, y

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 44- Steady State Non-dimensional Velocity Streamlines for Ra=105

(21 x 21, ∆ = 1.0E-5) in Second Order Time Accurate Approximation

107
 1

0.9
Non-dimensional Vertical Distance, y

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
-0.1 0 0.1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Velocity, u

Figure 45- Steady State Non-dimensional Horizontal Velocity Distribution along the Vertical
Centerline of the Enclosure for Ra=105 (21 x 21, ∆ = 1.0E-5) in Second Order
Time Accurate Approximation

108
 0.2
Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity, v

0.1

-0.1

-0.2

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 46- Steady State Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity Distribution along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Enclosure for Ra=105 (21 x 21, ∆ = 1.0E-5) in Second Order
Time Accurate Approximation

109
 1.1
Non-dimensional Temperature, T

1.05

0.95

0.9
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 47- Steady State Non-dimensional Temperature Distribution along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Enclosure for Ra=105 (21 x 21, ∆ = 1.0E-5) in Second Order
Time Accurate Approximation

110
 1

0.9
Non-dimensional Vertical Distance, y

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 48- Computational Mesh of the Non-dimensional domain for the Natural Convection
Case in Second Order Time Accurate Approximation (81 x 81, Ra = 105)

111
 1

0.9
Non-dimensional Vertical Distance, y

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 49- Steady State Non-dimensional Velocity Vectors for Ra=105 (81 x 81, ∆ = 1.0E-6) in
Second Order Time Accurate Approximation

112
 1

0.9
Non-dimensional Vertical Distance, y

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 50- Steady State Non-dimensional Velocity Streamlines for Ra=105

(81 x 81, ∆ = 1.0E-6) in Second Order Time Accurate Approximation

113
 1 T
1.095

0.9
4 56

1.081
1.09

05

1.068
81
55
Non-dimensional Vertical Distance, y

1.0

0.8
67

4
1.0

40

1.054
3
05

05
1.

04
1.

0.7 02 1.041
27
1.0
1.01351
1.027
0.6
1 1.014

0.5 0.986491
1.000

0.986
0.4 0.972982
0.973

0.3 0.959473 0.959

0.946
0.945964
0.2
0.932
36

0.1
0 54

0.932455 6 0.919
94
18
0.9

0.9
0.905
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 51- Steady State Non-dimensional Temperature Contours for Ra=105

(81 x 81, ∆ = 1.0E-6) in Second Order Time Accurate Approximation

114
10.2. The Comparison between First Order and Second Order Accurate in

Time Models

The comparison of the present model with first order accurate in time CMSIP model shows

negligible differences. A quantitative comparisons of the first order and second order accurate in

time CMSIP models for Rayleigh number 105 with ΔT = 64.84 deg K are presented in Table 27

through 29. The qualitative comparison is presented in Figure 52 through 54. The results for

Rayleigh number 104 by changing the temperature difference between the vertical walls of the

enclosure with the same size are presented quantitatively in Table 30 through 32 and

qualitatively in Figures 55 through 57. These results indicate that the accuracy of second order

accurate in time model can be verified successfully with first order accurate in time model.

The differences can be seen when one compares the velocity and temperature profiles in

horizontal and vertical directions for different Rayleigh numbers. The comparisons of the above

results at constant wall temperature difference for different Rayleigh numbers 10 4 and 105 are

presented. The qualitative comparisons of these results (velocity and temperature) are presented

in Figure 58 through 60. As shown in Figure 58, the magnitudes of the horizontal velocities are

predicted higher for Ra number 104 compared to Ra 105. But the magnitudes of the vertical

velocities and temperature are predicted higher for Ra 10 5 as depicted in Figure 59 and 60,

because of the increase in temperature difference between the walls of the enclosure.

115
Table 27- Comparison of Non-dimensional values of Horizontal Velocity along the Vertical
Centerline between First Order and Second Order Time Accurate Approximations
(Ra = 105, ∆ = 1.0E-5 and 21 X 21)

Non- Non-dimensional Non-dimensional % Deviation

dimensional Horizontal Horizontal in
Vertical Velocity, Velocity,
Distance, (1st Oder) (2nd Order)
1.00 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000000
0.95 0.0592333 0.0595109 0.4665191
0.90 0.0900378 0.0905231 0.5360290
0.85 0.1097794 0.1101803 0.3638581
0.80 0.1089421 0.1092251 0.2590979
0.75 0.0986343 0.0986764 0.04262419
0.70 0.0817787 0.0816850 -0.1147088
0.65 0.0647388 0.0644987 -0.3723174
0.60 0.0474760 0.0472117 -0.5598186
0.55 0.0344048 0.0340867 -0.9334432
0.50 0.0194978 0.0192216 -1.4371830
0.45 0.0074592 0.0071675 -4.0704532
0.40 -0.0094205 -0.0096449 2.3259011
0.35 -0.0276257 -0.0278360 0.7554943
0.30 -0.0509145 -0.0510775 0.3190640
0.25 -0.0814199 -0.0815223 0.1257077
0.20 -0.1101176 -0.1101736 0.0508288
0.15 -0.1395627 -0.1394019 -0.1153499
0.10 -0.1394197 -0.1390995 -0.2301949
0.05 -0.0870163 -0.0867933 -0.2568744
0.00 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000000

116
Table 28- Comparison of Non-dimensional values of Vertical Velocity along the Horizontal
Centerline between First Order and Second Order Time Accurate Approximations
(Ra = 105, ∆ = 1.0E-5 and 21 X 21)

Non-dimensional Non-dimensional Non-dimensional % Deviation

Horizontal Vertical Vertical in
Distance, Velocity, Velocity,
(1st Order) (2nd Order)
1.00 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000000
0.95 -0.2440669 -0.2440447 -0.0090966
0.90 -0.2001967 -0.2002889 0.0460335
0.85 -0.1041439 -0.1043035 0.1530149
0.80 -0.0356895 -0.0357540 0.1803991
0.75 -0.0030238 -0.0031484 3.9582403
0.70 0.0087026 0.0086785 -0.2781932
0.65 0.0107321 0.0106349 -0.9147241
0.60 0.0096055 0.0095869 -0.1936064
0.55 0.0071374 0.0070514 -1.2197429
0.50 0.0043102 0.0043028 -0.1719107
0.45 0.0015751 0.0015100 -4.3091294
0.40 -0.0003151 -0.0003056 -3.1057804
0.35 0.0007948 0.0007269 -9.3348089
0.30 0.0079977 0.0079743 -0.2939556
0.25 0.0277972 0.0276678 -0.4676911
0.20 0.0664985 0.0664488 -0.0748997
0.15 0.1278577 0.1278468 -0.0085258
0.10 0.1946601 0.1949693 0.1585890
0.05 0.2022876 0.2027110 0.2088687
0.00 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000000

117
Table 29- Comparison of Non-dimensional values of Temperature along the Horizontal
Centerline between First Order and Second Order Time Accurate Approximations
(Ra = 105, ∆ = 1.0E-5 and 21 X 21)

Non-dimensional Non-dimensional Non-dimensional % Deviation

Horizontal Temperature, Temperature, in
Distance, (1st Order) (2nd Order)
1.00 0.8919274 0.8919274 0.0000000
0.95 0.9541786 0.9541405 -0.0039931
0.90 0.9990383 0.9988405 -0.0198029
0.85 1.0216900 1.0214050 -0.0279027
0.80 1.0293790 1.0290520 -0.0317768
0.75 1.0303840 1.0300350 -0.0338823
0.70 1.0295550 1.0291910 -0.0353675
0.65 1.0287620 1.0283880 -0.0363675
0.60 1.0283270 1.0279430 -0.0373561
0.55 1.0281210 1.0277350 -0.0375583
0.50 1.0278720 1.0274820 -0.0379568
0.45 1.0273150 1.0269280 -0.0376852
0.40 1.0262080 1.0258250 -0.0373358
0.35 1.0243960 1.0240220 -0.0365226
0.30 1.0219900 1.0216240 -0.0358253
0.25 1.0196770 1.0193210 -0.0349252
0.20 1.0193410 1.0189950 -0.0339550
0.15 1.0245320 1.0242100 -0.0314388
0.10 1.0402610 1.0399920 -0.0258655
0.05 1.0699080 1.0697490 -0.0148633
0.00 1.1080730 1.1080730 0.0000000

118
 1

0.9
Non-dimensional Vertical Distance, y

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2 1st Order Accurate InTime & Ra = 1.0E5

2nd Order Accurate InTime & Ra = 1.0E5

0.1

0
-0.1 0 0.1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Velocity, u

Figure 52- Comparison of Steady State Horizontal Velocity Distribution along the Vertical
centerline of the Enclosure between First Order and Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation for Ra= 105

119
 0.2 1st Order Accurate InTime & Ra = 1.0E5
2nd Order Accurate InTime & Ra = 1.0E5
Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity, v

0.1

-0.1

-0.2

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 53- Comparison of Steady State Vertical Velocity Distribution along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Enclosure between First Order and Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation for Ra= 105

120
 1.1
1st Oder Accuarate in Time & Ra = 1.0E5
2nd Oder Accuarate in Time & Ra = 1.0E5
Non-dimensional Temperature, T

1.05

0.95

0.9
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 54- Comparison of Steady State Temperature Distribution along the Horizontal Centerline
of the Enclosure between First Order and Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation for Ra= 105

121
Table 30- Comparison of Non-dimensional values of Horizontal Velocity along the Vertical
Centerline between First Order and Second Order Time Accurate Approximations
(Ra = 104, ∆ = 1.0E-6 and 21 X 21)

Non- Non- Non-dimensional % Deviation

dimensional dimensional Horizontal in
Vertical Horizontal Velocity,
Distance, Velocity, (2nd Order)
(1st Oder)
1.00 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000000
0.95 0.0718289 0.0716946 -0.1873362
0.90 0.1109938 0.1108348 -0.1434567
0.85 0.1421789 0.1418300 -0.2459987
0.80 0.1526182 0.1521436 -0.3119421
0.75 0.1559837 0.1553692 -0.3955095
0.70 0.1456733 0.1449529 -0.4969890
0.65 0.1320233 0.1312004 -0.6272084
0.60 0.1075737 0.1067081 -0.8111849
0.55 0.0826481 0.0816952 -1.1664944
0.50 0.0481424 0.0472270 -1.9384242
0.45 0.0139338 0.0129922 -7.2470014
0.40 -0.0285451 -0.0292848 2.5260817
0.35 -0.0714584 -0.0719673 0.7071402
0.30 -0.1186585 -0.1186277 -0.0259635
0.25 -0.1640687 -0.1633397 -0.4463091
0.20 -0.2022790 -0.2006958 -0.7888555
0.15 -0.2229911 -0.2206229 -1.0734153
0.10 -0.2130995 -0.2103346 -1.3145245
0.05 -0.1350920 -0.1333185 -1.3302729
0.00 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000000

122
Table 31- Comparison of Non-dimensional values of Vertical Velocity along the Horizontal
Centerline between First Order and Second Order Time Accurate Approximations
(Ra = 104, ∆ = 1.0E-6 and 21 X 21)

Non-dimensional Non-dimensional Non-dimensional % Deviation

Horizontal Vertical Vertical in
Distance, Velocity, Velocity,
(1st Order) (2nd Order)
1.00 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000000
0.95 -0.1774396 -0.1748586 -1.4760497
0.90 -0.2428447 -0.2397430 -1.2937602
0.85 -0.2299650 -0.2278353 -0.9347541
0.80 -0.1823231 -0.1809458 -0.7611671
0.75 -0.1288377 -0.1284063 -0.3359648
0.70 -0.0824661 -0.0822997 -0.2021511
0.65 -0.0464804 -0.0467008 0.4720043
0.60 -0.0195359 -0.0196341 0.5004028
0.55 0.0016007 0.0013556 -18.078290
0.50 0.0195719 0.0195468 -0.1283070
0.45 0.0374285 0.0372685 -0.4293166
0.40 0.0566598 0.0566889 0.0512798
0.35 0.0796021 0.0793940 -0.2621734
0.30 0.1061552 0.1060370 -0.1114705
0.25 0.1366630 0.1361237 -0.3961837
0.20 0.1663514 0.1657783 -0.3457026
0.15 0.1886132 0.1874899 -0.5991256
0.10 0.1873610 0.1863276 -0.5546145
0.05 0.1414387 0.1402807 -0.8254877
0.00 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000000

123
Table 32- Comparison of Non-dimensional values of Temperature along the Horizontal
Centerline between First Order and Second Order Time Accurate Approximations
(Ra = 104, ∆ = 1.0E-6 and 21 X 21)

Non-dimensional Non-dimensional Non-dimensional % Deviation

Horizontal Temperature, Temperature, in
Distance, (1st Order) (2nd Order)
1.00 0.9891927 0.9891927 0.0000000
0.95 0.9925951 0.9928062 0.0212629
0.90 0.9959832 0.9961624 0.0179890
0.85 0.9989185 0.9990303 0.0111908
0.80 1.0011520 1.0012220 0.0069914
0.75 1.0026770 1.0027260 0.0048866
0.70 1.0036120 1.0036520 0.0039854
0.65 1.0041200 1.0041590 0.0038838
0.60 1.0043510 1.0043920 0.0040820
0.55 1.0044200 1.0044650 0.0044799
0.50 1.0044090 1.0044590 0.0049778
0.45 1.0043770 1.0044310 0.0053761
0.40 1.0043710 1.0044290 0.0057744
0.35 1.0044400 1.0045010 0.0060726
0.30 1.0046400 1.0047040 0.0063700
0.25 1.0050360 1.0051000 0.0063675
0.20 1.0056900 1.0057500 0.0059656
0.15 1.0066410 1.0066930 0.0051654
0.10 1.0078790 1.0079160 0.0036709
0.05 1.0093140 1.0093330 0.0018824
0.00 1.0108070 1.0108070 0.0000000

124
 1

0.9
Non-dimensional Vertical Distance, y

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2 1st Order Accurate InTime & Ra = 1.0E4

2nd Order Accurate InTime & Ra = 1.0E4

0.1

0
-0.2 -0.1 0 0.1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Velocity, u

Figure 55- Comparison of Steady State Horizontal Velocity Distribution along the Vertical
Centerline of the Enclosure between First Order and Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation for Ra= 104

125
 0.2
1st Order Accurate InTime & Ra = 1.0E4
2nd Order Accurate InTime & Ra = 1.0E4
Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity, v

0.1

-0.1

-0.2

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 56- Comparison of Steady State Vertical Velocity Distribution along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Enclosure between First Order and Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation for Ra= 104

126
 1.01
1st Oder Accuarate in Time & Ra = 1.0E4
2nd Oder Accuarate in Time & Ra = 1.0E4
Non-dimensional Temperature, T

1.005

0.995

0.99
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 57- Comparison of Steady State Temperature Distribution along the Horizontal Centerline
of the Enclosure between First Order and Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation for Ra= 104

127
 1

0.9
Non-dimensional Vertical Distance, y

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2 2nd Order Accurate InTime & Ra = 1.0E4

2nd Order Accurate InTime & Ra = 1.0E5

0.1

0
-0.2 -0.1 0 0.1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Velocity, u

Figure 58- Comparison of Steady State Horizontal Velocity Distribution along the Vertical
Centerline of the Enclosure between Ra= 104 and Ra= 105 in Second Order Time
Accurate Approximation

128
 2nd Order Accurate InTime & Ra = 1.0E4
0.2 2nd Order Accurate InTime & Ra = 1.0E5
Non-dimensional Vertical Velocity, v

0.1

-0.1

-0.2

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 59- Comparison of Steady State Vertical Velocity Distribution along the Horizontal
Centerline of the Enclosure between Ra= 104 and Ra= 105 in Second Order Time
Accurate Approximation

129
 1.1
2nd Oder Accuarate in Time & Ra = 1.0E4
2nd Oder Accuarate in Time & Ra = 1.0E5
Non-dimensional Temperature, T

1.05

0.95

0.9
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 60- Comparison of Steady State Temperature Distribution along the Horizontal Centerline
of the Enclosure between Ra= 104 and Ra= 105 in Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation

130
 Chapter 11
The Study of Unsteady Natural Convection in Square Enclosure

The unsteady thermal and hydrodynamic behavior of the working fluid was studied by

imposing a sudden wall temperature change in a square enclosure. The unsteady development of

the velocity vectors and temperatures for Ra = 105 and grid size of 41 x 41 for different non-

dimensional time levels (1 s, 5 s, 10 s, 15 s, 20 s, and 50 s) using second order accurate in time

model are presented in this chapter. The density of the air near the hot wall is lower than that of

the cold wall. As a result, the hot air rises near the left hot wall and falls near the cold right wall

ensuring in a clockwise circular motion. These results are presented in Figures 62 through 67 in

terms of velocity vectors. The flow is not unicellular as evident that the formation of two

secondary vertices. The temperature contours are presented in Figures 68 through 73. These

plots show the development of the expected temperature stratification at vertical centerline of the

square enclosure. The isotherms are parallel to the side walls of the enclosure depicting that

conduction is the major mode of heat transfer before imposing a sudden wall temperature

change. They compare favorable to ones given by Kublbeck [36]. A histogram of non-

dimensional temperature at location = 0.05 and = 0.5 is given in Figure 61.

131
 1.2

1.1

1
Non-dimensional Temperature, T

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 10 20 30 40
Non-dimensional Time, t

Figure 61- Non-dimensional Temperature Histogram for Ra = 105 at = 0.05 and = 0.5
(41 x 41, ∆ = 5.0E-6) in Second Order Time Accurate Approximation

132
 1

0.9
Non-dimensional Vertical Distance, y

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 62- Unsteady State Non-dimensional Velocity Vectors for Ra=105 at Non-dimensional
Time, = 1 (41 x 41, ∆ = 5.0E-6) in Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation

133
 1

0.9
Non-dimensional Vertical Distance, y

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 63- Unsteady State Non-dimensional Velocity Vectors for Ra=105 at Non-dimensional
Time, = 5 (41 x 41, ∆ = 5.0E-6) in Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation

134
 1

0.9
Non-dimensional Vertical Distance, y

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 64- Unsteady State Non-dimensional Velocity Vectors for Ra=105 at Non-dimensional
Time, = 10 (41 x 41, ∆ = 5.0E-6) in Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation

135
 1

0.9
Non-dimensional Vertical Distance, y

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 65- Unsteady State Non-dimensional Velocity Vectors for Ra=105 at Non-dimensional
Time, = 15 (41 x 41, ∆ = 5.0E-6) in Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation

136
 1

0.9
Non-dimensional Vertical Distance, y

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 66- Unsteady State Non-dimensional Velocity Vectors for Ra=105 at Non-dimensional
Time, = 20 (41 x 41, ∆ = 5.0E-6) in Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation

137
 1

0.9
Non-dimensional Vertical Distance, y

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 67- Unsteady State Non-dimensional Velocity Vectors for Ra=105 at Non-dimensional
Time, = 50 (41 x 41, ∆ = 5.0E-6) in Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation

138
 1 T
1.095

0.9 1.081
1.09456

1.068

0.905436
Non-dimensional Vertical Distance, y

0.8

0.932455
1.08105

1.054

0.945964
0.7 1.041
1.06755

0.918946
1.027
1.05404

0.959473
0.6
1.04053

0.972982
1.014
1.02702
1.01351

0.986491
0.5 1 1.000

0.986
0.4
0.973

0.3 0.959

0.946
0.2
0.932

0.1 0.919

0.905
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 68- Unsteady State Non-dimensional Temperature Contours for Ra=105 at Non-
dimensional Time, = 1 (41 x 41, ∆ = 5.0E-6) in Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation

139
 1 T
1.095

0.9 1.081
6
1.0945

5
8 10

1.068
1.0
Non-dimensional Vertical Distance, y

0.8
75 5

1.054
4
1.06
5 40

53
40
1.0

0.7 1.041
1.0

2
70
02
1.

1.027
1
35

0.6
01
1.

1.014

0.5 1
1.000

0.986
0.4
0.973
91
0.9 86 4
0.3 0.959
9 82
0.972
0.946
0.2 0.959
47 3

64
0.932
45 9 55
4 36

0.9 4
6

32
94

9
0.905

0.1 0.
18

0.919
0.9

0.905
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 69- Unsteady State Non-dimensional Temperature Contours for Ra=105 at Non-
dimensional Time, = 5 (41 x 41, ∆ = 5.0E-6) in Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation

140
 1 T
1.095

0.9
6

1.081
945
1.0

05
81

1.068
55
1.0

67
Non-dimensional Vertical Distance, y

0.8
4
1.0

40
05

3
05 1.054
1.

04
2

1.
70
02

0.7 1.041
1.

51
13
1 .0

1 1.027
0.6
1.014
0.98
6 49
0.5 1 1.000

0.986
0.4 0.9
72
98
2
0.973

0.3 0.959
0.959
473 0.946
0.2
0.932
0.945964
36

0.1 0.919
05 4

45 5 46
0.932 89
0.9

1
0.9
0.905
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 70- Unsteady State Non-dimensional Temperature Contours for Ra=105 at Non-
dimensional Time, = 10 (41 x 41, ∆ = 5.0E-6) in Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation

141
 1 T
1.095

0.9 1.081
45 6
1.09

05
81

1.068
1.0
1.0 6755
Non-dimensional Vertical Distance, y

0.8
04
1.0

1.054
54

53
40
1.0

0.7
70

1.041
02
1.

1
35
01 1.027
1.
0.6
1 1.014

0.5 1.000
0.986491
0.986
0.4
0.972982
0.973

0.3 0.959
0.959473
0.946
0.2
0.932
0.945964

0.1 0.919
36

45 5 46
05 4

0.932 89
91
0.
0.9

0.905
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 71- Unsteady State Non-dimensional Temperature Contours for Ra=105 at Non-
dimensional Time, = 15 (41 x 41, ∆ = 5.0E-6) in Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation

142
 1 T
1.095

0.9 1.081
56
1.094

1.068
5
81 0
Non-dimensional Vertical Distance, y

0.8
1.0

5
67 5

1.054
04
1.0
54
1.0

53

0.7 1.041
40

2
1.0

70
02
1.

1.027
351
0.6 1.01
1.014
1
0.5 1.000
0.986491 0.986
0.4
0.972982 0.973

0.3 73
0.959
0.9594

0.946
0.2 45 9 6 4
0.9
0.932
36

0.1 0.919
0 54

455 6
0.932 94
18
0.9

0.9
0.905
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 72- Unsteady State Non-dimensional Temperature Contours for Ra=105 at Non-
dimensional Time, = 20 (41 x 41, ∆ = 5.0E-6) in Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation

143
 1 T
1.095

0.9 1.081
56
1.094

1.068
5
81 0
Non-dimensional Vertical Distance, y

0.8
1.0

5
675

1.054
04
1.0
54
1.0

53

0.7 1.041
40
1.0

2
70
02
1.

1.027
1.01351
0.6
1.014
1

0.5 1.000
0.986491
0.986
0.4
0.972982 0.973

0.3 0.959473 0.959

0.946
0.2 0.9459
64

0.932
36

0.1 0.932455 6 0.919

05 4

94
18
0.9
0.9

0.905
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Non-dimensional Horizontal Distance, x

Figure 73- Unsteady State Non-dimensional Temperature Contours for Ra=105 at Non-
dimensional Time, = 50 (41 x 41, ∆ = 5.0E-6) in Second Order Time Accurate
Approximation

144
 Chapter 12
Calculations of Wall Heat Flux and Nusselt Number

The calculations of heat flux at the walls of the enclosure (the high temperature wall in

this case) and Nusselt number are presented in this chapter.

The rate of heat transfer is observed to be proportional to the temperature difference and

is expressed by Newton’s law of cooling as

q conv  h(Tw  T )
(9.1)

where h is the heat transfer coefficient in W/m2-K, Tw is temperature at hot wall side of the

enclosure, and T is the reference temperature.

The heat transfer from the solid surface to the fluid adjacent to the surface is by pure

conduction can be expressed as

 dT 
q cond  k  
 dx  x 0 (9.2)

 dT 
where T is the temperature distribution in the fluid,   is the temperature gradient at the
 dx  x 0

surface of hot wall, and k is thermal conductivity of the fluid in W/m-K

Conduction heat flux from the solid surface to the fluid is equal to the convection heat

flux to the fluid adjacent to surface, at x = 0. Therefore, equating equations 9.1 and 9.2 and

solving for the heat transfer coefficient yields,

 dT 
 k 
 dx  x 0
h (9.3)
Tw  T

145
 Non-dimensional heat transfer coefficient (or) Nusselt number is defined as,

hH
Nu  (9.4)
k

The wall heat fluxes and Nu numbers for ΔT = 64.8 deg K and ΔT = 356.6 deg K at

Ra = 105 were calculated from the temperature profiles (see Figures 74 through 77) near the

high temperature wall as predicted by both models, the constant property and the variable

property. The results of these calculations are presented in Table 33.

146
 Dimensional Temperature Distribution, T(deg K)

330

T = -4E+10x4 + 5E+08x3 - 396715x2 - 9199.6x + 332.77

325

320

315

310

0 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005

Dimensional Horizontal Distance, x (m)

Figure 74- Dimensional Temperature Distribution along the Horizontal Distance for Constant
Properties (ΔT = 64.8 deg K)

147
 Dimensional Temperature Distribution, T(deg K)

330

4 3 2
T = -4E+10x + 5E+08x - 749097x - 8161.3x + 332.77
325

320

315

310

0 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005

Dimensional Horizontal Distance, x (m)

Figure 75- Dimensional Temperature Distribution along the Horizontal Distance for Variable
Properties (ΔT = 64.8 deg K)

148
 480
Dimensional Temperature Distribution, T(deg K)

460

440

420 3 2
T = 7E+09x - 9E+06x - 98716x + 479.86

400

380

360

340

320

300

0 0.0005 0.001 0.0015 0.002 0.0025

DImensional Horizontal Distance, x (m)

Figure 76- Dimensional Temperature Distribution along the Horizontal Distance for Constant
Properties (ΔT = 356.6 deg K)

149
 Dimensional Temperature Distribution, T (deg K)

460

440
T = 4E+09x3 - 1E+07x2 - 59897x + 479.9

420

400

380

360

340

320
0 0.001 0.002
Dimensional Horizontal Distance, x (m)

Figure 77- Dimensional Temperature Distribution along the Horizontal Distance for Variable
Properties (ΔT = 356.6 deg K)

150
 Table 33 - Comparison of the Results of the Present Study (Variable properties) and
Constant Properties for Different Wall Temperature differences at Ra=105

Variable Constant %
ΔT ( 0K ) Properties Properties Deviation
2 2
w (W/m ) w (W/m ) in w
64.8 234.23 264.03 - 12.80
356.6 2180.00 3593.30 - 64.82

Variable Constant %
ΔT ( 0K ) Properties Properties Deviation
Nu Nu in Nu
64.8 6.40 7.21 - 12.65
356.6 4.83 7.97 - 65.02

As shown in the above table, the variable property model predicts the wall heat flux and

the Nu number values lower than the constant property model. The wall heat flux predicted by

the variable property model deviates by - 12.8 % from the values predicted by the variable

property model for ΔT = 64.8 0K . However, this difference is more for higher wall temperature

differences. Similarly, the computed value of Nusselt number of the variable property model is

12.6% less than the corresponding value predicted by the constant property model, and this

difference is high for higher wall temperature differences.

151
 Chapter 13

Conclusions

A numerical study of unsteady natural convection inside a square enclosure has been

carried out to determine the effect of variable properties, i.e., thermodynamic and transport

properties, on circulation patterns, velocity profiles in vertical and horizontal directions, and

temperature characteristics for a fluid with Pr number 0.72 and a Ra number ranging from 10 3 to

106. The following conclusions are drawn from this study.

1. A newly updated Coupled Modified Strongly Implicit Procedure (CMSIP) was

successfully employed to solve the governing equations of unsteady laminar natural

convection inside an enclosure using a first order and a second order accurate in time

finite difference approximations.

2. The results of the numerical study carried out using the mathematical model and solution

procedure proposed in this thesis fair well when compared to the results of the benchmark

case given in the literature.

3. There is a notable difference between the results of the variable property and the constant

property models. The variable property model predicts the wall heat fluxes and the Nu

number values lower than the constant property model.

4. The effect of variable properties on circulation patterns and velocity profiles is more

pronounced for high Ra numbers when the temperature difference between the walls of

the enclosure is high.

5. There is negligible difference between the results of the first order and second order

accurate in time models.

152
6. Transient development of circulation patterns and temperature isotherms were

qualitatively comparable to those found in literature.

153
 Chapter 14

Recommendations

The following recommendations are made to improve the present model in simulating natural

convection inside an enclosure with differentially heated side walls.

1. A finer mesh should be utilized to obtain more accurate results, especially at high

Rayleigh numbers.

2. Due to the boundary layer nature of the flow for high Rayleigh numbers, a stretched grid

should be incorporated near the walls of the enclosure to improve the accuracy of the

predicted results.

3. Effects of different boundary conditions such as constant and variable heat flux should be

considered.

4. A turbulence model k-ε should be incorporated to study natural convection in the

turbulent region, that is for Ra > 106.

5. Density should be considered as a primitive variable instead of pressure so that the model

can be applied to any fluid (liquid or gas).

154
 List of References

1. S. Ostrach, 1988, “Natural Convection in Enclosures,” ASME Journal of Heat Transfer,

Vol.110, pp. 1175-1190.
2. G. de Vahl Davis., 1983, “Natural Convection of Air in a Square Cavity:
A Bench Mark Numerical Solution,” International Journal for Numerical Methods in
Fluids, vol. 3, 249-264
3. G. de Vahl Davis and I.P. Jones, 1983, “Natural Convection in Square Cavity: a
Comparison Exercise,” International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids, Vol.3, pp.
249-264.
4. S. Kimura and A. Bejan, 1984, “The Boundary Layer Natural Convection Regime in a
Rectangular Cavity with Uniform Heat Flux from the Side,” ASME Journal of Heat
Transfer, Vol. 106, pp. 98-106.
5. T. H. Chen and L. Y. Chen, 2007, “ Study of Buoyancy-Induced Flows Subjected to
Partially Heated Sources on the Left and Bottom Walls in a Square Enclosure,”
International Journal of Thermal Sciences , Vol. 46, Issue 12, pp. 1219-1231
6. N. Nithyadevi , P. Kandaswamy and J. Lee, 2007, “Natural Convection in a Rectangular
Cavity with Partially Active Side Walls,” Int. Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol.
50, Issues 23-24, pp.4688-4697
7. D. E. Cormack, G. P. Stone, and L. G. Leal, 1975, “The Effect of Upper Surface
Conditions in a Shallow Cavity with Differentially Heated End-Walls,” Int. J. Heat and
Mass Transfer, Vol. 18, pp.635-648
8. M. Sathiyamoorthy, T. Basak, S. Roy, and N. C. Mahanti, 2007, “Effect of the
Temperature Difference Aspect Ratio on Natural Convection in a Square Cavity for Non-
uniform Thermal Boundary Conditions,” Journal of Heat Transfer, Vol.129, pp.1723-
1728
9. B. Calcagni, F. Marsili, M. Paroncini, 2005, “Natural Convective Heat Transfer in
Square Enclosures Heated from Below,” Applied Thermal Engineering , Vol. 25, Issue
16, pp. 2522-2531
10. M. M. Ganzarolli and L. F. Milanez, 1995, “Natural Convection in Rectangular
Enclosures Heated from Below and Symmetrically Cooled from the Sides,” Int. J. of Heat
and Mass Transfer , Vol. 38, Issue 6, pp. 1063-1073
11. Y. Le Peutrec and G. Lauriat, 1990, “Effects of the Heat Transfer at the Side Walls on
Natural Convection in Cavities,” Transactions of the ASME, Vol.112, pp. 370-378
12. V. C. Mariani, and A. da Silva, “Natural Convection: Analysis of Partially Open
Enclosures with an Internal Heated Source,” Numerical Heat Transfer, Part A:
Applications, Vol. 52, Issue 7, pp.595-619
13. O. Aydin, A. Ünal, T. Ayhan, 1999, “Natural Convection in Rectangular Enclosures
Heated from One Side and Cooled from the Ceiling,” Int. J. of Heat and Mass Transfer,
Vol. 42, Issue 13, pp. 2345-2355
14. T. Basak, S. Roy, and A. R. Balakrishnan, 2006, “Effects of Thermal Boundary
Conditions on Natural Convection Flows within a Square Cavity,” Int. J. of Heat and
Mass Transfer, Vol. 49, pp. 4525-4535

155
15. D. S. Lin and M. W. Nansteel, “Natural Convection Heat Transfer in a Square Enclosure
Containing Water at its Density Maximum,” Int. J. Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol.30,
No.11, pp. 2319-2328.
16. D. A. S. Rees and J. L. Lage, 1997, “The Effect of Thermal Stratification on Natural
Convection in a Vertical Porous Insulation Layer, “Int. J. Heat and Mass Transfer,
Vol.40, No.1, pp. 111-121.
17. R. Viskanta, D. M. Kim, and C. Gau, 1986, “Three dimensional Natural Convection Heat
Transfer of a Liquid Metal in a Cavity,” Int. Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol.29,
No.3, pp.475-485.
18. W. J. Hiller, S. T. Koch, T. A. Kowalewski, G. de Vahl Davis, and M. Behnia, 1990,
“Experimental and Numerical Investigation of Natural Convection in a Cube with Two-
Heated Side Walls,” Proceedings of IUTAM Symposium, Cambridge, England.
19. J. H. Moh, T. L. Bergman and D. C. Kuo, 1997, “ Simulation of Two-Dimensional ,
Low- Prandtl Number Natural Convection in Harmonically Oscillated , Differentially
Heated Enclosures,” Numerical Heat Transfer, Part A: Applications, Vol. 31, Issue 1, pp.
1-19
20. R. A. W. M. Henkes, F. F. Van Der Vlugt, and C. J. Hoogendoorn, 1991, “Natural-
Convection Flow in a Square Cavity calculated with Low-Reynolds Number Turbulence
Model,” Int. J. of Heat and Mass transfer, Vol.34, no.2, pp. 377-388.
21. E. Evren-Selamet, V. S. Arpaci, and C. Borgnakke, 1992, “Simulation of Laminar
Buoyancy-driven Flows in an Enclosure,” Numerical Heat Transfer; Part A:
Applications, Vol. 22, Issue 4, pp. 401-420
22. C. Xia and J. Y. Murthy, 2002, “ Buoyancy-Driven Flow Transitions in Deep Cavities
Heated from Below,” Journal of Heat Transfer, Vol.124, Issue 4, pp. 650-659
23. Anil Kumar Sharma , K. Velusamy, and C. Balaji, 2007, “ Turbulent Natural Convection
in an Enclosure with Localized Heating from Below,” International Journal of Thermal
Sciences, Vol. 46, Issue 12 , pp.1232-1241
24. D. Elkaim, M. Reggio, and R. Camarero, 1992, “Simulating Two-dimensional Turbulent
Flow by using the k-ε Model and the Vorticity-Stream Function Formulation,”
International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids, Vol. 14, Issue 8, pp. 961-980
25. J. P. Coulter and S. I. Guceri, 1987, “Laminar and Turbulent Natural Convection within
Irregularly Shaped Enclosures,” Numerical Heat Transfer, Part A: Applications, Vol.12,
Issue 2, pp. 211-227
26. C. J. Ho and F. J. Tu, 2001, “ Visualization and Prediction of Natural Convection of
Water Near its Density Maximum in a Tall Rectangular Enclosure at High Rayleigh
Numbers,” Journal of Heat Transfer, Vol.123 , Issue 1, pp. 84-95
27. K. M. Akyuzlu, Y. Pavri and A. Antoniou, 2004, “ A Numerical Study of Unsteady
Natural Convection in Rectangular Enclosure – The Effect of Compressibility,”
Proceedings of IMECE’04, ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and
Exposition
28. S. Mazumder, 2007, “On the Use of the Fully Compressible Navier-Stokes Equations for
the Steady-State Solution of Natural Convection Problems in Closed Cavities,” Journal of
Heat Transfer, Vol.129, pp. 387-390
29. D. D. Gray and A. Giorgini, 1976, “The Validity of the Boussinesq Approximation for
Liquids and Gases,” Int. J. of Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol.19, pp.545-551.

156
30. M. V. Joshi, U. N. Gaitonde, and S. K. Mitra, 2006, “Analytical Study of Natural
Convection in a Cavity With Volumetric Heat Generation,” Transactions of the ASME,
Vol.128, pp.176-182
31. R. Cai and N. Zhang, 2003, “Explicit Analytical Solutions of Incompressible Unsteady 2-
D Laminar Flow with Heat Transfer,” Int. J. of Heat and Mass transfer, Vol. 46, pp. 931-
934
32. T. Fusegi, J. M. Hyun, and K. Kuwahara, 1992, “Numerical Study of Natural Convection
in a Differentially Heated Cavity With Internal Heat Generation: Effects of the Aspect
Ratio,” Journal of Heat Transfer, Vol.114, pp.773-777
33. T. Fusegi, J. M. Hyun, K. Kuwahara, and B. Farouk, 1991, “A Numerical Study of
Three-Dimensional Natural Convection in a Differentially Heated Cubical Enclosure,”
Int. J. of Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol.44, pp. 1543-1557.
34. S. Wakitani, 2001, “ Numerical Study of Three-dimensional Oscillatory Natural
Convection at Low Prandtl Number in Rectangular Enclosures,” Journal of Heat
Transfer, Vol.123, pp. 77- 83
35. G. de Vahl Davis, 1968, “Laminar Natural Convection in an Enclosed Rectangular
Cavity,” Int. J. Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol.11, pp. 1675-1693.
36. K. Kublbeck, G. P. Merker, and J. Straub, 1980, “Advanced Numerical Computation of
Two-Dimensional Time-Dependent Free Convection in Cavities,” Int. J. of Heat and
Mass Transfer, Vol.23, pp. 203-217.
37. P. H. Oosthuizen and J. T. Paul, 2004, “Effect of Wall Thermal Boundary Conditions on
the Development of Three-dimensional, Unsteady Natural Convective Flow in a
Horizontal Enclosure with a Heated Strip on the Lower Surface,” ASME, Heat Transfer
Division, Vol. 375, Issue 3, Article No. IMECE2004-61381, pp. 173-180
38. S. Wakitani., 1997, “Development of Multicellular Solutions in Natural Convection in an
Air-filled Vertical Cavity,” Journal of Heat Transfer, Vol. 119. Pp. 97-
39. K. M. Akyuzlu, A. Antoniou, L. Manalo, and K. Nguyen., 2001, “A Numerical Study of
the effect of Subcooling on Natural Convection in a Densified Cryogenic Propellant,”
Proceedings of the IMECE2001, Paper No. HT-2859, New York, New York.
40. V. F. Nicolette, K. T. Yang, and J. R. Lloyd, 1985, “Transient Cooling by Natural
Convection in a Two-Dimensional Square Enclosure,” Int. J. Heat and Mass Transfer,
Vol. 28, No.9, pp. 1721-1731.
41. A. T. Kirkpatrick and M. Bohn, 1986, “An Experimental Investigation of Mixed Cavity
Natural Convection in the high Rayleigh Number Regime,” Int. Journal of Heat and Mass
Transfer, Vol.29, No.1, pp. 69-82.
42. S. J. M. Linthorst, W. M. M. Schinkel, and C. J. Hoogendoorn, 1981, “Flow Structure
with Natural Convection in Inclined Air-Filled Enclosures,” ASME Journal of Heat
Transfer, Vol.103, pp. 535-539.
43. F. Corvaro and M. Paroncini, 2009, “An Experimental Study of Natural Convection in a
Differentially Heated Cavity Through a 2D-PIV System,” Int. J. of Heat and Mass
transfer, Vol. 52, pp. 355-365
44. F. Corvaro and M.Paroncini, 2007, “ Experimental Aanalysis of Natural Convection in
Square Cavities Heated from Below with 2D-PIV and Holographic Interferometry,”
45. J. L. Wright, H. Jin, K.G.T. Hollands, and D. Naylor, 2006, “Flow Visualization of
Natural Convection in a Tall, Air-filled Vertical Cavity,” Int. J. of Heat and Mass
Transfer, Vol. 49, pp. 889-904

157
46. P. W. Giel, and F. W. Schmidt, 1986, “Experimental Study of High Rayleigh Number
Natural Convection in an Enclosure,” Heat Transfer, Proceedings of the International
Heat Transfer Conference , Vol. 4, pp. 1459-1464
47. F. Ampofo and T. G. Karayiannis, 2003, “Experimental Benchmark Data for Turbulent
Natural Convection in an Air Filled Square Cavity,” Int. J. of Heat and Mass transfer,
Vol. 46, pp. 3551-3572
48. K. M. Akyuzlu, S. Nemani, and K. Chakravarthy, 2003, “An Experimental Study of
Circulation Patterns in Natural Convection Using PIV,” Proceedings of IMECE2003,
Washington, D.C.
49. E. Báez and A. Nicolás, 2006, “ 2D Natural Convection Flows in Tilted Cavities: Porous
Media and Homogeneous Fluids,” Int. J. of Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol. 49, pp. 4773-
4785
50. A. Dalal, M. K. Das, 2005, “Laminar Natural Convection in an Inclined Complicated
Cavity with Spatially Variable Wall Temperature,” Int. J. of Heat and Mass Transfer,
Vol. 48, pp. 3833-3854
51. L. Adjlout, O. Imine, A. Azzi, and M. Belkadi , 2002, “Laminar Natural Convection in an
Inclined Cavity with a Wavy Wall,” Int. J. of Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol. 45, pp.
2141-2152
52. M. De Souza, R. F. De Miranda, H. A. Machado, 2003, “Natural Convection in
Enclosures with Variable Fluid Properties,” International Journal of Numerical Methods
for Heat and Fluid Flow, Vol. 13, Issue 8, pp. 1079-1096
53. M. A. Leal, H. A. Machado, R. M. Cotta , 2000, “Integral Transform Solutions of
Transient Natural Convection in Enclosures with Variable Fluid Properties,” Int. J. of
Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol.43, pp. 3977-3990
54. Z. Y. Zhong, K. T. Yang, and J. R. Lloyd, 1985,“Variable Property Effects in Laminar
Natural Convection in a Square Enclosure”, Journal of Heat Transfer, Vol. 107, Issue 1,
pp. 133-138
55. A.F. Emery and J. W. Lee., 1999, “The Effects of Property Variations on Natural
Convection in a Square Enclosure,” Transactions of the ASME , Vol.121. pp.57-62
56. M. A. Waheed, 2006, “ Temperature Dependent Fluid Properties Effects on the Heat
Function Formulation of Natural Convective Flow and Heat Transfer,” International
Journal of Numerical Methods for Heat and Fluid Flow, Vol. 16, Issue 2, pp. 240-260
57. N. C. Markatos and K. A. Pericleous, 1984, “Laminar and Turbulent Natural Convection
in an Enclosed Cavity,” Int. Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol. 27, pp. 755-772.
58. K. M. Akyuzlu, A. Antoniou, L. Manalo, and K. Nguyen., 2001, “A Numerical Study of
the effect of Subcooling on Natural Convection in a Densified Cryogenic Propellant,”
Proceedings of the IMECE2001, Paper No. HT-2859, New York, New York.
59. L. Manalo, and K. M. Akyuzlu, 2003, “A Study of Unsteady Natural Convection in
Cryogenic Storage Tanks for Densified Propellants,” Proceedings of the ASME
IMECE2003, Paper No.41810, Washington, D.C.
60. M. Zedan and G. E. Schneider, 1985, “A Coupled Strongly Implicit Procedure for Velocity
and Pressure Computation in Fluid Flow Problems,” Numerical Heat transfer, Vol.8, pp.
537-557
61. K. H. Chen, 1990, “A Primitive Variable, Strongly Implicit Calculation Procedure for
Two and Three-Dimensional Unsteady Viscous Flows Applications to Compressible and

158
 Incompressible Flows Including Flows with Free Surfaces,” Ph.D. Dissertation, Iowa State
University, Ames, IA.
62. K.M. Akyuzlu and A. Antoniou., 2004, “A physics based Comprehensive Mathematical
Model to Predict Motor Performance in Hybrid Rocket Propulsion Systems,”
Proceedings of AIAA 2004 Joint Propulsion Conference.
63. A. Antoniou, 2004, “A Physics Based Comprehensive Mathematical Model to Predict
Motor Performance in Hybrid Rocket Propulsion Systems,” Ph.D. Dissertation,
Department of Mechanical engineering, University of New Orleans.
64. Y. Pavri, 2004, “A Numerical Study of Unsteady Natural Convection of a Compressible
Fluid Inside an Enclosed Cavity Using the Coupled Modified Strongly Implicit Method.”
M.S. Thesis, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of New Orleans, New
Orleans, Louisiana.
65. L. Manalo, A Numerical Study of Thermal Stratification Due to Transient Natural
Convection in Densified Liquid Propellent Tanks, Ph. D. Dissertation, University of New
Orleans, New Orleans, LA, 2003
66. U. Ghia, K. N. Ghia, and C. T. Shin, 1982, “High-Re Solutions for Incompressible Flow
Using the Navier-Stokes Equations and a Multigrid Method,” Journal of Computational
Physics, Vol. 48, pp. 387-411
67. K. H. Chen, and R. H. Pletcher, 1991, “Primitive Variable, Strongly Implicit Calculation
Procedure for Viscous Flows at All Speeds,” AIAA Journal, Vol. 29, No. 8, pp. 1241-1249
68. G. H. Golub and C. F. Van Loan. 1983. Matrix Computations. Johns Hopkins University
Press, Baltimore, Maryland.
69. Tannehill, J. C., Anderson, D. A., and Pletcher, R. H., 1984, Computational Fluid
Mechanics and Heat Transfer, Second Edition, Hemisphere, New York.
70. Arpaci, V. S., and Laren, P. S., 1984, Convective Heat Transfer, Prentice-Hall, New
Jersey.
71. Anderson, J. D. Jr., 1995, Computational Fluid Dynamics: The Basics with Applications,
McGraw Hill, Inc., New York.
72. F, M. White., 1991, Viscous Fluid Flow, Second Edition, McGraw Hill, Inc., New York,
pp. 27-30, Chap. 1.
73. Sonntag, R. E., Borgnakke, C., Van Wylen G. J., 1998, Fundamentals of
Thermodynamics, Fifth Edition, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, pp. 113-117,
Chap. 5.
74. Akyuzlu, K. M., 2009, “A Second Order Accurate in Time SIM Algorithm for Solution
of Unsteady Compressible Navier-Stokes equations,” submitted to SIAM Journal of
Numerical Analysis.
75. Akyuzlu, K. M., Albayrak, K., and Karaeren, C., 2009, “A Numerical Study of
Thermoacoustic Oscillations in a Rectangular Channel using CMSIP Method,”
Proceedings of IMECE2009, paper no 13109, Lake Buena Vista, Florida.
76. Akyuzlu, K. M., 2009, “Unsteady Driven Cavity Flow with Moving Boundaries using a
Second Order Accurate in Time CMSIP Algorithm,” submitted to International Journal
for Numerical Methods in Fluids.
77. Akyuzlu, K. M., and Chidurala, M., 2009, “A Numerical Study of Unsteady Natural
Convection in a Rectangular Enclosure – The Effect of Variable Thermodynamic and
Transport Properties,” Proceedings of IMECE 2009, paper no. 13005, Lake Buena Vista,
Florida

159
Appendices

160
 Appendix I

Vector Form of Governing Differential Equations

The continuity equation is given by:

D  
 (   V )  0 (I.1)
Dt

The momentum equations are given by:


DV    u u j 2 u
  g  p  [ ( i  )   i, j k ] (I.2)
Dt x j x j xi 3 x k

where

 i, j  10 if
if
i j
i j 
The energy equation is given by:

Et   Q       
    EtV     q   f  V    ( i , j  V ) (I.3)
t t

where total energy, Et,

V2
Et   (e   PE  ...)
2

and the stress tensor,

 u u j  2 
   i , j u k 

 i , j   p i , j    i  where i, j, k =1, 2, 3
 x j xi  3
 x k 

The heat transfer by conduction in Eq. I.3 is

 
q  k T

161
Equation of state for ideal gas is given by:

p   RT (I.4)

162
 Appendix II

Dimensional Form of Governing Differential Equations

(A. Conservative Form)

The continuity equation is given by:

  
 (  u)  (  v)  0 (IIA.1)
t x y

The momentum equation in the x-direction is given by:

   p  2 u v 
( u)  ( u 2 )  (  uv)     (2  )
t x y x x 3 x  y 
(IIA.2)
  u v 
  (  )   g sin   0
 y   y x 

The momentum equation in the y-direction is given by:

   p
(  v)  (  uv)  ( v 2 ) 
t x y y
(IIA.3)
  u v    2 v u 
   (  )    (2  )  g cos  0
x   y x  y  3  y x 

The energy equation is given by:

  
( c pT )  ( c pT u )  ( c pT v)
t x y
(IIA.4)
 T  T
 (k )  (k )  0
x x y y

163
 Appendix II

Dimensional Form of Governing Differential Equations

(B. Using in terms of Primitive Variables u, v, p, T)

The continuity equation is given by:

  p    pu    pv 
      0 (IIB.1)
t  T   x  T   y  T 

The momentum equation in the x-direction is given by:

  pu    puu    puv   ( R p)  2 u v 
        R (2  )
t  T   x  T   y  T  x x  3 x  y 
(IIB.2)
  u v   p 

y  R  ( y  x )   T  g sin   0
   

The momentum equation in the y-direction is given by:

  pv    puv    pvv   ( R p )
     
t  T   x  T   y  T  y
  u v    2 v u   p 
  R (  )   R (2  )    g cos  0
x   y x  y  3  y x   T 

(IIB.3)

The energy equation is given by:

    T  T
(c p p )  (c p pu)  (c p pv)  (R k )  ( Rk )  0 (IIB.4)
t x y x x y y

164
 Appendix III

Sub Models of Thermodynamic and Transport Properties

1. Variable Specific Heat at Constant Pressure (Cp(T))

Constant-volume and constant-pressure specifics heats are assumed to be functions of
temperature. That is,
Cv= f (T) and Cp= f (T)
because all gases approach ideal-gas behavior as the pressure approaches zero.

The specific heat at constant pressure function of temperature for an ideal gas, C p 0 can be given
as (refer to Sonntag, Engineering Thermodynamics)

C p 0  C 0  C1  C 2 2  C3 3 KJ/Kg K (III.1)

where

T

1000
For Air, values of constants in the above equation are as follows

C 0 = 1.05, C1 = -0.365, C 2 = 0.85, C 3 = -0.39

This approximate form can be valid from 250K to 1200 K

2. Variable Viscosity (μ(T))

A widely used approximation resulted from a kinetic theory by Sutherland (1893) using
an idealized intermolecular-force potential. The formula is (refer to Frank M. White, Viscous
Flow)

3
  T  2 T0  S
 
 0  T0  T  S (III.2)
165
where

 is the Viscosity, N.s/m2

 0 is the Reference value, N.s/m2
T is the Absolute Temperature, K
T0 is the Reference Value, K and
S is the Sutherland Constant, which is characteristic of the gas, K

For Air, Values of constants in the above equation are as follows

 0 = 1.716 x 10-5 N.s/m2

T0 = 273 K

S = 111 K

166
 Appendix IV

Non-Dimensional Form of Governing Differential Equations

Continuity Equation

  p    pu    p v 
     0 (IV.1)
t  T  x  T   y  T 

Momentum equation in x-direction

  pu    pu u    pu v  
       R p 
t  T  x  T  y  T  x
1  2 u v  1   u v  1  p 
  R  (2  )  1 2  R  (  )    sin  0
Gr x  3
12
x  y  Gr y   y x  Fr  T 
(IV.2)

Momentum equation in y-direction

  pv    p u v    p v v  
      R p 
t  T  x  T  y  T  y
1   v u  1   2 v u  1  p 
  R  (  )  1 2  R  (2  )    cos 0
Gr x 
12
x  y  Gr y  3  y x  Fr  T 

(IV.3)

167
Energy equation


c p p    c p pu    c p pv   1 1 2   R c p  T 
t x y Pr Gr x  x 
(IV.4)
1   T 
  R c p  0
Pr Gr y 
12
y 

168
 Appendix V

Formula to Calculate the Lower [L] and Upper [U] Matrices for

CMSIP Method

The lower and upper diagonal matrices [L], and [U] have the following form

e1,1 
 
  
   
 
  
  
 
    
L  
ai , j bi , j ci , j d i , j ei , j 
      
 
  
 
  
      
 
      

169
      
      
 
      
 
  
  
 
   
U 
1 ai , j bi , j ci , j d i, j 
 
     
 
    
   
 
   
  


The elements of these matrices are calculated using the following formulas:

ai , j  Ai6, j (V.1)

bi , j  ( Ai5, j  ai , j fi 1, j 1   Ai4, j f i 1, j 1 ) (1   fi , j 1 f i 1, j 1 ) 1 (V.2)

ci , j  Ai4, j  bi , j fi , j 1 (V.3)

di , j  ( Ai7, j  ai , j hi 1, j 1  bi , j gi , j 1  2 ai , j gi 1, j ) (1   gi 1, j ) 1 (V.4)

ei , j  ( Ai9, j  ai , j hi 1, j 1  bi , j g i , j 1  2 ai , j g i 1, j  d i , j f i 1, j )

(V.5)
  (2 i1, j   i2, j   i3, j  2 i4, j )

f i , j  (ei , j ) 1 ( Ai3, j  bi , j si , j 1  ci , j hi 1, j 1  2 ( i1, j   i3, j )) (V.6)

g i , j  (ei , j ) 1 ( Ai8, j  d i , j hi 1, j ) (V.7)

g i , j  (ei , j ) 1 ( Ai3, j  bi , j si , j 1  ci , j hi 1, j 1  2 ( i1, j   i3, j )) (V.8)

170
 hi , j  (ei , j ) 1 ( Ai1, j  d i , j si 1, j   i4, j ) (V.9)

si , j  (ei , j ) 1 ( Ai2, j ) (V.10)

where  i1, j  ci , j f i 1, j 1 (V.11)

 i2, j  ai , j g i 1, j 1 (V.12)

 i3, j  ci , j si 1, j 1 (V.13)

 i4, j  d i , j g i 1, j (V.14)

171
 Appendix VI

Flow Chart for the Computer Program

(A. First Order Accurate in Time Model)

Natural Convection Program

START

Read input parameters

(Operating, Geometrical, Transport,
Non-dimensional, Computational)

Calculate physical
location of each node

Initializes the unknown

vectors of u, v, p, T

Initializes the counters

(time*=0, TIMEWR*=0, TIMEWRH*=0)
100
=0)
yes
If time = 0 Store Initial values of
u, v and T at vmax

no
Update counters with time increment Δt
(time= time + Δt, TIMEWR = TIMEWR+Δt,
TIMEWRH = TIMEWRH + Δt)

Calculates present values by assuming

future values of u, v, P, T and assign
boundary values to u, v and T

Call MODPVAR, To solve for unknown matrix X Continued

Continued on p.173 using Linearization and SIP algorithm (see p.174) on p.173

172
Continued on p.172
Continued from p.172

If time < (2 x Δt) yes Store output values of

u, v, p, T

no

TIMEWR > yes Store output values of

TIMEOUT u, v, p, T

no Creates data for

counterplots of u, v, p, T

Set TIMEWR = 0

yes
TIMEWRH > Store final values of
TIMEOUTH
u, v and T at vmax

no Set TIMEWRH = 0

no
Time < TIMESM

yes

Print the spatial coordinates,

x and y values

Creates data for counterplots

of u, v, p, T

STOP

173
 MODPVAR
(Subroutine for Modification of Primitive Variables using Linearization Iteration)

START

Initializes the counters

(l=0, k=0, IFLAG* =0)

Assigns the boundary values

to dummy matrix XV

Update the linearization counter

(l = l + 1)

Re-define coefficient matrix A

If time < (2 x Δt) yes Check dominance

factor for matrix A

Find inverse of matrix A

Define known vector b

Separate matrix A into lower (L)

and upper (U) matrices

Find inverse of matrix A

Call SIP
To solve unknown matrix X using
SIP algorithm (see p.175)

Check convergence criteria for

modified primitive variables
(refer to Eq. 5.24)

RETURN

174
 SIP
(Subroutine to Solve Unknown Primitive Variables using Strongly Implicit Procedure)

START

Initializes the counters

(k=0, IFLAG=0)

3
Assigns ASCII values of unknown matrix
X to previous unknown matrix X1

Update SIP counters (k=k+1)

Calculates R vector to solve for

unknown matrix X

Calculates W vector to solve for

unknown matrix X

Calculates D vector to solve for

unknown matrix X

Calculates initial values for

inner cells

Check the convergence criteria for

Strongly Implicit Procedure (SIP)

Calculates initial values for boundary

cells using inner cells

Assigns ASCII values of unknown

matrix X to previous unknown matrix X1

IFLAG=0
yes no RETURN

175
* List of Program Variables used in the Flow Chart
Time – Non-dimensional time
TIMESH - Total time of simulation
TIMEOUT - Time interval for prints

TIMEOUTH - Time interval for histograms

IFLAG - Conditional counter
TIMEWR - Time to write ASCII values of output primitive variables
TIMEWRH - Time to write ASCII values of output primitive variables as histogram data

176
 Appendix VI

Flow Chart for the Computer Program

(B. Second Order Accurate in Time Model)

Natural Convection Program

START

Read input parameters

(Operating, Geometrical, Transport,
Non-dimensional, Computational)

Calculate physical
location of each node

Initializes the unknown

vectors of u, v, p, T

Initializes the counters

(time*=0, TIMEWR*=0, TIMEWRH*=0)
100
=0)
yes
If time = 0 Store Initial values of
u, v and T at vmax

no
Update counters with time increment Δt
(time= time + Δt, TIMEWR = TIMEWR+Δt,
TIMEWRH = TIMEWRH + Δt)

Calculates present values by assuming

future values of u, v, P, T and assign
boundary values to u, v and T

Call MODPVAR, To solve for unknown matrix X Continued

Continued on p.178 using Linearization and SIP algorithm (see p.179) on p.178

177
Continued from p.177
Continued from p.177

If time < (2 x Δt) yes Store output values of

u, v, p, T

no

TIMEWR > yes Store output values of

TIMEOUT u, v, p, T

no Creates data for

counterplots of u, v, p, T

Set TIMEWR = 0

yes
TIMEWRH > Store final values of
TIMEOUTH
u, v and T at vmax

no Set TIMEWRH = 0

no
Time < TIMESM

yes

Print the spatial coordinates,

x and y values

Creates data for counterplots

of u, v, p, T

STOP

178
 MODPVAR
(Subroutine for Modification of Primitive Variables using Linearization Iteration)

START

Initializes the counters

(l=0, k=0, IFLAG* =0)
2
Assigns the boundary values
to dummy matrix XV

Update the linearization counter

(l = l + 1)

Re-define coefficient matrix A

If time < (2 x Δt) yes Check dominance

factor for matrix A

Find inverse of matrix A

Define known vector b

Separate matrix A into lower (L)

and upper (U) matrices

Find inverse of matrix A

Call SIP
To solve unknown matrix X using
SIP algorithm (see p.181)

Check convergence criteria for

modified primitive variables
(refer to Eq. 5.24)

Continued to p.180 Continued to p.180

179
Continued from p.179

Continued from p.179

no
IFLAG = 0

yes

Update the pressure at each node using

pressure smoothening function
(refer to Eq. 5.26)

RETURN

180
 SIP
(Subroutine to Solve Unknown Primitive Variables using Strongly Implicit Procedure)

START

Initializes the counters

(k=0, IFLAG=0)

3
Assigns ASCII values of unknown matrix
X to previous unknown matrix X1

Update SIP counters (k=k+1)

Calculates R vector to solve for

unknown matrix X

Calculates W vector to solve for

unknown matrix X

Calculates D vector to solve for

unknown matrix X

Calculates initial values for

inner cells

Check the convergence criteria for

Strongly Implicit Procedure (SIP)

Calculates initial values for boundary

cells using inner cells

Assigns ASCII values of unknown

matrix X to previous unknown matrix X1

IFLAG=0
yes no RETURN

181
* List of Program Variables used in the Flow Chart
Time – Non-dimensional time
TIMESH - Total time of simulation
TIMEOUT - Time interval for prints

TIMEOUTH - Time interval for histograms

IFLAG - Conditional counter
TIMEWR - Time to write ASCII values of output primitive variables
TIMEWRH - Time to write ASCII values of output primitive variables as histogram data

182
 Appendix VII

Program Parameters – Common to all Runs

List of program Parameters used in the Computer Program that are common to all runs:

AR = 1

g = 9.81 m/s2

= 2.21 x 105 m/s2

R = 287.0 J/Kg-K

cp0 = 1006.5 J/Kg-K

μ0 = 1.716 x 10-5 J/Kg-K

Pr = 0.72

γ = 1.4

= 0.2

= 1.0 x 10-7

= 1.0 x 10-7

183
 Appendix VIII

Program Parameters - Specific to Each Run

List of parameters that are specific to the Base Run:

Mesh size: 21 x 21

Δ = 1 x 10-5

Ra = 1 x 105

Gr = 1.413265 x 105

pref = 1 x 105 N/m2

Tref = 300 K

uref = 0.232073 m/s (calculated)

Lref = 0.0254 m

ΔT = 64.84 K

Th = 332.42 K (calculated)

Tc = 267.58 K (calculated)

Fr = 0.464914

184
 Vita

Manohar Chidurala was born on August 31, 1984 in Mutharam, Andhra Pradesh, India.

He received his bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering from the Jawaharlal Nehru

Technological University, Hyderabad, India in June, 2006. He was admitted to the University of

New Orleans as a graduate student in mechanical engineering. During the course of his study, he

worked as a graduate teaching assistant and had a chance to assistant in fluid mechanics and

thermal sciences Laboratories. His research interests include fluid mechanics, heat transfer and

computational fluid dynamics. In August 2009, he was granted a Master of Science degree in

mechanical engineering from the University of New Orleans.

185