, Volume 19, Issue 5, pp 765–783 | Cite as

Finite element/finite volume approaches with adaptive time stepping strategies for transient thermal problems

  • Ram V Mohan
  • Kumar K Tamma
Computational Heat Transfer


Transient thermal analysis of engineering materials and structures by space discretization techniques such as the finite element method (FEM) or finite volume method (FVM) lead to a system of parabolic ordinary differential equations in time. These semidiscrete equations are traditionally solved using the generalized trapezoidal family of time integration algorithms which uses a constant single time step. This single time step is normally selected based on the stability and accuracy criteria of the time integration method employed. For long duration transient analysis and/or when severe time step restrictions as in nonlinear problems prohibit the use of taking a larger time step, a single time stepping strategy for the thermal analysis may not be optimal during the entire temporal analysis. As a consequence, an adaptive time stepping strategy which computes the time step based on the local truncation error with a good global error control may be used to obtain optimal time steps for use during the entire analysis. Such an adaptive time stepping approach is described here. Also proposed is an approach for employing combinedFEM/FVM mesh partitionings to achieve numerically improved physical representations. Adaptive time stepping is employed thoughout to practical linear/nonlinear transient engineering problems for studying their effectiveness in finite element and finite volume thermal analysis simulations.


Transient thermal analysis finite element method finite volume method temporal analysis 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Baliga B R, Patankar S V 1983 A control volume finite element method for two dimensional fluid flow and heat transfer.Numer. Heat Transfer 6: 263–282zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Banaszek J 1984 A conservative finite element method for heat conduction problems.Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 20: 2033–2050zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bathe K J 1982Finite element procedures in engineering analysis (Englewood Cliffs,NJ: Prentice-Hall)Google Scholar
  4. Eriksson K, Johnson C 1987 Error estimators and automatic time step control for nonlinear parabolic problems-I.SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 24: 12–23zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. Hughes T J R 1987The finite element method (Englewood Cliffs,NJ: Prentice-Hall)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. Johnson C 1988 Error estimates and adaptive time-step control for a class of one-step methods for stiff ordinary differential equations.SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 25: 908–926zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. Lax P D, Wendroff B 1964 Difference schemes for hyperbolic equations with high order accuracy.Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 17: 381zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. Namburu R R, Tamma K K 1991 Applicability/evaluation of flux based representations for linear/higher order elements for heat transfer in structures: Generalizedγ T-family.In AIAA 29th Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Reno, NevadaGoogle Scholar
  9. Ouyang T, Tamma K K 1992 On adaptive time stepping approaches for thermal solidification processes. InProc. ASME Winter Annual Meeting, Anaheim, CA, ASME AMD, vol. 157Google Scholar
  10. Owen D R J, Damjanic F 1983 Reduced numerical integration in thermal transient finite element analysis.Comput. Struc. 17: 261–276zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. Patankar S V 1980Numerical heat transfer and fluid flow (New York: McGraw-Hill)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. Patankar S V, Baliga B R 1978 A new finite-difference scheme for parabolic differential equations.Numer. Heat Transfer 1: 27–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Richtmeyer R D, Morton K W 1967Difference methods for initial value problems. Interscience Tracts in Pure and Applied Mathematics-Number 4 (New York: Interscience)Google Scholar
  14. Schneider G E 1982 Control volume based finite element formulation of the heat conduction equation. In3rd AIAA/ASME Joint Thermophysics, Fluids, Plasma and Heat Transfer Conference, St. Louis,MO Google Scholar
  15. Schneider G E, Zedan M 1983 Control volume based finite element formulation of the heat conduction equation.Prog. Astronaut. Aeronaut. 86: 305–327Google Scholar
  16. Tamma K K, Namburu 1989 Explicit Lax-Wendroff/Taylor-Galerkin second-order accurate formulations involving flux representations for effective finite element thermal analysis. InAIAA 27th Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Reno, Nevada,AIAA-89-0521Google Scholar
  17. Taylor R L, Zienkiewicz O C, Baynham J M 1983 Mixed and irreducible formulations in finite element analysis.Hybrid and mixed finite element methods. (New York: John Wiley and Sons)Google Scholar
  18. Thomea V, Johnson C, Nie Y 1990 Ana posteriori error estimate and adaptive time step control for a backward Euler discretization of a parabolic problem.SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 27: 277–291CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  19. Williams S D, Curry D M 1977 An implicit-iterative solution of the heat conduction equation with a radiation boundary condition.Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 11: 1605–1619zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Zienkiewicz O C, Cheung Y K 1965 Finite elements in the solution of field problems.The Engineer: 507–510Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Indian Academy of Sciences 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ram V Mohan
    • 1
  • Kumar K Tamma
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Mechanical Engineering, Institute of TechnologyUniversity of MinnesotaMinneapolisUSA

Personalised recommendations