Advertisement

An extension of Oberbeck–Boussinesq approximation for thermal convection problems

  • Bernardo Alan de Freitas Duarte
  • Rafael Romão da Silva Melo
  • Millena Martins Villar
  • Ricardo Serfaty
  • Aristeu da Silveira Neto
Technical Paper
  • 58 Downloads

Abstract

An extension of the Oberbeck–Boussinesq approximation (OB) with expressive thermal effects is investigated to model specific mass with a temperature-dependent approach. An expansion of OB is proposed using a mathematical formulation with null velocity divergence in the continuity equation and variable specific mass in the momentum and energy equations (NOB). The NOB method has been previously tested in the literature, and the present paper aims to carry out a quantitative analysis between NOB and OB. The specific mass is calculated based on the temperature field and a divergence-free velocity is imposed on the NOB due to the small effects of variations of the specific mass in the continuity equation, as previously demonstrated by the OB. The purpose of the NOB is to overcome the OB’s restriction to single-phase flows, as well as to model the effects of specific mass variations more accurately, especially in problems with prominent thermal transfer effects, as that occur in the turbulent regime. Since the effects of a variable specific mass in the momentum and energy equations were taken into account by the NOB, it was expected that the thermal transfer results of the NOB would be improved compared with those of the OB. Then, three-dimensional natural convection simulations for a large range of Rayleigh numbers were performed using OB and NOB in a cubic cavity. Turbulence modeling was performed using Large Eddy Simulation (LES). Numerical results from both approaches were validated and all the results presented good quality. Thermal transfer was evaluated by the calculation of the Nusselt number at the heated wall and compared to experimental data from the literature. The OB and NOB provided adequate thermal transfer rate results; however, the differences between the literature and OB were higher than for NOB. Therefore, NOB is presented as a useful mathematical formulation for modeling incompressible flows with a temperature-dependent specific mass approach in single-phase or multiphase problems instead of solving the full compressible mathematical formulation. In addition, the differences between the literature and OB results increased as the Rayleigh number was raised, especially in the turbulent regime. The results of the NOB were closer to the literature than were those of the OB for the entire range of Rayleigh numbers tested. Therefore, the numerical results confirmed the higher accuracy of NOB compared to OB despite the NOB’s still being an approximate model. Lastly, flow visualization allowed the identification of coherent turbulent structures near the cavity walls in the simulation with Rayleigh number \(10^{10}\). The presence of hairpin and Tollmien–Schlichting instabilities revealed the importance of modeling the three-dimensional effects of natural convection in the turbulent regime.

Keywords

Natural convection Variable specific mass Temperature-dependent properties Buoyancy Tollmien–Schlichting instability 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge financial support from Petrobras, CNPQ, Fapemig and Capes. The authors are also grateful to the mechanical engineering graduate program from the Federal University of Uberlândia (UFU).

References

  1. 1.
    Markatos NC, Pericleous KA (1984) International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 27:755.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0017-9310(84)90145-5
  2. 2.
    Montiel-Gonzalez M, Hinojosab J, Villafn-Vidalesc H, Bautista-Orozcoc A, Estrada C (2015) Applied Thermal Engineering 75:1176.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2014.05.047
  3. 3.
    Gray DD, Giordini A (1976) Int J Heat Mass Transf 19:545.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0017-9310(76)90168-X CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zeytounian RK (2003) Comptes Rendus Mecanique 331:575.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1631-0721(03)00120-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Boussinesq J (1903) Theorie Analytique de la Chaleur, vol. 2. Gauthier-Villars, Paris.  https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511693229
  6. 6.
    Darbouli M, Metivier C, Leclerc S, Nouar C, Bouteera M, Stemmelen D (2016) Int J Heat Mass Transf 95:742.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2015.12.056 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wan D, Patnaik B, Wei G (2001) Numer Heat Transf 40:199.  https://doi.org/10.1080/104077901752379620 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kizildag D, Rodrquez I, Oliva A, Lehmkuhl O (2014) Int J Heat Mass Transf 68:489.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2013.09.046 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wang P, Zhang Y, Guo Z (2017) Int J Heat Mass Transf 113:217.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2017.05.057 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Poling BE, Prausnitz JM, O’Connell JP (2001) The properties of gases and liquids. McGraw-Hill.  https://doi.org/10.1036/0070116822
  11. 11.
    Leong WH, Hollands KGT, Brunger AP (1999) Int J Heat Mass Transf 42:1979.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0017-9310(98)00299-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
  13. 13.
    Kang S, Iaccarino G, Ham F (2009) J Comput Phys 228:3189.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2008.12.037 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
  15. 15.
    Centrella JM, Wilson JR (1984) Astrophys J Suppl Ser 54:229.  https://doi.org/10.1086/190927 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Germano M, Piomelli U, Moin P, Cabot WH (1991) Phys Fluids A: Fluid Dyn 3:1760CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lilly D (1992) Phys Fluids A: Fluid Dyn 4:633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Akhtar M, Kleis S (2013) Int J Multiphase Flow 53:88.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmultiphaseflow.2013.01.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Krane RJ, Jessee J (1983) Proc First ASME-JSME Thermal Eng Joint Conf 1:323Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Padilla E, Loureno M, Silveira-Neto A (2013) J Brazil Soc Mech Sci Eng 35:275.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40430-013-0033-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cowan GH, Lovegrove PC, Quarini GL (1982) Int Heat Transf Conf 7(15):195Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Manuilovich SV (1994) Nonlinear Instab Nonparallel Flows 96:160.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-85084-413 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lesieur M (2008) Turbulence in fluids. Springer, BerlinCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bernardo Alan de Freitas Duarte
    • 1
  • Rafael Romão da Silva Melo
    • 1
  • Millena Martins Villar
    • 1
  • Ricardo Serfaty
    • 2
  • Aristeu da Silveira Neto
    • 1
  1. 1.Federal University of UberlândiaUberlândiaBrazil
  2. 2.CENPESRio de JaneiroBrazil

Personalised recommendations