1)

2)
3)

4)
Exercise 3_

1)

TEMPARUTRE (K) DENSITY (kg/m^3)

280 999.99
285 999.5
290 998.78
295 997.77
300 996.52
305 995.03
310 993.34
315 991.45
320 989.37
325 987.13
330 984.73
335 982.17
340 979.47
345 976.63
350 973.65

Density v/s Temparture (p=1atm)

1005
Density v/s Temparture (p=1atm)

1000

995
Density (kg/m3)

990

985

980

975

970
280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 360
Temparuture (K)

2) Yes, I could identify the convection cells in the simulation and is evident in the image below.
3)

Velocity vectors are shown as small arrows

DENSITY
 TEMPARTURE

Convection of fluid flow happens between the flat plates due to the density difference created by the temperature
gradient along the section. This convection phenomena is responsible for both the heat and mass transfer happening
(mixing) between the plates. In case of water as the temperature increases the density decreases and hence becomes
lighter in weight and hence moves up and the less hot water settles down to the bottom. This phenomenon continues as
long as the temperature gradient is maintained. Due to continuous mixing the temperature gradient decreases and will
achieve an equilibrium temperature. As long as the temperature gradient is higher the speed of convection will be more,
that is ,heated water will be moving at higher velocity to the top plate and then to the center of the plate due to the
turbulence. Since the temperature of water is high near the bottom plate the density of water will be lower there, which
is evident from the simulations. Because of the turbulent mixing of the water at the center of the section, heat transfer
is high and hence is more likely to attain an equilibrium temperature similar with the case of velocity and density
4)

Four different streamlines are shown from different parts of the flow region.

5)
a. Earlier the velocity field had symmetry around the midsection of the plane but in shear driven model it is lost.

b. Both the magnitude and the velocity distribution of the flow was altered when shear driven model was used instead
of buoyancy model .In the buoyancy model maximum velocity was achieved at the bottom and top of the section due to
the temperature gradient, but in shear driven model velocity is maximum at one corner of the section as seen in the
simulation. There is a variation of 25% in the magnitude of velocity obtained.

c. The vortex formed due to the convection has moved to the right corner of the section in shear driven model but is
centered around the mid section in the buoyancy model.

d. I guess the software is trying to incorporate an additional shear force in the top layer of the section, as the main driver
for the convection which is wrong in our case as the top plate is not moving.
6)

a) As the mesh size is increased the no of iterations is decreased but there is variation in the results obtained. The
magnitude of velocity is higher in case of 7mm mesh and is lower in case of 3.5 mm mesh. Almost 30% variation in
results was seen compared to the 3.5mm mesh. As the mesh size is increased the accuracy of results is decreased but
time can be saved due to less no of calculations.

b)even though accuracy is reduced, the velocity distribution matches in both the cases, so depending upon the accuracy
needed for the calculations different mesh sizes can be selected for the same model.

7) The dynamic viscosity of the water also changes with the temperature, but it was not taken into account in the initial
simulations, it was kept constant. But in this simulation the variation of dynamic viscosity was also taken into account.

The striking difference is the magnitude of the velocity and also the presence of two convection cells or vortices in the
same section. The velocity of the flow is very less compared to the earlier simulation in magnitude .The presence of two
vortices shows high level of turbulence compared with the earlier simulation and hence mixing is much more efficient.
The momentum transfer and the heat transfer is high, which can be seen from the almost similar velocity vectors (there
are more number of blue arrows compared to the earlier simulation showing uniform velocity in the section.)

Also striking is the less number of velocity vectors at the center of the section compared to the sides of the section.
Which means the flow density more on the sides than in the middle of the section.

8) The physical model to be selected for simulation is of very high importance as can be seen from all the results of the
simulations above. When shear driven model was used instead of buoyancy driven there was a variation in the
magnitude of 25% in the results obtained .Also with the, changing dynamic viscosity model the variation in results was
near to 30%. The variation in results is unacceptable incase if the results were used to design a model. Hence it becomes
imperative to understand the physics behind the problem before doing the simulation to arrive at the correct, accurate
results.