Compare with 1mm gap zeroForced and natural convection #9
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…onvection is 0. The energy gain of NaturalConvection is 0.0439 W/m². Both is plausible.
|
@simon-wacker Can you please update the numbers of the two new tests? Shall I delete the result files before merging into add-gaps-with-forced-convection? |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
In order to validate the implementation of forced convection, create two tests each with two layers and a gap of 1 mm. The first tests uses natural convection for this gap. The second test uses forced convection with a gap air speed of zero. Both tests should have almost the same results, because the natural convection is very weak for such a small gap and results in an air speed of almost zero.
Both tests have almost the same results. The validation was successful.