{"id":347475,"date":"2024-01-31T06:48:50","date_gmt":"2024-01-31T06:48:50","guid":{"rendered":"\/forum\/forums\/reply\/347475\/"},"modified":"2024-01-31T06:48:50","modified_gmt":"2024-01-31T06:48:50","slug":"347475","status":"publish","type":"reply","link":"https:\/\/innovationspace.ansys.com\/forum\/forums\/reply\/347475\/","title":{"rendered":"Reply To: Difference in Analytical and Simulation results"},"content":{"rendered":"

<p>Hello<\/p><p>How does the numerical solution compare with experimental results?<\/p><p>It is possible to model a smaller domain if the actual geometry and physics allow. If the reduction in domain is appropriately accounted for in the form of geometry and boundary conditions in Fluent, you should get accurate results. <\/p><p>Given that different analytical results are obtained for “full” and “half” domains, I would suggest going with full domain, which would be simpler. “Halving” a domain needs to be appropriately accounted for in the analytical treatment as well in the effectiveness relations that may have been used. <\/p><p>If not checked out already, I would suggest visiting the following materials on AIS which could be of some help<\/p><p>How Heat Exchangers Work | Ansys Innovation Courses<\/a><\/p><p>Forced Convective Heat Transfer in a 2D Staggered Tube Bundle — Simulation Example – ANSYS Innovation Courses<\/a><\/p><p> <\/p><p>Thank you<\/p><p>Regards<\/p><p>Kishan<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"template":"","class_list":["post-347475","reply","type-reply","status-publish","hentry"],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t