Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Received November 12, 2012; revised February 21, 2013; accepted February 28, 2013
Copyright 2013 Ali Sahili et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which
permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
ABSTRACT
In this paper we present a full-geometry Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) modeling of air flow distribution from
an automotive engine cooling fan. To simplify geometric modeling and mesh generation, different solution domains
have been considered, the Core model, the Extended-Hub model, and the Multiple Reference Frame (MRF) model. We
also consider the effect of blockage on the flow and pressure fields. The Extended-Hub model simplifies meshing
without compromising accuracy. Optimal locations of the computational boundary conditions have been determined for
the MRF model. The blockage results in significant difference in pressure rise, and the difference increases with in-
creasing flow rates. Results are in good agreement with data obtained from an experimental test facility. Finally, we
consider Simplified Fan Models which simplifies geometric modeling and mesh generation and significantly reduce the
amount of computer memory used and time needed to carry out the calculations. Different models are compared in re-
gards to efficiency and accuracy. The effect of using data from different planes is considered to optimize performance.
The effect of blockage on simplified models is also considered.
From the transient simulation, they obtained the velocity airfoil data was used to determine the momentum sources
and pressure signals which showed that the peak signal which were written as functions of the local flow condi-
frequencies show strong correlation to the blade passing tions. The results showed that this model is able to accu-
frequencies and the fan rpm. They suggested that further rately predict the circulation distribution along the span of
work needs to be done in order to compare the fan curves the rotor blades, the rotor load distribution, the induced
with experimental results and to determine the validity of velocities in the respective coordinate directions, the in-
the frequency component due to the fan rpm. tegrated performance, and the path of the tip vortex.
Most simplified fan models are based on one or on a Reference [10] developed a three-dimensional nu-
combination of the following theories: the actuator disk merical method to simulate the asymmetric flow through
theory, the blade element theory and the vortex theory. high-speed low hub-to-ratio blade rows. Compressor
The actuator disk theory replaces the fan, which has a blade rows were modeled using actuator disks that pro-
finite number of blades, with another which has an infinite vide boundary conditions to the numerical calculation
number of blades. The fan blade loading is distributed domains. The boundary conditions used are: conservation
over a disk of zero thickness. of mass, conservation of radial momentum, conservation
In the blade element theory, the blade is divided into a of rothalpy, relative exit flow angle, and entropy rise. A
number of blade elements or sections and each section is simple choking model was incorporated into the actuator
treated as an isolated two-dimensional aerofoil. It is as- disk boundary conditions based upon two-dimensional
sumed that the forces on the blade due to its motion flow into a choked section. The author concluded that the
through the fluid are dependent only on the aerofoil method they developed has the capability to faithfully
aerodynamic properties and the relative fluid velocity. represent the performance of a high-speed rotor for certain
These forces are decomposed into normal and tangential flow conditions provided suitable loss and deviation rules
forces from which the lift and drag coefficients are de- and an appropriate choking model are used. In a com-
termined at the various sections. The influence of the panion paper [11], the author discussed the application of
wake and the rest of the fan are contained in the induced the above method to the problem of calculating the
angle of attack at the section. Blade element theory pro- asymmetric performance of a turbofan operating behind a
vides a lot of details about the flow field, but its treatment non-axisymmetric intake and due to the presence of the
of the induced effects is approximate, no account of flow engine pylon. He reported good agreement with experi-
rotation is taken, and the blade loading prediction is not mental results and with results obtained from three-di-
accurate near the blade tip [5]. mensional simulation of an isolated fan operating with a
In the vortex theory, the flow field of the rotor wake is non-axisymmetric inlet.
resolved using the fluid dynamic laws that govern the The unsteady case was investigated by [12]. These
action and influence of vorticity [6]. The fixed wake authors used the Gormont model to model the dynamic
model uses a vortex sheet that is locally independent of stall effects on the blade aerodynamic characteristics. This
time, and the blade forces are determined using the Kutta- model calculates the dynamic lift and drag coefficients
Joukowski law. The major shortcoming of this model is based upon aerofoil characteristics and blade kinematic
that the far wake boundary condition constrains the flow parameters such as the time derivative of the geometric
to be parallel to the free stream and does not allow it to angle of attack. Comparisons between predicted and
diverge. The free vortex model represents the blade by a measured flapwise bending moments, normal force coef-
bound vortex sheet and the wake by force-free shed vor- ficients and power production were made. They reported
tices. The free vortex model captures the fine details of the that the Gormont dynamic stall model successfully pre-
flow and the transient characteristics of the rotor. How- dicts the aerodynamic behavior of the blade tip sections,
ever, it is very expensive in terms of computer time. but fails below 63% span. They suggested that fine-tuning
Reference [7] performed actuator disk experiments and of the empirical constants of the Gormont model should
showed that the momentum theory under-predicts the be undertaken in order to improve the accuracy of the
maximum power by up to 10%. This may be largely due to predictions. Predicted induced velocity results of the wind
the behavior of the blade tip vortex, which is not ac- turbine operating in yawed flows were in agreement with
counted for by the theory. This effect is likely even more results based on Glauerts theoretical analysis. Also, pre-
pronounced when the fan is encompassed by a shroud as dictions of power production and flapwise bending mo-
in the engine cooling module. ments were shown to be close to measurements.
References [8,9] developed a procedure to analyze the Reference [13] investigated the efficiency of the dif-
flow field and performance of helicopter rotors. The flow ferent pressure interpolation schemes that are available in
was assumed to be steady, laminar, and axisymmetric, and Fluent for the prediction of HAWTs performances. In the
the rotor was represented by point momentum sources mathematical model that was employed, the flow field
distributed along the span of the rotor. Tabulated sectional around the turbine is described by the incompressible
dependent variables that are specified at the boundaries model and focuses on the mechanisms that affect the
of the fluid domain. Because of viscosity, the relative turbulent kinetic energy and its dissipation rate [19].
velocity between the fluid and a solid wall is zero. This is The transport equations for k and are
the no-slip condition for viscous fluids. Since u is the
absolute velocity of the fluid, this condition means that Dk t k
Gk
Dt xi k xi
u wall VW
and
where VW is the absolute velocity of the wall. If the
wall is at rest, then VW 0 , and the wall boundary con- D t 2
C1 Gk C2
dition becomes Dt xi xi k k
ut u t 0 where Gk represents the generation of turbulent kinetic
un u n 0 energy due to the mean velocity gradients and is given by
where t is the local unit tangent vector in any direction u j
Gk uiu j .
on the surface of the wall and n is the unit normal on xi
the wall surface. Here, ut and un are the tangential where ui represents the velocity fluctuations from the
and normal components, respectively, of the fluid veloc- mean, and overbar indicated Reynolds averaged quanti-
ity u on the wall. ties.
Sometimes it may be appropriate to impose the slip The eddy or turbulent viscosity is computed from
boundary condition at a solid wall even though the flow
in general is viscous. In this case the fluid is treated as k2
t C .
inviscid, and boundary condition on this wall becomes
ut 0 , and un 0 In these equations, C1 , C2 and C are constants
determined from experiments. k and are the
This condition is also referred to as the zero shear turbulent Prandtl numbers for k and , respectively.
stress wall boundary condition. If two walls form a peri-
odic pair then, for any flow variable , the condition
3. Mesh Generation
that must be imposed is
All meshing related to this work is accomplished using
wall1 wall2 the ICEM/Hexa grid module from ICEM CFD Engi-
neering [20]. One of the most important capabilities of
The axis boundary type must be used as the centerline
Hexa is elliptic smoothing. Mesh generation is an inte-
of an axisymmetric geometry. It can also be used for the
gral part of any numerical scheme, and the quality of the
centerline of a cylindrical-polar quadrilateral or hexahe-
mesh affects both the accuracy and stability of the nu-
dral grid. To determine the appropriate physical value for
merical computation. The properties associated with mesh
a particular variable at a point on the axis, the cell value
quality include smoothness, grid point clustering, cell
in the adjacent cell is used. A" velocity distribution is
shape, and orthogonality.
specified at the inlet, and at the outlet the condition of
Since the continuous physical domain is represented
radial pressure distribution is specified. At the inlet,
by a discrete mesh, the degree to which the salient fea-
V n is always negative indicating that the flow is into
tures of the flow (such as shear layers, separated regions,
the flow domain.
and boundary layers) are resolved depends on the density
and distribution of nodes in the mesh. Poor resolution in
2.4. Turbulence Modeling
regions with strong flow gradients can dramatically alter
Most fluid flows encountered in engineering practice are the flow characteristics. For example, the prediction of
turbulent, and certainly this is the case in turbomachinery separation due to an adverse pressure gradient depends
flows. To this date, there is no single turbulence model heavily on the resolution of the boundary layer upstream
that is best for all classes of problems. The choice of a of the point of separation. The proper resolution of the
model for a specific problem depends on many factors boundary layer (i.e., mesh spacing near walls) also plays
such as the physics of the flow under consideration, the a significant role in the accuracy of the computed wall
level of accuracy required, the available computational shear stresses. Numerical results for turbulent flows tend
resources, and the amount of time available for the simu- to be more susceptible to grid dependency than those for
lation. In this work we use the standard k model laminar flows because of the strong interaction of the
which is the most widely used and validated turbulence mean flow and turbulence. For the standard k tur-
model. The standard k model is a semi-empirical bulence model with wall functions, the distance from the
4.1. Discretization of the Governing Equations culations. The STANDARD scheme interpolates the
pressure values at the faces using momentum equation
First order discretization may be acceptable when the
coefficients [24]. This works well when the pressure
flow is aligned with the grid because it generally yields
variation between cell nodes is smooth. If, as is the case
better convergence than second order. However, when
with strongly swirling flows, there are jumps or large
the flow is not aligned with the grid, first order convec-
gradients in the momentum source terms between control
tive discretization increases the numerical diffusion and,
volumes, the pressure profile will have high gradients at
in this case, second order is recommended. For most of
the cell face. The above scheme cannot be used to inter-
our calculations, we choose the second order scheme for
polate pressure, else a discrepancy will show up as over-
the momentum equations and the first order scheme for
shoots or undershoots in the cell velocity. The PRES-
the rest of the governing equations. Upwind differencing
SURE Staggering Option (PRESTO) uses the discrete
eliminates the need for knowing velocities downstream,
continuity balance for a staggered control volume about
and hence the exit boundary conditions are not needed to
the face to compute the face pressure [25]. This proce-
solve the problem, that is, the velocity at the outlet is not
dure is similar in spirit to the staggered grid schemes
specified as a boundary condition, and this allows the
used with structured meshes, and it may only be used
flow through the fan to diverge naturally. The adequacy
with quadrilateral and hexahedral meshes.
of the central differencing scheme is governed by the
For incompressible flows the density is constant and
nondimensional cell Peclet number Pe which is defined
hence not linked to the pressure. There are several algo-
by
rithms that establish such a link. In this work the required
u link is accomplished using the SIMPLE (Semi-Implicit
Pe x
Method for Pressure Linked Equations) algorithm [25],
where x is the cell width. When Pe 2 physical which uses a relationship between velocity and pressure
diffusion will be sufficient to counteract local convective corrections to the effect that if the correct pressure field
instabilities in regions with large velocity gradients. For is applied in the momentum equations, the resulting ve-
Pe 2 the convective insensitivity of central differenc- locity field should satisfy the continuity equation.
ing leads to the appearance of oscillations in the solution.
To calculate the convective and diffusive fluxes, this 4.2. Numerical Boundary Conditions
scheme introduces influencing at the cell center from the The importance of imposing physically realistic, well-
directions of all its neighbours. Thus for high Pe , the posed boundary conditions cannot be overemphasized.
flow direction is not identified and the strength of con- The fluid flow inside a CFD solution domain is driven by
vection relative to diffusion is not recognized [19]. Be- boundary conditions and, in a sense, the solution process
cause of the restriction on the Peclet number, central dif- is nothing but the extrapolation (based on the flow equa-
ferencing discretization is not suitable for high Reynolds tions) of the boundary data into the domain interior. The
number flows, or if the grid is coarse. For general pur- imposition of improper or unrealistic boundary condi-
pose flow calculations other discretization schemes are tions is the most common cause of divergence of CFD
preferred, such as second order upwind or the QUICK simulations [3,4]. Even if the solution converges, incor-
schemes. rect boundary conditions will certainly result in an in-
The quadratic upwind interpolation for convective ki- correct solution. Various kinds of boundary conditions
netics (QUICK) scheme uses a three-point upstream- are used for CFD computations. The following are most
weighted quadratic interpolation for cell face values [24]. common and are relevant to the calculations performed
It has been found that the QUICK scheme generally in this study.
yields much better convergence and predicts a lower
pressure than the second order scheme. 4.2.1. Flow Inlet
The discretized form of the x-momentum equation, for At an inlet boundary, all quantities must be prescribed. In
instance, can be written as our calculations we used the velocity-inlet boundary
condition to define the velocity and scalar properties of
aPu P anbunb p f iA S
nb the flow at the inlet of the domain. This achieves two
goals. First, it simulates the ram effect of the air that
Since pressure and velocity are both stored at cell would be caused by the automotive vehicle motion. For
nodes, an interpolation scheme is needed to compute the every value of inlet velocity there is a corresponding
face values of pressure, p f , appearing in equation the volume flow rate (Q) where
above.
Q
Two of the several pressure interpolation schemes that uinlet
are available in FLUENT were implemented in our cal- Ainlet
Also, the inlet velocity is used to initialize the velocity ter and extending from the center of the fan hub to the
field in the whole solution domain. inlet.
Figure 9. Static pressure vs radius on the pressure surface Figure 12. Static pressure vs radius on the pressure surface
(Fan1, Qd, 2300 rpm). (Fan1, 1.8Qd, 2300 rpm).
fects of such a blockage on the fan performance. The sure rise. Configuration B does not correctly predict the
results presented in this part of the investigation pertain to pressure rise vs flow rate trend. The same trend is ob-
Fan1. served for the 2700 rpm case.
In the numerical test facility, the fan covers only a very For Configuration B, the predicted velocity field is also
small portion of the overall solution domain, and if the incorrect.
rotating reference frame is applied in the outer region, a Plots of typical velocity magnitude contours are shown
large Coriolis force will dominate the solution, masking in Figures 18-28, on planes 30 mm upstream, 25 mm and
out important physical forces such as the viscous force in 100 mm downstream of the fan, respectively. As can be
the region near the fan. Other problems may arise if the observed from the upstream velocity magnitude contours
whole solution domain is considered in a rotating refer- in Figures 18-20, Configuration B appears to model the
ence frame. For instance, the flow is known to be highly upstream region as accurately as the other configurations.
three-dimensional, but, in general, rotation imparts some The contours for Configuration C are essentially the same
kind of rigidity to the flow which results in a strong ten- as those for A.
dency of the flow towards two-dimensionality. Also, Even though the pressure is poorly simulated in B, the
rotation confers some elasticity on the fluid that makes experimental and numerical contours are in good agree-
possible the propagation of waves in a rotating fluid [26]. ment on a plane immediately behind the fan, as illustrated
Thus, in the present simulations, the outer region of the in Figures 21-24 by comparing Configurations A and B
computational domain is kept stationary and only the core with the experimental results. All configurations, except
region is allowed to rotate. the core domain, have similar contour plots, although the
The results of the numerical simulations of the fan at spread between minimum and maximum speed is slightly
2300 rpm are compared with data from the test facility greater for Configuration B. The simulations for A and B
[17]. Figure 17 shows that the predicted pressure rise tend to smear out the high velocity regions and move them
varies significantly depending upon the location of the closer to the hub but, in general, these contours are in good
outer boundary condition. Configurations A and C both agreement with the experimental contours on planes close
have good agreement with experimental data. The core to the fan. Configuration D, which confines the flow so
mesh simulation discussed in Section 5.1 (referred to here that it cannot expand beyond the outer ring, does not ac-
as Configuration D) significantly over-predicts the pres- curately simulate the flow downstream of the fan. (The
contours for Configuration C are the same as those for A).
Figures 25-28 show the velocity magnitude contours at
100 mm downstream of the fan, on an annulus with outer
radius slightly beyond the ring radius. These illustrate that
the numerical predictions from Configurations B and D
are completely inaccurate. The predicted velocity mag-
nitude is too low, falling completely out of the experi-
mental range in both cases. Configuration C gives slightly
more accurate results than A on this annulus, although the
high velocity region is located further from the shaft than
is observed in the experiments.
Figures 29 and 30 show the contours on an expanded
annulus at 100 mm downstream. For Configuration A (C
Figure 16. Computational domain: Configuration A. is similar), there is very good agreement between the
experimental and numerical contours, but the predicted
flow has expanded about 25 mm (16%) beyond the outer
ring. The simulation for Configuration B suggests that the
downstream flow expands widely, about 72% more than
in the test facility. Furthermore, the speed is entirely out of
the experimental range. The importance of the location of
the numerical boundary conditions is also seen to have a
drastic influence on the predicted downstream static
pressure.
Figure 18. Velocity magnitude on a plane 30 mm upstream Figure 21. Velocity magnitude on a plane 25 mm down-
of Fan2 (Configuration A). stream of Fan2 (Configuration A).
Figure 19. Velocity magnitude on a plane 30 mm upstream Figure 22. Velocity magnitude on a plane 25 mm down-
of Fan2 (Configuration B). stream of Fan2 (Configuration B).
Figure 20. Velocity magnitude on a plane 30 mm upstream Figure 23. Velocity magnitude on a plane 25 mm down-
of Fan2 (Experimental). stream of Fan2 (Configuration D).
Figure 24. Velocity magnitude on a plane 25 mm down- Figure 27. Velocity magnitude on a plane 100 mm down-
stream of Fan2 (Experimental). stream of Fan2 (Configuration D).
Figure 25. Velocity magnitude on a plane 100 mm down- Figure 28. Velocity magnitude on a plane 100 mm down-
stream of Fan2 (Configuration A). stream of Fan2 (Experimental).
Figure 26. Velocity magnitude on a plane 100 mm down- Figure 29. Velocity magnitude on an annulus 100 mm
stream of Fan2 (Configuration B). downstream of Fan2 (Configuration A, 25 mm expansion).
N
u r ci r i , 0 N 6 (3)
i 1
6.2. Prediction from Different Models the polynomial models perform better than the prof and dp
models, as can be seen, for instance, from Figure 38 that
Pressure rise prediction from the various simplified mod-
shows radial velocity versus radius on a plane 25 mm
els is in a very good agreement with the full cfd model
downstream of the fan for a representative case (0.299
(Figure 37). Thus, if the user is interested only in the
m3/s at 2300 rpm). In terms of convergence speed, the
p prediction and there is no need to include the swirl
polynomial models are the most efficient and the dp
velocity components in the model, then the dp model is a
model takes the greatest number of iterations to reach the
good choice. On the other hand, if the details of the ve-
converged state.
locity field are important, then it is necessary to include
If the circumferential variations of the velocity field are
models for ur and u . If only circumferentially aver-
of particular importance, then pressure and/or velocity
aged values of the velocity components are needed, then
contours must be examined. Typical contours of the ve-
Table 1. Average values of velocity components (m/s) and locity magnitude predicted by the various models are
pressure (Pascal) on plane 25 mm downstream of the fan shown in Figures 39-42. Clearly, the prof and poly2D are
(Qd = 0.299 m3/s, 2300 rpm). in better agreement than the poly1D model. The dp model
is not shown because it does not provide any reasonable
Poly1D model-data taken from prediction of the swirl velocity components. For higher
cfd Z = 5 Z = 10 Z = 15 flow rates, the differences between the poly1D model on
one hand, and the prof and poly2D models on the other
p 20.4 19.5 17.4 17.4
hand, become less prominent since the flow tends to mix
ue 6.84 6.11 6.62 5.79 out circumferentially.
ur 0.51 0.07 0.53 0.18
6.3. Effects of Blockage on Models
uz 5.22 5.23 5.19 5.17
The effects of blockage on the simplified models are in-
vavg 9.04 8.2 8.62 7.97
vestigated in this section. For that purpose, a number of
REFERENCES
[1] H. Capdevila and J. Pharoah, CFD Analysis of Axial
Flow Fans for Automotive Cooling Systems, CFD95,
Proceedings of the 3rd Annual Conference of the CFD
Society of Canada, Banff, Vol. 1, 1995, pp. 307-314.
Figure 43. Static pressure rise vs velocity magnitude cfd [2] E. Coggiola, B. Dessale and S. Moreau, On the Use of
nblk: full cfd model without blockage; cfd blk: full cfd CFD in the Automotive Engine Cooling Fan System De-
model with blockage; dp blk-blk data: dp model with p sign, AIAA-0772, 23 February 1998, pp. 1-10.
obtained from model with blockage; dp blk-nblk data: dp
model with p obtained from model without blockage. [3] J. Foss, D. Neal, M. Henner and S. Moreau, Evaluating
CFD Models of Axial Fans by Comparisons with Phase-
Averaged Experimental Data, Proceedings of the SAE
identical axial velocity distribution on this plane, regard- Vehicle Thermal Management Systems Conference, Nash-
less of whether data is taken from the blocked or un- ville, Vol. 363, 2001, pp. 83-92.
blocked model. This is not true for the high flow rates [4] V. Damodaran and J. Danciu, Steady and Transient CFD
since the difference in p is greatest there. Analysis of Automotive Fans, CFD 2002, Proceedings
of the 10th Annual Conference of the CFD Society of
7. Conclusions Canada, Windsor, 7-9 July 2002, pp. 360-365.
[5] B. A. McCormick, Aerodynamics, Aeronautics, and
The single reference frame model of the fan is computa-
Flight Mechanics, 2nd Edition, John Wiley and Sons
tionally efficient and captures all of the main physical Inc., NY, 1995.
features of the flow in a ducted fan. However, it is in-
[6] W. Johnson, Helicopter Theory, Dover, 1994.
adequate for extended mesh calculations, since the re-
sulting unphysical Coriolis forces will dominate the all [7] J. H. W. Lee and M. D. Greenberg, Line Momentum
Source in Shallow Inviscid Fluid, Journal of Fluid Me-
important viscous forces. Also, it does not provide a very chanics, Vol. 145, 1984, pp. 287-304.
realistic model of the fan when placed in a domain similar doi:10.1017/S0022112084002937
to that of the underhood environment. The multiple ref- [8] R. G. Rajagopalan, Inviscid Upwind Finite Difference
erence frame model is more suitable for such calculations. Model for Two-Dimensional Vertical Axis Wind Tur-
It is possible, under most working conditions, to re- bines, Ph.D. Thesis, West Virginia University, Morgan-
move the top of the hub from the domain. Mesh genera- town, 1984.
tion is greatly simplified, and significant gains in terms of [9] R. G. Rajagopalan and C. K. Lim, Laminar Flow Analy-
saving time and computer resources are achieved. sis of a Rotor in Hover, Journal of the American Heli-
For the extended mesh calculations, it has been shown copter Society, Vol. 36, No. 1, 1991, pp. 12-23.
that the pressure rise and flow field can be accurately [10] W. G. Joo, The Simulation of Turbomachinery Blade
predicted by the proper implementation of the outer Rows in Asymmetric Flow Using Actuator Disks, Jour-
boundary conditions, and the location of the numerical nal of Turbomachinery, Vol. 119, No. 4, 1997, pp. 723-
boundary conditions can have a significant impact on the 732. doi:10.1115/1.2841182
results obtained. [11] W. G. Joo, The Application of Actuator Disks to Calcu-
If the computational domain in a simplified fan model lations of the Flow in Turbofan Installations, Journal of
Turbomachinery, Vol. 119, No. 4, 1997, pp. 733-741.
simulation involves some kind of blockage, the p curves
doi:10.1115/1.2841183
and/or velocity profiles, or forces used for the imple-
[12] C. Leclerc and C. Masson, Predictions of Aerodynamic
mentation of the simplified fan model should be obtained
Performance and Loads of HAWTs Operating in Un-
from experiments or a full CFD model that also contain steady Conditions, AIAA-0066, Reno, 11-14 January 1998,
the same kind of blockage, because the presence of pp. 335-345.
blockage downstream of the fan changes the flow sig- [13] C. Alinot, C. Masson and A. Smaili, Effects of Pressure
nificantly. Interpolation Schemes on the Aerodynamic Simulations
For simplified fan models, the data for the determina- of Horizontal Axis Wind Turbines, CFD 2K, Proceed-
tion of the fan characteristics should be obtained from a ings of the 8th Annual Conference of the CFD Society of
plane as close to the fan as possible, but not too close to Canada, Montreal, 2000.
the fans wake. The dp model predicts pressure rise ac- [14] R. Sandboge, S. Caro, P. Ploumhans, R. Ambs, B. Schil-
lemeit, K. Washburn and F. Shakib, Validation of a Computational Fluid Dynamics: The Finite Volume Me-
CAA Formulation Based on Lighthills Analogy Using thod, Prentice Hall, Harlow, 1995.
AcuSolve and Actran/LA on an Idealized Automotive [20] ICEM CFD Engineering, ICEM CFD Hexa, Manual,
HVAC Blower and on an Axial Fan, 12th AIAA/CEAS 1997.
Aeroacoustics Conference, Cambridge, 8-10 May 2006,
pp. 3795-3812. [21] D. C. Wilcox, Turbulence Modeling for CFD, DCW
Ind., La Canada, 1994.
[15] H.-S. Chen, C.-Q. Tan, S. Kang, X.-Z. Liang, Numerical
and Experimental Study on Effects of Hub Leakage on [22] H. Schlichting, Boundary Layer Theory, 7th Edition,
Performance and Flow Field of Axial Fan, Fluid Ma- McGraw-Hill, 1979.
chinery, 2006, pp. 345-351. [23] J. D. Denton, Solution of the Euler Equations for Tur-
[16] S. H. Liu, R. F. Huang and L. J. Chen, Performance and bomachinery Flows: Part 2, Three Dimensional Flows,
Inter-Blade Flow of Axial Flow Fans with Different In: A. S. Ucer, P. Stow and C. Hirsch, Eds., Thermody-
Blade Angles of Attack, Journal of the Chinese Institute namics and Fluid Mechanics of Turbomachinery, NATO
of Engineers, Vol. 34, No. 1, 2011, pp. 141-153. ASI Series, Series E: Applied SciencesNo. 97A, Vol. 1,
1985, pp. 31-47.
[17] P. J. Nourse, Development of an Automotive Test Facil-
ity, MASc. Thesis, University of Windsor, Windsor, [24] FLUENT Inc., Fluent 5, Users Guide, 1998.
2002. [25] S. V. Patankar, Numerical Heat Transfer and Fluid
[18] M. Brown, Velocity Measurements Near an Automotive Flow, Hemisphere, 1980.
Cooling Fan, MASc Thesis, University of Windsor, [26] B. K. Shivamoggi, Theoretical Fluid Dynamics, John
Windsor, 2001. Wiley and Sons, NY, 1998. doi:10.1002/9781118032534
[19] H. K. Versteeg and W. Malalasekera, An Introduction to