This paper examines a code-to-code verification between two thermal models. One used a non-commercial code; the other a commercial. A point heat source was applied to one end of a cylindrical geometry. Melting and re-solidfying of a 316 L stainless steel alloy was considered. Temperature dependent material properties and latent heat were included. Mesh independency was achieved. Positive agreement of thermal histories, temperature profiles, melt pool depth and maximum temperature along the rod.
This paper examines a code-to-code verification between two thermal models. One used a...
Code-to-code verification for thermal models of melting and solidification in a metal alloy: comparisons between a Finite Volume Method and a Finite Element Method
Anna M. V. Harley et al.
Viewed
Total article views: 1,804 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML
PDF
XML
Total
BibTeX
EndNote
1,632
151
21
1,804
14
11
HTML: 1,632
PDF: 151
XML: 21
Total: 1,804
BibTeX: 14
EndNote: 11
Views and downloads (calculated since 23 Apr 2020)
Cumulative views and downloads
(calculated since 23 Apr 2020)
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Total article views: 1,423 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
Thereof 1,353 with geography defined
and 70 with unknown origin.
Country
#
Views
%
Total:
0
HTML:
0
PDF:
0
XML:
0
1
1
Latest update: 12 Apr 2021
Search articles
Download
Short summary
This paper examines a code-to-code verification between two thermal models. One used a non-commercial code; the other a commercial. A point heat source was applied to one end of a cylindrical geometry. Melting and re-solidfying of a 316 L stainless steel alloy was considered. Temperature dependent material properties and latent heat were included. Mesh independency was achieved. Positive agreement of thermal histories, temperature profiles, melt pool depth and maximum temperature along the rod.
This paper examines a code-to-code verification between two thermal models. One used a...