Thermal Analysis of a H1616 Shipping Container - prod.sandia.gov ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Temperature (F) 500 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Time (min) Flange Temperature (ISSIM1) Flange Temperature (C9SIM) Figure 28. Flange Temperatures for Simulated Thermal Tests (C9SIM vs. ISSIM1). Temperature (F) 60 40 20 0 -20 -40 -60 -80 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Time (min) Shroud Temperature Difference Flange Temperature Difference Figure 29. Temperature Differences for Simulated Thermal Tests (C9SIM vs. ISSIM1). 36
Temperature (F) 2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Time (min) Shroud Temperature (ISSIM2) Flange Temperature (ISSIM2) Shroud Temperature (C9SIM) Flange Temperature (C9SIM) Figure 30. Temperature Histories for Simulated Thermal Tests (C9SIM vs. ISSIM2). the complete thermal test is shown in Figure 30. The results are similar to those seen before. The maximum flange temperature predicted in the ISSIM2 scenario is 445.11 ◦ F which is 1.79 ◦ F greater than the 443.32 ◦ F predicted in the CTSIM1 scenario. Again, solar insolation effects have a minimal impact on the maximum flange temperature, and the C9SIM scenario is able to give a conservatively high value for the maximum flange temperature. Figure 31 provides a longer look at the thermal simulation and shows the cross over point to be at approximately 200 minutes. The difference between the C9SIM and ISSIM2 scenarios is plotted in Figure 32 for both the shroud and flange temperatures. At the time of the maximum flange temperature, the difference between the scenarios is 21.29 ◦ F. Finally, a third scenario is defined to evaluate the most unfavorable conditions. This scenario is labeled ISSIM3 and evaluates the effects of including a 120 W/m 2 heat source, cooling in a 120 ◦ F environment, and using the most extreme value of solar flux, 300 W/m 2 . A comparison between the shroud and flange temperatures for the complete thermal test is shown in Figure 33. For this scenario, the maximum predicted flange temperature is 456.59 ◦ F which is 9.81 ◦ F greater than the 466.40 ◦ F predicted in the C9SIM scenario. Figure 34 provides a longer look at the thermal simulation and shows the cross over point to be at approximately 140 minutes. This value is considerably shorter than previously seen but shows that even under the most unfavorable conditions, the C9SIM scenario is able to provide a conservatively high estimate of the maximum flange temperature. The temperature 37
Page 1 and 2: SAND REPORT SAND2002-8511 Unlimited
Page 3 and 4: SAND2002-8511 Unlimited Release Pri
Page 5 and 6: Contents 1 Introduction . . . . . .
Page 7 and 8: Thermal Analysis of a H1616 Shippin
Page 9 and 10: 2 Model Development and Validation
Page 11 and 12: Table 4. Thermal Properties of the
Page 13 and 14: 3 Model Calibration In order to ens
Page 15 and 16: Temperature (F) 1600 1400 1200 1000
Page 17 and 18: shown in Figure 5 using the paramet
Page 19 and 20: Table 7. Final Model Parameters det
Page 21 and 22: 4 Analysis and Results Once the mod
Page 23 and 24: Temperature (F) 180 170 160 150 140
Page 25 and 26: Temperature (F) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
Page 27 and 28: Temperature (F) 180 170 160 150 140
Page 35: Temperature (F) 2000 1800 1600 1400
Page 39 and 40: Table 9. Description and Results of
Page 41 and 42: Temperature (F) 60 40 20 0 -20 -40
Page 43 and 44: attributed to the fact that solar i
Page 45 and 46: References [1] General Plastics Mfg
Page 47 and 48: 1 MS 9401 J.M. Hruby, 8702 1 MS 904

Thermal Analysis of a H1616 Shipping Container - prod.sandia.gov ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?