Applied Math Modeling White Paper

Improving Model Geometry for CFD

Analysis
By Liz Marshall, Applied Math Modeling Inc., Concord, NH

October, 2010
solid objects, and too much detail can make
the simulation process more cumbersome
than it needs to be. This is certainly true in
data centers, where small gaps between
equipment are fair game for the CFD solver,
but may not be particularly relevant to the
large-scale flow patterns in the room. Facility analysts must always consider whether or
not the air flow in a narrow gap is an important feature of the flow in the room as a

Introduction

In todays world, computer-aided engineering (CAE) is an integral part of engineering

design and analysis. At the root of all CAE
is computer-aided design (CAD), which is
used to build virtual models of objects and
spaces. CAD models are used as input for a
number of engineering software packages,
where stress analysis, heat transfer, or fluid
flow is simulated. Fluid flow analysis is
done using computational fluid
dynamics (CFD), and this technology is used for applications
ranging from aircraft wings to
coal furnaces to room air
flows. Despite their close relationship, CAD models differ
from CFD models in one important way. With CAD the
focus is on solid geometry, so
more detail is generally considered better than less detail.
Figure 1: An example of a
mesh, used for performWith CFD, the focus is on the
fluid flow in the space between ing a CFD calculation of
the air flow in a room

2010 Applied Math Modeling Inc.

WP104

whole. It if is not, the geometry should be

modified to eliminate such gaps. Cleaning
up or more accurately, dumbing down the
geometry in this manner can make for a
much more rapid time to CFD solution with
minimal impact on the final results.

cases, the results confirm that the simpler

geometry is more cost effective for the application of CFD.

Case 1
Problem Definition

The CFD simulation process begins with the

construction of the model geometry. In the
case of a data center, this includes the room,
the equipment in the room, and perforated
floor tiles and ceiling grills to allow for the
passage of air, as needed. Once the room
geometry is specified, a computational mesh
is built. The mesh (Figure 1) is used to break
up the air space into thousands or millions of
small cells. In each of these cells, the relevant variables are computed and stored. It
is widely believed that models with more
cells have the potential to offer a more accurate solution, assuming that the equipment is
represented correctly. Cells can be wasted,
however, if they are used in regions where
the information is not relevant. When this
happens, the cell count is larger than it needs
to be but the accuracy in the solution is no
better. Furthermore, the time to solution can
be considerably longer than it needs to be.

A 5000 sq.ft. L-shaped data center is in operation at a major medical facility in the
Northeast. It has a raised floor and ceiling
return. Three downflow CRACs with turning vanes are positioned on the perimeter and
an upflow CRAC is positioned in the center
of the room. Ductwork is used to pipe the
supply air from the upflow CRAC to several
locations around the room.
Racks with heat loads ranging from 10 Watts
to 8 kW comprise a total heat load of 226
kW with a heat density of about 45 kW/sq.ft.
Four power density units (PDUs) each add an
average of 1 kW of heat to the room. The
supply plenum contains a number of pipes
and blockages. The rooms adjacent to the
data center are at a constant temperature of
72F, and the wall resistance is 2 ft2-F/(Btu/
Hr).
In the original model, the racks and 1inch
gaps between them - were properly sized, as
shown in Figure 2 (top). Gaps created in this
fashion are assumed to be important details
when the automated mesh generator goes to
work. However, their importance in the
global data center flow is questionable. To
find out how important the gaps are, a second
model is built in which the racks have the
same location but are given a slightly increased width to eliminate the gaps. The

To illustrate this point, two models of medium-sized data centers are considered using
CoolSim software. The original models of
the data centers are both accurate in the CAD
sense. All of the equipment is carefully represented, but as a result, there are gaps between adjacent equipment or there is excessive geometric detail. The models are then
improved for CFD by simplifying the geometry. The simulations are run and a thorough comparison is done to contrast the
original and modified geometries. In both
2010 Applied Math Modeling Inc.

WP104

shows that the maximum room temperature

differs by only 1F
while the maximum rack
inlet temperatures are
identical. The maximum flowrate through a
perforated tile is within
1% while the minimum
is within 8%. Taking a
closer look at the maximum rack inlet temperatures, 35% have the
same value and only 3%
have a value that differs
by more than 5%. The
maximum difference in
the average rack inlet
temperature is 5% for all
racks in the room.
Based on these results,
simplification of the
model has the benefit of
reducing the model size
and time to solution
without introducing
negative consequences
such as large scale error
in the results.
Figure 2: In the CAD-style geometry (top), the racks are accurately
sized, but have 1 inch gaps between them; a CFD-style geometry
(bottom) eliminates the gaps between racks by increasing the
widths by 1 inch

modified geometry is shown in Figure 2

Number of Cells
(bottom).

With Gaps No Gaps

3.766 M

2.801M

4.53

3.74

81

82

Solution Time (Hours)

Results

Max Room Temperature (F)

A CFD analysis is done using both of

77
77
the geometries and the results are com- Max Rack Inlet Temperature (F)
pared in Table 1. The results show that Max Perf Tile Flowrate (CFM)
729
734
elimination of the gaps leads to a model
472
436
Min Perf Tile Flowrate (CFM)
with about 1 million fewer cells. The
time to solution is reduced by about 45
Table 1: A comparison of the size, solution time, and
minutes. Comparison of the results
a few results for the data center modeled with and
without gaps between the equipment
2010 Applied Math Modeling Inc.

WP104

Case 2

used to guide the return air in an area where a

number of geometric constraints are present.
The original CFD model of the CRAC and
top is shown in Figure 3. While the top is an
accurate representation of reality, its complexity is perhaps more than is needed. After
all, the fan in the CRAC return will draw the
air into the unit. The role of the mounted
structure is simply to guide the air into the

Problem Definition

As a second example, consider one of the

small data centers at a large collocation facility. The 2500 sq. ft. raised floor data center
has two downflow CRACs, one of which is
outfitted with a complex structure on the return. The equipment heat load in the room is
about 100 W/sq.ft. and the complex top is

Figure 3: A complex structure mounted on the return of a downflow CRAC is used to

help guide the return air back to the unit

Figure 4: A simplified structure on the CRAC return does not have all of the features
of the original, but does include the essential shielding and open areas
2010 Applied Math Modeling Inc.

WP104

openings and a much simpler structure could

accomplish the same goal.

Looking again at the maximum rack inlet

temperatures, half of the racks have identical
values and only 1 rack has values that differ
by more than 5%. For the average rack inlet
temperature, all of the racks in the room
agree to within 0 or 1% except two, where
the agreement is within 2.5% and 5%. This
example further illustrates that less complexity in a CFD model can translate into more in
terms of decreased time to solution with negligible loss of accuracy.

An alternative design is shown in Figure 4,

where one such simplified structure is
shown. It has the same overall dimensions as
the complex structure, but avoids the minute
detailing.
Results

Using the two CRAC top designs as the only

difference between the cases, two CFD simulations are performed and the results compared. An overview of the results is summarized in Table 2.

Summary

These examples demonstrate that for the purpose of CFD modeling, simplified geometry
has advantages over complex, CADComplex
Simple
style geometries. In addition to saving
1.590 M
1.168M
Number of Cells
on the number of computational cells
2.32
1.87
Solution Time (Hours)
and solution time, the effort involved
in the setup is reduced as well. With
98
96
Max Room Temperature (F)
automatic grid generation and solution
91
90
Max Rack Inlet Temperature (F)
procedures in place for software de2,530
2,515
Max Perf Tile Flowrate (CFM)
signed for data center modeling, time
839
818
Min Perf Tile Flowrate (CFM)
savings during the setup can be significant. For the complex CRAC top,
Table 2: A comparison of the size, solution time,
for example, the original structure was
and a few results for the data center modeled with a
built using 33 baffle objects. By concomplex CRAC top and a simple CRAC top
trast, the simple model needed only 9
By changing only the structure on top of one
baffles. Even if the final goal is to have a
of the CRACs in the room, about 400,000
CFD model with a large amount of geometric
cells are saved and the CPU time is reduced
detail, these results show that simplified
by just under 30 minutes - or 19%. The
models are an excellent first pass solution
maximum rack inlet temperature differs by
and indeed, are usually just as good as mod1F and the maximum temperature in the
els with increased detail.
room by 2F. The maximum and minimum
flowrates through the perforated tiles are
within 2.5%.

2010 Applied Math Modeling Inc.

WP104