0
Research Papers

Modified Body Force Model for Air Flow Through Perforated Floor Tiles in Data Centers

[+] Author and Article Information
Vaibhav K. Arghode

George W. Woodruff
School of Mechanical Engineering,
Georgia Institute of Technology,
Atlanta, GA 30332
e-mail: vaibhav.arghode@gmail.com

Yogendra Joshi

George W. Woodruff
School of Mechanical Engineering,
Georgia Institute of Technology,
Atlanta, GA 30332

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Electronic and Photonic Packaging Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ELECTRONIC PACKAGING. Manuscript received October 17, 2015; final manuscript received April 15, 2016; published online May 16, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Pradip Dutta.

J. Electron. Packag 138(3), 031002 (May 16, 2016) (11 pages) Paper No: EP-15-1116; doi: 10.1115/1.4033464 History: Received October 17, 2015; Revised April 15, 2016

Generally, porous jump (PJ) model is used for rapid air flow simulations (without resolving the tile pore structure) through perforated floor tiles in data centers. The PJ model only specifies a step pressure loss across the tile surface, without any influence on the flow field. However, in reality, the downstream flow field is affected because of the momentum rise of air due to acceleration through the pores, and interaction of jets emerging from the pores. The momentum rise could be captured by either directly resolving the tile pore structure (geometrical resolution (GR) model) or simulated by specifying a momentum source above the tile surface (modified body force (MBF) model). Note that specification of momentum source obviates the need of resolving the tile pore geometry and, hence, requires considerably low computational effort. In previous investigations, the momentum source was imposed in a region above the tile surface whose width and length were same as the tile dimensions with a preselected height. This model showed improved prediction with the experimental data, as well as with the model resolving the tile pore geometry. In the present investigation, we present an analysis for obtaining the momentum source region dimensions and other associated input variables so that the MBF model can be applied for general cases. The results from this MBF model were compared with the GR model and good agreement was obtained.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Joshi, Y. , and Kumar, P. , 2012, Energy Efficient Thermal Management of Data Centers, Springer, New York.
Arghode, V. K. , and Joshi, Y. , 2015, “ Experimental Investigation of Air Flow Through a Perforated Tile in a Raised Floor Data Center,” ASME J. Electron. Packag., 137(1), p. 011011. [CrossRef]
Arghode, V. K. , Kumar, P. , Joshi, Y. , Weiss, T. , and Meyer, G. , 2013, “ Rack Level Modeling of Air Flow Through Perforated Tile in a Data Center,” ASME J. Electron. Packag., 135(3), p. 030902. [CrossRef]
Arghode, V. K. , and Joshi, Y. , 2014, “ Room Level Modeling of Air Flow in a Contained Data Center Aisle,” ASME J. Electron. Packag., 136(6), p. 011011. [CrossRef]
Arghode, V. K. , Sundaralingam, V. , Joshi, Y. , and Phelps, W. , 2013, “ Thermal Characteristics of Open and Contained Data Center Cold Aisle,” ASME J. Heat Transfer, 135(6), p. 061901. [CrossRef]
Abdelmaksoud, W. A. , Khalifa, H. E. , Dang, T. Q. , Elhadidi, B. , Schmidt, R. R. , and Iyengar, M. , 2010, “ Experimental and Computational Study of Perforated Floor Tile in Data Centers,” Intersociety Conference on Thermal and Thermomechanical Phenomena in Electronic Systems (ITherm), Las Vegas, NV, June 2–5.
Patankar, S. V. , 2010, “ Airflow and Cooling in a Data Center,” ASME J. Heat Transfer, 132(7), p. 073001. [CrossRef]
Karki, K. C. , and Patankar, S. V. , 2006, “ Airflow Distribution Through Perforated Tiles in Raised-Floor Data Centers,” Build. Environ., 41(6), pp. 734–744. [CrossRef]
Rambo, J. , and Joshi, Y. , 2007, “ Modeling of Data Center Airflow and Heat Transfer: State of the Art and Future Trends,” Distrib. Parallel Databases, 21(2), pp. 193–225. [CrossRef]
Alkharabsheh, S. , Fernandes, J. , Gebrehiwot, B. , Agonafer, D. , Ghose, K. , Ortega, A. , Joshi, Y. , and Sammakia, B. , 2015, “ A Brief Overview of Recent Developments in Thermal Management in Data Centers,” ASME J. Electron. Packag., 137(4), p. 040801. [CrossRef]
Alkharabsheh, S. A. , Sammakia, B. G. , and Shrivastava, S. K. , 2015, “ Experimentally Validated Computational Fluid Dynamics Model for a Data Center With Cold Aisle Containment,” ASME J. Electron. Packag., 137(2), p. 021010. [CrossRef]
Bhagwat, H. , Singh, U. , Deodhar, A. , Singh, A. , and Sivasubramaniam, A. , 2014, “ Fast and Accurate Evaluation of Cooling in Data Centers,” ASME J. Electron. Packag., 137(1), p. 011003. [CrossRef]
Freid, E. , and Idelchik, I. E. , 1989, Flow Resistance, a Design Guide for Engineers, Hemisphere, New York.
Miller, D. S. , 1990, Internal Flow Systems, 2nd ed., Gulf Publishing, Houston, TX.
Kumar, P. , and Joshi, Y. , 2010, “ Experimental Investigations on the Effect of Perforated Tile Air Jet Velocity on Server Air Distribution in a High Density Data Center,” Intersociety Conference on Thermal and Thermomechanical Phenomena in Electronic Systems (ITherm), Las Vegas, NV, June 2–5.
Arghode, V. K. , Sundaralingam, V. , and Joshi, Y. , 2016, “ Air Flow Management in a Contained Cold Aisle Using Active Fan Tiles for Energy Efficient Data Center Operation,” Heat Transfer Eng., 37(3), pp. 246–256. [CrossRef]
Lipari, G. , and Stansby, P. K. , 2011, “ Review of Experimental Data on Incompressible Turbulent Round Jets,” Flow, Turbul. Combust., 87(1), pp. 79–114. [CrossRef]
Arghode, V. K. , and Joshi, Y. , 2013, “ Modeling Strategies for Air Flow Through Perforated Tiles in a Data Center,” IEEE Trans. Compon., Packag., Manuf. Technol., 3(5), pp. 800–810. [CrossRef]
Yimer, I. , Becker, H. A. , and Grandmaison, E. W. , 1996, “ Development of Flow From Multiple–Jet Burners,” Can. J. Chem. Eng., 74(6), pp. 84–851. [CrossRef]
Arghode, V. K. , and Joshi, Y. , 2015, “ Evaluation of Modified Body Force (MBF) Model for Rapid Air Flow Modeling Through Perforated Tiles,” Semiconductor Thermal Measurement and Management Symposium (SEMI-THERM), San Jose, CA, Mar. 15–19, pp. 127–137.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

(a) MBF model without blocked edges, (b) MBF model with blocked edges, (c) MBF region, (d) perforated tile, (e) pressure drop across a tile without blocked edges, (f) pressure drop across a tile with blocked edges, and (g) MBF region height estimation based on jet behavior

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

(a)–(f) Comparison of GR and MBF model with different height for momentum source specification (H), (a) computational domain (tile size = 0.61 m × 0.61 m (2 ft × 2 ft), domain height = −0.31 m (1 ft) to + 1.98 m (6 ft 6 in.), domain width = 0.91 m (3 ft)), (b) D = 2.54 cm (1 in.) GR (base case), (c) H = 2D, (d) H = 4D, (e) H = 6D, (f) excess X-momentum, along the height, and (g) MBF model, choosing Fref = 25%, estimating the empirical constants: Cref, a, and b

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Comparison of GR and MBF models for different porosities (F) (a) GR, (b) MBF, (c) GR, (d) MBF, (e) GR, (f) MBF, (g) excess X-momentum for free jet array, (h) excess X-momentum for symmetrical single jet, (i) evaluating empirical constant n, Fref = 25%, (j) F = 11%, (k) F = 25%, and (l) F = 44%

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Comparison of contours of velocity magnitude from GR and MBF models for different tile edge blockage (B) (a) GR, (b) MBF, (c) GR, (d) MBF, (e) GR, (f) MBF, (g) excess X-momentum for free jet array, (h) excess X-momentum for free jet for open area except blockage, (i) estimating empirical constant m, (j) B = 0 cm (0 in.), (k) B = 3.81 cm (1.5 in.), and (l) B = 7.62 cm (3 in.)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Comparison of contours of GR and MBF models for small pore sizes (D) (a) D = 0.32 cm (0.125 in.), GR model, (b) D = 0.32 cm (0.125 in.), MBF model, (c) D = 0.64 cm (0.25 in.), GR model, (d) D = 0.64 cm (0.25 in.), MBF model, (e) computational domain, and (f) excess X-momentum

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Comparison of GR and MBF models for different tile thickness (T/D) (a) GR, (b) MBF, (c) GR, (d) MBF, (e) GR, (f) MBF, (g) excess X-momentum for free jet array, (h) excess X-momentum for symmetrical single jet, (i) T/D = 0 K = 32.0, (j) T/D = 1 K = 19.4, and (k) T/D = 1 K = 19.5

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Comparison of contours of GR and MBF models for AB (a) GR, (b) MBF, (c) GR, (d) MBF, (e) tile (D = 2.54 cm (1 in.), F = 25%), (f) anterior, 2.54 cm (1 in.) below tile (D = 5.08 cm (2in.), F = 50%), and (g) excess X-momentum

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In