LI Jiaze, BIAN Xu, ZHU Zhijia, et al. Separated vector method for fluid-solid coupled transient heat transfer analysis of electric machines[J]. 2026, 30(2): 101-110.
LI Jiaze, BIAN Xu, ZHU Zhijia, et al. Separated vector method for fluid-solid coupled transient heat transfer analysis of electric machines[J]. 2026, 30(2): 101-110. DOI: 10.15938/j.emc.2026.02.009.
电机流固耦合暂态传热分析的分离矢量法
摘要
电机在实际运行中常处于动态工况
其内部温度会随时间快速变化
因此需要进行准确的暂态传热分析。针对流固耦合法将流体场与温度场耦合求解
温度计算结果的准确度高
但是计算时间长
计算资源要求高的问题
提出分离矢量法
将流体矢量做为常数分离仅对温度标量进行暂态求解
降低计算时长和对计算资源的要求。以一台300 Mvar空冷同步调相机为例
建立其端部的分离矢量暂态传热模型
通过实测温度验证了分离矢量暂态传热模型的准确性。计算输电系统单相短路故障后100 s的暂态传热
对比分析分离矢量法和传统流固耦合法的计算过程与计算结果。结果表明
分离矢量法的计算时间仅占传统流固耦合法的7.7%
且求解所需内存仅占传统流固耦合法的64.4%。2种方法的温度计算结果最大差异为0.16%。
Abstract
Electric machines in actual operation often operate under dynamic conditions
leading to rapid internal temperature changes over time. Therefore
accurate transient heat transfer analysis is required. To address the issue of the coupled fluid-solid method
which solves the fluid field and temperature field simultaneously yielding high accuracy in temperature calculation but demands long computation time and high computational resources
the separated vector method was proposed. This method separates the fluid vector as a constant and solves only for the temperature scalar transiently
thereby reducing the computation duration and resource requirements. Taking a 300 Mvar air-cooled synchronous condenser as an example
a separated vector transient heat transfer model for its end region was established. The accuracy of the model was verified by measured temperatures. The transient heat transfer within 100 seconds after a single-phase short-circuit fault in the power transmission system was calculated. The computational processes and results of the separated vector method and the traditional coupled fluid-solid method were compared and analyzed. The results show that the computation time of the separated vector method is only 7.7% of that required by the traditional coupled fluid-solid method
and the memory required for the solution is only 64.4%. The maximum difference in the temperature calculation results between the two methods is 0.16%.