LaRC guidelines for selection of thermal analysis tool

These are general guidelines. There will always be cases where a different method will be used for reasons of experience, previous history, collaboration with other entities, etc. However, these are rules to consider when selecting a tool at the initiation of a modeling effort. Many analyses will be a combination of two or more of these analysis types, so several tools may be used.

Analysis characterization

Tool Recommendation

Comments

Part or assembly geometry exists in Pro/Engineer. No orbital influence. No complex fluid flow. No MLI. PATRAN Thermal Import geo directly from Pro/E
Problem largely influenced by complex fluid flow, speed less than Mach 5. CFDesign Import geo directly from Pro/E
Problem largely influenced by orbital (solar, planetary and space) radiation. Thermal Desktop / RADCAD Import geo as STEP or IGES from Pro/E. If suitable NASTRAN mesh exists, import that instead.
Problem includes large amount of MLI that is the principal influence on performance. Thermal Desktop / RADCAD MLI application, modeling and visualization is much easier in Thermal Desktop than in other tools here.
Problem largely influenced by aeroheating of hypersonic flow. PATRAN Thermal Currently, aeroheating interpolation code exists in moderately robust form in the ulib for PATRAN Thermal. However, it is possible that we will be able to incorporate this functionality in Thermal Desktop in the next several years.
Problem largely influenced by ablation. PATRAN Thermal Currently, we have code developed by MSC to incorporate ablation using CMA within PATRAN Thermal. A simplistic ablation capability exists within Thermal Desktop.
Ultimate performance is dependent on thermal stresses. PATRAN Thermal or Thermal Desktop Transfer of thermal map to NASTRAN mesh is simple and well-tried in both these tools (unknown if this is smooth for CFDesign).