The finite difference (FD), finite element (FE), and finite volume (FV) methods are critically assessed by comparing the solutions produced by the three methods for a simple one-dimensional steady-state heat conduction problem with heat generation. Three issues are assessed: (1) accuracy of temperature, (2) accuracy of heat flux, and (3) satisfaction of global energy conservation. It is found that if the order of accuracy of the numerical discretization schemes is the same (central difference for FD and FV, linear basis functions for FE), the accuracy of the temperature produced by the three methods is similar, except close to the boundaries where the FV method outshines the other two methods. Consequently, the FV method is found to predict more accurate heat fluxes at the boundaries compared to the other two methods and is found to be the only method that guarantees both local and global conservation of energy irrespective of mesh size. The FD and FE methods both violate energy conservation, and the degree to which energy conservation is violated is found to be mesh size dependent. Furthermore, it is shown that in the case of prescribed heat flux (Neumann) and Newton cooling (Robin) boundary conditions, the accuracy of the FD method depends in large part on how the boundary condition is implemented. If the boundary condition and the governing equation are both satisfied at the boundary, the predicted temperatures are more accurate than in the case where only the boundary condition is satisfied.
Skip Nav Destination
Article navigation
Research-Article
Comparative Assessment of the Finite Difference, Finite Element, and Finite Volume Methods for a Benchmark One-Dimensional Steady-State Heat Conduction Problem
Sandip Mazumder
Sandip Mazumder
Fellow ASME
Department of Mechanical and
Aerospace Engineering,
The Ohio State University,
Suite E410, Scott Laboratory,
201 West 19th Avenue,
Columbus, OH 43210
e-mail: mazumder.2@osu.edu
Department of Mechanical and
Aerospace Engineering,
The Ohio State University,
Suite E410, Scott Laboratory,
201 West 19th Avenue,
Columbus, OH 43210
e-mail: mazumder.2@osu.edu
Search for other works by this author on:
Sandip Mazumder
Fellow ASME
Department of Mechanical and
Aerospace Engineering,
The Ohio State University,
Suite E410, Scott Laboratory,
201 West 19th Avenue,
Columbus, OH 43210
e-mail: mazumder.2@osu.edu
Department of Mechanical and
Aerospace Engineering,
The Ohio State University,
Suite E410, Scott Laboratory,
201 West 19th Avenue,
Columbus, OH 43210
e-mail: mazumder.2@osu.edu
1Corresponding author.
Contributed by the Heat Transfer Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF HEAT TRANSFER. Manuscript received October 5, 2016; final manuscript received December 26, 2016; published online March 15, 2017. Assoc. Editor: Alan McGaughey.
J. Heat Transfer. Jul 2017, 139(7): 071301 (10 pages)
Published Online: March 15, 2017
Article history
Received:
October 5, 2016
Revised:
December 26, 2016
Citation
Mazumder, S. (March 15, 2017). "Comparative Assessment of the Finite Difference, Finite Element, and Finite Volume Methods for a Benchmark One-Dimensional Steady-State Heat Conduction Problem." ASME. J. Heat Transfer. July 2017; 139(7): 071301. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4035713
Download citation file:
Get Email Alerts
Cited By
Ducted heat exchanger aerodynamic shape and thermal optimization
J. Heat Mass Transfer
A Simplified Thermal Hydraulic Model for Solid Pin-Fueled Molten Salt Reactors Under Low-Flow Accident Scenarios
J. Heat Mass Transfer (December 2024)
Effect of Forced Convection Heat Transfer on Vapor Quality in Subcooled Flow Boiling
J. Heat Mass Transfer (December 2024)
Related Articles
A Symplectic Analytical Singular Element for Steady-State Thermal Conduction With Singularities in Anisotropic Material
J. Heat Transfer (September,2018)
Models of Steady Heat Conduction in Multiple Cylindrical Domains
J. Electron. Packag (March,2006)
Determination of Temperatures and Heat Fluxes on Surfaces and Interfaces of Multidomain Three-Dimensional Electronic Components
J. Electron. Packag (December,2004)
Inverse Determination of Steady Heat Convection Coefficient Distributions
J. Heat Transfer (May,1998)
Related Proceedings Papers
Related Chapters
Introduction
Introduction to Finite Element, Boundary Element, and Meshless Methods: With Applications to Heat Transfer and Fluid Flow
Conclusion
Introduction to Finite Element, Boundary Element, and Meshless Methods: With Applications to Heat Transfer and Fluid Flow
How to Use this Book
Thermal Spreading and Contact Resistance: Fundamentals and Applications