FEA · CFD · NVH · THERMAL · ACOUSTIC — ENGINEERING SIMULATION
BADGERMECX GET QUOTE
SPEC SHEET S-02 · REV A · UPDATED SEP 2026

S-02 · CFD

How will it flow? Loads, pressure drops and temperatures you can defend.

Steady and transient CFD for external aerodynamics, internal flows and conjugate heat transfer — with boundary conditions you can trace, a grid study that proves the mesh, and results reduced to the numbers your design decision needs.

∇·(ρu) = 0∂(ρu)/∂t + ∇·(ρu⊗u) = −∇p + ∇·τΔp · F · T_max
Submit a Problem Statement Sample report outline ↓
[✓] NDA before data exchange[✓] Fixed scope & price[✓] Independent internal check
FIG. 1 — Flow around a bluff body · streamlines SCHEMATIC flowhigh velocity
S-02 · AT A GLANCESPEC
TYPICAL SCOPE
External aerodynamics, wind loads, internal flow, HVAC and data-center airflow, conjugate heat transfer
DELIVERABLE
Signed PDF report, force and pressure tables, field plots; case files on request
LEAD TIME
Agreed in the written scope
TURBULENCE
RANS (k-ω SST, k-ε) · URANS · scale-resolving on request
CONFIDENTIALITY
NDA signed before any file is exchanged
QUALITY
Grid-convergence study in every report
Get a scoped quote →

01 / WHEN YOU NEED IT

Questions this analysis answers.

CFD is worth paying for when the flow decides the design: a load you cannot hand-calculate, a pressure drop that costs energy every operating hour, or a temperature limit you must not exceed.

We start from the number you need — force, pressure drop, temperature — and size the model to it.

Q1What wind load does the structure or enclosure really see?→ External RANS + pressure map for FEA
Q2Why is the pressure drop higher than the design value?→ Internal flow, loss breakdown
Q3Will the equipment stay below its temperature limit?→ Conjugate heat transfer (CHT)
Q4Where do hot spots and recirculation form in the room?→ Airflow study · data center / HVAC
Q5Is the flow steady — or will it shed vortices and oscillate?→ URANS, force history & spectra
Q6Which of these design variants performs best?→ Parametric CFD / DoE

02 / DELIVERABLES

What you receive. In writing, before we start.

Each item is listed in the scope document you sign off. Nothing on this list is a surprise at the end.

PDF

Technical report

Scope, assumptions, model, boundary conditions, results and conclusions. Signed and revision-controlled.

XLSX · PDF

Force & pressure tables

Integrated forces and moments, pressure drops, flow splits and temperatures per case and variant.

IN REPORT

Field plots

Velocity, pressure and temperature on the planes and surfaces that explain the result.

ON REQUEST

Pressure & temperature maps

Surface loads exported for structural or thermal analysis, mapped to your mesh.

APPENDIX

Verification appendix

Grid-convergence study (GCI), residual and monitor history, mass and energy balance.

IN REPORT

Design recommendations

Where losses, hot spots or separation come from, and which changes reduce them.

3 H ONLINE

Results review meeting

A walk-through with your engineers. Questions answered and recorded in the final revision.

Revision round

Re-run for design changes within the agreed scope, with a revision log in the report.

03 / METHODS

The right analysis for the question — not the most expensive one.

The turbulence model, time treatment and wall resolution are chosen for the quantity you need — then a grid study shows the answer does not depend on the mesh.

FIG. 0 — Flow around a bluff body (schematic)
ANALYSISUSE IT WHENKEY OUTPUTTYPICAL REFERENCE
Steady RANSTime-averaged loads, pressure drop and flow split in a flow that is statistically steadyForces, Δp, velocity and pressure fieldsk-ω SST · k-ε
Transient (URANS)Vortex shedding, pulsating inflow, start-up and other time-dependent behaviourForce history and spectra, Strouhal numberTime-step study included
Conjugate heat transferHeat moves between fluid and solid — electronics, enclosures, heat exchangersSolid and fluid temperatures, heat-transfer coefficients→ with S-04 Thermal
Wind loadsBuildings, enclosures and equipment whose shape the code's pressure coefficients do not coverc_p distributions, net forces, pressure map for FEAEN 1991-1-4 §1.5 · ASCE 7
Internal flow & pressure dropDucts, manifolds, valves, filters and cooling circuitsΔp vs. flow rate, loss coefficients, flow uniformity
Multiphase / free surfaceSloshing, spray and phase separation — on requestPhase distribution, loads on walls
Scale-resolving (LES / DES)Where RANS is known to fail: massive separation, aeroacoustic sourcesUnsteady fields and spectraOn request · → S-05 Acoustic
FIG. 2 — Near-wall resolution — the law of the wallSCHEMATIC
y⁺ ≈ 1 · resolved wall 30 < y⁺ < 300 · wall functions u⁺ = y⁺ buffer u⁺ = (1/κ) ln y⁺ + B 1 5 30 300 log y⁺ → u⁺ The first cell either resolves the viscous sublayer (y⁺ ≈ 1) or sits in the log layer for wall functions (about 30–300) — never in the buffer layer. The report states which, and the y⁺ achieved.
FIG. 3 — Grid convergence and Richardson extrapolationSCHEMATIC
GCI_fine fine medium coarse φ_ext (h → 0) grid spacing h → result φ Three systematically refined meshes give the observed order and the extrapolated value; the grid-convergence index GCI = 1.25·|ε| / (rᵖ − 1) is reported as the numerical uncertainty.

04 / PROCESS & TIMELINE

From problem statement to signed report.

Five steps, each with a clear hand-off. You always know what we need from you and what you get back.

  1. 012 day

    Scoping call

    FROM YOUProblem statement, drawings, deadline
    FROM USNDA, list of questions and missing data
  2. 022 days

    Scope & fixed quote

    FROM YOUOperating points, fluid data, target quantities
    FROM USWritten scope, assumptions, acceptance criteria, price
  3. 032 days

    Model & mesh

    FROM YOUCAD, boundary conditions, heat loads
    FROM USInterim check-in: domain, mesh and boundary-condition plots
  4. 047 days

    Solve & verify

    FROM YOUNothing — internal step
    FROM USGrid study, convergence and balance checks, second-engineer review
  5. 052 days

    Report & review

    FROM YOUYour comments on the draft
    FROM USSigned report, files, review meeting

05 / INPUTS

What we need from you.

REQUIRED
  • [✓]Geometry — STEP / IGES / Parasolid, or dimensioned drawings
  • [✓]Operating points — flow rates or velocities, pressures, temperatures
  • [✓]Fluid and material properties
  • [✓]Boundary conditions — inlets, outlets, heat sources, ambient
  • [✓]The quantity you need and its acceptance limit
  • [✓]The decision the result feeds, and the deadline
HELPFUL IF AVAILABLE
  • [+]Test or field measurements for comparison
  • [+]Previous calculations or CFD
  • [+]Fan or pump curves and component datasheets
  • [+]Photos of the installation
  • [+]Comments from your customer or approver
INCOMPLETE DATA?Most projects start that way.We list what's missing in the scoping call. Anything we have to assume is recorded in the report's assumption register — never hidden in the model.

06 / THE REPORT

See the report before you buy it.

A signed, revision-controlled report of 60 pages on average — written for the person who acts on it. Every force, pressure drop and temperature is traced to an operating point, a boundary condition and a mesh that was shown to be converged.

  1. T1
    Assumption registerEvery assumption numbered, justified, and linked to the results it affects.
  2. T2
    Boundary-condition traceabilityEvery inlet, outlet and heat source is listed with its value and where it came from.
  3. T3
    Verification evidenceGrid study with GCI, convergence history and mass/energy balance — included, not just claimed.
  4. T4
    Reproducible setupSolver, version, turbulence model, schemes and settings are stated so the case can be re-run.
  5. T5
    Plain-language conclusionOne page a manager can read: within limits or not, by how much, and what to change.

07 / APPLICATIONS

Typical flows and systems.

Data centers & electrical roomsAirflow · hot spots · cooling
Buildings & enclosuresWind loads · pressure coefficients
Energy equipmentGenset enclosures · ventilation · exhaust
Ducts & manifoldsPressure drop · flow distribution
VehiclesExternal aerodynamics · underhood cooling
Rail vehiclesHVAC airflow · crosswind
Marine systemsEngine-room ventilation · intakes
Aerospace equipmentVentilation · internal flow

08 / STANDARDS

Checked to the clause your approver reads.

Verification follows the recognised procedures, and loads and limits are taken from the standard your project is designed to — cited in the report.

STANDARDWHAT WE USE IT FOR
ASME V&V 20Verification and validation in CFD and heat transfer
Celik et al. (2008)Grid-convergence (GCI) procedure, J. Fluids Eng. 130(7)
EN 1991-1-4Wind actions — numerical methods where §1.5 allows them
ASCE 7Wind loads on buildings and other structures (comparison)
ASHRAE TC 9.9Thermal guidelines for data processing environments (inlet limits)

09 / HOW TO ENGAGE

Three ways to work with us.

Prices are fixed per written scope. You pay for the answer to a defined question, not for open-ended hours.

E-01PROJECT

Fixed-scope project

BEST FOR
A defined part or structure with a clear question
PRICE
Fixed quote after scoping
Start with a problem statement
E-02RETAINER

Engineering retainer

BEST FOR
Design teams with recurring analysis needs
PRICE
Quoted per scope
Discuss a retainer
E-03REVIEW

Third-party review

BEST FOR
Checking an FEA or hand calculation done by someone else
PRICE
Fixed quote
Request a review

10 / FAQ

Asked before every project.

Something else? Ask it in the problem statement — the answer comes with the scope.

Which software do you use?

Tessera — the solver we build — runs the free calculators on this site today, each published with its reference cases. For project work the solver is chosen against the standard the result must satisfy, and named in the written scope. Every report states the solver, version, turbulence model and numerical schemes, so the case can be reproduced.

Can CFD replace a wind-tunnel or flow test?

Not always. For many industrial geometries a verified RANS model gives design-grade loads; where the standard or the risk calls for testing, we say so in the scope.

Steady or transient — how do you decide?

From the physics. If the flow sheds vortices or the inflow varies, a steady result can hide peak loads, so we run a transient case and report the force history and spectra.

How do you know the mesh is fine enough?

We solve on at least three systematically refined meshes and report the grid-convergence index for the quantities you use.

Can the results feed our structural model?

Yes — surface pressures and temperatures can be mapped to an FEA mesh. See S-01 Structural and S-04 Thermal.

How is the price set?

Per written scope: geometry clean-up, number of operating points and variants, and whether transient or conjugate heat transfer is needed.

RELATED CAPABILITIESAll services →
S-01 · STRUCTURAL Structural / FEA σ_vM ≤ f_y / γ_M0 Spec sheet →
S-03 · DYNAMICS NVH & Dynamics [K − ω²M]{φ} = 0 Spec sheet →
S-04 · THERMAL Thermal ρc_p ∂T/∂t = ∇·(k∇T) + q Spec sheet →
S-05 · ACOUSTIC Acoustics ∇²p − (1/c²) ∂²p/∂t² = 0 Spec sheet →
S-06 · CONCEPT Concept & Design min f(x) s.t. g(x) ≤ 0 Spec sheet →

11 / PROBLEM STATEMENT

Send the operating point. Get a written scope back.

Tell us what flows where, at which rate and temperature, and which number decides the design. We reply with questions or a fixed scope.

  • [✓] NDA before data exchange
  • [✓] Response within 2 business day(s)
  • [✓] Scope, assumptions & acceptance criteria in writing