See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/267597649

Analysis of Airflow Distribution Across a Front-to-Rear Server Rack

Conference Paper · January 2007

DOI: 10.1115/IPACK2007-33574

CITATIONS READS
10 1,842

3 authors, including:

A. Radmehr Kailash C. Karki

Innovative Research, Inc. Innovative Research, Inc.
18 PUBLICATIONS   343 CITATIONS    61 PUBLICATIONS   1,324 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by A. Radmehr on 27 April 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Proceedings of IPACK2007
ASME InterPACK '07
July 8-12, 2007, Vancouver, British Columbia, CANADA

IPACK2007-33574

ANALYSIS OF AIRFLOW DISTRIBUTION ACROSS A FRONT-TO-REAR SERVER RACK

Amir Radmehr Kailash C. Karki

Innovative Research, Inc. Innovative Research, Inc.
Plymouth, MN, USA Plymouth, MN, USA

Suhas V. Patankar
Innovative Research, Inc.
Plymouth, MN, USA

ABSTRACT computational analysis, a simple model is developed to predict

The most common server racks in data centers are front-to-
rear racks, which draw in the cooling air from the front side
and discharge it from the backside. In a raised-floor data center
the cooling air to these racks is provided by perforated tiles that
are placed in front of them. In a high-density data center, these
tiles discharge a considerable amount of airflow, which leads to
a high-velocity vertical jet in front of the rack. Such a high-
velocity jet may bypass the servers located at the bottom of the
rack leading to their airflow starvation and potential failure.
In this paper the effect of the high-velocity jet on the
airflow taken by servers at various heights in the rack is
studied. A computer model based on the Computational Fluid
Dynamics (CFD) technique is used to predict the airflow
distribution through servers stacked in the rack. Two cases are
considered. In one case, the rack is placed in the middle of a
row of racks in a prefect hot aisle-cold aisle arrangement. The
boundary conditions around such a rack is symmetrical. In the
other case, the rack is placed in a room with asymmetrical
boundary conditions. The characteristics of the servers in the
rack are taken from typical 1U and 2U servers manufactured by
IBM.
It is shown that in general the high-velocity jet has a mild
effect on the airflow taken by the servers, and the airflow
reduction is limited to servers at the bottom of the rack. Racks
in a symmetrical configuration are more susceptible to the
airflow starvation. In the most critical conditions, an airflow
reduction of 15% is calculated for the server located at the
bottom of the rack. Using the result obtained from the
the reduction of the cooling air under the most critical situation
for the server placed at the bottom of the rack.
INTRODUCTION
Server racks and cabinets used in data centers have
different flow configurations such as front to rear, front to top,
bottom to top, etc. Of these, the front-to-rear configuration is
the most common. In these racks, servers are stacked at various
heights inside the rack. They draw cold air from the front side
of the rack and exhaust hot air to the rear side. The servers have
internal fans, which are designed to provide the needed airflow
for proper cooling, assuming that the server inlet and exhaust
pressure are the same. Low inlet pressure, high exhaust
pressure, or a combination of both will add to the server
internal pressure drop that fans are supposed to overcome, and,
therefore, reduce the airflow through the server, leading to
thermal failure.
In a raised-floor data center the cooling air is delivered to
the front-to-rear server racks through perforated tiles that are
placed in front of them. With increasing heat loads of servers
and their cooling demands, today's data centers are designed
such that the perforated tiles discharge a significant amount of
airflow (up to 2000 CFM). This is done by maintaining a
higher plenum pressure and using perforated tiles with large
open areas. One of the concerns of data center professionals is
that even with such a high amount of airflow, the servers at the
bottom of the rack may not receive adequate cooling. The large
airflow creates a high-velocity vertical jet, which in turn
produces a low-pressure region in front of the rack. As

1 Copyright © 2007 by ASME

explained above, such a low-pressure region puts extra burden
on the servers' internal fans, resulting in shortage of airflow. In
another words, the high-velocity jet may bypass the servers
located at the bottom of the rack, leading to their thermal
failure.
The factors affecting the airflow taken by servers are:
1. The velocity of the airflow jet from perforated tile
2. The server position in the rack
3. The server fan characteristics
4. The server internal flow resistance
The first two factors determine the server inlet and exhaust
pressures. The last two factors determine the server response to
the variation of the inlet and exhaust pressure. A server with
high internal resistance needs powerful fans and its airflow is
not very sensitive to the changes in the inlet and exhaust
pressures. A server with little internal resistance, on the other
hand, has rather weak fans and its airflow will be susceptible to
the changes in these pressures.
To the authors' knowledge, there have been no studies to
address this concern. The objective of this paper is to find the
effect of the high-velocity airflow jet discharging from
perforated tiles on the amount of airflow passing through
servers at various heights in a front-to-rear server rack. Also,
we want to provide a simple tool for data center professionals
to estimate the airflow reduction for servers in the rack.
A computational model based on the CFD technique is
used to analyze the flow field around the server rack and
calculate the airflow taken by the servers. Two cases are
studied. In one case, a server rack from a row of racks in a
prefect hot aisle-cold aisle arrangement is considered. The
boundary conditions around such a rack are completely
symmetrical. In the other case, a single rack in a room with
asymmetrical boundary conditions is analyzed. The servers
inside the rack are modeled as a combination of a fan and a
flow resistance. The characteristics of the fan and resistance are
taken from typical servers manufactured by IBM.
This paper is arranged as follows. First, we present the
details of the computational model, with special emphasis on
the treatment of servers inside the rack. Then we use the
computational model to demonstrate the potential problem of
the possible starvation of the servers at the bottom of the rack.
Next, we use the computational model to see how typical real-
life servers under practical operating conditions response to the
high-velocity jet. We demonstrate the effect of the high-
velocity jet on racks that accommodate various numbers of
servers. Finally, we use the insight provided by the
computational analysis to develop a simplified model for
estimating the reduction of airflow for servers placed at the
bottom of the rack.
Assumption: In all calculations performed in this study,
the following two assumptions are made:
1. The cooling air is supplied to the rack by one
perforated tile in front of the rack.
2. The airflow supplied by the perforated tile is equal to
the total airflow needed by all servers in the rack.
These are reasonable assumptions, which lead to more
conservative results.
THE COMPUTATIONAL MODEL
The mathematical model is formulated from the
incompressible form of the Navier-Stokes equations, together
with the k-ε turbulence model. The flow is assumed to be
steady.
The governing equations are solved using the
Computational Fluid Dynamics software package COMPACT
[1]. COMPACT is based on the finite-volume method described
by Patankar [2]. In the finite-volume method, the calculation
domain is divided into a number of finite or control volumes. A
grid point at the center of each control volume denotes the
location of the unknown dependent variable (e.g., velocity
components and pressure). The partial differential equation for
the dependent variable is integrated over the control volume,
and the resulting integrals are approximated in terms of grid
geometry and values of variables at surrounding grid points to
obtain an algebraic equation. The solution of these algebraic
equations, one for each grid point, provides the values of the
dependent variables at all grid points in the calculation domain.
The servers inside the rack are modeled as a volume
comprising a row of fans at the inlet and a distributed flow
resistance throughout the volume. The fans and distributed
flow resistance contribute respectively as source and sink terms
to the momentum equation in the flow direction. The
computational grid is refined several times to make sure the
grid independent results are obtained.
DEMONSTRATING THE POTENTIAL PROBLEM
The effect of the high-velocity jet on the airflow taken by
servers in the rack depends on the velocity of the jet, the
position of the server in the rack, the characteristics of the fans
used in the servers, and the server flow resistance (impedance).
The higher the velocity of the jet, the lower the inlet pressure to
the servers, which leads to lower airflow through them.
To demonstrate the effect of a high-velocity jet on the
airflow through the servers, two hypothetical 2U servers
(Server A and Server B) are considered. Both of them demand
about 137 CFM for proper cooling. Server A has a very high
internal resistance and strong fans, while server B has low
internal resistance and weaker fans. Table 1 summarizes the
2 Copyright © 2007 by ASME
characteristics of these servers when operating under same inlet examine their sensitivity to the variation of pressure at the front
and exhaust pressure. and rear of the rack.

Table 1. Flow rate and internal pressure drop for 2U servers ANALYSIS OF RACKS HOUSING REAL-LIFE
SERVERS UNDER PRACTICAL CONDITIONS
Flow rate at Internal pressure drop at In this section two real-life servers are considered. The
Server operating point operating point characteristics of these servers (fan performance curve and
(CFM) (in wg) server impedance) are provided by IBM and are representative
A 137 1.3 of realistic high-end 1U and 2U serves manufactured by IBM.

B 137 0.1 Table 2 summarizes the dimensions and operating

conditions for these servers. Please note that the data presented
in Table 2 are representative estimates for such servers and not
We consider two cases. In one case, a rack is populated the actual values.
with 20 type A servers. In the other case, the rack is populated
with 20 type B servers. The airflow provided by the perforated Table 2. Characteristics of typical 1U and 2U servers
tile in front of the rack meets the demand of the servers. This
airflow is 2740 CFM, which leads to a high jet velocity of 11.5 Flow rate at Internal pressure
ft/s. The rack is assumed to be in the middle of a row in a Serve Width Length operating drop at operating
perfect hot aisles-cold aisles arrangement. This assumption r Type (in) (in) point point
imposes symmetrical boundary conditions around the rack. The (CFM) (in wg)
details of these boundary conditions are described in the next
section. 1U 24 36 43 0.15

The airflow analysis for the two cases is performed. Fig. 1
shows the comparison of the flow distribution for servers at
different heights in the rack for the two cases. Servers of type A
are receiving almost the same flow rate irrespective of their
position in the rack. On the other hand, servers of type B are
very sensitive to their position in the rack. Those at the bottom
receive as little as 50% of the required airflow. The airflow for
the servers on the top of the rack is close to the needed airflow.
This exercise shows that the combination of high-velocity jets
and low resistance servers can create a critical situation for
servers at the bottom of the rack.
Server A Server B
2U 24 36 155 0.54
The location of a rack in the data center and the
environment around it affect the pressure distribution at inlet
and exhaust sides of the rack. In order to generalize the
findings of this study, two extreme cases are considered, which
are described below.
Case 1: In this case, the server rack is considered in the
middle of a row of racks in a perfectly hot aisles-cold aisles
arrangement as shown in Fig. 2. The boundary conditions
around the rack are symmetrical. Fig. 3 shows the solution
domain for such a rack.

160
Flow Rate (CFM)

120

80

40

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Rack's Bottom Server Position Rack's Top

Figure 1. Airflow rates through servers at various heights in the

rack

The server characteristics used in this example were

hypothetical and were chosen to create extreme cases and Figure 2. A server rack in the middle of a row in a perfect hot
aisles-cold aisle arrangement.
demonstrate the potential problem. In the next section, we will
consider typical real-life servers available in the market and

3 Copyright © 2007 by ASME

 the servers at the bottom of the rack receive less airflow
compared to those in the middle and top of the rack.

Figure 3. Solution domain for the rack in the middle of a row Figure 4. Solution domain for a stand-alone rack

The front, back, and two sides of the solution domain have
symmetry boundary conditions. The airflow is supplied from
Case 1 Case 2
the perforated tile in front of the rack. The exhaust is located at
the top of the hot aisle. In this case, the supply airflow jet is 50

contained within an invisible rectangular channel in front of the

Flow Rate (CFM)

40
rack. There is no space for the jet to expand. Similarly, the
airflow discharged from servers is contained in the rectangular 30

channel on the back of the rack. 20

Case 2: In this case, a single rack is placed in an empty 10

room with no other racks around it as shown in Fig. 4. Unlike 0

in the first case, the airflow supplied by the perforated tile is 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39
not contained and has room available for expansion. One Server Position
exhaust vent is considered on the back wall and another one on
Figure 5. Airflow distribution through 1U servers in a rack
the left-side wall. The amount of the airflow exiting from each
of the vents can be adjusted. To satisfy the overall continuity
Fig. 6 shows similar results for a rack full of 2U servers.
equation, the combined exit flow from these vents equals the
Again, case 1, which has symmetrical boundary conditions, is
inlet flow from the perforated tile. If the exhaust flow from the
more critical.
sidewall is set to zero, the supply jet will stay in front of the
rack. If the exhaust flow from the sidewall is nonzero, then the
jet will tilt to that direction, creating an asymmetrical jet. By Case 1 Case 2
changing the amount of the exit flow from the vent on the
160
sidewall, various asymmetrical conditions can be imposed.
Therefore, a complete range of asymmetrical conditions for a
Flow Rate (CFM)

120
rack can be examined. Such a model can represent a stand-
alone rack, a rack at the end of a row, and any other 80
asymmetrical conditions that may exists in a data center.
40
Fig. 5 shows the airflow distribution through 1U servers in
a rack for the two cases. The rack is full; there are 40 servers in 0
the rack. The data is shown for servers on the odd locations to 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
make the graph more readable. It can be seen that for case 2 the Server Position
servers receive almost the same airflow. However, for case 1, Figure 6. Airflow distribution through 2U servers in a rack

4 Copyright © 2007 by ASME


Results shown for case 2 in Figs. 5 and 6 are for fifty
percent flow split between the two exhausts. For other flow
splits very similar results are obtained. Therefore, we can
conclude that the effect of the high-velocity jet on the flow
distribution through servers is more critical for a rack in a
middle of a row in a hot aisles-cold aisles arrangement compare
to any other arrangements. The results shown in the rest of the
paper are for Case 1 (symmetrical boundary conditions).
THE MAXIMUM EFFECT OF THE HIGH-VELOCITY JET
In the previous section, we found that the effect of the
high-velocity jet on the airflow taken by servers is noticeable
only for racks in the middle of the row in a perfect hot aisles-
cold aisles arrangement. Also, the effect is limited to the servers
at the bottom of the rack. The goal of this section is to quantify
this effect and see how important it is.
First, the 1U servers considered in the previous section are
used in the calculation. The rack is populated with different
number of 1U servers from bottom to top. The rack can
accommodate up to 40 1U servers. Using the CFD results, the
airflow through servers is calculated for each case. The results
are presented for the server at the bottom of the rack since it
receives the minimum airflow and represent the worst case.
Fig. 7 shows the amount of the flow reduction for bottom
server as a function of the number of servers in the rack. The
flow reduction is defined as follows:
Ideal Flow − Actual Flow
Flow Reduction =
Ideal Flow
Ideal Flow is the airflow passing through the server when
the inlet and exhaust pressures are the same. Actual Flow is the
airflow calculated in the CFD modeling. The maximum flow
reduction for the bottom server is about 15% and happens
when the rack is fully filled with servers. The more servers in
the rack the more airflow from perforated tiles, which leads to
higher jet velocity and lower inlet pressure for the servers in
the rack. (Note that the airflow through the perforated tile
matches the airflow requirement of the servers present in the
rack.)
16%
% of Flow Reduction for Bottom Server
14%
12%
10%
8%
6%
4%
2%
0%
0 5 10 15
Number of Servers in the Rack
Figure 7. Flow reduction for the bottom server (1U servers)
Similar calculations are also performed for 2U servers and
the results are shown in Fig. 8. The rack can accommodate up
to 20 2U servers. Again, the maximum flow reduction for the
bottom server is about 15% and happens when the rack is fully
filled with servers.
The airflow supplied by the perforated tile for the rack full of
servers is 1750 CFM and 3100 CFM for 1U and 2U servers
respectively, which is very high. Manufacturers of servers do
not recommend filling up the rack with servers. Therefore, we
can conclude that 15% reduction in airflow for the bottom
server is the worst case that can happen.
16%
% of Flow Reduction for Bottom Server
14%
12%
10%
8%
6%
4%
2%
0%
0 5 10 15 20
Number of Servers in the Rack
Figure 8. Flow reduction for the bottom server (2U servers)
PREDICTION OF THE FLOW REDUCTION FOR
SERVERS PLACED AT THE BOTTOM OF THE RACK
The objective of this section is to provide a simple model
to calculate the flow reduction, caused by high-velocity jet, for
the server placed at the bottom of the rack.
To develop such a model, first we need to have a better
understanding of the physics of the problem. Fig. 9 shows the
side view of a server rack in a symmetrical configuration. A
perforated tile in the cold aisle supplies the cooling air and the
hot air is taken out from the top of the hot aisle. The static
pressure at the bottom of the cold aisle is PC1 and the vertical
velocity is V. Under ideal conditions, the airflow provided by
the perforated tile equals the demand of the rack. Thus, the
vertical velocity at the top of the cold aisle is zero and the
pressure is PC2.
Assuming a frictionless flow and using the Bernoulli
equation, the theoretical pressure increase in the cold aisle from
bottom to top of the rack will be one velocity head:
1
PC 2 − PC1 = ρV 2 (1)
2
20 25 30 35 40
5 Copyright © 2007 by ASME
 calculation. This results in a higher vertical velocity in the hot
PC2, 0 PH2 , V aisle and larger pressure variations from bottom to top of the
rack. Similar phenomenon, although somewhat weaker, in the
cold aisle also causes larger pressure variations along the height
of the rack. There are other factors that contribute to the
pressure variations on the hot and cold aisle. These include
Server
Exhaust pressure drops associated with turning, merging, and splitting
of the flow entering or exhausting from the servers. The actual
pressure difference across the servers is decided by the velocity
of the air discharging from the perforated tile, the airflow of the
Rack servers, and total number of servers. Fig. 10 shows the pressure
Server and velocity distribution in a plain passing through the middle
of the rack obtained from the CFD calculation.

Perforated
Tile
Server

PC1, V PH1 , 0

Figure 9. A server rack in a symmetrical configuration

The vertical velocity of the airflow at the bottom of the hot

aisle is zero. Assuming that the change of temperature has
negligible effect on the air density and considering the
conservation of mass, the vertical velocity of the air at the top
of the hot aisle is the same as the vertical velocity of the jet at
the bottom of the cold aisle, which is V. Therefore, the
theoretical pressure decrease from bottom to top of the hot aisle
will be again one velocity head:

1
PH 1 − PH 2 = ρV 2 (2)
2
Figure 10. Pressure and velocity distribution across the rack
The pressure at the top of the rack is nearly uniform:
To develop a simple model to estimate the amount of the
PC 2 = PH 2 (3) flow reduction for the server placed at the bottom of the rack,
many scenarios with different types of servers and different
number of servers in the rack were analyzed. The following
Using equations 1, 2, and 3 the theoretical pressure
dimensionless variables are defined:
difference across the server at the bottom of the rack is:
Velocity Head of the Flow Discharging from Tile
PH 1 − PC1 = ρV 2 (4) H=
Nominal Pressure Drop across the Server

which is twice the velocity head of the air supplied by the

perforated tile. The results of the CFD calculations, however,
show that the actual pressure difference across the server at the
bottom of the rack is higher—between 3 and 7 velocity heads
—than the theoretical value.
Due to the relatively high horizontal velocity of the air
exhausting from the back of the servers, the air is pressed
against the back of the hot aisle. As a result, the available width
and corresponding area for the vertical jet is less than the width
and projected area of the hot aisle considered in the theoretical
Bottom Server Actual Flow
F=
Server Ideal Flow
The nominal pressure drop across the server is the pressure
drop that is overcome by server fans when the inlet and exit
pressures for the server are the same. The nominal pressure
drop across the server can be found using the server flow rate
and the characteristic curve of the fan used in the server. The
values of F versus H for all cases analyzed are plotted in Fig.

6 Copyright © 2007 by ASME

11. The data follow a linear pattern and a curve fit to the data is SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
shown in the graph. In this paper the effect of the high-velocity jet on the flow
reduction through the servers placed in the front-to-rear racks
In practical cases the value of H is below 0.08. Therefore, was studied. The high-velocity jet creates a low-pressure region
for practical situations the value of F is above 0.85. This in front of the rack, which reduces the airflow taken by servers.
means that the reduction in the flow rates is usually less than It is shown that the racks positioned in the middle of a row in a
15%. perfectly hot aisles-cold aisles arrangement experience the
highest amount of flow reduction. For the worst case, the flow
1.0
reduction for the server at the bottom of the rack is about 15%.
0.9
A simple model is developed that relates the amount of the
0.8 flow going through the bottom server to the ratio of perforated
tile velocity head to server pressure drop. This model can be
0.7
F

used to estimate the amount of the airflow reduction for the

0.6 servers placed at the bottom of the rack and thus predict their
thermal performance.
0.5

0.4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30
The authors would like to thank Dr. Madhusudan Iyengar
and Dr. Roger Schmidt from IBM for providing us with the
H typical characteristics of the 1U and 2U servers.
Figure 11. Flow fraction for bottom server as a function of
dimensionless velocity head REFERENCES
[1] Compact User’s Manual, Innovative Research, Inc.,
The line fit shown in Fig. 11 can be expressed as the 3025 Harbor Lane N., Suite 300, Plymouth, MN 55447.
follows:
[2] S.V. Patankar, Numerical Heat Transfer and Fluid Flow,
F = 1 − 1.84 H (5) Hemisphere, 1980.

7 Copyright © 2007 by ASME

View publication stats