24 MW Midwestern Data Center — Waterless Dry-Cooler Recirculation · Exterior CFD Survey · Resolved Analytics

← Survey overview · Case Study 05 · Updated June 2026

24 MW Data Center — Midwestern US

Waterless dry-cooler recirculation: under a northeasterly wind, ground-level generator exhaust reaches the rooftop dry-cooler intakes — and the site's symmetry means the opposite wind drives a mirror-image exposure. Public-source inputs. Screening-level.

Exterior CFD result showing ground-level generator exhaust lofting onto the rooftop dry-cooler intakes under a northeasterly wind, with surface coloring indicating elevated local intake temperature
Exterior CFD output: wind from the northeast (45°) at 10 mph, 98°F ambient, all generators and all rooftop dry coolers running at full load. Streamlines trace generator exhaust lofting onto the rooftop heat-rejection units; surface coloring shows local intake temperature.

What this page covers

This page presents a screening-level exterior CFD analysis of a 24 MW data center in the Midwestern United States, developed by a major colocation operator and engineered by a national firm with a dedicated mission-critical practice. It is a waterless campus: heat rejection is handled by closed-loop, air-cooled rooftop dry coolers — no cooling towers, no water consumed — and the standby generators sit at grade, in a layout symmetric about the building's long axis.

The result is a recirculation question with a twist: because the site is symmetric, the exposure comes in matched pairs. Under a northeasterly wind, exhaust from the upwind generator group reaches the dry coolers — and a southwesterly wind produces the mirror image.

Facility context

The facts below are derived entirely from cited public sources: published facility and provider materials, aerial and street-level imagery, and public terrain data. No proprietary drawings, specifications, or operational data are used. Identifying details are withheld; the facility is described by type and configuration only.

Region.
Midwestern United States.
Owner-operator.
A major colocation operator. Not identified here.
Engineer of record.
A national engineering firm with a dedicated mission-critical practice. Not identified here.
Critical IT capacity.
24 MW, N+1 redundancy.
Building.
Two-story, purpose-built campus.
Cooling.
Waterless: rooftop dry coolers (closed-loop glycol, air-cooled) in two arrays, northeast and southwest; side-draw intakes through V-coil faces, vertical discharge. No cooling towers; no water consumed.
Backup power.
Ground-level generator enclosures on concrete pads, split into northeast and southwest groups with stack exhaust. Site layout is symmetric about the building's long axis.
Electrical service.
138 kV transmission to 34.5 kV building distribution.

Scenario presented

Wind and ambient.

Wind from the northeast (45°) at 10 mph, 98°F ambient — a high-end regional summer condition that carries the northeast generator group's exhaust toward the dry-cooler array.

Operating scenario.

All generators and all rooftop dry coolers running at full load — the on-generator condition that maximizes both the exhaust source and the heat-rejection demand together.

This case was isolated by a directional sweep across the full compass — not the standard four-point (N/S/E/W) check. The site's symmetry is the point: whatever the northeasterly wind does to one array, a southwesterly wind does to the other.

What the model shows

The observations below are qualitative readings of the presented scenario. Quantitative outputs — per-unit intake temperatures, recirculation magnitudes — are shared with the owner's team on request.

  1. Generator exhaust impinges on the rooftop dry coolers. Under the northeasterly wind, the plume from the upwind ground-level generator group rises and reaches the rooftop dry-cooler intakes rather than dispersing clear of the roof.
  2. The risk is symmetric. Because the generator groups and dry-cooler arrays mirror each other about the building's long axis, a southwesterly wind drives an equivalent exposure on the opposite array — two adverse vectors, not one.
  3. Waterless cooling raises the stakes on intake air. With no evaporative process to fall back on, dry-cooler capacity tracks intake dry-bulb directly, so warmed intake air translates straight into lost heat-rejection headroom — making intake air quality a first-order design concern here.
  4. Building geometry governs whether exhaust reaches the roofline. Whether the ground-level plume clears the roof edge or washes onto the arrays is set by massing and spacing — a question an exterior model resolves and an interior one takes as fixed.
Plan view showing dry-cooler intake temperatures with streamlines under the northeasterly case, warmed intakes concentrated on the array nearest the upwind generator group
Plan view. Dry-cooler intake temperatures with streamlines under the northeasterly case, showing warmed intakes concentrated on the array nearest the upwind generator group.
Side elevation showing the generator exhaust plume rising from grade and carried over the roof edge onto the dry-cooler intakes
Elevation view. Side elevation showing the generator exhaust plume rising from grade and carried over the roof edge onto the dry-cooler intakes.

Methodology

The methodology applied here is the same standardized exterior CFD approach applied to every facility in the cohort — cylindrical far-field domain, logarithmic atmospheric boundary layer inlet, polyhedral mesh in Siemens STAR-CCM+, realizable k-ε RANS baseline. The presented case uses a 98°F ambient. Full domain setup, boundary conditions, solver choices, and stated limitations are documented at the Methodology page. Key terms are defined at the Key Terms and FAQ page.

Why developers mandate independent validation Resolved Analytics engineers the macro-environmental physics outside of data centers — the wind, plume, and ambient behavior that decides whether those systems ever reach their design condition. Portfolio-level scrutiny of external thermal conditions varies with whichever engineering partner holds the scope, so developers bring in RA as the constant. We find and run the pessimistic scenarios — N+R conditions, elevated ambient, adverse non-standard wind vectors — alongside the engineering team from the 30% design stage, so the owner gets a facility that holds up in the conditions standard screening skips. This case is what one of those scenarios surfaces: generator exhaust carried onto the rooftop dry-cooler intakes — a symmetric, two-direction risk a waterless design can least afford. One question worth carrying into your next design review: were the adverse, non-standard wind vectors — including the mirror-image case — modeled explicitly, or only the standard design-day condition? Contact stewart@resolvedanalytics.com and reference Case Study 05.
About the author Stewart Bible, Principal, Resolved Analytics. Resolved Analytics is a Computational Fluid Dynamics consulting practice and authorized Siemens STAR-CCM+ reseller, with a long-standing service line in mission-critical facility exterior analysis. Contact: stewart@resolvedanalytics.com.

Disclosure. This is independent research conducted by Resolved Analytics. All inputs are derived from cited public sources; no proprietary drawings, specifications, or operational data are used. The facility is described by type and configuration only and is not identified. Results represent idealized exterior conditions and do not represent the actual as-built performance of any facility. No claims are made regarding life-safety, code compliance, or operational performance. This material is not engineering services rendered to any party.