[ghorrocks]

Then isn't this either:
* A number of separate steady state runs, each at a fixed heat source value covering the range of interest which will give you a temperature versus heat source power curve, OR
* A transient model

Doing it as a single steady state model with a variable heat source is not good practice as it is not a steady state model the way you have set it up.

[MNMK]

I do not want to create any curve of temperature vs. heat source. By changing the heat source value, the outlet temperature will change. To estimate this, I do not think the case should be calculated based on time.

Instead of changing a parameter and starting the case, I would prefer to see the effect during the calculation. Is this wrong? The absolute value is not my focus. My aim is to study the trend of changes.

[Opaque]

Originally Posted by MNMK

Thank you.

However, it would be better if it were possible to plot the expression before running it.

wishes

How can we probe/evaluate something that has not been computed? I am open to suggestions from YOU.

[MNMK]

It was my mistake. I calculated the model using a constant heat source and knew the temperature was about 130°C. Therefore, I thought it would be possible, but I realized it is not.

[ghorrocks]

Instead of changing a parameter and starting the case, I would prefer to see the effect during the calculation. Is this wrong? The absolute value is not my focus. My aim is to study the trend of changes.

This sounds like a transient simulation. A steady state simulation can only give you a single, steady state answer - all the intermediate results as it converges towards the answer are not useable results and are not physically correct. So you cannot use the intermediate results from a steady state simulation for anything. But in a transient simulation the time history is physically correct.