This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

of a pressure gradient

R. W. Lewis and W. J. Ferguson Department of Civil Engineering, Swansea, U.K. University College of Swansea, Singleton Park,

This paper presents a finite element analysis for a coupled heat and mass transfer problem under the influence of a pressure gradient. The numerical modelpresented is partially nonlinear, where some of the material properties are held constant during the solution process, and is compared with a fully nonlinear model, where all material properties are permitted to vary as the solution progresses.

Keywords: capillary-porous,

pressure gradient

Introduction process of the transfer of heat and mass of a substance are amongst the most important sections of modern science and have great practical importance in many technological areas such as chemical engineering, the construction industry, and soil science. The occurrence of heat and mass transfer problems within industry are wide and varied and the examples mentioned are just a few. A characteristic feature of the phenomena of heat and mass transfer in the areas mentioned is their interdependence, when heat and mass transfer become one combined process. It appears that the first engineering analysis of the drying of solids was carried out by Lewis’, who proposed that the drying of a solid material represents a balance between the processes of diffusion of moisture and of the evaporation of moisture from the material surface. The idea of moisture transfer by diffusion was further developed by Sherwood2*3, who discussed the possibility of moisture vaporizing within the porous body and moisture transfer occurring by diffusion of vapor to the surface. More sophisticated models were proposed, which were derived from either a classical approach, Krischer4, and Philip and De Vries’, or in aphenomenological manner, Luikov6, Huang et al.‘, and HarThe

Address reprint requests to Prof. Lewis at the Department of Civil Engineering, University College of Swansea, Singleton Park, Swansea SA2, 8PP, England. Received 1992 18 December 1991; revised 21 April 1992; accepted 5 May

marthy’. Only Luikov discusses the possibility of incorporating the gaseous pressure within the porous media into his model. His system of coupled partial differential equations was the more general and could be applied to any body, which can be idealized as capillary-porous in which heat and mass transfer takes place. Whitaker’ developed a system of equations from a mechanical approach that demonstrated the necessity of taking into account the gas phase momentum equation, even below the boiling point of water. His approach formed the basis of models by Perre et al.” and Quintard and Puiggali”. Moyne and Degoviannii* and Degovianni and Moyne13 showed that above the boiling point of water the pressure gradient becomes a significant driving force. Utilizing the thermodynamics of irreversible processes, 0nsager’4,‘5, Luikovl‘j,” defined a coupled system of partial differential equations that described the variation of temperature, moisture content, and pressure within a capillary-porous body. Analytical solutions to Luikov’s system of equations exist in only one dimension’8; hence they can be used for only the simplest of problems. To solve any realistic engineering problems having inherent intricate geometrical contigurations and complex boundary conditions, resort must be made to a numerical technique. Comini and Lewis I9were the first to employ a numerical technique; the finite element method, to solve the Luikov equations in real engineering situations. They took as an example problems involving a foundation basement and brick drying. The results obtained were restricted to the case where the material properties were assumed to be constant. This work was developed by Thomas et al.*’ and Thomas*’ such that the material properties were fully nonlinear and could vary with

0 1993 Butterworth-Heinemann

Appl. Math. Modelling,

1993, Vol. 17, January

15

where all material properties are allowed to vary with the relevant working variable. Modelling. vapor or liquid. However. 3 = solid. whereas moisture potential and temperature are C(0) continuous./ = .. Lewis and W. as demonstrated in the partially nonlinear formulation. the following assumptions were made in order to define the fully nonlinear model of temperature. 1 = vapor. By introducing the concept of moisture potential. moisture content.. Math. and pressure: l l On introducing equations and rearranging becomes pOc. i. The summation of the source and the sink terms equals zero. J.. which was developed by Ferguson and Lewis23. a fully nonlinear formulation. first. A system of partial differential equations resulted. the pressure term had been assumed constant throughout the domain of interest.V’U + k.Vm a7 + a.. = jifi. Both the moisture content and enthalpy are discontinuous across internal material boundaries. by summing for all the material components. 17.i hiZi .p. Ferguson Mass transfer equation either temperature or moisture content as the numerical solution progressed.a.S’V2T + k. Lewis and Ferguson2’ developed this work further to include the pressure term in the coupled heat and mass transfer equations. As a result of this pressure gradient an additional transfer of moisture and heat takes place because of the filtration motion of the liquid and vapor contained within the capillary porous body. (8) 16 Appl. the vapor. + jzf. i = 0.+Z. = jd.k.VP) (3) Luiko@ introduced the concept of moisture potential. 1993.g (4) and (5) into equation (3) l l The mass is present only as liquid and vapor.p.) -= a7 -divj. 3. = .j. . the mass balance for the material as a whole can be obtained.V2P (6) Heat transfer equation The balance of the thermal energy within the capillary-porous body is given by Luiko@ cppOE = -divj. follows from the law of mass conservation G%P. 2. However. The movement of moisture in the capillary-porous body is sufficiently slow so that in practice the temperature of the liquid.SVT + k.. and 4.VT i=o i=o (7) where the isobaric specific heat is denoted by ci The following subscripts are used to describe the various components of the material: 0 = porous body skeleton.e. after substituting equation (2) into equation (1) we obtain a(mp. the discontinuity can be overcome. In this paper we will demonstrate how the finite element method can be employed to solve the three degree of freedom Luikov equations. a partially nonlinear formulation where some material properties are held constant. and 4 = inert gas. and the body are equal at coincident points. during an intense period of drying. which is related to moisture content by the following relationship m=c.VP Equation (1) represents the mass balance for the i”’ bound material. Dimensional changes that occur within the material.p. The relationship between moisture content and moisture potential is analogous to that of enthalpy and temperature. where the specific mass capacity varies from material to material. = k.. The mass flux can be described as j.Heat and mass transfer in capillary-porous body: R. and pressure in a capillary-porous body. (1) The mass flux in a capillary-porous body is the sum of the mass flux due to diffusion and the mass flux due to filtration.U (4) Conservation equations In addition. which brings about a filtration transfer of the liquid and vapor mixture. A comparison is made between two formulations of the Luikov equations. For a nonhomogeneous problem. and second. Vol. and its effect on the numerical solution negligible. Chemical reactions associated with water loss are not taken into account.i c. the coefficient of moisture diffusivity is related to the coefficient of moisture conductivity by a. The diffusion mass flux is related not only to the moisture content gradient but also to the temperature gradient.. moisture. W. a total pressure gradient arises within the material. where jd. Previously. are comparatively small and can be ignored.(Vm + 8VT) + jfil (2) jfi. k =--!L PO cm (5) In the derivation of the partial differential equations. The total pressure gradient appears within the material as a result of evaporation and the resistance of the porous skeleton vapor motion.. 2 = liquid. Hence. which describes the interaction between heat. a discontinuity in the moisture content will arise across the material boundaries.. 1. due to a temperature or moisture content change. January . The mass balance for one of the bound materials. this effect is more commonly known as the Soret effect. The filtration mass flux occurs because of the presence of a total pressure gradient within the body.) = div (a.

V2T + K. &- + j.c. This effect is more commonly known as the Dufour effect. the heat flux is also related..2 h. in capillary-porous bodies...S’V=T - l k. moisture potential. = K.k. J. + Z4 (15) The specific mass content of the vapor-gas mixture is determined by the pressure and temperature (16) On differentiating equation (16) and assuming T* >> c. 1993. Diffusion of vapor and air in the capillaries is small in comparison with filtration transfer. (5). Cq.) + I. i=o (10) (17) we obtain d(m. and (12) into equation (10) and rearranging we obtain Equations (6). this is usually considered to be insignificant for capillary-porous bodies. Kx3 = k.(l - l )V*P (20) amzpo Vm + NT + &VP [ ( I) (12) amp0 k + Ak. Modelling. we obtain d(p. We can therefore write the heat flux as j..V=P . and (20) form the governing system of equations that describe the variation of temperature.divj. and pressure within a capillary-porous body. the convective heat transfer component is small in comparison with the conductive component.l k. Kx = km K32 = . i=o = -hdiv Introducing equation (4) and rearranging. = . and T >> db and letting Mllb c zzP R TP.(l Appl.V’T + K. provided that the equivalent Reynolds number. .P. + eAk. we obtain the governing equation for the pressure variation within the capillary-porous body. Therefore the simplified form of the thermal energy balance within a capillary-porous body is represented by Pl.V=U + K13V2P = (k.V2U + K2. g = . + j. is ~20.... Hence f: h. but in the case of coupled heat and mass transfer. to the moisture gradient...$‘) Cm = PoCm K.j. Therefore the convective heat transfer term is assumed to be negligible i c. albeit weakly..V*T + K2. This system of equations was used by Ferguson and Lewis22.V2P (21) C$ = K.E~ (19) The source or sink term is due to the phase change of the liquid or vapor contained within the body structure.Z.S’ K3. however. p$$ = -ek.. Math.. j..VT (11) dp p ar equations (18) (14) and (18) into equation = k. January 17 . (1 I). Ferguson However.cD$ The heat flux is usually related to the temperature gradient.23 to solve practical engineering problems. W.S’)V*T Pressure equation + l Ak.V2U + K3. Vol. C.. = Ehk.V2P Governing system of equations Substituting equations (4). 17.VP (14) Cm: = K. (13)..Heat and mass transfer in capillary-porous body: R. = k. Lewis and W. = -k.Z.V2P where K.. = -&‘k. = POCS = (k. an equation representing the change in pressure is required..VT-0 i=o (9) Summing the mass balance equation (1) with respect to i = 1 and 4.V2U l (13) For a closed system. Reey. c&I = PoCp K.+mA)=c dT On substituting (15) we obtain p. (ml + mJ) = -div(j.V’U + k.. + l hk. = Ehkp Kz = kg K2. In the majority of cases of heat and mass transfer in capillary-porous bodies the equivalent Reynolds numbers are considerably less than unity.

A(U. and (31) are substituted into equations (21) a residual is obtained.W (29) (27) u = Ii N. Although the surface boundary conditions. 1 m4 .. U. discontinuities do not occur.) + A. temperature. and the last term is the amount of heat expended in the phase change of the liquid.T. s=l (0 (30) (31) where J. pressure. which is then minimized using the Galerkin method. being used as the weighting functions. as described by Zienkiewicz25. + k. = Kz2 r ‘f slj. = A.. the first term describes the supply of moisture to the surface under the influence of a temperature gradient.U. conditions associated with the partially nonlinear system of equations are on I. J. respectively. and pressure.) + J. T.Heat and mass transfer in capillary-porous body: R..= - l )KI. + j. equations (22) to (26). (30). Equations (22).) + (1 . Ferguson Boundary conditions The boundary T= T. whereas the final two terms describe the amount of moisture drawn off from the surface. (22) (23) (24) (25) kqg +& + a. Math. January . with the shape functions.(U JZ.T. = F(l 4 A.y. For equation (25). 18 Appl.E)(Y. rs (26) The first term in equation (23) is the amount of heat passing into the body.. and moisture potential throughout the domain of interest. . as Ti: s=l Nsky)T. are expressed in terms of moisture potential. = f$jq 4 _ l ) 1 J.(T .+.:= 0 A. a more widely accepted method of defining the boundary conditions is to express them in terms of absolute humidity. W. Modelling.(U-U. and (26) describe the Dirichlet boundary condition for the moisture.+J.) = 0 on I4 on P = P.=A. as de. Vol. YW. which is unique to Luikov’s system of coupled partial differential equations.U.)+J. KIF.U. By introducing the concept of moisture potential as the driving force. = k. the second and third terms are the heat supplied at the surface... Lewis and W. the major drawback is that tailed by Keey 24 discontinuities would arise across the internal material boundaries. and P. A.)+A. If the approximation given by equations (29). 1993.(T-T. Cl. is approximated in terms of the nodal values.$‘$ + cxu(U .k Finite element formulation The variation of the temperature. (T . Equations (23) and (25) may be written in a generalized form as follows K. (24).) = 0 on I2 on I3 u= k. N. Us.. 17. R. This requires that the integral of the weighted errors over the domain.g u. (x. -~ Kz+qS kq C$(l 4 J. However. must be zero.

but. therefore the gradients of temperature and pressure are not affected by the presence of the barrier film. is one-dimensional. K” (’ 3 + pP+* .Cqz f K2. The noise can be dampened to an acceptable level by introducing a maximum permissible timestep.. The cross-section of the container. J.V2U + K. by evaluating the coefficient matrices at time level n. Modelling. 1993. which avoids the need for an iterative solver.. Wood2’ and Wood and Lewisz8 showed that this scheme was stable even though oscillations appeared in the solution when a convective boundary condition was used. To numerically achieve the effect of a moisture barrier tilm. and pressure within a capillary-porous body.. compared to the values used for the epoxy resin and air.V2U + K3.V2P .) The superscript n refers to the time level and A T refers to the timestep.V2P . moisture content. An obvious limitation in treating the entrapped air in this manner is that we cannot predict the air movement or circulation by convection within the Typical matrix elements are Timestepping algorithms The numerical solution of equation (33) is achieved by using the Lees three-level time stepping scheme26. Math. a small value. treating it as a material similar to solid materials and idealizing it as a capillary-porous body. k. The Lees three-level time stepping scheme has the advantage of solving for the time level n + 1. Inserted into the epoxy resin container wall is a layer that acts as a moisture barrier.. Ferguson + K. was used for the coefficient of moisture conductivity. it is not intended to act as a thermal insulator nor to provide an air-tight seal. which employs the finite difference technique in time.. The application of Green’s theorem (integration by parts) and the introduction of the generalized boundary conditions to equations (32) produces a system of differential equations that may be written in matrix form as K(O)@ + C(@)$ + J(Q) = 0 (33) matrices. it is intended to obtain the moisture variation within the central section of the container to a first order of approximation. The example consists of an epoxy resin container wall with air inside. which is designed to prevent the temperature and moisture levels from exceeding preset levels above which damage to the container’s contents would occur.. . shown in Figure I. Clearly air is a gas and not a capillaryporous body. Application The problem to be investigated consists of a crosssection through a container wall.Cp. January 19 . Appl.C. Luikov’s three degree of freedom system of partial differential equations describes the behavior of temperature. W.i E.ZV2U + K. Although the moisture barrier is designed to prevent an excessive migration of moisture. Lewis and W..Heat and mass transfer in capillary-porous body: R. Vol. 17.W-J) 2Ar + J” = 0 (34) where K(Q) and C(Q) are solution-dependent K= (3’. The moisture barrier is positioned within the epoxy resin wall to prevent excessive moisture migration in the x-direction from the epoxy resin exterior to the air entrapped within the container.V2P .: 1 1 I da = 0 da = 0 dfl = 0 (32) + K.

I. Air. which are brought about by the temperature difference and variation in density of the air within the central enclosed section of the container. Along face CD a flux type boundary condition. this epoxy resin container example is a one-dimensional problem.00*10~2 0. An alternative to modelling the air as a capillary-porous body would be to apply a boundary condition to the air/resin interface.8 4. 8.. Flow occurs only in the x-direction and not in the y-direction.00*10-2 0. Ferguson Insulated. Figure 1 shows only a cross-section through the container wall. - Table 1. However. Math. Vol. a boundary condition applied to the air/ resin interface would not be practical.0 S. also with a ramp loading. The boundary conditions increased linearly from the initial conditions to the epoxy container’s steady state conditions of temperature 5o”C.00*10-” 1. 17. Air has highly nonlinear material properties.50*10m5 3. 4 B .20*10-* 1.3 6. Modelling. and pressure 1 atmosphere. D I * * 0. cP E 6 J/kg J/hr.86*10m5 at 100% mc 1400. Boundary edge. The initial conditions throughout the domain of interest were temperature 2o”C.m.33*10m2 at 80% mc 1012. The material properties used in the partially nonlinear solution were those given in Table 1 except that pO.69*10m6 2343.3 6..0 at 50°C 4.0mm 47.52*10m6 at 50% mc 1. and pressure equilibrium values are not known.13 at 35°C 1. hence. faces AC and BD are assumed to be insulated because there is no flow either into or out of the body through these faces. moisture potential.5mm 50.m.04 at 20°C 99.0mm 4 Moisture barrier.08 at 50°C 2. W. Along sides 20 Appl.I ///////////////// 1.. were held constant and were taken as the mean of those values used for the fully nonlinear model...K kg/hr.0 at 20°C 794. As previously stated. was applied to the temperature and moisture potential. whilst for the pressure term there was a fixed-point boundary condition.00*10m3 2.00*10~3 k”. moisture potential SO”M.N.30*1 O6 154. The material properties presented in Table I are those used in the numerical simulation employing the fully nonlinear model. and these are shown alongside the material properties for the epoxy resin and the moisture barrier in Table 1. c. Material property PO Material properties for the fully nonlinear formulation Moisture barrier 55.N.0 at 50°C 6. kg a. Epoxy resin.Heat and mass transfer in capillary-porous I 8 body: R. 1993.0 5.. P e \ /v//I %. moisture potential 100”M and pressure 2 atmospheres.m-* m/h? J1kg. Cross-section of the epoxy resin container Insulated.0 5.0 5. the internal temperature. with a ramp loading. 45.0 Epoxy resin Air 1.00*10~2 0. The ramp loadings of the tixed point pressure boundary condition and of the ambient temperature and moisture potential are shown in Figure 2.19 at 20°C 1. J.I.30*106 92.45 at 50°C 6.3 at 20°C 1. Figure 1.00*10-3 kg/kg. units kg/m3 1170. E..30*106 512. and c. Lewis and W.K kg/kg.86*10~* at 40% mc 9..m-’ 2.1 I I I I I /. January .K container.. Hence.

Figures 4 to 6 show the variation of temperature against time. (Hrs) conditions I 3 75 123 Figure 3.5 02 015 02 05s 0. Temperature. The problem is one-dimensional.Heat and mass transfer in capillary-porous body: R. where the thermophysical properties are permitted to vary. Two curves are presented in each figure.01 Figure 2. the center line of the section of the epoxy resin container wall under analysis. 17. Temperature vs. the thermophysical properties are held constant. (Hrs) 1 Time. The variation of moisture within the capillary-porous body with time is expressed in terms of moisture potential. The finite element mesh used for the numerical solutions of both the fully and the partially nonlinear formulations is shown in Figure 3.03 0: 3. respectively.? 0.0 0. time at node 3 Figure 5. (Hrs) Figure 4. Math. one represents the numerical solution from the fully nonlinear model. Figures 7 to 9 show the variation of moisture potential against time. J.05 O. the variation of temperature. Lewis and W.0 0. Ramp loading boundary Time. and the other represents the numerical solution from the partially nonlinear model.4 CA5 03 8: I 1 1 I 0. therefore. 75. and 123. and Figures 10 to 12 show the variation of pressure against time for nodes 3. W. Figures 7 to 9.4 03 035 Time.. “C Moisture Potential. no flow occurs in the y-direction. Ferguson AC and BD there was assumed to be a nonconducting boundary condition. in this example. “51 For a given x-coordinate value along the center line. The nodes for which results are presented lie along the x-axis. Temperature Time. Modelling. Vol. (Hrs) vs.e. moisture potential and pressure versus time is identical for any position along theyaxis with the same x-coordinate. where. in the Xdirection. atms 0. Finite element discretization of the epoxy resin container E I / I I I I I 1 0. January 21 .8 01 025 1 0. time at node 75 Appl. The fully nonlinear heat and mass Pressure. (HE) 1 Time. 1993. i.

r I . Temperature vs. W. time at node 123 Figure 9.4 Jo-tidy Nm-inw. (Hrs) Figure 11. (Hrs) potential vs. Math.t 0.Heat and mass transfer in capillary-porous body: R. time at node 75 Figure 8.M c. Moisture potential vs. Lewis and W.8 I 02 1 OZS I Oil I 0s I 0. (Hrs) Figure 7. Modelling. time at node 3 0 m 200 do do Ga &I Time. 1993.Sl 00 0. January . (Hrs) Figure 6. Ferguson I-. time at node 123 Time. Moisture Time. time at node 75 22 Appl. Pressure vs. Moisture potential vs. . 17. (Hrs) 40 &I s& &I 0 50 m 50 2s 250 m Time. Vol. J.lAy No0-bw. time at node 3 Figure 10. 0 I I I m :m x8 do & 6io &I &a 930 c&o Time. Pressure vs.

. unless there was a finely graded finite element mesh at these boundaries. W. in this example. away from the external wall. or pressure causes the solution obtained from the fully nonlinear model to reach steady state equilibrium conditions.4 hr. where the specific mass capacity is not constant between materials. Figures 10 to 12. while the partially nonlinear model evaluates the moisture distribution in terms of moisture potential. were held constant. clearly indicating the consequences of nonlinear thermophysical properties on the numerical solution. The temperature gradient therefore has little or no effect on the transient pressure solution.. Figures 7 to 9. Moisture content is related to moisture potential according to equation (4). Lewis and W. Figure 7. which. Vol. it is C(0) continuous. Conclusions In the example presented in this paper. the specific mass capacity is constant throughout the whole of the domain of interest-the specific mass capacity for the epoxy resin is equal to the specific mass capacities for both the moisture barrier and the air. and pressure reached steady state equilibrium more quickly than did the numerical solution from the partially nonlinear model. The fully nonlinear solution is dictated by the nonlinear behavior of the materials under examination. at node 3. Hence no discontinuities occur across material boundaries. In a nonhomogeneous body. Figure 4. this is not always the case.. January 23 . whereas the partially nonlinear solution reaches the same value in 640 hrs. Luikov introduced the concept of moisture potential to overcome this difficulty.Heat and mass transfer in capillary-porous body: R. demonstrate and highlight the effect of varying the material properties as the solution proceeds toward steady state. Once again. Although the difference in the transient temperature solutions is not significant. moisture potential. is constant. because moisture potential is a continuous function across the internal material boundaries. although not significant. in this example the temperature has reached steady-state equilibrium at all nodes by 0. Ferguson Figure 12. For both numerical models the values of the moisture filtration coefficient. The numerical solutions presented in the moisture potential versus time graphs. the numerical solutions obtained from the fully nonlinear model for temperature. where the fully nonlinear solution reaches a value of 90”M in 480 hrs. Math. where all thermophysical properties were held constant.. the partially nonlinear model would be used to solve the problem so as to avoid a discontinuity in moisture content across the material boundaries. However. provided that the specific mass capacity. Figures 4 to 6. is not significant and is caused by the effect of the moisture gradient. c. The discontinuity in moisture content and the relationship to moisture potential is analogous to heat content and temperature. The effect of permitting the thermophysical properties to vary can be seen in the transient temperature solutions. where the boundary conditions are applied. Nomenclature 1. Because the system of partial differential equations that describe heat and mass transfer are coupled. node 3. This effect is most prominent. Although the difference between the two solutions was insignificant. J. However. both the temperature gradient and the moisture gradient affect the transient pressure solution. i. which is affected solely by the moisture and pressure gradients. would cause problems while solving the fully nonlinear model. and the degree of variation between the fully and partially nonlinear numerical solutions will be dependent on these material properties. k. faster than does the partially nonlinear solution. which were obtained from the two numerical models. because the moisture content and the transient moisture content solutions obtained by the fully nonlinear model can be converted to moisture potential according to equation (4). 17. The difference between the two numerical solutions for pressure versus time. In this example. the fully nonlinear solution reaches steady state equilibrium faster than does the partially nonlinear solution. from the assumed initial conditions. For other engineering problems. the effect becomes more prominent as we proceed toward the interior of the container. Acknowledgments WJF is grateful for the support of the Science and Engineering Research Council for a research scholarship to carry out this work.e. c. and the coefficient of humid air capacity. Modelling. the moisture content would produce a discontinuity across the material boundaries of the body. volumetric rial capacity of the source of the mate- Appl. moisture content. 1993. thereafter the temperature gradient will be zero. Pressure vs. time at node 123 transfer model calculates the moisture distribution within the body in terms of moisture content. and. permitting the material properties to vary with either temperature.

Am. Chem. Siang. 22. Pergamon Press. J-P. and Ferguson. Simultaneous heat. and Lewis. F. W. Int. R. Phys. A. and Amaud. Numer. C. A finite element analysis of shrinkage stresses in building materials. 119-204 Pen-e. R. Reciprocal relations in irreversible processes II. Numer. 1980 Luikov. eds. 427-432 Sherwood. 1977. Camp. 1. Moisture movement in porous materials under temperature gradients. Drying ‘85. W. 109-116 Degovianni. M. Heat Mass Transfer 1987. P. R. Modelling. R. 38. 1966. 973-984 Keev. 9. W. Fohr. Heat and mass transfer in capillary-porous bodies. Eng. 1717-1726 Wood. 24 25 26 21 Luikov. Union 1957. W. and Lewis. Simultaneous moisture and heat transfer in a porous system with particular reference to drying. pp. Morgan. G. C. Introduction to Industrial Drying Operations. Stanford. T. J.. Toei and A. J. The rate of drying of solid materials. Heat Transfer 1964. Heat and mass transfer in capillary-porous bodies. 1977 Lees. 15. 521-524 19 20 21 22 Comini. J. A linear three-level difference scheme for quasilinear narabolic eauations. M. 1931. Hartnett and T. Numer. A. 1980. 405-426 Onsager. J.. J. Math. Maths.. 27. Heat Mass Transfer 1962. Adv.‘M convective heat transfer coefftcient. and Moyne. Int. S(l). S. A comparison of a fully nonlinear and a partially nonlinear heat and mass transfer analysis of a timber drying problem.s-‘M moisture filtration coefficient. 92-103 Whitaker. R. University of Wales. Int. Int. T. A. Geophys. Proceedings of the VfZth International Conference on numerical methods in thermal problems. J. _I. W/m. 190-202 Sherwood. T u 2 body: R. R. A model of drying applied to softwoods: The effect of gaseous pressure below the boiling point. 1980 Lewis. 1931. 1975. K. London. Z and EC Fundamentals 1969.. L. New York.. Rev. 29. J/kg 10 I1 12 Harmarthy. H. K. J. R. V. 1931. J. L. 1985. D. P. 0. U. Oxford.S. kg/m3 bulk porosity of the body latent heat of vaporization of water. kg/ m’-s. Ind. H. J. 1387-1392 References Lewis. 2265-2279 Luikov. V.D. Trans. C. 13. kg*m/s+kN coefficient of thermal conductivity. J. Advances in Heat Transfer. Moscow. A. Hemisphere. M. Reciprocal relations in irreversible processes I. July 1991. kg*m*/ kgkN heat capacity. S. Phys. C. and Degovianni. W. Methods Eng. 1921. Heat and mass transfer. L. pp. Chem. J. Importance ofgas phase momentum equation in drying above the boiling point of water. C. 1930. Mujumdar. Drying ‘89. Rogues and A. 30(11). Ph. A. eds. Ind. M/K ratio of vapor diffusion to total diffusion dry density.. T. 1990. Eng. Znt. pp. Springer. Int. W. 1986. D. A fully nonlinear analysis of heat and mass transfer problems in porous bodies. 4(2). “C moisture potential. Int. pp. 0. Methods Eng. Vol. Heat Mass Transfer 1976. kN/m’ universal gas constant equivalent Reynolds number temperature. vol. Conductivite thermique de materieux poreux humides: evaluation theorique et possibilite de mesure. kg/ rn. R. R. W/“C~m* thermogradient coefficient. V. H. Z. Am. eds. 1966 Huang. Numerical modelling of transport processes during the drying of a granular porous medium.Heat and mass transfer in capillary-porous M P R Re. MIR Publishers. H. Chem. Application of theoretical diffusion equations to the drying of solids. McGraw-Hill.“C moisture content convective mass transfer coefficient. S. 38. P. January . 2225-2245 Onsager. W. Methods Eng. 13. On a system of differential equations for highly intensive heat and mass transfer. Heat and moisture transfer in concrete slabs. 357-369 Ferguson. K. 37-57 13 14 15 16 17 18 Moyne. Irvine. New York. 1932 Philip. The effect of temperature and total gas pressure on the moisture content in a capillary norous bodv. 20. Lewis and W. 132-136 Krischer. J. K.. B. 37. Berlin. Ins?. J. and Best. 12. J/kg. H.A. S. Int. On the Zienkiewici three and four time level schemes applied to the numerical integration of parabolic equations. Pineridge Press. and Puiggali. W. Academic Press. Numer. Hemisphere.“C specific enthalpy density of mass transfer flow density of diffusion mass transfer flow density of filtration mass transfer flow heat flux coefftcient of moisture conductivity. 123-184 Smirnov. J. Die wissenschafthchen Grundlagen der Trocknungstechnik. 17. A numerical solution of two dimensional problems involving heat and mass transfer. Rev. M. 1993. “M moisture diffusivity. J. and Lewis. m/s degree of saturation of the capillaries within the body moisture capacity. Ferguson 8 9 % S E PO n h molecular mass of humid air total pressure of humid air inside the body. W. The finite element method. Trans. 222-232 23 Thomas. and De Vries. 91-98 Quintard. 679-689 24 Appl. Thesis. A comparison of time marching schemes for the transient heat conduction equation. 1989. G. 22. Heat Technol. A. L. J. 19. W. Methods Enc. mass and momentum transfer in porous media: A theory of drying. W. 5. The drying of solids III.. and Lewis. 1381-1393 Thomas. New York. Eng. Oxford. L. Heat Mass Transfer 1979. Mujumdar. kg/kg*“M coefficient of humid air capacity. 257-266 28 Pergamon Press. R. 1978 Zienkiewicz. 516-622 Wood. 1978.

- neuralnetworkfor navierstokes6.pdf
- Neural Network Navier 3
- Neural Networks Windfarm
- Neuralnetworks for Navierstokesequation
- Void Fraction2
- LorenzNavierstokes.pdf
- Lorenz Navier
- Prof. Richardson Neuralnetworks
- Thermo2.pdf
- Neural Network33
- Neural Networks Back Propagation 1
- Neural Network 22
- neuralnetworks-344
- STATS 2
- Ch-7-2nd-Edition by Parts Integration Techniques
- fem30
- fem6
- Fem21
- nav1
- Fem Wave
- fem25
- fem30
- fem31
- Fem Power
- Fem Nonlinear

- NLHeatTransfer
- Adomian decomposition Method and Differential Transform Method to solve the Heat Equations with a power nonlinearity
- Hix HTM (Heat Transfer Machine) Booklet
- LinearizationLecture.pdf
- Class8
- lecture vka -7 [Compatibility Mode]
- The International Journal of Engineering and Science (The IJES)
- Work and Heat
- Numerical modelling of hygrothermal response in building envelopes
- A Program for Solving Heat and Mass Transfer Problems on a PC
- 2nd Report
- NIST.SP.1026r1
- 1-s2.0-0893965996000614-main.pdf
- Vim Method
- Elzaki Transform Homotopy Perturbation Method for Solving Porous Medium Equation
- j.ijheatmasstransfer.2009.06.006
- Studies on Geothermal Power Generation Using Abandoned Oil Wells
- ch2.pdf
- r059210304-thermodynamics
- Chemical Process Calculations
- Asymptotic Behavior for Solution of Nonlinear Differential Equation
- 1113
- Assignment 1 Report - Copy
- Elastic Collapse
- IcromThe Nonlinear Suboptimal Diving Control of an Autonomous Underwater Vehicle2014 Submission 1
- Articol20
- 61
- NonLinear Equations.pdf
- Non Linear Analysis
- 7. Maths - IJMCAR -POPULATION MODELS of - Muhamediyeva Dildora Kabulovna - Uzbekistan
- Fem21

Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

We've moved you to where you read on your other device.

Get the full title to continue

Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.

scribd