Transport in Porous Media 53: 145–161, 2003.

145
© 2003 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.

A Two-Equation Model for Heat Conduction

in Porous Media
(I: Theory)

J. G. FOURIE1,∗ and J. P. DU PLESSIS2

1 British Columbia, Institute of Technology, 3700 Willingdon Avenue, Burnaby, BC, Canada
V5G 3H2
2 Department of Applied Mathematics, University of Stellenbosch, Private Bag X1, Matieland 7602,
South Africa

(Received: 3 May 2001; in final form: 9 July 2002)

Abstract. A two-equation model is presented which describes the conservation of heat in each
phase of a porous medium in which diffusion is the predominant means of heat transfer, and of
which the phases are not in thermal equilibrium with each other. The model is derived using the
method of local volume averaging. This formulation, together with the introduction of characteristic
temperature distributions, yields the definition of an effective and a coupled thermal conductivity
tensor.

Key words: heat transfer, mathematical modelling, energy equation, volume averaging, thermal non-
equilibrium, effective thermal conductivity, coupled thermal conductivity.

1. Introduction
During the last two decades, the mathematical modelling of heat transfer processes
in porous media was greatly advanced. A characteristic of most models describing
these processes is the assumption that the solid and the fluid phase that constitute
the porous medium are in thermal equilibrium, which allows thermal transport to
be described by a single local temperature obtained from the solution of a single
governing equation. This approach is widely referred to in literature as the one-
equation model (Nozad et al., 1985). When the solid and the fluid phases are not
in thermal equilibrium, one is confronted with the validity of a single governing
equation approach as opposed to separate governing equation describing the en-
ergy conservation of thermal transport processes in each phase. Conditions that
would determine the validity of a single governing equation approach have not
yet been clearly identified (Whitaker, 1991). Truong and Zinsmeister (1978) found
that single governing equation approach gives good results for transient conductive
heat transient in layered composites, only if the thermal conductivity of the two
constituents did not differ widely. In general, the need for a separate description of
∗ Author for correspondence: Tel.: +1-604-453-4013; Fax: +1-604-431-8422;
e-mail: jfourie@bcit.ca
146 J. G. FOURIE AND J. P. DU PLESSIS

thermal transport processes in each phase has been widely recognised in literature
(Vortmeyer and Schaefer, 1974; Schlünder, 1975; Vortmeyer, 1975; Froment and
Bischoff, 1979; Pereira Duarte et al., 1984; Glatzmaier and Ramirez, 1988).
A physically sound theory describing thermal transport processes is available
in the form of the conservation of energy equation, derived by differential cal-
culus for a continuum substance. The level of details presented by the solution
of this equation, referred to here as a microscopic level, is rarely needed in most
engineering problems. Higher-level, or macroscopic level, aspects of transport pro-
cesses in porous media are much more relevant since they closely relate to physical
observations and instrumentation data.
For the case when the phases are not in thermal equilibrium, a number of mac-
roscopic level intuitive descriptions of conduction within each phase have been
proposed in literature (Vortmeyer and Schaefer, 1974; Schlünder, 1975; Vortmeyer,
1975; Glatzmaier and Ramirez, 1988; Vafai and Sözen, 1990). In these macro-
scopic descriptions, conduction in a phase is presented in terms of an effective
thermal conductivity and the gradient of the locally mean temperature of that phase.
In a more analytical approach, macroscopic level descriptions have been derived
through the application of the principles of local volume averaging (Whitaker,
1967; Bear and Bachmat, 1986) to the energy equation (Nozad et al., 1985;
Quintard and Whitaker, 1993; Quintard et al., 1997). However, this analytical pro-
cess yields a description of both convective heat transfer between the phases, and
thermal conduction within a phase, that is presented as integrals of microscopic
level temperatures.
For convective heat transfer between the phases, Gray (1975) and Whitaker
(1977) proposed a successful macroscopic level intuitive model to transform in-
tegrals of microscopic level temperatures into a description of in terms of locally
mean temperatures only.
Various theoretical methods have been proposed in literature to transform in-
tegrals of microscopic level temperatures in the description of thermal conduction
within a phase into a description in terms of volume-averaged temperatures only.
The analytical processes of these methods have all shown that conduction within
a phase described at a macroscopic level is not only a function of the gradient
of the volume-averaged temperature of that phase (as most intuitive models sug-
gest), but also a function of the gradient of the volume-averaged temperature of
the other phase. Theoretical methods therefore aim to present conduction in a
phase in terms of an effective thermal conductivity and a volume-averaged tem-
perature gradient of that phase, as well as a coupled thermal conductivity and
a volume-averaged temperature gradient of the other phase. Achieving this goal
through a sound theoretical analysis has proved to be a challenging problem that
has confronted researchers over the last few decades.
The first theoretical methods were dedicated in their application to specific
porous media and were restricted to special cases only (Carbonell and Whitaker,
1984; Zanotti and Carbonell, 1984; Whitaker, 1989; Kaviany, 1995). A significant
TWO-EQUATION MODEL FOR HEAT CONDUCTION – PART I 147

advancement towards the development of a universal model was the introduction

of a weighting function (Marle, 1967; Quintard and Whitaker, 1993) that allows
the microscopic level temperature deviation field, defined by Gray (1975), to be
mapped from the volume-averaged temperature field. This analytical process in-
cludes the steady-state closure of the temperature deviation field at a microscopic
level. However, length and time scale constraints, based on order-of-magnitude
estimates, have to be imposed for the application of this technique. Furthermore,
essential simplifications can only be made by neglecting higher order terms once
these constraints are satisfied, despite the fact that order-of-magnitude estimates
cannot identify these terms as negligible. This approach was later extended by us-
ing an unsteady state closure at microscopic level in the analytical mapping process
(Moyne, 1997), leading to an expression of the conductive terms as temporal con-
volutions. Only in the case of spatially periodic systems consisting of an array of
symmetric unit cells can further simplifications concerning the weighting function
be made in the original method, and the subsequent extension, to achieve closure.
These methods show various degrees of compatibility with the one-equation model
under conditions of thermal equilibrium.
In this first part of a two-part paper, a macroscopic description of heat transfer
in porous media in general is derived in an approach that resembles Fourier’s heat
conduction law: in analogy to thermal conductivity, effective macroscopic transport
parameters are defined in terms of parameters that relate the ratio of heat conduc-
tion to the temperature distribution. This is achieved using a novel approach in the
application of the analytical volume averaging process to the energy equation. It
requires the definition of unique characteristic temperature distributions that consti-
tute the microscopic level temperature distribution in two-phase systems in thermal
non-equilibrium. It avoids the need to map the microscopic level temperature devi-
ation field from the volume-averaged temperature field. No constraints are placed
on length or time scales, and the analytical development does not require terms of
any order to be neglected. The two-equation model reduces to the established one-
equation model formulation under the conditions of thermal equilibrium between
the solid phase and the fluid phase. The model is applied to the case of steady state,
one-dimensional heat transfer in a porous medium that is made up of geometrically
similar units of similar size and of ordered spatial distribution in Part II of this paper
(Fourie and Du Plessis, 2003).

2. Analysis
2.1. VOLUME - AVERAGED ENERGY EQUATION
Using Fourier’s conduction law, the energy equation for conductive heat transfer in
a substance is given as

∂T
ρcp ∇ T ) + I,
= ∇ · (k∇ (1)
∂t
148 J. G. FOURIE AND J. P. DU PLESSIS

Figure 1. Representative elementary volume (REV).

where ρ is the density, cp is the isobaric specific heat capacity, T is temperature, t

represents time, k is the thermal conductivity of the substance, and I represents an
internal heat source.
The principle of the analytical volume averaging process is applied by inte-
grating the energy equation (1) over each phase within a representative elementary
volume (REV). Figure 1 shows an REV associated with centre point O, in a po-
rous medium with a microstructure of arbitrary geometry. Details regarding the
selection and conditions of an REV are outlined in Whitaker (1967) and Bear and
Bachmat (1986). Further mathematical manipulation of the volume integrals yields
the volume-averaged energy equation at centre point O for the solid phase, given
as (Nozad et al., 1985; Whitaker, 1991)

 
∂T s 1
ρs cp,s = ∇ · (ks εs∇ T s ) + ∇ ·
s
ks T̊sn sf dA +
∂t V0 Asf

1
+ ks∇ Ts · nsf dA + I s , (2)
V0 Asf

and for the fluid phase, given as

 
∂T f 1
ρf cp,f = ∇ · (kf εf∇ T f ) + ∇ ·
f
kf T̊fn fs dA +
∂t V0 Asf

1
+ kf∇ Tf · n fs dA + I f . (3)
V0 Asf
TWO-EQUATION MODEL FOR HEAT CONDUCTION – PART I 149

In Equations (2) and (3), T s and T f are the phasial volume-averaged tempera-
tures defined as

1
T γ ≡ T dV , (4)
V0 Vγ

where γ = s or f, and V0 is the volume of the REV. Vs and Vf are the solid phase
and fluid phase volumes, respectively, within the REV, ks and kf are the thermal
conductivities of the solid phase and the fluid phase, respectively, and n sf and n fs
are unit surface vectors normal to the interface surface within the REV. T ss and
T ff are the intrinsic volume-averaged temperatures defined as

1
T γ ≡
γ
T dV , (5)
Vγ Vγ

and T̊s and T̊f are the temperature deviations, defined as

T̊γ ≡ T − T γγ , (6)

which is referred to as Gray’s decomposition (Gray, 1975). The solid phase and
fluid phase volume fractions εs and εf are defined as
Vγ
εγ ≡ , (7)
V0
and I s and I f are the phasial volume-averaged internal heat sources defined in
a similar manner as the phasial volume-averaged temperatures.
Close observation reveals that terms in Equations (2) and (3) that contain
volume-averaged quantities (referred to as macroscopic level terms), correspond to
a great deal to their counterparts at microscopic level in the energy equation (1). In
addition to the macroscopic level terms, both Equations (2) and (3) also show two
terms on the right-hand side that describe heat transfer processes at a macroscopic
level as an integral of microscopic level temperatures. Since physical observations
and measurements are restricted to a macroscopic level, any further development
towards the application and solution of Equations (2) and (3) requires that these
terms are transformed and rewritten in terms of volume-averaged temperatures.
This is achieved by the introduction of certain proportionality coefficients that are
defined at a macroscopic level.
By applying the Divergence Theorem (Kreyszig, 1993), it can be shown that
the first term containing an integral of a microscopic level temperature on the
right-hand side of Equations (2) and (3) describes a secondary conduction within
a phase in the REV as a result of the presence of a non-zero temperature deviation
occurring within that phase (Fourie, 2000). This secondary conduction is relative
to that described by the volume-averaged temperature distribution. This physical
interpretation justifies an attempt to incorporate this term into the first term on the
right-hand side of Equations (2) and (3).
150 J. G. FOURIE AND J. P. DU PLESSIS

As a first step, it is necessary to identify well defined and measurable compo-

nents amounting to observed microscopic level conductive heat transfer in a porous
medium where the phases are not in thermal equilibrium with each other, in such a
way that they could be utilised in the conceptual representation of conduction at a
macroscopic level. These components are identified by characteristic temperature
distributions in a consolidated solid phase and fluid phase, and are referred to
as equilibrium, directional non-equilibrium and non-directional non-equilibrium
temperature distributions. These characteristics temperature distributions are in-
troduced in the next section with reference to an arbitrarily selected microscopic
level temperature distribution in an REV. For the purpose of this analysis, locally
constant porosity is assumed within the REV.

2.2. EQUILIBRIUM AND NON - EQUILIBRIUM TEMPERATURE DISTRIBUTIONS

Figure 2 shows the upper half of the REV associated with centre point O shown
in Figure 1, placed in a coordinate system with an arbitrarily selected point-wise
microscopic level temperature distribution T at centreline AA. The corresponding
intrinsic volume-averaged temperatures for the solid and the fluid phase at centre
point O, as defined in Equation (5), are also shown. If the trend of the microscopic
level temperature distribution shown in Figure 2 continues on either side of the
REV along the centreline AA, and an array of REV’s is considered along the

Figure 2. Temperature distribution in the REV.

TWO-EQUATION MODEL FOR HEAT CONDUCTION – PART I 151

Figure 3. Intrinsic volume-averaged temperatures distributions in the REV.

Figure 4. Equilibrium temperature distribution Te in the REV.

centreline AA, then distributions for the intrinsic volume-averaged temperatures

of the solid and the fluid phase could be generated as shown in Figure 3.
Figures 4 and 5 now show the decomposition of the temperature distribution T
at any point within the REV into an equilibrium temperature distribution Te and
a non-equilibrium temperature distribution Tn . The equilibrium temperature distri-
bution Te is selected such that it accounts for directional heat transfer along centre
line AA within the REV, with a zero exchange of heat between the phases, that is,
the phases are in complete thermal equilibrium. The non-equilibrium temperature
distribution Tn then results in a zero net directional heat transfer along the centreline
AA within the overall REV, and accounts for the net exchange of heat between the
phases within the REV.
Within each phase, conductive heat transfer associated with T is considered
to consist of a linear combination of conductive heat transfer associated Te and
conductive heat transfer associated Tn , that is,

q = qe + qn , (8)
152 J. G. FOURIE AND J. P. DU PLESSIS

Figure 5. Non-equilibrium temperature distribution Tn in the REV.

where the subscripts in Equation (8) denote association with the continuum tem-
peratures Te and Tn . Substituting Fourier’s heat conduction law into Equation (8)
yields after integration and cancellation:

T = Te + Tn . (9)

With complete thermal equilibrium, the net heat transferred across the interface
between the two phases is zero, that is,

∇ Te )γ · n γ ϕ dA = 0,
(k∇ (10)
Asf

where γ = s and ϕ = f, and vice versa. If it is assumed that the centreline AA

corresponds to a principal direction of the coordinate system, denoted direction m,
then, with a zero net directional heat transfer in the principle direction m within the
overall REV, it follows that
   
∂Tn ∂Tn
ks = −kf . (11)
∂m s ∂m f
Gray (1975) and Whitaker (1977) proposed that the net exchange of heat between
the phases in a porous medium is directly proportional to the intrinsic volume-
averaged temperature difference between the phases, that is,

1
kγ ∇ Tγ · nγ ϕ dA = −hsf (T γγ − T ϕϕ ), (12)
Asf Asf
where γ = s and ϕ = f, and vice versa. hsf is a proportionality coefficient referred
to here as the interphasial heat transfer coefficient, which relates the macroscopic
level description of the interphasial heat transfer process given as an integral of
a microscopic level process on the left-hand side, to a macroscopic level descrip-
tion of the same process given in terms of volume-averaged temperatures on the
TWO-EQUATION MODEL FOR HEAT CONDUCTION – PART I 153

right-hand side. From Equations (10) and (12), it follows that the intrinsic volume-
averaged equilibrium temperature of the solid phase is equal to that of the fluid
phase everywhere within the REV, that is,

Te ss = Te ff . (13)

Therefore, with reference to the direction m:

∂ ∂
Te ss = Te ff . (14)
∂m ∂m

By assuming local constant porosity within the REV, and substituting the volume-
averaged temperature definitions (4) and (5), and Equation (7), with γ = s or f,
into Equation (14), it follows that

1 ∂ 1 ∂
Te s = Te f . (15)
εs ∂m εf ∂m

Figures 6 and 7 show the further decomposition of the non-equilibrium temperature

distribution Tn at any point within an REV into a non-directional non-
equilibrium point-wise continuum temperature distribution Tnn and a directional
non-equilibrium point-wise continuum temperature distribution Tnd . The non-
directional non-equilibrium temperature distribution Tnn is selected such that it ac-
counts for the net exchange of heat between the phases with a zero directional heat
transfer along centre line AA within each phase within the REV. The directional
non-equilibrium temperature distribution Tnd then accounts for the directional heat
transfer along the centre line AA within each phase within the REV, associated with
Tn , while the net exchange of heat between the two phases is zero within the REV.
(Note that in the introduction of Tnd , directional heat transfer within each phase
within the REV was considered, as opposed to directional heat transfer within the
overall REV in the case of Tn .)

Figure 6. Non-directional non-equilibrium temperature distribution Tnn in the REV.

154 J. G. FOURIE AND J. P. DU PLESSIS

Figure 7. Directional non-equilibrium temperature distribution Tnd in the REV.

Following the same argument that was used to derive Equation (10) from
Equation (8), this decomposition can be presented as a linear combination, that is,

Tn = Tnn + Tnd . (16)

With no heat transfer across the interface between the two phases within the REV:

∇ Tnd )γ · n γ ϕ dA = 0.
(k∇ (17)
Asf

Again, using the hypothesis of Gray (1975) and Whitaker (1977) presented in
Equation (12), it follows that the intrinsic volume-averaged directional non-
equilibrium temperatures Tnd ss and Tnd ff are equal at the centre of the REV,
that is,

Tnd ss = Tnd ff . (18)

Also, the gradients of the intrinsic directional non-equilibrium temperatures are

equal to the gradients in the intrinsic non-equilibrium temperatures at the centre of
the REV, that is,
∂ ∂
Tnd γγ = Tn γγ . (19)
∂m ∂m
Substituting the temperature decomposition (16) into Equation (19) yields, at the
centre of the REV:
∂
Tnn γγ = 0. (20)
∂m
Since Tnn is a continuous function, when written in volume integral form (see
Equation (5)), the spatial derivative in Equation (20) can be moved within the
volume integral. Further, with the assumption of a locally constant porosity within
TWO-EQUATION MODEL FOR HEAT CONDUCTION – PART I 155

the REV, substituting the volume-averaged temperature definitions (4) and (5), and
Equation (7), with γ = s or f, into Equation (20) yields:
 
∂Tnn
= 0, (21)
∂m γ
and substituting the temperature decomposition (16) and Equation (21) into Equa-
tion (11) yields:
   
∂Tnd ∂Tnd
ks = −kf . (22)
∂m s ∂m f

2.3. INTERPHASIAL HEAT TRANSFER

Substituting the temperature decompositions (9) and (16) and then Equations (10)
and (17) into the term on the left-hand side of Equation (12), and substituting the
temperature decompositions (9) and (16) and then Equations (13) and (18) into the
term on the right-hand side of Equation (12), yields:

1
∇ Tnn )γ · n γ ϕ dA = −hsf (Tnn γγ − Tnn ϕϕ ).
(k∇ (23)
Asf Asf

2.4. PHASIAL HEAT TRANSFER

By applying the analytical principles of the volume averaging theorem (Whitaker,
1967; Bear and Bachmat, 1986), the first two terms on the right-hand side of
Equation (2) and on the right-hand side of Equation (3) can be written as


 
  
∂ ∂ ∂ 1 ∂ ∂T
kγ εγ T γ +
γ
kγ T̊γ n γ ϕ,m dA = kγ ,
∂m ∂m ∂m V0 Asf ∂m ∂m γ
(24)
where γ = s and ϕ = f, and vice versa.
Substituting the temperature decompositions (9) and (16), and Equation (21)
into the term on the right-hand side of Equation (24) yields:


 
∂ ∂ ∂ 1
kγ εγ T γ +
γ
kγ T̊γ n γ ϕ,m dA
∂m ∂m ∂m V0 Asf

  
  
∂ ∂Te ∂ ∂Tnd
= kγ + kγ . (25)
∂m ∂m γ ∂m ∂m γ
Defining an equilibrium thermal conductivity and a non-equilibrium thermal con-
ductivity, respectively, as
kγ ∂Te /∂mγ
ke,γ ,m ≡ (26)
∂Te γ /∂m
156 J. G. FOURIE AND J. P. DU PLESSIS

and
kγ ∂Tnd /∂mγ
knd,γ ,m ≡ , (27)
∂Tnd γ /∂m
and substituting Equations (26) and (27), the right-hand side of Equation (25) is
given as



∂ ∂ ∂ ∂
ke,γ ,m Te γ + knd,γ ,m Tnd γ . (28)
∂m ∂m ∂m ∂m
Substituting the temperature decompositions (9) and (16) into the second term of
the expression given in (28) yields:

 

∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂
ke,γ ,m Te γ + knd,γ ,m T γ − Te γ − Tnn γ .
∂m ∂m ∂m ∂m ∂m ∂m
(29)
Substituting Equations (7) and (20), and the volume-averaged temperature defin-
itions (4) and (5) into the expression given in (29), utilising the assumption of a
locally constant porosity within the REV, and rearranging terms yields:
 

∂ ∂ ∂ ∂
(ke,γ ,m − knd,γ ,m ) Te γ + knd,γ ,m T γ . (30)
∂m ∂m ∂m ∂m
In order to derive an expression for the volume-averaged equilibrium temperature
Te γ in terms of the volume-averaged temperature T γ , with γ = s or f, substitute
Equation (27) into Equation (22) and then substitute the temperature decomposi-
tions (9) and (16), Equations (7) and (20), and the volume-averaged temperature
definitions (4) and (5) into Equation (30), and utilising the assumption of a locally
constant porosity within the REV, gives:



∂ ∂ ∂ ∂
knd,s,m T s − Te s = −knd,f,m T f − Te f . (31)
∂m ∂m ∂m ∂m
Substituting Equation (15) into Equation (31) yields, after rearranging terms:
∂ knd,γ ,m ∂
Te γ = T γ +
∂m knd,γ ,m + (εϕ /εγ )knd,ϕ,m ∂m
knd,ϕ,m ∂
+ T ϕ . (32)
knd,γ ,m + (εϕ /εγ )knd,ϕ,m ∂m
Substituting Equation (32) into the expression given by (30) yields:


∂ knd,γ ,m ∂
(ke,γ ,m − knd,γ ,m ) T γ +
∂m knd,γ ,m + (εϕ /εγ )knd,ϕ,m ∂m

knd,ϕ,m ∂
+ T ϕ +
knd,γ ,m + (εϕ /εγ )knd,ϕ,m ∂m


∂ ∂
+ knd,γ ,m T γ . (33)
∂m ∂m
TWO-EQUATION MODEL FOR HEAT CONDUCTION – PART I 157

After rearranging terms in the expression given by (33) and substituting back into
Equation (25), that equation can be written as


 
∂ ∂ ∂ 1
kγ εγ T γ +
γ
n
kγ T̊n γ ϕ,m dA
∂m ∂m ∂m V0 Asf



∂ ∂ ∂ ∂
= kγ γ ,m T γ + kγ ϕ,m T ϕ , (34)
∂m ∂m ∂m ∂m
with kγ γ ,m and kγ ϕ,m , respectively, defined as
knd,γ ,m ke,γ ,m + (εϕ /εγ )knd,ϕ,m knd,γ ,m
kγ γ ,m ≡ , (35)
knd,γ ,m + (εϕ /εγ )knd,ϕ,m
and
knd,ϕ,m (ke,γ ,m − knd,γ ,m )
kγ ϕ,m ≡ . (36)
knd,γ ,m + (εϕ /εγ )knd,ϕ,m
If the direction m is aligned with each principle direction in a multi-dimensional
domain, then Equation (34) can be generalized as

 
1
∇ · (kγ εγ ∇ T γ ) + ∇ ·
γ
kγ T̊γ n γ ϕ dA
V0 Asf
= ∇ · (kk γ γ · ∇ T γ ) + ∇ · (kk γ ϕ · ∇ T ϕ ). (37)

In Equation (37), the macroscopic level description of the conduction within a

phase given on the left-hand side of the equation, which includes an integral of
a microscopic level temperature, is related to a macroscopic description on the
right-hand side of the equation, which is in terms of volume-averaged temperatures
only. With γ = s and ϕ = f, k ss is referred to as the solid phase effective thermal
conductivity tensor and k sf is referred to as the solid phase coupled thermal con-
ductivity tensor. Similarly, with γ = f and ϕ = s, k ff is referred to as the fluid phase
effective thermal conductivity tensor and k fs is referred to as the fluid phase coupled
thermal conductivity tensor. Since these are diagonal tensors, a single directional
index is sufficient in their components given by Equations (35) and (36).

2.5. TWO - EQUATION MODEL

The substitution of Equations (12) and (37) into Equations (2) and (3), respectively,
considering Equations (7) and the volume-averaged temperature definitions (4) and
(5), forms the basis of the two-equation model, which yields for the solid phase:
∂T s
ρs cp,s = ∇ · (kk ss · ∇ T s ) + ∇ · (kk sf · ∇ T f ) −
∂t

hsf Asf εs
− T s − T f + I s , (38)
εs V0 1 − εs
158 J. G. FOURIE AND J. P. DU PLESSIS

and for the fluid phase:

∂T f
ρf cp,f = ∇ · (kk ff · ∇ T f ) + ∇ · (kk fs · ∇ T s ) −
∂t

hsf Asf εf
− T f − T s + I f . (39)
εf V0 1 − εf
Equations (38) and (39) satisfy the requirement that the conservation of heat in each
phase is described at a macroscopic level in terms of volume-averaged temperatures
only.

2.6. COMPATIBILITY WITH THE ONE EQUATION MODEL

Under the conditions of thermal equilibrium, it follows that
1 1
T ss = T ff = T s = T f = T . (40)
εs εf
After substituting Equation (40) into the expression given by the right-hand side of
Equation (37) for the case γ = s and ϕ = f, and for the case γ = f and ϕ = s, the
addition of the two cases yields:

∇ · [(εsk ss + εfk sf + εfk ff + εsk fs ) · ∇ T ]. (41)

Substituting the definition given by Equations (35) and (36) into the expression in
the parenthesis in (41) yields after rearrangement and cancellation of terms, yields:

∇ · [(εsk e,s + εfk e,f ) · ∇ T ], (42)

where k e,s and k e,f are the tensor forms of the equilibrium thermal conductivity
defined by Equation (26). Substituting Equation (26) for γ = s or f into the ex-
pression given by (42), under the condition of local uniform porosity in an REV,
yields:
εs ks (∂Te /∂m)s εf kf (∂Te /∂m)f
+ , (43)
∂Te s /∂m
s ∂Te ff /∂m
where m is the direction of net transfer of heat.
When the phases are in thermal equilibrium, as is the case with the equilibrium
temperature distribution Te , then:

Te ss = Te ff = Te . (44)

Substituting Equation (44) and rearranging terms, the expression given by (43) can
be written as
k(∂Te /∂m)
, (45)
∂Te /∂m
TWO-EQUATION MODEL FOR HEAT CONDUCTION – PART I 159

where the overall volume-averaged quantities k(∂Te /∂m) and Te  are defined as

1
φ ≡ φ dV . (46)
V0 V0
Dropping the subscript e, the expression given in (45) is the classic definition of the
overall thermal conductivity of a two-phase system where the phases are in thermal
equilibrium (Nozad et al., 1985). Therefore, the expression given by the right-hand
side of Equation (37) for the case γ = s and ϕ = f, and vice versa, are compatible
with the classic one-equation model.

3. Discussion
The mathematical model for phasial conduction, presented by Equation (37), is
consistent with previous analytical work (Carbonell and Whitaker, 1984; Zanotti
and Carbonell, 1984; Whitaker, 1989; Quintard and Whitaker, 1993; Kaviany,
1995; Moyne, 1997), in that conduction within a phase described at a macroscopic
level, is not just a function of the gradient of the volume-averaged temperature of
that phase, but also a function of the gradient of the volume-averaged temperature
of the other phase.
The coupled thermal conductivity determines the effect of the volume-averaged
temperature gradient in a particular phase on the ratio of the volume-averaged
temperature gradient to the gradient in the volume-averaged temperature in the
other phase. This effect is determined by the volume fraction of each phase, the
thermal resistance between the two phases and the presence of thermal sources or
sinks. The effect will be more relevant in geometries with regions where the two
phases are geometrically composed in series with respect to the direction of heat
flow and can be either positive or negative, that is, the coupled thermal conductivity
could take on a positive or negative value.
In an expression for the effective thermal conductivity of two dissimilar materi-
als geometrically arranged in series, the volume fraction of each material appears
in the denominator (Holman, 1976). Therefore, when a phase has a high volume
fraction, its coupled thermal conductivity will be a much stronger function of its
own thermal conductivity than the thermal conductivity of the other phase. Con-
versely, when a phase has a low volume fraction, its coupled thermal conductivity
will be a stronger function of the thermal conductivity of the other phase than that
of its own.

4. Conclusion
The two-equation model (38) and (39) describe the conservation of heat at a macro-
scopic level in each phase of a two-phase system in terms of the volume-averaged
temperature of each phase. These two equations constitute the two-equation model
of which the solution, with appropriate boundary conditions, provides a facility to
160 J. G. FOURIE AND J. P. DU PLESSIS

describe volume-averaged temperature distributions in each phase of a two-phase

system, when the phases may not be in thermal equilibrium with each other. The
two equations reduce to the established one-equation model formulation under the
conditions of thermal equilibrium between the solid and the fluid phases. Conduc-
tion in each phase is conceptually represented at a macroscopic level by an effective
and a coupled thermal conductivity tensor for each phase, both given in terms of
an equilibrium and a non-equilibrium thermal conductivity. The equilibrium and
the non-equilibrium thermal conductivity is determined from close observation
of the behaviour of uniquely defined microscopic level characteristic tempera-
ture distributions, referred to as the equilibrium, directional non-equilibrium, and
non-directional non-equilibrium temperature distributions, in an elementary single
geometric configuration that defines the complete microstructure geometry of the
porous medium (generally referred to in literature as a unit cell). This process is
explained with reference to a case study in part two of this paper.

References
Bear, J. and Bachmat, Y.: 1986, Macroscopic modelling of transport phenomena in porous media. 2.
Applications to mass, momentum and energy transport, Transport in Porous Media 1, 241–269.
Carbonell, R. G. and Whitaker, S.: 1984, Heat and mass transfer in porous media, in: J. Bear and
M. A. Corapcioglu (eds), Fundamentals of Transport Phenomena in Porous Media, Martinus
Nijhoff, Dordrecht, pp. 121–198.
Fourie, J. G.: 2000, The mathematical modelling of heat transfer and fluid flow in cellular metallic
foams, PhD Thesis, University of Stellenbosch, Stellenbosch, South Africa.
Fourie, J. G. and Du Plessis, J. P: 2003, A two-equation model for heat conduction in porous media –
II: application, Transport in Porous Media 53, 163–174.
Froment, G. F. and Bischoff, K. B.: 1979, Chemical Reactor Analysis and Design, Wiley, New York.
Glatzmaier, G. C. and Ramirez, W. F.: 1988, Use of volume averaging for the modelling of thermal
properties of porous materials, Chem. Eng. Sci. 30, 3157–3169.
Gray, W. G.: 1975, A derivation of the equations for multiphase transport, Chem. Eng. Sci. 30,
229–233.
Holman, J. P.: 1976, Heat Transfer, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Kaviany, M.: 1995, Principles of Heat Transfer in Porous Media, Springer, New York.
Kreyszig, E.: 1993, Advanced Engineering Mathematics, Wiley, New York.
Marle, C. M.: 1967, Ecoulements monophasiques en milieux poreux, Revue Institut Francais du
Petrole 22, 1471–1509.
Moyne, C.: 1997, Two-equation model for a diffusion process in porous media using the volume
averaging method with an unsteady-state closure, Adv. Water Resour. 20, 63–76.
Nozad, I., Carbonell, R. G. and Whitaker, S.: 1985, Heat conduction in multiphase systems. I. Theory
and experiment for two-phase systems, Chem. Eng. Sci. 40, 843–855.
Pereira Duarte, S. I., Ferretti, O. A. and Lemcoff, N. O.: 1984, A heterogeneous one-dimensional
model for non-adiabatic fixed bed catalytic reactors, Chem. Eng. Sci. 30, 1025–1031.
Quintard, M. and Whitaker, S.: 1993, One- and two-equation models for transient diffusion processes
in two-phase systems. Adv. Heat Transfer 23, 369–464.
Quintard, M., Kaviany, M. and Whitaker, S.: 1997, Two-medium treatment of heat transfer in porous
media: numerical results for effective properties, Adv. Water Resour. 20, 77–94.
Schlünder, E. U.: 1975, Equivalence of one- and two-phase models for heat transfer processes in
packed beds: one-dimensional theory, Chem. Eng. Sci. 30, 449–452.
TWO-EQUATION MODEL FOR HEAT CONDUCTION – PART I 161

Truong, H. V. and Zinsmeister, G. E.: 1978, Experimental study of heat transfer in layered
composites, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 21, 905–909.
Vafai, K. and Sözen, M.: 1990, Analysis of energy and momentum transport for fluid flow through a
porous bed, ASME J. Heat Transfer 112, 690–699.
Vortmeyer, D.: 1975, Axial heat dispersion in packed beds, Chem. Eng. Sci. 30, 999–1001.
Vortmeyer, D. and Schaefer, R. J.: 1974, Equivalence of one- and two-phase models for heat transfer
processes in packed beds, one-dimensional theory, Chem. Eng. Sci. 29, 485–491.
Whitaker, S.: 1967, Diffusion and dispersion in porous media, AIChE J. 13, 420–427.
Whitaker, S.: 1977, Simultaneous heat, mass and momentum transfer in porous media: a theory of
drying, Adv. Heat Transfer 13, 119–203.
Whitaker, S.: 1989, Heat transfer catalytic packed bed reactors, in: N. P. Cheremisinoff (ed.),
Handbook of Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol. 3, Catalysis, Kinetics & Reactor Engineering, Gulf
Publishers, New Jersey.
Whitaker, S.: 1991, Improved constraints for the principle of local thermal equilibrium, Ind. Eng.
Chem. Prod. Res. Dev. 30, 983–997.
Zanotti, F. and Carbonell, R. G.: 1984, Development of transport equations for multiphase systems,
Chem. Eng. Sci. 39, 263–311.