A Three Level Finite Di erence Scheme for Solving the

Pennes' Bioheat Transfer in a Triple-Layered Skin

Structure 
Weizhong Dai and Raja Nassar
Mathematics & Statistics
College of Engineering & Science
Louisiana Tech University
Ruston, LA 71272, USA
and
Jun Zhang y
Laboratory for High Performance Scienti c Computing and
Computer Simulation, Department of Computer Science,
University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40506, USA

May 3, 2002
Abstract
In this study, we develop a three-level nite di erence scheme for solving a 1D
Pennes' bioheat transfer equation in a triple-layered skin structure. A convergence
theorem is obtained by the discrete energy method, implying that the scheme is un-
conditionally stable. Numerical results for thermal analysis of a skin composed of
epidermis, dermis and subcutaneous layers are obtained.
KEY WORDS: nite di erence; convergence; stability; bioheat transfer equation

 Technical Report No. 343-02, Department of Computer Science, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY,
2002.
y This author's research work was supported in part by the U.S. National Science Foundation under grants

CCR-9902022, CCR-9988165, CCR-0092532, and ACI-0202934, in part by the U.S. Department of Energy
under grant DE-FG02-02ER45961, in part by the Japanese Research Organization for Information Science
and Technology, and in part by the University of Kentucky Research Committee.

1
1 INTRODUCTION
Skin burns caused by exposing to heat in a ash re, laser irradiation, or by being in
contact with hot substances, are some of the most commonly encountered hazards in daily
life and in industry [1-7]. This kind of heating has two common distinctive characteristics.
First, the heating process is very short with a typical duration of less than 5s (Torvi, 1994).
Second, the heat ux incident on the skin surface can be as high as up to 83.2 kW=m2 (Torvi,
1994). Investigations on such instantaneous thermal injuries can be useful for the accurate
assessment on burn evaluation and to establish thermal protections for various purposes,
e.g., re ghter's safeguard. For many years, researchers have used di erent bioheat transfer
models to predict the degree of skin burn (Killer, 1991). To date, nearly all the models
have been based on the Pennes' bioheat equation, in which the conduction term is based
on the classical Fourier's law. Recently, Liu and his co-workers have introduced a general
form of the thermal wave model of bioheat transfer in living tissues (Liu, 1995). The model
was obtained based on a modi ed unsteady heat conduction equation (the CV equation)
(Vernotte, 1958; Cattaneo 1958). In this article, we will develop an unconditionally stable
three-level nite di erence scheme for solving the Pennes' bioheat equation in a triple-layered
skin structure composed of epidermis, dermis and subcutaneous. Unconditional stability is
particularly important so that there are no restrictions on the mesh ratio because the grid
size in the thickness direction is very small. Using the discrete energy method, we establish
a convergence theorem for the nite di erence scheme, which shows that the scheme is
unconditionally stable in the triple-layered skin structure. The discrete system is then solved
by a domain decomposition algorithm based on the idea described in (Dai, 1998). The
method is illustrated by a numerical example.

2 FINITE DIFFERENCE SCHEME

The Pennes' bioheat transfer used to describe the thermal behavior of triple-layered skin
structures (as shown in Figure 1) can be expressed as (Liu, 1999; Pennes, 1948):

l Cl @ + WblCbl l ? kl @ 2l = Qlr ; l = 1; 2; 3;

2
l
(1)
@t @x
where l = T l (x; t) ? Tsl is the elevated tissue temperature above the steady state due to the
heating, l ; Cl; and kl denote density, speci c heat, and thermal conductivity of tissue, Cbl
is the speci c heat of blood, Wbl is the blood perfusion rate, Qlr is volumetric heat due to
spatial heating.
The elevation in temperature at the skin surface can be kept constant in the case of skin
burns caused by a large steel plate at a high temperature. For simpli cation, assuming that
heat ux approaches zero deep in tissue, which is also realistic for biological body, then the

2
interfacial conditions and boundary conditions can be listed as follows:
1 = 0; x = 0; (2)
1 = 2 ; k1 @@x
1
= k2 @2 ; x = L1;
@x (3)
2 = 3 ; k2 @
@x
2
= k3 @3 ; x = L1 + L2;
@x (4)
@3 = 0; x = L + L + L : (5)
@x 1 2 3

The initial conditions are

l = 0; @ l
@t = 0; t = 0; (6)
where l = 1; 2; 3:
Let (ul)ni be the numerical approximation of (l )(i
x; n
t); where
x and
t are the
x directional spatial and temporal mesh sizes, respectively. Here, i is chosen to be 0  i 
(Nl + 1) so that (Nl + 1)
x = Ll , l = 1; 2; 3: We use the following di erence operators:

xrxuni = uni+1 ? uni;
xrx uni = uni ? uni?1
and

x2 x2 uni = uni+1 ? 2uni + uni?1:
It can be seen that x2 uni = rx
rx uni:
To simplify the notations, we rewrite Eq. (1) as follows:

Bl @ + Dl l ? kl @ 2l = Gl ; l = 1; 2; 3;
2
l
(7)
@t @x
where Bl = l Cl ; Dl = Wbl Cbl and Gl = Qlr . Assuming that Bl ; Dl ; and kl are positive
constants. We develop a three-level nite di erence scheme for solving the above initial and
boundary triple-layered skin structure problem (Eqs. (1)-(6)) as follows:
n+1 ? (u )n?1 D
Bl (ul)i 2
t
l i
+ 4
l
[(u n+1 n n?1
l )i + 2(ul )i + (ul )i ]
1
? 4 kl x[(ul)i + 2(ul )i + (ul)in?1]
2 n +1 n

= (Gl )ni; l = 1; 2; 3: (8)

The discrete interfacial equations are assumed to be, for any time level n;
(u )n ? (u )n
k1 1 N1 +1
x 1 N1 = k2 (u2)1
?x(u2)0 ; (u1)nN1+1 = (u2)n0 ;
n n
(9)

3
and
k2 (u2)N2 +1
?x (u2)N2 = k3 (u3)1
?x(u3)0 ; (u2)nN2+1 = (u3)n0 :
n n n n
(10)
The initial and boundary conditions are chosen to be
(ul)0i = (ul )1i = 0; (11)
and
(u1)n0 = 0; (u3)nN3+1 = (u3)nN3 ; (12)
for any time level n. Since we employ second-order central nite di erences to discretize
Eq. (7), it can be seen that the truncation error of Eq. (8) at the grid point (i
x; n
t) is
O(
t2 +
x2 ) and hence that the exact solution l (x; t) satis es
n+1 ? ( )n?1 D
Bl (l )i 2
t
l i
+ 4
l
[( n 1 2 n+1
l )i + 2(l )i + (l )i ] ? kl x [(l )i + 2(l )i + (l )i ]
n+1 n?1
4
n n?1

= (Gl )ni + (l )ni; (13)

where (l )ni = O(
t2 +
x2 ):

3 CONVERGENCE AND STABILITY

We now investigate the convergence and stability of the scheme, Eqs. (8)-(12). To
this end, we rst introduce the de nition of the inner product and norm between the mesh
functions uni and vin: Let Sh be a set of fun = funigg: For any un, vn 2 Sh; the inner products
and norms are de ned as follows:
Nl
X
(un; vn)l =
x unvn;
i i kunk2l = (un; un)l ;
i=1
Nl
X
krx unk2l = (rx un; rxun)l =
x (rx uni)2l ;
i=1
NX+1
krxunk2l;1 = (rx un; rx un)l;1 =
x (rx uni)2l;1;
l

i=1
where l = 1; 2; 3:
LEMMA 1. For any un 2 Sh,
[uni +1 + 2uni + uin?1]
[uni +1 ? uin?1] = [uni +1 + uni]2 ? [uni + uin?1]2 (14)
and
rx [uni +1 + 2uni + uin?1]
rx [uni +1 ? uin?1] = [rx uni +1 + rx uni]2 ? [rx uni + rx uin?1]2 : (15)
4
 Proof. Eq. (14) can be obtained in the way:
[uni +1 + 2uni + uin?1]
[uni +1 ? uin?1]
= [uni +1]2 + 2uni +1
uni + uni +1
uin?1
?uni +1
uin?1 ? 2uni
uin?1 ? [uin?1]2
= [uni +1]2 + 2uni +1
uni + [uni]2
?f[uni]2 + 2uni
uin?1 + [uin?1]2 g
= [uni +1 + uni]2 ? [uni + uin?1]2:
Using a similar argument, we obtain Eq. (15).
LEMMA 2. If (ul)ni; l = 1; 2; 3; are the solutions of Eqs. (8)-(12), then
N1
X
k1
x x2 [(u1)ni +1 + 2(u1)ni + (u1)in?1]
[(u1)ni +1 ? (u1)in?1]
i=1
N2
X
+k2
x x2 [(u2)ni +1 + 2(u2)ni + (u2)in?1]
[(u2)ni +1 ? (u2)in?1]
i=1
N3
X
+k3
x x2 [(u3)ni +1 + 2(u3)ni + (u3)in?1]
[(u3)ni +1 ? (u3)in?1]
i=1
NX1 +1
= ?k1
x rx [(u1)ni +1 + 2(u1)ni + (u1)in?1]
rx [(u1)ni +1 ? (u1)in?1]
i=1
NX2 +1
?k2
x rx [(u2)ni +1 + 2(u2)ni + (u2)in?1]
rx [(u2)ni +1 ? (u2)in?1]
i=1
N3
X
?k3
x rx [(u3)ni +1 + 2(u3)ni + (u3)in?1]
rx [(u3)ni +1 ? (u3)in?1 ]: (16)
i=1

Proof. Let Ui(l) = (ul )ni +1 + 2(ul)ni + (ul )in?1 ; Vi(l) = (ul )ni +1 ? (ul )in?1 ; l = 1; 2; 3: As such,
the left-hand-side (LHS) of Eq. (16) can be simpli ed as follows:
N1
X N2
X N3
X
LHS = k1
x x2 Ui(1)
Vi(1) + k2
x x2 Ui(2)
Vi(2) + k3
x x2 Ui(3)
Vi(3)
i=1 i=1 i=1
N1
=
1x2 k1
x [(Ui(1)
X
+1 ? Ui ) ? (Ui ? Ui?1 )]
Vi
(1) (1) (1) (1)

i=1
N2
+
1x2 k2
x [(Ui(2)
X
+1 ? Ui ) ? (Ui ? Ui?1 )]
Vi
(2) (2) (2) (2)

i=1
N3
+ 1 2 k3
x [(Ui(3)
X
+1 ? Ui ) ? (Ui ? Ui?1 )]
Vi
(3) (3) (3) (3)

x i=1
N N1
= 1 2 k1[
x (Ui(1) ? Ui(1)
X1 +1 X

x ? 1 )
V i
(1)
? 1 ?
x (Ui(1) ? Ui(1)
?1 )
Vi ]
(1)

i=2 i=1

5
 1 NX2 +1 XN2
+
x2 k2[
x (Ui ? Ui?1)
Vi?1 ?
x (Ui(2) ? Ui(2)
(2) (2) (2)
?1 )
Vi ]
(2)

i=2 i=1
1 NX3 +1 XN3
+
x2 k3[
x (Ui ? Ui?1)
Vi?1 ?
x (Ui(3) ? Ui(3)
(3) (3) (3)
?1 )
Vi ]
(3)

i=2 i=1
Based on Eq. (12), the above LHS can be further written as follows:
N1 N1
LHS =
1x2 k1[
x (Ui(1) ? Ui(1)
X X
?1 )
V (1)
i?1 ?
x (Ui(1) ? Ui(1)
?1 )
Vi ]
(1)

i=1 i=1
N N2
+
1x2 k2 [
x (Ui(2) ? Ui(2)
X 2 X
?1 )
V (2)
i?1 ?
x (Ui(2) ? Ui(2)
?1 )
Vi ]
(2)

i=1 i=1
1 XN3 XN3
+
x2 k3 [
x (Ui ? Ui?1)
Vi?1 ?
x (Ui(3) ? Ui(3)
(3) (3) (3)
?1 )
Vi ]
(3)

i=1 i=1
1 (1) (1) (1) 1
+ 2 k1
x
(UN1 +1 ? UN1 )
VN1 ? 2 k2
x
(U1(2) ? U0(2) )
V0(2)

x
x
1
+ 2 k2
x
(UN2 +1 ? UN2 )
VN2 ? 1 2 k3
x
(U1(3) ? U0(3) )
V0(3) :
(2) (2) (2)

x
x
Using Eqs. (9) and (10), we simplify the above LHS as follows:
N1
X N2
X
LHS = ?k1
x rx Ui(1)
rx Vi(1) ? k2
x rx Ui(2)
rx Vi(2)
i=1 i=1
XN3
?k3
x rx Ui(3)
rx Vi(3)
i=1
+ 1 2 k1
x
(UN(1)1 +1 ? UN(1)1 )
VN(1)1 ? 1 2 k1
x
(UN(1)1+1 ? UN(1)1 )
VN(1)1 +1

x
x
+ 2 k2
x
(UN2 +1 ? UN2 )
VN2 ? 1 2 k2
x
(UN(2)2+1 ? UN(2)2 )
VN(2)2 +1
1 (2) (2) (2)

x
x
NX1 +1 NX
2 +1
= ?k1
x rx Ui(1)
rx Vi(1) ? k2
x rx Ui(2)
rx Vi(2)
i=1 i=1
N
X3
?k3
x rx Ui(3)
rx Vi(3)
i=1
= RHS:
To establish a convergence theorem, we let (zl )ni = (l )ni ? (ul )ni; l = 1; 2; 3: This implies
that (zl )ni; l = 1; 2; 3; satisfy

l )i ? (zl )i
( z n+1 n?1 D 1 2 n+1
l
l )i + 2(zl )i + (zl )i ] ? kl x [(zl )i + 2(zl )i + (zl )i ]
Bl + [(z n+1 n n?1 n n?1
2
t 4 4
= (l )ni: (17)
6
 THEOREM. For any n in 0  n
t  t0, (zl)ni ; l = 1; 2; 3; satisfy
 
F (n)  F (0) + c0t0
t 1max   
2 2 2
2
n 1 1 + 2 2 + 3 3 (18)
where
D 1
t
2
+1 n 2 D 2
t
2
F (n) = 2 (z1) + (z1) 1 + 2 (z2 ) + (z2 ) 2 + 2 (z3 )n+1 + (z3 )n 3
n n+1 n 2 D 3
t
2 2

+ 1 k1
t2 rx ((z1 )n+1 + (z1 )n) 1;1 + 1 k2
t2 rx((z2 )n+1 + (z2 )n) 2;1
2 2

2 2
1
+ k3
t rx ((z3 ) + (z3 ) ) 3
2 n+1 n 2
(19)
2
and c0 is a constant. This implies that the scheme is unconditionally stable.
Proof. Multiplying Eq. (17) with l = 1 by 2
t2 [(z1 )ni +1 ? (z1 )in?1 ], Eq. (17) with l = 2
by 2
t2[(z2 )ni +1 ? (z2)in?1]; and Eq. (17) with l = 3 by 2
t2 [(z3 )ni +1 ? (z3 )in?1]; summing
over i from i = 1;


; N1; i = 1;


; N2 and i = 1;


; N3; respectively, and then combining
them together, one obtains
B1
t((z1 )n+1 ? (z1)n?1; (z1 )n+1 ? (z1)n?1)1
+ D12
t ((z1 )n+1 + 2(z1 )n + (z1)n?1; (z1 )n+1 ? (z1)n?1)1
2

k1
t
2
? 2 (x2 [(z1)n+1 + 2(z1)n + (z1 )n?1]; (z1)n+1 ? (z1 )n?1)1
+B2
t((z2 )n+1 ? (z2)n?1; (z2 )n+1 ? (z2)n?1)2
+ D22
t ((z2 )n+1 + 2(z2 )n + (z2)n?1; (z2 )n+1 ? (z2)n?1)2
2

? k2
2 t (x2 [(z2)n+1 + 2(z2)n + (z2 )n?1]; (z2)n+1 ? (z2 )n?1)2

2

+B3
t((z3 )n+1 ? (z3)n?1; (z3 )n+1 ? (z3)n?1)3

+ D32
t ((z3 )n+1 + 2(z3 )n + (z3)n?1; (z3 )n+1 ? (z3)n?1)3
2

? k3
2 t (x2 [(z3)n+1 + 2(z3)n + (z3 )n?1]; (z3)n+1 ? (z3 )n?1)3

2

= 2
t2 ((1 )n; (z1)n+1 ? (z1)n?1 )1 + 2
t2 ((2 )n; (z2 )n+1 ? (z2)n?1)2
+2
t2 ((3)n; (z3 )n+1 ? (z3)n?1)3 : (20)
By lemmas 1 and 2, we obtain
B1
t (z1 )n+1 ? (z1 )n?1 1 + B2
t (z2)n+1 ? (z2 )n?1
2 2
2

+B3
t (z3)n+1 ? (z3 )n?1 3

2

+ D12
t [ (z1)n+1 + (z1 )n 1 ? (z1 )n + (z1 )n?1 1 ]

2 2 2

7
 + D22
t [ (z2)n+1 + (z2 )n 2 ? (z2 )n + (z2 )n?1 2 ]
2 2 2

+ D 3
t
2
[ (z3)n+1 + (z3 )n 3 ? (z3 )n + (z3 )n?1 3 ]
2 2

2
+ k 1
t
2
[ rx ((z1 )n+1 + (z1 )n) 1;1 ? rx ((z1)n + (z1 )n?1) 1;1 ]
2 2

2
+ 2 t [ rx ((z2 )n+1 + (z2 )n) 2;1 ? rx ((z2)n + (z2 )n?1) 2;1 ]
k
2 2 2

2
+ k3
2
t2 [ r ((z )n+1 + (z )n) 2 ? r ((z )n + (z )n?1) 2 ]
x 3 3
3
x 3 3
3
= 2
t ((1 ) ; (z1) ? (z1) )1 + 2
t ((2 ) ; (z2 ) ? (z2)n?1)2
2 n n +1 n ? 1 2 n n +1

+2
t2 ((3)n; (z3 )n+1 ? (z3)n?1)3 : (21)

By the generalized Cauchy-Schwarz's inequality, we have
2
t((1 )n; (z1)n+1 ? (z1 )n?1)1  " (z1 )n+1 ? (z1)n?1 1 + "?1
t2 k(1)nk21 ;
2

2
t((2 )n; (z2)n+1 ? (z2 )n?1)2  " (z2 )n+1 ? (z2)n?1 2 + "?1
t2 k(2)nk22 ;
2

and
2
t((3 )n; (z3)n+1 ? (z3 )n?1)3  " (z3 )n+1 ? (z3)n?1 3 + "?1
t2 k(3)nk23 ;
2

where " is a positive constant. Substituting the above inequalities into Eq. (21), we obtain

t(B1 ? ") (z1)n+1 ? (z1 )n?1 1 +
t(B2 ? ") (z2)n+1 ? (z2 )n?1 2
2 2

+
t(B3 ? ") (z3 )n+1 ? (z3 )n?1 3

2

+ D1
t [ (z1 )n+1 + (z1)n 1 ? (z1 )n + (z1)n?1 1 ]

2 2 2

2
+ 2
t [ (z2 )n+1 + (z2)n 2 ? (z2 )n + (z2)n?1 2 ]
D 2 2 2

2
+ D32
t [ (z3 )n+1 + (z3)n 3 ? (z3 )n + (z3)n?1 3 ]
2 2 2

+ k1

2
t2 [ r ((z )n+1 + (z )n) 2 ? r ((z )n + (z )n?1 ) 2 ]
x 1 1
1;1
x 1 1
1;1

+ k2
t [ r ((z )n+1 + (z )n) ? r ((z )n + (z )n?1 ) 2 ]

2 2
x 2 x 2
2 2
2;1
2
2;1

+ k3
t [ r ((z )n+1 + (z )n) 2 ? r ((z )n + (z )n?1) 2]

2
x 3 x 3
2 3
3
3
3
? 1 3 n 2 ? 1 3 n 2 ?
 "
t k(1 ) k1 + "
t k(2 ) k2 + "
t k(3 ) k3 :
1 3 n 2
(22)
Choosing " = minfB1; B2; B3 g to drop out the terms k(zl )n+1 ? (zl )n?1k2l ; l = 1; 2; 3; and
then using the notation
F (n) = D12
t (z1)n+1 + (z1)n 1 + D22
t (z2 )n+1 + (z2 )n 2 + D32
t (z3 )n+1 + (z3 )n 3
2 2 2 2 2 2

8
 + 12 k1
t2 rx ((z1 )n+1 + (z1 )n) 1;1 + 12 k2
t2 rx((z2 )n+1 + (z2 )n)
2 2
2;1

+ 21 k3
t2 rx ((z3 )n+1 + (z3 )n) 3 ;

2

we simplify Eq. (22) as follows:

0  F (n)  F (n ? 1) + c0
t3 (k1nk21 + k2nk22 + k3nk23)
n
X
 F (0) + c0
t 3
( 1 1 + 2 2 + 3 3)
2 2 2

=1
 
 F (0) + c0t0
t 1max
2
n

1 1
2
+ 
2 2
2
+ 
3 3
2
;
where c0 = "?1: Hence, the proof is completed.

4 DOMAIN DECOMPOSITION ALGORITHM

We express Eq. (8) as three tridiagonal linear systems:
?b(1)
m (u1 )m?1 + am (u1 )m ? cm (u1 )m+1 = dm ;
n+1 (1) n+1 (1) n+1 (1)
m = 1;


; N1; (23)
?b(2)
m (u2 )m?1 + am (u2 )m ? cm (u2 )m+1 = dm ;
n+1 (2) n+1 (2) n+1 (2)
m = 1;


; N2; (24)
?b(3)
m (u3 )m?1 + am (u3 )m ? cm (u3 )m+1 = dm ;
n+1 (3) n+1 (3) n+1 (3)
m = 1;


; N3; (25)
where
Bl + Dl + kl ; b(l) = kl ; c(l) = kl ;
am(l) = 2
t 4 2
x2 m 4
x2 m 2
x2
and
Bl (u )n?1 ? Dl [2(u )n + (u )n?1] + kl 2 [2(u )n + (u )n?1] + (G )n :
dm(l) = 2
t lm 4 l m l m
4
x2 x l m l m l m

Here, l = 1; 2; 3: Applying a parallel \divide and conquer" procedure for tridiagonal linear
system described in (Dai, 1998), we develop a domain decomposition algorithm for thermal
analysis in the triple-layered skin structure as follows:
m gm=1 ; f ~m ; ~m ; 
(2) (2) ~ (2) N2
Step 1. Calculate several sequences f m(1) ; m(1) gNm1=1; f m(2) ; m(2) ; (2) N2
m gm=1 ;
~
and f m ; ~m gm=1 based on the following formulas:
(3) (3) N3

= (1) cm(1) d + b m m?1 ;

(1) (1) (1) (1)
m
(1) (1) m
; m = (1) (1) (1)
= 0(1) = 0; m = 1;


; N1; (26)
am ? bm (1)
m?1 am ? bm m(1)?1 0

c
= (2) (2) (2) ; m = (2) (2) (2) ; m = (2) m (2)
d + b  b
(2) (2) (2) (2) (2) (2)
(2) m (2) m m m? 1 (2) m?1
m
am ? bm m?1 am ? bm m?1 am ? bm m(2)?1
0 = 1; m = 1;


; N2 ;
= 0(2) = 0; (2) (27)
(2)
0

9
 (2) ~ (2)
~m(2) = b(2)
m ; ~m = (2) (2) ~(2) ; m = (2) m (2)
(2) d(2)
m + c m 
~
(2) (2)
m+1 ~ (2) c m+1
(2) ~(2)
am ? cm m+1
(2)
am ? cm m+1 am ? cm ~m(2)+1
~N(2)2 +1 = ~N(2)2 +1 = 0; ~(2) N2 +1 = 1; m = N2 ;


; 1; (28)

~m(3) = b(3)
m d(3)
m +
; ~m = (3) (3)
(3) c m ~m?1 ; ~(3) =  (3) = 0; m = N ;


; 1: (29)
(3) (3)

(3) ~(3)
am ? cm m+1 am ? cm ~m(3)?1 N3 +1 N3+1
(3) 3

Step 2. Substitute the following four equations

(u1)nN+1
1
= (1) n+1
N1 (u1 )N1 +1 + N1 ;
(1)

(u2)nN+1
2
= N(2)2 (u2)nN+1
2 +1
+ N(2)2 + (2) n+1
N2 (u2 )0 ;
(u2)n1 +1 = ~1(2)(u2)n0 +1 + ~1(2) + ~(2) n+1
1 (u2 )N2 +1 ;

(u3)n1 +1 = ~1(1) (u3)n0 +1 + ~1(1) ;

into discrete boundary Equations (9) and (10) to obtain (u1)nN+1 1 +1
; (u2)n0 +1; (u2)Nn+1
2 +1
; and
n
(u3)0 .
+1

Step 3. Solve the rest unknowns in (ul )nm+1; l = 1; 2; 3; by

(u1)nm+1 = +1 + m ; m = N1 ;


; 1;
(u1)nm+1 (30)
(1) (1)
m

+1 + m + m (u2 )0 ; m = N2 ;


; 1;
(u2)nm+1 = m(2) (u2)nm+1 (2) (2) n+1 (31)
(u3)nm+1 = ~m(3) (u3)nm+1
?1 + ~m ; m = 1;


; N3 :
(3)
(32)

5 NUMERICAL EXAMPLE
To demonstrate the applicability of the developed numerical method, we investigate
the temperature rise in a triple-layered skin structure, namely epidermis, dermis and sub-
cutaneous with a step increase of the surface temperature (0 = 12oC and Qlr = 0). The
schematic geometry of the three-layer skin structure is shown in Figure 1. The properties
of the skin used in the analysis are listed in Table 1 (Liu, 1999). To apply the domain
decomposition algorithm described in the previous section, we chose the time increment,
t,
to be 0:005s, and three meshes of 10250  1250, 20500  2500, and 401000  5000 for
the triple-layered skin structure.
Figure 2 shows the temperature elevations in the skin at x = 0:00208m. The results are
similar to those obtained in (Liu, 1999) using the Pennes' equation. Further, the solutions
show no much di erence among these three meshes. Figure 3 shows the temperature pro les
along the x-direction at t = 150s.

10
6 CONCLUSION
In this study, we develop a three-level nite di erence scheme for solving the 1D Pennes'
bioheat transfer equation in a triple-layered skin structure. A convergence theorem has
been established by using the discrete energy method, which implies that the scheme is
unconditionally stable. A domain decomposition algorithm has been developed based on the
nature of the tripe-layered skin structure. Numerical results for thermal analysis of a triple-
layered skin structure, namely epidermis, dermis and subcutaneous are obtained. Further
research will focus on the development of an unconditionally stable nite di erence scheme
for solving a general form of the thermal wave model of bioheat transfer as follows (Liu,
1999):
l Cl  @@t2l + (l Cl + WblCbl  ) @ l C l  ? k @ l = G ; l = 1; 2; 3;
2 2
l
@t + W b b l l
@x2 l (33)
where l is de ned as the characteristic time needed for accumulating the thermal energy
required for propagative transfer to the nearest element within the nonhomogeneous inner
structures (Kaminski, 1990). The value of  in biological systems has been predicted to be 20-
30s (Kaminski, 1990). Recently, Mitra (1995) et al. performed experimental measurements
in processed meat and   16s was obtained.

Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Dr. Sherwood W. Samn at the Brooks Air Force Research
Laboratory for a few discussions concerning the bioheat modelings.

References
[1] Bechnke, W.P. (1984), \Predicting ash re protection of clothing from laboratory tests
using second-degree burn to rate performance", Fire Mat., Vol. 8, pp. 57-63.
[2] Cattaneo, C. (1958), \A form of heat conduction equation which eliminates the paradox
of instantaneous propagation", Compte Rendus, Vol. 247, pp. 431-433.
[3] Chen, Y. and Shi, J. (1993), Pathology of Burns (in Chinese), Chongqing, China, pp.
287-340.
[4] Dai, W. and Nassar, R. (1998), \A three-dimensional numerical method for thermal
analysis in X-ray lithography", Int. J. Numerical Methods for Heat & Fluid Flow, Vol.
4, pp. 409-423.
[5] Kaminski, W. (1990), \Hyperbolic heat conduction equation for material with a non-
homogeneous inner structure", ASME J. Heat Transfer, Vol. 112, pp. 555-560.
11
 [6] Killer, K.R. and Hayes, L.J. (1991), \Analysis of tissue injury by burning: Comparison
of in situ and skin ap models", Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, Vol. 34, pp. 1393-1406.
[7] Lecarpentier, G.L., Motamedi, M., Mcmath, L.P., Rastegar, S. and Welch, A.J. (1993),
\Continuous wave laser ablation of tissue: analysis of thermal and mechanical evernts",
IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng., Vol. 40, pp. 188-200.
[8] Li, J. and Liang, H. (1989), The Laser Medicine and its Biomedical Applications (in
Chinese). Beijing China, Science Press, pp. 254-259.
[9] Liu, J., Ren, Z. and Wang, C. (1995), \Interpretation of living tissue's temperature
oscillations by thermal wave theory", Chinese Sci. Bull., Vol. 40, pp. 1493-1495.
[10] Liu, J.,Chen, X. and Xu, L.X. (1999), \New thermal wave aspects on burn evaluation
of skin subjected to instantaneous heating", IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engi-
neering, Vol. 46, pp. 420-428.
[11] Mitra, K., Kumar, S., Vedavarz, A. and Moallemi, M.K. (1995), \Experimental evidence
of hyperbolic heat conduction in processes meat", ASME J. Heat Transfer, Vol. 117,
pp. 568-573.
[12] Moritz, A.R. and Henriques, F.C. (1947), \Studies of thermal injuries II: The rela-
tive importance of time and surface temperature in the causation of cutaneous burns",
America J. Pathol., Vol. 23, pp. 695-700.
[13] Pennes, H. H. (1948), \Analysis of tissue and arterial temperature in the resting human
forearm", J. Appl. Physiol., Vol. 1, pp. 93-122.
[14] Stoll, A.M. and Greene, L.C.(1959), \Relationship between pain and tissue damage due
to thermal radiation", J. Appl. Physiol., Vol. 14, pp 373-382.
[15] Torvi, D.A. and Dale, J.D. (1994), \A nite element model of skin subjected to a ash
re", ASME J. Biomech. Eng., Vol. 116, pp. 250-255.
[16] Vernotte, P. (1958), \Les paradoxes de la theoroe continue de l'equation de la chaleur",
Compte Rendus, Vol. 246, pp. 3154-3155.

12
 Epidermis Dermis Subcutaneous

Skin surface Body core

0.08 2.00 10.00

0.00 X (mm)

Figure 1: A geometric illustration of the three layer skin structure.

Table 1: Properties of the skin.

Property Epidermis Dermis Sub-cutaneous Blood
C; J=kg=oC 3578-3600 3200-3400 2288-3060 3770
o
k; W=m= C 0.21-0.26 0.37-0.52 0.16-0.21 |
; kg=m 3
1200 1200 1000 1000
Wb; kg=m 3
0 0.5 0.5 |

13
 12
x=0.00208m

10

8
Temperature θ

6
Grid points 40x1000x5000
Grid points 20x500x2500
Grid points 10x250x1250

0
0 30 60 90 120 150
Time t (s)

Figure 2. Temperature elevations in the skin due to a step surface heating

(θ0=12oC).
14
 epidermis

12

11
Grid points 40x1000x5000
10 Grid points 20x500x2500
Grid points 10x250x1250

8
Temperature θ

dermis sub-cutaneous
5

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
X (mm)

15x-direction when t = 150.0 (s).

Figure 3. Temperature profiles along