International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 37 (2010) 385–392

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer

j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : w w w. e l s e v i e r. c o m / l o c a t e / i c h m t

Solving heat transfer problems with phase change via smoothed effective heat
capacity and element-free Galerkin methods☆
Haitian Yang ⁎, Yiqian He
State Key Lab of Structural Analysis for Industrial Equipment, Department of Engineering Mechanics, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian, 116024, PR China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Available online 5 January 2010 This paper presents a smoothed effective heat capacity model that is combined with element-free Galerkin
(EFG) method, to solve heat transfer problems with phase change. The Sigmoid function is employed to build
Keywords: a continuous and smooth effective heat capacity function, so as to avoid possible error caused by the step-
Heat transfer jump. The proposed numerical model is verified via numerical examples, and the effects of arrangement of
Phase change EFG nodes and parameters relevant with Sigmoid function on the solutions are investigated. Satisfactory
Element-free Galerkin method
results are achieved in comparison with analytical solutions.
Sigmoid function
© 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction There have been several numerical approximations suggested to deal

This paper is devoted to the numerical solution of heat transfer
problems involving phase change that is accompanied by either
absorption or release of thermal energy, and results in a moving
boundary problem [1].
Generally, there are two kinds of numerical approaches to deal
with such a moving boundary problem, i.e. front-tracking methods and
fixed-domain methods [2].
Front-tracking methods continuously trace the interface of phase
change. A disadvantage of these methods is that front-tracking requires
continuously deforming grid remeshing, coordinate transformation or
the use of space–time element [3], which may cause high computational
cost. Another drawback of front-tracking methods is that they are not
suitable for the phase change with a finite freezing range [3].
Fixed-domain methods treat both the solid and liquid as one
continuous medium and interface condition becomes implicit in a new
form of the equations described by the enthalpy H, effective heat
capacity ceff or heat-generation term, etc. The fixed-domain method
doesn't require remeshing and can be easily implemented in an existing
conduction program [3]. On the other hand, fixed-domain methods can
handle the phase change problem with a finite freezing range [3].
Among the fixed-domain methods, one of the earliest and mostly
commonly used methods has been the ‘effective heat capacity’ method,
in which the effective heat capacity ceff is defined as the slope of
enthalpy–temperature curve [1,3]. Fig. 1 shows a typical variation of H
and ceff = dH/dT with temperature. It is noted that there is a
discontinuous step jump of ceff which may cause numerical oscillations
because of the difficulties in evaluating the capacitance matrix [1,3].
☆ Communicated by W.J. Minkowycz.
⁎ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: haitian@dlut.edu.cn (H. Yang).
with the difficulties caused by such a step-jump, [4–7]. Lemmon
proposed a space averaging method in which ceff is approximated by [7]


∇H∇H 0:5
ceff =
∇T∇T
where ∇H and ∇T represent spatial gradients of H and T.
Morgan represented a temporal averaging method in which ceff is
approximately evaluated by [6]
m m−1
H −H
ceff =
T m −T m−1
where m and m − 1 refer to mth and (m − 1)th time nodes, respectively.
Both space and temporal averaging are generally available for
solidification modeling. However space averaging needs an extra
computation of spatial derivatives, while as to temporal averaging, the
solution will lag behind and oscillations may occur [8].
Instead of averaging approximation, a smoothed ceff model is
proposed in this paper to avoid possible computing error caused by
the step-jump. By virtue of the Sigmoid function [9], the enthalpy
function H(T) is smoothed with a continuous and smooth derivative
with respect to T, thereby the step-jump is smoothed by ceff = dH/dT.
In this paper EFGM (element-Free Galerkin Method) is combined
with a smoothed effective heat capacity model to solve phase change
problems. EFGM does not require any element connectivity data and
does not suffer much degradation inaccuracy when nodal arrange-
ment are very irregular [10,11], and has been employed to solve
steady and transient heat transfer problems [12–16]. Gao used EFGM
to solve a phase change problem in the term of effective heat capacity
[17], but did not present sufficient computing details on the treatment
of the step-jump of ceff. In addition to EFGM, some other Free Element

0735-1933/$ – see front matter © 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.icheatmasstransfer.2009.12.002
386 H. Yang, Y. He / International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 37 (2010) 385–392

Nomenclature

C Heat capacity matrix

c Heat capacity
F Vector of right hand side term
f Phase fraction
H Enthalpy
K Coefficient matrix
k Thermal diffusivities
L Latent heat
m Time node
N Nodal number
n Time step
n Vector of unit outside normal
t Time
Δt Time interval Fig. 1. Typical variation of enthalpy and ceff with temperature.
q Prescribed heat flux on boundary
r Variable of weight function
S Sigmoid function
T Vector of nodal temperature The paper is organized as follows:
T Temperature Section 2 introduces the problem of interest. Section 3 gives a
V Normal velocity representation of Sigmoid function based smoothed effective heat
w Weight function capacity, Section 4 describes the implementation of EFGM, and
x, y x and y coordinate Section 5 provides two numerical examples to verify the proposed
model. The impacts of the parameter relevant with Sigmoid function
and the arrangement of EFG nodes on the solutions are investigated,
and satisfactory results have been achieved.
Greek symbols
α Parameter in Sigmoid function
β Penalty function
Γ Boundary
Φ Vector of MLS shape function
ϕ Variable in Sigmoid function
Ω Domain

Subscripts
b Prescribed temperature on boundary
eff Effective heat capacity
f Freezing interval
in Initial temperature
i, j Components of vector and matrix
l Liquid phase
liq Liquidus
r Reference temperature
s Solid phase
sℓ Phase change interface
sol Solidus
x, y x and y direction
1 Boundary prescribed with temperature
2 Boundary prescribed with heat flux

Superscripts
EFG Element-free Galerkin method
∼ EFG nodal parameters

methods were also employed to solve the phase change problem, such
as LRBFCM (local radial basis function collocation method) [18], FPM
(Finite Point Method) [19] and SPH (Smoothed-Particle Hydrody-
namics) [20]. However in both [18,19], iterations were required; in
[20], the discontinuity of intern energy of isothermal phase change,
which is similar to the enthalpy, was not discussed in detail. Fig. 2. Smoothed variation of enthalpy with temperature.
 H. Yang, Y. He / International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 37 (2010) 385–392 387

Fig. 3. Smoothed variation of ceff with temperature.

2. The governing equation of phase change problems The initial condition is

Consider a domain Ω that is divided into distinct liquid phase

region Ωℓ and solid phase region Ωs, thus Ω = Ωℓ + Ωs. T = Tin t = 0 ð5Þ
The governing equations in these two regions are [21]

At the phase change interface Γsℓ we have [21]

∂T
cℓ = ∇⋅ðkl ∇TÞ in Ωℓ ð1Þ
∂t
Tsℓ = Tf ð6Þ
and


∂T ∂T ∂T
cs = ∇⋅ðks ∇TÞ in Ωs ð2Þ LV = − kl l −ks s on Γsℓ ð7Þ
∂t ∂n ∂n

where cl and cs denote the volumetric heat capacities and kl and ks are
the thermal diffusivities of materials in Ωℓ and Ωs, respectively.
The boundary condition is specified by
T = Tb on Γ1 ;
where L is a latent heat; V represents the normal velocity at Γsℓ; Tf is
freezing temperature; ∂Tl/∂n and ∂Ts/∂n stand for normal derivatives
of T on Γsℓ in the liquid region and solid region, respectively.
ð3Þ
3. Sigmoid function based smoothed effective heat capacity

−k∇T⋅n = q on Γ2 ð4Þ
The problem defined in the Section 2 can be described via a single
energy conservation equation in the whole domain [1], i.e.
where n is a vector of unit outside normal, q stands for a heat flux
along n, k is thermal diffusivity, k = kl in liquid phase and k = ks in
solid phase. Tb and q are prescribed functions, Γ = Γ1 + Γ2 represents ∂T
ceff = ∇⋅ðk∇TÞ in Ω ð8Þ
the whole boundary of Ω. ∂t

Fig. 4. A solidification problem of an infinite slab of liquid.

388 H. Yang, Y. He / International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 37 (2010) 385–392

where ceff is effective heat capacity which is defined as where Tsol and Tliq stand for the solidus and the liquidus, respectively,
Tr is a reference temperature below Tsol, fl is the liquid fraction, and cf
dH is heat capacity in the freezing interval, and is defined by [22]
ceff = ð9Þ
dT

where H is the enthalpy. cf = ð1−fl Þcs + fl cl ð14Þ

For the isothermal phase change, H and k are specified by [1,2]
8 T In the previous work, a small but finite freezing internal is usually
< ∫Tr cs dT ðT ≤ Tf Þ assumed for isothermal phase change, thus in Eqs. (10) and (12), ceff
H= ð10Þ
: ∫Tf c dT + ∫T c dT + L ðT ≥ T Þ can be defined in the form
Tr s Tf ℓ f

 8
ks ðT ≤ Tf Þ >
> cs ðT ≤ Tsol Þ
k= ð11Þ >
>
kl ðT ≥ Tf Þ < L
ceff = cf + ðTsol ≤ T ≤ Tliq Þ ð15Þ
>
> Tliq −Tsol
>
>
For the phase change over a temperature interval from Tsol to Tliq, :c ðT N Tliq Þ
l
we have [1,3,22]
8 T
>
> ∫Tr cs dT ðT ≤ Tsol Þ where fl is assumed to vary linearly with temperature (i.e. fl = [T −Tsol]/
>
>
< T [Tliq −Tsol]) [3]. Obviously, step-jumps occur when T =Tsol and T =Tliq in
H = ∫Tsol cs dT + ∫TTsol cf dT + fl L ðTsol ≤ T ≤ Tliq Þ ð12Þ Eq. (15).
>
>
r
>
> Eq. (15) can become continuous by smoothing enthalpy H via the
: ∫Tsol c dT + ∫Tliq c dT + ∫T c dT + L ðT N T Þ
Tr s Tsol f Tliq ℓ liq Sigmoid function defined by [8]
8
< ks ðT ≤ Tsol Þ 1
k = ð1−fl Þks + fl kl ðTsol ≤ T ≤ Tliq Þ ð13Þ SðϕÞ = ð16Þ
:k 1 + e−αϕ
l ðT N Tliq Þ

where α is the parameter.

Fig. 5. The variation of temperature with time at x = 1.0, y = 0.05 with different EFG Fig. 6. The variation of temperature with time at x = 1.0, y = 0.05 via different
nodes. integration rules.
 H. Yang, Y. He / International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 37 (2010) 385–392 389

H is given in the form Table 1

Temperature value at different locations when t = 5.

H = ∫TTr ðð1−S′ Þ⋅cs + S′ ⋅cl ÞdT + LS′ X T (α = 30) T (α = 40) T (α = 50) Analytical
(Y=0.05) solution
1 L ð17Þ EFGM Error % EFGM Error % EFGM Error %
α⋅ðT−Tf Þ ′
= cs ⋅T + ðcl −cs Þ⋅ ⋅ lnð1 + e Þ+ −H
α 1 + e−α⋅ðT−Tf Þ 0.1 − 9.3465 0.047 − 9.3483 0.027 − 9.3497 0.012 − 9.3509
0.2 − 8.6935 0.099 − 8.697 0.058 − 8.6999 0.025 − 8.7021
0.3 − 8.0411 0.16 − 8.0464 0.094 − 8.0507 0.040 − 8.0540
where
0.4 − 7.3898 0.23 − 7.3967 0.13 − 7.4025 0.059 − 7.4069
0.5 − 6.7397 0.31 − 6.7484 0.18 − 6.7556 0.079 − 6.7610
′ 1 0.6 − 6.0912 0.41 − 6.1016 0.24 − 6.1102 0.107 − 6.1168
S = ð18Þ − 5.4448 − 5.4568 − 5.4668 − 5.4745
1 + e−αðT−Tf Þ 0.7 0.54 0.32 0.14
0.8 − 4.8006 0.69 − 4.8143 0.41 − 4.8256 0.18 − 4.8344
0.9 − 4.1590 0.90 − 4.1743 0.53 − 4.1870 0.23 − 4.1969
′ 1 α⋅ðT −T Þ 1.0 − 3.5203 1.17 − 3.5372 0.70 − 3.5513 0.30 − 3.5622
H = cs ⋅Tr + ðcl −cs Þ⋅ ⋅ lnð1 + e r f Þ ð19Þ
α

By choosing different α, a continuous effective heat capacity ceff

can be obtained for either the isothermal phase change or the phase
change over an interval

dH 1 Lα
ceff = = cs + ðcl −cs Þ⋅ + −αðT−T Þ
dT 1 + e−αðT−Tf Þ e f + eαðT−Tf Þ + 2
ð20Þ

Fig. 2(a) and (b) show smoothed H − T curves for the two kinds of
phase change, and Fig. 3 shows a smoothed continuous ceff − T curves.

4. Implementation of element free Galerkin method

An EFGM based weak solution of Eq. (1) with boundary condition

Eqs. (2) and (3) can be described by [23,24]

K T̃ + C T̃˙ = F ð21Þ

where
!
∂Φi ∂Φj ∂Φi ∂Φj
Kij = ∫ k + dΩ + ∫ βΦi Φj dΓ; ð22Þ
Ω
∂x ∂x ∂y ∂y Γ 1

Cij = ∫ ceff Φi Φj dΩ; ð23Þ

Ω

EFG
Fi = ∫ βTb Φi dΓ− ∫ qΦi dΓ; i; j = 1; 2; …N ð24Þ
Γ1 Γ2

Fig. 7. The variation of interface position with time with different α. Fig. 8. A solidification problem of a corner region.
390 H. Yang, Y. He / International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 37 (2010) 385–392

where k is the thermal conductivity, β is a penalty function [24], NEFG

is the total number of EFG nodes, and Φi stands for the components of
shape function Φ that is built by the moving least-square (MLS)
approximation [10], Kij represents the components of coefficient
matrix K, C is the heat capacity matrix, T̃ is a vector of nodal
parameters of T, and F is a vector of right hand side term.
The weight function is [24]
8
>
> 2 2 3
> −4r + 4r
> r≤1
>
<3
wðrÞ = 4 2 4 3 1 : ð25Þ
>
> −4r + 4r − r br≤1
>
> 3 3 2
>
:
0 r≤1

A backward difference scheme is employed to solve Eq. (21) in the

form [1]

n + 1 n n
ðC + ΔtKÞ T̃ = C T̃ + ΔtF ð26Þ

where Δt represents the size of a time interval.

The heat capacity matrix C can be computed with the aid of Gauss
rules or Newton–Cotes rules. In previous work, some researches
indicated that Newton–Cotes rule reduces the heat capacity matrix C
to a diagonal matrix (lumping) in finite element method, which will
avoid the presence of oscillations in the time integration [8].

Fig. 10. Nodal arrangements.

By virtue of a linear interpolation [22], the points with T = Tf can be

obtained, thereby the interface can be determined.

5. Numerical verifications

For the simplicity, all the parameters and variables are assumed
dimensionless.

Table 2
Temperature value at different locations when t = 0.02.

x = y T (α = 50) T (α = 60) T (α = 70) Analytical

solution
EFGM Error % EFGM Error % EFGM Error %

0.0 − 1.00000 0.00 − 1.0000. 0.00 − 1.00000 0.00 − 1.00000

0.1 − 0.76559 0.92 − 0.76526 0.96 − 0.76497 0.99 − 0.77268
0.2 − 0.26008 4.58 − 0.25892 5.00 − 0.25789 5.38 − 0.27256
0.3 0.08757 2.21 0.08665 1.14 0.08613 0.53 0.085674
0.4 0.21404 2.06 0.21380 2.16 0.21373 2.20 0.21854
0.5 0.27264 1.52 0.27260 1.53 0.27260 1.53 0.27685
0.6 0.29276 0.73 0.29275 0.73 0.29276 0.72 0.29491
0.7 0.29835 0.25 0.29835 0.25 0.29835 0.25 0.29912
0.8 0.29967 0.07 0.29967 0.07 0.29967 0.070 0.29988
0.9 0.29994 0.016 0.29994 0.016 0.29994 0.016 0.29999
1.0 0.29998 0.0066 0.29998 0.0066 0.29998 0.0066 0.30000
Fig. 9. The position of interface at t = 0.02 with different nodal arrangement.
 H. Yang, Y. He / International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 37 (2010) 385–392
5.1. Solidification of an infinite slab of liquid
This example refers to a 1-D semi-infinite region, initially occupied
by a liquid with a constant temperature (x N 0) greater than the
freezing point and subsequently maintained a constant temperature
(x = 0) below that of freezing point [25].
Fig. 11. The movement of interface.
391
The above problem can be handled as a 2-D problem as shown in
Fig. 4 [4] where Ti refers to the initial temperature, Tf refers to the
freezing point and Tb stands for the temperature at x = 0.
The domain defined in Fig. 4 is discretized by Nx × Ny EFG nodes.
Two integration rules are adopted, i.e.
(a) 4 × 4 Gauss rule
(b) Newton–Cotes rule
In comparison with an analytical solution [25], a variation of
temperature with time is described in Figs. 5 and 6. The impacts of
different nodal arrangement and different integration rules on the
solution are taken into account.
The solutions of interface position with different α are given in
Fig. 7, and are compared with an analytical solution [25].
The solutions of temperature with different α are exhibited in
Table 1, and are compared with an analytical solution [25].
5.2. Solidification of a corner region
The problem under consideration is an initially liquid quarter-
space with a constant Ti (x, y N 0), which is greater than the freezing
point Tf. For t ≥ 0, a constant temperature Tb, which is lower than Tf, is
maintained at x = 0 and y = 0 [26].
The above infinite corner region can be approximated by a square
domain [8], as shown in Fig. 8 where all computing parameters are
listed.
Fig. 9 exhibits the solutions of the interface position with different
EFG nodal arrangement as shown Fig. 10. These solutions are
compared with an analytical solution [26].
Table 2 shows the solutions with different α when t = 0.02.
Fig. 11 gives a comparison of interface positions at different time.
Numerical examples indicate
1. The solutions given by the proposed model have good accordance
with analytical solutions.
2. The computing accuracy increases with the increase of densities of
EFGM nodes.
3. The solution seems to be insensitive to α.
4. Both Gauss and Newton–Cotes integration rules are available for
the proposed model.
6. Conclusion
The major contribution of this paper is to present a Sigmoid
function based smoothed effective heat capacity model. Since the
step-jump is smoothed, ceff can be continuously evaluated via dH/dT,
thereby the possible numerical oscillation caused by the step-jump
can be avoided. On the other hand, the artificial freezing internal is not
required for the isothermal phase change.
Numerical verification indicates that the combination of smoothed
effective heat capacity model with EFGM is available for solving heat
transfer problems with phase change.
Acknowledgements
The research leading to this paper is funded by NSF (10421002),
NSF (10472019), NSF (10772035), NSF(10721062), NKBRSF
[2005CB321704,2010CB832703], and the fund of disciplines leaders
of young and middle age faculty in colleges of Liaoning Province.
References
[1] R.W. Lewis, K. Morgan, H.R. Thomas, K.N. Seetharamu, The finite element method
in heat transfer analysis [M], John wiley & Sons, 1996.
[2] John Crank, Free and moving boundary problems [M], Calverdon Press, Oxford,
1984.
[3] R.W. Lewis, K. Ravindran, Finite element simulation of metal casting [J], Int. J.
Numer. Meth. Engng. 47 (2000) 29–59.
392 H. Yang, Y. He / International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 37 (2010) 385–392
[4] G. Comini, Del Guidice, R.W. Lewis, O.C. Zienkiewicz, Finite element solution of
non-linear heat conduction problems with special reference to phase change [J],
International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 8 (1974) 613–624.
[5] Del Giudice, G. Comini, R.W. Lewis, Finite element simulation of freezing processes
in soils [J], International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in
Geomechanics 2 (1978) 223–235.
[6] K. Morgan, R.W. Lewis, O.C. Zienkiewicz, An improved algorithm for heat
conduction problems with phase change [J], International Journal for Numerical
Methods in Engineering 13 (1978) 1191–1195.
[7] E.C. Lemmon, Multidimensional integral phase change approximations for finite
element conduction codes, in: R.W. Lewis, K. Morgan, O.C. Zienkiewicz (Eds.),
Numerical Methods Heat Transfer, Wiley, New York, 1981, pp. 201–213.
[8] A.J. Dalhuijsen, A. Segal, Comparison of finite element techniques for solidification
problems [J], International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 23
(1986) 1807–1829.
[9] Jing Ren, Kenneth A. McIsaac, Rajni V. Patel, Terry M. Peters, A potential field
model using generalized Sigmoid functions [J], IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man,
and Cybernetics—Part B: Cybernetics 37 (NO. 2) (APRIL 2007).
[10] T. Belytschko, Y.Y. Lu, L. Gu, Element-free Galerkin methods [J], Int. J. Num. Meth.
Engng 37 (1994) 229–256.
[11] Y.Y. Lu, T. Belytschko, M. Tabbara, Element-free Galerkin method for wave
propagation and dynamic fracture[J], Computer methods in Applied Mechanics
and Engineerings 126 (1995) 131–153.
[12] A. Singh, I.V. Singh, R. Prakash, Numerical solution of temperature-dependent
thermal conductivity problems using meshless method [J], Numerical Heat
Transfer, Part A: Applications 50 (2) (2006) 125–145.
[13] I.V. Singh, A numerical study of weight functions. scaling and penalty parameters
for heat transfer applications [J], Numerical Heat Transfer, Part A: Applications 47
(10) (2005) 1025–1053.
[14] Y. Haitian, L. Ling, Solving transient heat conduction problems with cyclic
symmetry via a parallend EFGM and a precise algorithm [J], Numerical Heat
Transfer, Part B: Fundamentals 46 (5) (2004) 479–495.
[15] I.V. Singh, E.F.G. Meshless, method in three-dimensional heat transfer problems: a
numerical comparison, cost and error analysis [J], Numerical Heat Transfer, Part A:
Applications 46 (2) (2004) 199–220.
[16] I.V. Singh, K. Sandeep, R. Prakash, Heat transfer analysis of two-dimensional fins
using meshless element Galerkin method [J], Numerical Heat Transfer; Part A:
Applications 44 (2003) 73–84.
[17] Zhihua Gao, Mingyi Zhang, Zhiqiang Liu, Shujuan Zhang, A meshless method for
nonlinear transient field with phase change (in Chinese) [J], Chinese Journal of
Computational Physics 23 (2006) 545–550.
[18] Robert Vertnik, Bozidar Sarler, Meshless local radial basis function collocation
method for onvective-diffusive solid–liquid phase change problems [J], Interna-
tional Journal of Numerical Methods for Heat & Fluid Flow 16 ((5)5) (2006)
617–640.
[19] Lei Zhang, Yi-Ming Rong, Hou-Fa Shen, Tian-You Huang, Solidification modeling in
continuous casting by finite point method [J], Journal of Materials Processing
Technology (2007) 192–193 511–517.
[20] Simulations of droplet spreading and solidification using an improved SPH model
[J], Numerical Heat Transfer, Part A: Applications 55 (2) (2009) 124–143.
[21] Chen, B. Merriman, S. Osher, P. Smereka, A simple level set method for solving
Stefan problems [J], J. Comput. Phys. 135 (1997) 8–29.
[22] Yetao Zhou, Zhenqunand Guan, Yuanxian Gu, Equivalent heat capacity method for
solution of heat transfer with phase change [J], Journal of Chemical Industry and
Engineering (China) (2005) [in Chinese].
[23] Akhilendra Singh, Indra Vir Singh, Ravi Prakash, Meshless element free Galerkin
method for unsteady nonlinear heat transfer problems [J], International Journal of
Heat and Mass Transfer 50 (2007) 1212–1219.
[24] Zhang Xiong, Liu Yan. Meshless Methods [M], Tsinghua University Press &
Springer. 2004 (in Chinese).
[25] H.S. Carslaw, J.C. Jaeger, Conduction of Heat in Solids [M], 2nd ednOxford
University Press, 1959.
[26] K.A. Rathjen, L.A. Jiji, Heat conduction with melting or freezing in a conner [J],
J. Heat Transfer 93 (1971) 101–109.