Partial differential equations diffusion modeling

Dudukovic [70, 71], Rothaemel and Baems [72], Gleaves et al. [73], Soick et al. [74] and others. Quinta Ferreira et al. [75] discussed tiie influence of convective flow in large pores. Van der Linde et al. [76] present a detailed method of solution of the system of partial differential equations which model the TP reactor. Shekhtman et al. [69] developed a model of a so-called "thin-zone reactor" in which the concentration gradients across the short catalyst bed can be neglected, and diffusion and reaction can be separated. A very general model was presented by Garayhi and Keil [112-115] which comprises the TAP reactor as a special case, and which considers also multicomponent diffusion within the pores as well as the possibility to include arbitrarily complicated systems of reaction equations. 

In the mathematical sense, simplification can be defined as model reduction, that is, the rigorous or approximate representation of complex models by simpler ones. For example, in a certain domain of parameters or times, a model of partial differential equations ( diffusion-reaction model) is approximated by a model of differential equations, or a model of differential equations is approximated by a model of algebraic equations, and so on. 

As a last example in this section, let us consider a sphere situated in a solution extending to infinity in all directions. If the concentration at the surface of the sphere is maintained constant (for example c — 0) while the initial concentration of the solution is different (for example c = c°), then this represents a model of spherical diffusion. It is preferable to express the Laplace operator in the diffusion equation (2.5.1) in spherical coordinates for the centro-symmetrical case.t The resulting partial differential equation... 

This is Fick s second law of diffusion, the equation that forms the basis for most mathematical models of diffusion processes. The simple form of the equation shown above is applicable only to diffusion in one dimension (x) in systems of rectangular geometry. The mathematical form of the equation becomes more complex when diffusion is allowed to occur in more than one dimension or when the relationship is expressed in cylindrical or spherical coordinate geometries. Since the simple form shown above is itself a second-order partial differential equation, the threat of added complexity is an unpleasant proposition at best. 

Burns and Curtiss (1972) and Burns et al. (1984) have used the Facsimile program developed at AERE, Harwell to obtain a numerical solution of simultaneous partial differential equations of diffusion kinetics (see Eq. 7.1). In this procedure, the changes in the number of reactant species in concentric shells (spherical or cylindrical) by diffusion and reaction are calculated by a march of steps method. A very similar procedure has been adopted by Pimblott and La Verne (1990 La Verne and Pimblott, 1991). Later, Pimblott et al. (1996) analyzed carefully the relationship between the electron scavenging yield and the time dependence of eh yield through the Laplace transform, an idea first suggested by Balkas et al. (1970). These authors corrected for the artifactual effects of the experiments on eh decay and took into account the more recent data of Chernovitz and Jonah (1988). Their analysis raises the yield of eh at 100 ps to 4.8, in conformity with the value of Sumiyoshi et al. (1985). They also conclude that the time dependence of the eh yield and the yield of electron scavenging conform to each other through Laplace transform, but that neither is predicted correctly by the diffusion-kinetic model of water radiolysis. 

Why does the incorporation of advection and diffusion into a model lead to partial differential equations For what conditions do these equations become normal differential equations again ... 

How can diffusive transport be incorporated into box models Are the resulting expressions partial differential equations ... 

Errors and confusion in modelling arise because the complex set of coupled, nonlinear, partial differential equations are not usually an exact representation of the physical system. As examples, first consider the input parameters, such as chemical rate constants or diffusion coefficients. These input quantities, used as submodels in the detailed model, must be derived from more fundamental theories, models or experiments. They are usually not known to any appreciable accuracy and often their values are simply guesses. Or consider the geometry used in a calculation. It is often one or two dimensions less than needed to completely describe the real system. Multidimensional effects which may be important are either crudely approximated or ignored. This lack of exact correspondence between the model adopted and the actual physical system constitutes the basic problem of detailed modelling. This problem, which must be overcome in order to accurately model transient combustion systems, can be analyzed in terms of the multiple time scales, multiple space scales, geometric complexity, and physical complexity of the systems to be modelled. 

After the kinetic model for the network is defined, a simulation method needs to be chosen, given the systemic phenomenon of interest. The phenomenon might be spatial. Then it has to be decided whether in addition stochasticity plays a role or not. In the former case the kinetic model should be described with a reaction-diffusion master equation [81], whereas in the latter case partial differential equations should suffice. If the phenomenon does not involve a spatial organization, the dynamics can be simulated either using ordinary differential equations [47] or master equations [82-84]. In the latter case but not in the former, stochasticity is considered of importance. A first-order estimate of the magnitude of stochastic fluctuations can be obtained using the linear noise approximation, given only the ordinary differential equation description of the kinetic model [83-85, 87]. 

The mathematical model comprises a set of partial differential equations of convective diffusion and heat conduction as well as the Navier-Stokes equations written for each phase separately. For the description of reactive separation processes (e.g. reactive absorption, reactive distillation), the reaction terms are introduced either as source terms in the convective diffusion and heat conduction equations or in the boundary condition at the channel wall, depending on whether the reaction is homogeneous or heterogeneous. The solution yields local concentration and temperature fields, which are used for calculation of the concentration and temperature profiles along the column. 

Noncompartmental models were introduced as models that allow for transport of material through regions of the body that are not necessarily well mixed or of uniform concentration [248]. For substances that are transported relatively slowly to their site of degradation, transformation, or excretion, so that the rate of diffusion limits their rate of removal from the system, the noncompartmental model may involve diffusion or other random walk processes, leading to the solution in terms of the partial differential equation of diffusion or in terms of probability distributions. A number of noncompartmental models deal with plasma time-concentration curves that are best described by power functions of time. 

In order to obtain the concentration C at a location x and time t, the partial differential equation should be solved. It is possible if the initial (values t = 0) and boundary conditions (values at certain location x) are known, i.e., if a model of diffusion is assumed [ii—v]. 

The one-dimensional model is by no means descriptive of everything that goes on in the reactor, because it provides calculated temperatures, concentrations, pressures, and so on only in one dimension — lengthwise, down the axis of the tube. Actually, transport processes and diffusion cause variations and gradients not only axially but also radially within tubes and within individual catalyst pellets. Furthermore, the reactor may not actually operate at steady-state, and so time might also be included as a variable. All of these factors can be described quite easily by partial differential equations in as many as four dimensions (tube length, tube radius, pellet radius, and time). 

In order to carry out a simulation of the electrode response it is first necessary to transform the partial differential equations describing the process to the finite difference form. The finite difference form of (19) which describes the diffusion of B generated in (1) and reacting in (2) is given by (21). In (21) Df is the model diffusion coefficient equal to DAtjAx and is dimensionless. 

The analysis of outlet peaks is based on the model of processes in the column. Today the Kubi n - Kucera model [14,15], which accounts for all the above-mentioned processes, as long as they can be described by linear (differential) equations, is used nearly exclusively. Several possibilities exist for obtaining rate parameters of intracolumn processes (axial dispersion coefficient, external mass transfer coefficient, effective diffusion coefficient, adsorption/desorption rate or equilibrium constants) from the column response peaks. The moment approach in which moments of the outlet peaks are matched to theoretical expressions developed for the system of model (partial) differential equations is widespread because of its simplicity [16]. The today s availability of computers makes matching of column response peaks to model equations the preferred analysis method. Such matching can be performed in the Laplace- [17] or Fourier-domain [18], or, preferably in the time-domain [19,20]. 

The CNMMR model with laminar flow liquid stream in the annular region consists of three ordinary differential equations for the gas in the tube core and two partial differential equations for the liquid in the annular region. These equations are coupled through the diffusion-reaction equations inside the membrane and boundary conditions. The model can be solved by first discretizing the liquid-phase mass balance equations in the radial direction by the orthogonal collocation technique. The resulting equations are then solved by a semi-implicit integration procedure [Harold etal., 1989]. 

Delay models were discussed in Chapter 10. We repeat here that the most interesting problem is a modeling one. Since the problem is sensitive to how the delay is introduced, care must be taken in the modeling. A physical delay is caused by the physiology of the cell, so model equations must be modified to consider or approximate the cell physiology. Once a model is known, analysis of the corresponding system of equations (either functional differential equations or hyperbolic partial differential equations of a structured model) would be an important contribution. It is likely, however, that the delay will be state-dependent, and the theory for such equations is not well developed. A model with delays due to both cell physiology and diffusion in an unstirred chemostat would also be of interest. 

If we divide the airshed into L cells and consider N species, LN ordinary differential equations of the form (15) constitute the airshed model. As might be expected, this model bears a direct relation to the partial differential equations of conservation (7). If we allow the cell size to become small, it can be shown that (15) is the same as the first-order spatial finite difference representation of (7) in which turbulent diffusive transport is neglected—i.e,. 

In the case of selective neutrality—this means that all variants have the same selective values—evolution can be modeled successfully by diffusion models. This approach is based on the analysis of partial differential equations that describe free diffusion in a continuous model of the sequence space. The results obtained thereby and their consequences for molecular evolution were recently reviewed by Kimura [2]. Differences in selective values were found to be prohibitive, at least until now, for an exact solution of the diffusion approach. Needless to say, no exact results are available for value landscapes as complicated as those discussed in Section IV.3. Approximations are available for special cases only. In particular, the assumption of rare mutations has to be made almost in every case, and this contradicts the strategy basic to the quasi-species model. 

---