Laplace transform to bio heat equation

470 Views Asked by At

This is the bio heat equation and I have several questions when trying to work with it.

$$ \rho c \frac{\partial u(x,t)}{\partial t} = \nabla[k \nabla u(x,t)] + \omega_b \rho_b c_b [u_a - u(x,t)] + Q_m + Q_r(x,t) $$

where the first expression on the right hand side describes the conduction of heat induced by temperature gradient. Then by letting $k$ to be a constant through out the process this equation has been written as

$$ \rho c \frac{\partial u(\mathbf{x},t)}{\partial t} = k \nabla^2 u(\mathbf{x},t) +\omega_b \rho_b c_b[ u_a - u(\mathbf{x},t) ] + Q_m + Q_r(\mathbf{x},t). $$

  1. Here does $\nabla[k \nabla u(x,t)]$ become $k \nabla^2 u(\mathbf{x},t)$ due to this constant $k$?

  2. When taking the Lapalace transform what is the Laplace transform of the term $k \nabla^2 u(\mathbf{x},t)$?

  3. The bio heat equation at the top of the post is for a 2-D case. That is $\mathbf{x} = (x_1,x_2)$. But if this equation is written for a 1-D case at steady state temperature does the bio heat equation become
    $$ pc \frac{\partial u(x)}{\partial t} = \frac{\partial^2 u(x)}{\partial^2 x} + \omega_b p_b c_b[ u_a - u(x) ] +Q(m) + Q(x)? $$

1

There are 1 best solutions below

3
On
  1. I think yes if $$\nabla[k \nabla u(\underline x,t)] = \nabla \cdot [k \nabla u(\underline x,t)]:$$

By one of the product rules (enter image description here),

$$\nabla[k \nabla u(\underline x,t)]$$

$$= \nabla k \nabla u(\underline x,t) + k \nabla \nabla u(\underline x,t)]$$

$$= (0) \nabla u(\underline x,t) + k \nabla \nabla u(\underline x,t)]$$

$$= (0) \nabla u(\underline x,t) + k \nabla \nabla u(\underline x,t)]$$

$$= k \nabla \nabla u(\underline x,t)]$$

But what does $$\nabla \nabla u(\underline x,t)$$

even mean?

By definition, $\nabla^2 u(\underline x,t) = \nabla \cdot \nabla u(\underline x,t)$.

Also for 'well-behaved' u(\underline x,t), we have:

$$\nabla \times \nabla u(\underline x,t) = 0$$


  1. Try (10) and (11) here.

enter image description here


  1. Steady state temperature means $t = 0$?

If so, I think so except I think the last terms should be: $Q_m + Q_r(x)$ based on (1) and (4) here. In the link, it seems that $Q_r(x) = 0$


enter image description here


enter image description here