Advertisement

A Model of the Defrost Process

  • Yang Liu
  • Francis A. Kulacki
Chapter
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Applied Sciences and Technology book series (BRIEFSAPPLSCIENCES)

Abstract

A model of frost melting is developed from fundamental analysis of the heat and mass transfer. The melting model envisions three stages as the frosted surface is heated: absorption of the melt water by diffusion, accumulation of the melt water, and draining of the melt water along the surface. The three stages of melting are connected physically, but the analysis of each involves a particular set of assumptions and use of a wide range parameters and physical laws. Surface wettability enters the analysis as a factor in the draining stage. The possibility of frost slumping is expressed through a criterion based on a static force balance in which contact angel is an implicit factor.

Keywords

Defrost Process Permeation Layer Defrost Time Frost Layer Meltwater Drainage 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 74.
    Aoki K, Hattori M, Ujiie T (1988) Snow melting by heating from the bottom surface. JSME Int J 31(2):269–275Google Scholar
  2. 75.
    Colbeck SC, Davidson G (1972) Water percolation through homogeneous snow. IASH Publication 107:242–257Google Scholar
  3. 76.
    Colbeck SC (1974) The capillary effects on water percolation in homogeneous snow. J Glaciol 13(67):85–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 77.
    Colbeck SC (1976) An analysis of water flow in dry snow. Water Resour Res 12(3):523–527CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 78.
    Colbeck SC (1982) The permeability of a melting snow cover. Water Resour Res 18(4):904–908CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 79.
    Bengtsson L (1982) Percolation of meltwater through a snowpack. Cold Reg Sci Technol 6:73–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 80.
    Whitaker S (1986) Flow in porous media I: a theoretical derivation of Darcy’s law. Transport Porous Med 1:3–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 81.
    Shaun Sellers S (2000) Theory of water transport in melting snow with moving surface. Cold Reg Sci Technol 31:47–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 82.
    Manthey S, Hassanizadeh SM, Helmig R, Hilfer R (2008) Dimensional analysis of two-phase flow including a rate-dependent capillary pressure-saturation relationship. Adv Water Resour 31:1137–1150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 83.
    Daanen RP, Nieber JL (2009) Model for coupled liquid water flow and heat transport with phase change in a snowpack. J Cold Reg Eng 23(2):43–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 84.
    Hirashima H, Yamaguchi S, Sato A, Lehning M (2010) Numerical modeling of liquid water movement through layered snow based on new measurements of the water retention curve. Cold Reg Sci Technol 64:94–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 85.
    Yamaguchi S, Katsushima T, Sato A, Kumakura T (2010) Water retention curve of snow with different grain sizes. Cold Reg Sci Technol 64:87–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 86.
    Szymkiewicz A (2013) Modeling water flow in unsaturated porous media. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, HeidelbergCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 87.
    Katsushima T, Satoru Yamaguchi S, Kumakura T, Atsushi Sato A (2013) Experimental analysis of preferential flow in dry snowpack. Cold Reg Sci Technol 85:206–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 88.
    Washburn EW (1921) The dynamics of capillary flow. Phys Rev 18(3):273–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 89.
    Tsypkin GG (2010) Effect of the capillary forces on the moisture saturation distribution during the thawing of a frozen soil. Fluid Dyn 45(6):942–951MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 90.
    Beavers GS, Joseph DD (1967) Boundary conditions at a naturally permeable wall. J Fluid Mech 30(1):197–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 91.
    Taylor GI (1971) A model for the boundary condition of a porous material. Part 1. J Fluid Mech 49(2):319–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 92.
    Richardson S (1971) A model for the boundary condition of a porous material. Part 2. J Fluid Mech 49(2):327–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 93.
    Sahraoui M, Kaviany M (1992) Slip and no-slip velocity boundary conditions at interface of porous, plain media. Int J Heat Mass Transfer 35(4):927–943CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 94.
    Vinogradova OI (1995) Drainage of a thin liquid film confined between hydrophobic surfaces. Langmuir 11(6):2213–2220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 95.
    Barrat JL (1999) Large slip effect at a nonwetting fluid-solid interface. Phys Rev Lett 82(23):4671–4674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 96.
    Baidry J, Charlaix E (2001) Experimental evidence for a large slip effect at a nonwetting fluid-solid interface. Langmuir 17(17):5232–5236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 97.
    de Gennes PG (2002) On fluid/wall slippage. Langmuir 18(9):3413–3414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 98.
    Andrienko D, Dünweg B (2003) Boundary slip as a result of a prewetting transition. J Chem Phys 119(24):13106–13112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 99.
    Lauga E, Brenner MP, Stone HA (2005) Chapter 15: Microfluidics: the no-slip boundary condition. In: Foss J, Tropes C, Yarin A (eds) Handbook of experimental fluid dynamics. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  27. 100.
    Choi C-H, Kim C-J (2006) Large slip of aqueous liquid flow over a nanoengineered superhydrophobic surface. Phys Rev Lett 96:066001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 72.
    Meuler AJ, Smith JD, Varanasi KK, Mabry JM, McKinley GH, Cohen RE (2010) Relationships between water wettability and ice adhesion. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 2(11):3100–3110. https://doi.org/10.1021/am1006035 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yang Liu
    • 1
  • Francis A. Kulacki
    • 2
  1. 1.Graduate School at ShenzhenTsinghua UniversityShenzchenChina
  2. 2.Department of Mechanical EngineeringUniversity of MinnesotaMinneapolisUSA

Personalised recommendations