DifGsion of oxygen in a sphere with

simultaneous absorption
Radhey S. Gupta and N. C. Banik

Department of Mathematics, University of Roorkee, Roorkee, India

A problem of diffusion of oxygen in a sphere with simultaneous absorption at a constant rate is

formulated. It is transformed into linear space by making the standard change of variables. The
constant rate of absorption in the spherical geometry after transformation changes to a linearfunction
of the space variable. The problem is solved by using the moving grid (MC) method, and the results
are compared with those from the method of Murray and Landis. An approximate analytical solution
is also obtained, and the results are compared and found to be in very good agreement with those
from the other methods.

Keywords: absorption, moving grid method, Murray and Landis method, diffusion of oxygen, moving
boundary

solution using the constrained integral method (CIM)

Introduction
The moving boundary problems (MBPs) are generally
associated with the processes of melting and freezing,
which have a latent heat-type condition at the inter-
face connecting the velocity of the moving boundary
and the flux. However, there is another important class
of MBPs that arises from the diffusion of a gas into
an absorbing medium in which no such explicit con-
dition is available at the moving boundary. A popular
problem of this type was studied by Crank and Gupta
in which oxygen was allowed to diffuse in a body tissue
in the shape of a sheet that absorbs oxygen at a con-
stant rate. Evans and Gourley* extended the problem
to two dimensions. In the present paper we consider
the diffusion in a radially symmetric sphere with con-
stant absorption everywhere in it. Naturally, a simple
transformation reduces the problem of diffusion in a
sphere to that in a linear space. However, the constant
absorption terms in the sphere must be transformed in
the linear space to terms equivalent to the distance
from the origin. This problem in linear space is im-
portant in its own right in the sense that instead of
being constant everywhere, the absorption is a linear
function of the distance. Such problems, of course with
additional terms, may arise in the study of pollution.3
The objective of the present paper is twofold: first to
solve the problem with the help of the moving grid
proposed by the present authors.6
The problem
Let us consider a radially symmetric spherical tissue
(an absorbing medium in general) of radius k that con-
sumes oxygen at a constant rate A everywhere. The
sphere, which is assumed to be free of oxygen at time
zero, is subjected to unit concentration at its outer
surface r = k. As soon as oxygen penetrates the tissue,
absorption starts taking place in the region that has a
nonzero concentration. The diffusion process coupled
with absorption may be defined by the equation
r,,(T) < r < k (1)
where rO(T)is the radius of the spherical boundary at
time T, U(r, 7) is the concentration of oxygen at a radial
distance from the center of the sphere at time T, D is
the constant diffusion coefficient, and A the constant
rate of consumption of oxygen.
Because there is no flow beyond rO(T)into the sphere,
we have
U=$=O at r = r0(7) (2)

(MG) method suggested by Crank and Gupta,4 later

modified by Gupta,5 and second to find an approximate The conditions at the surface r = k and the initial
condition may be written as

U=l r=k r>o (3)

Address reprint requests to Dr. Gupta at the Department of Math-
ematics, University of Roorkee, Roorkee-247 667, India. and

Received 28 September 1988; accepted 8 September 1989 u=o O<r<k r=o (4)

114 Appl. Math. Modelling, 1990, Vol. 14, March 0 1990 Butterworth Publishers
 Diffusion of oxygen in a sphere: R. S. Gupta and N. C, Banik

with similarly by considering a sphere whose radius is suf-

ficiently large in comparison to the concentration ap-
r,,(O) = k (9 plied at the surface that a steady state is reached before
As usual, writing u = Ur in equation (1) reduces it to the oxygen reaches the center. It may be noted that
linear space. Further, by making the following changes this case conforms to the problem of Crank and Gupta,
of variables, who considered a semi-infinite medium in which the
diffusion takes place. This case will be similar to an
t = D7 Dv DxU
x=I: and intermediate state of case 2. Case 3 does not have any
k k2 u=s==
relevance to a moving boundary problem until the con-
the system (l)-(5) becomes centration at the center reduces to zero. After such a
time the method of solution will be the same as de-
au a*u scribed for case 2.
-=--x s(t) 5 x I 1
at ax2 After a steady state has been reached, the surface
x = 1 is sealed so that no oxygen can get into the
&LO x = s(t) medium or can come out of it. However, the process
ax of absorption still continues, and the point of zero con-
centration, which was originally at x = 0, starts moving
u=-$=uC(say) x=1 t>O (W away from it. Thus the problem is to determine the
location of the point of zero concentration and the
u=o 05x5 1 t=O (44 concentration distribution in the medium at different
times. Mathematically, the problem may be described
and by the following equations:
s(0) = 1 (5a) au a2i.4
-=--x s(t) < x < 1 t>O (7)
where s(t) is the position of the moving boundary in at ax2
linear space corresponding to ro(t) in the spherical
boundary. u2,() x = s(t) t>O (8)
As in the problem of Crank and Gupta, we first let ax
the system reach steady state and then seal off the
au
-=
surface x = 1. 0 x= 1 t>O
Thus let us study the steady-state solution given by ax
u = (x3 - 3x;x + 2x;)/6 u = x3/6 05x5 1 t=O (10)
(6)
where xP denotes the radius of furthest penetration with s(0) = 0, where t = 0 denotes the time when the
where the concentration and its gradient are zero. surface x = 1 is sealed.
This system depends on whether or not u, reaches
the steady state before the diffusant (oxygen) reaches
the center of the sphere. Gupta analyzes this situation
and observes the following: Short-time solution

1. If u, < 4, a steady state is reached before the oxygen
reaches the center.
2. If u, = 6, the steady state is reached when oxygen
just reaches the center.
3. If u, > Q, the steady state is reached only after the
oxygen has reached the center.
Moving boundary problem
In the present paper we consider case 2 only when the
position of zero concentration xP is at the center, that
is, xP = 0 and u, = Q. In that case the steady-state
solution is given by u = x3/6. Case 1 can be dealt with
From condition (10) we see that the gradient of con-
centration at the surface x = 1 is initially f. As soon
as the surface is sealed, a zero surface gradient is im-
posed according to (9). This discontinuity in the gra-
dient is likely to produce inaccurate results in the
neighborhood of x = 1 when a finite difference method
is used. To avoid this difficulty, we may note that the
effect of the movement of the boundary s(t) will not
be felt at the surface for a short period of time to a
prescribed degree of accuracy. Therefore an analytical
solution may be found that is valid for small times.
Assuming that the boundar y does not move within
a desired accuracy from its or iginal position s(O) = 0,
the analytical solution of (7)- (IO), taking (8) first, is
given by

u(x, t) = x3/6 +

Appl. Math. Modelling, 1990, Vol. 14, March 115

Diffusion of oxygen in a sphere: R. S. Gupta and N. C. Banik

It is found that in (11) the terms corresponding to n = 0 are sufficient for computing u(x, t) to a reasonably high
degree of accuracy over an appreciable interval of time. Thus putting n = 0 in (1 l), we get

u(x, t) = x3/6 + fi [exp { - (1 + ~)~/(4r)} - exp { - (1 - ~)~/(4t)}]

+ +[(l - X) erfc ((1 - x)l(2ti)} - (1 + X) erfc {(1 + x)l(2ti)}] (12)

Numerical computations from (12) show that the
change in concentration from zero time at x = 0.1 is
less than 0.1% at time t = 0.020, less than 1.0% at
time t = 0.025, and less than 5.0% at time t = 0.030.
Hence we can assume for future numerical computa-
tions that the boundary has hardly moved any distance
by time t = 0.020. The concentration distribution for
small times up to t 5 0.020 can therefore be obtained
from expression (12).
As soon as there is a change in concentration at
x = 0.1 (in the neighborhood of zero concentration)
to a specified degree of accuracy, the analytical so-
lution (12) is no longer applicable. We then have to
look for other methods that take care of the moving
boundary. We would like to develop the basic ap-
proach of Crank and Guptas4 moving grid method
comparing the result with those from the method of
Murray and Landis (ML).8 As will be seen, the cal-
culation of the moving boundary requires many more
terms in the present problem in comparison to the orig-
inal problem of Crank and Gupta.
only its relevant features with reference to the present
problem.
The region 0 5 x 5 1 is subdivided into N equal
intervals, each of width Ax, Xi = iAx (initially) for
i = 0, 1, . . . ) N. However, we choose N = 10, that
is, x = 0.1 and t = 0.001, such that the stability con-
dition for an explicit scheme is satisfied. Let x{ denote
the distance of the ith mesh point from the moving
boundary (Figure 1) at thejth time level when tj = jAt.
Obviously, s(tj), that is, xjo marks the position of the
moving boundary at the jth time level with x8 = 0.
Let us assume that computations have already been
made up to thejth time level and that the position of
the moving boundary S(tj) is also known. It is also
assumed that at this time level the number of intervals
is N (N 5 10). Now the finite difference replacement
of (7) at the point (xjl, tj) can be written as
U(XJI~
tj+l) - u(Xjl,tj)
At
U(Xjo,tj) - 2U(Xjl, tj) + U(X~, tj)

=
- 7x3 (13)
(A .d2

Since each quantity in (13) is known at the jth time

Method of Crank and Gupta level, we can calculate u(xjl, explicitly. Point P in
tj+ ,)

To formulate the moving grid (MG) method, let us Figure I is denoted by the coordinates (x3, tj+ ,).
refer to Figure 1. Because the full details of the MG To compute movement of the boundary in time At,
method may be found in Refs. 4 and 5, we describe we first derive some extra conditions there. Differ-

I_>+ I
(j+l)At I
---_-_-__--_ I
i+1 IV 'j.1 j*l I*1 j*l
x0
,I x1 X2 XN-2 XN-1

I
k AX --/ t
jAt ------------ I
Xi X( Xi XL-2 XL

Ax + , , /x=1
0 ----------------------
0 0
X, XP Xi Xl Xi XN =x,cl

Figure 1. Moving grid system of Crank and Gupta

116 Appt. Math. Modelling, 1990, Vol. 14, March

 Diffusion of oxygen in a sphere: R. S. Gupta and N. C. Banik

entiating first and second conditions of (8) with respect respectively. Writing Taylors expansion in the x-di-
to t and after using (7) and (8), we obtain rection at point P (Figure 1) when x = x4 and t = tj+ 1,
we get
a2u a3u ,1-$
and ax tit (14)
ax2 xzs = X=S

U(Xjl, tj + 1) = U(X&+ + 77, tj+ 1)

au q2 a2u 3 a3u
= U(Xiof, tj+I) + 77 - + . . . (15)
+% 2
0 ax x=xoI+I +T- ( dX2 1 x=xoI+ 1 ( ) X=XOJ+l

where xjot 1 is the position of the moving boundary at present problem the approximation of three terms gives
time tj+ 1 = (j + 1)At and 77 = xj - x&+, which is to rise to an ill-conditioned equation, since the second
be determined. It should be noted that n will be dif- derivative of the moving boundary is very small at
ferent at different times. Incorporating (14) and using small times. Hence it is necessary to use an additional
(8) and after neglecting higher-order terms, we obtain term for computing the position of the moving bound-
from (15) ary. It may be noticed from (14) that the third deriv-
ative is almost equal to unity at the moving boundary
U(XJI, tj+l) = BqX$+
for small t. Therefore it may not be ignored in (16).
+ Qq3[ 1 - xjO+l (~),=xo,+,]
(16)
Having determined u(xjl, tj+ 1) from (13), we evaluate
As from (18) by the Newton-Raphson method, choos-
ing an initial value of As equal to its value at the pre-
Expressing vious time level.
As soon as the movement As of the boundary has
ds x$+-x0 Ax-n
=-=_ As
-_= (17) been found, we shift the whole grid system a distance
dt At At At As toward the fixed end. The new mesh points at tj+l
where As denotes actual movement of the boundary are then given by
in time Ar from thejth to the (j + I)th time level, we xi+l zzx;+As i=O,l,... (N - 1) (19)
get
and
f(As) = (Ax - As)3[At - (~0+ As)As]
xJk+1 = xJ;
+ 3At(Ax - As)*(xo + As) (18)
- 6Atu(xj, tj+l) where N I 10 is the number of intervals at thejth time
level. To calculate the concentration at the new mesh
=o
points (see Figure Z), we adopt the following proce-
It may be noted that Crank and Gupta4 have used dure.
only the first three terms in the expansion (15) to cal- Writing Taylors expansion in space and time di-
culate the position of the moving boundary. But in the rections gives

1
2a*u
u(x + As, t + At) = u(x, t) + As: + At: + ; (As)% + 2AsAts + (At)*% + ... (20)

which after neglecting second- and higher-order terms obtained from (22) by replacing the first and second
and using (7) gives derivatives by central differences given by
u(x + As, t + At) au U(X{+,,tj)-U(Xi-,,tj)
(23)
=u(x,t)+AsE+at 0 ax ,=,f = 2Ax
(21)

and
By introducing our notations for x = x4 and t = tj+ 1,
(2 1) becomes a2u U(X_j- 1) tj) - 2U(X:, tj) + U(X-(+ 1, tj)
ax2 ,=,!
(-> = (A 4
u(x_i+ 1 9 tj+1) = u(x4~ tj)

(24)
fori= 1,2 ,..., N-2.
To calculate concentration at the mesh point ~$1~
The concentrations at the mesh points at tj+ 1 can be (see Figure I), nearest to the fixed end x = 1, we obtain

Appl. Math. Modelling, 1990, Vol. 14, March 117

Diffusion of oxygen in a sphere: R. S. Gupta and Al. C. Banik

the counterparts of (23) and (24) using Lagranges for- Results and discussion
mula for unequal intervals as follows:
As was already stated previously, we may use expres-
= AXU(X&,tj) (Ax - &)U(X&_ 13tj)
sion (12) for obtaining the concentration in the medium
for a short time. We have evaluated the concentration
ri(& + Ax) - &Ax as well as the position of the moving boundary from
_ rjCxiN-29 rj) time zero using the MG method taking AZ = 0.001 and
(25) Ax = 0.1. It is observed that the difference in con-
Ax(Ax + 6)
centration from the analytical solution (12) and the MG
and method does not exceed more than 5.0% anywhere for
t 5 0.020, and the boundary marking the zero concen-
24x&, tj) 2U(X&_I, tj) tration moves a distance of only 0.0008 by this time.
We have also made computations from f = 0.020 on-
x=x~_~ = &(6 + Ax) - &Ax ward, taking concentrations from (12) and assuming
2U(X&p2, tj) that the boundary has not moved at all by this time.
(26) Table I shows the concentrations obtained from the
+ Ax(5jAx + sj)
MG method at different mesh points at various times
along with positions of the moving boundary. It may
where & denotes the size of the interval nearest to the
be noted that the numbers in any particular column do
fixed surface at tj.
not correspond to a fixed value of x. They are given
At the last mesh point, that is, the fixed end x = 1,
at the mesh points xi(t), which is a function of time.
since au/ax is zero, in accordance with condition (9)
Figure 2 shows the concentration distributions in
we have
the medium at various times. As can be seen, the con-
centration at the fixed surface falls very rapidly in the
u(-ev-l,fj) initial stages. The moving boundary versus time graph
where the (N + 1)th mesh point is the mirror image in Figure 3 shows that the boundary moves very slowly
of the (N - 1)th mesh point. Thus in the beginning, while its movement becomes very
fast in the last stages.
d2U 3 The numerical results are also obtained from the

(ax2> X=X;
=2
J
[U(X&_Ir tj) - U(X&*tj)] (27) method of Murray and Landis.s The values of surface
concentrations obtained from the MG method are com-
pared with those from the ML method in Table 2 and
When the interval 6 becomes too small, we replace it the position of the moving boundary from the two
by sj + Ax, thus reducing the number of intervals to methods in Table 3. It can be noticed that the values
(N - 1) for subsequent computations. This process is are not much different from each other until the bound-
continued until only two intervals (including 6) are left ary has moved about halfway. After such a time, the
in the end. ML method starts giving absurd results, that is, the

Table 1. Values of 10% and the position of the moving boundary s from the MG method

Moving
t x0(t) x1(t) X2(f) X3(f) x4(t) X&l xdt) X,(f) xdt) x9(t) x10(t) boundary

0.0 0 167 1333 4500 10667 20833 36000 57167 85333 121500 166667 0.0
0.010 0 168 1337 4507 10679 20844 35922 56396 80913 103499 113169 0.000162
0.020 0 172 1349 4524 10649 20530 34507 52459 69737 83621 88694 0.000839
0 167 1332 4488 10583 20326 32795 51807 68715 81959 86894 0.0
0.030 0 200 1434 4633 10584 19722 31801 45523 58432 67473 70300 0.006557
0 205 1445 4627 10496 19497 31485 45131 57715 66324 68938 0.007673
0.040 0 297 1734 5093 10884 19137 29199 39645 48507 53873 54945 0.028224
0 319 1799 5202 11015 19252 29222 39454 47969 52953 53838 0.033380
0.050 0 461 2212 5787 11329 18501 26408 33723 39028 41484 0.069940
0 491 2312 5947 11520 18648 26401 33446 38415 0.077716
0.060 0 675 2793 6466 11472 17182 22652 26863 29397 0.135851
0 706 2883 6592 11572 17165 22421 26352 28497 0.145384
0.070 0 900 3288 6708 10604 14252 16937 18252 0.235460
0 925 3343 6736 10520 13970 16411 17414 0.247719
0.080 0 987 3205 5474 7222 7804 0.395903
0 980 3148 5260 6789 7029 0.415201
0.085 0 796 2387 2744 0.534410
0 736 2161 1967 0.563897
0.086 0 720 1739 0.571291
0 696 970 0.615263

Forts 0.020the lower entry correspondstothe numerical solution when computations are startedfrom expression (12).

118 Appl. Math. Modelling, 1990, Vol. 14, March

 Diffusion of oxygen in a sphere: R. S. Gupta and N. C.

160-

1 0.2 0.3 0.L 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

Distance x -
Figure 2. Concentration distribution for the steady state (t = 0) and for t > 0 from the MG method

1.00

____--v-v-- ----

0.08-

0.0 I I I I I 1 I I I

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.L 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

Moving Boundary s-
Figure 3. Graph of the position of the moving boundary versus time

Appl. Math. Modelling, 1990, Vol. 14, March 119

Diffusion of oxygen in a sphere: R. S. Gupta and N. C. Banik
Table 2. Comparison of concentrations at the fixed surface 10%~~at different times

Time

Method 0.010 0.020 0.030 0.040 0.050 0.060 0.070 0.080 0.085 0.086 0.087

MG 11317 8869 7030 5495 4148 2940 1825 780 274 174 73
ML (Ref. 8) 11317 8869 7029 5489 4138 2920 1804 769 279 - -

The dash denotes spurious results.

Table 3. Comparison of positions of the moving boundary 10% at different times

Time

Method 0.010 0.020 0.030 0.040 0.050 0.060 0.070 0.080 0.085 0.086 0.087

MG 16 34 656 2822 6994 13585 23546 39590 53441 57129 64630

ML [Ref. 8) 16 35 700 2917 7102 13680 23675 40275 56060 - -

The dash denotes spurious results.

computed value of the position of the moving boundary of the basic equation (7), which are given by
comes out to be greater than 1.O, which is impossible.
We cannot compute the total time for absorption of
the whole of the oxygen in the medium by any of the j-$dx=j($-x)dx (30)
above methods because the processes have to be stopped E .s
before the moving boundary reaches the fixed end. and
However, through projection in Figure 3 we conclude
that this time is approximately 0.089. It may be men-
tioned that in the case of a linear one-dimensional prob- i(l -x)$,=i(l -x,($x)dx (31)
lem, that is, the Crank and Gupta problem, the total s S
time for absorption is approximately 0.197.
We can write (30) as

zd s 1
Constrained integral method (CIM)
lrdx
Since the gradient is zero at x = 1, we assume a poly-
[,
nomial of even degree in (1 - x), in the present case
of degree 6, in the region s(t) < x < 1 to be which after substitution of (29), (8), and (9) and with
some manipulation gives

2[-48u, - 3s(l - s)* + (1 - Y)~]$

+ d(t) (28)
+ 96(1 - s)$ = 105(s2 - 1) (32)
where a, 6, c, and dare unknown parameters. As the
flux is prescribed at the fixed surface x = 1, according
Again from (31) we get
to the CIM proposed by the present authors6 we should
express these parameters in terms of the concentration
~(1, t) = u1 (say).
Therefore on using conditions (8) (9), and the first
;[j-(1 -x)udx] -(l -s)u(s&

I I-
part of (14) the profile (28) becomes
l-x 6
=(1-x)$ I+u g(1 - 9) + j( 1 - s3)
u(x, t) = [$S(l - S)2 - U,] l_s
( 1
l-x 4
s 3

(33)

+ [3u, - $s(l - S)21 I_s

( ) On using (28), (8), and (9) and after simplification we
l-x 2 get
+ [-3u, + A(1 - S)2] l_s + U,
( 1
(1 - s)[ -48~1 - 4S(l - S)2 + (1 - syl$
(29)
where ur and s are still unknown to be determined. To + 24(1 - s)+ = 32(6u, - 1 + 3s2 - 2s3) (34)
obtain u1 and S, we take the zeroth and first moments

120 Appl. Math. Modelling, 1990, Vol. 14, March

 Diffusion of oxygen in a sphere: R. S. Cupta and N. C. Banik

Solving (32) and (34), we finally get the simultaneous ds 23 - 76%~~+ 105s - 279.~~+ 151~~
-= (35)
differential equations, given by dt 2(1 - s)[48u, + Ss( 1 - s)~ - (1 - s)~]
and

du,
-=- 105( 1 - s)(s* - l)[(l - s)~ - 4s( 1 - s)~ - 48u,] + 64(6u1 - 1 + 3s2 - 2s3)[48u1 + 3s(l - s)* - (1 - s)~]
dt 48(1 - s)*[48u, + 5s(l - s)~ - (1 - s)~]
(36)

From (35) and (36), s and u1 at different times can be 0.0294 and s = 0.13585 at t = 0.06. The simultaneous
computed by using a standard numerical technique. equations (35) and (36) are solved by using the fourth-
order Runge-Kutta technique, taking time step At =
0.0001. Numerical values of s and ui from the CIM
Numerical results and discussion
along with corresponding values from the MG method
We know from the physics of the problem that dsldt are given in Table 4 for an overall comparison. As can
cannot be negative. Therefore from (35) we should be seen, the agreement is very good. It may be added
have that a polynomial of degree 4 was tried, and an in-
equality similar to (37) was obtained. It was found that
(23 - 768~4, + 105s - 279s + 151~~)2 0 (37) the inequality was not satisfied until t was taken to be
We tried different values of uI and s at a given t as quite large. Thus the duration of time for which the
obtained from the MG method and found that condition fourth-degree polynomial could hold would have been
(37) is not satisfied until t = 0.06. Therefore, to start very small.
the computations, we took from the MG method U, =
References
1 Crank, J. and Gupta, R. S. J. Inst. Math. Applications 1972,
Table 4. Comparison of position of the moving boundary 10, 19
10% and concentrations at the sealed surface lo%, 2 Evans, N. T. S. and Gourley, A. R. J. Inst. Math. Applications
1977, 19, 239
10% 3 Shukla, J. B. and Chauhan, R. S. Appl. Math. Modelling 1987,
10%, 11, 82
Time 4 Crank, J. and Gupta, R. S. J. Inst. Mufh. Applications 1972,
t MG method CIM MG method CIM 10, 296
0.060 13585 13585 2940 5 Gupta, R. S. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg. 1974, 4,
2940
0.070 23546 21582 143
1825 1843
0.080 39590 38491 6 Gupta, R. S. and Banik, N. C. Compur. Methods Appl. Mech.
780 777
0.085 53441 52844 274 Engrg. 1988, 67, 21 I
244
0.086 57129 56811 174 7 Gupta, R. S. Ph.D. thesis, Brunei University, Uxbridge, U.K.,
136
0.087 64630 61551 73 27 1972
8 Murray, W. D. and Landis, F. J. Heat Transfer 1959, 81, 106

Appl. Math. Modelling, 1990, Vol. 14, March 121