- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine
Access Provided by Xinjiang University

Physical Review E

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Effects of inhomogeneous partial absorption and the geometry of the boundary on population evolution of molecules diffusing in general porous media

Seungoh Ryu*

  • Schlumberger Doll Research, One Hampshire Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, USA

  • *sryu@slb.com
PDF

Phys. Rev. E 80, 026109 – Published 10 August, 2009

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.80.026109

Abstract

We consider aspects of the population dynamics, inside a bound domain, of diffusing agents carrying an attribute which is stochastically destroyed upon contact with the boundary. The normal mode analysis of the relevant Helmholtz equation under the partially absorbing, but uniform, boundary condition provides a starting framework in understanding detailed evolution dynamics of the attribute in the time domain. In particular, the boundary-localized depletion has been widely employed in practical applications that depend on geometry of various porous media such as rocks, cement, bones, and cheese. While direct relationship between the pore geometry and the diffusion-relaxation spectrum forms the basis for such applications and has been extensively studied, relatively less attention has been paid to the spatial variation in the boundary condition. In this work, we focus on the way the pore geometry and the inhomogeneous depletion strength of the boundary become intertwined and thus obscure the direct relationship between the spectrum and the geometry. It is often impossible to gauge experimentally the degree to which such interference occurs. We fill this gap by perturbatively incorporating classes of spatially varying boundary conditions and derive their consequences that are observable through numerical simulations or controlled experiments on glass bead packs and artificially fabricated porous media. We identify features of the spectrum that are most sensitive to the inhomogeneity, apply the method to the spherical pore with a simple hemispherical binary distribution of the depletion strength, and obtain bounds for the induced change in the slowest relaxation mode.

View figure in article

Article Text

References (57)

  1. M. Kac, Am. Math. Monthly 73, 1 (1966).
  2. C. Gordon, D. L. Webb, and S. Wolpert, Bull., New Ser., Am. Math. Soc. 27, 134 (1992).
  3. S. J. Chapman, Am. Math. Monthly 102, 124 (1995).
  4. B. Sapoval, M. Filoche, K. Karamanos, and R. Brizzi, Eur. Phys. J. B 9, 739 (1999).
  5. D. Rocchesso, Proceedings of the 2001 International Conference on Auditory Display, Espoo, Finland, 2001 (unpublished).
  6. P. G. de Gennes, Acad. Sci., Paris, C. R. 295, 1061 (1982).
  7. P. P. Mitra, P. N. Sen, L. M. Schwartz, and P. Le Doussal, Phys. Rev. Lett. 68, 3555 (1992).
  8. M. L. Metha, Random Matrices (Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2004).
  9. M. G. E. da Luz, A. S. Lupu-Sax, and E. J. Heller, Phys. Rev. E 56, 2496 (1997).
  10. R. A. Fisher, Proc. Annu. Symp. Eugen. Soc. 7, 355 (1937).
  11. J. Fort and V. Méndez, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 867 (1999).
  12. J. Fort and V. Méndez, Phys. Rev. E 60, 5894 (1999).
  13. H. Takeno, M. Muto, N. Fujimoto, and K. Hagihara, Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Mobile Data Management, 2006 (unpublished), p. 44.
  14. D. S. Grebenkov, Rev. Mod. Phys. 79, 1077 (2007).
  15. R. L. Kleinberg, in Encyclopedia of Nuclear Magnetic Resonance, edited by D. M. Grant and R. K. Harris (Wiley, Chichester, 1996).
  16. N. Bloembergen, E. M. Purcell, and R. V. Pound, Phys. Rev. 73, 679 (1948).
  17. J. M. Perez, L. Josephson, T. O’Loughlin, D. Högemann, and R. Weissleder, Nat. Biotechnol. 20, 816 (2002).
  18. A. R. Kansal and S. Torquato, J. Chem. Phys. 116, 10589 (2002).
  19. T. R. Bryar and R. J. Knight, Geophys. Res. Lett. 29, 2197 (2002).
  20. T. R. Bryar and R. J. Knight, Water Resour. Res. 44, W02401 (2008).
  21. R. Blinc, G. Lahajnar, S. Zumer, and M. M. Pintar, Phys. Rev. B 38, 2873 (1988).
  22. C. Casieri, F. De Luca, and P. Fantazzini, J. Appl. Phys. 97, 043901 (2005).
  23. F. R. E. Fenrich, C. Beaulieu, and P. S. Allen, NMR Biomed. 14, 133 (2001).
  24. M. J. Bronskill, G. E. Santyr, B. Walters, and R. M. Henkelman, Magn. Reson. Med. 31, 611 (1994).
  25. L. van der Weerd, Plant, Cell Environ. 25, 1539 (2002).
  26. M. D. Hürlimann, L. Burcaw, and Y.-Q. Song, J. Colloid Interface Sci. 297, 303 (2006).
  27. W. E. Kenyon, Nucl. Geophys. 6, 153 (1992).
  28. G. Sorland, K. Djurhuus, H. C. Wideroe, J. Lien, and A. Skauge, Diffus. Fundam. 5, 4.1 (2007).
  29. M. D. Hürlimann, L. Venkataramanan, and C. Flaum, J. Chem. Phys. 117, 10223 (2002).
  30. D. J. Bergman and K.-J. Dunn, Phys. Rev. E 51, 3401 (1995).
  31. K. R. Brownstein and C. E. Tarr, Phys. Rev. A 19, 2446 (1979).
  32. J.-P. Korb, L. Malier, F. Cros, S. Xu, and J. Jonas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 2312 (1996).
  33. T. M. de Swiet and P. N. Sen, J. Chem. Phys. 100, 5597 (1994).
  34. P. Gillis and S. H. Koenig, Magn. Reson. Med. 5, 323 (1987).
  35. K.-J. Dunn, J. Magn. Reson. 156, 171 (2002).
  36. R. L. Kleinberg, W. E. Kenyon, and P. P. Mitra, J. Magn. Reson., Ser. A 108, 206 (1994).
  37. D. J. Wilkinson, D. L. Johnson, and L. M. Schwartz, Phys. Rev. B 44, 4960 (1991).
  38. A. Valfouskaya, P. M. Adler, J. F. Thovert, and M. Fleury, J. Colloid Interface Sci. 295, 188 (2006).
  39. C. H. Arns, A. P. Sheppard, M. Saadatfar, and M. A. Knackstedt, SPWLA 47th Annual Logging Symposium, 2006 (unpublished), p. 498610GG.
  40. K. S. Mendelson, Phys. Rev. B 47, 1081 (1993).
  41. S. Ryu, SPWLA Proceedings of the 49th Annual Logging Symposium, SPWLA, 2008 (unpublished), p. 737008 BB.
  42. P. A. M. Dirac, The Principles of Quantum Mechanics (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1958).
  43. G. Arfken, Mathematical Methods for Physicists (Academic Press, New York, 1970), Chap. 9.
  44. S. Ryu, Magn. Reson. Imaging 19, 411 (2001).
  45. K. R. McCall, D. L. Johnson, and R. A. Guyer, Phys. Rev. B 44, 7344 (1991).
  46. Y.-Q. Song, S. Ryu, and P. N. Sen, Nature (London) 406, 178 (2000).
  47. L. J. Zielinski, Y.-Q. Song, S. Ryu, and P. N. Sen, J. Chem. Phys. 117, 5361 (2002).
  48. N. V. Lisitza and Y.-Q. Song, Phys. Rev. B 65, 172406 (2002).
  49. Y.-Q. Song, L. Zielinski, and S. Ryu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 248002 (2008).
  50. D. L. Johnson, J. Koplik, and L. M. Schwartz, Phys. Rev. Lett. 57, 2564 (1986).
  51. P. M. Morse and H. Feshbach, Methods of Theoretical Physics (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1953).
  52. J. Finjord, A. Hiorth, U. Lad, and S. Skjaeveland, Transp. Porous Media 69, 33 (2007).
  53. M. Abramowitz and I. A. Stegun, Handbook of Mathematical Functions (Dover, Mineola, NY, 1972).
  54. D. S. Grebenkov, Diffus. Fundam. 5, 1.1 (2007).
  55. D. L. Johnson and S. Ryu (unpublished).
  56. S. Ryu and D. L. Johnson, Phys. Rev. Lett. (to be published); also e-print arXiv:0903.1653.
  57. As the angular variation in δρ becomes more rapid, it acts as a high-pass filter in controlling the strength of each mode with L to δλ0,b (as indicated by the lower bounding curve of Fig. 4). In the case of the hemispherical δρ, all odd angular momenta bigger than L=1 contributes, and one would expect that the impact of this filtering would amount to suppression of some modes with L≤1 and n∼1. For a distribution with rapid angular variations, the number of such suppressed modes may increase, thereby impacting the convergence of the projection.

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. E 80, 026109– Published 10 August, 2009
  • Received 26 December 2008

© 2009 American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation