Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 54 references

Origin of effective non-Fourier heat conduction phenomena in heterogeneous materials

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A volume-averaging derivation shows that any two-component heterogeneous material conducting locally by Fourier's law is inherently over-diffusive: its dynamic thermal diffusivity always exceeds the static one.

desk verdict A clean upscaling exercise that proves over-diffusion only for a parallel-channel closure, not for general heterogeneous media; the validations are mostly fitted, but the algebra and entropy bound are worth a serious look. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.13336 v1 pith:ENW5G2SL submitted 2026-08-13 physics.app-ph cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Róbert Kovács This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.app-phcond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords non-Fourierheatconductionvolumeaveragingheterogeneousmediatwo-temperaturemodelover-diffusionJeffreysequationthermaldiffusivitylocalnon-equilibrium
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper derives a macroscopic heat-conduction equation for a two-component heterogeneous material starting only from Fourier's law in each component and upscaling by spatial volume averaging. The central claim is that non-Fourier, over-diffusive behavior—where heat spreads faster on short timescales than the static Fourier diffusivity predicts—is not a phenomenological extra assumption but a mathematical consequence of two phases having different thermal properties. The derivation yields a generalized Jeffreys-type equation whose two relaxation times always satisfy $\tau_T > \tau_q$, so any such heterogeneous medium is inherently over-diffusive. Finite sample boundaries enter as a higher-order spatial non-locality that suppresses the effect in thin samples, which the paper uses to explain size-dependent measurements in metal foams, carbon foams, rocks, and MOF–graphene composites.

What carries the argument

The central object is the over-diffusion coefficient $R = \tau_T/\tau_q$, the ratio of the gradient relaxation time to the heat-flux relaxation time; $R>1$ means the effective dynamic diffusivity exceeds the static Fourier value. The argument is carried by a chain of identities: the spatial averaging theorem and Gray's decomposition upscale the phase equations, a geometric closure field converts microscopic temperature deviations into macroscopic gradients, and elimination of the phase-temperature difference produces the effective constitutive equation. Replacing the Laplacian of the heat flux through the energy balance then exposes the second timescale $\tau_T$, and the single-eigenmode approximation $\Delta^2 T \approx -(\pi^2/L_{\mathrm{sample}}^2)\Delta T$ turns the fourth-order term into a size-dependent correction that suppresses over-diffusion in thin samples.

What would settle it

Take a well-characterized open-cell metal foam with known phase conductivities, heat capacities, and porosity, and measure the dynamic-to-static thermal diffusivity ratio for two sample thicknesses, one a few pore diameters thick and one orders of magnitude thicker. If the thick sample's ratio is not strictly greater than 1 for positive phase properties, or if the thin sample's ratio does not follow $R_{\mathrm{app}}(L_{\mathrm{sample}}) = R\left[1 + k_\alpha k_\beta \pi^2/(H k_{\mathrm{eff}} L_{\mathrm{sample}}^2)\right]^{-1}$, the paper's central claim fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims to prove that non-Fourier thermal behavior in heterogeneous media is a direct consequence of thermal asymmetries between constituents, not a phenomenological assumption. Working with uniform-porosity two-phase media where each phase conducts by Fourier's law, it volume-averages the phase energy balances, uses a geometric closure field to express microscopic temperature deviations in terms of the macroscopic gradient, and eliminates the phase-temperature difference. The resulting effective law is a Jeffreys-type heat equation, $\tau_q \partial_t \mathbf{q} + \mathbf{q} = -k_{\mathrm{eff}}\nabla T - k_{\mathrm{eff}}\tau_T \partial_t(\nabla T) + D\nabla(\Delta T)$. Its over-diffusion coefficient $R = \tau_T/\tau_q$ is $1 + (k_\alpha C_\beta^2 + k_\beta C_\alpha^2)/(C_\alpha C_\beta k_{\mathrm{eff}})$ when the non-local length is ignored, and this is always greater than 1 for positive material constants. The paper further shows that the higher-order term $D\nabla(\Delta T)$, tied to interface temperature curvature in finite samples, reduces the apparent $R$ in sub-RVE samples through $R_{\mathrm{app}}(L_{\mathrm{sample}}) = R\left[1 + D\pi^2/(k_{\mathrm{eff}} L_{\mathrm{sample}}^2)\right]^{-1}$, matching observed size trends.

Load-bearing premise

The whole argument rests on strict scale separation, $l \ll L \ll L_{\mathrm{mac}}$, together with uniform porosity, so that interface averages of the macroscopic temperature drop out; yet the paper applies the resulting equation to thin sub-RVE samples where this separation no longer holds, bridging the gap with a second-order Taylor expansion and a single-eigenmode approximation.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For any two-component heterogeneous medium with uniform porosity and local Fourier conduction, $\tau_T > \tau_q$ automatically, so the dynamic short-time thermal diffusivity is larger than the static one; experiments that see such over-diffusion need no extra internal variables.
  • The non-Fourier transport coefficients $\tau_q$, $\tau_T$, and $D$ are computable from phase conductivities, heat capacities, volume fractions, and the volumetric heat-transfer coefficient $H$, so microstructure determines the memory and non-local parameters.
  • Finite sample thickness suppresses the apparent over-diffusion: $R_{\mathrm{app}}$ decreases with $L_{\mathrm{sample}}$ roughly as $\left[1 + k_\alpha k_\beta \pi^2/(H k_{\mathrm{eff}} L_{\mathrm{sample}}^2)\right]^{-1}$, explaining why thin flash-experiment samples show weaker or absent non-Fourier signals.
  • The derived equation is thermodynamically compatible; entropy production is positive only if the non-local length obeys $l_{\mathrm{nl}}^2 < k_\alpha k_\beta/(k_{\mathrm{eff}} H)$, an upper bound not visible in purely phenomenological models.
  • Under curl-free heat flux and matching boundary and initial conditions, the derived Jeffreys-type equation reproduces the temperature histories of the Guyer–Krumhansl model, so earlier fits of that model to experiments remain interpretable within this derivation.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The author notes water-filled aluminum foam should have $R\approx 16$ but has not yet been tested; a flash experiment on that system would be a direct test of the predicted extreme over-diffusion and of whether $\tau_q \approx 18\,\mathrm{ms}$ is observable.
  • The single-eigenmode approximation underlying $R_{\mathrm{app}}$ assumes the first spatial mode dominates; a multi-mode or full numerical solution of the Jeffreys equation would show whether thin-sample data can distinguish the modal truncation from the true boundary effect.
  • The biological section suggests perfusion scans could supply $C_\alpha$, $C_\beta$, $k_\alpha$, and $k_\beta$ at each voxel; if implemented, surgical thermal planning could add a spatially varying $R_{\mathrm{bio}}$ instead of a single tissue-averaged diffusivity, but this requires validating the two-phase tissue model against in vivo temperature measurements.
  • Because radiation raises $H$ and lowers $D$, the model predicts that high-temperature flash experiments on open-cell foams should show stronger, not weaker, over-diffusion than room-temperature tests, since $R_{\mathrm{app}}$ would move closer to the intrinsic $R$.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper derives an effective non-Fourier heat conduction equation for two-component heterogeneous media using spatial volume averaging. Starting from local Fourier conduction in each phase and a linear interfacial exchange that includes a non-local Laplacian term, the author obtains a generalized Jeffreys-type equation for the effective heat flux, with explicit expressions for the flux relaxation time τ_q and the gradient relaxation time τ_T. The ratio R=τ_T/τ_q is shown to exceed unity under the model assumptions, implying over-diffusion. The paper also derives a thermodynamic upper bound on the non-local length scale from the Clausius-Duhem inequality, and proposes a single-eigenmode approximation to explain size-dependent apparent over-diffusion in thin samples. The model is compared with experiments on metal foams, carbon foams, rocks, and MOF/RGO composites.

Significance. If the universality claim is accepted, the paper would provide a clear microstructural origin for non-Fourier thermal behavior and an explicit formula for the over-diffusion ratio in terms of phase conductivities and heat capacities. The entropy-production bound on l_nl is a valuable and non-trivial constraint. The volume averaging and coefficient algebra in Sections 3-4 are transparent and check out, and the paper is honest about several parameter uncertainties in the validation section. However, the diagonal closure for the deviation fields and the uncontrolled modal approximation currently limit the generality of the 'inherently over-diffusive' statement; with those caveats addressed, the work would be a solid contribution to the non-Fourier heat conduction literature.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 3.1, Eq. (28)] The closure \tilde T_αm = b_α·∇T_α assumes that the microscopic deviation in phase α is driven only by ∇T_α. In the standard two-phase volume-averaging theory (cf. Quintard & Whitaker 1993), the closure problem couples the phases, yielding averaged phase fluxes of the form ⟨q_α⟩ = -K_αα∇T_α - K_αβ∇T_β. Isotropy and uniform porosity do not force K_αβ=0. When the cross-coupling is retained, the coefficient B in Eq. (37) is replaced by B - K_x(C_α+C_β)/(C_αC_β) (for isotropic K_x), and the expression for R in Eqs. (70)-(73) is not the general result. The positivity argument R>1 from Eq. (72) therefore holds only for the parallel, non-interacting-channel model. The abstract's 'mathematically proven ... inherently over-diffusive' overstates the validity of the derivation; either the cross terms must be shown to vanish under the stated assumptions or the claims must be restricted to the adopted closure.
  2. [Section 7.2, Eq. (77)] The replacement Δ²T ≈ -(π²/L²)ΔT is based on retaining only the first Fourier mode. For the n-th eigenmode, Δ²T_n = (nπ/L)^4 T_n, so the exact relation is mode-dependent. The claim that higher modes 'decay rapidly' is not sufficient for the early-time response probed by flash experiments, where the initial condition can excite many modes; no error estimate is provided. Since Eq. (80) and Tables 3-7 rely on this truncation, the size-dependence prediction is not established. The authors should justify the truncation for the relevant time window or provide a numerical check.
  3. [Section 8, Cases 4-5] In the limestone case, H is deduced from the experimentally observed τ_q ≈0.5 s, and the same experiments are then used to support the predicted size dependence; in the MOF case, the phase properties are acknowledged as 'mere estimates' and H is fixed by the observed τ_q ≈0.45 s. No quantitative comparison (e.g., measured versus predicted R or R_app with residuals) is given. The validation is therefore partly circular and primarily qualitative. Please separate fitted from predicted quantities and either provide quantitative comparisons or explicitly label these as consistency checks.
  4. [Section 2, Eq. (5); Section 7.2] The derivation assumes strict scale separation l≪L≪L_mac, but the size-dependence formula is applied to samples where this hierarchy fails, e.g., Case 1 with pore diameter d_p=2 mm and L_sample=2 mm. The Taylor expansion Eq. (20) and the eigenmode approximation are used exactly in the regime where the separation of scales is lost. The error introduced by these approximations is not quantified, so the explanation of suppressed over-diffusion in the thinnest samples is not quantitatively sound.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 3.1, around Eq. (28)] The phrase 'geometric effects vanish such that the tensor k_α simplifies to a scalar' is imprecise; statistical isotropy makes the tensor proportional to the identity, but the b-field contribution does not vanish.
  2. [Section 8, Tables 3-7] The R_app values are reported to two decimals without uncertainty estimates, even though several phase properties are estimates; including ranges would better reflect the accuracy.
  3. [Section 9.1] The clinical examples (R_spine ≈3.40, R_skin ≈4.67) rely on assumed phase properties and should be labeled as illustrative rather than predictive.
  4. [Abstract and Section 10] The phrases 'mathematically proven' and 'inherently over-diffusive' are too strong given the closure and modal assumptions; consider phrasing such as 'shown within the volume-averaging closure model'.
  5. [Section 6, after Eq. (69)] It would be helpful to state explicitly that the equivalence of the T-representations of the 2T model and the derived model holds for l_nl=0; this is implicit in the equations but not spelled out.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

Central upscaling derivation is algebraically self-contained; R>1 does not reduce to a fit. Minor validation caveats exist but the core result is not circular.

full rationale

The core derivation is an internal chain of volume averaging: microscopic Fourier equations (6)-(7), Gray decomposition, the geometric closure T~_alpha m = b_alpha * grad T_alpha, and elimination of delta T yield the effective Jeffreys-type equation (54). The over-diffusion ratio follows algebraically as R = 1 + (k_alpha C_beta^2 + k_beta C_alpha^2)/(C_alpha C_beta k_eff) minus the non-local correction (Eq. 72), with R > 1 for l_nl = 0 because all material properties are positive. This formula is independent of H, so the central claim that two Fourier channels with thermal asymmetry are over-diffusive is not obtained by fitting experimental data. The foam and rock case studies use tabulated or literature phase properties, and the rock R = 1.56 does not use the fitted H. The only near-circular element is in the size-dependence illustrations: in the rock and MOF cases H is deduced from the experimentally observed tau_q (Sec. 8, Cases 4 and 5) and then used to compute D and R_app(L), so those tables are calibrations rather than independent predictions. This does not affect the main R formula, and the paper does not claim to validate R_app against independently measured size-dependent values. The paper itself flags the MOF phase properties as 'mere estimates,' a data-quality limitation rather than a circular step. The universal claim 'any heterogeneous material ... R>1' is conditional on the diagonal closure assumption that the phase fluxes do not cross-couple; this is a correctness/universality limitation, not a circular reduction. Self-citations such as [35], [36], and [28] provide definitions, an auxiliary equivalence, and figures, but the central derivation is self-contained. Overall, no significant circularity is present, and the score reflects only minor validation caveats.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are postulated; l_nl is a model length scale and is tracked as a free parameter. The load-bearing ingredients are the Fourier law per phase, the two-temperature coupling, scale separation, the standard closure, and the single-mode approximation for finite samples.

free parameters (4)
  • H (volumetric interfacial heat transfer coefficient) = 1.14e6 (limestone), 1.59e6 (MOF), 546e3 (foams) W/(m3 K)
    In Cases 4 and 5 H is deduced from observed τ_q, so the scale-dependent R_app predictions are not parameter-free; in foam cases H is estimated from a heat-transfer correlation.
  • l_nl (non-local length scale) = set to 0 in all validations
    Introduced in Eq. (21) but never measured or fitted; all validation cases assume l_nl=0, so the non-local term is not tested.
  • Effective phase properties for MOF (kα, kβ, Cα, Cβ) = k_alpha=0.07, k_beta=0.35 W/mK, C_alpha=2.5e6, C_beta=1.0e6 J/m3K
    The text states 'no separate (component-wise) measurements were performed; thus, these are mere estimates.' The R≈3.15 value therefore is not an independent prediction.
  • Rock phase properties (C_s, k_s, C_f, k_f) = C_s=1.8e6, k_s=2, C_f=836e3, k_f=0.12 (SI)
    Chosen as typical values 'to test the developed theoretical background' (Case 4), and the resulting R≈1.56 is declared 'in complete agreement with [4]' without error bars; this resembles fitting.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Each phase obeys Fourier's law with constant properties at the microscale
    Section 2.1, Eqs. (6)-(7); the whole derivation of macro non-Fourier behavior rests on micro-Fourier conduction.
  • domain assumption Two-temperature LTNE representation with a single linear interfacial exchange coefficient H
    Section 1, Eqs. (1)-(2); the model assumes local thermal non-equilibrium with q_int=H(δT+...).
  • domain assumption Scale separation l<<L<<L_mac and uniform porosity (∇ε=0)
    Section 2, Eq. (5) and Eq. (14); required to drop surface integrals of macroscopic temperature; violated in the sub-RVE application.
  • domain assumption Closure T̃αm=bα·∇Tα and isotropic microstructure reduces conductivity tensor to scalar kα
    Section 3.1, Eq. (28); standard volume-averaging closure, not derived in this paper.
  • ad hoc to paper The temperature-difference field is smooth over the RVE so a second-order Taylor expansion is valid (Eq. 20), with ⟨y⊗y⟩=l_nl² I
    Section 3.1; this introduces the non-local term; no validation of the truncation order.
  • ad hoc to paper Single dominant eigenmode approximation Δ²T≈-(π²/L²)ΔT for finite samples
    Section 7.2, Eqs. (75)-(77); exact only for an isolated cosine mode with adiabatic boundaries; corrections from higher modes are neglected.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Origin of effective non-Fourier heat conduction phenomena in heterogeneous materials." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ENW5G2SL

@misc{pith2026260813336,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Origin of effective non-Fourier heat conduction phenomena in heterogeneous materials},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ENW5G2SL}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.13336}
}
read the original abstract

Phenomenological models of non-Fourier heat conduction often lack a strict microstructural foundation, leading to ambiguities when modeling complex heterogeneous materials. In this study, we derive a continuum heat equation beyond Fourier's law using spatial volume averaging for a two-component system. We analytically prove that the experimentally observed static and dynamic thermal diffusivity arise directly from the distinct material properties, concluding that heterogeneous media are inherently over-diffusive. The resulting heat equation is thermodynamically compatible, and the microstructural origin allows the calculation of non-Fourier transport coefficients. Furthermore, we demonstrate that finite-sample boundaries introduce higher-order spatial non-localities, thereby explaining the size dependence of over-diffusion. We validate the model against experimental data across metal and carbon foams, rocks, and metal-organic frameworks.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.13336 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The schematics of various length scales in a heterogeneous material, based on [ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Typical heterogeneous structure exhibiting effective non-Fourier behavior. A) Metal [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

54 extracted references · 53 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    S. Yang, J. Wang, G. Dai, F. Yang, and J. Huang. Controlling macroscopic heat transfer with thermal metamaterials: theory, experiment and application.Physics Reports, 908:1– 65, 2021

    work page 2021

  2. [2]

    M¨ uller and T

    I. M¨ uller and T. Ruggeri.Rational Extended Thermodynamics. Springer, 1998

    1998

  3. [3]

    H. E. Jackson and C. T. Walker. Thermal conductivity, second sound and phonon-phonon interactions in NaF.Physical Review B, 3(4):1428–1439, 1971

    work page 1971

  4. [4]

    Feh´ er, N

    A. Feh´ er, N. Luk´ acs, L. Somlai, T. Fodor, M. Sz¨ ucs, T. F¨ ul¨ op, P. V´ an, and R. Kov´ acs. Size effects and beyond-Fourier heat conduction in room-temperature experiments.Journal of Non-Equilibrium Thermodynamics, 46:403–411, 2021. 24

    work page 2021

  5. [5]

    Feh´ er, R

    A. Feh´ er, R. Kov´ acs,´A. Sud´ ar, and G. G. Barnaf¨ old. Challenges in the thermal modeling of highly porous carbon foams.Journal of Thermal Analysis and Calorimetry, 149:3605–3616, 2024

    work page 2024

  6. [6]

    Feh´ er, J

    A. Feh´ er, J. Mar´ oti, D. Tak´ acs, I. Orbulov, and R. Kov´ acs. Thermal and mechanical properties of alsi7mg matrix syntactic foams reinforced by Al2O3 or SiC particles in matrix. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 226:125446, 2024

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    Berezovski, J

    A. Berezovski, J. Engelbrecht, and G. A. Maugin. Thermoelasticity with dual internal variables.Journal of Thermal Stresses, 34(5-6):413–430, 2011

    work page 2011

  8. [8]

    V´ an, A

    P. V´ an, A. Berezovski, and J. Engelbrecht. Internal variables and dynamic degrees of freedom.Journal of Non-Equilibrium Thermodynamics, 33(3):235–254, 2008

    work page 2008

Show all 54 references
  1. [9]

    Quintard and S

    M. Quintard and S. Whitaker. Two-phase flow in heterogeneous porous media: The method of large-scale averaging.Transport in Porous Media, 3(4):357–413, 1988

    1988

  2. [10]

    Quintard and S

    M. Quintard and S. Whitaker. Transport in ordered and disordered porous media: volume- averaged equations, closure problems, and comparison with experiment.Chemical Engi- neering Science, 48(14):2537–2564, 1993

    1993

  3. [11]

    Quintard and S

    M. Quintard and S. Whitaker. Transport in ordered and disordered porous media II: Generalized volume averaging.Transport in Porous Media, 14(2):179–206, 1994

    1994

  4. [12]

    V. A. Cimmelli, D. Jou, T. Ruggeri, and P. V´ an. Entropy principle and recent results in non-equilibrium theories.Entropy, 16(3):1756–1807, 2014

    2014

  5. [13]

    Lebon, D

    G. Lebon, D. Jou, and M. Grmela. Extended Reversible and Irreversible Thermodynamics: A Hamiltonian Approach with Application to Heat Waves.Journal of Non-Equilibrium Thermodynamics, 42(2):153–168, 2017

    2017

  6. [14]

    Pavelka, V

    M. Pavelka, V. Klika, and M. Grmela.Multiscale thermo-dynamics: introduction to GENERIC. Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG, 2018

    2018

  7. [15]

    M. Grmela. GENERIC guide to the multiscale dynamics and thermodynamics.Journal of Physics Communications, 2(3):032001, 2018

    2018

  8. [16]

    B. D. Coleman and M. E. Gurtin. Thermodynamics with internal state variables.The Journal of Chemical Physics, 47(2):597–613, 1967

    1967

  9. [17]

    Berezovski and P

    A. Berezovski and P. V´ an.Internal Variables in Thermoelasticity. Springer, 2017

    2017

  10. [18]

    Duval, F

    F. Duval, F. Fichot, and M. Quintard. A local thermal non-equilibrium model for two-phase flows with phase-change in porous media.International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 47(3):613–639, 2004

    2004

  11. [19]

    S. Pati, A. Borah, M. P. Boruah, and P. R. Randive. Critical review on local thermal equilibrium and local thermal non-equilibrium approaches for the analysis of forced convec- tive flow through porous media.International communications in heat and mass Transfer, 132:105889, 2022

    2022

  12. [20]

    Gandomkar and K

    A. Gandomkar and K. E. Gray. Local thermal non-equilibrium in porous media with heat conduction.International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 124:1212–1216, 2018

    2018

  13. [21]

    S. L. Sobolev. Local non-equilibrium transport models.Physics-Uspekhi, 40(10):1043–1053, 1997. 25

    1997

  14. [22]

    S. L. Sobolev. Nonlocal two-temperature model: Application to heat transport in metals irradiated by ultrashort laser pulses.International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 94:138–144, 2016

    2016

  15. [23]

    D. Y. Tzou. A unified field approach for heat conduction from macro- to micro-scales. Journal of Heat Transfer, 117(1):8–16, 1995

    1995

  16. [24]

    Fabrizio and F

    M. Fabrizio and F. Franchi. Delayed thermal models: stability and thermodynamics.Jour- nal of Thermal Stresses, 37(2):160–173, 2014

    2014

  17. [25]

    Fabrizio and B

    M. Fabrizio and B. Lazzari. Stability and second law of thermodynamics in dual-phase-lag heat conduction.International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 74:484–489, 2014

    2014

  18. [26]

    Quintanilla and R

    R. Quintanilla and R. Racke. Qualitative aspects in dual-phase-lag heat conduction.Pro- ceedings of the Royal Society of London A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sci- ences, 463(2079):659–674, 2007

    2007

  19. [27]

    Chirit ¸˘ a, M

    S. Chirit ¸˘ a, M. Ciarletta, and V. Tibullo. On the thermomechanical consistency of the time differential dual-phase-lag models of heat conduction.International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 114:277–285, 2017

    2017

  20. [28]

    Kov´ acs

    R. Kov´ acs. Heat equations beyond Fourier: From heat waves to thermal metamaterials. Physics Reports, 1048:1–75, 2024

    2024

  21. [29]

    V´ an and T

    P. V´ an and T. F¨ ul¨ op. Universality in heat conduction theory – weakly nonlocal thermody- namics.Annalen der Physik (Berlin), 524(8):470–478, 2012

    2012

  22. [30]

    R. A. Guyer and J. A. Krumhansl. Solution of the linearized phonon Boltzmann equation. Physical Review, 148(2):766–778, 1966

    1966

  23. [31]

    W. G. Gray. A derivation of the equations for multi-phase transport.Chemical Engineering Science, 30(2):229–233, 1975

    1975

  24. [32]

    S. P. Neuman. Theoretical derivation of Darcy’s law.Acta Mechanica, 25(3):153–170, 1977

    1977

  25. [33]

    J. E. Mar´ oti and I. N. Orbulov. Characteristic compressive properties of AlSi7Mg matrix syntactic foams reinforced by Al2O3 or SiC particles in the matrix.Materials Science and Engineering: A, 869:144817, 2023

    2023

  26. [34]

    K´ aroly, J

    D. K´ aroly, J. E. Mar´ oti, J. Lolbert-Szab´ o, A. Kem´ eny, and I. N. Orbulov. Production of syntactic metal foams reinforced in the matrix material. InIOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, volume 1246, page 012014. IOP Publishing, 2022

    2022

  27. [35]

    Feh´ er and R

    A. Feh´ er and R. Kov´ acs. On the dynamic thermal conductivity and diffusivity observed in heat pulse experiments.Journal of Non-Equilibrium Thermodynamics, 49:161–170, 2024

    2024

  28. [36]

    S. Both, B. Cz´ el, T. F¨ ul¨ op, Gy. Gr´ of,´A. Gyenis, R. Kov´ acs, P. V´ an, and J. Verh´ as. Deviation from the Fourier law in room-temperature heat pulse experiments.Journal of Non-Equilibrium Thermodynamics, 41(1):41–48, 2016

    2016

  29. [37]

    G´ al, S

    M. G´ al, S. K. S. Andrade, A. Feh´ er, A. Farkas, J. Madar´ asz, L. Horv´ ath, P. Gordon, R. Kov´ acs, and K. L´ aszl´ o. Thermal diffusity in copper benzene-1, 3, 5-tricarboxylate– reduced graphite oxide mechanical composites.Journal of Thermal Analysis and Calorime- try, pa...

    2024

  30. [38]

    Lunev, A

    A. Lunev, A. Lauerer, V. Zborovskii, and F. L´ eonard. Digital twin of a laser flash experiment helps to assess the thermal performance of metal foams.International Journal of Thermal Sciences, 181:107743, 2022. 26

    2022

  31. [39]

    Lauerer and A

    A. Lauerer and A. Lunev. Experimental evidence of gas-mediated heat transfer in porous solids measured by the flash method.International Journal of Thermal Sciences, 184:107948, 2023

    2023

  32. [40]

    R. Lemlich. A theory for the limiting conductivity of polyhedral foam at low density. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, 64(1):107–110, 1978

    1978

  33. [41]

    Krishnan, S

    S. Krishnan, S. V. Garimella, and J. Y. Murthy. Simulation of thermal transport in open- cell metal foams: effect of periodic unit-cell structure.ASME Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 130:024503, 2008

    2008

  34. [42]

    T. J. Lu, H. A. Stone, and M. F. Ashby. Heat transfer in open-cell metal foams.Acta Materialia, 46(10):3619–3635, 1998

    1998

  35. [43]

    V. V. Calmidi and R. L. Mahajan. Forced convection in high porosity metal foams.ASME Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 122(3):557–565, 2000

    2000

  36. [44]

    X.-H. Han, Q. Wang, Y.-G. Park, C. T’Joen, A. Sommers, and A. Jacobi. A review of metal foam and metal matrix composites for heat exchangers and heat sinks.Heat Transfer Engineering, 33(12):991–1009, 2012

    2012

  37. [45]

    Boomsma, D

    K. Boomsma, D. Poulikakos, and F. Zwick. Metal foams as compact high performance heat exchangers.Mechanics of Materials, 35(12):1161–1176, 2003

    2003

  38. [46]

    S. L. James. Metal-organic frameworks.Chemical Society Reviews, 32(5):276–288, 2003

    2003

  39. [47]

    Dom´ an, J

    A. Dom´ an, J. Madar´ asz, Gy. S´ afr´ an, Y. Wang, and K. L´ aszl´ o. Copper benzene-1, 3, 5- tricarboxylate (HKUST-1)–graphene oxide pellets for methane adsorption.Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 316:110948, 2021

    2021

  40. [48]

    Liu, T.-J

    X.-W. Liu, T.-J. Sun, J.-L. Hu, and S.-D. Wang. Composites of metal–organic frameworks and carbon-based materials: preparations, functionalities and applications.Journal of Materials Chemistry A, 4(10):3584–3616, 2016

    2016

  41. [49]

    H. H. Pennes. Analysis of tissue and arterial blood temperatures in the resting human forearm.Journal of Applied Physiology, 1(2):93–122, 1948

    1948

  42. [50]

    Kutz.Biomedical Engineering and Design Handbook

    M. Kutz.Biomedical Engineering and Design Handbook. McGraw-Hill, New York, USA, 2 edition, 2009

    2009

  43. [51]

    Becker and A

    S. Becker and A. Kuznetsov.Heat Transfer and Fluid Flow in Biological Processes. Aca- demic Press, 2014

    2014

  44. [52]

    Hooshmand, A

    P. Hooshmand, A. Moradi, and B. Khezry. Bioheat transfer analysis of biological tissues induced by laser irradiation.International Journal of Thermal Sciences, 90:214–223, 2015

    2015

  45. [53]

    D. E. Dupuy, R. Hong, B. Oliver, and S. N. Goldberg. Radiofrequency ablation of spinal tumors: temperature distribution in the spinal canal.American Journal of Roentgenology, 175(5):1263–1266, 2000

    2000

  46. [54]

    Masala, M

    S. Masala, M. Roselli, F. Massari, R. Fiori, A. Ursone, E. Fossile, A. Laudisi, and G. Si- monetti. Radiofrequency heat ablation and vertebroplasty in the treatment of neoplastic vertebral body fractures.Anticancer Research, 24(5B):3129–3134, 2004. 27

    2004

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.