root/trunk/matml/transport/problems/czoch/czoch-solution.tex

Revision 122, 4.3 kB (checked in by powell, 6 years ago)

New problem: Czochralski crystal growth

  • Property svn:keywords set to Author Date Id Revision
Line 
1\documentclass{article}
2\usepackage{fullpage}
3\begin{document}
4\begin{enumerate}
5\item Czochralski crystal growth
6
7  \begin{enumerate}
8  \item \label{czoch1} Cartesian coordinates clearly don't make sense here, and
9    the complexity of the spherical equations only justify their use if the
10    boundary conditions would be greatly simplified, e.g. if the crucible is
11    exactly hemispherical and the top surface of the liquid is flat.  So we use
12    cylindrical coordinates.
13
14    The liquid silicon is incompressible, and its homogeneity (the silicon is
15    very pure) suggests constant density.  As a liquid metalloid, it is most
16    likely Newtonian, and unless there are very strong temperature gradients,
17    it has constant viscosity.
18
19    Under these conditions with laminar flow, we can use the Newtonian
20    incompressible form of the Navier-Stokes equations.
21
22    Now let's look at the other assumptions:
23    \begin{itemize}
24    \item Steady-state: the crystal and crucible are rotating at constant
25      speeds, so the only source of time-dependence is removal of the liquid as
26      the crystal grows and pulls out.  Because this pullout is orders of
27      magnitude slower than the rotations, we can assume a
28      ``quasi-steady-state'' where at any given moment the flow is at
29      steady-state, but that steady-state is changing {\em very} slowly with
30      time as there is progressively less liquid in the crucible.  So we can
31      cancel the time derivatives.
32
33    \item Fully-developed flow: because this is rotating, it's hard to define
34      an fully-developed, since ``entrance length'' is essentially zero and the
35      ``overall length'' essentially infinite.
36
37      Instead, it's better to think of it as having axial symmetry, that is, we
38      can lose the velocity derivatives in the $\theta$-direction.
39
40      However, the centrifugal force varies greatly with both $r$ and $z$, so
41      there is likely to be significant $r$-velocity variation, and the
42      continuity equation with the time and theta derivatives cancelled tells
43      us that this will produce flow in the $z$-direction.
44
45    \item Edge-effects: it's unclear whether the ``thickness'' or ``width''
46      direction is the $r$- or $z$-direction, because the sizes in those two
47      directions are so similar, so we really can not neglect edge effects.
48    \end{itemize}
49
50    The resulting equations, starting with continuity:
51    $$\frac{1}{r}\frac{\partial}{\partial r}\left(rv_r\right) +
52    \frac{\partial v_z}{\partial z} = 0$$
53    Motion $r$-component:
54    $$\rho\left(v_r\frac {\partial v_r}{\partial r} - \frac{v_\theta^2}{r} +
55      v_z\frac{\partial v_r}{\partial z}\right) =
56    -\frac{\partial p}{\partial r} +
57    \eta\left[\frac{\partial}{\partial r}\left(\frac{1}{r}
58        \frac{\partial}{\partial r}\left(rv_r\right)\right)+
59      \frac{\partial^2v_r}{\partial z^2}\right]$$
60    Motion $\theta$-component:
61    $$\rho\left(v_r\frac{\partial v_\theta}{\partial r} +
62      \frac{v_rv_\theta}{r} + v_z\frac{\partial v_\theta}{\partial z}\right) =
63    \eta\left[\frac{\partial}{\partial r}\left(\frac{1}{r}
64        \frac{\partial}{\partial r}\left(rv_\theta\right)\right)+
65      \frac{\partial^2v_\theta}{\partial z^2}\right]$$
66    Motion $z$-component:
67    $$\rho\left(v_r\frac{\partial v_z}{\partial r} +
68      v_z\frac{\partial v_z}{\partial z}\right)=
69    -\frac{\partial p}{\partial z} +
70    \eta\left[\frac{1}{r}\frac{\partial}{\partial r}
71      \left(r\frac{\partial v_z}{\partial r}\right)+
72      \frac{\partial^2v_z}{\partial z^2}\right]+\rho g_z$$
73    Isn't that much better?  We still need a computer to solve the system
74    though.
75
76  \item This is a bit of a trick question, as there are nonzero $r$-, $\theta$-
77    and $z$-components to flow, making it seem three-dimensional.  However,
78    because velocity and pressure are not functions of $\theta$ but only of $r$
79    and $z$, by the definition given in the problem, the flow is considered
80    two-dimensional.  (Likewise, all of the problems we actually solve in this
81    course can be considered one-dimensional, even if the flow direction is
82    different from the direction in which it's varying, {\em e.g.} $x$-velocity
83    as a function of $y$.)
84
85    Note that because of the non-zero $\theta$ velocity, some people use the
86    expression ``2.5-dimensional''...
87  \end{enumerate}
88\end{enumerate}
89\end{document}
Note: See TracBrowser for help on using the browser.