International Journal of Refrigeration 29 (2006) 125–133

www.elsevier.com/locate/ijrefrig

Analysis of stresses during the freezing of solid spherical foods

Q. Tuan Phama,*,1, Alain Le Bailb,2, Brice Tremeacb
a
School of Chemical Engineering and Industrial Chemistry, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia
b
UMR GEPEA (UA CNRS 6144-SPI), ENITIAA, Rue de la Geraudiere, BP 82225, F-44322 Nantes cedex 3, France
Received 16 August 2004; received in revised form 27 May 2005; accepted 13 June 2005
Available online 15 August 2005

Abstract
An analytical model is presented to calculate thermal stresses and strains during the freezing of a spherical food, taking into
account both the expansion during phase change and subsequent thermal contraction due to temperature decrease. The Young
modulus and Poisson ratio are assumed to undergo a step change at the freezing point. The expansion due to phase change cause
a uniform and virtually constant isotropic tensile stress in the unfrozen core. In the frozen shell, this expansion gives rise to
tensile radial stress and compressive tangential stress. The thermal contraction subsequent to phase change causes reverse
effects, i.e. uniform compressive stress in the unfrozen core and compressive radial stress in the frozen shell, while tangential
stress is tensile on the outside and compressive on the inside of the frozen shell. The effect of thermal contraction is noticeable
only at cryogenic temperatures.
q 2005 Elsevier Ltd and IIR. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Freezing; Food product; Geometry; Sphere; Modelling; Imaging; Mechanical property

Analyse des contraintes lors de la congélation de produits

alimentaires sphériques
Mots clés : Congélation ; Produit alimentaire ; Géométrie ; Sphère ; Modélisation ; Imagerie ; Propriété mécanique

1. Introduction carried out simulations for the cryogenic freezing of Tylose

When water rich food is frozen, there are large volume
changes associated with an increase in rigidity (Young
modulus), both of which leads to large stresses in the food
and some cases, to cracking. This topic has been relatively
neglected in the food literature until recently. Kim [1]
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: tuan.pham@unsw.edu.au (Q.T. Pham).
1 upon freezing is the cause of thermal stresses and cracking.
Q. T. Pham is a vice president of Commission C2.
2
A. Le Bail is a member of Commission C2.
0140-7007/$35.00 q 2005 Elsevier Ltd and IIR. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijrefrig.2005.06.003
and suggested that cracking occurs because during fast
freezing a ‘crust’ forms at the product surface, serving as a
shell which prevents further expansion when the internal
parts freeze (Hung and Kim, [2]). If this model is correct, it
is not clear why the same does not happen during slow
freezing. Kim and Hung [3] designed empirical prediction
equations for the probability of cracking during cryogenic
freezing, based on the food’s physical properties such as
Young modulus, Poisson ratio, porosity, density and water
content. Shi et al. [4,5] also assume that thermal expansion
Using a viscoelastic constitutional model, they calculated
126 Q.T. Pham et al. / International Journal of Refrigeration 29 (2006) 125–133
Nomenclature
A, A 0 , B, B 0 , C 0 coefficients
b radius of freezing front (m)
E Young modulus (Pa)
k coefficient varying from 1/2 to 1
K bulk modulus E/3(1-2n) (Pa)
p pressure (Pa)
r radial distance (m)
R sphere radius (m)
s dimensionless stress s/Efb(TbKTR)
T temperature (8C)
u radial displacement (m)
x R/r
X R/b
w dimensionless stress s/D0Ku
b thermal expansion coefficient of frozen
material (KK1)
D0 relative linear expansion due to phase change
the stresses and showed that isotropic tensile stresses (i.e.
negative pressure) develop in the unfrozen region of a
potato. Upon freezing, however, circumferential stresses
become compressive while radial stresses remain tensile.
While the model takes into account changes in thermal and
mechanical properties with temperatures, it ignores the
thermal contraction that takes place after phase change has
happened.
In the related fields of cryo-preservation and cryosur-
gery, Rubinsky et al. [6] modelled stresses around a sphere
undergoing freezing. To obtain an analytical solution,
assumptions have to be made such as no expansion or
change in mechanical properties due to phase change, so the
results were not very realistic. Gao et al. [7] measured
stresses in the constrained freezing of a solution inside a
brass tube, a situation which is not usually encountered in
food freezing. Rabin and Steif [8] investigated the effect of
both expansion upon phase change and subsequent thermal
contraction in a sphere, using a combined elastic-perfect
plastic model. They assume that the material starts as a
liquid and that material properties are unchanged by
freezing. To the authors’ knowledge, no analytical model
has been presented that takes into account the large changes
in mechanical properties due to phase change. While the
stresses and strains can be calculated numerically (e.g. with
Abaqus [9] or Pham et al. [10]), an analytical model would
be much faster, more easily implemented on spreadsheets,
and most importantly, an examination of the equations can
give us an insight on the effect of various parameters that are
difficult to obtain otherwise.
In this paper, an analytical model is presented for
calculating stresses of a sphere undergoing freezing. Both
the expansion due to phase change and the subsequent
thermal contraction are taken into account. A linear elastic
3 strain
f (1Knf)Ku/Ef
n Poisson ratio
s stress (Pa)
Subscripts
b at the freezing front
f frozen
r radial
R at surface of sphere
t tangential
u unfrozen
Superscripts
(exp) related to phase change expansion
(con) related to thermal contraction due to tempera-
ture fall
T due to phase change or temperature change
model is used, with the Young modulus and Poisson ratio
undergoing a step change at phase change. While a sphere is
a very simple geometry, it approximates many foods of
interest (such as fruits, potato) and many effects will be
qualitatively the same for other shapes.
2. Governing equations
The stress field is assumed to have no influence on heat
transfer. Therefore, the temperature field can be calculated
first, then the stress field calculated from it. In food freezing,
the surface freezes first forming a frozen shell, which
gradually thickens, until it reaches the centre. The move-
ment of the freezing front position depends on freezing
conditions and the shape, size and thermal properties of the
product. Its calculation does not concern us here, as it can be
calculated by many existing methods. All stresses and
strains will be calculated in terms of the relative position of
the freezing front b/R.
Thermal stresses in a material arise from differential
expansion and contraction. If temperature was uniform and
isotropic, it can easily be shown that there will be no thermal
stresses. Stresses and strains in 3D are described by 3!3
tensors, which are related by the constitutive equations of
the materials. To solve for these, mechanical equilibrium
equations are written for each direction. This gives only
three equations, fortunately the terms in the strain tensors
are not independent but are related by symmetry and
compatibility conditions, because there are only three
degrees of freedom for the displacements.
When liquids such as water or molten metal solidify, the
unfrozen material can move away from the freezing
interface without sustaining any shear (deviatoric) stresses.
 Q.T. Pham et al. / International Journal of Refrigeration 29 (2006) 125–133 127

The just-frozen solid at the interface is, therefore, also free stresses and strains. Doing it this way simplifies the
from deviatoric stresses, although pressure (normal stress) mathematical manipulations and furthermore gives an
may be present. This fact must be used as a boundary insight into the effects of each of these phenomena.
condition for the solution of the stress equations [8]. In this
paper, we consider a different situation, where the unfrozen
food is a solid (such as potato or carrot), and water 3. Solution for phase change expansion
molecules are embedded in a solid matrix that can sustain
shear stresses, unlike liquid water. When phase change takes 3.1. Unfrozen core
place, the food tries to expand isotropically, but differences
in the tangential and radial constraints will lead to shear When thermal contraction (not due to phase change) can
forces arising at the froaen interface. This will lead to a be ignored, 3T is zero throughout the unfrozen core, and to
different boundary condition for the freezing interface. avoid a singularity at the centre, C2 must be zero. Eqs. (6)
The equations are considerably simplified for the case of and (1) show that the core is under uniform strain and stress:
spherical symmetry, in which case all the shear strains and
stresses disappear and there are only two remaining strains sr Z st Z sb (7)
(radial and tangential, also termed circumferential or with sb to be found later.
azimuthal) and stresses (Timoshenko and Goodier [11] p.
417–418). 3.2. Frozen shell
For a sphere, the equation of mechanical equilibrium is
dsr 2 3.2.1. General solution for frozen shell
C ðsr K st Þ Z 0 (1)
dr r In the frozen shell, since there is a step change in volume
at the freezing point, the general solution (Eq. (6)) can be
Strains 3 are assumed to be the sum of thermal strain 3T,
written as
which is isotropic, and mechanical strain, which give rise to
ð
stresses. Conceptually, each volume element can be sr 2 D0 r 2 C1 2C2 1
ZK r dr C K (8)
visualized as a puzzle piece that expands or contracts freely Ef 1 K nf r3 b 1 K 2nf 1 C nf r 3
under the influence of temperature changes, then is forced
with boundary conditions governed by equilibrium:
by compressive or tensile forces from the rest of the solid to
deform and fit back into the puzzle. In this paper, a linear sr Z 0 at r Z R
elastic model is used for the material:
sr Z sb at r Z b (9)
sr K 2nst
3r K 3T Z (2) where b is the radial position of the freezing front and D0 is
E
the relative linear expansion upon phase change. Substitut-
st K nðsr C st Þ ing in the boundary conditions enable C1 and C2 to be found,
3t K 3T Z (3)
E giving for the frozen shell
As was stated before, the (total) strains are not independent rK3 K RK3 x3 K 1
but related by geometry. In this case: sðexpÞ
r Z s b Z sb (10)
bK3 K RK3 X3 K 1
du where xZR/r and XZR/b.
3r Z (4)
dr The tangential stress in the frozen shell is given by
u equilibrium, Eq. (1), from which
3t Z (5)
r 1 2 C x3
sðexpÞ
t Z s (11)
The general solution is (Timoshenko and Goodier [11] p. 2 1 K X3 b
418) It can be noted that the pressure in the frozen zone is
ð uniform and has a positive value (compression) given
sr 2 1 r C1 2C2 1
ZK 3 r2 dr C K (6) by
E 1 K n r3 a T 1 K 2n 1 C n r 3
2st C sr s
In water and food freezing, the thermal strain consists of two pðexpÞ Z K Z 3 b (12)
components: An expansion D0 around the freezing point, 3 X K1
due to the expansion of water upon crystallization; and a Thus, overall, the frozen shell is under uniform
thermal contraction due to temperature change, which is compression and the unfrozen core under uniform
approximated here by a constant thermal expansion tension. Intuitively, this can be interpreted as being
coefficient b. Due to the linear elastic assumption, the due the unexpanded unfrozen core pulling on the inside
effects of phase change expansion and thermal contraction of the expanding frozen shell, causing tensile radial
can be calculated separately then added to get the total stress and compressive tangential stress in the latter.
128 Q.T. Pham et al. / International Journal of Refrigeration 29 (2006) 125–133

However, at completion of freezing (bZ0), all stresses within the shell (distance ratio from inside and outside of
should come back to zero because thermal volume shell). An exception is when nuZ0.5, i.e. the unfrozen
change is now uniform. material is completely incompressible (such as a liquid) in
To find sb, we equate the u-value at the freezing which case the stress is completely determined by the frozen
front rZb for the frozen and unfrozen parts. On the properties and the thickness of the frozen shell.
unfrozen side Still for times after the initial period, from Eqs. (10) and
hui (18), the radial stress in the frozen shell rises from zero to
1 K 2nu
Z 3t Z sb (13)
r u Eu x3 K 1
sðexpÞ
r Z 3D0 Ku (19)
and on the frozen side X3 K 1
hui 1 and tangential stress in the frozen shell becomes (from Eqs.
Z 3t Z D0 C ½ð1 K nf Þst K nf sr  (14) (11) and (18))
r f Ef
Substituting in the values for st from Eq. (10) and st 3 x3 C 2
sðexpÞ
t Z K D0 Ku 3 (20)
from Eq. (11), we obtain after some manipulation 2 X K1
   K1 Thus, as the freezing front reaches a location, st at that point
1 1 3 1 K nf 1
sb Z D0 K C (15) switches from a tensile value to a compressive value, then
3Ku 3Kf 2 Ef 1 K XK3
tends to zero as freezing proceeds.
where K is the bulk modulus (inverse of The pressure in the frozen shell becomes, from Eqs. (12)
compressibility). and (18):
D0 Ku
3.2.2. Frozen shell solution for initial period pðexpÞ Z 3 (21)
X3 K 1
At the very beginning of freezing (Xz1), the last term in
the denominator of Eq. (15) dominates because it contains 1/ and it can be noted that stresses and pressures in the frozen
(1KXK3), and the solution is, for a very short time, shell do not depend on the frozen food properties (outside of
proportional to the frozen thickness and to Ef: the initial period).
D0 Ef D E R Kb
sb z2 ð1 K XK1 Þ Z 2 0 f (16)
1 K nf 1 K nf R 3.2.4. Strains
Strains in the unfrozen core can be calculated from Eqs.
This proportionality is due to the force exerted by the shell
(2), (7) and (15). Using the later time solution for sb (Eq.
being proportional to its thickness, while the contact area
(18)) we obtain, for reasonable frozen shell thickness:
between shell and core is almost constant. The initial
tangential stress in the frozen shell is, from Eqs. (11) and 3r zD0 (22)
(16) and letting r/R then b/R:
which shows that, because of its lesser rigidity, the unfrozen
D E
sðexpÞ
t ðt Z 0; r Z RÞ Z K 0 f (17) zone expands to accommodate all the expansion of the
1 K nf frozen shell (assuming unfrozen food is not incompressible,
i.e. nu!0.5). It can be shown similarly that in the frozen
3.2.3. Frozen shell solution at later time shell
Water rich foods become much stiffer on freezing, and
3r z3t zD0 (23)
normally Ef[Eu by several order of magnitude (Kim and
Hung [3], Shi and Datta [4,5]). Therefore, as soon as the i.e. the whole sphere expands almost uniformly.
frozen crust forms, the first term in Eq. (15) rapidly becomes It may be noted that the stress field is determined by b/R
dominant and sb reaches a limiting value and three product properties: D0K u, D 0Kf and
ðD0 Ef Þ=ð1K nf Þ. Of these the second has normally negligible
sb;lim z3D0 Ku (18)
effect and the third matters only in the initial period. If one
where Ku is the bulk modulus of the unfrozen material. defines dimensionless stresses w:
Thus, the tensile stress in the unfrozen core is uniform and s
constant for most of the freezing process, and is determined wh (24)
D0 K u
by the bulk modulus of the unfrozen material. The physical
explanation is that because the shell is so much stiffer than then wr and wt are functions of r/R, b/R, Ku/Kf and f, where
the core, it expands by almost D0, as if the core had no ð1 K nf ÞKu
restraining effect (as long as the shell has reached a certain fZ (25)
Ef
thickness), and therefore the volumetric expansion of the
core is also almost 3D0. A consequence is that the stresses in Figs. 1 and 2 plot stress profiles at different b values to
the frozen shell are determined only by the relative position illustrate the features described earlier.
 Q.T. Pham et al. / International Journal of Refrigeration 29 (2006) 125–133 129

shall assume a pseudo-steady state temperature profile:

 
R b
T Z Tb C ðTR K Tb Þ 1K (26)
R Kb r
Since 3T hbðT K Tb Þ, thermal strain varies with r as
 
T R b
3 Z bðTR K Tb Þ 1K (27)
R Kb r
Substitution of this equation into Eq. (6) gives the solution
1 1
sr Z A 0 C C 0 C B 0 3 (28)
r r
Let xZR/r, XZR/b and using the condition sr(R)Z0, the
equation for radial stress becomes
sr
sðconÞ
r h Z KAðx K 1Þ C Bðx3 K 1Þ (29)
Fig. 1. Dimensionless radial stress profiles (wr) at different freezing Ef bðTb K TR Þ
front positions due to phase change expansion. where
4. Solution for thermal contraction 1 1
AZ (30)
1 K nf X K 1
Thermal contraction during normal food freezing (in
To find the parameter B, we use the condition that
temperatures down to about K30 8C) is normally masked by
the expansion due to phase change, which starts at the sr ðXÞ Z sb (31)
freezing point but continue down to about K30 8C because
where sb, the dimensionless radial stress at the freezing
of the presence of solutes. Thermal contraction is front, is yet to be determined. Note that Rubinsky et al. [6]
significant, however, during cryogenic freezing, with a assumed sbZ0 at the freezing front, however, there is no
total contraction of around 0.6% for a typical food between reason to suppose that this is the case, since the unfrozen and
K30 and K200 8C (Rabin et al., [12]). Thermal contraction frozen zones will extract a force on each other due to
before freezing can be ignored because the range of differential contraction. The above condition gives
temperature is small (at most 40 8C).
All we need to consider therefore is the effect of thermal sb Z KAðX K 1Þ C BðX 3 K 1Þ
contraction in the frozen shell, which is (in cryogenic
freezing at least) very cold at the outer surface and warmer sb C ð1=ð1 K nf ÞÞ
BZ (32)
at the freezing front. A general solution was given in Eq. (6). X3 K 1
The solution depends on the temperature profile, which in The tangential stress can be found from Eq. (1):
turn depends on the freezing conditions. For this work we  
sðconÞ  x x3
sðconÞ
t h t
Z A 1 K K B 1 C (33)
Ef bðTb K TR Þ 2 2
As seen in the previous part, the unfrozen core has no
thermal strain and is therefore under uniform compression:
sðconÞ
r Z sðconÞ
t Z sb (34)
Displacements can be calculated from Eqs. (3) and (5). The
unfrozen core, which has no thermal stress, is under uniform
strain:
hui 1 K 2nu s
Z sb Z b (35)
r u Eu 3Ku
while the displacement in the frozen layer is
hui ð1 K nf Þst K nf sr
Z (36)
r f Ef

Fig. 2. Dimensionless tangential stress profiles (wt) at different To find sb, we equate the displacements at the freezing front
freezing front positions due to phase change expansion. (xZX) for the frozen and unfrozen parts, obtaining finally:
130 Q.T. Pham et al. / International Journal of Refrigeration 29 (2006) 125–133

ð1=ðX K 1ÞÞ K ð3=ðX 3 K 1ÞÞ K 2

sb Z (37)
ðð2Ef Þ=ð3Ku ÞÞ C 3ðð1 K nf Þ=ðX 3 K 1ÞÞ C 1 C nf

The evolution of stresses with time is shown in Figs. 3 and 4.

The unfrozen core will be under uniform compression sb.
For most practical case (Ku/Ef) this compression will be
roughly proportional to the unfrozen bulk modulus Ku and
independent of Ef. The peak radial stress in the frozen shell
increases with frozen thickness, although near the end (not
shown on graph) it decreases as the freezing front
approaches the centre. For most of the freezing process,
tangential stress will be positive (tensile) in (roughly) the
colder outer half of the frozen layer and negative in the
warmer inner half.
It can be shown that tangential stress has a maximum
tensile value at the surface and at the beginning of cooling.
This maximal value can be found by putting xZ1 in Eq. (33) Fig. 4. Dimensionless tangential stress profiles (sr) at different
freezing front positions due to thermal contraction, for Ku/EfZ0.05.
then letting X/1:
5. Solution for both expansion and contraction
1
sðconÞ
t ðt/ 0; r Z RÞ Z k
1 K nf Due to the linear behaviour of the material, the general
solution when both phase change expansion (superscript
‘exp’) and subsequent thermal contraction (superscript
Ef bðTb K TR Þ ‘con’) exist can be obtained by adding the solutions for
sðconÞ
t ðt/ 0; r Z RÞ Z k (38) each case:
1 K nf

where k varies from 1/2 for Ku/Ef to 1 when Ku[Ef srðtotalÞ Z sðexpÞ
r C sðconÞ
r (39)
(Appendix A). Physically this can be explained as follows:
When Ku[Ef the unfrozen core is completely rigid, so the
shell cannot contract and tangential stress is tensile stðtotalÞ Z sðexpÞ C sðconÞ (40)
t t
throughout the shell, increasing from a zero value at rZb
to (1Knf)K1 at rZR. When Ku/Ef the unfrozen core
where, for positions in the frozen shell, sðexpÞ
r is given by Eq.
offers no resistance and the shell shrinks freely, hence
(10), sðexpÞ
t by Eq. (11), sðconÞ
r by Eq. (29) and sðconÞ
t by Eq.
tangential stress is compressive in the warmer inner half and
(33). For the unfrozen core, both sðexpÞ
r and sðexpÞ
t are found
tensile in the colder outer half, increasing from (K(1/2)(1/
from Eq. (15) while sðconÞ
r and sðconÞ
t are found from Eq. (34).
(1Knf))) at rZb to ((1/2)(1/(1Knf))) at rZR.
The tangential stress is maximal at the surface and at tZ
0 for both phase change expansion (Eq. (17)) and thermal
contraction (Eq. (38)), but with opposite signs. The
combined initial tangential stress at the surface is

Ef
stðtotalÞ ðt Z 0; r Z RÞ Z ½KD0 C kbðTb K TR Þ (41)
1 K nf

where kZ0.5–1 as seen before. The magnitude of the first

Fig. 3. Dimensionless radial stress profiles (sr) at different freezing
front positions due to thermal contraction, for Ku/EfZ0.05.
term, D0, is greater than that of the second, kb(TbKTR),
hence the initial surface tangential stress is negative
(compressive).
The relative importance of phase change expansion and
thermal contraction depends on the ratio b(TbKTR)/D0. For
non-cryogenic food freezing this ratio is less than 0.05,
while for cryogenic freezing in liquid nitrogen it is around 0.
25. Sample calculations showed that the effect of thermal
contraction is non-negligible only in the latter case. Hence
we shall consider an example of cryogenic freezing.
 Q.T. Pham et al. / International Journal of Refrigeration 29 (2006) 125–133
6. Comparison with numerical calculations using real
property values
6.1. Phase change expansion only
Shi et al. [4] published numerical calculations for
cryogenic freezing of potato, using measured temperature
dependent properties. The properties do not have a step
change at the freezing point, the change being more gradual
and in particular, the steepest change in E occurring a few
degrees below freezing. However, we will use the
approximate limiting values in our analytical calculations:
EfZ1000 MPa, nfZ0.33, KuZ50 MPa, D0Z0.025, b(TbK
TR)Z0 (the zero thermal contraction is used to reproduce
Shi et al.’s assumptions, but will be re-examined later).
Thermal stress histories calculated by the present analytical
model are shown in Figs. 5 and 6.
Shi et al.’s calculated results, using an elastic model and
the finite element software ABAQUS, shows most of the
features described for the analytical model of this paper.
Tangential and radial stress are tensile and equal while
unfrozen, then st drops sharply to a negative (compressive)
value before turning around and tending back to zero, while
sr remains positive but also falls towards zero. Quantitat-
ively, the peak stress in the frozen core predicted by the
present model is about 50% higher than that calculated by
Shi et al. (3 vs 2 MPa). This could be explained firstly by the
fact that Shi modelled a long cylinder, which is restrained in
only two dimensions compared with tree for our sphere; and
secondly, by their use of a gradual increase of Ef from 0 to
K40 8C, instead of our assumption of sharp jump.
Shi et al. also tested a viscoelastic model. In the first half
of the process, there is little difference between elastic and
viscoelastic behaviours, but in the second half, viscoelastic
radial stresses level out at negative (compressive) values
Fig. 5. Radial stress vs relative frozen thickness at centre (solid line)
and five other positions (r/RZ0.2–1) for zero thermal contraction.
131
Fig. 6. Tangential stress vs relative frozen thickness at centre (solid
line) and five other positions (r/RZ0.2–1) for zero thermal
contraction.
while the elastic model predicts that they become zero. In
the viscoelastic model, the unfrozen core has time to expand
irreversibly to partly accommodate the tension exerted by
the frozen shell. Thus, when the core freezes, it becomes
restrained and undergoes compression.
6.2. Expansion followed by contraction
Next, thermal contraction is set at b(TbKTR)Z0.005,
corresponding to that applying to foods freezing at
K200 8C, i.e. in cryogenic freezing (Rabin et al., [12]).
Shi et al.’s Abaqus calculations neglect thermal contraction,
so the present model was tested against the numerical elastic
model of Pham et al. [10]. The same properties (with step
changes at freezing) are used, except that the thermal history
and stress–strain equations (Eqs. (1)–(5)) are solved by
numerical integration of the governing differential
equations. Results, as shown in Figs. 7–10, show very
good agreement between the numerical model and the
present analytical model.
7. Conclusions
In a sphere undergoing freezing, the effect of phase
change expansion and thermal contraction have opposite
effects. Expansion causes tensile (positive) radial stress and
compressive tangential stress in the frozen shell. These
stresses gradually tend towards zero, as inner layers freeze
and take up more of the stress. Contraction causes the
opposite effect. The unfrozen core is at uniform and
isotropic stress (uniform pressure). This stress is normally
tensile, because the effect of expansion dominates.
Normally, stresses are determined largely by the bulk
modulus of the unfrozen solid. The mechanical properties of
the frozen food become important only if the unfrozen solid
132 Q.T. Pham et al. / International Journal of Refrigeration 29 (2006) 125–133

Fig. 9. Numerically calculated radial stress history at centre (solid

Fig. 7. Radial stress history at centre (solid line) and five other line) and five other positions (r/RZ0.2–0.995) for non-zero thermal
positions (r/RZ0.2–1) for non-zero thermal contraction. contraction.

is incompressible, or nearly so (Poisson ratio near 0.5), and

at the surface of the food at the beginning of freezing. On the
The results obtained in this paper were derived from the
other hand, strains throughout the sphere are determined by
assumption that the unfrozen food behaves as a solid just
the thermal expansion of the frozen shell, since the unfrozen
before and after freezing. When considering the freezing of
part is too weak to resist the movement of the shell (again,
a liquid, different boundary arise at the freezing front and
except in the case where the unfrozen Poisson ratio is nearly
different conclusions will apply [8].
0.5). The main features of the strain and stress histories are
easy to understand if one visualizes the freezing sphere as
consisting of a flexible core and a stiff expanding frozen
shell, which pull on each other at the interface. Appendix A
In the study and prediction of thermal stresses, since it is
the bulk modulus of the unfrozen material that governs
stresses rather than its Young modulus, this property should A.1. Proof of Eq. (38) for initial tangential stress
be measured directly, instead of or in addition to Eu and nu.
The latter in particular is difficult to determine by direct From Eq. (33), putting xZ1 for the surface:
observation and should not be used to calculate the bulk
modulus.

Fig. 10. Numerically calculated tangential stress history at centre

Fig. 8. Tangential stress history at centre (solid line) and five other (solid line) and five other positions (r/RZ0.2–0.995) for non-zero
positions (r/RZ0.2–1) for non-zero thermal contraction. thermal contraction.
 Q.T. Pham et al. / International Journal of Refrigeration 29 (2006) 125–133 133

1 3 and by applying l’Hopital’s rule

stðconÞðsurfÞ Z A K B
2 2 1 1
lim sðconÞ
t Z
Substituting for A and B:
X/1 2 1 K nf

1 1 1 3 s C ð1=ð1 K nf ÞÞ
stðconÞðsurfÞ Z K b (A1)
2 1 K nf X K 1 2 X3 K 1
References
sb can be shown to be, from Eq. (37):
ðX C X 2 K 2X 3 Þ=ðX 3 K 1Þ [1] N.K. Kim, Mathematical modelling of cryogenic food freezing,
sb Z PhD Dissertation, University of Georgia, Athens, 1993.
ðð2Ef Þ=ð3Ku ÞÞ C 3ðð1 K nf Þ=ðX 3 K 1ÞÞ C 1 C nf
[2] Y.-C. Hung, N.K. Kim, Fundamental aspects of freezing-
At time 0, 1Cnf in the denominator can be neglected: cracking, Food Technol 50 (1996) 59–61.
[3] N.K. Kim, Y.-C. Hung, Freezing-crack in foods as affected by
ðX C X 2 K 2X 3 Þ=ðX 3 K 1Þ physical properties, J Food Sci 59 (1994) 669–674.
sb Z
ðð2Ef Þ=ð3Ku ÞÞ C 3ðð1 K nf Þ=ðX 3 K 1ÞÞ [4] X. Shi, A.K. Datta, Y. Mukherjee, Thermal stresses from large
volumetric expansion during freezing of biomaterials, Trans
If Ef/Ku is zero or finite, it can be neglected and
ASME 120 (1998) 720–726.
1 X C X 2 K 2X 3 [5] X. Shi, A.K. Datta, S. Mukherjee, Thermal fracture in a bio-
sb Z material during rapid freezing, J Therm Stress 22 (1999) 275–292.
3 1 K nf
[6] B. Rubinsky, E.G. Cravalho, B. Mikic, Thermal stresses in
Substituting into Eq. (A1) and letting X tend to 1 eventually frozen organs, Cryobiology 17 (1980) 66–73.
leads to [7] D.Y. Gao, S. Lin, P.F. Watson, J.K. Critser, Fracture phenomena
in an isotonic salt solution during freezing and their elimination
1
lim sðconÞ
t Z using glycerol, Cryobiology 32 (1995) 270–284.
X/1 1 K nf [8] Y. Rabin, P.S. Steif, Thermal stresses in a freezing sphere and its
If Ef/Ku tends to infinity, it dominates the denominator application in cryobiology, Trans ASME 65 (1998) 328–333.
and [9] Abaqus, ABAQUS Inc, Pawtucket, Rhode Island, USA, http://
www.hks.com/.
3Ku X C X 2 K 2X 3 [10] Q.T. Pham, A. Le Bail, M. Hayert, B. Tremeac, Stresses and
sb Z cracking in freezing spherical foods: a numerical model, J
2Ef X3 K 1
Food Eng 71 (2005) 408–418.
Substituting into Eq. (A1) and letting X tend to 1 [11] S. Timoshenko, J.N. Goodier, Theory of elasticity, 2nd ed,
eventually leads to McGraw-Hill, New York, 1951.
[12] Y. Rabin, M.J. Taylor, N. Wolmark, Thermal expansion
1 1 X C X2 K 2
sðconÞ
t Z measurement of frozen biological tissues at cryogenic
2 1 K nf X 3 K 1 temperatures, ASME J Biomech Eng 120 (1998) 259–266.