Muhammad Shoaib Anwar

Modeling and numerical simulations of some fractional
nonlinear viscoelastic flow problems
PhD Thesis
By
Muhammad Shoaib Anwar
Supervised By
Dr. Amer Rasheed
Department of Mathematics,
Lahore University of Management Sciences,
Lahore, Pakistan.
2019
Contents
Contents i
List of Figures iv
List of Tables ix
Publications x
Abstract xi
Introduction 1
1 Modeling with fractional derivatives and solution approach 10

1.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1.2 Fractional derivatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1.2.1 Gamma function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1.2.2 Riemann-Liouville fractional derivative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1.2.3 Caputo fractional derivative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1.3 Fundamental laws . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
1.3.1 Conservation of mass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
1.3.2 Conservation of momentum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
1.3.3 Generalized Fourier’s law and conservation of energy . . . . . . 13
1.3.3.1 Conservation of energy for fractional nanofluids . . . . 13
1.3.4 Generalized Fick’s law and conservation of concentration . . . . 14
1.3.4.1 Conservation of concentration for fractional nanofluids 15
1.3.5 Fractional formalism of homogeneous-heterogeneous reactions . 15
1.4 Cauchy stress tensor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
1.5 Fractional equations of viscoelastic second grade model . . . . . . . . . 17
1.6 Fractional equations of viscoelastic Oldroyd-B model . . . . . . . . . . 17
i
ii contents
1.7 Fractional equations of viscoelastic Maxwell model . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

1.8 Solution methodologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2 Nonlinear MHD flow of viscoelastic fluid with Cattaneo-Maxwell

model 20
2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.2 Mathematical formulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.2.1 Flow problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
2.2.1.1 Flow conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
2.2.1.2 Skin friction coefficient . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
2.2.1.3 Local Nusselt number . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
2.2.1.4 Non-dimensionalization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
2.3 Model discretization scheme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
2.3.1 Finite difference approximations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
2.3.2 Finite element discretization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
2.4 Convergence of scheme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
2.5 Numerical simulations and discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
3 Chemical reactions with non-integer time derivatives in a viscoelastic

fluid flow 42
3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
3.2.1 Mathematical statement of flow problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
3.2.2 Initial and boundary conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
3.2.3 Skin friction coefficient . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
3.2.4 Non-dimensionalization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
3.3 Numerical discretization scheme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
3.3.1 Finite difference approximations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
3.3.2 Finite element discretization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
3.3.3 Algorithm of scheme execution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
3.4 Numerical results and discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
4 Rate type nanofluid flow with Caputo time derivative 61

4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
4.2 Mathematical modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
4.2.1 Flow problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
4.2.1.1 Flow conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
contents iii

4.2.1.3 Nusselt number . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
4.2.1.4 Sherwood number . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
4.3 Solution methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
4.4 Convergence of proposed scheme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
4.4.1 Scheme validation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
4.5 Results and discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
5 Joule heating in magnetic resistive flow of a viscoelastic fluid 86

5.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
5.2 Governing partial differential equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
5.2.0.1 Flow conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
5.2.0.2 Remarkable physical parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
5.2.0.3 Non-dimensional flow equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
5.3 Solution Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
5.3.1 Flowchart of Numerical Scheme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
5.3.2 Convergence of Scheme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
5.4 Discussion on simulated results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
6 Interplay of chemical reacting species in a viscoelatic flow with un-

equal diffusivities 109
6.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
6.2.0.1 Flow conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
6.2.0.3 Local Sherwood Numbers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
6.3 Numerical iteration scheme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
6.4 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
Conclusion 135
Bibliography 137
List of Figures
2.1 Description of Cattaneo-Maxwell heat flux in a viscoelastic flow. . . . 22

2.2 Velocity and temperature numerical error estimates. . . . . . . . . . . 31
2.3 Effects of fractional exponent α and viscoelastic number β on fluid
velocity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
2.4 Effects of magnetic and convection parameters on the velocity profile . 34
2.5 Effects of moving exponent and final time on the velocity profile . . . . 35
2.6 Transient velocity profiles over the time intervals [0,1] and [0,2] . . . . 36
2.7 Effects of fractional exponent and thermal relaxation number on the
temperature profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
2.8 Effects of Prandtl number and thermal conductivity parameter on the
temperature profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
2.9 Transient temperature profiles with various values of involved parameters 40
3.1 Description of concentration flux. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

3.2 Effects of viscoelastic parameter β and magnetic number Ha on fluid
velocity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
3.3 Effects of diffusion parameters on the velocity profile . . . . . . . . . . 53
3.4 Effects of moving exponent and final time on the velocity profile . . . . 54
3.5 Trasient velocity profiles over the time intervals [0,1] and [0,2] . . . . . 55
3.6 Effects of non-integer exponent and Schmidt number on the concen-
tration profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
3.7 Effects of homogeneous-heterogeneous reactions strength on the con-
centration profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
3.8 Effect of relaxation parameter with 2D concentration profile . . . . . . 58
4.1 Physical model. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63

4.2 Numerical scheme validation for velocity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
4.3 Numerical scheme validation for temperature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
iv
list of figures v
4.4 Numerical scheme validation for concentration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71

4.5 Effect of fractional exponents α and β on the velocity profile when
λ1 = 0.4, λ2 = 0.3, λ3 = 0.3, λ4 = 0.4, N t = 0.9, N b = 0.8, Sc = 0.5,
P r = 0.5, γ3 = 0.1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
4.6 Effect of relaxation time parameter λ1 and retardation time parameter
λ2 on the velocity profile when α = 0.8, β = 0.7, λ3 = 0.9, λ4 = 0.8,
N t = 0.9, N b = 0.8, Sc = 0.9, P r = 5, γ3 = 0.1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
4.7 Effect of convection parameter λ3 and diffusion parameter λ4 on the
velocity profile when α = 0.5, β = 0.6, λ1 = 0.9, λ2 = 0.6, N t = 0.1,
N b = 0.2, Sc = 0.5, P r = 0.4, γ3 = 0.1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
4.8 Effect of convection parameter λ3 and diffusion parameter λ4 on the
velocity profile over time interval [0, 3] when α = 0.3, β = 0.2, λ1 =
0.4, λ2 = 0.3, N t = 0.9, N b = 0.8, Sc = 0.5, P r = 0.5, γ3 = 0.1. . . . . 76
4.9 Effect of thermophoresis parameter N t and pedesis parameter N b on
the velocity, temperature and concentration profiles when α = 0.2,
β = 0.1, λ1 = 0.4, λ2 = 0.3, λ3 = 0.8, λ4 = 0.9, P r = 0.7, Sc = 0.5. . . 77
4.10 Effect of Prandtl number P r and Schmidt number Sc on the velocity,
temperature and concentration profiles when α = 0.8, β = 0.1, λ1 =
0.9, λ2 = 0.8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
4.11 Transient velocity profiles for different values of parameters over the
time intervals [0, 1] and [0, 2] when α = 0.8, β = 0.1, λ1 = 0.9, λ2 = 0.8,
λ3 = 0.1, λ4 = 0.9, N t = 0.5, N b = 0.4, Sc = 0.9, P r = 5, γ3 = 0.1. . . 80
time intervals [0, 3] and [0, 4] when α = 0.5, β = 0.7, λ1 = 0.3, λ2 = 0.2,
λ3 = 0.3, λ4 = 0.5, N t = 0.3, N b = 0.5, Sc = 0.4, P r = 0.6, γ3 = 0.1. . 81
4.13 Effects of fractional exponent and Reynold number on skin friction
coefficient over the time interval [0, 1] when β = 0.7, λ1 = 0.1, λ2 = 0.2,
λ3 = 0.3, λ4 = 0.5, N t = 0.3, N b = 0.5, Sc = 0.4, P r = 0.6, γ3 = 0.1. . 82
4.14 Effects of relaxation and retardation time parameters on skin friction
coefficient over the time interval [0, 1] when α = 0.2, β = 0.7, λ3 = 0.3,
λ4 = 0.5, N t = 0.3, N b = 0.5, Sc = 0.4, P r = 0.6, Re = 5, γ3 = 0.1. . . 83
5.1 Schematic of flow geometry. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88

5.2 Numerical error estimate for velocity and temperature. . . . . . . . . . 93
5.3 L2 and H1 error curves for concentration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
vi list of figures
5.4 Effects of magnetic and electric parameters on the velocity profile when
β = 0.1, γ = 0.2, β1 = 0.5, γ1 = 0.6, P r = 0.7, Sc = 0.3, Ec = 0.3,
Ha = 0.8, E1 = 0.2, λ1 = 0.6, λ2 = 0.9, λ3 = 0.1, λ4 = 0.1. . . . . . . . 95
5.5 Effects of relaxation and retardation time parameters on the velocity
profile when α = 0.9, β = 0.3, γ = 0.6, β1 = 0.9, γ1 = 0.4, P r = 0.9,
Sc = 0.8, Ec = 0.5, λ3 = 0.1, λ4 = 0.1, Ha = 0.9, E1 = 0.1. . . . . . . 96
5.6 Effects of magnetic and electric parameters on the velocity profile when
α = 0.7, β = 0.3, γ = 0.2, β1 = 0.4, γ1 = 0.3, P r = 0.8, Sc = 0.7,
Ec = 0.3, λ1 = 0.5, λ2 = 0.2, λ3 = 0.3, λ4 = 0.3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
5.7 Effects of convection and diffusion parameters on the velocity profile
when α = 0.5, β = 0.4, γ = 0.1, β1 = 0.7, γ1 = 0.8, P r = 1.5, Sc = 0.9,
Ec = 0.5, λ1 = 0.7, λ2 = 0.5, Ha = 0.7, E1 = 0.6. . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
5.8 Effects of Prandtl number and thermal relaxation time parameter on
the temperature profile when λ3 = 0.2, α = 0.4, γ = 0.4, λ4 = 0.1,
γ1 = 0.7, n = 1, Sc = 0.5, Ec = 0.7, λ1 = 0.7, λ2 = 0.5, Ha = 0.4,
E1 = 0.6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
5.9 Effects of magnetic and electric parameters on the temperature profile
when α = 0.7, λ3 = 0.1, β1 = 0.8, γ = 0.3, λ4 = 0.2, γ1 = 0.9, n = 1,
Sc = 0.9, Ec = 0.8, λ1 = 0.7, λ2 = 0.9, P r = 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
5.10 Effects of Eckert number on the temperature profile when α = 0.5,
λ3 = 0.1, β1 = 0.7, γ = 0.2, λ4 = 0.2, γ1 = 0.8, n = 1, Sc = 0.6,
Ha = 0.7, E1 = 0.6, λ1 = 0.8, λ2 = 0.9, P r = 0.8. . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
5.11 Effects of Schmidt number and concentration relaxation time param-
eter on the concentration profile. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
time interval [0, 2] when α = 0.7, β = 0.5, γ = 0.9, β1 = 0.8, γ1 = 0.6,
Sc = 0.9, Ha = 0.6, Ec = 0.7, E1 = 0.5, λ1 = 0.7, λ2 = 0.8, λ3 = 0.2,
λ4 = 0.3, P r = 0.5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
5.13 Transient temperature and concentration profiles for different values
of parameters over the time interval [0, 2] when α = 0.1, β = 0.4,
γ = 0.6, n = 1, β1 = 0.5, γ1 = 0.7, Sc = 0.6, Ha = 0.1, Ec = 0.5,
E1 = 0.3, λ1 = 0.5, λ2 = 0.6, λ3 = 0.3, λ4 = 0.3, P r = 0.9. . . . . . . . 105
5.14 Effects of fractional exponent and relaxation parameter on the skin
friction coefficient over time interval [0, 1] when β = 0.4, γ = 0.6,
n = 1, β1 = 0.5, γ1 = 0.7, Sc = 0.6, Ha = 0.1, Ec = 0.5, E1 = 0.3,
λ1 = 0.5, λ2 = 0.6, λ3 = 0.3, λ4 = 0.3, Re = 10, P r = 0.9. . . . . . . . 106
list of figures vii
5.15 Effects of magnetic parameter and Reynold number on the skin friction
coefficient over time interval [0, 1] when α = 0.2, β = 0.4, γ = 0.6,
n = 1, β1 = 0.5, γ1 = 0.7, λ1 = 0.1, Sc = 0.6, Ec = 0.5, E1 = 0.3,
λ1 = 0.5, λ2 = 0.6, λ3 = 0.3, λ4 = 0.3, P r = 0.9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
6.1 Description of homogeneous-heterogeneous catalysis in 2D time frac-

tional flow. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
6.2 Effects of fractional exponent α and relaxation time parameter λ1 on
velocity profile when Ha = 0.4, n = 1.0. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
6.3 Effects of magnetic parameter Ha and moving exponent n on velocity
profiles when α = 0.8, λ1 = 0.5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
6.4 Contour and surface plots of velocity profiles when α = 0.8, λ1 = 0.5,
Ha = 0.5, n = 3.0. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
6.5 Effects of Schmidt number Sc and homogeneous reaction parameter
Kc on concentrations profile when α = 0.5, Ha = 0.2, λ1 = 0.1,
β = 0.7, γ = 0.6, λ2 = 0.4, λ3 = 0.5, ω = 0.1, δ = 0.9. . . . . . . . . . . 120
6.6 Surface plots of concentrations when α = 0.5, Ha = 0.2, λ1 = 0.1,
β = 0.7, γ = 0.6, λ2 = 0.4, λ3 = 0.5, ω = 0.1, δ = 0.9. . . . . . . . . . . 121
6.7 Effects of heterogeneous reaction parameter δ and diffusion coefficients
ratio parameter ω on concentrations profile when α = 0.8, Ha = 0.3,
λ1 = 0.1, β = 0.7, γ = 0.6, λ2 = 0.4, λ3 = 0.5, Kc = 0.8, Sc = 0.3. . . . 124
6.8 Surface plots of concentrations profile when α = 0.8, Ha = 0.3, λ1 =
0.1, β = 0.7, γ = 0.6, λ2 = 0.4, λ3 = 0.5, Kc = 0.8, Sc = 0.3. . . . . . . 125
6.9 Effects of relaxation time parameters λ2 and λ3 on concentrations pro-
file when α = 0.7, Ha = 0.4, λ1 = 0.2, β = 0.7, γ = 0.6, δ = 0.8,
ω = 0.3, Kc = 0.7, Sc = 0.4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
0.2, β = 0.7, γ = 0.6, δ = 0.8, ω = 0.3, Kc = 0.7, Sc = 0.4. . . . . . . . 127
6.11 Effects of fractional exponents β and γ on concentrations profile when
α = 0.5, Ha = 0.2, λ1 = 0.1, λ2 = 0.3, λ3 = 0.2, δ = 0.5, ω = 0.4,
Kc = 0.6, Sc = 0.2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
0.1, λ2 = 0.3, λ3 = 0.2, δ = 0.5, ω = 0.4, Kc = 0.6, Sc = 0.2. . . . . . . 129
6.13 Contour plots of concentration profiles when α = 0.9, Ha = 0.7, λ1 =
0.3, β = 0.6, γ = 0.8, λ2 = 0.1, λ3 = 0.1, δ = 0.4, ω = 0.1, Kc = 0.6,
Sc = 0.1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
viii list of figures
6.14 Effects of Schmidt number Sc and relaxation parameter λ2 on Sh1

when α = 0.5, Ha = 0.5, λ1 = 0.4, β = 0.4, γ = 0.3, n = 1.0,
λ3 = 0.2, δ = 0.5, ω = 0.3, Kc = 0.9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
6.15 Effects of fractional exponent β and heterogeneous reactions parameter
δ on Sh1 when α = 0.1, Ha = 0.3, λ1 = 0.5, λ2 = 0.7, γ = 0.5, n = 1.0,
λ3 = 0.3, Sc = 0.4, ω = 0.5, Kc = 0.8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
6.16 Effects of fractional exponent γ and ratio of diffusion coefficients ω on
Sh2 when α = 0.1, Ha = 0.9, λ1 = 0.8, λ2 = 0.8, β = 0.7, n = 1.0,
λ3 = 0.9, Sc = 0.8, δ = 0.3, Kc = 0.4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
6.17 Effects of Schmidt number Sc and relaxation parameter λ3 on Sh2
when α = 0.6, Ha = 0.2, λ1 = 0.3, λ2 = 0.2, β = 0.5, n = 1.0,
γ = 0.7, ω = 0.4, δ = 0.5, Kc = 0.7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
List of Tables
2.1 Velocity and temperature error estimates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

2.2 Variations of skin friction coefficient with fractional model parameters
at (y, t) = (0, 0.2) with P r = 0.5, = 0.1 and β1 = 0.8 . . . . . . . . . 38
2.3 Thermal gradient variations for different parameters of fractional model
at (y, t) = (0, 0.3). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
3.1 Variations of skin friction coefficient with non linear fractional model
parameters for (y, t) = (0, 0.1), α = 1, Sc = 0.6, K = 0.1, γ1 = 0.1
and δ1 = 0.2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
3.2 Variations of concentration gradient at the boundaries when t = 1. . . 60
4.1 Effects of non linear flow model parameters on the local Nusselt and
sherwood numbers at (y, t) = (1, 2) when γ3 = 0.1 . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
4.2 Effects of non linear flow model parameters on the local Nusselt and
Sherwood numbers at (y, t) = (−1, 2), for γ3 = 0.2 . . . . . . . . . . . 85
5.1 Effects of non linear flow model parameters on the local Nusselt num-
bers at (y, t) = (0, 1), (y, t) = (1, 1) when α = 0.1, n = 1, λ1 = 0.5,
λ2 = 0.6, λ3 = 0.1, and λ4 = 0.1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
5.2 Effects of non linear flow model parameters on the Sherwood number
at (y, t) = (0, 1) and (y, t) = (1, 1). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
6.1 Variations of skin friction coefficient with non linear fractional model
parameters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
ix
List of Publications
1. A. Rasheed, M.S. Anwar, Numerical computations of fractional nonlinear Hart-
mann flow with revised heat flux model, Comput. Math. Appl. 76 (2018)
2421-2433.
2. A. Rasheed, M.S. Anwar, Simulations of variable concentration aspects in a

fractional nonlinear viscoelastic fluid flow, Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer.
Simul. 65 (2018) 216-230.
3. M.S. Anwar, A. Rasheed, Simulations of a fractional rate type nanofluid flow

with non-integer Caputo time derivatives, Comput. Math. Appl. 74 (2017)
2485-2502.
4. M.S. Anwar, A. Rasheed, Joule heating in magnetic resistive flow with fractional
Cattaneo-Maxwell model, J. Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng. 40 (2018) 501.
5. A. Rasheed, M.S. Anwar, Interplay of chemical reacting species in a fractional

viscoelatic fluid flow, J. Mol. Liq. 273 (2019) 576-588.
x
Abstract
Modeling of viscoelastic flows in terms of fractional calculus is an inquisitive area

in engineering and industry. The physical models with fractional operators in non-
Newtonian fluid mechanics represent more realistic behavior of flows involving non-
linear complex dynamics. The efficiency is because of freedom to choose derivative
of any order in the mathematical formulation of the flows. Non-integer derivatives
are important for the systems having hereditary behavior as they depend on the
past conditions along with the local conditions. Viscoelastic fluids keep memory of
old deformations and their behavior is related to these deformations. The fractional
derivatives are more adequate in predicting the characteristics of viscoelastic fluids
than the ordinary derivatives. In literature linear flow problems, with non-integer
derivatives are solved by classical transforms methods. Unfortunately, most of the
viscoelastic fluids unlike Newtonian fluids, are not characterized by only one rela-
tion. Mathematical equations, for the viscoelastic fluid flows are highly nonlinear in
nature. In most of situations, highly nonlinear PDEs cannot be solved exactly, by
existing techniques. Literature survey indicates, that appropriate consideration is not
given to the numerical solutions, of anomalous nonlinear flow problems with non-
integer derivatives. In this study, we have modeled the viscoelastic flow problems via
fractional calculus approach and considered numerical techniques using finite differ-
ence approximations along with ”L1 algorithm” to discretize non-integer derivatives of
time and finite element, discretization is used for space variables, in order to solve the
governing fractional viscoelastic models. Finally we have predicted the behavior of
viscoelastic fluids that can be used directly for the simulations of industrial processes.
xi
Introduction
In introduction, we figure out the existing work in the field of ordinary and fractional
fluid flow problems. Literature review is carried out for the solution methodologies of
these problems. The objectives and importance of current study are stated appropri-
ately. Finally a concise description of each chapter is given in the introduction.
Literature review
Investigations of viscoelastic fluids are noteworthy due to their wide applications in
engineering and industrial processes. More specifically, these fluids are encountered
in polymer brushes, colloidal solutions, exotic lubricants, suspensions, polymer so-
lutions, paints, cosmetic and clay coating products. Flows of visoelastic polymer
solutions and suspensions are discussed extensively, for instance see [1, 2, 3] and the
references therein. Viscoelastic fluids act quite differently than the usual Newtonian
fluids [4]. Characteristics of viscoelastic fluids include stress relaxation, memory, en-
ergy absorption and stress anisotropy. Stresses in viscoelastic fluids are different than
those of Newtonian fluids with the similar deformation history [5]. In order to de-
scribe viscoelastic flow processes various empirical models are proposed in literature.
Particular mathematical model is considered to examine microstructure of a specific
viscoelastic fluid. Simplest models that can describe the viscoelastic features in a
flow are second grade, Maxwell and Oldroyd-B fluid models [6, 7, 8, 9, 10]. Second
grade model exhibits nonlinear response to applied stress but does not keep memory
of past deformations. It can be employed to predict flow situations where changes in
flow field with respect to time is much greater than the fluid relaxation time. Vari-
ation of normal stress in shear flows can be predicted with second grade viscoelastic
model. Second grade model can provide better estimations in case of polymer melts
(silicone oils), molten plastics (coatings), dilute polymer solutions (water solution of
polyethylene oxide, polyisobutylene). Various studies of practical interest are per-
formed with second grade viscoelastic model, for example solution of electroosmotic
fractional second grade fluid flow is examined by Wang et al. [11]. Shang [12] dis-
1
2 Introduction
cussed existence of solution for stochastic second grade fluid model with anticipating
conditions. In order to incorporate stress relaxation time, Maxwell fluid model is in-
troduced to tackle polymer solutions. Chemical reactions in MHD Maxwell nanofluid
flow are analyzed by Afify and Elgazery [13]. Abbasi and Shehzad [14] presented
3D Maxwell fluid flow with modified Fourier’s flux and variable thermal conductivity.
Later, retardation time is considered in polymer liquids by Oldroyd-B model. Re-
tardation time is actually the combination of relaxation time, polymeric and solvent
viscosities. Electroosmotic Oldroyd-B fluid flow with zeta potentials is studied by
Kaushik and Chakraborty [15]. Cylindrical particles orientation in Oldroyd-B fluid
flow with practical interests is examined by Lin et al. [16]. For accurate description
of polymer products, fractional calculus plays an important role in viscoelastic flow
problems [17, 18, 19, 20]. Fractional models are efficient for the viscoelastic analysis
and it has been proven that these models lead to well posed momentum equations
[21]. The studies in [19, 20, 21] demonstrate that fractional models are robust de-
scriptor for real applications. Valuable impact of fractional calculus is observed in
mechanics, viscoelasticity, control theory, particles dynamics, mechatronics and elec-
trochemistry [22, 23, 24]. Physically, fractional derivatives are important than ordi-
nary derivatives due to their significance in accurately simulating and understanding
the physical systems. Modeling via fractional derivatives as compared to ordinary
derivatives improved the solutions accuracy as they keep track of past deformations
in viscoelastic materials [25, 26, 27, 28]. Derivative of non-integer order remained
under debate by Leibniz, Laplace, Fourier, Euler and Lacroix [29]. First appropriate
fractional derivative application to tautochrone problem was made by Abel [29]. Af-
ter that Joseph Liouville successfully applied fractional derivatives to potential theory.
Theory of fractional integrals was developed by Riemann in his student life. First well
known Riemann-Liouville definition of fractional derivative was given by Sonian and
later Letnikov wrote the extension of Sonian work [29]. Caputo [30] definition of frac-
tional derivative is now considered for various applied initial value problems. Physical
viscoelastic problems require fractional derivative with interpretable initial conditions
which is limited in case of Riemann-Liouville definition [31, 32]. Abdullah et al. [33]
investigated nanoparticles blood flow with Caputo derivative. Electroosmotic MHD
flow with Caputo-Fabrizio derivative is analyzed by Abdulhameed et al. [34].
viscoelastic flows are sensitive to the thermal and concentration effects. Fourier’s
and Fick’s laws are used to describe thses effects in flow problems. Precisely, for
industrial point of view, mechanisms are based on concentration gradients and heat-
ing/cooling of moving fluid along the flow field. Therefore investigations of heat and
Introduction 3
mass change in viscoelastic flows are dynamically discussed due to their happening
in industry and technology such as in granular insulation, density machines, crys-
tal growth, fiber technology, nuclear repositories, geothermal extractions, petroleum
reservoirs and fermentation processes. Mass and energy transfer in flow of viscoelas-
tic Sakiadis nanofluid with HNNPSO is examined by Noghrehabadi et al. [35]. Sui
et al. [36] discussed heat and mass transfer with particulate thermophoresis in vis-
coelastic micropolar fluid flow. Reduction of enery transfer in flow of viscoelastic
fluid with RANS model is studied by Masoudian et al. [37]. Temperature and con-
centration disturbance propagate at infinite speed in dynamic problems describe by
Fourier’s and Fick’s laws [38]. Physical problems in science and engineering contradict
with this examination such as MHD generators, combustion engines, nuclear reactors
and supersonic flights. This contradiction was observed initially by Maxwell in 1867.
Cattaneo-Maxwell model was proposed to overcome this difficulty. Hyperbolic equa-
tion for temperature change was incorporated with Cattaneo-Maxwell model instead
of parabolic equation which lead to finite speed of temperature disturbance for non
zero thermal relaxation time [39]. Similar arguments were given to formulate the
generalized Fick’s law [40, 41]. Entransy dissipation in the process of mass transfer
is analyzed with generalized Fick’s law by Xia et al. [42]. Jiang et al. [43] presented
an absorption configuration with revised Fick’s law for non-local systems. Chemical
processes in Burger fluid flow with modified Fourier’s heat and Fick’s mass fluxes are
addressed by Khan et al. [44].
Difference of temperature and concentration in fluid flow is critical in engineer-
ing sciences, material science, environmental science particularly in enhancement of
oil recovery and removel of heat in nuclear plants. Higher thermal and concentra-
tion gradients lead to convection and diffusion in the flow domain. Numerous in-
vestigations are performed to highlight convection and diffusion in viscoelastic flow
problems. Malashetty and Kulkarni [45] explored convective Maxwell fluid instability
using a thermal model. Maxwell fluid stability analysis with diffusion and convection
is discussed by Wang and Tan [46]. Temperature and concentration difference be-
tween different layers of the fluid lead to flow generation via convection and diffusion
[47, 48]. These mechanisms of flow generation have a lot of significance in real world
and potential for future methodologies. By heating/cooling the bounding surface, one
can change density of the fluid adjacent to surface which initiate the movement in
that fluid. Transport of heat and mass due to convection and diffusion are derived by
molecular connections of fluid and gravitational force. Thermal systems in equilibrium
can be used to correlate the existing thermal gradient with challenging mechanisms
4 Introduction
such as systems with variable thermal conductivity [49]. Thermal conductivity usu-
ally varies in viscoelastic flows with temperature and influence the thermal fields [50].
Akinbobola and Okoya [51] analyzed viscoelastic flow with changable viscosity, con-
ductivity and in the presence of heat source. Melting heat transfer in stagnation flow
of micropolar fluid with variable viscosity and thermal conductivity is examined by
Animasaun [52]. Hayat et al. [53] investigated viscoelastic fluid with variable thermal
conductivity and modified Fourier’s flux.
Microscopic description of Joule heating is critical in polymers, electromagnetic
casting and food industries. Joule heating plays a vital role in efficient heating of
continuous viscoelastic flows and wet materials. Joule heating equipment can be used
for various industrial and magnetic applications in a better way as compared to con-
ventional heating equipment [54, 55]. Qayyum et al. [56] analyzed influence of Joule
heating in a comparative study of viscous fluid with five different nanoparticles. Com-
bined effects of Joule heating and viscous dissipation are observed in nanomaterial by
Hayat et al. [57]. Joule heat is formed by the passage of electrical current within
material, result in uniform heating and reduction of metallic contamination. It is a
volumetric heating process with appropriate power utilization [58]. Viscoelastic MHD
fluid that is electrically conducting has extensive practical applications [59, 60]. MHD
plays a vital role in nuclear fusion reactors that are cooled by liquid sodium. Radioac-
tive byproducts along with liquid sodium are usually disposed off by electromagnetic
forces. Additional aspects of MHD can be seen in homopolar generators, astrophysics,
geophysics and fusion power. Ming-Jiu Ni [61] discussed MHD flow applications for fu-
sion phenomena. Bedick et al. [62] developed conductive model for MHD application
in oxy fuels. Analysis of mass and energy transfer in magnetic viscoelastic materials
gained importance in geology, food processing, material science and polymer process-
ing. Sheikholeslami et al. [63] examined heat transfer in MHD nanofluid flow with
Lorentz force effects. Energy transfer in a ferrofluid with nonuniform magnetic effects
is also examined by Sheikholeslami et al. [64]. Irfan et al. [65] studied convective
transport of energy and mass in a Maxwell nanofluid with heat source. Simulations
of energy transfer in time dependent Willliamson flow is given by Hamid et al. [66].
Impact of nanoparticles suspension in viscoelastic fluids is increasing extensively
for the production of light materials, breakdown of organic pollutants and in electro-
spinning for mass production of nanofibers. Nanofibers are electrospun by creating an
electrically charged jet of polymer solution. Nonlinear viscoelastic jets of nanofibers
are important in many industrial processes. Particularly, one can see the influence
of nonlinear rheology on the jet profile during electrospinning [67, 68]. Nanoparticles
Introduction 5
are between atomic and bulk structures. Possibility of nano particles suspension is
due to interaction between the nanoparticles surface and base fluid is strong enough
to overcome the density difference. Industrial advancements usually reduce the size
and increase the heat flux produced by the electronic devices. Thermal problems in
these devices such as over heating decrease life span of these devices. Main reason
for these thermal problems is the heat flux dissipation. For the technology profes-
sionals, it is a challenge to develop cooling systems so that temperature of electronic
devices kept below certain prescribed level. For this, heat transfer rate of electronic
devices can be raised between cooling systems by adding nanoparticles to their work-
ing viscoelastic fluids. Nanoparticles effectively influence the properties of base fluid.
Thermal conductivity of base fluid increases with these particles suspension. First
formulation of nanofluid by the inclusion of nanoparticles in a fluid is given by Choi
[69] in 1995. Afterwards, the investigation of this area of advance working fluid had
been started. Buongiorno [70] proposed a model of nanofluid convective transport
phenomena. Currently this technique is applied in heat exchangers and heat pipes
[71, 72, 73]. Significant investigations are performed to explore different aspects of vis-
coelastic nanofluid flow problems. For instance, Kiran [74] presented convection phe-
nomena in viscoelastic nanofluid with gravity modulation. Viscoelastic Kuvshiniski
nanofluid with thermal convection is discussed by Yadav et al. [75]. Jahan et al. [76]
examined unsteady flow of a nanofluid with regression analyses.
Chemical reactions in viscoelastic flows have received much attention because of
its occurrence in combustion, catalysis and biochemical arrangements. Chemical reac-
tions are mainly classified into two groups i.e., homogeneous and heterogeneous reac-
tions, based on whether they occur in fluid with uniform appearance (homogeneous) or
with nonuniform appearance (heterogeneous). There are chemical processes in which
both chemical reactions occur simultaneously such as catalysis. The association of
homogeneous/heterogeneous chemical reactions is correlated by consumption along
with production of chemical species having unlike rates within the flow domain and
on prescribed catalyst surface. Variation in chemical reacting species along with order
of chemical reaction increase difficulty of constitutive system of differential equations
with the occurrence of independent reactions [77]. In such circumstances, concen-
trations sum may be constant or variable depending upon the flow conditions. Many
synthetically reacting systems incorporate catalysis testing such as hydrometallurgical
industry and polymer production [78]. Homogeneous-heterogeneous reactions have ir-
regular relationship in most of the industrial processes. These reactions may continue
at very slow speed or no reaction even in the presence of catalyst. Researchers are in-
6 Introduction
volved in developing catalytic processes with variable concentrations which essentially

require the happening of homogeneous-heterogeneous reactions simultaneously. Valu-
able utilization of chemical reacting species on catalyst surface as well as in a fluid flow
configuration at different reaction rates is possible due to homogeneous-heterogeneous
reactions. Homogeneous-heterogeneous model for the Newtonian fluid is studied by
Merkin [79]. Chaudhary and Merkin [80] presented homogeneous reactions in a bound-
ary layer flow to explore loss of reactant effects. Homogeneous-heterogeneous reactions
in a isothermal model with equal diffusivities are discussed by Chaudhary and Merkin
[81]. Later on, constant concentrations sum of chemical reacting species is discussed
extensively in literature, for example see [82, 83, 84, 85, 86].
Mathematical models describing the flow of viscoelastic fluids and their deforma-
tions are often coupled and nonlinear. In order to predict more realistic behavior of
viscoelastic fluid flows, we use fractional calculus to model these flow problems. In
literature, linear mathematical models involving fractional derivatives have been ex-
tensively discussed by many researchers for transport phenomena in Newtonian and
viscoelastic fluids whereas realistic flow problems are highly nonlinear in nature. In
past few years numerical solutions of equations with fractional derivatives have be-
come a significant research topic. Various algorithms have been published in literature
for the solutions of fractional differential equations. Many of these numerical meth-
ods have differences in theory and practical implementation [87]. The comparison
of numerical algorithms depend upon stability, convergence and consistency of these
algorithms. Convergence order and consistency may be regarded as benchmark for
assessment of numerical algorithms. It tells about decrease of error with decrease of
step size. Ford and Connolly [88] presented comparative study of numerical meth-
ods for the solutions of differential equations with non-integer derivatives. In this
study, numerical methods used for comparison are The implicit quadrature method,
The predictor-corrector method, The approximate Mittag-Leffler method, Collocation
method, Finite differences methods and Finite element methods. Most of these meth-
ods have been successfully applied to simulate linear fractional differential equations
arising in various engineering applications. Linear fractional models are also solved by
employing the Fourier, Mellin and Laplace transforms [89, 90, 91, 92, 93]. Nonlinear
models with fractional calculus approach are not given appropriate attention. It is
difficult to obtain the exact solution of coupled non-linear equations by the exact so-
lution techniques. Computer simulations are used as an essential tool for engineering
specially for the polymer handling. Optimization of polymer processes such as ex-
trusion can be performed by simulations. The extrusion mechanism can be handeled
Introduction 7
by viscoelastic fluid simulations in a constricting channel. By simulations, complete

flow profile is demonstrated for favorable as well as for unfavorable flow conditions.
Additionally, parametric investigations can be considered to study how flow behavior
is effected by material parameters. It is therefore indispensable to employ numerical
techniques in order to solve viscoelastic nonlinear problems [94, 95, 96, 97, 98].
Objectives and layout of the thesis

The aim of this study is to investigate viscoelastic fluid flows via generalized frac-
tional partial differential equations i.e. to understand memory and stress anisotropy
via constitutive mathematical equations of viscoelastic fluids. In addition, numeri-
cal algorithms will be introduced to simulate fractional nonlinear partial differential
equations using finite element and finite difference techniques. Various flow configura-
tions are considered i.e., flow of viscoelastic fluid with variable thermal conductivity,
fractional nanofluid flow, viscoelastic fluid flow with homogeneous-heterogeneous re-
actions, flow under the influence of applied electric, magnetic fields with Joule heating
and 2-dimensional 2-directional fractional viscoelatic flows. Contents of these inves-
tigations are published in reputable journals of the field. The thesis is structured as
follows:
Chapter 1 comprises the derivation of fractional momentum, energy and concen-
tration equations. Associated nanoparticles suspension and homogeneous-heterogeneous
reactions are also handled with non-integer formalism.
In chapter 2 we studied fractional nonlinear Hartmann flow of viscoelastic fluid.
Thermal conductivity of the fluid is assumed to be variable in this study. Revised
heat flux model is introduced in order to capture more realistic problems of the field.
Mixed convection effects are considered to investigate the influence of gravitational
body forces. Flow boundaries are considered non isothermal. Change in temperature
with respect to time is observed at the boundaries. Governing flow equations are
solved with the proposed algorithm. Error analysis of the scheme is performed in
order to validate our results. Numerical simulations for velocity and temperature are
presented and delineated.
Chapter 3 is dedicated to explore the variable concentration aspects in a vis-
coelatic differential type fluid. Sum of chemical reacting species is assumed to be
variable while evaluating this study. Homogeneous-heterogeneous reactions are con-
sidered in the flow field. Diffusion of chemical reacting species are encountered by
gravitational force. Governing fractional differential equations are coupled nonlinear.
Flow equations are simplified with the assumption of same diffusivity for both the
8 Introduction
chemical reacting species. At the end, influence of material parameters on velocity

and concentration fields are highlighted by graphical as well as by tabular results.
Devotion of chapter 4 is to describe unsteady fractional aspects of viscoelatic
nanofluid flow. Caputo derivative is used to explore memory characteristics. Ther-
mophoresis and pedesis effects are also considered in this communication. Variable
concentration is taken at the boundaries. Governing fractional partial differential
equations with conditions on geometry are solved by finite difference-finite element
scheme. Flow behavior is plotted for different values of physical parameters.
In chapter 5, we have discussed resistive aspects of magnetic field in a nonlinear
viscoelastic flow. Electric field is applied orthogonal to magnetic field in the flow
domain. Microscopic description of Joule heating can be seen with the proposed
model. Fractional formulation of the problem with Cataneo-Maxwell model leads
to oscillation and relaxation processes that show memory and delay of thermal and
diffusing flux. Abrupt change in temperature and concentration in MHD flow can be
controlled with this formalism. Time dependent flow is governed by highly nonlinear
coupled fractional differential equations.
Chapter 6 is devoted to analyze 2-dimensional 2-directional fractional viscoelastic
flow. Homogeneous-heterogeneous reactions are considered in the flow field. Diffusiv-
ities of chemical reacting species are not of comparable size. Concentration relaxation
times are introduced in the flow field via generalized Fick’s law. Governing nonlinear
fractional flow equations are solved by finite difference technique combined with L1
algorithm. Flow simulations are presented for pertinent physical parameters.
Finally, we have summarized our results and propose possible extensions of this
study.
Significance of current studies

Fractional formalism of viscoelastic flows lead to better understanding of various appli-
cations in chemical, food and mechanical industries. Memory parameters in fractional
models can explore viscoelastic characteristics more appropriately than the classical
models. On going studies for viscoelastic flow problems can be augmented with the
help of this generalized work. Variable concentration sum of chemical reacting species
is considered in this thesis, which may be regarded as the valuable extension of stud-
ies [79, 80, 81]. Realistic simulations have been carried out to capture the behavior
of viscoelastic flows using fractional formalism. Moreover, the formulation of stable
numerical algorithms for nonlinear fractional partial differential equations remained
helpful for solution accuracy. In order to validate our numerical scheme, we have
Introduction 9
performed numerical error analysis of the developed scheme for our proposed models.
Also we have presented comparison with the theoretical error estimates in order to
affirm our scheme for the authentication of physical simulations.
Chapter 1
Modeling with fractional

derivatives and solution approach
Contents
1.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1.2 Fractional derivatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1.2.1 Gamma function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1.2.2 Riemann-Liouville fractional derivative . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1.2.3 Caputo fractional derivative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1.3 Fundamental laws . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
1.3.1 Conservation of mass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
1.3.2 Conservation of momentum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
1.3.3 Generalized Fourier’s law and conservation of energy . . . . 13
1.3.4 Generalized Fick’s law and conservation of concentration . 14
1.3.5 Fractional formalism of homogeneous-heterogeneous reactions 15
1.4 Cauchy stress tensor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
1.5 Fractional equations of viscoelastic second grade model 17
1.6 Fractional equations of viscoelastic Oldroyd-B model . . 17
1.7 Fractional equations of viscoelastic Maxwell model . . . 18
1.8 Solution methodologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
10
1.1 Introduction 11
1.1 Introduction
Fractional derivatives and basic principles of transport phenomena are presented in
this chapter. Energy and concentration equations of nanofluid model are presented
for non-integer derivatives. Generalized Fourier’s and Fick’s laws are employed to
incorporate fractional time derivatives in the energy and concentration equations.
Homogeneous-heterogeneous reactions are also included with the fractional formalism.
Finally, governing equations of viscoelastic second grade, Maxwell and Oldroyd-B
fluids are presented.
1.2 Fractional derivatives

1.2.1 Gamma function
Euler gamma function, Γ(z) is utilized as elementary tool in fractional calculus which
generalizes factorial function p! to non-integer and complex values of p. It is defined
as
Z ∞
Γ(z) := e−x xz−1 dx,
0
and converges for Re{z} > 0.
1.2.2 Riemann-Liouville fractional derivative

Following the definition of Grunwald-Letnikov, Riemann-Liouville fractional deriva-
tive is the first appropriate generalization of integer order derivatives [99]. Mathe-
matically, it is stated as
p+1 Z t
β ∂
aDt f (t) := t − τ )p−β f (τ )dτ, p ≤ β < p + 1.
∂t a
1.2.3 Caputo fractional derivative

The definition of Riemann-Liouville played an important role in the theory of frac-
tional calculus. Modern aspects of fractional theory concern with viscoelasticity,
hereditary aspects of mechanics and better understanding of material properties.
Physical problems require that definition of fractional derivative which can interpret
applied initial conditions. The description of initial conditions is not possible with
12 Modeling with fractional derivatives and solution approach
the Riemann-Liouville definition of fractional derivative [99]. In order to solve this

paradox, Caputo proposed new definition of fractional derivative [30]. It is defined as
Z t
α 1 p−α−1 ∂ p
a∂t g(t) := t−τ g(τ )dτ, p − 1 < α < p,
Γ(α − p) a ∂τ p
where α, g(t) ∈ C and p ∈ N.
1.3 Fundamental laws

1.3.1 Conservation of mass
Mass conservation states that mass of an isolated system does not change with time
i.e. mass may changes its form but can not be created in the absence of source/sink.
In flow problems conservation of mass is usually defined by continuity equation as
∂ρf
+ ∇ · (ρf U) = 0, (1.1)
∂t
where ρf stands for fluid density and U is the fluid velocity. For incompressible fluids,
density remained constant and continuity equation is reduced as
∇ · U = 0. (1.2)
1.3.2 Conservation of momentum

Conservation of momentum states that momentum of an isolated system remained
constant and rate of change of momentum of a system is equal to sum of the forces
acting on that system i.e.
Rate of change of momentum = Surface forces + Body forces.
Mathematically,
dU d ∂
ρf = ∇ · T + ρf b with = + U · ∇. (1.3)
dt dt ∂t
In above equations, T stands for Cauchy stress tensor and b denotes per unit mass
body force.
1.3 Fundamental laws 13
1.3.3 Generalized Fourier’s law and conservation of energy

Temperature change with fractional derivatives is incorporated by generalized Fourier
law. Thermal flux q and temperature T with thermal conductivity k are related by
Fourier’s law
q = −k∇T. (1.4)
Generalized Fourier’s law was given by Cattaneo [39]
∂q
q + τ1 = −k∇T, (1.5)
∂t
where τ1 stands for thermal relaxation time. Fractional modified form of (1.5) is
defined as [102]
τ1α ∂α

1+ q = −k∇T. (1.6)
Γ (1 + α) ∂tα
First law of thermodynamics is used to observe the change in temperature i.e.
dT
= −∇ · q. (1.7)
dt
τ1α ∂α

Applying the operator, 1 + on equation (1.7) and using equation
Γ (1 + α) ∂tα
(1.6) we get the required energy equation
τ1α ∂α

d
ρf cf 1+ T = k∇2 T, (1.8)
dt Γ (1 + α) ∂tα
here cf stands for specific heat of the fluid.
1.3.3.1 Conservation of energy for fractional nanofluids
Energy equation for the nanofluids is given by Buongiorno [70]
dT
ρ f cf = −∇ · qn + hp ∇ · Jp , (1.9)
dt
where hp stands for specific enthalpy of nanoparticles, qn is energy flux relative to
nanofluid velocity and Jp denotes nanoparticles diffusion mass flux. These quantities
are defined as
∇C
qn = −k∇T + hp Jp and Jp = −ρp DB ∇C − ρp DT ,
T0
where DB , DT are diffusion coefficients and T0 stands for reference temperature. In
modified fractional form we may write qn and Jp as
τ2α ∂α τ2α ∂α

1+ qn = −k∇T + hp 1+ Jp
Γ (1 + α) ∂tα Γ (1 + α) ∂tα
and
τ2α ∂α

∇C
1+ Jp = −ρp DB ∇C − ρp DT .
Γ (1 + α) ∂tα T0
Using modified qn and Jp in (1.9) we have
τ2α ∂ α dT τ2α ∂α

2
ρ f cf 1 + = k∇ T − 1 + Jp · ∇hp . (1.10)
Γ (1 + α) ∂tα dt Γ (1 + α) ∂tα
Using the assumption ∇hp = cp ∇T given by [70], equation (1.10) is reduced to energy
equation in nanofluids with fractional derivative as
τ2α ∂ α dT τ2α ∂α

2
ρ f cf 1 + = k∇ T − ρp cp 1 +
Γ (1 + α) ∂tα dt Γ (1 + α) ∂tα

DT
DB ∇C · ∇T + ∇T · ∇T , (1.11)
T0
here τ2 stands for the relaxation time.
1.3.4 Generalized Fick’s law and conservation of concentra-

tion
For concentration change in terms of fractional derivatives, we shall use the modified
fractional form of generalized Fick’s law. Flux vector J and concentration C with
diffusion coefficient DA are related by first Fick’s law [100] as
J = −DA ∇C. (1.12)
Infinite propagation speed for concentration is predicted by (1.12) which contradicts

physical situations. Later on this paradox is resolved by generalized Fick’s first law
[101]
∂J
J + τ3 = −DA ∇C, (1.13)
∂t
where τ3 stands for concentration relaxation time. In this study, we shall consider the
fractional modified form of (1.13) given by Jumire [102, 103]
τ3α ∂α

1+ J = −DA ∇C, (1.14)
Γ (1 + α) ∂tα
here α denotes Caputo fractional derivative such that 0 ≤ α ≤ 1. Equation (1.14)
gives better understanding of oscillation and relaxation processes with memory and
1.3 Fundamental laws 15
delay of diffusing flux. Fick’s second law is used to observe the change in concentration
i.e.
dC
= −∇ · J. (1.15)
dt
τ3α ∂α

Operating 1 + on equation (1.15) and using equation (1.14), we get
Γ (1 + α) ∂tα
the required concentration equation
τ3α ∂α

d
1+ C = DA ∇2 C. (1.16)
dt Γ (1 + α) ∂tα
1.3.4.1 Conservation of concentration for fractional nanofluids
The concentration equation for the nanofluids is given by Buongiorno [70]

dC 1
= − ∇ · Jp . (1.17)
dt ρp
After using modified fractional form Jp , (1.17) is reduced to the concentration equation
of nanofluids with fractional derivatives as
τ2α ∂ α dC

DT 2
1+ α
= DB ∇2 C + ∇ T. (1.18)
Γ (1 + α) ∂t dt T0
1.3.5 Fractional formalism of homogeneous-heterogeneous re-

actions
The homogeneous-heterogeneous reactions in the fluid flow are described by Chaud-
hary and Merkin [79, 80]. Homogeneous reactions in the flow field for cubic autocatal-
ysis is defined as
A + B → 3B, rate = kc ab2 ,
while heterogeneous reaction on the prescribed reactant surface is given by
A → B, rate = ks a.
In above relations, kc and ks are the rate constants of homogeneous and heterogeneous
reactions, a, b denote chemical concentrations of species A, B respectively. According
to given assumption in [79, 80] and employing the conservation of concentrations,
homogeneous-heterogeneous reactions are governed by below given equations
da
= DA∗ ∇2 a − kc ab2 , (1.19)
dt
db
= DB ∗ ∇2 b + kc ab2 . (1.20)
dt
Using fractional formalism, generalized governing equations for homogeneous-heterogeneous

reactions are given by

d 2
1+ a = DA∗ ∇ a − kc 1 + ab2 , (1.21)
dt Γ (1 + α) ∂tα Γ (1 + α) ∂tα

d 2
1+ b = DB ∗ ∇ b + kc 1 + ab2 , (1.22)
dt Γ (1 + α) ∂tα Γ (1 + α) ∂tα
here DA∗ , DB ∗ are the diffusion coefficients and τ4 , τ5 denote relaxation times.
1.4 Cauchy stress tensor

In order to capture different aspects of viscoelatic fluids, various mathematical models
are proposed in literature [1, 2, 4, 5]. Cauchy stress tensor T plays a vital role in
specification of particular type of a fluid. In classical Newtonian fluids, stress depends
upon the rate of deformation whereas for the case of viscoelastic fluids T may evolve
in memory dependent nonlinear way via partial differential equation. In order to
tackle the particular nature of fluid and its deformation to applied stress, we consider
general form of Cauchy stress tensor i.e.
T = −pI + S, (1.23)
here p stands for pressure, I denotes identity operator and S stands for extra stress ten-
sor that incorporates stresses of the material. Cauchy stress tensor for the viscoelatic
second grade, Maxwell and Oldroyd-B models in fractional formalism are given by
T = −pI + S = −pI + µAa + α1 Ab + α2 A2a ,
∂ αS
T = −pI + S, S + λα1 = µAa ,
∂tα
α β

α∂ S β ∂ Aa
T = −pI + S, S + λ1 α = µ Aa + λ2 , (1.24)
∂t ∂tβ
where α1 , α2 are the moduli of normal stress, Aa , Ab stand for first and second Rivlin-
Ericksen tensors, µ denotes kinematic viscosity, λ1 , λ2 are relation and retardation
times and α, β represent Caputo fractional derivative as introduced by Friedrich [104]
for Maxwell model. Stress tensors in (1.24) are defined as
∂Aa
Aa = (∇U) + (∇U)† and Ab = + (U · ∇) Aa + Aa (∇U) + (∇U)† Aa .
∂t
1.5 Fractional equations of viscoelastic second grade model 17
1.5 Fractional equations of viscoelastic second grade

model
We consider the one dimensional unsteady flow of second grade fluid using Cartesian
coordinates. The velocity field is described as U = u(y, t)ex . Continuity equation is
identically satisfied and in the absence of body forces momentum equation is derived
by
dU d ∂
ρf =∇·T with = . (1.25)
dt dt ∂t
Finally with this configuration, we have
∂U
ρf = ∇ · T. (1.26)
∂t
Stress tensors are given by

∂ ∂u
   
∂u
0 0
 0 ∂y 0 
∂t ∂y2
 
∂u
   
Aa =  ∂ ∂u ∂u
0 0 , Ab = 
 

 ∂y
 2 0 
  ∂t ∂y ∂y 
0 0 0 0 0 0
and  2 
∂u ∂ ∂u
 −p − α1 µ + α1 0
∂y ∂t ∂y

 2 
T= ∂ ∂u ∂u .
 
 µ + α1 −p + α1 0 
 ∂t ∂y ∂y 
0 0 −p
∂p
Using these stress tensors and assuming = 0, governing equation for the second
∂x
grade model is
∂ ∂ 2u

∂u
ρf = µ + α1 , (1.27)
∂t ∂t ∂y 2
2 !
∂ ∂u
with gradient of pressure defined as, ∇p = 0, α1 ,0 .
∂y ∂y
1.6 Fractional equations of viscoelastic Oldroyd-B

model
The derivation of Oldroyd-B fractional flow equation with velocity field U = u(y, t)ex
is described as in equation (1.26), where T and S are given by (1.24). Stress tensor for
∂ αS β

β ∂ Aa
Oldroyd-B model is defined as S+λα1 α = µ Aa + λ2 . By applying operator
∂t ∂tβ
α

α ∂
1 + λ1 α on both sides of momentum equation (1.26), we arrive at
∂t
α α

α ∂ ∂U α ∂
ρf 1 + λ1 α = 1 + λ1 α ∇ · T. (1.28)
∂t ∂t ∂t
We may write (1.28) as
α α α

α ∂ ∂U α ∂ α ∂
ρf 1 + λ1 α = − 1 + λ1 α ∇p + 1 + λ1 α ∇ · S. (1.29)
∂t ∂t ∂t ∂t
Using stress tensor for Oldroyd-B model, (1.29) can be written as
α α β

α ∂ ∂U α ∂ β ∂
ρf 1 + λ1 α = − 1 + λ1 α ∇p + µ 1 + λ2 β ∇ · Aa , (1.30)
∂t ∂t ∂t ∂t
2
∂ u
here ∇·Aa is defined as ∇·Aa = ex . The governing equation for the Oldroyd-B
∂y 2
model yields
α β
2
α ∂ ∂u β ∂ ∂ u
ρf 1 + λ1 α = µ 1 + λ2 β , (1.31)
∂t ∂t ∂t ∂y 2
with pressure gradient ∇p = (0, 0, 0).
1.7 Fractional equations of viscoelastic Maxwell model

We formulate fractional equations for the Maxwell fluid in this section. Two dimen-
sional and two directional velocity field is considered for this fractional problem i.e.
U = [u(x, y, t), v(x, y, t), 0]. Equation of continuity and momentum equation for 2D
flow are
∂u ∂v
+ = 0, (1.32)
∂x ∂y
dU
ρf = ∇ · T. (1.33)
dt
α

α ∂
By applying operator 1 + λ1 α on both sides of momentum equation (1.33), we
∂t
obtain
α α α

α ∂ dU α ∂ α ∂
ρf 1 + λ1 α = − 1 + λ1 α ∇p + 1 + λ1 α ∇ · S. (1.34)
∂t dt ∂t ∂t
After using stress tensor for Maxwell model we can write (1.34) in the following form
α α

α ∂ dU α ∂
ρf 1 + λ1 α = − 1 + λ1 α ∇p + µ∇ · Aa . (1.35)
∂t dt ∂t
1.8 Solution methodologies 19
For the velocity field U = [u(x, y, t), v(x, y, t), 0], Aa is calculated as
 
∂u ∂u ∂v
 2 ∂x ∂y ∂x
+ 0 
∂u ∂v ∂v
 
Aa =  + 2 0 ,

 ∂y ∂x ∂y 
0 0 0
and for ∇ · Aa , we have
2
∂ u ∂ 2u ∂ 2v
2
∂ v ∂ 2v ∂ 2u

∇ · Aa = 2 2 + 2 + ex + 2 2 + 2 + ey . (1.36)
∂x ∂y ∂x∂y ∂y ∂x ∂x∂y
In the components form equation (1.35) is written as
α α
2
∂ u ∂ 2u ∂ 2v

α ∂ ∂u ∂u ∂u α ∂ ∂p
ρ f 1 + λ1 α +u +v = − 1 + λ1 α +µ 2 2 + 2 + ,
∂t ∂t ∂x ∂y ∂t ∂x ∂x ∂y ∂x∂y
α α
2
∂ v ∂ 2v ∂ 2u

α ∂ ∂v ∂v ∂v α ∂ ∂p
ρ f 1 + λ1 α +u +v = − 1 + λ1 α +µ 2 2 + 2 + ,
∂t ∂t ∂x ∂y ∂t ∂y ∂y ∂x ∂x∂y
α

α ∂ ∂p
1 + λ1 α = 0. (1.37)
∂t ∂z
In the absence of pressure gradient along with using boundary layer theory, we obtain
the governing equation for fractional Maxwell fluid from the set of equations (1.37) as
α
∂ 2u

α ∂ ∂u ∂u ∂u
ρf 1 + λ1 α +u +v = µ 2. (1.38)
∂t ∂t ∂x ∂y ∂y
1.8 Solution methodologies

Viscoelastic flow problems are usually governed by nonlinear differential equations.
Nonlinear fractional differential equations are difficult to solve by Fourier, Mellin and
Laplace transforms as various researchers do in case of linear fractional differential
equations. In order to tackle the issue of nonlinearity in viscoelastic flow problems
different numerical algorithms are proposed in literature. Comparative study of these
numerical algorithms is discussed by Ford and Connolly [88]. In accordance with [88],
we have used finite element-finite difference and finite difference-L1 [105] algorithms to
solve governing nonlinear fractional partial differential equations. These methods are
flexible, for solution of nonlinear problems. Discretization of time variable is carried
by L1 algorithm. For the discretization of space variables, finite element and finite
difference techniques are used in these algorithms. Numerical as well as theoretical
error estimates are also given to check the accuracy of proposed algorithms. These
algorithms are discussed with detail in the subsequent chapters.
Chapter 2
Nonlinear MHD flow of viscoelastic

fluid with Cattaneo-Maxwell model
Contents
2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.2 Mathematical formulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.2.1 Flow problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
2.3 Model discretization scheme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
2.3.1 Finite difference approximations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
2.3.2 Finite element discretization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
2.4 Convergence of scheme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
2.5 Numerical simulations and discussion . . . . . . . . . . . 32
20
2.1 Introduction 21
2.1 Introduction
In this chapter, we have examined the magnetohydrodynamic flow of viscoelastic fluid
with Cattaneo-Maxwell model and variable thermal conductivity. Effects of gravita-
tional body force, are analyzed via convection. Energy transfer, in flow field is stud-
ied by incorporating modified fractional thermal gradient. Non-integer derivatives
are used for effective analysis of thermal behavior. Temperature gradient exists be-
tween the flow boundaries and it increases with the passage of time. Flow is induced
by moving the boundary of flow domain. All the segments of numerical modeling
are completely described i.e. physical configuration, mathematical formulation, sim-
ulation, prediction, validation and verification. Unsteady motion of incompressible
viscoelastic fluid is governed by partial differential equations. Governing flow equa-
tions with suitable initial and boundary conditions have been discretized using finite
difference-finite element technique. Theoretical error estimates are speculated and
developed numerical plan has been validated by performing numerical error investiga-
tion concerning spatial directions. We have showed the error estimation in logarithmic
scales of L2 (Ω) and H 1 (Ω) norms by considering unique estimations of the space dis-
cretization and plotted the error curves. Nusselt number and coefficient of skin friction
are calculated for viscoelastic model. Flow field is demonstrated for different values
of involved parameters. The acquired results showed that fractional exponent α has
opposite effects on the velocity and temperature profiles for the final time t = 2. Ther-
mal relaxation and variable thermal conductivity parameters have opposite effects on
the temperature profile.
2.2 Mathematical formulation

Consider second grade fluid flow between infinite plates. These plates are parallel with
positions at y = 0 and y = L. We consider the modified Cattaneo-Maxwell heat flux
model in order to describe the heat transfer in unsteady flow regime of viscoelastic
fluid. Fluid starts moving by variable movement of lower plate. Lorentz force is also
incorporated in mathematical modeling of the flow field. Effects of mixed convection
are considered while analyzing the flow domain, which is the general case of convection
when a flow is determined simultaneously by outer energy supply and inner forces.
At initial time t = 0, the whole configuration is still with reference temperature T0 .
At the point when time t > 0, fluid moves by movement of lower boundary. Velocity
and temperature depend on t and y i.e. u = u(y, t) and T = T (y, t). Flow under
22 Nonlinear MHD flow of viscoelastic fluid with Cattaneo-Maxwell model
consideration is one dimensional and unidirectional, therefore other components of

velocity field do not contribute in the flow domain.
Applied Magnetic Field

Heated Wall
Fluid Flow
y T (y, t)
u (y, t)
Heated Wall
Variable Thermal Conductivity

K(T) = Ko (1 + cT)
T (y, t)
c>0
c=0
c<0
x
0 L
Figure 2.1: Description of Cattaneo-Maxwell heat flux in a viscoelastic flow.
Remark 2.2.1 Thermodynamic stability conditions for the viscoelastic second grade
fluid are given by [11]
µ ≥ 0, α1 ≥ 0 and α1 + α2 = 0. (2.1)
Cattaneo-Maxwell heat flux with variable thermal conductivity is defined as [39]

∂q
q + τ1 = K(T )∇T, (2.2)
∂t
here K(T ) denotes variable thermal conductivity, τ1 is the thermal relaxation time,
T denotes the temperature and q is the heat flux. In the governing thermal field, we
shall consider the fractional modified form of (2.2) given by Jumire [102]
τ1α ∂α

1+ q = k(T )∇T, (2.3)
Γ(1 + α) ∂tα
2.2 Mathematical formulation 23
where α is Caputo fractional derivative such that 0 ≤ α ≤ 1. The equation (2.3)

gives better understanding of relaxation time processes with delay of thermal flux.
We presume that variable thermal conductivity depends upon temperature in a linear
manner and defined as K(T ) = K0 (1 + cT ). In this expression, K0 is the reference
thermal conductivity and c denotes small parameter for temperature contributions.
All cases of variable thermal conductivity K(T ) = K0 (1 + cT ) are discussed i.e. when
c < 0, c = 0 and c > 0.
2.2.1 Flow problem

Flow equations that can describe adequately the present flow field are given in sections,
1.3.3 and 1.5 of chapter 1. Continuity equation is identically satisfied by the flow field
U = u(y, t)ex and (U · ∇)U ≡ 0. We get following governing mathematical equations,
after elimination of q from (2.3) and energy equations as
2
∂u ∂ ∂ u
ρf = µ + α1 2
− σB02 u + ρgβT (T − T0 ), (2.4)
∂t ∂t ∂y
2
τ1α ∂α ∂ 2T

∂ ∂T
ρ f cf 1+ α
T = K0 (1 + cT ) 2 + K0 c . (2.5)
∂t Γ(1 + α) ∂t ∂y ∂y
In above equations B0 is applied magnetic field, ρf > 0 stands for density of the fluid,
g is gravitational acceleration, cf denotes specific heat, βT stands for coefficient of
volumetric thermal expansion and T0 is the reference temperature. Pressure gradient
is assumed to be absent in the flow field.
2.2.1.1 Flow conditions
The fractional flow of viscoelastic fluid is considered between infinite plates. At time
t = 0, there is no motion in the flow regime and the temperature of fluid remained
constant. After the initial time fluid starts moving by the variable acceleration of the
lower plate and it is observed that temperature of the fluid increases with the passage
of time. Suitable conditions at the boundaries can be defined as
ν n
u (0, t) = u0 t , u (L, t) = 0, (2.6)
L2
ν2 2

T (0, t) = T0 1 + 4 t and T (L, t) = T0 t > 0, (2.7)
L
and initial conditions are defined by
∂T
u(y, 0) = 0, T (y, 0) = T0 , and (y, 0) = 0 |y| ≤ L. (2.8)
∂t
Where u0 stands for reference velocity, ν is kinematic viscosity, T0 is the reference

temperature and n denotes the variable exponent. Finally IBVP for the current flow
is modeled by (2.4)–(2.8).
2.2.1.2 Skin friction coefficient
Friction factor should be considered in order to completely predict the velocity field in
a flow regime. Skin friction coefficient is valuable tool to capture the frictional aspects
in a fluid flow. In current flow regime coefficients of skin friction is computed as
2τw
Cf := , (2.9)
ρu20
where shear stress at the boundary is defined as

∂ ∂u
τw = µ + α1 . (2.10)
∂t ∂y y=0
2.2.1.3 Local Nusselt number
Local surface heat flux is important while analyzing the heat transfer in a fluid flow.
Nusselt Number is non dimensional heat transfer coefficient which provides compari-
son between the convection and conduction heat transfer rates. Both the conductive
and convective heat flows are measured normal to the surface. In the current flow
field Nusselt number is defined as follows

−L ∂T
τ1α ∂α

∂y
y=0
1+ α
Nu = , (2.11)
Γ(1 + α) ∂t Ts − T0
where Ts denotes the temperature of bounding surface.
2.2.1.4 Non-dimensionalization
Suitable dimensionless quantities are used in order to make the IBVP (2.4)–(2.8)
dimensionless
y ν u T − T0
yb := , t := 2 t u
b b := , Tb := . (2.12)
L L u0 T0
Using dimensionless quantities in (2.12) and dropping hats, the IBVP (2.4)–(2.8) takes
the following form
2
∂u ∂ ∂ u
= 1+β − Hau + λ3 T,
∂t ∂t ∂y 2
2.3 Model discretization scheme 25
2
∂α ∂ 2T ∂ 2T

∂ ∂T
Pr 1 + β1 α T = (1 + ) 2 + T 2 + , (2.13)
∂t ∂t ∂y ∂y ∂y
together with following conditions

u(0, t) = tn , T (0, t) = t2 , u(1, t) = 0 = T (1, t),
∂u ∂T (2.14)
u(y, 0) = 0 = T (y, 0) and (y, 0) = 0 = (y, 0),
∂t ∂t
with β stands for viscoelastic parameter, λ3 is convection parameter, Ha is magnetic
number, P r is Prandtl number, β1 denotes thermal relaxation number and stands
for thermal conductivity number. These dimensionless numbers are mathematically,
stated as
α1 σB02 L2 gL2 βT T0
β := , Ha := , λ3 := ,
ρ f L2 µ u0 ν
µcf τ α1ν α
P r := , β1 := , := cT0 . (2.15)
K0 Γ(1 + α)L2α
Also non-dimensional forms of skin friction coefficient and Nusselt number are stated
as
∂α N u

ReCf ∂ ∂u ∂T
= 1+β and 1 + β1 α 2
=− , (2.16)
2 ∂t ∂y y=0 ∂t Re ∂y y=0
u0 L
here Re = represents the Reynold number.
ν
2.3 Model discretization scheme

This section demonstrates the developed scheme and discretization of the problem
(2.13)-(2.14). The discretization of time variable is carried out via finite difference for
non-integer Caputo derivative and finite element discretization has been considered
for space variables. For more details, reader is referred to [106] and references therein.
The well-posedness of alike problems can be confirmed in mention spaces, refer to
[107]. As a consequence, we have considered that stated problem is not ill-posed.
For discretization and weak formulation of governing model (2.13)-(2.14), we require
some appropriate functional spaces.
Space L2 (Ω) is the classical Lebesgue space of squared-integrable functions over the
domain Ω = (0, 1), alogwith classical L2 norm and inner product. The space Hp (Ω)
is Sobolev space for p > 0 and H0p (Ω) is a subspace of Hp (Ω) and a closure of C0∞ (Ω)
in Hp (Ω) where C0∞ (Ω) is the classical space of infinitely differentiably continuous
functions having compact support in the domain Ω; for more details, see for example
[108]. Moreover, we define the space
H1p (Ω) = u ∈ Hp (Ω) u|y=0 = 0, u|y=1 = 0 .

and L2 (Ω) = L2 (Ω) × L2 (Ω), Hp1 (Ω) = H1p (Ω) × H1p (Ω) and Hp0 (Ω) = H0p (Ω) × H0p (Ω).
Consider, C 0 (0, tf ; V(Ω)) be a space defined from [0, tf ] to V together with inner
product and norm given below
Z tf Z tf 1/2
2
(u, v)C 0 (0,tf ;V(Ω)) := (u, v)V(Ω) dt and kukC 0 (0,tf ;V(Ω)) := kukV(Ω) dt .
0 0
and for k ∈ N,

C k ([0, tf ]; V(Ω)) := u ∈ C 0 ([0, tf ]; V(Ω)) u|t=0 = t2 ,
∂tj u ∈ C 0 ([0, T ]; V(Ω)) , ∀j ≤ k : j ∈ N,
with the norm defined by

k

kukC k ([0,tf ];V(Ω)) := max ∂tj u C 0 ([0,t ) .
j=0 f ];V(Ω)
is a space of k − times continuously differentiable functions u : [0, tf ] → V where

C 0 ([0, tf ]; V(Ω)) is the space of continuous functions with the norm defined by
kukC 0 ([0,tf ];V(Ω)) := max kukV .

t∈[0,tf ]
2.3.1 Finite difference approximations

The time variable in the model (2.13)-(2.14) has been discretized using finite difference
technique. The time domain [0, tf ], where tf > 0 is final time, is discretized by
t
choosing a fix time step τ := mf , such as tk := kτ where k = 0, 1, 2, · · · , m. Consider
the following approximations of time derivatives at a fixed time tk , when 0 < k < m
∂u u(y, tk+1 ) − u(y, tk )
(y, tk+1 ) ' , tk ≤ s ≤ tk+1 , (2.17)
∂t τ
also when k = 0, we have u(y, t0 ) = tn .
The non-integer time derivative ∂tα (0 < α < 1) when 0 ≤ k < m is approximated
using Caputo definition
Z t
α 1 ∂m
∂t φ(t) := (t − τ )m−α−1 m φ(τ )dτ, m − 1 < <e{α} < m, m ∈ N,
Γ(m − α) 0 ∂τ
(2.18)
2.3 Model discretization scheme 27
with the Gamma function Γ(·) defined by

Z
Γ(z) := ξ z−1 e−ξ dξ, z ∈ C, <{z} > 0.
R
It is of worth mention that non-integer time derivative ∂tα φ coincides with the classical
integer order derivative ∂tm φ when the fractional order parameter α → m with m−1 <
α < m for m to be an integer. We define the operator
∂ (α+1)

α ∂
Lt [T (·)] (t) := + β1 (α+1) [T (t)] .
∂t ∂t
The finite difference approximations of operator Lαt [T ] can be defined as
∂ α+1

α ∂
Lt [T ](tk+1 ) = + β1 α+1 [T ] (tk+1 ),
∂t ∂t
T (tk+1 ) − T (tk )
+ Cα ψkα [T ] − ψk−1
α

' [T ]
h i τ
+Cα T (tk+1 ) − 2T (tk ) + T (tk−1 ) ,
Cα = β1 τ −α /Γ(2 − α) and where bαs := (s + 1)1−α − (s)1−α , for 0 ≤ s ≤ m and

k
X h i
ψkα [a] := bαs T (y, tk+1−s ) − T (y, tk−s ) with ψ0α [T ] := 0. (2.19)
s=1
2.3.2 Finite element discretization

The space variable y in governing model (2.13)-(2.14), has been discretized in this
section. We start by defining domain interval partition i.e. Ω = [0, 1] as
n
[
i. Ω = Ωi , with Ωi = (yi , yi+1 ),
i=1
\
ii. Ωi Ωj = ∅, ∀ i 6= j.
for i, j = 1, 2, 3, 4, ..., n. Elements Ωi are supposed to be of fix length h and h :=

yi+1 − yi . Moreover, we define finite dimensional, subspace V1h (Ω) h>0 of H11 (Ω)

V1h (Ω) := φ∈ H11 (Ω) φ| ∈ P r(Ωi ), ∀i = 0, 1, 2, · · · , n ,
Ωi
(2.20)
with P r(Ωi ) is a space of Lagrange polynomials, with polynomials of degree r. Let

Vh1 (Ω) = V1h (Ω) × V1h (Ω) and Vh0 (Ω) = V0h (Ω) × V0h (Ω), where V0h (Ω) is the subspace
of classical space H01 (Ω).

The weak formulation of the model problem (2.13)-(2.14) can then be obtained by
Weak formulation: Compute (u, T ) ∈ C1 ([0, tf ]; H11 (Ω)) and for all, (v, S) ∈ H10 (Ω)
such that



 ∂t (u, v) + (1 + β∂t ) hu, vi + Ha (u, v) − λ3 (T, v) = 0,

 2 2 !
 ∂ T ∂T
P rLαt (T, S) + (1 + ) hT, Si − T 2 , S −

, S = 0, (2.21)
 ∂y ∂y


u(y, 0) = 0, T (y, 0) = 0 = ∂T (y, 0).



∂t
Moreover, the weak form (2.21) can be utilized to achieve discrete weak form for
specific time t = tk , when 0 < k < m,
Discrete weak formulation: Find (uh (·, tk+1 ), T (·, tk+1 )) ∈ Vh1 (Ω) such that



 ∂t (uh (y, tk+1 ), v) + (1 + β∂t ) huh (y, tk+1 ), vi + Ha (uh (y, tk+1 ), v)





 −λ3 (Th (y, tk+1 ), v) = 0,

P rLα (T (y, t ), S) + (1 + ) hT (y, t ), Si

t h k+1 h k+1
2
2 !
 ∂ Th (y, tk+1 ) ∂T h (y, tk+1 )
− Th (y, tk+1 ) ,S − , S = 0,


∂y 2 ∂y








 0
uh (y) = 0, Th0 (y) = 0,
for all (v, S) ∈ Vh0 (Ω). here u0h (·) = uh (·, t0 ) and Th0 (·) = T (·, t0 ). In order to
approximate the solution (uh , Th ), we employ the following ansatz
N1h
X p
uh (y, tk+1 ) = up (tk+1 )W1h (y), y ∈ Ω, (2.22)
p=1
N1h
X p
Th (y, tk+1 ) = Tp (tk+1 )W1h (y), y ∈ Ω, (2.23)
p=1
p
here W1h = {W1h | p = 1, 2, · · · , N1h } used as basis of V1h (Ω) with N1h := dim(V1h )
and the parameters (up , Tp ) are the unknowns to be computed. Choosing v and S as
q
W1h for q = 1, 2, · · · , N1h , finally, we have obtained the following system of nonlinear
algebraic equations

h h h h
M1 D1,k+1 [Uh ] + N1 D2,k+1 [Uh ] + HaM1 Uh − λ3 M1 Th = 0,



P rMh2 Lαk+1 [Th ] + (1 + ) N2h Th − G1 (Th ) − G2 (Th ) = 0, (2.24)


U0 = 0, T0 = 0 = T1 ,

h h h
2.4 Convergence of scheme 29
where for all p, q = 1, 2, · · · , N1h ,

p q q p q p
(N1h )qp := hW1h , W1h i, (Mh2 )qp := (W1h , W1h ) , (N2h )qp := hW1h , W1h i,
p q
(Uh )p := up , (Th )p := Tp , (Mh1 )qp := (W1h , W1h ),
!
2
∂ 2 Th

p ∂Th p
(G1 )p := Th 2 , W1h , (G2 )p := , W1h .
∂y ∂y
The system of non-linear algebraic equations (2.24) have been computed by using New-
ton’s Method in order to obtain the simulations of flow and thermal fields. Quadratic
Lagrange elements, have been used to find the matrices associated with nonlinear
system (2.24). Numerical computations of velocity and temperature for various pa-
rameters have been shown in the next section. A Matlab code has been made in order
to solve (2.24).
2.4 Convergence of scheme

It is indispensable to validate any numerical scheme before executing real numerical
simulations. Therefore, we have testified the scheme by computing numerical error
estimates and comparing them to the theoretical error estimates derived for alike
problems. We postulate that the model under consideration satisfy the below given
error estimates
kψh (tk ) − ψex (tk )kL2 (Ω) ≤ C1 (hr+1 + τ 2−α ), (2.25)

kψh (tk ) − ψex (tk )kH 1 (Ω) ≤ C2 (hr + τ 2−α ). (2.26)
where the constants C1 , C2 > 0 do not depend upon step sizes h, τ, for details see
[106].
Numerical and theoretical error estimates are compared and approved via fabricated
exact solutions of governing problem by considering artificial source terms Ff ab1 and
Ff ab2 for the proposed model (2.13) as
 2
∂u ∂ ∂ u

 = 1+β − Hau + λ3 T + Ff ab1 (y, t),
∂t ∂t ∂y 2

2 (2.27)
∂ ∂α ∂ 2T ∂ 2T ∂T
P r 1 + β1 α T = (1 + ) 2 + T 2 + + Ff ab2 (y, t),


∂t ∂t ∂y ∂y ∂y
with the same initial and boundary conditions (2.14). The exact fabricated solutions
uex (y, t), Tex (y, t) fulfill the flow conditions (2.14). Using uex (y, t) = tn (1 − y)2 and
Tex (y, t) = t2 (1 − y)2 into the (2.27) and computing Ff ab1 , Ff ab2 the functions defined
by uex (y, t), Tex (y, t) will become the exact fabricated solutions of (2.27) with Ff ab1
and Ff ab2 are given by expressions
ntn−1 + Hatn − λ3 t2 (1 − y)2 − 2tn − 2βntn−1 ,

Ff ab1 =

2β1 P r 1−α
Ff ab2 = 2P rt + t − 6t (1 − y)2 − 2 (1 + ) t2 .
4
Γ(2 − α)
In order to show the validity of proposed scheme, we have incorporated the respective
Ff ab1 and Ff ab2 terms in (2.24). Also, error curves have been computed and shown in
the figures (2.2(a)) and (2.2(b)). Approximated errors are considered, in logarithmic
Table 2.1: Velocity and temperature error estimates
n h Velocity error estimates Temperature error estimates

||u − uex ||L2 (Ω) ||u − uex ||H 1 (Ω) ||T − Tex ||L2 (Ω) ||T − Tex ||H 1 (Ω)
5 0.2000 2.5816407 × 10−4 1.2760609 × 10−1 1.211309 × 10−3 1.4354636 × 10−1
8 0.1250 1.7530996 × 10−4 1.0335970 × 10−1 3.809681 × 10−4 8.0745953 × 10−2
11 0.0909 1.2588850 × 10−4 8.5420664 × 10−2 1.584861 × 10−4 5.1677587 × 10−2
14 0.0714 9.5167004 × 10−5 7.1776823 × 10−2 7.961571 × 10−5 3.5887264 × 10−2
17 0.0588 7.5460634 × 10−5 6.1158846 × 10−2 4.640319 × 10−5 2.6366180 × 10−2
20 0.0500 6.2508000 × 10−5 5.2733888 × 10−2 3.080652 × 10−5 2.0186628 × 10−2
23 0.0435 5.3821899 × 10−5 4.5937112 × 10−2 2.295907 × 10−5 1.5949951 × 10−2
26 0.0385 4.7890812 × 10−5 4.0374484 × 10−2 1.881524 × 10−5 1.2919484 × 10−2
scales of L2 (Ω), H 1 (Ω) norms by taking eight step sizes h, as illustrated in figures
2.2(a) and 2.2(b). It is noted that error curves slopes in these figures are approxi-
mately equal to 3 and 2 respectively, for L2 (Ω) and H 1 (Ω). In theoretical estimation,
(2.25) and (2.26) Lagrange polynomials degrees are accordingly r + 1 and r. Since
we are considering quadratic Lagrange polynomial, so slopes of corresponding error
curves should be 3 in L2 (Ω) and 2 in H1 (Ω) norms. This demonstrate that the error
estimates computed by using the numerical scheme are in complete agreement with
the theoretical error estimates. Table 2.1 has also been presented to show the numer-
ical outcomes of L2 (Ω) and H 1 (Ω) norms between numerical and exact solutions of u
2.4 Convergence of scheme 31
-2
-3
-4
Slope = 2.001
-5
log(||u - uex||L 2 (Ω))
-6 log(||u - uex||H (Ω)
)
1
-7
-8
Slope = 2.928
-9
-10
-2.8 -2.7 -2.6 -2.5 -2.4 -2.3 -2.2 -2.1
log(h)
(a) L2 and H1 error curves for velocity.
-1
-2
-3
-4
log(||T - Tex||L (Ω)
)
-5 2
Slope = 1.999
log(||T - Tex||H1 (Ω))
-6
-7
-8 Slope = 3.445
-9
-10
-11
-2.4 -2.2 -2 -1.8 -1.6 -1.4 -1.2 -1
log(h)
(b) L2 and H1 error curves for temperature.
Figure 2.2: Velocity and temperature numerical error estimates.
and T . It is observed that in both cases, error decreases with the decrease of step size
h. According to these considerations, we conclude that the numerical scheme (2.24)
is appropriate for real simulations of the model 2.13.
2.5 Numerical simulations and discussion

Numerical results for fractional modified thermal flux in a viscoelastic fluid flow are
discussed in this section. The velocity and temperature profiles are plotted for vari-
ous variations of physical parameters. Thermal conductivity, of viscoelastic material
is assumed to be variable while analyzing the unsteady incompressible flow problem.
Non-integer time derivatives have been incorporated for Cattaneo-Maxwell model of
thermal flux which is the revised version of Fourier heat flux model. Flow is gener-
ated by lower plate and variable thermal gradient is achieved at the moving boundary
of flow domain. Constant magnetic field is applied normal to the direction of flow.
Physical results of fractional problem are presented with the help of non-dimensional
flow parameters. Thermal behavior is noted with these dimensionless quantities tak-
ing into account the physical properties of the problem. Mostly, flow observations are
plotted over different time intervals. Figure 2.3 discuss velocity profiles due to variable
moving exponent n = 1 and n = 2 and for different values of non-integer exponent
α and viscoelastic parameter β. It is observed that as we increase α, the velocity
profile increases over the time interval [0, 2] when n = 1, see figure 2.3(a). However,
this occurrence is hereditary in the flow behavior and it is not possible to be gener-
alized for different values of parameters. It is noted that for both values of moving
exponent velocity profile increases with the increase of viscoelastic parameter β over
the time interval [0, 2]. Second grade parameter has direct influence as β increases
and space between the plates decreases keeping ρf as a constant for in-compressible
fluids. Therefore velocity gets larger with the larger values of β, see figure 2.3(b).
Effects of Hartmann number Ha and convection parameter, λ3 on velocity profiles
are plotted in figure 2.4. Velocity field decreases with the increase of Ha, see figure
2.4(a). This behavior of velocity is consistent with physical interpretations of the
flow configurations. For increasing values of Ha, an increase in Lorentz force is noted
which oppose the motion of fluid. Influence of convection parameter λ3 on velocity
profile is given in figure 2.4(b). Velocity is increasing by increasing the value of con-
vection parameter λ3 over the time [0, 2]. Buoyancy forces are directly related to λ3
while inverse relation is noted in case of inertial forces. For λ3 > 0, thermal energy
flows from lower plate to the fluid, as a result an increase in (Ts − T0 ) is observed.
Buoyancy forces also increase with the increase of λ3 . Consequently, velocity profiles
are at higher level for larger values of λ3 . Characteristics of moving exponent n and
final time is sketched in figure 2.5. It is observed that with the increase of n, veloc-
ity profile increases for time interval [0, 1.5] as shown in figure 2.5(a). Actually, an
increase in n, flow generation velocity increases over time interval [0, 1.5] which leads
2.5 Numerical simulations and discussion 33
2
= 0.05, 0.15, 0.25, 0.45
1.5 0.926
0.924
u(y,t)
1
= 0.5, Ha = 0.8 0.485 0.486 0.487
3
= 0.2, n = 1
0.5
1
= 0.3, = 0.1
Pr = 0.8
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
(a) Variations of velocity profile with α
n=2 = 0, 0.3, 0.6, 0.9

3
= 0.3, Ha = 0.9
3
= 0.1, 1 = 0.1
u(y,t)
n=1
2 Pr = 0.7, = 0.1
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
(b) Variations of velocity profile with β
Figure 2.3: Effects of fractional exponent α and viscoelastic number β on fluid velocity
to an increase of fluid velocity. On the other hand, it is concluded that by increasing

final time t, velocity increases with fixed value of moving exponent n = 1, see figure
2.5(b). Surface plots for transient velocity fields are displayed in figures 2.6(a) and
= 0.3, = 0.2
3 3
= 0.1, Pr = 0.5
n=2 1
= 0.4, = 0.1
u(y,t)
n=1
1
Ha = 0.1, 0.5, 1, 1.5

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
(a) Variations of velocity fields with Ha
4
n=2 = 0.1, 0.4, 0.7, 1
3
3 = 0.2, = 0.4
Ha = 0.6, 1 = 0.2
n=1
u(y,t)
Pr = 0.4, = 0.1
2
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
(b) Variations of velocity fields with λ3
Figure 2.4: Effects of magnetic and convection parameters on the velocity profile
2.6(a) for different values of n over time intervals [0, 1] and [0, 2]. Both plots show
fractional aspects of viscoelastic fluid. Effects of fractional exponent α and thermal
relaxation number β1 on the temperature profile are shown in figure 2.7. Figure 2.7(a)
3.5
= 0.3, = 0.6
3 Ha = 1.5, 3 = 0.3
2.5 Pr = 0.5, 1
= 0.4
2 = 0.1
u(y,t)
n = 0, 1, 2, 3
1.5
0.5
t = 1.5
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
(a) Variations of velocity profile with n
= 0.1, = 0.3
0.6
Ha = 0.5, 3 = 0.1
0.5 Pr = 1.5, = 0.2
1
0.4 t = 0.7 n = 1, = 0.1
u(y,t)
0.3 t = 0.5
0.2
t = 0.3
0.1
t = 0.1
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
(b) Variations of velocity profile with t
Figure 2.5: Effects of moving exponent and final time on the velocity profile
is sketched to examine the temperature profiles for various values of α. Temperature

profile decreases with the increase of α for time interval [0, 2]. Temperature changes,
with an increase of thermal relaxation parameter β1 is plotted in figure 2.7(b). Tem-
4
= 0.4 Pr = 0.2
= 0.2 = 0.4
3 1
Ha = 0.5
= 0.1
= 0.1
u(y,t)
2
3 t=2
n=2
1
0
0 2
1.5
0.5 1
0.5
1 0
y t
(a)
1
= 0.3 n=1
0.8 = 0.5 Pr = 0.5
3
= 0.2 = 0.8
0.6
1
u(y,t)
Ha = 1.5 = 0.1
0.4 t=1
0.2
0
0 1
0.5 0.5
1 0
y t
(b)
Figure 2.6: Transient velocity profiles over the time intervals [0,1] and [0,2]
perature profile, decreases with the increase of β1 over time interval [0, 2]. With an
increase of β1 , viscoelastic material requires more time for conduct of thermal energy
from high temperature particles to low temperature particles, as a result temperature
profile decreases for higher values of β1 . Figure 2.8 outlines the strength of Prandtl
4
2.04
3.5
Pr = 2.0
= 0.3 2.02
1
3
= 0.1 2
2.5 0.36 0.365 0.37

T(y,t)
1.5
0.5 = 0.05, 0.15, 0.25, 0.45

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
(a) Variations of temperature profile with α
4
2.2
T(y,t)
3.5
2.1
3
2
2.5 0.44 0.46 0.48
T(y,t)
2 y
1.5
1
= 0.1, 0.5, 1, 1.5
1 = 0.4
0.5
= 0.1
Pr = 0.3
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
(b) Variations of temperature profile with β1
Figure 2.7: Effects of fractional exponent and thermal relaxation number on the
temperature profile
number P r and thermal conductivity parameter on the temperature profiles. It is

found that temperature profile decreases with the increase of P r values shown in fig-
ure 2.8(a) but opposite trends are seen for 2.8(b) in all cases for linear contribution
of thermal conductivity. Influence of variable thermal conductivity is seen to be same
as proposed in figure 2.1. Momentum diffusivity increases while thermal diffusivity
decreases with the increase of P r which result in reduction of temperature field in the
fluid flow regime. With increase of , thermal conductivity of base fluid increases, as
a result further thermal energy is conducted from heated plate to the fluid. Conse-
quently, fluid temperature is at higher level for larger values of . Finally sub-figures
2.9(a) and 2.9(b) of figure 2.9 are sketched for transient temperature profiles over time
intervals [0, 1] and [0, 2]. Anomalous character of the fractional temperature field is
illustrated in these figures. Results for skin friction coefficient and thermal gradient
are shown in table 2.2 and 2.3. Magnitude of skin friction increases by the increase of
α and Ha while it decreases with the increase of β, λ3 and n. In table 2.3 we noted the
influence of physical parameters on the thermal gradient. It is observed that thermal
gradient increases, by increase of α, P r and β1 while opposite behavior is seen in case
of .
Table 2.2: Variations of skin friction coefficient with fractional model parameters at
(y, t) = (0, 0.2) with P r = 0.5, = 0.1 and β1 = 0.8
α β Ha λ3 n ReCf /2
0.10 0.30 0.50 0.10 1.0 -2.9297051
0.11 -3.0274291
0.12 0.30 -3.1282070
0.10 0.31 -2.9225142
0.32 0.50 -2.9154481
0.51 -2.9193922
0.52 0.10 -2.9233331
0.11 -2.9230560
0.12 1.0 -2.9227784
1.1 -2.2222361
1.2 -1.6929842
3.5 =0 = 0.4
1
= 0.3
3
2.5
T(y,t)
2 = 0.8
1.5
1
Pr = 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2
0.5
= - 0.1
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
(a) Variations of temperature profile with P r
3.5
= -0.1, -0.2, 0, 0.1, 0.2
3
2.5
>0
T(y,t)
1.5
1 = 0.4
0.5 1
= 0.3
0 Pr = 2 <0
-0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
(b) Variations of temperature profile with
Figure 2.8: Effects of Prandtl number and thermal conductivity parameter on the
temperature profile
4
= 0.3 t=2
3
1
= 0.7
= 0.1
T(y,t)
2
Pr = 0.5
1
0
0 2
0.2 1.5
0.4 1
0.6 0.5
0.8
1 0
y t
(a)
1
= 0.3 t=1
0.8
1
= 0.7
0.6
T(y,t)
= 0.1
0.4 Pr = 0.5
0.2
0
0 1
0.5 0.5
1 0
y t
(b)
Figure 2.9: Transient temperature profiles with various values of involved parameters
Table 2.3: Thermal gradient variations for different parameters of fractional model at
(y, t) = (0, 0.3).
α Pr β1 N u/Re2
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.0620762
0.4 0.0672770
0.5 0.4 0.0738822
0.5 0.0802728
0.6 0.5 0.0863584
0.6 0.0903430
0.7 0.1 0.0942184
0.2 0.0904498
0.3 0.0872024
Chapter 3
Chemical reactions with

non-integer time derivatives in a
viscoelastic fluid flow
Contents
3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
3.2.1 Mathematical statement of flow problem . . . . . . . . . . . 44
3.2.2 Initial and boundary conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
3.2.3 Skin friction coefficient . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
3.2.4 Non-dimensionalization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
3.3 Numerical discretization scheme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
3.3.1 Finite difference approximations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
3.3.2 Finite element discretization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
3.3.3 Algorithm of scheme execution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
3.4 Numerical results and discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
42
3.1 Introduction 43
3.1 Introduction
Viscoelastic fluid flow along with homogeneous-heterogeneous reactions is studied in
this chapter. We have analyzed the chemical reactions, with non-integer time deriva-
tives and variable concentrations of both the reactant species. Diffusion coefficients
of auto catalyst and reactant are of approximately equal size. Flux conditions are im-
posed on the chemical species at the boundary. Governing flow equations with suitable
initial and boundary conditions have been discretized using finite difference-finite ele-
ment scheme. Skin friction coefficients are calculated for fractional viscoelastic model.
Flow field is demonstrated for different values of involved parameters. The acquired
results revealed that with increase of fractional number α, concentration of chemical
specie decreases for the final time.

Consider MHD unsteady fractional viscoelastic flow of second grade fluid. We suppose
that there exist homogeneous-heterogeneous reactions in the fluid flow configuration
as stated in chapter 1 section 1.3.5. Concentrations of reacting species as well as the
sum of these concentrations are assumed variable in the flow field. Magnetic field is
applied along the y − axis that is perpendicular to flow boundaries. The velocity
field and concentration of chemical species depend on t and y. The velocity field is
presumed to be
U := uex + vey + wez ,
with assumption u = u(y, t) and v ≡ 0 ≡ w. Consequently the governing flow velocity
takes the form
U = u(y, t)ex . (3.1)
Here we considered the second grade fluid model as described in chapter 1 section
1.5. In current situation incompressible viscoelastic flow is governed by the following
equations
∇ · U = 0, (3.2)
dU 1
= (∇ · S) + b + gβa (a − a0 ) + gβb (b − a0 ), (3.3)
dt ρf

d 2
1+ α
a = DA∗ ∇ a − kc 1 + α
ab2 , (3.4)
dt Γ (1 + α) ∂t Γ (1 + α) ∂t
44 Chemical reactions with non-integer time derivatives in a viscoelastic fluid flow
Figure 3.1: Description of concentration flux.

d 2
1+ b = DB ∗ ∇ b + kc 1 + ab2 , (3.5)
dt Γ (1 + α) ∂tα Γ (1 + α) ∂tα
here ρf > 0 is density of fluid, α is Caputo fractional derivative such that 0 ≤
α ≤ 1, DA∗ and DB ∗ are the diffusion species coefficients, g stands for gravitational
acceleration, βa and βb are the coefficients of volumetric concentrations, b denotes the
body forces and a0 is the reference concentration. For simplicity pressure gradient is
neglected in flow regime.
3.2.1 Mathematical statement of flow problem

Continuity equation is identically satisfied by flow field U given by (3.1). Mathemat-
ical equations for this flow are given by
2
∂u ∂ ∂ u
ρf = µ + α1 2
− σB02 u + ρf βa g(a − a0 ) + ρf βb g(b − a0 ), (3.6)
∂t ∂t ∂y
τ4α ∂α ∂ 2a τ4α ∂α

∂
1+ a = DA∗ 2 − kc 1 + ab2 , (3.7)
∂t Γ (1 + α) ∂tα ∂y Γ (1 + α) ∂tα
τ5α ∂α ∂ 2b τ5α ∂α

∂
1+ b = DB ∗ 2 + kc 1 + ab2 . (3.8)
∂t Γ (1 + α) ∂tα ∂y Γ (1 + α) ∂tα
In the above expression B0 stands for applied magnetic field.
3.2 Mathematical formulation 45
3.2.2 Initial and boundary conditions

Flux conditions are imposed at the lower plate. At time t = 0, the fluid is assumed
to be static. The suitable conditions at the prescribed boundaries can be defined in
the following form ν n
u (0, t) = u0 t , u (L, t) = 0, (3.9)
L2
a0 ks ν 2 2 a0 ν 2 2

∂a
DA∗ = t and a(L, t) = t t > 0, (3.10)
∂y y=0 L4 L4
a0 ks ν 2 2

∂b
DB ∗ =− t and b(L, t) = 0 t > 0, (3.11)
∂y y=0 L4
and initial conditions are defined by
∂a ∂b
u(y, 0) = 0, a(y, 0) = 0 = (y, 0) and b(y, 0) = 0 = (y, 0) |y| ≤ L, (3.12)
∂t ∂t
with u0 denotes dimensional constant, ν is the kinematic viscosity and n denotes
variable motion exponent of lower plate. Finally a mathematical IBVP for the present
flow configuration is completely modeled by (3.6)–(3.12).
3.2.3 Skin friction coefficient

Skin friction coefficient is used to compute relative friction between fluid and boundary
of the solid geometry. In present flow configuration skin friction coefficients are given
by
2τw
Cf := , (3.13)
ρf u20
where τw wall, shear stress is defined as

∂ ∂u
τw = µ + α1 . (3.14)
∂t ∂y y=0,L
3.2.4 Non-dimensionalization
Considering suitable dimensionless quantities are used in order to make the IBVP
(3.6)–(3.12) dimensionless
y ν u a bb := b .
yb := , t := 2 t u
b b := , a :=
b (3.15)
L L u0 a0 a0
Using dimensionless quantities in (3.15) without hats, the IBVP (3.6)–(3.12) becomes
2
∂u ∂ ∂ u
= 1+β − Hau + λ4 (a − 1) + λ5 (b − 1) ,
∂t ∂t ∂y 2
∂α ∂ 2a ∂α

∂
Sc 1 + γ1 α a = 2 − KSc 1 + γ1 α ab2 ,
∂t ∂t ∂y ∂t
∂α ∂ 2b ∂α

∂
Sc 1 + γ2 α b = δ 2 + KSc 1 + γ2 α ab2 , (3.16)
∂t ∂t ∂y ∂t
together with following appropriate conditions

n ∂a 2 ∂b δ1
u(0, t) = t , u(1, t) = 0, = δ1 t , = − t2 , a(1, t) = t2 ,


∂y y=0 ∂y y=0 δ
 ∂a ∂b
b(1, t) = 0, u(y, 0) = 0, a(y, 0) = 0 =
 (y, 0) and b(y, 0) = 0 = (y, 0),
∂t ∂t
(3.17)
with β denotes viscoelastic number, λ4 , λ5 are diffusion parameters, Ha is magnetic
number, K, δ1 are homogeneous and heterogeneous reactions parameters respectively,
γ1 and γ2 are concentrations relaxation time parameters, δ denotes the ratio of dif-
fusion coefficients and Sc stands for Schmidt number. Mathematically, dimensionless
numbers are stated as
α1 σB02 L2 gL2 βa a0 gL2 βb a0 kc a20 L2
β := , Ha := , λ4 := , λ5 := , K := ,
ρf L2 µ u0 ν u0 ν ν
ν DB ∗ ks L τ1α ν α τ2α ν α
Sc := , δ := , δ1 := , γ1 := , γ2 := .
DA∗ DA∗ DA∗ Γ(1 + α)L2α Γ(1 + α)L2α
In most situations, we consider that diffusion coefficients of reacting species are of

comparable size. As a result, we can assume that DA∗ , DB ∗ are of comparable size
i.e. δ = 1 [79, 80, 81]. From equation (3.17), with this assumption we conclude that
a + b = t2 .
Finally, the equations (3.16) and (3.17) yield

2
∂u ∂ ∂ u
− Hau + λ4 (a − 1) + λ5 t2 − a − 1 ,

= 1+β 2
∂t ∂t ∂y
∂α ∂ 2a ∂α

∂ 2
Sc 1 + γ1 α a = 2 − KSc 1 + γ1 α a t2 − a , (3.18)
∂t ∂t ∂y ∂t
together with following boundary and initial conditions

n ∂a
u(0, t) = t , u(1, t) = 0, = δ1 t2 , a(1, t) = t2 ,


∂y y=0 (3.19)
 ∂a
u(y, 0) = 0 and a(y, 0) = 0 =
 (y, 0).
∂t
3.3 Numerical discretization scheme 47
In addition, the dimensionless skin friction coefficients are given by

ReCf ∂ ∂u
= 1+β , (3.20)
2 ∂t ∂y y=0,1
u0 L
here Re = is the local Reynold’s number.
ν
3.3 Numerical discretization scheme

In this section, we provide the discretization of formulated scheme of the problem
(3.18)-(3.19). We consider the well-posedness of the problem and define appropriate
spaces as discussed in chapter 2 section 2.3.
3.3.1 Finite difference approximations

We have employed the finite difference scheme in a similar way as discussed in chapter
2 section 2.3.1. Furthermore, we define the following two operators
∂ (α+1)

α ∂
Lt [a(·)] (t) := + γ1 (α+1) [a(t)] ,
∂t ∂t
∂α

α
Qt [a(·)] (t) := 1 + γ1 α [a(t)] .
∂t
The finite difference approximations of operators Lαt [a], Qαt [a] are defined as
∂ α+1

α ∂
Lt [a](tk+1 ) = + γ1 α+1 [a] (tk+1 )
∂t ∂t
a(tk+1 ) − a(tk )
+ Cα ψkα [a] − ψk−1
α

' [a]
h i τ
+Cα a(tk+1 ) − 2a(tk ) + a(tk−1 ) ,
and
∂α

Qαt [a](tk+1 ) = 1 + γ1 α [a] (tk+1 )
∂t
h i
' a(tk+1 ) + γ1 Cα a(tk+1 ) − a(tk ) + γ1 Cα ψkα [a] , (3.21)
with cα = τ −α /Γ(2 − α), bαs := (s + 1)1−α − (s)1−α , for 0 ≤ s ≤ m and

k
X h i
ψkα [a] := bαs a(y, tk+1−s ) − a(y, tk−s ) with ψ0α [a] := 0. (3.22)
s=1
3.3.2 Finite element discretization

This section describes briefly, the discretiztion scheme for spatial variable using finite
element method as discussed in chapter 2 section 2.3.2. Weak formulation for modeled
problem (3.18)-(3.19) is obtained as
Weak formulation: Find (u, a) ∈ C1 ([0, tf ]; H11 (Ω)) and for all (v, φ) ∈ H10 (Ω) such
that

∂ ∂
hu, vi + Ha (u, v) − λ4 (a − 1, v) − λ5 t2 − a − 1, v = 0,


 (u, v) + 1 + β
 ∂t ∂t



α α 2
2
ScLt (a, φ) + ha, φi + KScQt a t − a , φ = 0, (3.23)


u(y, 0) = 0, a(y, 0) = 0 = ∂a (y, 0)



∂t
Discrete weak formulation: Find (uh (·, tk+1 ), a(·, tk+1 )) ∈ Vh (Ω) s.t. ∀ (v, φ) ∈
Vh (Ω),

 ∂ ∂
(uh (y, tk+1 ), v) + 1 + β huh (y, tk+1 ), vi + Ha (uh (y, tk+1 ), v)





 ∂t ∂t

−λ4 (ah (y, tk+1 ) − 1, v) − λ5 t2k+1 − ah (y, tk+1 ) − 1, v = 0,




α
 ScLt (ah (y, tk+1 ), φ) + hah (y, tk+1 ), φi

 2
α 2
+KScQt ah (y, tk+1 ) tk+1 − ah (y, tk+1 ) , φ = 0,








 0
uh (y) = 0, a0h (y) = 0, a1h (y) = 0.
For the approximation of solutions we consider following ansatz

N0h
X p
uh (y, tk+1 ) = up (tk+1 )W0h (y), y ∈ Ω, (3.24)
p=1
N1h
X
l
ah (y, tk+1 ) = al (tk+1 )W1h (y), y ∈ Ω, (3.25)
l=1
p
here W0h = {W0h | p = 1, 2, 3, 4, · · · , N0h } represents basis of V0h (Ω) with N0h :=
dim(V0h ) and W1h = {W1h l
| l = 1, 2, · · · , N1h } are basis of V1h (Ω) with N1h := dim(V1h )
q
and the parameters (up , al ) are the unknowns to be computed. Choosing v as W0h for
3.3 Numerical discretization scheme 49
m
q = 1, 2, · · · , N0h and φ as W1h for m = 1, 2, · · · , N1h , we obtained

h d h d
M1 [Uh ] + τ N1 1 + β [Uh ]






 dt dt
+τ HaMh1 [Uh ] − τ λ4 Mh1 [ah ] + τ λ5 Mh1 [ah ] + τ F = 0,

(3.26)
ScMh2 Lαk+1 [ah ] + N2h [ah ] + KScN3h (ah (tk ))Qαk+1 [ah (tk+1 )] = 0,






U0 = 0, a0 = 0 = a1 ,

h h h
where for all p, q = 1, 2, · · · , N0h and l, m = 1, 2, · · · , N1h

p q p q
(Uh )p := up , (ah )l := al ,(Mh1 )qp := (W0h , W0h ) , (N1h )qp := hW0h , W0h i,
p
) , (Mh2 )lm := W1hl m
, (N2h )lm := hW1hl m

(F)p := (λ4 − λ5 (t − 1), W0h , W1h , W1h i
(N3h )lm := hW1h
l m
, W1h i.
After employing finite difference approximations to discretize time derivatives, we

further write system (3.26) as below
!
H1 (Uh )
H= = 0. (3.27)
H2 (ah )
where

Uk+1 − Ukh Uk+1 − Ukh

h h h k+1 h
H (U ) = M1 + N1 Uh + β


 1 h

 τ τ
+HaMh1 [Uk+1 h k+1 h k+1 (3.28)

 h ] − λ4 M1 [ah ] + λ5 M1 [ah ] + F,

H (a ) = ScMh Lα [ak+1 ] + N h [ak+1 ] + KScN h (a (t ))Qα [ak+1 ].

2 h 2 k+1 h 2 h 3 h k k+1 h
The system of algebraic equations (3.27) have been simulated for velocity and con-
centration, using Newton’s Method.
3.3.3 Algorithm of scheme execution

Algorithm 1 explains the basic structure of scheme execution, for the approximate
solutions (Uh , ah ) of nonlinear algebraic system (3.27). Global solutions are obtained
by the combination of the elementary solutions and finally we have plotted the solu-
tion curves from these approximate global solutions.
Algorithm 1 Scheme execution

Require: α, β, λ4 , λ5 , Ha, Sc, K, δ1 and γ1 .
1: procedure Finite element estimations with Newton’s iterations
technique
2: Define global matrices Mh1 , Mh2 , N1h , N2h , N3h and Jacobian J all of order
(dim Vkh + 1) × (dim Vkh + 1) and vectors Uh , ah , F, G of order (dim Vkh + 1) × 1.
Initialize all matrix and vector entries to zero.
3: e 0 = (U0 , a0 ), relative error = 1 and tolerance T OL = 10−8 .
Set initial guess $
4: procedure Fractional Time Iterations(i ← 0 : N )
5: Compute element matrices
6: for all j ← 0 : N do
7: Element matrices Mj1 , Mj2 , N1j , N2j , N3j and Jacobian, J j of order
2 × 2 and vector elements Fj and Gj of order 2 × 1.
8: end for
9: Use element matrices at corresponding points of global matrices.
10: Implement boundary conditions.
11: procedure Newton’s method Iterations(while > T OL)
12: Find $e = (Uh , ah ) such as J ($i )$ e = −H($i ).
13: Set $i+1 = $i + $.e
14: i←i+1
15: Compute
16: end procedure
17: Update solutions Uh , ah
18: end procedure
19: Plot the solutions.
20: end procedure
3.4 Numerical results and discussion

In this section, we have analyzed the numerical simulations of velocity field and con-
centration profiles of fractional viscoelastic fluid with variable concentration sum of
chemical reacting species and flux conditions. Non-integer time derivatives have been
analyzed for the homogeneous-heterogeneous reactions effects. Change in concentra-
tion gradient is observed by one of the lasting chemical species diffusion. Fluid is
flowing by the variable movement of the lower plate and constant magnetic field, is
applied along y − axis. We discuss the behavior of involved non-dimensional parame-
ters on the flow generation. Concentration gradient is observed at both the boundaries
3.4 Numerical results and discussion 51
for various pertinent numbers. In order to discuss the variations in the flow behavior,
dimensionless parameters have been given different values consistent with the physical
properties of the problem. Graphical trends for various profiles are plotted over the
√
time intervals [0, 1] and [0, 2]. Figure 3.2 analyze velocity profiles for various values
of viscoelastic parameter β and magnetic number Ha. It is observed that velocity
profile increases with the increase of viscoelastic parameter β. Increase of β, results
in the increase of viscoelastic physical parameter α1 , for a particular liquid keeping
ρf as constant. Therefore velocity gets larger with the larger values of β, see figure
3.2(a). Velocity field decreases when Ha is increased, see figure 3.2(b). This behavior
of velocity is consistent with physical interpretations of the flow configurations for
increasing values of Ha as Lorentz force rises which resist the motion of fluid. Varia-
tions in velocity for different values of diffusion parameters λ4 and λ5 are sketched in
figure 3.3. Characteristics of diffusion parameter λ4 for the chemical reacting specie
A with concentration a, on velocity field are displayed in figure 3.3(a). Velocity is
increasing by increasing the value of diffusion parameter λ4 over time intervals [0, 1]
√
and [0, 2]. Buoyancy forces are directly related to λ4 while inverse relation is seen in
case of inertial forces. For λ4 > 0 concentration of lasting chemical species flows from
plates to the fluid. Hence (as1 − a0 ) and (as2 − a0 ) increase. Consequently buoyancy
forces increase with the increase of λ4 .. Therefore fluid velocity increases over these
time intervals. While opposite effects are seen in case of diffusion parameter λ5 for
chemical specie B, with b as its concentration, see figure 3.3(b). Influence of variable
moving exponent and final time is simulated in figure 3.4. Velocity profile increases
with the increase of n, over time interval [0, 1.5] while opposite effects are observed
over the time interval [0, 0.5] 3.4(a). In fact with an increase of n, flow generation
velocity increases over time interval [0, 1.5] and it decreases over the time interval
[0, 0.5] which leads to an increase and decrease of fluid velocity respectively. On the
other hand it is noted, by increasing final time tf velocity increases with fixed value
of moving exponent n, see figure 3.4(b). Figures 3.5(a) and 3.5(b) display the surface
plots for transient velocity field u(y, t) for two different time intervals and for various
set of physical parameters. Both graphs illustrate variations of fractional viscoelas-
tic fluid. Effects of non-integer exponent and Schmidt number on the concentration
profile are shown in figure 3.6. Figure 3.6(a) is sketched to examine the chemical
species concentration profiles for various values of α. Concentration profile decreases
√
with the increase of α for time interval [0, 2]. Changes in concentration profile
with the increase of Schmidt number Sc is plotted in figure 3.6(b). It is perceived
√
that concentration profile decreases with the increase of Sc over time interval [0, 2]
2
= 0.4, 4 = 0.1, 5 = 0.1
Ha = 0.7, Sc = 0.8, K = 0.2
1.5 n = 1, 1 = 0.2, 1 = 0.1
t=2
= 0, 1, 3, 5
u(y,t)
t=1
0.5
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
(a) Variations of velocity profile with β
2
= 0.8, = 0.5, 4 = 0.2
Sc = 0.4, K = 0.2, n =1
1.5 1
= 0.1, 1 = 0.1, 5 = 0.1
t=2
u(y,t)
0.5 t=1
Ha = 0, 1, 2, 3
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
(b) Variations of velocity fields with Ha
Figure 3.2: Effects of viscoelastic parameter β and magnetic number Ha on fluid

velocity
when α = 0.1 and α = 1. Concentration profiles are at higher level for α = 0.1.
Momentum diffusivity increases while mass diffusivity decreases with the increase of
2
= 0.6, = 0.3, Ha =0.7
Sc = 0.5, K = 0.1, n = 1
1
= 0.2, 1 = 0.1, 5 = 0.1
1.5
t=2
4
= 0, 0.2, 0.4, 0.6
u(y,t)
0.5 t=1
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
(a) Variations of velocity fields with λ4
2
= 0.9, = 0.4, 4
= 0.1
1
= 0.1, 1
= 0.5, n = 1
1.5
t=2 Ha = 0.5, Sc = 0.4, K = 0.2
u(y,t)
t=1
0.5
5
= 0, 0.1, 0.3, 0.5
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
(b) Variations of velocity fields with λ5
Figure 3.3: Effects of diffusion parameters on the velocity profile
Sc result in reduction of concentration field in the fluid flow regime. Figure 3.7 is
outlined the strength of homogeneous-heterogeneous reactions parameters K and δ1 ,
on concentration profiles of chemical species. It is evaluated that concentration pro-
6
= 0.6, = 0.5, 4 = 0.2
t = 1.5
5 Ha = 0.8, Sc = 0.9, 5 = 0.1
K =0.2, 1 = 0.1, 1 = 0.1
4
u(y,t)
3 n = 1, 2, 3, 4
1 t = 0.5
n = 4, 3, 2, 1
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
(a) Variations of velocity profile with n
2.5
= 0.9, = 0.5, 4 = 0.2
= 0.1, 1 = 0.2, 1 = 0.1
2 t = 2.5 5
Ha = 0.8, Sc = 0.7, K = 0.2, n = 1
t=2
1.5
u(y,t)
t = 1.5
1
t=1
0.5
t = 0.5
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
(b) Variations of velocity profile with t
Figure 3.4: Effects of moving exponent and final time on the velocity profile
file increases as homogeneous reaction parameter K increases see figure, 3.7(a) while
opposite trends are seen for heterogeneous parameter, δ1 3.7(b). An increase in third
and first order chemical reaction rates, is seen with increase of K and δ1 , as a result
1
= 0.6 Sc = 0.2
= 2.5 K = 0.6
0.8
Ha = 0.3 n=1
= 0.1 1
= 0.7
0.6 4
= 0.1
u(y,t)
5
= 0.1 1
0.4
0.2
0
0 1
0.5 0.5
1 0
y t
(a)
2
= 0.8 Sc = 0.4
=3 K = 0.1
1.5 = 0.2 n=1
4
1
= 0.2
= 0.1
u(y,t)
5
1 1
= 0.1
Ha = 0.3
0.5
0
0 2
1.5
0.5 1
0.5
1 0
y t
(b)
Figure 3.5: Trasient velocity profiles over the time intervals [0,1] and [0,2]
mass diffusivity of the lasting chemical species increase which lead in enhancement
of concentration profile for increase of K while reduction of concentration profile for
increase of δ1 in fluid flow configuration. Finally figure 3.8 is sketched for the influ-
1.9 1.62
1.61
1.8 1.6
0.42 0.44
a(y,t)
1.7
Sc = 0.8
1.6
K = 0.2
1
= 0.1
1.5 1
= 0.4
= 0.1, 0.5, 0.7, 1
1.4
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
(a) Variations of concentration profile with α
2
K = 0.2
1
= 0.1
1.8 = 0.4
1
a(y,t)
1.6
--- =1
1.4 ___ = 0.1
Sc = 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2
1.2
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
(b) Variations of concentration profile with Sc
Figure 3.6: Effects of non-integer exponent and Schmidt number on the concentration
profile
ence of concentration relaxation time parameter γ1 on the concentration profile and

√
transient concentration profile over time interval [0, 2] for various set of physical
K = 0.1, 0.4, 0.7, 1

1.9 - - -
=1
1.8 ___ = 0.1
1.7
a(y,t)
1.6
Sc = 0.8
1.5 = 0.2
1
1.4 1
= 0.5
1.3
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
(a) Variations of concentration profile with K
2
Sc = 0.9
1.8 K = 0.3
1
= 0.1
1.6
a(y,t)
1.4
1.2 --- =1
___ = 0.1
1
1
= 0.1, 0.3, 0.5, 0.7
0.8
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
(b) Variations of concentration profile with δ1
Figure 3.7: Effects of homogeneous-heterogeneous reactions strength on the concen-

tration profile
parameters. Concentration profile increases with the increase of γ1 when α = 0.1,

while opposite effects are observed for α = 1 see figure 3.8(a). For transient 2D plot
of concentration profile see figure 3.8(b). Anomalous character of the fractional con-
centration field is illustrated in these figures. The skin friction coefficient values, by
2
Sc = 0.7 1
= 0.1, 0.5, 1, 1.5
1.9 K = 0.5
1
= 0.2
1.8
a(y,t)
1.49
1.7
1.485
1.6 1.48
0.02
1.5 --- =1
= 0.1, 0.5, 1, 1.5 ___ = 0.1
1
1.4
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
(a) Variations of concentration profile with γ1
2
= 0.6
K = 0.7 1
= 0.6
1.5 Sc = 0.2 1
= 0.1
a(y,t)
0.5
0
2
0.8 1
1 0.6
0.2 0.4
0 0
t y
(b) Transient 2D concentration profile
Figure 3.8: Effect of relaxation parameter with 2D concentration profile
varying involved parameters, are shown in table 3.1. It can be noted that absolute
value of skin friction, gets higher for larger values of physical parameters β, Ha, λ4
and λ5 , while it decreases with the increase of n. In table 3.2 we noted the behavior of
material parameters on concentration gradient at the boundaries. It is noticed that at
boundaries concentration gradients increase with increase of α, Sc, δ1 while opposite
trends are seen in case of γ1 and K.
Table 3.1: Variations of skin friction coefficient with non linear fractional model pa-
rameters for (y, t) = (0, 0.1), α = 1, Sc = 0.6, K = 0.1, γ1 = 0.1 and δ1 = 0.2.
β Ha λ4 λ5 n ReCf /2
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.8 -0.754482
0.2 -0.902756
0.3 0.2 -1.046789
0.3 -1.050054
0.4 0.3 -1.053314
0.4 -1.089122
0.5 0.1 -1.124930
0.2 -1.165253
0.3 0.8 -1.205575
0.9 -1.089273
1 -0.982362
Table 3.2: Variations of concentration gradient at the boundaries when t = 1.

α Sc K δ1 γ1 a0 (0) a0 (1)
0.1 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.203722 0.461127
0.5 0.203725 0.461178
0.9 0.3 0.203728 0.461218
0.4 0.204822 0.546150
0.5 0.1 0.205806 0.628870
0.2 0.205079 0.619942
0.3 0.2 0.204377 0.611416
0.3 0.301976 0.664846
0.4 0.1 0.399420 0.715515
0.2 0.399138 0.710324
0.3 0.398827 0.705697
Chapter 4
Rate type nanofluid flow with

Caputo time derivative
Contents
4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
4.2 Mathematical modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
4.2.1 Flow problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
4.3 Solution methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
4.4 Convergence of proposed scheme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
4.4.1 Scheme validation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
4.5 Results and discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
61
62 Rate type nanofluid flow with Caputo time derivative
4.1 Introduction
Unsteady flow of a rate type nanofluid with non integer Caputo time derivatives
is studied in this chapter. Mixed convection and diffusion are taken into account
while analyzing transport phenomena in the flow field. Thermophoresis and pedesis
effects are also incorporated. Fluid is confined between nonisothermal parallel plates
and flows by movement of lower plate. Concentration is assumed to be variable at
both plates. Governing flow partial differential equations with appropriate conditions
are solved by finite difference-finite element scheme. Local Nusselt and Sherwood
numbers are computed for non-integer model. Flow field is presented for numerous
values of involved physical parameters. Influence of different dimensionless quantities
on the Nusselt and Sherwood numbers is discussed by tabular results. The acquired
results demonstrated that fractional exponents α and β have opposite effects on the
velocity profiles. It is also noted that thermophoresis and pedesis parameters have
similar effects on heat flux while opposite effects are observed for mass flux at both
the plates.
4.2 Mathematical modeling

Consider unsteady flow of a fractional rate type nanofluid between infinite parallel
plates with mixed convection and diffusion. Space between the plates is filled with a
rate type fluid with colloidal suspension of tiny particles in a base fluid. Plates are
separated by a distance 2L > 0. At t = 0, the fluid and plates are at rest. Initially
the fluid is at constant temperature T0 and concentration C0 . When t > 0 fluid starts
moving by movement of the lower plate. Effects of Joule heating are assumed to be
negligible. We assume that velocity field, temperature and concentration are only
functions of t and y. Consider the velocity field
U := u(y, t)ex . (4.1)
Remark 4.2.1 The thermodynamic stability of the Oldroyd-B fluid model required
[109]
0 < λ2 < λ1 .
4.2 Mathematical modeling 63
y=L
Fluid Flow Nanoparticles

x
z
x, U = u(y,t)
y = -L u(-L,t)
Figure 4.1: Physical model.
Following the results in chapter 1 sections 1.3.3.1, 1.3.4.1 and 1.6 the incompressible
fluid flow is modeled by the following equations
∇ · U = 0, (4.2)
dU 1
= (∇ · S) + gβT (T − T0 ) + gβC (C − C0 ), (4.3)
dt ρf
2 !
τ2α ∂α ∂ 2T τ2α ∂α

d ∂T ∂C DT ∂T
1+ T = α3 2 +τ 1 + DB + ,
dt Γ (1 + α) ∂tα ∂y Γ (1 + α) ∂tα ∂y ∂y T0 ∂y
(4.4)
α α 2 2

d τ2 ∂ ∂ C DT ∂ T
1+ α
C = DB 2 + , (4.5)
dt Γ (1 + α) ∂t ∂y T0 ∂y 2
where ρf > 0 denotes the density of the fluid, α is Caputo fractional derivative such
that 0 ≤ α ≤ 1, T stands for temperature, C is concentration, α3 denotes thermal dif-
ρcp
fusivity, DT stands for thermophoretic coefficient, DB is Brownian coefficient, τ =
ρcf
denotes ratio of nano particles to base fluid heat capacities, βT stands for coefficient of
volumetric thermal expansion, βC is the coefficient of volumetric concentration, T0 , C0
are reference temperature and concentration respectively. The pressure gradient and
body forces are neglected for convenience.
4.2.1 Flow problem

The equations that govern the flow with relevant boundary conditions are presented
in this section. Equation of continuity is satisfied identically by the velocity field U
given in (4.2) and (U · ∇)U ≡ 0. Governing equations of the flow problem are as
follows:
α β
2
α ∂ ∂u β ∂ ∂ u
1 + λ1 α = ν 1 + λ2 β + gβT (T − T0 ) + gβC (C − C0 ), (4.6)
∂t ∂t ∂t ∂y 2
2 !
τ2α ∂α ∂ 2T τ2α ∂α

∂ ∂T ∂C DT ∂T
1+ T = α3 2 +τ 1+ DB + ,
∂t Γ (1 + α) ∂tα ∂y Γ (1 + α) ∂tα ∂y ∂y T0 ∂y
(4.7)
τ2α ∂α ∂ 2 C DT ∂ 2 T

∂
1+ C = DB + . (4.8)
∂t Γ (1 + α) ∂tα ∂y 2 T0 ∂y 2
We consider flow between infinite length parallel plates. Both plates exhibit variable
temperature and concentration for t > 0. At t = 0 the whole configuration is at rest
with temperature T0 and concentration C0 . Therefore, initial and boundary conditions
take the form
ν2
u (−L, t) = u0 4 t2 , u (L, t) = 0, (4.9)
L
ν2 2
ν
T (−L, t) = T0 1 + 4 t and T (L, t) = T0 1 + 2 t t > 0, (4.10)
L L
ν2 2
ν
C (−L, t) = C0 1 + 4 t and C(L, t) = C0 1 + 2 t , t > 0, (4.11)
L L
∂u
u(y, 0) = 0 =(y, 0), T (y, 0) = T0 and C(y, 0) = C0 |y| ≤ L. (4.12)
∂t
In above equations, u0 is dimensional constant and ν is the kinematic viscosity. Fi-
nally, IBVP governing the present flow regime is given by (4.6)–(4.12).
Friction coefficient is important for accumulation of drag between fluid and surround-
ing boundary. In governing flow field skin friction coefficient is defined as
2τw
Cf := , (4.13)
ρu20
4.2 Mathematical modeling 65
In above expression, wall shear stress τw is stated as

α

α ∂ ∂u
1 + λ1 α τw = µ . (4.14)
∂t ∂y (y=−L)
Using (4.14) in (4.13), average friction coefficient is given by

α

α ∂ 2ν ∂u
1 + λ1 α C f = 2 . (4.15)
∂t u0 ∂y y=−L
4.2.1.3 Nusselt number
Nusselt number is used to measure the local surface heat flux. It is non dimensional
heat transfer coefficient which provides comparison between the convection and con-
duction heat transfer rates. Both the conductive and convective heat flows are mea-
sured normal to the surface. In the current flow field Nusselt numbers are defined as
follows
∂T
−L
τ2α ∂α

∂y
y=L
1+ α
N u 1 = , (4.16)
Γ(1 + α) ∂t Ts1 − T0
where Ts1 denotes temperature of plate, at y = L. Nusselt number for plate at y = −L
is defined as
∂T
−L
τ2α ∂α

∂y
y=−L
1+ α
N u2 = , (4.17)
Γ(1 + α) ∂t Ts2 − T0
here Ts2 represents, temperature of plate at y = −L.
4.2.1.4 Sherwood number
Sherwood number is used to measure the local surface mass flux. It is in fact analogy
of Nusselt number in mass transfer. In current flow field, the Sherwood numbers are
defined as follows

α α
−L ∂C
τ2 ∂ ∂y
y=L
1+ α
Sh 1 = , (4.18)
Γ(1 + α) ∂t C s1 − C 0
where Cs1 denotes concentration nearer plate, at y = L. For plate at, y = −L the
Sherwood number is defined as

∂C
−L
τ2α ∂α

∂y
y=−L
1+ α
Sh 2 = , (4.19)
Γ(1 + α) ∂t C s2 − C 0
here Cs2 represents, concentration nearer plate at y = −L.

We use the following dimensionless quantities in order to non-dimensionalized the

IBVP (4.6)–(4.12)
y λ1 ν λ2 ν ν
yb := ,
λb1 := 2 , λb2 := 2 , b t := 2 t,
L L L L
u T − T0 C − C0
b := , Tb :=
u , C b := . (4.20)
u0 T0 C0
Using 4.20 using dimensionless quantities without hats, IBVP (4.6)–(4.12) takes the
form
α β
2
α ∂ ∂u β ∂ ∂ u
1 + λ1 α = 1 + λ2 β + λ3 T + λ4 C,
∂t ∂t ∂t ∂y 2
2 !
∂α ∂ 2T ∂α

∂ ∂T ∂C ∂T
Pr 1 + γ3 α T = 2
+ P r 1 + γ3 α Nb + Nt ,
∂t ∂t ∂y ∂t ∂y ∂y ∂y
∂α ∂ 2C N t ∂ 2T

∂
Sc 1 + γ3 α C = + , (4.21)
∂t ∂t ∂y 2 N b ∂y 2

u(−1, t) = t2 , u(1, t) = 0, T (−1, t) = t2 = C(−1, t), T (1, t) = t = C(1, t) t > 0,
u(y, 0) = 0 = ∂u (y, 0) and T (y, 0) = 0 = C(y, 0) |y| ≤ 1.
∂t
In above system of equations, λ3 is convection number, λ4 denotes diffusion parameter,
N b stands for pedesis parameter, N t is thermophoresis parameter, γ3 is the relaxation
time parameter, Sc represents Schmidt number and P r is Prandtl number. These
dimensionless, numbers are defined as
gβT T0 L2 gβC C0 L2 τ DB C0
λ3 := , λ4 := , N b := ,
u0 ν u0 ν ν
τ DT ν ν τ α1ν α
N t := , P r := , Sc := γ3 := .
ν α3 DB Γ(1 + α)L2α
Further non-dimensional coefficient of skin friction, Nussselt and Sherwood numbers
are stated as α

α ∂ 2 ∂u
1 + λ1 α Cf = , (4.22)
∂t Re ∂y y=−1
∂ α N u1 ∂ α N u2

∂T ∂T
1 + γ3 α =− and 1 + γ3 α = − ,
∂t Re ∂y y=1 ∂t Re2 ∂y y=−1
α
α
(4.23)
∂ Sh1 ∂C ∂ Sh2 ∂C
1 + γ3 α =− and 1 + γ3 α 2
=− ,
∂t Re ∂y y=1 ∂t Re ∂y y=−1
(4.24)
u0 L
where Re = is Reynold number.
ν
4.3 Solution methodology 67
4.3 Solution methodology

Finite element and finite difference algorithms along with apropriate operatores as
stated in chapters 2 and 3 are considered to discretize current flow equations. Finally,
following system of algebraic equations are solved after discretization with Newton’s
Method.



 Ah0 Lαk+1 [Uh ] (tk+1 ) + τ Bh0 Qαk+1 [Uh ] (tk+1 ) + τ λ3 Mh0 Th + τ λ4 Mh0 Ch = 0,


P rAh Lα [Th ] + τ Bh Th − τ P rN bCh (tk )C h Qα [Th ]


 1 k+1 1 1 k+1


−τ P rN tTh (tk )C1h Qαk+1 [Th ] = 0, (4.25)

h α h Nt h
ScA1 Lk+1 [Ch ] + τ B1 Ch + τ B1 Th = 0,






 N b

U0 = 0 = U1 , T0 = 0 = T1 , C0 = 0 = C1 ,

h h h h h h
where for all p, q = 1, 2, · · · , N0h and l, m = 1, 2, · · · , N1h .
(Uh )p := up , (Th )l := Tl , (Ch )l := Cl ,

p q p q p q
(Ah0 )qp := (W0h , W0h ) , (Bh0 )qp := hW0h , W0h i, (Mh0 )qp := (W0h , W0h ),
(Ah1 )lm := W1hl m
, (Bh1 )lm := hW1hl m
i, (C1h )lm := hW1h
l m

, W1h , W1h , W1h i.
4.4 Convergence of proposed scheme

Numerical scheme is proven with spatial directions error analysis and theoretical error
bounds.
Theorem 4.4.1 (Convergence) Suppose ψ(·, t) and ψhk+1 (·) are solutions to (4.2.1.5)
and (4.25) respectively. Constant C0 > 0, independent of step sizes h and τ exists,
such that
kψ(·, tk+1 ) − ψhk+1 (·)kL2 (Ω) ≤ C0 hr+1 + τ 2−α , 0 ≤ k < m,

(4.26)
kψ(·, tk+1 ) − ψhk+1 (·)kH 1 (Ω) ≤ C0 hr + τ 2−α , 0 ≤ k < m.

(4.27)
Proof The bounds (4.26) and (4.27) can be determined like those, in the proofs of
the theorems exhibited in [106, Theorem 3.2] and [20, Theorem 4.5].
4.4.1 Scheme validation

Numerical and theoretical error approximations of the scheme developed in foregoing
section, we fabricate an exact solution by introducing Fart (y, t) an artificial source
term on right hand side, of equations (4.2.1.5) and review the model as
 α
β
2
α ∂ ∂u β ∂ ∂ u
1 + λ1 α = 1 + λ2 β + λ3 T + λ4 C + Fart1 (y, t),


∂y 2



 ∂t ∂t ∂t
 α
2
α
2 !
∂ ∂ ∂ T ∂ ∂T ∂C ∂T


P r

1 + γ3 α T = + P r 1 + γ 3 N b + N t
∂t ∂t ∂y 2 ∂tα ∂y ∂y ∂y


 +F (y, t),
2 art2


α 2


 ∂ ∂ ∂ C Nt ∂ T
Sc 1 + γ3 α C = + + Fart3 (y, t),


∂t ∂t ∂y 2 N b ∂y 2
(4.28)
with the applied IC’s and BC’s. In order to develop the fabricated exact solutions of
the model we choose smooth functions, uex (y, t), Tex (y, t) and Cex (y, t) which fulfill
IC’s and BC’s of (4.2.1.5). By inserting uex , Tex and Cex in the above equations, the
artificial source terms Fart1 , Fart2 and Fart3 can be easily computed. Consequently,
uex , Tex and Cex will become exact solutions of (4.28). For solution fabrication we
π
have picked, uex (y, t) = t2 sin πy, Tex (y, t) = 4t(1 − y 2 ) and Cex (y, t) = t cos y. It is
2
beneficial to say that the artificial source terms are incorporated into the model just
to approve and validate the numerical plan convergence. In figures 4.2(a), 4.3(a) and
4.4(a), approximate error curves have been plotted in logarithmic scales, of L2 (Ω) and
H 1 (Ω) norms by considering four unique estimations of the space discretization step
size h and plotted the error curves. In accordance to theoretical estimates stated as
(4.26) and (4.27), slopes of error curves should be very near to r +1 and r respectively,
here r represents degree of the polynomial. We are considering Lagrange polynomials
of first degree, i.e., ℘1 − elements, so exact values of error curves slopes should be equal
to 2 in case of L2 (Ω) error and equal to 1 in case of H 1 (Ω) error. This demonstrates
that the developed numerical scheme is convergent and agrees with the theoretically
estimated convergence rates. Moreover, we have computed and compared the exact
and approximate solutions presented in figures 4.2(b), 4.3(b) and 4.4(b). It shows
velocity, temperature and concentration profiles of the exact (fabricated) and approx-
imated solutions at a fixed final time t = 1. The figure shows that the exact and
approximate solutions are in good agreement. All these computations show that the
numerical scheme introduced in foregoing section is valid and apposite for physical
simulations of the model (4.2.1.5).
4.5 Results and discussion 69
0.5
log(L2(u − uex)), log(H1(u − uex))

−0.5
−1
Slope = 0.9925
−1.5
−2 Slope = 1.8621
−2.5
−3
−3.5
−1.8 −1.7 −1.6 −1.5 −1.4 −1.3 −1.2 −1.1 −1 −0.9
log(h)
(a) L2 (Ω) and H 1 (Ω) Error Curves
0.8
uapp(y,t)
0.6 u (y,t)
ex
0.4
0.2
−0.2
−0.4
−0.6
−0.8
−1
−1 −0.5 0 0.5 1
−1 ≤ y ≤ 1
(b) Exact fabricated and numerical solution curves
Figure 4.2: Numerical scheme validation for velocity
4.5 Results and discussion

In the present study we have examined flow of a fractional Oldroyd-B nanofluid.
Analysis has been carried out for thermophoresis and pedesis effects. Non-integer Ca-
−1
log(L2(T − Tex)), log(H1(T − Tex))

−2
−3
Slope = 1.0002
−4
−5
Slope = 2.2170
−6
−7
−3.5 −3.4 −3.3 −3.2 −3.1 −3 −2.9 −2.8 −2.7
log(h)
3.5
2.5
1.5
Tapp(y,t)
1
Tex(y,t)
0.5
0
−1 −0.5 0 0.5 1
−1 ≤ y ≤ 1
Figure 4.3: Numerical scheme validation for temperature
puto fractional model is solved with the help of finite element-finite difference scheme.
Fractional time derivative is discretized by finite difference scheme while finite ele-
ment discretization is for spatial variables. Analysis of the numerical solutions with
−2.5
−3
log(L2(C − Cex)), log(H1(C − Cex))

−3.5
−4
Slope = 1.0001
−4.5
−5
−5.5
−6 Slope = 1.7771
−6.5
−7
−7.5
−3 −2.9 −2.8 −2.7 −2.6 −2.5
log(h)
0.8
0.6
0.4
Capp(y,t)
0.2
Cex(y,t)
0
−1 −0.5 0 0.5 1
−1 ≤ y ≤ 1
Figure 4.4: Numerical scheme validation for concentration
respect to different dimensionless parameters is analyzed in this section. Variations

of velocity, temperature and concentration by varying these dimensionless numbers
help to interpret the current flow regime. Monotonic behavior of all the dimensionless
parameters on the momentum, thermal and concentration profiles is observed in this

study. Effects of involved parameters on the velocity, temperature and concentration
profiles are plotted for the final time t = 2. Figure 4.5 exhibits the velocity profile
= 0.1, 0.4, 0.7, 0.9

3
u(y,t)
1 = 0.1
0
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
y
(a) Variation of velocity profile with α.
4
= 0.9
3
u(y,t)
= 0.1, 0.4, 0.7, 0.9
0
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
y
(b) Variation of velocity profile with β.
Figure 4.5: Effect of fractional exponents α and β on the velocity profile when λ1 =
0.4, λ2 = 0.3, λ3 = 0.3, λ4 = 0.4, N t = 0.9, N b = 0.8, Sc = 0.5, P r = 0.5, γ3 = 0.1.
for various values of fractional exponents α and β. It is concluded that increase of

fractional number α, velocity profile and associated momentum boundary layer thick-
ness increase while opposite effects are observed for the fractional number β. Figure
4.6 is sketched to analyze the effect of relaxation time parameter λ1 and retardation
time parameter λ2 on the velocity profiles. Velocity profile decreases while corre-
sponding boundary layer, thickness increases with the increase of λ1 . The relaxation
time is higher for greater values of λ1 . Consequently, velocity profile decreases by
increase of λ1 while contrary behavior is seen in case of retardation time λ2 . The
greater λ2 correspond to higher retardation time which give rise to fluid velocity. The
analysis of fractional Maxwell fluid flow can be recovered by putting λ2 = 0 in the
momentum equation. Also with λ1 = 0 = λ2 summarize the results of viscous fluid.
Effects of mixed convection parameter, λ3 and diffusion parameter, λ4 on velocity
profile is sketched in figures 4.7 and 4.8. It is noted that velocity profile and asso-
ciated momentum boundary layer thickness are at higher level for greater values of
λ3 . Convection number has direct influence on buoyancy forces while inverse behavior
is noted for inertial forces. Also, when λ3 > 0 energy is moved from plates to fluid
flow. As a result (Ts1 − T0 ) and (Ts2 − T0 ) increase. Hence with the increase of λ3 ,
buoyancy forces, (Ts1 − T0 ) and (Ts2 − T0 ) increase. Therefore fluid velocity increases.
Similar effects are observed for the diffusion parameter λ4 . Figure 4.9 is plotted to
show simultaneous behavior of thermophoresis number N t and pedesis number N b
on the velocity, temperature and concentration profiles. As expected velocity, tem-
perature and concentration profile increase by the increase of N t in figure 4.9(a).
Corresponding boundary layers thicknesses are at higher levels for larger values of
N t. The concentration profile increases more rapidly than the temperature and ve-
locity profile. By increase of N t, the viscosity and heat capacity of the base fluid
decrease, as a result velocity and temperature profiles increase. Also concentration
profile increases with the increase of thermophoretic diffusion coefficient. It is noted
that velocity and concentration profiles decrease while temperature profiles increase
with the increase of pedesis parameter N b 4.9(b). Velocity and concentration bound-
ary layers thicknesses are at higher levels while thermal layer thickness is at lower
level, for smaller values of N b. Again concentration profile decreases more rapidly
than the velocity profiles. Opposite behavior of temperature is due to the presence
of Brownian diffusion coefficient in the dimensionless expression of N b. Figure 4.10 is
plotted to show simultaneous behavior of Prandtl number P r and Schmidt number
Sc on the velocity, temperature and concentration profiles. Concentration profiles
increase while velocity and temperature profiles decrease with the increase of Prandtl
2
= 0.2
4
3
u(y,t)
2 = 0.3, 0.5, 0.7, 0.9

1
0
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
y
(a) Variation of velocity profile with λ1 .
1
= 0.9
2
= 0.1,0.4,0.7,0.8
u(y,t)
0
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
y
(b) Variation of velocity profile with λ2 .
Figure 4.6: Effect of relaxation time parameter λ1 and retardation time parameter λ2
on the velocity profile when α = 0.8, β = 0.7, λ3 = 0.9, λ4 = 0.8, N t = 0.9, N b = 0.8,
Sc = 0.9, P r = 5, γ3 = 0.1.
number P r in figure 4.10(a). The concentration and temperature profiles change

3
= 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8
3
u(y,t)
1 = 0.1
4
0
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
y
4
= 0.1, 0.3, 0.5, 0.7
3
u(y,t)
3
= 0.1
1
0
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
y
Figure 4.7: Effect of convection parameter λ3 and diffusion parameter λ4 on the

velocity profile when α = 0.5, β = 0.6, λ1 = 0.9, λ2 = 0.6, N t = 0.1, N b = 0.2,
Sc = 0.5, P r = 0.4, γ3 = 0.1.
more rapidly than the velocity profiles. Concentration boundary layer thickness, is at
15
3
= 0.3,1.3, 2.3, 3.3
10
u(y,t)
5
4
= 0.4
0
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
y
20
4
= 0.5, 1.5, 2.5, 3.5
15
u(y,t)
10
5 = 0.3
3
0
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
y
Figure 4.8: Effect of convection parameter λ3 and diffusion parameter λ4 on the

velocity profile over time interval [0, 3] when α = 0.3, β = 0.2, λ1 = 0.4, λ2 = 0.3,
N t = 0.9, N b = 0.8, Sc = 0.5, P r = 0.5, γ3 = 0.1.
higher levels while momentum and thermal boundary layer thicknesses remained at
5
Nt = 0.1,0.3,0.5,0.7
4
T (y,t)
1 u (y,t)
C (y,t)
0
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
y
(a) Variations of N t when N b = 0.4.
5
Nb = 0.8,0.6,0.4,0.2
2 Nb = 0.8,0.6,0.4,0.2
T(y,t)
1 u (y,t)
C (y,t)
0
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
y
(b) Variations of N b when N t = 0.6.
Figure 4.9: Effect of thermophoresis parameter N t and pedesis parameter N b on the

velocity, temperature and concentration profiles when α = 0.2, β = 0.1, λ1 = 0.4,
λ2 = 0.3, λ3 = 0.8, λ4 = 0.9, P r = 0.7, Sc = 0.5.
lower level for higher values of P r. Prandtl number defines as the ratio of momentum
4
Pr = 0.5,1.5,2.5,3.5
Pr = 0.5,1.5,2.5,3.5
1 T (y,t)
u (y.t)
C (y,t)
0
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
y
(a) Variations of P r when λ3 = 0.8, λ4 = 0.1, N b = 0.7,
N t = 0.8, Sc = 0.9.
2
Sc = 0.1,0.4, 0.7,0.9
T (y, t)
1 u (y, t)
C (y, t)
0
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
y
(b) Variations of Sc when λ3 = 0.1, λ4 = 0.9, N b = 0.4,
N t = 0.5, P r = 5.
Figure 4.10: Effect of Prandtl number P r and Schmidt number Sc on the velocity,
temperature and concentration profiles when α = 0.8, β = 0.1, λ1 = 0.9, λ2 = 0.8.
diffusivity and thermal diffusivity. With the increase of P r the momentum diffusivity
increases. Hence concentration profile increases with the increase of P r. But with the
increase of P r thermal diffusivity decreases while viscosity of fluid increases. As a re-
sult, the temperature and velocity profiles decrease. Relative thickness of momentum
and thermal boundary layers is managed by P r. Heat diffuses gradually and thermal
boundary layer is at lower level for lager values of P r while contrary trend is observed
at smaller values of P r. It is eminent that velocity and concentration profiles decrease
while temperature profiles increase with the increase of Schmidt number Sc in figure
4.10(b). With the increase of Sc, the viscosity of fluid increases while Brownian dif-
fusion coefficient decreases. Hence velocity and concentration remained at lower level
for higher values of Sc. Velocity and concentration boundary layers thicknesses are at
lower levels while thermal boundary layer thickness is at higher level for larger values
of Sc. Also note that concentration profiles decrease more rapidly than the velocity
profiles. Figures 4.11 and 4.12 are displayed for the transient velocity, temperature
and concentration profiles over the time intervals [0, 1], [0, 2], [0, 3] and [0, 4] for dif-
ferent sets of physical parameters. All the figures illustrated anomalous character of
fractional Oldroyd-B fluid. Finally, figures 4.13 and 4.14 are plotted for the influence
of embedded parameters on the skin friction coefficient over time interval [0, 1].
Effects of various fractional model parameters on the local Nusselt and Sherwood
numbers at the final time t = 2 are studied in tables 4.1 and 4.2. It is obvious that for
plate at y = L Nusselt number show increasing behavior with increase of N t and N b
while contrary behavior is noted for Sc and P r. At the same time Sherwood number
increases with the increase of N t and P r while opposite trend is seen for N b and Sc.
For the lower plate i.e. at y = −L Nusselt number show decreasing behavior with
increase of N t, N b and Sc while contrary behavior is noted for P r. Sherwood number
increases with the increase of N b and Sc while opposite trend is seen for N t and P r.
t=1
0.8
0.6
u(y,t)
0.4
0.2
0
-1
0 0.8 1
0.4 0.6
10 0.2
y t
(a)
3.5 t=2
3
2.5
u(y,t)
1.5
0.5
0
-1 2
-0.5 1.5
0 1
0.5 0.5
1 0
y t
(b)
Figure 4.11: Transient velocity profiles for different values of parameters over the time
intervals [0, 1] and [0, 2] when α = 0.8, β = 0.1, λ1 = 0.9, λ2 = 0.8, λ3 = 0.1, λ4 = 0.9,
N t = 0.5, N b = 0.4, Sc = 0.9, P r = 5, γ3 = 0.1.
10
8 t=3
6
u(y,t)
0
4
-1 -0.5 0 2
0.5 10
y t
(a)
16
14
t=4
12
10
u(y,t)
0 4
2
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 10
y t
(b)
intervals [0, 3] and [0, 4] when α = 0.5, β = 0.7, λ1 = 0.3, λ2 = 0.2, λ3 = 0.3, λ4 = 0.5,
N t = 0.3, N b = 0.5, Sc = 0.4, P r = 0.6, γ3 = 0.1.
-0.2
-0.4
Cf
-0.6
-0.8
α = 0.7, 0.5, 0.3, 0.1
-1
-1.2
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
t
(a)
-0.02
-0.04
-0.06
Cf
Re = 20, 15, 10, 5

-0.08
-0.1
-0.12
-0.14
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
t
(b)
Figure 4.13: Effects of fractional exponent and Reynold number on skin friction co-
efficient over the time interval [0, 1] when β = 0.7, λ1 = 0.1, λ2 = 0.2, λ3 = 0.3,
λ4 = 0.5, N t = 0.3, N b = 0.5, Sc = 0.4, P r = 0.6, γ3 = 0.1.
λ 1 = 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4

-0.1
-0.2
-0.3
Cf
-0.4
-0.5
-0.6
-0.7
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
t
(a)
-0.1
-0.2
-0.3
-0.4
Cf
-0.5
-0.6
-0.7
λ 2 = 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8
-0.8
-0.9
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
t
(b)
Figure 4.14: Effects of relaxation and retardation time parameters on skin friction
coefficient over the time interval [0, 1] when α = 0.2, β = 0.7, λ3 = 0.3, λ4 = 0.5,
N t = 0.3, N b = 0.5, Sc = 0.4, P r = 0.6, Re = 5, γ3 = 0.1.
Table 4.1: Effects of non linear flow model parameters on the local Nusselt and
sherwood numbers at (y, t) = (1, 2) when γ3 = 0.1
Nt Nb Sc Pr N u1 /Re Sh1 /Re
0.1 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.6425 0.7842
0.2 0.6562 1.1103
0.3 0.6701 1.4159
0.1 0.1 0.6425 0.7842
0.2 0.6528 0.6079
0.3 0.6631 0.5491
0.1 0.3 0.6425 0.7842
0.4 0.6414 0.6058
0.5 0.6404 0.4332
0.3 0.2 0.6425 0.7842
0.3 0.4663 0.9536
0.4 0.2927 1.1198
Table 4.2: Effects of non linear flow model parameters on the local Nusselt and
Sherwood numbers at (y, t) = (−1, 2), for γ3 = 0.2
Nt Nb Sc Pr N u2 /Re2 Sh2 /Re2
0.1 0.1 0.3 0.2 1.5168 1.3250
0.2 1.4983 0.8509
0.3 1.4800 0.4055
0.1 0.1 1.5168 1.3250
0.2 1.4933 1.5865
0.3 1.4701 1.6736
0.1 0.3 1.5168 1.3250
0.4 1.5152 1.5938
0.5 1.5136 1.8558
0.3 0.2 1.5168 1.3250
0.3 1.7639 1.0854
0.4 2.003 0.8543
Chapter 5
Joule heating in magnetic resistive

flow of a viscoelastic fluid
Contents
5.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
5.2 Governing partial differential equations . . . . . . . . . . 87
5.3 Solution Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
5.3.1 Flowchart of Numerical Scheme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
5.3.2 Convergence of Scheme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
5.4 Discussion on simulated results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
86
5.1 Introduction 87
5.1 Introduction
Influence of electric and magnetic fields in a nonlinear viscoelastic flow is studied in
this chapter. Microscopic interpretation for Joule heating is possible with the present
model. Fractional mechanism of the problem with Cataneo-Maxwell model leads
to oscillation and relaxation processes that show memory and delay of thermal and
diffusing flux. Abrupt change in temperature and concentration in MHD flow can be
controlled with this formalism. Time dependent flow is governed by highly nonlinear
fractional differential equations. Finite element-finite difference algorithm is used to
solve the fractional coupled fields and flow dynamics problem. Remarkable physical
parameters are simulated to reveal the significance of problem under observation.
5.2 Governing partial differential equations

Time dependent MHD flow is considered with thermal and concentration sources at
the boundary points. Electric and magnetic fields are orthogonal to flow direction with
vector representation E = (0, 0, −E0 ) and B = (0, B0 , 0) respectively. Ohm’s law is
obeyed by these fields i.e. J = σ(E+U×B), here U = (u(y, t), 0, 0) is the velocity field,
σ denotes the electrical conductivity and J stands for Joule current. Convection along
with diffusion are taken into consideration for thorough interpretation of body forces.
At time t = 0, whole flow domain is at steady temperature T0 and concentration C0 .
Also temperature and concentration depend upon t and y only. For basic derivation of
proposed model, one can see, chapter 1, sections 1.4 and 1.6. For fractional formalism
of the model one can see sections 1.3.3 and 1.3.4 in chapter 1. In the present case
continuity equation is identically satisfied for proposed velocity field U, incompressible
flow is modeled by the following fractional differential equations
α α
2
∂ α ∂ α ∂ ∂ u σ
E0 B0 − B02 u +gβT (T −T0 )+gβC (C−C0 ),

1 + λ1 α u = ν 1 + λ2 α 2
+
∂t ∂t ∂t ∂y ρf
! ! (5.1)
β β
∂ τ1 ∂β ∂ 2T σ τ1 ∂β
1+ β
T = α 3 2
+ 1 + β
(B0 u − E0 )2 , (5.2)
∂t Γ (1 + β) ∂t ∂y ρ f cf Γ (1 + β) ∂t
τ3γ ∂γ ∂ 2C

∂
1+ C = D A , (5.3)
∂t Γ (1 + γ) ∂tγ ∂y 2
here α Caputo fractional derivative is for momentum memory effect, ρf stands for
density of the fluid, λ1 , τ1 , τ3 denote the relaxation times, λ2 stands for retardation
time, T is temperature, C denotes the concentration, β Caputo fractional derivative is
88 Joule heating in magnetic resistive flow of a viscoelastic fluid
Fix upper plate Applied Magnetic Field

Thermal Source B Concentration Source B
Flow Field
Applied Electric Field
U T
C
n=1 Thermal Source A n=2 Concentration Source A n=3
Variable Movement of lower plate
Figure 5.1: Schematic of flow geometry.
for thermal memory effect, γ Caputo fractional derivative stands for diffusion memory
effect, cf denotes specific heat, α3 is thermal diffusivity, DA denotes diffusion coef-
ficient, g is gravitational acceleration, βC , βT are coefficients of volumetric diffusion
and thermal expansions, T0 , C0 are temperature and concentration constants. For
convenience, pressure gradient is neglected.
Initial and boundary conditions for the flow field under consideration are defined as
ν n
u (0, t) = u0 t , u (L, t) = 0, (5.4)
L2
ν2 2
ν
T (0, t) = T0 1 + 4 t and T (L, t) = T0 1 + 2 t t > 0, (5.5)
L L
ν2 2
ν
C(0, t) = C0 1 + 4 t and C(L, t) = C0 1 + 2 t t > 0, (5.6)
L L
∂u
u(y, 0) = 0 = (y, 0), T (y, 0) = T0 , C(y, 0) = C0 , (5.7)
∂t
5.2 Governing partial differential equations 89
∂T T0 ν ∂C
(y, 0) = 3 y = (y, 0) |y| ≤ L. (5.8)
∂t L ∂t
In above equations, u0 is dimensional constant and ν denotes, kinematic viscosity.
Finally, IBVP modeling the current flow field is given by (5.1)–(5.8).
5.2.0.2 Remarkable physical parameters
For reduction of metallic taint, oxidation in food processing via Joule heating, coeffi-
cient of skin friction, Nusselt and Sherwood numbers are quite important to measure
surface friction, heat and mass flux at bounding surfaces. Friction coefficient is impor-
tant for accumulation of drag between fluid and surrounding boundary. In governing
flow field skin friction coefficient is defined as
2τw
Cf := 2 , (5.9)
ρu0
α

α ∂ ∂u
1 + λ1 α τ w = µ . (5.10)
∂t ∂y (y=0)
Using (5.10) in (5.9), friction coefficient is given by

α

α ∂ 2ν ∂u
1 + λ1 α Cf = 2 . (5.11)
∂t u0 ∂y y=0
Also, for current flow domain Nusselt and Sherwood numbers are given by

∂T
! −L ∂y −L ∂C
τ1β ∂β γ γ

y=0 τ3 ∂ ∂y
y=0
1+ β
(N u1 ) = , 1+ γ
(Sh1 ) = ,
Γ (1 + β) ∂t Ts1 − T0 Γ (1 + γ) ∂t C s1 − C 0
where Ts1 and Cs1 stand for temperature and concentration nearer the plate, at y = 0.
Nusselt and Sherwood numbers for plate, at y = L are given by

∂T ∂C
β
! −L γ −L
∂β ∂γ

τ1 ∂y
y=L τ3 ∂y
y=L
1+ β
(N u 2 ) = , 1 + γ
(Sh 2 ) = ,
Γ (1 + β) ∂t Ts2 − T0 Γ (1 + γ) ∂t C s2 − C 0
here Ts2 , Cs2 denote temperature and concentration nearer plate, at y = L.
5.2.0.3 Non-dimensional flow equations
We consider the below mention dimensionless quantities to non-dimensionalized the

IBVP (5.1)–(5.8)
y ν u T − T0 b := C − C0 .
yb := , t := 2 t u
b b := , Tb := C (5.12)
L L u0 T0 C0
90 Joule heating in magnetic resistive flow of a viscoelastic fluid
With (5.12), after dropping hats of non dimensional quantities the IBVP (5.1)–(5.8)
becomes
α α
2
∂ α ∂ α ∂ ∂ u
1 + λ1 α u = 1 + λ2 α + Ha (E1 − u) + λ3 T + λ4 C,
∂t ∂t ∂t ∂y 2
∂β ∂ 2T ∂β

∂
Pr 1 + β1 β T = + HaEcP r 1 + β1 β (u − E1 )2 , (5.13)
∂t ∂t ∂y 2 ∂t
∂γ ∂ 2C

∂
Sc 1 + γ1 γ C = .
∂t ∂t ∂y 2
with below mentioned boundary and initial conditions



 u(0, t) = tn , u(1, t) = 0, T (0, t) = t2 = C(0, t), T (1, t) = t = C(1, t),

 ∂u
u(y, 0) = 0 = (y, 0), T (y, 0) = 0 = C(y, o) and
 ∂t

 ∂T ∂C
 (y, 0) = y =
 (y, 0).
∂t ∂t
(5.14)
Where λ1 , denotes relaxation time, λ2 denotes retardation time parameter, Ha is
magnetic number, E1 stands for electric number, λ3 , λ4 are convection and diffusion
parameters, P r is the Prandtl number, β1 is thermal relaxation number, Ec is the
Eckert number, γ1 is relaxation time parameter and Sc is Schmidt number. These
dimensionless numbers are defined as
gL2 βT T0 gL2 βC C0 τ1β ν β τ2γ ν γ

λ3 := , λ4 := , β1 := , γ1 := ,
u0 ν u0 ν Γ(1 + β)L2β Γ(1 + γ)L2γ
σB02 L2 E0 ν ν u20
Ha := , E1 := , P r := , Sc := , Ec := . (5.15)
µ B0 u0 α3 DA cf T0
Further, non-dimensional coefficient of skin friction, Nussselt and Sherwood numbers

are defined as α

α ∂ 2 ∂u
1 + λ1 α C f = , (5.16)
∂t Re ∂y y=0
∂ β N u1 ∂ β N u2

∂T ∂T
1 + β1 β = − and 1 + β 1 = − ,
∂t Re2 ∂y y=0 ∂tβ Re ∂y y=1
(5.17)
γ γ

∂ Sh1 ∂C ∂ Sh2 ∂C
1 + γ1 γ 2
=− and 1 + γ1 γ =− , (5.18)
∂t Re ∂y y=0 ∂t Re ∂y y=1
here Re = u0 L/ν is Reynold number.
5.3 Solution Methodology
Finite element and finite difference algorithms along with apropriate operatores as
stated in chapters 2 and 3 are used to discretize the current flow differential equations.
After discretization, we have solved the following algebraic equations, with Newton’s
Method

h α h α h h h
M1 Lk+1 [Uh ] + N1 Qk+1 Uh + HaM1 Uh − λ3 M1 Th − λ4 M1 Ch − HaE1Wh = 0,



P Mh Lβ [T ] + N h T − HaEcP rN h (u (t ))Qβ [U )]

r 2 k+1 h 2 h 3 h k k+1 h
(5.19)


 +2HaECP rE1 M2 Qk+1 Uh − HaECP rE12 Wh = 0,
h α

ScMh3 Lγk+1 [Ch ] + N3h Ch = 0.


5.3.1 Flowchart of Numerical Scheme
START
First we find physical values of α, β, β1 , γ, γ1 , λ1 , λ2 , λ3 , λ4 , Ha, Ec, P r, Sc, E1

and n.
Define global matrices Mh h h h h h

1 , M2 , M3 , N1 , N2 , N3 and Jacobian J all of
order (dim Vk + 1) × (dim Vk + 1) and vectors Uh , Th , Ch of order (dim Vkh +
h h
1) × 1. Initialize all matrix and vector entries to zero.
Set initial guess $

e 0 = (U0 , T0 , C0 ), relative error = 1 and tolerance T OL =
10−6 .
Fractional Time Iterations: i ← 0 : N , Compute element matrices and for all

j ← 0 : N , element matrices Mj1 , Mj2 , Mj3 , N1j , N2j , N3j and Jacobian J j of
order 2 × 2, add element matrices into the corresponding positions in global
matrices.
Apply boundary conditions and with Newton iteration while > T OL, find
$ e i ← i + 1, compute .
e = (Uh , Th , Ch ), set $i+1 = $i + $,
Update solutions Uh , Th , Ch , end procedure and plot the solutions.
STOP
91
5.3.2 Convergence of Scheme
Validation of numerical scheme is important before performing real simulations. Hence
we calculated numerical error estimates and provide comparison with theoretical error
estimates. We postulate that the model under consideration satisfy the following error
estimates
kφh (tk ) − φex (tk )kL2 (Ω) ≤ C1 (hr+1 + τ 2−α ), (5.20)

kφh (tk ) − φex (tk )kH 1 (Ω) ≤ C2 (hr + τ 2−α ). (5.21)
where C1 > 0 and C2 > 0 are constants, do not depend upon step sizes h and τ .
Numerical and theoretical error estimates, are compared and validated via fabricated
exact solutions of governing problem by considering artificial source terms Ff ab1 , Ff ab2
and Ff ab3 into the model 5.13 as follows
α α
 2
∂ α ∂ α ∂ ∂ u
1 + λ1 α u = 1 + λ2 α + Ha (E1 − u) + λ3 T + λ4 C + Ff ab1 (y, t),


∂t ∂t ∂t ∂y 2




∂β ∂ 2T ∂β

 ∂
Pr 1 + β1 β T = 2
+ HaEcP r 1 + β1 β (u − E1 )2 + Ff ab2 (y, t),

 ∂t ∂t ∂y ∂t
γ 2
∂ ∂ ∂ C


Sc 1 + γ1 γ C = + Ff ab3 (y, t),


∂t ∂t ∂y 2
(5.22)
with the same initial and boundary conditions. The fabricated exact solutions uex (y, t),
Tex (y, t) and Cex (y, t) satisfy the initial and boundary conditions. In order to show
the validity of the scheme, we have incorporated the respective Ff ab1 , Ff ab2 and Ff ab3
in (5.19). Further, the error curves have been computed and shown in the figures
(5.2(a)), (5.2(b)) and (5.3). Approximated errors are considered, in logarithmic
1
scales of L2 (Ω), H (Ω) norms by taking eight step sizes h, as illustrated in these fig-
ures. It is noted that error curves slopes in these figures are approximately equal to
3 and 2 respectively, for L2 (Ω) and H 1 (Ω). In theoretical estimation, 5.20 and 5.21
Lagrange polynomials degrees are accordingly r + 1 and r. Since we are considering
quadratic Lagrange polynomial, so slopes of corresponding error curves should be 3 in
L2 (Ω) and 2 in H1 (Ω) norms. This demonstrate that the error estimates computed by
using the numerical scheme are in complete agreement with the theoretical error esti-
mates. According to these observations, we conclude that proposed numerical scheme
(5.19) is convergent and suitable for real simulations of model 5.13.
92
0
-2
-4 log(||u - uex||L ( )
)
2
Slope = 1.798 log(||u - uex||H1( ))
-6
Slope = 3.024
-8
-10
-12
-2.4 -2.2 -2 -1.8 -1.6 -1.4 -1.2 -1
log(h)
(a) L2 and H1 error curves for velocity.
-1
-2
-3
-4
log(||T - Tex||L (Ω)
)
-5 2
Slope = 1.999
log(||T - Tex||H1 (Ω))
-6
-7
-8 Slope = 3.445
-9
-10
-11
-2.4 -2.2 -2 -1.8 -1.6 -1.4 -1.2 -1
log(h)
(b) L2 and H1 error curves for temperature.
Figure 5.2: Numerical error estimate for velocity and temperature.
5.4 Discussion on simulated results

Numerical results for velocity, thermal and diffusion fields are given in this section.
Formulation of flow model in terms of non-integer time derivatives leads to understand
the microscopic description of Joule heating along with memory effects. Simulations
93
0
-2
-4 log(||C - Cex||L ( )
)
2
Slope = 2.005 log(||C - Cex||H1( ))
-6
Slope = 2.995
-8
-10
-12
-2.4 -2.2 -2 -1.8 -1.6 -1.4 -1.2 -1
log(h)
Figure 5.3: L2 and H1 error curves for concentration.
have been carried out using Matlab R2017a code. For the physical understanding, we
have plotted the behavior of involved dimensionless numbers, for large time. Further,
we have calculated quantities of industrial interest, for small time. Figure 5.4 is
sketched to see the velocity field for various values of momentum memory number
α. It is noted that for higher values of α, velocity is at higher level. Variation in
velocity is smaller for flow generation number n = 1 than n = 2, see 5.4(a) and
5.4(b). Variations in velocity for numerous values of relaxation time λ1 , retardation
time λ2 are sketched in figure 5.5. It is seen that velocity decreases with the increase
of λ1 in 5.5(a) while opposite trend is observed for λ2 , see figure 5.5(b). As time
required by viscoelastic fluid to recover after deformation increases results in decrease
of fluid velocity in flow domain while opposite pattern is seen in case of retardation
time. Influence of electric and magnetic field parameters on the velocity is observed in
figure 5.6. It is eminent that velocity decreases with the increase of Ha while opposite
behavior is observed in case of electric number, E1 for both flow generation numbers
n = 1 and n = 2. With the increase of Ha Lorentz force increases which resist the
motion of fluid 5.6(a). On the other hand as electric parameter increases Lorentz force
decreases, results in increase of fluid velocity 5.6(b). Similar changes i.e. increasing
trend of velocity is seen for convection and diffusion parameters, see figure 5.7. Also
flow trends are merely similar for flow generation numbers n = 1 and n = 2 see 5.7(a)
and 5.7(b). Change in the thermal field is seen with respect to Prandtl number and
94
2
= 0, 0.5, 0.9, 0.95
1.5
u(y,t) n=1
0.96
0.5 0.95
0.94
0.49 0.5 0.51
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
(a) Variations of velocity profile with α.
4
= 0, 0.5, 0.9, 0.95
3
u(y,t)
1
n=2
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
(b) Variations of velocity profile with α.
Figure 5.4: Effects of magnetic and electric parameters on the velocity profile when
β = 0.1, γ = 0.2, β1 = 0.5, γ1 = 0.6, P r = 0.7, Sc = 0.3, Ec = 0.3, Ha = 0.8,
E1 = 0.2, λ1 = 0.6, λ2 = 0.9, λ3 = 0.1, λ4 = 0.1.
thermal relaxation time parameter via figure 5.8. Thermal field remained at lower
95
4
1.4
n=2
1.395
3
1.39
n=1 0.26 0.265
u(y,t)
2
= 0.2
1
1
= 0, 0.5, 1, 1.5
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
(a) Variations of velocity profile with λ1 .
4
n=2
3
2
= 0, 0.5, 1, 1.5
n=1
u(y,t)
1
= 0.3
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
(b) Variations of velocity profile with λ2 .
Figure 5.5: Effects of relaxation and retardation time parameters on the velocity
profile when α = 0.9, β = 0.3, γ = 0.6, β1 = 0.9, γ1 = 0.4, P r = 0.9, Sc = 0.8,
Ec = 0.5, λ3 = 0.1, λ4 = 0.1, Ha = 0.9, E1 = 0.1.
level for thermal fractional number β = 0.2 than β = 1. Also, decreasing trend for
96
4
n=2
3
n=1
u(y,t)
2
E1 = 0.1
Ha = 0, 1, 1.5, 2
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
(a) Variations of velocity profile with Ha.
4
n=2
3 E1 = 0, 1, 1.5, 2
n=1
u(y,t)
Ha = 1
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
(b) Variations of velocity profile with E1 .
Figure 5.6: Effects of magnetic and electric parameters on the velocity profile when
α = 0.7, β = 0.3, γ = 0.2, β1 = 0.4, γ1 = 0.3, P r = 0.8, Sc = 0.7, Ec = 0.3, λ1 = 0.5,
λ2 = 0.2, λ3 = 0.3, λ4 = 0.3.
temperature is seen, in case of Prandtl number in 5.8(a) and thermal relaxation time
97
4
n=2
3
3
= 0, 0.5, 1, 1.5
n=1
u(y,t)
4
= 0.1
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
(a) Variations of velocity profile with λ3 .
n=2
3
4
= 0, 0.5, 1, 1.5
n=1
u(y,t)
3
= 0.5
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
(b) Variations of velocity profile with λ4 .
Figure 5.7: Effects of convection and diffusion parameters on the velocity profile when
α = 0.5, β = 0.4, γ = 0.1, β1 = 0.7, γ1 = 0.8, P r = 1.5, Sc = 0.9, Ec = 0.5, λ1 = 0.7,
λ2 = 0.5, Ha = 0.7, E1 = 0.6.
parameter in 5.8(b). With the increase of P r thermal diffusivity decreases while the
98
momentum diffusivity increases in the flow configuration. Hence temperature profile
decreases with the increase of P r. Similar arguments hold for thermal relaxation
time parameter as for momentum relaxation time parameter. Temperature of the
flow field increases with the increase of magnetic parameter Ha 5.9(a) while decreases
with the increase of electric parameter in 5.9(b). Thermal profiles remained at higher
level, for thermal fractional number β = 1 than β = 0.2. 5.9. As stated earlier with
the increase of Ha Lorentz force increases while it decreases with the increase of E1 ,
results in increase (decrease) of resistance between different layers of the fluid. Hence
temperature profile increases (decreases) with the increase of Ha (E1 ). Figure 5.10
is plotted to show the absence and presence of Joule heating via Eckert number, for
Ec = 0 see figure 5.10(a) and for Ec 6= 0 see figure 5.10(b). Temperature profile
increases with the increase of Ec for both the thermal fractional numbers β = 1
and β = 0.2. With the increase of Ec advective transport of energy decreases while
potential of heat dissipation increases. Consequently, temperature profile increases
with the increase of Ec. Concentration in the flow domain decreases with the increase
of Schmidt number 5.11(a) and concentration relaxation time parameter 5.11(b). Also,
concentration profiles are at higher level for diffusion memory number γ = 1 than
γ = 0.3, see figure 5.11. Figures 5.12 and 5.13 are sketched for the 2D unsteady
velocity, temperature and concentration profiles over various time periods. All 2D
plots demonstrated anomalous behavior of fractional viscoelastic flow.
Finally, figures 5.14 and 5.15 are plotted for the influence of embedded parameters
on the skin friction coefficient over time interval [0, 1].
Effects of physical parameters, on Nusselt and Sherwood numbers are calculated
in tables 5.1 and 5.2. It is clear that absolute value of Nusselt number increases with
the increase of β, β1 , P r, E1 while it decreases with the increase of Ha, and Ec. Also,
absolute value of Sherwood number increases, with increase of γ, γ1 and Sc.
99
4
---- = 0.2
____ =1
3.5
3
T(y,t)
1
= 0.4
2.5
Pr = 0.2, 1.2, 2.2, 3.2

1.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
(a) Variations of temperature profile with P r.
4
---- = 0.2
____ =1
3.5
3
T(y,t)
2.5 Pr = 1.2
1
= 0.2, 1.2, 2.2, 3.2
1.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
(b) Variations of temperature profile with β1 .
Figure 5.8: Effects of Prandtl number and thermal relaxation time parameter on the
temperature profile when λ3 = 0.2, α = 0.4, γ = 0.4, λ4 = 0.1, γ1 = 0.7, n = 1,
Sc = 0.5, Ec = 0.7, λ1 = 0.7, λ2 = 0.5, Ha = 0.4, E1 = 0.6.
100
4
Ha = 0, 1, 2, 2.2
3.5
---- = 0.2
____
T(y,t)
=1
3
2.5 E1 = 0.4
2
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
(a) Variations of temperature profile with Ha.
4
---- = 0.2
____ =1
3.5
T(y,t)
3
Ha = 0.5
2.5
E1 = 0, 0.5, 1, 1.5
2
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
(b) Variations of temperature profile with E1 .
Figure 5.9: Effects of magnetic and electric parameters on the temperature profile
when α = 0.7, λ3 = 0.1, β1 = 0.8, γ = 0.3, λ4 = 0.2, γ1 = 0.9, n = 1, Sc = 0.9,
Ec = 0.8, λ1 = 0.7, λ2 = 0.9, P r = 1.
101
4
3.5
Ec = 0, 1, 1.5, 2
T(y,t)
2.5
---- = 0.2
____ =1
2
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
(a) Variations of temperature profile with Ec.
3.5
Ec = 2.2, 3.2
T(y,t)
2.5 ---- = 0.2

____ =1
2
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
(b) Variations of temperature profile with Ec.
Figure 5.10: Effects of Eckert number on the temperature profile when α = 0.5,
λ3 = 0.1, β1 = 0.7, γ = 0.2, λ4 = 0.2, γ1 = 0.8, n = 1, Sc = 0.6, Ha = 0.7, E1 = 0.6,
λ1 = 0.8, λ2 = 0.9, P r = 0.8.
102
4
---- = 0.3
____ =1
3.5
C(y,t)
1
= 0.5
2.5
Sc = 0.1, 0.5, 1, 1.5
2
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
(a) Variations of concentration profile with Sc.
4
---- = 0.3
____ =1
3.5
C(y,t)
Sc = 0.6
2.5
1
= 0, 0.5, 1, 1.5
2
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
(b) Variations of temperature profile with γ1 .
Figure 5.11: Effects of Schmidt number and concentration relaxation time parameter
on the concentration profile.
103
2
n=1
1.5
u(y,t)
0.5
0
0 2
1.5
0.5 1
0.5
1 0
y t
(a)
3 n=2
u(y,t)
0
0
2
1.5
0.5 1
0.5
1 0
y t
(b)
interval [0, 2] when α = 0.7, β = 0.5, γ = 0.9, β1 = 0.8, γ1 = 0.6, Sc = 0.9, Ha = 0.6,
Ec = 0.7, E1 = 0.5, λ1 = 0.7, λ2 = 0.8, λ3 = 0.2, λ4 = 0.3, P r = 0.5.
104
4
3
T(y,t)
0
0 2
1.5
0.5 1
0.5
1 0
y t
(a)
3
C(y,t)
0
0 2
1.5
0.5 1
0.5
1 0
y t
(b)
Figure 5.13: Transient temperature and concentration profiles for different values of
parameters over the time interval [0, 2] when α = 0.1, β = 0.4, γ = 0.6, n = 1,
β1 = 0.5, γ1 = 0.7, Sc = 0.6, Ha = 0.1, Ec = 0.5, E1 = 0.3, λ1 = 0.5, λ2 = 0.6,
λ3 = 0.3, λ4 = 0.3, P r = 0.9.
105
0
-0.1
-0.2
α = 0.9, 0.7, 0.4, 0.1

Cf
-0.3
-0.4
-0.5
-0.6
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
t
(a)
-0.05
-0.1
-0.15
λ 1 = 0.4, 0.3. 0.2, 0.1
Cf
-0.2
-0.25
-0.3
-0.35
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
t
(b)
Figure 5.14: Effects of fractional exponent and relaxation parameter on the skin
friction coefficient over time interval [0, 1] when β = 0.4, γ = 0.6, n = 1, β1 = 0.5,
γ1 = 0.7, Sc = 0.6, Ha = 0.1, Ec = 0.5, E1 = 0.3, λ1 = 0.5, λ2 = 0.6, λ3 = 0.3,
λ4 = 0.3, Re = 10, P r = 0.9.
106
0
-0.05
-0.1
Ha = 0, 1, 2, 3
Cf
-0.15
-0.2
-0.25
-0.3
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
t
(a)
-0.02
-0.04
-0.06
-0.08 Re = 40, 30, 20, 10

Cf
-0.1
-0.12
-0.14
-0.16
-0.18
-0.2
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
t
(b)
Figure 5.15: Effects of magnetic parameter and Reynold number on the skin friction
coefficient over time interval [0, 1] when α = 0.2, β = 0.4, γ = 0.6, n = 1, β1 = 0.5,
γ1 = 0.7, λ1 = 0.1, Sc = 0.6, Ec = 0.5, E1 = 0.3, λ1 = 0.5, λ2 = 0.6, λ3 = 0.3,
λ4 = 0.3, P r = 0.9.
107
Table 5.1: Effects of non linear flow model parameters on the local Nusselt numbers
at (y, t) = (0, 1), (y, t) = (1, 1) when α = 0.1, n = 1, λ1 = 0.5, λ2 = 0.6, λ3 = 0.1, and
λ4 = 0.1.
β β1 Pr Ha E1 Ec N u1 /Re2 N u2 /Re
0.1 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.378474 -0.289208
0.2 0.381082 -0.290673
0.3 0.3 0.383208 -0.291885
0.4 0.409564 -0.305953
0.5 0.4 0.435926 -0.320022
0.5 0.541965 -0.397377
0.6 0.2 0.646808 -0.473656
0.3 0.644499 -0.473183
0.4 0.1 0.642204 -0.472717
0.2 0.645201 -0.473691
0.3 0.2 0.647753 -0.474222
0.3 0.645904 -0.474031
0.4 0.644055 -0.473841
Table 5.2: Effects of non linear flow model parameters on the Sherwood number at
(y, t) = (0, 1) and (y, t) = (1, 1).
γ γ1 Sc Sh1 /Re2 Sh2 /Re
0.1 0.5 0.4 0.431429 -0.316440
0.2 0.435822 -0.318874
0.3 0.5 0.439369 -0.320861
0.6 0.465936 -0.334957
0.7 0.4 0.492498 -0.349048
0.5 0.612073 -0.433190
0.6 0.730216 -0.516072
108
Chapter 6
Interplay of chemical reacting

species in a viscoelatic flow with
unequal diffusivities
Contents
6.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
6.3 Numerical iteration scheme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
6.4 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
109
6.1 Introduction
Fractional MHD flow of a viscoelastic fluid with chemically reacting species has been
discussed in this chapter. Two dimensional and two directional unsteady flow field is
more critically analyzed via fractional time derivatives. Three memory parameters are
incorporated to explore the viscoelastic attributes of problem. Changes in concentra-
tions are prevailed due to homogeneous-heterogeneous reactions in the flow domain.
Consequently, concentrations change lead to one of the lasting chemical specie. Het-
erogeneous reactions are observed at the boundary while homogeneous reactions are
seen in the flowing region. We consider different orders of diffusion coefficients of
chemical reacting species to tackle the wider class of chemical processes. Governing
equations of the prescribed model are highly nonlinear in nature. Finite difference
scheme [110, 111] along with L1 algorithm [105] is used to discretize the modeled
equations. Finally, nonlinear fractional partial differential equations are solved for
the velocity and concentrations of chemical species.

Consider two dimensional, two directional unsteady fractional viscoelastic Maxwell
fluid flow. Flow is generated by moving boundary at y = 0. Variations in flow gen-
eration can be seen with moving exponent n. Magnetic field is applied along y axis
with constant strength B0 i.e. B = (0, B0 , 0). There are chemical species A, B in
the flow field having concentrations a, b. In flow domain, these species interact with
each other via homogeneous-heterogeneous reactions. Unequal diffusion coefficients
are considered for chemical reacting species. Relaxation times and delay of diffusion
fluxes are important in experimental data prediction. Caputo fractional time deriva-
tive is introduced to address relaxation times and delay of diffusion flux in a more
accurate way with memory parameters α, β and γ. Velocity field for problem under
consideration is of the form U = [u(x, y, t), v(x, y, t), 0]. Differential equations, for the
flow and concentrations fields are given using sections, 1.3.5 and 1.7 of chapter 1.
∂u ∂v
+ = 0, (6.1)
∂x ∂y
α
∂ 2 u σB02 α

α ∂ ∂u ∂u ∂u α ∂
1 + λ1 α +u +v =ν 2 − 1 + λ1 α u, (6.2)
∂t ∂t ∂x ∂y ∂y ρ ∂t
! !
λβ2 ∂β ∂ 2a λβ2 ∂β

∂a ∂a ∂a
1+ +u +v = DA∗ 2 − k 1 + ab2 ,
Γ (1 + β) ∂tβ ∂t ∂x ∂y ∂y Γ (1 + β) ∂tβ
(6.3)
110
λγ3 ∂γ ∂ 2b λγ3 ∂γ

∂b ∂b ∂b
1+ +u +v
= DB ∗ 2 + k 1 + ab2 ,
Γ (1 + γ) ∂tγ ∂t ∂x ∂y∂y Γ (1 + γ) ∂tγ
(6.4)
where λ1 , λ2 and λ3 are relaxation times, ρ is fluid density, ν is kinematic viscosity,
DA∗ , DB ∗ are diffusion coefficients, k is homogeneous reaction rate constant and σ
denotes electrical conductivity.
y a
Reactants
+
v(x,y,t) Intermediate Product Catalyst

b
(x,y+h2) (x+h1,y+h2)
2D time fractional viscoelastic flow
Homogeneous
Catalysis
(x,y) (x+h1,y) Heterogeneous

u (x,y,t)
Catalysis x
Absorbed Rectants Intermediate Absorbed Product
b
Product
a
Reactants
Figure 6.1: Description of homogeneous-heterogeneous catalysis in 2D time fractional

flow.
Initially fluid is at rest and there is no concentration of chemical reacting species in

the flow regime. Appropriate conditions at the boundaries of the flow field are
2 n
ν
u (x, 0, t) = u0 4 xt , v (x, 0, t) = 0, u (0, y, t) = 0 = v (0, y, t) , (6.5)
l u0
a0 k1 ν 2 2

∂a ∂b ∂a ∂b
DA∗ = 5
xt = −DB ∗ , =0= ,
∂y (x,0,t) l ∂y (x,0,t) ∂x (0,y,t) ∂x (0,y,t)
(6.6)
3
a0 ν 2
a (x, y, t) = xt , u (x, y, t) , v (x, y, t) , b (x, y, t) → 0 as y → ∞ (6.7)
u0 l 5
111
along with initial conditions
∂a ∂b
u(x, y, 0) = 0 = v(x, y, 0), a(x, y, 0) = 0 = (x, y, 0), b(x, y, 0) = 0 =
(x, y, 0),
∂t ∂t
(6.8)
with u0 , a0 are velocity and concentration constants, l stands for characteristics length,
n denotes moving exponent and k1 denotes heterogeneous rate constant. Finally,
mathematical IBVP for the present flow configuration is completely modeled by (6.1)–
(6.8).
Friction coefficient is important for accumulation of drag between fluid and surround-
ing boundary. In governing flow field skin friction coefficient is defined as
2τw
Cf := . (6.9)
ρu20
α

α ∂ ∂u
1 + λ1 α τw = µ . (6.10)
∂t ∂y (y=0)
Using (6.10) in (6.9), average friction coefficient is given by

α
Z
α ∂ 2ν ∂u
1 + λ1 α Cf = 2 dΩ. (6.11)
∂t u0 Ω ∂y y=0
6.2.0.3 Local Sherwood Numbers
Sherwood numbers are quite important for measuring mass flux of chemical species
at bounding surfaces. In the current flow domain Sherwood numbers are given by
!
λβ2 ∂β

l ∂a
1+ Sh1 = − , (6.12)
Γ(1 + β) ∂tβ a0 ∂y (y=0)
λγ3 ∂γ

l ∂b
1+ Sh2 = − . (6.13)
Γ(1 + γ) ∂tγ a0 ∂y (y=0)
Moreover, average Sherwood numbers are defined as

!
λβ2 ∂β
Z
l ∂a
1+ β
Sh1 = − dΩ, (6.14)
Γ(1 + β) ∂t a0 Ω ∂y (y=0)
λγ3 ∂γ
Z
l ∂b
1+ Sh2 = − dΩ. (6.15)
Γ(1 + γ) ∂tγ a0 Ω ∂y (y=0)
112
Using suitable dimensionless quantities, in order to make the IBVP (6.1)–(6.8) dimen-
sionless
ν y ν u l
x
b := x, yb := , t := 2 t u
b b := , vb := v,
u0 l2 l l u0 ν
a bb := b , ν ν ν
a :=
b λb1 := 2 λ1 , λb2 := 2 λ2 , λb3 := 2 λ3 . (6.16)
a0 a0 l l l
The dimensionless quantities defined in (6.16) without hats, IBVP (6.1)–(6.8) becomes
∂u ∂v
+ = 0,
∂x ∂y
α
∂ 2u α

α ∂ ∂u ∂u ∂u α ∂
1 + λ1 α +u +v = 2 − Ha 1 + λ1 α u,
∂t ∂t ∂x ∂y ∂y ∂t
! !
λβ2 ∂β ∂ 2a λβ2 ∂β

∂a ∂a ∂a
Sc 1 + +u +v = 2 −KcSc 1 + ab2 ,
Γ (1 + β) ∂tβ ∂t ∂x ∂y ∂y Γ (1 + β) ∂tβ
λγ3 ∂γ ∂ 2b λγ3 ∂γ

∂b ∂b ∂b
Sc 1 + γ
+u +v = ω 2 +KcSc 1 + γ
ab2 ,
Γ (1 + γ) ∂t ∂t ∂x ∂y ∂y Γ (1 + γ) ∂t
(6.17)
together with suitable below mentioned conditions



 u (x, 0, t) = (xt)n , v (x, 0, t) = 0, u (0, y, t) = 0 = v (0, y, t) ,

∂a ∂b ∂a ∂b


2
= δxt = −ω , =0= ,



∂y (x,0,t) ∂y (x,0,t) ∂x (0,y,t) ∂x (0,y,t)
a (x, y, t) = xt2 , u (x, y, t) , v (x, y, t) , b (x, y, t) → 0 as y → ∞




u(x, y, 0) = 0 = v(x, y, 0), a(x, y, 0) = 0 = ∂a (x, y, 0), b(x, y, 0) = 0 = ∂b (x, y, 0),



∂t ∂t
(6.18)
here Ha denotes magnetic parameter, Sc is Schmidt number, ω stands for ratio of
diffusion coefficients and δ, Kc are heterogeneous, homogeneous reactions parameters.
These dimensionless numbers are defined as
σB02 l2 ν DB ∗ ka20 l2 k1 u0 l2
Ha := , Sc := , ω := , Kc := , δ := . (6.19)
µ DA∗ DA∗ ν DA∗ ν
Also non-dimensional coefficient of skin friction and Sherwood numbers are mathe-
matically stated as
α
Z 1
α ∂ 2 ∂u
1 + λ1 α Cf = dx, (6.20)
∂t Re 0 ∂y y=0
113
!
λβ2
Z 1
∂β ∂a
1+ β
Sh1 = − dx, (6.21)
Γ(1 + β) ∂t 0 ∂y (y=0)
λγ3
Z 1
∂γ

∂b
1+ Sh 2 = − dx, (6.22)
Γ(1 + γ) ∂tγ 0 ∂y (y=0)
where Re = u0 l/ν stands for Reynold number.
6.3 Numerical iteration scheme

In this section, nonlinear partial differential equations (6.17)-(6.18) are computed by
newely formulated finite difference scheme along with, L1 algorithm [105, 110, 111].
After using the defined fractional operators in [110], we obtain the following iteration
equations in order to simulate our concerned problem
 !
k k−1 k−1
 u
− i,j+1 − 1 (r + 1) u i,j k 1 vi,j
ui−1,j − r1 + 1 + uki,j−1

k−1
 2



 2hy hx 2hy vi,j hy

1 + r1 1 + r1 k−1 1 + r1 k−1 2 + r1 1
+ + ui,j + vi,j + Ha + 2 uki,j =
∆t h x h y 2 h
y


k−1 k−1

u u

1 + r1 r1 1 A1 A2 A3 HaA4


k−1 i,j−1 i,j+1
− Ha − 2 ui,j + + + r1 + + + ,



 ∆t 2 hy 2h2y 2h2y ∆t hx hy 2
(6.23)
 k k k k k−1 k−1 k−1 k−1

 u i,j−1 + u i,j − u i−1,j−1 − u i−1,j + u i,j−1 + u i,j − u i−1,j−1 − u i−1,j

4hx (6.24)
k k−1 k k−1
 v i,j + vi,j − v i,j−1 − vi,j−1
+
 = 0,
2hy
 !
aki,j+1 k
vi,j

 Sc r 2 k k r 2 1
− − + u a − Sc + + aki,j−1


2 i,j i−1,j k
2h h Γ(1 + β)h Γ(1 + β) 2h v h

 x x y i,j y
y


 k k k
a u vi,j k

r r r2


 2 i,j 2 i,j k

 + Sc + + Sc + ai,j + Sc + ai,j


 Γ(1 + β) ∆t Γ(1 + β) h x Γ(1 + β) h y
r2 Sc r2 1

k−1 k−1 k
+KcSc 1 + bi,j bi,j ai,j = + − 2 ak−1 i,j


 Γ(1 + β) ∆t Γ(1 + β)∆t hy
ak−1 ak−1 r2


i,j−1 i,j+1
bk−1 k−1 k−1


 + 2
+ 2
− KcSc i,j bi,j ai,j
2h 2h Γ(1 + β)



 y y

 B 1 B 2 B 3 B 4 k−1 k−1
+r2 + + + KcSc b b ,


Γ(1 + β)∆t Γ(1 + β)hx Γ(1 + β)hy Γ(1 + β) i,j i,j
(6.25)
114
 !
k
vi,j

ω k Sc r 3 k k r 3 ω
bki,j−1


 − b
2 i,j+1
− + u b
i,j i−1,j − Sc + + k
2h h Γ(1 + γ)h Γ(1 + γ) 2h v h

x x y i,j y

y


 k k k
b u v

r3 r3 r3

i,j i,j k i,j k

+ Sc + + Sc + bi,j + Sc + b


Γ(1+ γ) hy i,j

Γ(1 + γ) ∆t Γ(1 +γ) hx



r3 k−1 k−1 k Sc r3 ω
−KcSc 1 + ai,j bi,j bi,j = + − 2 bk−1


 Γ(1 + γ) ∆t Γ(1 + γ)∆t hy i,j
 ω k−1 ω r3
+ 2 bk−1 ak−1 k−1 k−1

+ 2 bi,j−1 i,j+1 + KcSc i,j bi,j bi,j


2h 2hy Γ(1 + γ)



 y
C C C3 C4

1 2

k−1 k−1
+r3 + + − KcSc a b ,


Γ(1 + γ)∆t Γ(1 + γ)hx Γ(1 + γ)hy Γ(1 + γ) i,j i,j
(6.26)
λα1 ∆t−α λβ2 ∆t−β λγ3 ∆t−γ
here r1 = , r2 = and r3 = . Also A1 − A4 , B1 − B4 and
Γ(2 − α) Γ(2 − β) Γ(2 − γ)
C1 − C4 are defined as
k−1
X k−1
X
uk−s uk−s−1 (ds−1 − ds ) uk−s−1 uk−s k−s

A1 = (ds−1 − ds ) i,j − i,j , A2 = i,j i,j − ui−1,j ,
s=1 s=1
k−1
X k−1
X
k−s−1
uk−s uk−s (ds−1 − ds ) uk−s k−s−1

A3 = (ds−1 − ds ) vi,j i,j − i,j−1 , A4 = i,j + ui,j ,
s=1 s=1
k−1
X k−1
X
ak−s k−s−1
(es−1 − es ) uk−s−1 ak−s k−s

B1 = (es−1 − es ) i,j − ai,j , B2 = i,j i,j − ai−1,j ,
s=1 s=1
k−1
X k−1
X
bk−s bk−s−1 (fs−1 − fs ) uk−s−1 bk−s k−s

C1 = (fs−1 − fs ) i,j − i,j , C2 = i,j i,j − bi−1,j ,
s=1 s=1
k−1
X k−1
X
k−s−1
ak−s ak−s (es−1 − es ) bk−s−1 bk−s−1 ak−s k−s−1

B3 = (es−1 − es ) vi,j i,j − i,j−1 , B4 = i,j i,j i,j + ai,j ,
s=1 s=1
k−1
X k−1
X
k−s−1
bk−s bk−s (fs−1 − fs ) ak−s−1 bk−s−1 bk−s k−s−1

C3 = (fs−1 − fs ) vi,j i,j − i,j−1 , C4 = i,j i,j i,j + bi,j ,
s=1 s=1
with
ds = (1 + s)1−α − s1−α , es = (1 + s)1−β − s1−β ,
and
fs = (1 + s)1−γ − s1−γ , s = 0, 1, 2, 3, ..., k − 1.
Moreover, average coefficient of skin friction and sherwood numbers are discretized as
" k−1 Z 1 #
1 X 2 ∂u
Cf = r1 (ds−1 − ds ) Cf (tk−s ) + dx , (6.27)
1 + r1 s=1
Re 0 ∂y y=0
115
" k−1 Z 1 #
1 X ∂a
Sh1 = r2 (es−1 − es ) Sh1 (tk−s ) − dx , (6.28)
1 + r2 s=1 0 ∂y y=0
" k−1 Z 1 #
1 X ∂b
Sh2 = r3 (fs−1 − fs ) Sh2 (tk−s ) − dx . (6.29)
1 + r3 s=1 0 ∂y y=0
6.4 Discussion
The system of the discretized equations (6.23)-(6.26) have been solved by develop-
ing a code in Matlab. Velocity and concentrations profile of both chemical reacting
species are explored for different physical parameters. Three memory parameters are
introduced to capture more realistic simulations of flow domain. Unequal diffusivities
of chemical species are considered to address the broader class of chemical processes.
Heterogeneous reactions are observed at the boundary while homogeneous reactions
are seen in the flowing region. Change in concentrations consequently lead to one of
remaining chemical specie. Graphical trends are plotted over time interval [0,2] and at
the mid point of x interval [0,1]. Figure 6.13(b) portrays velocity profile for different
values of momentum relaxation time parameter λ1 and momentum memory number
α. It is noted that velocity increases with the increase of α in 6.12 while opposite trend
is noted for λ1 in 6.13(a). Also boundary layer thickness is at higher level (lower level)
for greater values of α (λ1 ). Fractional number, α reflects the anomalous character of
viscoelastic fluid and variations in velocity can be changed for other values of physical
parameters. With the increase of λ1 relaxation time of viscoelastic fluid after applying
stress increases which leads to resist the motion of the fluid. Moreover, an increase
in viscosity of flowing liquid can be seen with the increase of momentum relaxation
time parameter. Consequently, velocity decreases with the increase of λ1 . Influence of
magnetic parameter Ha and moving exponent n on velocity profile is plotted in figure
6.14(b). Velocity profile decreases with the increase of Ha 6.13 and similar effects are
observed for n away from the moving boundary. Closer to moving plate, velocity is
at higher level for greater values of n 6.14(a). Boundary layer thickness is at higher
level (lower level) for lower values of Ha (n) near the moving plate. Change of veloc-
ity profile is consistent with physical interpretation of flow configuration. With the
increase of n flow generation velocity increases as a result velocity profiles increase in
the neighborhood of moving plate but due to viscoelastic nature of the fluid decrease
in velocity is noted away from the moving boundary. For higher values of Ha , Lorentz
force and friction between different layers of viscoelastic material increase which resist
the fluid motion. Therefore the velocity decreases with the increase of Ha. Contour
116
and surface plots of velocity field are sketched in figure 6.15(b). Contour plot shows
constant t slices on 2D format 6.15(a) while for fixed time t, 3D plot describes the
variation of velocity with simultaneous change of x and y 6.14.
1.2
= 0.1
1
= 0.4
= 0.7
0.8
= 0.9
0.6
u
0.4
1
= 0.4
0.2
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
y
(a)
1.2
1
= 0.0
1
1
= 0.5
0.8
1
= 1.0
1
= 1.5
0.6
u
0.4
= 0.5
0.2
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
y
(b)
Figure 6.2: Effects of fractional exponent α and relaxation time parameter λ1 on

velocity profile when Ha = 0.4, n = 1.0.
117
1.2
Ha = 0.0
1 Ha = 0.5
Ha = 1.0
0.8
Ha = 1.5
0.6
u
0.4
0.2 n=1
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
y
(a)
3.5
n=0
3
n=1
2.5 n=2
n=3
2
1.5
u
1
Ha = 0.5
0.5
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
y
(b)
Figure 6.3: Effects of magnetic parameter Ha and moving exponent n on velocity

profiles when α = 0.8, λ1 = 0.5.
Effects of Schmidt number Sc and homogeneous reactions parameter Kc on con-

centrations profile are shown in figure 6.5. Concentrations of both chemical species
decrease when the value of Sc increases in 6.5(a) and similar effects of Kc are ob-
118
30
25
20
u(x,y)
15
10
0
1
5
4
0.5 3
2
1
x 0 0
y
(a)
Solution of velocity u(x,y,t)

1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
x
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
y
(b)
Figure 6.4: Contour and surface plots of velocity profiles when α = 0.8, λ1 = 0.5,
Ha = 0.5, n = 3.0.
served for concentration of specie A while no prominent influence of Kc is seen on

concentration of specie B in 6.5(b). Also, boundary layer thickness is at higher level
119
2.5
Sc = 0.1
2 Sc = 0.4
Sc = 0.7
1.5
Sc = 1.0
1 a
Kc = 0.9
0.5
b
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
y
(a)
Kc = 0.1
Kc = 0.4
1.5
Kc = 0.7
Kc = 1.0
a
1
Sc = 0.4
0.5
b
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
y
(b)
Figure 6.5: Effects of Schmidt number Sc and homogeneous reaction parameter Kc on

concentrations profile when α = 0.5, Ha = 0.2, λ1 = 0.1, β = 0.7, γ = 0.6, λ2 = 0.4,
λ3 = 0.5, ω = 0.1, δ = 0.9.
for lower values of Sc and Kc. Mass diffusivity decreases with the increase of Sc ,
120
4
3
Kc = 0.9
a(x,y,t) Sc = 0.4
2
0
1
5
4
0.5 3
2
1
x 0 0 y
(a)
2 Kc = 0.9
Sc = 0.4
1.5
b(x,y,t)
0.5
0
1
5
4
0.5 3
2
1
x 0 0
y
(b)
Figure 6.6: Surface plots of concentrations when α = 0.5, Ha = 0.2, λ1 = 0.1, β = 0.7,
γ = 0.6, λ2 = 0.4, λ3 = 0.5, ω = 0.1, δ = 0.9.
results in the reduction of concentrations of species A, B. Moreover, third order reac-

tion rate increases with the increase of Kc as a result mass diffusivity of the lasting
121
chemical specie decreases which lead to decrease of concentration profile of chemical
specie A. Surface plots of concentrations of chemical species A and B are sketched
in figures 6.6(a) and 6.6(b). These plots describe the variation of concentrations with
simultaneous change of x and y. Influence of ratio of diffusion coefficients parame-
ter ω and heterogeneous reactions parameter δ on concentrations profile is plotted in
figure 6.7. Concentration of specie A is at higher level for larger values of ω while
reverse effects are seen for concentration of chemical specie B in 6.7(a) near the mov-
ing plate. Specie A shows decrease in concentration while the concentration of B is
at higher level for greater values of δ in 6.7(b). Boundary layer thickness of a(b) is at
higher(lower) level for lager values of ω while reverse effects are observed for δ. Mass
diffusivity of A increases while B mass diffusivity decreases with the increase of ω,
results in the reduction of concentration b and enhancement of concentration a. Also
mass diffusivity of A decreases with the increase of δ, consequently concentration a
decreases in the flow field. With the increase of δ first order chemical reaction rate
increases which leads to increase of concentration b. Surface plots for concentrations
of chemical species A and B are plotted in figures 6.8(a) and 6.8(b) for fixed values
of ω and δ. Figure 6.9 shows the behavior of concentrations profiles for various values
of relaxation time parameters λ2 and λ3 . Concentration of specie A decreases with
the increase of λ2 while no prominent influence is noted on the concentration of B
in 6.9(a). Decrease in concentration b is noted with the increase of λ3 and opposite
effects are seen on the concentration a in 6.9(b). Boundary layer thickness of a(b)
is at lower level for lager values of λ2 and λ3 while reverse effects are seen for the
concentration a in case of λ3 . With the increase of λ2 and λ3 diffusion relaxation time
of concentrations a and b increase which leads to decrease in concentrations. More-
over, with the increase of λ3 diffusion relaxation time of concentration b increases,
causes an increase in concentration a near the moving plate. Surface plots for con-
centrations of chemical species A and B are sketched in figures 6.10(a) and 6.10(b)
for fixed values of λ2 and λ3 . Figure 6.11 portrays concentrations profiles for different
values of memory numbers β and γ. It is noted that concentrations increase with
the increase of β 6.11(a) while reverse behavior of γ is observed for concentration b
6.11(b). Boundary layer thickness is at higher level for larger values of β. For higher
values of γ, boundary layer thickness remains at lower level. Memory numbers β and
γ reflect the anomalous character and variations in concentrations can be changed for
other physical parameters. Surface plots of concentrations of chemical species A and
B are sketched in figures 6.12(a) and 6.12(b). These plots describe the variation of
concentrations for fixed values β and γ with simultaneous change of x and y. Con-
122
tour plots of concentrations a and b are sketched in figure 6.13. Contour plots show
constant t slices of concentrations on 2D format, see figures 6.13(a) and 6.13(b). It
is noted that Sherwood number for the concentration a increases with the increase of
Sc, β while it decreases with the increase of δ, λ2 , see figures 6.14(6.14(a),6.14(b))
and 6.15(6.15(a),6.15(b)). Also Sherwood number for the concentration b decreases
with the increase of λ3 , γ and ω while it increases with the increase of Sc see figures
6.16(6.16(a),6.16(b)) and 6.17(6.17(a),6.17(b)). Numerical values of friction coefficient
are given in table 6.1. It is clear from the table that magnitude of friction coefficient
increases with the increase of Ha while it decreases with the increase of α, λ1 and Re.
Table 6.1: Variations of skin friction coefficient with non linear fractional model pa-
rameters.
α λ1 Ha Re Cf
0.1 0.2 0.3 5 -0.219027
0.3 -0.182966
0.5 -0.135546
0.7 0.2 -0.094042
0.4 -0.067181
0.6 -0.054861
0.8 0.3 -0.047477
0.5 -0.048901
0.7 -0.050271
0.9 5 -0.051591
6 -0.043008
7 -0.036877
8 -0.032279
123
2.5
= 0.5
2 = 1.0
= 1.5
a
1.5 = 2.0
1
= 0.9
0.5 b
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
y
(a)
2.5
= 0.3
2 = 0.5
= 0.7
a = 0.9
1.5
x
= 0.2
0.5 b
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
y
(b)
Figure 6.7: Effects of heterogeneous reaction parameter δ and diffusion coefficients

ratio parameter ω on concentrations profile when α = 0.8, Ha = 0.3, λ1 = 0.1,
β = 0.7, γ = 0.6, λ2 = 0.4, λ3 = 0.5, Kc = 0.8, Sc = 0.3.
124
4
= 0.9
3 = 0.2
a(x,y,t)
0
1
5
4
0.5 3
2
1
x 0 0
y
(a)
1.5
= 0.9
= 0.2
1
b(x,y,t)
0.5
0
1
5
4
0.5 3
2
1
x 0 0
y
(b)
Figure 6.8: Surface plots of concentrations profile when α = 0.8, Ha = 0.3, λ1 = 0.1,
β = 0.7, γ = 0.6, λ2 = 0.4, λ3 = 0.5, Kc = 0.8, Sc = 0.3.
125
2
2
= 0.1
1.5 a = 0.2
2
2
= 0.3
1
2
= 0.4
3
= 0.1
0.5
b
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
y
(a)
2.5
3
= 0.1
2
3
= 0.2
3
= 0.3
1.5 a
3
= 0.4
x
2
= 0.1
0.5 b
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
y
(b)
Figure 6.9: Effects of relaxation time parameters λ2 and λ3 on concentrations profile

when α = 0.7, Ha = 0.4, λ1 = 0.2, β = 0.7, γ = 0.6, δ = 0.8, ω = 0.3, Kc = 0.7,
Sc = 0.4.
126
4
2
= 0.1
3
3
= 0.1
a(x,y,t)
0
1
5
4
0.5 3
2
1
x 0 0
y
(a)
1.2
2
= 0.1
1
3
= 0.1
0.8
b(x,y,t)
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
1
5
4
0.5 3
2
1
x 0 0
y
(b)
β = 0.7, γ = 0.6, δ = 0.8, ω = 0.3, Kc = 0.7, Sc = 0.4.
127
2.5
= 0.1
2 = 0.4
= 0.7
= 0.9 a
1.5
1
b = 0.1
0.5
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
y
(a)
2.5
= 0.1
2 = 0.4
= 0.7
= 0.9
1.5 a
= 0.1
0.5 b
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
y
(b)
Figure 6.11: Effects of fractional exponents β and γ on concentrations profile when

α = 0.5, Ha = 0.2, λ1 = 0.1, λ2 = 0.3, λ3 = 0.2, δ = 0.5, ω = 0.4, Kc = 0.6, Sc = 0.2.
128
4
= 0.1
3
= 0.1
a(x,y,t)
0
1
5
4
0.5 3
2
1
x 0 0
y
(a)
0.6
= 0.1
0.5
= 0.1
0.4
b(x,y,t)
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
1
5
4
0.5 3
2
1
x 0 0
y
(b)
λ2 = 0.3, λ3 = 0.2, δ = 0.5, ω = 0.4, Kc = 0.6, Sc = 0.2.
129
Solution of a(x,y,t)
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
x
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
y
(a)
Solution of b(x,y,t)
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
x
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
y
(b)
Figure 6.13: Contour plots of concentration profiles when α = 0.9, Ha = 0.7, λ1 = 0.3,
β = 0.6, γ = 0.8, λ2 = 0.1, λ3 = 0.1, δ = 0.4, ω = 0.1, Kc = 0.6, Sc = 0.1.
130
1.5
Sc = 0.1
Sc = 0.5
1 Sc = 1.0
Sc = 1.5
0.5
0 Sh 1 = 0.1
2
-0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
t
(a)
1.4
1.2 2
= 0.1
2
= 0.4
1
2
= 0.7
0.8
= 0.9 Sh 1
0.6 2
0.4
0.2
Sc = 0.1
0
-0.2
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
t
(b)
Figure 6.14: Effects of Schmidt number Sc and relaxation parameter λ2 on Sh1 when
α = 0.5, Ha = 0.5, λ1 = 0.4, β = 0.4, γ = 0.3, n = 1.0, λ3 = 0.2, δ = 0.5, ω = 0.3,
Kc = 0.9.
131
1.4
1.2 = 0.1
= 0.4
1
= 0.7
0.8 = 0.9
0.6 Sh 1
0.4
0.2 = 0.1
0
-0.2
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
t
(a)
1.4
1.2 = 0.1
= 0.4
1
= 0.7
0.8 = 0.9
0.6 Sh 1
0.4
0.2
0
= 0.1
-0.2
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
t
(b)
Figure 6.15: Effects of fractional exponent β and heterogeneous reactions parameter

δ on Sh1 when α = 0.1, Ha = 0.3, λ1 = 0.5, λ2 = 0.7, γ = 0.5, n = 1.0, λ3 = 0.3,
Sc = 0.4, ω = 0.5, Kc = 0.8.
132
2.5
= 0.1 = 0.1
2 = 0.4
= 0.7
1.5 = 0.9
1 Sh 2
0.5
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
t
(a)
2.5
= 0.1
2 = 0.5
= 0.8
1.5 = 1.2
1 Sh 2
= 0.1
0.5
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
t
(b)
Figure 6.16: Effects of fractional exponent γ and ratio of diffusion coefficients ω on

Sh2 when α = 0.1, Ha = 0.9, λ1 = 0.8, λ2 = 0.8, β = 0.7, n = 1.0, λ3 = 0.9, Sc = 0.8,
δ = 0.3, Kc = 0.4.
133
0.6
3
= 0.1
0.5
3
= 0.4
0.4
3
= 0.7
0.3 3
= 0.9
Sh 2
0.2
0.1
Sc = 0.1
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
t
(a)
0.8
0.7
Sc = 0.1
Sc = 0.4
0.6 Sc = 0.7
0.5 Sc = 0.9
0.4
Sh 2
0.3
0.2
0.1 3
= 0.1
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
t
(b)
Figure 6.17: Effects of Schmidt number Sc and relaxation parameter λ3 on Sh2 when
α = 0.6, Ha = 0.2, λ1 = 0.3, λ2 = 0.2, β = 0.5, n = 1.0, γ = 0.7, ω = 0.4, δ = 0.5,
Kc = 0.7.
134
Conclusion
Research provides a vital role for the advancement of every field of life. It is a continu-
ing process that gives new ideas and conclusions. In order to summarize our research,
we give concise contributions of this work and state possible recommendations for
future work based on this study. Viscoelastic fluid flows with non-integer time deriva-
tives have been discussed in this thesis. Flow modeling with non-integer derivatives is
the generalization of ordinary flow models. Modified version of Fourier heat flux and
Fick’s mass flux are considered while analyzing the flow field with hereditary effects.
Memory properties are exclusive to explore velocity, thermal and diffusing elements.
In literature researchers mostly consider linear non-integer models and solutions of
these models are found via various transforms methods. In fact, governing equations
of viscoelastic flow problems are nonlinear in nature and difficult to solve by classical
transform methods. Simulations of viscoelatic flow problems are quite important in
industrial processes. We consider the basic viscoelastic fluid models of differential and
rate type i.e. second grade, Maxwell and Oldroyd-B fluid models along with various
industrial aspects. Governing fractional partial differential equations are highly non-
linear and solved by finite element-finite difference schemes. Rates of convergence of
flow fields in L2 (Ω) and H 1 (Ω) norms are also presented in order to validate our pro-
posed numerical schemes. Fractional flows are explored in terms of non dimensional
physical parameters such as fractional and moving exponents, viscoelatic parameter,
convection and diffusion parameters, thermal and concentration relaxation time pa-
rameters, momentum relaxation and retardation time parameters, Brownian motion
and thermophoresis numbers, dimensionless homogeneous and heterogeneous reaction
numbers, Prandtl and Schmidt numbers, magnetic parameter, variable thermal con-
ductivity parameter, electric and Eckert numbers etc. The key finding of this study
are as follows:
1. Velocity profile is at higher level with the increasing values of fractional and
moving exponents while temperature and concentration profiles are at lower
level for higher values of fractional number.
135
2. Velocity, temperature and concentration profiles increase with the increase of
thermophoretic parameter.
3. Temperature profile increases with the increase of Schmidt number while oppo-
site effects are seen in case of velocity and concentration profiles.
4. Increase in momentum, thermal and concentration relaxation times decreases

the velocity, temperature and concentration profiles while opposite trends are
seen in case of momentum retardation time for velocity profile.
5. Enhancement in velocity and lessening in temperature is noted, with the in-

crease of electric parameter while opposite effects are seen in case of magnetic
parameter.
6. Concentration profile enhances for the higher values of homogeneous reaction

parameter while opposite trends are observed for the heterogeneous reaction
parameter.
7. Velocity profile augments with the increase of convection and diffusion param-
eters.
8. Pedesis parameter has similar effects on velocity and concentration profile while
reverse effects are noted for the temperature profile.
9. Temperature profile develops with the increase of Eckert number.
10. Temperature increases in the flow domain for different cases of linear thermal
conductivity contributions.
11. Velocity and concentration profiles heighten with the increase of Prandtl number
while contrary behavior is observed for the temperature profile.
Numerous expects are still to discuss in addition of this work. Here, we consider
mathematical formulation and numerical solutions of 1D and 2D flow problems for
the basic classes of viscoelatic models. Theoretical aspects of fractional flows are
observed in this study, experimental work can be carried out to confirm the given
theoretical results. We can extend these studies for 3D and three directional flows in
order to capture the wider class of industrial problems. Flows over a moving plate and
a stretching sheet are consider in this study. However, for engineering point of view
these flows can be studied over a stretching cylinder. Further we can extend these
studies for Burgers and generalized Burgers fluid models to investigate more realistic
characteristics of viscoelastic fluids.
136
Bibliography
[1] G. Yang, R. Jiang, G. Han, P. Xu, The flow of viscoelastic polymer solution in
porous media, Procedia Eng. 126 (2015) 491-495.
[2] M. Yang, S. Krishnan, E.S.G. Shaqfeh, Numerical simulations of the rheology of

suspensions of rigid spheres at low volume fraction in a viscoelastic fluid under
shear, J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 233 (2016) 181-197.
[3] G. Makanda, O.D. Makinde, P. Sibanda, Natural convection of viscoelastic fluid

from a cone embedded in a porous medium with viscous dissipation, Math. Prob.
Eng. 2013 (2013) 934712(11 pages).
[4] M.M. Villone, F. Greco, M.A. Hulsen, P.L. Maffettone, Simulations of an elastic
particle in Newtonian and viscoelastic fluids subjected to confined shear flow,
J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 210 (2014) 47-55.
[5] D. Picchi, P. Poesio, A. Ullmann, N. Brauner, Characteristics of stratified flows

of Newtonian/non-Newtonian shear-thinning fluids, Int. J. Multiphase Flow 97
(2017) 109-133.
[6] G.J. Reddy, M. Kumar, O.A. Beg, Effect of temperature dependent viscosity
on entropy generation in transient viscoelastic polymeric fluid flow from an
isothermal vertical plate, Phys. A 510 (2018) 426-445.
[7] M. Shen, S. Chen, F. Liu, Unsteady MHD flow and heat transfer of fractional
Maxwell viscoelastic nanofluid with Cattaneo heat flux and different particle
shapes, Chin. J. Phys. 56 (2018) 1199-1211.
[8] L. Liu, F. Liu, Boundary layer flow of fractional Maxwell fluid over a stretching
sheet with variable thickness, Appl. Math. Lett. 79 (2018) 92-99.
137
[9] J. Venkatesan, S. Ganesan, A three-field local projection stabilized formulation
for computations of Oldroyd-B viscoelastic fluid flows, J. Non-Newtonian Fluid
Mech. 247 (2017) 90-106.
[10] S. Eswaramoorthi, M. Bhuvaneswari, S. Sivasankaran, O.D. Makinde, Het-

erogeneous and homogeneous reaction analysis on MHD Oldroyd-B fluid with
Cattaneo-Christov heat flux model and convective heating, Defect Diffus. Forum
387 (2018) 194-206.
[11] X. Wang, H. Qi, B. Yu, Z. Xiong, H. Xu, Analytical and numerical study of
electroosmotic slip flows of fractional second grade fluids, Commun. Nonlinear
Sci. Numer. Simul. 50 (2017) 77-87.
[12] S. Shang, Anticipating stochastic equation of two-dimensional second grade flu-

ids, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 461 (2018) 1138-1152.
[13] A.A. Afify, N.S. Elgazery, Effect of a chemical reaction on magnetohydrody-

namic boundary layer flow of a Maxwell fluid over a stretching sheet with
nanoparticles, Particuology 29 (2016) 154-161.
[14] F.M. Abbasi, S.A. Shehzad, Heat transfer analysis for three-dimensional flow of
Maxwell fluid with temperature dependent thermal conductivity: Application
of Cattaneo-Christov heat flux model, J. Mol. Liq. 220 (2016) 848-854.
[15] P. Kaushik, S. Chakraborty, Startup electroosmotic flow of a viscoelastic fluid

characterized by Oldroyd-B model in a rectangular microchannel with symmet-
ric and asymmetric wall zeta potentials, J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 247
(2017) 41-52.
[16] J. Lin, Y. Wang, P. Zhang, X. Ku, Mixing and orientation behaviors of cylin-
drical particles in a mixing layer of an Oldroyd-B fluid, Chem. Eng. Sci. 176
(2018) 270-284.
[17] J. Zhao, L. Zheng, X. Chen, X. Zhang, F. Liu, Unsteady Marangoni convection

heat transfer of fractional Maxwell fluid with Cattaneo heat flux, Appl. Math.
Modell. 44 (2017) 497-507.
[18] Y. Zhang, H.J. Zhao, F. Liu, Y. Bai, Analytical and numerical solutions of the
unsteady 2D flow of MHD fractional Maxwell fluid induced by variable pressure
gradient, Comput. Math. Appl. 75 (2017) 965-980.
138
[19] R.L. Bagley, On the fractional order initial value problem and its engineering
applications, Coll. Eng. Nihon Uni. Tokyo Japan (1990) 12-20.
[20] R.L. Bagley, P.J. Torvik, A theoretical basis for the application of fractional
calculus to viscoelasticity, J. Rheol. 27 (1983) 201-210.
[21] R.L. Bagley, P.J. Torvik, Fractional calculus: A different approach to the anal-
ysis of viscoelastically damped structures, AIAA J. 21 (1983) 741-748.
[22] J. Sabatier, O.P. Agrawal, J.A.T. Machado, Advances in fractional calculus:

Theoretical developments and applications in physics and engineering, Springer
Publ. Company (2007).
[23] R.C. Koeller, Applications of fractional calculus to the theory of viscoelasticity,

J. Appl. Mech. 51 (1984) 299-307.
[24] V.E. Tarasov, Fractional dynamics, Springer, (2010) DOI:10.1007/978-3-642-

14003-7.
[25] M. Pan, L. Zheng, C. Liu, F. Liu, P. Lin, G. Chen, A stochastic model for
thermal transport of nanofluid in porous media: Derivation and applications,
Comput. Math. Appl. 75 (2018) 1226-1236.
[26] L. Liu, L.C. Zheng, Y. Fan, Y.P. Chen, F. Liu, Anomalous diffusion in comb
model with fractional dual-phase-lag constitutive relation, Comput. Math. Appl.
76 (2018) 245-256.
[27] L. Rogers, Operators and fractional derivatives for viscoelastic constitutive equa-
tions, J. Rheol. 27 (1983) 351-372.
[28] H.H. Hilton, Generalized fractional derivative anisotropic viscoelastic character-

ization, Mater. 5 (2012) 169-191.
[29] K.S. Miller, B. Ross, An introduction to the fractional calculus and fractional
differential equations, N. Y. Wiley (1993).
[30] M. Caputo, Linear model of dissipation whose Q is almost frequency

independent-II, Geophys. J. R. Astron. Soc. 13 (1967) 529-539.
[31] A.M.A. El-Sayed, A.G. Ibrahim, Multivalued fractional differential equations,

Appl. Math. Comput. 68 (1995) 15-25.
139
[32] L. Kexue, P. Jigen, Fractional resolvents and fractional evolution equations,
Appl. Math. Lett. 25 (2012) 808-812.
[33] M. Abdullah, A.R. Butt, N. Raza, A.S. Alshomrani, A.K. Alzahrani, Analysis
of blood flow with nanoparticles induced by uniform magnetic field through a
circular cylinder with fractional Caputo derivatives, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 446
(2018) 28-36.
[34] M. Abdulhameed, D. Vieru, R. Roslan, Magnetohydrodynamic electroosmotic

flow of Maxwell fluids with Caputo-Fabrizio derivatives through circular tubes,
Comput. Math. Appl. 74 (2017) 2503-2519.
[35] A. Noghrehabadi, R. Mirzaei, M. Ghalambaz, A. Chamkha, A. Ghanbarzadeh,

Boundary layer flow heat and mass transfer study of Sakiadis flow of viscoelas-
tic nanofluids using hybrid neural network-particle swarm optimization (HN-
NPSO), Therm. Sci. Eng. Prog. 4 (2017) 150-159.
[36] J. Sui, P. Zhao, Z. Cheng, M. Doi, Influence of particulate thermophoresis on

convection heat and mass transfer in a slip flow of a viscoelasticity based mi-
cropolar fluid, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 119 (2018) 40-51.
[37] M. Masoudian, F.T. Pinho, K. Kim, R. Sureshkumar, A RANS model for heat
transfer reduction in viscoelastic turbulent flow, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 100
(2016) 332-346.
[38] C. Eckart, The thermodynamics of irreversible processes. II. fluid mixtures,

Phys. Rev. 58 (1940) 269-275.
[39] A. Giusti, Dispersion relations for the time-fractional Cattaneo-Maxwell heat

equation, J. Math. Phys. 59 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5001555.
[40] P. Paradisi, R. Cesari, F. Mainardi, A. Maurizi, F. Tampieri, A generalized

Fick’s law to describe non-local transport effects, Phys. Chem. Earth 26 (2001)
275-279.
[41] L. Chen, S. Xia, F. Sun, Entropy generation minimization for isothermal crys-
tallization processes with a generalized mass diffusion law, Int. J. Heat Mass
Transfer 116 (2018) 1-8.
[42] S. Xia, L. Chen, F. Sun, Entransy dissipation minimization for one-way isother-
mal mass transfer processes with a generalized mass transfer law, Scientia Iran-
ica 19 (2012) 1616-1625.
140
[43] X. Jiang, M. Xu, H. Qi, The fractional diffusion model with an absorption term
and modified Fick’s law for non-local transport processes, Nonlinear Anal. Real
World Appl. 11 (2010) 262-269.
[44] W.A. Khan, M. Khan, A.S. Alshomrani, Impact of chemical processes on 3D

Burgers fluid utilizing Cattaneo-Christov double-diffusion: Applications of non-
Fourier’s heat and non-Fick’s mass flux models, J. Mol. Liq. 223 (2016) 1039-
1047.
[45] M.S. Malashetty, S. Kulkarni, The convective instability of Maxwell fluid-

saturated porous layer using a thermal non-equilibrium model, J. Non-
Newtonian Fluid Mech. 162 (2009) 29-37.
[46] S. Wang, W. Tan, Stability analysis of soret-driven double-diffusive convection

of Maxwell fluid in a porous medium, Int. J. Heat Fluid Flow 32 (2011) 88-94.
[47] B. Straughan, Thermal convection with the Cattaneo-Christov model, Int. J.

Heat Mass Transfer 53 (2010) 95-98.
[48] L. Liu, L. Zheng, F. Liu, X. Zhang, Anomalous convection diffusion and wave
coupling transport of cells on comb frame with fractional Cattaneo-Christov
flux, Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul. 38 (2016) 45-58.
[49] Juan-Cheng Yang, Feng-Chen Li, Wen-Wu Zhou, Yu-Rong He, Bao-Cheng
Jiang, Experimental investigation on the thermal conductivity and shear viscos-
ity of viscoelastic-fluid-based nanofluids, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 55 (2012)
3160-3166.
[50] T. Hayat, M. Waqad, S.A. Shehzad, A. Alsaedi, Mixed convection flow of vis-
coelastic nanofluid by a cylinder with variable thermal conductivity and heat
source/sink, Int. J. Numer. Methods Heat Fluid Flow 26 (2016) 214-234.
[51] T.E. Akinbobola, S.S. Okoya, The flow of second grade fluid over a stretching
sheet with variable thermal conductivity and viscosity in the presence of heat
source/sink, J. Niger. Math. Soc. 34 (2015) 331-342.
[52] I.L. Animasaun, Melting heat and mass transfer in stagnation point micropolar
fluid flow of temperature dependent fluid viscosity and thermal conductivity at
constant vortex viscosity, J. Egypt. Math. Soc. 25 (2017) 79-85.
141
[53] T. Hayat, S. Ahmad, M.I. Khan, A. Alsaedi, M. Waqas, Investigation of sec-
ond grade fluid through temperature dependent thermal conductivity and non-
Fourier heat flux, Results Phys. 9 (2018) 871-878.
[54] H. Jaeger, A. Roth, S. Toepfl, T. Holzhauser, Karl-Heinz Engel, D. Knorr, R.F.

Vogel, N. Bandick, S. Kulling, V. Heinz, P. Steinberg, Opinion on the use of
ohmic heating for the treatment of foods, Trends Food Sci. Technol. 55 (2016)
84-97.
[55] T. Hayat, M. Mumtaz, A. Shafiq, A. Alsaedi, Thermal stratifed three-

dimensional flow with inclined magnetic field and Joule heating, J. Braz. Soc.
Mech. Sci. Eng. 39 (2017) 1607-1621.
[56] S. Qayyum, M.I. Khan, T. Hayat, A. Alsaedi, Comparative investigation of five

nanoparticles in flow of viscous fluid with Joule heating and slip due to rotating
disk, Phys. B 534 (2018) 173-183.
[57] T. Hayat, M.I. Khan, A. Alsaedi, M.I. Khan, Joule heating and viscous dis-
sipation in flow of nanomaterial by a rotating disk, Int. Commun. Heat Mass
Transfer 89 (2017) 190-197.
[58] O. Redondo, S.G. Prolongo, M. Campo, C. Sbarufatti, M. Giglio, Anti-icing

and de-icing coatings based Joule’s heating of graphene nanoplatelets, Compos.
Sci. Technol. 164 (2018) 65-73.
[59] O.D. Makinde, F. Mabood, M.S. Ibrahim, Chemically reacting on MHD

boundary layer flow of nanofluid over a non-linear stretching sheet with heat
source/sink and thermal radiation, Therm. Sci. 22(1B) (2018) 495-506.
[60] P.V.S. Narayana, N. Tarakaramu, O.D. Makinde, B. Venkateswarlu, G. Saro-

jamma, MHD stagnation point flow of viscoelastic nanofluid past a convectively
heated stretching surface, Defect Diffus. Forum 387 (2018) 106-120.
[61] Ming-Jiu Ni, Recent advances in computational techniques for MHD flow and
application to fusion, Fusion Eng. Des. 87 (2012) 1544-1549.
[62] C.R. Bedick, L. Kolczynski, C.R. Woodside, Combustion plasma electrical con-
ductivity model development for oxy-fuel MHD applications, Combust. Flame
181 (2017) 225-238.
142
[63] M. Sheikholeslami, M.G. Bandpy, R. Ellahi, A. Zeeshan, Simulation of MHD
CuO-water nanofluid flow and convective heat transfer considering Lorentz
forces, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 369 (2014) 69-80.
[64] M. Sheikholeslami, M.B. Gerdroodbary, S.V. Mousavi, D.D. Ganji, R. Moradi,

Heat transfer enhancement of ferrofluid inside an 90° elbow channel by non-
uniform magnetic field, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 460 (2018) 302-311.
[65] M. Irfan, M. Khan, W. A. Khan, M. Ayaz, Modern development on the fea-

tures of magnetic field and heat sink/source in Maxwell nanofluid subject to
convective heat transport, Phys. Lett. A 382 (2018) 1992-2002.
[66] A. Hamid, Hashim, M. Khan, Numerical simulation for heat transfer perfor-
mance in unsteady flow of Williamson fluid driven by a wedge-geometry, Results
Phys. 9 (2018) 479-485.
[67] Y. Liu, Ji-Huan He, Bubble electrospinning for mass production of nanofibers,
Int. J. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul. 8 (2011) 393-396.
[68] P. Valipour, H. Zaersabet, M. Hatami, A. Zolfagharian, S.E. Ghasemi, Numeri-

cal study on polymer nanofibers with electrically charged jet of viscoelastic fluid
in electrospinning process, J. Cent. South Univ. 24 (2017) 2275-2280.
[69] S.U.S. Choi, Enhancing thermal conductivity of fluids with nanoparticles,

ASME FED 231 (1995).
[70] J. Buongiorno, Convective transport in nanofluids, ASME, J. Heat Transfer 128

(2006) 240-250.
[71] G. Paul, S. Sarkar, T. Pal, P.K. Das, I. Manna, Concentration and size depen-
dence of nano-silver dispersed water based nanofluids, J. Colloid Interface Sci.
371 (2012) 20-27.
[72] J.J. Vadasz, S. Govender, P. Vadasz, Heat transfer enhancement in nano-fluids

suspensions: Possible mechanisms and explanations, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer
48 (2005) 2673-2683.
[73] G. Wang, J. Zhang, Thermal and power performance analysis for heat transfer
applications of nanofluids in flows around cylinder, Appl. Therm. Eng. 112
(2017) 61-72.
143
[74] P. Kiran, Nonlinear thermal convection in a viscoelastic nanofluid saturated
porous medium under gravity modulation, Ain Shams Eng. J. 7 (2016) 639-651.
[75] D. Yadav, R.A. Mohamed, J. Lee, H.H. Cho, Thermal convection in a Ku-
vshiniski viscoelastic nanofluid saturated porous layer, Ain Shams Eng. J. 8
(2017) 613-621.
[76] S. Jahan, H. Sakidin, R. Nazar, I. Pop, Unsteady flow and heat transfer past
a permeable stretching/shrinking sheet in a nanofluid: A revised model with
stability and regression analyses, J. Mol. Liq. 261 (2018) 550-564.
[77] J. Pan, Q. Lu, S. Bani, A. Tang, W. Yang, X. Shao, Hetero-/homogeneous

combustion characteristics of premixed hydrogen-air mixture in a planar micro-
reactor with catalyst segmentation, Chem. Eng. Sci. 167 (2017) 327-333.
[78] G.D. Wehinger, T. Eppinger, M. Kraume, Fluidic effects on kinetic parameter

estimation in lab-scale catalysis testing-A critical evaluation based on compu-
tational fluid dynamics, Chem. Eng. Sci. 111 (2014) 220-230.
[79] J.H. Merkin, A model for isothermal homogeneous-heterogeneous reactions in

boundary layer flow, Math. Comput. Modell. 24 (1996) 125-136.
[80] M.A. Chaudhary, J.H. Merkin, Homogeneous-heterogeneous reactions in

boundary-layer flow: Effects of loss of reactant, Math. Comput. Modell. 24
(1996) 21-28.
[81] M.A. Chaudhary, J.H. Merkin, A simple isothermal model for homogeneous-
heterogeneous reactions in boundary-layer flow. I Equal diffusivities, Fluid Dyn.
Res. 16 (1995) 311-333.
[82] B.J. Gireesha, P.B.S. Kumar, B. Mahanthesh, S.A. Shehzad, A. Rauf, Nonlinear
3D flow of Casson-Carreau fluids with homogeneous-heterogeneous reactions: A
comparative study, Results Phys. 7 (2017) 2762-2770.
[83] I.L. Animasaun, C.S.K. Raju, N. Sandeep, Unequal diffusivities case of

homogeneous-heterogeneous reactions within viscoelastic fluid flow in the pres-
ence of induced magnetic-field and nonlinear thermal radiation, Alexandria Eng.
J. 55 (2016) 1595-1606.
[84] T. Hayat, Z. Hussain, M. Farooq, A. Alsaedi, Effects of homogeneous and het-

erogeneous reactions and melting heat in the viscoelastic fluid flow, J. Mol. Liq.
215 (2016) 749-755.
144
[85] Hashim, M. Khan, A.S. Alshomrani, R.U. Haq, Investigation of dual solutions
in flow of a non-Newtonian fluid with homogeneous-heterogeneous reactions:
Critical points, Eur. J. Mech. B. Fluids 68 (2018) 30-38.
[86] M. Sheikh, Z. Abbas, Homogeneous-heterogeneous reactions in stagnation point

flow of Casson fluid due to a stretching/shrinking sheet with uniform suction
and slip effects, Ain Shams Eng. J. 8 (2017) 467-474.
[87] K. Diethelm, J.M. Ford, N.J. Ford, M. Weilbeer, Pitfalls in fast numerical solvers
for fractional differential equations, J. Comput. Appl. Math. 186 (2005) 482-
503.
[88] N.J. Ford, J.A. Connolly, Comparison of numerical methods for fractional dif-
ferential equations, Commun. Pure Appl. Anal. 5 (2006) 289-307.
[89] Y. Mahsud, N.A. Shah, D. Vieru, Influence of time-fractional derivatives on the

boundary layer flow of Maxwell fluids, Chin. J. Phys. 55 (2017) 1340-1351.
[90] F. Ali, N.A. Sheikh, I. Khan, M. Saqib, Magnetic field effect on blood flow of
Casson fluid in axisymmetric cylindrical tube: A fractional model, J. Magn.
Magn. Mater. 423 (2017) 327-336.
[91] C.D.K. Bansi, C.B. Tabi, T.G. Motsumi, A. Mohamadou, Fractional blood flow
in oscillatory arteries with thermal radiation and magnetic field effects, J. Magn.
Magn. Mater. 456 (2018) 38-45.
[92] S.U. Haq, M.A. Khan, N.A. Shah, Analysis of magnetohydrodynamic flow of
a fractional viscous fluid through a porous medium, Chin. J. Phys. 56 (2018)
261-269.
[93] F. Ali, A. Imtiaz, I. Khan, N.A. Sheikh, Flow of magnetic particles in blood
with isothermal heating: A fractional model for two-phase flow, J. Magn. Magn.
Mater. 456 (2018) 413-422.
[94] R.W. Lewis, P. Nithiarasu, K.N. Seetharamu, Fundamentals of the finite element
method for heat and fluid flow, John Wiley Sons (2004).
[95] O.D. Makinde, T. Chinyoka, Numerical study of unsteady hydromagnetic Gen-

eralized Couette flow of a reactive third grade fluid with asymmetric convective
cooling, Comput. Math. Appl. 61 (2011) 1167-1179.
145
[96] J. Zhao, Q. Wang, X. Yang, Numerical approximations to a new phase field
model for two phase flows of complex fluids, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech.
Eng. 310 (2016) 77-97.
[97] D. Kumar, R.P. Agarwal, J. Singh, A modified numerical scheme and conver-
gence analysis for fractional model of Lienard’s equation, J. Comput. Appl.
Math. 339 (2018) 405-413.
[98] M. Sajid, M.N. Sadiq, N. Ali, T. Javed, Numerical simulation for Homann flow
of a micropolar fluid on a spiraling disk, Eur. J. Mech. B. Fluids 72 (2018)
320-327.
[99] I. Podlubny, Fractional differential equations, Math. Sci. Eng. Acad. Press San
Diego CA (1999).
[100] J.R. Welty, C.E. Wicks, R.E. Wilson, G.L. Rorrer, Fundamentals of momentum,
heat and mass transfer, John Wiley & Sons New York, 2007.
[101] K.R. Sharma, Polymer thermodynamics: Blends, copolymers and reversible

polymerization, CRC Press London, 2012.
[102] G. Jumarie, Derivation and solutions of some fractional Black-Scholes equations

in coarse-grained space and time. Application to Merton’s optimal portfolio,
Comput. Math. Appl. 59 (2010) 1142-1164.
[103] A.M. Abd El-Lateif, A.M. Abdel-Hameid, Comment on ”Solutions with special
functions for time fractional free convection flow of Brinkman-type fluid” by F.
Ali et al., Eur. Phys. J. Plus 132 (2017) 407.
[104] C. Friedrich, Relaxation and retardation functions of the Maxwell model with
fractional derivatives, Rheol. Acta 30 (1991) 151-158.
[105] F. Liu, P. Zhuang, V. Anh, I. Turner, K. Burrage, Stability and convergence

of the difference methods for the space-time fractional advection-diffusion equa-
tion, Appl. Math. Comput. 191 (2007) 12-20.
[106] Y. Lin and C. Xu, Finite difference/spectral approximations for the time-
fractional diffusion equation, J. Comput. Phys. 225 (2007) 1533-1552.
[107] A. Heibig, L.I. Palade, Well posedness of a linearized fractional derivative fluid
model, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 380 (2011) 188-203.
146
[108] R.A. Adams, Sobolev Spaces, Acad. Press New York, (1975).
[109] B.A. Toms, D.J. Strawbridge, Elastic and viscous properties of dilute solutions
of polymethyl methacrylate in organic liquids, Trans. Faraday Soc. 49 (1953)
1225-1232.
[110] Z. Cao, J. Zhao, Z. Wang, F. Liu, L. Zheng, MHD flow and heat transfer of
fractional Maxwell viscoelastic nanofluid over a moving plate, J. Mol. Liq. 222
(2016) 1121-1127.
[111] J. Zhao, L. Zheng, X. Zhang, F. Liu, Unsteady natural convection boundary

layer heat transfer of fractional Maxwell viscoelastic fluid over a vertical plate,
Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 97 (2016) 760-766.
147

Muhammad Shoaib Anwar - PHD Thesis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Muhammad Shoaib Anwar - PHD Thesis

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Muhammad Shoaib Anwar - PHD Thesis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Modeling and numerical simulations of some fractional

nonlinear viscoelastic flow problems

1 Modeling with fractional derivatives and solution approach 10

1.7 Fractional equations of viscoelastic Maxwell model . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

2 Nonlinear MHD flow of viscoelastic fluid with Cattaneo-Maxwell

3 Chemical reactions with non-integer time derivatives in a viscoelastic

4 Rate type nanofluid flow with Caputo time derivative 61

4.2.1.2 Skin friction coefficient . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

5 Joule heating in magnetic resistive flow of a viscoelastic fluid 86

6 Interplay of chemical reacting species in a viscoelatic flow with un-

2.1 Description of Cattaneo-Maxwell heat flux in a viscoelastic flow. . . . 22

3.1 Description of concentration flux. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

4.1 Physical model. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63

4.4 Numerical scheme validation for concentration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71

5.1 Schematic of flow geometry. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88

6.1 Description of homogeneous-heterogeneous catalysis in 2D time frac-

6.14 Effects of Schmidt number Sc and relaxation parameter λ2 on Sh1

2.1 Velocity and temperature error estimates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

2. A. Rasheed, M.S. Anwar, Simulations of variable concentration aspects in a

3. M.S. Anwar, A. Rasheed, Simulations of a fractional rate type nanofluid flow

5. A. Rasheed, M.S. Anwar, Interplay of chemical reacting species in a fractional

Modeling of viscoelastic flows in terms of fractional calculus is an inquisitive area

volved in developing catalytic processes with variable concentrations which essentially

by viscoelastic fluid simulations in a constricting channel. By simulations, complete

Objectives and layout of the thesis

chemical reacting species. At the end, influence of material parameters on velocity

Significance of current studies

Modeling with fractional

1.2 Fractional derivatives

and converges for Re{z} > 0.

1.2.2 Riemann-Liouville fractional derivative

1.2.3 Caputo fractional derivative

the Riemann-Liouville definition of fractional derivative [99]. In order to solve this

where α, g(t) ∈ C and p ∈ N.

1.3 Fundamental laws

1.3.2 Conservation of momentum

Rate of change of momentum = Surface forces + Body forces.

1.3.3 Generalized Fourier’s law and conservation of energy

here cf stands for specific heat of the fluid.

1.3.3.1 Conservation of energy for fractional nanofluids

Energy equation for the nanofluids is given by Buongiorno [70]

1.3.4 Generalized Fick’s law and conservation of concentra-

J = −DA ∇C. (1.12)

Infinite propagation speed for concentration is predicted by (1.12) which contradicts

1.3.4.1 Conservation of concentration for fractional nanofluids

The concentration equation for the nanofluids is given by Buongiorno [70]

1.3.5 Fractional formalism of homogeneous-heterogeneous re-

Using fractional formalism, generalized governing equations for homogeneous-heterogeneous

1.4 Cauchy stress tensor

T = −pI + S = −pI + µAa + α1 Ab + α2 A2a ,

1.5 Fractional equations of viscoelastic second grade

1.6 Fractional equations of viscoelastic Oldroyd-B

1.7 Fractional equations of viscoelastic Maxwell model

1.8 Solution methodologies

Nonlinear MHD flow of viscoelastic

2.2 Mathematical formulation

consideration is one dimensional and unidirectional, therefore other components of

Applied Magnetic Field

number P r and thermal conductivity parameter on the temperature profiles. It is