- Research
- Open Access
Finite difference-finite element approach for solving fractional Oldroyd-B equation
- Amer Rasheed^{1}Email author,
- Abdul Wahab^{2},
- Shaista Qaim Shah^{3} and
- Rab Nawaz^{4}
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13662-016-0961-9
© Rasheed et al. 2016
Received: 19 February 2016
Accepted: 2 September 2016
Published: 13 September 2016
Abstract
In this article, we study an unsteady flow of an anomalous Oldroyd-B fluid confined between two infinite parallel plates subject to no-slip condition at boundary. The flow is induced by a linear acceleration of the lower plate in its own plane. A standard Galerkin finite element method is adopted to construct an approximate solution blended with a finite difference approximation for Caputo fractional time derivatives. The convergence of the proposed numerical scheme is substantiated, and error estimates are provided in appropriate norms. Some adequate numerical simulations are performed in order to elucidate the dominance of characteristic flow parameters of velocity field in the prescribed configuration.
Keywords
- anomalous fluid
- Oldroyd-B fluid
- finite element method
- stability
- convergence
MSC
- 35A15
- 76A05
- 76A10
- 76D99
- 76M10
1 Introduction
The curiosity to understand mass transfer phenomena in fluids obeying non-Newtonian rheological paradigms is increasing due to broad range of engineering applications and apposite industrial processes. The examples include material plasticizing and solidification processes for manufacturing parts, oil-well drilling, and fossil fuel combustion; see, for instance, [1–3], the review article [4], and references therein. Spirited researchers endeavoring in assorted domains have been experimentally testing, mathematically modeling, establishing numerical approximations, and designing algorithms for analyzing various flow problems in different geometric and flow configurations [3–15]. Mathematicians are particularly exposed to challenging mathematical riddles, for instance, related to solvability, consistency, stability, and thermodynamic compatibility of constitutive flow models, their solutions, and approximations [1, 4, 11, 12, 16–23].
Several approximate and self-consistent non-Newtonian rheological models are proposed over the past decades as no single one can encompass assorted features of all the fluids. These models are classified into differential, rate, and integral types. The interested readers are referred, for instance, to [20, 24, 25] for detailed accounts. In particular, the stress relaxation in polymer processing is usually predicted using rate-type fluid models such as Maxwell, Oldroyd-B, or Burgers fluids [7, 9, 11, 24, 26–29].
In certain non-Newtonian fluids, an anomalous rheological model provides a more realistic fit to the experimental data [13, 30, 31]. For instance, the anomalous Maxwell model yields algebraically decaying stress relaxation modulus resulting in a good agreement to experimental data [31], whereas the Brownian Maxwell fluid fails to do so, at least over complete range of frequencies. Moreover, as indicated by Bagley and Torvik [32, 33], the molecular theory is harmonic to anomalous viscoelastic models. The anomalous nature of the flow is usually modeled with fractional-order time derivatives replacing those of integer order in classical stress-strain relations. The issues concerning well-posedness and thermodynamic stability of the anomalous viscoelastic flow models have been addressed, for instance, in [23, 34, 35].
The constitutive initial-boundary value problems for non-Newtonian fluids rarely have exact and closed-form analytic solutions since these models are strongly nonlinear, whereas sufficient boundary conditions are not often available. Thus, numerical and asymptotic techniques are sought exploiting supplementary information on the flow profile. Unfortunately, the asymptotic solutions are mostly divergent for strongly nonlinear problems and large values of pertinent flow parameters such as Péclet, Reynolds, and Weissenberg numbers [36, 37]. Therefore, great interest in numerical approximation techniques in non-Newtonian fluid mechanics is observed in recent years; see, for instance, [14, 15, 19, 38–40], among many others.
The hot topics in numerical analysis include challenging issues related to instability of approximate solutions due to strong nonlinearity, convection dominance, and parabolic-hyperbolic nature of non-Newtonian flow problems for increasing values of flow parameters. A variety of stabilization and numerical approximation frameworks are consequently introduced and analyzed. More recently, frameworks for approximating solutions to time and/or space fractional differential equations in connection with subdiffusion and superdiffusion, viscoelastic wave propagation, and anomalous flow problems are discussed; see [40–43] and references therein. The so-called L1-finite difference approximation method is invoked together with space approximation schemes to obtain numerical solutions to time-discretized models, such as spatial finite difference, spectral, lumped mass, and Galerkin finite element techniques.
In this article, we provide a numerical exposition of flow phenomena for an incompressible anomalous Oldroyd-B fluid using a standard Galerkin finite element method (FEM) blended with finite difference approximation in time. We consider the fluid confined between two infinite parallel plates, which starts flowing due to a linear acceleration of the lower plate in its own plane, whereas the upper plate is kept rigid and no slip condition at boundaries is imposed. The anomalous behavior of the Oldroyd-B fluid is modeled with left-sided Caputo fractional time derivatives thereby generalizing the canonical Brownian Oldroyd-B fluid model that can be perceived as a limiting case. The objective of the investigation is twofold: (1) understanding the velocity profile in the aforementioned flow and (2) deploying standard Lagrange-Galerkin FEM together with the L1-finite difference scheme and subsequently performing a convergence analysis following the pioneer works in [41–43]. Albeit, the assumptions of a linear plate acceleration and negligible pressure gradient are made for brevity, and the analysis contained herein can be analogously performed otherwise. The results can be extended to the Burgers fluids and will be discussed in a forthcoming investigation.
The rest of this contribution is arranged in the following manner. In Section 2, the flow problem is mathematically formulated. The equations governing the flow are detailed (see Section 2.1), and the associated initial boundary value problem (IBVP) is derived and nondimensionalized (Section 2.2). The finite element approximation to the velocity field is presented in Section 3. First, a few notions and notation are collected (Section 3.1), and a finite-difference-based temporal discretization scheme is presented for the fractional time derivatives (Section 3.2). Then, the spatial discretization of the IBVP is derived using Lagrange interpolation functions (Section 3.3). The convergence analysis of the numerical scheme is performed in Section 4, and the numerical simulations are presented in Section 5. Finally, the findings of the investigation are summarized in Section 6.
2 Formulation of flow problem
We fix the following notation henceforth.
Definition 2.1
Remark 2.2
The fractional derivative \(\partial^{\gamma}_{t} \phi\) converges to the canonical integer-order derivative \({\partial_{t}^{n}\phi}\) as the parameter \(\gamma\in \mathbb {R}\to n\in\mathbb{N}\), where \(n-1<\gamma<n\) (see, e.g., [45], p.92).
The following proposition from [45], Proposition 2.16, will be useful in the sequel.
Proposition 2.3
2.1 Flow configuration and governing equations for an ordinary fluid
Remark 2.4
The thermodynamic stability, necessary condition for well-posedness in the sense of Hadamard, and causality constraints restrict the values of relaxation and retardation times \(\lambda_{1}\) and \(\lambda_{2}\) to be such that \(0<\lambda_{2}<\lambda_{1}\) (refer, e.g., to [20, 46] for further details).
2.2 Flow problem
In this section, the constitutive equations corresponding to a fractional Oldroyd-B fluid are derived together with relevant initial and boundary conditions. Toward this end, we first briefly derive constitutive equations for the flow of a canonical Oldroyd-B fluid and then highlight appropriate changes in order to incorporate anomalous behavior of fluid rheology.
Remark 2.5
As a consequence of Remark 2.2, the anomalous Oldroyd-B model (16) reduces to the canonical Oldroyd-B model as \(\alpha ,\beta\to1\). Moreover, (16) refers to a fractional Maxwell fluid as \(\lambda_{2}\to0\).
3 Numerical approximation scheme
3.1 Functional spaces and norms
3.2 Finite difference approximation
3.3 Galerkin finite element approximation
Consider the following weak formulation of the flow problem (19).
Weak Form
In the sequel, we derive a space and time discrete weak formulation of the problem (19) using (28). Let \(\varphi _{h}\) be an approximate solution to (28) in \(\mathcal {C}^{1} ([0,T]; V^{h}_{0} )\), that is, the solution to following problem.
Semidiscrete weak form
4 Analysis of numerical scheme
This section is dedicated to the stability and error analysis of the numerical scheme established in Section 3. In the sequel, C represents a generic constant independent of τ and h but dependent on φ, α, β, \(\lambda_{1}\), \(\lambda_{2}\), u, and T and may differ from step to step.
4.1 Truncation error
Lemma 4.1
As an immediate consequence of Lemma 4.1, the following result is evident.
Lemma 4.2
(Truncation error)
4.2 Stability of discrete problem
Theorem 4.3
Proof
- 1.Initial step: (\(j=2\)). Taking \(\chi_{h}=\varphi _{h}^{2}\) and \(k=1\) in (32) yieldsBy initial conditions and the definition of operator \(\mathcal {M}_{1}\) we obtain$$ \bigl\Vert \varphi _{h}^{2}\bigr\Vert _{1,*}^{2} \leq \mathcal {M}_{1}\bigl[\varphi _{h}^{1},\varphi _{h}^{2} \bigr]+C\Vert g\Vert _{0}\bigl\Vert \varphi _{h}^{2} \bigr\Vert _{0}. $$(34)Consequently, inequality (34), together with the inequality \(\|\varphi _{h}^{2}\|_{0}\leq\|\varphi _{h}^{2}\|_{1}\), yields$$ \mathcal {M}_{1}\bigl[\varphi _{h}^{1},\varphi _{h}^{2} \bigr] = (1+2 \tau C_{\alpha}) \bigl(\varphi _{h}^{1}, \varphi _{h}^{2}\bigr)+\tau C_{\beta}\bigl\langle \varphi _{h}^{1},\varphi _{h}^{2}\bigr\rangle +\tau C_{\alpha}\bigl(\varphi _{h}^{0},\varphi _{h}^{2} \bigr)= 0. $$$$ \bigl\Vert \varphi _{h}^{2}\bigr\Vert _{1,*}\leq C \Vert g\Vert _{0}. $$
- 2.
Supposition step: (\(j < m\)). Assume that estimate (33) holds for \(2< j< m\), that is, there exists a constant C independent on τ and h such that \(\|\varphi _{h}^{j}\|_{1,*}\leq C \|g\|_{0}\).
- 3.Induction step: (\(j=m\)). It is evident from the definition of \(b_{k}^{\gamma}\) thatTaking \(\chi_{h}=\varphi _{h}^{m}\) and \(k=m-1\) in (32) yields$$ 1=b_{0}^{\gamma}> b_{1}^{\gamma}> \cdots> b_{k}^{\gamma}\to0\quad \text{as } k\to +\infty. $$(35)Again, by the definition of the operator \(\mathcal {M}_{m-1}\) we have$$ \bigl\Vert \varphi _{h}^{m}\bigr\Vert _{1,*}^{2} \leq \mathcal {M}_{m-1}\bigl[\varphi _{h}^{m-1}, \varphi _{h}^{m}\bigr] +C\Vert g\Vert _{0}\bigl\Vert \varphi _{h}^{m}\bigr\Vert _{0}. $$(36)To get the last inequality, we have used the assumption step and the fact that$$\begin{aligned}& \mathcal {M}_{m-1} \bigl[\varphi _{h}^{m-1},\varphi _{h}^{m} \bigr] \\& \quad = (1+2 \tau C_{\alpha}) \bigl(\varphi _{h}^{m-1}, \varphi _{h}^{m}\bigr)+\tau C_{\beta}\bigl\langle \varphi _{h}^{m-1},\varphi _{h}^{m}\bigr\rangle + \tau C_{\alpha}\bigl(\varphi _{h}^{m-2},\varphi _{h}^{m} \bigr) \\& \qquad {}+\tau C_{\alpha}\bigl(\zeta^{\alpha}_{m-1}[ \varphi _{h}]-\zeta_{m-2}^{\alpha}[\varphi _{h}], \varphi _{h}^{m}\bigr)+\tau C_{\beta}\bigl\langle \zeta^{\beta}_{m-1}[\varphi _{h}],\varphi _{h}^{m} \bigr\rangle \\& \quad \leq (1+2\tau C_{\alpha})\bigl\Vert \varphi _{h}^{m-1} \bigr\Vert _{0} \bigl\Vert \varphi _{h}^{m}\bigr\Vert _{0} + \tau C_{\beta}\biggl\Vert \frac{\partial \varphi _{h}^{m-1}}{\partial y} \biggr\Vert _{0} \biggl\Vert \frac{\partial \varphi _{h}^{m}}{\partial y} \biggr\Vert _{0} \\& \qquad {}+ \tau C_{\alpha}\bigl\Vert \varphi _{h}^{m-2} \bigr\Vert _{0} \bigl\Vert \varphi _{h}^{m}\bigr\Vert _{0} + \tau C_{\beta}\biggl\Vert \frac{\partial\zeta_{m-1}^{\beta}[\varphi _{h}]}{\partial y} \biggr\Vert _{0} \biggl\Vert \frac{\partial \varphi _{h}^{m}}{\partial y} \biggr\Vert _{0} \\& \qquad {}+ \tau C_{\alpha}\bigl\Vert \zeta^{\alpha}_{m-1}[ \varphi _{h}]\bigr\Vert _{0} \bigl\Vert \varphi _{h}^{m} \bigr\Vert _{0} + \tau C_{\alpha}\bigl\Vert \zeta^{\alpha}_{m-2}[\varphi _{h}]\bigr\Vert _{0} \bigl\Vert \varphi _{h}^{m}\bigr\Vert _{0} \\& \quad \leq C\max \biggl(1+2\lambda_{1}^{\alpha}\frac{T^{-\alpha}}{\Gamma (2-\alpha)}, \lambda_{2}^{\beta}\frac{T^{1-\beta}}{\Gamma(2-\beta )} \biggr) \Vert g\Vert _{0} \bigl\Vert \varphi _{h}^{m} \bigr\Vert _{1}. \end{aligned}$$for all \(p< m\), which holds again by the assumption step and relation (35). This completes the proof together with (36).$$\begin{aligned} \bigl\Vert \zeta^{\gamma}_{p}[\varphi ]\bigr\Vert _{1,*} &= \Biggl\Vert \sum_{s=1}^{p} b_{s}^{\gamma}\bigl(\varphi _{h}^{p+1-s}-\varphi _{h}^{p-s} \bigr)\Biggr\Vert _{1,*} \\ &\leq \sum_{s=1}^{p} \bigl(\bigl\Vert \varphi _{h}^{p+1-s}\bigr\Vert _{1,*}+\bigl\Vert \varphi _{h}^{p-s}\bigr\Vert _{1,*} \bigr) \leq C\Vert g\Vert _{0} \end{aligned}$$
4.3 Convergence of numerical scheme
Lemma 4.4
Proof
Theorem 4.5
(Convergence)
Proof
The convergence estimate (39) can be proved by arguments analogous to those in the proof of [41], Theorem 3.2, and that of [43], Theorem 2.1. The key ingredients of the proof are further presented for completeness.
5 Numerical results and discussion
In this section, we present some numerical results showing the validity of the approximation scheme and discuss the approximate velocity profile.
5.1 Validation of numerical scheme
Convergence rates in \(\pmb{L^{2}}\) and \(\pmb{H^{1}}\) norms
Number of elements | \(\boldsymbol{\|u - u_{\mathrm{ex}} \|_{L^{2}(\Omega)}}\) | \(\boldsymbol{\| u - u_{\mathrm{ex}} \|_{H^{1}(\Omega)}}\) |
---|---|---|
60 | 5.0077 × 10^{−3} | 9.5930 × 10^{−2} |
70 | 4.7797 × 10^{−3} | 8.2534 × 10^{−2} |
80 | 4.6342 × 10^{−3} | 7.2526 × 10^{−2} |
90 | 4.5357 × 10^{−3} | 6.4777 × 10^{−2} |
100 | 4.4659 × 10^{−3} | 5.8608 × 10^{−2} |
110 | 4.4146 × 10^{−3} | 5.3588 × 10^{−2} |
120 | 4.3758 × 10^{−3} | 4.9430 × 10^{−2} |
130 | 4.3458 × 10^{−3} | 4.5934 × 10^{−2} |
140 | 4.3220 × 10^{−3} | 4.2958 × 10^{−2} |
150 | 4.3029 × 10^{−3} | 4.0398 × 10^{−2} |
5.2 Characteristic behavior of velocity profile
6 Concluding remarks
In this article, we presented a Galerkin finite element method blended with a finite difference scheme for time fractional derivative to approximate flow velocity in an anomalous Oldroyd-B fluid confined between two infinite horizontal plates. The flow is induced by variable acceleration of the lower plate. No slip condition at the boundary is imposed. Convergence analysis of the numerical scheme is performed, and error bounds are presented. Numerical results are discussed, and the influence of pertinent flow parameters on the velocity field is delineated. The results presented in this investigation generalize those for Brownian Oldroyd-B fluids and anomalous Maxwell fluids in analogous flow configurations. In the present study, the pressure gradient is considered to be negligible for simplicity. The results contained in this paper can be extended for Burgers fluids and will be discussed in a forthcoming investigation.
Declarations
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by the Korea Research Fellowship Program funded by the Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2015H1D3A106240).
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
Authors’ Affiliations
References
- Richardson, SM: Flows of variable-viscosity fluids in ducts with heated walls. J. Non-Newton. Fluid Mech. 25, 137-156 (1987) View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Lewis, RW, Nithiarasu, P, Seetharamu, KN: Fundamentals of the Finite Element Method for Heat and Fluid Flow. Wiley, Chichester (2004) View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Massoudi, M, Phuoc, TX: Flow of a generalized second grade non-Newtonian fluid with variable viscosity. Contin. Mech. Thermodyn. 16, 529-538 (2004) MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Khaled, ARA, Vafai, K: The role of porous media in modeling flow and heat transfer in biological tissues. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 46, 4989-5003 (2003) View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Akbar, T, Nawaz, R, Kamran, M, Rasheed, A: Magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) flow analysis of second grade fluids in a porous medium with prescribed vorticity. AIP Adv. 5, 117133 (2015) View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Rashidi, MM, Hayat, T, Erfani, E, Pour, SAM, Hendi, AA: Simultaneous effects of partial slip and thermal-diffusion and diffusion-thermo on steady MHD convective flow due to a rotating disk. Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul. 16(11), 4303-4317 (2011) MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Liu, Y, Zheng, L, Zhang, X: Unsteady MHD Couette flow of a generalized Oldroyd-B fluid with fractional derivative. Comput. Math. Appl. 61, 443-450 (2011) MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Liu, Y, Zheng, L, Zhang, X: The oscillating flows and heat transfer of a generalized Oldroyd-B fluid in magnetic field. IAENG Int. J. Appl. Math. 40, 276-281 (2010) MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
- Fetecau, C, Athar, M, Fetecau, C: Unsteady flow of a generalized Maxwell fluid with fractional derivative due to a constantly accelerating plate. Comput. Math. Appl. 57(4), 596-603 (2009) MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Kazem, S, Abbasbandy, S, Kumar, S: Fractional-order Legendre functions for solving fractional-order differential equations. Appl. Math. Model. 37, 5498-5510 (2013) MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Hayat, T, Zaib, S, Asghar, S, Hendi, AA: Exact solutions in generalized Oldroyd-B fluid. Appl. Math. Mech. Engl. Ed. 33(4), 411-426 (2012) MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Khan, M, Anjum, A, Fetecau, C, Qi, H: Exact solutions for some oscillating motions of a fractional Burgers’ fluid. Math. Comput. Model. 51, 682-692 (2010) MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Makris, N, Dargush, DF, Constantinou, MC: Dynamic analysis of generalized viscoelastic fluids. J. Eng. Mech. 119(8), 1663-1679 (1993) View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Rasheed, A, Nawaz, R, Khan, SA, Hanif, H, Wahab, A: Numerical study of a thin film flow of fourth grade fluid. Int. J. Numer. Methods Heat Fluid Flow 25(4), 929-940 (2015) MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Wahab, A, Rasheed, A, Nawaz, R, Javaid, N: Numerical study of two dimensional unsteady flow of an anomalous Maxwell fluid. Int. J. Numer. Methods Heat Fluid Flow 25(5), 1120-1137 (2015) MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Wenchang, T, Wenxiao, P, Mingyu, X: A note on unsteady flows of a viscoelastic fluid with the fractional Maxwell model between two parallel plates. Int. J. Non-Linear Mech. 38, 645-650 (2003) View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Xue, C, Nie, J, Tan, W: An exact solution of start-up flow for the fractional generalized Burgers’ fluid in a porous half-space. Nonlinear Anal., Theory Methods Appl. 69(7), 2086-2094 (2008) MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Bernard, JM: Weak and classical solutions of equations of motions for third grade fluids. ESAIM: Math. Model. Numer. Anal. 33(6), 1091-1120 (1999) MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Wu, YS, Qin, G: A generalized numerical approach for modeling multiphase flow and transport in fractured porous media. Commun. Comput. Phys. 6(1), 85-108 (2009) MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Oldroyd, JG: Non-Newtonian effects in steady motion of some idealized elastico-viscous liquids. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 245, 278-297 (1958) MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Nield, DA, Bejan, A: Convection in Porous Media, 3rd edn. Springer, New York (2006) MATHGoogle Scholar
- Pathak, MG, Mulcahey, TI, Ghiaasiaan, SM: Conjugate heat transfer during oscillatory laminar flow in porous media. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 66, 23-30 (2013) View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Heibig, A, Palade, LI: On the rest state stability of an objective fractional derivative viscoelastic fluid model J. Math. Phys. 49, 043101 (2008) MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Bird, RB, Armstrong, RC, Hassager, O: Dynamics of Polymeric Liquids. Wiley, New York (1987) Google Scholar
- Truesdell, C, Noll, W: The Nonlinear Field Theories of Mechanics, 3rd edn. Springer, Berlin (2004) View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Shehzad, SA, Abdullah, Z, Abbasi, FM, Hayat, T, Alsaedi, A: Magnetic field effect in three-dimensional flow of an Oldroyd-B nanofluid over a radiative surface. J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 399, 97-108 (2016) View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Shehzad, SA, Alsaedi, A, Hayat, T, Alhuthali, MS: Thermophoresis particle deposition in mixed convection three-dimensional radiative flow of an Oldroyd-B fluid. J. Taiwan Inst. Chem. Eng. 45(3), 787-794 (2014) View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Nadeem, S, Ul Haq, R, Akbar, NS, Lee, C, Khan, ZH: Numerical study of boundary layer flow and heat transfer of Oldroyd-B nanofluid towards a stretching sheet. PLoS ONE 8(8), e69811 (2013) View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Ramzan, M, Farooq, M, Alhothuali, MS, Malaikah, HM, Cui, W, Hayat, T: Three dimensional flow of an Oldroyd-B fluid with Newtonian heating. Int. J. Numer. Methods Heat Fluid Flow 25, 68-85 (2015) MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Carcione, JM, Sanchez-Sesma, FJ, Luzón, F, Gavilán, JJP: Theory and simulation of time-fractional fluid diffusion in porous media. J. Phys. A, Math. Theor. 46, 345501 (2013) MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Hernández-Jiménez, A, Hernández-Santiago, J, Macias-García, A, Sánchez-González, J: Relaxation modulus in PMMA and PTFE fitting by fractional Maxwell model. Polym. Test. 21, 325-331 (2002) View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Bagley, RL, Torvik, PT: A theoretical basis for the application of fractional calculus to viscoelasticity. J. Rheol. 27(3), 201-210 (1983) View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Bagley, RL, Torvik, PT: On the fractional calculus model of viscoelastic behavior. J. Rheol. 30(1), 133-155 (1986) View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Heibig, A, Palade, LI: Well posedness of a linearized fractional derivative fluid model. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 380(1), 188-203 (2011) MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Song, DY, Jiang, TQ: Study on the constitutive equation with fractional derivative for the viscoelastics fluids-modified Jeffreys model and its application. Rheol. Acta 37, 512-517 (1998) View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Lipscombe, TC: Comment on ‘Application of the homotopy method for analytical solution of non-Newtonian channel flows’. Phys. Scr. 81, 037001 (2010) View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Sajid, M, Hayat, T, Asghar, S: Comparison of the HAM and HPM solutions of thin film flows of non-Newtonian fluids on a moving belt. Nonlinear Dyn. 50, 27-35 (2007) MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Pletcher, RH, Tannehill, JC, Anderson, D: Computational Fluid Mechanics and Heat Transfer. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2011) MATHGoogle Scholar
- Reddy, JN, Gartling, DK: The Finite Element Method in Heat Transfer and Fluid Dynamics, 3rd edn. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2010) MATHGoogle Scholar
- Zhuang, P, Liu, Q: Numerical method of Rayleigh-Stokes problem for heated generalized second grade fluid with fractional derivative. Appl. Math. Mech. Engl. Ed. 30(12), 1533-1546 (2009) MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Lin, Y, Xu, C: Finite difference/spectral approximations for the time-fractional diffusion equation. J. Comput. Phys. 225, 1533-1552 (2007) MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Li, C, Zhao, Z, Chen, Y: Numerical approximation of nonlinear fractional differential equations with subdiffusion and superdiffusion. Comput. Math. Appl. 62, 855-875 (2011) MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Jiang, Y, Ma, J: High-order finite element methods for time-fractional partial differential equations. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 235, 3285-3290 (2011) MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Podlubny, I: Fractional Differential Equations. Academic Press, San Diego (1999) MATHGoogle Scholar
- Kilbas, AA, Srivastava, HM, Trujillo, JJ: Theory and Applications of Fractional Differential Equations. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2006) MATHGoogle Scholar
- Toms, BA, Strawbridge, DJ: Elastic and viscous properties of dilute solutions of polymethyl methacrylate in organic liquids. Trans. Faraday Soc. 49, 1225-1232 (1953) View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Adams, RA: Sobolev Spaces. Academic Press, New York (1975) MATHGoogle Scholar
- Ciarlet, PG: The Finite Element Methods for Elliptic Problems. Classics in Applied Mathematics. SIAM, Philadelphia (2002) View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Thomée, V: Galerkin Finite Element Methods for Parabolic Problems. Springer, Berlin (2006) MATHGoogle Scholar