Open Access

Flow and heat transfer in a Maxwell liquid film over an unsteady stretching sheet in a porous medium with radiation

SpringerPlus20165:1061

https://doi.org/10.1186/s40064-016-2655-x

Received: 11 March 2016

Accepted: 23 June 2016

Published: 12 July 2016

Abstract

A problem of flow and heat transfer in a non-Newtonian Maxwell liquid film over an unsteady stretching sheet embedded in a porous medium in the presence of a thermal radiation is investigated. The unsteady boundary layer equations describing the problem are transformed to a system of non-linear ordinary differential equations which is solved numerically using the shooting method. The effects of various parameters like the Darcy parameter, the radiation parameter, the Deborah number and the Prandtl number on the flow and temperature profiles as well as on the local skin-friction coefficient and the local Nusselt number are presented and discussed. It is observed that increasing values of the Darcy parameter and the Deborah number cause an increase of the local skin-friction coefficient values and decrease in the values of the local Nusselt number. Also, it is noticed that the local Nusselt number increases as the Prandtl number increases and it decreases with increasing the radiation parameter. However, it is found that the free surface temperature increases by increasing the Darcy parameter, the radiation parameter and the Deborah number whereas it decreases by increasing the Prandtl number.

Keywords

Maxwell fluid Liquid film Thermal radiation Unsteady stretching sheet Porous medium

Background

The flow and heat transfer within a thin liquid film due to the stretching surface in otherwise quiescent fluid are important because of their wide applications in a number of industrial engineering processes. Examples may be found in the cooling of a large metallic plate in a cooling path, design of various heat exchangers, wire and fiber coating, manufacturing plastic films, continuous casting, crystal growing,artificial fiber, reactor fluidization, chemical processing equipment, a polymer sheet, polymer extrusion, annealing and tinning of copper wires, etc. The flow problem within a liquid film of Newtonian fluid on an unsteady stretching surface where the similarity transformation was used to transform the governing partial differential equations describing the problem to a non-linear ordinary differential equation with an unsteadiness parameter first are studied by Wang (1990). Many authors (Usha and Sridharan 1995; Andersson et al. 2000; Dandapat et al. 2003, 2007; Wang 2006; Dandapat and Maity 2006; Liu and Andersson 2008; Noor and Hashim 2010; Mahmoud 2010; Ray and Mazumder 2001; Abel et al. 2009) investigated thin liquid film under different situations.

Many important fluids, however, such as molten plastics, polymers, etc., are non-Newtonian in their flow characteristics. The flow of non-Newtonian fluids are finding increasing applications in several manufacturing processes. Flow of a thin liquid film of a power-law fluid caused by the unsteady stretching of a surface studied numerically by Andersson et al. (1996) and analytically by Wang and Pop (2006). The thin film flow problem with a third grade fluid on an inclined plane hase beed investigated by Siddiqui et al. (2008). Chen (2007) examined the effect of Marangoni convection of the flow and heat transfer within a power-law liquid film on unsteady stretching sheet. Siddiqui et al. (2007) presented the thin film flow of two non-Newtonian fluids namely, Sisko and an Oldroyd 6-constant fluid on a vertical moving belt. Hayat et al. (2008) presented an exact solution for the thin film flow problem of a third grade on an inclined plane. The problem of the flow and heat transfer in a thin film of power-law fluid on an unsteady stretching surface has been investigated by Chen (2003, 2006) where he also studied the effect of viscous dissipation on heat transfer in a non-Newtonian thin liquid film over an unsteady stretching sheet. The flow and heat transfer problem of a second grade fluid film over an unsteady stretching sheet has been presented by Hayat et al. (2008). Abel et al. (2009) investigated the effect of non-uniform heat source on MHD heat transfer in a liquid film over an unsteady stretching sheet. Sajid et al. (2009) presented exact solutions for thin film flows of a micropolar fluid down an inclined plane on moving belt and down a vertical cylinder. Mahmoud and Megahed (2009) investigated the effects of variable viscosity and thermal conductivity on the flow and heat transfer of an electrically conducting non-Newtonian power-law fluid within a thin liquid film over an unsteady stretching sheet in the presence of a transverse magnetic field.

Non of the above authors deals with the problem involving the thermal radiation on the flow and heat transfer in a liquid film on unsteady stretching surface. Thermal radiation effects may play an important role in controlling heat transfer in industry where the desired product with a sought characteristics depends on the heat controlling factors to some extent. The effect of thermal radiation on the flow and heat transfer of a non-Newtonian fluids has been studied by several authors (Aliakbar et al. 2009; Mahmoud 2007; Raptis 1998, 1999; Siddheshwar and Mahabaleswar 2005; Hayat and Qasim 2010). The transfer of heat due to the missing electromagnetic waves (thermal radiation) has been presented by Baleanu et al. (2015). Available literature shows that the effect of thermal radiation on Maxwell liquid film over an unsteady stretching sheet immersed in a porous medium is not being carried out. Therefore, the aim of this study is to investigate the influence of thermal radiation on heat transfer in an upper-convected Maxwell liquid film over an unsteady stretching surface embedded in a porous medium.

Formulation of the problem

Consider a laminar and incompressible unsteady flow of an upper-convected Maxwell fluid in a thin liquid film on a stretching surface immersed in a porous medium issuing from a narrow slit at the origin as shown in Fig. 1. The continuous surface aligned with the x axis at \(y=0\) moves in its own plane with a velocity \(u_{s}(x,t)\) and temperature distribution \(T_{s}(x,t)\). A thin liquid film of uniform thickness h(t) lies on the horizontal surface.
Fig. 1

Schematic of the physical system

The basic equations for mass, momentum and energy in the thin liquid layer using the usual boundary layer approximations are:
$$\begin{aligned}&\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}+\frac{\partial v}{\partial y}=0, \end{aligned}$$
(1)
$$\begin{aligned}&\frac{\partial u}{\partial t}+u\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}+v\frac{\partial u}{\partial y}=\frac{\mu }{\rho }\frac{\partial ^{2} u}{\partial y^{2}}-\lambda _{1}\left[ u^{2}\frac{\partial ^{2} u}{\partial x^{2}}+v^{2}\frac{\partial ^{2} u}{\partial y^{2}}+2uv\frac{\partial ^{2} u}{\partial x\partial y}\right] -\frac{\mu }{\rho k}u, \end{aligned}$$
(2)
$$\begin{aligned}&\frac{\partial T}{\partial t}+u\frac{\partial T}{\partial x}+v\frac{\partial T}{\partial y}=\frac{\kappa }{\rho c_{p}} \frac{\partial ^{2} T}{\partial y^{2}}-\frac{1}{\rho c_{p}}\frac{\partial q_{r}}{\partial y}, \end{aligned}$$
(3)
where u and v are the velocity components along the x and y directions, respectively. \(\rho\) is the fluid density, T is the temperature of the fluid, t is the time, \(\mu\) is the viscosity of the fluid, \(\lambda _{1}(t)=\lambda _{0}(1-at)\) is the relaxation time of period, \(\lambda _{0}\) is a constant (Mukhopadhyay 2012), k is the permeability of the porous medium, \(\kappa\) is the thermal conductivity, \(q_{r}\) is the radiative heat flux and \(c_{p}\) is the specific heat at constant pressure.
The appropriate boundary conditions for the present problem are:
$$\begin{aligned} u = u_{s}, v=0, \quad T=T_{s} \quad at \quad y=0, \end{aligned}$$
(4)
$$\begin{aligned} \frac{\partial u}{\partial y}=\frac{\partial T}{\partial y}=0 \quad at \quad y=h, \end{aligned}$$
(5)
$$\begin{aligned} v= \frac{d h}{d t} \quad at \quad y=h, \end{aligned}$$
(6)
where h is the thickness of the liquid film which has been assumed to be uniform. The flow is caused by stretching the elastic surface at \(y=0\) such that the continuous sheet moves in the \(x\)-direction with the velocity (Dandapat et al. 2003):
$$\begin{aligned} u_{s}=\frac{bx}{(1-at)}, \end{aligned}$$
(7)
where a and b are positive constants with dimension \((time)^{-1}\). Eqation (5) imposes a kinematic constraint of the fluid motion. \(T_{s}\) is the surface temperature of the stretching sheet, which varies with the distance x along the sheet and time t in the form (Dandapat et al. 2003):
$$\begin{aligned} T_{s}=T_{0}-T_{ref}\left[ \frac{bx^{2}}{2\nu }\right] (1-at)^{\frac{-3}{2}}, \end{aligned}$$
(8)
here \(T_{0}\) is the temperature at the slit and \(T_{ref}\) is the reference temperature, which can be taken either as a constant reference temperature or a constant temperature difference. In the present work \(T_{ref}\) will be taken as \(T_{ref}=T_{0}\). It should be noticed that the Eqs. (7) and (8), on which the following analysis is based, are valid only for time \(t<\frac{1}{a}\).
The radiative heat flux \(q_{r}\) is employed according to Rosseland approximation (Raptis 1999) such that:
$$\begin{aligned} q_{r}=-\frac{4\sigma ^{*}}{3k^{*}}\frac{\partial T^{4}}{\partial y}, \end{aligned}$$
(9)
where \(\sigma ^{*}\) is the Stefan-Boltzmann constant and \(k^{*}\) is the mean absorption coefficient. Following, Raptis (1998), we assume that the temperature difference within the flow are small such that \(T^{4}\) may be expressed as a linear function of the temperature. Expanding \(T^{4}\) in a Taylor series about \(T_{0}\) and neglecting higher-order terms, we have:
$$\begin{aligned} T^{4}\cong 4T_{0}^{3}T-3T_{0}^{4}. \end{aligned}$$
(10)
We introduce the following dimensionless variables (Dandapat et al. 2003):
$$\begin{aligned} \eta= \left( \frac{b}{\nu }\right) ^{\frac{1}{2}}(1-at)^{\frac{-1}{2}}y, \end{aligned}$$
(11)
$$\begin{aligned} \psi= \left[ \nu b (1-at)^{-1}\right] ^{\frac{1}{2}}xf, \end{aligned}$$
(12)
$$\begin{aligned} T= T_{0}-T_{ref}\left[ \frac{bx^{2}}{2\nu }\right] (1-at)^{\frac{-3}{2}}\theta , \end{aligned}$$
(13)
where \(\psi\) is the stream function that satisfies the continuity Eq. (1). The velocity components are:
$$u=\frac{\partial \psi}{\partial y}= \left (\frac{b x}{1-at} \right)f^{'}(\eta), v=-\frac{\partial \psi}{\partial x}=-\left(\frac{\nu b}{1-at}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}f(\eta).$$
(14)
By using the transformation given in Eqs. (11)–(14), the governing Eqs. (2)–(3) and the boundary conditions (46) become:
$$\begin{aligned}&f^{'''}+ff^{''}-f^{'2}-S\left( f^{'}+\frac{\eta }{2}f^{''}\right) -De\left[ f^{2}f^{'''}-2ff^{'}f^{''}\right] -Df^{'}=0, \end{aligned}$$
(15)
$$\begin{aligned}&\frac{1}{Pr}[(1+R)\theta ^{''}]+f\theta ^{'}-2f^{'}\theta -\frac{S}{2}\left[ 3\theta +\eta \theta ^{'}\right] =0,\end{aligned}$$
(16)
$$\begin{aligned}&f=0, \quad f^{'}=1, \quad \theta =1 \quad at \quad \eta =0, \end{aligned}$$
(17)
$$\begin{aligned}&f^{''}=0, \quad \theta ^{'}=0 \quad at \quad \eta =\beta , \end{aligned}$$
(18)
$$\begin{aligned}&f=\frac{1}{2}S\beta \quad at \quad \eta =\beta , \end{aligned}$$
(19)
where a prime denotes differentiation with respect to \(\eta\) , \(S=\frac{a}{b}\) is the unsteadiness parameter, \(Pr=\frac{\mu c_{p}}{\kappa }\) is the Prandtl number, \(R=\frac{16 \sigma ^{*}T_{0}^{3}}{3k^{*}\kappa }\) is the radiation parameter, \(De=\frac{\lambda _{1}(t) b}{(1-at)}\) is the local Deborah number, \(D=\frac{1}{Da}\) is the local Darcy parameter and \(Da=\frac{\rho b k(t)}{\mu (1-at)}\) is the Darcy number. For similarity solution the permeability k is taken in the form \(k(t)=(1-at)\). \(\beta\) is unknown constant, denotes the value of \(\eta\) at the free surface, which must be determined as a part of the present problem. It is noticed that although the dimensionless film thickness \(\beta\) is constant which depends only on S, the actual film thickness h(t) depends only on time t, then the actual film thickness \(\beta =\eta\) at \(y=h\) i.e.
$$\begin{aligned} h(t)=\beta \left( \frac{b}{\nu }\right) ^{\frac{-1}{2}}(1-at)^{\frac{1}{2}}. \end{aligned}$$
(20)
The physical quantities of interest are the local skin-friction coefficient \(Cf_{x}\) and the local Nusselt number \(Nu_{x}\) which are defined as:
$$\begin{aligned} Cf_{x}= -\frac{2\mu \left( \frac{\partial u}{\partial y}\right) _{y=0}}{\rho u_{s}^{2}}=-2Re_{x}^{\frac{-1}{2}}f^{''}(0), \end{aligned}$$
(21)
$$\begin{aligned} Nu_{x}= -\frac{x\left( \frac{\partial T}{\partial y}\right) _{y=0}}{ (T_{s}-T_{0})}=-Re_{x}^{\frac{1}{2}}\theta ^{'}(0), \end{aligned}$$
(22)
where \(Re_{x}=\frac{u_{s}x}{\nu }\) is the local Reynolds number.

Results and discussion

The exact analytical solution for the system of non-linear ordinary differential Eqs. (15) and (16) with the boundary conditions (17)–(19) is not feasible. Therefore Eqs. (14) and (15) along with the boundary conditions (16)–(18) were solved numerical using the fourth-order Runge-Kutta integration scheme with the shooting method. In order to validate of the numerical method, we have compared the values of \(f^{''}(0)\), \(\theta (\beta )\) and \(-\theta ^{'}(0)\)(in the absence of De, D and R ) with those obtained by Abel et al. (2009) (in the absence of M and Ec) and found in good agreement as shown in Tables 1 and 2.
Table 1

Comparison of \(\beta\) and \(-f^{''}\)(0) with \(De=D=0\)

S

Abel et al. (2009)

Present result

\(\beta\)

\(-f^{''}\)(0)

\(\beta\)

\(-f^{''}\)(0)

0.4

4.981455

1.134098

4.981455

1.134096

0.6

3.131710

1.195128

3.131711

1.195125

0.8

2.151990

1.245805

2.151992

1.245805

1.0

1.543617

1.277769

1.543616

1.277769

1.2

1.127780

1.279171

1.127781

1.279171

1.4

0.821033

1.233545

0.821032

1.233545

1.6

0.576176

1.114941

0.576175

1.114939

1.8

0.356390

0.867416

0.356389

0.867416

Table 2

Comparison of \(\theta (\beta )\) and \(-\theta ^{'}\)(0) with \(De=D=R=0\)

Pr

S

\(\beta\)

Abel et al. (2009)

Present result

\(\theta (\beta )\)

\(-\theta ^{'}\)(0)

\(\theta (\beta )\)

\(-\theta ^{'}\)(0)

0.01

0.8

2.151990

0.960438

0.042120

0.960480

0.042042

0.1

0.8

2.151990

0.692269

0.351920

0.692533

0.351377

1.0

0.8

2.151990

0.097825

1.671919

0.097884

1.671003

2.0

0.8

2.151990

0.024869

2.443914

0.024862

2.443866

3.0

0.8

2.151990

0.008324

3.034915

0.008311

3.036115

0.01

1.2

1.127780

0.982312

0.033515

0.982331

0.033459

0.1

1.2

1.127780

0.843485

0.305409

0.843622

0.304963

1.0

1.2

1.127780

2.86634

1.773772

2.86718

1.773030

2.0

1.2

1.127780

0.128174

2.638431

0.128123

2.638725

3.0

1.2

1.127780

0.067737

3.280329

0.067645

3.281949

To study the effects of various parameters like the radiation parameter R, the Darcy parameter D, the Deborah number De and the Prandtl number Pr on the dimensionless velocity \(f^{'}(\eta )\) and the dimensionless temperature \(\theta (\eta )\), numerical calculations have been carried out for different values of R, D, De and Pr as shown in Figs. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7. Also, the variation of the local skin-friction coefficient and the local Nusselt number with the change in the parameters R, D, De and Pr are illustrated in Table 3. Figure 2 demonstrates the effect of the Darcy parameter D on the horizontal velocity profiles for different values of S. It is revealed that the transverse velocity decreases as the Darcy parameter increases. Also, it is noticed that the film thickness \(\beta\) decreases as the unsteadiness parameter S increases. The dimensionless temperature profiles \(\theta (\eta )\) are depicted in Fig. 3 for various values of D. It is observed that the temperature at a point increases with increase in D. This is due to the fact that the porous medium produces a resistive type of force which causes a reduction in the fluid velocity and enhancing the temperature. The effect of the radiation parameter on the dimensionless temperature \(\theta (\eta )\) is displayed in Fig. 4. It is seen that the increase of the radiation parameter leads to an increase in the temperature at any point. This is because the increase in the radiation parameter implies higher surface heat flux and thereby increasing the temperature of the fluid. The influence of the Deborah number on the transverse velocity \(f^{'}(\eta )\) is shown in Fig. 5. It is shown that at any point \(f^{'}(\eta )\) decreases as De increases. Also, it is seen that the transverse velocity decreases with \(\eta\) and the film thickness decreases with increasing De. Figure 6 demonstrates that at any point the dimensionless temperature \(\theta (\eta )\) increases with the increasing of the Deborah number De. Also, it is noticed that the dimensionless temperature decreases with \(\eta\). The variation of the dimensionless temperature against \(\eta\) for various values of the Prandtl number are displayed in Fig. 7. It is found that the temperature decreases with \(\eta\) until its value at the free surface. It is also, observed that the temperature decreases with the increase of the Prandtl number. This is due to the fact that a fluid with larger Prandtl number possesses larger heat capacity, and hence augments the heat transfer.
Table 3

Values of \(-f^{''}\)(0) and \(-\theta ^{'}\)(0) for various values of DRDeS and Pr

D

R

De

Pr

S

\(-f^{''}\)(0)

\(\theta (\beta )\)

\(-\theta ^{'}\)(0)

0.0

1

0.2

5

0.8

1.2827

0.0187

2.7469

0.5

1

0.2

5

0.8

1.4606

0.0378

2.7177

1

1

0.2

5

0.8

1.6187

0.0600

2.6910

0.0

1

0.2

5

1.2

1.3056

0.1023

2.9708

0.5

1

0.2

5

1.2

1.4548

0.1427

2.9404

1

1

0.2

5

1.2

1.5901

0.1813

2.9087

0.5

0

0.2

5

0.8

1.4606

0.0059

3.9397

0.5

1

0.2

5

0.8

1.4606

0.0378

2.7177

0.5

2

0.2

5

0.8

1.4606

0.0826

2.1753

0.5

5

0.2

5

0.8

1.4606

0.2187

1.4581

0.5

0

0.2

5

1.2

1.4548

0.0458

4.2638

0.5

1

0.2

5

1.2

1.4548

0.1426

2.9404

0.5

2

0.2

5

1.2

1.4548

0.2323

2.3364

0.5

5

0.2

5

1.2

1.4548

0.4247

1.5150

0.5

1

0.0

5

0.8

1.4280

0.0316

2.7249

0.5

1

0.2

5

0.8

1.4606

0.0378

2.7177

0.5

1

0.5

5

0.8

1.5088

0.0479

2.7067

0.5

1

0.0

5

1.2

1.4311

0.1322

2.9478

0.5

1

0.2

5

1.2

1.4548

0.1426

2.9404

0.5

1

0.5

5

1.2

1.4904

0.1584

2.9286

0.5

1

0.2

3

0.8

1.4606

0.0984

2.0508

0.5

1

0.2

5

0.8

1.4606

0.0378

2.7177

0.5

1

0.2

10

0.8

1.4606

0.0059

3.9397

0.5

1

0.2

3

1.2

1.4548

0.2591

2.1955

0.5

1

0.2

5

1.2

1.4548

0.1427

2.9404

0.5

1

0.2

10

1.2

1.4548

0.0458

4.2638

Fig. 2

a Velocity profiles for various values of D. b Velocity profiles for various values of D

Fig. 3

a Temperature profiles for various values of D. b Temperature profiles for various values of D

Fig. 4

a Temperature profiles for various values of R. b Temperature profiles for various values of R

Fig. 5

a Velocity profiles for various values of De. b Velocity profiles for various values of De

Fig. 6

a Temperature profiles for various values of De. b Temperature profiles for various values of De

Fig. 7

a Temperature profiles for various values of Pr. b Temperature profiles for various values of Pr

The numerical values of the local skin-friction and the local Nusselt number in terms of \(-\theta ^{'}(0)\) for various values of the Darcy parameter D, the radiation parameter R, the Deborah number De and the Prandtl number Pr for both cases \(S=0.8\) and \(S=1.2\) are tabulated in Table 3. It can be seen that the local skin-friction coefficient increased by increasing D or De, whereas the local Nusselt number decreases with the increasing the Darcy parameter and the Deborah number. Also, it is noticed that the local Nusselt number decreases as the radiation parameter increases and increases with the increase of the Prandtl number. However it is found that the local Nusselt number decreases as S increases whereas the local skin-friction coefficient decreases with the unsteadiness parameter. Moreover, it is observed that the free surface temperature \(\theta (\beta )\) increases by increasing D, R, S and De whereas it decreased with increasing the Prandtl number.

Conclusions

A theoretical analysis is performed to study thermal radiation effects on flow and heat transfer in an upper convected Maxwell liquid film on an unsteady stretching sheet embedded in a porous medium. The governing equations are transformed to a system of non-linear ordinary differential equations which is solved numerically using the fourth order Runge-Kutta scheme with the shooting technique. The main conclusions which have been found from the present study are:
  1. 1.

    The velocity and the film thickness decreases with increasing the Darcy parameter and the Deborah number.

     
  2. 2.

    Increasing values of the Darcy parameter, radiation parameter and Deborah number leads to an increase in the temperature.

     
  3. 3.

    The temperature decreases with increasing the Prandtl number.

     
  4. 4.

    The Darcy parameter and the Deborah number have the effect of enhancing the local skin-friction coefficient.

     
  5. 5.

    The local Nusselt number decreases by increasing the radiation parameter, the Darcy parameter and the Deborah number and increases with increasing the Prandtl number.

     
  6. 6.

    The free surface temperature decreases as the Darcy parameter, the radiation parameter and the Deborah number increase while it decreases as the Prandtl number increases.

     

Declarations

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank the reviewers for their valuable comments, which led to the improvement of the work.

Competing interests

The author declares that she has no competing interests.

Open AccessThis 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

(1)
Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science, Benha University
(2)
Department of Mathematics and Statistic, Faculty of Science, Taif University

References

  1. Abel MS, Mahesha N, Tawade J (2009) Heat transfer in a liquid film over an unsteady stretching surface with viscous dissipation in presence of external magnetic field. Appl Math Modell 33:3430–3441View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  2. Abel MS, Tawade J, Nandeppanavar MM (2009) Effect of non-uniform heat source on MHD heat transfer in a liquid film over an unsteady stretching sheet. Int J Non Linear Mech 44:990–998View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  3. Aliakbar V, Alizadeh-Pahlavan A, Sadeghy K (2009) The influence of thermal radiation on MHD flow of Maxwellian fluids above stretching sheets. Commun Nonlinear Sci Num Simul 14:779–794View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  4. Andersson HI, Aarseth JB, Dandapat BS (2000) Heat transfer in a liquid film on an unsteady stretching surface. Int J Heat Mass Transf 43:69–74View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  5. Andersson HI, Aarseth JB, Braud N, Dandapat BS (1996) Flow of a power-law fluid film on an unsteady stretching surface. J Non Newton Fluid Mech 62:1–8View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  6. Baleanu D, Khan H, Jafari H, Khan RA (2015) On the exact solution of wave equation on cantor sets. Entropy 17:6229–6237View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  7. Chen C-H (2007) Marangoni effects on forced convection of power-law liquids in a thin film over a stretching surface. Phys Lett A 370:51–57View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  8. Chen C-H (2003) Heat transfer in a power-law fluid film over a unsteady stretching sheet. Heat Mass Transf 39:791–796View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  9. Chen C-H (2006) Effect of viscous dissipation on heat transfer in a non-Newtonian liquid film over an unsteady stretching sheet. J Non Newton Fluid Mech 135:128–135View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  10. Dandapat BS, Santra B, Andersson HI (2003) Thermocapillarity in a liquid film on an unsteady stretching surface. Int J Heat Mass Transf 46:3009–3015View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  11. Dandapat BS, Maity S (2006) Flow of a thin liquid film on an unsteady stretching sheet. Phys Fluids 18:102101–102107View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  12. Dandapat BS, Santra B, Vajravelu K (2007) The effects of variable fluid properties and thermoca-pillarity on the flow of a thin film on an unsteady stretching sheet. Int J Heat Mass Transf 50:991–996View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  13. Hayat T, Ellahi R, Mahomed FM (2008) Exact solutions for thin film flow of a third grade fluid down an inclined plane. Chaos Solitons Fractals 38:1336–1341View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  14. Hayat T, Saif S, Abbas Z (2008) The influence of heat transfer in an MHD second grade fluid film over an unsteady stretching sheet. Phys Lett A 372:5037–5045View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  15. Hayat T, Qasim M (2010) Influence of thermal radiation and Joule heating on MHD flow of a Maxwell fluid in the presence of thermophoresis. Int J Heat Mass Transf 53:4780–4788View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  16. Liu I-C, Andersson HI (2008) Heat transfer in a liquid film on an unsteady stretching sheet. Int J Therm Sci 47:766–772View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  17. Mahmoud MAA (2007) Thermal radiation effects on MHD flow of a micropolar fluid over a stretching surface with variable thermal conductivity. Phys A 375:401–410View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  18. Mahmoud MAA (2010) Thermal radiation effects on the flow and heat transfer in a liquid film on an unsteady stretching sheet. Int J Numer Methods Fluids. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/fld.2440 Google Scholar
  19. Mahmoud MAA, Megahed AM (2009) MHD flow and heat transfer in a non-Newtonian liquid film over an unsteady stretching sheet with variable fluid properties. Can J PhysGoogle Scholar
  20. Mukhopadhyay S (2012) Heat transfer analysis of the unsteady flow of a Maxwell fluid over a stretching surface in the presence of a heat source/sink. Chin Phys Lett 29:054703View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  21. Noor NFM, Hashim I (2010) Thermocapillarity and magnetic field effects in a thin liquid film on an unsteady stretching surface. Int J Heat Mass Transf 53:2044–2051View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  22. Noor NFM, Abdulaziz O, Hashim I (2009) MHD flow and heat transfer in a thin liquid film on an unsteady stretching sheet by the homotopy analysis method. Int J Numer Methods FluidsGoogle Scholar
  23. Raptis A (1998) Flow of a micropolar fluid past a continuously moving plate by the presence of radiation. Int J Heat Mass Transf 41:2865–2866View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  24. Raptis A (1999) Radiation and viscoelastic flow. Int Commun Heat Mass Transf 26:889–895View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  25. Ray RN, Mazumder BS (2001) Hall effects on hydromagnetic falling liquid film. Int J Non Linear Mech 36:1263–1267View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  26. Santra B, Dandapat BS (2009) Unsteady thin-film flow over a heated stretching sheet. Int J Heat Mass Transf 52:1965–1970View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  27. Sajid M, Ali N, Hayat T (2009) On exact solutions for thin film flows of a micropolar fluid. Commun Nonlinear Sci Num Simul 14:451–461View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  28. Siddiqui AM, Ahmed M, Ghori QK (2007) Thin film flow of non-Newtonian fluids on a moving belt. Chaos Solitons Fractals 33:1006–1016View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  29. Siddiqui AM, Mahmood R, Ghori QK (2008) Homotopy perturbation method for thin film flow of a third grade fluid down an inclined plane. Chaos Solitons Fractals 35:140–147View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  30. Siddheshwar PG, Mahabaleswar US (2005) Effects of radiation and heat source on MHD flow of a viscoelastic liquid and heat transfer over a stretching sheet. Int J Non Linear Mech 40:807–820View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  31. Usha R, Sridharan R (1995) The axisymmetric motion of a liquid film on an unsteady stretching surface. ASME Fluids Eng 117:81–85View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  32. Wang CY (1990) Liquid film on an unsteady stretching sheet. Q Appl Math XLVIII:601–610Google Scholar
  33. Wang C (2006) Analytic solutions for a liquid thin film on an unsteady stretching surface. Heat Mass Transf 42:759–766View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  34. Wang C, Pop I (2006) Analysis of the flow of a power-law fluid film on an unsteady stretching surface by means of homotopy analysis method. J Non Newton Fluid Mech 138:161–172View ArticleGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© The Author(s) 2016