J Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng.
(2016) 38:589–599
DOI 10.1007/s40430-014-0275-3
TECHNICAL PAPER
Differential transformation method for Newtonian
and Non‑Newtonian fluids flow analysis: comparison with HPM
and numerical solution
M. Hatami · J. Hatami ·
M. Jafaryar · G. Domairry 
Received: 15 August 2014 / Accepted: 7 November 2014 / Published online: 10 February 2015
© The Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering 2015
Abstract  In this study, a simple and high accurate series-
based method called differential transformation method
(DTM) is used for solving the coupled nonlinear differ-
ential equations in fluids’ mechanic problems. The con-
cept of the DTM is briefly introduced, and its application
for two different cases, natural convection of a non-New-
tonian fluid between two vertical plates and Newtonian
fluid flow between two horizontal plates, has been studied.
DTM results are compared with those obtained by another
series-based analytical technique namely homotopy pertur-
bation method (HPM) and a numerical solution (Fourth-
order Runge–Kutta) to show the accuracy of the proposed
method. Results reveal that DTM is very effective and con-
venient and can achieve more suitable results compared to
HPM in some areas of equations in engineering and science
problems.
Technical Editor: Francisco Ricardo Cunha.
M. Hatami (*) 
Mechanical Engineering Department, Esfarayen University
of Technology, Esfarayen, North Khorasan, Iran
e-mail: m.hatami2010@gmail.com
J. Hatami (*) 
Garmsar Health & Care Center, Semnan University of Medical
Sciences, Semnan, Garmsar, Semnan, Iran
e-mail: javad.hatamy@gmail.com
M. Jafaryar 
Mechanical Engineering Department, Mazandaran Institute
of Technology, Babol, Iran
G. Domairry 
Mechanical Engineering Faculty, Babol University
of Technology, Babol, Iran
e-mail: g.domairry@gmail.com
Keywords  Coupled nonlinear differential equations ·
Differential transformation method · Homotopy
perturbation method · Natural convection ·
Newtonian and non-Newtonian fluids
1 Introduction
Most technical problems in fluid mechanics and heat trans-
fer problems are inherently nonlinear. These problems and
phenomena can be modeled by ordinary or partial nonlin-
ear differential equations to find their behavior in the envi-
ronment. Most of these described physical and mechanical
problems have a system of coupled nonlinear differential
equations. For example, heat transfer by natural convection
which commonly occurs in many physical and engineering
applications such as geothermal systems, chemical catalytic
reactors, heat exchangers, etc. has a system of coupled non-
linear differential equations. One of the simple and reliable
methods for solving the system of coupled nonlinear dif-
ferential equations is analytical solution which recently is
widely used in many problems. Following, two applicable
analytical methods called homotopy perturbation method
(HPM) and differential transformation method (DTM) are
introduced.
Homotopy perturbation method is an effective and con-
venient method for solving the both linear and nonlinear
differential equations. He [1–4] applied this method for
many nonlinear problems. Roozi et al. [5] used HPM to
solve the nonlinear parabolic–hyperbolic partial differential
equations. Ganji and Sadighi [6] applied HPM for solving
nonlinear heat transfer in a porous media, and they intro-
duced HPM to obtain the exact solution of the linear and
nonlinear Schrödinger equations [7]. Sadighi and Ganji
[8] obtained the exact solutions of Laplace equation with
13

590 J Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng. (2016) 38:589–599

Dirichlet and Neumann boundary conditions by HPM. Zia- of problems, natural convection of a non-Newtonian fluid
bakhsh and Domairry [9] have studied the natural convec- between two vertical plates and Newtonian fluid flow analy-
tion of a non-Newtonian fluid between two infinite parallel sis between two horizontal plates, are solved. As an important
vertical flat plates by homotopy analysis method (HAM) result, it is depicted that the DTM results are more accurate
which is a general shape of the HPM. than those obtained by HPM in some areas. After this verifica-
Differential transformation method is another analytical tion, the effects of some physical parameters were analyzed to
method based on Taylor series. It constructs an analytical solu- show the efficiency of DTM for this type of the problems.
tion in the form of a polynomial. Actually, DTM is different
from the traditional high-order Taylor series method, which
requires symbolic calculation of the necessary derivatives of 2 Problems description
the data functions. This method was firstly applied in the engi-
neering domain by Zhou [10] and its abilities attracted many The study of the fluids flow between parallel plates
authors to use this method for solving the nonlinear equations. has many applications in industrials which motivated
DTM or improved shapes of it (Ms-DTM and Hybrid-DTM) the researchers to more study on them. Ziabakhsh and
can solve any coupled nonlinear equations set; also they can Domairry [9] investigated the natural convection of non-
be used for three dimensional problems. Ghafoori et al. [11] Newtonian fluid between vertical parallel plates using
solved a nonlinear oscillation equation by DTM and they HAM and, based on their work, Hatami and Ganji [18]
revealed that DTM results are more accurate than HPM and studied the effect of sodium alginate (SA) non-Newtonian
variation iteration method (VIM). Yahyazadeh et al. [12] eval- nanofluid between parallel plates. Also, Rajagopal and Na
uated the natural convection flow of a nanofluid over a linearly [19] presented a numerical solution for the natural convec-
stretching sheet in the presence of magnetic field using DTM. tion of non-Newtonian fluids between vertical plates. Fol-
Also, Biazar and Eslami [13] considered DTM to solve the lowing two cases of problems in fluids flow between paral-
quadratic Riccati differential equation and the derived results lel plates with coupled nonlinear differential equations are
by DTM were compared with the results of HAM and ADM introduced and it is aimed to investigate the efficiency of
(Adomian decomposition method). They showed that DTM DTM in comparison to HPM (as a special solution of HAM
results are more effective and favorable than HAM and ADM [9]) and numerical solution presented in [19].
results. Gokdogan et al. [14] acquired an approximate ana-
lytical solution of the chaotic Genesio system by the modified 2.1 Case 1
differential transform method. Ayaz [15] studied two-dimen-
sional differential transform method for solving an initial value Consider the steady flow of an incompressible Newtonian
problem in partial differential equations (PDEs). In another fluid between two infinite, parallel and horizontal plates
application of DTM, the natural frequencies and critical flow which are separated by a distance a as shown in Fig. 1 for
velocities of pipes conveying fluid with several typical bound- Case 1. Temperature of each plate considered to be constant
ary conditions were obtained by Ni et al. [16]. Although many at T0. The lower plate is stationary while the upper plate
analytical methods are presented in the literature, but DTM moves with a uniform velocity V. The thermal conductivity of
has more applications due to the following advantages: the fluid is assumed to be constant but the viscosity is allowed
to vary with temperature as following equation [17, 18],
I) Unlike perturbation techniques, DTM is independent
of any small parameter such as p in HPM. So, DTM µ = µ0 e−α(T −T0 ) (1)
can be applied no matter if governing equations and After assuming the following parameter:
boundary/initial conditions of a given nonlinear prob-
T − T0 y u µ0 V 2
lem contain small or large quantities or not. θ= , Y = , U = , β = αT0 , Br =
II) DTM does not need to calculate auxiliary parameter 1 T0 a V kT0
through h-curves against HAM. (2)
III) DTM does not need to initial guesses and auxiliary linear Momentum and energy equations for described problem
operator and it solves the equations directly versus HAM. will be [17]:
IV) DTM provides us with great freedom to express solu-  � �
tions of a given nonlinear problem by means of Pade d −βθ dU
 dY e = 0,


approximant and Ms-DTM.

dY
(3)
d2 θ dU 2
� �
 2 + Br × e−βθ

= 0.

This paper aims to apply DTM for system of coupled non-

dY dY
linear equations and compare its results to HPM. For show-
ing the accuracy of DTM in described problems, two cases And boundary conditions are

13
J Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng. (2016) 38:589–599 591

Fig. 1  Schematic of the two

cases of problems with coupled
nonlinear equations in fluids
mechanic

3 Principle of analytical methods


Y = 0 ⇒ U = 0, θ = 0
(4)
Y = 1 ⇒ U = 1, θ = 0
3.1 Differential transformation method
Following expansion is used for e−βθ:
For understanding this method’s concept, suppose that x(t)
e−βθ = 1 − βθ + . . . (5) is an analytic function in domain D, and t  =  ti represents
2.2 Case 2 any point in the domain. The function x(t) is then repre-
sented by one power series whose center is located at ti.
Consider a Non-Newtonian fluid between two flat and ver- The Taylor series expansion function of x(t) is in form of:
tical plates with a distance 2b apart as shown in Fig. 1 for
∞
 
Case 2. The walls at x = +b and x = −b are held at con-  (t − ti )k dk x(t)
x(t) = ∀t ∈ D (9)
stant temperatures T2 and T1, respectively, where T1 > T2. k! dt k
k=0 t=ti
This difference in temperature causes the fluid near the wall
at x = −b to rise, and the fluid near the wall at x = + b to The Maclaurin series of x(t) can be obtained by taking
fall. After using the following parameter [18]: ti = 0 in Eq. (9) as:

V02 ∞ k
 
υ x T − Tm t dk x(t)
V= , X= , θ= , E= ,

V0 b T1 − T 2 c(T1 − T2 ) x(t) = ∀t ∈ D (10)
k! dt k
k=0 t=0
µc 6β3 V02
Pr = , δ= (6)
k µb2 As explained in [10], the differential transformation of
the function x(t) is defined as follows:
where c is the specific heat of the fluid, Tm is the mean tem-
∞
 
perature, (T1 + T2)/2 and β3 is a constant which implies to  H k dk x(t)
the grade of fluid. The Navier–Stokes and energy equations
X(k) = (11)
k! dt k
k=0 t=0
can be reduced to the following pair of ordinary differential
equations [19]: where X(k) represents the transformed function and x(t) is
 2 � �2 2 the original function. The differential spectrum of X(k) is
d V dV d V
confined within the interval t ∈ [0, H], where H is a con-


 dX 2 + 6δ + θ = 0,
dX 2

dX
stant value and it can be assumed unity in common DTM,

 d2 θ
� �2
dV
� �4
dV (7) but for multi-step DTM it should be considered as the
 2 + E. Pr
 + 2δE. Pr = 0.
dX dX dX length of t steps. When H  →  ∞ the methods no longer
work and Pade approximation should be applied. More
And the appropriate boundary conditions are [18]: information about H is presented in [20]. The differential
 1 inverse transform of X(k) is defined as follows:
 X = −1 ⇒ V = 0, θ =

2 ∞  k
(8)
 t
 X = +1 ⇒ V = 0, θ = − 1
 x(t) = X(k) (12)
H
2 k=0

13

592 J Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng. (2016) 38:589–599

It is clear that the concept of differential transformation is with the boundary condition of:
based on the Taylor series expansion. The values of function  
∂u
X(k) at values of argument k are referred to as discrete, i.e., B u, = 0, r ∈ Γ , (15)
∂r
X(0) is known as the zero discrete, X(1) as the first discrete,
etc. The more discrete available, the more precise it is pos- where A is a general differential operator, B is a boundary
sible to restore the unknown function. The function x(t) con- operator, f(r) is a known analytical function and Γ is the
sists of the T-function X(k), and its value is given by the sum boundary of the domain Ω. A(u) can be divided into two
of the T-function with (t/H)k as its coefficient. In real applica- parts which are L(u) and N(u), where L(u) is linear and
tions, at the right choice of constant H, the larger values of N(u) is nonlinear. Equation (14) can, therefore, be rewritten
argument k the discrete of spectrum reduce rapidly. The func- as follows:
tion x(t) is expressed by a finite series and Eq. (12) can be
written as:
L(u) + N(u) − f (r) = 0, r ∈ Ω (16)
Homotopy perturbation structure is shown as follows:
n  k
 t  
x(t) = X(k) (13) H(ν, p) = (1 − p) [L(ν) − L(u0 )] + p A(ν) − f (r) = 0
H
k=0 (17)
where n is the number of statements of the DTM. Com- where
monly, by increasing n, DTM accuracy will be increased,
but it depends on H and time step’s length [20]. Actu-
ν(r, p) : Ω × [0, 1] → R (18)
ally, H depends on time steps, for which classical DTM In Eq. (17), p ∈ [0 , 1] is an embedding parameter and
is considered unity, but for multi-step DTM or Ms-DTM u0 is the first approximation that satisfies the boundary con-
it is equal to the time step value. Some important math- dition. It can be assumed that the solution of Eq. (17) can
ematical operations performed by differential transform be written as a power series in p, as follows:
method are listed in Table 1. As described before, one
of the most advantages of DTM is no needing to small ν = ν0 + pν1 + p2 ν2 + . . . (19)
parameter, linearization or perturbation. Also, it does not
need to determine auxiliary function, auxiliary param- and the best approximation for solution is:
eter or suitable initial guess against other analytical
u = lim ν = ν0 + ν1 + ν2 + . . . (20)
methods. p→1

3.2 Homotopy perturbation method 4 Application of analytical methods on the problems

To illustrate the basic ideas of this method, consider the 4.1 Application of DTM on Case 1
following general equation:
Now, DTM from Table 1 is applied to Eq. (3) for finding
A(u) − f (r) = 0 r ∈ Ω (14) θ (Y ) and U(Y ).

k

Table 1  Some fundamental operations of the differential transform  �
 −β (k + 1 − l)(l + 1)�(l + 1)Ū(k − l + 1) + (k + 1)(k + 2)Ū(k + 2)

method





 l=0

Origin function Transformed function k



 �
 −β

 �(l)(k + 1 − l)(k + 2 − l)Ū(k − l + 2) = 0

l=0

x(t) = αf (x) ± βg(t) X(k) = αF(k) ± βG(k)
k
d m f (t) (k + m)!F(k + m)
 �
X(k) =

x(t) = dt m k!



 (k + 1)(k + 2)�(k + 2) + Br (l + 1)(k + 1 − l)Ū(l + 1)Ū(k + 1 − l)

x(t) = f (t)g(t) k 

 l=0
X(k) = F(l)G(k − l) 


 � k−j
k �
l=0 
x(t) = t m  −Brβ (j + 1)Ū(j + 1)�(i)(k + 1 − j − i)Ū(k + 1 − j − i) = 0
 
1, if k = m, 

X(k) = δ(k − m) = j=0 i=0
0, if k �= m.
x(t) = exp(t) X(k) = k!1 (21)
x(t) = sin(ωt + α) k

X(k) = ωk! sin kπ

where  and Ū represent the DTM transformed form of θ
2 +α
k
  and U, respectively. Rearranging Eq. (21), a simple recur-
x(t) = cos(ωt + α) X(k) = ωk! cos kπ2 +α rence set of equations is obtained as follows:

13
J Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng. (2016) 38:589–599 593

  
k k
 1 � �
Ū(k + 2) = β (k + 1 − l)(l + 1)�(l + 1).Ū(k − l + 1) + β �(l)(k + 1 − l)(k + 2 − l)Ū(k − l + 2)




 (k + 1)(k + 2)
 l=0 l=0
 
 k k �k−j

 1 � �
 �(k + 2) = (k + 1)(k + 2) −Br


  (l + 1)(k + 1 − l)Ū(l + 1)Ū(k + 1 − l) + Brβ (j + 1)Ū(j + 1)�(i)(k + 1 − j − i)Ū(k + 1 − j − i)
l=0 j=0 i=0
(22)

The transformed form of boundary conditions can be The boundary conditions can be written as:
written as: 
V̄ (0) = a, V̄ (1) = b,
(28)

Ū(0) = 0, �(0) = 0, �(0) = c, �(1) = d.
(23)
Ū(1) = a, �(1) = b.
In ith step, by solving the set of coupled Eq. (27),
Using transformed boundary condition and Eq. (22), V̄ (i + 2) and �(i + 2) can be determined. For example,
using boundary condition and Eq. (27),
 1
 Ū(2) = βba
 
1 c
2  V̄ (2) = −


2 1 + 6δb2
 �(2) = − 1 Bra2

 �(2) = − 1 Pr b2 − δE Pr b4


2 2
1 1 (24) 1 −6δc3 + 6δc2 b + 36c2 b3 δ 2 + d + 18dδb2 + 108dδ 2 b4 + 216dδ 3 b6
 
 Ū(3) = β(b2 βa − Bra3 ) + b2 β 2 a  V̄ (3) = −


(1 + 6δb2 )4
  6
6 6 2 + 12δ 2 b4 − 2δcb)
1 E Pr bc(1 + 8δb
 �(3) = − 1 Bra2


  �(3) =

3 (1 + 6δb2 )2
6
...
... (29)
where a and b are unknown coefficients and other parame-
ters are known. After specifying θ(Y ) and U(Y ), two equa- where  and V̄ represent the DTM transformed form of θ
tions based on a and b will be obtained for θ(Y ) and U(Y ). and V, respectively, and a, b, c and d are unknown coef-
By applying boundary condition at Y  = 1 (Eq. 4) into ficients which after specifying θ (X) and V (X) and applying
θ (Y ) and U(Y ), two equations with two unknown coeffi- boundary condition (Eq. 8) will be determined. For exam-
cients will be appeared and a and b can be determined eas- ple, when Pr = δ = E = 0.5 following values were deter-
ily by solving them. For example, when Br = β = 0.5 fol- mined for a, b, c and d coefficients.
lowing values are determined for a and b coefficients.
a = −0.00006042749416, b = −0.08169745217,
(30)
a = 0.9802644829, b = 0.2450522090 (25) c = 0.00001670461380, d = −0.4999998878.
Finally, θ(Y ) and U(Y ) when Br  =  β  = 0.5 can be Finally, θ (X) and V (X) can be defined when
defined as: Pr = δ = E = 0.5:

θ (Y ) = 0.2450522090Y − 0.2402296141Y 2 − 0.009811466267Y 3 + 0.004208108590Y 4 + 0.0007807628430Y 5
(26)
U(Y ) = 0.9802644829Y + 0.06005399420Y 2 − 0.03434263843Y 3 − 0.007964818232Y 4 + 0.001988979504Y 5

4.2 Application of DTM on Case 2

Similarly, DTM is applied to Case 2. Transformed form of

Eq. (7) will be:
 � k � l ��
 � �


 6δ (k + 1 − l)(k + 2 − l)V̄ (k + 2 − l)(l + 1 − m)V̄ (l + 1 − m)(l + 1)V̄ (l + 1) +
l=0 m=0




 (k + 1)(k + 2)V̄ (k + 2) + �(k) = 0



k l m
� � � ���
� � �
 2δE Pr (k + 1 − l)V̄ (k + 1 − l)(l + 1)V̄ (l + 1)(l + 1 − m)V̄ (l + 1 − m)(m − n + 1)V̄ (m − n + 1) +
(27)



 l=0 m=0 n=0

 � k �

 �
E Pr (l + 1)V̄ (l + 1)(k + 1 − l) V̄ (k + 1 − l) + (k + 1)(k + 2)�(k + 2) = 0



l=0

13

594 J Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng. (2016) 38:589–599

V (X) = −0.00006042749416 − 0.08169745217X − 0.000008188348158X 2 + 0.08169745217X 3 + 0.00006861584235X 4


(31)
θ(X) = 0.00001670461380 − 0.4999998878X − 0.0008398777865X 2 − 1.122388468.10−7 X 3 + 0.0008231731724X 4

Convergence and accuracy of last equations are exam-  �

d2 θ(y)
� �
d2 θ(y)
� � �
du(y) 2
(1 − p) + p + Br(1 − θ(y)β)

ined by numerical method which is explained in “Results”.

dy2 dy2


 dy
Furthermore, other statements of θ(x) and V(x) were evalu-
� � � � � ��
2 � � � 2
 (1 − p) d u(y) + p − dθ(y) β du(y) + (1 − θ(y)β) d u(y)

(32)


ated which had decreasingly form. dy2 dy dy dy 2


by considering the u and θ as follows:

4.3 Application of HPM on Case 1
u(y) = u0 (y) + pu1 (y) + p2 u2 (y) + p3 u3 (y)
According to the so-called HPM, suppose the solution of
θ (y) = θ0 (y) + pθ1 (y) + p2 θ2 (y) + p3 θ3 (y) (33)
Eq. (17) has the form of:

Fig. 2  Comparison between DTM and HPM for θ(Y) and U(Y) for case 1 when Br = 0.5, β = 0.5

Table 2  DTM, HPM and Y U(Y) θ(Y)

numerical values for U(Y)
and θ(Y) for Case 1 when Numerical DTM HPM Numerical DTM HPM
Br = β = 0.5
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.1 0.098506951 0.098591869 0.09850000 0.022078043 0.02209354 0.02198906
0.2 0.197997096 0.198168208 0.19800000 0.039307129 0.03932974 0.03903333
0.3 0.298239735 0.298497271 0.29825000 0.051644659 0.05166607 0.05117656
0.4 0.398991451 0.399332971 0.39900000 0.059059701 0.05907193 0.05845000
0.5 0.500000000 0.500417264 0.50000000 0.061533483 0.06152967 0.06087239
0.6 0.601008548 0.601482540 0.60100000 0.059059701 0.05903547 0.05845000
0.7 0.701760264 0.702254005 0.70175000 0.051644659 0.05160029 0.05117656
0.8 0.802002903 0.802452071 0.80200000 0.039307129 0.03925082 0.03903333
0.9 0.901493048 0.901794741 0.90150000 0.022078043 0.02203041 0.02198906
1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

13
J Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng. (2016) 38:589–599 595

on powers of p-terms, when Br = β = 0.5: Consider the u and θ as follows:

d2 d2
p0 : θ0 (y) = 0, u0 (y) = 0 u(y) = u0 (y) + pu1 (y) + p2 u2 (y) + p3 u3 (y)
2
d y d2 y (37)
u0 (0) = 0, u0 (1) = 1, θ0 (0) = 0, θ0 (1) = 0.
θ (y) = θ0 (y) + pθ1 (y) + p2 θ2 (y) + p3 θ3 (y)
�2 2 �2
on powers of p-terms, when Pr = E = δ = 0.5:
 � �
 0.5 d u0 (y) + d θ1 (y) − 0.25θ0 (y) d u0 (y) = 0,



 dy dy 2 dy


 � �
d2 d2
� �� �
p1 : d d
u1 (y) − 0.5 θ0 (y) u 0 (y) − 0.5θ0 (y) u0 (y) =0
 dy2 dy dy dy2







u1 (0) = 0, u1 (1) = 0, θ1 (0) = 0, θ1 (1) = 0.
(34)
By solving the Eq. (34) using their boundary condition
and substituting in Eq. (20), following equations will be
obtained:
 47 1 1
 u(y) =
 y + y2 − y3
48 16 24
(35)
 θ(y) = 47 y − 1 y2 − 1 y3 − 1 y4

192 4 96 192
4.4 Application of HPM on Case 2

Similarity, HPM is applied to Eq. (7) for Case 2

� � � � �
d2 θ(x) d2 θ(x) dv(x) 2 dv(x) 4
 � � �
(1 − p) + p + E Pr + 2δE Pr


dx 2 dx 2


 dx dx
� � � �2 � 2 � �
2 2 �
 (1 − p) d v(x) + p d v(x) + 6δ dv(x) d v(x)


+ θ(x)

dx 2 dx 2 dx dx 2


(36) Fig. 3  Efficiency of DTM in comparison with HPM for Br  = 0.5,

β = 0.5

Fig. 4  Effect of Br number on θ(Y) and U(Y) for case 1 when β = 0.5

13

596 J Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng. (2016) 38:589–599

Fig. 5  Effect of β number on θ(Y) and U(Y) for case 1 when Br = 0.5

Fig. 6  Comparison between DTM and HPM for V(X) and θ(X) for case 2 when Pr = E = δ = 0.5

13
J Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng. (2016) 38:589–599 597

Table 3  DTM, HPM and X V(X) θ(X)

numerical values for V(X)
and θ(X) for Case 2 when Numerical DTM HPM Numerical DTM HPM
Pr = δ = E = 0.5
−1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.5
−0.9 0.014024647 0.013948223 0.0142500 0.450109657 0.4498764 0.4500000
−0.8 0.023735342 0.023491303 0.0240000 0.400182943 0.3998163 0.4000000
−0.7 0.029518638 0.029118025 0.0297500 0.350240605 0.3498027 0.3500000
−0.6 0.031819065 0.031317338 0.0320000 0.300293744 0.2998209 0.3000000
−0.5 0.031118538 0.030578358 0.0312500 0.250346361 0.2498581 0.2500000
−0.4 0.027918066 0.027390362 0.0280000 0.200397724 0.1999033 0.2000000
−0.3 0.022724352 0.022242795 0.0227500 0.150444418 0.1499477 0.1500000
−0.2 0.016041895 0.015625265 0.0160000 0.100482046 0.0999844 0.1000000
−0.1 0.008369792 0.008027545 0.0082500 0.050506535 0.0500084 0.0500000
0.0 0.000201883 −0.00006042 0.0000000 0.000515069 0.0000167 0.0000000
0.1 −0.00797106 −0.00814855 −0.0082500 −0.04949336 −0.0499916 −0.0500000
0.2 −0.01565814 −0.01574655 −0.0160000 −0.09951780 −0.1000155 −0.1000000
0.3 −0.02236514 −0.02236401 −0.0227500 −0.14955544 −0.1500521 −0.1500000
0.4 −0.02759231 −0.02751032 −0.0280000 −0.19960224 −0.2000965 −0.2000000
0.5 −0.03083434 −0.03069473 −0.0312500 −0.24965378 −0.2501417 −0.2500000
0.6 −0.03158346 −0.03142630 −0.0320000 −0.29970662 −0.3001789 −0.3000000
0.7 −0.02933741 −0.02921395 −0.0297500 −0.349759967 −0.3501971 −0.3500000
0.8 −0.02361278 −0.02356642 −0.0240000 −0.39981771 −0.4001836 −0.4000000
0.9 −0.01396325 −0.01399230 −0.0142500 −0.44989086 −0.4501235 −0.4500000
1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 −0.5 −0.5 −0.5

d2 d2
p0 : 2
θ0 (x) = 0, u0 (x) = 0
d x d2 x
1 1
v0 (−1) = 0, v0 (1) = 0, θ0 (−1) = , θ0 (1) = − .
2 2
� 2 � � �2 � �4
 d θ1 (x) + 0.25 d v0 (x) + 0.25 d v0 (x) = 0,

d2 x



 dx dx


1 2 �2 � 2 �
p :
�
d d d
 dx 2 v1 (x) + 3 dx v0 (x) 2 0
v (x) + θ0 (x) = 0



 d x



v1 (−1) = 0, v1 (1) = 0, θ1 (−1) = 0, θ1 (1) = 0.
...
(38)
By solving the Eq. (38) using their boundary condition
and substituting in Eq. (20), following equations will be
obtained:
 1 1
 v(x) = − x + x 3

12 12
 θ(x) = − 1 x

(39) Fig. 7  Efficiency of DTM in comparison with HPM for case 2
2

5 Results and discussion of their treatment can be performed by well-known ana-

lytical and numerical methods in which some of these
Newtonian and non-Newtonian fluids have many applica- methods are presented in [29–32] for solving the engi-
tions in industrial applications, such as [21–28]. Analysis neering problems. In this paper, efficiency of DTM for

13

598
Fig. 8  Effect of Pr number on θ(X) and V(X) for case 2 when E = δ = 0.5
solving these kinds of problems is examined through two
different problems introduced in the previous sections.
As describe above, DTM solutions are compared to HPM
(as a special solution of HAM presented by Ziabakhsh
and Domairry [9]) and numerical solution presented in
[19]. Figure 2a, b shows the variation of non-dimensional
temperature and velocity, θ(Y) and U(Y), for Case 1,
respectively; when Br = 0.5, β = 0.5. As seen, the results
of the present analysis are compared with HPM and an
accurate numerical solution called fourth-order Runge–
Kutta method from Maple 15 package. A very interesting
agreement between the results is observed, but in marked
area in Fig. 2a, DTM has a better agreement with numeri-
cal method compared to HPM. Obtained data for this fig-
ure are presented in Table 2. As it was prospected from
the boundary conditions, these figures show that the tem-
peratures of the fluids in upper and lower plates are the
same and constant, while the velocity of the upper plate
is not zero (or the same of below plate). Variations of
U(Y) versus θ(Y) are depicted in Fig. 3 which reveals that
DTM has better agreement than HPM in marked rectan-
gular region with numerical method. This figure confirms
that the maximum temperature occurs when the veloc-
ity has average value, i.e., in the middle plate of the flow
region. Figure 4a, b illustrates the effect of Br number on
the non-dimensional temperature and velocity, θ(Y) and
U(Y), respectively. According to Fig. 4a, b, increasing Br
number has not significant effect on U(Y) but it makes an
increase in θ(Y) values. The effect of β on θ(Y) and U(Y)
is presented in Fig. 5a, b. According to the Eqs. (1, 2),
β is directly related to α and viscosity of the fluids, so
it has effect on the both temperature and velocity of the
fluids as seen.
13
J Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng. (2016) 38:589–599
Figure  6a, b compares the obtained results for non-
dimensional velocity, V(X), and non-dimensional tem-
perature, θ(X), for case 2 when Pr  =  E  =  δ  = 0.5.
Because the boundary condition of the problem is
completely satisfied, the problem is solved success-
fully which obtained data for this case are presented in
Table  3. A good agreement between DTM, HPM and
numerical method is observed but in some areas (e.g.,
marked and enlarged area in Fig. 6a) DTM has better
agreement with numerical solutions. Variations of θ(X)
versus V(X) are presented in Fig. 7 which confirms the
accuracy of the DTM, especially in the maximum veloc-
ity regions. The effect of Pr number on θ(X) and V(X)
for case 2 is shown in Fig. 8a, b, respectively, when
E  =  δ  = 0.5. As seen in these figures, increasing the
Pr number makes an increase in both temperature and
velocity profiles between the plates.
6 Conclusion
In the present work, DTM and HPM are applied for
solving the coupled nonlinear differential equations in
fluids mechanic to show the validity and simplicity of
these methods. For this aim, two cases of problems in
fluid mechanics which have coupled nonlinear differ-
ential equations were selected and DTM and HPM were
applied on them. For illustrating the accuracy of described
methods, numerical method was used to solve the prob-
lems. Although a very interesting agreement between
three methods is observed in both problems, but in some
regions DTM has a better agreement with numerical
method compared to HPM. This DTM accuracy is due to
J Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng. (2016) 38:589–599 599
independency of small parameter (p) compared to HPM
and directly solving the equation without linearization or
discretization. So, outcomes reveal the validity, accuracy
and simplicity of DTM.
References
1. He JH (1999) Homotopy perturbation technique. Comput Meth-
ods Appl Mech Eng 178:257–262
2. He JH (2003) Homotopy perturbation method: a new nonlinear
analytical technique. Appl Math Comput 135:73–79
3. He JH (2012) Asymptotic methods for solitary solutions and
compactons, Abstract and Applied Analysis, 916793
4. He JH (2005) Homotopy perturbation method for bifurca-
tion of nonlinear problems. Int J Nonlinear Sci Numer Simul
6:207–208
5. Roozi A, Alibeiki E, Hosseini SS, Shafiof SM, Ebrahimi M
(2011) Homotopy perturbation method for special nonlinear par-
tial differential equations. J King Saud Uni Sci 23:99–103
6. Ganji DD, Sadighi A (2007) Application of homotopy-perturba-
tion and variational iteration methods to nonlinear heat transfer
and porous media equations. J Comput App Math 207:24–34
7. Sadighi A, Ganji DD (2008) Analytic treatment of linear and non-
linear Schrödinger equations: a study with homotopy-perturba-
tion and Adomian decomposition methods equations. Phys Lett A
372:465–469
8. Sadighi A, Ganji DD (2007) Exact solutions of Laplace equation
by homotopy-perturbation and Adomian decomposition methods.
Phys Lett A 367:83–87
9. Ziabakhsh Z, Domairry G (2009) Analytic solution of natural
convection flow of a non-Newtonian fluid between two vertical
flat plates using homotopy analysis method. Commun Nonlinear
Sci Numer Simulat 14:1868–1880
10. Zhou JK (1986) Differential transformation method and its appli-
cation for electrical circuits. Hauzhang University Press, Wuhan
11. Ghafoori S, Motevalli M, Nejad MG, Shakeri F, Ganji DD, Jalaal
M (2011) Efficiency of differential transformation method for
nonlinear oscillation: comparison with HPM and VIM. Current
Appl Phys 11:965–971
12. Yahyazadeh H, Ganji DD, Yahyazadeh A, Taghi M (2012) Khal-
ili, P. Jalili, M. Jouya, evaluation of natural convection flow of a
nanofluid over a linearly stretching sheet in the presence of mag-
netic field by the differential transformation method. Therm Sci
16(5):1281–1287
13. Biazar J, Eslami M (2010) Differential transform method
for quadratic riccati differential equation. Int J Nonlinear Sci
9(4):444–447
14. Gokdogan A, Merdan M, Yildirim A (2012) The modified algo-
rithm for the differential transform method to solution of Genesio
systems. Commun Nonlinear Sci Numer Simulat 17:45–51
15. Ayaz F (2003) On the two-dimensional differential transform
method. Appl Math Comput 143:361–374
16. Ni Q, Zhang ZL, Wang L (2011) Application of the differential
transformation method to vibration analysis of pipes conveying
fluid. Appl Math Comput 217:7028–7038
17. Ganji DD, Hashemi Kachapi SH (2011) Progress in nonlinear
science: analysis of nonlinear equations in fluids. Asian Aca-
demic Publisher Limited, HongKong
18. Hatami M, Ganji DD (2014) Natural convection of sodium algi-
nate (SA) non-Newtonian nanofluid flow between two vertical
flat plates by analytical and numerical methods. Case Studies in
Thermal Engineering 2:14–22
19. Rajagopal KR, Na TY (1985) Natural convection flow of a non-
Newtonian fluid between two vertical flat plates. Acta Mech
54:39–46
20. Bervillier C (2012) Status of the differential transformation
method. Appl Math Comput 218:10158–10170
21. Hatami M, Ganji DD (2013) Heat transfer and flow analysis for
SA-TiO2 non-Newtonian nanofluid passing through the porous
media between two coaxial cylinders. J Mol Liq 188:155–161
22. Hatami M, Hatami J, Ganji DD (2014) Computer simulation of
MHD blood conveying gold nanoparticles as a third grade non-
Newtonian nanofluid in a hollow porous vessel. Comput Methods
Programs Biomed 113(2):632–641
23. Domairry G, Hatami M (2014) Squeezing Cu–water nanofluid
flow analysis between parallel plates by DTM-Padé Method. J
Mol Liquids 193:37–44
24. Hatami M, Ganji DD (2014) Thermal and flow analysis of micro-
channel heat sink (MCHS) cooled by Cu–water nanofluid using
porous media approach and least square method. Energy Convers
Manag 78:347–358
25. Hatami M, Nouri R, Ganji DD (2013) Forced convection analysis
for MHD Al2O3–water nanofluid flow over a horizontal plate. J
Mol Liq 187:294–301
26. Sheikholeslami M, Hatami M, Ganji DD (2013) Analytical inves-
tigation of MHD nanofluid flow in a semi-porous channel. Pow-
der Technol 246:327–336
27. Sheikholeslami M, Hatami M, Ganji DD (2013) Nanofluid flow
and heat transfer in a rotating system in the presence of a mag-
netic field. J Mol Liquids 190:112–120
28. Hatami M, Sheikholeslami M, Ganji DD (2014) Laminar flow
and heat transfer of nanofluid between contracting and rotating
disks by least square method. Powder Technol 253:769–779
29. Hatami M, Ganji DD (2013) Thermal performance of circular
convective-radiative porous fins with different section shapes and
materials. Energy Convers Manag 76:185–193
30. Hatami M, Hasanpour A, Ganji DD (2013) Heat transfer study
through porous fins (Si3N4 and AL) with temperature-dependent
heat generation. Energy Convers Manag 74:9–16
31. Hatami M, Ganji DD (2013) Investigation of refrigeration effi-
ciency for fully wet circular porous fins with variable sec-
tions by combined heat and mass transfer analysis. Int J Refrig.
doi:10.1016/j.ijrefrig.2013.11.002
32. Hatami M, Domairry G (2014) Transient vertically motion of
a soluble particle in a Newtonian fluid media. Powder Technol
253:481–485
13