Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Comment On The Paper On Cattaneo Christov Heat Flux Model For C - 2017 - Result
Comment On The Paper On Cattaneo Christov Heat Flux Model For C - 2017 - Result
Comment On The Paper On Cattaneo Christov Heat Flux Model For C - 2017 - Result
Results in Physics
journal homepage: www.journals.elsevier.com/results-in-physics
Microarticle
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: The present comment concerns some doubtful results included in the above paper.
Received 18 February 2017 Ó 2017 The Author. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://
Received in revised form 27 March 2017 creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Accepted 7 April 2017
Available online 21 April 2017
In the above paper the transformed equations that have been The wall velocity is given by the following equation (Eq. (12) in
solved are as follows (Eqs. (22)–(25) in [1]) [1])
n on3 m
00 2 00 2 2 000 00 2m 0 2 uw ¼ U o ðx þ bÞ ð8Þ
1 þ nWe2 ðf Þ gf1 þ We2 ðf Þ f þ ff ðf Þ
mþ1
Substituting the wall velocity from Eq. (8) into Eq. (7) we have
2m 2
þ A ¼0 ð1Þ
mþ1 k1 a20 1m
K1 ¼ ðx þ bÞ ð9Þ
U0
m 3 0 0 m þ 1 2 00
h00 þ Prf h0 þ Prc ff h f h ¼0 ð2Þ It is clear that the dimensionless parameters We, c and K 1 are
2 2
functions of coordinate x and this means that the problem treated
1 00 2K 1 in [1] is non-similar. However, the authors ignored this fact and
0 2
g þ fg gh ¼ 0 ð3Þ treated the problem as similar.
Sc mþ1
In non-similar problems, in contrast to similar problems, the
d 00 0 2K 1 2
basic flow quantities change along the streamwise direction. The
h þ fh þ gh ¼ 0 ð4Þ following Eqs. (10) and (11) have been taken from Minkowycz
Sc mþ1
and Cheng [2] and represent a non-similar problem
where We is the Weissenberg number, c is the thermal relaxation
number and K 1 is the reaction parameter given by the following @ 2 h f @h n @f @h @f @h
þ ¼ ð10Þ
equations (page 313 in [1]) @ g2 2 @ g 2 @ g @n @n @ g
!1=2
U 30 ðm þ 1Þðx þ bÞ
3m1
C2 where the parameter n is a function of x
We ¼ ð5Þ 1=2
2t 2v w lax
n¼ ð11Þ
a q1 gbKðT w T 1 Þ
m1
c ¼ kU 0 ðx þ bÞ ð6Þ
In the above Eq. (10) there are derivatives in the streamwise direc-
tion (@f =@n; @h=@n) which are absent from the Eqs. (1)–(4). The local
k1 a20
K1 ¼ ðx þ bÞ ð7Þ similarity method is not correct according to the following excerpt
uw
from Minkowycz and Sparrow [3].
‘‘By deleting the terms involving @f =@n and @h=@n the computa-
tional task is simplified since the resulting equations are, in effect,
⇑ Corresponding author. ordinary differential equations. In addition, the streamwise cou-
E-mail address: apantokr@civil.duth.gr pling is severed so that locally autonomous solutions may be
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rinp.2017.04.008
2211-3797/Ó 2017 The Author. Published by Elsevier B.V.
This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
A. Pantokratoras / Results in Physics 7 (2017) 1504–1505 1505