Received: 27 March 2022 | Revised: 6 May 2022 | Accepted: 9 May 2022

DOI: 10.1002/htj.22601

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Significance of solar radiation and magnetic

dipole impact on micropolar ferromagnetic
fluid flow via an extending surface using finite
element approach

Sajjad Hussain1 | Imran Siddique2 | Bagh Ali3 |

1 3
Farooq Ahmad | Muazzam Ali

1
School of Mechanical and Aerospace
Engineering, Nanyang Technological
University, Singapore, Singapore
2
Department of Mathematics, University
of Management and Technology, Lahore,
Pakistan
3
Faculty of Computer Science and
Information Technology, Superior
University, Lahore, Pakistan
Correspondence
Imran Siddique, Department of
Mathematics, University of Management
and Technology, Lahore 54770, Pakistan.
Email: imransmsrazi@gmail.com
Funding information
Polish National Science Centre under the
Grant OPUS 14, Grant/Award Number:
2017/27/B/ST8/01330
Abstract
The Galerkin finite element approach is utilized to
examine the significance of magnetic dipole and solar
radiation on the dynamic of micropolar ferromagnetic
fluid due to extending stretch surface. The magnetic
field and the significant power of magnetic dipole help
to stabilize the magnetized nanoparticles inside the
fluid. The solid nano‐sized particles are incorporated
due to enhanced host fluid thermal conductivity,
which plays a significant role in heat exchangers,
modern nano‐technology, electronics chips, and mate-
rials sciences. In the present elaborated problem, with
the aid of similarity transformation, the partial
differential formulation is transformed into a set of
dimensionless ordinary differential equations, and
finds a numerical solution via finite element discretiza-
tion. The detailed parametric study corresponding to
various physical conditions is carried out to reveal that
incremented ferromagnetic interaction variable recedes
the flow speed, but it grows the thermal and
microrotation distributions, and the decline in temper-
ature is observed with the increment of ratio, viscous
dissipation, and curie temperature parameters. The

Sajjad Hussain and Imran Siddique contributed equally to this work and are co‐first authors.

Heat Transfer. 2022;1–18. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/htj © 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC. | 1

2 | HUSSAIN ET AL.

reliability of the Matlab code and validity of the

solution has been tested with already available litera-
ture data and see a good comparison of current results.

KEYWORDS
finite element approach, magnetic dipole, micropolar
ferromagnetic fluid, similarity transforms, solar radiation

1 | INTRODUCTION

Some important industrial and technological processes involve ferromagnetic fluids (FF). Stephen1
developed the ferrofluids idea In 1965, and actually, this type of fluid is a suspension of tiny particles
called ferromagnetic particles in a host fluid. These fluids show magnetization strength to avoid the
agglomeration of nano‐sized particles. Magnet therapy helps in medical treatment to manage pain
relief, electromechanical devices help in recording systems, magnet interactions are involved in
generators, and such types of fluids are considered in the growing heat transport rate. Initially, the
ferromagnetic significance in a base fluid was studied by Albrecht et al.,2 and many other physical
and numerical communications have been investigated to predict the significance of ferromagnetic
fluid like a fundamental aspect of ferromagnetic fluid dynamics presented by Anderson and Valnes,3
Shliomis4 modeled the analytical basic models associated with ferrofluids, Neuringer and
Rosensweig5 established mathematical formulations for the impact of magnetic dipole and magnetic
body cause to generate the magnetized field, and temperature‐dependent magnetization ferrofluids
such as coupling of thermomagnetic have wide practical implications.6 Investigations have been
continuously made to explore different facets of this study domain. Majeed et al.7 made an analysis
for the Soret and suction effects on Maxwell Ferrofluid flow adjusted with the magnetic dipole. Noor
et al.8 studied thermally stratified phenomenon by linear stretching sheet along with magnetic dipole
influence on dynamic of second‐grade ferrofluid. Hayat et al.9 analyzed the significance of magnetic
dipole on characteristics of ferromagnetic Williamson fluid. Recently, Hayat et al.10 presented their
observations about nanofluids subject to radiation. Shafiq et al.11 examined the thermal transportation
of Walters' B nanofluid over an extending surface. Iqbal et al.12 examined the Brownian motion of
nanoparticles in the host fluid and found that Brownian motion enhances the base fluid temperature.
Micropolar theory was led off by Eringen,13 and a lot of interest has been generated because
of this theory. The micropolar fluid theory has a wide scope of real‐life applications and various
flow problems have been investigated by the experts. The micropolar fluids theory, show the
impacts of couple stresses, and inertia, and explain the behavior of flow in which the classical
theory of Newtonian fluid is inadequate. Mishra et al.14 investigated micropolar fluid
characteristics and solved the coupled nonlinear partial differential equations by applying the
Runge–Kutta method. Recently, Jalili et al.15 studied the dynamic of inertial and microstructure
of a magnetized ferrofluid and examine the model through Akbari–Ganji's method. The heat
transfer effect for micropolar fluid motion over an extending surface was studied by Mohanty
et al.16 Shah et al.17 examined the significance of electric and magnetic fields on the dynamic of
rotatory micropolar nanofluid between two parallel plates. Mirzaaghaian and Ganji18 employed
the method of differential transformation to analyze heat transfer in micropolar fluids in a
channel that has permeable walls. Rout et al.19 discussed the effects of chemical reactions on
micropolar fluids with transverse magnetic field and wall temperature. The study of
HUSSAIN ET AL. | 3

non‐Newtonian fluid fascinates researchers due to daily life significance in, and pastes, paints,
biological fluids, motor oils, mechanical procedures, and complex mixtures.20–22 Recently,
many experts have been reported to analyze the dynamics of non‐Newtonian fluids like tangent
hyperbolic,23,24 third grade,25,26 Casson fluid,27,28 power law nanofluid,29,30 viscoelastic fluid,31
and micropolar fluid.32
The inherent difficulty in the solution of such problems due to the nonlinearity associated
with convective terms in the formulation has been addressed by employing various numerical
approaches such as finite difference (FD), finite volume (FV), boundary element (BE), and
finite element (FE). In a FE solution, the problem domain is distributed into elements of the
finite number to obtain polynomial type approximate solutions over each element. FE method
yields reliable solutions to a wide variety of problems. Abdel and Naji33 presented a case study
for magnetohydrodynamics (MHD) flow past porous regions confined between parallel sheets
and opined that the FE approach provides more reliable findings for comparison with the FD
approach. Bég et al.34 developed an FE solution for Lorentz force effects on rotating magneto
fluid flow. Ali et al.35 analyzed MHD flow along with finite element study for heat transfer in a
rotating nanofluid. Kadri et al.36 carried out an FE simulation procedure on a square cavity
with the hydromagnetic nanofluid flow.
In the above‐mentioned literature, less attention is given to the micropolar ferrofluids
dynamics subject to magnetic dipole and solar radiation. Thus, this report explores the
significance of magnetic dipole and solar radiation on micropolar ferrofluids dynamics across
extending sheets. The computation has been attempted by employing Galerkin finite element
approach with coding in Matlab. This technique solves the elaborated problem more precisely
and rapidly. Results have been obtained against physical parameters that are involved in the
formulation of the problem.

2 | MATHEMATICAL FORMULATIONS
(MAGNETIZATION+)

Let us examine the two‐dimensional, solar radiation, boundary layer flow of an electrically
viscous incompressible laminar micropolar ferrofluid along with an external magnetic dipole. A
magnetic dipole is fixed along the x‐direction and assumes the y‐axis as a perpendicular to the
horizontal x‐axis, and the dipole is fixed at (0, b) distance. The V = V (u, v ) and ω = (0, 0, ω)
are the velocity and micro‐rotation velocity vectors. The T is temperature function is T and
curie temperature Tc > Tw , here Tw is the surface temperature. The fluid temperature away
from the surface is T∞ . According to electromagnetic theory, magnetic force per unit volume
μ0 (M ∇) h becomes μ0 M ∇h with additional assumptions (i) the local magnetic field direction h
and magnetization direction M are in the same direction, (ii) the displacement current is
negligible, (iii) the magnetic field intensity is enough strong to drench the magnetite fluid, and
magnetization variation, (iv) neglect the induced field produced due to magnetization as
compared to the applied field, and considered only temperature range, thermal conductivity,
heat capacity, and coefficient of viscosity are independent of temperature. The heated ferrofluid
physical flow geometry is depicted in Figure 1. Keeping in view the assumptions made herein,
the governing equations are9,37,38:
∂u ∂v
+ = 0, (1)
∂x ∂y
4 | HUSSAIN ET AL.

FIGURE 1 Schematic of the problem. [Color figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]

 μ + κ  ∂2u
 
 ρ  ∂y 2 + ρ ∂y + ρ M ∂x = u ∂x + v ∂y ,
κ ∂ω μ0 ∂h ∂u ∂u
 
(2)

 ∂u   ∂ω ∂ω 
− κ  + 2ω = ρj u + v ,
∂ 2ω
 ∂y   ∂x ∂y 
γ1 2 (3)
∂y
 
μ0 T ∂M  ∂h ∂h  μ0   ∂u 2  ∂v 2

u + v  = α 0 2 −    + 2   .
   
ρCp ∂T  ∂x ρCp   ∂y   ∂y  

∂T ∂T ∂ 2T ∂qr
∂y 
u +v + + (4)
∂x ∂y ∂y ∂y

Here α 0 exemplify thermal diffusivity and qr is the radiative heat source. The related boundary
conditions are:
∂u
u = cx , v = −v0, ω = −m , T = Tw = T0 + b1 x , as y = 0, (5)
∂y

u = ax , ω → 0, T → T∞, as y → ∞. (6)

where c, b1 , and m are dimensionless constants, T0 and v0 are reference temperature and
constant velocity for suction.
The magnetic scalar potential (ϒ) is defined as (see Hayat et al.9 and Majeed et al.37):

B0 x
ϒ= (7)
2π x + ( y + b)2
2

in which B0 show the magnetic field power. The components of ϒ (magnetic scalar potential)
and magnetic field magnitude (h) are:

B  x 2 − ( y + b)2 
= 0  2 ,
2π  (x + (b + y )2)2 
∂ϒ
hx = − (8)
∂x
HUSSAIN ET AL. | 5

B  2x ( y + b) 
= 0  2 ,
2π  (x + ( y + b)2)2 
∂ϒ
hy = − (9)
∂y

 ∂Ω 2  ∂Ω 

  +   .
2

 ∂x   ∂y 
h= (10)

Now, from Equation (13), we have

B  2x 
= − 0  ,
2π  ( y + b) 4 
∂h
(11)
∂x

B  4x 2 
= − 0 − .
( y + b)5 
∂h 2
2π  ( y + b) 3
+ (12)
∂y

The magnetization (M ) variation by mean of fluid temperature is M = K (Tc − T ) , here K

represents the pyromagnetic coefficient. The previous mentioned set of governing equations
namely Equation (4)–(7) with boundary conditions (8)–(9) are transformed into ordinary
differential form by below similarity transforms37,39:

cρ cρ ρc
ψ (ζ , η) = ( ) ηf (ζ ), η = y
μ
ρ μ
,ζ = x
μ
, ω = (cx )
μ
g (ζ ),
(13)
T∞ − T
T (ζ , η) = = Θ1 (ζ ) + η2Θ2 (ζ ).
T0 − Tw

The radiation heat flux is mentioned below:

4 α * ∂T 4
qr = ,
3 K1 ∂y 2

where α*, and K1 are Stefan Boltzman constant and Roseland mean absorption coefficient, and
when very small temperature differences are considered and then using Taylor series by
ignoring higher‐order term, we get (see Khan et al.40 and Ali et al.41):

∂qr 3 2
−16α *T∞ ∂T
= .
∂y 3K1 ∂y 2

Equation (4) is satisfied identically. Equations (5)–(7) respectively, adopted the following
nondimensional forms:
2β Θ1
f ‴(ζ ) + Kf ‴(ζ ) + Kg (ζ ) − + R2 − f ′2 (ζ ) + f (ζ ) f ″(ζ ) = 0, (14)
(ζ + γ ) 4

 K
1 +  g″(ζ ) + f (ζ ) g′(ζ ) − g (ζ ) f ′(ζ ) − K (2g (ζ ) + f ″(ζ )) = 0,
 2
(15)

1 2λβ (Θ1 (ζ ) − ϵ) f (ζ )
(1 + N )Θ″(
1 ζ ) + f (ζ )Θ′(ζ ) − 2f ′(ζ )Θ1 + − 4λf ″(ζ ) = 0, (16)
Pr (ζ + γ )3
6 | HUSSAIN ET AL.

1 2λβ Θ2 (ζ )
2 ζ ) + Θ′1 (ζ ) f (ζ ) − 4Θ2 (ζ ) f ′(ζ ) +

 
(1 + N )Θ″(

 4f (ζ ) 
Pr (ζ + γ )3

− λβ (Θ1 (ζ ) − ϵ)   − λf ″2 (ζ ) = 0.
(ζ + γ )5 
(17)

 (ζ + γ )
2
4
f ′(ζ ) +

The boundary conditions (5) and (6) become:

f = f0 , f ′ = 1, g = −δf ″, Θ1 = 1, Θ2 = 1 at ζ = 0 (18)

f ′ → 0, g → 0, Θ1 → 0, Θ2 → 0 as ζ → ∞ (19)
c b2
where R = a
is the stretching (ratio) parameter, S1 = b1
is the thermal stratification parameter,
T∞ γμ0 K2 (T0 − Tw ) ρ
ϵ= T0 − Tw
is curie temperature, β = 2πμ2
is the magnetic interaction parameter,
2
cμ cρb2 ν
λ= ρk (T0 − Tw )
is viscous dissipation, γ = is a dimensionless number, Pr = α
is Prandtl
μk
ρ μ
number, f0 = ν0 is the suction parameter, K = κ
is the micropolar parameter, and
bμ
3
16σ *T∞
N= 3k *K
is radiation parameter.

3 | NUMERICAL P ROCEDURE

The general detail of the Galerkin finite element approach was described by Reddy.42
This potent, stable, and exceptionally productive numerical method has been actualized
lately for various linear and especially nonlinear problems including those of the fluid
flow and heat transport such as multiple slip effects on MHD Maxwell flow,43 MHD
axisymmetric buoyant nanofluid flow,44 and micropolar flow in porous media.45 Ali and
Ibrahim et al. 46,47 explained that Galerkin finite element technique addresses boundary
and initial value problems successfully, rapidly, and precisely. Consider the transforma-
tion to let

f ′(ζ ) = h (ζ ), (20)

The set of Equations (17)–(22) thus reduces to

2β Θ1
(1 + K ) h″(ζ ) + f (ζ ) h′(ζ ) − h2 (ζ ) + Kg (ζ ) − + R2 = 0, (21)
(ζ + γ ) 4

 K
1 +  g″(ζ ) + f (ζ ) g′(ζ ) − g (ζ ) h (ζ ) − K (2g (ζ ) + h′(ζ )) = 0,
 2
(22)

1 2λβ (Θ1 (ζ ) − ϵ) f (ζ )
(1 + N )Θ″(
1 ζ ) + f (ζ )Θ′(ζ ) − 2h (ζ )Θ1 + − 4λh′(ζ ) = 0, (23)
Pr (ζ + γ )3
HUSSAIN ET AL. | 7

1 2λβ Θ2 (ζ )
2 ζ ) + f (ζ )Θ′2 (ζ ) − 4Θ2 (ζ ) h (ζ ) +

 
(1 + N )Θ″(

 4f (ζ ) 
Pr (ζ + γ )3

− λβ (Θ1 (ζ ) − ϵ)   − λh′2 (ζ ) = 0,

(ζ + γ )5 
(24)

 (ζ + γ )
2
4
h (ζ ) +

f = f0 , h = 1, g = −δh′, Θ1 = 1, Θ2 = 1 at ζ = 0 



h → 0, g → 0, Θ1 → 0, Θ2 → 0 as ζ → ∞. 

(25)

In Equations (23)–(27), the variational form, over a linear element Ωa = (ζa, ζa+1) is given

ζ
by:
ζa+1
s1{ f ′(ζ )− h (ζ )} dζ = 0, (26)

ζ
a


 

s2 
 + R2


 
ζa+1
2β Θ1
 
(1 + K ) h″(ζ ) + f (ζ ) h′(ζ ) − h2 (ζ ) + Kg (ζ ) − 4
dζ = 0, (27)
(ζ + γ )

ζ
a


  K 

 1 +  g″(ζ ) + f (ζ ) g′(ζ ) − g (ζ ) h (ζ ) − K (2g (ζ ) + h′(ζ )) 
s3   dζ = 0,
ζa+1

  
(28)
a
2

ζ
1
 

s4 
 P (1 + N )Θ″( − 4λh′(ζ ) 


 
ζa +1
2λβ (Θ1 (ζ ) − ϵ) f (ζ )
 r 
1 ζ ) + f (ζ )Θ′(ζ ) − 2h (ζ )Θ1 + dζ = 0,


1 2λβ Θ2 (ζ ) 
(ζ + γ ) 3


s5  
a


 
3 
 
ζa +1

 
(1 + N )Θ″(2 ζ ) + f (ζ )Θ′2 (ζ ) − 4Θ2 (ζ ) h (ζ ) +
ζa Pr (ζ + γ )
(29)
 
 4f (ζ ) 
−λβ (Θ1 (ζ ) − ϵ)    − λh′2 (ζ )} dζ = 0.
 (ζ + γ ) 4 (ζ + γ )5 
2
h (ζ ) + (30)

where s1, s2, s3, s4 , and s5 are arbitrary trial functions. The associated approximations of finite
element scheme are:

 f¯j ψj , h¯ =  h¯j ψj , g¯ =  g¯j ψj , Θ̄1 =  Θ̄1j ψj , Θ̄2 =  Θ̄2j ψj .

2 2 2 2 2
f¯ = (31)
j =1 j =1 j =1 j =1 j =1

with s1 = s2 = s3 = s4 = s5 = ψq (q = 1, 2) , where the trial functions ψj for a typical length

element Ωa = (ζa, ζa+1) are given by.

ζa +1 − ζ ζ − ζa
ψ1 = , ψ2 = , ζa ≤ ζ ≤ ζa +1. (32)
ζa +1 − ζa ζa +1 − ζa

Finally, the developed finite element of model of the equations is given by:
8 | HUSSAIN ET AL.

 11     
[A ] [A15 ]  { f }   {b1} 
   
   
[A21 ] [A25 ]  {h}   {b2} 
[A12 ] [A13 ] [A14 ]

 31     
[A ] [A35 ]  {g }  =  {b3} 
[A22 ] [A23 ] [A24 ]
     
 41
[A ] [A45 ]  {Θ1}   {b4} 
[A32 ] [A33 ] [A34 ] (33)
    
 
[A51 ] [A55 ]  {Θ2}   {b5} 
[A42 ] [A43 ] [A44 ]
 [A52 ] [A53 ] [A54 ]

where, [Amn ] and [bm] are order of 2 × 2 and 2 × 1, respectively, and m , n = 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, 5.0
are defined as:

ζ ζ
ζa +1 dψj ζa +1
Aij11 = ψi dζ , Aij12 = − ψi ψj dζ , Aij13 = Aij14 = Aij15 = Aij21 = 0,

ζ ζ ζ
a
dζ a

ζa +1 dψi dψj ζa +1 dψj ζa +1

Aij22 = −(1 + K ) dζ + f¯ ψi dζ − h¯ ψi ψj dζ ,

ζ
a
dζ dζ a
dζ a

ζa +1
Aij23 = K ψi ψj dζ ,

ζ ζ
a

2β ζa +1 ζa +1 dψj
Aij24 = ψi ψj dζ , Aij25 = Aij31 = 0, Aij32 = −K ψi dζ ,

ζ ζ ζ
(ζ + γ ) 4 dζ
 K
Aij33 = −1 + 
a a

ζa +1 dψi dψj ζa +1 ζa +1 dψj

 2
dζ − h¯ ψi ψj dζ + f¯ ψi dζ ,

ζ
a
dζ dζ a a
dζ
ζa +1
2λβ
Aij41 = − ψi ψj dζ ,

ζ
(ζ + γ )3 a

ζa +1
Aij42 = −4λ h¯ ψi ψj dζ , Aij34 = Aij35 = Aij43 = Aij45 = 0,

ζ ζ ζ
a

1 ζa +1 dψi dψj ζa +1 dψj ζa +1

Aij44 = − (1 + N ) dζ + f¯ ψi dζ − 2 h¯ ψi ψj dζdζ

ζ
Pr a
dζ dζ a
dζ a

ζa +1
2λβ
+ f¯ ψi ψj dζ ,

ζ ζ ζ
(ζ + γ )3 a

4λβ ϵ ζa +1 ζa +1 dψj 4λβ ϵ ζa +1

Aij51 = ψi ψj dζ , Aij52 = −λ ψi dζ + ψi ψj dζ ,
(ζ + γ )5 a a
dζ (ζ + γ ) 4 a

ζ ζ ζ
Aij53 = Aij54 = 0,
1 ζa +1 dψi dψj ζa +1 dψj ζa +1
Aij55 = − (1 + Rd ) dζ + f¯ ψi dζ − 4 h¯ ψi ψj dζdζ

ζ
Pr a
dζ dζ a
dζ a

ζa +1
2λβ
+ ψi ψj dζ

ζ ζ
(ζ + γ )3 a

ζa +1 ζa +1
2λβ 4λβ
− h¯ ψi ψj dζ − f¯ ψi ψj dζ ,
(ζ + γ ) 4 a
(ζ + γ )5 a

and
HUSSAIN ET AL. | 9

T A B L E 1 Convergence of FEM against n (number of elements) when (Pr = 2, K = 0.1, γ = 1, λ = 0.01,

β = 0.5, R = 0.5, ϵ = 2, S1 = 0.2, δ = 0.5, f0 = 0.3, N = 0.5) .
n f (3.0) h (3.0) g (3.0) Θ1 (3.0) Θ2 (3.0)
100 2.08719 0.49924 0.07391 −0.00407 0.00014
180 2.08747 0.49925 0.07387 −0.00406 0.00015
300 2.08755 0.49926 0.07386 −0.00406 0.00015
500 2.08758 0.49926 0.07385 −0.00405 0.00016
1000 2.08759 0.49926 0.07385 −0.00405 0.00016
1200 2.8759 0.49926 0.07385 −0.00405 0.00016

ζ
 dg ζa+1  K   dg  a
ψi dζ − (1 + K ) ψ  , bi3 = −1 +  ψ 
ζa +1 ζ +1

 dζ ζa  2   dζ ζ
bi1 = 0, bi2 = −R2

 dΘ ζa+1  dΘ ζa+1
a
a

= − (1 + N ) ψ 1  bi5 = − 4 (1 + N ) ψ 2  .

(34)
1 A
 dζ ζa  dζ ζa
bi4
pr pr

where f¯ = 2j =1 f¯j ψj , h¯ = 2j =1 h¯ j ψj , Θ̄1 = 2j =1 Θ̄1j ψj , and Θ̄2 = 2j =1 Θ̄2j ψj are supposed to be
known.
After the element equation assembly process, the acquired equations are inherently nonlinear,
so requires the implementation of an iterative procedure for a successful solution. The
calculations for fluid velocity, microrotation, and temperature functions are then finished for a
more elevated level, and proceeded until the desired accuracy of 0.000005 is acquired. To ensure,
the accuracy of the present numerical solution, a mesh sensitivity test is observed. Moreover, no
sufficient change in outcomes is seen for ζ > 10 (ζ = 10.0) . To test the convergence of
outcomes, the number of elements is successively incremented as n = 100, 180, 300, 500, 1000,
and 1200. Table 1, is presented to reveal that as n surpasses 500, no huge variation in the
estimation functions is noticed, hence the last results are accounted for n = 500.

4 | RESULTS A ND DISCUSSION

Although the FE method bears considerable reliability, the present results are validated
through a strongly agreeable comparison of the present and previously existing results in some
limiting cases, as exhibited in Tables 2 and 3. It is noted that the outcomes of the FE method
and Keller box method are in excellent agreement with already published results. The main
advantage of the finite element technique over the Keller box method is in terms of time
consumption. The response of flow velocity f ′(ζ ) , microrotation function g (ζ ) , and
temperature functions Θ1, Θ2 under the influence of designated parameters are computed
and delineated in the pictorial form. Figure 2A marked the variation of flow velocity f ′(ζ ) to
reveal that the f ′(ζ ) becomes slower when the f0 is made larger, but the microrotation
function g (ζ ) varies directly with suction, as mapped in Figure 2B. These outcomes are
physically relevant to the mass transfer conditions at the wall. The larger suction is responsible
for the increased vertical downward flow and hence reduction in horizontal momentum and
increments in body torque result. Figure 3A portrays the impact of ferromagnetic interaction
10 | HUSSAIN ET AL.

TABLE 2 Comparison of the results for −Θ1 (0).

Pr Chen48 Noor et al.8 FEM results
0.72 1.0885 1.088521 1.088624
1.00 1.3333 1.333306 1.333336
2.00 2.0210 2.021092 2.000003
3.00 2.5097 2.509762 2.509737
4.00 – 2.903051 2.938806
10.0 4.7968 – 4.795972

TABLE 3 Validation of the results for Skin‐friction, when ignoring other parameters.
Our results
49 50
K Qasim et al. Tripathy et al. FEM CPU time (s) KBM CPU time (s)
0.0 −1.000000 −1.000172 −1.000009 7.728257 −1.000025 9.458712
1.0 −1.367872 −1.367902 −1.367997 7.382210 −1.367858 9.269540
2.0 −1.621225 −1.621938 −1.621576 7.251073 −1.621241 8.9047126
4.0 −2.004133 −2.007341 −2.005421 8.005379 −2.005149 7.9716427

F I G U R E 2 The effect of f0 on the (A) velocity and (B) microrotation distributions. [Color figure can be
viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]

parameter β on g (ζ ) . The curve for g (ζ ) rises directly with β . It is because increment in

ferromagnetic interaction provides an opposing force to the fluid velocity and hence increases
the microrotation. Figure 3B is presented to demonstrate the pictorial behavior of the quantity
g (ζ ) , with an increasing variation of ratio parameter R. The R indicates the ratio of ambient
fluid velocity to surface due to a stretchable sheet. The pattern of the curve indicates the
reduction in microrotation (anticlockwise) when R (R < 0) increases, but the increment in
R (R > 0) adds to the magnitude of microrotation (clockwise).
HUSSAIN ET AL. | 11

F I G U R E 3 The effect of (A) β and (B) R on the microrotation distribution. [Color figure can be viewed at
wileyonlinelibrary.com]

F I G U R E 4 The effect of K on (A) microrotation and (B) velocity distributions. [Color figure can be viewed
at wileyonlinelibrary.com]

Figure 4A shows that the microrotation reduces when the K is increased. The strength in K
means the decrease in vortex viscosity, and hence reduction in g (ζ ) , the microrotation.
However, the rise in the values of K has incremented the fluid velocity f ′(ζ ) , as depicted in
Figure 4B. Figure 5A shows the dependence of f ′(ζ ) on the β (ferromagnetic parameter),
which shows the influence of the external magnetic field. The momentum boundary layer
thickness reduces against β . The resistive force produced by the interaction of electric and
magnetic fields slows the flow. The impact of ratio parameter R on nondimensional horizontal
velocity is mapped in Figure 5B to disclose that it remains almost uniform for R = 1. The
momentum boundary layer in parabolic shape becomes thinner with rising values of R (R > 1
and R < 1) however, it is inverted when R < 1.
Figures 6A,B and 7A,B, respectively, reveal the lowering pattern of the temperature
curves for Θ1 and Θ2 when the stretching parameter R is incremented. The temperature of
fluid becomes lower. A continuously stretching in the surface cause liquid movement in
the zone of the boundary layer, the liquid absorbs more heat and so the temperature is
decreased. Figure 7A,B in order reveals that the temperature functions Θ1 and Θ2 both are
12 | HUSSAIN ET AL.

F I G U R E 5 The effect of (A) β and (B) R on the velocity distribution. [Color figure can be viewed at
wileyonlinelibrary.com]

F I G U R E 6 Graph of temperature (A) Θ1 and (B) Θ2 under influence of R . [Color figure can be viewed at
wileyonlinelibrary.com]

enhanced with an incremented variation of the ferromagnetic interaction parameter β .

Physically, the magnetized particles contribute positively to the thermal conductivity of
the base fluid, moreover, the applied magnetic field provides resistive force to fluid flow
and hence causes a rise in thermal distribution. An enhancement in mass transfer at the
wall with addition in the values of suction parameter f0 causes reduction in thermal
distribution as depicted respectively in Figure 8A,B. It is observed that the curves of both
the temperature functions Θ1 and Θ2 are declined. By its virtue, the increased Prandtl
number Pr boosts the momentum diffusivity in proportion to thermal diffusivity; hence, a
rise in the horizontal velocity curve is delineated in Figure 9A. However, the
microrotation undergoes its reduced pattern with increment in Pr , as revealed in
Figure 9B. Figure 10A,B in respective order show that the temperature function Θ1 and Θ2
decline due to the very nature of Pr , which is reciprocal to thermal diffusivity. Thus,
cooling is caused by a reduction in thermal distribution. Figure 11A,B in their respective
order indicates that Θ1 and Θ2 , both the temperature functions are reduced when the
viscous dissipation parameter is made larger. The dependence of temperature profiles of
HUSSAIN ET AL. | 13

F I G U R E 7 Graph of temperature (A) Θ1 and (B) Θ2 under influence of β . [Color figure can be viewed at
wileyonlinelibrary.com]

F I G U R E 8 Graph of temperature (A) Θ1 and (B) Θ2 under influence of f0 . [Color figure can be viewed at
wileyonlinelibrary.com]

F I G U R E 9 Graph of (A) velocity and (B) microrotation under influence of Pr . [Color figure can be viewed at
wileyonlinelibrary.com]
14 | HUSSAIN ET AL.

F I G U R E 10 Graph of temperature (A) Θ1 and (B) Θ2 under influence of Pr . [Color figure can be viewed at
wileyonlinelibrary.com]

F I G U R E 11 Graph of temperature (A) Θ1 and (B) Θ2 under influence of λ. [Color figure can be viewed at
wileyonlinelibrary.com]

F I G U R E 12 Graph of temperature (A) Θ1 and (B) Θ2 under influence of N. [Color figure can be viewed at
wileyonlinelibrary.com]
HUSSAIN ET AL. | 15

F I G U R E 13 Graph of temperature (A) Θ1 and (B) Θ2 under influence of ϵ. [Color figure can be viewed at
wileyonlinelibrary.com]

the functions Θ1 and Θ2 on thermal radiation parameter N is depicted in order in

Figure 12A,B. It is revealed that the thermal distribution in the flow field becomes
stronger with a direct variation of N . Physically, the decays of the mean absorption
coefficient for the growing strength of solar radiation and occurs diffusion flux due to
gradient of temperature, which finally incremented the host fluid temperature. The
variation of ϵ is shown in Figure 13A,B. It can also be noticed that the thermal boundary‐
layer thickness reduces with an increment in the values of ϵ .

5 | CONCLUSIONS

This exploration examines the micropolar ferromagnetic fluid flow over a stretching surface.
The parametric study involving the variation of the magnetic field, micropolarity, the magnetic
dipole, thermophoresis, thermal radiation, and other prominent factors of influence has been
elaborated by employing the FEM. Some of the salient findings are summarized below:

• The ferromagnetic β and suction f0 parameters cause a reduction in horizontal flow speed
f ′(ζ ), and the nondimensional microrotation g (ζ ) and temperature profiles rise directly
against higher strength in ferromagnetic interaction.
• The fluid velocity f ′(ζ ) is incremented when the strength of the micropolar parameter (K )
enhances, but opposite curves behavior is reported for the microrotation g (ζ ) .
• The decline in temperature is observed with the increment of ratio parameter R , suction f0,
Prandtl number, viscous dissipation, and curie temperature, but rising values of stretching R
upgrade the velocity.
• The radiation parameter causes a rise in the temperature profile.
• The ferromagnetic (β ) and radiation parameters cause a rise in the temperature profile.

The obtained results in the present report can be utilized in the field of heat exchangers,
modern nanotechnology, biomedical, and so on. This numerical study may be extended for the
significance of magnetic dipole on the dynamic of Oldroyd‐B, Maxwell, tangent hyperbolic,
16 | HUSSAIN ET AL.

viscoelastic Jeffrey, and Casson non‐Newtonian fluid models subject to various types of
nanoparticles.

DATA A VAILABILITY S TATEMENT

The data that support the findings of this study are openly available in ORCID at https://orcid.
org/0000-0002-5060-7906. Fully documented templates are available in the elsarticle package
on CTAN.

ORCID
Imran Siddique https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5060-7906

REFERENCES
1. Papell S. Low viscosity magnetic fluid obtained by the colloidal suspension of magnetic particles. Patent.
2. Albrecht T, Bührer C, Fähnle M, Maier K, Platzek D, Reske J. First observation of ferromagnetism and
ferromagnetic domains in a liquid metal. Appl Phys A. 1997;65(2):215‐220.
3. Andersson H, Valnes O. Flow of a heated ferrofluid over a stretching sheet in the presence of a magnetic
dipole. Acta Mech. 1998;128(1‐2):39‐47.
4. Shliomis M. Comment on “ferrofluids as thermal ratchets”. Phys Rev Lett. 2004;92(18):188901.
5. Neuringer JL. Some viscous flows of a saturated ferro‐fluid under the combined influence of thermal and
magnetic field gradients. Int J Non‐Linear Mech. 1966;1(2):123‐137.
6. Bailey R. Lesser known applications of ferrofluids. J Magnet Magnet Mater. 1983;39(1‐2):178‐182.
7. Majeed A, Zeeshan A, Ellahi R. Chemical reaction and heat transfer on boundary layer Maxwell Ferro‐fluid
flow under magnetic dipole with Soret and suction effects. Eng Sci Technol Int J. 2017;20(3):1122‐1128.
8. Muhammad N, Nadeem S, Haq RU. Heat transport phenomenon in the ferromagnetic fluid over a
stretching sheet with thermal stratification. Results Phys. 2017;7:854‐861.
9. Hayat T, Ahmad S, Khan MI, Alsaedi A. Exploring magnetic dipole contribution on radiative flow of
ferromagnetic Williamson fluid. Results Phys. 2018;8:545‐551.
10. Hayat T, Qayyum S, Alsaedi A, Shafiq A. Inclined magnetic field and heat source/sink aspects in flow of
nanofluid with nonlinear thermal radiation. Int J Heat Mass Transfer. 2016;103:99‐107.
11. Shafiq A, Mebarek‐Oudina F, Sindhu TN, Abidi A. A study of dual stratification on stagnation point
Walters' B nanofluid flow via radiative Riga plate: a statistical approach. Eur Phys J Plus. 2021;136(4):1‐24.
12. Iqbal M, Ghaffari A, Mustafa I. Investigation into thermophoresis and Brownian motion effects of
nanoparticles on radiative heat transfer in Hiemenz flow using spectral method. Sci Iranica. 2019;26(6):
3905‐3916.
13. Eringen AC. Theory of micropolar fluids. J Math Mech. 1966;16:1‐18.
14. Mishra S, Khan I, Al‐Mdallal Q, Asifa T. Free convective micropolar fluid flow and heat transfer over a
shrinking sheet with heat source. Case Stud Thermal Eng. 2018;11:113‐119.
15. Jalili B, Sadighi S, Jalili P, Ganji DD. Characteristics of ferrofluid flow over a stretching sheet with suction
and injection. Case Stud Thermal Eng. 2019;14:100470.
16. Mohanty B, Mishra S, Pattanayak H. Numerical investigation on heat and mass transfer effect of
micropolar fluid over a stretching sheet through porous media. Alex Eng J. 2015;54(2):223‐232.
17. Shah Z, Islam S, Gul T, Bonyah E, Khan MA. The electrical MHD and hall current impact on micropolar
nanofluid flow between rotating parallel plates. Results Phys. 2018;9:1201‐1214.
18. Mirzaaghaian A, Ganji D. Application of differential transformation method in micropolar fluid flow and
heat transfer through permeable walls. Alex Eng J. 2016;55(3):2183‐2191.
19. Rout P, Sahoo S, Dash G, Mishra S. Chemical reaction effect on MHD free convection flow in a micropolar
fluid. Alex Eng J. 2016;55(3):2967‐2973.
20. Shafiq A, Çolak AB, Sindhu TN, Al‐Mdallal QM, Abdeljawad T. Estimation of unsteady hydromagnetic
Williamson fluid flow in a radiative surface through numerical and artificial neural network modeling. Sci
Rep. 2021;11(1):1‐21.
HUSSAIN ET AL. | 17

21. Ahmad H, Javed T, Ghaffari A. Radiation effect on mixed convection boundary layer flow of a viscoelastic
fluid over a horizontal circular cylinder with constant heat flux. J Appl Fluid Mech. 2016;9(3):1167‐1174.
22. Shafiq A, Sindhu T. Statistical study of hydromagnetic boundary layer flow of Williamson fluid regarding a
radiative surface. Results Phys. 2017;7:3059‐3067.
23. Shafiq A, Sindhu TN, Khalique CM. Numerical investigation and sensitivity analysis on bioconvective
tangent hyperbolic nanofluid flow towards stretching surface by response surface methodology. Alex Eng J.
2020;59(6):4533‐4548.
24. Shafiq A, Lone S, Sindhu TN, Al‐Mdallal Q, Rasool G. Statistical modeling for bioconvective tangent
hyperbolic nanofluid towards stretching surface with zero mass flux condition. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):1‐11.
25. Hayat T, Shafiq A, Alsaedi A, Asghar S. Effect of inclined magnetic field in flow of third grade fluid with
variable thermal conductivity. AIP Adv. 2015;5(8):087108.
26. Hayat T, Shafiq A, Alsaedi A. MHD axisymmetric flow of third grade fluid by a stretching cylinder. Alex
Eng J. 2015;54(2):205‐212.
27. Shamshuddin M, Ghaffari A, Usman Usman. Radiative heat energy exploration on Casson‐type nanoliquid
induced by a convectively heated porous plate in conjunction with thermophoresis and Brownian
movements. Int J Ambient Energy. 2021;3:1‐12.
28. Ali B, Shafiq A, Manan A, Wakif A, Hussain S. Bioconvection: significance of mixed convection and MHD
on dynamics of Casson nanofluid in the stagnation point of rotating sphere via finite element simulation.
Math Comput Simul. 2022;194:254‐268.
29. Ghaffari A, Mustafa I, Muhammad T, et al. Analysis of entropy generation in a power‐law nanofluid flow
over a stretchable rotatory porous disk. Case Stud Thermal Eng. 2021;28:101370.
30. Ghaffari A, Muhammad T, Mustafa I, et al. Heat transfer enhancement in a power‐law nanofluid flow
between two rotating stretchable disks. Pramana. 2022;96(1):1‐11.
31. Ghaffari A, Javed T, Majeed A. Influence of radiation on non‐Newtonian fluid in the region of oblique
stagnation point flow in a porous medium: a numerical study. Trans Porous Media. 2016;113(1):245‐266.
32. Ali B, Khan SA, Hussein AK, Thumma T, Hussain S. Hybrid nanofluids: significance of gravity modulation,
heat source/sink, and magnetohydrodynamic on dynamics of micropolar fluid over an inclined surface via
finite element simulation. Appl Math Comput. 2022;419:126878.
33. Sa'adAldin A, Qatanani N. Finite element solution of an unsteady MHD flow through porous medium
between two parallel flat plates. J Appl Math. 2017;2017:1‐7.
34. Bég AO, Rawat S, Zueco J, Osmond L, Gorla R. Finite element and network electrical simulation of rotating
magnetofluid flow in nonlinear porous media with inclined magnetic field and hall currents. Theor Appl
Mech. 2014;41(1):1‐35.
35. Ali B, Siddique I, Ahmadian A, Senu N, Ali L, Haider A. Significance of lorentz and coriolis forces on
dynamics of water based silver tiny particles via finite element simulation. Ain Shams Eng J.
2022;13(2):101572.
36. Kadri S, Mehdaoui R, Elmir M. A vertical magneto‐convection in square cavity containing a Al2O3. water
nanofluid: cooling of electronic compounds. Energy Proc. 2012;18:724‐732.
37. Majeed A, Zeeshan A, Hayat T. Analysis of magnetic properties of nanoparticles due to applied magnetic
dipole in aqueous medium with momentum slip condition. Neural Comput Appl. 2019;31(1):189‐197.
38. Raslan K, Mohamadain S, Abdel‐wahed M, Abedel‐aal E. MHD Steady/unsteady porous boundary layer of
Cu‐water nanofluid with micropolar effect over a permeable surface. Appl Sci. 2018;8(5):736.
39. Ali L, Liu X, Ali B, Mujeed S, Abdal S, Mutahir A. The impact of nanoparticles due to applied magnetic
dipole in micropolar fluid flow using the finite element method. Symmetry. 2020;12(4):520.
40. Khan SA, Nie Y, Ali B. Multiple slip effects on MHD unsteady viscoelastic nano‐fluid flow over a permeable
stretching sheet with radiation using the finite element method. SN Appl Sci. 2020;2(1):66.
41. Ali L, Liu X, Ali B, Mujeed S, Abdal S. Finite element analysis of thermo‐diffusion and multi‐slip effects on
MHD unsteady flow of casson nano‐fluid over a shrinking/stretching sheet with radiation and heat source.
Appl Sci. 2019;9(23):5217.
42. Reddy JN. Solutions Manual for an Introduction to the Finite Element Method. McGraw‐Hill. 1993.
43. Ali B, Nie Y, Khan SA, Sadiq MT, Tariq M. Finite element simulation of multiple slip effects on MHD
unsteady maxwell nanofluid flow over a permeable stretching sheet with radiation and thermo‐diffusion in
the presence of chemical reaction. Processes. 2019;7(9):628.
18 | HUSSAIN ET AL.

44. Khan SA, Nie Y, Ali B. Multiple slip effects on magnetohydrodynamic axisymmetric buoyant nanofluid
flow above a stretching sheet with radiation and chemical reaction. Symmetry. 2019;11(9):1171.
45. Swapna G, Kumar L, Rana P, Kumari A, Singh B. Finite element study of radiative double‐diffusive mixed
convection magneto‐micropolar flow in a porous medium with chemical reaction and convective condition.
Alex Eng J. 2018;57(1):107‐120.
46. Ali B, Naqvi RA, Nie Y, et al. Variable viscosity effects on unsteady MHD an axisymmetric nanofluid flow
over a stretching surface with thermo‐diffusion: FEM approach. Symmetry. 2020;12(2):234.
47. Ibrahim W, Gadisa G. Finite element method solution of boundary layer flow of Powell‐Eyring nanofluid
over a nonlinear stretching surface. J Appl Math. 2019;2019:1‐7.
48. Chen CH. Laminar mixed convection adjacent to vertical, continuously stretching sheets. Heat Mass
Transfer. 1998;33(5):471‐476.
49. Qasim M, Khan I, Shafie S. Heat transfer in a micropolar fluid over a stretching sheet with Newtonian
heating. PLoS One. 2013;8(4):e59393.
50. Tripathy R, Dash G, Mishra S, Hoque MM. Numerical analysis of hydromagnetic micropolar fluid along a
stretching sheet embedded in porous medium with non‐uniform heat source and chemical reaction. Eng
Sci Technol Int J 2016;19(3):1573‐1581.

How to cite this article: Hussain S, Siddique I, Ali B, Ahmad F, Ali M. Significance of
solar radiation and magnetic dipole impact on micropolar ferromagnetic fluid flow via an
extending surface using finite element approach. Heat Transfer. 2022;1‐18.
doi:10.1002/htj.22601