3b2 Version Number

File path
Date and Time

:
:
:

7.51c/W (Jun 11 2001)

P:/Santype/Journals/TandF_Production/GCEC/v198n12/GCEC570389/gcec570389.3d
28/06/11 and 21:05

Chem. Eng. Comm., 198:123, 2011

Copyright # Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 0098-6445 print=1563-5201 online
DOI: 10.1080/00986445.2011.570389

Exact Analytic Solutions for the Flow of a

Generalized Burgers Fluid Induced Byan
Accelerated Shear Stress
M. JAMIL,1 A. A. ZAFAR,1 C. FETECAU,1 AND
N. A. KHAN2

Abdus Salam School of Mathematical Sciences, GC University,

Lahore, Pakistan
2
Department of Mathematics, University of Karachi, Karachi, Pakistan
The rotational flow of a generalized Burgers fluid between two infinite coaxial
cylinders is considered. The flow is produced by the inner cylinder when at time
t 0 a torsional time-dependent accelerated shear is applied to the fluid. The exact
analytic solutions obtained with the help of Laplace and finite Hankel transforms
and presented in series form in terms of Bessel functions of the first and second kinds
satisfy all imposed initial and boundary conditions. The similar solutions for Burgers, Maxwell, second grade, and Newtonian fluids are easily obtained as limiting
cases of general solutions for generalized Burgers and Oldroyd B fluids. Furthermore, for small values of the appropriate material parameters, the general solutions
corresponding to generalized Burgers fluid are reduced to those for Oldroyd B and
Newtonian fluids, respectively. Finally, the influence of the pertinent parameters on
the fluid motion, as well as a comparison between models, is shown by graphical
illustrations.

10

15

20

Keywords Coaxial cylinders; Generalized Burgers fluid; Laplace and Hankel

transforms; Time-dependent accelerated shear stress; Velocity field

Introduction
It is a well-established fact that the non-Newtonian fluids play an appropriate and
important role in industry and technological applications. Serval researchers in the
field cite a large variety of applications in rheological problems in biological sciences,
geophysics, and the chemical and petroleum industries (Yu and Lin, 1998). This is
due to the rheological properties of non-Newtonian fluids. The understanding of
flows of such fluids has progressed via a number of theoretical, computational,
and experimental efforts. The resulting equations of such fluids are in general of
higher order than the classical Navier-Stokes equations, and one needs additional
conditions for a unique solution (Rajagopal, 1995; Rajagopal and Kaloni, 1989).
Specifically, to obtain an exact analytic solution for such flows is not an easy
task. In spite of several challenges, many investigations regarding the exact analytic
solutions for flows of non-Newtonian fluids have been performed (Rajagopal, 1982,
Address correspondence to M. Jamil, Abdus School of Mathematical Sciences, GC
University, 68-B, New Muslim Town, Lahore 54600, Pakistan. E-mail: jqrza26@yahoo.com

25

30

35

M. Jamil et al.

1984; Larson, 1999; Aksel et al., 2006; Zhang et al., 2007, 2008; Tan and Masuoka,
2007; Wang and Tan, 2008; Hayat et al., 2008; Fetecau et al., 2009a,b).
There are several models to describe the rheological properties of nonNewtonian fluids (Dunn and Rajagopal, 1995; Rajagopal, 1993). Non-Newtonian
fluids are generally divided in three types: differential, integral, and rate-type. The
fluids that take into account elastic and memory effects belong to rate-type fluids.
The Maxwell and Oldroyd B fluids are the simplest rate-type fluids. But these fluids
do have not enough rheological properties to explain many real fluids such as cheese
in food products and asphalt in geomechanics. In 1935 the one-dimensional rate-type
model known as the Burgers model (1935) was put in a thermodynamic framework,
which was later extended to the frame-indifferent three-dimensional form by
Krishnan and Rajagopal (2004). This model has been successfully used to describe
the motion of the earths mantle. The Burgers model is the preferred model to
describe the response of asphalt and asphalt concrete (Lee and Markwick, 1937).
This model is mostly used to model other geological structures, such as olivine rocks
(Tan et al., 2001) and the propagation of seismic waves in the interior of the earth
(Peltier et al., 1981). In the literature, the vast majority of the flows of the rate-type
fluids has been discussed using Maxwell and Oldroyd B models, and the Burgers
model has not received much attention in spite of its diverse applications. We here
mention some of the studies (Ravindran et al., 2004; Hayat et al., 2008b; Fetecau
et al., 2010b; Khan et al., 2010a) made by using Burgers model.
Generally, there are three types of boundary value problems in fluid mechanics:
(a) when the velocity is given on the boundary, (b) when the shear stress is given on
the boundary, and (c) the mixed boundary value problems. From the theoretical and
application points of view, all three types of boundary value problems are of interest
and important. There are a large number of articles in which the velocity is given on
the boundary. Interested readers can see for instance, the papers (Tong, 2010; Wang
and Yu, 2009; Khan et al., 2009, 2010b; Shah and Qi, 2010; Tong and Shan, 2009;
Zheng et al., 2010; Fetecau et al., 2009b; Shah, 2009; Khan, 2009; Kang and Xu,
2009) and therein related references. Unfortunately, there are few exact solutions
corresponding to cases 2 and 3. To the best of our knowledge, the first exact
solutions for motions of non-Newtonian fluids due to a given shear stress on the
boundary are those of Waters and King (1970), Bandelli et al. (1995), and Erdogan
(2003) over an infinite plate and Bandelli and Rajagopal (1995) in cylindrical
domains. However little work, appeared for motions of non-Newtonian fluids in cylindrical domains due to a shear stress given on the boundary (Akhtar and Jamil,
2008; Siddique and Vieru, 2009; Fetecau et al., 2009c, d, 2010c, d; Jamil and Fetecau,
2010; Siddique and Sajid, 2011).
The objective of present article is two-fold. First, we solve a problem for the
motion of a generalized Burgers fluid in which the velocity is given on one part of
the boundary and the shear stress on the other part. Second, it is to extend the results
of Bandelli and Rajagopal (1995, Sect. 5) to rate-type fluids, namely to Oldroyd B,
Burgers, and generalized Burgers fluids. The general solutions for Oldroyd B fluids
can be immediately specialized to similar solutions for Maxwell, second grade, and
Newtonian fluids, while the solutions for Burgers fluids can be obtained as limiting
cases of those for generalized Burgers fluid. These solutions satisfy both the governing equations and all imposed initial and boundary conditions. The large-time solutions for Newtonian fluid and transient solutions for generalized Burgers fluid are
also determined and the effect of various parameters on transient solutions is

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

Flow of Generalized Burgers Fluid

discussed. Furthermore, for small values of the material parameters, k2 and k4 or k1,
k2, k3, and k4, the general solutions corresponding to generalized Burgers fluid are
reduced to those for Oldroyd B and Newtonian fluids, respectively. Finally, in order
to reveal some relevant physical aspects of the obtained results, the diagrams of
the velocity and the shear stress are depicted against r for different values of t and 90
of the rheological parameters. A comparison between generalized Burgers, OldrydB, and Newtonian fluid models is also presented.

The Differential Equations Governing the Flow

The equations governing the flow of an incompressible fluid include the continuity
equation and the momentum equation. In the absence of body forces, they are
r
V0
r
Tq

@V
qV
rV
@t

where q and V are respectively the fluid density and the velocity field and r
represents the gradient operator.
The Cauchy stress tensor T for an incompressible generalized Burgers fluid is
characterized by the following constitutive equations (Fetecau et al., 2010b; Khan
et al., 2010b; Tong, 2010; Tong and Shan, 2009):

T pI S;

95

"
#
dS
d2 S
dA
d2 A
k2 2 l A k3
k4 2
S k1
dt
dt
dt
dt

100

where pI denotes the indeterminate spherical stress, S is the extra-stress tensor,
A L LT is the first Rivlin-Ericksen tensor (L being the velocity gradient), l is 105
the dynamic viscosity, k1 and k3(<k1) are relaxation and retardation times, k2 and
k4 are the new material parameters of the generalized Burgers fluid (having the
dimension of t2), and d=dt denotes the upper convected derivative defined by
(Fetecau et al., 2010b; Khan et al., 2010b; Tong, 2010)
dS dS

 LS  SLT ;
dt
dt


d2 S d dS

dt2
dt dt

Into the above relation, d=dt is the usual material time derivative.
This model includes as special cases the Burgers model (for k4 0), Oldroyd B
model (for k2 k4 0), Maxwell model (for k2 k3 k4 0), and the Newtonian
fluid model when k1 k2 k3 k4 0. In some special flows, like those considered
here, the governing equations corresponding to generalized Burgers fluid resemble
those for second grade fluids (when k1 k2 k4 0).
For the problem under consideration we assume a velocity field V and an
extra-stress tensor S of the form
V Vr; t wr; teh ;

S Sr; t

115

M. Jamil et al.

where eh is the unit vector in the h-direction of a cylindrical coordinate system r, h, z. 120
For these flows the constraint of incompressibility is automatically satisfied. If the
fluid is at rest up to the moment t 0, then
Vr; 0 0;

Sr; 0 0

Assuming that the time derivative of the extra-stress S is zero at time t 0,

Equations (3) and (5) imply Srr Shz Szr Szz 0.
125
The balance of the linear momentum, in the absence of a pressure gradient in the
axial direction (@ hp 0 due to the rotational symmetry (Rajagopal and Bhatnagar,
1995)), and the constitutive equation corresponding to generalized Burgers fluid lead
to the relevant partial differential equations (Tong, 2010):
q


1 k1

@wr; t

@t


@ 2
sr; t
@r r







@
@2
@
@2
@ 1
k2 2 sr; t l 1 k3 k4 2
 wr; t
@t
@t
@r r
@t
@t

where s(r, t) Srh(r, t) is the shear stress is different from zero.

Eliminating s between Equations (8) and (9), we attain the governing equation





2

@
@ 2 @wr; t
@
@2
@
1@
1
n 1 k 3 k4 2

1 k1 k2 2

wr; t 9
@t
@t
@t
@t
@t
@r2 r @r r2

where n l=q is the kinematic viscosity of the fluid.

135
The system of partial differential equations (8) and (9), with adequate initial and
boundary conditions, can be solved in principle by several methods, their effectiveness strictly depending on the domain of definition. In our case the integral transforms technique presents a systematic, efficient, and powerful tool. The Laplace
transform can be used to eliminate the time variable while the finite Hankel trans- 140
form can be employed to eliminate the spatial variable.

Rotating Flow of a Generalized Burgers Fluid Due to an Accelerated

Shear Stress
Let us consider an incompressible generalized Burgers fluid at rest in an annular pipe
between two coaxial circular cylinders of radii R1 and R2(>R1). At time t 0, a
time-dependent couple per unit length 2pR1s(R1, t), where



p32 ep1 t  p31 ep2 t
2
2
sR1 ; t f t  k1 k1  2k2 1 k2
p2  p1

p1 ; p2

k1 

q
k21  4k2
2k2

145

10

11

and f is a constant, is applied to the inner cylinder. Due to the shear, the fluid is
gradually moved. Its velocity is of the form (5)1 while the governing equations

150

Flow of Generalized Burgers Fluid

are given by Equations (8) and (9). The appropriate initial and boundary conditions are
wr; 0

@wr; 0 @ 2 wr; 0

0;
@t
@t2

sr; 0

@sr; 0
0;
@t

r 2 R1 ; R2









@
@2
@
@2
l 1 k3 k4 2
1 k1 k2 2 sr; t
@t
@t
@t
@t
rR1





@ 1
 wr; t

ft2 ; and wR2 ; t 0; t > 0
@r r
rR1

12

13
155

Of course, it is easy to see that s(R1, t) given by Equation (10) is just the solution
of Equation (13) Furthermore, making k1 ; k2 , and k4 ! 0 into Equation (13) reduces
to the boundary condition (5.3) used by Bandelli and Rajagopal (1995). It corresponds to a problem with constantly accelerated shear on a part of the boundary,
namely







@
@ 1
 wr; t
sR1 ; t l 1 k3
ft2 ; and wR2 ; t 0;
@t @r r
rR1

160

t > 0 14

In order to solve the partial differential equations (8) and (9), with the initial
and boundary conditions (12) and (13), we shall use the Laplace and finite Hankel
transforms.
Calculation of the Velocity Field

165

Applying the Laplace transform to Equation (9) and having in mind the initial and
boundary conditions (12) and (13), we find that

@2 1 @
1

r; q;

q k1 q k2 q

wr; q n1 k3 q k4 q

w
@r2 r @r r2
2

r 2 R1 ; R2
15

r; q Lfwr; tg has to satisfy the conditions

where the image function w


@ 1
f
2

R2 ; q 0

R1 ; q
 w
; and w
@r r
l q3 1 k3 q k4 q2

16

In the following we denote by (Debnath and Bhatta, 2007)

H rn ; q
w

R2

r

wr; qBr; rn dr;

n 1; 2; 3; . . .

17

R1

r; q, where
the finite Hankel transforms of w
Br; rn J1 rrn Y2 R1 rn  J2 R1 rn Y1 rrn

18

M. Jamil et al.

rn are the positive roots of the transcendental equation B(R2, r) 0 and Jm(.) and 175
Ym(.) are the Bessel functions of the first and second kind of order m. Multiplying
both sides of Equation (15) by rB(r, rn), integrating with respect to r from R1 to
R2, and taking into account the conditions (16) and the identity
Z

R2
R1



r; q w

r; q 1 @ w

r; q
@2w

r

Br; rn dr
r @r
@r2
r2





2
@ 1

r; q
 w

pr @r r
2
n

19

H rn ;q
rR1 rn w

we find that

180

H rn ; q
w

4f
1
3
3
2
qprn q k2 q k1 k4 nrn q2 1 k3 nr2n q nr2n 

20

Now, for a more suitable presentation of the final results, we rewrite

Equation (20) in the following equivalent form

H rn ; q
w

4f 1
4f
k2 q2 k1 k4 nr2n q 1 k3 nr2n

plr3n q3 plr3n q2 k2 q3 k1 k4 nr2n q2 1 k3 nr2n q nr2n 

21

The inverse Hankel transform formula corresponding to (17) is given by (Debnath

and Bhatta, 2007)

r; q
w

1
p2 X
r2n J12 R2 rn Br; rn

H rn ; q
w
2 n1 J22 R1 rn  J12 R2 rn

22

Applying the above inverse Hankel transform formula to Equation (21) and taking
into account the following known result (Jamil ajnd Fetecau, 2010)
Z

R2
R1

r2  R22 Br; rn dr


4 R2 2
pr3n R1

190

23

we find that

r; q
w




1
f R1 2
R2 1 2pf X
J12 R2 rn Br; rn
r 2 3
l R2
l n1 rn J22 R1 rn  J12 R2 rn 
r q
k2 q2 k1 k4 nr2n q 1 k3 nr2n
 2
3
q k2 q k1 k4 nr2n q2 1 k3 nr2n q nr2n 

24

In order to obtain the velocity field wr; t L1 f

wr; qg, we apply the inverse 195
Laplace transform to Equation (24) and use Equation (A1) from the appendix. As a

Flow of Generalized Burgers Fluid

result, we find for the velocity field, the following simple expression:

wr; t


i
R 2

f h
R2
1
t  k3 2 k23  2k4
r 2
2l
R2
r



1
2
X
2pf
rn J1 R2 rn Br; rn
k2
1

 2 4 t k1  2k3  2
qk2 n1 J22 R1 rn  J12 R2 rn
nrn
n rn
eq1n t
eq2n t
 3
 3
q1n q1n  q2n q1n  q3n q2n q2n  q1n q2n  q3n

eq3n t
 3
q3n q3n  q1n q3n  q2n

25

where
qin sin 

k1 k4 nr2n
;
3k2

i 1; 2; 3

are the roots of the algebraic equation k2 q3 k1 k4 nr2n q2 1 k3 nr2n q

nr2n 0. In the above relations (see Cardanos formulas (Kuros, 1973))

s1n

s2n

s3n

s v
s
u
u
u
u
2
3
3
3
b1n a1n t b1n
b21n a31n
t b


 1n
2
4
27
2
4
27

v
v
s
s
u
u
u
u
2
3
3
3
b1n a1n
b21n a31n
t b
t b

Z2  1n 
Z  1n
2
4
27
2
4
27
v
v
s
s
u
u
u
u
3
3
b
b21n a31n
b
b21n a31n
t
t

Z  1n 
Z 2  1n
2
4
27
2
4
27

are the roots of the algebraic equations X3 a1nX b1n 0, where

a1n 

b1n
and

k1 k4 nr2n 2 1 k3 nr2n

k2
3k22

nr2n 2k1 k4 nr2n 3 k1 k4 nr2n 1 k3 nr2n


k2
3k22
27k32
p
1 i 3
Z
2

From Routh-Hurwitzs principle (Morrs, 1966), we get Re(qin) < 0, if k1 k3 

p
k2 k4 > 2 k1 k3 k4 , provided k1, k2, k3, k4 > 0.

M. Jamil et al.

Calculation of the Shear Stress

Applying the Laplace transform to Equation (8), we find that

215


1 k 3 q k4 q2 @ 1

r; q
 w
s
r; q l
1 k1 q k2 q2 @r r

26

where




@ 1
f R1 2
2

r; q
 w
@r r
l r q3 1 k3 q k4 q2
1
e r; rn
2pf X
J12 R2 rn B

l n1 J22 R1 rn  J12 R2 rn 


27

1 k1 q k2 q2
q2 1 k3 q k4 q2 k2 q3 k1 k4 nr2n q2 1 k3 nr2n q nr2n 

has been obtained from Equation (20) applying the inverse Hankel transform and
using Equations (23) and (A2). Furthermore, in the above relation
e r; rn J2 rrn Y2 R1 rn  J2 R1 rn Y2 rrn
B

220

28

Substituting (27) in (26), we obtain

s
r; q f

2
1
X
e r; rn
R1
2
J12 R2 rn B

2pf
2
3
2
r q 1 k1 q k2 q
J R1 rn  J12 R2 rn 
n1 2

1
 2
q k2 q3 k1 k4 nr2n q2 1 k3 nr2n q nr2n 

29

Applying the inverse Laplace transform to Equation (29) and using (A3) and (A4),
we find that the shear stress s(r, t) has the following form:

2 

p3 ep1 t  p31 ep2 t

t  k1  2k2 1 k2 2
p2  p1



1
2
X
e
2pf
J1 R2 rn Br; rn
k2
1

t

k

3
k2 n1 J22 R1 rn  J12 R2 rn nr2n
nr2n

R1
sr; t f
r

k21



eq1n t
eq2n t
2
2
q1n q1n  q2n q1n  q3n q2n q2n  q1n q2n  q3n

eq3n t
2
q3n q3n  q1n q3n  q2n

30

225

Flow of Generalized Burgers Fluid

Special Cases
Burgers Fluid
Making k4 ! 0 into Equations (25) and (30) we obtain the velocity field
wB r; t

2


1
f
R1
R2
2pf X
rn J12 R2 rn Br; rn
t  k3 2 k23 
r 2 
2l
qk2 n1 J22 R1 rn  J12 R2 rn
R2
r



k2
1
eq4n t
 2 4 t k1  2k3  2  3
nrn
n rn
q4n q4n  q5n q4n  q6n

q5n t
e
eq6n t
 3

q5n q5n  q4n q5n  q6n q36n q6n  q4n q6n  q5n

230

31

and the associated shear stress



2 
p32 ep1 t  p31 ep2 t
2
2
t  k1 k1  2k2 1 k2
p2  p1



1
2
X
e
2pf
J1 R2 rn Br; rn
k2
1

t

k

3
k2 n1 J22 R1 rn  J12 R2 rn nr2n
nr2n

R1
sB r; t f
r

eq4n t
eq5n t
2
2
q4n q4n  q5n q4n  q6n q5n q5n  q4n q5n  q6n

eq6n t
2
q6n q6n  q4n q6n  q5n

32

corresponding to a Burgers fluid performing the same motion. In the above relations
qin sin 

k1
;
3k2

i 4; 5; 6

are the roots of the algebraic equation k2 q3 k1 q2 1 k3 nr2n q nr2n 0, and

s4n

s5n

s6n

s v
s
u
u
u
u
2
3
3
3
b2n a2n t b2n
b22n a32n
t b


 2n
2
4
27
2
4
27

v
v
s
s
u
u
u
u
2
3
3
3
b2n a2n
b22n a32n
t b
t b

Z2  2n 
Z  2n
2
4
27
2
4
27
v
v
s
s
u
u
u
u
2
3
3
3
b2n a2n
b22n a32n
t b
t b

Z  2n 
Z 2  2n
2
4
27
2
4
27

are the roots of the algebraic equations X3 a2nX b2n 0, where

a2n 

k21
1 k3 nr2n

2
k2
3k2

240

10

M. Jamil et al.

b2n

nr2n
2k3
k1 1 k3 nr2n
13 
k2 27k2
3k22

Oldroyd B Fluid
Making k2 and k4 ! 0 into Equations (24) and (29), and following the same way as 245
before, we get the velocity field (see also Equations (A5)(A7)):

i
R 2

f h
R22
1
2
2
t  k3 k3
wOB r; t
r
2l
R2
r
1
2pf X
J12 R2 rn Br; rn

ln n1 r3n J22 R1 rn  J12 R2 rn 



3 q7n t
 q37n eq8n t
1
2 q8n e
 t k1  2k3  2 1  k1
nrn
q8n  q7n

33

and the shear stress

sOB r; t f

R1
r

2 h
i
t
t  k1 2 k21 1  2e k1

1
e r; rn
2pf X
J12 R2 rn B
2
2
n n1 rn J2 R1 rn  J12 R2 rn 



1
q28n eq7n t  q27n eq8n t
 t  k3  2 1 k1
nrn
q8n  q7n

34

corresponding to an Oldroyd B fluid. In the above relations

q7n ; q8n

1 k3 nr2n 

250

q
1 k3 nr2n 2  4nk1 r2n
2k1

Maxwell Fluid
Making the limit of Equations (33) and (34) as k3 ! 0, we obtain the solutions




1
ft2 R1 2
R22
2pf X
J12 R2 r3n Br; rn
r
wM r; t

ln n1 r3n J22 R1 rn  J12 R2 rn 
2l R2
r



3
q9n t
 q39n eq10n t
1
2 q10n e
 t k1  2 1  k1
nrn
q10n  q9n

35

Flow of Generalized Burgers Fluid

sM r; t f

R1
r

2 h

t  k1 2 k21 1  2e

kt

11
i

1
e r; rn
2pf X
J12 R2 rn B
2
n n1 r2n J2 R1 rn  J12 R2 rn 



1
q2 eq9n t  q29n eq10n t
 t  2 1 k1 10n
nrn
q10n  q9n

36

corresponding to a Maxwell fluid. The new roots q9n and q10n are given by

q9n ; q10n

1 

p
1  4nk1 r2n
2k1

Second Grade Fluid

260

By now letting k1 ! 0 into Equations (33) and (34), the similar solutions

i
R 2

f h
R2
1
t  k3 2 k23
r 2
2l
R2
r
1
2
X
2pf
J1 R2 rn Br; rn

ln n1 r3n J22 R1 rn  J12 R2 rn 





1
nr2n t
 t  2k3  2 1  1 k3 nr2n 2 exp 
nrn
1 k3 nr2n

37

2
1
e r; rn
R1
2pf X
J12 R2 rn B
sSG r; t ft

n n1 r2n J22 R1 rn  J12 R2 rn 

r





1
nr2n t
2
 t  k3  2 1  1 k3 nrn exp 
nrn
1 k3 nr2n

38

wSG r; t

corresponding to a second grade fluid are obtained. Of course, the solution (37) is in
accordance to that obtained in Bandelli and Rajagopal (1995), Equation (5.17) (up 265
to a sign due to a typing error).

Newtonian Fluid
Finally, making k1 ! 0 into Equations (35) and (36) or k3 ! 0 into (37) and (38), the
solutions for a Newtonian fluid




ft2 R1 2
R22
wN r; t
r
2l R2
r

1


2pf X
J12 R2 rn Br; rn
1
nr2n t

1

e
t

ln n1 r3n J22 R1 rn  J12 R2 rn 
nr2n

39

12

M. Jamil et al.

sN r; t ft2



2
1


e r; rn
R1
2pf X
J12 R2 rn B
1
nr2n t

1

e
t

n n1 r2n J22 R1 rn  J12 R2 rn 
nr2n
r

40

are achieved. They correspond to the boundary conditions (see also Equation (14)
for k3 ! 0)





@ 1
 wr; t
ft2 ;
sR1 ; t l
@r r
rR1

and

wR2 ; t 0;

t>0

41

Consequently, the solutions (39) and (40, as well as (37) and (38), correspond to a
constantly accelerated couple on the boundary.

275

Large-Time Solutions
For large times, when the transient disappears, the solutions (33)(40) corresponding
to Oldroyd B, Maxwell, second grade, and Newtonian fluids tend to the corresponding large-time solutions, which are different from one model to another. For 280
Newtonian fluids they are
wNL r; t






1
ft2 R1 2
R2
2pf X
J12 R2 rn Br; rn
1
r 2 
t

ln n1 r3n J22 R1 rn  J12 R2 rn 
nr2n
2l R2
r

sNL r; t ft2




2
1
e r; rn
R1
2pf X
J12 R2 rn B
1

t

n n1 r2n J22 R1 rn  J12 R2 rn 
nr2n
r

42

43

If the rheological parameters ki > 0 with i 1, 2, 3, 4 satisfy the inequality k1 k3 

p
k2 k4 > 2 k1 k3 k4 (Morris, 1966), then for large values of t the general solutions
(25), (30) and (31), (32) for generalized Burgers and Burgers fluid also tend to the
corresponding large-time solutions. The transient solutions for generalized Burgers
fluid for instance, are

1
2pf X
rn J12 R2 rn Br; rn
eq1n t
wGBT r; t
qk2 n1 J22 R1 rn  J12 R2 rn q31n q1n  q2n q1n  q3n

eq2n t
eq3n t
3

q2n q2n  q1n q2n  q3n q33n q3n  q1n q3n  q2n


2  3 p1n t
p2n e  p31n ep2n t
R1
r
p2n  p1n

1
2
X
e r; rn
2pf
J1 R2 rn B
eq1n t


k2 n1 J22 R1 rn  J12 R2 rn
q21n q1n  q2n q1n  q3n

eq2n t
eq3n t
2
2
q2n q2n  q1n q2n  q3n q3n q3n  q1n q3n  q2n

44

sGBT r; t 2k22 f

45

Of course, the required time to reach the large-time state or the decay of transient
solutions under a given limit depends on the rheological parameters. In order to

Flow of Generalized Burgers Fluid

13

Figure 1. Decay of the transient components for the velocity w(r, t) and the shear stress s(r, t)
of generalized Burgers fluid given by Equations (44) and (45), for R1 0:05; R2 0:07;
r 0:06; f 0:01; n 0:001188; l 1:05; k2 5; k3 2; k4 2; and different values
of k1.

show this, the decay of the transients in time is depicted in Figures 1, 2, and 3 for
different values of relaxation time k1, retardation time k3, and kinematic viscosity
n. For better clarity of the graphs only two sets of values have been taken into con- 295
sideration for these parameters. The effects of k1 and k3 on the decay of the transients, as the results from Figures 1 and 2 show, are opposite. The required time to
reach the large-time state increases with respect to k1 and decreases with regard to
k3. It also decreases if the kinematic viscosity of the fluid n decreases.
Generally speaking, the large-time solutions for unsteady motions of Newtonian 300
or non-Newtonian fluids are important for those who need to eliminate transients
from their rheological measurements. This is the reason that an important problem
regarding the technical relevance of these solutions is to determine the approximate
time after which the fluid is moving according to the large-time solutions. More
exactly, in practice it is necessary to known the required time to reach the large-time 305
state. It can be easily obtained by graphical illustrations.

Figure 2. Decay of the transient components for the velocity w(r, t) and the shear stress s(r, t)
of generalized Burgers fluid given by Equations (44) and (45), for R1 0:05; R2 0:07;
r 0:06; f 0:01; n 0:001188; l 1:05; k1 1:5; k2 0:2; k4 2; and different
values of k3.

14

M. Jamil et al.

Figure 3. Decay of the transient components for the velocity w(r, t) and the shear stress s(r, t)
of generalized Burgers fluid given by Equations (44) and (45), for R1 0:05; R2 0:07;
r 0:06; f 0:01; q 883:838; k1 1:5; k2 0:5; k3 1; k4 2; and different values
of n.

Numerical Results and Discussion

In this section we present some numerical results for the velocity and the shear stress
corresponding to flows generated by the inner cylinder that applies a torsional
time-dependent accelerated shear to the fluid. Attention has been focused to inter- 310
pret the results with regard to the variations of rising parameters of interest.
In order to provide a check of general solutions, similar solutions for Oldroyd B
and Newtonian fluids have been determined and some comparisons have been realized by graphical illustrations. Figures 4(a) and 4(b) clearly show that, for small
values of k2 and k4, the diagrams of v(r, t) and s(r, t)corresponding to generalized 315
Burgers fluid are almost identical to those corresponding to an Oldroyd B fluid. Furthermore, Figures 5(a) and 5(b) also show that for small values of k1, k2, k3, and k4,
the diagrams of the velocity v(r, t) and the shear stress s(r, t) corresponding to a generalized Burgers fluid are almost identical to those corresponding to a Newtonian
fluid. It is also worth pointing out that the solutions for Newtonian fluids, as well 320

Figure 4. Profiles of the velocity w(r, t) and the shear stress s(r, t) for generalized Burgers and
Oldroyd B fluids, for R1 0:05; R2 0:07; f 0:01; n 0:001188; l 1:05; k1 2;
k2 0:00001; k3 2; k4 0:00001, and different values of t.

Flow of Generalized Burgers Fluid

15

Figure 5. Profiles of the velocity w(r, t) and the shear stress s(r, t) for generalized Burgers
and Newtonian fluids, for R1 0:05; R2 0:07; f 0:01; n 0:001188; l 1:05; k1
0:00001; k2 0:00001; k3 0:00001; k4 0:00001, and different values of t.

as those corresponding to second grade and Maxwell fluids, have been obtained as
limiting cases of the general solutions for Oldroyd B fluids. The velocity field corresponding to a Newtonian fluid, as well as that for a second grade fluid, is in accordance (up to a sign, due to a type error) to that obtained in Bandelli and Rajagopal
(1995), Eq. (5.17) and corresponds to a constantly accelerated shear ft2 on the 325
boundary.
Figure 6 was prepared to show the influence of the time t on the velocity v(r, t)
and the shear stress s(r, t). As expected, it clearly shows that both the velocity and
the shear stress (in absolute value) are increasing functions of t. Figures 7 and 8 show
the influence of the relaxation time k1 and the rheological parameter k2 on the fluid 330
motion. Their influence on the shear stress is qualitatively the same but the effect on
the velocity is opposite. The velocity of the fluid is a deceasing function with respect
to k1 and an increasing one with regard to k2. Figures 9 and 10 show the influence of
the retardation time k3 and the rheological parameter k4 on the fluid motion. Qualitatively, their effect on the fluid velocity is almost the same. In exchange, the shear 335

Figure 6. Profiles of the velocity w(r, t) and the shear stress s(r, t) given by Equations (25) and
(30), for R1 0:05; R2 0:07; f 0:01; n 0:001188; l 1:05; k1 2; k2 2; k3 2;
k4 2, and different values of t.

16

M. Jamil et al.

Figure 7. Profiles of the velocity w(r, t) and the shear stress s(r, t) given by Equations (25) and
(30), for R1 0:05; R2 0:07; f 0:01; n 0:001188; l 1:05; k2 5; k3 1; k4 5;
t 12s; and different values of k1.

Figure 8. Profiles of the velocity w(r, t) and the shear stress s(r, t) given by Equations (25) and
(30), for R1 0:05; R2 0:07; f 0:01; n 0:001188; l 1:05; k1 0:2; k3 0:2;
k4 4; t 12s; and different values of k2.

Figure 9. Profiles of the velocity w(r, t) and the shear stress s(r, t) given by Equations (25) and
(30), for R1 0:05; R2 0:07; f 0:01; n 0:001188; l 1:05; k1 4; k2 2; k4 5;
t 12s, and different values of k3.

Flow of Generalized Burgers Fluid

17

Figure 10. Profiles of the velocity w(r, t) and the shear stress s(r, t) given by Equations (25)
and (30), for R1 0:05; R2 0:07; f 0:01; n 0:001188; l 1:05; k1 5; k2 5;
k3 0:5; t 12s, and different values of k4.

stress in absolute value is an increasing function with respect to k3 and a decreasing

one with regard to k4. Figure 11 clearly shows that the velocity of the fluid decreases
for increasing n and the shear stress in absolute value increases.
Finally, for comparison the profiles of the velocity and the shear stress corresponding to three types of fluids (Newtonian, Oldroyd B and generalized Burgers) 340
are plotted together in Figure 12 at three different times for the same values of
the common parameters. The Newtonian fluid is the swiftest and the generalized
Burgers fluid is the slowest. The shear stress corresponding to Newtonian fluid, as
expected, is the highest and that of the generalized Burgers fluid is the lowest.
Figures 12(a3) and 12(b3) show that for large times the velocity and the shear stress 345
corresponding to generalized Burgers and Oldroyd B fluids are approaching those
for Newtonian fluids. Consequently, the non-Newtonian effects disappear in time.
The units of the material parameters in Figures 112 are SI units and the roots rn
have been approximated by (2n  1)p=[2(R2  R1)].

Figure 11. Profiles of the velocity w(r, t) and the shear stress s(r, t) given by Equations (25)
and (30), for R1 0:05; R2 0:07; f 0:01; q 883:838; k1 2; k2 2; k3 2; k4
2; t 12s; and different values of n.

18

M. Jamil et al.

Figure 12. Profiles of the velocity w(r, t) and the shear stress s(r, t) for generalized Burgers,
Oldroyd B and Newtonian fluids, for R1 0:05; R2 0:07; f 0:01; n 0:001188;
l 1:05; k1 1:5; k2 2; k3 1:2; k4 2, and different values of t.

Conclusions

350

In this study, exact analytic expressions for the velocity w(r, t) and the shear stress
s(r, t) corresponding to the unsteady motion of an incompressible generalized Burgers fluid between two infinite coaxial circular cylinders are obtained by means of
integral transforms. The motion of the fluid is due to the inner cylinder that after
time t 0 applies an accelerated shear to the fluid. The solutions that have been 355
obtained are presented under series form in terms of the usual Bessell functions
J1(.), J2(.), Y1(.), and Y2(.), and can immediately be reduced to similar solutions
for Burgers fluid. Direct computations show that they satisfy all imposed initial
and boundary conditions.

Flow of Generalized Burgers Fluid

19

For completion, as well as for a check of the results, similar solutions for Old- 360
royd B fluids have been also established and the corresponding solutions for Maxwell, second grade, and Newtonian fluids, performing the same motion, were
obtained as limiting cases. The solutions for second grade and Newtonian fluids,
as results from Equations (14) and (41), correspond to a constantly accelerated shear
ft2 on the boundary. The main outcomes obtained in this study are:
365
. The general solutions (25) and (30) are presented under simple forms as a sum of
the large-time and transient solutions. These solutions can be easily particularized
to give similar solutions for Burgers fluids.
. The correctness of these solutions has been tested by graphical illustrations.
More exactly, we showed that for small values of k2 and k4 or k1, k2, k3, and
k4, their diagrams are almost identical to those corresponding to Oldroyd B
and Newtonian fluids, respectively.
If the rheological parameters ki > 0 with i 1, 2, 3, 4 satisfy the inequality
p
k1 k3  k2 k4 > 2 k1 k3 k4 , then for large times the general solutions for Burgers and generalized Burgers fluids, as well as those for Oldroyd B, Maxwell,
second grade, and Newtonian fluids, tend to the corresponding large-time
solutions.
. The velocity w(r, t), as well as the shear stress s(r, t) in absolute value, is an
increasing function with respect to t and a decreasing one with regard to r.
. The kinematic viscosity n of the fluid has considerable influence on the fluid
motion. The velocity of the fluid is a decreasing function of n on the whole flow
domain and the shear stress (in absolute value) increases.
. Qualitatively, the relaxation time k1 and the rheological parameter k2 have similar
effects on the shear stress. The shear stress is a decreasing function with respect to
the two parameters. Their effects on the velocity are opposite.
. The other two parameters, k3 and k4, have similar effects on the velocity. More
exactly, the velocity of the fluid is a decreasing function with respect to these parameters. However, their effects on the shear stress are opposite.
. As was expected, in comparison with Oldroyd B and Burgers fluids, the Newtonian fluid is the swiftest and the generalized Burgers fluid is the slowest. Furthermore, the non-Newtonian effects disappear in time.

370

375

380

385

390

Acknowledgment
The authors would like to express their sincere gratitude to the referees for their careful assessment and fruitful remarks and suggestions regarding the initial version of
the manuscript.
395
The author M. Jamil is highly thankful and grateful to the Abdus Salam School
of Mathematical Sciences, GC University, Lahore, Pakistan; Department of Mathematics, NED University of Engineering & Technology, Karachi, Pakistan, and also
Higher Education Commission of Pakistan for generously support and facilitating
this research work.
400
The author A. A. Zafar is highly thankful and grateful to the Abdus Salam
School of Mathematical Sciences, GC University, Lahore, Pakistan and also Higher
Education Commission of Pakistan for generous support and facilitating this
research work.

20

M. Jamil et al.

Appendix

405


k2 q2 k1 k4 nr2n q 1 k3 nr2n
L
q2 k2 q3 k1 k4 nr2n q2 1 k3 nr2n q nr2n 


1 1 k2 q2 k1 k4 nr2n q 1 k3 nr2n
L
k2
q2 q  q1n q  q2n q  q3n

1
1 k3 nr2n k2 q21n k1 k4 nr2n q1n 1 k3 nr2n
2
L1 
k2
q1n q2n q3n
q1n q1n  q2n q1n  q3n q  q1n
1

k2 q22n k1 k4 nr2n q2n 1 k3 nr2n

q22n q2n  q1n q2n  q3n q  q2n

k2 q23n k1 k4 nr2n q3n 1 k3 nr2n

q23n q3n  q1n q3n  q2n q  q3n

q1n q2n q1n q3n q2n q3n 1 k3 nr2n q1n q2n q3n k1 k4 nr2n
q21n q22n q23n q



nr2n k2
1
2
tk3  k3 k4
t k1  2k3  2
nrn
k2 n 2 r4n
q1n t
e
 3
q1n q1n  q2n q1n  q3n

eq2n t
eq3n t
 3

q2n q2n  q1n q2n  q3n q33n q3n  q1n q3n  q2n

d
1
e r; rn
Br; rn Br; rn  rn B
dr
r



2
2 1
1
L

q3 k2 q2 k1 q 1
k2
q3 q  p1 q  p2

2
1 1 p1 p2 1 p21 p1 p2 p22 1

L1
k2
p1 p2 q3
q
p1 p2 q2
p31 p32

1
1
 2

p1 p2  p1 q  p1 p22 p2  p1 q  p2


p32 ep1 t  p31 ep2 t
2
2
t  k1 k1  2k2 1 k2
p2  p1

L1

A1

A2

A3


1
L
q2 k2 q3 k1 k4 nr2n q2 1 k3 nr2n q nr2n 



1 1
1
1 1
1
1
L

L
k2
q2 q  q1n q  q2n q  q3n
k2
q1n q2n q3n q2
q1n q2n q1n q3n q2n q3n 1
1


q q21n q1n  q2n q1n  q3n q  q1n
q21n q22n q23n

1
1
2

q2n q2n  q1n q2n  q3n q  q2n q23n q3n  q1n q3n  q2n q  q3n
1

Flow of Generalized Burgers Fluid




1 k2
1
eq1n t

t

k
2
3
2
2
k2 nrn
nrn
q1n q1n  q2n q1n  q3n

eq2n t
eq3n t
2
2
q2n q2n  q1n q2n  q3n q3n q3n  q1n q3n  q2n

21


A4


k1 q 1 k3 nr2n

q2 k1 q2 1 k3 nr2n q nr2n


1 1
k1 q 1 k3 nr2n
L
k1
q2 q  q7 q  q8

1
1 k3 nr2n 1 q7n q8n 1 k3 nr2n q7n q8n k1 1

L1
A5
k1
q
q7n q8n q2
q27n q28n

k1 q7n 1 k3 nr2n
k1 q8n 1 k3 nr2n
2
2
q7n q7n  q8n q  q7n q8n q8n  q7n q  q8n
"
(
)#
2 3 q7n t
 q37n eq8n t
2
2
2 1  k1 q8n e
tk3  k3 1nrn t k1  2k3  1nrn
;
q8n  q7n

L1

L1

(
)

2
3
2
2
2k
2k
2k
1
1
L1 3  2 1 
q3 1 k1 q
q
q
q
1 k1 q A6

t
t  k1 2 k21 1  2e k1




1
1 1
1
L

q2 k1 q2 1 k3 nr2n q nr2n 
k1
q2 q  q7n q  q8n

1
1 1 q7n q8n 1
1

2 2
L1
k1
q7n q8n q2
q7n q8n q q27n q8n  q7n q  q7n

1
2
q8n q8n  q7n q  q8n



q28n eq7n t  q27n eq8n t
1
1
2 t  k3  2 1 k1
nrn
nrn
q8n  q7n

L1

A7

415

References
Akhtar, W., and Jamil, M. (2008). On the axial Couette flow of a Maxwell fluid due to longitudinal time dependent shear stress, Bull. Math. Soc. Sci. Roum., 51, 93101.
Aksel, N., Fetecau, C., and Scholle, M. (2006). Starting solutions for some unsteady unidirectional flows of Oldroyd B fluids, Z. Angew. Math. Phys., 57, 815831.
Bandelli, R., and Rajagopal, K. R. (1995). Start-up flows of second grade fluids in domains
with one finite dimension, Int. J. Non-linear Mech., 30, 817839.
Bandelli, R., Rajagopal, K. R., and Galdi, G. P. (1995). On some unsteady motions of fluids
of second grade, Arch. Mech., 47, 661676.
Burgers, J. M. (1935). Mechanical considerations-model systems-phenomenological theories
of relaxation and of viscosity, in: First Report on Viscosity and Plasticity, ed. J. M.
Burgers, Nordemann Publishing Company, New York.

420

425

22

M. Jamil et al.

Debnath, L., and Bhatta, D. (2007). Integral Transforms and Their Applications, 2nd ed.,
Chapman & Hall=CRC, Boca Raton, Fla.
Dunn, J. E., and Rajagopal, K. R. (1995). Fluid of differential type: Critical review and thermodynamic analysis, Int. J. Eng. Sci., 33, 689729.
Erdogan, M. E. (2003). On unsteady motion of a second grade fluid over a plane wall, Int. J.
Non-linear Mech., 38, 10451051.
Fetecau, C., Jamil, M., Fetecau, C., and Vieru, D. (2009). The Rayleigh-Stokes problem for an
edge in a generalized Oldroyd B fluid, Z. Angew. Math. Phys., 60, 921933.
Fetecau, C., Athar, M., and Fetecau, C. (2009). Unsteady flow of a generalized Maxwell fluid
with fractional derivative due to a constantly accelerating plate, Comput. Math. Appl., 57,
596603.
Fetecau, C., Fetecau, C., and Imran, M. (2009). Axial couette flow of an Oldroyd-B fluid due
to a time-dependent shear stress, Math. Reports, 11, 145154.
Fetecau, C., Awan, A. U., and Fetecau, C. (2009). Taylor-Couette flow of an Oldroyd-B fluid
in a circular cylinder subject to a time-dependent rotation, Bull. Math. Soc. Sci. Math.
Roumanie Tom, 52, 117128.
Fetecau, C., Zierep, J., Bohning, R., and Fetecau, C. (2010). On the energetic balance for the
flow of an Oldroyd B fluid due to a flat plate subject to a time-dependent shear stress,
Comput. Math. Appl., 60, 7482.
Fetecau, C., Hayat, T., Khan, M., and Fetecau, C. (2010). A note on longitudinal oscillations
of a generalized Burgers fluid in cylindrical domains, J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech., 165,
350361.
Fetecau, C., Imran, M. Fetecau, C., and Burdujan, I. (2010). Helical flow of an Oldroyd-B
fluid due to a circular cylinder subject to time-dependent shear stresses, Z. Angew. Math.
Phys., 61, 959969.
Fetecau, C., Mahmood, A., and Jamil, M. (2010). Exact solutions for the flow of a viscoelastic
fluid induced by a circular cylinder subject to a time dependent shear stress, Commun.
Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simulat., 15, 39313938.
Hayat, T., Ellahi, R., and Asghar, S. (2008). Hall effects on the unsteady flow due to
non-coaxial rotating disk and a fluid at infinity, Chem. Eng. Comm., 195, 958976.
Hayat, T., Khan, S. B., Khan, M. (2008). Influence of Hall current on the rotating flow of a
Burgers fluid through a porous space, J. Porous Med., 11, 277287.
Jamil, M., and Fetecau, C. (2010). Helical flows of Maxwell fluid between coaxial cylinders with
given shear stresses on the boundary, Nonlinear Anal.: Real World Appl., 11, 43024311.
Khan, M., Shah, S. H. A. M., and Qi, H. (2009). Exact solutions of starting flow for a fractional Burgers fluid between coaxial cylinders, Nonlinear Anal.: Real World Appl., 10,
1775178.
Kang, J., and Xu, M. (2009). An exact solution for flow past an accelerated horizontal plate in
a rotating fluid with the generalized Oldroyd-B model, Acta Mech Sinina, 25, 463469.
Khan, M. (2009). The Rayleigh-Stokes problem for an edge in a viscoelastic fluid with a fractional derivative model, Nonlinear Anal.: Real World Appl., 10, 31903195.
Khan, M., Malik, R., Fetecau, C., and Fetecau, C. (2010). Exact solutions for the unsteady
flow of a Burgers fluid between two side walls perpendicular to the plate, Chem. Eng.
Commun., 197, 13671386.
Khan, M., Anjum, A., Qi, H. T., and Fetecau, C. (2010). On exact solutions for some oscillating motions of a generalized Oldroyd-B fluid, Z. Angew. Math. Phys., 61, 133145.
Krishnan, J. M., and Rajagopal, K. R. (2004). A thermodynamic framework for the constitutive
modeling of asphalt concrete: Theory and application, J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 16, 155166.
Kuros, A. (1973). Cours dalgebre superieure, Edition Mir Moscow.
Larson, R. G. (1999). The Structure and Rheology of Complex Fluids, Oxford University Press,
NewYork.
Lee, A. R., and Markwick, A. H. D. (1937). The mechanical properties of bituminous
surfacing materials under constant stress, J. Soc. Chem. Ind., 56, 146156.

430

435

440

445

450

455

460

465

470

475

480

Flow of Generalized Burgers Fluid

23

Morris, M. (1966). Geometry of Polynomials, American Mathematical Society, Providence, R.I.

Peltier, W. R., Wu, P., and Yuen, D. A. (1981). The viscosities of the earth mantle, in: Anelasticity in the Earth, eds. F. D. Stacey, M. S. Paterson, and A. Nicholas, American
Geophysical Union, Colorado.
Rajagopal, K. R. (1982). A note on unsteady unidirectional flows of a non-Newtonian fluid,
Int. J. Non-Linear Mech., 17, 369373.
Rajagopal, K. R. (1984). On the creeping flow of the second-order fluid, J. Non-Newton., Fluid
Mech., 15, 239246.
Rajagopal, K. R. (1993). Mechanics of non-Newtonian fluids in recent development in theoretical fluid Mechanics, Pitman Res. Notes Math., 291, 129162.
Rajagopal, K. R. (1995). On the boundary conditions for fluids of differential type in:
Navier-Stokes Equations and Related Non-Linear Problems, ed. A. Sequeira, Plenum
Press, NewYork.
Rajagopal, K. R., and Bhatnagar, R. K. (1995). Exact solutions for some simple flows of an
Oldroyd-B fluid, Acta Mech., 113, 223239.
Rajagopal, K. R., and Kaloni, P. N. (1989). Some remarks on boundary conditions for fluids
of differential type, in: Continuum Mechanics and its Applications, eds. G. A. C. Gram and
S. K. Malik, Hemisphere, Washington, DC.
Ravindran, P., Krishnan, J. M., and Rajagopal, K. R. (2004). A note on the flow of a Burgers
fluid in an orthogonal rheometer, Int. J. Eng. Sci., 42, 19731985.
Shah, S. H. A. M. (2009). Some accelerated flows of generalized Oldroyd-B fluid between two
side walls perpendicular to the plate, Nonlinear Anal.: Real World Appl., 10, 21462150.
Shah, S. H. A. M., and Qi, H. (2010). Starting solutions for a viscoelastic fluid with fractional
Burgers model in an annular pipe, Nonlinear Anal.: Real World Appl., 11, 547554.
Siddique, I., and Sajid, Z. (2011). Exact solutions for the unsteady axial flow of
non-Newtonian fluids through a circular cylinder, Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simulat., 16, 226238.
Siddique, I., and Vieru, D. (2009). Exact solution for the rotational flow of a generalized
second grade fluid in a circular cylinder, Acta Mech. Sinna, 25, 777785.
Tan, W. C., and Masuoka, T. (2007). Stability analysis of a Maxwell fluid in a porous medium
heated from below, Phys. Lett. A, 360, 454460.
Tan, B. H., Jackson, I., and Gerald, J. D. F. (2001). High-temperature viscoelasticity of
fine-grained polycrystalline olivine, Phys. Chem. Miner., 28, 641664.
Tong, D. (2010). Starting solutions for oscillating motions of a generalized Burgers fluid in
cylindrical domains, Acta Mech., 214, 395407.
Tong, D., and Shan, L. T. (2009). Exact solution for generalized Burgers fluid in an annular
pipe, Meccanica, 44, 427431.
Wang, S., and Tan, W. C. (2008). Stability analysis of double-diffusive convection of Maxwell
fluid in a porous medium heated from below, Phys. Lett. A, 372, 30463050.
Wang, S. W., and Xu, M. Y. (2009). Axial Couette flow of two kinds of fractional viscoelastic
fluids in an annulus, Nonlinear Anal.: Real World Appl., 10, 10871096.
Waters, N. D., and King, M. J. (1970). Unsteady flow of an elastico-viscous liquid, Rheol.
Acta, 9, 345355.
Yu, Z. S., and Lin, J. Z. (1998). Numerical research on the coherent structure in the viscoelastic second-order mixing layers, Appl. Math. Mech., 8, 717723.
Zhang, Z., Fu, C., Tan, W. C., and Wang, C. Y. (2007). Onset of oscillatory convection in a
porous cylinder saturated with a viscoelastic fluid, Phys. Fluids, 19, 098104.
Zhang, Z., Fu, C., and Tan, W. (2008). Linear and nonlinear stability analyses of thermal
convection for Oldroyd B fluids in porous media heated from below, Phys. Fluids, 20,
084103.
Zheng, L., Zhao, F., and Zhang, X. (2010). Exact solutions for generalized Maxwell fluid flow
due to oscillatory and constantly accelerating plate, Nonlinear Anal.: Real World Appl.,
11, 37443751.

485

490

495

500

505

510

515

520

525

530