Numerical exploration of thin film flow of MHD pseudo-plastic fluid in fractional space: Utilization of fractional calculus approach

Mubashir Qayyum; Farnaz Ismail; Muhammad Sohail; Naveed Imran; Sameh Askar; Choonkil Park

doi:10.1515/phys-2021-0081

Article Open Access

Numerical exploration of thin film flow of MHD pseudo-plastic fluid in fractional space: Utilization of fractional calculus approach

Mubashir Qayyum , Farnaz Ismail , Muhammad Sohail , Naveed Imran , Sameh Askar and Choonkil Park

Published/Copyright: November 26, 2021

Published by

Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Submit Manuscript Author Information Explore this Subject

From the journal Open Physics Volume 19 Issue 1

Abstract

In this article, thin film flow of non-Newtonian pseudo-plastic fluid is investigated on a vertical wall through homotopy-based scheme along with fractional calculus. Three cases were examined after considering (i) partial fractional differential equation (PFDE) by altering first-order derivative to fractional derivative in the interval (0, 1), (ii) PFDE by altering second-order derivative to fractional derivative in the interval (1, 2), and (iii) fully FDE by altering first-order derivative to fractional derivative in (0, 1) and second-order derivative to fractional derivative in (1, 2). Different physical quantities such as the velocity profile and volume flux were computed and analyzed. Validity of obtained results was checked by finding residuals. Moreover, consequence of different parameters on the velocity were also explored in fractional space.

Keywords: magneto hydro dynamic; homotopy perturbation method; fractional differential equation; pseudo-plastic fluid

1 Introduction

Thin film stream can be seen in various normally happening wonders like development of downpour beads down a window sheet, eye tears, and magma streams. Modern and designing applications are found in oil refining measures, chip production, atomic reactors, development and common works, water system, laser cutting, painting, among others [1,2,3,4]. Since stream conditions can be essentially influenced by various naturally visible dangers, critical measure of hypothetical and exploratory work has been performed to comprehend the crucial stream qualities. Aman et al. [5] investigating the natural convection flow of fluids using the Atangana–Baleanu fractional model developed a modified fractional model for magneto hydrodynamic (MHD) fluid flow in which they used the Atangana–Baleanu fractional derivative (ABFD). The partial differential equations are translated into ordinary differential equations (ODEs). The Laplace transformation method is used for its inversion to complete the exact solutions of the momentum and heat equations. It is found that the normal fluid flows faster compared to the fractional fluid. Moreover, Al-Mdallal et al. [6] defined a new approach of Caputo-Fabrizio fractional derivative (CFFD) for use in the mathematical formation of the problem of heat and mass transfer with MHD flow over a vertical oscillating plate embedded in a porous medium. The problem is solved analytically and solutions of mass concentration, temperature distribution, and velocity field are found in the presence and absence of porous and magnetic field influences. In addition, Aman et al. [7] investigated the flow of Maxwell’s fractional nano-gluten with a second-order slip. The numerical technique of the Laplace Stehfest translation algorithm was applied. Various parameters are investigated and effected. Aman and Al-Mdallal [8] which is investigated in deriving a non-integer order, Maxwell’s fractional ferrofluid flow is examined with a second-order slip. The effect of volume fraction on flow behavior is thoroughly analyzed and discussed. In addition, Aman et al. [9] investigated the effect of second-order slip on MHD flow of Maxwell’s fractional fluid on a moving plate together with a comparison of two numerical algorithms. The influences of a fractional parameter, the magnetic force, the porosity parameter, and the slip parameters are analyzed and discussed. Also, Aman et al. [10] used a new Caputo time fractional model to improve the heat transfer of water-based graphene nanofluid with an emphasis on its application to solar energy. It is found that the heat transfer rate increases as the volume fraction of the nanoparticles and fractional time parameters of Caputo increase. This body of work is briefly outlined in the remainder of this article.

Beginning work on the issue was completed based on Newtonian liquids [3], where the terms of speed increase were precluded and the subsequent interaction brought about a harmony among thick and gravitational powers. The methodology was legitimate for enormous time ranges, nonlinear investigation needed in non-Newtonian liquids like cements, gels, liquid plastics, greases containing polymer added substances, blood, and staples like nectar, pot was deficient [11]. Thus, after tackling the thin film flow problem for Phan-Thien-Tanner fluid and third-grade fluid, over a tilted plane [12,13], Siddiqui et al. [14] also tackled the problem by using fourth-grade fluids on vertical cylinders. Alam et al. [15] studied the thin-film flow of MHD pseudo-plastic fluid on a vertical wall. Bazighifan and Ramos [16] studied the asymptotic analysis by engaging generalized Riccati transformations. They derived the criterion for oscillatory behavior of the differential system solutions. Imran and Abdel-Salam [17] analyzed the comportment of slip on peristaltic transport. In ref. [18], comportment of chemical reactions is reported. Studies mentioned in ref. [19] contain the inspirations of Hall effects. In ref. [20], authors studied the transport mechanism under peristaltic phenomenon in a flexible channel. In ref. [21], utilization of Darcy’s law is securitized. The studies reported in ref. [22] contain the theoretical analysis for Sutterby fluid model in ref. [23]. The author proposed a powerful tool to obtain the solutions of linear differential systems. In ref. [24], authors discussed the solution of nonlinear model of propagating waves. In ref. [25], modification in perturbation approach is discussed in detail. In ref. [26], boundary value problem is solved. Yildirim [27] used the perturbation method for fourth-order equations. Applications of HPM on squeezing flow was studied by Qayyum et al. [28]. For flow types, Yih applied an initial analysis of laminar flows [29], while Landau [30] and Stuart [31] extended the analysis to turbulent flows. Nakaya [32] and Lin [33] performed a stability analysis taking into account the surface tension. Ahmad et al. [34] performed the comparative study for fractional Jeffery’s model by considering natural convection and heat source. In another survey, Ahmad et al. [35] modeled the fractional hybrid nanofluid model based on viscoelastic nature of Maxwell fluid. Imran et al. [36] studied the characteristics of thermal and mass transportation in second-grade fluid. Ahmad et al. [37] studied the MHD viscous incompressible flow model with thermal transport in fractional sense. Sohail et al. [38] studied the nonlinear couple stress model with variable properties using optimal procedure. The dynamics of non-Newtonian Oldroyd-B model over a paraboloid surface with thermal transport were examined by Ali et al. [39]. Ali et al. [40] focused on fractional Casson fluid model with magnetic effect in an axisymmetric cylinder. They solved the modeled equations using Hankel transform coupled with Laplace procedure. Some important contributions on fractional models are covered in refs. [41–53] and studies reported therein.

In this contemplation, we stretch out to partial space crafted by ref. [9] by addressing the issue as various kinds of fractional differential equations (FDEs), and got an answer utilizing a half and half methodology of blending fragmentary analytics with homotopy perturbation method (HPM) which was at first proposed by He [23,24]. The HPM consolidates both old style homotopy with bother procedures, and has been effectively applied to address numerous straight [23] and non-direct issues [24,25,26,27,28]. The FDEs are speculations of customary differential conditions to non-whole number self-assertive request. The use of FDEs permit us to demonstrate and notice more mind boggling spatial and transient marvels concerning the liquid stream by considering non-neighborhood relations.

As far as author could possibly know, the examination of the issue in partial space has not yet been performed. In our future attempts, we will consider the association of on the asymptotic and oscillatory conduct of the arrangements of a class of defer differential conditions on consider circumstance and we will screen their belongings.

2 Basic definitions of fractional calculus

FDEs have been the focal point of many examinations in material science, science, designing, signal preparing, control hypothesis, and money in view of its capacity to catch complex nonlinear wonders that are not normally acknowledged by ordinary differential conditions. Before we continue on to different areas portraying a slender film stream model in partial space, we present a couple of essential definitions and properties of fragmentary math that will be utilized in later segments.

2.1 Definition

A real function h ( t ) , t > 0 , is said to be in the space C μ , μ ∈ R , if there exists a real number p > μ such that h ( t ) = t p h 1 ( t ) , where h 1 ( t ) ∈ C ( 0 , ∞ ) , and it is said to be in the space C μ n if and only if h n ∈ C μ , n ∈ N .

2.2 Definition

The fractional derivative ( D α ) of h ( t ) , in Caputo sense is defined as

(1) D α h ( t ) = 1 Γ ( n − α ) ∫ 0 t ( t − τ ) n − α − 1 h n ( τ ) d τ ,

for n − 1 < α < n , n ∈ N , t > 0 , h ∈ C − 1 n .

The following are two basic properties of the Caputo fractional derivative [10].

(2.2.1) Let h ∈ C − 1 n , n ∈ N . Then, D α h , 0 ≤ α ≤ n is well defined and D α h ∈ C − 1 .

(2.2.2) Let n − 1 ≤ α ≤ n , n ∈ N and h ∈ C μ n , μ ≥ − 1 . Then,

( J α D α ) h ( t ) = h ( t ) − ∑ k = 0 n − 1 h k ( 0 + ) t k k ! .

3 Mathematical formulation

Consider an instance of steady, laminar, and uniform electrically conductive thin film streaming down a boundless vertical divider. The film thickness is accepted as δ and gravity acts along the descending way. The essential conditions administering the movement of isothermal, homogeneous, and uncompressed liquids are [14]

(2) div V = 0 ,

(3) ρ D V D t = ρ f − grad P + div S , ,

where V is the speed vector, ρ is the consistent thickness, f is the body power per unit mass, P indicates the unique pressing factor, and D D t signifies the material subsidiary.

(4) S + λ 1 S ∇ + 1 2 ( λ 1 − μ 1 ) ( A 1 S + S A 1 ) = η 0 A 1 ,

where η 0 is the zero shear consistency, λ 1 is the unwinding time, μ 1 is the material steady, and

(5) A 1 = ( grad V ) + ( grad V ) T ,

and

(6) S ∇ = D S D t − { ( grad V ) T S + S ( grad V ) } .

The boundary conditions are

(7) at x = 0 , w = 0 .

(8) at x = δ , S x z = 0 .

The speed field with attractive impact for the expressed issue characterizes as

(9) V = ( 0 , 0 , − σ B 0 2 w ( x ) ) ,

and extra stress tensor as

(10) S = S ( x ) .

By inserting equation (9) in equations (2) and (10), the continuity equation (2) is identically satisfied and equation (3) takes the following form

(11) 0 = d S x x d x ,

(12) 0 = d S z x d x − ρ g − σ B 0 2 w ( x ) ,

where

(13) S x x = − η 0 ( λ 1 − μ 1 ) d w d x 2 1 + ( λ 1 2 − μ 1 2 ) d w d x 2 , S z z = η 0 ( λ 1 + μ 1 ) d w d x 2 1 + ( λ 1 2 − μ 1 2 ) d w d x 2 , S z x = η 0 d w d x 1 + ( λ 1 2 − μ 1 2 ) d w d x 2 .

Substituting S z x in equation (12) and utilizing w ⁎ = w U 0 and x ⁎ = x δ , we get the following three sets of problems

(14) d 2 w ( x ) d x 2 − β d w ( x ) d x 2 d 2 w ( x ) d x 2 − β 2 S t d w ( x ) d x 4 − 2 β S t d w ( x ) d x 2 − M 2 β 2 w ( x ) d w ( x ) d x 4 − 2 β M 2 w ( x ) d w ( x ) d x 2 − M 2 w ( x ) = S t ,

with

(15) d w d x = 0 at x = 1 and w = 0 at x = 0 ,

where non-Newtonian parameter is β = ( λ 1 2 − μ 1 2 ) U 0 2 δ 2 and stokes number is S t = ρ g δ 2 μ eff U 0 , while MHD parameter is M 2 = σ B 0 2 δ μ eff .

Equation (14) subject to the conditions (15) is highly nonlinear BVP. After using basic definitions of fractional calculus following three cases of FDEs along with boundary conditions are obtained from equations (14) and (15).

3.1 Case I

(16) d 2 w ( x ) d x 2 − β ( D α w ( x ) ) 2 d 2 w ( x ) d x 2 − β 2 S t ( D α w ( x ) ) 4 − 2 β S t 2 ( D α w ( x ) ) 2 − M 2 β 2 w ( x ) ( D α w ( x ) ) 4 − 2 β M 2 w ( x ) ( D α w ( x ) ) 2 − M 2 w ( x ) = S t ,

(17) w ( 0 ) = 0 , w ′ ( 1 ) = 0 , 0 < α < 1 .

3.2 Case II

(18) D γ w ( x ) − β d w ( x ) d x 2 D γ w ( x ) − β 2 S t d w ( x ) d x 4 − 2 β S t 2 d w ( x ) d x 2 − M 2 β 2 w ( x ) d w ( x ) d x 4 − 2 β M 2 w ( x ) d w ( x ) d x 2 − M 2 w ( x ) = S t ,

(19) w ( 0 ) = 0 , w ′ ( 1 ) = 0 , 1 < γ < 2 .

3.3 Case III

(20) D γ w ( x ) − β ( D α w ( x ) ) 2 D γ w ( x ) − β 2 S t ( D α w ( x ) ) 4 − 2 β S t 2 ( D α w ( x ) ) 2 − M 2 β 2 w ( x ) ( D α w ( x ) ) 4 − 2 β M 2 w ( x ) ( D α w ( x ) ) 2 − M 2 w ( x ) = S t ,

(21) w ( 0 ) = 0 , w ′ ( 1 ) = 0 , 0 < α < 1 , 1 < γ < 2 .

4 Application of HPM to Case I

Let us define homotopy for equation (16) as follows:

(22) ( 1 − p ) d 2 w d x 2 + p d 2 w d x 2 − β ( D α ) 2 d 2 w d x 2 − β 2 S t ( D α ) 4 − 2 β S t ( D α ) 2 − M 2 β 2 w ( x ) ( D α ) 4 − 2 β M 2 w ( x ) ( D α ) 2 − M 2 w ( x ) − S t ] = 0 .

4.1 Zeroth-order problem

Various order problems using (20) and (21) are

(23) w ′ 0 ( 1 ) = 0 , w ″ 0 ( x ) = 0 , w 0 ( 0 ) = 0 .

4.2 First-order problem

(24) − S t − M 2 w 0 ( x ) − 2 S t β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 2 − 2 M 2 β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 3 − S t β 2 ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 4 − M 2 β 2 ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 5 − β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 2 w ″ 0 ( x ) + w ″ 0 ( x ) = 0 , w 1 ( 0 ) = 0 , w ′ 0 ( 1 ) = 0 .

4.3 Second-order problem

(25) − M 2 w 1 ( x ) − 4 S t β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 2 w 1 ( x ) − 6 M 2 β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 2 w 1 ( x ) − 4 S t β 2 ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 4 w 1 ( x ) − 5 ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 4 M 2 β 2 w 1 ( x ) − 2 β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 2 w 1 ( x ) w ″ 0 ( x ) − ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 2 w ″ 1 ( x ) + w ″ 2 ( x ) = 0 , w 2 ( 0 ) = 0 , w ′ 2 ( 1 ) = 0 .

4.4 Third-order problem

(26) − 2 S t β ( D α w 1 ( x ) ) 2 − 6 β ( D α w 1 ( x ) ) 2 M 2 w 0 ( x ) − 6 S t β 2 ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 4 w 1 ( x ) − 10 M 2 β 2 ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 4 ( w 1 ( x ) ) 2 − M 2 w 2 ( x ) − 4 S t β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 2 S β w 2 ( x ) − 6 M 2 β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 2 w 2 ( x ) − 4 S t β 2 ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 4 w 2 ( x ) − 5 M 2 β 2 ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 4 w 2 ( x ) − ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 2 β w ″ 0 ( x ) − 2 ( D α w 2 ( x ) ) 2 β w 0 ( x ) w ″ 0 ( x ) − 2 β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 2 w 1 ( x ) w ″ 1 ( x ) − β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 2 w ″ 2 ( x ) + w ″ 3 ( x ) = 0 , w 3 ( 0 ) = 0 , w ′ 3 ( 1 ) = 0 .

4.5 Fourth-order problem

(27) − 2 M 2 β ( D α w 1 ( x ) ) 2 − 4 S t β 2 ( D α w 1 ( x ) ) 4 w 0 ( x ) − 10 M 2 β 2 ( D α w 1 ( x ) ) 4 w 0 ( x ) − 4 S t β ( D α w 1 ( x ) ) 2 w 2 ( x ) − 12 M 2 β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 2 w 1 ( x ) w 2 ( x ) − 12 S t β 2 ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 4 w 1 ( x ) w 2 ( x ) − 20 M 2 β 2 ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 4 w 1 ( x ) w 2 ( x ) − M 2 w 3 ( x ) − 4 S t β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 2 w 3 ( x ) − 6 M 2 β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 2 M 2 β w 3 ( x ) − 4 S t β 2 ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 4 w 3 ( x ) − 5 M 2 β 2 ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 4 w 3 ( x ) − 2 β ( D α w 2 ( x ) ) 2 w 1 ( x ) w 0 ″ ( x ) − 2 β ( D α w 3 ( x ) ) 2 w 0 ( x ) w 0 ″ ( x ) − ( D α w 1 ( x ) ) 2 w 1 ″ ( x ) − 2 β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 2 w 2 ( x ) w 1 ″ ( x ) − 2 β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 2 w 1 ( x ) w 2 ″ ( x ) − β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 2 w 3 ″ ( x ) + w 4 ″ ( x ) = 0 , w 4 ( 0 ) = 0 , w 4 ′ ( 1 ) = 0 .

Fixing β = 0.1 , α = 0.99 , S t = 0.1 and M = 0 . 1 , fourth order solution is

(28) W ( x ) = ½ ( − 0.2 x + 0.1 x 2 ) + 1 24 ( 0.008 x − 0.004 x 3 + 0.001 x 4 ) + 1 x 1.98 0.000110654 ( − 0.605635 x 2.98 + 0.887264 x 4 + 0.00502064 x 4.98 − 0.59341 x 5 + 0.147614 x 6 − 0.000753097 x 6.98 + 0.000125516 x 7.98 ) − 1 x 1.98 4.34454 × 10 − 8 ( 737.514 x 2.98 − 1114.85 x 4 + 2.5709 x 4.98 + 758.295 x 5 − 203.137 x 6 − 0.00639373 x 6.98 + 8.30092 x 7 − 1.37889 x 8 + 0.1000456695 x 8.98 − 0.0000570869 x 9.98 ) .

The residual of the problem is

(29) Residula 1 = d 2 W ( x ) d x 2 − β ( D α W ( x ) ) 2 d 2 W ( x ) d x 2 − β 2 S t ( D α W ( x ) ) 4 − 2 β S t 2 ( D α W ( x ) ) 2 − M 2 β 2 W ( x ) ( D α W ( x ) ) 4 − 2 β M 2 W ( x ) ( D α W ( x ) ) 2 − M 2 W ( x ) − S t .

5 Flow rate and average velocity

Flow rate (FR) per unit width is

(30) FR = ∫ 0 1 w ( x ) d x ,

(31) FR = S t ( 945 S 2 ( − 9 + 2 α ) ( 6 ( − 3 + α ) 2 × ( 88 − 207 α + 176 α 2 − 64 α 3 + 8 α 4 ) + M 2 ( 1 , 188 − 2 , 574 α + 2 , 401 α 2 − 1 , 206 α 3 + 347 α 4 − 56 α 5 + 4 α 6 ) ) β [ 5 − α ] 2 − 2 Γ [ 4 − α ] 2 ( 945 S 2 ( 12 − 7 α + α 2 ) × ( 3 ( 6 , 048 − 17 , 184 α + 21 , 034 α 2 − 14 , 107 α 3 + 5 , 537 α 4 − 1 , 266 α 5 + 156 α 6 − 8 α 7 ) + 2 M 2 ( − 29 , 484 + 87 , 369 α − 109 , 265 α 2 + 73 , 862 α 3 − 28 , 941 α 4 + 6 , 558 α 5 − 796 α 6 + 40 α 7 ) ) β − 2 ( − 945 + 378 M 2 − 153 M 4 + 62 M 6 ) × ( 945 − 1 , 488 α + 824 α 2 − 192 α 3 + 16 α 4 ) Γ [ 5 − α ] 2 ) ) ) / ( 11 , 340 ( − 9 + 2 α ) × ( − 105 + 142 α − 60 α 2 + 8 α 3 ) Γ [ 4 − α ] 2 Γ [ 5 − α ] 2

The average velocity V ¯ is

(32) V ¯ = Q .

6 Application of HPM to Case II

Let us define homotopy for equation (18) as follows:

(33) ( 1 − p ) ( D γ w ( x ) ) + p [ D γ w ( x ) − β d w ( x ) d x 2 D γ w ( x ) − β 2 S t d w ( x ) d x 4 − 2 β S t 2 d w ( x ) d x 2 − M 2 β 2 w ( x ) d w ( x ) d x 4 − 2 β M 2 w ( x ) d w ( x ) d x 2 − M 2 w ( x ) − S t = 0 .

6.1 Zeroth-order problem

Various order problems using (18) and (19) are

(34) D γ w 0 ( x ) = 0 , w 0 ( 0 ) = 0 , w 0 ' ( 1 ) = 0 .

6.2 First-order problem

(35) − S t + D γ ( w 1 ( x ) ) − M 2 w 0 ( x ) − 2 S t β ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) 2 − β ( D γ ( w 0 ( x ) ) ) ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) 2 − 2 M 2 β ( w 0 ( x ) ) ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) 2 − S t β 2 ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) 4 − M 2 β 2 ( w 0 ( x ) ) ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) 4 = 0 , w 1 ( 0 ) = 0 , w 1 ′ ( 1 ) = 0 .

6.3 Second-order problem

(36) D γ ( w 2 ( x ) ) − M 2 w 1 ( x ) − β D γ ( w 1 ( x ) ) ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) 2 − 2 M 2 β w 1 ( x ) ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) 2 − M 2 β 2 w 1 ( x ) ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) 4 − 4 S t β ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) ( w 1 ′ ( x ) ) − 2 β D γ ( w 0 ( x ) ) ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) ( w 1 ′ ( x ) ) − 4 M 2 β w 0 ( x ) ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) ( w 1 ′ ( x ) ) − 4 S t β 2 ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) 3 ( w 1 ′ ( x ) ) − 4 M 2 β 2 w 0 ( x ) ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) 3 ( w 1 ′ ( x ) ) = 0 , w 2 ( 0 ) = 0 , w 2 ′ ( 1 ) = 0 . .

6.4 Third-order problem

(37) D γ ( w 3 ( x ) ) − M 2 w 2 ( x ) − β D γ ( w 2 ( x ) ) ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) 2 − 2 M 2 β ( w 2 ( x ) ) ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) 2 − M 2 β 2 ( w 2 ( x ) ) ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) 4 − 2 β D γ ( w 1 ( x ) ) ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) ( w 1 ′ ( x ) ) − 4 M 2 β ( w 1 ( x ) ) ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) ( w 1 ′ ( x ) ) − M 2 β 2 ( w 2 ( x ) ) ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) 4 − 2 β D γ ( w 1 ( x ) ) ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) ( w 1 ′ ( x ) ) − 4 M 2 β ( w 1 ( x ) ) ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) ( w 1 ′ ( x ) ) − 2 M 2 β ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) 2 − 6 S t β 2 ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) 2 ( w 1 ′ ( x ) ) 2 − 6 M 2 β 2 ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) 2 ( w 1 ′ ( x ) ) 2 − 4 S t β ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) ( w 2 ′ ( x ) ) − 2 β D γ ( w 0 ( x ) ) ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) ( w 2 ′ ( x ) ) − 4 M 2 β ( w 0 ( x ) ) ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) ( w 2 ′ ( x ) ) − 4 S t β 2 ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) 3 ( w 2 ′ ( x ) ) − 4 M 2 β 2 ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) 3 ( w 2 ′ ( x ) ) = 0 , w 3 ( 0 ) = 0 , w 3 ′ ( 1 ) = 0 .

6.5 Fourth-order problem

(38) − M 2 w 3 ( x ) + D γ ( w 4 ( x ) ) − β D γ ( w 3 ( x ) ) ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) 2 − 2 M 2 β ( w 3 ( x ) ) ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) 2 − M 2 β 2 ( w 3 ( x ) ) ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) 4 − 2 β D γ ( w 2 ( x ) ) ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) ( w 1 ′ ( x ) ) − 4 M 2 β ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) ( w 1 ′ ( x ) ) − 4 M 2 β 2 ( w 2 ( x ) ) ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) 3 ( w 1 ′ ( x ) ) − β D γ ( w 1 ( x ) ) ( w 1 ′ ( x ) ) 2 − 2 M 2 β ( w 1 ( x ) ) ( w 1 ′ ( x ) ) 2 − 6 M 2 β 2 ( w 1 ( x ) ) ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) 2 ( w 1 ′ ( x ) ) 2 − 4 S t β 2 ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) ( w 1 ′ ( x ) ) 3 − 4 M 2 β 2 ( w 0 ( x ) ) ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) ( w 1 ′ ( x ) ) 3 − 2 β D γ ( w 1 ( x ) ) ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) ( w 2 ′ ( x ) ) − 4 M 2 β ( w 1 ( x ) ) ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) ( w 2 ′ ( x ) ) − 4 M 2 β 2 ( w 1 ( x ) ) ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) 3 ( w 2 ′ ( x ) ) − 4 S t β ( w 1 ′ ( x ) ) ( w 2 ′ ( x ) ) − 2 β D γ ( w 0 ( x ) ) ( w 1 ′ ( x ) ) ( w 2 ′ ( x ) ) − 4 M 2 β ( w 0 ( x ) ) ( w 1 ′ ( x ) ) ( w 2 ′ ( x ) ) − 12 S t β 2 ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) 2 ( w 1 ′ ( x ) ) ( w 2 ′ ( x ) ) − 12 M 2 β 2 ( w 0 ( x ) ) ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) 2 ( w 1 ′ ( x ) ) ( w 2 ′ ( x ) ) − 4 S t β ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) ( w 3 ′ ( x ) ) − 2 β D γ ( w 0 ( x ) ) ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) ( w 3 ′ ( x ) ) − 4 M 2 β ( w 0 ( x ) ) ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) ( w 3 ′ ( x ) ) − 4 S t β 2 ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) 3 ( w 3 ′ ( x ) ) − 4 M 2 β 2 ( w 0 ( x ) ) ( w 0 ′ ( x ) ) 3 ( w 3 ′ ( x ) ) = 0 , w 4 ( 0 ) = 0 , w 4 ′ ( 1 ) = 0 .

Fixing β = 0.2 , γ = 1.99 , S t = 0.01 and M = 0 . 1 fourth order solution is

(39) W ( x ) = − 0.0100002 x + 0.00504696 x 1.99 + 0.0050005 x 2 − 1.36726 × 10 − 7 x 2.98 − 0.0000178199 x 2.99 − 4.00144 × 10 − 7 x 3 + 4.36363 × 10 − 6 x 3.98 + 4.57125 × 10 − 6 x 3.99 + 1.00136 × 10 − 7 x 4 − 9.79591 × 10 − 9 x 4.98 − 3.16703 × 10 − 9 x 4.99 − 6 × 10 − 11 x 5 + 1.70948 × 10 − 9 x 5.98 + 5.28971 × 10 − 10 x 5.99 + 1 × 10 − 11 x 6 − 1.36242 × 10 − 12 x 6.98 − 1.08198 × 10 − 13 x 6.99 + 1.71212 × 10 − 13 x 7.98 + 1.35449 × 10 − 14 x 7.99 − 3.95961 × 10 − 17 x 8.98 − 1.06448 × 10 − 18 x 8.99 + 3.9692 × 10 − 18 x 9.98 + 1.06555 × 10 − 19 x 9.99 − 4.52311 × 10 − 22 x 10.98 + 3.7764 × 10 − 23 x 11.98 − 1.95805 × 10 − 27 x 12.98 + 1.40061 × 10 − 28 x 13.98 .

The residual of the problem is

(40) Residual 2 = D γ W ( x ) − β d W ( x ) d x 2 D γ W ( x ) − β 2 S t W ( x ) d x 4 − 2 β S t 2 d W ( x ) d x 2 − M 2 β 2 w ( x ) d W ( x ) d x 4 − 2 β M 2 W ( x ) d W ( x ) d x 2 − M 2 W 1 ( x ) − S t .

7 Application of HPM to Case III

Let us define homotopy for equation (21) as follows:

(41) ( 1 − p ) ( D γ w ( x ) ) + p [ D γ w ( x ) − β ( D α w ( x ) ) 2 D γ w ( x ) − β 2 S t ( D α w ( x ) ) 4 − 2 β S t 2 ( D α w ( x ) ) 2 − M 2 β 2 w ( x ) ( D α w ( x ) ) 4 − 2 β M 2 w ( x ) ( D α w ( x ) ) 2 − M 2 w ( x ) − S t ] = 0 .

7.1 Zeroth-order problem

Various order problems using (20) and (21) are

(42) D γ w 0 ( x ) = 0 , w 0 ( 0 ) = 0 , w 0 ′ ( 1 ) = 0 .

7.2 First-order problem

(43) − S t − 2 S t β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 2 − S t β 2 ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 4 − β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 2 ( D γ ( w 0 ( x ) ) ) + D γ ( w 1 ( x ) ) − M 2 ( w 0 ( x ) ) − 2 M 2 β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 2 ( w 0 ( x ) ) − M 2 β 2 ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 4 ( w 0 ( x ) ) = 0 , w 1 ( 0 ) = 0 , w 1 ′ ( 1 ) = 0 .

7.3 Second-order problem

(44) − 4 S t − β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) ( D α w 1 ( x ) ) − 4 S t − β 2 ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 3 ( D α w 1 ( x ) ) − 2 β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) ( D α w 1 ( x ) ) ( D γ ( w 0 ( x ) ) ) − β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 2 ( D γ ( w 1 ( x ) ) ) + ( D γ ( w 2 ( x ) ) ) − 4 M 2 β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) ( D α w 1 ( x ) ) ( w 0 ( x ) ) − 4 M 2 β 2 ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 3 ( D α w 1 ( x ) ) ( w 0 ( x ) ) − M 2 ( w 1 ( x ) ) − 2 M 2 β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 2 ( w 1 ( x ) ) − M 2 β 2 ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 4 ( w 1 ( x ) ) = 0 , w 2 ( 0 ) = 0 , w 2 ′ ( 1 ) = 0 .

7.4 Third-order problem

(45) − 2 S t β ( D α w 1 ( x ) ) 2 − 6 S t β 2 D α w 0 ( x ) ) 2 ( D α w 1 ( x ) ) 2 − 4 S t β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) ( D α w 2 ( x ) ) − 4 S t β 2 ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 3 ( D α w 2 ( x ) ) − β ( D α w 1 ( x ) ) 2 ( D γ ( w 0 ( x ) ) ) − 2 β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) ( D α w 2 ( x ) ) ( D γ ( w 0 ( x ) ) ) − 2 β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) ( D α w 1 ( x ) ) ( D γ ( w 1 ( x ) ) ) − β ( D α w 1 ( x ) ) 2 ( D γ ( w 2 ( x ) ) ) + D γ ( w 3 ( x ) ) − 2 M 2 β ( D α w 1 ( x ) ) 2 ( w 0 ( x ) ) − 6 M 2 β 2 ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 2 ( D α w 1 ( x ) ) 2 ( w 0 ( x ) ) − 4 M 2 β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) ( D α w 2 ( x ) ) ( w 0 ( x ) ) − 4 M 2 β 2 ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 3 ( D α w 2 ( x ) ) ( w 0 ( x ) ) − 4 M 2 β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) ( D α w 1 ( x ) ) ( w 1 ( x ) ) − 4 M 2 β 2 ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 3 ( D α w 1 ( x ) ) ( w 1 ( x ) ) − M 2 ( w 2 ( x ) ) − 2 M 2 β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 2 ( w 2 ( x ) ) − M 2 β 2 ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 4 ( w 2 ( x ) ) = 0 , w 3 ( 0 ) = 0 , w 3 ′ ( 1 ) = 0 .

7.5 Fourth-order problem

(46) − 4 S t β 2 ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) ( D α w 1 ( x ) ) 3 − 4 S t β ( D α w 1 ( x ) ) ( D α w 2 ( x ) ) − 12 S t β 2 ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 2 ( D α w 1 ( x ) ) ( D α w 2 ( x ) ) − 4 S t β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) ( D α w 3 ( x ) ) − 4 S t β 2 ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 3 ( D α w 3 ( x ) ) − 2 β ( D α w 1 ( x ) ) ( D α w 2 ( x ) ) ( D γ ( w 0 ( x ) ) ) − 2 β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) ( D α w 3 ( x ) ) ( D γ ( w 0 ( x ) ) ) − β ( D α w 1 ( x ) ) 2 ( D γ ( w 1 ( x ) ) ) − 2 β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) ( D α w 2 ( x ) ) ( D γ ( w 1 ( x ) ) ) − 2 β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) ( D α w 1 ( x ) ) ( D γ ( w 2 ( x ) ) ) − β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 2 ( D γ ( w 3 ( x ) ) ) + D γ ( w 4 ( x ) ) − 4 M 2 β 2 ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) ( D α w 1 ( x ) ) 3 ( w 0 ( x ) ) ) − 4 M 2 β ( D α w 1 ( x ) ) ( D α w 2 ( x ) ) ( w 0 ( x ) ) − 12 M 2 β 2 ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 2 ( D α w 1 ( x ) ) ( D α w 2 ( x ) ) ( w 0 ( x ) ) − 4 M 2 β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) ( D α w 3 ( x ) ) ( w 0 ( x ) ) − 4 M 2 β 2 ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 3 ( D α w 3 ( x ) ) ( w 0 ( x ) ) − 2 M 2 β ( D α w 1 ( x ) ) 2 ( w 1 ( x ) ) − 6 M 2 β 2 ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 2 ( D α w 1 ( x ) ) 2 ( w 1 ( x ) ) − 4 M 2 β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) ( D α w 2 ( x ) ) ( w 1 ( x ) ) − 4 M 2 β 2 ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 3 ( D α w 2 ( x ) ) ( w 1 ( x ) ) − 4 M 2 β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) ( D α w 1 ( x ) ) ( w 2 ( x ) ) − 4 M 2 β 2 ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 3 ( D α w 1 ( x ) ) ( w 2 ( x ) ) − M 2 ( w 3 ( x ) ) − 2 M 2 β ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 2 ( w 3 ( x ) ) − M 2 β 2 ( D α w 0 ( x ) ) 4 ( w 3 ( x ) ) = 0 , w 4 ( 0 ) = 0 , w 4 ′ ( 1 ) = 0 .

Fixing α = 0.99 , γ = 1.99 , β = 0.1 , S t = 0.01 and M = 0.1 fourth order solution is

(47) W ( x ) = 0.00504625 x 1.99 + 4.2939 × 10 − 6 x 3.98 + 0.01 ( 1.46905 × 10 − 6 + 1.69194 × 10 − 6 / x 1.98 ) x 5.97 .

The residual of the problem is

(48) Residual 3 = D γ W ( x ) − β ( D α W ( x ) ) 2 D γ w ( x ) − β 2 S t ( D α W ( x ) ) 4 − 2 β S t 2 ( D α W ( x ) ) 2 − M 2 β 2 W ( x ) ( D α W ( x ) ) 4 − 2 β M 2 W ( x ) ( D α W ( x ) ) 2 − M 2 W ( x ) − S t .

8 Results and discussion

In this article, homotopy-based fractional analysis of thin film flow of pseudo-plastic fluid on a vertical wall has been performed. The problem is solved as a partially fractional differential equation (PFDEs) and fully fractional differential equation (FFDE). Three cases are considered: (i) PFDE by altering first-order derivative to fractional derivative in ( 0 , 1 ) , (ii) PFDE by altering second-order derivative to fractional derivative in ( 1 , 2 ) , and (iii) FFDE by altering first- and second-order derivatives to fractional derivatives in ( 0 , 1 ) and ( 1 , 2 ) , respectively. These cases are solved for different values of considered parameters and results are presented in tables and graphs. Tables 1–4 demonstrate the solution and errors for various values of α , β , S t , and M, respectively, in Case I. Table 5 presents solution and error for various values of γ , while fixing other parameters in Case II. Tables 6 and 7 show solution and error for various α and γ keeping other parameters fixed in Case III. All the tables clearly show that solutions are acceptable. Furthermore, the parameters’ effect on the speed profiles are examined graphically. Figure 1 shows the effect of M on the velocity profiles. It is seen that velocity decreases as M increases. Higher estimation of magnetic field produced causes the velocity field to retard. Figures 2 and 3 show that S t and β have direct relation with velocity. Figure 4 shows the effect of α on the dimensionless velocity. It has been noticed that the velocity profile slightly decreases with increase in α .

Table 1

Solutions and residuals for different α , while β = 0.1 , S t = 0.01 , M = 0.1 in Case I

x	α = 0.4		α = 0.8		α = 0.99
x	Sol.	Error	Sol.	Error	Sol.	Error
0.1	0.000946702	7.27 × 10⁻¹¹	0.000946704	3.38 × 10⁻¹⁰	0.000946705	6.55 × 10⁻¹⁰
0.2	0.0017935	1.60 × 10⁻¹⁰	0.0017935	4.42 × 10⁻¹⁰	0.0017935	6.38 × 10⁻¹⁰
0.3	0.00254047	2.47 × 10⁻¹⁰	0.00254047	4.85 × 10⁻¹⁰	0.00254047	5.77 × 10⁻¹⁰
0.4	0.0031877	3.22 × 10⁻¹⁰	0.0031877	4.85 × 10⁻¹⁰	0.0031877	4.90 × 10⁻¹⁰
0.5	0.00373524	3.78 × 10⁻¹⁰	0.00373524	4.51 × 10⁻¹⁰	0.00373524	3.92 × 10⁻¹⁰
0.6	0.00418316	4.12 × 10⁻¹⁰	0.00418316	3.94 × 10⁻¹⁰	0.0048315	2.95 × 10⁻¹⁰
0.7	0.00453149	4.23 × 10⁻¹⁰	0.00453149	3.26 × 10⁻¹⁰	0.00453148	2.08 × 10⁻¹⁰
0.8	0.00478027	4.12 × 10⁻¹⁰	0.00478027	2.55 × 10⁻¹⁰	0.00478027	1.39 × 10⁻¹⁰
0.9	0.00492953	3.81 × 10⁻¹⁰	0.00492953	1.89 × 10⁻¹⁰	0.00492952	9.52 × 10⁻¹¹
1	0.00497928	3.36 × 10⁻¹⁰	0.00497928	1.37 × 10⁻¹⁰	0.00497928	7.81 × 10⁻¹¹

Table 2

Solutions and residuals for different β , while α = 0.99 , S t = 0.01 , M = 0.3 in Case I

x	β = 0.3		β = 0.7		β = 1
x	Sol.	Error	Sol.	Error	Sol.	Error
0.1	0.000918127	1.10 × 10⁻⁸	0.000918158	3.28 × 10⁻⁸	0.000918181	4.91062 × 10⁻⁸
0.2	0.00173716	5.05 × 10⁻⁹	0.00173721	2.58 × 10⁻⁸	0.00173725	4.13872 × 10⁻⁸
0.3	0.0024579	−1.68 × 10⁻⁹	0.00245798	1.68 × 10⁻⁸	0.00245803	3.06414 × 10⁻⁸
0.4	0.00308111	−8.56 × 10⁻⁹	0.00308119	6.91 × 10⁻⁹	0.00308125	1.8503 × 10⁻⁸
0.5	0.00360738	−1.51 × 10⁻⁸	0.00360746	−2.90 × 10⁻⁹	0.00360753	6.2414 × 10⁻⁹
0.6	0.00403725	−2.09 × 10⁻⁸	0.00403733	−1.19 × 10⁻⁸	0.0040374	−5.13147 × 10⁻⁹
0.7	0.00437114	−2.58 × 10⁻⁸	0.00437123	−1.95 × 10⁻⁸	0.0043713	−1.48221 × 10⁻⁸
0.8	0.0046094	−2.95 × 10⁻⁸	0.00460949	−2.53 × 10⁻⁸	0.00460956	−2.22307 × 10⁻⁸
0.9	0.00475226	−3.18 × 10⁻⁸	0.00475235	−2.90 × 10⁻⁸	0.00475242	−2.69346 × 10⁻⁸
1	0.00479986	−3.26 × 10⁻⁸	0.00479995	−3.03 × 10⁻⁸	0.00480002	−2.86763 × 10⁻⁸

Table 3

Solutions and residuals for different S t , while α = 0.98 , β = 0.2 , M = 0.2 in Case I

x	S t = 0.001		S t = 0.01		S t = 0.2
x	Sol.	Error	Sol.	Error	Sol.	Error
0.1	0.0000936941	−8.93 × 10⁻¹²	0.000936957	4.66 × 10⁻⁹	0.0188698	−3.46 × 10⁻⁵
0.2	0.000177425	−2.24 × 10⁻¹¹	0.00177428	4.45 × 10⁻⁹	0.0357116	−1.02 × 10⁻⁵
0.3	0.000251227	−3.56 × 10⁻¹¹	0.00251231	3.89 × 10⁻⁹	0.0505386	5.11 × 10⁻⁶
0.4	0.000315129	−4.80 × 10⁻¹¹	0.00315133	3.15 × 10⁻⁹	0.063363	1.29 × 10⁻⁵
0.5	0.000369157	−5.92 × 10⁻¹¹	0.00369161	2.33 × 10⁻⁹	0.0741956	1.52 × 10⁻⁵
0.6	0.000413332	−6.89 × 10⁻¹¹	0.00413337	1.52 × 10⁻⁹	0.0830458	1.42 × 10⁻⁵
0.7	0.000447672	−7.67 × 10⁻¹¹	0.00447677	8.11 × 10⁻¹⁰	0.0899212	1.14 × 10⁻⁵
0.8	0.000472191	−8.25 × 10⁻¹¹	0.00472196	2.45 × 10⁻¹⁰	0.0948277	8.26 × 10⁻⁶
0.9	0.000486898	−8.61 × 10⁻¹¹	0.00486903	−1.29 × 10⁻¹⁰	0.0977698	5.81 × 10⁻⁶
1	0.0004918	−8.73 × 10⁻¹¹	0.00491805	−2.84 × 10⁻¹⁰	0.0987502	4.73 × 10⁻⁶

Table 4

Solutions and residuals for different M , while α = 0.95 , β = 0.2 , S t = 0.01 in Case I

x	M = 0.1		M = 0.4		M = 0.6
x	Sol.	Error	Sol.	Error	Sol.	Error
0.1	0.000946713	1.13 × 10⁻⁹	0.00090012	−2.17 × 10⁻⁸	0.000845297	−8.84 × 10⁻⁷
0.2	0.00179352	1.18 × 10⁻⁹	0.00170166	−5.61 × 10⁻⁸	0.00159361	−1.76 × 10⁻⁶
0.3	0.00254049	1.12 × 10⁻⁹	0.00240591	−8.99 × 10⁻⁸	0.00224765	−2.60 × 10⁻⁶
0.4	0.00318772	9.91 × 10⁻¹⁰	0.003014	−1.21 × 10⁻⁷	0.00280978	−3.38 × 10⁻⁶
0.5	0.00373526	8.23 × 10⁻¹⁰	0.0035269	−1.50 × 10⁻⁷	0.00328203	−4.07 × 10⁻⁶
0.6	0.00418318	6.43 × 10⁻¹⁰	0.00394542	−1.75 × 10⁻⁷	0.00366611	−4.66 × 10⁻⁶
0.7	0.00453151	4.72 × 10⁻¹⁰	0.00427025	−1.96 × 10⁻⁷	0.0039634	−5.13 × 10⁻⁶
0.8	0.00478029	3.29 × 10⁻¹⁰	0.0045019	−2.11 × 10⁻⁷	0.00417499	−5.48 × 10⁻⁶
0.9	0.00492955	2.25 × 10⁻¹⁰	0.00464074	−2.20 × 10⁻⁷	0.00430164	−5.69 × 10⁻⁶
1	0.0049793	1.72 × 10⁻¹⁰	0.00468699	−2.23 × 10⁻⁷	0.00434381	−5.77 × 10⁻⁶

Table 5

Solutions and residuals for different γ , while M = 0.1 , β = 0.1 , S t = 0.001 in Case II

x	γ = 1.5		γ = 1.8		γ = 1.99
x	Sol.	Error	Sol.	Error	Sol.	Error
0.1	0.0000712193	−1.01713 × 10⁻³	0.0000855495	−1.04881 × 10⁻³	0.0000898378	−1.08657 × 10⁻³
0.2	0.000112754	−1.04078 × 10⁻³	0.000147101	−1.09814 × 10⁻³	0.0001595	−1.15489 × 10⁻³
0.3	0.000131483	−1.06249 × 10⁻³	0.000186758	−1.138 × 10⁻³	0.000209073	−1.20404 × 10⁻³
0.4	0.000129857	−1.07862 × 10⁻³	0.000205487	−1.16532 × 10⁻³	0.000238604	−1.23383 × 10⁻³
0.5	0.000109286	−1.08678 × 10⁻³	0.000203909	−1.17837 × 10⁻³	0.000248125	−1.24412 × 10⁻³
0.6	0.0000707202	−1.08516 × 10⁻³	0.000182478	−1.17598 × 10⁻³	0.00023766	−1.23485 × 10⁻³
0.7	0.0000148502	−1.07228 × 10⁻³	0.000141545	−1.15726 × 10⁻³	0.000207225	−1.20596 × 10⁻³
0.8	0.000577914	−1.04689 × 10⁻³	0.0000813935	−1.12151 × 10⁻³	0.000156834	−1.15742 × 10⁻³
0.9	0.00014678	−1.00788 × 10⁻³	0.00000225869	−1.06816 × 10⁻³	0.0000864945	−1.08918 × 10⁻³
1	0.000251767	−9.54261 × 10⁻⁴	0.0000956603	−9.96704 × 10⁻⁴	0.00000378926	−1.00122 × 10⁻³

Table 6

Solutions and residuals for different α , while γ = 1.98 , M = 0.1 , β = 0.2 , S t = 0.001 in Case III

x	α = 0.2		α = 0.5		α = 0.99
x	Sol.	Error	Sol.	Error	Sol.	Error
0.1	0.00000533279	−1.98011 × 10⁻³	0.00000533279	−1.98011 × 10⁻³	0.00000533279	−1.98011 × 10⁻³
0.2	0.0000210381	−1.98042 × 10⁻³	0.0000210381	−1.98042 × 10⁻³	0.0000210381	−1.98042 × 10⁻³
0.3	0.0000469554	−1.98093 × 10⁻³	0.0000469554	−1.98093 × 10⁻³	0.0000469554	−1.98093 × 10⁻³
0.4	0.0000830025	−1.98164 × 10⁻³	0.0000830025	−1.98164 × 10⁻³	0.0000830025	−1.98164 × 10⁻³
0.5	0.000129124	−1.98256 × 10⁻³	0.000129124	−1.98256 × 10⁻³	0.000129124	−1.98256 × 10⁻³
0.6	0.00018528	−1.98367 × 10⁻³	0.00018528	−1.98367 × 10⁻³	0.00018528	−1.98367 × 10⁻³
0.7	0.000251438	−1.98498 × 10⁻³	0.000251438	−1.98498 × 10⁻³	0.000251438	−1.98498 × 10⁻³
0.8	0.000327576	−1.98649 × 10⁻³	0.000327576	−1.98649 × 10⁻³	0.000327576	−1.98649 × 10⁻³
0.9	0.000413673	−1.98819 × 10⁻³	0.000413673	−1.98819 × 10⁻³	0.000413673	−1.98819 × 10⁻³
1	0.000509716	−1.99009 × 10⁻³	0.000509716	−1.99009 × 10⁻³	0.000509716	−1.99009 × 10⁻³

Table 7

Solutions and residuals for different γ , while α = 0.99 , M = 0.1 , β = 0.1 , S t = 0.001 in Case III

x	γ = 1.3		γ = 1.5		γ = 1.99
x	Sol.	Error	Sol.	Error	Sol.	Error
0.1	4.2964 × 10⁻⁵	−1.30056 × 10⁻³	1.29173 × 10⁻⁵	−1.70022 × 10⁻³	0.00000516384	−0.0019901
0.2	1.05814 × 10⁻⁴	−1.30138 × 10⁻³	4.19714 × 10⁻⁵	−1.70071 × 10⁻³	0.0000205132	−1.99041 × 10⁻³
0.3	1.79299 × 10⁻⁴	−1.30233 × 10⁻³	8.36279 × 10⁻⁵	−1.70142 × 10⁻³	0.0000459699	−1.99091 × 10⁻³
0.4	260693 × 10⁻⁴	−1.30339 × 10⁻³	1.36396 × 10⁻⁴	−1.70232 × 10⁻³	0.0000814945	−1.99162 × 10⁻³
0.5	3.48539 × 10⁻⁴	−1.30453 × 10⁻³	1.99348 × 10⁻⁴	−1.70339 × 10⁻³	0.000127061	−1.99253 × 10⁻³
0.6	4.41911 × 10⁻⁴	−1.30575 × 10⁻³	2.71828 × 10⁻⁴	−1.70462 × 10⁻³	0.000182652	−1.99363 × 10⁻³
0.7	5.40159 × 10⁻⁴	−1.30702 × 10⁻³	3.53336 × 10⁻⁴	−1.70601 × 10⁻³	0.000248254	−1.99494 × 10⁻³
0.8	6.42797 × 10⁻⁴	−1.30836 × 10⁻³	4.43472 × 10⁻⁴	−1.70754 × 10⁻³	0.000323858	−1.99644 × 10⁻³
0.9	7.49446 × 10⁻⁴	−1.30974 × 10⁻³	5.41908 × 10⁻⁴	−1.70921 × 10⁻³	0.00040946	−1.99815 × 10⁻³
1	8.59805 × 10⁻⁴	−1.31118 × 10⁻³	6.48368 × 10⁻⁴	−1.71102 × 10⁻³	0.00505055	−2.00005 × 10⁻³

Figure 1

Effect of M on velocity field in Case I.

$Figure 2 Effect of S t {S}_{t} on fluid velocity in Case I.$

Figure 2

Effect of S t on fluid velocity in Case I.

$Figure 3 Effect of β \beta on velocity in Case I.$

Figure 3

Effect of β on velocity in Case I.

$Figure 4 Effect of α \alpha on velocity in Case I.$

Figure 4

Effect of α on velocity in Case I.

Nomenclature

w: velocity vector
D ^α: α order derivative
δ: thickness of the film
f: body force
S: stress tensor
β: non-Newtonian parameter
S _t: Stokes number
M ²: MHD parameter
α, γ: fractional parameter
ρ: fluid density
P: pressure
Q: flow rate
V ¯: average velocity

Funding information: Research Supporting Project Number (RSP-2021/167), King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Author contributions: All authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this manuscript and approved its submission.
Conflict of interest: The authors state no conflict of interest.
Data availability statement: All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article.

References

[1] Schetz JA, Fuhs AE. Fundamentals of fluid mechanics. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1999.Search in Google Scholar

[2] Denson CD. The drainage of Newtonian liquids entrained on a vertical surface. Ind Eng Chem Fundamen. 1970;9(3):443–8.10.1021/i160035a022Search in Google Scholar

[3] O’Brien SBG, Schwartz LW. Theory and modeling of thin film flows. Encycl Surf Colloid Sci. 2002;1:5283–97.10.1081/E-ESCS3-120000885Search in Google Scholar

[4] Rossum JJV. Viscous lifting and drainage of liquids. Appl Sci Res, Sect A. 1958;7(2–3):121–44.10.1007/BF03184644Search in Google Scholar

[5] Aman S, Abdeljawad T, Al-Mdallal Q. Natural convection flow of a fluid using Atangana and Baleanu fractional model. Adv Differ Equ. 2020;2020:1–15.10.1186/s13662-020-02768-wSearch in Google Scholar

[6] Al-Mdallal Q, Abro KA, Khan I. Analytical solutions of fractional Walter’s B fluid with applications. Complexity. 2018;2018:1–10.10.1155/2018/8131329Search in Google Scholar

[7] Aman S, Al-Mdallal Q. SA-copper based Maxwell nanofluid flow with second order slip effect using fractional derivatives. AIP Conference Proceedings. AIP Publishing LLC; 2019. Vol. 2116. Issue 1.10.1063/1.5114005Search in Google Scholar

[8] Aman S, Al-Mdallal Q. Flow of ferrofluids under second order slip effect. AIP Conference Proceedings. AIP Publishing LLC; 2019. Vol. 2116. Issue 1.10.1063/1.5113996Search in Google Scholar

[9] Aman S, Al-Mdallal Q, Khan I. Heat transfer and second order slip effect on MHD flow of fractional Maxwell fluid in a porous medium. J King Saud Univ – Sci. 2020;32(1):450–8.10.1016/j.jksus.2018.07.007Search in Google Scholar

[10] Aman S, Khan I, Ismail Z, Salleh MZ, Tlili I. A new Caputo time fractional model for heat transfer enhancement of water based graphene nanofluid: An application to solar energy. Results Phys. 2018;9:1352–62.10.1016/j.rinp.2018.04.007Search in Google Scholar

[11] Astarita G, Marrucci G, Principles of non-Newtonian fluid mechanics. London, New York: McGraw-Hill Companies; 1974.Search in Google Scholar

[12] Siddiqui AM, Mahmood R, Ghori QK. Homotopy perturbation method for thin film flow of a third grade fluid down an inclined plane. Chaos Solitons Fractals. 2008;35(1):140–7.10.1016/j.chaos.2006.05.026Search in Google Scholar

[13] Siddiqui AM, Mahmood R, Ghori QK. Some exact solutions for the thin film flow of a PTT fluid. Phys Lett A. 2006;356(4–5):353–6.10.1016/j.physleta.2006.03.071Search in Google Scholar

[14] Siddiqui AM, Mahmood R, Ghori QK. Homotopy perturbation method for thin film flow of a fourth grade fluid down a vertical cylinder. Phys Lett A. 2006;352(4–5):404–10.10.1016/j.physleta.2005.12.033Search in Google Scholar

[15] Alam MK, Siddiqui AM, Rahim MT, Islam S, Avital EJ, Williams J. Thin film flow of magneto hydrodynamic (MHD) pseudo-plastic fluid on vertical wall. Appl Math Comput. 2014;245:544–56.10.1016/j.amc.2014.07.047Search in Google Scholar

[16] Bazighifan O, Ramos H. On the asymptotic and oscillatory behavior of the solutions of a class of higher-order differential equations with middle term. Appl Math Lett. 2020;107:106431.10.1016/j.aml.2020.106431Search in Google Scholar

[17] Imran N, Tassaddiq A, Javed M, Alreshidi NA, Sohail M, Khan I. Influence of chemical reactions and mechanism of peristalsis for the thermal distribution obeying slip constraints: applications to conductive transportation. J Mater Res Technol. 2020;9(3):6533–43.10.1016/j.jmrt.2020.04.039Search in Google Scholar

[18] Imran N, Javed M, Sohail M, Tlili I. Simultaneous effects of heterogeneous-homogeneous reactions in peristaltic flow comprising thermal radiation: Rabinowitsch fluid model. J Mater Res Technol. 2020;9(3):3520–9.10.1016/j.jmrt.2020.01.089Search in Google Scholar

[19] Imran N, Javed M, Sohail M, Thounthong P, Nabwey HA, Tlili I. Utilization of Hall current and ions slip effects for the dynamic simulation of peristalsis in a compliant channel. Alex Eng J. 2020;59:3609–22.10.1016/j.aej.2020.06.006Search in Google Scholar

[20] Imran N, Javed M, Sohail M, Farooq S, Qayyum M. Outcome of slip features on the peristaltic flow of a Rabinowitsch nanofluid in an asymmetric flexible channel. Multidiscipline Modeling Mater Struct. 2020;17:181–97.10.1108/MMMS-02-2020-0039Search in Google Scholar

[21] Imran N, Javed M, Sohail M, Tlili I. Utilization of modified Darcy’s law in peristalsis with a compliant channel: applications to thermal science. J Mater Res Technol. 2020;9(3):5619–29.10.1016/j.jmrt.2020.03.087Search in Google Scholar

[22] Imran N, Javed M, Sohail M, Thounthong P, Abdelmalek Z. Theoretical exploration of thermal transportation with chemical reactions for sutterby fluid model obeying peristaltic mechanism. J Mater Res Technol. 2020;9(4):7449–59.10.1016/j.jmrt.2020.04.071Search in Google Scholar

[23] He JH. Homotopy perturbation method: A new nonlinear analytical technique. Appl Math Comput. 2003;135(1):73–9.10.1016/S0096-3003(01)00312-5Search in Google Scholar

[24] He JH. Application of homotopy perturbation method to nonlinear wave equations. Chaos Solitons Fractals. 2005;26:695–700.10.1016/j.chaos.2005.03.006Search in Google Scholar

[25] Abbasbandy S. Homotopy perturbation method for quadratic Riccati differential equation and comparison with Adomian’s decomposition method. Appl Math Comput. 2006;172(1):485–90.10.1016/j.amc.2005.02.014Search in Google Scholar

[26] He JH. Homotopy perturbation method for solving boundary value problems. Phys Lett A. 2006;350(1–2):87–8.10.1016/j.physleta.2005.10.005Search in Google Scholar

[27] Yıldırım A. Solution of BVPs for fourth-order integro-differential equations by using homotopy perturbation method. Comput Math Appl. 2008;56(12):3175–80.10.1016/j.camwa.2008.07.020Search in Google Scholar

[28] Qayyum M, Khan H, Khan O. Slip analysis at fluid-solid interface in MHD squeezing flow of Casson fluid through porous medium. Results Phys. 2017;7:732–50.10.1016/j.rinp.2017.01.033Search in Google Scholar

[29] Yih CS. Proceedings of the Second US National Congress of Applied Mechanics. New York: American Society of Mechanical Engineers; 1955. p. 623Search in Google Scholar

[30] Landau LD. On the problem of turbulence. Dokl Akad Nauk USSR. 44:311.Search in Google Scholar

[31] Stuart JT. On the role of Reynolds stresses in stability theory. J Aero Sci. 1956;23(1):86–8.Search in Google Scholar

[32] Nakaya C. Equilibrium states of periodic waves on the fluid film down a vertical wall. J Phys Soc Jpn. 1974;36(3):921.10.1143/JPSJ.36.921Search in Google Scholar

[33] Lin SP. Finite amplitude side-band stability of a viscous film. J Fluid Mech. 1974;63(3):417–29.10.1017/S0022112074001704Search in Google Scholar

[34] Ahmad MMAI, Imran MA, Aleem M, Khan I. A comparative study and analysis of natural convection flow of MHD non-Newtonian fluid in the presence of heat source and first-order chemical reaction. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2019;137(5):1783–96.10.1007/s10973-019-08065-3Search in Google Scholar

[35] Ahmad M, Imran MA, Nazar M. Mathematical modeling of (Cu−Al2O3) water based Maxwell hybrid nanofluids with Caputo–Fabrizio fractional derivative. Adv Mech Eng. 2020;12(9):1687814020958841.10.1177/1687814020958841Search in Google Scholar

[36] Imran MA, Khan I, Ahmad M, Shah NA, Nazar M. Heat and mass transport of differential type fluid with non-integer order time-fractional Caputo derivatives. J Mol Liq. 2017;229:67–75.10.1016/j.molliq.2016.11.095Search in Google Scholar

[37] Ahmad M, Imran MA, Baleanu D, Alshomrani AS. Thermal analysis of magneto hydrodynamic viscous fluid with innovative fractional derivative. Therm Sci. 2020;24(Suppl. 1):351–9.10.2298/TSCI20S1351ASearch in Google Scholar

[38] Sohail M, Ali U, Al-Mdallal Q, Thounthong P, Sherif ESM, Alrabaiah H, et al. Theoretical and numerical investigation of entropy for the variable thermophysical characteristics of couple stress material: Applications to optimization. Alex Eng J. 2020;59:4365–75.10.1016/j.aej.2020.07.042Search in Google Scholar

[39] Ali Z, Zeeshan A, Bhatti MM, Hobiny A, Saeed T. Insight into the dynamics of Oldroyd-B fluid over an upper horizontal surface of a paraboloid of revolution subject to chemical reaction dependent on the first-order activation energy. Arab J Sci Eng. 2021;46:6039–48. 10.1007/s13369-020-05324-6.Search in Google Scholar

[40] Ali F, Sheikh NA, Khan I, Saqib M. Magnetic field effect on blood flow of Casson fluid in axisymmetric cylindrical tube: a fractional model. J Magnetism Magnetic Mater. 2017;423:327–36.10.1016/j.jmmm.2016.09.125Search in Google Scholar

[41] Tchier F, Inc M, Korpinar ZS, Baleanu D. Solutions of the time fractional reaction–diffusion equations with residual power series method. Adv Mech Eng. 2016;8(10):1687814016670867.10.1177/1687814016670867Search in Google Scholar

[42] Singh J, Kumar D, Hammouch Z, Atangana A. A fractional epidemiological model for computer viruses pertaining to a new fractional derivative. Appl Math Comput. 2018;316:504–15.10.1016/j.amc.2017.08.048Search in Google Scholar

[43] Faqihi F, Alharthy A, Alodat M, Asad D, Aletreby W, Kutsogiannis DJ, et al. Space-time fractional Rosenou–Haynam equation: Lie symmetry analysis, explicit solutions and conservation laws. Adv Differ Equ. 2018;46:506. 10.1186/s13662-018-1468-3.Search in Google Scholar

[44] Hashemi MS, Inc M, Parto-Haghighi M, Bayram M. On numerical solution of the time-fractional diffusion-wave equation with the fictitious time integration method. Eur Phys J Plus. 2019;134:488. 10.1140/epjp/i2019-12845-1.Search in Google Scholar

[45] Inc M, Korpinar Z, Almohsen B, Chu YM. Some numerical solutions of local fractional tricomi equation in fractal transonic flow. Alex Eng J. 2021;60(1):1147–53.10.1016/j.aej.2020.10.038Search in Google Scholar

[46] Arain MB, Bhatti MM, Zeeshan A, Alzahrani FS. Bioconvection Reiner–Rivlin nanofluid flow between rotating circular plates with induced magnetic effects. Act Energy Squeez Phenom Math. 2021;9(17):2139.10.3390/math9172139Search in Google Scholar

[47] Zhang L, Bhatti MM, Shahid A, Ellahi R, Bég OA, Sait SM. Nonlinear nanofluid fluid flow under the consequences of Lorentz forces and Arrhenius kinetics through a permeable surface: A robust spectral approach. J Taiwan Inst Chem Eng. 2021;11:16458.10.1016/j.jtice.2021.04.065Search in Google Scholar

[48] Akinyemi L, Rezazadeh H, Shi QH, Inc M, Khater MM, Ahmad H, et al. New optical solitons of perturbed nonlinear Schrödinger–Hirota equation with spatio-temporal dispersion. Results Phys. 2021;29:104656.10.1016/j.rinp.2021.104656Search in Google Scholar

[49] Ahmad I, Ahmad H, Inc M, Rezazadeh H, Akbar MA, Khater MM, et al. Solution of fractional-order Korteweg-de Vries and Burgers’ equations utilizing local meshless method. J Ocean Eng Sci. 2021.10.1016/j.joes.2021.08.014Search in Google Scholar

[50] Akinyemi L, Rezazadeh H, Yao SW, Akbar MA, Khater MM, Jhangeer A, et al. Nonlinear dispersion in parabolic law medium and its optical solitons. Results Phys. 2021;26:104411.10.1016/j.rinp.2021.104411Search in Google Scholar

[51] Ali U, Khan Z, Iqbal A, Sohail M, Abdullah FA. Compact implicit difference approximation for time-fractional diffusion-wave equation. Alex Eng J. 202110.1016/j.aej.2021.09.005Search in Google Scholar

[52] Sohail M, Nazir U, Bazighifan O, El-Nabulsi RA, Selim MM, Alrabaiah H, et al. Significant involvement of double diffusion theories on viscoelastic fluid comprising variable thermophysical properties. Micromach. 2021;12(8):951.10.3390/mi12080951Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[53] Wong HF, Sohail M, Siri Z, NF. Numerical solutions for heat transfer of an unsteady cavity with viscous heating. Comput Mater Continua. 2021;68(1):319–36.10.32604/cmc.2021.015710Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2021-05-04

Revised: 2021-10-30

Accepted: 2021-10-30

Published Online: 2021-11-26

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Articles in the same Issue

https://doi.org/10.1515/phys-2021-0081

Keywords for this article

magneto hydro dynamic; homotopy perturbation method; fractional differential equation; pseudo-plastic fluid

Creative Commons

BY 4.0