Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T12:22:22.593Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Stokes flow singularity at the junction between impermeable and porous walls

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 October 2012

Ludwig C. Nitsche  and
Prashanth Parthasarathi
Ludwig C. Nitsche*
Affiliation:
Department of Chemical Engineering, The University of Illinois at Chicago, 810 South Clinton Street, Chicago, IL 60607, USA
Prashanth Parthasarathi
Affiliation:
Department of Chemical Engineering, The University of Illinois at Chicago, 810 South Clinton Street, Chicago, IL 60607, USA
*
†Email address for correspondence: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

For two-dimensional, creeping flow in a half-plane, we consider the singularity that arises at an abrupt transition in permeability from zero to a finite value along the wall, where the pressure is coupled to the seepage flux by Darcy’s law. This problem represents the junction between the impermeable wall of the inflow section and the porous membrane further downstream in a spiral-wound desalination module. On a macroscopic, outer length scale the singularity appears like a jump discontinuity in normal velocity, characterized by a non-integrable $1/ r$ divergence of the pressure. This far-field solution is imposed as the boundary condition along a semicircular arc of dimensionless radius 30 (referred to the microscopic, inner length scale). A preliminary numerical solution (using a least-squares variant of the method of fundamental solutions) indicates a continuous normal velocity along the wall coupled with a weaker $1/ \sqrt{r} $ singularity in the pressure. However, inconsistencies in the numerically imposed outer boundary condition indicate a very slow radial decay. We undertake asymptotic analysis to: (i) understand the radial decay behaviour; and (ii) find a more accurate far-field solution to impose as the outer boundary condition. Similarity solutions (involving a stream function that varies like some power of $r$) are insufficient to satisfy all boundary conditions along the wall, so we generalize these by introducing linear and quadratic terms in $\log r$. By iterating on the wall boundary conditions (analogous to the method of reflections), the outer asymptotic series is developed through second order. We then use a hybrid computational scheme in which the numerics are iteratively patched to the outer asymptotics, thereby determining two free coefficients in the latter. We also derive an inner asymptotic series and fit its free coefficient to the numerics at $r= 0. 01$. This enables evaluation of the singular flow field in the limit as $r\ensuremath{\rightarrow} 0$. Finally, a uniformly valid fit is obtained with analytical formulas. The singular flow field for a solid–porous abutment and the general Stokes flow solutions obtained in the asymptotic analysis are programmed in Fortran for future use as local basis functions in computational schemes. Numerics are required for the intermediate-$r$ regime because the inner and outer asymptotic expansions do not extend far enough toward each other to enable rigorous asymptotic matching. The logarithmic correction terms explain why the leading far-field solution (used in the preliminary numerics) was insufficient even at very large distances.

JFM classification

Low-Reynolds-number flows: Boundary integral methods Boundary Layers: Boundary layer control Low-Reynolds-number flows: Porous media
Type
Papers
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 713 , 25 December 2012 , pp. 183 - 215
Copyright
©2012 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aleksidze, M. A. 1966 On approximate solutions of a certain mixed boundary value problem in the theory of harmonic functions. Differ. Equ. 2, 515–518.Google Scholar
Alves, C. J. S. 2009 On the choice of source points in the method of fundamental solutions. Engng Anal. Bound. Elem. 33, 1348–1361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alves, C. J. S. & Silvestre, A. L. 2004 Density results using Stokeslets and a method of fundamental solutions for the Stokes equations. Engng Anal. Bound. Elem. 28, 1245–1252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Asghar, S., Mushtaq, M. & Hayat, T. 2010 Flow in a slowly deforming channel with weak permeability: an analytical approach. Nonlinear Anal. Real World Applics 11, 555–561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beavers, G. S. & Joseph, D. D. 1967 Boundary conditions at a naturally permeable wall. J. Fluid Mech. 30, 197–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beavers, G. S., Sparrow, E. M. & Masha, B. A. 1974 Boundary condition at a porous surface which bounds a fluid flow. AIChE J. 20, 596–597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berman, A. S. 1953 Laminar flow in channels with porous walls. J. Appl. Phys. 24, 1232–1235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Betyaev, S. K. 2002 Fluid flow within permeable boundaries. Fluid Dyn. 37, 695–704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bogomolny, A. 1985 Fundamental solutions method for elliptic boundary value problems. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 22, 644–669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borsi, I., Farina, A. & Fasano, A. 2011 Incompressible laminar flow through hollow fibers: a general study by means of a two-scale approach. Z. Angew. Math. Phys. 62, 681–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brady, J. F. 1984 Flow development in a porous channel and tube. Phys. Fluids 27, 1061–1067.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruns, F. W. 1979 Numerical calculation on creeping flow in a closed cylindrical cavity. Comput. Fluids 7, 257–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bujurke, N. M., Madalli, V. S. & Mulimani, B. G. 1998 Long series analysis of laminar flow through parallel and uniformly porous walls of different permeability. Comput. Meth. Appl. Mech. Engng 160, 39–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burgess, G. & Mahajerin, E. 1984 Rotational fluid flow using a least squares collocation technique. Comput. Fluids 4, 311–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chellam, S. & Liu, M. 2006 Effect of slip on existence, uniqueness, and behavior of similarity solutions for steady incompressible laminar flow in porous tubes and channels. Phys. Fluids 18, 083601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chellam, S., Wiesner, M. R. & Dawson, C. 1992 Slip at a uniformly porous boundary: effect on fluid flow and mass transfer. J. Engng Maths 26, 481–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chellam, S., Wiesner, M. R. & Dawson, C. 1995 Laminar flow in porous ducts. Rev. Chem. Engng 11, 53–99.Google Scholar
Chen, N., Gunzburger, M. & Wang, X. 2010 Asymptotic analysis of the differences between the Stokes–Darcy system with different interface conditions and the Stokes–Brinkman system. J. Math. Anal. Applics 368, 658–676.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Damak, K, Ayadi, A, Zeghmati, B & Schmitz, P 2004a Concentration polarisation in tubular membranes – a numerical approach. Desalination 171, 139–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Damak, K, Ayadi, A, Zeghmati, B & Schmitz, P 2004b A new Navier–Stokes and Darcy’s law combined model for fluid flow in crossflow filtration tubular membranes. Desalination 161, 67–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dassios, G. & Hadjinicolaou, M. 2002 Multipole expansions in Stokes flow. Intl J. Engng Sci. 40, 223–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dauenhauer, E. C. & Majdalani, J. 2003 Exact self-similarity solution of the Navier–Stokes equations for a porous channel with orthogonally moving walls. Phys. Fluids 15, 1485–1495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Da̧broś, T. 1985 A singularity method for calculating hydrodynamic forces and particle velocities in low-Reynolds-number flows. J. Fluid Mech. 156, 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dempsey, J. P. 1995 Power-logarithmic stress singularities at bi-material corners and interface cracks. J. Adhes. Sci. Technol. 9, 253–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dempsey, J. P. & Sinclair, G. B. 1979 On the stress singularities in the plane elasticity of the composite wedge. J. Elast. 9, 373–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dempsey, J. P. & Sinclair, G. B. 1981 On the singular behaviour at the vertex of a bi-material wedge. J. Elast. 11, 317–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deng, C. & Martinez, D. M. 2005 Viscous flow in a channel partially filled with a porous medium and with wall suction. Chem. Engng Sci. 60, 329–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fairweather, G. & Karageorghis, A. 1998 The method of fundamental solutions for elliptic boundary value problems. Adv. Comput. Maths 9, 69–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferro, S. & Gnavi, G. 2000 Spatial stability of similarity solutions for viscous flows in channels with porous walls. Phys. Fluids 12, 797–802.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Floryan, J. M. & Czechowski, L. 1995 On the numerical treatment of corner singularity in the vorticity field. J. Comput. Phys. 118, 222–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galowin, L. S., Fletcher, L. S. & DeSantis, M. J. 1974 Investigation of laminar flow in a porous pipe with variable wall suction. AIAA J. 12, 1585–1589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geraldes, V., Semião, V. & de Pinho, M. N. 2002a The effect of the ladder-type spacers configuration in NF spiral-wound modules on the concentration boundary layers disruption. Desalination 146, 187–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geraldes, V., Semiao, V. & de Pinho, M. N. 2002b The effect on mass transfer of momentum and concentration boundary layers at the entrance region of a slit with a nanofiltration membrane wall. Chem. Engng Sci. 57, 735–748.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geraldes, V., Semião, V. & de Pinho, M. N. 2002c Flow management in nanofiltration spiral wound modules with ladder-type spacers. J. Membr. Sci. 203, 87–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gluckman, M. J., Pfeffer, R. & Weinbaum, S. 1971 A new technique for treating multiparticle slow viscous flow: axisymmetric flow past spheres and spheroids. J. Fluid Mech. 50, 705–740.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gupta, B. K. & Levy, E. K. 1976 Symmetrical laminar channel flow with wall suction. Trans. ASME: J. Fluids Engng 98, 469–474.Google Scholar
Gupta, M. M., Manohar, R. P. & Noble, B. 1981 Nature of viscous flows near sharp corners. Comput. Fluids 9, 379–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gupte, S. K. & Advani, S. G. 1997 Flow near the permeable boundary of a porous medium: an experimental investigation using LDA. Exp. Fluids 22, 408–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haldenwang, P. 2007 Laminar flow in a two-dimensional plane channel with local pressure-dependent crossflow. J. Fluid Mech. 593, 463–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamza, E. A. 1999 Suction and injection effects on a similar flow between parallel plates. J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 32, 656–663.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Han, P. S. & Olson, M. D. 1987 An adaptive boundary element method. Intl J. Numer. Meth. Engng 24, 1187–1202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hancock, C., Lewis, E. & Moffatt, H. K. 1981 Effects of inertia in forced corner flows. J. Fluid Mech. 112, 315–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Happel, J. & Brenner, H. 1991 Low Reynolds Number Hydrodynamics: With Special Applications to Particulate Media. Kluwer.Google Scholar
Harper, J. F. & Wake, G. C. 1983 Stokes flow between parallel plates due to a transversely moving end wall. IMA J. Appl. Maths 30, 141–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawa, T. & Rusak, Z. 2002 Numerical-asymptotic expansion matching for computing a viscous flow around a sharp expansion corner. Theor. Comput. Fluid Dyn. 15, 265–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hills, C. P. & Moffatt, H. K. 2000 Rotary honing: a variant of the Taylor paint-scraper problem. J. Fluid Mech. 418, 119–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hwang, T.-W. & Wang, C.-A. 1992 On multiple solutions for Berman’s problem. Proc. R. Soc. Edin. 121A, 219–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ingham, D. B. & Kelmanson, M. A. 1984 Boundary Integral Equation Analyses of Singular, Potential, and Biharmonic Problems, Lecture Notes in Engineering , vol. 7. Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, I. P. 1973 Low Reynolds number flow past a porous spherical shell. Math. Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. 73, 231–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, A. S. 2007 Permeate flux inflection due to concentration polarization in crossflow membrane filtration: a novel analytic approach. Eur. Phys. J. E 24, 331–341.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kim, S. & Karrila, S. J. 2005 Microhydrodynamics: Principles and Selected Applications. Dover.Google Scholar
King, J. R. & Cox, S. M. 2005 Self-similar ‘stagnation point’ boundary layer flows with suction or injection. Stud. Appl. Maths 115, 73–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kołodziej, J. A. & Kleiber, M. 1989 Boundary collocation method vs FEM for some harmonic 2-d problems. Comput. Struct. 33, 155–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kostoglou, M. & Karabelas, A. J. 2008 On the structure of the single-phase flow field in hollow fiber membrane modules during filtration. J. Membr. Sci. 322, 128–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kupradze, V. D. 1964 A method for the approximate solution of limiting problems in mathematical physics. USSR Comput. Maths Math. Phys. 4, 199–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kupradze, V. D. & Aleksidze, M. A. 1964 The method of functional equations for the approximate solution of certain boundary value problems. USSR Comput. Maths Math. Phys. 4, 82–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larson, R. E. & Higdon, J. J. L. 1986 Microscopic flow near the surface of two-dimensional porous media. Part 1. Axial flow. J. Fluid Mech. 166, 449–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larson, R. E. & Higdon, J. J. L. 1987 Microscopic flow near the surface of two-dimensional porous media. Part 2. Transverse flow. J. Fluid Mech. 178, 119–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, Z. L. & Wang, Ch. 2010 Particular solutions of a two-dimensional infinite wedge for various boundary conditions with weak singularity. Trans. ASME: J. Appl. Mech. 77, 011004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, Q. & Prosperetti, A. 2011 Pressure-driven flow in a channel with porous walls. J. Fluid Mech. 679, 77–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lu, C. 1997 On the asymptotic solution of laminar channel flow with large suction. SIAM J. Math. Anal. 28, 1113–1134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Majdalani, J., Zhou, C. & Dawson, C. A. 2002 Two-dimensional viscous flow between slowly expanding or contracting walls with weak permeability. J. Biomech. 35, 1399–1403.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mathon, R. & Johnston, R. L. 1977 The approximate solution of elliptic boundary-value problems by fundamental solutions. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 14, 638–650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mellis, R., Gill, W. N. & Belfort, G. 1993 Fluid dynamics in a tubular membrane: theory and experiment. Chem. Engng Commun. 122, 103–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miranda, J. M. & Campos, J. B. L. M. 2001 An improved numerical scheme to study mass transfer over a separation membrane. J. Membr. Sci. 188, 49–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moffatt, H. K. 1964a Viscous and resistive eddies near a sharp corner. J. Fluid Mech. 18, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moffatt, H. K. 1964b Viscous eddies near a sharp corner. Arch. Mech. Stosowanej 2, 365–372.Google Scholar
Moffatt, H. K. & Duffy, B. R. 1980 Local similarity solutions and their limitations. J. Fluid Mech. 96, 299–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neale, G. & Nader, W. 1974 Practical significance of Brinkman’s extension of Darcy’s law: coupled parallel flows within a channel and a bounding porous medium. Can. J. Chem. Engng 52, 475–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nield, D. A. 1983 The boundary correction for the Rayleigh–Darcy problem: limitations of the Brinkman equation. J. Fluid Mech. 128, 37–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nield, D. A. 2009 The Beavers–Joseph boundary condition and related matters: a historical and critical note. Transp. Porous Med. 78, 537–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nitsche, L. C. & Brenner, H. 1990 Hydrodynamics of particulate motion in sinusoidal pores via a singularity method. AIChE J. 36, 1403–1419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nitsche, L. C. & Zhuge, S. 1995 Hydrodynamics and selectivity of antipolarization dialysis. Chem. Engng Sci. 50, 2731–2746.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pak, A., Mohammadi, T., Hosseinalipour, S. M. & Allahdini, V. 2008 CFD modeling of porous membranes. Desalination 222, 482–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pan, F. & Acrivos, A. 1967 Steady flows in rectangular cavities. J. Fluid Mech. 28, 643–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parthasarathi, P. 2008 Asymptotic and particle methods in nonlinear transport phenomena: membrane separations and drop dynamics. PhD thesis, The University of Illinois at Chicago.Google Scholar
Patil, S. K. R. & Ng, T. T. 2010 Control of separation using spanwise periodic porosity. AIAA J. 48, 174–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Pinho, M. N., Semião, V. & Geraldes, V. 2002 Integrated modelling of transport processes in fluid/nanofiltration membrane systems. J. Membr. Sci. 206, 189–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pozrikidis, C. 1992 Boundary Integral and Singularity Methods for Linearized Viscous Flow. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pozrikidis, C. 2001 Shear flow over a particulate or fibrous plate. J. Engng Maths 39, 3–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pozrikidis, C. 2005 Effect of membrane thickness on the slip and drift velocity in parallel shear flow. J. Fluids Struct. 20, 177–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pozrikidis, C. 2010 Stokes flow through a permeable tube. Arch. Appl. Mech. 80, 323–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raghunathan, S. & Cooper, R. K. 2000 Passive boundary layer control with slots in short diffusers. Trans. ASME: J. Fluids Engng 122, 177–179.Google Scholar
Raghunathan, S., McIlwain, S. T. & Mabey, D. G. 1991 Wide angle diffusers with passive boundary-layer control. Aeronaut. J. 95, 28–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, W. A. 1976 The existence of multiple solutions for the laminar flow in a uniformly porous channel with suction at both walls. J. Engng Maths 10, 23–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saavedra, I. & Power, H. 2003 Multipole fast algorithm for the least-squares approach of the method of fundamental solutions for three-dimensional harmonic problems. Numer. Meth. Partial Differ. Equ. 19, 828–845.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saavedra, I. & Power, H. 2004 Adaptive refinement scheme for the least-squares approach of the method of fundamental solution for three-dimensional harmonic problems. Engng Anal. Bound. Elem. 28, 1123–1133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saffman, P. G. 1971 On the boundary condition at the surface of a porous medium. Stud. Appl. Maths 50, 93–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sahraoui, M. & Kaviany, M. 1992 Slip and no-slip velocity boundary conditions at interface of porous, plain media. Intl J. Heat Mass Transfer 35, 927–943.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmitz, P. & Prat, M. 1995 3-d laminar stationary flow over a porous surface with suction: description at pore level. AIChE J. 41, 2212–2226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapeev, A. V. & Lin, P. 2009 An asymptotic fitting finite element method with exponential mesh refinement for accurate computation of corner eddies in viscous flows. SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 31, 1874–1900.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sherwood, T. K., Brian, P. L. T., Fisher, R. E. & Dresner, L. 1965 Salt concentration at phase boundaries in desalination by reverse osmosis. I&EC Fundam. 4, 113–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shi, J.-M., Breuer, M. & Durst, F. 2004 A combined analytical-numerical method for treating corner singularities in viscous flow predictions. Intl J. Numer. Meth. Fluids 45, 659–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shih, K.-G. 1987 On the existence of solutions of an equation arising in the theory of laminar flow in a uniformly porous channel with injection. SIAM J. Appl. Maths 47, 526–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sinclair, G. B. 2010 On the pressure and stress singularities induced by steady flows of a pair of nonmiscible, incompressible, viscous fluids in contact with a wall. Acta Mech. Sin. 26, 669–673.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sinclair, G. B., Chi, X. & Shih, T. I.-P. 2009 On the pressure and stress singularities induced by steady flows of incompressible viscous fluids. Acta Mech. Sin. 25, 451–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh, R. & Laurence, R. L. 1979a Influence of slip velocity at a membrane surface on ultrafiltration performance – I. Channel flow system. Intl J. Heat Mass Transfer 22, 721–729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh, R. & Laurence, R. L. 1979b Influence of slip velocity at a membrane surface on ultrafiltration performance – II. Tube flow system. Intl J. Heat Mass Transfer 22, 731–737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skalak, F. M. & Wang, C.-Y. 1978 On the nonunique solutions of laminar flow through a porous tube or channel. SIAM J. Appl. Maths 34, 535–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stampouloglou, I. H. & Theotokoglou, E. E. 2010 Additional separated-variable solutions of the biharmonic equation in polar coordinates. Trans ASME: J. Appl. Mech. 77, 021003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, G. 1956 Fluid flow in regions bounded by porous surfaces. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A. 234, 456–475.Google Scholar
Taylor, G. I. 1960 Similarity solutions of hydrodynamic problems. In Aeronaut. Astronaut. (Durand Anniv. Vol.), pp. 21–28. Pergmon.Google Scholar
Taylor, G. I. 1962 On scraping viscous fluid from a plane surface. Reprinted in The Scientic Papers of Sir Geoffrey Ingram Taylor, vol. IV (ed. G. K. Batchelor), pp. 410–413. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Taylor, C. L., Banks, W. H. H., Zaturska, M. B. & Drazin, P. G. 1991 Three-dimensional flow in a porous channel. Q. J. Mech. Appl. Maths 44, 105–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Terrill, R. M. 1964 Laminar flow in a uniformly porous channel. Aeronaut. Q. 15, 299–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weissberg, H. L. 1959 Laminar flow in the entrance region of a porous pipe. Phys. Fluids 2, 510–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yan, Z.-Y., Weinbaum, S., Ganatos, P. & Pfeffer, R. 1987 The three-dimensional hydrodynamic interaction of a finite sphere with a circular orifice at low Reynolds number. J. Fluid Mech. 174, 39–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yeh, H. M. & Cheng, T. W. 1999 Analysis of the slip effect on the permeate flux in membrane ultrafiltration. J. Membr. Sci. 154, 41–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yuan, S. W. & Finkelstein, A. B. 1956 Laminar pipe flow with injection and suction through a porous wall. Trans. ASME 78, 719–724.Google Scholar
Yucel, N. & Turkoglu, H. 1995 Numerical analysis of fluid flow and mass transfer in a channel with a porous bottom wall. Intl J. Numer. Meth. Fluids 21, 391–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zaturska, M. B. & Banks, W. H. H. 1995 Suction-driven flow in a porous pipe. Z. Angew. Math. Mech. 75, 21–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zaturska, M. B., Drazin, P. G. & Banks, W. H. H. 1988 On the flow of a viscous fluid driven along a channel by suction at porous walls. Fluid Dyn. Res. 4, 151–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zheng, L., Zhao, N. & Zhang, X. 2007 Asymptotic solutions for laminar flow in a channel with uniformly accelerating rigid porous walls. J. Univ. Sci. Technol. Beijing 14, 405–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Nitsche et al. supplementary material

Supplementary data

Download Nitsche et al. supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 186.3 KB