2006
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijnonlinmec.2006.08.005
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Stagnation-point flow of upper-convected Maxwell fluids

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

12
69
1

Year Published

2013
2013
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 144 publications
(82 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
12
69
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The study on dynamics of upper-convected Maxwell fluid is extended in Hayat et al (2006) and reported that boundary layer thickness decreases by increasing the magnitude of MHD parameter, suction/injection velocity parameter and relaxation time parameter. In recent years, many researchers has investigated and reported the effect of some parameters on upper-convected Maxwell fluid flow (see Sadeghy et al (2006), Abbas et al (2008), Sadeghy et al (2009), Pop et al (2012, Motsa et al (2012), Mustafa et al (2012), Prasad et al (2013) and ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The study on dynamics of upper-convected Maxwell fluid is extended in Hayat et al (2006) and reported that boundary layer thickness decreases by increasing the magnitude of MHD parameter, suction/injection velocity parameter and relaxation time parameter. In recent years, many researchers has investigated and reported the effect of some parameters on upper-convected Maxwell fluid flow (see Sadeghy et al (2006), Abbas et al (2008), Sadeghy et al (2009), Pop et al (2012, Motsa et al (2012), Mustafa et al (2012), Prasad et al (2013) and ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This prediction is controversial to those reported for the Maxwell model used by Phan-Thien [1], Hayat et al [2,4], Abbas et al [3], and Nadeem et al [5]. It is further found that the papers by Sadeghy et al [6] and Kumari and Nath [7] considered different sign of elasticity term as used in Hayat et al [2,4], Abbas et al [3], and Nadeem et al [5]. It has to be mentioned here that the controversial and confusion over viscoelastic model, specifically flow retardation, and model approximation of the second-grade model has been discussed in detail by Dunn and Rajagopal [9].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 83%
“…On the other hand, Sadeghy et al [6] presented the theory and results for two-dimensional boundary layer stagnation-point flow of UCM fluids while Kumari and Nath [7] studied the steady state magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) mixed convection flow of UCM fluids near the stagnation-point. They found that there is no velocity overshoot in the UCM model as found by Beard and Walters [8] in second-grade fluids.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They derived local similarity solutions by four different approaches and concluded that velocity is a decreasing function of the local Deborah number. Sadeghy et al 3 also studied stagnation-point flow of upper-convected Maxwell fluid using Chebyshev pseudo-spectral collocation-point method. Kumari and Nath 4 used finite difference method to compute numerical solutions of the boundary value problem arising in mixed convection stagnation-point flow of Maxwell fluid.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%