Approximate solutions for MHD squeezing fluid flow by a novel method

Mustafa Inc; Ali Akgül

doi:10.1186/1687-2770-2014-18

Impact Factor 0.819

Research

Open Access

Approximate solutions for MHD squeezing fluid flow by a novel method

Mustafa Inc¹ and
Ali Akgül^{2, 3}Email author

Boundary Value Problems20142014:18

https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-2770-2014-18

Received: 5 October 2013

Accepted: 10 December 2013

Published: 16 January 2014

Abstract

In this paper, a steady axisymmetric MHD flow of two-dimensional incompressible fluids has been investigated. The reproducing kernel Hilbert space method (RKHSM) has been implemented to obtain a solution of the reduced fourth-order nonlinear boundary value problem. Numerical results have been compared with the results obtained by the Runge-Kutta method (RK-4) and optimal homotopy asymptotic method (OHAM).

MSC: 46E22, 35A24.

Keywords

reproducing kernel method series solutions squeezing fluid flow magnetohydrodynamics reproducing kernel space

1 Introduction

Squeezing flows have many applications in food industry, principally in chemical engineering [1–4]. Some practical examples of squeezing flow include polymer processing, compression and injection molding. Grimm [5] studied numerically the thin Newtonian liquids films being squeezed between two plates. Squeezing flow coupled with magnetic field is widely applied to bearing with liquid-metal lubrication [2, 6–8].

In this paper, we use RKHSM to study the squeezing MHD fluid flow between two infinite planar plates. This problem has been solved by RKHSM and for comparison it has been compared with the OHAM and numerically with the RK-4 by using Maple 16.

The RKHSM, which accurately computes the series solution, is of great interest to applied sciences. The method provides the solution in a rapidly convergent series with components that can be elegantly computed. The efficiency of the method was used by many authors to investigate several scientific applications. Geng and Cui [9] and Zhou et al. [10] applied the RKHSM to handle the second-order boundary value problems. Yao and Cui [11] and Wang et al. [12] investigated a class of singular boundary value problems by this method and the obtained results were good. Wang and Chao [13], Li and Cui [14], Zhou and Cui [15] independently employed the RKSHSM to variable-coefficient partial differential equations. Du and Cui [16] investigated the approximate solution of the forced Duffing equation with integral boundary conditions by combining the homotopy perturbation method and the RKM. Lv and Cui [17] presented a new algorithm to solve linear fifth-order boundary value problems. Cui and Du [18] obtained the representation of the exact solution for the nonlinear Volterra-Fredholm integral equations by using the RKHSM. Wu and Li [19] applied iterative RKHSM to obtain the analytical approximate solution of a nonlinear oscillator with discontinuities. For more details about RKHSM and the modified forms and its effectiveness, see [9–37] and the references therein.

The paper is organized as follows. We give the problem formulation in Section 2. Section 3 introduces several reproducing kernel spaces. A bounded linear operator is presented in Section 4. In Section 5, we provide the main results, the exact and approximate solutions. An iterative method is developed for the kind of problems in the reproducing kernel space. We prove that the approximate solution converges to the exact solution uniformly. Some numerical experiments are illustrated in Section 6. There are some conclusions in the last section.

2 Problem formulation

Consider a squeezing flow of an incompressible Newtonian fluid in the presence of a magnetic field of a constant density ρ and viscosity μ squeezed between two large planar parallel plates separated by a small distance 2H and the plates approaching each other with a low constant velocity V, as illustrated in Figure 1, and the flow can be assumed to quasi-steady [1–3, 39]. The Navier-Stokes equations [3, 4] governing such flow in the presence of magnetic field, when inertial terms are retained in the flow, are given as [38]

\nabla V \cdot u = 0

(2.1)

and

ρ [\frac{\partial u}{\partial t} + (u \cdot \nabla) u] = \nabla \cdot T + J \times B + ρ f,

(2.2)

where u is the velocity vector, ∇ denotes the material time derivative, T is the Cauchy stress tensor,

T = - p I + μ A_{1}

and

A_{1} = \nabla u + u^{T},

J is the electric current density, B is the total magnetic field and

B = B_{0} + b,

B_{0}

represents the imposed magnetic field and b denotes the induced magnetic field. In the absence of displacement currents, the modified Ohm law and Maxwell’s equations (see [40] and the references therein) are given by [38]

J = σ [E + u \times B]

(2.3)

and

div B = 0, \nabla \times B = μ_{m} J, curl E = \frac{\partial B}{\partial t},

(2.4)

in which σ is the electrical conductivity, E is the electric field and

μ_{m}

is the magnetic permeability.

Figure 1
**A steady squeezing axisymmetric fluid flow between two parallel plates** [38].

The following assumptions are needed [38].

(a)

The density ρ, magnetic permeability $μ_{m}$ and electric field conductivity σ are assumed to be constant throughout the flow field region.
(b)

The electrical conductivity σ of the fluid is considered to be finite.
(c)

Total magnetic field B is perpendicular to the velocity field V and the induced magnetic field b is negligible compared with the applied magnetic field $B_{0}$ so that the magnetic Reynolds number is small (see [40] and the references therein).
(d)

We assume a situation where no energy is added or extracted from the fluid by the electric field, which implies that there is no electric field present in the fluid flow region.

Under these assumptions, the magnetohydrodynamic force involved in Eq. (2.2) can be put into the form

J \times B = - σ B_{0}^{2} u .

(2.5)

An axisymmetric flow in cylindrical coordinates r, θ, z with z-axis perpendicular to plates and

z = \pm H

at the plates. Since we have axial symmetry, u is represented by

u = (u_{r} (r, z), 0, u_{z} (r, z)),

when body forces are negligible, Navier-Stokes Eqs. (2.1)-(2.2) in cylindrical coordinates, where there is no tangential velocity (

u_{θ} = 0

), are given as [38]

ρ (u_{r} \frac{\partial u_{r}}{\partial r} + u_{z} \frac{\partial u_{r}}{\partial z}) = - \frac{\partial p}{\partial r} + (\frac{\partial^{2} u_{r}}{\partial r^{2}} + \frac{1}{r} \frac{\partial u_{r}}{\partial r} - \frac{u_{r}}{r^{2}} + \frac{\partial^{2} u_{r}}{\partial z^{2}}) + σ B_{0}^{2} u

(2.6)

and

ρ (u_{z} \frac{\partial u_{z}}{\partial r} + u_{z} \frac{\partial u_{z}}{\partial z}) = - \frac{\partial p}{\partial r} + (\frac{\partial^{2} u_{z}}{\partial r^{2}} + \frac{1}{r} \frac{\partial u_{z}}{\partial r} + \frac{\partial^{2} u_{z}}{\partial z^{2}}),

(2.7)

where p is the pressure, and the equation of continuity is given by [38]

\frac{1}{r} \frac{\partial}{\partial r} (r u_{r}) + \frac{\partial u_{z}}{\partial z} = 0 .

(2.8)

The boundary conditions require

\begin{aligned} u_{r} = 0, u_{z} = - V at z = H, \\ \frac{\partial u_{r}}{\partial z} = 0, u_{z} = 0 at z = 0 . \end{aligned}

(2.9)

Let us introduce the axisymmetric Stokes stream function Ψ as

u_{r} = \frac{1}{r} \frac{\partial Ψ}{\partial z}, u_{z} = - \frac{1}{r} \frac{\partial Ψ}{\partial r} .

(2.10)

The continuity equation is satisfied using Eq. (2.10). Substituting Eqs. (2.3)-(2.5) and Eq. (2.10) into Eqs. (2.7)-(2.8), we obtain

- \frac{ρ}{r^{2}} \frac{\partial Ψ}{\partial r} E^{2} Ψ = - \frac{\partial p}{\partial r} + \frac{μ}{r} \frac{\partial E^{2} Ψ}{\partial z} - \frac{σ B_{0}^{2}}{r} \frac{\partial Ψ}{\partial z}

(2.11)

and

- \frac{ρ}{r^{2}} \frac{\partial Ψ}{\partial z} E^{2} Ψ = - \frac{\partial p}{\partial z} + \frac{μ}{r} \frac{\partial E^{2} Ψ}{\partial r} .

(2.12)

Eliminating the pressure from Eqs. (2.11) and (2.12) by the integrability condition, we get the compatibility equation as [38]

- ρ [\frac{\partial (Ψ, \frac{E^{2} Ψ}{r^{2}})}{\partial (r, z)}] = \frac{μ}{r} E^{2} Ψ - \frac{σ B_{0}^{2}}{r} \frac{\partial^{2 Ψ}}{\partial z^{2}},

(2.13)

where

E^{2} = \frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial r^{2}} - \frac{1}{r} \frac{\partial}{\partial r} + \frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial z^{2}} .

The stream function can be expressed as [1, 3]

Ψ (r, z) = r^{2} F (z) .

(2.14)

In view of Eq. (2.14), the compatibility equation (2.13) and the boundary conditions (2.9) take the form

F^{(i v)} (z) - \frac{σ B_{0}^{2}}{r} F^{″} (z) + 2 \frac{ρ}{μ} F (z) F^{‴} (z) = 0,

(2.15)

subject to

\begin{aligned} F (0) = 0, F^{″} (0) = 0, \\ F (H) = \frac{V}{2}, F^{'} (H) = 0 . \end{aligned}

(2.16)

Non-dimensional parameters are given as [38]

F^{*} = 2 \frac{F}{V}, z^{*} = \frac{z}{H}, Re = \frac{ρ H V}{μ}, m = B_{0} H \sqrt{\frac{σ}{μ}} .

For simplicity omitting the ∗, the boundary value problem (2.15)-(2.16) becomes [38]

F^{(i v)} (z) - m^{2} F^{″} (z) + Re F (z) F^{‴} (z) = 0,

(2.17)

with the boundary conditions

\begin{aligned} F (0) = 0, F^{″} (0) = 0, \\ F (1) = 1, F^{'} (1) = 0, \end{aligned}

(2.18)

where Re is the Reynolds number and m is the Hartmann number.

3 Reproducing kernel spaces

In this section, we define some useful reproducing kernel spaces.

Definition 3.1 (Reproducing kernel)

Let E be a nonempty abstract set. A function

K : E \times E ⟶ C

is a reproducing kernel of the Hilbert space H if and only if

{\begin{cases} \forall t \in E, K (\cdot, t) \in H, \\ \forall t \in E, \forall φ \in H, 〈 φ (\cdot), K (\cdot, t) 〉 = φ (t) . \end{cases}

(3.1)

The last condition is called ‘the reproducing property’: the value of the function φ at the point t is reproduced by the inner product of φ with $K (\cdot, t)$ .

Definition 3.2 We define the space

W_{2}^{5} [0, 1]

by

W_{2}^{5} [0, 1] = {\begin{cases} u | u, u^{'}, u^{″}, u^{‴}, u^{(4)} are absolutely continuous in [0, 1], \\ u^{(5)} \in L^{2} [0, 1], x \in [0, 1], u (0) = u (1) = u^{'} (1) = u^{″} (0) = 0 \end{cases}} .

The fifth derivative of u exists almost everywhere since

u^{(4)}

is absolutely continuous. The inner product and the norm in

W_{2}^{5} [0, 1]

are defined respectively by

{〈 u, v 〉}_{W_{2}^{5}} = \sum_{i = 0}^{4} u^{(i)} (0) v^{(i)} (0) + \int_{0}^{1} u^{(5)} (x) v^{(5)} (x) d x, u, v \in W_{2}^{5} [0, 1]

and

{∥ u ∥}_{W_{2}^{5}} = \sqrt{{〈 u, u 〉}_{_{W_{2}^{5}}}}, u \in W_{2}^{5} [0, 1] .

The space

W_{2}^{5} [0, 1]

is a reproducing kernel space, i.e., for each fixed

y \in [0, 1]

and any

u \in W_{2}^{5} [0, 1]

, there exists a function

R_{y}

such that

u = {〈 u, R_{y} 〉}_{W_{2}^{5}} .

Definition 3.3 We define the space

W_{2}^{4} [0, 1]

by

W_{2}^{4} [0, 1] = {\begin{cases} u | u, u^{'}, u^{″}, u^{‴} are absolutely continuous in [0, 1], \\ u^{(4)} \in L^{2} [0, 1], x \in [0, 1] \end{cases}} .

The fourth derivative of u exists almost everywhere since

u^{(3)}

is absolutely continuous. The inner product and the norm in

W_{2}^{4} [0, 1]

are defined respectively by

{〈 u, v 〉}_{W_{2}^{4}} = \sum_{i = 0}^{3} u^{(i)} (0) v^{(i)} (0) + \int_{0}^{1} u^{(4)} (x) v^{(4)} (x) d x, u, v \in W_{2}^{4} [0, 1]

and

{∥ u ∥}_{W_{2}^{4}} = \sqrt{{〈 u, u 〉}_{_{W_{2}^{4}}}}, u \in W_{2}^{4} [0, 1] .

The space

W_{2}^{4} [0, 1]

is a reproducing kernel space, i.e., for each fixed

y \in [0, 1]

and any

u \in W_{2}^{4} [0, 1]

, there exists a function

r_{y}

such that

u = {〈 u, r_{y} 〉}_{W_{2}^{4}} .

Theorem 3.1 The space

W_{2}^{5} [0, 1]

is a reproducing kernel Hilbert space whose reproducing kernel function is given by

R_{y} (x) = {\begin{cases} \sum_{i = 1}^{10} c_{i} (y) x^{i - 1}, & x \leq y, \\ \sum_{i = 1}^{10} d_{i} (y) x^{i - 1}, & x > y, \end{cases}

where $c_{i} (y)$ and $d_{i} (y)$ can be obtained easily by using Maple 16 and the proof of Theorem 3.1 is given in Appendix.

Remark 3.1 The reproducing kernel function

r_{y}

of

W_{2}^{4} [0, 1]

is given as

r_{y} (x) = {\begin{cases} 1 + x y + \frac{1}{4} y^{2} x^{2} + \frac{1}{36} y^{3} x^{3} + \frac{1}{144} y^{3} x^{4} - \frac{1}{240} y^{2} x^{5} + \frac{1}{720} y x^{6} - \frac{1}{5, 040} x^{7}, & x \leq y, \\ 1 + y x + \frac{1}{4} y^{2} x^{2} + \frac{1}{36} y^{3} x^{3} + \frac{1}{144} x^{3} y^{4} - \frac{1}{240} x^{2} y^{5} + \frac{1}{720} x y^{6} - \frac{1}{5, 040} y^{7}, & x > y . \end{cases}

This can be proved easily as the proof of Theorem 3.1.

4 Bounded linear operator in $W_{2}^{5} [0, 1]$

In this section, the solution of Eq. (2.17) is given in the reproducing kernel space $W_{2}^{5} [0, 1]$ .

On defining the linear operator

L : W_{2}^{5} [0, 1] \to W_{2}^{4} [0, 1]

as

L u = u^{(4)} (x) + Re \frac{e^{x}}{e} (x^{3} - 4 x^{2} + 4 x) u^{(3)} (x) - m^{2} u^{″} (x) + Re \frac{e^{x}}{e} (x^{3} + 5 x^{2} - 2 x - 6) u (x) .

Model problem (2.17)-(2.18) changes the following problem:

{\begin{cases} L u = M (x, u, u^{(3)}), x \in [0, 1], \\ u (0) = 0, u (1) = 0, u^{'} (1) = 0, u^{″} (0) = 0, \end{cases}

(4.1)

where

F (x) = u (x) + \frac{e^{x}}{e} (x^{3} - 4 x^{2} + 4 x)

and

\begin{array}{rcl} M (x, u, u^{(3)}) & = & - Re u^{(3)} (x) u (x) - Re {(\frac{e^{x}}{e})}^{2} (x^{3} - 4 x^{2} + 4 x) (x^{3} + 5 x^{2} - 2 x - 6) \\ - \frac{e^{x}}{e} (x^{3} + 8 x^{2} + 8 x - 2) + m^{2} \frac{e^{x}}{e} (x^{3} + 2 x^{2} - 6 x) . \end{array}

Theorem 4.1 The operator L defined by (4.1) is a bounded linear operator.

Proof We only need to prove

{∥ L u ∥}_{W_{2}^{4}}^{2} \leq P {∥ L u ∥}_{W_{2}^{5}}^{2},

where P is a positive constant. By Definition 3.3, we have

{∥ u ∥}_{W_{2}^{4}}^{2} = {〈 u, u 〉}_{W_{2}^{4}} = \sum_{i = 0}^{3} {[u^{(i)} (0)]}^{2} + \int_{0}^{1} {[u^{(4)} (x)]}^{2} d x, u \in W_{2}^{4} [0, 1],

and

\begin{array}{rcl} {∥ L u ∥}_{W_{2}^{4}}^{2} = {〈 L u, L u 〉}_{W_{2}^{4}} & = & {[(L u) (0)]}^{2} + {[{(L u)}^{'} (0)]}^{2} + {[{(L u)}^{″} (0)]}^{2} \\ + {[{(L u)}^{(3)} (0)]}^{2} + \int_{0}^{1} {[{(L u)}^{(4)} (x)]}^{2} d x . \end{array}

By the reproducing property, we have

u (x) = {〈 u, R_{x} 〉}_{W_{2}^{5}},

and

\begin{matrix} (L u) (x) = {〈 u, (L R_{x}) 〉}_{W_{2}^{5}}, {(L u)}^{'} (x) = {〈 u, {(L R_{x})}^{'} 〉}_{W_{2}^{5}}, \\ {(L u)}^{″} (x) = {〈 u, {(L R_{x})}^{″} 〉}_{W_{2}^{5}}, {(L u)}^{(3)} (x) = {〈 u, {(L R_{x})}^{(3)} 〉}_{W_{2}^{5}}, \\ {(L u)}^{(4)} (x) = {〈 u, {(L R_{x})}^{(4)} 〉}_{W_{2}^{5}} . \end{matrix}

Therefore, by the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, we get

\begin{matrix} | (L u) (x) | \leq {∥ u ∥}_{W_{2}^{5}} {∥ L R_{x} ∥}_{W_{2}^{5}} = a_{1} {∥ u ∥}_{W_{2}^{5}} (where a_{1} > 0 is a positive constant), \\ | {(L u)}^{'} (x) | \leq {∥ u ∥}_{W_{2}^{5}} {∥ {(L R_{x})}^{'} ∥}_{W_{2}^{5}} = a_{2} {∥ u ∥}_{W_{2}^{5}} (where a_{2} > 0 is a positive constant), \\ | {(L u)}^{″} (x) | \leq {∥ u ∥}_{W_{2}^{5}} {∥ {(L R_{x})}^{″} ∥}_{W_{2}^{5}} = a_{3} {∥ u ∥}_{W_{2}^{5}} (where a_{3} > 0 is a positive constant), \\ | {(L u)}^{(3)} (x) | \leq {∥ u ∥}_{W_{2}^{5}} {∥ {(L R_{x})}^{(3)} ∥}_{W_{2}^{5}} = a_{4} {∥ u ∥}_{W_{2}^{5}} (where a_{4} > 0 is a positive constant). \end{matrix}

Thus

{[(L u) (0)]}^{2} + {[{(L u)}^{'} (0)]}^{2} + {[{(L u)}^{″} (0)]}^{2} + {[{(L u)}^{(3)} (0)]}^{2} \leq (a_{1}^{2} + a_{2}^{2} + a_{3}^{2} + a_{4}^{2}) {∥ u ∥}_{W_{2}^{5}}^{2} .

Since

{(L u)}^{(4)} = {〈 u, {(L R_{x})}^{(4)} 〉}_{W_{2}^{5}},

then

| {(L u)}^{(4)} | \leq {∥ u ∥}_{W_{2}^{5}} {∥ {(L R_{x})}^{(4)} ∥}_{W_{2}^{5}} = a_{5} {∥ u ∥}_{W_{2}^{4}} (where a_{5} > 0 is a positive constant).

Therefore, we have

{[{(L u)}^{(4)}]}^{2} \leq a_{5}^{2} {∥ u ∥}_{W_{2}^{5}}^{2}

and

\int_{0}^{1} {[{(L u)}^{(4)} (x)]}^{2} d x \leq a_{5}^{2} {∥ u ∥}_{W_{2}^{5}}^{2},

that is,

\begin{array}{rcl} {∥ L u ∥}_{W_{2}^{4}}^{2} & = & {[(L u) (0)]}^{2} + {[{(L u)}^{'} (0)]}^{2} + {[{(L u)}^{″} (0)]}^{2} + {[{(L u)}^{(3)} (0)]}^{2} + \int_{0}^{1} {[{(L u)}^{(4)} (x)]}^{2} d x \\ \leq & (a_{1}^{2} + a_{2}^{2} + a_{3}^{2} + a_{4}^{2} + a_{5}^{2}) {∥ u ∥}_{W_{2}^{5}}^{2} = P {∥ u ∥}_{W_{2}^{4}}^{2}, \end{array}

where $P = (a_{1}^{2} + a_{2}^{2} + a_{3}^{2} + a_{4}^{2} + a_{5}^{2}) > 0$ is a positive constant. This completes the proof. □

5 Analysis of the solution of (2.17)-(2.18)

Let

{x_{i}}_{i = 1}^{\infty}

be any dense set in

[0, 1]

and

Ψ_{x} (y) = L^{*} r_{x} (y)

, where

L^{*}

is the adjoint operator of L and

r_{x}

is given by Remark 3.1. Furthermore

Ψ_{i} (x) \overset{def}{=} Ψ_{x_{i}} (x) = L^{*} r_{x_{i}} (x) .

Lemma 5.1 ${Ψ_{i} (x)}_{i = 1}^{\infty}$ is a complete system of $W_{2}^{5} [0, 1]$ .

Proof For

u \in W_{2}^{5} [0, 1]

, let

〈 u, Ψ_{i} 〉 = 0 (i = 1, 2, \dots),

that is,

〈 u, L^{*} r_{x_{i}} 〉 = (L u) (x_{i}) = 0 .

Note that ${x_{i}}_{i = 1}^{\infty}$ is the dense set in $[0, 1]$ . Therefore $(L u) (x) = 0$ . Assume that (4.1) has a unique solution. Then L is one-to-one on $W_{2}^{5} [0, 1]$ and thus $u (x) = 0$ . This completes the proof. □

Lemma 5.2 The following formula holds:

Ψ_{i} (x) = (L_{η} R_{x} (η)) (x_{i}),

where the subscript η of the operator $L_{η}$ indicates that the operator L applies to a function of η.

Proof

\begin{array}{rcl} Ψ_{i} (x) & = & {〈 Ψ_{i} (ξ), R_{x} (ξ) 〉}_{W_{2}^{5} [0, 1]} \\ = & {〈 L^{*} r_{x_{i}} (ξ), R_{x} (ξ) 〉}_{W_{2}^{5} [0, 1]} \\ = & {〈 (r_{x_{i}}) (ξ), (L_{η} R_{x} (η)) (ξ) 〉}_{W_{2}^{4} [0, 1]} \\ = & (L_{η} R_{x} (η)) (x_{i}) . \end{array}

This completes the proof. □

Remark 5.1 The orthonormal system

{{\bar{Ψ}}_{i} (x)}_{i = 1}^{\infty}

of

W_{2}^{5} [0, 1]

can be derived from the Gram-Schmidt orthogonalization process of

{Ψ_{i} (x)}_{i = 1}^{\infty}

as

{\bar{Ψ}}_{i} (x) = \sum_{k = 1}^{i} β_{i k} Ψ_{k} (x) (β_{i i} > 0, i = 1, 2, \dots),

(5.1)

where $β_{i k}$ are orthogonal coefficients.

In the following, we give the representation of the exact solution of Eq. (2.17) in the reproducing kernel space $W_{2}^{5} [0, 1]$ .

Theorem 5.1 If u is the exact solution of (4.1), then

u = \sum_{i = 1}^{\infty} \sum_{k = 1}^{i} β_{i k} M (x_{k}, u (x_{k}), u^{(3)} (x_{k})) {\bar{Ψ}}_{i} (x),

where ${x_{i}}_{i = 1}^{\infty}$ is a dense set in $[0, 1]$ .

Proof From (5.1) and the uniqueness of solution of (4.1), we have

\begin{array}{rcl} u & = & \sum_{i = 1}^{\infty} {〈 u, {\bar{Ψ}}_{i} 〉}_{W_{2}^{5}} {\bar{Ψ}}_{i} = \sum_{i = 1}^{\infty} \sum_{k = 1}^{i} β_{i k} {〈 u, L^{*} r_{x_{k}} 〉}_{W_{2}^{5}} {\bar{Ψ}}_{i} \\ = & \sum_{i = 1}^{\infty} \sum_{k = 1}^{i} β_{i k} {〈 L u, r_{x_{k}} 〉}_{W_{2}^{4}} {\bar{Ψ}}_{i} = \sum_{i = 1}^{\infty} \sum_{k = 1}^{i} β_{i k} {〈 M (x, u, u^{(3)}), r_{x_{k}} 〉}_{W_{2}^{4}} {\bar{Ψ}}_{i} \\ = & \sum_{i = 1}^{\infty} \sum_{k = 1}^{i} β_{i k} M (x_{k}, u (x_{k}), u^{(3)} (x_{k})) {\bar{Ψ}}_{i} (x) . \end{array}

This completes the proof. □

Now the approximate solution

u_{n}

can be obtained by truncating the n-term of the exact solution u as

u_{n} = \sum_{i = 1}^{n} \sum_{k = 1}^{i} β_{i k} M (x_{k}, u (x_{k}), u^{(3)} (x_{k})) {\bar{Ψ}}_{i} (x) .

Lemma 5.3 ([30])

Assume that u is the solution of (4.1) and $r_{n}$ is the error between the approximate solution $u_{n}$ and the exact solution u. Then the error sequence $r_{n}$ is monotone decreasing in the sense of ${∥ \cdot ∥}_{W_{2}^{5}}$ and ${∥ r_{n} (x) ∥}_{W_{2}^{5}} \to 0$ .

6 Numerical results

In this section, comparisons of results are made through different Reynolds numbers Re and magnetic field effect m. All computations are performed by Maple 16. Figure 5.7 shows comparisons of

F (z)

for a fixed Reynolds number with increasing magnetic field effect

m = 1, 3, 8, 20

. From this figure, the velocity decreases due to an increase in m. Figure 5.8 shows comparisons of

F (z)

for a fixed magnetic field

m = 1

with increasing Reynolds numbers

Re = 1, 4, 10

. It is observed that much increase in Reynolds numbers affects the results. The RKHSM does not require discretization of the variables, i.e., time and space, it is not affected by computation round of errors and one is not faced with necessity of large computer memory and time. The accuracy of the RKHSM for the MHD squeezing fluid flow is controllable and absolute errors are small with present choice of x (see Tables 1-6 and Figures 2-7). The numerical results we obtained justify the advantage of this methodology. Generally it is not possible to find the exact solution of these problems.

Figure 2
**Comparison RKHSM, OHAM and RK-4 solutions for** $m = Re = 1$ .

Figure 3
**Comparison RKHSM, OHAM and RK-4 solutions for** $m = 3$ **and** $Re = 1$ .

Figure 4
**AE and RE for** $m = 1$ **and** $Re = 4$ .

Figure 5
**AE and RE for** $m = 1$ **and** $Re = 10$ .

Figure 6
**Comparison of squeezing flow for a fixed Reynolds number** $Re = 1$ **and increasing magnetic field effect** $m = 1, 3, 8, 20$ .

Figure 7
**Comparison of squeezing flow for a fixed magnetic field effect** $m = 1$ **and increasing Reynolds numbers** $Re = 1, 4, 10$ .

Table 1

Numerical results at $m = 1$ and $Re = 1$

x	OHAM	Numerical solution (RK-4)	Approximate solution RKHSM	Absolute error	Relative error	Time (s)
0.1	0.150265	0.150294	0.15029400074386619072	7.43 × 10⁻¹⁰	4.94 × 10⁻⁹	2.948
0.2	0.297424	0.297481	0.29748099943286204844	5.67 × 10⁻¹⁰	1.9 × 10⁻⁹	2.980
0.3	0.438387	0.438467	0.43846699936146542481	6.38 × 10⁻¹⁰	1.45 × 10⁻⁹	2.870
0.4	0.570093	0.570189	0.57018899983086605298	1.69 × 10⁻¹⁰	2.96 × 10⁻¹⁰	2.792
0.5	0.68952	0.689624	0.68962399932753349664	6.72 × 10⁻¹⁰	9.75 × 10⁻¹⁰	2.824
0.6	0.793695	0.793796	0.79379600052975674440	5.29 × 10⁻¹⁰	6.67 × 10⁻¹⁰	2.902
0.7	0.879695	0.879779	0.87977900034152532706	3.41 × 10⁻¹⁰	3.88 × 10⁻¹⁰	2.964
0.8	0.944641	0.944696	0.94469600021478585921	2.14 × 10⁻¹⁰	2.27 × 10⁻¹⁰	2.808
0.9	0.985687	0.985707	0.98570699945336089741	5.46 × 10⁻¹⁰	5.54 × 10⁻¹⁰	2.761
1.0	1.0	1.0	1.0	0.0	0.0	2.902

Table 2

Numerical results at $m = 3$ and $Re = 1$

x	OHAM	Numerical solution (RK-4)	Approximate solution RKHSM	Absolute error	Relative error	Time (s)
0.1	0.13709	0.137044	0.13704399924397146430	7.56 × 10⁻¹⁰	5.51 × 10⁻⁹	3.261
0.2	0.272583	0.272494	0.27249400041809657591	4.18 × 10⁻¹⁰	1.53 × 10⁻⁹	3.542
0.3	0.404759	0.404637	0.40463699937791012358	6.22 × 10⁻¹⁰	1.53 × 10⁻⁹	2.949
0.4	0.531649	0.531508	0.53150799980699743080	1.93 × 10⁻¹⁰	3.63 × 10⁻¹⁰	3.541
0.5	0.650894	0.650756	0.65075599905912100256	9.4 × 10⁻¹⁰	1.44 × 10⁻⁹	3.089
0.6	0.759591	0.759478	0.75947799979255971384	2.07 × 10⁻¹⁰	2.73 × 10⁻¹⁰	2.996
0.7	0.854106	0.854035	0.85403499924057783299	7.59 × 10⁻¹⁰	8.89 × 10⁻¹⁰	3.026
0.8	0.929845	0.929817	0.92981700082221438640	8.22 × 10⁻¹⁰	8.84 × 10⁻¹⁰	7.582
0.9	0.980966	0.980963	0.98096299961587653980	3.84 × 10⁻¹⁰	3.91 × 10⁻¹⁰	3.291
1.0	1.0	1.0	1.0	0.0	0.0	2.902

Table 3

Numerical results at $m = 8$ and $Re = 1$

x	OHAM	Numerical solution (RK-4)	Approximate solution RKHSM	Absolute error	Relative error	Time (s)
0.1	0.11507	0.114976	0.11497599095960418967	9.04 × 10⁻⁹	7.86 × 10⁻⁸	4.290
0.2	0.230068	0.229882	0.22988199268533318687	7.31 × 10⁻⁹	3.18 × 10⁻⁸	4.134
0.3	0.344866	0.344604	0.34460400584434350472	5.84 × 10⁻⁹	1.69 × 10⁻⁸	4.477
0.4	0.459205	0.458904	0.45890399132822355411	8.67 × 10⁻⁹	1.88 × 10⁻⁸	4.275
0.5	0.572545	0.572276	0.5722759999680104400	3.19 × 10⁻¹¹	5.58 × 10⁻¹¹	3.931
0.6	0.683769	0.683628	0.68362799155831029523	8.44 × 10⁻⁹	1.23 × 10⁻⁸	4.556
0.7	0.790543	0.790607	0.79060700783664672119	7.83 × 10⁻⁹	9.91 × 10⁻⁹	4.461
0.8	0.887936	0.888173	0.88817300466724146312	4.66 × 10⁻⁹	5.25 × 10⁻⁹	3.885
0.9	0.965381	0.965578	0.96557800220185786369	2.2 × 10⁻⁹	2.28 × 10⁻⁹	5.007
1.0	1.0	1.0	1.0	0.0	0.0	2.902

Table 4

Numerical results at $m = 20$ and $Re = 1$

x	OHAM	Numerical solution (RK-4)	Approximate solution RKHSM	Absolute error	Relative error	Time (s)
0.1	0.105312	0.105391	0.10539098947593257979	1.05 × 10⁻⁸	9.98 × 10⁻⁸	4.134
0.2	0.210625	0.210782	0.2107819933190829	6.68 × 10⁻⁹	3.16 × 10⁻⁸	5.101
0.3	0.315938	0.316173	0.3161729190893567630	8.09 × 10⁻⁸	2.55 × 10⁻⁷	3.010
0.4	0.421249	0.421563	0.4215629919618786430	8.03 × 10⁻⁹	1.9 × 10⁻⁸	3.198
0.5	0.526551	0.526952	0.5269519479728988	5.2 × 10⁻⁸	9.87 × 10⁻⁸	3.042
0.6	0.631824	0.632324	0.632323981769674315	1.82 × 10⁻⁸	2.88 × 10⁻⁸	3.074
0.7	0.736971	0.737586	0.7375860570172070642	5.7 × 10⁻⁸	7.73 × 10⁻⁸	3.089
0.8	0.841352	0.842051	0.84205103495023398982	3.49 × 10⁻⁸	4.15 × 10⁻⁸	3.073
0.9	0.94035	0.940861	0.94086101815219431313	1.81 × 10⁻⁸	1.92 × 10⁻⁸	3.135
1.0	1.0	1.0	1.0	0.0	0.0	2.902

Table 5

Numerical results at $m = 1$ and $Re = 4$

x	OHAM	Numerical solution (RK-4)	Approximate solution RKHSM	Absolute error	Relative error	Time (s)
0.1	0.156218	0.158104	0.15810400012535311729	1.25 × 10⁻¹⁰	7.92 × 10⁻¹⁰	5.304
0.2	0.308363	0.311962	0.31196200057873017887	5.78 × 10⁻¹⁰	1.85 × 10⁻⁹	7.332
0.3	0.452557	0.457539	0.45753900003164153289	3.16 × 10⁻¹¹	6.91 × 10⁻¹¹	5.913
0.4	0.585287	0.591193	0.59119300033029000468	3.3 × 10⁻¹⁰	5.58 × 10⁻¹⁰	6.272
0.5	0.703518	0.709771	0.70977100026331200670	2.63 × 10⁻¹⁰	3.7 × 10⁻¹⁰	5.757
0.6	0.804726	0.810642	0.81064200064720692438	6.47 × 10⁻¹⁰	7.98 × 10⁻¹⁰	6.256
0.7	0.886838	0.891666	0.89166599939606220359	6.03 × 10⁻¹⁰	6.03 × 10⁻¹⁰	6.396
0.8	0.948051	0.95112	0.95112000044608660232	4.46 × 10⁻¹⁰	4.69 × 10⁻¹⁰	5.101
0.9	0.986529	0.987612	0.98761199979328069240	2.06 × 10⁻¹⁰	2.09 × 10⁻¹⁰	5.616
1.0	1.0	1.0	1.0	0.0	0.0	2.902

Table 6

Numerical results at $m = 1$ and $Re = 10$

x	OHAM	Numerical solution (RK-4)	Approximate solution RKHSM	Absolute error	Relative error	Time (s)
0.1	0.175911	0.167616	0.1676160001397322991	1.39 × 10⁻¹⁰	8.33 × 10⁻¹⁰	5.569
0.2	0.344336	0.329031	0.32903100221406728329	2.21 × 10⁻⁹	6.72 × 10⁻⁹	6.365
0.3	0.498671	0.478907	0.47890699791462877619	2.08 × 10⁻⁹	4.35 × 10⁻⁹	7.378
0.4	0.633941	0.613252	0.61325199550552162812	4.49 × 10⁻⁹	7.32 × 10⁻⁹	7.254
0.5	0.747277	0.729428	0.72942799845508679063	1.54 × 10⁻⁹	2.11 × 10⁻⁹	6.271
0.6	0.838004	0.825843	0.82584300690485584332	6.9 × 10⁻⁹	8.36 × 10⁻⁹	7.425
0.7	0.907244	0.901576	0.90157600840425340903	8.4 × 10⁻⁹	9.32 × 10⁻⁹	6.162
0.8	0.956954	0.901576	0.90157518382496567601	8.16 × 10⁻⁷	9.05 × 10⁻⁷	7.410
0.9	0.988387	0.988978	0.98897799997420425356	2.57 × 10⁻¹¹	2.6 × 10⁻¹¹	7.910
1.0	1.0	1.0	1.0	0.0	0.0	2.902

7 Conclusion

In this paper, we introduced an algorithm for solving the MHD squeezing fluid flow. We applied a new powerful method RKHSM to the reduced nonlinear boundary value problem. The approximate solution obtained by the present method is uniformly convergent. Clearly, the series solution methodology can be applied to much more complicated nonlinear differential equations and boundary value problems. However, if the problem becomes nonlinear, then the RKHSM does not require discretization or perturbation and it does not make closure approximation. Results of numerical examples show that the present method is an accurate and reliable analytical method for this problem.

Appendix

Proof of Theorem 3.1 Let

u \in W_{2}^{5} [0, 1]

. By Definition 3.2 we have

{〈 u, R_{y} 〉}_{_{W_{2}^{5}}} = \sum_{i = 0}^{4} u^{(i)} (0) R_{y}^{(i)} (0) + \int_{0}^{1} u^{(5)} (x) R_{y}^{(5)} (x) d x .

(A.1)

Through several integrations by parts for (A.1), we have

\begin{array}{rcl} {〈 u, R_{y} 〉}_{_{W_{2}^{5}}} & = & \sum_{i = 0}^{4} u^{(i)} (0) [R_{y}^{(i)} (0) - {(- 1)}^{(4 - i)} R_{y}^{(9 - i)} (0)] \\ + \sum_{i = 0}^{4} {(- 1)}^{(4 - i)} u^{(i)} (1) R_{y}^{(9 - i)} (1) - \int_{0}^{1} u (x) R_{y}^{(10)} (x) d x . \end{array}

(A.2)

Note the property of the reproducing kernel

{〈 u, R_{y} 〉}_{W_{2}^{5}} = u (y) .

Now, if

{\begin{cases} R_{y}^{^{'}} (0) + R_{y}^{(8)} (0) = 0, \\ R_{y}^{(3)} (0) + R_{y}^{(6)} (0) = 0, \\ R_{y}^{(4)} (0) - R_{y}^{(5)} (0) = 0, \\ R_{y}^{(5)} (1) = 0, \\ R_{y}^{(6)} (1) = 0, \\ R_{y}^{(7)} (1) = 0, \end{cases}

(A.3)

then (A.2) implies that

R_{y}^{(10)} (x) = - δ (x - y),

when

x \neq y

R_{y}^{(10)} (x) = 0,

and therefore

R_{y} (x) = {\begin{cases} \sum_{i = 1}^{10} c_{i} (y) x^{i - 1}, & x \leq y, \\ \sum_{i = 1}^{10} d_{i} (y) x^{i - 1}, & x > y . \end{cases}

Since

R_{y}^{(10)} (x) = δ (x - y),

we have

R_{y^{+}}^{(k)} (y) = R_{y^{-}}^{(k)} (y), k = 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8,

(A.4)

and

R_{y^{+}}^{(9)} (y) - R_{y^{-}}^{(9)} (y) = - 1 .

(A.5)

Since

R_{y} (x) \in W_{2}^{5} [0, 1]

, it follows that

R_{y} (0) = 0, R_{y} (1) = 0, R_{y}^{'} (1) = 0, R_{y}^{''} (0) = 0 .

(A.6)

From (A.3)-(A.6), the unknown coefficients $c_{i} (y)$ and $d_{i} (y)$ ( $i = 1, 2, \dots, 12$ ) can be obtained. This completes the proof. □

Declarations

Acknowledgements

We presented this paper in the International Symposium on Biomathematics and Ecology Education Research in 2013. We would like to thank the organizers of this conference and the reviewers for their kind and helpful comments on this paper. Ali Akgül gratefully acknowledge that this paper was partially supported by the Dicle University and the Firat University. This paper is a part of PhD thesis of Ali Akgül.

Authors' original submitted files for images

Below are the links to the authors’ original submitted files for images.

13661_2013_511_MOESM1_ESM.jpg Authors’ original file for figure 1

13661_2013_511_MOESM2_ESM.jpg Authors’ original file for figure 2

13661_2013_511_MOESM3_ESM.jpg Authors’ original file for figure 3

13661_2013_511_MOESM4_ESM.jpg Authors’ original file for figure 4

13661_2013_511_MOESM5_ESM.jpg Authors’ original file for figure 5

13661_2013_511_MOESM6_ESM.jpg Authors’ original file for figure 6

13661_2013_511_MOESM7_ESM.jpg Authors’ original file for figure 7

13661_2013_511_MOESM8_ESM.pdf Authors’ original file for figure 8

13661_2013_511_MOESM9_ESM.pdf Authors’ original file for figure 9

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)

Department of Mathematics, Science Faculty, Fırat University

(2)

Department of Mathematics, Education Faculty, Dicle University

(3)

Department of Mathematics, Texas A&M University-Kingsville

References

Papanastasiou TC, Georgiou GC, Alexandrou AN: Viscous Fluid Flow. CRC Press, Boca Raton; 1994.Google Scholar
Stefa Hughes WF, Elco RA: Magnetohydrodynamic lubrication flow between parallel rotating disks. J. Fluid Mech. 1962, 13: 21-32. 10.1017/S0022112062000464MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Ghori QK, Ahmed M, Siddiqui AM: Application of homotopy perturbation method to squeezing flow of a Newtonian fluid. Int. J. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul. 2007, 8: 179-184.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
Ran XJ, Zhu QY, Li Y: An explicit series solution of the squeezing flow between two infinite plates by means of the homotopy analysis method. Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul. 2009, 14: 119-132. 10.1016/j.cnsns.2007.07.012MATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Grimm RG: Squeezing flows of Newtonian liquid films an analysis include the fluid inertia. Appl. Sci. Res. 1976, 32: 149-166. 10.1007/BF00383711View ArticleGoogle Scholar
Kamiyama S: Inertia effects in MHD hydrostatic thrust bearing. J. Lubr. Technol. 1969, 91: 589-596. 10.1115/1.3555005View ArticleGoogle Scholar
Hamza EA: The magnetohydrodynamic squeeze film. J. Tribol. 1988, 110: 375-377. 10.1115/1.3261636View ArticleGoogle Scholar
Bhattacharya S, Pal A: Unsteady MHD squeezing flow between two parallel rotating discs. Mech. Res. Commun. 1997, 24: 615-623. 10.1016/S0093-6413(97)00079-7View ArticleGoogle Scholar
Geng F, Cui M: Solving a nonlinear system of second order boundary value problems. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2007, 327: 1167-1181. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2006.05.011MATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Zhou Y, Lin Y, Cui M: An efficient computational method for second order boundary value problems of nonlinear differential equations. Appl. Math. Comput. 2007, 194: 357-365.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Yao H, Cui M: A new algorithm for a class of singular boundary value problems. Appl. Math. Comput. 2007, 186: 1183-1191. 10.1016/j.amc.2006.07.157MATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Wang W, Cui M, Han B: A new method for solving a class of singular two-point boundary value problems. Appl. Math. Comput. 2008, 206: 721-727. 10.1016/j.amc.2008.09.019MATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Wang YL, Chao L: Using reproducing kernel for solving a class of partial differential equation with variable-coefficients. Appl. Math. Mech. 2008, 29: 129-137. 10.1007/s10483-008-0115-yMATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Li F, Cui M: A best approximation for the solution of one-dimensional variable-coefficient Burgers’ equation. Numer. Methods Partial Differ. Equ. 2009, 25: 1353-1365. 10.1002/num.20428MATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Zhou S, Cui M: Approximate solution for a variable-coefficient semilinear heat equation with nonlocal boundary conditions. Int. J. Comput. Math. 2009, 86: 2248-2258. 10.1080/00207160903229881MATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Du J, Cui M: Solving the forced Duffing equations with integral boundary conditions in the reproducing kernel space. Int. J. Comput. Math. 2010, 87: 2088-2100. 10.1080/00207160802610843MATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Lv X, Cui M: An efficient computational method for linear fifth-order two-point boundary value problems. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 2010, 234: 1551-1558. 10.1016/j.cam.2010.02.036MATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Du J, Cui M: Constructive proof of existence for a class of fourth-order nonlinear BVPs. Comput. Math. Appl. 2010, 59: 903-911. 10.1016/j.camwa.2009.10.003MATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Wu BY, Li XY: Iterative reproducing kernel method for nonlinear oscillator with discontinuity. Appl. Math. Lett. 2010, 23: 1301-1304. 10.1016/j.aml.2010.06.018MATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Cui M, Lin Y: Nonlinear Numerical Analysis in the Reproducing Kernel Spaces. Nova Science Publishers, New York; 2009.Google Scholar
Lü X, Cui M: Analytic solutions to a class of nonlinear infinite-delay-differential equations. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2008, 343: 724-732. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2008.01.101MATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Jiang W, Cui M: Constructive proof for existence of nonlinear two-point boundary value problems. Appl. Math. Comput. 2009, 215: 1937-1948. 10.1016/j.amc.2009.07.044MATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Cui M, Du H: Representation of exact solution for the nonlinear Volterra-Fredholm integral equations. Appl. Math. Comput. 2006, 182: 1795-1802. 10.1016/j.amc.2006.06.016MATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Jiang W, Lin Y: Representation of exact solution for the time-fractional telegraph equation in the reproducing kernel space. Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul. 2011, 16: 3639-3645. 10.1016/j.cnsns.2010.12.019MATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Lin Y, Cui M: A numerical solution to nonlinear multi-point boundary-value problems in the reproducing kernel space. Math. Methods Appl. Sci. 2011, 34: 44-47. 10.1002/mma.1327MATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Mohammadi M, Mokhtari R: Solving the generalized regularized long wave equation on the basis of a reproducing kernel space. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 2011, 235: 4003-4014. 10.1016/j.cam.2011.02.012MATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Wu BY, Li XY: A new algorithm for a class of linear nonlocal boundary value problems based on the reproducing kernel method. Appl. Math. Lett. 2011, 24: 156-159. 10.1016/j.aml.2010.08.036MATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Yao H, Lin Y: New algorithm for solving a nonlinear hyperbolic telegraph equation with an integral condition. Int. J. Numer. Methods Biomed. Eng. 2011, 27: 1558-1568. 10.1002/cnm.1376MATHView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Inc M, Akgül A: The reproducing kernel Hilbert space method for solving Troesch’s problem. J. Assoc. Arab Univ. Basic. Appl. Sci. 2013, 14: 19-27.Google Scholar
Inc, M, Akgül, A, Geng, F: Reproducing kernel Hilbert space method for solving Bratu’s problem. Bul. Malays. Math. Sci. Soc. (in press)Google Scholar
Inc M, Akgül A, Kilicman A: Explicit solution of telegraph equation based on reproducing kernel method. J. Funct. Spaces Appl. 2012., 2012: Article ID 984682Google Scholar
Inc M, Akgül A, Kilicman A: A new application of the reproducing kernel Hilbert space method to solve MHD Jeffery-Hamel flows problem in non-parallel walls. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2013., 2013: Article ID 239454Google Scholar
Inc M, Akgül A, Kilicman A: On solving KdV equation using reproducing kernel Hilbert space method. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2013., 2013: Article ID 578942Google Scholar
Inc M, Akgül A, Kilicman A: Numerical solutions of the second-order one-dimensional telegraph equation based on reproducing kernel Hilbert space method. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2013., 2013: Article ID 768963Google Scholar
Akram G, Rehman HU: Numerical solution of eighth order boundary value problems in reproducing Kernel space. Numer. Algorithms 2013, 62(3):527-540. 10.1007/s11075-012-9608-4MATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Wenyan W, Bo H, Masahiro Y: Inverse heat problem of determining time-dependent source parameter in reproducing kernel space. Nonlinear Anal., Real World Appl. 2013, 14(1):875-887. 10.1016/j.nonrwa.2012.08.009MATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Mokhtari R, İsfahani FT, Mohammadi M: Reproducing kernel method for solving nonlinear differential-difference equations. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2012., 2012: Article ID 514103Google Scholar
Islam S, Ullah M, Zaman G, Idrees M: Approximate solutions to MHD squeezing fluid flow. J. Appl. Math. Inform. 2011, 29(5-6):1081-1096.MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Idrees M, Islam S, Haq S, Islam S: Application of the optimal homotopy asymptotic method to squeezing flow. Comput. Math. Appl. 2010, 59: 3858-3866. 10.1016/j.camwa.2010.04.023MATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Mohyuddin MR, Gotz T: Resonance behavior of viscoelastic fluid in Poiseuille flow in the presence of a transversal magnetic field. Int. J. Numer. Methods Fluids 2005, 49: 837-847. 10.1002/fld.1026MATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar

Copyright

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Approximate solutions for MHD squeezing fluid flow by a novel method

Abstract

Keywords

1 Introduction

2 Problem formulation

3 Reproducing kernel spaces

4 Bounded linear operator in W 2 5 [ 0 , 1 ]

5 Analysis of the solution of (2.17)-(2.18)

6 Numerical results

7 Conclusion

Appendix

Declarations

Acknowledgements

Authors’ Affiliations

References

Copyright

4 Bounded linear operator in $W_{2}^{5} [0, 1]$