4.5 Article

A comparative study of convective fluid motion in rotating cavity via Atangana-Baleanu and Caputo-Fabrizio fractal-fractional differentiations

期刊

EUROPEAN PHYSICAL JOURNAL PLUS
卷 135, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1140/epjp/s13360-020-00136-x

关键词

-

资金

  1. Institute of Ground Water Studies, Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Sciences, University of the Free State, Bloemfontein, South Africa
  2. Mehran university of Engineering and Technology, Jamshoro, Pakistan

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this paper, a fractal-fractional mathematical model of convective fluid motion in rotating cavity is investigated inside the ellipsoid with inhomogeneous external heating. The fractal-fractional differential operators namely Caputo, Caputo-Fabrizio and Atangana-Baleanu D tau(epsilon 1,tau 1), D-tau(epsilon 2,tau 2) and D-tau(epsilon 3,tau 3), respectively, are used in the non-linear mathematical model of convective fluid motion in rotating cavity. The numerical algorithms have been generated in terms of newly presented fractal-fractional differential operators on the basis of Adams-Bashforth method to compute the approximate solutions explicitly. The equilibrium points and stability analysis of the fractal-fractional Atangana-Baleanu, Caputo-Fabrizio and Caputo differential operators in Caputo sense have been investigated for non-linear mathematical model of convective fluid motion in rotating cavity. The numerical solutions are simulated in three types of variations (i) presence of fractional parameter without fractal parameter, (ii) presence of fractal parameter without fractional parameter, and (iii) presence of fractal parameter as well as fractional parameter. The chaotic behavior of convective fluid motion in rotating cavity based on each fractal-fractional differential operator has been highlighted as (a) projection on the x-y plane, (b) projection on the x-z plane, (c) projection on the y-z plane and (d) projection on the xyz plane in three dimensions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据