1] Similarity solution: Consider a fluid moving in a pipe with a velocity profile shown below as the lower plate is dragged

along the z axis;

vz = 0
z

vz =

This fluid has a velocity, vz, which is a function of both time and space expressed as;

vz 2vz =V . t x 2
It is desired to solve the PD to show the velocity profile of the fluid with respect to time and position in the pipe! "fter analytical transformation from PD to an #D , the PD was expressed in terms on new independent and dependent variable such as f and respectively! $ith this, the problem can be solved by bvp%c! d2 f df + 2.. =0 2 d d $ith boundary condition; f =1 at = 0 and at = which can be any number

f =0

y1 = f dy1 df = = y2 dx d

d 2 y1 d 2 f dy = = 2 2 dx d dx dy 2 + 2.x. y 2 = 0 dx

dy 2 = 2.x. y2 dx dy1 = y2 dx

&&&&&&&&&&& e'uation (

&&&&&&&&&&& e'uation )

m&files* clc solinit+bvpinit,-.*.!.(*/0,-1 /02; sol+bvp%c,3as4%fun,3as4%bc,solinit2; sol!x5 sol!y5 plot,sol!x,sol!y,(,*22 xlabel,5n52;ylabel,5f52; &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& function dydx+as4%fun,x,y2 dydx+ -y,)2;&)6x6y,)20; &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& function res+as4%bc,ya,yb2 res+-ya,(2&(;yb,(20; 7igure (!(
1.2

0.8

0.6 f 0.4 0.2 0 -0.2

0.5

1.5

2.5 n

3.5

4.5

7igure (!)

0.2

-0.2

-0.4 df/dn -0.6 -0.8 -1 -1.2

0.5

1.5

2.5 n

3.5

4.5

To express the result in terms of vz by x and t, we first assume values associated with the model fluid! 8et us consider the fluid to be ethanol;

x 2. v . t

$here

viscosity and x and t is the variable and time variables respectively! kg 8et us assume the viscosity to be v =1.2cP =1.2 x10 3 m. min $here 9 is the velocity of the plate while v z = velocity of the fluid moving m&files* clc solinit+bvpinit,-.*(*1.0,-1 /02; sol+bvp%c,3as4%fun,3as4%bc,solinit2; close all :assume a value of viscosity and velocity of plane moving past the fluid v+(!)e&1; :assume viscosity 9+;; :velocity of plate :&&&&&&&&& f+-0; eta+-0; for i+(*(*).; t+-(*)*%.0; for w+(*(*).; <+-.!)/*.!)/*/0; y+-0; x,w2+,<,w22=(.; eta,i,w2+,x,w2=,)6,s'rt,v226,s'rt,t,i22222; y+deval,sol,eta,i,w22; f,i,w2+y,(,(2; end end eta(+eta,*,*25

v=

f(+f,*,*25 vz+f!69 x figure hold on for s+(*).; plot,x,vz,s,*22; end xlabel,5space variable, x52;ylabel,5velocity,vz52; figure hold on for s+(*).; plot,t,vz,*,s22; end xlabel,5time52;ylabel,5velocity,vz52; figure surf,x,t,vz2 zlabel,5velocity,vz52;xlabel,5space,x52;ylabel,5time,t52; &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& 7igure (!1 This figure shows the progression of movement of the fluid when the lower plate ,space variable2 is dragged along the x axis with velocity 9 as time changes! "t x+., the value of vz is at maximum while at x+, , vz will approach zero at that location, both at all values of t > .! The red curve indicates the velocity profile of the fluid along the x axis at t + (! This satisfies the boundary condition stated above!
8 7 6 5 velocity,vz 4 3 2 1 0 -1

t >0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2 0.25 0.3 space variable,x

0.35

0.4

0.45

0.5

7igure (!% "s the lower plate is dragged at a value of x+ , the value of vz as t increases will approach zero at a value of x! This phenomena can be seen on figure (!/

8 7 6 5 velocity,vz 4 3 2 1 0 -1

X=0

X
0 5 10 15 20 time,t 25 30

35 40

7igure (!/

8 6 velocity,vz 4 2 0 -2 40 30 20 10 time,t 0 0 0.2 0.1 space,z 0.4 0.3 0.5

2] Diffusion and Adsorption in an idealized pore: Consider two PD ?s to represent the diffusion and adsorption in an idealized pore!

c 2 c = D. 2 [ ka.(1 f ) kd . f t x

f = .[ ka.(1 f ) kd . f t
$here

c+dimensionless concentration of adsorbate in the fluid within the pore f+fraction of pore covered by the adosrbate x+dimensionless spatial coordinate @a+rate of adsorption, constant at ( @d+rate of desorption D and beta are constants + (

7or . A x A ( ; t > .; BC: "t x+. ; c+ ( for t > .; c "t x+( ; = 0 for t > .; x IC: C,x,.2+. ; f,x,.2+. for . > x > ( $here D+ +@a+( Bolve when; ka a! = 0.1 kd ka b! =1 kd ka c! = 10 kd and explain the effect of relative rate of adsorption vs! desorption! &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& Identifying terms vs! the PD template;

C1 =1; C 2 =1 m =0 C f 1 = D. x f f 2 = 0. x S1 = [ka.(1 f ) kd . f ] S 2 = .[ka.(1 f ) kd . f ]

The rate of desorption decreases when the ratio of adsorption increases as @a is constant! Theoretically, the adsorbate concentration should become lower when the former happens! Therefore, let us verify in the solutions to this problem and discover the profiles associated with the following changes;

m&files and output* function pdex%/41 clc m + .; : as the bondary condition is . A x A (, t > ., we assumed the domain limit as (e&/ A+ x A+ .!CCC and t >+ (e&/ x + linspace,(e&/,.!CCC,).2; t + linspace,(e&/,(,D2; sol + pdepe,m,3pdex%pde,3pdex%ic,3pdex%bc,x,t2 u( + sol,*,*,(2; u) + sol,*,*,)2; u1+sol,*,*2 figure; surf,x,t,u(2 title,5"dsorbate Concentration,x,t252 zlabel,5"dsorbate Concentration52 xlabel,5Distance x52 ylabel,5Time t52 figure; surf,x,t,u)2 title,57raction of pore,x,t252 zlabel,57raction of pore52 xlabel,5Distance x52 ylabel,5Time t52 : &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& function -c,f,s0 + pdex%pde,x,t,u,DuDx2 c + -(;(0; f + -(;.0 !6 DuDx; @+(.; @a+(; @d+@a=@; 7+,&@aE,@a6u,)22E,@d6,u,)2222; s + -7;&70; : &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& function u. + pdex%ic,x2; :assuming initial condition c,x,(e&/2+(e&/ and f,x,(e&/2+(e&/ u. + -(e&/; (e&/0; : &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& function -pl,'l,pr,'r0 + pdex%bc,xl,ul,xr,ur,t2 :assuming boundary condition c,(e&/,t2+.!CCC and dc=dx,.!CCC,t2+(e&/ pl + -ul,(2&.!CCC; .0; 'l + -.; (0; pr + -(e&/ ;.0; 'r + -(;(0; Profiles of "dsorbate Concentration 7igure )!(

Adsorbate Concentration(x,t)

1 Adsorbate Concentration 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 1 1 0.5 0.4 Time t 0 0.2 0 Distance x 0.8 0.6

7igure )!)
Adsorbate Concentration(x,t)

1 Adsorbate Concentration 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 1 1 0.5 0.4 0.2 Time t 0 0 Distance x 0.8 0.6

7igure )!1

Adsorbate Concentration(x,t)

1 Adsorbate Concentration 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 1 1 0.5 0.4 Time t 0 0.2 0 Distance x 0.8 0.6

"t position x+. all concentration at all ratios of @a=@d are the same but the as the position approaches x +(, the drop in concentration for the ratio of adsorption to desorption when @a=@d+(. ,7igure )!12 is lower compared to the relative ratio of adsorption to desorption at @a=@d+.!( ,7igure )!(2!

Profiles of fraction of pore

7igure )!%
Fraction of pore(x,t)

0.1 0.08 Fraction of pore 0.06 0.04 0.02 0 1 1 0.5 0.4 Time t 0 0.2 0 Distance x 0.8 0.6

7igure )!/
Fraction of pore(x,t)

0.5 0.4 Fraction of pore 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 1 1 0.5 0.4 Time t 0 0.2 0 Distance x 0.8 0.6

7igure )!F

Fraction of pore(x,t)

0.8

0.6 Fraction of pore

0.4

0.2

0 1 1 0.5 0.4 0.2 Time t 0 0 Distance x 0.8 0.6

"t low relative ratio of adsorption to desorption rate ,figure )!%2, the adsorbate concentration increases rapidly= abruptly but has a lower fraction covered by the adsorbate due to a higher desorption vs! adsorption rate! "s the adsorption rate is relatively higher, as shown by figures )!/ and )!F, the increase is ot drastic but a higher fraction covered by the adsorbate is achieved versus the @a=@d+.!( at figure )!%! &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& GD&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&