Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1 Abstract .................................................................................................... 1
2 Introduction ............................................................................................. 2
3 Governing Equation.................................................................................. 3
6 Modeling .................................................................................................. 6
7 Discussion ................................................................................................. 7
References ……………………………………………………...................III
1 –Abstract
It is shown that the surface reaction is the dominant mechanism near the
leading edge.
2-Introduction
A B rate 𝒌𝒔 a (2)
The governing equation of this case is the energy equation are below .
𝜕𝑢 𝛿𝑣
+ =0 (3)
𝜕𝑥 𝛿𝑦
𝜕𝑢 𝜕𝑢 𝜕2 𝑢
𝑢 +𝑣 =𝑣 (4)
𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑦 2
𝜕𝑎 𝜕𝑎 𝜕2 𝑎
𝑢 +𝑣 = 𝐷𝐴 − 𝑘𝑐 𝑎𝑏2 (5)
𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑦 2
𝜕𝑏 𝜕𝑏 𝜕2 𝑏
𝑢 +𝑣 = 𝐷𝐵 + 𝑘𝑐 𝑎𝑏 2 (6)
𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑦 2
We assume that there is no feedback from the chemical reactions to the flow
and, consequently, the boundary-layer flow will be given by the standard
Blasius similarity solution;
𝜕𝑎 𝜕𝑏
𝑢 = 𝑣 = 0 , 𝐷𝐴 = 𝑘𝑠 𝑎 , 𝐷𝐵 = − 𝑘𝑠 𝑎 𝑜𝑛 𝑦 = 0 (𝑥 > 0) (7)
𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑦
At large distances downstream, we find that the surface reaction has been
effectively switched off (as the concentration of the reactant A close to the
surface falls to zero) and that the reaction is confined to a relatively thin
region located at increasingly large distances from the surface.
The model is given by equations (3)-(9) has prescribed scales Uo and ao for
velocity and concentration, but does not have a prescribed length scale 𝒍 the
choice for 𝒍 is, to some extent, at our disposal and we find it convenient to
take
𝐔𝐨
𝑙=𝑘 (10)
𝑐 𝑎𝑜2
We note that this choice for 1 gives a ratio of the strength of convective
effects, of O(𝐔𝐨 𝐚𝐨/ 𝒍 ) to the strength of the homogeneous reaction, of
O(𝒌𝒄 𝒂𝒐𝟑 ).
We now write
𝑥
𝑢 = Uo 𝑢̅ , 𝑣 = Uo R 𝑒−0.5 𝑣̅ ̅ , 𝑥̅ =
, 𝑎 = 𝑎𝑜 𝑎 ,
𝑙
𝑦𝑅𝑒 0.5 Uo 𝑙
𝑦̅ = , 𝑅𝑒 = (11)
𝑙 𝑣
with equations (3)-(6) becoming (on dropping the bars for convenience)
𝝏𝒖 𝜹𝒗
+ =𝟎 (12)
𝝏𝒙 𝜹𝒚
𝜕𝑢 𝜕𝑢 𝜕2 𝑢
𝑢 +𝑣 =𝑣 (13)
𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑦 2
𝜕𝑎 𝜕𝑎 1 𝜕2 𝑎
𝑢 +𝑣 = − 𝑎𝑏 2 (14)
𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝑆𝑐 𝜕𝑦 2
𝜕𝑏 𝜕𝑏 ɸ 𝜕2 𝑏
𝑢 +𝑣 = + 𝑎𝑏 2 (15)
𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝑆𝑐 𝜕𝑦 2
where 𝑆𝑐 = 𝑣/𝐷𝐴 is the Schmidt number and ɸ = 𝐷𝐵 /𝐷𝐴 is the ratio of the
diffusion coefficients.
So boundary conditions (7)-(9) become
𝜕𝑎 𝜕𝑏
𝑢 =𝑣 =0, = 𝑘𝑠 a , ɸ= − 𝑘𝑠 a 𝑜𝑛 𝑦 = 0 (𝑥 > 0) (16)
𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑦
𝑢 1 , a 1 , b 0 as y=∞ (𝑥 > 0) (17)
𝐮 = 𝟏 , 𝐚 = 𝟏 ,𝐛 = 𝟎 𝐨𝐧 𝒙 = 𝟎 (𝒚 > 𝟎) (18)
𝒌 𝒗
where 𝑲𝒔 = ( 𝒔 )( )𝟎.𝟓 is a dimensionless measure of the
𝑫𝑨 𝒌𝒄𝒂𝒐𝟐)
heterogeneous reaction.
In general, the diffusion coefficients of chemical species 𝑨 and 𝑩 will not be
equal, though we could expect them to be comparable in size. In the special
case where 𝑫𝑨 = 𝑫𝑩 (i.e., ɸ = l),
equations (14),(15) can be combined to give
𝜕𝑎 𝜕𝑎 1 𝜕2 𝑎
𝑢 +𝑣 = − 𝑎(1 − 𝑎)2 (20)
𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝑆𝑐 𝜕𝑦 2
This leads to the standard Blasius problem for 𝒇(ƞ) and to the equation
1 𝜕2 𝑎 1 𝜕𝑎 𝑑𝑓 𝜕𝑎
2
+ 𝑓 − 𝑥𝑎(1 − 𝑎)2 − 𝑥 =0 (22)
𝑆𝑐 𝜕ƞ 2 𝜕ƞ 𝑑ƞ 𝜕𝒙
The details are straightforward and need not be given here, except to
mention that the surface
reaction constant 𝑲𝒔 can be factored from the equations at each order, and
that the homogeneous reaction term does not enter the expansion until
O(𝒙𝟐 ) .
We find, from a numerical solution of the resulting ordinary differential
equations for the ai(ƞ) that, for 𝑺𝒄 = 1.
𝟑
𝑎𝑠 = 1 − 2.1788𝑲𝒔 𝒙𝟎.𝟓 + 𝟒. 𝟎𝟏𝟔𝟔𝑲𝒔 𝟐 𝒙 − 𝟔. 𝟔𝟐𝟎𝟖𝑲𝒔 𝟑 𝒙𝟐 + (𝟏𝟎. 𝟎𝟑𝟒𝟕𝑲𝒔 𝟒 − 𝟑. 𝟕𝟏𝟐𝑲𝒔 𝟐 )𝒙𝟐
(25)
B) Solution for 𝒙 is Large
Here we consider a solution of equation (20) for large 𝒙. The numerical
results plotted and shows that here the homogeneous reaction is confined to
a relatively narrow region at large distances from the surface with a
balancing of terms in equation (20) suggesting that this
Reaction zone will have a thickness of O(1) in y. This, together with the
result that
Ū~𝐲 − ∆𝒙𝟎.𝟓 𝒇𝒐𝒓 𝒚 >> 𝒙𝟎.𝟓
(26)
where 𝒚 = 𝑹(𝒙) >> 𝟏 𝒇𝒐𝒓 𝒙 >> 𝟏 is the location of the reaction zone
Substituting (26),(27) into equation (20) leads us to conclude that 𝑹(𝒙) is
O(𝒙) as 𝒙 ∞ and suggests the expansion
𝑅(𝑥) = 𝑅0 (𝑥) + 𝑅1 𝑥 0.5 (28)
For constants 𝑹𝟎 , 𝑹𝟏 to be determined, and to look for a solution of the form
𝑎(𝑥, 𝑌) = 𝑎0 (𝑌) + 𝑎1 (𝑌)𝑥 −0.5 + ⋯ (29)
At leading order, we obtain the equations.
1
𝑎0′′ + 𝑅𝑜 𝑎𝑜′ − 𝑎𝑜 (1 − 𝑎𝑜 )2 = 0 (30)
𝑆𝑐
Thus
𝑎𝑜 1 , 𝑌 ∞ , 𝑎𝑜 0 𝑌 ∞ (31)
(where primes denote differentiation with respect to( Y). Now equation (30)
is the cubic-Fisher travelling wave equation and has been discussed in detail
by Billingham and Needham [12].
To put the equation in the form treated in [12], we first write ̅𝒀 = 𝒀 𝑺𝒄 𝟎.𝟓
and then, from [12], we have that .
̅̅̅
𝑌
1 exp ( )
𝑅0 = , 𝑎0 (𝑌̅) = √2
̅̅̅ (32)
(2𝑆𝑐 0.5 ) 𝑌
1+𝑒𝑥𝑝( )
√2
Subject to
𝑎1 0 𝑎𝑠 𝑌̅ ∞ (34)
Primes now denote differentiation with respect to 𝒀 ̅ , now equation (33) has
a complementary function 𝒂𝟎 ′ which satisfies boundary conditions (34), and
hence, for the full system to have a solution, the compatibility condition .
∞ 𝑌 ̅
(∆ − 𝑅1 ) ∫−∞(𝑎0 )2 exp ( ) 𝑑 𝑌̅ = 0 (35)
2 √
Must be satisfied. It is clear that the integral in (35) is nonzero, and hence,
we must have
𝑅1 = ∆ (36)
From (32),(36), we then have that
𝑥
𝑅𝑥 ~ + ∆𝑥 0.5 + ⋯ 𝑥 ∞ (37)
2𝑆𝑐 0.5
∞
𝒚𝑹 (𝑥) = ∫0 (1 − 𝑎)𝑑𝑦 = 0 (38)
3
The equations for the 𝒂𝒊 , 𝒃𝒊 are decoupled up to the term of O(𝑥 2 ), and
hence, the solution for 𝒂𝒊 is the same as for the case when ɸ = 𝟏, being
independent of ɸ up to this order, the solution of the equations for the 𝒃𝒊 do
depend on ɸ. It is only at O (𝒙𝟐 ) that the effects of the homogeneous
reaction enter the solution with both 𝒂𝟒 (ƞ) and 𝒃𝟒 (ƞ) depending on ɸ.
Thus, we expect the initial development of 𝒂𝒔 , to be insensitive to the value
of ɸ, though we expect 𝒃(𝒙, 𝟎) = 𝒃𝒔 , to depend on ɸ for small 𝑥. This
was confirmed from numerical integration of equations (12)-(18), where
we found that 𝒂𝒔 , approached zero relatively rapidly for all the values of ɸ
tried (from ɸ = 0.1 to ɸ = 10), following closely the behaviour for ɸ = 1.
The behaviour for 𝒃𝒔 , is somewhat different and depends on whether ɸ > 1
or ɸ < 1. The results that shown numerically , where we see that for ɸ > 1,
𝒃𝒔 , increases monotonically from zero, approaching its downstream value
(𝒃𝒔 𝟏 only very slowly (as compared to ɸ = 1).
For ɸ < 1, 𝒃𝒔 attains a maximum value (of 𝒃𝒔 ≈ 2.16 at 𝒙 ≈ 1.64 for
ɸ = 0.2) before falling (again very slowly) to its asymptotic value.
ɸ
𝑏0′′ + 𝑅0 𝑏0 + 𝑎0 𝑏 2 0 = 0 (41)
𝑆𝐶
subject to
𝑎0 1 , 𝑏0 0 , 𝑎𝑠 𝑌 ∞ (42)
𝑎0 0 , 𝑏0 1 , 𝑎𝑠 𝑌 −∞ (43)
𝐵′ (0) = 0 , 𝐵 0 as ƞ ∞ (46)
A consideration of equations (45),(46) reveals that the smallest eigenvalue is
m = l/2 for all ɸ and 𝒔𝒄 , with corresponding solution.
𝒔𝒄 ƞ
𝐵(ƞ) = 𝐵0 exp(− ∫ 𝑓(𝑠)𝑑𝑠 ) (47)
2ɸ 0
𝒃𝒔 = 𝟏 + 𝑶(𝒙−𝟎.𝟓 ) as 𝒙 ∞ (48)
References III