We investigate the stability of free-surface flow on a heated incline. We develop a complete mathematical model for the flow which captures the Marangoni effect and also accounts for changes in the properties of the fluid with temperature. We apply a linear stability analysis to determine the stability of the steady and uniform flow. The associated eigenvalue problem is solved numerically by means of a spectral collocation method. Comparisons with nonlinear simulations are also made and the agreement is good.
Citation: Jean-Paul Pascal, Serge D’Alessio, Syeda Rubaida Zafar. The instability of liquid films with temperature-dependent properties flowing down a heated incline[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2019, 4(6): 1700-1720. doi: 10.3934/math.2019.6.1700
[1] | Mehmet Kunt, Artion Kashuri, Tingsong Du, Abdul Wakil Baidar . Quantum Montgomery identity and quantum estimates of Ostrowski type inequalities. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(6): 5439-5457. doi: 10.3934/math.2020349 |
[2] | Marwa M. Tharwat, Marwa M. Ahmed, Ammara Nosheen, Khuram Ali Khan, Iram Shahzadi, Dumitru Baleanu, Ahmed A. El-Deeb . Dynamic inequalities of Grüss, Ostrowski and Trapezoid type via diamond-$ \alpha $ integrals and Montgomery identity. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(5): 12778-12799. doi: 10.3934/math.2024624 |
[3] | Atiqe Ur Rahman, Khuram Ali Khan, Ammara Nosheen, Muhammad Saeed, Thongchai Botmart, Nehad Ali Shah . Weighted Ostrowski type inequalities via Montgomery identity involving double integrals on time scales. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(9): 16657-16672. doi: 10.3934/math.2022913 |
[4] | Bandar Bin-Mohsin, Muhammad Uzair Awan, Muhammad Zakria Javed, Sadia Talib, Hüseyin Budak, Muhammad Aslam Noor, Khalida Inayat Noor . On some classical integral inequalities in the setting of new post quantum integrals. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(1): 1995-2017. doi: 10.3934/math.2023103 |
[5] | Humaira Kalsoom, Muhammad Amer Latif, Muhammad Idrees, Muhammad Arif, Zabidin Salleh . Quantum Hermite-Hadamard type inequalities for generalized strongly preinvex functions. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(12): 13291-13310. doi: 10.3934/math.2021769 |
[6] | Da Shi, Ghulam Farid, Abd Elmotaleb A. M. A. Elamin, Wajida Akram, Abdullah A. Alahmari, B. A. Younis . Generalizations of some $ q $-integral inequalities of Hölder, Ostrowski and Grüss type. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(10): 23459-23471. doi: 10.3934/math.20231192 |
[7] | Humaira Kalsoom, Muhammad Idrees, Artion Kashuri, Muhammad Uzair Awan, Yu-Ming Chu . Some New $(p_1p_2,q_1q_2)$-Estimates of Ostrowski-type integral inequalities via n-polynomials s-type convexity. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(6): 7122-7144. doi: 10.3934/math.2020456 |
[8] | Muhammad Amer Latif, Mehmet Kunt, Sever Silvestru Dragomir, İmdat İşcan . Post-quantum trapezoid type inequalities. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(4): 4011-4026. doi: 10.3934/math.2020258 |
[9] | Mustafa Gürbüz, Yakup Taşdan, Erhan Set . Ostrowski type inequalities via the Katugampola fractional integrals. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(1): 42-53. doi: 10.3934/math.2020004 |
[10] | Miguel Vivas-Cortez, Muhammad Aamir Ali, Hüseyin Budak, Ifra Bashir Sial . Post-quantum Ostrowski type integral inequalities for functions of two variables. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(5): 8035-8063. doi: 10.3934/math.2022448 |
We investigate the stability of free-surface flow on a heated incline. We develop a complete mathematical model for the flow which captures the Marangoni effect and also accounts for changes in the properties of the fluid with temperature. We apply a linear stability analysis to determine the stability of the steady and uniform flow. The associated eigenvalue problem is solved numerically by means of a spectral collocation method. Comparisons with nonlinear simulations are also made and the agreement is good.
In [4] the authors obtained the following generalization of Montgomery identity for quantum calculus.
Lemma 1. [4] (Quantum Montgomery identity) Let f:[a,b]→R, be an arbitrary function with daqf quantum integrable on [a,b], then the following quantum identity holds:
f(x)−1b−ab∫af(t)daqt=(b−a)1∫0Kq,x(t)Daqf(tb+(1−t)a)d0qt | (1.1) |
where Kq,x(t) is defined by
Kq,x(t)={qt,0≤t≤x−ab−a,qt−1,x−ab−a<t≤1. | (1.2) |
Using this identity, the authors have obtained two Ostrowski type inequalities for quantum integrals and applied it in several special cases.
Unfortunately, in the proof of this lemma an error is made when calculating the integrals involving the kernel Kq,x(t) on the interval [x−ab−a,1]. Also, in the proofs of Theorem 3 and Theorem 4 a small mistake related to the convexity of |Daqf|r is made.
In the present paper we prove that the identity (1.1) and, thus, all of the consequent results are incorrect and provide corrections for these results.
The q-derivative of a function f:[a,b]→R for q∈⟨0,1⟩ (see [5] or [2] for a=0) is given by
Daqf(x)=f(x)−f(a+q(x−a))(1−q)(x−a),forx∈⟨a,b]Daqf(a)=limx→aDaqf(x) |
We say that f:[a,b]→R is q-differentiable if limx→aDaqf(x) exists. The q-derivative is a discretization of the ordinary derivative and if f is a differentiable function then ([1,3])
limq→1 Daqf(x)=f′(x). |
Further, the q-integral of f is defined by
x∫af(t)daqt=(1−q)(x−a)∞∑k=0qkf(a+qk(x−a)), x∈[a,b]. |
If the series on the right hand-side is convergent, then the q-integral ∫xaf(t)daqt exists and f:[a,b]→R is said to be q-integrable on [a,x]. If f is continuous on [a,b] the series (1−q)(x−a)∞∑k=0qkf(a+qk(x−a)) tends to the Riemann integral of f as q→1 ([1], [3])
limq→1x∫af(t)daqt=x∫af(t)dt. |
If c∈⟨a,x⟩ the q-integral is defined by
x∫cf(t)daqt=x∫af(t)daqt−c∫af(t)daqt. |
Obviously, the q-integral depends on the values of f at the points outside the interval of integration and an important difference between the definite q-integral and Riemann integral is that even if we are integrating a function over the interval [c,x], a<c<x<b, for q-integral we have to take into account its behavior at t=a as well as its values on [a,x]. This is the main reason for mistakes made in [4] since in the proof of Lemma 1 the following error was made:
1∫x−ab−aKq,x(t)Daqf(tb+(1−t)a)d0qt=1∫0(qt−1)Daqf(tb+(1−t)a)d0qt−x−ab−a∫0(qt−1)Daqf(tb+(1−t)a)d0qt. |
But Kq,x(t)≠(qt−1) for t∈[0,1] or for t∈[0,x−ab−a], so the equality does not hold.
Now, we give a proof that the quantum Montgomery identity (1.1) is not correct, since it does not hold for all x∈[a,b]. As we shall see, the identity (1.1) is valid only if x=a+qm+1(b−a) for some m∈N∪{0}. We have
(b−a)1∫0Kq,x(t)Daqf(tb+(1−t)a)d0qt=(b−a)(1−q)∞∑k=0qkKq,x(qk)Daqf(a+qk(b−a)). |
For q∈⟨0,1⟩ let m∈N∪{0} be such that
qm+1≤x−ab−a<qm, |
in other words
m=⌈logqx−ab−a⌉−1. |
Then
Kq,x(qk)={qk+1−1,k≤m,qk+1,k≥m+1, |
and
(b−a)(1−q)∞∑k=0qkKq,x(qk)Daqf(a+qk(b−a))=(b−a)(1−q)(m∑k=0qk(qk+1−1)f(a+qk(b−a))−f(a+qk+1(b−a))(1−q)qk(b−a)+∞∑k=m+1qk(qk+1)f(a+qk(b−a))−f(a+qk+1(b−a))(1−q)qk(b−a))=−m∑k=0(f(a+qk(b−a))−f(a+qk+1(b−a)))+∞∑k=0qk+1(f(a+qk(b−a))−f(a+qk+1(b−a)))=f(a+qm+1(b−a))−f(b)+∞∑k=0qk+1(f(a+qk(b−a))−f(a+qk+1(b−a))). |
If we put S=∞∑k=0qkf(a+qk(b−a))=1(1−q)(b−a)b∫af(t)daqt, we have
∞∑k=0(qk+1)(f(a+qk(b−a))−f(a+qk+1(b−a)))=qS−(S−f(b)) |
and
1b−ab∫af(t)daqt+(b−a)1∫0Kq,x(t)Daqf(tb+(1−t)a)d0qt=1b−ab∫af(t)daqt+(f(a+qm+1(b−a))−f(b))+qS−(S−f(b))=(1−q)S+f(a+qm+1(b−a))−f(b)+qS−S+f(b)=f(a+qm+1(b−a)) |
which is obviously not equal to f(x), unless x=a+qm+1(b−a).
This is no surprise since Jackson integral takes into account only f(a+qk(x−a)) for k∈N∪{0}. Thus, we have proved the next lemma which is a corrected version of Lemma 1 from [4].
Lemma 2. (Quantum Montgomery identity) Let f:[a,b]→R, be an arbitrary function with Daqf quantum integrable on [a,b], then for all x∈⟨a,b⟩ the following quantum identity holds:
f(a+q⌈logqx−ab−a⌉(b−a))−1b−ab∫af(t)daqt=(b−a)1∫0Kq,x(t)Daqf(tb+(1−t)a)d0qt |
where Kq,x(t) is defined by
Kq,x(t)={qt,0≤t≤x−ab−a,qt−1,x−ab−a<t≤1. |
In Theorem 3 and Theorem 4 from [4] the authors have used the identity (1.1) to derive Ostrowski type inequalities for functions f for which Daqf is quantum integrable on [a,b] and |Daqf|r, r≥1 is a convex function. Since these inequalities depends on the validity of Lemma 1, our discussion invalidates all the results from [4].
More precisely, in all the inequalities an additional assumption x=a+qm(b−a) for some m∈N∪{0} should be added. In Theorems 3 and 4 |Daqf(a)|r and |Daqf(b)|r should be swapped, since in the proofs of Theorem 3 and Theorem 4, when applying the convexity of |Daqf|r the following mistake was made
|Daqf(tb+(1−t)a)|r≤t|Daqf(a)|r+(1−t)|Daqf(b)|r. |
Lastly, the integral K4(a,b,x,q) is incorrectly computed and should read:
K4(a,b,x,q)=1−q1+q(b−xb−a)+q1+q(b−xb−a)2. |
The main goal of this paper was to point out that some results in [4] are not correct. We have concentrated on Lemma 3 (Quantum Montgomery identity). The statement of that Lemma is not correct as we have shown. We also found and analyzed the mistake in the proof of Lemma 3.
However, we went one step further and stated and proved the correct version of Lemma 3 (it is Lemma 2 in our paper). We have also explained how can all inequalities derived from Quantum Montgomery identity be corrected.
Domagoj Kovačević was supported by the QuantiXLie Centre of Excellence, a project co financed by the Croatian Government and European Union through the European Regional Development Fund-the Competitiveness and Cohesion Operational Programme (Grant KK.01.1.1.01.0004).
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
After our Correction was accepted we were contacted by the first author of [4], Professor Kunt, who suggested an alternate way to correct the results of [4].
The incorrect version of Montgomery identity from [4]
f(x)−1b−ab∫af(t)daqt=(b−a)1∫0Kq,x(t)Daqf(tb+(1−t)a)d0qt |
can be fixed in two ways: either by changing the left hand side or by changing the right hand side of this equation. In Lemma 2 we showed how to fix the identity by correcting the left hand side. This makes it easier to salvage the rest of results in [4], as all the results remain valid with the added assumption that x=a+qm(b−a) for some m∈N∪{0}.
Professor Kunt suggested correcting the right hand side of this equation to obtain the identity:
f(x)−1b−a∫baf(t)daqt=(b−a)[∫x−ab−a0qtDaqf(tb+(1−t)a)d0qt+∫1x−ab−a(qt−1)Daqf(tb+(1−t)a)d0qt]. (∗) |
By doing so, the proofs of all the remaining results have to be corrected as the bound used
|∫1x−ab−a(qt−1)Daqf(tb+(1−t)a)d0qt|≤∫1x−ab−a|(qt−1)Daqf(tb+(1−t)a)|d0qt |
does not hold for q-integrals in general. This is discussed, for example, on page 12 in [1,Section 1.3.1,Remark (ii)].
When x−ab−a=qm or equivalently x=a+qm(b−a) for some m∈N∪{0} the bound above does hold, which is why there is no need to change the rest of the results in [4] if one takes our approach. Nevertheless, we list below the results that can be obtained using identity (3.1). The results below are due to Professor Kunt.
Theorem 3 in [4] should be as follows:
Theorem 3. Let f:[a,b]→R be an arbitrary function with Daqf is quantum integrable on [a,b]. If |Daqf|r, r≥1 is a convex function, then the following quantum integral inequality holds:
|f(x)−1b−a∫baf(t)daqt|≤(b−a)[(11+q)1−1r[|Daqf(b)|r1(1+q)(1+q+q2)+|Daqf(a)|rq1+q+q2]1r+(x−ab−a)[|Daqf(b)|r(x−ab−a)11+q+|Daqf(a)|r(1−(x−ab−a)11+q)]1r] | (3.1) |
for all x∈[a,b].
Proof. Using convexity of |Daqf|r, we have that
|Daqf(tb+(1−t)a)|r≤t|Daqf(b)|r+(1−t)|Daqf(a)|r. | (3.2) |
By using (∗), quantum power mean inequality and (3.2), we have that
|f(x)−1b−a∫baf(t)daqt| | (3.3) |
=(b−a)|∫x−ab−a0qtDaqf(tb+(1−t)a)d0qt+∫1x−ab−a(qt−1)Daqf(tb+(1−t)a)d0qt|=(b−a)|∫10(qt−1)Daqf(tb+(1−t)a)d0qt+∫x−ab−a0Daqf(tb+(1−t)a)d0qt|≤(b−a)|∫10(qt−1)Daqf(tb+(1−t)a)d0qt|+|∫x−ab−a0Daqf(tb+(1−t)a)d0qt| |
≤(b−a)[∫10(1−qt)|Daqf(tb+(1−t)a)|d0qt+∫x−ab−a0|Daqf(tb+(1−t)a)|d0qt] |
≤(b−a)[(∫101−qtd0qt)1−1r(∫10(1−qt)|Daqf(tb+(1−t)a)|rd0qt)1r+(∫x−ab−a0d0qt)1−1r(∫x−ab−a0|Daqf(tb+(1−t)a)|rd0qt)1r]≤(b−a)[(∫10(1−qt)d0qt)1−1r×(|Daqf(b)|r∫10(1−qt)td0q+|Daqf(a)|r∫10(1−qt)(1−t)d0qt)1r+(∫x−ab−a0d0qt)1−1r×(|Daqf(b)|r∫x−ab−a0td0qt+|Daqf(a)|r∫x−ab−a0(1−t)d0qt)1r] |
On the other hand, calculating the following quantum integrals we have
∫10(1−qt)d0qt=(1−q)∞∑n=0qn(1−qn+1)=(1−q)[11−q−q1−q2]=11+q, | (3.4) |
∫10(1−qt)td0qt=(1−q)∞∑n=0qn[(1−qn+1)qn]=(1−q)[11−q2−q1−q3]=11+q−q1+q+q2=1(1+q)(1+q+q2), | (3.5) |
∫10(1−qt)(1−t)d0qt=∫101−qtd0qt−∫10(1−qt)td0qt=11+q−1(1+q)(1+q+q2)=q1+q+q2, | (3.6) |
∫x−ab−a0d0qt=(1−q)(x−ab−a)∞∑n=0qn=x−ab−a, | (3.7) |
∫x−ab−a0td0qt=(1−q)(x−ab−a)∞∑n=0qn(qn(x−ab−a))=(x−ab−a)211+q, | (3.8) |
∫x−ab−a0(1−t)d0qt=∫x−ab−a0d0qt−∫x−ab−a0td0qt=x−ab−a−(x−ab−a)211+q=(x−ab−a)[1−(x−ab−a)11+q]. | (3.9) |
Using (3.4)–(3.9) in (3.3), we have (3.1).
Theorem 4 in [4] should be as follows:
Theorem 4. Let f:[a,b]→R be an arbitrary function with Daqf is quantum integrable on [a,b]. If |Daqf|r, r>1 and 1r+1p=1 is convex function, then the following quantum integral inequality holds:
|f(x)−1b−a∫baf(t)daqt| | (3.10) |
≤(b−a)[(∫10(1−qt)pd0qt)1p(|Daqf(b)|r11+q+|Daqf(a)|rq1+q)1r+(x−ab−a)[|Daqf(b)|r(x−ab−a)11+q+|Daqf(a)|r(1−(x−ab−a)11+q)]1r] |
for all x∈[a,b].
Proof. By using (∗) and quantum Hölder inequality, we have
|f(x)−1b−a∫baf(t)daqt|≤(b−a)|∫10(qt−1)Daqf(tb+(1−t)a)d0qt|+|∫x−ab−a0Daqf(tb+(1−t)a)d0qt|≤(b−a)[∫10(1−qt)|Daqf(tb+(1−t)a)|d0qt+∫x−ab−a0|Daqf(tb+(1−t)a)|d0qt]≤(b−a)[(∫10(1−qt)pd0qt)1p(∫10|Daqf(tb+(1−t)a)|rd0qt)1r+(∫x−ab−a0d0qt)1p(∫x−ab−a0|Daqf(tb+(1−t)a)|rd0qt)1r]≤(b−a)[(∫10(1−qt)pd0qt)1p(∫10[t|Daqf(b)|r+(1−t)|Daqf(a)|r]d0qt)1r+(∫x−ab−a0d0qt)1p(∫x−ab−a0[t|Daqf(b)|r+(1−t)|Daqf(a)|r]d0qt)1r]≤(b−a)[(∫10(1−qt)pd0qt)1p(|Daqf(b)|r∫10td0qt+|Daqf(a)|r∫10(1−t)d0qt)1r+(∫x−ab−a0d0qt)1p(|Daqf(b)|r∫x−ab−a0td0qt+|Daqf(a)|r∫x−ab−a0(1−t)d0qt)1r]=(b−a)[(∫10(1−qt)pd0qt)1p(|Daqf(b)|r11+q+|Daqf(a)|rq1+q)1r+(x−ab−a)[|Daqf(b)|r(x−ab−a)11+q+|Daqf(a)|r(1−(x−ab−a)11+q)]1r]. |
We conclude this section by noting that the bounds obtained in the original paper [4] which, as we have previously shown, do hold with the added assumption x=a+qm(b−a) for some m∈N∪{0}, are tighter than the bounds obtained above by Professor Kunt. Professor Kunt's bounds, however, hold for all x∈[a,b].
[1] | P. L. Kapitza, Wave flow of thin layers of a viscous fluid: II. Fluid flow in the presence of continuous gas flow and heat transfer, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz., 18 (1948), 19-28. |
[2] | P. L. Kapitza and S. P. Kapitza, Wave flow of thin layers of a viscous fluid: III. Experimental study of undulatory flow conditions, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz., 19 (1949), 105-120. |
[3] |
T. B. Benjamin, Wave formation in laminar flow down an inclined plane, J. Fluid Mech., 2 (1957), 554-574. doi: 10.1017/S0022112057000373
![]() |
[4] |
C.-S. Yih, Stability of liquid flow down an inclined plane, Phys. Fluids, 6 (1963), 321-334. doi: 10.1063/1.1706737
![]() |
[5] | D. J. Benney, Long waves on liquid films, J. Math. and Phys., 45 (1966), 150-155. |
[6] | B. Gjevik, Occurrence of Finite-Amplitude Surface Waves on Falling Liquid Films, Phys. Fluids, 13 (1970), 1918-1925. |
[7] | S. Kalliadasis, E. A. Demekhin, C. Ruyer-Quil, et al. Falling liquid films, Springer-Verlag, London, 2012. |
[8] |
S. Kalliadasis, E. A. Demekhin, C. Ruyer-Quil, et al. Thermocapillary instability and wave formation on a film flowing down a uniformly heated plane, J. Fluid Mech., 492 (2003), 303-338. doi: 10.1017/S0022112003005809
![]() |
[9] | C. Ruyer-Quil, B. Scheid, S. Kalliadasis, et al. Thermocapillary long waves in a liquid film flow. part 1. low-dimensional formulation, J. Fluid Mech., 538 (2005), 199-222. |
[10] | B. Scheid, C. Ruyer-Quil, S. Kalliadasis, et al. Thermocapillary long waves in a liquid film flow. part 2. linear stability and nonlinear waves, J. Fluid Mech., 538 (2005), 223-244. |
[11] | P. Trevelyan, B. Scheid, C. Ruyer-Quil, et al. Heated falling films, J. Fluid Mech., 592 (2007), 295-334. |
[12] |
S. Lin, Stability of a liquid flow down a heated inclined plane, Lett. Heat Mass Transfer, 2 (1975), 361-369. doi: 10.1016/0094-4548(75)90002-8
![]() |
[13] | Y. O. Kabova and V. V. Kuznetsov, Downward flow of a nonisothermal thin liquid film with variable viscosity, J. Appl. Mech. Tech. Phys., 43 (2002), 895-901. |
[14] | D. A. Goussis and R. A. Kelly, Effects of viscosity on the stability of film flow down heated or cooled inclined surfaces: Long-wavelength analysis, Phys. Fluids, 28 (1985), 3207-3214. |
[15] | C.-C. Hwang and C.-I. Weng, Non-linear stability analysis of film flow down a heated or cooled inclined plane with viscosity variation, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 31 (1988), 1775-1784. |
[16] | K. A. Ogden, S. J. D. D'Alessio, J.P. Pascal, Gravity-driven flow over heated, porous, wavy surfaces, Phys. Fluids, 23 (2011), 122102. |
[17] |
J. P. Pascal, N. Gonputh and S. J. D. D'Alessio, Long-wave instability of flow with temperature dependent fluid properties down a heated incline, Intl J. Eng. Sci., 70 (2013), 73-90. doi: 10.1016/j.ijengsci.2013.05.003
![]() |
[18] | S. J. D. D'Alessio, C. J. M. P. Seth and J. P. Pascal, The effects of variable fluid properties on thin film stability, Phys. Fluids, 26 (2014), 122105. |
[19] | M. Chhay, D. Dutykhb, M. Gisclonb, et al. New asymptotic heat transfer model in thin liquid films, Appl. Math. Model., 48 (2017), 844-859. |
[20] | J. H. Spurk and N. Aksel, Fluid Mechanics, 2nd edition, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2008. |
[21] | C. Ruyer-Quil and P. Manneville, Improved modeling of flows down inclined planes, Eur. Phys. J. B, 15 (2000), 357-369. |
[22] | C. Ruyer-Quil and P. Manneville, Further accuracy and convergence results on the modeling of flows down inclined planes by weighted-residual approximations, Phys. Fluids, 14 (2002), 170-183. |
[23] | N. Gonputh, J. P. Pascal and S. J. D. D'Alessio, Inclined flow of a heated fluid film with temperature dependent fluid properties, In: Proceedings of the 2012 International Conference on Scientific Computing, pp. 247-253, CSREA Press, 2012. |
1. | Andrea Aglić Aljinović, Lana Horvat Dmitrović , Ana Žgaljić Keko , Cauchy-Schwarz inequality for shifted quantum integral operator, 2024, 51, 12236934, 106, 10.52846/ami.v51i1.1749 |