Rheol Acta (2009) 48:117–120

DOI 10.1007/s00397-008-0299-7

LETTER TO THE EDITOR

Couette–Poiseuille flow of the Giesekus model

between parallel plates
Irene Daprà · Giambattista Scarpi

Received: 30 April 2008 / Accepted: 19 June 2008 / Published online: 2 August 2008
© Springer-Verlag 2008

∗
An approximate solution for the Couette–Poiseuille In the quoted paper τ yy is expanded as power series of
∗
flow of the Giesekus model between parallel plates has α Deτ yx
been recently proposed by Raisi et al. (2008) in Rheol
Acta 47:75–80.  
∗ ∗2 ∗2
Raisi et al. analyse the plane flow in x direction of τ yy = −α Deτ yx 1 + α 2 De2 τ yx + ... (4)
a viscoplastic fluid between parallel plates; the upper
one moves at constant velocity and the lower one is
and only the first term of the series is considered:
at rest. A pressure gradient can also be applied. The
fluid obeys the Giesekus constitutive equation. Using  
∗ ∗
dimensionless variables, and with the same notations of τ yy = −α Deτ yx = −α De τ0∗ − Gy∗ (5)
Raisi et al., the tangent stress τ yx∗ and the normal stress
∗
τ yy are, respectively,
substituting in (3) gives
∗
τ yx = τ0∗ + Gy∗ (1)
∗2
∗
1 − α (2α − 1) De2 τ yx ∗
and γ̇ yx =  2 τ yx (6)
∗2
1 − De2 τ yx

−1 ± ∗2
1 − 4α 2 De2 τ yx
∗
τ yy = (2)
2α De which is integrated to give an approximated profile of
velocity:
where α is the Giesekus parameter, dependent on the
anisotropy of the molecular structure, De is the Debo- 
rah number, τ0∗ the shear stress at the fixed plate and 1 2 (α − 1)
∗
G the pressure gradient; the shear rate γ̇ yx can thus be u∗x =  2 + (2α − 1)
2αGDe2 1 − α De2 τ0∗ + Gy∗
written as 
  ∗ 
∗
∗ du∗ 1 + (2α − 1) Deτ yy ∗ × ln 1 − α De τ0 + Gy
2 ∗ 2
+C
γ̇ yx = =  2 τ yx (3)
dy∗ ∗
1 + Deτ yy
(7)

The constant C and the shear stress at the fixed plate

are obtained imposing the boundary condition at the
I. Daprà (B) · G. Scarpi
plates, u∗x (0) = 0 and u∗x (1) = 1.
DISTART, University of Bologna, Viale Risorgimento 2,
40136 Bologna, Italy In our opinion, however, it is not necessary to ex-
∗ ∗
e-mail: irene.dapra@unibo.it pand τ yy because the complete expression for γ̇ yx is
118 Rheol Acta (2009) 48:117–120

Fig. 1 Velocity profiles for

Couette–Poiseuille flow:
a, A α = 0.3, De = 2, G = 1;
b, B α = 0.1, De = 2, G = 1;
c, C α = 0.1, De = 2, G = 0;
d, D α = 0.1, De = 2, G = −1;
e, E α = 0.3, De = 2, G = −1.
Capital letters: present paper;
small letters: Raisi et al

Fig. 2 Effect of α on velocity

profile for De = 1 and G = 1.
The solid lines and the dashed
lines represent the Raisi et al.
and the present solution,
respectively

Fig. 3 Effect of De on
velocity profile for α = 0.1
and G = 1. The solid lines and
dashed lines represent the
Raisi et al. and the present
solution, respectively
Rheol Acta (2009) 48:117–120 119

Fig. 4 Effect of α on shear

stress at the stationary plate
for De = 1, G = 1; the solid
line corresponds to Eq. 26 of
Raisi et al., the dashed line to
the present paper

integrable in closed form, giving the exact expression and integrating

of the velocity u∗x : substituting τ yx
∗ ∗
and τ yy in (6) gives
⎧
 ⎨ 8α 2 − 8α + 1
1
u∗x = ∗
γ yx dy =
du∗x GDe2 ⎩ 2α
∗
γ̇ yx =
dy∗  

 2
 ×ln 1 − 4α 2 De2 τ0∗ + Gy∗ + 2α − 1 +
(2α − 1)  2
1+ −1 + 1 − 4α 2 De2 τ0∗ + Gy∗
2α 
=  1 − 2α  2
⎧  2 ⎫2 + 1 − 4α 2 De2 τ0∗ + Gy∗
⎨ −1 + 1 − 4α 2 De2 τ0∗ + Gy∗ ⎬ 2α
1+   ⎫
⎩ 2α ⎭ 2 2α 2 − 3α + 1 ⎬
+  2 + C. (9)
  ⎭
× τ0∗ + Gy∗ (8) 1 − 4α 2 De2 τ0∗ + Gy∗ + 2α − 1

Fig. 5 Effect of De on shear

stress at the stationary plate
for α = 0.1, G = 1; the solid
line corresponds to Eq. 26 of
Raisi et al., the dashed line to
the present paper
120 Rheol Acta (2009) 48:117–120

The exact expression (9) of u∗x can be integrated again

∗ 1
to give the average velocity ux = u∗x dy∗ :
0

⎧ ⎡   ⎛ ⎞
⎨ √ ∗
√
∗ 1 6α − 12α + 7α − 1 ⎣
3 2
GDe α (α − 1) τ De (2α − 1) α
ux = 2 2 √ arctan   + arctan ⎝  0  √
⎠−
G De α ⎩ De α (α − 1) α − 1 + α De2 τ0∗ τ0∗ + G ∗ 2
1 − 4 α Deτ α−1 0

⎛   ⎞
√
τ0∗ +G∗ De (2α−1) α      
⎠+ 48α −72α +26α−1 arcsin 2α De τ0∗ + G −arcsin 2α Deτ0∗ +
3 2
− arctan⎝   ∗ 2 √ 8α De
1−4α 2 De2 τ0 +G α−1
   
8α 2 − 8α+1    2  2
+ τ0∗ +G ln 1−4α 2 De2 τ0∗ +G +2α−1 −τ0∗ ln 1−4 α Deτ0∗ +2α−1 − G +
2
⎫
   ⎬
1 − 2α  ∗   ∗ 2  
τ0 + G 1 − 4α 2 De2 τ0 + G − τ0∗ 1 − 4 α Deτ0∗
2
+ +C
4 ⎭

instead of Eq. 28 in the quoted paper.
To emphasise the difference between the exact an-
alytic solution (9) and the approximated one (7) given
by Raisi et al., some plots have been executed (Figs. 1,
2 and 3), which correspond to Figs. 3, 5, and 7 of the
quoted paper. Raisi et al. compare their approximated
solution with the values obtained by numerical inte-
gration of the equation of motion, which is improperly
quoted as “exact solution”. Figures 4 and 5 show the
influence of α and De, respectively, on the value of the
shear stress at the fixed wall. As expected, the differ-
ence between the exact and the approximate solution
increases, the greater αDe is.
Reference
Raisi A, Mirzazadeh M, Dehnavi AS, Rashidi F (2008) An ap-
proximate solution for the Couette–Poiseuille flow of the
Giesekus model between parallel plates. Rheol Acta 47:
75–80