Hindawi Publishing Corporation

ISRN Physical Chemistry

Volume 2013, Article ID 487240, 14 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/487240

Research Article
Analytical Solution of Non-Isothermal Diffusion-Reaction
Processes and Effectiveness Factors

Vembu Ananthaswamy and Lakshmanan Rajendran

Department of Mathematics, e Madura College, TamilNadu, Madurai 625011, India

Correspondence should be addressed to Lakshmanan Rajendran; raj_sms@rediffmail.com

Received 13 September 2012; Accepted 31 October 2012

Academic Editors: J. M. Farrar, E. B. Starikov, and A. Vergara

Copyright © 2013 V. Ananthaswamy and L. Rajendran. is is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons
Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is
properly cited.

e mathematical modeling of nonlinear boundary value problems in catalytically chemical reactor is discussed. In this paper,
we obtain the approximate analytical solution and the effectiveness factors for the evolution of single-step transformations under
non-isothermal conditions using homotopy perturbation method. We have applied it to many reaction models and obtained very
simple analytical expressions for the shape of the corresponding transformation rate peaks. ese analytical solutions represent
a signi�cant simpli�cation of the system�s description allowing easy curve �tting to experiment. e accuracy achieved with our
method is checked against several reaction models and numerical results. A satisfactory agreement is noted.

1. Introduction Gibbs energy. is is not surprising, because classical non-

equilibrium thermodynamics [12, 13] assumes a linear rela-
Non-isothermal systems, where reaction and diffusion take tion between these two variables, and experimental evidence
place, are typical in the chemical process industry [1] and also indicates that this is only correct very close to chemical
in biological systems [2–4]. e chemical reaction is always equilibrium. e �rst to address this problem successfully
central in these systems, because the rate of the reaction was Kramers [14] who described the reaction as a diffusion
oen will determine how fast chemicals can be produced. process along a reaction coordinate.
A high rate can be realized when the reaction is far from e extension in the context of non-equilibrium ther-
equilibrium. But an operation far from equilibrium is also an modynamics was �rst proposed by Prigogine and Mazur
operation in which the energy dissipation is large. With the [15–17]. By integrating over these variables to obtain the
present interest to save valuable resources, chemical reactors thermodynamic level, one can describe several phenomena,
should be studied also from the perspective of obtaining a which are non-linear on the macroscopic level, and which
more energy-efficient operation, in addition to maintaining retain a linear force-�ux relation on the mesocopic level. is
the production of chemicals. In biological systems, one may applies not only to chemical reactions [18], but for instance
expect that energy efficiency is an issue of survival, especially also to adsorption [19], nucleation [20], electrode over poten-
under harsh conditions [5]. In such cases and probably many tials [21] and active transport in biology [4]. e number of
others, a thermodynamic description will be important to cases studied is now growing fast. e coupling of chemical
understand the transport phenomena involved [4, 6]. Studies reactions to other processes is then important [8, 18, 22–
of minimum energy dissipation start with an expression for 25]. Non-equilibrium thermodynamics is not only a theory
the entropy production [7–9]. for transport processes, it is also a theory for �uctuations.
Chemical reactions are inherently non-linear processes, It has been demonstrated that the �uctuating contributions
and are most successfully described in the �eld of reaction to the thermodynamic �uxes in a non-equilibrium system
kinetics by the law of mass action [10, 11]. e reaction satisfy the �uctuation-dissipation theorem just like they do
rate is not commonly expressed as a function of the reaction in equilibrium [26].
2 ISRN Physical Chemistry

e theory of non-equilibrium thermodynamics is based where 𝑑𝑑 is the thermicity of the reaction and is de�ned as
on the assumption of local thermodynamic equilibrium. follows:
e validity of this assumption has been established by 𝐷𝐷𝐴𝐴 𝐶𝐶AS (−Δ𝐻𝐻)
molecular dynamics simulations in several cases [27–29]. 𝑑𝑑 𝑑 . (5)
Fluctuations and the resulting correlation functions away 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑆𝑆
from equilibrium were then not considered. One of the major Here −Δ𝐻𝐻 is the reaction heat; 𝑘𝑘 is the effective thermal
�ndings has been that although local equilibrium is valid conductivity inside the porous slab; and 𝑇𝑇𝑆𝑆 is the dimensional
for the description of the mean values of thermodynamic temperature at the external pellet surface. Δ𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝑆𝑆 repre-
�elds, it is no longer valid for the description of the �uc- sents the entropy change “Δ𝑆𝑆” of a system under this pro-
tuations around their average non-equilibrium values [26]. cess. Entropy increases in all spontaneous processes. Hence
Recently Vergara et al. [30] developed the multicomponent entropy may be regarded as a measure of disorder or random-
diffusion system including cross-term diffusion coefficients ness of the molecules of the system. For isothermal process,
relating to �ux of the component 𝑖𝑖 to concentration gradients the entropy changes of the universe during a reversible
of component 𝑗𝑗. But in our problem the cross-diffusion process are zero. e entropy of the universe increases in an
is neglected. Ikeda et al. [31] analyzed this problem for irreversible process. e parameter 𝑑𝑑 represents the deviation
a reaction-diffusion problem with a temperature gradient from isothermal conditions, being 𝑑𝑑 𝑑𝑑 and 𝑑𝑑 𝑑 𝑑 for
using a linear approximation for the description of the endothermic and exothermic reactions, respectively. Now the
reaction. For the reaction-diffusion problem the assumption dimensionless reaction rate function 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 including (1) is
of local equilibrium has to be extended to be valid also given by
along the reaction coordinate. However, to the best of our
knowledge, till date no general analytical expressions of mass 𝑐𝑐 (1 − 𝑢𝑢)
𝑓𝑓 (𝑢𝑢) = 𝑢𝑢𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 exp 󶁥󶁥 󶁵󶁵 , (6)
concentrations and effectiveness factors have been reported. 𝑑𝑑 (1 − 𝑢𝑢) +1
e purpose of this communication is to derive the approxi-
mate analytical expression of mass concentration for planar where the parameter 𝑐𝑐 is de�ned as follows:
particles by solving the non-linear differential equations 𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐 (7)
using He’s homotopy perturbation method [32–35].
where 𝛾𝛾 is the Arrhenius group and is de�ned as
2. Mathematical Formulation of 𝐸𝐸
the Problem and Analysis 𝛾𝛾𝛾 . (8)
𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑆𝑆
e mathematical description of a catalytic chemical reactor Here 𝐸𝐸 denotes the activation energy; 𝑅𝑅 is the universal
(𝑚𝑚𝑚 𝑚𝑚𝑚 𝑚 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 𝑚 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 𝑚 𝑚𝑚 is given by [1] gas constant. Hence the corresponding non-linear boundary
𝑑𝑑2 𝑢𝑢 value problem is given by
− 𝜙𝜙2 𝑓𝑓 (𝑢𝑢) = 0 for 0 < 𝑥𝑥𝑥 𝑥𝑥𝑥
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑2 𝑑𝑑2 𝑢𝑢 𝑐𝑐 (1 − 𝑢𝑢)
(1) − 𝜙𝜙2 𝑢𝑢𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 exp 󶁥󶁥 󶁵󶁵 = 0 for 0 < 𝑥𝑥𝑥 𝑥𝑥𝑥
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑2 𝑑𝑑 (1 − 𝑢𝑢) +1
𝑢𝑢 𝑢 𝑢 at 𝑥𝑥𝑥 𝑥𝑥𝑥 = 0 at 𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
where 𝑥𝑥 is the spatial coordinate, 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 is the reaction rate 𝑢𝑢 𝑢 𝑢 for 𝑥𝑥𝑥 𝑥𝑥𝑥 =0 for 𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
function (which is non-linear), and 𝐿𝐿 is the half thickness of (9)
porous slab (𝑚𝑚𝑚. e mass concentration 𝑢𝑢 is de�ned as the
following function: Using the following dimensionless variables:
𝐶𝐶𝐴𝐴 𝑥𝑥
𝑢𝑢 𝑢 , (2) 𝑧𝑧 𝑧𝑧𝑧 , 𝑦𝑦 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 (10)
𝐶𝐶AS 𝐿𝐿
where 𝐶𝐶𝐴𝐴 is the volumetric molar concentration of the key Now (9) becomes in dimensionless form as follows:
component 𝐴𝐴, 𝐶𝐶AS is the surface value of the key component
𝑑𝑑2 𝑦𝑦 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐
𝐴𝐴, and 𝜙𝜙 is the corresponding iele modulus which is 2
− 𝜙𝜙2 󶀡󶀡1 − 𝑦𝑦󶀱󶀱 exp 󶁥󶁥 󶁵󶁵 = 0 for 0 < 𝑧𝑧 𝑧𝑧𝑧
de�ned as follows: 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
𝑝𝑝
(11)
𝐿𝐿2 𝑘𝑘𝑆𝑆 𝐶𝐶𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
AS 𝐶𝐶BS
𝜙𝜙 𝜙 󵀌󵀌 . (3) 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
𝐷𝐷𝐴𝐴 𝑦𝑦 𝑦𝑦 for 𝑧𝑧 𝑧𝑧𝑧 =0 for 𝑧𝑧 𝑧𝑧𝑧 (12)
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
Here 𝑘𝑘𝑆𝑆 , 𝐷𝐷𝐴𝐴 , and 𝐶𝐶BS are the speci�c kinetic constant, effec-
tive diffusivity coefficient, and the dimensionless concentra- e internal effectiveness factor (𝜂𝜂𝜂 is a measure of the relative
tion of the component 𝐵𝐵, respectively. Also the temperature importance of diffusion to reaction limitations. at is,
𝑇𝑇 and the mass concentration 𝑢𝑢 are no longer independent, actual overall reaction rate
which satis�es the following relation: 𝜂𝜂 𝜂 .
rate if entire surface were exposed to 𝐶𝐶AS , 𝑇𝑇𝑆𝑆
𝑇𝑇 𝑇𝑇𝑇 (1 − 𝑢𝑢) +1, (4) (13)
ISRN Physical Chemistry 3

e effectiveness factor for the heterogeneous chemical reac- provided 𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐. Using (14), the effectiveness factor 𝜂𝜂 is given
tion is [22–26] by
1 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
𝜂𝜂 𝜂 󶁥󶁥 󶁵󶁵 . (14) sin 󶀡󶀡𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐󶀱󶀱 𝑑𝑑 𝑑𝑑𝑑 󶀡󶀡𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐󶀱󶀱
𝜙𝜙2 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧 𝜂𝜂 𝜂 󶁦󶁦 󶁶󶁶 − 󶁦󶁦 3/2 󶁶󶁶
𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐 󶀡󶀡𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐󶀱󶀱 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 cos 󶀡󶀡𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐󶀱󶀱
(19)
3. Solution of Boundary Value Problem 2𝑑𝑑 𝑑𝑑𝑑 󶀡󶀡𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐󶀱󶀱 𝑑𝑑
Using HPM − 󶁦󶁦 󶁶󶁶 + 󶁦󶁦 󶁶󶁶 .
3/2 3 √
3𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 cos 󶀡󶀡𝑎𝑎 𝑐𝑐󶀱󶀱 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 󶀡󶀡𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐󶀱󶀱
2

Recently, many authors have applied the homotopy pertur- Case 2. When the reaction orders 𝑞𝑞 𝑞𝑞 and 𝑚𝑚 𝑚𝑚, we can
bation method (HPM) to solve the non-linear problems obtain the analytical solution of (11) to (12) using homotopy
in physics and engineering sciences [36–39]. Recently this perturbation method as follows:
method is also used to solve some of the non-linear problem
in physical sciences [32–34]. is method is a combination of (𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐) 󶀢󶀢3 + tan2 (𝑎𝑎)󶀲󶀲 1
homotopy in topology and classic perturbation techniques. 𝑦𝑦 (𝑧𝑧) = 󶁧󶁧 3
− 󶁷󶁷
2(𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐) (𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐)
He used to solve the Lighthill equation [32], the Diffusion
equation [33], and the Blasius equation [34, 35]. e HPM is 1 tan (𝑎𝑎)
+ 󶁥󶁥 + 𝑎𝑎1 󶁵󶁵 󶁵cos (𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎)) + 󶁥󶁥 + 𝑎𝑎2 󶁵󶁵 󶁵sin (𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎))
unique in its applicability, accuracy and efficiency. e HPM (𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐) (𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐)
uses the imbedding parameter 𝑝𝑝 as a small parameter, and
only a few iterations are needed to search for an asymptotic 𝜙𝜙2 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐) 󶀢󶀢󶀢󶀢1 − tan2 (𝑎𝑎)󶀲󶀲 cos (2𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎) + 2 tan (𝑎𝑎) sin (2𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎)󶀲󶀲
− 󶁧󶁧 󶁷󶁷
solution. Using this method, we can obtain the following 6𝑎𝑎2 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐)2
solution to (11) and (12) for the following three cases (see
Appendices A–C): 𝜙𝜙2 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐) (tan (𝑎𝑎) 𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧 (𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎) − 𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧 (𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎))
+ 󶁦󶁦 󶁶󶁶 ,
𝑎𝑎(𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐)2
Case 1. When the reaction orders 𝑞𝑞 𝑞𝑞 and 𝑚𝑚 𝑚𝑚, (20)
the analytical solution of (11) to (12) using homotopy
perturbation method [35, 40–44] is where
𝑑𝑑 󶀢󶀢3 + tan2 (𝑘𝑘)󶀲󶀲 1 1 𝑎𝑎 𝑎𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐 (21)
𝑦𝑦 (𝑧𝑧) = 󶁧󶁧 − 󶁷󶁷 + 󶁤󶁤 + 𝑘𝑘1 󶁴󶁴 cos (𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘)
2𝑐𝑐2 𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐
𝜙𝜙2 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐) 󶀢󶀢1 − tan2 (𝑎𝑎)󶀲󶀲
𝑎𝑎1 = 󶁧󶁧 󶁷󶁷
tan (𝑘𝑘) 6𝑎𝑎2 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐)2
+ 󶁥󶁥 + 𝑘𝑘2 󶁵󶁵 󶁵sin (𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘))
𝑐𝑐 (22)
2 2 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐) 󶀢󶀢3 + tan2 (𝑎𝑎)󶀲󶀲
𝜙𝜙 𝑑𝑑 󶀢󶀢󶀢󶀢1 − tan (𝑘𝑘)󶀲󶀲 cos (2𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘) + 2 tan (𝑘𝑘) sin (2𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘)󶀲󶀲 − 󶁧󶁧 󶁷󶁷 ,
− 󶁧󶁧 󶁷󶁷 2(𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐)3
6𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐2

𝜙𝜙2 𝑑𝑑 (tan (𝑘𝑘) 𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧 (𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘) − 𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧 (𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘)) 1 𝜙𝜙2 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐)
+ 󶁦󶁦 󶁶󶁶 , 𝑎𝑎2 = 󶁆󶁆󶀡󶀡𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎1 sin (𝑎𝑎)󶀱󶀱 − 󶀦󶀦 󶀶󶀶
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 𝑎𝑎 𝑎𝑎𝑎 (𝑎𝑎) 3𝑎𝑎(𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐)2
(15)
× 󶁢󶁢󶁢󶁢1 − tan2 (𝑎𝑎)󶀲󶀲 sin (2𝑎𝑎) − 2 tan (𝑎𝑎) cos (2𝑎𝑎)󶁲󶁲
where
𝜙𝜙2 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐)
𝑘𝑘 𝑘𝑘𝑘√𝑐𝑐𝑐 (16) + 󶀦󶀦 󶀶󶀶 [tan (𝑎𝑎) (cos (𝑎𝑎) − 𝑎𝑎 𝑎𝑎𝑎 (𝑎𝑎))
𝑎𝑎(𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐)2
𝜙𝜙2 𝑑𝑑 󶀢󶀢1 − tan2 (𝑘𝑘)󶀲󶀲 𝑑𝑑 󶀢󶀢3 + tan2 (𝑘𝑘)󶀲󶀲
𝑘𝑘1 = 󶁧󶁧 󶁷󶁷 − 󶁧󶁧 󶁷󶁷 , (17) − (sin (𝑎𝑎) + 𝑎𝑎 𝑎𝑎𝑎 (𝑎𝑎))] 󶁖󶁖 ,
6𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐2 2𝑐𝑐2
(23)
1 𝜙𝜙2 𝑑𝑑
𝑘𝑘2 = 󶁆󶁆󶁆󶁆𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘1 sin (𝑘𝑘)󶁱󶁱 − 󶀦󶀦 󶀶󶀶 provided 𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐. Using (14), the effectiveness factor 𝜂𝜂 is given
𝑘𝑘 𝑘𝑘𝑘 (𝑘𝑘) 3𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐
by
× 󶁢󶁢󶁢󶁢1 − tan2 (𝑘𝑘)󶀲󶀲 sin (2𝑘𝑘)
𝑐𝑐2 sin 󶀢󶀢𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐󶀲󶀲
−2 tan (𝑘𝑘) cos (2𝑘𝑘)󶁲󶁲 𝜂𝜂 𝜂 󶁧󶁧 󶁷󶁷
𝑎𝑎 𝑎𝑎𝑎 󶀢󶀢𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐󶀲󶀲 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐)5/2
𝜙𝜙2 𝑑𝑑
− 󶀦󶀦 󶀶󶀶 [tan (𝑘𝑘) (cos (𝑘𝑘) − 𝑘𝑘 𝑘𝑘𝑘 (𝑘𝑘)) 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 󶀡󶀡𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐󶀱󶀱
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 + 󶁧󶁧 󶁷󶁷
(𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐)2 cos2 󶀢󶀢𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐󶀲󶀲
− (sin (𝑘𝑘) + 𝑘𝑘 𝑘𝑘𝑘 (𝑘𝑘))] 󶁖󶁖 ,
2𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 󶀢󶀢𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐󶀲󶀲
− 󶁧󶁧 󶁷󶁷
(18) 3𝑎𝑎(𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐)5/2 cos3 󶀢󶀢𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐󶀲󶀲
4 ISRN Physical Chemistry

2𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐 󶀢󶀢𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐󶀲󶀲 e above expression is valid only if 𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐. Using (14), the
− 󶁧󶁧 󶁷󶁷 effectiveness factor 𝜂𝜂 is given by
3𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎3 󶀢󶀢𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐󶀲󶀲 󶀲𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐)5/2
𝑐𝑐2 sin 󶀢󶀢𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐󶀲󶀲
𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐 󶀢󶀢𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐󶀲󶀲 𝜂𝜂 𝜂 󶁧󶁧 󶁷󶁷
− 󶁧󶁧 󶁷󶁷 𝑎𝑎 𝑎𝑎𝑎 󶀢󶀢𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐󶀲󶀲 󶀲𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐)5/2
3𝑎𝑎 𝑎𝑎𝑎 󶀢󶀢𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐󶀲󶀲 󶀲𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐)5/2
𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐 󶀡󶀡𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐󶀱󶀱
7𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐 󶀢󶀢𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐󶀲󶀲 + 󶁧󶁧 󶁷󶁷
− 󶁧󶁧 󶁷󶁷 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐)2 cos2 󶀢󶀢𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐󶀲󶀲
3𝑎𝑎 𝑎𝑎𝑎 󶀢󶀢𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐󶀲󶀲 󶀲𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐)5/2
2𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐 󶀢󶀢𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐󶀲󶀲
𝑐𝑐 − 󶁧󶁧 󶁷󶁷
+ 󶁧󶁧 󶁷󶁷 3𝑎𝑎(𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐)5/2 cos3 󶀢󶀢𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐󶀲󶀲
cos2 󶀢󶀢𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐󶀲󶀲 󶀲𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐)2
4𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐 󶀢󶀢𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐󶀲󶀲
sin 󶀢󶀢𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐󶀲󶀲 − 󶁧󶁧 󶁷󶁷
+ 󶁧󶁧 󶁷󶁷 . 3𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎3 󶀢󶀢𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐󶀲󶀲 󶀲𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐)5/2
𝑎𝑎 𝑎𝑎𝑎 󶀢󶀢𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐󶀲󶀲 󶀲𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐)5/2
(24) 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐 󶀢󶀢𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐󶀲󶀲
− 󶁧󶁧 󶁷󶁷
3𝑎𝑎 𝑎𝑎𝑎 󶀢󶀢𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐󶀲󶀲 󶀲𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐)5/2
Case 3. When the reaction orders 𝑞𝑞 𝑞 𝑞 and 𝑚𝑚 𝑚𝑚,
the analytical solution of (11) to (12) using the homotopy 14𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐 󶀢󶀢𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐󶀲󶀲
perturbation method is given by − 󶁧󶁧 󶁷󶁷
3𝑎𝑎 𝑎𝑎𝑎 󶀢󶀢𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐󶀲󶀲 󶀲𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐)5/2

(𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐) 󶀢󶀢3 + tan2 (𝑏𝑏)󶀲󶀲 1 2𝑐𝑐

𝑦𝑦 (𝑧𝑧) = 󶁧󶁧 − 󶁷󶁷 + 󶁧󶁧 󶁷󶁷
󶀢󶀢𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐󶀲󶀲 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐)2
3
2(𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐) (𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐) cos2
1 13 sin 󶀢󶀢𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐󶀲󶀲
+ 󶁥󶁥 + 𝑏𝑏1 󶁵󶁵 󶁵cos (𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏))
(𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐) + 󶁧󶁧 󶁷󶁷
3𝑎𝑎 𝑎𝑎𝑎 󶀢󶀢𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐󶀲󶀲 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐)5/2
𝜙𝜙2 (𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐) 󶀢󶀢󶀢󶀢1−tan2 (𝑏𝑏)󶀲󶀲 cos (2𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏)+2 tan (𝑏𝑏) sin (2𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏)󶀲󶀲
− 󶁧󶁧 󶁷󶁷
6𝑏𝑏2 (𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐)2 2 sin 󶀢󶀢𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐󶀲󶀲
+ 󶁧󶁧 󶁷󶁷
2
3𝑎𝑎 𝑎𝑎𝑎 󶀢󶀢𝑎𝑎√𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐󶀲󶀲 󶀲𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐)5/2
𝜙𝜙 (𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐) (tan (𝑏𝑏) 𝑧𝑧 𝑧𝑧𝑧 (𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏)−𝑧𝑧 𝑧𝑧𝑧 (𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏))
+ 󶁦󶁦 󶁶󶁶
𝑏𝑏(𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐)2 1
− 󶁧󶁧 󶁷󶁷 .
tan (𝑏𝑏) cos2 󶀢󶀢𝑎𝑎 𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐󶀲󶀲 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐)2
√
+ 󶁥󶁥 + 𝑏𝑏2 󶁵󶁵 󶁵sin (𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏)) ,
(𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐) (29)
(25)

𝑏𝑏 𝑏𝑏𝑏√𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐 (26)

4. Numerical Simulation
𝜙𝜙2 (𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐) 󶀢󶀢1 − tan2 (𝑏𝑏)󶀲󶀲
𝑏𝑏1 = 󶁧󶁧 󶁷󶁷 e non-linear equations (11) to (12) for the �ve cases
6𝑏𝑏2 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐)2 are solved by numerical methods. e function pdex4, in
(27)
Matlab soware, is used to solve two-point boundary value
(𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐) 󶀢󶀢3 + tan2 (𝑏𝑏)󶀲󶀲
− 󶁧󶁧 󶁷󶁷 , problems (BVPs) for ordinary differential equations which
2(𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐)3
are given in Appendices D–H. In Tables 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5,
1 𝜙𝜙2 (𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐) the numerical results are also compared with the obtained
𝑏𝑏2 = 󶀥󶀥
𝑏𝑏 𝑏𝑏𝑏 (𝑏𝑏)
󶀵󶀵 󶀵󶀵𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏1 sin (𝑏𝑏) − 󶁦󶁦
3𝑏𝑏(𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐)2
󶁶󶁶 analytical expressions (see (15), (20), and (25)) and Villa et
al. [1� results for some �xed value of 𝜙𝜙 𝜙 𝜙𝜙𝜙.
× 󶀢󶀢󶀢󶀢1 − tan2 (𝑏𝑏)󶀲󶀲 sin (2𝑏𝑏)
5. Results and Discussions
−2 tan (𝑏𝑏) cos (2𝑏𝑏)󶀲󶀲
(28) Tables 1–5 represent the dimensionless mass concentration
𝜙𝜙2 (𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐)
+ 󶁦󶁦 󶁶󶁶 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 versus the dimensionless spatial coordinate 𝑧𝑧 for the
𝑏𝑏(𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐)2 following different values of the dimensionless parameters 𝑐𝑐
× (tan (𝑏𝑏) (cos (𝑏𝑏) − 𝑏𝑏 𝑏𝑏𝑏 (𝑏𝑏)) and 𝑑𝑑:
(i) when 𝑚𝑚 𝑚𝑚, 𝑞𝑞 𝑞 𝑞, 𝜙𝜙 𝜙 𝜙𝜙𝜙, 𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐, and 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑.
− (sin (𝑏𝑏) + 𝑏𝑏 𝑏𝑏𝑏 (𝑏𝑏))) 󶁖󶁖 .
(ii) when 𝑚𝑚 𝑚𝑚, 𝑞𝑞 𝑞 𝑞, 𝜙𝜙 𝜙 𝜙𝜙𝜙, 𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐, and 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑.
ISRN Physical Chemistry 5

T 1: Comparison of our analytical e�pression of concentration pro�les 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 with numerical results and Villa et al. [1] results
corresponding to Case 1, for 𝑚𝑚 𝑚 𝑚𝑚 𝑚𝑚 𝑚 𝑚, and 𝜙𝜙 𝜙𝜙𝜙𝜙, when 𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐 and 𝑑𝑑 𝑑𝑑.

Dimensionless spatial coordinate 𝑧𝑧

𝑐𝑐 𝑑𝑑
0.0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1.00
Numerical 0.000000 0.073340 0.128200 0.162200 0.173700
2.5 0.5 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 Analytical (15) 0.000000 0.070005 0.121817 0.153614 0.164329
Villa et al. [1] 0.000000 0.074132 0.129628 0.164013 0.175663

Numerical 0.000000 0.068130 0.118500 0.149500 0.160000

2 0.4 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 Analytical (15) 0.000000 0.066522 0.115447 0.145359 0.155421
Villa et al. [1] 0.000000 0.068637 0.119455 0.150699 0.161243

Numerical 0.000000 0.060340 0.104200 0.130700 0.139700

1 0.2 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 Analytical (15) 0.000000 0.060165 0.103798 0.130241 0.139099
Villa et al. [1] 0.000000 0.060524 0.104481 0.131152 0.140093

Numerical 0.000000 0.057310 0.098580 0.123500 0.131804

0.5 0.1 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 Analytical (15) 0.000000 0.057319 0.098578 0.123460 0.131775
Villa et al. [1] 0.000000 0.057394 0.098722 0.123652 0.131985

Numerical 0.000000 0.055960 0.096080 0.120200 0.128300

0.25 0.05 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 Analytical (15) 0.000000 0.055977 0.096116 0.120262 0.128321
Villa et al. [1] 0.000000 0.055994 0.096149 0.120306 0.128369

T 2: Comparison of our analytical e�pression of concentration pro�les 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 with numerical results and Villa et al. [1] results
corresponding to Case 1, for 𝑚𝑚 𝑚 𝑚𝑚 𝑚𝑚 𝑚 𝑚, and 𝜙𝜙 𝜙𝜙𝜙𝜙, when 𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐 and 𝑑𝑑 𝑑𝑑.

Dimensionless spatial coordinate 𝑧𝑧

𝑐𝑐 𝑑𝑑
0.0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1.00
Numerical 0.000000 0.044356 0.074890 0.092878 0.098564
−2.5 −0.5 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 Analytical (15) 0.000000 0.044254 0.074608 0.092320 0.098140
Villa et al. [1] 0.000000 0.045077 0.076180 0.094425 0.100440

Numerical 0.000000 0.037821 0.062402 0.076523 0.080991

−5 −0.5 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 Analytical (15) 0.000000 0.037461 0.062200 0.076257 0.080814
Villa et al. [1] 0.000000 0.039354 0.065829 0.081121 0.086125

Numerical 0.000000 0.032841 0.053973 0.068000 0.070002

−7.5 −0.5 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 Analytical (15) 0.000000 0.032651 0.053454 0.067831 0.069662
Villa et al. [1] 0.000000 0.035385 0.058706 0.072018 0.076351

Numerical 0.000000 0.040345 0.067145 0.083100 0.087989

−4 −0.2 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 Analytical (15) 0.000000 0.040097 0.067028 0.082520 0.087574
Villa et al. [1] 0.000000 0.041559 0.069825 0.086265 0.091662

Numerical 0.000000 0.038110 0.062899 0.077121 0.081987

−5 −0.2 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 Analytical (15) 0.000000 0.037684 0.062628 0.076831 0.081440
Villa et al. [1] 0.000000 0.039551 0.066203 0.081619 0.086668

(iii) when 𝑚𝑚 𝑚 𝑚, 𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞, 𝜙𝜙 𝜙𝜙𝜙𝜙, 𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐, and 𝑑𝑑 𝑑𝑑. our analytical results for the mass concentrations 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 are
(iv) when 𝑚𝑚 𝑚 𝑚, 𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞, 𝜙𝜙 𝜙𝜙𝜙𝜙, 𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐, and 𝑑𝑑 𝑑𝑑. compared with the numerical results and Villa et al. results
[1]. Villa et al. [1] obtained the analytical solution of this
(v) when 𝑚𝑚 𝑚 𝑚, 𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞, 𝜙𝜙 𝜙𝜙𝜙𝜙, 𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐, and 𝑑𝑑 𝑑𝑑. problem only for taking the parametric restrictions.
From these tables it is evident that the values of In Tables 1–4, our analytical results are compared with
the dimensionless mass concentration 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 decrease, when the numerical results and Villa et al. [1] results. A good
dimensionless parameters 𝑐𝑐 and 𝑑𝑑 decrease. In Tables 1–5, agreement between them is noted. In Table 5 for the Case 3,
6 ISRN Physical Chemistry

T 3: Comparison of our analytical e�pression of concentration pro�les 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 with numerical results and Villa et al. [1] results
corresponding to Case 2, for 𝑚𝑚 𝑚 𝑚𝑚 𝑚𝑚 𝑚 𝑚, and 𝜙𝜙 𝜙𝜙𝜙𝜙, when 𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐 and 𝑑𝑑 𝑑𝑑.

Dimensionless spatial coordinate 𝑧𝑧

𝑐𝑐 𝑑𝑑
0.0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1.00
Numerical 0.000000 0.059510 0.102600 0.128600 0.137400
2 0.4 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 Analytical (20) 0.000000 0.058307 0.100271 0.125535 0.133966
Villa et al. [1] 0.000000 0.059654 0.102825 0.128938 0.137675

Numerical 0.000000 0.054380 0.093160 0.116400 0.124100

1.01 0.2 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 Analytical (20) 0.000000 0.055077 0.093182 0.116617 0.123772
Villa et al. [1] (𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐) 0.000000 0.054316 0.093042 0.116241 0.123967

Numerical 0.000000 0.052160 0.089100 0.111100 0.118400

0.5 0.1 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 Analytical (20) 0.000000 0.052036 0.88869 0.110829 0.118125
Villa et al. [1] 0.000000 0.052090 0.088971 0.110966 0.118275

Numerical 0.000000 0.051160 0.087260 0.108700 0.115900

0.25 0.05 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 Analytical (20) 0.000000 0.051052 0.087075 0.108510 0.115625
Villa et al. [1] 0.000000 0.051065 0.087099 0.108542 0.115660

Numerical 0.000000 0.050590 0.086210 0.107400 0.114400

0.1 0.02 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 Analytical (20) 0.000000 0.050474 0.086019 0.107144 0.114151
Villa et al. [1] 0.000000 0.050476 0.086023 0.107149 0.114157

Numerical 0.000000 0.050250 0.085590 0.106600 0.113500

0.01 0.002 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 Analytical (20) 0.000000 0.050130 0.085393 0.106333 0.113278
Villa et al. [1] 0.000000 0.050130 0.085393 0.106333 0.113278

Numerical 0.000000 0.050220 0.085530 0.106500 0.113500

0.001 0.0002 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 Analytical (20) 0.000000 0.050096 0.085330 0.106253 0.113191
Villa et al. [1] 0.000000 0.050096 0.085330 0.106253 0.113191

T 4: Comparison of our analytical e�pression of concentration pro�les 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 with numerical results and Villa et al. [1] results
corresponding to Case 2, for 𝑚𝑚 𝑚 𝑚𝑚 𝑚𝑚 𝑚 𝑚, and 𝜙𝜙 𝜙𝜙𝜙𝜙, when 𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐 and 𝑑𝑑 𝑑𝑑.

Dimensionless spatial coordinate 𝑧𝑧

𝑐𝑐 𝑑𝑑
0.0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1.00
Numerical 0.000000 0.048975 0.083298 0.103610 0.110432
−0.3 −0.1 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 Analytical (20) 0.000000 0.048969 0.083271 0.103588 0.110316
Villa et al. [1] 0.000000 0.048985 0.083302 0.103629 0.110361

Numerical 0.000000 0.048943 0.082101 0.102105 0.108924

−0.5 −0.1 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 Analytical (20) 0.000000 0.048246 0.081952 0.101881 0.108475
Villa et al. [1] 0.000000 0.048288 0.082031 0.101987 0.108591

Numerical 0.000000 0.046786 0.078998 0.097997 0.104789

−1.0 −0.1 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 Analytical (20) 0.000000 0.046530 0.078818 0.097825 0.104101
Villa et al. [1] 0.000000 0.046673 0.079091 0.098191 0.104500

Numerical 0.000000 0.045001 0.076001 0.094255 0.100213

−1.5 −0.1 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 Analytical (20) 0.000000 0.044931 0.075901 0.094050 0.100030
Villa et al. [1] 0.000000 0.045214 0.076442 0.094775 0.100821

Numerical 0.000000 0.043678 0.073356 0.090611 0.096987

−2.0 −0.1 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 Analytical (20) 0.000000 0.043438 0.073179 0.090530 0.096234
Villa et al. [1] 0.000000 0.043888 0.074037 0.091678 0.097487
ISRN Physical Chemistry 7

T 5: Comparison of our analytical expression of concentration pro�les 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 with numerical results and Villa et al. [1] results
corresponding to Case 3, for 𝑚𝑚 𝑚 𝑚𝑚 𝑚𝑚 𝑚 𝑚, and 𝜙𝜙 𝜙 𝜙𝜙𝜙, when 𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐 and 𝑑𝑑 𝑑𝑑.

Dimensionless spatial coordinate 𝑧𝑧

𝑐𝑐 𝑑𝑑
0.0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1.00
Numerical 0.000000 0.053770 0.092021 0.114923 0.122500
Analytical (25) 0.000000 0.053168 0.090154 0.110179 0.119763
1.99 0.4 y(z) (error %) (0.0000) (1.1195) (2.0288) (4.0102) (2.2342)
Villa et al. [1] (𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐) 0.000000 0.013657 0.023410 0.029260 0.031210
(error %) (0.0000) (74.6010) (74.5601) (74.5394) (74.5224)

Numerical 0.000000 0.049970 0.085070 0.105900 0.112800

Analytical (25) 0.000000 0.049630 0.084442 0.105065 0.108007
1.0 0.2 y(z) (error %) (0.0000) (0.6804) (0.7640) (0.7884) (4.2491)
Villa et al. [1] 0.000000 0.013358 0.022862 0.028549 0.030442
(error %) (0.0000) (73.2679) (73.1256) (73.0415) (73.0124)

Numerical 0.000000 0.048300 0.082010 0.101900 0.108500

Analytical (25) 0.000000 0.048078 0.081632 0.101452 0.108007
0.5 0.1 y(z) (error %) (0.0000) (0.4596) (0.4609) (0.4396) (0.4543)
Villa et al. [1] 0.000000 0.013216 0.022601 0.028210 0.030076
(error %) (0.0000) (72.6376) (72.7766) (72.3159) (72.2801)

Numerical 0.000000 0.047510 0.080580 0.100100 0.106500

Analytical (25) 0.000000 0.046859 0.079420 0.098604 0.104941
0.25 0.05 y(z) (error %) (0.0000) (1.3702) (1.4395) (1.4945) (1.4638)
Villa et al. [1] 0.000000 0.013146 0.022473 0.028044 0.029897
(error %) (0.0000) (72.3300) (72.1109) (71.9840) (71.9276)

Numerical 0.000000 0.047060 0.079750 0.099010 0.105400

Analytical (25) 0.000000 0.046859 0.079420 0.098604 0.104941
0.1 0.02 y(z) (error %) (0.0000) (0.4271) (0.4137) (0.4100) (0.4354)
Villa et al. [1] 0.000000 0.013104 0.022397 0.027946 0.029791
(error %) (0.0000) (72.1546) (71.9159) (71.7745) (72.3531)

Numerical 0.000000 0.046790 0.079260 0.098380 0.104700

Analytical (25) 0.000000 0.046588 0.078929 0.097971 0.104259
0.01 0.002 y(z) (error %) (0.0000) (0.4317) (0.41756) (0.4157) (0.4212)
Villa et al. [1] 0.000000 0.013080 0.022352 0.027887 0.029727
(0.0000) (72.0453) (71.7991) (71.6537) (71.6074)

Numerical 0.000000 0.046760 0.079210 0.098320 0.104600

Analytical (25) 0.000000 0.046561 0.078880 0.097907 0.104191
0.001 0.0002 y(z) (error %) (0.0000) (0.4255) (0.4166) (0.4200) (0.3910)
Villa et al. [1] 0.000000 0.013077 0.022347 0.027881 0.029721
(error %) (0.0000) (72.0337) (71.7876) (71.6425) (71.5860)

our analytical results and Villa et al. [1] results are compared approximate dimensionless mass concentrations 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 are
with the numerical results. Our analytical result gives good derived by using the HPM for all values of dimensionless
agreement with the numerical results. In Table 6, the effec- parameters 𝑐𝑐, 𝑑𝑑, and 𝜙𝜙. e HPM is an extremely simple
tiveness factors for the Cases 1 and 2, a satisfactory agreement method and it is also a promising method to solve other non-
between our results and Villa et al. [1] results is noted. linear equations. is method can be easily extended to �nd
the solution of all other non-linear equations. e proposed
6. Conclusion formulas are used to �nd the thiele module range, in which
e steady state non-linear reaction-diffusion equation has multiple values of the effectiveness factor should be searched.
been solved analytically and numerically. A simple and e present method is quick and efficient and is able to reduce
8 ISRN Physical Chemistry

T 6: Comparison of our effectiveness factors ((19), (24), and (29)), and Villa et al. [1] when 𝜙𝜙 𝜙 𝜙𝜙𝜙.

Effectiveness factors (𝜂𝜂)

Cases 𝑐𝑐 𝑑𝑑
Villa et al. [1] Our results
2.5 0.5 1.3195 1.2526
2 0.4 1.2294 1.1952
1 0.2 1.0961 1.0903
0.5 0.1 1.0446 1.0434
0.25 0.05 1.0215 1.0213
Case 1 (𝑚𝑚 𝑚𝑚𝑚 𝑚𝑚 𝑚𝑚)
−2.5 −0.5 0.8142 0.8280
−5 −0.5 0.7461 0.7157
−7.5 −0.5 0.6797 0.6360
−4 −0.2 0.7827 0.7592
−5 −0.2 0.7493 0.7193

2.0 0.4 1.0820 1.0603

1.01 0.2 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐 0.9940 0.9890
0.5 0.1 0.9572 0.9564
0.25 0.05 0.9403 0.9401
0.1 0.02 0.9306 0.9305
0.01 0.002 0.9249 0.9249
Case 2 (𝑚𝑚 𝑚 𝑚𝑚 𝑚𝑚 𝑚𝑚𝑚
0.001 0.0002 0.9243 0.9242
−0.3 −0.5 0.9059 0.9057
−0.5 −0.5 0.8944 0.8937
−1.0 −0.5 0.8676 0.8653
−1.5 −0.2 0.8435 0.8389
−2.0 −0.2 0.8214 0.8142

1.99 0.4 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐𝑐 0.9991 0.9678

1.0 0.2 0.9793 0.9168
0.5 0.1 0.9699 0.8910
Case 3 (𝑚𝑚 𝑚 𝑚𝑚 𝑚𝑚 𝑚 𝑚𝑚 0.25 0.05 0.9653 0.8783
0.1 0.02 0.9626 0.8708
0.01 0.002 0.9609 0.8663
0.001 0.0002 0.9608 0.8658

si�ni�cantly the amount of computations in simulations of We construct the homotopy as follows:

the catalytic chemical reactors.

Appendices 𝑑𝑑2 𝑦𝑦
󶀡󶀡1 − 𝑝𝑝󶀱󶀱 󶀱󶀱 + 𝜙𝜙2 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐𝑐2 󶁶󶁶
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑2
A. Solution of Nonlinear Equations (11) and (12) (A.2)
Using HPM 𝑑𝑑2 𝑦𝑦
+ 𝑝𝑝 󶁦󶁦 2 + 𝜙𝜙2 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐2 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐2 + 𝜙𝜙2 󶁶󶁶 =0.
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
In this Appendix, we indicate how (15) in this paper is
derived. To �nd the solution of (11) and (12), when 𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞
and 𝑚𝑚 𝑚𝑚. When 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐𝑐 small, then (11) reduces to e analytical solution of (A.1) is

𝑑𝑑2 𝑦𝑦 (A.1)
+ 𝜙𝜙2 󶁢󶁢1+ 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐2 󶁲󶁲 =0. 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦0 + 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝1 + 𝑝𝑝2 𝑦𝑦2 + ⋯ . (A.3)
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑2
ISRN Physical Chemistry 9

Substituting (A.3) into (A.2), we get B. Solution of Nonlinear Equations (11) and (12)
Using HPM
𝑑𝑑2 󶀢󶀢𝑦𝑦0 + 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝1 + 𝑝𝑝2 𝑦𝑦2 + ⋯󶀲󶀲
󶀡󶀡1 − 𝑝𝑝󶀱󶀱 󶁧󶁧 In this Appendix, we indicate how (20) in this paper is
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑2
derived. �o �nd the solution of (11) and (12), when 𝑞𝑞 𝑞𝑞
and 𝑚𝑚 𝑚𝑚. When 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 small, then (11) reduces to
+𝜙𝜙2 𝑐𝑐 󶀢󶀢𝑦𝑦0 + 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝1 + 𝑝𝑝2 𝑦𝑦2 + ⋯󶀲󶀲 + 𝜙𝜙2 󶁷󶁷
𝑑𝑑2 𝑦𝑦 (B.1)
2 2 + 𝜙𝜙2 󶁢󶁢1 + (𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐) 𝑦𝑦 𝑦 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐) 𝑦𝑦2 󶁲󶁲 = 0.
𝑑𝑑 󶀢󶀢𝑦𝑦0 + 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝1 + 𝑝𝑝 𝑦𝑦2 + ⋯󶀲󶀲 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑2
+ 𝑝𝑝 󶁧󶁧
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑2
We construct the homotopy as follows:
2 2
+ 𝜙𝜙 𝑐𝑐 󶀢󶀢𝑦𝑦0 + 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝1 + 𝑝𝑝 𝑦𝑦2 + ⋯󶀲󶀲
𝑑𝑑2 𝑦𝑦
󶀡󶀡1 − 𝑝𝑝󶀱󶀱 󶀱󶀱 + 𝜙𝜙2 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐) 𝑦𝑦 𝑦𝑦𝑦2 󶁶󶁶
−𝜙𝜙2 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐󶀢󶀢𝑦𝑦0 + 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝1 + 𝑝𝑝2 𝑦𝑦2 + ⋯󶀲󶀲 + 𝜙𝜙2 󶁷󶁷 = 0.
2 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑2

(A.4) 𝑑𝑑2 𝑦𝑦
+ 𝑝𝑝 󶁦󶁦 + 𝜙𝜙2 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐) 𝑦𝑦 𝑦𝑦𝑦2 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐) 𝑦𝑦2 + 𝜙𝜙2 󶁶󶁶 = 0.
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑2
Comparing the coefficients of like powers of 𝑝𝑝 in (A.4) we get (B.2)

𝑑𝑑2 𝑦𝑦0
𝑝𝑝0 ∶ + 𝜙𝜙2 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐0 + 𝜙𝜙2 = 0, e analytical solution of (B.1) is
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑2
(A.5)
1 𝑑𝑑2 𝑦𝑦1 𝑦𝑦 𝑦 𝑦𝑦0 + 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝1 + 𝑝𝑝2 𝑦𝑦2 + ⋯ . (B.3)
𝑝𝑝 ∶ + 𝜙𝜙2 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐1 − 𝜙𝜙2 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐20 = 0.
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑2
e initial approximations are as follows: Substituting (B.3) into (B.2), we get

𝑦𝑦0 (0) = 0, 𝑦𝑦′0 (1) = 0, 𝑑𝑑2 󶀢󶀢𝑦𝑦0 + 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝1 + 𝑝𝑝2 𝑦𝑦2 + ⋯󶀲󶀲
(A.6) 󶀡󶀡1 − 𝑝𝑝󶀱󶀱 󶁧󶁧
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑2
𝑦𝑦𝑖𝑖 (0) = 𝑦𝑦′𝑖𝑖 (1) = 0, 𝑖𝑖 𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 𝑖 𝑖 𝑖

Solving (A.5) and using the boundary conditions (A.6) we +𝜙𝜙2 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐) 󶀢󶀢𝑦𝑦0 + 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝1 + 𝑝𝑝2 𝑦𝑦2 + ⋯󶀲󶀲 + 𝜙𝜙2 󶁷󶁷
obtain the following results:
1 𝑑𝑑2 󶀢󶀢𝑦𝑦0 + 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝1 + 𝑝𝑝2 𝑦𝑦2 + ⋯󶀲󶀲 (B.4)
𝑦𝑦0 = [cos (𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘) + tan (𝑘𝑘) sin (𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘) − 1] , + 𝑝𝑝 󶁧󶁧 + 𝜙𝜙2 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐)
𝑐𝑐 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑2
𝑑𝑑 󶀢󶀢3 + tan2 (𝑘𝑘)󶀲󶀲
𝑦𝑦1 = 𝑘𝑘1 cos (𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘) + 𝑘𝑘2 sin (𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘) + 󶁧󶁧 󶁷󶁷 × 󶀢󶀢𝑦𝑦0 + 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝1 + 𝑝𝑝2 𝑦𝑦2 + ⋯󶀲󶀲 − 𝜙𝜙2 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐)
2𝑐𝑐2
2
𝜙𝜙2 𝑑𝑑 󶀢󶀢1 − tan2 (𝑘𝑘)󶀲󶀲 cos (2𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘) ×󶀢󶀢𝑦𝑦0 + 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝1 + 𝑝𝑝2 𝑦𝑦2 + ⋯󶀲󶀲 + 𝜙𝜙2 󶁷󶁷 = 0.
− 󶁧󶁧 󶁷󶁷 (A.7)
6𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐2

𝜙𝜙2 𝑑𝑑 𝑑𝑑𝑑 (𝑘𝑘) sin (2𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘) Comparing the coefficients of like powers of 𝑝𝑝 in (B.4) we get
− 󶁦󶁦 2
󶁶󶁶
3𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐
𝑑𝑑2 𝑦𝑦0
𝜙𝜙2 𝑑𝑑 𝑑𝑑𝑑 (𝑘𝑘) 𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧 (𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘) 𝜙𝜙2 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 𝑑𝑑𝑑 (𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘) 𝑝𝑝0 ∶ + 𝜙𝜙2 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐) 𝑦𝑦0 + 𝜙𝜙2 = 0,
+ 󶁦󶁦 󶁶󶁶 − 󶁦󶁦 󶁶󶁶 , 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑2
𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 (B.5)
𝑑𝑑2 𝑦𝑦1
where 𝑘𝑘, 𝑘𝑘1 , and 𝑘𝑘2 are de�ned in the text (16), (17), and (18), 𝑝𝑝1 ∶ + 𝜙𝜙2 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐) 𝑦𝑦1 + 𝜙𝜙2 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐) 𝑦𝑦20 = 0.
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑2
respectively.
According to the HPM, we can conclude that e initial approximations are as follows:
𝑦𝑦 𝑦 𝑦𝑦𝑦 𝑦𝑦 (𝑡𝑡) = 𝑦𝑦0 + 𝑦𝑦1 . (A.8)
𝑝𝑝 𝑝 𝑝
𝑦𝑦0 (0) = 0, 𝑦𝑦′0 (1) = 0,
(B.6)
Aer putting (A.7) into (A.8) we obtain the solution in the
text (15). 𝑦𝑦𝑖𝑖 (0) = 𝑦𝑦′𝑖𝑖 (1) = 0, 𝑖𝑖 𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 𝑖 𝑖 𝑖
10 ISRN Physical Chemistry

Solving (B.5) and using the boundary conditions (B.6) we Substituting (C.3) into (C.2), we get
obtain the following results:
𝑑𝑑2 󶀢󶀢𝑦𝑦0 + 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝1 + 𝑝𝑝2 𝑦𝑦2 + ⋯󶀲󶀲
󶀡󶀡1 − 𝑝𝑝󶀱󶀱 󶀱󶀱
1 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑2
𝑦𝑦0 = 󶀥󶀥 󶀵󶀵 󶀵cos (𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎) + tan (𝑎𝑎) sin (𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎) − 1] ,
(𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐)

(𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐) 󶀢󶀢3 + tan2 (𝑎𝑎)󶀲󶀲 +𝜙𝜙2 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐) 󶀢󶀢𝑦𝑦0 + 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝1 + 𝑝𝑝2 𝑦𝑦2 + ⋯󶀲󶀲 + 𝜙𝜙2 󶁷󶁷
𝑦𝑦1 = 󶁡󶁡𝑎𝑎1 cos (𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎) + 𝑎𝑎2 sin (𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎)󶁱󶁱 + 󶁧󶁧 󶁷󶁷
2(𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐)3
𝑑𝑑2 󶀢󶀢𝑦𝑦0 + 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝1 + 𝑝𝑝2 𝑦𝑦2 + ⋯󶀲󶀲
2 2
𝜙𝜙 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐) 󶀢󶀢1 − tan (𝑎𝑎)󶀲󶀲 cos (2𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎) + 𝑝𝑝 󶁧󶁧 + 𝜙𝜙2 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐)
− 󶁧󶁧 󶁷󶁷 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑2
6(𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐)2 𝑎𝑎2
× 󶀢󶀢𝑦𝑦0 + 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝1 + 𝑝𝑝2 𝑦𝑦2 + ⋯󶀲󶀲 − 𝜙𝜙2 (𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐)
2
𝜙𝜙 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐) tan (𝑎𝑎) sin (2𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎)
− 󶁦󶁦 󶁶󶁶
3(𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐)2 𝑎𝑎2 2
×󶀢󶀢𝑦𝑦0 + 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝1 + 𝑝𝑝2 𝑦𝑦2 + ⋯󶀲󶀲 + 𝜙𝜙2 󶁷󶁷 = 0.
𝜙𝜙2 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐) tan (𝑎𝑎) 𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧 (𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎) (C.4)
+ 󶁦󶁦 󶁶󶁶
(𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐)2 𝑎𝑎
Comparing the coefficients of like powers of 𝑝𝑝 in (C.4) we get
𝜙𝜙2 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐) 𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧 (𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎)
− 󶁦󶁦 󶁶󶁶 , 𝑑𝑑2 𝑦𝑦0
(𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐)2 𝑎𝑎 𝑝𝑝0 ∶ + 𝜙𝜙2 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐) 𝑦𝑦0 + 𝜙𝜙2 = 0,
(B.7) 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑2
(C.5)
𝑑𝑑2 𝑦𝑦1
where 𝑎𝑎, 𝑎𝑎1 , and 𝑎𝑎2 are de�ned in the text (21), (22), and (23) 𝑝𝑝1 ∶ + 𝜙𝜙2 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐) 𝑦𝑦1 − 𝜙𝜙2 (𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐) 𝑦𝑦20 = 0.
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑2
respectively.
According to the HPM, we can conclude that e initial approximations is as follows:

𝑦𝑦0 (0) = 0, 𝑦𝑦′0 (1) = 0,

𝑦𝑦 𝑦 𝑦𝑦𝑦 𝑦𝑦 (𝑡𝑡) = 𝑦𝑦0 + 𝑦𝑦1 . (B.8) (C.6)
𝑝𝑝 𝑝 𝑝
𝑦𝑦𝑖𝑖 (0) = 𝑦𝑦′𝑖𝑖 (1) = 0, 𝑖𝑖 𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 𝑖 𝑖
Aer putting (B.7) into (B.8) we obtain the solution in the text Solving (C.5) and using the boundary conditions (C.6) we
(20). obtain the following results:
1
C. Solution of Nonlinear Equations (11) and (12) 𝑦𝑦0 = [cos (𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏) + tan (𝑏𝑏) sin (𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏) − 1] ,
(𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐)
Using HPM
𝑦𝑦1 = 󶁡󶁡𝑏𝑏1 cos (𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏) + 𝑏𝑏2 sin (𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏)󶁱󶁱
In this Appendix, we indicate how (25) in this paper is
derived. �o �nd the solution of (11) and (12), when 𝑞𝑞 𝑞𝑞 (𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐) 󶀢󶀢3 + tan2 (𝑏𝑏)󶀲󶀲
and 𝑚𝑚 𝑚𝑚. + 󶁧󶁧 󶁷󶁷
2(𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐)3
When 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 small, then (11) reduces to
𝜙𝜙2 (𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐) 󶀢󶀢1 − tan2 (𝑏𝑏)󶀲󶀲 cos (2𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏)
2
𝑑𝑑 𝑦𝑦 − 󶁧󶁧 󶁷󶁷
+ 𝜙𝜙2 󶁢󶁢1 + (𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐) 𝑦𝑦 𝑦 (𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐) 𝑦𝑦2 󶁲󶁲 = 0. (C.1) 6(𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐)2 𝑏𝑏2 (C.7)
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑2
𝜙𝜙2 (𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐) tan (𝑏𝑏) sin (2𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏)
We construct the homotopy as follows: − 󶁦󶁦 󶁶󶁶
3(𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐)2 𝑏𝑏2

𝑑𝑑2 𝑦𝑦 𝜙𝜙2 (𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐) tan (𝑏𝑏) 𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧 (𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏)

󶀡󶀡1 − 𝑝𝑝󶀱󶀱 󶀱󶀱 + 𝜙𝜙2 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐) 𝑦𝑦 𝑦𝑦𝑦2 󶁶󶁶 + 󶁦󶁦 󶁶󶁶
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑2 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐)2 𝑏𝑏

𝑑𝑑2 𝑦𝑦 𝜙𝜙2 (𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐) 𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧 (𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏)

+𝑝𝑝 󶁦󶁦 + 𝜙𝜙2 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐) 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦2 (𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐) 𝑦𝑦2 + 𝜙𝜙2 󶁶󶁶 = 0. − 󶁦󶁦 󶁶󶁶 ,
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑2 (𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐)2 𝑏𝑏
(C.2) where 𝑏𝑏, 𝑏𝑏1 , and 𝑏𝑏2 are de�ned in the text (26), (27), and (28),
respectively.
e analytical solution of (C.1) is According to the HPM, we can conclude that
𝑦𝑦 𝑦 𝑦𝑦𝑦 𝑦𝑦 (𝑡𝑡) = 𝑦𝑦0 + 𝑦𝑦1 . (C.8)
𝑦𝑦 𝑦 𝑦𝑦0 + 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝1 + 𝑝𝑝2 𝑦𝑦2 + ⋯ . (C.3) 𝑝𝑝 𝑝 𝑝
ISRN Physical Chemistry 11

Aer putting (C.7) into (C.8) we obtain the solution in the t=linspace(0,10000);
text (25). sol = pdepe(m,@pdex4pde,@pdex4ic,@pdex4bc,x,t);
u = sol(:,:,1);
D. MATLAB Program to Find the Numerical
Solution of Nonlinear Equations (11) and (12) �gure
plot(x,u(end,:))
function pdex4
title(’u(x,t)’)
m = 0;
xlabel(’Distance x’)
x =[0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1];
ylabel(’u(x,t)’)
t=linspace(0,10000);
%---------------------------------------------------------
sol = pdepe(m,@pdex4pde,@pdex4ic,@pdex4bc,x,t); --------
u = sol(:,:,1);
function [c,f,s] = pdex4pde(x,t,u,DuDx)
�gure
c = 1;
plot(x,u(end,:))
f = DuDx;
title(’u(x,t)’)
a=0.5;
xlabel (’Distance x’)
c=−7.5;
ylabel (’u(x,t)’)
d=−0.5;
%---------------------------------------------------------
-------- m=0;
function [c,f,s] = pdex4pde(x,t,u,DuDx) p=0;
c = 1; F =a∧ 2∗ (1-u)∧ (m+p)∗ exp(c∗ u/(1+d∗ u))
f = DuDx; s = F;
a=0.5; %---------------------------------------------------------
--------
c=1;
function u0 = pdex4ic(x); %create initial conditions
d=0.2;
u0 = 1;
m=0;
%---------------------------------------------------------
p=0;
--------
F =a∧ 2∗ (1-u)∧ (m+p)∗ exp(c∗ u/(1+d∗ u))
function[pl,ql,pr,qr]=pdex4bc(xl,ul,xr,ur,t) %create
s = F; boundary conditions
%--------------------------------------------------------- pl = ul;
--------
ql = 0;
function u0 = pdex4ic(x); %create initial conditions
pr = 0;
u0 = 1;
qr = 1.
%---------------------------------------------------------
--------
F. MATLAB Program to Find
function[pl,ql,pr,qr]=pdex4bc(xl,ul,xr,ur,t) %create the Numerical Solution of Non-Linear
boundary conditions
Equations (11) and (12)
pl = ul;
ql = 0; function pdex4

pr = 0; m = 0;
qr = 1. x =[0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1];
t=linspace(0,10000);
E. MATLAB Program to Find the Numerical sol = pdepe(m,@pdex4pde,@pdex4ic,@pdex4bc,x,t);
Solution of Nonlinear Equations (11) and (12) u = sol(:,:,1);
function pdex4 �gure
m = 0; plot(x,u(end,:))
x =[0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1]; title(’u(x,t)’)
12 ISRN Physical Chemistry

xlabel(’Distance x’) f = DuDx;

ylabel(’u(x,t)’) a=0.5;
%--------------------------------------------------------- c=−1.5;
-------- d=−0.1;
function [c,f,s] = pdex4pde(x,t,u,DuDx) m=1;
c = 1; p=0;
f = DuDx; F =a∧ 2∗ (1-u)∧ (m+p)∗ exp(c∗ u/(1+d∗ u))
a=0.5; s = F;
c=2; %---------------------------------------------------------
d=0.4; --------
m=1; function u0 = pdex4ic(x); %create initial conditions
p=0; u0 = 1;
∧ ∗ ∧ ∗ ∗ ∗ %---------------------------------------------------------
F =a 2 (1-u) (m+p) exp(c u/(1+d u));
--------
s = F;
function[pl,ql,pr,qr]=pdex4bc(xl,ul,xr,ur,t) %create
%---------------------------------------------------------
boundary conditions
--------
pl = ul;
function u0 = pdex4ic(x); %create initial conditions
ql = 0;
u0 = 1;
pr = 0;
%---------------------------------------------------------
-------- qr = 1.
function[pl,ql,pr,qr]=pdex4bc(xl,ul,xr,ur,t) %create
boundary conditions H. MATLAB Program to Find
pl = ul;
the Numerical Solution of Non-Linear
Equations (11) and (12)
ql = 0;
pr = 0; function pdex4
qr = 1. m = 0;
x =[0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1];
G. MATLAB Program to Find t=linspace(0,10000);
the Numerical Solution of Non-Linear sol = pdepe(m,@pdex4pde,@pdex4ic,@pdex4bc,x,t);
Equations (11) and (12) u = sol(:,:,1);
function pdex4 ��ure
m = 0; plot(x,u(end,:))
x =[0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1]; title(’u(x,t)’)
t=linspace(0,10000); xlabel(’Distance x’)
sol = pdepe(m,@pdex4pde,@pdex4ic,@pdex4bc,x,t); ylabel(’u(x,t)’)
u = sol(:,:,1); %---------------------------------------------------------
��ure --------
plot(x,u(end,:)) function [c,f,s] = pdex4pde(x,t,u,DuDx)
title(’u(x,t)’) c = 1;
xlabel(’Distance x’) f = DuDx;
ylabel(’u(x,t)’) a=0.5;
%--------------------------------------------------------- c=1;
-------- d=0.2;
function [c,f,s] = pdex4pde(x,t,u,DuDx) m=1;
c = 1; p=1;
ISRN Physical Chemistry 13

F =a∧ 2∗ (1-u)∧ (m+p)∗ exp(c∗ u/(1+d∗ u)) References

s = F; [1] L. T. Villa, N. A. Acosta, and C. M. Albarracin, “A note on non-
isothermal diffusion-reaction processes,” International Journal
%--------------------------------------------------------- of Pure and Applied Mathematics, vol. 71, no. 4, pp. 525–538,
-------- 2011.
function u0 = pdex4ic(x); %create initial conditions [2] D. Bedeaux, I. Pagonabarraga, J. M. Ortiz De Zárate, J. V.
Sengers, and S. Kjelstrup, “Mesoscopic non-equilibrium ther-
u0 = 1; modynamics of non-isothermal reaction-diffusion,” Physical
Chemistry Chemical Physics, vol. 12, no. 39, pp. 12780–12793,
%--------------------------------------------------------- 2010.
-------- [3] G. F. Froment and K. B. Bischoff, Chemical Reactor Analysis and
Design, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, USA, 2nd edition,
function[pl,ql,pr,qr]=pdex4bc(xl,ul,xr,ur,t) %create 1990.
boundary conditions [4] S. Kjelstrup, J. M. Rubi, and D. Bedeaux, “Energy dissipation
pl = ul; in slipping biological pumps,” Physical Chemistry Chemical
Physics, vol. 7, no. 23, pp. 4009–4018, 2005.
ql = 0; [5] A. S. Blix, Arctic Animals, Tapir Academic, Trondheim, Norway,
2001.
pr = 0; [6] D. Bedeaux and S. Kjelstrup, “e measurable heat �ux that
qr = 1. accompanies active transport by Ca2+ -ATPase,” Physical Chem-
istry Chemical Physics, vol. 10, no. 48, pp. 7304–7317, 2008.
[7] E. Johannessen and S. Kjelstrup, “Numerical evidence for a
Nomenclature “highway in state space” for reactors with minimum entropy
production,” Chemical Engineering Science, vol. 60, no. 5, pp.
𝑥𝑥: Spatial coordinate (𝑚𝑚)
1491–1495, 2005.
𝑧𝑧: Dimensionless spatial coordinate
[8] S. Kjelstrup, D. Bedeaux, and E. Johannessen, Elements of
𝑢𝑢𝑢 𝑢𝑢: Dimensionless mass concentration of
Irreversible ermodynamics for Engineers, Tapir Academic,
reactive component 𝐴𝐴 Trondheim, Norway, 2007.
𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓: Dimensionless reaction rate [9] L. V. Van Der Ham, J. Gross, A. Verkooijen, and S. Kjelstrup,
𝑣𝑣𝑣 𝑣𝑣: Dimensionless functions “Efficient conversion of thermal energy into hydrogen: com-
𝐿𝐿: Half thickness of porous slab (𝑚𝑚) paring two methods to reduce exergy losses in a sulfuric acid
𝑚𝑚𝑚 𝑚𝑚: Whole numbers which denote the reaction decomposition reactor,” Industrial and Engineering Chemistry
order Research, vol. 48, no. 18, pp. 8500–8507, 2009.
𝑃𝑃: Product chemical component in a chemical [10] C. M. Guldberg and P. Waage, ForhandlInger: VIdenskabs-
reaction Selskabet i ChrIstIanIa, 1864.
𝑅𝑅: Universal gas constant [11] H. Eyring and E. Eyring, Modern Chemical Kinetics, Chapman
𝑇𝑇: Functions which represent temperature & Hall, London, UK, 1965.
pro�le in the porous slab (∘ K) [12] L. Onsager, “Reciprocal relations in irreversible processes. I,”
𝐶𝐶𝐴𝐴 : Volumetric molar concentration of the key Physical Review, vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 405–426, 1931.
component 𝐴𝐴 [13] L. Onsager, “Reciprocal relations in irreversible processes. II,”
𝐶𝐶AS : Surface value of the key component 𝐴𝐴 Physical Review, vol. 38, no. 12, pp. 2265–2279, 1931.
𝐷𝐷𝐴𝐴 : Effective diffusivity coefficient [14] H. A. Kramers, “Brownian motion in a �eld of force and the
𝑘𝑘𝑆𝑆 Speci�c kinetic constant diffusion model of chemical reactions,” Physica, vol. 7, no. 4, pp.
𝐶𝐶BS : Dimensionless concentration of component 284–304, 1940.
𝐵𝐵 [15] I. Prigogine and P. Mazur, “Sur l’extension de la thermody-
𝑑𝑑: ermicity of the reaction namique aux phénomènes irreversibles liés aux degrés de liberté
𝛾𝛾: Arrhenius group internes,” Physica, vol. 19, no. 1–12, pp. 241–254, 1953.
𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐𝑐 𝑐 𝑐𝑐: Dimensionless parameter [16] S. R. de Groot and P. Mazur, Non-Equilibrium ermodynamics,
North-Holland, Amsterdam, e Netherlands, 1962.
𝜙𝜙: iele modulus
[17] D. Reguera, J. M. Rubí, and J. M. G. Vilar, “e mesoscopic
𝜂𝜂: Effectiveness factor for the heterogeneous
dynamics of thermodynamic systems,” Journal of Physical
chemical reaction.
Chemistry B, vol. 109, no. 46, pp. 21502–21515, 2005.
[18] I. Pagonabarraga, A. Pérez-Madrid, and J. M. Rubí, “Fluctuating
Acknowledgments hydrodynamics approach to chemical reactions,” Physica A, vol.
237, no. 1-2, pp. 205–219, 1997.
is work was supported by the Council of Scienti�c and [19] I. Pagonabarraga and J. M. Rubí, “Derivation of the Langmuir
Industrial Research (CSIR), no. 01 (2442)/10/EMR-II, Gov- adsorption equation from non-equilibrium thermodynamics,”
ernment of India. e authors are thankful to the Secretary, Physica A, vol. 188, no. 4, pp. 553–567, 1992.
the Principal, e Madura College, Madurai, TamilNadu, [20] D. Reguera and J. M. Rubí, “Nonequilibrium translational-
India for their constant encouragement. e authors are very rotational effects in nucleation,” Journal of Chemical Physics, vol.
grateful to referees for their valuable suggestions. 115, no. 15, pp. 7100–7106, 2001.
14 ISRN Physical Chemistry

[21] J. M. Rubi and S. Kjelstrup, “Mesoscopic nonequilibrium ther- [38] S. J. Li and Y. X. Liu, “An improved approach to nonlinear
modynamics gives the same thermodynamic basis to Butler- dynamical system identi�cation using PID neural networks,”
Volmer and Nerst equations,” Journal of Physical Chemistry B, International Journal of Nonlinear Sciences and Numerical
vol. 107, no. 48, pp. 13471–13477, 2003. Simulation, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 177–182, 2006.
[22] Y. Demirel and S. I. Sandler, “Effects of concentration and [39] M. M. Mousa and S. F. Ragab, “Application of the homotopy
temperature on the coupled heat and mass transport in liquid perturbation method to linear and nonlinear schrödinger
mixtures,” International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, vol. equations,” Zeitschri für Naturforschung, vol. 63, no. 3-4, pp.
45, no. 1, pp. 75–86, 2001. 140–144, 2008.
[23] S. Kjelstrup and D. Bedeaux, “Elements of irreversible ther- [40] V. Ananthaswamy and L. Rajendran, “Analytical Solution of
modynamics for engineers,” in Applied ermodynamics, A. H. Non-Linear Kinetic equation in a porous pellet,” Global Journal
Goodwin, J. V. Sengers, and C. J. Peters, Eds., IUPAC Chemical of Pure and Applied Mathematics, vol. 8, pp. 101–111, 2012.
Data Series no. XX, chapter 14, Royal Society of Chemistry, [41] S. Loghambal and L. Rajendran, “Mathematical modeling of
London, UK, 2010. diffusion and kinetics in amperometric immobilized enzyme
[24] Y. Demirel, “Non-isothermal reaction-diffusion systems with electrodes,” Electrochimica Acta, vol. 55, no. 18, pp. 5230–5238,
thermodynamically coupled heat and mass transfer,” Chemical 2010.
Engineering Science, vol. 61, no. 10, pp. 3379–3385, 2006. [42] A. Meena and L. Rajendran, “Mathematical modeling of amper-
[25] Y. Demirel, “Modeling of thermodynamically coupled reaction- ometric and potentiometric biosensors and system of non-
transport systems,” Chemical Engineering Journal, vol. 139, no. linear equations—homotopy perturbation approach,” Journal of
1, pp. 106–117, 2008. Electroanalytical Chemistry, vol. 644, no. 1, pp. 50–59, 2010.
[26] J. M. Ortiz de Zárate and J. V. Sengers, Hydrodynamic Fluctu- [43] A. Shanmugarajan, S. Alwarappan, S. Somasundaram, and R.
ations in Fluids and Fluid Mixtures, Elsevier, Amsterdam, e Lakshmanan, “Analytical solution of amperometric enzymatic
Netherlands, 2006. reactions based on Homotopy perturbation method,” Elec-
[27] B. Hafskjold and S. K. Ratkje, “Criteria for local equilibrium in trochimica Acta, vol. 56, no. 9, pp. 3345–3352, 2011.
a system with transport of heat and mass,” Journal of Statistical [44] V. Ananthaswamy and L. Rajendran, “Analytical solution of
Physics, vol. 78, no. 1-2, pp. 463–494, 1995. two-point non linear boundary value problems in a porous cat-
[28] J. Xu, S. Kjelstrup, D. Bedeaux, and J. M. Simon, “Transport alyst particles,” International Journal of Mathematical Archieve,
properties of 2F ⇄ F2 in a temperature gradient as studied by vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 810–821, 2012.
molecular dynamics simulations,” Physical Chemistry Chemical
Physics, vol. 9, no. 8, pp. 969–981, 2007.
[29] J. Xu, S. Kjelstrup, and D. Bedeaux, “Molecular dynamics
simulations of a chemical reaction; Conditions for local equilib-
rium in a temperature gradient,” Physical Chemistry Chemical
Physics, vol. 8, no. 17, pp. 2017–2027, 2006.
[30] A. Vergara, F. Capuano, L. Paduano, and R. Sartorio, “Lysozyme
mutual diffusion in solutions crowded by poly(ethylene glycol),”
Macromolecules, vol. 39, no. 13, pp. 4500–4506, 2006.
[31] T. Ikeda, M. Boero, and K. Terakura, “Hydration of alkali ions
from �rst principles molecular dynamics revisited,” Journal of
Chemical Physics, vol. 126, no. 3, Article ID 034501, 9 pages,
2007.
[32] J. H. He, “Homotopy perturbation technique,” Computer Meth-
ods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, vol. 178, pp. 257–262,
1999.
[33] J. H. He, “Homotopy perturbation method: a new nonlinear
analytical technique,” Applied Mathematics and Computation,
vol. 135, no. 1, pp. 73–79, 2003.
[34] J. H. He, “A simple perturbation approach to Blasius equation,”
Applied Mathematics and Computation, vol. 140, no. 2-3, pp.
217–222, 2003.
[35] P. D. Ariel, “Alternative approaches to construction of Homo-
topy perturbation Algorithms,” Nonlinear Science Letters, vol. 1,
pp. 43–52, 2010.
[36] Q. K. Ghori, M. Ahmed, and A. M. Siddiqui, “Application
of homotopy perturbation method to squeezing �ow of a
newtonian �uid,” International Journal of Nonlinear Sciences
and Numerical Simulation, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 179–184, 2007.
[37] T. Öziş and A. Yildirim, “A comparative study of He’s Homotopy
Perturbation Method for determining frequency-amplitude
relation of a nonlinear oscillator with discontinuities,” Interna-
tional Journal of Nonlinear Sciences and Numerical Simulation,
vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 243–248, 2007.