 Open Access
 Total Downloads : 1086
 Authors : Suresh Chand
 Paper ID : IJERTV1IS5020
 Volume & Issue : Volume 01, Issue 05 (July 2012)
 Published (First Online): 02082012
 ISSN (Online) : 22780181
 Publisher Name : IJERT
 License: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Triple diffusive convection in a micropolar ferrofluid in the presence of rotation
Suresh Chand Department of Mathematics, SCVB Govt. College Palampur, HP176061 India
Abstract
This paper deals with the theoretical investigation of the triplediffusive convection in a micropolar ferrofluid layer heated and soluted below subjected to a transverse uniform magnetic field in thev presence of uniform vertical rotation. For a flat fluid layer contained between two free boundaries, an exact solution is obtained. A linear stability analysis theory and normal mode analysis method have been carried out to study the onset convection. The influence of various parameters like rotation, solute gradients, and micropolar parameters (i.e. coupling parameter, spin diffusion parameter and micropolar heat conduction parameter) has been analyzed on the onset of stationary convection. The critical magnetic thermal Rayleigh number for the onset of instability is also determined numerically for sufficiently large value of buoyancy magnetization parameter M1(ratio of the magnetic to gravitational forces). The principle of exchange of stabilities is found to hold true for the micropolar fluid heated from below in the absence of micropolar viscous effect, microinertia, solute gradient and rotation. The oscillatory modes are introduced due to the presence of the micropolar viscous effect, microinertia , solute gradient and rotation, which were nonexistent in their absence. In this paper, an attempt is also made to obtain the sufficient conditions for the nonexistence of overstability.
Keywords: Triple diffusive convection; Micropolar ferrofluid; Thermal convection; Solute gradient;
Vertical magnetic field; Rotation; Magnetization.

Introduction
Micropolar fluids are fluids with internal structures in which coupling between the spin of each particle and the microscopic velocity field is taken into account. They represent fluids consisiting of rigid, randomly oriented or spherical particles suspended in viscous medium, where the deformation of fluid particles is ignored (e.g. polymeric suspension, animal blood, liquid crystal). Micropolar fluids have been receiving a great deal of research focus and interest due to their application in a number of processes that occur in industry. Such applications include the extrusion of polymer fluids, solidification of liquid crystal, cooling of metallic plate in a bath, exotic lubricants and colloidal suspension solutions. Micropolar fluid theory was introduced by Eringen [1] in order to describe some physical systems, which do not satisfy the Navier Stokes equation. The equations governing the micropolar fluid involve a spin vector and microinertia tensor in addition to the velocity vector. The theory can be used to explain the flow of colloidal fluids, liquid crystals, animal blood etc. The generalization of the theory including thermal effects has been developed by Kazakia and Ariman [2] and Eringen [3]. The theory of thermomicropolar convection began with Datta and Sastry[4] and interestingly continued by Ahmadi[5], Lebon and Perez Garcia[6],Bhattacharya and Jena[7], Payne and Straughan [8], Sharma and Kumar [9,10]
and Sharma and Gupta [11]. The above works give a good understanding of thermal convection in micropolar fluids.
In many situations involving suspensions, as in the magnetic fluid case, it might be pertinent to demand an Eringen micropolar description. This was suggested, in fact, by Rosenweig [12] in his monograph. An interesting possibilities in a planer micropolar ferrofluid flow with an AC magnetic field has been considered by Zahn and Greer [13].They examined a simpler case where the applied magnetic fields along and transverse to the duct axis are spatially uniform and varying sinusoidally with time. In a uniform magnetic field, the magnetization characteristic depends on particle spin but does not depend on fluid velocity. Micropolar ferrofluid stabilities have become an important field of research these days. A particular stability problem is RayleighBÃ©nard instability in a horizontal thin layer of fluid heated from below. A detailed account of thermal convection in a horizontal thin layer of Newtonian fluid heated from below has been given by Chadrasekhar [14]. For a ferrofluid, a thermomechanical interaction is predicted by Finlayson [15] in the presence of a uniform vertical magnetic field provided the magnetization is a function of temperature and magnetic field, and a temperature gradient is established across the fluid layer. The thermal convection in Newtonian ferro fluid has been studied by many authors [1625].
RayleighBÃ©nard convection in a micropolar ferrofluid layer permeated by a uniform, vertical magnetic field with freefree, isothermal, spinvanishing, magnetic boundaries has been considered by Abraham [26]. She observed that the micropolar ferro fluid layer heated from below is more stable as compared with the classical Newtonian ferrofluid.The effect of rotation on thermal convection in a micropolar fluids is important in certain chemical engineering and biochemical situations. Qin and Kaloni [27] have considered a thermal instability problem in a rotating micropolar fluid. They found that, depending upon the values of various micropolar parameters and the low values of the Taylor number, the rotation has a stabilizing effect. The effect of rotation on thermal convection in micropolar fluids has also been studied by Sharma and Kumar [28] , whereas the numerical solution of thermal instability of rotating micropolar fluid has been discussed by Sastry and Rao[29] without taking into account the rotation effect in angular momentum equation. But we also appreciate the work of Bhattacharyya and Abbas [30] and Qin and Kaloni ,they have considered the effect of rotation in angular momentum equation. More recently, Sunil et al., [3133] ] have studied the effect of rotation on the thermal convection problems in ferrofluid. .
In the standard BÃ©nard problem, the instability is driven by a density difference caused by a temperature difference between the upper and lower planes bounding the fluid. If the fluid, additionally has salt dissolved in it , then there are potentially two destabilizing sources for the density difference, the temperature field and salt field. The solution behavior in the doublediffusive convection problem is more interesting than that of the single component situation in so much as new instability phenomena may occur which is not present in the classical BÃ©nard problem. When temperature and two or more component agencies, or three different salts, are present then the physical and mathematical situation becomes increasingly richer. Very interesting results in triply diffusive convection have been obtained by Pearlstein et al., [34]. The results of Pearlstein et al., are remarkable. They demonstrate that for triple diffusive convection linear instability can occur in discrete sections of the Rayleigh number domain with the fluid
being linearly stable in a region in between the linear instability ones. This is because for certain parameters the neutral curve has a finite isolated oscillatory instability curve lying below the usual unbounded stationary convection one. Straughan and Walker [35] derive the equations for nonBoussinesq convection in a multi component fluid and investigate the situation analogous to that of Pearlstein et al., but allowing for a density non linear in the temperature field. Lopez et al., [36] derive the equivalent problem with fixed boundary conditions and show that the effect of the boundary conditions breaks the perfect symmetry. In reality the density of a fluid is never a linear function of temperature, and so the work of Straughan and Walker applies to the general situation where the equation of state is one of the density quadratic in temperature. This is important, since they find that departure from the linear Boussinesq equation of state changes the perfect symmetry of the heart shaped neutral curve of Pearlstein et al.,. Suresh [37, 38] has studied the triple diffusive convection in Walters(Model B) fluid in the porous medium in hydromagnetics and effect of rotation on triplediffusive convection in a magnetized ferrofluid with internal angular momentum saturating a porous medium.
In view of the recent increase in the number of non isothermal situations wherein magnetic fluid are put to use in place of classical fluids, we intend to extend our work to the problem of thermal convection in Eringen,s micropolar fluid to the triplediffusive convection in a mocropolar ferrofluid in the presence of rotation. In the present analysis, for mathematically simplicity, we have not considered the effect of rotation in angular momentum equation.

Mathematical formulation of the problem
Here we consider an infinite, horizontal layer of thickness d of an electrically non conducting incompressible thin micropolar ferromagnetic fluid heated and salted from below. The temperature T and solute concentrations C1 and C2 at the bottom and top
surfaces z = d are T0 and T1 ; C01 and C11; and C02 and C12 respectively, and a uniform temperature gradient ) and uniform solute gradients ) and
) are maintained. Both the boundaries are taken to be free and perfect conductors
of heat. The fluid layer is assumed to occupy the layer z (d/2,d/2) with gravity acting in the negative z direction and magnetic field , H =H0ext , where = (0,0,1), acts outside the layer. The whole system is assumed to rotate with angular velocity = (0,0, ) along the vertical axis,which is taken as zaxis.
The mathematical equations governing the motion of incompressible micropolar ferrofluids (utilizing Boussinesq approximation ) the for the above model are as follows: The continuity equation for an incompressible fluid is
(1)
The momentum and internal angular momentum equations are
0 q = – + g + 0 (M. + ( 2q +2 ( + 0 (q , (2)
0I =2 ( + 0 (M +( + ) + 2 (3)
The temperature and solute concentration equations for an incompressible micropolar ferromagnetic fluid are
[ 0 CV, H – 0H ( ) V, H ] + 0T ( ) V, H = K12T + ( . (4) [ 0 CV, H – 0H ( ) V, H ] + 0 ( ) V, H = K 12C 1 (5) [ 0 CV, H – 0H ( ) V, H ] + 0 ( ) V, H = K1 2 C 2 (6)In terms of temperature T and the concentrations C 1 and C 2, we suppose the density of the mixture is given by (known as density equation of state)
a
= 0 [1 (T Ta ) + ( C 1 C 1 ) + ( C 2 Ca2 ) ] (7)
Where 0, q, , t, p, , , , , I, 0, B, CV, H, M, K1, K 1, K1 , , are the fluid density ,reference density, velocity, microrotation, time, pressure, shear kinematic viscosity coefficient, coupling viscosity coefficient or vortex viscosity, bulk spin viscosity coefficient, shear spin viscosity coefficient, micropolar heat conduction coefficient , moment of inertia (microinertia constant),magnetic permeability, magnetic induction, heat capacity at constant volume and magnetic field, magnetization, thermal conductivity, solute conductivity, thermal expansion coefficient and concentration expansion coefficient analogous to the thermal expansion coefficient respectively. Tais the average temperature given by
Ta = (T0+T1)/2 where T0 and T1 are the constant average temperatures of the lower and upper surfaces of the layer and C 1 and C 2are the average concentrations given by C 1 = (C 1+C 1)/2
a a a 0 1
1
1
1
and Ca2 = (C02+C 2)/2 , where C01 , C 1 and C02, C 2are the constant average concentrations of
the lower and upper surfaces of the layer. The partial derivatives of M are the material properties that can be evaluated once the magnetic equation of state, such as (10) below is known. In writing equation (2), we also use the Boussinesq approximation by allowing the density to change only in the gravitational body force term.
Maxwell ,s equation, simplified for a nonconducting fluid with no displacement currents, become
. B = 0, (8a)
H = 0, (8b)
where the magnetic induction is given by
B = 0 (H + M).
We assume that the magnetization is aligned with the magnetic field, but allow a dependence on the magnitude of the magnetic field, temperature and salinity, so that
M = M( H,T,C1 ,C2). (9)
The magnetic equation of state is linearized about the magnetic field, H0, an average temperature,
Ta , and average concentrations, Ca1and Ca2 to become
M = M0 + (H H0) – K2 (T Ta)+K3(C 1 Ca1) + K4( C 2 – C a 2). (10)
where magnetic susceptibility, pyromagnetic coefficient and salinity magnetic coefficients are defined by
( ) H0 , Ta ; K2 – ( ) H0 , Ta ; K3 ( ) H0, ca1 and K4 ( ) H0 , ca 2 respectively. (11)
Here H0 is the uniform magnetic field of the fluid layer when placed in an external magnetic field H =H0ext , where is a unit vector in the z direction,
H =H, M = Mand M0 = M ( H0, Ta, Ca1 , Ca2 ).
The effect of rotation contributes two terms: (a) Centrifugal force 0 /2) grad 2 and
(b) Coriolis force 2 0 ( ). In equation (2), p = pf – 0 2 is the reduced pressure, where pf stands for fluid pressure.
The basic state is assumed to be quiescent state and is given by
b a
q = qb = (0,0,0), b = (0,0,0), = b(z) , p = pb (z), T = Tb (z) = – Ta , C1 = C1 (z) = 1
b a 0 1 1 0 1 0
C2 = C2 (z) = – 2 , =(T – T )/d , = (C 1 C 1)/d, = (C 2 C 2)/d,
0
Hb = [ H0 – + ] , Mb = [ M0 + – ] and H0 + MO = H ext, (12 )
where the subscript b denotes the basic state.

The perturbation equations and normal mode analysis method
We now examine the stability of the basic state, and assume that the perturbation quantities are small. We write
b b
q = qb + q , b + , = b + , p = pb (z)+ p , T = Tb (z) + , C1 = C1 (z) + , C2 = C2 (z) + ,
H = H b(z)+ H and M = Mb (z) + M (13)
= – 0 (
).
(14)
Then, the linearized perturbation equations (by neglecting secondorder small quantities) of the micropolar ferromagnetic fluid become
0
= –
+ 0(M0 + H0)
+ ( 2u + 1 + 0 V, (15)
0
= –
+ 0(M0 + H0)
+ ( 2v + 2 0 u , (16)
where q = (u, v, w), =( 1, 2, 3 ), , , M are perturbation in velocity q, spin , pressure p, temperature T, concentrations C1 and C2 , magnetic field intensity H, and magnetization M, respectively. The change in density , caused mainly by the perturbation in temperature and concentrations, respectively, is given by
0 = – + 0(M0 + H0) + ( 2w + 2 – 0 H3 ( ) K2 } ,
+ 0 { H3 ( )+ K3 } + 0 { H3 ( )+ K4 } – 0 ( + )
+ 0 ( + ) – 0 ( + ) + 0g ( – – , (17)
0I =2 ( + 0 (Mb +( + ) + 2 (18)
+ + = 0, (19)
0 0 2
C1 – 0 T0K2 ( =K12 + [C1 – T K 2 /( ] – 3 , (20)
0
C1 – 0 C 1K3 ( =K1 2 + [C1 – 0C01K32 )] , (21)
0 0 0 2
C1 – 0 C 2K2 ( =K1 + [C1 – C 2K 2 ] , (22)
where C1 = 0 CV, H + 0 K2H0; C1 = 0 CV, H – 0 K3H0; C1 = 0 CV, H – 0 K4H0,
Equation (9) and Equation (10) yield
H3 + M3 = (
) H3 K2
,
(23)
H3 + M3 = (
) H3 K3
,
(24)
H3 + M3 = (
<>) H3 K4 (25)
Hi + Mi = (1+ M0/H0)Hi i=1,2,3 . (26)
where, we have assumed K2 ( Tb Ta)<< (1+ H0; K3 d << (1+ H0; K4 d << (1+ H0;
= (1 2 3 ) = ( x )
Thus the analysis is restricted to physical situation in which the magnetization induced by temperature and concentration variations is small compared to that induced by the external magnetic field. Eq. (7b) means that we can write H = 1 – 2 – 3 ), where 1 is the perturbed magnetic potential and 2 3 are the perturbed magnetic potentials analogous to solute.
Eliminating u, v, p between Eq. (15) (17), using Eq. (18), and taking curl once on Eq. (3) and considering only kth component, we obtain
1
( 1
– 2
– 3
) K2
}
( 1
– 2
– 3
) K3
}
( 0 – ( ) 2 ) = – 0 2 {(1+
1
0 2 {(1+
1 1 2 3 4
+ 0 2 {(1+ ( – – ) K }
1 0 1
– 0 2 ( + ) + 2 ( + )
1 0 1
– 0 2 ( + ) + g 2 ( –
+2 2 3 0 (27)
0 I = 2 (2 + 23 ) + 2 3 . (28)
The vertical component of the vorticity equation is
0 = 2 0 + ( 2 (29)
Where = stands for the zcomponent of the vorticity From Eq. (20), we have
(1+
+ (1+
(1+
+ (1+
(1+
+ (1+
2 1 – K2 = 0, (30)
2 2 – K3 = 0, (31)
2 3 – K4 = 0, (32)
We analyze the normal mode technique. This can be written
f ( x, y, z, t) = f ( z, t ) expi( kx x + ky y), (33)
where f (z, t ) represent W(z, t), Z(z,t), , 1 (z, t), 2 (z, t),
3 (z, t ), 3 (z, t ); kx ,ky are the wave numbers along the x and ydirections, respectively and k k 2 + k 2) is the resultant wave number.
x y
Following the normal mode analysis, the linearized perturbation dimensionless equations are
{ (1+N1)(D2 a2) }(D2 a2)W = a [(M1 M4) D 1*(1+M1 M4)T*]
2 3
+a[(M1 M4 )D *+(1M1 +M4 [(M1 M4 )D *
+ (1M1 +M4 ) C2*]+2N1(D2a2)3* DZ* (34)
{ (1+N1) (D2 a2) } Z* = DW* (35)
I = – 2N1 { (D2 a2)W* + 2 3*} + N3(D2 a2) 3*, (36)
3
Pr – Pr M2 (D 1*) = (D2 a2) +a (1 M2) W* – a N5 *, (37)
P – P M2 (D 2* ) = (D2 a2) +a (1 M 2) W* , (38)
P – P M2 (D 3* ) = (D2 a2) +a (1 M2 ) W* , (39)
1 3 1
D2 * – a2 M * – D = 0, (40)
D2 2* – a2 M3 2* – D = 0, (41)
3 3 3
D2 * – a2 M * – D = 0, (42)
Where the following non dimension quantities and non dimensionless parameters are introduced:
t = , W* = , 1* = 1, 2* = 2, 3* = 3, R1 = , S1 = = , S2 = , T* = , , a = k d, z = , D = , Pr = , = ,
= , TA = ( )2 , M1 = , M1 = , M1 = , M2 = M2 = , M2 = , M3 = , M4 = ,
M4 = , M4 = , M5 = , N1 = , N3 = , N5 = , I = , and 3*= .

Exact solution for free boundaries
Here the simplest boundary conditions chosen, namely freefree, no spin, isothermal with infinite magnetic susceptibility in the perturbed field keep the problem analytically tractable and serve the purpose of providing a qualitative insight in to the problem. The case of two free boundaries is of little physical interest, but it is mathematically important because one can derive an exact solution, whose properties guide our analysis. Thus the exact solution of Eqs. (34) (42) subject to the boundary conditions are
W* = D2W = T* = = = 3* = 1* = 2* = 3* =0 at z = , (43)
is written in the form
W* = A1 cos , T* = B1 cos , D 1* = C1 cos , 3* =D1 cos ,
D 2* = cos , 1 * = ( ) sin , 2 * = ( ) = = cos
= = cos , 3* = H1 cos , 3* = ( ) (44)
Where A1, B1, C1, D1, E1, F1, G1, and H1 are constants and is the growth rate, in, general, a complex constant. Substituting eq. (49) in equations. (40) (47) and dropping asterisks for convenience, we get following equations:
{ + (1+N1)( 2+ a2)} ( 2 + a2) A1 + a [(M1 M4) C1 (1+ M1 M4) [(M1 M4 ) E1
+(1M1 +M4 ) F1]+a [(M1 M4 ) H1 +(1M1 +M4 ) G1] – 2N1( 2+a2) D1
+ A1 = 0, (45)
– 2N1 ( 2 +a2) A1 + I N1 + N3 ( 2+ a2)} D1 = 0, (46)
(1 M2) a A1 – ( 2+ a2 + Pr B1 + (Pr M2 C1 – a N5 D1 = 0, (47)
(1 M2 ) a A1 – ( 2+ a2 + F1 + M2 E1 = 0, (48)
(1 M2 ) a A1 – ( 2+ a2 + G1 + M2 H1 =0, (49) B1 + 2 + a2 M3) C1 = 0, (50)
2 F1 + 2 + a2 M3) E1 = 0, (51)
2G1 + 2+ a2 M3) H1 = 0. (52)
For existence of nontrivial solutions of the above equations, the determinant of the coefficients of A1, B1, C1, D1, E1, F1, G1, and H1 in equations (45) (52) must vanish. This determinant on simplification yields
iT5 + T4 iT3 T2 + iT1 +T0=0. (53)
Here
T5 = b I1,
T4 = b [ ) I1 + { (1 + )b I1 + 4 + } + ],
T3 = b3 [ ) (1 + ) + + ] I1 + b2 [ ( )
+ {(1 + ) + } I1] + b [ ] +
{ (1 + ) + – } + [ (1 ) (x
+ (1 M2 ) (x + { + – } ( x )( x )]I1,
T2 = b4 [( + )(1 + )I1 + b3 [ 4 + ) + (1 + ) I1]
+ b2 [ +b[ (1 M2 )( x – (1 ) } I1
+ – (1 M2 ) 1)} (x )( x ) + (2 )
[+ –
+ (1 M2 ) { + I1} (x ) .
T1 = b4
+b2[{(1 M2 )I1 (1 M2 )I1 } (x )+{2 ( + ) – (1 M2) } ]
+ b [ ( + + ) {
–(1 M2
) }
+(
+
)
{ (1 M2
)
(1
) + )
].
T0 = b3[ (2 + b2{ ] + [(1 M2 )
(1 M2 ) } – (1 M2) ]} . (54)
where
R1 = , = S1 = , S2 = , x = ,I1 = i = , = N3 , = N5, b = 1+x, = (1+xM3), = P (1+x M3), = [1+xM3 + xM3 M1 (1 M5)], = Pr [(1 M2) + xM3 ],
= [1+x M3 + x M3 M1 ( 1)], = P ( 1 M2 + x M3 ), =[1+x M3+ x M3 M1 1)], = (1 M2 + x M3), = Pr (1 M2 ).

Results and discussion
5.1 The case of stationary convection
When the instability sets in as stationary convection in the case M2 0, M2 0, the marginal state will be characterized by = 0 [14], then the Rayleigh number R1 is given by
R1=
which expresses the modified Rayleigh number R1 as a function of dimension less wave number x, buoyancy magnetization parameter M1, the nonbuoyancy magnetization parameter M3 , solute gradient parameters S1 and S2, ratio of the salinity effect on magnetic field to pyromagnetic coefficient M5, coupling parameter N1( coupling between vorticity and spin effects), spin diffusion parameter N3 and micropolar heat conduction parameter N5 (coupling between spin and heat fluxes). The parameters N1 and N3 measure the micropolar viscous effect and micropolar diffusion effect, respectively.
The classical results in respect of Newtonian fluids can be obtained as the limiting case of present study. Setting N1 = 0 and S1 = 0, and keeping N3 arbitrary in equation (55), we get
R1 (56)
which is the expression for the Rayleigh number of ferromagnetic fluids (Finlayson [15]). Setting M3 = 0 in equation (56), we get
R1 , (57)
the classical Rayleigh BÃ©nard result [14], for the Newtonian fluid case.
Before we investigate the effects of various parameters, we first make some comments on the parameters N1, N3 and N5 arising due to suspended particles. Assuming the Clausius Duhem inequality, Eringen [31] presented certain thermodynamic restrictions which lead to non negativeness of N1, N3 and N5 . It is obvious that couple stress comes into play at small values of N3 . This supports the condition that 0 N1 1 and that N3 is small positive real number. The parameter N5 has to finite because the increasing of concentration has to be practically stop somewhere and hence it has to positive, finite real number. he range of the values for the other parameters is as in classical ferroconvection problem involving Newtonian ferromagnetic fluid [2830]. M1 M1 is the effect of magnetization due to salinity. This is allowed to vary 0.1 to
0.5 taking values less than the magnetization parameter M3. M5 represents the ratio of the salinity effects on the magnetic field to pyromagnetic coefficient. This is varied between 0.1 to 0.5. The salinity Rayleigh numbers S1 and S2 varied from 0 to 500.
To investigate the effect of solute gradients, nonbuoyancy magnetization coefficient, coupling parameter, spin parameter, and micropolar heat conduction parameter, we examine the behavior of analytically. Equation (55) gives
=
which is positive if
, (58)
which shows that the rotation has a stabilizing effect when condition (58) holds. In the absence of micropolar viscous effect ( the rotation always has a stabilizing effect on the system.
= , (59)
= , (60)
This shows that,for a stationary convection,the stable solute gradients have stabilizing effect, if . (61)
In the absence of micropolar viscous effect (coupling parameter ), stable solute gradients always have stabilizing effect, on the system. Equation (55) also yields
= , (62)
Which is negative, if
, and . (63) This shows that the nonbuoyancy magnetization has a destabilizing effect when conditions (63) hold. In the absence of micropolar viscous effect = 0) and the effect on magnetization due to salinity = 0 and = 0), the nonbuoyancy magnetization always has a destabilizing effect on the system.
It follows from equation (55) that
= (64)
which is positive if
1 and (65)
This shows that coupling parameter always has a stabilizing effect when condition (65) hold. In the absence of rotation = 0), (65) yield that is always positive, implying thereby the stabilizing effect of coupling parameter. Thus , the stabilizing behavior of coupling parameter is
virtually unaffected by magnetization parameters but it is significantly affected by micropolar
heat conduction and by Taylor .
Equation (55) gives number
which is negative if .
, (66)
This shows that the spin diffusion has a stabilizing effect when condition (66) holds. Equation (55) also gives
= , (67)
which is always positive.
This shows that the micropoalr heat conduction always has a stabilizing effect.
For sufficiently large values of M1 [15], we obtain the results for the magnetic mechanism
Rm = R1 M1
= , (68)
where Rm is the magnetic thermal Rayleigh number.
As a function of x, Rm given by equation (70) attains its maximum when
P6x6 +P5x5+P4x4 +P3x3+ P2x2 +P1x+ P0 =0. (69)
The coefficients P0, P1, P2, P3, P4, P5, P6 being quite lengthy , have not been written here and are evaluated numerical calculation.
The values of critical wave number for the onset of instability are determined numerically using
Newtonian Raphson method by the condition = 0. With x1 determined as a solution of equation (69), equation (68) will give the required critical magnetic thermal Rayleigh number Nc
3
which depend upon M3, S1, S2 and micropolar parameters N1, N and N5 .
5.2 Principle of exchange of stabilities
Here we examine the possibility of oscillatory modes, if any, on stability problem due to the presence of micropolar parameters and solute gradients. Equating the imaginary parts of equation (53), we obtain
1
1
1
[{b I } – { b4 [( + )(1 + )I + b3 [ 4 + ) + (1 + ) I ]
2
+ b2 [ +b[ (1 M
)( x – (1 ) } I1
+ – (1 M2 ) 1)} (x )( x ) + (2 )
[+ –
2 1
+ (1 M ) { + I } (x )} +{ b4
2 1 2 1 2
+b2[{(1 M )I (1 M )I } (x )+{2 ( + ) – (1 M ) } ]
+ b [ ( + + ) {
–(1 M2 ) } +( + )
{ (1 M2 ) (1 ) + ) } = 0, (70)
It is evident from equation (70) that may be either zero or nonzero, meaning that the modes may be either oscillatory or oscillatory. In the absence of micropolar viscous effect (N1=0), microinertia (I1= 0 ) and solute gradients (S1=0, S2 =0 ), we obtain the result as
[+ ) = 0. (71)Here the quantity inside the bracket is positive definite because the typical values of M2 are
+10 6 [15].Hence
=0, (72)
which implies that the oscillatory modes are not allowed and the principle of exchange of stabilities is satisfied for micropolar ferromagnetic fluid heated from below, in the absence of micropolar viscous effect, microinertia and solute gradients. Thus from equation (71), we conclude that the oscillatory modes are introduced due to the presence of the micropolar viscous effect, microinertia and solute gradient, which are nonexistent in their absence. Thus, it is
important to note that the Taylor number , gives significant contribution in developing the oscillatory modes in the stability analysis.
5.2 The case of overstability
The present section is devoted to find the possibility that the observed instability may really be overstability. Since we wish to determine the Rayleigh number for the onset of instability through state of pure oscillations, it is suffices to find conditions for which (53) will admit of solutions with real.
Equating real and imaginary parts of (53) and eliminating R1 between them, we obtain
A3c13 +A2c12 +A1c1 +A0 =0, (73)
Where, c1 = , Since is real for overstability, the three values of c1( = ) are positive. The product of roots of equation (73) is , where
A3= b I1 { + (1 + ) ] (1 ) + (2N1 ) }, (74)
A0 ={ b3 (2 ) b2(1 M2) }{b4 +b2[{(1 M2 )I1 (1 M2 )I1
} (x ]+ b{ [( + + ) ]
–(1 M2 ) } +( + )
2
{(1 M ) ]} b2{[ ]
+[{(1 M2 ) (1 M2 ) } ]}
2
{b2[2 (+ ) – (1M ) ] b (1 ) + ) ]}. (75)
The coefficients A2 and A1 being quite lengthy and not needed in the discussion of overstability , has not been written here.
Since is real for overstability, the three values of c1( = ) are positive. The product of roots of equation (73) is , and if this is to be negative, then A3 and A0 are of the same sign. Now, the product is negative if
(1 ) 4 , (1 ) , I1 , , and (1+ ), (1+ ),
i.e. if , , N1 , ( 1+ ) and ( 1+ )+ , (1+ ) and ( 1+ )+ ,
which implies that
max { , }, K1 < K1 ] and K1 < K1 ], ,
However (1+ ) and (1+ ) are already satisfied in above condition because the typical values of are + 106 [15].
Thus, for 
max 
{ 
, 
}, 

K1 < K1 [ 
] 
and K1 < K1 [ 
], 
,
overstability cannot occur and the principle of the exchange of stabilities is valid. Hence the above conditions are the sufficient conditions for the non existence of overstability, the violation of which does not necessarily imply the occurrence of overstability. Rotation contributes two more conditions i.e.
,
for the nonexistence of overstability. In rotating nonmagnetic fluid and in the absence of microrotation, above condition reduces to , which is in good agreement with the result obtained earlier [14].
5. Conclusions
In this paper, the effect of rotation on triple diffusive convection in a micropolar ferrofluid layer heated and soluted from below subjected to a transverse uniform magnetic field has been investigated. The behavior of various parameters like rotation parameter,solute gradients, non buoyancy magnetization, coupling parameter, spin diffusive parameter and micropolar heat conduction on the onset of convection has been analyzed analytically and numerically. The results show that for the state of stationary convection, the nonbuoyancy magnetization, spin diffusive parameter have destbilizing effect under certain condition(s), whereas the rotation, coupling parameter and solute gradients have a stabilizing effect under certain condition(s). However, the micropolar heat conduction always has a stabilizing effect. The principle of exchange of stabilities is found to hold true for the micropolar ferrofluid heated from below in the absence of micropolar viscous effect, microinertia, rotation and solute gradient. Thus oscillatory modes are introduced due to the presence of the micropolar viscous effect, microinertia, rotation and solute gradients, which were nonexistent in their absence. In addition the presence of rotation, solute gradients, coupling between vorticity and spin effect (micropolar viscous effect) and microinertia may bring overstability in the system. Finally, we conclude that the rotation and micropolar parameters have a profound influence on triple diffusive convection in a micropolar ferrofluid layer heated and soluted from below.The micropolar rotating ferrofluid stabilities do deserve a fresh look as related microgravity environment applications.
References

A.C.Eringen, (1966) : Theory of micropolar fluids J. Math. Mech. Vol.16, pp. 118.

Y. Kazakia, and T .Ariman, (1971) : Heatconducting micropolar fluids Rheol. Acta. Vol. 10, pp. 319325.

A.C Eringen, (1972) : Theory of thermomicrofluids J. Math. Anal. Appl. Vol. 38, pp. 480496.

A.B. Datta, and V.U.K Sastry, (1976) : Thermal instability of a horizontal layer of micropolar fluid heated from below Int. J. Eng. Sci. Vol 14, pp.631637.

A.Ahmadi, (1976): Stability of a micropolar fluid layer heated from below Int. J. Eng. Sci. Vol. 14 (1), pp. 8189.

G. Lebon, and C .PerezGarcia, (1981): Convective instability of a micropolar fluid layer by the method of energy Int. J. Eng. Sci. Vol. 19, (10) pp.13211329.

S.P Bhattacharyya,. and S.K Jena, (1983) : On the stability of a hot layer of micropolar fluid Int. J. Eng. Sci. Vol. 21 (9), pp. 10191024.

L.E. Payne, and B .( Straughan, 1989) :Critical Rayleigh numbers for oscillatory and nonlinear convection in an isotropic thermomicropolar fluid Int. J. Eng. Sci. Vol. 27 (7) , pp. 827836.

R.C. Sharma, and P.Kumar, (1995) :On micropolar fluids heated from below in hydromagnetics J. NonEquilib. Thermodyn. Vol. 20, pp. 150159.

R.C. Sharma, and P. Kumar, (1997) : On micropolar fluids heated from below in hydromagnetics in porous medium Czech. J. Phys. Vol.47, pp. 637647.

R.C. Sharma, and U. Gupta, (1995):Thermal convection in micropolar fluids in porous medium Int. J. Eng. Sci.Vol .33 (13), pp. 18871892.

R.E.Rosensweig, (1995) : Ferrohydrodynamics Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

M. Zahn, and D.R. Greer, (1995) : Ferrohydrodynamic pumping in spatially uniform sinusoidally timevarying magnetic fields J. Magn. Magn.Mater. Vol.149 (12), pp. 165173.

S Chandrasekhar,.(1981) : Hydrodynamic and Hydromagnetic Stability Dover Publication, New York.

B.A.Finlayson, (1970) : Convective instability of ferromagnetic fluids – J. Fluid Mech. Vol.40 (4), pp. 753767.

D.P. Lalas, and S. Carmi, (1971) : Thermoconvective stability of ferrofluids Phys. Fluids Vol.14 (2), pp.436437.

K. Gotoh, and M.Yamada, (1982) :Thermal convection in a horizontal layer of magnetic fluids J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. Vol.51, pp. 30423048.

P.J. Stiles, and M.Kagan, (1990):Thermoconvective instability of a horizontal layer of ferrofluid in a strong vertical magnetic field,
J. Magn. Magn. Mater. Vol.85 (13), pp. 196198.

P.G.Siddheshwar, (1993) : RayleighBeÂ´nard convection in a ferromagnetic fluid with second sound Jpn. Soc. Mag. Fluids Vol.25, pp.3236.

P.G.Siddheshwar, (1995) :Convective instability of ferromagnetic fluids bounded by fluid permeable magnetic boundaries – J. Magn. Magn. Mater. Vol. 149 (12), pp. 148150.

Sunil, Divya, R.C.Sharma, (2004) : Effect of rotation on ferromagnetic fluid heated and soluted from below saturating a porous Medium
– J.Geophys. Eng. Vol. 1 (2) , pp. 116127.

Sunil, Divya, V.Sharma, (2005) : Effect of dust particles on rotating ferromagnetic fluid heated from below saturating a porous Medium
– J.Colloid Interface Sci. Vol. 291, pp. 152161.

Sunil, Divya, R.C Sharma, ,.( 2005) : Effect of dust particles on thermal convection in ferromagnetic fluid saturating a porous Medium
– J.Magn. Magn. Mater. Vol. 288 (1), pp. 183195.

Sunil, Divya, R.C Sharma, (2005 ): The effect of magnetic field dependent viscosity on thermosolutal convection in ferromagnetic fluids aturating a porous medium Trans. Porous Media Vol. 60 (3), pp. 251274.

Sunil, Anu Sharma, R.C Sharma, (2006) : Effect of dust particles on ferrofluid heated and soluted from below Int. J. Therm. Sci. Vol. 45 (4), 347358.

A. Abraham, (2002) : RayleighBeÂ´nard convection in a micropolar ferromagnetic fluid Int. J. Eng. Sci. Vol. 40 (4), pp. 449460.

Y. Qin, and P.N.Kaloni, (1992) : Int. J. Eng. Sci. Vol.30 pp. 1117.

R.C. Sharma, and P. Kumar ( 1994) :Int. J. Eng. Sci. Vol.32 pp. 545.

V.U. K Sastry, and V.Rammohan Rao, (1983): Int. J. Eng. Sci. Vol.21 pp. 449. [30 ] S.P. Bhattacharyya, and M.Abbas,( 1985): Int. J. Eng. Sci. Vol.23 pp. 371.

Sunil, Anu Sharma, R.C. Sharma (2006) : Effect of dust particles on ferrofluid heated and soluted from below Int. J. Therm. Sci. 45 (4).347358.

Sunil and Amit Mahajan .(2009) : A nonlinear stability analysis in a double diffusive magnetized ferrofluid with magnetic field dependent viscosity saturating a porous medium Can.J.Phys. 87: 659673.

Sunil, C. Prakash ,K. Pawan, and Amit Mahajan. (2008) : Thermal Convection in micropolar ferrofluid in the presence of rotation –
Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Marerials. Vol.32 pp. 316324.

A. J. Pearlstein, R. M. Harris, and G .Terrones,(1989) :The onset of convective instability in a triply diffusive fluid layer – Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 202, pp. 443465.

B. Straughan, &. D.W.Walker (1997) : Multi component diffusion and penetrative convection – Fluid Dynamics Research, Vol. 19, pp. 7789.

R .Lopez Amalia, Louis A. Romero, and J.Pearlstein Arne ( 1990) : Effect of rigid boundaries on the onset of convective instability in a triply diffusive fluid layer – Phys. Fluids A Vol. 2, pp. 897.

Suresh Chand (2012) : triplediffusive convection in Walters(Model B) fluid in the porous medium in hydromagnetics. Research J. Engineeringand Tech. 3(2): AprilJune 2012 pp 140145.

Suresh Chand (2012) : effect of rotation on triplediffusive convection in a magnetized ferrofluid with internal angular momentum saturating a porous medium. Applied Mathematical Sciences, vol.6, 2012, no.65, 32453258.
.