Discontinuous shear-thickening asymptotic for power-law systems related to compressible flows

Cosmin Burtea; Didier Bresch (LAMA); Maja Szlenk

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Discontinuous shear-thickening asymptotic for power-law systems related to compressible flows

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper proves that the p→∞ limit of compressible power-law shear-thickening fluids is a thick fluid whose shear rate is capped at a maximum value.

desk verdict A genuinely new p→∞ thick-fluid limit for 1D compressible power-law flows, but the fixed-p global existence step is cited rather than proved and the multi-D results lean on conditional or sketched arguments; deserves refereeing. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.15410 v1 pith:7LLMQMAM submitted 2025-07-21 math.AP

Didier Bresch (LAMA) , Cosmin Burtea , Maja Szlenk This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.AP MSC 35Q3576A0576N1035B2549J40

keywords discontinuousshearthickeningpower-lawfluidscompressibleNavier-Stokesthickmaximumadmissibleratep-Laplacianasymptoticsvariationalinequalitiesunilateralconstraint

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper proves that the power-law model for compressible shear-thickening fluids, in which the stress grows like |D u|^{p−2} D u, has a well-defined limit as the exponent p tends to infinity, and that the limit is a 'thick' compressible fluid whose shear rate is capped at a maximum value. In the one-dimensional non-stationary case, the paper shows that any sequence of weak solutions with initial data satisfying |∂x u_{p,0}| ≤ 1 converges to a solution of a PDE in which the velocity gradient is constrained by |∂x u| ≤ 1 and the viscous stress takes the form τ = π ∂x u with a Lagrange multiplier π ≥ 0 that vanishes unless |∂x u| = 1. The same limiting mechanism is obtained for the multi-dimensional semi-stationary Stokes system, where the limit is described by a variational inequality with a constraint on the symmetric strain tensor, provided the approximating fixed-p solutions exist with the stated uniform bounds. The paper also shows that the same limit arises from a singular shear-rate-dependent stress law in one dimension. A reader should care because this gives a mathematical justification, in the compressible setting, for the unilateral strain constraint that models discontinuous shear thickening in suspensions such as cornstarch.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by p-uniform a priori estimates built on two devices. The first is a maximum-principle bound for the generalized Cauchy stress σ_p = µ|∂x u_p|^{p−2}∂x u_p − a ρ_p^γ, which controls the positive part of the strain rate and, via a transport argument, yields the lower density bound; the upper density bound uses the Basov–Shelukhin identity on ρ_p^µ exp(−ψ_p). The second device is the monotonicity of the p-Laplacian-type stress tensor S_p(Du)=|Du|^{p−2}Du, which gives strong convergence of the density through a Grönwall-type inequality on the convexity gap X_p=∫(ρ_p^γ−ρ^γ−$γρ^{{γ−1}}$(ρ_p−ρ)), and then forces the limit relation |τ|=τ∂x u, from which τ=π∂x u with π≥0 and π(1−|∂x u|)=0 follows.

What would settle it

Run a high-p direct numerical simulation of the periodic one-dimensional system (1.3) with data satisfying |∂x u_{p,0}| ≤ 1: if the density develops a finite-time blow-up while the energy stays bounded, the uniform estimates of Proposition 2.1 are false and the convergence to (1.7) cannot hold; the paper's claim conversely predicts that such simulations stay bounded in density and converge to the constrained system with |∂x u| ≤ 1.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is Theorem 1.5: for the one-dimensional periodic compressible power-law system (1.3), initial data with bounded energy, density bounded away from zero and infinity, and |∂x u_{p,0}| ≤ 1, produce a subsequence converging strongly enough to pass to the limit in the equations, and the limit (ρ,u) satisfies the continuity equation, the momentum equation with τ = |∂x u|^{p−2}∂x u replaced by τ = π ∂x u, the inequality |∂x u| ≤ 1, and the complementarity condition π(1 − |∂x u|) = 0. In other words, the p→∞ limit of the compressible power-law system is exactly the thick compressible fluid with maximum admissible shear rate. In the multi-dimensional semi-stationary Stokes case (Theorem 1.9), the paper reaches the same constraint |D u| ≤ 1 and characterizes the limit by the variational inequality (1.12), assuming the approximating fixed-p weak solutions exist; the construction is made unconditional in Theorem 1.10 by adding a regularizing term for div u and using the singular-stress existence theory. Section 4 shows that the one-dimensional singular stress law ∂x u/√(1 − |∂x u|²) leads to the same limiting system.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that global weak solutions of the fixed-p compressible power-law systems exist with the uniform-in-p bounds stated in Theorem 1.1; the paper cites a local-in-time existence result and does not supply the full upgrade to global weak solutions, and for the multi-dimensional semi-stationary system existence is explicitly left open, so if those fixed-p solutions or their uniform bounds fail, the compactness passages do not run.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

The p→∞ limit of the compressible power-law model is a well-defined PDE with a unilateral constraint, so the maximum-admissible-shear-rate condition can be derived from the power-law model rather than assumed.
In the limit, the fluid cannot shear faster than the threshold |∂x u| = 1 (or |D u| ≤ 1 in multiple dimensions), and the stress is a Lagrange multiplier that is active only at the threshold, giving a precise rheological characterization of the thickened state.
The same limit obtained from the singular stress law in Section 4 indicates that the asymptotic constrained model is insensitive to whether the viscosity diverges through a power law or through a singular square-root-type term.
The variational-inequality formulation in multiple dimensions provides a framework for studying existence, uniqueness, and numerical approximation of the thick compressible fluid without needing strong solutions.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

If global weak solutions of the multi-dimensional semi-stationary system (1.8) with the uniform energy bound can be constructed, Theorem 1.9 would upgrade from a conditional compactness result to a fully constructive convergence theorem; the one-dimensional proof suggests the missing ingredient is a fixed-p existence theory with bounds independent of p.
The complementarity condition π(1−|∂x u|)=0 is structurally the same as the 'free/congested' density constraint π(1−ρ)=0 studied elsewhere, and the two regimes might be combined in a single two-constraint model for jamming flows.
The one-dimensional mechanism, based on maximum principles and transport estimates, is likely to extend to bounded intervals with no-slip boundary conditions if the Poincaré–Wirtinger step is replaced by a suitable estimate on the mean velocity, which would make the model applicable to squeezing-flow experiments.
A testable quantitative prediction is that in the limiting model the shear stress saturates at the maximal shear rate and becomes independent of further increases in applied pressure; rheometric experiments on dense suspensions could look for such a plateau.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Short version: this is a real extension of the thick-fluid p→∞ theory to the compressible setting, and the 1D part is mostly sound. The main gap is the fixed-p global existence step in Section 2, which is cited rather than proved; that is fixable but it is load-bearing for the limit. The multi-D results are more conditional than the 1D theorem, and Section 4 is a sketch.

What's new: the 1D nonstationary theorem gives the expected limit system with |∂xu|≤1 and the complementarity relation, and it goes through a coherent compactness chain: stress maximum principle, density bounds, Hoff-type estimate on ρ u̇, strong convergence of density, and a monotonicity argument to identify the stress. The maximum principle on σp = μ|∂xu|^{p−2}∂xu − aρ^γ is an elegant piece; the sign term the reader flagged is compressed in presentation but is actually non-positive by monotonicity of H^{−1}, so the argument survives scrutiny. The multidimensional semi-stationary compactness argument yields the |Du|≤1 constraint and strong density convergence under an energy bound, and the paper is honest that existence of the approximating sequence is open. The singular-stress extension in Section 4 is plausible but only sketched.

Soft spots, in order of importance. First, Section 2 says 'we skip the details' for local existence and then states Theorem 1.1: global weak solutions for fixed p with uniform-in-p bounds. The cited [24] is local-in-time, and no continuation argument is supplied. The a priori estimates in Propositions 2.1 and 2.4 are exactly what a continuation would need, but the step is not written. This matters because Theorem 1.5 needs a sequence of such global solutions; if the step fails, the limit statement has nothing to act on. I think it is likely fixable by standard continuation, but the paper should say so. Second, Theorem 1.10 leans on an unproved adaptation of [18] (dropping the convective term, replacing D_d u by Du). A referee should ask for that proof or a precise statement. Third, Theorem 1.9 is explicitly conditional, which is fine but limits its status. Section 4 should either be expanded or labeled as formal. The citation pattern is fine; the self-citations are to prior published compactness lemmas and singular-limit results, not to prop up this argument.

Who this is for: people working on p→∞ limits, thick fluids, compressible non-Newtonian flows. The 1D result is likely to be cited. My recommendation: send it to referees, with the expectation of heavy revision rather than acceptance as is.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper studies the limit p -> infinity for several compressible power-law fluid systems. In the one-dimensional non-stationary case, the authors claim that, under initial data satisfying |partial_x u_{p,0}| <= 1, the compressible power-law system (1.3) converges to a 'thick' compressible system with the constraint |partial_x u| <= 1, the stress relation tau = pi partial_x u, and the complementarity condition pi(1 - |partial_x u|) = 0. In the multi-dimensional semi-stationary Stokes case, they establish a conditional compactness result toward a variational inequality, and they construct solutions to a regularized variant of the limit problem. The proofs combine a stress maximum principle, uniform density bounds, Hoff-type estimates, and monotonicity arguments.

Significance. If made fully rigorous, the 1D result is a natural and nontrivial extension of the known p -> infinity thick-fluid limits to the compressible setting, with motivation from shear-thickening suspensions in which large pressures may require compressibility. The paper is honest about the multi-dimensional theorem being conditional, and the appendix contains a complete proof of a useful continuity property. No free parameters or fitted data enter the analysis; the limit systems are derived from a priori estimates. The compactness chain is plausible and contains interesting ideas. However, the missing fixed-p global existence step is load-bearing for the main theorem, and the ordering of one compactness argument appears circular as written.

major comments (3)

[Section 2, Theorem 1.1] Theorem 1.1 asserts global weak solutions for fixed p (large enough) with uniform-in-p bounds, and this is the starting point for the entire limit passage. The proof only cites [24] for local-in-time strong solutions and then states 'we skip the details'; the a priori estimates in Propositions 2.1 and 2.4 concern smooth solutions and do not by themselves produce a global weak solution on [0,T]. A continuation argument, or a reference to a global existence theorem for (1.3)-(1.5), is missing. Since Theorem 1.5 and the convergence statements in (1.6) require a sequence of such global solutions, this gap is load-bearing.
[Section 2.2.1] The strong density convergence argument uses the bound |partial_x u| <= 1 ('Note that we know that |partial_x u| <= 1...') before Proposition 2.6 in Section 2.2.2 establishes this bound. As written the proof is circular: the density compactness step appears to rely on the very constraint that is only derived afterward. Please reorder the proof so that the L^infty bound on partial_x u is proved first, or explain which terms in Section 2.2.1 can be handled without it.
[Section 3, Theorems 1.9 and 1.10] The notion of solution used in Theorem 1.9 is not aligned with Definition 1.8. Definition 1.8 defines variational solutions through the energy inequality, the continuity equation, and a variational momentum inequality, but the proof of Theorem 1.9 tests the PDE (1.8) by psi u_p and psi u, which requires the PDE formulation. Please state precisely which assumptions are needed. In addition, Theorem 1.10 relies on the sentence 'from the proof it is clear' that the global existence result of [18] applies to the modified system (3.8), with the deviatoric part removed and the singular term changed. This is a nontrivial transfer of a cited theorem and is the basis for the approximating sequence; it needs a verification or a direct construction.

minor comments (5)

[Theorem 1.1, display (1.6)] The convergence 'partial_t u_p -> partial_t u weakly-* in L^2(0,T;L^infty(T))' appears to be a typo; the available estimate on partial_t u_p is in L^2((0,T)xT), so the convergence should be stated in L^2((0,T)xT) unless an additional L^infty bound is proved.
[Proposition 2.6] The level-set proof bounds the energy by the entropy expression integral(rho_0 log rho_0 - rho_0), which is not the quantity supplied by the energy inequality; the available uniform bound is E_0. Since any fixed finite constant would suffice for the contradiction, this is not fatal, but the displayed estimate should be corrected.
[Section 2.2.2] The variational inequality satisfied by global weak solutions at fixed p is asserted without derivation. A short derivation from the weak formulation and the convexity of the stress potential would improve the readability and would clarify the role of the constraint |partial_x v| <= 1.
[Remark 1.6] Remark 1.6 ends with the sentence 'Note also that the formulation (1.7) with the regularity found on (rho,u) given in Theorem 1.1 is equivalent to the problem' and then stops; the sentence is incomplete.
[Throughout] There are several minor typographical and grammatical issues, for example 'stated with the work' should be 'starting with the work' in the abstract, and 'Concerinig' should be 'Concerning' in the introduction; these should be corrected in a revised version.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

The p→∞ limit is derived from uniform estimates, not from the target constraint; self-citations are supporting and non-load-bearing.

full rationale

The central derivation chain is not circular. The paper starts from the fixed-p power-law system (1.3) and obtains, via a priori estimates in Propositions 2.1, 2.4 and 2.5, uniform bounds on density, velocity, |∂x u_p|^{p−2}∂x u_p and ρ_p ˙u_p. The unilateral constraint |∂x u| ≤ 1 is then deduced in Proposition 2.6 from the uniform p-energy bound and weak lower semicontinuity (and similarly in Proposition 3.1 in multi-D), while the Lagrange-multiplier structure τ = π∂x u with π(1−|∂x u|)=0 is obtained in Section 2.2.3 from the equality |τ| = τ∂x u, itself a consequence of the previous bound and of convergence of the stress. At no point is the target limit system imposed as a definition or used to construct the approximating sequence. The authors' self-citations are not load-bearing: Lemma A.1 from [6] is reproduced with a full proof in Appendix A, and [7,8] are cited for context or for an analogous singular limit, not to justify the p→∞ compactness. The genuine weakness is a completeness/correctness gap: in Section 2 the authors state 'The local existence of strong solutions can be achieved using a classical Galerkin method or fixed point theorem... We skip the details and we refer the reader for example to [24]', and Theorem 1.1 needs global fixed-p weak solutions; the passage from the cited local-existence result to the global solutions used in (1.6) is not written out. This affects whether Theorems 1.1 and 1.5 have a solution sequence to pass to the limit, but it is an omitted proof, not a circular reduction: the fixed-p solutions are inputs, and the limit statement is not equivalent to those inputs by construction. No fitted data or parameter appears anywhere in the proof. The multi-D Theorem 1.9 is explicitly conditional ('the construction of weak solutions to (1.8) remains an open problem'), which is an honest limitation rather than a circular use of the conclusion.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims depend on existence and regularity inputs from prior or skipped arguments, not on fitted parameters. The main axioms are: fixed-p global solutions with uniform bounds, the stress maximum-principle estimate, the adaptation of [18] for the regularized multidimensional system, and the assumed existence in the conditional multidimensional theorem. No free parameters or invented physical entities are introduced.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption For each fixed large p, global weak solutions of the compressible power-law system (1.3)-(1.5) exist with the uniform bounds stated in Theorem 1.1.
Section 2, opening paragraph: local existence 'can be achieved using a classical Galerkin method or fixed point' and details are skipped, with reference to [24]; all later compactness uses these bounds.
domain assumption The maximum-principle argument yields the pointwise stress bound μ|∂x u_p|^{p-2}∂x u_p - a ρ_p^γ ≤ μ uniformly in p.
Proposition 2.1, eq. (2.5); the proof invokes a maximum principle with a drift and a pressure term, but the sign handling of the term -γσ_p ∂x u_p is only sketched. The density bounds and hence the convergence rest on this estimate.
domain assumption The regularized multidimensional system (3.8) has global variational solutions for each large p, as stated to follow from Feireisl-Liao-Malek [18].
Section 3.1: 'from the proof it is clear that the same result holds'; this adaptation is not proven in the paper.
domain assumption Existence of a sequence (ρ_p,u_p) of weak solutions to the semi-stationary power-law system (1.8) satisfying the energy bound (1.13) is assumed.
Theorem 1.9 states this as an assumption and notes the construction is open; the theorem's convergence is conditional on it.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Discontinuous shear-thickening asymptotic for power-law systems related to compressible flows." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7LLMQMAM

@misc{pith2026250715410,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Discontinuous shear-thickening asymptotic for power-law systems related to compressible flows},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7LLMQMAM}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.15410}
}

read the original abstract

In this paper we study the convergence of a power-law model for dilatant compressible fluids to a class of models exhibiting a maximum admissible shear rate, called thick compressible fluids. These kinds of problems were studied previously for elliptic equations, stating with the work of Bhattacharya, E. DiBenedetto and J. Manfredi [Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Politec. Torino 1989], and more recently for incompressible fluids by J.F. Rodrigues [J. Math. Sciences 2015]. Our result may be seen as an extension to the compressible setting of these previous works. Physically, this is motivated by the fact that the pressures generated during a squeezing flow are often large, potentially requiring the consideration of compressibility, see M. Fang and R. Gilbert [Z. Anal. Anwend 2004]. Mathematically, the main difficulty in the compressible setting concerns the strong hyperbolicparabolic coupling between the density and velocity field. We obtain two main results, the first concerning the one-dimensional non-stationary compressible power-law system while the second one concerns the semi-stationary multi-dimensional case. Finally, we present an extension in onedimension for a viscous Cauchy stress with singular dependence on the shear rate.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

Dissipative Solutions to a Compressible Non-Newtonian Korteweg System with Density-Dependent Viscous Stress Tensor
math.AP 2026-01 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

Global dissipative solutions and weak-strong uniqueness hold for a compressible non-Newtonian Navier–Stokes–Korteweg system with density-dependent viscosity on the torus in 2D and 3D.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

38 extracted references · 38 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[24]

Kalousek, V

M. Kalousek, V. Mácha, and Š. Nečasová. Local-in-time e xistence of strong solutions to a class of the compressible non-Newtonian Navier–Stokes equations. Mathematische Annalen , 384:1–33, 11 2021

work page 2021
[18]

Feireisl, X

E. Feireisl, X. Liao, and J. Málek. Global weak solution s to a class of non-Newtonian compressible ﬂuids. Mathematical Methods in the Applied Sciences , 38(16), 2015. 26

work page 2015
[1]

Aronsson and L

G. Aronsson and L. Evans. An asymptotic model for compres sion molding. Indiana University Mathematics Journal , 51(1):1–36, 2002

work page 2002
[2]

dilatancy

H. Barnes. Shear-thickening (“dilatancy”) in suspensio ns of nonaggregating solid particles dispersed in newtonian liquids. Journal of Rheology , 33(2):329–366, 1989

work page 1989
[3]

Basov and V

I. Basov and V. Shelukhin. Generalized solutions to the eq uations of compressible Bingham ﬂows. ZAMM - Journal of Applied Mathematics and Mechanics / Zeitsc hrift für Angewandte Mathematik und Mechanik, 79(3):185–192, 1999

work page 1999
[4]

Bhattacharya, E

T. Bhattacharya, E. DiBenedetto, and J. Manfredi. Limits a s p → ∞ of ∆ pup = f and related extremal problems. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Politec. Torino , 47:15–68, 1989

work page 1989
[5]

Bouchitté, G

G. Bouchitté, G. Buttazzo, and L. de Pascale. A p-Laplacian approximation for some mass optimization problems. Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications , 118(1):1–25, 2003

work page 2003
[6]

Bresch and C

D. Bresch and C. Burtea. Global existence of weak solutions for the anisotropic compressible Stokes system. Annales de l’Institut Henri Poincaré C, Analyse non linéair e, 37(6):1271–1297, 2020

work page 2020

Show all 38 references

[7]

Bresch, C

D. Bresch, C. Burtea, P. Gonin-Joubert, and F. Lagoutière. Mathematical justiﬁcation of a compressible two-phase averaged system with temperature b ut without heat conductivity. ArXiv preprint, 07 2024

2024
[8]

Bresch, C

D. Bresch, C. Perrin, and E. Zatorska. Singular limit of a N avier–Stokes system leading to a free/congested zones two-phase model. Comptes Rendus. Mathématique , 352(9):685–690, 2014

2014
[9]

Brown and H

E. Brown and H. M. Jaeger. Dynamic jamming point for shear t hickening suspensions. Phys. Rev. Lett., 103:086001, Aug 2009

2009
[10]

Burtea and M

C. Burtea and M. Szlenk. Weak solutions to the navier–sto kes equations for steady compressible non-Newtonian ﬂuids. Nonlinear Analysis, 255:113774, 2025

2025
[11]

Constantin, T

P. Constantin, T. D. Drivas, H. Q. Nguyen, and F. Pasqual otto. Compressible ﬂuids and active potentials. Annales de l’Institut Henri Poincaré C, Analyse non linéair e, 37(1):145–180, Feb. 2020

2020
[12]

De los Reyes and G

J. De los Reyes and G. Stadler. A nonsmooth model for disc ontinuous shear thickening ﬂuids: Analysis and numerical solution. Interfaces and Free Boundaries , 16:575–602, 12 2014

2014
[13]

J. C. De los Reyes and G. Stadler. A nonsmooth model for di scontinuous shear thickening ﬂuids: analysis and numerical solution. Interfaces and Free Boundaries , 16(4):575–602, 2014

2014
[14]

De Pascale, L

L. De Pascale, L. C. Evans, and A. Pratelli. Integral est imates for transport densities. Bulletin of the London Mathematical Society , 36(3):383–395, 2004

2004
[15]

Diening, M

L. Diening, M. R˘ užička, and J. Wolf. Existence of weak s olutions for unsteady motions of general- ized Newtonian ﬂuids. Annali della Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa-Classe di Sci enze, 9(1):1–46, 2010

2010
[16]

L. C. Evans. Partial Diﬀerential Equations and Monge-K antorovich Mass Transfer. Current Developments in Mathematics , 1997(1), 1997

1997
[17]

Fang and R

M. Fang and R. Gilbert. Compression molding ii: Existen ce of the solution for a Hele-Shaw type model. Zeitschrift Fur Analysis Und Ihre Anwendungen , 23:783–807, 12 2004

2004
[19]

Frehse, J

J. Frehse, J. Málek, and M. R˘ užička. Large data existen ce result for unsteady ﬂows of inho- mogeneous shear-thickening heat-conducting incompressi ble ﬂuids. Communications in Partial Diﬀerential Equations , 35(10):1891–1919, 2010

1919
[20]

Frehse, J

J. Frehse, J. Málek, and M. Steinhauer. On existence res ults for ﬂuids with shear dependent viscosity. – Unsteady ﬂows. In Partial diﬀerential equations: theory and numerical solut ion. Proceedings of the ICM’98 satellite conference, Prague, Cz ech Republic, August 10–16, 199...

1998
[21]

D. Hoﬀ. Global existence for 1d, compressible, isentropic Navier-Stokes equations with l arge initial data. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society , 303(1):169–181, 1987

1987
[22]

D. Hoﬀ. Global solutions of the Navier-Stokes equation s for multidimensional compressible ﬂow with discontinuous initial data. Journal of Diﬀerential Equations , 120(1):215–254, 1995

1995
[23]

R. Hoﬀman. Discontinuous and dilatant viscosity behav ior in concentrated suspensions. i. obser- vation of a ﬂow instability. Transactions of the Society of Rheology , 16(1):155–173, 1972

1972
[25]

Katzourakis and T

N. Katzourakis and T. Pryer. On the numerical approxima tion of ∞-harmonc mappings. Nonlinear Diﬀerential Equations and Applications NoDEA , 23, 10 2015

2015
[26]

O. A. Ladyzhenskaya. New equations for the description of the motions of viscous incompressible ﬂuids, and global solvability for their boundary value prob lems. Trudy Matematicheskogo Instituta Imeni V A Steklova, 102:85–104, 1967

1967
[27]

H. Laun, R. Bung, and F. Schmidt. Rheology of extremely sh ear thickening polymer disper- sionsa)(passively viscosity switching ﬂuids). Journal of rheology , 35(6):999–1034, 1991

1991
[28]

C.-C. Lee, F. Folgar, and C. L. Tucker. Simulation of com pression molding for ﬁber-reinforced thermosetting polymers. Journal of Engineering for Industry , 106(2):114–125, 05 1984

1984
[29]

Lefebvre-Lepot and B

A. Lefebvre-Lepot and B. Maury. Micro-macro modelling o f an array of spheres interacting through lubrication forces. Adv. Math. Sci. Appl. , 21(2):535–557, 2011

2011
[30]

Lions and N

P.-L. Lions and N. Masmoudi. On a free boundary barotrop ic model. Annales de l’I.H.P. Analyse non linéaire, 16(3):373–410, 1999

1999
[31]

Málek, J

J. Málek, J. Nečas, and M. R˘ užička. On the Non-Newtonia n incompressible ﬂuids. Mathematical Models and Methods in Applied Sciences , 03(01):35–63, Feb. 1993

1993
[32]

Miranda and J

F. Miranda and J. F. Rodrigues. On a variational inequal ity for incompressible non-Newtonian thick ﬂows. Contemporary Mathematics, 666, 2016

2016
[33]

Perrin and E

C. Perrin and E. Zatorska. Free/congested two-phase mo del from weak solutions to multi- dimensional compressible Navier-Stokes equations. Comm. in PDE , 40:1558–1589, 2015

2015
[34]

T. A. Prabhu and A. Singh. Eﬀect of carrier ﬂuid and parti cle size distribution on the rheology of shear thickening suspensions. Rheologica Acta, 60:107–118, 2021

2021
[35]

Rodrigues

J. Rodrigues. On the mathematical analysis of thick ﬂui ds. Journal of Mathematical Sciences , 210, 11 2015

2015
[36]

J. F. Rodrigues and L. Santos. Variational and quasi-va riational inequalities with gradient type constraints. In M. Hintermüller and J. F. Rodrigues, editor s, Topics in Applied Analysis and Optimisation, pages 319–361, Cham, 2019. Springer International Publis hing. 27

2019
[37]

Sazhenkov

S. Sazhenkov. The problem of motion of rigid bodies in a n on-Newtonian incompressible ﬂuid. Siberian Mathematical Journal , 39(1):126–140, 1998

1998
[38]

J. Wolf. Existence of weak solutions to the equations of non-stationary motion of non-Newtonian ﬂuids with shear rate dependent viscosity. Journal of Mathematical Fluid Mechanics , 9(1):104– 138, 2007. 28

2007

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [24]

Kalousek, V

M. Kalousek, V. Mácha, and Š. Nečasová. Local-in-time e xistence of strong solutions to a class of the compressible non-Newtonian Navier–Stokes equations. Mathematische Annalen , 384:1–33, 11 2021

work page 2021

[2] [18]

Feireisl, X

E. Feireisl, X. Liao, and J. Málek. Global weak solution s to a class of non-Newtonian compressible ﬂuids. Mathematical Methods in the Applied Sciences , 38(16), 2015. 26

work page 2015

[3] [1]

Aronsson and L

G. Aronsson and L. Evans. An asymptotic model for compres sion molding. Indiana University Mathematics Journal , 51(1):1–36, 2002

work page 2002

[4] [2]

dilatancy

H. Barnes. Shear-thickening (“dilatancy”) in suspensio ns of nonaggregating solid particles dispersed in newtonian liquids. Journal of Rheology , 33(2):329–366, 1989

work page 1989

[5] [3]

Basov and V

I. Basov and V. Shelukhin. Generalized solutions to the eq uations of compressible Bingham ﬂows. ZAMM - Journal of Applied Mathematics and Mechanics / Zeitsc hrift für Angewandte Mathematik und Mechanik, 79(3):185–192, 1999

work page 1999

[6] [4]

Bhattacharya, E

T. Bhattacharya, E. DiBenedetto, and J. Manfredi. Limits a s p → ∞ of ∆ pup = f and related extremal problems. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Politec. Torino , 47:15–68, 1989

work page 1989

[7] [5]

Bouchitté, G

G. Bouchitté, G. Buttazzo, and L. de Pascale. A p-Laplacian approximation for some mass optimization problems. Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications , 118(1):1–25, 2003

work page 2003

[8] [6]

Bresch and C

D. Bresch and C. Burtea. Global existence of weak solutions for the anisotropic compressible Stokes system. Annales de l’Institut Henri Poincaré C, Analyse non linéair e, 37(6):1271–1297, 2020

work page 2020