Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 minor 44 references

Exact Rheology of Uniform Shear Flow in a Gas of Inelastic and Rough Maxwell Particles

T0 review · 0 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-04 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read For a model of rough, inelastic grains, the rheology of uniform shear flow is solved exactly.

desk verdict A clean exact-solution paper for sheared rough Maxwell gases; the algebra is transparent and checks out, but the eight rate coefficients come from the authors' prior paper and there is a minor notation slip in the definition of κ. read the letter →

arxiv 2602.22927 v2 pith:3ACQM55W submitted 2026-02-26 cond-mat.soft cond-mat.stat-mech

Andrés Santos , Gilberto M. Kremer This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.softcond-mat.stat-mech MSC 76P0582C4035Q20
keywords granulargasinelasticroughMaxwellmodeluniformshearflownon-Newtonianrheologystresstensorspin-spinviscometricfunctionsmean-fieldcollisionoperator
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 solves, with no approximations beyond the model itself, the steady uniform shear flow of a granular gas whose particles are both inelastic and rough. It derives closed-form expressions for the full stress tensor, the spin-spin tensor, and the shear rate in terms of two effective parameters that generalize the cooling rate and stress-relaxation rate of the smooth Maxwell model. Two quantities—the rotational-to-translational temperature ratio and the proportionality between spin-spin and stress—come out independent of normal restitution, fixed only by surface roughness and moment of inertia. This gives a rare exact non-Newtonian rheology for a granular model with both normal and tangential inelasticity, and it reduces to the smooth inelastic Maxwell solution and to the elastic perfectly rough Pidduck gas in the appropriate limits.

What carries the argument

The engine of the derivation is the mean-field Boltzmann collision operator of the inelastic rough Maxwell model, in which the collision frequency is replaced by an effective rate proportional to the square root of the translational temperature. That mean-field structure makes the collisional production rates of moments up to second degree close exactly on moments of the same degree, through eight coefficients imported from the authors' earlier moment calculation. Substituting those production rates into the USF balance equations, the problem collapses to two scalar effective parameters—χ, the generalized cooling rate, and ψ, the generalized stress-relaxation rate—plus an algebraic relation

What would settle it

Directly evaluate the collision integrals in Eqs. (11) from the IRMM collision operator (9) for a test state (e.g., α=0.8, β=0.5, κ=0.4) and compare the eight coefficients with Eq. (12); or run a direct simulation of the kinetic equation (9) under steady uniform shear and compare measured Π*_xx, Π*_xy, θ, and γ̇* with Eqs. (13a), (13d), and (18). Any discrepancy would falsify the exact solution.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that in the inelastic rough Maxwell model, the steady uniform shear-flow state admits an exact solution for all second-degree moments. The reduced stress tensor is diagonal with Π*_xx = -2Π*_yy = -2Π*_zz = 2χ/ψ, the reduced shear stress is Π*_xy = -√[(3/2)(χ/ψ)(1-χ/ψ)], and the reduced shear rate is γ̇* = √[(3/2)ψχ/(1-χ/ψ)], where χ and ψ are explicit functions of the normal and tangential restitution coefficients and the moment of inertia. In addition, the rotational-to-translational temperature ratio θ and the proportionality factor λ connecting the spin-spin tensor to the stress tensor are completely independent of the normal restitution coefficient. The paper also de

Load-bearing premise

Everything downstream rests on the eight collisional production coefficients in Eqs. (12), taken from the earlier moment paper without re-derivation: if any coefficient is wrong, every reported stress, spin, and shear-rate expression shifts. The second load-bearing premise is that the steady uniform shear state is adequately described by closing the production rates at second degree.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A complete non-Newtonian rheology—normal stresses, shear stress, shear-rate dependence, viscosity, viscometric function, and friction coefficient—is available in closed form for a granular model with both normal and tangential inelasticity.
  • The rotational-to-translational temperature ratio and the spin-stress proportionality depend only on roughness and moment of inertia, so they are universal signatures of this rough Maxwell interaction.
  • The reduced shear stress and normal stress obey the relation Π*_xy = -(1/2)√(3/2) Π*_xx(2-Π*_xx) for arbitrary restitution coefficients and moment of inertia.
  • In the perfectly smooth inelastic limit the formulas reproduce the known IMM shear-flow solution; in the elastic perfectly rough limit they reproduce the Pidduck gas viscosity and Burnett coefficient, confirming the limits are internally consistent.
  • The reduced shear viscosity's dependence on restitution is opposite to that of the Newtonian shear viscosity found earlier for the same model, showing that Newtonian transport coefficients do not extrapolate into the strongly sheared regime.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because the derivation only uses the second-moment structure, the same χ-ψ reduction should apply to any kinetic model—BGK-like or Grad-like—that shares the same production rates; the paper's comparison with a BGK-like result already hints at this.
  • The exact nonmonotonic dependence of normal stress and shear rate on roughness suggests that particle simulations of rough granular gases, in the regime where a Maxwellian collision rate is a good approximation, should show a measurable intermediate-roughness maximum.
  • A natural extension is to binary mixtures: the effective-parameter scheme may carry over, giving exact shear-flow rheology for rough inelastic mixtures with only a few additional coefficients.
  • The exact solution is a ready-made testbed for numerical solvers of the kinetic equation: a simulation that does not converge to Eqs. (18) for the inelastic rough Maxwell model would indicate a solver error, not a theory error.
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.

Referee Report

0 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper derives exact closed-form solutions for the steady uniform shear flow (USF) of a dilute granular gas composed of inelastic and rough Maxwell particles (IRMM). Starting from the Boltzmann equation in the USF geometry, the authors close the moment hierarchy using the eight collisional production rates from their earlier work (Ref. [5]) and solve the resulting nonlinear algebraic system exactly. The main results are explicit expressions for the reduced stress tensor, spin-spin tensor, and shear rate (Eqs. (18)), together with the findings that the rotational-to-translational temperature ratio θ (Eq. (13a)) and the stress-spin proportionality λ (Eq. (13d)) are independent of the normal restitution coefficient α. The results reduce to the smooth inelastic Maxwell model (β = −1) and the elastic perfectly rough Pidduck gas (α = β = 1), and are used to obtain non-Newtonian viscosity, first viscometric function, and friction coefficient (§4, Eqs. (22)).

Significance. If correct, this is the first exact non-Newtonian rheological description of a granular-gas model incorporating both normal and tangential inelasticity. The paper is notable for its transparent algebraic derivations, which I verified for the balance equations (8), the closed forms (13a) and (13d), the reductions (23) and (24), and the internal consistency of Eqs. (18). The claimed α-independence of θ and λ, and the nonmonotonic dependence on the tangential restitution coefficient β, are novel and physically interesting. The explicit closed forms provide a valuable benchmark for approximate kinetic theories and simulations of rough granular shear flows. The main caveat is that the input coefficients (12) are imported from the authors' prior publication rather than re-derived here, but this is a normal practice and does not undermine the central derivation.

minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 2.1, Eq. (3); Sec. 4, Figs. 1–3] The definition κ ≡ I/(mσ²) with σ the diameter gives κ = 1/10 for uniform spheres (I = (2/5)m(σ/2)²), yet the paper uses κ = 2/5 for uniform spheres throughout. This factor-of-4 inconsistency should be resolved: either σ is the radius (but then the collision rules use σ/2 as the lever arm), or the value for uniform spheres should be 1/10. This affects the quantitative physical interpretation of all plotted quantities.
  2. [Sec. 3, Eq. (12)] The eight coefficients in Eq. (12) are the sole input to the new results, but they are quoted verbatim from Ref. [5] without derivation. To make the paper more self-contained and to allow the reader to assess the validity of the central claim, please include a brief derivation or an explicit cross-check of these coefficients in an appendix, or at least cite the precise equations in Ref. [5] where they are obtained.
  3. [Sec. 3, text after Eq. (9)] The phrase 'production rates appearing in Eqs. (13c)' appears to be a typo; the production rates in question are given in Eqs. (11). Please correct the reference.
  4. [Sec. 4, Eq. (18c)] The expression for γ̇* requires 1 − χ/ψ > 0 for a real shear rate. It would be helpful to state this existence condition explicitly and to comment briefly on whether it is satisfied for the entire physical parameter range (0 ≤ α ≤ 1, −1 ≤ β ≤ 1, κ > 0).

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the USF solution is an algebraic consequence of independently published production-rate coefficients, not of the result being predicted.

full rationale

The paper's central results (Eqs. 13–24) are derived by inserting the collision-production-rate coefficients (12) into the moment-balance equations (8). Those eight coefficients are quoted from the authors' previous paper [5], but they were derived there from the IRMM collision operator (9) in a separate context (collisional moments), and they do not assume or contain the uniform-shear-flow solution. Thus the USF stress/spin tensors and shear rate are not inputs to the coefficient derivation; they are outputs of the present moment-equation solution. No parameter is fitted to the target data, no quantity is defined in terms of the quantity it is said to predict, and no uniqueness theorem or ansatz from the authors' prior work is invoked to force the final expressions. The smooth-IMM limit (23) and Pidduck-gas limit (24) are independent consistency checks, not sources of the rough-inelastic formulas. The dependence of the final formulas on un-re-derived coefficients from [5] is a verification/robustness concern, but it is not circularity: a cited, published, parameter-free derivation with stated assumptions that exclude the target result counts as independent evidence. Even the self-citational chain ([5] and [6]) does not reduce to the present claim. The notation issue with κ = I/(mσ²) versus the uniform-sphere value κ = 2/5 is a physical-identification/correctness concern, not a circularity. Therefore no circular step can be exhibitied, and the appropriate score is 0.

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

No fitted parameters: α, β, κ are physical model inputs, γ̇* is the imposed control parameter, and χ, ψ are closed-form functions of the inputs (Eqs. 15, 17). No ad hoc entities are introduced: the IRMM is the authors' previously published model [5,6], not a new mechanism invented here. The central input that a reader must take on faith is the set of eight rate coefficients (12) quoted from [5]; the rest of the derivation is presented in full and I verified its internal consistency.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Collision rules (1)-(2) with constant α, β and reduced moment of inertia κ define the collision mechanics (standard rough-sphere model).
    Section 2.1, Eqs. (1)-(2), citing refs [2,37]; shared by IRHSM and IRMM; not justified in this paper.
  • domain assumption A steady, spatially uniform USF solution of Eq. (4) exists in the Lagrangian frame.
    Section 2.2, Eq. (4); the standard USF ansatz; existence and stability of the steady state are not proven here.
  • domain assumption The IRMM collision operator (9) with mean-field rate ν ∝ √Tt represents the rough granular gas; all 'exact' results are exact within this model.
    Section 3, Eq. (9), from refs [5,6]; the model is an approximation of the physical hard-sphere gas.
  • domain assumption The eight production-rate coefficients (12) quoted from ref. [5] are correct, and the second-moment production rates close on first- and second-degree moments.
    Section 3, Eqs. (11)-(12); the sole external input to the derivation, not re-derived in this paper.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Exact Rheology of Uniform Shear Flow in a Gas of Inelastic and Rough Maxwell Particles." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/3ACQM55W

@misc{pith2026260222927,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Exact Rheology of Uniform Shear Flow in a Gas of Inelastic and Rough Maxwell Particles},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/3ACQM55W}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2602.22927}
}
read the original abstract

We investigate the steady uniform shear flow of a granular gas composed of inelastic and rough Maxwell particles. Exploiting the mean-field character of the model, we derive exact expressions for the collisional production rates of the second-degree moments and obtain a closed nonlinear solution for the stress and spin-spin tensors. The rotational-to-translational temperature ratio and the proportionality between the spin-spin and stress tensors are shown to be independent of the coefficient of normal restitution and determined solely by roughness and moment of inertia. The reduced normal stresses, shear stress, and shear rate are obtained explicitly in terms of two effective parameters generalizing the cooling and stress relaxation rates of the smooth model. From these results we derive exact expressions for the non-Newtonian shear viscosity, the first viscometric function, and the friction coefficient. The dependence of the rheological properties on the normal and tangential restitution coefficients is analyzed in detail, revealing strong non-Newtonian behavior and nonmonotonic effects of roughness. The results reduce, in the appropriate limits, to those of the inelastic Maxwell model for smooth particles and to the Pidduck gas in the elastic perfectly rough case.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 27 canonical work pages

  1. [5]

    Kremer, A

    G.M. Kremer, A. Santos, Granular gas of inelastic and rough Maxw ell particles. J. Stat. Phys. 189, 23 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10955- 022-02984-6

    doi:10.1007/s10955- 2022

  2. [1]

    Brilliantov, T

    N.V. Brilliantov, T. P¨ oschel, Kinetic Theory of Granular Gases (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2004)

    2004

  3. [2]

    Garz´ o, Granular Gaseous Flows

    V. Garz´ o, Granular Gaseous Flows. A Kinetic Theory Approach to Granular Gaseous Flows (Springer Nature, Switzerland, 2019)

    2019

  4. [3]

    Bobylev, J.A

    A.V. Bobylev, J.A. Carrillo, I.M. Gamba, On some properties of kinet ic and hydrodynamic equations for inelastic interactions. J. Stat. Ph ys. 98, 743–773 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018627625800

    work page doi:10.1023/a:1018627625800 2000

  5. [4]

    Jenkins, M.W

    J.T. Jenkins, M.W. Richman, Kinetic theory for plane flows of a dens e gas of identical, rough, inelastic, circular disks. Phys. Fluids 28, 3485–3494 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.865302

    work page doi:10.1063/1.865302 1985

  6. [6]

    Santos, G.M

    A. Santos, G.M. Kremer, Exact transport coefficients from the inelastic rough Maxwell model of a granular gas. J. Stat. Phys. 191, 54 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10955-024-03269-w

    work page doi:10.1007/s10955-024-03269-w 2024

  7. [7]

    Santos, V

    A. Santos, V. Garz´ o, J.W. Dufty, Inherent rheology of a gran ular fluid in uniform shear flow. Phys. Rev. E 69, 061,303 (2004). https://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevE.69.061303

    2004

  8. [8]

    Campbell, A

    C.S. Campbell, A. Gong, The stress tensor in a two-dimensional gr anular shear flow. J. Fluid Mech. 164, 107–125 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1017/ S0022112086002495

    1986

Show all 44 references
  1. [9]

    Campbell, The stress tensor for simple shear flows of a granu lar material

    C.S. Campbell, The stress tensor for simple shear flows of a granu lar material. J. Fluid Mech. 203, 449–473 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1017/ S0022112089001540

    1989

  2. [10]

    Campbell, Self-diffusion in granular shear flows

    C.S. Campbell, Self-diffusion in granular shear flows. J. Fluid Mech. 348, 85–101 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022112097006496 Springer Nature 2021 LATEX template 12 Rheology of Uniform Shear Flow

    1997 doi

  3. [11]

    Montanero, V

    J.M. Montanero, V. Garz´ o, M. Alam, S. Luding, Rheology of two - and three-dimensional granular mixtures under uniform shear flow: En skog kinetic theory versus molecular dynamics simulations. Granul. Matte r 8, 103–115 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10035-006-0001-7

    2006 doi

  4. [12]

    Chamorro, F

    M.G. Chamorro, F. Vega Reyes, V. Garz´ o, Non-Newtonian hyd rodynam- ics for a dilute granular suspension under uniform shear flow. Phys. Rev. E 92, 052,205 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1103/physreve.92.052205

    2015 doi

  5. [13]

    Hayakawa, S

    H. Hayakawa, S. Takada, V. Garz´ o, Kinetic theory of shear t hickening for a moderately dense gas-solid suspension: From discontinuous thick ening to continuous thickening. Phys. Rev. E 96, 042,903 (2017). https://doi. org/10.1103/PhysRevE.96.042903

    2017 doi

  6. [14]

    Hayakawa, S

    H. Hayakawa, S. Takada, Kinetic theory of discontinuous rheo logical phase transition for a dilute inertial suspension. Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys . 2019, 083J01 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1093/ptep/ptz075

    2019 doi

  7. [15]

    Brey, M.J

    J.J. Brey, M.J. Ruiz-Montero, F. Moreno, Steady uniform shea r flow in a low density granular gas. Phys. Rev. E 55, 2846–2856 (1997). https:// doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.55.2846

    1997 doi

  8. [16]

    Garz´ o, Transport coefficients for an inelastic gas around u niform shear flow: Linear stability analysis

    V. Garz´ o, Transport coefficients for an inelastic gas around u niform shear flow: Linear stability analysis. Phys. Rev. E 73, 021,304 (2006). https:// doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.73.021304

    2006 doi

  9. [17]

    G´ omez Gonz´ alez, V

    R. G´ omez Gonz´ alez, V. Garz´ o, Simple shear flow in granular suspensiones: Inelastic Maxwell models and BGK-type kinetic model. J. Stat. Mech. 013206 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-5468/aaf719

    2019 doi

  10. [18]

    Astillero, A

    A. Astillero, A. Santos, Uniform shear flow in dissipative gases: C omputer simulations of inelastic hard spheres and frictional elastic hard sphe res. Phys. Rev. E 72, 031,309 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.72. 031309

    2005 doi

  11. [19]

    Takada, H

    S. Takada, H. Hayakawa, A. Santos, V. Garz´ o, Enskog kinet ic theory of rheology for a moderately dense inertial suspension. Phys. Rev. E 102, 022,907 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.102.022907

    2020 doi

  12. [20]

    Cercignani, Shear flow of a granular material

    C. Cercignani, Shear flow of a granular material. J. Stat. Phys. 102, 1407–1415 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004804815471

    2001 doi

  13. [21]

    Garz´ o, Nonlinear transport in inelastic Maxwell mixtures und er simple shear flow

    V. Garz´ o, Nonlinear transport in inelastic Maxwell mixtures und er simple shear flow. J. Stat. Phys. 112, 657–683 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/ A:1023828109434 Springer Nature 2021 LATEX template Rheology of Uniform Shear Flow 13

    2003

  14. [22]

    Garz´ o, Shear-rate dependent transport coefficients fo r inelastic Maxwell models

    V. Garz´ o, Shear-rate dependent transport coefficients fo r inelastic Maxwell models. J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 40, 10,729–10,767 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1088/1751-8113/40/35/002

    2007 doi

  15. [23]

    Santos, V

    A. Santos, V. Garz´ o, Simple shear flow in inelastic Maxwell models . J. Stat. Mech. P08021 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-5468/2007/ 08/P08021

    2007 doi

  16. [24]

    Garz´ o, Mass flux of a binary mixture of maxwell molecules und er shear flow

    V. Garz´ o, Mass flux of a binary mixture of maxwell molecules und er shear flow. Physica A 387, 3423–3431 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physa. 2008.02.019

    2008 doi

  17. [25]

    Garz´ o, E

    V. Garz´ o, E. Trizac, Rheological properties for inelastic Maxwell mixtures under shear flow. J. Non-Newton. Fluid Mech. 165, 932–940 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnnfm.2010.01.016

    2010 doi

  18. [26]

    Garz´ o, A

    V. Garz´ o, A. Santos, Hydrodynamics of inelastic Maxwell mode ls. Math. Model. Nat. Phenom. 6(4), 37–76 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1051/ mmnp/20116403

    2011

  19. [27]

    Garz´ o, E

    V. Garz´ o, E. Trizac, Impurity in a sheared inelastic Maxwell gas . Phys. Rev. E 85, 011,302 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.85.011302

    2012 doi

  20. [28]

    Khalil, V

    N. Khalil, V. Garz´ o, A. Santos, Hydrodynamic Burnett equatio ns for inelastic Maxwell models of granular gases. Phys. Rev. E 89, 052201 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.89.052201

    2014 doi

  21. [29]

    Garz´ o, E

    V. Garz´ o, E. Trizac, Generalized transport coefficients for in elastic Maxwell mixtures under shear flow. Phys. Rev. E 92, 052,202 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.92.052202

    2015 doi

  22. [30]

    Garz´ o, N

    V. Garz´ o, N. Khalil, E. Trizac, Anomalous transport of impuritie s in inelastic Maxwell gases. Eur. Phys. J. E 38, 16 (2015). https://doi.org/ 10.1140/epje/i2015-15016-5

    2015 doi

  23. [31]

    Garz´ o, E

    V. Garz´ o, E. Trizac, Tracer diffusion coefficients in a sheared in elastic Maxwell gas. J. Stat. Mech. 073206 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1088/ 1742-5468/2016/07/073206

    2016

  24. [32]

    Khalil, V

    N. Khalil, V. Garz´ o, Unified hydrodynamic description for driven and undriven inelastic Maxwell mixtures at low density. J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 53, 355002 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1088/1751-8121/ab9f72

    2020 doi

  25. [33]

    S´ anchez Romero, V

    C. S´ anchez Romero, V. Garz´ o, High-degree collisional moments of inelas- tic Maxwell mixtures—Application to the homogeneous cooling and uniform shear flow states. Entropy 25, 222 (2023). https://doi.org/10. 3390/e25020222 Springer Nature 2021 LATEX template 14 Rheology of U...

    2023

  26. [34]

    Gayen, M

    B. Gayen, M. Alam, Orientational correlation and velocity distrib utions in uniform shear flow of a dilute granular gas. Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 068,002 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.068002

    2008 doi

  27. [35]

    Santos, A Bhatnagar–Gross–Krook-like model kinetic equa tion for a granular gas of inelastic rough hard spheres

    A. Santos, A Bhatnagar–Gross–Krook-like model kinetic equa tion for a granular gas of inelastic rough hard spheres. AIP Conf. Proc. 1333, 41–48 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3562623

    2011 doi

  28. [36]

    G´ omez Gonz´ alez, V

    R. G´ omez Gonz´ alez, V. Garz´ o, Non-Newtonian rheology in inertial sus- pensions of inelastic rough hard spheres under simple shear flow. Ph ys. Fluids 32, 073315 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0015241

    2020 doi

  29. [37]

    Santos, G.M

    A. Santos, G.M. Kremer, V. Garz´ o, Energy production rates in fluid mix- tures of inelastic rough hard spheres. Prog. Theor. Phys. Suppl. 184, 31–48 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1143/PTPS.184.31

    2010 doi

  30. [38]

    Babic, Average balance equations for granular materials

    M. Babic, Average balance equations for granular materials. In tl. J. Eng. Sci. 35, 523–548 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0020-7225(96)00094-8

    1997 doi

  31. [39]

    Mitarai, H

    N. Mitarai, H. Hayakawa, H. Nakanishi, Collisional granular flow as a micropolar fluid. Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 174301 (2002). https://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevLett.88.174301

    2002

  32. [40]

    Pidduck, The kinetic theory of a special type of rigid molecule

    F.B. Pidduck, The kinetic theory of a special type of rigid molecule . Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 101, 101–112 (1922). https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1922. 0028

    1922 doi

  33. [41]

    Condiff, W

    D.W. Condiff, W. Lu, J.S. Dahler, Transport properties of polyat omic fluids, a dilute gas of perfectly rough spheres. J. Chem. Phys. 42, 3445– 3475 (1965). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1695749

    1965 doi

  34. [42]

    McCoy, S.I

    B.J. McCoy, S.I. Sandler, J.S. Dahler, Transport properties of polyatomic fluids. IV. The kinetic theory of a dense gas of perfectly rough sph eres. J. Chem. Phys. 45(10), 3485–3512 (1966). https://doi.org/10.1063/1. 1727365

    1966 doi

  35. [43]

    Chapman, T.G

    S. Chapman, T.G. Cowling, The Mathematical Theory of Non-Uniform Gases, 3rd edn. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1970)

    1970

  36. [44]

    Kremer, An Introduction to the Boltzmann Equation and Transport Processes in Gases (Springer, Berlin, 2010)

    G.M. Kremer, An Introduction to the Boltzmann Equation and Transport Processes in Gases (Springer, Berlin, 2010)

    2010

Pith tools

Reviewed August 4, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.