| Literature DB >> 32439893 |
Taza Gul1,2, Abbas Khan1, Muhammad Bilal1, Nasser Aedh Alreshidi3, Safyan Mukhtar4, Zahir Shah5, Poom Kumam6,7.
Abstract
The main features of present numerical model is to explore and compare the behavior of simple and hybrid nanoparticles, which were allowed to move on a spreading sheet. The effect of magnetic dipole on hybrid nanofluid flow is considered. A magnetic dipole combined with hybrid nanofluid plays a vital role in controlling the momentum and thermal boundary layers. In view of the impacts of a magnetic dipole on the simple and hybrid nanofluids, steady, laminar and boundary layer flow of [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] are characterized in this analysis. The governing equations of flow problem are diminished to ordinary differential equation (ODE's) by using similarity approach. For the numerical solution of the nonlinear ODE's, Runge Kutta order 4th technique has been executed. The impact of various physical constraints, such as volume friction, viscous dissipation, Prandtl number and so on have been sketched and briefly discussed for velocity and temperature profile. In this work, some vital characteristics such as skin friction, Curie temperature and local Nusselt number are chosen for physical and numerical analysis. It has been noted that the hybrid nanofluid is more efficient in thermal conduction due to its strong thermal characteristics as compared to simple nanofluid. From results, it is also observed that the turbulence of fluid flow can be controlled through magnetic dipole.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32439893 PMCID: PMC7242412 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-65298-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Geometry of the problem.
Figure 2The impact of β (Ferohydrodynamic) versus Temperature-1.
Figure 3The impact of β (Ferohydrodynamic) versus Temperature-2.
Figure 4The impact of β (Ferohydrodynamic) versus Velocity.
Figure 5The impact of γ (Magnetic field strength) versus Temperature-1.
Figure 6The impact of γ versus Temperature-2.
Figure 7The impact of γ versus Velocity.
Figure 8The impact of λ versus Temperature-1.
Figure 9The impactof λ versus Temperature-2.
Figure 10The impact of ϕ versus Temperature-1.
Figure 11The impact of ϕ versus Temperature-2.
Figure 12The impact of ϕ versus Velocity.
Figure 13The impact of Pr. versus Temperature-1.
Figure 14The impact of Pr. versus Temperature-2.
Comparison with existing literature, excluding dissimilar parameters.
| Present | Present | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.1 | 1.5221 | 1.5222318 | 0.5670 | 0.56713188 |
| 0.2 | 1.5074 | 1.5075729 | 0.5765 | 0.5766750 |
| 0.3 | 1.4884 | 1.4885273 | 0.5921 | 0.5922552 |
| 0.4 | 1.4637 | 1.4638747 | 0.6151 | 0.6152945 |
When.
Skin friction for the Hybrid nanofluid When. .
| 0.1 | 0.1 | 2 | 0.3 | 0.639816 | 0.63582 |
| 0.2 | 0.998612 | ||||
| 0.3 | 0.65258 | ||||
| 0.2 | 0.989658 | ||||
| 0.3 | 0.61375 | ||||
| 3 | 3.11988 | 2.97985 | |||
| 4 | 3.58719 | 3.54835 | |||
| 0.4 | 4.79543 | 4.27571 | |||
| 0.5 | 5.79559 | 5.25752 |
Nusselt number for the Hybrid nanofluids. When. .
| 0.1 | 0.1 | 7 | 1.9234 | 1.98188 |
| 0.2 | 2.39452 | 2.49348 | ||
| 0.3 | 2.88562 | 2.994988 | ||
| 0.2 | 1.96725 | 1.94758 | ||
| 0.3 | 0.948876 | 0.989986 | ||
| 1.99864 | 2.06123 | |||
| 2.1323956 | 2.345722 |