| Literature DB >> 33266654 |
Muhammad Suleman1,2, Muhammad Ramzan1,3, Madiha Zulfiqar4, Muhammad Bilal5, Ahmad Shafee6, Jae Dong Chung7, Dianchen Lu1, Umer Farooq1,2.
Abstract
The present study characterizes the flow of three-dimensional viscoelastic magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) nanofluids flow with entropy generation analysis past an exponentially permeable stretched surface with simultaneous impacts of chemical reaction and heat generation/absorption. The analysis was conducted with additional effects nonlinear thermal radiation and convective heat and mass boundary conditions. Apposite transformations were considered to transform the presented mathematical model to a system of differential equations. Analytical solutions of the proposed model were developed via a well-known homotopy analysis scheme. The numerically calculated values of the dimensionless drag coefficient, local Nusselt number, and mass transfer Nusselt number are presented, with physical insights. The graphs depicting the consequences of numerous parameters on involved distributions with requisite deliberations were also a part of this model. It is seen that the Bejan number is an increasing function of the thermal radiation parameter.Entities:
Keywords: chemical species; entropy generation; exponential stretched surface; nonlinear thermal radiation
Year: 2018 PMID: 33266654 PMCID: PMC7512516 DOI: 10.3390/e20120930
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Entropy (Basel) ISSN: 1099-4300 Impact factor: 2.524
Figure 1Geometry of the problem.
Figure 2The ħ curves for .
Series solution convergence for varied orders of approximations when = 0.1, Nb = 0.5, Nt = 0.3, K = 0.2, M = 0.3, Le = 1, Pr = 1.2, Rd = 0.2, A = B = 0.1.
| Order of Approximation |
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1.19588 | 0.12037 | 0.16113 | 0.16180 |
| 3 | 1.37115 | 0.13887 | 0.15382 | 0.15745 |
| 7 | 1.42903 | 0.14518 | 0.14911 | 0.15586 |
| 10 | 1.45762 | 0.14852 | 0.14206 | 0.15476 |
| 13 | 1.46000 | 0.14883 | 0.13937 | 0.15471 |
| 14 | 1.46000 | 0.14883 | 0.13798 | 0.15460 |
| 15 | 1.46000 | 0.14883 | 0.13796 | 0.15460 |
| 18 | 1.46000 | 0.14883 | 0.13796 | 0.15460 |
Figure 3Effect of K on .
Figure 4Effect of M on and .
Figure 5Effect of Pr and γ on .
Figure 6Effect of Pr and A on .
Figure 7Effect of on .
Figure 8Effect of Nt and Nb on .
Figure 9Effect of Rd and Q on .
Figure 10Effect of M on .
Figure 11Effect of K on .
Figure 12Effect of K on .
Figure 13Effect of Rd on .
Figure 14Effect of Ω on .
Figure 15Effect of Re on .
Figure 16Effect of Rd on .
Figure 17Effect of Br on .
Figure 18Effect of M and K on average entropy generation.
Figure 19Effect of Pr and Rd on average entropy generation.
Values of local Nusselt and Sherwood numbers for involved parameters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.1 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 0.13878 | 0.12199 |
| 0.2 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 0.1388 | 0.12157 |
| 0.5 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 0.1421 | 0.12032 |
| - | 0.5 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 0.13878 | 0.12199 |
| - | 1.0 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 0.13772 | 0.11917 |
| - | 1.5 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 0.13770 | 0.11823 |
| - | - | 0.0 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 0.13878 | 0.11635 |
| - | - | 0.2 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 0.13878 | 0.12199 |
| - | - | 0.5 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 0.13878 | 0.12576 |
| - | - | - | 1.0 | - | - | - | - | - | - | 0.14447 | 0.12981 |
| - | - | - | 1.5 | - | - | - | - | - | - | 0.13878 | 0.12199 |
| - | - | - | 2.0 | - | - | - | - | - | - | 0.12572 | 0.11010 |
| - | - | - | - | 1.0 | - | - | - | - | - | 0.13878 | 0.12199 |
| - | - | - | - | 1.2 | - | - | - | - | - | 0.13775 | 0.08889 |
| - | - | - | - | 1.5 | - | - | - | - | - | 0.13774 | 0.06499 |
| - | - | - | - | - | 0.0 | - | - | - | - | 0.13878 | 0.12199 |
| - | - | - | - | - | 0.2 | - | - | - | - | 0.13878 | 0.12199 |
| - | - | - | - | - | 0.3 | - | - | - | - | 0.13878 | 0.12199 |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | 0.0 | - | - | - | 0.13878 | 0.12199 |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | 0.02 | - | - | - | 0.13878 | 0.12199 |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | 0.04 | - | - | - | 0.13878 | 0.12199 |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 0.2 | - | - | 0.13878 | 0.12199 |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 0.4 | - | - | 0.14392 | 0.12146 |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 0.5 | - | - | 0.14480 | 0.12123 |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 0.1 | - | 0.13878 | 0.12199 |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 0.5 | - | 0.13878 | 0.12199 |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 0.7 | - | 0.13878 | 0.12199 |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 0.2 | 0.13878 | 0.12199 |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 0.4 | 0.14962 | 0.12199 |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 0.5 | 0.15679 | 0.12199 |
Values of skin friction coefficients for involved parameters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.1 | - | - | 1.6768 | 0.2237 |
| 0.2 | - | - | 1.7698 | 0.4089 |
| 0.5 | - | - | 2.0571 | 1.0804 |
| - | 0.3 | - | 1.6768 | 0.2237 |
| - | 0.5 | - | 1.7422 | 0.2325 |
| - | 1.0 | - | 2.0212 | 0.2697 |
| - | - | 0.02 | 1.6768 | 0.2237 |
| - | - | 0.03 | 1.9607 | 0.2675 |
| - | - | 0.04 | 1.8168 | 0.3138 |
Comparison of present values to Liu et al. [52] in the limiting case when (also, values of the convective boundary were neglected).
|
|
|
| Liu et al. [ | Present Study |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.0 | 0.7 | 0.0 | −0.42583804 | −0.4258120 |
| 2.0 | −1.02143617 | −1.0214514 | ||
| 5.0 | −1.64165922 | −1.6416620 | ||
| 0.25 | 0.7 | 0.0 | −0.47609996 | −0.4761032 |
| 2.0 | −1.14199997 | −1.1420014 | ||
| 5.0 | −1.83543073 | −1.8354210 | ||
| 0.50 | 0.7 | 0.0 | −0.52154103 | −0.5215267 |
| 2.0 | −1.25099820 | −1.2509991 | ||
| 5.0 | −2.01061361 | −2.0106021 | ||
| 0.75 | 0.7 | 0.0 | −0.56332861 | −0.5633148 |
| 2.0 | −1.35123246 | −1.3512221 | ||
| 5.0 | −2.17171091 | −2.1717006 | ||
| 1.0 | 0.7 | 0.0 | −0.60222359 | −0.6022167 |
| 2.0 | −1.44452826 | −1.4445214 | ||
| 5.0 | −2.32165661 | −2.3216340 |