| Literature DB >> 34996921 |
Hussam Alrabaiah1,2, Muhammad Bilal3, Muhammad Altaf Khan4, Taseer Muhammad5, Endris Yimer Legas6.
Abstract
The silver, magnesium oxide and gyrotactic microorganism-based hybrid nanofluid flow inside the conical space between disc and cone is addressed in the perspective of thermal energy stabilization. Different cases have been discussed between the spinning of cone and disc in the same or counter wise directions. The hybrid nanofluid has been synthesized in the presence of silver Ag and magnesium oxide MgO nanoparticulate. The viscous dissipation and the magnetic field factors are introduced to the modeled equations. The parametric continuation method (PCM) is utilized to numerically handle the modeled problem. Magnesium oxide is chemically made up of Mg2+ and O2- ions that are bound by a strong ionic connection and can be made by pyrolyzing Mg(OH)2 (magnesium hydroxide) and MgCO3 (magnesium carbonate) at high temperature (700-1500 °C). For metallurgical, biomedical and electrical implementations, it is more efficient. Similarly, silver nanoparticle's antibacterial properties could be employed to control bacterial growth. It has been observed that a circulating disc with a stationary cone can achieve the optimum cooling of the cone-disk apparatus while the outer edge temperature remains fixed. The thermal energy profile remarkably upgraded with the magnetic effect, the addition of nanoparticulate in base fluid and Eckert number.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 34996921 PMCID: PMC8741995 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-03077-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1The hybrid nanofluid flow arrangement between the disc and cone.
The numerical properties of silver, magnesium oxide and water[40,41].
| Pure water | 997.1 | 4179 | 0.613 | 21 | 6.2 |
| Magnesium oxide | 3560 | 955 | 45 | 1.80 | |
| Silver | 10,500 | 235 | 429 | 1.89 |
Figure 2The behavior of axial velocity profile versus (a) magnetic field M (b) volume friction of silver (c) volume friction of magnesium oxide (d) cone angular velocity (e) disk angular velocity .
Figure 3The behavior of radial velocity profile versus (a) magnetic field M (b) disk rotation (c) cone rotation (d) both disk and cone co-rotation (e) both disk and cone counter rotation.
Figure 4The behavior of tangential velocity profile versus (a) magnetic field M (b) volume friction of silver (c) volume friction of magnesium oxide (d) cone angular velocity (e) disk angular velocity .
Figure 5The behavior of thermal energy profile versus (a) magnetic field M (b) volume friction of silver (c) volume friction of magnesium oxide (d) Eckert number Ec (e) Prandtl number Pr.
Figure 6The behavior of thermal energy profile versus (a) disk rotation (b) cone rotation (c) both disk and cone co-rotation (d) both disk and cone counter-rotation.
Figure 7The behavior of mass transfer profile and motile microorganism versus (a) Schmidt number Sc (b) volume friction of silver (c) Reynold number Re (d) Peclet number Pe.
Numerical outputs of Nusselt number at the surface of disc.
| 6.4 | 0.976487 | 0.979312 | 0.976945 | 0.981377 |
| 6.5 | 0.975697 | 0.979587 | 0.976274 | 0.979668 |
| 6.6 | 0.974928 | 0.978862 | 0.975492 | 0.969958 |
Numerical outputs of Nusselt number at the surface of cone.
| 6.4 | 1.14573 | 1.24956 | 2.77864 | 2.78345 |
| 6.5 | 1.14487 | 1.23471 | 2.76196 | 2.77784 |
| 6.6 | 1.14367 | 1.22182 | 2.75845 | 2.76399 |
Numerical outputs of Sherwood number at the surface of disc.
| 0.2 | 0.896487 | 0.899312 | 0.896945 | 0.891377 |
| 0.3 | 0.895697 | 0.899587 | 0.896274 | 0.899668 |
| 0.4 | 0.894928 | 0.898862 | 0.895492 | 0.899958 |
Numerical outputs of Sherwood number at the surface of cone.
| 0.2 | 1.04573 | 1.04956 | 2.57864 | 2.58345 |
| 0.3 | 1.04487 | 1.03471 | 2.56196 | 2.57784 |
| 0.4 | 1.04367 | 1.02182 | 2.55845 | 2.56399 |
PCM and bvp4c methods comparison for : when
| No. | PCM | bvp4c | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | |||
| 2 | |||
| 3 | |||
| 4 | |||
| 5 |