| Literature DB >> 35564275 |
Adnan Asghar1, Liaquat Ali Lund2, Zahir Shah3, Narcisa Vrinceanu4, Wejdan Deebani5, Meshal Shutaywi5.
Abstract
The effect of thermal radiation on the three-dimensional magnetized rotating flow of a hybrid nanofluid has been numerically investigated. Enhancing heat transmission is a contemporary engineering challenge in a range of sectors, including heat exchangers, electronics, chemical and biological reactors, and medical detectors. The main goal of the current study is to investigate the effect of magnetic parameter, solid volume fraction of copper, Eckert number, and radiation parameter on velocity and temperature distributions, and the consequence of solid volume fraction on declined skin friction and heat transfer against suction and a stretching/shrinking surface. A hybrid nanofluid is a contemporary type of nanofluid that is used to increase heat transfer performance. A linear similarity variable is-applied to convert the governing partial differential equations (PDEs) into corresponding ordinary differential equations (ODEs). Using the three-stage Labatto III-A method included in the MATLAB software's bvp4c solver, the ODE system is solved numerically. In certain ranges of involved parameters, two solutions are received. The temperature profile θη upsurges in both solutions with growing values of EC and Rd. Moreover, the conclusion is that solution duality exists when the suction parameter S≥Sci, while no flow of fluid is possible when S<Sci. Finally, stability analysis has been performed and it has been found that only the first solution is the stable one between both solutions.Entities:
Keywords: Joule heating; dual solution; hybrid nanofluid; radiation; thermal radiation
Year: 2022 PMID: 35564275 PMCID: PMC9101542 DOI: 10.3390/nano12091566
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nanomaterials (Basel) ISSN: 2079-4991 Impact factor: 5.719
Figure 1The physical model of a stretching/shrinking surface.
Thermophysical properties of a hybrid nanofluid [33].
| Names | Properties |
|---|---|
| Dynamic viscosity |
|
| Density |
|
| Thermal conductivity |
|
| Heat capacity |
|
| Electrical conductivity |
|
Solid nanoparticles and base fluid(water) thermophysical properties.
| Fluids |
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Copper ( | 8933 |
| 385 | 400 | - |
|
| 3970 |
| 765 | 40 | - |
| 997.1 | 0.05 | 4179 | 0.613 | 6.2 |
The comparison results of rotation parameter at different values when,,, and .
| Nazar et al. [ | Anuar et al. [ | Current Results | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 0.5 | −1.1384 | −0.5128 | −1.13838 | −0.51276 | −1.138374 | −0.512760 |
| 1.0 | −1.3250 | −0.8371 | −1.35503 | −0.83710 | −1.325028 | −0.837098 |
| 2.0 | −1.6523 | −1.2873 | −1.65235 | −1.28726 | −1.65235 | −1.287258 |
Figure 2(a–c): Influence of against suction on , , and .
Figure 3(a–c): Influence of against stretching/shrinking on , , and .
Figure 4(a–c) Profiles of velocity , , and temperature for different .
Figure 5(a–c): Profiles of velocity , , and temperature for different .
Figure 6Profile of for different parameters.
The results of the Eckert number when , ,, , =, and .
|
|
|
|---|---|
| 0 | 8.247357 (8.476272) |
| 0.3 | 8.247162 (8.476187) |
| 0.6 | 8.246967 (8.476103) |
Note: The values inside the brackets represent the values of the second solution.
Figure 7Profile of for different parameters.
The results of the suction parameter at different values of when
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| First Solution | Second Solution |
| 0 | 3 | 0.2042 | −0.2233 |
| 2.5 | 0.1584 | −0.2093 | |
| 2 | 0.0806 | −0.1003 | |
| 1.9868 | 0.0071 | −0.0251 | |
| 0.02 | 3 | 0.8668 | −0.8978 |
| 2.8 | 0.7704 | −0.7929 | |
| 2.6 | 0.5954 | −0.5988 | |
| 2.4 | 0.3723 | −0.4012 | |
| 2.2 | 0.1912 | −0.0853 | |
| 1.8810 | 0.0108 | −0.0071 | |
| 0.06 | 3 | 1.1380 | −1.0836 |
| 2.8 | 1.0230 | −0.9651 | |
| 2.6 | 0.8186 | −0.7554 | |
| 2.4 | 0.6591 | −0.5691 | |
| 2.2 | 0.3532 | −0.2856 | |
| 2 | 0.0993 | −0.1003 | |
| 1.7681 | 0.0080 | −0.0006 | |