| Literature DB >> 35683689 |
Wen Wang1, Mohammed M M Jaradat2, Imran Siddique3, Abd Allah A Mousa4, Sohaib Abdal5,6, Zead Mustafa2, Hafiz Muhammad Ali7,8.
Abstract
This study addresses thermal transportation associated with dissipated flow of a Maxwell Sutterby nanofluid caused by an elongating surface. The fluid passes across Darcy-Forchheimer sponge medium and it is affected by electromagnetic field applied along the normal surface. Appropriate similarity transforms are employed to convert the controlling partial differential equations into ordinary differential form, which are then resolved numerically with implementation of Runge-Kutta method and shooting approach. The computational analysis for physical insight is attempted for varying inputs of pertinent parameters. The output revealed that the velocity of fluid for shear thickening is slower than that of shear thinning. The fluid temperature increases directly with Eckert number, and parameters of Cattaneo-Christov diffusion, radiation, electric field, magnetic field, Brownian motion and thermophoresis. The Nusselt number explicitly elevated as the values of radiation and Hartmann number, as well as Brownian motion, improved. The nanoparticle volume fraction diminishes against Prandtl number and Lewis number.Entities:
Keywords: Cattaneo–Christov diffusion; Darcy–Forchheimer; Maxwell fluid; Sutterby fluid; electric field; nanofluid
Year: 2022 PMID: 35683689 PMCID: PMC9181986 DOI: 10.3390/nano12111834
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nanomaterials (Basel) ISSN: 2079-4991 Impact factor: 5.719
Figure 1Problem description.
The comparative outputs for .
|
| Ibrahim and Negera [ | Sajid et al. [ | Present Results |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.0 | 1.2105 | 1.1706 | 1.1917 |
| 0.3 | 1.3578 | 1.3393 | 1.3485 |
| 0.5 | 1.4478 | 1.4408 | 1.4456 |
| 1.0 | 1.6504 | 1.6677 | 1.6545 |
Figure 2Velocity variation with and .
Figure 3Velocity variation with , and .
Figure 4Velocity variation with and .
Figure 5Temperature variation with and .
Figure 6Temperature variation with and .
Figure 7Temperature variation with b and .
Figure 8Temperature variation with and .
Figure 9Concentration variation with and .
Figure 10Concentration variation with and .
Results for .
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.01 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.1 | 1.0 | 0.1 | 0.3 | 1.0792 |
| 0.03 | 1.0780 | |||||||
| 0.05 | 1.0758 | |||||||
| 0.01 | 0.1 | 1.0191 | ||||||
| 0.3 | 1.0486 | |||||||
| 0.5 | 1.0792 | |||||||
| 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0792 | ||||||
| 0.7 | 1.1109 | |||||||
| 0.9 | 1.1440 | |||||||
| 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0792 | ||||||
| 1.0 | 1.1610 | |||||||
| 1.5 | 1.2522 | |||||||
| 0.5 | 0.0 | 1.1889 | ||||||
| 0.1 | 1.0792 | |||||||
| 0.2 | 0.9685 | |||||||
| 0.1 | 1.0 | 1.0792 | ||||||
| 2.0 | 1.0790 | |||||||
| 3.0 | 1.0788 | |||||||
| 1.0 | 0.1 | 1.0792 | ||||||
| 0.2 | 1.1209 | |||||||
| 0.3 | 1.1608 | |||||||
| 0.1 | 0.1 | 1.0359 | ||||||
| 0.2 | 1.0579 | |||||||
| 0.3 | 1.0792 |
Results for .
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.0 | 3.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.01 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.0408 |
| 2.0 | 0.0831 | |||||||
| 3.0 | 0.0985 | |||||||
| 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.1063 | ||||||
| 2.0 | 0.0773 | |||||||
| 3.0 | 0.0408 | |||||||
| 3.0 | 0.1 | 0.0517 | ||||||
| 0.3 | 0.0462 | |||||||
| 0.5 | 0.0408 | |||||||
| 0.5 | 0.1 | 0.1875 | ||||||
| 0.3 | 0.1145 | |||||||
| 0.5 | 0.0408 | |||||||
| 0.5 | 0.01 | 0.0408 | ||||||
| 0.03 | 0.0416 | |||||||
| 0.05 | 0.0429 | |||||||
| 0.01 | 1.0 | 0.0408 | ||||||
| 3.0 | 0.0403 | |||||||
| 5.0 | 0.0387 | |||||||
| 1.0 | 0.1 | 0.0921 | ||||||
| 0.3 | 0.0647 | |||||||
| 0.5 | 0.0408 | |||||||
| 0.5 | 0.1 | 0.1075 | ||||||
| 0.3 | 0.0709 | |||||||
| 0.5 | 0.0408 |
Results for .
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3.0 | 3.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.6124 |
| 4.0 | 1.8410 | |||
| 5.0 | 2.0313 | |||
| 5.0 | 1.0 | 1.1343 | ||
| 2.0 | 1.6545 | |||
| 3.0 | 2.0313 | |||
| 3.0 | 0.1 | 2.2199 | ||
| 0.3 | 2.0662 | |||
| 0.5 | 2.0313 | |||
| 0.5 | 0.1 | 1.9574 | ||
| 0.3 | 1.9925 | |||
| 0.5 | 2.0313 |