| Literature DB >> 36151361 |
Ebrahem A Algehyne1,2, Amal F Alharbi3,4, Anwar Saeed5, Abdullah Dawar6, Poom Kumam7,8, Ahmed M Galal9,10.
Abstract
This report presents the three-dimensional electromagnetohydrodynamic flow of a zinc-oxide-water nanofluid past a bidirectional Riga plate with velocity slips and thermal and mass convection conditions. The Cattaneo-Christov heat and mas flux model, thermal radiation, chemical reaction and activation energy are considered to analyze the flow problem. The volume fraction of the ZnO nanoparticles is taken 6% in this analysis. An appropriate set of similarity variables is used to transform the partial differential equations into ordinary differential equations. During this process, some parameters are found and influences of these factors on the flow profiles are shown and discussed in detail. A numerical technique called NDSolve is considered for the solution of the nanofluid flow problem. The results showed that higher solid volume fraction and slip parameter have reduced velocities profiles and the increasing solid volume fraction and thermal Biot number have increased the temperature profile. Additionally, the concentration Biot number has increased the concentration profile. The modified Hartmann number has significantly increased the velocity profile. Dual impacts in velocity profiles along primary and secondary direction has been observed due to stretching ratio parameter. A comparison of current results has been carried with a fine agreement amongst current and established results.Entities:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36151361 PMCID: PMC9508195 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-20256-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.996
Figure 1(a) Flow chart. (b) Flow geometry.
Numerical values of thermophysical properties of and [42–45].
| Base fluid and nanoparticle | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| 997.1 | 4179 | 0.613 | |
| 5600 | 495.2 | 13 |
Figure 2Effect of on .
Figure 3Effect of on .
Figure 4Effect of on .
Figure 5Effect of on .
Figure 6Effect of on .
Figure 7Effect of on .
Figure 8Effect of slip parameter on .
Figure 9Effect of slip parameter on .
Figure 10Influence of thermal Biot number upon .
Figure 11Influence of concentration Biot number upon .
Figure 12Effect of on .
Figure 13Effect of on .
Figure 14Effect of on .
Figure 15Effect of on .
Figure 16Effect of on .
Comparison of current results of with previously reported results, when .
| Iqbal et al.[ | Khan et al.[ | Makinde and Aziz[ | Present results | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 1.0000 | 1.0000 | 1.0000 | 1.00000 |
| 0.25 | 1.048813 | 1.048813 | 1.048812 | 1.05428 |
| 0.50 | 1.093097 | 1.093095 | 1.093095 | 1.09731 |
| 0.75 | 1.134485 | 1.134485 | 1.134485 | 1.13782 |
| 1.00 | 1.173720 | 1.173721 | 1.173721 | 1.17641 |
Comparison of current results of with previously reported results, when .
| Iqbal et al.[ | Khan et al.[ | Makinde and Aziz[ | Present results | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 0.000000 | 0.000000 | 0.000000 | 0.000000 |
| 0.25 | 0.194564 | 0.194564 | 0.194564 | 0.197344 |
| 0.50 | 0.465205 | 0.465205 | 0.465205 | 0.468343 |
| 0.75 | 0.794622 | 0.794622 | 0.794622 | 0.797595 |
| 1.00 | 1.173720 | 1.173720 | 1.173720 | 1.176410 |
Impacts of the embedded parameters on and .
| 0.01 | 0.1 | 0.9 | 0.5 | 0.817115 | 0.409982 |
| 0.03 | 0.795033 | 0.394869 | |||
| 0.04 | 0.782609 | 0.386907 | |||
| 0.06 | 0.755505 | 0.370360 | |||
| 0.2 | 0.663296 | 0.330800 | |||
| 0.3 | 0.592753 | 0.299782 | |||
| 0.4 | 0.536768 | 0.274672 | |||
| 0.2 | 0.589796 | 0.272797 | |||
| 0.5 | 0.566982 | 0.273606 | |||
| 0.7 | 0.551849 | 0.274141 | |||
| 0.2 | 0.518715 | 0.095370 | |||
| 0.4 | 0.531060 | 0.211124 | |||
| 0.6 | 0.542225 | 0.341353 |
Impacts of the embedded parameters on .
| 0.01 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.104389 |
| 0.03 | 0.105025 | ||
| 0.04 | 0.106852 | ||
| 0.06 | 0.108529 | ||
| 0.2 | 0.111480 | ||
| 0.3 | 0.119405 | ||
| 0.4 | 0.127304 | ||
| 0.2 | 0.197853 | ||
| 0.3 | 0.284146 | ||
| 0.4 | 0.363343 |