4.7 Article

Darcy Forhheimer aspects for CNTs nanofluid past a stretching cylinder; using Keller box method

Journal

RESULTS IN PHYSICS
Volume 11, Issue -, Pages 801-816

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.rinp.2018.09.029

Keywords

Keller box method; CNTs (SWCNT and MWCNT); Stretching cylinder and flat sheet; Renovated Hamilton-Crosser model; Xue model; Darcy Forhheimer law

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Present study deals with Darcy Forhheimer application to CNTs nanofluid flow due to a cylinder and flat sheet. Thermal conductivity of CNTs nanofluid is inspected under renovated Hamilton-Crosser and Xue models. The solute concentration is regulated through a simple isothermal model of homogeneous-heterogeneous reactions. Thermodynamics processes of reactant and autocatalyst analyze the impact of temperature phase changes like evaporation or convection. It is considered that the base fluid (water) is essentially composed of SWCNT-Water (base fluid with SWCNT) and MWCNT-Water (base fluid with MWCNT). The solution of the problem is obtained by using implicit finite difference method (Keller-Box). It is unconditionally convergent and the well-tested extensively validated method. Influence of physically involved parameters are illustrated through graphs. Darcy Forhheimer parameters decline the fluid flow. The fluid velocity and thermal boundary layer thickness in case of flat sheet is higher when compared with stretching cylinder. Interestingly reverse outcomes are preserved for concentration. Homogeneous reaction parameter and Schmidt number have opposite trend on nanoparticle concentration. Higher curvature parameter is accounted for drag coefficient and heat transfer at the cylinder. Renovated Hamilton-Crosser model have larger thermal conductivity when compared with Xue model. Comparison of current result with previous result is given. The outcomes are found in an excellent agreement.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available