4.7 Article

Thermosolutal convection from a discrete heat and solute source in a vertical porous annulus

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEAT AND MASS TRANSFER
卷 55, 期 15-16, 页码 4116-4128

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2012.03.053

关键词

Double-diffusive convection; Porous annulus; Heat and solute source; Radius ratio

资金

  1. WCU (World Class University) program through Korea Science and Engineering Foundation
  2. Ministry of Education, Science and Technology [R32-2009-000-20021-0]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Double-diffusive convection in a vertical annulus filled with a fluid-saturated porous medium is numerically investigated with the aim to understand the effects of a discrete source of heat and solute on the fluid flow and heat and mass transfer rates. The porous annulus is subject to heat and mass fluxes from a portion of the inner wall, while the outer wall is maintained at uniform temperature and concentration. In the formulation of the problem, the Darcy-Brinkman model is adopted to the fluid flow in the porous annulus. The influence of the main controlling parameters, such as thermal Rayleigh number, Darcy number, Lewis number, buoyancy ratio and radius ratio are investigated on the flow patterns, and heat and mass transfer rates for different locations of the heat and solute source. The numerical results show that the flow structure and the rates of heat and mass transfer strongly depend on the location of the heat and solute source. Further, the buoyancy ratio at which flow transition and flow reversal occur is significantly influenced by the thermal Rayleigh number, Darcy number, Lewis number and the segment location. The average Nusselt and Sherwood numbers increase with an increase in radius ratio, Darcy and thermal Rayleigh numbers. It is found that the location for stronger flow circulation is not associated with higher heat and mass transfer rates in the porous annular cavity. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据