4.6 Article

Radiative swirl motion of hydromagnetic Casson nanofluid flow over rotary cylinder using Joule dissipation impact

期刊

PHYSICA SCRIPTA
卷 96, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/1402-4896/abdf83

关键词

Casson nanopartcle; spinning cylinder; Joule heating; stretching flow; heat generation; absorption; HAM

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article investigates heat transfer in spinning flow of Casson nanofluid, analyzing flow characteristics under different temperature conditions and the impact of Casson nanofluid. The study reveals that flow characteristics decrease with increasing Reynolds number and magnetic parameter, temperature profiles are affected, and fluid concentration decreases with increasing Prandtl and Lewis numbers.
In this article, the heat transfer is examined in spinning flow of the Casson nanofluid. The spinning motion is produced with the help of stretching and rotating cylinder. In current work two cases, both for constant and variant axial temperature over the exterior of the spinning cylinder are studied. For controlling the rate of heat transfer, some heat effects such as heat generation/absorption, Joule heating and thermal radiations have been considered for flow system. For investigation the influence of thermophoretic force and Brownian motion exerted by Casson nanofluid, the famous Buongiorno model has been employed. The modeled equations have converted to dimensionless form using a set of similar variables. To improve the solution convergence of flow equations a compressed variable is also employed. As the main outcome of this work, it has observed that, with growing values of Reynolds number and magnetic parameter the flow characteristics reduce in all directions. A growth in temperature profile is also observed for constant wall temperature (CWT), while a reduction is noticed in temperature profile for prescribed surface temperature (PST). Moreover, the concentration of fluid reduces with growing values of Prandtl and Lewis numbers.

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

4.6
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