4.2 Article

EMHD CASSON HYBRID NANOFLUID FLOW OVER AN EXPONENTIALLY ACCELERATED ROTATING POROUS SURFACE

期刊

JOURNAL OF POROUS MEDIA
卷 25, 期 11, 页码 1-24

出版社

BEGELL HOUSE INC
DOI: 10.1615/JPorMedia.2022041050

关键词

hybrid Ag-Al2O3 nanofluids; electromagnetohydrodynamics (EMHD); Casson fluid; viscoplastic; radiation heat flux; Laplace transforms; Joule dissipation; rotary blood mixing devices

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The influence of various forces on the mixed convection behavior and heat transfer of nanofluids in a rotating system is analyzed. The results show that different forces have different effects on nanofluid velocity and acceleration, and the performance of different nanofluids is compared.
The influence of Coriolis body force, electromagnetohydrodynamics (EMHD), and thermal radiative heat transfer on the Casson hybrid mixed convection nanofluid driven by an exponentially accelerated plate adjacent to a porous medium in a rotating system is analyzed. Hybrid (Ag-Al2O3) and Al2O3 nanofluids are considered with ethylene glycol (EG) base fluid. The Maxwell-Garnett model has been deployed to derive the thermal conductivity of the hybrid nanofluid. The electrical potential problem is simplified by applying Debye-Huckel linearization. The Laplace transform method (LTM) is employed to derive closed-form solutions. In terms of heat transfer, the hybrid nanofluid (Ag-Al2O3)/EG and nanofluid (Al2O3)/EG performances are compared. The present analysis shows that boosting the Taylor number reduces both hybrid (Ag-Al2O3) and Al2O3 nanofluids' velocity values; however, the unitary nanofluid achieves better acceleration than the hybrid nanofluid. The benefits of EG-based hybrid nanofluid (Ag-Al2O3) relative to EG based (Al2O3) nanofluid are elaborated. The analysis finds applications in centrifugal dynamic electrochromatog-raphy under electromagnetic gradient, bioanalytical separation techniques with electric field gradients, and rotary bio-inspired DC electromagnetic blood pumps.

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

4.2
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