4.5 Article

Thermophoretic particle deposition impact in the Oldroyd-B fluid flow influenced by a magnetic dipole with an exponential thermal heat source

期刊

出版社

WORLD SCIENTIFIC PUBL CO PTE LTD
DOI: 10.1142/S0217979223500595

关键词

Thermophoretic particle deposition; Oldroyd-B fluid; magnetic dipole; exponential and temperature-dependent heat source; sink

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study numerically solves a set of ordinary differential equations to analyze the influence of a magnetic dipole on the flow of non-electrical conducting Oldroyd-B fluid. The effects of thermophoretic particle deposition and chemical reaction parameter on velocity, temperature, and concentration are examined. The model is validated in the limiting case.
The role of non-Newtonian fluids can't be denied owing to their immense industrial and engineering applications. Taking this point in mind, the motivation of the current investigation is to examine the influence of a magnetic dipole on two-dimensional nonelectrical conducting Oldroyd-B fluid flow in the existence of thermophoretic particle deposition along a linearly stretching surface. The exponential space-based thermal source and the temperature-dependent heat source/sink are incorporated into the thermal equation. The fluid concentration is strengthened with binary activation energy and Arrhenius chemical reaction. The set of ordinary differential equations that are attained after applying the similarity transformations is resolved numerically by the bvp4c approach of MATLAB software. The impact of diverse parameters on velocity, temperature, and concentration are graphically examined. The quantities of physical importance are also computed and analyzed numerically. The results revealed that fluid velocity and temperature have opposing trends for the ferromagnetic interaction parameter. It is also witnessed that the fluid concentration arguments for the chemical reaction parameter. The validation of the model in the limiting case is also given.

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

4.5
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