4.7 Article

Thermal stratification effects on MHD radiative flow of nanofluid over nonlinear stretching sheet with variable thickness

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcde.2017.09.001

关键词

MHD nanofluid; Variable thickness; Thermal radiation; Similarity solution; Thermal stratification

资金

  1. Ministry of Higher Education and Research Management Centre, UTM [11H90, 03G50, 03G53]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The combined effects of thermal stratification, applied electric and magnetic fields, thermal radiation, viscous dissipation and Joules heating are numerically studied on a boundary layer flow of electrical conducting nanofluid over a nonlinearly stretching sheet with variable thickness. The governing equations which are partial differential equations are converted to a couple of ordinary differential equations with suitable similarity transformation techniques and are solved using implicit finite difference scheme. The electrical conducting nanofluid particle fraction on the boundary is passively rather than actively controlled. The effects of the emerging parameters on the electrical conducting nanofluid velocity, temperature, and nanoparticles concentration volume fraction with skin friction, heat transfer characteristics are examined with the aids of graphs and tabular form. It is observed that the variable thickness enhances the fluid velocity, temperature, and nanoparticle concentration volume fraction. The heat and mass transfer rate at the surface increases with thermal stratification resulting to a reduction in the fluid temperature. Electric field enhances the nanofluid velocity which resolved the sticking effects caused by a magnetic field which suppressed the profiles. Radiative heat transfer and viscous dissipation are sensitive to an increase in the fluid temperature and thicker thermal boundary layer thickness. Comparison with published results is examined and presented. (C) 2017 Society for Computational Design and Engineering. Publishing Services by Elsevier.

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