4.7 Article

MHD convective heat transfer in a discretely heated square cavity with conductive inner block using two-phase nanofluid model

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 8, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-25749-2

关键词

-

资金

  1. Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) [DIP-2017-010]
  2. Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation [13.6542.2017/6.7]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The problem of steady, laminar natural convection in a discretely heated and cooled square cavity filled by an alumina/water nanofluid with a centered heat-conducting solid block under the effects of inclined uniform magnetic field, Brownian diffusion and thermophoresis is studied numerically by using the finite difference method. Isothermal heaters and coolers are placed along the vertical walls and the bottom horizontal wall, while the upper horizontal wall is kept adiabatic. Water-based nanofluids with alumina nanoparticles are chosen for investigation. The governing parameters of this study are the Rayleigh number (10(3) <= Ra <= 10(6)), the Hartmann number (0 <= Ha <= 50), thermal conductivity ratio (0.28 <= k(w) <= 16), centered solid block size (0.1 <= D <= 0.7) and the nanoparticles volume fraction (0 <= phi <= 0.04). The developed computational code is validated comprehensively using the grid independency test and numerical and experimental data of other authors. The obtained results reveal that the effects of the thermal conductivity ratio, centered solid block size and the nanoparticles volume fraction are non-linear for the heat transfer rate. Therefore, it is possible to find optimal parameters for the heat transfer enhancement in dependence on the considered system. Moreover, high values of the Rayleigh number and nanoparticles volume fraction characterize homogeneous distributions of nanoparticles inside the cavity. High concentration of nanoparticles can be found near the centered solid block where thermal plumes from the local heaters interact.

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