Research Unit of Ionized Backgrounds and Reagents Studies (UEMIR), Preparatory Institute for Engineering Studies of Monastir (IPEIM), University of Monastir, Monastir, Tunisia

College of Engineering, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Al Imam Mohammad Ibn Saud Islamic University, Riyadh 11432, Saudi Arabia

Higher School of Sciences and Technology of Hammam Sousse (ESSTHS), Physics Department, University of Sousse, 4011 Lamine Abassi Street, Sousse, Tunisia

Search for more papers by this author

https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217979222500606Cited by:19 (Source: Crossref)

Abstract

This study aims to investigate the thermodynamic analysis for electroosmotic flow of ${Fe}_{3} O_{4}$ ${Fe}_{3} O_{4}$ – ${Cu/H}_{2} O$ ${Cu/H}_{2} O$ hybrid nanofluid in the presence of peristaltic propulsion. Hybrid nanofluid is an aqueous solution of copper and iron oxide nanoparticles. Effects of electric field, Ohmic heating, magnetic field, viscous dissipation, heat sink/source and mixed convection are also considered. The Debye–Hückel and lubrication approach has been adopted to perform mathematical modeling. The resulting differential equations are numerically solved by employing the Shooting method. Analysis has been presented for irreversibility rate and heat transfer for the flow of hybrid nanoliquid. Results reveal that the addition of nanoparticles reduces the temperature and entropy generation of hybrid nanoliquid. Heat transfer rate enhances by improving Joule heating and electroosmotic parameters. An increase in Helmholtz–Smoluchowski velocity and Hartmann number decrease the velocity of fluid. Thermal performance of hybrid nanofluid ( ${Fe}_{3} O_{4}$ ${Fe}_{3} O_{4}$ – ${Cu/H}_{2} O$ ${Cu/H}_{2} O$ ) is more noticeable in comparison with conventional mono nanofluid ( ${Fe}_{3} O_{4}$ ${Fe}_{3} O_{4}$ – $H_{2} O$ $H_{2} O$ ) and base fluid ( $H_{2} O$ $H_{2} O$ ).

Keywords:

PACS: 47.15.G−, 47.10.A−, 47.10.ad

You currently do not have access to the full text article.
Recommend the journal to your library today!

References

1. S. U. S. Choi and J. Eastman, Proc. ASME Int. Mech. Eng. Congress Expo. 66, 99 (1995). Google Scholar
2. P. Keblinski et al., Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 45, 855 (2002). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
3. S. M. S. Murshed, K. C. Leong and C. Yang, Int. J. Therm. Sci. 47, 560 (2008). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
4. K. Khanafer and K. Vafai, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 54, 4410 (2011). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
5. S. A. Angayarkanni and J. Philip, Adv. Colloid Interface Sci. 225, 146 (2015). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
6. M. I. Pryazhnikov et al., Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 104, 1275 (2017). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
7. A. O. Borode, N. A. Ahmed and P. A. Olubambi, Nano-Struct. Nano-Objects 20, 100394 (2019). Crossref, Google Scholar
8. S. Suresh et al., Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 38, 54 (2012). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
9. M. Batmunkh et al., Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 53, 8445 (2014). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
10. J. Sarkar, P. Ghosh and A. Adil, Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 43, 164 (2015). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
11. M. H. Esfe et al., Appl. Therm. Eng. 125, 673 (2017). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
12. Ç. Yıldız, M. Arıcı and H. Karabay, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 140, 598 (2019). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
13. S. A. Shehzad et al., Appl. Nanosci. 10, 5351 (2020). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
14. T. W. Latham, Fluid motion in a peristaltic pump, MS thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge (1966). Google Scholar
15. A. H. Shapiro, M. Y. Jaffrin and S. L. Weinberg, J. Fluid Mech. 37, 799 (1969). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
16. H. S. Lew, Y. C. Fung and C. B. Lowenstein, J. Biomech. 4, 297 (1971). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
17. N. S. Akbar et al., Meccanica 47, 1283 (2012). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
18. F. M. Abbasi, T. Hayat and A. Alsaedi, Int. J. Biomath. 9, 1650022 (2016). Link, Web of Science, Google Scholar
19. J. Prakash et al., Symmetry 11, 868 (2019). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
20. S. R. E. Koumy, I. B. E. Sayed and S. I. Abdelsalam, Transp. Porous Media 94, 643 (2012). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
21. I. M. Eldesoky et al., J. Porous Media 23, 695 (2020). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
22. R. M. Abumandour et al., Z. Naturforsch. A 75, 727 (2020). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
23. M. M Bhatti and S. I. Abdelsalam, Waves in Random and Complex Media. (2021), p. 1. Google Scholar
24. F. M. Abbasi, T. Hayat and A. Alsaedi, Phys. E: Low-Dimens. Syst. Nanostructures 68, 123 (2015). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
25. M. Sheikholeslami and H. B. Rokni, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 107, 288 (2017). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
26. S. S. Ghadikolaei, K. Hosseinzadeh and D. D. Ganji, World J. Eng. 16, 51 (2019). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
27. G. Manjunatha et al., Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 45, 417 (2020). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
28. C. L. Rice and R. Whitehead, J. Phys. Chem. A 69, 4017 (1965). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
29. G. H. Tang et al., J. Non-Newton. Fluid Mech. 157, 133 (2009). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
30. D. Tripathi, S. Bhushan and O. A. Bég, Colloids Surf. A: Physicochem. Eng. Asp. 506, 32 (2016). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
31. X. Guo and H. Qi, Micromachines 8, 341 (2017). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
32. M. Rashid, I. Shahzadi and S. Nadeem, Results Phys. 9, 171 (2018). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
33. J. Akram, N. S. Akbar and E. N. Maraj, Alex. Eng. J. 59, 943 (2020). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
34. S. Nadeem et al., Electrophoresis 41, 32304245 (2020). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
35. A. Bejan, J. Heat Transf. 101, 718 (1979). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
36. A. Bejan, The Method of Entropy Generation Minimization, Energy and the Environment, Vol. 15 (Springer, Berlin, Germany, 1999), p. 11. Google Scholar
37. J. Escandón, O. Bautista and F. Méndez, Energy 55, 486 (2013). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
38. M. A. Mansour et al., Therm. Sci. Eng. Prog. 6, 57 (2018). Crossref, Google Scholar
39. Z. Xie and Y. Jian, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 127, 600 (2018). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
40. N. K. Ranjit, G. C. Shit and D. Tripathi, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 153, 430 (2019). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
41. U. M. Zahid, Y. Akbar and F. M. Abbasi, Chin. J. Phys. 67, 330 (2020). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
42. Y. Akbar, F. M. Abbasi and S. A. Shehzad, Appl. Nanosci. 10, 5421 (2020). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
43. Y. Akbar and F. M. Abbasi, Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 118, 104826 (2020). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
44. Y. Akbar et al., Phys. Scr. 95, 115201 (2020). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
45. Y. Akbar, F. M. Abbasi and S. A. Shehzad, Appl. Nanosci. 1 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1007/s13204-020-01569-7. Web of Science, Google Scholar
46. Y. Akbar, F. M. Abbasi and S. A. Shehzad, Phys. Scr. 96, 025210 (2020). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
47. J. A. Maxwell, Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism, 2nd edn. (Oxford University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1904). Google Scholar
48. H. C. Brinkman, J. Chem. Phys. 20, 571 (1952). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar