Research PaperNo Access

Department of Computational Sciences, School of Sciences, CHRIST University, Bengaluru 560029, India

E-mail Address: puneeth.v@res.christuniversity.in

Corresponding author.

Search for more papers by this author

Emad H. Aly

Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Education, Ain Shams University, Roxy, Cairo, Egypt

E-mail Address: emad-aly@hotmail.com

Search for more papers by this author

, and

Ioan Pop

Department of Mathematics, Babeş–Bolyai University, 400084 Cluj–Napoca, Romania

E-mail Address: popm.ioan@yahoo.co.uk

Search for more papers by this author

https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217979223502491Cited by:5 (Source: Crossref)

Abstract

The model presented in this paper deals with the investigation of the unsteady laminar flow past a stretchable disk. The nanofluids Al₂O₃/H₂O and Cu/H₂O are considered for the analysis where the thermal characteristics and flow behavior of these nanofluids are compared. In addition, the system is subjected to the suction force that has significant impacts on velocity of the nanofluid flow. Further, the nanoparticle solid volume fraction is another important parameter that is discussed which has a prominent role on both profiles of the nanofluid. Furthermore, the investigated mathematical model is framed using PDEs that are transformed to ODEs using suitable transformations. The system of equations obtained in this regard is solved by employing the RKF-45 numerical method where the results are obtained in the form of graphs. Various nanofluids flow parameters arise in the study and the impact of all these parameters has been analyzed and interpreted. Some of the major outcomes are that the higher values of nanoparticle solid volume fraction enhance the temperature while it decreases velocity of the flow. The comparison of flow of the two nanofluids concluded that alumina–water nanofluid has a better velocity while the copper–water nanofluid has a better thermal conductivity.

Keywords:

PACS: 02.30.Jr, 02.30.Hq, 44.25.+f, 44.10.+i

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

References

1. V. Puneeth, A. K. Baby and S. Manjunatha, Heat Transfer 51, 2586 (2022). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
2. L. Zhang et al., PLoS One 17, e0265026 (2022). Google Scholar
3. E. H. Aly and H. M. Sayed, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 422, 440 (2017). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
4. E. H. Aly and A. Ebaid, J. Molecular Liquids 215, 625 (2016). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
5. E. H. Aly, Powder Technol. 342, 528 (2019). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
6. V. Puneeth et al., Waves Random Complex Media (2022). Google Scholar
7. Y. Qin, Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 127, 105487 (2021). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
8. M. I. Khan and V. Puneeth, Waves in Random and Complex Media (2021). Google Scholar
9. E. H. Aly, Math. Probl. Eng. 2015, Article ID: 563547 (2015). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
10. E. H. Aly, Powder Technol. 301, 760 (2016). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
11. V. Puneeth et al., Heat Transf. 50, 7632 (2021). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
12. E. H. Aly and K. Vajravelu, Appl. Math. Comput. 232, 191 (2014). Web of Science, Google Scholar
13. E. H. Aly and I. Pop, Int. J. Numer. Methods Heat Fluid Flow 29, 3012 (2019). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
14. E. H. Aly and I. Pop, Powder Technol. 367, 192 (2020). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
15. F. Mabood, G. P. Ashwinkumar and N. Sandeep, J. Thermal Anal. Calorim. 146, 227 (2021). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
16. A. Banerjee et al., Chin. Phys. B 31, 044701 (2022). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
17. I. Ahmad, M. Faisal and T. Javed, Special Top. Rev. Porous Media: Int. J. 12, 49 (2021). Crossref, Google Scholar
18. M. Usman et al., Chin. J. Phys. 66, 222 (2020). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
19. T. Hayat et al., Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 119, 104904 (2020). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
20. I. Waini, A. Ishak and I. Pop, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 136, 288 (2019). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
21. T. Gul et al., Sci. Rep. 11, 1 (2021). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
22. A. Tassaddiq et al., AIP Adv. 10, 055317 (2020). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
23. Y. Lv et al., Sci. Rep. 11, 1 (2021). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
24. S. N. Khan et al., Sci. Rep. 10, 1 (2020). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
25. T. Hayat et al., Comput. Methods Progr. Biomed. 177, 57 (2019). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
26. A. Ahmadian et al., Sci. Rep. 10, Article ID 17088 (2020). Google Scholar
27. M. Ramzan et al., Sci. Rep. 11, Article ID 120 (2021). Google Scholar
28. K. Sharma et al., Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 133, Article ID 105977 (2022). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
29. S. Saranya and Q. M. Al-Mdallal, Case Stud. Thermal Eng. 25, 100943 (2021). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
30. U. Khan et al., Numer. Methods Partial Differential Equations 38, 308 (2022). Web of Science, Google Scholar
31. K. Sharma et al., Chaos Solitons Fractals 148, 111055 (2021). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
32. K. Gangadhar, P. R. Sobhana Babu and O. D. Makinde, Defect Diffusion Forum 384, 69 (2018). Crossref, Google Scholar
33. S. Das et al., J. Nanofluids 5, 48 (2016). Crossref, Google Scholar
34. S. Shateyi and O. D. Makinde, J. Nanofluids 2013, 616947 (2013). Google Scholar
35. P. Sibanda and O. D. Makinde, Int. J. Numer. Methods Heat Fluid Flow 20, 269 (2010). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
36. K. Gangadhar et al., Defect Diffusion Forum 387, 461 (2018). Crossref, Google Scholar
37. K. Gangadhar, P. R. Sobhana Babu and O. D. Makinde, Defect Diffusion Forum 387, 575 (2018). Crossref, Google Scholar
38. M. S. Alqarni et al., Sci. Rep. 12, 8447 (2022). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
39. H. Waqas et al., Sci. Rep. 12, 8035 (2022). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
40. H. Waqas et al., Math. Probl. Eng. 2021, 1 (2021). Google Scholar
41. H. Waqas et al., Case Stud. Thermal Eng. 28, 101615 (2021). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
42. L. Chen et al., Comput. Model. Eng. Sci. 130, 1771 (2022). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
43. U. Farooq et al., J. Chem. Reactor Eng. 20, 465 (2022). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
44. J. H. Merkin et al., Similarity Solutions for the Boundary Layer Flow and Heat Transfer of Viscous Fluids, Nanofluids, Porous Media and Micropolar Fluids (Elsevier, 2022). Google Scholar
45. I. Waini, A. Ishak and I. Pop, Eur. J. Mech.-B/Fluids 94, 121 (2022). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
46. S. U. Devi and S. A. Devi, J. Nigerian Math. Soc. 36, 419 (2017). Google Scholar
47. M. Sheremet, I. Pop and A. Roşca, Int. J. Numer. Methods Heat Fluid Flow 28, 1738 (2018). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
48. N. Ahmed et al., Appl. Sci. 9, 1976 (2019). Crossref, Google Scholar
49. T. Fang and H. Tao, Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul. 17, 5064 (2012). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar