2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijthermalsci.2016.06.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Water aluminum oxide nanofluid benchmark model

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
18
0
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 75 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
(37 reference statements)
0
18
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In the case of nanoliquid free convection inside the differentially heated square chamber, the obtained data were compared with experimental results of Ho et al [22] and numerical results of Saghir et al [23]. Table 1 shows a very good agreement between the considered data.…”
Section: Numerical Techniquementioning
confidence: 71%
“…In the case of nanoliquid free convection inside the differentially heated square chamber, the obtained data were compared with experimental results of Ho et al [22] and numerical results of Saghir et al [23]. Table 1 shows a very good agreement between the considered data.…”
Section: Numerical Techniquementioning
confidence: 71%
“…The results of the existing code are also substantiated by the outcomes of a benchmark numerical study of Saghir et al (2016) and an experimental study of Ho et al (2010). The comparative results with the experimental ave Nu are displayed in Fig.…”
Section: Code Validationmentioning
confidence: 76%
“…Experimental measurement and numerical computation of the temperature, the Nusselt number, and the nondimensional temperature (Q = 0.22 USGPM)…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is believed that the result would have been different if the thermal conductivity of the nanofluid was taken into consideration. The reason for this discrepancy also lies in the high FIGURE 3 Variation of the specific heat with temperature for two different mixtures 11 FIGURE 4 Experimental measurement and numerical computation of the temperature, the Nusselt number, and the nondimensional temperature (Q = 0.22 USGPM) [29][30][31][32] flow rate for this case, which overcomes the nanofluid effect. Figure 5 presents an identical case to Figure 4 but with a lower flow rate of 0.18 USGPM.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%