Entropy generation in Darcy–Forchheimer flow of nanofluid with five nanoarticles due to stretching cylinder

  • Madiha RashidEmail author
  • Tasawar Hayat
  • Ahmed Alsaedi
Original Article


In the present paper, formulation and computations are made to investigate the flow of nanofluid past a heated stretching cylinder. Flow in porous space is specified by Darcy–Forchheimer model. Water with silver (Ag), copper (Cu), copper oxide (CuO), titanium oxide (TiO2) and aluminum oxide (Al2O3) are considered as nanofluids. Heat transport mechanism is expressed through nonlinear radiation and non-uniform heat generation/absorption. Convective condition is also utilized for heat transport phenomenon. Through implementation of second law of thermodynamics the total entropy generation is calculated. Moreover, entropy generation for fluid friction and heat transfer is discussed. This study is specially investigated for the impact of Darcy–Forchheimer relation with entropy generation subject to distinct flow parameters. Optimal homotopy algorithm computes the nonlinear strong differential systems. Plots reflecting outcomes of influential variables are examined. The obtained results indicate that entropy rate directly depends on Brinkman number, temperature difference parameter and Forchheimer number. Estimations of skin friction coefficient and heat transfer rate are also carried out. It is found that magnitude of rate of heat transfer and skin friction coefficient enhances via volume fraction of nanoparticles.


Five nanoparticles Non-uniform heat source/sink Nonlinear radiation Darcy–Forchheimer relation Convective boundary condition Entropy generation 



  1. Alshomrani AS, Irfan M, Saleem A, Khan M (2018) Chemically reactive flow and heat transfer of magnetite Oldroyd-B nanofluid subject to stratifications. Appl Nanosci 8:1743–1754CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alzahrani AK (2018) Importance of Darcy–Forchheimer porous medium in 3D convective flow of carbon nanotubes. Phys Lett A 382:2938–2943CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anwar MS, Rasheed A (2017) Heat transfer at microscopic level in a MHD fractional inertial flow confined between non-isothermal boundaries. Eur Phys J Plus 132:305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Anwar MS, Rasheed A (2018) Joule heating in magnetic resistive flow with fractional Cattaneo–Maxwell model. J Braz Soc Mech Sci Eng 40:501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Choi SUS, Eastman JA (1995) Enhancing thermal conductivity of fluids with nanoparticles. ASME Int Mech Eng Congr Expos 66:99–105Google Scholar
  6. Dinarvand S, Hosseini R, Pop I (2016) Homotopy analysis method for unsteady mixed convective stagnation-point flow of a nanofluid using Tiwari–Das nanofluid model, Int J Numer Methods Heat Fluid Flow 40–62Google Scholar
  7. Dinarvand S, Hosseini R, Pop I (2017) Axisymmetric mixed convective stagnation-point flow of a nanofluid over a vertical permeable cylinder by Tiwari–Das nanofluid model. Powder Technol 311:147–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Forchheimer P (1901) Wasserbewegung durch boden. Zeitschrift Ver D Ing 45:1782–1788Google Scholar
  9. Ganvir RB, Walke PV, Kriplani VM (2017) Heat transfer characteristics in nanofluid—a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 75:451–460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hayat T, Rashid M, Imtiaz M, Alsaedi A (2017a) MHD effects on a thermo-solutal stratified nanofluid flow on an exponentially radiating stretching sheet. J Appl Mech Tech Phys 58:214–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hayat T, Rashid M, Alsaedi A (2017b) MHD convective flow of magnetite-Fe3O4 nanoparticles by curved stretching sheet. Results Phys 7:3107–3115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hayat T, Aziz A, Muhammad T, Alsaedi A (2018a) An optimal analysis for Darcy–Forchheimer 3D flow of Carreau nanofluid with convectively heated surface. Results Phys 9:598–608CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hayat T, Rafique K, Muhammad T, Alsaedi A, Ayub M (2018b) Carbon nanotubes significance in Darcy–Forchheimer flow. Results Phys 8:26–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hayat T, Rashid M, Alsaedi A, Ahmad B (2018c) Flow of nanofluid by nonlinear stretching velocity. Results Phys 8:1104–1109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Imtiaz M, Hayat T, Alsaedi A, Asghar S (2017) Slip flow by a variable thickness rotating disk subject to magnetohydrodynamics. Results Phys 7:503–509CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Irfan M, Khan M, Khan WA, Sajid M (2018) Thermal and solutal stratifications in flow of Oldroyd-B nanofluid with variable conductivity. Appl Phys A. Google Scholar
  17. Irfan M, Khan M, Khan WA (2019a) Impact of non-uniform heat sink/source and convective condition in radiative heat transfer to Oldroyd-B nanofluid: a revised proposed relation. Phys Lett A 383:376–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Irfan M, Khan WA, Khan M, Mudassar Gulzar M (2019b) Influence of Arrhenius activation energy in chemically reactive radiative flow of 3D Carreau nanofluid with nonlinear mixed convection. J Phys Chem Solids 125:141–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Khan M, Irfan M, Khan WA (2018) Impact of heat source/sink on radiative heat transfer to Maxwell nanofluid subject to revised mass flux condition. Results Phys 9:851–857CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kumar A, Kumar PM (2017) Natural convection and thermal radiation influence on nanofluid flow over a stretching cylinder in a porous medium with viscous dissipation. Alex Eng J 56:55–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lakshmi KLK, Gireesha BJ, Gorla RSR, Mahanthesh B (2016) Effects of diffusion-thermo and thermo-diffusion on two-phase boundary layer flow past a stretching sheet with fluid-particle suspension and chemical reaction: a numerical study. J Niger Math Soc 35:66–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Liao SJ (2004) On the homotopy analysis method for nonlinear problems. Appl Math Comput 147:499–513Google Scholar
  23. Merkin JH, Najib N, Bachok N, Ishak A, Pop I (2017) Stagnation-point flow and heat transfer over an exponentially stretching/shrinking cylinder. J Taiwan Inst Chem Eng 47:65–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Muhammad T, Alsaedi A, Shehzad SA, Hayat T (2017) A revised model for Darcy–Forchheimer flow of Maxwell nanofluid subject to convective boundary condition. Chin J Phys 55:963–976CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Muskat M (1946) The flow of homogeneous fluids through porous media. Edwards, IrvineGoogle Scholar
  26. Nourazar SS, Hatami M, Ganji DD, Khazayineja M (2017) Thermal-flow boundary layer analysis of nanofluid over a porous stretching cylinder under the magnetic field effect. Powder Technol 317:310–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Qayyum S, Khan MI, Hayat T, Alsaedi A (2018) Comparative investigation of five nanoparticles in flow of viscous fluid with Joule heating and slip due to rotating disk. Phys B Phys Condensed Matter 534:173–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Rasheed A, Anwar MS (2018) Simulations of variable concentration aspects in a fractional nonlinear viscoelastic fluid flow. Commun Nonlinear Sci Num Simul 65:216–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rasheed A, Anwar MS (2019) Interplay of chemical reacting species in a fractional viscoelastic fluid flow. J Mol Liq 273:576–588CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Rashid M, Khan MI, Hayat T, Khan MI, Alsaedi A (2019) Entropy generation in flow of ferromagnetic liquid with nonlinear radiation and slip condition. J Mol Liq 276:441–452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rout BC, Mishra SR (2018) Thermal energy transport on MHD nanofluid flow over a stretching surface: a comparative study. Eng Sci Technol Int J 21:60–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sakiadis BC (1961) Boundary layer behaviour on continuous solid surfaces: boundary layer equations for two-dimensional and axisymmetric flow. AICEJ 7:26–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Seddeek MA (2006) Influence of viscous dissipation and thermophoresis on Darcy–Forchheimer mixed convection in a fluid saturated porous media. J Colloid Interface Sci 293:137–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Shaiq S, Maraj EN, Iqbal Z (2019) A comparative analysis of shape factor and thermophysical properties of electrically conducting nanofluids TiO2-EG and Cu-EG towards stretching cylinder. Chaos Solitons Fractals 118:290–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Shehzad SA, Hayat T, Alsaedi A, Chen B (2016) A useful model for solar radiation. Energy Ecol Environ 1:30–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sheikholeslami M, Hayat T, Alsaedi A, Abelman S (2017) Numerical analysis of EHD nanofluid force convective heat transfer considering electric field dependent viscosity. Int J Heat Mass Transf 108:2558–2565CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Turkyilmazoglu M (2016) An effective approach for evaluation of the optimal convergence control parameter in the homotopy analysis method. Filomat 30:1633–1650CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Umavathi JC, Ojjela O, Vajravelu K (2017) Numerical analysis of natural convective flow and heat transfer of nanofluids in a vertical rectangular duct using Darcy–Forchheimer–Brinkman model. Int J Thermal Sci 111:511–524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wang CY, Chiu-OnNg (2011) Slip flow due to a stretching cylinder. Int J Nonlinear Mech 46:1191–1194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Zhang Y, Zhang M, Bai Y (2017) Unsteady flow and heat transfer of power-law nanofluid thin film over a stretching sheet with variable magnetic field and power-law velocity slip effect. J Taiwan Inst Chem Eng 70:104–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of MathematicsQuaid-I-Azam UniversityIslamabadPakistan
  2. 2.Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science, Nonlinear Analysis and Applied Mathematics (NAAM) Research GroupKing Abdulaziz UniversityJiddaSaudi Arabia

Personalised recommendations