Acta Technica 59 (2014), 237–253 c 2014 Institute of Thermomechanics AS CR, v.v.i.

Mixed convection flow of nanofluids

past a permeable vertical surface
under convective boundary condition 1

Suri Venkata Subhashini 2,3 , Nancy Samuel 2,4

Abstract. The effect of thermal diffusion on mixed convection flow of nanofluids over a
permeable vertical flat surface with convective boundary condition has been studied numer-
ically by considering Brownian diffusion parameter and thermophoresis diffusion parameter.
The non-linear coupled partial differential equations governing the flow, thermal and con-
centration fields are first transformed into a set of non-linear coupled ordinary differential
equations by using a set of suitable similarity transformations. The resulting system of non-
linear coupled ordinary differential equations is solved numerically using an implicit finite
difference scheme in combination with the quasi-linearization technique. Results indicate
that the increase in Lewis number causes a decrease in concentration boundary layer thick-
ness and therefore, mass transfer rate at the wall increases. Further, increase in Brownian
motion parameter causes increase in the surface temperature of the plate. The increase in
thermophoresis parameter causes to increase in both thermal and concentration boundary
layer thicknesses.

Key words. Mixed convection, nanofluids, vertical surfaces, convective boundary con-
dition.

1. Introduction

Conventional heat transfer fluids such as oil, water and ethylene glycol mix-
ture are not good heat transfer fluids. Therefore, an innovative technique has
been introduced to improve the heat transfer by using nano-scale particles in
the base fluid. Nanofluids are solid-liquid composite materials consisting of
1 One of the authors (Nancy Samuel) gratefully acknowledges the Council of Scientific
and Industrial Research (CSIR), Human Resource Development Group, New Delhi, India,
for the financial support.
2 Department of Mathematics, Anna University, Chennai 600 025, India
3 E-mail: subha@annauniv.edu
4 E-mail: samuelnancy1984@gmail.com

http://journal.it.cas.cz
238 S. V. SUBHASHINI, N. SAMUEL

solid nanoparticles or nanofibres with sizes typically 1–100 nm suspended in

liquid. Choi et al. [1] showed that the addition of small amount (less than 1 %
by volume) of nanoparticles to conventional heat transfer liquids increases the
thermal conductivity of the fluid up to approximately two times. The unique
features of nanofluids are the formation of very stable colloidal system with
very little settling [2] and the impressive enhancement of the thermal con-
ductivity in comparison with the base fluid [3]. Cell separation, drug delivery,
hyperthermia and contrast enhancement in magnetic resonance imaging [1], [4]
are some of the biomedical applications that involve nanofluids. Depending on
the specific application, there are different chemical syntheses developed for
various types of magnetic nanofluids for different requirements and applica-
tions [5]. Eastman et al. [6] have conducted an experimental study on thermal
conductivity enhancement of ethylene glycol based nanofluids containing cop-
per nanoparticles. Their results show that the effective thermal conductivity
of Ethylene-glycol increases up to 40 % when 0.3 % of copper nanoparticles of
diameter less than 10 nm is added.
The literature on nanofluids is enriched by many recent articles, namely,
Eastman et al. [7], Das et al. [8], Trisaksri and Wongwises [9], Wang and
Mujumdar [10], Kakac and Pramuanjaroenkij [11]. These reviews discuss in
detail the work done on convective transport in nanofluids. Several ideas have
been proposed to explain the enhanced heat transfer characteristics of nanoflu-
ids. However, after an extensive evaluation of the literature, Boungiorno [12]
has shown that the high heat transfer coefficients in nanofluids cannot be ex-
plained satisfactorily by thermal dispersion or increase in turbulence intensity
or nanoparticle rotation. He proposed that the analytical model for convec-
tive transport in nanofluids must take into account the Brownian diffusion and
thermophoresis effect. Further, the increase in heat transfer coefficient was
due to significant decrease in the viscosity of the fluid caused by the large
temperature variations within the boundary layers. Various other models and
methods have been proposed by different authors to study convective flows of
nanofluids, namely, Tiwari and Das [13], Oztop and Abu-Nada [14], etc.
Kuznetsov and Nield [15] have examined the influence of nanoparticles on
natural convection boundary layer flow past a vertical plate using the Buon-
giorno [12] model. The authors have assumed the simplest boundary con-
ditions, particularly, those in which both the temperature and the nanopar-
ticle fraction are constant along the wall. Their similarity analysis identi-
fied four parameters governing the transport process, namely, Lewis num-
ber Le, buoyancy-ratio parameter Nr, Brownian motion parameter Nb and
thermophoresis parameter Nt. Further, Nield and Kuzentsov [16] have stud-
ied the Cheng–Minkowycz problem on natural convection past a vertical plate
in a porous medium saturated by nanofluids. Also, Kuzentsov and Nield [17]
have analyzed double-diffusive natural convective boundary layer over a verti-
cal plate. The model used for nanofluids incorporates the effects of Brownian
 MIXED CONVECTION FLOW OF NANOFLUIDS 239

motion and thermophoresis. In the above studies the surface temperature of

the vertical plate is taken to be isothermal. Boungiorno model [12] has also
been used by Khan and Aziz [18] to investigate the boundary layer flow of
nanofluids past a vertical surface with a constant heat flux. Other papers on
forced and free convection of nanofluids past vertical and horizontal surfaces
include Sarkar [19], and Pakravan and Yaghoubi [20] among others. Certain
natural situations arise in which convective boundary condition has to be taken.
Aziz [21] has reported that a similarity solution exists if the convective heat
transfer of the fluid heating the plate on its lower surface is proportional to
x−1/2 , x denoting the length along the plate. Later, several researchers such as
Ishak [22], Ibrahim and Shanker [23], Makinde [24], [25], Makinde and Aziz [26],
and Makinde and Olanrewaju [27] have used convective boundary condition to
study the problem over flat plate with different fluid flow conditions. Re-
cently, Aziz and Khan [28] has bridged the gap between the work of Kuznetsov
and Nield [15] for an isothermal wall condition and Khan and Aziz [18] for a
constant wall heat flux condition by studying the natural convective flow of
nanofluids over a vertical plate with a convective boundary condition.
Recent advancement of modern technologies has stimulated interest in fluid
flows involving mixed convection. The problem of mixed convection over a flat
surface has assumed practical importance in engineering devices such as atmo-
spheric boundary layer flows, heat exchangers, solar collectors, nuclear reac-
tors and electronic equipments etc. The problem of mixed convection boundary
layer flow past a horizontal flat plate is a major subject in heat transfer because
of its importance in both basic and practical viewpoints. References [29]–[31]
present some recent work done on mixed convection flow over flat surfaces. The
objective of the present investigation is to analyze the influence of thermal dif-
fusion on a mixed convection flow of nanofluids over a permeable vertical flat
surface with convective boundary condition. The self-similar solution of the
coupled non-linear partial differential equations governing the mixed convec-
tive flow has been obtained numerically using the method of quasi-linearization
and an implicit finite difference scheme [32]. The results for some particular
cases are compared with those of Aziz and Khan [28].

2. Analysis

Consider a steady state two dimensional laminar mixed convection flow

along a static permeable vertical plate. The fluid is assumed to flow over
the surface of the plate with a constant velocity U∞ . A stream of cold fluid at
temperature T∞ on the right surface of the plate is heated by convection from
a hot fluid of temperature Tf on the left side of the plate and this provides a
heat transfer coefficient hf . The nanoparticle fractions near the wall and am-
bient are Cw and C∞ , respectively (see Fig. 1). The Boussinesq approximation
240 S. V. SUBHASHINI, N. SAMUEL

Fig. 1. Physical model and coordinate system

is employed to the field equations. The governing boundary layer equations

that are based on the balance laws of mass, linear momentum, energy and
nanoparticle fraction for the present problem are given as follows [15]:

∂u ∂v
+ =0, (1)
∂x ∂y

∂u ∂u
u +v =
∂x ∂y
∂2u
= υ 2 + (1 − C∞ ) ρf∞ βg (T − T∞ ) − (ρp − ρf∞ ) g (C − C∞ ) , (2)
∂y
" 2 #
∂2T

∂T ∂T ∂C ∂T DT ∂T
u +v =α + Γ DB + , (3)
∂x ∂y ∂y 2 ∂y ∂y T∞ ∂y

∂C ∂C ∂2C DT ∂ 2 T
u +v = DB 2 + , (4)
∂x ∂y ∂y T∞ ∂y 2
where u and v are the velocity components in the x- and y-directions, re-
spectively, g is the acceleration due to gravity, υ is the kinematic viscosity,
β is the volumetric coefficient of thermal expansion, ρf is the density of the
base fluid, ρf∞ is the ambient density of the base fluid, ρp is the density of
nanoparticles, DB is the Brownian diffusion coefficient, DT is the thermophore-
sis diffusion coefficient, α = k/(ρf cf ) is the thermal diffusivity parameter and
Γ = (ρp cp )/(ρf cf ) is the ratio between the effective heat capacity of the
nanoparticle material and heat capacity of the fluid, T is the fluid temperature
 MIXED CONVECTION FLOW OF NANOFLUIDS 241

in the boundary layer and C is the nanoparticle fraction in the boundary layer.
The relevant boundary conditions for velocity and nanoparticle fraction are

u = 0 , v = Vw (x) , C = Cw at y = 0 ,
(5)
u → U∞ , C → C∞ as y → ∞ ,

where Vw (x) < 0 corresponds to suction and Vw (x) > 0 corresponds to blowing
or injection, respectively. The boundary conditions for temperature are

∂T
−k = hf (Tf − Tw ) at y = 0 ,
∂y
(6)
T → T∞ as y → ∞ .

The similarity transformations [15]

y ∂ψ ∂ψ
η= Ra1/4 1/4
x , ψ(x, y) = α Rax f (η) , u = , v=− ,
x ∂y ∂x
(7)
T − T∞ C − C∞ (1 − C∞ ) β g (Tf − T∞ ) x3
θ(η) = , ϕ(η) = , Rax =
T f − T∞ Cw − C∞ υα

are used in (1)–(4) so that (1) is identically satisfied and the velocity compo-
nents u and v are obtained as
α ′ α
f (η) Ra1/2 Ra1/4


u= x , v = x ηf ′ (η) − 3f (η) ,
x 4x
where η is the similarity variable, ψ is the stream function, θ is the dimen-
sionless temperature, ϕ is the dimensionless concentration and Rax is the local
Rayleigh number. In order that similarity solutions of (1)–(6) exist, Vw (x) is
taken as
3α
Vw (x) = − Ra1/4
x fw , (8)
4x
where the constant fw determines the transpiration rate, with fw > 0 for
suction, fw < 0 for injection and fw = 0 for an impermeable surface.
On substituting the new variables (7), Eqs. (2)–(4) are reduced to the fol-
lowing system of ordinary differential equations:

1
3f F ′ − 2F 2 + θ − Nr ϕ = 0 ,


F ′′ + (9)
4 Pr
3 ′ 2
θ′′ + f θ + Nb θ′ ϕ′ + Nt θ′ = 0 , (10)
4
242 S. V. SUBHASHINI, N. SAMUEL

3 Nt ′′
ϕ′′ + Le f ϕ′ + θ =0, (11)
4 Nb
where primes denote differentiation with respect to η and f ′ (η) = F (η).
The transformed boundary conditions (5) and (6) are

f (η) = fw , F (η) = 0 , θ′ (η) = −a [1 − θ(η)] , ϕ(η) = 1 at η = 0 ,

(12)
F (η) = 1 , θ(η) = 0 , ϕ(η) = 0 at η = η∞ ,

where η∞ is the edge of the boundary layer and

1/4
hf x1/4

υα
a=
k (1 − C∞ ) g β (Tf − T∞ )

is the convective parameter. Further, the buoyancy ratio parameter Nr, the
Brownian motion parameter Nb, the thermophoresis parameter Nt, the Lewis
number Le and the Prandtl number Pr are given by

(ρp − ρf∞ ) (Cw − C∞ ) Γ DB (Cw − C∞ )

Nr = , Nb = ,
ρf∞ β (1 − Cw ) (Tf − T∞ ) α
Γ DT (Tf − T∞ ) α υ
Nt = , Le = , Pr = .
α T∞ DB α

Further it is noticed that self-similar solutions are obtained if the convective

heat transfer coefficient hf is proportional to x−1/4 . For a → ∞, the convec-
tive boundary condition reduces to a constant surface temperature boundary
condition.
The quantities of practical interest are the local skin friction coefficient, the
local Nusselt number and the local Sherwood number which are defined as

µ (∂u/∂y)y=0 −kx (∂T /∂y)y=0 −DB x (∂C/∂y)y=0

Cf x = 2
, Nux = , Shx = ,
ρf U ∞ k (Tf − T∞ ) DB (Cw − C∞ )
(13)
respectively. Using the similarity variables (7), the expressions in (13) are
written as

2 2
Cf x U∞ x
= F ′ (0) , Nux Rax−1/4 = −θ′ (0) , Shx Rax−1/4 = −ϕ′ (0) . (14)
υ α Ra3/4
x
 MIXED CONVECTION FLOW OF NANOFLUIDS 243

3. Method of solution

The nonlinear coupled ordinary differential equations (9)–(11) under the

boundary conditions (12) have been solved numerically using an implicit fi-
nite difference scheme in combination with the quasi-linearization technique.
An iterative sequence of linear equations is constructed to approximate the
non-linear equations (9)–(11) for achieving quadratic convergence and mono-
tonicity. Since the method is described by Roy and Anilkumar [32], its detailed
description is not provided for the sake of brevity. At each iteration step, the
linear differential equations were expressed in difference forms using central
difference scheme. Thus, in each iteration step, these equations were then re-
duced to a system of linear algebraic equations with a block tri-diagonal matrix,
which is solved by Varga’s algorithm [33]. To ensure the convergence of the
numerical solution to the exact solution, the step size ∆η has been optimized
and taken as 0.005. The results presented here are independent of the step
sizes at least up to the fourth decimal place. Convergence criteria based on the
relative difference between the current and previous iterative values of F ′ (η),
θ′ (η) and ϕ′ (η) at the wall are employed. When the difference reaches 10−4 , the
solution is assumed to have converged and the iterative process is terminated.

4. Results and discussion

Computations have been carried out for various values of Pr (1.0 ≤ Pr ≤

≤ 10.0), Le (1 ≤ Le ≤ 30), Nr (0.1 ≤ Nr ≤ 0.8), Nb (0.1 ≤ Nb ≤ 1.5),
Nt (0.1 ≤ Nt ≤ 0.9), a (0.5 ≤ a ≤ 10) and fw (−0.5 ≤ fw ≤ 0.5). The
edge of the boundary layer η∞ has been taken between 3 and 6 depending on
the values of the parameter. In order to verify the correctness of the present
numerical approach, the computed results are compared with those of Aziz and

Table 1. Comparison of −θ′ (0) and −ϕ′ (0) for various values
of Nb, Nr and Pr with the results of Aziz and Khan [28];
fw = 0, Nt = 0.1, a = 10 and Le = 10

Aziz and Khan [28] Present results

Nb Nr Pr
−θ′ (0) −ϕ′ (0) −θ′ (0) −ϕ′ (0)

0.1 0.3 1.0 0.3334 0.9697 0.3332 0.9697

0.1 0.3 5.0 0.3739 1.0351 0.3739 1.0350
0.1 0.5 1.0 0.3267 0.9414 0.3259 0.9412
0.1 0.5 5.0 0.3665 1.0071 0.3664 1.0071
0.5 0.1 5.0 0.2855 1.1263 0.2853 1.1264
0.5 0.4 10.0 0.2885 1.1120 0.2882 1.1119
244 S. V. SUBHASHINI, N. SAMUEL

Fig. 2. Effect of Le on concentration profile ϕ(η) when Pr = 1.0,

Nr = 0.5, a = 1.0, fw = 0.1, Nb = 0.5 and Nt = 0.5

Khan [28]. The results are found to be in excellent agreement and some of the
comparisons are shown in Table 1.
The effect of Lewis number Le on the nanoparticle volume fraction that
is concentration distribution ϕ(η) is presented in Fig. 2. It is observed from
Fig. 2 that as the Lewis number Le increases, the boundary layer thickness
of nanoparticle volume fraction ϕ(η) reduces. For example (see Fig. 2), for
Le = 5, the concentration boundary layer thickness η∞ ) is approximately 3.7,
whereas the thickness η∞ ≈ 2.6 for Le = 30. The physical reason is that
the higher Lewis number Le implies a lower Brownian diffusion coefficient DB ,
which results in shorter penetration depth of concentration boundary layer that
is the boundary layer thickness of nanoparticle fraction ϕ(η) decreases.
The effect of Brownian motion parameter Nb on temperature profile θ(η)
is presented in Fig. 3. Brownian motion of nanoparticles at molecular and
nanoscale level is a key feature to nanoscale mechanism governing the thermal
behavior. As the particle scale approaches to the nanometer scale, the Brow-
nian motion of the particle and its effect on the surrounding fluids play an
important role in the heat transfer. It is interesting to observe in Fig. 3 that
as the Brownian motion parameter Nb increases, the thermal boundary layer
thickness increases. For example, for Nb = 0.2, the thermal boundary layer
thickness is approximately 4.2, whereas the thermal boundary layer thickness
η∞ ≈ 4.4 for Nb = 1.5. Also, it is found that the increase in Nb causes increase
in the surface temperature of the plate. For example, the surface temperature
of the plate θ(0) increases from 0.70 to 0.75 as the Brownian motion parame-
ter increases from 0.6 to 1.0 (Fig. 3). Figure 4 presents the effect of Brownian
motion parameter on concentration profile ϕ(η). Increase in Brownian motion
 MIXED CONVECTION FLOW OF NANOFLUIDS 245

Fig. 3. Effect of Nb on temperature profile θ(η) when Pr = 0.1,

Le = 10, a = 1.0, fw = 0.2, Nr = 0.5 and Nt = 0.5

Fig. 4. Effect of Nb on concentration profile ϕ(η) when Pr = 1.0,

Le = 10, a = 1.0, fw = 0.2, Nr = 0.5 and Nt = 0.5

parameter Nb causes decrease in the concentration ϕ(η) boundary layer thick-

ness (Fig. 4). For example, for Nb = 0.2, the concentration boundary layer
thickness is approximately 3.9, whereas the thickness η∞ ≈ 3.6 for Nb = 0.4.
The effect of thermophoresis parameter Nt on the temperature profile θ(η)
is presented in Fig. 5. This figure shows that the increase in thermophoresis
parameter Nt causes an enhancement in thermal boundary layer thickness.
That is the thermal boundary layer thickness increases as the thermophoresis
246 S. V. SUBHASHINI, N. SAMUEL

Fig. 5. Effect of Nt on temperature profile θ(η) when Pr = 1.0,

Nr = 0.5, a = 1.0, fw = −0.3, Nb = 0.5 and Le = 10

Fig. 6. Effect of fw on concentration ϕ(η) and temperature θ(η)

profiles when Pr = 1.0, Le = 10, Nr = 0.1, a = 1.0, Nb = 0.5
and Nt = 0.5

diffusion penetrates deeper into the fluid. For example, it is important to

notice in Fig. 5 that as Nt increases from 0.3 to 0.9 the thermal boundary layer
thickness increases approximately from 4.7 to 4.9. Consequently, temperature
on the surface of the plate increases.
Figure 6 presents the effects of suction (fw > 0) and injection (fw < 0)
parameter on temperature θ(η) and nanoparticle volume fraction ϕ(η) profiles.
 MIXED CONVECTION FLOW OF NANOFLUIDS 247

Fig. 7. Variation of −θ′ (0) with Nt for various values of Nb and a

when Pr = 1.0, Le = 5.0, Nr = 0.5 and fw = 0.2

It is obvious from Fig. 6 that injection causes a decrease in the steepness of

the temperature profiles θ(η) but the steepness of the temperature profiles θ(η)
increases with the suction (fw > 0). Therefore, thermal boundary layer thick-
ness increases with injection and decreases with suction. The reason is that the
fluid is brought closer to the surface by suction and hence the thermal bound-
ary layer thickness is reduced. Similar effects are noticed on the nanoparticle
fraction profile presented in Fig. 6. The concentration boundary layer thickness
decreases with suction and the reverse effect is observed for injection.
The variation in dimensionless heat transfer rates −θ′ (0) at the surface of
the plate with respect to thermophoresis parameter Nt for different values
of Brownian motion parameter Nb and convective parameter a is shown in
Fig. 7. It is interesting to observe that the dimensionless heat transfer rates
decreases with the increase in Brownian motion parameter Nb. In particular,
for Nt = 0.1, approximately 36 % decrease in heat transfer is noticed as the
Brownian motion parameter Nb increases from 0.1 to 0.8 when a = 1.0. The
increase in Brownian motion parameter Nb causes increase in the thermal
boundary layer thickness and hence the gradient reduces. Also, it is found
that the increase in thermophoresis parameter Nt causes a decrease in the
heat transfer at the surface of the plate. In particular, it is seen from Fig. 7
that as Nt increases from 0.1 to 0.8, approximately 24 % decrease in heat
transfer is occurred for Nb = 0.5 and a = 1.0. Further, it may be noticed
from Fig. 7 that as the convective parameter a increases, the heat transfer
rate at the surface −θ′ (0) decreases. Figure 8 presents the variation of mass
transfer rates at the surface of the plate −ϕ′ (0) with respect to thermophoresis
parameter for various values of Brownian motion parameter Nb. It is observed
248 S. V. SUBHASHINI, N. SAMUEL

Fig. 8. Variation of −ϕ′ (0) with Nt for various values of Nb when

a = 0.5, Pr = 1.0, Le = 5.0, Nr = 0.5 and fw = 0.2

that as the Brownian motion parameter Nb increases, the mass transfer rate
at the surface −ϕ′ (0) also increases. Further, the increase in thermophoresis
parameter Nt causes a decrease in the mass transfer rate at the plate. For
example, for Nb = 0.5, approximately 6 % decrease in mass transfer rate at
the plate is noticed when Nt increases from 0.1 to 0.8. Further, the effect of
thermophoresis parameter Nt is more significant on mass transfer rate at the
lower value of the Brownian motion parameter Nb. In particular, for Nb = 0.1,
approximately 18 % decrease in mass transfer rate at the surface is noticed as
Nt increases from 0.1 to 0.8 whereas only 6 % decrease is noticed for Nb = 0.5.
Variation of local skin friction coefficient F ′ (0) with respect to buoyancy
ratio parameter Nr for different values of Prandtl number Pr is presented for
both suction (fw > 0) and injection (fw < 0) in Fig. 9. It is observed that
skin friction reduces with the increase in the buoyancy ratio parameter Nr. For
example, for Pr = 1.0, approximately 42 % decrease in skin friction is noted for
fw = 0.2 when buoyancy ratio parameter Nr increases from 0.1 to 0.8. Also,
the increase in Prandtl number Pr causes a decrease in skin friction F ′ (0). In
particular, 7 % decrease in skin friction F ′ (0) is observed as Prandtl number Pr
increases from 1.0 to 10.0 for fw = 0.2 and Nr = 0.1. Further, skin friction in-
creases with suction and decreases for injection. The physical meaning for the
above behavior is that the blowing gives rise to a thicker momentum boundary
layer thereby decreasing velocity gradient at the surface. Figure 10 presents
the effect of Brownian motion parameter on dimensionless heat transfer rates
at the plate for different values of Prandtl number Pr and fw . It is noticed that
heat transfer rate −θ′ (0) increases with the increase in Prandtl number Pr. For
example, for Nb = 0.8, approximately 30 % increase in heat transfer rate at
 MIXED CONVECTION FLOW OF NANOFLUIDS 249

Fig. 9. Variation of F ′ (0) with Nr for various values Pr and fw

when a = 1.0, Le = 5.0, Nr = 0.5 and Nt = 0.5

Fig. 10. Variation of −θ′ (0) with Nb for various values of Pr

and fw when a = 1.0, Le = 5.0, Nt = 0.5 and Nr = 0.5

wall is noticed as Prandtl number Pr increase from 1.0 to 10.0 when fw = 0.1.
Also, heat transfer at the wall −θ′ (0) increases with suction and reduces with
injection. Further, it may be noted that increase in Brownian motion param-
eter Nb causes a decrease in the heat transfer rate at the wall. In particular,
48 % decrease in the heat transfer rate at the wall is noticed as Nb increases
250 S. V. SUBHASHINI, N. SAMUEL

Fig. 11. Variation of −ϕ′ (0) with Nb for various values of Le

and fw when a = 1.0, Pr = 1.0, Nt = 0.5 and Nr = 0.5

from 0.1 to 0.8 for Pr = 7.0 and fw = 0.1. It is interesting to observe that
the effect of Brownian motion parameter Nb is more significant for suction
(fw > 0) as compared to injection (fw < 0). Effects of Lewis number Le
and fw on mass transfer rate at the surface −ϕ′ (0) is presented in Fig. 11. It is
noticed from this figure that mass transfer at the surface increases with suction
and decreases for injection. Also, the increase in Lewis number Le causes an
increase in mass transfer rate at the wall −ϕ′ (0). In particular, for Nb = 0.1,
fw = 0.1 the mass transfer rate at wall increases, approximately, by 106 % as
Lewis number increases from 5.0 to 10.0. Further, it is found that the effect of
Lewis number is more significant for suction that that of injection. For exam-
ple, for Nb = 0.1, fw = 0.1, approximately 47 % increase in mass transfer rate
at the wall is noted as Lewis number increases from 5.0 to 7.0 whereas only
27 % increase in mass transfer rate at wall is noticed for Nb = 0.1, fw = −0.1.

5. Conclusions

The influence of nanoparticles on a mixed convection flow past a vertical flat

plate with convective boundary condition is studied numerically. Conclusions
of the study are as follows:
• Higher Lewis number causes significant reduction in concentration boundary
layer thickness. In fact, thickness decreases approximately by 29 % with the
increase of Le from Le = 5 to Le = 30 and, therefore, mass transfer at the
wall −ϕ′ (0) increases.
 MIXED CONVECTION FLOW OF NANOFLUIDS 251

• Approximately 5 % increase in thermal boundary layer thickness is observed

as the Brownian motion parameter increases from 0.2 to 1.5. The concen-
tration boundary layer thickness reduces by 8 % as Nb increases from 0.2
to 0.4.
• It is noticed that injection parameter fw = −0.5 increases thermal and
concentration boundary layer thickness by 18 % and 12 %, respectively, but
suction parameter fw = 0.5 does the reverse.
• Effect of Brownian motion parameter Nb on heat transfer at the wall −θ′ (0)
is significant for suction fw = 0.1, approximately 46–50 % decrease is noticed
as Nb increases from 0.1 to 0.8. Similarly, effect of Lewis number Le on mass
transfer rate at the wall −ϕ′ (0) is significant for suction fw = 0.1.
• The increase in buoyancy ratio parameter Nr from 0.1 to 0.8 causes about
42 % significant reduction in skin friction. Further 7 % decrease in skin
friction and 30 % increase in heat transfer at the wall is noticed as Prandtl
number Pr increases from 10.

References

[1] S. U. S. Choi, Z. G. Zhang, W. Yu, F. E. Lockwood, E. A. Grulke: Anomalous

thermal conductivity enhancement in nano-tube suspensions. Appl. Phys. Lett. 79
(2001), 2252–2254.
[2] K. B. Anoop, S. Kabelac, T. Sundararajan, S. K. Das: Rheological and flow char-
acteristics of nanofluids: influence of electroviscous effects and particle agglomera-
tion. J. Appl. Phys. 106 (2009), 034909.
[3] S. Jain, H. E. Patel, S. K. Das: Brownian dynamic simulation for the prediction of
effective thermal conductivity of nanofluid. J. Nanoparticle Res. 11 (2009), 767–773.
[4] M. Salloum, R. Ma, D. Weeks, L. Zhu: Controlling nanoparticle delivery in mag-
netic nanoparticle hyperthermia for cancer treatment: Experimental study in agarose
gel. Int. J. Hyperthermia 24 (2008), 337–345.
[5] M. Chandrasekar, S. Suresh: A review of the mechanisms of heat transport in
nanofluids. Heat Transfer Eng. 30 (2009), 1136–1150.
[6] J. A. Eastman, S. U. S. Choi, S. Li, W. Yu, L. J. Thompson: Anomalously increased
effective thermal conductivities containing copper nanoparticles. Appl. Phys. Lett. 78
(2001), 718–720.
[7] J. A. Eastman, S. R. Phillpot, S. U. S. Choi, P. Keblinski: Thermal transport in
nanofluids. Annual Rev. Mater. Res. 34 (2004), 219–246.
[8] S. K. Das, S. U. S. Choi, W. Yu, T. Pradeep: Nanofluids—science and technology.
Wiley, New Jersey 2007.
[9] V. Trisaksri, S. Wongwises: Critical review of heat transfer characteristics of nanoflu-
ids. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 11 (2007), 512–523.
[10] X. Q. Wang, A. S. Mujumdar: Heat transfer characteristics of nanofluids: a review.
Int. J. Thermal Sci. 46 (2007), 1–19.
[11] S. Kakac, A. Pramuanjaroenkij: Review of convective heat transfer enhancement
with nanofluids. Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 52 (2009), 3187–3196.
252 S. V. SUBHASHINI, N. SAMUEL

[12] J. Buongiorno: Convective transport in nanofluids. J. Heat Transfer 128 (2006),

240–250.
[13] R. K. Tiwari, M. K. Das: Heat transfer augmentation in a two-sided lid-driven dif-
ferentially heated square cavity utilizing nanofluids. Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 50
(2007), 2002–2018.
[14] H. F. Oztop, E. Abu-Nada: Numerical study of natural convection in partially heated
rectangular enclosures filled with nanofluids. Int. J. Heat Fluid Flow 29 (2008), 1326–1336.
[15] A. V. Kuznetsov, D. A. Nield: Natural convective boundary layer flow of a nanofluid
past a vertical plate. Int. J. Thermal Sci. 49 (2010), 243–247.
[16] D. A. Nield, A. V. Kuznetsov: The Cheng–Minkowycz problem for natural convec-
tive boundary layer flow in a porous medium saturated by a nanofluid. Int. J. Heat
Mass Transfer 52 (2009), 5792–5795.
[17] A. V. Kuznetsov, D. A. Nield: Double-diffusive natural convection boundary-layer
of a nonofluid past a vertical plate. Int. J. Thermal Sci. 50 (2011), 712–717.
[18] W. A. Khan, A. Aziz: Natural convective flow of a nanofluid over a vertical plate
with uniform surface flux. Int. J. Thermal Sci. 50 (2011), 1207–1214.
[19] J. Sarkar: A critical review on convective heat transfer correlations of nanofluids.
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 15 (2011), 3271–3277.
[20] H. A. Pakravan, M. Yaghoubi: Combined thermophoresis, Brownian motion and
Dufour effects on natural convection of nanofluids. Int. J. Thermal Sci. 50 (2011),
394–402.
[21] A. Aziz: A similarity solution for laminar thermal boundary layer over a flat plate
with convective surface boundary condition. Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simulat.
14 (2009), 1064–1068.
[22] A. Ishak: Similarity solutions for flow and heat transfer over a permeable surface
with convective boundary condition. Appl. Math. Comput. 217 (2010), 837–842.
[23] W. Ibrahim, B. Shanker: Boundary layer flow and heat transfer of nanofluid over a
vertical plate with convective surface boundary condition. J. Fluids Eng. 134 (2012),
081203.
[24] O. D. Makinde: Effect of variable viscosity on thermal boundary layer over a perme-
able flat plate with radiation and a convective surface boundary condition. J. Mech.
Sci. Technol. 26 (2012), 1615–1622.
[25] O. D. Makinde: On MHD heat and mass transfer over a moving vertical plate with
a convective surface boundary condition. Canad. J. Chem. Eng. 88 (2010), 983–990.
[26] O. D. Makinde, A. Aziz: MHD mixed convection from a vertical plate embedded in a
porous medium with a convective boundary condition. Int. J. Thermal Sci. 49 (2010),
1813–1820.
[27] O. D. Makinde, P. O. Olanrewaju: Buoyancy effects on thermal boundary layer
over a vertical plate with a convective surface boundary condition. J. Fluids Eng. 132
(2010), 044502.
[28] A. Aziz, W. A. Khan Natural convective boundary layer flow of a nanofluid
past a convectively heated vertical plate: , Int. J. Thermal Sci. 52 (2012), 83–90.
[29] S. V. Subhashini, Nancy Samuel, I. Pop: Effects of buoyancy assisting and opposing
flows on mixed convection boundary layer flow over a permeable vertical surface. Int.
Commun. Heat Mass Transfer 38 (2011), 499–503.
[30] S. V. Subhashini, R. Sumathi, I. Pop: Dual solutions in a double-diffusive convection
near stagnation point region over a stretching vertical surface. Int. J. Heat Mass
Transfer 55 (2012), 2524–2530.
 MIXED CONVECTION FLOW OF NANOFLUIDS 253

[31] K. Bhattacharyya, M. S. Uddin, G. C. Layek: Effect of partial slip on boundary

layer mixed convective flow adjacent to a vertical permeable stretching sheet in porous
medium. Acta Techn. 58 (2013), 27–39.
[32] S. Roy, D. Anilkumar: Unsteady mixed convection from a rotating cone in a rotating
fluid due to the combined effects of thermal and mass diffusion. Int. J. Heat Mass
Transfer 47 (2004) 1673–1684.
[33] R. S. Varga: Matrix iterative analysis. Prentice Hall, New Jersey 2000.

Received July 23, 2013