Entropy generation of nanofluid flow in hexagonal microchannel

Figures & data

Figure 1. Arbitrary hexagonal constant cross-section microchannel.

Table 1. Nanoparticle and base fluid properties.

Nanoparticles	$\rho (\text{Kg}{\text{m}}^{-3})$	$Cp(\text{J}\text{K}{\text{g}}^{-1}{\text{k}}^{-1})$	$\text{k}(\text{W}{\text{m}}^{-1}{\text{K}}^{-1})$	$\mu (\text{N}\text{s}{\text{m}}^{-2})$
CuO	6320	551	76.500	–
AL2O3	3970	765	40	–
TiO2	4230	692	8.400	–
Cu	8954	383.10	386	_
H2O	998.203	4182.20	0.613	0.00101

Figure 2. Comparative studies: thermal entropy generation number vs. heat flux.

Figure 3. Comparative studies: frictional entropy generation number vs. heat flux.

Figure 4. Comparative studies: total entropy generation number vs. heat flux.

Figure 5. Thermal entropy generation number as a function of heat flux for various nanofluids.

Figure 6. Frictional entropy generation number vs. heat flux for various nanofluids.

Figure 7. Total entropy generation number as a function of heat flux for various nanofluids.

Figure 8. Variation of Bejan number vs. heat flux.

Figure 9. Variation of thermal entropy generation number vs. heat flux for different volume fraction of CuO–water.

Figure 10. Variation of frictional entropy generation number vs. heat flux for different volume fraction of CuO–water.

Figure 11. Total entropy generation number vs. heat flux for various volume fraction of CuO–water.

Figure 12. Variation of Bejan number vs. heat flux for different volume fraction of CuO–water.

Figure 13. Variation of thermal entropy generation number vs. heat flux for various nanoparticles diameter of CuO–water.

Figure 14. Variation of frictional entropy generation number vs. heat flux for various nanoparticles diameter of CuO–water.

Figure 15. Variation of total entropy generation number vs. heat flux for different nanoparticles diameter of CuO–water.

Figure 16. Variation of Bejan number vs. heat flux for different nanoparticles diameter of CuO–water.