3.

5 Validation
3.5.a Encloser full with Fluid only
The comparing has been accomplished with theoretical study of ( Orhan Aydin
et , al 2000) which was nearly investigated the present work and obtained very
close together results as Figure (3.1.a,b,c and d) , Figure (3.2)
Note:
 The length of local heater (E) equal to 0.2 of total bottom length.
 The top plate for Orhan Aydin at el , 2000 and present work for below
section

Figure (3,1, a) comparing the streamline and isotherms for

Pr = 0.71 Ra = 103
Figure (3,1, b) comparing the streamline and isotherms for Ra = 104
Figure (3,1, c) comparing the streamline and isotherms for Ra = 105
Figure (3,1, d) comparing the streamline and isotherms for Ra = 106
 Orhan Aydin et, al 2000

E = 1/5 E = 2/5 E = 3/5 E = 4/5

12
Present Work
10

8
Nusset Number

0
1000 1000000

Rayleigh number

Figure (3,2) comparing and variation of average Nusselt number at the heated wall
with the Rayleigh number for different nondimensional heat source length (E)
 3.5.b Encloser full with porous and Fluid
The steady natural convection flow in encloser filled with porous medium for
linearly heated side wall (M. Sathiyamoorthy at, el 2006) was compared with
president work and the obtained values was identical as Figure (3,5), (3,6) and
(3,7).

a b

Figure (3,5) Local Nusselt number for bottom wall (a), M. Sathiyamoorthy, (b)
present study

a b
Figure (3,6) isothermal contour a. (M. Sathiyamoorthy),
b. present study
Figure (3,7) stream function, ψ(Left), M. Sathiyamoorthy, present
study (Right)
 3.5.c Encloser partially filling with porous and Fluid
To validate the case of present work, the experimental and numerical study of C.
Beckerrmann at, al 1988 has been chose. the configuration (3) of this study
investigated the natural convection in vertical encloser divided into two equal
domain, horizontal lower domain by porous and upper gap by pure water with
parameters (Fluid -water /Beads 1.5 mm glass, Da=7.242*10e-7, Ra=3.7*10 6,
Pr=6.44 Rk=1.372,C=0.588) as Table (3.1). the results were very identical as
Figure (3.3) and Figure (3,4)

Table (3.1) Test conditions for Experiences

 0.912

0.20

0.554

Configuration -3

Figure (3,3) comparation temperature profile for present work (Right side) and
Beckerman at, al 1988 (Left side).
A

(a) (b)

Figure (3,4) comparation of present work Right side with Beckerman at, al 1988
(Left side) (a) Stream lines (b) isotherms