Fig. 1
Schematic diagram of straight rectangular fin.
Table 1
Comparison of Bernoulli wavelet results with Roy et al. [20] for N, 0.2, Q = 0, Nc = 1, β = 0.2, θa= 0, θs= 0.
| η | BWM | ADM | NM | GM |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 0.667011 | 0.666858 | 0.667013 | 0.667013 |
| 0.1 | 0.670132 | 0.669984 | 0.670132 | 0.670132 |
| 0.2 | 0.679512 | 0.679386 | 0.679514 | 0.679514 |
| 0.3 | 0.695228 | 0.695136 | 0.695229 | 0.695228 |
| 0.4 | 0.717398 | 0.717357 | 0.717399 | 0.717399 |
| 0.5 | 0.746198 | 0.746220 | 0.746198 | 0.746198 |
| 0.6 | 0.781854 | 0.781944 | 0.781855 | 0.781855 |
| 0.7 | 0.824659 | 0.824806 | 0.824655 | 0.824659 |
| 0.8 | 0.874972 | 0.875145 | 0.874972 | 0.874971 |
| 0.9 | 0.933238 | 0.933373 | 0.933237 | 0.933237 |
| 1.0 | 1.000000 | 1.000000 | 1.000000 | 1.000000 |
Fig. 2
Influence of β on θ (η) for Nc = 1, Nr = 0.2, θa = 0.2, θs = 0.2, Q = 0.1
Fig. 3
Influence of θa on θ (η) for Nc = 1, Nr = 0.2,β = 0.2, θs =0.2,Q=0.1.
Fig. 4
Influence of θs on θ (η) for Nc =1, Nr =0.2,β =0.2, θa =0.2,Q=0.1.
Fig. 5
Influence of Nc on θ (η) for θs =0.2, Nr =0.2, β =0.2, θa =0.2,Q=0.1
Fig. 6
Influence of Nr on θ (η) for θs =0.2, Nc =0.2, β =0.2, θa =0.2,Q=0.1.
Fig. 7
Influence of Q on θ (η) for θs =0.2, Nc =0.2,β =0.2, θa =0.2,Nr =0.2.