This short note is a response to the comment (TIPM936) on our recently published paper cited in the title. All the points raised by the author of the comment are discussed. It is shown that one of the remarks, concerning eigenflow solutions in the limiting case of forced convection, has not a sound physical basis. In fact, it refers to a circumstance, a fluid with a thermal expansion coefficient greater than that of a perfect gas, of marginal or no interest in the framework of convection in porous media.
Response to Comment on “Combined Forced and Free Convective Flow in a Vertical Porous Channel: The Effects of Viscous Dissipation and PressureWork” by A. Barletta and D. A. Nield, Transport in Porous Media, DOI 10.1007/s11242-008-9320-y, 2009 / A. Barletta; D.A. Nield. - In: TRANSPORT IN POROUS MEDIA. - ISSN 0169-3913. - STAMPA. - 80:(2009), pp. 397-398. [10.1007/s11242-009-9365-6]
Response to Comment on “Combined Forced and Free Convective Flow in a Vertical Porous Channel: The Effects of Viscous Dissipation and PressureWork” by A. Barletta and D. A. Nield, Transport in Porous Media, DOI 10.1007/s11242-008-9320-y, 2009
BARLETTA, ANTONIO;
2009
Abstract
This short note is a response to the comment (TIPM936) on our recently published paper cited in the title. All the points raised by the author of the comment are discussed. It is shown that one of the remarks, concerning eigenflow solutions in the limiting case of forced convection, has not a sound physical basis. In fact, it refers to a circumstance, a fluid with a thermal expansion coefficient greater than that of a perfect gas, of marginal or no interest in the framework of convection in porous media.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
