# Thermal Conductivity OF Nanofluid with GK method

Hello everyone,

I was trying to find how to calculate the Thermal Conductivity of Cu-Ar Nanofluid using G-K method.
The Green-Kubo method for calculation is the formula below,as described in “Molecular dynamics simulation of effective thermal conductivity and study of enhanced thermal transport mechanism in nanofluids” by Suranjan Sarkar and R. Panneer Selvam

In paper the “h” is the average enthalpy, they calculated the average enthalpy as the sum of the average kinetic energy, potential energy, and average virial terms per particle of each species.
The question is I didnot find a method to deal with it although I have got the satisfied result of Ar fluid with Green-Kubo method by lammps.
I tried a lot of texts, but l failed at last. Could anyone give me some suggestions? I really appriciate for your help.
The compute heat/flux can not get the right answer simply, I need to find how to calculate the last term of the formula and then subtract it from the flux.
Best regards.

Hello everyone,
I was trying to find how to calculate the Thermal Conductivity of Cu-Ar
Nanofluid using G-K method.
The Green-Kubo method for calculation is the formula below,as described in
"Molecular dynamics simulation of effective thermal conductivity and
study of enhanced thermal transport mechanism in nanofluids" by Suranjan
Sarkar and R. Panneer Selvam
In paper the "h" is the *average enthalpy*, they calculated the average
enthalpy *as the sum of the average kinetic energy, potential energy, and
average virial terms per particle of each species.*
The question is I didnot find a method to deal with it although I have
got the satisfied result of Ar fluid with Green-Kubo method by lammps.
I tried a lot of texts, but l failed at last. Could anyone give me some
suggestions? I really appriciate for your help.​

The compute heat/flux can not get the right answer simply, I need to find*

how to calculate the last term* of the formula and then subtract it from
the flux.

​so what do you expect to happen now?​ that somebody solved *your* problem
for you? or something else? and what are *you* offering for that effort in
return?
if you are not happy with what LAMMPS offers to you, you have basically
three choices:

- implement it yourself by modifying/extending the source.

- use a different software that offers the feature you want

- entice somebody to do the implementation for you

axel.

Dr.Axel
From your apply,you seem not happy with my question.
As for lammps,it is a very efficient and useful tool for me.I should say thanks for lammps and its develop team and their effort and devotion.
I should say thanks for lammps user’s help and your help.
I have to say I am a new leaner, I may have some questions which may seem obsurd or should not be.I just want to identify the reason why I can not figour it out and what is wrong in my understanding process and the conception.That is why I wrote the email about the Qs above.
To be honest, your reply is not what I expect to get exactly. Please forgive what I say in this way.I should call you respectful Dr,because I am a beginner, how to entice somebody,could you give me some suggestions???
If this letter cause some unconvenience for you, I should say sorry and you can ignore my email or block my post.
Thanks all the same.

Axel is not upset with you. He is just being Axel!
He’s old school in the sense that in his books you pretty much have to fry your brain trying and experimenting before requesting help (typically a characteristic of great achievers). And your wording did not make it sound like you tried very hard. As to your Q, you need to understand how exactly that equation you sent compares to the one implemented in lammps. If only the last term is the missing part, then your job is to first see if there is a way to compute it with the commands that lammps offers (grouping and per atom quantities come to mind). There are very slim chances any one here will want to guide you (for free) step by step along the path required to get to the solution.
Carlos

Dr.Axel
From your apply,you seem not happy with my question.
As for lammps,it is a very efficient and useful tool for me.I should say
thanks for lammps and its develop team and their effort and devotion.
I should say thanks for lammps user's help and your help.

​you can save your breath on this. ​

I have to say I am a new leaner, I may have some questions which may seem
obsurd or should not be.I just want to identify the reason why I can not
figour it out and what is wrong in my understanding process and the
conception.That is why I wrote the email about the Qs above.
forgive what I say in this way.I should call you respectful Dr,because I am
a beginner, how to entice somebody,could you give me some suggestions???

​you are mixing up two things here: 1) learning how to use LAMMPS and 2)
learning how to compute thermal conductivity.

the job of the mailing list is to discuss if you have problems with 1), but
it is not the purpose of the list to teach you 2).
or equivalent. if you cannot figure out from the papers and text books that
you have read, perhaps it means that you have not read the proper ones or
that you are missing some more fundamental knowledge required to better
understand the texts you have read. in any case, this mailing list is not a
classroom and thus questions on learning methodology in general are - most
of the time - off-topic. there are forums specific for that, e.g. physics
exchange, research gate etc.

you can see it as the different between learning how to drive (2) and how
to operate a specific car (1). now your question seems to be the equivalent
as asking about how to turn on the turbocharger while the LAMMPS
documentation seems to tell you it doesn't have one.

If this letter cause some unconvenience for you, I should say sorry and you

can ignore my email or block my post.

​it is more important that you understand choosing the right forum for your
inquiries. as of now, you need to provide convincing proof why the formula
you presented is different from what LAMMPS does, *and* a good argument for
why and how LAMMPS should be changed to serve your needs (and those of
others).​

​axel​

Dear Carlos Campana,