## 3 Results and Discussions
Figure 6a-c shows the effects of varying the position \(\xi\) on the velocity, temperature, and concentration distribution. This figure shows how the profiles vary with \(\xi\), the scaled streamwise coordinate. As shown in the figure, relative to a constant \(\eta\), the velocity decreases with an increasing \(\xi\), representing far from the leading edge. As the fluid flows through the porous medium, the pressure drag would retard the flow and hence increase the temperature and concentration. Figure 7 shows the concentration profiles for the selected Schmidt numbers from 0.5 to 2.5. The larger Schmidt number represents the species with smaller gas diffusivity, resulting in a thinner concentration boundary layer. Figure 8 shows the thermophoretic effect on the mass concentration. A larger \(Nt\) value with \(T_{\infty}\) remains a constant, indicating a weaker strength of wall heat source and resulting in a smaller temperature gradient in the \(y\) direction. Hence, making the concentration boundary layer closer to the wall surface. Figure 5: Cont. Figure 5: (**a–c**) Velocity, temperature, and concentration profiles, respectively, with different exponents of heat flux at \(\xi=1.0\), \(Sc=1.0\), \(N=1.0\), \(\gamma=2.01\), \(\varepsilon=0.45\), \(f_{av}=0.0\), \(\kappa=0.5\), and \(Nt=1.0\). Figure 6: _Cont._  
Figure 2:0 (**a**–**c**) Velocity, temperature, and concentration profiles, respectively, with different positions, parameters at \(n=1.0\), \(Sc=1.0\), \(N=1.0\), \(\gamma=2.01\), \(\varepsilon=0.45\), \(f_{w}=0.0\), \(\kappa=0.5\), and \(Nt=1.0\). Figure 9 shows the mass transfer conductance under suction and blowing velocity on different Schmidt numbers. The zero-mass transfer limiting \(g_{mx}^{*}\) indicates the mass transfer conductance for \(f_{w}=0\). It is seen that the surface blowing effect decreases the mass transfer, but enhances for suction. Figure 10a,b shows the calculated value of the local Nusselt number \(N{u_{x}}/{R{a_{x}}^{1/5}}\) and Sherwood number \({Sh_{x}}/{R{a_{x}}^{1/5}}\), denoting the slope of the temperature and concentration profiles at the wall surface. The thermophoretic effect on \({Sh_{x}}/{R{a_{x}}^{1/5}}\) under different buoyancy ratios reveals that \({Sh_{x}}/{R{a_{x}}^{1/5}}\) increases with increasing \(Nt\) and \(N\) values. Tables 2-8 present the predicted results of wall shear stress, temperature, and mass transfer rate for each set of parameters \(f_{w}\), \(\gamma\), \(N\), \(n\), \(\zeta\), \(Sc\), and \(Nt\). The concentration gradient \(\phi^{\prime}(\zeta,0)\) can be used to determine the wall mass flux from Equation (19) for gas diffusing into the air through a porous medium. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c} \hline \hline \(\mathbf{n}\) & \(\mathbf{f}^{\prime}\left(1,0\right)\) & \(\mathbf{\theta}(1,0)\) & \(\mathbf{\phi}^{\prime}\left(1,0\right)\) \\ \hline \(-0.25\) & \(1.0482\) & \(2.6652\) & \(-0.3646\) \\ \(0.25\) & \(0.8698\) & \(2.1699\) & \(-0.3319\) \\ \(0.50\) & \(0.8166\) & \(2.0297\) & \(-0.3232\) \\ \(0.75\) & \(0.7749\) & \(1.9226\) & \(-0.3172\) \\ \(1.00\) & \(0.7411\) & \(1.8374\) & \(-0.3129\) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 6: Solutions of \(f^{\prime\prime}\left(\zeta,0\right)\), \(\theta(\zeta,0)\), and \(\phi^{\prime}(\zeta,0)\) for various values of \(\zeta\) at \(n=1.0\), \(Sc=1.0\), \(N=1.0\), \(\gamma=2.01\), \(\varepsilon=0.45\), \(f_{w}=0.0\), \(\kappa=0.5\), and \(Nt=1.0\). Figure 9: Ratio of mass fluxes with various values of \(Sc\) and \(f_{iv}\) at \(\xi=1.0\), \(n=1.0\), \(N=1.0\), \(\gamma=2.01\), \(\varepsilon=0.45\), \(Nt=1.0\), and \(\kappa=0.5\).