Correction: Sachhin et al. Darcy–Brinkman Model for Ternary Dusty Nanofluid Flow across Stretching/Shrinking Surface with Suction/Injection. Fluids 2024, 9, 94

Figures: In Section 5, we aligned Figures 14–18 by consistently adding all the modelling parameters inside the labels [1]. We also revised the captions for Figures 14–18 to clearly state what they represent [1]. The correct Figure 14, Figure 15, Figure 16, Figure 17, Figure 18 appears below.

Text Correction: In Section 2, the following text was added: “Similar to previous studies [2]”, “b is a parameter that is b > 0 for heated and b < 0 for cooled plate”. The correct text appears below.

Similar to previous studies [2], here, $u, v, u_p$, and $v_p$ are the velocity components of a fluid and dusty fluid phase along the x- and y-directions, respectively; the dusty and fluid phase temperatures are Tp and T; $\mu$ is the dynamic viscosity; $\rho$ is the effective density; $\kappa$ is the thermal conductivity; b is a parameter that is b > 0 for heated and b < 0 for cooled plate; $\sigma$ is the electrical conductivity; $C_p$ and $C_m$ are the specific heat coefficients; ${\tau }_T$ is the heat equilibrium time; ${\mathit{L}}_1$ is the Stokes drag/resistance term; $\nu$ is the kinematic viscosity of nanoparticles N; $k_1$ is the flow permeability; and ${\tau }_v={\displaystyle \frac{m}{L_1}}$ is a relaxation time parameter, where m denotes the mass of dusty particles [2].

In Section 2, we corrected the typographical error in the definition of the Prandtl number. The correct one is $\mathrm{Pr}={\displaystyle \frac{\mu C_p}{{\kappa }_f}}$.

In Section 5, we revised the text to avoid ambiguity regarding the results of Figure 14, Figure 15, Figure 16 [1]. The correct text appears below.

Figure 14, Figure 15, Figure 16 show the temperatures for the fluid and dusty phases for different values of S = −2, 0 and 2, respectively. Increasing S value increases the thermal boundary layer thickness of the fluid phase. The dusty phase exhibits an increase in the thermal boundary layer when S increases from −2 to 0, while decreases for S = 2.

Equations: In Equations (35)–(39), there are typographical errors. We revised the subscript thnf to tnf. In Equation (38), we also revised the κ_nf to κ_f. The correct equations appears below:

$${\mu }_{tnf}=\frac{1}{{\left(1-{\mathit{\varphi }}_{Ag}\right)}^{2.5}{\left(1-{\mathit{\varphi }}_{Cu}\right)}^{2.5}{\left(1-{\mathit{\varphi }}_{Ti{O}_2}\right)}^{2.5}}.$$

(35)

$$\begin{array}{c}\frac{{\rho }_{tnf}}{{\rho }_f}=\left(1-{\mathit{\varphi }}_{Ag}\right)\left\{\left(1-{\mathit{\varphi }}_{Cu}\right)\left[\begin{array}{c}\left(1-{\mathit{\varphi }}_{Ti{O}_2}\right)\hfill \\ +{\mathit{\varphi }}_{Ti{O}_2}\frac{{\rho }_{Ti{O}_2}}{{\rho }_f}\hfill \end{array}\right]+{\mathit{\varphi }}_{Cu}\frac{{\rho }_{Cu}}{{\rho }_f}\right\}\hfill \\ +{\mathit{\varphi }}_{Ag}\frac{{\rho }_{Ag}}{{\rho }_f}.\hfill \end{array}$$

(36)

$$\frac{{\left(\rho C_p\right)}_{tnf}}{{\left(\rho C_p\right)}_f}=\left(1-{\mathit{\varphi }}_{Ag}\right)\left\{\begin{array}{c}\left(1-{\mathit{\varphi }}_{Cu}\right)\times \hfill \\ \left[\begin{array}{c}\left(1-{\mathit{\varphi }}_{Ti{O}_2}\right)\hfill \\ +{\mathit{\varphi }}_{Ti{O}_2}\frac{{\left(\rho C_p\right)}_{Ti{O}_2}}{{\left(\rho C_p\right)}_f}\hfill \end{array}\right]\hfill \\ +{\mathit{\varphi }}_{Cu}\frac{{\left(\rho C_p\right)}_{Cu}}{{\left(\rho C_p\right)}_f}\hfill \end{array}\right\}+{\mathit{\varphi }}_{Ag}\frac{{\left(\rho C_p\right)}_{Ag}}{{\left(\rho C_p\right)}_f}.$$

(37)

$$\left.\begin{array}{c}\frac{{\kappa }_{tnf}}{{\kappa }_{hnf}}=\frac{{\kappa }_{Ag}+2{\kappa }_{hnf}-2{\mathit{\varphi }}_{Ag}\left({\kappa }_{hnf}-{\kappa }_{Ag}\right)}{{\kappa }_{Ag}+2{\kappa }_{hnf}+{\mathit{\varphi }}_{Ag}\left({\kappa }_{hnf}-{\kappa }_{Ag}\right)},\hfill \\ \frac{{\kappa }_{hnf}}{{\kappa }_{nf}}=\frac{{\kappa }_{Cu}+2{\kappa }_{nf}-2{\mathit{\varphi }}_{Cu}\left({\kappa }_{nf}-{\kappa }_{Cu}\right)}{{\kappa }_{Cu}+2{\kappa }_{nf}+{\mathit{\varphi }}_{Cu}\left({\kappa }_{nf}-{\kappa }_{Cu}\right)},\hfill \\ \frac{{\kappa }_{nf}}{{\kappa }_f}=\frac{{\kappa }_{Ti{O}_2}+2{\kappa }_f-2{\mathit{\varphi }}_{Ti{O}_2}\left({\kappa }_f-{\kappa }_{Ti{O}_2}\right)}{{\kappa }_{Ti{O}_2}+2{\kappa }_f+{\mathit{\varphi }}_{Ti{O}_2}\left({\kappa }_f-{\kappa }_{Ti{O}_2}\right)}.\hfill \end{array}\right\}$$

(38)

$$\left.\begin{array}{c}\frac{{\sigma }_{tnf}}{{\sigma }_{hnf}}=1+\frac{3\left(\frac{{\sigma }_{Ag}}{{\sigma }_{hnf}}-1\right){\mathit{\varphi }}_{Ag}}{\left(\frac{{\sigma }_{Ag}}{{\sigma }_{hnf}}+2\right)-\left(\frac{{\sigma }_{Ag}}{{\sigma }_{hnf}}-1\right){\mathit{\varphi }}_{Ag}},\hfill \\ \frac{{\sigma }_{hnf}}{{\sigma }_{nf}}=1+\frac{3\left(\frac{{\sigma }_{Cu}}{{\sigma }_{nf}}-1\right){\mathit{\varphi }}_{Cu}}{\left(\frac{{\sigma }_{Cu}}{{\sigma }_{nf}}+2\right)-\left(\frac{{\sigma }_{Cu}}{{\sigma }_{nf}}-1\right){\mathit{\varphi }}_{Cu}},\hfill \\ \frac{{\sigma }_{nf}}{{\sigma }_f}=1+\frac{3\left(\frac{{\sigma }_{Ti{O}_2}}{{\sigma }_f}-1\right){\mathit{\varphi }}_{Ti{O}_2}}{\left(\frac{{\sigma }_{Ti{O}_2}}{{\sigma }_f}+2\right)-\left(\frac{{\sigma }_{Ti{O}_2}}{{\sigma }_f}-1\right){\mathit{\varphi }}_{Ti{O}_2}}.\hfill \end{array}\right\}$$

(39)

Nomenclature: We added the units that were missing in several parameters and corrected the typographical errors in some of the parameters [1]. The correct Nomenclature appears below.

The authors state that the scientific conclusions are unaffected. These corrections were approved by the Academic Editor. The original publication has also been updated.