Effect of various surfactants on stability and thermophysical properties of nanofluids

Wang, Jin; Li, Guolong; Li, Tan; Zeng, Min; Sundén, Bengt

doi:10.1007/s10973-020-09381-9

Cited by 64 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The λ water increased by 1.66-3.09%, 1.99-4.23%, 1.83-3.42%, and 4.48-5.62% with the addition of GNP-alumina (25:75), GNP-alumina (50:50), GNPalumina (75:25) and GNP, respectively at the examined temperatures. The higher λ NF of mono nanofluid agrees with the study by Kumar and Sarkar (2020) and Wang et al (2021).…”

Section: Thermal Conductivitysupporting

confidence: 90%

Investigation of the Thermal Conductivity, Viscosity, and Thermal Performance of Graphene Nanoplatelet-Alumina Hybrid Nanofluid in a Differentially Heated Cavity

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper investigates the thermophysical properties and heat transfer performance of graphene nanoplatelet (GNP) and alumina hybrid nanofluids at different mixing ratios. The electrical conductivity and viscosity of the nanofluids were obtained at temperatures between 15–55°C. The thermal conductivity was measured at temperatures between 20–40°C. The natural convection properties, including Nusselt number, Rayleigh number, and heat transfer coefficient, were experimentally obtained at different temperature gradients (20, 25, 30, and 35°C) in a rectangular cavity. The Mouromtseff number was used to theoretically estimate all the nanofluids’ forced convective performance at temperatures between 20–40°C. The results indicated that the thermal conductivity and viscosity of water are increased with the hybrid nanomaterial. On the other hand, the viscosity and thermal conductivity of the hybrid nanofluids are lesser than that of mono-GNP nanofluids. Notwithstanding, of all the hybrid nanofluids, GNP-alumina hybrid nanofluid with a mixing ratio of 50:50 and 75:25 were found to have the highest thermal conductivity and viscosity, enhancing thermal conductivity by 4.23% and increasing viscosity by 15.79%, compared to water. Further, the addition of the hybrid nanomaterials improved the natural convective performance of water while it deteriorates with mono-GNP. The maximum augmentation of 6.44 and 10.48% were obtained for Nuaverage and haverage of GNP-Alumina (50:50) hybrid nanofluid compared to water, respectively. This study shows that hybrid nanofluids are more effective for heat transfer than water and mono-GNP nanofluid.

show abstract

Section: Thermal Conductivitysupporting

confidence: 90%

Investigation of the Thermal Conductivity, Viscosity, and Thermal Performance of Graphene Nanoplatelet-Alumina Hybrid Nanofluid in a Differentially Heated Cavity

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The similar relative µ nf are obtained for the two particles. However, the µ of CNP nanofluid (at 0.5 vol% at 20 °C, 3.911 mPas) is much higher than that of the CNS nanofluids (1.545 mPas) due to the usage of surfactant [ 73 ]. The µ increment of CNS nanofluid is between 3.11% and 9.31%, while this range of the CNP nanofluids is 5.31% and 9.56%.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative Study of Carbon Nanosphere and Carbon Nanopowder on Viscosity and Thermal Conductivity of Nanofluids

Bohus

Lukács

et al. 2021

Nanomaterials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A comparative research on stability, viscosity (µ), and thermal conductivity (k) of carbon nanosphere (CNS) and carbon nanopowder (CNP) nanofluids was performed. CNS was synthesized by the hydrothermal method, while CNP was provided by the manufacturer. Stable nanofluids at high concentrations 0.5, 1.0, and 1.5 vol% were prepared successfully. The properties of CNS and CNP nanoparticles were analyzed with Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FT-IR), scanning electron microscope (SEM), X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), specific surface area (SBET), X-ray powder diffraction (XRD), thermogravimetry/differential thermal analysis (TG/DTA), and energy dispersive X-ray analysis (EDX). The CNP nanofluids have the highest k enhancement of 10.61% for 1.5 vol% concentration compared to the base fluid, while the CNS does not make the thermal conductivity of nanofluids (knf) significantly higher. The studied nanofluids were Newtonian. The relative µ of CNS and CNP nanofluids was 1.04 and 1.07 at 0.5 vol% concentration and 30 °C. These results can be explained by the different sizes and crystallinity of the used nanoparticles.

show abstract

“…The aggregates begin to crystallise as their density exceeds that of the base fluid and affects the stability of the nanofluids over time [152]. Some of the factors that affect the stability of the nanofluids include the method of preparation of the nanofluids [66], agitation and sonication time [160][161][162], pH of the nanofluids [152], the addition of surfactants [163,164] and surface charge density of the nanoparticles [158]. Asadi et al [165] reviewed the effect of sonication on the stability and thermophysical properties of nanofluids.…”

Section: Factors Affecting Nanofluids Stability and Thermophysical Prmentioning

confidence: 99%

An updated review of nanofluids in various heat transfer devices

Okonkwo

Wole‐Osho

Almanassra

et al. 2020

J Therm Anal Calorim

254

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The field of nanofluids has received interesting attention since the concept of dispersing nanoscaled particles into a fluid was first introduced in the later part of the twentieth century. This is evident from the increased number of studies related to nanofluids published annually. The increasing attention on nanofluids is primarily due to their enhanced thermophysical properties and their ability to be incorporated into a wide range of thermal applications ranging from enhancing the effectiveness of heat exchangers used in industries to solar energy harvesting for renewable energy production. Owing to the increasing number of studies relating to nanofluids, there is a need for a holistic review of the progress and steps taken in 2019 concerning their application in heat transfer devices. This review takes a retrospective look at the year 2019 by reviewing the progress made in the area of nanofluids preparation and the applications of nanofluids in various heat transfer devices such as solar collectors, heat exchangers, refrigeration systems, radiators, thermal storage systems and electronic cooling. This review aims to update readers on recent progress while also highlighting the challenges and future of nanofluids as the next-generation heat transfer fluids. Finally, a conclusion on the merits and demerits of nanofluids is presented along with recommendations for future studies that would mobilise the rapid commercialisation of nanofluids.

show abstract

Effect of various surfactants on stability and thermophysical properties of nanofluids

Cited by 64 publications

References 34 publications

Investigation of the Thermal Conductivity, Viscosity, and Thermal Performance of Graphene Nanoplatelet-Alumina Hybrid Nanofluid in a Differentially Heated Cavity

Investigation of the Thermal Conductivity, Viscosity, and Thermal Performance of Graphene Nanoplatelet-Alumina Hybrid Nanofluid in a Differentially Heated Cavity

Comparative Study of Carbon Nanosphere and Carbon Nanopowder on Viscosity and Thermal Conductivity of Nanofluids

An updated review of nanofluids in various heat transfer devices

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About