Advertisement

Journal of Thermal Analysis and Calorimetry

, Volume 132, Issue 2, pp 1399–1407 | Cite as

Development of a new density correlation for carbon-based nanofluids using response surface methodology

  • Elham Montazer
  • Erfan Salami
  • Hooman Yarmand
  • Zaira Zaman Chowdhury
  • Mahidzal Dahari
  • S. N. Kazi
  • A. Badarudin
Article

Abstract

Density is among the fundamental thermo-physical characteristics of fluids that are examined prior to carrying out performance analysis of the fluid. In this study, the effect of the design variables on the density of nanofluids was studied using response surface methodology (RSM). The quadratic model produced by RSM was employed to determine the performance factors, i.e., mass concentration and temperature with reasonably good accuracy. Improved experimental correlations were proposed for the density prediction of the carbon-based nanofluids based on the experimental data. Experimentally measured densities of two different nanofluids at the nanoparticle mass concentration of up to 0.1% and the temperature range of 20–40 °C were examined. The improvement in densities compared to the density of base fluid at 20 and 40 °C is approximately 0.15% for 0.1% fraction of MWCNT–COOH nanoparticles. Additionally, the densities of F-GNP nanofluids are increased by 0.056% compared to the density of distilled water. As a final point, the RSM results were compared with the results which got from the empirical data. It was detected that the optimal RSM model is accurate and the absolute maximum deviation measured values from the predicted densities of MWCNT–COOH and F-GNP nanofluids are 0.012 and 0.009%, respectively.

Keywords

Thermo-physical properties Nanofluids Correlation Response surface methodology 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge UMRG Grant RP045C-17AET, University of Malaya, Malaysia, for support to conduct this research work.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

All authors have received research grants from University of Malaya. The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Cheng L. Nanofluid heat transfer technologies. Recent Pat Eng. 2009;3(1):1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chol S. Enhancing thermal conductivity of fluids with nanoparticles. ASME Publ Fed. 1995;231:99–106.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Yarmand H, Gharehkhani S, Ahmadi G, Shirazi SFS, Baradaran S, Montazer E, et al. Graphene nanoplatelets–silver hybrid nanofluids for enhanced heat transfer. Energy Convers Manag. 2015;100:419–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Khoshvaght-Aliabadi M. Influence of different design parameters and Al2O3-water nanofluid flow on heat transfer and flow characteristics of sinusoidal-corrugated channels. Energy Convers Manag. 2014;88:96–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Yarmand H, Ahmadi G, Gharehkhani S, Kazi SN, Safaei MR, Alehashem MS, et al. Entropy generation during turbulent flow of zirconia-water and other nanofluids in a square cross section tube with a constant heat flux. Entropy. 2014;16(11):6116–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Peyghambarzadeh S, Hashemabadi S, Chabi A, Salimi M. Performance of water based CuO and Al2O3 nanofluids in a Cu–Be alloy heat sink with rectangular microchannels. Energy Convers Manag. 2014;86:28–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    H-t Zhu, Y-s Lin, Y-s Yin. A novel one-step chemical method for preparation of copper nanofluids. J Colloid Interface Sci. 2004;277(1):100–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Esfe MH, Saedodin S, Mahian O, Wongwises S. Thermal conductivity of Al2O3/water nanofluids. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2014;117(2):675–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Navaei A, Mohammed H, Munisamy K, Yarmand H, Gharehkhani S. Heat transfer enhancement of turbulent nanofluid flow over various types of internally corrugated channels. Powder Technol. 2015;286:332–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Montazer E, Salami E, Yarmand H, Kazi S, Badarudin A editors. The RSM approach to develop a new correlation for density of metal-oxide aqueous nanofluids. In: IOP conference series: materials science and engineering. IOP Publishing; 2017.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Choi S, Zhang Z, Yu W, Lockwood F, Grulke E. Anomalous thermal conductivity enhancement in nanotube suspensions. Appl Phys Lett. 2001;79(14):2252–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Turgut A, Tavman I, Chirtoc M, Schuchmann H, Sauter C, Tavman S. Thermal conductivity and viscosity measurements of water-based TiO2 nanofluids. Int J Thermophys. 2009;30(4):1213–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Karthikeyan N, Philip J, Raj B. Effect of clustering on the thermal conductivity of nanofluids. Mater Chem Phys. 2008;109(1):50–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Das SK, Putra N, Thiesen P, Roetzel W. Temperature dependence of thermal conductivity enhancement for nanofluids. J Heat Transf. 2003;125(4):567–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yarmand H, Gharehkhani S, Shirazi SFS, Amiri A, Alehashem MS, Dahari M, et al. Experimental investigation of thermo-physical properties, convective heat transfer and pressure drop of functionalized graphene nanoplatelets aqueous nanofluid in a square heated pipe. Energy Convers Manag. 2016;114:38–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ahammed N, Asirvatham LG, Wongwises S. Effect of volume concentration and temperature on viscosity and surface tension of graphene–water nanofluid for heat transfer applications. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2016;123(2):1399–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sudeep P, Taha-Tijerina J, Ajayan P, Narayanan T, Anantharaman M. Nanofluids based on fluorinated graphene oxide for efficient thermal management. RSC Adv. 2014;4(47):24887–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hwang Y, Ahn Y, Shin H, Lee C, Kim G, Park H, et al. Investigation on characteristics of thermal conductivity enhancement of nanofluids. Curr Appl Phys. 2006;6(6):1068–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nikkhah Z, Karimipour A, Safaei MR, Forghani-Tehrani P, Goodarzi M, Dahari M, et al. Forced convective heat transfer of water/functionalized multi-walled carbon nanotube nanofluids in a microchannel with oscillating heat flux and slip boundary condition. Int Commun Heat Mass Transf. 2015;68:69–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Estellé P, Halelfadl S, Maré T. Thermophysical properties and heat transfer performance of carbon nanotubes water-based nanofluids. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2017;127(3):2075–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Timofeeva EV, Moravek MR, Singh D. Improving the heat transfer efficiency of synthetic oil with silica nanoparticles. J Colloid Interface Sci. 2011;364(1):71–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Montazer E, Yarmand H, Salami E, Muhamad MR, Kazi S, Badarudin A. A brief review study of flow phenomena over a backward-facing step and its optimization. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2018;82:994–1005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Yu W, Xie H, Bao D. Enhanced thermal conductivities of nanofluids containing graphene oxide nanosheets. Nanotechnology. 2009;21(5):055705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Zheng R, Gao J, Wang J, Feng S-P, Ohtani H, Wang J, et al. Thermal percolation in stable graphite suspensions. Nano Lett. 2011;12(1):188–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ding Y, Alias H, Wen D, Williams RA. Heat transfer of aqueous suspensions of carbon nanotubes (CNT nanofluids). Int J Heat Mass Transf. 2006;49(1):240–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Yu W, Xie H, Wang X, Wang X. Significant thermal conductivity enhancement for nanofluids containing graphene nanosheets. Phys Lett A. 2011;375(10):1323–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lamas B, Abreu B, Fonseca A, Martins N, Oliveira M. Assessing colloidal stability of long term MWCNT based nanofluids. J Colloid Interface Sci. 2012;381(1):17–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Amiri A, Shanbedi M, Yarmand H, Arzani HK, Gharehkhani S, Montazer E, et al. Laminar convective heat transfer of hexylamine-treated MWCNTs-based turbine oil nanofluid. Energy Convers Manag. 2015;105:355–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ren Y, Xie H, Cai A. Effective thermal conductivity of nanofluids containing spherical nanoparticles. J Phys D Appl Phys. 2005;38(21):3958.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Mintsa HA, Roy G, Nguyen CT, Doucet D. New temperature dependent thermal conductivity data for water-based nanofluids. Int J Therm Sci. 2009;48(2):363–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Chandrasekar M, Suresh S, Bose AC. Experimental investigations and theoretical determination of thermal conductivity and viscosity of Al2O3/water nanofluid. Exp Therm Fluid Sci. 2010;34(2):210–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Papari MM, Yousefi F, Moghadasi J, Karimi H, Campo A. Modeling thermal conductivity augmentation of nanofluids using diffusion neural networks. Int J Therm Sci. 2011;50(1):44–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Hosseini SM, Moghadassi A, Henneke DE. A new dimensionless group model for determining the viscosity of nanofluids. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2010;100(3):873–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Yarmand H, Gharehkhani S, Shirazi SFS, Amiri A, Montazer E, Arzani HK, et al. Nanofluid based on activated hybrid of biomass carbon/graphene oxide: synthesis, thermo-physical and electrical properties. Int Commun Heat Mass Transf. 2016;72:10–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Maiga SEB, Palm SJ, Nguyen CT, Roy G, Galanis N. Heat transfer enhancement by using nanofluids in forced convection flows. Int J Heat Fluid Flow. 2005;26(4):530–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Pastoriza-Gallego M, Casanova C. Legido Ja, Piñeiro M. CuO in water nanofluid: influence of particle size and polydispersity on volumetric behaviour and viscosity. Fluid Phase Equilib. 2011;300(1):188–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Vajjha R, Das D, Mahagaonkar B. Density measurement of different nanofluids and their comparison with theory. Pet Sci Technol. 2009;27(6):612–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Karimi H, Yousefi F. Application of artificial neural network–genetic algorithm (ANN–GA) to correlation of density in nanofluids. Fluid Phase Equilib. 2012;336:79–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Sánchez N, Martínez M, Aracil J. Selective esterification of glycerine to 1-glycerol monooleate. 2. Optimization studies. Ind Eng Chem Res. 1997;36(5):1529–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Box GE, Draper NR. Empirical model-building and response surfaces. New York: Wiley; 1987.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Sadollah A, Ghadimi A, Metselaar IH, Bahreininejad A. Prediction and optimization of stability parameters for titanium dioxide nanofluid using response surface methodology and artificial neural networks. Sci Eng Compos Mater. 2013;20(4):319–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Low KL, Tan SH, Zein SHS, McPhail DS, Boccaccini AR. Optimization of the mechanical properties of calcium phosphate/multi-walled carbon nanotubes/bovine serum albumin composites using response surface methodology. Mater Des. 2011;32(6):3312–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Hassan AM, Alrashdan A, Hayajneh MT, Mayyas AT. Prediction of density, porosity and hardness in aluminum–copper-based composite materials using artificial neural network. J Mater Process Technol. 2009;209(2):894–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Singh R, Bhoopal R, Kumar S. Prediction of effective thermal conductivity of moist porous materials using artificial neural network approach. Build Environ. 2011;46(12):2603–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Sumpter BG, Noid DW. On the design, analysis, and characterization of materials using computational neural networks. Annu Rev Mater Sci. 1996;26(1):223–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Pak BC, Cho YI. Hydrodynamic and heat transfer study of dispersed fluids with submicron metallic oxide particles. Exp Heat Transf Int J. 1998;11(2):151–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Kalil S, Maugeri F, Rodrigues M. Response surface analysis and simulation as a tool for bioprocess design and optimization. Process Biochem. 2000;35(6):539–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Montazer E, Mirzaei M, Salami E, Ward T, Romli F, Kazi S, editors. Optimization of a synthetic jet actuator for flow control around an airfoil. IOP conference series: materials science and engineering. IOP Publishing; 2016.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Rao KJ, Kim C-H, Rhee S-K. Statistical optimization of medium for the production of recombinant hirudin from Saccharomyces cerevisiae using response surface methodology. Process Biochem. 2000;35(7):639–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Desai KM, Survase SA, Saudagar PS, Lele S, Singhal RS. Comparison of artificial neural network (ANN) and response surface methodology (RSM) in fermentation media optimization: case study of fermentative production of scleroglucan. Biochem Eng J. 2008;41(3):266–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elham Montazer
    • 1
  • Erfan Salami
    • 1
  • Hooman Yarmand
    • 1
  • Zaira Zaman Chowdhury
    • 2
  • Mahidzal Dahari
    • 3
  • S. N. Kazi
    • 1
  • A. Badarudin
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of EngineeringUniversity of MalayaKuala LumpurMalaysia
  2. 2.Nanotechnology and Catalysis Research Centre (NANOCAT), University of MalayaKuala LumpurMalaysia
  3. 3.Department of Electrical Engineering, Faculty of EngineeringUniversity of MalayaKuala LumpurMalaysia

Personalised recommendations