SINGLE AND TWO PHASE CONTINUUM MODELING

OF
LAMINAR NANOFLUID FORCED CONVECTION
by
Sinan Gktepe
June, 2013

Boazii University
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Supervisor: Dr. Kunt Atalk

Co-supervisor: Dr. Hakan Ertrk

Outline
Introduction to Nanofluids
Literature

Mathematical Models
Single-phase Approach
Two-phase Approach

Problem Domain and Numerical Methods

Results

Conclusion
Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering
03.07.2013

Sinan GKTEPE

Need for Improved Thermal Management

Increasing cooling demand for data centers, power electronics, etc.

Focus:
High efficiency, smaller form factors.
Rapid battery charging and prolonged battery life of EVs.
Increase in power density: need for improved thermal management.
Engineered fluids are key to improve thermal performance.
Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering
03.07.2013

Sinan GKTEPE

What is and Why Nanofluids?

Nanofluids:
Colloidal suspensions of nanoparticles (Al203, Ti02,
Fe304, hBN, etc.).
Production methods: One-step, two-step
Improved thermal management:
Enhanced thermal conductivity and convection heat
transfer.
Tunable physical properties:
- Particle size, concentration, type, etc.
- Magnetic field
Application areas:
Automotive industry, cooling of electronics, bio
medical, solar water heating, nuclear reactors.
Thermal and hydrodynamic characterization and robust
modeling is needed for system and equipment design.

Al2O3 water nanofluid, source:

http://www.xtremesyste ms.org/f

TEM image of nanoparticles,

source: M.H. Kayhania et al.

Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering

03.07.2013

Sinan GKTEPE

Nanofluid Modeling
Micro Models

Essential for property characterization

Molecular dynamics
Lattice Boltzmann
Brownian dynamics

Macro Models
Essential for design of engineering systems
Single-phase: Nanofluid is a single continuum
Homogeneous model
non-Homogeneous model

Two-phase: Particle and fluid phases are considered separately

Eulerian- Volume of Fluid Model
Eulerian - Mixture Model
Eulerian - Eulerian Model
Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering

03.07.2013

Sinan GKTEPE

Heat Transfer Studies on Macro Models

Researcher

Flow Regime

Flow

B.C.

Prop.

Model

Geo.

Maiga et al. (2004)

Laminar/ Turbulent

FD

CHF

Const.

SP

Tube

Ozerinc et al. (2012)

Laminar

FD

CHF/CWT

Temp.
Dep.

SP-D

Tube

Fard et al. (2009)

Laminar

FD

CWT

Const.

SP/TP

Tube

Akbari et al. (2011)

Laminar

Entry

CHF

Temp.
Dep.

SP/EE/M/
VOF

Tube

Kalteh et al. (2011)

Laminar

Entry

CHF

Const.

EE

Micro
Ch.

Bianco et al. (2009)

Laminar

Entry

CHF

Temp.
Dep.

SP/EE

Tube

Lotfi et al. (2010)

Laminar

Entry

CHF

Const.

SP/EE/M

Tube

Mokmeli et al. (2009)

Laminar

Entry

CHF

Const.

SP-D

Tube

Moraveji et al.(2011)

Laminar

Entry

CHF

Const.

SP

Tube

There is no complete study comparing, state-of-the art and recently proposed models
No comparison of computational efficiency of models and coupling algorithms
Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering
14.11.2012

Experimental Studies on Nanofluids

Annop et al., 2009
Effect of electro viscous forces on nanofluids viscosity is investigated, data is
unusable.

Hwang et al., 2009

Laminar nanofluid flow in a circular tube is investigated .
C.T. Nguyen et al.
Hysteresis in Al2O3 nanofluids viscosity above 60oC is reported.

Wen et al., 2004

Forced convection of nanofluid in a circular pipe with constant heat flux
boundary condition.
Heris et al., 2006
Forced convection of nanofluid in a circular pipe with constant wall
temperature boundary condition.
Li et al., 2011
Thermal conductivity of Boron Nitride ethylene glycol nanofluid.

Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering

14.11.2012

Sinan GKTEPE

Current Status and Challenges

Current status
Over 2000 publications since 1995
Over 100 patents since 2001
Used in high-end automotive applications (tunable dampers)
Commercialization stage
Challenges
Production cost of nanoparticles.
Long term instability and reliability issues.
Environmental and health impact.
Lack of agreement between reported results:
Heat transport mechanism and rheological behavior
Experimental data
Lack of agreement in modeling approaches.
Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering
03.07.2013

Sinan GKTEPE

Objective
Objective of this study is:
To compare accuracies and computational efficiencies of recent
state-of-the-art nanofluid models.
To introduce a new viscosity model to increase accuracy of singlephase models.
Compare two-different coupling algorithms for Eulerian-Eulerian
two-phase model.
Provide data for forced convection of hBN nanofluid.

Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering

03.07.2013

Sinan GKTEPE

Mathematical Models
Single-phase models
Two-phase models

Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering

03.07.2013

Sinan GKTEPE

10

Introduction to Single-phase Models

For all single phase models, nanofluid is a single continuum, nanoparticles
and base fluid share same temperature and velocity field.
Homogeneous Models:
Nanofluid is represented by its effective properties.
Effect of particle-fluid, and particle-particle interactions are neglected.

non-Homogeneous Models:
Nanofluid is represented by its effective properties.
Effect of particle-fluid, and particle-particle interactions are included in the
effective properties.
Calibration of models with respect to experimental data is required.
Can be regarded as advanced homogeneous models.
Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering
03.07.2013

Sinan GKTEPE

11

Single-phase Model Equations

For incompressible nanofluid, at steady state:
Continuity Eq.

= 0

Momentum Eq.

nf = + 2

Energy Eq.

nf , = ( )

Effective density and specific heat:

= +
, = , + ,

Effective thermal conductivity and viscosity:

Homogeneous model:
= and =
non-Homogeneous models:
Dispersion models: = + and = +
Brownian model: = + and = +
Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering
03.07.2013

Sinan GKTEPE

12

Nanofluid Properties
Nanofluid Thermal Conductivity
Hamilton and Crosser, (1962) (no Temp. Depend.):
=

+ 1 1
+ 1 +

Chon et al. (2005) (Temperature dependent):

= 1 + 64.7 0.7460

Pr =

Nanofluid Viscosity:
Einstein equation (1906):

14.11.2012

Re =

0.3690

0.7476

=
2

3
bf

Pr 0.9955 1.2321
= 10/()

= 1 + 2.5

13

Dispersion and Brownian Thermal Conductivities

To account for the effect of Brownian motion of particles on energy transport.
Two thermal dispersion models and one Brownian conductivity model are
proposed.
1. Single-phase dispersion model 1, (Xuan and Roetzel, 2000) (SPD1)
is = 1

2. Single-phase dispersion model 2, (Mokmeli and Saffar-Avval , 2009) (SPD2)

isp = 2 p

3. Single-phase Brownian thermal conductivity model (Koo and Kleinstreuer,
2004) (SPBM):

br = 5

104 ,

Nanofluid viscosity is estimated by Einstein Equation.

Nanofluid thermal conductivity is estimated by temperature dependent model.
Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering
03.07.2013

Sinan GKTEPE

14

Dispersion and Brownian Viscosities

To account for the effect of Brownian motion of particles on momentum transport.
Dispersion and Brownian viscosity models are considered.
1. Brownian viscosity model (BVM) (Raisee, M. and M. Moghaddami, 2008) :

Brownian Prandtl ( ) number assumed to be equal to unity so;

br = 5

104

2. Dispersion viscosity model (DVM):

Brownian Prandtl number assumed to be equal to nanofluid Prandtl number

so;

=
= 2 p
,

Nanofluid viscosity for DVM, and BVM is estimated by Einstein Equation.

Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering
03.07.2013

Sinan GKTEPE

15

Summary of Single Phase Models

Summary of mathematical models that are used to build up single-phase models
Model Name

Thermal Conductivity Model(s)

Viscosity Model(s)

HSPM

Hamilton et al.

Einstein

HSPM-TD

Chon et al.

Einstein

SPD1

Chon et al.

Xuan et al.

Einstein

SPD2

Chon et al.

Mokmeli et al.

Einstein

DVM

Chon et al.

Mokmeli et al.

Einstein

From Mokmeli
Prbr=Prnf = 6.97

SPBM

Hamilton et al.

Koo et al.

Einstein

BVM

Hamilton et al.

Koo et al.

Einstein

From Koo et al.

Prbr=1

DVM: Dispersion viscosity model.

BVM: Brownian viscosity model.
SPD1 and SPD2: Single phase dispersion
models 1 and 2.

SPBM: Single-phase Brownian conductivity model.

HSPM: Homogeneous single-phase model.
HSPM-TD: Homogeneous single-phase model with
temperature dependent properties.

Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering

03.07.2013

Sinan GKTEPE

16

Two phase models

Base fluid and nanoparticles can have different velocity and temperature fields.

Two phase models are suggested for applications where interaction between
phases are not well defined
Two common two-phase models:
Eulerian Eulerian
Each phase is considered as different continuum, and phase equations are
coupled using interphase equations
Eulerian Mixture
Equations are solved for mixture phase , and phase velocities are related by
empirical correlations.
Coupling schemes:
Phase Coupled Semi Implicit Method for Pressure Linked Equations (PCSIMPLE)
Full Multiphase Coupled (FMC)
Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering
03.07.2013

Sinan GKTEPE

17

Mixture Model
For incompressible nanofluid at steady state:

m = 0

Continuity Equation:

+ 1
=

= 1 +

Momentum Equation:

= + +
( , , , , )
Drift Velocity:

Particle phase: , =

++

Base fluid phase: , =

Mixture Viscosity: =

Energy Equation:
+ + +

= +
Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering
14.11.2012

18

Eulerian-Eulerian Model
For incompressible nanofluid at steady state:
Continuity Equation:
Liquid phase: + = 0

Particle phase: + = 0

x Momentum Equation:
Particle phase:


+

=
+

+

+

=
+

+

Base fluid phase:

Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering

03.07.2013

Sinan GKTEPE

19

Eulerian-Eulerian Model
Fd (Drag force):

= ( )

For dilute solutions is defined accordingly to Syamlal and Gidaspow (1985)

as;
1
3
2.65
=

4

Cd is the drag coefficient and it is given as;

24
1 + 0.15 0.697 1000

0.44 > 1000

Rep is particle Reynolds number and defined as;

=

Kalteh et al. (2011) showed that and are negligible. Therefore both
forces are neglected in our model.
Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering
03.07.2013

Sinan GKTEPE

20

Eulerian-Eulerian Model
Steady State Energy Equation:
Base fluid Phase:

, +

=
,
+ ( ,
) ( )

Particle Phase:

, +

=
,
+
,

+ ( )

, , are the effective thermal conductivity determined by Kuipers et al. (1992)

Volumetric heat transfer coefficient ( ):

6 1
=

hp is defined by Wakao
and Kagei (1982) as;

=
= 2 + 1.10.6 1/3

Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering

14.11.2012

Sinan GKTEPE

21

Numeric Methods and Problem Description

Problem domain
Numeric methods
Boundary conditions
Model validation

Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering

03.07.2013

Sinan GKTEPE

22

Numerical Methods and Definition of Problem

Part of the grid used in

discretization:

Actual problem domain:

x=0

Boundary conditions:
Uniform inlet velocity
no-slip boundary condition at walls
Constant heat flux at wall

Domain discretization
Quadrilateral elements
Uniform structured grid
15 x 2000 elements

Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering

03.07.2013

Sinan GKTEPE

23

Grid Independency/Validation Study

30
25
20

Nux

Fluid: Water
Re: 1050
Shah Eq. Used in this study is;

G1 - 6 x 1000
G2 - 10 x 1000
G3 - 15 x 2000
Exp.
Shah Eq.

3 10

5 3

+ 1

= 1 + 115.2

0.5 3 5
= 5.364 1 + 220 10 9

15

2 3

10

= 1 + ( 0.0207)
= 1 + 220 10

5
0

3 10

50

100

150
x/D

200

250

300

Figure: Grid independency study

Nusselt Number is defined as;

"
=
=

( )

Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering

03.07.2013

Sinan GKTEPE

24

Grid Independency Study

0.1

0.09
0.085

Friction factor ( f )

Fluid: Water
Re: 1050
Darcy friction factor used here;

G1 - 6 x 1000
G2 - 10 x 1000
G3 - 15 x 2000
Theoretical - Water

0.095

0.08

0.075
0.07

Theoretical pure water

8
2

: wall shear stress

: mean velocity

0.065
0.06
0.055
0.05

50

100

150
x/D

200

250

300

G3 has 0.7% error from theoretical value of Darcy friction factor

Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering

03.07.2013

Sinan GKTEPE

25

Results

Friction factor prediction of models

Convective heat transfer prediction of models
Computational efficiency of models
hBN-water nanofluid results

Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering

03.07.2013

Sinan GKTEPE

26

Friction Factor Predictions

0. 17

BVM:
2

0. 16

br = 5 104 ,

Apparent Friction Factor

0. 15
0. 14

0. 13
0. 12
0. 11
0. 1
0. 09
0. 08
400

Pr
, br

Prbr = 1

DVM:
HSPM
DVM Pr =1

is = 2

br

DVM Prb r=6. 97

500

Pr
Prbr = 6.97
, br
Calibration point: = 178
=

BVM
EEM
EMM
Water
Exp. Hw ang et al.
450

550

600

650

Calibration data: Wen and Ding.

Reynolds Number

EEM is the most accurate model.

Single-phase model fails to predict
friction factor.

DVM Prbr=6.97 is the most accurate

single-phase model.

Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering

03.07.2013

Sinan GKTEPE

27

Friction Factor Predictions

0. 24
EEM
EMM
BVM
DVM Pr =6. 97

0. 22

The most accurate model is EEM.

DVM model is the most accurate
single-phase model.

Friction Factor

(f )

br

DVM Prb r=1

0. 2

Water

Brownian effects can be

represented as an additional
diffusion mechanism.

= 8
2

0. 18

0. 16

Re = 501

0. 14

0. 12

Nanofluid: 0.3%Al2O3-water
0

50

100

150
x/D

200

250

300

Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering

03.07.2013

Sinan GKTEPE

28

Predicted Heat Transfer Coefficient

3000

2500

hx [W/m2 K]

SPD 1:

EMM
Exp. Wen and Ding
EMM by Akbari et al.
EEM
HSPM
HSPM-TD
SPD2
SPD1
SPBM

2000

= 1

SPD2:

= 2

SPBM:

1500

br = 5 104 ,
1000

Calibration point: = 178

500

Re = 1050
0

50

100

150
x/D

200

250

300

Nanofluid: 1.6% Al2O3-water

EEM and EMM are the most accurate models.

SPD2 is the most accurate single-phase model.
SPBM and HSPM-TD have same accuracies.
Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering
03.07.2013

Sinan GKTEPE

29

Accuracy of Models
30

EEM 1.6%
EEM 0.6%
SPD2 1.6%
SPD2 0.6%
SPBM 1.6%
SPBM 0.6%
HSPM 1.6%
HSPM 0.6%

Error in Predicting hx (x ) [%]

20
10
0

-10
-20

Only EEM is considered, since it has same

accuracy as EMM.
Error decreases as volume faction
decreases
The most accurate single phase model is
SPD2
EEM model is the most accurate model in
entry region
SPD1:
= 1

-30

SPD2:
-40
-50
20

40

60

80

100
x/D

120

= 2

140

160

180

Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering

03.07.2013

Sinan GKTEPE

30

Effect of Volume Fraction

2000

2000
1800

1.6% Exp.
1% Exp.
0.6% Exp.
Wate r
1.6%, EEM
1%, EEM
0.6%, EEM

hx [W/m2K]

1600
1400

1.6% Exp.
1% Exp.
0.6% Exp.
Water
1.6% SPD2
1% SPD2
0.6% SPD2

1600

1200

1400
1200

Calibration point
1000

1000

800

800
600

1800

hx [W/m2K]

50

100

150
x/D

200

250

300

600
0

50

100

150
x/D

200

250

300

Same calibration constant is also valid for

0.6% and 1.6% volume concentrations.

Eulerian-Eulerian model over predicts heat

transfer as flow develops.

SPD2 under predicts heat transfer

coefficient.

Error in Eulerian-Eulerian model increases

as volume fraction increases.

Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering

03.07.2013

Sinan GKTEPE

31

Nusselt Number Predictions

12
11
10

1.6%, Exp.
1.6%, SPD1
1.6%, SPD2
1.6%, EMM
1.6%, EEM
1.6% BVM

Nusselt Number:

For all models, by Hamilton

and Crosser.

Nux

SPD2 is most accurate at specified

axial distance.

8
7

SPD2 can predict change in

Reynolds number accurately
compared to other models.

6
5
600

800

1000

1200
1400
1600
Reynolds Number

1800

2000

SPBM model is the least accurate

non-homogeneous model.

Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering

03.07.2013

Sinan GKTEPE

32

PC-SIMPLE vs. Full Multiphase Coupled

6000

PC - SIMPLE
FCM

CPU Time [s]

h [W/m K]

5000

E.Eulerian
4000
3000
2000
1000

50

100

150
x/D

200

Nanofluid: 1.6% Al2O3-water

250

300

E.Mixture

S.Phase

[%]

PCSIMPLE

FMC

0.6

157.14

82.19

552.80

77.64

158.62

89.81

572.71

78.05

1.6

163.79

111.69

566.50

81.68

SIMPLE

Processor: Intel XEON 2.4 GHz

Reynolds Number: 1050

For low volume concentrations, computational cost can be reduced up to 50%

EEM model is the most efficient two-phase model.
Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering
03.07.2013

Sinan GKTEPE

33

Hexagonal Boron Nitride

Graphite like layered atomic structure.

Orthotropic properties

Basal plane

Covalent bonds

High conductive in direction

parallel to its basal plane.

Poor conductive in direction

perpendicular to its basal plane.

Di-electric

Only one study in literature that

considers hBN-EG nanofluids.

Van der Waals Forces

Atomic structure of hexagonal Boron Nitride

Density

Specific heat

Thermal conductivity

Al2O3

3984 kg/m3

755 J/Kg K

33 W/mK

hBN

2300 kg/m3

800 J/Kg K

600 , 30 , 33.47 W/mK (D.A)

Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering

03.07.2013

Sinan GKTEPE

34

hBN-water Results
4000

1500
Water
1.6% hBN-water
1% hBN-water
0.6% hBN-water

1400
1300

Water
1.6% hBN-water
1% hBN-water
0.6% hBN-water

3500
3000

hx(x) [W/m K]

1100

2500

hx(x) [W/m K]

1200

1000
900

2000
1500

800

1000
700

500

600
500

50

100

150
x/D

200

250

300

50

100

150
x/D

200

250

300

There is %50 difference between two model.

Comparison with experimental data is

required.
Comparison of effective conductivity models
for hBN is required.

Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering

03.07.2013

Sinan GKTEPE

35

hBN-water vs. Al2O3-water

1130
1. 6% Al O -w ater
2

1125

1. 6% hBN-w ater

1115

h (x) [W/m K]

1120

1110
1105
1100

Re=1050

1095
1090
600

700

800

900

1000

1100

Even for the worst case scenario, use of hBN particles yields higher heat transfer
coefficient.
Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering
03.07.2013

Sinan GKTEPE

36

Conclusion
Single Phase Models:
Fails to represent change in friction coefficient at fully developed
region.
With thermal dispersion, single phase model can be used as an
effective method at entry region if experimental data is available for
calibration.

Dispersion model with new formulation (SPD2) is more accurate than

the older formulation (SPD1) at entry region.
Dispersion viscosity model is the most accurate single-phase model in
prediction of friction factor.
Calibration constant is independent of Reynolds number and particle
volume fraction (SPD2).
Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering
03.07.2013

Sinan GKTEPE

37

Cont. Conclusion
Two Phase Models:
Eulerian-Eulerian model is effective in predicting friction and
convective heat transfer coefficients at entry region.
Eulerian-Eulerian model is suggested if there are no experimental
data.
For Eulerian-Eulerian model, computational time can be reduced
up to 50% by implementation of Full Multiphase Coupled
Scheme.

hBN:
Assessment of effective thermal conductivity models is required.
Experimental results are needed to compare numeric models.
For fixed pressure drop, hx enhancement is higher than that of
Al2O3.
Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering
03.07.2013

Sinan GKTEPE

38

Recommendations for Future Work

Unsteady comparison of single and two phase models.
Extensive study that covers calibrations constants of single-phase
models for different nanoparticles and base fluids

Experimental studies of Hexagonal Boron Nitride nanofluids.

Numerical studies on anisotropic nanoparticles.
Theoretical studies on two-phase mode parameters for better
modeling of nanofluids.

Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering

03.07.2013

Sinan GKTEPE

39

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank to my supervisors Dr. Atalk and Dr. Ertrk for their guidance
during my academic study.

This study is supported by TBTAK

Under the grant 111M1777 of the 1001 Program.

Boazii University Department of Mechanical Engineering

03.07.2013

Sinan GKTEPE

40

Questions

03.07.2013

Sinan GKTEPE

41