International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 116 (2018) 1314–1325

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijhmt

Thermal conductivity and viscosity models of metallic oxides nanofluids

Omer A. Alawi a, Nor Azwadi Che Sidik a,b,⇑, Hong Wei Xian b, Tung Hao Kean b, S.N. Kazi c
a
Department of Thermofluids, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, 81310 UTM Skudai, Johor Bahru, Malaysia
b
Department of Mechanical Precision Engineering, Malaysia – Japan International Institute of Technology (MJIIT), University Teknologi Malaysia Kuala Lumpur,
Jalan Sultan Yahya Petra (JalanSemarak), 54100 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
c
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur 50603, Malaysia

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: For over ten years, investigators focused on determining and modelling the effective thermal conductivity
Received 14 March 2017 and viscosity of nanofluids. Lately, many theoretical and experimental investigations on convective heat
Received in revised form 27 September transfer have been performed on the augmentation of heat transfer by utilizing suspensions of
2017
nanometer-sized solid particle materials (metallic or nonmetallic) in base fluids. The main purpose of this
Accepted 29 September 2017
Available online 9 October 2017
work is to determine the thermal conductivity and viscosity of various types of metallic oxides (Al2O3,
CuO, SiO2 and ZnO) for nanoparticle concentrations of 1–5 vol% at temperatures of 300–320 K and
nanoparticle shapes (blades, platelets, cylindrical, bricks, and spherical). The results illustrate that the
Keywords:
Metallic oxides nanofluids
effective thermal conductivity and thermal conductivity ratio of metallic oxide nanofluids increase with
Thermal conductivity temperature and nanoparticles volume fraction but decreases nanoparticle size intensifies. Besides that,
Dynamic viscosity the results of effective viscosity and viscosity ratio obtained indicate a considerable rise with the increase
Nanoparticles shape of nanoparticles concentration. Thus, optimum nanoparticle concentration is essential to be determined
in forming nanofluids that can enhance thermal systems performance. Finally, it is found that nanopar-
ticles shape has great impact on the thermophysical properties of nanofluids.
Ó 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction mixture. This led to development of new theoretical models to

Nanofluids are novel class of heat transfer working fluids
achieved by adding solid nanoparticles to basefluids. The nanofluid
terminology was first used by Choi [1,2], who revealed that the
homogenized mixture of nanoparticles at low volume fraction
and conventional fluids such as ethylene glycol, glycerine, oil and
water might remarkably increase its thermal performance. Due
to the possible influence upon numerous engineering applications
[3–5], nanofluids have been attracting expanding number of
researchers [6–8], as their importance is highlighted in some
review articles written by Wang and Mujumdar [9], Trisaksri and
Wongwises [10], Daungthongsuk and Wongwises [11], Khattak
et al. [12] and Murshed et al. [13].
One of the most important findings of this detailed literature is
the models of thermal conductivity of milli-sized and micro-sized
particles, developed by Maxwell [14], Hamilton and Crosser [15],
and Davis [16]. These models and equations describe the influence
of nanoparticles volume fraction on the thermal conductivity of the
⇑ Corresponding author at: Department of Thermofluids, Faculty of Mechanical
Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, 81310 UTM Skudai, Johor Bahru,
Malaysia.
E-mail address: azwadi@mail.fkm.utm.my (N.A.C. Sidik).
evaluate the effective thermal conductivity of nanofluids, which
represents the special effects of the solid/liquid boundary and the
micro-mixing convection affected by the nanoparticles Brownian
motion, as presented in the models of Yu and Choi [17], Xue [18],
Kumar et al. [19], Koo and Kleinstreuer [20], Jang and Choi
[21–23], Xie et al. [24], Patel et al. [25], Ren et al. [26], Prasher
et al. [27,28], Leong et al. [29], Xuan et al. [30], Prakash and
Giannelis [31], and Murshed et al. [32]. Nevertheless, these models
show significant differences among each other, which mean there
are limitations in their applications.
Based on past reviews, thermal conductivity is not only the crit-
ical impact of the nanoparticles suspension to base fluid, dynamic
viscosity plays a vital role as well. A modern development in effec-
tive dynamic viscosity might be a substantial restriction, either in
forced convection conditions with maximum pressure drop
increased, or strong nanofluid motion decrement in natural con-
vection conditions. Therefore, computing the dynamic viscosity
of nanofluids seems vital if it is truly beneficial to the base fluid.
Despite this, models and concepts developed for conventional col-
loid dispersions by Einstein [33,34], Brinkman [35], Lundgren [36],
and Batchelor [37] underestimated the dynamic viscosity of
nanoparticle. However, only limited equations have lately been
suggested to describe the nanofluids rheological behaviour of

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2017.09.133
0017-9310/Ó 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 O.A. Alawi et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 116 (2018) 1314–1325 1315

Nomenclature

Al2O3 aluminum oxide q density, kg/m3

h nanolayer of thickness u nanoparticles volume fraction (%)
n shape factor
TiO2 titanium dioxide Subscripts
SSA specific surface area Cp specific heat, kJ/kgK
CuO copper oxide dp particles diameter, nm
r spherical nanoparticle of radius keff effective thermal conductivity, W/mK
SiO2 silicon dioxide mf fluid viscosity, Pas
T temperature, K df equivalent diameter of basefluid, nm
ZnO zinc oxide ks particles thermal conductivity, W/mK
kf fluid thermal conductivity, W/mK
Greek symbols meff effective viscosity, Pas
b volumetric coefficient of thermal expansion, 1/K
l dynamic viscosity, Nm/s

nanoparticle, such as Koo and Kleinstreuer [20], and Masoumi et al. during preparation of nanofluids and hence the effect of surfac-
[38]. In fact, their models include experimental correction factors tants or additives are neglected in this study as there is no previous
depending on trivial number of investigational data, thus validity studies done on this impact.
and reliability of their results are not exact.
The objective of this paper is to discuss and introduce some
3. Empirical correlations and equations
empirical equations to predict the effective thermal conductivity
and dynamic viscosity of various types of metallic oxides (Al2O3,
3.1. Thermal conductivity models
CuO, SiO2 and ZnO) which are consistent with many previous
experimental studies.
In the literature, effective thermal conductivity enhancement
has been defined as the ratio of thermal conductivity of nanofluid
to thermal conductivity of base fluid (Keff/Kf). Former researchers
2. The study methodology
developed their thermal conductivity models based on the
research of Maxwell [41] who examined conduction through
The thermophysical properties of metal oxides nanofluids have
heterogeneous media. The effective thermal conductivity of two-
been investigated using some mathematical correlations and equa-
phase mixture consisting of continuous and discontinuous phases
tions. The properties of (Al2O3, CuO, SiO2 and ZnO) nanoparticles
determined by Maxwell [41] is found to be
and distilled water are tabulated in Tables 1 and 2. The findings
of nanofluids behaviour are based on four types on nanoparticles keff ks þ 2kf þ 2/ðkf  ks Þ
(Al2O3, CuO, SiO2 and ZnO) with volume fraction of 1–5% and ¼ ð1Þ
kf ks þ 2kf  /ðkf  ks Þ
nanoparticles diameter of 20–100 nm. The average nanoparticles
size is considered to be 20 nm and the temperature of nanofluids where / is the concentration of nanoparticles. Kf and Ks indicate the
preparation ranged from 300 K to 325 K. The parameters included thermal conductivity of the base fluid and the solid nanoparticle
are types of nanofluids (Al2O3, CuO, SiO2 and ZnO) and nanoparti- respectively. There are two hypothesis which Maxwell referred to
cles shapes (blades, platelets, cylindrical, bricks, and spherical) in form his model. First, thermal conductivity is dependent on base
order to determine the influence of effective thermal conductivity fluids, thermal conductivity of spherical nanoparticles and concen-
and viscosity of nanofluids. Moreover, there is no surfactant added tration of nanoparticles. Then, discontinuous phase is spherical
shaped.
Hamilton and Crosser [15] expanded Maxwell model for non-
Table 1
spherical nanoparticles and they found out the shape factor (n)
The values of b for different nanoparticle sand its boundary conditions [39,40].
for different type of nanoparticles can be determined from experi-
Type of Fraction of liquid Volume Temperature (K) ment. Their study was aimed to develop a model for both continu-
particles volume traveling fraction (%)
ous and discontinuous phases in term of conductivity, structure
with particles
and shape of nanoparticles. For discontinuous phase scattered in
Al2O3 8.4407(100u)1.07304 1%  u  10% 298 K  T  363 K continuous phase, Hamilton and Crosser model stated that:
CuO 9.881(100u)0.9446 1%  u  6% 298 K  T  363 K
SiO2 1.9526(100u)1.4594 1%  u  10% 298 K  T  363 K keff kp þ ðn  1Þkf  ðn  1Þðkf  kp Þ/
ZnO 8.4407(100u)1.07304 1%  u  7% 298 K  T  363 K ¼ ð2Þ
kf kp þ ðn  1Þkf þ ðkf  kp Þ/

where the empirical shape factor is presented as n = 3/w and w is

Table 2 sphericity which is the ratio of the surface area of a sphere (with
Thermophysical properties of various nanoparticles [39,40].
the same volume as the given particle) to the surface area of the
Particle type q (kg/m3) l (mPas) k (W/mK) Cp (J/kgK) b (1/K) particle. The sphericity is 1 and 0.5 for the spherical and cylindrical
Al2O3 3970 – 40 765 5.80E06 shapes, respectively.
CuO 6500 – 20 535.6 4.30E06 More than that, thermal conductivity can be enhanced when
SiO2 2200 – 1.2 703 5.50E06 the thickness of interfacial layer has high effective volume fraction.
ZnO 5600 – 13 495.2 4.31E06
To take account the effect of nanolayer in calculating (Keff), Yu and
Pure water 998.203 1.01 6.13E01 4182.2 2.06E04
Choi [17] modified Maxwell model and assumed a spherical
1316 O.A. Alawi et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 116 (2018) 1314–1325

Table 3 Table 5
Models and correlations of thermal conductivity. Effect of particle shape and surface resistance to thermal conductivity of nanoparticle
[62].
Models Thermal conductivity equation
Type Aspect ratio CK CShape CSurface
Yu and Choi [17] keff kp þ2kf 2/ðkf kp Þð1þgÞ3 K K
¼
kf kp þ2kf þ/ðkf kp Þð1þgÞ3
Platelets 1:1/8 2.61 5.72 3.11
Maxwell [41] keff ks þ2kf þ2/ðkf ks Þ Blades 1:6:1/12 2.74 8.26 5.52
kf
¼ ks þ2kf /ðkf ks Þ
Cylindrical 1:8 3.95 4.82 0.87
Hamilton and keff kp þðn1Þkf ðn1Þðkf kp Þ/ Bricks 1:1:1 3.37 3.72 0.35
kf
¼ kp þðn1Þkf þðkf kp Þ/
Crosser [15]
Timofeeva et al. keff
¼ ð1 þ 3/Þ
kf
[42] Table 6
h i qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Koo and kp þ2kf 2/ðkf kp Þ Viscosity enhancement coefficients [62].
keff ¼ kf ks þ2kf /ðkf ks Þ
þ 5  104 b/qf ðC p Þ kB T
dp q
f ðT; /Þ
p
Kleinstreuer
Coefficient Platelets Blades Cylindrical Bricks
[20,43]
  A1 37.1 14.6 13.5 1.9
Patel et al. [25] keff k df / 2kB Tdp
¼ 1 þ k dppð1/Þ 1þc A2 612.6 123.3 904.4 471.4
kf f paf lf d2p

Chon et al. [44]  0:369  0:7476

keff df kf
kf
¼ 1 þ 64:7/0:764 ds k
Pr T Re1:2321
T

Wasp [45] keff

¼
kp þ2kf 2/ðkf kp Þ keff kp þ 2kf  2/ðkf  kp Þð1 þ gÞ3
kf kp þ2kf þ/ðkf kp Þ ¼ ð3Þ
kf kp þ 2kf þ /ðkf  kp Þð1 þ gÞ3
Mintsa et al. [46] keff
¼ 1:72/ þ 1:0
kf
From the equation above, the thermal conductivity ratio of
Jang and Choi [22] keff
¼ ð1  /Þ þ Bkp / þ 18  106 dnanof kf Re2dnano Pr/
3d
kf nanofluids depends mainly on thermal conductivity of nanoparti-
pffiffiffiffiffi cles, nanolayer and basefluid. Other than that, concentration, thick-
Wang et al. [47] keff ð3/1Þkp =kf þ½3ð1/Þ1þ DB
¼
kf 4
ness and shape of nanoparticles are taken into account as well.
DB ¼ ð3/  1Þkp =kf þ ½3ð1  /Þ  12 þ 8kp =kf Timofeeva et al. [42] introduced a new model on calculating the
Charuyakorn et al. keff
¼
kp þ2kf 2/ðkf kp Þ
ð1 þ b/Pem
p Þ
thermal conductivity of nanofluids as presented in the following
kf kp þ2kf þ/ðkf kp Þ
[48] formula:
h i
Eastman et al. [49] keff kp /df
kf
¼ 1þk ð1/Þdp keff
¼ ð1 þ 3/Þ ð4Þ
f

kf
Lately, Koo and Kleinstreuer [20,43] considered the effects of
nanoparticle size, nanoparticle concentration and temperature of
nanoparticle with radius (r) is surrounded by a solid-like layer of
mixture rather than thermophysical properties of the basefluid
thickness (h) to form a larger particle with radius of r + h. Hence,
and Brownian motion of nanoparticles. As result, their model is
Yu and Choi modified Eq. (1) and produced the following model
proposed as:
for the effective thermal conductivity:

Table 4
Nanofluids dynamic viscosity equations.

Models Viscosity equation

qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
 ffi
Koo and Kleinstreuer [20] lBrownian ¼ 5  104 bqm/p KB T
2q r p ð134:63 þ 1722:3/p Þ þ ð0:4705  6:04/p ÞT
p

Brinkman [35] leff lf

lf ¼ ð1/Þ2:5

Einstein [33] leff ¼ lð1 þ 2:5/Þ / < 0:05

Wang [50] leff 2
lf ¼ 1 þ 7:3/ þ 123/

Gherasim [51] leff

lf ¼ 0:904e
14:8/

Pak and Cho [52] leff ¼ lf ð1 þ 39:11/ þ 533:9/2 Þ

Tiwari and Das [53] leff
lf ¼  1 0:3
dp
134:87 df
u1:03

Neilson [55] leff

/p
l ¼ 1 þ 1:5/p e
ð1/m Þ
f

De Bruijn [56] leff 2

lf ¼ 1 þ 2:5/ þ 4:698/

Mooney [57] leff 2

lf ¼ 1 þ 2:5/ þ ½3:125 þ ð2:5=/max Þ/

Maiga [58] leff 2

lf ¼ 123/ þ 7:3/ þ 1

Nguyen [59] leff 2

lf ¼ ð2:1275  0:0215T þ 0:00027T Þ
 
Jang et al. [21,23] 2e
leff ¼ lf ð1 þ 2:5/Þ 1 þ gdHp /2=3 ðe þ 1Þ

Dávalos-Orozco [60] leff ¼ lf ð1 þ 2:5/ þ 6:17/2 Þ

leff
 n
Chandrasekar [61] /
lf ¼ 1 þ b 1/
 O.A. Alawi et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 116 (2018) 1314–1325 1317

2 2
Al2O3/DW CuO/DW
Yu and Choi Model Yu and Choi Model

Thermal Conductivity Ratio

Thermal Conductivity Ratio

1.75 Maxwell Model 1.75 Maxwell Model
Hamilton and Crosser Model Hamilton and Crosser Model
Timofeeva Model Timofeeva Model
1.5 The Current Model 1.5 The Current Model

1.25 1.25

1 1

0.75 0.75
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Nanoparticles Volume Fraction (%) Nanoparticles Volume Fraction (%)

2 2
SiO2/DW ZnO/DW
Yu and Choi Model Yu and Choi Model
Thermal Conductivity Ratio

Thermal Conductivity Ratio

1.75 Maxwell Model 1.75 Maxwell Model
Hamilton and Crosser Model Hamilton and Crosser Model
Timofeeva Model Timofeeva Model
1.5 The Current Model 1.5 The Current Model

1.25 1.25

1 1

0.75 0.75
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Nanoparticles Volume Fraction (%) Nanoparticles Volume Fraction (%)

Fig. 1. Thermal conductivity ratio as a function of nanoparticle volume fraction of different model and different nanoparticles types.

1.5 1.5
Al2O3/DW CuO/DW
Thermal Conductivity Ratio

Thermal Conductivity Ratio

1.4 1% 1.4 1%
2% 2%
3% 3%
4% 4%
1.3 1.3
5% 5%

1.2 1.2

1.1 1.1

1 1
20 40 60 80 100 20 40 60 80 100
Nanoparticles Diameter (nm) Nanoparticles Diameter (nm)

1.2 1.5
SiO2/DW ZnO/DW
Thermal Conductivity Ratio

Thermal Conductivity Ratio

1% 1.4 1%
1.15 2% 2%
3% 3%
4% 1.3 4%
5% 5%
1.1
1.2

1.05
1.1

1 1
20 40 60 80 100 20 40 60 80 100
Nanoparticles Diameter (nm) Nanoparticles Diameter (nm)

Fig. 2. Thermal conductivity ratio as a function of nanoparticle size and different nanoparticles types.
1318 O.A. Alawi et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 116 (2018) 1314–1325

1.5 1.5
Al2O3/DW CuO/DW
20 nm 20 nm

Thermal Conductivity Ratio

Thermal Conductivity Ratio

1.4 40 nm 1.4 40 nm
60 nm 60 nm
80 nm 80 nm
1.3 100 nm 1.3 100 nm

1.2 1.2

1.1 1.1

1 1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Nanoparticle Volume Fraction (%) Nanoparticle Volume Fraction (%)

1.1 1.5
SiO2/DW ZnO/DW
20 nm
20 nm
Thermal Conductivity Ratio

40 nm

Thermal Conductivity Ratio

1.4 40 nm
1.075 60 nm
60 nm
80 nm
80 nm
100 nm
1.3 100 nm
1.05
1.2

1.025
1.1

1 1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Nanoparticle Volume Fraction (%) Nanoparticle Volume Fraction (%)

Fig. 3. Thermal conductivity ratio as a nanoparticles volume fraction of different nanoparticles diameter and different nanofluids.

1.7 1.7
Al2O3/DW CuO/DW
1.6 1% 1.6
Thermal Conductivity Ratio

Thermal Conductivity Ratio

1%
2%
2%
1.5 3% 1.5 3%
4%
4%
5%
1.4 1.4 5%

1.3 1.3

1.2 1.2

1.1 1.1

1 1
300 310 320 330 300 310 320 330
Temperature (K) Temperature (K)

1.2 1.7
SiO2/DW ZnO/DW
1.175 1.6
Thermal Conductivity Ratio

Thermal Conductivity Ratio

1% 1%
1.15 2% 2%
3% 1.5 3%
1.125 4% 4%
5% 1.4 5%
1.1
1.3
1.075
1.2
1.05

1.025 1.1

1 1
300 310 320 330 300 310 320 330
Temperature (K) Temperature (K)

Fig. 4. Thermal conductivity ratio as a function of temperature of different nanofluid types.

 O.A. Alawi et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 116 (2018) 1314–1325 1319

1.5 1.5
Al2O3/DW CuO/DW

Thermal Conductivity Ratio

Thermal Conductivity Ratio

1.4 Blades Nanoparticles 1.4 Blades Nanoparticles
Bricks Nanoparticles Bricks Nanoparticles
Cylindrical Nanoparticles Cylindrical Nanoparticles
1.3 Platelets Nanoparticles 1.3 Platelets Nanoparticles
Spherical Nanoparticles Spherical Nanoparticles

1.2 1.2

1.1 1.1

1 1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Nanoparticles Volume Fraction (%) Nanoparticles Volume Fraction (%)

1.5 1.5
SiO2/DW ZnO/DW
Thermal Conductivity Ratio

Thermal Conductivity Ratio

Blades Nanoparticles Blades Nanoparticles
1.4 1.4
Bricks Nanoparticles Bricks Nanoparticles
Cylindrical Nanoparticles Cylindrical Nanoparticles
Platelets Nanoparticles Platelets Nanoparticles
1.3 1.3 Spherical Nanoparticles
Spherical Nanoparticles

1.2 1.2

1.1 1.1

1 1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Nanoparticles Volume Fraction (%) Nanoparticles Volume Fraction (%)

Fig. 5. Nanoparticle shapes effects on the thermal conductivity ratio of different nanofluids.

0.9 0.9
Al2O3/DW CuO/DW
Thermal Conductivity (W/m.K)
Thermal Conductivity (W/m.K)

Blades Nanoparticles
Blades Nanoparticles
Bricks Nanoparticles
Bricks Nanoparticles
Cylindrical Nanoparticles
Cylindrical Nanoparticles
0.8 Platelets Nanoparticles 0.8
Platelets Nanoparticles
Spherical Nanoparticles
Spherical Nanoparticles

0.7 0.7

0.6 0.6
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Nanoparticles Volume Fraction (%) Nanoparticles Volume Fraction (%)

0.9 0.9
SiO2/DW ZnO/DW
Thermal Conductivity (W/m.K)
Thermal Conductivity (W/m.K)

Blades Nanoparticles Blades Nanoparticles

Bricks Nanoparticles Bricks Nanoparticles
0.8 Cylindrical Nanoparticles 0.8 Cylindrical Nanoparticles
Platelets Nanoparticles Platelets Nanoparticles
Spherical Nanoparticles Spherical Nanoparticles

0.7 0.7

0.6 0.6
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Nanoparticles Volume Fraction (%) Nanoparticles Volume Fraction (%)

Fig. 6. Effect of nanoparticle shapes on thermal conductivity of different nanofluids.

1320 O.A. Alawi et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 116 (2018) 1314–1325

sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi

kp þ 2kf  2/ðkf  kp Þ

kB T
leff 1
¼ kf þ 5  10 b/qf ðC p Þ
4
f ðT; /Þ ¼ ð6Þ
keff
ks þ 2kf  /ðkf  ks Þ dp qp lf ð1  /Þ2:5
ð5Þ Wang et al. [50] proposed an equation to calculate the viscosity
of nanofluid which depends on the concentration of nanoparticles:
There are two parts shown in Eq. (5). The front part is modified
from Eq. (3) of Maxwell formula while the part behind considers leff
¼ ð1 þ 7:3/ þ 123/2 Þ ð7Þ
the Brownian motion of nanoparticles. It shows that the tempera- lf
ture depends on the effective thermal conductivity. f ðT; uÞ can be
Moreover, Gherasim et al. [51] presented a model to find out the
assumed to vary continuously with the volume fraction of nanopar-
viscosity of nanofluids and its effects. This model could be applied
ticle where f ðT; /Þ ¼ ð6:04u þ 0:4705Þ  T þ ð1722:3u  134:63Þ.
to spherical nanoparticles only, which is defined as Eq. (8).
b is related to particle motion.
leff
¼ 0:904e14:8/ ð8Þ
3.2. Dynamic viscosity models lf
The viscosities of two metallic oxide nanoparticles (Al2O3 and
Dynamic viscosity is vital in nanofluids as well as thermal con-
TiO2) dispersed in water with nanoparticles size of 13 and 27 nm
ductivity. There are less studies that discussed on the viscosity of
are measured by Pak and Cho [52]. The viscosity of Al2O3 and
the nanofluid compared to studies that focused on the thermal
TiO2 at high volume concentration (10%) was about 200 and 3
conductivity. Viscosity models and formulas considered the con-
times better than that of base fluid respectively. The effective vis-
centration of nanoparticles as a function to express the effective-
cosity is presented in Eq. (9).
ness of nanofluids viscosity. Temperature is also considered as
one of the most important factors affecting the viscosity of the leff ¼ lf ð1 þ 39:11/ þ 533:9/2 Þ ð9Þ
nanofluid and thus some empirical correlations and measurements
have been introduced for investigating the its effect on viscosity of Tiwari and Das [53] obtained the effective viscosity experimen-
nanofluids. tally by considering Brownian motion of nanoparticles as shown in
The Einstein model [33] was modified by Brinkman [35]. The equations below:
modified equation included the volume fraction of nanoparticles Viscosity:
and viscosity of both nanoparticles and basefluid as shown in leff 1
¼ ð10Þ
Eq. (6). lf 1  34:87dp 0:3 u1:03
df

6 6
Al2O3/DW CuO/DW

5 Brinkman Model 5 Brinkman Model

Dynamic Viscosity Ratio

Dynamic Viscosity Ratio

Wang et al. Model Wang et al. Model

Gherasim et al. Model Gherasim et al. Model
4 Pak and Cho Model 4 Pak and Cho Model
The Present Model The Present Model
3 3

2 2

1 1

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Nanoparticles Volume Fraction (%) Nanoparticles Volume Fraction (%)

6 6
SiO2/DW ZnO/DW

5 Brinkman Model 5 Brinkman Model

Dynamic Viscosity Ratio

Dynamic Viscosity Ratio

Wang et al. Model Wang et al. Model

Gherasim et al. Model Gherasim et al. Model
4 Pak and Cho Model 4 Pak and Cho Model
The Present Model The Present Model
3 3

2 2

1 1

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Nanoparticles Volume Fraction (%) Nanoparticles Volume Fraction (%)
Fig. 7. Variation of dynamic viscosity as a function of nanoparticle volume fraction of different nanofluids.
 O.A. Alawi et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 116 (2018) 1314–1325 1321

Equivalent diameter of basefluid molecule: 4. Results and discussions

 1=3 Fig. 1 illustrates the thermal conductivity ratio of various metal-

6M
df ¼ ð11Þ
Npqbf lic oxides (Al2O3, CuO, SiO2 and ZnO) as a function of nanoparticle
concentration in the range of 1–5%. The current investigation
Tables 3 and 4 present the empirical correlations and models results are validated with previous results achieved by other mod-
used to measure the effective thermal conductivity and dynamic els and empirical correlations. From Fig. 1, results show the ther-
viscosity experimentally. Eqs. (5) and (10) are considered to be mal conductivity of the metal oxides nanofluids increases
the current model in this study. linearly with nanoparticle concentration. By applying the current
proposed model of Koo and Kleinstreuer [20,43], Al2O3, CuO, and
ZnO have greater thermal conductivity ratio compared to Maxwell
3.3. Different nanoparticle shapes model [41], Hamilton and Crosser [15], Timofeeva et al. [42], and
Yu and Choi [17]. On the other hand, SiO2 shows less thermal con-
Five different nanoparticle shapes (spherical, platelets, blades, ductivity ratio due to its lower thermal conductivity among the
cylindrical and bricks) are discussed in this paper. In order to con- four metal oxides nanofluid used in this investigation. Overall, it
sider the effects of these nanoparticle shapes on thermophysical can be concluded that the thermal conductivity of nanofluid
properties of nanofluid, the following equations were presented increases with nanoparticle volume fractions.
by Timofeeva et al. [54]: The influence of nanoparticle diameter (dp) on the thermal
Effective thermal conductivity: conductivity ratio of nanofluid is investigated in this section. All
the nanoparticles diameter are assumed to be in the range of
keff   20–100 nm. Figs. 2 and 3 depict that the effective thermal conduc-
¼ 1 þ C Shape
k þ C Surface
k u ¼ 1 þ C uk ð12Þ
tivity for all types of nanofluids decreases when the nanoparticle
kf
diameter (size) of nanofluid increases. According to the interfacial
The effective thermal conductivity can be obtained by using the layer concept, the interfacial layers that surrounding the nanopar-
data from Table 5. ticles of nanofluid are considered as the enhancement mechanism
Dynamic viscosity: to increase the thermal conductivity. Decrement in nanoparticle
size causes increment in specific surface area (SSA) of nanoparti-
leff ¼ lf ð1 þ A1 u þ A2 u2 Þ ð13Þ cles as well as the augmentation effects of interfacial layers. CuO
gives the highest nanoparticles diameter effect on the effective
where A1 and A2 are coefficients shown in Table 6. thermal conductivity followed by Al2O3, ZnO and SiO2.

6 6
Al2O3/DW CuO/DW
Blades Nanoparticles Blades Nanoparticles
Bricks Nanoparticles Bricks Nanoparticles
5 Cylindrical Nanoparticles 5 Cylindrical Nanoparticles
Dynamic Viscosity Ratio
Dynamic Viscosity Ratio

Platelets Nanoparticles Platelets Nanoparticles

Spherical Nanoparticles Spherical Nanoparticles
4 4

3 3

2 2

1 1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Nanoparticles Volume Fraction (%) Nanoparticles Volume Fraction (%)
6 6
SiO2/DW ZnO/DW
Blades Nanoparticles Blades Nanoparticles
Bricks Nanoparticles Bricks Nanoparticles
5 Cylindrical Nanoparticles 5 Cylindrical Nanoparticles
Dynamic Viscosity Ratio
Dynamic Viscosity Ratio

Platelets Nanoparticles Platelets Nanoparticles

Spherical Nanoparticles Spherical Nanoparticles
4 4

3 3

2 2

1 1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Nanoparticles Volume Fraction (%) Nanoparticles Volume Fraction (%)

Fig. 8. Nanoparticle shapes and dynamic viscosity ratio of different nanoparticles.

1322 O.A. Alawi et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 116 (2018) 1314–1325

Temperature effects on the effective thermal conductivity of
nanofluids have been investigated by increasing the temperature
of preparation from 300 to 325 K. Fig. 4 indicates the thermal con-
ductivity increment is about 40% at a temperature of 325 K with 5
vol% of nanoparticle concentration. For temperature of 300 K and
nanoparticle concentration of 1 vol%, it shows lowest thermal con-
ductivity which is only about 4% of augmentation. Besides, results
also prove that the thermal conductivity of nanofluid is propor-
tional to the preparation temperature and the concentration of
nanoparticles. High nanofluid temperature can intensify the Brow-
nian motion of nanoparticles and decrease the viscosity of nano-
fluid. Moreover, the contribution of micro-convection in heat
transport is possible to be augmented as well. Therefore, it is
noticeably revealed that the thermal conductivity of nanofluid
can be improved by increasing the preparation temperature.
The effects of different nanoparticles shapes on the effective
thermal conductivity is predicted analytically from the adopted
model in this study. Various nanoparticle shapes effects (blades,
platelets, cylindrical, bricks, and spherical) on nanofluid thermal
conductivity ratio are presented in Fig. 5. It is observed that the
nanofluid with spherical nanoparticle shape has the maximum
heat transfer enhancement, followed by nanoparticles with cylin-
drical, bricks, blades and platelets shapes respectively. However,
cylindrical SiO2 has the highest thermal conductivity ratio followed
by bricks, blades, platelets and spherical nanoparticles.
Based on Fig. 6, the thermal conductivity trend for the four
types of nanofluid is similar to the behaviour of thermal conductiv-
ity ratio shown in Fig. 5. By increasing the nanoparticles concentra-
tion from 1 to 5%, the thermal conductivity of nanofluids is
increased linearly. For Al2O3, CuO and ZnO nanofluids, spherical
nanoparticles show the highest thermal conductivity compared
to other nanoparticle shapes. Nevertheless, cylindrical nanoparti-
cles shape demonstrates the highest thermal conductivity in SiO2
nanofluid.
Fig. 7 denotes the relative viscosity (leff/lf) of nanofluid which
is recognized as the ratio of the nanofluid viscosity to distilled
water viscosity, as a function of nanoparticle concentration. The
graph shows that the effective viscosity of nanofluids is propor-
tional to the nanoparticle concentration for all models and types
of nanoparticles. These results have similar tendency with all
empirical equations. However, all slopes plotted using Brinkman’s
correlation [35] are deviated from other models since Brinkman’s
model could only be applied for less than 2 vol% of nanoparticle
concentration. In order to overcome this limitation, Brownian
motion of nanoparticles is considered in defining the viscosity of
nanofluid at higher nanoparticles concentration up to 5 vol% in
the current investigation.
Although Pak and Cho [52], Wang et al. [50] and Gherasim et al.
[51] utilized several aspects for the correlations, the trend shown
in graphs are almost the same for all the four nanoparticles. The
theoretical investigations on nanoparticle suspensions were
presented based on Einstein’s model [33], which described the
viscosity of nanofluids was highly affected by nanoparticle
concentration.
The impact of various shapes of four nanoparticles (Al2O3, CuO,
SiO2 and ZnO) which dispersed in distilled water as a function of
nanoparticle volume fraction has been discussed and studied ana-
lytically. The effects of various nanoparticle shapes (spherical,
cylindrical, bricks, platelets, and blades) on dynamic viscosity
and effective dynamic viscosity are shown in Figs. 8 and 9 respec-
tively. From observation, the nanofluid with platelets-shaped
nanoparticle gives the highest heat transfer improvement.

6 6
Al2O3/DW CuO/DW
Blades Nanoparticles Blades Nanoparticles
Dynamic Viscosity (mPa. s)
Dynamic Viscosity (mPa. s)

Bricks Nanoparticles Bricks Nanoparticles

5 5
Cylindrical Nanoparticles Cylindrical Nanoparticles
Platelets Nanoparticles Platelets Nanoparticles
Spherical Nanoparticles Spherical Nanoparticles
4 4

3 3

2 2

1 1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Nanoparticles Volume Fraction (%) Nanoparticles Volume Fraction (%)
6 6
SiO2/DW ZnO/DW
Blades Nanoparticles Blades Nanoparticles
Dynamic Viscosity (mPa. s)
Dynamic Viscosity (mPa. s)

Bricks Nanoparticles Bricks Nanoparticles

5 5
Cylindrical Nanoparticles Cylindrical Nanoparticles
Platelets Nanoparticles Platelets Nanoparticles
Spherical Nanoparticles Spherical Nanoparticles
4 4

3 3

2 2

1 1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Nanoparticles Volume Fraction (%) Nanoparticles Volume Fraction (%)

Fig. 9. Effect of nanoparticle shapes on dynamic viscosity of different nanofluids.

 O.A. Alawi et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 116 (2018) 1314–1325 1323

3 3
Al2O3/DW CuO/DW

1%

Dynamic Viscosity Ratio

Dynamic Viscosity Ratio

1%
2.5 2% 2.5 2%
3% 3%
4% 4%
5% 5%
2 2

1.5 1.5

1 1
20 40 60 80 100 20 40 60 80 100
Nanoparticles Diameter (nm) Nanoparticles Diameter (nm)

3 3
SiO2/DW ZnO/DW

1%
Dynamic Viscosity Ratio

Dynamic Viscosity Ratio

1%
2.5 2% 2.5 2%
3% 3%
4% 4%
5% 5%
2 2

1.5 1.5

1 1
20 40 60 80 100 20 40 60 80 100
Nanoparticles Diameter (nm) Nanoparticles Diameter (nm)

Fig. 10. Effect of nanoparticles diameter on dynamic viscosity ratio of different nanoparticles types as a function of nanoparticles size.

Fig. 11. Effect of nanoparticles diameter on dynamic viscosity ratio of different nanofluids as a function of nanoparticles concentration.
1324 O.A. Alawi et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 116 (2018) 1314–1325

3 3
Al2O3/DW CuO/DW
1% 1%
2.5 2% 2.5 2%

Dynamic Viscosity Ratio

Dynamic Viscosity Ratio
3% 3%
4% 4%
5% 5%
2 2

1.5 1.5

1 1

0.5 0.5
300 310 320 330 300 310 320 330
Temperature (K) Temperature (K)
3 3
SiO2/DW ZnO/DW
1% 1%
2.5 2% 2.5 2%

Dynamic Viscosity Ratio

Dynamic Viscosity Ratio

3% 3%
4% 4%
5% 5%
2 2

1.5 1.5

1 1

0.5 0.5
300 310 320 330 300 310 320 330
Temperature (K) Temperature (K)

Fig. 12. Effect of temperature on dynamic viscosity ratio of different nanofluids.

Cylindrical, bricks, blades, and spherical nanoparticle shapes also
enhance the heat transfer but less than that of platelets shape.
Figs. 10 and 11 present the effects of nanoparticles diameter on
the dynamic viscosity. The nanoparticles size (dp) of this study is in
the range of 20–100 nm. Al2O3, CuO, SiO2 and ZnO nanoparticles
have similar result on dynamic viscosity ratio. By increasing the
nanoparticles size for all types of nanoparticles, the ratio of
dynamic viscosity decreases gradually. In general, types of nanoflu-
ids does not give high impact on the dynamic viscosity.
Fig. 12 illustrates the influence of preparation temperature on
the dynamic viscosity ratio of various nanofluids. It is obvious that
dynamic viscosity ratio of the metallic oxides decreases when
preparation temperature of nanofluids increases. In addition,
Al2O3, CuO, SiO2 and ZnO nanoparticles give the same trend in
dynamic viscosity ratio with the increment of preparation temper-
ature. In short, the effect of temperature on viscosity ratio is dis-
tinct while the effect of temperature on nanofluid types is
insignificant.
pared to the effect of mixture temperature. The thermal conductiv-
ity enhancement due to temperature increment is a promising
characteristic for practical applications. Besides that, nanoparticles
shape has considerable influence on thermal conductivity and
thermal conductivity ratio.
Volume fractions of nanoparticles and temperature of mixture
have significant effects on the viscosity of the nanofluids. Results
indicate that viscosity increases with the increment of the particle
volume fractions. However, it decreases when temperature
increases. For shape of nanoparticles, it plays vital role as different
shapes have different impact on viscosity and viscosity ratio.
Conflict of interest
The authors declared that there is no conflict of interest.
References

5. Conclusions [1] J.A. Eastman, U.S. Choi, S. Li, G. Soyez, L.J. Thompson, R.J. DiMelfi, Novel thermal
properties of nanostructured materials, Mater. Sci. Forum. 312 (1999) 629–
634.
In this analysis, different empirical correlations and models of [2] S.U.S. Choi, Enhancing thermal conductivity of fluids with nanoparticles.
effective thermal conductivity and dynamic viscosity are referred. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Fluids Engineering Division
(Publication) FED, 1995, pp. 99–105.
Effective thermal conductivity and viscosity of four type of [3] T. Mugilan, N.A.C. Sidik, W.M.A.A. Japar, The use of smart material of nanofluid
nanoparticles (Al2O3, CuO, SiO2 and ZnO) within concentration of for heat transfer enhancement in microtube with helically spiral rib and
1–5%, preparation temperature of 300–325 Kand various nanopar- groove, J. Adv. Res. Mater. Sci. 32 (2017) 1–12.
[4] G. Ny, N. Barom, S. Noraziman, S. Yeow, Numerical study on turbulent-forced
ticle shapes are studied. This study adopted Koo and Kleinstreuer
convective heat transfer of Ag/Heg water nanofluid in pipe, J. Adv. Res. Mater.
model for to obtain thermal conductivity and dynamic viscosity Sci. 22 (2016) 11–27.
of nanofluids. [5] S. Shervin, C.S. Nor Azwadi, Effect of viscous and thermal forcings on
The thermal conductivity of the metal oxides nanofluid shows dynamical features of swimming of microorganisms in nanofluids, J. Adv.
Res. Fluid Mech. Therm. Sci. 17 (2016) 18–27.
similar behaviour like other nanofluids. The thermal conductivity [6] C.S. Nor Azwadi, O.A. Alawi, Computational investigations on heat transfer
due to nanoparticle concentration increases more gradually com- enhancement using nanorefrigerants, J. Adv. Res. Design. 1 (2014) 35–41.
 O.A. Alawi et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 116 (2018) 1314–1325
[7] Y.K. Lee, The use of nanofluids in domestic water heat exchanger, J. Adv. Res.
Appl. Mech. 3 (2014) 9–24.
[8] O.A. Alawi, C.S. Nor Azwadi, S. Kazi, M.K. Abdolbaqi, Comparative study on heat
transfer enhancement and nanofluids flow over backward and forward facing
steps, J. Adv. Res. Fluid Mech. Therm. Sci. 23 (2016) 25–49.
[9] X.-Q. Wang, A.S. Mujumdar, C. Yap, Thermal characteristics of tree-shaped
microchannel nets for cooling of a rectangular heat sink, Int. J. Therm. Sci. 45
(2006) 1103–1112.
[10] V. Trisaksri, S. Wongwises, Critical review of heat transfer characteristics of
nanofluids, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 11 (2007) 512–523.
[11] W. Daungthongsuk, S. Wongwises, A critical review of convective heat transfer
of nanofluids, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 11 (2007) 797–817.
[12] M. Khattak, A. Mukhtar, S.K. Afaq, Application of nano-fluids as coolant in heat
exchangers: a review, J Adv Rev Sci Res. 22 (2016) 1–11.
[13] S. Murshed, K. Leong, C. Yang, Thermophysical and electrokinetic properties of
nanofluids–a critical review, Appl. Therm. Eng. 28 (2008) 2109–2125.
[14] M.J. Clerk, A treatise on electricity and magnetism, vol. II, 1954.
[15] R. Hamilton, O. Crosser, Thermal conductivity of heterogeneous two-
component systems, Ind. Eng. Chem. Fundam. 1 (1962) 187–191.
[16] R. Davis, The effective thermal conductivity of a composite material with
spherical inclusions, Int. J. Thermophys. 7 (1986) 609–620.
[17] W. Yu, S. Choi, The role of interfacial layers in the enhanced thermal
conductivity of nanofluids: a renovated Maxwell model, J. Nanopart. Res. 5
(2003) 167–171.
[18] Q.Z. Xue, Model for effective thermal conductivity of nanofluids, Phys. Lett.,
Sect. A: Gen., Atom. Solid State Phys. 307 (2003) 313–317.
[19] D.H. Kumar, H.E. Patel, V.R.R. Kumar, T. Sundararajan, T. Pradeep, S.K. Das,
Model for heat conduction in nanofluids, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 (2004), 144301-1–
4.
[20] J. Koo, C. Kleinstreuer, Erratum: a new thermal conductivity model for
nanofluids (J. Nanopart. Res. (2004) 6 (577–588)), J. Nanopart. Res. 7 (2005)
324.
[21] S.P. Jang, S.U.S. Choi, Effects of various parameters on nanofluid thermal
conductivity, J. Heat Transf. 129 (2007) 617–623.
[22] S.P. Jang, S.U.S. Choi, Role of Brownian motion in the enhanced thermal
conductivity of nanofluids, Appl. Phys. Lett. 84 (2004) 4316–4318.
[23] S.P. Jang, J.H. Lee, K.S. Hwang, S.U.S. Choi, Particle concentration and tube size
dependence of viscosities of Al2O3-water nanofluids flowing through micro-
and minitubes, Appl. Phys. Lett. 91 (2007).
[24] H. Xie, M. Fujii, X. Zhang, Effect of interfacial nanolayer on the effective
thermal conductivity of nanoparticle-fluid mixture, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 48
(2005) 2926–2932.
[25] H.E. Patel, T. Sundararajan, T. Pradeep, A. Dasgupta, N. Dasgupta, S.K. Das, A
micro-convection model for thermal conductivity of nanofluids, Pramana – J.
Phys. 65 (2005) 863–869.
[26] Y. Ren, H. Xie, A. Cai, Effective thermal conductivity of nanofluids containing
spherical nanoparticles, J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 38 (2005) 3958–3961.
[27] R. Prasher, P. Bhattacharya, P.E. Phelan, Brownian-motion-based convective-
conductive model for the effective thermal conductivity of nanofluids, J. Heat
Transf. 128 (2006) 588–595.
[28] R. Prasher, P. Bhattacharya, P.E. Phelan, Thermal conductivity of nanoscale
colloidal solutions (nanofluids), Phys. Rev. Lett. 94 (2005).
[29] K.C. Leong, C. Yang, S.M.S. Murshed, A model for the thermal conductivity
of nanofluids – the effect of interfacial layer, J. Nanopart. Res. 8 (2006)
245–254.
[30] Y. Xuan, Q. Li, X. Zhang, M. Fujii, Stochastic thermal transport of nanoparticle
suspensions, J. Appl. Phys. 100 (2006).
[31] M. Prakash, E.P. Giannelis, Mechanism of heat transport in nanofluids, J.
Comput. Aided Mater. Des. 14 (2007) 109–117.
[32] S.M.S. Murshed, K.C. Leong, C. Yang, A combined model for the effective
thermal conductivity of nanofluids, Appl. Therm. Eng. 29 (2009) 2477–2483.
[33] A. Einstein, A new determination of molecular dimensions, Ann. Phys. 19
(1906) 289–306.
[34] A. Einstein, Berichtigung zu meiner Arbeit: ‘‘Eine neue Bestimmung der
Moleküldimensionen”, Annalen der Physik 339 (1911) 591–592.
[35] H.C. Brinkman, The viscosity of concentrated suspensions and solutions, J.
Chem. Phys. 20 (1952) 571.
[36] T.S. Lundgren, Slow flow through stationary random beds and suspensions of
spheres, J. Fluid Mech. 51 (1972) 273–299.
1325
[37] G.K. Batchelor, The effect of Brownian motion on the bulk stress in a
suspension of spherical particles, J. Fluid Mech. 83 (1977) 97–117.
[38] N. Masoumi, N. Sohrabi, A. Behzadmehr, A new model for calculating the
effective viscosity of nanofluids, J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 42 (2009).
[39] R.S. Vajjha, D.K. Das, Experimental determination of thermal conductivity of
three nanofluids and development of new correlations, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf.
52 (2009) 4675–4682.
[40] R.S. Vajjha, D.K. Das, D.P. Kulkarni, Development of new correlations for
convective heat transfer and friction factor in turbulent regime for nanofluids,
Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 53 (2010) 4607–4618.
[41] J.C. Maxwell, A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism Unabridged, Dover,
1954.
[42] E.V. Timofeeva, A.N. Gavrilov, J.M. McCloskey, Y.V. Tolmachev, S. Sprunt, L.M.
Lopatina, et al., Thermal conductivity and particle agglomeration in alumina
nanofluids: experiment and theory, Phys. Rev. E – Stat., Nonlinear, Soft Matter
Phys. 76 (2007).
[43] J. Koo, Computational nanofluid flow and heat transfer analyses applied to
micro-systems, 2005.
[44] C.H. Chon, K.D. Kihm, S.P. Lee, S.U.S. Choi, Empirical correlation finding the role
of temperature and particle size for nanofluid (Al2O3) thermal conductivity
enhancement, Appl. Phys. Lett. 87 (2005) 1–3.
[45] E.J. Wasp, J.P. Kenny, R.L. Gandhi, Solid–liquid flow: slurry pipeline
transportation. [Pumps, valves, mechanical equipment, economics], Ser. Bulk
Mater. Handl.; (United States) 1 (1977).
[46] H.A. Mintsa, G. Roy, C.T. Nguyen, D. Doucet, New temperature dependent
thermal conductivity data for water-based nanofluids, Int. J. Therm. Sci. 48
(2009) 363–371.
[47] B.X. Wang, L.P. Zhou, X.F. Peng, A fractal model for predicting the effective
thermal conductivity of liquid with suspension of nanoparticles, Int. J. Heat
Mass Transf. 46 (2003) 2665–2672.
[48] P. Charunyakorn, S. Sengupta, S.K. Roy, Forced convection heat transfer in
microencapsulated phase change material slurries: flow in circular ducts, Int. J.
Heat Mass Transf. 34 (1991) 819–833.
[49] J.A. Eastman, S.R. Phillpot, S.U.S. Choi, P. Keblinski, Thermal transport in
nanofluids, Annu. Rev. Mater. Res. (2004) 219–246.
[50] X. Wang, X. Xu, S.U.S. Choi, Thermal conductivity of nanoparticle-fluid
mixture, J. Thermophys. Heat Transf. 13 (1999) 474–480.
[51] I. Gherasim, G. Roy, C.T. Nguyen, D. Vo-Ngoc, Experimental investigation of
nanofluids in confined laminar radial flows, Int. J. Therm. Sci. 48 (2009) 1486–
1493.
[52] B.C. Pak, Y.I. Cho, Hydrodynamic and heat transfer study of dispersed fluids
with submicron metallic oxide particles, Exp. Heat Transf. 11 (1998) 151–170.
[53] R.K. Tiwari, M.K. Das, Heat transfer augmentation in a two-sided lid-driven
differentially heated square cavity utilizing nanofluids, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf.
50 (2007) 2002–2018.
[54] E.V. Timofeeva, M.R. Moravek, D. Singh, Improving the heat transfer efficiency
of synthetic oil with silica nanoparticles, J. Colloid Interface Sci. 364 (2011) 71–
79.
[55] L.E. Nielsen, Generalized equation for the elastic moduli of composite
materials, J. Appl. Phys. 41 (1970) 4626–4627.
[56] H. de Bruijn, The viscosity of suspensions of spherical particles. (The
fundamental g-c and u relations), Recueil des Travaux Chimiques des Pays-
Bas 61 (1942) 863–874.
[57] M. Mooney, The viscosity of a concentrated suspension of spherical particles, J.
Colloid Sci. 6 (1951) 162–170.
[58] Maïga S El Bécaye, S.J. Palm, C.T. Nguyen, G. Roy, N. Galanis, Heat transfer
enhancement by using nanofluids in forced convection flows, Int. J. Heat Fluid
Flow 26 (2005) 530–546.
[59] C.T. Nguyen, F. Desgranges, N. Galanis, G. Roy, T. Maré, S. Boucher, et al.,
Viscosity data for Al2O3-water nanofluid-hysteresis: is heat transfer
enhancement using nanofluids reliable?, Int J. Therm. Sci. 47 (2008) 103–111.
[60] L.A. Dávalos-Orozco, L.F. Del Castillo, Hydrodynamic behavior of suspensions
of polar particles, 2003.
[61] M. Chandrasekar, S. Suresh, Bose A. Chandra, Experimental investigations and
theoretical determination of thermal conductivity and viscosity of Al2O3/water
nanofluid, Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 34 (2010) 210–216.
[62] S.M. Vanaki, H.A. Mohammed, A. Abdollahi, M.A. Wahid, Effect of nanoparticle
shapes on the heat transfer enhancement in a wavy channel with different
phase shifts, J. Mol. Liq. 196 (2014) 32–42.