Open Access

CFD simulation of the effect of particle size on the nanofluids convective heat transfer in the developed region in a circular tube

SpringerPlus20132:192

https://doi.org/10.1186/2193-1801-2-192

Received: 7 January 2013

Accepted: 15 March 2013

Published: 30 April 2013

Abstract

The CFD simulation of heat transfer characteristics of a nanofluid in a circular tube under constant heat flux was considered using Fluent software (version 6.3.26) in the laminar flow. Al2O3 nanoparticles in water with concentrations of 0.5%, 1.0%, 1.5%, 2% and 2.5% were used in this simulation. All of the thermo-physical properties of nanofluids were assumed to be temperature independent. Two particle sizes with average size of 20 and 50 nm were used in this research. It was concluded that heat transfer coefficient increased by increasing the Reynolds number and the concentration of nanoparticles. The maximum convective heat transfer coefficient was observed at the highest concentration of nano-particles in water (2.5%). Furthermore, the two nanofluids showed higher heat transfer than the base fluid (water) although the nanofluid with particles size of 20 nm had the highest heat transfer coefficient.

Keywords

Nanofluid Heat transfer Simulation Laminar flow

Introduction

Fluid heating and cooling play the significant roles in a lot of industrial processes such as power stations, production processes, transportation and electronics. Most of the methods for heat transfer are based on the structure variation, vibration of the heated surface, injection or suction of fluid and applying electrical or magnetic fields (Ahuja 1975; Bergles & Webb 1970; Bergles 1973). These techniques meet a great enhancement in heat flux. Heat transfer in the traditional fluids such as water, ethyleneglycol and oil inherently has low thermal conductivity compared with the metals and metal oxides. Therefore, fluids with suspended solid particles are expected to have better heat transfer properties (Eastman et al. 2001). Due to the associated technological problems, the majority of studies on heat transfer of suspension of metal oxides in fluids were limited to suspensions with millimeter or micron-sized particles. The large particles may cause severe problems in the heat transfer equipments. In particular, large particles quickly tend to settle out. So, pressure drop can occur in the micro-channels (Khanafer et al. 2003). Furthermore, the abrasive actions of the particles cause the erosion phenomenon in pipe lines. Small particles and their little volume fractions prevent particles clogging and pressure drop increment in the nanofluids (Khanafer et al. 2003; Zhou 2004). Moreover, large surface area of nanoparticles increases the stability and reduces the sedimentation of nanoparticles. A more dramatic improvement in heat transfer efficiency is expected as a result of the particle size reduction in a suspension because heat transfer takes place at the particles surface (ZeinaliHeris et al. 2007).

Choi employed the particles in nanometer dimensions as a suspended solution (Choi & Eastman 1995). He showed that the nanofluid thermal conductivity considerably increased. Lee et al. showed that the suspension of 4.0% with 35 nm Cuo particles in ethylene glycol had 20% increment in the thermal conductivity (Lee et al. 1999). Choi et al. observed 60% enhancement in the thermal conductivity of engine oil with 1.0% carbon nanotube (Choi et al. 2001). Das et al. investigated the temperature dependency of thermal conductivity in the nanofluids (Das et al. 2003). It was observed that a 2–4 fold increase in the thermal conductivity of nanofluid can take place over a temperature range of 21–51°C.

According to the literature, alumina and copper oxide are the most ordinary and cheap nanoparticles which are used in the applied processes (Rezaee & Tayebi 2010). Xuan and Li experimentally studied the convective heat transfer and friction coefficient for the nanofluid in both laminar and turbulent flows (Xuan & Li 2000; Xuan & Li 2003). According to these researches, the flow velocity and volume fraction of nanoparticles affected the heat transfer coefficient. Wen and Ding investigated the convective heat transfer characteristics in Al2O3-water nanofluid along a tube (Wen & Ding 2004). It was observed that heat transfer increased by increasing the Reynolds number and volumetric ratio of particles.

Abu-Nada investigated the effects of variable viscosity and thermal conductivity of a nanofluid (Al2O3-water) on the natural convective heat transfer (Abu-Nada 2009). Sharma et al. experimentally studied the convective heat transfer coefficient and pressure drop in the transient region for Al2O3-water nanofluid under a constant heat flux (Sharma et al. 2009). They found that convective heat transfer increased by adding Al2O3 nanoparticles in water.

Mirmasoumi et al. numerically studied the convective heat transfer in a fully developed flow for Al2O3-water nanofluid (Mirmasoumi & Behzadmehr 2008). They applied two-phase mixture model in their simulation. They found that the convective heat transfer coefficient significantly increased by decreasing the nanoparticles mean diameter. Since the theoretical models such as Maxwell and Hamilton-Crosser (Keblinski et al. 2002; Xue & Xu 2005; Eastman et al. 2001) predict the thermal conductivity of nanofluids, the mechanisms of thermal conductivity enhancement in the nanofluids should be studied.

Moraveji et al. simulated water-Al2O3 nanofluid through a tube under constant heat flux (Moraveji et al. 2011). They found that the heat transfer coefficient increased by increasing the nanoparticle concentration and Reynolds number. Furthermore, the heat transfer coefficient increased by decreasing particle diameter.

In this research, the convective heat transfer in the developed region of the tube flow containing water and Al2O3 nanofluid under constant heat flux was simulated using the Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) tools. Al2O3 nanoparticles with two average diameters of 20 nm and 50 nm were dispersed in water. The nanofluids with five different Al2O3 nanoparticle concentrations (0.2%, 1.0%, 1.5%, 2.0% and 2.5% volume fraction) were used. Effects of nanoparticle size and their concentrations on the convective heat transfer coefficient were also investigated.

Mathematical modeling

The nanofluid as a single phase fluid with different physical properties (density, thermal conductivity and viscosity) was applied for the simulation. Heat transfer and flow are considered by the continuity, momentum and energy equations (Izadi et al. 2009):

Continuity equation:
. ρ nf V m = 0
(1)
Momentum equation:
. ρ nf V m V m = P + . μ nf V m
(2)
Energy equation:
ρ nf V m TC = k nf T
(3)
The physical properties for above equation can be obtained (Ghasemi & Aminossadati 2009):
ρ nf = 1 ϕ ρ bf + ϕ ρ p
(4)
The effective heat capacity is calculated by (Ghasemi & Aminossadati 2011):
C nf = ϕ ρC p + 1 ϕ ρC bf ρ nf
(5)
The viscosities of nanofluid (with the average particle size of 20 and 50 nm) can be predicted by Einstein’s equation:
μ nf = μ bf 1 + 2.5 ϕ
(6)
In this research, the single-phase approach was applied. Solid particles with less than 100 nm diameter were spotted in the single-phase approach. Moreover, some necessary data for the thermal conductivities determination for various concentrations of nanofluid were obtained from the literature (ZeinaliHeris et al. 2007). Yu and Choi’s correlation (Yu & Choi 2003; Trisaksri & Wongwises 2007) was applied for the nanofluid effective thermal conductivity determination:
k nf = k p + 2 k bf + 2 k p - k bf 1 + β 3 ϕ k p + 2 k bf - 2 k p - k bf 1 + β 3 ϕ k bf
(7)

Where, β is the ratio of the nano-layer thickness to the original particle radius (β = 0.1) (Yu & Choi 2003). The rheological and physical properties of the nanofluid were calculated at the average bulk temperature.

As shown in Figure 1, a two dimensional pipe (with 1 m length and 6 mm inner diameter) was spotted in our simulation. The single phase approach was used for nanofluid simulation and effect of nanoparticle concentration on the convective heat transfer coefficient was investigated in the various Reynolds numbers (700 < Re < 2050).There were 20 meshes in the radial direction with a size ratio of 1 from the center to the wall. The constant heat flux of 1.8 (W/cm2) as a boundary condition at the pipe wall was applied.
Figure 1

Pipe numerical domain.

CFD simulation procedure

The geometry and the gird were generated using GAMBIT. The GAMBIT is an integrated preprocessor for CFD analysis. The sequences of GAMBIT steps are shown in Figure 2a. There are 20 meshes in the radial direction with a size ratio of 1 from the center to the wall. Further, there are 1000 meshes in the horizontal direction with an average size. The sequences of GAMBIT steps are shown in Figure 2a. The physical boundary conditions for the geometry are defined as inlet, outlet and wall of the pipe. The continuum was the fluid. Then, the mesh file was successfully conducted into the Fluent (version 6.3.26). For single phase approach, solid particles with diameter less than 100 nm were spotted. Therefore, single phase approach was adopted for nanofluid modeling (Moraveji et al. 2011). The fluid was entered the pipe with a constant velocity in each run. The initial temperature of fluid (at t = 0) was 25°C. The Symmetric option was chosen in the software. The constant heat flux of 1.8 (W/cm2) as a boundary condition at the pipe wall was applied.
Figure 2

Temperature map at the end part of the pipe for the nanofluid (20 nm & 2.5%). (a). GAMBIT steps during meshes generation. (b). Meshes generation. (c). U = 0.1664 (m/s). (d). U = 0.0706 (m/s).

Results and discussion

The local heat transfer coefficient and local Nusselt number were calculated using the following equations:
Nu x = h x D k
(8)
h nf x = q T w x T f x
(9)

Where, D, q, h nf , k, T w and T nf are pipe diameter, heat flux, nanofluid heat transfer coefficient, thermal conductivity of the fluid, tube wall temperature and nanofluid temperature, respectively.

Figure 2b demonstrates the meshes generation in this research. Figure 2c and d show temperature distribution at the end of pipe for velocity of 0.0706 and0.1664 (m/s) (or Re = 420 and 991.6) for nanofluid (with the particle diameter of 20 nm and volume fraction of 2.5). The nanofluid was heated by the pipe wall and its temperature increased along the pipe. The temperature of nanofluid along the pipe at Reynolds number of 420 varied sharper than that of Reynolds number of 991.6.Its reason was due to magnifying the heat transfer coefficient (He et al. 2009).

Figure 3a and b show heat transfer coefficient in the tube versus velocity for various concentrations of nanoparticles (with diameters of 20 and 50 nm). According to these figures, heat transfer coefficients increased by increasing the volume fraction and velocity.
Figure 3

(a). Heat transfer coefficient versus velocity for the nanofluid with particle size of 20 nm. (b). Heat transfer coefficient velocity for the nanofluid with particle size of 50 nm.

Figure 4a and b show heat transfer coefficients (h) and Nusselt (Nu) number in the tube versus velocity at particle concentrations of 2.5 and 2% for both particle sizes. As shown in these figures, heat transfer coefficients increased by increasing velocity and decreasing particle diameter. Furthermore, the nanofluid with average particle size of 20 nm showed the maximum heat transfer (Anoop et al. 2009).
Figure 4

(a) . Effect of particle size on the heat transfer coefficient in the various velocities. (b). Effect of particle size on the Nusselt number in the various velocities.

Figure 5 shows nanofluid temperature versus velocity for particles of 20 and 50 nm (for volume fractions of 2.5 and 2). As show in this figure, the nanofluid temperature decreased by increasing the particle size although a change in the volume fraction had no significant effect on the nanofluid temperature. The experimental results investigated by Anoop et al. (2009) were in very good agreement with our theoretical data and supported them.
Figure 5

Temperature of nanofluid versus velocity for various concentrations of nanoparticles.

Conclusions

In this article, the heat transfer coefficient in the developed region of pipe flow containing Al2O3-water nanofluid during the constant heat flux was simulated using CFD. The focal point of investigation was to evaluate the effect of particle size on convective heat transfer characteristics in the developed region of the tube flow containing water-Al2O3 nanofluid. It was observed that both nanofluids (with 20 and 50 nm particles size) showed higher heat transfer characteristics than that of the base fluid (water). Furthermore, the nanofluid with 20 nm particles size showed the highest heat transfer coefficient. The average heat transfer coefficient and Nusselt number increased by increasing the particle concentration and flow rate. The average temperature of nanofluid decreased by increasing the particles size.

Nomenclature

D diameter of the tube [m]

k thermal conductivity [W/m.K]

Nu Nusselt number

Re Reynolds number

T Temperature [K]

C specific heat (J/ kg.K )

q heat flux [W/]

x distance a long axis [m]

Subscripts

w wall

nf nanofluid

In inlet

p particle

Out outlet

bf base fluid

f fluid

Greek letters

μ viscosity (Pa.s)

ф volume fraction

Declarations

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Chemical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Arak University
(2)
Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Science, Arak University

References

  1. Abu-Nada E: Effects of variable viscosity and thermal conductivity of Al2O3–water nanofluid on heat transfer enhancement in natural convection. Int J Heat Fluid Flow 2009, 30: 679-690. 10.1016/j.ijheatfluidflow.2009.02.003View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahuja AS: Augmentation of heat transport in laminar flow of polystyrene suspension, I. Experimental and results. J Appl Phys 1975, 46(8):3408-3416. 10.1063/1.322107View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  3. Anoop KB, Sundararajan T, Das SK: Effect of particle size on the convective heat transfer in nanofluid in the developing region. Int J Heat Mass Transf 2009, 52: 2189-2195. 10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2007.11.063View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  4. Bergles AE: Recent development in convective heat transfer augmentation. Appl Mech Rev 1973, 26: 675-682.Google Scholar
  5. Bergles AE, Webb RL: Augmentation of convective heat and mass transfer. ASME, New York, N.Y.: Winter Annual Meeting of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers; 1970.Google Scholar
  6. Choi SUS, Eastman JA: Enhancing thermal conductivity of fluid with nanoparticles. San Francisco, CA: ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress & Exhibition; 1995.Google Scholar
  7. Choi SUS, Zhang ZG, Yu W, Lockwood FE, Grulke EA: Anomalous thermal conductivity enhancement in nanotube suspensions. Appl Phys Lett 2001, 79(14):2252-2254. 10.1063/1.1408272View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  8. Das SK, Putra N, Theisen P, Roetzel W: Temperature dependence of thermal conductivity enhancement for nanofluid. Journal of Heat Transfer 2003, 125: 567-574. 10.1115/1.1571080View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  9. Eastman JA, Choi SUS, Li S, Yu W, Thompson LJ: Anomalously increased effective thermal conductivities of ethylene glycol-based nanofluids containing copper nanoparticles. Appl Phys Lett 2001, 78(6):718-720. 10.1063/1.1341218View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  10. Ghasemi B, Aminossadati SM: Natural convection heat transfer in an inclined enclosure filled with a water-CuO nanofluid. Numerical Heat Transfer, Part A 2009, 55: 807-823. 10.1080/10407780902864623View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  11. Ghasemi B, Aminossadati SM: A numerical study on the forced convection of laminar nanofluid in a micro channel with both slip and no slip conditions. Numerical Heat Transfer, Part A 2011, 59: 114-129. 10.1080/10407782.2011.540964View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  12. He Y, Men Y, Zhao Y, Lu H, Ding Y: Numerical investigation into the convective heat transfer of TiO2nanofluids flowing through a straight tube under the laminar flow conditions. Appl Therm Eng 2009, 29: 1965-1972. 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2008.09.020View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  13. Izadi M, Behzadmehr A, Jalali-Vahid D: Numerical study of developing laminar forced convection of a nanofluid in an annulus. Int J Therm Sci 2009, 48: 2119-2129. 10.1016/j.ijthermalsci.2009.04.003View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  14. Keblinski P, Phillpot SR, Choi SUS, Eastman JA: Mechanism of heat flow in suspension of nano-sized particle (nanofluids). Int J Heat Mass Transf 2002, 45(4):855-863. 10.1016/S0017-9310(01)00175-2View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  15. Khanafer K, Vafai K, Lightstone M: Buoyancy-driven heat transfer enhancement in a two-dimensional enclosure utilizing nanofluids. Int J Heat Mass Transf 2003, 46(19):3639-3653. 10.1016/S0017-9310(03)00156-XView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  16. Lee S, Choi SUS, Li S, Eastman JA: Measuring thermal conductivity of fluids containing oxide nanoparticles. Journal of Heat Transfer 1999, 121: 280-289. 10.1115/1.2825978View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  17. Mirmasoumi S, Behzadmehr A: Effect of nanoparticles mean diameter on mixed convection heat transfer of a nanofluid in a horizontal tube. Int J Heat Fluid Flow 2008, 29: 557-566. 10.1016/j.ijheatfluidflow.2007.11.007View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  18. Moraveji MK, Darabi M, Hossein Haddad SM, Davarnejad R: Modeling of convective heat transfer of a nanofluid in the developing region of tube flow with computational fluid dynamics. Int Commun Heat Mass Transfer 2011, 38: 1291-1295. 10.1016/j.icheatmasstransfer.2011.06.011View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  19. Rezaee FK, Tayebi A: Energy destruction of forced convective (EG + AL2O3) nanofluid through a duct with constant wall temperature in contrast to (Ethylene Glycol) fluid. J Appl Sci 2010, 10(13):1279-1285.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  20. Sharma KV, SyamSundar L, Sarma PK: Estimation of heat transfer coefficient and friction factor in the transition flow with low volume concentration of Al2O3nanofluid flowing in a circular tube and with twisted tape insert. Int Commun Heat Mass Transfer 2009, 36: 503-507. 10.1016/j.icheatmasstransfer.2009.02.011View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  21. Trisaksri V, Wongwises S: Critical review of heat transfer characteristics of nanofluids. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2007, 11: 512-523. 10.1016/j.rser.2005.01.010View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  22. Wen D, Ding Y: Experimental investigation into convective heat transfer of nanofluids at the entrance region under laminar flow conditions. Int J Heat Mass Transf 2004, 47: 5181-5188. 10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2004.07.012View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  23. Xuan YM, Li Q: Heat transfer enhancement of nanofluids. Int J Heat Fluid Flow 2000, 21: 58-64. 10.1016/S0142-727X(99)00067-3View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  24. Xuan YM, Li Q: Investigation on convective heat transfer and flow features of nanofluids. Journal of Heat Transfer 2003, 125: 151-155. 10.1115/1.1532008View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  25. Xue Q, Xu WM: A model of thermal conductivity of nanofluids with interfacial shells. Mater Chem Phys 2005, 90(2):298-301. 10.1016/j.matchemphys.2004.05.029View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  26. Yu W, Choi SUS: The role of international layers in the enhanced thermal conductivity of nanofluids: A renovated Maxwell model. J Nanoparticle Res 2003, 5: 167-171.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  27. ZeinaliHeris S, Nasr Esfahany M, Etemad SG: Experimental investigation of convective heat transfer of Al2O3/water nanofluid in circular tube. Int J Heat Fluid Flow 2007, 28: 203-210. 10.1016/j.ijheatfluidflow.2006.05.001View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  28. Zhou DW: Heat transfer enhancement of copper nanofluid with acoustic cavitations. Int J Heat Mass Transf 2004, 47(14):3109-3117. 10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2004.02.018View ArticleGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© Davarnejad et al.; licensee Springer. 2013

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.