VOL. 13, NO.

4, FEBRUARY 2018 ISSN 1819-6608

ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences
©2006-2018 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com

EFFECT OF SURFACTANT ON CNT DISPERSION IN POLAR MEDIA

AND THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY OFPREPARED CNT NANOFLUIDS
Babita, S. K. Sharma, Shipra Mital Gupta and Arinjay Kumar
USCT, Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, Dwarka, India
E-Mail: skschem1964@gmail.com

ABSTRACT
Dispersion of carbon nanotubes (CNT) in aqueous media is a challenging task for their utilization in industrial
heat transfer applications. Since, CNT are hydrophobic in nature, so they remain unstable in polar base fluids. But, use of
surfactants has opened a new gateway for resolving the problem of CNT dispersion by attaching non-covalent hydrophilic
group onto the surface of CNT. This study reports a comparative analysis on the dispersion of CNT in water using three
surfactants SDBS, SDS, and GA. The CNT nanofluids were prepared under dynamic condition. Dispersion of CNT has
been characterized with the help of UV-vis spectroscopy. An optimum Surfactant⁄CNTs ratio has been determined for
each surfactant. This parameter has been shown to affect the dispersion of CNT in aqueous basefluid significantly. The
ratio above or below the optimum Surfactant⁄CNTs ratio effects the dispersion of CNT adversely. To analyze stability, the
prepared CNT nanofluids were kept under static condition and observed visually.

Keywords: surfactants, cnt, uv-spectroscopy, dispersion, stability.

INTRODUCTION rendering them soluble in aqueous phase. To date, various

Carbon nanotubes (CNT) based nanofluids have
attracted the attention of numerous researchers due to their
better heat transfer characteristics [Rastogi et al. 2008;
Wang 2009]. The effective dispersion of CNT in
conventional fluids is one of the critical step involved
during the preparation of CNT nanofluids. Dispersing
CNT is challenging. specially in polar basefluids, due to
their high aspect ratio, strong vander Waals forces
between CNT surfaces and their hydrophobic nature
[Wusiman et al. 2013; Chen et al. 2010]. CNT entangle
among themselves and agglomerate during dispersion
[Nasiri et al. 2011; Yazid et al. 2016]. Generally, two
treatments are used for the dispersion of CNT in basefluids
- physical and chemical treatment [Babita et al. 2016]. The
physical treatments include ultrasonication and high shear
homogenization of nanofluids. These processes are time
consuming and less efficient. Stability of the dispersion is
also poor [Rastogi et al. 2008]. It is reported that
ultrasonication time must be optimized because excessive
ultrasonication might introduce some defects [Babita et al.
2016]. The chemical treatments include covalent and non-
covalent functionalization. Covalent functionalization
involves covalent linkages of CNT with different
chemicals to improve their dispersion in basefluid [Rastogi
et al. 2008]. Non-covalent functionalization involves the
adsorption of ions onto the surface of nanotubes. It is
reported that non-covalent functionalization is much better
than covalent functionalization because non-covalent
functionalization does not alter the structure of CNT, thus
preserving its physical properties [Yazid et al. 2016].
Addition of surfactants is an effective and
economic way to get a better dispersion of CNT in
basefluids via non-covalent functionalization method
[Babita et al. 2016, Rastogi et al. 2008; Shanbedi et al.
2015]. Surfactants get adsorbed onto the surface of CNT
surfactants such as sodium dodecyl benzene sulfonate
(SDBS) [Sharma et al. 2016; Sadri et al. 2014; Kun et al.
2013; Kim et al. 2008; Tang et al. 2010; Clark et al. 2011;
Halelfadl et al. 2014; Teng et al. 2014; Estelle et al. 2015],
sodium lauryl sulfate (SDS) [Wsiman et al. 2013;
Shanbedi et al. 2015], gum arabic (GA) [Shanbedi et al.
2015; Walvekar et al. 2015], hexadecyl trimethyl
ammonium bromide (HTAB) [Kim et al. 2008; Song et al.
2015], chitosan [Phuoc et al. 2011], oleylamine [Xie et al.
2003], Triton X-100 [Tang et al. 2010], Polyvinyl
pyrrolidone [Park et al. 2009], etc., have been investigated
to disperse CNT in different basefluids in order to prepare
CNT nanofluids. Out of various investigated surfactants
most commonly used were SDS, SDBS, and GA.
Bystrzejewski et al. (2010)prepared CNT nanofluids using
SDS and SDBS and observed that both the surfactants
were helpful to prepare CNT nanofluids. They reported
that the surfactant’s structure affect the diameter of
agglomerated CNT dispersed in basefluid. Gum Arabic
(GA) is used to prepare a stable CNT nanofluid having
enhanced thermal conductivity [Rashmi et al. 2011;
Shanbedi et al. 2015; Sadri et al. 2014]. Sadri et al. (2014)
prepared CNT nanofluids using SDBS, SDS and GA to
study their thermo-physical properties by varying
ultrasonication time, temperature, etc. They observed that
CNT nanofluids prepared using GA have better thermal
conductivity than SDBS and SDS based CNT nanofluids.
But, addition of GA results in an increase in the viscosity
of nanofluids and requires more energy to pump the fluids.
Most of the available studies were focused on the thermo-
physical characterization like thermal conductivity [Ding
et al. 2006; Glory et al. 2008], viscosity [Ding et al. 2006;
Sadri et al. 2014], static stability [Glory et al. 2008;
Walvekar et al. 2015] etc. A summary of such studies is
given in Table-1.

1202
 VOL. 13, NO. 4, FEBRUARY 2018 ISSN 1819-6608
ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences
©2006-2018 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com

Table-1. Characteristics of CNT nanofluids.

Thermo-physical Characterization of
S. No. Base fluid Surfactant Reference
characteristics stability/Stability period
Bandyopadhyaya
1. Water GA TEM
et al. (2001)
Viscosity, thermal
Ding et al.
2. Water GA conductivity, convective
(2006)
heat transfer coefficient
TEM/UV-vis pectroscopy
3. Water SDS Yu et al. (2007)
Several months stability
visual observation and UV-
4. Water GA Thermal conductivity visible absorbance Glory et al. (2008)
More than 5 days stability
SDBS, PVP, UV-vis absorbance/ TEM/
5. DMAc Tang et al. (2010)
Triton X-100 SEM 2 months stability
Thermal conductivity
6. Water Gemini Zeta potential/FT-IR Chen et al. (2010)

7. Water DTAB, SOCT Viscosity TEM Madni et al. (2010)

TEM/SEM/DLS
8. Water SDS Thermal conductivity Nasiri et al. (2011)
Stable
Rashmi et al.
9. Water GA Thermal conductivity UV-vis spectroscopy
(2011)
10. Water SDBS Zeta Potential/DLS Ju et al. (2012)
DLS More than 8 months
11. Water SDBS Kun et al. (2013)
stability
SDBS, SDS, Thermal conductivity, TEM
12. Water Sadri et al. (2014)
GA viscosity More than 28 days stability
Static and centrifugal
sedimentation/Zeta
SDBS, SDS, Viscosity, thermal
13. Water potential/UV-vis Teng et al. (2014)
Chitoson conductivity
spectroscopy
Highly stable
Thermal conductivity,
Walvekar et al.
15. Water GA viscosity, density, Stable
(2015)
convective heat transfer
GA, SDS Viscosity, electrical Shanbedi et al.
16. Water Zeta potential
CTAB, conductivity (2015)

According to Table-1, only a few studies are
available in which the CNT nanofluids have been prepared
under dynamic conditions, which can be of researcher’s
interest for commercialization of CNT nanofluids. It is
reported that the preparedCNT nanofluids are stable but
only a few have reported the long term stability of CNT
nanofluids. In addition to that, it was also observed that
the stability is affected by type of surfactant,
surfactant/CNT ratio, ultrasonication time etc. [Madni et
al. 2010; Rashmi et al. 2011; Rastogi et al. 2008].
The present study confronts a comparative
analysis of three surfactants - SDBS, SDS, and GA for the
preparation of CNT nanofluids having long duration
stability under dynamic condition. This study provides
insight into parameters like concentration of CNT,
surfactant(s), etc. for the optimization of CNT dispersion
in water and to find out the best surfactant. UV-vis
spectroscopy has been employed to analyze the dispersion
ability of surfactants at different parameters. To observe
the stability, prepared CNT nanofluids were kept under
static conditions for a long period of time. The thermal
conductivity of the long term stable CNT nanofluids was
measured and it was found that CNT nanofluids have
much enhanced thermal conductivity than water.
MATERIALS
Double distilled water was used as basefluid in
all the experiments performed.Multi-walled carbon
nanotubes were used as nanoparticles. The industrial grade
carbon nanotubes were sourced from Nanostructured &
Amorphous Materials, Inc. USA. Surfactants sodium
dodecyl benzene sulfonate (SDBS), sodium dodecyl
sulfate (SDS) were procured from HiMedia Laboratories
Pvt. Ltd. and gum arabic (GA) from Qualikems Fine
Chem. Pvt. Ltd.
Quantification of CNT dispersion
The measurement of absorbance has become an
important evaluation for understanding dispersion
characteristics of surfactants. Based on Beer Lambert’s

1203
 VOL. 13, NO. 4, FEBRUARY 2018 ISSN 1819-6608
ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences
©2006-2018 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com

law, at low concentration, the concentration of particles 0.10

Surfactants
present in a liquid is directly proportional to its 0.09 SDBS
absorbance. The concentration of CNT present in the SDS
supernatant was measured by using UV-spectrophotometer 0.08
GA
(U-2190, HITACHI). The measurements were conducted 0.07

Absorbance (A)
at 800 nm wavelength as surfactants did not interfere with
0.06
the UV absorbance of CNT at this wavelength [Teng et al.
2014; Kun et al. 2013; Ju et al. 2012; Matarredona et al. 0.05
2003], shown in Figure-1. The calibration curve for 0.04
different surfactant based CNT nanofluids is shown in
Figure-2. 0.03

0.02

0.01

0.00
0 20 40 60 80 100
Concentration (ppm)
Figure-1. Absorbance versus concentration of surfactants
SDBA, SDS, and GA at 800 nm.

2
SDBS
1,8
SDS
1,6
GA
1,4
Absorbance (A)

1,2
1
0,8
0,6
0,4
0,2
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
CNT concentration (ppm)

Figure-2. Calibration curve for SDBS, SDS, and GA based CNT nanofluids at 800 nm.

Thermal conductivity measurement RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

For the measurement of thermal conductivity of
stable CNT nanofluids, KD2 Pro thermal property
analyzer of make Decagon devices, USA was used. The
apparatus is based on the working principle of transient
hot-wire method. It is equipped with a 60 mm long and 1.3
mm in diameter probe which incorporates a heating
element and a thermo-resistor. The probe is connected to a
microprocessor for controlling and conducting the
measurements. To estimate the error in measurements, the
apparatus was calibrated with glycerin. After calibration,
the thermal conductivity of CNT nanofluids was measured
at room temperature. To obtain accuracy in results, three
different measurements were taken for each sample and
averaged.
Effect of surfactant on the dispersion of CNT
It has been reported that surfactants are helpful in
dispersing CNT especially in polar solvents like water.
Surfactants acts like a bridge between the surfaces of
carbon nanotubes and basefluid and built continuity
between them which results in the dispersion CNT in polar
basefluid [Mukherjee and 2013; Yu et al. 2012]. In this
study three different surfactants SDBS, SDS and GA were
used for the proper dispersion of CNT in water. Fig. 3
shows the dispersion of CNT in different surfactant-water
solution. From Figure-3, it can be observed dispersion of
CNT in water is effected by the type of surfactant used for
CNT nanofluids preparation. Maximum dispersion of CNT
was obtained when SDS was used as surfactant for the
preparation of CNT nanofluids in comparison to SDBS
and GA based CNT nanofluids prepared under same

1204
 VOL. 13, NO. 4, FEBRUARY 2018 ISSN 1819-6608
ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences
©2006-2018 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com

conditions. So, it is concluded that different surfactants Effect of initial CNT concentration and surfactant/
added in same amount have varying capability to disperse CNT ratio on the dispersion of CNT for each
different amount of CNT. surfactant
On the basis of Fig. 3 results, it is concluded that
0.18 type of surfactant used for the preparation of CNT
nanofluids is an important parameter which can affect the
0.16
dispersion of CNT in water. So, to check whether
dispersion of CNT is also dependent on initial
Dispersion of CNTs (wt%)

0.14
concentration of CNT added and surfactant/CNT ratio
0.12
both are varied from 0.274 wt% to 0.461 wt% and 1 to 3
0.10 respectively for CNT nanofluids prepared using SDS only.
Figure-4 shows the results obtained when initial
0.08
concentration of CNT and surfactant/CNT ratio was
0.06 changed. From Figure-4a, it is observed that dispersion of
CNT initially increased when initial CNT concentration
0.04
was increased and further increase in initial CNT
0.02 concentration caused a reduction in the dispersion of CNT
keeping surfactant/CNT constant i.e. 1. From Figure-4b, it
0.00
SDBS SDS GA is observed that at constant initial CNT concentration with
Surfactants an increase in surfactant/CNT ratio, the dispersion of CNT
decreased. So, from Figure-4 it can be inferred that initial
Figure-3. Calculated dispersion of carbon nanotubes into CNT concentration as well as surfactant/CNT ratio affect
surfactant-water solution at 1:1 surfactant/CNT ratio. the dispersion of CNT.

0.21 0.17
(a) (b)
0.20 0.16
0.19
DIspersion of CNTs (wt%)

Dispersion of CNTs (wt%)

0.15
0.18
0.14
0.17
0.13
0.16
0.12
0.15
0.11
0.14
0.10
0.13
0.09
0.12

0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 0.08

1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Initial CNTs conc. (wt%)
Surfactant/CNTs ratio

Figure-4. Effect of (a) initial CNT concentration and (b) surfactant/CNT ratio on the dispersion of CNT.

Based on the results obtained in Figure-4, the
effect of initial CNT concentration at different
surfactant/CNT ratio was checked on the dispersion of
CNT for each surfactant, shown in Figure-5. From Figure-
5 it is observed that initial CNT concentration and
surfactant/CNT ratio effect the dispersion of CNT for
CNT nanofluid prepared using SDBS (a), SDS (b), and
GA (c). According to Rastogi et al. (2008), to disperse
CNT in water, molecules of surfactant orient themselves in
such a way that hydrophobic tail face toward the carbon
nanotubes surface while hydrophilic head face towards the
aqueous phase, which helps in lowering the interfacial
tension between nanotubes and water. So, dispersion of
CNT in water is strongly dependent on how firmly the
surfactants get adsorbed onto the surface of CNT. In
Figure-5a, shows the dispersion of CNT when SDBS was
used as surfactant for the preparation of CNT nanofluids.
It is inferred that as the initial CNT concentration increase
the dispersion of CNT increased and further increase in
concentration cause a reduction in the dispersion of CNT
to a very low value. But this trend is followed only in case
when surfactant/CNT is 1 and 2. When the ratio is 3 then
there was almost a linear decrease in the dispersion of
CNT i.e. as the initial CNT concentration increase the
dispersion of CNT decreased. The maximum dispersion of
CNT when SDBS was used as surfactant was obtained
when the initial CNT concentration was 0.36 wt% and
surfactant/CNT ratio 1. The effect of initial CNT
concentration on the CNT dispersion when CNT nanofluid
were prepared using SDS is shown in Figure-5b, In this

1205
 VOL. 13, NO. 4, FEBRUARY 2018 ISSN 1819-6608
ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences
©2006-2018 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com

case, the dispersion of CNT first increased and then different trend. There was no effect on the dispersion of
decreased with an increase in the initial CNT CNT as the initial CNT concentration was increased when
concentration for all the surfactant/CNT ratios. For SDS surfactant/CNT ratio was 1. When surfactant/CNT ratio
based CNT nanofluid, the maximum dispersion of CNT was 2 and 3 the dispersion of CNT continuously decreased
was also obtained when initial CNT concentration and with an increase in initial CNT concentration. In this case,
surfactant/CNT ratio were 0.36 wt% and 1 respectively. the maximum dispersion of CNT was obtained when
Fig. 5c, shows the dispersion of CNT at different initial initial CNT concentration and surfactant/CNT ratio were
CNT concentration and at different surfactant/CNT ratio 0.275 wt% and 3 respectively.
when CNT nanofluid was prepared using GA. It follows a

0.12 0.21
(b) Surfactant/CNT ratio
(a) Surfactant/CNT ratio 0.20
1 1
0.11 0.19 2
2
0.18 3

Dispersion of CNT (wt%)

3
Dispersion of CNT (wt%)

0.10
0.17
0.09 0.16
0.15
0.08
0.14
0.07 0.13
0.12
0.06 0.11
0.10
0.05
0.09
0.04 0.08
0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 0.55
0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 0.55
Initial CNT conc. (wt%)
Initial CNT conc. (wt%)
0.18
(c) Surfactant/CNT ratio
0.17 1
2
0.16
3
Dispersion of CNT (wt%)

0.15

0.14

0.13

0.12

0.11

0.10

0.09

0.08
0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50
Initial CNT conc. (wt%)

Figure-5. Initial concentration of CNT versus dispersion of CNT for (a) SDBS, (b) SDS, and (c) GA.

Comparison between SDBS, SDS, and GA However, when the surfactant/CNT ratio was 3 as shown
Based on the above results, a comparison has in Figure-6c, maximum dispersion was obtained when
been done on the basis of the dispersion of CNT obtained 0.275 wt% GA was used as surfactant for CNT nanofluid
among SDBS, SDS, and GA based CNT nanofluids. In fig. preparation. Comparing at 0.36 wt%, maximum dispersion
6, initial CNT concentration was plotted against dispersion of CNT was again obtained when SDS was used as
of CNT obtained when SDBS, SDS, and GA were used for surfactant.
the preparation of CNT nanofluids for surfactant/CNT Figure-7 is plotted between surfactant/CNT ratio
ratio 1, 2 and 3, individually. From Figures 6a and 6b, at and dispersion of CNT for SDBS, SDS, and GA based
ratio 1 and 2, it was observed that the maximum dispersion CNT nanofluids fixing the initial CNT concentration.
was obtained when CNT nanofluid prepared using SDS in When initial CNT concentration was 0.274 wt% (Fig. 7a),
comparison to SDBS and GA based CNT nanofluids. the dispersion of CNT is decreases in an almost linear

1206
 VOL. 13, NO. 4, FEBRUARY 2018 ISSN 1819-6608
ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences
©2006-2018 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com

pattern when surfactant/CNT ratio was increased from 1 to
3 for SDBS and SDS based CNT nanofluids. For GA
based CNT nanofluid the dispersion of CNT increased
with an increase in the surfactant/CNT ratio from 1 to 3.
Similarly when initial concentration was 0.36 wt% and
0.461 wt%, the dispersion of CNT decrease with an
increase in surfactant/CNT for SDBS and SDS based CNT
nanofluids but it increased with an increase in the
surfactant/CNT ratio when GA was used surfactant for the
preparation of CNT nanofluid.

0.20
0.20 (a) Surfactants (b) Surfactants
SDBS 0.18 SDBS
SDS SDS

Dispersion of CNT (wt%)

GA GA
Dispersion of CNT (wt%)

0.16

0.15 0.14

0.12

0.10
0.10
0.08

0.06

0.05
0.04
0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50
Initial CNT conc. (wt%) Initial CNT conc. (wt%)
0.18
(c) Surfactants
SDBS
0.16
SDS
GA
Dispersion of CNT (wt%)

0.14

0.12

0.10

0.08

0.06

0.04

0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50

Initial CNT conc. (wt%)
Figure-6. Initial CNT concentration versus dispersion of CNT surfactant/CNT (a) Ratio 1, (b) Ratio 2, and (c) Ratio 3.

1207
 VOL. 13, NO. 4, FEBRUARY 2018 ISSN 1819-6608
ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences
©2006-2018 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com

0.22 0.22
Surfactants (a) (b) Surfactants
0.20 SDBS 0.20 SDBS
SDS

Dispersion of CNT (wt%)

SDS
0.18 GA 0.18 GA
Disperson of CNT (wt%)

0.16 0.16

0.14 0.14

0.12 0.12

0.10 0.10

0.08 0.08

0.06 0.06

1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Surfactant/CNT ratio Surfactant/CNT ratio
0.16
(c) Surfactants
0.15
SDBS
0.14 SDS
GA
Dispersion of CNT (wt%)

0.13
0.12
0.11
0.10
0.09
0.08
0.07
0.06
0.05
0.04

1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0

Surfactant/CNT ratio
Figure-7. Surfactant/CNT ratio versus Dispersion of CNT for concentration (a) 0.274 wt%, (b) 0.36 wt%, and (c) 0.461
wt%.

Stability of CNT nanofluids Thermal conductivity of surfactant based CNT

According to Derjaguin, Verway, Landau and
Overbeek (DLVO) theory [Paramashivaiah and
Rajashekha 2016], the dispersion stability of nanoparticles
in basefluids is determined by sum of vander Waals
attractive forces between nanoparticles when they come
closer to each other during the Brownian motion within
the basefluid. If the vander Waals attractive forces are
larger than repulsive force, the nanoparticles that collide or
come closer may adhere together and form agglomerates
whose size increases with the advent of time which may
settle down due to gravitational effect and hence the
suspension becomes unstable. When CNT nanofluids
prepared are without the use of surfactants, then, due to
the lack of electrostatic or steric repulsion, vander Waals
attractive forces dominates, which causes formation of
agglomerates. Addition of surfactants prevents the
formation of nanoparticle agglomerates by adsorbing onto
the surface of nanoparticles. In this study, the CNT
nanofluids prepared under dynamic conditions and then
kept under static condition were found to be stable for
more than a year. It was observed that there was no visible
settling at the bottoms of the tubes in which nanofluids
was kept.
nanofluids
In Figure-8 the thermal conductivity of CNT
nanofluids to that of basefluid has been plotted. In Figure-
8 (a) SDS based CNT nanofluids thermal conductivity
data has been provided and showed that thermal
conductivity of CNT nanofluids is dependent on the
dispersion of CNT [Glory et al. 2008; Halelfadl et al.
2014]. It showed that as the dispersion of CNT increased,
thermal conductivity ratio was also increased. In addition
to that thermal conductivity of different surfactant based
CNT nanofluids was also measured at their optimum
condition. According to Figure-8 (b), it was observed that
in addition to CNT dispersion the thermal conductivity of
CNT nanofluids is also dependent on the surfactant. For
example, the dispersion of CNT in GA based CNT
nanofluid was higher than that of SDBS based CNT
nanofluid, so its thermal conductivity was also high. But,
dispersion was much better in SDS based CNT nanofluid
than GA based CNT nanofluid but thermal conductivity
was lesser in SDS than GA based CNT nanofluid. The
thermal conductivity of CNT nanofluids is found to be
very high in comparison to water. The main reason behind
such a large enhancement in thermal conductivity could be
the high aspect ratio of CNT and the stability of prepared
CNT nanofluids [Walvekar et al. 2015; Estelle et al.
2015].

1208
 VOL. 13, NO. 4, FEBRUARY 2018 ISSN 1819-6608
ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences
©2006-2018 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com

10
(b)
7.6 (a)

8
7.4

7.2
6

knf/kbf
knf/kbf

7.0

4
6.8

6.6
2
6.4

6.2 0
0.12 0.13 0.14 0.15 0.16 0.17 0.18 0.19 0.20 0.21 SDBS SDS GA
Dispersion of CNT (wt%) Surfactants

Figure-8. Thermal conductivity of CNT nanofluids (a) SDS based CNT nanofluids, (b) SDBS
(Ratio 1), SDS (Ratio 1), and GA (Ratio 3) based CNT nanofluids at optimum condition

CONCLUSIONS [3] K. Wusiman, H. Jeong, K. Tulugan, H. Afrianto, H.

For a comparative study of dispersion of CNT in
water, three surfactants, namely SDBS, SDS, and GA
were analyzed. The main motive of this study was to
analyze the parameters responsible for the dispersion
ability of a surfactant. With this aim UV-vis spectroscopy
method was utilized to find out the concentration of CNT.
Based on experimental data the dispersion ability of
surfactants was observed. The dispersing power of
surfactant is SDS > 𝐺 > 𝑆𝐷 𝑆. Surfactant SDS shows
the highest dispersion of CNT in water among three
surfactants. The key finding of the present study is the
significance of optimum surfactant⁄CNT ratio. For SDS
and SDBS based CNT nanofluids the
optimumsurfactant⁄CNT ratio was found to be 1 and
above this dispersion decreased while it is 3in case of
surfactant GA and below this dispersion of CNT is low.
Thus surfactant should be just sufficient so that they coat
the surface of CNT to provide steric hindrance between
CNT. High or low concentration other than optimum,
effect the dispersion of CNT adversely. The thermal
conductivity of CNT nanofluids was found to be higher
than that of basefluid. Thermal conductivity was found to
be dependent on the concentration of CNTs, its stability
and type of surfactant used to prepare CNT nanofluids an.
REFERENCES
[1] R. Rastogi, R. Kaushal, S. K. Tripathi, A. L. Sharma,
I. Kaur, L. M. Bharadwaj. 2008. Comparative study of
carbon nanotube dispersion using surfactants. Journal
of Colloid and Interface Science. 328: 421-428.
[2] H. Wang. 2009. Dipersing carbon nanotubes using
surfactants. Current opinion in Colloid & Interface
Science. 14: 364-371.
Chung. 2013. Thermal performance of multi-walled
carbon nanotubes (MWCNT) in aqueous suspensions
with surfactants SDBS and SDS, Int. Commun. Heat
Mass Transfer. 41: 28-33.
[4] L. Chen, H. Xie. 2010. Properties of carbon nanotubes
nanofluids stabilized by cationic Gemini surfactant,
Thermochimica Acta. 62-66.
[5] A. Nasiri, M.S. -Niasar, A. Rashidi, A. Amrollahi, R.
Khodafarin. 2011. Effect of dispersion method on
thermal conductivity and stability of nanofluid, Exp.
Therm. Fluid Sci. 35: 717-723.
[6] M.N.A.W.M. Yazid, N.A.C. Sidik, R. Mamat, G.
Najafi. 2016. A review of the impact of preparation
on stability of carbon nanotube nanofluids, Int.
Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer. 78: 253-
263.
[7] Babita, S.K. Sharma, Shipra Mital Gupta. 2016.
Preparation and evaluation of stable nanofluids for
heat transfer application: A review Experimental
Thermal and Fluid Science. 79: 202-212.
[8] M. Shanbedi, S.Z. Heris, A. Maskooki. 2015.
Experimental investigation of stability and thermos-
physicalproperties of carbon nanotubes suspension in
the presence of different surfactants, J. Therm. Anal.
Calorim. 120: 1193-1201.

1209
 VOL. 13, NO. 4, FEBRUARY 2018
ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences
©2006-2018 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.
www.arpnjournals.com
[9] S.K. Sharma, Babita, Shipra Mital Gupta. 2016.
Preparation of stable CNT nanofluids for heat transfer
applications. PetroTech, India.
[10] R. Sadri, G. Ahmadi, H. Togun, M. Dahari, S.N. Kazi,
E. Sadeghinezhad, N. Zubir. 2014. An experimental
study on thermal conductivity and viscosity of
nanofluids containing carbon nanotubes, Nanoscale
Res. Lett. 9(151).
[11] Y. Kun, Y. Z. Li, J. Q. Feng, Y. R.. Liang, J. Wei, L.
D. Hui. 2013. Sonication-assisted dispersion of
carbon nanotubes in aqueoussolutions of the anionic
surfactant SDBS: The role ofsonication energy, Chin.
Sci. Bull. 58(17): 2082-2090.
[12] H.S. Kim, W.I Park, M. Kang, H.J. Jin. 2008.
Multiple light scattering measurement and stability
analysis of aqueous carbon nanotube dispersions, J.
Phys. Chem. Solids. 69: 1209-1212.
[13] Q.Y. Tang, I. Shafiq, Y.C. Chan, N.B. Wong, R.
Cheung. 2010. Study of the Dispersion and Electrical
Properties of Carbon Nanotubes Treated by
Surfactants in Dimethylacetamide, J. Nanosci.
Nanotechnol. 10: 4967–4974.
[14] MichaelD. Clark, Sachin Subramanian, Ramanan
Krishnamoorti. 2011. Understanding surfactant aided
aqueous dispersion of multi-walled carbon nanotubes.
Journal of Colloid and Interface Science. 354: 144-
151.
[15] S. Halelfadl, T. Mare, P. Estelle. 2014. Efficiency of
carbon nanotubes water based nanofluids as coolants,
Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 53: 104-110.
[16] T.P. Teng, Y.B. Fang, Y.C. Hsu, L. Lin. 2014.
Evaluating stability of aqueous multiwalled carbon
nanotube nanofluids by using different stabilizers, J.
Nanomater. 693459, p. 15.
[17] P. Estelle, S. Halelfadl, T. Mare. 2015. Thermal
conductivity of CNT water based nanofluids:
Experimental trends and models overview, Journal of
Thermal Engineering. 1(2): 381-390.
[18] R. Walvekar, M.K. Siddiqui, S.S. Ong, A.F. Ismail.
2015. Application of CNT nanofluids in a turbulent
flow heat exchanger, J. Exp. Nanosci. 10(1): 1-17.
ISSN 1819-6608
[19] Y.Y. Song, H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia, D.W. Suh. 2015.
Stability of stainless-steel nanoparticle and water
mixtures, Powder Technol. 272: 34-44.
[20] T.X. Phuoc, M. Massoudi, R, H. Chen. 2011.
Viscosity and thermal conductivity of nanofluids
containing multi-walled carbon nanotubes stabilized
by chitosan, Int. J. Therm. Sci. 50: 12-18.
[21] H. Xie, H. Lee, W. Youn, M. Choi. 2003. Nanofluids
containing multi-walled carbon nano-tubes and their
enhanced thermal conductivities, J. Appl. Phys. 94(8):
4967-4971.
[22] K.J. Park, D. Jung, S.E. Shim. 2009. Nucleate boiling
heat transfer in aqueous solutions with carbon
nanotubes up to critical heat fluxes, Int. J. Multiphase
Flow. 35(6): 525-532.
[23] Bystrzejewski M, Huczko A, Lange H, Gemming T,
Buchner B, Rummeli M. 2010. Dispersion and
diameter separation of multi-walled carnon nanotubes
in aqueous solutions, Journal of Colloid and Interface
Science. 345: 138-142.
[24] W. Rashmi, A.F. Ismail, I. Sopyan, A.T. Jameel, F.
Yusof, M. Khalid, N.M. Mubarak. 2011. Stability and
thermal conductivity enhancement of carbon nanotube
nanofluid using gum arabic, J. Exp. Nanosci. (6): 567-
579.
[25] Y. Ding, H. Alias, D. Wen, R. A. Williams. 2006.
Heat transfer of aqueous suspensions of carbon
nanotubes (CNT nanofluids), International journal of
Heat and Mass Transfer. 49: 240-250.
[26] J. Glory, M. Bonetti, M. Helezen, L. Mayne, M.
Hermite, C. Reynaud. 2008. Thermal and electrical
conductivities of water-based nanofluids prepared
with long multiwalled carbon nanotubes, Journal of
applied physics. 103: 094309 1-7.
[27] Rajdip Bandyopadhyaya, Einat Nativ-Roth, Oren
Regev, and Rachel Yerushalmi-Rozen. 2001.
Stabilization of Individual Carbon Nanotubes in
Aqueous Solutions, Nano Letters. 2(1): 25-28.
[28] L. Ju, W. Zhang, X. Wang, J. Hu, Y. Zhang. 2012.
Aggregation kinetics of SDBS dispersed carbon
nanotubes in different aqueous suspensions, Colloids
Surf. A. 409: 159-166.
[29] Y. Kun, Y. Z. Li, J. Q. Feng, Y. R.. Liang, J. Wei, L.
D. Hui. 2013. Sonication-assisted dispersion of
1210
 VOL. 13, NO. 4, FEBRUARY 2018 ISSN 1819-6608
ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences
©2006-2018 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com

carbon nanotubes in aqueous solutions of the anionic

surfactant SDBS: The role of sonication energy, Chin.
Sci. Bull. 58(17): 2082-2090.

[30] A. Nasiri, M. S. Niasar, A. Rashidi, A. Amrollahi, R.

Khodafarin. 2011. Effect of dispersion method on
thermal conductivity and stability of nanofluid, Exp.
Therm. Fluid Sci. 35: 717-723.

[31] J. Yu, N. Grossiord, C.E. Koning, J. Loos. 2007.

Controlling the dispersion of multi-wall carbon
nanotubes in aqueous surfactant solution, Carbon. 45:
618-623.

[32] Madni, C.Y. Hwang, S. D. Park, Y.H. Choaa, H. T.

Kim. 2010. Mixed surfactant system for stable
suspension of multiwalled carbon nanotubes, Colloids
and Surfaces A. 358: 101-107.

[33] W. Rashmi, A.F. Ismail, I. Sopyan, A.T. Jameel, F.

Yusof, M. Khalid, N.M. Mubarak. 2011. Stability and
thermal conductivity enhancement of carbon nanotube
nanofluid using gum arabic, J. Exp. Nanosci. (6): 567-
579.

[34] O. Matarredona, H. Rhoads, Z. Li, J.H. Harwell, L.

Balzano, D.E. Resasco. 2003. Dispersion of single-
walled carbon nanotubes in aqueous solutions of the
anionic surfactant NaDDBS, J. Phys. Chem. B. 107:
13357-13367.

[35] S. Mukherjee, S. Paria. 2013. Preparation and stability

of nanofluids - A Review, IOSR-J. Mech. Civ. Eng. 9:
63-69.

[36] H. Yu, S. Hermann, S.E. Schulz, T. Gessner, Z. Dong,

W.J. Li. 2012. Optimizing sonication parameters for
dispersion of single-walled carbon nanotubes, Chem.
Phys. 408: 11-16.

[37] B M Paramashivaiah1 and C R Rajashekhar. 2016.

Studies on effect of various surfactants on stable
dispersion of graphene nano particles in simarouba
biodiesel. IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and
Engineering. 149, 012083 doi:10.1088/1757-
899X/149/1/012083.

1211