See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/285674038

Comparison of the effects of Al2O3 and CuO nanoparticles on the performance

of a solar flat-plate collector

Article  in  Journal of Non-Equilibrium Thermodynamics · December 2015

DOI: 10.1515/jnet-2015-0019

CITATIONS READS

6 258

3 authors, including:

Dinesh Babu Munuswamy Venkata Ramanan

Panimalar Engineering College Anna University, Chennai
28 PUBLICATIONS   952 CITATIONS    21 PUBLICATIONS   347 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

solar energy View project

Taguchi View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Dinesh Babu Munuswamy on 13 March 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 DOI 10.1515/jnet-2015-0019 | J. Non-Equilib. Thermodyn. 2015; 40 (4):265–273

Research Article

Dinesh Babu Munuswamy*, Venkata Ramanan Madhavan and Mukunthan Mohan

Comparison of the effects of Al2O3 and CuO nanoparticles
on the performance of a solar flat-plate collector
Abstract: To improve the efficiency of solar flat-plate collectors further, a study had been carried out wherein
the conventional working fluid was replaced by nanofluids. A 25-L/day solar flat-plate water heater with col-
lector area of 0.5 m2 has been designed and fabricated. The thermosyphon system of the solar water heater
was monitored at 15 locations using T-type thermocouples. Alumina and CuO nanoparticles were synthe-
sized and characterized using Brunauer–Emmett–Teller and X-ray diffraction techniques and dispersed us-
ing ultrasonic mechanism. To stabilize the system at an optimum level, the collector is operated with volume
fractions of 0.2% and 0.4% of synthesized Al2 O3 and CuO nanoparticles mixed with distilled water and used
in the solar flat-plate collector. The temperature profile was compared with different volume fractions of the
nanoparticles in the flowing medium. Enhanced heat transfer was observed in the solar flat-plate collector
using nanoparticles, and hence, it is inferred that addition of nanoparticles improves the efficiency of the so-
lar water heaters. This paper details the temperature profile observed in the collectors, variation of insolation
over the day, and change in efficiency both on the primary side (collector) and on the secondary side (storage
tank) of the solar water heater.

Keywords: Flat-plate collector, nanoparticles, solar water heater, surface area determination using Brunauer–
Emmett–Teller (BET) by adsorption

||
*Corresponding author: Dinesh Babu Munuswamy: Department of Mechanical Engineering, RMK Engineering College,
Kavaraipettai, Chennai, India, e-mail: dinesh198014@yahoo.com
Venkata Ramanan Madhavan: Institute for Energy Studies, College of Engineering Guindy Campus, Anna University,
Chennai 600025, India, e-mail: venkat@annauniv.edu
Mukunthan Mohan: Water and Steam Chemistry Division, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Kalpakkam, India,
e-mail: mukunth1975@gmail.com

1 Introduction
Solar energy plays a vital role in energy conservation and has become a well-proven appliance for catering
to hot-water requirements. Solar water heating is a very simple and efficient way to use energy from the sun,
despite its low average efficiency (35%–50%). Hence, any improvement in the construction and operation of
solar water-heating system would definitely result in savings in the initial investment. Among the types of
solar water heating systems, flat plate is preferred owing to its ruggedness and generation of hot water in the
moderate temperature range (60 ∘ C–90 ∘ C) without any requirement for tracking mechanisms. Said, Sabiha
and Saidur [1] studied the use of TiO2 + water nanofluid as working fluid for enhancing the performance of a
flat-plate solar collector. The volume fractions of the nanoparticles were 0.1% and 0.3%, respectively, whereas
the mass flow rates of the nanofluid varied from 0.5 to 1.5 kg/min, respectively. The results reveal the impact
and importance of each of these parameters. Energy efficiency increased by 76.6% for 0.1% volume fraction
and 0.5 kg/min flow rate, whereas the highest exergy efficiency achieved was 16.9% for 0.1% volume fraction
and 0.5 kg/min flow rate. Results showed that the pressure drop and pumping power of the TiO2 nanofluid
was very close to the base fluid for the studied volume fractions. Jamal-Abad et al. [2] examined the effect of
Cu nanoparticles on flat-plate collector efficiency. According to experimental results, the collector efficiency
was higher when the concentration of nanoparticles was increased, and the results show that the collector
efficiency at 0.05 wt% was approximately 24% more than that of the pure base fluids for given conditions.

Brought to you by | Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan

Authenticated
Download Date | 12/28/15 5:46 PM
266 | D. B. Munuswamy et al., Performance of a solar flat-plate collector

Hussain, Jawad and Sultan [3] studied the performance of an evacuated tube solar collector when silver (Ag,
30 nm) + distilled water and zirconium oxide (ZrO2 , 50 nm) + distilled water nanofluid were used as the work-
ing fluids. The result showed that the solar collector efficiency for the Ag (30 nm) + distilled water nanofluid
was greater than the ZrO2 (50 nm) + distilled water nanofluid due to the small particle size of Ag compared
with ZrO2 . The type of nanofluid is a key factor for heat transfer enhancement and improves the performance
of evacuated tube solar collector. Sokhansefat, Kasaeian and Kowsary [4] numerically investigated the heat
transfer enhancement for Al2 O3 + synthetic oil nanofluid with concentrations up to 5% in a parabolic trough
collector tube at different operational temperatures. Singh et al. [5] added Cu to commercial solar heat trans-
fer fluids (Therminol 59 [TH59] and Therminol 66 [TH66]) by the combination of temperature and ultrasonic
ripening processes. They stated that surfactant selection has an important role in preparing stable nanoflu-
ids. Choosing the right surfactant is mainly dependent on the properties of the base fluids and particles.
They concluded that Cu + TH66 nanofluids appear to be more stable than the Cu + TH59 nanofluids because
of the higher dynamic viscosity. Yousefi et al. [6, 7] experimentally studied the effect of Al2 O3 (15 nm) and
MWCNT (10–30 nm) water nanofluids on the efficiency of a flat-plate solar collector. The weight fractions of
the nanoparticles were 0.2% and 0.4%, and the experiments were performed with and without Triton X-100 as
surfactant. Their findings showed that the surfactant’s presence in the nanofluid extremely affects the solar
collector’s efficiency. Lenert and Wang [8] presented a model and experimental study of concentrated solar
power application using carbon-coated cobalt (C-Co) nanoparticles and Therminol VP-1 base fluid and con-
cluded that the efficiency is more than 35% with nanofluid and increases with increasing nanofluid height.
Lu, Liu and Xiao [9] showed that application of copper oxide (CuO) nanoparticles in evacuated tubular so-
lar collector significantly enhances the thermal performance of evaporator and the evaporating heat transfer
coefficient increased by 30% compared to water as working fluid. Nearly 5% improvement in efficiency was
noted by Otanicar et al. [10] using different nanoparticles with water as base fluid for micro-solar-thermal col-
lector. Suresh et al. [11] performed a comparative study on AI2 O3 + water and CuO + water for helical screw tape
inserts with twist ratio (length/diameter), and the results show that the CuO + water nanofluid gives a better
performance than the Al2 O3 + water nanofluid. Asirvatham et al. [12] investigated the heat transfer charac-
teristics of the Ag + water nanofluid in a solar flatplate collector. An increase in the performance of nanofluid
is also witnessed when compared to the base fluid, which has a strong dependence on volume concentra-
tion and mass flow rate. Tyagi, Phelan and Prasher [13] theoretically compared the conventional flat-plate
collector with a direct absorption solar collector (DAC) and observed the former to be 10% more efficient. An
experimental study by Robert et al. [14] on nanofluid-based direct absorption solar collector demonstrated
an efficiency improvement up to 5% in solar thermal collectors using nanofluids as an absorption mecha-
nism. Waghole et al. [15], in their experimental investigations on heat transfer, friction factor of Ag nanofluid
in absorber, or receiver of parabolic trough collector with twisted tape inserts, concluded that when twisted
tape inserts are used, the result shows a greatly enhanced heat transfer rate in the absorber as well as higher
heat transfer coefficient and friction factor of 0.1% volume concentration of Ag nanofluid, as compared with
water flow in the absorber. Ghasemi and Mehdizadeh Ahangar [16] studied solar parabolic trough collectors
with Cu-water nanofluid through numerical analysis, and they concluded that copper nanoparticles inside
the base fluid also considerably improve its heat gain capacity. Thus, they noted in the analysis that ther-
mal and optical efficiencies are improved. This leads to the conclusion that the nanofluid-based parabolic
concentrator has a higher efficiency compared with the conventional collector. Kundan and Sharma [17] eval-
uated the CuO + water nanofluid-based low-flux solar collector. They concluded that when CuO nanofluids
are used in DAC, the efficiency increases in the order of 4% to 6%, which is comparable with water and CuO
nanofluid with 0.005% volume fraction, with a gain of 2%–2.5% in efficiency than the 0.05% volume fraction.
They also conclude that a higher efficiency is obtained due to the very small size particle, which increases
the absorption capacity of the nanofluid. The efficiency of the solar collector increased by 4%–6%. Madadi,
Tavakoli and Rahimi [18] studied the energy and exergy performance of a parabolic dish collector, and three
aperture diameters are considered. Fully opened receivers were deduced to have the greatest exergy and ther-
mal efficiency. This study compares the influence of nanofluid on the efficiency of the solar water heater. As
the volume fraction increases, the heat transfer rate also increases considerably. To stabilize the system at
optimum level, the collector is operated with very low weight fractions of 0.2% and 0.4% of the synthesized

Brought to you by | Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan

Authenticated
Download Date | 12/28/15 5:46 PM
 D. B. Munuswamy et al., Performance of a solar flat-plate collector | 267

Al2 O3 and CuO nanoparticle. The temperature profile was compared with different weight fractions of the
nanoparticles in the flowing medium. The aim of current work is to study the effect of synthesized Al2 O3 and
CuO nanoparticle as the absorbing medium on the efficiency of 25-L/day (LPD) flat-plate solar water heaters.

2 Synthesis of nanoparticles
Nanoparticles are generally synthesized by four methods, viz., sol gel, attrition, vapor deposition, and com-
bustion. In the present study, chemical combustion was adopted for nanoparticle synthesis because of its
capability to produce particles of very low size with the least expenditure. The procedures for synthesis are
the following:
1. Stoichiometric quantity of raw material in the molar ratio of 1:1 (salts of nitrate : urea) was dissolved in
distilled water to get a homogeneous solution.
2. The solution was dried in a furnace and heated to a temperature of 110 ∘ C to remove all the volatiles/
moisture present.
3. The resulting paste was heated in a muffle furnace between 250 ∘ C and 500 ∘ C depending on the particle
size requirement.
4. Particle size mainly depends on the molar ratio of the raw material to the operating temperature. As the
temperature increases, the surface area per unit volume increases and particle size reduces.
5. The generated powder was then very slowly annealed to ambient condition.
6. The annealed powder was dissolved in distilled water based on the requirement of volume fraction and
was then subjected to ultrasonification to get continuous dispersion of nanoparticle in the base fluid.
7. The synthesized nanofluid was tested for settling in a settling chamber for ten days.
8. If settling was observed, as in the case of CuO, surfactant was added to improve better suspension of
nanoparticles.
9. Finally, magnetic stirring was carried out to avoid agglomeration before loading the nanoparticles into
the collector.

2.1 Characterization of nanoparticle

To confirm the phase transformation and particle size range, one has to conduct scanning electron mi-
croscopy, transmission electron microscopy, and X-ray diffraction (XRD) test to confirm the size, shape,
and phase transformations. Apart from adsorption method, the Brunauer–Emmett–Teller (BET) adsorption
isotherm method is used to find the surface area of the particle size. N2 gas is used as adsorbent based on
particle pressure in the vapor phase, and vapor pressure in the solid phase determines the density value at
isothermal condition (77 K) from 1 to 760 mm Hg. The particle size is calculated from the surface area using
the sphericity method for spherical particle. The above method determines the average particle size, and for
phase transformation, XRD was conducted to determine the stable oxide form of nanoparticle.

2.2 Surface area determination by BET curve method

The surface area of the nanoparticle is determined through the BET method using Sorptomatic Instrument
by measuring the physical adsorption of gas molecules on the solid surface, i.e. the surface area of particle
per unit weight of nanoparticle. The concept is an extension of the Langmuir theory, which is a theory for
monolayer molecular adsorption, to multilayer adsorption with the following hypotheses: (a) gas molecules
physically adsorb on a solid in layers infinitely; (b) there is no interaction between each adsorption layer; and
(c) the Langmuir theory can be applied to each layer. The resulting BET equation is expressed by
1 𝐶−1 𝑃 1
𝑃𝑜
= [ ]+[ ],
𝑉{ − 1} 𝑉𝑚 𝐶 𝑃𝑜 𝑉𝑚 𝐶
𝑃

Brought to you by | Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan

Authenticated
Download Date | 12/28/15 5:46 PM
268 | D. B. Munuswamy et al., Performance of a solar flat-plate collector

and the total surface area and a specific surface area are evaluated by
𝑉𝑚 𝑁𝑆
𝑆BET,total = ,
𝑉
where 𝑃 and 𝑃𝑜 are the equilibrium and saturation pressure of adsorbates at the temperature of adsorption,
respectively, 𝐶 is the BET constant, 𝑉 is the molar volume of the adsorbate gas, 𝑉𝑚 is the monolayer adsorbed
gas volume, 𝑁 is Avogadro’s number, and 𝑆 is the adsorption cross section of the absorbing species.
The required stoichiometric quantity of urea (fuel) and nitrate in a 1:1 molar ratio is measured with the
help of physical balance. As the collector area (0.5 m2 ) is small, a lesser-quantity nanoparticle is required
for the synthesis; hence, we use the chemical combustion method for preparing the nanoparticles, which is
very economical and results in high-purity nanoparticles, which is difficult in other synthesis process. The
prepared chemicals/nanoparticles are dried to ambient condition and mixed in the required volume fraction
with distilled water. The product solution’s so-called nanofluid is treated ultrasonically for better suspension
of the particle in the base fluid (Table 1).

Products Raw material Fuel Reaction temperature (∘ C) Molar ratio Product size (nm) Color of the product

Alumina Aluminum nitrate Urea 500 1:1 40 Pale yellow

CuO Copper nitrate Urea 500 1:1 40 Dark brown

Table 1. Preparation of nanoparticles.

3 Experimental setup
As the objective was to analyze the effectiveness of nanoparticles in solar water heating systems, a double-
loop 25-LPD solar water-heating system was designed and fabricated. The motive behind fabricating the
double-loop system was that the nanoparticle-laden water will absorb solar energy in the collector (primary
loop) and transmit it to the water in the storage tank through the secondary loop. Both the loops were of
ladder-type construction. The collector area was fixed as 1 m × 0.5 m. Four riser tubes made of copper (13 mm
OD and 12 mm ID), with thickness of 0.5 mm, were used. Longitudinal corrugated fins were brazed on either
side of the tubes. A fin of copper material was used, and the dimensions of the pitch were 100 mm width
and 1 mm thickness. Spacing between the tubes were maintained uniformly at 100 mm. A copper tube of
25 mm diameter serves as the common header to supply cold water from the storage tank to the riser tubes
and another copper tube of same 25 mm diameter serves as the outlet header for collecting hot water from
the riser tubes. The riser tubes were covered on all sides by a chamber made of aluminum walls. Between
the walls, glass wool was used for insulation. Aluminum foil was laid above and along the collector walls
to reflect the insolation incident on it. The entire collector assembly was covered with a transparent single
glass cover to reduce surface heat loss. The glass cover was firmly attached to the collector by suitable gasket
and screwing arrangements. The water-holding capacity of the constructed primary loop was observed to be
about 2.5 L. The outlet header from the collector was connected to the storage tank through a 25-mm-diameter
CPVC (Chlorinated Polyvinyl Chloride) pipe. The storage tank was made of copper, and the dimensions were
300 mm diameter and 360 mm length. The tank was insulated with polyurethane foam to prevent heat loss
and was covered with carbon steel. Hot water from the collector was made to pass through a ladder-type
heat exchanger. To increase heat transfer at the storage tank, it needs a surface equal to that of the collector
surface area (0.5 m2 ). Hence, the collector was build with ladder-type heat exchanger to increase the heat
transfer rate and to avoid the thermal stratification inside the storage tank. During the course of flow in the
ladder-type arrangement, the water lost its heat and the resultant water is circulated back to the collector
using another 25-mm-diameter CPVC pipe. The water in the storage tank absorbs heat from the hot water and
thus generates hot water for the intended application. Provisions were made before the collector in the CPVC
pipe for draining and feeding the primary circuit fluid.

Brought to you by | Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan

Authenticated
Download Date | 12/28/15 5:46 PM
 D. B. Munuswamy et al., Performance of a solar flat-plate collector | 269

Figure 1. Instrumentation flow diagram for 25-LPD solar flat-plate collector.

4 Instrumentation setup
It is imperative to observe the variations of temperature and pressure across the fabricated solar water heater
system operating under varying degrees of solar insolation. Instruments along with logging devices were used
for recording the variations in temperature and insolation. Temperature was monitored across 15 locations
in the system, and pressure was measured upstream and downstream of the flat-plate collector. T-type ther-
mocouples (copper constantan) were used for temperature measurements, as the temperature range in the
entire system was anticipated to be less than 100 ∘ C. The collector is being operated by natural circulation to
ensure the circulation ratio and equal flow rate at all parallel tubes. As the tube size of 12 mm OD is used, it is
very difficult to track the flow distribution inside the tube. However, it can be visualized by the temperature at
different locations of the tube. Therefore, the thermocouple at different locations inside the tube reflects the
flow distribution within the individual tubes and the heat of mixing also being estimated. To calculate the in-
stantaneous and overall efficiency of the collector based on the storage tank temperature, six thermocouples
were mounted in the thermowell created in the bottom portion of the four riser tubes. The bottom sides of the
riser tube were selected for nullifying the influence of solar insolation on temperature measurement. The first
thermocouple (𝑇1 ) was mounted on the lower end of the first riser tube, 𝑇2 on the middle of the second riser
tuber, 𝑇3 on the top end of the third riser tube, whereas 𝑇4 , 𝑇5 , and 𝑇6 were mounted at the bottom, middle,
and top end of the final riser tube, respectively. Any difference in temperature indicated between 𝑇1 and 𝑇4 ,
between 𝑇2 and 𝑇5 , and between 𝑇3 and 𝑇6 reveals improper flow distribution among the four riser tubes. This
methodology of placing six thermocouples instead of nine was adopted to reduce the pressure drop across the
riser tubes because of the presence of thermowell. 𝑇7 and 𝑇8 indicate the temperature of hot water from the
collector and temperature of cold water to the collector, respectively. Ambient temperature and collector wall
temperature are indicated by 𝑇9 and 𝑇10 , respectively. Temperature stratification in the storage tank was mon-
itored with the help of thermocouples 𝑇11 , 𝑇12 , and 𝑇13 . Thermocouples 𝑇14 and 𝑇15 were used for measuring
the temperature of air gap inside the collector and surface temperature of glass cover, respectively. Insolation
data were recorded using the watchdog apparatus. All the temperature measurements and insolation data
used the Agilent 34972A LXI acquisition data logger system. The schematic diagram of the instrumentation
setup is shown in Figure 1.

Brought to you by | Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan

Authenticated
Download Date | 12/28/15 5:46 PM
270 | D. B. Munuswamy et al., Performance of a solar flat-plate collector

Figure 2. Average storage tank temperature of 0.2% (left) and 0.4% (right) volume fractions of Al2 O3 and CuO nanofluids.

5 Determination of efficiency
Generally, the solar flat-plate collector is being calculated by the ASHRAE method. Owing to the introduction
of nanoparticle, the secondary (𝜂𝑆 ) or flat-plate collector depends on the (a) thermal stratification inside the
storage tank, (b) heat effectiveness of heat exchanger, and (c) volume fraction of nanofluid.
(i) The secondary side efficiency 𝜂𝑆 is calculated using

𝑚𝐶𝑝 (𝑇𝑠 − 𝑇1 )
𝜂𝑠 = ⋅ ∫ 𝐼 𝑑𝑡.
𝐴𝑐

A test has been conducted for different nanofluids and for different insolation values for different days.
(ii) The primary side efficiency 𝜂𝑃 is calculated by

𝑄𝑢
𝜂𝑃 = { ⋅ 𝐼(𝑡)}.
𝐴𝑐

6 Results and discussions

In this study, a 25-LPD solar flat-plate collector area of 0.5 m2 is operated at a very low nanofluid concentration
for volume fractions of 0.2% and 0.4% Al2 O3 and CuO nanofluids with the base fluid. Based on the heat gained
by the storage tank, the efficiency of the solar collector is calculated.

6.1 Comparison of average temperature attained by storage tank for different

nanofluids and with base working fluid water

Experiments were conducted for 0.2% and 0.4% volume fractions of nanofluids, with water as base work-
ing fluid, independently on different days in the secondary loop heat exchanger. The average temperature
(top, middle, and bottom layers) attained in the storage tank (secondary side) for a volume fraction of 0.4%
nanofluids is inferred to be higher than that of 0.2%. The Al2 O3 nanofluid achieves higher average tempera-
ture for both 0.4% and 0.2%. This could be attributed to better heat transfer rate and good dispersion medium
compared to CuO nanoparticles and base working fluid water. Figure 2 shows the variation of average tem-
perature gained inside the storage tank for different nanofluids for a volume fraction of 0.2% and 0.4% with
water.

Brought to you by | Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan

Authenticated
Download Date | 12/28/15 5:46 PM
 D. B. Munuswamy et al., Performance of a solar flat-plate collector | 271

Figure 3. Secondary side efficiency of 0.4% (first row, left) and 0.2% (first row, right) volume fractions of Al2 O3 and CuO
nanofluids. Primary side efficiency of 0.4% (second row, left) and 0.2% (second row, right) volume fractions of Al2 O3 and CuO
nanofluids.

6.2 Day average efficiency comparison for different nanofluids for secondary side
(storage tank) and primary side (collector)

The collector efficiency for Al2 O3 nanofluid was observed to be higher than CuO and water. As the concen-
tration of nanoparticles increases, a higher thermal conductivity of working fluid was obtained, because the
fluids could set more heat transfer from the collector and the heat loss is less for the nanofluids from the col-
lector when compared to that of water. Moreover, the temperature difference between the inlet and the outlet
is higher for the Al2 O3 nanofluid. The efficiency of the 0.2% volume fractions of the Al2 O3 nanofluid is found to
be 28.01% and 24.46% for CuO. Similarly, for the 0.4% volume fractions of the Al2 O3 nanofluid, the efficiency
is found to be 33.05% and 28.50% for CuO and 20.03% for water. In both primary and secondary sides, the
efficiency of the Al2 O3 nanofluid is higher than the other (CuO and water) working fluids. The experimental
results revealed that there is an enhancement in heat transfer from the collector side to the storage tank side,
which emphasizes the increase in efficiency for the different nanofluids, and the results are comparable with
water. Figure 3 shows the efficiency comparison on the primary side (collector) and the secondary side (stor-
age tank) for two different nanofluids (0.2% and 0.4% volume fractions) operated in a 2.5-L heat exchanger
(ladder type) with water as base working fluid.

Brought to you by | Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan

Authenticated
Download Date | 12/28/15 5:46 PM
272 | D. B. Munuswamy et al., Performance of a solar flat-plate collector

Working Volume frac- Particle size Volume of pri- Volume of sec- Average primary Average sec-
fluid tion (%) (nm) mary circuit (L) ondary circuit side efficiency ondary side effi-
(L) (%) ciency (%)

Al2 O3 0.2 40 2.5 25 28.01 18.27

Al2 O3 0.4 40 2.5 25 33.05 21.05
CuO 0.2 40 2.5 25 24.46 17.20
CuO 0.4 40 2.5 25 28.50 20.01
Water — — 2.5 25 21.03 14.67

Table 2. Comparison table for the day average efficiency.

6.3 Cause and effect

The key characteristic of the solar flat-plate collector is its ability to maximize efficiency, grab the maximum
heat from the solar insolation, and convert into useful heat energy. The collector area is one of the major parts
of the collector that enhances the heat transfer rate. The Al2 O3 and CuO nanofluids were chosen here as the
best option as working fluids because of their low cost, availability, limpness to the collector material and
tank, low corrosiveness, easy dispersion in water, low scaling and fouling, and high thermal conductivity.
Consequently, the collector is operated with Al2 O3 and CuO nanofluids with different volume fractions,
and their efficiency on the primary and secondary side is compared with the base working fluid (water). From
the experimental result, using Al2 O3 and CuO nanofluids in the solar flat-plate collector increases the ef-
ficiency in order of 12% in the primary side and 7% in the secondary side, which is comparable with the
Al2 O3 + nanofluid with 0.4% volume fraction gain from 5% to 6% efficiency and 0.2% volume fraction gain
from 3% to 4% to that of the CuO nanofluid. The experimental result shows that the Al2 O3 nanofluid gives a
higher efficiency than CuO. Hence, for an incessant operation and for the flat-plate collector to accomplish a
higher thermal efficiency, Al2 O3 nanoparticles are favored.

7 Conclusion
A 25-LPD solar flat collector was designed experimentally and theoretically. Two nanoparticles of different
thermal conductivities were identified and synthesized using the chemical combustion method. Efficiency
was calculated by comparing the baseline fixation with as water in the secondary loop heat exchanger. From
experimentation, the best collector efficiency obtained in a 25-LPD solar collector is Al2 O3 0.4% volume frac-
tion, which increased to 12% for Al2 O3 and 7% for CuO. Similarly, 0.2% volume fraction resulted in improve-
ment of 7% for Al2 O3 and 5.5% for CuO compared to that of the water base working fluid in the secondary loop.
For the same volume fraction of nanoparticles, Al2 O3 exhibits high heat transfer compared to CuO, which in
turn improves the overall performance (efficiency) of the solar flat-plate collector (Table 2).

Nomenclature
𝐴𝑐 Area of the collector (m2 )
𝐶 BET constant
𝐶𝑝 Specific heat capacity of water (J/kg K)
𝐼(𝑡) Intensity of incident radiation (W/m2 )
𝑀 Mass flow rate (kg/s)
𝑁𝑠 Avogadro’s number
𝑃/𝑃𝑜 Saturation pressure of adsorbates at the temperature of adsorption
𝑆 Adsorption cross section of the adsorbing species

Brought to you by | Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan

Authenticated
Download Date | 12/28/15 5:46 PM
 D. B. Munuswamy et al., Performance of a solar flat-plate collector | 273

𝑇1 Inlet water temperature (∘ C)

𝑇2 Outlet water temperature (∘ C)
𝑉 Molar volume of adsorbate gas: mass of adsorbent (g)
𝑉𝑚 Molar volume of the adsorbate gas
𝜂𝑃 Primary side efficiency (collector)
𝜂𝑆 Secondary side efficiency (storage tank)

Acknowledgement: The authors express their thanks to the Water and Steam Chemistry Division (WSCD) of
BARC-F, Kalpakkam, and special thanks to TATA BP, Bangalore.

References
[1] Z. Said, M. A. Sabiha and R. Saidur, Performance enhancement of a flat plate solar collector using titanium dioxide
nanofluid and polyethylene glycol dispersant, J. Cleaner Prod. 92 (2015), 343–353.
[2] M. T. Jamal-Abad, A. Zamzamian, E. Imani and M. Mansouri, Experimental study of the performance of a flat-plate collector
using Cu-water nanofluid, J. Thermophys. Heat Trans. 27 (2013), 756–760.
[3] H. A. Hussain, Q. Jawad and K. F. Sultan, Experimental analysis on thermal efficiency of evacuated tube solar collector by
using nanofluids, Int. J. Sustain. Green Energy 4 (2015), 19–28.
[4] T. Sokhansefat, A. B. Kasaeian and F. Kowsary, Heat transfer enhancement in parabolic trough collector tube using
Al2 O3 /synthetic oil nanofluid, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 33 (2014), 636–644.
[5] D. Singh, E. V. Timofeeva, M. R. Moravek, S. Cingarapu, W. Yu, T. Fischer and S. Mathur, Use of metallic nanoparticles to
improve the thermophysical properties of organic heat transfer fluids used in concentrated solar power, J. Solar Energy
105 (2014), 468–478.
[6] T. Yousefi, F. Veysi, E. Shojaeizadeh and S. Zinadini, An experimental investigation on the effect of Al2 O3 -H2 O nanofluid on
the efficiency of flat-plate solar collectors, J. Renew. Energy 39 (2012), 293–298.
[7] T. Yousefi, F. Veysi, E. Shojaeizadeh and S. Zinadini, An experimental investigation on the effect of MWCNT-H2 O nanofluid
on the efficiency of flat-plate solar collectors, Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 39 (2012), 207–212.
[8] A. Lenert and E. N. Wang, Optimization of nanofluid volumetric receivers for solar thermal energy conversion, Solar En-
ergy 86 (2012), 253–265.
[9] L. Lu, Z. H. Liu and H. S. Xiao, Thermal performance of an open thermosyphon using nanofluids for high temperature evac-
uated tubular solar collectors Part 1: Indoor experiment, Solar Energy 85 (2011), 379–387.
[10] T. P. Otanicar, P. E. Phelan, R. S. Prasher, G. Rosengarten and R. A. Taylor, Nanofluid based and direct absorption solar
collector, J. Renew. Sustain. Energy 2 (2010), 033102.
[11] S. Suresh and K. P. Venkitaraj, P. Selvakumar and M. Chandrasekar, A comparison of thermal characteristics of
Al2 O3 /water and CuO/water nanofluids in transition flow through a straight circular duct fitted with helical screw tape
inserts, Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 39 (2012), 37–44.
[12] L. G. Asirvatham, S. Roy, D. Kunhappan, E. Cephas and S. Wongwises, Heat transfer performance of silver/water nanofluid
in a solar flat-plate collector, J. Thermal Eng. 1 (2015), 104–112.
[13] H. Tyagi, P. E. Phelan and R. Prasher, Predicted efficiency of a low-temperature nanofluid based direct absorption solar
collector, J. Sol. Energy Eng. 131 (2009), 041004.
[14] T. A. Robert, P. E. Phelan, T. P. Otanicar, C. A. Walker, M. Nguyen, S. Trimble and R. Prasher, Applicability of nanofluids in
high flux solar collectors Tempe, Arizona, J. Renew. Sustain. Energy 3 (2011), 023104.
[15] D. R. Waghole, R. M. Warkhedkar, V. S. Kulkarni and R. K. Shrivastva, Experimental investigations on heat transfer and
friction factor of silver nanofliud in absorber/receiver of parabolic trough collector with twisted tape inserts, Energy Pro-
cedia 45 (2014), 558–567.
[16] S. E. Ghasemi and G. H. R. Mehdizadeh Ahangar, Numerical analysis of performance of solar parabolic trough collector
with Cu-water nanofluid, Int. J. Nano Dimens. 5 (2014), 233–240.
[17] L. Kundan and P. Sharma, Performance evaluation of a nanofluid (CuO-H2 O) based low flux solar collector, Int. J. Eng. Res.
2 (2013), 108–112.
[18] V. Madadi, T. Tavakoli and A. Rahimi, First and second thermodynamic law analyses applied to a solar dish collector,
J. Non-Equilib. Thermodyn. 39 (2014), 187–197.

Received April 14, 2015; revised July 31, 2015; accepted August 11, 2015.

Brought to you by | Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan

Authenticated
Download Date | 12/28/15 5:46 PM
View publication stats