Smart Materials and Structures

PAPER Related content

- An experimental study on the normal
Experimental study on heat transfer of the stress of magnetorheological fluids
Jile Jiang, Yu Tian, Dongxue Ren et al.
magnetorheological fluids - Influence of large size magnetic particles
on the magneto-viscous properties of
ferrofluid
To cite this article: Gokhan Yildirim and Seval Genc 2013 Smart Mater. Struct. 22 085001 Kruti Shah, R V Upadhyay and V K Aswal

- Thermal conductivity enhancement and

sedimentation reduction of
magnetorheological fluids with nano-sized
Cu and Al additives
View the article online for updates and enhancements. M S A Rahim, I Ismail, S B Choi et al.

Recent citations
- A novel magnetorheological fluid damper
with a heat insulation function
Chengbin Du et al

- Magnetorheology: a review
Jose R. Morillas and Juan de Vicente

- Contribution of magnetic nanoparticle in

thermal conductivity of flake-shaped iron
particles based magnetorheological (MR)
fluid
Mujiba S. Pisuwala et al

This content was downloaded from IP address 106.207.74.144 on 03/09/2021 at 16:10

IOP PUBLISHING SMART MATERIALS AND STRUCTURES
Smart Mater. Struct. 22 (2013) 085001 (8pp) doi:10.1088/0964-1726/22/8/085001

Experimental study on heat transfer of

the magnetorheological fluids
Gokhan Yildirim and Seval Genc
The Faculty of Engineering, Department of Metallurgical and Materials Engineering,
Marmara University, Turkey

E-mail: gokhan.yildirim@hotmail.com and sgenc@marmara.edu.tr

Received 8 February 2013, in final form 28 May 2013

Published 27 June 2013
Online at stacks.iop.org/SMS/22/085001

Abstract
Thermal conductivity of magnetorheological suspensions synthesized with iron powder and
silicone oil is experimentally investigated for varying particle volume fractions (5, 20, and
40 vol%) of two different grades of iron (Fe) and magnetic field strengths. In order to
determine the temperature range at which the thermal conductivity of MR fluids is more
effective for different heat transfer applications, the experiments are done for three different
temperature intervals in three different temperature ranges: from −20 to 0 ◦ C, from 0 to 50
◦ C, and from 50 to 100 ◦ C. In this study, ISO 8301 ‘Thermal insulation—determination of

steady state thermal resistance and related properties—heat flow meter apparatus’ is used. The
thermal conductivity of the MR fluids shows an increase with increasing magnetic field and
volume fraction in the temperature intervals from 0 to 50 ◦ C and from 50 to 100 ◦ C. In
particular, there is a substantial enhancement in the thermal conductivity for the 50–100 ◦ C
temperature interval (enhancement ratio by almost 134% for 40SM at H = 150 G). However,
the thermal conductivity shows a decrease in the lower temperature interval from −20 to 0 ◦ C
(a decrease by 42% for 40SM at 150 G), which could be due the effect of the thermal
conductivity of silicone oil at lower temperatures. Although the heat transfer coefficient is
higher for higher particle concentrations, the percentage increase is more pronounced for
lower particle concentrations, especially in the 0 to 50 ◦ C temperature interval (for the 40SM
sample at 150 G 18% an enhancement for a 20 K temperature difference is observed, whereas
for the 20% MR fluid sample, the enhancement is 34%).
(Some figures may appear in colour only in the online journal)

1. Introduction are important characteristics of the magnetically active

Magnetorheological (MR) fluids are suspensions of non-
colloidal (∼0.05–10 µm), multi-domain, and magnetically
soft particles in organic or aqueous liquids. An unstable
columnar or chain-like structure forms as a result of the
magnetization and interaction of ferromagnetic particles in
an external magnetic field [1–3]. The formation of the
chain-like structure of magnetic particles distinguishes them
from colloidal ferrofluids in which the structure formation
does not take place [4]. In MR fluids many different ceramic
metals and alloys can be used as long as the particles
are magnetically multi-domain and exhibit low levels of
magnetic coercivity [5]. Particle size, shape, density, particle
size distribution, saturation magnetization, and coercive field
dispersed phase. Other than magnetic particles, the base
fluids, surfactants, and anticorrosion additives are important
factors that affect the rheological properties, stability and
redispersibility of the MR fluid [6].
The increase in the viscosity and yield stress of MR fluids
under an applied magnetic field have been among the most
important research areas since the first discovery of these
fluids by Rabinow in 1948 [7]. The increase of the yield stress
in a 40 vol% Fe based MR fluids can go up to 100 kPa [8].
The unique characteristics of MR fluids, such as adjustable
viscosity, rapid response time, high dynamic flow strength and
the ability to work in an extensive temperature gradient enable
applications such as vibration damping, shock absorbers,
suspension systems, brake-clutch systems, prostheses, optical

0964-1726/13/085001+08$33.00 1 c 2013 IOP Publishing Ltd Printed in the UK & the USA

Smart Mater. Struct. 22 (2013) 085001 G Yildirim and S Genc

Table 1. Description of the MR fluids used in this research.

Name Description
40SM 40 vol% SM grade Fe powder + 100 cSt silicone oil + 5 vol% surfactant
40SQ 40 vol% SQ grade Fe powder + 100 cSt silicone oil + 5 vol% surfactant
20SM 20 vol% SM grade Fe powder + 350 cSt silicone oil + 5 vol% surfactant
20SQ 20 vol% SQ grade Fe powder + 350 cSt silicone oil + 5 vol% surfactant
5SM 5 vol% SM grade Fe powder + 350 cSt silicone oil + 5 vol% surfactant
5SQ 5 vol% SQ grade Fe powder + 350 cSt silicone oil + 5 vol% surfactant

finishing and sealing systems [9–11]. The structure of MR
fluids is anisotropic due to the formation of particles along
the field lines of the applied magnetic field. Most MR fluid
applications such as clutches, brakes and dampers use the
situation in which the magnetic field is applied along the
gradient direction.
Another important application field of MR fluids is
in the field of thermal engineering, which makes the
understanding on the transport properties important. Several
important technological applications of magnetic fluids, such
as voice coil coolants for modern loudspeakers, depend
on heat transfer through these suspensions. In some of
the home appliances, such as refrigerators, ovens etc, heat
transfer techniques are used in order to provide heating or
cooling. Controlling the heat transfer in these appliances
will decrease the energy consumption. Although there are a
few studies on the enhancement of the thermal conductivity
of magnetic fluids in the literature, they are not enough to
enable optimization of the usage of MR fluids in practical
applications. Shulman and co-workers reported an increase
up to 70% for 20 wt% nickel based MR fluid in the direction
of the magnetic field, whereas the component perpendicular
to the magnetic field can decrease by as much as 15% [12].
Li and co-workers analyzed iron and water based magnetic
fluids in which heat transfer coefficients were measured as
0.66 W K−1 m−1 and 0.83 W K−1 m−1 under approximately
60 G and 250 G of magnetic field, respectively [13]. In their
same work, no change in the thermal conductivity of the
aqueous magnetic fluids in the magnetic field perpendicular
to the temperature gradient was also reported. Heine et al
also investigated the thermal transport in MR fluid subjected
to shear and externally applied magnetic fields [14]. They
showed that, even in a flowing system, energy transport in
the field direction is typically dominated by conduction. More
recently, Reinecke et al analyzed the anisotropic behavior of
the thermal conductivity of iron based MR suspensions and
reported that the thermal conductivity is anisotropic under
a magnetic field [15]. They found that the component of
the thermal conductivity increased by almost 100% while
remaining constant in the directions perpendicular to the field.
The transport properties of the MR fluids mainly depend on
the properties, concentration, and distribution of the magnetic
particles as well as the relevant properties of the carrier liquid.
Although the enhancement in the thermal conductivities
of MR fluids under externally applied magnetic field was
reported by the researchers mentioned above, the thermal
conductivity behavior of MR fluids in different temperature
intervals has not been reported. The investigation of the
thermal conductivity in different temperature intervals and
ranges may help to understand the working ranges of these
materials in heat transfer applications.
The present paper reports the experimental results of
the thermal conductivity of MR fluids with the control
of the magnetic field under stationary conditions. The
thermal conductivity experiments were performed at different
temperature intervals and temperature differences in order
to understand the thermal conductivity behavior at different
temperature ranges. Since the thermal conductivity is
enhanced under a magnetic field parallel to the temperature
gradient [13, 15] rather than the perpendicular direction, the
experiments were performed under parallel conditions. The
types, concentration of the dispersed phase, and the magnetic
intensity were also varied.
2. Experimental procedure
2.1. Sample fluids
In the present work, two different grades of Fe powder, SQ and
SM grades, which were obtained from BASF, are involved.
The average particle sizes for these high-purity SM and SQ
grade iron powders were 4.65 and 6.6 µm, respectively.
The saturation magnetization for both of the powders was
214 emu g−1 . The carrier fluid was chosen as silicone oil
with 100 and 350 cSt kinematic viscosity. 350 cSt silicone
oil was preferred for 20 and 5 vol% based MR fluids in order
to slow down the very rapid settling of the particles, which
would affect the result of the thermal conductivity. 100 cSt
silicone oil was preferred for 40 vol% MR fluids, because with
350 cSt the fluid gets very thick, which makes it difficult to
homogenize.
The fluids contained 5, 20 and 40 vol% iron powder,
silicone oil and 5% surfactant to prevent the sedimentation
of particles. MR fluids were synthesized using conventional
ceramic processing techniques in which the powder, silicone
oil and the surfactant were mixed with a mechanical mixer,
followed by ball milling of the fluids for 24 h with
yttria-stabilized zirconia milling balls.
A summary of the fluids is given in table 1.
The 40 vol% based MR fluids showed good stability and
redispersibility. 40SM MR fluids showed a settling amount of
approximately 7% at the end of two weeks and 40SQ fluids
show a settling amount of almost 12% at the end of one week.
No more settling was observed after these time periods. The
more rapid settling of the SQ grade could be due to the larger
particle size of the powder.

2
Smart Mater. Struct. 22 (2013) 085001
Figure 1. Single-specimen asymmetrical configuration: U0 and U00 :
cooling and heating units, respectively; H: heat fluxmeter;
S: sample.
The 20SQ and 20SM MR fluids showed more rapid
settling than those of the 40 vol% fluids. 20SQ MR fluid
shows 52% settling and SM grade fluid shows 58% settling
at the end of 15 days. The 5SM and 5SQ fluids showed
very rapid settling. Although the fluids showed some amount
of settling, no caking was observed at the bottom of the
containers. Prior to the thermal conductivity measurements
each MR fluid was shaken and mechanically stirred to ensure
that the suspension was evenly dispersed.
2.2. Apparatus and procedure
The ISO 8301 ‘Thermal Insulation—Determination of steady
state thermal resistance and related properties—heat flow
Figure 2. Experimental setup.
Figure 3. The measuring system.
3
G Yildirim and S Genc
meter apparatus’ standard was adopted in the heat transfer
experiments in stationary conditions. The experimental
setup was established as a single-specimen asymmetrical
configuration according to the standard shown in figure 1.
The schematic drawing of the experimental setup is
indicated in figure 2. The experimental setup consisted of
a space for the sample, heat flux sensors, thermocouples,
heating–cooling sources, and polyurethane insulating material
from outside to inside. The photograph of the experimental
setup is given in figure 3. The magnetic field was applied by
neodymium permanent magnets parallel to the temperature
gradient. For reproducibility of the data, each measurement
was performed for five MR fluid samples. Although the
experimental setup was isolated, there could still be some
heat loss. Another uncertainty of the setup could be the
non-uniformity of the magnetic field. The magnetic field was
measured from three different points along the radial direction
of the sample holder and then the average of these three
measurements was taken for the magnetic field values. The
relatively faster settling of the magnetic particles in MR fluids
with smaller volume fractions could be another uncertainty of
the system.
In order to determine the temperature range at which
the thermal conductivity of MR fluids is more effective for
different applications, the experiments were done for three
different temperature intervals; from −20 to 0 ◦ C, from 0 to
50 ◦ C, and from 50 to 100 ◦ C. The temperature differences
between the hot and cold surfaces of the setup are given
in table 2. The experiments were performed in the different
Smart Mater. Struct. 22 (2013) 085001
Figure 4. Thermal conductivities of 40SQ, 40SM, 20SQ, 20SM, 5SQ, and 5SM type MR fluids with a 20 K temperature difference.
Table 2. Temperature intervals and temperature differences for
which the experiments were performed.
−20–0 ◦ C 0–50 ◦ C 50–100 ◦ C
1T = 20 K (−20–0 ◦ C) 1T = 35 K (15–50 ◦ C) 1T = 15 K
1T = 15 K (−15–0 ◦ C) 1T = 20 K (20–40 ◦ C) (50–65 ◦ C)
temperature ranges using these temperature intervals. The
summary of the temperature intervals of the measurements
and the temperature differences between the hot and cold
surfaces are given in parenthesis in table 2. In the 50–100 ◦ C
temperature range only one temperature difference could be
measured due to leakage of water from the silicone connectors
at high temperatures. The temperature difference of 35 K in
the interval from −20 to 0 cannot be maintained due to the
freezing of the water in the baths and in the hose pipes.
The measurements were performed by taking the data
from the heat flux sensors after the steady state was
established between the cold and hot surfaces. The heat
transfer coefficient was then calculated using equation (1).
A 1T
k=− (1)
Q 1x
where Q is the heat flow in input or lost heat flow, A is the
heat transfer surface area, 1T is the difference in temperature
between the cold and hot surfaces, and 1x is the height of the
MR fluid sample in the measuring setup.
3. Results
The experimental results in figure 3 illustrate the increase
in thermal conductivities of different concentrations of MR
fluids as a function of the magnetic field in the temperature
interval from 0 to 50 ◦ C. The temperature difference between
the hot and cold surfaces was 20 K.
The enhancement of the thermal conductivity was
observed around the magnetic field of 24 G and then
the increase was slowed down as the magnetic field was
increased. The thermal conductivity enhancement ratio was
defined as (kH=0 − kH=24 )/kH=0 .
The enhancement ratio of MR fluids for 40SM and 40SQ
MR fluids at 24 G were 10% and 6%, respectively. For 20SM
4
G Yildirim and S Genc
and 20SQ samples at the same magnetic field, the increase
was 2% and 22%, respectively. Finally, for the 5SM and
5SQ samples, although the heat transfer coefficient at zero
magnetic field was lower than that of the 40 and 20% samples,
the percentage increase was observed to be more than that
of the more concentrated samples. The enhancement ratio of
these samples was 17% for 5SM and 16% for 5SQ.
At 150 G magnetic field the enhancement was 18%
and 11% for 40SM and 40SQ MR fluids, respectively.
The increase in the heat transfer coefficients of 20SM and
SQ type MR fluids was 3.9% and 21%, respectively. The
enhancements in the 5SQ and 5SM were 32% and 34%
respectively. Although 40SM and 40SQ fluids showed higher
thermal conductivities at a magnetic field of 134 G, the
percentage increases in the conductivity of 20 vol% and
5 vol% fluids were more than that of the 40 vol% based fluids.
In figure 5 the increase in the thermal conductivities are
given for different MR fluids as a function of magnetic field at
a 35 K temperature difference. The enhancement ratio of MR
fluids for 40SM and 40SQ MR fluids at 24 G were 9% and
12%, respectively. For 20SM and 20SQ samples at the same
magnetic field, the increases were 14% and 20%, respectively.
Finally for the 5SM and 5SQ samples the enhancement
ratios were 32% and 34%, respectively. A summary of the
enhancement ratios is given in tables 3 and 4.
The thermal conductivity of silicone oil based MR fluids
containing iron particles with different volume fractions was
measured and the results can be seen in figures 4 and 5.
Substantial increases in thermal conductivity are seen for all
the measured MR fluids with increasing iron powder loading,
which is consistent with other reported results [12–15].
However, although the heat transfer coefficient was high
for higher particle concentration, the percentage increase
was more pronounced for lower particle concentrations. This
may be due to the close packing of particles in the higher
volume fractions of the magnetic phase. In these higher
concentrations, the particles were already in closer contact
with each other and, as a result, although the application of the
magnetic field put these particles into chain-like structures,
interactions between the particles were not affected very
much. However, for lower concentrations, the particles which
were farther away from each other in the off-state lined up in a
chain-like formation and the interaction was increased under
Smart Mater. Struct. 22 (2013) 085001 G Yildirim and S Genc

Figure 5. Thermal conductivities of 40SQ, 40SM, 20SQ, 20SM, 5SQ, and 5SM type MR fluids with a 35 K temperature difference.

Table 3. Thermal conductivity enhancement ratio of MR fluids with respect to an applied magnetic field H = 24 G.
0–50 ◦ C at 24 G 50–100 ◦ C at 24 G −20–0 ◦ C at 24 G
1T = 35 K (%) 1T = 20 K (%) 1T = 15 K (%) 1T = 20 K (%) 1T = 15 K (%)
40SM 6 10 100 −35 −2
40SQ 8 6 31 −24 −7
20SM 9 2 147 −20 −3
20SQ 18 22 29 −7 −13
5SM 20 17 68 −20 −7
5SQ 16 16 56 −23 −9

Table 4. Thermal conductivity enhancement ratio of MR fluids with respect to an applied magnetic field H = 150 G.
0–50 ◦ C at 150 G 50–100 ◦ C at 150 G −20–0 ◦ C at 150 G
1T = 35 K (%) 1T = 20 K (%) 1T = 15 K (%) 1T = 20 K (%) 1T = 15 K (%)
40SM 12 18 134 −42 −2
40SQ 9 11 50 −29 −8
20SM 14 3.9 188 −25 −6
20SQ 20 21 36 −7 0.2
5SM 29 32 78 −25 −4
5SQ 23 34 95 −31 −0.2

a magnetic field giving rise to a higher increase in the thermal
conductivity.
The next set of measurements involved lower temperature
intervals, such as from −20 to 0 ◦ C. In this interval the
temperature differences were taken as 15 and 20 K. Figure 6
shows the change in the heat conductivity with respect to the
magnetic field under a 15 K temperature difference. Unlike the
results obtained in the higher temperature intervals (figures 4
and 5), there was a very small increase in the conductivity,
followed by a slight decrease as the magnetic field increases.
All the fluids showed a similar trend.
As the temperature decreased the conductivity started to
decrease even as the magnetic field increased. A summary of
the enhancement ratios is given in tables 3 and 4.
In figure 7 the temperature difference was 20 K in the
same temperature interval.
The percentage decreases in the thermal conductivity of
MR fluids for 40SM and 40SQ MR fluids at 24 G were
35% and 24%, respectively. For 20SM and 20SQ samples
at the same magnetic field, the decreases were 20% and
7%, respectively. Finally for the 5SM and 5SQ samples the
decreases were 20% and 23%, respectively.
At 150 G magnetic field the decreases were 42% and 29%
for 40SM and 40SQ MR fluids, respectively. The decreases
in the heat transfer coefficients of 20SM and 20SQ type
MR fluids were 25% and 7%, respectively. The decreases in
the 5SQ and 5SM were both 25% and 31%, respectively. A
summary of the enhancement ratio is given in tables 3 and 4.
The last set of measurements involved an investigation of
the heat transfer coefficients of MR fluids in the temperature
interval from 50 to 100 ◦ C and the temperature gradient was
taken as 15 K.
The changes in the heat transfer coefficients of MR
fluids at 15 K are given in figure 8. The increases in this
temperature range were more enhanced than the increases in
the other temperature ranges. The increases in the heat transfer

5
Smart Mater. Struct. 22 (2013) 085001 G Yildirim and S Genc

Figure 6. Thermal conductivities of 40SQ, 40SM, 20SQ, 20SM, 5SQ, and 5SM type MR fluids with a 15 K temperature difference.

Figure 7. Thermal conductivities of 40SQ, 40SM, 20SQ, 20SM, 5SQ, and 5SM type MR fluids with a 20 K temperature difference.

Figure 8. Thermal conductivities of 40SQ, 40SM, 20SQ, 20SM, 5SQ, and 5SM type MR fluids with a 15 K temperature difference.

coefficient of 40SM and 40SQ type MR fluids were 134%
and 50%, respectively. The slight decrease in the thermal
conductivity of the 40SQ sample needs to be investigated
more. 20SM and 20SQ MR fluids showed increases in heat
transfer coefficients by 188% and 36%, respectively. The
larger difference between the percentage increases of the
thermal conductivity for 20% MR fluids could be attributed
to the faster settling of the particles and inhomogeneities in
the fluids. A summary of the enhancement of this temperature
interval ratio is given in tables 3 and 4.

6
Smart Mater. Struct. 22 (2013) 085001
Figure 9. Comparison of the thermal conductivity behavior of 40SQ MR fluid at different temperature intervals.
In this temperature range (50–100 ◦ C), when the
magnetic field was zero (H = 0), the heat transfer coefficient
was smaller than the heat transfer coefficients in other
temperature ranges; for example the heat transfer coefficients
of the 40SQ MR fluid in the temperature interval from
−20 to 0 ◦ C, from 0 to 50 ◦ C, and from 50 to 100 ◦ C,
were 0.78 Wm K−1 , 0.55 Wm K−1 and 0.41 Wm K−1 ,
respectively. In the measurements executed in the off-state,
the carrier liquid showed a more dominant characteristic.
Under zero magnetic field (H = 0), the MR fluids behave
as any heterogeneous systems. If the heat conductivity of
the dispersed phase is larger than that of the carrier liquid
and if the volume fraction of the magnetic phase is smaller
than 0.4, then the effective heat transfer coefficients of the
heterogeneous systems becomes independent of the heat
transfer coefficient of the dispersed phase [12].
The mechanism of thermal conductivity involves the
collision of molecules with one another and exchanging
energy and momentum. If a molecule moves from a high
temperature region to a region of lower temperature, it
transports kinetic energy to the lower temperature part of
the system and gives up this energy through collisions with
lower energy molecules. On the other hand a solid’s thermal
energy may be conducted by lattice vibrations. In the MR
fluids, where we have a mixture of a liquid and a solid,
the thermal conductivity is dependent on the temperature. At
different temperature intervals, especially at low temperatures
ranges (−20 ◦ C), the molecules in the liquid have insufficient
energy to cause collisions and the lattice vibrations could
be insufficient to transfer heat. The decrease of the thermal
conductivity in the interval from 0 to −20 ◦ C could be due
to the less energetic molecules. We presume that thermal
conductivity of the magnetic fluids is determined by the
compensation of stability of the suspension, particle size, and
viscosity of the base fluid. Another important point leading to
different characteristics of the heat transfer of MR fluids could
be the thermo-convective instability of the magnetic fluids.
The reason why this instability arises is because the colder
fluid is more strongly magnetized so it is drawn to the higher
field region, displacing the warmer fluid [4].
7
G Yildirim and S Genc
In our study, the thermal conductivity of MR fluids
shows a variation especially at zero and small magnetic fields.
figure 9 shows this variation for the 40 vol% SQ based
MR fluid at the three different temperature ranges. Similar
behavior is observed for the other types of MR fluids as
well. The thermal conductivity of MR fluid shows a gradual
increase starting from approximately 0.25 W mK−1 at zero
magnetic field. It eventually reaches 0.6 W mK−1 at higher
values of the magnetic field, as high as 150 G. However,
at temperatures as low as −20 ◦ C, for the same temperature
difference, the thermal conductivity shows a gradual decrease
from a value around 0.8 W mK−1 to about 0.6 W mK−1 .
Irrespective of the temperature range the thermal conductivity
reaches 0.6 W mK−1 at high magnetic fields. The trends at
magnetic fields lower than 24 G are different for the high
and low temperature ranges. As the temperature decreases the
density and viscosity of the base fluid, silicone oil, increases.
The denser and more viscous fluid hinders the motion of the
magnetic particles due to the temperature difference, which
is 20 ◦ C. Thus the suspension is more uniform at lower
temperatures due to inhibited motion of particles, which will
prevent settling of the particles. At higher temperatures, the
density and viscosity of the silicone oil decreases and thus
the stability of the fluid can be affected in a negative way
at lower magnetic fields. The instability of the MR fluids at
low temperature could be the reason for the different thermal
conductivities at low magnetic fields. At higher magnetic
fields, chain formation between the magnetic particles is
activated by the increase in magnetic field. This in turn
increases the thermal conductivity of the magnetic fluid at
low temperatures. As the magnetism increases, the effect of
the temperature range diminishes and thermal conductivity
measurements reach almost the same value.
All the MR fluids measured in the temperature intervals
from 0 to 50 ◦ C and from 50 to 100 ◦ C showed an increasing
trend in their heat transfer coefficients under an applied
magnetic field. However, the measurements performed at low
temperature (from −20 to 0 ◦ C) showed a decrease in the
thermal conductivity. Since the thermal conductivity of MR
Smart Mater. Struct. 22 (2013) 085001 G Yildirim and S Genc

fluids is not effective at low temperatures, silicone oil based MR fluids may not be suitable for low temperature heat
MR fluids may not be suitable for low temperature heat transfer applications.
transfer applications. Further experimental study is needed to
provide an insight into the mechanism of thermal transport of Acknowledgments
magnetic fluids.
The work is supported by Scientific and Technological
Council of Turkey, TUBITAK, under Grant 108M473. I would
4. Conclusion also like to thank Vasi Kadir Ertis in Arcelik and Professor Dr
Omer Z Cebeci in Marmara University for useful discussions.
The heat transfer characteristics of 40, 20 and 5% Fe
based MR fluids were investigated under a magnetic field References
which was applied parallel to the temperature gradient. The
thermal conductivity behavior of the MR fluids in different [1] Klingenberg D 2001 AIChE J. 47 6916
temperature ranges was analyzed and it was seen that the [2] Martin J and Odinek J 1992 Phys. Rev. Lett. 69 1524
heat transfer was more effective at higher temperatures. The [3] Tao R and Jiang Q 1994 Phys. Rev. Lett. 73 205
fluids showed an increase in the thermal conductivity in [4] Rosensweig R E 1985 Ferrohydrodynamics (New York:
Dover)
the temperature intervals from 0 to 50 ◦ C, and from 50 [5] Carlson J D and Weiss K D 1995 US Patent Lord
to 100 ◦ C and a decrease from −20 to 0 ◦ C. There is a Corporation, USA
substantial enhancement in the thermal conductivity for the 50 [6] Ginder J M 1996 Rheology controlled by magnetic fields
to 100 ◦ C temperature interval (enhancement ratio by almost Encyclopedia of Applied Physics ed E Immergut
(New York: VCH) p 487
134% for 40SM at H = 150 G). Although the heat transfer [7] Rabinow J 1948 AIEE Trans. 67 1308–15
coefficient was high for higher particle concentration, the [8] Genc S and Phule P P 2002 Smart Mater. Struct. 11 140–6
percentage increase was more pronounced for lower particle [9] Dixit R K and Buckner G D 2005 Veh. Syst. Dyn. 43
concentrations. This may be due to the close packing of [10] Hong S R, Choi S B and Choi Y T 2005 J. Sound Vib.
particles in the higher volume fractions of the magnetic 288 847–63
[11] Cheng H B, Yam Y and Wang Y T 2009 J. Mater. Process.
phase. For lower concentrations, the particles which were Technol. 209 5254–61
farther away from each other in the off-state lined up in a [12] Shulman Z P, Kordonsky V I and Demchuk S A 1977 J. Heat
chain-like formation and the interaction was more increased Mass Transfer 22 389–94
under a magnetic field. At lower temperatures (−20–0 ◦ C), [13] Li Q, Xuan Y and Wang J 2005 Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci.
the thermal conductivity showed a decrease as the magnetic 30 109–16
[14] Heine M C, Vincente J d and Klingenberg D J 2006 Phys.
field increased (a decrease by 42% for 40SM at 150 G). Fluids 18 023301
This decrease could be due to the decrease of the thermal [15] Reinecke B N, Shan J W, Suabedissen K K and
conductivity of the silicone oil. As a result, silicone oil based Cherkasova A S 2008 J. Appl. Phys. 104 023507