Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Materials Today: Proceedings 18 (2019) 788–797 www.materialstoday.com/proceedings

ICN3I-2017

Experimental Study of Heat Transfer Characteristics of Al2O3 and

CuO Nanofluids for Machining Application

S.S. Chaudharia, R.R. Chakulea,*, P.S. Talmaleb

a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Yeshwantrao Chavan College of Engineering, RTMNU, Nagpur, India, 441110
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Sapkal College of Engineering, SPPU, Pune, India, 422005.

Abstract

In thermal engineering applications, the nanofluids are used to enhance the heat transfer performance. Recently traditional cutting
fluids are gradually being replaced by the nanofluid due to growing need of green manufacturing and environmental friendly
process. This paper presents the experimental study of water based Al2O3 and CuO nanofluids at different volume %
concentrations such as 0.05%, 0.15%, 0.3%, 0.5% and 1% for heat transfer application. The thermal conductivity and viscosity of
nanofluids are considered together for heat transfer performance. The result shows that thermal conductivity ratio is enhanced by
19.74% and 36.21% for Al2O3 and CuO nanofluids at 1 vol. % concentration respectively. Similarly absolute viscosity ratio is
increased by 29.77% and 48.71%. The better heat transfer fluid is obtained for machining application at optimal values 0.30 vol.
% concentration of Al2O3 and 0.15 vol. %concentrations of CuO nanofluid for combined consideration of thermal conductivity
and viscosity. It is also observed that after 0.50 vol. % concentration the viscosity of nanofluid increases largely which affects on
thermal conductivity of nanofluid and gives the poor thermal performance. The performance of Nanofluid MQL process for
machining performance is also reviewed.

© 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Selection and/or Peer-review under responsibility of International Conference on Nanotechnology: Ideas, Innovations & Initiatives-2017 (ICN:3i-
2017).

Keywords:Machining performance;Nanofluid MQL;Thermal conductivity; Viscosity

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +919922435720; fax: 91-253-2232863.

E-mail address: r_chakule@rediffmail.com

2214-7853© 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Selection and/or Peer-review under responsibility of International Conference on Nanotechnology: Ideas, Innovations & Initiatives-2017 (ICN:3i-
2017).
 R.R. Chakule et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings 18 (2019) 788–797 789

1. Introduction

The machining performance and surface integrity is the prime requirement of today’s globalised competitive
environments. At the same time the machining process should be clean, economical, environment, human friendly
and energy conservative. The traditional fluids such as water, ethylene glycol, soluble oil are the common choice of
industry but these fluids have relatively poor thermo physical properties. In conventional application of machining,
the large amount of cutting fluid consumes for minimizing the thermo related problems during the machining
process due to friction and wear. Again excess usage of cutting fluid is uneconomical and harmful to human and
environment. The reason of excess usage is improper penetration of fluid at cutting zone and most of the fluid goes
in waste form. The effectiveness of conventional system of cutting fluid is inefficient due to improper lubrication
and cooling effects at contact interface of cutting tool and workpiece surface. The heat generations at contact zone is
varies from machining to machining process that significantly affects on surface integrity, machining performance.
The governmental regulations towards environment and health are striving to minimize large consumption of metal
working fluid [1-4]. The application of new class of cutting fluid called nanofluid enhanced the thermo physical
properties [5]. The nanofluid is the colloidal mixture of nanoparticles (1-100 nm) in size and base fluid. The
nanofluid improved the heat transfer rate significantly when such nanofluid of small fraction of nanoparticle is used
for machining application. The novel features of nanoparticle are large relative surface area, high thermo-physical
properties and better suspension stability. The suspended nanoparticle in base fluid significantly change the
transport and heat transfer characteristics of suspension which increases the surface volume ratio, Brownian motion
of nanoparticle is discussed in papers [6,7]. The preparation techniques of nanofluid and its application are
summarized in papers [8, 9]. The application of Nanofluid using Minimum Quantity Lubrication (Nanofluid MQL)
technique can reduce the friction, cutting forces and temperature significantly at cutting zone due to better heat
transfer and tribological characteristics of nanofluid [10-14]. The machining performance improves largely when
such nanofluid penetrates properly at grinding zone as mist [15, 16].
The enhancement in thermal conductivity depends on different factors namely fraction amount of nanoparticle,
its type, size, shape, tested temperature, sonication time, surfactants and pH value etc. The different techniques of
synthesis the nanoparticle are summarised in papers [17, 18]. The viscosity is another important parameter that
affects on thermal conductivity and fluid flow. The pressure drop, pumping power and heat transfer rate is directly
related with viscosity of fluid flow. The increased in fluid viscosity decreases the effectiveness of Brownian motion
and finally affects on heat transfer in convection mode [19]. The most common, user friendly and economical
nanoparticle namely Al2O3 and CuO are used for nanofluid due to good features such as melting and boiling point,
density, tribological and anti-toxic properties, high thermal conductivity [20]. Finally Al2O3 and CuO nanoparticles
are selected for nanofluid purpose and further application. The effect of parameters such as particle size, shape, base
fluid, concentration, surfactants etc. on stability of nanofluid and its characterization is summarized in paper [21].
The most of the researchers had studied nanofluid related parameters and their effects either on thermal
conductivity or viscosity of fluid flow. In present research, the prime focus was to prepare the stable nanofluid of
optimal vol. % concentration of nanoparticle for machining application. In machining the cooling and lubricating
effects are more important at contact interface for better machining results. The thermal conductivity and viscosity
of fluid flow both are considered together for finding the optimised value of concentration. In this study Al2O3 and
CuO nanofluid samples of different concentration such as 0.05, 0.15, 0.30, 0.5 and 1.0 vol. % were prepared for
optimal value. The enhancement in thermal conductivity and viscosity ratio of water based alumina and CuO
nanofluid were studied at different vol. % concentration of nanoparticles. The machining results related to
performance using Nanofluid MQL technique are also summarised.

2. Preparation of nanofluids

The analytical grade of spherical γ- Al2O3 and CuO nanoparticles having 99.50% purity and size 30-50 nm was
used to prepare the nanofluids in distilled water. The nanoparticle of required fraction was measured by electronic
balance of 0.001 gm accuracy. The amount of nanoparticle for nanofluid was determined considering the true
density of nanoparticle and volume fraction of nanoparticle in 100 ml distilled water. The surfactant was used in
790 R.R. Chakule et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings 18 (2019) 788–797

proper proportion while preparing the nanofluids of 0.05, 0.15, 0.30, 0.50 and 1 vol. % concentrations to avoid
agglomeration [1]. An anionic dispersant sodium dodecyl sulphate (SDS) of analytic grade was used to prepare the
nanofluids. The five samples of each nanofluid type were tested for thermal conductivity and viscosity. The
sonicator was used to vibrate the disperse system for 2 hours and afterwards mixing for 1 hour by stirrer at 1000
rpm. The time of sonication and stirring is determined based on settlement time and stability of nanofluid. The
possible aggregation of nanoparticles breaks during sonication of nanofluid. The pH of nanofluid is measured by
precision pH meter and obtained in the range of 7.8 to 8 and 9 to 9.5 for Al2O3 and CuO nanofluid respectively. The
thermal conductivity and viscosity of water measured at 30°C are 0.613 W/mK and 0.776 MPa.s respectively. The
dispersion stability of nanofluid observed poor when no surfactant is added in nanofluid. Based on visual
observations, the prepared nanofluid of Al2O3 were stable for 8 hours and CuO nanofluids for the period of 4 hours,
after which the sedimentation was started gradually. The thermal conductivity of nanofluids was measured by KD2
thermal property analyzer and viscosity by AR-G2 rheometer. The proper calibration of instrument and average
reading of parameters were considered. The schematic diagram of ultrasonic bath sonicator and stirrer used for
preparing the nanofluids are shown in Fig. 1.

a b

Fig.1. Schematic diagram of (a) Ultrasonic bath sonicator; (b) Stirrer for preparation of Al2O3 and CuO nanofluids.

2.1. Physical Characterization

The powder used for nanofluid was characterized using various techniques. The Field Emission Scanning
Electron Microscope (FESEM) test is performed for observing the nanoparticles characteristic such as shape,
average particle size and particle nature whether isolated or agglomerated. The Energy-dispersive X-ray
spectroscopy (EDX) was used to study the composition and the percentage of each element. The X-ray diffraction
(XRD) measurement were recorded from 10 to 90 (2 theta) with a scanning step of 0.017 to investigate the crystal
structure and related information. The grain size was determined using Debye-Scherrer equation.

2.2. Thermal conductivity and viscosity measurement

The transient method of thermal conductivity measurement gives the fast measurement and minimizes unwanted
modes of heat transfer. The transient hot-wire and modified transient thermal probe method is also used to measure
the thermal conductivity of nanofluid. In present study KD2 Pro thermal properties analyzer is used which operates
on transient hot wire method. The single needle sensor (KS-1) type having 1.3 mm diameter and 60 mm length was
used and inserted in nanofluid sample which is kept in glass tube. The glass tube of 35 mm diameter and 80 mm
height was used for nanofluid. The sensor was integrated with heating element, thermo resistor and its interior. It is
connected to microprocessor for conducting and controlling the measurements. The viscosity was measured by an
 R.R. Chakule et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings 18 (2019) 788–797 791

AR-G2 rheometer (TA Instruments, USA). It is a rotational rheometer, with plate cone geometry. The amount of
0.35 ml nanofluid was taken with a micro pipette having same volume considered ideal for the analysis and placed
on the Peltier plate of the instrument. The second part of the geometry, the cone, was supported and controlled by
the upper part of the rheometer having magnetic bearing. The cone went down, to an imposed gap of 30μm from the
plate and covered the sample. All the measurements were performed at 30°C.

3. Results and discussion

3.1.Characterization of nanoparticles

The FEG SEM images of Al2O3 and CuO nanoparticles are shown in Fig. 2. The particles are spherical in shape
and size in the range between 30-50 nm, confirm the nanocrystalline structure of the powder. The Fig.3 shows the
EDX images of Al2O3 and CuO nanoparticles which confirms the presence of Al, O in Al2O3 and Cu, O elements in
CuO nanoparticles and no impurities trace. This indicates the purity of powder for application purpose. The XRD
patterns of prepared samples of Al2O3 and CuO nanoparticles are shown in Fig. 4. The Fig. 4(a) shows the peak at
(220), (222) of Al2O3nanoparticle and Fig.4 (b) shows peaks at (-111) (111) (200) of CuO nanoparticle are well
matched with the standard JCPDS data. The XRD patterns confirm the polycrystalline nature of the samples. The
calculated lattice parameters were matched with JCPDS data. The grain size calculated by Debey-Scherrer equation
supports the formation of nanoparticles. The spectrum observed in Al2O3 was narrow while in CuO it appears broad.
The absence of unwanted peaks indicates the purity of the samples and verifies the phase formation of Al2O3 and
CuO nanoparticles.

a b

Fig.2. (a) SEM micrograph of Al2O3; (b) CuO nanopowder

a b

Fig.3. (a) EDX image of Al2O3;(b) CuO nanoparticle

792 R.R. Chakule et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings 18 (2019) 788–797

a b

Fig.4. (a) XRD image of Al2O3; (b) CuO nanoparticle

3.2. Thermal conductivity measurement of nanofluids

The thermal conductivity ratio of Al2O3 and CuO nanofluids at different vol. % concentrations are shown in
Fig.5. The increase trend of thermal conductivity observed for nanofluid samples when more fraction amount of
nanoparticles is mixed in base fluid. The rate of increase in thermal conductivity of CuO nanofluid is observed the
higher compared to Al2O3 nanofluid. From experimental study thermal conductivity values of Al2O3 nanofluid are
0.637 W/mK and 0.734 W/mK at 0.05 and 1 vol. % concentrations respectively. For CuO nanofluid the value of
thermal conductivity obtained are 0.718 W/mK and 0.835 W/mK at 0.05 and 1 vol. % concentrations respectively.
Thus enhancement in thermal conductivity ratio of Al2O3 and CuO nanofluids are obtained by 19.74% and 36.21%
at 1 vol. % concentration.

Fig.5. Enhancement in thermal conductivity ratio of Al2O3 and CuO nanofluids

The several studies on thermal conductivity for different type of nanofluids are summarized in paper [22]. The
enhancement ratio of thermal conductivity is observed in the range of 1.01-1.10 for 42 nm size water based Al2O3
nanofluid from 0.19-1.59 vol. % concentrations [23]. The similar results of enhancement in thermal conductivity
ratio by 1.03 is observed for 47 nm Al2O3 nanofluid at 21°C when 1 vol.% concentration is added [24]. The thermal
conductivity increases by 16% for 20 nm Al2O3-water nanofluid at 1 vol. % concentration is stated in paper [25].
Similarly 21% enhancement of thermal conductivity is obtained for 68 nm size Al2O3 nanofluid at 5 vol. %
concentration [26]. Similar trend of increment of thermal conductivity is observed for CuO nanofluid. The
enhancement ratio of 1.04-1.12 is obtained for 25 nm size water based CuO nanofluid for concentration range of
0.03-0.30 vol. % [27]. The improvement by 17% is measured for CuO-water nanofluid at 0.4 vol. % concentration
[28]. The enhancement ratio of thermal conductivity in the range of 1.04-1.10 of 20 nm size Al2O3–water nanofluid
 R.R. Chakule et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings 18 (2019) 788–797 793

is obtained at 0.20 vol. % concentration whereas for the same nanofluid, the enhancement ratio of 1.12-1.19 at 1 vol.
% concentration. For water based CuO nanofluid of 50-60 nm size particle, the enhancement ratio of thermal
conductivity is by 1.02-1.11 at 0.20 vol.% concentration and 1.06 -1.20 at 1 vol.% concentration [29]. The
enhancement in thermal conductivity is observed by 17% for 50 nm CuO-water nanofluid at 0.4 vol. %
concentrations [30].
The experimental results shows that small fraction amount of nanoparticles in the range of 0.05 to 1 vol.%
concentration, the enhancement in thermal conductivity obtained by 19.74% and 36.21% for 30-50 nm size of Al2O3
and CuO nanofluids. The improvement in thermal conductivity found better even at small concentration compared
to related reviewed papers [23-30]. The different authors have suggested the scattered data of parameters which
affects the improvement of thermal conductivity. The possible reason for better results may be due to formation of
stable homogeneous nanofluid. The parameters involved during nanofluid formation namely nanoparticle shape,
size, surfactants, distilled water and their proportion, mixing method and sonication time were considered carefully
while preparing the nanofluid. The pH of nanofluid can helps to enhance the thermal conductivity by forming better
suspension of nanofluid. The less viscous fluid permit the particles to move more freely and quickly interact with
one another which increases the Brownian motion of nanoparticles in base fluid. Thus better Brownian motion
observed in low viscous fluid where nanoparticles are more active. The small particle size increases the surface area
relative to volume which gives the uniform distribution of particles and helps to enhance thermal conductivity.

3.3. Viscosity measurement of nanofluids

The viscosity is another important thermal property in engineering systems which is more closely related with
fluid flow. The Fig. 6 shows the effect of nanoparticle vol. % concentration on viscosity of nanofluid. The more
increase trend of viscosity is observed for CuO nanofluid compared to Al2O3 nanofluid even at same concentration.
The reason may be due to high density of CuO nanoparticle. From experimental study, the viscosity found 0.801
MPa.s and 0.811 MPa.s at 0.05 vol. % concentration for Al2O3 and CuO nanofluids respectively. Similarly the
viscosity of 1.007 MPa.s and 1.154MPa.s are obtained at 1 vol. % concentration. Thus enhancement in viscosity
ratio is observed by 29.77% and 48.71% for Al2O3 and CuOnanofluidat 1 vol. % concentration.

Fig.6. Viscosity of nanofluids at different volume (%) concentration

The very few studies were reported on effective viscosity of nanofluid. The viscosity of Al2O3 and CuO
nanofluids is a function of shear rate and shows that the Newtonian behaviour of nanofluids in the range 1-4 vol. %
concentration. The trend of increase in viscosity is observed with increase of particle volume %concentration [31,
32]. The 86% enhancement in viscosity is stated for 28 nm size Al2O3 nanoparticle in distilled water at 5 vol. %
concentration [33]. The viscosity increases rapidly with increasing particle volume concentration in nanofluid. Thus
vol. %concentration of nanoparticle should be optimised in practical applications for more stable nanofluid. The
reason may be due to inter-molecular attraction among the nanoparticles. As the concentration increases, the less
space remain to move around for nanoparticles as compact structure occurs due to increase of viscosity. The
nanofluid becomes more viscous and it affects on flow rate in application.
794 R.R. Chakule et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings 18 (2019) 788–797

3.4. Experimental design and optimization

The proper selection of experimental design based on experimental objectives and feasibility is important for
accurate experimental data. After the experiment the statistical analysis of data are important to check the adequacy
of model and ANOVA to find significant factors and their interactions [34-36]. The optimal machining parameters
are important to achieve economic and quality production in global competition. Modeling and optimization of
process parameters of any manufacturing process is usually a difficult task due to complex nature of process. An
effective way to solve such problem is to find the relationship between the performance parameters and its
controllable input parameters by modeling the process through suitable mathematical techniques and optimization
using optimization algorithms. Mathematically complex traditional approaches often fail to give optimal results and
struck in local optima for nonlinear machining process problem. Therefore researchers are focusing more on non-
traditional techniques that are flexible, easy to implement and gives the globalised solution. The optimization of
response parameters for Nanofluid MQL technique is the prime requirement of industry in order to sustain in
competitive working environment and to make process environmental friendly. To the best of author’s knowledge,
the few papers are available which focussed on design and optimization of micro lubrication techniques such as
Nanofluid MQL [37-47].
The application of nanofluid using MQL significantly improves the machining performance due to good
lubricity-cooling effect and effective penetration of cutting fluid. Wang et al. [53] investigated the optimum
lubrication performance among selected nanofluids on nickel alloy GH4169 using MQL. The experiments were
conducted for flood lubrication, pure palm oil MQL and Nanofluid MQL grinding environments. The response
parameters such as sliding friction coefficient, specific sliding grinding energy, G-ratio and surface roughness across
the grinding direction are considered for grinding performance. The result shows that Nanofluid MQL technique
gives excellent lubrication performance by reducing the friction and wear. Out of six types of nanofluids, the
Al2O3nanofluid gives the lowest sliding friction coefficient (0.348), specific sliding grinding energy (82.13 J/mm3),
surface roughness (0.302 µm), highest G-ratio (35.94) and better workpiece surface morphology. Thus, the better
lubrication effects are observed for nanofluids in the following order as Al2O3, MoS2 and SiO2. The results of
grinding performance parameters are shown in Fig.7. The papers based on Nanofluid MQL technique for machining
performance are reviewed in papers [48-54].
a b

c d

Fig.7. (a) Sliding friction coefficient; (b) Specific sliding grinding energy; (c) G-ratio; (d) Surface roughness at different lubrication conditions
 R.R. Chakule et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings 18 (2019) 788–797 795

4. Conclusion

 The thermal conductivity of Al2O3 and CuO nanofluids increases with increment of nanoparticle vol. %
concentration. The rate of thermal conductivity increment of CuO nanofluid is observed the higher compared to
Al2O3 nanofluid even at same concentration. The thermal conductivity of Al2O3 and CuO nanofluids obtained
are 0.637 W/mK and 0.718 W/mK respectively at 0.05 vol. % concentration whereas at 1 vol. % concentration
the value of thermal conductivity measured 0.734 W/mK and 0.835 W/mK. The enhancement ratio of thermal
conductivity by 19.74% and 36.21% at 1 vol. % concentration is observed for Al2O3 and CuO nanofluids.
Similarly the absolute viscosity of Al2O3 and CuO nanofluids are 0.801 MPa.s and 0.811 MPa.s at 0.05 vol. %
concentration whereas at 1 vol. % concentration the values of viscosity obtained are 1.007 MPa.s and 1.154
MPa.s. The improvement in viscosity ratio by 29.77% and 48.71% is observed at 1 vol. % concentration.
 From experimental studies it is cleared that thermal conductivity and viscosity are related to each other. As
more amount of vol. % concentration added in base fluid, the viscosity is increased accordingly but after 0.30
vol. % concentration it is observed that the rate of increment of viscosity is higher. The best choice is that heat
transfer should better at moderate viscosity value for good machining results. After preparing the different
concentrations of nanofluid samples, it is observed that 0.30 vol. % concentration of Al2O3 and 0.15 vol. %
concentration of CuO give the better results.
 The application of nanofluid for machining under different working environments is reviewed where significant
reduction in cutting forces, cutting zone temperature and workpiece surface morphology and tool life improved
largely in Nanofluid MQL. The reason for better machining performance in Nanofluid MQL may be due to high
thermo-physical properties of nanoparticle and proper penetration of nanofluid by MQL approach. The
suggested approach of optimization of Nanofluid MQL technique may substitute to conventional lubrication as
it is clean manufacturing, cost effective, protects the environment, safer to worker and enhance the machining
performance significantly in less amount of cutting fluid.

Acknowledgements

The authors are thankful to the Sir Dr. M. S. Gosavi Pharmaceutical College to provide facilities for nanofluid
preparation and also Visvesvaraya National Institute of Technology (VNIT) and North Maharashtra University
(NMU) for characterization of nanoparticles and nanofluids.

References

[1] D. Setti et al. Int. J. of Machine Tools and Manufacture 88(2015) 237-248.
[2] P.-H. Lee et al., A study on thermal characteristics of micro-scale grinding process using nanofluid minimum quantity lubrication (MQL), Int.
J. of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing 16(9)(2015) 1899-1909.
[3] M. S. Najiha et al., Environmental impacts and hazards associated with metal working fluids and recent advances in the sustainable systems:
A review, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 60 (2016) 1008-1031.
[4] R. R. Chakule et al., Evaluation of the effects of machining parameters on MQL based surface grinding process using response surface
methodology, J. of Mechanical Science and Technology 31(8)(2017) 3907-3916.
[5] X. Wang et al., Thermal Conductivity of Nanoparticle- Fluid Mixture, J. Thermophysics and Heat Transfer 13(4)(1999) 474-480.
[6] L. Godson et al., Enhancement of heat transfer using nanofluids- An overview, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 14(2) (2010)
629-641.
[7] P. Sharma et al., Enhancement of thermal conductivity of ethylene glycol based silver nanofluids, Powder Technology 208 (1) (2011) 7-19.
[8] D. K. Devendiran et al., A review on preparation, characterization, properties and applications of nanofluids, Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews 60 (2016) 21-40.
[9] Y. Shokoohi et al., Application of nanofluids in machining processes-A Review, J. Nanoscience and Technology 2(1)(2016) 59-63.
[10]Y. Ding et al., Particle migration in a flow of nanoparticle suspensions, Powder Technology 149(2-3) (2005) 84-92.
[11]N. Sankar et al., Molecular dynamics modeling of thermal conductivity enhancement in metal nanoparticle suspensions, Int. Communications
in Heat and Mass Transfer 35(7) (2008) 867-872.
[12] J.-H. Wu et al., Bio-inspired surface engineering and tribology of MoS2 overcoated cBN-TiN composite coating, Wear 261(5- 6)(2006) 592-
599.
796 R.R. Chakule et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings 18 (2019) 788–797

[13] Y. Wang et al., Experimental evaluation on tribological performance of the wheel/workpiece interface in minimum quantity lubrication
grinding with different concentrations of Al2O3 nanofluids, J. of Cleaner Production 142(4)(2017)3571-3583.
[14] H. - J. Kim et al., Nano-Lubrication: A Review, Int J. of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing 17(6) (2016) 829-841.
[15] B. Shen et al., Application of nanofluids in minimum quantity lubrication grinding, J. of Tribology Transctions 51(6) (2008) 730-737.
[16] B.Shen et al., Performance of novel MoS2 nanoparticles based grinding fluids in minimum quantity lubrication grinding, Trans
NAMRI/SME 36 (2008) 357-364.
[17] A.K. Singh et al., Thermal Conductivity of Nanofluids, Defence Science Journal 58(5) (2008) 600-607.
[18] W. Yu et al., D.M. France, J.L. Routbort, E. Stephen, U.S. Choi, Review and comparison of nanofluid thermal conductivity and heat transfer
enhancements, Heat Transfer Engineering 29(5) (2008) 432-460.
[19] P.C. Mishra et al., A brief review on viscosity of nanofluids, Int. Nano Lett. 4(2014) 109-120.
[20] Y. Aparna et al., Synthesis and characterization of CuO nanoparticles by novel sol-gel method, 2nd International Conference on Environment
Science and Biotechnology (IPCBEE) 48(2012)156-160.
[21] D.K. Devendiran et al., A review on preparation, characterization, properties and applications of nanofluids, Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews 60(2016) 21-40.
[22]S.M.S. Murshed et al., Thermophysical and electrokinetic properties of nanofluids- A critical review, Applied Thermal Engineering 28(2008)
2109-2125.
[23] D. Wen et al., Experimental investigation into convective heat transfer of nanofluids at the entrance region under laminar flow conditions,
Int. J. of Heat and Mass Transfer 47(2004) 5181-5188.
[24] C.H. Chon et al., Empirical correlation finding the role of temperature and particle size for nanofluid (Al2O3) thermal conductivity
enhancement, Applied Physics Letters 87(15)(2005) 1-3.
[25] S. Krishnamurthy et al., Enhanced mass transport in nanofluids, Nano Letters 6(2006) 419–423.
[26] H. Xie et al., Thermal conductivity enhancement of suspensions containing nanosized alumna particles, J. Applied Physics 91(7) (2002)
4568-4572.
[27] D. Lee et al., A new parameter to control heat transport in nanofluids: Surface charge state of the particle in suspension, J. of Physical
Chemistry B 110(2006) 4323-4328.
[28] B.-X. Wang et al., A fractal model for predicting the effective thermal conductivity of liquid with suspension of nanoparticles, Int. J. of Heat
and Mass Transfer 46(2003) 2665–2672.
[29] S. Z. Heris et al., Experimental investigation of oxide nanofluids laminar flow convective heat transfer, Int. Communications in Heat and
Mass Transfer 33(4) (2006) 529-535.
[30] C.H. Chon et al., Thermal conductivity enhancement of nanofluids by Brownian motion, J. of Heat Transfer 127 (8) (2005) 810.
[31] S.K. Das et al., Pool boiling characteristics of nanofluids, Int. J. of Heat and Mass Transfer 46(2003) 851–862.
[32] N. Putra et al., Natural convection of nanofluids, Heat and Mass Transfer 39(2003) 775–784.
[33] X. Wang et al., Thermal conductivity of nanoparticle–fluid mixture, J. of Thermophysics and Heat Transfer 13(1999) 474–480.
[34] K. Krishnaiah et al., Applied Design of Experiments and Taguchi Methods, Prentice-Hall of India Private Limited, 2013.
[35] D.C. Montgomery, Design and Analysis of Experiments, eight ed., A Wiley Publication, 2013.
[36] P. Mathews, Design of Experiments with MINITAB, first ed., New Age International Publishers,2010.
[37] M. Mia et al., Optimization of MQL flow rate for minimum cutting force and surface roughness in end milling of hardened steel (HRC 40),
International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 89(1-4) (2017) 675-690.
[38] M.K. Gupta et al., Optimization of machining parameters and cutting fluids during nano-fluid based minimum quantity lubrication turning of
titanium alloy by using evolutionary techniques, Journal of Cleaner Production 135(2016) 1276-1288.
[39] M.K. Gupta et al., Machining parameters optimization of titanium alloy using response surface methodology and particle swarm
optimization under minimum quantity lubrication environment, Materials and Manufacturing Processes 31(13)(2016) 1671-1682.
[40] F. Rabiei et al., Performance improvement of minimum quantity lubrication (MQL) technique in surface grinding by modeling and
optimization, Journal of Cleaner Production 86(2015) 447-460.
[41] A.H. Plaine et al., Process parameter optimization in friction spot welding of AA5754 and Ti6Al4V dissimilar joints using response surface
methodology, Int. J. Advanced Manufacturing Technology 85(5-8)1575-1583.
[42] R. Kadaganchi et al., Optimization of process parameters of aluminum alloy AA 2014-T6 friction stir welds by response surface
methodology, Defence Technology11(3) (2015) 209-219.
[43] M. Hadad, An experimental investigation of the effects of machining parameters on environmentally friendly grinding process, Journal of
Cleaner Production 108 (Part A) (2015) 217-231.
[44] S. Rajakumar et al., Optimization and sensitivity analysis of friction stir welding process and tool parameters for joining AA1100 aluminium
alloy, Int. J. Microstructure and Materials Properties 6(1/2)(2011).
[45] J.S. Nam et al., Optimization of environmentally benign micro-drilling process with nanofluid minimum quantity lubrication using response
surface methodology and genetic algorithm, Journal of Cleaner Production 102(2015) 428-436.
[46] S. Agarwal, Optimizing machining parameters to combine high productivity with high surface integrity in grinding silicon carbide ceramics,
Ceramics International 42(5)(2016) 6244-6262.
[47] K. Abhishek et al., Application of JAYA algorithm for the optimization of machining performance characteristics during the turning of
CFRP (epoxy) composites: Comparison with TLBO, GA, and ICA, Engineering with Computers 33(3) (2017) 457-475.
[48] D. Zhang et al., Specific grinding energy and surface roughness of nanoparticle jet minimum quantity lubrication in grinding, Chinese J. of
Aeronautics 28(2) (2015) 570-581.
 R.R. Chakule et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings 18 (2019) 788–797 797

[49] M.K. Sinha et al., Application of eco-friendly nanofluids during grinding of Inconel 718 through small quantity lubrication, J. of Cleaner
Production 141(2017)1359-1375.
[50] Y. Zhang et al., Experimental evaluation of the lubrication performance of MoS2/CNT nanofluid for minimal quantity lubrication in Ni-
based alloy grinding, International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 99(2015)19-33.
[51] Y. Zhang et al., Experimental study on the effect of nanoparticle concentration on the lubricating property of nanofluids for MQL grinding
of Ni-based alloy, J. of Materials Processing Technology 232(2016) 100-115.
[52] Y. Wang et al., Experimental evaluation on tribological performance of the wheel/workpiece interface in minimum quantity lubrication
grinding with different concentrations of Al2O3nanofluids, J. of Cleaner Production 142(4) (2017) 3571-3583.
[53] Y. Wang et al., Experimental evaluation of the lubrication properties of the wheel/workpiece interface in MQL grinding with different
nanofluids, Tribology International 99(2016) 198-210.
[54] M. Shabgard et al., Experimental investigation into lubrication properties and mechanism of vegetable-based CuO nanofluid in MQL
grinding, Int. J. Advanced Manufacturing Technology 92 (9-12) (2017) 3807-3823.