Experimental Studies on

Nanofluid-Based Rectangular
Ramesh Babu Bejjam1
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
SASI Institute of Technology and Engineering,
Tadepalligudem, Andhra Pradesh 534 101, India
e-mail: rameshbabubejjam@gmail.com
K. Kiran Kumar
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
National Institute of Technology,
Warangal 506 004, India
Karthik Balasubramanian
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
National Institute of Technology,
Warangal 506 004, India
Natural Circulation Loop
The main objective of the present study is to carry out experimental investigation on ther-
mal performance of the nanofluid-based rectangular natural circulation loop (NCL). For
this study, an experimental test rig is fabricated with heater as heat source, and tube in
tube heat exchanger as heat sink. For the experimentation, three different nanofluids are
used as working fluids. The nanometer-sized particles of silicon dioxide (SiO2), copper
oxide (CuO), and alumina (Al2O3) are dispersed in distilled water to produce the nano-
fluids at different volume concentrations ranging from 0.5% to 1.5%. Experiments are
carried out at different power inputs and different cold fluid inlet temperatures. The
results indicate that NCL operating with nanofluid reaches steady-state condition quickly,
when compared to water due to its increased thermal conductivity. The steady-state
reaching time is reduced by 12–27% by using different nanofluids as working fluids in the
loop when compared to water. The thermal performance parameters like mass flow rate,
Rayleigh number, and average Nusselt number of the nanofluid-based NCL are improved
by 10.95%, 16.64%, and 8.10%, respectively, when compared with water-based NCL. At
a given power input, CuO–water nanofluid possess higher mass flow rate, Rayleigh
number and Nusselt number than SiO2–water and Al2O3–water nanofluids due to better
thermo-rheological properties. [DOI: 10.1115/1.4043760]

Keywords: natural circulation, mass flow rate, nanofluid, thermophysical properties,

heat transfer enhancement, heat exchanger

1 Introduction devices, solar collectors, different heat exchangers, nuclear reac-

tor core cooling, liquid fuels, and lubricants.
Heat transfer loops are categorized into two—one is forced cir-
Zvirin [6] reviewed studies on suitability of NCL in various
culation loop and another is natural circulation loop (NCL). In
heat transfer applications. Vijayan [7] numerically studied the
NCL, no external aid is required to circulate the working fluid in
steady-state behavior of uniform and nonuniform diameter NCLs,
the loop, whereas in case of forced circulation loop, an external
and he developed new correlations in terms of Re and Grm. Misale
aid is used to circulate the working fluid. The absence of pump
et al. [8] examined the performance of mini-NCL by varying the
facilitates NCLs with low maintenance cost, safety, and high reli-
inclination angle using water as working fluid. They reported that
ability. Therefore, NCLs offer some unique applications such as
lower inclination angles would not affect the NCL performance.
solar systems [1], geothermal heat extraction [2], nuclear reactor
Therefore, they concluded from their experimental data that the
core cooling [3], refrigeration systems [4], electronic cooling sys-
single-phase mini-loop has better thermal performance at low
tems [5], etc. A simple NCL consists of heat source and heat sink
power input with 0 deg loop inclination angle. Nayak et al. [9–11]
as heat extracting elements, which are connected by two vertical
conducted experiments on rectangular NCL with heater and cold
legs named as riser and downcomer. In NCL, the buoyancy is
heat exchanger (CHE) using Al2O3–water nanofluid as working
developed by imposing temperature difference, leads to create
fluid at different particle concentrations. They concluded that the
density gradient between heat source and heat sink, which causes
stable flow can be attained with in NCL with use of nanofluid as
to circulate the working fluid in the entire loop. Most of the
working fluid. Also, they derived a relation for particle settling
researchers numerically studied the effect of various operating
velocity of nanofluid, which is useful to get stability nature in nat-
parameters and geometric parameters that influences the perform-
ural circulation flows. Kumar et al. [12] experimentally examined
ance of NCLs using different working fluids. Only few researchers
the performance of the carbon dioxide based NCL under single-
experimentally studied the performance of NCL with different
phase and two-phase modes. They reported that by operating the
working fluids.
loop with carbon dioxide, no oscillations are noticed and loop is
Advancements in nanotechnology open a gateway to a new
found to stable in both the modes of operations. They also
generation of fluids for heat transfer applications. Suspending
reported that the inlet temperature of cold fluid strongly influences
the nanoparticles in the working fluid at low concentrations signif-
the performance of the loop. Yadav et al. [13] numerically ana-
icantly alters the thermal conductivity and consequently heat
lyzed the performance of NCL, under steady-state condition with
transfer properties. In the past several years, nanofluids have
water and CO2 as loop fluids. Their investigation revealed that at
found widespread applications in various industrial and commer-
pseudo-critical region, the NCL with CO2 exhibits seven times
cial applications such as in refrigerators, cooling electronic
higher heat transfer rate than water at atmospheric condition.
They developed new correlations for friction factor and Nusselt
number for CO2-based NCL. Bejjam and Kiran Kumar [14]
1
Corresponding author. numerically studied the influence of particle concentration on heat
Contributed by the Heat Transfer Division of ASME for publication in the
JOURNAL OF THERMAL SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING APPLICATIONS. Manuscript received
and fluid flow characteristics of nanofluid-based NCL, and they
November 29, 2018; final manuscript received May 6, 2019; published online May concluded that particle concentration of 5% is an optimum value
24, 2019. Assoc. Editor: Ali J. Chamkha. for that kind of NCL model. In their extended work [15], the

Journal of Thermal Science and Engineering Applications AUGUST 2019, Vol. 11 / 041006-1
Copyright VC 2019 by ASME

Downloaded From: https://thermalscienceapplication.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 08/07/2019 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 influence of loop inclination angle on thermal performance of the
NCL was investigated using ANSYS–FLUENT, and they reported that
lower inclination angles (less than 15 deg) can be preferable with-
out any noticeable effect on performance of the NCL. Misale
et al. [16] conducted experimental investigation to study the effect
of Al2O3 nanoparticle suspensions on the performance of the
mini-NCL in terms of overall heat transfer coefficient. They con-
cluded from their experimental data that the overall heat transfer
coefficient was enhanced with nanofluid, when compared to water
and also it was enhanced with particle concentration. Vajjha and
Das [17] experimentally investigated the effect of temperature
and particle concentrations on thermo-physical properties of dif-
ferent nanofluids and reported that both temperature and particle
concentrations strongly influence the thermo-physical properties
of nanofluid. Ho et al. [18] experimentally investigated the ther-
mal resistance of Al2O3–water nanofluid-based NCL with mini-
channel heat exchangers. They proposed a new correlation for
effective Reynolds number at 0–1% nanoparticle concentrations.
Doganay and Turgut [19] conducted experiments to study the
Fig. 1 Nanopowder and surfactant
effectiveness of single-phase natural circulation mini-loop which
was referred to an electronic chip cooling application. They
observed the enhancement of effectiveness of the NCL by using
the nanofluid in place of water. Koca et al. [20] experimentally
studied the performance of mini-NCL. For their study, Ag–water
nanofluid was used as working fluid. They concluded that the per-
formance of the nanofluid-based NCL was enhanced by 11%
when compared to water. Goudarzi and Talebi [21] employed an
entransy dissipation method used to estimate thermodynamic per-
formance of the NCL. In this work, different orientations of the
heater and cooler were investigated. They concluded that under
steady-state conditions, the horizontal orientation of the heater
and cooler leads to higher mass flow rates than other orientations.
From the aforementioned literature, use of nanofluid as working
fluid has been clearly established as an effective approach to
improve the performance of NCL. Based on the above compre-
hensive literature survey, it is also clear that experimental studies
are relatively scarce. Most researchers have concentrated on the
numerical approach. There is a definite need for reliable experi-
mental data to deeply understand the phenomenon of heat transfer
augmentation using nanofluids in NCL. The current study aims to
experimentally investigate the effect of different nanofluids as
working fluids on thermal performance of a NCL, by varying par- Fig. 2 Ultra sonicator
ticle concentration, power input, and cold fluid inlet temperature. 2 3
wnp
6 qnp 7
2 Nanofluid Preparation and Thermophysical particle volume concentration ð1Þ ¼ 6 7
6wnp wbf 7  100
4 þ 5
Properties of the Nanofluids qnp qbf
2.1 Nanofluid Preparation. Dispersion of nanoparticle in (1)
water will refine its thermophysical properties and these properties
are strongly influenced by particle concentration and uniform sus- 2.2 Thermo-Physical Properties of the Nanofluids. In the
pension of nanoparticles. However, preparation of homogeneous current study, three nanofluids called SiO2–water, Al2O3–water,
and stable nanofluid is a challenging issue. Therefore, nanofluid and CuO–water are used. The properties of water and bulk materi-
preparation is a pivotal stage and it is not just suspension of solid als used in this study are presented in Table 1. The density, spe-
particles in fluid medium. cific heat, and thermal expansion coefficient of the nanofluids are
The nanometer-sized (20–30 nm) particles of Al2O3, CuO, and calculated using empirical correlations available in open litera-
SiO2 (supplied by SRL, Mumbai) with 99.9% purity are dispersed ture. In natural circulation flows, among all thermo-physical prop-
in distilled water. The photographic view of the various nanoma- erties, the influence of thermal conductivity and viscosity is
terials used in current work is presented in Fig. 1. All the nano- predominant. Therefore, these two properties are experimentally
fluids are prepared by a two-step method. For the homogeneous measured for further analysis and used.
dispersion of nanoparticles and to control the agglomeration,
nanofluid is sonicated using probe type ultra sonicator (Electro- 2.2.1 Density Measurement. Vajjha et al. [26] developed an
sonic Industries, India), which is shown in Fig. 2, and C-TAB empirical relation to estimate the density of nanofluids by using
(cetyl trimethyl ammonium bromide) surfactant is added to further mixture rule and it is given in the following equation:
suppress the agglomeration rate of nanofluid. Initially, distilled
water is sonicated for 5 min and after C-TAB surfactant is dis- qnf ¼ ð1  1Þqbf þ 1qnp (2)
persed in that water and sonicated for 15 min. Finally, the meas-
ured quantity of nanopowder is dispersed in that mixture and
sonicated for 90 min. It is observed that all the nanofluids are per- 2.2.2 Specific Heat Measurement. Xuan and Roetzel [27]
fectly stable for 72 h without any settlement when undisturbed. developed a relation to estimate the specific heat of nanofluids by

041006-2 / Vol. 11, AUGUST 2019 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: https://thermalscienceapplication.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 08/07/2019 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use


Material/liquid [Reference]
Silicon dioxide (SiO2) [22]
Alumina (Al2O3) [23]
Copper oxide (CuO) [24]
Water [25]
Fig. 3 Rheolab QC rotational Rheometer
Fig. 4 Variation of viscosity with temperature
Journal of Thermal Science and Engineering Applications
Downloaded From: https://thermalscienceapplication.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 08/07/2019 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
Table 1 Properties of solid materials and water
Density (kg/m3) Specific heat (J/kg K) Thermal conductivity (W/m K) Thermal expansion coefficient (K1)
2220 745 1.4 0.5  106
3900 785.21 40 8.4  106
6350 535.6 69 9.3  106
997 4181.3 0.6 2.5  104
assuming thermal equilibrium between liquid phase and solid
nanoparticles. The correlation is given in the following equation:
ð1  1Þqbf Cp;bf þ 1qnp Cp;np
Cp;nf ¼ (3)
qnf
2.2.3 Thermal Expansion Coefficient Measurement. Khanafer
et al. [28] proposed a relation to evaluate thermal expansion coef-
ficient and it is given in the following equation:
2 3
1 bnp 1
bnf ¼ bnf 6 þ (4)
4 ð1  1Þ qbf bbf 1 qnp 7 5
1þ 1þ
1 qnp ð1  1Þ qbf
2.2.4 Viscosity Measurement. The dynamic viscosity of dis-
tilled water, CuO–water, Al2O3–water, and SiO2–water nanofluids
at different particle concentrations and temperatures are measured
using Rheolab QC rotational Rheometer (Anton Paar supplier,
India). The photographic view of Rheometer is shown in Fig. 3.
The apparatus is equipped with a Peltier thermostatic bath to con-
trol the temperature of working fluid. The effect of temperature on
viscosity of various nanofluids at 1% concentration is presented in
Fig. 4. Figure 4 illustrates that the viscosity of nanofluid is gradu-
ally decreasing with the temperature due to ceasing of Van Der
Waals forces of attractions [29].
2.2.5 Thermal Conductivity Measurement. Thermal conduc-
tivity analyzer (TPS 500S, Therm Test Inc., Fredericton, NB,
Canada) is used to experimentally measure the conductivity of
different nanofluids and water. To control the temperature of the
fluid, Julabo thermostatic bath is connected to thermal conductiv-
ity analyzer. The apparatus has a separate 7552 Kapton sensor of
2 mm diameter to measure thermal conductivity of liquids. Exper-
imental facility of Thermal conductivity analyzer is shown in
Fig. 5. The apparatus works based on transient plane source prin-
ciple and follows ISO 22007-2.2 Standards. The variation of ther-
mal conductivity of water and different nanofluids at 1% particle
Fig. 5 (a) Thermal conductivity analyzer and (b) 7552 Kapton sensor
AUGUST 2019, Vol. 11 / 041006-3
 Fig. 6 Variation of thermal conductivity with temperature

concentration with temperature is presented in Fig. 6. By increas-

ing the temperature, the inter-particle cohesive forces and corre-
sponding viscosity diminish, which increases brownian motion and
promotes micro-convection between particle and fluid that leads to
Fig. 8 Experimental test rig
enhancement in the thermal conductivity of nanofluids [30].

3 Experimental Details
3.1 Experimental Setup. Figure 7 shows the line diagram of
the experimental facility. The photographic view of the experi-
mental test rig is presented in Fig. 8. The system consists of heater
at bottom and tube-in-tube cold heat exchanger at top. These two
are connected by two parallel legs called riser and downcomer. A
smooth stainless steel tube with 15.1 mm external diameter and
12.7 mm internal diameter is chosen for loop pipe based on
numerical study of Bejjam and Kiran Kumar [31]. To prevent heat
leak from or to ambient, the entire loop is insulated with 4 mm
thick asbestos rope. The geometrical specifications and operating
parameters are given in Table 2. The temperatures of the loop
fluid (T1–T4), external fluid (T5 and T6), and heater wall surface
(T7–T10) are measured by using resistance temperature detectors
as shown in Fig. 7. These resistance temperature detectors are

Fig. 7 Line diagram of the experimental test rig

041006-4 / Vol. 11, AUGUST 2019 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: https://thermalscienceapplication.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 08/07/2019 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Table 2 Geometrical specifications and operating parameters of the NCL

Parameter Value

Loop pipe diameter 0.012 m

Inner diameter of the annulus at CHE 0.0215 m
Loop height 1.64 m
Loop width 1.22 m
Total length of the loop 10.4 m
Length of heater 1m
Length of CHE 5m
Power input to heater 500–2500 W
Cold water inlet temperature 5–20  C
Pipe wall thickness 0.0016 m
Cold fluid mass flow rate 0.08 kg/s
Particle volume concentration (U) 0.5%, 1.0%, and 1.5%
External fluid to CHE Water
Pipe wall material Stainless steel
Working fluid (loop fluid) Distilled water, CuO–water, Al2O3–water and SiO2–water nanofluids

connected to a computer integrated data acquisition system Q

(DAQ) (Agilent-34972A) to log the temperature data at regular hlf ¼  heater  (7)
As Twall  Tb;lf
intervals. Pressure drop between different sections in the NCL is
measured using U-tube manometers. Both heater and cold heat
hlf D
exchangers are operated at constant pressure condition. Therefore, Nu ¼ (8)
manometer tubes are connected at the entrance and exit of the klf
riser and downcomer sections, respectively, as shown in Fig. 7.
where Twall is the average wall surface temperature measured at
To measure cold fluid mass flow rate, a rotameter is connected
four locations (i.e., 7, 8, 9, and 10. Refer Fig. 7) between the inlet
between cold heat exchanger inlet and thermostatic bath outlet.
and outlet of the heater and it is calculated by
Classic scientific made thermostatic bath is used to control the
cold fluid temperature sent to CHE. The developed test rig is use- T7 þ T8 þ T9 þ T10
ful to study the performance of the NCL for high heat transfer rate Twall ¼ (9)
(maximum of 2500 W) applications (solar energy, geothermal 4
heat extraction, etc.). Tb;lf is the bulk fluid temperature measured by following equation:

3.2 Experimental Procedure. Experimental study on single- T1 þ T2

phase rectangular natural circulation loop is initially conducted Tb;lf ¼ (10)
2
with distilled water then after conducted with three different nano-
fluids (SiO2–water, Al2O3–water, and CuO–water) at 0.5%, 1.0%, The Rayleigh number can be estimated by
and 1.5% concentrations. During the experimentation, the com-
 
bined effect of power input, particle concentration, and cooling g blf q00 d4 q2lf Cp;lf
water inlet temperatures are analyzed. The experimentation is car- Ralf ¼   (11)
ried out with the following procedure: llf  klf2

 The NCL is filled with working fluid.

 Air bubbles are drained out by giving continuous pulses
while filling the loop.
 Sufficient time is given to the loop fluid to obtain thermal
equilibrium with room temperature without heating.
 The cold fluid temperature at CHE is set at a required value.
 The DAQ system is switched on and the initial readings are
taken.
 After ensuring the thermal equilibrium from the DAQ system,
the thermostatic bath and heater are started simultaneously.
 Repeatability of the test rig is ensured.
 The same procedure is repeated for all the experiments.
4 Date Reduction
The steady-state mass flow rate ðm_ Þ and Reynolds number can
be calculated by using following relation:
power input ¼ Qheater ¼ m_ lf  Cp; lf  ðT2  T1 Þ (5)
The Reynolds number is estimated by
4 m_ lf
Relf ¼ (6)
p d llf
The average heat transfer coefficient and average Nusselt numbers
are estimated by
5 Results and Discussion
In the present study, the effect of type of working fluid, particle
concentration, power input, and inlet temperature of cold fluid on
thermal performance of the NCL for are experimentally investi-
gated. Different nanofluids such as CuO–water, SiO2–water, and
Al2O3–water are used at different particle concentrations (0.5%,
1.0%, and 1.5%), and the results are compared with water. The
power input at heater is varied from 500 W to 2500 W with incre-
ment of 500 W. The inlet temperature of cold fluid is varied from
5  C to 20  C with the step size of 5  C.
5.1 Comparison of Experimental and Analytical Results.
The experimental outcomes are compared with the analytical
results of Vijayan’s correlation [7]. Reynolds number can be esti-
mated by the following equation:
 
Grm 0:5
Ress ¼ 0:1768 (12)
NG
where the modified Grashof number (Grm) and effective loss coeffi-
cient (NG) can be calculated by Eqs. (13) and (14), respectively [7]
 
g blf q2lf d 3 Qheater H
Grm; lf ¼   (13)
Acs l3lf Cp;lf

Journal of Thermal Science and Engineering Applications AUGUST 2019, Vol. 11 / 041006-5

Downloaded From: https://thermalscienceapplication.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 08/07/2019 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Fig. 9 Comparison of experimental results with published data
Fig. 10 Transient response of NCL with different working
fluids
Lt
NG ¼ (14)
d Al2O3–water, and SiO2–water nanofluids is reduced by 5.29%,
Figure 9 shows the comparison of experimental outcomes of cur-
rent study with the analytical approach of Vijayan’s correlation
and notice that the analytical approach is underestimating the
Reynolds number; however, this deviation is within the allowable
limits of less than 615%.
5.2 Transient Response of the Natural Circulation Loop
for Different Working Fluids. Figure 10 shows the temperature
difference of various loop fluids with time at heater. It is observed
from Fig. 10 that the transient response of NCL with water and
nanofluids have similar trend. As shown in Fig. 10, the steady-
state reaching time for water, SiO2–water, Al2O3–water, and
CuO–water nanofluids is 25.33, 22.17, 20.41, and 18.40 min,
respectively. Particularly, NCL operated with CuO–water nano-
fluid quickly reaches steady-state condition when compared with
other working fluids, due to its higher thermal conductivity than
other fluids. From Fig. 10, it is concluded that the steady-state
reaching time can be reduced by 12–27% with different nanofluids
compared to water.
5.3 Influence of Particle Concentration and Power Input
on Steady-State Mass Flow Rate. Variation of the mass flow
rate in NCL with power input and for different working fluids is
described in Fig. 11, and it shows that the loop fluid mass flow
rate increases with power input. For a given power input, the mass
flow rate of any nanofluid is higher than the water. At particle
041006-6 / Vol. 11, AUGUST 2019
Downloaded From: https://thermalscienceapplication.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 08/07/2019 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
Fig. 11 Variation of mass flow rate with power input
Fig. 12 Variation of mass flow rate with particle concentration
concentration of 1%, the net specific heat of the CuO–water,
3.09%, and 1.80%, respectively, when compared with water. This
decrement in specific heat gives large temperature rise in the fluid
for a given power input. The temperature rise gives large increase
in density gradient between the heater and cold heat exchanger
sections which causes for increasing the steady-state mass flow
rate in loop. Furthermore, thermal expansion coefficient also
influences the mas flow rate. Thermal expansion coefficient is
enhanced by dispersing nanosized particles in water and it
improves the driving force [32]. At a given power input, the
CuO–water nanofluid has higher mass flow rate than Al2O3–water
and SiO2–water nanofluids due to its higher thermal expansion
coefficient and lower specific heat. It is concluded from Fig. 11
that the mass flow rate of loop fluid is enhanced by 10.95%,
7.51%, and 4.05% for CuO–water, Al2O3–water, and SiO2–water
nanofluids, respectively, when compared with water at power
input of 2500 W.
Figure 12 shows the variation of mass flow rate with particle
concentration. The mass flow rate is gradually increasing with the
particle concentration. As particle concentration increases, the
specific heat decreases. Hence, with the same heat flux, nanofluid
with increased particle concentration will induce high-density gra-
dient between different sections of the NCL. This leads to increase
in mass flow rate. It is concluded from Fig. 12 that the mass flow
rate is increased by 3.92%, 4.17%, and 4.02% for CuO–water,
Al2O3–water, and SiO2–water nanofluids, respectively, by varying
the particle concentration from 0.5% to 1.5% at 2000 W power
input.
Transactions of the ASME

Fig. 13 Variation of temperature difference at heater with
power input
Fig. 14 Variation of temperature difference at heater with parti-
cle concentration
5.4 Influence of Power Input and Particle Concentration
on Temperature Difference at Heater. Figure 13 shows the
variation of temperature gradient with power input at 1% particle
concentration of nanofluids and 20  C cooling water inlet tempera-
ture. It is observed from Fig. 13 that the loop fluid temperature
difference increases with power input. The enhanced thermal and
transport properties of nanofluids facilitates to reduce the tempera-
ture gradient at heater by 5.55%, 9.81%, and 14.46% for
SiO2–water, Al2O3–water, and CuO–water nanofluids, respec-
tively, when compared to water at maximum power input.
Figure 14 illustrates that temperature difference is decreasing
with particle concentration for all nanofluids. From Fig. 12, it was
observed that mass flow rate increased with particle concentration.
This in turn reduces the residence time of the nanofluid within the
heater section. This explains the reduction in temperature gradient
across the heater section with increased particle concentration.
From Fig. 14, it is observed that the temperature gradient is
decreased by 7.94%, 7.74%, and 6.26% for SiO2–water,
Al2O3–water, and CuO–water nanofluids, respectively, by varying
particle concentration from 0.5% to 1.5% at 2000 W power input.
5.5 Influence of Particle Concentration and Power Input
on Rayleigh Number. Figure 15 shows the variation of Rayleigh
number with power input for water and different nanofluids. As
shown in Fig. 15, the Rayleigh number of the working fluid is
increasing with power input. The resultant high buoyancy force
could be the reason for higher Rayleigh number for the nanofluid
compared with water. It is observed from Fig. 15 that the Rayleigh
number is enhanced by 16.64%, 10.20%, and 4.41% for
Journal of Thermal Science and Engineering Applications
Downloaded From: https://thermalscienceapplication.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 08/07/2019 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
Fig. 15 Variation of Rayleigh number with power input
Fig. 16 Variation of Rayleigh number with particle
concentration
CuO–water, Al2O3–water, and SiO2–water, nanofluids, respec-
tively, when compared with water at the highest power input.
The variation of Rayleigh number with the particle concentration
is shown in Fig. 16. It is observed from Fig. 16 that by increasing the
particle concentration from 0.5% to 1.5%, the Rayleigh number is
increased by 38.20%, 43.63%, and 51.29% for CuO–water,
Al2O3–water, and SiO2–water nanofluids, respectively, at 2000 W
power input. At a fixed concentration, CuO–water nanofluid has
higher Rayleigh number than SiO2–water and Al2O3–water. The
improved thermo-rheological properties of CuO–water nanofluid
lead to higher Rayleigh number.
5.6 Influence of Particle Concentration and Power Input
on Average Nusselt Number. Figure 17 shows the variation of
average Nusselt number with power input and different working
fluids at 20  C cooling water inlet temperature. As shown in
Fig. 17, for a given working fluid, the average Nusselt number
increases with power input due to increased average heat transfer
coefficient. At a given power input to heater, the mass flow rate of
the nanofluid is higher than water, which increases the convection
heat rate at the heater, thereby increasing the average Nusselt
number. It is noticed from Fig. 17 that the average Nusselt number
is enhanced by 8.10%, 4.53%, and 2.20% for CuO–water,
Al2O3–water, and SiO2–water nanofluids, respectively, when
compared with water at maximum power input. At a fixed power
input, CuO–water nanofluid has higher average Nusselt number
than SiO2–water and Al2O3–water nanofluids, as it has higher
average heat transfer coefficient.
The influence of particle concentration on average Nusselt
number at heater section is illustrated in Fig. 18. The average
Nusselt number is increasing with the particle concentration.
AUGUST 2019, Vol. 11 / 041006-7
 Fig. 17 Variation of average Nusselt number at heater with Fig. 19 Variation of pressure drop with power input
power input

Fig. 20 Variation of pressure drop with particle concentration

Fig. 18 Variation of average Nusselt number at heater with par-
ticle concentration
When the concentration of nanoparticles increased, the thermal
conductivity of the nanofluid is increased. This enhancement of
thermal conductivity of the nanofluid has a positive effect on the
average heat transfer coefficient and consequently on the average
Nusselt number. Another cause for the enhanced average Nusselt
number is attributed to the enhanced average heat transfer coeffi-
cient at higher mass flow rate. It is noticed from Fig. 18 that the
average Nusselt number is enhanced by 14.82%, 16.22%, and
14.61% for SiO2–water, Al2O3–water, and CuO–water nanofluids,
respectively, by varying particle concentration from 0.5% to
1.5%.
0.5% to 1.5%, the pressure drop is increased by 6.32%, 6.68%,
and 9.48% for SiO2–water, Al2O3–water, and CuO–water nano-
fluids, respectively.
5.8 Effect of Cooling Water Inlet Temperature on Mass
Flow Rate and Average Nusselt Number. The variation of mass
flow rate with inlet temperature of cooling water is described in
Fig. 21. By reducing the inlet temperature of cold fluid at CHE, high
temperature gradient across the heater and CHE is developed in the
loop fluid. That leads to increase in the buoyancy and mass flow rate.
Figure 22 shows the effect of cooling water inlet temperature
on average Nusselt number for different working fluids at 2000 W

5.7 Influence of Particle Concentration and Power Input

on Pressure Drop in Natural Circulation Loop. Figure 19
shows the pressure drop as a function of power input for pure
water and different nanofluids. As expected, irrespective of work-
ing fluid, the pressure drop increases with power input. As can be
seen from Fig. 19, all the nanofluids shows higher pressure drop
than pure water due to high viscosity and high density. At low
power input, the pressure drop difference is small among all nano-
fluids when compared to water and it is increasing with power
input. The pressure drop is increased by 6.90%, 12.44%, and
19.08% for SiO2–water, Al2O3–water, and CuO–water nanofluids,
respectively, when compared with water at high power input. The
CuO–water nanofluid has more pressure drop than other working
fluids due to its higher viscosity and density. Figure 20 shows the
pressure drop with particle concentration at 2000 W power input.
The pressure drop is increasing with particle concentration. It is Fig. 21 Variation of mass flow rate with cooling water inlet
observed from Fig. 20 that by varying particle concentration from temperature

041006-8 / Vol. 11, AUGUST 2019 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: https://thermalscienceapplication.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 08/07/2019 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 d¼ diameter of the pipe (m)
g¼ acceleration due to gravity (m/s2)
Grm ¼ modified Grashof number
h¼ heat transfer coefficient (W/m2 K)
H¼ loop height (m)
I¼ current (amps)
k¼ thermal conductivity (W/m K)
L¼ length of the pipe (m)
NG ¼ dimensionless parameter
nm ¼ nanometer
Nu ¼ Nusselt number
Q¼ power input (W)
q00 ¼ heat flux (W/m2)
Ra ¼ Rayleigh number
Re ¼ Reynolds number
T¼ temperature ( C)
v¼ voltage (V)
Fig. 22 Variation of average Nusselt number with inlet temper-
ature of the cooling water w¼ weight (kg)

power input. It is seen that the inlet temperature of cold water has Greek Symbols
much stronger effect on average Nusselt number. When the power b ¼ thermal expansion coefficient (/K)
input to heater is kept constant, and by decreasing the inlet tem- l ¼ viscosity (Ns/m2)
perature of the cooling water, mass flow rate of the working fluid q ¼ density (kg/m3)
increases, which increases the convective heat transfer rate as Ø ¼ particle volume concentration
well as average Nusselt number.
Subscripts
6 Conclusions
avg ¼ average
In this study, the influence of power input, particle concentra- bf ¼ base fluid
tion, and cold fluid inlet temperature on heat transfer and fluid c ¼ cold heat exchanger
flow behavior of the natural circulation loop is experimentally cs ¼ cross section
investigated. For this study, three water-based nanofluids such as lf ¼ loop fluid
SiO2, Al2O3, and CuO are used at different particle concentrations nf ¼ nanofluid
and results are compared with pure water. np ¼ nanoparticle
(1) Thermo-physical properties of the nanofluids are strongly ss ¼ steady-state
influenced by temperature. t ¼ total
(2) Natural circulation loop operated with nanofluid quickly
reaches steady-state condition compared to water. The steady- Abbreviations
state reaching time is reduced by 12–27% by using various CHE ¼ cold heat exchanger
nanofluids. NCL ¼ natural circulation loop
(3) The steady-state mass flow rate increases with power input. SRL ¼ Sisco Research Laboratory
Also, the fluid flow rate is further enhanced by adding
nanoparticles to the working fluid.
(4) Thermophysical properties of the working fluid influence
the Rayleigh number. The nanofluids possess favorable Appendix: Uncertainty Analysis
thermophysical properties, which improve the Rayleigh To find the errors associated with experimentation, uncertainty
number. Rayleigh number is further increased with the par- analysis has been carried out based on the procedure suggested by
ticle concentration due to more buoyancy. Kline and McClintock [33]. The maximum uncertainties of
(5) Average Nusselt number increases with particle concentra- steady-state mass flow rate, average heat transfer coefficient,
tion and power input. and average Nusselt number are estimated and presented in
(6) As expected, with decrease in cooling water inlet tempera- Table 3.
ture at CHE, the mass flow rate and average Nusselt num-
(1) Power input, Qheater
ber of working fluid increase.
(7) Nanofluids possess higher viscosity and density than water;
Qheater ¼ V  I;
therefore, the loop operated with nanofluid has more pres- sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
sure drop when compared to water.  2  2 qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
UQheater UV UI 2 2
¼ þ ¼ ð0:28Þ þ ð0:15Þ
Qheater V I
Acknowledgment
¼ 60:3176%
The financial support offered by DST-MHRD, India, is grate-
fully acknowledged. (2) Steady-state mass flow rate, m_
Funding Data Qheater
m_ ss ¼ ;
Cp  ðT2  T1 Þ
 DST-MHRD (Funder ID: 10.13039/501100001409). sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
   
Um_ ss UQheater 2 UðT2 T1 Þ 2
¼ þ
Nomenclature m_ ss Qheater T2  T1
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
A ¼ area (m2) 2 2
Cp ¼ specific heat (J/kg k) ¼ ð0:3176Þ þ ð0:232Þ ¼ 60:3934%:

Journal of Thermal Science and Engineering Applications AUGUST 2019, Vol. 11 / 041006-9

Downloaded From: https://thermalscienceapplication.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 08/07/2019 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Table 3 Uncertainties of variables [9] Nayak, A. K., Gartia, M. R., and Vijayan, P. K., 2008, “An Experimental Inves-
tigation of Single-Phase Natural Circulation Behavior in a Rectangular Loop
S. No. Variable Uncertainty (%) With Al2O3 Nanofluids,” Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci., 33(1), pp. 184–189.
[10] Nayak, A. K., Gartia, M. R., and Vijayan, P. K., 2009, “Thermal–Hydraulic
Characteristics of a Single Phase NCL With Water and Al2O3 Nanofluids,”
1 Steady-state mass flow rate 0.3934 Nucl. Eng. Des., 239(3), pp. 526–540.
2 Average heat transfer coefficient 0.3631 [11] Nayak, A. K., Gartia, M. R., and Vijayan, P. K., 2009, “Nanofluids: A Novel
3 Average Nusselt number 0.4718 Promising Flow Stabilizer in Natural Circulation Systems,” AIChE J., 55(1),
pp. 268–274.
[12] Kumar, R. G., 2009, “Steady State Analysis of CO2 Based Natural Circulation
Loops With End Heat Exchangers,” Appl. Therm. Eng., 29, pp. 1893–1903.
[13] Yadav, A. K., Ram Gopal, M., and Bhattacharyya, S., 2012, “CO2 Based Natu-
(3) Reynolds number, Re ral Circulation Loops: New Correlations for Friction and Heat Transfer,” Int. J.
Heat Mass Transfer, 55(17–18), pp. 4621–4630.
[14] Bejjam, R. B., and Kiran Kumar, K., 2018, “Numerical Study on Heat Transfer
4m_ Characteristics of Nanofluid Based Natural Circulation Loop,” Therm. Sci. J.,
Re ¼ ; 22(2), pp. 885–897.
pDl
s ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
2  2 qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi [15] Bejjam, R. B., and Kiran Kumar, K., 2018, “Numerical Investigation to Study
URe Um_ Ul the Effect of Loop Inclination Angle on Thermal Performance of Nanofluid
2 2
¼ þ ¼ ð0:3934Þ þ ð0:2Þ Based Natural Circulation Loop,” Int. J. Ambient Energy (accepted).
Re m_ l [16] Misale, M., Devia, F., and Garibaldi, P., 2012, “Experiments With Al2O3 Nano-
fluid in a Single Phase Natural Circulation Mini-Loop: Preliminary Results,”
¼ 60:4412% Appl. Therm. Eng., 40, pp. 64–70.
[17] Vajjha, R. S., and Das, D. K., 2012, “A Review and Analysis on Influence of
(4) Average heat transfer coefficient, havg Temperature and Concentration of Nanofluids on Thermophysical Properties,
Heat Transfer and Pumping Power,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 55(15–16), pp.
4063–4078.
Qheater
havg ¼ ; [18] Ho, C. J., Chung, Y. N., and Lai, C.-M., 2014, “Thermal Performance of Al2O3/
As ðTwall  Tb Þ Water Nanofluid in a Natural Circulation Loop With a Mini-Channel Heat Sink
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ffi and Heat Source,” Energy Convers. Manage., 87, pp. 848–858.
 2 
Uhavg UQ UðTwall Tb Þ 2 [19] Doganay, S., and Turgut, A., 2015, “Enhanced Effectiveness of Nanofluid
¼ þ Based Natural Circulation Mini Loop,” Appl. Therm. Eng., 75, pp. 669–676.
havg Q ðTwall  Tb Þ [20] Koca, H. D., Doganay, S., and Turgut, A., 2017, “Thermal Characteristics and
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi Performance of Ag-Water Nanofluid: Application to Natural Circulation
2 2
¼ ð0:3176Þ þ ð0:176Þ ¼ 60:3631% Loops,” Energy Convers. Manage., 135, pp. 9–20.
[21] Goudarzi, N., and Talebi, S., 2018, “Heat Removal Ability for Different Orien-
tations of Single-Phase Natural Circulation Loops Using the Entransy Method,”
(5) Average Nusselt number, Nuavg Ann. Nucl. Energy, 111, pp. 509–522.
[22] Vajjha, R. S., Das, D. K., and Kulkarni, D. P., 2010, “Development of
New Correlations for Convective Heat Transfer and Friction Factor in Turbulent
havg d Regime for Nanofluids,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 53(21–22), pp. 4607–4618.
Nuavg ¼ ;
vkffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
[23] Pak, B. C., and Cho, Y. I., 1998, “Hydrodynamic and Heat Transfer Study of
u !2   2 Dispersed Fluids With Submicron Metallic Oxide Particles,” Exp. Heat Trans-
UNuavg u Uh Uk fer, 11(2), pp. 151–170.
¼ t avg
þ [24] Fotukian, S. M., and Nasr Esfahany, M., 2010, “Experimental Study of
Nuavg havg k Turbulent Convective Heat Transfer and Pressure Drop of Dilute CuO/Water
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi Nanofluid Inside a Circular Tube,” Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transfer, 37(2),
2 2 pp. 214–219.
¼ ð0:3631Þ þ ð0:3Þ ¼ 60:4718% [25] Lemmon, E. W., Huber, M. L., and McLinden, M. O., 2013, “NIST Standard
Reference Database 23: Reference Fluid Thermodynamic and Transport
Properties-REFPROP,” Version 9.1, National Institute of Standards and Tech-
nology, Gaithersburg, MD.
References [26] Vajjha, R. S., Das, D. K., and Mahagaonkar, B. M., 2009, “Density Measure-
[1] Close, D. J., 1962, “The Performance of Solar Water Heaters With Natural ments of Different Nanofluids and Their Comparison With Theory,” Petrol. Sci.
Circulation,” Sol. Energy, 6(1), pp. 33–40. Technol., 27(6), pp. 612–624.
[2] Kreitlow, D. B., Reistad, G. M., Miles, C. R., and Culver, G. G., 1978, [27] Xuan, Y., and Roetzel, W., 2000, “Conceptions of Heat Transfer Correlation of
“Thermosyphon Models for Down Hole Heat Exchanger Application in Nanofluids,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 43(19), pp. 3701–3707.
Shallow Geothermal Systems,” ASME J. Heat Transfer, 100(4), pp. 713–719. [28] Khanafer, K., Vafai, K., and Lightstone, M., 2003, “Buoyancy Driven Heat
[3] Nayak, A. K., Vijayan, P. K., Saha, D., Venkat Raj, V., and Aritomi, M., 2000, Transfer Enhancement in a Two-Dimensional Enclosure Utilizing Nanofluids,”
“Analytical Study of Nuclear-Coupled Density-Wave Instability in a Natural Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 46(19), pp. 3639–3653.
Circulation Pressure Tube Type Boiling Water Reactor,” Nucl. Eng. Des., [29] Meybodi, M. K., Daryasafar, A., Koochi, M. M., Moghadasi, J., Meybodi, R.
195(1), pp. 27–44. B., and Ghahfarokhi, A. K., 2016, “A Novel Correlation Approach for Viscosity
[4] Lee, J. S., Rhi, S. H., Kim, C. N., and Lee, Y., 2003, “Use of Two-Phase Ther- Prediction of Water Based Nanofluids of Al2O3, TiO2, SiO2 and CuO,” J. Tai-
mosyphons for Thermoelectric Refrigeration: Experiment and Analysis,” Appl. wan Inst. Chem. Eng., 58, pp. 19–27.
Therm. Eng., 23(9), pp. 1167–1176. [30] Kumar, P. M., Kumar, J., Tamilarasan, R., Sendhilnathan, S., and Suresh, S.,
[5] Vladimir, P. G., and Maydanik, Y. F., 2007, “Low-Noise Cooling System 2015, “Review on Nanofluids Theoretical Thermal Conductivity Models,” Eng.
for PC on the Base of Loop Heat Pipes,” Appl. Therm. Eng., 27(5–6), pp. J., 19(1), pp. 67–83.
894–901. [31] Bejjam, R. B., and Kiran Kumar, K., 2016, “Numerical Study on Heat Transfer
[6] Zvirin, Y., 1982, “A Review of Natural Circulation Loops in Pressurized Water and Fluid Flow Behavior in Nanofluid Based Single-Phase Natural Circulation
Reactors and Other Systems,” Nucl. Eng. Des., 67(2), pp. 203–225. Loop,” ICRTEST, Issue-III, Hyderabad, India, Oct. 23–25, Paper No. PNFE-
[7] Vijayan, P. K., 2002, “Experimental Observations on the General Trends of the EP-097.
Steady State and Stability Behavior of Single Phase Natural Circulation Loops,” [32] Nayak, A. K., Singh, R. K., and Kulkarni, P. P., 2010, “Measurement of Volu-
Nucl. Eng. Des., 215(1–2), pp. 139–152. metric Thermal Expansion Coefficient of Various Nanofluids,” Tech. Phys.
[8] Misale, M., Garibaldi, P., Passos, J. C., and de Bitencourt, G. G., 2007, Lett., 36(8), pp. 696–698.
“Experiments in a Single Phase Natural Circulation Mini-Loop,” Exp. Therm. [33] Kline, S. J., and McClintock, F. A., 1953, “Describing Uncertainties in Single-
Fluid Sci., 31(8), pp. 1111–1120. Sample Experiments,” Mech. Eng., 75, pp. 3–8.

041006-10 / Vol. 11, AUGUST 2019 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: https://thermalscienceapplication.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 08/07/2019 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use