International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 85 (2015) 1034–1040

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijhmt

Thermal performance analysis of Al2O3/R-134a nanorefrigerant

I.M. Mahbubul a, A. Saadah a, R. Saidur b,⇑, M.A. Khairul a, A. Kamyar c
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
b
Centre of Research Excellence in Renewable Energy, King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals (KFUPM), Dhahran, 31261, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
c
School of Mechanical and Mining Engineering, The University of Queensland, QLD 4072, Australia

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Nowadays, nanofluids are being considered as an efficient heat transfer fluid in various thermal
Received 13 August 2014 applications. Refrigerant-based nanofluids, termed as ‘‘nanorefrigerants’’, have the potential to improve
Received in revised form 12 February 2015 the heat transfer performances of refrigeration and air-conditioning systems. This study analyzed the
Accepted 12 February 2015
thermophysical properties and their effects on the coefficient of performance (COP) resulted by addition
of 5 vol.% Al2O3 nanoparticles into R-134a refrigerant at temperatures of 283–308 K. The analysis has
been done for a uniform mass flux through a horizontal smooth tube using established correlations.
Keywords:
The results indicate that the thermal conductivity, dynamic viscosity, and density of Al2O3/R-134a
Nanofluid
Thermal conductivity
nanorefrigerant increased about 28.58%, 13.68%, and 11%, respectively compared to the base refrigerant
Viscosity (R-134a) for the same temperature. On the other hand, specific heat of nanorefrigerant is slightly lower
Density than that of R-134a. Moreover, Al2O3/R-134a nanorefrigerant shows the highest COP of 15%, 3.2%, and
Specific heat 2.6% for thermal conductivity, density, and specific heat, respectively compared to R-134a refrigerant.
Coefficient of performance Therefore, application of nanoparticles in refrigeration and air-conditioning systems is promising to
improve the performances of the systems.
Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction thermophysical properties of the refrigerant. Consequently, energy

A nanorefrigerant is one kind of nanofluid for which the base
fluid is a refrigerant. Like other nanofluids, it is a mixture of
refrigerant and solid particles. Nanorefrigerant is being considered
as a potential to enhance the thermal performance of refrigeration
and air-conditioning systems because of the higher thermal con-
ductivity of nanoparticles. Three main benefits have been reported
when using nanorefrigerants in a refrigerator [1]; Firstly, use of
nanoparticles can improve the solubility between the lubricant
and the refrigerant [2]. Secondly, nanoparticles can enhance the
thermal conductivity as well as heat transfer characteristics of a
refrigerant [3,4]. Finally, reduction of the friction coefficient and
wear rate is observed in nanorefrigerants compared to regular
refrigerants [5]. It is hoped that, the addition of nanoparticles into
conventional refrigerants will improve the heat transfer perfor-
mance of refrigeration systems [6,7]. Almost all vapor compression
refrigeration systems use lubricating oil making it possible to use
nanoparticles in refrigeration systems in the form of a nanoparti-
cles/oil suspension [8]. The existence of nanoparticles in oil
suspension influences the overall performance of the refrigeration
system since nanoparticles significantly enhance the
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +966 13 860 4628; fax: +966 13 860 7312.
E-mail addresses: saidur@kfupm.edu.sa, saidur912@yahoo.com (R. Saidur).
consumption will be decreased along with reduction in emissions
that lead to global warming and greenhouse-gas effects.
Thermophysical properties are the performance parameters
that need to be analyzed in order to select the most suitable option
for the energy conversion systems. Thermal conductivity is affect-
ed by temperature and density. High thermal conductivity of the
refrigerant is crucial in order to gain the maximum output from
the system [9]. Addition of nanoparticles with high thermal con-
ductivity and increasing their concentration can enhance the ther-
mal conductivity of a nanorefrigerant [10,11]. Viscosity is another
property that affects the pumping power and pressure drop para-
meters [12]. It is known that pressure drop plays a significant role
when designing and optimizing refrigeration systems [13].
Mahbubul et al. [14] studied the viscosity of R123-TiO2 nanorefrig-
erant for different nanoparticle volume concentrations using
Brinkman’s model [15], and concluded that pressure drop increases
significantly with the increase of viscosity. Moreover, rheological
behavior of Al2O3/R141b nanorefrigerant was studied and the mix-
ture was found to behave in a non-Newtonian way [16]. As like vis-
cosity, density of a fluid also has influences on the pressure drop
and pumping power capacity. A solid substance has a higher den-
sity in comparison to a liquid; therefore, the density of a nanofluid
is found to be higher by increasing the concentration of nanoparti-
cles within a fluid. Mahbubul et al. [17] measured the density of

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2015.02.038
0017-9310/Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 I.M. Mahbubul et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 85 (2015) 1034–1040 1035

Nomenclature

A heat transfer surface area (m2) W net total work (W)

bd bubble departure diameter (m) x mass quality
Bo boiling number X tt Martinelli parameter
Co convection number
Cp specific heat capacity (J/kg K) Greek symbols
COP coefficient of performance / particle volume concentration (%)
D tube diameter (m) q density (kg/m3)
E enhancement factor l dynamic viscosity (N s/m2)
g gravitational acceleration (m/s2) r surface tension (N/m)
G mass flux (kg/m2 s)
h heat transfer coefficient (W/m2 K)
Subscripts
hfg latent heat (kJ/kg) cond condenser
HTC heat transfer coefficient (W/m2 K) DB pool boiling
k thermal conductivity (W/m K) down downstream
K orifice constant
evap evaporator
l tube length (m) in input
L temperature lift (K) l interfacial layer/nanolayer
m _ mass flow rate (kg/s)
Npl no pressure losses
Nu Nusselt number nr nanorefrigerant
P pressure (Pa) p nanoparticle
Pr Prandtl number r refrigerant
q heat flux (W/m2)
s saturation
Q out heat output (W) SA single phase
r radius of the tube (m) up upstream
rp radius of the nanoparticles (m) v vapor
Re Reynolds number
S suppression factor
Prefix
t thickness of interfacial layer (m)
T temperature (K) D gradient
V volumetric flow rate (m3/s)

Al2O3/R141b nanorefrigerant and found that density increases lin- properties of Al2O3/R-134a nanorefrigerant were calculated using
early with increasing the volume concentration and decreases with Microsoft Excel 2010 based on the established correlations from
increasing the temperature. Specific heat is a measure of energy literature.
storage capability of the working fluid. Fluids with large specific
heat require significant amounts of energy input to sensibly 2.1. Thermal conductivity
increase or decrease their temperature. Specific heat is proportion-
al to the change of internal energy of a system, thus when the tem- Thermal conductivity of Al2O3/R-134a nanorefrigerant was
perature of the system increases, the fluctuation of molecules will predicted using the Sitprasert et al. [29] correlation. This model
be intensified and a higher heat capacity will be induced, as more considers the effects of nanoparticle volume concentration,
energy levels can be filled up. This will be the reason of higher heat nanoparticle size, and temperature-dependent interfacial layer.
transfer rates. However, there is no literature available on the
ðkp  kl Þ/kl ½2b31  b3 þ 1 þ ðkp þ 2kl Þb31 ½/b3 ðkl  kr Þ þ kr 
specific heat capacity of nanorefrigerants. knr ¼
High COP and environmental friendliness are considered as the b31 ðkp þ 2kl Þ  ðkp  kl Þ/½b31 þ b3  1
major selection criteria of a refrigerant. There are some studies ð1Þ
available about the pool boiling [18], flow boiling [19], convective
where,
heat transfer [20,21], pressure drop [22,23], migration characteris-
tics [24,25], and energy performance [1,6] of the nanorefrigerants. t
b¼1þ ð1aÞ
To the best of authors’ knowledge, there are no studies available rp
discussing the effect of thermophysical properties on the COP of
a system using nanorefrigerants. The objective of this study is to t
b1 ¼ 1 þ ð1bÞ
investigate the effect of temperature on thermal conductivity, vis- 2rp
cosity, density, and specific heat of Al2O3 nanoparticles suspended
in R-134a refrigerant. Moreover, the effects of changed thermo-
physical properties of nanorefrigerant on the COP are investigated Table 1
and compared with that of R-134a refrigerant. Properties of Al2O3 nanoparticles [26].

Properties Value
2. Experimental method Radius 15 nm
Molecular mass 101.00 kg/kmol
The properties of Al2O3 nanoparticles and R-134a refrigerant are Density 3880 kg/m3
shown in Table 1 and Table 2, respectively. The analysis was car- Thermal conductivity 40* W/m K
Specific heat 729 J/kg K
ried out considering 5 vol.% of Al2O3 nanoparticles in R-134a refrig-
erant with the temperature range of 283–308 K. Thermophysical *
Source: Wang and Mujumdar [27].
1036 I.M. Mahbubul et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 85 (2015) 1034–1040

Table 2
Properties of R-134a refrigerant [28].

Temperature Pressure Liquid Density Vapor density Liquid Specific heat Liquid Thermal conductivity Liquid Viscosity Surface Tension
(K) (Mpa) (kg/m3) (kg/m3) (kJ/kg k) (W/m k) (mPa s) (N/m)
283 0.41461 1261.0 20.226 1.3704 0.087618 0.23487 0.010138
288 0.48837 1243.4 23.758 1.3869 0.085444 0.22066 0.009441
293 0.57171 1225.3 27.780 1.4049 0.083284 0.20737 0.008756
298 0.66538 1206.7 32.350 1.4246 0.081134 0.19489 0.008081
303 0.77020 1187.5 37.535 1.4465 0.078992 0.18313 0.007417
308 0.88698 1167.5 43.416 1.4709 0.076853 0.17200 0.006766

The thickness and the thermal conductivity of the interfacial h i0:5

bd ¼ 0:0146 a gðq2rq Þ with a ¼ 35 . T s in Eq. (2f) is the saturation
layer are calculated from Eqs. (1c) and (1d), g

temperature corresponding to the test section pressure for the flow

t ¼ 0:01ðT  73Þr 0:35
p ð1cÞ boiling. The constants C 1 to C 5 in Eqs. (2c) and (2e), were obtained
by an iteration process to minimize the errors between the theore-
t tical calculated HTC and experimental results [30]. The constant
kl ¼ C kr ð1dÞ
rp values are shown in Table 3.
Substituting the above equations, the final relationship between
where C ¼ 30 is a constant for Al2O3 nanoparticles. COP and thermal conductivity for refrigerant and nanorefrigerant
COP is equal to heat output divided by total work input. are expressed in forms of Eqs. (3) and (4), respectively:
Q out  h 
COP ¼ ð2Þ i 0:326
h i0:67  0:581
W net;in E 0:023 kDr Re0:8 Pr0:4 þ S 207 kðbdÞ
r qðbdÞ
Ts
qv
q Pr0:533
A DT
COP ¼
Eq. (2a) shows the basic equation used to calculate the heat W net;in
transfer coefficient (HTC). ð3Þ
Q out ¼ h A DT ð2aÞ  h i  h i0:67  0:581
0:326
qv
E 0:023 kDnr Re0:8 Pr0:4 þ S 207 kðbdÞ
nr qðbdÞ
Ts q Pr 0:533
A DT
where, Q out is the heat output, h is the HTC, A is the heat transfer COP nr ¼
area, and DT is the temperature difference. W net;in
Eq. (2b) introduces the relationship between force convective ð4Þ
boiling heat transfer of pure refrigerant and the output heat, taken
from Wen et al. [30]
2.2. Viscosity
h ¼ E hDB þ S hSA ð2bÞ
The viscosity of nanorefrigerant was calculated using Brinkman
In this equation, E is the enhancement factor, S is the suppres-
model [15] in the following form:
sion factor, hDB is the pool boiling HTC obtained from the correla-
tion by Dittus and Boelter [31]. hSA is the single phase heat 1
lnr ¼ lr ð5Þ
transfer suggested by Stephan and Abdelsalam [32]. Eqs. (2c) – ð1  /Þ2:5
(2f) express all four parameters.
where, lnr and lr are the effective viscosity of nanorefrigerant and
E ¼ C 1 BoC 2 X Ctt3 ð2cÞ pure refrigerant, respectively. / is the particle volume fraction
which is 0.05 (5%) in our case.
k 0:8 0:4 Klein et al. [33] analyzed the impact of pressure drop on the
hDB ¼ 0:023 Re Pr ð2dÞ refrigeration performance using liquid-suction heat exchanger.
D
They proposed a dimensionless correlation that indicates COP in
The Reynolds number was calculated using, Re ¼ GD
l and Prandtl terms of pressure drop as follow:
number by Pr ¼ C Pkl. Here, mass flux,G, and tube diameter, D, were  
COP DP
assumed to be 150 kg/m2 sand 6 mm, respectively. ¼ 1  ð2:37  0:0471L þ 3:01  104 L2 Þ  ð6Þ
COPnpl Pev ap
S ¼ C 4 CoC5 ð2eÞ where, L is the temperature lift which equals to T cond  T ev ap and
 0:674  0:581 Pev ap is the evaporator pressure.
k qðbdÞ qv Pressure drop of refrigerant in the compressor was calculated
hSA ¼ 207 Pr0:533 ð2fÞ
bd kT s q using Hagen–Poiseuille equation [34]. In this analysis, refrigerant
was assumed nearly incompressible. Hagen–Poiseuille model that
Referring to Eq. (2c), boiling number can be found from,
is used to calculate the pressure drop for a fluid flow through a
Bo ¼ h q G, while X tt is the Martinelli parameter defined by
fg cylindrical tube, is expressed as follows:
h i0:9  0:5  0:1
qv l
X tt ¼ ð1xÞ . In Eqs. (2e) and (2f), Convection num-
x q lv 8llV
h i0:8  0:5 DP ¼ ð6aÞ
ber, Co ¼ x ð1xÞ qv
q and Bubble departure diameter, pr 4
Table 3 Replacing pressure drop in Eq. (6) by Eq. (6a) gives a new rela-
The constants in Eqs. (2c) and (2e) [30]. tionship between COP and viscosity:
C1 C2 C3 C4 C5  
COP 8llV
53.64 0.314 0.839 0.927 0.319 ¼ 1  ð2:37  0:0471L þ 3:01  104 L2 Þ ð7Þ
COPnpl pPev ap r4
 I.M. Mahbubul et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 85 (2015) 1034–1040 1037

2.3. Density

The density of nanofluid was calculated using Pak and Cho [35]
correlation shown in Eq. (8):
qnr ¼ /qp þ ð1  /Þqr ð8Þ

Performance of the system is dependent on the mass flow rate

of the refrigerant. This was suggested by Bukac et al. [36] according
to the following relation:
_ Dh E
m
COP ¼ ð9Þ
W net;in
where, DhE is the change of enthalpy in the evaporator.
The single-phase orifice equation [37] was used to calculate the
mass flow rate through a short tube:
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
_ ¼ K A 2g qðPup  Pdown Þ
m ð9aÞ

To obtain the relationship between COP and density, the mass

flow rate through a short tube in Eq. (9a) has been substituted into
Eq. (9). The final equation is indicated as follows:
Fig. 1. Variation of thermal conductivity as a function of temperature.
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
DhE K A 2g qðPup  Pdown Þ
COP ¼ ð10Þ
W net;in
refrigerant, thermal conductivity was decreased with increasing
temperature. This is due to the fact that when temperature increas-
2.4. Specific heat es, the liquid is evaporated, which causes the atoms to be positive-
ly charged and vibrate with greater amplitude. This is why the
For a given particle volume fraction, specific heat of a nanore- thermal conductivity for any substance is lower at the vapor state
frigerant can be calculated using the correlation suggested by compared with the liquid state. The increments in the thermal con-
Pak and Cho [35]. ductivity of Al2O3/R-134a nanorefrigerant are from 8.12% to 28.58%
for 283 K to 308 K, respectively.
C p;nr ¼ /C p;p þ ð1  /ÞC p;r ð11Þ Fig. 2 demonstrates the effect of thermal conductivity on COP of
where, C p;p is the specific heat of Al2O3 nanoparticles and C p;r is the the refrigeration system at different temperatures for R-134a
specific heat of R-134a refrigerant. refrigerant and Al2O3/R-134a nanorefrigerant. As noted from
Substituting Prandtl numbers in Eqs. (3), (4) by expressions of Fig. 2, COP increases with the increase of temperature (calculated
specific heat, viscosity and thermal conductivity, the relationship using Eqs. (3) and (4), respectively). A maximum rise of 15% in
between COP and specific heat for the refrigerant and nanorefriger- COP is observed for the nanorefrigerant compared to that of the
ant can be obtained from Eqs. (12) and (13), respectively. refrigerant due to its higher thermal conductivity. Since thermal
 h i  conductivity is proportional to HTC, HTC of the nanorefrigerant
0:6 0:4   1 0:207 hqðbdÞi0:674 q 0:581 0:533
E 0:023
D
kr Re0:8 ðC p;r lr Þ þ S 207
bd kr Ts q
v ðC p;r lr Þ A DT with higher thermal conductivity is larger than that of the fluid
COP ¼ with lower thermal conductivity at the same Nusselt number [3].
W net;in
ð12Þ It can be stated that addition of more particles contributes to the
 h i   0:207 h i0:674  0:581
0:6 qv
E 0:023
D
kr Re0:8 ðC p;nr lr Þ0:4 þ S 207
bd
1
kr
qðbdÞ
Ts q ðC p;nr lr Þ0:533 A DT
COP nr ¼
W net;in
ð13Þ

3. Result and discussion

3.1. Thermal conductivity

Fig. 1 shows the variation of thermal conductivity of refrigerant

and nanorefrigerant with temperature ranging from 283 to 308 K.
It can be seen in Fig. 1 that, the thermal conductivity of Al2O3/
R-134a nanorefrigerant was linearly increased with increasing
temperature, while for pure refrigerant, thermal conductivity
moderately decreased with increasing temperature. As the thermal
conductivity of Al2O3 nanoparticle is higher than the base fluid
(refrigerant) therefore, the thermal conductivity of the nanorefrig-
erant was found to be higher than pure refrigerant [3]. Again, with
the rise of temperature, the Brownian motion of nanoparticles will
intensify and the contribution of micro convection in heat trans-
port will increase, which results in the augmentation of thermal
conductivity [9]. Therefore, the thermal conductivity of nanorefrig- Fig. 2. Effect of the thermal conductivity of Al2O3/R-134a nanorefrigerant on COP at
erant tends to increase with increasing temperature. For pure different temperatures.
1038 I.M. Mahbubul et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 85 (2015) 1034–1040

increased effective surface area for heat transfer. As a result, the

inherently greater thermal conductivity of nanoparticles enhances
the thermal conductivity of the nanorefrigerant [9]. This is also the
reason for maximization of HTC and minimization of entropy gen-
eration rate i.e. improvement in exergy efficiency. Since higher
energy levels are more easily accessed, the heat transfer rate
should be increased. As a result, the overall COP of the system will
increase [38].

3.2. Viscosity

Fig. 3 shows the comparison between viscosities of Al2O3/

R-134a nanorefrigerant and R-134a refrigerant in the temperature
range of 283 K to 308 K. Viscosity of refrigerant and nanorefrigerant
decrease linearly with the increase of temperature. The viscosity of
nanorefrigerant is observed to be slightly higher compared to that
of pure refrigerant. The plot outlines the considerable effect of tem-
perature on the viscosity of nanorefrigerant. When temperature of
fluid increases, the inter-particle and intermolecular adhesion
forces are decreased [39] and as a result the viscosity of fluid is also
reduced. This is a natural phenomenon that in most cases, viscosity
Fig. 4. Effect of the viscosity of Al2O3/R-134a nanorefrigerant on COP at different
of a liquid is decreases with the increase of temperature. When
temperatures.
temperature of any substance increases, the movement among
the molecules is also intensified. For the higher movement of
the molecules, the resistance to flow of a material (referred to as [41]. As a result, though Al2O3/R-134a nanorefrigerant has higher
viscosity) is decreases. Besides this, a higher temperature of viscosity compared to R-134a refrigerant, it shows better COP ratio
nanorefrigerant intensifies the Brownian motion of nanoparticles, compared to R-134a refrigerant.
and as a result, the viscosity of nanorefrigerant is decreased [40].
Moreover, the viscosity of nanorefrigerant was found to be 13.68% 3.3. Density
higher than that of the base fluid (R-134a refrigerant).
Fig. 4 shows the effect of viscosity on COP for both Al2O3/R-134a The change in density with respect to refrigerant’s temperature
nanorefrigerant and R-134a refrigerant at different temperatures. has been shown in Fig. 5 for R-134a and Al2O3/R-134a nanorefrig-
In both cases, COP was increased with increasing temperature. It erant. Eq. (8) was used to calculate the density of nanorefrigerant.
is essential to study the flow resistance of the nanorefrigerant in The density of Al2O3/R-134a nanorefrigerant and R-134a refriger-
addition to the heat transfer improvement characteristic in order ant are moderately decreased with the increase of temperature.
to be able to utilize the nanorefrigerant in a refrigerator system It is found that, Al2O3/R-134a nanorefrigerant exhibits
in a feasible way. The R-134a refrigerant and Al2O3/R-134a nanore- approximately 11% higher density compared to R-134a refrigerant
frigerants with 5 vol.% concentration are considered for the calcu- at the same temperature. Density is defined as the mass divided by
lation of the pressure drop. The COP of refrigerant in terms of volume. The atoms of the refrigerant are starting to vibrate with
viscosity is calculated using Eq. (7). Apparently, no substantial increasing temperature. Hence, the volume of the refrigerant
addition to the pressure drop is caused for the nanorefrigerant in increases and the density will linearly decrease with the increase
all successions of the enquiry, which exposes that nanorefrigerant of temperature. Moreover, the density of solid particles is much
will not result in an additional penalty as a rise of pumping power higher than that of liquids or gases (in this case the density of

Fig. 3. Variation of viscosity as a function of temperature. Fig. 5. Variation of density as a function of temperature.
 I.M. Mahbubul et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 85 (2015) 1034–1040 1039

Al2O3 and R-134a are about 3880 and 1220 kg/m3, respectively)
causing the mixture of solid–liquid suspension to show higher
density compared to the base fluid. This is why the density of
Al2O3/R-134a nanorefrigerant is found to be higher than the
R-134a refrigerant.
The effect of density on the COP at different temperatures has
been shown in Fig. 6. COP for both Al2O3/R-134a nanorefrigerant
and R-134a refrigerant are noted to decrease with the increase of
temperature. The COP of nanorefrigerant is about 3.2% higher than
that of R-134a refrigerant due to the high density of nanorefriger-
ant. COP and mass flow rate are calculated by Eq. (9) and (9a). From
the equations, the COP is directly proportional to mass flow rate,
and the mass flow rate of Al2O3/R-134a nanorefrigerant is higher
than the pure refrigerant due to its higher density. Therefore,
higher COP is observed for the nanorefrigerant. In a centrifugal
compressor, pressure rise is related to the density of the refriger-
ant. A high value of density results in the high pressure rise which
indirectly reduces the overall pressure drop. This, in turn, will
improve the system performance.

3.4. Specific heat Fig. 7. Variation of specific heat as a function of temperature.

The specific heat of both Al2O3/R-134a nanorefrigerant and

R-134a refrigerant linearly increase with the rise of temperature
from 283 K to 308 K as shown in Fig. 7. The specific heat of nanore-
frigerant was calculated from Eq. (11). For a particular volume frac-
tion, analysis showed that the minimum specific heat belonged to
the nanorefrigerant. This decrease is due to the lower specific heat
of added particles. Moreover, higher specific heat of the base fluid
is the reason why the specific heat of the mixture exceeds that of
the nanoparticles. Therefore, the specific heat of the solid–liquid
mixture becomes lower than the specific heat value of the base flu-
id. Specific heat capacity of R-134a refrigerant is 2.4% higher com-
pared to Al2O3/R-134a nanorefrigerant. It is because an increase in
heat capacity will increase internal energy of the system. The
increment in temperature will cause the liquid to fluctuate about
its equilibrium value to a higher extent, and then the heat capacity
of the system will increase, as more energy levels will be filled up.
Most researchers agree upon the fact that specific heat capacity of
nanofluids are lower than that of the base fluids [42].
Fig. 8 demonstrates the effect of specific heat on the COP of a
refrigeration system considering at different temperatures. The
value of COP linearly rises with the increase of temperature for
Fig. 8. Effect of the specific heat of Al2O3/R-134a nanorefrigerant on COP at
different temperatures.

both Al2O3/R-134a nanorefrigerant and R-134a refrigerant.

Approximately, a 2.6% higher COP was noticed for nanorefrigerant
compared to R-134a refrigerant. This parameter is increased
tremendously with increasing the output temperature.
Refrigeration systems operated with nanorefrigerant provide more
efficiency due to their higher output temperature. The specific rea-
son for higher output temperature is the more amounts of
nanoparticles in the base fluid. As we know, specific heat is defined
as, ‘‘the heat required to raise the temperature of a unit mass of a
substance by one unit of temperature.’’ It is clear from the defini-
tion of specific heat that any substance with lower specific heat
provides more output temperature for equal heat flow.

4. Conclusions

In the present study, thermophysical properties of Al2O3/R-134a

nanorefrigerant and the effect of these properties on the COP with
Fig. 6. Effect of the density of Al2O3/R-134a nanorefrigerant on COP at different respect to temperature have been studied. The outcomes of this
temperatures. analysis could be drawn as follows.
1040 I.M. Mahbubul et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 85 (2015) 1034–1040
Thermal conductivity of the Al2O3/R-134a nanorefrigerant was
found to increase by the increase of temperature. Approximately,
a maximum of 28.58% enhancement of thermal conductivity is
found for the nanorefrigerant compared to the base refrigerant.
Analytical results revealed that the thermal conductivity of
nanorefrigerant could enhance the COP of the refrigeration system
up to 15% in comparison with the pure refrigerant.
Both viscosity and density were found to be augmented for
Al2O3/R-134a nanorefrigerant compared to pure refrigerant.
About 13.68% and 11% enhancements have been also found for
viscosity and density, respectively. Unlike, thermal conductivity;
dynamic viscosity and density were decreased by the increase of
temperature for Al2O3/R-134a nanorefrigerant. When considering
the viscosity, it can be concluded that the COP can be enhanced
by replacing the working fluid with nanorefrigerant. COP increased
roughly by 3.2% as a function of density, for the case of
nanorefrigerant.
Specific heat capacities of refrigerant and nanorefrigerant were
also increased with increasing temperature. However, specific heat
of nanorefrigerant was found to be slightly lower than the pure
refrigerant. Nevertheless, 2.6% higher COP was observed for
nanorefrigerant due to its specific heat capacity.
We hope that this study will shed light on the effect of using
nanorefrigerants on the performance of the refrigeration systems
and encourage more future investigations in this area. More study
and experimental work are required to check the improvement of
the performance and the efficiency of the refrigeration systems
using nanorefrigerants.
Conflict of interest
None declared.
Acknowledgment
‘‘The authors are thankful to University of Malaya for financial
support under the High Impact Research MoE Grant: UM.C/625/
1/HIR/MoE/ENG/40 (D000040-16001) from the Ministry of
Education Malaysia.’’
References
[1] S. Bi, K. Guo, Z. Liu, J. Wu, Performance of a domestic refrigerator using TiO2-
R600a nano-refrigerant as working fluid, Energy Convers. Manage. 52 (1)
(2011) 733–737.
[2] R. Wang, B. Hao, G. Xie, A refrigerating system using HFC134a and mineral
lubricant appended with n-TiO2 (R) as working fluids, in: Proceedings of the
4th International Symposium on HAVC, Tsinghua University Press, Beijing,
China, 2003.
[3] W. Jiang, G. Ding, H. Peng, Measurement and model on thermal conductivities
of carbon nanotube nanorefrigerants, Int. J. Therm. Sci. 48 (6) (2009) 1108–
1115.
[4] K.-J. Wang, G.-L. Ding, W. Jiang, Nano-scale thermal transporting and its use in
engineering, in: Proceedings of the 4th Symposium on Refrigeration and Air
Condition, Southeast University Press, Nanjing, China, 2006.
[5] K. Lee, Y. Hwang, S. Cheong, L. Kwon, S. Kim, J. Lee, Performance evaluation of
nano-lubricants of fullerene nanoparticles in refrigeration mineral oil, Curr.
Appl. Phys. 9 (2) (2009) e128–e131.
[6] S.-S. Bi, L. Shi, L.-L. Zhang, Application of nanoparticles in domestic
refrigerators, Appl. Therm. Eng. 28 (14) (2008) 1834–1843.
[7] K. Wang, K. Shiromoto, T. Mizogami. Experiment study on the effect of nano-
scale particle on the condensation process, in: Proceedings of the 22nd
International Congress of Refrigeration, Beijing, China, Paper No. 2007.
[8] M. Kedzierski, M. Gong, Effect of CuO nanolubricant on R134a pool boiling heat
transfer, Int. J. Refrig. 32 (5) (2009) 791–799.
[9] I.M. Mahbubul, S.A. Fadhilah, R. Saidur, K.Y. Leong, M.A. Amalina,
Thermophysical properties and heat transfer performance of Al2O3/R-134a
nanorefrigerants, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 57 (1) (2013) 100–108.
[10] W. Jiang, G. Ding, H. Peng, Y. Gao, K. Wang, Experimental and model research
on nanorefrigerant thermal conductivity, HVAC&R Res. 15 (3) (2009) 651–669.
[11] R. Saidur, S. Kazi, M. Hossain, M. Rahman, H. Mohammed, A review on the
performance of nanoparticles suspended with refrigerants and lubricating oils
in refrigeration systems, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 15 (1) (2011) 310–323.
[12] I.M. Mahbubul, R. Saidur, M.A. Amalina, Latest developments on the viscosity
of nanofluids, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 55 (4) (2012) 877–888.
[13] O. Didi, N. Kattan, J. Thome, Prediction of two-phase pressure gradients of
refrigerants in horizontal tubes, Int. J. Refrig. 25 (7) (2002) 935–947.
[14] I.M. Mahbubul, R. Saidur, M.A. Amalina, Investigation of viscosity of R123-TiO2
nanorefrigerant, Int. J. Mech. Mater. Eng. 7 (2) (2012) 146–151.
[15] H. Brinkman, The viscosity of concentrated suspensions and solutions, J. Chem.
Phys. 20 (1952) 571.
[16] I.M. Mahbubul, S.S. Khaleduzzaman, R. Saidur, M.A. Amalina, Rheological
behavior of Al2O3/R141b nanorefrigerant, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 73 (2014)
118–123.
[17] I.M. Mahbubul, R. Saidur, M.A. Amalina, Thermal conductivity, viscosity and
density of R141b refrigerant based nanofluid, Procedia Eng. 56 (2013) 310–
315.
[18] M. Kedzierski, Effect of Al2O3 nanolubricant on R134a pool boiling heat
transfer, Int. J. Refrig. 34 (2) (2011) 498–508.
[19] K. Henderson, Y.-G. Park, L. Liu, A.M. Jacobi, Flow-boiling heat transfer of R-
134a-based nanofluids in a horizontal tube, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 53 (5–6)
(2010) 944–951.
[20] I.M. Mahbubul, R. Saidur, M.A. Amalina, Heat transfer and pressure drop
characteristics of Al2O3-R141b nanorefrigerant in horizontal smooth circular
tube, Procedia Eng. 56 (2013) 323–329.
[21] H. Peng, G. Ding, W. Jiang, H. Hu, Y. Gao, Heat transfer characteristics of
refrigerant-based nanofluid flow boiling inside a horizontal smooth tube, Int. J.
Refrig. 32 (6) (2009) 1259–1270.
[22] I.M. Mahbubul, R. Saidur, M.A. Amalina, Pressure drop characteristics of TiO2-
R123 nanorefrigerant in a circular tube, Eng. e-Trans. 6 (2) (2011) 124–130.
[23] H. Peng, G. Ding, W. Jiang, H. Hu, Y. Gao, Measurement and correlation of
frictional pressure drop of refrigerant-based nanofluid flow boiling inside a
horizontal smooth tube, Int. J. Refrig. 32 (7) (2009) 1756–1764.
[24] H. Peng, G. Ding, H. Hu, Migration of carbon nanotubes from liquid phase to
vapor phase in the refrigerant-based nanofluid pool boiling, Nanoscale Res.
Lett. 6 (1) (2011) 219.
[25] I.M. Mahbubul, A. Kamyar, R. Saidur, M.A. Amalina, Migration properties of
TiO2 nanoparticles during the pool boiling of nanorefrigerants, Ind. Eng. Chem.
Res. 52 (2013) 6032–6038.
[26] M. Chandrasekar, S. Suresh, A. Chandra Bose, Experimental investigations and
theoretical determination of thermal conductivity and viscosity of Al2O3/water
nanofluid, Exp. Thermal Fluid Sci. 34 (2) (2010) 210–216.
[27] X.-Q. Wang, A.S. Mujumdar, Heat transfer characteristics of nanofluids: a
review, Int. J. Therm. Sci. 46 (1) (2007) 1–19.
[28] E.W. Lemmon, M.O. McLinden, M.L. Huber, NIST Reference Fluid
Thermodynamic and Transport Properties – REFPROP, Version 7.0, NIST
Standard Reference Database 23, in Database. 2002, U.S. Department of
Commerce, Gaithersburg, Boulder.
[29] C. Sitprasert, P. Dechaumphai, V. Juntasaro, A thermal conductivity model for
nanofluids including effect of the temperature-dependent interfacial layer, J.
Nanopart. Res. 11 (6) (2009) 1465–1476.
[30] M.-Y. Wen, C.-Y. Ho, Evaporation heat transfer and pressure drop
characteristics of R-290 (propane), R-600 (butane), and a mixture of R-290/
R-600 in the three-lines serpentine small-tube bank, Appl. Therm. Eng. 25 (17–
18) (2005) 2921–2936.
[31] F. Dittus, L. Boelter, Public Eng. 2, University of California, Berkeley, 1930.
[32] K. Stephan, M. Abdelsalam, Heat-transfer correlations for natural convection
boiling, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 23 (1) (1980) 73–87.
[33] S. Klein, D. Reindl, K. Brownell, Refrigeration system performance using liquid-
suction heat exchangers, Int. J. Refrig. 23 (8) (2000) 588–596.
[34] S.P. Sutera, R. Skalak, The history of Poiseuille’s law, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 25
(1) (1993) 1–20.
[35] B.C. Pak, Y.I. Cho, Hydrodynamic and heat transfer study of dispersed fluids
with submicron metallic oxide particles, Exp. Heat Transfer 11 (2) (1998) 151–
170.
[36] H. Bukac, Modeling capacity and coefficient of performance of a refrigeration
compressor, in: International Compressor Engineering Conference at Purdue,
2004.
[37] V. Payne, D.L. O’Neal, A mass flow rate correlation for refrigerants and
refrigerant mixtures flowing through short tubes, HVAC&R Res. 10 (1) (2004)
73–87.
[38] J.U. Ahamed, R. Saidur, H.H. Masjuki, A review on exergy analysis of vapor
compression refrigeration system, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 15 (3) (2011)
1593–1600.
[39] M. Kole, T. Dey, Effect of aggregation on the viscosity of copper oxide-gear oil
nanofluids, Int. J. Therm. Sci. 50 (9) (2011) 1741–1747.
[40] I.M. Mahbubul, R. Saidur, M.A. Amalina, Influence of particle concentration and
temperature on thermal conductivity and viscosity of Al2O3/R141b
nanorefrigerant, Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transfer 43 (2013) 100–104.
[41] R. Chein, G. Huang, Analysis of microchannel heat sink performance using
nanofluids, Appl. Therm. Eng. 25 (17) (2005) 3104–3114.
[42] I.M. Shahrul, I.M. Mahbubul, S.S. Khaleduzzaman, R. Saidur, M.F.M. Sabri, A
comparative review on the specific heat of nanofluids for energy perspective,
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 38 (2014) 88–98.