Copyright © 2008 American Scientific Publishers Journal of

All rights reserved Nanoscience and Nanotechnology

Printed in the United States of America Vol. 8, 4923–4929, 2008

Transient Thermal Conductivity and

Colloidal Stability Measurements of
Nanofluids by Using the 3
Method
Dong-Wook Oh1 , Ohmyoung Kwon2 , and Joon Sik Lee1
∗
1
School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Seoul National University, Seoul 151-742, Korea
2
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Korea University, Seoul 136-701, Korea

RESEARCH ARTICLE
Nanofluid is a mixture of nanoscale particles of metal, metal oxide or carbon nanotube and heat
transfer fluids such as water and ethylene glycol. This work presents the application of the 3-omega
(3
) method for measuring the colloidal stability and the transient thermal conductivity of multi-wall
carbon nanotube (MWCNT), Al2 O3 and TiO2 nanoparticles suspended in water or ethylene glycol.
The microfabricated 3
device is verified by comparing the measured thermal conductivities of pure
fluids with the table values. After the validation, the transient thermal responses of the nanofluids
are measured to evaluate the colloidal stability. All of Al2 O3 nanofluid samples show a clear sign of
sedimentation while the acid-treated MWCNT (tMWCNT) nanofluid and a couple of TiO2 nanofluids
with pH control or surfactant addition are found to have excellent colloidal stability. The thermal
conductivities of tMWCNT nanofluids in the de-ionized water and ethylene glycol are measured,
which are found to be in good agreement with previous data.
Delivered by Publishing Technology to: Chinese University of Hong Kong
Keywords: 3
Method, Colloidal Stability,
IP: 220.136.124.123 On:Effective
Mon, 29 Thermal Conductivity,
Feb 2016 10:09:04 Nanofluid.
Copyright: American Scientific Publishers

1. INTRODUCTION medium approximation.5
6 However, one of the biggest

The thermal conductivity enhancement of working flu-
ids is one of the most effective methods to improve the
heat transfer performance of thermal devices such as heat
exchangers, automobile engines and power plants. Mixing
solid particles of high thermal conductivity with conven-
tional heat transfer fluids such as water or ethylene glycol
(EG) is known to be the easiest way to enhance the heat
transfer performance of the fluids.1–3 However, the sus-
pension of micro- or mili-scale particles are not suitable
for channel flows because they may cause abrasion and
clogging so that the long term stability of the whole heat
transfer system can be degraded.4
The development of nanotechnology enables the synthe-
sis and mass-production of metal, metal-oxide nanoparti-
cles and carbon nanotubes. The nanoparticles can be mixed
with fluids to form nanoparticle suspensions known as
nanofluids. Nanofluids are free from such short comings
of microscale or larger particle suspensions. Moreover, it
has been reported that the increase in the effective thermal
conductivity values of nanoparticle suspensions exceed the
estimates by conventional theories such as the effective
∗
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
problems that limit the use of nanofluids is quick set-
tlement of the nanoparticles, leading to non-homogenous
nanoparticle dispersions and possible fouling.
It is very difficult to detect the aggregation and sedi-
mentation of the nanoparticles because the nanofluids are
generally opaque and cannot be seen through. The sur-
face charge of the nanoparticle or the zeta potential can
be used to judge the colloidal stability.7–9 However, this
is an indirect method to evaluate the nanofluid stability
because it is based on the amount of measured electro-
static repulsive force between the particles. Thus, quantifi-
cation of the nanoparticle aggregation and sedimentation
is not possible. The stability of the nanofluid can also be
detected by the UV-vis spectrophotometric method where
the transient light absorption of a sample fluid, which has
a linear relationship with the nanoparticle concentration,
is measured.7
10 However, the UV-vis spectrophotomet-
ric method can only be applicable to the low concentra-
tion nanofluid (generally less than 1% volume fraction of
nanoparticles), for the light absorption value tends to con-
verge to a constant value as the nanoparticle concentra-
tion is getting high and the nanofluid becomes completely
opaque. Moreover, it takes days and may be a few weeks
to verify the colloidal stability of the sample fluid. Such

J. Nanosci. Nanotechnol. 2008, Vol. 8, No. 10 1533-4880/2008/8/4923/007 doi:10.1166/jnn.2008.1178 4923

 Transient Thermal Conductivity and Colloidal Stability Measurements of Nanofluids by Using the 3 Method
shortcomings of the colloidal stability detection methods
mentioned above can be overcome by using the transient
nanofluid thermal conductivity measurement.11
In this study, the 3-omega (3) method12 is used to
measure the transient behavior of the nanofluid colloidal
stability as well as the thermal conductivity. A droplet of
a nanofluid placed on a microfabricated device where a
thin film heater is deposited on a pyrex wafer is modeled
by modifying the conventional 3 method. The 3 device
is fabricated by the MEMS technique. The accuracy of
the fabricated sensor and the thermal modeling is verified
by measuring the thermal conductivity of pure fluids and
comparing the results with the table values. The nanoflu-
ids used in this work are prepared by mixing nanoparticles
such as multi-wall carbon nanotube (MWCNT), Al2 O3 or
TiO2 with either de-ionized (DI) water or EG. The effect
RESEARCH ARTICLE
of chemical dispersion methods of MWCNT such as acid
treatment and addition of Gum Arabic (GA) or Sodium
Dodecyl Benzene Sulfate (SDBS) are observed. The col-
loidal stability of the acid treated MWCNT (tMWCNT)
nanofluid with various particle volume fractions is exam-
ined as well. For Al2 O3 and TiO2 nanofluids, the colloidal
stabilities are analyzed with different pH values of the base mentation in the nanofluid.
fluid or addition of SDBS. The transient thermal conduc-
tivities of tMWCNT nanofluids, which are found to be
most stable, are measured and compared with the data in
the literature. Delivered by Publishing Technology to:with
IP: 220.136.124.123 On: Mon,
Copyright: American Scientific Publishers
2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
The 3 method is a well known technique for the measure-
ment of thermophysical properties of solids.12 A sinusoidal
electric current of angular frequency  is passed through
a thin film metal heater deposited on a solid substrate of
interest. The metal heater also acts as a thermometer. Due
to the sinusoidal heating at double the frequency of the
input current, the metal temperature also oscillates at an
angular frequency of 2. Since the electrical resistance of
the metal heater is a linear function of temperature, the
temperature oscillation can be measured indirectly by mea-
suring the associated 3 voltage across the metal heater.
The amplitude of the temperature oscillation can be used
to determine the thermophysical properties of the substrate
since these parameters are related to each other through
the energy balance in a given geometry with appropriate
boundary conditions.
For a metal heater with width of 2b on a substrate
or a layer of fluid, the relationship between the tem-
perature oscillation and the heat generation rate can be
expressed as12
Q̇
 sin2
b
T = d
(1)
k 0
b2
2 + q 2 1/2

i2Cp
q= (2)
k 2 semi-infinite mediums of the nanofluid and the substrate.
4924
Oh et al.
where T represents the 2 temperature oscillation, Q̇
the heating power per unit length generated at the metal
heater, k the thermal conductivity of the substrate or the
fluid, q the complex thermal wave number,  the angu-
lar frequency of the input current, and the substrate or the
fluid, and  and Cp are the density heat capacity, respec-
tively. The amplitude of reciprocal q, 1/q, is known as
the thermal penetration depth (TPD).
The TPD is the depth of a sinusoidal temperature pulse,
generated from the metal heater, being diffused into the
substrate or the fluid and damped away. The temperature
amplitude at a distance of 7 times the TPD away from
the metal heater is known to be 0.1% of the temperature
amplitude at the metal heater.13 At the input current fre-
quency in the range of 5 Hz∼1 kHz, the TPD of water
or EG is shorter than 50 m. Due to this fact, the local
thermal property of a small volume fluid can effectively
be measured. With the 3 device fabricated by the MEMS
technique, the thermal property can be measured with only
a droplet of a sample fluid. Moreover, the orientation of
the 3 device to the gravity field can easily be arranged to
quantitatively examine the effect of the nanoparticle sedi-
The original 3 method is extended for use in the case
of heat transfer in parallel through two semi-infinite media.
The nanofluid of interest is placed on a pyrex substrate
a thinUniversity
Chinese metal heater as shown
of Hong Kongin Figure 1. Thermal
29 Feb 2016 10:09:04
modeling of the 3 device and the nanofluid is carried out
by using the modified boundary mismatch assumption.14
The nanofluid on the substrate is modeled as a thermal
resistance for heat transfer from the heater to the ambi-
ent, as shown in the thermal resistance circuit in Figure 1.
A simple relationship between the temperature oscillations
can be obtained from the modified boundary mismatch
assumption as follows;
1 1 1
= + (3)
Th Tsub Tf
Fig. 1. Schematic and equivalent thermal circuit of the metal heater and
J. Nanosci. Nanotechnol. 8, 4923–4929, 2008
Oh et al. Transient Thermal Conductivity and Colloidal Stability Measurements of Nanofluids by Using the 3 Method

Note that Th is the measured temperature amplitude of (a)

the heater, with the substrate on one side and the nanofluid
layer on the other. Tsub is the heater temperature ampli-
tude due to heat transport in the quartz substrate alone. In
other words, Tsub is measured in vacuum. A least squares
fit of Tf calculated from Eq. (1) can be used to determine
the value of the nanofluid thermal conductivity. The vol-
Metal heater (2b = 10 µm)
umetric heat capacity (Cp ) of the nanofluid is calculated
by using the following assumption;

Cp nf =  Cp np + 1 −  Cp f (4)

where suspscripts nf, np and f represent the properties of (b)

the nanofluid, nanoparticle and the base fluid, respectively,
and  denotes the volume fraction of the nanoparticle.

3. EXPERIMENTAL SETUP AND VALIDATION
The 3 device is microfabricated by metal deposi-
tion and patterning on a 500 m thick pyrex wafer.
A 20 nm Chromium and a 100 nm Platinum are sput-
tered and patterned by the liftoff method followed by the
plasma enhanced chemical vapor deposition (PECVD) of
a 200 nm SiO2 passivation layer. The passivation layer
on the contact pads are etched away by the plasma etch-
ing process. A close-up picture of the metal heater on the
pyrex substrate is shown in Figure 2(a). The wafer is then
Delivered by Publishing Technology to: Chinese University of Hong Kong
diced into individual devices, each
IP:of which is packagedOn:
220.136.124.123 in Mon, 29 Feb 2016 10:09:04
a ceramic chip carrier. The wire bonding facilitates
elec- Scientific
Copyright: American
trical access to metal heaters. A 3 mm thick PDMS gasket
is used to seal the device and to create a well around the
heater as depicted in Figure 2(b). Approximately 30 l of
nanofluid is placed inside the PDMS well.
The nanofluids are prepared by mixing the commer-
cial MWCNT (CM-95, Iljin Nanotech Co., LTD.), Al2 O3
(NanoTek® , Nanophase Technologies Corp.), TiO2 (rutile
10 × 40 nm, Nanostructured & Amorphous Materials, Inc.)
nanoparticles with the base fluids. The raw MWCNTs are
generally hydrophobic in nature. In order to disperse the
raw MWCNT, acid treatment15 and addition of surfactants
such as GA (0.25% wt) or SDBS (0.50% wt) are used. For
the MWCNT nanofluids, the particle volume concentration
is varied from 0.11% to 0.51%. The DI water and EG are
used as the base fluids. The Al2 O3 and TiO2 nanoparticles
are mixed with DI water and the particle volume concen-
tration is fixed at 2%. The colloidal stability is compared
with Al2 O3 and TiO2 nanofluids with chemical treatments
such as pH control and SDBS addition. The pH of nanoflu-
ids is controlled by adding a small amount of either dilute
HNO3 or NaOH solution. To ensure homogeneous disper-
sion of nanoparticles, all prepared nanofluids are ultrason-
ically vibrated for over 18 hours in an ultrasonic cleaner.
The fresh sample from the ultrasonic cleaner is taken out
and left to cool down to room temperature for about 5 min-
utes and then thoroughly shaken before a droplet is placed
on the 3 device.
RESEARCH ARTICLE
5 mm
Fig. 2. Microfabricated 3 device. (a) Close-up view of the metal
Publishers
heater on pyrex wafer and (b) packaged 3 device.
All experiments are performed inside a thermally insu-
lated oven at room temperature. The metal heater in the
3 device is configured as part of a balanced Wheatstone
bridge, and a lock-in amplifier (SR850, Stanford Research)
is used to accurately measure the 3 voltage across the
metal heater. The temperature oscillation of the pyrex sub-
strate is first measured in the vacuum chamber. The input
current frequency range is controlled to be from 1 Hz to
1 kHz. To eliminate the natural convection of the sample
fluid due to temperature oscillation of the metal heater, the
temperature amplitude of the heater and the time period
of a frequency scan are always maintained less than 0.5 K
and 3 minutes, respectively.
The thermal modeling of the 3 device is validated
by measuring the thermal conductivities of DI water and
EG and comparing the results with the theoretical model.
Figures 3(a) and (b) show the measured temperature ampli-
tude of the DI water and EG, respectively. The mea-
sured values of temperature amplitudes, with fluid (Th ),
and without fluid (Tsub ) on the 3 device, are put into
Eq. (3) to calculate the temperature amplitude of the
sample fluid (Tf ). The least square value of the ther-
mal conductivity obtained by comparing the experimental
data with the model is 0582 ± 0002 W/mK and 0276 ±
0013 W/mK for the DI water and EG, which are both in

J. Nanosci. Nanotechnol. 8, 4923–4929, 2008 4925

 Transient Thermal Conductivity and Colloidal Stability Measurements of Nanofluids by Using the 3 Method Oh et al.

(a) 1.0 the thermal property of the surrounding medium within a

∆Tf (DI water) few hundreds of micrometers. At a constant heater power
∆Tsub
0.8 ∆Th generation, it is obvious that a smaller temperature ampli-
Temperature amplitude (K)

Best Fit (k = 0.582 W/mK) tude can be measured from a higher thermal conductivity
medium and vise versa. By measuring the time dependent
0.6
temperature amplitude of a nanofluid at a fixed input fre-
quency, the behavior of the transient thermal conductivity
0.4 is anticipated. Since the increase in the nanoparticle con-
centration is related directly to the increase in the nanofluid
0.2 thermal conductivity, the decrease in the transient temper-
ature amplitude can be regarded as a sign of nanoparticle
sedimentation.
0.0
10 100 1000 The temperature amplitudes of the MWCNT in the DI
Frequency (Hz) water with 0.11% volume fraction prepared by various
chemical dispersion methods are compared in Figures 4(a)
(b) 2.0
and (b) where the temperature amplitude measured by the
RESEARCH ARTICLE

∆Tf (EG)
∆Tsub 3 device at the upright and upside down positions to
∆Th
1.6
the gravitational field, respectively. At the upright posi-
Temperature amplitude (K)

Best fit (k = 0.276 W/mK)

1.2
0.8
0.4
0.0 Delivered by Publishing Technology to:shown
10 100
IP: 220.136.124.1231000
Frequency (Hz)Copyright: American Scientific Publishers
Fig. 3. Comparison of experimental data with the best fit value: (a) DI
water and (b) EG.
good agreement with the standard values of 0.61 W/mK
and 0.26 W/mK at room temperature. The best agreement
is obtained when the oscillation frequency of the input
current is in the range of 30 Hz to 300 Hz.
In order to measure the colloidal stability of various
nanofluids, the input frequency is fixed at 125 Hz and the
transient temperature amplitude is measured. The TPD is
less than 10 m in this case, for the DI water and EG. As a
result, the measured temperature amplitude is the thermal
response of the fluid layer within a hundred micrometer
distance from the metal heater. By changing the gravita-
tional orientation of the 3 device, the transient tempera-
ture amplitude behavior of the nanofluid at the bottom or
top fluid layer of a droplet can be compared. The nanofluid
droplet placed inside the PDMS well is so small that the
change in the droplet shape can be negligible when it is
turned upside down.
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1. Nanofluid Colloidal Stability
As aforementioned in Section 2, the temperature ampli-
tude measured from the metal heater is determined by
tion, the metal heater is placed at the bottom of the sample
fluid. At the upside down position, the fluid is heated from
the top. Since the thermal property of a few hundreds of
micrometers within the nanofluid layer is measured, the
results shown in Figures 4(a) and (b) represent the ther-
mal property of the top and bottom layer of the nanofluid
droplet, respectively. The tMWCNT nanofluid shows no
change in the temperature amplitude for both cases as
Chinesein Figures 4(aofand
University Hong b). Kong
For MWCNT nanofluids
On: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 10:09:04
with surfactants such as GA and SDBS, the decrease in
the temperature amplitude with time at the bottom of the
sample fluid is noticed (see Fig. 4(a)). However, no sig-
nificant change in the temperature amplitude can be found
in Figure 4(b) for the same samples compared to the
result of tMWCNT nanofluid. This indicates that the sen-
sor orientation to the gravity field causes either increase
or decrease in the nanoparticle concentration within the
TPD. One possible explanation is that nanoparticles may
not have been completely deagglomerated for the cases of
GA and SDBS added MWCNT nanofluids, and the sedi-
mentation of the aggregated nanoparticles gradually takes
place. The relative colloidal stability of GA and SDBS
added nanofluids cannot be compared with the current
results. The temperature amplitude drop is larger for SDBS
added nanofluid case but the results of GA added nanofluid
are observed to be more scattered. Future work is needed
to fully understand the relative colloidal stability among
nanofluids when aggregation and sedimentation are occur-
ring. For now we can conclude that the stable dispersion
of MWCNT can be achieved only with the acid treatment
method while sedimentation can be detected with GA and
SDBS added nanofluids.
The transient behavior of the nanofluid temperature
amplitude is compared in Figures 4(c) and (d) for vari-
ous volume fractions of the tMWCNT dispersed in the DI
water and EG, respectively. A decrease in the temperature
amplitude is observed for the tMWCNT nanofluid with

4926 J. Nanosci. Nanotechnol. 8, 4923–4929, 2008

Oh et al. Transient Thermal Conductivity and Colloidal Stability Measurements of Nanofluids by Using the 3 Method

(a) 0.23 (b) 0.23

Upright sensor position
Upside down sensor position

Temperature amplitude (K)

Temperature amplitude (K)

0.22 DI water
Acid treated
GA added
0.21 SDBS added
0.22

DI water
0.20
Acid treated
GA added
SDBS added
0.19 0.21
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
Time (sec) Time (sec)

(c) 0.23 (d) 0.29

tMWCNT + DI water nanofluids tMWCNT + EG nanofluids
Temperature amplitude (K)

Temperature amplitude (K)

RESEARCH ARTICLE
0.22 0.28

0.11% vol. 0.13% vol.

0.23% vol. 0.26% vol.
0.34% vol. 0.38% vol.
0.46% vol. 0.51% vol.
0.21 0.27
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
Time (sec) Time (sec)
Delivered
Fig. 4. Transient temperature byof Publishing
amplitude Technology
DI water and EG based MWCNTto:nanofluids:
Chinese(a)University ofposition
upright sensor Hong(0.11%
Kongvol.) and (b) upside down
IP:based
sensor position (0.11% vol.), (c) DI water 220.136.124.123
tMWCNT nanofluids On:
andMon,
(d) EG29 Feb
based 2016 10:09:04
tMWCNT nanofluids.
Copyright: American Scientific Publishers
volume fraction exceeding 0.4% for both DI water and EG constant value after about 2000 seconds. After this point,
based nanofluids. For tMWCNT nanofluids, the colloidal no additional sedimentation occurs, and the concentration
stability significantly degrades as the tMWCNT volume profile of the sample nanofluid can be assumed to be strati-
fraction exceeds 0.4%. fied. However, for the rest of the Al2 O3 nanofluid samples,
In the cases of Al2 O3 and TiO2 nanofluids, the transient the temperature amplitude keeps on decreasing during the
temperature amplitude is measured with various nanofluid whole measurement period of 4000 seconds. We can con-
pH, and the effect of SDBS addition is analyzed. The clude that the Al2 O3 nanofluid with a pH value near the
surface charge density and the surface potential of a IEP is less stable compared to that with different at pH
nanoparticle can be controlled by changing the pH of the values. Furthermore, adding SDBS surfactant to the Al2 O3
nanofluid. The isoelectric point (IEP), where the electro- nanofluid does not help in preventing the aggregation and
static repulsive between the particles is absent, is known to sedimentation of Al2 O3 nanoparticles, which results in a
be at pH values of 8.7 and 6.5 for Al2 O3 and TiO2 nanopar- decrease in the colloidal stability on the contrary.
ticles suspended in water, respectively.8
16 The suspension The transient temperature amplitude of various TiO2
stability of the nanofluid can be quantified with the sur- nanofluids with different pH values and SDBS surfactant
face state of the nanoparticles by applying the Derjaguin- added samples are measured and the results are depicted
Landau-Verwey-Overbeek (DLVO) theory.9
17 According in Figure 5(b). Unlike the Al2 O3 nanofluids result, the
to the DLVO theory, the interaction between particles is nanofluids with pH controlled to 2.3 and SDBS added sam-
governed by the attractive van der Waals force at IEP. As ples are observed to be stable although a slight decrease in
a result, aggregation and sedimentation of particles occur. the temperature amplitude is noticed. However, aggregation
The transient temperature amplitude measurement of and sedimentation take place and show similar decrease in
various Al2 O3 nanofluids with various pH and a SDBS the temperature amplitude with time regardless of the pH
surfactant added case is shown in Figure 5(a). The temper- values for other TiO2 nanofluid samples.
ature amplitude decreases in all of the Al2 O3 nanofluids
samples. The relative colloidal stability can be obtained 4.2. Nanofluid Thermal Conductivity
by careful observation of the temperature amplitude slop
with time. For the pH value of 8.4 and SDBS added Al2 O3 The thermal conductivity of nanofluids is measure only for
nanofluid samples, the temperature amplitude reaches a tMWCNT nanofluids which show the excellent colloidal

J. Nanosci. Nanotechnol. 8, 4923–4929, 2008 4927

 Transient Thermal Conductivity and Colloidal Stability Measurements of Nanofluids by Using the 3 Method Oh et al.

(a) 0.225 conductivity is detected. The slight variation with time is

due to the experimental uncertainty.
The effective thermal conductivity of the DI water
Temperature amplitude (K)

DI water pH 6.0 SDBS added

pH 2.0 pH 8.4(IEP) and EG based tMWCNT nanofluids are presented in
0.220
pH 4.8 pH 10.9 Figures 7(a) and (b), respectively. For the DI water based
nanofluids, only little deviation (see the error bar) from
the average effective thermal conductivity ratio is observed
at each volume fraction of the tMWCNT in the DI water
0.215
as shown in Figure 7(a). On the other hand, large scatter-
ing of the effective thermal conductivity ratio is noticed
Al2O3 nanofluids for the EG based nanofluids, except at the volume fraction
0.210
of 0.26%. The measured effective thermal conductivities
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 of tMWCNT nanofluids show relatively good agreement
Time (sec) with those of Xie et al.,15 but quite a large discrepancy
(b) 0.225 can be found in comparison with data of Ding et al.18
and Wen and Ding.19 The tMWCNT used in Xie et al.’s
RESEARCH ARTICLE

experiment is made by the similar acid treatment process

Temperature amplitude (K)

TiO2 nanofluids
of the present method, while in Ding et al.’s and Wen
0.220 and Ding’s experiments the MWCNT are dispersed by
adding GA and SDBS surfactants, respectively. The dif-
ference in the thermal conductivity measurement method
may be another reason for this observation. It seems that
0.215 the same commercial transient hot wire probe is used to
DI water pH 6.0(IEP) measure the thermal conductivity of the nanofluids in both
pH 2.3 pH 8.0
pH 4.8 pH 11.4 SDBS added 1.24
(a)
Effective thermal conductivity ratio (knf /kf)

0.210
tMWCNT, Experiment
0 500 Delivered
1000 by
1500 2000 Publishing
2500 3000 Technology
3500 4000 to: Chinese University of Hong
tMWCNT, Xie (2003) Kong
1.202016 10:09:04
TimeIP: 220.136.124.123 On: Mon, 29 Feb
(sec) GA added, Ding (2006)
Copyright: American Scientific Publishers
SDBS added, Wen (2004)
Fig. 5. Transient temperature amplitude of Al2 O3 and TiO2 nanofluids 1.16
with pH control and a SDBS addition: (a) Al2 O3 nanofluids and (b) TiO2
nanofluids. 1.12

1.08
stability. The transient thermal conductivity ratio of 0.11%
and 0.34% tMWCNT dispersed in the DI water is pre- 1.04
sented in Figure 6. The dotted lines indicate the aver-
age effective thermal conductivity ratios. No clear sign 1.00 MWCNT + DI water nanofluids

of increase or decrease in the nanofluid effective thermal 0.0 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.0
Volume fraction (%)
1.05 (b) 1.24
Effective thermal conductivity ratio (knf /kf)
Effective thermal conductivity ratio (knf /kf)

MWCNT + DI water nanofluids 0.11% vol. tMWCNT, Experiment

0.34% vol. 1.20 tMWCNT, Xie (2003)
1.04
1.16

1.03
1.12

1.02 1.08

1.04
1.01
1.00 MWCNT + EG nanofluids

1.00 0.0 0.50 1.0 1.5 2.0

0 600 1200 1800 2400 3000 3600 Volume fraction (%)
Time (sec)
Fig. 7. Measured effective thermal conductivity ratios of tMWCNT
Fig. 6. Effective thermal conductivity ratio change of tMWCNT nanofluids: (a) DI water based tMWCNT nanofluids and (b) EG based
nanofluids along time. tMWCNT nanofluids.

4928 J. Nanosci. Nanotechnol. 8, 4923–4929, 2008

Oh et al. Transient Thermal Conductivity and Colloidal Stability Measurements of Nanofluids by Using the 3 Method
experiments of Ding et al. and Wen and Ding. The mea-
sured data from the transient hot wire method can be
affected by the sedimentation of MWCNTs since the non-
homogeneous MWCNT concentration in the direction of
gravity can cause temperature gradient within the vertical
hot wire which may induce measurement error.
For nanofluids with considerable particle sedimenta-
tion, the thermal conductivity cannot be measured by the
present 3 device, since no information on the nanopar-
ticle concentration within the TPD region of the metal
heater can be obtained. The volumetric heat capacity
needed to calculate the thermal conductivity of the sample
cannot be known without the information on the nanopar-
ticle concentration. Future research is required to mea-
sure the volumetric heat capacity or the thermal diffusivity
simultaneously along with the thermal conductivity in
order to clearly understand the physics behind nanoparticle
aggregation and sedimentation.
5. CONCLUSION
In this work, the 3 method is extended and used to mea-
sure the colloidal stability of various nanofluids as well
as the effective thermal conductivity. The conventional 3
method is modified for heat transport in two semi-infinite
media in parallel. The equations obtained by this exten-
sion are validated byDelivered
thermal conductivity measurements
by Publishing Technology to:11.Chinese
of pure DI water and EG that IP: agree well with table val-
220.136.124.123 On: Mon, 29
ues. Nanofluids with chemical treatments such as American
Copyright: particle Scientific
acid treatment, surfactant addition and pH adjustment are
analyzed with the 3 device. The acid treated MWCNT
(tMWCNT) nanofluid and a couple of TiO2 nanofluids
with pH control or surfactant addition are found to be sta-
ble while other nanofluids show sedimentation.
Compared to other colloidal stability detection methods
in literature, the 3 measurement technique proposed here
offers several advantages. The 3 method can be used to
determine whether homogeneous mixing is achieved for
the stationary nanofluid with only a small volume sample
regardless of initial nanoparticle concentration. In addi-
tion, it may be possible to measure the spatial variation of 19. D. Wen and Y. Ding, J. Thermophys. Heat Transfer 18, 481
the thermal conductivity which may provide insight into
J. Nanosci. Nanotechnol. 8, 4923–4929, 2008
the thermophysics of the aggregation process. However,
future work is necessary to simultaneously measure the
volumetric heat capacity with the thermal conductivity in
order to calculate the accurate thermal conductivity of non-
homogeneous nanofluids.
Acknowledgment: The authors gratefully acknowl-
edge financial support from the Micro Thermal Sys-
tem Research Center sponsored by the Korean Science
and Engineering Foundation, Korea Research Foundation
Grant No. KRF-2004-R08-2004-000-10619-0.
References and Notes
1. R. L. Hamilton and O. K. Crosser, Ind. Eng. Chem. Fundam. 1, 187
(1962).
RESEARCH ARTICLE
2. A. S. Ahuja, J. Appl. Phys. 46, 3408 (1975).
3. W. Yu and S. U. S. Choi, J. Nanosci. Nanotechnol. 5, 4 (2005).
4. Y. Xuan and Q. Li, Int. J. Heat Fluid Flow 21, 58 (2000).
5. J. C. Maxwell, A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism, Oxford
University Press, London (1892).
6. P. Keblinski, J. A. Eastman, and D. G. Cahill, Mater. Today 8, 36
(2005).
7. L. Jiang and L. Gao, J. Colloid Interface Sci. 260, 89 (2003).
8. D. Wen and Y. Ding, IEEE Trans. Nanotech. 5, 220 (2006).
9. D. Lee, J. W. Kim, and B. G. Kim, J. Phys. Chem. B 110, 4323
(2006).
10. Y. Hwang, J. K. Lee, C. H. Lee, Y. M. Jung, S. I. Cheong, C. G.
Lee, B. C. Ku, and S. P. Jang, Thermochim. Acta 455, 70 (2007).
University of Hong Kong
K. S. Hong, T. K. Hong, and H. S. Yang, Appl. Phys. Lett. 88,
Feb 2016 10:09:04
031901 (2006).
Publishers
12. D. G. Cahill, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 61, 802 (1990).
13. U. G. Jonsson and O. Andersson, Meas. Sci. Technol. 9, 1873 (1998).
14. F. Chen, J. Shulman, Y. Xue, C. W. Chu, and G. S. Nolas, Rev. Sci.
Instrum. 75, 4578 (2004).
15. H. Xie, H. Lee, W. Youn, and M. S. Choi, J. Appl. Phys. 94, 4967
(2003).
16. J. L. Krsmanovic, Adsorption of Novel Block Copolymers for Steric
Stabilization and Flocculation of Colloidal Particles in Aqueous
Environments, Ph.D. Dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and
State University (2003).
17. R. J. Hunter, Foundations of Colloid Science, 1st edn., Clarendon
Press, Oxford (1987).
18. Y. Ding, H. Alias, D. Wen, and R. A. Williams, Int. J. Heat Mass
Transfer 49, 240 (2006).
(2004).
Received: 30 December 2007. Accepted: 21 February 2008.
4929