Thermal Conductivity of Nanofluids

Siw, Sin Chien

University of Pittsburgh

ENERGETICS
ME 3007
Oct 27, 2008
 Outline

1. Introduction
2. Objective
3. Experimental results
4. Simulation results
5. Discussion and Comments
6. Conclusion
 Introduction
“ Nanofluid” is the name conceived to describe a fluid in which
nanometer-sized particles are suspended [Choi 2008].
knanoparticles > kbase fluids

X. Q. Wang & A.S. Mujumbar [2007]

 Introduction-Why?
• Early days, researchers - heat transfer performance of fluid
- changing flow geometry
- boundary conditions
- enhancing thermal conductivity of the fluid-dispersion of particles
• Base fluid can be enhanced by suspending micro/larger size solid particles.
- large particles (micron size) ~ higher density , settling down
- induced additional flow resistance ~ possible erosion
- basic concept of dispersing solid particles in fluids to enhance thermal
conductivity can be traced back to Maxwell in the 19th Century.
- confined to mm-sized particles.
- major challenge is the rapid settling of these particles in fluids.

• Nanoparticles stay suspended much longer than micro-particles and, if below

a threshold level and/or enhanced with surfactants/stabilizers, remain in
suspension almost indefinitely.
- surface area per unit volume of nanoparticles is much larger (million times) than

that of microparticles (the number of surface atoms per unit of interior atoms of
nanoparticles, is very large).
 Introduction

Criteria Microparticles Nanoparticles

Stability Settle Stable (remain in
suspension almost
indefinitely)
Surface/volume ratio 1 1000 times larger than
that of microparticles

Conductivity Low High

Clog in microchannel? Yes No

Erosion? Yes No
Pumping Power Large Small

Table 1 : Comparison of the Old and New [Sarit K. Das et. a.l. 2008]
 Introduction

• Unprecedented growth in electronics, communication and computing technologies

- Increasing power , decreasing size, higher heat capacity
~ demand for suitable for next generation of flow and heat transfer (innovative
cooling technology)

• Conventional method to increase heat flux rates:

- extended surfaces such as fins and micro-channels
- increasing flow rates increases pumping power

• However, current design solutions already push available technology to its limits.

• NEW Technologies and new, advanced fluids with potential to improve flow &
thermal characteristics are of critical importance

• Nanofluids are promising solution to meet and enhance the

challenges
 Introduction

Particle Size Base fluid

Particle material
material

Thermal Conductivity
Enhancement
pH

Particle volume Temperature

concentration
 Objectives

1. Explore the experimental and simulation results of thermal

conductivity enhancement reported by researcher in the
recent years.
2. Compare the experimental and simulation results.
3. Identify the current issues in nanofluids.
 Experiment – Preparation of nanofluids
• 2 techniques
- The single step method
The single step simultaneously makes and disperses the nanoparticles

directly into a base fluid; best for metallic nanofluids.

- Nanoparticles agglomeration is minimized (Pros)

- Only suitable for low vapor pressure fluid (Cons)

- The two-step method (widely used)

Nanoparticles was first produced and dispersed into the base fluids.
- Good for oxides nanoparticles (Pros)
- Not suitable for metallic nanoparticles (Cons)
 Experiment – Preparation of nanofluids

Figure 2: ZrO2 in water that produced Figure 3: Cu nanoparticles in ethylene

with Two Step method
glycol produced with One Step method
Experimental Results – Effect of Particle Size

Figure 4 Effect of particle size for Al2O3 in water Figure 5 Effect of particle size for Al2O3 in ethylene glycol
[Chon C.H. et. al. (2006)] [H.U. Kang et. Al. (2006)]

- smaller particles, higher thermal conductivity

- effective surface area increase as particle size decrease
- increment due to Brownian motion
- exponential increment as size getting smaller
Experimental Results – Effect of Particle Shape

cylindrical shape

cylindrical shape

Figure 6 Effect of particle shape for SiC in water Figure 7 Effect of particle shape for SiC in water

- cylinder shape nanoparticles ~ extended profile/geometry that can transport heat rapidly
over significant distance.
- High aspect ratio nanoparticles may aligned parallel to the temperature gradient
~ enhance keff
Experimental Results – Effect of Temperature

Figure 8 Effect of temperature for Al2O3 in water Figure 9 Effect of temperature for Al2O3 in water

- temperature increment reduce the viscosity of the nanofluids – promote Brownian motion
- same volume fractions, highest thermal conductivity ~ highest temperature.
- ~ 7% - 10% increment for temp. range from 28oC – 35oC.
Experimental Results – Effect of Temperature

1.62
1.26

Figure 10 Effect temperature for MWCNT in water Figure 11 Effect temperature for MWCNT in water

- temperature increment reduce the viscosity of the nanofluids

- Inconsistency; At 0.4% volume fraction – different keff
 Experimental Results-Volume fraction

Figure 12 Particle volume fraction effect of Ag in Figure 13 Particle volume fraction effect of Si in
water [ H.U. Kang et. al. (2006) ] water [ H.U. Kang et. al. (2006) ]

- Silver nanoparticle (~8-15nm) ; Silica nanoparticle (~15-20nm)

- keff increase with volume fraction
 Simulation Results

Maxwell was one of the first to analytically investigate conduction through

suspended particles.

This equation and other equations for thermal conductivity e.g., Hamilton and
Crosser, and Rayleigh predict thermal conductivity reasonably well for dilute
mixtures of relatively large particles in fluids.

When we go to the nanoscale we have to consider some effects that do not

exist in large scales. To improve the predictions we consider:

1- Effect of nanoparticle-matrix interfacial layer

2- Effect of nanoparticle Brownian motion
3- Effect of nanoparticle cluster/aggregate
 Simulation Results – Jang and Choi (2007)

- Investigate the effects of various parameters

1. ratio of the thermal conductivity of the nanoparticles to the base fluid
2. volume fraction
3. nanoparticle size
4. temperature effect

Model of Nanofluid Thermal Conductivity – 4 modes

1st mode ~ Base Fluid Molecules

2nd mode ~ Nanoparticles
3rd mode ~ Collisions of Nanoparticles with Each Other
4th mode ~ Nanoconvection
 Simulation Results – Jang and Choi

1st Mode - Base Fluid Molecules ~ derived based kinetic theory

1   dT dT
J U   l BF C V , BF C BF (1  f )  k BF (1  f )
3 dZ dZ

f = volume fraction
kBF = thermal conductivity of the base fluid molecules
Ĉ
 v = heat capacity per unit volume
C = mean speed of molecules

l = mean free path

T = temperature

~ collisions of base fluid molecules with each other – indicate the heat transfer by
thermal conductivity
 Simulation Results – Jang and Choi

2nd Mode – Thermal Diffusion of Nanoparticles

1 dT dT dT
 
JU   lnano C V , nano v f  knano f J U  k nano f
3 dZ dZ dZ
β = Kapitza resistance per unit area ~ 0.01

knano = thermal conductivity of nanoparticle


v
= mean speed of free electron
lnano = mean free path of heat carriers in nanoparticles

~ diffusion of nanoparticles
~ knano, thermal conductivity of nanoparticles using Chen’s correlation
 Simulation Results – Jang and Choi
3rd Mode – Nanoconvection

- collisions between base fluid molecules and nanoparticles by thermally

induced fluctuations
- assume linear temperature profile in thermal boundary layer

(Tnano  TBF ) dT
J U  h(Tnano  TBF )  h T f ~  h T f
T dZ

h = heat transfer coefficient

δT = thermal boundary layer
f = volume fraction
 Simulation Results – Jang and Choi
4th Mode – Collisions of Nanoparticle with Each Other
Flux energy by
1   dT collision of
Ju    nano C V ,nano C T f
3 dz nanoparticles

1  
 nano C V , nano C T f ~ O(10 5 )
3

~ Brownian motion (minimal effect among all modes)

Effective Thermal Conductivity of Nanofluids

d BF
keff  k BF (1  f )  k particle f  C1 k BF Re 2 d Pr f C1=18x106
d nano
 Simulation Results – Jang and Choi

Figure 13 Effect of diameter of nanoparticle on thermal conductivity of nanofluids [Jang & Choi 2007]

- Size nanoparticles reduced, thermal conductivity increased.

~ Brownian motion is greater, nanoconvection become dominant.
- Maxwell model only valid as the size of the nanoparticles is greater than 30nm.
 Simulation Results – Jang and Choi

Figure 14 Experimental data for temperature-dependent conductivity of the prediction from Jang & Choi model as
comparison to Maxwell model [Jang & Choi 2007].

- ~3 times increment over a small temperature range (20-50oC).

- Temperature increased, dynamic viscosity decreased
~ nanoconvection remarkably increased with temperature.
 Simulation Results – Monte Carlo

Figure 15 Comparison between simulated effective thermal conductivities with the experimental data (Al 2O3-EG)
[Yongjin Feng et al. 2008]

- Parameters in M.C. simulation

~ 1. thermal conductivities of base fluid and nanoparticles
2. volume fraction
3. size of nanoparticles & cluster generation effect
4. interfacial resistance
 Simulation Results – Monte Carlo

Figure 16 Monte Carlo simulation at different volume Figure 17 Effective thermal conductivity for different
fraction as a function of radius of gyration aggregated clusters [W. Evans et. al. 2008]
[W. Evans et. al 2008]

- Monte Carlo Simulation

~ As cluster size increased, keff increases rapidly. ~ promote rapid conduction
~ Size of the cluster – too big? Optimum size?
 Contradiction
Thermal conductivity computed from integrated heat flux autocorrelation function [C.Nie
et.al. (2008)]:-

1  
k eff 
3VkT 2 
0
S (0)  S (t ) dt with

 d  
S    r i f ei f    hf v i f
dt  i  i


S = heat flux

ri f = position of the fluid molecules

hf = entropy of the fluid molecules

ei f = total energy of the fluid molecule including kinetic energy and interaction
potential
vi f = velocity of the fluid molecules
 Contradiction
Contribution to the keff due to the Brownian motion of nanoparticles :-

85 k 2 BT
k eff 
96 2 R 4 
kB = Boltzmann constant

keff = f (Φ, T, 1/R, 1/µ)

- keff enhancement ~ due to Brownian motion is proportional to volume fraction

- Temperature increase causes viscosity of decrease ~ k eff increased
~ e.g. @ 300K, using water as base fluid with μ=7.978 × 10−4 Pa.s
keff ~ O(10-15W/mK)
 Contradiction
It is recognized that the thermal conductivity in fluid and solid components of the nanofluid
is related to the type of phonon excited, the phonon mean path, and the phonon transport
speed, i.e., the speed of sound in the medium. [J.Che et al, 2000]

Figure 18 Density distribution for water around a nanoparticle of 30nm @ 320K [C.Nie et. al 2008]

- Density distributions around a nanoparticle ~ are nearly the same.

- Low volume concentration of nanoparticles, ~ mean free path of phonon nearly the same.
- Phonon transport speed is related to the speed in the fluid

1 1 P C = sound speed
c  ĸT = compressibility of material (can be
 T T 
determine from E.O.S)
 Contradiction

1  Ps   Pc            
 n  
  
    
s
   c 
 P    s 
T n n     n 
     s    c   s 

- Ps = Pressure contribution from fluid molecules

- Pc = Pressure contribution from the suspended cylinder
- α = free volume fraction
- η = packing factors (e.g. for water ~ 0.466)
- n = number density

- negligible changes in compressibility, ~ very small speed of phonon transport

- Proposed Brownian motion has negligible effect.

- No enhancement effect
 Discussion & Comments

- keff of alumina nanofluids ~ 8% to 33%

- There is no clear indication about the enhancement rate
- keff varies in the first 5 days, reproducible keff value is achieved later.
 Discussion & Comments

Figure 19 Effect of aging in the water based nanofluids on thermal conductivity [Timofeeva et. al 2007]

- keff of alumina nanofluids ~ 2% to 17% in 7 days period

- There is no clear indication about the exact enhancement rate
- keff varies in the first 5 days, reproducible keff value is achieved later.
~ Why?
 Discussion & Comments
Experimental and Simulation approach ~ Comparison
- No tools/equipments that is capable to capture any visual data that can clearly explain this
behavior as compare to macroscale experimental (e.g. internal flow ~ laminar and
turbulent flow)
~ Dynamic Light Scattering (DLS) and Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) latest
approach used to study the structure of the nanoparticles
~ DLS – limited to low volume fraction nanofluids (Φ<1.0%)
~ SEM – can only be performed after drying the base fluid.

- Lack of agreement between experimental results from different groups

- Lack of theoretical understanding of the mechanisms

Jang and Choi
~ No cluster generation effect

Monte Carlo
~ Maximum size of the clusters is preset? Will the size of the cluster keep growing?
~ What if the clusters is too heavy and difficult to suspend?
~ Collisions of nanoparticles is not considered
~ Nanoconvection is not considered
 Remaining Challenges

1. Nanoparticles may form agglomerates and settle rapidly

- forming a layer on the surface and reduced the overall heat transfer
capacity
2. Larger nanoparticles or agglomerates may clog the narrow cooling
channels
3. Pressure drop of the fluid increases considerably
- Suitable choice of base fluid and nanoparticles for optimum
performance.
4. Brownian motion effect – controversial
- may need to be revisited – particularly on the effect of temperature
 Discussion & Comments

Some of the reported Application

1. Transportation (2005) ~ CuO nanoparticles in engine transmission oil, claims to lower the
transmission temperature at both high and low rotating speed.
~ any corrosive effects?
2. Electronics Cooling (2004) ~ Tsai et al used a water based nanofluid as working medium in a
circular heat pipe - CPU and notebook
- positive results as compare to deionized water.
3. Defense (2007) ~ Transformer cooling (Navy) – nanofluid to replace the transformer oil.
4. Space (2004) ~ Vassalo et al. reported a magnitude increase in the critical heat flux in pool boiling
with nanofluids compared to base fluid alone.
- potential for space applications ~ high power density.
5. Nuclear System Cooling (On-going) ~ MIT explore the impact of using nanofluids on the
safety, neutronic and economic performance of nuclear systems.
6. Biomedicine (1999) ~ Jordan A. et al. reported that nanofluids can produced high temperature
around tumor to kill cancerous cells without affecting healthy cells.
 Conclusion
1. Nanofluids development is still considered in the research stage ~ many

factors need to be explore and optimized in both experimental and

computational areas.
~ Issues/problems (e.g. nanoparticles agglomeration, settling, erosion
potential and etc needs to be addressed)
~ The parameters chosen in the simulation is based on the researchers
experience, instinct findings.
2. Heat transfer data are somewhat sparse. ~ no clear trends for
application guidelines
3. Results may not be repeatable. ~ keff varies at time period.
4. Different types of base fluids (water, E-G, and etc) and nanoparticles
(CuO, Al2O3, CNTs, etc) provide different enhancement
~ Suitable choice of base fluid and nanoparticles for optimum
performance.
5. Ability to suspend the nanoparticles for a long period of time?
– Clusters?
Thank you