PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT OF DOUBLE-TUBE GAS COOLER IN

CO2 REFRIGERATION SYSTEM USING NANOFLUIDS

by

Jahar SARKAR1
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Institute of Technology, BHU, Varanasi, India 221005

The theoretical analyses of the double-tube gas cooler in transcritical carbon

dioxide refrigeration cycle have been performed to study the performance
improvement of gas cooler as well as CO2 cycle using Al2O3, TiO2, CuO and Cu
nanofluids as coolants. Effects of various operating parameters (nanofluid inlet
temperature and mass flow rate, CO2 pressure and particle volume fraction) are
studied as well. Use of nanofluid as coolant in double-tube gas cooler of CO2
cycle improves the gas cooler effectiveness, cooling capacity and COP without
penalty of pumping power. The CO2 cycle yields best performance using Al2O3-
H2O as a coolant in double-tube gas cooler followed by TiO2-H2O, CuO-H2O
and Cu-H2O. The maximum cooling COP improvement of transcritical CO2
cycle for Al2O3-H2O is 25.4%, whereas that for TiO2-H2O is 23.8%, for CuO-
H2O is 20.2% and for Cu-H2O is 16.2% for the given ranges of study. Study
shows that the nanofluid may effectively use as coolant in double-tube gas cooler
to improve the performance of transcritical CO2 refrigeration cycle.

Keywords: Transcritical CO2 cycle, double tube gas cooler, nanofluids, heat
transfer, modeling, performance

Introduction

To attain a higher degree of sustainability, natural refrigerants such as ammonia, carbon dioxide,
hydrocarbons and nitrous oxide do appear more attractive than the other synthetic refrigerants. CO2 is
increasingly becoming the refrigerant of choice and have been widely accepted due to its various
advantages including zero ODP and negligible GWP. Within the last decade, carbon dioxide has drawn
ample interest as a natural refrigerant in refrigeration, air-conditioning and heat pump applications [1-2].
The double tube heat exchanger have been extensively used as a gas cooler in transcritical CO2 systems
for smaller and medium capacity refrigeration and heat pump applications [3-6]. Nanofluid can be used as
a coolant in gas cooler to improve the performance of CO2 refrigeration system.

1
Tel: 91-9919787557; Fax: 91-542-2368428; E-mail: js_iitkgp@yahoo.co.in
1
 Nanofluids are a new class of nanotechnology-based heat transfer fluids that are engineered by
stably suspending a small amount of nanoparticles. Nanofluids consisting of such particles suspended in
liquids (typically conventional heat transfer liquids) have been shown to enhance the thermal conductivity
and convective heat transfer performance of the base liquids. Nanofluids have the potential to reduce such
thermal resistances, and various industrial groups would benefit from such improved heat transfer fluids
[7]. Use of nanofluids in double tube heat exchanger is comparatively more effective [8]. Chun et al. [9]
measured heat transfer characteristics of γ-Al2O3/transformer oil nanofluid in a double tube heat exchanger
system under laminar flow condition and showed significant heat transfer enhancement possibly due to
high concentration of nanoparticles in the thermal boundary layer at the wall side through the migration of
nanoparticles. Experimental studies of pressure drop and convective heat transfer of TiO 2/water nanofluid
in a double pipe heat exchanger are reported by Duangthongsuk et al. [10]. They showed that the
convective heat transfer coefficient of nanofluid is slightly higher than that of the base liquid. Fard et al.
[11] numerically and experimentally investigated the heat transfer characteristics of ZnO/Water nanofluid
in a concentric tube heat exchanger under laminar flow condition and showed that the heat transfer
coefficient of nanofluid was 14% higher than base fluid. Zamzamian et al. [12] experimentally
investigated forced convective heat transfer coefficient of Al2O3/EG and CuO/EG nanofluids in a double
pipe heat exchanger under turbulent flow. However, any theoretical or experimental investigation on the
use of nanofluid as secondary fluid in refrigeration or heat pump system is scarce in the open literatures.
In the present work, a nanofluid cooled double tube heat exchanger (gas cooler) has been modeled
and simulated for transcritical CO2 refrigeration system. To take care of highly variable heat transfer
characteristics (due to the sharp variation of CO2 properties near pseudocritical region), the lengthwise
dicretization of gas cooler has been incorporated in the model. Effects of operating pressure and
temperature, mass flow rate, nanofluid variety and particle volume concentration on the performance have
been studied as well.

Theoretical modeling and simulation

The nanofluid cooled concentric double tube gas cooler considered in this study has following
dimensions: inner and outer diameters of inner tube are 4.75mm and 6.35mm, respectively, inner diameter
of outer tube is 10mm and tube length is 14m [5]. The heat exchanger is counter-flow type, where the
nanofluid flows through the inner tube and the refrigerant flows through the annulus. As the effect of
using nanofluid as a cooling medium in gas cooler on the cycle performance improvement is the main aim
of the present study, only gas cooler has been modeled. The temperature entropy diagram of transcritical
CO2 refrigeration cycle is shown in Fig. 1 with non-isentropic compression (1-2), gas cooling/heat
rejection through double-tube gas cooler (2-3), isenthalpic expansion (3-4) and evaporation/heat addition
(4-1) to get the useful refrigeration effect.
It may be noted that the CO2 properties variations in gas cooler is very significant and hence to
take care of this, the lengthwise discretization technique has been successfully applied for gas cooler of
double pipe, fin-tube compact heat exchanger as well as shell and tube types [5, 13-14] in transcritical CO2
system. In the present study also, to consider the lengthwise highly property variation, the double tube heat
exchanger (gas cooler) has been discretized and mass, momentum and energy conservation equations have
been applied to each segment. The following assumptions have been made in the analysis:
 Compressor inlet condition is dry-saturated.
2
 Heat transfer with the ambient is negligible.
 Only single-phase heat transfer occurs for nanofluid.

Fig. 1. T-s diagram of transcritical CO2 refrigeration cycle

Fig. 2. A computational segment of gas cooler

The double tube gas cooler has been equally divided into number of segments of length L as
shown in Fig. 2. Employing LMTD expression, heat transfer in ith segment of the gas cooler is given by
[5],

3
 (Tri  Tnfi )  (Tri 1  Tnfi 1 )
Q  UA
i i
(1)
ln (Tri  Tnfi ) (Tri 1  Tnfi 1 ) 
The overall heat transfer coefficient and heat transfer area product is determined by the following
equation [5]:
1 1 ln(do / di ) 1
   (2)
UA Anf  nf 2 kt L Ar r
Additionally, energy balance in ith segment of gas cooler for both the fluids yield [5]:
Qi  mr  hr i  hr i 1   mnf c p ,nf Tnf i  Tnf i 1  (3)
For supercritical CO2 cooling in annulus, to take care of large variation of CO2 properties in the
radial direction, Pitla et al. [15] proposed a modified correlation incorporating both bulk and wall
properties. This correlation, used for gas cooler model, is given by;
 Nu  Nurt  krt
Nur   rb  (4)
 2  krb
Here, Nurb and Nurt are the Nusselt numbers at bulk and wall temperature, respectively, predicted by
Gnielinski equation within the range 2300<Re<10 6 and 0.6<Pr<105.

Nu 
f / 8 Re 1000  Pr
(5)
1.07  12.7  f / 8
0.5
 Pr 2/3
 1
where, f is the friction factor given by:
f   0.79ln  Re   1.64  , Re  4mr   Di  do   rb 
2
(6)
Hence, heat transfer coefficient is given by,
krb
r  Nur (7)
de
where, the equivalent diameter of annulus side de is given by,
de   Di2  do2  do (8)
To evaluate the heat transfer coefficient of nanofluid for turbulent flow, Xuan and Li correlation
[16] has been used, which is given by ( 104  Renf  2.5 104 ,   2% ),
 nf di
 0.0059 1  7.6286 0.6886 Pe p 0.001  Re0.9238
nf Prnf0.4 (9)
knf
The Reynolds number, the Prandtl number and the particle Peclet number for nanofluid are defined
respectively as [14]:
nf um di 4mnf
Renf   (10)
nf  di nf
Prnf  c p ,nf nf knf (11)
nf c p ,nf um d p 4mnf c p ,nf d p
Ped   (12)
knf  di 2 knf
4
The effective density and the effective specific heat of the nanofluid can be calculated from the following
relations [14]:
nf  (1   ) w   p (13)

 c  p nf  (1   )   c p      c p 
w p
(14)

The viscosity of nanofluid has been calculated by Einstein’s equation [14], given by:
nf  1  2.5  w (15)
The effective thermal conductivity of the nanofluid has been calculated by Yu and Choi equation [17],
given by (   5% ),
k p  2kw  2(k p  kw )(1   )3
knf  kw (16)
k p  2kw  (k p  kw )(1   )3
Where, β = 0.1 and the temperature dependent transport properties: dynamic viscosity and thermal
conductivity of water are given by [14], respectively ( 0  t  90o C ),
w  0.00157  4.68 105 t  5.71107 t 2  2.52 109 t 3 (17)
kw  0.5473  2.14 103 t  9.6737 106 t 2 (18)
The annulus (CO2)-side pressure drop in each segment is predicted by [13],
8mr 2  i L 
pi  pi 1   fr  1.2 (19)
 2  Di2  d 
2 2
o r i  Di  do 
where, the friction factor is given by in Ref. [13].
The tube side pressure drop is given by [18],
L 8mnf
2

pnfi  f nf (20)
di  2 di4 nf i
The friction factor correlation of nanofluid, which has been established for Al2O3, SiO2 and CuO
nanofluids [18], is given by ( 4000  Re  16000 ,   6% ),

 nf   nf 
0.797 0.108
0.25
f nf  0.3164 Re     (21)
 w   w 
nf

Assuming 85% pump efficiency [14], the pump work is given by,
mnf pnf
Wp 
0.85
 n nf
(22)

The Cooling capacity and compressor power, respectively, are given by,
Qe  mr  h1  h3  (23)
Wc  mr  h2  h1  (24)
Finally, the effective system performance using nanofluid is given by,
COP  Qe Wc  Wp  (25)

5
 Based on previously developed simulation model for CO2 heat pump (validation with
experimental data showed good agreement [5]), a computer code has been developed to simulate the
double tube heat exchanger (gas cooler) in transcritical CO2 refrigeration system at various operating
conditions. Author’s own developed subroutine ‘CO2PROP’ [5] has been integrated with code to estimate
the thermodynamic and transport properties of carbon dioxide in subcritical as well as supercritical zones.
To consider the sharp property variation, the entire length of the gas cooler has been divided equally into
several discrete segments (segment length L  Total Length n ) and each segment has been treated as a
counter flow heat exchanger. In each segment, heat transfer coefficients for both refrigerant and nanofluid
are calculated based on mean values. This way, the gas cooler is made equivalent to a number of counter
flow heat exchangers arranged in series and the combined heat transfer of all the segments is the total heat
transfer of the gas cooler. Therefore, fast changing properties of CO 2 have been modelled accurately in the
gas cooler. For given evaporator temperature and gas cooler pressure, gas cooler inlet enthalpy and
temperature of CO2 are calculated by assumed 75% compressor efficiency to accommodate non-isentropic
compression. For given, gas cooler geometry, CO2 and nanofluid mass flow rates and nanofluid properties
[14], gas cooler model is used to calculate outlet temperatures and capacity. It may be noted that the mass
flow rates are so selected that the both CO2 and nanofluid flows will be turbulent with moderate Re. The
heat transfer coefficient for pure water has been calculated by Gnieliniski equation for liquids [14]. The
effective iteration technique has been used in the code to get good accuracy of results. Finally,
performance parameters have been calculated for various input parameters.

Results and Discussion

The performances of the double tube gas cooler as well as the CO2 refrigeration cycle are
presented for various compressor discharge pressures (90 to 110 bar), nanofluid mass flow rates (0.015 to
0.05 kg/s) and nanoparticle volume fraction in nanofluid (0.1 to 2%). Unless otherwise stated the mean
values are refrigerant pressure at gas cooler inlet of 100bar, nanofluid mass flow rate of 0.03kg/s and
nano-particle volume concentration of 1%. The CO2 temperature in evaporator, CO2 mass flow rate and
nanofluid inlet temperature to gas cooler have been taken as 5oC, 0.02kg/s and 30oC, respectively. The
nano-particle diameter is taken as 50nm. The heat exchanger (gas cooler) effectiveness and cooling COP
are suitably plotted to illustrate the various performance trends.
The grid dependent test results show that with the increase in number of segments, the result
initially changes rapidly and then slowly merges to same value and that has been happened approximately
after 15 number of segments. Hence the number of segment has been taken as 20 for simulation, where
result becomes nearly independent on number of segments (e.g. error in COP is less than 0.1% per
segment). For example, the lengthwise variations of CO2 and nanofluid temperatures, and overall heat
transfer coefficient are shown in Fig. 3 for mean operating conditions with alumina-water nanofluid,
which shows the significant variation of overall heat transfer coefficient and the maximum value is at the
pseudocritical temperature and confirms to need of discretization, and also the grid dependent variation is
shown in Fig. 4. Hence, similar to previous studies [5,13-14], the discretization has been effectively used
in gas cooler to get the better accuracy of results.

6
 Fig. 3. Lengthwise variations of temperatures and conductance

Fig. 4. Grid dependent test

The performance comparison of double-tube gas cooler with four nanofluids: Alumina-water
(Al2O3-H2O), Titanium dioxide-water (TiO2-H2O), Copper oxide-water (CuO-H2O) and Copper-water
(Cu-H2O) as coolant is shown in Table 1 for mean operating conditions. Results show that the heat transfer

7
in double-tube gas cooler increases by using nanofluid due to increase in heat transfer properties (overall
heat transfer coefficient) and hence the effectiveness of gas cooler also increases. As a result, the cooling
capacity increases due to decrease in CO2 exit temperature in gas cooler. It may be noted that the density,
viscosity and thermal conductivity increases and specific heat capacity decreases by using nanoparticle,
and hence both Re and Pr decreases for same mass flow rate. However, the heat transfer coefficient
increases compared to base fluid due to increase in thermal conductivity and probably improvement of
heat transport properties due to several slip mechanisms of nanofluids. Pressure drops by using nanofluids
are similar to that of pure water as a coolant in gas cooler, which agreed with the experimental results with
nanofluid [16]. However, the pump work decreases slightly with the use of nanoparticle in water due to
increase in fluid density. As a result, the cooling COP of CO2 cycle improves by using nanofluid as
coolant in double-tube gas cooler. It may be noted that the specific heat for Alumina nanofluid is
maximum and the thermal conductivity for Cu nanofluid is maximum and as a result, Pr and Pe are
maximum for Alumina nanofluid for same particle volume concentration, and ultimately, Nussult number
and heat transfer coefficient are maximum for Alumina nanofluid. Hence, as shown in Table 1, the
increase in heat rejection and effectiveness are maximum for alumina followed by TiO 2, CuO and Cu
nanofluids. On the other hand, the pressure drop and pumping power are maximum for alumina nanofluid.
The cooling COP is maximum for Alumina followed by TiO2, CuO and Cu nanofluids for same operating
conditions.

Table 1: Performance comparison ( p2  100bar , mnf  0.03kg / s ,   1% )

Parameters Al2O3 TiO2 CuO Cu
Discharge temperature (oC) 82.3 82.3 82.3 82.3
Gas cooler CO2 exit temperature (oC) 40.38 40.45 40.61 40.82
Nanofluid outlet temperature (oC) 56.20 56.28 56.65 56.98
Nanofluid pressure drop (bar) 1.2720 1.2705 1.2654 1.2562
Cooling capacity (W) 2245.7 2239.9 2217.7 2192.0
Compressor work (W) 950.4 950.4 950.4 950.4
Pump work (W) 4.371 4.347 4.227 4.108
Increase in pump work (%) –1.5 –2.0 –4.0 –6.5
Heat rejection in gas cooler (W) 3196.2 3190.3 3168.1 3142.5
Increase in heat rejection (%) 3.3 3.2 2.9 2.5
Gas cooler effectiveness (%) 80.16 80.07 79.71 79.30
Increase in effectiveness 0.67 0.64 0.55 0.45
Cooling COP 2.3521 2.3460 2.3230 2.2965
COP improvement (%) 4.36 4.16 3.66 3.03

The variations of double tube gas cooler effectiveness and cooling COP with compressor
discharge pressure are shown in Figs. 5 and 6, respectively using studied nanofluids. The CO 2 inlet
temperature increases with increase in compressor discharge pressure and hence, the heat rejection in gas
cooler increases due to increase in effective heat transfer temperature difference. Whereas, the
effectiveness of gas cooler decreases with increase in CO2 pressure due to degradation of heat transfer
properties as go away from critical pressure. However, due to distinct cycle behavior of transcritical CO 2
cycle [5], the cooling COP of the cycle increases with increase in CO 2 inlet pressure to gas cooler. As the
8
compressor discharge pressure has no effect on nanofluid heat transfer or flow properties, the performance
deviations with all four nanofluids are independent on the CO2 inlet pressure to gas cooler as shown in
figures.

Fig. 5. Variation of gas cooler effectiveness with compressor discharge pressure

Fig. 6. Variation of cooling COP with compressor discharge pressure

9
 Fig. 7. Variation of gas cooler effectiveness with nanofluid mass flow rate

Fig. 8. Variation of cooling COP with nanofluid mass flow rate

The variations of double tube gas cooler effectiveness and cooling COP with nanofluid mass flow
rate are shown in Figs. 7 and 8, respectively using studied nanofluids. The nanofluid heat transfer
coefficient increases with increase in nanofluid mass flow rate due to increase in Re and hence overall heat
transfer coefficient increases resulting in increase in gas cooler effectiveness. The cooling capacity
10
increases due to increase in gas cooler effectiveness and mass flow rate. The compressor work remain
unchanged and the pumping power increases significantly with increase in mass flow rate, however,
negligibly small compared to compressor work. Hence, the cooling COP of the cycle increases with
increase in nanofluid mass flow rate. As the nanofluid properties are independent on nanofluid mass flow
rate, the effect on performance deviations with all four nanofluids is negligible.

Fig. 9. Variation of gas cooler effectiveness with particle volume fraction

Fig. 10. Variation of cooling COP with particle volume fraction

11
 The variations of double tube gas cooler effectiveness and cooling COP with particle volume
fraction are shown in Figs. 9 and 10, respectively using studied nanofluids. The specific heat capacity
decreases and viscosity increases, whereas the thermal conductivity increases initially rapidly and then
slowly, and hence the heat transfer coefficient initially increases rapidly and then negligibly with increase
in particle volume fraction. As a result, the effectiveness of gas cooler and cooling capacity increases with
increase in volume fraction. The pressure drop increases but pumping power decreases negligibly with
increase in volume fraction due to increase in density. Hence, the cooling COP increases rapidly and then
slowly with increase in volume fraction. The deviation of nanofluid properties increases and hence the
deviation of COP values increases with increase in volume fraction. Study shows that the particle volume
fraction may be optimize based on cooling COP, however, the higher optimum volume fraction will cause
more stability problem of nanofluid.

Fig. 11. Comparison of COP improvements

The improvement of performance has be observed for CO2 cycle by using nanofluid as a coolant
instead of water in double tube gas cooler and the improvement is dependent on kind of nanofluids as well
as operating conditions. Fig. 11 predicts the percentage of cooling COP improvements using nanofluid
compared to water for various operating conditions. The percentage of improvement is also dependent on
absolute value. For the given ranges of study, the maximum cooling COP improvement of transcritical
CO2 cycle for Al2O3-H2O is observed as 25.4%, whereas that for TiO2-H2O is 23,8%, for CuO-H2O is
20.2% and for Cu-H2O is 16.2%. It may be noted that the large deviation between various correlations for
nanofluid heat transfer coefficient has been observed [19], which leads to performance deviation.
Interestingly, system performance will be obviously improved without extra pump power by using
nanofluids.

12
Conclusions

The nanofluid cooled double tube gas cooler has been modeled and simulated for transcritical CO 2
refrigeration system to study the effects of various operating parameters on system performance
improvement. From the results and discussion, the following conclusion can be made:
 Use of nanofluid as coolant in double-tube gas cooler improves the gas cooler effectiveness, cooling
capacity and COP without penalty of pumping.
 The CO2 system yields best performance using Al2O3-H2O as coolant in double-tube gas cooler
followed by TiO2-H2O, CuO-H2O and Cu-H2O.
 The performance variation shows the similar trends with respect to gas cooler inlet pressure and
nanofluid mass flow rates for all nanofluids, however, the performance deviation increases with
increase in particle volume fraction.
 The cooling COP increases with increase in compressor discharge pressure, nanofluid mass flow rate
and particle volume fraction.
 The maximum cooling COP improvement of transcritical CO2 cycle for Al2O3-H2O is 25.4%, whereas
that for TiO2-H2O is 23.8%, for CuO-H2O is 20.2% and for Cu-H2O is 16.2% for the given ranges of
study.

Nomenclature

A heat transfer area (m2)

cp specific heat capacity (kJ kg–1K–1)
d,D diameter, inner & outer tube diameter (m)
f friction factor
h specific enthalpy (kJ kg–1)
k thermal conductivity (W m–1 K–1)
m mass flow rate (kg s–1)
n number of segments
Nu Nusselt number
p pressure (bar)
Pe Peclet number
Pr Prandtl number
Q heat transfer rate (W)
Re Reynolds number
t,T temperature (oC, K)
U overall heat transfer coefficient (W m–2 K–1)
um mean velocity (m s–1)
W work transfer (W)
α heat transfer coefficient (W m–2 K–1)
ΔL segmented length (m)

13
µ dynamic viscosity Ns m–2)
Ø particle volume fraction
ρ fluid density (kg m–3)

Subscripts
b bulk property
c compressor
i inner
nf nanofluid
o outer
p nanoparticle, pump
r refrigerant
t tube, tube wall
w water

References

[1] Kim, M., Pettersen, J., Bullard C.W., Fundamental process and system design issues in CO 2 vapour
compression systems, Progress in Energy and Combustion Science, 30 (2004), 2, pp. 119-174.
[2] Austin, B.T., Sumathy, K., Transcritical carbon dioxide heat pump systems: A review, Renewable
and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 15 (2011), 8, pp. 4013-4029.
[3] Rigola, J., Raush, G., Pe´rez-Segarra, C.D., Oliva, A., Numerical simulation and experimental
validation of vapour compression refrigeration systems. Special emphasis on CO 2 trans-critical
cycles, International Journal of Refrigeration, 28 (2005), pp. 1225–1237.
[4] Cabello R., Sa´nchez, D., Llopis, R., Torrella, E., Experimental evaluation of the energy efficiency of
a CO2 refrigerating plant working in transcritical conditions, Applied Thermal Engineering, 28
(2008), pp. 1596–1604.
[5] Sarkar, J., Bhattacharyya, S., Ramgopal, M., A transcritical CO2 heat pump for simultaneous water
cooling and heating: Test results and model validation, International Journal of Energy Research, 33
(2009), 1, pp. 100-109.
[6] Sa´nchez, D., Torrella, E., Cabello, R., Llopis, R., Influence of the superheat associated to a
semihermetic compressor of a transcritical CO2 refrigeration plant, Applied Thermal Engineering, 30
(2010), pp. 302–309.
[7] Wong, K.V., Leon, O.D., Applications of Nanofluids: Current and Future, Advances in Mechanical
Engineering, (2010), Article ID 519659.
[8] Liu, L., Kim, E.S., Park, Y.G., Jacobi, A.N., The potential impact of nano-fluid enhancements on the
performance of heat exchangers, Heat Transfer Engineering, 33 (2011), 1, pp. 31-41.
[9] Chun, B.H., Kang, H.U., Kim, S.H., Effect of alumina nanoparticles in the fluid on heat transfer in
double-pipe heat exchanger system, Korean Journal of Chemical Engineering, 25 (2008), 5, pp. 966-
971.
[10] Duangthongsuk, W., Wongwises, S., Heat transfer enhancement and pressure drop characteristics of
TiO2–water nanofluid in a double-tube counter flow heat exchanger, International Journal of Heat
and Mass Transfer, 52 (2009), pp. 2059–2067.

14
[11] Fard, M H., Talaie, M.R., Nasr, S., Numerical and experimental investigation of heat transfer of
ZnO/Water nanofluid in the concentric tube and plate heat exchangers, Thermal Science, 15 (2011),
1, pp. 183-194.
[12] Zamzamian, A., Oskouie, S.N., Doosthoseini, A., Joneidi, A., Pazouki, M., Experimental
investigation of forced convective heat transfer coefficient in nanofluids of Al 2O3/EG and CuO/EG in
a double pipe and plate heat exchangers under turbulent flow, Experimental Thermal and Fluid
Science, 35 (2011), 3, pp. 495-502.
[13] Sarkar, J., Bhattacharyya, S., Ramgopal, M., CO2 heat pump dryer: Part 1. Mathematical model and
simulation, Drying Technology, 24 (2006), 1583-1591.
[14] Sarkar, J., Performance of nanofluid-cooled shell and tube gas cooler in transcritical CO 2
refrigeration systems, Applied Thermal Engineering, 31 (2011), 14-15, pp. 2541-2548.
[15] Pitla, S.S., Groll, E.A., Ramadhyani, S., New correlation to predict the heat transfer coefficient
during in-tube cooling of turbulent supercritical CO2. International Journal of Refrigeration, 25
(2002), pp. 887–895.
[16] Xuan, Y., Li, Q., Investigation of convective heat transfer and flow features of nanofluids, Journal of
Heat Transfer, 125 (2003), pp. 151–155.
[17] Yu, W., Choi, S.U.S., The role of interfacial layers in the enhanced thermal conductivity of
nanofluids: a renovated Maxwell model, Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 5 (2003), pp. 167-171.
[18] Vajjha, R.S., Das, D.K., Kulkarni, D.P., Development of new correlations for convective heat
transfer and friction factor in turbulent regime for nanofluids, International Journal of Heat and
Mass Transfer, 53 (2010), pp. 4607–4618.
[19] Sarkar, J., A critical review on convective heat transfer correlations of nanofluids, Renewable &
Sustainable Energy Reviews, 15 (2011), 6, pp. 3271-3277.

15