Pressure Drop of Tio Nano Uid in Circular Pipes: Particuology
Pressure Drop of Tio Nano Uid in Circular Pipes: Particuology
Pressure Drop of Tio Nano Uid in Circular Pipes: Particuology
Particuology
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/partic
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: This paper discusses the pressure drop in circular pipes of TiO2 /water nanofluid for both laminar and
Received 22 September 2009 turbulent flows at different temperatures and TiO2 weight fractions. This study shows that TiO2 /water
Received in revised form 14 January 2011 nanofluid causes enhancement, but temperature rise reduces pressure drop. The proportional increase in
Accepted 3 May 2011
pressure drop for turbulent flow is lower than that for laminar flow. The traditional equation for pressure
drop fails to accurately estimate the pressure drop for laminar and turbulent flows. Accordingly, this study
Keywords:
developed new empirical equations for the friction factor for both laminar and turbulent flows, and the
Titania (TiO2 )
maximum deviations between calculated and experimental results were reduced to within the ranges
Nanofluid
Laminar flow
of −6.17% to 3.55% and −3.08% to 3.81%, respectively, that is, for TiO2 /water nanofluid, the correlations
Turbulent flow apply better to turbulent than to laminar flow.
© 2011 Chinese Society of Particuology and Institute of Process Engineering, Chinese Academy of
Sciences. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction tical pipe, both laminar and turbulent, under a constant heat flux
around the tube, finding that the pressure drop of the nanofluids
Research has shown that adding nanoparticles to a liquid can was not much different from that of the base fluid. Rea, McKrell,
enhance its thermal conductivity, which, however, does not nec- Hu, and Buongiorno (2009) studied laminar convective heat trans-
essarily lead to increase heat exchange in real practice. Recent fer and viscous pressure loss for alumina/water and zirconia/water
research has focused on the benefits of nanofluid in heat convection nanofluids flowing in a vertical heated tube, showing that the
(Buongiorno, Venerus, Prabhat, McKrell, Townsend, & Christianson, heat transfer coefficient was increased by the nanofluids, and that
2009; Godson, Raja, Mohan Lal, & Wongwises, 2010; Heris, Etemad, the measured pressure loss for the nanofluids was much higher
& Esfahany, 2006; Khanafer, Vafai, & Lightstone, 2003; Nguyen, Roy, than that for pure water. The pressure loss of the 6 vol.% alu-
Gauthier, & Galanis, 2007; Tsai et al., 2004; Wang & Mujumdar, mina nanofluid was approximately 7.2 times higher than that of
2007; Wu et al., 2010; Xuan & Li, 2003). However, others sug- water. Duangthongsuk and Wongwises (2009) studied experimen-
gested the opposite results (Putra, Roetzel, & Das, 2003; Wen & tally the forced convective heat transfer and flow characteristics
Ding, 2006) and believed that the performance of the whole sys- of a nanofluid consisting of water and 0.2 vol.% TiO2 nanoparti-
tem would deteriorate if the benefits of increased performance in cles. The results showed that use of a nanofluid had hardly any
heat exchange were less than the damage caused by increased pres- penalty in pressure drop. Pantzali, Kanaris, Antoniadis, Mouza, and
sure drop due to increased viscosity by the solid–liquid mixture. Paras (2009) presented the effects of using a nanofluid (CuO/water,
Many empirical equations have been proposed to predict viscos- 4 vol.%) in a miniature plate heat exchanger (PHE) with a mod-
ity of nanofluids, yet no consensus has been reached because of ulated surface, showing that the pressure drop increased by less
differences caused by materials, particle sizes, and manufactur- than 10%. Sundar and Sharma (2010) studied the heat transfer coef-
ing methods (Das, Putra, & Roetzel, 2003; Jwo, Teng, Wu, Chang, ficient and friction factor in a plain tube with a twisted tape insert
& Chen, 2009; Li, Li, & Wang, 2002; Rao, 2010; Tseng & Lin, 2003; at different volume concentrations of Al2 O3 nanofluids under Re of
Wang, Xu, & Choi, 1999; Wierenga & Philipse, 1998). 10,000–22,000 (turbulent flow) with tapes of different twist ratios,
He et al. (2007) studied both heat transfer and flow behavior showing that the friction factor of 0.5 vol.% of Al2 O3 nanofluid with
of TiO2 /distilled water nanofluids flowing upward through a ver- a twist ratio of five was 1.096 times higher as compared to the flow
of water in a circular tube.
This research focuses on TiO2 /water nanofluids with low
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +866 2 7734 3358; fax: +866 2 2392 9449.
nanoparticle concentrations (0–1.5 wt%), aiming at measuring the
E-mail address: tube.t5763@msa.hinet.net (T.-P. Teng).
effect of nanoparticle concentration and temperatures (10–40 ◦ C)
1674-2001/$ – see front matter © 2011 Chinese Society of Particuology and Institute of Process Engineering, Chinese Academy of Sciences. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.partic.2011.05.001
T.-P. Teng et al. / Particuology 9 (2011) 486–491 487
L V2
P = f , (1)
d 2 f
with the following friction factor for laminar flow:
Fig. 1. SEM image of TiO2 nanoparticles as purchased.
64
flami. = . (2)
Re
For turbulent flow, Swamee and Jain (1976) proposed a formula
which leads to calculated results extremely close to the turbulent
flow region in the Moody chart, as could be written as follows:
0.25
fturb. = 2
. (3)
[log((1/(3.7(d/ε))) + (5.74/Re0.9 ))]
The Reynolds number (Re) in Eqs. (2) and (3) could be shown as:
Vdf
Re = , (4)
f
where f is the friction factor, d is the inner diameter of pipe (m),
L is the length of pipe (m), V is the velocity of fluid (m/s), f is
the density of fluid (kg/m3 ), ε is the roughness (m), and f is the
viscosity of fluid (Pa s).
The value of Re represents the flow condition: for laminar flow
Re < 2000 and for turbulent flow Re > 4000.
2 2 2 2 2 2
V P W T
um = + + + + + .
V P W T
(5)
Fig. 6. Experimental results of viscosity measurement. Fig. 8. Experimental data and calculated results of pressure drop in laminar flow
(V = 0.57 m/s).
of nanofluid. The influence of weight fractions on density change Fig. 8 compares calculated pressure drop with experimental
appears to be approximately linear. However, the density pre- results for TiO2 /water nanofluid in laminar flow (V = 0.57 m/s),
sented a non-linear trend under different temperatures; the main showing rather great deviation between calculated and experimen-
reason is that the added nanoparticles and bulk liquid have a great tal results. To consider the impact of pressure drop when the TiO2
difference in the coefficient of thermal expansion. Fig. 6 shows the nanoparticles were added, in the concentration range of 0–1.5 wt%
measured effect of the weight fractions of TiO2 /water nanofluid on and temperature range of 10–40 ◦ C, the margin of deviation is 0.01%
the change of viscosity under different temperatures. Temperature to −52.36%. It is found that the higher the temperature, the greater
rise reduces the viscosity of nanofluid, whereas increased weight the deviation between the calculated and experimental values.
fraction increases the viscosity of nanofluid, and for the different Fig. 9 compares calculated and experimental pressure drops for
temperatures, the effect of weight fraction on viscosity appears TiO2 /water nanofluid in turbulent flow (V = 1.53 m/s), showing that
nearly linear. the deviation between the two is within 20%. For concentration
Fig. 7 shows the enhancement ratio of pressure drop by increas- range of 0–1.5 wt% and temperature of 10–40 ◦ C, the margin of
ing the solids content of the TiO2 /water nanofluid. For solids deviation is 3.20–19.48%, showing that calculation tends toward
content of 0–1.5 wt% and temperature of 10–40 ◦ C, the enhance- overestimation.
ment ratio of pressure drop is 25.0–63.3% and 5.7–15.3% for laminar Comparison between calculation and experiment for pressure
and turbulent flow, respectively, the enhancement ratio of pres- drop shows that the deviation between the two is extremely large,
sure drop being larger for laminar flow than for turbulent flow. The reaching −52.36% of the maximum for laminar flow (Jwo et al.,
results compare well with literature data (Jwo et al., 2009; Rea et al., 2009), thus showing that the traditional equation for calculat-
2009; Sundar & Sharma, 2010). ing pressure drop calls for amendment. To apply the empirical
Fig. 9. Experimental data and calculated results of pressure drop in turbulent flow
Fig. 7. Enhancement ratio of experimental data of pressure drop. (V = 1.53 m/s).
490 T.-P. Teng et al. / Particuology 9 (2011) 486–491
5. Conclusions
(1) Increase in its solids content will enhance both the density
and viscosity of a nanofluid, whereas temperature rise tends
to reduce both the density and viscosity.
(2) Enhancement of pressure drop for a nanofluid is lower under
turbulent flow in a circular pipe, but higher under laminar flow
condition, thus helping to reduce the delivery loss of pumping.
(3) Traditional equations of friction factor cannot accurately cal-
culate the TiO2 /water nanofluid flow through circular pipes,
especially in the range of laminar flow.
(4) New empirical equations for friction factor are proposed in this
Fig. 10. Pressure drop in laminar flow: comparison between experiments and esti-
study. The traditional equation of pressure drop can thus cal-
mates by regression.
culate the pressure drop more accurately for the TiO2 /water
nanofluid flow through the circular pipe under laminar and
equation developed in this study to a wider range, this paper uses turbulent flow using the friction factor from newly proposed
multiple regression analysis for the friction factor under both lam- empirical equations.
inar and turbulent flow, to estimate the influence of temperature, (5) The deviation of the empirical friction factor equation is much
weight fraction, and calculated friction factor (flami. and fturb. ) on lower than that produced by the use of the traditional friction
friction factor (fExp. ) from examining pressure drop under laminar factor equation for the pressure drop under laminar and turbu-
and turbulent flow respectively. The new equations for the friction lent flow; the margin of deviation was in the ranges of −6.17%
factor (flamiReg. and fturbReg. ) were respectively Eqs. (9) and (10) with to 3.55% and −3.08% to 3.81%.
R2 = 0.970 and 0.910, and the pressure drop was calculated by using
Eq. (1). Figs. 10 and 11 compare the pressure drops estimated by
Acknowledgement
regression of the friction factor with weight fraction, temperature,
and calculated friction factor. The deviation of the empirical fric-
The authors would like to thank National Science Council of the
tion factor equation is much lower than that produced by the use
Republic of China, Taiwan, for financial support under Contract Nos.
of the traditional friction factor equation for pressure drop under
NSC 98-2221-E-003-018 and 99-2221-E-003-008.
laminar and turbulent flow: the margin of deviation is respectively
in the ranges of −6.17% to 3.55% and −3.08% to 3.81%. Thus, mul-
tiple regression of the friction factor could accurately estimate the References
result in this investigation.
Buongiorno, J., Venerus, D. C., Prabhat, N., McKrell, T., Townsend, J., Christianson,
R., et al. (2009). A benchmark study on the thermal conductivity of nanofluids.
flami.Reg. = 0.041 + 0.079flami. + 0.014ω − 3.516 × 10−6 T 2 , (9) Journal of Applied Physics, 106, 094312.
Das, S. K., Putra, N., & Roetzel, W. (2003). Pool boiling characteristics of nano-fluids.
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 46(5), 851–862.
Duangthongsuk, W., & Wongwises, S. (2009). Heat transfer enhancement and pres-
sure drop characteristics of TiO2 -water nanofluid in a double-tube counter flow
heat exchanger. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 52, 2059–2067.
Godson, L., Raja, B., Mohan Lal, D., & Wongwises, S. (2010). Enhancement of heat
transfer using nanofluids – An overview. Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews, 14, 629–641.
He, Y., Jin, Y., Chen, H., Ding, Y., Cang, D., & Lu, H. (2007). Heat transfer and flow
behaviour of aqueous suspensions of TiO2 nanoparticles (nanofluids) flowing
upward through a vertical pipe. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer,
50, 2272–2282.
Heris, S. Z., Etemad, S., & Esfahany, Gh. M. N. (2006). Experimental investigation of
oxide nanofluids laminar flow convective heat transfer. International Communi-
cations in Heat and Mass Transfer, 33(4), 529–535.
Jwo, C. C., Teng, T. P., Wu, D. J., Chang, H., & Chen, S. L. (2009). Research on pres-
sure loss of alumina nanofluid flow in a pipe. Journal of the Chinese Society of
Mechanical Engineers, 30(6), 511–517.
Khanafer, K., Vafai, K., & Lightstone, M. (2003). Buoyancy-driven heat transfer
enhancement in a two-dimensional enclosure utilizing nanofluids. International
Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 46, 3639–3653.
Li, J. M., Li, Z. L., & Wang, B. X. (2002). Experimental viscosity measurements for
copper oxide nanoparticle suspensions. Tsinghua Science & Technology, 7(2),
198–201.
Nguyen, C. T., Roy, G., Gauthier, C., & Galanis, N. (2007). Heat transfer enhancement
using Al2 O3 -water nanofluid for an electronic liquid cooling system. Applied
Thermal Engineering, 27, 1501–1506.
Pantzali, M. N., Kanaris, A. G., Antoniadis, K. D., Mouza, A. A., & Paras, S. V. (2009).
Fig. 11. Pressure drop in turbulent flow: comparison between experiments and Effect of nanofluids on the performance of a miniature plate heat exchanger with
estimates by regression. modulated surface. International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow, 30, 691–699.
T.-P. Teng et al. / Particuology 9 (2011) 486–491 491
Putra, N., Roetzel, W., & Das, S. K. (2003). Natural convection of nano-fluids. Heat Wang, X. Q., & Mujumdar, A. S. (2007). Heat transfer characteristics of nanofluids: A
and Mass Transfer, 39(8–9), 775–784. review. International Journal of Thermal Sciences, 46, 1–19.
Rao, Y. (2010). Nanofluids: Stability, phase diagram, rheology and applications. Par- Wang, X. W., Xu, X. F., & Choi, S. U. S. (1999). Thermal conductivity of
ticuology, 8, 549–555. nanoparticle-fluid mixture. Journal of Thermophysics and Heat Transfer, 13(4),
Rea, U., McKrell, T., Hu, L. W., & Buongiorno, J. (2009). Laminar convective heat trans- 474–480.
fer and viscous pressure loss of alumina-water and zirconia-water nanofluids. Wen, D., & Ding, Y. (2006). Natural convective heat transfer of suspensions of tita-
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 52, 2042–2048. nium dioxide nanoparticles (nanofluids). IEEE Transactions on nanotechnology,
Sundar, L. S., & Sharma, K. V. (2010). Turbulent heat transfer and friction factor of 5(3), 220–227.
Al2 O3 nanofluid in circular tube with twisted tape inserts. International Journal White, F. M. (1991). Viscous fluid flow. New York: McGraw Hill, Inc.
of Heat and Mass Transfer, 53, 1409–1416. Wierenga, A. M., & Philipse, A. P. (1998). Low-shear viscosity of isotropic
Swamee, P. K., & Jain, A. K. (1976). Explicit equation for pipe-flow problem. Journal dispersions of (Brownian) rods and fibres: A review of theory and experi-
of the hydraulics division, 102(HY5), 657–664. ments. Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects, 137,
Tsai, C. Y., Chien, H. T., Ding, P. P., Chan, B., Luh, T. Y., & Chen, P. H. (2004). Effect 355–372.
of structural character of gold nanoparticles in nanofluid on heat pipe thermal Wu, C., Cho, T. J., Xu, J., Lee, D., Yang, B., & Zachariah, M. Z. (2010). Effect of nanopar-
performance. Materials Letters, 58, 1461–1465. ticle clustering on the effective thermal conductivity of concentrated silica
Tseng, W. J., & Lin, K. C. (2003). Rheology and colloidal structure of aque- colloids. Physical Review E, 81, 011406.
ous TiO2 nanoparticle suspensions. Materials Science and Engineering A, 355, Xuan, Y., & Li, Q. (2003). Investigation on convective heat transfer and flow features
186–192. of nanofluids. ASME Journal of Heat Transfer, 125, 151–155.
Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.
Alternative Proxies: