Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Materials Today: Proceedings 4 (2017) 4022–4031 www.materialstoday.com/proceedings

5th International Conference of Materials Processing and Characterization (ICMPC 2016)

Review on Thermal Conductivity of Nanofluids

R. M. Sarviyaa, Veeresh Fuskeleb
a
Professor,Department of Mechanical Engineering, MANIT, Bhopal (M.P.)-462003, India
b
Research Scholar, Department of Mechanical Engineering, MANIT, Bhopal (M.P.)-462003, India

Abstract

Among the thermo physical properties of the nano fluids thermal conductivity is the key property which depends on the pertinent
parameters of nanoparticles material, volume fraction, size, aspect ratio, base fluid thermo physical properties, temperature, and
surfactant. Over last decades, numerous works have reported the higher thermal conductivity of nano fluids than that of the
conventional heat transfer fluids with the reason of random motion of nanoparticles and a number of numerical and theoretical
models have been proposed. In this article, the current state of knowledge on the several thermal conductivity measurement
techniques employed by the researchers along with the factors affecting the thermal conductivity of nano fluids have been
presented. This review leads to some directions for future research in nano fluids.

©2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Selection and peer-review under responsibility of Conference Committee Members of 5th International Conference of Materials
Processing and Characterization (ICMPC 2016).

Keywords:Nanofluids, thermal conductivity, measurement techniques, theoritical models.

1. Introduction

Enhancing heat transport properties of traditional heat transfer fluids has become a challenging topic for research
and development. For developing energy efficient heat transfer equipment the need of novel heat transfer fluids
having higher thermal conductivity becomes mandatory [1]. Nanofluids are well-dispersed nanoparticles suspended
at low volume fractions in conventional liquids which enhance the mixture’s thermal conductivity [2].Nanofluids
with enhanced thermal conductivity are beneficial for heat transfer applications as they do not block flow channels
inducing a very small pressure drop and the vigorous Brownian motion of suspended nanoparticles in base fluids
makes nanofluids more stable [3].

E-mail address:rpurohit73@gmail.com

2214-7853©2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Selection and peer-review under responsibility of Conference Committee Members of 5th International Conference of Materials Processing and
Characterization (ICMPC 2016).
 R. M. Sarviya et al / Materials Today: Proceedings 4 (2017) 4022–4031 4023

Synthesis of nanoparticles and preparation method of nanofluids play an important role on stability and thus on
thermal conductivity of nanofluids [4]. Existing experimental studies showed that the thermal conductivity of
nanofluid is function of thermo-physical properties of nanoparticles and base fluid,the size of nanoparticles, solid
concentration, temperature etc [5]. Choi made the first measurement of thermal conductivity of nanofluid. Since
then, several experimental works have been reported on the thermal conductivity of nanofluids and a number of
theoretical models have been proposed [6,7]. A few latest review papers [1, 3] have discussed on the thermal
conductivity measurement and the factors influencing it (up to 2014). In this paper, we will review the recent (2015-
16) progress in measurement techniques of the thermal conductivity, theoretical models and factors affecting the
enhancement of thermal conductivity.

2. Measurement of Thermal Conductivity of Nanofluids:

Nanofluids have attracted attention of researchers due to increased thermal conductivity compared to the
conventional fluid used for transfer. Measuring thermal conductivity has been a challenge since various techniques
and methods present different results. Thus, the method to be used should be significant to lower the uncertainty and
measurement error as much as possible. Generally, Fourier’s law for conduction heat transfer can be utilized to
measure thermal conductivity of a material. In case of liquids, suppressing convection should be regarded during
measurements and since fluids does not have definite shape, size and cross sectional area, it is more difficult to
calculate thermal conductivity. Thus, measurement should take place in a very short time. Even the situation is
worse in case of nanofluids, whereas suspended nanoparticles may cause a major problem. Furthermore, heating it
from above facilitates conduction of heat in a layer wise manner. Keeping these points in mind several techniques
have been proposed to measure the thermal conductivity of nanofluids over the past few years. Various techniques
such as transient hot wire method, thermal constants analyzer, steady state parallel plate method and 3ω method
have been used for measuring the thermal conductivity of nanofluids. In the recent literature, the transient hot-wire
method has been used most extensively. [8]

2.1 Transient hot-wire (THW) technique

This method is based on the principle of measurement of temperature and time response of the wire subjected to
an abrupt electrical pulse. In this method, a long, thin platinum wire is used as a probe which functions both as a
dual line heater and as a temperature sensor and is inserted into the nanofluid for measurement. Temperature of the
wire is raised by supplying constant current through resistive heating. The heat dissipated in the sensor is transferred
to the surrounding nanofluid through conduction thereby increasing its temperature. This temperature rise depends
on the thermal conductivity of the nanofluid. The thermal conductivity of the fluid (Eq. 1) is obtained from the
relative change in resistivity of the wire which is measured through four wire resistive measurement system (Fig. 1).
[1, 8]. The advantages of THW method are low cost and easy implementation.
𝑞 𝑡
𝑘 = �4𝜋(∆𝑇 −∆𝑇 )� 𝑙𝑛 �𝑡2 � (1)
2 1 1

Fig. 1. Schematics of transient hot wire experimental setup [1] Fig. 2. KD2 Pro thermal properties analyzer [8]
4024 R. M. Sarviya et al/ Materials Today: Proceedings 4 (2017) 4022–4031

Uses of transient hot-wire method for the measuring thermal conductivity of nanofluids has been reported by
Angayarkanni et al.[1]. Some of the recent work was reviewed here. Esfe et al. [5] and Esfe et al. [9] utilized KD2
Pro device employing the transient hot-wire method to characterize the thermal conductivity of the nanofluid by
measuring the temperature of nanofluid during cooling and heating phases. The measured values were compared
with available thermal conductivities values for water and only 1% difference was observed in the temperature range
of 25–50 °C. For accurate values of the thermal conductivity all the measurements were repeated at least three times.
Similar device was used by Esfe et al. [10] Esfe et al. [11]to measure the thermal conductivity of ZnO - EG
nanofluid and Cu/TiO2–water/EG hybrid nanofluid respectively with accuracy of ± 5%. To minimize the free
convection the sensor was inserted vertically. To stabilize the temperature of nanofluid a hot water bath was
included with the KD2 Pro device by Esfe et al. [12] for measuring the thermal conductivity of Al2O3–water
nanofluid in various solid volume fractions and temperatures (ranging from 26 to 55 °C). Farbod et al.[13] also used
a KD2-Pro thermal property analyzer to measure the thermal conductivity of the nanofluids. He reported that errors
and the convection effects can be avoided if the probe is dipped vertically in the middle of the nanofluid sample and
by creating thermally and acoustically stable environment around the sample. Also the thermal conductivity value is
reliable if the error shown by the device is less than 0.01.

Several variations of the transient hot-wire method have been used to measure the thermal conductivity of
liquids. Gawel Zyla [14] and Karami et al. [15] used modern KD2 Pro thermal properties analyzer (Fig. 2) which
meets the standards of ASTM D5334 and IEEE 442-1981 regulations.Kim et al.[16] used an in house manufactured
more accurate transient hot wire method (Fig. 3a) for reducing its uncertainty to less than 1% by using XYZ stage
(Fig. 3b) to maintain and adjust wire tension and also by changing the sampling range of voltage according to tilt
angle, which is directly used to calculate the thermal conductivity.

(a) (b)

Fig.3. (a) Experimental apparatus and (b) schematic diagram of the transient hot wire method [16].

Lee et al. [17] investigated the thermal conductivity of nanofluids by using an advanced transient hot wire system
which avoids the capacitance influence and natural convection by using a high resolution source measuring unit and
modifying data processing method. The temperature history of the hot wire was estimated using relation between the
temperature and changes in resistance.

𝑅𝑤 = 𝑅0 (1 + 𝛼∆𝑇) (2)

where Rw, R0, and αΔT represent measured and initial resistances of hot-wire, temperature coefficient of resistance
of hot-wire, and temperature rise from the initial temperature respectively. The thermal conductivity of fluids was
estimated from the obtained temperature history by using the relation () and were validated study using
computational fluid dynamics analysis.

𝑄̇ 𝑑 𝑙𝑛𝑡
𝑘𝑓 = 4𝜋𝐿
. 𝑑∆𝑇
(3)
 R. M. Sarviya et al / Materials Today: Proceedings 4 (2017) 4022–4031 4025

Xing et al. [18] and Xing et al. [19] used the same technique to measure the thermal conductivity of
carbonnanotubes(CNTs) nanofluids. Li et al. [20] and Li et al. [21]applied a transient hot-wire apparatus with a
temperature controlled bath to measure the thermal conductivities of ZnO-EG nanofluids with a maximum deviation
of ±2.35% and SiC nanofluids with uncertainty less than 2%.Mare et al. [22], Huminic et al. [23],Shahsavar et al.
[24],Shanbedi et al. [25] also used the KD2 Pro device to measure the thermal conductivity of nanofluid using
transient hot wire method.

2.2 Transient Plane Source (TPS) technique

The transient plane source (TPS) theory is utilized by the thermal constants analyzer (TCA) to measure the
thermal conductivity of nanofluid. In this method, the TPS element which consists of an electrically conducting thin
foil of a typical pattern sandwiched inside an insulating layer, as shown in Fig. 4 acts both as the heat source and the
temperature sensor. Similar to THW method the TPS method also uses the Fourier law of heat conduction as its
fundamental principle for measuring the thermal conductivity. Faster measurements, wide range, sample preparation
not required and flexible sample size are few advantages of this method [1, 8]. The components of the setup (Fig. 5)
are TCA, a constant temperature bath, a vessel and a thermometer. The TPS element is immersed vertically in the
vessel which is placed in the constant temperature bath containing the nanofluid. The temperature of the nanofluid is
measured by a thermometer. The thermal conductivity of the nanofluid is determined by measuring the resistance of
the TPS element. According to Fourier Law of heat conduction, if no natural convection of a fluid occurs, ΔT(τ) can
be calculated as per Eq. 4, 5:

𝑊
∆𝑇(𝜏) = 𝐷(𝜏) (4)
𝜋1.5 𝑟𝑝 𝑘

(𝜏) 1 1
−𝑢2 − 𝑣 2 𝑢𝑣 (5)
𝐷(𝜏) = � 𝑑𝜎(𝜎 −2 ) � 𝑣𝑑𝑣 � 𝑢𝑑𝑢 × exp � � 𝐼0 � 2 �
0 0 0 4𝜎 2 2𝜎

where W is the electric power supplied to the probe, k is the thermal conductivity of fluid, I0 is a modified Bessel
function, and D(τ) is a geometric function [1, 8].

Fig. 4. TPS sensor [8]. Fig. 5. Experimental setup for TCA measurement [1].

D. Cabaleiro et al. [26] used hot disk thermal constant analyzer having thin nickel double spiral probe to
determine the thermal conductivity of nanofluid through transient plane source TPS technique. The variation in
sensor resistance is measured to register the temperature increment caused by supplying small current to the probe.
To avoid natural convection low thermal power (30-40 mW) is employed for short time (4 s). Thermostatic bath is
4026 R. M. Sarviya et al/ Materials Today: Proceedings 4 (2017) 4022–4031

used to ensure uniform temperature. Heat is allowed to diffuse in all directions by placing the hot disk
probevertically in the sample, which surrounds the sensor completely. The deviations in thermal conductivity
measurements were found to be less than 2%. Fang et al. [27] used the similar technique to measure the thermal
conductivity of Ag nanowires suspension in EG by employing heating power at 200 mV for 3 s to avoid natural
convection. Temperature uniformity was maintained by covering the sample container with a polyfoam pad.
Saarinen et al. [28] also used similar device to measure the thermal conductivity of the nanofluids and it found that
the measured values do not deviate from the predicted values by the Maxwell model.

3. Theoretical studies

Apart from experimental techniques, theoretical analyses and analytical models may provide additional physical
insight which may help to explain possibly anomalous enhancement of the thermal conductivity of nanofluids. [2].
Periyasamy et al. [1] reviewed various theoretical models for thermal conductivity. He reported that there are two
approaches, first applicable for low particle concentration only is MG model and second which considers the
nanoparticles surface is CSM model. He also reported about the Rayleigh model that considers the effect of particle
interaction and EMT model used by Maxwell and its modifications done by other researchers. Two modelling
approaches CMA and SMA based on insight view of the particle structure were also reported. Most of the classical
models were found to be developed by considering the nanoparticles in static condition. Statistical models were
formulated by using Brownian motion and Stokes-Einstein law. It was reported that Chandrasekar et al. considered
convection mode of heat transport to formulate the thermal conductivity model. It was revealed that movement of
nanoparticles in the base fluids caused the effect of nano-convection. Models developed by inclusion of liquid
layering and interfacial thermal resistance (Kapitza resistance) were also mentioned along with temperature
dependent models. The dynamic models which considered the effect of nanostructures along with the lateral and
random motion of nanoparticles in base fluids were also reported.Many researchers have used these models to
analytically calculate the thermal conductivity or the thermal conductivity enhancement ratio (TCER) of the
nanofluids. TCER is defined as the the ratio of thermal conductivity of the nanofluid to the thermal conductivity of
the base fluid (Keff/Kf) [29]. Alawi et al. [29] compared the various models (Table 1) of thermal conductivity for
SWCNT/R-134a nanorefrigerant.

Table 1. Thermal conductivity models for nanofluids.

Models Thermal conductivity Factor considered

k eff 𝑘𝑠 + 2𝑘𝑓 + 2∅�𝑘𝑓 − 𝑘𝑠 � Thermal conductivity of spherical particles,
Maxwell = the base fluid and the particle volume
𝑘𝑓 𝑘𝑠 + 2𝑘𝑓 − ∅�𝑘𝑓 − 𝑘𝑠 � fraction.

k eff 𝑘𝑝 + (𝑛 − 1)𝑘𝑓 − (𝑛 − 1)�𝑘𝑓 − 𝑘𝑝 �∅

Hamilton and = Introduced the shape factor (n).
Crosser 𝑘𝑓 𝑘𝑝 + (𝑛 − 1)𝑘𝑓 + �𝑘𝑓 − 𝑘𝑝 �∅

k eff 𝑘𝑝 + 2𝑘𝑓 − 2∅�𝑘𝑓 − 𝑘𝑝 �(1 + 𝜂)3

Yu and Choi = Considered the nanolayer.
𝑘𝑓 𝑘𝑝 + 2𝑘𝑓 + ∅�𝑘𝑓 − 𝑘𝑝 �(1 + 𝜂)3

Timofeeva et k eff
al.
= (1 + 3∅) The effective medium theory
𝑘𝑓
𝑘𝑠 + 2𝑘𝑓 + 2∅�𝑘𝑓 − 𝑘𝑝 �
k eff = 𝑘𝑓 � �+5 Particle size, particle volume fraction and
Koo and
𝑘𝑠 + 2𝑘𝑓 − ∅�𝑘𝑓 − 𝑘𝑠 � temperature dependence as well as properties
Kleinstreuer of the base fluid and the particle subject to
𝑘𝐵 𝑇 Brownian motion.
× 104 𝛽∅𝜌𝑓 �𝐶𝑝 �� 𝑓(𝑇, ∅)
𝑑𝑝 𝜌𝑝
 R. M. Sarviya et al / Materials Today: Proceedings 4 (2017) 4022–4031 4027

Mahbubul et al. [30] used Sitprasert correlation (Eq. 6) to predict the thermal conductivity of Al2O3/R-134a
nanorefrigerant considering the effects of nanoparticles size, nanoparticles volume concentration, and temperature-
dependent interfacial layer.

�𝑘𝑝 − 𝑘𝑙 �∅𝑘𝑙 �2𝛽13 − 𝛽 3 + 1�+ �𝑘𝑝 + 2𝑘𝑙 �𝛽13 �∅𝛽 3 (𝑘𝑙 − 𝑘𝑟 )+ 𝑘𝑟 �

𝑘𝑛𝑟 = (6)
𝛽13 �𝑘𝑝 +2𝑘𝑙 �− �𝑘𝑝 − 𝑘𝑙 �∅�𝛽13 +𝛽 3 −1�
Shin et al. [31] compared the thermal conductivity values measured experimentally with the theoretical models,
such as the Maxwell–Garnett model and the Hamilton–Crosser model (Table 1). Wang et al. [32] found that
Corcione correlation (Eq. 7) was most suitable for Al2O3/H2O nanofluid with less than 3.87% maximum deviation.

𝑘𝑛𝑓 𝑇 𝑘
= 1 + 4.4𝑅𝑒 0.4 𝑃𝑟 0.66 ( )10 ( 𝑝 )0.03 ∅0.66
𝑘𝑓 𝑇𝑓𝑟 𝑘𝑓 (7)

Hassani et al. [7] developed new correlations for the thermal conductivity of nanofluids using the Vaschy–
Buckingham theorem taking into account various parameters (Table 2) like the variation of volume fraction, the
Brownian motion, the size distribution of nanoparticles and the temperature. The developed expression was derived
from 196 values of nanofluids thermal conductivity and was found to successfully predict the thermal conductivity
of a variety of nanofluids with a mean deviation of 2.74% and standard deviation of 3.63%. The developed
correlation (Eq. 8) was proposed to be useful for preparing the nanofluid for different applications in thermal solar
collectors and heat exchangers.

Table 2. Dimensionless π-groups of the present correlations.

𝜋 − 𝑔𝑟𝑜𝑢𝑝 Parameter
𝑘𝑛
𝜋1
𝑘𝑓
𝜋2 ∅
𝑘𝑝
𝜋3
𝑘𝑓
𝜋4 Pr
𝑑𝑟𝑒𝑓
𝜋5
𝑑𝑝
𝑣𝑓
𝜋6
𝑑𝑝 𝑣𝐵𝑟
𝑐𝑝
𝜋7 2
𝑇 −1 𝑣𝐵𝑟
𝑇𝑏
𝜋8
𝑇

1 262
𝜋1 = 1.04 + 𝜋21.11 𝜋30.33 𝜋4−1.7 � − + (135𝜋50.23 𝜋60.82 𝜋7−0.1 𝜋8−7 )� (8)
𝜋4−1.7 𝜋30.33

Karami et al. [15] correlated the thermal conductivity for CuO/Water-EG nanofluids with volume fraction (fv)
and temperature (T ) as in Eq. 9 with average deviation of 2.8%.
𝑘𝑛𝑓
= (0.0018 × 𝑇 + 0.36)(𝑓𝑣 + 1)0.05
𝑘𝑏𝑓 (9)

4. Factors influencing Thermal Conductivity

The thermal conductivity of nanofluids depends on many factors such as particle volume fraction, particle
material, particle size, and particle shape. Detailed literature reviews on the effect of these parameters on thermal
properties of nanofluids are presented below. The thermal conductivity enhancement strongly depends on the solid
volume fraction and also to some extent on temperature. The thermal conductivity of MgO/water–EG (60:40)
nanofluids was studied for different solid volume fractions up to 3% with temperature ranging from 20 to 50 °C
4028 R. M. Sarviya et al/ Materials Today: Proceedings 4 (2017) 4022–4031

andit was found that thermal conductivity of nanofluid increases with increasing temperature in all considered solid
volume fractions. It was also shown (Fig. 6) that the temperature doesn't play an important role in low solid volume
fraction where as variations of thermal conductivity with temperature are more tangible at higher concentration [5].

Fig.6. Variations of thermal conductivity for various Fig.7.3-D surface–Interaction effect of temperature and
temperatures and solid volume fractions [5]. volume fraction on thermal conductivity ratio [9].

Esfe et al. [9]studied the effect of solid volume fraction of nanoparticles and temperature on thermal conductivity
of CNTs-Al2O3/water hybrid nanofluid using full factorial 3-level designs and was found that the thermal
conductivity of nanofluid occurred in high amount of solid volume fraction and temperatures. As indicated in Fig. 7,
temperature and volume fraction have 3-D surface-interaction effect on thermal conductivity ratio. In addition, the
graph shows that the solid volume fraction plays higher influential role to the high values of thermal conductivity
(instead of temperature). D. Cabaleiro et al. [26] found that the increase in thermal conductivity with temperature
and nanoparticles (ZnO) concentration was as usual for nanofluids and enhancements of 8.3% was achieved for the
highest concentration. Fang et al. [27] studied the size effects of Ag nanowires on thermal conductivity of EG-based
suspensions in influence of concentration and temperature. Specimens containing three types of Ag nanowires were
investigated and it was shown (Fig. 8) that the measured thermal conductivity of EG-based suspensions increased
with the rising temperature and loading with the maximum at 10 mg/mL. It was also predicted that the enhancement
ratio is maximum at some optimum temperature. Besides, the relative enhancement in thermal conductivity
exhibited a linear relationship with respect to the specific surface area of Ag nanowires (Fig. 9).

Fig.8. Thermal conductivity of three types of Ag Fig.9. Relative enhancement among three different
nanowires at the highest loading [27]. surface area Ag nanowires [27].
 R. M. Sarviya et al / Materials Today: Proceedings 4 (2017) 4022–4031 4029

Farbod et al. [13] investigated the water-based nanofluids prepared with different lengths and concentrations of
functionalized MWCNTs which are cut into small lengths by reflux in an oxidizing mixture. It was found that the
thermal conductivity of nanofluids increases with increasing the temperature and with decreasing the length of the
CNTs. The highest thermal conductivity was shown by nanofluid prepared at different vol% by using 1 h refluxed
CNTs. Huminic et al. [23] showed that the thermal conductivity of FeC/water nanofluids increases with the increase
of the weight concentration of nanoparticles and temperatures. Kim et al. [16] studied the effect of nanoparticle
shape on the thermal conductivity of Al2O3 nanofluids and showed that the thermal conductivity of nanofluids with
brick-shaped nanoparticles was more than that of the blade-shaped nanoparticles with the same volume fraction. Lee
et al. [17] statistically analyzed the impacts of size and particle volume fraction on effective thermal conductivity of
nanofluids and concluded that under very low volume fraction condition (/ < 0.25%), the particle size was found to
be more important factor than the volume fraction effecting the thermal conductivity of nanofluids. Li et al. [20]
showed that by increasing the temperature the absolute thermal conductivity increases and also it increases
nonlinearly with the mass fraction of nanoparticles. Li et al. [21] also showed that with increase in volume fractions,
the thermal conductivity ratio increases nonlinearly. He also concluded that the addition of nanoparticles was the
main reason of observed temperature dependence. In addition, with the increase of temperature the Brownian
motion of nanoparticles became more intense allowing a much rapid heat flow among particles which resulted in the
thermal conductivity enhancement. Mahbubul et al. [30] found that with increasing temperature the thermal
conductivity of Al2O3/R-134a nanorefrigerant was linearly increased, while for pure refrigerant, thermal
conductivity moderately decreased with increasing temperature. Alawi et al. [29] compared the various models of
thermal conductivity for SWCNT/R-134a nanorefrigerant and concluded that the thermal conductivity of
nanorefrigerant can be enhanced by increasing the temperature and increases with the increase of particle volume
fractions (Fig. 10).

(a) (b)

Fig.10 Thermal conductivity as a function of (a) particle volume fraction and (b) increase in temperature [29].

Mare et al. [22] investigated the thermal conductivity measurement of water-based nanofluids containing carbon
nanotubes stabilized by SDBS as surfactant as a function of volume fraction. It was showed that the thermal
conductivity of the base fluids decreases when the amount of surfactant increases and it increase with volume
fraction within the range 0.055–0.55%,which is enhanced with temperature increase. The highest value of thermal
conductivity ratio was observed for the highest tested volume fraction in nanoparticles. The existence of a peak in
thermal conductivity was showed for the first time at very small volume fraction below theoretical percolation
threshold, which is temperature independent. Parametthanuwat et al. [33] studied the thermal conductivity of the
silver nanofluids as a function of temperature with potassium oleate surfactant (OAK+) at concentration of 0.5, 1,
and 1.5 wt%. The thermal conductivity of the nanofluids was found dependent on the linearity of the temperature. It
was indicated that the thermal conductivity increases independently on surfactant concentration as the
nanoparticlesdispersed in the liquid increased the surface area for the heat absorption. It was also observed that the
4030 R. M. Sarviya et al/ Materials Today: Proceedings 4 (2017) 4022–4031

high OAK+ concentration appeared to hinder the aggregation and entanglement of the nanoparticles, which was
observed at the bottom of the liquid. 1 wt% OAK+ was enough to homogeneously disperse the nanoparticles and
produce efficient thermal transfer between the particles and deionized water, and consequently resulted in the
highest thermal conductivity enhancement. Shahsavar et al. [24]experimentally investigated the effect of
ultrasonication on the thermal conductivity of water-based hybrid nanofluid containing TMAH coated Fe3O4
nanoparticles and GA coated carbon nanotubes. It was indicated that for the maximum enhancement in the thermal
conductivity there is an optimum sonication time for the hybrid nanofluids. It was also showed that the thermal
conductivity enhancement of hybrid nanofluid is higher for higher concentrations of Fe3O4 and CNT and also
depends on the temperature. Shanbedi et al. [25] also showed that with increasing concentration and temperature,
the thermal conductivity of nanofluids is improved as compared to the pure water. Shin et al. [31] compared the
thermal conductivity of pure eutectic and the SiO2 nanocomposite and found enhanced thermal conductivity for the
nanocomposite over that of the pure eutectic with least variations with the temperature. Ajitha et al. [34] studied the
effect of pH on the size of the nanoparticles and it was found that the particle size decreases with increasing pH
value. By controlling the pH value the stability of nanofluids can be increased [35] and thus the thermal
conductivity. Xing et al. [18] found that with the increasing amount of CNTs as well as temperature, higher thermal
conductivity values can be obtained. It was indicated that the length and number of walls of CNTs i.e. aspect ratio
strongly influence the thermal conductivity of CNTs-nanofluid. L-SWNTs nanofluid possessing high aspect ratio
and special surface area showed the highest thermal conductivity value. Xing et al. [19] also showed that the thermal
conductivity increases with an increase in the mass fraction of SWCNTs and temperature. Gawel Zyla [14] also
found that the thermal conductivity increases nonlinearly with increasing concentration of nanoparticles.

5. Conclusions

This review presents the recent developments in the field of nanofluids from thermal conductivity perspective.
The techniques of thermal conductivity measurement, theoretical studies on thermal conductivity and the factor
influencing thermal conductivity of nanofluids are discussed. The review shows that the transient hotwire technique
is the most commonly used technique for measuring thermal conductivity because of the fact that repeatable
measurements can be made instantaneous with a good level of accuracy. Various theoretical models reviewed are
found to be the modifications of the classic Maxwell model considering various factors influencing the thermal
conductivity of the nanofluids. A new correlation was developed considering the various factors together by using
dimensional analysis and was found to be successfully applicable to variety of nanofluids. Studies on effects of
various factors on the thermal conductivity of nanofluids have also been reviewed. It was found that the thermal
conductivity of nanofluids was dependent on temperature, volume fractions, particle size, aspect ratio, weight
concentration, surfactant concentration, ultrasonication etc. The behaviour of the thermal conductivity with aging
and at low temperatures are yet been reported and this can point a new direction in this field of research.

References

[1]Periyasamy Mukesh Kumar, Jegadeesan Kumar, Rengasamy Tamilarasan, Seshachalam Sendhilnathan, and Sivan Suresh, Review on
nanofluids theoretical thermal conductivity models, ENGINEERING JOURNAL Volume 19 Issue 1, 2015, 67-83.
[2] Clement Kleinstreuer, Yu Feng, Experimental and theoretical studies of nanofluid thermal conductivity enhancement: a review, Kleinstreuer
and Feng Nanoscale Research Letters 2011, 6:229.
[3] S.A. Angayarkanni, John Philip, Review on thermal properties of nanofluids: Recent developments, Advances in Colloid and Interface
Science 225 (2015) 146–176.
[4] Rajesh Purohita, Kuldeep Purohitb, Saraswati Rana, R. S. Ranaa and Vivek Patel, Carbon Nanotubes and Their Growth Methods, Procedia
Materials Science 6 ( 2014 ) 716 – 728.
[5] Mohammad Hemmat Esfe, Masoud Afrand, Arash Karimipour, Wei-Mon Yanb, Nima Sina, An experimental study on thermal conductivity
of MgO nanoparticles suspended in a binary mixture of water and ethylene glycol, International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer
67 (2015) 173–175.
[6] A. K. Singh, Thermal Conductivity of Nanofluids, Defence Science Journal, Vol. 58, No. 5, September 2008, pp. 600-607.
[7] Samir Hassani, R. Saidur, Saad Mekhilef, Arif Hepbasli, A new correlation for predicting the thermal conductivity of nanofluids; using
dimensional analysis, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 90 (2015) 121–130.
[8] G. Paul, M. Chopkar, I. Manna, P.K. Das, Techniques for measuring the thermal conductivity of nanofluids: A review, Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews 14 (2010) 1913–1924.
[9] Mohammad Hemmat Esfe, Seyfolah Saedodin, Mojtaba Biglari, Hadi Rostamian, Experimental investigation of thermal conductivity of
CNTs-Al2O3/water: A statistical approach, International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 69 (2015) 29–33.
 R. M. Sarviya et al / Materials Today: Proceedings 4 (2017) 4022–4031 4031

[10]Mohammad Hemmat Esfe, Seyfolah Saedodin, Ali Naderi, Ali Alirezaie, Arash Karimipour, Somchai Wongwises, Marjan Goodarzi,
Mahidzal bin Dahari, Modeling of thermal conductivity of ZnO-EG using experimental data and ANN methods, International
Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 63 (2015) 35–40.
[11]Mohammd Hemmat Esfe, Somchai Wongwises, Ali Naderi, Amin Asadi, Mohammad Reza Safaei, Hadi Rostamian, Mahidzal Dahari, Arash
Karimipour, Thermal conductivity of Cu/TiO2–water/EG hybrid nanofluid: Experimental data and modeling using artificial neural network
and correlation, International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 66 (2015) 100–104.
[12]Mohammad Hemmat Esfe, Masoud Afrand, Wei-Mon Yan, Mohammad Akbari, Applicability of artificial neural network and nonlinear
regression to predict thermal conductivity modeling of Al2O3–water nanofluids using experimental data, International Communications in
Heat and Mass Transfer 66 (2015) 246–249.
[13]Mansoor Farboda, Ameneh Ahangarpour, Seyed Gholamreza Etemad, Stability and thermal conductivity of water-based carbon
nanotubenanofluids, Particuology 22 (2015) 59–65.
[14]Gaweł Zyła, Thermophysical properties of ethylene glycol based yttrium aluminum garnet (Y3Al5O12–EG) nanofluids, International Journal
of Heat and Mass Transfer 92 (2016) 751–756.
[15]M. Karami, M.A.Akhavan-Behabadi, M.RaiseeDehkordi, S.Delfani, Thermo-optical properties of copper oxide nanofluids for direct
absorption of solar radiation, Solar EnergyMaterials&SolarCells144(2016)136–142.
[16]Hyun Jin Kim, Seung-Hyun Lee, Soo Bin Kim, Seok Pil Jang, The effect of nanoparticle shape on the thermal resistance of a flat-plate heat
pipe using acetone-based Al2O3 nanofluids, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 92 (2016) 572–577.
[17]Joohyun Lee, Hansul Lee, Young-Jin Baik, Junemo Koo, Quantitative analyses of factors affecting thermal conductivity of nanofluids using
an improved transient hot-wire method apparatus, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 89 (2015) 116–123.
[18]Meibo Xing, Jianlin Yu, Ruixiang Wang, Experimental study on the thermal conductivity enhancement of water based nanofluids using
different types of carbon nanotubes, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 88 (2015) 609–616.
[19]Meibo Xing, Jianlin Yu, Ruixiang Wang, Thermo-physical properties of water-based single-walled carbon nanotube nanofluid as advanced
coolant, Applied Thermal Engineering 87 (2015) 344-351.
[20]Haoran Li, Li Wang, Yurong He, Yanwei Hu, Jiaqi Zhu, Baocheng Jiang, Experimental investigation of thermal conductivity and viscosity of
ethylene glycol based ZnO nanofluids, Applied Thermal Engineering 88 (2015) 363-368.
[21]Xiaoke Li, Changjun Zou, Xinyu Lei, Wenliang Li, Stability and enhanced thermal conductivity of ethylene glycol-based SiC nanofluids,
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 89 (2015) 613–619.
[22]Thierry Maré, Salma Halelfadl, Stefan Van Vaerenbergh, Patrice Estellé, Unexpected sharp peak in thermal conductivity of carbon nanotubes
water-based nanofluids, International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 66 (2015) 80–83.
[23]Angel Huminic, Gabriela Huminic, Claudiu Fleaca, Florian Dumitrache, Ion Morjan, Thermal conductivity, viscosity and surface tension of
nanofluids based on FeC nanoparticles, Powder Technology 284 (2015) 78–84.
[24]A. Shahsavar, M.R.Salimpour, M.Saghafian, M.B.Shafii, An experimental study on the effect of ultrasonication on thermal conductivity of
ferrofluid loaded with carbon nanotubes, Thermochimica Acta 617(2015) 102–110.
[25]Mehdi Shanbedi, Saeed Zeinali Heris, Ahmad Amiri, Ebrahim Hosseinipour, Hossein Eshghi, S.N. Kazi, Synthesis of aspartic acid-treated
multi-walled carbon nanotubes based water coolant and experimental investigation of thermal and hydrodynamic properties in circular tube,
Energy Conversion and Management 105 (2015) 1366–1376.
[26]D. Cabaleiro, L. Colla, F. Agresti, L. Lugo, L. Fedele, Transport properties and heat transfer coefficients of ZnO/(ethylene glycol + water)
nanofluids, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 89 (2015) 433–443.
[27]Xin Fang, Qing Ding, Li-Wu Fan, Hai Lu, Zi-Tao Yu, Effects of inclusion size on thermal conductivity and rheological behavior of ethylene
glycol-based suspensions containing silver nanowires with various specific surface areas, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 81
(2015) 554–562.
[28]Sampo Saarinen, Salla Puupponen, Arttu Meriläinen, Aliakbar Joneidi, Ari Seppälä, Kari Saari, Tapio Ala-Nissila, Turbulent heat transfer
characteristics in a circular tube and thermal properties of n-decane-in-water nanoemulsion fluids and micelles-in-water fluids, International
Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 81 (2015) 246–251.
[29]Omer A. Alawi, Nor Azwadi Che Sidik, The effect of temperature and particles concentration on the determination of thermo and physical
properties of SWCNT-nanorefrigerant, International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 67 (2015) 8–13.
[30]I.M. Mahbubul, A. Saadah, R. Saidur, M.A. Khairul, A. Kamyar, Thermal performance analysis of Al2O3/R-134a nanorefrigerant,
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 85 (2015) 1034–1040.
[31]Donghyun Shin, Debjyoti Banerjee, Enhanced thermal properties of SiO2 nanocomposite for solar thermal energy storage applications,
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 84 (2015) 898–902.
[32]Yun Wang, Jun Mei Wu, Numerical simulation on single bubble behavior during Al2O3/H2O nanofluids flow boiling using Moving Particle
Simi-implicit method, Progress in Nuclear Energy 85 (2015) 130-139.
[33]T. Parametthanuwat, N. Bhuwakietkumjohn, S. Rittidech, Y. Ding, Experimental investigation on thermal properties of silver nanofluids,
International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 56 (2015) 80–90.
[34]B. Ajitha, A. Divya, P. Sreedhara Reddy, Impact of Ph on the Properties of Spherical Silver Nanoparticles Capped by PVA, Advanced
Materials Manufacturing & Characterization Vol 3 Issue 1 (2013) 403-406.
[35]V. Nikkhah, M.M. Sarafraz, F. Hormozi, S.M. Peyghambarzadeh, Particulate fouling of CuO–water nanofluid at isothermal diffusive
condition inside the conventional heat exchanger-experimental and modeling, Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 60 (2015) 83–95.