Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Solar Energy 118 (2015) 390–396
www.elsevier.com/locate/solener

An experimental investigation of a low temperature

Al2O3-H2O nanofluid based direct absorption solar collector
Hemant Kumar Gupta ⇑, Ghanshyam Das Agrawal, Jyotirmay Mathur
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Malaviya National Institute of Technology Jaipur, India

Received 6 June 2014; received in revised form 1 April 2015; accepted 2 April 2015
Available online 21 June 2015

Communicated by: Associate Editor Brian Norton

Abstract

The conventional tube-in-plate type flat plate solar collectors have low efficiency and higher heat losses due to surface based solar
energy absorption and indirect transfer of heat from hot absorber surface to working fluid flowing through tubes. A full scale direct
absorption solar collector having gross area of 1.4 m2 and working on volumetric absorption principle was developed to perform
experimental study using thin film of Al2O3-H2O nanofluid. Use of nanofluid as working fluid improves the optical and thermo physical
properties that result into an increase in the efficiency of the collector. Experimentation was carried using four different volume fractions
of 20 nm Al2O3 nanoparticles, 0.001%, 0.005%, 0.01% and 0.05%. ASHRAE standard 93-86 was followed for calculation of
instantaneous efficiency of solar collector. Improvement in efficiency of solar collector has been recorded in all four cases of using
nanofluids in place of water. Instantaneous efficiency enhancement of 22.1%, 39.6%, 24.6% and 18.75% has been observed for
0.001%, 0.005%, 0.01% and 0.05% volume fraction respectively. The experimental results also indicated that collector efficiency peaked
at certain volume fraction, and decreased for lower and higher values of volume fraction.
Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Direct absorption solar collector; Al2O3-water nanofluid; Collector testing; Efficiency enhancement

1. Introduction
Solar energy is one of the most popular renewable
sources of sustainable energy with least environmental
impact and free availability for every human being all over
the world. The major limitation with the use of solar energy
is poor collection and conversion efficiency of solar sys-
tems. Solar thermal collector is one of the most common
type of solar energy based system for collection and con-
version of solar energy into thermal energy. Among these
different types of solar collectors, the conventional ‘tube
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: hemant.rin2001@gmail.com (H.K. Gupta).
in plate’ type flat plate collector absorbs incident solar radi-
ation through a black solid surface, and transfers heat to
working fluid flowing in tubes called risers, brazed onto
the surface of the absorber plate. The efficiency of a solar
thermal collector relies on the effectiveness of absorbing
incident solar radiant energy and heat transfer from the
absorber to the carrier, which is normally fluid. Due to
surface heat absorption and indirect transfer of heat to
working fluid, the conversion of sunlight into thermal
energy suffers from relatively low efficiencies (Pacheco,
2001).
In order to improve the efficiency of solar thermal col-
lector, researchers proposed the concept of directly absorb-
ing the solar energy within the fluid volume in the 1970s
called Direct Absorption Solar Collector (DASC)

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2015.04.041
0038-092X/Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 H.K. Gupta et al. / Solar Energy 118 (2015) 390–396
Nomenclature
I global solar irradiance (W/m2)
Ta ambient temperature (K)
Tin collector inlet fluid temperature (K)
Tout collector outlet fluid temperature (K)
Qu useful heat gain (W)
Cp specific heat (J/kg K)
m_ mass flow rate (kg/s)
mnp mass of nanoparticles (kg)
Vt total volume of nanofluid (m3)
Ac aperture area of the collector (m2)
FR heat removal factor
UL overall loss coefficient
Ug uncertainty for efficiency (%)
(Minardi and Chunag, 1975; Bertocchi et al., 2004).
However, the efficiency of direct absorption collector is
limited by the absorption properties of the conventional
working fluid, which is very poor over the range of wave-
length in solar spectrum (Otanicar et al., 2009). In the
beginning, black liquids containing millimeter to microme-
ter sized particles were also used as working fluid in direct
absorption solar collectors to enhance the absorption of
solar radiation that had showed efficiency improvement.
The applications of micron-sized particles into the base
fluid for DASCs lead to pipe blockage, erosion, abrasion
and poor stability. Particle sedimentation from the suspen-
sions resulted in clogged channels (Minardi and Chunag,
1975).
Advance material synthesis technologies provide us an
opportunity to produce the nano size materials called
nanoparticles. The mixing of nanoparticles in a base fluid
(nanofluid) has a dramatic effect on the liquid thermo phys-
ical properties such as thermal conductivity and optical
properties. Studies suggested the thermal conductivity
enhancement due to dispersion of nanoparticles (Wang
and Majumdar, 2007), intensification of turbulence (Pak
and Cho, 1998), Brownian motion (Xuan and Li, 2000;
Keblinski et al., 2002) and thermophoresis (Koo and
Kleinstreuer, 2005; Buongiorno, 2006).
Masuda et al. (1993) dispersed Al2O3 and TiO2
nanoparticles in water and found thermal conductivity
improvement by 32% and 11%, respectively. Grimm
(1993) dispersed aluminum metal particles (1–80 nm) into
water and claimed 100% increase in thermal conductivity
of the nanofluid for 0.5–10 wt%. Natarajan and Sathish
(2009) investigated the thermal conductivity enhancement
of base fluids using carbon nanotube (CNT) and suggested
efficiency enhancement of the conventional solar water
heater by using CNT based nanofluids as a heat transport
medium. Nanoparticles also offer the potential of improv-
ing the radiative properties of liquids, leading enhanced
efficiency of direct absorption solar collectors (Mu et al.,
2010).
391
Greek symbols
g efficiency
gi instantaneous efficiency
a absorptivity
/ volume fraction
q density (kg/m3)
s transitivity
Subscripts
nf nanofluid
np nanoparticle
bf base fluid
Yousefi et al. (2012a) reported the experimental results
on a tube in plate type conventional solar collector (size
2 m2) using Al2O3-H2O nanofluid of 0.2 wt% and 0.4 wt%
concentrations for three different mass flow rates and
found 28.3% improvement in efficiency with 0.2 wt% of
nanofluid in comparison to water. Yousefi et al. (2012b)
also examined the effects of multi wall carbon nanotubes–
water nanofluid and observed remarkable efficiency
increase with 0.4 wt% nanofluid.
Tyagi et al. (2009) numerically studied a direct absorp-
tion solar collector using aluminum nanoparticles in water
for performance evaluation and reported efficiency
improvement up to 10% than that of a flat-plate collector.
Otanicar et al. (2010) experimentally studied the role of dif-
ferent nanofluids as the absorption medium on the effi-
ciency of horizontal micro size (3 cm  5 cm) direct
absorption collector in indoor environment and reported
efficiency improvement up to 5%.
Very few studies on the thermal performance evaluation
of flat plate solar collector with nanofluids are available. As
such no study on full size (1.4 m2) tilted DASC under
actual outdoor condition is available. An attempt has been
made in the present paper, to experimentally study the
effect of Al2O3-H2O nanofluid flowing as thin film over
the glass absorber plate as a direct absorbing medium on
the efficiency of a tilted direct absorption solar collector
under outdoor condition. Effect of four different nanopar-
ticle volume concentrations i.e. 0.001%, 0.005%, 0.01% and
0.05% were considered on the DASC efficiency and the col-
lector performance was also compared with base fluid dis-
tilled water.
2. DASC experimental set-up
Schematic diagram of experimental set up of direct
absorption collector is shown in Fig. 1.
An experimental set up of direct absorption solar collec-
tor of size 1.54 m  0.9 m (gross area of 1.4 m2) has been
developed as shown in Fig. 2.
392 H.K. Gupta et al. / Solar Energy 118 (2015) 390–396

Table 1
The specifications of DASC components.
Component Dimension Remark
Collector 1.54 m  0.9 m Gross area = 1.40 m2
Absorber 1.44 m  0.80 m Effective area = 1.15 m2
Transparent cover 6 mm Material-toughened glass
Base plate 6 mm thick Material-toughened glass
Collector box inner 6 mm thick Material-plain glass
glass wall
3= 00
Film formation 4 header pipe with Aluminum pipe
system 1 mm dia holes-106
no, pitch 1 mm
Bottom insulation 50 mm thick Glass wool
Side insulation 25 mm thick Glass wool
Fig. 1. The schematic of experimental set up.
Frame 200 mm height Material-M.S.

2.1. Experimental apparatus and procedure

For experimental study, a set up of DASC was devel-
oped and erected at the roof top of Mechanical
Engineering Department, Malaviya National Institute of
Technology, Jaipur (26.01° latitude and 75.52° longitudes).
The collector was oriented due south with a tilt angle of
26°. Photograph of experimental set up (Fig. 2) showing
direct absorption collector, two tanks and instruments used
along specification of the collector components used in
Table 1. It mainly consists of a glass base plate (1.5 m long,
0.9 m wide, 0.006 m thick), mounted on a wooden box with
inner glass wall on all four sides and equipped with a spray
system for film formation over the glass base plate. In
DASC no tubes are used for carrying fluid and nanofluid
flows directly over the glass plate, which is used in place
of black absorber plate. A perforated header pipe (106
holes of 1 mm diameter with 1 mm pitch) is used to obtain
a uniform nanofluid film on the glass plate.
Experimental test set up consists of a solar collector,
working fluid loop and data acquisition system. The
working fluid loop has two tanks called bottom storage
reservoir and upper reservoir. A simple manual globe valve
is used to control flow rate of working fluid and flow rate is
measured with the help of electromagnetic digital flow
meter (Make-Electronet, range 0–5 lpm, accuracy ±1% as
per given by supplier). A centrifugal pump circulates the
collected fluid in the system.
Five J-type thermocouples were installed to measure col-
lector inlet and outlet fluid temperatures, the ambient tem-
perature, bottom temperature of glass base plate and glass
cover temperature. These readings were collected and
stored in a computer through a data logger
(Make-Agilent, model-34970A, 16 channels). Intensity of
total solar radiation was recorded using digital solar meter
(Range-1 to 1200 W/m2, accuracy ±5% of measurement as
per given by supplier). The experiments were performed at
different inlet temperatures of working fluid according to
ASHRAE Standard 93-86.
Before every test run, the experimental test loop was
cleaned using distilled water to remove oxides of nano

Fig. 2. Photograph for setup of direct absorption solar collector.

 H.K. Gupta et al. / Solar Energy 118 (2015) 390–396
particles and fouling residue that could affect the collector
performance.
2.2. Nanofluid preparation
Preparation of stable nanofluid with uniform dispersion
is an important requirement for improving heat transfer
performance of conventional fluids and nanofluid needs
to be prepared in a systematic and careful manner. Three
methods available for preparation of stable nanofluids
are (Trisaksri and Wongwises, 2007).
i. Surfactant addition to the base fluid.
ii. Acid treatment of base fluid.
iii. Ultrasonic mixing of nano powder in base liquid.
Thermo physical properties of nanofluids are affected
with the use of surfactants and acid treatment may cause
material degradation after some days of continuous usage
of nanofluids in practical applications. The sonication is
an approved technique for dispersing the aggregated
nanoparticles (Liu et al., 1998). In the present study ultra-
sonic vibration mixer is used for preparation of nanofluid
with minimum aggregation of nanoparticles and improved
dispersion behavior. Dry Al2O3 nanoparticles of 99.99%
purity and average size of 20–30 nm (procured from
Nanoshel-Intelligent Materials Private Ltd, USA based
company) are used with distilled water as base fluid in
nanofluid preparation. Properties of the Al2O3 nanoparti-
cles used are tabulated in Table 2.
The quantity of Al2O3 nanoparticles required for prepa-
ration of nanofluid of different volume concentrations is
calculated using formula in Eq. (1). A sensitive balance
(make-citizen, model-CTG 602 resolution-0.1 mg) is used
to weigh the Al2O3 nanoparticles very accurately.
mnp ¼ V t :/np :qnp
where mnp is the mass of nanoparticles (kg), Vt is the total
volume of nanofluid (m3), unp is the volume fraction of
nanoparticles and qnp is the density of nanoparticles
(kg/m3).
Ultrasonication was applied for 6–7 h to mix calculated
amount of Al2O3 nanoparticles in distilled water using
ultrasonic vibration mixer (Make-Toshniwal, model-UP-
600S, power-600 W, frequency-27 ± 3 kHz).
The Al2O3 nanofluid thus prepared was kept for obser-
vation and no particle settlement was observed at the
Table 2
Physical properties of alumina (Al2O3) nanoparticles.
Size of particles 20–30 nm
Shape of particles Spherical particles
Density 3700 kg/m3
Surface area per unit weight 15–20 m2/g
Crystal form Gamma
Al2O3 content 99.99%
393
bottom of the flask even after twenty four hours. During
the experimentation, the time taken to complete the exper-
iment is less than the time required for first sedimentation
to take place and hence surfactants are not mixed in the
Al2O3 nanofluids. Four different volume concentrations
of 0.001%, 0.005%, 0.01%, and 0.05% were used in the
study.
3. Testing method
Thermal performance of solar collectors is commonly
evaluated using ASHRAE Standard 93-86. Collector ther-
mal performance is calculated by determining collector
instantaneous efficiency for different incident solar radia-
tions, ambient temperatures, and inlet fluid temperatures.
Intensity of incident solar radiations as well as useful heat
gain by the working fluid is measured under steady state
conditions.
3.1. Time attempt
As per ASHRAE Standard 93-86 steady-state condi-
tions should be maintained during the data period and also
during a specified time interval prior to the data period,
called the pre-data period. For attaining steady state condi-
tions the mass flow rate must be within ±1%, irradiation
must be within ±50 W/m2, the outdoor ambient tempera-
ture must not vary more than ±1.5 K, and the inlet temper-
ature must be within ±0.1 K for the entire test period.
3.2. Governing equations for efficiency calculation
The experiments were performed at different inlet
temperatures of working fluid according to ASHRAE
Standard. The measurements were taken for ambient, inlet
& outlet temperature, global solar intensity and the mass
ð1Þ
flow rate of working fluid. The useful heat gain by the fluid
can be calculated using Eq. (2).
Qu ¼ mC
_ p ðT o  T i Þ ¼ Ac F R ½IðsaÞ  U L ðT i  T a Þ ð2Þ
where Qu is the useful heat gain (W), m_ is the mass flow rate
of fluid (kg/min), Cp is the heat capacity of water or nano-
fluid (J/kg K), T o is the outlet fluid temperature of solar
collector (K), Ac is the surface area of solar collector
(m2), F R is the heat removal factor, (sa) is absorptance–tr
ansmittance product, I is the global solar radiation
(W/m2), U L is the overall loss coefficient of solar collector,
and Ta is the ambient temperature (K).
The heat capacity of nanofluid is calculated with the
help of Eq. (3) (Liu et al., 1998).
C p;nf ¼ C p;np ð/Þ þ C p;bf ð1  /Þ ð3Þ
where / indicates the volume fraction of nanoparticles, and
C p;np and C p;bf are heat capacities of nanoparticles
(773 J/kg K) and base fluid (4180 J/kg K) respectively.
Instantaneous collector efficiency relates the useful heat
gain to the incident solar energy by Eqs. (4) and (5).
394 H.K. Gupta et al. / Solar Energy 118 (2015) 390–396

Qu _ p ðT o  T i Þ
mC
gi ¼ ð4Þ
Ac I I
ðT i  T a Þ
gi ¼ F R ðsaÞ  F R U L
I
If the thermal efficiency test is performed at the normal
incidence conditions then F R (sa), and F R U L is constant for
the temperature range of the collector. When the efficiency
values obtained from averaged data is plotted against ðT i T
I
aÞ
a straight line will result according to Eq. (5). Intersection
of the line with the vertical efficiency axis equals to
absorbed energy parameter, F R (sa). At this point the tem-
perature of the fluid entering the collector equals the ambi-
ent temperature and collector efficiency is at its maximum.
Slope of the line indicates energy loss from the collector
that is nominated as energy loss parameter F R U L . At the
intersection of the line with the horizontal axis collector
efficiency is zero and designated as stagnation point,
usually occurs when no fluid flows in the collector.
3.3. Experimental uncertainty analysis
As per ASME guidelines, absolute measurements do not
exist and errors arise from many sources. Some of the
common sources of error are: Calibration errors, data
acquisition errors and data reduction errors. The uncer-
tainty of the experimental results in the present work was
determined by following ASME guidelines on reporting
uncertainties in experimental measurements based on the
deviation in experimental parameters (Abernethy et al.,
1983). The major components to uncertainty in collector
efficiency are the inaccuracy in flow rate measurement,
temperature measurement and solar radiation intensity
measurement. The results of uncertainty analysis of the
measurements including all the sources of errors are
presented in Table 3.
The combined uncertainty for evaluating collector effi-
ciency, Ug, was obtained by the root sum square method
(RSS), based on Eq. (4) by the following relation.
" 
2  2  2 #
2 Dm_ DðT o  T i Þ DI
ðU g Þ þ þ ð6Þ
4. Results and discussions
4.1. Water as working fluid
ð5Þ
Experimental tests were performed with distilled water
on direct absorption solar collector from 10 AM to the
time at which stagnation point is reached for three flow
rates of 1.5, 2 and 2.5 l/min on three consecutive days in
October 2013. Each test was performed several times and
the best data satisfying conditions of ASHRAE standard
have been taken. Fig. 3 shows the variation of collector
efficiency versus the reduced temperature parameters,
(Ti  Ta)/I, for each flow rate. The experimental data are
best fitted with linear equations to provide the performance
characteristic parameters of the collector for different flow
rates. Error bars for experimental points are also shown in
the figure. The efficiency parameters, FRUL and FR(sa), at
each flow rate with uncertainty values are presented in
Table 4.
It is observed from Table 4 that absorbed energy param-
eter, FR(sa) at 2.5 l/min is the maximum and energy loss
parameter FRUL is the minimum and the instantaneous
efficiency of the collector is the highest at this flow rate.
4.2. Al2O3-water as working fluid-effect of flow rates
Al2O3 nanoparticles are mixed in base fluid distilled
water to get nanofluid of 0.005 volume fraction concentra-
tion and investigations are performed to determine the
effect of different flow rates at 1.5, 2 and 2.5 l/min.
Nanofluid is collected in the bottom tank and then pumped
to overhead tank. At each flow rate experiments with sev-
eral test periods at different inlet fluid temperature in quasi
steady state conditions were conducted from 10.00 AM to
time when stagnation temperature is achieved on a day.
The experimental results are plotted with their standard
error bars as shown in Fig. 4. The efficiency parameters
0.6
1.5 lpm
0.5
2 lpm
0.4 2.5 lpm
η→

m_ To  Ti I 0.3

0.2
The maximum uncertainty obtained in the present study
0.1
in determining the collector efficiency, at various tests was
0
around 6% (including all sources of errors). 0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06
A number of experimental points used for this analysis (Ti -Ta)/I (m2K/W) →
with their standard error bars are shown in Figs. 3–5 with
result and discussion section. Fig. 3. Efficiency versus (Ti  Ta)/IT curve at three flow rates for water.

Table 4
Table 3 Collector efficiency parameters at three flow rates.
Results of uncertainty analysis. S. no. Flow rate FRUL Uncertainty FR(sa) Uncertainty
S. no. Parameter Uncertainty (%) (l/min) (%) (%)
1 Solar intensity ±5.6 1 1.5 11.197 4.4 0.4926 4.9
2 Volumetric flow ±1.4 2 2 11.56 3.8 0.528 4.5
3 Temperature difference ±1.7 3 2.5 9.9727 5.3 0.5326 5.8
 H.K. Gupta et al. / Solar Energy 118 (2015) 390–396 395

FR(sa) and FRUL of collector for three flow rate of Al2O3 0.9
water
nanofluid with uncertainty in values are presented in 0.8
0.001
Table 5. 0.7 0.005
It is observed from Fig. 4 that the collector efficiency 0.6 0.01

lines for 2 and 2.5 l/min intersect each other at reduced 0.05
0.5

η→
temperature value of 0.035. For low temperature range, 0.4
(Ti  Ta)/I < 0.035, the collector efficiency is greater at 0.3
2 l/min due to higher value of absorbed energy parameter
0.2
and reduced heat losses. However for high temperature
0.1
range, (Ti  Ta)/I > 0.035, the collector efficiency is greater
0
at 2.5 l/min. As collector is operated most of the time in the 0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035 0.04 0.045 0.05
low temperature range hence, 2 l/min flow rate is chosen (Ti-Ta)/I (m2K/W) →
for further experimental study.
Fig. 5. Efficiency plots for Al2O3-water nanofluid at four concentrations.
4.3. Al2O3-water as working fluid – effect of volume fraction
Table 6
Al2O3-water nanofluid of four different concentrations Collector efficiency parameters for Al2O3-water nanofluid.
of 0.001 vol%, 0.005 vol%, 0.01 vol% and 0.05 vol% were S. Working Volume FRUL Uncertainty FR(sa) Uncertainty
prepared and studies were performed at the flow rate of no. fluid type fraction (%) (%)
2 l/min. The experimental results for water and four con- (%)
centrations of nanofluids are plotted in the form of effi- 1 Water 0 11.56 3.8 0.528 4.5
ciency curves with standard error bars as shown in Fig. 5. 2 Al2O3 0.001 14.346 3.5 0.6447 3.7
3 nanofluid 0.005 15.663 5.9 0.7372 6.3
It is observed from Fig. 5 that collector efficiency with
4 0.01 14.132 6.1 0.6579 6
all the four concentrations of Al2O3 nanofluid is higher 5 0.05 13.693 6.5 0.6271 6.4
than with water as working fluid. This is due to higher val-
ues of absorbed energy parameter FR(sa) and lower values
of energy loss parameter FRUL for Al2O3 nanofluids as efficiency for the fluids become nearly equal toward higher
compared to water as can be noticed from Table 6. It is temperature range.
also clear that for wide temperature range, the absorbed Direct absorption collector efficiency increased with
energy parameter, FR(sa), value for 0.001 vol% of nano- increase in nanoparticle concentration from 0.001 to
fluid is higher than water by 22.1% and correspondingly 0.005 vol% due to increase in absorbed energy parameter
maximum collector efficiency with nanofluid is greater than by 14.35% and heat loss parameter increase by 9.2% as
water by 22.1% because in low temperature range absorbed observed from Table 6. Further increase of nanoparticle
energy parameter dominates over heat loss parameter. But concentration from 0.005 vol% to 0.05 vol%, resulted col-
higher value of heat loss parameter, FRUL, for 0.001 vol lector efficiency decrease.
fraction of Al2O3 nanofluid than water, in high tempera- Collector efficiency peaked at certain volume fraction (/),
ture range causes collector efficiency decrease and collector and decreased for lower and higher values of volume frac-
0.9
tion. For lower volume fraction, some of the incident solar
0.8 1.5 lpm radiations were absorbed by the nanofluid film and remain-
0.7 2.5 lpm ing portion absorbed by the bottom base plate. This raised
0.6
2 lpm the nanofluid temperature near the bottom plate causing
0.5
η→

0.4 extra emissive losses hence lower collector efficiency. At cer-

0.3
0.2 tain nanofluid volume fraction when peak collector effi-
0.1 ciency is obtained even temperature distribution within
0
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06
nanofluid volume is observed. For higher volume fraction,
(Ti -Ta)/I (m2K/W) → top layers of nanofluid absorbed most of the incident radi-
ation and allowing little or no radiation to penetrate the
Fig. 4. Efficiency curve at three flow rates for Al2O3-water nanofluid of lower fluid layer and reach the bottom plate. This results
0.005% concentration.
in uneven temperature distribution within nanofluid film
and higher top layer temperature causes excessive emissive
Table 5 losses and drop in collector efficiency. The trade-off between
Collector efficiency parameters for Al2O3-water nanofluid. the two effects at low and high / values described above
S. no. Flow rate FRUL Uncertainty FR(sa) Uncertainty accounts for the trend seen in Fig 5.
(l/min) (%) (%) Tyagi et al. (2009) also explained that increasing the nano
1 1.5 10.903 5.1 0.5455 5.6 particle volume fraction leads to a corresponding increase in
2 2 15.663 5.9 0.7372 6.3 attenuation of sunlight passing through the collector, and
3 2.5 9.4418 6.5 0.5322 6.8
this, in turn, increases the collector efficiency. Since the
396 H.K. Gupta et al. / Solar Energy 118 (2015) 390–396
attenuation varies exponentially with the extinction coeffi-
cient (and hence also with volume fraction), the efficiency
initially increases very rapidly at low volume fraction and
quickly reaches an asymptotic value at higher volume frac-
tions. This result also indicates that adding large amount
of nanoparticles will be advantageous only up to a certain
limit, beyond which the increase in efficiency would be minis-
cule. The experimental results are well justified.
Sajid et al. (2014) measured experimentally and theoreti-
cally the increase in optical properties like extinction coeffi-
cient and absorption coefficient of alumina-water nanofluid
at such low volume fraction and suggested improvement in
efficiency of direct absorption solar collector. The present
experimental results are also in line and well justified.
It is also suggested that some other factors may be asso-
ciated with the increased particle volume fraction. The first
factor is the particle agglomeration and deposition on the
surface, which would reduce the intensity of the sunlight
into the fluid, and this effect increases with particle concen-
tration. The other factor may be increased radiation heat
loss as the particle volume fraction exceeds a certain value.
All these factors might responsible for decreased efficiency
of direct-absorption solar collectors at high particle
concentration.
5. Conclusion
Thermal performance study of direct absorption solar
collector using nanofluid of four different concentrations
0.001%, 0.005%, 0.01% and 0.05% with 20 nm alumina
nanoparticles in distilled water is carried out. The collector
efficiency increased for all four concentrations of nanofluid
than pure water. Collector efficiency enhancement of 39.6%
and 22.1% is noticed for 0.005 vol% and 0.001 vol% respec-
tively. Enhancement in efficiency with nanoparticle concen-
trations beyond 0.005 vol% is found to be lower as
compared to other concentrations.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the Department of
Science & Technology, India for supporting fund under
the program of Solar Energy Research Initiatives (SERI)
Project. The authors would like to thank the Department
of Mechanical Engineering, Malaviya national Institute
of Technology, for supporting testing facilities.
References
Abernethy, R.B., Benedict, R.P., Dowdell, R.B., 1983. ASME
Measurement Uncertainty.
Bertocchi, R., Karni, J., Kribus, A., 2004. Experimental evaluation of a
non-isothermal high temperature solar particle receiver. Energy 29,
687–700.
Buongiorno, J., 2006. Convective transport in nanofluids. J. Heat Transfer
128 (3), 240–251.
Grimm, A., 1993. Powdered aluminum-containing heat transfer fluids,
German Patent DE 4131516 A1.
Keblinski, P., Phillpot, S.R., Choi, S.U.S., Eastman, J.A., 2002.
Mechanisms of heat flow in suspensions of nano-sized particles
(nanofluids). Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 45 (4), 855–863.
Koo, J., Kleinstreuer, C., 2005. Impact analysis of nanoparticle motion
mechanisms on the thermal conductivity of nanofluids. Int. Commun.
Heat Mass Transfer 32 (9), 1111–1118.
Liu, J., Rinzler, A.G., Dai, H.J., Hafner, J.H., Bradley, R.K., Boul, P.J.,
et al., 1998. Fullerene pipes. Science 280, 1253–1256.
Masuda, H., Ebata, A., Teramae, K., Hishinuma, N., 1993. Alteration of
thermal conductivity and viscosity of liquid by dispersing ultra-fine
particles (dispersion of g-Al2O3, SiO2 and TiO2 ultra-fine particles).
Netsu Bussei (Japan) 7, 227–233.
Minardi, J.E., Chunag, H.N., 1975. Performance of a black liquid flat-
plate solar collector. Sol. Energy 17, 179–183.
Mu, L.J., Zhu, Q.Z., Si, L.L., 2010. Radiative properties of nanofluids and
performance of a direct solar absorber using nanofluids. In: 2nd
ASME Micro/Nanoscale Heat & Mass Transfer International
Conference 2010, vol. 1, pp. 549–553.
Natarajan, E., Sathish, R., 2009. Role of nanofluids in solar water heater.
Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00170-008-
1876-8.
Otanicar, T.P., Phelan, P.E., Golden, J.S., 2009. Optical properties of
liquids for direct absorption solar thermal energy systems. Solar
Energy 83 (7), 969–977.
Otanicar, T.P., Phelan, P.E., Prasher, R.S., Rosengarten, G., Taylor,
R.A., 2010. Nanofluid based direct absorption solar collector. J.
Renew. Sustain. Energy 2 (033102), 1–13.
Pacheco, J.E., 2001. Demonstration of solar-generated electricity on
demand: the solar two project. J. Solar Energy Eng. Trans. ASME 123
(1), 5.
Pak, B.C., Cho, I.Y., 1998. Hydrodynamic and heat transfer study of
dispersed fluids with sub-micron metallic oxide particles. Exp. Heat
Transfer 11, 151–170.
Sajid, M.H., Said, Z., Saidur, R., Adikan, F.R.M., Sabri, M.F.M., Rahim,
N.A., 2014. A time variant investigation on optical properties of water
based Al2O3 nanofluid. Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transfer 50, 108–
116.
Trisaksri, V., Wongwises, S., 2007. Critical review of heat transfer
characteristics of nanofluids. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 11, 512–
523.
Tyagi, H., Phelan, P., Prasher, R., 2009. Predicted efficiency of a low-
temperature nanofluid-based direct absorption solar collector. J. Solar
Energy Eng. 131 (4), 1–7.
Wang, X.Q., Majumdar, A.S., 2007. Heat transfer characteristics of
nanofluids, a review. Int. J. Therm. Sci. 46, 1.
Xuan, Y., Li, Q., 2000. Heat transfer enhancement of nanofluids. Int. J.
Heat Fluid Flow 21 (1), 58–64.
Yousefi, T., Veysi, F., Shojaeizadeh, E., Zinadini, S., 2012a. An
experimental investigation on the effect of Al2O3–H2O nanofluid on
the efficiency of flat-plate solar collectors. Renew. Energy 39, 293–298.
Yousefi, T., Veysi, F., Shojaeizadeh, E., Zinadini, S., 2012b. An
experimental investigation on the effect of MWCNT-H2O nanofluid
on the efficiency of flat-plate solar collectors. Exp. Thermal Fluid Sci.
39, 207–212.