Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 66 (2015) 279–289

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/etfs

Intensification of forced convection heat transfer using biological

nanofluid in a double-pipe heat exchanger
M.M. Sarafraz ⇑, F. Hormozi 1
Faculty of Chemical, Petroleum and Gas Engineering, Semnan University, Semnan, Iran

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This work mainly focuses on forced convective heat transfer coefficient of a biologically produced nano-
Received 25 October 2014 fluid flowing in a circular tube inside a heat exchanger. Diameters of inner and outer tubes (ID and OD)
Received in revised form 12 February 2015 were 6.35 and 12.7 mm respectively (in accordance with ANSI/ASME/API 5L). Experiments were con-
Accepted 14 March 2015
ducted at laminar, transient and turbulent flow regimes. Nanofluids were prepared at volume fractions
Available online 8 April 2015
of 0.1%, 0.5% and 1% and well-dispersed in ethylene–glycol/water (50:50 by volume) as a base fluid.
Particles were produced using plant extract method from green tea leaves and silver nitrate. Thermal
Keywords:
conductivity of nanofluids were experimentally measured and compared to well-known predicting
Forced convective
Biological nanofluid
correlations. Due to fairly agreement of obtained results with existing equations, a new correlation is pro-
Double pipe heat exchanger posed with absolute average deviation of ±3.43. Influence of different operating parameters including:
Silver nanofluid flow rate, concentration of nanofluid and inlet bulk temperature on heat transfer coefficient were experi-
mentally investigated and briefly discussed. Influence of nanofluids on pressure drop and friction factor
was experimentally investigated. Results demonstrated a remarkable enhancement of heat transfer
coefficient up to 67% at vol.% = 1.
Ó 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction nanofluid is its superior thermal conductivity comparing to base

Due to the continuous progress in thermal engineered systems
and heat exchangers, enhancement of rate of heating or cooling has
always been in demands for heating/cooling industries. Poor heat
transfer properties of traditional coolants have been an indispens-
able challenge in heat transfer media and limits their applications.
In fact, the heart of a cooling system is its working fluid. Despite
considerable efforts to improve the rate of heat transfer by differ-
ent active/passive ways, there are still challenges, which have
remained unsolved. Extended surfaces have been the most
common-used passive way for enhancing the rate of heat transfer,
although space limitations is the major drawback of using
extended surfaces. As an innovative idea, nanofluid was introduced
by Choi et al. [1] which is a fluid comprising the solid particles
(usually a metal oxide powder or none-metallic thermal conduc-
tive powder) with size of 1–100 nm suspended in a base fluid (usu-
ally a traditional coolant such as: water or ethylene glycol).
Nanofluid has been considered as a promising way for enhancing
the heat transfer in fluids. In fact, the outstanding feature of a
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +98 9120976870.
E-mail addresses: mohamadmohsensarafraz@gmail.com (M.M. Sarafraz),
fhormozi@semnan.ac.ir (F. Hormozi).
1
Tel.: +98 9123930495.
fluid. Using nanofluids can open up new horizons for heat transfer
researchers. Because nanofluids have higher thermal properties
such as viscosity, density and thermal conductivity. On the other
hand, employing nanofluids is a passive, available and cost-effec-
tive way for industries. Thus, many experimental studies are con-
cerned with measurement of thermal conductivity and thermal
performance of nanofluids in heating systems as a possible coolant
[2–7]. Recently, Ryzhkov and Minakov [8] conducted experiments
on laminar convective heat transfer of water–alumina nanofluid in
a circular tube with uniform heat flux using alumina/water nano-
fluid and showed that nanofluid can have better performance than
the base fluid in the range of low pumping power and low inlet
velocity. Ho and Lin [9] experimentally explored the influence of
elevated inlet fluid temperature on the turbulent forced convective
heat transfer of alumina–water nanofluid in copper horizontal cir-
cular tube at a fixed heating power. Results showed that turbulent
forced convection heat transfer effectiveness of the alumina–water
nanofluid over that of the pure water can be further uplifted by
elevating its inlet temperature entering the circular tube well
above the ambient, thereby manifesting its potential as an effective
warm functional coolant. Specifically, an increase in the averaged
heat transfer enhancement of more than 44% arises for the
nanofluid. In other study, Bahiraei and Hangi [10] investigate the

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.expthermflusci.2015.03.028
0894-1777/Ó 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
280 M.M. Sarafraz, F. Hormozi / Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 66 (2015) 279–289

Nomenclature

A area, m2 bs base fluid

Cp heat capacity, J kg1 °C1 hot heating loop
f fanning friction factor nf nanofluid
h convective heat transfer coefficient, W m2 °C1 cold cooling loop
k thermal conductivity, W m1 °C1 in inlet
L length, m out outlet
Nu Nusselt number n number of data points
Pe Pecklet number m mean
Pr Prandtl number m mass flow, kg s1
P pressure, Pa w wall
Q heat, W
Re Reynolds number Greek symbols
T temperature, °C a thermal diffusion, m2 s1
u fluid velocity, m s1 q density, kg m3
l viscosity, kg m1 s1
Subscripts–Superscripts / volume fraction
ave average D difference
b bulk

performance of water based Mn–Zn ferrite magnetic nanofluid in a
counter-flow double-pipe heat exchanger. The nanofluid flows in
the tube side as coolant, while the hot water flows in the annulus
side. Results indicated that increasing each of the parameters of
concentration, particle size and magnitude of the magnetic field
will lead to a greater pressure drop and also higher heat transfer
improvement. At higher Reynolds numbers, the effect of magnetic
force is diminished. Pressure drop and convective heat transfer of
water and nanofluids in a double-pipe helical heat exchanger
was investigated by Wu et al. [11]. In contrast to other studies,
for both laminar flow and turbulent flow, no anomalous heat trans-
fer enhancement was found. The heat transfer enhancement of the
nanofluids compared to water is from 0.37% to 3.43% according to
the constant flow velocity basis. While for double pipe helical heat
exchanger, Reddy and Rao [12] reported that heat transfer coeffi-
cient and friction factor can get enhanced by 10.73% and 8.73%
for 0.02% volume concentration of TiO2 water based nanofluids
when compared to base fluid flowing in a tube. For an annular heat
exchanger, Sarafraz et al. [5,6] reported the reduction of heat trans-
fer coefficient for forced convective and nucleate boiling heat
transfer coefficient using CuO/water nanofluids flowing upward
around the vertical cylinder with uniform heat flux. Darzi et al.
[13] performed experimental study to investigate the influence of
alumina nanofluid on pressure drop and thermal performance of
a double tubes heat exchanger. Results indicate that there is a good
potential in promoting the thermal performance of heat exchanger
by adding nanoparticles in the investigated ranges where there is
not a severe pressure drop penalty. Arani et al. [14] carried out
experiments to investigate the convection heat transfer character-
istics in fully developed turbulent flow of TiO2–water nanofluid in
a horizontal double tube counter-flow heat exchanger. The results
indicated higher Nusselt number for all nanofluids compared to the
base fluid. It was also seen that the Nusselt number does not
increase by decreasing the diameter of nanoparticles generally.
Therefore, a new definition for thermal performance factor was
proposed. Sahin et al. [15] investigated the steady state turbulent
convective heat transfer and pressure drop characteristics of
Al2O3–water nanofluid inside a circular tube. The effects of the
volume fraction and Reynolds number were determined under
constant heat flux and obtained results showed that the heat trans-
fer increased with the increase of Reynolds number and particle
volume fraction. No significant data were reported on pressure
drop. Table 1 summarily shows the other researches related to
forced convective heat transfer of nanofluids in circular/double
tube heat exchangers.
In present work, a biological nanofluid is introduced which is
fabricated from the biologically produced silver nanoparticles dis-
persed in ethylene glycol–water (50:50: by volume) as base fluid.
Nanoparticles are producing using plant extract method and dis-
persed uniformly within the base fluid. Thermal conductivity of
nanofluid at different volume fractions of nanofluid is experimen-
tally measured and correlated. Thermal performance of nanofluid
is evaluated by a double pipe counter current heat exchanger.
Also, influence of different operating parameters including: volume
fraction of nanofluid, inlet temperature, and flow rate of nanofluid
on heat transfer coefficient of heat exchanger is experimentally
investigated and briefly discussed.
2. Experimental
2.1. Experimental setup
Fig. 1 schematically represent the used test facility which con-
sists of three main sections:
(1) Two fluid circulation units including nanofluid loop and
water loop.
(2) Measurement instruments.
(3) Main test section (a counter-current double pipe heat
exchanger).
Each of circulation units has been equipped with a tank which
holds the working fluid. Water is the working fluid for water loop
and Ag/water–ethylene glycol (50:50 by volume) or AG/WEG50
nanofluid is working fluid for nanofluid loop. For each fluid loop,
a centrifugal pump has been employed to circulate the fluid inside
the system. To measure the fluid flow, an ultrasonic flow meter
(manufactured by Flownetix) has been installed in trajectory of
fluid. An AC bolt heater (manufactured by Cetal Co.) has been
mounted inside the nanofluid tank. For water loop, a refrigerant
cooler is installed inside the tank for chilling the warmed water.
Temperature of both of tanks was controlled by a PID controller
(manufactured by Autonics). Pipes and tanks were heavily isolated
by glass wool to prevent heat losses to environments. To measure
the temperatures of fluids, four RTDs were mounted at inlet and
 M.M. Sarafraz, F. Hormozi / Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 66 (2015) 279–289 281

Table 1
Some of nanofluid-related researches on forced convective heat transfer in conventional heat exchanger.

Author Nanofluid Type of heat exchanger Remarks Enhancement

Khedkar TiO2/water Concentric tube heat Enhancement in heat transfer and thermal performance by using nanofluids, +
et al. [16] exchanger, fabricated from thermal performance is improved by increasing the concentration of
copper nanoparticles, TiO2 nanofluids can be used for low heat flux cooling systems
Mohammed Al2O3, CuO, SiO2, Circular double pipe heat SiO2 nanofluid has the highest Nusselt number value, followed by Al2O3, ZnO, and +
et al. [17] and ZnO in exchanger with louvered strip CuO while pure water has the lowest Nusselt number. The results show that the
water inserts Nusselt number increases with decreasing the nanoparticle diameter and it
increases slightly with increasing the volume fraction of nanoparticles
Mojarrad Alumina/ Circular plane tube Data were collected at thermal entrance region with constant wall temperature, +
et al. [18] WEG50 average convective heat transfer and average Nusselt number increase with
alumina/water increasing volume fraction as well as Reynolds number. But the average Nusselt
number ratio was not improves with increasing Reynolds number. Also it is found
alumina/WEG50 nanofluids have more heat transfer increment compared to
alumina/water nanofluids. The pressure drop behavior was the same as the
average convective heat transfer coefficient with the presence of nanoparticles in
the base fluid
Srinivas Alumina/water Agitated helical coil heat Energy savings are more in laminar and turbulent conditions of flow than +
et al. [19] exchanger transition regime, percentage savings increase with increase in nanoparticle
concentration. Higher stirrer speed and shell-side fluid temperature resulted in
more energy savings, use of nanofluid resulted in heating the coil-side fluid
(water) to higher outlet temperature. Maximum energy savings of 10.65% have
been obtained
Bianco et al. Alumina/water Circular section tube, Constant wall temperature, at the increase of nanofluid concentration, the Nusselt 
[20] numerical number increases, but entropy generation and pumping power also increase,
therefore the penalties overcome the benefits
Sarafraz CuO/water Annular heat exchanger, Two-phase flow boiling regime was studied, reduction of heat transfer is reported 
et al. [21] vertical due to the deposition on heating surface for forced convective and nucleate boiling

Fig. 1. A scheme of test loop.

outlet of test section for water loop and nanofluid loop. For
measuring the temperature of nanofluid inside the test section,
eight RTDs were longitudinally installed at outside wall of test sec-
tion. To minimize the thermal resistance between RTDs and wall
surface of test section, silicone paste was injected into the location.
Also, two pressure transmitters was also employed at both ends of
nanofluid loop to measure the pressure drop inside the pipe. More
details on type, accuracy and precision of instruments have been
represented in Table 2. Main part of this test is the test section
involving a double-pipe copper made heat exchanger working at
282 M.M. Sarafraz, F. Hormozi / Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 66 (2015) 279–289
Table 2
Accuracy and details of measuring instruments.
Instrument Model Accuracy
Flow meter Flownetix series 100x 1% of readingsb
RTDs PT-100 resistance sensor 1Ka
Bolt heater 1200 W, 100 mm  10 mm(L  D) 2% of readingsa
Pump Centrifugal, stainless steel – Horiba DLS analyzer. As can be seen, mean average size of particles
impeller
Pressure Sensys pressure transmitter 1% of readingsa
transmitter
PID controller Autonics T3H 1% of readingsb
a
Based on the calibration process.
b
Based on manufacturer claim.
counter-current condition. Length of test section is 2400 mm and
diameter of inner and outer tubes (ID) were 6.35 and 12.7 mm
respectively (in accordance with ANSI/ASME/API 5L). More details
of test loop can be seen in Fig. 1.
2.2. Production and preparation of biological nanofluid
For producing the nanoparticles, a modified version of biologi-
cal method was utilized which has been represented in our pre-
vious publication [21] and the work reported by Yu et al. [22]. As
a reducing agent, Camellia sinensis (green tea leaves) extract was
used as follows: initially, about 15.54 g of tea leaves was washed
and dried in microwave-assisted oven. Dried leaves were grinded
and milled. Obtained powders were added to 100 mL deionized
water in a clean flask. The mixture was boiled for 12 min,
quenched, screened, and filtered by a micro-filter paper.
Although Yu et al. suggested that the filtrate should be kept in
277 K, we stored the filtrate at 288 K as the stock solution. Using
TOC analyzer, total organic carbon (TOC) content of tea extract
was evaluated and analyzed (TOC-Dohrmann, Teledyne), which
was approximately 19.07 g/L. In next step, 750 mL silver nitrate
(10 mM) (purchased from Merck Co. CAS#7761-88-8) was added
drop-wise into the 20 mL tea extract solution under sonication
using Hielscher UP400S GmbH (210 W/24 kHz and mechanical
stirring with speed of 400 rpm for 100 min at 303–323 K. Ag
nanoparticles were concentrated and purified by centrifugal ultra-
filtration, then rinsed and dried. Noticeably, formation of Ag nano-
particles was indicated by the appearance of signature smoky
brown color of the solution, which is in a good agreement with
observations reported by Sun et al. [22]. In the present work,
water/ethylene glycol was mixed with ratio of 50:50 by volume
as the base fluid. Ag nanoparticles were dispersed into the ethylene
glycol and no surfactants were added into the nanofluid. During
mixing, mechanical stirring was used and before experimentations,
nanofluid were exposed to ultrasonic at 20 kHz/650 W for 2 h. For
vol.% of 0.1, 0.5 and 1, pH was 7.43, 7.76, and 8.07 respectively.
Stability of nanofluids was examined using time-sedimentation
experiment. Results showed that nanofluids are stable for 7, 9
and 12 days at vol.% of 0.1, 0.5 and 1 respectively. Fig. 2a schemati-
cally shows the preparation of nanofluid.
Quality tests were also carried out to ensure about the size,
shape, purity and uniform dispersion of nanoparticles and nano-
fluid. As can be seen in Fig. 2b, nanoparticles have a uniform
spherical shape and almost have an identical size ranged from 40
to 50 nm which was proved by particle size-count test. Fig. 2c
demonstrates that nanoparticles are well-dispersed within the
base fluid. As can be seen, neither agglomeration nor clustering
is formed inside the bulk of nanofluid. To check the purity and
morphology, we examined the produced nanoparticles with XRD
test. XRD pattern depicted in Fig. 2d demonstrates the single-phase
Ag nanoparticles with a monoclinic structure which implies on this
fact that there is no impurity other than Ag; however, a small peak
due to existence of AgO2 was also observed which is negligible.
Accordingly, no significant peaks of impurities are found in XRD
pattern. XRD Diffraction pattern gives information on symmetry
size and shape of the particle and purity of particles from peak
positions. Fig. 2e represents the results of particle size test using
are ranged from 50 to 60 nm.
2.3. Thermo-physical properties of nanofluid
Thermal conductivity of nanofluid is experimentally measured
using KD2 Decagon (uncertainty: 5% reading) at different tempera-
tures ranged from 25 °C to 80 °C and volume fractions 0.1%, 0.5%
and 1%. For other thermo-physical properties, well-known correla-
tions introduced in Table 3 was used. According to experimental
results represented in Fig. 3, thermal conductivity of nanofluid is
a strong function of volume fraction of nanoparticles and a weak
function of temperature such that with increasing the volume frac-
tion of nanoparticles, thermal conductivity of nanofluids con-
siderably increases, while by increasing the temperature, a slight
increase for thermal conductivity of nanofluids is reported. To
represent and correlate the experimental data, enhancement ratio
is defined as:
knf
Enhancement ratio ¼ ð1Þ
kbf
where knf is thermal conductivity of nanofluid and kbf is thermal
conductivity of water–ethylene glycol (WEG50).
Therefore, based on the temperature and volume fraction of
nanoparticles, new correlation for thermal conductivity of nano-
fluid is proposed as:
knf
¼ 0:981 þ 0:00114  Tð CÞ þ 30:661  /ðvol:%Þ ð2Þ
kbf
where T is temperature and / is volume fraction of nanoparticles
suspended in WEG50. Also, comparisons have been made to evalu-
ate the accuracy and absolute average deviation of proposed
correlation in comparison with Maxwell and Hamilton-Crosser
correlations [23] against experimental data. According to obtained
results, A.A.D% for proposed correlation, Maxwell, Hamilton-
Crosser is 3.43%, 15.14% and 10.93% respectively (see Fig. 4).
Table 3 shows the other correlations used for estimating the
thermal properties of nanofluid.
Fig. 5 represents the results related to the thermo-physical
properties of nanofluid. Z is symbol of a physical property, which
can be density, viscosity, thermal conductivity and heat capacity
of nanofluid.
2.4. Data reduction and validation
For heating section, heat transfer coefficient can be estimated
using following correlations:
Q hot
nf ¼ mnf :C p;nf ðT in;nf  T out;nf Þ ð3Þ
For cooling section, heat transfer coefficient can be estimated
using following correlations:
Q cold
w ¼ mw :C p;w ðT in;w  T out;w Þ ð4Þ
In Eq. (3), Q hot
nf is the rate of heat transfer belonging to hot nanofluid,
mnf is quantity of mass flow the hot nanofluid. In Eq. (4), Q hot
nf is the
rate of heat transfer belonging to cooling loop and mw is quantity of
mass flow of water. The average heat transfer rate is defined as
follows:
 M.M. Sarafraz, F. Hormozi / Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 66 (2015) 279–289 283

Fig. 2a. A scheme of cycle of nanofluid production and preparation.

Q hot cold
nf þ Q w
Q av e: ¼ ð5Þ
2
where Qave is the average heat transfer rate between the heating
and cooling loops. To calculate the convective heat transfer coeffi-
cient of nanofluid, h, following equation is utilized as:
Q av e
hnf ¼ ð6Þ
T w  T b;nf
In this equation, Tw is the arithmetic average of eight RTDs mounted
on the wall of inner tube. Tb is bulk temperature (film temperature)
of nanofluids which can be calculated as arithmetic average of inlet
and outlet temperatures of inner tube. Nusselt, Reynolds, Prandtl
and Pecklet numbers can be calculated as:
hnf  Di
Fig. 2b. Scanning electron microscopy of produced Ag nanoparticles.
Nunf ¼ ð7Þ
knf

qnf :unf :Di

Renf ¼ ð8Þ
lnf

Fig. 2c. TEM image of Ag nanofluid. Fig. 2d. XRD pattern of Ag nanoparticles.
284 M.M. Sarafraz, F. Hormozi / Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 66 (2015) 279–289
Fig. 2e. Results of particle count test of Ag nanoparticles.
um  dp k mance of nanofluid. As can be seen in Fig. 8, for higher volume frac-
Penf ¼ ; anf ¼ nf
anf qnf C p;nf
C p;nf :lnf
Prnf ¼
knf
To assess the uncertainty of experimental data, sequential per-
turbation suggested method suggested by Moffat [26] was used.
According to this method and uncertainty values represented in
Table 1, total uncertainty of heat transfer coefficient is about
8.93%. As a validation, deionized water (three times distillated)
was tested by the facility. The obtained results were compared to
well-known Dittus-Boelter and Gnielinski correlations [27] for
heat transfer coefficient and Colebrook equation [28] for friction
factor. Results of comparisons showed that experimental data are
in a good agreement with those of obtained by correlations.
Figs. 6a and 6b show the results of calibration with DI-water for
average heat transfer coefficient and friction factor.
3. Results and discussion
Experiments were conducted such that influence of different
operating parameters on convective heat transfer coefficient of
nanofluid can be investigated which come as follows:
3.1. Influence of volume fraction
Volume fraction of nanoparticles can influence on heat transfer
coefficient of nanofluid in a convective flow. On the other hand, as
represented in Fig. 5, thermo-physical properties of nanofluid are
strong functions of volume fraction of nanoparticles, meaning that
by increasing the vol.% of nanoparticles, thermal conductivity, vis-
cosity and density of nanofluid significantly increase, while heat
capacity of nanofluid deteriorates. Also, due to the presence of
nanoparticles, Brownian motion is intensified and conductivity of
nanofluid increases. In a convective flow, Brownian motion, ther-
mophoresis and internal thermal conductivity of nanoparticles
Table 3
Correlations for estimating the thermal properties of Ag/WEG50.
Thermo-physical property Correlation
Density qnf ¼ /qp þ ð1  /Þpbf
Heat capacity ðqcp Þnf ¼ /ðcp Þp þ ð1  /Þðqcp Þbf
Viscosity lnf
lbf ¼ 1 þ 2:5/
lbf ¼ ð1  /EG Þlw þ /EG lEG
/EG ¼ 0:5
are the main reasons for enhancing the heat transfer coefficient,
especially in turbulent flow regime in which eddies are formed
and Brownian motion will considerably be intensified. According
to experimental data, by increasing the vol.% of nanofluids, convec-
tive heat transfer coefficient of nanofluid increase. Fig. 7 demon-
strates the experimental results related to influence of volume
fraction (concentration) of nanofluids on average convective heat
transfer coefficient.
Results of research showed that nanofluid can provide earlier
flow regime change from laminar to transient, and transient to tur-
bulent regime, which implies on this fact that nanofluids can
represent higher heat transfer coefficient comparing to base fluid.
For better comparison, a new criterion is defined as enhance-
ment parameter as follows:
hnf
Enhancement parameter ¼ ð11Þ
hbf
In this work, Eq. (5) is considered as a criterion for thermal perfor-
ð9Þ
tion of nanoparticles, higher enhancement factor can be seen, while
for turbulent flow regime, enhancement ratio is significantly inten-
sified comparing to laminar and transient regimes. Briefly speaking,
ð10Þ when Reynolds number increases up to turbulent flow regime,
eddies and local agitation will form, subsequently, heat transfer
coefficient is more intensified comparing to other flow regimes.
Likewise, by increasing the volume fraction of nanoparticles,
enhancement parameter slightly increases for laminar transient
and turbulent flow.
3.2. Influence of fluid flow rate (Reynolds number)
Flow rate of fluid has a strong influence on convective heat
transfer coefficient. Based on the experimental data represented
in Fig. 9, by increasing the flow rate of fluid, average convective
heat transfer coefficient considerably increases, especially when
flow regime changes from laminar-transient to turbulent.
Note that, at lower Reynolds number, clogging and aggregation
of particles are possible, therefore, for better thermal performance
of nanofluid, turbulent flow regime is suggested.
3.3. Influence of inlet bulk temperature
Thermo-physical properties of nanofluids are functions of tem-
perature. When inlet bulk temperature of nanofluid changes, it will
Refs.
[24,25]
[25]
[25]
Fig. 3. Experimental thermal conductivity of nanofluid at different temperature
and volume fraction of nanoparticles.
 M.M. Sarafraz, F. Hormozi / Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 66 (2015) 279–289
Maxwell correlation
Fig. 4. Comparison between well-known correlations [23] and proposed correlation against experimental data.
Fig. 5. Thermo-physical properties of Ag/WEG50 nanofluid.
influence on Brownian motion of nanoparticles. Therefore, by
increasing the temperature of nanofluid, a slight increase in heat
transfer coefficient of nanofluid can be seen, which is due to the
intensification of Brownian motion, increase in thermal conductiv-
ity and other thermal properties. Noticeably, for turbulent regime,
influence of temperature on average heat transfer coefficient is
higher when comparing to lower Reynolds numbers (laminar or
transient regions) (see Fig. 10).
Fig. 6a. Results of calibration and comparison between Dittus-Boelter and
Gnielinski correlations against experimental data related to DI-water.
285
Proposed correlation Hamilton-Crosser correlation
3.4. Friction factor and pressure drop
Simultaneously with the heat transfer performance, it is
required to quantify the friction factor and pressure drop of
nanofluids for further practical and industrial applications.
Therefore, pressure drop of nanofluids was measured using pres-
sure transmitter mounted at both ends of inner tube. According
to obtained results indicated in Fig. 11, comparison between fric-
tion factor of WEG50 and Ag/WEG50 nanofluids shows that values
of friction factors related to nanofluids (at vol.% = 1) are 11.3%
higher than that of quantified for WEG50, which implies on this
fact that there is a small penalty for utilization of nanofluids as
coolant. Subsequently, higher pumping power and fouling would
be expected in case of using nanofluids. For pressure drop, experi-
mental data demonstrate, when concentration of nanoparticles
increases, quantity of pressure drop increases, which has been
represented in Fig. 12. In fact, none-linear behavior versus
Reynolds number for increasing the pressure drop is reported for
all volume fraction of nanofluids. Noticeably, pressure drop regis-
tered for WEG50 was lower than that of registered for nanofluids.
This is due to the presence of nanoparticles inside the bulk of
WEG50, which increases the pumping power and pressure drop.
In fact, using the nanofluid at higher volume fraction of nanoparti-
cles can lead to the penalty in pressure drop. Amount of this pen-
alty depends on the type, size and volume fraction of nanoparticles
inside the base fluid.
Fig. 6b. Results of calibration belonging to friction factor in comparison with
Colebrook equation.
286 M.M. Sarafraz, F. Hormozi / Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 66 (2015) 279–289

Fig. 7. Influence of concentration of nanofluids (vol.%) on average convective heat

transfer coefficient of nanofluid.
Fig. 9. Influence of volume fraction of nanoparticles on average heat transfer
coefficient of nanofluids.
3.5. Correlation of experimental data

In this section, experimental data were examined by existing

correlations namely: Pak and Cho [24], Xuan and Li [29] Maiga
et al. [30] and Gnielinski correlations. Results of comparisons
showed that these correlations are unable to predict the Nusselt
number very well. Values of absolute average deviation, A.A.D%,
have been represented in Table 4.
In this work, for biological silver/WEG50, a new correlation is
proposed as:
pffiffiffiffi
Nu ¼ 0:00564ð1 þ 8:14 /ÞRe0:9324  Pr0:38  Pe0:0038 ð12Þ
In Eq. (12), / is volume fraction of nanoparticles of biologically pro-
duced silver in WEG50. Results of well-known and proposed
correlations against experimental data for vol.% = 1 have been
represented in Fig. 13.
As can be seen in Fig. 13, all the predicting correlations have
under-predicted the experimental results. This is due to the rela-
tively higher thermal conductivity of biologically-produced nano-
fluid rather than other nanofluids. As can also be seen in Fig. 13, Fig. 10. Influence of inlet temperature on average heat transfer coefficient of
proposed correlation is able to accurately predict the Nusselt num- nanofluid.

ber with absolute average deviation of about 8.7%. In order to indi-

cate the favorable thermal conductivity of Ag/WEG50 nanofluid, a
rough comparison has been made between measured thermal con-
ductivity enhancements reported in the literature and result of this
work at vol.% = 1, which has been presented in Table 5.

Fig. 11. Experimental friction factor for Ag/WEG50 nanofluids comparing to

WEG50.

According to Table 5, the biologically-produced nanofluid at

vol.% = 1 has relatively higher thermal conductivity rather than
Fig. 8. Comparison between enhancement parameter at different Reynolds number
other nanofluid, even in comparison with two-step Ag/water nano-
and volume fractions. fluid [42]. According to Table 5, it can be stated that, other
 M.M. Sarafraz, F. Hormozi / Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 66 (2015) 279–289
Fig. 12. Pressure drop of nanofluid (Ag/WEG50) at different vol.% of nanoparticles.
Fig. 13. Results of existing correlations in comparison with proposed model.
Fig. 14. Comparison between proposed correlation and data extracted from
bibliography sources of [5,6,14,44].
287
Table 4
Absolute average deviation of existing correlations against experimental data.
Author Xuan and Li Maiga Pak and Cho Gnielinski
A.A.Da 41% 51% 38% 67%
n = number of data
 points. 
a Nu Nu 
A:A:D% ¼ 1n  expNu: est : est:   100.
nanofluids at volumetric concentration higher than 1% have lower
thermal conductivity enhancement comparing to the results of this
work at vol.% = 1. For instance, Timofeeva et al. [35] has reported
the thermal conductivity enhancement of about 10% for alumina/
water at vol.% = 5, while result of this work shows that thermal
conductivity can be enhanced up to 37% at vol.% = 1. This is an evi-
dence that Ag/WEG50 biologically-produced nanofluid can have
potential applications in heat transfer media due to its relatively
higher thermal conductivity.
Also, a comparison between available experimental data in the
literature and predicted results by the proposed correlation has
been performed. Results of this comparison indicate that proposed
correlation can obtain the reasonable values for Nusselt number
with deviation up to 17%. Note that some of the bibliographic data
have been represented for silver nanofluids, while others belonging
to the other nanofluids (see Fig. 14).
All in all, results showed the positive influence of using nano-
fluid as a working fluid in heat exchanging media which is in accor-
dance with previous studies of [31–33].
4. Conclusions
The convective heat transfer coefficient of biologically produced
silver–ethylene–glycol/water nanofluid was experimentally quan-
tified in a counter-current double pipe heat exchanger.
Experimental results demonstrated that nanofluids can remarkably
enhance the heat transfer coefficient of heat exchanger comparing
to base fluid. In fact, biological nanofluid can change flow regime
earlier from laminar to transient, and transient to turbulent
regime. Addition of nanoparticles at volume fractions 0.1%, 0.5%
288 M.M. Sarafraz, F. Hormozi / Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 66 (2015) 279–289

Table 5
Comparison between thermal conductivity enhancements reported in literature review and result of this work related to vol.% = 1.

Author(s) Nanofluid Concentration Nanoparticle size (nm) Enhancement

This work Ag/WEG50 1% volumetric 40–50 37%
Chon et al. [34] Alumina/water 4% volumetric 50 30%
Timofeeva et al. [35] Alumina/water 5% volumetric 40 10%
Teng et al. [36] Alumina/water 2% by weight 20 14.7
Beck et al. [37] Alumina/water 4% volumetric 12 23%
Yang et al. [38] Graphite/oil 2% by weight 20–40 29%
Utomo et al. [39] Titania/water 4% volumetric 50–60 5%
Utomo et al. [39] Alumina/water 4% volumetric 20–30 10%
Zhang et al. [40] Copper/ethyleneglycol 5% volumetric 33 11.5%
Xie et al. [41] SiC/water 4.2% volumetric 25 15.9%
Rezazadeh et al. [42] Ag/water 1% volumetric 20–40 29%
Lee et al. [43] Alumina/water 3.5% volumetric 20–50 12%

and 1% enhanced the heat transfer coefficient 22%, 36% and 67%
respectively. Results also revealed that by increasing the nanopar-
ticle concentration, pressure drop of system increases. Similar
trend was found for friction factor, which implies on this fact that
in case of using nanofluids, there is a small penalty and a minor
drawback of pressure drop and friction factor enhancement.
Experimental results were then compared to existing correlations.
Due to inconsistency of available correlations, a new equation is
proposed, which predicts the heat transfer coefficient of biologi-
cally-produced nanofluid with A.A.D of about 8.7%. Comparison
between bibliographic data and proposed model demonstrated a
good agreement between experimental data and the proposed
correlation with average deviation of 17%.
Acknowledgements
Authors of this work tends to dedicate this article to Imam
Mahdi and appreciate Prof. M. Zamani, M. Sinaei for their valuable
advices. Also, special thanks is dedicated to Hormozgan, Mahshahr
and Semnan Universities for sharing their facilities.
References
[1] S.U.S. Choi, Z.G. Zhang, W. Yu, F.E. Lockwood, E.A. Grulke, Anomalous thermal
conductivity enhancement in nanotube suspensions, Appl. Phys. Lett. 79 (14)
(2001) 2252–2254.
[2] S.K. Das, N. Putra, W. Roetzel, Pool boiling characteristics of nano-fluids, Int. J.
Heat Mass Transfer 46 (5) (2003) 851–862.
[3] Y.J. Hwang, Y.C. Ahn, H.S. Shin, C.G. Lee, G.T. Kim, H.S. Park, Investigation on
characteristics of thermal conductivity enhancement of nanofluids, Curr. Appl.
Phys. 6 (2006) 1068–1071.
[4] S.S.J. Aravind, P. Baskar, T. Baby, R.K. Sabareesh, S. Das, S. Ramaprabhu,
Investigation of structural stability, dispersion, viscosity and conductive heat
transfer properties of functionalized carbon nanotube based nanofluids, J.
Phys. Chem. 115 (2011) 16737–16744.
[5] M.M. Sarafraz, F. Hormozi, Convective boiling and particulate fouling of
stabilized CuO-ethylene glycol nanofluids inside the annular heat exchanger,
Int. Commun. Heat Mass Trans. 53 (2014) 116–123.
[6] M.M. Sarafraz, F. Hormozi, Scale formation and sub-cooled flow boiling heat
transfer of CuO–water nanofluid inside the vertical annulus, Exp. Thermal
Fluid Sci. 52 (2014) 205–214.
[7] W. Duangthongsuk, S. Wongwises, Effect of thermo-physical properties
models on the predicting of the convective heat transfer coefficient for low
concentration nanofluid, Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transfer 35 (2008) 1320–
1326.
[8] I. Ryzhkov, A.V. Minakov, The effect of nanoparticle diffusion and
thermophoresis on convective heat transfer of nanofluid in a circular tube,
Int. J. Heat Mass Trans. 77 (2014) 956–969.
[9] C.J. Ho, Y.J. Lin, Turbulent forced convection effectiveness of alumina–water
nanofluid in a circular tube with elevated inlet fluid temperatures: an
experimental study, Int. Commun. Heat Mass Trans. 57 (2014) 247–253.
[10] M. Bahiraei, M. Hangi, Investigating the efficacy of magnetic nanofluid as a
coolant in double-pipe heat exchanger in the presence of magnetic field,
Energy Conver. Manage. 76 (2013) 1125–1133.
[11] Z. Wu, L. Wang, B. Sundén, Pressure drop and convective heat transfer of water
and nanofluids in a double-pipe helical heat exchanger, Appl. Therm. Eng. 60
(2013) 266–274.
[12] M.C.S. Reddy, V.V. Rao, Experimental investigation of heat transfer coefficient
and friction factor of ethylene glycol water based TiO2 nanofluid in double pipe
heat exchanger with and without helical coil inserts, Int. Commun. Heat Mass
Trans. 50 (2014) 68–76.
[13] A.A.R. Darzi, M. Farhadi, K. Sedighi, Heat transfer and flow characteristics of
Al2O3–water nanofluid in a double tube heat exchanger, Int. Commun. Heat
Mass Trans. 47 (2013) 105–112.
[14] A.A. Abbasian Arani, J. Amani, Experimental investigation of diameter effect on
heat transfer performance and pressure drop of TiO2–water nanofluid, Exp.
Thermal Fluid Sci. 44 (2013) 520–533.
[15] B. Sahin, G. Gültekin, E. Manay, S. Karagoz, Experimental investigation of heat
transfer and pressure drop characteristics of Al2O3–water nanofluid, Exp.
Thermal Fluid Sci. 50 (2013) 21–28.
[16] R.S. Khedkar, Shriram S. Sonawane, Kailas L. Wasewar, Heat transfer study on
concentric tube heat exchanger using TiO2–water based nanofluid, Int.
Commun. Heat Mass Trans. 57 (2014) 163–169.
[17] H.A. Mohammed, Husam A. Hasan, M.A. Wahid, Heat transfer enhancement of
nanofluids in a double pipe heat exchanger with louvered strip inserts, Int.
Commun. Heat Mass Trans. 40 (2013) 36–46.
[18] M. Mojarrad, A. Keshavarz, M. Ziabasharhagh, M.M. Raznahan, Experimental
investigation on heat transfer enhancement of alumina/water and alumina/
water–ethylene glycol nanofluids in thermally developing laminar flow, Exp.
Thermal Fluid Sci. 53 (2014) 111–118.
[19] T. Srinivas, A. Venu Vinod, Performance of an agitated helical coil heat exchanger
using Al2O3/water nanofluid, Exp. Thermal Fluid Sci. 51 (2013) 77–83.
[20] V. Bianco, O. Manca, S. Nardini, Performance analysis of turbulent convection
heat transfer of Al2O3 water-nanofluid in circular tubes at constant wall
temperature, Energy, 2014 (in press) doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.
2014.09.025.
[21] M.M. Sarafraz, F. Hormozi, S.M. Peyghambarzadeh, Thermal performance and
efficiency of a thermosyphon heat pipe working with a biologically ecofriendly
nanofluid, Int. Commun. Heat Mass Trans. 57 (2014) 297–303.
[22] Q. Sun, X. Cai, J. Li, M. Zheng, Z. Chen, C. Yu, Green synthesis of silver nanoparticles
using tea leaf extract and evaluation of their stability and antibacterial activity,
Coll. Surf. A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 444 (2014) 226–231.
[23] S.M.S. Murshed, C.A. Nieto de Castro, Superior thermal features of carbon
nanotubes-based nanofluids – a review, Renew. Sustain. Ene Rev. 37 (2014)
155–167.
[24] B.C. Pak, Y.I. Cho, Hydrodynamic and heat transfer study of dispersed fluids
with sub-micron metallic oxide particles., Exp. Heat Transf. 11 (1998) 151–170.
[25] B.A. Bhanvase, M.R. Sarode, L.A. Putterwar, K.A. Abdullah, M.P. Deosarkar, S.H.
Sonawane, Intensification of convective heat transfer in water/ethylene glycol
based nanofluids containing TiO2 nanoparticles, Chem. Eng. Process.: Process
Intensif. 82 (2014) 123–131.
[26] R.J. Moffat, Describing the uncertainties in experimental results, Exp. Thermal
Fluid Sci. 1 (1988) 3–17.
[27] F.P. Incropera, D.P. DeWitt, Fundamentals of Heat and Mass Transfer, sixth ed.,
Wiley, New York, 2007, p. 514. ISBN: 09780471457282.
[28] C.F. Colebrook, Turbulent flow in pipes, with particular reference to the
transition between the smooth and rough pipe laws, J. Inst. Civ. Eng. Lond. 11
(1939) 133.
[29] Y. Xuan, Q. Li, Investigation on convective heat transfer and flow features of
nanofluids, ASME J. Heat Transf. 125 (2003) 151–155.
[30] S.B. Maiga, C.T. Nguyen, N. Galanis, G. Roy, T. Mare, M. Coqueux, Heat transfer
enhancement in turbulent tube flow using Al2O3 nanoparticle suspension, Int.
J. Num. Meth. Heat Fluid Flow 16 (2006) 275–292.
[31] J.C. Ho, W.C. Chen, W.M. Yan, Correlations of heat transfer effectiveness in a
mini channel heat sink with water-based suspensions of Al2O3 nanoparticles
and/or MEPCM particles, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 69 (2014) 276–284.
[32] T.C. Hung, W.M. Yan, X.D. Wang, C.Y. Chang, Heat transfer enhancement in
micro-channel heat sinks using nanofluids, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 55 (2012)
2559–2570.
[33] T.C. Hung, W.M. Yan, Enhancement of thermal performance in double-layered
micro-channel heat sink with nanofluids, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 55 (2012)
3225–3238.
[34] C.H. Chon, K.D. Kihm, S.P. Lee, S.U.S. Choi, Empirical correlation finding the role
of temperature and particle size for nanofluid (Al2O3) thermal conductivity
enhancement, Appl. Phys. L 87 (2005) 1531071–1531073.
 M.M. Sarafraz, F. Hormozi / Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 66 (2015) 279–289
[35] E.V. Timofeeva, A.N. Gavrilov, J.M. McCloskey, Y.V. Tolmachev, Thermal
conductivity and particle agglomeration in alumina nanofluids: experiment
and theory, Phys. Rev. E 76 (2007) 0612031–06120316.
[36] T.P. Teng, Y.H. Hung, T.C. Teng, H.E. Mo, H.G. Hsu, The effect of alumina/water
nanofluid particle size on thermal conductivity, Appl. Therm. Eng. 30 (2010)
2213–2218.
[37] M.P. Beck, Y. Yuan, P. Warrier, A.S. Teja, The thermal conductivity of alumina
nanofluids in water, ethylene glycol, and ethylene glycol + water mixture, J.
Nanoparticles Res. 12 (2010) 1469–1477.
[38] Y. Yang, Z. Zhang, E.A. Grulke, W.B. Anderson, G. Wu, Heat transfer properties
of nanoparticle-in-fluid dispersions (nanofluids) in laminar flow, Int. J. Heat
Mass Trans. 48 (2005) 1107–1116.
[39] A.T. Utomo, H. Poth, P.T. Robbins, A.W. Pacek, Experimental and theoretical
studies of thermal conductivity, viscosity and heat transfer coefficient of
titania and alumina nanofluids, Int. J. Heat Mass Trans. 55 (2012) 7772–7781.
289
[40] X. Zhang, H. Gu, M. Fujii, Experimental study on the effective thermal
conductivity and thermal diffusivity of Nanofluid, Int. J. Thermophys. 27
(2006) 569–580.
[41] H.Q. Xie, Study on the thermal conductivity of SiC nanofluids, J. Chin. Ceram.
Soc. 29 (2001) 361–364 (in Chinese).
[42] H. Maddah, M. Rezazadeh, M. Maghsoudi, S. NasiriKokhdan, The effect of silver
and aluminum oxide nanoparticles on thermophysical properties of
nanofluids, J. Nanostruct. Chem. 3 (2013) 28.
[43] D. Kim, Y. Kwon, Y. Cho, C. Li, S. Cheong, Y. Hwang, J. Lee, D. Hong, S. Moon,
Convective heat transfer characteristics of nanofluids under laminar and
turbulent flow conditions, Curr. Appl. Phys. 9 (2009) 119–123.
[44] A.M. Hussein, K.V. Sharma, R.A. Bakar, K. Kadirgama, A review of forced
convection heat transfer enhancement and hydrodynamic characteristics of a
nanofluid, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 29 (2014) 734–743.