ISSN 1810-2328, Journal of Engineering Thermophysics, 2018, Vol. 27, No. 4, pp. 507–514.


c Pleiades Publishing, Ltd., 2018.

Overview of Hybrid Nanofluids Development and Benefits

A. A. Minea* and M. G. Moldoveanu
Technical University Gheorghe Asachi, Iasi, Romania
Received July 3, 2017

Abstract—Conventional fluids have poor heat transfer properties, but their vast applications in
power generation, chemical processes, heating and cooling processes, electronics and other micro-
sized applications make the reprocessing of those thermofluids to have better heat transfer properties
quite essential. Recently, it has been shown that the addition of solid nanoparticles to various
fluids can increase the thermal conductivity and can influence the viscosity of the suspensions by
tens of percent. Thermophysical properties of nanofluids were shown dependent on the particle
material, shape, size, concentration, the type of the base fluid, and other additives. In spite of some
inconsistency in the reported results and insufficient understanding of the mechanism of the heat
transfer in nanofluids, it has been emerged as a promising heat transfer fluid. In the continuation
of nanofluids research, the researchers have also tried to use hybrid nanofluid recently, which is
engineered by suspending dissimilar nanoparticles either in mixture or composite form. The idea
of using hybrid nanofluids is to further improve the heat transfer and pressure drop characteristics
by trade-off between advantages and disadvantages of individual suspension, attributed to good
aspect ratio, better thermal network and synergistic effect of nanomaterials. As a conclusion, the
hybrid nanofluids containing composite nanoparticles yield significant enhancement of thermal con-
ductivity. However, the long-term stability, production process, selection of suitable nanomaterials
combination to get synergistic effect and cost of nanofluids may be major challenges behind the
practical applications.

DOI: 10.1134/S1810232818040124

1. INTRODUCTION
Nanofluid is a solid–liquid mixture that consists of nanoparticles and a base liquid. Nanoparticles are
basically metal (Cu, Ni, Al, etc.), oxides (Al2 O3 , TiO2 , CuO, SiO2 , Fe2 O3 , Fe3 O4 , BaTiO3 , etc.), and
some other compounds (SiC, CaCO3 , graphene, etc.), and base fluids usually include water, ethylene
glycol, propylene glycol, engine oil, etc. [1–3]. Moreover, in the last few years, some hybrid nanofluids
were developed in order to surpass some inconveniences that affect nanofluids. The introduction of a new
concept of combined/hybrid nanofluids will be clearly explained in this article. These hybrids contain
different nanoparticles types, different base fluids or nanocomposites [4–9].
Nanofluids prepared with nanocomposite materials dispersed in the base fluids are recently consid-
ered by some authors. The nanocomposite defined as composite of two or more nanomaterials in the
nanometer range and dispersed in the fluids is a significant part of nanotechnology, which is one of the
fastest growing areas in materials science and engineering.
Few results on these can be summarized as: Suresh et al. [10] prepared Al2 O3 –Cu nanocomposite-
based nanofluids (by dispersing the nanocomposite in water) and observed thermal conductivity en-
hancement. Suresh et al. [11] studied also the convective heat transfer of the Al2 O3 –Cu nanocom-
posite nanofluid and observed a heat transfer enhancement of about 14%. Kumar et al. [12] observed
thermal conductivity and viscosity enhancements for Cu–Zn nanofluids. Sundar et al. [13] synthesized
nanodiamond–nickel nanocomposite and estimated thermal conductivity and viscosity on experimental
bases. Nine et al. [14] prepared Al2 O3 –MWCNTs hybrid nanofluids and studied their thermal properties
for volume concentrations of 1–6%. Baby and Ramaprabhu [15] synthesized the hybrid nanostructure
*
E-mail: aminea@tuiasi.ro

507
508 MINEA, MOLDOVEANU

(f-MWNT + f-HEG) of functionalized MWNT (f-MWNT) and functionalized HEG (f-HEG) and pre-
pared hybrid nanofluids by dispersing them in water. Sundar et al. [16] prepared MWCNT–Fe3 O4 /water
nanofluid and noticed both heat transfer and friction factor enhancement. Jia et al. [17] prepared
Fe3 O4 -CNT using a hydrothermal method. Madhesh et al. [18] prepared copper–titania nanocomposite
nanofluids and observed that the overall heat transfer coefficient is increasing by more than 50% for all
volume concentrations.
On the other hand, experimental work for a nanocomposite-based nanofluids flow in a tube with
turbulent promoters has limited availability in the literature. Some research was developed by Sundar et
al. [19] for MWCNT–Fe3 O4 /water nanocomposite nanofluids flow in a tube.
Despite the research on nanocomposites, some authors tried different methods to create hybrid
nanofluids and few of these results are reviewed here. Han and Rhi [20] mixed two nanofluids resulting
in a hybrid Ag–Al2 O3 /water, and their main conclusion was that the hybrid nanofluids were not much
effective comparing with the pure nanoparticle nanofluid system. Momim [21] considered two kinds of
particles (Al2 O3 –Cu) mixed in water and found a maximum enhancement of 13.56% in Nusselt number
at a Reynolds number of 1730. Jana et al. [22] added Au and Cu to a CNT water-based nanofluid and
observed that the synergistic effect of hybrid nanofluid that was expected to produce higher thermal
conductivity did not occur for both hybrid nanofluids. Hence, the CNTs did not increase the thermal
conductivity of both CuNP–CNT and AuNP–CNT nanofluids but rather lowered the values if compared
to thermal conductivity of respective single CuNP and AuNP nanofluids.
Chen et al. [23] also mixed two kinds of particles (MWCNT–Fe2 O3 ) in water and noticed a 28%
enhancement for thermal conductivity of hybrid nanofluid. Nimmagadda and Venkatasubbaiah [24]
considered two kinds of particles (Al2 O3 + Ag) mixed in water and noticed a large heat transfer
coefficient enhancement.
Furthermore, this article summarizes recent researches on thermophysical properties, heat transfer
and possible applications and challenges of hybrid nanofluids.

2. METHODOLOGY
2.1. Thermophysical Properties of Hybrid Nanofluids
There are some studies considering heating behavior of hybrid nanofluids, as was explained earlier.
Nevertheless, the information provided in the open literature is incomplete and only few articles dealt
with a comprehensive description of all the thermophysical properties of a certain hybrid nanofluid. In
this article we would like to make a comparison of some described hybrid nanofluids and the simple
nanofluids, as well, and to offer a conclusion of advantages of using a certain hybrid nanofluid.
Furthermore, some data were selected from different references and will be numerically compared in
order to describe hybrid nanofluid in terms of heating performance. The thermophysical properties of the
solid nanoparticles adopted to be used in this study are indicated in Table 1.
The thermophysical properties of studied nanofluids are listed in Table 2. The table contains experi-
mental and theoretical determined properties in order to outline the differences and to be able to attain
a comparison of available data. The experimental results were adopted from Esfe et al. [25–27] and the
theoretical estimations were done with the help of the equations summarized by Oztop and Abu-Nada
[28] as:

cpnf = ϕcpp + (1 − ϕ) cpf , (1)

Table 1. Thermophysical properties of nanoparticles at 293 K borrowed from Esfe et al. [25]

Property Nanoparticle (Ag) Nanoparticle (MgO) Nanocomposite (Ag + MgO)

Specific heat (J/kg K) 235 874 554.5
Density (kg/m3 ) 10490 3580 7035
Thermal conductivity (W/m K) 429 55 242

JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING THERMOPHYSICS Vol. 27 No. 4 2018

 OVERVIEW OF HYBRID NANOFLUIDS DEVELOPMENT AND BENEFITS 509

Table 2. Relative thermophysical properties of nanofluids at 293 K

Thermophysical properties enhancement

Nanofluid Method
Specific heat Density Thermal conductivity Viscosity
(J/kg K) (kg/m3 ) (W/m K) (kg/ms)
Theoretical 0.995281 1.047529 1.015012 1.039575
0.5% Ag/water
Experimental – – 1.048 1.1047
Theoretical 0.9905619 1.095058 1.030175 1.052731
1% Ag/water
Experimental – – 1.122 1.2125
Theoretical 0.996045 1.012927 1.014589 1.039575
0.5% MgO/water
Experimental – – 1.049 1.056
Theoretical 0.9920899 1.025854 1.02932 1.052731
1% MgO/water
Experimental – – 1.052 1.118
Theoretical 0.995663 1.030228 1.014963 1.039575
0.5% Ag–MgO/water
Experimental 0.9956624 1.030225 1.046512 1.050633
Theoretical 0.9913259 1.060456 1.030076 1.052731
1% Ag–MgO/water
Experimental 0.9963271 1.060461 1.094684 1.126582

ρnf = ϕρp + (1 − ϕ) ρf . (2)

The effective thermal conductivity of the nanofluid is approximated by the Maxwell–Garnetts model:

kp + 2kf + 2ϕ (kp − kf )
knf = kf . (3)
kp + 2kf − ϕ (kp − kf )
For viscosity, the Wang et al. [1999] correlation is expressed as:
 
μnf = 1 + 7.3ϕ + 123ϕ2 μf , (4)
where μf is the viscosity of the base fluid.
Relative properties are defined as the ratio between the thermophysical property of the nanofluid and
of the base fluid.

2.2. Description and Numerical Procedure

In this research, the CFD models were presented for fully developed turbulent flows in a uniformly
heated tube based on single-phase model. The aim of this article is to examine the effects of flow rate and
specially hybrid nanofluids behavior in a steady state system with computational fluid dynamic tools. In
order to confirm the modeling results, a comparison with the experimental data presented by Sundar et
al. [13] was done and an acceptable agreement was observed.
The geometry consists of a 3D tube with a length of 1.75 m, inner diameter of 0.014 m and outer
diameter of 0.016 m. The tube wall boundary condition was considered as a constant heat flux of
12998.83 W/m2 . The aspect ratio (L/D = 125) of the test section is sufficiently large for the flow to
be hydrodynamically developed.
The fluid enters the tube with a constant inlet temperature of 300 K and with uniform axial velocity.
The Reynolds number was varied from 7800 to 22000.
The single-phase model is employed in order to analyze the thermal and fluid dynamic behavior of the
considered hybrid nanofluids. In the single-phase model the nanofluid is treated as a normal fluid, but

JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING THERMOPHYSICS Vol. 27 No. 4 2018

510 MINEA, MOLDOVEANU

with enhanced properties due to the inclusion of nanoparticles. The following formulation represents the
mathematical description of single-phase model governing equations:
Conservation of mass:

div (ρv̄) = 0. (5)

Conservation of momentum:
   
div (ρv̄v̄) = −grad P̄ + μ∇2 v̄ − div ρū ū . (6)
Conservation of energy:
   
div ρv̄cp T̄ = div kgradT̄ − ρcp ū t¯ . (7)
In the above equations, the symbols v̄, P̄ , and T̄ represent the time-averaged flow variables,
while the symbols ū and t¯ represent
 the fluctuations in velocity and temperature. The terms in the
governing equations ρū ū and ρcp ū t¯ represent the turbulent shear stress and turbulent heat flux,
 

respectively. These terms are unknown and must be approximately expressed in terms of mean velocity
and temperature.

2.3. Turbulence Modeling

For closure of the governing equations of fluid flow, empirical data or approximate models are required
to express the turbulent stresses and heat flux quantities of the related physical phenomenon. In the
present numerical analysis, a κ-ε turbulent model was adopted. The κ-ε turbulent model introduces two
additional equations, namely, turbulent kinetic energy (κ) and rate of dissipation (ε).
The κ-ε model introduces two new equations, one for the turbulent kinetic energy and the other for
the rate of dissipation. The two equations can be expressed in the following form:

div (ρv̄κ) = div {(μ + μt ) /σκ grad κ} + Gκ − ρε, (8)

div (ρv̄ε) = div {(μ + (μt /σε )) grad ε} + C1ε (ε/κ)Gκ + ρC2ε (ε2 /κ). (9)
In the above equations, Gκ represents the generation of turbulent kinetic energy due to mean velocity
gradients; σκ and σε are effective Prandtl numbers for turbulent kinetic energy and rate of dissipation,
respectively; C1ε and C2ε are constants and μt is the eddy viscosity and is modeled as:

μt = (ρCμ κ2 )/ε. (10)

Cμ is a constant and its value is 0.09.
In Eqs. (8) and (9), C1ε = 1.44, C2ε = 1.92, σκ = 1.0, and σε = 1.3.

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

3.1. Thermophysical Properties Estimation Method
As one can notice from Table 2, some differences appear in the enhancement of thermal conductivity
and viscosity when it compares experimental data and theoretical data. As is well known in the literature
and was also observed by the current authors in the previous work, the theoretical models for viscosity are
under-predicting it. Concerning the thermal conductivity, the opinions are different. In regard to thermal
conductivity enhancement, the theoretical predictions with Maxwell model (that is the most trustable
one, as was demonstrated in the open literature) gave the same values for all nanofluids and hybrids.
In Fig. 1 the Prandtl number is calculated from the thermophysical properties of studied nanofluids,
while for water, Pr = 5.49. All the nanofluids have a Pr number higher than water:

μcp
Pr = . (11)
k

JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING THERMOPHYSICS Vol. 27 No. 4 2018

 OVERVIEW OF HYBRID NANOFLUIDS DEVELOPMENT AND BENEFITS 511

Fig. 1. Pr number variation for studied nanofluids.

3.2. Heat Transfer Enhancement

For this study, the convective heat transfer coefficient was evaluated at the tube exit. Figure 2
summarizes some of the numerical results for the heat transfer coefficient and its variation with Re
number and nanofluid volume fraction.
The heat transfer enhancement was calculated as the ratio between heat convective heat transfer
coefficient for the nanofluids and the base fluid (i.e., water).
The convective heat transfer coefficient was numerically evaluated at the tube exit, as:

q
h= . (12)
Tw − Tmexit
Moreover, the mean exit temperature was obtained by:

R R
vT (2πr) dr vrT dr
0 0
Tmexit = = . (13)
R R
v (2πr) dr vrdr
0 0

One can notice that the heat transfer coefficient increases with the addition of nanoparticles to the
working fluid and with Re increasing. The results for the considered nanofluids are similar in heat transfer
enhancement.
From Fig. 2, one can notice a better heat transfer performance for the hybrid nanofluid compared to
MgO or Ag water-based nanofluid. This can be explained based on Pr number variation. Furthermore,
this variation trend is similar for all Re numbers considered for this study.
As a conclusion, it can be affirmed that the hybrid nanofluids behave better in heat transfer than the
basic nanofluids.

JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING THERMOPHYSICS Vol. 27 No. 4 2018

512 MINEA, MOLDOVEANU

Fig. 2. Heat transfer enhancement.

4. CONCLUSIONS
The review showed that proper hybridization may make the hybrid nanofluids very promising for
heat transfer enhancement; however, lot of research works is still needed in the fields of preparation
and stability, characterization and applications to overcome the challenges.
In this paper, a three-dimensional numerical study using CFD is performed for one metal, one
oxide and one nanocomposite water-based nanofluids flowing in a tube configuration. The overall
conclusion can be that the nanocomposites based on water nanofluids behave better in heat transfer
than the components. This can be attributed to a better synergy between the components that leads
to a better thermal conductivity and a satisfying viscosity (lower for the hybrids in comparison with
basic nanofluids). Moreover, by this hybridization it can make a better heat transfer fluid by combining
nanoparticles with better thermal conductivity and overcoming the disadvantage of increased viscosity
of the resulting fluids.
Nevertheless, further theoretical and experimental research investigations on the effective thermal
conductivity and viscosity are needed to demonstrate the potential of these new fluids and to understand
the heat transfer characteristics of hybrid nanofluids as well as to identify new and unique applications
for these fields.

NOTATIONS
cp —specific heat, J/kg K
D—hydraulic diameter, m
G—generation of turbulent kinetic energy due to mean velocity gradients
h—heat transfer coefficient, W/m2 K
k—thermal conductivity, W/m K
L—channel length, m
Nu—Nusselt number
P̄ —time-averaged flow variable
Pr—Prandtl number
q—wall heat flux, W/m2

JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING THERMOPHYSICS Vol. 27 No. 4 2018

 OVERVIEW OF HYBRID NANOFLUIDS DEVELOPMENT AND BENEFITS 513

r—ray, m
R—ray, R = D/2, m
Re—Reynolds number
T —temperature, K
t¯ —fluctuations in temperature
T̄ —time-averaged temperature
ū —fluctuations in velocity
v—axial velocity, m/s
v̄—time-averaged velocity

Greek Symbols
ε—rate of dissipation
ϕ—volume fraction of particles, %
κ—turbulent kinetic energy
ρ—density, kg/m3
σ—effective Prandtl numbers
μ—fluid dynamic viscosity, kg/ms

Subscripts
f —base-fluid
nf —nanofluid property
m—mean value
mexit—mean value on exit
r—nanofluid/base-fluid ratio
w—wall
ε—rate of dissipation
κ—turbulent kinetic energy

REFERENCES
1. Abbasi, S.M., Nemati, A., Rashidi, A., and Arzani, K., The Effect of Fictionalization Method on the Stability
and the Thermal Conductivity of Nanofluid Hybrids of Carbon Nanotubes/Gamma Alumina, Ceram. Int.,
2013, vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 3885–3891.
2. Batmunkh, M., Tanshen, M.R., Nine, M.J., Myekhlai, M., Choi, H., and Chung, H., Thermal Conductivity
of TiO2 Nanoparticles-Based Aqueous Nanofluids with an Addition of a Modified Silver Particle, Ind. Eng.
Chem. Res., 2014, vol. 53, no. 20, pp. 8445–8451.
3. Munkhbayar, B., Tanshen, M.R., Jeoun, J., Chung, H., and Jeong, H., Surfactant-Free Dispersion of Silver
Nanoparticles into MWCNT-Aqueous Nanofluids Prepared by One-Step Technique and Their Thermal
Characteristics, Ceram. Int., 2013, vol. 39, no. 6, pp. 6415–6425.
4. Aravind, S.S.J. and Ramaprabhu, S., Graphene Wrapped Multiwalled Carbon Nano-Tubes Dispersed
Nanofluids for Heat Transfer Applications, J. Appl. Phys., 2012, vol. 112, p. 124304.
5. Baghbanzadeh, M., Rashidi, A., Rashtchian, D., Lotfi, R., and Amrollahi, A., Synthesis of Spherical
Silica/Multiwall Carbon Nanotubes Hybrid Nanostructures and Investigation of Thermal Conductivity of
Related Nanofluids, Thermochim. Acta, 2012, vol. 549, pp. 87–94.
6. Baghbanzadeh, M., Rashidi, A., Soleimanisalim, A.H., and Rashtchian, D., Investigating the Rheological
Properties of Nanofluids of Water/Hybrid Nanostructure of Spherical Silica/MWCNT, Thermochim. Acta,
2014, vol. 578, pp. 53–58.
7. Botha, S.S., Ndungu, P., and Bladergroen, B.J., Physico-Chemical Properties of Oil-Based Nanofluids
Containing Hybrid Structures of Silver Nanoparticles Supported on Silica, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 2011,
vol. 50, pp. 3071–3077.

JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING THERMOPHYSICS Vol. 27 No. 4 2018

514 MINEA, MOLDOVEANU

8. Ho, C.J., Huang, J.B, Tsai, P.S., and Yang, Y.M., Preparation and Properties of Hybrid Water-Based
Suspension of Al2 O3 Nanoparticles and MEPCM Particles as Functional Forced Convection Fluid, Int.
Comm. Heat Mass Transfer, 2010, vol. 37, pp. 490–494.
9. Paul, G., Philip, J., Raj, B., Das, P.K., and Manna, I., Synthesis, Characterization, and Thermal Property
Measurement of Nano-Al95Zn05 Dispersed Nanofluid Prepared by a Two-Step Process, Int. J. Heat Mass
Transfer, 2011, vol. 54, pp. 3783–3788.
10. Suresh, S., Venkitaraj, K.P, Selvakumar, P., and Chandrasekar, M., Synthesis of Al2 O3 –Cu/Water Hybrid
Nanofluids Using Two-Step Method and Its Thermophysical Properties, Colloids Surf. A: Physicochem.
Eng. Asp., 2011, vol. 388, pp. 41–48.
11. Suresh, S., Venkitaraj, K.P., Selvakumar, P., and Chandrasekar, M., Effect of Al2 O3 –Cu/Water Hybrid
Nanofluid in Heat Transfer, Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci., 2012, vol. 38, pp. 54–60.
12. Kumar, M.S., Vasu, V., and Gopal, A.V., Thermal Conductivity and Viscosity of Vegetable Oil-Based Cu,
Zn, and Cu–Zn Hybrid Nanofluids, J. Test. Eval., 2015, vol. 44, pp. 1–8.
13. Sundar, L.S., Singh, M.K., Ramana, E.V., Singh, B.K., Gracio, J., and Sousa, A.C.M., Enhanced Thermal
Conductivity and Viscosity of Nanodiamond–Nickel Nanocomposite-Based Nanofluids, Sci. Rep., 2014,
vol. 4, pp. 1–13.
14. Nine, M.J., Batmunkh, M., Kim, J.H., Chung, H.S., and Jeong, H.M., Investigation of Al2 O3 –MWCNTs
Hybrid Dispersion in Water and Their Thermal Characterization, J. Nanosci. Nanotechnol., 2012, vol. 12,
pp. 4553–4559.
15. Baby, T.T. and Ramaprabhu, S., Experimental Investigation of the Thermal Transport Properties of a Carbon
Nanohybrid Dispersed Nanofluid, Nanoscale, 2011, vol. 3, pp. 2208–2214.
16. Sundar, L.S., Singh, M.K., and Sousa, A.C.M., Enhanced Heat Transfer and Friction Factor of MWCNT-
Fe3 O4 /Water Hybrid Nanofluids, Int. Comm. Heat Mass Transfer, 2014, vol. 52, pp. 73–83.
17. Jia, B.P., Gao, L., and Sun, J., Self-Assembly of Magnetite Beads along Multiwalled Carbon Nanotubes via
a Simple Hydrothermal Process, Carbon, 2007, vol. 45, pp. 1476–1481.
18. Madhesh, D., Parameshwaran, R., and Kalaiselvam, S., Experimental Investigation on Convective Heat
Transfer and Rheological Characteristics of Cu–TiO2 Hybrid Nanofluids, Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci., 2014,
vol. 52, pp. 104–115.
19. Sundar, L.S., Singh, M.K., and Sousa, A.C.M., Heat Transfer Enhancement of Low Volume Concentration
of Carbon Nanotube–Fe3 O4 /Water Hybrid Nanofluids in a Tube with Twisted Tape Inserts under Turbulent
Flow, J. Therm. Sci. Eng. Appl., 2015, vol. 7, pp. 1–12.
20. Han, W.S. and Rhi, S.H., Thermal Characteristics of Grooved Heat Pipe with Hybrid Nanofluids, Therm.
Sci., 2011, vol. 15, pp. 195–206.
21. Momin, G., Experimental Investigation of Mixed Convection with Water-Al2 O3 and Hybrid Nanofluid in
Inclined Tube for Laminar Flow, Int. J. Sci. Tech. Res., 2014, vol. 2, pp. 193–202.
22. Jana, S., Khojin, A.S., and Zhong, W.H., Enhancement of Fluid Thermal Conductivity by the Addition of
Single and Hybrid Nano-Additives, Thermochim. Acta, 2007, vol. 462, pp. 45–55.
23. Chen, L.F., Cheng, M., Yang, D.J., and Yang, L., Enhanced Thermal Conductivity of Nanofluid by Synergistic
Effect of Multi-Walled Carbon Nanotubes and Fe2 O3 Nanoparticles, Appl. Mech. Mat., 2014, vols. 548/549,
pp. 118–123.
24. Nimmagadda, R. and Venkatasubbaiah, K., Conjugate Heat Transfer Analysis of Micro-Channel Using
Novel Hybrid Nanofluids (Al2 O3 + Ag/Water), Eur. J. Mech. B/Fluids, 2015, vol. 52, pp. 19–27.
25. Esfe, M.H., Abbasian, A.A., Rezaie, M., Yan, W-M., and Karimipour, A., Experimental Determination of
Thermal Conductivity and Dynamic Viscosity of Ag–MgO/Water Hybrid Nanofluid, Int. Comm. Heat Mass
Transfer, 2015, vol. 66, pp. 189–195.
26. Esfe, M.H., Saedodin, S., and Mahmoodi, M., Experimental Studies on the Convective Heat Transfer
Performance and Thermophysical Properties of MgO–Water Nanofluid under Turbulent Flow, Exp. Therm.
Fluid Sci., 2014, vol. 52, pp. 68–78.
27. Esfe, M.H., Saedodin, S., Biglari, M., and Rostamian, H., An Experimental Study on Thermophysical
Properties and Heat Transfer Characteristics of Low Volume Concentrations of Ag–Water Nanofluid, Int.
Comm. Heat Mass Transfer, 2016, vol. 74, pp. 91–97.
28. Oztop, H.F. and Abu-Nada, E., Numerical Study of Natural Convection in Partially Heated Rectangular
Enclosures Filled with Nanofluids, Int. J. Heat Fl. Flow, 2008, vol. 29, pp. 1326–1336.

JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING THERMOPHYSICS Vol. 27 No. 4 2018