Timofeeva et al.

Nanoscale Research Letters 2011, 6:182

http://www.nanoscalereslett.com/content/6/1/182

NANO EXPRESS Open Access

Nanofluids for heat transfer: an engineering

approach
Elena V Timofeeva1*, Wenhua Yu1, David M France2, Dileep Singh3, Jules L Routbort1

Abstract
An overview of systematic studies that address the complexity of nanofluid systems and advance the
understanding of nanoscale contributions to viscosity, thermal conductivity, and cooling efficiency of nanofluids is
presented. A nanoparticle suspension is considered as a three-phase system including the solid phase
(nanoparticles), the liquid phase (fluid media), and the interfacial phase, which contributes significantly to the
system properties because of its extremely high surface-to-volume ratio in nanofluids. The systems engineering
approach was applied to nanofluid design resulting in a detailed assessment of various parameters in the
multivariable nanofluid systems. The relative importance of nanofluid parameters for heat transfer evaluated in this
article allows engineering nanofluids with desired set of properties.

Introduction and heat transfer in nanofluids. We believe that the

Suspensions of solid submicron- and nanometer-sized par- underestimated complexity and the controversy of nano-
ticles in various fluids (also called nanofluids) have been fluid systems is related to the solid/liquid boundary
considered for applications as advanced heat transfer fluids layers between nanoparticles and the liquid, which at
for almost two decades. However, due to the wide variety significant surface area of nanoparticles contribute to
and the complexity of the nanofluid systems, no agreement the fluid properties, resulting in three-phase systems.
has been achieved on the magnitude of potential benefits The approach to nanofluids as three-phase systems
of using nanofluids for heat transfer applications. Large (instead of traditional consideration of nanofluids as
volume of studies devoted to characterization of individual two-phase systems of solid and liquid) allows for deeper
thermo-physical properties of nanofluids, such as thermal understanding of correlations between the engineering
conductivity, viscosity, and agglomeration of nanoparticles, parameters, nanofluid properties, and cooling perfor-
has been summarized in a number of review articles [1-9]. mance. The factors contributing to the fluid cooling effi-
Evaluation of cooling efficiency, i.e., ability to remove ciency are discussed first, followed by a review of
heat from the heat source, includes assessing flow nanofluid engineering parameters and a brief analysis of
regime-dependent contributions from thermal conduc- their contributions to basic thermo-physical properties.
tivity, viscosity, specific heat, and density of the fluid Finally, a systems engineering approach is used to
and also depends on the applied flow regime. The stu- describe how various nanofluid parameters contribute to
dies devoted to evaluation of the heat transfer perfor- the cooling performance. The latter also offers insights
mance of nanofluids are scarce and inconclusive into the principles of the efficient nanofluid design.
compared to the studies on the thermo-physical proper-
ties of various nanofluids indicating a significant gap Cooling efficiency of nanofluids
between fundamental research and practical applications The initial promise of nanofluids as advanced heat
of nanofluids for thermal management. transfer fluids was based on the increased thermal con-
In this article we present a summary of systematic ductivity of nanoparticle suspensions. Low thermal con-
experimental studies of both thermo-physical properties ductivity of conventional fluids improves when the solid
particles are added. However, the magnitudes of the
* Correspondence: [email protected] effects reported in the literature are scattered from few
1
Energy Systems Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, percent (as predicted by effective medium theory (EMT)
IL 60439, USA.
Full list of author information is available at the end of the article [10-12]) to hundred percents per volume concentration

© 2011 Timofeeva et al; licensee Springer. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in
any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Timofeeva et al. Nanoscale Research Letters 2011, 6:182 Page 2 of 7
http://www.nanoscalereslett.com/content/6/1/182

of nanoparticles (i.e., abnormal enhancements [4,13,14]). The velocity term in Equation (3) also represents the
Theoretical works exploring the mechanisms that could pumping power penalties resulting from the increased
be responsible for abnormally enhanced thermal con- viscosity of nanofluids [16,20].
ductivities are widely presented in the literature [2,15]. For comparing two liquid coolants flowing in fully devel-
Unfortunately it is not always realized that the thermal oped turbulent flow regime over or through a given geo-
conductivity is not the only property that determines the metry at a fixed velocity the ratio of Mouromtseff values
efficiency of heat transfer in the system. In the forced (Mo) was suggested as a figure of merit [21,22]. The fluid
flow systems the coolant is pumped through the pipes with the highest Mo value will provide the highest heat
of a heat exchanger, introducing convective heat transfer transfer rate for cooling application. Based on the Dittus-
mechanisms and pumping power penalties. Efficiencies Boelter equation, Mo value can be expressed as:
of various liquid coolants depend on the fluid properties
and the flow mode (laminar or turbulent) and can be  0.8k 0.67c p0.33
estimated from the fluid dynamics equations [16]. In the Mo = ; Mo eff / Mo 0 > 1 (4)
 0.47
case of hydrodynamically and thermally fully developed
laminar flow, the heat transfer coefficient (h) is propor- Thus, the challenge in the development of nanofluids for
tional to the thermal conductivity (k), and independent heat transfer applications is in understanding of how
of the flow velocity (within the acceptable range of micro- and macroscale interactions between the particles
inlet/outlet temperature difference) [17]: and the fluid affect the properties of the fluid. This requires
a complex approach that accounts for changes in all impor-
h∝k (1)
tant thermo-physical properties caused by introduction of
An alternative merit criterion for laminar flow [18] nanomaterials to the fluid. It is obvious that the properties
was suggested, for situation, when the tube diameter of suspensions depend on many system variables (i.e., engi-
can be increased for the nanofluid to result in the same neering parameters) such as the nanoparticle material, con-
heat transfer coefficient: centration, size, and shape, the properties of the base fluid,
and the presence of additives, surfactants, electrolyte
 eff k eff strength, and pH. Below we discuss how each of the above
≈ 1 + C  ; ≈ 1 + C k ; C / Ck < 4 (2)
0 k0 parameters affects individual nanofluids properties.

where  is the particle volume concentration, μ is the Nanofluid engineering parameters

dynamic viscosity of the nanofluid (eff) and the base fluid Nanoparticles
(0), and Cμ and Ck are viscosity and thermal conductivity Great varieties of nanoparticles are commercially avail-
enhancement coefficients, determined from experimental able and can be used for preparation of nanofluids.
viscosity and thermal conductivity ratios. However, it is Nanoparticle material, concentration, size, and shape all
not very practical when efficiencies of two fluids are com- contribute to the nanofluid properties.
pared in the same system geometry (i.e., tube diameter). Nanoparticle material defines density, specific heat,
In turbulent flow regime the heat transfer rate (based and thermal conductivity of the solid phase contributing
on the Dittus-Boelter equation for heating applications) to nanofluids properties (subscripts p, 0, and eff refer to
is dependent not only upon the thermal conductivity nanoparticle, base fluid, and nanofluid, respectively) in
(k), but also on the density (r), specific heat (cp), viscos- proportion to the volume concentration of particles ():
ity (μ), and flow velocity (V) [16]:
 eff = (1 −  ) 0 +  p ; (5)
h ∝  4 /5c p2 /5 −2 /5k 3/5V 4 /5 (3)

(1 −  )(  c p ) 0 + (  c p ) p
Introduction of nanoparticles to the fluid affects all of
thermo-physical properties and should be accounted for ( c p ) eff = (1 −  ) 0 +  p
; (6)
in the nanofluid evaluations [18,19]. Density and specific
heat are proportional to the volume ratio of solid and
liquid in the system, generally with density increasing ⎛ k p + 2k 0 + 2(k p − k 0 ) ⎞
k eff = k 0 ⎜ ⎟,
and specific heat decreasing with addition of nanoparti- ⎜ k p + 2k 0 − (k p − k 0 ) ⎟ (7)
⎝ ⎠
cles to the fluid. According to Equation (3) the increase ( for the simplest case of spherical particles by EMT ) .
in density, specific heat, and thermal conductivity of
nanofluids favors the heat transfer coefficient; however, As it was mentioned previously the materials with the
the well-described increase in the viscosity of nanoparti- higher thermal conductivity, specific heat, and density
cle suspensions is not beneficial for heat transfer. are beneficial for heat transfer.
Timofeeva et al. Nanoscale Research Letters 2011, 6:182 Page 3 of 7
http://www.nanoscalereslett.com/content/6/1/182

The size of nanoparticles defines the surface-to-volume (defined by lower settling rates) improves if: (a) the den-
ratio and for the same volume concentrations suspension sity of the solid material (rp) is close to that of the fluid
of smaller particles will have a higher area of the solid/ (r0), (b) the viscosity of the suspension (μ) is high, and
liquid interface. Therefore, the contribution of interfacial (c) the particle radius (r) is small.
effects will be stronger in such a suspension [23,24]. Effects of the nanoparticles shapes on the thermal
Interactions between the nanoparticles and the fluid are conductivity and viscosity of alumina-EG/H2O suspen-
manifested through the interfacial thermal resistance, sions [24] are also strongly related to the total area of
also known as Kapitza resistance (R k ), which rises the solid/liquid interface. In nanofluids with non-spheri-
because interfaces act as an obstacle to heat flow and cal particles the thermal conductivity enhancements pre-
diminish the overall thermal conductivity of the system dicted by the Hamilton-Crosser equation [11] (randomly
[25]. The values of Kapitza resistance are constant for the arranged elongated particles provide higher thermal
particular solid/liquid interface defined by the strength of conductivities than spheres, EMT [29]) are diminished
solid-liquid interaction and can be correlated to the wet- by the negative contribution of the interfacial thermal
ting properties of the interface [25]. When the interac- resistance as the sphericity of nanoparticles decreases
tions between the nanoparticle surfaces and the fluid are [24]. Elongated particles and agglomerates also result in
weak (non-wetting case) the rates of energy transfer are higher viscosity at the same volume concentration as
small resulting in relatively large values of Rk. The overall spheres due to structural limitation of rotational and
contribution of the solid/liquid interface to the macro- transitional Brownian motion. Therefore, it can be con-
scopic thermal conductivity of nanofluids is negative and cluded that spherical particles or low aspect ratio spher-
was found proportional to the total area of the interface, oids are more practical for achieving lower viscosities in
increasing with decreasing particle sizes [24,26]. nanofluids–the property that is highly desirable for
The size of nanoparticles also affects the viscosity of minimizing the pumping power penalties in cooling sys-
nanofluids. In general, the viscosity increases as the tem applications.
volume concentration of particles increases. Studies of Base fluid
suspensions with the same volume concentration and The influence of base fluids on the thermo-physical
material of nanoparticles but different sizes [26,27] properties of suspensions is not very well studied and
showed that the viscosity of suspension increases as the understood. However, there are few publications indicat-
particle size decreases. This behavior is related to forma- ing some general trends of the base fluid effects.
tion of structured layers of the fluid along the nanopar- Suspensions of the same Al 2 O 3 nanoparticles in
ticle interfaces that move with the particles in the flow water, ethylene glycol (EG), glycerol, and pump oil
[28]. The thicknesses of those fluid layers depend on the showed increase in relative thermal conductivity (keff/
strength of particle-fluid interactions while the volume k 0 ) with decrease in thermal conductivity of the base
of immobilized fluid increases in proportion to the total fluid [23,30]. On the other hand, the alteration of the
area of the solid/liquid interface. The “effective volume base fluid viscosity [31] (from 4.2 to 5500 cP, by mix-
concentration” (immobile fluid and nanoparticles) is ing two with approximately the same thermal conduc-
higher in suspensions of smaller nanoparticles resulting tivity) resulted in decrease in the thermal conductivity
in higher viscosity. Therefore, contributions of interfacial of the Fe 2 O 3 suspension as the viscosity of the base
effects, negligible at micron particle sizes, become very fluid increased. Comparative studies of SiC suspen-
important for nanoparticle suspensions. To achieve ben- sions in water and 50/50 ethylene glycol/water mix-
efit for heat transfer, the suspensions of larger nanopar- ture with controlled particle sizes, concentration, and
ticles with the higher thermal conductivity and lower pH showed that relative change in thermal conductiv-
viscosity should be used. ity due to the introduction of nanoparticles is ~5%
A drawback of using larger nanoparticles is the poten- higher in EG/H 2 O than in H 2 O [27]. This effect can-
tial instability of nanofluids. Rough estimation of the not be explained simply by the lower thermal conduc-
settling velocity of nanoparticles (Vs) can be calculated tivity of the EG/H2O base fluid since the difference in
from Stokes law (only accounts for gravitational and enhancement values expected from EMT is less than
buoyant forces): 0.1% [15]. Therefore, the “base fluid effect” observed
in different nanofluid systems is most likely related to
2 ⎛ p − 0 ⎞ 2 the lower value of the interfacial thermal resistance
Vs = ⎜ ⎟ r g, (8)
9⎝  ⎠ (better wettability) in the EG/H 2 O than in the H 2 O-
based nanofluids.
where g is the gravitational acceleration. As one can Relative viscosity decreases with the increase of
see from Equation (8), the stability of a suspension the average particle size in both EG/H 2 O than in
Timofeeva et al. Nanoscale Research Letters 2011, 6:182 Page 4 of 7
http://www.nanoscalereslett.com/content/6/1/182

H2O-based suspensions. However, at the same volume with the temperature; however, it was shown that rela-
concentration of nanoparticles relative viscosity increase tive enhancement in the thermal conductivity due to
is smaller in the EG/H2O than in H2O-based nanofluids, addition of nanoparticles remains constant [29,36]. The
especially in suspensions of smaller nanoparticles [27]. viscosity of most fluids strongly depends on the tem-
According to the classic Einstein-Bachelor equation for perature, typically decreasing with increasing tempera-
hard non-interacting spheres [32], the percentage viscos- ture. It was noted in a couple of nanofluid systems that
ity increase should be independent of the viscosity of the relative increase in viscosity is reduced as tempera-
the base fluid and only proportional to the particle ture rises [26,27]. The fact of constant thermal conduc-
volume concentration. Therefore, the experimentally tivity increase and viscosity decrease with temperature
observed change in viscosity increase in base fluids can makes nanofluids technology very promising for high-
be related to the difference in structure and thickness of temperature application. The density and specific heat
immobilized fluid layers around the nanoparticles, of nanofluids change insignificantly within the practical
affecting the effective volume concentration and ulti- range of current cooling applications. Stability of nano-
mately the viscosity of the suspensions [24,26,27]. fluids could be improved with temperature increase due
Since both high thermal conductivity and low viscosity to increase in kinetic energy of particles, but heating
increases in nanofluids are important for heat transfer also may affect the suspension stability provided by elec-
performance, the nanofluids prepared from more vis- trostatic or/and steric methods. Further studies are
cous base fluids will have greater potential for practical needed in this area.
applications.
Viscosity increase in nanofluids was shown to depend Systems engineering approach to nanofluids
not only on the type of the base fluid, but also on the Systems engineering is an interdisciplinary field widely
pH value (in protonic fluids) that establishes zeta poten- used for designing and managing complex engineering
tial (charge at the particle’s slipping plane). Particles of project, where the properties of a system as a whole
the same charge repel each other minimizing the parti- may greatly differ from the sum of the parts’ properties
cle-particle interactions that strongly affect viscosity [37]. The decision matrix approach used in this study is
[24,26,33]. It was demonstrated that the viscosity of the a semi-quantitative technique for ranking multi-dimen-
alumina-based nanofluids can be decreased by 31% by sional nanofluid engineering options [38]. It also offers
only adjusting the pH of the suspension without affect- an alternative way to look at the inner workings of a
ing the thermal conductivity [24]. Nanoparticles in sus- nanofluid system and allows for design choices addres-
pensions can be well-dispersed (particles move sing the heat transfer demands of a given industrial
independently) or agglomerated (ensembles of particles application.
move together). Depending on the particle concentra- The correlations between the nanofluid engineering
tion and the magnitude of particle-particle interactions parameters and the nanofluid properties are schemati-
that are affected by pH, surfactant additives and particle cally presented in Figure 1 as discussed in the previous
size and shape, a dispersion/agglomeration equilibrium sections. Due to the described complexity of the nano-
establishes in nanoparticle suspension. Extended fluid systems, manipulation of the system performance
agglomerates can provide increased thermal conductivity requires identification of critical parameters and prop-
as described in the literature [34,35], but agglomeration erties of nanofluids. The trends in nanoparticle suspen-
and clustering of nanoparticles result in undesirable sions observed in our experimental work and reported
viscosity increase and/or settling of suspensions. in the literature discussed earlier in the article are
Introduction of other additives (salts and surfactants) arranged in a basic decision matrix (Table 1) with each
may also affect the zeta potential at the particle surfaces. engineering parameter in a separate column and the
Non-ionic surfactants provide steric insulation of nano- nanofluid properties listed in rows. Each cell in the
particles preventing Van der Waals interactions, while table represents the strength of the effect of a particu-
ionic surfactants may serve as both electrostatic and lar parameter to the nanofluid’s property with “x”, “▲”,
steric stabilization. The thermal conductivity of surfac- “○”, and “■” indicating no, weak, medium, and strong
tants is significantly lower than water and ethylene gly- dependence, respectively, that were scored as 0.0, 0.25,
col. Therefore, addition of such additives, while 0.5, and 1.0 correspondingly [38]. The relative impor-
improving viscosity, typically reduces the thermal con- tance of each nanofluid parameter can be estimated as
ductivity of suspension. a sum of the gained scores (Table 1). Based on that
It should be mentioned here that all thermo-physical the nanofluid engineering parameters can be arranged
properties have some temperature dependence. The by the decreasing importance for the heat transfer
thermal conductivity of fluids may increase or decrease performance: particle concentration > base fluid
Timofeeva et al. Nanoscale Research Letters 2011, 6:182 Page 5 of 7
http://www.nanoscalereslett.com/content/6/1/182

Figure 1 Schematic representation of the multivariability of a nanofluid system.

> nanoparticle size > nanoparticle material ≈ surface define the weighted importance and sensitivity of each
charge > temperature ≈ particle shape > additives > nanofluid property contributing to the heat transfer.
Kapitza resistance. This is an approximate ranking of
engineering parameters that assumes equal and inde- Summary
pendent weight of each of the nanofluid properties The article first identifies the thermo-physical properties
contributing to thermal transport. The advantage of of nanofluids that are important for heat transfer using the
this approach to decision making in nanofluid engi- fluid dynamics-based cooling efficiency criteria for single-
neering is that subjective opinions about the impor- phase fluids. Then the nanofluid engineering parameters
tance of one nanofluid parameter versus another can are reviewed in regards to their influence on the thermo-
be made more objective. physical properties of nanoparticle suspensions. The indi-
Applications of the decision matrix (Table 1) are not lim- vidual nanofluid parameter-property correlations are
ited to the design of new nanofluids; it also can be used as summarized and analyzed using the system engineering
guidance for improving the performance of existing nano- approach, which allows identifying the most influential
particle suspensions. While the particle material, size, nanofluid parameters. The relative importance of engi-
shape, concentration, and the base fluid parameters are neering parameters resulted from such analysis suggests
fixed in a given nanofluid, the cooling performance still can the potential nanofluid design options. Importantly, the
be improved by remaining adjustable nanofluid parameters criteria are not weighted to allow a quick selection pro-
in order of their relative importance, i.e., by adjusting the cess. The nanoparticle concentration, base fluid, and parti-
zeta potential and/or by increasing the test/operation tem- cle size appear to be the most influential parameters for
peratures in the above case. Further studies are needed to improving the heat transfer efficiency of nanofluid.
 http://www.nanoscalereslett.com/content/6/1/182
Timofeeva et al. Nanoscale Research Letters 2011, 6:182
Table 1 Systems engineering approach to nanofluid design
ENGINEERING Nanoparticle Nanoparticle Nanoparticle Nanoparticle Base Zeta potential/ Kapitza Additives Temperature
PARAMETERS material concentration shape size fluid fluid pH resistance
NANOFLUID
PROPERTIES
Stability ⇑ ▲ ▲ ▲ ■↓ ○ ■ x ■ ?
Density ⇑ ■ ■↑ x x ■ x x x x
Specific Heat ⇑ ■ ■↓ x x ■ x x x ▲
Thermal ⇑ ○ ■↑ ○ ■↑ ▲ ○ ■↓ ▲ ○
Conductivity
Viscosity ⇓ ▲ ■↓ ■ ■↓ ■↑ ■ x ○ ■
Heat Transfer ⇑ ■ ■↑* ■ ■↑ ■ ■ ■↓ ○ ■
Coefficient
Pumping Power ⇓ x ■ ■ ■↑ ■ ■ x ○ ■
Penalty

Relative 4.0 6.25 3.75 5.0 5.25 4.0 2.0 2.75 3.75
Importance
Symbols:
■- strong dependence; ○- medium dependence; ▲- weak dependence; x - no dependence; ? - unknown or varies from system to system; ⇑ - larger the better;⇓ - smaller the better; ↑- increase with increase in
parameter; ↓- decrease with increase in parameter; *-within the linear property increase.

Page 6 of 7
Timofeeva et al. Nanoscale Research Letters 2011, 6:182 Page 7 of 7
http://www.nanoscalereslett.com/content/6/1/182

Abbreviations 14. Trisaksri V, Wongwises S: Critical review of heat transfer characteristics of

EG: ethylene glycol; EMT: effective medium theory. nanofluids. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2007, 11(3):512-523.
15. Yu W, France DM, Singh D, Timofeeva EV, Smith DS, Routbort JL:
Acknowledgements Mechanisms and models of effective thermal conductivities of
This study is funded by the DOE Industrial Technology Program nanofluids. J Nanosci Nanotechnol 2010, 10:1-26.
#M68008852. Argonne National Laboratory is a US Department of Energy 16. Yu W, France DM, Timofeeva EV, Singh D, Routbort JL: Thermophysical
Office of Science Laboratory under contract number DE-AC02-06CH11357 by property-related comparison criteria for nanofluid heat transfer
UChicago Argonne, LLC. enhancement in turbulent flow. Appl Phys Lett 2010, 96:213109-3.
17. Etherington H, (Ed): Nuclear Engineering Handbook New York, USA: McGraw-
Author details Hill Book Company, Inc; 1958.
1
Energy Systems Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, 18. Prasher R, Song D, Wang JL, Phelan P: Measurements of nanofluid
IL 60439, USA. 2Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, viscosity and its implications for thermal applications. Appl Phys Lett
University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL 60607, USA. 3Nuclear Engineering 2006, 89(13):133108-133110.
Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL 60439, USA. 19. Murshed SMS, Leong KC, Yang C: Investigations of thermal conductivity
and viscosity of nanofluids. Int J Therm Sci 2008, 47(5):560-568.
Authors’ contributions 20. Routbort JL, Singh D, Timofeeva EV, Yu W, France DM: Pumping power of
ET carried out the preparation and testing of thermo-physical properties of nanofluids in a flowing system. J Nanopart Res 2011, 12, published online.
nanofluids and drafted the manuscript. WY carried out the testing of the 21. Mouromtseff IE: Water and forced-air cooling of vacuum tubes.
heat transfer coefficients of the fluids and developed a basis for the proper Proceedings of the Institute of Radio Engineers 1942, 190-205.
comparison of the heat transfer properties. DF participated in the design of 22. Simons RE: Comparing heat transfer rates of liquid coolants using the
the study and analysis of cooling efficiency. DS and JR participated in the Mouromtseff number. Electron Cooling 2006, 12: [http://electronics-cooling.
design and coordination of the study and discussion of the results. All com/articles/2006/2006_may_cc.php].
authors read and approved the final manuscript. 23. Xie HQ, Wang JC, Xi TG, Liu Y, Ai F, Wu QR: Thermal conductivity
enhancement of suspensions containing nanosized alumina particles.
Competing interests J Appl Phys 2002, 91(7):4568-4572.
The authors declare that they have no competing interests. 24. Timofeeva EV, Routbort JL, Singh D: Particle shape effects on
thermophysical properties of alumina nanofluids. J Appl Phys 2009,
Received: 4 November 2010 Accepted: 28 February 2011 106:014304, (10 pp).
Published: 28 February 2011 25. Barrat JL, Chiaruttini F: Kapitza resistance at the liquid-solid interface. Mol
Phys 2003, 101:1605-1610.
References 26. Timofeeva EV, Smith DS, Yu W, France DM, Singh D, Routbort JL: The
1. Ozerinc S, Kakac S, Yazicioglu AG: Enhanced thermal conductivity of particle size and interfacial effects on thermo-physical and heat transfer
nanofluids: a state-of-the-art review. Microfluid Nanofluid 2010, 8(2):145-170. characteristics of water based a-SiC nanofluids. Nanotechnology 2010,
2. Chandrasekar M, Suresh S: A review on the mechanisms of heat transport 21(21):215703-215713.
in nanofluids. Heat Transf Eng 2009, 30(14):1136-1150. 27. Timofeeva EV, Yu W, France DM, Singh D, Routbort JL: Base fluid and
3. Li YJ, Zhou JE, Tung S, Schneider E, Xi SQ: A review on development of temperature effects on the heat transfer characteristics of SiC in EG/H2O
nanofluid preparation and characterization. Powder Technol 2009, and H2O nanofluids. J Appl Phys 2011, 109:014914, (5 pp).
196(2):89-101. 28. Li L, Zhang YW, Ma HB, Yang M: An investigation of molecular layering at
4. Yu W, France DM, Routbort JL, Choi SUS: Review and comparison of the liquid-solid interface in nanofluids by molecular dynamics
nanofluid thermal conductivity and heat transfer enhancements. Heat simulation. Phys Lett A 2008, 372(25):4541-4544.
Transf Eng 2008, 29(5):432-460. 29. Timofeeva EV, Gavrilov AN, McCloskey JM, Tolmachev YV, Sprunt S,
5. Cheng LX, Bandarra EP, Thome JR: Nanofluid two-phase flow and thermal Lopatina LM, Selinger JV: Thermal conductivity and particle
physics: a new research frontier of nanotechnology and its challenges. agglomeration in alumina nanofluids: experiment and theory. Phys Rev E
J Nanosci Nanotechnol 2008, 8(7):3315-3332. 2007, 76:061203-061216.
6. Murshed SMS, Leong KC, Yang C: Thermophysical and electrokinetic 30. Xie HQ, Wang JC, Xi TG, Liu Y, Ai F: Dependence of the thermal
properties of nanofluids–a critical review. Appl Therm Eng 2008, 28(17- conductivity of nanoparticle-fluid mixture on the base fluid. J Mater Sci
18):2109-2125. Lett 2002, 21(19):1469-1471.
7. Choi SUS: Nanofluids: from vision to reality through research. J Heat 31. Tsai TH, Kuo LS, Chen PH, Yang CT: Effect of viscosity of base fluid on
Transf Trans ASME 2009, 131(3):033106, (9 pp). thermal conductivity of nanofluids. Appl Phys Lett 2008, 93(23):233121, (3 pp).
8. Wen DS, Lin GP, Vafaei S, Zhang K: Review of nanofluids for heat transfer 32. Vold RD, Vold MJ: Colloid and Interface Chemistry Reading, MA: Addison-
applications. Particuology 2009, 7(2):141-150. Wesley Publishing Company, Inc; 1983.
9. Wang XQ, Mujumdar AS: Heat transfer characteristics of nanofluids: a 33. Zhao JF, Luo ZY, Ni MJ, Cen KF: Dependence of nanofluid viscosity on
review. Int J Therm Sci 2007, 46(1):1-19. particle size and pH value. Chin Phys Lett 2009, 26(6):066202, (3 pp).
10. Maxwell JC: A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism Oxford, UK: Clarendon; 1873. 34. Prasher R, Evans W, Meakin P, Fish J, Phelan P, Keblinski P: Effect of
11. Hamilton RL, Crosser OK: Thermal conductivity of heterogeneous two- aggregation on thermal conduction in colloidal nanofluids. Appl Phys Lett
component systems. Ind Eng Chem Fundam 1962, 1(3):187-191. 2006, 89(14):143119, (3 pp).
12. Buongiorno J, Venerus DC, Prabhat N, McKrell T, Townsend J, 35. Eapen J, Rusconi R, Piazza R, Yip S: The classical nature of thermal
Christianson R, Tolmachev YV, Keblinski P, Hu LW, Alvarado JL, Bang IC, conduction in nanofluids. J Heat Transf Trans ASME 2010, 132(10):102402,
Bishnoi SW, Bonetti M, Botz F, Cecere A, Chang Y, Chen G, Chen H, (14 pp).
Chung SJ, Chyu MK, Das SK, Paola RD, Ding Y, Dubois F, Dzido G, Eapen J, 36. Singh D, Timofeeva E, Yu W, Routbort J, France D, Smith D, Lopez-
Escher W, Funfschilling D, Galand Q, Gao J, Gharagozloo PE, Goodson KE, Cepero JM: An investigation of silicon carbide-water nanofluid for heat
Gutierrez JG, Hong H, Horton M, Hwang KS, Iorio CS, Jang SP, Jarzebski AB, transfer applications. J Appl Phys 2009, 105(6):064306, (6 pp).
Jiang Y, Jin L, Kabelac S, Kamath A, Kedzierski MA, Kieng LG, Kim C, Kim JH, 37. Kossiakoff A, Sweet WN: Systems engineering: principles and practice. In
Kim S, Lee SH, Leong KC, Manna I, Michel B, Ni R, Patel HE, Philip J, Systems Engineering and Management. Edited by: Sage A. New York: Wiley-
Poulikakos D, Reynaud C, Savino R, Singh PK, Song P, Sundararajan T, IEEE; 2003:463.
Timofeeva EV, Tritcak T, Turanov AN, Vaerenbergh SV, Wen D, Witharana S, 38. Pugh S, Clausing D, Andrade R: Creating Innovative Products Using Total
Yang C, Yeh WH, Zhao XZ, Zhou SQ: A benchmark study on the thermal Design: The Living Legacy of Stuart Pugh Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Pub.
conductivity of nanofluids. J Appl Phys 2009, 106(9):094312. Co; 1996.
13. Kabelac S, Kuhnke JF: Heat transfer mechanisms in nanofluids–
doi:10.1186/1556-276X-6-182
experiments and theory. Annals of the Assembly for International Heat Cite this article as: Timofeeva et al.: Nanofluids for heat transfer: an
Transfer Conference 2006, 13:KN-11. engineering approach. Nanoscale Research Letters 2011 6:182.