4.7 Article

Experimental investigation of nanofluid stability on thermal performance and flow regimes in pulsating heat pipe

Journal

JOURNAL OF THERMAL ANALYSIS AND CALORIMETRY
Volume 135, Issue 3, Pages 1835-1847

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10973-018-7388-3

Keywords

Pulsating heat pipe (PHP); Titania; water nanofluid; Graphene; water nanofluid; Flow patterns; regimes; Thermal performance

Funding

  1. Iran National Science Foundation (INSF) [940017]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Pulsating heat pipe (PHP) is a type of wickless heat pipe that has a simple structure and an outstanding thermal performance. Nanofluid is a type of fluid in which nanoparticles are dispersed in a base fluid and have generally a better thermal conductivity in comparison with its base fluid. In this article, the performance of a nanofluid PHP is investigated. Graphene/water nanofluid with a concentration of 1mgmL(-1) and TiO2 (titania)/water nanofluid with a concentration of 10mgmL(-1) are used as the working fluids. To simultaneously investigate the thermal performance and flow regimes in the PHP, a one-turn copper PHP with a Pyrex glass attached to its adiabatic section is used. A one-turn Pyrex PHP is also used to fully visualize flow patterns in the PHP. Our results show that the material for the fabrication of a PHP and temperature of the working fluid are the most important parameters that affect the stability of a nanofluid in the PHP. The more stable nanofluid keeps its stability in the cupper PHP, while the less stable nanofluid starts to aggregate right after the injection to the cupper PHP. The more stable nanofluid has a better thermal performance than water, while the less stable nanofluid has a worse thermal performance than water. In the case of flow regimes, no significant differences are observed between the nanofluid PHP and the water PHP which is different from the previous observations. These results can help researchers to choose the best working fluid for PHPs.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available