4.5 Article

Three-level homogeneous model for the study of heat transfer mechanism in metallic nanofluids

期刊

PHYSICA B-CONDENSED MATTER
卷 662, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.physb.2023.414973

关键词

Thermal conductivity; Nanofluids; Brownian diffusion; Base fluid

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To explain heat conduction mechanism in nanofluids, existing models have been analyzed but none of them accurately predict the variation of thermal conductivity with volume concentration. In this study, the static and dynamic contributions of nanoparticles in the base fluid are found to be responsible for its conductivity. A new model, which incorporates the effects of nanoparticle shape, size, allocation, temperature, junction layer, congregate pattern, and Brownian diffusion, is proposed to predict the exact mechanism of thermal conductivity of nanofluids. The proposed model shows good agreement with experimental data when applied to various nanofluids at different volume concentrations.
To explain heat conduction mechanism in nanofluids, different existing models have been analysed, but none of these can predict exact variation of thermal conductivity with volume concentration. In present study, it is found that the static and dynamic contributions of nanoparticles in the base fluid are responsible for its conductivity. Unfortunately, these both aspects have not been included in any of the existing model. We have modified the Xuan model including effect of shape and size of nanoparticles (static contribution) and allocation of nanoparticles, temperature, junction layer, congregate pattern, and Brownian diffusion (dynamic contribution) to propose a new model which can predict the exact mechanism of thermal conductivity of nfs. We have tested the proposed model to compute the thermal conductivity of Al2O3, ZnO, Ag, CuO, Co3O4 and Fe2O3 based nanofluids at different volume concentrations. Computed results using our proposed model are in very good agreement with experimental data.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据