Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 66 (2015) 46–52

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science

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

Experimental study on heat transfer characteristics of R600a/POE/CuO

nano-refrigerant flow condensation
M.A. Akhavan-Behabadi a,⇑, M.K. Sadoughi a, Milad Darzi a, M. Fakoor-Pakdaman b
a
Center of Excellence in Design and Optimization of Energy Systems, School of Mechanical Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
b
Laboratory for Alternative Energy Conversion (LAEC), School of Mechatronic Systems Engineering, Simon Fraser University, Surrey, BC, Canada

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

Article history: An experimental study is carried out on heat transfer characteristics of a nano-refrigerant flow during
Received 27 September 2014 condensation inside a horizontal smooth tube. Experiments are conducted for three different working
Received in revised form 25 February 2015 fluid types including: (i) pure refrigerant (R600a); (ii) refrigerant/lubricant (R600a/oil); and (iii) nano-
Accepted 28 February 2015
refrigerant: refrigerant/lubricant/nanoparticles (R600a/oil/CuO). Polyolester oil (POE) is utilized as the
Available online 27 March 2015
lubricant in the two latter cases. In addition, nano-refrigerants (R600a/oil/CuO) are prepared by dispers-
ing CuO nanoparticles with different mass fractions of 0.5%, 1% and 1.5% in the baseline mixture (R600a/
Keywords:
oil). The implemented experiments covered a wide range of variables including: (i) mass fluxes from
Condensation
R600a
154.8 to 265.4 kg/m2/s; (ii) vapor qualities between 10% and 80%; (iii) heat flux from 17 to 20 kW/m2;
Heat transfer and (iv) condensation pressure from 5.1 to 6.2 bar. It is shown that significant heat transfer enhancement
Nano-refrigerant is achieved by adding nanoparticles to the baseline mixture and pure refrigerant. The maximum heat
transfer augmentation was observed for nano-refrigerant with 1.5% mass fraction; 83% higher heat trans-
fer rate compared to pure-refrigerant fluid flow at the same experimental conditions.
Ó 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction TiO2 nanoparticles could be used as additives to enhance the solu-

bility between mineral oil and HFC refrigerant.
Dispersing nanoparticles of solid materials in conventional Studies on nano-refrigerants indicated that mixing proper mass
fluids, nanofluids, is a promising method to enhance the thermal fraction of nano-particles and refrigerant caused enhancement in
properties of working fluids in thermodynamic cycles. the convective heat transfer coefficient [6–9]. Peng. et al. [7] stud-
Nanoparticles are commonly metal oxides, metals, or carbon based ied the flow boiling heat transfer characteristics of CuO nanoparti-
particles which should be less than 100 nm at least in two dimen- cles in R113 and showed that heat transfer coefficient enhanced up
sions (for CNT the length of particles may exceed some microme- to 29.7% by applying refrigerant-based nanofluid. Park and Jung
ters). Experimental studies showed that nanofluids have higher [8,10] reported the maximum heat transfer augmentation of
thermal conductivity compared to host fluids [1–3]. As such, 36.6% in pool boiling of CNT nanorefrigerant with the base fluids
nano-refrigerant has been proposed based on the concept of of R22, R123 and R134. However, according to some other studies,
nanofluids while its host fluid is a commercial refrigerant. Higher utilizing nanoparticles led to deterioration in pool boiling heat
thermal conductivity of refrigerant-based nanofluids compared to transfer. Trisaksri and Wongwises [11] showed the nucleate pool
conventional refrigerants was confirmed by many researchers, boiling heat transfer of HCFC-1416 declined with increasing TiO2
e.g., [4,5]. Jiang et al. [4] showed that the thermal conductivity of nanoparticles concentrations, especially at higher heat fluxes.
1 vol% fraction CNT-R-113 nano-refrigerants was up to 82% higher Tang et al. [12] carried out an experimental investigation on nucle-
than the pure refrigerant. It was also stated that the thermal con- ate pool boiling heat transfer characteristics of Al2O3/R-141b
ductivity of CNT-R113 nano-refrigerants are much larger compared nanofluids on a horizontal flat square copper surface under atmo-
to CNT-water nanofluids. In addition, the solubility between the spheric pressure and heat fluxes between 10 and 200 kW/m2. The
lubricant and the refrigerant can be enhanced by nanoparticles. Al2O3 nanoparticles at various concentration of 0.001 vol%,
An experimental investigation by Weng et al. [5] showed that 0.01 vol% and 0.1 vol% with and without surfactant SDBS were uti-
lized. As such, pool boiling heat transfer of R141b enhanced at
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +98 21 88005677; fax: +98 21 88013029. 0.001 vol% and 0.01 vol% of nanoparticles with and without the
E-mail address: akhavan@ut.ac.ir (M.A. Akhavan-Behabadi). surfactant SDBS. However, at 0.1 vol% of nanoparticles without

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.expthermflusci.2015.02.027
0894-1777/Ó 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
 M.A. Akhavan-Behabadi et al. / Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 66 (2015) 46–52 47

Nomenclature

x mass fraction Subscripts

x quality in inlet
Q heat evaporator heat transfer rate [W] o oil
h enthalpy [J/kg] r refrigerant
Q test condenser heat transfer rate [W] out outlet
m mass flow rate [kg/s] w water
Cp specific heat [J/kg/K] no nominal concentration
T temperature [K] loc local concentration
h heat transfer coefficient [W/m2/K] s surface
A area [m2] wall tube wall
D diameter [m] Th thermocouple
G mass velocity [kg/m2/s]

the surfactant SDBS, pool boiling heat transfer of R-141b declined condenser, post condenser, bypass path and flow meter. The hea-
due to large deposition of nanoparticles. ters are applied before the test condenser in order to reach desired
Most of the available literature on heat transfer characteristics values of vapor quality. The heaters are two 3 kW electrical resis-
of nano-refrigerants was focused on: (i) pool boiling [12,13]; and tances which are insulated by glass wool pads. As such, the desired
(ii) boiling heat transfer characteristics of nano-refrigerants values of inlet vapor qualities to the test section could be achieved.
[14,15]. However, to the best knowledge of the authors, no study The test condenser is a shell and tube counter flow heat exchanger
has been done so far to investigate the condensation characteristics with 8.7 cm inner tube diameter. The working fluid flows inside
of a nano-refrigerant inside a channel. The only study related to the internal tube and the cooled-water flows in the annulus. In
condensation of nanofluids in open literature, Wang et al. [16], order to measure the temperature of the tube external surface,
was focused on the effects of nanoparticles on condensation of k-type thermocouples with the accuracy of ±1 °C are mounted at
R410a in an air conditioner. Refrigerant properties affect thermal six locations along the test section with four thermocouples at
characteristics of the two-phase flow and they have environmental top, bottom and sides of the tube at each location. The values of
impact. The use of CFC, HCFC and HFC refrigerants outlawed in the 4 peripheral thermocouples are averaged to report the tube
Montreal protocol (1987) and Kyoto protocol 1997 according to surface temperature at each location. Furthermore, to calculate
their ozone depletion and global warming potentials, respectively the heat exchange between the refrigerant and cooling water,
[17]. However, natural refrigerants such as ammonia (R717), two calibrated RTD PT100 temperature sensors of ±0.1 °C accuracy
hydrocarbons (R600a), water, CO2 were introduced as alternatives are located at the inlet and outlet of the annulus. Inlet and outlet
[18]. In this study, hydrocarbon refrigeration, Isobutene (R600a) pressures of the test section are measured by EN 837-1 Wika
was chosen due to its appropriate thermodynamic features, high model pressure gauges, with the accuracy of 10 kPa, and the pres-
energy efficiency, negligible ozone depletion, and global warming sure drop along the test section is measured by a PDM-75 pressure
potentials [19–21]. transducer sensor (DP), which is calibrated by the factory, Endress
In commercial systems, compressors are usually lubricated Hauser, for up to 150 kPa.
using oil in different parts of the device and a small portion of The post condenser is a counter flow heat exchanger with a
the oil might leak into the working fluid. However, in most pre- 12 m coiled tube. A cylindrical shell is installed downstream of
vious studies, nanoparticles were added directly to refrigerants the test condenser as a receiver to ensure that the working fluid
without presence of oil [7,22]. To address such deficiency in litera- is liquid before it enters the gear pump. A magnetically gear pump
ture, in this study, nanoparticles are dispersed into the lubricant oil drives the pure refrigerant/baseline mixture/nano-refrigerant in
and then are mixed with the refrigerant. The main objective of the the system and compensates for the pressure drop. Then, the fluid
present study is to experimentally investigate the condensation flows back to heaters to be heated up and evaporates again. The
heat transfer characteristics of nano-refrigerant flow inside a hori- mass velocity of the working fluid is adjusted by an inventor,
zontal plain tube. As such, the convective heat transfer coefficient which is connected to the gear pump. A Fischer rotameter with
of R600a/oil/CuO nano-refrigerant condensing in a horizontal the accuracy within 1% of full scale is set to measure the flow rate
smooth tube is measured experimentally for a wide range of of the working fluid. The pure-refrigerant is Isobutene (R600a)
parameters: (i) mass fluxes from 154.8 to 265.4 kg/m2/s; (ii) vapor with the purity of 99.5%. In addition, the lubricant is selected to
qualities between 10% and 80%; (iii) heat flux from 17 to 20 kW/ be Polyolester oil (POE). The lubricant or the homogenized blend
m2; and (iv) condensation pressure from 5.1 to 6.2 bar. The of lubricant/nanoparticles is injected to the pure refrigerant flow-
obtained results for the heat transfer characteristics of nano-re- ing inside the system via the bypass line. As such, the base-line
frigerants are then compared with those of the pure refrigerant, mixture (R600a/oil) or nano-refrigerant flows (R600a/oil/CuO) are
and the baseline mixture (R600a/oil). Significant heat transfer formed. To that end, first the two ball valves in the bypass direction
enhancement, up to 83%, is observed as a result of dispersing the are shut down and the path is vacuumed by a vacuum pump using
nanoparticles inside the pure refrigerant and baseline mixture. a needle valve located between the two ball valves. Afterwards, the
lubricant or the mixture of lubricant/nanoparticles is injected to
2. Experiment the bypass line by a syringe from a valve which is installed
between the ball and needle valves. Finally by blocking the injec-
2.1. Experimental apparatus tion valve and opening the right ball valve, oil or oil/nanoparticles
are mixed with the refrigerant passing through the experimental
A schematic of the fabricated experimental setup is shown in setup. Subsequently the pump works for 4 h in order to homoge-
Fig. 1. The main elements of the setup are gear pump, heaters, test nize the mixture. For validating the accuracy and reliability of
48 M.A. Akhavan-Behabadi et al. / Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 66 (2015) 46–52

Fig. 1. A schematic of the fabricated experimental setup.

the experimental system, heat transfer data for pure R600a are Table 2
obtained and compared to the correlations in the literature; see Uncertainty of the experimental parameters.
Section 4 for more detail. Parameters Uncertainty
Tube diameter ±0.05 mm
2.2. Working fluids Tube length ±0.5 mm
Temperature ±1 °C
Pressure ±5 kPa
The refrigerant R600a is used as the refrigerant due to its low Heat transfer coefficient 6%
global warming and ozone depletion potential compared to other
conventional refrigerants. R600a is considered as one of the most
environmentally friendly refrigerants [23,24] Polyolester oil 12 h. Therefore, the experiments for each sample mixture are
(POE) with commercial name of RL68H is applied as the lubricant implemented for less than 8 h. Following the methods presented
added to the pure refrigerant by 1% mass fraction to form the base- by Schultz et al. [25], Table 2 shows the uncertainties of the instru-
line mixture. POE is completely soluble in Isobutene refrigerant ments and calculated parameters. According to the Schultz
and has the nominal kinematic viscosity of 72.3 lm2/s at 40 °C, approach, the uncertainty of the desired parameter like R would
as reported by the manufacturer. The nanoparticles that are used be derived by the following equation:
in this study are copper oxide (CuO) with approximate scale of "  2 #1=2
50 nm. This nanoparticle with the mass fraction of 0.5%, 1% and X
n
@R
UR ¼ UV i ð1Þ
1.5% is dispersed in oil (by a digital electronic balance with the i¼1
@V i
maximum error of 0.1 mg). By using the ultrasonic device
(UP400S, Hielscher GmbH) the mixture of oil and nanoparticles which UR is the total uncertainty, U V i is the uncertainty of each
are made for one hour, at 400 W and 20 kHz to approach the well independent variable and n is the number of total variables.
dispersed mixture. Then the mixture of oil/nanoparticles is Each experiment had been repeated for two times. If the results
injected to the pure refrigerant. The dispersion of the nanofluid is had the proper coincidence, then the mean of them were reported.
visually studied and no sedimentation and remarkable accumula- But if the result had a noticeable difference, the testing procedure
tion is indicated for about 12 h after the dispersion process. To was repeated for third time.
avoid the effect of surfactant on heat transfer performance during
condensing; it is not used for stabilization. A sight glass section 3. Data reduction
was installed in the system in order to capture the deposition of
the nanofluid. However, a small quantity of deposition was For evaluating the percentage of oil in mixture, nominal oil con-
observed during the operation, this amount was ignorable. The centration is defined as:
characteristics of these nanoparticles are presented in Table 1. It mo
is observed that the nano-refrigerants are stable for more than xno ¼ ð2Þ
mo þ mR
where mo and mR are the mass flow rate of oil and refrigerant,
Table 1 respectively. Local oil concentration is determined as the percent-
Nanoparticle specifications as specified by the manufacturer EPRUI Nanoparticles and
Microspheres Co.
age of oil in liquid phase of mixture.
mo xno
Isobaric Purity Density Diameter Thermal xloc ¼ ¼ ð3Þ
specific (%) (g/cm3) (nm) conductivity mo þ mR;L 1  xR;o
heat (J/kg/K]) (W/m/K)
where mR;L ; xR;o and xloc are the mass flow rate of refrigerant liquid,
550.5 99.8 6.32 40 32.9
the quality of oil/refrigerant mixture, and Local oil concentration,
 M.A. Akhavan-Behabadi et al. / Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 66 (2015) 46–52 49

respectively. Vapor quality of the mixture can be determined by 6000

Predicted heat transfer coefficient [W/m K]

calculating the mixture enthalpy at each point along the test

2
condenser.
5000
ðmo þ mR ÞhR;o  mo ho  mR hR;l +15%
xR;0 ¼ ð4Þ
ðmo þ mR ÞðhR;V  hR;L Þ
4000
where xR;0 ; hR;o ; ho ; hR;l and hR;V are the vapor quality of the mixture, -15%
enthalpy of the mixture, enthalpy of oil, enthalpy of the refrigerant
liquid, and vapor phase, respectively. The enthalpy at the inlet and 3000

outlet of the test condenser is computed as given below.

Q heat 2000
hR;o;in ¼ hR;o;1 þ ð5Þ
mo þ mR
1000
Q test
hR;o;out ¼ hR;o;in  ð6Þ Shah 2008
mo þ mR
0
where hR,o,in and hR,o,out are the inlet and outlet enthalpy of the test 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
section respectively. hR,o,1 is the enthalpy of the mixture at the inlet Experimental heat transfer coefficient [W/m2 K]
of the heater which can be specified using the temperature and
pressure at this point. It should be noted that at this point the Fig. 2. Comparison of the obtained experimental data for heat transfer coefficients
refrigerant is single phase. In addition, Qheat is the heating capacity of pure refrigerant with Shah correlation [16].

of the preheating section that leads to two phase condition at the

inlet of the test condenser. Qtest is the heat exchange rate in the test
[26]; an error band of ±15%. This reasonable agreement verifies
section which can be defined by considering the temperature differ-
the accuracy of the experimental setup.
ence and mass velocity of the cooling water in the heat exchanger,
Fig. 3 shows the effect of mass flux on the condensing heat
Eq. (7).
transfer coefficients of the applied working fluids against the vapor
Q test ¼ mw C p;w ðT in  T out Þ ð7Þ quality for both of Shah correlation [25] and the obtained experi-
mental data. It can be seen that the heat transfer coefficient
where mw, Cp,w, Tin and Tout are cooling water mass velocity, specific
increases with vapor quality and mass flux. This happens due to
heat ratio of water, temperature at the inlet, and outlet of the cool-
the decrease in the thickness of the liquid film on the inner tube
ing water, respectively. By using the above equations the average
wall which in turn reduces the thermal resistance and increases
vapor quality along the test section can be determined.
the turbulent interaction between the vapor and liquid phases in
ðxR;o Þin þ ðxR;o Þout liquid–vapor interface. These trends are also similar to the pre-
ðxR;o Þav e ¼ ð8Þ vious conducted studies, see [8,27].
2
Fig. 4 depicts the condensation heat transfer coefficient of dif-
A condensing heat transfer coefficient for the test section is
ferent working fluids against the vapor quality at mass flux of
defined as:
221 kg/m2 s. As such, For evaluating the effect of nanoparticles
Q test on condensing heat transfer coefficient, experiments are conducted
h¼ ð9Þ
Ai ðT s  T wall Þ for three different working fluid types including: (i) pure refriger-
ant (R600a); (ii) refrigerant/oil (R600a/oil); and (iii) nanoparticle/
where Ai, Ts and Twall are the area of heat transfer exchange, wall
temperature of the inner tube surface and saturated temperature
of refrigerant by considering the test condenser operating pressure,
respectively. To consider the effects of the tube wall thickness
on the heat transfer rate Twall is calculated by the following
relationship.
 
Do
T wall ¼ T th þ Q r ln =2pLK copper ð10Þ
Di
where Tth, Do, Di, L and Kcopper are the average temperature of the
peripheral thermocouples at each location along the test condenser
surface, outer tube diameter, inner tube diameter, length of test
condenser, and tube thermal conductivity, respectively. In fact,
the difference between Tth and Twall is insignificant due to high con-
ductive heat transfer coefficient of copper.

4. Results and discussion

The experimental heat transfer coefficients of pure refrigerant

in the round tube test section are measured and compared with
the predictions by Shah [26] to validate the accuracy of the experi-
mental apparatus in the vast range of vapor qualities from 0.15 to
0.8, mass flux of 154–265.4 kg/m2 s and 8.7 cm inner tube diame-
ter. As shown in Fig. 2, there is a good agreement between the Fig. 3. The effect of mass flux on the heat transfer coefficient for pure refrigerant for
obtained experimental data and the values predicted by Shah experimental data and Shah correlation [25].
50 M.A. Akhavan-Behabadi et al. / Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 66 (2015) 46–52

6
2
G=221.1 kg/m s
Heat Transfer Coefficient [kW/m K]

5
2

2
Pure Ref
Ref/Oil 1%
Ref/Oil/CuO 0.5%
1
Ref/Oil/CuO 1%
Ref/Oil/CuO 1.5%

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

Vapor Quality [-]

Fig. 4. Condensing heat transfer coefficients of different working fluid types (pure
refrigerant, refrigerant oil mixture, and three different weight fractions of CuO Fig. 5. Comparing the heat transfer coefficients for R-600a/oil/CuO with R-600a/oil.
nanoparticles) versus vapor quality at mass flux of 221 kg/m2 s.

(iv) Adding nanoparticles enhance the surface tension of the

lubricant/refrigerant (R600a/oil/CuO). The CuO nanoparticles with mixture in comparison with the pure refrigerant, and this
three weight fractions of 0.5%, 1.0% and 1.5% are dispersed in the increases the wettability leading to the heat transfer
baseline mixture and added to R600a to form the nano-re- enhancement.
frigerants. As such, the heat transfer coefficient increases with (v) Nanofluids have higher thermal conductivity compared to
the vapor quality due to: (i) elevation of the vapor quality which base fluid; one the most important parameters enhancing
leads to developing the flow regime toward the annular flow; the heat transfer coefficient.
and (ii) decrease in the thickness of the liquid film on the inner
tube wall which in turn causes heat transfer enhancement [7]. Fig. 6 shows the local heat transfer coefficient for baseline mix-
The heat transfer coefficient of CuO/R600a nanofluid is signifi- ture (oil/refrigerant) and nano-refrigerants against mass flux for
cantly higher than that of pure refrigerant. Since there is no rele- three different vapor qualities in the range of 0.15–0.34. As can
vant study on the effect of oil and nanoparticles on condensing be seen in this figure, the heat transfer coefficient for all cases
heat transfer of R600a, the results of this study cannot be com- increases with the mass flux. Increasing the Reynolds number is
pared quantitatively with literature. However the present working the main consequence of increasing the mass flux which in turn
fluids show similar trends to that of boiling heat transfer of R600a/ leads to a decrease in the thickness of the boundary layer at the
oil/nano mixture [14]; adding nanoparticles enhanced the heat inner tube wall. This augments the thermal gradient near the tube
transfer at low and intermediate vapor qualities. At the higher
vapor quality the effect of nanoparticles on heat transfer enhance-
ment decreases. It probably is related to a dominant factor that 7
influences heat transfer rate when the vapor quality varies. In fact,
oil viscosity is much higher than the refrigerant. Therefore, by Oil
6 Nano 0.5%
increasing the vapor quality the local oil concentration in the liquid
Nano 1%
Heat Transfer coefficient [kW/m2K]

phases of the refrigerant enhances. As a result, for the qualities Nano 1.5%
more than about 0.6, the viscosity of the mixture increases; this 5
leads to a decrease in the Reynolds number and the rate of convec-
tive heat transfer enhancement.
Fig. 5 shows the heat transfer coefficient for R600a/oil/CuO and 4
compares it with R600a/oil to show the effect of nanoparticles on
heat transfer enhancement in horizontal smooth tubes. As shown
3
in Fig. 5, in all cases, the heat transfer increases with nanoparticles
concentration, and the highest heat transfer augmentation is
achieved for 1.5% mass fraction of R600a/oil/CuO. The most impor- 2
tant reasons for this phenomenon are mainly caused by the
following:
1
(i) Nanoparticle disturbance leads to decreasing the boundary
layer thickness which in turn reduces the thermal resistance
160 200 240 280
and enhances heat transfer coefficient [28,29].
2
(ii) The liquid molecules are absorbed by nanoparticles which in G [kg/m s]
turn increase the heat transfer rate of the fluid flow [30].
Fig. 6. The local heat transfer coefficient for baseline oil/refrigerant and nano-
(iii) Deposition of a molecular layer of the nanoparticles on the refrigerant versus mass flux presented for three different vapor qualities in the
inner tube surface increases the heat transfer coefficient. range of 0.15–0.34.
 M.A. Akhavan-Behabadi et al. / Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 66 (2015) 46–52 51

2 condensation pressure from 5.1 to 6.2 bar. The following is the

highlights of the present study:
Oil
1.8 Nano 0.5% (1) Heat transfer coefficient increases by adding the nanoparti-
Nano 1%
Heat Transfer Enhancement Ratio [-]

cles to refrigerant/oil mixture.

Nano 1.5%
(2) Utilizing a nanofluid enhances the heat transfer coefficient
1.6
by increasing the vapor quality as well as mass flux. The
same behavior is observed for pure refrigerant and refriger-
1.4 ant/oil mixture.
(3) For 1.5% mass fraction of nanoparticle, heat transfer
enhancement yields 83% (hr,o,n/hr = 1.83) when compared
1.2 to the pure refrigerant.
(4) Heat transfer augmentation by adding nanoparticles is more
effective at lower mass fluxes.
1

0.8 Acknowledgments

The authors would like to express their thanks to the Center of

0.6 Excellence in Design and Optimization of Energy Systems, College
160 200 240 280
2 of Engineering, University of Tehran for the financial supports
G [kg/m s]
through the set-up construction and research implementation
Fig. 7. Variation of heat transfer enhancement ratio versus mass flux at three and also the center of excellence in design and optimization of
different vapor qualities (in the range of 0.15–0.35) for nano-refrigerants with three energy systems.
different mass concentrations and oil/refrigerant.
References

wall and consequently increases the heat transfer coefficient. The [1] S. Chol, Enhancing thermal conductivity of fluids with nanoparticles, ASME-
general trend is the fact that adding nanoparticles lead to increase Publ. -Fed 231 (1995) 99–106.
in heat transfer coefficient. However, at the same conditions, the [2] Y. Hwang et al., Stability and thermal conductivity characteristics of
nanofluids, Thermochim. Acta 455 (1–2) (2007) 70–74.
heat transfer coefficients of nanofluids at low vapor qualities [3] S.K. Das et al., Temperature dependence of thermal conductivity enhancement
may be less than that of the baseline mixture (oil/refrigerant). for nanofluids, J. Heat Transfer 125 (4) (2003) 567–574.
To investigate the effects of adding nanoparticles to refrigerant [4] W. Jiang, G. Ding, H. Peng, Measurement and model on thermal conductivities
of carbon nanotube nanorefrigerants, Int. J. Therm. Sci. 48 (6) (2009) 1108–
on heat transfer, the ratio of heat transfer coefficient for nano-re- 1115.
frigerant to pure refrigerant at similar test points, hr,o,n/hr, were [5] R. Wang et al., A refrigerating system using HFC134a and mineral lubricant
defined as ‘‘heat transfer enhancement ratio’’. Where hr,o,n is the appended with n-TiO2 (R) as working fluids, in: Proceedings of the 4th
International Symposium on HAVC, Tsinghua University Press, Beijing, China,
heat transfer coefficient of refrigerant/oil/nano mixture and hr is 2003.
the heat transfer coefficient of pure refrigerant. Fig. 7 shows the [6] K.-J. Wang, G.-L. Ding, W. Jiang, Nano-scale thermal transporting and its use in
variation of heat transfer enhancement ratio versus mass flux at engineering, in: Proceedings of the 4th Symposium on Refrigeration and Air
Conditioning, Southeast University Press, Nanjing, China, 2006.
three different vapor qualities in the range of 0.15–0.35 and for [7] H. Peng et al., Heat transfer characteristics of refrigerant-based nanofluid flow
nano-refrigerants with three different mass concentrations and boiling inside a horizontal smooth tube, Int. J. Refrig 32 (6) (2009) 1259–1270.
oil/refrigerant mixture. From this figure it can be concluded that [8] K.-J. Park, D. Jung, Boiling heat transfer enhancement with carbon nanotubes
for refrigerants used in building air-conditioning, Energy Build. 39 (9) (2007)
adding the nanoparticles causes a significant augmentation in heat
1061–1064.
transfer coefficients at all of the test points. The heat transfer [9] G. Ding et al., The migration characteristics of nanoparticles in the pool boiling
enhancement is more announced at the lower mass velocities for process of nanorefrigerant and nanorefrigerant–oil mixture, Int. J. Refrig 32 (1)
all cases. The highest heat transfer enhancement ratio was (2009) 114–123.
[10] K.-J. Park, D. Jung, Enhancement of nucleate boiling heat transfer using carbon
observed due to 1.5% mass fraction of R-600a/oil/CuO at mass flux nanotubes, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 50 (21) (2007) 4499–4502.
of 154.8 kg/m2 s. For 1.5% mass fraction of nanoparticle, heat trans- [11] V. Trisaksri, S. Wongwises, Nucleate pool boiling heat transfer of TiO2-R141b
fer enhancement of up to 83% (hr,o,n/hr = 1.83) is achieved com- nanofluids, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 52 (5) (2009) 1582–1588.
[12] X. Tang, Yao-Hua Zhao, Y.H. Diao, Experimental investigation of the nucleate
pared to the pure refrigerant case. In addition, the lowest ratio pool boiling heat transfer characteristics of d-Al2O3-R141b nanofluids on a
was observed for refrigerant/oil mixture at all mass fluxes and horizontal plate, Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 52 (2014) 88–96.
vapor qualities, although this ratio was greater than unity in all [13] WU Xiao-Min, LI Peng, LI Hui, Investigation of pool boiling heat transfer of R11
with TiO2 nanoparticle, J. Eng. Thermophys. 28 (2008) 124–126.
cases. [14] S. Baqeri, M. Akhavan-Behabadi, B. Ghadimi, Experimental investigation of the
forced convective boiling heat transfer of R-600a/oil/nanoparticle, Int.
Commun. Heat Mass Transfer 55 (2014) 71–76.
[15] M. Akhavan-Behabadi, M. Nasr, S. Baqeri, Experimental investigation of flow
5. Conclusion boiling heat transfer of R-600a/oil/CuO in a plain horizontal tube, Exp. Therm.
Fluid Sci. 58 (2014) 105–111.
[16] K. Wang, K. Shiromoto, T. Mizogami, Experiment study on the effect of nano-
An experimental investigation is carried out to study the ther- scale particle on the condensation process, in: Proceedings of the 22nd
mal characteristics of nano-refrigerant flows inside a plain hori- International Congress of Refrigeration, Beijing, China, Paper No. 2007.
zontal tube. Experiments are conducted for three different [17] C.R. Sunstein, Of Montreal and Kyoto: a tale of two protocols, Harv. Envtl. L.
Rev. 31 (2007) 1.
working-fluid types including: (i) pure refrigerant (R600a);
[18] J.M. Calm, The next generation of refrigerants–historical review,
(ii) refrigerant/oil (R600a/oil); and (iii) refrigerant/lubri- considerations, and outlook, Int. J. Refrig 31 (7) (2008) 1123–1133.
cant/nanoparticles (R600a/oil/CuO). The implemented experi- [19] M.J. Kurylo, The chemistry of stratospheric ozone: its response to natural and
ments covered a wide range of variables including: (i) mass anthropogenic influences, Int. J. Refrig 13 (2) (1990) 62–72.
[20] M.J. Molina, F.S. Rowland, Stratospheric sink for chlorofluoromethanes:
fluxes from 154.8 to 265.4 kg/m2/s; (ii) vapor qualities between chlorine atom-catalysed destruction of ozone, Nature 249 (5460) (1974)
10% and 80%; (iii) heat flux from 17 to 20 kW/m2; and (iv) 810–812.
52 M.A. Akhavan-Behabadi et al. / Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 66 (2015) 46–52

[21] M. Darzi et al., Experimental study of horizontal flattened tubes performance [26] M.M. Shah, An improved and extended general correlation for heat transfer
on condensation of R600a vapor, Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transfer 62 (2015) during condensation in plain tubes, HVAC&R Res. 15 (5) (2009) 889–913.
18–25. _ Teke, Experimental investigation of condensation of hydrocarbon
[27] Ö. Ağra, I.
[22] B. Sun, D. Yang, Flow boiling heat transfer characteristics of nano-refrigerants refrigerants (R600a) in a horizontal smooth tube, Int. Commun. Heat Mass
in a horizontal tube, Int. J. Refrig 38 (2014) 206–214. Transfer 35 (9) (2008) 1165–1171.
[23] M.-Y. Wen, K.-J. Jang, C.-Y. Ho, The characteristics of boiling heat transfer and [28] K. Wang, G. Ding, W. Jiang, Fluid visualization on nano-scale heat transfer, J.
pressure drop of R-600a in a circular tube with porous inserts, Appl. Therm. Chem. Ind. Eng. (China) 57 (2006) 15–20.
Eng. 64 (1) (2014) 348–357. [29] K. Wang, G. Ding, W. Jiang, Development of nanorefrigerant and its rudiment
[24] S. Wang et al., Two-phase heat transfer and pressure drop of propane during property, in: 8th International Symposium on Fluid Control, Measurement and
saturated flow boiling inside a horizontal tube, Int. J. Refrig 41 (2014) 200– Visualization, China Aerodynamics Research Society, Chengdu, China, 2005.
209. [30] C.-J. Yu et al., Molecular layering in a liquid on a solid substrate: an X-ray
[25] R. Schultz, R. Cole. Uncertainty analysis in boiling nucleation, in: AIChE reflectivity study, Physica B 283 (1) (2000) 27–31.
Symposium Series, 1979.