Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng.

Aspects 417 (2013) 39–46

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and

Engineering Aspects
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/colsurfa

Electrical conductivity of ceramic and metallic nanofluids

K.G. Kalpana Sarojini a , Siva V. Manoj a , Pawan K. Singh a , T. Pradeep b , Sarit K. Das a,∗
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, IIT Madras, Chennai 600036, India
b
Department of Chemistry, IIT Madras, Chennai 600036, India

h i g h l i g h t s g r a p h i c a l a b s t r a c t

 Nanofluids are prepared using water

and ethylene glycol followed by
ultrasonication.
 The electrical conductivity of
nanofluids is studied with various
parameters.
 Results are compared with existing
models such as Maxwell and O’Brien
model.
 The stability of nanofluids depends
critically on surface charge of
nanoparticles.

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

Article history: An extensive experimental evaluation of electrical conductivity of nanofluids containing metallic and
Received 6 July 2012 ceramic particles (Cu, Al2 O3 , and CuO) with different volume fractions in the dilute regime, particle sizes,
Received in revised form electrolyte effect, temperature and base fluids has been carried out. It is observed that, in both water-
18 September 2012
and ethylene glycol (EG)-based nanofluids, the electrical conductivity increases with increasing particle
Accepted 1 October 2012
concentration and reducing particle size. It is argued that the effective dielectric constant and density are
Available online 17 October 2012
at the root of the counterintuitive observation that the electrical conductivity enhancement of ceramic
nanofluids is more than that of metal-based ones which is substantiated by the Clausius–Mossotti rela-
Keywords:
Nanofluids
tion for the polar fluids. The influence of surfactant is found to increase the stability and decrease the
Electrical double layer electrical conductivity of the nanofluids by increasing its viscosity. There is a rise in electrical conduc-
Dielectric constant tivity of nanofluids having low electrolyte concentration whereas a decrement is observed in nanofluids
Electrical conductivity of high electrolyte concentration due to reduced surface conductance. These experimental observations
on alumina nanofluids are compared with the theoretical model proposed by O’Brien [19] for electrical
conductivity of dilute suspensions. It has also been observed that there is no significant effect of fluid
temperature on the electrical conductivity in the range 30–60 ◦ C. This clearly indicates that enhance-
ment mechanism for electrical conductivity is completely different from that of thermal conductivity in
nanofluids.
© 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction essential components of present computation, scientific mea-

surement, material processing, and medicine and communication
Nanofluids are the dilute suspension of nano-sized particles devices. Generally the conventional base fluids which are usually
in base fluids including water, ethylene glycol, transformer oil, used in cooling are not sufficient to meet the growth in these fields
kerosene, etc. Lasers, high power X-rays and optical fibres are particularly in electronic chip and computing technologies. For this
increasing demand, intensive research on nanofluids has been trig-
gered using various types of nanoparticles. As the particle size
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +91 44 22574655; fax: +91 44 22570545. decreases, the surface area increases. This property enhances the
E-mail address: skdas@iitm.ac.in (S.K. Das). heat transfer capability of the nanoparticles which in turn enhances

0927-7757/$ – see front matter © 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfa.2012.10.010
40 K.G.K. Sarojini et al. / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 417 (2013) 39–46

the thermal conductivity of nanofluids. Thermal conductivity of dif- Au and CNT) with water as base fluid. The parameters studied
ferent nanofluids such as alumina [1–4], copper [5], copper oxide are particle concentration and temperature. This brings out only a
[2] and titanium dioxide [6] has been measured and found to be limited picture of the physics of electrical conduction process which
significantly enhanced. Also recently carbon nanotubes [7,8] (sin- needs more extensive investigation into the dependence of electri-
gle walled and multi-walled) have renewed interest in heat transfer cal conductivity in the parametric space. Thus the objective of this
with nanofluids in which its high aspect ratio tubes form a network work is to reveal experimentally in detail the dependence of elec-
owing to the percolation threshold [9]. trical conductivity of nanofluids on particle concentrations, base
Dispersion and stability are the essential characteristics in the fluids, particle size, temperature, influence of electrolyte and sur-
enhancement of the thermal conductivity of nanofluids. Uniform factant and the underlying physics behind the conduction of charge
dispersion and stable suspension of nanoparticles in the liquids are in them. Two kinds of nanoparticles, namely metallic (copper) and
the key to most applications of nanofluids since the final properties ceramic (alumina and CuO), are chosen and their effects on the elec-
of nanofluids are determined by the quality of the dispersed state trical conductivity of nanofluids are analysed. These particles are
of the suspension [10–12]. Many researchers have reported the used in different particle concentrations with water and EG as base
necessity of proper dispersion of nanofluids and various dispersion fluids. The behaviour of electrical conductivity of alumina–water
techniques [4]. They also measured the thermal conductivity as a nanofluids has been studied for different temperature, particle
function of ultra-sonication (physical technique) time and showed sizes, and electrolyte concentrations to give a comprehensive pic-
that long hours of ultra-sonic dispersion are required to improve ture of the ion transport behaviour in nanofluids. The results have
particle dispersion [10]. Chemical techniques such as the use of been compared with the theoretical model of O’Brien [19].
surfactants are also discussed. It is found that surfactants can play
an effective role for proper dispersion of nanoparticles without 2. Materials and methods
affecting nanofluid’s thermo-physical properties and heat transfer
performance by ensuring higher stability [6,7]. 2.1. Preparation and characterisation of nanofluids
From the above discussion on dispersion methods, it is obvi-
ous that stability of a nanofluid plays a major role in determining Nanoparticles with different particle sizes used in this study
its thermal properties. In addition to the thermal properties, stud- are purchased commercially. Alpha alumina nanopowders (␣-
ies have also been conducted on their electrical performance. Al2 O3 ) with particle size of ∼150 nm were procured from Inframat
Electrical conductivity of a nanofluid is related to the ability of Advanced Materials, USA whereas particles with sizes 20–30 nm
charged particles (ions) in the suspension to carry the charges (elec- and 80 nm were from Nabond, China. Copper and copper oxide
trons) towards respective electrodes when an electric potential is nanoparticles, with size ∼80 nm were bought from NT base, South
applied. In nanofluids, the nanoparticles dispersed in a base fluid Korea. Deionised water (DI) and EG are used as the base fluids,
get charged due to the formation of electrical double layer (EDL) sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) as a surfactant and hydrochloric acid
around the particle surface. These nanoparticles along with the (HCl) is used as electrolyte. The nanoparticles are characterised for
EDL move towards oppositely charged electrode when a potential its morphology by transmission electron microscopy (TEM). The
is applied. This EDL formation depends on the surface charge, size TEM images (Fig. 1) of the nanoparticles show that alumina, copper
and volume fraction of the particles and ionic concentration in the and CuO nanoparticles are spherical in shape and properly dis-
base fluid. Thus the electrophoretic mobility of charged particles persed. However, in the present study, the particle shape is not
determines the electrical conductivity of a nanofluid. considered as a parameter and the study is concentrated only on
Very few experimental works have been reported on the electri- the state of dispersion for estimating the electrical conductivity.
cal conductivity of water-based nanofluids. The change in electrical The metals form a thin layer of oxide on its surface in atmosphere
conductivity of alumina-based fluids with particle fraction and and the rate of oxidation depends on the temperature, humidity
temperature was studied by Ganguly et al. [13]. They showed a lin- and level of pollution of the surroundings. The purity of Cu is con-
ear rise of electrical conductivity with particle fraction and almost firmed by X-ray diffraction (XRD) in Fig. 2. The peaks corresponding
no variation with temperature. A linear rise in electrical conductiv- to 43.63◦ , 50.6◦ , and 74.3◦ are the characteristics peaks of copper
ity of TiO2 suspensions with particle fraction was observed for low as given by JCPDS data software. The other two peaks at 36.7◦ and
ionic strength and no significant impact for high ionic concentra- 61.6◦ are due to oxides and their presence is relatively less. The pure
tions by Luis and Biswas [14]. Electrical and thermal conductivities metal powder should be taken care that it is not exposed to open
of multi-walled CNT-based fluids and electrical conductivity of atmosphere for long periods and there should be minimum rise in
graphene and gold nanofluids have been studied [15–17]. Few temperature while sonicating to avoid oxidation of nanofluids so
investigations dealt with numerical and analytical studies on elec- that the oxidation is minimum as in the present case.
trical conductivity of concentrated and dilute colloidal suspensions Nanofluids with various particle concentrations (0.05, 0.1, 0.25,
[18,19]. There is scarcity in studies dealing with the electrical con- 0.5, and 1 vol%) are prepared weighing the particles accurately
ductivity of mildly polar ethylene glycol (EG)-based nanofluids. The and mixing with base fluid in a clean glass beaker, followed by
stability of a suspension depends on its electrostatic characteristics ultra-sonication. The effect of electrolyte has been studied using
such as iso-electric point (IEP) and zeta potential which play a major three different concentrations (1 M, 0.5 M, and 0.05 M) of HCl
role in the electrical conduction process [18,20]. The electrical con- alumina–water nanofluids. Alumina with various particle sizes has
ductivity of nanofluids is related to its stability [13,21]. Also, the been used to estimate the variation in electrical conductivity with
most commonly used thermal conductivity measurement method particle size. The dependence of electrical conductivity on tempera-
of transient hot wire gets significantly affected by the electrical ture is analysed in the temperature range of 30–60 ◦ C and the effect
conductivity of nanofluids. Thus, this is an important parameter for of surfactant is also studied.
characterisation of nanofluids and it needs similar attention as ther-
mal conductivity of nanofluids. These electrically conducting fluids 2.2. Experimental setup and measurement details
have a variety of applications such as field induced pattern for-
mation in colloidal dispersion [22,23] and electrically conducting The electrical conductivity is measured by a 4-Cell conductivity
adhesive technology [24]. electrode meter (CYBERSCAN CON 11) with inbuilt automatic
The experimental studies on electrical conductivities of nanoflu- temperature compensation (ATC). Experimental setup is shown in
ids are limited to only certain types of particles so far (Al2 O3 , TiO2 , Fig. 3. Fig. 3(a) shows the electrical circuit which has four circular
 K.G.K. Sarojini et al. / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 417 (2013) 39–46 41

Fig. 1. Transmission electron microscope (TEM) images of nanoparticles: (a) Al2 O3 , (b) Cu, and (c) CuO.

electrodes and Fig. 3(b) shows the measuring setup with the The experimental setup is used to measure the electrical
sample. The display shows the electrical conductivity values with conductivity of few known fluids and is compared with the stan-
instantaneous temperature. The electrode meter gives both tem- dard values in the literature [25]. The values are tabulated in
perature and conductivity values simultaneously at a given instant. Table 1.
The instrument is calibrated with de-ionised (DI) water and ethy-
lene glycol, and the consistency of readings is checked by repeating
measurements and is found to agree with the standard values. The
zeta potential of the particles is measured using Zetasizer Nano
ZS 90 Malvern in the measurement range of 3.8 nm to 100 ␮m. A
water proof pH meter Testr30 (Eutech Instruments – Oakton) with
inbuilt ATC has been used to measure pH of the solution, which is
having the range of −1.00 to 15.00 pH and relative accuracy is 0.01.
The error in the experimental data can be given as the total of
the instrumental and the measurement error. The measurement
error is attributed to the deviation from the actual results (from
repeatability) due to experimental conditions. It is found to be ±1%.
The instrumental uncertainty for electrical conductivity and tem-
perature measurement is ±1% (full scale + 1 digit) and 0.1 K in the
conductivity range is 0–1999 ␮S/cm. Thus, the total experimental
error is limited to 2%. The deviation due to the error is shown in the
form of error bars in Figs. 4 and 6. Fig. 2. X-ray diffraction (XRD) of Cu.
42 K.G.K. Sarojini et al. / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 417 (2013) 39–46

Fig. 3. Experimental setup of electrical conductivity measurement: (a) electrical circuit with circular electrodes and (b) measurement setup with sample.

Table 1 altered on the dispersion of nanoparticles. The electrical conduc-

Comparison of electrical conductivities of known fluids with the standard values.
tivity of the base fluid (DI water) is measured as 6 ␮S/cm. Fig. 4
Fluids K (␮S/cm) (measured) K (␮S/cm) (standard) shows the electrical conductivity values of water-based nanofluids
Isopropyl alcohol 5 6 with various particle concentrations and compared with Maxwell
10 mM KCl 1408 1400 model. It is observed from the figure that the electrical conductivity
increases linearly with concentration for ceramic (CuO and Al2 O3 )
nanofluids and increases in a nonlinear fashion for metallic nanoflu-
3. Results and discussion ids (Cu). Also it is observed that the metallic nanofluids show less
conductivity enhancement than oxides which is counterintuitive,
The contribution of electrical properties in nanofluids is keeping the higher conductivity of metals into consideration.
revealed in this work. There is a significant dependence on the dis- The main cause for the enhancement in the above observation
persed particles and its concentration. A detailed study on electrical is the formation of surface charges by polarisation of nanoparticles
conductivity of nanofluids with various parameters is thoroughly when dispersed in the base fluid of water which is polar. The pola-
analysed in the following sections. risation process is quantified by the effective dielectric constants
and the densities of both the particles and the base fluid as given
3.1. Effect of system (nanoparticles and base fluid combination) in Table 2.
The dielectric constant [26] and density [27] of base fluid get
The present work investigates the effect of different nanopar- altered when the nanoparticles are dispersed in it. The effective
ticles in base fluids. The electrical properties of the base fluid get values of the properties are given by Eqs. (1) and (2).
3ε1 (ε2 − ε1 )
εeff = ε1 +  (1)
2ε1 + ε2
nf = p  + bf (1 − ) (2)

where subscripts p, nf, and bf refer to the particle, nanofluid and

base fluid, respectively,  is the density,  is the particle volume

Table 2
Properties of nanoparticles and base fluids used in this work.

System Dielectric constant, ε Density,  (g/cm3 )

Water 80 0.999
Ethylene glycol 38 1.1085
CuO 18.1 6.3
Al2 O3 9.1–9.3 4
Cu 6.1 9
Fig. 4. Electrical conductivity of water nanofluids.
 K.G.K. Sarojini et al. / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 417 (2013) 39–46 43

Table 3
Increment in dielectric constant with density of particles.

Nanofluids nf εeff dε/d

CuO 3.65 38.3 137.27

Al2 O3 2.5 29.8 122.11
Cu 5 26.6 49.15

fraction, and ε1 and ε2 are the dielectric constants of the base fluid
and particle, respectively.
The change in dielectric constant (dε) for a change in the con-
centration or density (d) of particles is given by Clausius–Mossotti
relation as
dε (ε − 1)(εeff + 2) Fig. 5. Effect of dielectric constant on the electrical conductivity of water nanofluids.
= eff (3)
d 3nf
shows the increase in the conductivity values with dielectric con-
From Eq. (3), the increase in effective dielectric constant of nanoflu- stant and also with volume fractions. The results are consistent with
ids with density can be found. Table 3 shows dε/d values of water the above explanation.
nanofluids for a particular concentration ( = 0.5) of particles. Fig. 6 shows the electrical conductivity variation of EG nanoflu-
From Table 3, it is observed that the effective increment of ids with particle concentration. Electrical conductivity of EG is
dielectric constant with density is high for oxide nanofluids and 1.07 ␮S/cm which is a mild polar liquid. The polarisation process
for copper nanofluids it is low due to its high particle density. In is very weak compared to the water nanofluids as there is less
general, the electric field (E) experienced by the particles (consid- availability of polar molecules. Thus the increase in electrical con-
ered as dielectric here) present in a medium is reduced due to the ductivity values is very low with particle concentration. The results
polarisation as given by are also compared with the Maxwell model which considers the
q concentration of particles. The model fits well for the conducting
E= (4)
ε particles (Cu) in the limit of infinite particle electrical conductiv-
ity which reduces the model to depend on concentration alone. It
and the polarisation density (P) is given by
does not agree for non-conducting particles (Al2 O3 and CuO). The
 1

Clausius–Mossotti (C–M) relation holds good only for polar fluids.
P =q 1− (5)
εeff A correction term for mildly polar fluids is included in the C–M
equation that takes the dipole moment interaction and their fluc-
where q is the charge of the carrier. The polarisation (P) increases tuations between the neighbouring molecules into account which
due to the effective dielectric constant of the dispersion (Eq. (5)). complicates the term and usually found only by molecular dynamic
To relate the polarisation to the conductivity (K) of the fluid, from simulations [28].
the basic principles it is known that the conductivity is the ratio of
total current density (Jtot ) to the applied electric field (E) given by
3.2. Effect of stabilisation of alumina–water nanofluids
Jtot J
K= = b (6)
E E The effect of electrolytes on the nanofluids in the formation
of electrical double layer (EDL) is studied by adding three differ-
and total current density is the sum of current densities due to free
ent concentrations (1 M, 0.5 M, and 0.05 M) of hydrochloric acid to
(electrons, holes) carriers (Jf ) and bound (polarised) charge carriers
alumina–water nanofluids and the results are shown in Fig. 7. From
(Jb ). In nanofluids, we assume only the presence of bound carriers,
the figure it can be observed that for each HCl concentration, the
Jf being zero.
electrical conductivity decreases with the fraction of nanoparticles
  and shows a slight rise after a particular (critical) concentration
∂
Jtot = Jb = b dV = − ∇ .P dV (7) of particles. The critical concentration increases with increasing
∂t
electrolyte concentration.
Using Gauss theorem volume integral is changed to surface integral
where the surface S is the area bounded by the volume V:
 
− ∇ · P dV = − P · da (8)

where b is the density of bound charges in volume V.

Thus from the above discussion, it is clear that polarisation is
responsible for the current flux across the interface of the parti-
cles surface S. The polarisation current density is found and applied
electric field being known, the electrical conductivity of polarised
particles in the aqueous medium is found by Eq. (6). The results are
compared with the Maxwell model based on ‘effective medium’
theory which relates the electrical conductivity of the nanofluids
with the concentration of the particles () alone. This model does
not include the polarisation effect of the particles and the effective
values of its properties and hence the experimental results do not
match with the model as shown in Fig. 4. The electrical conductiv-
ity increment with effective dielectric constant is shown in Fig. 5. It Fig. 6. Electrical conductivity of EG nanofluids.
44 K.G.K. Sarojini et al. / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 417 (2013) 39–46

Fig. 7. Effect of electrolyte (HCl) on the electrical conductivity of alumina–water

nanofluids. Fig. 9. Comparison of experimental results of alumina water nanofluids with
O’Brien model of dilute suspensions.

This feature can be explained on the basis of EDL formation.

The dispersed particles forms surface charges which are compen- the suspensions and m1 and m2 are ionic drag coefficients of the
sated by a dense layer of counter ions close to the surface, followed species.
by diffuse layer of both type of ions. The potential measured from The O’Brien model is explained using double layer thickness (a)
the surface of the particle to the bulk solution where the potential and zeta potential () values. Theoretical calculations are done for
becomes less is termed as zeta potential and this layer is called elec- different a values and compared with the experimental values of
trical double layer. The thickness of this layer is termed as Debye electrical conductivity as shown in Fig. 9. It is observed that the the-
length (1/). Zeta potential is measured to be 51 mV, 33.4 mV and oretical values are comparable with experiments for a double layer
32 mV for three HCl concentrations, respectively. Fig. 8 shows the thickness (a) of 10 where ‘a’ is the radius of the particle (80 nm).
zeta potential curve for 0.5 M HCl in alumina–water nanofluids. The Debye length (1/) is calculated using the concentration of ions
For low ionic concentration, the surface conductance is more than (I) by the equation,
the bulk fluid which increases the electrical conductivity and with √
 = (32.87 × 108 I) m−1 (10)
higher ionic concentrations the diffuse layer becomes thicker and
the electrical conductivity is reduced. This model can be used for finding the double layer thickness of
The experimental values of electrical conductivity are compared a given nanofluid if the ionic concentration is not known.
with the theoretical model proposed by O’Brien [19] for dilute sus-
pensions given by Eq. (9): 3.3. Effect of surfactants on alumina–water nanofluids

K∗ L(a)I3 e The surfactant used in the stabilisation of nanofluids has a cru-
= 1 − 3˚ −
Kbf kT cial effect on the electrical conductivity of nanofluids. Sodium
  j=N
 dodecyl sulfate (SDS) is used as a surfactant. These surfactants,
z 2 n∞  e 2 below the critical micelle concentration (CMC) are in the form of
j=1 j j
− I4 M(a) + N(a) 
j=N 2 ∞ kT
(9) monomers and at CMC they form micelles (aggregates) and further
z (nj /mj )
j=1 j addition increases the viscosity of the nanofluids. The experiments
where have been done below the CMC of the surfactant. The monomer
attaches to the particles surface, stabilises them and thus increases
z1 (ω1 − ω2 ) the electrical conductivity of the nanofluids. Fig. 10 shows the
I3 =
(ω1 + ω2 ) influence of surfactant on the electrical conductivity of alumina
I4 = (z12 ) nanofluids. Two different concentrations (0.1 mM and 0.5 mM) of

j=N
z 2 n∞
j=1 j j 2m1 m2
j=N =
m1 + m2
z 2 (n∞
j=1 j j
/mj )

and L(a), M(a), and N(a) are mathematical functions given in

terms of exponential integrals, ω1 and ω2 are the ionic mobility of

Fig. 8. Zeta potential of 0.5 M HCl added alumina water nanofluids (34 mV). Fig. 10. Influence of surfactant on the electrical conductivity of alumina nanofluids.
 K.G.K. Sarojini et al. / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 417 (2013) 39–46 45

Fig. 11. Electrical conductivity variation of alumina water nanofluids with particle
size.
Fig. 12. Influence of temperature on electrical conductivity of nanofluids.

SDS are used with various particle fractions. It can be observed which facilitates the charge transport between the electrodes with
that the enhancement of the conductivity in presence of the par- increase in particle fractions. This also brings out the fact that
ticles with SDS is more than water with SDS alone. It is also the mechanism of charge transport is different from that of heat
observed in the graph that the conductivity is contributed greatly transport where perceptible increase in thermal conductivity with
by the particles at higher concentrations (>0.25%), whereas at temperature is observed due to the increase Brownian motion of
low concentrations contribution of free ionic monomers are more the particles [31]. This also indicates that the classical Maxwellian
to the electrical conductivity of nanofluids. The presence of the effective medium theory for microsuspensions which is applica-
surfactants confirms the stability of nanofluids but the electrical ble to both thermal and electrical conductivity does not apply to
conductivity of them is reduced slightly in their presence which nanofluids.
can be clearly seen from Fig. 10.
4. Conclusion
3.4. Effect of particle size of alumina–water nanofluids
An experimental study has been performed to bring out the
Particle size determines the surface area, pH and dispersion influence of various physico-chemical factors on the electrical con-
properties in nanofluids. It was observed that the surface reactivity ductivity of nanofluids with ceramic and metallic nanoparticles.
and iso electric point (IEP) are size-dependent [25]. The zeta poten- The nanoparticles used in the present study are copper, alumina
tial decreases with reducing particle diameter, due to increase in and copper oxide. It is shown that there is a nearly linear rise
surface area and the number of particles. As the number of parti- in electrical conductivity of water- and EG-based nanofluids with
cles increases, the charges available for the formation of EDL are not particle volume fraction. It is argued that the effective dielectric
sufficient for particles and thus there is a reduction in zeta poten- constant and density are at the root of the counterintuitive obser-
tial. Fig. 11 shows the variation of electrical conductivity of alumina vation that the electrical conductivity enhancement of ceramic
nanofluids with particle size. The effect of particle size is explained nanofluid is more than that of metals which is substantiated by
and the effective particle volume fraction is given by Larson [29]: the Clausius–Mossotti relation for the polar fluids. The presence
deff of surfactant increases the stability and decreases the electrical
eff =  (11) conductivity of the nanofluids. The decrease in the size of alumina
2a
nanoparticles increases the electrical conductivity of water-based
where  is the particle volume fraction (%), eff is the effective par-
nanofluids which is attributed to the increased surface area and
ticle volume fraction (%), a is the particle radius (nm), deff is the
electrophoretic mobility of the particles. There is no significant
effective particle diameter (nm) of the nanoparticles.
rise in electrical conductivity of water nanofluids with tempera-
From the above equation, it can be seen that for the same vol-
ture. The electrical double layer formation around the particles is
ume fraction of nanofluids having different sizes of nanoparticles,
studied by adding different molar concentrations of HCl to the alu-
the effective volume fraction is higher for smaller particle sizes.
mina water nanofluids. It is found that nanofluids with low ionic
The electrophoretic mobility increases with reduced particle size.
strength have an enhancement in electrical conductivity while it
Hence it is observed that particle size reduction has a positive effect
decreases for high ionic strength. This is due to the variation in
on the electrical conductivity of nanofluids.
the surface conductance of the particles. The experimental values
are compared with O’Brien [19] model of electrical conductivity
3.5. Effect of temperature on nanofluids
of dilute suspensions. This model explains the electrical conduc-
tivity from the electro kinetic radius (a) and zeta potential () of
The effect of temperature on the electrical conductivity of
the dispersed particles. From this theoretical model, a values of
alumina–water nanofluids has been studied and the results are
alumina nanofluids have been found out. This work will also be
shown in Fig. 12. There is no appreciable enhancement of electri-
useful for studying the stability criteria of the nanofluids since the
cal conductivity with temperature for low volume fractions (less
stability of nanofluids depends critically on surface charges on the
than 0.5%). It has been stated that aggregation is a time-dependent
nanoparticles.
phenomena and the aggregation time decreases significantly for
decreasing nanoparticles size and with the increasing tempera-
ture [30]. In this work the particle size is same and even though References
aggregation takes place with temperature, there is an electrical
[1] D. Zhu, X. Li, N. Wang, X. Wang, J. Gao, H. Li, Dispersion behaviour and thermal
conductivity enhancement with the same. This is because the conductivity characteristics of Al2 O3 –H2 O nanofluids, Curr. Appl. Phys. 9 (2010)
aggregated particle forms contact (percolation) with each other 131–139.
46 K.G.K. Sarojini et al. / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 417 (2013) 39–46

[2] H.A. Minsta, G. Roy, C.T. Nguyen, D. Doucet, New temperature dependent ther- [16] T.T. Baby, S. Ramaprabhu, Investigation of thermal and electrical conductivity
mal conductivity data for water-based nanofluids, Int. J. Therm. Sci. 48 (2009) of graphene based nanofluids, J. Appl. Phys. 108 (2010) 1–6.
363–371. [17] F. Fang, Y.F. Zhang, DC electrical conductivity of Au nanoparticles/chloroform
[3] M.P. Beck, T. Sun, A.S. Teja, The thermal conductivity of alumina nanoparticles and toluene suspensions, J. Mater. Sci. 40 (2005) 2979–2980.
dispersed in ethylene glycol, Fluid Phase Equilib. 260 (2007) 275–278. [18] R.C.D. Cruz, J. Reinshagen, R. Oberacker, A.M. Segadaes, M.J. Hoffmann, Electri-
[4] E.V. Timofeeva, A.N. Gavrilov, J.M. McCloskey, Y.V. Tolmachev, S. Sprunt, L.M. cal conductivity and stability of concentrated aqueous alumina suspensions, J.
Lopatina, J.V. Selinger, Thermal conductivity and particle agglomeration in alu- Colloid Interface Sci. 286 (2005) 579–588.
mina nanofluids: experiment and theory, Phys. Rev. E 76 (2007) 1–16. [19] R.W. O’Brien, The electrical conductivity of a dilute suspension of charged par-
[5] J. Garg, B. Poudel, M. Chiesa, J.B. Gordon, J.J. Ma, J.B. Wang, Z.F. Ren, Y.T. Kang, H. ticles, J. Colloid Interface Sci. 81 (1980) 234.
Ohtani, J. Nanda, G.J. Mc Kinley, G. Chen, Enhanced thermal conductivity and [20] J.D. Posner, Properties and electrokinetic behaviour of non dilute colloidal sus-
viscosity of copper nanoparticles in ethylene glycol nanofluid, J. Appl. Phys. 103 pensions, Mech. Res. Commun. 36 (2009) 22–32.
(2008) 1–4. [21] F. Bordi, C. Cametti, P. Codastefano, P. Tartaglia, Electrical conductivity and
[6] S.M.S. Murshed, K.C. Leong, C. Yang, Enhanced thermal conductivity of stability of concentrated aqueous alumina suspensions, Physica A 164 (1990)
TiO2 –water based nanofluids, Int. J. Therm. Sci. 44 (2005) 367–373. 663–672.
[7] Y. Hwang, H. Park, J. Lee, W. Jung, Thermal conductivity and lubrication char- [22] J. Felba, Nanomaterials and technology for conductive microstructures, in:
acteristics of nanofluids, Curr. Appl. Phys. 1 (2006) 67–71. Nanotechnology, nanomaterials and nanoelectronics. C012, IEEE, 2008, pp.
[8] D.J. Yang, Q. Zhang, G. Chen, S.F. Yoon, J. Ahn, S.G. Wang, Q. Zhou, Q. Wang, 205–211.
J.Q. Li, Thermal conductivity of multiwalled carbon nanotubes, Phys. Rev. B 66 [23] J. Kolbe, A. Arp, F. Calderone, E.M. Meyer, W. Meyer, H. Schaefer, M. Stuve,
(2002) 1–6. Inkjettable conductive adhesive for use in microelectronics and microsystems
[9] N. Venkata Sastry, N. Avijit Bhunia, T.S. Sundararajan, S.K. Das, Predicting the technology, Microelectron. Reliab. 47 (2007) 331–334.
effective thermal conductivity carbon nanotube based nanofluids, Nanotech- [24] W.A. Lynch, N.A. Sondergaard, Liquid additives to improve conductivity in elec-
nology 19 (2008) 1–8. tric contacts, in: 2009 Proc. 55th IEEE Holm Conference on Electrical Contacts,
[10] S.P. Jang, K.S. Hwang, J.H. Lee, J.H. Kim, B.H. Lee, S.U.S. Choi, Effective thermal 2009, pp. 78–86.
conductivities and viscosities of water based nanofluids containing Al2 O3 with [25] B.R. McCleskey, Electrical conductivity of electrolytes found in natural waters
low concentration, in: Proc. 7th IEEE, 2007, pp. 1011–1014. from (5 to 90) ◦ C, J. Chem. Eng. Data 56 (2011) 317–327.
[11] T.K. Hong, H.S. Yang, Nanoparticle-dispersion-dependent thermal conductivity [26] E. Matijevic, Surf. Colloid Sci. 3 (1971).
in nanofluids, J. Kor. Phys. Soc. 47 (2001) 321–324. [27] R.S. Vajjha, D.K. Das, B.M. Mahagoankar, Density measurement of different
[12] X.-j. Wang, X. Li, S. Yang, Influence of pH and SDBS on the stability and thermal nanofluids and their comparison with theory, Pet. Sci. Technol. 27 (6) (2009)
conductivity of nanofluids, Energy Fuels (2009) 2684–2689. 612.
[13] S. Ganguly, S. Sikdar, S. Basu, Experimental investigation of the effective elec- [28] M. Valisko, D. Boda, Correction to the Clausius–Mossotti equation: the dielectric
trical conductivity of aluminium oxide nanofluids, Powder Technol. 196 (2009) constant of non polar fluids from Monte Carlo simulations, J. Chem. Phys. 131
326–330. (2009) 1–4.
[14] L.B. Modesto Lopez, P. Biswas, Role of the effective electrical conductivity of [29] R.G. Larson, The Structure and Rheology of Complex Fluids, 1999.
nano suspensions in the generation of TiO2 agglomerates with electro spray, J. [30] R. Prasher, P.E. Phelan, P. Bhattacharya, Effect of aggregation kinetics on the
Aerosol Sci. 41 (2010) 790–804. thermal conductivity of nanoscale colloidal solutions (nanofluids), Nano Lett.
[15] J. Glory, M. Bonetti, M. Helezen, M. Mayne l’Hermite, C. Reynaud, Thermal and 7 (2006) 1529.
electrical conductivities of water based nanofluids prepared with long multi- [31] D.S. Kumar, N. Putra, P. Thiesen, W. Roetzel, Temperature dependence of ther-
walled carbon nanotubes, J. Appl. Phys. 103 (2008) 1–7. mal conductivity enhancement for nanofluids, Trans. ASME 125 (2003) 567.