Accepted Manuscript

Recent research contributions concerning use of nanofluids in heat exchangers:

A critical review

Mehdi Bahiraei, Reza Rahmani, Ali Yaghoobi, Erfan Khodabandeh, Ramin

Mashayekhi, Mohammad Amani

PII: S1359-4311(17)31021-9
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2018.01.041
Reference: ATE 11695

To appear in: Applied Thermal Engineering

Received Date: 14 February 2017

Revised Date: 11 January 2018
Accepted Date: 12 January 2018

Please cite this article as: M. Bahiraei, R. Rahmani, A. Yaghoobi, E. Khodabandeh, R. Mashayekhi, M. Amani,
Recent research contributions concerning use of nanofluids in heat exchangers: A critical review, Applied Thermal
Engineering (2018), doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2018.01.041

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers
we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and
review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process
errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
Recent research contributions concerning use of nanofluids

in heat exchangers: A critical review

Mehdi Bahiraeia,*, Reza Rahmania, Ali Yaghoobia, Erfan Khodabandehb, Ramin Mashayekhic,

Mohammad Amanid

a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Kermanshah University of Technology, Kermanshah, Iran
b
Mechanical Engineering Dept., Amirkabir University of Technology (Tehran Polytechnic), 424 Hafez Avenue,

P.O. Box 15875-4413, Tehran, Iran

c
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Khomeinishahr Branch, Islamic Azad University, Khomeinishahr, Iran
d
Mechanical and Energy Engineering Department, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran

Corresponding author: Mehdi Bahiraei

* E-mail: m.bahiraei@kut.ac.ir

Tel: +988337259980

Abstract

Heat exchangers have already proven to be important devices for thermal systems in many

industrial fields. In order to improve the efficacy of heat exchangers, nanofluids are recently

employed as coolants in them. Regarding unique characteristics of nanofluids, research studies in

this area have witnessed a remarkable growth. This paper reviews and summarizes recent

investigations conducted on use of nanofluids in heat exchangers including those carried out on

plate heat exchangers, double-pipe heat exchangers, shell and tube heat exchangers, and compact

heat exchangers. Meanwhile, some fascinating aspects about combination of nanofluids with

1
heat exchangers are introduced. In addition, the challenges and opportunities for future research

are presented and discussed.

Keywords: Plate heat exchangers, double-pipe heat exchangers, shell and tube heat exchangers,

compact heat exchangers, nanofluids

1. Introduction

The energy conservation is one of the vital issues of the twenty-first century, and it will certainly

be one of the most significant challenges in the near future. Therefore, scientists, engineers and

researchers are considerably trying to address this important concern. The advances made in

heating or cooling in industrial devices cause energy saving and heat transfer improvement, and

increase the operational life of the equipment. Energy savings can be performed by the efficient

use of energy. Energy conversion, conservation and recovery are some routes for energy saving.

To above mentioned purpose, various types of heat exchangers are utilized in many industrial

areas such as power plants, nuclear reactors, petrochemical industry, refrigeration, air-

conditioning, process industry, solar water heater, food engineering, and chemical reactors.

Different technologies are employed to improve the efficacy of heat exchangers. For decades,

efforts have been made to progress heat transfer in heat exchangers, decrease the heat exchange

time and finally improve the system efficacy. Augmenting the heat transfer area by adopting fins

is frequently used. This technique, however, increases weight and volume of heat exchangers.

Therefore, common approaches such as use of fins have now reached their boundaries.

In addition to geometrical modifications, improving the thermal characteristics of the heat

transfer fluids can present greater convective heat transfer in heat exchangers. Application of

2
additives to the working fluids to modify their thermophysical properties is an interesting

technique for the heat transfer improvement. Recent development in nanotechnology has

presented a way to this. To improve heat transfer characteristics of conventional fluids, the

concept of “nanofluid” was proposed by Choi [1] in 1995. Combination of conventional fluids

and solid nanoparticles called nanofluid. Nanofluids are advanced heat transfer fluids which can

overcome the restrictions of poor thermophysical characteristics related to conventional fluids

such as low thermal conductivity. Researchers have proven that nanofluids have advantages such

as great thermal conductivity and proper stability [2-4]. Many surveys have been carried out in

the field of nanofluids [5-15], and some of investigators have reviewed the studies conducted in

this area in different fields such as applying nanofluids in boiling heat transfer [16], convective

heat transfer and friction factor correlations of nanofluids [17], particle migration in nanofluids

[18], magnetic nanofluids [19], entropy generation in nanofluids [20], mass transfer in nanofluids

[21], and so forth.

Utilizing nanofluids can be one of the most interesting techniques for heat transfer enhancement

in heat exchangers. Several researchers have used nanofluids for this purpose. This review article

attempts to present the developments in use of nanofluids for heat exchangers, and identify

shortcomings and challenges. At first, the review focuses on the investigations conducted on

different types of heat exchangers in which nanofluids have been employed as coolants and

finally, some interesting aspects in this field (i.e. combination of nanofluids with heat

exchangers) are introduced and discussed.

3
2. Plate heat exchangers

Since the creation of the Plate Heat Exchanger (PHE) in 1921 for utilization in the dairy

technology, it has been extensively employed in different areas. PHE includes a set of thin plates

and a frame to support them. The working fluid moves inside the gap between adjacent plates.

The heat transfer surface can be simply modified with adding or removing plates, and the heat

transfer rate can be adjusted. With intensifying requirements for energy savings, the PHEs now

play a key role in industries. A PHE with great efficacy can considerably decrease energy waste.

There are many kinds of PHEs, such as chevron, herringbone, and wash board. From these types,

the chevron PHE is the most extensively utilized. Generally, a chevron plate can cause relatively

high turbulence, allowing efficient heat transfer. As per the study of Troupe et al. [22], heat

transfer coefficients provided using a PHE can be similar to values for pipes in which Reynolds

number is several times greater. Therefore, much studies on PHEs with various geometries have

been performed.

Due to the significance of PHEs in industry along with the proper characteristics of nanofluids,

many researchers have studied the effects of using nanofluids in this group of heat exchangers.

Barzegarian et al. [23] examined the effect of using TiO2-water nanofluid on heat transfer

enhancement and pressure drop in a brazed PHE used in domestic hot water system. TiO2

nanoparticles were used for making the nanofluids with weight concentrations of 0.3, 0.8 and

1.5%. The effects of Reynolds number and concentration on the heat transfer characteristics were

investigated experimentally. This resulted in a significant increase in convective heat transfer

coefficient through adding nanoparticles to distilled water. The maximum enhancement of the

4
nanofluid convective heat transfer at concentrations of 0.3%, 0.8% and 1.5% were almost 6.6%,

13.5% and 23.7%, respectively.

Tiwari et al. [24] explored the heat transfer and pressure drop characteristics in a chevron-type

corrugated PHE using CeO2/water nanofluid as the coolant. The experiments were aimed for

determining the heat transfer and pressure drop performance at the wide range of concentrations

(0.5 to 3 vol. %) for various fluid flow rates (1 to 4 lpm), and operating temperatures. Optimum

concentration for CeO2/water nanofluid was determined as well, which yielded maximum heat

transfer improvement over base fluid. It was found that the nanofluid in the PHE has maximum

of 39% higher heat transfer coefficient compared to water at optimum concentration of 0.75 vol.

%. Moreover, the heat transfer coefficient increased with an increase in the volume flow rate of

the hot water and nanofluid, and increased with a decrease in the nanofluid temperature.

Kabeel et al. [25] developed an experimental setup to study the PHE thermal characteristics

including heat transfer coefficient, effectiveness, transmitted power and pressure drop at

different volume fractions of Al2O3 nanomaterial in pure water. A pronounced increase in both

heat transfer coefficient and transmitted power was observed by increasing the concentration.

The maximum increase in heat transfer coefficient was reached 13% for a concentration of 4%.

Moreover, both pressure drop and required pumping power increased with the increase in

Reynolds number. The maximum increase in pressure drop was recorded 45% above the base

fluid at concentration of 4%. The schematic of the chevron plate used and corrugation

dimensions have been illustrated in Fig. 1.

5
Fig. 1. (a) Schematic of a chevron plate, (b) Corrugation dimensions [25]. Reprinted with permission from Elsevier.

Behrangzade and Heyhat [26] evaluated efficiency improvement of a commercial corrugated

PHE working with silver-water nanofluid. In this regard, an experimental rig was provided to

recognize the heat transfer rate and pressure drop of the nanofluid. The findings displayed that

the overall heat transfer coefficient becomes larger, from 6.18% to 16.79%, for 100 ppm silver

nanofluid. While using nanofluid, no significant growth in pressure drop values was observed.

Moreover, the process temperatures and flow rates had significant impacts on the helpfulness of

applying nanofluid in the PHE.

Goodarzi et al. [27] investigated the influence of different functional covalent groups on the

thermophysical properties of carbon nanotube-base fluid. To shed more light on this issue,

cysteine (Cys) and silver (Ag) were covalently attached to the surface of the Multi-Walled

Carbon Nanotubes (MWCNT) (see Fig. 2). To calculate the thermal properties, different water-

based nanofluids such as Gum Arabic-treated MWCNT, functionalized MWCNT with cysteine

(FMWCNT-Cys) and silver (FMWCNT-Ag) were employed as coolants in a counter flow

6
corrugated PHE. It was found that increasing Reynolds number, Peclet number or volume

fraction would improve the heat transfer characteristics of the nanofluid. At concentration of 1%,

41.3073% and 41.3058% increment in heat transfer coefficients were obtained at minimum and

maximum Peclet numbers, respectively.

Fig. 2. Schematic diagram of functionalization procedure of MWCNT with cysteine and Ag [27]. Reprinted with

permission from Elsevier.

The investigations conducted on PHEs show a great performance of nanofluids in terms of heat

transfer characteristics. Based on the obtained results, it can be concluded that heat transfer

coefficient increases with an increase in the volume fraction which can further be related and

verified to enhancement in the thermophysical properties. Nevertheless, there are certain (few of

them) studies which reveal inconsistency with this finding and tend to conclude that the heat

7
transfer efficacy enhance with a reduction in the concentration of nanofluids and an increment in

Reynolds number and Peclet number.

Because of their plates, PHEs have more geometric parameters than other heat exchangers. For

this reason, many of the studies conducted on application of nanofluids in PHEs have focused on

the geometric characteristics of them.

Khoshvaght‑Aliabadi [28] investigated the effects of vortex-generator (VG) and Cu/water

nanofluid flow on performance of plate-fin heat exchangers. A highly precise test loop was

fabricated to obtain accurate results of the heat transfer and pressure drop characteristics. Based

on the results, utilizing the VG channel instead of the plain channel enhanced the heat transfer

rate remarkably. Also, the results showed that the VG channel is more effective than the

nanofluid on the performance of plate-fin heat exchangers. It was observed that the combination

of these two heat transfer enhancement techniques has a noticeably high thermal–hydraulic

performance, which enhances up to 1.67.

Abed et al. [29] studied heat transfer of nanofluids in trapezoidal PHE. This study evaluated the

effects of four different types of nanoparticles, Al2O3, CuO, SiO2, and ZnO, with different

volume fractions. The effects of geometrical parameters (wavy amplitudes and longitudinal

pitch) of the trapezoidal channel were examined. The results indicated that SiO2 has the highest

Nusselt number among the nanofluids. Enhancement of heat transfer increased with

concentration, but a slight increase in pressure loss with decreasing nanoparticle diameter was

also observed. The increment in average Nusselt number was observed for nanoparticles with a

diameter of 20 nm, and the heat transfer enhancement was up to 35% compared to water.

In some studies, the effect of chevron angle on thermal features in PHEs has been examined.

8
Kumar et al. [30] focused on the effect of symmetric (   30o / 30o and   60o / 60o ) and mixed

(   30o / 60o ) chevron angles in PHE on comparative energetic and exergetic performance for

ZnO/water nanofluids. Experimental observations confirmed that optimum enhancement in heat

transfer rate ratio, heat transfer coefficient ratio and optimum reduction in exergy loss are

obtained at   60o / 60o for volume concentration of 1.0%. Total entropy generation also

minimized for this configuration, which was 41.78% and 26.94% for   60o / 60o as compared

to   30o / 30o and   30o / 60o in PHE, respectively. In addition, Bejan number was the

highest for   60o / 60o in PHE due to reduced effect of fluid friction in entropy generation.

Maximum exergetic efficiency (about 45%) were achieved for corrugated PHE at optimal

concentration. The schematic of the experimental apparatus used has been depicted in Fig. 3.

Fig. 3. Schematic of experimental apparatus [30]. Reprinted with permission from Elsevier.

9
Chen et al. [31] assessed the performance of a lithium bromide (LiBr) solution with and without

nanoparticles in a PHE for various chevron angles and mass flow rates. As a result, the heat

transfer rate and the overall heat transfer coefficient in 60 o/60o PHE was over 100% higher than

that of 30o/30o PHE, and the effectiveness of the PHE in 60 o/60o PHE was about 70% higher than

that of 30o/30o PHE. By using nanoparticle in the working fluid, the heat transfer performance

increased significantly. The heat transfer rate of 3 vol.% nanofluids augmented about 3–8%

compared to that of LiBr solution for all chevron PHEs. Besides, the 60 o/60o PHE using 3 vol.%

nanofluids produced the largest heat transfer rate and effectiveness.

Some researchers have investigated the effect of the nanoparticle materials used in nanofluids on

PHEs and have compared these materials with each other.

Mare et al. [32] compared experimentally the thermal performances of two types of commercial

nanofluids at low temperature in a PHE. The first was composed of alumina dispersed in water

and the second one was aqueous suspensions of Carbon Nanotubes (CNTs). The results showed

an improvement in laminar mode of the convective heat transfer coefficient of about 42% and

50% for alumina and CNT nanofluids compared to that of pure water, respectively. The results

revealed that the impact of the viscosity and the pressure drop at low temperatures is important

and has to take into account before to use nanofluids in the heat exchanger.

Sun et al. [33] studied the flow and convective heat transfer characteristics of nanofluids inside a

PHE. They used nanoparticles (Cu, Fe2O3 and Al2O3) with a particle size of 50 nm. The results

demonstrated that the overall heat transfer coefficient and resistance coefficient enhance with the

addition of nanoparticles. Different nanoparticles led to different consequences such that the

convective heat transfer coefficient of the Cu–water nanofluid was the best. Maximum

10
enhancement was 34.55% which occurred for the Cu–water nanofluid at concentration of 0.5%.

Fig. 4 illustrates heat transfer coefficient ratio in terms of Reynolds number for different

nanoparticles at the concentration of 0.5%.

Fig. 4. Heat transfer coefficient ratio for different nanoparticles at concentration of 0.5% [33]. Reprinted with

permission from Elsevier.

Tiwari et al. [34] made an attempt to optimize different volume fractions based on a maximum

heat transfer rate, convective heat transfer coefficient, overall heat transfer coefficient,

effectiveness, and performance index for CeO2-water, Al2O3-water, TiO2-water and SiO2-water

nanofluids. The novelty of their study was the optimization of volume fraction of various

nanofluids based on experimentation in the commercial PHE for wide range of volume fractions.

The results showed that for maximum enhancement of heat transfer characteristics, different

nanofluids work at different optimum concentrations. For CeO 2-water, Al2O3-water, TiO2-water

and SiO2-water nanofluids, the optimum concentrations were 0.75%, 1%, 0.75% and 1.25%,

11
respectively. The corresponding maximum heat transfer enhancements were about 35.9%,

26.3%, 24.1%, and 13.9%, respectively.

Huang et al. [35] investigated heat transfer and pressure drop characteristics of Al2O3/water and

MWCNT/water nanofluids flowing in a chevron-type PHE. The results showed that heat transfer

seemed to be improved by using nanofluids at constant Reynolds number. However, little heat

transfer enhancement was observed based on a constant flow velocity. The heat transfer

deterioration of MWCNT/water nanofluids was more intensive than Al2O3/water nanofluids. The

pressure drop of nanofluid was reasonably higher than that of water and seemed to increase with

increasing concentration due to the increase in viscosity. However, there was not much

difference between the pressure drop of nanofluids and that of water at low concentrations. The

enhancement values were 8.1% for Al2O3 and 0.42% for CNT.

Javadi et al. [36] applied the nanofluids containing SiO2, TiO2 and Al2O3 nanoparticles in a PHE.

It was concluded that the thermal conductivity, heat transfer coefficient and heat transfer rate of

the fluid increase by adding the nanoparticles, and TiO 2 and Al2O3 resulted in higher

thermophysical properties in comparison with SiO 2. The highest overall heat transfer coefficient

was achieved by Al2O3 nanofluid, which was 308.69 W/m2 K in 0.2% concentration. The related

heat transfer rate was improved around 30% compared to SiO2 nanofluid. In terms of pressure

drop, SiO2 showed the lowest pressure drop, and it was around 50% smaller than the pressure

drop in case of using TiO2 and Al2O3.

As shown in the above studies, different nanoparticle materials can be proper selections for being

used in PHEs in spite of the fact that certain differences have been observed in a number of

studies. For example, Mare et al. [32] found out that CNTs are preferable to oxide nanoparticles,

whereas Huang et al. [35] demonstrated that the reverse is true. To achieve a more general

12
conclusion in this regard, further studies are needed to be conducted on the effects of different

particle materials. Meanwhile, because the cost of nanoparticles is still high, research

experiments should be conducted, regarding the economy and practicality of nanofluids, to

progressively realize the best utilizations of nanofluids under various conditions, various

environments, and with various surfactants.

It is clear that the energy amount is not valuable when it is taken into account alone, and the

work that is obtained from that amount of energy is important. This work is evaluated by a

concept called exergy. The term “availability” was made popular in the United States by the

M.I.T. School of Engineering in the 1940s. Today, the term of exergy, introduced in Europe in

the 1950s, has found global acceptance partly because it is shorter, it rhymes with energy and

entropy, and it can be adapted without requiring translation [37]. The exergy of a system at a

given thermodynamic state is the maximum work amount that can be achieved when the system

goes from that specific state to a state of equilibrium with the surroundings. As we know energy

can be neither produced nor consumed but exergy is used through processes caused by

irreversibilities and therefore, it will be non-conservative. Indeed, exergy analysis is based on

second law of thermodynamics.

Considering the significance of exergy analysis, some researchers have carried out it when using

nanofluids in PHEs.

Pandey and Nema [38] investigated experimentally the effects of using Al2 O3-water nanofluids

and pure water as coolants on heat transfer, frictional losses, and exergy loss in a counter flow

corrugated PHE. It was observed that the heat transfer characteristics improve with increase in

Reynolds number and Peclet number, and with decrease in nanofluid concentration. For a given

heat load, the required pumping power increased with increase in concentration. The non-

13
dimensional exergy loss was found to remain constant for water. In addition, among the four

coolants considered for experiments, the non-dimensional exergy loss was lowest for 2 vol.%

nanofluid at a flow rate of 3.7 lpm. Moreover, average effectiveness of the PHE on the energy

basis was 84% for the water and 87% for the nanofluid.

Khairul et al. [39] assessed the effects of water and CuO/water nanofluid on heat transfer

coefficient, heat transfer rate, frictional loss, pressure drop, pumping power and exergy

destruction in the corrugated PHE. The heat transfer coefficient of CuO/water nanofluid

increased about 18.50 to 27.20% with the enhancement of concentration from 0.50 to 1.50%

compared to water. Moreover, exergy loss reduced by 24% employing nanofluids as a heat

transfer medium in comparison with conventional fluid. Additionally, 34% higher exergetic heat

transfer effectiveness was found for volume fraction of 1.5%.

As can be observed, contrasting conclusions have been obtained in the above two studies in

terms of the effect of particle concentration on exergy loss. For instance, Pandey and Nema [38]

showed that increasing concentration intensifies exergy loss, whereas Khairul et al. [39] reported

that exergy loss decreases as a result of concentration increment. Hence, far more research, based

on the second law of thermodynamics, is required in the future before a definite conclusion can

be reached in this regard.

Fouling deposit is a chief problem in operation of PHEs because it intensifies both thermal

resistance and pressure loss, therefore affecting the initial cost as well as operating prices. The

fouling and corrosion cost in the US industry was $3–10 billion in 1985 [40]. This problem thus

encourages scientists and engineers for study on characterization of fouling deposition and

development of suitable fouling mitigation techniques. Mechanisms of fouling development have

been extensively evaluated by researchers. Previous surveys have mostly concentrated on factors

14
including operation time, geometric structure [41], hydrodynamic conditions [42], flow

temperature [43] and surface material.

It is noteworthy that fouling is further aggravated in PHEs that use nanofluids since, in addition

to the primary factors that cause fouling, these PHEs might also be prone to nanoparticle fouling

in the long run. There is limited research on fouling for PHEs which work with nanofluids.

Sarafraz and Hormozi [44] performed an experimental research on the heat transfer and pressure

drop characteristics of MWCNT nanofluids inside a PHE with the consideration of fouling

formation of CNTs. The results demonstrated that the heat transfer coefficient could be

augmented, when flow rate and concentration of nanoparticles increase. The heat transfer

enhancement was 14% at concentration of 1% in comparison with the water. It was also seen that

the pressure drop intensified with increasing the flow rate and mass concentration. Although

MWCNT/water nanofluids presented higher pressure drop in comparison with the base fluid,

they provided better overall thermal performance. For long-operating condition, significant

fouling resistance was also measured, which was amplified by increasing the concentration.

When a particulate working fluid flows in a heat-exchanging medium, fouling formation is a

matter of concern. When it comes to the MWCNT nanofluids, nanotube aggregation and

clustering can intensify the fouling formation. In order to investigate the fouling formation of the

nanofluid, the authors utilized the fouling thermal resistance parameter as below:

1 1
Rf   (1)
U f Uc

In Eq. (1), Uc is the overall heat transfer coefficient of PHE, when it is clean (at the initial

moment of experiment) and Uf, is the overall heat transfer coefficient when fouling is formed

inside the heat exchanger. Additionally, Rf represents fouling thermal resistance. One sign for

fouling formation is that the overall heat transfer coefficient is deteriorated over the extended

15
time. In fact, fouling can create a significant thermal resistance, which reduces the rate of heat

transfer. In the work of Sarafraz and Hormozi [44], the PHE let to be continuously operated for

about 720 working hours. During the operation, fouling resistance was constantly monitored. As

can be seen in Fig. 5, fouling resistance parameter had a rectilinear behavior with different line

slope and this slope value intensified with time of operation and increasing the MWCNT

concentration. In terms of order of magnitude, in a rough comparison with fouling resistance of

metal oxides [45, 46], the authors claimed that metal oxides inside the heat exchangers have

fouling resistance about 10-fold larger than MWCNT.

Fig. 5. Fouling resistance of the nanofluid inside the PHE [44]. Reprinted with permission from Elsevier.

In another study, Anoop et al. [47] investigated thermal performance of SiO2–water nanofluids in

an industrial PHE. The experimental results showed both augmentation and deterioration of heat

transfer coefficient for nanofluids depending on the flow rate and nanofluid concentration. The

authors attributed this trend by the counter effect of the changes in thermophysical properties of

fluids together with the fouling on the contact surfaces of the PHE. They claimed that in addition

16
to the reduced specific heat values of nanofluids at higher concentrations, fouling of heat

exchanger surfaces due to particle deposition could also reduce the heat transfer performance

while using nanofluids. Maximum heat transfer enhancement of about 5% was noticed for

concentration of 2% at the lowest flow rate.

Similar degradation in heat transfer performance was also observed earlier for nanofluids in

microchannels [48].

The above studies showed that fouling could have significant effects on the characteristics of the

PHEs which work with nanofluids. However, little research has so far been conducted in this

field and consequently, much more investigations are required for establishing relevant strategies

to design PHEs optimally.

Numerical studies which have been conducted on nanofluids in the literature are based on two

approaches, namely: single-phase and two-phase. Conservation equations are solved considering

the effective properties of nanofluids in the former, while solution is implemented to demonstrate

behavior of liquid and solid phases in the latter. In fact, since many factors such as gravity,

Brownian force, friction between the fluid and solid particles, thermophoresis, sedimentation,

and dispersion can happen in nanofluids, some investigators have tried to employ two-phase

techniques for nanofluids in order to reach more realistic findings. In the field of PHEs, few

researchers have also used two-phase methods for simulating characteristics of nanofluids in this

type of heat exchangers.

Khoshvaght-Aliabadi et al. [49] studied forced convective heat transfer with laminar and steady-

state flow of copper–water nanofluid inside the vortex-generator plate-fin heat exchanger using

single-phase (homogeneous) and two different two-phase (mixture and Eulerian) models. For the

case under consideration, the mixture model presented closer predictions of the convective heat

17
 transfer coefficient to the experimental data than the homogeneous and Eulerian models. It was

concluded that the homogeneous and Eulerian models underestimate Nusselt number. The heat

transfer coefficient at concentration of 0.3% for wings with height of 2.5 mm, 5.0 mm, and 7.5

mm were approximately 19.1%, 16.3%, and 14.4% greater than that of the base fluid,

respectively. Eventually, two correlations were developed for Colburn factor and Fanning

friction factor in terms of Reynolds number, nanoparticle weight fraction, and geometrical

parameters.

In spite of the studies conducted so far on using nanofluids in PHEs, there are still uncertainties

that need to be resolved in future research. For instance, Javadi et al. [36] and Tiwari et al. [24]

showed that the using nanofluids in the PHEs can improve the thermal performance, while

Kabeel et al. [25] illustrated that the use of nanofluids in the PHEs is doubtful. Hence, further

research investigations in this area is needed to address the discrepancies in findings between

different researchers.

Table 1 summarizes some of the studies conducted on application of nanofluids in PHEs

including the most important conclusions obtained from these contributions.

Table 1. Some of the studies conducted on application of nanofluids in PHEs.

Flow
Researcher(s) Year Nanoparticles Quantified improvement Work type Finding(s)
regime
The particles deposited
Overall heat transfer on the plate heat
Pourhoseini and coefficient increases by exchanger surface cause
2017 Ag Turbulent Experimental
Naghizadeh [50] almost 1620 W/m2K with additional heat transfer
adding the nanoparticles. resistance and reduce the
heat transfer coefficients.
Maximum reduction in exergy
Entropy generation
loss (about 51%) and
reduces with the
maximum exergetic efficiency
Kumar et al. [30] 2016 ZnO Turbulent Experimental increasing volume
(about 45%) are attained for
concentration.
corrugated PHE at optimal
concentration.
Pandey and 2012 Al2O3 Turbulent Average value of Experimental For a given heat load, the

18
Nema [38] effectiveness of the corrugated associated pumping
PHE on energy basis was 84% power augmented by
for water–water and 87% for increasing the
water–nanofluid. concentration.
Savings in pumping power: All the nanofluids show
Al2O3, CuO
4.72% for Al2O3 and 3.01% improvements in their
Ray et al. [51] 2014 and SiO2 Laminar Experimental
for CuO performance over the
base fluid.
10% enhancement in average
SiO2 had the greatest
Al2O3, CuO, Nusselt number was observed
Abed et al. [29] 2015 Turbulent Numerical Nusselt number among
SiO2 and ZnO for nanoparticles with a
the nanofluids.
diameter of 20 nm at 4vol %.
As the SiO2
nanoparticles are
relatively inexpensive
Heat transfer enhancement
Stogiannis et al. and their nanofluids are
2015 SiO2 Laminar was up to 35% compared to Numerical
[52] easy to produce, their
water.
usage was suggested as
an attractive solution for
mini-scale devices.
The pressure drop
Maximum enhancement of the
intensifies by using
nanofluid convective heat
nanofluid and this
transfer coefficient at 0.3%,
Barzegarian et al. increase can be neglected
2016 TiO2 Turbulent 0.8% and 1.5% weight Experimental
[23] compared to the
fraction of nanoparticles are
significant increment of
about 6.6%, 13.5% and
nanofluid convective
23.7%, respectively.
heat transfer.
Heat transfer coefficient of
Density and thermal
nanofluid increased about
conductivity are the most
18.50 to 27.20% with the
Khairul et al. significant parameters for
2014 CuO Turbulent enhancement of nanoparticles Experimental
[39] efficacy improvement of
volume concentration from
a heat exchanger
0.50 to 1.50% compared to
water.
The heat transfer
Laminar,
The heat transfer enhancement coefficient intensifies as
Sarafraz and transient
2016 CNT is 14% at concentration of 1% Experimental flow rate and
Hormozi [44] and
in comparison with the water. nanoparticle
turbulent
concentration increase.
Maximum enhancement was The convective heat
Cu, Fe2O3 and 34.55% which occurred for transfer coefficient of
Sun et al. [33] 2016 Turbulent Experimental
Al2O3 the Cu–water nanofluid at Cu–water nanofluid was
concentration of 0.5%. the best.
The heat transfer
deterioration may be
Enhancement in thermal caused by the
Huang et al. [35] 2015 Al2O3 and CNT Turbulent conductivity was 8.1% for Experimental suppression of turbulence
Al2O3 and 0.42% for CNT. intensity with addition of
nanoparticles and the
viscosity increase.
Overall heat transfer Inlet temperature of
Behrangzade and coefficient becomes larger, nanofluid into the PHE
2016 Ag Laminar Experimental
Heyhat [26] from 6.18% to 16.79%, for has a significant effect on
100 ppm Ag nanofluid. the overall heat transfer

19
 coefficient.
Rates of heat transfer
Laminar enhancement and
Taghizadeh- Maximum performance index
2016 TiO2 and Experimental pressure drop increase
Tabari et al. [53] was approximately 1.17.
turbulent were higher for turbulent
flow conditions.
Employing the nanofluid
Laminar
Khoshvaght- Thermal–hydraulic with the lowest
2016 Cu and Experimental
Aliabadi [28] performance was 1.67. concentration has better
turbulent
efficiency.
The heat transfer rate of 3
By use of nanoparticles
vol.% nanofluids enhanced
in the base fluid, the heat
Chen et al. [31] 2014 Al2O3 Turbulent about 3-8% compared to that Numerical
transfer performance
of base fluid for all chevron
increased significantly.
PHEs.
For 1% nanofluid, 41.3073%
With changing the
and 41.3058% increment in
working fluid of the heat
heat transfer coefficients were
Goodarzi et al. exchanger with
2015 CNT-Ag Turbulent obtained at minimum and Numerical
[27] nanofluid, efficacy of the
maximum Peclet numbers,
device enhances.
respectively, compared to
water.
Fouling of nanoparticles
was mitigated via low
Laminar,
Overall heat transfer frequency vibration, and
Sarafraz et al. transient
2017 CuO coefficient enhanced up to Experimental fouling thermal
[54] and
8.6%. resistance was decreased
turbulent
by applying the
vibration.
Alumina and CNTs show
a better thermal-
An improvement in the hydraulic performance in
CNT and Laminar convective heat transfer terms of a competition
Mare et al. [32] 2011 Experimental
Al2O3 coefficient up to 50% between heat transfer
compared to pure water enhancement and
pumping power loss in
comparison with water.

3. Double-pipe heat exchangers

Double-pipe heat exchangers are simplest type of heat exchangers geometrically, which have

many applications. For this reason, many studies have been conducted on using different

nanofluids in them. In the different subdivisions of the present section, we have reviewed and

evaluated the studies conducted on double-pipe heat exchangers working with nanofluids. In

each subsection, the relevant challenges as well as opportunities are discussed.

20
Rabienataj Darzi et al. [55] performed an experimental study in order to find out the effects of

Al2O3 nanofluid on heat transfer, pressure drop and thermal performance of a double-pipe heat

exchanger. The results indicated that there is a good potential in promoting the thermal

performance of heat exchanger by adding nanoparticles in the investigated ranges where there is

not a severe pressure drop penalty. An empirical correlation was developed for Nusselt number

based on the Reynolds number and concentration. Maximum enhancement in the Nusselt

numbers was about 20% for 1% concentration.

Duangthongsuk and Wongwises [56] carried out an experimental study on the forced convective

heat transfer of a nanofluid consisting of water and TiO 2 nanoparticles. The heat transfer

coefficient and friction factor of the nanofluid flowing in a double-pipe counter flow heat

exchanger under turbulent conditions were investigated. The results showed that the convective

heat transfer coefficient of nanofluid is higher than that of the base liquid by about 6–11%.

Moreover, the heat transfer coefficient of the nanofluid increased with an increase in the mass

flow rate of the hot water and nanofluid, and increased with a decrease in the nanofluid

temperature. It was also found that the Gnielinski equation fails to predict the heat transfer

coefficient of the nanofluid. Fig. 6 shows the apparatus used in this experimental research.

21
 Fig. 6. Schematic diagram of the experimental apparatus [56]. Reprinted with permission from Elsevier.

Chun et al. [57] conducted an investigation on the convective heat transfer coefficient of the

nanofluid made of alumina nanoparticles and transformer oil which flowed through a double-

pipe heat exchanger in the laminar flow regime. The nanofluids exhibited a considerable increase

of heat transfer coefficient. Besides, an experimental correlation was proposed for this nanofluid

system. Nanofluid with concentration of 0.5% had a typical increase in average heat transfer

coefficient of 13% over the base fluid.

Aghayari et al. [58] investigated heat transfer performance and flow characteristics of an Al2O3

nanofluid flowing in a horizontal double-pipe counter flow heat exchanger. Experiments were

carried out under turbulent flow conditions. The effects of the Reynolds number, the nanofluid

temperature and concentration on the heat transfer and flow characteristics were investigated.

22
The results showed that the use of Al2O3–water nanofluid significantly gives higher heat transfer

coefficients than those of the base fluid with the enhancement of greater than 12%.

Khedkar et al. [59] evaluated heat transfer characteristics of TiO2–water nanofluids as a coolant

in concentric tube heat exchanger. The nanofluids were the mixture of water and TiO2

nanoparticles. For the same range of Reynolds number, addition of nanoparticles to the base fluid

enhanced the heat transfer performance and resulted in the higher heat transfer coefficient than

that of the base fluid, such that a 14% enhancement in the heat transfer was perceived.

Akhtari et al. [60] carried out an experimental and numerical study on the heat transfer of a-

Al2O3-water nanofluid flowing through a double-pipe heat exchanger under laminar conditions.

Effects of important parameters such as hot and cold volume flow rates, nanofluid temperature,

and nanoparticle concentration were investigated. The results indicated that the heat transfer

performance increases with increasing the hot and cold volume flow rates, as well as the particle

concentration and nanofluid inlet temperature. The results showed that the heat transfer

coefficient of nanofluid is higher than that of water by 13.2%.

As reported in the majority of the studies conducted on ordinary double-pipe heat exchangers,

adding nanoparticles to the base liquid would increase heat transfer rate. However, additional

investigations are needed to evaluate the effects of different particle concentrations on the

convective heat transfer coefficients and flow features of nanofluids in these heat exchangers. In

fact, the development of accurate correlations, which predict the heat transfer coefficient of

nanofluids flowing in double-pipe heat exchangers, is necessary.

Some researchers have investigated the effect of applying nanofluids in double-pipe helically

coiled heat exchangers.

23
Wu et al. [61] investigated pressure drop and convective heat transfer characteristics of water

and alumina-water nanofluids inside a double-pipe helically coiled heat exchanger. A new

correlation was developed for laminar flow in helically coiled tubes, which can predict the

experimental heat transfer data very well. For both laminar and turbulent flows, no anomalous

heat transfer enhancement was found, and the heat transfer enhancement of the nanofluids

compared to water was up to 3.43%. The authors claimed that additional possible effects of

nanoparticles, e.g., Brownian motion, thermophoresis and diffusiophoresis, on the convective

heat transfer characteristics of the nanofluids are insignificant compared to the dominant

thermophysical properties of the nanofluids.

Mohammed and Narrein [62] evaluated the effects of using different geometrical parameters

with the combination of water–CuO nanofluid on heat transfer and fluid flow characteristics in a

helically coiled tube heat exchanger. The mass flow rate of water in the annulus was kept

constant and the nanofluid flow rate in the inner tube was varied. The effect of flow

configuration (parallel and counter) was also examined. The results indicated that geometrical

parameters such as the helix radius and inner tube diameter affect the performance of the heat

exchanger. It was also found that counter-flow configuration produces better results as compared

to parallel-flow one. A 34% increment in effectiveness and a 29% enhancement in performance

index were observed for the counter flow configuration.

Huminic and Huminic [63] performed three-dimensional analysis to study the heat transfer and

entropy generation inside a helically coiled heat exchanger in laminar regime using two different

types of nanofluids. Overall heat transfer coefficient, effectiveness, Nusselt number, and entropy

generation of the heat exchanger were investigated. The numerical results revealed that the use

of nanofluids in this heat exchanger improves the heat transfer performance. The maximum

24
effectiveness was 91% for 2% CuO nanoparticles and 80% for 2% TiO 2 nanoparticles. Also, the

increase of concentration led to the Nusselt number increase and the reduction of the entropy

generation.

Narrein and Mohammed [64] investigated the effects of various types of nanofluids on heat

transfer and fluid flow characteristics in a helically coiled tube heat exchanger. Mainly, the

effects of nanoparticles type (Al2O3, SiO2, CuO, ZnO), concentration, particle diameter, and base

fluid type (water, ethylene glycol, engine oil) were analyzed. The results revealed that nanofluids

can enhance the thermal properties and performance but it is accompanied with a slight increase

in pressure drop. It was found that the Nusselt number is highest for the CuO–water nanofluid.

The heat transfer rate increases up to about 1300 W at temperature difference of 50 K. Fig. 7

illustrates the temperature contours at tube mid-length for the pure water and the CuO-water

nanofluid (4%). This figure reveals that the core region of water is much hotter in comparison

with the nanofluid indicating that nanofluid is capable of exchanging heat more efficiently.

25
 Fig. 7. Temperature contours at tube mid-length for: (a) pure water, and (b) CuO-water nanofluid (4%) [64].

Reprinted with permission from Elsevier.

Aly [65] carried out a CFD study to investigate the heat transfer and pressure drop of the water-

Al2O3 nanofluid flowing inside coiled heat exchangers. The overall performance of the tested

heat exchangers was assessed based on the thermo-hydrodynamic performance index. Design

parameters were in the range of volume concentrations 0.5%, 1.0% and 2.0%, coil diameters

0.18, 0.24 and 0.30 m, inner tube and annulus sides flow rates from 2 to 5 LPM and 10 to 25

LPM, respectively. At the same Re number or Dean number, the heat transfer coefficient

increased by increasing the coil diameter and concentration. Also, the friction factor increased

with the increase in curvature ratio, and pressure drop penalty was negligible with increasing the

concentration. In comparison with the water, a 30% heat transfer enhancement was obtained for

the nanofluid at concentration of 2%.

26
Most of the studies on using nanofluids in double-pipe helically coiled heat exchangers have

investigated the effects of nanoparticle concentration as well as flow parameters on heat transfer

and pressure drop. Although geometric characteristics including helix radius and inner tube

diameter can also have significant effects on flow and heat transfer characteristics of this type of

heat exchangers, these parameters have received less attention in research conducted so far.

Some studies on double-pipe heat exchangers have examined the effect of structural

modifications such as employing tape inserts. Tape insert is one of the most efficient heat

transfer enhancement techniques which has many applications caused by simplicity, easy

installment, low cost, and easy maintenance. In general, twisted tape is utilized as a continuous

swirl generator which creates turbulence in flow. It causes a better mixing in the flow which

results in a greater heat exchange rate.

Hazbehian et al. [66] assessed heat transfer coefficient in combination with structural

modifications of tape inserts inside double-pipe heat exchanger equipped with reduced width

twisted tapes inserts. Polyvinyl Alcohol and TiO2 were chosen as base fluid and nanoparticles,

respectively. The investigations were carried out for tapes of different width length ratios. For

the reduced width twisted tapes, the heat transfer rate was decreased with decreasing tapes width.

The Nusselt numbers in the tube fitted with the reduced width twisted tape of 16, 14 and 12 were

respectively 210–390, 190–320 and 170–290% of that in the plain tube. Maximum thermal

performance factor belonged to twists with twist ratio of 2 and width of 16 with concentration of

0.5%.

Reddy and Rao [67] examined heat transfer coefficient and friction factor of TiO2 nanofluid

flowing in a double-pipe heat exchanger with and without helical coil inserts. The base fluid was

prepared by considering 40% of ethylene glycol and 60% of distilled water. The heat transfer

27
coefficient and friction factor get enhanced by 10.73% and 8.73% for the nanofluid with

concentration of 0.02% when compared to base fluid. Heat transfer coefficient and friction factor

further get enhanced by 13.85% and 10.69% respectively when compared to base fluid with

helical coil insert of P/d=2.5. Based on the experimental data, generalized correlations were

proposed for Nusselt number and friction factor.

Durga Prasad et al. [68] investigated turbulent forced convection heat transfer and friction of

Al2O3–water nanofluid flow through a concentric tube U-bend heat exchanger with and without

helical tape inserts in the inner tube. The results indicated that increasing Reynolds number and

Prandtl number increases the Nusselt number. The Nusselt number of entire pipes for 0.03%

concentration with helical tape inserts of p/d=5 showed an enhancement of 32.91% as compared

to water. Fig. 8 depicts Nusselt number of 0.03% nanofluid in the tube with helical tape inserts

for different p/d ratios. The friction factor for the entire inner tube at 0.03% concentration of

nanofluid with helical tape inserts of p/d=5 increased by 1.38-times as compared to water.

28
Fig. 8. Nusselt number of 0.03% nanofluid in a tube with helical tape inserts for different p/d ratios [68]. Reprinted

with permission from Elsevier.

Mohammed et al. [69] evaluated the effect of using louvered strip inserts placed in a circular

double-pipe heat exchanger on the thermal and flow fields utilizing various types of nanofluids.

Two different louvered strip insert arrangements (forward and backward) were used. Four

different types of nanoparticles, Al2O3, CuO, SiO2, and ZnO, were used. The numerical results

indicated that the forward louvered strip arrangement can promote the heat transfer by

approximately 367% to 411% at the highest slant angle of α=30° and lowest pitch of S=30 mm.

The maximal friction coefficient of the enhanced tube was around 10 times than that of the

smooth tube. It was also found that SiO2 nanofluid had the highest Nusselt number value,

followed by Al2O3, ZnO, and CuO.

Above overview demonstrates that the advantages of applying nanofluids in double-pipe heat

exchangers can vary considerably depending not only on thermophysical properties but also on

the geometrical parameters of the heat exchanging equipment and the working conditions.

Although some of the studies conducted on double-pipe heat exchangers with tape inserts have

proposed correlations for predicting thermal and flow characteristics of nanofluids, many more

numerical and experimental investigations are required for better clarifying the variations of

these parameters.

Examination of the surveys on nanofluid flow in double-pipe heat exchangers reveals that

researchers have mostly used metal and metal oxide nanoparticles. However, a small number of

the studies have utilized other nanoparticle materials.

Khajeh Arzani et al. [70] investigated heat transfer enhancement of graphene nanoplatelet-based

water nanofluids including non-covalent nanofluid (GNP-SDBS-based water nanofluid) and

29
covalent nanofluid (GNP-COOH-based water nanofluid) in an annular heat exchanger.

Convective heat transfer coefficient and pressure drop were investigated at different

concentrations, input powers and temperatures. The suspended GNP-SDBS and GNP-COOH

nanoparticles significantly enhanced the heat transfer performance of the base fluid. At constant

concentration, the higher Reynolds number caused the higher Nusselt number. In addition, the

friction factor was also declined as the Reynolds number increased. About 22% increment in the

convective heat transfer coefficient was seen at Reynolds number of 17,000 and 0.1 wt.% of

GNP-SDBS.

Wu et al. [71] experimentally investigated the hydraulic and thermal performance of MWCNT

nanofluids in a double-pipe helically coiled heat exchanger. The authors stated that possible

MWCNT effects, e.g., Brownian motion and thermophoresis, on the thermal performance in

helically coiled tubes are probably unimportant. Moreover, no heat transfer enhancement was

observed as a fixed flow velocity and a fixed pumping power. The relatively low thermal

conductivity increase and great viscosity increment resulted in an inefficient MWCNT–water

nanofluid.

Most of the studies on double-pipe heat exchangers emphasize strongly that using nanofluids in

these heat exchangers is useful, whereas the above study shows that the MWCNT-water

nanofluid does not have a proper efficacy under the conditions considered in [71].

Disagreement of studies on application of nanofluids in double-pipe heat exchangers is

absolutely obvious. Moreover, in comparison with conventional theory, some evaluations have

underpredicted the performance while others have overpredicted it. On the other hand, some of

researchers have illustrated no deviation from that of the classical theory. This discrepancy must

be dissolved such that a route is given as to whether classical theory should be followed or new

30
 theory must be employed. In addition, above literature review shows that research studies

conducted on double-pipe heat exchangers are dependent on type of nanofluids used and

consequently, the drawn conclusions cannot be generalized for all nanofluids.

For better comparison of the studies performed on application of nanofluids in double-pipe heat

exchangers, Table 2 lists some of the investigations carried out in this area.

Table 2. Some of the research studies carried out on application of nanofluids in double-pipe heat exchangers.

Flow
Researcher(s) Year Nanoparticles Quantified improvement Work type Finding(s)
regime
Maximum rates of
Using counter flow heat
average Nusselt number
Bahmani et al. exchangers was
2018 Al2O3 Turbulent and thermal efficiency Numerical
[72] recommended at greater
enhancement were 32.7%
Reynolds numbers.
and 30%, respectively.
Nanofluid with The surface properties of
concentration of 0.5% had nanoparticles, particle
a typical increase in loading, and particle shape
Chun et al. [57] 2008 Al2O3 Laminar Experimental
average heat transfer are important causes for
coefficient of 13% over enhancing heat transfer in
the base fluid. the heat exchanger.
Heat transfer of nanofluid Enhancement of convective
in comparison with the heat transfer coefficient
Aghayari et al.
2015 Al2O3 Turbulent heat transfer of fluid is Experimental depends on the fluid thermal
[58]
somewhat greater than conductivity and thermal
12%. boundary layer thickness.
Effectiveness enhances When concentration and
from about 0.4 to 0.45 by Reynolds number increase,
Bahiraei et al.
2017 Ag Laminar increasing the Numerical the overall heat transfer
[73]
concentration from 0.01% coefficient and heat transfer
to 0.1%. rate augment.
A considerable
enhancement was
Nanoparticles enhance the
observed in convective
Zamzamian et forced convective heat
2011 Al2O3 Turbulent heat transfer coefficient of Experimental
al. [74] transfer coefficient of the
the nanofluid as compared
base fluid significantly.
to the base fluid, ranging
from 2 to 50%.
The average Nusselt
number and friction factor Heat transfer coefficient is
Laminar in the tube fitted with the further increases for
Hazbehian et
2016 TiO2 and full-length twisted tapes Experimental nanofluid in the tube with
al. [66]
turbulent are respectively 50–130, strip insert.
and 30–95% higher than
those in the plain tube.
Kumar et al. The Nusselt number Maximum heat transfer
2017 Fe3O4 Turbulent Numerical
[75] enhancement is 14.7% for enhancement of 14.7% was

31
 volume concentration of achieved at 0.06% volume
0.06%. concentration and Re=28970
compared with water.
Heat transfer coefficient
Using helical coil inserts is
and friction factor
Laminar advantageous to increase
Reddy and Rao increase by 13.85% and
2014 TiO2 and Experimental heat transfer, while it also
[67] 10.69%, respectively for
turbulent causes pressure drop.
0.02% nanofluid
compared to base fluid.
The friction factor for the
The Nusselt number for
inner tube for 0.03%
0.03% concentration
Durga Prasad concentration of nanofluid
2015 Al2O3 Turbulent shows an enhancement of Experimental
et al. [68] with helical tape inserts
32.91% as compared to
intensifies by 1.38-times
water.
compared to water.
Maximum enhancement Adding the nanoparticles to
Rabienataj in Nusselt numbers was the base fluid has better
2013 Al2O3 Turbulent Experimental
Darzi et al. [55] about 20% for 1% result at high Reynolds
concentration. numbers.
Convective heat transfer The nanofluid incurs no
Duangthongsuk
coefficient of nanofluid is penalty of pumping power
and
2009 TiO2 Turbulent higher than that of the Experimental and can be appropriate for
Wongwises
base liquid by about 6– practical application.
[56]
11%.
Improvement in the Using the nanofluid can
efficiency was up to 5.1% improve thermal
Sozen et al.
2016 Al2O3 Turbulent when alumina nanofluid Experimental performance and efficiency
[76]
was used as the working of heat exchangers.
fluid.
By applying a non-uniform
By applying non-uniform
Shakiba and transverse magnetic field,
transverse magnetic field,
Vahedi [77] 2016 Fe3O4 Laminar Numerical the ferrofluid flow is
the average Nusselt
controlled and the cooling
number increases by 45%.
process improves.
An improvement of
Performance of the heat
31.2% was obtained for
exchanger improved through
Sozen et al. the heat exchanger
2016 Fly ash Turbulent Experimental an increase in the amount of
[78] efficiency when the fly-
heat transferred into the cold
ash nanofluid was used
fluid.
rather than the water.
A remarkable
Laminar, The nanofluid can change
enhancement of heat
Sarafraz and transient flow regime earlier from
2015 Ag transfer coefficient up to Experimental
Hormozi [79] and laminar to transient and
67% was achieved at
turbulent transient to turbulent.
concentration of 1%.
Nusselt number for 0.03%
Average Nusselt number
concentration with
enhances with an increase of
Prasad et al. trapezoidal-cut twisted
2015 Al2O3 Turbulent Experimental Reynolds number and
[80] tape inserts was increased
nanoparticle concentration.
by 34.24% as compared to
water.
Compared with pure
Nanoparticles increase the
Akhtari et al. water, the heat transfer
2013 Al2O3 Laminar Experimental heat transfer rate and overall
[60] coefficient of nanofluid
heat transfer coefficient.
was higher than that of

32
 water by 13.2%.
The heat transfer
For constant Reynolds
enhancement of the
numbers, no multiphase
Laminar nanofluids compared to
phenomenon was observed
Wu et al. [61] 2013 Al2O3 and water was from 0.37% to Experimental
and the employed alumina
turbulent 3.43% according to the
nanofluids behave like
constant flow velocity
homogeneous fluids.
basis.
For Reynolds number of
1000 and concentration of
At large concentrations and
1%, the total entropy
Reynolds numbers, particle
Bahiraei et al. generation rates for the
2017 Ag Laminar Numerical migration have a significant
[81] nanofluid, wall, and water
effect on entropy generation
were 0.098810, 0.000133,
rates.
and 0.041851 W/K,
respectively.
Increasing volume
Heat transfer
Cu, CuO and concentration has the most
Saeedan et al. enhancement is up to
2016 CNT Turbulent Numerical effect on heat transfer
[82] 12.6% for Cu, 3.4% for
attributes for Cu compared
CNT and 10.6% for CuO.
with other nanoparticles.
For 2% CuO, the heat Outlet water temperature
Huminic and transfer rate of the increases by increasing
CuO and TiO2
Huminic [83] 2011 Laminar nanofluid was Numerical particle concentration, and
approximately 14% CuO is better than TiO2.
greater than of pure water.
Maximum enhancement Heat transfer rates for
Laminar of overall heat transfer nanofluids are higher than
Sonawane et al.
2013 Al2O3 and coefficient with 3% Experimental those for the water, and this
[84]
turbulent concentration exceeds increases with concentration
39%. increment.

4. Shell and tube heat exchangers

Shell-and-Tube Heat Exchangers (STHXs) are among the mostly utilized types of heat

exchangers in industry with numerous applications in power plants, oil refineries, food

industries, and so forth. More than 35–40% of the heat exchangers are STHX due to their robust

construction geometry as well as easy maintenance and possible upgrades [85]. Due to their

merits, these heat exchangers still have remained as the main choice by engineers and

extensively are employed as heat exchange devises despite the industrial advancements in other

kinds.

33
To improve the performance of STHXs, some researchers have studied the effect of applying

nanofluids in them.

Albadr et al. [86] reported an experimental study on the forced convective heat transfer and flow

characteristics of water–Al2O3 nanofluids flowing in a STHX under turbulent conditions. The

results showed that the heat transfer coefficient of nanofluid is slightly higher than that of the

base liquid at same mass flow rate and same inlet temperature. The heat transfer coefficient of

the nanofluid increased with an increase in the mass flow rate and the concentration, however

increasing the concentration caused increase in the viscosity leading to increase in friction factor.

The value of the overall heat transfer coefficient of the nanofluid was 57% greater than that of

pure water.

Bahrehmand and Abbassi [87] investigated heat transfer of Al2O3 nanofluid flow inside shell and

helical tube heat exchangers. The results indicated that the presence of 0.2% and 0.3% volume

concentration increases the heat transfer rate by approximately 14% and 18%, respectively. The

results also showed that the coil-side, shell-side and overall heat transfer coefficients enhance

with the concentration increment. It was indicated that for the same mass flow rate, the heat

transfer rate of nanofluid enhances noticeably compared to water and it increases marginally

with the further increase in the concentration. In addition, it was found that the effectiveness

enhances by decreasing the mass flow rate and increasing the concentration, tube diameter and

coil diameter.

Shahrul et al. [88] evaluated the performance of a STHX operated with nanofluid. The

convective heat transfer coefficient was found to be 2–15% higher than that of water. In addition,

energy effectiveness improved about 23–52% for the nanofluid. As energy effectiveness is

34
strongly depends on the density and specific heat of the operating fluids, maximum effectiveness

was obtained for the ZnO–water nanofluid and lowest one for the SiO2-water nanofluid.

Some contributions have examined the effect of nanoparticle shape on the characteristics of

STHXs.

Elias et al. [89] studied the effect of different particle shapes (cylindrical, bricks, blades, and

platelets) on the overall heat transfer coefficient, heat transfer rate and entropy generation of a

STHX with different baffle angles and segmental baffle. Cylindrical shape nanoparticles showed

best heat transfer coefficient among the other shapes for different baffle angles along wit h

segmental baffle. An enhancement of overall heat transfer coefficient for cylindrical shape

particles with 20o baffle angle was found 12%, 19.9%, 28.23% and 17.85% higher than 30 o, 40o,

50o baffle angles and segmental baffle, respectively for 1 vol. % concentration of Boehmite

alumina. Heat transfer rate was also found higher for cylindrical shape at 20 o baffle angle than

other baffle angles as well as segmental baffle. However, entropy generation decreased with the

concentration increment for all baffle angles and segmental baffle.

In other study, Elias et al. [90] investigated the effect of different nanoparticle shapes on the

performance of a STHX operating with nanofluid analytically. Boehmite alumina nanoparticles

of different shapes were dispersed in a mixture of water-ethylene glycol. The results showed an

increase in both the heat transfer and thermodynamic performance of the system. However,

among the different nanoparticle shapes, cylindrical shape exhibited better heat transfer

characteristics. The heat transfer coefficient of cylindrical shaped nanoparticles, at concentration

of 1% demonstrated 2.4% greater performance compared with the spherical shaped

nanoparticles. On the other hand, entropy generation for nanofluids containing cylindrical shaped

nanoparticles was higher in comparison with the other nanoparticle shapes.

35
Due to the favorable characteristics of CNTs, some studies have focused on utilizing nanofluids

containing CNTs in STHXs.

Lotfi et al. [91] studied heat transfer enhancement of a MWCNT–water nanofluid in a horizontal

STHX. CNTs were synthesized by the use of catalytic chemical vapor deposition method over

Co Mo–MgO nanocatalyst. Obtained MWCNTs were purified using a three stage method.

COOH functional groups were inserted for making the nanotubes hydrophilic and increasing the

stability of the nanofluid. The results indicated that heat transfer in the heat exchanger enhances

in the presence of MWCNTs in comparison with the base fluid. Overall heat transfer coefficient

increased from 30 to 32 W/m2 K by adding the nanoparticles.

Hosseini et al. [92] presented the performance of CNT–water nanofluid as a cooling fluid in a

shell and tube intercooler of a LPG absorber tower. It was observed that for maximum CNT

volume fraction which was 0.278%, the overall heat transfer coefficient and heat transfer rate

increased about 14.5% and 10.3%, respectively, compared to water. This advantage can decrease

the heat transfer area of the heat exchanger which will lead to decrease the manufacturing cost.

The outlet temperature of the hot fluid decreased with increasing the volume fraction whereas the

pressure drop due to the nanoparticles suspended in water was too low.

Although the above two studies show that employing CNTs increases heat transfer in STHXs,

one particular challenge concerning the use of CNTs is their entanglement which leads to their

quick sedimentation. To prevent this, CNTs can be used in hybrid form with magnetic

nanoparticles. Functionalizing CNTs using magnetic nanoparticles can combine the

characteristics of magnetic nanoparticles and CNTs, which can develop materials with new

chemical and physical features and therefore, promising applications. Indeed, the magnetic

particles connect to the wall of CNTs by hydrophobic interactions. Therefore, the ferromagnetic

36
property is added to the CNTs without altering the great yield of tube formation. This quick and

simple process causes the spatial organization of the CNTs in the magnetic field direction.

Utilizing this technique in the presence of magnetic fields prevents entanglement of CNTs in

liquids.

According to a great number of studies, adding nanoparticles to a base fluid would increase

viscosity, which leads to pressure drop increment. For this reason, some researchers have studied

the pressure drop variations caused by applying nanofluids in STHXs.

Kumar et al. [93] carried out the heat transfer and pressure drop analysis of a shell and helically

coiled tube heat exchanger by using Al2O3/water nanofluids. The pressure drop of 0.1%, 0.4%

and 0.8% were found to be 4%, 6%, and 9%, respectively higher than water. The tube side

experimental Nusselt number for 0.1%, 0.4% and 0.8% nanofluids were found to be 28%, 36%

and 56%, respectively higher than base fluid. These enhancements were due to higher thermal

conductivity of nanofluid, better fluid mixing and strong secondary flow formation in coiled

tube. The value of thermal performance factor was found to be greater than unity. It was

concluded that the Al2O3 nanofluid can be applied as a coolant in helically coiled tube heat

exchanger to enhance heat transfer with negligible pressure drop.

Anoop et al. [47] investigated thermal performance of SiO2–water nanofluids in industrial type

heat exchangers. Experiments were conducted to compare the overall heat transfer coefficient

and pressure drop of water vs. nanofluids in a laboratory-scale STHX. The measured pressure

drop while using nanofluids showed an increase when compared to that of base fluid which

could limit the use of nanofluids in industrial applications. The schematic of the experimental

setup used in this study has been illustrated in Fig. 9.

37
 Fig. 9. Schematic of the experimental setup used [47]. Reprinted with permission from Elsevier.

Kumar et al. [94] studied the pressure drop and heat transfer coefficient of a helically coiled tube

heat exchanger handling Al2O3/water nanofluid by CFD simulation. The maximum pressure drop

was found to be 9% higher than water. It was also found that the pressure drop and Nusselt

number significantly increase with increasing volume concentration and Dean number. The

pressure drop values were compared with the experimental and theoretical results, and it was

concluded that the CFD approach gives good prediction for pressure drop in the heat exchanger.

The Nusselt number for the nanofluid was found to be 30% greater than that for the water.

Although some investigations have found that behavior of pressure drop for nanofluids deviates

from that of conventional fluids, they have not been able to obviously clarify the dominance of

the careful physical mechanisms creating the deviation.

Although some researchers have shown that using nanofluids instead of conventional fluids is

not associated with a pronounced pressure drop increase in STHXs, a great number of studies

such as [47, 94] demonstrate that a great increase in pressure drop occurs in such cases.

Therefore, some investigators have attempted to optimize such cases by obtaining optimum

38
points where it would be possible to accomplish great heat transfer rates along with low pressure

drop values.

Bahiraei et al. [95] evaluated hydrothermal characteristics of the water–Al2O3 nanofluid in a

STHX equipped with helical baffles. Heat transfer and pressure drop increased by increasing

nanoparticle concentration and baffle overlapping, and decreasing helix angle. Increase of the

concentration from 1 to 2% and from 4 to 5% enhances the convective heat transfer coefficient

about 4.8 and 2%, respectively. In order to obtain conditions of effective parameters which cause

maximum heat transfer along with minimum pressure drop, optimization was performed on the

obtained neural network model. The results indicated that even when a low pressure drop is

significantly important for designer, nanofluids with high concentrations can be employed.

Meanwhile, when both high heat transfer and low pressure drop are important, a small helix

angle can be used. In addition, using large overlapping was recommended only when the heat

transfer enhancement is considerably more important than the reduction of the pressure drop.

Fig. 10 presents the schematic of helical baffles of STHX used in this study.

Fig. 10. Schematic view of helical baffles [95]. Reprinted with permission from Elsevier.

39
Vahdat Azad and Vahdat Azad [96] investigated application of alumina nanofluid to enhance the

efficiency of a STHX while reducing energy consumption and overall cost. The nanofluid

increased the heat transfer coefficient of the heat exchanger. Increased heat transfer coefficients

reduce the required tube length leading to reduced pressure drop in the heat exchanger. In the

case studied in this paper, over 185% increase in tube side heat transfer coefficient allowed

reduction of heat exchanger length and flow velocity and thereby reduction of pressure drop up

to 94%. Consequently, the overall cost of the heat exchanger reduced more than 55%. Given the

important result obtained from the use of nanofluids, the authors proposed the use of this

technology as an efficient method for the optimal design of STHXs.

In some studies, optimization has been performed by taking into account heat transfer without

considering pressure drop or the required costs.

Farajollahi et al. [97] measured heat transfer characteristics of Al2O3/water and TiO2/water

nanofluids in a STHX. Based on the results, adding of nanoparticles to the base fluid caused the

significant enhancement of heat transfer. For both nanofluids, two different optimum

nanoparticle concentrations existed. Comparison of the heat transfer behavior of two nanofluids

indicated that at a certain Peclet number, heat transfer characteristics of TiO 2/water nanofluid at

its optimum concentration are greater than those of Al2O3/water nanofluids, while Al2O3/water

nanofluid possessed better heat transfer behavior at higher concentrations. The heat transfer

enhancement for 0.3, 0.5, 0.75, 1, and 2 vol.% of Al2O3–water nanofluid was about 46, 56, 46,

38, and 19%, respectively. It was also about 20, 56, 33, and 18% for the TiO 2–water nanofluid at

concentrations of 0.15, 0.3, 0.5, and 0.75 vol.%.

It can be mentioned that considering both performance optimization and cost analysis

simultaneously is very important, however the research surveys that have investigated both

40
hydrothermal optimization and cost analysis in STHXs are very sparse. Therefore, future

optimization studies should consider economic analysis including the required costs for

producing nanofluids as well as heat transfer and pressure drop considerations.

In addition to first law of thermodynamics, it is necessary to pay special attention to second law

of thermodynamics in studying thermal systems. Second law of thermodynamics states that

energy conversion direction is moving from high quality energy to low quality energy.

Conserving useful energy depends on how to develop an operative heat transfer process from the

thermodynamic point of view. Measurement of irreversibility values during a process is called as

entropy production rate. Energy exchange processes cause an irreversible increase in entropy.

Therefore, even though energy is conserved, its quality reduces by converting it into a different

form of energy at which less work can be achieved. Decreasing the produced entropy will result

in more operative designs of energy systems. Investigators have conducted the irreversibility

analysis of various systems and have proved that irreversibility or entropy production analysis is

a powerful tool to determine which system or process is efficient [37, 98].

In spite of the high significance of second law analysis for STHXs, few studies have addressed

the entropy generation associated with nanofluid flow in these heat exchangers.

Leong et al. [99] focused on the heat transfer and entropy analysis of STHXs operated with

nanofluids with segmental, 25° and 50° helical baffles. Heat transfer rate of the 25° helical

baffles heat exchanger was found to be the highest among the three heat exchangers studied in

this research. The results indicated that the STHX with 50° helical baffles exhibits lowest

entropy generation among different heat exchangers. A 3.04% heat transfer enhancement was

observed for 25° helical exchanger at 2% concentration in comparison with the base fluid.

41
Falahat [100] investigated the effects of water–Al2O3 nanofluid on the entropy generation

through a STHX under uniform wall temperature condition in laminar regime. It was found that

adding nanoparticles improves the thermal performance of water–Al2O3 nanofluid. Furthermore,

total entropy generation decreased by increasing either volume concentration or Reynolds

number.

Above literature review on applying nanofluids in STHXs reveals that most of the investigations

concerning these heat exchangers are without phase change, while in many practical

applications, phase change occurs and consequently, it should be considered in future research.

In addition, it is clear in the relevant literature that the obtained results significantly depend on

thermal properties of nanofluids such as the nanoparticle type, morphology shape, surfactants,

preparation techniques and plans considered for simulation or measuring the parameters.

Therefore, neglecting the effect of different parameters can decrease accuracy and thus, different

parameters should be taken into account despite the fact that many investigators prefer to just

concentrate on specific ones and simple configurations which are not directly usable in industry.

As a result, future studies should be more comprehensive and avoid, as much as possible, to use

simplifying assumptions.

In spite of many numerical and experimental investigations on heat transfer performance of

nanofluids in STHXs which have been reported in the literature, there is still an important lack of

information considering the issue of mixed convection heat transfer in this type of heat

exchangers. Due to the importance of mixed convection in practical applications of STHXs,

further comprehensive studies are required in this area.

It should be mentioned that baffles in STHXs are one of the important design parameters that

affect the performance significantly; one improvement can be the modification of baffle

42
 configurations. Baffle spacing and baffle cut are the most important geometric elements affecting

both heat transfer rate and pressure loss. Nevertheless, little research has been conducted

concerning the effect of baffle configuration on the characteristics of STHXs which work with

nanofluids. This has to receive further attention in future studies.

Table 3 is a summary table which presents some of the research contributions performed on use

of nanofluids in STHXs containing the quantified results as well as main findings.

Table 3. Some of the studies conducted on application of nanofluids in STHXs.

Flow Quantified
Researcher(s) Year Nanoparticles Work type Finding(s)
regime improvement
A substantial increase in
Overall heat transfer
Nusselt number as well as
coefficient increases
the overall heat transfer
Barzegarian et around 5.4, 10.3 and
2017 Al2O3 Laminar Experimental coefficient occurs with
al. [101] 19.1% at concentrations
enhancement of Reynolds
of 0.03, 0.14 and 0.3%,
number and nanoparticle
respectively.
concentration.
Heat transfer coefficient
For each flow regime
for laminar and turbulent
Laminar, (laminar, transient and
flow at 0.1%
Aghabozorg Fe2O3-CNT transient turbulent), the nanofluids
2016 concentration enhances Experimental
et al. [102] and convective heat transfer
13.54% and 27.69%,
turbulent coefficient enhances at
respectively compared
greater heat flux.
with water.
Highest convective heat
Overall performance of transfer coefficient and
Al2O3, SiO2 the heat exchanger overall heat transfer
Shahrul et al.
2016 and ZnO Laminar improves about 35% by Experimental coefficient were observed
[103]
using ZnO–water for ZnO and lowest
nanofluid. effectiveness was found
for SiO2.
Heat transfer increases in
Overall heat transfer
the presence of
Lotfi et al. coefficient enhances
2012 CNT Turbulent multiwalled CNTs in
[91] from 30 to 32 W/m2K by Experimental
comparison with the base
adding the nanoparticles.
fluid.
3.04% heat transfer Heat transfer rate of the
enhancement is observed 25° helical baffles heat
Leong et al. for 25° helical exchanger exchanger is the highest
2012 Cu Turbulent Theoretical
[99] at 2% concentration in compared to that of
comparison with the segmental and 50° helical
base fluid. exchanger.
Rabbani Laminar Increasing the graphene Use of graphene oxide
Graphene
Esfahani and 2017 and oxide concentration from Experimental nanofluids as the hot fluid
oxide
Mohseni turbulent 0.01% to 0.1% resulted resulted in less exergy loss

43
Languri [104] in 8.7% and 18.9% under both laminar and
thermal conductivity turbulent conditions.
enhancement at 25 and
40°C, respectively.
Increase of the
concentration from 1 to Even when a low pressure
2% and from 4 to 5% drop is significantly
Bahiraei et al.
2015 Al2O3 Turbulent enhances the convective Numerical important, nanofluids with
[95]
heat transfer coefficient great concentrations can be
about 4.8 and 2%, used.
respectively.
Decrease of Reynolds
Friction factor reduces
number increases the
21.5% and 8.9% from
friction factor, but no
Reynolds number of 700
Bahiraei et al. considerable change is
2014 Al2O3 Turbulent to 1300, and from Numerical
[85] seen in the friction factor
Reynolds number of
by increasing the volume
1900 to 2500,
fraction at constant
respectively.
Reynolds number.
Enhancement of heat
transfer for cylindrical
shape particles with
20°baffle angle is The entropy minimization
Laminar obtained 12%, 19.9%, rate was found higher for
Elias et al.
2014 γ-ALOOH and 28.23% and 17.85% Theoretical cylindrical shape
[89]
turbulent higher than 30°, 40°, 50° compared to any other
baffle angles and shapes.
segmental baffle,
respectively at 1 vol.%
concentration.
Outlet temperature of the
The overall heat transfer
hot fluid decreases with
coefficient and heat
increasing the CNT
Hosseini et al. transfer rate enhance
2016 CNT Turbulent Numerical volume fraction whereas
[92] about 14.5% and 10.3%
the pressure drop due to
compared to water,
the solid nanoparticles is
respectively.
very low.
Heat exchanger
1.24% enhancement in
thermoeconomic
the effectiveness and
parameters are enhanced
Hajabdollahi 3.75% decrease in the
greater in the case of
and Boehmite annual cost are observed
2017 Turbulent Theoretical bricks as nanoparticle
Hajabdollahi alumina in the case of blades
shape and generally
[105] shape nanoparticle
followed by blades,
compared with the case
cylindrical and platelets
of without nanoparticle.
shapes.
The heat transfer
enhancement for 0.3,
0.5, 0.75, 1, and 2 vol.% Heat transfer attributes of
of Al2O3/water TiO2/water nanofluid at
Farajollahi et Al2O3 and nanofluid are about 46%, optimum nanoparticle
2010 Turbulent Experimental
al. [97] TiO2 56%, 46%, 38%, and concentration are greater
19%, respectively. It is than those of Al2O3/water
also about 20%, 56%, nanofluid.
33%, and 18% for the
TiO2/water nanofluid

44
 with 0.15, 0.3, 0.5, and
0.75 vol.%.
A maximum The results showed an
enhancement in increment in convective
Godson et al. convective heat transfer heat transfer coefficient
2014 Ag Turbulent Experimental
[106] coefficient of 12.4% and and effectiveness of the
effectiveness of 6.14% is nanofluid as the
recorded. concentration is increased.
Convective heat transfer
By increasing graphene
coefficient of graphene
concentration and fluid
Ghozatloo et nanofluids at 38°C
2014 Graphene Laminar Experimental temperature, the heat
al. [107] increases up to 35.6% at
transfer coefficient
concentration of 0.1%
increases.
compared with water.

5. Compact heat exchangers

Although some studies have been conducted on using nanofluids in compact heat exchangers,

applying nanofluids in these heat exchangers has been evaluated less than other heat exchangers,

whereas they are extensively utilized in different applications for thermal systems. Automotive

thermal fluid systems, car radiators, evaporators and condensers for HVAC systems, oil coolers

and inter coolers are usual instances that can be observed in ground equipment.

Ray et al. [51] studied three nanofluids comprising of aluminum oxide, copper oxide and silicon

dioxide nanoparticles in ethylene glycol and water mixture to compare their performance in a

compact minichannel heat exchanger. The study revealed that for a dilute concentration, all the

nanofluids show improvements in their performance over the base fluid. Comparisons were

made on the basis of three important parameters; equal mass flow rate, equal heat transfer rate

and equal pumping power. For each of these cases, all three nanofluids exhibited increase in

convective heat transfer coefficient, reduction in the volumetric flow rate and reduction in the

pumping power requirement for the same amount of heat transfer. Alumina gave a 4.75%

enhancement in the convective heat transfer coefficient, and CuO gave a 1.73% reduction in the

required pumping power compared with base fluid.

45
Vasu et al. [108] investigated the thermal design of flat tube plain fin compact heat exchanger

using the ε-NTU method applying Al2O3/water nanofluid as coolant. It was found that the

pressure drop of the nanofluid with concentration of 4% is almost double of the base fluid.

Some researchers have studied the effect of utilizing nanofluids in car radiators. In fact, car

radiators are considered as compact heat exchangers. Radiator in a car plays a key role in

preventing the vehicle engine from overheating. A radiator is created with louvered fins such that

more heat at the surface area can be transferred and disturb the boundary layer formed adjacent

to the surface.

Thermal characteristics of working fluid within car radiators are important for optimization of

fuel consumption and resizing of radiators. Applying nanofluids is one of the novel efforts to

improve heat transfer in car radiators. Employing nanofluids as coolant in car radiators is an

interesting subject in the vehicles industry due to the appropriate characteristics of nanofluids in

heat transfer enhancement.

Hussein et al. [109] studied the car radiator heat transfer enhancement by using TiO 2 and SiO2

nanoparticles dispersed in water experimentally. The test rig was set up as a car radiator with

tubes and container. The range of Reynolds number and volume fraction were (250–1750) and

(1.0–2.5%), respectively. The results showed that the heat transfer increases with increasing

volume fraction. The enhancement values in the energy rate were 20 and 32% and in

effectiveness were 24 and 29.5% respectively for TiO2 and SiO2 nanofluids.

Samira et al. [110] investigated the effect of nanofluid on pressure drop and friction factor in a

special car radiator at different concentrations. A mixture of 60/40 ratio of ethylene glycol and

distilled water was used as the base fluid, and CuO nanoparticles were dispersed well to make

stable nanofluids. The results demonstrated that the presence of nanoparticles causes an increase

46
in pressure drop, which was intensified by increasing concentration as well as decreasing

temperature of inlet fluid. An empirical equation for prediction of pressure drop through the

radiator was developed as well. Additionally, with increasing the flow rate, the performance

index increased and indicated that application of nanofluid at higher flow rate is affordable.

When the inlet temperature increased by 19oC, pressure drop was decreased by almost 13.17%.

Vajjha et al. [111] evaluated flow and heat transfer with two different nanofluids, Al2O3 and

CuO, in an ethylene glycol and water mixture circulating through the flat tubes of an automobile

radiator. Convective heat transfer coefficient in the developing and developed regions along the

flat tubes with the nanofluid flow showed marked improvement over the base fluid. At Reynolds

number of 2000, the percentage increment in the heat transfer coefficient over the base fluid was

94% for a 10% Al2O3 nanofluid, and 89% for a 6% CuO nanofluid. The pressure loss increased

with increasing the concentration; however, due to the reduced volumetric flow needed for the

same amount of heat transfer, the required pumping power diminished.

Sandhya et al. [112] determined the performance of ethylene glycol and water based TiO2

nanofluids as an automobile radiator coolant experimentally (see Fig. 11). In all the experiments,

the nanofluids made to flow through the radiator tubes and air flowed with constant speed in the

crosswise direction in between the tubes of a tube bundle. The results demonstrated that

increasing the fluid circulation rate can improve the heat transfer performance while the fluid

inlet temperature to the radiator had little effect. The nanofluids investigated in the present work

with low concentrations enhanced the heat transfer rate up to 37% in comparison with base fluid.

47
 Fig. 11. Schematic of experimental setup [112]. Reprinted with permission from Elsevier.

Elsebay et al. [113] performed resizing process for a radiator due to the use of nanofluids instead

of water. Two nanofluids (i.e. Al2O3/water and CuO/water) flowing in a flat tube of radiator were

investigated numerically to evaluate both thermal and flow performances and accomplish the

resizing process. The flattened tube model was constructed, discretized, tested and validated with

the available data from the literature. A significant reduction of the radiator volume was

achieved due to marked improvement in the heat transfer performance. On the contrary, the

required pumping power after the radiator volume reduction increased over that needed for base

fluid. For Al2O3 at Reynolds number of 1000, the values of heat transfer enhancement for

concentrations of 1, 3, 5 and 7% were about 5, 16, 30 and 47%, respectively greater than that for

the pure water. Moreover, the related enhancements were 3, 13, 24 and 38% for CuO

nanoparticles.

48
Although, according to most research reports, it is convenient to employ nanofluids in car

radiators, a small number of studies have shown that using some nanofluids in these heat

exchangers are not promising. For example, Oliveira et al. [114] carried out an experimental

evaluation of the thermal performance of MWCNTs dispersed in distilled water flowing inside

an automotive radiator. A two-step method called high-pressure homogenization was used to

disperse the MWCNTs in water. Experiments were conducted in an experimental setup

composed by a wind tunnel that simulated the air flow through a car radiator, and a hot fluid

circuit that circulated the nanofluid inside the radiator. The results revealed that the heat transfer

rate decreases with the concentration increment, indicating that this nanofluid is not ideal to

replace with conventional coolant.

In general, as per the presented results, it can be concluded that nanofluids are a potential

working medium for improving the heat transfer in car radiators. However, adding nanoparticles

usually increases the pressure drop, which may limit the efficacy factor of car radiators.

Additionally, due to the lack of standardization among various investigations, there are some

discrepancies in the enhancement percentage and the optimal amounts of nanoparticles. Hence,

more careful and systematic studies are needed to examine the practical application of nanofluids

in car radiators with different conditions. In practice, thermal-hydraulic analysis is one of the

chief problems for the application of nanofluids in automobile radiators.

Table 4 summarizes some of the articles published on employing nanofluids in compact heat

exchangers. The type of nanoparticles, flow regime, work type as well as the main results of

these contributions are presented in this table.

49
 Table 4. Some of the studies performed on application of nanofluids in compact heat exchangers.

Flow
Researcher(s) Year Nanoparticles Quantified improvement Work type Finding(s)
regime
The heat transfer
Nanofluid with 0.2%
performance is enhanced
Subhedar et volume fraction results in
2018 Al2O3 Laminar Experimental by using nanofluids
al. [115] a 30% rise in heat
compared to conventional
transfer.
coolant.
Al2O3 gave a 4.75%
enhancement in the
Laminar convective heat transfer Theoretical The nanofluids had
Al2O3 and
Ray et al. [51] 2014 and coefficient, and CuO gave and superior performance
CuO
turbulent a 1.73% reduction in the experimental compared to the base fluid.
required pumping power
compared with base fluid.
With increasing flow rate,
When the inlet
the performance index
temperature increased by
Samira et al. enhanced, and indicated
2015 CuO Turbulent 19oC, pressure drop was Experimental
[110] that use of nanofluid at
decreased by almost
greater flow rates was
13.17%.
affordable.
The maximum heat
transfer coefficient was
Tijani and recorded at 36384.41 Numerical
Al2O3 and CuO nanofluid had a better
Sudirman 2018 Turbulent W/m2K, Nusselt number and
CuO performance than Al2O3.
[116] was 208.71 and the rate of experimental
heat transfer was 28.45
W.
The simultaneous use of
the coil inserts with the
nanofluid leads to the
Use of coil inserts
Goudarzi and thermal performance
2017 Al2O3 Turbulent Experimental increased heat transfer rate
Jamali [117] enhancement up to 5% as
significantly.
compared to the
application of coils inserts
alone.
An increment in the
When the nanoparticle
temperature from 50 to
Oliveira et al. concentration increased,
2017 CNT Turbulent 80ºC, resulted in about a Experimental
[114] the heat transfer rate
180% increase in the heat
reduced.
transfer rate.
The pressure drop of
Maximum heat transfer nanofluids increased with
Selvam et al.
2017 Graphene Laminar enhancement was Experimental increment in mass flow
[118]
obtained 104% at 35ºC. rate and graphene
concentration.
Increasing the fluid
Low concentrations circulation rate enhanced
Sandhya et al. increased the heat transfer the heat transfer
2016 TiO2 Turbulent Experimental
[112] rate up to 37% compared performance while the
with the base fluid. fluid inlet temperature had
little or no effect.

50
6. Some interesting aspects

In addition to the studies discussed and evaluated in the previous sections of this paper,

combining two subjects of nanofluids and heat exchangers has other interesting aspects, some of

which are introduced below.

6.1. Applying hybrid nanofluids in heat exchangers

Recently, hybrid nanofluids have received increasing interest because they can improve thermal

properties and heat transfer significantly [119-124]. Therefore, some researchers have been

motivated to assess the hydrothermal characteristics of this modern type of nanofluids in heat

exchangers.

Aghabozorg et al. [102] investigated use of a hybrid nanofluid containing Fe2O3–CNT

nanoparticles inside a horizontal STHX. The nanoparticles with 30 nm diameter and distilled

water as base fluid were used. Fig. 12 shows TEM image of the Fe2O3–CNT nanoparticles used

in this research. Increasing the weight concentration and temperature led to enhancement of

convective heat transfer coefficient. It was observed that hybrid Fe2O3–CNT nanofluids show

higher heat transfer coefficient compared to the base fluid. The results revealed that the heat

transfer coefficient for laminar and turbulent flows at concentration of 0.1% enhances 13.54%

and 27.69%, respectively.

51
 Fig. 12. TEM image of Fe2O3-CNT nanoparticles [102]. Reprinted with permission from Elsevier.

Huang et al. [125] examined heat transfer and pressure drop of a hybrid nanofluid containing

alumina nanoparticles and MWCNTs in a chevron corrugated PHE. The results showed that the

heat transfer coefficient of the hybrid nanofluid is slightly larger than that of the Al2O3/water

nanofluid and water, when comparison is based on the same flow velocity. The hybrid nanofluid

also exhibited the highest heat transfer coefficient at a given pumping power. Furthermore, the

pressure drop of the hybrid nanofluid was smaller than that of the Al2O3/water nanofluid and

only slightly higher than that of water. Therefore, the authors mentioned that hybrid nanofluids

can be promising in many heat transfer applications.

Allahyar et al. [126] investigated the thermal performance of hybrid and single type nanofluids

in a coiled heat exchanger. The composition of the synthesized nanoparticle regarding hybrid

nanofluid experiments was 97.5% alumina and 2.5% silver. The maximum rate of heat transfer

was obtained by using the hybrid nanofluid at a concentration of 0.4 vol% which was 31.58%

higher than that of the water. Overall, the maximum thermal performance factor for the hybrid

nanofluid was about 2.55 suggesting the superior performance of the presented approach in heat

exchangers.

52
6.2. Applying biological nanofluids in heat exchangers

In recent years, silver nanoparticles have been extensively employed in several practical

applications like medical devices, thermal systems, and clothing due to their appropriate features.

Typically, the method for the preparation of Ag nanoparticles is the reduction of Ag ions in the

solution or in great temperature in gaseous media [127]. However, the reducing reagents, such as

sodium borohydride, can increase the environmental toxicity or biological problems [128].

Meanwhile, the high temperature raises the production cost. Hence, the development of green

preparation techniques for Ag nanoparticles by employing eco-friendly solvents and nontoxic

reagents is very significant. Sun et al. [129] developed a simple, environmentally friendly and

cost-effective method to synthesize silver nanoparticles using tea leaf extract. The silver

nanoparticles were synthesized using silver nitrate and tea extract, and the reaction was carried

out for 2 h at room temperature.

Sarafraz and Hormozi [79] used the method presented by Sun et al. [129] to prepare the

nanofluid containing Ag nanoparticles (see Fig. 13). They focused on forced convective heat

transfer coefficient of this biologically produced nanofluid flowing inside a double-pipe heat

exchanger. Experiments were conducted at laminar, transient and turbulent flow regimes.

Nanofluids were prepared at volume fractions of 0.1%, 0.5% and 1% and well dispersed in

ethylene glycol/water (50:50 by volume) as a base fluid. Influence of different operating

parameters including flow rate, concentration of nanofluid and inlet bulk temperature on heat

transfer coefficient of the heat exchanger were experimentally investigated. The results

demonstrated a remarkable enhancement of heat transfer coefficient up to 67% at volume

concentration of 1%.

53
 Fig. 13. The cycle of the nanofluid production [79]. Reprinted with permission from Elsevier.

6.3. Heat exchangers under magnetic fields

Magnetic nanofluids (MNFs) are suspensions of a non-magnetic base fluid and magnetic

nanoparticles which are coated with surfactant layers such as oleic acid to provide proper

stability [130, 131]. Magnetic nanoparticles employed in MNFs are commonly synthetized in

different sizes and forms from metal materials such as nickel, iron, cobalt, as well as their oxides

such as spinel-type ferrites, magnetite, and so forth. The main feature of this type of nanofluids is

that apart from improvement of thermal properties, they possess both magnetic properties similar

to other magnetic materials and flowability like other fluids [19]. Such unique characteristic

makes it possible to control fluid flow, heat transfer and particles movement by applying

magnetic fields and consequently, they have a great potential for being used in various fields

such as bioengineering, electronics as well as thermal engineering [132-134].

54
In the area of thermal systems, adopting MNFs has attracted the attention of many investigators

in recent years resulting from their potential to be controlled in the presence of magnetic fields.

Therefore, some researchers have used this type of nanofluids in heat exchangers and have

investigated their characteristics under magnetic fields.

Shakiba and Vahedi [77] investigated the hydrothermal characteristics of a MNF (water and 4

vol % Fe3O4) in a double-pipe heat exchanger, which was exposed to a non-uniform magnetic

field with different intensities. The results showed that applying the magnetic field causes kelvin

force to be produced perpendicular to the flow, changing axial velocity profile and creating a pair

of vortices which lead to an increase in Nusselt number, friction factor and pressure drop. By

applying the non-uniform transverse magnetic field, the average Nusselt number increases by

45%. Fig. 14 shows the changes of dimensionless temperature in internal pipe by applying the

magnetic field with different intensities. It is noticed that employing a magnetic field causes

diffusion of a cold boundary layer to central parts of internal pipe in the heat exchanger, and by

intensifying the magnetic field, diffusion of this layer increases. Eventually, the authors claimed

that applying non-uniform transverse magnetic field can control the flow of MNF and improve

heat transfer process of the heat exchanger.

55
 Fig. 14. Dimensionless temperature profiles at different magnetic field intensities [77]. Reprinted with permission

from Elsevier.

Bahiraei and Hangi [135] evaluated the performance of water based Mn–Zn ferrite MNF in a

double-pipe heat exchanger under quadrupole magnetic field using the Eulerian–Lagrangian

method. Distribution of the particles was non-uniform at the cross section of the tube such that

the concentration was higher at central regions. Application of the magnetic field made the

distribution of particles more uniform and this uniformity increased by increasing the distance

from the tube inlet. Increasing each of the parameters of concentration, particle size and

magnitude of the magnetic field led to a greater pressure drop and also higher heat transfer.

Increase of the magnetic field magnitude from 1 T to 3 T resulted in the enhancements of

approximately 36.4% and 25.6% at Reynolds numbers of 10,000 and 30,000, respectively.

56
Optimization was performed using genetic algorithm coupled with compromise programming

technique in order to reach the maximum overall heat transfer coefficient along with the

minimum pressure drop. Eventually, the optimal values were obtained considering different

conditions for relative importance of the objective functions.

6.4. Mini and micro heat exchangers

With the recent advances in miniaturization technology and noticeable requirements for more

efficient equipment, mini-scale and micro-scale systems are verifying to be valuable and

advantageous. The route towards miniaturization is essentially driven by the demand for heat

transfer improvement, intensified heat flux dissipation in microelectronic equipment, and

development of micro-scale devices that need cooling. Currently, micro and mini heat

exchangers are utilized in industries such as microelectronics, biomedical, robotics, aerospace,

telecommunications, and automotive. Miniaturized devices, generally known as MEMS (Micro

Electromechanical Systems), are getting more advanced and intricate as the micro fabrication

industry is developing properly.

Although the application of miniaturized heat exchangers is immense, the research surveys

carried out on these devices by applying nanofluids are very sparse.

Some researchers have used numerical simulation to study the characteristics of nanofluids in

micro and mini heat exchangers.

Mohammed et al. [136] investigated the effects of different nanofluids on heat transfer and fluid

flow characteristics in a square shaped microchannel heat exchanger (MCHE) numerically. The

performance of an aluminum MCHE with four different types of nanofluids (Al2O3, SiO2, Ag,

and TiO2) using water as base fluid was analyzed. The results revealed that nanofluids can

57
enhance the thermal properties and performance of the heat exchanger while having a slight

increase in pressure drop. It was also found that increasing the Reynolds number causes the

pumping power to increase and the effectiveness to decrease. Maximum heat transfer

enhancement was obtained by SiO2 nanoparticles which was 46%.

Pantzali et al. [137] studied the effect of the use of a nanofluid in a miniature PHE with

modulated surface numerically and experimentally. The effect of surface modulation on heat

transfer and friction was investigated by simulating the existing PHE as well as a notional similar

PHE with flat plate using a CFD code. The PHE modulated plate and the schematic of the heat

exchanging unit have been illustrated in Fig. 15. As the CuO nanofluid was the cooling medium,

the heat transfer rate exhibited more than 10% increment compared to that of water. The results

suggested that for a given heat duty, the nanofluid flow rate required is lower than that of water

causing lower pressure drop. As a result, smaller equipment and less pumping power are

required. In conclusion, the authors claimed that the use of the nanofluids is a promising solution

towards designing efficient heat exchanging systems, especially when the total volume of the

equipment is the main issue.

58
 Fig. 15. (a) Photo of the PHE modulated plate, (b) schematic of the heat exchanging unit [137]. Reprinted with

permission from Elsevier.

Most studies in the field of nanofluid application in micro and mini heat exchangers have been

performed experimentally.

In an experimental work, Stogiannis et al. [52] studied a miniature PHE with modulated surface

along with water–SiO2 nanofluids used as working liquids aiming for a more compact and

efficient cooling equipment for low-temperature applications. It was proved that the nanofluid

enhances heat transfer rate up to 35% compared to water. CFD simulations, also conducted

during this study, showed that for a given operating temperature less cooling liquid and

consequently less pumping power is needed when this nanofluid is used instead of water. The

authors mentioned that as SiO2 nanoparticles are relatively inexpensive and their nanofluids are

easy to prepare, their use appears to be an attractive solution for mini-scale devices.

Abdelhafez et al. [138] investigated the possibility of improving the solar heat recovery from

copper–water nanofluids using a micro heat exchanger experimentally. This micro heat

59
exchanger consisted of double brass tubes with a micro annular space. The nanofluid was forced

to flow in the tube side, while the fluid in the shell side was pure water. The heat transfer and

overall heat transfer coefficient of the nanofluid at 0.1 wt.% were found to increase respectively

49.9 and 42.08% in comparison with pure water.

Wu et al. [139] described a new method to enhance the heat transfer of a single phase liquid in a

microchannel heat exchanger by adding phase change nanoparticles (nano-PCMs), which absorb

thermal energy during solid–liquid phase changes. The details of the microchannel heat

exchanger have been shown in Fig. 16. Two types of slurries having bare and silica encapsulated

indium nano-PCMs were made using colloid method and suspended into Poly-A-Olefin (PAO)

for potential high temperature applications. Experiments indicated that the heat transfer

coefficient with 30% bare indium nanoparticles can reach 47000 W/m2 K at flow rate of 3.5 ml/s.

The magnitude of heat transfer coefficient represented 2 times improvement over that of single

phase PAO, and was also higher than that of single phase water.

Fig. 16. Details of microchannel heat exchanger-heater assembly [139]. Reprinted with permission from Elsevier.

60
Ahammed et al. [140] studied the performance of thermoelectric cooling of electronic devices

with the Al2O3-water nanofluid in a multiport minichannel heat exchanger experimentally. The

Bismuth Telluride (BiTe3) thermoelectric cooler was used to extract heat from the electronic

devices, which is a power transistor. The results showed 40% enhancement in the coefficient of

performance of thermoelectric module. A 9.15% decrement in thermoelectric temperature

difference between the hot and cold side was also observed for nanofluids (0.2 vol.%), which

enhanced the module cooling capacity. The enhancement in Nusselt number was found to be

23.92% for concentration of 0.2%. The migration of nanoparticles due to temperature difference

(thermophoresis) from the wall to the center was attributed to be the reason for the higher

Nusselt number. In Fig. 17, this mechanism along with other slip mechanisms that are effective

on particle migration have been presented.

Fig. 17. Graphical representation of slip mechanisms [140]. Reprinted with permission from Elsevier.

61
The combination of micro heat exchangers and nanofluids will present both highly conducting

fluids and a large heat exchange area. This cannot be achieved with macro- and micro-particles

because they clog miniaturized channels. The studies conducted in these area prove that using

nanofluids improves efficiency of miniaturized heat exchangers. In addition, miniaturized

equipment along with nanofluid technology will support the present industrial trend toward

component and system miniaturization by allowing the development of smaller and lighter heat

exchanger systems. Miniaturized systems will decrease the inventory of heat transfer fluid and

will lead to price savings. There is, however, a chief factor that restricts the heat transfer

coefficient in micro and mini heat exchangers: the decrease in the channel size is accompanied

by considerable pressure drops. Therefore, the decrease of significant total thermal resistance is

not achieved in turbulent flows within miniaturized heat exchangers because the greater pumping

power requirements compensate the augmentation in the overall thermal performance. As a

result, only laminar flow is employed in these heat exchangers.

It is noteworthy that miniature heat exchangers are usually fabricated by bonding a stack of

minichannel plates/microchannel foils. The perfect cost of fabricating the channel foils/plates

and bonding them to construct a complete mini heat exchanger is relatively expensive, which is a

problem for extensive use of miniature heat exchangers in practical applications. However,

compactness and decrease in size and weight together with an enhancement in the heat

exchanger performance have made these a superior selection in cryogenic systems [141] and

space utilizations [142]. Micro- and mini heat exchangers can be noticed steadily becoming an

essential part of fuel cell systems [143, 144]. Convective cooling of electronic circuits has also

been attained with the help of these heat exchangers [145, 146].

62
6.5. Using artificial neural networks for heat exchangers working with nanofluids

The theoretical analyses of heat exchangers include several assumptions and complex equations.

Moreover, the experimental approaches are expensive caused by initial investment required in

constructing an experimental device. To overcome these problems, Artificial Neural Networks

(ANNs) can be utilized for simulation and optimization of thermal equipment involving heat

exchangers. ANN develops the correlations by means of training data, which does not need any

particular analytical equations and system clarifications. Non-linear parameters included in the

thermal processes of heat exchangers can be correlated applying ANNs with acceptable

accuracies.

Many researchers have used ANNs for analysis of heat exchangers. However, this tool has

seldom been utilized to study heat exchangers working with nanofluids.

Saeedan et al. [82] investigated thermal performance of a helically baffled heat exchanger

combined with a fined tube. Water based nanofluids of Cu, CuO, and CNT nanoparticles were

considered. An increase in the concentration and Reynolds number intensified both heat transfer

and pressure drop. Heat transfer enhancement was up to 12.6% for Cu, 3.4% for CNT and 10.6%

for CuO. Models of Nusselt number and pressure gradient were obtained for the heat exchanger

in terms of Reynolds number, concentration and physical properties of particles by applying

ANNs. The developed ANN predicted the output variables with a great accuracy.

Bahiraei et al. [85] simulated heat transfer and flow field of water–Al2 O3 nanofluid in the shell-

side of a STHX with helical baffles. Increasing the volume fraction and Reynolds number

intensified both heat transfer and pressure drop. Reduction of the Reynolds number increased the

friction factor, but no considerable change was observed in the friction factor by increasing the

volume fraction at constant Reynolds number. Friction factor reduces 21.5% and 8.9% from

63
Reynolds number of 700 to 1300, and from Reynolds number of 1900 to 2500, respectively. Heat

transfer of the nanofluid revealed greater dependency on the volume fraction at lower Reynolds

numbers. Eventually, the Nusselt number and friction factor were modeled in terms of Reynolds

number and volume fraction employing ANNs with a proper accuracy.

It should be mentioned that only multilayer perceptron ANNs have been used in the studies

conducted in this regard. In the future, however, other ANN models with greater prediction

capabilities can also be employed. In addition, due to their desirable capabilities, ANNs can be

used for prediction of fouling in heat exchangers in terms of the effective parameters. ANN

models can also be implemented in the future to analyze nanofluid exergy in heat exchangers,

which can play an important role in optimization of heat exchangers in terms of size, geometry,

and cost.

6.6. Using heat exchangers with nanofluids in milk industry

In dairy industries, increasing PHE efficacy is very important for decreasing energy consumption

in milk sterilization and pasteurization. In addition, fouling happens during milk pasteurization

which can decrease heat transfer rate of PHE, leading to considerable energy loss. To our

knowledge, research investigations on applications of nanofluids in PHEs for the milk industry

are very sparse.

Taghizadeh Tabari and Zeinali Heris [147] used the nanofluids containing MWCNTs in order to

enhance heat transfer capability of water as a hot stream in PHEs for milk pasteurization. An

experimental setup was designed and manufactured to measure heat transfer coefficient. The

experimental results indicated that heat transfer coefficient and Nu number increase by adding

MWCNT. The enhancement ratio of MWCNT–water nanofluid at 0.25 and 0.55 wt%

64
concentrations was 1.04 and 1.14, respectively, at Peclet number of 345. The heat transfer

augmentation was intensified at higher Peclet numbers which showed more effective presence of

them at high flow rates. Augmentation of heat transfer capability resulted in more heat exchange

with milk in a short time. Therefore, the authors claimed that before occurrence of fouling in

plates of heat exchanger, pasteurization of milk and production of the products would be easier.

In order to enhance heat transfer capability of distilled water as a hot stream in a PHE for milk

pasteurization, Taghizadeh Tabari et al. [53] added titanium dioxide nanoparticles to the distilled

water. Based on the experimental data, the nanofluid at all concentrations showed higher heat

transfer rate and pressure drop than that of the water, resulting from higher thermal conductivity

of the nanoparticles. In order to evaluate the positive and negative aspects of the nanofluid

application in the PHE simultaneously, parameter of performance index was introduced and the

results confirmed the potential of this nanofluid in PHE for milk pasteurization industries.

Maximum performance index was obtained approximately 1.17.

The above studies in this section show that, due to the increased heat transfer rates and

consequently reduced process time associated with applying nanofluids in PHEs, nanofluids can

be used not only for optimizing energy utilization, but also for considerable reduction of the

fouling problem observed in milk pasteurization.

7. Conclusion

The current contribution attempted to present a comprehensive review of assessments carried out

on the field of nanofluid utilization in heat exchangers. Due to the proper characteristics of

nanofluids, a great number of investigations have been performed to study the performance of

nanofluids in heat exchangers. Most of the experimental and numerical examinations have

65
shown that nanofluids present an enhanced heat transfer rate in comparison with conventional

fluids, and it augments significantly by increasing concentration and Reynolds number. The

following critical research directions and challenges can be obtained from this review:

- In practice, in order to develop the use of nanofluids in heat exchangers, the prices of nanofluid

synthesis and the stability of nanoparticles are two main factors that should be considered. It is

very important to provide more attention on the price subjects related to nanofluids application as

coolants in the future research. If the trade-offs between nanofluid performance enhancement

and nanofluid cost cannot be well verified, the application of nanofluids might be limited.

Therefore, considering both performance optimization and cost analysis simultaneously is very

significant, however the contributions that have investigated both hydrothermal optimization and

cost analysis in heat exchangers are very sparse. Hence, in addition to heat transfer and pressure

drop considerations, future optimization investigations should consider economic analysis

including the required costs for producing nanofluids.

- One of the main problems, which is seen in research investigations conducted on application of

nanofluids in heat exchangers, is the lack of standardization among various evaluations. This can

be the main reason for the deviations observed in the findings presented by the related studies.

Indeed, due to widespread variations in the data interpretation and lack of standard approaches,

comparison of different published contributions is difficult. As a recommendation, it would be

helpful to have an extensive communication and network among investigators in this area to

have a more systematic view towards the research and fast growth of this technology.

- The development of accurate correlations, which predict the heat transfer coefficient and

pressure drop of nanofluids in heat exchangers, is crucial.

66
- Fouling can have significant effects on the characteristics of the heat exchangers which work

with nanofluids. However, little research has been performed in this area and therefore, much

more investigations are needed to establish proper strategies for designing heat exchangers

optimally.

- The advantages of applying nanofluids in heat exchangers can vary considerably depending not

only on thermophysical properties but also on the geometrical parameters of the heat exchanging

equipment and the working conditions.

- Research studies conducted on double-pipe heat exchangers are dependent on type of

nanofluids used and consequently, the drawn conclusions cannot be generalized for all

nanofluids.

- Baffles in STHXs are one of the important design parameters that affect the performance

considerably. Nevertheless, little research has been conducted on the effect of baffle

configuration on the characteristics of STHXs working with nanofluids. This has to receive

further attention in future studies.

- Hybrid nanofluids can be applied in the future as promising nanofluids for heat transfer

augmentation in heat exchangers. It can open the road for improvement in performance of heat

exchangers.

- Silver nanoparticles have a great thermal conductivity. Therefore, development of green

preparation techniques for Ag nanoparticles by adopting eco-friendly solvents and nontoxic

reagents is very important for application of nanofluids containing these nanoparticles in heat

exchanger systems.

67
- Two-phase approaches and other newer numerical methods such as lattice-Boltzmann can

hopefully present complete insight into performance of nanofluids in heat exchangers that need

to be pursued in the future.

- Most of the investigations concerning STHXs are without phase change, while in many

practical applications, phase change occurs and consequently, it should be considered in future

research.

- The obtained results significantly depend on the several parameters such as the nanoparticle

type, morphology shape, surfactants, preparation techniques and plans considered for simulation

or measuring the variables. Therefore, neglecting the effect of different parameters can decrease

accuracy and consequently, different parameters should be taken into account. As a consequence,

future studies should be performed more comprehensively and avoid, as much as possible, to

apply simplifying assumptions.

- In spite of high potential of magnetic nanofluids for application in thermal systems, very few

researchers have used this type of nanofluids in heat exchangers.

- ANNs can be employed instead of complicated theoretical correlations. The time and volume

of calculations can be decreased by utilization of this tool in CFD. Despite extensive applications

of this method in various areas of engineering, there are a few surveys in which it is implemented

for application of nanofluids in heat exchangers.

- Along with high heat transfer rate, the miniature heat exchangers lead to great pressure drop.

Hence, their practical design involves the choice of an optimal solution, keeping a balance

between heat transfer and pressure drop. Moreover, accurate fabrication of the minichannels and

next bonding them together is an expensive technology. Therefore, development of more

68
effective fabrication methods is necessary for progress in miniature heat exchangers. These light

heat exchangers are especially applicable in electronic, aerospace and transportation applications.

- Due to the significant effect of particle migration on hydrothermal characteristics of nanofluids

[18], it is necessary considering its effect in future research studies in this critical field.

Finally, it should be mentioned that with further advancement in heat exchangers and also

producing better nanofluids, this technology will find substantial applications in many thermal

engineering fields, especially those in which there is a crucial need for decreasing the energy

consumption. Combining heat exchangers and nanofluids could cause a vital breakthrough in

developing heat exchange equipment.

69
References
[1] S.U.S. Choi, Enhancing thermal conductivity of fluids with nanoparticles, Proc. ASME Int. Mech. Eng.
Congress Expos. 66 (1995) 99–105.
[2] R. Agarwal, K. Verma, N.K. Agrawal, R. Singh, Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 80 (2017) 19–26.
[3] M.I. Pryazhnikov, A.V. Minakov, V.Y. Rudyak, D.V. Guzei, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer
104 (2017) 1275–1282.
[4] B. Wei, C. Zou, X. Li, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 104 (2017) 537–543.
[5] M. Bahiraei, K. Gharagozloo, M. Alighardashi, N. Mazaheri, Energy Conversion and Management 144 (2017)
374–387.
[6] Q. Gravndyan, O.A. Akbari, D. Toghraie, A. Marzban, R. Mashayekhi, R. Karimi, F. Pourfattah, Journal of
Molecular Liquids 236 (2017): 254–265.
[7] M. Bahiraei, M. Hangi, Materials Chemistry and Physics, 181 (2016) 333–343.
[8] A. Behnampour, O.A. Akbari, M.R. Safaei, M. Ghavami, A. Marzban, Gh. Ahmadi Sheikh Shabani, R.
Mashayekhi, Physica E: Low-dimensional Systems and Nanostructures 91 (2017): 15–31.
[9] M. Bahiraei, M. Hangi, Advanced Powder Technology, 27 (2016) 184–192.
[10] M.R. Shamsi, O.A. Akbari, A. Marzban, D. Toghraie, R. Mashayekhi, Physica E: Low-dimensional Systems
and Nanostructures 93 (2017): 167–178.
[11] M. Bahiraei, R. Khosravi, S. Heshmatian, Applied Thermal Engineering 123 (2017) 266–276.
[12] O. Rezaei, O.A. Akbari, A. Marzban, D. Toghraie, F. Pourfattah, R. Mashayekhi, Physica E: Low-dimensional
Systems and Nanostructures 93 (2017): 179–189.
[13] R. Mashayekhi, E. Khodabandeh, M. Bahiraei, L. Bahrami, D. Toghraie, O.A. Akbari, Energy Conversion and
Management 151 (2017): 573–586.
[14] S. Heshmatian, M. Bahiraei, Chemical Engineering Science 172 (2017) 52–65.
[15] A. Heydari, O.A. Akbari, M.R. Safaei, M. Derakhshani, A.AAA Alrashed, R. Mashayekhi, Gh. Ahmadi Sheikh
Shabani, M. Zarringhalam, T.K. Nguyen, The effect of attack angle of triangular ribs on heat transfer of nanofluids
in a microchannel, Journal of Thermal Analysis and Calorimetry, (2017), in press.
[16] J.M. Wu, J. Zhao, Progress in Nuclear Energy 66 (2013) 13–24.
[17] L.S. Sundar, M.K. Singh, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 20 (2013) 23–35.
[18] M. Bahiraei, International Journal of Thermal Sciences 109 (2016) 90–113.
[19] M. Bahiraei, M. Hangi, Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials 374 (2015) 125–138.
[20] O. Mahian, A. Kianifar, C. Kleinstreuer, M.A. Al-Nimr, I. Pop, A.Z. Sahin, S. Wongwises, Int. J. Heat Mass
Transf. 65 (2013) 514–532.
[21] S.S. Ashrafmansouri, M. Nasr Esfahany, International Journal of Thermal Sciences 82 (2014) 84–99.
[22] Troupe, R.A., Morgan, J.G., Prifti, J., Chem. Eng. Prog. 56 (1960) 124–128.
[23] R. Barzegarian, M. Keshavarz Moraveji, A. Aloueyan, Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 74 (2016) 11–
18.
[24] A.K. Tiwari, P. Ghosh, J. Sarkar, Applied Thermal Engineering 57 (2013) 24–32.

70
[25] A.E. Kabeel, T.A.E. Maaty, Y.E. Samadony, Applied Thermal Engineering 52 (2013) 221–229.
[26] A. Behrangzade, M.M. Heyhat, Applied Thermal Engineering 102 (2016) 311–317.
[27] M. Goodarzi, A. Amiri, M.S. Goodarzi, M.R. Safaei, A. Karimipour, E. Mohseni Languri, M. Dahari,
International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 66 (2015) 172–179.
[28] M. Khoshvaght‑Aliabadi, Heat Mass Transf. 52 (2016) 819–828.
[29] A.M. Abed, M.A. Alghoul, K. Sopian, H.A.M. Hasan, S. Majdi, A. Najah, S. Shamani, Chemical Engineering
and Processing 87 (2015) 88–103.
[30] V. Kumar, A.K. Tiwari, S.K. Ghosh, Energy Conversion and Management 118 (2016) 142–154.
[31] T. Chen, J. Kim, H. Cho, International Journal of Refrigeration 48 (2014) 233–244.
[32] T. Mare, S. Halelfadl, O. Sow, P. Estelle, S. Duret, F. Bazantay, Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 35
(2011) 1535–1543.
[33] B. Sun, C. Peng, R. Zuo, D. Yang, H. Li, Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 76 (2016) 75–86.
[34] A.K. Tiwari, P. Ghosh, J. Sarkar, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 89 (2015) 1110–1118.
[35] D. Huang, Z. Wu, B. Sunden, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 89 (2015) 620–626.
[36] F.S. Javadi, S. Sadeghipour, R. Saidur, G. BoroumandJazi, B. Rahmati, M.M. Elias, M.R. Sohel, International
Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 44 (2013) 58–63.
[37] Y.A. Cengel, M.A. Boles, Thermodynamics: An Engineering Approach, McGraw-Hill, 8th edition, New York,
2015.
[38] S.D. Pandey, V.K. Nema, Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 38 (2012) 248–256.
[39] M.A. Khairul, M.A. Alim, I.M. Mahbubul, R. Saidur, A. Hepbasli, A. Hossain, International Communications
in Heat and Mass Transfer 50 (2014) 8–14.
[40] B.A. Garret-Price, S.A. Smith, R.L. Watts, J.G. Knudsen, W.J. Marner, J.W. Suitor, Fouling of Heat
Exchangers-Characteristics, Costs, Prevention, Control and Removal, Noyes Publications, Park Ridge, NJ, 1985.
[41] G. Bergeles, D. Bouris, M. Yianneskis, S. Balabani, A. Kravaritis, S. Itskos, Applied Thermal Engineering, 17
(8–10) (1997) 739–749.
[42] M. Forster, W. Augustin, M. Bohnet, Chem. Eng. Process. 38 (1999) 449–461.
[43] M.T. Belmar-Beiny, S.M. Gotham, W.R. Paterson, P.J. Fryer, A.M. Pritchard, J. Food Eng. 19 (1993) 119–139.
[44] M.M. Sarafraz, F. Hormozi, Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 72 (2016) 1–11.
[45] V. Nikkhah, M.M. Sarafraz, F. Hormozi, S.M. Peyghambarzadeh, Exp. Thermal Fluid Sci. 60 (2015) 83–95.
[46] M.M. Sarafraz, F. Hormozi, Int. J. Thermal Sci. 90 (2015) 224–237.
[47] K. Anoop, J. Cox, R. Sadr, International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 49 (2013) 5–9.
[48] K. Anoop, R. Sadr, J. Yu, S. Kang, S. Jeon, D. Banerjee, Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transfer 39 (2012) 1325–
1330.
[49] M. Khoshvaght-Aliabadi, F. Hormozi, A. Zamzamian, Applied Thermal Engineering 70 (2014) 565–579.
[50] S.H. Pourhoseini, N. Naghizadeh, Journal of the Taiwan Institute of Chemical Engineers 75 (2017) 220–227.
[51] D.R. Ray, D.K. Das, R.S. Vajjha, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 71 (2014) 732–746.
[52] I.A. Stogiannis, A.A. Mouza, S.V. Paras, International Journal of Thermal Sciences 92 (2015) 230–238.

71
[53] Z. Taghizadeh-Tabari, S. Zeinali Heris, M. Moradi, M. Kahani, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 58
(2016) 1318–1326.
[54] M.M. Sarafraz, V. Nikkhah, S.A. Madani, Mohammad Jafarian, F. Hormozi, Applied Thermal Engineering 121
(2017) 388–399.
[55] A.A. Rabienataj Darzi, M. Farhadi, K. Sedighi, International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 47
(2013) 105–112.
[56] W. Duangthongsuk, S. Wongwises, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 52 (2009) 2059–2067.
[57] B.H. Chun, H.U. Kang, S.H. Kim, Korean J. Chem. Eng. 25 (2008) 966–971.
[58] R. Aghayari, H. Maddah, F. Ashori, A. Hakiminejad, M. Aghili, Heat Mass Transf. 51 (2015) 301–306.
[59] R.S. Khedkar, S.S. Sonawane, K.L. Wasewar, International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 57
(2014) 163–169.
[60] M. Akhtari, M. Haghshenasfard, M.R. Talaie, Numerical Heat Transfer, Part A, 63 (2013) 941–958.
[61] Z. Wu, L. Wang, B. Sunden, Applied Thermal Engineering 60 (2013) 266–274.
[62] H.A. Mohammed, K. Narrein, International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 39 (2012) 1375–1383.
[63] G. Huminic, A. Huminic, International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 71 (2016) 118–125.
[64] K. Narrein, H.A. Mohammed, Thermochimica Acta 564 (2013) 13–23.
[65] W.I.A. Aly, Energy Conversion and Management 79 (2014) 304–316.
[66] M. Hazbehian, H. Maddah, H. Mohammadiun, M. Alizadeh, Heat Mass Transf. 52 (2016) 2515–2529.
[67] M.C.S. Reddy, V.V. Rao, International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 50 (2014) 68–76.
[68] P.V. Durga Prasad, A.V.S.S.K.S. Gupta, M. Sreeramulu, L.S. Sundar, M.K. Singh, A.C.M. Sousa,
Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 62 (2015) 141–150.
[69] H.A. Mohammed, H.A. Hasan, M.A. Wahid, International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 40
(2013) 36–46.
[70] H. Khajeh Arzani, A. Amiri, S.N. Kazi, B.T. Chew, A. Badarudin, International Communications in Heat and
Mass Transfer 68 (2015) 267–275.
[71] Z. Wu, L. Wang, B. Sunden, L. Wadso, Applied Thermal Engineering 96 (2016) 364–371.
[72] M.H. Bahmani, Gh. Sheikhzadeh, M. Zarringhalam, O.A. Akbari, A.A.A.A. Alrashed, Gh. Ahmadi Sheikh
Shabani, M. Goodarzi, Advanced Powder Technology 29 (2018) 273–282.
[73] M. Bahiraei, S.M. Naghibzadeh, M. Jamshidmofid, Energy Conversion and Management 144 (2017) 224–234.
[74] A. Zamzamian, Sh. Nasseri Oskouie, A. Doosthoseini, A. Joneidi, M. Pazouki, Experimental Thermal and Fluid
Science 35 (2011) 495–502.
[75] N.T.R. Kumar, P. Bhramara, B.M. Addis, L. Syam Sundar, M.K. Singh, A.C.M. Sousa,

72
International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 81 (2017) 155–163.
[76] A. Sozen, H.I. Variyenli, M.B. Ozdemir, M. Guru, I. Aytac, Journal of the Energy Institute, 89 (2016) 414–424.
[77] A. Shakiba, Kh. Vahedi, Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials 402 (2016) 131–142.
[78] A. Sozen, H.I. Variyenli, M.B. Ozdemir, M. Guru, Heat Transfer Engineering, 37(9):805–813, 2016.
[79] M.M. Sarafraz, F. Hormozi, Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 66 (2015) 279–289.
[80] P.V. Durga Prasad, A.V.S.S.K.S. Gupta, K. Deepak, Procedia Materials Science 10 (2015) 50–63.
[81] M. Bahiraei, M. Jamshidmofid, S. Heshmatian, Advanced Powder Technology 28 (2017) 2380–2392.
[82] M. Saeedan, A.R. Solaimany Nazar, Y. Abbasi, R. Karimi, Applied Thermal Engineering 100 (2016) 721–729.
[83] G. Huminic, A. Huminic, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 54 (2011) 4280–4287.
[84] S.S. Sonawane, R.S. Khedkar, K.L. Wasewar, International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 49
(2013) 60–68.
[85] M. Bahiraei, S.M. Hosseinalipour, M. Saeedan, Chemical Engineering Communications 202 (2015) 260–268.
[86] J. Albadr, S. Tayal, M. Alasadi, Case Studies in Thermal Engineering 1 (2013) 38–44.
[87] S. Bahrehmand A. Abbassi, Chemical Engineering Research and Design 109 (2016) 628–637.
[88] I.M. Shahrul, I.M. Mahbubul, R. Saidur, S.S. Khaleduzzaman, M.F.M. Sabri, Heat Mass Transf. 52 (2016)
1425–1433.
[89] M.M. Elias, I.M. Shahrul, I.M. Mahbubul, R. Saidur, N.A. Rahim, International Journal of Heat and Mass
Transfer 70 (2014) 289–297.
[90] M.M. Elias, M. Miqdad, I.M. Mahbubul, R. Saidur, M. Kamalisarvestani, M.R. Sohel, A. Hepbasli, N.A.
Rahim, M.A. Amalina, International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 44 (2013) 93–99.
[91] R. Lotfi, A.M. Rashidi, A. Amrollahi, International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 39 (2012) 108–
111.
[92] S.M. Hosseini, L. Vafajoo, B.H. Salman, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 102 (2016) 45–53.
[93] P.C.M. Kumar, J. Kumar, R. Tamilarasan, S.S. Nathan, S. Suresh, Journal of Mechanical Science and
Technology 28 (2014) 1841–1847.
[94] P.C.M. Kumar, K. Palanisamy, J. Kumar, R. Tamilarasan, S. Sendhilnathan, Journal of Mechanical Science and
Technology 29 (2015) 697–705.
[95] M. Bahiraei, M. Hangi, M. Saeedan, Energy 93 (2015) 2229–2240.
[96] A. Vahdat Azad, N. Vahdat Azad, Case Studies in Thermal Engineering 8 (2016) 198–206.
[97] B. Farajollahi, S.Gh. Etemad, M. Hojjat, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 53 (2010) 12–17.
[98] M. Bahiraei, F. Abdi, Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems 157 (2016) 16–28.
[99] K.Y. Leong, R. Saidur, M. Khairulmaini, Z. Michael, A. Kamyar, International Communications in Heat and
Mass Transfer 39 (2012) 838–843.
[100] A. Falahat, Entropy generation analysis of nanofluid flow in Coiled tube heat exchanger under laminar flow,
Elixir Mech. Engg. 51 (2012) 10674–10676.
[101] R. Barzegarian, A. Aloueyan, T. Yousefi, International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 86 (2017)
52–59.

73
[102] M.H. Aghabozorg, A. Rashidi, S. Mohammadi, Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 72 (2016) 182–189.
[103] I.M. Shahrul, I.M. Mahbubul, R. Saidur, M.F.M. Sabri, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 97
(2016) 547–558.
[104] M. Rabbani Esfahani, E. Mohseni Languri, Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 83 (2017) 100–106.
[105] H. Hajabdollahi, Z. Hajabdollahi, Chemical Engineering Research and Design 125 (2017) 449–460.
[106] L. Godson, K. Deepak, C. Enoch, B. Jefferson, B. Raja, Archives of Civil and Mechanical Engineering 14
(2014) 489–496.
[107] A. Ghozatloo, A. Rashidi, M. Shariaty-Niassar, Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 53 (2014) 136–141.
[108] Vasu V, Krishna KR, Kumar ACS. International Journal of Nanomanufacturing 2 (2008) 271–287.
[109] A.M. Hussein, R.A. Bakar, K. Kadirgama, K.V. Sharma, Heat Mass Transfer 50 (2014) 1553–1561.
[110] P. Samira, Z.H. Saeed, S. Motahare, K. Mostafa, Korean J. Chem. Eng. 32 (2015) 609–616.
[111] R.S. Vajjha, D.K. Das, P.K. Namburu, International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 31 (2010) 613–621.
[112] D. Sandhya, M.C.S. Reddy, V.V. Rao, International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer, 78 (2016)
121–126.
[113] M. Elsebay, I. Elbadawy, M.H. Shedid, M. Fatouh, Applied Mathematical Modelling 40 (2016) 6437–6450.
[114] G.A. Oliveira, E.M.C. Contreras, E.P.B. Filho, Applied Thermal Engineering, 111 (2017) 1450–1456.
[115] D.G. Subhedar, B.M. Ramani, A. Gupta, Case Studies in Thermal Engineering 11 (2018) 26–34.
[116] A.S. Tijani, A.S. Sudirman, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 118 (2018) 48–57.
[117] K. Goudarzi, H. Jamali, Applied Thermal Engineering, 118 (2017) 510–517.
[118] C. Selvam, R.S. Raja, D.M. Lal, S. Harish, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 115 (2017) 580–
588.
[119] Z. Wu, Z.Z. Feng, B. Sunden, L. Wadso, Front. Heat Mass Transfer 5 (2014) 18.
[120] S. Suresh, K.P. Venkitaraj, P. Selvakumar, M. Chandrasekar, Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 38 (2012) 54–60.
[121] M.N. Labib, Md.J. Nine, H. Afrianto, H. Chung, H. Jeong, Int. J. Therm. Sci. 71 (2013) 163–171.
[122] H. Yarmand, S. Gharehkhani, G. Ahmadi, S.F.S. Shirazi, S. Baradaran, E. Montazer, M.N.M. Zubir, M.S.
Alehashem, S.N. Kazi, M. Dahari, Energy Convers. Manage. 100 (2015) 419–428.
[123] M.H. Esfe, A.A.A. Arani, M. Rezaie, W.M. Yan, A. Karimipour, Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transfer 66 (2015)
189–195.
[124] A. Moghadassi, E. Ghomi, F. Parvizian, Int. J. Therm. Sci. 92 (2015) 50–57.
[125] D. Huang, Z. Wu, B. Sunden, Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 72 (2016) 190–196.
[126] H.R. Allahyar, F. Hormozi, B. ZareNezhad, Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 76 (2016) 324–329.
[127] F. Cheng, J.W. Betts, S.M. Kelly, J. Schaller, T. Heinze, Green Chem. 15 (2013) 989–998.
[128] J.H. He, T. Kunitake, A. Nakao, Chem. Mater. 15 (2003) 4401–4406.
[129] Q. Sun, X. Cai, J. Li, M. Zheng, Z. Chen, C.P. Yu, Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 444
(2014) 226–231.
[130] S. Odenbach, Ferrofluids, Springer, Berlin, 2002.
[131] R.E. Rosensweig, Ferrohydrodynamics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1985.

74
[132] M. Lin, D. Zhang, J. Huang, J. Zhang, W. Xiao, H. Yu, L. Zhang, J. Ye, Nanotechnology 24 (2013) 255101.
[133] A. Miaskowski, B. Sawicki, IEEE Transaction on Biomedical Engineering 60 (2013) 1806–1813.
[134] Y.W. Lee, T.L. Chang, Microelectronic Engineering 111 (2013) 58–63.
[135] M. Bahiraei, M. Hangi, Energy Conversion and Management 76 (2013) 1125–1133.
[136] H.A. Mohammed, G. Bhaskaran, N.H. Shuaib, H.I. Abu-Mulaweh, International Communications in Heat and
Mass Transfer 38 (2011) 1–9.
[137] M.N. Pantzali, A.G. Kanaris, K.D. Antoniadis, A.A. Mouza, S.V. Paras, International Journal of Heat and
Fluid Flow 30 (2009) 691–699.
[138] S.E. AbdElhafez, A.H. El-Shazly, A. El-Maghraby, Desalination and Water Treatment 57 (2016) 23066–
23073.
[139] W. Wu, H. Bostanci, L.C. Chow, Y. Hong, C.M. Wang, M. Su, J.P. Kizito, International Journal of Heat and
Mass Transfer 58 (2013) 348–355.
[140] N. Ahammed, L.G. Asirvatham, S. Wongwises, Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 74 (2016) 81–90.
[141] Ohadi M., Choo K., Dessiatoun S., Cetegen E. Next generation microchannel heat exchangers. Springer Briefs
Appl Sci Technol; 2013.
[142] Radebaugh R. Microscale heat transfer at low temperatures. In: Kakac S, Vasiliev LL, Bayazitoglu Y, Yener
Y, editors. Microscale heat transfer applications. Netherlands: Springer; 2005. p. 93–124.
[143] Amin MR, Lindstrom JD. J Mech Eng 2005; 51: 418–425.
[144] Murphy DM, Rosen B, Blasi J, Sullivan NP, Kee RJ, Hartmann M, et al. Ceramic microchannel heat
exchanger and reactor for SOFC applications. ECS Trans 2011; 35: 2835–2843.
[145] Glockner PS, Naterer GF. Int J Energy Res 2007; 31: 603–618.
[146] Lu B, Meng WJ, Mei F. Microsyst Technol 2012; 18: 341–352.
[147] Z. Taghizadeh Tabari, S. Zeinali Heris, Journal of Dispersion Science and Technology, 36:196–204, 2015.

75
Table captions
Table 1. Some of the studies conducted on application of nanofluids in PHEs.

Table 2. Some of the studies conducted on application of nanofluids in double-pipe heat exchangers.

Table 3. Some of the studies conducted on application of nanofluids in STHXs.

Table 4. Some of the studies performed on application of nanofluids in compact heat exchangers.

76
Figure captions

Fig. 1. (a) Schematic of a chevron plate, (b) Corrugation dimensions [25]. Reprinted with permission from Elsevier.

Fig. 2. Schematic diagram of functionalization procedure of MWCNT with cysteine and Ag [27]. Reprinted with

permission from Elsevier.

Fig. 3. Schematic of experimental apparatus [30]. Reprinted with permission from Elsevier.

Fig. 4. Heat transfer coefficient ratio for different nanoparticles at concentration of 0.5% [33]. Reprinted with

permission from Elsevier.

Fig. 5. Fouling resistance of the nanofluid inside the PHE [44]. Reprinted with permission from Elsevier.

Fig. 6. Schematic diagram of the experimental apparatus [56]. Reprinted with permission from Elsevier.

Fig. 7. Temperature contours at tube mid-length for: (a) pure water, and (b) CuO-water nanofluid (4%) [64].

Reprinted with permission from Elsevier.

Fig. 8. Nusselt number of 0.03% nanofluid in a tube with helical tape inserts for different p/d ratios [68]. Reprinted

with permission from Elsevier.

Fig. 9. Schematic of the experimental setup used [47]. Reprinted with permission from Elsevier.

Fig. 10. Schematic view of helical baffles [95]. Reprinted with permission from Elsevier.

Fig. 11. Schematic of experimental setup [112]. Reprinted with permission from Elsevier.

Fig. 12. TEM image of Fe2O3-CNT nanoparticles [102]. Reprinted with permission from Elsevier.

Fig. 13. The cycle of the nanofluid production [79]. Reprinted with permission from Elsevier.

Fig. 14. Dimensionless temperature profiles at different magnetic field intensities [77]. Reprinted with permission

from Elsevier.

Fig. 15. (a) Photo of the PHE modulated plate, (b) schematic of the heat exchanging unit [137]. Reprinted with

permission from Elsevier.

Fig. 16. Details of microchannel heat exchanger-heater assembly [139]. Reprinted with permission from Elsevier.

Fig. 17. Graphical representation of slip mechanisms [140]. Reprinted with permission from Elsevier.

77
 Recent studies conducted on use of nanofluids in heat exchangers are reviewed.

 Fascinating aspects on combination of nanofluid with heat exchanger are presented.

 Challenges and opportunities for future research are addressed and discussed.

78