Scholarlink

<p>Enhancing heat exchanger efficiency is vital in industrial applications, as improved heat transfer leads to significant energy savings. One potential strategy is to add nanoparticles to the base fluid. To reduce the cost and effort of experimental trials, a CFD model in ANSYS<sup>®</sup> 24.0 was developed to investigate the influence of nanoparticle kind and concentration (1% to 7%) on heat exchanger performance, considering copper (Cu), copper oxide (CuO), and titanium dioxide (TiO₂). The simulations revealed that Cu nanofluids provided the greatest thermal enhancement, with the overall coefficient of heat transfer (U) improving by 10% (from 955 to 1054&#xa0;W·m⁻²·K⁻¹) and the rate of heat transfer (Q) by 7% (from 9.48 to 10.14&#xa0;kW) as concentration rose from 1% to 7%, although the pressure drop also rose sharply by 53% (from 19.4 to 29.7&#xa0;kPa). CuO nanofluids showed a more balanced performance, with U rising by 7.8% (from 951 to 1025&#xa0;W·m⁻²·K⁻¹), Q rising by 5.2% (from 9.46 to 9.95&#xa0;kW), and a more moderate pressure-drop increase of 35% (from 18.8 to 25.3&#xa0;kPa). TiO₂ nanofluids delivered the lowest thermal enhancement (U rising by 6.5%, Q rising by 4.2%) but the smallest hydraulic penalty (23% pressure-reduction rise). The results indicate that pressure drop increases steadily with nanoparticle concentration and varies among different nanoparticle materials, as the adopted viscosity model accounts for nanoparticles’ type, size, and temperature. The performance evaluation criterion (PEC) further highlighted all these differences, peaking at 2% for Cu (PEC = 1.11), 3% for CuO (PEC = 1.09), and 5% for TiO₂ (PEC = 1.06). Overall, the findings confirm that both nanoparticle concentration and type strongly affect heat-exchanger performance: Cu offers the greatest thermal improvement at low loadings but suffers from high pressure penalties; CuO achieves a balance between thermal gain and hydraulic cost; and TiO₂, though less conductive, ensures stable operation with lower pumping power.</p> Graphical abstract <p></p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Analyzing heat transfer in nanofluid-enhanced shell and tube heat exchangers via computational methods

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年1月28日

查看全文
  • Mohamed Rashad Ali,
  • Mahmoud A. Fouad,
  • Ahmed Abu-Zaid

摘要

Enhancing heat exchanger efficiency is vital in industrial applications, as improved heat transfer leads to significant energy savings. One potential strategy is to add nanoparticles to the base fluid. To reduce the cost and effort of experimental trials, a CFD model in ANSYS® 24.0 was developed to investigate the influence of nanoparticle kind and concentration (1% to 7%) on heat exchanger performance, considering copper (Cu), copper oxide (CuO), and titanium dioxide (TiO₂). The simulations revealed that Cu nanofluids provided the greatest thermal enhancement, with the overall coefficient of heat transfer (U) improving by 10% (from 955 to 1054 W·m⁻²·K⁻¹) and the rate of heat transfer (Q) by 7% (from 9.48 to 10.14 kW) as concentration rose from 1% to 7%, although the pressure drop also rose sharply by 53% (from 19.4 to 29.7 kPa). CuO nanofluids showed a more balanced performance, with U rising by 7.8% (from 951 to 1025 W·m⁻²·K⁻¹), Q rising by 5.2% (from 9.46 to 9.95 kW), and a more moderate pressure-drop increase of 35% (from 18.8 to 25.3 kPa). TiO₂ nanofluids delivered the lowest thermal enhancement (U rising by 6.5%, Q rising by 4.2%) but the smallest hydraulic penalty (23% pressure-reduction rise). The results indicate that pressure drop increases steadily with nanoparticle concentration and varies among different nanoparticle materials, as the adopted viscosity model accounts for nanoparticles’ type, size, and temperature. The performance evaluation criterion (PEC) further highlighted all these differences, peaking at 2% for Cu (PEC = 1.11), 3% for CuO (PEC = 1.09), and 5% for TiO₂ (PEC = 1.06). Overall, the findings confirm that both nanoparticle concentration and type strongly affect heat-exchanger performance: Cu offers the greatest thermal improvement at low loadings but suffers from high pressure penalties; CuO achieves a balance between thermal gain and hydraulic cost; and TiO₂, though less conductive, ensures stable operation with lower pumping power.

Graphical abstract