Next Article in Journal
Electromechanical Coupling Dynamic Characteristics of the Dual-Motor Electric Drive System of Hybrid Electric Vehicles
Next Article in Special Issue
A Review on Recent Developments of RCCI Engines Operated with Alternative Fuels
Previous Article in Journal
Failure Detection Techniques on the Demand Side of Smart and Sustainable Compressed Air Systems: A Systematic Review
Previous Article in Special Issue
Biodiesel Additives Synthesis Using Solid Heteropolyacid Catalysts
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:

Review on Mono and Hybrid Nanofluids: Preparation, Properties, Investigation, and Applications in IC Engines and Heat Transfer

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Koneru Lakshmaiah Education Foundation, Vaddeswaram 522302, India
Department of Mechanical Engineering, K.L.E. Technological University, Hubballi 580031, India
Centre of Excellence in Material Science, K.L.E. Technological University, Hubballi 580031, India
Mechanical Engineering Department, College of Engineering, King Khalid University, P.O. Box 394, Abha 61421, Saudi Arabia
Aerospace Integration Engineer, Aerosapien Technologies, Daytona Beach, FL 32114, USA
Department of Chemistry, K.L.E. Technological University, Hubballi 580031, India
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Yenepoya Institute of Technology, Mangalore 574225, India
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Energies 2023, 16(7), 3189;
Received: 20 February 2023 / Revised: 15 March 2023 / Accepted: 30 March 2023 / Published: 31 March 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Recent Progress in Biodiesel and IC Engines)


Nano fluids are widely used today for various energy-related applications such as coolants, refrigerants, and fuel additives. New coolants and design modifications are being explored due to renewed interest in improving the working fluid properties of heat exchangers. Several studies have investigated nanofluids to enhance radiator and heat exchanger performance. A new class of coolants includes single, binary, and tertiary nanoparticle-based hybrid nano-coolants using ethylene glycol/deionized water combinations as base fluids infused with different nanoparticles. This review article focuses on the hydrothermal behavior of heat exchangers (radiators for engine applications) with mono/hybrid nanofluids. The first part of the review focuses on the preparation of hybrid nanofluids, highlighting the working fluid properties such as density, viscosity, specific heat, and thermal conductivity. The second part discusses innovative methodologies adopted for accomplishing higher heat transfer rates with relatively low-pressure drop and pump work. The third part discusses the applications of mono and hybrid nanofluids in engine radiators and fuel additives in diesel and biodiesel blends. The last part is devoted to a summary of the research and future directions using mono and hybrid nanofluids for various cooling applications.

1. Introduction

One of the dominant threats in the current energy scenario is the depletion of energy reserves. Thermal systems such as refrigerators, heat pumps, and air conditioners place enormous energy demands. Due to limited energy resources, several investigations have been conducted to improve thermal system efficiency and performance by reforming the design of system components or changing the working fluid. Many small heating devices (such as tube heat exchangers, plate heat exchangers, and mini-channel heat exchangers) with mono/hybrid nanofluid usage improve the system’s performance.

1.1. Heat Exchanger

Heat exchangers (HEs) play an essential role in thermal energy management. Regarding the energy crisis, efficient HEs are needed to develop new energy-efficient technologies for industries to reduce energy consumption. Therefore, researchers are focusing on improving the design of equipment and the thermal properties of working fluids. Energy optimization also becomes very important due to the limitations associated with conventional fuels. Energy savings can be achieved by increasing the performance of HEs. HEs available are plate-type heat exchangers (PHEs), double-pipe heat exchangers (DPHEs), heat pipes (HPs), and mini-channel/heat sinks (Figure 1). Because of compactness, high effectiveness, flexibility, ease of handling, and high thermal performance, PHEs originated to meet the requirements of the dairy industries and other engineering applications (such as heat recovery, HVAC, cooling, offshore oil, breweries, power generation, dairy, food processing, chemical, pulp and paper production, and refrigeration). In DPHEs, both fluids can move in the same or opposite directions [1]. Power plants use shell-and-tube or double-pipe HEs to generate electricity. Heaters and economizers are components of these plants [2]. DTHEs have become widespread in use due to their simple design, easy cleaning, and low cost involved [3]. Portable devices (laptops, mobile phones, etc.) are preferable, which require limited space. Cooling these small objects is a challenge. Thus, mini/micro channels have emerged [4]. HPs also play an essential role in cooling these small devices [5]. Improved heat transfer in HEs is accompanied by higher pumping power. Therefore, the benefit of enhanced heat transfer and associated pressure loss must be balanced [6].

1.2. Hybrid Nanofluids

Industries with cooling solution requirements have focused on the use of modified fluids with various additives [7] to obtain improved thermal properties. Nanofluids are colloidal mixtures of nanosized particles (10–100 nm) suspended in base fluids [8]. They possess good physical or chemical properties and thermal or rheological properties [9,10]. Hybrid nanofluids are suspensions of a mixture of dissimilar nanoparticles or nanocomposites infused in the conventional base fluid, which yield better thermal conductivity and heat transfer characteristics due to hybridization [11]. They are used in phase change materials, heat exchangers, solar energy, electronics, agriculture, chemical, manufacturing, and automobile industries [12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25]. The two-step method is used for preparing hybrid nanofluids. Different nanoparticles are prepared and mixed in the primary liquid through magnetic or mechanical stirring. The solution is sonicated and characterized to ensure stable and homogeneous mixing, providing improved heat transfer characteristics [26]. Enhanced heat transfer is due to increased surface area, collision, interactive effect, and proper mixing of nanoparticles in base fluids (causing micro turbulences). Hybrid nanofluids play four roles (used as refrigerant, lubricant, absorbent, and secondary refrigerant) in improving the thermal system performance in low-temperature applications. The effects of nanoparticle concentration and size on the performance of water-based CuO nanofluids were investigated in [27]. The synthesis, stability, and thermo-physical properties of hybrid nanofluids were studied in [28]. Zaynon and Azmi [29] presented the influence of nanoparticle type, concentration, temperature, shape, and size on the nanofluid properties. The amount of grapheme required in the base fluid to improve thermal performance was suggested in [30].

1.3. Secondary Refrigerant

Global warming has been a significant concern for environmentalists during the past couple of decades. Refrigeration industries replaced chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) with hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) to overcome the ozone depletion problem. Supermarket refrigeration systems utilize direct expansion systems with separate evaporation units. Up to 30% loss of refrigerant charges is estimated annually [31]. This refrigerant charge leak exacerbates the global warming problem. There is a necessity for a secondary refrigerant to reduce the leak. Liquid cooling systems are used in industrial refrigeration and commercial air conditioning [32]. A secondary circuit cooling system uses primary and secondary refrigerants. The primary refrigerant (while undergoing a phase change in the evaporator) cools the secondary pumping fluid to the supermarket for cooling. Secondary refrigerants minimize the leakage of primary refrigerants with the possibility of load sharing and easy maintenance. They improve the thermophysical properties of the primary refrigerants, overcoming the additional investment cost and pump work requirement.

1.4. Objectives

The remainder of this review describes the hydrothermal characteristics of a nanofluid-driven single/hybrid plate heat exchanger (PHE), covers the creation of hybrid nanofluids, the empirical relationship with thermo-physical properties, and innovative ways to achieve high heat transfer with relatively low-pressure drops, as well as the research on using single and hybrid nanofluids for heat exchangers (HE) and internal combustion engines (ICEs), and highlights the potential for using single and hybrid nanofluids in the low-temperature sector.

2. Preparation of Mono/Hybrid Nanofluids

Nanofluids are organized according to their preparation using one- or two-step methods (Figure 2). In a one-step approach, nanoparticles are prepared and mixed directly in a base fluid using physical or chemical processes. In the two-step method, nanoparticles are obtained using physical or chemical methods and then effectively infused in an essential base liquid [33]. Several investigators have reviewed the preparation of different mono/hybrid nanofluids based on various base fluids [34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44]. Spherical ZnO particles were synthesized using a sol–gel annealing process at 500–600 °C in [45]. The ball milling process was used to grind aluminum nitride carbon nanocomposite (a nontoxic ceramic) for heat transfer experiments [46]. Making nanofluids through a single-step method is expensive and time-consuming. The control of particle agglomeration is the primary problem in the two-step method. Ultrasonication minimizes nanoparticle sedimentation and improves nanofluid stability [47]. Due to simplicity, 95% of researchers used a two-step method when preparing nanofluids (see Table 1).
Jana et al. [49] infused various volume fractions of CNTs in water to obtain CNT suspensions. Au nanoparticles were suspended with CNT in varying volume fractions to obtain CNT–Au suspensions. The hybrid suspension was sonicated for 1 h using an ultrasonic cleaner to get an adequately dispersed solution. Bhosale and Borse [63] prepared a hybrid nanofluid (Al2O3–CuO water) by mixing 2.5 mg of CuO and Al2O3 in distilled water. Later, the concentration was varied to 0.25%, 0.5%, and 1.0% volume. Toghraie et al. [82] prepared ZnO–TiO2/EG hybrid nanofluids by dispersing equal volumes of ZnO and titanium dioxide (TiO2) nanoparticles in a given amount of pure EG as a base liquid. The stability of the prepared nanofluid was confirmed, ensuring no sedimentation. Paul et al. [55] synthesized Al–Zn nanoparticles by stirring. They prepared hybrid nanofluids through a two-step process. Al–Zn nanoparticles were added to ethylene glycol (base fluid), followed by sonication and magnetic stirring. Suresh et al. [56] obtained a hybrid powder of alumina–copper using a thermochemical method, including spray-drying, oxidation of the precursor powder, hydrogen reduction, and homogenization. They used different volume fractions (0.1%, 0.33%, 0.75%, 1.0%, and 2.0%). Baby and Sundara [54] used a hydrogen-induced exfoliation and chemical reduction process of graphite oxide (GO) to synthesize grapheme decorated with CuO (CuO/HEG). The HEG obtained was functionalized by acid treatment and coated with CuO nanoparticles. CuO/HEG was dispersed in the base liquid (water/EG) by ultrasonication. Nine et al. [66] reported an economical and beneficial process for synthesizing Cu2O and Cu/Cu2O nanoparticles with a mean size of less than 30 nm. A ball milling process was used to synthesize Cu/Cu2O–water hybrid nanofluids. Madhesh et al. [71] prepared a copper–titania hybrid nanofluid by uniformly dispersing an aqueous solution of titania (5 g) and copper acetate (0.5 g) in an ultrasonic vibrator for 2 h using reducing agents at 45 °C and atmospheric pressure. A one-step method was described for a hybrid nanofluid containing silver and silica nanoparticles by Botha et al. [57]. Ho et al. [58] prepared phase change material (PCM) suspensions using interfacial poly-condensation and emulsion techniques. Nanofluid Al2O3–water was obtained by adding Al2O3 nanoparticles in water (base liquid). Chen et al. [61] prepared Ag/MWCNT nanocomposites using the silver mirror reaction. Functionalized MWCNTs were used to fabricate Ag/MWCNT nanocomposites using sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) as a surfactant and formaldehyde as a reducing agent.

3. Characterization and Stability of Mono/Hybrid Nanofluids

Several forces, such as van der Waals attraction, buoyancy, gravity, and electrostatic repulsion, cause destabilization and sediment formation. Van der Waals attraction and gravity decrease the stability of colloidal suspensions. Stability is a critical factor in the effectiveness of nanofluids for technological applications. All thermo-physical properties of nanofluids depend on their stability. The instability of nanofluids can reduce their effectiveness in many heat transfer applications. It is caused by the tendency of nanoparticles to form clusters in liquids. An SEM image of the Al2O3–MWCNT/water hybrid nanofluid is shown in Figure 3 [101].
The particle aggregation causes the separation of nanoparticles from base fluids and forms sedimentation [102]. The coagulation rate is determined from the collision frequency of particles in Brownian motion and cohesion probability [103]. Removal of agglomeration propensity yields stable nanofluids. Methods adopted for assessing the stability of nanofluids are the sedimentation method, spectral absorbance, centrifugation method, transmittance measurement, zeta potential measurement, and dynamic light scattering [104]. For long-term stable and homogenous nanofluids, the following surfactants can be added [105,106]: anionic (sodium dodecyl sulfate and sodium dodecyl benzene sulfonate), cationic (cetyl trimethyl ammonium bromide), nonionic (Span-80 and Tween-20), and polymer (polyvinyl pyrrolidone, polyvinyl alcohol, and gum Arabic). Surfactants improve the wettability of the nanoparticles and the base fluids by reducing the base fluid’s surface tension and improving the nanoparticles’ dispersibility [107].
Ultrasonic mills, baths, stirrers, and high-pressure homogenizers are used for the dispersion of nanoparticles. Baby and Sundara [59] used an economical method to synthesize hydrogen-functionalized, exfoliation-induced silver-decorated graphene (Ag/HEG) and prepared nanofluids. Ag/HEG was distributed in a mixture of deionized water/ethylene glycol using ultrasonic agitation without surfactant. The hybrid nanofluid was observed to be stable for more than 3 months. Aravind and Ramaprabhu [62] prepared MWCNT nanocomposites with graphene shells and synthesized them by chemical vapor deposition. The prepared hybrid nanofluid was stable for an extended period. Megatif et al. [80] prepared a CNT–TiO2 hybrid nanocomposite and dispersed it in water to obtain a hybrid nanofluid. The surfactant SDBS was added to the suspension for proper dispersion. They sonicated the solution for 15 min and tested its stability. The solution was stable for 2 days.
Although most (95%) of the researchers adhered to the two-step method, nanofluids synthesized by the expensive and complex one-step method improve the stability of nanoparticle suspensions in base oils due to high sedimentation rates with short sonication times [108]. Ultrasonication lessens the sedimentation of nanoparticles, resulting in enhanced nanofluid stability. A better understanding of the mechanisms of nanofluids at the atomic level is required to address particle transport, aggregation, and stability issues with minimal experimentation.
No sophisticated equipment is required to produce nanofluids using a simple two-step method. Dispersion of nanoparticles requires sonication times of 3–10 h [109]. Amin et al. [110] critically reviewed the properties of single and hybrid nanofluids based on organic and synthetic materials. Malika and Sonavan [111] used a two-step method to prepare CuO–ZnO/water hybrid nanofluids. Ultrasonication provided nanofluid stability. FESEM/EDS, dynamic light scattering, and zeta potential measurements provide insight into nanoparticle morphology, shape, and size. The stability of Al2O3–CuO/(50/50) EG/W (ethylene glycol/water) hybrid nanofluids at 60 °C was confirmed by zeta potential measurements [112].
The stability of trihybrid nanofluids was tested by mixing three types of nanoparticles (i.e., Al2O3, TiO2, and SiO2 with volume concentrations of 0.05–0.3%) in a water/ethylene glycol-based fluid [113] and a recommended sonication time of 10 h at a zeta potential of 25.1 mV. To improve the stability of nanofluids, Afshari et al. [114] highlighted properties such as the acidity degree of the nanofluid, ultrasonication, nanoparticle material, base fluid type, nanoparticle concentration, surfactants, and surface modification of nanoparticles. Arora and Gupta [115] reviewed stability evaluation techniques (spectral absorbance, sedimentation, zeta-potential, and electron microscopy) and enhancement techniques (ultrasonication, surfactant addition, particle surface modifications, and pH change). Future research should focus on industrial applications to minimize pressure losses, the concentration of nanoparticles, and the long-term stability of hybrid nanofluids.
The stability characteristics of mono and hybrid nanofluids have been studied using zeta potential measurements and vibrating sample magnetometry (VSM) analysis [116]. To maintain nanofluid stability, Zainon and Azmi [29] recommend analysis by sonication, pH modification, surfactant, TEM, field emission scanning electron microscopy (FESEM), XRD, zeta potential, and UV/visible spectroscopy techniques. Bumataria et al. [117] used single and hybrid nanofluids to study heat transfer consider in heat pipe technologies. The use of dispersing agents and sonication increases the stability of nanofluids [118]. Excellent suspension stability could be obtained by adding small amounts of SDBS and PEG to DW (hybrid nanofluid 25% Al2O3 + 75% TiO2) [119]. The hybrid nanofluid’s stability was high, as the zeta potential value (i.e., the electrostatic repulsive force between the nanoparticle and the base fluid) was 42.6 mV compared to the reference value of 30 mV. Said et al. [120] investigated the stability of carbon nanofibers (CNF), functionalized carbon nanofibers (F-CNF), reduced graphene oxide (rGO), and F-CNF/rGO nanofluids. Hybrid nanofluids (FCNF/rGO) showed higher stability than CNF, F-CNF, and rGO nanofluids.
Muthoka et al. [121] investigated the stability of hybrid nanofluids with two nanoparticles in PCM/DI water. The stability of surfactant-free MgO and 24 wt.% primary liquid was poor after 24 h, whereas the functionalized MWCNT solution showed no separation after 24 h. It was confirmed that the nanofluid’s low-temperature stability was increased using a surfactant. Acid treatment with CNF was used to test stability [122]. The zeta potential of 0.02 vol.% F–CNF nanofluids measured after 2 and 90 days was −42.9 and −41.8 mV, indicating improved stability compared to the −16.3 and −15.5 mV UNV zeta potentials, which were characterized by relatively unstable dispersion. Alawi et al. [123] synthesized aqueous nanofluids PEG–GnP, PEG–TGr, Al2O3, and SiO2. The dispersion stability of the carbon-based nanofluid and the metal oxide nanofluid was observed for 30 days, and the high dispersibility of PEG–HNP and PEG–TGr in an aqueous medium with low sedimentation was confirmed. Compared to GnP/DW nanofluids, TiO2/DW nanofluids showed superior stability [124]. The addition of CTAB surfactant showed excellent stability of ternary hybrid nanofluids [125]. Uysal [126] used a 500 rpm homogenizer to mix and stabilize nano-graphene in vegetable oil. Al-Waeli et al. [127] demonstrated high nanofluid stability (over 80 days) with CTAB and tannic acid + ammonia solution. The stability of Al2O3/water nanofluids using CTAB and SDBS surfactants was investigated for various pH values [128]. Kazemi et al. [129] visually observed the stability of SiO2/water and G/water nanofluids. SiO2/water nanofluids were found stable at all pH values (see Table 2 for the stability of various nanofluids).
Brownian motion of nanoparticles, micro-convection, clustering, and pH value strongly affect the thermal properties of hybrid nanofluids [141]. Solidification and clustering of nanocomposites of different sizes in nanofluids affect their thermal properties [142,143]. The stabilization and evaporation of single and hybrid nanofluids have been studied in specific systems from a statistical point of view [144,145].

4. Thermo-Physical Properties of Mono/Hybrid Nanofluids

This section summarizes the influence of using hybrid nanofluids on effective thermal conductivity, dynamic viscosity, density, and specific heat [146,147,148]. Devices commonly used for measuring the properties (density, specific heat, thermal conductivity, and viscosity) of working fluids, including nanofluids and hybrid nanofluids, are shown in Figure 4. The density of a liquid can be measured by taking the weight of the liquid and dividing it by its volume. A digital scale can be used to measure mass. Viscosity can be measured with a Brookfield DV1 digital viscometer, and thermal conductivity and specific heat can be measured with a hot disc thermal constant analyzer.

4.1. Density and Specific Heat of Mono/Hybrid Nanofluids

Density and specific heat capacity are among the most important thermo-physical properties of hybrid nanofluids when studying the heat transfer properties of working fluids. Ho et al. [149] studied aqueous hybrid nanofluids of Al2O3 nanoparticles and microencapsulated particles of phase change materials. They measured various thermo-physical properties of the hybrid nanofluids. Baghbanzadeh et al. [150] studied the therm-o-physical properties of aqueous hybrid nanofluids containing different weights of silica and MWCNTs. They observed that the density and viscosity of the hybrid nanofluids increased with concentration but decreased with increasing temperature. Labib et al. [151] found that density increased more than the viscosity with the volume fraction of a hybrid suspension containing carbon nanotubes and oxides.
Some studies of hybrid nanofluids concluded that the specific heat increases with particle volume concentration and temperature, while the density enhances with concentration and drops with the temperature. The increase in specific heat is related to the formation of nanostructures at the solid–liquid interface, whereas particle aggregation harms the increase in specific heat. The hybrid nanofluid’s density ratio [152] is obtained from the mass balance and the specific heat capacity from the energy balance. The generalized form of the density and specific heat equations for hybrid nanofluids are as follows:
ρ n f = ϕ p ρ p + ρ b f ( 1 ϕ p ) ,
ρ n f c n f = ϕ p ρ p c p + ρ b f c b f ( 1 ϕ p ) ,
where ρ is the density, ϕ is the volume fraction, and c is the specific heat.

4.2. Viscosity of Mono/Hybrid Nanofluids

Viscosity is one of the critical thermophysical properties for studying the behavior of hybrid nanofluids because the required pressure drop and pump operation depend on it. Numerous physical parameters affect the viscosity of nanofluids. Large particles have a relatively higher viscosity than small particles [153]. Nanofluids at low volume concentrations exhibit Newtonian behavior [154]. Ho et al. [149] reported the viscosity of a 10 wt.% hybrid suspension compared to water. Baghbanzadeh et al. [150] studied the rheological properties of aqueous hybrid nanofluids containing silicon dioxide and MWCNTs in weight ratios of 80:20 and 50:50. They observed that the nanofluid’s viscosity increased as the concentration and temperature decreased. The viscosity increase was the smallest for the 50:50 wt.% ratio. Abashi et al. [65] measured the viscosity of MWNT–TiO2/water suspensions. They observed an increase in fluid viscosity, and the enhancement was more significant when there were more MWCNT nanoparticles than TiO2 nanoparticles in the solution. Sundar et al. [68] experimentally determined the viscosity of the nanocomposite hybrid nanofluid MWCNT–Fe3O4 and observed an increase in viscosity up to 1.5 times at 3 vol.% concentration and 60 °C compared to water.
Esfe et al. [155] and Dardan et al. [156] studied an oil-based hybrid nanofluid containing MWCNT nanoparticles. They observed a significant increase in viscosity. Soltani and Akbari [157] studied ethylene glycol-based hybrid nanofluids containing MgO and MWCNT nanoparticles. They observed an increase in viscosity of up to 168% when increasing the particle volume fraction to 1.0%. Esfe et al. [158] studied the viscosity of MWCNT–TiO2 hybrid nanofluids using brine as the base fluid. They observed an 83% increase in viscosity at 10 °C. Asadi and Asadi [159] proposed a correlation for the viscosity of motor oil-based hybrid nanofluids containing MWCNTs and ZnO nanoparticles (15:85). The maximum increase in viscosity was about 45% at 55 °C and 1.0% concentration. Suresh et al. [56] tested a hybrid nanofluid of aluminum oxide and copper, showing that the viscosity increased by 115% at a concentration of 2.0 vol.%. At low concentrations, the effect was negligible. Suspensions containing silica and silver particles had lower viscosities than those containing only silica particles [57]. A 24% increase in viscosity was observed at a concentration of 0.02 vol.% [160].
Yarmand et al. [161] found a 30% increase in viscosity and 0.09% density for the nanocomposite hybrid nanofluid GNP–silver at 40 °C. The thermal conductivity and viscosity of nanodiamond–Fe3O4 nanofluids were noted for 20 to 60 °C temperature and concentrations up to 0.2 vol.% [162]. They suggested a correlation for the viscosity ratio at different temperatures, which was exponential and depended only on the volume concentration. An expression was proposed for the viscosity of hybrid oil-based MWCNT nanofluids at 25–60 °C [155,163,164]. A correlation for the viscosity of the hybrid nanofluids was established according to the shape function [165].
μ n f μ b f = 1 + ψ 1 ϕ + ψ 2 ϕ 2 ,
where ϕ is the total volume fraction of particles. μnf and μbf are the viscosities of the hybrid nanofluid and base fluid, respectively, and Ψ1 and Ψ2 are coefficients, whose values were given by Sheikholeslami and Shamlooei [165]. Correlations for the viscosity and viscosity ratio for different hybrid nanofluids are summarized in Table 3. The viscosity data obtained from the test and proposed empirical relations were compared for the 0.1% volume concentration of alumina nanofluid (Figure 5). It can be observed that some results matched the test data, whereas others showed deviation. The reason can be negligence of particle size or working temperature, whereas different relationships may be valid for other working parameters. Therefore, researchers must choose an appropriate empirical ratio or develop one suitable for the nanofluid synthesized.

4.3. Thermal Conductivity of Mono/Hybrid Nanofluids

Thermal conductivity is one of the essential physical properties of fluid for improving the heat transfer performance of a working fluid because the heat transfer characteristics increase as the thermal conductivity increases. The mechanism of Brownian motion enhances the thermal conductivity of nanofluids at low temperatures [167]. Hamze et al. [168] studied the influence of thermal conductivity on FLG properties. Triton X-100 surfactant increased thermal conductivity and dynamic viscosity in [169]. Batmunkh et al. [70] showed a 0.8% increase in thermal conductivity for silver–titanium hybrid nanofluids. Hybrid silver–magnesium nanofluids showed a rise of 8.6% in thermal conductivity at a concentration of 0.02 vol.% [160]. Charab et al. [170] developed a thermal conductivity model for Al2O3–TiO2 hybrid nanofluids. They found a nonlinear relationship between particle volume concentration and thermal conductivity due to stability issues in nanofluids.
Baghbanzadeh et al. [150] observed 23.3% and 8.8% increases in thermal conductivity for MWCNT nanofluids and silica nanofluids. The effect of nanoparticle shape on fluid thermal conductivity was examined using alumina–MWCNT hybrid nanofluids [171]. The thermal conductivity was found to be enhanced. However, spherical particles give better results than cylindrical particles. Sundar et al. [68] and Shahsavar et al. [172] saw increased thermal conductivity when using CNT–Fe3O4 hybrid nanofluids. Farbod and Ahangarpour [173] and Munkhbayar et al. [67] studied the thermal properties of water-based hybrid Ag–MWCNT nanofluids. They found that the resulting thermal conductivity was 20% and 14.5% higher than the base fluid. Soltani and Akbari [157] analyzed ethylene glycol-based hybrid nanofluids containing MgO and MWCNT nanoparticles. Thermal conductivity increased by 14.5% at 40 °C. Harandi et al. [174] experimentally studied the thermal conductivity of EG-based hybrid nanofluids containing functionalized MWCNTs and Fe3O4 nanoparticles. They found an augmentation in thermal conductivity of 30% at a temperature of 50 °C and a concentration of 2.3%.
Botha et al. [57] studied an oil-based hybrid nanofluid of silver and silica (a nano lubricant) and observed a 15% increase in thermal conductivity for 0.6 wt.% Ag and 0.7 wt.% silica by weight. Al2O3–Cu hybrid nanofluids gave better results than aluminum oxide nanofluids with an augmented thermal conductivity of 12.11% [56]. Adding 0.2 vol.% ND–Fe3O4 nanoparticles increased the thermal conductivity of water by 17.8% [162]. Yarmand et al. [175] studied the thermal conductivity of graphene (0.06 wt.%) activated a carbon suspension in ethylene glycol and observed 4.17% and 6.47% increases at 20 °C and 40 °C. Various researchers have proposed correlations for hybrid nanofluids with various base fluids (deionized water, motor oil, vegetable oil, glycols, mixtures of glycols, and water). Table 4 summarizes the correlations proposed by the researchers for the thermal conductivity of hybrid nanofluids.
Elias et al. [190] proposed the following correlation for the thermal conductivity of hybrid nanofluids according to their shape function:
k n f k b f = k 1 + ( n 1 1 ) k b f ( n 1 1 ) ( k b f k 1 ) ϕ 1 k 1 + ( n 1 1 ) k b f + ( k b f k 1 ) ϕ 1 k 2 + ( n 2 1 ) k n f ( n 2 1 ) ( k n f k 2 ) ϕ 2 k 2 + ( n 2 1 ) k n f + ( k n f k 2 ) ϕ 2 ,
where n1 and n2 are shape functions whose values differ for different shapes. knf and kbf are the thermal conductivities of the hybrid nanofluid and base fluid, respectively. k1 and k2 are the thermal conductivities of particles 1 and 2, respectively. ϕ 1 and ϕ 2 are the volume fractions of particles 1 and 2, respectively. Different shapes, such as cylinders, blades, bricks, and plates, were considered in [190], revealing that cylindrical particles performed better than other shapes.
For thermal conductivity, some empirical relationships have been presented that are not valid for all nanofluids with different concentrations of nanoparticles. This can be seen from Figure 6, where test data are compared with the results obtained from other empirical relations. Therefore, researchers must choose an appropriate empirical ratio or develop a relation suitable for the developed nanofluid. It was observed that the viscosity and thermal conductivity of the working fluid increased with the addition of nanoparticles. The researchers observed this at low concentrations of nanoparticles and assumed that the same trend would continue at higher concentrations. Experiments revealed that the Prandtl number (ratio of viscosity to thermal conductivity) increases up to a specific concentration of nanoparticles. Then, it starts to fall because the two properties do not increase proportionally [190]. This increasing–decreasing trend in the Prandtl number affects the Nusselt number, which in turn affects the performance of the heat exchanger.
Table 5 represents the thermo-physical properties of different fluids measured by devices mentioned in Figure 4. It also shows the variation of properties at different working temperatures (10–25 °C). It can be observed that the thermal conductivity, density, and viscosity increase with the addition of nanoparticles in the base fluid. The fluid’s thermal conductivity increases with the temperature increase, whereas density and viscosity decrease. No change is observed for the specific heat as the studied temperature range is small. Table 6 compares the test data and theoretical data obtained from Equations (1)–(4) for different thermo-physical properties of alumina nanofluid with 0.1 vol.% concentration. It can be observed that the specific heat and density data are the same for the experimental data and theoretical prediction from the empirical relation. Whereas there is a deviation in the case of thermal conductivity and viscosity, as indicated in the provided empirical relations, the influence of temperature and particle size is neglected. Hence, correlations containing the effect of temperature and particle size are needed for predicting accurate results.

5. Hydrothermal Characteristics of Heat Exchanger

Focused extensive research is being conducted to enhance the performance of heat exchangers under laminar and turbulent flow. Providing the corrugation and chevron angle on a flat surface augments the heat transfer behavior because it increases the surface area and includes turbulence, further increasing the heat transfer coefficient [191]. Different mono and hybrid nanofluids have been introduced to enhance the performance of thermal devices, and their hydrothermal characteristics have been studied [192,193,194,195,196,197,198,199,200,201,202]. Heat transfer increases with the heat transfer coefficient, which nanofluids enhance due to increased thermal conductivity via several mechanisms. It was observed that heat transfer and pressure drop both increase using nanofluids, but the rise in pressure drop is comparatively insignificant. This section is divided into two parts: experimental and numerical studies of mono/hybrid nanofluids for heat exchangers (plate heat exchanger, tubular heat exchanger, mini-channel heat exchanger, and heat pipe).

5.1. Experimental Studies on Heat Exchangers

Pandey and Nema [203] analyzed an alumina–water solution as the refrigerant in a corrugated plate heat exchanger. They observed enhanced heat transfer properties with the Reynolds number. Tiwari et al. [204,205] conducted experimental studies on plate heat exchangers using various nanofluids to improve their performance. Barzegarian et al. [206] studied the hydrothermal characteristics of a plate heat exchanger for domestic hot water application using TiO2–water nanofluid. Tabari et al. [207] used TiO2–water nanofluid in a PHE for milk pasteurization considering mass concentrations (0.25%, 0.35%, and 0.8%) and concluded that the heat transfer rate increased due to the increased thermal conductivity. The effect of plate orientation in an alumina nanofluid plate heat exchanger was studied experimentally by Prashant et al. [208]. They found that the heat transfer decreased with the Reynolds number when the plate orientation was changed from horizontal to vertical. The heat transfer coefficient was reduced by 10–15% at a tilt angle of 30°. Huang et al. [209] used a mixture of Al2O3–water and MWCNT–water at a ratio of 2.5:1 in a plate heat exchanger and observed an increase in HTC and a pressure drop when using the hybrid solution compared to the primary fluid. Bhattad et al. [210,211] conducted experiments with plate heat exchangers using different hybrid nanofluids as refrigerants and observed changes in the volume ratio of the particles and an influence of particle size on the heat exchanger performance. They discussed the ranking of different fluids based on the achieved thermal conductivity, viscosity, density, and specific heat properties. According to heat transfer performance, studied nanofluids were arranged in ascending order as TiO2, CuO, Al2O3, MgO, AlN, SiC, and MWCNT. Similarly, according to pump work, different fluids were arranged in descending order as MWCNT, CuO, TiO2, Al2O3, MgO, AlN, and SiC. Bhattad [212,213] performed experiments with hybrid nanofluids in plate heat exchangers and found that hybrid nanofluids increased the heat transfer efficiency of the heat exchanger.
Kavitha et al. [214] experimented with CuO–water nanofluid as a coolant to improve a two-tube heat exchanger. Jassim and Ahmed [215,216] experimentally evaluated the effect of Al2O3 nanofluids on heat exchanger performance. Mansoury et al. [217] experimentally studied the heat transfer characteristics and flow of Al2O3–water nanofluids in heat exchangers. Pipe heat exchangers offer higher heat transfer coefficients than plate heat exchangers. Henein et al. [218] improved the thermal performance of a heat pipe vacuum tube solar collector using MgO–MWCNT/water hybrid nanofluids as the working fluid. It was interpreted that the energy and exergy efficiency increased as the mass ratio of MWCNT nanoparticles increased. The heat transfer properties of heat exchangers were improved [219,220,221,222,223]. Cylindrical (MWCNT) and various spherical (MgO) nanoparticles have been used to study the properties of two-pipe heat exchangers [224,225]. The heat transfer rate was increased by 115% using the MWCNT nanofluid. Subramanian et al. [226] experimentally found that the heat transfer of the TiO2–water nanofluid was higher than that of the primary fluid (water). The pump work required due to the differential pressure could be estimated from the equations mentioned in the study by Dalkilic et al. [227]. Bahmani et al. [228] studied forced convection in a tube heat exchanger using a nanofluid (aluminum oxide/water). The extreme increase rate of the average Nusselt number and increase rate of thermal efficiency were 32.70% and 30%, respectively. Later, Bahmani et al. [229] studied forced convection in a two-tube heat exchanger with nanofluids at various Reynolds numbers ranging from 100 to 1500. Kristiawan et al. [230] observed enhancement in the thermal performance of helical micro-fin tubes using titania nanofluid with different particle concentrations. They also proposed a correlation to predict the Nusselt number.
Heat pipes are designed to act as heat transfer and thermostats. They were first introduced by Akachi [231]. A survey was conducted on heat pipe stability and operating limitations [232]. The heat transfer ability of nanofluid-filled PHP depends more on factors such as the nanofluid’s thermal conductivity and viscosity. A variety of nanoparticles, including metals [233], oxide particles [234], graphene, graphene oxide [235], and diamond particles [236], have been tested to understand their effect on the heat transfer properties of a PHP. Heat flux increases with nanofluid concentration, while a higher concentration leads to a higher viscosity [237]. Qu and Wu [238] tested the thermal performance of a PHP using SiO2/water and Al2O3/water nanofluids. Experimental results showed that the Al2O3/water nanofluid improved the heat transfer performance of the PHP. Goshayeshi et al. [239] compared the properties of CLPHP charged with nanofluid Fe3O4 and ɤFe2O3. Results showed that Fe3O4 exhibits higher thermal performance than ɤFe2O3.
The thermal resistance and critical thermal load of FP–PHP decreased with increasing nanoparticle concentration/mass fraction [240]. Li [235] investigated the change in heat transfer efficiency in a PHP of graphene/water–ethylene glycol nanosuspensions at various concentrations and packing factors. Xu et al. [241] performed experiments considering hybrid working fluids. Zufar et al. [242] investigated a PHP using various hybrid nanofluids and concluded that the thermal resistance of the PHP for SiO2–CuO and Al2O3–CuO hybrid nanofluids was 50% and 34% lower than that of water, respectively. Khodami et al. [243] studied a PHP heat exchanger prototype. The results showed that silver nanofluid improved exergy efficiency and reduces exergy loss. Jahani et al. [244] studied the thermal properties of nanofluidic PHP charges. The results showed the improvement in PHP performance using silver nanofluid. Su et al. [245] showed that self-wetting nanofluids have better heat transfer properties than charged self-wetting liquids and nanofluids alone over the entire operating range.
Several experimental studies on the hydrothermal behavior of HyNfs in mini/microchannel heat sinks are available [246]. Selvakumar and Suresh [247] synthesized hybrid AlO–Cu nanoparticles and studied the properties of HyNf Al2O3–Cu/water in a mini-channel. Ahammed et al. [248] showed a 63.13% increase in the convective heat transfer coefficient when using HyNf Al2O3–graphene in a mini-channel. Nimmagadda and Venkatasubbaiah [249] experimentally studied the behavior of Al2O3–Ag HyNf in microchannels. Ho et al. [250] looked at nano-encapsulated phase change materials at MCHS and found up to 70% improvement in heat transfer. Kumar and Sarkar [251] determined various combinations of HyNf-based nanoparticles in MCHS and showed that the Al2O3–AlN combination performed best. Similar investigations on micro/mini-channel heat exchange devices using HyNfs were performed in [252,253,254,255,256,257,258,259].

5.2. Numerical Studies on the Heat Exchangers

Pantzali et al. [260] investigated the operation of a miniature plate heat exchanger whose surface was modulated using nanofluids. It has been reported that using the nanofluid of CuO/water reduces the equipment’s size and the pump’s operation. Gherasim et al. [261] studied the heat transfer and flow properties of plate-like HEX using a homogeneous model with CuO and aluminum oxide nanofluids. They found that the heat transfer rate increased at higher pressure drops using nanofluids. The performance of various nanofluids (1.0 vol.%) in a small plate heat exchanger was examined [262]. They found the need for an increase in the convective heat transfer coefficient, as well as decreases in the volumetric flow rate and pumping power. A single-phase numerical model obtained promising results with various nanofluids [263]. Stogiannis et al. [264] numerically observed decreases in coolant consumption and pumping power with SiO2 nanofluid coolant in a PFC. In the course of numerical studies conducted by Jokar and O’Halloran [265], a clear conclusion was drawn regarding augmented thermal conductivity and a drop in heat transfer with increasing volumetric concentration. Goodarzi et al. [266] and Bhattad et al. [267] numerically studied MWCNT hybrid nanofluids on HEX plates in the turbulent regime. They noted that the heat transfer rate and pump work both increased.
Ding et al. [268] performed a numerical study of TiO2/water nanofluids in a two-tube heat exchanger. The results showed that the nanofluid’s heat transfer capacity was higher than that of deionized water. Bhattad and Babu [269] performed thermal evaluations of shell-and-tube heat exchangers using various alumina/water hybrid nanofluids. They found a 16.5% heat transfer rate gain using MWCNT/alumina hybrid nanofluid. Jafarmadar et al. [270] investigated PHP’s entropy generation and thermal analysis using Al2O3, CuO, and Ag nanofluids. An optimal concentration of 0.5–1% of the nanoparticle volume was determined on the basis of mathematical modeling. Yan et al. [271] and Khetib et al. [272] performed a numerical study to determine the effect of different types of nanofluids on MCHS. Kalteh et al. [273] conducted a numerical study of forced convection heat exchange between alumina and copper nanofluids at MCHS. At a volume fraction of 0.03, the average Nusselt number of copper nanofluids increased by 29.41%.
Some of the relevant studies with significant results are listed in Table 7. The literature survey in the present section showed that the Nusselt number plays a very significant role in convective studies of fluid flow problems. Hence, the quantitative data for the Nusselt number are presented in Table 8.
The survey revealed that many empirical relations are available for calculating the Nusselt number on the basis of nondimensional numbers, i.e., Reynolds and Prandtl numbers. However, the Nusselt number, by definition, depends on the thermal conductivity, geometric parameters, and heat transfer coefficient. Therefore, it is suggested to validate the results in two ways. For this purpose, conducting experiments and obtaining the required parameters are recommended. The table depicts the Nusselt number for base fluid, titania nanofluid, and alumina nanofluid at different temperatures. It can be observed that the Nusselt number increases with the addition of nanoparticles and the increase in working temperature. Hybrid nanofluid plays an extraordinary role in heat transmission in the presence of a magnetic field. The temperature transfer rate increases as the Prandtl number increases. When the surface stretching rate increases, the velocity profile decays while the temperature profile increases [313].

6. Exergy Analysis of Mono/Hybrid Nanofluids

When the conversion of heat energy into valuable work is incomplete, this indicates the presence of unavailable power. The amount of available energy is termed exergy. The exergy increases as the operating condition moves far from the ambient temperature. Hence, for every thermal system where heat and work transfer are essential, one must estimate the exergy, irreversibility, exergetic efficiency, etc. Bhattad et al. [48] performed exergy destruction analysis in their research using different nanoparticle combinations for coolant purposes. Bhattad et al. [101] analyzed exergy destruction with alumina and multiwalled carbon nanotubes. They observed that the irreversibility increased with flow rate and decreased with inlet temperature, as it was directly proportional to flow rate and inversely proportional to inlet temperature. Exergetic efficiency showed the opposite trend. Bhattad et al. [314,315] performed exergy destruction analysis with different brine solution-based fluids and nanoparticle combinations for low-temperature applications. They used working fluid as a secondary refrigerant in plate evaporators. The irreversibility and nondimensional exergy destruction (NDE) were reduced while using brine-based hybrid nanofluids as a secondary refrigerant compared with the corresponding base fluid for all low-temperature applications. Hybrid nanofluids enhanced the exergetic efficiency and irreversibility distribution ratio (IDR). The irreversibility/exergy destruction of the system can be calculated as follows:
I = T e S g e n ,
where Te is the ambient temperature in Kelvin.
Sgen is the entropy generation rate, which can be calculated as follows:
S g e n = m ˙ c p ln T o T i + Δ p ρ T a v ,
where Tav is the average temperature of the inlet and outlet temperature.
The second law of efficiency or exergy efficiency (ηII) is the ratio of exergy gain to exergy loss, which is given by
η I I = E g E l .
The scaling of exergetic parameters has become essential from the design point of view for thermal systems. Hence, different parameters such as non-dimensional exergy destruction, irreversibility distribution ratio, and Bejan number are discussed in the present investigation. Non-dimensional exergy destruction (NDE) is the ratio of irreversibility to maximum heat transfer rate, which signifies the effect of design parameters on the exergy destruction for a given operating condition. A non-dimensional parameter, entropy generation number, was introduced by Mishra et al. [316] to study the influence of heat capacity on entropy generation. The sustainability of the device was evaluated in terms of the exergy ratio to understand the utilization of resources [317]. Bejan [318] introduced the irreversibility distribution ratio (IDR) concept to show the relative influence of heat transfer and pressure drop on irreversibility. The irreversibility distribution ratio was defined as the ratio of entropy generation due to heat transfer to that due to pressure drop.
Bhattad et al. [211] performed exergetic analyses of the plate heat exchanger using Al2O3–TiO2 hybrid nanofluid as a coolant for sub-ambient temperature application. They observed a 4.01% reduction in the exergetic efficiency for TiO2 nanofluid. The study showed that the exergetic performance decreased continuously with the increase in TiO2 ratio in the hybrid solution. Bhattad et al. [212] observed that the irreversibility was enhanced with the flow rate and nanoparticle suspension for MgO–alumina hybrid nanofluid. Bhattad et al. [213] observed an augmentation of the coolant exergy rate, irreversibility rate, and non-dimensional exergy by 4.8%, 7.5%, and 3.5%, respectively. At the same time, the second law of efficiency is reduced when using nanoparticles and increasing flow rate, and it decreases with the coolant inlet temperature. The authors of [319] investigated a novel nanofluid ternary hybrid nanofluid (THdNF) obtained from a mixture of three different nanoparticles, resulting in better overall performance even at low concentrations. Bahiraei et al. [320] examined twisted turbulator inserts in the concurrent pipe and found lower entropy generation when arranged counter-currently. Bahiraei and Heshmatian [321] investigated the effect of nanofluid on the cooling devices on the entropy generation and revealed a net reduction in the temperature. In the interim, various research studies focusing on entropy and exergy investigation are available in the open literature using different nanofluids [322,323,324]. Kumar and Sahoo [325,326] investigated combined exergo-economic and environmental impact analysis of THdNF as the working fluid with various turbulator inserts used for automobile applications. They found the highest 24.7% exergy change and 6.4% exergy efficiency at the lowest Reynolds number without inserts. Rai and Sahoo [327] performed exergy analysis for a 5% water in diesel emulsion (WiDE) fuel, with 50 ppm carbon nanotube (CNT) and 50 ppm aluminum oxide (Al2O3) nano-additive fuels, on a diesel engine with changeable engine speed and load. The exergy-based sustainability was highest for 5% WiDE–CNT fuel at 2000 engine rpm with full engine load. The exergy destruction and entropy generation rates with the 5% WiDE–Al2O3 and 5% WiDE–CNT nano additive fuels had 2.07% and 4.15% higher values, respectively, compared to the diesel fuel.

7. Applications of Mono/Hybrid Nanofluids

Due to their improved thermophysical characteristics, nanofluids and hybrid nanofluids can be used in radiators (as coolant), biodiesel blends, fuel additives, refrigerators, heat pumps, and air conditioning applications as primary fluids (nano refrigerants) and secondary fluids (secondary refrigerants on the evaporator side and nano lubricants as refrigerants on the condenser side). The thermophysical characteristics, pressure drop, and heat transfer characteristics of nano lubricants and nano refrigerants in refrigeration systems were reviewed by Saidur et al. [328] and Bhattad et al. [329]. Alawi et al. [330] discovered that the thermal conductivity of nano refrigerants during pool boiling is highly influenced by the temperature at low concentrations. The properties, flow characteristics, and uses of nano refrigerants at sub-ambient temperatures were evaluated by Celen et al. [331]. The use of nano lubricants and nano refrigerants has been considered in refrigeration, air conditioning, and heat pump systems [332]. The effects of employing nano coolants on cooling devices in terms of energy consumption and heat transfer efficiency were reviewed by Alawi et al. [333]. A review was conducted on the thermophysical characteristics and effectiveness of nano refrigerants in refrigeration systems [334]. Nano refrigerants were thoroughly evaluated by Nair et al. [335], who covered their manufacture, characteristics, heat transfer abilities, and effects on the performance of refrigeration systems. Hybrid nano lubricants were utilized by Zawawi et al. [336] to enhance the performance of refrigeration systems. ZnO/water (0.5 vol.%) nanofluid was described by Fard et al. [337] as the hot fluid in a plate heat exchanger. They demonstrated that the heat transfer behavior of the nanofluid was superior to that of the basic fluid. Javadi et al. [338] looked into how utilizing Al2O3, TiO2, and SiO2 nanofluids affected the heat transfer of a plate heat exchanger. The SiO2 nanofluid exhibited a lower pressure drop, while the Al2O3 nanofluid had the highest heat transfer coefficient. The thermal characteristics of the two nanofluids were contrasted in a plate heat exchanger operating at low temperatures [339]. Carbon nanotubes and aluminum oxide outperformed water in terms of increased heat transfer and reduced pump power loss.
Nanofluids can be utilized in auxiliary circuits as additional fluids (evaporators and condensers) to cool the primary working fluid or refrigerant [340]. When employing nanofluids, Liu et al. [341] noticed a rise in cooling capacity and COP, as well as a fall in compressor performance. The enhanced HTC enhanced the cooling capacity [342]. Nanofluids were explored numerically by Loaiza et al. [343] for application as secondary coolants in cooling systems. It was discovered that when the concentration of nanoparticles increased and the size of the nanoparticles decreased, the evaporator area and pressure drop of the refrigerant decreased for a specific cooling capacity. Nanofluids had a minimal effect on pump power and increased chiller efficiency, cooling capacity, and efficiency. The use of Cu–H2O nanofluids as condenser coolant in a vapor compression heat pump was modeled by Parise and Tiecher [344]. A nanoparticle percentage of 2.0% resulted in a 5.4% increase in the efficiency factor. Askari et al. [345] conducted an experimental investigation on the effectiveness of counter flow wet coolers. Nanoporous graphene nanofluids and MWCNTs are employed. They noticed increases in cooling distance, coolant flow, and cooling tower efficiency. When Kolhapure and Patil [346] employed nanofluids as refrigerants, they found that compressor operation and condenser heat transfer decreased as efficiency increased. Condensers and cooling tower sizes were reduced.
Thermal simulations of vapor compression refrigeration systems were detailed by Jaiswal and Mishra [347] utilizing Al2O3-, TiO2-, CuO-, and Cu-based nanofluids in the secondary circuit and R134a refrigerant in the primary circuit. Using aqueous nanofluids in the secondary circuit boosted system performance with the same geometrical parameters from 17% to 20%. Increased cold chain efficiency employing nanofluids as secondary refrigerants was reported by Ndoye et al. [348]. To investigate the energy characteristics of secondary circuits in refrigeration systems, Soliman et al. [349] employed a variety of nanofluids. It was noted that, when concentration increased, the pump power increased, whereas the performance coefficient decreased. Excellent cooling capacity and COP for SWCNT/water suspensions were reported by Vasconcelos et al. [350]. In air conditioning systems, nanofluids can be employed as phase change refrigeration reservoirs on the evaporator side [351]. Nanotechnology is widely used in the food, food packaging, and milk pasteurization industries [352]. Zhang et al. [353] examined the ice formation process’ nucleation phenomenon using nanofluids. With nanofluids, the nucleation mechanism could be improved. A raw milk dispenser based on nanofluidic technology was created by Longo et al. [354]. Hybrid nanofluids were employed as secondary coolants for low-temperature applications by Bhattad et al. [314,315,355]. Table 9 provides an overview of the uses of nanofluids as primary and secondary coolants.
Arshad et al. [358] investigated the 3D flow of an engine oil-based nanofluid under the impact of rotation and partial slip phenomenon over a stretchable surface. The study’s outcomes were related to already available studies and were in good agreement. Kumar and Sahoo [359] investigated the performance characteristics of a car radiator by using a ternary hybrid nanofluid of 0.12 vol.% fraction (Al2O3–CuO–TiO2/water) and water as coolant and validated results with simulation. Ternary hybrid nanofluids (THNF) showed a 14% higher heat transfer coefficient at 8 lpm, and the mixture model predicted a 5% better result than the single-phase approach. A 12.54% enhancement in BTE was observed with a fuel-saving rate of 14.28%. Kumar and Sahoo [360] investigated the thermo-hydraulic performance of a car radiator using Al2O3, CuO, and TiO2 nanoparticles disseminated in an equal fraction in the range of 0.06–0.12% THNF. Coolant was operated with a flow rate of 3–8 lpm. Results revealed a 14.2% enhancement in heat transfer with a coolant flow rate of 6 lpm using a 0.12% vol. fraction of THNF. A maximum fuel saving rate of 14.28% was observed at 50% load on the engine. Preheating of fuel through radiator waste heat recovery decreased the BSFC. Rai and Sahoo [361] investigated the engine performance parameters for 5% water-emulsified fuel, 50 ppm CNT, and 50 ppm Al2O3–CNT (25 ppm each) hybrid nano-additive fuels, with different speeds and loads on a DICI engine. The CNT catalyst had a higher effect on the BSFC than the Al2O3–CNT catalyst. The BTE with 5% WiDE, 5% WiDE–Al2O3–CNT, and 5% WiDE–CNT nano-additive was 1.49%, 2.86%, and 3.07% higher than with diesel. Overall, compared to all fuel blends, the optimal performance was found for 5% WiDE–CNT. Najafi [362] observed the impact of adding Ag and CNT nano-additive on engine performance and combustion parameters. The results showed that adding a nanocatalyst shortened the time needed for the engine to ignite and increased the cylinder’s peak pressure and rate of heat release. The best outcome was obtained when 120 ppm of CNT nano-additive is used. Jiaqiang et al. [363] evaluated the effects of adding water and a nanocatalyst on a CI engine’s performance and emission characteristics when using diesel/biodiesel mixes. The blend of biodiesel and diesel with 90 ppm CeO2 nano-additive was emulsified with 2%, 4%, and 6% (v/v) ratios. The investigation results showed that water emulsification up to 4% was favorable, and the addition of nanocatalyst enhanced performance and lowered emissions levels. Kumar and Raheman [364] investigated water-emulsified biodiesel blends with nano-oxide incorporation. According to the characterization analysis, the ideal fuel stability characteristics were 1% surfactant, 10% water, 2500 rpm stirrer speed, and 69.7 ppm nano-oxide.
Wro’blewski [365,366] performed energy analysis on IC engines for hydrophobic and hydrophilic multilayer nanocoatings surrounded by soot. The multilayer coating reduced the friction coefficient and, hence, improved tribological performance. Rai and Sahoo [367] carried out energy, exergy, and sustainability analyses of a diesel engine with hybrid nanofluids incorporated with various shaped (25 ppm CNT and 25 ppm spherical Al2O3 nano-additives). The 5% WiDE based Al2O3–CNT hybrid nano fuel improved BTE by 2.86% with an exergy efficiency of 4.16%. Rao and Anand [368] investigated an analysis of the energy and emissions produced by a DICI engine running on fuel containing AlO(OH) nano-additive and water in a diesel emulsion. The results of the experimental study demonstrated that adding water as an AlO(OH) nano-additive to diesel emulsion fuel considerably enhanced the engine’s energy parameters and emission characteristics. El-Seesy et al. [369] examined the optimal Al2O3 nano-additive concentration in diesel and Jojoba biodiesel blends to achieve higher performance. The analysis showed that all performance indicators significantly increased at a concentration of 30 mg/L Al2O3. Ozcan [370] studied the impact of Al2O3 nano-additive (50 and 100 ppm) on the energy and performance parameters of diesel engines charged with diesel/biodiesel blends through experiments. According to experimental data, the engine’s performance was improved, entropy generation decreased, and unexplained losses decreased. Hasannuddin et al. [371] evaluated the fuel qualities, emission characteristics, and performance metrics of diesel engines running on fuel containing various nano-additives and 10% water (Al2O3, CuO, MgO, MnO, and ZnO). According to the study, of all the nano fuels discussed, the water-in-diesel emulsion with Al2O3 addition had the smallest droplet size, improved torque, and decreased BSFC, BSCO, and BSNOx. Aghbashlo et al. [372] performed an energetic performance investigation of the diesel engine using four concentrations of hybrid nano-catalyst and two types of biodiesel/diesel blends (CeO2 and MWCNT). The results showed that all fuel mixes had the same energy efficiency and sustainability index except for the nano-catalyst.

8. Conclusions

Investigations were made on different mono and hybrid nanofluids from nanocomposites, mixing other nanoparticles comprising oxides, metals, and phase change materials of different shapes such as spherical, cylindrical, and flake in a base fluid using one-step and two-step methods. Nanofluids were characterized and thermo-physical properties were measured to develop empirical relations for CFD simulations. Experimental and theoretical investigations were conducted on the heat exchangers with mono and hybrid nanofluids, and an enhancement in performance was observed. A study on different hybrid nanofluids (SiC, Al2O3–AlN, Al2O3–MgO, Al2O3–CuO, and Al2O3–MWCNT) conducted by Bhattad et al. [210] showed the ranking of different nanofluids according to different thermophysical properties. These nanofluids can serve as a coolant, secondary refrigerant, nano refrigerant, and nano lubricant for low-temperature applications such as refrigeration systems, air conditioning, and food processing, or as fuels for ICEs. From the present literature survey, the research gaps identified are as follows:
  • There are limited studies on the heat transfer properties of hybrid nanofluid heat exchangers.
  • The influence of individual particle proportions of hybrid nanofluids on the performance of heat exchangers is unknown.
  • There is little experimental work and validation by CFD modeling of heat exchangers using hybrid nanofluids operating for low-temperature applications.
  • Hybrid nanofluids can be used in biodiesel blends and as fuel additives to enhance the performance of IC engines.
  • A single correlation containing the effect of temperature and particle size is needed to predict accurate thermal conductivity and viscosity of mono/hybrid nanofluids.
  • Nanofluids with more thermal conductivity show better heat transfer characteristics, and nanofluids with more viscosity provide higher pressure drop and pump work. An increment in heat transfer is desirable, while an increment in pump work is undesirable; thus, another performance indicator must be determined, such as a performance index (ratio of heat transfer rate and pump work), to obtain a better nanofluid.
  • Many empirical relations are available for calculating the Nusselt number on the basis of non-dimensional numbers, i.e., Reynolds and Prandtl numbers. However, the Nusselt number, by definition, depends on the thermal conductivity, geometric parameters, and heat transfer coefficient. Hence, it is suggested to validate the results in two ways. For this purpose, conducting the experiments and obtaining the required parameters are recommended.
  • It can be observed that the thermal conductivity, density, and viscosity increase with the addition of nanoparticles in the base fluid. The fluid’s thermal conductivity increases with the temperature increase, whereas density and viscosity decrease. No change can be observed for the specific heat as the studied temperature range is small.
  • Hybrid nanofluids can be used as a coolant in automobile radiators and ICEs.
  • Few investigations are available for ternary hybrid nanofluids to analyze irreversibility, exergy, economic, and the second law of efficiency in air heat exchangers utilizing various turbulators.
  • Studies were conducted primarily with water and EG/water brine as base fluids. Using different brines as primary and secondary cooling water should be explored.
Most (95%) investigators adopted a two-step method while preparing nanofluids. However, nanofluids synthesized using the one-step process (which is expensive and involved) improved the stability of the nanoparticles in the base fluid due to the high sedimentation rate with low sonification time. Ultrasonication reduces the sedimentation issue, and adding surfactants further improves nanofluid stability. FESEM/EDS, DLS, and zeta potential measurements help understand nanoparticle morphology, shape, and size. The mechanism of nanofluids at the atomic level should be understood to address particle migration, aggregation, and stability with minimal experimentation. Future research should focus on industrial applications to minimize pressure losses, specifiy the optimal concentration of nanoparticles, and ensure the long-term stability of hybrid nanofluids. Very few studies are available on ternary hybrid nanofluid to analyze irreversibility, exergy, economic, and the second law of efficiency in air heat exchangers utilizing various turbulators. Thus, this area needs to be explored more to improve automobile performance.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.B., V.A. and N.R.B.; methodology, B.N.R. and V.A.; software, V.A. and R.P.S.; validation, V.A., N.R.B. and C.V.; formal analysis, V.A., N.R.B. and A.B.; investigation, V.A. and R.P.S.; resources, C.V., S.K., T.M.Y.K. and A.M.S.; data curation, V.A., R.P.S. and N.R.B.; writing—original draft preparation, V.A. and B.N.R.; writing—review and editing, V.A., B.N.R. and N.H.A.; visualization, N.H.A., C.V., S.K. and A.M.S.; supervision, V.A. and N.R.B.; project administration, T.M.Y.K., C.V., S.K. and N.R.B.; funding acquisition, T.M.Y.K., C.V. and S.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.


This work was funded by King Khalid University under grant number RGP2/76/44.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.


The authors extend their appreciation to the Deanship of Scientific Research at King Khalid University for funding this work through large group Research Project under grant number RGP2/76/44.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.


bPlate spacing, mm
CSpecific heat, J/kg·K
KThermal conductivity, W/m·K
Mass flow rate, kg/s
NShape factor
PePecklet number
ReReynolds number
TTemperature, °C
VVolume, m3
COPCoefficient of performance
CTABCetyl trimethyl ammonium bromide
DIDeionized water
DLSDynamic light scattering
EGEthylene glycol
F-CNFFunctionalized carbon nanofiber
FESEMField-emission scanning electron microscopy
GAGum Arabic
HEGHydrogen-induced exfoliated graphene
HEXHeat exchanger
HTCHeat transfer coefficient
HVACHeating, ventilation, and air conditioning
HyNfHybrid nanofluid
MCHSMicrochannel heat sink
MWCNTMultiwalled carbon nanotube
PCMPhase change material
PHEPlate heat exchanger
PHPPulsating heat pipe
PVPPolyvinyl pyrrolidone
PVAPolyvinyl alcohol
rGOReduced graphene oxide
SDSSodium dodecyl sulfate
SDBSSodium dodecyl benzene sulfonate
SEMScanning electron microscopy
TEMTransmission electron microscopy
VSMVibrating sample magnetometry
v%Percentage volume concentration
XRDX-ray diffraction
Greek symbols
βChevron angle, °
ΩDischarge, lpm
µDynamic viscosity, Pa·S
ρDensity, kg/m3
ΦVolume concentration
bfBase fluid


  1. Rao, V.; Sankar, B. Heat transfer and friction factor investigations of CuO nanofluid flow in a double pipe U-bend heat exchanger. Mater. Today Proc. 2019, 18, 207–218. [Google Scholar]
  2. Omidi, M.; Farhadi, M.; Jafari, M. A comprehensive review on double pipe heat exchangers. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2017, 110, 1075–1090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Li, H.; Wang, Y.; Han, Y.; Li, W.; Yang, L.; Guo, J.; Liu, Y.; Zhang, J.; Zhang, M.; Jiang, F. A comprehensive review of heat transfer enhancement and flow characteristics in the concentric pipe heat exchanger. Powder Technol. 2021, 397, 117037. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Ding, M.; Liu, C.; Rao, Z. Experimental investigation on heat transfer characteristic of TiO2-H2O nanofluid in microchannel for thermal energy storage. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2019, 160, 114024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Alshukri, M.; Hussein, A.; Eidan, A.; Alsabery, A. A review on applications and techniques of improving the performance of heat pipe-solar collector systems. Sol. Energy 2022, 236, 417–433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Cengel, Y. Heat and Mass Transfer. A Practical Approach, 3rd ed.; McGraw Hill/Interamericana Editores, S.A.: Mexico City, Mexico, 2013; pp. 1689–1699. [Google Scholar]
  7. Rostami, S.; Shahsavar, A.; Kefayati, G.; Goldanlou, A.S. Energy and exergy analysis of using turbulator in a parabolic trough solar collector filled with mesoporous silica modified with copper nanoparticles hybrid nanofluid. Energies 2020, 13, 2946. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Choi, S. Enhancing Thermal Conductivity of Fluids with Nanoparticles, Developments and Applications of Non-Newtonian Flows; ASME: New York, NY, USA, 1995; pp. 99–105. [Google Scholar]
  9. Kumar, P.M.; Palanisamy, K.; Vijayan, V. Stability analysis of heat transfer hybrid/water nanofluids. Mater. Today Proc. 2020, 21, 708–712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Okonkwo, E.; Wole-Osho, I.; Almanassra, I.; Abdullatif, Y.; Al-Ansari, T. An updated review of nanofluids in various heat transfer devices. J. Therm. Anal. 2021, 145, 2817–2872. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Sarkar, J.; Ghosh, P.; Adil, A. A review on hybrid nanofluids: Recent research, development and applications. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 43, 164–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Sahin, A. Performance enhancement of solar energy using nanofluids: An update review. Renew Energy 2020, 145, 1126–1148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Zayed, M.; Du, Y.; Kabeel, A.; Shalaby, S. Factors affecting the thermal performance of the plate solar collector using nanofluids: A review. Sol. Energ. 2019, 182, 382–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Wahab, A.; Hassan, A.; Qasim, M.; Ali, H.; Babar, H.; Sajid, M. Solar energy systems—Potential of nanofluids. J. Mol. Liq. 2019, 289, 111049. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Pordanjani, A.; Aghakhani, S.; Afrand, M.; Mahmoudi, B.; Mahian, O.; Wongwises, S. An updated review on application of nanofluids in heat exchangers for saving energy. Energy Convers. Manag. 2019, 198, 111886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Sajid, M.; Ali, H. Recent advances in application of nanofluids in heat transfer devices: A critical review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2019, 103, 556–592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Kumar, A.; Subudhi, S. Preparation, characterization and heat transfer analysis of nanofluids used for engine cooling. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2019, 160, 114092. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Rahman, S.; Ashraf, M.; Amin, A.; Bashar, M.; Ashik, M.; Kamruzzaman, M. Tuning nanofluids for improved lubrication performance in turning biomedical grade titanium alloy. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 206, 180–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Panithasan, M.; Gopalakichenin, D.; Veeraraagavan, S. Impact of rice husk nanoparticle on the performance and emission aspect of a diesel engine running on blends on pine oildiesel. Env. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2019, 26, 282–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Pinto, R.; Fiorelli, F. Review of the mechanisms responsible for heat transfer enhancement using nanofluids. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2016, 108, 720–739. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Radomska, E.; Mika, L.; Sztekler, K. The impact of additives on the main properties of phase change materials. Energies 2020, 13, 3064. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Suhaimi, N.; Din, M.; Hamid, M.; Amin, N.; Zamri, W.; Wang, J. Optimum electrical and dielectric performance of multi-walled carbon nanotubes doped disposed transformer oil. Energies 2020, 13, 3181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Sekar, A.; Jayabalan, T.; Muthukumar, H.; Chandrasekaran, N.; Mohamed, S.; Matheswaran, M. Enhancing power generation and treatment of dairy waste water in microbial fuel cell using Cu-doped iron oxide nanoparticles decorated anode. Energy 2019, 172, 173–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Said, Z.; Gupta, M.; Khan, A.; Jamil, M.; Bellos, E. A comprehensive review on minimum quantity lubrication (MQL) in machining processes using nano-cutting fluids. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2019, 105, 2057–2086. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Huminic, G.; Huminic, A. The influence of hybrid nanofluids on the performances of elliptical tube: Recent research and numerical study. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 2019, 129, 132–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Elsaid, A. Experimental study on the heat transfer performance and friction factor characteristics of Co3O4 and Al2O3 based H2O/(CH2OH)2 nanofluids in a vehicle engine radiator. Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 2019, 108, 104263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Al-Shdaifat, M.; Zulkifli, R.; Sopian, K.; Salih, A. Thermal and hydraulic performance of CuO/water nanofluids: A review. Micromachines 2020, 11, 416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Eshgarf, H.; Kalbasi, R.; Maleki, A.; Shadloo, M.; Karimipour, A. A review on the properties, preparation, models and stability of hybrid nanofluids to optimize energy consumption. J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 2021, 144, 1959–1983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Zainon, S.; Azmi, W. Recent progress on stability and thermo-physical properties of mono and hybrid towards green nanofluids. Micromachines 2021, 12, 176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Pavia, M.; Alajami, K.; Estellé, P.; Vigolo, B. A critical review on thermal conductivity enhancement of graphene-based nanofluids. Adv. Colloid. Interface Sci. 2021, 294, 102452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Inlow, S.; Groll, E. A performance comparison of secondary refrigerants. In Proceedings of the 1996 Purdue International Refrigeration Conference, West Lafayette, IN, USA, 23 July 1996; pp. 167–178. [Google Scholar]
  32. Wang, K.; Eisele, M.; Hwang, Y.; Radermacher, R. Review of secondary loop refrigeration systems. Int. J. Refrig. 2010, 33, 212–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Sreelakshmy, K.; Aswathy, S.; Vidhya, K.; Saranya, T.; Sreeja, C. An overview of recent nanofluid research. Int. Res. J. Pharm. 2014, 5, 239–243. [Google Scholar]
  34. Nor-Azwadi, C.; Adamu, I.; Jamil, M. Preparation methods and thermal performance of hybrid nanofluids. J. Adv. Rev. Sci. Res. 2016, 24, 13–23. [Google Scholar]
  35. Sidik, N.; Adamu, I.; Jamil, M.; Kefayati, G.; Mamat, R.; Najafi, G. Recent progress on hybrid nanofluids in heat transfer applications: A comprehensive review. Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 2016, 78, 68–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Nabil, M.; Azmi, W.; Hamid, K.; Zawawi, N.; Priyandoko, G.; Mamat, R. Thermo-physical properties of hybrid nanofluids and hybrid nanolubricants: A comprehensive review on performance. Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 2017, 83, 30–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Sundar, L.; Sharma, K.; Singh, M.; Sousa, A. Hybrid nanofluids preparation, thermal properties, heat transfer and friction factor–A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 68, 185–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Babu, J.; Kumar, K.; Rao, S. State-of-art review on hybrid nanofluids. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 77, 551–565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Sidik, N.; Jamil, M.; Aziz-Japar, W.; Adamu, I. A review on preparation methods, stability and applications of hybrid nanofluids. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 80, 1112–1122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Kumar, D.; Arasu, A. A comprehensive review of preparation, characterization, properties and stability of hybrid nanofluids. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 81, 1669–1689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Gupta, M.; Singh, V.; Kumar, S.; Said, Z. Up to date review on the synthesis and thermophysical properties of hybrid nanofluids. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 190, 169–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Jamkhande, P.; Bamer, A.; Kalaskar, M. Metal nanoparticles synthesis: An overview on methods of preparation, advantages and disadvantages, and applications. J. Drug Deliv. Sci. Technol. 2019, 53, 101174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Asadi, A.; Aberoumand, S.; Moradikazerouni, A.; Pourfattah, F.; Żyła, G.; Estellé, P.; Mahian, O.; Wongwises, S.; Nguyen, H.M.; Arabkoohsar, A. Recent advances in preparation methods and thermophysical properties of oil-based nanofluids: A state of the art review. Powder Technol. 2019, 352, 209–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Arshad, A.; Jabbal, M.; Yan, Y.; Reay, D. A review on graphene based nanofluids: Preparation, characterization and applications. J. Mol. Liq. 2019, 279, 444–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Mishra, P.; Sen, S.; Amin, R.; Biring, S. Effect of annealing on structure, optoelectronic and photoresponsivity properties of sol–gel prepared ZnO nanoparticles. Mater. Today Proc. 2019, 17, 261–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Esmaeili, E.; Rounaghi, S.; Gruner, W.; Eckert, J. The preparation of surfactant-free highly dispersed ethylene glycol-based aluminum nitride-carbon nanofluids for heat transfer application. Adv. Powder Technol. 2019, 30, 2032–2041. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Das, N.; Naik, P.; Reddy, D.; Mallik, B.; Bose, S.; Banerjee, T. Experimental and molecular dynamic insights on the thermophysical properties for MWCNT-Phosphonium based eutectic thermal media. J. Mol. Liq. 2022, 354, 118892. [Google Scholar]
  48. Bhattad, A.; Sarkar, J.; Ghosh, P. Use of Hybrid Nanofluids in Plate Heat Exchanger for Low Temperature Applications. Ph.D. Thesis, Indian Institute of Technology Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, India, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  49. Jana, S.; Khojin, A.; Zhong, W. Enhancement of fluid thermal conductivity by the addition of single and hybrid nano-additives. Thermochim. Acta 2007, 462, 45–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Han, Z.; Yang, B.; Kim, S.; Zachariah, M. Application of hybrid sphere/ carbon nanotube particles in nanofluids. Nanotechnology 2007, 18, 105701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Turcu, R.; Pana, O.; Nan, A.; Craciunescu, I.; Chauvet, O.; Payen, C. Polypyrrole coated magnetite nanoparticles from water based nanofluids. J. Phys. Appl. Phys. 2008, 41, 245002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Jha, N.; Ramaprabhu, S. Synthesis and thermal conductivity of copper nanoparticle decorated multiwalled carbon nanotubes based nanofluids. J. Phys. Chem. C 2008, 112, 9315–9319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Han, W.; Rhi, S. Thermal characteristics of grooved heat pipe with hybrid nanofluids. Therm. Sci. 2011, 15, 195–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Baby, T.; Sundara, R. Synthesis and transport properties of metal oxide decorated graphene dispersed nanofluids. J. Phys. Chem. C 2011, 115, 8527–8533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Paul, G.; Philip, J.; Raj, B.; Das, P.; Manna, I. Synthesis, characterization and thermal property measurement of nano-Al95Zn05 dispersed nanofluid prepared by a two-step process. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 2011, 54, 3783–3788. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Suresh, S.; Venkitaraj, K.; Selvakumar, P.; Chandrasekar, M. Synthesis of Al2O3-Cu/water hybrid nanofluids using two step method and its thermo physical properties. Colloids Surfaces A Physicochem. Eng. Asp. 2011, 388, 41–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Botha, S.S.; Ndungu, P.; Bladergroen, B.J. Physicochemical properties of oil-based nanofluids containing hybrid structures of silver nanoparticles supported on silica. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2011, 50, 3071–3077. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Ho, C.; Huang, J.; Tsai, P.; Yang, Y. On laminar convective cooling performance of hybrid water-based suspensions of Al2O3 nanoparticles and MEPCM particles in a circular tube. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 2011, 54, 2397–2407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Baby, T.; Sundara, R. Synthesis and nanofluid application of silver nanoparticles decorated graphene. J. Mater. Chem. 2011, 21, 9702–9709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Amiri, A.; Shanbedi, M.; Eshghi, H.; Heris, S.; Baniadam, M. Highly dispersed multiwalled carbon nanotubes decorated with Ag nanoparticles in water and experimental investigation of the thermophysical properties. J. Phys. Chem. C 2012, 116, 3369–3375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Chen, L.; Yu, W.; Xie, H. Enhanced thermal conductivity of nanofluids containing Ag/MWNT composites. Powder Technol. 2012, 231, 18–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Aravind, S.; Ramaprabhu, S. Graphene wrapped multiwalled carbon nanotubes dispersed nanofluids for heat transfer applications. J. Appl. Phys. 2012, 112, 124304–124309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Bhosale, G.; Borse, S. Pool boiling CHF enhancement with Al2O3–CuO/H2O hybrid nanofluid. Int. J. Eng. Res. Technol. 2013, 2, 946–950. [Google Scholar]
  64. Balla, H.; Abdullah, S.; MohdFaizal, W.; Zulkifli, R.; Sopian, K. Numerical study of the enhancement of heat transfer for hybrid CuO-Cu nanofluids flowing in a circular pipe. J. Oleo Sci. 2013, 62, 533–539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Abbasi, S.; Rashidi, A.; Nemati, A.; Arzani, K. The effect of functionalisation methodon the stability and the thermal conductivity of nanofluid hybrids of carbon nanotubes/gamma alumina. Ceram. Int. 2013, 39, 3885–3891. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Nine, M.; Munkhbayar, B.; Rahman, M.; Chung, H.; Jeong, H. Highly productive synthesis process of well dispersed Cu2O and Cu/Cu2O nanoparticles and its thermal characterization. Mater. Chem. Phys. 2013, 141, 636–642. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Munkhbayar, B.; Tanshen, M.; Jeoun, J.; Chung, H.; Jeong, H. Surfactant-free dispersion of silver nanoparticles into MWCNT-aqueous nanofluids prepared by one-step technique and their thermal characteristics. Ceram. Int. 2013, 39, 6415–6425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Sundar, L.; Singh, M.; Ramana, E.; Sing, B.; Gracio, J.; Sousa, A. Enhanced thermal conductivity and viscosity of nanodiamond–nickel nanocomposite nanofluids. Sci. Rep. 2014, 4, 4039. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Parameshwaran, R.; Deepak, K.; Saravanan, R.; Kalaiselvam, S. Preparation, thermal and rheological properties of hybrid nanocomposite phase change material for thermal energy storage. Appl. Energy 2014, 115, 320–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Batmunkh, M.; Tanshen, M.; Nine, M.; Myekhlai, M.; Choi, H.; Chung, H.; Jeong, H. Thermal conductivity of TiO2 nanoparticles based aqueous nanofluids with an addition of a modified silver particle. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2014, 53, 8445–8451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Madhesh, D.; Parameshwaran, R.; Kalaiselvam, S. Experimental investigation on convective heat transfer and rheological characteristics of Cu-TiO2 hybrid nanofluids. Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 2014, 52, 104–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Chen, L.; Cheng, M.; Yang, D.; Yang, L. Enhanced thermal conductivity of nanofluid by synergistic effect of multi-walled carbon nanotubes and Fe2O3 nanoparticles. Appl. Mech. Mater. 2014, 548, 118–123. [Google Scholar]
  73. Parekh, K. Thermo-magnetic properties of ternary polydispersed Mn0.5Zn0.5Fe2O4 ferrite magnetic fluid. Solid State Commun. 2014, 187, 33–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Luo, T.; Wei, X.; Zhao, H.; Cai, G.; Zheng, X. Tribology properties of Al2O3/TiO2 nanocomposites as lubricant additives. Ceram. Int. 2014, 40, 10103–10109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Madhesh, D.; Kalaiselvam, S. Experimental study on heat transfer and rheological characteristics of hybrid nanofluids for cooling applications. J. Exp. Nanosci. 2015, 10, 1194–1213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Zubir, M.; Badarudin, A.; Kazi, S.; Huang, N.; Misran, M.; Sadeghinezhad, E.; Mehrali, M.; Syuhada, N.; Gharehkhani, S. Experimental investigation on the use of reduced graphene oxide and its hybrid complexes in improving closed conduit turbulent forced convective heat transfer. Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 2015, 66, 290–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Qadri, M.; Chandra, R.; Ravindra, S.; Velmurugan, V. Synthesis and testing of graphene /cuprous oxide composite based nano fluids for engine coolants. Mater. Today Proc. 2015, 2, 4640–4645. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Karimi, A.; Sadatlu, M.; Saberi, B.; Shariatmadar, H. Experimental investigation on thermal conductivity of water based nickel ferrite nanofluids. Adv. Powder Technol. 2015, 26, 1529–1536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Chakraborty, S.; Sarkar, I.; Haldar, K.; Pal, S.; Chakraborty, S. Synthesis of Cu–Al layered double hydroxide nanofluid and characterization of its thermal properties. Appl. Clay Sci. 2015, 107, 98–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Megatif, L.; Ghozatloo, A.; Arimi, A.; Niasar, M. Investigation of laminar convective heat transfer of a novel TiO2-carbon nanotube hybrid water-based nanofluid. Exp. Heat Transf. 2015, 6152, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Abbasi, S.; Zebarjad, S.; Baghban, S.; Youssefi, A.; Ekrami-Kakhki, M. Experimental investigation of the rheological behavior and viscosity of decorated multi-walled carbon nanotubes with TiO2 nanoparticles/water nanofluids. J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 2016, 123, 81–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Toghraie, D.; Chaharsoghi, V.; Afrand, M. Measurement of thermal conductivity of ZnO–TiO2/EG hybrid nanofluid. J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 2016, 125, 527–535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Bhanvase, B.; Kamath, S.; Patil, U.; Patil, H.; Pandit, A.; Sonawane, S. Intensification of heat transfer using PANI nanoparticles and PANI-CuO nanocomposite based nanofluids. Chem. Eng. Process. 2016, 104, 172–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Asadi, A.; Alarifi, I.; Foong, L. An experimental study on characterization, stability and dynamic viscosity of CuO-TiO2/water hybrid nanofluid. J. Mol. Liq. 2020, 307, 112987. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Chen, Z.; Shahsavar, A.; Al-Rashed, A.; Afrand, M. The impact of sonication and stirring durations on the thermal conductivity of alumina-liquid paraffin nanofluid: An experimental assessment. Powder Technol. 2020, 360, 1134–1142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Asadi, A.; Alarifid, I.; Ali, V.; Nguyen, H. An experimental investigation on the effects of ultrasonication time on stability and thermal conductivity of MWCNTwater nanofluid: Finding the optimum ultrasonication time. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2019, 58, 104639. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Gulzar, O.; Qayoum, A.; Gupta, R. Experimental study on stability and rheological behavior of hybrid Al2O3—TiO2 Therminol-55 nanofluids for concentrating solar collectors. Powder Technol. 2019, 352, 436–444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Alarifi, I.; Alkouh, A.; Ali, V.; Nguyen, H.; Asadi, A. On the rheological properties of MWCNT-TiO2/oil hybrid nanofluid: An experimental investigation on the effects of shear rate, temperature, and solid concentration of nanoparticles. Powder Technol. 2019, 355, 157–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Akram, N.; Sadri, R.; Kazi, S.N.; Ahmed, S.M.; Zubir, M.N.M.; Ridha, M.; Soudagar, M.; Ahmed, W.; Arzpeyma, M.; Tong, G.B. An experimental investigation on the performance of a flat-plate solar collector using eco-friendly treated graphene nanoplatelets–water nanofluids. J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 2019, 138, 609–621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Sharafeldin, M.; Grof, G. Efficiency of evacuated tube solar collector using WO3/Water nanofluid. Renew. Energy 2019, 134, 453–460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Chen, W.; Zou, C.; Li, X. Application of large-scale prepared MWCNTs nanofluids in solar energy system as volumetric solar absorber. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 2019, 200, 109931. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Ali, N.; Teixeira, J.; Addali, A. Aluminum nanofluids stability: A comparison between the conventional two-step fabrication approach and the controlled sonication bath temperature method. J. Nanomater. 2019, 2019, 3930572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Mahbubul, I.; Elcioglu, E.; Amalina, M.; Saidur, R. Stability, thermophysical properties and performance assessment of alumina–water nanofluid with emphasis on ultrasonication and storage period. Powder Technol. 2019, 345, 668–675. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Mahyari, A.; Karimipour, A.; Afrand, M. Effects of dispersed added Graphene Oxide-Silicon Carbide nanoparticles to present a statistical formulation for the mixture thermal properties. Phys. A Stat. Mech. Its Appl. 2019, 521, 98–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Chen, W.; Zou, C.; Li, X.; Liang, H. Application of recoverable carbon nanotube nanofluids in solar desalination system: An experimental investigation. Desalination 2019, 451, 92–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Okonkwo, E.; Wole-Osho, I.; Kavaz, D.; Abid, M. Comparison of experimental and theoretical methods of obtaining the thermal properties of alumina/iron mono and hybrid nanofluids. J. Mol. Liq. 2019, 292, 111377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Teruel, M.; Aguilar, T.; Martínez-Merino, P.; Carrillo-Berdugo, I.; Gallardo-Bernal, J.J.; Gómez-Villarejo, R.; Alcántara, R.; Fernández-Lorenzo, C.; Navas, J. 2D MoSe2-based nanofluids prepared by liquid phase exfoliation for heat transfer applications in concentrating solar power. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 2019, 200, 109972. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Li, Z.; Asadi, S.; Karimipour, A.; Abdollahi, A.; Tlili, I. Experimental study of temperature and mass fraction effects on thermal conductivity and dynamic viscosity of SiO2-oleic acid/ liquid paraffin nanofluid. Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 2020, 110, 104436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Geng, Y.; Al-Rashed, A.; Mahmoudi, B.; Alsagri, A.; Shahsavar, A.; Alebizadehsardari, P. Characterization of the nanoparticles, the stability analysis and the evaluation of a new hybrid nano-oil thermal conductivity. J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 2020, 139, 1553–1564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Li, Y.; Kalbasi, R.; Nguyen, Q.; Afrand, M. Effects of sonication duration and nanoparticles concentration on thermal conductivity of silica-ethylene glycol nanofluid under different temperatures: An experimental study. Powder Technol. 2020, 367, 464–473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Bhattad, A.; Sarkar, J.; Ghosh, P. Experimentation on effect of particle ratio on hydrothermal performance of plate heat exchanger using hybrid nanofluid. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2019, 162, 114309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Yang, L.; Ji, W.; Mao, M.; Huang, J. An updated review on the properties, fabrication and application of hybrid-nanofluids along with their environmental effects. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 257, 120408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Sezer, N.; Atieh, M.A.; Koç, M. A comprehensive review on synthesis, stability, thermophysical properties, and characterization of nanofluids. Powder Technol. 2019, 344, 404–431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Asadi, A.; Pourfattah, F.; Szilágyi, I.; Afrand, M.; Żyła, G.; Ahn, H.; Wongwises, N.H.; Arabkoohsar, A.; Mahian, O. Effect of sonication characteristics on stability, thermophysical properties, and heat transfer of nanofluids: A comprehensive review. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2019, 58, 104701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Lu, Y.; Lu, X.; Mayers, B.; Herricks, T.; Xia, Y. Synthesis and characterization of magnetic Co nanoparticles: A comparison study of three different capping surfactants. J. Solid State Chem. 2008, 181, 1530–1538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Saeedinia, M.; Akhavan-Behabadi, M.; Razi, P. Thermal and rheological characteristics of CuO-Base oil nanofluidflow inside a circular tube. Int. Commun. Heat Mass Tran. 2012, 39, 152–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Khan, A.; Arasu, A. A review of influence of nanoparticle synthesis and geometrical parameters on thermophysical properties and stability of nanofluids. Therm. Sci. Eng. Prog. 2019, 11, 334–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Singh, S. Review on the stability of the nanofluids. In Pipeline Engineering; Rushd, S., Ismail, M.A., Eds.; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Safiei, W.; Rahman, M.; Yusoff, A.; Radin, M. Preparation, stability and wettability of nanofluid: A review. J. Mech. Eng. Sci. 2020, 14, 7244–7257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Amin, A.; Hamzah, W.; Oumer, A. Thermal conductivity and dynamic viscosity of mono and hybrid organic- and synthetic-based nanofluids: A critical review. Nanotechnol. Rev. 2021, 10, 1624–1661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Malika, M.; Sonawane, S. Effect of nanoparticle mixed ratio on stability and thermo-physical properties of CuO-ZnO/water-based hybrid nanofluid. J. Indian Chem. Soc. 2020, 97, 414–419. [Google Scholar]
  112. Sahoo, R.; Kumar, V. Comparative analysis of Viscosity and Thermal Conductivity for Al2O3/CuO Hybrid Nanofluid in Binary Base Fluids. Nanotechnol. Mater. Sci. 2019, 6, 34–42. [Google Scholar]
  113. Ramadhan, A.; Azmi, W.; Mamat, R.; Hamid, K.; Norsakinah, S. Investigation on stability of tri-hybrid nanofluids in water- ethylene glycol mixture. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2019, 469, 012068. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Afshari, F.; Manay, E.; Rahimpour, S.; Sahin, B.; Muratçobanoglu, B.; Teimuri-Mofrad, R. A review study on factors affecting the stability of nanofluids. Heat Transf. Res. 2022, 53, 77–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Arora, N.; Gupta, M. Stability Evaluation and Enhancement Methods in Nanofluids: A Review. AIP Conf. Proc. 2021, 2341, 040022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Wcislik, S. Efficient stabilization of mono and hybrid nanofluids. Energies 2020, 13, 3793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Bumataria, R.; Chavda, N.; Panchal, H. Current research aspects in mono and hybrid nanofluid based heat pipe technologies. Heliyon 2019, 5, e01627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  118. Ali, A.; Salam, B. A review on nanofluid: Preparation, stability, thermophysical properties, heat transfer characteristics and application. SN Appl. Sci. 2020, 2, 1636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Xu, Q.; Liu, L.; Feng, J.; Qiao, L.; Yu, C.; Shi, W.; Ding, C.; Zang, Y.; Chang, C.; Xiong, Y.; et al. A comparative investigation on the effect of different nanofluids on the thermal performance of two-phase closed thermosiphon. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 2020, 149, 119189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Said, Z.; Abdelkareem, M.; Rezk, H.; Nassef, A.; Atwany, H. Stability, thermophysical and electrical properties of synthesized carbon nanofiber and reduced-graphene oxidebased nanofluids and their hybrid along with fuzzy modeling approach. Powder Technol. 2020, 364, 795–809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Muthoka, M.; Xuelai, Z.; Xioafeng, X. Experimental investigation on supercooling, thermal conductivity and stability of nanofluid based composite phase change material. J. Energy Storage 2018, 17, 47–55. [Google Scholar]
  122. Said, Z.; Allagui, A.; Abdelkareem, M.; Alawadhi, H.; Elsaid, K. Acid functionalized carbon nanofibers for high stability, thermoelectrical and electrochemical properties of nanofluids. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2018, 18, 30190–30195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Alawi, O.; Mallah, A.; Kazi, S.; Sidik, N.; Najafi, G. Thermophysical properties and stability of carbon nanostructures and metallic oxides nanofluids. J. Therm. Anal. Calor. 2019, 135, 1545–1562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Akbari, A.; Saidi, M. Experimental investigation of nanofluid stability on thermal performance and flow regimes in pulsating heat pipe. J. Therm. Anal. Calor. 2019, 135, 1835–1847. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Boroomandpour, A.; Toghraie, D.; Hashemian, M. A comprehensive experimental investigation of thermal conductivity of a ternary hybrid nanofluid containing MWCNTs- titania zinc oxide/water water ethylene (80:20) as well as binary and mono nanofluids. Synth. Met. 2020, 268, 116501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Uysal, A. Investigation of flank wear in MQL milling of ferritic stainless steel by using nano graphene reinforced vegetable cutting fluid. Ind. Lubr. Tribol. 2016, 68, 446–451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Al-Waeli, A.H.A.; Chaichan, M.T.; Kazem, H.A.; Sopian, K. Evaluation and analysis of nanofluid and surfactant impact on photovoltaic-thermal systems. Case Stud. Therm. Eng. 2019, 13, 100392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Cacua, K.; Ordoñez, F.; Zapata, C.; Herrera, B.; Pabón, E.; Buitrago-Sierra, R. Surfactant concentration and pH effects on the zeta potential values of alumina nanofluids to inspect stability. Colloids Surf. A Physicochem. Eng. Asp. 2019, 583, 123960. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Kazemi, I.; Sefid, M.; Afrand, M. A novel comparative experimental study on rheological behavior of mono & hybrid nanofluids concerned graphene and silica nano-powders: Characterization, stability and viscosity measurements. Powder Technol. 2020, 366, 216–229. [Google Scholar]
  130. Xian, H.; Sidik, N.; Saidur, R. Impact of different surfactants and ultrasonication time on the Stability and thermophysical properties of hybrid nanofluids. Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 2020, 110, 104389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Almanassra, I.; Manasrah, A.; Al-Mubaiyedh, U.; Al-Ansari, T.; Malaibari, Z.; Atieh, M. An experimental study on stability and thermal conductivity of water/CNTs nanofluids using different surfactants: A comparison study. J. Mol. Liq. 2019, 19, 30396–30397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Cacua, K.; Buitrago-Sierra, R.; Pabon, E.; Gallego, A.; Zapata, C.; Herrera, B. Nanofluids stability effect on a thermosyphon thermal performance. Int. J. Therm. Sci. 2020, 153, 106347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Ouikhalfan, M.; Labihi, A.; Belaqziz, M.; Chehouani, H.; Benhamou, B.; Sarı, A.; Belfkira, A. Stability and thermal conductivity enhancement of aqueous nanofluid based on surfactant-modified TiO2. J. Dispers. Sci. Technol. 2020, 41, 374–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Siddiqui, F.; Tso, C.; Chan, K.; Fu, S.; Chao, C. On trade-off for dispersion stability and thermal transport of Cu-Al2O3 hybrid nanofluid for various mixing ratios. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 2019, 132, 1200–1216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Etedali, S.; Afrand, M.; Abdollahi, A. Effect of different surfactants on the pool boiling heat transfer of SiO2/ deionized water nanofluid on a copper surface. Int. J. Therm. Sci. 2019, 145, 105977. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Giwa, S.; Sharifpur, M.; Goodarzi, M.; Alsulami, H.; Meyer, J. Influence of base fluid, temperature, and concentration on the thermophysical properties of hybrid nanofluids of alumina–ferrofluid: Experimental data, modeling through enhanced ANN, ANFIS, and curve fitting. J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 2020, 6, 4149–4167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Kazemi, I.; Sefid, M.; Afrand, M. Improving the thermal conductivity of water by adding mono & hybrid nanoadditives containing graphene and silica: A comparative experimental study. Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 2020, 116, 104648. [Google Scholar]
  138. Gallego, A.; Cacua, K.; Herrera, B.; Cabaleiro, D.; Piñeiro, M.; Lugo, L. Experimental evaluation of the effect in the stability and thermophysical properties of water-Al2O3 based nanofluids using SDBS as dispersant agent. Adv. Powder Technol. 2020, 31, 560–570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Shah, S.N.A.; Shahabuddin, S.; Sabri, M.F.M.; Salleh, M.F.M.; Ali, M.A.; Hayat, N.; Sidik, N.; Smykano, M.; Saidur, R. Experimental investigation on stability, thermal conductivity and rheological properties of rGO/ethylene glycol based nanofluids. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 2020, 150, 118981. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Ilyas, S.; Ridha, S.; Kareem, F. Dispersion stability and surface tension of SDS Stabilized saline nanofluids with graphene nanoplatelets. Colloids Surf. A Physicochem. Eng. Asp. 2020, 592, 124584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Wu, S.; Ortiz, C. Experimental investigation of the effect of magnetic field on vapour absorption with LiBr-H2O nanofluid. Energy 2020, 193, 116640. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Xiao, X.; Jia, H.; Wen, D.; Zhao, X. Thermal performance analysis of a solar energy storage unit encapsulated with HITEC salt/copper foam/nanoparticles composite. Energy 2020, 192, 116593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Lee, J.; Kang, Y. CO2 absorption enhancement by Al2O3 nanoparticles in NaCl aqueous solution. Energy 2020, 53, 206–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Vajjha, R.; Das, D. Experimental determination of thermal conductivity of three nanofluids and development of new correlations. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 2009, 52, 4675–4682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Zhou, Y.; Zheng, S. Multi-level uncertainty optimisation on phase change materials integrated renewable systems with hybrid ventilations and active cooling. Energy 2020, 202, 117747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Khodadadi, H.; Aghakhani, S.; Majd, H.; Kalbasi, R.; Wongwises, S.; Afrand, M. A comprehensive review on rheological behavior of mono and hybrid nanofluids: Effective parameters and predictive correlations. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 2018, 127, 997–1012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  147. Sajid, M.; Ali, H. Thermal conductivity of hybrid nanofluids: A critical review. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 2018, 126, 211–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Askari, S.; Lotfi, R.; Rashidi, A.; Koolivand, H.; Koolivand-Salooki, M. Rheological and thermophysical properties of ultra-stable kerosene-based Fe3O4/Graphene nanofluids for energy conservation. Energy Convers. Manag. 2016, 128, 134–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. Ho, C.; Huang, J.; Tsai, P.; Yang, Y. Preparation and properties of hybrid water-based suspension of Al2O3 nanoparticles and MEPCM particles as functional forced convection fluid. Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 2010, 37, 490–494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Baghbanzadeh, M.; Rashidi, A.; Rashtchian, D.; Lotfi, R.; Amrollahi, A. Synthesis of spherical silica/multiwall carbon nanotubes hybrid nanostructures and investigation of thermal conductivity of related nanofluids. Thermochim. Acta 2012, 549, 87–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Labib, M.; Nine, M.; Afrianto, H.; Chung, H.; Jeong, H. Numerical investigation on effect of base fluids and hybrid nanofluid in forced convective heat transfer. Int. J. Therm. Sci. 2013, 71, 163–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Nguyen, C.; Desgranges, F.; Galanis, N.; Roy, G.; Mare, T.; Boucher, S.; Mintsa, H. Viscosity data for Al2O3-water nanofluid-hysteresis: Is heat transfer enhancement using nanofluids reliable? Int. J. Therm. Sci. 2008, 47, 103–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Kishore, P.; Sireesha, V.; Harsha, V.; Rao, V.; Solomon, A. Preparation, characterization and thermo-physical properties of Cu-graphene nanoplatelets hybrid nanofluids. Mater. Today Proc. 2020, 27, 610–614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  154. Yu, W.; Xie, H.; Chen, L.; Li, Y. Investigation of thermal conductivity and viscosity of ethylene glycol based ZnO nanofluid. Thermochim. Acta 2009, 491, 92–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  155. Esfe, M.; Afrand, M.; Yan, W.; Yarmand, H.; Toghraie, D.; Dahari, M. Effects of temperature; concentration on rheological behavior of MWCNTs/SiO2 (20-80)-SAE40 hybrid nano-lubricant. Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 2016, 76, 133–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  156. Dardan, E.; Afrand, M.; Meghdadi-Isfahani, A. Effect of suspending hybrid nano-additives on rheological behavior of engine oil and pumping power. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2016, 109, 524–534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Soltani, O.; Akbari, M. Effects of temperature and particles concentration on the dynamic viscosity of MgO-MWCNT/ethylene glycol hybrid nanofluid: Experimental study. Phys. E Low Dimens. Syst. Nanostructures 2016, 84, 564–570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Esfe, M.; Raki, H.; Emami, M.; Afrand, M. Viscosity and rheological properties of antifreeze based nanofluid containing hybrid nano-powders of MWCNTs and TiO2 under different temperature conditions. Powder Technol. 2019, 342, 808–816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Asadi, M.; Asadi, A. Dynamic viscosity of MWCNT/ZnO-engine oil hybrid nanofluid: An experimental investigation and new correlation in different temperatures and solid concentrations. Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 2016, 76, 41–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  160. Esfe, M.; Arani, A.; Rezaie, M.; Yan, W.; Karimipour, A. Experimental determination of thermal conductivity and dynamic viscosity of Ag-MgO/water hybrid nanofluid. Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 2015, 66, 189–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Yarmand, H.; Gharehkhani, S.; Ahmadi, G.; Shirazi, S.; Baradaran, S.; Montazer, E.; Zubir, M.; Alehashem, M.; Kazi, S.; Dahari, M. Graphene nanoplatelets-silver hybrid nanofluids for enhanced heat transfer. Energy Convers. Manag. 2015, 100, 419–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  162. Sundar, L.; Ramana, E.; Graça, M.; Singh, M.; Sousa, A. Nanodiamond-Fe3O4 nanofluids: Preparation and measurement of viscosity, electrical and thermal conductivities. Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 2016, 73, 62–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  163. Afrand, M.; Najafabadi, K.; Akbari, M. Effects of temperature and solid volume fraction on viscosity of SiO2-MWCNTs/SAE40 hybrid nanofluid as a coolant and lubricant in heat engines. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2016, 102, 45–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  164. Esfe, M.; Afrand, M.; Rostamian, S.; Toghraie, D. Examination of rheological behavior of MWCNTs/ZnO-SAE40 hybrid nano-lubricants under various temperatures and solid volume fractions. Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 2017, 80, 384–390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  165. Sheikholeslami, M.; Shamlooei, M. Magnetic source influence on nanofluid flow in porous medium considering shape factor effect. Phys. Lett. A 2017, 381, 3071–3078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  166. Asadi, A.; Asadi, M.; Rezaei, M.; Siahmargoi, M.; Asadi, F. The effect of temperature and solid concentration on dynamic viscosity of MWCNT/MgO (20–80)–SAE50 hybrid nano-lubricant and proposing a new correlation: An experimental study. Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 2016, 78, 48–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  167. Riahi, A.; Khamlich, S.; Balghouthi, M.; Khamliche, T.; Doyle, T.; Dimassi, W.; Guizani, A.; Maaza, M. Study of thermal conductivity of synthesized Al2O3-water nanofluid by pulsed laser ablation in liquid. J. Mol. Liq. 2020, 304, 112694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  168. Hamze, S.; Berrada, N.; Cabaleiro, D.; Desforges, A.; Ghanbaja, J.; Gleize, J.; Bégin, D.; Michaux, F.; Maré, T.; Vigolo, B.; et al. Few-layer graphene-based nanofluids with enhanced thermal conductivity. Nanomaterials 2020, 10, 1258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  169. Hamze, S.; Cabaleiro, D.; Maré, T.; Vigolo, B.; Estellé, P. Shear flow behavior and dynamic viscosity of few-layer graphene nanofluids based on propylene glycol-water mixture. J. Mol. Liq. 2020, 316, 113875. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  170. Charab, A.; Movahedirad, S.; Norouzbeigi, R. Thermal conductivity of Al2O3 + TiO2/water nanofluid: Model development and experimental validation. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2017, 119, 42–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  171. Nine, M.; Batmunkh, M.; Kim, J.; Chung, H.; Jeong, H. Investigation of Al2O3-MWCNTs hybrid dispersion in water and their thermal characterization. J. Nanosci. Nanotechnol. 2012, 12, 4553–4559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  172. Shahsavar, A.; Salimpour, M.; Saghafian, M.; Shafii, M. An experimental study on the effect of ultrasonication on thermal conductivity of ferrofluid loaded with carbon nanotubes. Thermochim. Acta 2015, 617, 102–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  173. Farbod, M.; Ahangarpour, A. Improved thermal conductivity of Ag decorated carbon nanotubes water based nanofluids. Phys. Lett. Sect. A 2016, 380, 4044–4048. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  174. Harandi, S.; Karimipour, A.; Afrand, M.; Akbari, M.; D’Orazio, A. An experimental study on thermal conductivity of F-MWCNTs-Fe3O4/EG hybrid nanofluid: Effects of temperature and concentration. Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 2016, 76, 171–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  175. Yarmand, H.; Gharehkhani, S.; Shirazi, S.; Amiri, A.; Montazer, E.; Arzani, H.; Sadri, R.; Dahari, M.; Kazi, S. Nanofluid based on activated hybrid of biomass carbon/graphene oxide: Synthesis, thermo-physical and electrical properties. Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 2016, 72, 10–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  176. Chougule, S.; Sahu, S. Model of heat conduction in hybrid nanofluid. In Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE International Conference ON Emerging Trends in Computing, Communication and Nanotechnology (ICECCN), Tirunelveli, India, 25–26 March 2013; pp. 337–341. [Google Scholar]
  177. Takabi, B.; Salehi, S. Augmentation of the heat transfer performance of a sinusoidal corrugated enclosure by employing hybrid nanofluid. Adv. Mech. Eng. 2014, 2014, 147059. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  178. Esfe, M.; Saedodin, S.; Biglari, M.; Rostamian, H. Experimental investigation of thermal conductivity of CNTs-Al2O3/water: A statistical approach. Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 2015, 69, 29–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  179. Esfe, M.; Wongwises, S.; Naderi, A.; Asadi, A.; Safaei, M.; Rostamian, H.; Dahari, M.; Karimipour, A. Thermal conductivity of Cu/TiO2-water/EG hybrid nanofluid: Experimental data and modeling using artificial neural network and correlation. Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 2015, 66, 100–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  180. Esfe, M.; Yan, W.; Akbari, M.; Karimipour, A.; Hassani, M. Experimental study on thermal conductivity of DWCNT-ZnO/water-EG nanofluids. Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 2015, 68, 248–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  181. Afrand, M. Experimental study on thermal conductivity of ethylene glycol containing hybrid nano-additives and development of a new correlation. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2017, 110, 1111–1119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  182. Vafaei, M.; Afrand, M.; Sina, N.; Kalbasi, R.; Sourani, F.; Teimouri, H. Evaluation of thermal conductivity of MgO-MWCNTs/EG hybrid nanofluids based on experimental data by selecting optimal artificial neural networks. Phys. E Low Dimens. Syst. Nanostructures 2017, 85, 90–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  183. Esfe, M.; Alirezaie, A.; Rejvani, M. An applicable study on the thermal conductivity of SWCNT-MgO hybrid nanofluid and price-performance analysis for energy management. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2017, 111, 1202–1210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  184. Esfe, M.; Behbahani, P.; Arani, A.; Sarlak, M. Thermal conductivity enhancement of SiO2–MWCNT (85:15%)–EG hybrid nanofluids: ANN designing, experimental investigation, cost performance and sensitivity analysis. J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 2017, 128, 249–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  185. Esfe, M.; Esfandeh, S.; Rejvani, M. Modeling of thermal conductivity of MWCNT-SiO2 (30:70%)/EG hybrid nanofluid, sensitivity analyzing and cost performance for industrial applications. J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 2018, 131, 1437–1447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  186. Esfe, H.M.; Arani, A.A.A.; Badi, S.R.; Rejvani, M. ANN modeling, cost performance and sensitivity analyzing of thermal conductivity of DWCNT–SiO2/EG hybrid nanofluid for higher heat transfer: An experimental study. J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 2017, 131, 2381–2393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  187. Esfe, M.; Rejvani, M.; Karimpour, R.; Arani, A. Estimation of thermal conductivity of ethylene glycol-based nanofluid with hybrid suspensions of SWCNT–Al2O3 nanoparticles by correlation and ANN methods using experimental data. J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 2017, 128, 1359–1371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  188. Rostamian, S.; Biglari, M.; Saedodin, S.; Esfe, M. An inspection of thermal conductivity of CuO-SWCNTs hybrid nanofluid versus temperature and concentration using experimental data, ANN modeling and new correlation. J. Mol. Liq. 2017, 231, 364–369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  189. Zadkhast, M.; Toghraie, D.; Karimipour, A. Developing a new correlation to estimate the thermal conductivity of MWCNT-CuO/water hybrid nanofluid via an experimental investigation. J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 2017, 129, 859–867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  190. Elias, M.; Shahrul, I.; Mahbubul, I.; Saidur, R.; Rahim, N. Effect of different nanoparticle shapes on shell and tube heat exchanger using different baffle angles and operated with nanofluid. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 2014, 70, 289–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  191. Vajjha, R.; Das, D.K. A review and analysis on influence of temperature and concentration of nanofluids on thermophysical properties, heat transfer and pumping power. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 2012, 55, 4063–4078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  192. Huminic, G.; Huminic, A. Application of nanofluids in heat exchangers: A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2012, 16, 5625–5638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  193. Huminic, G.; Huminic, A. Hybrid nanofluids for heat transfer applications—A state-of-the-art review. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 2018, 125, 82–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  194. Anoop, K.; Cox, J.; Sadr, R. Thermal evaluation of nanofluids in heat exchangers. Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 2013, 49, 5–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  195. Kumar, V.; Tiwari, A.; Ghosh, S. Application of nanofluids in plate heat exchanger: A review. Energy Convers. Manag. 2015, 105, 1017–1036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  196. Azmi, W.; Hamid, K.; Usri, N.; Mamat, R.; Sharma, K. Heat transfer augmentation of ethylene glycol: Water nanofluids and applications—A review. Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 2016, 75, 13–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  197. Minea, A. Challenges in hybrid nanofluids behavior in turbulent flow: Recent resarch and numerical comparison. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 71, 426–434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  198. Elmaaty, T.A.; Kabeel, A.; Mahgoub, M. Corrugated plate heat exchanger review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 70, 852–860. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  199. Zheng, D.; Wang, J.; Pang, Y.; Chen, Z.; Sunden, B. Heat transfer performance and friction factor of various nanofluids in a double-tube counter flow heat exchanger. Therm. Sci. 2020, 24, 3601–3612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  200. Zheng, D.; Wang, J.; Chen, Z.; Baleta, J.; Sundén, B. Performance analysis of a plate heat exchanger using various nanofluids. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 2020, 158, 119993. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  201. Babu, C.R.; Kumar, P.; Roy, S.; Ganesan, R. A comprehensive review on compound heat transfer enhancement using passive techniques in a heat exchanger. Mater. Today Proc. 2021, 54, 428–436. [Google Scholar]
  202. Bakthavatchalam, B.; Habib, K.; Saidur, R.; Saha, B.; Irshad, K. Comprehensive study on nanofluid and ionanofluid for heat transfer enhancement: A review on current and future perspective. J. Mol. Liq. 2020, 305, 112787. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  203. Pandey, S.; Nema, V. Experimental analysis of heat transfer and friction factor of nanofluid as a coolant in a corrugated plate heat exchanger. Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 2012, 38, 248–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  204. Tiwari, A.; Ghosh, P.; Sarkar, J. Performance comparison of the plate heat exchanger using different nanofluids. Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 2013, 49, 141–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  205. Tiwari, A.; Ghosh, P.; Sarkar, J. Particle concentration levels of various nanofluids in plate heat exchanger for best performance. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 2015, 89, 1110–1118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  206. Barzegarian, R.; Moraveji, M.; Aloueyan, A. Experimental investigation on heat transfer characteristics and pressure drop of BPHE (brazed plate heat exchanger) using TiO2-water nanofluid. Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 2016, 74, 11–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  207. Tabari, Z.T.; Heris, S.Z.; Kahani, M. The study on application of TiO2/water nanofluid in plate heat exchanger of milk pasteurization industries. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 58, 1318–1326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  208. Prashant, G.S.; Sarao, T. Experimental analysis of heat transfer and friction factor in plate heat exchanger with different orientations using Al2O3 nanofluids. Int. J. Eng. 2016, 29, 1450–1458. [Google Scholar]
  209. Huang, D.; Wu, Z.; Sunden, B. Pressure drop and convective heat transfer of Al2O3/water and MWCNT/water nanofluids in a chevron plate heat exchanger. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 2015, 89, 620–626. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  210. Bhattad, A.; Sarkar, J.; Ghosh, P. Hydrothermal performance of different alumina hybrid nanofluid types in plate heat exchanger. J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 2020, 139, 3777–3787. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  211. Bhattad, A.; Sarkar, J.; Ghosh, P. Heat transfer characteristics of plate heat exchanger using hybrid nanofluids: Effect of nanoparticle mixture ratio. Heat Mass Transf. 2020, 56, 2457–2472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  212. Bhattad, A. Experimental investigation of Al2O3–MgO hot hybrid nanofluid in a plate heat exchanger. Heat Transf. 2020, 49, 2344–2354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  213. Bhattad, A. Exergy analysis of plate heat exchanger with graphene alumina hybrid nanofluid: Experimentation. Int. J. Exergy 2020, 33, 254–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  214. Kavitha, R.; Algani, Y.; Kulkarni, K.; Gupta, M. Heat transfer enhancement in a double pipe heat exchanger with copper oxide nanofluid: An experimental study. Mater. Today Proc. 2021, 56, 3446–3449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  215. Jassim, E.; Ahmed, F. Assessment of nanofluid on the performance and energy-environment interaction of Plate-Type-Heat exchanger. Therm. Sci. Eng. Prog. 2021, 25, 100988. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  216. Jassim, E.; Ahmed, F. Experimental assessment of Al2O3 and Cu nanofluids on the performance and heat leak of double pipe heat exchanger. Heat Mass Transf. 2020, 56, 1845–1858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  217. Mansoury, D.; Doshmanziari, F.; Kiani, A.; Chamkha, A.; Sharifpur, M. Heat transfer and flow characteristics of Al2O3/water nanofluid in various heat exchangers: Experiments on counter flow. Heat Transf. Eng. 2019, 41, 220–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  218. Henein, S.; Abdel-Rehim, A. The performance response of a heat pipe evacuated tube solar collector using MgO/MWCNT hybrid nanofluid as a working fluid. Case Stud. Therm. Eng. 2022, 33, 101957. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  219. Heyhat, M.; Abdi, A.; Jafarzad, A. Performance evaluation and exergy analysis of a double pipe heat exchanger under air bubble injection. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2018, 143, 582–593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  220. Hosseinian, A.; Isfahani, A. Experimental study of heat transfer enhancement due to the surface vibrations in a flexible double pipe heat exchanger. Heat Mass Transf. 2017, 54, 1113–1120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  221. Bezaatpour, M.; Goharkhah, M. Convective heat transfer enhancement in a double pipe mini heat exchanger by magnetic field induced swirling flow. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2020, 167, 114801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  222. Setareh, M.; Saffar-Avval, M.; Abdullah, A. Experimental and numerical study on heat transfer enhancement using ultrasonic vibration in a double-pipe heat exchanger. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2019, 159, 113867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  223. Akbarzadeh, M.; Rashidi, S.; Keshmiri, A.; Shokri, N. The optimum position of porous insert for a double-pipe heat exchanger based on entropy generation and thermal analysis. J. Therm. Anal. 2020, 139, 411–426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  224. Poongavanam, G.; Panchabikesan, K.; Murugesan, R.; Duraisamy, S.; Ramalingam, V. Experimental investigation on heat transfer and pressure drop of MWCNT-Solar glycol based nanofluids in shot peened double pipe heat exchanger. Powder Technol. 2019, 345, 815–824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  225. Arya, H.; Sarafraz, M.; Pourmehran, O.; Arjomandi, M. Performance index improvement of a double-pipe cooler with MgO/waterethylene glycol (50:50) nano-suspension. Propuls. Power Res. 2020, 9, 75–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  226. Subramanian, R.; Kumar, A.S.; Vinayagar, K.; Muthusamy, S. Experimental analyses on heat transfer performance of TiO2–water nanofluid in double-pipe counter-flow heat exchanger for various flow regimes. J. Therm. Anal. 2020, 140, 603–612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  227. Dalkılıç, A.S.; Mercan, H.; Özçelik, G.; Wongwises, S. Optimization of the finned double-pipe heat exchanger using nanofluids as working fluids. J. Therm. Anal. 2021, 143, 859–878. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  228. Bahmani, M.H.; Sheikhzadeh, G.; Zarringhalam, M.; Akbari, O.A.; Alrashed, A.A.; Shabani, G.A.S.; Goodarzi, M. Investigation of turbulent heat transfer and nanofluid flow in a double pipe heat exchanger. Adv. Powder Technol. 2018, 29, 273–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  229. Bahmani, M.H.; Akbari, O.A.; Zarringhalam, M.; Shabani, G.A.S.; Goodarzi, M. Forced convection in a double tube heat exchanger using nanofluids with constant and variable thermophysical properties. Int. J. Numer. Methods Heat Fluid Flow 2019, 30, 3247–3265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  230. Kristiawan, B.; Rifa, A.; Enoki, K.; Wijayanta, A.; Miyazaki, T. Enhancing the thermal performance of TiO2/water nanofluids flowing in a helical microfin tube. Powder Technol. 2020, 376, 254–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  231. Akachi, H. Structure of a Heat Pipe. U.S. Patent 4921041; Scientific research an academic publisher, 1990. [Google Scholar]
  232. Singh, U.; Kumar, N. Stability issues and operating limitations of nanofluid filled heat pipe: A critical review. Mater. Today Proc. 2023, in press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  233. Karthikeyan, V.K.; Ramachandran, K.; Pillai, B.C.; Solomon, A.B. Effect of nanofluids on thermal performance of closed loop pulsating heat pipe. Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 2014, 54, 171–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  234. Goshayeshi, H.R.; Safaei, M.R.; Goodarzi, M.; Dahari, M. Particle size and type effects on heat transfer enhancement of ferro-nanofluids in a pulsating heat pipe. Powder Technol. 2016, 301, 1218–1226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  235. Li, Z. Operation analysis, response and performance evaluation of a pulsating heat pipe for low temperature heat recovery. Energy Convers. Manag. 2020, 222, 113230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  236. Kim, H.-T.; Bang, K.-H. Heat transfer enhancement of nanofluids in a pulsating heat pipe for heat dissipation of led lighting. J. Korean Soc. Manuf. Process Eng. 2014, 38, 1200–1205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  237. Kang, S.W.; Wang, Y.C.; Liu, Y.C.; Lo, H.M. Visualization and thermal resistance measurements for a magnetic nanofluid pulsating heat pipe. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2017, 126, 1044–1050. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  238. Wu, H. Thermal performance comparison of oscillating heat pipes with SiO2/water and Al2O3/water nanofluids. Int. J. Therm. Sci. 2011, 50, 1954–1962. [Google Scholar]
  239. Goshayeshi, H.R.; Izadi, F.; Bashirnezhad, K. Comparison of heat transfer performance on closed pulsating heat pipe for Fe3O4 and ɤFe2O3 for achieving an empirical correlation. Phys. E Low Dimens. Syst. Nanostruct. 2017, 89, 43–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  240. Xu, R.; Wang, R.; Li, Y. Effect of C60 nanofluid on the thermal performance of a flat-plate pulsating heat pipe. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 2016, 100, 892–898. [Google Scholar]
  241. Xue, Y.; Qi, H.; Cai, W. Experimental study on heat transfer performance of pulsating heat pipes with hybrid working fluids. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 2020, 157, 119727. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  242. Zufar, G.P.; Kumar, H.M.; Ng, K.C. Numerical and experimental investigations of hybrid nanofluids on pulsating heat pipe performance. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 2020, 146, 118887. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  243. Khodami, R.; Nejad, A.A.; Khabbaz, M.R.A. Experimental investigation of energy and exergy efficiency of a pulsating heat pipe for chimney heat recovery. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess. 2016, 16, 11–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  244. Jahani, M.M.; Shafii, M.B.; Shiee, Z. Promising technology for electronic cooling: Nanofluidic micro pulsating heat pipes. J. Electron. Packag. 2013, 135, 021005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  245. Zhang, M.; Han, W.; Guo, X. Enhancement of heat transport in oscillating heat pipe with ternary fluid. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 2015, 87, 258–264. [Google Scholar]
  246. Babar, H.; Ali, H. Towards hybrid nanofluids: Preparation, thermophysical properties, applications, and challenges. J. Mol. Liq. 2019, 281, 598–633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  247. Selvakumar, P.; Suresh, S. Use of Al2O3–Cu/water hybrid nanofluid in an electronic heat sink. IEEE Trans. Compon. Packag. Manuf. Technol. 2012, 2, 1600–1607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  248. Ahammed, N.; Asirvatham, L.; Wongwises, S. Entropy generation analysis of graphene–alumina hybrid nanofluid in multiport mini channel heat exchanger coupled with thermoelectric cooler. Int. J. Heat Mass Tran. 2016, 103, 1084–1097. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  249. Nimmagadda, R.; Venkatasubbaiah, K. Experimental and multiphase analysis of nanofluids on the conjugate performance of micro-channel at low Reynolds numbers. Heat Mass Tran. 2017, 53, 2099–2115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  250. Ho, C.; Liu, Y.; Ghalambaz, M.; Yan, W. Forced convection heat transfer of Nano-Encapsulated Phase Change Material (NEPCM) suspension in a mini-channel heatsink. Int. J. Heat Mass Tran. 2020, 155, 119858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  251. Kumar, V.; Sarkar, J. Effect of different nanoparticles mixture dispersed nanofluids on hydrothermal characteristics in mini channel heat sink. Adv. Powder Technol. 2020, 31, 621–631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  252. Nimmagadda, R.; Venkatasubbaiah, K. Two-phase analysis on the conjugate heat transfer performance of microchannel with Cu, Al, SWCNT, and hybrid nanofluids. J. Therm. Sci. Eng. Appl. 2017, 9, 041011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  253. Bahiraei, M.; Berahmand, M.; Shahsavar, A. Irreversibility analysis for flow of a non Newtonian hybrid nanofluid containing coated CNT/Fe3O4 nanoparticles in a mini channel heat exchanger. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2017, 125, 1083–1093. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  254. Mashayekhi, R.; Khodabandeh, E.; Akbari, O.; Toghraie, D.; Bahiraei, M.; Gholami, M. CFD analysis of thermal and hydrodynamic characteristics of hybrid nanofluid in a new designed sinusoidal double-layered microchannel heat sink. J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 2018, 134, 2305–2315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  255. Bahiraei, M.; Jamshidmofid, M.; Dahari, M. Second law analysis of hybrid nanofluid flow in a microchannel heat sink integrated with ribs and secondary channels for utilization in miniature thermal devices. Chem. Eng. Process 2020, 153, 107963. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  256. Ho, C.; Guo, Y.; Yang, T.; Rashidi, S.; Yan, W. Numerical study on forced convection of water-based suspensions of nanoencapsulated PCM particles/Al2O3 nanoparticles in a mini-channel heat sink. Int. J. Heat Mass Tran. 2020, 157, 119965. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  257. Uysal, C.; Gedik, E.; Chamkha, A. A Numerical analysis of laminar forced convection and entropy generation of a diamond-Fe3O4/water hybrid nanofluid in a rectangular mini channel. J. Appl. Fluid Mech. 2019, 12, 391–402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  258. Shahsavar, A.; Godini, A.; Sardari, P.; Toghraie, D.; Salehipour, H. Impact of variable fluid properties on forced convection of Fe3O4/CNT/water hybrid nanofluid in a double-pipe mini-channel heat exchanger. J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 2019, 137, 1031–1043. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  259. He, W.; Mashayekhi, R.; Toghraie, D.; Akbari, O.; Li, Z.; Tlili, I. Hydrothermal performance of nanofluid flow in a sinusoidal double layer microchannel in order to geometric optimization. Int. Commun. Heat Mass Tran. 2020, 117, 104700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  260. Pantzali, M.N.; Kanaris, A.G.; Antoniadis, K.D.; Mouza, A.A.; Paras, S.V. Effect of nanofluids on the performance of a miniature plate heat exchanger with modulatedsurface. Int. J. Heat Fluid Flow 2009, 30, 691–699. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  261. Gherasim, I.; Galanis, N.; Nguyen, C.T. Numerical study of nanofluid flow and heat transfer in a plate heat exchanger. Comput. Therm. 2013, 5, 317–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  262. Ray, D.R.; Das, D.K.; Vajjha, R.S. Experimental and numerical investigations of nanofluids performance in a compact minichannel plate heat exchanger. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 2014, 71, 732–746. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  263. Tiwari, A.K.; Ghosh, P.; Sarkar, J.; Dahiya, H.; Parekh, J. Numerical investigation of heat transfer and fluid flow in plate heat exchanger using nanofluids. Int. J. Therm. Sci. 2014, 85, 93–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  264. Stogiannis, I.A.; Mouza, A.A.; Paras, S.V. Efficacy of SiO2 nanofluids in a miniature plate heat exchanger with undulated surface. Int. J. Therm. Sci. 2015, 92, 230–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  265. Jokar, A.; O’Halloran, S.P. Heat transfer and fluid flow analysis of nanofluids in corrugated plate heat exchangers using computational fluid dynamics simulation. J. Therm. Sci. Eng. Appl. 2013, 5, 011002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  266. Goodarzi, M.; Amiri, A.; Goodarzi, M.S.; Safaei, M.R.; Karimipour, A.; Languri, E.M.; Dahari, M. Investigation of heat transfer and pressure drop of a counter flow corrugated plate heat exchanger using MWCNT based nanofluids. Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 2015, 66, 172–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  267. Bhattad, A.; Sarkar, J.; Ghosh, P. Discrete phase numerical model and experimental study of hybrid nanofluid heat transfer and pressure drop in plate heat exchanger. Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 2018, 91, 262–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  268. Ding, Z.; Qi, C.; Luo, T.; Wang, Y.; Tu, J.; Wang, C. Numerical simulation of nanofluids forced convection in a corrugated double-pipe heat exchanger. Can. J. Chem. Eng. 2021, 100, 1954–1964. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  269. Bhattad, A.; Babu, S.S. Thermal analysis of shell and tube type heat exchanger using hybrid nanofluid. Trends Sci. 2022, 19, 2890. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  270. Jafarmadar, S.; Azizinia, N.; Razmara, N.; Mobadersani, F. Thermal analysis and entropy generation of pulsating heat pipes using nanofluids. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2016, 103, 356–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  271. Yan, H.; Yang, J.; Zhang, W. Numerical study of enhanced heat transfer of microchannel heat sink with nanofluids. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2020, 721, 012052. [Google Scholar]
  272. Khetib, Y.; Abo-Dief, H.M.; Alanazi, A.K.; Sajadi, S.M.; Sharifpur, M.; Meyer, J.P. A computational fluid dynamic study on efficiency of a wavy microchannel/heat sink containing various nanoparticles. Micromachines 2021, 12, 1192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  273. Kalteh, M.; Kouhikamali, R.; Akbari, S. Numerical simulation of nanofluid heat transfer in a double-layered microchannel heat sink using two phase mixture model. J. Nanofluids 2016, 5, 139–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  274. Pantzali, M.N.; Mouza, A.A.; Paras, S.V. Investigating the efficacy of nanofluids as coolants in plate heat exchangers (PHE). Chem. Eng. Sci. 2009, 64, 3290–3300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  275. Zamzamian, A.; Oskouie, S.N.; Doosthoseini, A.; Joneidi, A.; Pazouki, M. Experimental investigation of forced convective heat transfer coefficient in nanofluids of Al2O3/EG and CuO/EG in a double pipe and plate heat exchangers under turbulent flow. Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 2011, 35, 495–502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  276. Kabeel, A.E.; El-Maaty, T.M.A.; El-Samadony, Y. The effect of using nano-particles on corrugated plate heat exchanger performance. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2013, 52, 221–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  277. Tiwari, A.K.; Ghosh, P.; Sarkar, J. Heat transfer and pressure drop characteristics of CeO2/water nanofluid in plate heat exchanger. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2013, 57, 24–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  278. Khairul, M.A.; Alim, M.A.; Mahbubul, I.M.; Saidur, R.; Hepbasli, A.; Hossain, A. Heat transfer performance and exergy analyses of a corrugated plate heat exchanger using metal oxide nanofluids. Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 2014, 50, 8–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  279. Huang, D.; Wu, Z.; Sunden, B. Effects of hybrid nanofluid mixture in plate heat exchangers. Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 2016, 72, 190–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  280. Tabari, Z.T.; Heris, S.Z. Heat Transfer Performance of Milk Pasteurization Plate Heat Exchangers Using MWCNT/Water Nanofluid. J. Dispers. Sci. Technol. 2015, 36, 196–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  281. Abed, A.M.; Alghoul, M.A.; Sopian, K.; Mohammed, H.A.; Al-Shamani, A.N. Design characteristics of corrugated trapezoidal plate heat exchangers using nanofluids. Chem. Eng. Process. Process Intensif. 2015, 87, 88–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  282. Behrangzade, A.; Heyhat, M.M. The effect of using nano-silver dispersed water based nanofluid as a passive method for energy efficiency enhancement in a plate heat exchanger. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2016, 102, 311–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  283. Sarafraz, M.M.; Hormozi, F.J.E.T. Heat transfer, pressure drop and fouling studies of multi-walled carbon nanotube nanofluids inside a plate heat exchanger. Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 2016, 72, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  284. Sun, P.; Zuo, Y. Investigation on the flow and convective heat transfer characteristics of nanofluids in the plate heat exchanger. Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 2016, 76, 75–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  285. Kumar, V.; Tiwari, A.K.; Ghosh, S.K. Effect of chevron angle on heat transfer performance in plate heat exchanger using ZnO/water nanofluid. Energy Convers. Manag. 2016, 118, 142–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  286. Kumar, V.; Tiwari, A.K.; Ghosh, S.K. Effect of variable spacing on performance of plate heat exchanger using nanofluids. Energy 2016, 114, 1107–1119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  287. Ahmed, H.E.; Ahmed, M.I.; Seder, I.M.; Salman, B.H. Experimental investigation for sequential triangular double-layered microchannel heat sink with nanofluids. Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 2016, 77, 104–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  288. Sarvar-Ardeh, S.; Rafee, R.; Rashidi, S. Hybrid nanofluids with temperature-dependent properties for use in double-layered microchannel heat sink; hydrothermal investigation. J. Taiwan Inst. Chem. Eng. 2021, 124, 53–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  289. Wang, J.; Yu, K.; Ye, M.; Wang, E.; Wang, W.; Sundén, B. Effects of pin fins; vortex generators on thermal performance in a microchannel with Al2O3 nanofluids. Energy 2022, 239, 122606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  290. Adio, S.A.; Alo, T.A.; Olagoke, R.O.; Olalere, A.E.; Veeredhi, V.R.; Ewim, D.R. Thermohydraulic and entropy characteristics of Al2O3-water nanofluid in a ribbed interrupted microchannel heat exchanger. Heat Transf. 2021, 50, 1951–1984. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  291. Adio, A.S.; Olalere, A.E.; Olagoke, R.O.; Alo, T.A.; Veeredhi, V.R.; Ewim, D.R.; Olakoyejo, O.T. Thermal and entropy analysis of a manifold microchannel heat sink operating on CuO–water nanofluid. J. Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng. 2021, 43, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  292. Ali, M.A.; Angelino, M.; Rona, A. Numerical analysis on the thermal performance of microchannel heat sinks with Al2O3 nanofluid and various fins. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2021, 198, 117458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  293. Kumar, M.P.; Kumar, C.A. Numerical study on heat transfer performance using Al2O3/water nanofluids in six circular channel heat sink for electronic chip. Mater. Today Proc. 2020, 21, 194–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  294. Elbadawy, I.; Fayed, M. Reliability of Al2O3 nanofluid concentration on the heat transfer augmentation and resizing for single and double stack mi-crochannels. Alex. Eng. J. 2020, 59, 1771–1785. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  295. Mostafa, K. Simulation of nanofluid flow through rectangular microchannel by modified thermal dispersion model. Heat Transf. Eng. 2020, 41, 377–392. [Google Scholar]
  296. Pourfattah, F.; Arani, A.A.A.; Babaie, M.R.; Nguyen, H.M.; Asadi, A. On the thermal characteristics of a manifold microchannel heat sink subjected to nanofluid using two-phase flow simulation. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 2019, 143, 118518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  297. Kumar, A.; Nath, S.; Bhanja, D. Effect of nanofluid on thermo hydraulic performance of double layer tapered microchannel heat sink used for electronic chip cooling. Numer. Heat Transf. Part A Appl. 2018, 73, 429–445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  298. Arjun, K.S.; Rakesh, K. CFD analysis of thermal performance of microchannel nanofluid flow at different Reynolds numbers. Songklanakarin J. Sci. Technol. 2019, 41, 109–116. [Google Scholar]
  299. Madhava Reddy, H.; Venu Vinod, A. CFD simulation of the heat transfer using nanofluids in microchannel with dimple and protrusion. Indian Chem. Eng. 2019, 61, 40–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  300. Darzi, A.A.R.; Farhadi, M.; Sedighi, K. Heat transfer and flow characteristics of Al2O3–water nanofluid in a double tube heat exchanger. Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 2013, 47, 105–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  301. Maddah, H.; Alizadeh, M.; Ghasemi, N.; Alwi, S.R.W. Experimental study of Al2O3/water nanofluid turbulent heat transfer enhancement in the horizontal double pipes fitted with modified twisted tapes. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 2014, 78, 1042–1054. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  302. Sarafraz, M.M.; Hormozi, F. Intensification of forced convection heat transfer using biological nanofluid in a double-pipe heat exchanger. Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 2015, 66, 279–289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  303. Jafarimoghaddam, A.; Aberoumand, S.; Aberoumand, H.; Javaherdeh, K. Experimental study on Cu/Oil nanofluids through concentric annular tube: A correlation. Heat Tran. Asian Res. 2017, 46, 251–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  304. Shirvan, K.M.; Mamourian, M.; Mirzakhanlari, S.; Ellahi, R. Numerical investigation of heat exchanger effectiveness in a double pipe heat exchanger filled with nanofluid: A sensitivity analysis by response surface methodology. Powder Technol. 2017, 313, 99–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  305. Akyurek, E.F.; Gelis, K.; Sahin, B.; Many, E. Experimental analysis for heat transfer of nanofluid with wire coil turbulators in a concentric tube heat exchanger. Results Phys. 2018, 9, 376–389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  306. Albadr, J.; Tayal, S.; Alasadi, M. Heat transfer through heat exchanger using Al2O3 nanofluid at different concentrations. Case Stud. Therm. Eng. 2013, 1, 38–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  307. Godson, L.; Deepak, K.; Enoch, C.; Jefferson, B.; Raja, B. Heat transfer characteristics of silver/water nanofluids in a shell and tube heat exchanger. Arch. Civ. Mech. Eng. 2014, 14, 489–496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  308. Dharmalingam, R.; Sivagnanaprabhu, K.K.; Yogaraja, J.; Gunasekaran, S.; Mohan, R. Experimental investigation of heat transfer characteristics of nanofluid using parallel flow, counter flow and shell and tube heat exchanger. Arch. Mech. Eng. 2015, LXII, 509–522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  309. Aghabozorg, M.H.; Rashidi, A.; Mohammadi, S. Experimental investigation of heat transfer enhancement of Fe2O3-CNT/water magnetic nanofluids under laminar, transient and turbulent flow inside a horizontal shell and tube heat exchanger. Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 2016, 72, 182–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  310. Tan, Y.; He, Z.; Xu, T.; Fang, X.; Gao, X.; Zhang, Z. Experimental investigation of heat transfer and pressure drop characteristics of non-Newtonian nanofluids flowing in the shell-side of a helical baffle heat exchanger with low-finned tubes. Heat Mass Transf. 2017, 53, 2813–2827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  311. Naik, B.A.K.; Vinod, A.V. Heat transfer enhancement using non Newtonian nanofluids in a shell and helical coil heat exchanger. Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 2018, 90, 132–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  312. Said, Z.; Rahman, S.M.A.; Assad, M.E.H.; Alami, A.H. Heat transfer enhancement and life cycle analysis of a Shell-and-Tube Heat Exchanger using stable CuO/water nanofluid. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assessm. 2019, 31, 306–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  313. Arshad, M.; Hussain, A.; Hassan, A.; Wro, P.; Elfasakhany, A.; Elkotb, M.; Abdelmohimen, M.; Galal, A. Thermal energy investigation of magnetohydrodynamic nano-material liquid flow over a stretching sheet: Comparison of single and composite particles. Alex. Eng. J. 2022, 61, 10453–10462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  314. Bhattad, A.; Sarkar, J.; Ghosh, P. Exergetic analysis of plate evaporator using hybrid nanofluids as secondary refrigerant for low temperature applications. Int. J. Exergy 2017, 24, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  315. Bhattad, A.; Sarkar, J.; Ghosh, P. Energetic and exergetic performances of plate heat exchanger using brine based hybrid nanofluid for milk chilling application. Heat Transf. Eng. 2020, 41, 522–535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  316. Mishra, R.; Das, P.K.; Sarangi, S. Second law based optimisation of crossflow plate-fin heat exchanger design using genetic algorithm. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2009, 29, 2983–2989. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  317. Rosen, M.A.; Dincer, I.; Kanoglu, M. Role of exergy in increasing efficiency and sustainability and reducing environmental impact. Energy Pol. 2008, 36, 128–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  318. Bejan, A. Entropy Generation through Heat; Fluid Flow; Wiley: New York, NY, USA, 1982. [Google Scholar]
  319. Kumar, V.; Sahoo, R.R. Exergy and energy analysis of a wavy fin radiator with variously shaped nanofluids as coolants. Heat Transfer. Asian Res. 2019, 48, 2174–2192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  320. Bahiraei, M.; Mazaheri, N.; Aliee, F. Second law analysis of a hybrid nanofluid in tubes equipped with double twisted tape inserts. Powder Technol. 2019, 345, 692–703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  321. Bahiraei, M.; Heshmatian, S. Efficacy of a novel liquid block working with a nanofluid containing graphene nanoplatelets decorated with silver nanoparticles compared with conventional cpu coolers. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2017, 127, 1233–1245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  322. Sundar, L.S.; Mouli, C.K.V.; Said, Z.; Sousa, A.C. Heat transfer and second law analysis of ethylene glycol-based ternary hybrid nanofluid under laminar flow. ASME J. Therm. Sci. Eng. Appl. 2021, 13, 051021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  323. Mmohammadiun, M.; Dashtestani, F.; Alizadeh, M. Exergy prediction model of a double pipe heat exchanger using metal oxide nanofluids and twisted tape based on the artificial neural network approach and experimental results. ASME J. Heat Transfer-Trans. ASME 2016, 138, 011801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  324. Singh, S.K.; Sarkar, J. Improving hydrothermal performance of double-tube heat exchanger with modified twisted tape inserts using hybrid nanofluid. J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 2021, 143, 4287–4298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  325. Kumar, V.; Sahoo, R. Energy-economic and exergy-environment performance evaluation of compact heat exchanger with turbulator passive inserts using THDNF. J. Therm. Sci. Eng. Appl. 2023, 15, 021011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  326. Kumar, V.; Sahoo, R. 4 E’s (Energy, Exergy, Economic, Environmental) performance analysis of air heat exchanger equipped with various twisted turbulator inserts utilizing ternary hybrid nanofluids. Alex. Eng. J. 2022, 61, 5033–5050. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  327. Rai, R.; Sahoo, R. Experimental energetic and exergetic analysis with the novel emulsion fuels incorporating CNT and Al2O3 nano additive for DICI engine. Int. J. Exergy 2021, 34, 4492–4514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  328. Saidur, R.; Kazi, S.N.; Hossain, M.S.; Rahman, M.M.; Mohammed, H.A. A review on the performance of nanoparticles suspended with refrigerants and lubricating oils in refrigeration systems. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2011, 15, 310–323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  329. Bhattad, A.; Sarkar, J.; Ghosh, P. Improving the performance of refrigeration systems by using nanofluids: A comprehensive review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 82, 3656–3669. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  330. Alawi, O.A.; Sidik, N.A.C.; Mohammed, H.A. A comprehensive review of fundamentals, preparation and applications of nanorefrigerants. Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 2014, 54, 81–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  331. Celen, A.; Çebi, A.; Aktas, M.; Mahian, O.; Dalkilic, A.S.; Wongwises, S. A review of nanorefrigerants: Flow characteristics and applications. Int. J. Refrig. 2014, 44, 125–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  332. Alawi, O.A.; Sidik, N.A.C. Applications of nanorefrigerant and nanolubricants in refrigeration, air- conditioning and heat pump systems: A review. Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 2015, 68, 91–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  333. Alawi, O.A.; Sidik, N.A.C.; Kherbeet, A.S. Nanorefrigerant effects in heat transfer performance and energy consumption reduction: A review. Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 2015, 69, 76–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  334. Patil, M.S.; Kim, S.C.; Seo, J.H.; Lee, M.Y. Review of the thermo-physical properties and performance characteristics of a refrigeration system using refrigerant-based nanofluids. Energies 2016, 9, 22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  335. Nair, V.; Tailor, P.R.; Parekh, A.D. Nanorefrigerants: A comprehensive review on its past, present and future. Int. J. Refrig. 2016, 67, 290–307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  336. Zawawi, N.N.M.; Azmi, W.H.; Redhwan, A.A.M.; Sharif, M.Z.; Sharma, K.V. Thermo-physical properties of Al2O3-SiO2/PAG composite nanolubricant for refrigeration system. Int. J. Refrig. 2017, 80, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  337. Fard, M.H.; Talaie, N. Numerical and experimental investigation of heat transfer of ZnO/Water nanofluid in the concentric tube and plate heat exchangers. Therm. Sci. 2011, 1, 183–194. [Google Scholar]
  338. Javadi, F.S.; Sadeghipour, S.; Saisur, R.; Boroumandjazi, G.; Rahmati, B.; Elias, M.M.; Sohel, M.R. The effects of nanofluid on thermophysical properties and heat transfer characteristics of a plate heat exchanger. Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 2013, 44, 58–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  339. Maré, T.; Halelfadl, S.; Sow, O.; Estellé, P.; Duret, S.; Bazantay, F. Comparison of the thermal performances of two nanofluids at low temperature in a plate heat exchanger. Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 2011, 35, 1535–1543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  340. Nitsas, M.T.; Koronaki, I.P. Investigating the potential impact of nanofluids on the performance of condensers and evaporators-A general approach. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2016, 100, 577–585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  341. Liu, M.S.; Lin, M.C.C.; Liaw, J.S.; Wang, C.C. Performance augmentation of a water chiller system using nanofluids. ASHRAE Trans. 2009, 115, 581–586. [Google Scholar]
  342. Kumaresan, V.; Velraj, R.; Das, S.K. Convective heat transfer characteristics of secondary refrigerant based CNT nanofluids in a tubular heat exchanger. Int. J. Refrig. 2012, 35, 2287–2296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  343. Loaiza, J.C.V.; Pruzaesky, F.C.; Parise, J.A.R. A numerical study on the application of nanofluids in refrigeration systems. In Proceedings of the 13th International Refrigeration and Air-Conditioning Conference at Purdue, West Lafayette, IN, USA, 12–15 July 2010; pp. 2495–2508. [Google Scholar]
  344. Parise, J.A.R.; Tiecher, R.F.P. A simulation model for the application of nanofluids as condenser coolants in vapor compression heat pumps. In Proceedings of the 14th International Refrigeration and Air-Conditioning Conference at Purdue, West Lafayette, IN, USA, 16–19 July 2012; pp. 2531–2610. [Google Scholar]
  345. Askari, S.; Lotfi, R.; Seifkordi, A.; Rashidi, A.M.; Koolivand, H. A novel approach for energy and water conservation in wet cooling towers by using MWNTs and nanoporous graphene nanofluids. Energy Convers. Manag. 2016, 109, 10–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  346. Kolhapure, K.B.; Patil, U.S. Experimental investigation of refrigeration system using Al2O3/water nanofluids as cooling medium. Int. J. Res. Aeronaut. Mech. Eng. 2016, 4, 86–95. [Google Scholar]
  347. Jaiswal, R.K.; Mishra, R.S. Performance evaluation of vapour compression refrigeration system using eco-friendly refrigerants in primary circuit and nanofluid (water- nano particles based) in secondary circuit. Int. Res. J. Sustain. Sci. Eng. 2014, 2, 350–362. [Google Scholar]
  348. Ndoye, F.T.; Schalbart, P.; Leducq, D.; Alvarez, G. Numerical study of energy performance of nanofluids used in secondary loops of refrigeration systems. Int. J. Refrig. 2015, 52, 122–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  349. Soliman, A.M.A.; Abdelrahman, A.K.; Ookawara, S. Analytical investigation of energy performance insecondary loops of refrigeration systems using different nano materials additives. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Sustainable Energy Technologies—SET, Singapore, 19–22 July 2016. [Google Scholar]
  350. Vasconcelos, A.A.; Gómez, A.O.C.; Filho, E.P.B.; Parise, J.A.R. Experimental evaluation of SWCNT-water nanofluid as a secondary fluid in a refrigeration system. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2017, 111, 1487–1492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  351. Zhai, X.Q.; Wang, X.L.; Wang, T.; Wang, R.Z. A review on phase change cold storage in AC system: Materials and applications. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2013, 22, 108–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  352. Hannon, J.C.; Kerry, J.; Cruz-Romero, M.; Morris, M.; Cummins, E. Advances and challenges for the use of engineered nanoparticles in food contact materials. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2015, 43, 43–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  353. Zhang, X.J.; Qiu, L.M.; Zhang, X.B.; Tian, X.J. Analysis of the nucleation of nanofluids in the ice formation process. Energy Convers. Manag. 2010, 51, 130–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  354. Longo, G.A.; Righetti, G.; Zilio, C. Development of an innovative raw milk dispenser based on nanofluid technology. Int. J. Food Eng. 2016, 12, 165–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  355. Bhattad, A.; Sarkar, J.; Ghosh, P. Energy-Economic analysis of plate evaporator using brine based hybrid nanofluids as secondary refrigerant. Int. J. Air Cond. Refrig. 2018, 26, 1850003–1850012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  356. Sarkar, J. Performance evaluation of using water-based nanofluids as coolants in the gas cooler of a transcritical CO2 refrigerant system. J. Enhanc. Heat Transf. 2013, 20, 389–397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  357. Sarkar, J. Performance improvement of double-tube gas cooler in CO2 refrigeration system using nanofluids. Therm. Sci. 2015, 19, 109–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  358. Arshad, M.; Hussain, A.; Hassan, A.; Karamti, H.; Wro, P.; Khan, I.; Andualem, M.; Galal, A. Scrutinization of slip due to lateral velocity on the dynamics of engine oil conveying cupric and alumina nanoparticles subject to coriolis force. Math. Probl. Eng. 2022, 2022, 2526951. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  359. Kumar, V.; Sahoo, R. Experimental and numerical study on cooling system waste heat recovery for engine air preheating by ternary hybrid nanofluid. J. Enhanc. Heat Transf. 2021, 28, 1–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  360. Kumar, V.; Sahoo, R. Preheating Effects on Compression Ignition Engine Through Waste Heat Recovery Using THNF-Based Radiator Coolant: An Experimental Study. J. Therm. Sci. Eng. Appl. 2022, 14, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  361. Rai, R.; Sahoo, R. Effect of CNT and Al2O3-CNT hybrid nano-additive in water-emulsified fuels on DICI engine energetic and exergetic performances. J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 2021, 147, 3577–3589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  362. Najafi, G. Diesel engine combustion characteristics using Nanoparticles in biodiesel-diesel blends. Fuel 2018, 212, 668–678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  363. Jiaqiang, E.; Zhang, Z.; Chen, J.; Pham, M.; Zhao, X.; Peng, Q.; Zhang, B.; Yin, Z. Performance and emission evaluation of a marine diesel engine fueled by water biodiesel-diesel emulsion blends with a fuel additive of a cerium oxide nano-particle. Energy Convers. Manag. 2018, 169, 194–205. [Google Scholar]
  364. Kumar, N.; Raheman, H. Characterization of nano-oxide added water emulsified biodiesel blend prepared with optimal emulsifying parameters. Renew. Energy 2020, 145, 308–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  365. Wro, P. Investigation of energy losses of the internal combustion engine taking into account the correlation of the hydrophobic and hydrophilic. Energy 2023, 264, 126002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  366. Wro, P. Reduction of friction energy in a piston combustion engine for hydrophobic and hydrophilic multilayer nanocoatings surrounded by soot. Energy 2023, 271, 126974. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  367. Rai, R.; Sahoo, R. Impact of different shape based hybrid nano additives in emulsion fuel for exergetic, energetic, and sustainability analysis of diesel engine. Energy 2020, 214, 119086. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  368. Rao, M.; Anand, R. Performance and emission characteristics improvement studies on biodiesel fuelled DICI engine using water and AlO (OH) nano-particles. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2016, 98, 636–645. [Google Scholar]
  369. El-Seesy, A.; Attia, A.; El-Batsh, H. The effect of aluminum oxide nanoparticles addition with Jojoba methyl ester-diesel fuel blends on diesel engine performance, combustion, and emission characteristics. Fuel 2018, 224, 147–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  370. Ozcan, H. Energy and exergy analyses of Al2O3-diesel-biodiesel blend in a diesel engine. Int. J. Exergy 2019, 28, 29–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  371. Hasannuddin, A.; Yahya, W.; Sarah, S.; Ithnin, A.; Syahrullail, S.; Sidik, N.; Kassim, K.; Ahmad, Y.; Hirofumi, N.; Ahmad, M.; et al. Nano-additives incorporated water in diesel emulsion fuel: Fuel properties, performance, and emission characteristics assessment. Energy Convers. Manag. 2018, 169, 291–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  372. Aghbashlo, M.; Tabatabaei, M.; Mohammadi, P.; Mirzajanzadeh, M.; Ardjmand, M.; Rashidi, A. Effect of an emission-reducing soluble hybrid nano-catalyst in diesel/biodiesel blends on exergetic performance of a DI diesel engine. Renew. Energy 2016, 93, 353–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Heat exchangers.
Figure 1. Heat exchangers.
Energies 16 03189 g001
Figure 2. Flowchart for producing hybrid nanofluids [48].
Figure 2. Flowchart for producing hybrid nanofluids [48].
Energies 16 03189 g002
Figure 3. SEM image of Al2O3–MWCNT/water hybrid nanofluid [101].
Figure 3. SEM image of Al2O3–MWCNT/water hybrid nanofluid [101].
Energies 16 03189 g003
Figure 4. Photographs of (a) digital weighing balance, (b) Brookfield DV1 digital viscometer, and (c) hot disc thermal constant analyzer apparatus [48].
Figure 4. Photographs of (a) digital weighing balance, (b) Brookfield DV1 digital viscometer, and (c) hot disc thermal constant analyzer apparatus [48].
Energies 16 03189 g004
Figure 5. Comparison of experimental and empirical results for viscosity.
Figure 5. Comparison of experimental and empirical results for viscosity.
Energies 16 03189 g005
Figure 6. Comparison of experimental and empirical results for thermal conductivity.
Figure 6. Comparison of experimental and empirical results for thermal conductivity.
Energies 16 03189 g006
Table 1. Examples of hybrid nanofluids adopting two-step preparation.
Table 1. Examples of hybrid nanofluids adopting two-step preparation.
Author(s)NanoparticleBase Fluid
Jana et al. [49]Au–CNT, Cu–CNTWater
Han et al. [50]Sphere–CNTOil
Turcu et al. [51]Fe3O4–polypyrroleWater
Jha and Ramaprabhu [52]Cu–MWCNTWater/EG
Han and Rhi [53]Ag–Al2O3Water
Baby and Sundara [54]CuO–HEGWater/EG
Paul et al. [55]Al–ZnEG
Suresh et al. [56]Al2O3–CuWater
Botha et al. [57] *Ag–SiO2Oil
Ho et al. [58]Al2O3–PCMWater
Baby and Sundara [59]Ag–HEGWater/EG
Amiri et al. [60]Ag–MWCNTWater
Chen et al. [61]Ag–MWCNTWater
Aravind and Ramaprabhu [62]Graphene–MWCNTWater and EG
Bhosale and Borse [63]Al2O3–CuO Water
Balla et al. [64]CuO–CuWater
Abbasi et al. [65]ϒ-Al2O3–MWCNTWater
Nine et al. [66]Cu–Cu2OWater
Munkhbayar et al. [67] *Ag–MWCNTWater
Sundar et al. [68]Nanodiamond–nickelWater/EG
Parameshwaran et al. [69]Ag–TiO2PCM
Batmunkh et al. [70]Ag–TiO2Water
Madhesh et al. [71]Cu–TiO2Water
Chen et al. [72]MWCNT–Fe3O4Water
Parekh [73]Mn0.5Zn0.5Fe2O4Oil
Luo et al. [74]Al2O3–TiO2Lubricating oil
Madhesh and Kalaiselvam [75]Cu–TiO2Water
Zubir et al. [76]Graphene oxide–CNT Water
Qadri et al. [77]Graphene–Cu2OWater/EG
Karimi et al. [78]NiFe2O4Water
Chakraborty et al. [79]Cu–AlWater
Megatif et al. [80]CNT–TiO2Water
Abbasi et al. [81]MWCNT–TiO2Water
Toghraie et al. [82] ZnO–TiO2EG
Bhanvase et al. [83]PANI–CuOWater
Asadi et al. [84]CuO–TiO2Water
Chen et al. [85]Al2O3Liquid paraffin
Asadi et al. [86]MWCNTWater
Gulzar et al. [87]Al2O3–TiO2Therminol-55
Alarifi et al. [88]MWCNT–TiO2Oil
Akram et al. [89]CGNPDI Water
Sharafeldin and Grof [90]WO3Water
Chen et al. [91]MWCNTWater
Ali et al. [92]AlWater
Mahbubul et al. [93]Al2O3Water
Mahyari et al. [94]GO–SiCWater/EG
Chen et al. [95]Fe3O4–MWCNTBrine water
Okonkwo et al. [96]Al2O3–FeWater
Terueal et al. [97]MoSe2Water
Li et al. [98]SiO2Liquid paraffin
Geng et al. [99]ZnO–MWCNTOil
Li et al. [100]SiO2EG
* Single-step method.
Table 2. Stability of different nanofluids with surfactants.
Table 2. Stability of different nanofluids with surfactants.
Author(s) Nanoparticle Base FluidSurfactant (s)
Xian et al. [130]COOH-GnP, TiO2DW/EGSDC, CTAB *, SDBS
Almanassra et al. [131]CNTWaterGA *, PVP, SDS
Cacua et al. [132]Al2O3WaterCTAB, SDBS *
Kazemi et al. [129]SiO2, grapheneWaterCMC *
Ouikhalfan et al. [133]TiO2DWCTAB *, SDS
Siddiqui et al. [134]Cu-Al2O3DI water
Cacua et al. [128]Al2O3DI waterCTAB, SDBS *
Etedali et al. [135]SiO2DI waterCTAB *, SLS *
Giwa et al. [136]Al2O3-Fe2O3DWSDS *, NaDBS *
Kazemi et al. [137]G-SiO2DWCMC *
Gallego et al. [138]Al2O3WaterSDBS *
Shah et al. [139](rGO)EGCTAB *, SDBS, and SDS
Ilyas et al. [140]GnPSaline waterSDS *
* Recommended surfactant for improved stability of hybrid nanofluids.
Table 3. Summary of correlation for the viscosity of hybrid nanofluids.
Table 3. Summary of correlation for the viscosity of hybrid nanofluids.
Author(s)Nanoparticle/Base FluidWorking
Esfe et al. [160]Ag–MgO (50: 50)/waterφ = 0–2% μ n f μ b f = 1 + 32.795 ϕ 7214 ϕ 2 + 714600 ϕ 3 0.1941 × 1 0 8 ϕ 4
Asadi and Asadi [159]MWCNT–ZnO (15:85)/engine oilT = 5–55 °C,
φ = 0.125–1.0%
μ n f = 796.8 + 76.26 ϕ + 12.88 T + 0.7965 ϕ T 196.9 T 16.53 Φ T
Afrand et al. [163]MWCNT–SiO2 (equal portion)/SAE40T = 25–60 °C,
φ = 0–1%
μ n f μ b f = 0.00337 + exp ( 0.07731 ϕ 1.452 T 0.3387 )
Asadi et al. [166]MWCNT–MgO (20:80)/SAE50T = 25–50 °C,
φ = 0–2%
μ n f μ b f = ( 328201 T 2.053 ϕ 0.09359 )
Dardan et al. [156]MWCNT–Al2O3 (25:75)/SAE40T = 25–50 °C,
φ = 0–2%
μ n f μ b f = 1.123 + 0.3251 ϕ 0.08994 T + 0.002552 T 2 0.00002386 T 3 + 0.9695 T ϕ 0.01719
Soltani and Akbari [157]MWCNT–MgO/EGT = 30–60 °C,
φ = 0.1–1.0%
μ n f μ b f = 0.191 ϕ + 0.240 T 0.342 ϕ 0.473 × exp 1.45 T 0.120 ϕ 0.158
Table 4. Summary of correlation for the thermal conductivity of hybrid nanofluids.
Table 4. Summary of correlation for the thermal conductivity of hybrid nanofluids.
Author(s)Nanoparticle/Base FluidWorking
Chougule and Sahu [176]-- k e f f k b f = 1 + k p 1 ϕ 1 r b f k b f r p 1 1 ϕ 1 + ϕ 2 + k p 2 ϕ 2 r b f k b f r p 2 1 ϕ 1 + ϕ 2
Takabi and Salehi [177]Al2O3–Cu/waterφ = 0.1–2.0% k n f k b f = ϕ 1 k 1 + ϕ 2 k 2 ϕ + 2 ( 1 ϕ ) k b f + 2 ( ϕ 1 k 1 + ϕ 2 k 2 ) ϕ 1 k 1 + ϕ 2 k 2 ϕ + ( 2 + ϕ ) k b f ( ϕ 1 k 1 + ϕ 2 k 2 )
Esfe et al. [178]CNTs–Al2O3/waterT = 27–57 °C,
φ = 0–1%
k n f k b f = 1.05 + 0.005 T + 0.06 ϕ + 0.0099 ϕ T + 0.00317 T 2 + 0.026 ϕ 2 + 0.0034 T 2 ϕ + 0.00735 T ϕ 2
Esfe et al. [160]Ag–MgO (equal)/waterφ = 0–2% k n f k b f = 0.1747 × 1 0 5 + ϕ 0.1747 × 1 0 5 0.1498 × 1 0 6 ϕ + 0.1117 × 1 0 7 ϕ 2 + 0.1997 × 1 0 8 ϕ 3
Esfe et al. [179]Cu–TiO2/water–EG (60:40)T = 30–60 °C,
φ = 0.1–2.0%
k n f k b f = 1.07 + 0.000589 T 0.000184 ϕ T + 4.44 T ϕ × c o s 6.11 + 0.00673 T + 4.41 ϕ T 0.0414 sin T 32.5 ϕ
Esfe et al. [180]DWCNT–ZnO/water–EG (60:40)T = 25–50 °C,
φ = 0.025–1.0%
k n f k b f = 0.0288 × ln ( ϕ ) + 1.085 exp ( 0.001351 T + 0.13 ϕ 2 )
Harandi et al. [174]MWCNT–Fe3O4 (equal)/EGT = 25–50 °C,
φ = 0.1–2.3%
k n f k b f = 1 + 0.0162 ϕ 0.7038 T 0.6009
Afrand [181]MgO–fMWCNT/EGT = 25–50 °C,
φ = 0.0–0.6%
k n f k b f = 0.8341 + 1.1 ϕ 0.243 T 0.289
Vafaei et al. [182]MgO–MWCNT/EGT = 25–50 °C,
φ = 0.0–0.6%
k n f k b f = 0.9787 + exp 0.3081 ϕ 0.3097 0.002 T
Esfe et al. [183]SWCNT–MgO (20:80)/EGT = 30–50 °C,
φ = 0.0–2.0%
k n f k b f = 0.90844 0.06613 ϕ 0.3 T 0.7 + 0.01266 ϕ 0.31 T
Esfe et al. [184]MWCNT–SiO2 (15:85)/EGT = 30–50 °C,
φ = 0.0–2.0%
k n f k b f = 0.905 + 0.002069 T ϕ + 0.04375 ϕ 0.09265 T 0.3305 0.0063 ϕ 3
Esfe et al. [185]MWCNT–SiO2 (30:70)/EGT = 30–60 °C,
φ = 0.025–0.86%
k n f k b f = 1.01 + 0.007685 T ϕ 0.5136 ϕ 2 T 0.1578 + 11.5 ϕ 3 T 1.175
Esfe et al. [186]DWCNT–SiO2/EGT = 30–50 °C,
φ = 0.03–1.71%
k n f k b f = 0.9896 0.07122 ϕ + 0.02705 ϕ 0.7685 T 0.627 + 1.531 × 1 0 5 T 2
Esfe et al. [187]SWCNT–Al2O3 (15:85)/EGT = 30–50 °C,
φ = 0.0–2.5%
k n f k b f = 0.963 + 0.008379 ϕ 0.4439 × T 0.9246
Rostamian et al. [188]CuO–SWCNT (50:50)/water–EG (60:40)T = 20–50 °C,
φ = 0.02–0.75%
k n f k b f = 1 + 0.04056 ϕ T 0.003252 ϕ T 2 + 0.0001181 ϕ T 3 0.000001431 ϕ T 4
Zadkhast et al. [189]MWCNT–CuO/waterT = 25–50 °C, φ = 0.0–0.6% k n f k b f = 0.907 exp ( 0.36 ϕ 0.3111 + 0.000956 T )
Table 5. Experimental data for thermo-physical properties of different fluids.
Table 5. Experimental data for thermo-physical properties of different fluids.
T (°C)WaterTiO2 (0.1 vol.%)Al2O3 (0.1 vol.%)
Thermal conductivity, k (W/m-K)
Density, ρ (kg/m3)
Viscosity, μ (mPa·S)
Specific Heat, C P (J/kg·K)
Table 6. Comparison of experimental and theoretical data for thermo-physical properties of Al2O3 nanofluid.
Table 6. Comparison of experimental and theoretical data for thermo-physical properties of Al2O3 nanofluid.
T (°C)K_Test (W/m-K)K_th (W/m-K) μ _ t e s t (mPa·S) μ _ t h (mPa·S) C P _ t e s t (J/kg·K) C P _ t h (J/kg·K) ρ _ t e s t (kg/m3) ρ _ t h (kg/m3)
Table 7. Summary of studies on HEX with mono and hybrid nanofluids.
Table 7. Summary of studies on HEX with mono and hybrid nanofluids.
Author(s)Operating VariablesNanofluid
Pantzali et al. [274]Nanofluid as coolant, PHE, Tci = 30, Thi = 50 °C, Ωh = 40–56 mL/s, Ωc = 10–100 mL/sAl2O3, CNT, TiO2, CuO/water (0.5–4.0 vol.%), surfactant: CTABThe use of nanofluids was
advantageous in laminar flow.
Zamzamian et al. [275] Hot side: nanofluid, PHE, cold side: water, Ωh: 3 lpm, Ωc: 2.5 lpm, Thi = 45–75 °CAl2O3, CuO/EG (0.1–1.0 wt.%), surfactant: SDS, SDBS, and CTABHTC increased with increasing concentration and temperature by 3% to 49%.
Kabeel et al. [276] Hot side: nanofluid, PHE, cold side: water, laminar flow, Thi = 40 °C, Ωc = 3 m3/hAl2O3/water (1–4 vol.%)HTC and pump work increased with φ . For 4.0 vol.%, HTC increased by 13%.
Tiwari et al. [277] Nanofluid as coolant, PHE, Ωh = 3 lpm, Ωc = 1.0–4.0 lpm, Tci = (25–50 °C), Thi = 70 °CCeO2/water (0.5–3.0 vol.%)
HTC increased by 39% at 0.75 vol.% with almost no pressure drop.
Khairul et al. [278]PHE, nanofluid as coolant, Ωc = 2–5 lpm, Ωh = 2 lpm,Tci = 300 KCuO/water (0.5–1.5 vol.%)HTC increased by 27.20%, while exergy loss was reduced by 24% at 1.5 vol.%.
Huang et al. [279]Hot side: nanofluid, PHE, cold side: water, counter flow, Re = 58–624, Ω = 0–0.16 lps, Thi = 33 °C, Tci = 22 °CAl2O3/water (0.56–2.84 vol.%) and MWCNT/water (0.0111–0.0555 vol.%)HTC and the pressure drop increased with concentration.
Tabari and Heris [280] PHE, hot side: nanofluid, cold side: milk, counter flow, Pe = 300–1100, Thi = 68–72 °CMWCNT/water (0.25–0.55 wt.%)HTC and heat transfer rates increased upon adding MWCNTs to the base fluid.
Abed et al. [281] PHE, height = 2.5–5 mm, pitch = 6–12 mm, constant heat flux: 6 kW/m2, Ti = 300K, turbulent flowAl2O3, CuO, SiO2, and ZnO/water (0–4 vol.%)The most desirable channel parameters were a trapezoid height of 5 mm and a vertical pitch of 6 mm.
Behrangzade and Heyhat [282]PHE, hot side: nanofluid, cold side: water, Ωc = 2–4 lpm, Ωh = 4–8 lpm, Thi = 30–55 °CAg/water (100 ppm)Overall, HTC increased by 16.79% for 100 ppm nanofluid.
Sarafraz and Hormozi [283]PHE, Reh = 700–25000, Thi = 50–70 °CMWCNT/water nanofluid (0.5–1.5 vol.%)HTC increased with flow rate and volume concentration.
Sun et al. [284]PHE, Re = 1000–2800(Cu, Fe2O3, and Al2O3)/DI water (0.1–0.5%)Overall, HTC increased with mass fraction of particles.
Kumar et al. [285]PHE, Tci = 20 °C, Thi = 50 °C, Ωc = 0.5–2 lpm, Ωh = 3 lpm, β = 30°/30°, 30°/60°, 60°/60°ZnO/water (0–2 vol.%), surfactant: CTABThe optimum increase in HTRR and HTCR, as well as reduction in exergy loss, was observed at 1.0 vol.% for β-60°/60°.
Kumar et al. [286]PHE, Nanofluid as coolant, Tci = 20 °C, Thi = 50 °C, Ωc = Ωh = 3 lpm, b = 2.5–10.0 mmTiO2, Al2O3, ZnO, CeO2, GNP, MWCNT nanofluids, Cu + Al2O3 hybrid nanofluid/DI water (0.5–2.0 vol.%), surfactant: CTABExergy destruction was lowest and exergetic efficiency was maximum for 5 mm spacing at 0.75 vol.%.
Ahmed et al. [287]Microchannel, Re = 50–300, laminar flowAl2O3 and SiO2/water (0.3–0.9 vol.%)Al2O3 had the lowest thermal resistance. SiO2 was preferred due to lower pressure drop.
Ardeh et al. [288]Microchannel, Re = 50–400, laminar flowAl2O3–SiO2, Al2O3–Cu/water (0–5 vol.%)Al2O3–SiO2 hybrid nanofluid had a lower thermal resistance and better thermal performance.
Wang et al. [289]Microchannel, Re = 340–640, laminar flow Al2O3/water (1–4 vol.%), D = 20–40 nmNanoparticles with small diameters and high concentrations provided higher heat transfer performance.
Adio et al. [290]Microchannel, Re = 100–700, laminar flowAl2O3/water (0.5–4 vol.%)A 43.6% enhancement in heat transfer coefficient was observed.
Adio et al. [291]Microchannel, Re = 100–400, laminar flowCuO/Water (0.5–4 vol.%)A 6.5% enhancement in heat transfer was observed.
Ali et al. [292]Microchannel, Re = 100–350, laminar flowAl2O3/water (0–3 vol.%)The Nusselt number at 3 vol.% and Re = 350 showed a 0.67% enhancement.
Kumar et al. [293]Microchannel, Re = 200–600, laminar flowAl2O3/water (0.25–0.75 vol.%)A 40% heat transfer coefficient enhancement was obserbed at 0.75 vol.% fraction.
Elbadawy and Fayed [294]Microchannel, Re = 200–1500, laminar flowAl2O3/water (0.01–0.05 vol.%)Cooling performance was enhanced.
Kahani [295]Microchannel, Re = 100–300, laminar flowAl2O3/water (0–1 vol.%)The average Nusselt number
increased to 1.36 at a 1 vol.% fraction.
Pourfattah et al. [296]Microchannel, Re = 25–100, laminar flowCuO/water (0.02–0.04 vol.%)The heat transfer coefficient was highest at a 0.04 vol.% fraction.
Kumar et al. [297]Microchannel, Re = 100–500, laminar flowAl2O3/water (2–7 vol.%), D = 10–40 nmNu increased and thermal
resistance decreased when the nanoparticles diameter was
Arjun and Rakesh [298]Microchannel, turbulent flowAl2O3/water (0–5 vol.%)The heat transfer coefficient improved by about 12% to 5% particle volume fraction.
Reddy et al. [299]Microchannel, Re = 100–700, laminar flowCuO/water (0–4 vol.%)The heat transfer coefficient and viscosity increased, while the specific heat capacity decreased.
Darzi et al. [300]Straight-tube HEXAl2O3/waterThe heat transfer increased with the concentration.
Maddah et al. [301]Straight, twisted
Al2O3/waterThe heat transfer was enhanced by 12% to 52% compared to the tube with twisted tapes.
Sarafraz and Hormozi [302]StraightSilver/EG–water (0.1–1 vol.%)The 0.1–1 vol.% fraction increased the heat transfer coefficient by 22–67%.
Jafarimoghaddam et al. [303]StraightCu/oilThe heat transfer coefficient increased by 17.32%.
Shirvan et al. [304]StraightAl2O3/water, φ = 0.03The Nusselt number was enhanced by 57.7% with Re = 150 and φ = 0.03.
Akyurek et al. [305]Wire coil turbulatorAl2O3/waterThe addition of a wire coil increased the Nusselt number and the heat transfer coefficient.
Albadr et al. [306]Shell-and-tube HEXAl2O3/water, φ = 2 v%The overall heat transfer coefficient increased by 57%.
Godson et al. [307]Shell-and-tube HEXAg/water, φ = 0.01–0.04 vol.%There was a 12.4% rise in heat transfer coefficient.
Dharmalingam et al. [308]Shell-and-tube HEXAl2O3/waterThere was a 17% rise in overall heat transfer coefficient.
Aghabozorg et al. [309]Shell-and-tube HEXFe2O3–CNT/water (0.2 wt.%)There were 34.02% and 37.50% increases in the heat transfer coefficient for laminar and turbulent flow.
Tan et al. [310]Shell-and-tube HEXMWCNT/DI water, φ = 0.2–1 wt.%There was a 24.3% increase in the heat transfer coefficient.
Naik and Vinod [311]Shell-and-tube HEXFe2O3, CuO, Al2O3/(CMC), φ = 1 wt.%There were 26% and 29% increases in the overall heat transfer coefficient for Al2O3 and CuO nanofluids.
Said et al. [312]Shell-and-tube HEXCuO/waterA 7% increase in overall heat transfer and a 11.39% increase in convective heat transfer were observed.
Table 8. Quantitative data of Nusselt number for different fluids.
Table 8. Quantitative data of Nusselt number for different fluids.
T (°C)WaterTiO2 (0.1 vol.%)Al2O3 (0.1 vol.%)
Table 9. Summary of the application of nanofluids as coolant and secondary refrigerant.
Table 9. Summary of the application of nanofluids as coolant and secondary refrigerant.
Author(s)Operating VariablesNanofluid CharacteristicsFindings
Liu et al. [341]MWCNT/water,Water chillerEfficiency improved by 5.15%, while cooling capacity increased by 4.2%.
Loaiza et al. [343]Al2O3, TiO2, CuO, and Cu/waterVapor compression refrigeration systemThe evaporator area and pressure drop decreased for fixed cooling capacity as particle size and concentration increased.
Zhang et al. [353]Al2O3, SiO2/waterIce makingWith the use of nanoparticles, supercooling was reduced to a lesser extent.
Kumaresan et al. [342]MWCNT/(EG + water)
-Higher temperatures and velocities increased heat transmission efficiency, preferably with 0.15% MWCNTs by volume.
Parise and Tiecher [344]Cu/waterVapor compression heat pumpsWhen the volume fraction of nanoparticles reached 2%, COP increased by 5.4%.
Sarkar [356,357]Al2O3, TiO2, CuO, SiO2, and Cu/waterCO2 refrigerant systemThe shell-and-tube gas cooler’s cooling effectiveness and capacity were enhanced.
Jaiswal and Mishra [347]Al2O3, TiO2, CuO, and Cu/waterDomestic refrigeration systemThe performance of the cooling system increased by 17–20%.
Longo et al. [354]Al2O3/(EG + water)Milk dispenserEnergy consumption was reduced by 63–70%.
Ndoye et al. [348]Co, CuO, Fe, SiO2, Al2O3, and TiO2/waterCold chain refrigeration plantsThe cold chain became more efficient by consuming less energy and producing fewer emissions.
Askari et al. [345]MWCNT and graphene/waterCooling towerEfficiency, cooling range, and cooling tower performance were all improved with lower water use, as were the tower’s attributes.
Kolhapure and Patil [346]Al2O3/water
Air conditioning and refrigeration systemThe capacitor thermal cutoff, which lowered compressor operation and used less energy, boosted COP.
Soliman et al. [349]Al2O3, Ag, TiO2, Co, Cu, Au, Fe, CuO, diamond, and graphite/waterRefrigeration systemWhen the mass fraction was 0.1%, productivity increased by 10.5%.
Vasconcelos et al. [350]SWCNT/waterVapor compression refrigeration systemExcellent COP and cooling capacity.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Bhattad, A.; Atgur, V.; Rao, B.N.; Banapurmath, N.R.; Yunus Khan, T.M.; Vadlamudi, C.; Krishnappa, S.; Sajjan, A.M.; Shankara, R.P.; Ayachit, N.H. Review on Mono and Hybrid Nanofluids: Preparation, Properties, Investigation, and Applications in IC Engines and Heat Transfer. Energies 2023, 16, 3189.

AMA Style

Bhattad A, Atgur V, Rao BN, Banapurmath NR, Yunus Khan TM, Vadlamudi C, Krishnappa S, Sajjan AM, Shankara RP, Ayachit NH. Review on Mono and Hybrid Nanofluids: Preparation, Properties, Investigation, and Applications in IC Engines and Heat Transfer. Energies. 2023; 16(7):3189.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Bhattad, Atul, Vinay Atgur, Boggarapu Nageswar Rao, N. R. Banapurmath, T. M. Yunus Khan, Chandramouli Vadlamudi, Sanjay Krishnappa, A. M. Sajjan, R. Prasanna Shankara, and N. H. Ayachit. 2023. "Review on Mono and Hybrid Nanofluids: Preparation, Properties, Investigation, and Applications in IC Engines and Heat Transfer" Energies 16, no. 7: 3189.

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop