Energy Conversion and Management 148 (2017) 963–973

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy Conversion and Management

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

Comparative study to use nano-(Al2O3, CuO, and SiC) with water

to enhance photovoltaic thermal PV/T collectors
Ali H.A. Al-Waeli a,⇑, Miqdam T. Chaichan b, Hussein A. Kazem c,⇑, K. Sopian a
a
Solar Energy Research Institute, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, 43600 Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia
b
Energy and Renewable Energies Technology Research Center, University of Technology, Baghdad, Iraq
c
Faculty of Engineering, Sohar University, PO Box 44, Sohar PCI 311, Oman

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

Article history: The reduction in efficiency of photovoltaic (PV) units due to increases in cell temperature occurs when a
Received 4 May 2017 small part of the absorbed solar radiation is converted into electricity and the remaining part is lost as
Received in revised form 23 June 2017 heat. Recently, the addition of a range of nanomaterials with high thermal conductivity to the cooling
Accepted 24 June 2017
fluid in PV/T systems has been the subject of much research. In this study, three nanomaterials were
added to water as a base fluid with several volume fractions to determine the best concentration and
nanoparticle for this application. The PV/T system was setup in an indoor laboratory. Knowing which
Keywords:
material has a better effect on the PV unit in particular, and the PV/T unit in general, is important for
PVT collector
Nanofluids
deciding which nanomaterial is more suitable for the system. The results reveal that nanofluid gives
Nanoparticles higher thermal conductivity with very little increase in the fluid density and viscosity compared with
Indoor the base fluid. The studied volume fractions were 0.5, 1, 2, 3, and 4% and the selected nanoparticles were
Density Al2O3, CuO, and SiC. It was found that silicon carbide nanoparticles have the best stability and the highest
Viscosity thermal conductivity compared to the other two nano-substances. Copper oxide nanofluid has higher
Stability thermal conductivity than aluminium oxide but lower stability, although it was found here that this
material reliably stable compared to in other studies. The nanofluid reduced the indoor PV/T system tem-
perature and enhanced its generated power.
Ó 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction conductivity. However, researchers have encountered the problem

of the deposition of particles at the base of the liquid’s container,
The use of nanofluids in solar heat exchangers is a recently which reduces the utility of thermal conductivity. In a later study,
developed way to improve heat transfer properties. Moreover, add- Choi [5] managed to prepare liquids containing nanometre-sized
ing nanomaterial to conventional heat transfer fluids improves materials. He observed a significant improvement in the thermal
their thermal properties [1]. The use of nanofluids in solar heat conductivity of the resulting fluid. Moreover, the dispersion of
exchangers has attracted considerable attention by researchers nanometre-sized particles in conventional liquids was sufficient
recently due to the significant improvement in heat transfer com- and resulted in stability and a suspension without precipitation.
pared to conventional fluids [2]. The benefits of using nanomaterials in fluids come from the fact
Maxwell [3] first noted that the addition of solid particles to that they provide a higher surface area than that of conventional
conventional heat transfer fluids enhances their thermal conduc- fluids. Many researchers have studied the benefits of adding these
tivity. However, dispersion is problematic for solid particles in liq- nanomaterials to fluids and applications that can take advantage of
uids as they accumulate, leading to their sedimentation. This the enhancement in heat transfer, especially solar collectors.
causes a consequent blockage of flow paths, corrosion of flow pipes Table 1 lists some of these studies.
walls, and an increased pressure drop. In 1993, study by Masuda Table 1 shows some of the experimental and numerical works
et al. [4] indicated that a combination of micrometre size solid par- conducted on the thermal behaviour of different types of nanopar-
ticles and conventional heat transfer fluids could enhance thermal ticles operating in applications with heat exchangers of different
geometries. For the interested reader, many review papers have
highlighted this work in detail [16–20].
⇑ Corresponding authors.
Photovoltaic cells (PV) are made of semiconductor materials
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (A.H.A. Al-Waeli), h.kazem@soharuni.
which produce electricity by converting sunlight radiation which
edu.om (H.A. Kazem).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2017.06.072
0196-8904/Ó 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
964 A.H.A. Al-Waeli et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 148 (2017) 963–973

Table 1
Studies on the use of nanomaterials to enhance the thermal conductivity of the base fluid (water).

Ref. The used The Thermal conductivity Notes

nanomaterial base enhancement rate (%)
fluid
Li and Xuan [6] Cu Water 60 The study focused on convective heat transfer enhancement when Cu-water nanofluid is
used
Wen and Ding [7] Al2O3 Water 30 Experimental work conducted using Al2O3-water nanofluid in copper tubes. Considerable
enhancement was observed with nanofluid use especially at the tube entrance
He et al. [8] TiO2 Water 26 Several nanoparticles of TiO2 in size and concentrations were used in water. It has been
found that the resulting solution is stable and has higher thermal conductivity
Hwang et al. [9] Al2O3 Water 8 Al2O3 nanoparticles were added to water to transfer heat in a flow of a circular tube system
that is a uniformly heated. The convection heat transfer coefficient and pressure reduction
were measured during the system run in the case of laminar flow. The convection heat
transfer coefficient was increased to 8% with 0.3% nano-concentration
Chandrasekar and Al2O3 Water 60 An experimental study was conducted to observe the heat transfer properties of Al2O3-
Suresh [10] water nanofluid. The results indicated an enhancement in Nusselt No. which was due to
the physical thermal properties of nanostructures
Yousefi et al. [11] Al2O3 Water 28.3 Experimental work used flat plate solar collector
Rayatzadeh et al. TiO2 Water 65 The experimental investigation was conducted to evaluate the effect of using continuous
[12] induced ultrasound in the formation of nanofluid under continuous heat flow. The study
showed that the addition of TiO2 nanoparticles to water enhances the Nusselt No., and
increasing the nanoparticle concentration has led to further improvements in this number
Nimmagadda and TiO2 Water 43 This study investigated the properties of heat transfer flow when a micro-channel system
Venkatasubbaiah Ag working with nano (Al2O3), Ag, and hybrid (Al2O3 + Ag). The study showed a significant
[13] enhancement of heat transfer properties when using these nanomaterials
Bajestan et al. [14] TiO2 Water 21 Practical experiments and numerical modeling study was conducted to evaluate the
improvement in the heat transfer coefficient of laminar flow when adding titanium dioxide
nanotubes to the water flowing through a tube that is heated uniformly
Adriana [15] Al2O3, TiO2 Water 12 The thermodynamic properties of nanomaterials were studied to determine the behaviour
and SiO2 of heat transfer and the numerical evaluation of three nano-oxides that were suggested.
The study observed that the properties of studied nanoparticles, whether physical or
thermal, varied with the concentration of nanoparticles in the fluid

stimulates electrons. As only a fraction of the solar spectrum is uti- and 0.1592 kg of silicon carbide. These quantities have reasonable
lized in this process to excite electrons to create electron-hole prices in the local markets all over the word (1 US dollar/g) which
pairs, the photovoltaic cells have limited electrical efficiency. Pho- confirm the good selection if these materials. Nanoparticles will be
tovoltaic cells mainly absorb the solar spectrum between 700 nm used to form nanofluids with water and the resulting fluid cooling
and 1100 nm. Shorter or longer wavelengths are not collected efficiency will be evaluated in an indoor PV/T system using a solar
[21,22] but converted to heat that can reduce cell efficiency or, simulator to control the solar intensity variation. The aim of the
to some extent, cause damage [23]. current study is to determine which ratios are more suitable for
In contrast, solar thermal energy collectors (consisting of a heat mixing nanomaterials with water with regard to thermophysical
transfer fluid inside a tube or container with a solid surface that properties, the maximum output of electrical and thermal energies
absorbs heat) can utilize the entire solar spectrum [24]. In recent and efficiency.
years, nanofluids have been explored as more efficient cooling liq-
uids than air and water. This property was applied to cool PV cells
and was referred to as a hybrid thermal photoelectric cell [25]. 2. Experimental setup
Many studies have shown that hybrid PV/T is more efficient than
individual photovoltaic or thermal systems because it benefits 2.1. The indoor PV/T simulator
from most of the incident solar energy [26,27]. The low tempera-
ture of the photovoltaic cell increases its output capacity and the A thermal solar energy basic unit ‘‘MINI-EESTC”, made in Italy,
heat absorbed by the solar collector can be used in other applica- was used as an indoor solar simulator. The rig consists of a solar
tions. Table 2 summarizes some of the recent works in this field. collector made of tempered glass whose surface was replaced by
As Table 2 indicates, there are major achievements in the field a copper plate to operate as a heat transfer agent. A PV panel is
of employing nanoparticles to cool down PV/T systems, but as placed above the upper plate, whose specifications are listed in
many researchers have pointed out, there are still many aspects Table 3. The back of the panel and the top plate surfaces were
under discussion such as thermal absorber design, materials used, painted with silicone oil to avoid any air gaps that may reduce
coating, cost minimization, conservation of energy, performance the heat transfer from the panel to the collector. Inside the collec-
testing and control. Research is under way to overcome the diffi- tor, there is a copper pipe mesh welded to a copper plate to
culties associated with the use of nanofluids in PV/T systems. increase the heat transfer rate. Above of the photovoltaic cell there
In this investigation, three types of nanoparticles will be stud- are fifteen bright lights installed to provide variable intensity of 0–
ied. These nanoparticles were chosen from a group of species that 1500 W/m2 controlled by the control panel as a solar simulator.
had two important properties, namely high thermal conductivity This simulator has a fluid circulating pump that gives options to
and moderate prices. Also, these materials have been used in pre- operate the system in forced or natural convection. However, in
vious research works dealing with PV/T systems, which give an this study, the natural convection heat transfer mode was used.
important comparison of all properties studied with previous liter- When the PV panel is heated, it transfers its accumulated heat to
ature. For example, Al2O3 was investigated in Refs. [7,9,10]; Refs. the collector causing the temperature of the working fluid inside
[43–45] studied the use of CuO, and SiC was investigated in Refs. to increase. Water movement can be achieved by natural convec-
[47,48,50]. Since the size of the system used is 12 l, the amount tion due to the difference in temperature between the cold fluid
of nanoparticles used was 0.2717 kg of CuO, 0.14 kg for alumina, in the tank and hot fluid in the collector or by using a pump (forced
 A.H.A. Al-Waeli et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 148 (2017) 963–973 965

Table 2
Recent studies of nanofluids cooling PVT systems.

Ref. Nanomaterial Base Nanoparticles Electric Thermal Notes

type fluid concentration power energy
wt.% enhancement gained
Ghadiri et al. [28] Fe2O4 Water 1–3% 17% 33% The study investigated the effects of a Fe2O4-water nanofluid on the
electrical and thermal efficiencies of a PVT system. The study was
conducted indoor using solar simulator
Sardarabadi and Al2O3 Water 2.37–7.48% 23.2% 85% The experimental and numerical study was conducted to evaluate the
Fard [29] TiO2 0.38–3.8% 23.5% 105% various metal oxides nanofluids coolant effect. ZnO/water nano-fluid
ZnO 1.93–4.11% 23.5% 110% had the highest thermal efficiency in comparison with the other two
nanofluids
Radwan et al. [30] Al2O3 Water 4% 19% 62% A microchannel heat sink was used in new designed technique where a
SiC 4% nanofluid is applied to cool down a PV/T system
An et al. [31] Cu9S5 Water 0.23–0.92% 21% 40% A fluid based spectral splitting filter was provided to a concentrating
PV/T collector with in this work. The maximum overall efficiency in
this case was increased to 34.2% compared with the case without filter
which was 17.9%
Manikandan and Sand Propylene 0.5–2% – 16.5% The study was conducted to investigate the thermos-physical
Rajan [32] glycol- properties of prepared surfactant-free, sand-propylene glycol-water
water nanofluids for solar energy collection. The thermal conductivity was
enhanced by 16.3% and the viscosity was reduced by 47% when 2 vol.%
of sand-PG water nanofluid at 28 °C was used
Khanjari et al. [33] Ag Water 3.4% 3.9% 12.4% A CFD study conducted to evaluate the cooling effect of two studied
Al2O3 3% 1.83% 4.45% nanofluids on a PVT system.
Sardarabadi et al. ZnO Water 0.2% 9.5% 42% The authors studied two cases: using nanofluid and PCM to cool PVT
[34] system and compared the results with water only
Hjerrild et al. [35] Ag– Water 0.026% 19% 60% The authors used Ag-SiO2 and CNT in water. These materials were
SiO2 + CNT used due to its sun light absorbing properties
Jing et al. [36] SiO2 Water 0.02% – 9.7% A CFD study focused on changing the nanomaterial sizes. The thermal
conductivity showed 20% enhancement. The system maximum
exergetic efficiency was defined at a specific nanofluid flow velocity
and nano-SiO2 concentration

Table 3 The nanoparticles were heated using an oven to eliminate any

The used PV panel specifications. accompanying moisture. The heating was done for a quarter of
Solar module type APM-P 110-12 an hour with an oven temperature of 200 °C. Nanofluids were
Peak power 110 W
formed using different weight ratios of the studied nanoparticles
Max. power voltage 17.2 V and deionized water.
Max. power current 6.40 A The repeated experiments proved that it is hard to prepare
Open-circuit voltage 21.6 V nanofluid at the desired concentration with water without adding
Short-circuit current 7.0 A
any surfactant. For this reason, a minuscule amount (about 0.1 ml)
Weight 11.4 kg
Dimensions 1450  720  35 of cetyl-trichromyl ammonium bromide (CTAB) was added. The
Operating temperature 40 °C to 90 °C nanoparticle material was weighed using an analytical balance
Wind resistance 2400 Pa (EJ6I0-E).
The mixing of nanomaterials with water is a crucial process: it
determines the success or failure of the mixture. Water was poured
convection). Fig. 1 shows a photo and schematic diagram of the
inside an ultrasonic shaker (TELSONIC ULTRASONICS CT-I2) with a
system.
basin size of 12 l. The nanoparticles were added slowly to the bath
As Fig. 1 shows, five temperature sensors are used in this exper-
at intervals. The bath vibrated continuously for 12 h to ensure that
iment including a room temperature sensor; it is well known that
the nanoparticle agglomerations break down and form a
not all of the electric power is transformed into luminous power
homogeneous and stable suspension. Variable volumetric concen-
(there is an efficiency factor), as well as, not all of the radiant
trations of nanoparticles were prepared (0.5, 1.0, 2, 3 and 4) for
power is applied to the panel. For this reason, three curtains sur-
each material. The required quantity of nanoparticles needed for
round the collector from three sides while the fourth side is
a particular volume concentration was calculated using the follow-
blocked by the fluid tank base. In addition to a fluid pump, four
ing equation:
thermocouples are attached to measure variable system tempera-
tures. Table 3 shows the specifications of the PV panel to provide
an accurate understanding of its behaviour.
ðmp =qp Þ
/% ¼ ð1Þ
ðmp =qp Þ þ ðmf =qf Þ
2.2. Nanofluid preparation
Since suspended fluid stability is crucial to maintaining its ther-
To date, no perfect method has been determined for the prepa- mophysical properties, the deposition of a part of the nanoparticle
ration and processing of stable nanofluids. Therefore, after each significantly affects these properties. Therefore, after each mixing
mixing process, the thermophysical properties of the resulting sus- process, a sample of the mixture was taken and kept in a glass bot-
pension must be examined. Nanoparticles of alumina (Al2O3), sili- tle. The stability of the suspension and settling rate are checked
con carbide (SiC), and copper oxide (CuO) were used as provided by every three months. Fine details on the topographic surface of
the manufacturer. Table 4 lists the studied nanomaterials specifica- the studied nanoparticles were studied using Scanning Electron
tions, which helps in identifying its behaviour and tracking Microscopy (SEM). Fig. 2 shows the SEM images taken for each of
changes after the mixing process is complete. the studied nanoparticles.
966 A.H.A. Al-Waeli et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 148 (2017) 963–973

Fig. 1. A schematic diagram of the indoor solar simulator.

Table 4
Nanoparticle and base fluid properties.

Particle qp (kg/m3) kp (W/m.°C) Purity dp (nm) Color Source providing

Al2O3 3890 30 99.99% 30–60 White Yurui (Shanghai) Chemical Co., Ltd
CuO 6310 32.9 99% 35–45 Black US Research Nanomaterials, Inc.
SiC 3220 37–49 99 + % 45–65 Grayish white US Research Nanomaterials, Inc.
Base fluid qf (kg/m3) kf (W/m.C) cpf (J/kg.C) lf (nm)
De-ionized water (DIW) 997.1 0.6017 4183 0.000957 Steam Lap.

Fig. 2. SEM image of SiC nanoparticles.

2.3. Thermophysical property measurements 2. Viscosity measurements: A Brookfield programmable viscome-

ter (model: LVDV-III ultra-programmable) was used to measure
Thermophysical and rheological properties of the prepared the viscosities of the nanofluid suspensions. This device is inter-
nanofluid were predicted experimentally as follows: faced with a personal computer for data collection and storage.
3. Thermal conductivity measurements: The thermal conductivity
1. Density measurements: The density of the prepared suspen- of the studied nanofluids was explored using a HOT DESK Tps
sions was measured by weighing a sample (250 ml) for each 500 thermal conductivity meter (KIJTALEY, Sweden). This ther-
concentration of nanomaterial and then dividing the weight mal constant analyser uses a standard isotropic method for
by the volume. Multiple Refs. [33,36,37] have suggested that ranges from 0.03 to 100 W/m K. The measuring time ranges
the base liquid is the most important factor affecting the den- from 2.5 to 2560 s. The instrument accuracy is higher than
sity of nanofluids, while other variables such as the size and 97.5%.
shape of the nanoparticles have limited effect.
 A.H.A. Al-Waeli et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 148 (2017) 963–973 967

4. Specific heat measurements: The specific heat of the studied Table 5

nanofluids was measured using a heat colorimeter apparatus The PVT system measurements’ uncertainties.

(ESD-201). Equipment Parameter Experimental

uncertainty
All density, viscosity, thermal conductivity, and specific heat Density tester Nanofluid density ±0.78%
experiments were repeated three times to confirm repeatability, Viscometer Viscosity ±1.01%
and the mean value was taken to reduce the uncertainty resulting KD2 Pro Thermal conductivity ±0.68%
analyzer
from the random error in the measurement. The following equa- Multi-meter Voltage ±0.35%
tions were used in the system performance: Multi-meter Current ±0.023%
The system’s thermal efficiency is: Luminous Irradiance ±0.89%
intensity
Qu
gth ¼ ð2Þ meter
I s  Ac Thermocouples Temperature (PV module, PVT collector, ±1.12 °C
inlet, outlet, and ambient)
where Is is the solar intensity and Ac is the collector area.
Flow meter Coolants’ flow rate (kg/s) ±0.34
The electrical power is:
P ¼IV ð3Þ
2.5. Experimental procedures
where I - is the current and V - is the voltage.
The useful collected heat (W)
The first set of experiments undertaken was the mixing of
_ p ðT o  T i Þ
Q u ¼ mC ð4Þ nanoparticles with deionized water using the previously men-
tioned mixing method to prepare the required volume ratios. In
where m _ is the mass flow rate, Cp is the specific heat (J/kg K) and To
the second stage, the density, viscosity, thermal conductivity and
and Ti are outlet and inlet fluid temperatures, respectively (ST-2 and
stability of the resulting nano-suspensions were examined. The
ST-1 in Fig. 1).
validation of the results was achieved by comparing the study
The electrical efficiency ge is:
results with those of other studies. The primary objective was to
P
ge ¼ ð5Þ determine the best mixing ratio between water and nanomaterials
Is  Apanel to use in the PV/T system to give the best performance.
After determining the optimum mixing ratio, experiments were
where Apanel is the PV panel area.
conducted in the solar simulator system. The first experiment
The total efficiency (gt ) = the thermal efficiency + the electrical
involved using water as a cooling fluid and to then compare with
efficiency
nanofluid. After the water tests, the nanofluids were applied to
Qu þ P
gt ¼ gth þ ge ¼ ð6Þ the system and the effect of each one studied on the system’s per-
I s  At formance in detail. The outdoor solar intensity varies with time
where At is the total area of the PV panel and collector. and many other weather parameters. The simulation of the out-
door solar intensity in an indoor device needs suitable simulation
2.4. Experimental errors and uncertainties of the intensity and time parameters. For this purpose, the inten-
sity of the luminous lights was varied by 150 W/m2 each hour
The experimental error was analysed by calibrating all measur- between 7 AM and 12 PM. At the starting point, at 7 AM, the inten-
ing devices used in this study. The experimental error is the differ- sity used was 250 W/m2. The luminous intensity was fixed for two
ence between the measured and real quantity, and the hours (12 AM and 1 PM) at 1000 W/m2 and then it was reduced
determination of the value of this error determines a certain uncer- 200 W/m2 each hour till 6 PM where it reached 0 W/m2. For the
tainty in the measurement for each experiment. The definition of comparison to be fair, two systems were used in this study: a water
uncertainty described by Ref. [38] was used: cooled PV/T system and a nanofluid cooling PV/T system. The study
"
aimed to determine the best mixing ratio between the nanoparti-
2
2
2 #0:5
@R @R @R cles and water to give the best results in the PV/T system. More-
eR ¼ e1 þ e2 þ  þ en ð7Þ
@V 1 @V 2 @V n over, the study tried to identify the best nanomaterial between
the three nanofluids employed to enhance such systems.
where
eR : uncertainty in the results.
R: a given function of the independent variables V1, V2, . . . , Vn or 3. Results and discussions
R = R(V1, V2, . . . , Vn).
ei: uncertainty interval in the nth variable. 3.1. Nanofluid density
@R
@V1
- The measured result sensitivity for a single variable.
Density is an important thermophysical property that must be
Table 5 lists the calibration analysis of the experimental mea- studied, especially when adding a high-density material (nanoma-
suring property for the measuring devices used. The test uncertain- terial) to water. A significant variation in intensity has a severe
ties can be identified depending on these values as: impact on the pumping force and reduces the amount of flowing
fluid in the case of a high increase in density. Fig. 3 shows the den-
er ¼ ½ð0:78Þ2 þ ð1:01Þ2 þ ð0:68Þ2 þ ð0:35Þ2 þ ð0:023Þ2 þ ð0:89Þ2 sity variation when nano-Al2O3, CuO, and SiC were added to water
in variable volumetric fractions (VF). The nanofluid density
þð1:12Þ2 þ ð0:34Þ2 0:5 ¼ 2:0951
increased with an increase in the nanoparticle volumetric fraction
The resulting uncertainty value was less than 5%, which indi- and is almost negligible in the case of small proportions such as 0.5
cates that an acceptable and reliable engineering border was or 1%. The results show that the largest increase occurred when
achieved in the conducted tests. Table 5 is very important for adding 4% VF. The increases in the used nanofluids density were
assessing the accuracy of the produced results to be able to judge 0.0012, 0.0057, and 0.002% for the Al2O3, CuO, and SiC nanofluids,
the effect these nanofluids hold on PV/T collectors. respectively. When compared the addition of 3% nanoparticles to
968 A.H.A. Al-Waeli et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 148 (2017) 963–973

water with water density, nano-Al2O3-water is found to be the affect the flow. Viscosity is a function of temperature as it reduced
closest to water density while nano-CuO-water is the farthest. with increasing the fluid’s temperature as the figure reveals.
SiC nanofluid density is relatively higher than the water density Increasing the VF from 0 to 4% increased the viscosity by 0.0076,
by a moderate rate and does not affect the pumping performance 0.0039, and 0.0088% for the Al2O3, CuO, and SiC nanofluids, respec-
if a pump is used in the system. These results clearly show the tively. The figure shows that the addition of 3% nano-SiC results in
effect of added nanoparticles’ size, its added rate to water, and higher viscosity compared to other substances. In general, the lim-
the density of these substances on the resulting nanofluid density. ited increase in viscosity of the studied nanofluids will be negligi-
ble when using a pump in the system.
3.2. Nanofluid viscosity
3.3. Thermal conductivity of nanofluids
Viscosity is also an important property when employing
nanoparticles in thermal applications, where the flow rate is a Fig. 5 shows the thermal conductivity of the tested nanofluids
function of viscosity. Viscosity and its changes reflect the resis- as a function of VF and temperature. Thermal conductivity appears
tance of inertia when fluid flows into the system, so adequate to increase non-linearly with an increase in nanoparticle VF as the
information on nanofluid viscosity is necessary to design the figure indicates. The thermal conductivity of the nanofluids also
proper pumping capacity for convection and heat transfer coeffi- increases for all concentrations with increasing temperature. The
cient of any system [51]. Viscosity is no less important than ther- figure clearly shows that thermal conductivity increases with tem-
mal conductivity in engineering systems. Nanoparticles cause an perature. The main reason for this noticeable increase in tempera-
increase in thermal conductivity, and it is believed that this ture can be attributed to the added nanoparticles. The intensity of
increase cannot be achieved without a decrease in pressure, which the Brownian motion of nanoparticles increases as the temperature
in turns relates to viscosity. The viscosity resulting from adding increase, allowing for greater heat flow between the particles that
nanoparticles to a fluid depends on many factors such as the liquid lead to thermal conductivity enhancement. Any addition, even as
base, shape and size of the nanoparticles, surface tension and small as 0.5%, will improve the thermal conductivity of the result-
chemistry of particles, temperature, method of dispersion of ing nanofluid. Increasing VF from 0 to 4% increases the thermal
nanoparticles in suspension, and the resulting nanofluid pH conductivity by 1.96, 3.42, and 4.8% for the Al2O3, CuO, and SiC
[52,53]. As the results in Fig. 4 show, the addition of nanoparticles nanofluids, respectively. When comparing the nanoparticles added
to water increased its viscosity compared with water alone. The with VF = 3%, the thermal conductivity of SiC nanofluid is observed
nanoparticles concentration increase in the nanofluids enhances to be higher than the other two fluids. This can be attributed to the
the viscosity of the resulting liquid. Refs. [54–57] indicate that high thermal conductivity of nano-SiC compared to the other two
nanoparticles could aggregate, extend, and form a connected struc- substances. These results show a clear dependence on the thermal
ture within nanofluids. Nanofluid viscosity is positively affected by conductivity of nanomaterials as the measured differences
aggregation, as the group size increases in comparison with the correspond to the difference between the conductivity of the
nanoparticles by a factor of four or five. Moreover, aggregation nanoparticles used. Also, Between 50 and 60 °C, the rate of increase
can be responsible for increasing viscosity over time which can in thermal conductivity for the CuO nanofluid decreases to become

0% CuO
1.005 0% Al2O3 1.01
0.5%CuO
0.5% Al2O3
1.005 1.0% CuO
1 1.0% Al2O3
2.0% CuO
2.0% Al2O3
1 3.0% CuO
0.995 3.0% Al2O3
Density (gm/cm3)

4.0% CuO
Density (g,/m3)

4.0% Al2O3
0.995
0.99
0.99
0.985
0.985
0.98
0.98
0.975 0.975

0.97 0.97
20 30 40 50 60 70 20 40 60
Temperature (°C) Temperatures (°C)

1.005 0% SiC
1.005
3.0% Al2O3
0.5% SiC
1 1 3.0% CuO
1.0% SiC 3.0% SiC
Density (gm/m3)

0.995 2% SiC 0.995

Density (gm/cm3)

Water
3.0% SiC
0.99 0.99
4.0% SiC

0.985 0.985

0.98 0.98

0.975 0.975

0.97 0.97
20 30 40 50 60 70 20 30 40 50 60 70
Temperature (°C) Temperature (°C)

Fig. 3. Density variation with temperature for the studied nanofluids.

 A.H.A. Al-Waeli et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 148 (2017) 963–973 969

1.02 1.02
0% Al2O3 0% CuO
0.5% Al2O3 0.5%CuO
1 1
1.0% Al2O3 1.0% CuO
2.0% Al2O3 2.0% CuO
0.98 3.0% Al2O3 0.98

Viscosity (mPa.s)
3.0% CuO

Viscosity (mPa.s)
4.0% Al2O3
4.0% CuO
0.96 0.96

0.94 0.94

0.92 0.92

0.9 0.9

0.88
0.88 20 40 60
20 40 60
Temperature (°C) Temperature (°C)

1.02
0% SiC
1.02 3.0% Al2O3
0.5 % SiC
1 3.0% CuO
1.0% SiC 1 3.0% SiC
0.98 2.0% SiC Water
0.98

Viscosity mPa.s
Viscosity ( (mPa.s)

3.0% SiC
0.96 4.0% SiC
0.96

0.94 0.94

0.92 0.92

0.9 0.9

0.88 0.88
20 40 60 20 30 40 50 60 70

Temperature (°C) Temperature (°C)

Fig. 4. Viscosity variation with temperature for the studied nanofluids.

closer to that of Al2O3 nanofluid while SiC nanofluid rate continued important to ensure that no nanoparticle is deposited and the mix-
rising. The Brownian motion properties and aggregation rate of the ture remains homogeneous and stable. The deposition of the stud-
nanoparticles determine the improvement in thermal conductivity. ied materials has been verified visually by conserving
Table 6 shows a comparison between the results obtained from nanoparticles in open containers. The volume fractions of all the
the present study and those of other studies involving the same studied nanofluids were stored in containers and the suspended
nanomaterials. Comparisons with other studies may not be fluid sedimentation was monitored. Fig. 6 shows the containers
insightful as though these studies employed nanoparticles of the stored for the deposition examination. Attention should be paid
same type; they had different sizes, as well as different mixing to the difference in the colour of the solution as its darkness
methods, aggregation rates and sedimentations (suspension stabil- increases as the nanoparticle VF increases.
ity). The results show an acceptable convergence, in general, for After a certain period, a few small clusters of nanoparticles
Al2O3 and CuO nanofluids. However, for SiC nanofluid, Refs. appeared. Table 7 shows how much time elapsed before the
[47,48] results were little diverge compared to present study. For nanoparticles were deposited at the bottom of the container. From
Ref. [47], the use of large nanoparticles (170 nm) reduces their sur- the results in the table, it is evident that increasing the nanoparti-
face area inside the fluid, resulting in degradation in the thermal cle VF in the suspended solution increases the amount of deposi-
conductivity of the nanofluid. In Ref. [48], the authors claimed that tion. SiC nanofluids remained suspended for longer periods
adding ethylene glycol (EG) to water reduces the thermal conduc- compared to the other particles. This was also found in other stud-
tivity of the resulting base fluid. In Ref. [50], a high volume fraction ies [49,50,60]. The results also indicate that Al2O3 nanoparticles are
(9%) was used which doubled the produced thermal conductivity more stable than CuO nanoparticles. The sedimentation experi-
compared to the present study. The current study has focused on ment indicated that though small agglomerates might not be
the stability of the used nanofluids as long as possible, which pre- observable visually, however, the distribution in the primary fluid
vented the increase of the added value of nanoparticles. The is still appropriate. CuO nanoparticles tend to aggregate more than
increase of the nanoparticles percentage means increasing its the other materials studied and therefore deposition occurs at a
instability and its desire to accumulate and deposition. faster rate.

3.4. Nanofluid stability 3.5. Nanofluids impact on PV/T system

The ability to use a nanomaterial in a fluid depends mainly on The main purpose of using PV/T systems is to reduce the PV
the possibility of nanoparticles to be suspended in the mixture panels’ temperatures resulting from high solar radiation intensity.
for extended periods of time and not be deposited in the tubes or The higher the heat drawn from the panels, the more likely they
on the surfaces. In the current study, three different types of are to maintain the panels at suitable temperatures close to 25 °C
nanoparticles were mixed using a normal mixing method. It is and the better their output.
970 A.H.A. Al-Waeli et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 148 (2017) 963–973

Fig. 5. Thermal conductivity variation with temperature for the studied nanofluids.

Table 6
Comparisons between the present study results and literatures.

Ref. Diameter size (nm) Volume concentration (vol.%) Thermal conductivity enhancement (%) Base fluid
Al2O3
Present study 30–60 4 1.69 Water
Huang et al. [39] 40 2.84 8.1 Water
Sundar et al. [40] 36.5 8 1.15 Ethylene glycol and water (50:50)
Vijjha and Das [41] 53 4 1.45 Ethylene glycol and water (60:40)
Minsta et al. [42] 47 0.17 1.3 Water
CuO
Present study 35–45 4 3.42 Water
Milanese et al. [43] 30 3 1.1 Water
Vinodhan et al. [44] 22–28 1.7 2.1 Water
Agarwal et al. [45] 55–66 2 2.6 Water
Xuan et al. [46] 10 3 2 Water
SiC
Present study 45–65 4 4.8 Water
Yu et al. [47] 170 3.7 1.6 Water
Li et al. [48] 30 15 1.6 Ethylene glycol (EG)
Li and Zuo [49] 30 1 3.3 Water/EG
Al-Waeli et al. [50] 45–65 9 8.4 Water

Fig. 7 illustrates the effect of luminous intensity of the tested for water, and the highest one is that for SiC-water. The higher
fluids temperatures and the resulting power of the PV/T system. the heat drew from the cell, the higher the thermal power of the
The temperature of the water increases significantly with an system. Nano-SiC-water nanofluid has practically proved to have
increase in radiation intensity, as the solar cell absorbs specific the highest ability to reduce solar cell heat and gain maximum
wavelengths, while the rest becomes heat in the cell body and is thermal power. Also, the heat dissipation from the cell helped to
transferred to the water. The use of nanofluid reduced the resulting improve the resulted voltage and current, causing a higher electri-
heat as it is rapidly transferred to the reservoir before eventually cal power as the figure shows. As Refs. [58,59] revealed that an
passing to the air depending on its high thermal conductivity. increase in the PV panel’s temperature can cause a significant
For this reason, the SiC nanofluid has the lowest measured temper- reduction in voltage while its effect on the current is limited. The
ature. The thermal powers of the nanofluids are higher than that temperatures of the nanofluids were lower than that of water
 A.H.A. Al-Waeli et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 148 (2017) 963–973 971

Fig. 6. The studied nanofluid stability test after 90 days.

Table 7
The number of days for the tested nanofluid without signs of sedimentation. However, the optimal fluid must be selected for this purpose.
The results of the study indicate that SiC nanofluid showed the best
VF Number of days for first sedimentation
results compared to all the other materials used.
Al2O3 nanofluid CuO nanofluid SiC nanofluid Fig. 8 shows the effect of the tested nanofluids on the electrical
0.5 236 201 234 and thermal powers of the PV/T system. In this figure, increasing
1 208 189 212 the luminous intensity reduced the electrical efficiency for all the
2 195 172 200
used cooling fluids while the thermal powers are increased. The
3 177 162 192
4 162 144 186 reduction in the electrical efficiency means that the use of natural
convection in cooling the PV/T system was not efficient and forced
convection should be used instead. Natural convection gives the
resulting in higher current and voltage which means better system system enough time to heat exchange and thus increase the ther-
performance. The increase in radiation intensity improves the cell’s mal efficiency of the system. The reduction in electrical efficiency
power when its temperature is lowered. Hence, as the figure indi- is due to the increase in temperature with the increase of luminous
cates, the resulting electrical power of the PV/T system is higher intensity. However, the efficiency is higher in case of cooling by
when SiC nanofluid is employed compared to all of the other fluids nanofluid compared with water. Certainly, the overall efficiency
studied. of the system has increased significantly when compared to a pho-
The present results show that the use of nanofluids improved tovoltaic cell operating without a PV/T system, and an additional
the thermal conductivity of the base fluid, and hence the cooling increase is expected, if the operation was modified to use a nano-
of the photovoltaic cell which leads to higher power production. fluid recirculating pump.

90 Water
600
80 Al2O3
Fluid temperature (°C)

500
70
Thermal power (W)

CuO
SiC
60 400
50
300
40
30 200 SiC
Al2O3
20
100 CuO
10 Water

0 0
0 500 1000
0 200 400 600 800 1000
Luminous intensity (W/m2) Luminous intensity (W/m2)

8 100
7 90
80
Electrical power (W)

6
70
Current (amp.)

5 60
4 50
Water
Al2O3 40
3 Water Al2O3
CuO 30
2 SiC 20
CuO SiC
1 10
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000
0 5 10 15 20
Voltage (V) Luminous intensity (W/m2)

Fig. 7. The effect of luminous intensity of the nanofluids temperatures and the system electrical power.
972 A.H.A. Al-Waeli et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 148 (2017) 963–973

Fig. 8. The effect of tested nanofluids on the electrical and thermal efficiencies of the PV/T system.

4. Conclusions [9] Hwang KS, Jang SP, Choi SU. Flow and convective heat transfer characteristics
of water-based Al2O3 nanofluids in fully developed laminar flow regime. Int J
Heat Mass Transfer 2009;52(1):193–9.
Indoor experiments were conducted to test PV/T systems [10] Chandrasekar M, Suresh S. Experiments to explore the mechanisms of heat
employing nanofluids consisting of different types of nanoparticles transfer in nano-crystalline alumina/water nanofluid under laminar and
turbulent flow conditions. Exp Heat Transfer 2011;24(3):234–56.
and water as a base fluid. Thermophysical properties such as vis-
[11] Yousefi T, Veysi F, Shojaeizadeh E, Zinadini S. An experimental investigation on
cosity, density, thermal conductivity, and fluid stability were stud- the effect of Al2O3–H2O nanofluid on the efficiency of flat-plate solar
ied. A MINI-EEST indoor solar simulator unit was modified and collectors. Renew Energy 2012;39:293–8.
[12] Rayatzadeh HR, Saffar-Avval M, Mansourkiaei M, Abbassi A. Effects of
used as a PV/T system cooled by nanofluids.
continuous sonication on laminar convective heat transfer inside a tube
The results showed that thermal conductivity increased as using water–TiO2 nanofluid. Exp Therm Fluid Sci 2013;48:8–14.
nanoparticles were added to water. The improvement in thermal [13] Nimmagadda R, Venkatasubbaiah K. Conjugate heat transfer analysis of micro-
conductivity was 1.96, 3.42, and 4.8% for Al2O3, CuO, and SiC channel using novel hybrid nanofluids (Al2O3+Ag/water). Eur J Mech B Fluids
2015;52:19–27.
nanofluids with 4% volume fractions, respectively. SiC nanofluid [14] Bajestan EE, Moghadam MC, Niazmand H, Daungthongsuk W, Wongwises S.
showed a higher stability compared to the rest of the nanofluids Experimental and numerical investigation of nanofluids heat transfer
studied. The lower the volume fraction, the greater the stability characteristics for application in solar heat exchangers. Int J Heat Mass
Transfer 2016;92:1041–52.
of the fluid is. The temperatures of the nanofluids were lower than [15] Adriana MA. Hybrid nanofluids based on Al2O3, TiO2 and SiO2: numerical
that of water due to better heat transfer abilities. This property evaluation of different approaches. Int J Heat Mass Transfer 2017;104:852–60.
resulted in the system showing an increase in generated power. [16] Hussein AM, Sharma KV, Bakar RA, Kadirgama K. A review of forced convection
heat transfer enhancement and hydrodynamic characteristics of a nanofluid.
From the three nanomaterials tested, SiC shows higher stability Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2014;29:734–43.
and thermal conductivity, and was shown to improve the perfor- [17] Javadi F, Saidur R, Kamalisarvestani M. Investigating performance
mance of the PV/T system more than the other two nanofluids. improvement of solar collectors by using nanofluids. Renew Sustain Energy
Rev 2013;28:232–45.
[18] Syam L, Sundar Singh MK. Convective heat transfer and friction factor
Acknowledgment correlations of nanofluid in a tube and with inserts: a review. Renew Sustain
Energy Rev 2013;20:23–35.
[19] Shan F, Tang F, Cao L, Fang G. Performance evaluations and applications of
The authors would like to thank Solar Energy Research Institute, photovoltaic–thermal collectors and systems. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
UKM-Malaysia and Energy and Renewable Energies Technology 2014;33:467–83.
[20] Al-Waeli AH, Sopian K, Kazem HA, Chaichan MT. Photovoltaic solar thermal
Research Center, University of Technology-Iraq staff for their sup-
(PV/T) collectors past, present and future: a review. Int J Appl Eng Res 2016;11
port. Also, thanks to Makmal Morfologi CRIM from National (22):1075–10765.
University of Malaysia for their support as well. [21] Mojiri A, Stanley C, Taylor RA, Kalantar-zadeh K, Rosengarten G. A spectrally
splitting photovoltaic-thermal hybrid receiver utilising direct absorption and
wave interference light filtering. Sol Energy Mater Sol Cells 2015;139:71–80.
References [22] Chaichan MT, Kazem HA. Experimental analysis of solar intensity on
photovoltaic in hot and humid weather conditions. Int J Sci Eng Res 2016;7
[1] Bajestan EE, Moghadam MC, Daungthongsuk HNW, Wongwises S. (3):91–6.
Experimental and numerical investigation of nanofluids heat transfer [23] Al-Waeli HA, Sopian K, Kazem HA, Chaichan MT. Photovoltaic/thermal (PV/T)
characteristics for application in solar heat exchangers. Int J Heat Mass systems: status and future prospects. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
Transfer 2016;92:1041–52. 2017;77:109–30.
[2] Sokhansefat T, Kasaeian AB, Kowsary F. Heat transfer enhancement in [24] Taylor RA, Phelan PE, Otanicar TP, Walker CA, Nguyen M, Trimble S, et al.
parabolic trough collector tube using Al2O3/synthetic oil nanofluid. Renew Applicability of nanofluids in high flux solar collectors. Renew Sustain Energy
Sustain Energy Rev 2014;33:636–44. 2011;3:023104.
[3] Simpson TK. Maxwell’s mathematical rhetoric: rethinking the treatise on [25] Hassani S, Taylor RA, Mekhilef S, Saidur R. A cascade nanofluid-based PV/T
electricity and magnetism. Santa Fe (New Mexico): Green Lion Press; 2010. system with optimized optical and thermal properties. Energy
[4] Masuda H, Ebata A, Teramae K, Hishinuma N. Alteration of thermal 2016;112:963–75.
conductivity and viscosity of liquid by dispersing ultrafine particles [26] Otanicar TP, Taylor RA, Telang C. Photovoltaic/thermal system performance
(dispersion of gamma-Al2O3, SiO2 and TiO2 ultra-fine particles). Netsu Bussei utilizing thin film and nanoparticle dispersion based optical filters. J Renew
1993;4:227–33. Sustain Energy 2013;5(3):033124.
[5] Choi SUS. Enhancing thermal conductivity of fluids with nanoparticles, [27] Teo HG, Lee PS, Hawlader MNA. An active cooling system for photovoltaic
developments and applications of non-newtonian flows. New York: ASME; modules. Appl Energy 2012;90(1):309–15.
1995. p. 99–105 [FED-Vol. 231/MD-Vol. 66]. [28] Ghadiri M, Sardarabadi M, Fard MP, Moghadam AJ. Experimental investigation
[6] Li Q, Xuan Y. Convective heat transfer and flow characteristics of Cu–water of a PVT system performance using nano ferrofluids. Energy Conver Manage
nanofluid. Sci China Ser E: Technol Sci 2002;45(4):408–16. 2015;103:468–76.
[7] Wen D, Ding Y. Experimental investigation into convective heat transfer of [29] Sardarabadi M, Fard MP. Experimental and numerical study of metal-oxides/
nanofluids at the entrance region under laminar flow conditions. Int J Heat water nanofluids as coolant in photovoltaic thermal systems (PVT). Sol Energy
Mass Transfer 2004;47(24):5181–8. Mater Sol Cells 2016;157:533–42.
[8] He Y, Jin Y, Chen H, Ding Y, Cang D, Lu H. Heat transfer and flow behavior of [30] Radwan A, Ahmed M, Ookawara S. Performance enhancement of concentrated
aqueous suspensions of TiO2 nanoparticles (nanofluids) flowing upward photovoltaic systems using a microchannel heat sink with nanofluids. Energy
through a vertical pipe. Int J Heat Mass Transfer 2007;50(11):2272–81. Convers Manage 2016;119:289–303.
 A.H.A. Al-Waeli et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 148 (2017) 963–973 973

[31] An W, Wu J, Zhu T, Zhu Q. Experimental investigation of a concentrating PV/T [46] Xuan Y, Li Q, Hu W. Aggregation structure and thermal conductivity of
collector with Cu9S5 nanofluid spectral splitting filter. Appl Energy nanofluids. Am Inst Chem Eng J 2003;49(4):1038–43.
2016;184:197–206. [47] Yu W, France DM, Smith DS, Singh D, Timofeeva EV, Routbort JL. Heat transfer
[32] Manikandan S, Rajan KS. Sand-propylene glycol-water nanofluids for to a silicon carbide/water nanofluid. Int J Heat Mass Transfer
improved solar energy collection. Energy 2016;113:917–29. 2009;52:3606–12.
[33] Khanjari Y, Pourfayaz F, Kasaeian AB. Numerical investigation on using of [48] Li X, Zou C, Lei C, Li W. Stability and enhanced thermal conductivity of
nanofluid in a water-cooled photovoltaic thermal system. Energy Convers ethylene glycol-based SiC nanofluids. Int J Heat Mass Transfer 2015;89:613–9.
Manage 2016;122:263–78. [49] Li X, Zou C. Thermo-physical properties of water and ethylene glycol mixture
[34] Sardarabadi M, Fard MP, Maghrebi MJ, Ghazikhani M. Experimental study of based SiC nanofluids: an experimental investigation. Int J Heat Mass Transfer
using both ZnO/water nanofluid and phase change material (PCM) in 2016;101:412–7.
photovoltaic thermal systems. Sol Energy Mater Sol Cells 2017;161:62–9. [50] Al-Waeli AHA, Sopian K, Chaichan MT, Kazem HA. An experimental
[35] Hjerrild NE, Mesgari S, Crisostomo F, Scott JA, Amal R, Taylor RA. Hybrid PV/T investigation on using of nano-SiC-water as base-fluid for photovoltaic
enhancement using selectively absorbing Ag–SiO2/carbon nanofluids. Sol thermal system. Energy Convers Manage 2017;142:547–58.
Energy Mater Sol Cells 2016;147:281–7. [51] Zawrah MF, Khattab RM, Girgis LG, El Daidamony H, Abdel Aziz RE. Stability
[36] Sundar LS, Ramana EV, Graca MPF, Singh MK, Sousa ACM. Nanodiamond-Fe3O4 and electrical conductivity of water-base Al2O3 nanofluids for different
nanofluids: preparation and measurement of viscosity, electrical and thermal applications. HBRC J 2016;12:227–34.
conductivities. Int Commun Heat Mass Transfer 2016;73:62–74. [52] Solangi KH, Kazi SN, Luhur MR, Badarudin A, Amiri A, Sadri R. A comprehensive
[37] Li X, Zou C, Lei X, Li W. Stability and enhanced thermal conductivity of review of thermo-physical properties and convective heat transfer to
ethylene glycol-based SiC nanofluids. Int J Heat Mass Transfer 2015;89:613–9. nanofluids. Energy 2015;89:1065–86.
[38] Holman JP. Experimental methods for engineers. New York: McGraw-Hill; [53] Rejeb O, Dhaou H, Jemni A. A numerical investigation of a photovoltaic thermal
2012. (PV/T) collector. Renew Energy 2015;77:43–50.
[39] Huang D, Wu Z, Sunden B. Pressure drop and convective heat transfer of Al2O3/ [54] Chen H, Witharana S, Jin Y, Kimd C, Ding Y. Predicting thermal conductivity of
water and MWCNT/water nanofluids in a chevron plate heat exchanger. Int J liquid suspensions of nanoparticles (nanofluids) based on rheology.
Heat Mass Transfer 2015;89:620–6. Particuology 2009;7:151–7.
[40] Sundar LS, Farooky MdH, Sarada SN, Singh MK. Experimental thermal [55] Chen HS, Ding Y, He Y, Tan C. Rheological behavior of ethylene glycol based
conductivity of ethylene glycol and water mixture based low volume Titania nanofluids. Chem Phys Lett 2007;444:333–7.
concentration of Al2O3 and CuO nanofluids. Int Commun Heat Mass Transfer [56] Vakili-Nezhaad GR, Dorany A. Investigation of the effect of multi walled
2013;41:41–6. carbon nanotubes on the viscosity index of lube oil cuts. Chem Eng Commun
[41] Vajjha RS, Das DK. Experimental determination of thermal conductivity of 2009;196:997–1007.
three nanofluids and development of new correlations. Int J Heat Mass [57] Yang Y, Zhang Z, Grulke E, Anderson W, Wu G. Heat transfer properties of
Transfer 2009;52:4675–82. nanoparticle-in-fluid dispersions (nanofluids) in laminar flow. J Heat Mass
[42] Minsta HA, Roy G, Nguyen CT, Doucet D. New temperature dependent thermal Transfer 2005;48:1107–16.
conductivity data for water-based nanofluids. Int J Therm Sci 2009;48:363–71. [58] Kazem HA, Chaichan MT. Effect of environmental variables on photovoltaic
[43] Milanese M, Iacobazzi F, Colangelo G, de Risi A. An investigation of layering performance-based on experimental studies. Int J Civ, Mech Energy Sci 2016;2
phenomenon at the liquid–solid interface in Cu and CuO based nanofluids. Int J (4):1–8.
Heat Mass Transfer 2016;103:564–71. [59] Fudholi A, Sopian K, Yazdi MH, Ruslan MH, Ibrahim A, Kazem HA. Performance
[44] Vinodhan VL, Suganthi KS, Rajan KS. Convective heat transfer performance of analysis of photovoltaic thermal (PVT) water collectors. Energy Convers
CuO–water nanofluids in U-shaped minitube: potential for improved energy Manage 2014;78:641–51.
recovery. Energy Convers Manage 2016;118:415–25. [60] Lee SW, Chung WY. Investigation of viscosity and thermal conductivity of SiC
[45] Agarwal A, Verma K, Agrawal NK, Duchaniya RK, Singh R. Synthesis, nanofluids for heat transfer applications. Int J Heat Mass Transfer
characterization, thermal conductivity and sensitivity of CuO nanofluids. 2011;54:433–8.
Appl Therm Eng 2016;10:1024–36.