The numerical simulation of subcooled flow boiling of R-113 working fluid has been done for two different nanofluids (R-113/Al2O3, R-113/TiO2) under different volume concentrations (0.5%, 1%, and 3%). The numerical results were compared with experimental results obtained by previous researchers, and the comparison shows that the numerical results are in good accordance. Nucleation site density, bubble departure frequency, and bubble departure diameter, which are three key parameters, are investigated in this study. The results express that these three parameters have the highest variation at low Reynolds numbers. The influence of different nanoparticles concentrations on the variation of the heat transfer coefficient is studied. The results indicate there is an insignificant difference between the effect of 1% and 3% concentrations on the heat transfer coefficient that means an increase of nanoparticles more than 1% concentration cannot improve heat transfer. The effect of different non-drag forces such as lubrication force, turbulent dispersion force, and lift force is also studied. Two correlations are proposed for predicting the convective heat transfer coefficient.
AfrandMNajafabadiKNAkbariM. 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 Eng2016; 102: 45–54.
2.
AfrandMToghraieDRuhaniB. Effects of temperature and nanoparticles concentration on rheological behavior of Fe3O4–Ag/EG hybrid nanofluid: an experimental study. Exp Therm Fluid Sci2016; 77: 38–44.
3.
AfrandMToghraieDSinaN. Experimental study on thermal conductivity of water-based Fe3O4 nanofluid: development of a new correlation and modeled by artificial neural network. Int Commun Heat Mass2016; 75: 262–269.
4.
EshgarfHAfrandM. An experimental study on rheological behavior of non-Newtonian hybrid nano-coolant for application in cooling and heating systems. Exp Thermal Fluid Sci2016; 76: 221–227.
5.
EsfeMHSaedodinSSinaN, et al.Designing an artificial neural network to predict thermal conductivity and dynamic viscosity of ferromagnetic nanofluid. Int Commun Heat Mass2015; 68: 50–57.
6.
SoltanimehrMAfrandM. Thermal conductivity enhancement of COOH-functionalized MWCNTs/ethylene glycol–water nanofluid for application in heating and cooling systems. Appl Therm Eng2016; 105: 716–723.
7.
SinaNMoosaviHAghaeiH, et al.Wave dispersion of carbon nanotubes conveying fluid supported on linear viscoelastic two-parameter foundation including thermal and small-scale effects. Phys E2017; 85: 109–116.
8.
DolatiAslKBakhshanYAbediniE, et al.Numerical investigation of critical heat flux in subcooled flow boiling of nanofluids. J Therm Anal Calorim2020; 139: 2295–2308.
9.
DolatiAslKBakhshanYAbediniE, et al.Correlations for estimating critical heat flux (CHF) of nanofluid flow boiling. Int J Heat Mass Transfer2019; 139: 69–76.
JavadiFSSaidurR. Energetic, economic and environmental impacts of using nanorefrigerant in domestic refrigerators in Malaysia. Energy Convers Manage2013; 73: 335–339.
12.
LancMBatailleJ. Turbulence in the liquid phase of a uniform bubbly air-water flow. J fluid Mech1991; 222: 95.
13.
LiuTJBankoffSG. Structure of air-water bubbly flow in a vertical pipe—I. Liquid mean velocity and turbulence measurements. Int J Heat Mass Transfer1993; 36: 1049–1060.
14.
LiuTJBankoffSG. Structure of air-water bubbly flow in a vertical pipe—II. Void fraction, bubble velocity and bubble size distribution. Int J Heat Mass Transfer1993; 36: 1061–1072.
15.
SuzanneCEllingsenKRissoF, et al.Local measurements in turbulent bubbly flows. Nucl Eng Des1998; 184: 319–327.
16.
KocamustafaogullariGWangZ. An experimental study on local interfacial parameters in a horizontal bubbly two-phase flow. Int J Multiphase Flow1991; 17: 553–572.
17.
KocamustafaogullariGHuangWD. Internal structure and interfacial velocity development for bubbly two-phase flow. Nucl Eng Des1994; 151: 79–101.
18.
AbediniEBehzadmehrARajabniaH, et al.Experimental investigation and comparison of subcooled flow boiling of TiO2 nanofluid in a vertical and horizontal tube. Proc IMechE, Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science2013; 227: 1742–1753.
19.
Maxwell JC. A treatise on electricity and magnetism (Vol. 1). Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1873.
XueQZ. Model for effective thermal conductivity of nanofluids. Phys Lett A2003; 307: 313–317. .
22.
XuanYLiQHuW. Aggregation structure and thermal conductivity of nanofluids. AIChE J2003; 49: 1038–1043.
23.
MasoumiNSohrabiNBehzadmehrA. A new model for calculating the effective viscosity of nanofluids. J Phys D Appl Phys2009; 42: 055501.
24.
SohrabiNMasoumiNBehzadmehrA, et al.A simple analytical model for calculating the effective thermal conductivity of nanofluids. Heat Transfer Asian Res2010; 39: 141–150.
25.
AfrandMAbediniETeimouriH. Experimental investigation and simulation of flow boiling of nanofluids in different flow directions. Phys E2017; 87: 248–253.
26.
AfrandMEsfeMHAbediniE, et al.Predicting the effects of magnesium oxide nanoparticles and temperature on the thermal conductivity of water using artificial neural network and experimental data. Phys E2017; 87: 242–247.
27.
GaroosiFJahanshalooLRashidiMM, et al.Numerical simulation of natural convection of the nanofluid in heat exchangers using a Buongiorno model. Appl Math Comput2015; 254: 183–203.
28.
ToghraieDMokhtariMAfrandM. Molecular dynamic simulation of copper and platinum nanoparticles Poiseuille flow in a nanochannels. Phys E2016; 84: 152–161.
29.
PengHDingGHuH. Influences of refrigerant-based nanofluid composition and heating condition on the migration of nanoparticles during pool boiling. Part II: model development and validation. Int J Refrig2011; 34: 1833–1845.
30.
PengHDingGHuH, et al.Effect of nanoparticle size on nucleate pool boiling heat transfer of refrigerant/oil mixture with nanoparticles. Int J Heat Mass Transfer2011; 54: 1839–1850.
31.
ShariatMAkbariniaAHossein NezhadA, et al.Numerical study of two phase laminar mixed convection nanofluid in elliptic ducts. Appl Therm Eng2011; 31: 2348–2359.
32.
BiancoVChiacchioFMancaO, et al.Numerical investigation of nanofluids forced convection in circular tubes. Appl Therm Eng2009; 29: 3632–3642.
33.
RostamiJAbbassiA. Conjugate heat transfer in a wavy microchannel using nanofluid by two-phase Eulerian–Lagrangian method. Adv Powder Technol2016; 27: 9–18.
34.
GhasemiBAminossadatiSM. Brownian motion of nanoparticles in a triangular enclosure with natural convection. Int J Therm Sci2010; 49: 931–940.
35.
Tolubinsky VI and Kostanchuk DM. Vapor bubbles growth rate and heat transfer intensity at subcooed eater boiling. In: Fourth international heat transfer conference, Paris, France, 1970, paper no. B-2.8.
36.
FritzW. Berechnung des maximalvolumes von dampfblasen. Phys Z1935; 36: 379.
37.
RogersJTLiJH. Prediction of the onset of significant void in flow boiling of water. J Heat Transfer1994; 116: 1049–1053.
38.
DasSKPutraNRoetzelW. Pool boiling characteristics of nano-fluids. Int J Heat Mass Transfer2003; 46: 851–862.
39.
Lemmert M and Chawla LM. Influence of flow velocity on surface boiling heat transfer coefficient in heat transfer in boiling. New York: Academic Press and Hemisphere, 1977.
40.
ColeR. A photographic study of pool boiling in the region of the critical heat flux. AIChE J1960; 6: 533–538.
41.
RoyRPKangSZarateJA, et al.Turbulent subcooled boiling flow—experiments and simulations. J Heat Transfer2002; 124: 73–93.
42.
AbediniEBehzadmehrASarvariSMH, et al.Numerical investigation of subcooled flow boiling of a nanofluid. Int J Therm Sci2013; 64: 232–239.
43.
AbediniEZareiTRajabniaH, et al.Numerical investigation of vapor volume fraction in subcooled flow boiling of a nanofluid. J Mol Liq2017; 238: 281–289.
