|
| Authors | Base fluid | Nanoparticle | Nanoparticle concentration | Results obtained |
|
| Rudyak et al. [1] | Distilled | Zirconia, aluminum, silicon, and titanium | 1% and 8% by volume | The Prandtl number increased with increasing nanoparticle concentration and dropped with decreasing nanoparticle size [1] |
| Ganesh et al. [2] | Water and ethylene glycol | Gamma aluminum oxide | 0.05, 0.1, 0.15, and 0.2 by volume | A velocity profile rise was noticed [2] |
| Raza et al. [3] | Water | Copper | | Nanoparticle concentrations and Prandtl number influence the velocity profile [3] |
| Kim et al. [4] | Distilled water | Aluminum oxide | 0.25%, 0.5% and 1% wt% | Found a decline in Prandtl number when nanoparticle concentrations rose [4] |
| Özdemir and Öğüt [5] | Water/ethylene glycol ethylene glycol concentration from 0% to 60% | Aluminum oxide | 0% to 1.5% | The Prandtl number grew as the concentration of ethylene glycol likewise increased [5] |
| Al-Amir et al. [6] | Water | Silver | 0 < ϕ < 0.2 by volume | Conclusion: the Nusselt number increased as the Prandtl number increased [6] |
| Mikkola et al. [7] | Water | Aluminum oxide, micelles, polystyrene, and silicon oxide | 0.1% to 1.8% volume percentage | In comparing nanofluids, the significance of the Prandtl number varies. The Nusselt number remained negligible since the Prandtl number was considered [7] |
| Sundar et al. [8] | Oil magnetic | Ferrous oxide | 0.05% to 0.5% | The Prandtl number of nanofluid is 1.52 times greater at 30°C and 1.6 times greater at 60°C compared to the base fluid. With increasing temperature, the Prandtl number decreased [8] |
| Veera Krishna [9] | Water | Aluminum copper | 0.05%, 0.1%, 0.15% | Raising the Prandtl number decreased the temperature and thickness of the boundary layer [9] |
| Zargartalebi et al. [10] | | | | When the Prandtl number increased, a reduction in the thickness of the thermal boundary layer was noticed [10] |
| Nasrin [11] | Water | Aluminum oxide | 2% | The rise in the Prandtl number enhanced the heat transfer rate, but it decreased the collector’s efficiency [11] |
| Nabil et al. [12] | Water/ethylene glycol (60 : 40) | Titanium oxide-silicon dioxide (50 : 50) | 0.5% to 3.0% | With an increase in temperature, viscosity was shown to diminish [12] |
| Yu et al. [13] | Water | MWCNT | 0.0047%, 0.023%, 0.0571%, 0.1428%, and 0.2381% | Results indicated a small increase in viscosity when temperature rose over the critical threshold [13] |
| Shah et al. [14] | Ethylene glycol | Reduced graphene oxide | 0.02%, 0.04%, and 0.05% | Reduced graphene oxide/ethylene glycol nanofluid viscosity was lowered by 22% [14] |
| Iqbal et al. [15] | Water | Titanium oxide | 0.1%, 0.25%, 0.5%, and 0.75% | Viscosity rose with increasing nanoparticle concentrations [15] |
| Manikandan and Baskar [16] | Water/ethylene glycol at 40 : 60, 50 : 50, and 30 : 70 | Titanium oxide zinc oxide | 0.2 to 1.0 by volume | Found an increase in viscosity after adding nanoparticles to the basic fluids [16] |
| Samylingam et al. [17] | Ethylene glycol (40%)/water (60%) | Cellulose nanocrystal CNC | 0.1%, 03%, 0.5%, 0.7%, 0.9, 1.1, and 1.5% | Measurements revealed a rise in viscosity as nanoparticle concentration rose, with the lowest viscosity measured at 70°C for a concentration of 0.1% by volume [17] |
| Kumar et al. [18] | Water | Ceric oxide zinc oxide | 0.5% to 2.0% by volume | Temperature led to an increase in viscosity. The ceric oxide nanofluid displayed a greater rise in viscosity compared to the zinc oxide nanofluid [18] |
| Żyła et al. [19] | Ethylene glycol | Nanodiamond | 0.01 to 0.1 by volume | It was noticed that viscosity increased whenever nanoparticle concentrations were raised [19] |
| Zheng et al. [20] | Water | Copper oxide, iron oxide black, aluminum oxide, and silicon carbide | 0.05%, 0.1%, 0.5%, and 1.0% | An observation was made of the rise in viscosity [20] |
|
