J Mater Sci (2014) 49:45444551

DOI 10.1007/s10853-014-8154-y

Investigating corrosion effects and heat transfer enhancement

in smaller size radiators using CNT-nanofluids
W. Rashmi A. F. Ismail M. Khalid
A. Anuar T. Yusaf

Received: 13 November 2013 / Accepted: 8 March 2014 / Published online: 2 April 2014
Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Abstract Nanofluids have been extensively studied in the

past to enhance the heat transfer performance and efficiency of systems. However, corrosion effects have been
paid very little attention and thus this work presents an
experimental study on the effect of carbon nanotubes
(CNT) on corrosion of three different metals under study
such as aluminium alloy, stainless steel and copper,
respectively. The work was further extended to study the
heat transfer performance in a car radiator of two different
sizes. Both the studies were performed using four different
fluids such as water, ethylene glycol, 0.02 % CNT-nanofluid and 0.1 % CNT-nanofluid, respectively. It was
observed that among the three metals, the highest rate of
corrosion occurs to aluminium, followed by stainless steel
and copper, irrespective of the fluid used. The rate of
corrosion increased with the increase in temperature
(2790 C) in all cases. The experimental results showed
that the stable CNT-nanofluids prepared in this work
showed better heat transfer performance in both engines.
W. Rashmi (&)
Energy Research Group, School of Engineering, Taylors
University, Subang Jaya, Malaysia
e-mail: rashmi.walvekar@gmail.com
A. F. Ismail
A. Anuar
Nanoscience and Nanotechnology Research Group (NANORG),
Kulliyyah of Engineering, International Islamic University,
Gombak, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
M. Khalid
Division of Manufacturing and Industrial Processes, Faculty of
Engineering, University of Nottingham, Semenyih,
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
T. Yusaf
Department of Mechanical & Mechatronics Engineering,
University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, Australia

123

Moreover, the smaller radiator using the CNT-nanofluids

depicted enhanced heat transfer rates compared to the
standard radiator using water and ethylene glycol.

Introduction
Nanofluids have attracted a large number of scientific community since their discovery by Choi [1] in 1995, due to their
enhanced heat transfer properties and large applications
ranging from chemical and process industries, electronic
cooling, cooling of heavy vehicles, solar energy harvesting
and heat transfer applications as suitable coolants [2]. Many
review papers are available in this field with regards to the
effect of various parameters on thermal conductivity
enhancement, stability and heat transfer mechanisms and its
applications [37]. Carbon nanotubes (CNT) are widely being
used due to its high thermal conductivity and unique
mechanical, electrical and optical properties, respectively [8].
Previous researchers have measured the thermal conductivity
of CNT-nanofluids dispersed in various base fluids and further
reported that the CNT-nanofluids displayed significantly
higher thermal conductivities than their base fluids [914].
In the design of automotive systems, engineers are
exploring the idea of using nanofluids as coolants to reduce the
weight and cost of the radiator. This will result in better fuel
consumption and lower car prices in near future. Nevertheless,
not many studies have been reported to check the compatibility of nanofluids to be used as a coolant in the engine
radiator. A good quality coolant must possess a high thermal
capacity, low viscosity, and it should be non-toxic, low cost,
chemically inert, low electrical conductivity and resists oxidation. Water is a basic coolant that is commonly used as a
heat transfer fluid, due to its high thermal conductivity, cheap
and it is readily available. However, water freezing point at

J Mater Sci (2014) 49:45444551

0 C limits its capability to act as a pure coolant without any

addition of ethylene glycol. In addition, most of coolants are
blended with inhibitors to prevent corrosion in the engine
radiator. In the case of a highly corroded cooling system, the
performance of the vehicle will be severely affected. The
damage occurs due to increase in engine temperature and as
the heat that cannot be transferred directly from the engine to
the coolant effectively. Furthermore, corrosion may cause the
cavitation in the radiator that which can further restrict the
flow of coolant in the cooling system.
There are also many studies reported to investigate the
effect of coolant especially ethylene glycol (EG) towards
different materials used in the cooling system. Some of the
common metals used to manufacture the cooling system are
aluminium, steel, cast iron and copper. The corrosive effects
of EG on steel and copper were investigated by Khomomi
et al. [15] and May et al. [16], whereas Liu and Cheng [17
19] and Niu and Cheng [20] studied the corrosion effects on
aluminium. All of the tests were mostly restricted to EG with
different inhibitors and concentrations. Celata et al. [21]
conducted erosion tests on aluminium, stainless steel and
copper using TiO2, Al2O3, SiC and ZrO2 nanofluids. The
results showed that the mechanical effects strongly depended
on the target material and type of nanoparticle material.
Among all, Al2O3 has proved to give a largest damage to the
gears followed by SiC, ZrO2 and TiO2 being the last. In
addition, it is also reported that the use nanofluids in radiators
can lead to a reduction in the frontal area of the radiator up to
10 % and the fuel saving up to 5 % due to the reduction in
aerodynamic drag [22].
Thus, this study aims to study the corrosion effects of
CNT-nanofluids using water and EG as base fluids. Two
different CNT concentrations have been studied, 0.02 and
0.1 wt%, respectively. Further, these nanofluids are applied
in two different size radiators to test their heat transfer
performance and efficiency.

4545

adding them to the respective measured amount of base

fluid. Optimum amount of gum Arabic (GA) dispersant
was added to stabilize the CNT in base fluid. The solution
was further homogenized using high shear homogenizer
(Fluko, Germany) at 28000 rpm for 10 min, respectively.
This was done in order to break the agglomerates and
homogenize the suspension. The solution was immediately
sonicated in a water bath sonicator at 25 C for 4 h. During
the sonication process, the CNTs which are initially
entangled gets separated due to the effect of ultrasonic
vibration and a thin layer of GA is coated on the CNT
surface which will prevent the agglomeration and sedimentation. From, our previous studies, it is reported that
the optimum amount of GA for 0.02 wt% CNT is 1.0 wt%
and for 0.1 wt% CNT is 2.5 wt%, respectively. Further, 4 h
sonication was found to be optimum as increasing the
sonication time would damage the CNT structure and
morphology. More details on stability of CNT-nanofluids
can be found in our previously published paper [13].
Corrosion test method
Specimen preparation
Metal specimens were prepared before being used as the
working electrode (Fig. 1). Prior to testing, cutting,
grinding, polishing, washing and drying of the metal
specimens were carried out. The specimen of copper,
stainless steel and aluminium alloy plate were cut with
dimension of 1 9 1 cm2 with metal scissors. The metals
are then ground with different grades of emery paper from
100 degrees of fineness and increasing up to 800 degrees of
fineness. Since the samples are small in size, they are first
mounted together before grinding as shown in Fig. 2.
The metal pieces were mounted with copper wire connected to the metal. The copper wire was used as a wire
connection of the working electrode to the circuit. The
mounted metal mould makes the grounding process easier.

Experimental procedure
Materials
Multiwalled CNTs were used in the present work with size
of 2030 nm OD and 510 nm ID, a length of approximately 30 lm and the purity of the CNT was greater than
95 %. CNT was purchased from Sab Bayan Enterprise,
Klang Malaysia. Ethylene glycol used in this work was
purchased from Chemolab, Malaysia.
Preparation of CNT-nanofluid
Stable CNT-nanofluids of 0.02 and 0.1 wt% were prepared
by measuring the correct amount of CNT nanoparticles and

Fig. 1 Copper, aluminium alloy and stainless steel in 1 9 1 cm2 size

123

4546

J Mater Sci (2014) 49:45444551

Fig. 2 a Metal pieces connected to copper wire to be mounted together. b Mounted specimen with copper wire
Fig. 3 Polarization test setup

Then, the specimens were polished with aluminium oxide

on the horizontal polishing machine manually. This was
done to remove all the scratch marks on the metal surfaces
thus making the surface smooth. These mounted metals
were polished until they looked like a mirror image. The
shinier the metal surfaces, the more easy reading can be
taken. Next, the metals were washed with distilled water
twice to remove any metal residue. Finally, the specimens
were dried with a hair dryer to remove the moisture.
Polarization test
Before carrying out the polarization test, all of the equipment and samples were prepared in advance and test setup
is done as shown in Fig. 3. A 50 ml solution of water is
placed in a 100-ml beaker which acts as the electrolyte.
While making sure the working electrode is fully immersed
in the electrolyte, the other two electrodes that are counter
electrode and reference electrode were also connected to
the circuit. The reference electrode that is used here is
saturated calomel electrode (SCE) and the counter electrode is the platinum plate (Fig. 4). After all of the electrodes are connected to the circuit system, the computer to

123

run the test was turned on. The constant maximum and
minimum voltage of ?2 and -2 mV were applied to the
circuit system. This is the potential limit for the circuit.
The polarization test was carried out by varying the
temperature of the nanofluid keeping the solution static
(magnetic stirrer was set off). The nanofluid was heated
using the hot plate. After it reached the desired temperature, the polarization test was conducted on the metal and
solution. During the experiment, the temperature was varied from 27 to 90 C by 10 C increment. Readings were
tabulated and plotted for every measurement.
Radiator test
Engine specifications and dimensions
Two different sizes of radiators were tested with a 1.5 L
Proton Wira engine at idle conditions. Tables 1 and 2 list
the dimensions of both the standard radiator used for the
engine and the smaller radiator used as its replacement.
Where L, H and W denotes the length, height and width of
the radiators, tubes and fins, and N is the number of tubes
and fins used in both radiators. While the width of both

J Mater Sci (2014) 49:45444551

4547

Fig. 4 Images of metals. a Counter electrode; platinum and nickel. b Aluminium alloy, copper and stainless steel. c Saturated calomel electrode
(SCE) as the reference electrode

Table 1 Standard radiator

dimensions for the 1.5 L Proton
Wira

Table 2 Smaller radiator

dimensions used as the
replacement

Lradiator
(mm)

Hradiator
(mm)

Wradiator
(mm)

Wtube
(mm)

Htube
(mm)

Lfin
(mm)

Wfin
(mm)

Hfin
(mm)

Ntube

Nfin

678

375

40

25.4

2.11

3.96

58.42

0.0762

45

188

Lradiator
(mm)

Hradiator
(mm)

Wradiator
(mm)

Wtube
(mm)

Htube
(mm)

Lfin
(mm)

Wfin
(mm)

Hfin
(mm)

Ntube

Nfin

318

350

40

25.4

2.11

3.96

58.42

0.0762

28

168

radiators is the same, the length and the height of the

smaller radiator are approximately 47 and 9 % less than
that of standard radiator, respectively. The engine specification is listed in Table 3.
Test procedure
Half cut car which is Proton Wira using the Magma engine
12 valves is used in this experiment as shown in Fig. 5 to
determine the heat transfer of the cooling system. Custom
made connectors or radiator hoses are connected from the
engine to the radiator. Thermocouples were attached to the
connectors by using epoxy resin to gain a strong bond that
can withstand high temperature and pressure of coolant.
Later, the thermocouple probes were connected to the
thermocouple to measure and record the coolant temperature. Initially, water as a coolant was poured into the
radiator and the engine was started. After 10 min, the
temperature readings for the coolant inlet and outlet of the
radiator were recorded with every 5 s increment until 60 s

for every 1000, 2000 and 3000 rpm. Tables 4 and 5 give
the summary of the experimental values through smaller
and standard radiators, respectively.
Strobotest was used to indicate rpm reading for every
throttle position. Finally, the coolant was flushed out from
the radiator. This procedure was repeated for other types of
coolant, which are the ethyleneglycol, CNT-nanofluids
0.1 wt% and CNT-nanofluids 0.02 wt%, respectively.
Later, similar procedure is repeated for different radiator
sizes.

Results and discussion

Corrosion rates
The corrosion rates of aluminium alloy, stainless steel and
copper, using 0.1 wt% CNT-nanofluid at different temperatures are presented in Fig. 5. Tables 4, 5, and 6 present
the corrosion rates of four different coolants measured at

123

4548

J Mater Sci (2014) 49:45444551

Table 3 Engine specification

Table 4 Summary of heat transfer test for smaller radiator

Code

Type of
coolant

4G15

Manufacturer

Mitsubishi

Type

S-4
SOHC
12 valves

Water

75.5 9 82 mm2

Bore/stroke ratio

0.92

Displacement

1468 cc

Unitary capacity

367 cc/cylinder

Density ratio

9.20:1

Fuel system
Aspiration

MPFi
Normal

Intercooler

No

Catalytic converter

Yes

Maximum output

89.2 PS (88.0 bhp) (65.6 kW) @ 6000 rpm

Maximum torque

126.0 Nm (93 lbft) (12.8 kgm) @ 3000 rpm

Specific output

59.9 bhp/l

Specific torque

85.83 m/l

different temperatures and different metals used, respectively. As observed from Fig. 6, copper shows the lowest
corrosion rate value compared with the other two metals.
The highest corrosion rate at a fixed temperature is
obtained by aluminium alloy in all of the coolants as
depicted by the results in Tables 4, 5, and 6. This can be
explained by the galvanic series for metal and alloy, where
aluminium alloy position is the nearest to the active side of
metals. For all coolants, the stainless steel corrosion rates
are between copper and aluminium alloy. The results also
demonstrate that the rate of corrosion increases with the
increase in temperature in all cases.
For water, Table 6 indicates that the corrosion rate for
aluminium alloy varies from 3.01 9 10-2 mm/year at 27 C
to 9.75 9 10-2 mm/year at 90 C. Meanwhile, the corrosion
rates for stainless steel (Table 7) and copper (Table 8) vary

Specific
heat, Cp
(J/kg C)

Temp
difference,
DT (C)

Heat
transfer
rate,
Q_ (kW)

1000

0.066

4191

16.217

4.485

0.066
0.066

4198
4203

16.267
16.308

4.507
4.524

1000

0.071

3583

19

4.833

2000

0.071

3583

19.025

4.840

3000

0.071

3598

22.108

5.648

CNTnanofluids
0.02

1000

0.142

4129

21.842

12.595

2000

0.142

4134

23.15

13.590

3000

0.142

4139

24.533

14.419

CNTnanofluids
0.01

1000

0.142

3851

23.017

12.586

2000

0.142

3856

24.517

13.424

3000

0.142

3860

25.5

13.977

Ethylene
glycol

from 1.59 9 10-2 mm/year to 8.60 9 10-2 mm/year and

1.06 9 10-2 mm/year to 7.97 9 10-2 mm/year, respectively. It is further observed that aluminium alloy has the
highest corrosion rate compared to stainless steel and copper
in both CNT-nanofluids with the value from 3.95 9
10-5 mm/year (at 27 C) to 2.54 9 10-4 mm/year (at 90 C)
for 0.1 wt% CNT-nanofluid and from 9.23 9 10-5 mm/year
(at 27 C) to 6.66 9 10-3 mm/year (at 90 C) for 0.02 wt%
CNT-nanofluid.
On the other hand, lower corrosion rates are produced
when EG and the CNT-nanofluids are being used as the
solution. The reason for this is the existent of inhibitor in
EG that prevents corrosion from happening. Interestingly,
the corrosion rates of metals using the CNT-nanofluid are
the lowest compared to the corrosion rates using pure water
and ethylene glycol. This could be explained on the basis
that nanofluids show lower and more stable friction coefficients and they also have self-healing lubricating effects
[23]. This could be the main reason for low corrosion rate
of metals in nanofluids. It has been reported that the stable

Fig. 5 Experimental setup with Magma engine 12 value and thermocouple probe placement

123

Mass
flow
rate, m_
(kg/s)

2000
3000

3 valves/cylinder
Bore 9 stroke

rpm

J Mater Sci (2014) 49:45444551

4549

Table 5 Summary of heat transfer test for bigger radiator

Type of
coolant

rpm

Temp
difference,
DT (C)

Table 7 Corrosion rate of stainless steel (mm/year)

Heat
transfer
rate, Q_
(kW)

Mass
flow
rate, m_
(kg/s)

Specific
heat, Cp
(J/kg C)

1000

0.041

4198

20.442

3.518

2000
3000

0.041
0.041

4198
4198

21.85
22.708

3.761
3.908

1000

0.044

3583

22.417

3.534

2000

0.044

3583

23.317

3.676

3000

0.044

3622

23.708

3.778

CNTnanofluids
0.02

1000

0.089

4129

25.075

9.215

2000

0.089

4139

25.017

3000

0.089

4139

31.5

CNTnanofluids
0.01

1000

0.089

3851

26.942

2000

0.089

3856

27.092

9.307

3000

0.089

3860

32.492

11.162

Water

Ethylene
glycol

9.234

Temperature
(C)

Water

Ethylene
glycol

Nanofluid
0.1 wt%

Nanofluid
0.02 wt%

27

3.01E-02

1.85E-02

3.95E-05

9.23E-05

40

3.64E-02

2.01E-02

4.49E-05

1.36E-04

50
60

3.94E-02
4.15E-02

2.39E-02
3.02E-02

6.29E-05
7.47E-05

1.64E-03
1.74E-03

70

6.99E-02

3.72E-02

9.29E-05

4.82E-03

80

7.88E-02

3.84E-02

2.24E-04

6.09E-03

90

9.75E-02

4.15E-02

2.54E-04

6.66E-03

Corrosion Rate (mm/year)

Copper
Stainless Steal
Aluminium Alloy

0.00025
0.0002
0.00015
0.0001
0.00005
0
0

20

40

60

Water

Ethylene
glycol

Nanofluid
0.1 wt%

Nanofluid
0.02 wt%

27

1.59E-02

1.42E-02

2.48E-05

3.32E-05

40

2.01E-02

1.76E-02

3.53E-05

3.59E-05

50

2.03E-02

1.94E-02

3.66E-05

4.85E-05

60

3.68E-02

2.47E-02

5.14E-05

7.11E-05

70

3.94E-02

2.91E-02

7.81E-05

7.66E-05

80

8.31E-02

3.90E-02

1.03E-04

9.73E-05

90

8.60E-02

4.03E-02

2.46E-04

1.41E-04

9.215
11.604

Table 6 Corrosion rate of aluminium alloy (mm/year)

0.0003

Temperature
(C)

80

100

Temperature (C)

Fig. 6 Corrosion rates of metals using 0.1 wt% CNT-nanofluid

and homogeneously dispersed nanoparticles in mineral oils

are effective in reducing wear and increasing load carrying
capacity. Furthermore, the friction can be reduced between
the moving mechanical parts. The corrosion rates produced

Table 8 Corrosion rate of copper (mm/year)

Temperature
(C)

Water

Ethylene
glycol

Nanofluid
0.1 wt%

Nanofluid
0.02 wt%

27

1.06E-02

1.46E-03

8.54E-06

4.56E-05

40

1.30E-02

1.57E-03

1.03E-05

5.64E-05

50

1.57E-02

1.59E-03

1.07E-05

5.94E-05

60

2.17E-02

4.18E-03

1.13E-05

7.10E-05

70

2.89E-02

2.01E-02

1.16E-05

7.10E-05

80

3.72E-02

3.17E-02

1.35E-05

9.16E-05

90

7.97E-02

3.81E-02

1.43E-05

1.01E-04

by the 0.1 wt% CNT-nanofluid and 0.02 wt% CNT-nanofluid are very similar.
Another reason for the low corrosion rates of both CNTnanofluids under study is the presence of additive (GA) in
the solution. It has been widely known that GA is commonly used as an inhibitor and its function is to prevent or
slow down the corrosion process [2426]. GA is a natural
biopolymer which contains hydroxyls, aldehydes, ketones,
carboxyls, double bonds, ester, ether and other functional
groups. These functional groups impart good adhesion and
corrosion resistance performance to the substrate. As these
CNT-nanofluids uses GA as dispersant, indirectly the
inhibitor characteristics of the nanofluids are enhanced. As
a result, lower corrosion rates of metals are recorded in the
experiment using the CNT-nanofluids.
Radiator performance
Figure 7 indicates the temperature difference between the
inlet and outlet as a function of the engine speed for the
standard size radiator using the four different types of
coolants used in this work. It is observed that the temperature difference increases with the increase in rpm. For all
rpms, the highest temperature difference is produced by the
0.1 wt% CNT-nanofluid followed by 0.02 % CNT-nanofluid, EG and water. These results prove that the CNT-

123

4550

J Mater Sci (2014) 49:45444551

Water
Ethylene Glycol
0.02% CNT-Nanofluid
0.1%CNT-Nanofluid

30

Water
Ethylene Glycol
0.02%CNT Nanofluid
0.1%CNT Nanofluid

14

Heat Transfer Rate (kW)

Temperature Difference (C)

35

25

20

15

12
10
8
6
4
2

10
0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

0
0

RPM

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

3000

3500

RPM

Fig. 7 Temperature difference between inlet and outlet temperatures

for the standard radiator

Water
Ethylene Glycol
0.02% CNT-nanofluid
0.1% CNT-nanofluid

30

Water
Ethylene Glycol
16

25

20

15

10

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

RPM

Heat Transfer Rate (kW)

Temperature Difference (C)

35

Fig. 9 Heat transfer rates for the standard radiator

0.02%CNT Nanofluid
0.1%CNT Nanofluid

14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0

Fig. 8 Temperature difference between inlet and outlet temperatures

for the smaller radiator

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

RPM

Fig. 10 Heat transfer rates for the smaller radiator

nanofluids have greater thermal conductivity that can

absorb and transfer more heat to the surroundings.
The temperature difference between the inlet and outlet
temperatures as a function of the engine speed for the
smaller radiator is shown in Fig. 8. The plots reveal similar
trends depicted in Fig. 7. Comparing the values of the
results in Figs. 7 and 8, it can be seen that the temperature
difference (between 22 and 25 C) obtained using CNTnanofluids in the smaller radiator match the temperature
difference obtained using EG or water in the standard size
radiator.
Figures 9 and 10 demonstrate the heat transfer rates as a
function of the engine speed rpm for the standard radiator
and the smaller radiator, respectively. For both radiators,
the heat transfer rate for water and ethyleneglycol demonstrates almost similar values for each rpm. The two
different CNT-nanofluids used in this study show similar
heat transfer rates which are higher than those of water and
ethylene glycol. This is expected due to the higher thermal

123

properties of the CNT-nanofluids and the results suggest

that 0.02 wt% CNT concentration is adequate to enhance
the heat transfer rates. Overall, the heat transfer rates
increase with the increase of the engine speeds, since more
heat needs to be dissipated at higher rpm.
Comparing the results in Figs. 9 and 10, the heat transfer
rates produced by the two CNT-nanofluids in the smaller
radiator are much higher that the rates obtained by either
water or EG in the standard radiator.

Conclusion
Corrosion rates using three different metals and heat
transfer studies in two different size radiators have been
performed using water, EG and two different CNT-water
nanofluids. The results indicated that the corrosion rates of

J Mater Sci (2014) 49:45444551

the three metals are found to be lower using CNT-nanofluids under study. Aluminium alloy showed the highest
corrosion rate compared to stainless steel and copper in
both sets of CNT-nanofluids demonstrating their selfhealing lubricating properties. Moreover, the addition of
GA not only enhanced the stability of the CNT-nanofluid
but also improved the corrosion resistance. The results on
heat transfer rates and the temperature difference using
CNT-nanofluids in the smaller radiator were found to be
similar or higher than those using water or EG in the
standard radiator. Thus, proving that the smaller radiator
can be deployed using the nanofluids in the car cooling
system. This will further lead to improved system that will
provide better engine performance as well as lower fuel
consumption in the automotive industry. The results of this
study should promote further investigations on the optimum operating process conditions using the CNTnanofluids.

References
1. Choi SUS (1995) Enhancing thermal conductivity of fluids with
nanoparticles. In: Siginer DA, Wang HP (eds) Developments and
applications of non-newtonian flows. ASME, New York,
pp 99105
2. Taylor R, Coulombe S, Otanicar T et al (2013) Small particles,
big impacts: a review of the diverse applications of nanofluids.
J Appl Phys 113:011301011319
3. Fan J, Wang L (2011) Review of heat conduction in nanofluids.
J Heat Transfer 133:040801-1040801-14
4. Yu W, Xie H (2012) A review on nanofluids: preparation, stability mechanisms, and applications. J Nano Mater. doi:10.1155/
2012/435873
5. Wang XQ, Mujumdar AS (2008) A review on nanofluidspart I:
theoretical and numerical investigations. Braz J Chem Eng
25:613630
6. Kakac S, Pramuanjaroenkij A (2009) Review of convective heat
transfer enhancement with nanofluids. Int J Heat Mass Transfer
52:31873196
7. Lee JH, Lee SH, Choi J, Jang SP, Choi SUS (2010) A review of
thermal conductivity data, mechanics and models for nanofluids.
Int J Micro-Nano Scale Transp 1:269322
8. Dresselhaus MS, Dresselhaus G, Charlier JC, Ernandez EH
(2004) Thermal and mechanical properties of carbon nanotubes.
Philos Trans R Soc Lond A 362:20652098
9. Ding Y, Alias H, Wen D, Williams RA (2006) Heat transfer of
aqueous suspensions of carbon nanotubes (CNT nanofluids). Int J
Heat Mass Transfer 49:240250

4551
10. Rashmi W, Ismail AF, Khalid M (2012) Thermal conductivity of
carbon nanotube nanofluid-Experimental and theoretical study.
Heat Tran Asian Res 41:145163
11. Xie H, Lee H, Youn W, Choi M (2003) Nanofluids containing
multiwalled carbon nanotubes and their enhanced thermal conductivities. J Appl Phys 94:49674971
12. Rashmi W, Khalid M, Ismail AF, Saidur R, Rasheed AK (2013)
Experimental and numerical investigation of heat transfer in CNT
nanofluids. J Exp Nanosci. doi:10.1080/17458080.2013.848296
13. Rashmi W, Ismail AF, Sopyan I, Jameel AT, Yusof F, Khalid M
(2011) Stability and thermal conductivity enhancement of carbon
nanotube nanofluid using gum Arabic. J Exp Nanosci 6:567579
14. Liu MS, Lin MCC, Huang IT, Wang CC (2005) Enhancement of
thermal conductivity with carbon nanotube for nanofluids. Int
Commun Heat Mass 32:12021210
15. Khomami MN, Danaee I, Attar AA, Peykari M (2012) Effects of
NO2- and NO3- ions on corrosion of AISI 4130 steel in ethylene
glycol?water electrolyte. Trans Indian Inst Met 65:303311
16. May PM, Ritchie IM, Tan ET (1991) The corrosion of copper in
ethylene glycolwater mixtures containing chloride ions. J Appl
Electrochem 21:358364
17. Liu Y, Cheng YF (2009) Cathodic reaction kinetics and its
implication on flow-assisted corrosion of aluminum alloy in
aqueous ethylene glycol solution. J Appl Electrochem
39:12671272
18. Liu Y, Cheng YF (2011) Characterization of passivity and pitting
corrosion of 3003 aluminum alloy in ethylene glycolwater
solutions. J Appl Electrochem 41:151159
19. Liu Y, Cheng YF (2011) Inhibition of corrosion of 3003 aluminum alloy in ethylene glycolwater solution. J Mater Eng Perform 20:271275
20. Niu L, Cheng YF (2007) Electrochemical characterization of
metastable pitting of 3003 aluminum alloy in ethylene glycol
water solution. J Mater Sci 42:86138617. doi:10.1007/s10853007-1841-1
21. Celata GP, DAnnibale F, Mariani A (2011) Nanofluid flow
effects on metal surfaces. Energ Ambiente e Innovazione
45:9498
22. Singh D, Toutbort J, Chen G, (2006) Heavy vehicle systems
optimization merit review and peer evaluation. Annual Report,
Argonne National Laboratory, USA
23. Sahoo RR, Bhattacharjee S, Das T (2013) Development of
nanofluids as lubricant to study friction and wear behavior of
stainless steels. Int J Mod Phys Conf Ser. doi:10.1142/
S2010194513010829
24. Arthur DE, Jonathan A, Ameh PO, Anya C (2013) A review on
the assessment of polymeric materials used as corrosion inhibitor
of metals and alloys. Int J Ind Chem. doi:10.1186/2228-5547-4-2
25. Kesavan D, Gopiraman M, Sulochana N (2012) Green inhibitors
for corrosion of metals: a review. Chem Sci Rev Lett 1:18
26. Rani BEA, Basu BBJ (2012) Green inhibitors for corrosion
protection of metals and alloys: an overview. Int J Corros. doi:10.
1155/2012/380217

123