Accepted Manuscript

An experimental study of Cu-water nanofluid flow inside serpentine tubes with

variable straightsection lengths
Morteza Khoshvaght-Aliabadi, Ahmad Alizadeh
PII:
DOI:
Reference:

S0894-1777(14)00239-8
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.expthermflusci.2014.09.014
ETF 8310

To appear in:

Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science

Received Date:
Revised Date:
Accepted Date:

19 June 2014
5 September 2014
26 September 2014

Please cite this article as: M. Khoshvaght-Aliabadi, A. Alizadeh, An experimental study of Cu-water nanofluid flow
inside serpentine tubes with variable straightsection lengths, Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science (2014), doi:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.expthermflusci.2014.09.014

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers
we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and
review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process
errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

An experimental study of Cu-water nanofluid flow inside serpentine tubes

with variable straightsection lengths

Morteza Khoshvaght-Aliabadi*, Ahmad Alizadeh

Department of Chemical Engineering, Shahrood Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shahrood, Iran.

*(Corresponding author): E-mail: mkhaliabadi@gmail.com

Phone: +98 9151811311, Fax: +98 5812244818, Postal address: 94717-75857.

Abstract
Indirect channels like the serpentine tubes are widely utilized in many engineering
applications such as chemical and petrochemical industries, air conditioning and refrigeration
systems, and modern energy conversion, etc. Nanofluids are advanced and potential coolants,
which can provide appropriate thermal performance in heat exchange devices. In this paper, fluid
flow and heat transfer characteristics of Cu-water nanofluid inside five serpentine tubes with
variable straight section lengths are experimentally investigated. The concentrations of 0%,
0.1%, and 0.4% wt. of stabilized Cu-water nanofluid are examined with variation of flow rates in
the range of 1 to 5 lit/min. The Cu-water nanofluids are produced by a one-step method, namely
electro-exploded wire (EEW) technique, and the thermo-physical properties of the nanofluids
required for the analysis are systematically measured. To obtain accurate results, a highly precise
test loop with the ability to produce a constant wall temperature condition is designed and
fabricated. It is found that creating short straight section lengths at the beginning of the
serpentine tubes enhances both the heat transfer coefficient and pressure drop values. However,
this technique improves the overall thermal-hydraulic performance of the serpentine tubes about
10%. Also, the results show that Cu-water nanofluids flow inside all the studied serpentine tubes
increase the heat transfer rate. The maximum performance evaluation criterion (PEC) of 1.18 is
obtained for the 0.4% wt. nanofluid inside the serpentine tube with Low to High straight section
lengths.

Keywords: Heat transfer enhancement; Serpentine tube; Variable straightsection; Nanofluid; Experimental study.

1. Introduction
It has been frequently reported in literature that the heat transfer rate inside the indirect
channels such as helical, spiral, or serpentine tubes as a passive heat transfer enhancement
technique are higher when compared to the straight ones. The centrifugal forces induced in an
indirect channel give rise to rotational flows, i.e. swirl flow and secondary flow patterns.
Therefore, in addition to the axial direction, the heat transfer takes place by diffusion and
convection in the radial direction. In the other word, the presence of such secondary convective
transport significantly improves the heat transfer rate per unit length of the indirect channels
compared to straight ones [1]. This causes a compact structure in the practical applications such
as power generation, nuclear industry, process plants, heat recovery systems, air conditioning,
refrigeration, food and petrochemical industries, etc. [2,3].
In additional to the indirect channels, research on the nanofluid as an advanced working
fluid and also another passive heat transfer enhancement technique has received great attention
of many researchers, recently. A nanofluid is a suspension of solid nanoparticles (normally less
than 100 nm diameters) in the conventional liquids such as water, oil, and ethylene glycol.
Thermal conductivity enhancement, mixing effects of nanoparticles near the wall, Brownian
motion of nanoparticles, nanoparticles migration, and reduction of boundary layer thickness
cause a better thermal performance for nanofluids compared to the their base fluids [4,5].
Concentration, size, dispersion, and stability of nanoparticles in the base fluids affect the
influence of these phenomena.
Effects of various metallic and oxide-metallic nanofluids on the performance of different
geometries have been tested [6-12]. However, review of literature shows that most of these
studies are mainly for nanofluids flow inside the straight channels, and there are few studies

which used nanofluids in the indirect channels. Huminic and Huminic [13] numerically showed
higher heat transfer rate of CuO-water and TiO2-water nanofluids compared to the base fluid
inside double-tube helical heat exchangers for laminar flow. Fakoor Pakdaman et al. [14]
performed an experimental investigation on the performance of MWCNT-oil nanofluids flow
inside vertical helically coiled tubes. They reported high overall performance index of up to 6.4
for the simultaneous utilization of both heat transfer enhancement techniques. Mukesh Kumar et
al. [15] experimentally observed that the maximum enhancement of tube side heat transfer
coefficient was up to 24.6% for Al2O3-water nanofluids based on the constant Dean number.
Kahani et al. [16] conducted a comparative experimental study on the heat transfer behavior of
the oxide-metallic nanofluid flows (Al2O3-water and TiO2-water) through the helical coiled tubes
with uniform heat flux boundary condition. It was shown that because of greater thermal
conductivity and smaller size of Al2O3 nanoparticles compared to TiO2 nanoparticles, the Al2O3water nanofluid showed a better heat transfer augmentation. Wu et al. [17] experimentally
investigated pressure drop and convective heat transfer characteristics of Al2O3-water nanofluid
at six different weight concentrations inside a double-pipe helically coiled heat exchanger for
both laminar flow and turbulent flow. Mohammed and Narrein [18] and Narrein and Mohammed
[19] performed numerical investigations to investigate effects of different geometrical
parameters and material, diameter and volume concentration of nanoparticles on the thermalhydraulic characteristics in helically coiled tube heat exchangers. A CFD study was carried out
to study the heat transfer and pressure drop characteristics of Al2O3-water nanofluid flowing
inside coiled tube-in-tube heat exchangers by Aly [20]. The results showed a different behavior
depending on the parameter selected for the comparison (nanoparticle concentration and
curvature ratio) with the base fluid. Effects of Al-water and Cu-water nanofluids flow in a spiral

coil in the laminar flow regime with the constant wall temperature condition were investigated
by Tajik Jamal-Abad et al. [21]. They reported that the geometry has more effects on the thermal
performance than the nanofluids.
According to the above literature, studies on heat transfer characteristics of nanofluids
inside spiral tubes are very scarce. Also, no study has investigated the performance of serpentine
tubes particularly with variable straight section lengths when a nanofluid has been used as
working media, and this has motivated the current study. The article is organized as follows: we
begin with the introduction of nanofluids preparation and their thermo-physical properties
measurement methods. In the next section, a description of the experimental loop used for heat
transfer studies and the methodology of experiments are presented and followed by the applied
data reduction process. In the last section, the experimental results for thermal-hydraulic
characteristics of serpentine tubes with variable straight section lengths are presented and
discussed. Subsequently, effects of the prepared nanofluids flow inside the serpentine tubes are
analyzed as a compound heat transfer enhancement technique.

2. Nanofluid preparation and properties

The first step in the current experimental tests is the production uniform and stable
nanofluids. Deionized water is used as the base fluid. Dilute suspensions of copper (Cu)
nanoparticles in the base fluid are produced by a one-step method, namely electro-exploded wire
(EEW) technique to form Cu-water nanofluids. In EEW technique, a high electric voltage and
current are applied to convert a bulk metal into the nanoparticles through an explosive process.
The details about this technique, including EEW condition and copper wire dimensions are
tabulated in Table 1. A process like this technique prevents from the nanoparticles oxidation,

especially for the nanofluids with high conductivity metals like copper [22]. It is favorable
because drying, storage, transportation, and dispersion of nanoparticles are avoided, so the
agglomeration of nanoparticles decreases and the stability of the nanofluids increases [23]. For
instance, the prepared nanofluids in the present study remained stable about five days without
any observable sedimentation, whilst the duration of each experiment was about four hours. The
generated nanoparticles are near the spherical shape with diameter about 50 nm. The TEM is
used to monitor the nanoparticles into the base fluid, as shown in Fig. 1. Also, the desired weight
concentrations are 0%, 0.1%, and 0.4% wt.

Please insert Table 1 here

Please insert Fig. 1 here

Likewise, the main parameters to assess heat transfer merits of the prepared nanofluids are
their thermo-physical properties, including thermal conductivity, dynamic viscosity, density, and
specific heat capacity. The thermo-physical properties of the Cu-water nanofluids are
experimentally measured as function of the nanoparticles concentration and temperature. The
thermal conductivity of the nanofluids is measured by using a KD2 Pro system (Decagon
Devices) equipped with a hot wire measuring probe. A comparison of the thermal conductivity
ratio values between the measured data by Li et al. [24] and the present ones are reported in Fig.
2. The rheological behaviors are studied by using an accurate rheometer (Physica MCR 301,
Anton Paar). In order to prove the classification of the nanofluids, Newtonian or non-Newtonian
fluids, the shear stress of the Cu-water nanofluids are plotted against to the shear rate in Fig. 3 at
300.15 K. It is clear that the shear stress of the nanofluids increases linearly with the shear rate.

Therefore, the tested nanofluids will be categorized under Newtonian type. The slope of line
increases with increase in the nanoparticles concentration, which indicates that the viscosity of
the nanofluid increases with increase in the nanoparticles concentration. Furthermore, the density
is evaluated by weighing a known volume of the nanofluids by using a set of precise digitalelectronic balance (CPA 1003S, Sartorius) and pycnometer. Also, the specific heat capacity is
measured with a differential scanning calorimeter (C80D, Setaram).

Please insert Fig. 2 here

Please insert Fig. 3 here

The effects of weight concentrations (0%, 0.1%, and 0.4% wt.) and temperature (25, 30,
35, 40, 45, 50, and 55 C) on the mentioned properties of the Cu-water nanofluids are examined.
It is observed from the results that the thermal conductivity, viscosity, and density values of
nanofluids increase with the nanoparticles weight concentration, while the specific heat capacity
values decrease. With the increase in the weight fraction from 0.1% to 0.4% wt., the thermal
conductivity, viscosity, and density increase from 7.5% to 27.5%, 3.1% to 5.5%, and 2.510-2%
to 10.110-2%, respectively, but the specific heat capacity decreases from 4.6% to 7.3% than
those of the base fluid. Also, the thermal conductivity enhances with the temperature, whereas
the viscosity and density decrease. With the increase in the temperature from 25 to 55 C, the
thermal conductivity increases from 1.6% to 3.3%, but the viscosity and density decrease from
0.9% to 1.1% and 6.310-2% to 7.210-2%, respectively. For the specific heat capacity, no
significant variation is observed with the temperature in the studied range. Moreover, the pH of
the nanofluids is measured by a pH meter (691, Metrohm) to control the stability. The pH values

are between 7.06 and 7.53 for the nanofluids, which are far from isoelectric point (IEP) of Cu
nanoparticles. All the thermo-physical properties are measured in the laboratories of Materials
and Energy Research Center (MERC). It should be noted that a repeated measures method is
adopted for every case, and the average values of centralized data are used in this investigation.
Also, the uncertainty of the measurements is less than 2% in the range tested.

3. Experimental loop and procedure

The designed and fabricated experimental loop to study the flow and convective heat
transfer feature of the prepared Cu-water nanofluids flowing in the serpentine tubes is
schematically shown in Fig. 4(a). It mainly consisted of (1) transmission fluid state, (2)
measurement equipment, (3) constant temperature bath system, (4) cooling unite, and (5) test
sections.

Please insert Fig. 4 here

The reservoir tank of 6.75 litter capacity is manufactured of stainless-steel to store the
working fluid. The working fluid is forced through the loop with aid of a centrifugal pump
(PKm60, Pedrollo), and its flow rate is controlled by using two ball valves; required quantity of
the fluid is allowed into the test section and the remaining fluid is sent back to the reservoir tank.
The entry section is long enough (1.2 m) to accomplish fully developed flow at the entrance of
the test sections. This section is well insulated in order to eliminate the heat transfer with the
ambient. To achieve reliable and accurate results, very sensitive measurement equipment is
utilized. The volumetric flow rate passing through the test sections is measured by using a high

sensitive ultrasonic flow meter (Flownetix-100seriesTM). Two T-type thermocouples are located
at the entrance and exit of the test sections to measure the working fluid inlet and outlet
temperatures. Five K-type thermocouples (Omega) are mounted on the surface of the serpentine
tubes at axial distances of 0.15 (T1), 0.35 (T2), 0.55 (T3), 0.75 (T4), 0.95 (T5) m to measure the
surface temperatures. The location of these thermocouples for the serpentine tube with uniform
straight section lengths is shown in Fig. 5(a). Both the T-type and the K-type thermocouples
have 0.1 C resolution and are calibrated before fixing them at the specified locations. Also, the
pressure drop along the serpentine tubes is found by using two very sensitive pressure
transmitters (PSCH00.5BCIA, Sensys). The constant temperature bath system has dimensions of
25 cm 35 cm 30 cm (Width Length Height). Two 2 kW electrical heaters are fixed at the
bottom of the bath and submerged in water. When the bath water achieves its boiling state, the
test section (serpentine tubes) is surrounded by steam bath. The working fluid flowing inside the
test section is heated through the tube wall by saturated steam condensed on the outer test section
surface. This causes in the uniform wall temperature along the tested tubes. The constant
temperature bath system is carefully insulated with 10 mm thick glass-wool to minimize the heat
loss to the ambient. The cooling unit consisted of a double tube heat exchanger and a brazed
plate heat exchanger (B3-014C-12-3.0-H, Danfuss). While the working fluid is cooled circa the
reservoir temperature by the double tube heat exchanger, the supplementary cooling to achieve
the stringent temperature of the reservoir is done in the plate heat exchanger. The flow rate of the
cooling fluid (tap water) is controlled by using a rotameter (LZT-1005G, MBLD). This cooling
system restores the working fluid temperature to the reservoir temperature (i.e. 25C). A
photograph representation of experimental loop is depicted in Fig. 4(b).

The serpentine tubes are recognized by five geometrical parameters, including tube
diameter (D), tube length (L), tube thickness (t), tubes pitch (p), and straight section length (l).
These geometrical parameters along with their values for the standard and uniform serpentine
tube are shown in Fig. 5 (a). As depicted in Fig. 5 (b), five serpentine tubes are fabricated and
examined as the test sections. As shown, all the serpentine tubes have the same tube diameter (7
mm), tube length (1100 mm), tube thickness (1 mm), and tube pitch (25 mm), whereas the
straight section lengths of the tubes are variable along the flow. In the current work, it is
proposed to change the straight section lengths of the serpentine tube along the flow. Therefore,
to study the effects of non-uniform straight section lengths on the thermal-hydraulic behavior,
procedure of the straight section length variations in the serpentine tubes are taken into account
as shown in Fig. 5(b). These variations are presented in Table 2.

Please insert Fig. 5 here

Please insert Table 2 here

The experimental procedure is as follows:

I.

The uniform serpentine tube is assembled in the constant temperature bath system as test

section.
II.

The constant temperature bath system is prepared.

III.

The reservoir is filled with deionized water, as working fluid, at the particular volume

(3.0 lit).
IV.

The pump is switched on, and the flow rate of the working fluid through the loop is set at

1.0 lit/min by using the adjustable valves and ultrasonic flow meter.

10

V.

The outlet temperature of the working fluid is restored at the constant value (25 C) by

using the cooling system.

VI.

After steady-state condition, which is achieved after 30 minutes, the required data are

logged.
VII.

The flow rate of the working fluid through the loop is increased to 1.5 lit/min and the

steps (V) and (VI) are repeated.

VIII.

The step (VII) is repeated up to 5.0 lit/min.

IX.

The working fluid is changed with the 0.1% wt. nanofluid, and the steps from (II) to

(VIII) are repeated.

X.

Two typical methods are consecutively used to properly clean up the loop; one blowing

by means of a connected air compressor (1HP-2P, Fazar Fan) to extract the nanofluid from the
loop and the other one washing by means of the deionized water to completely remove the
nanofluid from the loop.
XI.

A vacuum-trap system is employed to extract the nanofluid from the reservoir by mean of

a vacuum pump (DV-42N, Platinum).

XII.

The uniform serpentine tube is replaced with another serpentine tube, and all the steps are

repeated.

4. Data acquisition and uncertainty analysis

The obtained experimental data are used to estimate the thermal-hydraulic parameters,
including heat exchange rate, convective heat transfer coefficient, Nusselt number, pressure
drop, and friction factor, of each serpentine tube and working fluid in different volumetric flow

11

rates. Moreover, the obtained parameters are employed to evaluate the performance of each
serpentine tube by using the introduced performance evaluation criterion.
The equation of the convective heat transfer rate is used to compute the heat transfer
coefficient,
Qconv = mC P (T b ,out T b ,in )

(1)

where, m, CP, Tb,out and Tb,in represent the mass flow rate, specific heat, inlet and outlet bulk
temperatures of the working fluid, respectively. The effective heat transfer coefficient is
estimated from the ratio of the convective heat transfer rate to the total surface area and
logarithmic mean temperature difference of the wall-and-bulk fluid,
h=

Qconv .
A (Tw T b ) LMTD

(Tw T b ) LMTD =

(2)

Tw b ,in Tw b ,out

(3)

log ( Tw b ,in Tw b ,out )

where, Tw-b,in and Tw-b,out denote the differences between the wall temperature and the bulk
fluid temperature at the inlet and outlet of the heat transfer section. Also, the average Nusselt
number is defined as,

Nu =

hD h

(4)

The pressure drop is estimated from the experimental observations and theoretical formula
as given below,

P = Pin Pout

(5)

To appraise the hydraulic performance, the Fanning friction factor of the serpentine tubes
is estimated from the pressure drop values by using the following equation [25],

12

2 D h P
LG 2

f =

(6)

where, G is the mass velocity.

To assess the practical use of the proposed serpentine tubes and prepared nanofluids, the
performance is evaluated relatively to the uniform serpentine tube and base fluid at an identical
pumping power in terms of a performance evaluation criterion (PEC), which can be expressed as
[26],

( Nu i Nu r )
13
(f i f r )

(7)

where, the subscripts i and r mean a type of the serpentine tubes and uniform one, as the
reference status or baseline, respectively. Obviously, when the PEC is higher than unity, it
indicates that the applied technique is more in the favor of the heat transfer enhancement rather
than in the favor of the pressure drop increasing.
A detailed systematical uncertainty analysis is carried out to estimate the errors associated
with experiments by using the following equation [27],
M
R =
j =1

R
X

2 1/2

(8)

where, j, M, R, and Xj are the specific parameter counter, number of the independent variables,
uncertainties associated with the dependent, R, and independent, Xj, variables. The uncertainty
table for different instruments used in the experiments is given in Table 3. Also, the maximum
possible error for the parameters involved in the analysis are estimated and summarized in Table
4.

Please insert Table 3 here

13

Please insert Table 4 here

5. Results and discussion

In the current section, the heat transfer, pressure drop, and performance factor
characteristics of the base fluid and Cu-water nanofluids flow inside the considered serpentine
tubes for the volumetric flow rate between 1.0 and 5.0 lit/min are presented and described.

5.1. Effect of straight section length variations

Geometrical parameters have considerable effects on the thermal-hydraulic performance of
heat exchange devices. The effect of straight section length variations on the performance of heat
exchangers with the serpentine tubes has been not investigated in the past. Fig. 6(a-b)
individually shows the heat transfer coefficient and pressure drop values for the water flow
inside the serpentine tubes with variable straight section lengths as function of the volumetric
flow rate. As depicted in the figure, both the heat transfer coefficient and the pressure drop in all
the serpentine tubes gradually increase with increasing the flow rate. At a given flow rate, the
heat transfer coefficient of the L to H serpentine tube (Type 2) is consistently higher than that of
the other serpentine tubes, and its difference compared to the other serpentine tubes enhances
with the flow rate. For instance, at the minimum flow rate, i.e. 1 lit/min, the heat transfer
coefficient of the L to H serpentine tube is about 5.8% higher than that of the uniform one (Type
1), whereas at the maximum flow rate, i.e. 5 lit/min, this value is about 11.8%. The results show
that the H to L to H serpentine tube (Type 5) gets the second place at the lower flow rates, while
its heat transfer coefficient values decrease compared to the other serpentine tubes as the flow
rate increases. The L to H to L serpentine tube (Type 4) has a little bit higher values in

14

comparison with the uniform one (Type 1). It is also detected that the H to L serpentine tube
(Type 3) proposes the lowest heat transfer coefficient values in the studied range.

Please insert Fig. 6 here

For further details and having a better vision of the straight section length variations effect
on the performance of the serpentine tubes, a CFD study is also carried out. The considered
governing equations of continuity, momentum, and energy equation for the fluid domain are as
follows [28],
Continuity equation is:

( u i ) = 0
x i

(9)

where, is the density of fluid and ui is the velocity in x-direction.

Momentum equation is:

+
u i u j ) =
(
x i
x j x i

u
u j 2
u
ij + i
i +
x j
x j x i 3

u iu j
+

(10)

where, , uj, and u' are the fluid viscosity, velocity in y-direction, and fluctuated velocity,
respectively, and u iu j is the turbulent shear stress.
It should be noted that based on the studied range of flow rate (1.0 to 5.0 lit/min) and tube
diameter, the range of Reynolds number lies in 3,000 to 15,000. Therefore, the effect of
turbulence on the flow field is included through the application of RNG k turbulence model
[29]. The turbulence kinetic energy, k, and its dissipation rate, , are obtained from the following
transport equations,

15



k
( ku i ) = k eff
x i
x i
x j

( u i ) =
x i
x i

2
+ t S

(11)

2
2
C
S
C
+
+
R

k eff

1
tk
2
x
k
k

(12)

where, eff = + t and t = Ck2/ in the high Reynolds number range with C = 0.0845, and S
is the modulus of the mean rate of the strain tensor defined as,
S = ( 2S ij S ji )

(13)

where,
S ij =

1 u j u i
+

2 x i x j

(14)

The quantities K and are the inverse effective Prandtl numbers for k and , respectively.
The rate of the strain term is given by,
R =

C 3 (1 0 ) 2
1 + 3

(15)

where, = Sk/, 0 = 4.38, and = 0.012. The constants of the RNG k model have the
following default values; C1 = 1.42 and C2 = 1.68.
Energy equation is:

u i ( E + P ) =

x i
x i

T
eff

x i

(16)

where, E is the total energy, T is the temperature, and eff is the effective thermal conductivity
(t+f, where t and f are the turbulent and fluid thermal conductivity defined according to the
turbulent model being used).
The governing equations are discretized by the finite volume method (FVM). The standard
scheme is used for the pressure discretization, and the semi implicit method for pressure linked
16

equation (SIMPLE) algorithm is applied to deal with the coupling of pressure and velocity. In
order to achieve a more precise numerical solution, the second order upwind scheme is selected
for the convective terms. All solutions performed in this study are assumed to be converged
when the residuals resulting from the governing equations are lower than 106. Four different
non-uniform structured sets of mesh (27,500, 55,000, 110,000, and 165,000) are tested on the
uniform serpentine tube and water as working fluid in order to perform the mesh independence
analysis. The results indicated that the mesh system of 110,000 ensures a satisfactory solution,
which further increase in meshes to 165,000 gives less than 5% variation in both the heat transfer
and the pressure drop values.
The obtained numerical results and recorded experimental data for the base fluid flow are
in a good agreement. The difference between them is less than 8%. The temperature distributions
along the flow direction for different types of the serpentine tubes on the certain horizontal
planes are exhibited in Fig. 7. This figure schematically exhibits the effects of the straight section
length variations on the temperature distribution. When a fluid flows through the serpentine
tubes, rotational flows like the secondary flows (Dean Vortices) may be generated. The start and
growth of the rotational flows intensify the mixing of the fluid in the boundary layer thereby
enhancing the convective heat transfer. The variations of the straight section length along the
serpentine tubes can change the location and number of the rotational flows. The strength and
number of rotational flows in the L to H serpentine tube due to the short straight section lengths
at the vicinity of the upstream and a low pressure drop at the entrance is higher than the other
types. It can also be noticed that due to these short lengths in Type 2, the secondary flows are
generated in these areas. It means that the temperature gradient, i.e. heat transfer, is the highest at
the entrance due to the fluid mixing, and it decreases along the flow direction with increasing the

17

straight section lengths. These conditions occur in Types 3 and 5 at the end and middle of the
serpentine tubes, respectively. In Type 4, the heat transfer is enhanced at both the entrance and
the exit of the serpentine tube. It is obvious that the effect of the rotational flows on the
temperature gradient can change with the decreasing or increasing of the flow rate. From the
quantitative and schematic observations presented in Figs. 5(a) and 6, it can be concluded that
the short straight section lengths at the beginning of the serpentine tubes enhance the heat
transfer rate. Also, the results show that the controlling of the local temperature gradient and heat
transfer coefficient in the serpentine tubes is one of the significant advantages of the straight
section length variations. It can be one of the expectations in the novel heat exchange devices
like the heat exchanger-reactors as multi-functional devices.

Please insert Fig. 7 here

However, to specify a better performance of different serpentine tubes, it is necessary to

study the pressure drop. Some details of the pressure drop along the serpentine tubes are depicted
in Fig. 6(b). Generally, the pressure drop across the serpentine tubes is created by drag forces
exerted on the flow field, turbulence enhancement, and rotational flows produced by the
corrugated paths. Effects of these phenomena on the pressure drop are changed by the variations
of the straight section length along the flow direction. Among the serpentine tubes, the L to H to
L serpentine tube (Type 4) because of having two short straight section lengths along the flow
direction has the greatest pressure drop values on the whole range of flow rates, and the L to H
serpentine tubes comes in the second. It is interesting to note that at the lower flow rates, the
effect of the straight section length variations on the pressure drop is not significant. However, as

18

the flow rate goes up, the different of the pressure drop values for different serpentine tubes
increases. It is attributed to the variations of the strength and number of rotational flows
generated inside different types of the serpentine tubes, which affect the pressure drop, with the
increasing of the flow rate.
As presented in Fig. 6(a-b), improvement in the heat transfer performance from the straight
section length variations inside the serpentine tubes is associated with a penalty in the pressure
drop. Consequently, it is significant to evaluate the net profits of using such proposed patterns
for the serpentine tubes. The values of the considered PEC, i.e. Eq. (7), for different types of the
serpentine tubes are presented in Fig. 8. The solid line refers to the reference status which is the
water flow inside the serpentine tube with uniform straight sections. This figure displays that the
L to H serpentine tube has the greatest PEC values, and its values are higher than unity over the
range of studied. While the PEC values of this type approximately enhance with the increasing of
the flow rate, the maximum value of 1.12 is found at the flow rate equal to 4.0 lit/min. It is found
that the H to L to H serpentine tube has the greater values than the uniform and L to H to L
serpentine tubes at the lower flow rates, but at the higher flow rates the greater values occur for
the L to H to L and uniform serpentine tubes, respectively. Also, the results depict that the H to L
serpentine tube has the lowest values in the entire tested range.

Please insert Fig. 8 here

5.2. Effect of Cu-water nanofluid

The heat transfer coefficient and pressure drop values of the base fluid and prepared Cuwater nanofluids flow inside the uniform serpentine tube (Type 1) against the volumetric flow

19

rate are presented in Fig. 9(a-b). The experimental results clearly show that at a given flow rate
inside the serpentine tube, Cu nanoparticles suspended in the base fluid increase the heat transfer
coefficient. As previously mentioned [4,5], the reasons for such increases may be due to many
issues such as thermal conductivity enhancement, mixing effects of nanoparticles near the wall,
Brownian motion of nanoparticles, nanoparticles migration, and reduction of boundary layer
thickness. Moreover, at the higher concentrations of nanofluid, more nanoparticles are taking
part in heat transfer media, and there is higher surface area of particles interacting with the base
fluid, thereby enhancing the heat transfer process. As an example for the studied case, the
nanofluids of 0.1% and 0.4% wt. have the heat transfer coefficient averagely about 7.2% and
15.1% higher than that of the base fluid. As depicted in the figure, the difference of the heat
transfer coefficient values between the base fluid and the nanofluids increases with the flow rate.
For instance, at the minimum flow rate, i.e. 1.0 lit/min, the heat transfer coefficient values of the
0.1% and 0.4% wt. nanofluids are 5.1% and 10.9% higher than that of the base fluid, while at the
maximum flow rate, i.e. 5.0 lit/min, these values are 7.5% and 17.7%. This is may be due to the
fact that at the lower flow rates, the base fluid keeps the Cu nanoparticles in a limited area and
does not let them to migrate freely from one position to another one inside the serpentine tube.
However, as the flow rate goes up, the base fluid loses its control on the nanoparticles movement
and migration. Actually, dispersion effects and chaotic movements of the nanoparticles are
intensified which leads to increase in the heat transfer coefficient. In addition, rotational flows
inside the serpentine tube, which find strength at the higher flow rates, enhance fluid mixing and
break down the possible agglomerated particles partially for the nanofluid with the higher
nanoparticles weight fraction. As depicted, the increase of the flow rate from the 1.0 lit/min to
the 5.0 lit/min causes higher enhancement in the heat transfer coefficient of the 0.4% wt.

20

nanofluid (62.4%) in comparison with the 0.1% wt. nanofluid (47.1%). Therefore, it can be
concluded that the use of the nanofluids inside the serpentine tube is more effective at the higher
nanoparticles concentrations and flow rates from the thermal point of view.
The measured data demonstrated that at the same flow condition, the presence of Cu
nanoparticles slightly decreases the wall temperature of the serpentine tube. As an example, the
0.1% wt. nanofluid flow inside the serpentine tube averagely reduces the wall temperature about
2.4% compared to that of the base fluid flow. The Cu nanoparticles collide with the wall and
absorb the heat, then mix back with eddies to the core of the fluid flow. Probably, this
phenomenon is the reason which reduces the temperature of the serpentine tube wall.
There is a slight increase in the pressure drop of the 0.1% and 0.4% wt. nanofluids flow
(about 1.5% and 3.3%) inside the serpentine tube compared to the base fluid flow, see Fig. 9(b).
The pressure drop is a function of the density, dynamic viscosity, and volume flow rate in
addition to the geometry of the serpentine tube. The density and viscosity depend on the working
fluid. Further, as discussed in the nanofluid properties subsection, in the case of the nanofluids,
the viscosity increases with increase in its weight concentration, but the density remains
practically constant. Since, the viscosity is in direct relation with the pressure drop, the higher
value of the viscosity leads to increase the pressure drop value due to reduction in the moving of
fluid. Another reason which can be responsible may be attributed to the chaotic motion and
migration of nanoparticles in the base fluid. It can be also observed from the figure that the
pressure drop intensifies at the higher flow rates where the laminar sublayer is thinner and
subsequently the shear stress increases. Likewise, the chaotic motion and migration of
nanoparticles in the base fluid becomes more significant at the higher flow rates. These reasons

21

explain why at higher flow rates, the rate of increase in the pressure drop enhances, while at the
low flow rates, the pressure drops of the base fluid and nanofluids are almost the same.

Please insert Fig. 9 here

The variations of the PEC value versus the volumetric flow rate for the 0.1% and 0.4% wt.
nanofluids flow inside the uniform serpentine tube are presented in Fig. 10. As depicted in the
figure, the PEC values of the nanofluids are higher than unity over the range of studied.
Therefore, utilizing the nanofluid instead of the base fluid as a passive technique shows an
improvement in the thermal-hydraulic performance of the serpentine tube. It is also shown that at
the higher flow rates, the nanofluids propose higher values of the PEC. Likewise, the PEC values
in the case of the 0.4% wt. nanofluid places between those of the base fluid (unity) and the 0.1%
wt. nanofluid at the very low flow rates (1.0 and 1.5 lit/min), but at the high flow rates (3.5 to 5.0
lit/min), the PEC values of this working fluid is found to be greater than those of the 0.1% wt.
nanofluid. It is interesting to note that the 0.1% and 0.4% wt. nanofluids almost have the same
values of the PEC at the middle flow rates (2.0 to 3.0 lit/min).

Please insert Fig. 10 here

In this section, the use of the serpentine tubes with non-uniform straight section lengths
along with the Cu-water nanofluids is evaluated. Various forms of dimensional and nondimensional results can be displayed from the output of the conducted experiments, but due to
space restriction, only some of these results are presented here using of the defined PEC. It

22

should be noted that similar to the uniform serpentine tube (Type 1), the convective heat transfer
coefficient and pressure drop values of all the other serpentine tubes enhance with the Cu
nanoparticles weight fraction. Fig. 11(a-b) shows the variations of the PEC value with the
volumetric flow rate for the Cu-water nanofluids flow inside the serpentine tubes with nonuniform straight section lengths. In these figures, the water flow inside the uniform serpentine
tube is considered as baseline in Eq. (7). As shown in this figure, all the obtained values of the
PEC for the nanofluids flow inside the L to H serpentine tube (Type 2) are much greater than
unity which obviously indicates a reliable performance in practical applications. It is noticeable
to state that at the lower flow rates, the PEC values of the 0.1% wt. nanofluid are greater than
those of the 0.4% wt. nanofluid, whereas at the higher flow rates, the greater values are obtained
for the 0.4% wt. nanofluid. The maximum PEC value of 1.18 is found for the 0.4% wt. nanofluid
flow inside the L to H serpentine tube at the maximum flow rate. The presented results in Figs. 7
and 8 show that the thermal-hydraulic performance of the L to H to L serpentine tube (Type 4)
enhances when the working fluid is a nanofluid.

Please insert Fig. 11 here

6. Conclusion

Serpentine tubes and nanofluids are two passive techniques to enhance the thermal
performance of heat exchange devices. By combining these techniques together, as a compound
heat transfer enhancement technique, energy efficiency of heat exchange devices could be
increased dramatically. This study deals with an experimental investigation on the performance
of Cu-water nanofluids flow inside the serpentine tubes with variable straight section lengths.

23

The thermo-physical properties of the nanofluids required for the analysis are systematically
measured. The obtained results indicate that the heat transfer coefficient and pressure drop values
enhance with increasing two parameters, volumetric flow rate and Cu nanoparticles weight
fraction. The serpentine tube with Low to High straight section lengths has the highest values of
the heat transfer coefficient in comparison with the other ones. And, the serpentine tube with
Low to High to Low straight section lengths because of having two short straight section lengths
along the flow direction has the greatest pressure drop values on the whole range of flow rates.
Considerable high performance evaluation criterion (PEC) is calculated for simultaneous
utilization of the Cu-water nanofluid inside the serpentine tube with Low to High straight section
lengths. The maximum value of the PEF is 1.18 which renders these techniques a good choice in
practical applications.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to express their thanks to University of Islamic Azad University,
Shahrood Branch for their supports through the set-up fabrication and research implementation.

Nomenclature

total surface area in contact with working fluid, m2

Dh

hydraulic diameter, m

Cp

specific heat capacity, J.kg-1.K-1

turbulent model constant

turbulent model constant

total energy, J

mass velocity, kg.m-2.s-1

24

Gk

generation of turbulent kinetic energy

effective heat transfer coefficient W.m-2.K-1

turbulent kinetic energy, J.kg-1

tube length, m

straight section length, m

number of the independent variables

mass flow rate, kg.s-1

Qconv

convective heat transfer rate, W

temperature, K

tube thickness, m

pressure, Pa

tube pitch, m

pressure drop, Pa

dependent variable

temperature difference, K

velocity, m.s-1

independent variables

Greek symbols

density, kg.m-3

dynamic viscosity, Pa.s

thermal conductivity, W.m-1.K-1

ij

Kronecker delta

turbulent dissipation rate, m2.s-3

25

diffusion prandtl number for k

rate of dissipation

shear stress, kg.m-2

nanoparticle weight fraction

considered performance evaluation criterion

Dimensionless groups
f

Fanning friction factor = DhP/2LG2

Nu

Nusselt number = hDh/

Re

Reynolds number = GDh/

Subscripts
bf

base fluid

bulk fluid

b,in

fluid inlet

b,out

fluid outlet

specific parameter counter

LMTD

Logarithmic Mean Temperature Difference

nf

nanofluid

wall

Acronyms
CFD

Computational Fluid Dynamics

26

EEW

Electro-Exploded Wire

FVM

Finite Volume Method

PEC

Performance Evaluation Criterion

SIMPLE

Semi Implicit Method for Pressure Linked Equation

TEM

Transmission Electron Microscope

27

References

[1]

M.A. Khairul, R. Saidur, M.M. Rahman, M.A. Alim, A. Hossain, Z. Abdin, Heat transfer
and thermodynamic analyses of a helically coiled heat exchanger using different types of
nanofluids, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 67 (2013) 398-403.

[2]

S. Chingulpitak, S. Wongwises, A comparison of flow characteristics of refrigerants

flowing

through

adiabatic

straight

and

helical

capillary

tubes,

International

Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer 38 (3) (2011) 398-404.

[3]

Z. Zhao, X. Wang, D. Che, Z. Cao, Numerical studies on flow and heat transfer in
membrane helical-coil heat exchanger and membrane serpentine-tube heat exchanger,
International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer (9) (2011) 1189-1194.

[4]

D. Kim, Y. Kwon, Y. Cho, C. Li, S. Cheong, Y. Hwang, J. Lee, D. Hong, S. Moon,

Convective heat transfer characteristics of nanofluids under laminar and turbulent flow
conditions, Current Applied Physics 9 (2009) 119-123.

[5]

W. Duangthongsuk, S. Wongwises, An experimental study on the heat transfer

performance and pressure drop of TiO2-water nanofluids flowing under a turbulent flow
regime, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 53 (2010) 334-344.

[6]

L. Godson, B. Raja, D. Mohan Lal, S. Wongwises, Enhancement of heat transfer using

nanofluids-an overview, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 14 (2010) 629-641.

[7]

J. Sarkar, A critical review on convective heat transfer correlations of nanofluids,

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 15 (2011) 3271-3277.

[8]

G. Huminic, A. Huminic, Application of nanofluids in heat exchangers: A review,

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 16 (2012) 5625-5638.

28

[9]

B.H. Salman, H.A. Mohammed, K.M. Munisamy, A.S. Kherbeet, Characteristics of heat
transfer and fluid flow in microtube and microchannel using conventional fluids and
nanofluids: A review, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 28 (2013) 848-880.

[10]

M.A. Husseina, K.V. Sharma, R.A. Bakar, K. Kadirgama, A review of forced convection
heat transfer enhancement and hydrodynamic characteristics of a nanofluid, Renewable
and Sustainable Energy Reviews 29 (2014) Pages 734-743.

[11]

O. Mahian, A. Kianifar, C. Kleinstreuer, M.A. Al-Nimr, I. Pop, A.Z. Sahine, S.

Wongwises, A review of entropy generation in nanofluid flow, International Journal of
Heat and Mass Transfer 65 (2013) 514-532.

[12]

O. Mahian, A. Kianifar, S.A. Kalogirou, I. Pop, S. Wongwises, A review of the

applications of nanofluids in solar energy, International Journal of Heat and Mass
Transfer 57 (2) (2013) 582-594.

[13]

G. Huminic, A. Huminic, Heat transfer characteristics in double tube helical heat

exchangers using nanofluids, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 54 (19-20)
(2011) 4280-4287.

[14]

M. Fakoor Pakdaman, M.A. Akhavan-Behabadi, P. Razi, An experimental investigation

on thermo-physical properties and overall performance of MWCNT/heat transfer oil
nanofluid flow inside vertical helically coiled tubes, Experimental Thermal and Fluid
Science 40 (2012) 103-111.

[15]

P.C. Mukesh Kumar, J. Kumar, S. Suresh, K. Praveen Babu, Heat transfer enhancement
in a helically coiled tube with Al2O3/water nanofluid under laminar flow condition,
International Journal of Nanoscience 11 (2012) 1250029.

29

[16]

M. Kahani, S. Zeinali Heris, S.M. Mousavi, Comparative study between metal oxide
nanopowders on thermal characteristics of nanofluid flow through helical coils, Powder
Technology 246 (2013) 82-92.

[17]

Z. Wu, L. Wang, B. Sundn, Pressure drop and convective heat transfer of water and
nanofluids in a double-pipe helical heat exchanger, Applied Thermal Engineering 60
(2013) 266-274.

[18]

H.A. Mohammed, K. Narrein, Thermal and hydraulic characteristics of nanofluid flow in

a helically coiled tube heat exchanger, International Communications in Heat and Mass
Transfer 39 (2012) 1375-1383.

[19]

K. Narrein, H.A. Mohammed, Influence of nanofluids and rotation on helically coiled

tube heat exchanger performance, Thermochimica Acta 564 (2013) 13-23.

[20]

W.I.A. Aly, Numerical study on turbulent heat transfer and pressure drop of nanofluid in
coiled tube-in-tube heat exchangers, Energy Conversion and Management 79 (2014) 304316.

[21]

M. Tajik Jamal-Abada, A. Zamzamiana, M. Dehghan, Experimental studies on the heat

transfer and pressure drop characteristics of Cu-water and Al-water nanofluids in a spiral
coil, Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 47 (2013) 206-212.

[22]

W. Yu, D.M. France, J.L. Routbort, S.U.S. Choi, Review and comparison of nanofluid
thermal conductivity and heat transfer enhancements, Heat Transfer Engineering 29 (5)
(2008) 432-460.

[23]

A. Ghadimi, R. Saidur, H.S.C. Metselaar, A review of nanofluid stability properties and

characterization in stationary conditions, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer
54, (2011) 4051-4068.

30

[24]

X.F. Li, D.S.

Zhu, X.J. Wang, N. Wang, J.W. Gao, H. Li, Thermal conductivity

enhancement dependent pH and chemical surfactant for Cu-H2O nanofluids,

Thermochimica Acta 469 (2008) 98-103.
[25]

W.M. Kays, A.L. London, Compact Heat Exchangers, 3rd ed., Kreiger Publishing,
Melbourne, 1984.

[26]

K. Wongcharee, S. Eiamsa-ard, Heat transfer enhancement by using CuO/water nanofluid

in corrugated tube equipped with twisted tape, International Communications in Heat and
Mass Transfer 39 (2012) 251-257.

[27]

S.J. Kline, F.A. McClintock, Describing uncertainties in single-sample experiments,

Mechanical Engineering 75 (1953) 3-8.

[28]

F.P. Incropera, D.P. De Witt, Fundamentals of Heat and Mass Transfer, Fifth edition
John Wiley and Sons, New York, 2002.

[29]

FLUENT Incorporated, FLUENT 6.2 Users Guide, Fluent Incorporated Lebanon, NH,
USA, 2006.

31

Caption of Figures:
Fig. 1. TEM of Cu nanoparticles.
Fig. 2. Comparison of thermal conductivity ratio of Cu-water nanofluids between Li et al. [24] and present
measurements.
Fig. 3. Variations of shear stress against to shear rate of Cu-water nanofluids at 300.15 K.
Fig. 4. (a) Schematic and (b) Photograph representation of experimental loop.
Fig. 5. (a) Schematic of a standard serpentine tube along with geometrical parameter terminologies and values, (b)
Photograph of examined serpentine tubes with variable straight section lengths.
Fig. 6. Heat transfer coefficient Volumetric flow rate (b) Pressure drop Volumetric flow rate for water flow
inside different serpentine tubes.
Fig. 7. Temperature contours for water flow inside serpentine tubes at volumetric flow rate of 1.0 lit/min.
Fig. 8. Performance Evaluation Criterion Volumetric flow rate for water flow inside different serpentine tubes.
Fig. 9. (a) Heat transfer coefficient Volumetric flow rate (b) Pressure drop Volumetric flow rate for different
working fluid inside uniform serpentine tube (Type 1).
Fig. 10. Performance Evaluation Criterion Volumetric flow rate for different working fluid inside uniform
serpentine tube (Type 1).
Fig. 11. Performance Evaluation Criterion Volumetric flow rate: (a) 0.1% wt. nanofluid (b) 0.4% wt. nanofluid
flow inside different serpentine tubes.

32

Caption of Tables:
Table 1. EEW condition and copper wire dimension.
Table 2. Procedure of straight section length variations (mm).
Table 3. Uncertainties of experimental instruments.
Table 4. Uncertainties of experimental parameters.

33

Fig. 1. TEM of Cu nanoparticles.

34

Thermal conductivity ratio (nf / bf)

Li et al. data

1.8

Present data

1.6
1.4
1.2
1

0.8
0.6
0.4
0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

Nanoparticles weight fraction (%)

Fig. 2. Comparison of thermal conductivity ratio of Cu-water nanofluids between Li et al. [24] and present
measurements.

35

4.5

= 0.1%

= 0.4%

Shear stress (Pa)

3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0

100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900

Shear rate (s-1)

Fig. 3. Variations of shear stress against to shear rate of Cu-water nanofluids at 300.15 K.

36

(a)

37

(b)
Fig. 4. (a) Schematic (b) Photograph representation of experimental loop.

38

(a)

(b)
Fig. 5. (a) Schematic of a standard serpentine tube along with geometrical parameter terminologies and values, (b)
Photograph of examined serpentine tubes with variable straight section lengths.

39

Type 1

Heat transfer coefficicent (kW/m2.K)

1.8

Type 2

Type 3

Type 4

Type 5

1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1
0.9
0.8
0.5

1.5

2.5

3.5

4.5

5.5

Volumetric flow rate (lit/min)

(a)
Type 1

35

Type 2

Type 3

Type 4

Type 5

Pressure drop (kPa)

30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0.5

1.5

2.5

3.5

4.5

5.5

Volumetric flow rate (lit/min)

(b)
Fig. 6. Heat transfer coefficient Volumetric flow rate (b) Pressure drop Volumetric flow rate for water flow
inside different serpentine tubes.

40

Fig. 7. Temperature contours for water flow inside serpentine tubes at volumetric flow rate of 1.0 lit/min.

41

Type 2

Performance Evaluation Criterion

1.3

Type 3

Type 4

Type 5

Solid line: Reference status

Markers: PEC values for different models

1.2

1.1

0.9

0.8
0.5

1.5

2.5

3.5

4.5

5.5

Volumetric flow rate (lit/min)

Fig. 8. Performance Evaluation Criterion Volumetric flow rate for water flow inside different serpentine tubes.

42

 = 0% (Water)

= 0.1%

= 0.4%

Heat transfer coefficicent (kW/m2.K)

1.9
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1
0.9
0.8
0.5

1.5

2.5

3.5

4.5

5.5

Volumetric flow rate (lit/min)

(a)
= 0% (Water)

35

= 0.1%

= 0.4%

Pressure drop (kPa)

30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0.5

1.5

2.5

3.5

4.5

5.5

Volumetric flow rate (lit/min)

(b)
Fig. 9. (a) Heat transfer coefficient Volumetric flow rate (b) Pressure drop Volumetric flow rate for different
working fluid inside uniform serpentine tube (Type 1).

43

 = 0% (Water)

Performance Evaluation Criterion

1.3

= 0.1%

= 0.4%

Solid line: Reference status

Markers: PEC values for different models

1.2

1.1

0.9

0.8
0.5

1.5

2.5

3.5

4.5

5.5

Volumetric flow rate (lit/min)

Fig. 10. Performance Evaluation Criterion Volumetric flow rate for different working fluid inside uniform
serpentine tube (Type 1).

44

Performance Evaluation Criterion

1.3

Water flow in Type 1

Type 2
Type 3
Type 4
Type 5

1.2

1.1

0.9

Solid line: Reference status

Markers: PEC values for different models

0.8
0.5

1.5

2.5

3.5

4.5

5.5

5.5

Volumetric flow rate (lit/min)

(a)

Performance Evaluation Criterion

1.3

Water flow in Type 1

Type 2
Type 3
Type 4
Type 5

1.2

1.1

0.9

Solid line; Reference status

Markers: PEC values for different models

0.8
0.5

1.5

2.5

3.5

4.5

Volumetric flow rate (lit/min)

(b)
Fig. 11. Performance Evaluation Criterion Volumetric flow rate: (a) 0.1% wt. nanofluid (b) 0.4% wt. nanofluid
flow inside different serpentine tubes.

45

Table 1.
EEW condition and copper wire dimension.
Specifications
Range
Output voltage
0.5-1 kV
Input power
1P 220VAC 500W
Ignition time
1-5 s
Wire diameter
0.25 mm
Exploded length of wire
1-3 mm

46

Table 2.
Procedure of straight section length variations (mm).
Straight section length No.
1
2
3
4
Type No.
1 (Uniform)
100
100
100 100
2 (L to H)
50
60
70
80
150
140
130
120
3 (H to L)
115
4 (L to H to L)
55
75
95
5 (H to L to H)
145
125
105
85
L = Low
H = High

47

10

11

100
90
110
135
65

100
100
100
150
50

100
110
90
135
65

100
120
80
115
85

100
130
70
95
105

100
140
60
75
125

100
150
50
55
145

Table 3.
Uncertainties of experimental instruments.
Name of
Range of
Variable
instrument
instrument
measured
Flow meter
0 to 20 lit.min-1 Volumetric flow rate
Thermocouple -50 to 200 C
Bulk temperature
Thermocouple -73 to 260 C
Wall temperature
Transmitter
0 to 50,000 Pa Local pressure

Least division in
measuring instrument
0.01 lit.min-1
0.1 C
0.1 C
10 Pa

48

Min. and Max. values

measured in experiments
1 to 5 lit.min-1
25 to 52 C
51 to 72 C
1,530 to 30,120 Pa

Uncertainty
0.200%
0.192%
0.139%
0.033%

Table 4.
Uncertainties of experimental parameters.
Parameter name
Convective heat transfer coefficient
Nusselt number
Friction factor
PEC

49

Uncertainty error
1.62%
1.91%
2.14%
1.98%

Graphical abstract

50

Highlights

Effect of straight section variations on performance of serpentine tubes is studied.

Cu-water nanofluids are produced with a one-step technique at 0.1% and 0.4% wt.
Short straight sections at beginning enhance the heat transfer and pressure drop.
Cu-water nanofluid flow increases the heat transfer rate in serpentine tubes.

51