NDDES, DES fluid, Solar power, Aspen plus, KD2 Pro, Experiment, Simulation, solar power concentration, etc.

1. MEASUREMENT AND ASPEN BASED
SIMULATION OF DEEP EUTECTIC BASED
NANOFLUIDS FOR THERMAL APPLICATION
By- ASHVINI
KUMAR
UPADHYAY
(174107052)
Department
OF Chemical
Engineering
IIT Guwahati,
Guwahati
Date
04/07/2019
MTP presentation

2. Outlines
 Introduction
 Literature Review
 Objectives
 System description
 Aspen Plus Simulation of Molten Salt and DES
 Conclusion
 References
1

3. Introduction
 CSP(Concentrated Solar Power)
technology
 The conventional thermal
fluids have low to moderate
thermal stability and heat
storage capacity
Shifted to molten salt (KNO3,
NaNO2 and NaNO3).
 Alternative : Ionic liquid have
tried as HTF.
DES (Deep Eutectic Solvent) as
HTF (heat transfer fluid)??
2
Image Credit: Department of Energy, USA
Greener
Cheaper
Faster
Deep eutectic
solvent

4. Literature review
3
Sr. No. Highlights Author/Year
1 Heretofore Al2O3 and TiO2 nanoparticle dispersed in water by volume
fraction of 1 to 3% have experimentally observed up to 12% decrement
in heat transfer coefficient and measurable viscosity increment,
proposed new correlation for Nusselt Number Nu = 0.021 Re0.8 Pr0.5 .
Pak et
al./1998
2 Sedimentation were observed in 3% and 4% of volume nanofluids, and
viscosity increased for higher fraction of nanoparticle of Al2O3 and CuO.
Das et
al./2003
3 Al2O3 and TiO2 nanoparticle dispersed in water by volume fraction of
4.3% observed 32% and 11% higher thermal conductivity as compared
to the base fluid respectively
Masuda et
al./1993
4 Viscosity were increasing more rapidly for spherical particle than
cylindrical particle but thermal conductivity was observed higher for
cylindrical particle.
Muesed et
al./2005
5 Maxwell-Garnett (1891) model for thermal conductivity were developed
for spherical particle initially, Hamilton-Crosser (1962) for spherical as
well as cylindrical, then Wasp (1977), Yu and Choi (2003) etc.
Rashmi et
al./2012
6 DES can be prepared by using four type of pair of component,
quaternary salt and metal halide, quaternary salt and hydrated metal
halide, quaternary salt and hydrogen bond donor, and metal halide and
hydrogen bond donor.
Tome et
al./2018

5. 4
Hydrogen Bond Acceptor + Hydrogen Bond Donor

6.  DES are mixture of organic salts entirely composed of ions (cations and anions)
called hydrogen bond acceptor(HBA) with a suitable hydrogen bond
donor(HBD) :Liquid at room temperature and having negligible vapour
pressure.
 DES such as choline chloride + urea in molar ratio 1:2 was first introduced in
2004
 Our Work: oleic acid (OA) as HBA and DL-Menthol (DLM) as HBD in a molar
ratio of 1:1.46
HBD
OH
CH3
O
oleic Acid
DES

7. Objectives
6
To find the Aspen plus simulation result for nitrate
based molten salt as HTF and deviation from
experimental results.
To find Aspen plus simulation performance of
DES as HTF for specified geometry.
Measurement of viscosity and density of DES and
NDDES.

8. Water inlet
Water inlet
U-shaped
heat exchanger
Molten salt outlet
Molten salt pipe
Steam pipe
Superheated
vapor
Shell and Tube
heat exchanger
Molten salt inlet
Molten Salt as Thermal Fluid
Figure 2. Experimental system of molten salt

9. Aspen plus Simulation
8
Figure 2. Aspen plus simulation system of Molten salt

10. Aspen plus simulation of molten salt (KNO3, NaNO2
and NaNO3)
EDR Browser, Temperature Profile and steam table (Shell and Tube)
9
Figure 3. EDR browser and temperature profile of S-T heat exchanger

11. EDR Browser, Temperature Profile and steam table (U-Tube)
10
Figure 4. EDR browser and temperature profile of U-T heat exchanger

12. Stream table
11

13. Benchmarking of Aspen plus Simulations on Molten
Salts(KNO3, NaNO2 and NaNO3)
12
300 320 340 360 380 400
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
q
m,w
(kg/hr.)
Temperature (K)
1 m3
/hr. [24]
1.5m3
/hr. [24]
2 m3
/hr. [24]
1 m3
/hr. (Aspen)
1.5m3
/hr. (Aspen)
2 m3
/hr. (Aspen)
300 320 340 360 380 400
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Overall
Heat
Transfer
Coefficient
(W
m
-2
K
-1
)
Temperature (K)
1 m3
/hr. [24]
1.5 m3
/hr. [24]
2 m3
/hr. [24]
1 m3
/hr. (Aspen)
1.5 m3
/hr. (Aspen)
2 m3
/hr. (Aspen)
Figure 6. Steam generation rate with molten salt Figure 7. Overall heat transfer coefficient for
molten salt
[24] He CM, Lu J, Ding J, Wang W, and Yuan Y. Heat Transfer and Thermal Performance of Two-Stage Molten Salt Steam Generator, Applied Energy
2017;204;1231;1239

14. 13
300 320 340 360 380 400
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Total
Heat
flux
(kWm
-2
)
Temperature (K)
1 m3
/hr. [24]
1.5 m3
/hr. [24]
2 m3
/hr. [24]
Total
Heat
Transfer
Rate
(kWm
-2
)
1 m3
/hr. (Aspen)
1.5 m3
/hr. (Aspen)
2 m3
/hr. (Aspen)
Figure 8. Heat flux for molten salt Figure 9. Maximum of overall heat transfer
coefficient and Heat flux of molten salt
[24]. He CM, Lu J, Ding J, Wang W, and Yuan Y. Heat Transfer and Thermal Performance of Two-Stage Molten Salt Steam Generator, Applied Energy
2017;204;1231;1239
300 320 340 360 380 400
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Heat Transfer Coefficient (Aspen)
Heat Transfer Coefficient [24]
Heat flux (Aspen)
Heat flux [24]
Temperature (K)
Overall
Heat
Transfer
Coefficient
(Wm
-2
K
-1
)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Toatal
Heat
Flux
(kWm
-2
)

15. Aspen plus simulation for DES
14
120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
q
m,w
(kg/hr.)
Temperature (K)
1 m3
/hr.
1.5 m3
/hr.
2 m3
/hr.
120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
Overall
Heat
Transfer
Coefficient
(W
m
-2
K
-1
)
Temperature (K)
1 m3
/hr.
1.5 m3
/hr.
2 m3
/hr.
Figure 10. Steam generation rate with DES Figure 11. Overall heat transfer coefficient
for DES

16. 15
120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
Total
Heat
Flux
(kWm
-2
)
Temperature (K)
1 m3
/hr.
1.5 m3
/hr.
2 m3
/hr.
120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
0
15
30
45
60
75
90
Heat Transfer Coefficient
Heat Flux
Temperature (K)
Overall
Heat
Transfer
Coefficient
(Wm
-2
K
-1
)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Toatal
Heat
Flux
(kWm
-2
)
Figure 12. Heat flux for DES Figure 13. Overall heat transfer coefficient
and heat flux of DES

17. Behavior of Density and Viscosity of DES and NDDES with
temperature as well as volume fraction of nanoparticle.
16
280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380
800
825
850
875
900
925
950
975
1000
Density
(kg
m
-3
)
Temperature (K)
DES (DL-Menthol+Oleic acid)
BN NDDES (0.001 Volume Fraction)
BN NDDES (0.005 Volume Fraction)
BN NDDES (0.01 Volume Fraction)
290 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Viscosity
(cP)
Temparature (K)
DES (DL-Menthol+Oleic acid)
BN NDDES (0.001 Volume Fraction)
BN NDDES (0.005 Volume Fraction)
BN NDDES (0.01 Volume Fraction)
Figure 14. Density of DES and NDDES Figure 15. Viscosity of DES and NDDES

18. Conclusion
 Aspen plus simulation result of molten salt were following the
same pattern as experimental result up to a maximum point
temperature.
 Aspen plus simulation does not consider the dominance of
boiling heat transfer coefficient and higher heat loss at higher
temperature.
 Overall heat transfer coefficient and total heat flux increasing
with flow rate of molten salt.
 Aspen simulation result of DES has the same pattern as
Molten salt.
17

19. References
• Eck M, and Hennecke K. In Heat Transfer Fluids for Future Parabolic Trough Solar
Thermal Power Plants, Proceedings of ISES World Congress 2007 (Vol. I–Vol. V),
Springer: 2008; pp 1806-1812.
• Bridges N J, Visser A E, and Fox E B. Potential Of Nanoparticle-Enhanced Ionic Liquids
(NEILs) as Advanced Heat-Transfer Fluids. Energy Fuels 2011;25;4862-4864.
• Kearney D, Herrmann U, Nava P, Kelly B, Mahoney R, Pacheco J, Cable R, Potrovitza
N, Blake D, and Price H. Assessment of a Molten Salt Heat Transfer Fluid in a
Parabolic Trough Solar Field, Journal of Solar Energy Engineering 2003;125;170-176.
• Abbott AP, Boothby D, Capper G, Davies DL, and Rasheed RK. Deep Eutectic Solvents
Formed Between Choline Chloride and Carboxylic Acids: Versatile Alternatives to Ionic
Liquids, Journal of the American Chemical Society 2004;126;9142-9147.
• Tang B, Zhang H, and Row KH. Application of Deep Eutectic Solvents in the Extraction
and Separation of Target Compounds From Various Samples, Journal of Separation
Science 2015;38;1053-1064.
• Pak B C, and Cho Y I. Hydrodynamic and Heat Transfer Study of Dispersed fluid with
Submicron Metallic Oxide Particles. Experimental Heat Transfer 1998;11;151-170.
18

20. • Das SK, Putra N, Thiesen P, and Roetzel Wilfried. Temperature Dependence of
Thermal Conductivity Enhancement of Nanofluids. Jouenal of Heat Transfer
2003;125;567-574.
• Masuda H, Ebata A, Teramae K, and Hishinuma N, Alteration of Thermal Conductivity
and Viscosity of liquid by Dispersing Ultra-Fine Particles. Netsu Bussei 1993;7;227-233.
• Mueshed SMS, Leong K. C, and Yang C. Enhanced Thermal Conductivity of TiO2-
Water Based Nanofluid. International Journal of Thermal Science 2005;44;367-373.
• Rashmi W, Faris IA, and Khalid M. Thermal Conductivity of Carbon Nanotube
Nanofluid-Experimental and Theoretical Study, Heat Transfer-Asian Research
2012;41;145-163.
• Maxwell JC. A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism, Clarendon Press Series
1873;1;360-373.
• Hamilton RL, and Crosser OK. Thermal Conductivity of Heterogeneous Two-
Component System, Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Fundamentals 1962;1;187-
191.
• Wasp EJ, Kenny JP, and Gandhi RL. Solid-liquid Flow Slurry Pipeline Transportation,
Transport Technology Publication 1977;1;1-224.
• Wang X, Xu X, and Choi SUS. Thermal Conductivity of Nanoparticle-Fluid Mixture,
Journal of Thermodynamic and Heat Transfer 1999;13;474-480.
• He CM, Lu J, Ding J, Wang W, and Yuan Y. Heat Transfer and Thermal Performance of
Two-Stage Molten Salt Steam Generator, Applied Energy 2017;204;1231;1239.
19

21. THANK YOU
20