| Summary: | The building sector is targeting net-zero emissions through the integration of renewable energy technologies, especially for space cooling and heating applications. In this regard, the use of solar thermal concentrating collectors is of vital importance. The performance of these collectors increases by using an efficient fluid such as a nanofluid due to their high thermal conductivity. This research addresses the preparation, stability analysis, and characterisation of metallic and non-metallic oxide nanofluids and their experimental analysis in a compound parabolic collector (CPC) system. Five different combinations of nanofluids are used with different volumetric concentrations (0.025%, 0.05%, and 0.075%) including multi-wall carbon nanotube with water (MWCNT–H<sub>2</sub>O), multi-wall carbon nanotube with ethylene glycol (MWCNT–EG), aluminium oxide with water (Al<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub>–H<sub>2</sub>O), aluminium oxide with ethylene glycol (Al<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub>–EG), and magnesium oxide with ethylene glycol (MgO–EG). The prepared nanofluids are characterised in terms of thermal conductivity and viscosity. Detailed experimentation is performed to investigate the CPC system integrated with the nanofluids. The results obtained from the detailed characterisation of the MWCNT–H<sub>2</sub>O nanofluid showed that the nanofluids have a 37.17% better thermal conductivity than distilled water as a primary fluid, and the MWCNT–EG nanofluid has demonstrated an increase in viscosity by 8.5% compared to ethylene glycol (EG). The experimental analysis revealed that the thermal efficiency of the collector integrated with the MWCNT–H<sub>2</sub>O nanofluid is increased by 33% compared to water. Meanwhile, the thermal efficiency of the collector with MWCNT–EG was increased by 24.9% compared to EG. Moreover, a comparative analysis among metallic nanofluids was also performed, i.e., Al<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub>–H<sub>2</sub>O, Al<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub>–EG, and MgO–EG. In each case, the thermal efficiency of the collector was recorded, which was greater than the base fluid by percentages of 29.4%, 22.29%, and 23.1%, respectively. The efficiency of non-metallic nanofluids is better than metallic nanofluids by 7.7%. From the obtained results, it can be concluded that the CPC system performed best with MWCNT–H<sub>2</sub>O compared to any other combination of nanofluids.
|
|---|