↓ Skip to main content

Nanofluid optical property characterization: towards efficient direct absorption solar collectors

Overview of attention for article published in Discover Nano, March 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
6 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
453 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
383 Mendeley
Title
Nanofluid optical property characterization: towards efficient direct absorption solar collectors
Published in
Discover Nano, March 2011
DOI 10.1186/1556-276x-6-225
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robert A Taylor, Patrick E Phelan, Todd P Otanicar, Ronald Adrian, Ravi Prasher

Abstract

Suspensions of nanoparticles (i.e., particles with diameters < 100 nm) in liquids, termed nanofluids, show remarkable thermal and optical property changes from the base liquid at low particle loadings. Recent studies also indicate that selected nanofluids may improve the efficiency of direct absorption solar thermal collectors. To determine the effectiveness of nanofluids in solar applications, their ability to convert light energy to thermal energy must be known. That is, their absorption of the solar spectrum must be established. Accordingly, this study compares model predictions to spectroscopic measurements of extinction coefficients over wavelengths that are important for solar energy (0.25 to 2.5 μm). A simple addition of the base fluid and nanoparticle extinction coefficients is applied as an approximation of the effective nanofluid extinction coefficient. Comparisons with measured extinction coefficients reveal that the approximation works well with water-based nanofluids containing graphite nanoparticles but less well with metallic nanoparticles and/or oil-based fluids. For the materials used in this study, over 95% of incoming sunlight can be absorbed (in a nanofluid thickness ≥10 cm) with extremely low nanoparticle volume fractions - less than 1 × 10-5, or 10 parts per million. Thus, nanofluids could be used to absorb sunlight with a negligible amount of viscosity and/or density (read: pumping power) increase.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 383 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Turkey 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 376 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 88 23%
Student > Master 61 16%
Researcher 43 11%
Student > Bachelor 34 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 20 5%
Other 65 17%
Unknown 72 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 161 42%
Energy 30 8%
Materials Science 20 5%
Chemistry 17 4%
Physics and Astronomy 16 4%
Other 40 10%
Unknown 99 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 November 2018.
All research outputs
#8,534,528
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Discover Nano
#227
of 1,146 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,865
of 119,017 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Discover Nano
#10
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,146 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 119,017 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.