7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Comparative Analysis of Machine Learning Models for Nanofluids Viscosity Assessment

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The process of selecting a nanofluid for a particular application requires determining the thermophysical properties of nanofluid, such as viscosity. However, the experimental measurement of nanofluid viscosity is expensive. Several closed-form formulas for calculating the viscosity have been proposed by scientists based on theoretical and empirical methods, but these methods produce inaccurate results. Recently, a machine learning model based on the combination of seven baselines, which is called the committee machine intelligent system (CMIS), was proposed to predict the viscosity of nanofluids. CMIS was applied on 3144 experimental data of relative viscosity of 42 different nanofluid systems based on five features (temperature, the viscosity of the base fluid, nanoparticle volume fraction, size, and density) and returned an average absolute relative error (AARE) of 4.036% on the test. In this work, eight models (on the same dataset as the one used in CMIS), including two multilayer perceptron (MLP), each with Nesterov accelerated adaptive moment (Nadam) optimizer; two MLP, each with three hidden layers and Adamax optimizer; a support vector regression (SVR) with radial basis function (RBF) kernel; a decision tree (DT); tree-based ensemble models, including random forest (RF) and extra tree (ET), were proposed. The performance of these models at different ranges of input variables was assessed and compared with the ones presented in the literature. Based on our result, all the eight suggested models outperformed the baselines used in the literature, and five of our presented models outperformed the CMIS, where two of them returned an AARE less than 3% on the test data. Besides, the physical validity of models was studied by examining the physically expected trends of nanofluid viscosity due to changing volume fraction.

          Related collections

          Most cited references87

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Support-vector networks

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Multilayer feedforward networks are universal approximators

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Extremely randomized trees

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Nanomaterials (Basel)
                Nanomaterials (Basel)
                nanomaterials
                Nanomaterials
                MDPI
                2079-4991
                07 September 2020
                September 2020
                : 10
                : 9
                : 1767
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering, McGill University, Montreal, QC H3A 2K6, Canada; mohammadhadi.shateri@ 123456mail.mcgill.ca (M.S.); zeinab.sobhanigavgani@ 123456mail.mcgill.ca (Z.S.); azin.alinasab@ 123456polymtl.ca (A.A.)
                [2 ]Department of Chemical & Petroleum Engineering, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB T2N 1N4, Canada; amir.varamesh@ 123456ucalgary.ca
                [3 ]Department of Petroleum Engineering, Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman, Kerman 7616913439, Iran
                [4 ]College of Construction Engineering, Jilin University, Changchun 130600, China
                [5 ]Faculty of Civil Engineering, Technische Universität Dresden, 01069 Dresden, Germany
                [6 ]School of Economics and Business, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, 1430 Ås, Norway
                [7 ]Institute of Automation, Kando Kalman Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Obuda University, 1034 Budapest, Hungary
                [8 ]Institute of Research and Development, Duy Tan University, Da Nang 550000, Vietnam
                [9 ]Future Technology Research Center, College of Future, National Yunlin University of Science and Technology, 123 University Road, Section 3, Douliou, Yunlin 64002, Taiwan
                Author notes
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4842-0613
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6605-498X
                Article
                nanomaterials-10-01767
                10.3390/nano10091767
                7558292
                32906742
                7c9971f5-3819-4e5d-81e9-8786cfe260b4
                © 2020 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 23 June 2020
                : 31 August 2020
                Categories
                Article

                nanofluid viscosity,experimental data,machine learning,deep learning,nano,nanomaterials,nanofluid,artificial neural network,data science,big data,ensemble models,artificial intelligence,computational fluid dynamics,material design,computational mechanics

                Comments

                Comment on this article