kth.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Experimental analysis of submerged coil and encapsulated slab latent heat storage
KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Energy Technology.
Tsinghua Univ, Dept Bldg Technol & Sci, Beijing 100084, Peoples R China..
KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Energy Technology, Heat and Power Technology.ORCID iD: 0000-0001-6982-2879
2022 (English)In: Applied Thermal Engineering, ISSN 1359-4311, E-ISSN 1873-5606, Vol. 209, article id 118259Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Latent heat thermal energy storage (LHTES) has two primary LHTES packing methods, encapsulation and bulk PCM storage. Since there is still a lack of experimental comparison between these two methods, two types of LHTES units based on separated methods were built for direct comparison. Moreover, the impact of heat transfer fluid (HTF) flowrate on LHTES performance was evaluated. Unit one is a 0.38 m(3) tank containing slab-shaped macro-encapsulated phase change material (PCM); unit two is a 0.54 m(3) tank containing submerged spiral coil heat exchanger (SCHE) in PCM. PCM with a melting temperature of 58-60 ? was charged/discharged between 46 and 72 ?. Parametric studies on constant and time-varying HTF flowrates were conducted to test the impact on the thermal storage performance.& nbsp;The time-varying flowrate control enables the system to supply the needed power at different discharging stages. Moreover, partial charging/discharging demonstrates higher mean thermal power than full charge/discharge rendering this control strategy adequate under specific operating conditions. Finally, the comparison between the slab-encapsulated PCM storage unit and the SCHE based unit shows that the former requires a shorter completion time while the latter has a higher energy storage density.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier BV , 2022. Vol. 209, article id 118259
Keywords [en]
Phase change materials, Thermal energy storage, Experimental study, Spiral coil heat exchanger, Slab encapsulation
National Category
Energy Engineering
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-312191DOI: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2022.118259ISI: 000788205200001Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85126300901OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kth-312191DiVA, id: diva2:1658846
Note

QC 20220518

Available from: 2022-05-18 Created: 2022-05-18 Last updated: 2022-06-25Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records

Hu, Ming-HsuanChiu, Justin NingWei

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Hu, Ming-HsuanChiu, Justin NingWei
By organisation
Energy TechnologyHeat and Power Technology
In the same journal
Applied Thermal Engineering
Energy Engineering

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 116 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf