4.7 Article

Modelling study of the low-pump-power demand constructal T-shaped pipe network for a large scale radiative cooled-cold storage system

Journal

APPLIED THERMAL ENGINEERING
Volume 127, Issue -, Pages 1564-1573

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2017.08.131

Keywords

Radiative cooling; Pipe network; Constructal theory; Cold storage; Reverse return design

Funding

  1. U.S. Department of Energy's Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) [DE-AR0000580]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To provide supplemental cooling to air cooled condenser (ACC) based thermo-electric power plants, radiative cooling is one of the options to ensure comparable efficiency as water cooled power plants. However, radiative cooling has relatively low energy intensity, about 100 W/m(2) cooling power on daily average. To work with power plants generally at few hundreds of megawatts, an intermediate system is needed to bridge this huge energy intensity mismatching at low energy cost. A low-pump-power demand pipe network is proposed to collect cold energy generated by the radiative cooling surfaces using water as the heat transfer fluid and the cold water is thus stored in intermediate storage devices. In this work, head loss and heat loss analysis models have been developed for the proposed constructal T-shaped network design, which provides convenience to integrate and scale up the radiative cooling modules to a large system to meet megawatt power plant's supplemental cooling demand. A large radiative cooling system may consist of hundreds to thousand radiative cooled-cold (RadiCold) storage subsystems at a size of about 200-kW(th) each. Design of the 200-kW(th) RadiCold subsystem with constructal T-shaped network shows 11 kWh/day for pump electricity consumption and delivers cold energy of 4096 kW(th)/day. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available