4.7 Review

Review on building energy performance improvement using phase change materials

Journal

ENERGY AND BUILDINGS
Volume 158, Issue -, Pages 776-793

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2017.10.066

Keywords

Phase change material; Building envelope; Building equipment; Energy performance; Thermal comfort; Thermal energy storage

Funding

  1. Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) [51606044]
  2. Nanyang Technological University

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Confronted with the crises of the growing resource shortages and continued deterioration of the environment, building energy performance improvement using phase change materials has received much attention in recent years. This review work provides an update on recent developments, 2004 similar to 2017, in phase change materials used to optimize building envelope and equipment. Firstly, a review of building envelope optimization methods by integrating surrounding wall, roof, and floor with phase change materials, is given. This is followed by reporting articles on building equipment optimized with phase change materials to reduce regular energy consumption. Series of air cooling, heating, and ventilation systems coupled with thermal energy storage were comparatively investigated. Finally, the existing gaps in the research works on energy performance improvement with phase change materials were identified, and recommendations offered as authors' viewpoints in 5 aspects. It was also found that the phase change temperature range of PCMs used was changed from 10 similar to 39 degrees C for envelope to -15.4 similar to 77 degrees C for equipment. We believe this comprehensive review might provide an overview of the analytical tools for scholars, engineers, developers, and policy designers, and shed new light on the designing and performance optimization for PCMs used in building envelope and equipment. (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. 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