4.7 Article

An effectiveness study of enhanced heat transfer in phase change materials (PCMs)

期刊

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2013.01.013

关键词

Phase field method; Phase change materials (PCMs); Metal foams; Effectiveness study

资金

  1. National Basic Research Programme of China (973 Project) [2013CB228303]
  2. UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) [EP/F061439/1]
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) [51176110]
  4. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/F061439/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  5. EPSRC [EP/F061439/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A phase field model is for the first time employed to solve the phase change problem in a metal foam-embedded Latent Thermal Energy Storage (LTES) system. A phase field model deals with free boundary problems without tracing their positions, and therefore provides potentials of being extended to consider more complicated mechanisms: multi-dimension and volume change. The coupled heat transfer between PCMs and metal foams is solved based on the non-equilibrium heat transfer theory. Two phase fields are introduced to deal with phase change and volume change. Comparisons are made between the model predictions and the experimental data available in existing literatures. Two dimensionless groups of the material and structure parameters are identified to control the effectiveness of the system. An Effectiveness Map is also produced to distinguish the conditions under which incorporating metal foam into the PCMs is sensitive, lowly sensitive or irrelevant. The map provides a useful tool to guide the metal selection and structure design of the metal foams when enhancing the heat transfer of PCMs. Finally case studies are also carried out, in which the minimum thermal conductivity of copper/aluminium foams and the maximum k(int) can be determined by referring to the obtained Effectiveness Map. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据