4.8 Article

Experimental study of layered thermal energy storage in an air-alumina packed bed using axial pipe injections

期刊

APPLIED ENERGY
卷 249, 期 -, 页码 409-422

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.04.111

关键词

Packed bed thermal energy storage; Thermal front; Axial flow injection; Exergy

资金

  1. Montana State University
  2. Higher Committee for Educational Development in Iraq (HCED)
  3. Iraqi government

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper presents the experimental results of thermal behavior in an air-alumina packed bed storage system using a new technique for charging/discharging proceecec A normal packed bed system, 100 cm in length, is divided into layers via pipes inserted internally along the axial length of the bed. Alumina beads were used as solid storage material and air was used as the heat transfer fluid (HTF) with an inlet temperature of 150 degrees C. This study analyzes the thermal behavior for full charge/discharge processes by dividing the bed domain into layers, focusing on the thermal exergetic efficiency for different charging/discharging schemes. One, two, and three layer configurations are considered along with various schemes including duration and magnitude of mass flow to each layer. In the most efficient configuration, the thermal exergetic efficiency increases with the number of layers from 53.2% to 69.6% for 0.0048 m(3)/s and 55.4% to 73.4% for 0.0061 m(3)/s, from one layer to two layers. At these same flow rates, thermal exergetic efficiencies increase to 76.8% and 80.3% for three layers. To determine the contributions of axial thermal dispersion and heat losses, a numerical model was run for a full charge/discharge cycle in adiabatic and non-adiabatic cases. The model results show that the dispersive effect is reduced by 23.2% in the best two-layer case and 25.6% in the best three-layer case for 0.0048 m(3)/s and by 22.8% in the best two-layer case and 26.5% in the best three-layer case for 0.0061 m(3)/s, resulting in these gains in exergetic efficiency.

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

4.8
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