4.7 Review

Review on numerical simulations for nano-enhanced phase change material (NEPCM) phase change process

期刊

JOURNAL OF THERMAL ANALYSIS AND CALORIMETRY
卷 141, 期 2, 页码 669-684

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10973-019-09038-2

关键词

Nano-enhanced phase change material; NEPCM; Solidification and melting process; Brinkman and Maxwell correlations

资金

  1. Takasago Thermal and Environmental Systems (TTES) i-Kohza, Malaysia-Japan International Institute of Technology (MJIIT), Universiti Teknologi Malaysia [4B314]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A review on numerical simulations performed for solidification and melting process of nano-enhanced phase change materials (NEPCM) is reported. The studies were conducted to understand the factors influencing the process such as nanoparticle fraction in the mixture, nanoparticle size and shape, boundary conditions imposed and container and fin geometry. Then, common nanoparticles applied in the studies were highlighted. The numerical models applied to simulate the problems were next presented. Finally, the thermophysical properties predicted and applied in the numerical works were compared. It was found that copper was the most applied nanoparticle in the numerical simulations. Most researchers applied enthalpy-porosity formulation coupled with finite volume method to perform the simulations. This method was preferred because it is relatively simpler compared to multidomain approach and mesoscale methods. Regardless of the chosen method, most researchers used a single thermophysical property value for the NEPCM in both solid and liquid regions. Brinkman and Maxwell correlations were mostly used to approximate the dynamic viscosity and thermal conductivity of the NEPCM, respectively. It is essential to understand the limitations and to select the most suitable thermophysical properties correlation to be applied in the numerical simulations to ensure that the final results will be acceptable and deviation from experimental works is effectively suppressed.

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