Experimental Comparison of Three Characterization Methods for Two Phase Change Materials Suitable for Domestic Hot Water Storage

This study presents an experimental comparison of three characterization methods for phase change materials (PCM). Two methods were carried out with a calorimeter, the first with direct scanning (DSC) and the second with step scanning (STEP). The third method is a fluxmetric (FM) characterization performed using a fluxmeter bench. For the three methods, paraffin RT58 and polymer PEG6000, two PCM suitable for domestic hot water (DHW) storage, were characterized. For each PCM, no significant difference was observed on the latent heat and the total energy exchanged between the three characterization methods. However, DSC and STEP methods did not enable the accurate characterization of the supercooling process observed with the FM method for polymer PEG6000. For PEG6000, the shape of the enthalpy curve of melting also differed between the experiments on the calorimeter-DSC and STEP-methods, and the FM method. Concerning the PCM comparison, RT58 and PEG6000 appeared to have an equivalent energy density but, as the mass density of PEG6000 is greater, more energy is stored inside the same volume for PEG6000. However, as PEG6000 experienced supercooling, the discharging temperature was lower than for RT58 and the material is therefore less adapted to DHW storage operating with partial phase change cycles where the PCM temperature does not decrease below 52 & DEG;C.

Automated summary

This study compares three characterization methods for phase change materials (PCM) and finds no significant difference in latent heat and total energy exchanged. However, the calorimeter-DSC and STEP methods were not accurate in characterizing the supercooling process of PEG6000 observed with the FM method. RT58 and PEG6000 have equivalent energy density, but PEG6000 stores more energy within the same volume due to its higher mass density.