Experimental investigation of solidification in metal foam enhanced phase change material
A major challenge for the use of phase change materials (PCMs) in thermal energy storage (TES) is overcoming the low thermal conductivity of PCM’s. The low conductivity gives rise to limited power during charging and discharging TES. Impregnating metal foam with PCM, however, has been found to enhan...
| Autores: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2017 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universitat de Lleida (UdL) |
| Repositorio: | Repositori Obert UdL |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:repositori.udl.cat:10459.1/60492 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/251/1/012112 http://hdl.handle.net/10459.1/60492 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Phase change materials (PCM) |
| Sumario: | A major challenge for the use of phase change materials (PCMs) in thermal energy storage (TES) is overcoming the low thermal conductivity of PCM’s. The low conductivity gives rise to limited power during charging and discharging TES. Impregnating metal foam with PCM, however, has been found to enhance the heat transfer. On the other hand, the effect of foam parameters such as porosity, pore size and material type has remained unclear. In this paper, the effect of these foam parameters on the solidification time is investigated. Different samples of PCM-impregnated metal foam were experimentally tested and compared to one without metal foam. The samples varied with respect to choice of material, porosity and pore size. They were placed in a rectangular cavity and cooled from one side using a coolant flowing through a cold plate. The other sides of the rectangular cavity were Polymethyl Methacrylate (PM) walls exposed to ambient. The temperature on the exterior walls of the cavity was monitored as well as the coolant flow rate and its temperature. The metal foam inserts reduced the solidification times by at least 25 %. However, the difference between the best performing and worst performing metal foam is about 28 %. This shows a large potential for future research. |
|---|