New proposed methodology for specific heat capacity determination of materials for thermal energy storage (TES) by DSC

This study presents a methodology to determine the specific heat capacity (Cp) of materials for thermal energy storage (TES) by DSC. These materials have great energy storage capacities, and due to that, important heat flow fluctuations can be observed for each temperature differential, taking more...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Ferrer, Gerard, Barreneche Güerisoli, Camila, Solé, Aran, Martorell, Ingrid, Cabeza, Luisa F.
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Estado:Versión aceptada para publicación
Fecha de publicación:2017
País:España
Institución:Varias* (Consorci de Biblioteques Universitáries de Catalunya, Centre de Serveis Científics i Acadèmics de Catalunya)
Repositorio:Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunya
OAI Identifier:oai:recercat.cat:10459.1/59271
Acceso en línea:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2017.02.002
http://hdl.handle.net/10459.1/59271
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:Specific heat capacity (Cp)
Differential scanning calorimetry (DSC)
Thermal energy storage (TES)
Sensible heat storage
Descripción
Sumario:This study presents a methodology to determine the specific heat capacity (Cp) of materials for thermal energy storage (TES) by DSC. These materials have great energy storage capacities, and due to that, important heat flow fluctuations can be observed for each temperature differential, taking more time to reach a desired temperature gradient. Three different DSC methods are considered to be applied in the methodology, and are explained and compared in this study in order to select the most proper one for Cp determination. To perform this study, the Cp of three materials commonly used in sensible TES systems, slate, water, and potassium nitrate (KNO3), is determined. Excellent results with errors lower than 3% are obtained when using the proposed methodology with the areas method. Worse results are obtained with both dynamic and isostep methods, with errors up to 6% and 16% respectively, as a consequence of sensitivity problems during the measurements.