THERMAL PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF A

CASCADED COLD STORAGE UNIT USING

MULTIPLE PHASE CHANGE MATERIALS
(PCM’S)
 INTRODUCTION
• ENERGY STORAGE
• is indispensable for the utilization of renewable energy resources.
• THERMAL ENERGY STORAGE (TES)
• stores energy in the form of heat.
• SENSIBLE THERMAL ENERGY STORAGE (STES)
• Sensible heat
• LATENT THERMAL ENERGY STORAGE (LTES)
• Latent heat
MAIN ADVANTAGES OF CASCADED LTES
1. Increase in charging/discharging rate, especially during the phase change
period.
2. A uniform outlet heat transfer fluid (HTF) temperature for a longer duration.
3. Enhancement of the energy capacity and exergy efficiency simulated an
encapsulated cascaded LTES and concluded that a maximal of 5.12% more
energy can be stored in a 2-stage cascaded LTES.
• Cold storage unit, as a kind of TES device, has seen its application in air-
conditioning system for peak load shifting of the power grid in solar cooling system
for stabilizing the system operation, and in cold chain transportation for food and
medicine protection.
• In the above applications, the cold storage mediums are usually water, ice or a single
type of PCM. Given the merits of the cascaded LTES studied in different areas, a
cascaded cold storage unit (CCSU) with multiple PCMs might also be superior to a
single-stage cold storage unit (SCSU). However, most of the cascaded LTES
systems investigated are employed for high temperature heat storage, whose phase
change temperatures are usually higher than 150 C. Cascaded LTES with mild phase
change temperature that falls in the range of 30e80 C are also seen in the literature.
• Until now, only a few investigations have been made on cascaded cold storage that
contains PCMs with low phase change temperatures. Besides, the few cases
available in the literature are performed only in numerical methods. Hence, it is
meaningful to conduct more investigations on CCSU with different configurations and
application scenarios.
• PCMs with different phase change temperatures in a packed bed CSU. An
experimental set-up for testing the heat transfer characteristics of the CCSU
was established, and then a one-dimensional mathematical model was
developed and validated by using the experimental data. The thermal
performance of the CCSU was compared, in terms of the solidification
processes, with those of a single-stage cold storage unit (SCSU).
Characteristics under different operating conditions, including charging time,
accumulated cold stored and exergy efficiency, are compared and presented
in the paper.
EXPERIMENTAL TEST
PHASE CHANGE MATERIALS
• The PCMs employed are composed of the Capric- Lauric acid eutectic and
Oleic acid with different mole fraction (denoted as C-L/O PCMs). Here, Oleic
acid is used as an addictive for adjusting the phase change temperatures of
the PCMs. Three kinds of C-L/O PCMs with 10%, 6% and 2% mole fraction
of Oleic acid (denoted as PCM_1,PCM_2 and PCM_3) are tested and found
to be appropriate for cold storage in terms of phase change temperature.
Test result by the Thistory method shows that the onset solidifying
temperatures of PCM_1, PCM_2 and PCM_3 are 13 C, 14.5 C and 17 C,
respectively. The latent heats of the PCMs, measured by a differential
scanning calorimeter (DSC) at a cooling rate of 3 K/min, are in the range
of90e127 kJ/kg, as shown by the black curves in Fig. 1. Besides, it is seen
that the phase change temperatures of the PCMs occur in abroad
temperature range rather than a constant temperature, though most of the
latent heat is located in the peak area. Therefore, the enthalpy-temperature
relationship, as presented by the red curves, is a more precise way to depict
the latent heats of PCMs. Where, the enthalpy-temperature relationship
curves are derived from the integration of the DSC curves, in which the onset
solidification temperatures are revised according to the test results by the T-
history method. Detailed thermal properties are listed in Table 1.
TABLE 1
EXPERIMENTAL SET-UP AND PROCEDURE
• Fig. 2 shows the structure and parameters of the CSU designed. The unit is mainly
composed of three cylinder segments (denoted as Segment-1, Segment-2 and Segment-
3) and two cone type end covers. The inner diameter and length of each segment are
identically to be 19 and 28 cm. In each segment, 150 spherical PCM capsules are
randomly packed. In order to form a firm platform for comparing the thermal performance
between CCSU and SCSU, two different packing schemes are arranged so that average
charging temperature and cold storage capacity are equal in both units. In the SCSU, all
the PCM capsules in three segments are filled with PCM_2, while in the CCSU, PCM
capsules packed in Segment-1, Segment-2 and Segment-3 are separately filled with
PCM_1, PCM_2 and PCM_3. The diameter and wall thickness of each capsule are 38 mm
and 0.3 mm, respectively. Thus, the corresponding void fraction of the each CSU is 0.46.
The cone type end covers, which are connected between the CSU and the inlet/outlet
pipes, are served as the convergent pipes to make sure that the HTF flows evenly. The
inner diameter of the inlet/outlet pipes are 2 cm. In addition, the storage tank is covered
with a 4 cm rubber foam insulation layer.
FIGURE 2
• A schematic diagram of the experimental set-up for testing the thermal performance of the
CCSU and SCSU is shown in Fig. 3. The system mainly consists of a homo-thermal
circulator, a chilled water storage tank and a vertically-standing packed bed CSU, where
the CSU is replaceable according to the test object. The HTF is water, which will be
pumped to unit from the bottom inlet during the cold charging process. Before the
charging process, 500L chilled water will be stored in the chilled water storage tank in
advance for stabilizing the initial charging process when large amount of heat exchange
happens, making sure that the HTF is supplied at a constant temperature. During the
charging process, valve 2, valve 3, valve 4 and valve 6 are turned on, while valve 1 is
closed and valve 5 is partially switched on for adjusting the flow rate. Thus, a constant
flow rate is ensured. A rotameter, with a range of 50e500 L/h and an accuracy of ±4%, is
used for measuring the inlet flow rate. The rotameter is calibrated by measuring the
volume of the total water passing through in a rated time. The temperature variations are
logged every 30s by a Keithley 2700 data acquisition system.
FIGURE 3
SIMULATION WORK
MATHEMATICAL MODEL AND GOVERNING
EQUATIONS
• A one-dimensional concentric dispersion model is developed. In the model, HTF and PCM are
treated separately as two-phase, assuming that the packed bed is an isotropic porous medium.
The temperature distribution is also considered inside the capsules. The following assumptions
are employed in the model:
1. Temperature and velocity gradient in the flow direction are neglected, simplifying the
governing equation into one dimensional;
2. The flow pattern inside the bed is deemed as plug flow, and the fluid flow friction is
negligible due to the inlet low flow rates studied. So the momentum equation for HTF is
neglected;
3. The physical properties of PCMs are assumed to be homogeneous and isotropic;
4. The thermal resistance of the capsule wall is too thin to be considered;
5. As the temperature difference between HTF and PCM is small in the cold charging
process, natural convection in the capsules is neglected;
6. Since the tank is well insulated, there is no cold leakage from the unit to the environment.
 BALANCING EQUATIONS

Where:
ε is the void fraction;
rf and Cf are density and specific heat of HTF;
Tf and Tp are the temperatures of HTF and PCM;
u is the mean velocity inside the unit;
ap is the superficial capsule area per unit bed volume.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
• The repeatability of the experiment was
firstly verified before the model validation.
Take the CCSU as an example, two rounds
of experiment was conducted under the
same condition, and the result is shown in
Fig. 4. As can be seen in the figure, the data
in both experiments shows good
repeatability, though minor deviation d 0.158
C of root-mean absolute error and 1.98% of
mean absolute percentage error, is
observed. Where, the deviation mainly
results from the minor difference in initial
and operating condition.
• The validation of the mathematical model is verified by comparing the simulation results
with the experimental data. Fig. 5 shows both the experimental and simulation results in
terms of time-wise PCM temperature variation in the two types of CSUs compared. As
shown, the simulation results are in good agreement with the experimental data. The
maximal deviations between the simulation results and experimental data are observed as
5.1% and 8.1%, respectively, for the SCSU and CCSU.
• Further comparisons are performed in terms of time-wise HTF temperature variation in
both CSUs investigated, as shown in Fig. 6(a) and (b). Also, the simulation results agree
well with the experimental data. The maximal deviations observed are 2.7% and 3.7%,
respectively, for the SCSU and CCSU. The time and grid independence are also tested,
and it is indicated that the results calculated by a time step of 0.002 s and a spatial step
of 1mm are identical with that calculated by a time step of 0.005 s and a spatial step of 2
mm, manifesting the validation of the mathematical model.
FIGURE 5
FIGURE 5
FIGURE 6
FIGURE 6
• Fig. 7 depicts the time-wise cold storage variations in both kinds of CSUs, at the
operating condition of Tin ¼ 10 C, V_ f ¼ 100 L/h. The total cold stored in the whole CSU
and the cold stored in each segment are presented. As the figure shows, the cold stored
in both of the CSUs, either in every single segment or in the whole CSU, rise quickly in
the earlier charging process when Stage One dominates. Afterwards, the cold charging
rates in both CSUs slow down gradually. It is observed that a maximal of 1358 kJ and
1328 kJ cold are stored separately in the SCSU and CCSU. However, the total charging
time of the CCSU is almost 2000 s less than that of the SCSU, indicating a faster average
charging rate of the CCSU. When it comes to the individual segment, a maximal of 452 kJ
cold is charged in each segment of the SCSU. In comparison, the maximal cold charged
in segment-1 to segment-3 of the CCSU are 388 kJ, 452 kJ and 488 kJ, respectively. The
difference in maximal cold charged in different segments results from the different types
of PCMs used. In addition, most of the cold is stored in Stage One and Two. Only a small
amount of cold are stored in Stage Three, which accounts for a large percentage of the
total charging time. Herein, it is found that the time, when 90% of the maximal cold are
stored in each segment, accounts for only about half of the total charging time.
FIGURE 7
FIGURE 7
FIGURE 8
• Fig. 8 shows the charging time in each segment of both CSUs under different inlet HTF
temperatures. The black and red dotted line indicates the charging time of the CCSU and
the SCSU, respectively.
FIGURE 9
• Fig. 9 shows the cold stored in both CSUs under different inlet HTF temperature. As
presented in the figure, the total cold stored in both CSUs drop with the increase of inlet
HTF temperature. The total cold stored in the CCSU, under all the comparing conditions,
is smaller than that in the SCSU.
TABLE 2
• Table 2 lists in detailed the average charging rates in both CSUs under different inlet HTF
temperatures. It is indicated that inlet HTF temperature has an effective influence on the
average charging rate for both CSUs. As the inlet HTF temperature decrease from 11 C to
6 C, the average charging rates of SCSU and CCSU have increased by about 186% and
135%, respectively.
FIGURE 10
• Fig. 10 shows in detail the exergy stored in both CSUs under different inlet HTF
temperatures. The variation trends of the exergy with respect to inlet HTF temperature in
both of the CSUs are very similar to the trends of cold variation.
FIGURE 11
• However, the exergy efficiency in CCSU, as shown in Fig. 11, is generally 2% higher than
that in the SCUS. This solely results from the destruction caused by heat transfer
temperature difference, as the exergy destruction caused by flow friction is not considered
in the simulation model.
FIGURE 12
• Fig. 12 shows the comparison result of charging time in both CSUs under different inlet
HTF flow rates. As heat transfer coefficient strongly depends on HTF flow rate, the
charging rate is, therefore, obviously influenced by HTF flow rate.
FIGURE 13 AND 14
• Where, thermal resistances in HTF side and in PCM side are schematically shown in Fig.
13, and can be expressed in Eqs. (21) and (22), respectively. It is found from Eq. (21) that
the thermal resistance in HTF side decreases with the increase of flow rate, and the
dropping trend is more obvious when flow rate is less than 150 L/h, as Fig. 14 shows.

Eq. 21 Eq. 22
Fig. 13 Fig. 14
• The cold stored in both CSUs remains almost unchanged under all the operating
conditions studied due to the same inlet HTF temperature. Table 3 lists in detail the
average charging rate in both CSUs under different inlet HTF flow rates.
FIGURE 15
• The exergy stored in both CSUs also remains almost unchanged under all the operating
conditions studied due to the same inlet HTF temperature supplied. Thus, only the exergy
efficiency is investigated for both CSUs under different HTF flow rates. Fig. 15 depicts in
detail the variations of exergy efficiency with the rise of inlet HTF flow rate in both CSUs.
CONCLUSION
• In this paper, a cascaded three-stage cold storage unit has been designed. The heat-
transfer characteristics of CCSU have been experimentally and numerically studied in
terms of the solidification processes by comparing them with those of a SCSU. It can be
concluded from the results that:
1. Compared with the SCSU, the heat transfer performance of CCSU is better. When
flow rates remains to be 100 L/h, the cold charging rate in CCSU has been enhanced
by about 11.1%e35%, as the inlet HTF temperature increases from 6 C to 11 C. In
contrast, the cold stored has been decreased slightly by 2% - 5%.
2. Although the exergy stored in the CCSU is about 4% - 8% less than that in the
SCSU, the exergy efficiency in the CCSU, however, has been enhanced by 2%.
3. As the inlet HTF flow rate decreases, the cold charging rate in CCSU has been
enhanced by about 35% - 19%, compared with the SCSU. Moreover, its exergy
efficiency has been improved by 2.4% - 4.8%.