Accepted Manuscript

Properties of concretes enhanced with phase change materials for

building applications

Umberto Berardi

PII: S0378-7788(19)31397-0
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2019.07.014
Reference: ENB 9297

To appear in: Energy & Buildings

Received date: 6 May 2019

Revised date: 5 July 2019
Accepted date: 6 July 2019

Please cite this article as: Umberto Berardi , Properties of concretes enhanced with
phase change materials for building applications, Energy & Buildings (2019), doi:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2019.07.014

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service
to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo
copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please
note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and
all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Highlights
 Organic paraffins and non-paraffins are suitable PCMs for incorporation into concrete.
 Indirect methods of PCM incorporation into concrete avoid PCM leakage.
 Microcapsules could help reduce the loss in the compressive strength of PCM-concrete.
 Testing specifications for measuring thermal properties of PCM-concrete are required.
 Thermal conductivity and storage of PCM-concrete increases with high conductive
PCM-coatings.

T
IP
CR
US
AN
M
ED
PT
CE
AC

1
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Properties of concretes enhanced with phase

change materials for building applications

Abstract
Phase change materials (PCMs) have been widely used in building applications as a thermal
storage medium for passive thermal regulation and for increasing the efficiency of HVAC

T
systems. Both applications have shown great potential in reducing energy demand or peak

IP
loads for both heating and cooling in buildings. Literature shows different ways to

CR
incorporate PCMs in the building envelope. This review focuses on the use of PCMs as an
additive or replacement material in typical concrete mixtures for building applications.
Literature shows that organic paraffin and non-paraffins are the most suitable PCMs for

US
incorporation into concrete mixtures, as they have suitable melting points that match human
comfort temperature, high heat capacity, low volume changes during phase change transition,
AN
and good chemical and thermal stability. To avoid PCM leakage from the concrete, indirect
methods of PCM incorporation in concrete are highlighted, such as encapsulation methods
and vacuum impregnation techniques combined with macro-encapsulation methods. Updated
M

information related to the influence of the type of PCM and different incorporation methods
on the physical, mechanical and thermal properties of fresh and hardened concrete is
ED

presented. Literature shows that by adding PCM to the concrete mixture the heat storage
capacity of concrete is generally increased. However, various studies showed that PCMs also
PT

have some negative impacts on the physical and mechanical properties of concrete. New
relationships between the quantity of PCM and the change in both the thermal and
CE

mechanical properties of the concrete are provided. From the reviewed literature, it can be
concluded that the potential of using PCM in concrete still requires further research, to study
AC

solutions that allow increasing the amount of PCM that is effectively incorporated into
concrete and to develop standard testing procedures for measuring the thermal properties of
inhomogeneous materials such as PCM-concrete composites.

Keywords: Phase change materials; concrete; thermal energy storage; thermal mass; passive
thermal regulation

2
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 3
2. Suitable PCMs for use in concrete.............................................................................................. 4
3. Methods of PCM incorporation in concrete ................................................................................ 6
3.1 Direct methods of PCM incorporation in concrete .............................................................. 7
3.2 Indirect methods of PCM incorporation in concrete ............................................................ 8
3.2.1 Micro-encapsulation of PCM ...................................................................................... 8
3.2.2 Macro-encapsulation of PCM and lightweight aggregates containing PCM ................. 9

T
4. Mechanical and physical properties of PCM-concrete .............................................................. 10

IP
4.1 Concrete enhanced with micro-encapsulated PCM............................................................ 10
4.1.1 Workability .............................................................................................................. 11

CR
4.1.2 Density and open porosity ........................................................................................ 13
4.1.3 Compressive strength ............................................................................................... 13
4.2
4.2.1
4.2.2
US
Concrete enhanced with macro-encapsulated PCM or LWA-PCM .................................... 18
Workability .............................................................................................................. 18
Density ..................................................................................................................... 18
AN
4.2.3 Compressive strength ............................................................................................... 18
5. Thermal properties of PCM-concrete ....................................................................................... 23
M

5.1 Concrete enhanced with micro-encapsulated PCM............................................................ 23

5.1.1 Thermal conductivity ................................................................................................ 23
ED

5.1.2 Specific heat capacity and latent heat ........................................................................ 25

5.2 Concrete enhanced with macro-encapsulated PCM or LWA-PCM .................................... 28
5.2.1 Thermal conductivity................................................................................................ 28
PT

5.2.2 Specific heat capacity ............................................................................................... 30

6. Conclusions ............................................................................................................................. 31
CE

References....................................................................................................................................... 33
AC

1. Introduction

Buildings are responsible for almost 40% of the worldwide energy demand and at the current rate of

growth the International Energy Agency’s (IEA) Reference Technology Scenario (RTS), forecasts

that global energy demand in the buildings sector will increase by 30% by 2060 reaching an overall

demand of 160 EJ [1]. Buildings will, therefore, add substantial pressure on primary energy supply if

significant actions are not taken to improve their efficiency.

3
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Increasing the energy efficiency of buildings should be one of the main priorities of governments

around the world, as building energy saving helps to decrease energy consumption and reduce

greenhouse emissions, offers increased energy security, reduce energy poverty, and contributes

towards a more sustainable economic growth [2]. This article focuses on reviewing one way to

improve the thermal performance of concrete, which is the most widely used building construction

material. Concrete is used extensively in the construction of residential and commercial buildings as it

T
has several outstanding properties such as good fire-resistant properties, versatility, mouldability, and

IP
most importantly high compressive strength. However, the thermal performance of concrete is not

optimum.

CR
Many types of research have focused on optimizing the energy efficiency of concrete by increasing its

US
heat storage capacity through the incorporation of phase change materials (PCMs), for storing heat in

building constructions [3–7]. Increasing the latent heat thermal energy storage capacity of concrete
AN
using PCMs has positive effects on the energy efficiency of a building as it contributes to a reduction

in temperature fluctuations and reduces thermal loads [8–10]. However, PCMs also have some
M

negative impacts on the properties of fresh and hardened concrete [3,11,12] that depend on the type

and the method of PCM incorporation during the production of the PCM-concrete composite.
ED

The aim of this article is to provide an overview of the incorporation of PCMs in concrete to improve

the energy efficiency and indoor thermal comfort of buildings. A review of relevant literature
PT

published during the period between 2008 – 2018 is performed. The main reviewed topics include the

comparison of different types of PCMs that are suitable for incorporation into concrete mixtures
CE

(section 2), the different methods of PCM incorporation into concrete (section 3), and the effects of
AC

PCM on the fresh and hardened properties of PCM-concrete composites (sections 4 and 5).

2. Suitable PCMs for use in concrete

PCMs have been increasingly proposed in building applications as a thermal storage medium for

passive thermal regulation and for reducing the heating and cooling demand of buildings [13]. For

building applications, PCMs should have properties such as high heat of fusion and thermal

conductivity (to allow fast energy storage), high specific heat capacity, small volume change, non-

4
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

corrosiveness, non-toxicity, highly inflammable, exhibit little or no decomposition or subcooling, and

have a reasonable price and availability on the market [14,15]. Additionally, the PCM should have a

melting/freezing point that matches the application. For building applications, Cabeza et al. [14]

suggested three temperature ranges, i.e. up to 21 ℃ for cooling applications, between 22 and 28 ℃ for

human comfort applications, and between 29 and 60 ℃ for hot water applications.

Literature identifies two main typologies of PCMs that can be incorporated into concrete for building

T
applications: (i) organic (paraffin and non-paraffins), and (ii) inorganic PCMs (salt hydrates) [16].

IP
However, most inorganic PCMs present high volume changes and potential subcooling, which has

resulted in greater use of organic PCMs in combination with concrete [7].

CR
Organic paraffin wax has been regarded as one of the best PCMs for use in concrete because it has

US
good stability [17] and it is inactive in an alkaline medium [16]. Other beneficial aspects of paraffin

include the suitable melting point that matches human comfort temperature, high heat capacity,
AN
congruent melting without segregation, little or no supercooling during phase transition, lower vapor

pressure, non-toxicity, non-corrosiveness to metal containers, good chemical and thermal stability,
M

and low cost [18–20]. The main limitations of paraffin include its low thermal conductivity, its

flammability, incompatibility with plastics, and high-volume changes [16,21].

ED

Different kinds of organic non-paraffin PCM (e.g. esters, glycols, and fatty acids) have also been

incorporated into concrete [22]–[26]. An advantage of non-paraffin PCMs like bio-based fatty acids
PT

over paraffin PCMs is that they have low flammability and are renewable in nature [21]. However,

bio-based fatty acids have also an increased cost (about three times) compared to paraffin PCM [16].
CE

Some of the non-paraffin PCMs that have been studied for incorporation into concrete include butyl
AC

stearate [23-25], mixtures of lauryl alcohol, myristic acid, and palmitic acid [24], and mixtures of

capric acid and myristic acid [26,27]. Among these, butyl stearate showed the most potential because

of its relatively low cost, low inflammability, and overall stable nature [16]. The advantages and

limitations associated with paraffin and non-paraffins are summarized in Fig. 1.

5
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Organic PCMS

Paraffins Non-paraffins

Advantages Limitations Advantages Limitations

Non-corrosiveness Flammable Renewable origin High cost

Low thermal
Low subcooling High latent heat
conductivity

T
IP
High latent heat High volume changes Low flammability

CR
Good chemical and
Low supercooling
thermal stability

Low cost

Inactivity in alkaline
medium
US
AN
Figure 1. Advantages and limitations of organic PCMs for applications in concrete.
M

3. Methods of PCM incorporation in concrete

ED

This section reviews the methods that have been used to incorporate PCM in concrete and focus on

the most promising methods for avoiding PCM leakage. The different methods found in the literature
PT

are classified in two main categories, i.e. direct and indirect methods of PCM incorporation in

concrete (Fig.2). Most of the studies performed in the last decade used indirect methods for PCM
CE

incorporation in concrete.
AC

6
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Methods of PCM
incorporation in
concrete

Direct methods Indirect methods

Vacuum
Wet mixing
Encapsulation impregnation +
technique
Encapsulation

T
Immersion Micro- Lightweight aggregates

IP
technique encapsulation containing PCM (LWA-PCM)

CR
Macro-
encapsulation

US
Figure 2. Methods of PCM incorporation in concrete.
AN
3.1 Direct methods of PCM incorporation in concrete

PCMs can be directly added to concrete by using wet mixing or immersion techniques [28,29]. Wet
M

mixing consists of adding the liquid PCM directly to the concrete mix during production [12,30]. This
ED

means that there is no barrier between the PCM and the concrete mix, which increases PCM leakage

risks and the risk of affecting the properties of concrete. On the other hand, in the immersion
PT

technique, concrete products are immersed in a container with melted (liquid) PCM, in which the

PCM is absorbed by capillary action [31].

CE

Direct methods of PCM incorporation in concrete were mainly used in the earlier studies of PCM-
AC

enhanced concrete [32–34]. However, as Bentz and Turpin [34] and Schossig et al. [35] pointed out,

PCMs that are not encapsulated are very likely to interact with the surrounding matrix and change its

properties, or present leakage problems over the lifetime. Consequently, direct methods of PCM

incorporation in concrete are not regarded anymore as a practical technique. This is probably the

reason for the scarcity of research studies in the last decade, in which a direct method is used for

incorporating PCM into the concrete.

7
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

3.2 Indirect methods of PCM incorporation in concrete

PCMs can be indirectly incorporated into concrete by using encapsulated PCMs or lightweight

aggregates containing PCM (LWA-PCM). The encapsulated PCMs and LWA-PCM composites are

generally prepared using encapsulation and vacuum impregnation techniques, respectively, and then

these components are “indirectly” added to the concrete during the mixing process. The encapsulation

or PCM carrier must not react with the material that is in contact with it (PCM or concrete), should

T
have high thermal conductivity, and should be hard enough to avoid any damage during the concrete

IP
mixing and casting process [12,36].

CR
There are two means of encapsulation, micro, and macro-encapsulation. A detailed description of

each method and their effects on the mechanical and thermal properties of PCM-concrete composites

is updated below.

3.2.1 Micro-encapsulation of PCM

US
AN
Microencapsulated PCM refers to PCM particles enclosed in a thin solid shell (microcapsule) that is

usually made from natural and synthetic polymers with a size that ranges from 1 μm to 1000 μm [12].
M

The shell is generally formed using physical or chemical methods, which are detailed in available

literature [37,38]. The main advantage of this method compared to the direct incorporation methods
ED

is related to the leakage prevention of PCM during phase transition. Another advantage of

microencapsulation is that it provides a high heat transfer rate through its larger surface area per unit
PT

volume [39]. Microencapsulated PCMs also show improved chemical stability and thermal reliability,
CE

since phase separation within the material, during the phase transition, is limited to microscopic

distances [12]. However, as various researchers pointed out, microencapsulation may affect the
AC

mechanical properties of concrete and it is relatively expensive [39].

Most of the studies that incorporated microencapsulated PCM into concrete used commercially

available microencapsulated paraffin in powder form, but microencapsulated fatty acids have also

been used [26]. Microencapsulated PCMs have mostly been incorporated in Portland cement concrete

(PCC). However, this type of PCM has also been incorporated in self-compacting concrete [3,40], and

in geopolymer concrete (GPC) [11,41].

8
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Two different mixture design methods have been used for adding microencapsulated PCM particles

into concrete, i.e. the PCM replacement method and the PCM additive method. In the PCM

replacement method, microencapsulated PCM replaces a certain amount of fine aggregates (sand,

cement, marble powder) in the concrete mixture [3-6,11,26,41,42]. In the PCM additive method, the

microencapsulated PCM is used as an additive in the concrete mixture [42,43]. Most of the studies

that incorporated microencapsulated PCM in concrete have used the replacement method, as the

T
resulting strength reductions are less than those of the PCM additive method [42].

IP
3.2.2 Macro-encapsulation of PCM and lightweight aggregates containing PCM

CR
The macroencapsulation method consists of incorporating PCM in containers such as tubes, pouches,

spheres, porous materials or panels that can be used as separate elements or incorporated into building

US
products [14]. The size of these containers is usually larger than 1 cm [14]. An advantage of macro-

encapsulated PCMs is that they can be used directly in concrete as large aggregates or separate
AN
elements without influencing the structural function of concrete in buildings [22], [44]–[46]. Also,

they usually allow the incorporation of a higher content fraction of PCM [22], [46], [47] and can be
M

easily produced at low cost [48]. An example of the use of macro-encapsulated PCM as a separate

element that does not influence the structural function of concrete can be found in hollow concrete
ED

core slabs or concrete decks with PCM [49].

Various types of PCM containers have been used to incorporate PCMs into the concrete. For example,
PT

Cui et al. [48] developed steel balls as PCM containers, while several other authors [24,46,47,50]

have focused on the use of the porous structure of light-weight aggregates (LWA) as PCM containers.
CE

As noted by Bentz et al. [34], an added advantage of filling the porous LWA with the PCM is that it
AC

enhances heat transfer between the PCM and the bulk concrete. LWA that have been used as PCM

carrier include expanded clay [22,23,44,46,47], expanded perlite [25], expanded slate [51], expanded

vermiculite [52], diatomite [24], pumice [51] and graphitic carbon-based material [50]. Additionally,

researchers generally applied a protective coating material to avoid PCM leakage from LWA, and

improve the thermal and mechanical properties of the LWA-PCM composites [22,24,25,44,46]. The

9
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

protective coating materials used for sealing the LWA-PCM include a combination of epoxy resin,

graphite powder, and silica fume; modified cement paste; polyester resin; and limestone powder.

Generally, two different methods have been used to incorporate PCM into LWA: vacuum

impregnation and direct impregnation. However, authors like Memon et al. [44] showed that vacuum

impregnation enables a better absorption capacity of PCM compared to direct impregnation (the

absorption capacity of LWA can rise to 73.85% using vacuum impregnation, compared to an

T
absorption capacity of 18% using direct impregnation).

IP
Most of the studies found in the literature have used the replacement method for adding LWA-PCM

into the concrete mixture. However, LWA-PCM have been used to replace different components of

CR
the concrete mixture such as normal weight aggregates (NWA) [44], fine aggregates (sand) [25], [50],

US
and regular light-weight aggregates (LWA) [22], [23], [47]. Different types of fatty acids and their

mixtures [22]–[25] as well as organic paraffin [44], [46], [47] have been used as PCM in the studies
AN
of concrete containing LWA-PCM.

4. Mechanical and physical properties of PCM-concrete

M

4.1 Concrete enhanced with micro-encapsulated PCM

ED

4.1.1 Heat of hydration

Conventional isothermal and non-isothermal calorimetry methods have been used to measure the heat
PT

of hydration of concrete enhanced with PCM [53]. Various studies showed that the incorporation of
CE

PCM into concrete reduces the peak temperature of hydration, by absorbing the heat released by the

cement’s hydration process. The study performed by Kim et al. [54] showed a peak hydration
AC

temperature reduction of approximately 3 ℃ when microencapsulated PCM was used in a mix

containing Portland cement concrete, fly ash and slag. Hunger et al. [3] obtained a similar result, as

the peak hydration temperature of self-compacting concrete was reduced by up to 28% with the

incorporation of 5% microencapsulated PCM by weight of concrete. The study performed by Hunger

et al. [3] also suggested that the addition of microencapsulated PCM could cause a delay in the time

required to reach the peak hydration temperature and could interfere with the hydration reaction.

10
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Savija & Schlangen [55] used numerical models to study the influence of microencapsulated PCM on

hydration temperature evolution and stress development in hardening concrete. The results of the

study showed that by increasing the amount of PCM or its latent heat of fusion, the temperature rise in

cement paste is delayed for a longer time.

Based on the discussed results, several authors [54–57] have concluded that microencapsulated PCM

could be potentially used to control and mitigate the thermal stress and cracking of concrete structures

T
caused by the cement hydration process. Other authors also suggested that PCM could help to reduce

IP
thermal stress and damage due to freezing-thawing cycles or temperature gradients in concrete

pavements [58,59].

CR
4.1.2 Workability

US
Generally, research results showed that by adding microencapsulated PCM the workability and the

flow values of concrete mixtures are reduced [3,40,60]. To reduce this negative effect, various authors
AN
suggested to increase the water content or to add an appropriate amount of superplasticizer to the

PCM-concrete mixture [5,60,61].

M

The effect of microencapsulated PCM on the slump of self-compacting concrete has been investigated

by Hunger et al. [3] and Fenollera et al. [40]. The study performed by Hunger et al. [3] showed that all
ED

the mixes of self-compacting concrete with 1%, 3% and 5% of PCM by mass of concrete had flow
PT

diameters in the range of 740–770 mm [3], which are considered appropriate for a self-compacting

concrete (allowable flow diameter between 550 mm - 850 mm) [31]. The 3% and 5% of mixes
CE

showed slightly higher viscosity which was attributed to the water dosage. On the other hand,

according to the slump flow test results of the study performed by Fenollera et al. [40], the flow
AC

diameters of mixes containing 20% and 25% PCM by volume of cement were lower than the

allowable flow diameter for a self-compacting concrete [31].

The effect of microencapsulated PCM on the workability of cementitious materials was also evaluated

by Snoeck et al. [60]. The authors suggested that the maximum amount of microencapsulated PCM

that can be incorporated into concrete to achieve an acceptable reduction in workability is around 5%

(by mass of concrete) [60]. To reduce the negative effect of PCM on the workability of concrete, the

11
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

authors recommended adding encapsulated PCMs at the end of the concrete mixing process. The

authors also suggested to increase the water content or to add superplasticizer to the concrete or

mortar mixture with PCM. However, according to various authors [43], [60], the modified water to

cement ratio could cause unwanted effects in the strength of the PCM-concrete composite, and the

additional superplasticizer could influence the setting properties [60]. Lecompte et al. [5] also

suggested that PCM incorporation in the concrete mix requires additional water (approximately 10%

T
of the PCM mass) to achieve the workability of a traditional mixture. The increase in water demand

IP
has been related to the water absorption characteristics of the polymeric shell of microcapsules as well

as the absorption of water by the hydrogen bonds of the hydroxyl and imino groups of the

CR
microcapsules [62].

US
The use of superplasticizer for maintaining the workability of mortar tiles containing

microencapsulated PCM (Micronal type DS5040X) was considered in the study performed by
AN
Pomianowski et al. [61]. The authors indicated that amounts higher than 6% by weight of PCM

showed poor workability despite the use of a plasticizer. Thus, the authors concluded that with current
M

commercially available superplasticizers, the highest amount of microencapsulated PCM that can be

incorporated in concrete and mortars for achieving satisfactory workability properties is around 6% by
ED

weight of concrete [61].

In the study performed by Pilehvar et al. [41], a slump test was used to determine the effect of
PT

microencapsulated paraffin (Rubitherm RT27) on the workability of fresh Portland cement concrete

(PCC) and Geopolymer concrete (GPC) mixtures. Research results showed that by incorporating
CE

PCM in the concrete mixtures, the workability of both GPC and PCC is reduced. For GPC, the slump
AC

showed a variation between 10 and 200 mm, while PCC showed a slump in the range between 30 mm

and 230 mm [41]. In all cases, the slump of GPC was lower than PCC which was attributed to the

high viscosity of sodium silicate in the alkaline solution, making the GPC mixture highly cohesive

[41].

12
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

4.1.3 Density and open porosity

When microencapsulated PCM is incorporated in concrete, the density of the concrete is reduced as

PCM generally replaces materials with higher densities (i.e. aggregates). This was proven in the

studies performed by Hunger et al. [3] and Dehdezi et al. [4], in which the overall density reduction of

PCM-concrete samples was attributed to the replacement of sand (density of 2.64 kg/m3) with

microencapsulated PCM with a lower density (0.90 kg/m3). Additionally, various authors concluded

T
that the decrease in density is also due to an increase in the concrete porosity of the PCM-concrete

IP
samples [4,6,41]. According to Fenollera et al. [40], density in fresh decreases by 1.1% per every 5%

CR
of added microencapsulated PCM.

4.1.4 Compressive strength

US
The usual requirement of concrete in the hardened state is a satisfactory compressive strength.

Unfortunately, all the reviewed studies have shown that the compressive strength of concrete
AN
significantly reduces with the incorporation of microencapsulated PCMs. Various authors concluded

that the reduction of the compressive strength is mainly due to breakage of the microcapsules (shells)
M

and consequent leakage of PCM during the mixing or loading process [3–6,42], or due to chemical

reactions [63] which could cause interference with the cement hydration reaction [64]. Breakage of
ED

the shells of PCM capsules during mixing or loading processes is common as they have low intrinsic

strength due to their polymeric nature [5]. The increased porosity due to poor compatibility between
PT

PCM and the concrete matrix has also been considered as one of the causes of the compressive
CE

strength reduction of concrete incorporating microencapsulated PCM [11,41]. It is also important to

note that the additional water used to compensate for the workability loss of PCM-concrete mixtures
AC

could also be one of the reasons for the decrease in compressive strength [5,65].

As shown in Figure 3, the average decrease in compressive strength of PCM-concrete specimens with

over 3 % in weight of microencapsulated PCM is generally higher than 40% of the original strength

capacity [3,4,6,41,43]. However, some specimens containing up to 5% PCM (by mass of concrete)

that have a compressive strength suitable for structural applications are reported in literature [3,5–

7,23,66].

13
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

In the study performed by Hunger et al. [3], the properties of self-compacting concrete containing 1%,

3%, and 5% PCM by mass of concrete were evaluated. In this study, PCM replaced marble powder on

a volumetric basis instead of replacing sand. The compressive strength of concrete was reduced by up

to 69% with the incorporation of 5 % microencapsulated PCM (by mass of concrete). To determine

the cause of the reductions in compressive strength, the authors used scanning electron microscopy

(SEM) images, which revealed a porous micro-structure and spherical voids in the PCM-concrete

T
samples. The authors concluded that the reduction in compressive strength was due to breakage of the

IP
shells of PCM capsules during the mixing process, which resulted in PCM leakage and interference

with the surrounding matrix [3].

CR
SEM images were also used by Cao et al. [11] and Pilehvar et al. [41], to determine the cause of the

US
reductions in compressive strength of PCC and GPC with microencapsulated paraffin (Rubitherm

RT27). PCC samples contained 0%, 0.8%, 1.6%, and 3.2% of PCM by weight of concrete. For GPC,
AN
the concentrations of PCM included 0%, 0.7%, 1.3%, and 2.7% by weight of concrete, SEM images

revealed weak connections and air voids between the microencapsulated PCM and the surrounding
M

matrix, which was considered as one of the causes of the strength reduction of concrete with

incorporated microencapsulated PCM. The authors concluded that the shell used in the
ED

microencapsulated PCM is not appropriate for incorporation in concrete structures, as it showed poor

compatibility with the concrete matrix, causing voids to be formed between them. In addition, the
PT

study performed by Cao et al. [11] showed that the compressive strength of microencapsulated PCM-

concrete didn’t change after 100 thermal cycles.

CE

Dehdezi et al. [4] performed a detailed microstructural characterization of a concrete mixture with
AC

0.5%, 1%, 3% and 5% microencapsulated paraffin in powder form, to determine the cause of the

significant reductions in compressive strength. No direct evidence of PCM particle damage was found

during mixing or compaction of fresh concrete. Instead, the authors suggested that PCM particles fail

by bursting under loading, which creates voids and cracks initiation points. As a solution to the

reduction in mechanical strength, Dehdezi et al. [4] suggested focussing on the development of

microencapsulated PCM particles with strong outer shells. Jayalath et al. [6] also suggested

14
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

developing a stronger outer shell for reducing the loss of compressive strength in PCM-concrete

composites, as microencapsulated PCM particles are weak due to their polymeric nature [6].

Authors like Cellat et al. [26] and Beyhan et al. [67] have focused on developing and testing stronger

shells to prevent PCM capsule breakage during the concrete mixing process. The study performed by

Beyhan et al. [67], investigated two microencapsulated PCMs with a new shell material composition

to increase the robustness. The two microencapsulated PCMs were successfully synthesized through

T
free radical polymerization method. Concrete specimens containing the two microencapsulated PCMs

IP
were prepared to test the mechanical strength of the shell material. SEM analysis revealed that the

microcapsules in the concrete mixture were distributed homogeneously and the shells of the

CR
microencapsulated PCMs were not broken during mixing with harder aggregates [67].

US
The effects of the incorporation of a robust microencapsulated fatty acid mixture on the mechanical

properties of concrete were evaluated by Cellat et al. [26]. With 10% by weight of robust
AN
microencapsulated PCM content in concrete, the average loss in compressive strength was 38%.

Unlike most studies, even with a considerable high amount of PCM by mass of concrete, the
M

developed PCM-concrete complies with C30/37 class of concrete that is suitable for many structural

applications (Fig.3a). From these results, it can be concluded that the production of robust
ED

microencapsulated PCMs could be a potential solution for reducing the loss of compressive strength,

and thus increasing the thermal energy storage capacity of PCM-concrete composites.
PT

Eddhahak-Ouni et al. [64] evaluated the mechanical properties of PCC with micro-encapsulated

paraffin PCM (Micronal DS 5001X). Research results showed a 16%, 24% and 32% decrease in
CE

compressive strength between the reference sample (without PCM) and the samples with 1%, 3% and
AC

5% microencapsulated PCM by volume, respectively. The authors suggested that the cause of the

decrease in the compressive strength of PCC with microencapsulated paraffin PCM (Micronal DS

5001X) was related to the delay of the cement hydration reaction caused by the addition of PCMs

[64].

A concrete tile system with microencapsulated paraffin (Micronal DS 5008) that was used in a ZEB

project was developed and tested by Narain et al. [68]. The results of the study showed a 25%

decrease in compressive strength with the incorporation of 20% PCM per volume of concrete.

15
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Workability tests, esthetic evaluations (i.e. presence of surface voids), and compression results

indicated that the maximum amount of PCM that can be incorporated in concrete should not be higher

than 15% per volume of concrete.

The compressive strength results from the discussed studies are presented in Figure 3. It must be

noted that there is a limit to the quantity of microencapsulated PCM that can be effectively

incorporated into concrete, as microcapsules reduce the mechanical strength of PCM-concrete. It can

T
be concluded that the maximum amount of microencapsulated PCM that can be incorporated into

IP
concrete is around 3 to 5% by weight of concrete (or around 10 to 12% by volume of concrete), in

order to achieve the minimum compressive strength for structural concrete (2500 psi [17.24 MPa])

CR
[69].

US
AN
M
ED
PT
CE
AC

16
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Hunger et al. [3] Dehdezi et al. [4] Meshgin and Xi [42]

Cellat et al. [26] Lecompte et al. [5] Jayalath et al. [6]
Figueiredo et al. [43] Niall et al. [23] D'Alessandro et al. [7]
80
28-day Compreissive Strength (MPa)

microencapsulated paraffin in powder form

70 microencapsulated paraffin in wet cake form
robust microencapsulated fatty acids
60

50

T
40

IP
30

CR
20
minimum required compressive strength for
10 structural concrete - 17.24 MPa [62]

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 US 6 7 8
% PCM content by weight of concrete
9 10 11
AN
Hunger et al. [3] Dehdezi et al. [4] Meshgin and Xi [42] Lecompte et al. [5]
Jayalath et al. [6] Figueiredo et al. [43] Niall et al. [23] D'Alessandro et al. [7]
M

100%
y = 0.1899x
y = 0.1564x
Compressive strength reduction rate (%)

90% R² = 0.3402
ED

R² = -0.196
80%
y = 0.1553x
70% R² = 0.6826
PT

60%
y = 0.1154x
50% R² = 0.9148
CE

40%
y = 0.0909x
30% R² = 0.8924
20%
AC

10% y = 0.1395x
R² = 0.8645
0%
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
% PCM content (microencapsulated paraffin) by weight of concrete

Figure 3. Compressive strength results of PCM-concrete composites developed in different

studies with different concentrations of microencapsulated PCM. a) Average compressive

17
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

strength (MPa) of concrete samples; b) Compressive strength reduction rate of concrete

samples.

4.2 Concrete enhanced with macro-encapsulated PCM or LWA-PCM

4.2.1 Workability

The study performed by Wang et al. [24] reported results on the workability of concrete made with

macro-encapsulated LWA-PCM. To evaluate the workability of fresh concrete mixtures, the authors

T
performed a slump test. Results showed that the addition of LWA-PCM reduced the fluidity of fresh

IP
concrete especially when diatomite was used as LWA. Similar to Snoeck et al. [60], the authors

CR
suggested to increase the water content or to add superplasticizer to achieve the workability of a

traditional concrete mixture.

4.2.2 Density
US
Density measurements of concrete containing LWA-PCM composite were reported by Niall et al.
AN
[23]. Despite that PCM replaced the air in the aggregates, the density of LWA-PCM concrete

composites was lower than the control concrete with ordinary aggregates.
M

D’Alessandro et al. [7] found that the density of concrete decreases with the incorporation of macro-

encapsulated PCM. In this study, a macro-encapsulated PCM produced by Microtek Laboratories was
ED

incorporated into concrete mixtures. The macrocapsules have diameters between 3 and 5mm and

contain various microencapsulated PCMs suspended in a gelling agent solution of polysaccharide

PT

alginate. Research results showed that samples with 5% macro-encapsulated PCM (by mass of
CE

concrete) had a density reduction of about 11% compared to normal concrete [7].

4.2.3 Compressive strength

AC

There is a lot of dispersion of results regarding the compressive strength measurements of concrete

containing LWA-PCM. Most studies showed that the addition of LWA containing PCM had an

adverse effect on the strength of concrete [23–25,46,50]. However, the study performed by Memon et

al. [47] showed that the addition of LWA containing PCM does not affect the compressive strength of

concrete. This inconsistency might be related to the high variability of various important factors that

influence the performance of LWA-PCM concrete such as the type and amount of PCM, the type of

18
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

LWA and its absorption capacity, the method used to incorporate PCM into LWA, the mixture design

method for adding LWA-PCM into the concrete mixture, the coating and supporting materials, and

the methods used to characterize and evaluate the performance of LWA-PCM concrete.

In the study performed by Niall et al. [23], the authors compared different PCM-concrete composite

panels, which included panels manufactured by vacuum impregnating an LWA with butyl stearate as

PCM. Two different concrete mixtures were tested: one with 100% PCC and one with ground

T
granulated blast-furnace slag (GGBS) as a partial cement replacement. Research results showed that

IP
the addition of LWA containing PCM had an adverse effect on the strength of the concrete panels.

When replacing all regular LWA aggregates with LWA-PCM by volume, both types of PCM panels

CR
only achieved strengths in the order of 25 MPa after 28 days. LWA-PCM composite panels with

US
100% PPC and 50 % GGBS had a strength reduction of 50% and 37%, respectively. According to the

authors, one reason for the loss of strength of PCM-LWA composites was due to leaked PCM. A
AN
solution to this issue is presented in other studies [22,24,25,46,70], in which the surface of LWA

containing PCM was coated for preventing leakage of PCM from the LWA.
M

An LWA-PCM consisting of expanded clay LWA containing lauryl alcohol as PCM was prepared by

Cui et al. [22] using the vacuum impregnation method. The percentage of PCM retained by LWA was
ED

found to be 49.1 % by weight of concrete. The surface of LWA-PCM was also coated with epoxy and

modified cement paste, for comparing the sealing and mechanical performance of these two coating
PT

materials. The tested PCM-concrete specimens were prepared by replacing the total amount of LWA

with coated LWA-PCM in the concrete mixture. The results of the study showed that the compressive
CE

strength of concrete mixtures with epoxy and modified cement paste coated LWA-PCM was around
AC

29.6 MPa and 31.8 MPa, with an average loss of compressive strength, with respect to control

concrete, of around 15.4% and 9.1%, respectively. Hence, both configurations can be used for

structural applications. However, the results showed that after 150 thermal cycles the PCM mass loss

with epoxy coated LWA was around 1%, which is less than the case with cement paste coated LWA

(around 4.9% PCM mass loss) [22].

In the study performed by Memon et al. [47], a paraffin-based PCM was incorporated into expanded

clay LWA using vacuum impregnation setup. A coating material consisting of epoxy resin adhesive

19
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

and hardener was used to prevent PCM leakage. Moreover, graphite powder was used to improve the

thermal conductivity of LWA-PCM composites while silica fume was used to separate LWA-PCM

particles coated with epoxy [47]. Test results showed that the compressive strength of concrete

samples containing LWA-PCM was higher than the control mixture without LWA-PCM. The

compressive strength of the control mixture and of the mixes containing 100% and 50% LWA-PCM

was 15 MPa, 17 MPa, and 16 MPa, respectively. Authors suggested that the higher strength of the

T
coating materials helped to avoid a reduction in the compressive strength of the PCM-concrete.

IP
Considering the low compressive strength of the control LWA concrete developed in [47], Memon et

al. [44] tested the same type of LWA-PCM coated with epoxy. The mix design included coarse

CR
aggregates consisting of crushed granite that were replaced by different percentages of LWA and

US
LWA-PCM to evaluate their effect on compressive strength. The compressive strength with LWA-

PCM ranged from 33.29 to 53.11 MPa. Similar to the previous findings by [47], specimens that
AN
replaced normal weight aggregate with LWA-PCM had higher compressive strength than specimens

that used LWA without PCM.

M

In the study performed by Kastiukas et al. [46], the mechanical strength of a geopolymeric binder

(GP) with and without the addition of LWA-PCM consisting of expanded clay LWA impregnated
ED

with a paraffin wax was evaluated. A polyester resin was used to produce a leak-proof coating.

Results showed that the compressive strength of GP reduced with the incorporation of LWA-PCM.
PT

The GP without any LWA-PCM and the specimen containing 20% by weight resin-granite powder

coated LWA-PCM has a compressive strength of 22 MPa and 12.5 MPa, respectively. SEM images
CE

revealed the presence of air voids between the LWA-PCM and the surrounding GP matrix, which
AC

might be one of the reasons for the reduction in compressive strength.

Min et al. [50] evaluated the mechanical behavior of concrete mixed with LWA-PCM composites.

The LWA-PCM was manufactured by vacuum impregnating an organic-based PCM (octadecane -

C18H38) with a melting temperature of 28 ℃ into the structure of a black fine aggregate (xGnP –

graphitic carbon-based material). Two different methods were tested for adding LWA-PCM to the

concrete mixture, i.e. the replacement and the additive method. The results of the study showed a

reduction in the compressive strength and the elastic modulus of concrete mixed with LWA-PCM

20
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

when the LWA-PCM content increased. The results also showed that with the replacement method the

compressive strength reductions are less than with the additive method. Based on the experimental

findings, a linear relationship between the compressive strength reduction rate and the mass fraction

of LWA-PCM to concrete was proposed.

Another study that evaluated the influence of LWA-PCM on the mechanical properties of cement

concretes was performed by Wang et al. [24]. Two types of LWA with the size of 5mm to 20mm, i.e.

T
ceramsite (expanded clay) and diatomite particles, were used as containers for PCM. A eutectic PCM

IP
mixture of laurie acid, myristic acid and palmitic acid was used. A coating material was also added to

LWA-PCM composites for avoiding PCM leakage. Results showed that the compressive strength of

CR
the control mixture was around 50 MPa, and it was reduced to 18.3 MPa, 13.3 MPa and 19.7 MPa,

US
13.8 MPa by the addition of 80% and 100% ceramsite and diatomite respectively. The addition of

40% by volume ceramsite and diatomite based LWA-PCM resulted in a concrete composite with a
AN
compressive strength of around 28 MPa.

The mechanical behavior of concrete containing LWA-PCM was investigated by Ma et al. [25].
M

LWA-PCM was prepared by impregnating butyl stearate into pores of expanded perlites and wrapping

them with limestone powder. The replacement method was used to incorporate LWA-PCM into the
ED

concrete mixtures (replacing sand with LWA-PCM). Results indicated that the addition of LWA-PCM

reduced the compressive strength of concrete. The compressive strength of concrete with 0%, 10%,
PT

20% and 30% LWA-PCM (by volume) was 56.39 MPa, 54.33 MPa, 45.08 MPa and 39.24 MPa,

respectively.
CE

Recent innovative macro-encapsulated PCM concrete composites have been studied by Cui et al. [48]

and D’Alessandro et al. [7]. An innovative macro-encapsulated PCM concrete composite using
AC

hollow steel balls (HSB) was developed and tested by Cui et al. [48]. HSB attached with metal clamps

were used as carrier of an organic paraffin (octadecane) PCM. The replacement method was used to

replace the normal coarse aggregate of the control concrete, with 25%, 50%, 75% and 100% by

volume of PCM. Compared to the control concrete, a reduction of compressive strength from 16 to

42% was obtained when the PCM content increased from 25 to 100%, respectively. The compressive

strength of the macro-encapsulated PCM concrete composite using hollow steel balls (HSB) with

21
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

metal clamps ranged between 41.2 and 28.1 MPa, showing great potential for structural applications.

Similar results were obtained by D’Alessandro et al. [7], who concluded that a structural concrete

with a 5% weight content of macro-encapsulated PCMs having a target class equal to C25/30 or

higher could be achieved by increasing the strength of the original mix design [7]. The compressive

strength results from all the discussed studies that used LWA-PCM for incorporation into concrete are

presented in Table 1. This table shows that it is feasible to create concrete containing LWA-PCM that

T
can achieve the minimum compressive strength for structural concrete (2500 psi) [69].

IP
CR
Table 1. Comparison of different studies that evaluated the compressive strength of concrete

composites containing LWA-PCM.

Ref.
Type of
PCM
Aggregate
Coating
material US
Percentage of
incorporated PCM (%)
Compressive
strength
(MPa)
Loss of
compressive
strength (%)
AN
[22] Lauryl Expanded Epoxy Control mixture 35 0.0%
alcohol clay coating 100% by volume 29.6 15.4%
Modified Control mixture 35 0.0%
cement 100% by volume 31.8 9.1%
paste
M

[47] Paraffin Expanded Epoxy Control mixture 15 0.0%

clay coating, 100% by volume 17 13.0%
graphite (increase)*
ED

50% by volume 16 7.0% (increase)*

[44] Paraffin Synthetic Epoxy Control mixture 61.33 0.0%
LWA coating 17% LWA by volume of NWA 44.1 28.1%
from with
PT

17% PCM-LWA by volume of 53.11 13.4%

expanded graphite
NWA
clay powder
33% LWA by volume of NWA 35.44 42.2%
33% PCM-LWA by volume of 42.14 31.3%
CE

NWA
50% LWA by volume of NWA 29 52.7%
50% PCM-LWA by volume of 33.29 45.7%
NWA
AC

[46] Paraffin Expanded Polyester Control mixture 22 0.0%

wax clay resin 20 wt% 12.5 43.2%
adhesive
Control mixture (100% OPC) 51.9 0.0%
Butyl Expanded Not 100% (by volume) (100% OPC) 25.8 50.3%
[23]
stearate clay specified Control mixture (50% GGBS) 39.5 0.0%
100% (by volume) (50% GGBS) 25 36.7%
Control mixture 56.39 0.0%
Butyl Expanded Limestone 10% by volume 54.33 3.7%
[25]
stearate perlite powder 20% by volume 45.08 20.1%
30% by volume 39.24 30.4%

22
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

[50] Octadecane xGnP Not Control mixture (35.42% w/c ratio) 48.96 0.0%
(C18H38) (graphitic specified 10% SSPCM to cement ratio (wt, %) 42.75 12.7%
based PCM carbon
20% SSPCM to cement ratio (wt, %) 33.07 32.5%
based
material - 30% SSPCM to cement ratio (wt, %) 28.13 42.5%
black fine Control mixture (48% w/c ratio) 35.74 0.0%
aggregate) 10% SSPCM to cement ratio (wt, %) 30.45 14.8%
20% SSPCM to cement ratio (wt, %) 27.92 21.9%
30% SSPCM to cement ratio (wt, %) 24.99 30.1%
Control mixture (48% w/c ratio) 35.74 0.0%
5.4% by volume of fine aggregate 32.75 8.4%
10.8% by volume of fine aggregate 28.59 20.0%

T
[24] Eutectic Ceramsite Sprayed Control mixture 50 0.0%
mixture of (expanded glue

IP
20% (by volume) 31 38.0%
fatty acids clay) Guerqi
(laurie 901 and 40% (by volume) 28 44.0%
acid, covered 60% (by volume) 22 56.0%

CR
myristic by a thin 80% (by volume) 18.3 63.4%
acid and layer of 100% (by volume) 13.3 73.4%
palmitic cement
acid) Diatomite Control mixture ( 50 0.0%

US
20% (by volume)
40% (by volume)
60% (by volume)
34
28.5
22
32.0%
43.0%
56.0%
AN
80% (by volume) 19.7 60.6%
100% (by volume) 13.8 72.4%
M

5. Thermal properties of PCM-concrete

ED

5.1 Concrete enhanced with micro-encapsulated PCM

PT

5.1.1 Thermal conductivity

The thermal conductivity of concrete integrating microencapsulated PCM has been typically
CE

measured using steady-state methods such as the hot disk and guarded hot disk methods. However, it

is important to mention that other methods can also be used to measure the thermal conductivity of
AC

PCM-concrete composites such as commercial transient techniques (e.g. the laser flash and the

transient plane source (TPS) method [71]) and the T-history method [72].

Most of the reviewed studies showed that the addition of microencapsulated PCMs in concrete results

in lower thermal conductivity. According to various authors, this mainly occurs due to increased

concrete porosity from entrapped air caused by the PCM (which replaces some of the heat transfer by

23
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

conduction with natural convection) [3], [4], [6], and due to the replacement of a certain amount of

sand in the concrete mixture with PCM particles which have a lower conductivity [4,5,40].

The study performed by Eddhahak-Ouni et al. [64] is probably the only study that showed an almost

constant thermal conductivity (less than 3% decrease) when 5% of microencapsulated PCM (by

volume of concrete) is incorporated into concrete. This study also showed that the aged PCM-concrete

has a similar thermal conductivity than the non-aged PCM-concrete, which is an indication of an

T
acceptable long-term thermal behavior.

IP
Hunger et al. [3] and Jayalath et al. [6] measured the thermal conductivity of PCM-concrete

composites when the microencapsulated PCM was in liquid stage. In the study performed by Hunger

CR
et al. [3], the effective thermal conductivities of self-compacting concrete containing 1%, 3% and 5%

US
of microencapsulated paraffin (by mass of concrete) were measured at 30℃ (above the melting range

of the used PCM). The thermal conductivity was reduced from 3.4 W/mK for a reference mix to 2.1
AN
W/mK for concrete containing 5% PCM by mass of concrete. Similarly, in the study performed by

Jayalath et al. [6], the thermal conductivity of concrete samples with 5% microencapsulated PCM by
M

mass of concrete was reduced by approximately 45% compared to the control mix without PCM

(Fig.4).
ED

In various studies, the thermal conductivity of PCM-concrete samples was determined at temperatures

below and above the melting range of microencapsulated PCM [4], [5], [11]. Research results showed
PT

that the thermal conductivity of PCM-concrete is higher when the PCM is in a solid state than when

the PCM is in a liquid state [11]. In the study performed by Dehdezi et al. [4] the thermal conductivity
CE

of microencapsulated PCM-concrete specimens showed a reduction of 36.6% in the thermal

AC

conductivity for a concrete containing 5 % PCM (by mass of concrete), as the thermal conductivity

was reduced from 1.12 W/mK for a reference mix, to 0.71 W/mK for the 5% PCM mix.

Most recently, Fabiani and Pisello [71] developed an innovative experimental procedure coupling

environmental thermal forcing and transient plane source method to determine the thermal properties

(including thermal conductivity) of a concrete sample containing PCM for structural building

applications. The tested PCM-concrete composite contained 5% of microencapsulated PCM (organic

paraffin wax) by weight of concrete, with a nominal melting temperature of about 18 °C. For the

24
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

experimental procedure, the authors used a climatic chamber to dynamically control the hygrothermal

profile of the tested samples and applied the transient plane source method to produce a temperature

dependent profile for thermal conductivity, thermal diffusivity and volumetric specific heat. The

results of the study showed that the incorporation of PCM into concrete reduced the average thermal

conductivity and diffusivity.

The results of the reviewed studies that included thermal conductivity measurements of the

T
microencapsulated PCM-concrete composites are summarized in Fig. 4. It can be concluded that even

IP
with low concentrations of PCM such as 5 % by mass of concrete, the thermal conductivity of PCM-

concrete composites is reduced by approximately 25 to 50%.

CR
Hunger et al. [3] Dehdezi et al. [4] Lecompte et al. [5]
Jayalath et al. [6] Cao et al. [11] Niall et al. [23]

US
Reduction in thermal conductivity (%)

60%
y = 10.3x
R² = 0.7902
AN
50% y = 8.6555x
R² = 0.8865

40% y = 7.0404x
R² = 0.8957
M

y = 7.8043x
R² = 0.665
30%
ED

20% y = 5.6228x
R² = 0.9506
y = 4.6154x
10% R² = 1
PT

0%
0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6%
CE

% PCM content (microencapsulated paraffin) by mass of concrete

AC

Figure 4. Reduction of the thermal conductivity of concrete due to the addition of different

concentrations of microencapsulated paraffin PCM.

5.1.2 Specific heat capacity

Generally, the reviewed studies showed that the incorporation of microencapsulated PCM increases

the specific heat capacity of concrete, especially across the PCM melting temperature range due to its

latent heat capacity. However, due to the lack of an established methodology for the measurement of

25
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

specific heat capacity of PCM-concrete composites, various methods with different accuracies have

been employed. Most studies [4,5,42,64] used Differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) for measuring

the specific heat capacity despite the limitations of this method (samples must be homogeneous and of

very small size – less than 10 mg). According to Pomianowski et al. [73], PCM-concrete samples of

only a few milligrams have to be considered as inhomogeneous materials, which indicates that

conventional calorimetry methods, differential thermal analysis (DTA) and DSC methods should not

T
be used. For this reason, authors like Hunger et al. [3], Pomianowski et al. [73], and Fabiani & Pisello

IP
[71] proposed alternative methods for measuring the specific heat capacity of PCM-concrete.

Hunger et al. [3] developed their own experimental setup for measuring the heat capacity and thermal

CR
mass of self-compacting concrete containing 1%, 3% and 5% of microencapsulated paraffin (by mass

US
of concrete). The heat capacity and thermal mass of the samples were calculated from temperature

and heat flux measurements of the samples placed between two thermo-regulated plates as:
AN
̇
(1)
( )

(2)
M

where is the heat capacity of the sample, the thermal mass, the heat exchange area of the
ED

sample, ̇ the heat flux per square meter, the mass of the sample, the temperature of the sample,

and the time. Research results showed that by increasing the amount of PCM in the concrete
PT

mixture, the specific heat capacity also increases by up to 3.5 times for the 5 wt% PCM content, in the

melting temperature range of the PCM (23 – 26 ℃).

CE

In the study performed by Cao et al. [11], the latent heat and the specific heat capacity of samples of

microencapsulated paraffin incorporated into PCC and GPC were determined with the guarded hot
AC

plates method, in a similar experimental setup to the one used by Hunger et al. [3]. Research results

showed that latent heat increases linearly with respect to the microcapsule concentration. The latent

heat of PCC and GPC with 3.2 and 2.7% of PCM (by weight of concrete) was determined within the

temperature range of 10 – 35 ℃ and resulted in values of around 2.4 J/g and 1.7 J/g, respectively. On

the other hand, the results showed the specific heat capacity of PCM-concrete samples is nearly the

same (around 1000 J/kg °K) when the PCM is in the solid state (from 10-15 ℃) and liquid state (35-40

26
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

℃), and does not change when the concentration of PCM increases. For comparison, the specific heat

capacities of the pure micro-encapsulated PCMs in the solid state ( ℃) and in

liquid staa te ( ℃) were determined using the DSC method. The authors

suggested that the low concentrations of microencapsulated PCM used in the study was probably too

small to increase the sensible heat capacity of the concrete.

In the study performed by Dehdezi et al. [4], the mean heat capacity of each PCM-concrete composite

T
was calculated using the specific heat capacities of the constituent parts weighted by their relative

IP
mass proportions [4]. The specific heat capacities of the constituent parts including aggregates,

CR
hardened cement paste, and PCM powder were determined by using a DSC. The calculated specific

heat capacities at 25 ℃ of the reference concrete and of PCM-concrete samples containing 0.5%, 1%,

US
3% and 5% by weight of concrete are 963 J/kgK, 1069 J/kgK, 1174 J/kgK, 1381 J/kgK, and 1780

J/kgK, respectively.
AN
Pomianowski et al. [73] proposed and compared four different methods to calculate the specific heat

capacity of inhomogeneous concrete material with incorporated microencapsulated-PCM, i.e.

M

theoretical method, simple method, numerical simple method, and inverse method. The theoretical

method is similar to the method proposed by Dehdezi et al. [4], which uses a weighted average of the
ED

specific heat capacities of the constituent parts (concrete and microencapsulated PCM) using DSC

measurements. Using the theoretical method, the specific heat capacity of PCM-concrete samples is
PT

calculated as:
CE

(3)

Where is the specific heat capacity of the PCM-concrete sample, is the specific heat
AC

capacity of the microencapsulated PCM, is the weight ratio of the PCM to the composite, and

is the specific heat capacity of the matrix material [73]. The simple method is the same as the

method proposed by Hunger et al. [3], which uses Eq. (1) to calculate the specific heat capacity of

PCM concrete composites based on experimental measurements of heat flux and temperature of the

sample. The numerical simple method uses a finite difference method to solve the 1D unsteady heat

conduction problem, using the following equation [73]:

27
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

(4)

Where is temperature (℃), is time, is length (m), and is the thermal diffusivity (m2/s).

Research results showed that the numerical simple method provides acceptable accuracy but it

requires a manual iterative process to find a satisfactory linear approximation of the specific heat

capacity as a function of temperature [73]. Finally, the inverse method uses a non-linear constrained

optimization method to calculate the specific heat capacity as a function of temperature. The authors

T
concluded that the numerical simple method and the inverse method are probably the most suitable

IP
methods for measuring the specific heat capacity of PCM-concrete composites [73], as the simple

CR
method and specially the theoretical method results in overestimated values for the specific heat

capacity of PCM-concrete composites.

US
Considering the limitations of DSC and T-history methods for measuring the specific heat capacity of

PCM-concrete composites, Fabiani & Pisello [71] developed an innovative experimental setup that
AN
combines a transient plane source (TPS) method with a dynamically controlled environment. This

experimental setup was used to produce temperature dependent profiles of the thermal properties
M

(including volumetric specific heat) of concrete samples enhanced with microencapsulated PCM for

structural building applications. The results obtained with the dynamic-TPS procedure showed a huge
ED

volumetric specific heat increase across the PCM melting temperature range (between 13.5 ℃ and 18
3
℃), reaching a peak value of about 71.482 ±15.874 MJ/m K. The authors concluded that the
PT

measurements obtained with the proposed experimental setup are influenced by heat transfer
CE

between the sample and the surrounding environment, which is not considered during the

calculation procedure of the TPS method [71].

AC

5.2 Concrete enhanced with macro-encapsulated PCM or LWA-PCM

5.2.1 Thermal conductivity

The thermal conductivity of macro-encapsulated LWA containing lauryl alcohol (LA) as PCM was

measured in the study performed by Cui et al. [22]. The results of the study showed that the thermal

conductivity of concrete mixtures with epoxy and modified cement paste coated LWA-PCM was

around 0.615 W/mK and 0.738 W/mK, with an average loss of thermal conductivity, with respect to

28
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

control concrete (0.817 W/mK), of around 24.7% and 9.7%, respectively. These results suggest that

the coating material used for preventing PCM leakage from LWA has a significant influence on the

thermal conductivity of the final LWA-PCM concrete composite. The authors concluded that for

thermal energy storage purposes, the thermal conductivity of LWA-PCM concrete composites should

be improved by adding an additional layer of a conductive material such as graphite powder, to

enhance the efficiency of the system [22].

T
An alternative to increase the thermal conductivity of LWA-PCM concrete composites, by adding a

IP
conductive material as a coating for the LWA-PCM was studied by Memon et al. [47]. A mixture of

epoxy and graphite powder was used as a coating material to enhance the thermal conductivity of

CR
LWA-PCM. Research results showed that the thermal conductivity increased by 69.4%, 126.9%,

US
162.3% and 176.4% for 5%, 10%, 15% and 20% mass fractions of graphite powder, respectively.

However, the thermal properties of the final concrete containing LWA-PCM coated with graphite
AN
powder were not reported.

Wang et al. [24] also measured the thermal conductivity of a hardened concrete containing LWA-
M

PCM. Similarly to the study performed by Memon et al. [47], the authors found that the incorporation

of 1%, 3%, 5%, 7% and 9% graphite powder increases the thermal conductivity of LWA-PCM by
ED

17%, 34%, 55%, 119%, and 193% respectively. However, the thermal conductivity of concrete

containing LWA-PCM decreases with an increase of LWA-PCM content, due to the low thermal
PT

conductivity of PCM filled in the pores of LWA.

Kastiukas et al. [46] also evaluated the use of different coating materials such as carbon fibers (CF)
CE

and graphite spray (GS) to improve the thermal conductivity of LWA-PCM or macro-encapsulated
AC

LWA. Unlike the previous studies [24,47], the addition of carbon fibers or graphite spray did not

increase the thermal conductivity of LWA-PCM. The measured thermal conductivity of regular

LWA-PCM and LWA-PCM coated with CF and GS was 0.1382 W/mK, 0.1382 W/mK, and 0.1337

W/mK, respectively.

In the study performed by Niall et al. [23], the authors used an adjusted hot plate apparatus to

determine the conductivity of the LWA-PCM composite panels with 100% PCC and 50 % GGBS.

Additionally, the recorded temperature data together with the measured densities and thermal

29
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

conductivities were used to determine the thermal storage behavior of the panels. Research results

showed that both panels had a thermal conductivity reduction of 47.4% and 42.8%, respectively.

According to the authors, this is caused by the low conductivity of the PCM material. The authors also

indicated that lower conductivity and higher heat storage capacity of the PCM panels results in

reduced thermal diffusivity, which in turn reduces the effectiveness of the PCM as depth increases as

the heat takes longer to reach the PCM [23,50].

T
5.2.2 Specific heat capacity

IP
Despite the limitations of the DSC method to evaluate the thermal behavior of inhomogeneous

CR
materials, all the reviewed studies used this method to determine the specific heat capacity of concrete

containing LWA-PCM. Probably also, for this reason, the specific heat capacity results of concrete

containing LWA-PCM are not consistent.

US
A DSC was used in the study performed by Kastiukas et al. [46] to evaluate the phase change
AN
temperature and thermal energy storage of LWA-PCM. To conduct the DSC test, the LWA-PCM was

crushed to a coarse powder. According to the results, the latent heat of melting of the PCM that was
M

used in this study (RT25) in its pure state is 130.5 J/g while for the LWA impregnated with RT25 it is

57.93 J/g.
ED

In the study performed by Min et al. [50], a DSC was also used to determine the specific heat of

concrete with LWA-PCM. The results showed that the specific heat of LWA-PCM increases when the
PT

content of LWA-PCM increases. However, the changes are not significant when the ratio of LWA-

PCM to cement is 10%. On the temperature range from 10 ℃ to 24 ℃, the measured specific heats
CE

were 0.46 J/gK, 0.62 J/gK, 0.80 J/gK, and 0.93 J/gK for the specimens having 0%, 10%, 20%, and
AC

30% of LWA-PCM, respectively [50].

Similar to previous studies, Ma et al. [25] used a DSC analysis to characterize energy-storing

properties of concrete specimens containing different fractions of LWA-PCM. Results showed that in

the heating process, the equivalent specific heat capacity and equivalent energy storage of concrete

containing 20% LWA-PCM was increased by 86.40% and 82.73%, respectively. In the cooling

30
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

process, the equivalent specific heat capacity and equivalent energy storage of concrete with 20%

LWA-PCM was increased by 60.10% and 56.94%, respectively.

6. Conclusions
Based on the review of recent studies focusing on the incorporation of PCMs into concrete for

building applications the following conclusions can be drawn.

 The maximum amount of microencapsulated PCM that can be added to concrete is restricted by

T
the reduction of mechanical strength and workability of the PCM-concrete composite. In terms of

IP
concrete workability, the maximum amount of microencapsulated PCM that can be incorporated

CR
into concrete is not higher than 6% by weight of concrete. Similarly, according to various studies,

approximately 3–5 % by weight of concrete (which corresponds to approximately 10-12% by

US
volume of concrete) is the maximum amount of microencapsulated PCM that can be incorporated

into concrete to reach the minimum recommended compressive strength for structural concrete
AN
(17.24 MPa). To overcome these limitations, future work could focus on improving

microcapsules with low tendency of agglomeration, high compatibility with the concrete matrix
M

and strong mechanical properties, and the production of new innovative superplasticizers for use

in PCM-concrete mixtures. The production of robust microencapsulated PCMs (with increased

ED

robustness of the shell material) could be a potential solution for reducing the loss of compressive
PT

strength, and thus incrementing the amount of PCM to enhance the latent heat thermal energy

storage capacity of PCM-concrete composites.

CE

 Data presented in the reviewed publications showed that the average decrease in compressive

strength of PCM-concrete specimens with over 3 % in weight of microencapsulated PCM is

AC

generally higher than 40%. Taking this into consideration, the reference concrete mix design

should have a minimum target strength of around 30 MPa to reach the minimum recommended

compressive strength for structural concrete (17.24 MPa) after the incorporation of

microencapsulated PCM.

 The addition of microencapsulated PCMs in concrete results in lower thermal conductivity. This

mainly occurs due to increased concrete porosity from entrapped air caused by the PCM (which

31
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

replaces some of the heat transfer by conduction with natural convection), and due to the

replacement of a certain amount of sand in the concrete mixture with PCM particles with lower

conductivity. Based on the results of different studies that used microencapsulated PCMs for

incorporation into concrete, it can be concluded that even with low concentrations of

microencapsulated PCM such as 5 % by mass of concrete, the thermal conductivity of PCM-

concrete composites is reduced by approximately 25 to 50%.

T
 Most of the reviewed studies showed that the incorporation of PCM increases the specific heat

IP
capacity of concrete, especially across the PCM melting temperature range due to its latent heat

CR
capacity. However, specific heat capacity of concrete containing both micro and macro-

encapsulated PCM have mostly been obtained with a DSC, which is not applicable to

US
inhomogeneous materials such as PCM-concrete composites. For this reason, it can be concluded

that there is a need to develop appropriate standards or specifications with an established

AN
methodology for measuring the specific heat capacity of inhomogeneous materials such as

PCM-concrete composites.
M

 Several authors have successfully evaluated concrete containing LWA-PCM. However, due to the

high variability in the parameters used to produce LWA-PCM concrete composites and high
ED

results disparity, a conclusion regarding the maximum amount of PCM that can be incorporated

into concrete without affecting its mechanical performance could not be obtained. With the
PT

information presented in the reviewed publications, it is not possible to determine what is the
CE

reason for the difference in mechanical strength results when LWA-PCM is added.

 Researchers who have used LWA as the carrier for PCM have normally applied a protective
AC

coating material to avoid PCM leakage from LWA. Thermal conductivity measurements of

LWA-PCM showed that the coating material has a significant influence on the thermal

conductivity of the final LWA-PCM concrete composite. For this reason, it is recommended to

use graphite powder, graphite spray, carbon fibers or other highly conductive materials as

protective coating materials so that the heat transfer rate between the LWA-PCM and the concrete

matrix could increase.

32
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

References
[1] UN Environment and International Energy Agency, “Towards a zero-emission, efficient, and
resilient buildings and construction sector. Global Status Report 2017,” 2017.

[2] M. Santamouris, “Innovating to zero the building sector in Europe: Minimising the energy
consumption, eradication of the energy poverty and mitigating the local climate change,” Sol.
Energy, vol. 128, pp. 61–94, 2016.

[3] M. Hunger, A. G. Entrop, I. Mandilaras, H. J. H. Brouwers, and M. Founti, “The behavior of

T
self-compacting concrete containing micro-encapsulated Phase Change Materials,” Cem.

IP
Concr. Compos., vol. 31, no. 10, pp. 731–743, 2009.

P. K. Dehdezi, M. R. Hall, A. R. Dawson, and S. P. Casey, “Thermal, mechanical and

CR
[4]
microstructural analysis of concrete containing microencapsulated phase change materials,”
Int. J. Pavement Eng., vol. 14, no. August 2014, pp. 1–14, 2012.

[5]
US
T. Lecompte, P. Le Bideau, P. Glouannec, D. Nortershauser, and S. Le Masson, “Mechanical
and thermo-physical behaviour of concretes and mortars containing phase change material,”
AN
Energy Build., vol. 94, pp. 52–60, 2015.

[6] A. Jayalath, R. San Nicolas, M. Sofi, R. Shanks, T. Ngo, L. Aye, and P. Mendis, “Properties of
cementitious mortar and concrete containing micro-encapsulated phase change materials,”
M

Constr. Build. Mater., vol. 120, pp. 408–417, 2016.

ED

[7] A. D’Alessandro, A. L. Pisello, C. Fabiani, F. Ubertini, L. F. Cabeza, and F. Cotana,

“Multifunctional smart concretes with novel phase change materials: Mechanical and thermo-
energy investigation,” Appl. Energy, vol. 212, no. January, pp. 1448–1461, 2018.
PT

[8] L. Navarro, A. De Gracia, A. Castell, and L. F. Cabeza, “Experimental evaluation of a

concrete core slab with phase change materials for cooling purposes,” Energy Build., vol. 116,
CE

pp. 411–419, 2016.

[9] A. M. Thiele, A. Jamet, G. Sant, and L. Pilon, “Annual energy analysis of concrete containing
AC

phase change materials for building envelopes,” Energy Convers. Manag., vol. 103, pp. 374–
386, 2015.

[10] A. M. Thiele, G. Sant, and L. Pilon, “Diurnal thermal analysis of microencapsulated PCM-
concrete composite walls,” Energy Convers. Manag., vol. 93, pp. 215–227, 2015.

[11] V. D. Cao, S. Pilehvar, C. Salas-Bringas, A. M. Szczotok, J. F. Rodriguez, M. Carmona, N.

Al-Manasir, and A. L. Kjøniksen, “Microencapsulated phase change materials for enhancing
the thermal performance of Portland cement concrete and geopolymer concrete for passive

33
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

building applications,” Energy Convers. Manag., vol. 133, pp. 56–66, 2017.

[12] L. Navarro, A. de Gracia, D. Niall, A. Castell, M. Browne, S. J. McCormack, P. Griffiths, and

L. F. Cabeza, “Thermal energy storage in building integrated thermal systems: A review. Part
2. Integration as passive system,” Renew. Energy, vol. 85, pp. 1334–1356, 2016.

[13] R. Parameshwaran, S. Harikrishnan, and S. Kalaiselvam, “Energy efficient PCM-based

variable air volume air conditioning system for modern buildings,” Energy Build., vol. 42, no.
8, pp. 1353–1360, 2010.

T
[14] L. F. Cabeza, A. Castell, C. Barreneche, A. De Gracia, and A. I. Fernández, “Materials used as

IP
PCM in thermal energy storage in buildings : A review,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 15,
no. 3, pp. 1675–1695, 2011.

CR
[15] L. F. C. Lidia Navarro, Aran Solé, Marc Martín, Camila Barreneche, Lorenzo Olivieri, José
Antonio Tenorio, “Benchmarking of useful phase change materials for a building application,”

[16]
Energy Build., vol. 182, pp. 45–50, 2018.
US
T. C. Ling and C. S. Poon, “Use of phase change materials for thermal energy storage in
AN
concrete: An overview,” Constr. Build. Mater., vol. 46, pp. 55–62, 2013.

[17] D. W. Hawes, D. Banu, and D. Feldman, “The stability of phase change materials in concrete,”
M

Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 103–118, 1992.

[18] F. O. Cedeño, M. M. Prieto, A. Espina, and J. R. García, “Measurements of temperature and

ED

melting heat of some pure fatty acids and their binary and ternary mixtures by differential
scanning calorimetry,” Thermochim. Acta, vol. 369, no. 1–2, pp. 39–50, 2001.
PT

[19] T. Inoue, Y. Hisatsugu, R. Ishikawa, and M. Suzuki, “Solid-liquid phase behavior of binary
fatty acid mixtures: 2. Mixtures of oleic acid with lauric acid, myristic acid, and palmitic acid,”
Chem. Phys. Lipids, vol. 127, no. 2, pp. 161–173, 2004.
CE

[20] D. Rozanna, T. G. Chuah, A. Salmiah, T. S. Y. Choong, and M. Sa’ari, “Fatty Acids as Phase
Change Materials (PCMs) for Thermal Energy Storage: A Review,” Int. J. Green Energy, vol.
AC

1, no. 4, pp. 495–513, 2005.

[21] V. V. Rao, R. Parameshwaran, and V. V. Ram, “PCM-mortar based construction materials for
energy efficient buildings: A review on research trends,” Energy Build., vol. 158, pp. 95–122,
2018.

[22] H. Cui, S. A. Memon, and R. Liu, “Development, mechanical properties and numerical
simulation of macro encapsulated thermal energy storage concrete,” Energy Build., vol. 96, pp.
162–174, 2015.

34
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

[23] D. Niall, O. Kinnane, R. P. West, and S. McCormack, “Mechanical and thermal evaluation of
different types of PCM–concrete composite panels,” J. Struct. Integr. Maint., vol. 2, no. 2, pp.
100–108, 2017.

[24] R. Wang, M. Ren, X. Gao, and L. Qin, “Preparation and properties of fatty acids based thermal
energy storage aggregate concrete,” Constr. Build. Mater., vol. 165, pp. 1–10, 2018.

[25] Q. Ma and M. Bai, “Mechanical behavior , energy-storing properties and thermal reliability of
phase-changing energy-storing concrete,” Constr. Build. Mater., vol. 176, pp. 43–49, 2018.

T
[26] K. Cellat, F. Tezcan, B. Beyhan, G. Kardaş, and H. Paksoy, “A comparative study on

IP
corrosion behavior of rebar in concrete with fatty acid additive as phase change material,”
Constr. Build. Mater., vol. 143, pp. 490–500, 2017.

CR
[27] H. Paksoy, G. Kardas, Y. Konuklu, K. Cellat, and F. Tezcan, “Characterization of Concrete
Mixes Containing Phase Change Materials,” IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng., vol. 251, no. 1,

[28]
2017.
US
X. Li, J. G. Sanjayan, and J. L. Wilson, “Fabrication and stability of form-stable
AN
diatomite/paraffin phase change material composites,” Energy Build., vol. 76, pp. 284–294,
2014.

N. Soares, J. J. Costa, A. R. Gaspar, and P. Santos, “Review of passive PCM latent heat
M

[29]
thermal energy storage systems towards buildings ’ energy efficiency,” Energy Build., vol. 59,
pp. 82–103, 2013.
ED

[30] D. Feldman, D. Banu, D. Hawes, and E. Ghanbari, “Obtaining an energy storing building
material by direct incorporation of an organic phase change material in gypsum wallboard,”
PT

Sol. Energy Mater., vol. 22, no. 2–3, pp. 231–242, 1991.

[31] L. Navarro, A. de Gracia, S. Colclough, M. Browne, S. J. McCormack, P. Griffiths, and L. F.

CE

Cabeza, “Thermal energy storage in building integrated thermal systems: A review. Part 1.
active storage systems,” Renew. Energy, vol. 88, pp. 526–547, 2016.
AC

[32] D. W. Hawes, D. Banu, and D. Feldman, “Latent heat storage in concrete,” Sol. Energy
Mater., vol. 19, pp. 335–348, 1989.

[33] T. Lee, D. W. Hawes, D. Banu, and D. Feldman, “Control aspects of latent heat storage and
recovery in concrete,” Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells, vol. 62, no. 3, pp. 217–237, 2000.

[34] D. P. Bentz and R. Turpin, “Potential applications of phase change materials in concrete
technology,” Cem. Concr. Compos., vol. 29, no. 7, pp. 527–532, 2007.

[35] P. Schossig, H. M. Henning, S. Gschwander, and T. Haussmann, “Micro-encapsulated phase-

35
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

change materials integrated into construction materials,” Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells, vol. 89,
no. 2–3, pp. 297–306, 2005.

[36] D. W. Hawes, “Latent heat storage in building materials,” Energy Build. 20 77-86, vol. 20, pp.
77–86, 1993.

[37] A. Jamekhorshid, S. M. Sadrameli, and M. Farid, “A review of microencapsulation methods of

phase change materials (PCMs) as a thermal energy storage (TES) medium,” Renew. Sustain.
Energy Rev., vol. 31, pp. 531–542, 2014.

T
[38] A. Hassan, M. Shakeel Laghari, and Y. Rashid, “Micro-encapsulated phase change materials:

IP
A review of encapsulation, safety and thermal characteristics,” Sustainability, vol. 8, no. 10, p.
1046, 2016.

CR
[39] S. A. Memon, “Phase change materials integrated in building walls: A state of the art review,”
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 31, pp. 870–906, 2014.

[40]
US
M. Fenollera, J. L. Míguez, I. Goicoechea, J. Lorenzo, and M. Á. Álvarez, “The influence of
phase change materials on the properties of self-compacting concrete,” Materials (Basel)., vol.
AN
6, no. 8, pp. 3530–3546, 2013.

[41] S. Pilehvar, V. D. Cao, A. M. Szczotok, L. Valentini, D. Salvioni, M. Magistri, R. Pamies, and

A. L. Kjøniksen, “Mechanical properties and microscale changes of geopolymer concrete and
M

Portland cement concrete containing micro-encapsulated phase change materials,” Cem.

Concr. Res., vol. 100, no. August, pp. 341–349, 2017.
ED

[42] P. Meshgin and Y. Xi, “Effect of Phase-Change Materials on Properties of Concrete,” ACI
Mater. J., vol. 109, no. 1, 2012.
PT

[43] A. Figueiredo, J. Lapa, R. Vicente, and C. Cardoso, “Mechanical and thermal characterization
of concrete with incorporation of microencapsulated PCM for applications in thermally
CE

activated slabs,” Constr. Build. Mater., vol. 112, pp. 639–647, 2016.

[44] S. A. Memon, H. Cui, T. Y. Lo, and Q. Li, “Development of structural-functional integrated

AC

concrete with macro-encapsulated PCM for thermal energy storage,” Appl. Energy, vol. 150,
pp. 245–257, 2015.

[45] H. Akeiber, P. Nejat, M. Zaimi, A. Majid, M. A. Wahid, F. Jomehzadeh, I. Zeynali, J. Kaiser,

B. Richard, and S. Ahmad, “A review on phase change material ( PCM ) for sustainable
passive cooling in building envelopes,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 60, pp. 1470–1497,
2016.

[46] G. Kastiukas, X. Zhou, and J. Castro-gomes, “Development and optimisation of phase change

36
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

material-impregnated lightweight aggregates for geopolymer composites made from

aluminosilicate rich mud and milled glass powder,” Constr. Build. Mater., vol. 110, pp. 201–
210, 2016.

[47] S. A. Memon, H. Z. Cui, H. Zhang, and F. Xing, “Utilization of macro encapsulated phase
change materials for the development of thermal energy storage and structural lightweight
aggregate concrete,” Appl. Energy, vol. 139, pp. 43–55, 2015.

[48] H. Cui, W. Tang, Q. Qin, F. Xing, W. Liao, and H. Wen, “Development of structural-

T
functional integrated energy storage concrete with innovative macro-encapsulated PCM by
hollow steel ball,” Appl. Energy, vol. 185, pp. 107–118, 2017.

IP
[49] M. Pomianowski, P. Heiselberg, and R. L. Jensen, “Dynamic heat storage and cooling capacity

CR
of a concrete deck with PCM and thermally activated building system,” Energy Build., vol. 53,
pp. 96–107, 2012.

[50]
US
H. W. Min, S. Kim, and H. S. Kim, “Investigation on thermal and mechanical characteristics
of concrete mixed with shape stabilized phase change material for mix design,” Constr. Build.
Mater., vol. 149, pp. 749–762, 2017.
AN
[51] M. Aguayo, S. Das, C. Castro, N. Kabay, G. Sant, and N. Neithalath, “Porous inclusions as
hosts for phase change materials in cementitious composites: Characterization, thermal
M

performance, and analytical models,” Constr. Build. Mater., vol. 134, pp. 574–584, 2017.

[52] B. Xu, H. Ma, Z. Lu, and Z. Li, “Paraffin/expanded vermiculite composite phase change
ED

material as aggregate for developing lightweight thermal energy storage cement-based

composites,” Appl. Energy, vol. 160, pp. 358–367, 2015.
PT

[53] S. Drissi, T.-C. Ling, K. H. Mo, and A. Eddhahak, “A review of microencapsulated and
composite phase change materials: Alteration of strength and thermal properties of cement-
CE

based materials,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 110, no. November 2018, pp. 467–484,
2019.
AC

[54] Y. R. Kim, B. S. Khil, S. J. Jang, W. C. Choi, and H. Do Yun, “Effect of barium-based phase
change material (PCM) to control the heat of hydration on the mechanical properties of mass
concrete,” Thermochim. Acta, vol. 613, pp. 100–107, 2015.

[55] B. Šavija and E. Schlangen, “Use of phase change materials (PCMs) to mitigate early age
thermal cracking in concrete: Theoretical considerations,” Constr. Build. Mater., vol. 126, pp.
332–344, 2016.

[56] F. Fernandes, S. Manari, M. Aguayo, K. Santos, T. Oey, Z. Wei, G. Falzone, N. Neithalath,

37
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

and G. Sant, “On the feasibility of using phase change materials (PCMs) to mitigate thermal
cracking in cementitious materials,” Cem. Concr. Compos., vol. 51, pp. 14–26, 2014.

[57] A. Arora, G. Sant, and N. Neithalath, “Numerical simulations to quantify the influence of
phase change materials (PCMs) on the early- and later-age thermal response of concrete
pavements,” Cem. Concr. Compos., vol. 81, pp. 11–24, 2017.

[58] S. Pilehvar, A. M. Szczotok, J. F. Rodríguez, L. Valentini, M. Lanzón, R. Pamies, and A. L.

Kjøniksen, “Effect of freeze-thaw cycles on the mechanical behavior of geopolymer concrete
and Portland cement concrete containing micro-encapsulated phase change materials,” Constr.

T
Build. Mater., vol. 200, pp. 94–103, 2019.

IP
[59] N. P. Sharifi and K. C. Mahboub, “Application of a PCM-rich concrete overlay to control

CR
thermal induced curling stresses in concrete pavements,” Constr. Build. Mater., vol. 183, pp.
502–512, 2018.

[60]
US
D. Snoeck, B. Priem, P. Dubruel, and N. De Belie, “Encapsulated Phase-Change Materials as
additives in cementitious materials to promote thermal comfort in concrete constructions,”
Mater. Struct. Constr., vol. 49, no. 1–2, pp. 225–239, 2016.
AN
[61] M. Pomianowski, P. Heiselberg, and R. L. Jensen, “Full-scale investigation of the dynamic
heat storage of concrete decks with PCM and enhanced heat transfer surface area,” Energy
M

Build., vol. 59, pp. 287–300, 2013.

[62] Z. I. Djamai, F. Salvatore, A. Si Larbi, G. Cai, and M. El Mankibi, “Multiphysics analysis of

ED

effects of encapsulated phase change materials (PCMs) in cement mortars,” Cem. Concr. Res.,
vol. 119, no. January, pp. 51–63, 2019.
PT

[63] Z. Wei, G. Falzone, B. Wang, A. Thiele, G. Puerta-Falla, L. Pilon, N. Neithalath, and G. Sant,
“The durability of cementitious composites containing microencapsulated phase change
CE

materials,” Cem. Concr. Compos., vol. 81, pp. 66–76, 2017.

[64] A. Eddhahak-Ouni, S. Drissi, J. Colin, J. Neji, and S. Care, “Experimental and multi-scale
AC

analysis of the thermal properties of Portland cement concretes embedded with

microencapsulated Phase Change Materials (PCMs),” Appl. Therm. Eng., vol. 64, no. 1–2, pp.
32–39, 2014.

[65] S. Cunha, J. Aguiar, V. Ferreira, and A. Tadeu, “Mortars based in different binders with
incorporation of phase-change materials: Physical and mechanical properties,” Eur. J. Environ.
Civ. Eng., vol. 19, no. 10, pp. 1216–1233, 2015.

[66] L. F. Cabeza, C. Castellón, M. Nogués, M. Medrano, R. Leppers, and O. Zubillaga, “Use of

38
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

microencapsulated PCM in concrete walls for energy savings,” Energy Build., vol. 39, no. 2,
pp. 113–119, 2007.

[67] B. Beyhan, K. Cellat, Y. Konuklu, C. Gungor, O. Karahan, C. Dundar, and H. Paksoy,

“Robust microencapsulated phase change materials in concrete mixes for sustainable
buildings,” Int. J. Energy Res., vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 113–126, 2017.

[68] J. Narain, W. Jin, M. Ghandehari, E. Wilke, N. Shukla, U. Berardi, T. El-Korchi, and S. Van
Dessel, “Design and Application of Concrete Tiles Enhanced with Microencapsulated Phase-
Change Material,” J. Archit. Eng., vol. 22, no. 1, p. 05015003, 2016.

T
IP
[69] American Concrete Institute (ACI), Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI
318-14): Commentary on Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318R-

CR
14): an ACI Report. American Concrete Institute. ACI, 2014.

[70] Y. Cui, J. Xie, J. Liu, and S. Pan, “Review of Phase Change Materials Integrated in Building

[71]
US
Walls for Energy Saving,” Procedia Eng., vol. 121, pp. 763–770, 2015.

C. Fabiani and A. L. Pisello, “Coupling the transient plane source method with a dynamically
AN
controlled environment to study PCM-doped building materials,” Energy Build., vol. 180, pp.
122–134, 2018.

L. F. Cabeza et al., “Unconventional experimental technologies available for phase change

M

[72]
materials (PCM) characterization. Part 1. Thermophysical properties,” Renew. Sustain. Energy
Rev., vol. 43, pp. 1399–1414, 2015.
ED

[73] M. Pomianowski, P. Heiselberg, R. L. Jensen, R. Cheng, and Y. Zhang, “A new experimental

method to determine specific heat capacity of inhomogeneous concrete material with
PT

incorporated microencapsulated-PCM,” Cem. Concr. Res., vol. 55, pp. 22–34, 2014.
CE
AC

39