Received: 4 June 2018 Revised: 24 July 2018 Accepted: 24 July 2018

DOI: 10.1002/er.4196

REVIEW PAPER

Review on heat transfer analysis in thermal energy storage

using latent heat storage systems and phase change
materials

Ioan Sarbu | Alexandru Dorca

Department of Building Services

Engineering, Polytechnic University of
Timisoara, Piata Victoriei 2A, 300006
Timisoara, Romania
Correspondence
Ioan Sarbu, Department of Building
Services Engineering, Polytechnic
University of Timisoara, Piata Victoriei
2A, 300006 Timisoara, Romania.
Email: ioan.sarbu@upt.ro
Summary
Thermal energy storage (TES) is a technology that stocks thermal energy by
heating or cooling a storage medium so that the stored energy can be used later
for heating and cooling applications and for power generation. TES has
recently attracted increasing interest to thermal applications such as space
and water heating, waste heat utilisation, cooling, and air conditioning. Phase
change materials (PCMs) used for the storage of thermal energy as latent heat
are special types of advanced materials that substantially contribute to the
efficient use and conservation of waste heat and solar energy. This paper pro-
vides a comprehensive review on the development of latent heat storage
(LHS) systems focused on heat transfer and enhancement techniques
employed in PCMs to effectively charge and discharge latent heat energy,
and the formulation of the phase change problem. The main categories of
PCMs are classified and briefly described, and heat transfer enhancement tech-
nologies, namely dispersion of low‐density materials, use of porous materials,

Nomenclature: a, thermal diffusivity of PCM (m2/s); A, cross‐sectional area of the material (m2); Bi, Biot number; ck, specific heat of phase k in PCM
(J/(kg K)); cp, specific heat capacity at constant pressure (J/(kg·K)); d, diameter (m); f , melt fraction; Fo, Fourier number; g, gravitational acceleration
(m/s2); Gr, Grashof number; h, specific enthalpy (J/kg); h, sensible volumetric enthalpy of PCM (J/m3); hf, sensible volumetric enthalpy of container
material (J/m3); href, reference enthalpy (J/kg); H, total volumetric enthalpy of PCM (J/m3); k, heat transfer coefficient (W/(m2·K)); kp, permeability of
porous medium (m2); l, length in the flow direction (m); L, latent heat of fusion (J/kg); m, mass flow rate (kg/s); M, mass of PCM medium (kg); Mi,
molecular mass (kg/mol); Nu, Nusselt number; NTU, effectiveness of heat transfer; p, pressure (Pa); P, wetted perimeter (m); Pr, Prandtl number; Q,
energy (J); r, radius or radial coordinate (m); Ra, Rayleigh number; Re, Reynolds number; Ste, Stephan number; t, temperature (°C or K); tcr, critical
temperature (°C or K); tf, final temperature (°C or K); tHTF, temperature of HTF (°C or K); ti, initial temperature (°C or K); tl, liquid phase temperatures
(°C or K); tm, melting temperature (°C or K); ts, solid phase temperatures (°C or K); u, specific internal energy (J/kg); !u , velocity vector (m/s); U, heat
transfer coefficient between the HTF and PCM (W/(m2·K)); v, velocity (m/s); V, volume (m3); w, dimensionless geometric parameter defined by
1 + w = lA/V; x, y, z, axial coordinates (m)
Greek symbols: α, thermal diffusivity of PCM (m2/s); αf, thermal diffusivity of container material (m2/s); βt, thermal expansion coefficient (K−1); δ, fin
thickness (m); Δt, temperature difference (°C or K); ε, remittance; φ, porosity; ϕt, dimensionless temperature difference; λ, mixture thermal
conductivity (W/(m K)); λfr, friction factor; λk, thermal conductivity of phase k in PCM (W/(m ⋅K)); λl, thermal conductivities of the liquid PCM
(W/(m K)); λs, thermal conductivities of the solid PCM (W/(m K)); μ, dynamic viscosity of the liquid PCM, in kg/(m ⋅s); ν, kinematic viscosity (m2/
s); ω, admissible error; Ω, a constant introduced to avoid division by zero in the Carman‐Koseny equation; ρ, mixture density of PCM (kg/m3);
ρHTF, density of HTF (kg/m3); ρk, density of phase k in PCM (kg/m3); ρl, density of liquid PCM (kg/m3); ρref, reference density (kg/m3); τ, time (s);
θ, angular coordinate (°)
Abbreviations: CFD, computational fluid dynamics; DSC, differential scanning calorimetry; DTA, differential thermal analysis; EG, expanded
graphite; EPCM, encapsulated PCM; FEM, finite element method; GNF, graphite nanofiber; HP, heat pipe; HTF, heat transfer fluid; LHS, latent
heat storage; NASA, National Aeronautics and Space Administration; PCM, phase change material; SHS, sensible heat storage; TES, thermal
energy storage; TTHX, triplex‐tube heat exchanger; VFM, volume of fluid method; W, E, P, N, S, west, east, centre, north, and south node

Int J Energy Res. 2019;43:29–64. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/er © 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 29
30 SARBU AND DORCA

metal matrices and encapsulation, incorporation of extended surfaces and fins,

utilisation of heat pipes, cascaded storage, and direct heat transfer techniques,
are also discussed in detail. Additionally, a two‐dimensional heat transfer
simulation model of an LHS system is developed using the control volume
technique to solve the phase change problem. Furthermore, a three‐
dimensional numerical simulation model of an LHS is built to investigate the
quasi‐steady state and transient heat transfer in PCMs. Finally, several future
research directions are provided.

KEYWORDS
heat transfer enhancement, heat transfer simulation models, latent heat storage system, phase
change material

1 | INTRODUCTION material is transformed from one crystalline form to

Energy storage has become an important part of renew-
able energy technology systems. Solar energy, which is a
major renewable energy source, is of intermittent nature,
and its effective utilisation is partly dependent on effi-
cient and effective energy storage systems. Thermal
energy storage (TES) is a technology that stocks thermal
energy by heating or cooling a storage medium so that
the stored energy can be used later for heating and
cooling applications and for power generation. TES has
recently attracted increasing interest to thermal applica-
tions such as space and water heating, waste heat
utilisation, cooling, and air conditioning. Energy storage
is essential whenever there is a mismatch between the
supply and consumption of energy.1,2 Various TES tech-
niques have been developed over the past four decades.
Thermal energy storage can be achieved through
three distinct ways: sensible, latent, or thermo‐chemical
heat storage. The classification of energy storage and the
materials used are detailed in Sarbu and Sebarchievici.3
An overview of major TES techniques is shown in
Figure 1. In the sensible heat storage (SHS), the temper-
ature of the storage material increases as the energy is
stored whereas the latent heat storage (LHS) makes
use of the energy stored when a substance changes from
one phase to another. The internal energy increases
when energy in the form of heat is added to a sub-
stance. The well‐known consequence is an increase in
temperature (sensible heating) or change in phase
(latent heating).
Latent heat storage may be classified based on the
phase change process as solid‐solid, solid‐liquid, solid‐
gas, and liquid‐gas. Solid‐gas and liquid‐gas transforma-
tions are generally not employed for energy storage
despite their high latent heats, because gases occupy large
volumes. In solid‐solid transitions, heat stored as the
another. These transitions generally have small latent
heats making such materials less desirable. LHS by
solid‐liquid phase transition is a particularly attractive
technique as it provides a high energy storage density.
Moreover, it has the capacity to store energy as latent
heat of fusion at a constant temperature corresponding
to the phase transition temperature of the phase change
material (PCM). Hence, it can potentially lower the
cost.4-7 The temperature of the PCM remains nearly con-
stant during melting (charging) and solidification
(discharging), which is desirable.
Phase change materials used for the storage of thermal
energy as latent heat are special types of advanced mate-
rials, which substantially contribute to the efficient use
and conservation of waste heat and solar energy. The
solid‐liquid transition as applied to LHS applications is
more efficient compared with the other transformations
and, hence, is the most widely used.8,9 Thermo‐chemical
heat storage is more energetic than LHS; however, because
it relies on adsorption/desorption or other chemical reac-
tions, its actual performance is primarily determined by
the reaction kinetics and reactor design. In addition, it
requires distinct melting and solidification temperatures10
(usually between 100°C and 300°C, depending on the reac-
tion) that have potential for inter‐seasonal storage applica-
tions. The study of PCMs was pioneered by Telkes and
Raymond11; however, PCMs did not receive much atten-
tion until the energy crisis in the early 1980s, when they
were extensively researched for use in different applica-
tions especially for solar heating systems.12-25 The LHS,
using PCMs, is in full development. By 2020, the specific
investment cost for compact LHS should be below 50 €/
kWh. Towards 2030, the intention is to have industrial
process heat applications with TES.26
The use of PCMs is one of the novel methods that
have been proposed to achieve the objective of high
SARBU AND DORCA
FIGURE 1 Types of thermal energy
storage3
storage density with higher efficiency. PCMs have been
widely used in LHS systems for heat pumps, solar
engineering, and spacecraft thermal control applica-
tions. The use of PCMs for heating and cooling appli-
cations in buildings has been investigated in the past
decade.27 There are many PCMs that melt and solidify
at a wide range of temperatures, making them attrac-
tive for many applications. A proper design of TES
systems using PCMs requires quantitative information
on the heat transfer and phase change processes in
the PCM.
This paper provides a comprehensive review on the
development of LHS systems focused on heat transfer
and enhancement techniques employed in PCMs to
effectively charge and discharge latent heat energy,
and the formulation of the phase change problem.
The main categories of PCMs are classified and briefly
described, including the main characteristic properties
and selection criteria. The heat transfer enhancement
technologies, namely dispersion of low‐density mate-
rials, use of porous materials, metal matrices and
encapsulation, incorporation of extended surfaces and
fins, utilisation of heat pipes (HPs), cascaded storage,
and direct heat transfer techniques, are also discussed
in detail. Additionally, a numerical simulation model
of an LHS system is developed using the control
volume technique to solve the phase change problem.
Furthermore, a three‐dimensional heat transfer simula-
tion model of an LHS is built to investigate the quasi‐
steady state and transient heat transfer in PCMs and
several future research directions are provided. The
topics approached in present research are similar to
that of the other works with specific topic, but it
synthesises in a unitary manner and provides the use-
ful fundamental and practical information updated
and more extensive that can be used by engineers
working on theory, design, and/or application of
LHS systems.
31
2 | LATENT H EAT THERMAL
EN ERG Y S TORA GE
Latent heat storage materials are known as PCMs
because of their property of releasing or absorbing energy
with a change in physical state. The energy storage den-
sity increases and, hence, the volume is reduced in the
case of LHS. Results from studies by Morrison and
Abdel‐Khalik28 and Ghoneim29 show that to store the
same amount of energy from a unit collector area, rock
(SHS material) requires more than seven times the stor-
age mass of paraffin P116‐Wax, five times the storage
mass of medicinal paraffin, and more than eight times
the storage mass of Na2SO4⋅10H2O.
The main advantage of LHS over SHS is the high stor-
age density within a small temperature band. Figure 2
gives a comparison between a SHS system and a LHS sys-
tem made of a single PCM. For the small temperature dif-
ference covering the phase change, there is a factor of 3
between the heat stored in the LHS system and the SHS
system. For a large temperature difference, the advantage
of the LHS shrinks to 6:4 = 1.5.30
The heat storage capacity Q, in J, of an LHS system is
given by2,27,31
tm tf
Q ¼ ∫ti Mcp dt þ MfL þ ∫tm Mcp dt (1)
FIGURE 2 Comparison of stored heat between SHS and LHS
with a single PCM30
32
where tm is the melting temperature, in °C; ti is the initial
temperature, in °C; tf is the final temperature, in °C; M is
the mass of PCM medium, in kg; cp is the specific heat
capacity, in J/(kg·°C); f is the melt fraction; and L is
the latent heat of fusion, in J/kg.
In contrast to SHS in which the materials have a large
temperature rise/drop when storing/releasing thermal
energy, LHS can work in a nearly isothermal way, owing
to the phase change mechanism. This makes LHS
favourable for applications that require stringent working
temperature requirements. However, the main disadvan-
tage of LHS is its low thermal conductivity, which mostly
fall in the range of 0.2 W/(m⋅K) to 0.7 W/(m⋅K); there-
fore, effective heat transfer enhancement technologies
must be adopted.32
2.1 | System components
An LHS system consists of the following three main
components:
(1) a PCM suitable for the desired temperature range;
(2) container for the PCM (encapsulation of PCM);
(3) heat exchange surface area for transferring heat
from the heat source to the PCM and from the
PCM to the heat sink.
The integration of LHS containers into specific
heating or cooling systems can be classified according to
the heat transfer fluid (HTF) used, ie, air or liquid. The
LHS containers could be integrated in conventional cen-
tral heating systems with water radiators when the HTF
used is water; this is ideal to retrofit when changing a
gas boiler to a heat pump33 (Figure 3A). The LHS con-
tainers can be integrated into centralised ventilation sys-
tems when the HTF used is air, typical in large office
areas and commercial buildings (Figure 3B).34
Most LHS containers can be classified into two groups:
compact and encapsulated. Figure 4 shows the cross
FIGURE 3 Schematic of the integration of LHS into A, water space heating systems and B, centralised air space heating systems33 [Colour
figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
SARBU AND DORCA
sections for three different types of LHS containers suitable
to be integrated with heating systems. In compact LHS sys-
tems, the PCM is enclosed in a large container with an
embedded heat exchanger.35 The general configuration
used is the shell‐and‐tube type (Figure 4A). Compact LHS
systems are generally designed to integrate with water
heating systems.36 Encapsulated systems (Figure 4B,C) are
those in which the PCM is contained in small containers,
over which the HTF flows, leading to a heat storage system
that contains a greater component of SHS than compact
LHS systems in the same temperature range.37 Such encap-
sulated models have the versatility to be integrated with
both air and water heating systems, owing to their shape
versatility and leak proof construction.
2.2 | Phase change materials
Many PCMs are known to melt with a high heat of fusion
in any required temperature range. However, their use as
heat storage material depends on the desirable character-
istics related to
• thermo‐physical properties (latent heat of transition
and thermal conductivity should be high, and density
and volume variations during phase transition should
be, respectively, high and low in order to minimise
storage volume),
• kinetic and chemical properties (super‐cooling should
be limited to a few degrees, and materials should have
long‐term chemical stability, compatibility with mate-
rials of construction, no toxicity, and no fire hazard), and
• economic advantages (low cost and large‐scale avail-
ability of PCMs are also very important).
The main characteristics required for PCMs are indicated
in Table 1.2,38,39
Phase change materials can be used for both short‐
term (daily) and long‐term (seasonal) energy storage,
SARBU AND DORCA 33

FIGURE 4 Cross sections of A, a compact tube in tube; B, an encapsulated packed bed; and C, encapsulated staggered cylinders LHS
containers33

TABLE 1 Main desirable characteristics of PCMs

Thermal Properties Physical Properties Kinetic Properties Chemical Properties Economics

(1) Melting temperature in (1) Small vapour pressure at (1) Little or no super‐ (1) Chemical stability (1) Abundant
desired operating range operating temperatures cooling during freezing
(2) High latent heat of fusion (2) Small volume variation (2) High nucleation rate to (2) Complete reversible (2) Large‐scale
per unit volume on phase change avoid super‐cooling freezing/melting cycle availabilities
(3) High specific heat (3) High density (3) Adequate rate of (3) Compatibility with (3) Effective
crystallisation container materials cost
(4) High thermal (4) No toxic, no flammable
conductivity of both and no explosive material
phases

using various techniques and materials. Possible applica- 2.2.1 | Classification

tions of PCMs are as follows:
• installation in gypsum boards, plasters, concrete, or
other wall covering materials that are part of the build-
ing structure to enhance the TES capacity, with main
utilisation in peak‐load shifting (and shaving) and solar
energy40 (in this application, the typical operating tem-
perature range is 22°C to 25°C, but it can vary as a
function of climate and heating/cooling loads);
• cold storage for cooling plants (operating temperature
range of 7°C‐15°C)41;
• warm storage for heating plants (40°C‐50°C)41;
• hot storage for solar cooling and heating (80°C‐
90°C).41
Latent heat storage materials are broadly classified based
on their physical transformation for heat absorbing and
desorbing capabilities. Several authors have carried out
investigations on a wide range of PCMs, subdividing
them into organic, inorganic, and eutectics.2 PCMs are
classified into different groups depending on the material
nature (paraffin, fatty acids, salt hydrates, etc.) (Figure 5).
A comparison of the advantages and disadvantages of dif-
ferent categories of PCMs is presented in Table 2.4
Organic PCMs
Organic PCMs can melt and solidify many times without
phase segregation, and because of the degradation of their
34 SARBU AND DORCA

FIGURE 5 Classification of phase

change materials (PCMs)2

TABLE 2 Comparison of different categories of PCMs

Classification Advantages Disadvantages

Organic PCMs Availability in a large temperature range Low thermal conductivity

High heat of fusion Relatively large volume change
No super‐cooling Flammability
Noncorrosive
Chemically stable and recyclable
Good compatibility with other materials
Inorganic PCMs High heat of fusion Super‐cooling
High thermal conductivity Corrosion
Low volume change
Availability in low cost
Eutectics Sharp melting temperature Lack of currently available
test data of thermo‐physical properties
High volumetric thermal storage density

latent melting heat, they crystallise with little or no
super‐cooling, and they are usually noncorrosive. The
two main groups are as follows:
1. Paraffin waxes: they consist of a mixture of
mostly straight chain n‐alkenes CH3―(CH2)
―CH3. The crystallisation of the (CH3)― chain
releases a large amount of latent heat. Both the
melting point and latent heat of fusion increase
with chain length. Owing to cost consideration,
however, only technical grade paraffins could be
used as PCMs in LHS systems. Paraffin is
safe, reliable, predictable, less expensive, noncorro-
sive, and available in a large temperature range
(5°C‐80°C).2
2. Non‐paraffin organic PCMs: they are the most
numerous of the PCMs with highly varied properties.
A number of esters, fatty acids, alcohols, and glycols
suitable for energy storage have been identified.42
Some of the main features of these organic materials
include high heat of fusion, inflammability, low
thermal conductivity, low flash points, and instability
at high temperatures.
Fatty acids have a high heat of fusion compared with
paraffins, and they have reproducible melting and freez-
ing behaviours with little or no super‐cooling. However,
fatty acids are more expensive than technical grade paraf-
fins, and they are mildly corrosive and possess an
unpleasant odour.2
SARBU AND DORCA
Inorganic PCMs
Inorganic PCMs are used in high‐temperature solar appli-
cations and one of their most reported challenges is main-
tenance. At low temperatures, they freeze, and at high
temperatures, they are difficult to handle. These PCMs
do not super‐cool appreciably, and their melting
enthalpies do not degrade with cycling. The two main
types are as follows:
1. Salt hydrate. Salt hydrates with the general formula
AB ⋅nH2O are alloys of inorganic salts (AB) contain-
ing n kmol of water of crystallisation. During phase
transformation, dehydration of the salt occurs,
forming either a salt hydrate that contains fewer
water molecules:
AB⋅nH2 O→AB⋅mH2 O þ ðn−mÞH2 O; (2)
or to its anhydrous form:
AB⋅nH2 O→AB þ nH2 O; (3)
Salt hydrate melting is classified as congruent, incon-
gruent, and semi‐congruent31:
• congruent melting occurs when the salt is soluble in
the hydration water at the melting temperature;
• incongruent melting occurs when the salt is only par-
tially soluble in the hydration water at the melting
temperature;
• semi‐congruent melting occurs when the solid and
liquid phases that are in equilibrium have different
compositions during the melting process because of
the transformation of the salt hydrate to a salt hydrate
with a lesser amount of hydration water.
Salt hydrates have been extensively studied in heat
storage applications43 because of their positive
characteristics: high latent heat of fusion per unit
volume, relatively high thermal conductivity (almost
double that of paraffin), low corrosiveness, and
compatibility with plastics. These materials dissociate
into anhydrous salts, release water vapour when
subjected to a heat source, and store the energy sup-
plied for dehydration upon heating. A numerical study
was conducted to investigate the performance of three
different salt hydrates, namely magnesium sulphate
(MgSO4·7H2O), cupric sulphate (CuSO4·5H2O), and gyp-
sum (CaSO4·2H2O), to investigate their abilities to effi-
ciently store thermo‐chemical energy. It was shown
that cupric sulphate had the highest efficiency and
required the least heating time to initiate a chemical
reaction.
35
2. Metallic. Metallic PCMs include low‐melting point
metals and their alloys. This category offers the
potential for high‐density and high‐temperature
TES.44 Metallic PCMs have high thermal conductiv-
ity, which relate to high charging and discharging
rates in TES systems, and they can operate at temper-
atures exceeding 560°C. They also have high thermal
diffusivity, which eliminates the need for large heat
exchange surfaces.
As noted by Kenisarin,45 the two most important material
properties of PCMs are the melting temperature and heat
of fusion. By plotting the melting temperature and heat of
fusion of each material on a chart (Figure 6), it is possible
to select the PCM with the most favourable characteris-
tics for the design.
The largest phase transition heat, on a mass or vol-
ume basis, has been found for binary and ternary alloys
of the relatively plentiful elements Al, Cu, Mg, and Zn,
but not all of the potential materials are suitable for use
in TES systems.47 Compared with other LHS materials,
eutectic aluminium alloys were principally investigated
for use as PCMs in high temperature TES systems
because of their suitable phase change temperature, high
latent heat density, and good thermal stability.48 Huang
et al49 determined the specific heat of the liquid and solid
forms and the latent heat of fusion of Al‐Si, Al‐Si‐Mg, and
Al‐Si‐Cu alloys. The thermal reliability and corrosion
behaviour of Al‐Mg‐Zn alloy with respect to the number
of thermal cycles for TES systems were studied by Sun
et al.50 They found that the melting temperature changed
by 3 to 5 K, and the latent heat of fusion decreased after
1000 thermal cycles. Birchenall and Riechman51 identi-
fied the CuMgSi ternary as a leading candidate for con-
centrated solar power storage, and synthesised
laboratory quantities after three attempts. In a study per-
formed by Kotzé et al46 a eutectic aluminium‐silicon
alloy, AlSi12 is identified as a good potential PCM. AlSi12
has a heat of fusion of 560 J/g and a melting temperature
of 577°C, which is above the working temperature of reg-
ular HTFs. Li et al52 conducted a study on the suitability
of aluminium‐silicon alloys as PCMs. They found that
aluminium‐silicon alloys are relatively stable through
multiple heating and cooling cycles, and that having an
accurate eutectic composition and controlling cooling
rates may improve stability.
Eutectics
Eutectic materials are combinations of two or more low
melting point materials with similar (congruent) melting
and freezing points; eutectics nearly always melt and
freeze without segregation and have high thermal con-
ductivities and densities. The weight percentage of each
36 SARBU AND DORCA

FIGURE 6 Latent heats and melting temperatures of metallic PCMs46

material can be varied to obtain different melting points

of the resulting eutectic mixture.2 For this reason, they
are a promising type of PCM for the future, even if they
are actually less diffused than the other groups. However,
they have low latent and specific heat capacities.53
The temperature range is one of the main criteria for
the suitability of a PCM in any application. There are
numerous TES applications that use PCM, which all fit
a particular range suitable for their optimum thermal per-
formance.54 Figure 7 shows a brief classification system
based on melting temperatures, which can help in decid-
ing which PCM to use55 based on the desired application.

2.2.2 | Thermo‐physical properties

Table 3 presents the thermo‐physical properties of
organic compounds identified based on quoted stability
and enthalpy of phase change, whereas Table 4 summa-
rises the thermo‐physical properties for a selection of salt
hydrates.7,33,56
Table 5 presents the physical properties of selected
eutectic compounds in the 0°C to 250°C range.7,33,56
Owing to the lack of experimental data for some of the
thermo‐physical properties of eutectic mixtures,
weighting methods have been used to predict missing
values.60,61 The weighting correlations used to obtain
the thermo‐physical properties, namely melting enthalpy
(h), specific heat capacity (cp), thermal conductivity (λ),
FIGURE 7 Category of PCM based on melting point55 [Colour
figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
and density (ρ), are presented in Equations (4) to (9),
which use available properties of the mixture and its con-
stituents, molar ratio (xi), molecular mass (Mi), mass ratio
(wi), volumetric ratio (zi), and their melting point (tm) to
predict the unknown values. A comparison of some
eutectic salts with available experimental data was made;
the difference between predictions and measurements
was less than 10%.33
SARBU AND DORCA 37

TABLE 3 Thermo‐physical properties of selected organic compounds

Melting Specific Heat, kJ/(kg⋅K) Thermal Conductivity, W/(m ⋅K)

Melting Enthalpy, Density,
Compound Point, °C kJ/kg Solid Liquid Solid Liquid kg/m3 Refs.
56
Formic acid 8 277 1 1.17 0.30 0.27 1227
.00
56
Acetic acid 17 192 1.33 2.04 0.26 0.19 1214
56
Lauric acid 44 212 2.02 2.15 0.22 0.15 1007
57
Stearic acid 54 157 1.76 2.27 0.29 0.17 940
56
Palmitic acid 61 222 1.69 2.20 0.21 0.17 989
Parrafin wax 0‐90 150‐250 3.00 2.00 0.20 − 880‐950 56

56
Acetamide 82 260 2.00 3.00 0.40 0.25 1160
57
Erythritol 117 340 2.25 2.61 0.73 0.33 1450
56
HDPE 130 255 2.60 2.15 0.48 0.44 952
57
Urea 134 250 1.80 2.11 0.80 0.60 1320
Maleic acid 141 385 1.17 2.08 − − 1590 57

58
d‐Mannitol 165 300 1.31 2.36 0.19 0.11 1490
Hydroquinone 172 258 1.59 1.64 − − 1300 56

TABLE 4 Thermo‐physical properties of selected salt hydrates

Specific Heat, Thermal Conductivity,

Melting Melting
kJ/(kg⋅K) W/(m ⋅K)
Point, Enthalpy, Density,
Compound °C kJ/kg Solid Liquid Solid Liquid kg/m3 Refs.
56
Water 0 333 3.30 4.18 1.60 0.61 920
56
Calcium chloride hexahydrate 30 125 1.42 2.20 1.09 0.53 1710
56
Sodium sulphate decahydrate 32 180 1.93 2.80 0.56 0.45 1485
56
Sodium thiosulfate pentahydrate 46 210 1.46 2.39 0.76 0.38 1666
56
Sodium acetate trihydrate 58 265 1.68 2.37 0.43 0.34 1450
56
Barium hydroxide octahydrate 78 280 1.34 2.44 1.26 0.66 2180
56
Magnesium nitrate hexahydrate 89 140 2.50 3.10 0.65 0.50 1640
57
Oxalic acid dihydrate 105 264 2.11 2.89 0.90 0.70 1653
56
Magnesium chloride hexahydrate 117 150 2.00 2.40 0.70 0.58 1570

−1
λ eutectic ¼ ∏λzi i ; (8)
w i ¼ x i M i ∑x i M i ; (4) i
i

 heutectic ¼ tm;eutectic ∑
hi wi
;
wi wi −1 t m;i
(9)
zi ¼ ∑ ; (5) i
ρi i ρi

cp;eutectic ¼ ∑cp;i wi ; (6) 2.2.3 | Measurement of thermal proper-

i
ties of PCMs
The methods used for measuring the thermal properties
ρeutectic ¼ ∑ρi zi ; (7)
i of PCMs are very important. There are many existing
38 SARBU AND DORCA

TABLE 5 Thermo‐physical properties of selected eutectic compounds

Specific Heat, Thermal Conductivity,

Melting Melting
kJ/(kg⋅K) W/(m ⋅K)
Mass Point, Enthalpy, Density,
Compound Ratio °C kJ/kg Solid Liquid Solid Liquid kg/m3 Refs.

CaCl2⋅(H2O)6MgCl2⋅(H2O)6 67‐33 25 127 1620 2270 0.930 0.550 1661 56

31
Urea CH3COONa⋅(H2O)3 60‐40 30 200 1750 2210 0.630 0.480 1370
Mg (NO3)2⋅(H2O)6NH4NO3 61‐39 52 125 2130 2670 0.590 0.500 1672 31

4
Urea‐acetamide 38‐62 53 224 1920 2660 0.510 0.340 1216
Mg (NO3)2⋅(H2O)6‐MgCl2⋅(H2O)6 59‐41 59 132 2290 2810 0.670 0.530 1610 56

Stearic acid ‐ acetamide 83‐17 65 213 1800 2400 0.300 0.180 972 33

LiNO3MgNO3⋅(H2O)6 14‐86 72 180 2380 2900 0.700 0.510 1713 33

2
Urea‐LiNO3 82‐18 76 218 1770 2020 0.850 0.600 1438
33
Urea‐NaNO3 71‐29 83 187 1600 2030 0.750 0.590 1502
33
Urea‐NH4Cl 85‐15 102 214 1770 2090 0.760 0.580 1348
33
Urea‐K2CO3 15‐85 102 206 1660 2020 0.780 0.580 1415
33
Urea‐KNO3 77‐23 109 195 1600 1910 0.810 0.580 1416
33
Urea‐NaCl 90‐10 112 230 1720 2020 0.820 0.600 1372
33
Urea‐KCl 89‐11 115 227 1690 1960 0.830 0.660 1370
KNO3‐NaNO2 56‐44 141 97 1180 1740 0.730 0.570 1994 59

KNO3‐NaNO3‐NaNO2 53‐6‐41 142 110 1170 1730 0.720 0.570 2006 59

KNO2‐NaNO3 48‐52 149 124 1050 1630 0.580 0.520 2080 59

LiNO3‐NaNO2 62‐38 156 233 1570 1910 1.120 0.660 2296 33

LiNO3‐KCl 58‐42 160 272 1260 1350 1.310 0.590 2196 56

LiNO3‐NaNO3‐KCl 45‐50‐5 160 266 1320 1690 0.880 0.590 2297 33

59
LiOH‐LiNO3 19‐81 183 352 1600 2000 1.330 0.690 2124
LiNO3‐NaNO3 49‐51 194 262 1350 1720 0.870 0.590 2317 59

LiNO3‐NaCl 87‐13 208 369 1540 1560 1.350 0.630 2350 56

KNO3‐KOH 80‐20 214 83 1030 1350 0.880 0.540 1905 56

KNO3‐NaNO3 55‐45 222 110 1010 1490 0.730 0.510 2028 33

59
LiBr‐LiNO3 27‐73 228 279 1340 1380 1.140 0.570 2603
LiOH‐NaNO3‐NaOH 6‐67‐27 230 184 1300 2000 0.780 0.670 2154 33

NaNO2‐NaNO3 55‐45 233 163 1310 2130 0.590 0.640 2210 33

CaCl2‐LiNO3 13‐87 238 317 1500 1530 1.370 0.690 2362 33

33
LiCl‐LiNO3 9‐91 244 342 1580 1610 1.370 0.640 2351
NaNO3‐NaOH 86‐14 250 160 1190 1860 0.660 0.600 2241 56

measurement techniques, among which, the differential
scanning calorimetry (DSC) and differential thermal
analysis (DTA) are the most commonly used. In DSC
and DTA techniques, a sample and a reference material
are heated at constant rate. The temperature difference
between them is proportional to the difference in heat
flow between the two materials and is recorded as the
DSC curve. The recommended reference material is
alumina (Al2O3). The latent heat of fusion is calculated
using the area under the peak and the melting
temperature is estimated by the tangent at the point
of greatest slope on the face portion of the peak.
The DSC method can also be used for analysing
the thermal properties of PCM wallboards. Through a
DSC test, the melting temperature and heat of
fusion of a PCM can be obtained. In addition, the dis-
tribution of PCM in the wallboard, heat storage capac-
ity of the PCM wallboard, and effect of multiple
thermal cycling on the thermal properties of PCMs
can be tested.
SARBU AND DORCA
2.2.4 | Criteria for PCM selection
When developing a TES system, the selection of a PCM is
an important task, and the selected PCM must fit the
requirements of the system. The melting temperature
and phase change enthalpy of existing PCMs are shown
in Figure 8.62 In building applications, as an example,
PCMs with a phase change temperature range of 18 to
30°C are preferred to meet the requirements of thermal
comfort. From the point of melting temperature, it can
be observed that for LHS in building applications, the
potential PCMs are paraffin, fatty acids, salt hydrates,
and eutectic mixtures.
Zalba et al,4 Abhat,41 and Jegadheeswaran et al63
described the main criteria that govern the selection of
a PCM. To be a suitable material for LHS systems, the fol-
lowing criteria, namely physical, kinetic, chemical, and
economic properties, need to be met (see Table 1). A
visual combination of important thermal properties
(Figure 9) of a few types of PCMs was produced by Li
et al.64
2.2.5 | Long‐term stability
Insufficient long‐term stability of the storage materials
and containers is a problem that has limited the wide-
spread use of LHS. Long‐term stability of PCMs is
required in practical applications of LHS; therefore,
major changes in their thermal properties after undergo-
ing numerous thermal cycles should not occur. Thermal
cycling tests to check the stability of PCMs in LHS sys-
tems were carried out by many researchers for organics,
salt hydrates, and salt hydrate mixtures.65-69 Some poten-
tial PCMs were identified to have good stability and
thermo‐physical properties. Recently, Shukla et al70
FIGURE 8 Melting temperature and phase change enthalpy for
existing PCMs62 [Colour figure can be viewed at
wileyonlinelibrary.com]
39
carried out thermal cycling tests for some organic and
inorganic PCMs and their results showed that organic
PCMs tend to have better thermal stabilities than inor-
ganic PCMs.
3 | HEAT TRANSFER
ENHA NC E M EN T T E C HNO L O GIE S
There are several methods of enhancing the heat trans-
fer in a latent heat thermal storage: thermal conductiv-
ity enhancement using low‐density materials such as
carbon fibres and paraffin composites,63 porous mate-
rials either as a metal foam (copper, steel, or alumin-
ium) or as porous material like graphite,71-73 metal
matrices,74 and encapsulation methods using graphite,50
polymers, or the nickel film coating of PCM copper
spheres75; enhancement with fins (extended metal sur-
face),76 HPs,77 and cascaded storage (multiple PCMs)63;
and direct heat transfer techniques.78 The most com-
mon enhancement techniques involve the use of
extended surfaces such as fins and HPs or using multi-
ple PCMs of different melting points.79 The general
review of some these techniques was performed by
Ibrahim et al,79 which revealed that enhancement in
heat transfer can be accomplished either by increasing
the heat transfer area of the storage system or by
increasing the thermal conductivity of the storage
material. The reasons behind this selection are the
result of the detailed assessment, which summarises
as given below.
3.1 | Low‐density materials
To enhance the heat transfer in TES systems, the inser-
tion of high thermal conductivity materials including
metal structures has been tested.80 Metal structures pos-
sess relatively high densities, and this usually leads to
their settlement at the bottom surface of the PCM con-
tainer. Hence, many researchers consider other alterna-
tives such as low‐density and high‐conductivity
additives for PCMs.
Carbon fibres can be better alternatives to enhance
the thermal performance of LHS systems as they have
relatively lower densities than metals, and the thermal
conductivities are almost equal to those of aluminium
and copper.63 Carbon fibres also exhibit a high corro-
sive resistance potential and hence are compatible with
most PCMs. Nakaso et al81 tested the use of carbon
fibres to enhance heat transfer in thermal storage
tanks, reporting a twofold rise in effective thermal con-
ductivities. Their carbon cloths and carbon brushes are
shown in Figure 10. They also found that carbon cloths
40
had better thermal performance than carbon brushes
because the cloth structure was more continuous than
the brush structure. Carbon fibres with high thermal
conductivity embedded into paraffin PCMs can
enhance the overall thermal conductivities in heat stor-
age systems as confirmed by Fukai et al.82
Frusteri et al83 randomly dispersed carbon fibres of
different lengths into an inorganic PCM to increase its
thermal conductivity. Their results indicated that the
composite PCM fibre had enhanced heat diffusion.
Hamada et al84 carried out experiments on carbon
SARBU AND DORCA
FIGURE 9 Thermal properties of
various PCMs63 [Colour figure can be
viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
FIGURE 10 Use of carbon fibres to
enhance heat transfer: A, fibre cloth; B,
fibre brush; C, no carbon fibre30
brush/n‐octadecane composites enclosed in a shell‐and‐
tube LHS. They discussed the effect of carbon fibre
brushes on the thermal conductivity of the composite
PCM. The results revealed a satisfactory improvement of
transient thermal responses in the entire composite.
Sanusi et al85 investigated the thermal performance
of a paraffin/graphite nanofiber (GNF) composite PCM
during the solidification period. They found that
impregnating GNF into paraffin‐based PCMs is an effec-
tive means for reducing its solidification time and
enhancing the TES.
SARBU AND DORCA
3.2 | Porous materials
Incorporation of porous materials to PCMs increases their
thermal conductivity and hence improves the thermal
performance of LHS systems.71-73 This is primarily due
to the higher thermal conductivity of porous materials
compared with pure PCMs.86
Paraffin/expanded graphite (EG) composites were
introduced, and they can be made to incorporate even
more carbon. Sari and Karaipekli87 compared two sam-
ples: the first made from pure paraffin and the second
from a paraffin/EG composite. They found that the paraf-
fin/EG composites with mass fractions of 2%, 4%, 7%, and
10% EG had increased their effective thermal conductivi-
ties by 81.2%, 136.3%, 209.1%, and 272.7%, respectively.
However, the main disadvantage of EG is its structural
discontinuity, which means that heat cannot be trans-
ferred very smoothly and efficiently.
Lopez et al88 studied the behaviour of graphite with
closed and open pores, made with salt as a PCM. A
pore‐thermo‐elastic analysis was performed from which
was concluded that variations in expansion volumes of
the salt due to fusion were limited by the matrix of graph-
ite, which causes an increase of pressure in the pores.
Higher pressure causes a progressive increase in the melt-
ing temperature of the salt and a gradual decrease of the
latent heat. This implies that a significant part of the
energy supplied to the material is used to heat it (sensible
heat instead of latent heat). Zhou and Zhao89 investigated
the heat transfer enhancement of PCMs by using EG and
metal foams. They found that both increased the heat
transfer rate significantly, but metal foams showed a bet-
ter performance than EG, which is shown in Figure 11.
The reason is that the structures inside the EG are sparse,
whereas metal foams have a much more continuous
matrix than EG, which means that heat can be easily
transferred to PCMs.
Lafdi et al90 studied experimentally the heat transfer
characteristics of a paraffin wax/aluminium foam com-
posite PCM and investigated the effect of the foam poros-
ity and pore size on the melting rate of the PCM. The
results indicated that the higher porosity aluminium
foam accelerates the attainment of a steady‐state temper-
ature as compared with the foams with lower porosity.
Sedeh and Khodadadi91 reported that highly conductive
graphite foam has good potential for improving the ther-
mal conductivity and heat transfer of PCMs. A numerical
investigation on the thermal behaviour of sodium nitrate
(NaNO3) as a PCM was conducted using the commercial
computational fluid dynamics (CFD) software, Fluent.92
Fleming et al93 compared the thermal performance of
two shell‐and‐tube LHS units, with one composed of alu-
minium foam. The experimental results showed that the
41
FIGURE 11 Temperature differences (Δt) between metal foams
and EG89
foam significantly increased the heat transfer during both
melting and solidification in terms of the overall heat
transfer coefficient.
3.3 | Metal matrices
A metal matrix, such as a porous matrix, has been used to
enhance the heat transfer rate in TES. A porous matrix is
characterised by two parameters, ie, the porosity and the
cell size which refer, respectively, to the percentage of
volume that will be occupied by PCM and the size of
the pore expressed in pores per inch. For the first param-
eter, Mesalhy et al94 indicated that the performance
improvement depends on both the porosity of the matrix
and its conductivity. Low values of porosity lead to a
higher effective thermal conductivity, resulting in an
increased performance enhancement. However, a
decrease in the porosity has the opposite effect because
the low porosity of the matrix hampers the movement
of the liquid PCM and the natural convection. For the
second parameter, Elgafy et al95 showed how the mean
pore size of the additives could be of critical importance
on the system performance. If it is too small, the PCM
molecular motion will be hindered, thereby it will be very
difficult to impregnate the porous media with the PCM,
which will adversely affect the LHS capacity.
Metals with the highest thermal conductivities are
silver, copper, gold and aluminium,96 which turns
them into a desirable option for metal matrix
production to LHS systems. Their characteristics are
given in Table 6.97 Due to their lower prices in compari-
son with gold and silver, copper and aluminium are most
commonly used. Steel wool is more feasible for improving
the thermal conductivity of PCMs compared with EG.
However, it is not as compactable as graphite. Figure 12
42 SARBU AND DORCA

TABLE 6 Metals with high thermal conductivities

Metal Melting Point, °C Specific Heat, J/(kg⋅K) Thermal Conductivity, W/(m⋅K) Density, kg/m3

Silver 961.9 237 429.0 10 490

Copper 1084.6 381 387.6 8978
Gold 1064.4 129 401.0 19 300
Aluminium 660.2 910 237.0 2800
Nickel 1450.0 440 90.3 8910

in which they are incorporated. Besides these advantages,

FIGURE 12 A, Stainless steel and B, aluminium lessing rings7
[Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
shows two approaches used to effectively enhance the
heat transfer within a PCM.7
3.4 | Encapsulation
The encapsulation method for heat transfer enhancement
consists of confining the PCM as a core covered by a shell
of another type of material. The classification of encapsu-
lation techniques is dependent on the size of the capsules:
macro‐encapsulation (1‐10 mm), micro‐encapsulation (1‐
1000 μm), and nano‐encapsulation (<1 μm).98
3.4.1 | Macro‐encapsulation
The most common type of PCM containment is macro‐
encapsulation in which a significant quantity of PCM is
encapsulated in a discrete unit. The macro‐encapsulation
of PCMs can (1) avoid large phase separations; (2)
increase the rate of heat transfer; and (3) provide a self‐
supporting structure for the PCM. The most cost‐effective
containers are plastic (high density and low‐density poly-
ethylene, polypropylene) bottles, tin‐plated metal cans,
and mild steel cans. These containers can serve directly
as heat exchangers and can be incorporated into building
construction solutions.
The macro‐encapsulation method allows accommo-
dating large PCM quantities and the macro‐capsules can
have different shapes according to the building element
macro‐capsules improves the thermal performance of the
PCM and material compatibility with the surrounding,
creating a barrier and containing the external volume
change of PCMs.99
The geometries used vary significantly with the appli-
cation, but they commonly have cylindrical or spherically
shaped capsules, which can be inserted into off the shelf
storage containers. Encapsulating a PCM into spherical
capsules provides closer packing within the storage sys-
tem.100 This approach benefits from higher mixing of
the HTF and consequently better convective heat transfer
coefficients than in the vertical cylinders.
Direct space cooling applications in which the melting
of the store occurs during the night and solidification
occurs during the day to cool office areas have been stud-
ied by Jiao and Xu.101 Air was used as the HTF with the
PCM encapsulated in rectangular cross section slabs with
CaCl2⋅6H2O as PCM. Another possible application for an
encapsulated LHS system was studied in.102 Heat from
solar thermal collectors is stored in an array of cylinders
filled with paraffin wax and air is used as the HTF. Due
to the poor convective heat transfer obtained to the outer
shell of the capsules, aluminium strips were used to
increase the effective heat transfer area of the cylinders,
providing a substantial increase in the LHS system's effec-
tiveness and the global solar collector system efficiency.
Zhao et al103 investigated the transport phenomena in
a large‐scale TES module as applicable for a solar power
and other industrial thermal systems. The encapsulated
PCM studied is a NaNO3 encapsulated by a stainless steel.
Transient two‐dimensional heat transfer analysis is per-
formed using the front‐tracking and the enthalpy‐poros-
ity methods. It has been shown that the interface
dynamics, the temperature distribution and the time of
energy storage and retrieval predicted by the front‐track-
ing and the enthalpy‐porosity methods agree very well.
Elmozughi et al104 performed a heat transfer analysis
of the melting and solidification of a NaNO3‐stainless steel
encapsulated phase change material (EPCM) capsules
using the enthalpy‐porosity and volume of fluid methods
(VFMs) in Fluent software. Two‐dimensional simulations
SARBU AND DORCA
of a 25.4 and 76.2‐mm cylindrical EPCM capsules with an
internal air void were conducted using two different HTFs,
air and therminol/VP‐1. The shape of the solid/liquid
interface is determined by the rate of heat transfer. The
higher rate of heat transfer achieved with VP‐1 as the
HTF increases natural convection within the molten salt,
thus reducing the total melting time. Additionally, the
presence of the air void at the top of the capsule reduces
the heat transfer at the top of the capsule.
Ying et al105 designed and built a pilot‐scale test sec-
tion to demonstrate latent heat‐based TES using EPCM
in the temperature range of 250°C to 386°C for the bot-
tom capsule. NaNO3 was selected as the storage medium
and was encapsulated in stainless steel. A numerical
model was developed to investigate the dynamic perfor-
mance of the charging and discharging of the test section
with phase change in the NaNO3 capsule. The experi-
mental and the numerical investigations indicated that
the latent heat of phase change of the NaNO3 contributed
significantly to approximately 42% of the energy stored in
the capsules, providing high storage density.
Solomon et al106 examined experimentally and numer-
ically the capability of an EPCM‐based TES system to store
a large fraction of latent energy at high temperatures. The
results show that the use of metal deflectors yields a nearly
constant heat transfer coefficient over the capsule's sur-
face. Despite this, the presence of the void in the capsule
and natural convection within the molten PCM influenced
the storage characteristics of the system affecting the
shape of the isotherms and melting front. A total of
14.5 MJ of energy was stored by the 17.7 kg of NaNO3, of
which 20% is attributed to the latent heat.
3.4.2 | Micro‐ and nano‐encapsulation
Micro‐encapsulation is defined as a process in which tiny
particles or droplets are surrounded by a coating, or
embedded in a homogeneous or heterogeneous matrix,
to produce small capsules with many useful properties.107
Unless the matrix encapsulating the PCM has a high ther-
mal conductivity, the micro‐encapsulation system suffers
from low heat transfer rate. The rigidity of the matrix pre-
vents convection currents and all heat transfer needs to
FIGURE 13 Schematic formation of the silica‐microencapsulated PCM75
43
occur by conduction. This can reduce seriously the heat
transfer rates, especially in the melting process.
Currently, micro‐encapsulated PCMs have been used
in TES of buildings. For the use of PCMs in building com-
ponents, the encapsulation of PCMs is an advantage
because, if not encapsulated, they could interact with
the building structure and change the properties of the
matrix materials. Additionally, encapsulation has the
benefit of increasing the surface area for heat transfer,
thereby increasing the thermal conductivity of the LHS,
enhancing the compatibility of the PCMs with storage
materials, reducing the risk of corrosion, and minimising
the effect of volume change during phase change.
Phase change material microcapsules are composed of
microscopic capsules, commonly a polymer, with a diam-
eter of some micrometres.108 These capsules have a spher-
ical shape, and the PCM is enclosed inside the
microcapsule. There are many techniques available to
successfully encapsulate PCMs, such as coacervation,
suspension, emulsion, condensation, polyaddition poly-
merisation, or spray drying,109,110 which can be coupled
to the process. Considering the studies already reported,
urea‐formaldehyde resin, melamine‐formaldehyde resin,
urea‐melamine‐formaldehyde resin,111 polyurethanes,
and poly (methyl methacrylate)112 are usually selected as
the microcapsule shell material.42,109
Polymeric shells bring some disadvantages such as
flammability, poor thermal and chemical stability, and
low heat conductivity. Thus, recent studies have focused
on developing inorganic shell materials with high thermal
conductivity, chemical and thermal stability, and flame
retardancy.113 However, these approaches have lower
encapsulation efficiency compared with organic shells.
The early studies mentioned the use of silica as a shell
material prepared by oil‐in‐water emulsion and via a sol‐
gel process.114,115 Fan et al116 and Li et al117 reported the
preparation and energy storage properties of PCM micro-
capsules based on paraffin cores and a silica shell mate-
rial via in situ polycondensation. Figure 13 shows the
steps involved in the preparation of a paraffin micro‐
encapsulated SiO2 PCM.75
Li118 studied the improvement in thermal conductiv-
ity of PCMs (paraffin) with nano‐graphite. It was demon-
strated that nano‐graphite can be prepared easily from
44
exfoliated graphite and EG. Results showed that the ther-
mal conductivity of the composite PCMs with 1% and 10%
nano‐graphite is 2.89 times and 7.41 times of that of par-
affin, respectively. The phase change temperature of the
nano‐graphite/paraffin composite PCM was slightly less
than that of pure paraffin. As the nano‐graphite content
increased, the thermal conductivity of the nano‐graph-
ite/paraffin composite increased while the latent heat
gradually decreased.
Recent studies by Cao et al119 reported the micro‐
encapsulation of paraffin and fatty acid with TiO2 by
the sol‐gel method. Moreover, hybrid (organic and inor-
ganic) materials have been an issue of interest owing to
the potential of combining distinct properties of these
materials. Pan et al120 reported an encapsulation method
for palmitic acid with aluminium hydroxide shell.
Caprylic acid as PCM was encapsulated in different shell
materials by opting for simple and complex coacervation
techniques. It was concluded that emulsion temperature
and stirring time were the major factors affecting the
micro‐encapsulation efficiency.121
3.5 | Extended metal surface and fins
One of the most widely used heat transfer enhancement
technique is to increase the heat transfer area by adding
extended metal surfaces (fins). They can be axial or radial
and are usually attached to tubes. Depending on their
shape and their configuration inside the storage tank
with the storage media, this mechanism has different
results. For example, according to Zhang and Faghri,122
for internally finned tubes, the melting fraction volume
can be significantly increased by adding more fins and
TABLE 7 Properties of common fin materials
Property Graphite Foil Aluminium
Thermal conductivity (W/(m ⋅K)) 150
3
Density (kg/m ) 1000
Estimated volume 10 000
specific cost ($/m3)
SARBU AND DORCA
increasing their thickness and height. Selection of the
fin material depends on its thermal conductivity,
density, cost, and corrosion potential. Some relevant
properties and cost of common fin materials are given in
Table 7.123 Graphite foil appears to have the advantage of
low density, whereas aluminium has the advantage of rel-
atively high thermal conductivity, low cost, and medium
density compared with other materials.
Various studies have been performed on modelling
the phase change process with different fin geometries.76
Erek et al124 numerically and experimentally investigated
latent heat TES with phase change around a radially
finned tube. The results showed that the stored energy
increases with increasing fin radius and decreasing fin
space. A study conducted by Agyenim et al34 tested a
compact horizontal tube in a container using erythritol
as the PCM and axial fins for enhancing heat transfer.
They found the melting/solidification properties for this
system, which could provide a suitable heat source for
driving an absorption cooling system. Figure 14 illustrates
two common fin geometries widely used in the literature.
Zhao and Tan125 reported that an increase in the HTF
(water) inlet temperature, mass flow rate, and fin height
can provide a higher PCM heat charging rate and a
shorter total charging time. Jmal and Baccar126 investi-
gated the thermal performance of a PCM‐air heat
exchanger system using internally and externally finned
tubes. Their results showed a faster energy extraction
from the PCM to the air as well as an increase in the out-
let air temperature.
Yang et al127 reported that fins improve the energy
storage and release in an LHS unit and that smaller fin
pitches lead to a shorter melting/solidification period
Stainless steel Carbon Steel Copper
200 20 30 350
2700 7800 7800 8800
7000 20 000 15 000 40 000
FIGURE 14 Schematic of a tube‐in‐
tube heat storage unit with A, longitudinal
fins and B, annular fins33
SARBU AND DORCA
mainly due to the smaller PCM volume and larger heat
transfer surface area. Rahimi et al128 studied the effects
of fin geometry and operational parameters on PCM
melting and solidification processes in a finned tube heat
exchanger.
Al‐Abidi et al129 investigated numerically the rate of
PCM melting in a triplex finned tube heat exchanger
using a two‐dimensional numerical model applying
CFD. They considered pure conduction and natural con-
vection modes of heat transfer. The results showed that
the fin length and number of fins strongly affect the melt-
ing rate whereas an increment in the fin thickness
slightly affects the melting rate. Shatikian et al130 carried
out two‐ and three‐dimensional transient simulations of a
PCM melting process in a heat sink with a constant tem-
perature horizontal base, vertical internal fins, and a top
open to air. The results showed that the transient melting
process of the PCM depends on the thermal and geomet-
rical parameters of the system. Fan et al131 reported that
the presence of internal fins in a PCM‐based heat sink
system results in a better performance regardless of the
type of PCM.
Recent numerical investigations of heat transfer
enhancement in LHS systems were performed.132-134
Standard Galerkin finite element method (FEM) has been
employed by Sheikholeslami et al132 to provide numerical
analysis of heat transfer enhancement during solidifica-
tion process. The efficiency of nano‐particle dispersion
in PCM and adding fin with different structures on LHS
performance has been examined from the viewpoint of
either discharging expedition or maximum energy storage
capacity. Results indicate that adding simple longitudinal
and snowflake shaped fin to LHS makes solidification
process 4.5 and 7.8 times faster in comparison with LHS
without fin, respectively. Adding nano‐particles with vol-
ume fractions of 0.025 and 0.05 makes the process rate 1.1
and 1.2 times faster in comparison with LHS containing
pure PCM without fin, respectively. Lohrasbi et al133
investigated solidification simulation in LHS systems by
standard Galerkin FEM. Adaptive grid refinement strat-
egy was used in the solution procedure. An innovative
fin configuration is optimised by multi‐objective response
surface method and then is employed as a heat transfer
enhancement technique of LHS system. In the optimisa-
tion procedure, full solidification time minimisation and
energy storage capacity maximisation have been consid-
ered as the two objectives. It is indicated that considering
the parameter of energy storage capacity as one of the
objectives of response surface method optimisation leads
to efficient design of LHS system shape. Other major
results indicated that immersing fin in LHS enhances
solidification rate significantly higher than nano‐particles
dispersion.
45
The triplex‐tube heat exchanger (TTHX) as a design
having three concentric tubes provides a larger heat‐
exchange area compared with the conventional double‐
pipe heat exchanger. Research on the acceleration of
melting and solidification in the LHS system has impor-
tant applications (eg, PCM heat exchanger used by
National Aeronautics and Space Administration [NASA]
as a cooling device for satellites and spaceships for mis-
sions in low lunar orbit). Acceleration of PCM melting
and solidification can be achieved through employing
heat transfer enhancement techniques. Numerical simu-
lation of the PCM melting process in a TTHX in the pres-
ence of fins was performed by Mahdi et al134 to study the
effects of using a wide variety of fin configurations at dif-
ferent regions of heat exchanger. This study proposes an
efficient alternative to the use of nano‐particles. Results
show that using a relatively small number of medium
sized fins at the upper half of the annulus sufficiently
enhances the convection heat transfer into the PCM so
that faster melting of PCM can be achieved.
3.6 | Heat pipes
Heat pipes are considered to be thermal super conductors
due to the high heat rates they transfer across small tem-
perature gradients. On their simplest form HPs are called
thermo‐siphons, and their operation relies on gravity,
whereas the heat is transferred only from the lower to
the upper end of the pipe. A HP which allows the bi‐
directional transfer of heat is called wickless. The main
structure of HPs is an evacuated tube partially filled with
a working fluid that exists in both liquid and vapour
phase.
Heat pipes act as thermal carriers between the HTF
and PCM through the evaporation and condensation pro-
cesses of its working fluid occurring in the evaporator and
condenser respectively. HPs are made in variety of shapes
and operate at specific temperature ranges.135 Generally,
there are two types of HPs, namely wickless or gravity‐
assisted HP and wick‐assisted or screen mesh HP, and
both operate with various working fluids.77
One common configuration of storage systems that
suit HPs for heat transfer enhancement is the shell‐and‐
tube. In this configuration, the HTF passes through or
over the tubes within the shell containing the PCM. Berg-
man et al136 reported a numerical study on a high‐tem-
perature shell‐and‐tube LHS system integrated with HPs
for a solar thermal power plant. Both charging and
discharging modes were considered during the simula-
tion and the results showed a significant increase in the
charging and discharging rates owing to the presence of
HPs for two cases of HTF flow patterns.
46
The optimum arrangement of HPs in two HP‐assisted
LHS configurations was identified by Nithyanandam and
Pitchumani.137 The configurations were (1) a PCM
housed inside tubes exposed to a cross flow of HTF and
(2) a PCM surrounding the HTF tubes. In another
study,138 they investigated the dynamic performance
behaviours of an HP‐assisted LHS system subjected to
cyclic charging (melting) and discharging (solidification)
processes. A simplified two‐dimensional configuration
was analysed by Shabgard et al139 based on a physically
reasonable geometric arrangement. The researchers stud-
ied three modes of operation for a typical daily cycle,
namely (1) melting only, (2) simultaneous melting and
solidification, and (3) solidification only, and investigated
systems with various geometrical configurations. They
identified that HP spacing is the key parameter that con-
trols the dynamic response of the system. Recently, novel
gravity‐assisted HP thermal storage units are reported,140
and the authors concluded that the units have promising
potential for industrial applications.
Jung and Boo141 developed an analytical model to pre-
dict the transient thermal behaviour of an LHS system
with circular fins attached to HPs within the system.
They used row‐by‐row heat transfer analysis to assist in
predicting the required number of row for the entire
LHS system. Increasing the pitch from 4 mm to 16 mm
led to an increase in the heat transfer rate by 18.4%.
Khalifa et al142 investigated the thermal performance
of LHS systems using a bare HP and on an identical HP
with four axial fins. They showed that fining the HPs
TABLE 8 Heat pipe assisted LHS systems
HP Material/
Fluid System
Geometry Nature of Study
Stainless steel/mercury Shell‐and‐tube Numerical
Stainless steel/mercury Rectangular Numerical
shell‐and‐tube
Stainless steel/water Rectangular Numerical
shell‐and‐tube
Stainless steel/potassium Rectangular Numerical
Stainless steel/biphenyl Rectangular channel Numerical
Stainless steel/sodium Rectangular channel Numerical
SARBU AND DORCA
significantly increased the rate of energy extraction from
the PCM by 86% and the HP effectiveness by 24%.
Tiari and Qiu143 reported three‐dimensional simula-
tion of high temperature LHS system assisted by finned
HPs. They used a eutectic mixture of sodium nitrate and
potassium nitrate with melting temperature of 220°C
enclosed by a vertical cylindrical container as the PCM.
The results showed that increasing the number of HPs
decreases the thermal resistance within the system, lead-
ing to the faster melting process. Khalifa et al144 investi-
gated the thermal performance of a LHTES unit
composed with finned‐HP during solidification. They
showed the effectiveness of the 12‐HP configuration lead
to increase in the energy stored by 140% as compared
with the baseline configuration.
Table 8 summarises the various studies on HP‐
enhanced LHS systems. The results indicate that the
effects of the number and orientation of HPs on the ther-
mal performance of the LHS system are not considered in
most of the reported studies, although consideration of
these effects is important for system optimisation.
3.7 | Cascaded storage
For a larger temperature difference, the advantage of the
LHS system with a single PCM compared with an SHS
system reduces to 6:4 = 1.5 (Figure 2) as previously men-
tioned. Mehling and Cabeza99 suggested that the use of a
cascaded arrangement of multiple PCMs with different
melting temperatures can solve the above problem.
Main Results Refs.
The energy stored within the PCM during 136
melting near a single HP is about 13%
of the energy stored next to the HTF tube
Increase in the length of condenser, 137
evaporator sections, and the vapour
core radius enhanced the
system effectiveness
A cycle ratio of 1 is preferred for a stable 138
operation of the unit, and this presents
a favourable energy transfer rate within the PCM
The melting rates increases by increasing 145
the condenser length or diameter of the HP
The cascade LHS yields about 10% more 146
exergy during a 24‐h charging‐discharging cycle
Longer HP condenser length is needed due to 140
the increase in surface area available for
melting and solidification of the PCM
SARBU AND DORCA
Figure 15 shows a typical three‐stage cascaded storage
system: PCM 1 with the lowest melting temperature is
heated from t1 to t2, PCM 2 with a medium melting tem-
perature is heated from t2 to t3, and PCM 3 with the
highest melting temperature is heated from t3 to the max-
imum temperature. By using such a cascaded storage sys-
tem, the difference between the stored energy of the
cascaded LHS and the single SHS increases to 10:4 = 2.5.
The purpose of using multiple PCMs is to maintain a
nearly constant temperature difference between the HTF
and the PCMs during the melting and solidification
cycles, thereby increasing the thermal performance of
the LHS system. If multiple PCMs with different melting
temperatures are packed in a typical shell‐and‐tube LHS
system, in a decreasing order of their melting points
(Figure 16), nearly a constant temperature difference
can be maintained during the melting process, even
though the temperature of HTF decreases along the flow
direction. This arrangement leads to an almost constant
heat flux to the PCM. During solidification, if the HTF
flow direction is reversed, the PCMs remain in the
increasing order of their melting points and a nearly con-
stant heat flux from the PCM to the HTF can be
obtained.63
The effects of different multiple PCMs on the perfor-
mance of an LHS unit has been studied numerically by
Fang and Chen.147 They reported that the difference in
the melting temperature between the multiple PCMs is
very important for the performance enhancement of the
LHS; hence, it should be taken into account. Wang
et al148 reported a new concept of a homogeneous phase
change process using multiple PCMs. They indicated that
compared with conventional phase change processes, the
phase change time of homogeneous PCMs can be
decreased significantly.
FIGURE 15 Comparison of stored heat
between SHS and LHS with cascaded
latent heat storage30
FIGURE 16 Schematic of multiple
PCMs in shell‐and‐tube LHS unit63
[Colour figure can be viewed at
wileyonlinelibrary.com]
47
Adine and El Qarnia149 numerically investigated the
thermal behaviour and performance of LHS units using
a single PCM and two PCMs of different melting points.
The results showed that approximately, an average of
57% increment in the heat transfer rate was obtained
using multiple PCMs. Mosaffa et al150 reported energy
and exergy analyses for an LHS unit composed of multi-
ple PCMs as a free cooling system for air conditioning
applications.
Hu et al151 studied a frustum‐shaped LHS unit and
investigated numerically the effects of the multiple
PCMs arrangement, multiple PCMs' melting tempera-
ture distribution, and type on the melting behaviour
and heat transfer on its performance. Their results indi-
cated that the unit performed more effective when the
multiple PCMs were arranged in increasing order of
the melting temperature from top to bottom of the unit.
The results also revealed about 5.1% and 21.5% reduc-
tion in the total melting time for three and five multiple
PCMs, respectively. Chinnapandian et al152 presented a
comparison of performance of a cascaded LHS system
over the single storage tank system for heat recovery
from a diesel engine. The energy and exergy saved and
efficiencies during the melting process are evaluated
and reported using actual system data. The solidification
process is analysed with a case study, and it is con-
cluded that it is possible to improve both the energy
and exergy efficiencies appreciably using the cascaded
LHS system.
There is limited number of experimental works on the
use of multiple PCMs in LHS systems in the literature. An
example of experimental multiple PCMs is shown by
Kuravi et al153; the shell side is loaded with different
PCMs, and synthetic oil is allowed to flow through the
inner tube, all PCMs being arranged in the flow direction
48
(axial direction) in contact with the HTF. Michels and
Pitz‐Paal154 reported experimental and numerical results
from the investigation of cascaded LHSs with alkali
nitrate salts like NaNO3, KNO3, and others more. The
experiments were conducted with vertical shell and tube
type heat exchanger devices under realistic operation
parameters and were used for a numerical model to sim-
ulate different cascaded storage configurations. Recently,
Peiro et al155 performed an experimental evaluation of
the advantages of using the cascaded PCM configuration
with melting temperature in the range of 150°C to
200°C instead of the single PCM configuration in TES sys-
tems. The results showed that the cascaded PCM configu-
ration led to a 19.36% improvement in efficiency.
Another important configuration similar to the cas-
caded storage system is the PCM‐HP heat exchanger.156
In this case, the PCM is positioned at the middle section
of the HP, and two HTF channels are in thermal contact
with the condenser and evaporator sections of the HP as
shown in Figure 17.79 The PCM undergoes simultaneous
melting and solidification, thereby providing cooling at
the evaporator section and heating at the condenser
section.
One important consideration when employing multi-
ple PCMs in LHS is the selection of appropriate PCM
pairs in terms of melting temperatures, which are suitable
for the target application.
3.8 | Direct heat transfer techniques
Another technique to increase heat transfer would be to
allow direct contact between the HTF and the PCM. This
would provide an effective increase in heat transfer
FIGURE 17 PCM‐HP heat exchanger with two HTF flow
channels79 [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
SARBU AND DORCA
during the melting process because the convective nature
of the HTF would act directly on the solid PCM phase.78
To overcome the initial blocking of the fluid flow path
when the PCM is in the solid state, Guo et al157 studied
the insertion of electric heaters (Figure 18) and concluded
that the overall energy consumed on melting the initial
flow pathways was 5% of the total thermal energy stored.
4 | H E A T T R A N S F E R A N A LY S I S
4.1 | Theory and correlations for the
analysis of phase change problems
The study on the heat transfer characteristics of the melt-
ing and solidification processes is one of the most inter-
esting areas in contemporary heat transfer research.
Based on both experimental and numerical investigations
conducted to examine the thermal characteristics of LHS
systems, various correlations have been developed relat-
ing thermal performance and dimensionless numbers in
given parametric domains. Among the thermal perfor-
mance parameters for which correlations have been
developed are melted volume fraction, temperature pro-
file, melting time, and melting rate. Table 9 provides the
mathematical definitions of the common dimensionless
numbers used in the study of LHS systems and their sig-
nificances to the phase change process. Table 10 presents
references to some of the correlations derived using
dimensionless numbers.
The following notations are used in Tables 9 and 10: k
—heat transfer coefficient (W/(m2·K)); λ—thermal con-
ductivity (W/(m K)); l—length (m); d—diameter (m);
τ—time (s); ρ—density (kg/m3); cp—specific heat capac-
ity (J/(kg·K)); Δt—temperature difference (K); L—latent
FIGURE 18 Schematic of the locations of electric heaters in the
inlet pipes157 [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.
com]
SARBU AND DORCA 49

TABLE 9 Definition of the common dimensionless parameters used in the analysis of phase change problems

Number Formula Significance Refs.

158
Biot, Bi kl Ratio of conductive to convective heat transfers resistance
Bi ¼
λ (determines uniformity of temperature in solid)
159
Nusselt, Nu kd Ratio of the conductive thermal resistance to convective thermal
Nu ¼
λ resistance. (determines the ratio of actual heat transferred by a
moving fluid to the heat transfer that would occur by conduction)
Fourier, Fo λτ Characterises heat flux into a body or system 159
Fo ¼
ρcp l2
Stephan, Ste cp;l Δt Ratio of thermal capacity of the melted solid to the latent heat 160
Ste ¼
L
160
Rayleigh, Ra gβt Δtl3 Determines the onset of convection. Below a critical value,
Ra ¼
aυ heat transfer is primarily conduction
Prandtl, Pr a Approximates the ratio of momentum diffusivity to thermal 160
Pr ¼
υ diffusivity (Low Pr means effective heat conduction with
dominant thermal diffusivity. High Pr means effective heat
convection with dominant momentum diffusivity)
161
Reynolds, Re vd Ratio of inertial forces to viscous forces (determines whether flow
Re ¼
υ is laminar or turbulent)
162
Grashof, Gr gβt Δtl3 Approximates the ratio of buoyancy force to the viscous force
Gr ¼
υ2

TABLE 10 List of some correlations derived using dimensionless numbers

Correlation Interpretation of Correlation Refs.

163
V Melted volume fraction for the entire duration of test runs in
¼ 4:73Fo0:906 Ste1:538 Ra0:002
V0 terms of Fo, Ste and Ra


h Time averaged Nusselt number for the entire melting process
Nu ¼ 0:219Ra0:387 Pr0:019
δ
164
l2 Duration of the melting process
τm ¼ ½1 þ ð0:25 þ 0:17w0:7 ÞSte
2að1 þ wÞSte

 165
dðτÞ 1=4 Equivalent thermal conductivity and dimensionless
λeq ðτÞ ¼ 0:228ϕt RaðτÞ1=4 1− melting rate [1 − A(τ)]
d
τ
AðτÞ½1− lnAðτÞ ¼ 1−4∫0 λ eq ðτÞdτ
166
Q Radial temperature gradient in the unfinned and finned
¼ 2:39×10−2 Fo0:765 Ste0:528 Re0:195
Qmax tube PCM (MgCl2⋅6H2O) system
Q
¼ 2:23×10−3 Fo0:781 Ste0:616 Re0:503
Qmax

heat of fusion (J/kg); g—gravitational acceleration (m/s2); (1) Hamada et al159 employed an equation from
βt—coefficient of volumetric expansion (K−1); a—ther- Gnielinski167:
mal diffusivity of PCM (m2/s); ν—kinematic viscosity
(m2/s); v—velocity (m/s); V—volume (m3); h—specific ðλ fr =2Þð Re−1000Þ Pr
Nu ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi  (10)
enthalpy (J/kg); δ—fin thickness (m); A—area (m2); w 1 þ 12:7 λfr =2 Pr2=3 −1
—dimensionless geometric parameter defined by  
3000 < Re < 106 ; 0:5 < Pr < 2000 ;
1 + w = lA/V; ϕt—dimensionless temperature difference;
and Q—energy (J).
The difficulty in comparing the data was illustrated by where λfr is the friction factor.
Agyenim et al7 by comparing the dependence of the
Nusselt number on Reynolds number for four indepen- (2) Zhang and Faghri168 employed an empirical correla-
dent researchers: tion proposed by Edwards and Jensen169:
50
0:023ðl=di Þ0:2
Nu ¼ Re0:8 Pr0:4 ; (11)
1:35 − 0:35l=di
with l/di calculated as 0.50408.
(3) Sexana et al170 calculated the Nusselt number using
the following equation for turbulent flow:
Nu ¼ 0:026 Re0:8 Pr0:33 ; (12)
171
(4) Esen et al employed the Dittus‐Boelter equation
for turbulent flow:
Nu ¼ 0:023 Re0:8 Pr0:4 ð Re>2200Þ (13)
All correlations showed the same general trend with
small differences in values recorded for the lower Reyn-
olds numbers in the turbulent regime. The major devia-
tions increased with the increase in Nusselt and
Reynolds numbers.
4.2 | Phase change problem formulation
4.2.1 | Moving boundary condition
In addition to the fixed boundaries of the PCM domain,
the phase change process of PCMs involves moving the
boundary between phases and is generally known as the
Stefan or moving boundary condition. Melting and solid-
ification are the two thermal processes for LHS systems.
Melting occurs when a solid PCM receives and absorbs
heat energy, which represents the actual storage. Recov-
ery of the latent heat energy from the PCM is accom-
plished through solidification (freezing) of the liquid.13
The PCM phase transition proceeds from a solid to a
mushy state and then to a liquid state during the melting
process and vice versa during the solidification process.
The heat transfer mechanisms associated with the melt-
ing and solidification processes can be either conduc-
tion‐controlled or convection‐controlled (natural
convection in most situations) or simultaneous conduc-
tion/convection‐controlled.
The main difficulty in solving liquid‐solid phase
change problems lies in the Stephan condition.172 The
numerical treatment of the moving boundary condition
can be used to classify numerical methods for melting
problems into deforming and fixed grid schemes.173 In
deforming grid schemes, the position of the interface is
determined by rearranging the mesh, whereas in fixed
grid schemes the phase boundary is not explicitly tracked.
Instead, an additional variable called the phase fraction is
introduced. It is expressed as a function of the
SARBU AND DORCA
temperature or the enthalpy and determines the position
of the phase boundary.
The problem of predicting the behavior of phase
change systems is difficult due to its inherent nonlinear
nature at moving interfaces, for which displacement rate
is controlled by the latent heat lost or absorbed at the
boundary. The following energy equation, known as the
Stephan condition, describes this transition process2,75,172:
dsðτÞ δt s δt l
ρL ¼ λ s −λ l (14)
dτ δτ δτ
where ρ is the density of PCM (it is not specified if it is solid
or liquid); L is the latent heat of fusion of PCM; s(τ) is the
surface position; λs and λl are the thermal conductivities of
the solid and liquid PCM, respectively; ts and tl are the
solid and liquid phase temperatures respectively; and τ is
the time.
Boundary integral methods are very convenient to use
for the solution of Stephan condition. In these methods,
nodal points are located only on the boundaries and
move together with the phase change interface. This
means that there is no need for any mesh adjustment.174
For multidimensional problems, mesh adjustment is nec-
essary but much easier to perform than in standard
domain methods. The solution of Stefan condition based
on boundary integral methods started in the early 1970s
with papers by Chuang and Szekely.175 Other applica-
tions include those of Wrobel,176 Heinlein et al,177 Hsieh
et al,178 and Ahmed and Meshrif.179
Shamsundar and Sparrow180 demonstrated the equiv-
alence between the energy conservation equation applied
in three zones (solid, liquid, and solid/liquid) and the
enthalpy formulation method. These are solved through
a finite difference method and the solidification is
analysed in a square plate cooled by convection. This
method is applicable for both phase change in a single
temperature and phase change in a range of temperatures
(mixtures or alloys). Later, they evaluated the effects of
density change.181 In their conclusions, the relation
between the heat transfer speed and the Biot number,
linked with convection of the HTF, was presented.
Meyer182 studied the problem of phase change con-
duction, establishing that the classic Stefan problem
implies the resolution of the temperature range and car-
rying out a review and comparison of explicit and implicit
methods. Hunter183 confirmed that the enthalpy formula-
tion method is the most suitable for real substances on
the condition that there is no alteration to the numerical
scheme in the boundary. Fewer works treated convection
and conduction at different stages and concluded that the
phase transition stage determines whether conduction or
convection controls the heat transfer.165,184-186
SARBU AND DORCA 51

4.2.2 | Energy conservation equation Solid phase of PCM:

forms
The analysis of heat transfer problems in phase change ∂u λs ∂2 t s UP
¼ þ ðt HTF −t s Þ; (19)
processes is complex because the solid‐liquid boundary ∂τ ρs ∂x 2 ρs A
moves depending on the speed at which the latent heat
where u, ts, λs, and ρs are the specific internal energy,
is absorbed or lost at the boundary. Solutions to phase
temperature, thermal conductivity, and density of PCM
change problems include analytical, experimental, and
respectively; tHTF, U, and P are the HTF temperature,
numerical using one‐dimensional, two‐dimensional, or
overall heat transfer coefficient between the fluid and
three‐dimensional models to solve the energy conserva-
PCM, and wetted perimeter respectively.
tion equation, which is formulated in various ways with
Heat transfer fluid:
the phase change being considered in different represen-
tations. Examples of some formulations by various ∂t HTF m ∂tHTF UP
þ ¼ ðt s −t HTF Þ;
researchers are given below: ∂τ ρHTF AHTF ∂x ρHTF AHTF cp;HTF
(20)
• Solomon164:
where m, ρHTF, AHTF, and cp,HTF are the mass flow rate,

 density, flow area, and specific heat of fluid, respectively.
∂t a ∂ w ∂t
¼ r ; r ðτÞ ≤ r ≤ l; t ¼ t cr ; r ≤ r ðτÞ; (15) It has been shown that axial conduction during flow is
∂τ r w ∂r ∂r
negligible and if the fluid capacitance is small, Equa-
in which 1 + w = lA/V with tions (19) and (20) become189:
8
>
< 0 for a PCM slab insulated at one end ∂u ∂t HTF
w ¼ 1 for a PCM cylinder .where r is ¼ NTU ðt s −t HTF Þ; ¼ NTU ðt HTF −t s Þ; (21)
> ∂Θ ∂ðx=lÞ
:
2 for a PCM sphere
the radius, in m and tcr is the critical temperature, in °C with ratio Θ = τmcp,HTF/ρsAl and effectiveness
or K. NTU = UPl/(mcp,HTF), where A is the cross‐sectional area
of the material, in m2 and l is the length in the flow
• Lacroix187: direction, in m.

• Verlaj et al190:



∂h 1 ∂ ∂k ∂ ∂k ∂f


¼ ar þ a −ρL ; (16) ∂H 1 ∂ ∂t 1 ∂ λ ∂t
∂τ r ∂r ∂r ∂z ∂z ∂τ ρ ¼ λr þ (22)
∂τ r ∂r ∂r r ∂θ r ∂θ

with phase change: H (t) = h (t) + ρl f (t) L, where with phase change formula:
t
hðt Þ ¼ ∫tm ρcp dt, f (t) is the liquid fraction of melted
PCM, tm is the melting temperature, in K, and r, z are • solid region (t ≤ tm −ε): H = cpt,
the radial and axial coordinates, in m, respectively. • interface (tm −ε ≤ t ≤ tm + ε): H = cpt + (L/2ε)t −tm + ε,
• and liquid region (t ≥ tm + ε): H = cpt + L,
• Gong and Mujumdar188:
where r is the radial coordinate, θ is the angular coordi-


∂t HTF ∂t HTF 4k ∂2 t HTF nate, and ε is the remittance.
ρHTF cp;HTF þυ ¼ ðt PCM −t HTF Þ þ λHTF ;
∂τ ∂x d ∂x 2
• Faden et al191:
(17)



∂t   λ ∂f  
cp þ cp ∇ !
u t −∇⋅ ∇t ¼ −L þ∇ !
u f ; (23)
and ∂τ ρ ∂t



∂hPCM 1 ∂ ∂t PCM ∂ ∂t PCM
¼ λ PCM r þ λ PCM ; (18) where: cp is the mixture heat capacity, in J/(kg K); t is the
∂τ r ∂r ∂r ∂x ∂x
temperature, in K; τ is the time, in s; !
u is the velocity vec-
where x and r are the axial and radial coordinates. tor, in m/s; λis the mixture thermal conductivity, in W/
(m K); ρ is the mixture density, in kg/m3; L is the latent
• Morrison and Abdel‐Khalik28: heat of fusion, in J/kg; and f is the phase fraction.
52
4.2.3 | Numerical methods to simulate the
phase change process
Phase change processes exhibit a transient and nonlinear
phenomenon and involve flow problems associated with
HTF. Therefore, numerical methods are widely used to
model the phase change process through either enthalpy
formulation method or effective heat capacity
method.192-195 In addition to these approaches, a temper-
ature‐transforming model is used to simulate the phase
change process.196,197
For enthalpy formulation method, the enthalpy is
considered as a dependent variable, and the flow of latent
heat is expressed in terms of the volumetric enthalpy H as
a function of the PCM temperature t, which is the only
unknown variable2,4,133,198,199:
∂H
¼ ∇ðλð∇t ÞÞ (24)
∂τ
By introducing an enthalpy method, the phase change
problem becomes much simpler since the governing
equation is the same for the two phases; interface condi-
tions are automatically achieved and create a mushy zone
between the two phases. This zone avoids sharp disconti-
nuities that may create some numerical instability. In
consequence, the thickness and the quality of the
discretisation of this mushy zone are critical to the model
performance.
The main advantages of this procedure are as fol-
lows4,27: (1) the governing equation is similar to the sin-
gle‐phase equation; (2) there is no condition to be
satisfied at the solid‐liquid interface as it automatically
complies with the interface condition; and (3) the
enthalpy formulation allows a mushy zone between the
two phases.
For the effective heat capacity method, the latent heat
capacity of the PCM during the phase change process is
approximated over a phase change temperature inter-
val.194,200 The effective heat capacity is directly propor-
tional to the energy gained/released during the phase
change process but inversely proportional to the melting
or solidification temperature range.
The temperature‐transforming model is considered as
a combination of the apparent heat capacity method and
the enthalpy formulation method.196
4.2.4 | Techniques for solving the simula-
tion models
The available methods for solving the simulation models
include analytical and numerical methods.79 Many
approximate analytical techniques such as the heat bal-
ance integral,201 variation technique,202 isothermal
SARBU AND DORCA
migration,203 source and sink method,204 perturbation
method,205 and periodic solution206 are used. A common
drawback of these approximate techniques is that they
are limited to one‐dimensional analysis and they become
very complicated when applied to multidimensional
problems. Numerical methods, such as finite differ-
ence,207 finite element,192,208 and control volume,209
appear more powerful in solving the simulation models.
Since the introduction of finite element and finite volume
methods in the 1970s, they are mostly preferred over
finite difference methods. The use of CFD, which is based
on the finite volume approach, has the highest prospect
in contemporary research in this area.79
Numerical formulation focuses on resolving specific
PCM problems and studying the characteristics of pro-
posed or new materials.
4.3 | Mathematical modelling and
numerical simulation of LHS systems
Generally, the heat transfer analysis of phase change
problems is much more complex than single‐phase prob-
lems owing to (1) nonlinearity of the problem due to the
motion of the solid‐liquid interface during phase change,
(2) inadequate knowledge of the heat transfer process at
the solid‐liquid interface because of buoyancy‐driven nat-
ural convection in the liquid, (3) uncertainty of the inter-
face thermal resistance between the container and the
solid PCM, (4) volume change with change in phase,
and (5) the presence and configuration of holes in a solid.
The enthalpy formulation method is the most suitable
for typical applications under the restriction that there is
no alteration to the numerical scheme at the interface.
This method is one of the most popular fixed‐domain
methods for solving the phase change problem. The
major advantage is that the method does not require
explicit treatment of the moving boundary.
4.3.1 | Two‐dimensional heat transfer
simulation model
4.3.1.1 Enthalpy formulation. Enthalpy function h, defined
as a function of temperature, is given by Voller.209 For a
phase change process, the energy conservation can be
expressed mathematically in terms of the total volumetric
enthalpy and temperature for constant thermo‐physical
properties, as follows133,198,199:
∂H
¼ ∇ðλk ð∇t ÞÞ; (25)
∂τ
where H is the total volumetric enthalpy, in J/m3; τ is the
time, in s; λk is the thermal conductivity of phase k in
PCM, in W/(m⋅K); and t is the temperature, in K.
SARBU AND DORCA 53

The total volumetric enthalpy is the sum of the sensi- where τis the time, in s; x and y are the space coordinates,
ble and latent heat of PCM2: in m; α is the thermal diffusivity of PCM, in m2/s; αf is the
thermal diffusivity of container material, in m2/s; and hf
H ðt Þ ¼ hðt Þ þ ρl f ðtÞL; (26) is the sensible volumetric enthalpy of container material,
in J/m3.
where h is the sensible volumetric enthalpy, in J/m3; ρl is
4.3.1.2 Numerical solution. The control volume
the density of liquid PCM, in kg/m3; f is the melt frac-
discretisation technique developed by Voller209 has been
tion; and L is the latent heat of fusion, in J/kg.
used to solve the energy conservation equation. The
The sensible volumetric enthalpy is expressed as199
domain is divided into elementary control volumes, and
t then the equation is integrated in these control volumes.
h ¼ ∫tm ρk ck dt; (27)
Equation (35) is solved using a fully implicit finite dif-
ference method. The finite difference equation for PCM is
where ρk is the density of phase k in PCM, in kg/m3; ck
obtained by integrating Equation (30) over each control
is the specific heat of phase k in PCM, in J/(kg K); t
volume. The discretisation of Equation (30) for Δx = Δy
is the temperature, in K; and tm is the melting
leads to the following scheme (Figure 19):
temperature, in K.
In the case of isothermal phase change, the liquid  
hP ¼ hoP þ αRðhE −4hP þ hW þ hN þ hS Þ þ ρl L f oP −f kP ;
fraction of melt is given by198
(37)
8
>
< 0; if t< t m ðsolidÞ
f ¼ 0−1; if t ¼ tm ðmushyÞ : (28) aE hE þ aW hW þ aP hP þ aN hN þ aS hS ¼ Q; (38)
>
:
1; if t > t m ðliquidÞ
with
Using Equations (26) and (27), the enthalpy of PCM is
aE ¼ aW ¼ aN ¼ aS ¼ −αR
(39)
H¼
t
∫tm ρs cs dt; t < tm ðsolidÞ; (29) aP ¼ 1−aE −aW −aP −aN −aS ;

  dt
H ¼ ρl fL; t ¼ t m ðmeltingÞ; (30) Q ¼ hoP þ ρl L f oP −f kP ; R¼ ; (40)
ðdx Þ2
t
H ¼ ∫tm ρl cl dt þ ρl L; t > t m ðliquidÞ: (31) where hoP , f oP refer to the enthalpy and the melt fraction,
respectively, from the previous time step and W, E, P,
Solving Equations (29) to (31) for the PCM temperature, N, S are the west, east, centre, north, and south nodes,
we obtain respectively.
Equation (38) can be solved using a three‐diagonal
t
H ¼ ∫tm ρl cl dt þ ρl L; t > t m ðliquidÞ; (32) matrix algorithm. The basis feature of the present fixed
grid enthalpy method is the source term Q, which keeps
track of the latent heat evolution, and its driving element
t ¼ tm ; 0 ≤ H ≤ ρl L ðinterfaceÞ; (33)
is the melt fraction. Its value is determined iteratively
from the solution of the enthalpy equation. Hence, after
t m þ ðH−ρl LÞ the (k + 1) th numerical solution of the enthalpy equation
t¼ ; H > ρl L ðliquidÞ: (34)
ρl cl of the Pth node, Equation (38) could be rearranged as

Using Equations (26) and (27), an alternative form of  

aP hP ¼ −aE hE −aW hW −aN hN −aS hS þ hoP þ ρl L f oP −f kP :
Equation (25) for a two‐dimensional heat transfer in
(41)
PCM can be obtained as


 If phase change occurs about the Pth node (ie, 0 ≤ f ≤1),
∂h ∂ ∂h ∂ ∂h ∂f
¼ α þ α −ρl L ; (35) the (k + 1) th estimate of the melt fraction needs to be
∂τ ∂x ∂x ∂y ∂y ∂τ
updated such that the left side of Equation (41) is zero, ie,
and for the heat exchanger container material, it is  
0 ¼ −aE hE −aW hW −aN hN −aS hS þ hoP þ ρl L f oP −f kP :


 (42)
∂hf ∂ ∂hf ∂ ∂hf
¼ αf þ αf ; (36)
∂τ ∂x ∂x ∂y ∂y Equation (42) could be rearranged as
54 SARBU AND DORCA

temperature and is subjected to constant convective

boundary conditions of free air stream based on a specific
ventilation airflow rate. The numerical solution is con-
ducted using the Fluent software.211 The numerical simu-
lation results using paraffin RT20 are compared with
available experimental data for cooling and heating of
buildings.
A numerical technique is employed to simulate the
PCM heat transfer within a certain range of phase change
temperature, which typically uses the enthalpy‐porosity
theory to deal with solid‐liquid interface. In this method,
a mixed solid‐liquid phase region is present during the
phase change. The region is described using a parameter
called liquid fraction with a value which varies from 0 to
1. The porosity effect is found to be similar to that of the
liquid volume fraction of the porous media at the mushy
region.212 Based on multiphase flow models such as the
VFM, mixture, and Euler model, only the VFM and solid-
FIGURE 19 Two‐dimensional domain2 ification/melting model can be applied simultaneously.
For simplicity, the following assumptions are
considered:

−aE hE −aW hW −aN hN −aS hS þ hoP 1) The axial conduction and viscous dissipation in the
f Pkþ1 ¼ : (43)
ρl L þ f oP fluid are negligible and are ignored.
2) The PCM and porous matrix material are considered
The melt fraction update Equation (43) is applied at every homogeneous and isotropic.
node after the (k + 1) th solution of Equation (38) for 3) The thermo‐physical properties of the PCM and HTF
sensible volumetric enthalpy h, along with under/over are independent of temperature; however, the prop-
correction, ie, erties of the PCM could be different in the solid and
( liquid phases.
0; if ð f Þkþ1 ≤ 0 4) The PCM is considered at a single mean melting tem-
f ¼ : (44)
1; if ð f Þkþ1 ≥ 1 perature tm.
5) The effect of radiation heat transfer is negligible.
Convergence at a given time step is declared when the
difference in the total enthalpy fields falls below an
admissible error, ie, Governing equations
 kþ1  The density and dynamic viscosity of the liquid PCM depend
H −H k  on its temperature. The density ρof PCM, in kg/m3, is
≤ω: (45)
ρk c k approximated by210

The typically value ω=10−4 of admissible error was used. ρref

ρ¼ ; (46)
βt ðt−t m Þ þ 1

4.3.2 | Three‐dimensional heat transfer
simulation model
Centralised LHS systems offer potential benefits in energy
efficiency, load shifting, and emergency heating/cooling
load systems. This section reports the development of a
mathematical model of a centralised finned LHS for
analysing the thermal performance of the melting process
for both quasi‐steady state and transient conjugate heat
transfer problems.210 The model utilises a PCM technol-
ogy that stores and retrieves energy at almost a constant
where ρref is the reference density of PCM at the melting
temperature tm, and βt is the expansion factor. The value
of βt = 0.001 K−1 can be selected.
The dynamic viscosity μ of the liquid PCM, in kg/
(m⋅s), can be calculated using the following equation:


1790
μ ¼ exp −4:25 þ ; (47)
t
where t is the temperature of PCM, in K.
SARBU AND DORCA 55

The energy equation is written in terms of the sensible Cð1−φÞ2

enthalpy as follows198: A0 ¼ ; (56)
φ3 þ Ω
t
h ¼ ∫tref cp dt; (48) where C is a constant of 1.6 ×105 accounting for the
mushy‐region morphology, φ is the porosity between 0
or and 1, and Ω= 10−3 is a constant introduced to avoid divi-

 sion by zero.
∂ρ h λ
þ divðρu hÞ ¼ div grad h þ Qh ; (49) Assuming the Boussinesq approximation, the gravity
∂x cp source term, Qg can be written as212
where h is the sensible enthalpy, in J/kg; u ¼ ðu; v; wÞ is ρref βt ðh−href Þ
the velocity, in m/s; λ is the thermal conductivity, in W/ Qg ¼ ; (57)
cp
(m⋅K); cp is the specific heat at constant pressure, in J/
(kg ⋅K); and Qh is the latent heat source term. To describe where βt is the thermal expansion coefficient, in K−1; cp is
the fluid flow in the full liquid and mushy regions, the the liquid specific heat, in J/(kg·K); href and ρref are refer-
conservation equations of momentum and mass are ence values of enthalpy, in J/kg and density, in kg/m3,
required. In the enthalpy‐porosity approach, the energy respectively. Darcy's law is used to describe the flow of
equation source term, Qh, which accounts for the latent fluid through the porous medium as
heat term, could be written in the following form210:
kp
∂ðρ ΔH Þ u¼− grad p; (58)
Qh ¼ þ divðρ u ΔH Þ; (50) μ
∂t
where kp is the permeability, which is considered as a
where ΔH = F (t) is the latent heat content, in J/kg, and function of porosity.
is recognised as a function F of temperature t. The value The total enthalpy H of the PCM is the sum of the
of F (t) can be generalised as follows: sensible heat, h = cpt, and latent heat ΔH:
8
>
< L; t ≥ tl H ¼ h þ ΔH: (59)
F ðt Þ ¼ Lð1−f s Þ; tl ≥ t ≥ ts ; (51)
>
: The liquid fraction f can be expressed as
0; t < ts
8
>
> 0 t<t l
where L is the latent heat of phase change, in J/kg; f s is >
>
>
<
the local solid fraction; tl is the liquid phase temperatures,
in K; and ts is the solid phase temperatures, in K. f ¼ 1 t>t l : (60)
>
>
>
> t−t s
Assuming a Newtonian laminar flow, the continuity and >
: ts <t<t l
momentum equations are tl −t s

∂ρ The latent heat content of the PCM can be written in the

þ divðρ uÞ ¼ 0; (52) following form:
∂τ

ΔH ¼ fL: (61)
∂ðρ uÞ ∂p
þ divðρu uÞ ¼ divðμ grad uÞ − þ A0 u; (53)
∂τ ∂x In the enthalpy‐porosity technique, the mushy region is
treated as a porous medium. For the purpose of method-
∂ðρ vÞ ∂p ology development, it is worthwhile to consider the entire
þ divðρu vÞ ¼ divðμ grad vÞ− þ A0 v þ Qg ; (54)
∂τ ∂y cavity as a porous medium. In fully solidified regions, the
porosity (φ) is set as zero and takes the value φ = 1 in
fully liquid regions, whereas in mushy regions, φ lies
∂ðρ wÞ ∂p
þ divðρuwÞ ¼ divðμ grad wÞ − þ A0 w; (55) between 0 and 1. Accordingly, the flow velocity is linked
∂τ ∂z
to the porosity state and is defined as u = φui, where ui is
where u ¼ ðu; v; wÞis the velocity, p is the effective pres- the flow velocity.
sure, and μ is the viscosity.
The parameter A0 in Equations (53) to (55) is defined Physical model
so that the momentum equations are forced to mimic the A schematic of the three‐dimensional physical model of
Carman‐Koseny equation213: a centralised storage unit filled with PCM is shown in
56
Figure 20. Two different fins made of aluminium are
used to increase the thermal performance of the stor-
age unit. They are connected to the metal box from
both sides of the lower and upper faces. The same
fin structure that is outside the box is extended in to
the PCM. The fins on the external side of the box
are aimed at increasing the exposed area for convective
heat flux whereas fins inside the box are for boosting
the thermal conduction heat flux. The box is filled with
paraffin RT20 with a melting point of 22°C, heat stor-
age capacity of 172 kJ/kg within an operating tempera-
ture range of 11 to 26°C, and specific heat capacity of
1.8 and 2.4 kJ/(kg·K) for solid and liquid,
respectively.214
Paraffin RT20 is chemically stable and commercially
available compared with the other materials. In addition,
the phase change temperature range of paraffin RT20 is
suitable for regulating the indoor air temperature within
the range of comfort condition inside the building.215
The centralised LHS system is integrated into a mechan-
ical ventilation system with an advanced control unit
through suitable air supply ducts for free cooling of a
low‐energy building. Thus, the swing of indoor air tem-
perature is stabilised during daytime.
Model description
The three‐dimensional computational domain storage
unit filled with PCM with aluminium fins are arranged
orthogonal to the axis of the unit. The HTF flows in the
vicinity of such unit. The model has three zones: (1) air
box with airflow around the fins and system, (2) PCM
box (fluid/solid), and (3) fin box (solid).
All boxes are coupled to each other as one geometri-
cal body. The air and PCM are coupled so that the
SARBU AND DORCA
energy transfers from the air to fin and then from the
fin to PCM. Owing to the symmetrical structure of the
considered unit, the computational domain is simplified
to only one symmetry unit cell in which the planes of
symmetry are in the middle of the fin and are in the
middle between two subsequent fins, as illustrated in
Figure 20.
Model validation
To verify the model, the numerical simulation of the
evolution of fraction of melted phase was compared
with the experiment of Gua et al,216 who measured
the performance of a physical model in a rectangular
cavity with a length of 88.9 mm and a height of
63.5 mm filled with another PCM (gallium). The melt-
ing temperature of gallium was assumed to be 29.8°C.
At the initial time, the left wall temperature suddenly
increased to 38°C and remained constant while the
temperature at the right wall was maintained constant
at 28.3°C. Table 11 provides the properties of paraffin,
gallium, air, and aluminium. The model employed a
single precision, unsteady solver to solve the
implicit scheme of second order; the time step was set
as 0.2 seconds. The numerical solution was performed
using Fluent. The computational domain of the two‐
dimensional physical model was meshed to 44 × 32
using the Gambit software. Figure 21 shows the solid‐
liquid interface positions for 2, 6, 10, and 17 minutes
of melting process.
The numerical simulation results are in good agree-
ment with the experimental results as shown in
Figure 21. Thus, the numerical model demonstrates great
potential to predict the fluid flow and heat transfer per-
formance of a centralised LHS system.
FIGURE 20 Geometrical configuration
of LHS: A, schematic of LHS system; B,
three‐dimensional computational domain;
C, cross‐section of computational
domain210 [Colour figure can be viewed at
wileyonlinelibrary.com]
SARBU AND DORCA
TABLE 11 Properties of paraffin, gallium, air, and aluminium used for calculation
Materials ρ, kg/m3 λ, W/(m K)
Paraffin 740/(0.001×(t−293.15) + 1) 0.15
Gallium 6093 32
Air 1.2×10−5t2−0.01134 t + 3.498 0.0242
Aluminium 2719 2024
FIGURE 21 Comparison between experimental and numerical
results210
5 | C O N C L U S I O N S AN D F UT U R E
RESEARCH DIRECTIONS
The use of TES systems based on the latent heat capacity
of PCMs is an efficient method for storing thermal
energy. This has been the topic of extensive research for
few decades and many strategies have been considered
to overcome the drawbacks linked to the use of PCMs
to widen the potential of this technology.
Phase change materials enable a target‐oriented solid-
ification temperature that is set by the constant tempera-
ture of the phase change. Melting temperature, latent
heat of fusion, and PCM thermo‐physical issues are three
basic factors influencing the selection of PCMs in any
application. Two primary requirements in the selection
approach are high heat of fusion and precise melting/
solidification temperature.
This study showed that enhancement in heat transfer
can be accomplished by either increasing the heat trans-
fer area of the storage system or increasing the thermal
conductivity of the PCM. From the literature review, it
is clear that the phase change rate (melting/solidification)
can be increased considerably by adding porous, high
conductivity, and low‐density materials. Additionally,
the most common enhancement techniques involve the
use of extended surfaces such as fins and HPs or using
multiple PCMs of different melting points. The micro‐
57
cp, J/(kg K) tPCM, °C L, J/kg μ, kg/(m s)
RT20(DSC) 20−22 172.000 0.001×exp(−4.25 + 1970/t)
381.5 29.78 80.160 1.81×10−3
1006.43 − − 1.7894×10−5
871 − − −
encapsulation and nano‐encapsulation of PCMs with
inorganic and organic shells can increase the heat trans-
fer surface area and solve the phase segregation in salt
hydrates. The use of other approaches, such as metallic
foam‐HPs, metallic foam‐fins, or fins‐multiple PCMs,
are relatively new and, therefore, could be potential
research areas for future studies.
Heat transfer is considered mainly from a theoretical
point of view, considering different simulation tech-
niques. Numerical methods appear to be a suitable
approach to solving phase change problems although
most of the available solutions to such problems apply
only to one‐ or two‐dimensional systems owing to the
complexity of the equations involved in the phase
change. A common approach observed in the solution
of phase change problems has been the use of an
enthalpy formulation that facilitates the implementation
of a numerical algorithm. The presented numerical sim-
ulation models are of real use to researchers in their
future work.
The use of CFD for thermal conductivity enhance-
ment of PCMs involving porous, high conductivity,
and low‐density materials is recommended. Encapsulat-
ing materials that offer a strong and durable shell
around the PCM and provide good bonding with the
construction material, ie, concrete, need to be investi-
gated. Additionally, the application of micro‐encapsu-
lated PCMs is not widely tested in various climatic
conditions with various heat loads to determine their
long‐term thermal stability, which is a potential area
of future research.
Majority of the studies on HP are numerical, and,
therefore, experimental works on the use of HP for heat
transfer enhancement in LHS systems require more
attention for future studies in this area. Additionally,
the use of extended surfaces (fins, HP) together with addi-
tion of high conductivity materials for heat transfer
enhancement of LHS systems is also recommended for
future researches.
Life cycle analysis, both economical and energetic,
should be performed on systems to determine into which
conditions energy storage systems involving PCMs should
be used.
58
One of the obstacles that prevent the development of
PCM applied technologies is the lack of international
technical standards for testing PCMs. This has led to
research groups using their own methods for characteri-
sation of energy storage materials. Consequently, it is dif-
ficult to directly compare the thermo‐physical properties
such as latent heat of fusion and thermal conductivity
and this necessitates the repetition of experiments rather
than focusing on the development of advanced materials
for energy storage. The elaboration of the current status
and research related to the experimenting and testing
procedures is very important and deserves separate study
and comprehensive analysis.
ORCID
Ioan Sarbu http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5606-6090
R EF E RE N C E S
1. Garg HP. Solar Thermal Energy Storage. Boston, Lancaster: D.
Reidel Publishing Company; 1985.
2. Sharma A, Tyagi VV, Chen CR, Buddhi D. Review on thermal
energy storage with phase change materials and applications.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2009;13:318‐345.
3. Sarbu I, Sebarchievici C. A comprehensive review of thermal
energy storage. Sustainability. 2018;10(art.191):1‐33.
4. Zalba B, Marin JM, Cabeza LF, Mehling H. Review on thermal
energy storage with phase change: materials, heat transfer
analysis and applications. Appl Therm Eng. 2003;23(3):251‐283.
5. Farid MM, Khudhair AM, Razack SAK, Al‐Hallaj S. A review
on phase change energy storage: materials and applications.
Energ Conver Manage. 2004;45(9–10):1597‐1615.
6. Sharma SD, Sagara K. Latent heat storage materials and sys-
tems: a review. International Journal of Green Energy.
2005;2(1):1‐56.
7. Agyenim F, Hewitt N, Eames P, Smyth M. A review of mate-
rials, heat transfer and phase change problem formulation for
latent heat thermal energy storage systems (LHTESS). Renew
Sustain Energy Rev. 2010;14(2):615‐628.
8. Fernandes D, Pitié F, Cáceres G, Baeyens J. Thermal energy
storage: how previous findings determine current research
priorities. Energy. 2012;39:246‐257.
9. Regin AF, Solanki SC, Saini JS. Heat transfer characteristics of
thermal energy storage system using PCM capsules: a review.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2008;12:2438‐2458.
10. Zondag H, Kikkert B, Smeding S, de Boer R, Bakker M. Proto-
type thermochemical heat storage with open reactor system.
Appl Energy. 2013;109(9):360‐365.
11. Telkes M, Raymond E. Storing solar heat in chemicals—a
report on the Dover house. Heat Vent. 1949;46(11):80‐86.
12. Telkes M. Thermal energy storage in salt hydrates. Solar
Energy Materials. 1980;2(4):381‐393.
SARBU AND DORCA
13. Sparrow EM, Larson ED, Ramsey JW. Freezing on a finned
tube for either conduction‐controlled or natural‐convection‐
controlled heat transfer. International Journal of Heat and
Mass Transfer. 1981;24(2):273‐284.
14. Kemink RG, Sparrow EM. Heat transfer coefficients for melt-
ing about a vertical cylinder with or without subcooling and
for open or closed containment. International Journal of Heat
and Mass Transfer. 1981;24(10):1699‐1710.
15. Hale NW Jr, Viskanta R. Solid–liquid phase‐change heat trans-
fer and interface motion in materials cooled or heated from
above or below. International Journal of Heat and Mass Trans-
fer. 1980;23(3):283‐292.
16. Bareiss M, Beer H. An analytical solution of the heat transfer
process during melting of an unfixed solid phase change mate-
rial inside a horizontal tube. International Journal of Heat and
Mass Transfer. 1984;27(5):739‐746.
17. Feldman D, Shapiro MM, Fazio P, Sayegh S. The compressive
strength of cement blocks permeated with an organic phase
change material. Energ Buildings. 1984;6(1):85‐92.
18. Bhargava AK. A solar water heater based on phase‐changing
material. Appl Energy. 1983;14(3):197‐209.
19. Ho CJ, Viskanta R. Inward solid–liquid phase‐change heat
transfer in a rectangular cavity with conducting vertical walls.
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer.
1984;27(7):1055‐1065.
20. Marshall R, Dietsche C. Comparisons of paraffin wax storage
subsystem models using liquid heat transfer media. Solar
Energy. 1982;29(6):503‐511.
21. Solomon AD. On the melting of a simple body with a convec-
tion boundary condition. Letters in Heat and Mass Transfer.
1980;7(3):183‐188.
22. Garg HP, Nasim M. Studies on low‐temperature salt‐hydrate
for thermal storage applications. Energ Conver Manage.
1981;21(2):125‐130.
23. Marshall R. Parametric sensitivity studies using paraffin wax
storage subsystems. Solar Energy. 1984;32(1):41‐48.
24. Knowles TR. Proportioning composites for efficient thermal
storage walls. Solar Energy. 1983;31(3):319‐326.
25. Miller WM. Energy storage via desiccants for food/agricultural
applications. Energy in Agriculture. 1983;2:341‐354.
26. Teller O, Nicolai J‐P, Lafoz M, et al. Joint EASE/EERA Recom-
mendations for a European Energy Storage Technology
Development Roadmap towards 2030. European Association
for Storage of Energy: Brussels, Belgium; 2013.
27. Sarbu I, Sebarchievici C. Solar Heating and Cooling Systems:
Fundamentals, Experiments and Applications. Oxford, UK:
Elsevier; 2017.
28. Morisson DJ, Abdel‐Khalik SI. Effects of phase‐change energy
storage on the performance of air‐based and liquid‐based solar
heating systems. Solar Energy. 1978;20(1):57‐67.
29. Ghoneim AA. Comparison of theoretical models of phase‐
change and sensible heat storage for air and water‐based solar
heating systems. Solar Energy. 1989;42(3):209‐220.
SARBU AND DORCA
30. Tian Y, Zhao CY. A review of solar collectors and thermal
energy storage in solar thermal applications. Appl Energy.
2013;104:538‐553.
31. Pielichowska K, Pielichowski K. Phase change materials for
thermal energy storage. Progress in Materials Science.
2014;65:67‐123.
32. Zhao CY, Lu W, Tian Y. Heat transfer enhancement for ther-
mal energy storage using metal foams embedded within
phase change materials (PCMs). Solar Energy. 2010;84(8):
1402‐1412.
33. Hewitt NJ. Heat pumps and energy storage—the challenges of
implementation. Appl Energy. 2012;89(1):37‐44.
34. Pereira da Cunha J, Eames P. Thermal energy storage for low
and medium temperature applications using phase change
materials—a review. Applied Energy 2016;177:227–238.→(6)
35. Agyenim F, Eames P, Smyth M. Experimental study on the
melting and solidification behaviour of a medium temperature
phase change storage material (erythritol) system augmented
with fins to power a LiBr/H2O absorption cooling system.
Renew Energy. 2011;36(1):108‐117.
36. Trp A. An experimental and numerical investigation of heat
transfer during technical grade paraffin melting and solidifica-
tion in a shell‐and‐tube latent thermal energy storage unit.
Solar Energy. 2005;79(6):648‐660.
37. Barba A, Spiga M. Discharge mode for encapsulated PCMs in
storage tanks. Solar Energy. 2003;74:141‐148.
38. Khudhair AM, Farid MM. A review on energy conservation in
building applications with thermal storage by latent heat using
phase change materials. Energ Conver Manage. 2004;45(2):
263‐275.
39. Tyagi VV, Buddhi D. PCM thermal storage in buildings: a state
of art. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2007;11:1146‐1166.
40. Kenisarin M, Mahkamov K. Passive thermal control in residen-
tial buildings using phase change materials. Renew Sustain
Energy Rev. 2016;55:371‐398.
41. Basecq V, Michaux G, Inard C, Blondeau P. Short‐term storage
systems of thermal energy for buildings: a review. Advances in
Building Energy Research. 2013;7:66‐119.
42. Abhat A. Development of a modular heat exchanger with inte-
grated latent heat storage. Report no. BMFT FBT 81–050,
Ministry of Science and Technology Bonn, Germany; 1981.
43. Al‐Abbasi O, Abdelkefi A, Ghommem M. Modeling and assess-
ment of a thermochemical energy storage using salt hydrates.
International Journal of Energy Research. 2017;41(14):
2149‐2161.
44. Gil A, Medrano M, Martorell I, et al. State of the art on high
temperature thermal energy storage for power generation: Part
1—Concepts, materials and modellization. Renew Sustain
Energy Rev. 2010;14:31‐55.
45. Kenisarin MM. High‐temperature phase change materials for
thermal energy storage. Renew Sustain Energy Rev.
2010;14(3):955‐970.
46. Kotze JP, von Backstrom TW, Erens PJ. High temperature ther-
mal energy storage utilizing metallic phase change materials
59
and metallic heat transfer fluids. Journal of Solar Energy Engi-
neering 2013;135(3),035001:1–6.
47. Birchenall CE, Riechman AF. Heat storage in eutectic alloys.
Metallurgical Transactions. 1980;11A:1415‐1420.
48. Sun JQ, Zhang RY. Review of thermal energy storage with
metal phase change materials. Materials Reviews.
2005;19:99‐101.
49. Huang ZG, Wu GZ, Xiao SI, Me SH. Properties of cast alumi-
num alloys as thermal storage materials. Cast Metals.
1990;4:203‐206.
50. Sun JQ, Zhang RY, Liu ZP, Lu GH. Thermal reliability test of
Al–34%Mg–6%Zn alloy as latent heat storage material and cor-
rosion of metal with respect to thermal cycling. Energ Conver
Manage. 2007;48(2):619‐624.
51. Birchenall CE, Riechman A. Heat storage in eutectic alloys.
Metallurgical and Materials Transactions a. 1980;11(8):
1415‐1420.
52. Li F, Hu Y, Zhang R. The influence of heating‐cooling cycles
on the thermal storage performances of Al‐17 wt.% Si alloy.
Advanced Material Research. 2011;239–242:2248‐2251.
53. Su W, Darkwa J, Kokogiannakis G. Review of solid–liquid
phase change materials and their encapsulation technologies.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2015;48:373‐391.
54. Sharma RK, Ganesan P, Tyagi VV, Metselaar HSC, Sandaran
SC. Developments in organic solid–liquid phase change mate-
rials and their applications in thermal energy storage. Energ
Conver Manage. 2015;95:193‐228.
55. Ge H, Li H, Mei S, Liu J. Low melting point liquid metal as a
new class of phase change material: an emerging frontier in
energy area. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2013;21:331‐346.
56. Jankowski NR, McCluskey FP. A review of phase change mate-
rials for vehicle component thermal buffering. Appl Energy.
2014;113:1525‐1561.
57. Haillot D, Bauer T, Kröner U, Tamme R. Thermal analysis of
phase change materials in the temperature range 120–150 °C.
Thermochimica Acta. 2011;513(1–2):49‐59.
58. Solé A, Neumann H, Niedermaier S, Martorell I, Schossig P,
Cabeza LF. Stability of sugar alcohols as PCM for thermal
energy storage. Solar Energy Materials and Solar Cells.
2014;126:125‐134.
59. Janz GJ, Tomkins RPT. Molten salts: volume 5, Part 2. Addi-
tional single and multi‐component salt systems. Electrical
conductance, density, viscosity and surface tension data. J Phys
Chem Ref Data Monogr. 1983;12(3):591‐815.
60. Rowlinson J. Molecular thermodynamics of fluid‐phase equi-
libria. Journal of Chemical Thermodynamics. 1970;2(1):158‐159.
61. Yanping Y, Wenquan T, Xiaoling C, Li B. Theoretic prediction
of melting temperature and latent heat for a fatty acid eutectic
mixture. J Chem Eng Data. 2011;56(6):2889‐2891.
62. Zhou D, Zhao CY, Tian Y. Review on thermal energy storage
with phase change materials (PCMs) in building applications.
Applied Energy. 2012;92(8):593‐605.
63. Jegadheeswaran S, Pohekar SD. Performance enhancement in
latent heat thermal storage system: a review. Renew Sustain
Energy Rev. 2009;13(9):2225‐2244.
60
64. Li G, Hwang Y, Radermacher R. Review of cold storage mate-
rials for air conditioning application. International Journal of
Refrigeration. 2012;35(8):2053‐2077.
65. Ting KC, Giannakakas PN, Gilbert SG. Durability of latent
heat storage tube sheets. Solar Energy. 1987;39(2):79‐85.
66. Fernanda PG. Salt hydrate used for latent heat storage: corro-
sion metals and reliability of thermal performance. Solar
Energy. 1988;41(2):193‐197.
67. Sharma SD, Buddhi D, Sawhney RL. Accelerated thermal cycle
test of latent heat storage materials. Solar Energy.
1999;66(6):483‐490.
68. Sharma A, Sharma SD, Buddhi D. Accelerated thermal cycle
test of acetamide, stearic acid and paraffin wax for solar ther-
mal latent heat storage applications. Energ Conver Manage.
2002;43(14):1923‐1930.
69. Kimura H, Junjiro K. Mixture of calcium chloride hexahydrate
with salt hydrate or anhydrous salts as latent heat storage
materials. Energ Conver Manage. 1988;28(3):197‐200.
70. Shukla A, Buddhi D, Sawhney RL. Thermal cycling test of few
selected inorganic and organic phase change materials. Renew
Energy. 2008;33:2606‐2614.
71. Wang W, Yang X, Fang Y, Ding J, Yan J. Enhanced thermal
conductivity and thermal performance of form‐stable compos-
ite phase change materials by using b‐aluminum nitride. Appl
Energy. 2009;86(7‐8):1196‐1200.
72. Tian Y, Zhao CY. A numerical investigation of heat transfer in
phase change materials (PCMs) embedded in porous metals.
Energy. 2011;36:5539‐5546.
73. Srivatsa PVSS, Baby R, Balaji C. Numerical investigation of
pcm based heat sinks with embedded metal foam/crossed plate
fins. Numerical Heat Transfer, Part A: Applications.
2014;66:1131‐1153.
74. Trelles JP, Dufly JJ. Numerical simulation of porous latent heat
thermal energy storage for thermoelectric cooling. Appl Therm
Eng. 2003;23:1647‐1664.
75. Amaral C, Vicente R, Marques PAAP, Barros‐Timmons A.
Phase change materials and carbon nanostructures for thermal
energy storage: a literature review. Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews. 2017;79(57):1212‐1228.
76. Sciacovelli A, Gagliardi F, Verda V. Maximization of perfor-
mance of a PCM latent heat storage system with innovative
fins. Appl Energy. 2015;137:707‐715.
77. Brahim T, Dhaou MH, Jemni A. Theoretical and experimental
investigation of plate screen mesh heat pipe solar collector.
Energ Conver Manage. 2014;87:428‐438.
78. Wang W, Yang X, Fang Y, Ding J, Yan J. Preparation and ther-
mal properties of polyethylene glycol/expanded graphite
blends for energy storage. Appl Energy. 2009;86(9):1479‐1483.
79. Ibrahim NI, Al‐Sulaiman FA, Rahman S, Bekir S, Yilbas BS,
Sahin AZ. Heat transfer enhancement of phase change mate-
rials for thermal energy storage applications: a critical review.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2017;74:26‐50.
80. Mettawee ES, Assassa GMR. Thermal conductivity enhance-
ment in a latent heat storage system. Solar Energy.
2007;81:839‐845.
SARBU AND DORCA
81. Nakaso K, Teshima H, Yoshimura A, Nogami S, Hamada S,
Fukai J. Extension of heat transfer area using carbon fiber
cloths in latent heat thermal energy storage tanks. Chemical
Engineering and Processing—Process Intensification.
2008;47:879‐885.
82. Fukai J, Kanou M, Kodama Y, Miyatake O. Thermal conduc-
tivity enhancement of energy storage media using carbon
fibers. Energ Conver Manage. 2000;41(14):1543‐1556.
83. Frusteri F, Leonardi V, Vasta S, Restuccia G. Thermal conduc-
tivity measurement of a PCM based storage system containing
carbon fibers. Appl Therm Eng. 2005;25(11‐12):1623‐1633.
84. Hamada Y, Otsu W, Fukai J, Morozumi Y, Miyatake O. Aniso-
tropic heat transfer in composites based on high‐thermal
conductive carbon fibers. Energy. 2005;30:221‐233.
85. Sanusi O, Warzoha R, Fleischer AS. Energy storage and solidi-
fication of paraffin phase change material embedded with
graphite nanofibers. International Journal of Heat and Mass
Transfer. 2011;54(19‐20):4429‐4436.
86. Chen J, Yang D, Jiang J, Ma A, Song D. Research progress of
phase change materials (PCMs) embedded with metal foam
(a review). Procedia Material Science. 2014;4:389‐394.
87. Sarı A, Karaipekli A. Thermal conductivity and latent heat
thermal energy storage characteristics of paraffin/expanded
graphite composite as phase change material. Appl Therm
Eng. 2007;27:1271‐1277.
88. Lopez J, Caceres G, Palomo Del Barrio E, Jomaa W. Confined
melting in deformable porous media: a first attempt to explain
the graphite/salt composites behaviour. International Journal
of Heat and Mass Transfer. 2010;53:1195‐1207.
89. Zhou D, Zhao CY. Experimental investigations on heat transfer
in phase change materials (PCMs) embedded with porous
materials. Appl Therm Eng. 2011;31(5):970‐977.
90. Lafdi K, Mesalhy O, Shaikh S. Experimental study on the influ-
ence of foam porosity and pore size on the melting of phase
change materials. J Appl Phys. 2007;102. 083549
91. Moeini Sedeh M, Khodadadi JM. Thermal conductivity
improvement of phase change materials/graphite foam com-
posites. Carbon NY. 2013;60:117‐128.
92. Li Z, Wu Z‐G. Numerical study on the thermal behavior of
phase change materials (PCMs) embedded in porous metal
matrix. Solar Energy. 2014;99:172‐184.
93. Fleming E, Wen S, Shi L, da Silva AK. Experimental and theo-
retical analysis of an aluminum foam enhanced phase change
thermal storage unit. International Journal of Heat and Mass
Transfer. 2015;82:273‐281.
94. Mesalhy O, Lafdi K, Elgafy A, Bowman K. Numerical study for
enhancing the thermal conductivity of phase change material
(PCM) storage using high thermal conductivity porous matrix.
Energ Conver Manage. 2005;46:847‐867.
95. Elgafy A, Lafdi K. Effect of carbon nanofiber additives on ther-
mal behavior of phase change materials. Carbon.
2005;43:3067‐3074.
96. Goodfellow. Metal—thermal catalogue; 2015.
SARBU AND DORCA
97. Zhang H, Baeyens J, Caceres G, Degreve J, Lv Y. Thermal
energy storage: recent developments and practical aspects.
Progress in Energy and Combustion Science. 2016;53:1‐40.
98. Jacob R, Bruno F. Review on shell materials used in the encap-
sulation of phase change materials for high temperature
thermal energy storage. Renew Sustain Energy Rev.
2015;48:79‐87.
99. Mehling H, Cabeza LF. Heat and Cold Storage with PCM: An
Up to Date Introduction into Basics and Applications. Berlin,
Germany: Springer; 2008.
100. Wu M, Xu C, He Y‐L. Dynamic thermal performance analysis
of a molten‐salt packed‐bed thermal energy storage system
using PCM capsules. Appl Energy. 2014;121(May):184‐195.
101. Jiao F, Xu P. Simulation and feasibility analysis of PCM based
passive cooling technique in residential house. Procedia Engi-
neering. 2015;121:1969‐1976.
102. Reyes A, Henríquez‐Vargas L, Aravena R, Sepúlveda F. Exper-
imental analysis, modeling and simulation of a solar energy
accumulator with paraffin wax as PCM. Energ Conver Manage.
2015;105(November):189‐196.
103. Zhao W, Elmozughi AF, Oztekin A, Neti S. Heat transfer anal-
ysis of encapsulated phase change material for thermal energy
storage. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer.
2013;63:323‐335.
104. Elmozughi AF, Solomon L, Oztekin A, Neti S. Encapsulated
phase change material for high temperature thermal energy
storage—heat transfer analysis. International Journal of Heat
and Mass Transfer. 2014;78:1135‐1144.
105. Ying Z, Barton JL, Tuzla K, et al. Experimental and computa-
tional study of thermal energy storage with encapsulated
NANO3 for high temperature applications. Solar Energy.
2015;115:180‐194.
106. Solomon L, Zheng Y, Tuzla K, Neti S, Oztekin A. Analysis of
an encapsulated phase change material‐based energy storage
system for high‐temperature applications. International Jour-
nal of Energy Research. 2018;42(7):2518‐2535.
107. Salunkhe PB, Shembekar PS. A review on effect of phase
change material encapsulation on the thermal performance of
a system. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2012;16:5603‐5616.
108. Kuznik F, David D, Johannes K, Roux J‐J. A review on phase
change materials integrated in building walls. Renew Sustain
Energy Rev. 2011;15:379‐391.
109. Jamekhorshid A, Sadrameli SM, Farid M. A review of microen-
capsulation methods of phase change materials (PCMs) as a
thermal energy storage (TES) medium. Renew Sustain Energy
Rev. 2014;31:531‐542.
110. Hassan A, Shakeel Laghari M, Rashid Y. Micro‐encapsulated
phase change materials: a review of encapsulation, safety and
thermal characteristics. Sustainability. 2016;8:1046.
111. Konuklu Y, Paksoy HO, Unal M, Konuklu S. Microencapsula-
tion of a fatty acid with poly (melamine–urea–formaldehyde).
Energ Conver Manage. 2014;80:382‐390.
112. Sarı A, Alkan C, Karaipekli A. Preparation, characterization
and thermal properties of PMMA/n‐heptadecane
61
microcapsules as novel solid–liquid microPCM for thermal
energy storage. Appl Energy. 2010;87(5):1529‐1534.
113. Yu S, Wang X, Wu D. Microencapsulation of n‐octadecane
phase change material with calcium carbonate shell for
enhancement of thermal conductivity and serving durability:
synthesis, microstructure, and performance evaluation. Appl
Energy. 2014;114:632‐643.
114. Fang G, Chen Z, Li H. Synthesis and properties of microencap-
sulated paraffin composites with SiO2 shell as thermal energy
storage materials. Chem Eng J. 2010;163:154‐159.
115. Li M, Wu Z, Tan J. Properties of form‐stable paraffin/silicon
dioxide/expanded graphite phase change composites prepared
by sol–gel method. Appl Energy. 2012;92:456‐461.
116. Fan L‐W, Fang X, Wang X, et al. Effects of various carbon
nanofillers on the thermal conductivity and energy storage
properties of paraffin‐based nanocomposite phase change
materials. Appl Energy. 2013;110:163‐172.
117. Li M, Chen M, Wu Z. Enhancement in thermal property and
mechanical property of phase change microcapsule with mod-
ified carbon nanotube. Appl Energy. 2014;127:166‐171.
118. Li M. A nano‐graphite/paraffin phase change material with
high thermal conductivity. Appl Energy. 2013;106:25‐30.
119. Cao L, Tang F, Fang G. Synthesis and characterization of
microencapsulated paraffin with titanium dioxide shell as
shape‐stabilized thermal energy storage materials in buildings.
Energ Buildings. 2014;72:31‐37.
120. Pan L, Tao Q, Zhang S, et al. Preparation, characterization and
thermal properties of micro‐encapsulated phase change mate-
rials. Solar Energy Materials and Solar Cells. 2012;98:66‐70.
121. Konuklu Y, Unal M, Paksoy HO. Microencapsulation of
caprylic acid with different wall materials as phase change
material for thermal energy storage. Solar Energy Materials
and Solar Cells. 2014;120:536‐542.
122. Zhang Y, Faghri A. Heat transfer enhancement in latent heat
thermal energy storage system by using an external radial
finned tube. Journal of Enhanced Heat Transfer.
1996;3:119‐127.
123. Liu M, Saman W, Bruno F. Review on storage materials and
thermal performance enhancement techniques for high tem-
perature phase change thermal storage systems. Renew
Sustain Energy Rev. 2012;16(4):2118‐2132.
124. Erek A, Ylken Z, Acar MA. Experimental and numerical inves-
tigation of thermal energy storage with a finned tube.
International Journal of Energy Research. 2005;29:283‐301.
125. Zhao D, Tan G. Numerical analysis of a shell‐and‐tube latent
heat storage unit with fins for air‐conditioning application.
Appl Energy. 2015;138:381‐392.
126. Jmal I, Baccar M. Numerical study of PCM solidification in a
finned tube thermal storage including natural convection. Appl
Therm Eng. 2015;84:320‐330.
127. Yang L, Peng H, Ling X, Dong H. Numerical analysis on per-
formance of naphthalene phase change thermal storage
system in aluminum plate‐fin unit. Heat and Mass Transfer.
2014;75:195‐207.
62
128. Rahimi M, Ranjbar AA, Ganji DD, Sedighi K, Hosseini MJ,
Bahrampoury R. Analysis of geometrical and operational
parameters of PCM in a fin and tube heat exchanger. Interna-
tional Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer.
2014;53:109‐115.
129. Al‐Abidi AA, Mat S, Sopian K, Sulaiman MY, Mohammad AT.
Internal and external fin heat transfer enhancement technique
for latent heat thermal energy storage in triplex tube heat
exchangers. Appl Therm Eng. 2013;53:147‐156.
130. Shatikian V, Ziskind G, Letan R. Numerical investigation of a
PCM‐based heat sink with internal fins. International Journal
of Heat and Mass Transfer. 2005;48(17):3689‐3706.
131. Fan LW, Xiao YQ, Zeng Y, et al. Effects of melting temperature
and the presence of internal fins on the performance of a phase
change material (PCM)‐based heat sink. International Journal
of Thermal Sciences. 2013;70:114‐126.
132. Sheikholeslami M, Lohrasbi S, Ganji DD. Numerical analysis
of discharging process acceleration in LHTESS by immersing
innovative fin configuration using finite element method.
Applied Thermal Engineering. 2016;107(25 August):154‐166.
133. Lohrasbi S, Sheikholeslami M, Ganji DD. Multi‐objective RSM
optimization of fin assisted latent heat thermal energy storage
system based on solidification process of phase change material
in presence of copper nanoparticles. Applied Thermal Engineer-
ing. 2017;118(25 May):430‐447.
134. Mahdi JM, Lohrasbi S, Ganji DD, Nsofor EC. Accelerated melt-
ing of PCM in energy storage systems via novel configuration
of fins in the triplex‐tube heat exchanger. International Journal
of Heat and Mass Transfer. 2018;124:663‐676.
135. Faghri A. Heat Pipe Science and Technology. Washington DC,
USA: Taylor & Francis; 1995.
136. Shabgard H, Bergman TL, Sharifi N, Faghri A. High tempera-
ture latent heat thermal energy storage using heat pipes.
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer.
2010;53:2979‐2988.
137. Nithyanandam K, Pitchumani R. Analysis and optimization of
a latent thermal energy storage system with embedded heat
pipes. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer.
2011;54:4596‐4610.
138. Nithyanandam K. Computational modeling of dynamic
response of a latent thermal energy storage system with
embedded heat pipes. Journal of Solar Energy Engineering.
2013;136:11010.
139. Shabgard H, Faghri A, Bergman TL, Andraka CE. Numerical
simulation of heat pipe‐assisted latent heat thermal energy
storage unit for Dish‐Stirling systems. Journal of Solar Energy
Engineering. 2014;136(2). 021025
140. Nithyanandam K, Pitchumani R. Design of a latent thermal
energy storage system with embedded heat pipes. Appl Energy.
2014;126:266‐280.
141. Jung EG, Boo JH. Thermal analytical model of latent thermal
storage with heat pipe heat exchanger for concentrated solar
power. Solar Energy. 2014;102:318‐332.
142. Khalifa A, Tan L, Date A, Akbarzadeh A. A numerical and
experimental study of solidification around axially finned heat
SARBU AND DORCA
pipes for high temperature latent heat thermal energy storage
units. Appl Therm Eng. 2014;70:609‐619.
143. Tiari S, Qiu S. Three‐dimensional simulation of high tempera-
ture latent heat thermal energy storage system assisted by
finned heat pipes. Energ Conver Manage. 2015;105:260‐271.
144. Khalifa A, Tan L, Date A, Akbarzadeh A. Performance of
suspended finned heat pipes in high‐temperature latent heat
thermal energy storage. Appl Therm Eng. 2015;81:242‐252.
145. Sharifi N, Wang S, Bergman TL, Faghri A. Heat pipe‐assisted
melting of a phase change material. International Journal of
Heat and Mass Transfer. 2012;55(13–14):3458‐3469.
146. Shabgard H, Robak CW, Bergman TL, Faghri A. Heat transfer
and exergy analysis of cascaded latent heat storage with grav-
ity‐assisted heat pipes for concentrating solar power
applications. Solar Energy. 2012;86:816‐830.
147. Fang M, Chen G. Effects of different multiple PCMs on the per-
formance of a latent thermal energy storage system. Appl
Therm Eng. 2007;27:994‐1000.
148. Wang J, Chen G, Jiang H. Theoretical study on a novel phase
change process. International Journal of Energy Research.
1999;294:287‐294.
149. Adine HA, El Qarnia H. Numerical analysis of the thermal
behaviour of a shell‐and‐tube heat storage unit using phase
change materials. App Math Model. 2009;33:2132‐2144.
150. Mosaffa AH, Garousi Farshi L, Infante Ferreira CA, Rosen MA.
Energy and exergy evaluation of a multiple‐PCM thermal stor-
age unit for free cooling applications. Renew Energy.
2014;68:452‐458.
151. Hu Z, Li A, Gao R, Yin H. Enhanced heat transfer for PCM
melting in the frustum‐shaped unit with multiple PCMs. Jour-
nal of Thermal Analysis and Calorimetry.
2015;120(2):1407‐1416.
152. Chinnapandian M, Pandiyarajan V, Velraj R. A study on the
thermodynamic analysis of a cascaded latent heat storage sys-
tem over the single storage tank system for diesel engine
waste heat recovery. International Journal of Exergy.
2012;11(3):349‐370.
153. Kuravi S, Trahan J, Goswami DY, Rahman MM, Stefanakos
EK. Thermal energy storage technologies and systems for con-
centrating solar power plants. Progress in Energy and
Combustion Science. 2013;39(4):285‐319.
154. Michels H, Pitz‐Paal R. Cascaded latent heat storage for para-
bolic trough solar power plants. Solar Energy.
2007;81(6):829‐837.
155. Peiró G, Gasia J, Miró L, Cabeza LF. Experimental evaluation
at pilot plant scale of multiple PCMs (cascaded) vs. single
PCM configuration for thermal energy storage. Renew Energy.
2015;83:729‐736.
156. Shabgard H, Allen MJ, Sharifi N, Benn SP, Faghri A, Bergman
TL. Heat pipe heat exchangers and heat sinks: opportunities,
challenges, applications, analysis, and state of the art. Interna-
tional Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer. 2015;89:138‐158.
157. Guo S, Zhao J, Wang W, et al. Experimental study on solving
the blocking for the direct contact mobilized thermal energy
storage container. Appl Therm Eng. 2015;78(3):556‐564.
SARBU AND DORCA
158. Bulunti B, Arslantürk C. Analysis of inward melting of spheres
subject to convection and radiation. Journal of Thermal Science
and Technology. 2006;26(2):11‐16.
159. Hamada Y, Ohtsu W, Fukai J. Thermal response in thermal
energy storage material around heat transfer tubes: effect of
additives on heat transfer rates. Solar Energy. 2003;75:317‐328.
160. Giangi M, Stella F, Kowalewski TA. Phase change problems
with free convection: fixed grid numerical simulation. Comput-
ing and Visualization in Science. 1999;2:123‐130.
161. Liu Z, Sun X, Ma C. Experimental investigations on the charac-
teristics of melting processes of stearic acid in an annulus and
its thermal conductivity enhancement by fins. Energ Conver
Manage. 2005;46:959‐969.
162. Archibold AR, Rahman MM, Goswami DY, Stefanakos EK.
Analysis of heat transfer and fluid flow during melting inside
a spherical container for thermal energy storage. Applied Ther-
mal Engineering 2014; 64(s 1–2):396–407.
163. Wang Y, Amiri A, Vafai K. An experimental investigation of
the melting process in a rectangular enclosure. Heat and Mass
Transfer. 1999;42:3659‐3672.
164. Solomon AD. Melt time and heat flux for a simple PCM body.
Solar Energy. 1979;22:251‐257.
165. Hirata T, Nishida K. An analysis of heat transfer using equiva-
lent thermal conductivity of liquid phase during melting inside
an isothermally heated horizontal cylinder. Heat and Mass
Transfer. 1989;32(9):1663‐1670.
166. Choi JC, Kim SD. Heat transfer characteristics of a latent heat
storage system using MgCl2 6H2O. Energy.
1992;17(12):1153‐1164.
167. Gnielinski V. New equations for heat and mass transfer in tur-
bulent pipes and channels flow. International Chemical
Engineering. 1976;16:359‐368.
168. Zhang Y, Faghri A. Heat transfer enhancement in latent heat
thermal energy storage system by using the internally finned
tube. International Journal of Heat Mass Transfer.
1996;39(15):3165‐3173.
169. Edwards DP, Jensen MK. Pressure drop and heat transfer pre-
dictions of turbulent flow in longitudinally finned tubes.
Advances in Enhanced Heat Transfer. 1994;287:17‐23.
170. Saxena S, Subrahmaniyam S, Sarkah MK. A preliminary model
for phase change thermal energy storage in a shell and tube
heat exchanger. Solar Energy. 1982;29(3):257‐263.
171. Esen M, Durmus A, Durmus A. Geometric design of solar‐
aided latent heat store depending on various parameters and
phase change materials. Solar Energy. 1998;62(1):19‐28.
172. Stefan J. Über die Theorie der Eisbildung, insbesondere über
die Eisbildung im Polarmeere. Ann Phys Rehabil Med.
1891;278(2):269‐286.
173. Voller VR. An overview of numerical methods for solving
phase change problems. Advances in Numerical Heat Transfer.
1996;1(9):341‐380.
174. Ahmed SG, Wrobel LC. Numerical solution of solidification
problems using integral equations, in: Third Int. Conference
of Free and Moving Boundary Problems, Bled, Slovenia; 1995.
63
175. Chuang YK, Szekely J. On the use of Green's functions for solv-
ing melting or solidification problems. International Journal of
Heat Mass Transfer. 1972;14:1285‐1294.
176. Wrobel LC. A boundary element solution to Stefan's problem.
In: Boundary Elements. Berlin: Springer‐Verlag; 1983.
177. Heinlein M, Mukherjee S, Richmond C. A boundary element
method analysis of temperature fields and stress during solidi-
fication. Acta Mechanica. 1986;59:59‐81.
178. Hsieh CK, Choi C‐Y, Kassab AJ. Solution of Stefan problems by
a boundary element method. In: Boundary Element Technology
VII, Computational Mechanics Publication. London: South-
ampton and Elsevier; 1992.
179. Ahmed SG, Meshrif SA. A new numerical algorithm for 2D
moving boundary problems using a boundary element method.
Computers and Mathematics with Applications.
2009;58:1302‐1308.
180. Shamsundar N, Sparrow EM. Analysis of multidimensional
conduction phase change via the enthalpy model. ASME Jour-
nal of Heat Transfer. 1975;8:333‐340.
181. Shamsundar N, Sparrow EM. Effect of density change on mul-
tidimensional conduction phase change. ASME Journal of Heat
Transfer. 1976;98:550‐557.
182. Meyer GH. The numerical solution of multidimensional Stefan
problems—a survey. In: Moving Boundary Problems. New
York, USA: Academic Press; 1978.
183. Hunter LW, Kuttler JR. The enthalpy method for heat conduc-
tion problems with moving boundaries. ASME Journal of Heat
Transfer. 1989;111:239‐242.
184. Sari A, Kaygusuz K. Thermal and heat transfer characteristics
in a latent heat storage system using lauric acid. Energ Conver
Manage. 2002;43:2493‐2507.
185. Agyenim F, Eames P, Smyth M. Heat transfer enhancement in
medium temperature thermal energy storage system using a
multitube heat transfer array. Renew Energy.
2010;35(1):198‐207.
186. Zhang Z, Bejan A. The problem of time‐dependent natural con-
vection melting with conduction in the solid. Heat and Mass
Transfer. 1989;32(12):2447‐2457.
187. Lacroix M. Numerical simulation of a shell and tube latent
heat thermal energy storage unit. Solar Energy.
1993;50(4):357‐367.
188. Gong Z, Mujumdar AS. Finite‐element analysis of cyclic heat
transfer in a shell and tube latent heat energy storage
exchanger. Appl Therm Eng. 1997;17(4):583‐591.
189. Duffie JA, Beckman WA. Solar Engineering of Thermal Pro-
cesses. Hoboken, NJ, USA: Wiley & Sons Inc.; 2013.
190. Velraj R, Seeniraj RV, Hafner B, Faber C, Schwarzer K. Exper-
imental analysis and numerical modelling of inward
solidification on a finned vertical tube for a latent heat storage
unit. Solar Energy. 1997;60(5):281‐290.
191. Faden M, König‐Haagen A, Höhlein S, Brüggemann D. An
implicit algorithm for melting and settling of phase change
material inside macrocapsules. International Journal of Heat
and Mass Transfer. 2018;117:757‐767.
64
192. Comini G, Del Guidice S, Lewis RW, Zienkiewicz OC. Finite
element solution of non‐linear heat conduction problems with
special reference to phase change. International Journal of
Numerical Methods in Engineering. 1974;8:613‐624.
193. Dalhuijsen AJ, Segal A. Comparison of finite element tech-
niques for solidification problems. International Journal of
Numerical Methods in Engineering. 1986;23:1807‐1829.
194. Yao M, Chait A. An alternative formulation of the apparent
heat capacity method for phase‐change problems. Numerical
Heat Transfer, Part B: Fundamentals. 1993;24:279‐300.
195. Costa M, Buddhi D, Oliva A. Numerical simulation of a latent
heat thermal energy storage system with enhanced heat con-
duction. Energ Conver Manage. 1998;39:319‐330.
196. Zeng X, Faghri A. Temperature‐transforming model for binary
solid–liquid phase change problems, part 1: mathematical
modeling and numerical methodology. Numerical Heat Trans-
fer, Part B: Fundamentals. 1994;25:467‐480.
197. Wang S, Faghri A, Bergman TL. A comprehensive numerical
model for melting with natural convection. International Jour-
nal of Heat and Mass Transfer. 2010;53:1986‐2000.
198. Dutil Y, Rousse DR, Salah NB, Lassue S, Zalewski L. A review
on phase‐change materials: mathematical modeling and simu-
lations. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2011;15:112‐130.
199. Ghani F, Waser R, O'Donovan TS, Schuetz P, Zaglio M,
Wortischek J. Non‐linear system identification of a latent heat
thermal energy storage system. Appl Therm Eng. 2018;134:
585‐593.
200. Liu S, Li Y, Zhang Y. Review on heat transfer mechanisms and
characteristics in encapsulated PCMs. Heat Transfer Engineer-
ing. 2014;36:880‐901.
201. Yeh LT, Chung BT. Solidification and melting of material sub-
jected to convention and radiation. Journal of Spacecraft and
Rockets. 1975;12:329‐334.
202. Crank J, Gupta R. Isothermal migration in two dimensions.
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer. 1975;18:
1101‐1117.
203. Keung CS. The use of sources and sinks in solving two dimen-
sion conduction problem with change of phase in arbitrary
domains. PhD dissertation, Columbia University, New York;
1980.
204. Buddhi D, Bansal N, Sawhney R, Sodha M. Solar thermal stor-
age systems using phase change materials. International
Journal of Energy Research. 1988;12(3):547‐555.
SARBU AND DORCA
205. Yao LS, Prusa J. Melting and freezing. Advances in Heat Trans-
fer. 1989;19:1‐95.
206. Lazaridis A. A numerical solution of the multidimensional
solidification (or melting) problem. International Journal of
Heat and Mass Transfer. 1970;13(9):1459‐1477.
207. Bonacina C, Comini G, Fasano A, Primicerio M. Numerical
solution phase change problems. International Journal of Heat
and Mass Transfer. 1973;16(10):1825‐1832.
208. Yoo J, Rubinsky B. Numerical computation using finite ele-
ments for the moving interface in heat transfer problems
with phase change transformation. Numerical Heat Transfer.
1983;6(2):209‐222.
209. Voller VR. Fast implicit finite‐difference method for the analy-
sis of phase change problems. Numerical Heat Transfer, Part B:
Fundamentals. 1990;17:155‐169.
210. El‐Sawi A, Haghighat F, Akbari H. Centralized latent heat
thermal energy storage system: model development and valida-
tion. Energ Buildings. 2013;65:260‐271.
211. ANSYS Fluent 12.0 User's Guide. USA: ANSYS, Inc.; 2009.
212. Brent AD, Voller VR, Reid KJ. Enthalpy‐porosity technique for
modeling convection‐diffusion phase change: application to the
melting of a pure metal. Numerical Heat Transfer.
1988;13:297‐318.
213. Carman PC. Fluid flow through granular beds. Transactions of
the Institute of Chemical Engineers. 1937;15:150‐156.
214. Stritih U, Butala V. Experimental investigation of energy sav-
ing in buildings with PCM cold storage. International Journal
of Refrigeration. 2010;33:1676‐1683.
215. Tatsidjodoung P, Le Pierres N, Luo L. A review of potential
materials for thermal energy storage in building applications.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2013;18:327‐349.
216. Gua C, Viskanta R. Melting and solidification of a pure metal
on a vertical wall. J Heat Transfer. 1986;108:174‐181.
How to cite this article: Sarbu I, Dorca A.
Review on heat transfer analysis in thermal energy
storage using latent heat storage systems and phase
change materials. Int J Energy Res. 2019;43:29–64.
https://doi.org/10.1002/er.4196