Applied Thermal Engineering 187 (2021) 116569

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Thermal Engineering

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apthermeng

Characterization and monitoring of vacuum pressure of tank containers

with multilayer insulation for cryogenic clean fuels storage
and transportation
Wang Boa, Luo Ruoyina, Chen Hongb, Zheng Chenc, Gao Yunfeic, Wang Haorena,
Hashmi Abdul Rehmana, Zhao Qinyua, Zhihua Gan a, b, *
a
Key Laboratory of Refrigeration and Cryogenic Technology of Zhejiang Province, Institute of Refrigeration and Cryogenics, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027,
China
b
State Key Laboratory of Technologies in Space Cryogenic Propellants, Beijing 100028, China
c
College of Metrology and Measurement Engineering, China Jiliang University, Hangzhou 310018, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Liquid natural gas and liquid hydrogen are promising and economical clean energy sources for reducing CO2
Liquid hydrogen emissions and slowing global warming. Characterization and monitoring of the vacuum pressure inside tank
LNG containers with multilayer insulation (MLI) are essential for the safe storage and convenient transportation of
Vacuum pressure
these cryogenic fuels. Herein, a new method for characterizing the vacuum pressure of tank containers with MLI
MLI
Tank container
is proposed. A theoretical analysis revealed that the temperature of the outer surface of the MLI material (To) is a
good indicator of the vacuum pressure inside the tanks. Experimental verification was conducted using an MLI
performance-testing apparatus, To was measured under 10 different vacuum pressures. The results showed that
when the vacuum pressure was <10-1 Pa, To kept almost. However, when the vacuum pressure was >1 Pa, To
decreased sharply with the increase of vacuum pressure.
The mechanism of the proposed method was also discussed based on the thermal analysis of the experimental
system at different vacuum pressures. This study provides a simple and reliable method for vacuum pressure
monitoring of tank containers with MLI, which allows the large-scale and safe utilization of clean energy with a
low boiling temperature.

1. Introduction
Although extensive international efforts and collaborations have
been made in the past decades to limit the increase in the global mean
temperature, global warming is accelerating [1,2]. According to the
latest predictions of the World Meteorological Organization regarding
the global climate, the annual global temperature is likely to be at least 1
◦
C warmer than preindustrial levels in each of the coming 5 years and is
very likely to be within the range of 0.91–1.59 ◦ C [3]. Previous studies
suggest that actions such as adopting clean energy [4] and replacing the
existing energy infrastructure [5] must be taken immediately to fulfill
the target of the “Paris Agreement on Climate Change.”
According to the BP statistical review of world energy, renewable
energy accounted for 11.8% of the total energy consumption of China in
2018, which was significantly lower than the average value for the
world (28.3%) [6]. Clean energy, including natural gas and hydrogen, is
essential for the Chinese government to achieve its goal of reducing the
CO2 emissions per gross domestic product to 60%–65% of that of 2005
by 2030 [7]. China imports a large amount of natural gas to compensate
for shortages and satisfy the demand [8]. Hydrogen energy—a clean
form of energy—is promising for powering vehicles [9] and aircrafts
[10] and has the advantages of a high energy density, low costs, and low
emissions [11,12].
Safe storage and convenient transportation are important aspects for
the large-scale utilization of these fuels. The density of liquid hydrogen
(LH2) at 1 atm is equal to that of hydrogen gas at 193.75 MPa and 300 K,
and the density of liquid natural gas (LNG) at 1 atm is equal to that of
natural gas at 240.18 MPa and 300 K [13]. Normally, high-pressure
hydrogen vessels operate at a pressure of 77 MPa; therefore, fuels
(natural gas and hydrogen) in the liquid form have the advantages of a

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: gan_zhihua@zju.edu.cn (Z. Gan).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2021.116569
Received 9 September 2020; Received in revised form 18 December 2020; Accepted 5 January 2021
Available online 12 January 2021
1359-4311/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
B. Wang et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 187 (2021) 116569

low pressure and a high energy density, compared with the high-
pressure and physical or chemical adsorption in hydrides [14].
Thermal insulation is crucial for the storage of LNG or LH2 because of
the low boiling temperature and low latent heat. The boiling tempera­
tures of LNG and LH2 are 111.5 and 20.2 K, respectively, at 1 atm. A
small amount of heat leaking into the low-temperature tank results in a
remarkable pressure increase and leads to the risk of cryogenic-liquid
release, combustion, and boiling liquid expanding vapor explosion
(BLEVE) [15–17]. The survey indicated that more than 1000 people died
and 10,000 people were injured because of BLEVEs from 1940 to 2005
[17].
To prevent the LNG or LH2 tanks from over pressuring and increase
the liquid storage time, multilayer insulation (MLI) with high-vacuum
conditions is widely used in the aerospace field, the gas industry, and
low-temperature physics [18–21]. The simplest MLI structure contains a
reflector layer with a low emissivity and a spacer layer with a low
thermal conductivity. The low-emissivity reflector can reduce the
amount of thermal radiation, and the low-thermal conductivity spacer
can reduce the amount of thermal conduction. If the MLI is installed in a
high-vacuum environment, the amounts of convection and conduction
of the residential gas are reduced, benefiting from the high vacuum.
Many studies have been conducted on performance testing and char­
acterization [19,22], novel structures (including layered composites)
[23], variable-density MLI [24,25], spacers [26], and MLI with a vapor-
cooled shield [27].
In addition to the material and layout of the reflector and spacer, the
vacuum pressure significantly affects the performance of the MLI
[19,22]. The apparent thermal conductivity of the MLI is <10-4 W/(m⋅K)
when the vacuum pressure is <10-1 Pa, and the apparent thermal con­
ductivity increases significantly with the increasing vacuum pressure
when the vacuum pressure is >10-1 Pa. The vacuum pressure inside the
tanks is recommended to be <10-1 Pa for avoiding heat-load leakage.
The characterization and monitoring of the vacuum pressure of LNG
or LH2 tanks (particularly tank containers) with MLI are vital for the safe
and economical storage and transportation of LNG and LH2. The vacuum
pressure can be determined using a vacuum gauge for onsite tanks, but it
is difficult for the vacuum pressures of tank containers to be monitored
over the long distance and long duration of transportation from the port
near the coast to terminal users in rural areas [28].
Few studies have been performed on the characterization and
monitoring of the vacuum pressure of a tank container with MLI for LNG
or LH2 storage and transportation. In this paper, a new method for
characterizing the vacuum pressure of tanks with MLI is proposed. A
theoretical analysis reveals that the temperature of the outer surface of
the MLI material is a good indicator of the vacuum pressure inside the
tank [29]. Experimental measurements were conducted using an MLI
performance-testing apparatus, and the results validated the proposed
method. This study provides a simple and reliable method for vacuum
pressure monitoring of tank containers with MLI that allows the safe,
large-scale utilization of clean energy with a low boiling temperature
(LNG and LH2).
2. Physical model and characterization method of vacuum
pressure
Fig. 1. Schematic of an LNG or LH2 tank container with MLI.
II). The amount of heat remains constant (Qt) in the two processes. All
three types of heat transfer occur inside the tank during process I. The
heat radiates from the inside of the outer tank at a high temperature of
Ta to the MLI with a temperature of To at the outer surface. Heat is
conducted through the temperature gradient of Ta and To by residential
gas. Heat convection may also occur under certain conditions. The heat
transfer during process II is similar to that during process I, but the
calculation of the three types of heat transfer is more complex and
difficult.
2.2. Calculation of thermal resistances
The thermal network of heat transfer inside the tank is shown in
Fig. 2. Thermal contact resistance between the MLI and inner tank was
neglected because the coldest layer of MLI was mounted to the wall of
the inner tank directly by aluminum tape. Previous study also verified
the conclusion, and vacuum pressure also has a very weak influence on
the temperature distribution along with the MLI [35].
The thermal resistance between Ta and To consists of the radiation
resistance (R1), conduction resistance (R2), and convection resistance
(R3), which can be calculated theoretically. The thermal resistance be­
tween the outer surface of the MLI (To) and the liquid (Tc) is the apparent
thermal resistance of the MLI (RMLI). RMLI is a hybrid thermal resistance
that includes the radiation resistance and conduction resistance of the
reflectors and spacers, conduction resistance, and convection resistance
of the residential gas inside the MLI. It is not easy to determine RMLI
theoretically; therefore, empirical models such as the Lockheed–Martin
model [30] and the layer-by-layer model [31] are typically used to
calculate RMLI.
2.2.1. Radiation resistance
In the space with a gap of δ between the outer tank and the MLI, the
radiation resistance R1 can be determined using Eq. (1):
Ta - To
R1 = (1)
εσ Ao (T4a - T4o )

2.1. Physical model of tank

Fig. 1 presents a schematic of an LNG or LH2 tank container with

MLI. The inner tank with a diameter of di is filled with LNG or LH2, and
the temperature of the liquid is Tc. Heat (Qt) is transferred from the
surroundings (with a temperature of Ta) through the MLI to the inner
tank. The upper and lower boundaries of the inner tank are assumed to
be isothermal, in accordance with the experimental testing conditions,
and heat can only be leaked to the inner tank through the side.
As shown in Fig. 1, heat first flows from the outer tank to the MLI
(process I) and then from MLI to the liquid inside the inner tank (process Fig. 2. Thermal network of heat transfer of the tank.

2
B. Wang et al.
where Ta represents the ambient temperature, To represents the tem­
perature of the outer surface of the MLI, ε represents the mutual emis­
sivity of the outer tank and MLI system, σ represents the
Stefan–Boltzmann constant, and Ao represents the area of the outer
surface of the MLI.
2.2.2. Conduction resistance
The conduction resistance R2 of the gas inside the space depends on
the conditions within the space, and three zones are defined according to
the Knudsen number, which is given as follows [32]:
l0
Kn = (2)
δ
where l0 represents the mean free path of the residential gas, and δ
represents the spacing.
l0 is a parameter related to the pressure and temperature of the space.
The mean free path of air molecules is approximated as follows [32]:
5T
l0 = 2.27 × 10− (3)
p
where T represents the temperature, and p represents the pressure.
When Kn > 10, the mean free path of the gas is significantly larger
than the spacing. This is called the free molecular state. As indicated by
Eq. (3), for a certain type of molecule, the lower the pressure, and the
larger the mean free path, the state is also called a high-vacuum state. In
the high-vacuum state, the classical Fourier conduction law is no longer
valid, and the conduction resistance R2f is expressed as follows [33]:
1 If the boundary conditions (such as Ta, Tc, R1, R3, and RMLI) are
R2f = (4)
Ao kap
where a represents the thermal accommodation coefficient, which can
only be determined via experimental measurement, and p represents the
pressure. k is a parameter related to the properties of the gas inside the
space and can be determined by referencing tables, the reference tem­
perature for the thermal properties is the average temperature of Ta and
To.
The heat conduction of the gas inside the space is an intermediate
pressure state when 0.01 < Kn < 10. The pressure in this state is not very
high, and the scale of the mean free path of the molecule is at the same
level of spacing. The conduction resistance R2i in the intermediate
pressure state is expressed as follows [33]:
R2i =
δ(1 + 2βKn)
(5)
Ao λp
where δ represents the spacing, λp represents the thermal conductivity of
the gas at the atmospheric pressure, Kn represents the Knudsen number,
and β is a parameter related to the properties of the gas inside the space.
The reference temperature for the thermal properties is the average
temperature of Ta and To.
The continuum state is defined at Kn < 0.01, which is the normal
state of the atmospheric pressure, and the conduction resistance R2c in
this state is expressed as follows:
δ 1 h is less than 5%, it can be conclude that the system was in a steady
R2c = (6)
Ao λp
As indicated by Eqs. (4)–(6), in the free molecular state and inter­
mediate pressure state, the pressure significantly affects the conduction
resistance R2. Although the pressure has no impact on R2 in the con­
tinuum state (Eq. (6)), the pressure (atmosphere pressure) is outside of
the range of the vacuum pressure considered in this study; the present
paper focuses on a vacuum pressure between 0.01 Pa and the atmo­
sphere pressure.
3
Applied Thermal Engineering 187 (2021) 116569
2.2.3. Convection resistance
The convection resistance R3 is expressed as follows:
1
R3 = (7)
Ao h
where h represents the convective heat transfer coefficient. The heat
convection in the finite space is dependent on the Grashof number (Gr);
when Gr ≤ 2860, the heat convection can be neglected [34]. Gr is
expressed as follows:
gα(Ta − To )δ3
Grδ = (8)
ν2
where g represents the gravitational acceleration, α represents the vol­
ume expansion factor of the gas, and ν represents the kinematic vis­
cosity. The reference temperature for the thermal properties is the
average temperature of Ta and To.
2.3. Characterization of vacuum pressure
For the thermal network shown in Fig. 2, the energy-conservation
law requires that the heat transferred in process I (from the outer tank
to the MLI) is equal to that transferred in process II (from the MLI to the
inner tank), as the areas of the cylinder and the inner tank are almost
identical. We can obtain the following:
Ta − To To − Tc
1
= (9)
1 1 1 RMLI
R1 +R2 +R3
known, the relationship between the temperature of the outer surface of
the MLI (To) and the conduction resistance (R2) can be determined using
Eq. (9). As discussed previously, in the vacuum-pressure range consid­
ered in this study, the pressure significantly affects the conduction
resistance R2; thus, a relationship between the temperature of the outer
surface of the MLI (To) and the vacuum pressure (p) can be established
using Eq. (9).
3. Experimental system and testing conditions
3.1. Experimental system
Experiments were conducted on an MIL performance-testing plat­
form to verify the characterization method proposed in Section 2. Figs. 3
and 4 show the layout and a photograph of the experimental system,
respectively. 50 layers of MLI materials with a thickness of 17 mm were
wrapped around the heat calorimeter, including a testing chamber in the
middle, an upper guard chamber, and a lower guard chamber. The heat
calorimeter was installed in a cylinder with vacuum pumps. A needle
valve connected to a compressed N2 gas source was placed between the
cylinder and pumps to adjust the vacuum pressure inside the cylinder.
The guard chamber and test chamber were filled with liquid nitrogen
during the test, several hours were taken to reach the thermal equilib­
rium after the filling, and liquid nitrogen was refilled into the chambers
to carry out the actual tests. When the change of volume flow rate within
state. Data of temperatures and volume flow rate were recorded when
the experimental system reached steady state.
The vacuum inside the cylinder was controlled by the opening of the
needle valve, and a group of 10 vacuum pressures ranges (listed in
Table 1) from 1 × 10-4 to 1 × 105 Pa was chosen in this study. The
ambient temperature (Ta) was controlled by circulating water from a
water reservoir connected to outer cylinder of the test apparatus, and Ta
during a single test is very stable, and the change of Ta during the whole
test was about 5 K, as shown in the following section.
B. Wang et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 187 (2021) 116569

Fig. 3. Layout of the MLI performance-testing platform.

evaporated from the test chamber to the atmosphere. The evaporated

cold nitrogen gas was warmed by a bubbler, and the temperature and
mass flow rate of the evaporated nitrogen gas were measured by a vol­
ume flow-meter and temperature sensors.
Four temperature sensors are attached in the middle position of test
chamber and pairwise with a 90◦ azimuthal shift to measure the tem­
perature of the outer surface of the MLI (To). A temperature sensor was
pasted on the inner wall of the outer cylinder to measure the ambient
temperature (Ta). All the sensors were fixed on the surface of the MLI by
aluminum tape. Two sets of vacuum gauges ranging with measurement
ranges of 1 × 10-4 to 1 × 105 Pa were placed around the cylinder to
monitor the vacuum pressure inside the cylinder when adjusting the
opening of the needle valve. The uncertainties of the measured param­
eters are presented in Table 2.
The total amount of heat (Qt) that leaks to the test chamber can be
determined using the following equation:
Qt = V × ρgS × hfg (10)

Fig. 4. Photograph of the MLI performance-testing platform. where Qt represents the amount of heat that leaks to the test tank, V
represents the volume flow rate of the evaporated nitrogen under
standard conditions, ρgS represents the density of nitrogen under
Table 1
Testing conditions of vacuum pressure.
Testing No. 1 2 3 4 5 Table 2
Vacuum pressure/ 5 × 10-4 4.65 × 10- 0.0425 0.0775 0.46 Uncertainties of the measured parameters.
3
Pa Parameter Instrument Producer Uncertainty
Testing No. 6 7 8 9 10
Vacuum pressure/ 3.55 13 170 1500 1.013 × Vacuum Resistance Chengdu Zhenghua ±1% of reading
Pa 105 pressure vacuum gauge
Ionization CANON ANELVA ±0.2% of reading
vacuum gauges M-341DG
3.2. Data acquisition and testing conditions Temperature Resistance TIPC, CSA ±0.1 K
thermometer
Flow rate Volume flow- MKS ±1% of reading
As shown in Fig. 3, the heat leaked to the test chamber only from the meter GE50A013203RMV020 (20%–100% full
side, as the temperatures of the upper and lower surfaces of the test scale)
chamber were kept constant by the two guard chambers. The cryogenic ±0.2% of reading
(2%–20% full
liquid in the test chamber (liquid nitrogen) adsorbed heat and
scale)

4
B. Wang et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 187 (2021) 116569

standard conditions (1250.7 g/m3), and hfg represents the latent heat of
nitrogen under the testing conditions.
The apparent thermal conductivity (Keff) of the MLI can be evaluated
using the equation of steady-state heat transfer through a cylinder of
inner diameter di, outer diameter do, and length L. The apparent thermal
conductivity (Keff) and apparent thermal resistance of the MLI (RMLI) are
expressed as follows:
Qt × ln(do /di )
Keff = (11)
2πL(To − Tc )

ln(do /di )
RMLI = (12)
2π Keff L

With the above equations, the measured parameters can be used to

calculate the different thermal resistances and vacuum pressures of the
system. The volume flow rate, temperature of the outer surface of the
MLI, and ambient temperature under nine different vacuum pressures
and the atmospheric pressure were measured and recorded in the Fig. 5. Volume flow rate, To, and Ta at 5 × 10-4 Pa.
experimental verification.
Fig. 5 shows the volume flow rate of the nitrogen gas, ambient
temperature (Ta), and temperature of the outer surface of the MLI (To)
3.3. Uncertainty analysis
during 10 h under a vacuum pressure of 5 × 10-4 Pa. It can be seen from
the figure, Ta and To were kept constant in the test, and Ta is higher than
Uncertainty analysis is important for the confidence of the experi­
To. The volume flow rate oscillated in a small range, which indicates
mental results. The uncertainty of Qt, Keff, Gr and Kn are expressed as
steady state was reached in this operation condition. The heat load and
follows [36]:
apparent thermal conductivity were calculated using Eqs. (10) and (11)
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
( )2 with the help of the average volume flow rate and temperature during
∂Qt
σ Qt = σV (13) the test.
∂V
For high vacuum pressures (>1 Pa), the total amount of heat leakage
to the liquid nitrogen is too large to obtain a steady volume flow rate,
because the performance of the MLI is degraded under low vacuum

√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
⎛ ⎞2
√
√
√( )2 ( )2 ( )2 ( )
√ ∂Keff ∂Keff ∂Keff ⎜∂Keff do ⎟
σ Keff =√
√ ∂Qt σ Qt + ∂L σ L + ∂(To − Tc ) σ(To − Tc ) + ⎝∂(do ) σ di ⎠
⎜ ⎟ (14)
di

pressures. Fig. 6 shows the volume flow rate of the nitrogen gas, ambient
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
( )2 ( )2 temperature (Ta), and temperature of the outer surface of the MLI (To)
∂Gr ∂Gr under a pressure of 1.0135 × 105 Pa. It can be seen from the figure, Ta
σ Gr = σδ + σ (Ta − To ) (15)
∂δ ∂(Ta − To ) remained constant and To oscillated in a limited range, but the volume
flow rate of the nitrogen gas changed significantly during the test. In this
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
(
∂Kn
)2 (
∂Kn
)2 operation condition, the time from the completion of the filling to the
σ Kn = σl0 + σδ (16)
∂l0 ∂δ
According to Eqs. (13)–(16) and Table 2, the uncertainty of Qt, Keff,
Gr and Kn are 1.0%, 4.35%, 3.77% and 1.0%.

4. Experimental results and discussion

4.1. Typical volume flow rate, ambient temperature, and temperature of

outer surface of MLI

The apparent thermal conductivity of MLI is small (at a level of 10-4

W/m-K) at low vacuum pressures (<10-1 Pa), and the amount of heat
that leaks to the liquid nitrogen is small, along with the amount of liquid
nitrogen evaporated. It can be expected that the volume flow rate,
ambient temperature, and temperature of the outer surface of the MLI
under a high vacuum pressure are at equilibrium because the storage
time for a fixed volume of liquid nitrogen is long when the amount of
heat leakage is small.
Fig. 6. Volume flow rate, To, and Ta at the atmosphere pressure.

5
B. Wang et al.
Fig. 7. Apparent thermal conductivity and To at different vacuum pressures.
completely dry state was used to calculate the heat load. The
“completely dry” state was defined by the volume flow rate rapidly
decreasing to a very low value. And only the average heat load could be
determined under this condition.
4.2. Apparent thermal conductivity and temperature of outer surface of
MLI at different vacuum pressures
Fig. 7 shows the apparent thermal conductivity and temperature of
the outer surface of the MLI at 10 different vacuum pressures. The
hollow circles indicate the apparent thermal conductivity, as explained
in the Introduction. The apparent thermal conductivity remained con­
stant when the vacuum pressure was <10-1 Pa, and it increased when the
vacuum pressure was >10-1 Pa.
In Fig. 7, the red triangles indicate the temperature of the outer
surface of the MLI (To), the black squares represent the ambient tem­
perature (Ta). The change of Ta among the 10 operation conditions was
about 5 K.
As shown in Fig. 7, when the vacuum pressure was <10-1 Pa, the heat
load leaked to the inner tank remained almost constant, so the To also
kept almost constant as the ambient temperature did not change.
However, when the vacuum pressure was >1 Pa, the total heat load of
liquid nitrogen increased significantly as the apparent thermal con­
ductivity of MLI increased. A larger temperature difference was occurred
due to the larger heat load, so To decreased sharply with the increase of
vacuum pressure.
The trend of the heat load (flux) was identical to that of the apparent
thermal conductivity (Fig. 7), as the heat load was proportional to the
apparent thermal conductivity. The heat flux remained almost constant
at low vacuum pressures and increased rapidly when the vacuum pres­
sure was >1 Pa.
As shown in Fig. 7, when the vacuum pressure inside the tank
container increased from a lower value (initial state, such as 10-3 Pa) to
a higher value because of outgassing or mechanical failure, the tem­
perature of the outer surface of the MLI initially oscillated in a limited
range, and when the vacuum pressure reached a certain value, the
temperature of the outer surface of the MLI decreased significantly.
The signal for decreasing the temperature of the outer surface of the
MLI can be used to monitor the vacuum failure of the tank (the region
between the two dashed lines in Fig. 7), and overhaul must be taken to
ensure the safe operation of the tank. The experimental results indi­
cated that the vacuum pressure can be characterized by the tempera­
ture of the outer surface of MLI, and the feasibility of the proposed
method for characterizing the vacuum pressure of tank containers is
also verified.
6
Applied Thermal Engineering 187 (2021) 116569
Fig. 8. Change of the To with the vacuum pressure.
4.3. Discussion
Responding time is vital for the practical application of the proposed
method. The Fig. 8 showed the change of the temperature of outer
surface of MLI (To) with the vacuum pressure. From the figure we can see
that the temperature of outer surface of MLI changed very fast with the
change of vacuum pressure, and the result indicates that the time con­
stant for the To in response to the change of the vacuum pressure is
small, and it’s suitable for practical application in industry.
As shown in Fig. 7, in contrast to the heat flux, To initially remained
steady within a wide range of low vacuum pressures and then decreased
with an increase in the vacuum pressure. When the vacuum pressure
continued to increase, the temperature of the outer surface of the MLI
increased again. The reason for the change in To is discussed in detail in
this section.
As discussed in Section 2, the Knudsen number (Eq. (2)) and Grashof
number (Eq. (8)) significantly affected the heat transfer inside the space.
Fig. 9 shows the Knudsen and Grashof numbers at different vacuum
pressures. The critical values for the two numbers are labeled.
As shown in Fig. 9, Kn decreases with the increasing vacuum pres­
sure, as the mean free path of nitrogen is inversely proportional to the
pressure. Three zones are defined according to the critical Kn number,
and different equations are used to calculate the heat conduction of the
residential gas. In contrast to Kn, Gr increases with the vacuum pressure,
and the kinematic viscosity decreases with the increasing vacuum
pressure. When Gr < 2860, the free convection inside the space can be
neglected. Gr reaches 2860 when the vacuum pressure is 1500, and the
empirical equation can be used to calculate the heat convection [34].
Using Eqs. (1)–(8), the heat loads at different vacuum pressures were
calculated and compared with the experimental values. As shown in
Fig. 10, the theoretical calculations agreed well with the experimental
results, and heat radiation dominates the heat load leaked to the system at
the two lowest vacuum pressures. When the Kn number falls into the in­
termediate pressure zone (as shown in Fig. 9), the heat conduction of the
residential gas increases and remains almost constant at a vacuum pres­
sure of >1 Pa. When the vacuum pressure is >1 Pa, the heat radiation
increases significantly with the vacuum pressure, and the temperature
difference between Ta and To increases. As the ambient temperature is
constant, the temperature of the outer surface of the MLI (To) decreases
sharply with the increasing vacuum pressure in the range of 1–1500 Pa.
As indicated in Fig. 9, natural convection in a limited space occurs
when the vacuum pressure is >1500 Pa. As the convection resistance is
much smaller than the conduction and radiation resistances, the tem­
perature difference between Ta and To decreases; thus, the temperature
of the outer surface of the MLI To increases sharply when the vacuum
pressure is in the range of >1500 Pa.
B. Wang et al.
Fig. 9. Kn and Gr at different vacuum pressures.
Fig. 10. Components of the heat load at different vacuum pressures.
5. Conclusion
This paper proposes the use of the temperature of the outer surface of
the MLI material to characterize the vacuum pressure of tank containers
with MLI for LNG and LH2 storage and transportation. A theoretical
analysis of the thermal resistance indicates that the temperature of the
outer surface of the MLI material is a good indicator of the vacuum
pressure inside the tanks. The temperatures of the outer surface of the
MLI at 10 different vacuum pressures were tested using an MLI
performance-testing apparatus, and the results validated the feasibility
of the new method. This study provides a simple and reliable method for
7
Applied Thermal Engineering 187 (2021) 116569
vacuum pressure monitoring of tank containers with MLI and can sup­
port the large-scale and safe utilization of clean energy with a low
boiling temperature (LNG and LH2).
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgements
This work was financially supported by the National Natural Science
Foundation of China (No. 52006190), the Research Fund of State Key
Laboratory of Technologies in Space Cryogenic Propellants
(SKLTSCP1808) and State Key Laboratory of Clean Energy Utilization
(Project No.CEU2020017). The authors would like to express their
gratitude to Prof. Y.X He at CRRC Yangtze Co., Ltd for providing the MLI
material and helpful discussion.
References
[1] S.R. Loarie, P.B. Duffy, H. Hanmilton, et al., The velocity of climate change, Nature
462 (2009) 1052–1053.
[2] L.J. Cheng, J. Abraham, Z. Hausfather, et al., How fast are the oceans warming?
Science 363 (6423) (2019) 128–129.
[3] Global Annual to Decadal Climate Update, Target years: 2020 and 2020-2024.
WMO, https://public.wmo.int/en/media/press-release/new-climate-predictions
-assess-global-temperatures-coming-five-years (Access on 24/07/2020).
[4] B. Obama, The irreversible momentum of clean energy, Science 355 (2017)
126–129.
[5] D. Tong, Q. Zhang, Y. Zheng, et al., Committed emissions from existing energy
infrastructure jeopardize 1.5 ◦ C climate target, Nature 572 (2019) 373–377.
[6] BP statistical review of world energy 2019, 68th edition [OL]. https://www.bp.co
m/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy.
html (Access on 24/07/2020).
B. Wang et al.
[7] O. Odgaard, J. Delman, China’s energy security and its challenges towards 2035,
Energy Policy 71 (2014) 107–117.
[8] J. Wang, L. Feng, L. Zhao, S. Snowden, China’s natural gas: resources, production
and its impacts, Energy Policy 55 (2013) 690–698.
[9] T. Sinigaglia, F. Lewiski, M.S. Martins, et al., Production, storage, fuel stations of
hydrogen and its utilization in automotive applications-a review, Int. J. Hydrogen
Energy 39 (2017) 24597–24611.
[10] K. Bhupendra, K. Adam, R. Paulas, et al., Hydrogen powered aircraft: the future of
air transport, Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 60 (2013) 45–59.
[11] A.M. Abdalla, S. Hossain, O.B. Nisfindy, et al., Hydrogen production, storage,
transportation and key challenges with applications: a review, Energy Convers.
Manage. 165 (2018) 602–627.
[12] G. Maggio, A. Nicita, G. Squadrito, How the hydrogen production from RES could
change energy and fuel markets: a review of recent literature, Int. J. Hydrogen
Energy 44 (23) (2019) 11371–11384.
[13] E.W. Lemmon, M.O. McLinden, M.L. Huber, NIST Reference Fluid Thermodynamic
and Transport Properties —REFPROP, Version 7.0, NIST, 2002.
[14] N.T. Stetson, S. Mcwhorter, C.C. Ahn, Introduction to hydrogen storage,
Compendium of Hydrogen Energy, vol. 2, Woodhead Publishing, Cambridge, 2016,
pp. 3-25.
[15] R. Wurster, Hydrogen safety: An overview. Compendium of Hydrogen Energy, vol.
4, Woodhead Publishing, Cambridge, 2016, pp. 195-213.
[16] Z. Liu, Y.Z. Li, Thermal physical performance in liquid hydrogen tank under
constant wall temperature, Renew. Energy 130 (2019) 601–612.
[17] T. Abbasi, S.A. Abbasi, The boiling liquid expanding vapour explosion (BLEVE):
mechanism, consequence assessment, management, J. Hazard. Mater. 141 (2007)
489–519.
[18] M. Donabedian, Spacecraft Thermal Control Handbook, vol. II, Cryogenics The
Aerospace Press, California, 2003.
[19] J.E. Fesmire, W.L. Johnson, Cylindrical cryogenic calorimeter testing of six types of
multilayer insulation systems, Cryogenics 89 (2018) 58–75.
[20] T.C. Nast, D.J. Frank, J. Feller, Multilayer insulation considerations for large
propellant tanks, Cryogenics 64 (2014) 105–111.
[21] David W. Plachta, Monica C. Guzik, Cryogenic boil-off reduction system,
Cryogenics 60 (2014) 62–67.
Applied Thermal Engineering 187 (2021) 116569
[22] J.E. Fesmire, Aerogel insulation systems for space launch applications, Cryogenics
46 (2006) 111–117.
[23] J.E. Fesmire, Layered composite thermal insulation system for nonvacuum
cryogenic applications, Cryogenics 74 (2016) 154–165.
[24] Y.H. Huang, B. Wang, S.H. Zhou, et al., Modeling and experimental study on
combination of foam and variable density multilayer insulation for cryogen
storage, Energy 123 (2017) 487–498.
[25] B. Wang, Y.H. Huang, P. Li, et al., Optimization of variable density multilayer
insulation for cryogenic application and experimental validation, Cryogenics 80
(2016) 154–163.
[26] Y. Haim, Y. Weiss, R. Letan, Effect of spacers on the thermal performance of an
annular multi-layer insulation, Appl. Therm. Eng. 65 (1–2) (2014) 418–421.
[27] J.P. Zheng, L.B. Chen, X.M. Liu, et al., Thermodynamic optimization of composite
insulation system with cold shield for liquid hydrogen zero-boil-off storage, Renew.
Energy 147 (2020) 824–832.
[28] Y.X. He, W.M. Zhou, Z.H. Gan, et al., Calculation and experiment on static
evaporation rate of 40-foot LNG container tank for railway and its intermodal
application, Cryogenics (2020) 52–56 (in Chinese).
[29] B. Wang, Y.X. He, R.Y. Luo, et al., Vacuum pressure monitoring method and
apparatus for tank containers with MLI, CN 2020100145345.
[30] C.W. Keller, G.R. Cunnington, A.P. Glassford, Thermal performance of multilayer
insulations, NASA CR-134477 (1974).
[31] G.E. McIntosh, Layer by layer MLI calculation using a separated mode equation,
Adv. Cryog. Eng. 39 (1994) 1683–1690.
[32] J.P. Holman, Heat transfer, 10th ed., McGraw-Hill, 2010.
[33] G.B. Chen, P. Zhang, Thermal insulation and heat transfer at low temperature,
Science Press, Beijing, 2004.
[34] S.M. Yang, W.Q. Tao, Heat transfer, fourth ed., Higher Education Press, Beijing,
2008.
[35] H.W. Zhu, Theoretical and experimental study on variable density multi-layer
insulation in vacuum. Master Theses, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai,
2013.
[36] Editorial. Journal of heat transfer policy on reporting uncertainties in experimental
measurements and results, ASME Journal of Heat Transfer 115 (1993) 5-6.