Journal of Energy Storage 82 (2024) 110591

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Energy Storage

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

Research papers

Research on the thermal behavior of medium-temperature phase change

materials and factors influencing the thermal performance based on a
vertical shell-and-tube latent heat storage system
Laiquan Lv , Shengyao Huang , Yan Rong , Hao Zhou *
State Key Laboratory of Clean Energy Utilization, Institute for Thermal Power Engineering, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, PR China

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

Keywords: Medium-and-high temperature latent heat storage systems have been developed to address challenges related to
Phase change material exhaust heat utilization and energy peak regulation in the field of energy engineering. However, there is still a
Latent heat storage lack of understanding regarding the thermal behavior of medium-and-high temperature phase change materials
Medium-high temperature thermal energy
within heat exchangers and the factors influencing the system's thermal characteristics. Therefore, this study
storage
designed and constructed a new medium-temperature (300 ◦ C) latent heat storage system with spiral-finned heat
Influence of different parameters
exchanger tubes. It uses 260 kg of medium-temperature phase change material for 68.3 MJ energy storage over 2
h. The system's response to variations in the inlet temperature and flow rate of the heat transfer fluid is inves­
tigated using thermocouples and visualization windows and provides recommendations for operating parame­
ters. Results show natural convection as the primary heat transfer mechanism in the charging process, leading to
temperature stratification in the tank (the upper has a higher temperature than the lower part). In contrast, heat
conduction dominates heat transfer during discharging, resulting in a more uniform temperature distribution in
vertical latent heat storage systems. Besides, inlet parameters significantly influence the system. Increasing
storage temperature by 20 ◦ C or flow rate by 20 L/min reduces storage time by 33.5 % and 54.0 %, respectively.
In contrast, during the exothermic stage, heat conduction dominates with a more uniform temperature distri­
bution. Optimal conditions are found at 280–150 ◦ C, 15 L/min, achieving an input of 84 MJ and output of 50.25
MJ over 200 min, with a cycle efficiency of approximately 59.82 %.

are gaining growing attention due to their notable advantages, including

high energy density and stable operating temperature range [5]. How­
1. Introduction
ever, the relatively low thermal conductivity of the phase change ma­
terials (PCMs) hinders their practical application by causing slow
The increasing global energy demand [1] and concerns over envi­
thermal response effects [6]. Several methods are currently employed to
ronmental pollution have led to a growing emphasis on renewable and
optimize LHS systems, including developing new PCMs, optimizing the
clean energy sources. Solar energy is a promising option due to its
thermal energy storage (TES) system, and selecting optimal operating
abundant resources and cost-effectiveness. However, the intermittent
parameters.
nature of solar energy poses challenges in maintaining a stable power
Researchers have investigated diverse strategies to improve the
output, which affects the balance between energy supply and demand
thermal conductivity and safety of PCMs. One method involves incor­
[2]. To ensure continuous energy supply, energy storage systems are
porating nanoparticles and metal foams [7] or utilizing porous skeletons
widely integrated into renewable energy systems. Thermal storage sys­
[8]. Sarı and Karaipekli [9] investigated the incorporation of expanded
tems offer advantages by minimizing losses associated with thermo­
graphite (EG) into PCMs at different ratios, resulting in improved ther­
electric conversion and are particularly suitable for applications in
mal conductivity and reduced melting time. Fan et al. [10] studied the
photovoltaic power plants where heat is utilized as the final product [3].
optimal mass ratio of polyethylene glycol and EG composites, demon­
Among different types of thermal storage, latent heat storage (LHS)
strating good thermal stability and cycle life. Cui et al. [11] added
systems are up-and-coming in their ability to absorb/release heat
copper nanoparticles to sodium acetate trihydrate, achieving a 20 %
through phase transition using heat storage materials [4]. These systems

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: zhouhao@zju.edu.cn (H. Zhou).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2024.110591
Received 14 September 2023; Received in revised form 25 December 2023; Accepted 13 January 2024
Available online 22 January 2024
2352-152X/© 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
L. Lv et al.
Nomenclature
Abbreviation
EG expanded graphite
HTF heat transfer fluid
LHS latent heat storage
PCM phase change material
TES thermal energy storage
Symbol
cp specific heat (kJ/kg⋅K)
E accumulative energy (kJ)
k thermal conductivity (W/(m⋅K))
m mass (kg)
ṁ mass flow (kg/s)
P power (kW)
T temperature (◦ C)
increase in thermal conductivity while reducing supercooling.
Optimization of the TES involves structural design and heat
exchanger tube configuration to enhance system efficiency by increasing
the surface area for heat transfer. Common approaches include multi-
tube structures, cascade PCM structures, and innovative fin designs.
Vikas et al. [12,13] compared different types of TES, finding that the
staggered multi-tube design significantly improved melting rate by
shortening PCM melting time by 53.3 %–71.1 %. They also suggested
placing heat exchanger tubes in the upper half close to the center to
improve temperature stratification within the TES while designing tubes
in the lower half to be located in the undesirable melting zone of the
lower layer. Peiró et al. [14] experimentally evaluated a cascaded LHS
system using multiple PCM configurations, which improved the stability
of inlet/outlet temperatures for heat transfer fluid (HTF) and enhanced
energy output efficiency by 19.36 %. Elbahjaoui [15] confirmed that
cascade configurations maximize latent heat utilization for energy
storage. Chen and Fan [16] found that an optimized conical TES design
effectively utilizes natural convection for enhanced heat transfer. Be­
sides, Dai et al. [17] enhanced the thermal storage efficiency of a vertical
shell-and-tube LHS system through a systematic investigation into the
influence of cone angle values within the conical shell and conical tube
on the charging process. The findings reveal that the PCM melting rate
exhibited an augmentation trend with increasing cone angle, albeit with
a diminishing magnitude of enhancement. Subsequently, comparative
analyses were extended to assess the thermal dynamics during the
melting and solidification phases of the conical tube [18]. The outcomes
demonstrate that the optimized cone design facilitated accelerated PCM
melting, albeit at the expense of solidification performance. Notably,
this issue was effectively mitigated by a 180◦ rotation of the system,
presenting a viable solution. While the impact of TES structure on sys­
tem performance has been confirmed, it's important to note that com­
plex TES structures and process issues can lead to thermal stress
concentration during cycles. Therefore, research on fin-based heat
transfer enhancement technologies with more straightforward and
compact designs continues to be widely studied.
Lv et al. [19] compared the performance of three different fin
structures and smooth heat exchanger tubes, finding that spiral fins
exhibited the best heat transfer performance, increasing cumulative
stored energy by 31.2 % within the same period compared to smooth
tubes. Karami and Kamkari [20] utilized perforated spiral fins to
enhance natural convection in the liquid state of the PCM, resulting in a
7 % improvement in thermal performance. Liu et al. [21,22] introduced
trapezoidal fins based on longitudinal fins, reducing total melting time
by 52.2 %. Furthermore, Liu's study identified optimal arrangements
using bifurcated tree-type fins, consisting of short straight fins at the top
2
Journal of Energy Storage 82 (2024) 110591
t time (s)
W parameter
y independent variable
Greek letter
λ melting heat (kJ/kg)
μ dynamic viscosity (mPa⋅s)
ρ density (kg/m3)
η efficiency
ΔW parameter uncertainty
Δy independent variable uncertainty
Subscripts
after after the charging process
before before the charging process
in the HTF inflow of the heat exchange tube
out the HTF outflow of the heat exchange tube
and long Y-shaped fins at the bottom. Wołoszyn and Szopa [23] imple­
mented spiral-coiled heat exchanger tubes with helical fins, reducing
melting time by 44–60 % and solidification time by 21–26 %. Addi­
tionally, studies have focused on analyzing the optimal size and
arrangement of finned heat exchanger tubes. Zhao et al. [24] investi­
gated the impact of material, spacing, and length on fin heat transfer
performance. Feng et al. [25] observed that H-type fin efficiency in­
creases with greater fin thickness and thermal conductivity but de­
creases with wider slits, taller fins, and higher surface heat transfer
coefficients. Qin et al. [26] analyzed the optimum size and arrangement
of longitudinal finned heat transfer tubes while also studying the effect
of inclination orientation and angle on thermal characteristics; down­
ward sloping fins at -15◦ demonstrated superior heat transfer perfor­
mance. Bahlekeh et al. [27] addressed undesired phase transition zones
at the bottom of vertical TES systems by adding additional fins, resulting
in a 53.3 % reduction in heat storage time. Tiari et al. [28], focusing on
spiral fin spacing and radius uniformity with constant fin volume, found
that an optimal system exhibited sparse top spacing and increasing fin
radius from top to bottom for improved thermal characteristics.
In addition to studying individual enhanced heat transfer methods,
researchers also explore combinations of multiple techniques or novel
approaches. Farahani et al. [29] improved the melting process of a
system by adding nanoparticles and introducing a nonuniform magnetic
field in spiral-finned heat exchanger tubes. Sarani et al. [30] achieved
enhanced heat transfer by combining non-continuous longitudinal fins
with nanoparticles, resulting in a 59.5–77.8 % reduction in exothermic
time. Ge et al. [31] investigated the thermal characteristics of systems
with varying combinations of metal foam filling ratios and fin topol­
ogies, finding that the inclusion substantially enhanced heat transfer
efficiency during the initial stage of heat storage, and it weakened the
effectiveness of the fins throughout the complete cycle process. Qu et al.
[32] proposed a new method to enhance heat transfer inside PCM cap­
sules by oscillating them, resulting in a 50 % increase in heat transfer
coefficients during melting and a 94 % increase during solidification.
Ramazani et al. [33] reduced the solidification time of paraffin wax from
7200 to 39 s by adding acetone as an intermediate boiling liquid. In
addition to implementing enhanced heat transfer methods, it is crucial
to determine the optimal operating parameters to achieve the most
suitable working conditions for various application scenarios. Murray
and Groulx [34] discovered that the melting rate of the PCM during heat
storage is directly influenced by the inlet flow rate of the HTF, while its
effect is negligible during the discharge process. Tao et al. [35] observed
that improving the charging temperature reduces cycle time, surpassing
the impact of the inlet flow rate. Both Panchabikesan et al. [36] and
Khan et al. [37] investigated how varying the HTF's inlet temperature
L. Lv et al.
affects intensifying heat transfer through adjustments in flow rate. Their
experimental results demonstrated that higher inlet temperatures are
more effective in increasing HTF flow rates.
As mentioned in the previous literature review, most studies on LHS
systems have primarily focused on numerical simulations, and the
experimental setups used are often small-scale pilot rigs with a single
tube. Furthermore, the emphasis has been on low-temperature heat
storage while neglecting heat release. However, since most renewable
energy systems and industrial processes generate heat outside the low-
temperature range, these existing studies do not guide the application
of latent heat storage systems in these fields. Therefore, this study aims
to develop and build a shell-and-tube LHS system capable of storing
medium-to-high temperatures (up to 300 ◦ C). The system utilizes ver­
tical heat exchanger tubes with spiral fins for improved performance.
Commercial binary molten salts are employed as the PCM for medium-
to-high temperature heat. Examined the temperature distribution within
the TES unit under varying charging and discharging temperatures and
HTF flow rates and analyzed the system's instantaneous power and cu­
mulative energy to assess thermal performance distinctions across
diverse operational scenarios. Besides, the melting and solidification
behaviors of the PCM were evaluated by a visualization window incor­
porated into the designed system. The findings from this study can offer
valuable insights for designing and developing LHS systems in industrial
engineering applications. Analyzing the thermal characteristics of the
system under various operating conditions will aid in identifying
optimal parameters for diverse application scenarios.
2. Experimental system and procedures
2.1. Experimental system
The experimental setup is designed to examine the thermal behavior
of the LHS system during the charging and discharging processes at
medium-to-high temperatures (200–300 ◦ C). It further investigates the
influence of various parameters of the HTF on the system. The complete
system comprises an HTF circulating heating system, the TES unit, an
Fig. 1. Schematic illustration of the experimental test system (blue lines: water path, red lines: heat transfer oil path). (For interpretation of the references to colour
in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
3
Journal of Energy Storage 82 (2024) 110591
HTF circulating cooling system, and a data acquisition system, as illus­
trated in Fig. 1. Fig. 2 depicts the photograph of the experimental setup.
The HTF circulating heating system comprises an HTF boiler, an inlet
manifold, an outlet manifold, bypasses, valves, and a flowmeter. Its
purpose is to provide HTF with controllable temperatures and stable
flow rates to heat and cool the PCM in the TES. The primary component
of the HTF circulating cooling system is a shell-and-tube heat exchanger.
In this configuration, HTF flows through the tube side while cooling
water circulates through the shell side. The cooling system cools down
the high-temperature HTF during discharging. Subsequently, it returns
to the HTF boiler to be heated to a predetermined temperature.
The design considerations for the size and storage capacity of TES
units were determined by the following factors: (1) TES units could
represent a typical component of large-scale LHS systems to accurately
capture the crucial performance aspects of such systems; (2) TES unit
size should be judiciously chosen, avoiding excessive dimensions to
facilitate the installation of visualization windows and prevent potential
glass breakage during experiments. Hence, the TES unit was designed as
a rectangular shell-and-tube tank with dimensions as follows: length:
1130 mm, width: 186 mm, height: 964 mm, and wall thickness: 10 mm.
It has a set of vertical spiral-type heat transfer tube bundles consisting of
11 layers with 2 rows per layer, totaling 22 finned tubes. The articula­
tion between these tubes involves both vertical and horizontal U-shaped
tubes. The finned tubes are constructed from carbon steel with outer and
inner diameters measuring 38 and 32 mm, respectively. Pertinent
dimensional parameters for the spiral finned tubes include pitch: 10 mm,
height: 15 mm, and thickness: 1.5 mm, as depicted in Fig. 3 (c). A
visualization window, made of high-temperature-resistant quartz glass,
is incorporated into the heat exchanger tube shell (Fig. 3 (a)). This
window allows for precise observation and visualization of the phase
change process within the TES unit during cycling.
The data acquisition system comprises two parts: K-type thermo­
couples for temperature measurement and a vortex flowmeter for
recording the flow rate of the HTF. The temperature data required for
studying the thermal characteristics of the system includes the inlet and
outlet of the system and the temperature distribution of the PCM inside
L. Lv et al. Journal of Energy Storage 82 (2024) 110591

Fig. 2. (a) Photograph of the experimental setup utilized in this study, (b) setup dimensions and layout diagram of thermocouples.

Fig. 3. Dimensions of (a) experimental setup, (b) visualization window, (c) spiral finned heat exchanger tube.

the TES unit. To capture this information, a total of 57 thermocouples
are employed. These include two points for measuring HTF temperature
(#1 and #2) and 55 for measuring PCM temperature (#3–#57). The
#3–#57 thermocouples are divided into five bundles with a spacing of
228 mm per bundle. Each bundle consists of 11 evenly spaced thermo­
couples at an axial spacing of 76 mm to obtain detailed temperature
readings within the TES system. Fig. 2 (b) illustrates the configuration of
the thermocouples in the experimental setup. Table 1 provides an
overview of the essential parameters associated with the primary com­
ponents of the experimental setup.
2.2. Experimental procedures

The experiment will be divided into two processes, charging and

Table 1 discharging, to investigate the potential engineering application of the
Essential parameters associated with the primary components of the experi­
LHS system in TES. This division allows for simulating a complete cycle
mental setup.
of the system.
Components Parameters Before the charging process, valve #2 was opened to enable external
HTF boiler Specification: YDW-225, maximum operating power: 225 circulation. The HTF was heated to a predetermined temperature by
kW, manufactured by Nanjing Lidesheng Machinery Co., circulating it through the boiler. After that, valve #2 was closed, and
Ltd., China
valves #3 and #4 were opened. At this point, HTF with a temperature of
Data acquisition Agilent 34970 A
instrument 215 ◦ C was injected from above into the TES unit through the finned
Vortex flow sensors Specification: LUGB-15C, flow range and error: 0–80 L/ heat exchanger tubes to preheat the PCM within the TES unit. Pre­
min and ± 1.5 %, manufactured by Hubei Nankong heating was suspended once the average temperature of PCM reached
Instrument Technology Co., Ltd., China 200 ◦ C. The HTF was then heated again through external circulation
Thermocouple probes K-type, temperature range and error: 0–1100 ◦ C and ± 1 ◦ C
until it reached the desired charging temperature. Subsequently, the

4
L. Lv et al. Journal of Energy Storage 82 (2024) 110591

formal charging process for heat storage commenced, where high- Table 3
temperature HTF was introduced from the top, facilitating heat ex­ Thermal properties of the energy storage material, HTF, and carbon steel.
change with the PCM within the system. Heat transfer concluded with Properties Units PCM HTF (200 ◦ C/ Carbon
HTF returning to be reheated in the boiler and recirculated into the cycle 290 ◦ C) steel
process. During this process, thermocouples #3–#57 observed temper­ Solidus/liquidus density kg/m3 2213.5/ 868/792 7850
ature changes within PCM inside the TES system. The charging process 1924.6
concluded when the average PCM temperature inside reached 265 ◦ C. Peak melting/ ◦
C 226.73/ – –
Before entering the discharging process, keep open valves #5 and #6 in solidification 222.25
temperature
place for the HTF cooling system to cool down high-temperature HTF Melting/solidification kJ/kg 117/120 – –
after heat exchange. In the discharging process, the process was heat
considered complete when the average temperature of PCM inside the Specific heat kJ/ 1.536 2.209/2.520 0.47
system was observed to cool down to less than 200 ◦ C. The Schematic (kg⋅K)
Thermal conductivity W/ 0.503 0.1079/0.096 48.85
illustration of the experimental test system is depicted in Fig. 1.
(m⋅K)
Dynamic viscosity mPa⋅s 4.34 0.62/0.323 –
2.3. Experimental conditions

When determining the crucial parameters for experimental condi­
tions, meticulous consideration was given to the inlet HTF temperature
and HTF flow rate parameters, constrained by both the experimental
system and the properties of the PCM. Due to limitations in the HTF
usage temperature and the HTF circulating cooling system, the HTF
operates within the temperature range of 150–300 ◦ C. Simultaneously,
the melting and solidification temperature range of PCM falls approxi­
mately between 220 and 240 ◦ C. Consequently, the inlet HTF temper­
atures during charging were established at 280, 290, and 300 ◦ C, while
during discharging, they were set at 150, 160, and 170 ◦ C. Subsequently,
considering the power constraints of the HTF circulation pump and the
system's stability at low HTF flow rates, the HTF operates within the flow
range of 5–30 L/min. Consequently, the HTF flow rates were determined
at 5, 15, and 25 L/min. Five working conditions are listed in this
experiment to study the impact of inlet HTF temperature and HTF flow
rate on the system's thermal behavior. Relevant system parameters are
calculated based on collected data. Case I represents the standard
working condition among these conditions, while Cases II and III have
identical inlet flow rates but different inlet temperatures. Similarly,
Cases IV and V have identical temperatures but different inlet flow rates.
Specific parameters for each working condition are presented in Table 2.
2.4. Thermal properties of the materials
To achieve stable heat storage at medium-to-high temperatures
(200–300 ◦ C), a commercial binary nitrate obtained from HeatMate
Technology (Shanghai) Co. was used as the energy storage material. This
material has been verified for safety reliability, and its latent heat uti­
lization temperature range (210–250 ◦ C) aligns with the target heat
range of this experiment, making it suitable for use as a storage medium
in a medium-to-high temperature LHS system. The heat transfer oil used
as the HTF was sourced from Eastman Chemical Co., and its physical
properties have been described extensively in previous literature [38].
Further details of the employed materials are summarized in Table 3.
2.5. Uncertainty analysis
Experimental errors primarily stem from the data acquisition system,
resulting in ±1 ◦ C uncertainty for temperature measurements and ± 1.5
% uncertainty for flow rate measurements. These uncertainties affect
subsequent calculations of system thermal characteristics and will be
discussed further in Section 3.4.
Table 2
Specific parameters for experimental conditions.
Case I Case II Case III Case IV Case V
Charging temperature (◦ C) 300 290 280 300 300
Discharging temperature (◦ C) 170 160 150 170 170
HTF flow rate(L/min) 15 15 15 25 5
3. Results and discussion
To examine the thermal characteristics of the developed LHS system
and provide valuable insights for future engineering applications, this
section will present the experimental results in the following sequence:
Firstly, Case I will be considered as the standard working condition. In
this case, charging was performed using HTF at 300 ◦ C with a flow rate
of 20 L/min, while discharging was conducted at 170 ◦ C with a flow rate
of 20 L/min. The temperature variations of thermocouples #1–#57
throughout the cycle will be discussed. Next, different inlet tempera­
tures (Case II, III) will be investigated while maintaining the HTF flow
rate constant. The influence of inlet temperature on the thermal char­
acteristics of the system will be analyzed. Finally, by fixing the inlet
temperature of the HTF, changes in the thermal characteristics of the
system under different HTF flow rates (Case IV, V) will be examined.
3.1. Analysis of the variation of temperature under standard operating
conditions
3.1.1. Charging process
Fig. 4 (a, b) depicts the temperature changes of the TES system's
inlet, outlet, and internal regions during the charging process under
standard working conditions. To minimize the influence of natural heat
dissipation from the TES shell on internal temperature measurements,
the third bundle of thermocouples, positioned between the 2nd and 10th
layers, is chosen to represent the internal temperature of the TES. Fig. 4
(a) demonstrates the rapid increase in inlet HTF temperature from the
preheating temperature to reaching the final charging temperature
during the initial phase of the charging process (the automatic control
system of the HTF circulating heating system causes the fluctuation in
inlet temperature). The outlet temperature exhibited a comparatively
slower increase compared to the inlet temperature. The diminishing
temperature difference between the inlet and outlet suggested a gradual
heat transfer from the HTF to the PCM within the TES unit.
Fig. 4 (b) displays the temperature change within TES during the
charging process from top (layer 1) to bottom (layer 10). Analyzing the
trend of temperature curves revealed a slow-rapid-slow rise pattern for
PCMs at different heights, except for layer 1, and this change occurred
earlier in the upper layers. Further analysis of points where there were
changes in the rate of temperature rise showed that PCMs first under­
went a phase change period. The heat was transferred indirectly from
the HTF to the PCM through fin heat pipes, which were stored in the
form of latent heat. Material temperatures changed more slowly as PCM
gradually melted. After completing its phase change, sensible heat
storage became the primary energy storage mechanism. The tempera­
ture of PCM rose rapidly, but as the temperature difference gradually
decreased, the temperature increase slowed down.
Fig. 4 (c, d) provides a more precise and intuitive representation of
PCM's temperature and phase change within the TES during the
charging process in the standard working condition. As exhibited in

5
L. Lv et al.
Fig. 4. (a) Temperature variations of the inlet and outlet HTF, (b) temperature variations in each layer within the TES, (c) PCM temperature distribution inside the
TES unit, and (d) melting behavior of the PCM during the charging process in the standard working condition.
Fig. 4 (c), the initial stage of charging depicted a relatively uniform
temperature distribution of the PCM within the TES unit, both vertically
and horizontally. As the charging was initiated from left to right, the
heat from the HTF was transferred to the PCM through heat conduction
through the heat exchange tube wall and spiral fins, and a gradual
temperature disparity emerged between the left and right PCM sections.
Furthermore, after 30 min of charging, the upper PCM's temperature
surpassed that of the lower PCM, attributed to the heat transfer from the
high-temperature HTF, inducing PCM melting. The resulting liquid
PCM, with lower density, triggered natural convection, concentrating in
the upper part of the TES unit and elevating the temperature of the upper
PCM. The presence of melted liquid PCM in the upper section (Fig. 4 (d))
validated this phenomenon. With the charging progression, temperature
stratification intensified, evidenced by a gradual top-to-bottom tem­
perature distribution decrease (Fig. 4 (d)), corresponding to the PCM's
melting sequence from top to bottom. As charging concluded, PCM
uniformity was restored within the TES unit (Fig. 4 (d)), signifying
complete PCM melting. The HTF heat contributed to raising the sensible
heat of the liquid PCM, promoting a more homogeneous temperature
distribution.
6
Journal of Energy Storage 82 (2024) 110591
Additionally, a melting kinetics comparison was conducted between
high-temperature PCM and low-temperature PCM during the melting
process. Three primary factors contribute to the distinct melting kinetics
observed in high-temperature PCM and low-temperature PCM. Firstly,
variations in thermal conductivity play a crucial role. Low-temperature
PCMs, such as paraffin or fatty acids, often exhibit lower thermal con­
ductivity, whereas high-temperature PCMs, including molten salts and
metal alloys, boast higher thermal conductivity [39]. PCMs with
heightened thermal conductivity facilitate rapid heat transfer from the
HTF to the farther PCM, resulting in a more uniform PCM temperature
within the storage tank. Secondly, density differences contribute
significantly. The density contrast between the liquid and solid states of
high-temperature PCM is considerably more pronounced than that of
low-temperature PCM, intensifying natural convection during the
melting process of high-temperature PCM and expediting heat transfer
[3]. Lastly, distinctions in energy states and molecular motion are
influential. High-temperature PCM typically involves elevated energy
states and swifter molecular motion, providing an additional boost to
heat transfer. Nevertheless, it is essential to acknowledge that high-
temperature PCM is susceptible to more significant heat loss than low-
L. Lv et al.
temperature PCM, necessitating insulation measures for high-
temperature LHS systems.
3.1.2. Discharging process
Fig. 5 (a, b) depicts the temperature changes of the TES system's
inlet, outlet, and internal regions during the charging process under
standard working conditions. As shown in Fig. 5 (a), after discharging,
the HTF circulating cooling system cooled HTF into the TES at a pre­
determined low temperature to displace heat from PCM. Unlike the
charging process, in the early stages of the discharging stage, the tem­
perature of each layer of PCM rapidly decreased simultaneously until
reaching its phase transition point. Subsequently, each layer started to
solidify and released its latent heat (Fig. 5 (b)).
As illustrated in Fig. 5 (c), the initial phase of discharging exhibited a
uniformly distributed temperature of the PCM, both vertically and
horizontally, within the TES unit. As the discharging proceeded, the rate
Fig. 5. (a) Temperature variations of the inlet and outlet HTF, (b) temperature variations in each layer within the TES, (c) PCM temperature distribution inside the
TES unit, and (d) solidification behavior of the PCM during the discharging process in the standard working condition.
7
Journal of Energy Storage 82 (2024) 110591
of temperature decline in the lower PCM surpassed that of the upper
PCM, leading to a substantial temperature contrast between the upper
and lower PCM. This phenomenon arose from the relatively high initial
temperature of PCM during discharging, where PCM imparted liquid
sensible heat to the HTF, inducing a temperature differential between
the upper and lower PCM under natural convection. This was visually
depicted in Fig. 5 (d). After 20 min of discharging, the PCM temperature
in the TES unit approached the solidification temperature. At this point,
the liquid PCM near the heat exchange tube wall and spiral fins initiated
solidification, and the solid PCM layer gradually propagated outward
from the heat exchange tube when heat transfer primarily occurred
through thermal conduction. During this solidification phase, the tem­
perature distribution of PCM in the TES unit was relatively uniform. This
uniformity was attributed to the PCM near the thermocouple being in
the solid-liquid phase transition zone, where temperature variations
were insignificant. After 60 min of discharging, the temperature of the
L. Lv et al. Journal of Energy Storage 82 (2024) 110591

left PCM gradually decreased compared to the right PCM, influenced by thermal insulation measures in applying TES systems.
the left-to-right discharging progression after solidification.
Moreover, the differentiation in solidification kinetics between high-
3.2. Charging/discharging processes at different inlet temperatures
temperature PCM and low-temperature PCM can be attributed to three
key factors. Firstly, variations in thermal conductivity play a pivotal
Fig. 7 depicts the changes in the volume flow rate of HTF during the
role. High-temperature PCM, characterized by elevated thermal con­
charging and discharging processes under variable temperature condi­
ductivity, facilitates faster heat transfer to the HTF, leading to an
tions. The average volume flow rates were 14.78, 14.78, 15.28, 15.43,
accelerated heat transfer rate compared to low-temperature PCM. Sec­
14.78, and 17.73 L/min, respectively. These flow rates remained rela­
ondly, distinctions in crystal growth rate contribute significantly. High-
tively stable, with less than 5 % fluctuations throughout the cycling
temperature PCM typically exhibits a rapid crystal growth rate and
process. This stability enhanced the reliability of the experimental
generally experiences lower supercooling degrees [40], thereby expe­
results.
diting the heat release of PCM. Thirdly, variances in energy states and
The research findings indicated that the cycle time of the system was
molecular motion are influential. High-temperature PCM, associated
notably influenced by the inlet temperature of the HTF (Fig. 8), which
with higher energy states and swifter molecular motion, further en­
was attributed to the fact that an increase in inlet temperature resulted
hances heat transfer during solidification.
in a more significant temperature difference, enhancing heat transfer
between HTF and PCM within TES, and therefore accelerated the
3.1.3. Natural cooling processes
charging process. The time required to complete heat storage at inlet
Fig. 6 shows the PCM temperature distribution inside the TES unit
temperatures of 300, 290, and 280 ◦ C was found to be 5615, 6720, and
during the natural cooling process in an ambient room temperature
8445 s, respectively, for every 10 ◦ C increase in inlet temperature from
environment after completing charging, which took 460 min, and the
280 to 300 ◦ C; there was a reduction in storage time by approximately
temperature of the PCM inside the TES was reduced from 275 to 110 ◦ C.
25.7 % and 16.4 %, respectively. This decrease may be due to higher
During the natural cooling process, the PCM inside the TES system was
temperatures leading to increased heat loss, thereby weakening the gain
significantly influenced by natural convection. Additionally, it is
in temperature for heat transfer. When initiating the discharging process
observed that the TES shell and the visualization glass in the middle of
from higher base temperatures, reducing the inlet temperature of the
the TES contribute to lower temperatures and higher heat loss in these
HTF had a more significant impact on shortening the discharging time.
regions due to unavoidable heat dissipation. This affected the experi­
At inlet temperatures of 170, 160, and 150 ◦ C, the times required to
mental system's thermal performance and reflected the importance of
complete the discharging processes were 5100, 3970, and 3550 s,

Fig. 6. PCM temperature distribution inside the TES unit during the natural cooling process.

8
L. Lv et al. Journal of Energy Storage 82 (2024) 110591

Fig. 7. Volume flow rate of HTF at different charging/discharging temperatures during (a) charging process and (b) discharging process.

Fig. 8. (a) Charging time and (b) discharging time at different charging/discharging temperatures.

respectively. Reducing the inlet temperature by 10 ◦ C from 170 ◦ C
shortened discharging time by 22.2 %, but this effect diminished as the
inlet temperature decreased.
Fig. 9 depicts the temperature variations of the HTF under variable-
temperature conditions. All curves exhibited a consistent pattern,
characterized by a rapid increase in inlet temperature, a gradual rise in
outlet temperature, and a diminishing temperature difference between
the inlet and outlet over time. Notably, when the charging temperature
was set at 280 ◦ C, and the discharging temperature was set at 170 ◦ C, the
outlet temperature of the HTF demonstrated a relatively smooth change
after an initial rapid increase. This configuration enabled a prolonged
period of stable heat output.
Fig. 10 illustrates the PCM temperature distribution inside the TES
unit for the charging/discharging processes of Cases II and III. At the
initial stage of charging, under identical initial conditions, the temper­
ature distributions of Cases I, II, and III, with charging temperatures of
300, 290, and 280 ◦ C, respectively, are consistent. As charging pro­
ceeded, the temperature increase rate in Case I, with the highest
charging temperature, was notably faster, followed by Cases II and III.
This phenomenon was attributed to the higher charging temperature in

Fig. 9. Temperature variations of the inlet and outlet HTF at different charging/discharging temperatures during (a) the charging process and (b) the discharg­
ing process.

9
L. Lv et al.
Fig. 10. PCM temperature distribution inside the TES unit for (a) the charging process of Case II, (b) the discharging process of Case II, (c) the charging process of
Case III, and (d) the discharging process of Case III.
Case I, resulting in a stronger heat transfer driving force and an
increased heat transfer rate, leading to a faster rise in PCM temperature.
At the conclusion of charging, the temperature in Case I surpassed that
of the other two cases with the highest charging temperature. During the
discharging process, after 10 min, the temperature in Case I was
significantly higher, followed by Cases II and III. This difference arose
from the higher initial temperature and a higher discharging tempera­
ture in Case I, resulting in the release of liquid sensible heat taking
longer. Subsequently, the temperature distribution within the TES unit
became uniform, indicating PCM entering the liquid-solid phase tran­
sition zone. The time for the temperature distribution in Cases I, II, and
III to become uneven again, representing the solid-state sensible heat
zone of PCM, was approximately 50, 40, and 40 min, respectively.
These findings suggest that the inlet temperature had a more sig­
nificant impact on the charging process than the discharging process.
This was attributed to natural convection dominating heat transfer
during charging, with higher temperatures initiating earlier natural
convection and a stronger heat transfer driving force, significantly
expediting heat transfer. As PCM near the pipe wall thickened during the
discharging process, thermal conduction became the dominant heat
transfer mode, and the higher discharging temperature's advantage
became less prominent due to increased heat transfer resistance.
Moreover, the above research results point out that the selection of a
higher charging temperature and lower discharging temperature can
achieve a rapid response of the system, which is suitable for the appli­
cation in the field of mobile heat storage, etc., while lower charging
temperature and high discharging temperature can bring a long time
and stable temperature output, which is suitable for new energy peaking
and other occasions. The selection of an appropriate inlet temperature
should be based on specific usage scenarios.
10
Journal of Energy Storage 82 (2024) 110591
3.3. Charging/discharging processes at different inlet flow rates
Fig. 11 illustrates the cycle duration of the LHS system at identical
inlet temperatures but with varying HTF flow rates. The findings reveal
that increasing the HTF flow rate enhanced the heat transfer, signifi­
cantly reducing the system's cycle time, particularly during the charging
process. For instance, under 5 L/min HTF flow rate conditions, the
charging and discharging processes took 7910 and 6800 s, respectively.
However, by increasing the HTF flow rate to 25 L/min, the charging
time was reduced by 54 %, and the discharging time was reduced by
44.6 %. Consequently, the entire cycle can be completed in just 7410 s.
Fig. 12 presents the inlet and outlet temperatures, as well as the
temperature differences, of the system under different flow rates. It is
evident that while the change in the inlet temperature curve remained
relatively consistent for systems operating at the same inlet tempera­
tures, there are notable variations in the outlet temperature curves.
Under low-flow-rate conditions, a more significant temperature differ­
ence between the inlet and outlet of the system was observed. This
disparity can be attributed to the prolonged presence of HTF in the in­
ternal pipelines of the TES system during low-flow-rate conditions. At
this stage, the HTF had more opportunities for heat exchange with PCM
inside TES, resulting in a closer correlation between system temperature
and internal TES temperature (as depicted in Fig. 12).
Fig. 13 exhibited the PCM temperature distribution inside the TES
unit for the charging/discharging processes of Cases IV and V. During
the charging process, Case IV, characterized by a higher charging flow
rate, exhibited a significantly faster temperature increase rate, followed
by Cases I and V. This phenomenon was attributed to the larger charging
flow rate reducing thermal resistance on the heat exchange tube side.
Simultaneously, the average charging temperature at a higher flow rate
was higher than that at a smaller flow rate (Fig. 12 (a)), thereby
L. Lv et al. Journal of Energy Storage 82 (2024) 110591

Fig. 11. (a) Charging time and (b) discharging time at different HTF flow rates.

Fig. 12. Temperature variations of the inlet and outlet HTF at different HTF flow rates during (a) the charging process and (b) the discharging process; temperature
difference between inlet and outlet HTF temperatures during (c) the charging process and (d) the discharging process.

increasing the heat transfer driving force and accelerating heat transfer
while minimizing resistance [41]. In the discharging process, the times
for Cases IV, I, and V to enter the liquid-solid phase transition zone were
approximately 10, 20, and 20 min, respectively. Similar to the obser­
vations in the charging/discharging processes at different temperatures,
the impact of the charging flow rate on the charging process appeared to
be greater than the discharging process. The detailed reasons for this
phenomenon have been described in Section 3.2 and will not be further
elaborated here.
3.4. Thermal performance of LHS system
An energy analysis of the system was performed, including the sys­
tem power and the input and output energy during the charging and
discharging processes, to assess this LHS system's thermal characteristics
and investigate the impact of the HTF inlet temperature on it.
The instantaneous power of the system is calculated from the tem­
perature difference of the HTF and its volume flow rate, as shown in Eq.
(1) [19]:
P = ṁcp,HTF |(Tin − Tout )| (1)
where ṁ and cp,HTF are the mass flow rate and specific heat of HTF (cp,
HTF = 1.536 kJ/(kg⋅K)). Tin and Tout represent the inlet and outlet
temperatures of the HTF.
The cumulative energy is equal to the product of instantaneous
power and time, as shown in Eq. (2) [42]:

11
L. Lv et al. Journal of Energy Storage 82 (2024) 110591

Fig. 13. PCM temperature distribution inside the TES unit for (a) the charging process of Case IV, (b) the discharging process of Case IV, (c) the charging process of
Case V, and (d) the discharging process of Case V.

∫ t
The uncertainty associated with the parameters discussed in this
EHTF = p⋅dt (2)
0
article, namely temperature and volume flow rate, can be evaluated
using Kline-McClintock's method [45]. This method allows for calcu­
The efficiency of the system is calculated from the actual stored and
lating parameter uncertainty (ΔW) based on the uncertainties of the
released energy of the PCM and the cumulative energy of the HTF, as
independent variables y1, y2, y3, …, yn. The relationship between ΔW
shown in Eqs. (3) and (4) [41,43]:
and the uncertainties Δy1, Δy2, Δy3, …, and Δyn of these variables can be
⃒ ⃒
EPCM = λPCM ⋅mPCM + cp,PCM ⋅⃒Tafter − Tbefore ⃒⋅m (3) determined using the following equation when considering independent
variables [42]:
EPCM √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
ηTES = (4) [
∂W
]2 [
∂W
]2 [
∂W
]2 [
∂W
]2
EHTF ΔW = Δy1 + Δy2 + Δy3 + … + Δyn (6)
∂y1 ∂y2 ∂y3 ∂yn
where EPCM represents the actual stored and released energy of PCM,
which is equal to the sum of latent heat and sensible heat of PCM. λPCM The following equation can calculate the uncertainty of power,
represents the melting heat of PCM (λPCM = 117 kJ/kg), while mPCM and accumulative energy, and cycle efficiency.

√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
ΔW(P) = cp,HTF ((Tin − Tout ) × ΔW(ṁ) )2 + (ṁ × ΔW(Tin ) )2 + ( − ṁ × ΔW(Tout ) )2 (7)

√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
ΔW(E) = cp,HTF × t × ((Tin − Tout ) × ΔW(ṁ) )2 + (ṁ × ΔW(Tin ) )2 + ( − ṁ × ΔW(Tout ) )2 (8)

cp, PCM are the mass and specific heat of the PCM, respectively. Tafter and
Tbefore are the temperatures of the TES unit after and before charging √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
( )2 ( )2
1 EPCM
(discharging). ΔW(ηTES ) = × ΔW(EPCM ) + − 2 × ΔW(EHTF ) (9)
EHTF EHTF
The system efficiency can be obtained from Eq. (5) [44]:
EHTF,out
ηLHS = (5)
EHTF,in

12
L. Lv et al.
Fig. 14. Instantaneous power and cumulative energy of the LHS system at different charging/discharging temperatures: (a) charging power, (b) heat storage energy,
(c) discharging power, and (d) heat release energy.
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
√( ) (
√ ( ) 2
ΔW(ηLHS ) = √ 1
× ΔW EHTF,out + −
EHTF,in
3.4.1. Thermal performance of the system at different inlet temperatures
Under the charging temperatures of 300, 290, and 280 ◦ C, the LHS
system exhibited a rapid initial increase in instantaneous power at the
beginning of the charging process, reaching 30.3, 25.6, and 22.6 kW,
respectively (as shown in Fig. 14 (a)). Subsequently, as the temperature
difference between the inlet and outlet decreased, the system's instan­
taneous power gradually decreased until the end of charging. The
average power during the charging process demonstrated an increase
from 10.00 ± 0.69 kW to 13.30 ± 1.07 kW and further to 15.34 ± 1.29
kW, corresponding to improvements of approximately 33 % and 53.4 %,
respectively (as depicted in Fig. 14 (b)). Moreover, the cumulative
stored energy amounted to approximately 84.00 ± 5.87, 87.75 ± 7.23,
and 87.41 ± 7.28 MJ for each condition.
Similarly, during discharging processes, there was an initial rapid
increase in instantaneous power (reaching around 20–25 kW), followed
by a gradual decrease (as depicted in Fig. 14 (c)). Unlike the charging
process, temperature had less influence on the system's instantaneous
power during discharging processes, where all three power curves
overlap closely with each other.
By reducing the discharging temperature from 170 to 160 and150 ◦ C
Journal of Energy Storage 82 (2024) 110591
)2 respectively, there was an improvement in average power from 9.87 ±
( )
EHTF,out
× ΔW EHTF,in 0.75 kW to13.96 ± 0.95 kW and 13.96 ± 1.17 kW, respectively, rep­
E2HTF,in resenting enhancements of approximately 33.9 % and 41.4 % (as shown
(10) in Fig. 14 (c)). The cumulative released energy amounted to approxi­
mately 50.25 ± 3.87, 51.55 ± 3.81, and 50.32 ± 4.18 MJ for each
condition (as depicted in Fig. 14 (d)).
3.4.2. Thermal performance of the system at different inlet flow rates
Fig. 15 illustrates the variations in system power, as well as the
accumulated storage and release energy under different flow rate con­
ditions. Unlike the instantaneous power curve observed under variable
temperature conditions, the curves depicting the changes in instanta­
neous power exhibited variability with different HTF flow rates. This
phenomenon can be attributed to an increased convective heat transfer
coefficient within the tube when the HTF flow rate was higher. As a
result, there was a reduction in thermal resistance between the HTF and
the PCM, leading to a more extensive initial stage of power output
during the discharging process. Subsequently, there was a rapid
decrease in temperature difference between the inlet and outlet,
affecting the overall behavior of instantaneous power. As the tempera­
ture difference between the inlet and outlet decreased rapidly, the sys­
tem's instantaneous power also decreased at a faster change rate (Fig. 15
(a)); in the whole cycle, the instantaneous power of the system under the
low-flow condition could be maintained in a small fluctuating range
(5–20 kW), which was conducive to achieving stable operation of the
13
L. Lv et al. Journal of Energy Storage 82 (2024) 110591

Fig. 15. Instantaneous power and cumulative energy of the LHS system at different HTF flow rates: (a) charging power, (b) heat storage energy, (c) discharging
power, and (d) heat release energy.

LHS system.
Increasing HTF inlet flow rate from 5 to 15 and 25 L/min at a
charging temperature of 300 ◦ C increased average system power from
10.65 ± 1 to 15.34 ± 1.29 and 23.82 ± 1.91 kW, respectively (Fig. 15
(a)), representing improvements of approximately 44 % and 123.6 %,
and the cumulative stored energy was 83.09 ± 7.9, 87.41 ± 1.91, and
85.74 ± 1.93 MJ, respectively. Increasing the HTF inlet flow rate from 5
to 15 and 25 L/min at a discharging temperature of 170 ◦ C, the average
power of the system was increased from 7.29 ± 0.59 to 9.86 ± 0.75 and
13.48 ± 0.82 kW, respectively (Fig. 15 (c)). The improvements were

Fig. 16. Charging and discharging efficiencies of the LHS system at (a) different charging/discharging temperatures and (b) different HTF flow rates.

14
L. Lv et al. Journal of Energy Storage 82 (2024) 110591

35.2 % and 84.9 %, and the cumulative stored energy was 48.14 ± 4.05, Table 4
50.32 ± 4.18 and 48.53 ± 3.08 MJ, respectively (Fig. 15 (d)). Thermal characteristics of the LHS system at different experimental conditions.
Experimental Charging Discharging Circulating
3.4.3. Charging/discharging and circulating efficiencies of the system under conditions efficiency efficiency efficiency
different operating conditions 300–170 ◦
C, 15
Case I 80 % 73 % 57.57 %
Fig. 16 shows the charging and discharging efficiencies of the system L/min
during the cycles. In the variable-temperature condition, the HTF Case 290–160 ◦
C, 15
76 % 78 % 58.74 %
injected 87.4, 87.7, and 84.0 MJ of heat into the system at 300, 290, and II L/min
Case 280–150 ◦
C, 15
280 ◦ C, respectively, of which 69.9, 66.7, and 64.7 MJ are stored as III L/min
77 % 79 % 59.82 %
latent heat and sensible heat in 260 kg of PCM inside the TES (the most Case 300–170 ◦
C, 25
79 % 72 % 56.91 %
rest of the heat was lost in the form of natural heat dissipation), the IV L/min
charging efficiencies were 80 %, 76 %, 77 %, respectively. During dis­ Case 300–170 C, 5 L/
◦
81 % 72 % 57.82 %
V min
charging processes, when the HTF was exchanged at 170, 160, and
150 ◦ C, the PCM inside the TES released a total of 68.7, 65.5, and 63.7
MJ of heat, of which the HTF brought out 50.3, 51.5, and 50.2 MJ, and
the discharging efficiencies of the system were 73 %, 78 %, and 79 %, as follows:
respectively. Besides, at 5 L/min inlet flow rate, HTF injected 83.5 MJ
heat into the system, of which 68.3 MJ heat was conserved, 48.3 MJ heat 1. Natural convection plays a crucial role in heat transfer during the
was exported in the discharging process, the charging and discharging charging process, leading to temperature stratification. Heat con­
efficiencies of the system are 81 % and 72 %, respectively, whereas, at duction results in a more uniform temperature distribution during
25 L/min inlet flow rate condition, the figures are 79 % and 72 %. the discharging process.
Fig. 17 demonstrates the circulating efficiencies under different 2. Increasing the charging temperature from 280 to 300 ◦ C can effec­
working conditions. The circulating efficiencies of Cases I, II, III, IV, and tively shorten the charging time; every 10 ◦ C increase in the inlet
V were 57.57 %, 58.74 %, 59.82 %, 56.91 %, and 57.82 %, respectively. HTF temperature shortens the storage time by 25.7 % and 16.4 %,
Affected by the heat loss brought by the natural heat dissipation, the respectively. Reducing the discharging temperature can shorten the
circulating efficiency of the system decreased with the inlet tempera­ discharging time, but the effect is not as good as the charging
ture, while under variable flow rate conditions, the small flow rate temperature.
ensured sufficient heat transfer within the TES, slightly improving the 3. Increasing the inlet HTF flow rate reduces the system cycle time,
system's circulating efficiency, but not to the same extent as the effect of particularly the charging duration. For instance, under 5 L/min HTF
temperature. Furthermore, building on our prior research, the experi­ flow rate conditions, the charging process took 7910 s, and the dis­
mental system required a total of 426 min for the natural cooling process charging process took 6800 s. However, when the HTF flow rate was
from 280 to 195 ◦ C. The estimated heat dissipation loss during the increased to 25 L/min, the entire cycle could be completed in just
charging/discharging cycle was approximately 39.32 %. Across all 7410 s.
experimental conditions, the cycle efficiency of the LHS system stood at 4. Adjusting parameters like charging and discharging temperatures or
approximately 60 %, as summarized in Table 4, aligning with the inlet HTF flow rate influences the system's average power. Higher
principle of energy conservation and reinforcing the experiment's temperatures and lower flow rates result in stable power fluctuations
reliability. during charging.
5. The system's circulating efficiency remains consistent across
different HTF inlet parameters, with values ranging from 56.91 % to
4. Conclusions
59.82 %.
6. Appropriate operating parameters depend on the application sce­
This study constructed an LHS system featuring spiral vertical finned
nario. Higher temperatures or flow rates achieve rapid energy stor­
heat exchanger tubes. Dense thermocouples and visualization windows
age, while lower temperatures ensure prolonged and stable energy
were strategically placed to understand the thermal behavior and heat
output. Lower flow rates reduce power fluctuations for system
transfer mechanism of medium-temperature PCM. The study focuses on
stability.
analyzing the impact of different operating parameters, specifically the
HTF inlet temperature and flow rate, on various aspects of the system's
thermal behavior. The critical conclusions obtained from this work are

Fig. 17. Circulating efficiencies of the LHS system at (a) different charging/discharging temperatures and (b) different HTF flow rates.

15
L. Lv et al.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Laiquan Lv: Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Project
administration. Shengyao Huang: Data curation, Formal analysis,
Investigation, Project administration, Writing – original draft. Yan
Rong: Investigation. Hao Zhou: Conceptualization, Methodology,
Validation.
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.
Data availability
Data will be made available on request.
Acknowledgments
This study was supported by the Fundamental Research Funds for the
Central Universities (2022ZFJH04).
References
[1] Mohammad Ali Bagherian, Kamyar Mehranzamir, A comprehensive review on
renewable energy integration for combined heat and power production, Energ.
Conver. Manage. 224 (2020) 113454, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
enconman.2020.113454.
[2] Aude Pommeret, Katheline Schubert, Optimal energy transition with variable and
intermittent renewable electricity generation, J. Econ. Dyn. Control. 134 (2022)
104273, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jedc.2021.104273.
[3] Mingyang Sun, Tong Liu, Haonan Sha, Mulin Li, Tianze Liu, Xinlei Wang,
Guijun Chen, Jiadian Wang, Dongyue Jiang, A review on thermal energy storage
with eutectic phase change materials: fundamentals and applications, J. Energy
Storage 68 (2023) 107713, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2023. 107713.
[4] Guruprasad Alva, Yaxue Lin, Guiyin Fang, An overview of thermal energy storage
systems, Energy 144 (2018) 341–378, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
energy.2017.12.037.
[5] Viyat Varun Upadhyay, Sandeep Singhal, A review of current developments in the
use of materials with latent heat phase changes for the storage of thermal energy,
Mater. Today Proceed. (2023), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2023.02.187.
[6] Varun Goel, Ankur Dwivedi, Rajat Kumar, Reji Kumar, A.K. Pandey, K. Chopra, V.
V. Tyagi, PCM-assisted energy storage systems for solar-thermal applications:
Review of the associated problems and their mitigation strategies, J. Energy
Storage 69 (2023) 107912, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2023.107912.
[7] Santosh Kumar Singh, Sujit Kumar Verma, Rahul Kumar, Thermal performance and
behavior analysis of SiO2, Al2O3 and MgO based nano-enhanced phase-changing
materials, latent heat thermal energy storage system, J. Energy Storage 48 (2022)
103977, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2022.103977.
[8] Hao Zhou, Laiquan Lv, Yize Zhang, Mengting Ji, Kefa Cen, Preparation and
characterization of a shape-stable xylitol/expanded graphite composite phase
change material for thermal energy storage, Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 230
(2021) 111244, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solmat.2021.111244.
[9] Ahmet Sarı, Ali Karaipekli, Thermal conductivity and latent heat thermal energy
storage characteristics of paraffin/expanded graphite composite as phase change
material, Appl. Therm. Eng. 27 (2007) 1271–1277, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
applthermaleng.2006.11.004.
[10] Man Fan, Hanxiao Suo, Hua Yang, Xuemei Zhang, Xiaofei Li, Leihong Guo,
Xiangfei Kong, Experimental study on thermophysical parameters of a solar
assisted cascaded latent heat thermal energy storage (CLHTES) system, Energy 256
(2022) 124639, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2022.124639.
[11] Wenlong Cui, Yanping Yuan, Liangliang Sun, Xiaoling Cao, Xiaojiao Yang,
Experimental studies on the supercooling and melting/freezing characteristics of
nano-copper/sodium acetate trihydrate composite phase change materials, Renew.
Energy 99 (2016) 1029–1037, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene. 2016.08.001.
[12] Ankit Yadav Vikas, Sushant Samir, Melting dynamics analysis of a multi-tube latent
heat thermal energy storage system: numerical study, Appl. Therm. Eng. 214
(2022) 118803, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2022.118803.
[13] Ankit Yadav Vikas, Sushant Samir, Müslüm Arıcı, A comprehensive study on
melting enhance- ment by changing tube arrangement in a multi-tube latent heat
thermal energy storage system, J. Energy Storage 55 (2022) 105517, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.est.2022.105517.
[14] Gerard Peiró, Jaume Gasia, Laia Miró, Luisa F. Cabeza, Experimental evaluation at
pilot plant scale of multiple PCMs (cascaded) vs. single PCM configuration for
thermal energy storage, Renew. Energy 83 (2015) 729–736, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.renene.2015.05.029.
16
Journal of Energy Storage 82 (2024) 110591
[15] Radouane Elbahjaoui, Improvement of the thermal performance of a solar triple
concentric-tube thermal energy storage unit using cascaded phase change
materials, J. Energy Storage 42 (2021) 103047, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
est.2021.103047.
[16] Lanxin Chen, Aiwu Fan, Effects of shell modifications and operational parameters
on melting uniformity of a vertical multi-section shell-and-tube latent heat thermal
energy storage unit, J. Energy Storage 55 (2022) 105539, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.est.2022.105593.
[17] Hui Dai, Yuhang Wang, Nini Wang, Haotian Li, Ming Gao, Simulation study on
charging performance of the latent energy storage heat exchanger with a novel
conical inner tube, J. Energy Storage 56 (2022), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
est.2022.106006.
[18] Hui Dai, Jianguo Jiang, Wenlong Wang, Yuhang Wang, Suoying He, Ming Gao,
Comparative study on melting and solidification processes of vertical shell-and-
tube phase change heat exchanger with an improved conical inner tube, Appl.
Therm. Eng. 235 (2023), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
applthermaleng.2023.121383.
[19] Laiquan Lv, Yang Zou, Shengyao Huang, Xinyi Wang, Rongyu Shao, Xue Xue,
Yan Rong, Hao Zhou, Experimental study on a pilot-scale medium-temperature
latent heat storage system with various fins, Renew. Energy 205 (2023) 499–508,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2023.01.089.
[20] Ramin Karami, Babak Kamkari, Experimental investigation of the effect of
perforated fins on thermal performance enhancement of vertical shell and tube
latent heat energy storage systems, Energ. Conver. Manage. 210 (2020) 112679,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2020.112679.
[21] Zhan Liu, Zihui Liu, Junfei Guo, Fan Wang, Xiaohu Yang, Jinyue Yan, Innovative
ladder-shaped fin design on a latent heat storage device for waste heat recovery,
Appl. Energy 321 (2022) 119300, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
apenergy.2022.119300.
[22] Zhan Liu, Zihui Liu, Gang Liu, Xiaohu Yang, Jinyue Yan, Melting assessment on the
effect of nonuniform Y-shaped fin upon solid–liquid phase change in a thermal
storage tank, Appl. Energy 321 (2022) 119330, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
apenergy.2022.119330.
[23] Jerzy Wołoszyn, Krystian Szopa, A combined heat transfer enhancement technique
for shell-and-tube latent heat thermal energy storage, Renew. Energy 202 (2023)
1342–1356, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. renene.2022.12.010.
[24] Chunrong Zhao, Jianyong Wang, Yubiao Sun, Suoying He, Kamel Hooman, Fin
design optimi- zation to enhance PCM melting rate inside a rectangular enclosure,
Appl. Energy 321 (2022) 119368, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
apenergy.2022.119368.
[25] Yongshi Feng, Wu Xin, Cai Liang, Zhongping Sun, A convenient method for the
accurate calculation of fin efficiency of H-type fins based on linear nomograms and
fitting formulae, Energies 15 (2022) 456, https://doi.org/10.3390/en15020456.
[26] Zhen Qin, Zheng Hua Low, Chenzhen Ji, Fei Duan, Efficacy of angled metallic fins
for enhancing phase change material melting, Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transfer
132 (2022) 105921, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.icheatmasstransfer.2022.105921.
[27] Abdullah Bahlekeh, Hayder I. Mohammed, Waleed Khalid Al-Azzawi,
Anmar Dulaimi, Hasan Sh. Majdi, Pouyan Talebizadehsardari, Jasim M. Mahdi,
CFD analysis on optimizing the annular fin parameters toward an improved storage
response in a triple-tube containment system, Energy Sci. Eng. 10 (2022)
4814–4839, https://doi.org/10.1002/ese3.1310.
[28] Saeed Tiari, Addison Hockins, Kyle Shank, Experimental study of a latent heat
thermal energy storage system assisted by varying annular fins, J. Energy Storage
55 (2022) 105603, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2022.105603.
[29] Somayeh Davoodabadi Farahani, Amir Davoodabadi Farahani,
Fatemeh Tayebzadeh, Hakan F. Öztop, The effect of novel fin shapes and non-
uniform magnetic field on the nanoparticles embedded PCM melting in a tube,
Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials 562 (2022) 169826, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jmmm.2022.169826.
[30] I. Sarani, S. Payan, S.A. Nada, A. Payan, Numerical investigation of an innovative
discontinuous distribution of fins for solidification rate enhancement in PCM with
and without nanoparticles, Appl. Therm. Eng. 176 (2020) 115017, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2020.115017.
[31] Ruihuan Ge, Qi Li, Chuan Li, Qing Liu, Evaluation of different melting performance
enhancement structures in a shell-and-tube latent heat thermal energy storage
system, Renew. Energy 187 (2022) 829–843, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
renene.2022.01.097.
[32] Qu Xiaohang, Shan Jiang, Xiaoni Qi, Experimental investigation on performance
improvement of latent heat storage capsule by oscillating movement, Appl. Energy
316 (2022) 119130, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2022.119130.
[33] Hamed Zahraei Ramazani, Omid Mohammadi, Iman Rahgozar, Mohammad
Behshad Shafii, Mohammad Hossein Ahmadi, Super-fast discharge of phase change
materials by using an intermediate boiling fluid, Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transfer
115 (2020) 104597, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.icheatmasstransfer.2020.104597.
[34] Robynne E. Murray, Dominic Groulx, Experimental study of the phase change and
energy characteristics inside a cylindrical latent heat energy storage system: part 1
consecutive charging and discharging, Renew. Energy 62 (2014) 571–581, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2013.08.007.
[35] Yu-Bing Tao, Ming-Jia Li, Ya-Ling He, Wen-Quan Tao, Effects of parameters on
performance of high temperature molten salt latent heat storage unit, Appl. Therm.
Eng. 72 (2014) 48–55, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2014.01.038.
[36] Karthik Panchabikesan, Muthusamy V. Swami, Velraj Ramalingam,
Fariborz Haghighat, Influence of PCM thermal conductivity and HTF velocity
during solidification of PCM through the free cooling concept – a parametric study,
J. Energy Storage 21 (2019) 48–57, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2018.11. 005.
L. Lv et al.
[37] Zakir Khan, Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan, An experimental investigation of discharge/
solidification cycle of paraffin in novel shell and tube with longitudinal fins based
latent heat storage system, Energ. Conver. Manage. 154 (2017) 157–167, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2017.10.051.
[38] Laiquan Lv, Shengyao Huang, Yang Zou, Xinyi Wang, Hao Zhou, Thermal
performance investiga- tion of a novel medium-temperature pilot-scale latent heat
storage system at different charging and discharging temperatures, J. Clean. Prod.
418 (2023), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.138 130.
[39] Zubair Ahmad Qureshi, Hafiz Muhammad Ali, Shahab Khushnood, Recent
advances on thermal conductivity enhancement of phase change materials for
energy storage system: a review, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 127 (2018) 838–856,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2018.08.049.
[40] I. Shamseddine, F. Pennec, P. Biwole, F. Fardoun, Supercooling of phase change
materials: a review, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 158 (2022), https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.rser.2022.112172.
[41] Laiquan Lv, Shengyao Huang, Yang Zou, Xinyi Wang, Hao Zhou, Heat transfer and
thermal resistance analysis under various heat transfer fluid flow rates based on a
17
Journal of Energy Storage 82 (2024) 110591
medium-temperature pilot-scale latent heat storage system, Int. J. Heat Mass
Transf. 220 (2024), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2023.124896.
[42] Fan He, Renfei Bo, Hu Chenxi, Xi Meng, Weijun Gao, Employing spiral fins to
improve the thermal performance of phase-change materials in shell-tube latent
heat storage units, Renew. Energy 203 (2023) 518–528, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
renene.2022.12.091.
[43] Laiquan Lv, Shengyao Huang, Hao Zhou, Heat transfer and thermal performance
investigation on a visualized latent heat storage system in pilot-scale: scalable
medium-temperature thermal energy storage system, J. Clean. Prod. 426 (2023),
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.139141.
[44] Fan He, Baowen Yan, Junlong Zou, Hu Chenxi, Xi Meng, Weijun Gao, Experimental
evaluation of the effect of perforated spiral fins on the thermal performance of
latent heat storage units, J. Energy Storage 58 (2023) 106359, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.est.2022.106359.
[45] S.J. Kline, F.A. Mcclintock, Describing Uncertainties in Single-Sample Experiments,
Mechanical engineering (New York, N.Y.: 1919) 75, 1953.