Analytical Modeling of Metal Foam Composite Phase Change Materials (PCM) in Thermal Energy Storage Using Asymptotic Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The use of phase change materials (PCMs) for thermal energy storage can release or absorb a significant amount of latent heat during the freezing or melting process, offering a higher energy storage density. One of the main drawbacks of PCMs is their low thermal conductivity, resulting in poor thermal performance. Recent research has attempted to enhance heat transfer and increase the thermal conductivity of PCMs, including the use of metal foams. However, modeling the metal foam composite PCM using conventional methods is computationally expensive. This paper proposes an asymptotic solution for a Stefan-like problem subject to a convective boundary for outward solidification in a hollow cylinder, capable of predicting the freeze-melt cycle of the metal foam composite PCM. Specifically, three temporal regimes and four spatial layers are considered in the asymptotic analysis for each phase change process. The thermal conductivity is calculated by a theoretical three-dimensional tetrakaidecahedron model, while other thermophysical properties are obtained using the method of volume averaging. The results are verified with numerical data and validated against experimental data in the literature. The presented analytical modeling framework could have the potential to be applied to other types of composite PCMs with considerably lower computational costs compared with conventional methods.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".