Numerical Study of a Latent Heat Storage System’s Performance as a Function of the Phase Change Material’s Thermal Conductivity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The thermal conductivities of most commonly used phase change materials (PCMs) are typically fairly low (in the range of 0.2 to 0.4 W/m·K) and are an important consideration when designing latent heat energy storage systems (LHESSs). Because of that, material scientists have been asking the following question: “by how much does the thermal conductivity of a PCM needs to be increased to positively impact the design and performance of a LHESS?” The answer to this question is not straightforward as the performance of a LHESS depends on the PCM’s thermal conductivity, other PCM thermophysical properties, the type of heat exchange system geometry used, the mode of operation, and the targeted power/energy storage of the LHESS. This paper presents work related to this question through a numerical study based on a simplified 2D model of an experimental setup studied previously in the authors’ laboratory. A model created in COMSOL Multiphysics, based on conduction and accounting for the solid-liquid phase change process, was initially validated against experimental results and then used to study the impact of the PCM’s thermal conductivity (dodecanoic acid) on the discharging power of the LHESS. The results show that even increasing the thermal conductivity of the PCM by a factor of 50 only leads to a maximum instantaneous power increase by a factor of 2 or 3 depending on the LHESS configurations.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".