Energy 183 (2019) 428e436

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/energy

Development of a math module of shell and tube phase-change

energy storage system used in TRNSYS
Guohui Feng, Ming Liu, Kailiang Huang*, Xiaoqian Qiang, Qunpeng Chang
Department of Thermal Engineering, Shenyang Jianzhu University, Liaoning, 110168, China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Due to the lack of phase-change energy storage modules in the TRNSYS software, this paper applies the
Received 18 October 2018 numerical simulation method to develop a TRNSYS module. Research has been conducted on the char-
Received in revised form acteristics of the shell-and-tube phase-change energy storage system in order to provide a reasonable
5 March 2019
basis for its application in practical engineering. According to the principles of energy conservation, a
Accepted 9 June 2019
numerical model has been proposed to calculate the temperature field and fluid temperature field of the
Available online 17 June 2019
phase-change unit, and a mathematical model is applied to guide the editing of the TRNSYS module. A
Fluent model was established to compare the TRNSYS simulation results and verify the physical validity
Keywords:
Phase-change energy storage
of the module. In terms of the thermal outlet temperature of the HTF, the maximum relative error be-
Shell and tube tween the two in the melting phase is noted to be 1.17%, and the maximum relative error at the solid-
Numerical simulation ification stage is 1.83%.Different flow parameters of the system have been studied. The results of the
TRNSYS module development study indicate that differences in inlet temperatures have a greater influence on the average temperature
and outlet temperature of the PCM, whereas differing inlet flows have a negligible influence on the
phase-change unit.
© 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
The world-wide energy crisis has become increasingly severe;
thus, new technologies should be utilized to maintain the status
quo and reuse waste energy in industrial applications [1,2]. If we
don't make full use of existing energy, the energy of the earth will
get exhausted one day. Due to the current high energy consumption
rate, improving the efficiency and cost effectiveness of thermal
energy storage has been a wide concern for researchers [3]. At
present, there are three main types of heat storage methods
available: sensible, latent, and thermalechemical heat storage.
Among these methods, latent heat thermal storage (LHTS)
employing PCM is the most preferred due to its high energy storage
density and small temperature changes [4e9]. Therefore, the use of
PCM in thermal storage units not only reduces the thermal storage
volume but also stores and releases heat at an almost constant
temperature, thereby overcoming the disadvantages presented by
traditional thermal storage tanks [10]. The melting and solidifica-
tion of PCM have great significance in engineering applications. In
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: huangkailiang_v@163.com (K. Huang).
recent years, through solidification (or melting), latent heat storage
has been widely achieved in the food processing systems, metal
castings, environmental engineering, solar energy, and heat pump
air conditioning systems. With the development of PCM, the ability
to absorb heat has become greater [11].
At present, there are many different types of PCM energy storage
units in practical applications. For the shell and tube type, the PCM
occupies the space between the tube and the shell. Heat is con-
ducted through the HTF in a single tube. The shell and tube type
unit is a more attractive option in energy storage applications.
Many papers have been published on heat transfer in dual
concentric tubes or shell and tube heat exchangers with PCM for
thermal storage system [12e24]. Among them, Zivkovic B [18]
numerically examined the melting time of PCM in rectangular and
cylindrical memory cells possessing the same heat transfer area
and the same volume in two memory cells. Liu [19] analyzed the
effects of medium and hot fluid inlet conditions on the thermal
properties of phase-change energy storage devices applying nu-
merical methods. Ismail KAR [14] performed a numerical analysis
of the solidification process of shell and tube phase-change energy
storage systems. Due to the mobility of the solidification interface,
these types of problems are essentially non-linear. A numerical
method must be adopted to obtain a sufficiently accurate solution

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2019.06.078
0360-5442/© 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 G. Feng et al. / Energy 183 (2019) 428e436 429

for heat transfer. The commonly used methods to solve the phase- (2) The outer wall of the phase-change energy storage unit is
change problem are enthalpy methods and temperature-based adiabatic.
equivalent heat capacity methods [12e15]. However, these (3) The temperature of the PCM is uniformly distributed initially.
models are too complicated and require several calculations. Zhu (4) The flow of the HTF is fully developed and turbulent.
Yingqiu proposed an easier model called alternative iteration be- (5) The heat transfer effect of the HTF and PCM in the axial di-
tween thermal resistance and temperature model [17]. rection are neglected.
The phase-change energy storage unit can greatly improve the (6) The thermo-physical parameters of the PCM and HTF do not
efficiency of thermal energy storage. At the same time, in order to change with temperature.
understand the heat transfer of phase-change energy storage units
as a guide for practical applications, many scholars have conducted Assumption (1) is widely discussed in the literature. Since the
numerical analyses and established mathematical models, pro- tube length is very large compared to the diameter, previous
posing different methods to solve the phase-change problem. studies have evidenced that it has little effect on the results [15].
However, due to the complicated phase transition process, a lot of Assumptions (2) and (3) are necessary as an initial condition for the
calculations must be done. Furthermore, for changes in the external numerical analysis. Turbulence can enhance the effect of heat
parameters, mathematical models will also have difficulties in transfer, heat transfer effect of the HTF and PCM in the axial di-
solving the problem. Therefore, it is necessary to make a module rection has less effect on the overall heat transfer process. As-
that can satisfy the transient simulation. A software called TRNSYS sumptions (4), (5), and (6) are reasonable.
can solve this problem. TRNSYS stands for Transient System According to the energy equation, the heat transfer process
Simulation Program. Its greatest feature is the modular analysis. between the HTF and the PCM can be defined through the following
Modular analysis means that all transmission systems comprise equation [14], where the average phase transition temperature of
several small systems, and each module implements a specific the PCM is Tm.
function [18]. So far, the TRNSYS modules for phase-change energy
vTf ðx; tÞ h i
storage are not yet mature enough.
Cpf mf ¼ hf pDi Tt ðx; tÞ  Tf ðx; tÞ (1)
This paper mainly concerns the numerical analysis and simu- vx
lation of the shell and tube phase-change energy storage system.
HTF is generated through forced convection. The PCM lies in the Tf ðx; tÞ  Tt ðx; tÞ Rf
shell surrounding the heat exchange fluidecarrying tube. A math- ¼ (2)
Tf ðx; tÞ  Tp ðx; tÞ Rf þ Rt þ Rp ðx; tÞ
ematical model was formulated to solve the issues with the phase-
change energy storage unit. For the complexity of the phase-change For the melting process, when Tp<Tm,
energy storage process, a method of iteratively solving the nu- h i   vT ðx; tÞ
p
merical model was proposed in order to modify a phase-change hf pDi Tf ðx; tÞ  Tt ðx; tÞ ¼ rp:s Cpp:s pr 2s  pr 2o (3)
module in TRNSYS. A Fluent model was created to be compared vt
with the TRNSYS simulation results, thereby verifying the accuracy
when Tp ¼ Tm,
of the module in TRNSYS. In addition, the influence of different flow
parameters on the energy storage system was analyzed utilizing the h i vra ðx; tÞ
module in TRNSYS. Compared with the prior technology and hf pDi Tf ðx; tÞ  Tt ðx; tÞ ¼ 2prp:s Hra ðx; tÞ (4)
vt
simulation, TRNSYS can not only establish a separate module, but
also can use a separately established module to operate with the when ra ¼ rs or Tp>Tm,
original TRNSYS module to form a system, such as a solar phase
change energy storage system. This is of great significance in the h i   vT ðx; tÞ
p
hf pDi Tf ðx; tÞ  Tt ðx; tÞ ¼ rp:l Cpp:l pr 2s  pr 2o (5)
simulation of different systems with phase change energy storage. vt
This is of great significance for the simulation of different systems
For the solidification process, when Tp>Tm,
with phase change energy storage.
h i   vT ðx; tÞ
p
hf pDi Tf ðx; tÞ  Tt ðx; tÞ ¼ rp:l Cpp:l pr 2s  pr 2o (6)
vt
2. Development of math module and compilation
when Tp ¼ Tm,
2.1. Mathematical model
h i vra ðx; tÞ
hf pDi Tt ðx; tÞ  Tf ðx; tÞ ¼ 2prp:l Hra ðx; tÞ (7)
The numerical model is based on a phase-change unit of the vt
phase-change thermal storage system, and the shell and tube
phase-change energy storage device consists of several phase- when ra ¼ rs or Tp<Tm,
change units. The phase-change unit is a typical heat transfer h i   vT ðx; tÞ
p
module. The HTF flows through the inner tube, the phase change hf pDi Tf ðx; tÞ  Tt ðx; tÞ ¼ rp:s Cpp:s pr 2s  pr 2o (8)
material encloses the hollow cylinder, and the heat exchange pro- vt
cess is through forced convection. The shell and tube type phase- In the abovementioned process, (1) represents the fluid heat
change energy storage unit is illustrated in Fig. 1, where the transfer equation, (2) represents the relationship between tem-
length of the tube is denoted by L, and a cylinder with diameter Ds perature and thermal resistance, (3)e(5) refer to the process of
is utilized to store the PCM. The cylinder passes through a circular melting the PCM, (3) and (5) present the heat transfer equation of
tube with an inner diameter of Di and an outer diameter of Do. The PCM in the sensible heating process, and (4) represents the heat
HTF streams through the tube and exchanges heat with the PCM. To transfer equation of PCM in the endothermic melting process.
simplify the analysis, make the following assumptions: Furthermore, (6)e(8) represent the process of PCM solidification,
(6) and (8) represent the heat transfer equation of the PCM in the
(1) The physical properties of the PCM in the liquid and solid sensible heat cooling process, and (7) provides the heat exchange
phases are constant. equation of the PCM in the exothermic solidification process. The
430 G. Feng et al. / Energy 183 (2019) 428e436

Fig. 1. Shell and tube type phase change energy storage unit.

thermal resistance R is offered through Eqs. (9)e(12).

Cpf mf
Prf ¼ (17)
1 kf
Rf ¼ (9)
phf Di
Enter the initial conditions and boundary conditions for the
  equation. Then, the initial condition is as follows:
1 Do
Rt ¼ In (10)
2pkt Di rl ðx; t ¼ 0Þ ¼ r0 (18)
For the melting process, For the solidification process,
8
>   rs ðx; t ¼ 0Þ ¼ r0 (19)
>
> 1 D
>
> In Tp < Tm
>
> 2pkp:s Do The r0 position is shown in Fig. 1.For the PCM and HTF,
>
>
>
>  
< 1 Da ðx; tÞ
Rp ðx; tÞ ¼ In Tp ¼ Tm (11) Tp ðx; t ¼ 0Þ ¼ Tp:0 (20)
>
> 2pkp:l Do
>
>  
>
>
>
> 1 D Tf ðx; t ¼ 0Þ ¼ Tp:0 (21)
>
> In Tp > Tm
>
: 2pkp:l Do
Boundary conditions is as follow,

For the solidification process, Tf ðx ¼ 0; tÞ ¼ Tin ðtÞ (22)

8
>  
>
> 1 D
>
> In Tp > Tm
>
> 2pkp:l Do
>
> 2.2. The solution of the equation [14] and TRNSYS module editing
>
>  
< 1 Da ðx; tÞ
Rp ðx; tÞ ¼ In Tp ¼ Tm (12)
>
> 2pkp:s Do For the melting process, simultaneous Eqs. (1) and (2), according
>
>
>
>   to assumption (8), provides the solution to the local HTF temper-
>
> 1 D
>
> In Tp < Tm ature (23). By solving simultaneous Eqs. (2), (3) and (5), the solution
>
: 2pkp:s Do to the local PCM temperature during sensible heating (24) and (26)
can be found. Simultaneous Eqs. (2) and (4) can determine the
In order to determine the convection heat transfer coefficient hf position of the interface during the melting process (25), the liquid
of the HTF, the phase-change unit can be analyzed using the rele- rate Eq. (27), and the average temperature of the PCM (28). For the
vant criteria number: solidification process, simultaneous Eqs. (2) and (6)e(8) produces
the results given in (27)e(29), the liquid rate Eq. (30), and the
Nuf kf average temperature of the PCM (31).
hf ¼ (13)
Di "
  pDi hf
The forced turbulence heat transfer criterion correlation is Tf ðx; tÞ ¼ Tp ðx; tÞ  Tp ðx; tÞ  Tin ðtÞ  exp 
expressed by the following power function: Cpf mf ðtÞ
#
Rf
Nu ¼ CRen Prm (14)  x (23)
Rf þ Rt þ Rp:l ðx; tÞ
Nu can apply the relational formula proposed by Gurlinski,
whereby the correlation is as follows: For the melting process, when Tp<Tm,
"  2=3 # 
  Prf 0:11 ðt
d hf pDi Rf
Nuf ¼ 0:012 Re0:87
f  280 Pr0:4
f 1þ (15) Tp ðx; tÞ ¼ Tp:0 þ  
l Prw rp:s Cpp:s prs  pr0
2 2 R f þ Rt þ Rp:l ðx; tÞ
0
h i
rf vf D  Tf ðx; tÞ  Tp ðx; tÞ dt
Ref ¼ (16)
mf (24)
 G. Feng et al. / Energy 183 (2019) 428e436 431

when Tp ¼ Tm,
vffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
u ðt !
u hf pDi Rf h i
u 2
ra ðx; tÞ ¼ tr o þ   Tf ðx; tÞ  Tp dt
Hrp:s Rf þ Rt þ Rp ðx; tÞ
tm:s

(25)

when ra ¼ rs or Tp>Tm,

ðt
hf pDi Rf
Tp ðx; tÞ ¼ Tm þ  
rp:l Cpp:l prs  pr0
2 2 Rf þ R t þ Rp:s ðx; tÞ
tm:o
h i
 Tf ðx; tÞ  Tp ðx; tÞ dt
(26)

for the solidification process, when Tp>Tm,

ðt
hf pDi Rf
Tp ðx; tÞ ¼ Tp:0 þ  
rp:l Cpp:l pr2s  pr20 Rf þ Rt þ Rp:l ðx; tÞ
0
h i Fig. 2. Module edit flow chart.
 Tf ðx; tÞ  Tp ðx; tÞ dt (27)

when Tp ¼ Tm, temperature Tm.s and the phase-change end temperature Tm. o. The
vffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi solution of equations are displayed in (32)e(35). The solidification
u ðt ! equations’ adjustment methods are similar to those of the melting
u hf pDi Rf h i
u equation, which have not been repeated here.
ra ðx; tÞ ¼ tr 2o þ   Tf ðx; tÞ  Tp dt
Hrp:l Rf þ Rt þ Rp ðx; tÞ For the melting process, when Tp<Tm.s,
tm:s

(28) ðt
hf pDi Rf
Tp ðx; tÞ ¼ Tp:0 þ  
when ra ¼ rs or Tp<Tm, rp:s Cpp:s pr2s  pr20 Rf þ Rt þ Rp:l ðx; tÞ
0
h i
ðt  Tf ðx; tÞ  Tp ðx; tÞ dt
hf pDi Rf
Tp ðx; tÞ ¼ Tm þ  
rp:s Cpp:s pr2s  pr20 Rf þ Rt þ Rp:s ðx; tÞ (32)
tm:o
h i
 Tf ðx; tÞ  Tp ðx; tÞ dt when Tm.sTp<Tm.o,
vffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
(29) u tt ðm:s !
u hf pDi Rf h i
u
ra ðx;tÞ ¼ tr 2o þ   Tf ðx;tÞ  Tp dt
ðL H rp:s Rf þ Rt þ Rp ðx;tÞ
pr2a ðx; tÞ  pr20 dx tm:s
0 (33)
YðtÞ ¼ (30)
pr2s  pr2o  L
ra ðx; tÞ  ro
ð L ð rs Tp ðx; tÞ ¼  ðTm:o  Tm:s Þ (34)
rs  ro
2prTp ðx; tÞdrdx
0 r
Tp:j ðtÞ ¼  o 2 (31) when ra ¼ rs or Tp>Tm.o,
prs  pr2o  L
In the sensible heat stage of the melting process, an iterative ðm:o
tt
hf pDi Rf
solution can be discerned using (23), (24), and (26). For the latent Tp ðx; tÞ ¼ Tm:o þ  
heat stage, alternative iteration between thermal resistance and the
rp:l Cpp:l prs  pr0
2 2 Rf þ R t þ Rp:s ðx; tÞ
tm:o
temperature method must be implemented [14]. Further, it is h i
repeated iteratively using (11), (23), and (25) to obtain the phase  Tf ðx; tÞ  Tp ðx; tÞ dt
transition interface position and outflow temperature. The solidi- (35)
fication process can also be solved using similar methods.
The numerical model is used to guide the customization of the
phase-change module in TRNSYS. The specific flow chart is illus-
trated in Fig. 2. During the simulation, the temperature of the PCM 3. Validation of the module based on CFD simulation
being determined by the average temperature. However, the
average temperature of the PCM in the actual process is not a value 3.1. Fluent model establishment
but a range, leading to the module simulation result deviating from
the actual result. Therefore, it is necessary to adjust the equation to In order to test the accuracy of the numerical model and the
correct the module, using the range input as the phase-change start phase-change module in TRNSYS, a Fluent simulation was used to
432 G. Feng et al. / Energy 183 (2019) 428e436

compare the analysis of the simulation in TRNSYS. A phase change Table 1

unit was simulated using Fluent as exhibited in Fig. 3. The simu- Physical parameters of decanoic acid.

lation parameter is as follows: the tube length was 0.7 m, a cylinder Decanoic acid
with a diameter of 0.05 m was used for storing the PCM, and the average density (kg/m3) 885.8
PCM was decanoic acid. The cylinder was passed through a PET average specific heat capacity (kJ/(kg.k)) 2
tube having an inner diameter of 0.018 m and an outer diameter of average thermal conductivity (W/(m.k)) 0.2
0.02 m. The HTF in the tube was water. The physical properties of phase change latent heat (kJ/kg) 152
phase change temperature (k) 304
the PCM, water, and PET are presented in Tables 1e4.

3.2. Fluent simulation results

Table 2
Physical parameters of PET.
In this paper, the Fluent simulation validates the accuracy of the
established module. The computational domain adopts an un- PET
structured grid, and that mainly compares the two different pro- average density (kg/m3) 1400
cesses of melting and solidification. The melting process has water, average specific heat capacity (kJ/(kg.k)) 1.14
at a constant temperature of 323 K, entering from the inlet. The average thermal conductivity (W/(m.k)) 0.2

initial temperature of the PCM and the PET tube is 293 K, and the
temperature distribution is constant with a flow rate of 4.5 l/h. The
solidification process was executed at a constant temperature of Table 3
Physical parameters of 50 Cwater.
293 K. The initial temperature of the PCM and PET tube was 323 K
with a flow rate of 4.5 l/h, and the simulation time was set to 50 Cwater
50,000 s, which is 13.89 h. density (kg/m3) 998
Figs. 4 and 5 display the temperature of the HTF as well as the specific heat capacity J/(kg.k) 4178
PCM and the liquid phase ratio of the PCM respectively during the thermal Conductivity W/m.k 0.610
melting process at 1000 s, 10,000 s, 30,000 s, and 50,000 s. As dynamic viscosity coefficient mpa.s 1.005

observed from Fig. 5, for the HTF, the temperature gradually de-
creases along the axial direction. With the change in time, the
outflow temperature gradually increases, and the temperature Table 4
Physical parameters of 20 Cwater.
gradient gradually decreases, indicating that the heat exchange
amount gradually decreased. For the PCM, the temperature did not 20 Cwater
differ much in the axial direction until 10,000 s. density (kg/m3) 998
specific heat capacity J/(kg.k) 4183
3.3. Comparison of results and discussion thermal Conductivity W/m.k 0.582
dynamic viscosity coefficient mpa.s 0.5494

3.3.1. Output temperature

During the melting process, with the HFT inlet temperature of
323 K, the outlet HTF temperature at the phase-change unit is
illustrated in Fig. 6(a). The outlet temperature gradually increases
with time, and the outflow temperature changes rapidly at 0e2 h
and 8e14 h. The outflow temperature changes slowly at 2e8 h, and
the final outflow temperature tends towards 323 K. In the solidifi-
cation process, with the inlet temperature of the HTF at 293 K, the
outlet temperature of the phase-change unit is shown in Fig. 6(b).
The trend of the temperature change, further, is contrary to the
melting process, and the outlet temperature gradually decreases,
the temperature decreases quickly at 0e2 h and at 7e14 h, and
decreases slowly at 2e7 h.
According to the description presented above, it can be seen that
the change trend of outflow temperature is larger in the process of
sensible heat exchange and that the change trend in the latent heat
exchange process is smaller, because the temperature change of the
PCM is more obvious in the sensible heat process. This simulation is

Fig. 4. Phase change unit temperature cloud diagram at different times. (a) 1000s (b)
10000s (c) 30000s (d) 50000s.

in agreement with the results of that by Fluent and TRNSYS. During

the melting process, the maximum difference of the two simulation
results is 3.51 K, and the average difference is 0.84 K. The maximum
relative error is 1.17%, and the average relative error is 0.28%. The
maximum difference between the solidification process is 5.51 K,
the average difference is 0.55 K, the maximum relative error is
Fig. 3. Fluent model. 1.83%, and the average relative error is 0.18%. According to the
 G. Feng et al. / Energy 183 (2019) 428e436
Fig. 5. Phase change cell phase rate cloud diagram at different times. (a) 1000s (b)
10000s (c) 30000s (d) 50000s.
temperature curve and the Y ¼ 323 K enclosed area, the heat ex-
change between the HTF and the PCM during the melting process
are comparable. The simulated heat transfer of TRNSYS is slightly
higher than that of Fluent. In the solidification process, the area
enclosed by the temperature curve and Y ¼ 293 K can provide
comparison of the heat exchange between the HTF and the PCM,
which are almost equal.
3.3.2. Phase change material temperature
The average temperature of the PCM during the melting and
solidification processes is presented in Fig. 7(a) and (b). During the
melting process, the average temperature of the PCM is 305e310 K,
and the temperature changes slowly. When the PCM is in the
sensible heat exchange process, the temperature changes rapidly.
During the solidification process, the phase transition temperature
ranged from 303 K to 298 K.
For comparison between the Fluent and TRNSYS simulations,
during the melting process, the two simulation results show that
the maximum difference in the PCM's average temperature is
1.86 K, and the average difference is 0.93 K. The maximum relative
error is 0.62%, and the average relative error is 0.31%. With regard to
the solidification process, the maximum difference in the PCM's
average temperature is 6.05 K, and the average difference is 1.10 K.
The maximum relative error is 2.01%, and the average relative error


433
is 0.37%. For the two different simulation methods, the trend in
temperature change of the PCM remains the same, but for certain
occasions, the temperature of the PCM is slightly different, which
might have been due to the different phase transition temperature
ranges in different simulations which were utilized to deal with the
two kinds of simulations. Thus, the two liquid phase rates should be
analyzed. For the final temperature of the PCM, during the melting
process, the average temperature of the PCM simulated by TRNSYS
is slightly higher than the Fluent simulation, implying that the heat
exchange is higher when simulated by TRNSYS. For the solidifica-
tion process, the two simulation results show that the average
temperature of the PCM is nearly equal, indicating that the heat
exchange is almost equal. This is in accordance with the analysis
result of the outlet temperature.
3.3.3. Liquid phase rate
Since the average temperature of the PCM simulated by TRNSYS
and Fluent differs at certain moments, it is necessary to analyze the
liquid phase rate during the simulation. The liquid phase rates of
the melting and solidification processes are given in Fig. 8(a) and
(b). It can be noted that the liquid phase rates of the two simula-
tions are different during both melting process and solidification
process. The liquid phase rate changes from the beginning of the
simulation in Fluent, that is, the phase transition has occurred from
the beginning, which can be seen from the previous analysis.
However, for the edited TRNSYS module, we need to set the phase
transition temperature or phase transition temperature range of
the module, so that it does not start the phase change from the
beginning of the simulation, rather the phase changes after
reaching the phase change range, which can cause certain de-
viations. The entire phase change simulated by Fluent is relatively
delayed, because certain “dead zones” may appear during the phase
transition. This is unpredictable in the numerical analysis and thus
shows bias. However, the deviation of the liquid phase rate's in-
fluence on the outlet temperature and the average temperature of
the PCM is acceptable for the module.
4. Parameter study based on the TRNSYS module
After verifying the TRNSYS module with the Fluent simulation,
the results are observed to be in close agreement. In the practical
application of the phase-change unit, the inlet temperature and the
inlet flow of the HTF are key factors for the study of heat transfer
between the HTF and the PCM. The analysis of their influence on
heat transfer has great significance for theoretical research as well
as practical application. In order to analyze the influence of

2XWOHW 7HPSHUDWXUH .

2XWOHW 7HPSHUDWXUH .




 


 





 
               
7LPH K 7LPH K
)OXHQW 6LPXODWLRQ 5HVXOW )OXHQW 6LPXODWLRQ 5HVXOW
7UQV\V 6LPXODWLRQ 5HVXOW 7UQV\V 6LPXODWLRQ 5HVXOW

(a) (b)
Fig. 6. Different process outlet temperature comparison in Trnsys and Fluent. (a) Melting process (b) Solidification process.
434 G. Feng et al. / Energy 183 (2019) 428e436

 

3&0 $YHUDJH 7HPSHUDWXUH .

3&0 $YHUDJH 7HPSHUDWXUH .





 


 





 
               
7LPH K 7LPH K
)OXHQW 6LPXODWLRQ 5HVXOW )OXHQW 6LPXODWLRQ 5HVXOW
7UQV\V 6LPXODWLRQ 5HVXOW 7UQV\V 6LPXODWLRQ 5HVXOW

(a) (b)
Fig. 7. Different process average temperature comparison of PCM in Trnsys and Fluent. (a) Melting process (b) Solidification process.

 

 
/LTXLG SKDVH UDWH

/LTXLG SKDVH UDWH

 

 

 

 

 
               
7LPH K 7LPH K
)OXHQW 6LPXODWLRQ 5HVXOW
7UQV\V 6LPXODWLRQ 5HVXOW
(a)
Fig. 8. Different process liquid phase rate comparison in Trnsys and Fluent. (a) Melting process (b) Solidification process.
different parameters on heat transfer conditions, a TRNSYS simu-
lation analysis was carried out on different inlet flow rates and
different fluid inlet temperatures.
4.1. Different HTF inlet temperatures
In order to study the effect of inlet temperature on the HTF and
the PCM, different inlet temperatures were taken for simulation.
During the melting process, three inlet temperatures of 313 K,
323 K, and 333 K were used for a phase-change unit with an initial
temperature of 293 K. During the solidification process, three inlet
temperatures of 278 K, 283 K, and 288 K were used for a phase-
change unit with an initial temperature of 323 K. As presented in
Fig. 9(a) and (b), with an increase in the inlet temperature of the
HTF, the outlet temperature changes rapidly and tends towards the
inlet temperature, and the heat exchange increases. The melting
time of the PCM significantly decreases, and the average temper-
ature tends towards the inlet temperature. Further, the higher the
inlet temperature is, the faster is the rate of change. When the inlet
temperature was 333 K, the PCM completely melted in 5 h.
Conversely, the PCM did not completely melt with the inlet tem-
perature of 313 K even after 14 h. A similar effect can be seen in the
solidification process in Fig. 10(a) and (b), where the solidification
time is significantly reduced for a lower inlet temperature, and the
heat exchange is greater.

)OXHQW 6LPXODWLRQ 5HVXOW
7UQV\V 6LPXODWLRQ 5HVXOW
(b)
4.2. Different HTF inlet flow rates
In order to study the effects of different inlet flow rates on the
HTF and the PCM, the melting and solidification processes were
analyzed utilizing inlet flow rates of 6.75 l/h, 4.5 l/h and 3.375 l/h.
The inlet temperature for the melting process was 323 K, the initial
temperature of the phase-change unit was 293 K, the inlet tem-
perature for the solidification process was 293 K, and the initial
temperature of the phase-change unit was 323 K. From Figs. 11 and
12, it can be noted that the inlet flow rate has little influence on the
phase-change unit. With the increase of the inlet flow rate, the
solidification and melting times are slightly reduced, but this
reduction is not significant, and the average temperature of the
PCM tends towards the inlet temperature eventually. For the outlet
temperature, due to the lesser and slower flow rate, the heat ex-
change time with the PCM is longer. Additionally, the outlet tem-
perature with a lesser flow in the melting process is lower, and the
outlet temperature with a lesser flow during solidification is higher.
5. Conclusion
This paper presents a numerical model for the analysis of heat
transfer between the HTF and the PCM in shell and tube heat ex-
changers that contain PCM. This numerical method can be applied
to simulate latent heat storage systems. Moreover, this numerical
method is used to direct the phase-change module of the TRNSYS.
In order to verify the accuracy of the phase-change module, a
Fluent numerical model was formulated to compare and analyze
 G. Feng et al. / Energy 183 (2019) 428e436 435

 

3&0 $YHUDJH 7HPSHUDWXUH .

2XWOHW 7HPSHUDWXUH .
 

 

 

 

 
               
7LPH K 7LPH K
,QOHW . ,QOHW .
,QOHW . ,QOHW .
,QOHW . ,QOHW .
(a) (b)
Fig. 9. Influence of different Inlet temperature on system in melting process. (a)HTF outlet temperature (b) PCM average temperature.

 

3&0 $YHUDJH 7HPSHUDWXUH .


2XWOHW 7HPSHUDWXUH .












 
               
7LPH K 7LPH K
,QOHW . ,QOHW .
,QOHW . ,QOHW .
,QOHW . ,QOHW .
(a) (b)
Fig. 10. Influence of different Inlet temperature on system in solidification process. (a) HTF outlet temperature (b) PCM average temperature.

 
3&0 $YHUDJH 7HPSHUDWXUH .

 
2XWOHW 7HPSHUDWXUH .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
               
7LPH K 7LPH K
9ROXPH )ORZUDWH /K 9ROXPH )ORZUDWH /K
9ROXPH )ORZUDWH /K 9ROXPH )ORZUDWH /K
9ROXPH )ORZUDWH /K 9ROXPH )ORZUDWH /K
(a) (b)

Fig. 11. Influence of different inlet flow rates on system in melting process. (a) HTF outlet temperature (b) PCM average temperature.

the simulation results. From the Fluent simulation results, it was observed in the solidification process was 2.01%, and the average
seen that the PCM begins to change phase soon after the HTF relative error was 0.37%. However, there was a slight difference in
passes, and the phase transition during the HTF entrance is quicker. the liquid phase rate. This is because phase transitions exist from
It can be noted from the comparison of the two simulation methods the beginning of the simulation by Fluent, and the module edited
that the outlet temperature and the average temperature of the by TRNSYS requires the PCM to reach the phase transition tem-
PCM are in close agreement. In terms of the HFT outlet temperature, perature before it actually starts the phase transition. A graphical
the maximum relative error in melting process was 1.17%, whereas representation of the different results of the HTF outlet tempera-
the average relative error was 0.28%. The maximum relative error in ture and time, the PCM average temperature and time, and the
the solidification process was 1.83%, and the average relative error liquid phase rate and the time has been provided and discussed.
was 0.18%. In terms of the average temperature of the PCM, the By exploring the parameters, the influence of different HTF pa-
maximum relative error in the melting process was 0.62%, and the rameters on the heat transfer of the phase-change unit was
average relative error was 0.31%. The maximum relative error analyzed. The results demonstrate that different inlet temperatures
436 G. Feng et al. / Energy 183 (2019) 428e436

 

3&0 $YHUDJH 7HPSHUDWXUH .

2XWOHW 7HPSHUDWXUH .
 

 

 

 

 
               
7LPH K 7LPH K
9ROXPH )ORZUDWH /K 9ROXPH )ORZUDWH /K
9ROXPH )ORZUDWH /K 9ROXPH )ORZUDWH /K
9ROXPH )ORZUDWH /K 9ROXPH )ORZUDWH /K
(a) (b)

Fig. 12. Influence of different inlet flow rates on system in solidification process. (a) HTF outlet temperature (b) PCM average temperature.

have a greater influence on the average temperature and outlet change storage material inside shell and tube heat exchanger. Int Commun
Heat Mass Transf 2012;39(9):1416e24.
temperature of the PCM, whereas different inlet flow rates have a
[4] Mehling H, Cabeza LF. PHASE change materials and their basic PROPERTIES
lower impact on the phase-change unit. [M]//thermal energy storage for sustainable energy consumption. Springer
Netherlands; 2007. p. 257e77.
Acknowledgement [5] Agyenim F, Hewitt N, Eames P, et al. A review of materials, heat transfer and
phase change problem formulation for latent heat thermal energy storage
systems. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2010;14(2):615e28.
This project is supported by the National Natural Science [6] Zhou D, Zhao CY, Tian Y. Review on thermal energy storage with phase change
Foundation of China (No51778376), and the Liaoning Provincial materials (PCMs) in building applications. Appl Energy 2012;92(4):593e605.
[7] Zhang Z, Zhang N, Peng J, et al. Preparation and thermal energy storage
Department of Education Key Laboratory Project (2017307002), properties of paraffin/expanded graphite composite phase change material.
and Shenyang Science and Technology Bureau(F17-52-1-00). Appl Energy 2012;91(1):426e31.
[8] Yuan Y, Zhang N, Li T, et al. Thermal performance enhancement of palmitic-
stearic acid by adding graphene nanoplatelets and expanded graphite for
Nomenclature thermal energy storage: a comparative study. Energy 2016;97:488e97.
[9] Yuan Y, Gao X, Wu H, et al. Coupled cooling method and application of latent
Cp specific heat (J/kg K) heat thermal energy storage combined with pre-cooling of envelope: method
and model development. Energy 2017;119:817e33.
m mass flow rate (kg/s) [10] Zhao J, Ji Y, Yuan Y, et al. Seven operation modes and simulation models of
T temperature (K) solar heating system with PCM storage Tank. Energies 2017;10(12):2128.
x axial distance (m) [11] Ismail KAR, Abugderah MM. Performance of a thermal storage system of the
vertical tube type. Energy Convers Manag 2000;41(11):1165e90.
h convective heat transfer coefficient (W/m2 K)
[12] Halawa E, Bruno F, Saman W. Numerical analysis of a PCM thermal storage
D diameter (m) system with varying wall temperature. Energy Convers Manag 2005;46(15):
R thermal conductive resistance (m K/W) 2592e604.
r density (kg/m3) [13] Trp A. An experimental and numerical investigation of heat transfer during
technical grade paraffin melting and solidification in a shell-and-tube latent
r location in the radial direction (m) thermal energy storage unit. Sol Energy 2005;79(6):648e60.
H latent heat (J/kg) [14] Ismail KAR, Alves CLF, Modesto MS. Numerical and experimental study on the
k thermal conductivity (W/m$K) solidification of PCM around a vertical axially finned isothermal cylinder. Appl
Therm Eng 2001;21(1):53e77.
L Length of tube (m) [15] Regin AF, Solanki SC, Saini JS. Latent heat thermal energy storage using cy-
T Time(s) lindrical capsule: numerical and experimental investigations. Renew Energy
2006;31(13):2025e41.
[16] Kibria MA, Anisur MR, Mahfuz MH, et al. Numerical and experimental
Subscripts investigation of heat transfer in a shell and tube thermal energy storage
f Heat transfer fluids system. Int Commun Heat Mass Transf 2014;53(4):71e8.
i Inside wall of tube [17] Zhu Y, Zhang Y, et al. Thermal storage and heat transfer in phase change
material outside a circular tube with axial variation of the heat transfer fluid
o Outside wall of tube temperature. J Sol Energy Eng 1999;121(3):145e9.
s Wall off shell [18] Zivkovic B, Fujii I. An analysis of isothermal phase change of phase change
t tube material within rectangular and cylindrical containers. Sol Energy 2001;70(1):
51e61.
p PCM - Phase Change Material
[19] Liu Z, Yao Y, Wu H. Numerical modeling for solideliquid phase change phe-
j Average nomena in porous media: shell-and-tube type latent heat thermal energy
a Phase transition interface storage. Appl Energy 2013;112(16):1222e32.
m.s Phase change initiation [20] Ermis K, Erek A, Dincer I. Heat transfer analysis of phase change process in a
finned-tube thermal energy storage system using artificial neural network. Int
m.o End of phase transition J Heat Mass Transf 2007;50(15):3163e75.
p.s Solid PCM [21] Zukowski M. Mathematical modeling and numerical simulation of a short
term thermal energy storage system using phase change material for heating
applications. Energy Convers Manag 2007;48(1):155e65.
References [22] Guo C, Zhang W. Numerical simulation and parametric study on new type of
high temperature latent heat thermal energy storage system. Energy Convers
[1] Arce P, Medrano M, Gil A, et al. Overview of thermal energy storage (TES) Manag 2008;49(5):919e27.
potential energy savings and climate change mitigation in Spain and Europe. [23] Guo C, Zhang W. Numerical simulation and parametric study on new type of
Appl Energy 2011;88(8):2764e74. high temperature latent heat thermal energy storage system. Energy Convers
[2] Reichl J, Kollmann A. The baseline in bottom-up energy efficiency and saving Manag 2008;49(5):919e27.
calculations e a concept for its formalisation and a discussion of relevant [24] Kayansayan N, Acar MA. Ice formation around a finned-tube heat exchanger
options. Appl Energy 2011;88(2):422e31. for cold thermal energy storage. Int J Therm Sci 2006;45(4):405e18.
[3] Hosseini MJ, Ranjbar AA, Sedighi K, et al. A combined experimental and
computational study on the melting behavior of a medium temperature phase