Solar Energy 207 (2020) 937–956

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Solar Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/solener

A review on sensible heat based packed bed solar thermal energy storage T
system for low temperature applications
⁎
Abhishek Gautam , R.P. Saini
Department of Hydro and Renewable Energy, Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee, 247667, India

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Solar thermal energy is one of the categories of renewable energy source and it is quantitative abundant and
Packed bed qualitative superior. It is capable to fulfil the global thermal energy demand and it emerges as a competitive
Storage element option with the conventional equipment’s if these systems are incorporated with storage units. The solar thermal
Stratification storage unit can also improve the equipment performance in terms of a smooth supply of energy with fluctuated
Thermal Performance
solar energy collection as solar radiation varies throughout a day. Packed bed storage system is one of the
Pressure drop
feasible techniques to store the solar thermal energy which can be assembled with various solar thermal ap-
plications of low temperature as well as high temperature. The present review covers the sensible heat based
packed bed solar thermal energy storage systems for low temperature applications. It includes a brief discussion
about packed bed, its thermodynamic background, temperature distribution within packed bed, various design
parameters affecting its performance and its analysis based on the energy as well as exergy efficiency. Various
experimental and numerical investigations for performance analysis of PBSS have also been reported. The
economic feasibility of the PBSS and comparison of sensible heat based PBSS with latent heat based PBSS has
also been discussed in detail.

1. Introduction
Energy is an essential segment for the advancement of industry,
public service and transport (Gautam et al., 2018). It is the prime mover
for the monetary benefit and advancement of every nation. Its demand
is consistently expanding because of the worldwide population growth
and rising living standards. As per a report of world energy outlook
2017, although the current rate of escalation in energy demand is quite
low as compared to the past few years, it is still expected to expand by
30% between 2017 and 2040 which is nearly equivalent to adding a
new China and India in current demand (Energy Information
Administration, 2011). In such scenario, renewable energy resources
are the assets, specially solar energy and its modernization have
chances to provide solutions of constantly increasing energy related
being faced by various countries (Rawea and Urooj, 2018).
From the last few decades, solar energy is emerging as a feasible
alternative, especially for the thermal applications. However, due to
intermittent nature of solar energy, the solar thermal systems require a
storage unit for their efficient utilization. Reduced energy cost, redis-
tributed energy, reduced initial and maintenance cost, diminished size
and most efficient usage of the equipment’s are the characteristics ex-
pected from the storage unit in order to make it a competitive approach
to its conventional counterparts (Lefebvre and Tezel, 2017). The solar
thermal energy can be store in the form of sensible heat, latent heat and
thermo-chemical energy. The scope of this review is limited to sensible
heat based TES systems for low temperature applications. Greenhouse
heating, solar drying, solar air heaters and space heating are some
applications falls under this category whose working temperature range
is up to 100 °C.
Storage tank (Brosseau et al., 2004), fluidized bed system (Almen-
dros-Ibáñez et al., 2018), packed bed storage system (PBSS) and con-
crete blocks (Girardi et al., 2017) are the sensible heat storage methods
generally integrated with low temperature solar thermal applications.
PBSS is the suitable method for TES due to its simple mechanism and
economic feasibility (Kuravi et al., 2013). The required characteristics
of an efficient PBSS for low temperature applications are given in Fig. 1.
A typical PBSS incorporate an insulated tank, storage material, a
screen whose role is to support the bed of packing elements, some
supporting arrangement for the screen, inlet and outlet ducts as shown
in Fig. 2 (Duffie and William, 2013). The insulated tank contains sto-
rage elements in the form of fixed bed and utilized as the primary heat
storage medium in which the thermal energy can be stored by raising
the temperature of the material. Thermal stratification is desirable in an
efficient PBSS, therefore the use of packing elements with having high

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: gautam0120abhishek@gmail.com (A. Gautam).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2020.07.027
Received 20 November 2018; Received in revised form 6 July 2020; Accepted 9 July 2020
0038-092X/ © 2020 International Solar Energy Society. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
A. Gautam and R.P. Saini Solar Energy 207 (2020) 937–956

Nomenclature Greek symbols

A Area γ Dimensionless pressure drop

c1 & c2 Coefficient of wall correction term β Porosity
Cp Specific heat capacity ε Void fraction
De Equivalent diameter of particle µ Coefficient of viscosity
D Bed diameter ρ Density
f Friction factor ψ Sphericity
G Mass flow rate per unit area λ Particle surface effectiveness
h Heat transfer coefficient α Thermal diffusivity of filler element
he Specific latent heat ɸ Aspect ratio
k Thermal conductivity of air η Efficiency
k1 & k2 Dimensionless constant ζ Exergy efficiency
L Height of packed bed
M Wall effect correction Subscripts
m Mass of the storage material
Nu Nusselt number cha Charging
ΔP Pressure drop dis Discharging
P Perimeter of the storage tank eff Effective
p Distance between walls of bed f Final
Q Amount of heat stored g Gas
T Temperature ini Initial
ΔT Change in temperature m Melting point
t Time max Maximum
U Superficial gas velocity opt Optimum
Uloss Overall loss coefficient p Particle or packing material
V Volumetric flow rate per unit area s Surface
w Specific weight v Volumetric

mass density is preferred. between packing element and HTF is the dominating mode of heat
In case of low temperature solar thermal applications, usually air is transfer in PBSS for low temperature applications as compared to the
used as heat transfer fluid (HTF). As shown in Fig. 2, the hot air from a other modes viz. conduction and radiation (Balakrishnan and Pei,
solar collector passes through the bed where it delivers its thermal 1979). Various studies reported on the heat transfer and pressure drop
energy to the storage material. During discharging, cold air from load is within the packed bed are discussed in Section 4.
circulated in reverse direction to receive heat from the bed. A contrast A number of reviews are reported on the PBSS, however, none of
to liquid storage tank, the charging and discharging in PBSS cannot be them were exclusive for the sensible heat based PBSS for low
done simultaneously. As the HTF makes direct contact with the heat
storage medium, a vast surface area of contact is provided for heat
transfer that serves to enhance the efficiency of the system.
The heat transfer in typical PBSS involves conduction among
packing elements, conduction between wall and packing elements,
convection among packing materials and HTF, convection among HTF
and wall surface and heat transfer due to mixing of HTF. Convection

Fig. 1. Basic characteristics of an efficient PBSS (Kuravi et al., 2013). Fig. 2. Schematic of typical sensible heat based PBSS.

938
A. Gautam and R.P. Saini
temperature solar thermal systems. Therefore, the present review
covers the sensible heat based packed bed solar thermal energy storage
systems for low temperature applications. It includes a brief discussion
about packed bed, its thermodynamic background, temperature dis-
tribution within packed bed, various design parameters affecting its
performance and its analysis based on the energy as well as exergy
efficiency. Various experimental and numerical investigations for per-
formance analysis of PBSS have also been reported. The economic
feasibility of the PBSS and comparison of sensible heat based PBSS with
latent heat based PBSS has also been discussed in detail.
2. Packed bed storage system
2.1. Thermodynamic background
The PBSSs have been used from last few decades that featuring only
sensible heat storage. The packing materials of PBSS are the materials
with high specific heat that can store the significant amount of thermal
energy by raising their temperature. Concrete. rocks, clay, pebbles and
masonry are some typical sensible heat storage materials. The amount
of sensible energy stored in the materials is influenced by mass of the
storage medium, temperature difference between initial and final state
of the material and its specific heat capacity (Hänchen et al., 2011). The
heat is transferred to and extracted from the packing materials by cir-
culating the HTF through the voids between the PBSS (Meier et al.,
1991).
2.2. Temperature distribution in PBSS
On the basis of the flow direction of HTF, the PBSSs are classified as
axial flow PBSS and radial flow PBSS (Chai et al., 2014; McTigue,
2017). Fig. 3 shows the schematic of radial flow PBSS, in which the gas
arrives through the center of the packed bed, it flows in radial direction
and exits through the outer plenum. Discrete aspects of the radial flow
packed bed have been discussed by various authors in their studies, like
flow distribution (Kareeri et al., 2006) and effective conductivity
(Fuentes et al., 1998; de Pironti, 1987). The radial dispersion of tem-
perature can be described with the help of few phenomena like edge
effect, low air flow rate, non-uniformity of packing etc. (Coutier and
Farber, 1982).
A wall of the storage tank significantly influences the thermal en-
ergy transfer under the PBSS during charging process. Therefore, at
least 2-dimensional model should be used to evaluate the energy stored
and energy delivered to obtain the accurate temperature distribution in
radial and axial direction (Cascetta et al., 2015). On the other hand, the
flow of air with high pressure resulted in a reduced radial temperature
distribution as well as slightly reduced the influence of edge effect on
the heat transfer coefficient (Liu et al., 2014).
The radial flow PBSS can achieve the same efficiency as axial flow
PBSS at higher cost. It is therefore, the radial flow requires compara-
tively large space for inner and outer plena. The cost of radial flow PBSS
could be reduced through reducing the volume of it and this area is
required to be explored. Therefore, the use of axial flow PBSS for low
temperature solar thermal systems is recommended.
2.3. Performance affecting parameters of PBSS
The performance of the PBSS is affected by various design as well as
operating parameters and the selection of each parameter depends on
the particular application for which it is designed. The discussion on the
influence of such parameters is provided in the following subsection:
2.3.1. Aspect ratio and particle diameter
The effect of equivalent diameter of particle and aspect ratio can be
investigated by keeping operating temperatures, mass flow rate and
storage volume constant. An agreement between effective heat transfer
939
Solar Energy 207 (2020) 937–956
and pressure drop in the PBSS should always be maintained which re-
sults in an optimal value of the diameter of the particle and aspect ratio
(McTigue, 2017). Decrease in particle diameter and increase aspect
ratio will always result in increased value of friction factor. As the
particle diameter and aspect ratio affects the undesirable pressure drop
and desirable heat transfer coefficient, it is recommended to select the
size of particle which results with a balance between these two per-
formance parameters (Gautam and Saini, 2020a).
2.3.2. Packing elements
The selection of storage material for PBSS is an influential judgment
(Gautam and Saini, 2020b). Few requirements like good thermal and
mechanical properties must be fulfilled by the material. The material
should have sufficient compressive strength so that it can resist the
force caused by its own weight. Apart from these qualities, the material
should be cost effective, environmental friendly, cheap and easy
availability. Few authors (Dreißigacker et al., 2013; Vargas and
McCarthy, 2002), have presented a mechanical model of the storage
elements in order to perceive their thermodynamic behavior and me-
chanical strength.
The storage material require some essential properties like melting
point should be favorable for a particular application, high thermal
conductivity, high value of specific heat capacity (Alva et al., 2018). In
spite of these essential properties, the materials should have some de-
sired properties for the efficient working of PBSS like Chemical stabi-
lity, low flammability, low super cooling, congruent melting, non-toxic,
low cost and easy availability (Alva et al., 2017). The materials which
can be used as packing materials to store the thermal energy for low
temperature solar thermal systems in PBSS are given in Table 1.
2.3.3. Storage losses
As compared to the pressure drop and convective heat transfer
losses, the storage losses have limited significance. These losses in-
corporate leakage loss and conductive loss during the storage phase. As
the equivalent diameter increases, a steady fall in conductive loss is
observed. However, in case of the large size storage element, an ex-
tensive augmentation is detected in storage losses. It is therefore, the
large size elements receive a reduction in charging period and en-
hancement in the quantity of heat stored (McTigue et al., 2018).
2.3.4. Void fraction
The void fraction is the ratio of void within the packed bed to the
total volume of the bed. It has been reported that the lower values of
void fraction results in large number of point contact between the
packing elements. Such conditions provides enhancement in heat
transfer through conduction within the packed bed and hence
Fig. 3. Schematic of radial flow of HTF in packed bed (McTigue, 2017).
A. Gautam and R.P. Saini Solar Energy 207 (2020) 937–956

Table 1 improvement in the thermal performance of the storage unit. However,

Types of materials used under various to store sensible heat in PBSSs (Alva in packed bed of low void fraction, more pumping power required for
et al., 2018; Esence et al., 2017; Singh et al., 2010). the circulation of HTF (Zhang et al., 2011). On its counterpart, the
Material Thermal conductivity (W/ Density (kg/m3) Specific heat (kJ/ packed bed of higher values of void fraction results in lesser pressure
mK) kg K) drop as well as lesser heat transfer. It is therefore, an optimum value of
void fraction should be selected that depends on the particular appli-
Alumina 11 4000 0.900
cations and the constraints related to it.
Basalt 3.2 2610–2670 1.470
Brick 0.69 at 29 °C 1698 0.840
Cast iron 29.3 7900 0.837
Ceramics 1.3 3550 0.900 2.3.5. Sphericity
Concrete 0.9–1.3 2240 1.130 Sphericity of a packing element is the ratio of the surface area of a
Granite 1.73–3.98 2640 0.820
sphere to the surface area packing element with equal volume as sphere
Hornfels 1.5 2400–2800 0.700
Limestone 1.26–1.33 2500 0.900 (Wadell, 1935). The performance of the PBSS also affected by the shape
Marble 2.07–2.94 2600 0.800 of the packing element and sphericity is the non-dimensional re-
Pure iron 73 at 20 °C 7897 0.452 presentation of it. A number of investigations were carried out to report
Quartize 2 2210–2770 0.800 the effect of various shapes of packing element on thermal and hy-
Sandstone 1.83 2200 0.710
draulic performance of the PBSS. It has been found that out of cylinder,
perforated cylinder, cylinder having internal grooves, sphere, cube,
cuboids of various sphericities, flat ellipsoid and long ellipsoid, spheres
results in better thermo-hydraulic performance (Gautam and Saini,
2020c).

Table 2
Various studies on PBSS for low temperature.
Ref. Specification Application Outcome

Fahmy and Abdel-Rehim • Standalone PV system integrated with PBSS Air and water heating • The performance of considered was found reliable, simple to
(1997) • Dm s.=D0.0235 m, L = 1.2 m, G = 0.15 and 0.3 kg/ use efficient and economic.
• Best
e
2
= 0.5 m, T = 80 °C. performance with steel and worst performance with
• The
i
considered packing elements are pebbles, rock, pebbles were achieved.
Glass, steel, porcelain.

Öztürk and Başçetinçelik • The considered PBSS was rectangular cross-section. Greenhouse heating • During charging, the energy efficiency obtained as 37.6%
(2003) • Considered packing elements were volcanic and exergy efficiency obtained 2.03%.
materials. • Out of the total energy required, about 18% was supplied
through PBSS.

Jain and Jain (2004)
• The performance of PBSS enabled SAHS for the
purpose of crop drying was analytically analysed.
Crop Drying • Due to lesser moisture content evaporation, the drying rate
was linear reduced.
• The PBSS was composed of granite grit in deep bed. • Due to presence of more moisture content, drying rate
• Four different values of bed length were considered:
0.05 m, 0.10 m, 0.15 m and 0.20 m.
increases with increase in depth of the bed.

Jain (2007) • An analytical model was reported for crop drying

having PBSS and reversed absorber plate.
Crop Drying • The thermal storage capacity of the PBSS increases with
increase in height of the bed and can be used during
• The validation of the developed model was done for unavailability of solar energy.
Delhi, India under the month of october. • The optimum height for the considered system was reported as
0.15 m.

Sethi and Sharma, (2008)
• Greenhouse heating integrated with PBSS was
reviewed and compared with other thermal energy
Greenhouse heating • Gravels within the range of 20 mm − 100 mm diameter
were recommended as packing materials covered with
storage technologies.. polythene.
• The reported heating capacity required to fulfil 20% to 70%
energy annual thermal energy demand is 157.28 kJ/°C/m . 2

Tyagi, et al. (2012) • Performance comparison was reported in terms of

exergy analysis of SAHS with and without PBSS as
Air heating
storage unit.
• SAHS without storage unit, SAHS with latent heat
storage unit and SAHS with sensible heat storage
unit were the three considered systems.
• Systems having storage unit were found better compared
system without storage unit.
• The performance of latent heat storage was found better as
compared to sensible heat storage system.
• Energy efficiency of both the systems was found very high as
compared to exergy efficiency as irreversibility was not
considered under exergy analysis.

Bouadila et al. (2014) • Thermal performance SAHS integrated with PBSS

was evaluated during night of east–west oriented
Greenhouse heating • 31% of the total energy demand in greenhouse heating was
delivered through PBSS during night time.
greenhouse for greenhouse heating.

Karthikeyan et al. (2014) • The performance of PBSS integrated to SAHS was

analytically analysed for low temperature solar air
Air heating • The convective heat transfer area, convective heat transfer
coefficient and temperature difference among packing
heater. materials and air were significantly influenced through mass
flow rate of air, its inlet temperature and equivalent
diameter of packing element.

Perpétua and Cláudio

(2018)
• Orange pulp & peel (OPP), sugarcane bagasse (SCB)
and wheat bran (WB) were used as packing elements
Bioreactors for solid
state fermentation
• Lesser values of effective thermal conductivity and
convective heat transfer coefficient of agricultural wastes
in PBSS. were the reason for working of PBSS.
• rate
D/D = 260, T = 40 °C, T = 65 °C, air flow
e a w
= 400 to 1200 L/hrs, L = 60 mm to 180 mm.

940
A. Gautam and R.P. Saini Solar Energy 207 (2020) 937–956

3. Performance evaluation of PBSSs
The performance evaluation of PBSSs can be achieved either on the
basis of principle of first law of thermodynamics or second law of
thermodynamics. The performance evaluation based on energy and
exergy analysis enables to achieve the optimized system for a particular
application.
3.1. Performance evaluation based on energy conservation
In order to obtain the energy storage performance of a PBSS, energy
efficiency is evaluated which is the ratio between energy recovered
from the storage system and the energy delivered to it (Li, 2016). The
discharge efficiency increases with increase in height of the tank be-
cause the constant supply of maximum temperature increases with
height during discharge. However, the temperature of HTF becomes
lower than the maximum level of discharge temperature due to ex-
pansion of the heat exchange zone in case of high Reynolds numbers.
Therefore, discharge efficiency decreases with increase in Reynolds
number (Yang and Garimella, 2010).
Many studies are reported using experimental as well as numerical
approach based on various design parameters, operating conditions,
different geometries and configurations of PBSSs for various applica-
tions. However, studies are still required to investigate the performance
of PBSSs by considering all the performance affecting parameters si-
multaneously. Such kind of approach can lead towards the ideal storage
system. It was also observed that in maximum studies the pump work
was not considered during the energy analysis, whose possible reason is
its low magnitude as compared to the actual energy stored, but such
small factors should also be considered in order to reach towards more
accuracy (Li, 2016).
3.2. Performance evaluation based on exergy analysis
The energy analysis does not consider the degradation of energy
during its transfer among materials and HTF throughout the process.
Therefore, it is necessary to consider the irreversibility at different areas
of PBSS in order to obtain its comprehensive analysis. Under the exergy
analysis, the temperature at which heat transfer occurs in different
processes are considered. Eventually, the performance analysis of PBSS
is found accurate and preferable with exergy analysis. It is therefore,
the exergy analysis assesses the performance of PBSS in terms of energy
balance and also provides the potential to produce the mechanical work
(Kalogirou et al., 2016).
The exergy efficiency is the ratio of total exergy recovered from the
storage unit to total exergy delivered to the storage unit. The mass flow
rate has a significant effect on the exergy efficiency of cascade PBSS of
multiple PCMs, specially for mass flow rates lower than 100 L/hour. On
increasing the mass flow rate from 50 L/hour to 250 L/hour, the exergy
efficiency was decreased by 10% (Cheng and Zhai, 2018).
The aspect ratio of storage tank and size of the packing elements
also creates impact on exergy efficiency of the PBSSs. For the storage of
long duration, the aspect ratio should be within 0.5–0.8 for the op-
timum exergy efficiency of the PBSS (Cárdenas et al., 2019). Atalay
(2019) investigated the exergy efficiency of PBSS enabled solar dryer in
which drying of orange slices were considered. The exergy efficiency
was evaluated for sunshine hours as well as off-sunshine hours and
which was within the range of 50.18–66.58% and 54.71–68.37% re-
spectively.
The value of exergy efficiency is always lesser than the energy ef-
ficiency of a system. It is therefore, the exergy efficiency includes the
destroyed and lost quantity of energy in its evaluation. As heat transfer
is a time dependent process, therefore, it is recommended to investigate
the exergy efficiency at different intervals of time (Li, 2016). It is also
recommended to include the pump work under the exergy analysis as it
is observed that maximum of reported studies have not considered it.
Hence, exergy analysis based results are found more accurate than
energy analysis as it includes the measure of irreversibility’s.
4. State-of-the-art of PBSS for low temperature applications
The PBSS can be used by integrating it with greenhouses heating for
cultivation, crop drying, space heating or cooling, solar desiccant and
also helpful for energy conservation in residential houses. Various in-
vestigations carried out on PBSS integrated with low temperature solar
thermal systems are presented in Table 2. It is necessary to study the

Fig. 4. Various thermos-hydraulic phenomenon involved under PBSS (Esence et al., 2017).

941
A. Gautam and R.P. Saini Solar Energy 207 (2020) 937–956

parameters that affects the thermo-hydraulic performance, amount of fraction was found to have the least value of friction factor. The friction
thermal energy stored under PBSS and stratification of PBSS for low factor increased with increase in roughness of the storage elements, and
temperature application. improved performance in terms of pressure drop was attained with a
packed bed having two different sizes of storage elements. The various
4.1. Thermo-hydraulic performance packing elements utilized in this study of discrete shaped are shown in
Fig. 6.
As shown in Fig. 4, there are various phenomenon involved under Singh et al. (2006) investigated the thermo-hydraulic behavior of
PBSS and a number of studies were reported on the heat transfer and five distinct shapes which are T-joint masonry tile bricks, standard
pressure drop among the PBSSs. Colburn, (1931) investigated the heat masonry tile bricks, standard masonry bricks, concrete cubes, concrete
transfer coefficient of air flowing through a packed bed tube filled with spheres used in PBSS. The sphericity of the storage elements were
granular materials, porcelain balls, pebbles and zinc balls of various conserved in the range of 0.55–1, void fraction in between 0.306 and
sizes. It was found that the heat transfer coefficient was raised by eight 0.63 and a Reynolds number varied in between 1047 and 2674. It was
times than the empty tube and the developed coefficient for it which discovered that Nusselt number for a given Reynolds number decreased
depend on mass flow rate of air and ratio of particle diameter to tube as sphericity decreased from 1 to 0.8 but, after that Nusselt number
diameter. Littman et al. (1968) generated the experimental data for increased with a further decreased in the value of sphericity. On the
heat transfer coefficient of gas particles having Reynolds number be- other end, Nusselt number decreased with an increase in the void
tween 2 and 100 in order to investigate the axial dispersion of heat from fraction for a given value of the Reynolds number. As the void fraction
gas to solid and conduction within solid in packed beds of copper, lead increased, the tortuous nature of flowing fluid through the bed get re-
and glass. duced as well as the area of contact between storage elements and HTF
Standish and Drinkwate (1970) examined the response of shape also got reduced.
particle on the performance of the packed bed column. The perfor- In case of friction factor, it decreased with when sphericity de-
mance was tested by using glass sphere, coke sphere and ceramic rings creased from 1 to 0.8 while increased when sphericity decreased from
having porosity between 0.41 and 0.59 and sphericity in between 0.53 0.8 to 0.55 for a given value of Reynolds number. Similarly, Singh et al.
and 1.0. Air and water was used one by one as HTF. The study ends up (2013) also explored the thermo-hydraulic behavior of the PBSS of
with the conclusion that the pressure drop was much affected by the large size storage elements having a low void fraction. Investigators
pore spaces and apart from the size of the storage elements, its shape used large size storage elements of five different shapes, having
also played a significant role in the performance of the packed bed sphericity are 0.55, 0.63, 0.72, 0.8 and 1 and void fraction are 0.275,
column. 0.36, 0.42 and 0.48. It was revealed that Nusselt number was the
Löf and Hawley, (1948) revealed that there is a linear relationship maximum for the spherical element (sphericity = 1) with lowest void
of heat transfer coefficient with air flow rate and size of an element fraction (0.25), while friction factor was minimized in the case of cu-
within the packed bed as heat transfer coefficient increases with an bical element having sphericity = 0.8 with lowest void fraction (0.25).
increase in air flow rate, but it decreases with increase in particle dia- Investigation concluded with a outcome that the highest thermo-hy-
meter. A correlation was also developed, which is applicable for air draulic performance was obtained for the sphere with lowest void
flow rate between 12.05 and 66.3 ft3/min/ft2 and initial temperature fraction. The schematic of experimental rig used in this investigation
from 100°F to 250°F. Ergun, (1952) analyzed the pressure drop of
flowing fluid in packed beds. As per the conclusion of the study, it is the
sum of kinetic energy loss due to friction between a flowing fluid and
solid surface and viscous energy loss which arises within the layers of
fluids. A correlation was also developed for friction factor which is the
ratio of pressure drop within the bed to the kinetic energy term of
packed bed having granular solid as storage elements.
Eisfeld and Schnitzlein (2001) reported the effect of the walls of the
container on the pressure drop of the packed bed in case of finite
packing and using the experimental values of previous studies, a cor-
relation was developed. Due to wall effect, the pressure drop increased
at low and moderate Reynolds number. Only at high Reynolds number
it decreased as shown in Fig. 5.
As per Sorour, (1988), very small size of storage elements can be the
reason for reduced storage efficiency. It is beneficial to use intermediate
particle with low Reynolds number rather than small particle at high
Reynolds number in terms of storage efficiency. Koekemoer and Luckos,
(2015) studied the influence of material and PSD on pressure drop of
PBSS by using three distinct bed particles, i.e. ash particle bed, char bed
and coal bed, and concluded that in each case, equivalent diameter had
a comparatively less effect than PSD on void fraction, as expanded PSD
results in diminished void fraction because the space between large
particles is replete with the lower particles.
Trudel and Hallett (2017) evolved a correlation and come out with a
principle to understand the pressure drop in packed bed replete with
parallelepiped. The study of Nemec and Levec (2005) was extended as
in it the effect of particle overlap and particle surface effectiveness was
investigated. The effects of roughness, size distribution, packing ar-
rangement and particle shape on pressure drop were scrutinized by
Allen et al. (2013). In the study, three diverse packing arrangements,
hexagonal closed, offset simple cubic and simple cubic of various void
fractions were utilized out of which simple cubic with 0.48 void Fig. 5. Outcome retrieved by Eisfeld and Schnitzlein, (2001).

942
A. Gautam and R.P. Saini
Fig. 6. Pictures of various packing elements (a) smooth glass spheres, (b) sand coated marbles, (c) wooden cubes, (d) wooden cylinders, (e) ellipsoids, (f) Crushed
rocks, and (g) Rounded rocks (Allen et al., 2013).
and by Singh et al. (2006) is shown in Fig. 7.
Agrawal et al. (2018) used cylinder with internal grooves as storage
elements having an aspect ratio (0.66–1.33), void fraction (0.47–0.60)
and Reynolds number (200–2050) as varying parameter. It was de-
clared that Nusselt number and friction factor both increased with in-
crease in aspect ratio from 0.66 to 1. They also reported that on in-
crease in inlet temperature of HTF, an increment in Nusselt number and
stored heat was detected with reduced charging time.
The numerical models for PBSS had been extensively reviewed by
de Gracia and Cabeza (2017). Most of the models derived by applying
energy equations to various components of PBSS and in consideration
of the assumptions that there will be no mass exchange and no heat will
be produced within the PBSS. Newton’s law was considered in order to
solve the problems related to the heat transfer between storage ele-
ments and HTF (Esence et al., 2017).
943
Solar Energy 207 (2020) 937–956
Shitzer (1983) carried out the numerical solution of the pressure
drop in PBSS of crushed quarry rocked having an equivalent diameter
between 18 mm and 44 mm and validated the solution by analytical
solution and experimental values which constitute a good agreement
with each other. However, the correlations established through the
research results in deviation with the correlations established by Ergun
(1952) and Willits and Chandra (1981) whose acknowledged justifi-
cation was different size of particles used in various studies.
Coutier and Farber (1982) developed another model to solve the
differential equations in order to draw the heat transfer process of the
PBSS which is found more accurate as it comprises the effect of the
radial dispersion of the temperature. A design procedure of four steps
was developed which incorporated the determination of rock bed vo-
lume, mass flow rate per unit cross section area, equivalent diameter,
optimal length and frontal area. Sanderson and Cunningham (1995)
A. Gautam and R.P. Saini
Fig. 7. Schematic of experimental setup used by Singh et al. (2006, 2013).
developed a model to impart a better comprehension of axial dispersion
in packed bed by the use of lumped parameter approach and Ranz model
(E, 1952).
Numerical investigation of four discrete models, i.e. Schumann’s
model, thermal diffusion model, continuous solid phase model and single
phase model of PBSS was carried out and after comparison with the work
of by Ismail and Stuginsky Jr (1999) it was revealed that that the cyclic
variation of mass flow rate affected much, however, cyclic variation in
inlet fluid temperature had a strong effect on the outcome. DEM-DLM/
FM technique of direct numerical simulation was utilized in case of
Newtonian fluid collision having sedimentation of polygonal isometric
particle by Dorai et al. (2015) in order to execute the fully resolved
simulations of flow in between the packed bed with cylindrical pallets
to attain the corollary of local microstructure on pressure drop.
Yang et al. (2010) studied the behavior of heat transfer and fluid
flow of packed bed contained ellipsoidal or non-uniform spherical
particles in which 3-D Navier-Stokes equation and RNG k-ε model were
applied in order to earn the numerical solution. CFX-10 tool was uti-
lized to solve the governing equations and discretized the convective
term in momentum equation. A coupled algorithm using finite volume
method was implemented to solve continuity and momentum equation
simultaneously. From obtained results, the conclusions were made that
random packing was recommended for high porosity cases, while
structured porosity such as FCC and BCC for low porosity cases. For
identical packing form and particle shape, the heat transfer and pres-
sure drop were more in case of non-uniform packing, while the overall
heat transfer coefficient was higher in the case of uniform packing.
Wang et al. (2018) investigated the transmission of a diffused beam
in one-dimensional packed bed with double layered, uniformly sized,
random distributed spheres. Monte-Carlo ray-tracing technique was ap-
plied for approximation of geometrical optics and found that the re-
duction in absorption coefficient reduces the transmission and re-
flectance. The study concluded with the outcome that for large
refractive index the complete ray transmitted in sphere was absorbed
and for sufficient high value of porosity, there was a rapid reduction in
the reflection.
Schulze et al. (2017) presented a particle resolved CFD-model on the
basis of study of heat transfer, mass transfer, flowing fluid and chemical
reactions. In this study, a two dimensional model is solved and vali-
dated with experimental observation where a good agreement was
obtained. Numerical simulations were carried out in various operating
conditions and obtained species mass fraction, local temperatures and
carbon mass flux were discussed in detail. A 2-D approach was also
944
Solar Energy 207 (2020) 937–956
compared with 3-D representation of packing which involved random
closed packing and simple cubic packing. It was attained that the 3-D
distributions of particles had a significant effect on heat transfer, mass
transfer and flowing fluid. The conversion process in case of 2-D was
shifted with a diameter of half particle.
Li et al. (2017) applied the large eddy simulation method to nu-
merically investigate the heat transfer and flow behavior for two ad-
jacent spheres. In this study, drag coefficient and local and mean
Nusselt numbers were evaluated at various values of gap ratio (1.25,
1.5, 2 and 3) which was the ratio of center distance between adjacent
sphere to sphere diameter. A rise in drag coefficient was observed on
decreasing the gap ratio due to setback in flow separation of the spheres
and local Nusselt number varied with the gap ratio, while mean Nusselt
number was not influenced from it. It was also observed that flow
pattern around the spheres increased the RMS velocity in y-direction, z-
direction and instantaneous cross stream velocity on decreasing the gap
ratio.
Wang et al. (2017) used grilled sphere composite structure packed
bed and obtained the heat transfer and fluid flow characteristics by
using experimental and numerical approach which were having ac-
ceptable deviation of 20%. In this study, naphthalene sublimation
technique was applied for experimentation and numerical simulation
was carried out in FLUENT 14.0 which was based on finite volume
analysis. In order to couple the pressure and velocities, SIMPLE algo-
rithm was used and for the convective terms in turbulence and mo-
mentum equations, second order upwind scheme was used. Using both
approaches, it was obtained that the grille sphere has high overall heat
transfer efficiency as random packing having a drawback of high
pressure drop and simple cubic packing provides low value of Nusselt
number.
Ranmode et al. (2019) modified the lumped capacitance method
through investigating the effective HTC using one term approximation
of exact series solution for unsteady heat conduction under solid. The
proposed method is suitable to assess the effective HTC of plate, cube,
cuboid, spheres, cylinders and even of complicated 3-D solid geome-
tries. Contestabile et al. (2019) developed a quasi-one-dimensional
model called ATHENS in which advanced wall treatment was con-
sidered to obtain fast and accurate results. The developed model con-
sists of wall behavior integrated with equations of packed bed and HTF.
It was reported the model accuracy decreases for the wall made up of
materials with large thermal conductivity and in the case when heat
capacity of wall and packing elements are in similar order.
It is found in the reported studies that the convective heat transfer
A. Gautam and R.P. Saini
among the packing elements and air is the major mode of heat transfer.
Therefore, the heat transfer under PBSS is influenced through all the
factors that affects the convective heat transfer. The increase in inlet
temperature and mass flow rate of air not only improves the heat
transfer rate under PBSS, however, the overall and process efficiencies
are also enhanced by means of it. However, circulation of air with high
velocity also results in increased pressure drop.
The void fraction is an another parameter that affects the thermo-
hydraulic performance of PBSS as it effects flow pattern and turbulence.
There is an inverse relation of void fraction with heat transfer and
pressure drop. Similarly, shape and size of the packing element also
affects the flow pattern and hence, it affects the heat transfer and
pressure drop. Bed height, physical properties of air, aspect ratio of bed
and wall effects are the other parameters that also affects the pressure
drop within packed bed. Therefore, it is recommended to select op-
timum values of these parameters to obtain maximum heat transfer
with minimum pressure loss.
4.2. Thermal energy stored
The material and size selection of storage medium are depend on
the amount of amount energy to be stored. Audi (1992) reported that
zeolite is much favorable rock for sensible heat storage in packed bed as
compared to Tarsand, limestone and Basalt. In the study, the collector
efficiency equations, heat capacities of selected rocks and system design
parameters for the storage unit were determined which were further
implemented for space heating of a house acquiring 20 m2 floor area in
Amman. It was retrieved that if a collector area of 50 m2 is used than
51% of the absolute energy is contributed by solar energy and if 100 m2
is used than the contribution of solar energy is 81%. The storage vo-
lume required for a collector area of 50 m2 was 8.9 m3 of zeolite, while
falling down to 3.5 m3 in case Tarsand.
Singh et al. (2015) examined the solar collection efficiency and heat
retrieval efficiency of a PBSS to store solar thermal energy in rocks with
the help of experimental setup whose schematic is shown in Fig. 8. The
PBSS contained 8500 kg of rocks which retained 0.47 void fraction and
50 mm equivalent diameter. The experimental data was obtained in
between 9:00 h and 17:30 h for each month of a year. Meanwhile
during charging, the bed temperature had been raised up to 49–34 °C
and it raised the temperature of flowing air in between 41.5 °C and
44 °C for 13 h of discharging after sunset, then through appropriate
Fig. 8. Schematic of experimental setup used by Singh et al. (2015).
945
Solar Energy 207 (2020) 937–956
relations, the solar collection efficiency was assessed in between 36%
and 51% and heat retrieval efficiency in between 75% and 77%.
Sagara and Nakahara (1991) established a theoretical model based
on the consideration of quadratic temperature gradient between large
size solid storage material and on the basis of the model, numerical
simulation was carried out for space heating having dynamic conditions
of Japan. At last, the study concluded with the fact that the energy
performance was identical for the small size materials and large size
material and decision of the selection should be taken based on their
economic factor. Saez and McCoy (1982) considered the axial disper-
sion and intra particle conduction to develop a model, compared it with
the existing models and validated with the experimental values of
earlier studies. The objective of the study was to acquire a worthy hour
of the day after which the storage system turns off the charging mode to
attain maximum storage of thermal energy.
This simulation was drawn under the dynamic conditions of New
Mexico state university Solar house, physical properties of air were
considered at 25 °C and properties of rocks were considered for study of
Clark (1979). After consideration of appropriate assumptions, the heat
balance was applied for solar collectors and Hermite polynomial ex-
pansion was used in order to attain the approximation of temperature
response of rock and air. Conclusion secured from this study was 9 h,
i.e. 4:30 pm was the time at which availability was maximum and after
that the storage unit should be kept at stand-by mode and discharging
should be started as per the requirement.
A procedure to design and size the PBSS for SAHS was conferred by
Kulakowski and Schmidt (1982) in which a bypass arrangement was
implemented to maintain a constant outlet temperature of the storage
unit as shown in Fig. 9. Two options were imparted, first one was useful
in the conditions where space was the limitation while the second op-
tion was economical. In the first procedure, the calculation was in-
itiated by selecting the bed length and on the basis of that rest para-
meters. In another procedure, the surface area of the collector was
selected first on the basis of load, and then further calculations were
made.
Aly and El-Sharkawy (1990) developed a one-dimension, two phase
transient model and its numerical solutions revealed the time de-
pendency of thermal storage. The comparison between aluminium,
steel and rock was also demonstrated in which it was determined that
aluminium had the highest temperature within 1 h of charging, while
after 6 h rocks has the highest temperature.
A. Gautam and R.P. Saini
Fig. 9. Schematic of experimental setup used by Kulakowski and Schmidt (Kulakowski and Schmidt, 1982).
Ziada and Abdel Rehim, (1998) evolved a mathematical model
which was used to describe the consequence of various design para-
meters on temperature of air and storage material at any instant along
the multilayer packed bed. A computer program was established to
obtain the solution of two partial differential equations on the basis of
finite difference method. Five distinct layers of glass, rock, porcelain,
pebbles and steel were constructed and attain that multilayer packed
bed did not exhibit substantial difference than the packed bed of
homogeneous material. Egyptian clay named Tafla was used as storage
material in packed bed and compared with a rock bed by Ammar and
Ghoneim (1991) and found that the performance of tafla was found
better than rocks. The optimization of the bed parameters by the use of
direct search technique is also unveiled in the study.
Based on the studies reported under this section it is found that the
selection of storage material is significantly influenced by amount of
energy to be stored, application of energy storage system, temperature
range, duration of energy storage, density of material, operating con-
ditions and economic aspect. There is no generalized method found for
designing the PBSS and it depends upon above mentioned parameters.
Therefore, it is recommended that values of different parameters should
be optimized as per the desired resuts and operating conditions.
4.3. Stratification
The major benefit associated sensible heat based PBSS for low
Fig. 10. Energy in (a) Standard Rock PBSS and (b) Segmental PBSS (Crandall and Thacher, 2004).
946
Solar Energy 207 (2020) 937–956
temperature is stratification as it increases the efficiency of solar col-
lector and enhances the exergy under the bed. The physical significance
of stratification was explored by Phillips (1981) with the help of stra-
tification coefficient. The stratification coefficient is the function of
three dimensionless parameters i.e. collector effectiveness, number of
transfer unit of bed and dimensionless bed conductivity, but if the
number of transfer units is much more than 1, than stratification
coefficient will depend only on rest two parameters.
Crandall and Thacher (2004) studied an approach to preserve the
stratification by creating segments in packed bed and its effect on the
stored energy with time. The maximum amount of energy accumulated
under segmental PBSS was 1% lower as compared to the standard PBSS
as shown in Fig. 10. It is due to the surplus expenditure of time to get
highest limit of TES in standard PBSS. However, the segmental PBSS
was able to store the energy for more duration of time comparatively.
Ramana et al. (2014) reported that the PBSS performance can be
improved with many different factors and stratification is one of such
factors. It was found that the at lower mass flow rate, better stratifi-
cation was achieved and hence storage efficiency increases during
charging process. However, Lugolole et al. (2019) compared the per-
formances of two PBSS having granite rocks of 10.5 mm and 31.9 mm
during discharging at different flow rates. It was reported that the de-
stratification is influenced by mass flow rate of HTF and equivalent
diameter of the packing material. The stratification was improved on
reducing the flow rate of HTF. It is therefore, thermal mixing among
A. Gautam and R.P. Saini
flowing streams reduces with decreased values of flow rate. However,
stratification decreased with increase in size of the packing elements.
Yang et al. (2019) suggested that packing elements with lesser
thermal conductivity, complete charging of bed and proper insulation
of storage tank are some measures to preserve the stratification under
packed bed during static period. Rosen, (2001) reported that the exergy
of the packed bed increases with increase in stratification for the same
energy content. It was also reported that the bed with more thermal
gradient is associated to higher exergy as compared to the same bed
with uniform temperature or lesser thermal gradient. It is therefore, the
thermal energy can be delivered at higher temperature for long dura-
tion in case of higher thermal gradient during discharging. The various
types of stratification are shown in Fig. 11.
Based on the reported studies, it is found that stratification is an
important parameter for effective utilization of PBSS. It is influenced
through the inner wall material of storage tank during the static con-
dition. However, heat conduction in vertical direction and heat losses
are the two major factors associated to de-stratification in PBSS. The
stratification coefficient decreases with increase in charging time due to
increase in temperature within the packed bed. Initially it remains
higher due to high temperature gradient, however, it starts decreasing
with time due to heating of bottom layers which leads to reduce the
temperature gradient under the bed.
Various study carried out on PBSS using experimental and numer-
ical approach are presented in Tables 3 and 4, respectively.
5. Economic aspects
Various existing energy storage technologies are not feasible with
the energy systems due to large monetary investment. On the other
hand, in spite of the technical benefits, the TES technologies are of-
fering economic advantages on their implementations with solar
thermal systems. Energy storage in the form of sensible heat facilitates
the solar thermal systems to work effectively under low cost compared
to the other energy storage systems (Suresh and Saini, 2020). Lesser
capital and operating costs are two major advantages due to which TES
is recommended for installation (Dincer et al., 1996).
The monetary benefits should be analyzed with the help of life cycle
saving or other appropriate method as a tool for economic comparison
between available options (Dincer et al., 1997). The cost and economics
associated with TES systems are the two major factors that helps to
provide preferences for their selection. Such studies on economic fea-
sibility and related parameters are discussed under this section.
Levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) is a most adopted economic
indicator to evaluate the economic feasibility of a TES technology. It is
recommended to define the system boundary in order to obtain the
accurate LCOE (Heller and Gauché, 2013; Montes et al., 2009). The
LCOE can also be evaluated in terms of storage duration. The longer
Fig. 11. Various stages of stratification (a) Higher stratification, (b) lesser stratification and (c) unstartified (Haller et al., 2009).
947
Solar Energy 207 (2020) 937–956
period of energy storage in TES results in more economic feasibility as
this stored energy can be utilized during peak hours if the energy de-
mand cannot be fulfilled through available solar energy (Sioshansi and
Denholm, 2010).
Solar multiple is an another factor that can be used to evaluate the
LCOE of solar TES systems. It is the ratio of thermal energy stored
during the availability of solar energy to the energy provide to the
systems by storage unit (Ã et al., 2010). Thaker et al. (2017) developed
a techno-economic model to assess the LCOE for sensible heat, latent
heat and thermochemical heat storage. The sensitivity analysis to assess
the impact on LCOE and uncertainty analysis using Monte-Carlo si-
mulation to assess the uncertainty in LCOE were also carried out. The
optimized values of LCOE was found lowest as 3¢/kWh in sensible heat
storage. However, the corresponding values were 8¢/kWh and 11¢/
kWh in case of latent heat and thermochemical energy storage. The
presented sensitivity analysis of various parameters in sensible heat
based PBSS is shown in Fig. 12.
The economic aspects are usually correlated with the technical
properties of the storage unit. As favorable heat transfer rate and ad-
vanced storage material can lead towards the lower size of storage unit,
and hence reduced cost (Agrawal et al., 2018). Cast iron is proved to be
the best material to store the sensible heat, as its energy density level is
more than water (Hasnain et al., 1996). In spite of this, rock piles and
pebbles are recommended due to their low cost and comparatively
lesser payback period than cast iron (Hasnain, 1998).
Maaliou (1985) proposed a method for optimization of net financial
income in terms of thermal energy stored in packed bed. The optimi-
zation was subjected to maximization of thermal energy stored with
constraints to minimize equipment and operating costs under the con-
sideration of equivalent diameter, packed bed dimension charging
period and flow rate as variable. It was recommended that the opti-
mization should be based on one variable as consideration of more than
one variables leads towards complicated process and inappropriate
results. To optimize the performance of the PBSS, a multi objective
optimization approach named NSGA-II (Non-dominated Sorting Ge-
netic Algorithm – II) was used by Deb et al. (2002) in which the per-
formance of axial flow and radial flow has been compared to the storage
unit.
Galione et al. (2015) observed that the use of earth materials like
rocks, pebbles and sand along with inexpensive HTF can reduce the cost
of PBSS up to 70%. Brosseau et al. (2004) revealed that the two tank
storage system was expensive by 35% than the PBSS. As per Turner
(1978), pumping power and storage capacity should be minimized in
order to minimize the cost, as both the parameters were directly related
to cost. However, the storage system should be able to store the re-
quired amount of energy for an adequate period of time.
Bouadila et al. (2014) assessed the economic feasibility of a PBSS
enabled solar air heater for greenhouse cultivation during night time
 Table 3
Experimental studies carried out by various researchers on axial flow PBSS for low temperature applications.
References Packing Elements HTF Working Parameters Remarks

Colburn (1931) of the storage elements. transfer depends on the wall effect.
2
• GranulesPebbles
balls
• Air • Size to 2.6 lb/ft /sec.
• Heat as the ratio of d/D, heat transfer increased. But, after certain
• Porcelain • GD /D= 0.2
e
• Initially,
value, it started decreasing.
A. Gautam and R.P. Saini

• Zinc balls • = 0.04 to 0.32.

Ergun (1952) • Granular Solid • Air • Air flow rate • The energy drop in the packed bed is the sum of viscous and kinetic
• Properties of fluid energy loss.
•ε v correlation of the f which is the ratio of pressure drop to viscous
• Aenergy was presented.

Littman et al. (1968) • Copper • Gas = 2–100.

• ReStorage • The h in the range of 6–99.2 was reliable.
• Lead • element’s size = 0.0198–0.080 in.. • The Nu was of the right order in the range of 2–6.
• Glass
Standish and Drinkwate • Glass Spheres • Air • The ΔP was affected by the pore spaces.
(1970) Spheres from the size distribution of particles, shape is the most
• βΨ == 0.41–0.59
• Coke • Water • 0.53–1.0 • Apart
dominating factor which affects packing structure and its properties in
• Ceramic Rings randomly packed beds.

Schmidt and Szego • Feolite • Air • Biot Number (Bi) • The set of curves had been presented which are useful to identify the
(1976) • Water • α and U transient behavior of this particular heat storage unit.

Pomeroy (1979) • Iron sphere • Sodium • Sphere size • The possibility was identified to select the various design parameters
in order to limit the thermocline spreading up to less than 20% of
the total discharge time.

Willits and Chandra e 9.9–26.9 mm. β was major parameter to be determined before predicting the
3
(1981)
• Rock • Air • Dρ ==1404, 1534 and 1612 kg/m .
• The
ΔP.
and 0.46.
• β = 0.38, 0.41 times lesser ΔP was observed with β of 0.45 than 0.35.
• 1.9

948
• Temperature Ratio = 0.05–0.3. h do not have any significant effect of temperature.
• • The
v
• β.h depends on the air flow rate and rock size, but not much depend on
Hollands and Sullivan • Thoroughly washed crushed rocks • Air = 0.31, 0.34, 0.39, 0.4 and 0.48. The ΔP at full scale packed bed was 15% higher than the due to the
(1984) stones
• εCoefficient in diameter of particles = 0.125,
• edge effect.
• Round • 0.165, 0.177,of variation
0.187, 0.231, 0.235, 0.288, 0.4. The above difference does not have much significance, in case of
• Crushed stones • coarse aggregate the difference was up to 20% and clear aggregate was
up to 10%.

Waked (1986) • Rocks • Air • De = 0.02 m to 0.075 m. • The maximum part of stored heat can be regained at a temperature
• ε = 0.36 and 0.47 very close of the T of packed bed because of temperature
max

• w = 13260 kg/m3 & 15180 kg/m3 stratification along its axis.

Sorour (1988) • Sphere shaped gypsum • Air • LD == 0.5 m, 0.6 m, 0.75 m Charging period was the function of the D and air temperature at
• the e

• 0.012 m, 0.018 m and 0.030 m inlet

str
Enhancement of η of packed bed was very much affected by the
• dimensions of the insulated container.
e
Higher m or very small D can become the reason for lower η as
• compared str
to low m with intermediate D . e

Sagara and Nakahara • Gravel • Air 0.38, 0.46, 0.51, 0.56, 0.58, 0.67. • The overall energy balance by using large size packing elements was
(1991)
• εD ==0.3,0.042,
e 0.1, 0.13 found similar to the small size packing elements. Therefore it was
• Brick Block
• recommended to finalized it on the basis of economic feasibility.
• Concrete
• U-Shaped Gutter
Audi (1992) • Limestone • Air • Four different types of rocks • The system performance was affected by various types of rocks as it
affects the size and cost of storage unit.
3
• Tarsand • Volume factor = 0.31, 0.61, 0.94 and 1 For identical thermal storage requirement, tarsand require 6.4 m , and
3
• Zeolite • zeolite 3.4 m .
• Basalt
• Sphere • Air • Re = 0.1–17,635
(continued on next page)
Solar Energy 207 (2020) 937–956
 Table 3 (continued)

References Packing Elements HTF Working Parameters Remarks

Eisfeld and Schnitzlein • Cubes • D/D = 1.624–264

e • The losses under creeping flow region were found to be increased
(2001) • Cylindrical • ε = 0.33–0.88 due to the external boundaries.
• Correlation of pressure drop were developed with consideration of
A. Gautam and R.P. Saini

wall effects and found more accurate than previous reported

correlations.

Singh et al. (2006) • T-joint masonry tile bricks • Air 0.55–1.00 • Nu increased along with an increase in Re while f decreased.
masonry bricks for Nu and f had been developed which were the function
• Ψε == 0.306–0.63
2
• Standard cubes
• G = 0.155–0.266 kg/s m • ofCorrelations
Re, Ψ and ε with average an absolute percentage deviation of 5.3%
• Concrete • Re = 1047–1955 and 7.7% respectively.
• Concrete spheres • increased with decrease in ε and increase in Ψ.
• Nu
• f decreased with increase in Ψ and ε.
Nemec and Levec (2005) • Spherical particles 2, 2, 2, CO2, • Correlations were developed and reported for non-spherical packing
particles (cylinders, rings,
• NHe, HAr O • βRe==0.37–0.52
10–500 elements and their results were found more accurate as compared to
• Nonspherical
trilobes & quadralobes).
• Ψ = 0.593, 0.59, 0.63, 0.672, 0.782, 0.866 previously reported correlations.
•
Singh et al. (2013) • Sphere • Air Ψ = 0.65, 0.71, 0.8 and 1 • The Nu increases while f decreases on increasing the values of Re.
as well as f decreases with increase in void fraction up to 0.8,
• ε = 0.275, 0.36,0.75,
• Cube blocks of three different Ψ (0.65,
• Re = 503–866 0.42 and 0.48. • Nu
however the maximum value of Nu observed at void fraction of 1.
• Rectangular
0.71 and 0.75)
• However, the values of f acquire were nearly equal at void fraction of
0.8 and 1.
• A decrement was observed in the values of Nu and f with increase in
value of sphericity.

Allen et al. (2013) • Rough spheres • Air • The f in case of irregular shapes is dependent on the packing
cylinders 0.76–1 arrangement and varies with it.
• εΨ == 0.28–0.48
• Smooth • Hexagonal packing, offset cubic packing and surface roughness of the spheres increases, the f also increases

949
• Cubes rock
• simple cubicclosed
packing arrangement.
• Asfor the
the same size of storage elements, but comparatively decreases for
• Crushed p p the non-uniform size of storage elements.
• Smooth sphere • ƩV /ƩA = 1.3–4.1
Singh et al. (2015) e
• 8500 kg rock pebbles having D = 50 mm • Air • Hours between 9:00 and 17:30 of various months. The solar collection efficiency found 36–51%, while heat retrieval
• efficiency found 75% to 77%.

Koekemoer and Luckos • Large coal • Air 0.73–0.83 The highest on the ash particle bed, followed by char bed and
(2015)
• Ψε == 0.32–0.5 • coal bed hasεthewaslowest.
• Char e
• ΔD = 0.33–2.18 mm e
In all cases, D has a comparatively less effect than PSD on ε as wider
• Ash particle • • PSD results in lower ε because the space between large particles was
filled with the lower particles.

Pistocchini et al. (2016) • polyoxymethylene spheres of various De (3, 4 • Air • p/De = 1–2 new correlation has been developed in order to predict the
and 5 mm) ε = 0.32–0.68
• Apressure loss for such condition.
•
Halkarni et al. (2016) • Steel balls • Water • εD/D= 0.359, 0.378 and 0.387 All configurations in this study having the same pressure drop
5, 10 and 21
e
• on comparing withused end shield configuration of insert.
• Re = =150–10,000 effect on pressure drop was observed of disturbed flow entering at
• • No
upstream in the bed with inserts and without inserts.

Trudel and Hallett (2017) • Parallelepipeds of seven different shapes. • Air 0.82, 0.83, 0.84 and 0.85 • The developed theory under this study with modifications were
0.619, 0.629, 0.664, 0.677, 0.747, 0.75 and 0.789 found more relevant as compared to the previously reported to
• λΨ == 0.69,
0.443, 0.454, 0.48, 0.493 and 0.53 predict the pressure drop under PBSS.
• ε = 0.426,
• Re = 150–900
•
Agrawal et al. (2018) • Cylindrical elements with 6 internal grooves • Air 200–2050 • The value of Nu increases with increasing Re, decreasing void
made of cement and sand in the ratio of 1:2. and 1.33 fraction and increasing aspect ratio within 0.6–1. However, it
• Reɸ ==0.66,
and 0.6 decreases on increasing void fraction between 1 and 1.33.
• ε = 0.47, 0.53
• decrement was observed on increasing the void fraction among
• A0.47–0.6, and increases with increase in aspect ratio from 0.66 to 1.
Solar Energy 207 (2020) 937–956
 Table 4
Numerical studies carried out by various researchers on axial flow PBSS for low temperature applications.
References Objective Model Specification
Phillips (1981) • Tobedpredict the effect of stratification of a rock Stratification coefficient is the ratio of actual • Heat exchanger effectiveness of collector was
storage unit based SAHS with the help of
• energy gain to the energy gain at a uniform
theoretical models. temperature.
• between 1.0 and 1.4.
Kulakowski and a method for design and sizing of by-pass arrangement was utilized to
Schmidt (1982)
• ToPBSSpresent
for SAHS.
• Amaintain the outlet temperature of storage
unit at a constant value.
The specifications of storage unit were:
• granite, density is 2675 kg/m3, Specific heat
is 0.88 kJ/kg °C, bed porosity was 0.4.
• The equations were solved with the help of
uniform grid pattern with 200 subdivisions
along the unit length and accuracy was
assured by 14,400 time steps.
Saez and McCoy, (1982) develop a mathematical model to
• Tosimulate • The model considered the axial dispersion
the dynamic temperature response along with intra particle conduction.
on the basis of inlet air temperature of the • The model was compared with different
packed bed column. mathematical models and found a good
950
compatibility with them.
• The output was validated with the result of
different studies based experiments.
Coutier and Farber develop a general method to solve model • The design method developed in the study has
(1982)
• Toof differential equations to describe the heat considered the pumping power of the fan,
• A125kWh collected energy and η
transfer process of PBSS. energy transfer, output temperature and noise
control.
• Procedure of design method was divided into
four steps: Determination of rock bed volume,
G and De, optimal length and frontal area of
packed bed.
• Results were provided in terms of curves and
empirical correlations.
Shitzer (1983) • ToPBSSanalyze transient thermal behavior of • Duhamel’s theorem was applied to calculate
having non-uniform inlet air the HTF and packed bed temperature in
temperature. return of random temperature of the inlet air.
• The obtained solution was based on the
infinite double series.
• The obtained result was compared with
experimental values, as well as previously
published numerical solutions and there was a
good agreement obtained between them.
Aly and El-Sharkawy study the impact of solid storage one-dimensional, two-phase transient mid-length bed temperature reaches 45 °C
(1990)
• Toelement’s properties on thermal performance
• Amodel was developed in order to describe the
• The
for material of 8000 kg/m density, 70 °C for
during charging of PBSS.
Results Remarks
• Collector effectiveness, number of transfer unit
between 0.01 and 0.50. of bed and dimensionless bed conductivity were
Stratification coefficient for all SAHS was in the 3D parameters which affect the stratification
A. Gautam and R.P. Saini
coefficient.
• If the number of transfer units is much greater
than one, then stratification coefficient is based
only rest two dimensionless parameters.
• The ΔP was 0.76 cm of water for a bed of rock • On reduction of allowable pressure drop, the
e
having D = 2 cm and ε = 0.4. thermal characteristics can be maintained same
best month for energy retrieval were march by reducing the height and increasing the
2
• The
or November with 46.45 m collector area and frontal area of the bed.
2
0.21 kg/m s HTF velocity. methods can be used to size the storage unit.
• Two
The first can be used when space is the limitation,
while the second method is economical.
• The first method was initiated by selecting the bed
length and on the basis of that rest parameters can
be determined using KS curves.
the second method, initially surface area of the
• Incollector was selected on the basis of load, and
then further calculations were made.
• The maximum availability of thermal energy was • The interpolation using the model was
found 380 MJ at 9 h i.e, 4:30 pm which was quite worthwhile as the presented model was simple
more than he energy required for the purpose. with good accuracy for practical applications.
• Hermite expansion was found suitable for the low
axial dispersion and low intra particle conduction
while laguerre expansion was advised in the
counter case.
house of Florida had 112 kWh daily load, • The presented model is found to be a very
considered
storage powerful tool in the evaluation of PBSS
was 0.9. The calculated volume for storge unit performance as it also includes the radial
was 25 m3 with G = 0.12 kg/m2s having temperature dispersion effect.
De = 3.2 cm and L = 2.62 m. • A good agreement was found between the
obtained value of hv from the model and the
experimental values.
• The model also included the practical conditions
of SAHS to predict the output based on the values
obtained from the experimental results.
2
ΔP was between 4.1 and 10.9 mm of H O for • Numerical solutions took less time than
• ReThebetween 158 and 393. analytical results due to involvement of infinite
series, so it was recommended to use analytical
calculations to validate the numerical solutions.
• On comparisons between pressure drop with
previous studies was found much deviation has
been found whose reason was believed to be the
different size of particles used to charge in various
studies.
• The presented correlations can only be applied
when the full range of conditions and parameters
will be applicable.
in storage capacity and decrease rate of
3
• Increase
temperature rise was observed when increase in
3 3
2560 kg/m and 77 °C for 1000 kg/m . specific heat capacity and density was obtained.
Solar Energy 207 (2020) 937–956
(continued on next page)
 Table 4 (continued)
References Objective Model Specification
temperature distribution in the air and solid
storage elements of packed bed.
• The time dependency of TES was obtained by
getting numerical solution of the two-coupled
partial differential equation.
• The results were obtained to identify the
effect of properties like specific heat, thermal
conductivity and density of storage elements.
Ammar and Ghoneim the packed bed parameters in Mass flow rate, bed length, sphere diameter
(1991)
• Toorderoptimize
to get the highest ratio of energy stored
• were the considered explicit constraint and
to pressure drop. pressure drop was the considered implicit
constraint.
The optimization was carried out by using the
• direct search method.
• Two packed beds were compared in which
one was having rock and another was having
Egyptian clay named Tafla.
Sanderson and develop a simple model for qualitative • The model was prepared for Bi less than 0.1, •–
Cunningham
• Toanalysis of axial flow in bed and provide so lumped parameter approach was applied.
(1995) shortest time for charging. • haswas predicted based on the Ranz model [99]
it was applicable to a single sphere in
external flow to spheres in packed beds.
• Axial dispersion with thermally long and
short packing was discussed with the effect of
the size of storage spheres.
951
Al-Nimr et al. (1996) present a mathematical model in order to
• Todescribe • Temperature distribution was described on
the dynamic behavior of the PBSS. considering inlet fluid temperature as
variable.
• Laplace transforms technique was used to
obtain the solution.
Ziada and Abdel Rehim describe the thermal behavior of program was developed to obtain • The maximum ΔT within the bed increases up to
(1998)
• Tocylindrical PBSS with the help of a transient
• Athecomputer
solution of two partial differential 54 °C within first 1 h, than it remains constant till
one-dimensional mathematical model. equations on the basis of finite difference
method.
• A number of layers of different materials
having different properties were used to
obtain the solution.
• Glass, rock, porcelain, pebbles and steel were
the considered storage materials.
Ismail and Stuginsky Jr the output of appropriate packed • Four different groups of models (Schumann’s
(1999)
• Tobedobtain
thermal model by numerical method. model, thermal diffusion model, continuous solid
• leads to increase in Nu from 14.9 to 19.7.
phase model and single phase model) were
compared.
• Water was considered to be the HTF and
stones to be the storage element.
• Separate computer programs were formed
and run for each model.
Results Remarks
• Rate of temperature rise and energy storage was
increasing up to a certain limit of time in between
charging, beyond which the trend observed in
A. Gautam and R.P. Saini
reverse direction.
• A comparison between aluminum, steel and rock
was shown, which revealed that aluminum is
preferred for the short time storage and rock for
long duration.
• The optimized values of ratio heat stored to • Bed length of 2.1 m, mass flow rate of 900 kg/h
pumping energy are L = 2.1 m, D = 0.019 m,
opt e and particle diameter of 0.019 m were the
mass flow rate = 900 kg/h. optimized value of investigated parameters.
Tafla was found more reliable as compared to the
• rocks.
• Highest second law availability and maximum
efficient use of packing storage volume can be
achieved by use of smallest sphere which can be
practically available.
• Packing storage volume can be made more
efficient by providing the flow distributors in the
storage tank.
Transient convection coefficient instabilities were
• caused due to natural convection.
•– • The model was solved mathematically with the
help of two coupled partial differential
equations.
• The obtained result by mathematical model was
validated by experimental results which were in
good agreement.
model was obtained which was
• Ausedmathematical
to describe the effect of various design
2 h and after that it starts decreasing and reaches parameters on temperature of air and storage
to 0 °C up to 11 h. material at any instant along the multilayer
packed bed.
• The multilayer packed bed does not show
considerable difference than the packed bed of
homogeneous material.
The increase in D between 25 mm and 50 mm
e • The important factors which affect the
performance of packed bed were: void fraction,
heat losses, particle size, mass flux, flow rate,
storage material, working fluid and inlet fluid
temperature variation.
• A cyclic variation of mass flow rate of working
fluid had very slight effect, while a cyclic variation
of inlet temperature of fluid strongly influences
the predictions of all models.
• Void fraction affects the overall heat capacity of
the bed and ultimately the heat stored.
(continued on next page)
Solar Energy 207 (2020) 937–956
 Table 4 (continued)
References Objective Model Specification
Crandall and Thacher study a method to preserve the results obtained through numerical
(2004)
• Tostratification through segmentation of the
• The
simulations of segmental PBSS were
PBSS numerically. compared with the results of standard PBSS.
• The flow rate through the bed was assumed to
equal and constant, while losses from the bed
are neglected.
• The cross sectional area of bed, size and mass
of rocks were identical.
Yang et al. (2010) To analyze the behavior of thermal and flow
• behavior 3-D Navier-Stokes equation and RNG k-ε
of packed bed having ellipsoidal or
• model was used in order to obtain the
non-uniform spherical particles. numerical solution.
• The ANSYS CFX-10 tool was used to solve the
governing equations and discretization was
done of the convective term in momentum
equation.
• A coupled algorithm using finite volume
method was implemented in order to solve
continuity and momentum equation
simultaneously.
Dorai et al. (2015) the fully resolved simulations of • DEM-DLM/FM method of direct numerical •–
in between the packed bed having
• Toflowperform simulation was used for Newtonian fluid with
cylindrical pallets in order to get the effect of collision having sedimentation of polygonal
local microstructure on pressure drop. isometric particles.
• Impact of degree of poly-dispersity and
particle shape on pressure drop had been
952
investigated.
Wang et al. (2018) study the transmission of a diffused beam
• Toin one- • Monte-Carlo ray-tracing technique was used
dimensional packed bed having for approximation of geometrical optics.
double layered, uniformly sized, random • Effects of optical properties like refractive
distributed spheres. index and absorption coefficient of internal
sphere were examined.
Schulze et al. (2017) present the particle resolved CFD-model
• Toon the • The two dimensional model was solved and
basis of study of heat transfer, mass validated with experimental observation in
transfer, flowing fluid and chemical which good agreement was found.
reactions. • Numerical simulations were carried out in
various conditions and obtained species mass
fraction, local temperatures and carbon mass
flux were discussed in detail.
• The 2-D approach was compared with the 3-D
representation of packing which involves
random closed packing and simple cubic
packing.
• A discrete element method was used to
generate random packed bed.
Li et al. (2017) analyze the heat transfer and • Four values of gap ratio, i.e. 1.25, 1.5, 2 and 3 • The Local Nu is found maximum at gape ratio of
behavior using large eddy simulation at Re = 5000 were used as parameters.
• Toflownumerically
method for two adjacent spheres. • ANSYS FLUENT 12.1 was applied in order to
get the numerical solution, while considering
mesh was generated by ANSYS ICEM 12.1 and
it is O-block structured grids with hexahedral
elements.
Results Remarks
maximum stored energy in segmental PBSS segmentation and control scheme of
5
• The
was 2.90 × 10 kJ, while in standard bed was
• Bed
charging are two ways to preserve the
2.93 × 105 kJ. stratification.
A. Gautam and R.P. Saini
• The temperature distribution were different
among the segmental PBSS and standard PBSS.
• The average temperature of PBSS is 308 K for • Random packing was recommended for high
simple cubic arrangement, 317 for BCC and 327 porosity cases, while structured porosity such as
for FCC. FCC and BCC for low porosity cases.
• For identical packing form and particle shape, the
heat transfer and pressure drop was more in case
of non-uniform packing, while overall heat
transfer coefficient was higher in case of uniform
packing.
• The study provide the detailed information
about many aspects like hydrodynamic forces
exerted on individual particles, local velocity
etc.
• Keeping the same mass of pellets, due to large
porosity, lower pressure drop was observed in case
of cylinders.
•– • Reduction in absorption coefficient reduces the
transmission and reflectance.
• The complete ray transmitted in sphere was
absorbed for the large refractive index.
• Aforrapid reduction in the reflection was observed
sufficient large value of porosity.
• The estimated amount of energy stored is in • The 3-D distributions of particles have
between 136 kJ/mol to 231 kJ/mol considerable effect of heat transfer, mass
transfer and flowing fluid.
was recommended that the attention should be
• Itmade during the selection of kinematic parameters
for heterogeneous combustion.
• The well suited arrangement of particles in the 2-D
case was randomly packed bed.
• The conversion process in case of 2-D was shifted
with a diameter of half particle further in the
packed bed on comparing with a random packed
bed of 3-D in order to maintain a mass fraction and
temperature.
rise in drag coefficient was observed on
1.25.
• Adecreasing the gap ratio due to delay in flow
separation of the spheres.
• The local Nu varies with the gap ratio, while mean
Nu does not influence from it.
• The flow pattern around the spheres increased the
RMS velocity in y-direction, z-direction and
(continued on next page)
Solar Energy 207 (2020) 937–956
A. Gautam and R.P. Saini Solar Energy 207 (2020) 937–956

Overall heat transfer efficiency was higher in case

instantaneous cross stream velocity on decreasing

because random packing has high ΔP and simple

under the conditions of Tunisia using life cycle analysis. The outcome of

The ΔP obtained from experimentation in case of

was 30 of randomly packing and 31 higher than

of grille sphere composite structure packed bed

And Nu was almost double than simple cubic,

Deviation of Nu and ΔP between the obtained

acceptable on consideration of uncertainities.

sphere composite structure packed bed
the analysis was that the payback period is 5 years if the system op-

investigation was within 20%, which was

erates 3 months a year. In this study, the energy cost and investment

from experimental and numerical

cost (system cost, operating cost and maintenance cost) were con-
sidered as total cost and inflation and interest were not considered. Oró

while 79% of random packing.

et al. (2012) compared the feasibility of three different packing ele-
ments (concrete, molten salt and PCM) using life cycle assessment
methodology. It was concluded that in normal conditions, PCMs have
highest global impact/kWh which is followed by molten salts and

cubic has low Nu.

concrete results with least impact out of these options.
the gap ratio.

simple cubic.

Domanski and Fellah (1998) carried out the thermo-economic

analysis of sensible heat storage system to illustrate its complete char-

• values
• grille
Remarks

ging and discharging. Basically, an approach was provided to design

and operate the TES system having excellent performance with
•
•

minimum cost which includes capital cost, maintenance cost and op-
erating cost. Initially, first and second law efficiencies were determined
optimum paramters provides decreament in
Nu by 21% but decreament in ΔP decreased by

by energy and exergy balance respectively, for charging as well as

discharging process. Later on the basis of second law efficiency, the
economic analysis was investigated to achieve the efficiency with
minimum total cost. This study concluded that optimized values of the
number of transfer units and second law efficiency obtained using
thermo-economic and exergy analyses can be equal only if the effect of
capital cost will be negligible on total cost.
In present situation, the low temperature solar thermal energy based
systems integrated TES do not contribute much to the international
trade. In spite of economically feasible, the major barriers among
commercialization of these systems are improper communication,
70%.

negligible industrial support, high investment cost and infrastructure

• The
Results

constraints. The government of nations can promote these systems in

terms of subsidy, funds for project investments and awareness among
the common people. A few countries like Germany, Italy and Spain have
equation for incompressible fluid, steady state

FLUENT 14.0, was used in order to couple the

steady RANS model was used to converge

sublimation technique was applied

For internal turbulent flow, RNG k-ω model

flow was applied for numerical simulation.

set a milestone for the other countries in this direction (Schmalensee,

flow field and SST k-ω model was used to

volume analysis software named

scalable wall function are applied.

navier stokes equation and energy

2015). The developing countries should also adopt such measures as it

can be a breakthrough in their energy security.
for experimental investigation.
improve the accuracy of flow.

6. Comparison of sensible heat based PBSSs with PCMs based

PBSSs
all involved equation.
Model Specification

The thermal energy can also be stored in PBSS in the form of latent
heat by using the phase change material (PCM). The heat stored in
• Napthelene

various materials during phase change occurs usually between solid-

• Finite

liquid, however materials in which phase change occurs between li-

• The

• and
• 3-D

quid-gas are also used in some applications (Cárdenas and León, 2013).
The energy stored in the form of latent heat depends on the density of
the material, specific latent heat and the amount of energy stored. Many
structured packed bed using experimental

PCMs like paraffin, fatty acid, ester, alcohols, glycols and salt hydrates
characteristics for grille-sphere composite
To investigate the heat transfer and flow

are utilized to store the thermal energy as latent heat (Alva et al., 2018).
The amount of energy stored in PCMs can be calculated by using the
expression as given below:
Tm Tf
and numerical approach.

Q= ∫ mCp,p ΔTp + mhe + ∫ mCp,p ΔTp

Tini Tm (1)

The PCMs are recommended to store the thermal energy for high
temperature applications as it can store 50–100 times more thermal
energy than sensible heat based PBSSs (Alva et al., 2018). The PCMs
Objective

require lesser volume than sensible energy storage materials to store the
•

same amount of thermal energy. However, sensible heat based PBSSs

are recommended over PCMs for low temperature solar thermal systems
as PCMs are not economic feasible for such applications (Singh et al.,
Table 4 (continued)

Wang et al. (2017)

2010).
The poor thermal conductivity of the PCMs is the major drawback.
It ranges for Salt PCMs and organic PCMs between 0.5–1 W/m·K and
References

0.1–0.3 W/m·K, respectively. Although PCMs are non-toxic, never-

theless, organic PCMs are inflammable. Such PCMs like esters, long
chain fatty acid and paraffin are not recommended to store as well

953
A. Gautam and R.P. Saini
Fig. 12. Sensitivity analysis of various parameters in sensible heat based PBSS.
transport in the tanks made up of plastics. In the same manner, in-
organic PCMs are not recommended to store in metal containers as they
are corrosive in nature. In order to provide the significant preventive
measures for such undesirable points, the use of PBSS having PCM as
energy storage material for low temperature solar thermal systems are
not economically feasible. It is therefore, the sensible heat based PBSSs
are recommended for such applications.
7. Conclusion
On the basis of literature survey, it is found that the sensible heat
based PBSSs are the suitable option for low temperature solar thermal
systems and following conclusions have been drawn:
• Aspect ratio of the storage tank, the geometry of the packing ele-
ment, operating condition such as charging period and physical
properties of the HTF and packing element are the factors that in-
fluence the thermal stratification in the packed bed. Hence, storage
efficiency and operation of PBSSs are influenced through these
factors.
• The radial flow requires comparatively large space for inner and
outer plena. The cost of radial flow PBSS could be reduced through
reducing the volume of it and this research area is required to be
explored. Therefore, the use of axial flow PBSS for low temperature
solar thermal systems is recommended.
• In order to determine the irreversibility, the performance analysis of
PBSS based on exergy efficiency has been reported to be more ac-
curate as compared to energy efficiency. It is therefore, re-
commended that the exergy efficiency should be investigated at
different intervals of time as heat transfer is a time dependent pro-
cess.
• The thermo-hydraulic performance of PBSSs is influenced through
shapes and size of packing elements and sphere having smooth
surface resulted in best performance. However, the optimize size of
the packing elements have not been reported so far.
• Very few studies for economic feasibility of the solar thermal system
are reported for commercialization. In order to make them compe-
titive with conventional counterparts, more investigation on eco-
nomic aspect of PBSS for low temperature applications of solar
thermal systems are required.
The present study may be helpful in investigating further the per-
formance of the PBSS to store energy as sensible heat for applications of
low temperature considering technical and economical gaps discussed
in this paper.
954
Solar Energy 207 (2020) 937–956
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influ-
ence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgement
The first author is grateful to the Ministry of Human Resource
Development (MHRD), Government of India for providing the financial
support in the form of fellowship for the research work.
References
Shitzer, A., 1983. Transient behavior of a rook-bed thermal storage system subjected to
variable inlet air temperatures: analysis and experimentation. J. Sol. Energy Eng.
105, 200–206.
Ã, N.F., Izquierdo, S., Montan, C., 2010. Analysis of CSP plants for the definition of energy
policies : The influence on electricity cost of solar multiples, capacity factors and
energy storage 38, 6215–6221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2010.06.009.
Agrawal, P., Gautam, A., Kunwar, A., Kumar, M., Chamoli, S., 2018. Performance as-
sessment of heat transfer and friction characteristics of a packed bed heat storage
system embedded with internal grooved cylinders. Sol. Energy 161, 148–158.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2017.12.044.
Al-Nimr, M., Abu-Qudais, M., Mashaqi, M., 1996. Dynamic behaviour of a packed bed
energy storage system. Energy Convers. Manag. 904, 23–30. https://doi.org/10.
1016/0196-8904(95)00024-8.
Allen, K.G., von Backström, T.W., Kröger, D.G., 2013. Packed bed pressure drop depen-
dence on particle shape, size distribution, packing arrangement and roughness.
Powder Technol. 246, 590–600. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.powtec.2013.06.022.
Alva, G., Lin, Y., Fang, G., 2018. An overview of thermal energy storage systems. Energy
144, 341–378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.12.037.
Alva, G., Liu, L., Huang, X., Fang, G., 2017. Thermal energy storage materials and systems
for solar energy applications. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 68, 693–706. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.10.021.
Aly, S.L., El-Sharkawy, A.I., 1990. Effect of storage medium on thermal properties of
packed beds. Heat Recover. Syst. CHP 10, 509–517. https://doi.org/10.1016/0890-
4332(90)90201-T.
Ammar, A.S.A., Ghoneim, A.A., 1991. Optimization of a sensible heat storage unit packed
with spheres of a local material. Renew. Energy 1, 91–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/
0960-1481(91)90107-Z.
Atalay, H., 2019. Performance analysis of a solar dryer integrated with the packed bed
thermal energy storage (TES) system. Energy 172, 1037–1052. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.energy.2019.02.023.
Audi, M.S., 1992. Experimental study of a solar space heating model using Jordanian
rocks for storage. Energy Convers. Manag. 33, 833–842. https://doi.org/10.1016/
0196-8904(92)90011-K.
Bouadila, S., Lazaar, M., Skouri, S., Kooli, S., Farhat, A., 2014. Assessment of the
greenhouse climate with a new packed-bed solar air heater at night, in Tunisia.
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 35, 31–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.03.051.
Brosseau, D., Edgar, M., Kelton, J.W., Chisman, K., Ray, D., Emms, B., 2004. Testing of
thermocline filler materials and molten-salt heat transfer fluids for thermal energy
storage systems in parabolic trough power plants. Sol. Energy 127, 587–595. https://
doi.org/10.1115/ISEC2004-65144.
Cárdenas, B., Davenne, T.R., Wang, J., Ding, Y., Jin, Y., Chen, H., Wu, Y., Garvey, S.D.,
2019. Techno-economic optimization of a packed-bed for utility-scale energy storage.
A. Gautam and R.P. Saini
Appl. Therm. Eng. 153, 206–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2019.
02.134.
Cárdenas, B., León, N., 2013. High temperature latent heat thermal energy storage: Phase
change materials, design considerations and performance enhancement techniques.
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 27, 724–737. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.07.
028.
Cascetta, M., Cau, G., Puddu, P., Serra, F., 2015. A study of a packed-bed thermal energy
storage device: Test rig, experimental and numerical results. Energy Procedia 81,
987–994. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2015.12.157.
Chai, L., Wang, L., Liu, J., Yang, L., Chen, H., Tan, C., 2014. Performance study of a
packed bed in a closed loop thermal energy storage system. Energy 77, 871–879.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2014.09.073.
Cheng, X., Zhai, X., 2018. Thermal performance analysis and optimization of a cascaded
packed bed cool thermal energy storage unit using multiple phase change materials.
Appl. Energy 215, 566–576. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.02.053.
Colburn, A.P., 1931. Heat transfer and pressure drop in empty, baffled, and packed tubes:
I—Heat transfer in packed tubes. Ind. Eng. Chem. 23, 910–913. https://doi.org/10.
1021/ie50260a015.
Contestabile, F., Cornolti, L., Zavattoni, S., Barbato, M.C., 2019. An advanced wall
treatment for a 1D model of packed bed thermal energy storage systems. J. Energy
Storage 26, 100918. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2019.100918.
Coutier, J.P., Farber, E.A., 1982. Two applications of a numerical approach of heat
transfer process within rock beds. Sol. Energy 29, 451–462. https://doi.org/10.1016/
0038-092X(82)90053-6.
Crandall, D.M., Thacher, E.F., 2004. Segmented thermal storage. Sol. Energy 77,
435–440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2003.08.011.
de Gracia, A., Cabeza, L.F., 2017. Numerical simulation of a PCM packed bed system: A
review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 69, 1055–1063. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.
2016.09.092.
Dincer, I., Dost, S., Li, X., 1996. Thermal energy storage systems and energy savings, in:
First Rabzon Int. Energy and Environment Symp. 29–31 July. Trabzon, Turkey, pp.
373–379.
Dincer, I., Dost, S., Li, X., 1997. Performance analyses of sensible heat storage systems for
thermal applications. Fuel Energy Abstr. 38, 435. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-
6701(97)82292-8.
Domanski, Roman, Fellah, G., 1998. Thermoeconomic analysis of sensible heat, thermal
energy storage systems. Appl. Therm. Eng. 18, 693–704.
Dorai, F., Moura Teixeira, C., Rolland, M., Climent, E., Marcoux, M., Wachs, A., 2015.
Fully resolved simulations of the flow through a packed bed of cylinders: Effect of size
distribution. Chem. Eng. Sci. 129, 180–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2015.01.
070.
Dreißigacker, V., Zunft, S., Müller-Steinhagen, H., 2013. A thermo-mechanical model of
packed-bed storage and experimental validation. Appl. Energy 111, 1120–1125.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.03.067.
E, W.R., 1952. Friction and transfer coefficients for single particles and packed beds.
Chem. Eng. Prog. 42, 247–253.
Eisfeld, B., Schnitzlein, K., 2001. The influence of confining walls on the pressure drop in
packed beds. Chem. Eng. Sci. 56, 4321–4329. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0009-
2509(00)00533-9.
Energy Information Administration, 2011. No Title [WWW Document]. Int. Energy
Outlook. URL https://www.eia.gov/ (accessed 7.6.18).
Ergun, S., 1952. Fluid flow through packed columns. Chem. Eng. Prog. https://doi.org/
citeulike-article-id:7797897.
Esence, T., Bruch, A., Molina, S., Stutz, B., Fourmigué, J.F., 2017. A review on experience
feedback and numerical modeling of packed-bed thermal energy storage systems. Sol.
Energy 153, 628–654. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2017.03.032.
Fahmy, F.H., Abdel-Rehim, Z.S., 1997. Novel design of photovoltaic system coupled with
packed bed thermal energy storage. Energy Sources 19, 1031–1041. https://doi.org/
10.1080/00908319708908906.
Fuentes, J., Pironti, F.F., Lopez de Ramos, A.L., 1998. Effective thermal conductivity in a
radial-flow packed-bed reactor. Int. J. Thermophys. 19, 781–792.
Galione, P., Pérez-Segarra, C., Rodríguez, I., Torras, S., Rigola, J., 2015. Numerical eva-
luation of multi-layered solid-PCM thermocline-like tanks as thermal energy storage
systems for CSP applications. Energy Procedia 69, 832–841. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.egypro.2015.03.099.
Gautam, A., Pandey, L., Singh, S., 2018. Influence of perforated triple wing vortex gen-
erator on a turbulent flow through a circular tube. Heat Mass Transf. und
Stoffuebertragung 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00231-018-2296-4.
Gautam, Abhishek, Saini, R.P., 2020a. Experimental investigation of heat transfer and
fluid flow behavior of packed bed solar thermal energy storage system having spheres
as packing element with pores. Sol. Energy 204, 530–541. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
solener.2020.05.024.
Gautam, Abhishek, Saini, R.P., 2020b. Thermal and hydraulic characteristics of packed
bed solar energy storage system having spheres as packing element with pores. J.
Energy Storage 30, 101414. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2020.101414.
Gautam, A., Saini, R.P., 2020c. A review on technical, applications and economic aspect
of packed bed solar thermal energy storage system. J. Energy Storage 27. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.est.2019.101046.
Halkarni, S.S., Sridharan, A., Prabhu, S.V., 2016. Influence of inserts on the pressure drop
distribution in randomly packed beds with uniform sized spheres in the endshield
model of AHWR. Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 74, 181–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
expthermflusci.2015.12.009.
Haller, M.Y., Cruickshank, C.A., Streicher, W., Harrison, S.J., Andersen, E., Furbo, S.,
2009. Methods to determine stratification efficiency of thermal energy storage pro-
cesses – Review and theoretical comparison. Sol. Energy 83, 1847–1860. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.solener.2009.06.019.
955
Solar Energy 207 (2020) 937–956
Hänchen, M., Brückner, S., Steinfeld, A., 2011. High-temperature thermal storage using a
packed bed of rocks – Heat transfer analysis and experimental validation. Appl.
Therm. Eng. 31, 1798–1806. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2010.10.
034.
Hasnain, S.M., Smiai, M., Al-Saedi, Y., Al-Khaldi, M., 1996. Energy Research Institute-
Internal Report. KACST, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Hasnain, S.M., 1998. Review on sustainable thermal energy storage technologies, Part I:
heat storage materials and techniques. Energy Convers. Manag. 39, 1127–1138.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0196-8904(98)00025-9.
Heller, L., Gauché, P., 2013. Modeling of the rock bed thermal energy storage system of a
combined cycle solar thermal power plant in South Africa. Sol. Energy 93, 345–356.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2013.04.018.
Hollands, K.G.T., Sullivan, H.F., 1984. Pressure drops across rock bed thermal storage
systems. Sol. Energy 33, 221–225. https://doi.org/10.1016/0038-092X(84)90241-X.
Ismail, K.A.R., Stuginsky Jr., R., 1999. A parametric study on possible fixed bed models
for pcm and sensible heat storage. Appl. Therm. Eng. 19, 757–788. https://doi.org/
10.1016/S1359-4311(98)00081-7.
Clark, J.A., 1979. Von Karman Institute for Fluid Dynamics. Lect. Ser. Vol. 1.
McTigue, J.D., 2017. A comparison of radial-flow and axial-flow packed beds for thermal
energy storage. Appl. Energy.
Jain, D., 2007. Modeling the performance of the reversed absorber with packed bed
thermal storage natural convection solar crop dryer. J. Food Eng. 78, 637–647.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2005.10.035.
Jain, D., Jain, R.K., 2004. Performance evaluation of an inclined multi-pass solar air
heater with in-built thermal storage on deep-bed drying application. J. Food Eng. 65,
497–509. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2004.02.013.
Duffie, John A., William, A.B., 2013. No Title, in: Solar Engineering of Thermal Processes.
Wiley, p. 384.
Kalogirou, S.A., Karellas, S., Braimakis, K., Stanciu, C., Badescu, V., 2016. Exergy analysis
of solar thermal collectors and processes. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 56, 106–137.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2016.05.002.
Deb, Kalyanmoy, Pratap, Amrit, Agarwal, Sameer, 2002. A fast and elitist multiobjective
genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput.
Kareeri, A.A., Zughbi, H.D., Al-Ali, H.H., 2006. Simulation of flow distribution in radial
flow reactors. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 45, 2862–2874. https://doi.org/10.1021/
ie050027x.
Karthikeyan, S., Ravikumar Solomon, G., Kumaresan, V., Velraj, R., 2014. Parametric
studies on packed bed storage unit filled with PCM encapsulated spherical containers
for low temperature solar air heating applications. Energy Convers. Manag. 78,
74–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2013.10.042.
Koekemoer, A., Luckos, A., 2015. Effect of material type and particle size distribution on
pressure drop in packed beds of large particles: Extending the Ergun equation. Fuel
158, 232–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2015.05.036.
Kulakowski, B.T., Schmidt, F.W., 1982. Design of a packed bed thermal storage unit for a
solar system. Trans. ASME. J. Sol. Energy Eng. 104, 223–228. https://doi.org/10.
1115/1.3266306.
Kuravi, S., Trahan, J., Goswami, D.Y., Rahman, M.M., Stefanakos, E.K., 2013. Thermal
energy storage technologies and systems for concentrating solar power plants. Prog.
Energy Combust. Sci. 39, 285–319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2013.02.001.
Lefebvre, D., Tezel, F.H., 2017. A review of energy storage technologies with a focus on
adsorption thermal energy storage processes for heating applications. Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 67, 116–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.08.019.
Li, G., 2016. Sensible heat thermal storage energy and exergy performance evaluations.
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 53, 897–923. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.09.
006.
Li, S., Yang, J., Wang, Q., 2017. Large eddy simulation of flow and heat transfer past two
side-by-side spheres. Appl. Therm. Eng. 121, 810–819. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
applthermaleng.2017.04.065.
Littman, H., Barile, R.G., Pulsifer, A.H., 1968. Gas-particle heat transfer coefficients in
packed beds at low Reynolds numbers. Ind. Eng. Chem. Fundam. 7, 554–561. https://
doi.org/10.1021/i160028a005.
Liu, J., Wang, L., Yang, L., Yue, L., Chai, L., Sheng, Y., Chen, H., Tan, C., 2014.
Experimental study on heat storage and transfer characteristics of supercritical air in
a rock bed. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 77, 883–890. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijheatmasstransfer.2014.06.026.
Löf, G.O.G., Hawley, R.W., 1948. Unsteady-state heat transfer between air and loose
solids. Ind. Eng. Chem. 40, 1061–1070. https://doi.org/10.1021/ie50462a017.
Lugolole, R., Mawire, A., Okello, D., Lentswe, K.A., Nyeinga, K., Shobo, A.B., 2019.
Experimental analyses of sensible heat thermal energy storage systems during dis-
charging. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assessm. 35, 117–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
seta.2019.06.007.
McTigue, J.D., Markides, C.N., White, A.J., 2018. Performance response of packed-bed
thermal storage to cycle duration perturbations. J. Energy Storage 19, 379–392.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2018.08.016.
Meier, A., Winkler, C., Wuillemin, D., 1991. Experiment for modeling high temperature
rock bed storage. Sol. Energy Mater. 24, 255–264. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-
1633(91)90066-T.
Montes, M.J., Abánades, A., Martínez-Val, J.M., 2009. Performance of a direct steam
generation solar thermal power plant for electricity production as a function of the
solar multiple. Sol. Energy 83, 679–689. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2008.10.
015.
Standish, N., Drinkwate, J.B., 1970. The effect of particle shape on flooding rates in
packed columns. Chem. Eng. Sci. 25, 1619–1621.
Nemec, D., Levec, J., 2005. Flow through packed bed reactors: 1. Single-phase flow.
Chem. Eng. Sci. 60, 6947–6957. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2005.05.068.
Maaliou, O., 1985. Optimization of thermal energy storage in packed columns. Sol.
A. Gautam and R.P. Saini
Energy 34, 35–41.
Oró, E., Gil, A., de Gracia, A., Boer, D., Cabeza, L.F., 2012. Comparative life cycle as-
sessment of thermal energy storage systems for solar power plants. Renew. Energy
44, 166–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2012.01.008.
Öztürk, H.H., Başçetinçelik, A., 2003. Energy and exergy efficiency of a packed-bed heat
storage unit for greenhouse heating. Biosyst. Eng. 86, 231–245. https://doi.org/10.
1016/S1537-5110(03)00134-X.
Perpétua, F., Cláudio, J., 2018. Heat transfer in packed-beds of agricultural waste with
low rates of air flow applicable to solid-state fermentation. Chem. Eng. Sci. 188,
97–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2018.05.024.
de Pironti, A.L.L., 1987. Effective thermal conductivity in a packed-bed radial-flow re-
actor. AIChE J. 33, 1747–1750.
Pistocchini, L., Garone, S., Motta, M., 2016. Porosity and pressure drop in packed beds of
spheres between narrow parallel walls. Chem. Eng. J. 284, 802–811. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.cej.2015.08.047.
Pomeroy, B.D., 1979. Thermal energy storage in a packed bed of iron spheres with liquid
sodium coolant. Sol. Energy 23, 513–515. https://doi.org/10.1016/0038-092X(79)
90075-6.
Ramana, A.S., Venkatesh, R., Antony Aroul Raj, V., Velraj, R., 2014. Experimental in-
vestigation of the LHS system and comparison of the stratification performance with
the SHS system using CFD simulation. Sol. Energy 103, 378–389. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.solener.2014.02.009.
Ranmode, V., Singh, M., Bhattacharya, J., 2019. Analytical formulation of effective heat
transfer coefficient and extension of lumped capacitance method to simplify the
analysis of packed bed storage systems. Sol. Energy 183, 606–618. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.solener.2019.03.066.
Rawea, A.S., Urooj, S., 2018. Strategies, current status, problems of energy and per-
spectives of Yemen’s renewable energy solutions. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 82,
1655–1663. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.07.015.
Rosen, M.A., 2001. The exergy of stratified thermal energy storage. Sol. Energy 71,
173–185.
Saez, A.E., McCoy, B.J., 1982. Dynamic response of a packed bed thermal storage sys-
tem—a model for solar air heating. Sol. Energy 29, 201–206. https://doi.org/10.
1016/0038-092X(82)90206-7.
Sagara, K., Nakahara, N., 1991. Thermal performance and pressure drop of rock beds with
large storage materials. Sol. Energy 47, 157–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/0038-
092X(91)90074-7.
Sanderson, T.M., Cunningham, G.T., 1995. Performance and efficient design of packed
bed thermal storage systems. Part 1. Appl. Energy 50, 119–132. https://doi.org/10.
1016/0306-2619(95)92628-7.
Schmalensee, R., 2015. The future of solar energy: a personal assessment. Energy Econ.
52, S142–S148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2015.08.012.
Schmidt, F.W., Szego, J., 1976. Transient response of solid sensible heat thermal storage
units—single fluid. J. Heat Transfer 98, 471. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.3450578.
Schulze, S., Nikrityuk, P., Compart, F., Richter, A., Meyer, B., 2017. Particle-resolved
numerical study of char conversion processes in packed beds. Fuel 207, 655–662.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2017.05.071.
Sethi, V.P., Sharma, S.K., 2008. Survey and evaluation of heating technologies for
worldwide agricultural greenhouse applications. Sol. Energy 82, 832–859. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2008.02.010.
Singh, H., Saini, R.P., Saini, J.S., 2013. Performance of a packed bed solar energy storage
system having large sized elements with low void fraction. Sol. Energy 87, 22–34.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2012.10.004.
Singh, H., Saini, R.P., Saini, J.S., 2010. A review on packed bed solar energy storage
systems. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 14, 1059–1069. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
rser.2009.10.022.
Singh, P.L., Deshpandey, S.D., Jena, P.C., 2015. Thermal performance of packed bed heat
956
Solar Energy 207 (2020) 937–956
storage system for solar air heaters. Energy Sustain. Dev. 29, 112–117. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.esd.2015.10.010.
Singh, R., Saini, R.P., Saini, J.S., 2006. Nusselt number and friction factor correlations for
packed bed solar energy storage system having large sized elements of different
shapes. Sol. Energy 80, 760–771. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2005.07.001.
Sioshansi, R., Denholm, P., 2010. The value of concentrating solar power and thermal
energy storage 1, 173–183. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSTE.2010.2052078.
Sorour, M.M., 1988. Performance of a small sensible heat energy storage unit. Energy
Convers. Manag. 28, 211–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/0196-8904(88)90024-6.
Suresh, C., Saini, R.P., 2020. Review on solar thermal energy storage technologies and
their geometrical configurations. Int. J. Energy Res. 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1002/
er.5143.
Thaker, S., Olufemi Oni, A., Kumar, A., 2017. Techno-economic evaluation of solar-based
thermal energy storage systems. Energy Convers. Manag. 153, 423–434. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.enconman.2017.10.004.
Trudel, Élizabeth, Hallett, William, 2017. Pressure drop in packed beds of angular par-
allelepipeds, including the effects of particle interference. Chem. Eng. Sci. 162,
209–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2017.01.004.
Turner, R.H., 1978. High temperature thermal energy storage, including a discussion of
TES integrated into power plants.
Tyagi, V.V., Pandey, A.K., Giridhar, G., Bandyopadhyay, B., et al., 2012. Comparative
study based on exergy analysis of solar air heater collector using thermal energy
storage. Int. J. Energy Res. 36 (724), 736. https://doi.org/10.1002/er.1827.
Vargas, W.L., McCarthy, J.J., 2002. Stress effects on the conductivity of particulate beds.
Chem. Eng. Sci. 57, 3119–3131. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0009-2509(02)00176-8.
Phillips, W.F., 1981. Effects of stratification on the performance of solar air heating
systems. Sol. Energy 26, 175–180.
Wadell, H., 1935. Volume, shape, and roundness of quartz particles. J. Geol. 43, 250–280.
https://doi.org/10.1086/624298.
Waked, A.M., 1986. Solar energy storage in rocks. Sol. Wind Technol. 3, 27–31. https://
doi.org/10.1016/0741-983X(86)90045-7.
Wang, C.A., Lai, Q.Z., Shen, T.R., Tan, J.Y., 2018. Numerical investigation of radiation
transfer in packed bed of semitransparent coated spherical particles. Int. J. Therm.
Sci. 127, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijthermalsci.2017.12.021.
Wang, J., Yang, J., Cheng, Z., Liu, Y., Chen, Y., Wang, Q., 2017. Experimental and nu-
merical study on pressure drop and heat transfer performance of grille-sphere com-
posite structured packed bed. Appl. Energy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.
2017.07.140.
Willits, D.H., Chandra, P., 1981. Pressure drop and heat transfer characteristics of air-rock
bed thermal storage systems. Sol. Energy 27, 547–553. https://doi.org/10.1016/
0038-092X(81)90050-5.
Yang, B., Bai, F., Wang, Y., Wang, Z., 2019. Study on standby process of an air-based solid
packed bed for flexible high-temperature heat storage: Experimental results and
modelling. Appl. Energy 238, 135–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.
01.073.
Yang, J., Wang, Q., Zeng, M., Nakayama, A., 2010. Computational study of forced con-
vective heat transfer in structured packed beds with spherical or ellipsoidal particles.
Chem. Eng. Sci. 65, 726–738. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2009.09.026.
Yang, Z., Garimella, S., 2010. Thermal analysis of solar thermal energy storage in a
molten-salt thermocline. Sol. Energy 84, 974–985. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
solener.2010.03.007.
Zhang, H.W., Zhou, Q., Xing, H.L., Muhlhaus, H., 2011. A DEM study on the effective
thermal conductivity of granular assemblies. Powder Technol. 205, 172–183. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.powtec.2010.09.008.
Ziada, M.A., Abdel Rehim, Z.S., 1998. Thermal analysis of energy storage in packed beds
of multilayer storing medium. Energy Sources 20, 209–222. https://doi.org/10.
1080/00908319808970059.