Applied Thermal Engineering 165 (2020) 114617

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Thermal Engineering

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

A new design concept of thermal storage tank for adaptive heat charging in T
solar heating system
⁎
Jiarong Lia,b, Xiangdong Lic, Ruiqing Dua,b, Yong Wanga,b, , Jiyuan Tuc
a
National Centre for International Research of Low-carbon and Green Buildings, Ministry of Science & Technology, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400045, PR China
b
Joint International Research Laboratory of Green Buildings and Built Environments, Ministry of Education, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400045, PR China
c
School of Engineering, RMIT University, PO Box 71, Bundoora, VIC 3083, Australia

H I GH L IG H T S

• AThermal
new design concept of variable-volume tank with multiple outlets is proposed.
• The new behaviours of the new tank are simulated under various weather conditions.
• The new tank shortens the system response time by 30 mins on cloudy day.
• tank improves the useful energy and exergy by 12.7% and 20% on cloudy day.

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

Keywords: A new design of storage tank with multiple outlets for storing solar thermal energy is proposed and investigated.
Variable-volume tank The storage tank is featured with one fixed inlet port and three outlet ports at different heights. The new design
Multiple outlets at different heights provides an adaptive effective tank volume to cater for the dynamic solar heat supply. As an alternative of
Energy and exergy analysis variable-volume tank, it helps improve the system performance and build a more flexible system. Using CFD
Solar heating system
simulations, the present work compares the transient temperature contours in the new design against those in a
conventional tank during a charging process. Energy and exergy analysis are performed to investigate the
thermal storing performance of a solar heating system with the new tank. It is found that the new storage tank is
particularly useful in shortening the thermal response time and generating more useful energy and exergy in the
cloudy day, by 12.7% and 20%, respectively, over a traditional tank.

1. Introduction
Solar heating is regarded as a promising method to reduce the en-
ergy consumption of buildings and curb the growing energy crisis and
global warming [1]. In a solar heating system, thermal storage tank
which stores and transfers heat to the heating terminals holds tre-
mendous influence on the system efficiencies [2–4]. Different tank size
would lead to more than 15% difference of solar fraction for domestic
hot water [3,5] and more than 50% difference of supply heat for space
heating [4]. The thermal storage tank as an important component of
solar heating systems has been paid a lot of attention.
The challenge of tank design is to find out a proper size of storage
tank for the heating system to gain more thermal energy of higher
temperature. Higher temperature in tank represents a larger tempera-
ture difference between the tank and the heat exchanger which is
beneficial for extracting more heat from the tank. A larger storage tank
is preferred in pursuit of the quantity of thermal energy, but it will lead
to a lower tank temperature [2,6–8]. And for either producing domestic
hot water or space heating, a minimum tank temperature is required.
Regarding the production of domestic hot water, the temperature of
60 °C is needed for at least 2 h per day to prevent legionella disease [3].
While for the space heating with radiant floor heating, the supply
temperature of at least 35 °C is needed [9,10]. With increase tank vo-
lume, the annual number of days when solar heated water reaches the
required temperature dropped [11]. To meet required temperature,
auxiliary heat resource or more solar collectors would be needed for an
overlarge storage tank [12,13]. Thus, a large storage tank is not always
the best choice.
To find out the optimal tank volume for the heating system, a lot of
studies have been carried out. For domestic hot water, Löf et al. [14]
proposed the optimal tank volume per collector area (V/A) should be in
the range of 0.05–0.075 m3/m2 for the heating system with flat-plate

⁎
Corresponding author at: School of Civil Engineering, Chongqing University, Shapingba Street, Chongqing 400045, PR China.
E-mail address: cqwangyong@cqu.edu.cn (Y. Wang).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2019.114617
Received 14 May 2019; Received in revised form 13 September 2019; Accepted 30 October 2019
Available online 01 November 2019
1359-4311/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
J. Li, et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 165 (2020) 114617

Nomenclature Qu useful energy

Qloss heat loss
cp specific heat of water (J/kg⋅℃) ηa stored energy efficiency
ρ density of water (kg/m3) ηu useful energy efficiency
u velocity vector (m/s) Ex a stored exergy
k thermal conductivity (W/m⋅℃) Ex u useful exergy
t time (s) Exl exergy leakage
τ deviatoric stress tensor (Pa) Ex d exergy destruction
L length of the evacuated tube (m) ηa∗ stored exergy efficiency
T temperature (℃) ηu∗ useful exergy efficiency
P pressure (Pa)
m mass (kg) Subscript:
ms circulation flow rate (kg/s)
Ac collector area (m2 ) in inflow
At tank surface area (m2 ) out outflow
It solar irradiance (W/m2 ) a ambient
hext heat transfer coefficient (W/m2⋅℃) ins Insulation layer
δ thickness of the insulation layer w water
Qa stored energy node computation node

collectors. Çomaklı et al. [2] recommended the V/A to be in 0.05–0.07
m3/m2 for the collector efficiency from 0.35 to 0.45 and the required
temperature of more than 45 °C in Turkey. Rodríguez-Hidalgo et al. [3]
pointed out that a larger tank volume was preferred in winter and a
smaller in summer. While for space heating with radiant floor heating,
Guo et al. [4] suggested the V/A to be 0.082 m3/m2 in Beijing. Different
system components, heating purposes and weather conditions would
shape different optimal volumes. The conventional tank with fixed
storage volume is incapable for the varying need. A tank with variable
storage volume is, thus, in need.
As a variable volume tank, the multi-tank storage (MTS) was first
proposed by Mather [15] to address the installation difficulty of a large
single tank. It consists of multiple storage tanks and could change the
volume by incorporating different numbers of small tanks into the
system. The thermal response of the MTS with three storage tanks under
various running strategies was investigated [15–18]. The results
showed that the parallel connection of the MTS would lead to a quicker
thermal response and higher tank temperature. Chen et al. [19] applied
an MTS with four storage tanks and one running tank to a solar cooling
system. With the advantage of quick temperature rising, it shortened
the system response time by 6.95 h. Due to the short response time, the
ideal working duration time was extended by 26.67% which helped
improve the system performance. Buonomano et al. [20] compared the
performance of an MTS with three tanks against a fixed-volume tank in
a solar cooling and heating system. They found that the collected solar
energy in the system with MTS was more efficiently delivered for space
heating and cooling purposes. The monthly natural gas consumption of
the auxiliary heater was cut down by up to 2% and could be further
improved under a higher solar fraction. The variable-volume tank has
exhibited certain advantage over the conventional fixed-volume tank.
However, the MTS still has the following drawbacks. The stored
thermal energy was less than that of the single tank system [17]. The
separate tanks increase the surface area of the MTS which might lead to
a large system heat loss. The connection and system control of the tanks
are complicated [18]. Incorporating more control valves and tempera-
ture sensors raises the construction cost. Moreover, to retrofit an ex-
isting solar system with fixed-volume tank to a variable-volume tank,
the MTS needs to replace the whole tank [15].
To tackle the above issues, a novel design of variable-volume tank is
proposed in this paper. It is a single tank with a fixed inlet and multiple
outlets at different heights. By switching the operative outlet, it dyna-
mically changes the effective volume of the tank. In this paper, the new
tank enables a 30 min-quicker thermal response and improves the
useful energy and exergy by 12.7% and 20% respectively on a cloudy
day. To the best of authors’ knowledge, the variable volume tank is still
a subject to be developed, and the tank using multiple outlets to change
the effective volume has not been reported in the literature.
The first objective of this paper is to investigate the thermal

(a) Conventional tank with fixed outlet (b) The new tank with multiple outlets at different heights
Fig. 1. Schematic of the storage tanks.

2
J. Li, et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 165 (2020) 114617

response of the new design and to evaluate its ability of varying the
effective volume. With the help of CFD technique, the charging process
of the new design has been simulated and compared against the con-
ventional tank. The second objective of this paper is to quantify the
thermal impact of the new design on the charging performance of the
solar heating system under different weather conditions, and to identify
the thermal behaviour trends. For a comprehensive investigation, in
addition to the energy analysis, the system performance is also eval-
uated with the exergy analysis which is widely used in the optimization
of a heating system [21–25].

2. Description of the new design concept

The design of the new storage tank is schematically shown in

Fig. 1(b). The conventional tank shown in Fig. 1(a) is generally
equipped with fixed inlet and outlet. While the new storage tank is a
vertical cylindrical storage tank with one fixed inlet port (port a) and
three outlet ports at different height (port b/c/d). The new tank is di-
rectly connected to the solar collector and the stored energy is trans-
ferred to the heating terminals with an immersed heat exchanger at the
top of the tank [26]. The top section of the storage tank is, thus, called
function zone. To avoid the degradation of the exergy and energy
within the functional zone, the inlet port is designed at the bottom edge
of the function zone. Only the hot inflow would rise into the function
zone due to the buoyance force. The part between the inflow and
outflow port is called the circulation zone where the fluid keeps cir-
culating between the solar collector and the storage tank. The bottom
section of the tank is called dead zone where the fluid flow is almost
stagnant, and thus, it is not regarded as effective volume of the storage
tank.
The solar thermal energy is transferred from the collector to the
storage tank by the forced circulation. Due to the buoyancy effect and
the thermal stratification, most of the thermal energy is stored in the
circulation zone and the function zone which are regarded as the ef-
fective volume of the tank. In a conventional tank, the dead zone is
supposed to be eliminated for a larger effective volume. However, in
this paper, the dead zone as non-effective volume is the key to the
variable tank volume. As shown in Fig. 1(b), the new tank changes the
size of the dead zone and the circulation zone by switching outlet port.
At the beginning of the charging, the outlet port b is open. The dead
zone takes up more than half of the tank volume and results in the
smallest effective volume. After reaching certain criteria, the outlet port
switches from b to c and, at last, from c to d. The effective volume
expands with the switches. By means of changing the outlet ports, it
dynamically reallocates the circulation zone and the dead zone which
changes the effective tank volume.
Compared to the conventional tank, the new design is a variable-
volume tank which could shorten the system response time and mini-
mize the usage of the auxiliary heat source. It makes the system more
flexible and suitable for the varying outdoor condition and heat load.
Compared to the MTS, it contains only one tank and one immersed heat
exchanger which enables simpler running strategy and lower con-
struction cost. It has a smaller surface area as the fixed-volume tank
which reduces tank heat loss. Moreover, for a retrofit from a fixed-vo-
lume tank to a variable-volume tank, the new design demands only a
few updates.
For comparison, the conventional tank and the new design are both
Fig. 2. Geometry of the new tank with multiple outlets.
investigated in this paper. As shown in Table 1, the storage tank with
fixed outlet port d represents the conventional tank. The new design is
the storage tank with multiple outlets. According to the Chinese stan-
dard [27] which proposes the recommended supply water temperature
of less than 50 °C and the limit of 60 °C in floor heating, two criteria for
the outlet switch are set to prevent the tank temperature from rising too
high. when the temperature of the function zone reaches 50 °C and
60 °C, the outlet port would switch from b to c and from c to d re-
spectively.
3. Numerical model and validation
3.1. Numerical model
3.1.1. The tank model
As shown in Fig. 2, for direct model validation and data comparison,
a cylindric tank of 0.544 m in diameter and 1.225 m height was built to
match Baeten et al.’s experimental tank [28]. The tank has a volume of
0.285 m3 and three outlet ports. The diameters of the inlet and outlet
ports are 40 mm. The ports are connected to the solar collector using
water as the working fluid. According to relevant recommendations
[4,27], the collector area is set to be 3.6 m2 for a V/A of 0.079 m with
the flow rate of 0.144 m3/h . The tank is insulated by flexible poly-
urethane of 0.1 m thick.
3.1.2. Governing equations
The Navier–Stokes equation and energy equation in three-dimen-
sional form were used to simulate the fluid flow in the tank. The
thermal buoyancy is simulated by considering the water density
varying with temperature [29]. The flow in tank is assumed to be la-
minar according to relevant studies [30–33]. The assumptions con-
sidered in the flow models are as follows: the working fluid is in-
compressible, the viscous dissipation is negligible, the influence of
pressure in temperature is negligible. With the assumptions, the gov-
erning equations in the fluid region can be expressed as [30]:
∂ρ
+ ∇ ·(ρu ) = 0,
∂t (1)

Table 1
Storage tank operations.
Type Feature Criteria for port switch

Conventional tank Fixed outlet (port d)

New tank Multiple outlets From b to c: Function zone reaches 50 °C
From c to d: Function zone reaches 60 °C

3
J. Li, et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 165 (2020) 114617

∂ various step sizes. Thus, the time step of 1 s was used in the simulations.
(ρu ) + (ρu·∇) u = −∇p + ∇ ·τ − ρg,
∂t (2) Furthermore, mesh independence study was conducted before the mesh
size is determined. Four mesh sizes of element numbers 61492, 93219,
∂
Cp (ρT ) + Cp ∇ ·(ρuT ) = ∇ ·(k w ∇T ), 122,465 and 2,017,729 are investigated. The mesh with element
∂t (3)
numbers of 122,465 turned out to be suitable for the simulation.
where ρ is the density of water (kg/m3); u
is the velocity vectors (m/s ); t
is time (s); τ is the deviatoric stress tensor (Pa); p is the pressure (Pa) T 3.2. Model validation
is temperature (°C); Cp is specific heat of water (J/kg·° C); k w is thermal
conductivity of water (W/m·° C ). The experimental data for the validation of the CFD model is from
The thermal properties of water are modelled with polynomial Baeten et al.’s study [28] where the configuration of the tank in this
functions shown in Table 2 [29]. paper is derived. In the experiment, the initial water temperature is
16 °C and the water flow rate is 0.3 m3 /h at 57 °C. The experimental and
3.1.3. Boundary conditions numerical results of tank temperature profiles are illustrated in Fig. 3. 8
The boundary condition applied to the inlet port of the tank is ve- measurement points locate at the left side of the tank. Point 1 is set to
locity-inlet with the flow rate of 0.144 m3/h . be at 60 mm beneath the water surface and 100 mm above point 2. The
The inflow temperature (°C), Tin , correlated to the collector effi- distance between the rest neighbouring points is 150 mm. The numer-
ciency, ηc , is calculated by [34]: ical results are in good agreement with the experimental data with the
It Ac ηc relative root-mean-square errors less than 8%. The accuracy of nu-
Tin = + Tout , merical simulation is well proved.
ms (4)

(Tc − Ta) (T − Ta)2 4. Simulation results of storage tanks

ηc = 0.656 − 0.325 − 0.0238 c ,
It It
where It is the solar irradiance (W/m2 ); Ac is the area of the collectors
(m2 ); ms is the circulating flow rate (kg/s ); Tout is the outflow tem-
perature (°C); Tc is the working temperature of the collector (°C); Ta is
the ambient temperature (°C) from Fig. 4.
The operative outlet port is assigned to be a pressure-outlet with
zero gauge pressure. While the other closed outlet ports are set to be
wall.
To calculate the heat loss, the heat transfer of the insulation layer is
considered to be one-dimensional and the tank wall is ignored for its
small thermal resistance [32]. The third boundary condition is placed
on the outer surface of the insulation, as [32]:
ΔTins h
− = ext (Tins − Ta).
δ kins
where Tins is the temperature of the insulation layer; δ is the thickness of
the insulation; kins is thermal conductivity of the insulation (W/m·° C ).
hext denotes the heat transfer coefficient at the outer surface and is set to
be 10 W/m2·° C [35].
No-slip condition is imposed at all tank walls as [30]:
u = 0.
3.1.4. Numerical procedure
The governing equations, linearized in an implicit manner, are
solved in a pressure-based solver. PISO algorithm is employed for the
pressure-velocity coupling in the transient simulation. The discretiza-
tion scheme for pressure is body force weighted recommended by
FLUENT to tackle large body force. The discretization scheme for the
diffusive terms are the second-order scheme of central differences, and
the convective terms in the momentum and energy equations are the
second-order upwind scheme [32].
The governing equations with the boundary conditions are solved
by the commercial CFD code Fluent v17.2. The transient simulation
with time step size of 0.2 s, 0.5 s and 1 s have been conducted. For an 8-
h charging simulation, the results showed little variation among the
(5)
By CFD simulations, the developments of water temperature within
the storage tanks could be visualised. In this paper, two representative
operating conditions of sunny and cloudy day are considered and
shown in Table 3, respectively. A sunny day represents the situation
when collected thermal energy transcends the heat load and heat loss. It
results in an initial tank temperature of the next day no less than the
required value (35 °C). While the overcast weather would lead to lower
initial temperature. The temperature drop because of the overnight heat
loss could be assumed to be 5 °C [36,37].
The solar irradiance and outdoor temperature measured on 26th
Dec 2017 and 12th Jan 2018 at Kangding, Sichuan Province in China
(29.99°N, 101.95°E) are shown in Fig. 4. The charging period started
from 9:30 to 17:30.
(6)
4.1. Temperature development during the charging process
The charging period of both the conventional tank and the new tank
on the cloudy day and sunny day are simulated.
The temperature developments of the tanks at a cloudy day are il-
lustrated in Fig. 5(a). During the charging period, the new tank showed
(7)
a higher temperature over the conventional tank at the function zone
and the circulation zone, ending with the advantage of 4.2 °C. It
benefited from the relatively small effective volume. Unlike the con-
ventional tank where the solar energy was dispersed into the whole
tank volume, the new tank kept the energy within a small volume
which helped the volume to be heated up to a higher temperature. The
function zone of new tank reached 50 °C at 14:27 which trigged the
only port switch, then, it gradually declined until the end. Due to the
statistical method and the reallocation of the effective volume after the
switch, discontinuity of the mass-average temperature was found in the
circulation zone and the dead zone of the new tank. At the end of the
charging, the dead zone temperature of the new tank was 0.9 °C lower
than the initial value. It implies that the thermal energy transferred into
the dead zone was less than the heat loss from the dead zone. It proved
the new tank effective in keeping the thermal energy from dispersing

Table 2
Thermal properties of water.
Thermal property Equations

Thermal conductivity (W/m·° C ) − 7.695·10−6T2 + 1.884·10−3T + 0.5684

Dynamic viscosity (Pa⋅s) − 2.581·10−9T3 + 5.830·10−7T2 − 4.689·10−5T + 1.792·10−3
Density (kg/m3) 1.595·10−5T3 − 5.880·10−3T2 + 0.01775T + 1000.3736

4
J. Li, et al.
Fig. 3. Comparison between experimental and numerical results of temperature profiles. (Markers: experimental measurements; Solid lines: CFD results.)
into the whole tank volume.
The temperature developments of the tanks on sunny day are illu-
strated in Fig. 5(b). The function zone of new tank reached 50 °C and
60 °C at 12:07 and 14:45 which trigged the first and second port
switches respectively. Due to the smaller effective volume, the new tank
showed a higher temperature at the function zone and the circulation
zone before the second switch. However, after the second switch, both
tanks shared the same effective volume. The gap of the temperature
between the two tanks gradually narrowed. The function zone tem-
perature of the new tank gradually dropped from the peak of 60 °C to
58.9 °C. And the circulation temperatures of both tanks almost over-
lapped. By the end of the charging, the temperature difference between
the function zone and the circulation was less than 0.5 °C for both tanks
which implied a poor thermal stratification.
4.2. Visualization of temperature distribution
For a detailed analysis of the charging process, the representative
moments of charging of both tanks were discussed and visualized in
Figs. 6 and 7. The representative moments focused on the beginning,
the port switch and the end of the charging period.
At 10:00 half an hour after the charging began, the inflow rose into
the function zone on sunny day due to the buoyancy effect, while it
descended into the circulation zone on cloudy day because of the poor
outdoor conditions. However, little difference of the temperature dis-
tribution was found between the two types of storage tanks.
At 14:27 on cloudy day and 12:07 on sunny day, the function zone
of the new tank reached 50 °C. It trigged the first outlet switch from port
b to port c. Before the switch, the dead zone took up more than half of
the tank volume, and most of the dead zone was no higher than the
initial temperature. It illustrated that most of the collected solar energy
was well constrained in the effective volume. It helped the effective
volume of the new tank reach a relatively high temperature. Compared
with the new tank, the solar energy was well dispersed into the con-
ventional tank. Most of the water in tank was heated by the limited
solar energy and the temperature increase was shown in most of the
tank. Because of the energy dispersion, the tank temperature was lower
Table 3
Operating conditions of sunny day and cloudy day.
Solar insolation(kWh/m2·day) Average outdoor temperature (°C)
Sunny day 4.5 2 35
Cloudy day 2.8 −2.4
5
Applied Thermal Engineering 165 (2020) 114617
than 42 °C on cloudy day and 45 °C on sunny day.
3 min after the switch, a considerable disturbance was observed in
the new tank. Because of the switch, the outflow temperature plunged
from around 45 °C to 30 °C on cloudy day and from 46 °C to 35 °C on
sunny day. It resulted in the plummet of the inflow temperature. The
low inflow temperature caused the inflow sank into the circulation zone
and caused thermal destratification. On the other hand, the circulation
zone expanded and the dead zone shrunk after the switch. It was
showed in the temperature contours as the zone with relatively high
temperature gradually extended downward. Due to the poor weather
condition on cloudy day, the function zone of the new tank did not
reach 60 °C. While on sunny day, it reached 60 °C at 14:45 and trigged
the second switch from port c to port d. The thermal destratification
and the expansion of the circulation zone after the switch occurred
again. Noted that after the second switch, the effective volume of the
new tank was as large as the conventional tank.
At the end of the charging, new tank showed the temperature of the
effective volume approximately 4 °C higher than the counterpart on
cloudy day. While on sunny day, little difference of temperature dis-
tribution was observed between two tanks. It implied that the new tank
could exhibit a similar performance as the conventional tank if they
ended up with the same effective volume, despite the large differences
during charging period. Subjected to the destratification and the heat
loss, no distinct stratification was observed in the function zone and
circulation zone at the end which was in accordance with Fig. 5.
Both the temperature development and the temperature contours
proved that the new tank succeeded in concentrating the solar energy in
the effective volume and could provide higher temperature of the ef-
fective volume during the charging period. It raised the temperature of
the effective volume on cloudy day and showed a similar performance
as the conventional tank on sunny day.
5. Theoretical analysis
In this section, the influences of the tank design on the system
performance were evaluated using energy and exergy analyses. A better
energy performance manifests more heat is stored. However, for storing
Initial tank temperature (°C) Weather data
Measured on 26th Dec 2017
30 Measured on 12th Jan 2018
J. Li, et al.
°
26th December (sunny day)
Fig. 4. Outdoor temperature and solar irradiance at a sunny and cloudy day.
the same amount of heat, the tank with higher temperature and smaller
volume is preferred over the one with lower temperature and larger
volume. Because a higher temperature in the tank allows using a
smaller heat exchanger and/or a lower circulation flow rate, which
improve system performance. However, the energy analysis could not
tell the difference between the two tanks due to the same amount of
stored heat. Exergy as a measure of energy quality accounts not only for
the thermal energy stored but also for the temperature at which this
energy is stored [38,39]. A higher exergy efficiency denotes a less en-
ergy degradation and entropy generation due to thermodynamic irre-
versibility [38]. It shows how close is the real performance of the
system from the ideal condition [38] and is, thus, widely used in the
improvement and optimization of a heating system [21–25].
5.1. Energy and exergy evaluation models
As radiant floor heating being the heating terminal, 35 °C is
°
(a) Cloudy day
Fig. 5. Temperature developments of the storage tanks.
6
Applied Thermal Engineering 165 (2020) 114617
°
12th January (cloudy day)
regarded as the minimum supply temperature [9,10,40,41]. Thus, only
the thermal energy over 35 °C was available for use and, thus, was re-
ferred to as useful energy [39]. Compared with the stored energy and
exergy, the useful energy and exergy are more suitable to describe the
working performance of the heating system. Thus, both the stored and
useful efficiencies of energy and exergy in tank are used to evaluate the
performance of the tank in the solar heating system.
In addition, for the small heating system in this paper with Reynolds
number of less than 5000, the effect of the circulation pump on the
energy and exergy efficiency would be far less than 2% which is neg-
ligible [38]. Therefore, in the calculation of energy and exergy effi-
ciency, the influence of the circulation pump is ignored.
The stored energy rate (W), Qa , and the useful energy rate (W), Qu ,
in tank can be calculated respectively by [39]:
N
dTnode
Qa = ∑ Cp mnode
dt
,
(8)
node = 1
°
(b) Sunny day
J. Li, et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 165 (2020) 114617

(a) Conventional tank

(b) New tank

Fig. 6. Temperature contours of the storage tanks on cloudy day.

N ° The stored exergy rate (W), Ex a , and useful exergy rate (W), Ex u , in
⎧Cp mnode (dTnode / dt ) Tnode > 35 C
Qu = ∑ ⎨0 tank could be calculated by [39,42]:
node = 1 ⎩ Tnode < 35 °C (9)
N
where Tnode and mnode denote the temperature (°C) and the mass (kg) of a dunode ds
Ex a = ∑ mnode ( − T0 node ),
computation node. node = 1
dt dt (13)
The tank heat loss (W), Qloss , could be calculated according to Eq. (6)
N °
as: ⎧ mnode [(dunode /dt ) − T0 (dsnode /dt )] Tnode > 35 C ,
Ex u = ∑ ⎨ °C
Qloss = At hext (Tins − Ta), (10) node = 1 ⎩ 0 Tnode < 35 (14)

where At denotes the area of the surface are of the storage tank (m2 ). where unode and snode are the specific internal energy (J/kg ) and entropy
The transient stored energy efficiency, ηa , and the useful energy (J/°C·kg ) of a computation node respectively.
efficiency of the system, ηu , can be expressed respectively as [2,39]: The exergy leakage rate (W), Exl , and exergy destruction rate (W),
Ex d , of tank could be calculated respectively by [42]:
Qa Q
ηa = = a ,
Qinput It Ac (11) T
Exl = Qloss ⎛1 − a ⎞,
⎜ ⎟

⎝ Tm ⎠ (15)
Qu Q
ηu = = u .
Qinput It Ac (12) Ex d = ms [h in − h out − T0 (sin − sout )] − Ex a − Exl , (16)

where Qinput denotes the transient input of solar energy (W). where h in and h out denote the specific enthalpy (J/kg ) of inflow and

7
J. Li, et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 165 (2020) 114617

(a) Conventional tank

(b) New tank

Fig. 7. Temperature contours of the storage tanks on sunny day.

outflow respectively; sin and sout denote the specific entropy (J/°C·kg ) of exceeded the collected energy which leaded to negative stored effi-
inflow and outflow respectively; Tm is the average tank temperature. ciencies until 10:10. As shown in Fig. 6, the outflow temperature
The transient stored exergy efficiency, ηa∗, and the useful exergy plunging after port switch caused the thermal destratification. It also
efficiency of the system, ηu∗, can be expressed respectively as [39,42]: improved the collector efficiency. Thus, after the switch, the new tank
system experienced a plummet in the stored exergy and a sharp increase
Ex a Ex a
ηa∗ = = Ta
, in the stored energy.
Ex input It Ac (1 − )
Ts (17) For the useful efficiencies, the new tank system showed a large
advantage in the response time. Because of the low initial tank tem-
Ex u Ex u perature, no useful energy and exergy could be provided at the begin-
ηu∗ = = Ta
,
Ex input It Ac (1 − ) ning of the charging. By concentrating the solar energy in a relatively
Ts (18)
small effective volume, the new tank system quickly reached the re-
where Ex input denotes the transient exergy input of the sun (W). Ts is the quired temperature. The useful efficiencies started to rise at 11:50 for
apparent sun temperature (°C) taken as 4226.85 °C [43]. which was 30 min earlier than the counterpart. With a quicker thermal
response, the new tank could minimize the usage of the auxiliary heat
5.2. Energy and exergy performance source and extend the operation time of the solar heating system [20].
Compared with the counterpart, the new tank system also exhibited a
5.2.1. Transient system performance of different storage tanks sharper increase of the useful efficiencies. After the switch, the
The transient efficiencies of the heating system with different sto- plummet of the inflow temperature cooled down part of the useful
rage tanks on cloudy day are shown in Fig. 8(a). For the stored effi- energy to lower than 35 °C. It impaired the useful energy efficiency
ciencies, the system with new tank prevailed at the stored exergy before despite the stored energy efficiency was improved. Within 30 mins after
the port switch due to the relatively high temperature in the small ef- the switch, the useful efficiencies of the new tank system rose back to
fective volume. However, the high temperature compromised the col- the level close to the counterpart.
lector efficiency and resulted in less stored energy during most of the The transient efficiencies on sunny day are shown in Fig. 8(b). As
charging period. Because of the low solar irradiance, the heat loss shown in Fig. 7, during the charging on sunny day, the tank

8
J. Li, et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 165 (2020) 114617

(a) cloudy day

(b) sunny day

Fig. 8. Development of energy and exergy efficiencies.

temperature was higher than the minimum working temperature of
35 °C. Therefore, the useful efficiencies were identical to the stored
efficiencies. Before the second port switch, the new tank with smaller
effective volume leaded to a lower stored energy efficiency and a higher
stored exergy efficiency. After the second switch, the efficiencies of the
new tank system became closer to the conventional tank system. The
port switches caused a temporary increase in energy and a decrease in
exergy of the system which lasted less than 30 min.
5.2.2. Overall system performance of different storage tanks
By integrating the transient system performances as shown in Fig. 8
over time from 9:30 to 17:30, the overall performances of energy and
exergy are shown in Tables 4 and 5.
The energy parameters of heating systems on sunny day and cloudy
day are presented in Table 4. Both systems shared the same input solar
energy of 9.25 kW∙h on cloudy day and 14.9 kW∙h on sunny day. In
accordance with the relevant study [2], the energy loss from collectors
took up most of the input energy which left the stored efficiency less
than 0.5. On cloudy day, the new tank possessed 2.59 kW∙h useful en-
ergy which was 13.6% more than the counterpart. However, it was at
the cost of 5.9% of the stored energy which was 0.22 kW∙h. Notes that,
by concentrating the limited energy in a relatively small effective vo-
lume, the new tank transferred 72.5% of the stored energy to useful
energy, while the conventional tank was only 60.7%. On sunny day, the
new tank system showed the stored and useful energy of 6.73 kW∙h. It
was less than 2% different from the counterpart. It was because both
tanks shared the same effective volume at the end of the charging on
sunny day. It leaded to similar temperature distribution of both tanks as
shown in Fig. 7(b) and, thus, similar stored and useful energy. Due to
the more desirable outdoor condition, the energy efficiencies of both

Table 4
Energy parameters of the heating systems.
System with Input energy (kW∙h) Stored energy (kW∙h) Useful energy (kW∙h) Tank heat loss (kW∙h) Stored efficiency Useful efficiency

Cloudy day Conventional tank 9.25 3.73 2.28 0.57 0.40 0.25
New tank 9.25 3.51 2.59 0.57 0.38 0.28
Sunny day Conventional tank 14.9 6.85 6.85 0.65 0.46 0.46
New tank 14.9 6.73 6.73 0.65 0.45 0.45

9
J. Li, et al.
Table 5
Exergy parameters of the heating systems.
System with Input exergy Stored exergy Useful exergy
(kW∙h) (kW∙h) (kW∙h)
Cloudy day Conventional tank 8.69 0.48 0.30
New tank 8.69 0.47 0.36
Sunny day Conventional tank 13.99 0.96 0.96
New tank 13.99 0.95 0.95
tanks on sunny day were distinctly higher than those on cloudy day. In
addition, as both tanks shared the same surface area, they suffered from
the same tank heat loss. It showed that charging with varying outlets
has little impact on the tank heat loss.
The exergy parameters of the heating systems are presented in
Table 5. In accordance with relevant studies [23,44], the exergy loss of
the collector took up most of the input exergy which left the stored
exergy efficiency less than 0.06 on cloudy day and less than 0.07 on
sunny day. On cloudy day, the new tank system exhibited the useful
exergy 20% larger than the counterpart, despite the fact that they
shared a similar stored exergy of 2% difference. On sunny day, because
of same effective volume at the end, the difference of the stored and
useful exergy between the two systems was only 1%. In addition, due to
the thermal destratification caused by port switch, a relatively large
tank exergy destruction was spotted in the new tank. By alleviating the
thermal destratification, the exergy performance of the new tank could
be further improved.
The energy and exergy analysis showed that the new tank greatly
improved the system performance in useful energy and exergy on
cloudy day. It provided the useful energy and exergy 13.6% and 20%
more than the conventional tank respectively. While on sunny day, the
differences of system performances between the new tank and the
conventional tank were less than 2%.
6. Conclusions
A new design concept of storage tank is proposed in this study. The
new design is featured with an outlet with varying exhausting height,
offering a flexibility to change the effective volume of the storage tank.
The storage tank with multiple outlets at different height is compared
against a conventional fixed-outlet tank numerically and with energy
and exergy analysis. The results demonstrate that the new design is
more efficient in terms of providing useful energy and exergy at a
cloudy day. It could be used to improve the system efficiency of not
only the space heating but the production of domestic hot water and
solar cooling. The main conclusions rising from this study are as fol-
lows:
1. The multiple outlets at different height succeeded in changing the
effective volume of the storage tank and performed well in con-
centrating the thermal energy within the effective volume.
Compared with the MTS, the new storage tank has simpler structure
and control strategy and could be effortlessly retrofitted from the
existing conventional tank with less cost.
2. On the cloudy day, the new tank design substantially improved the
useful energy and exergy by 12.7% and 20% respectively. More heat
was extracted for use from the new tank on cloudy day and the
operating time of the solar heating system could be extended. It
could minimize the usage of the auxiliary heat sources. While on the
sunny day, differences between the conventional tank system and
the new tank system were far from noticeable.
3. The new tank allowed the heating system to have a 30 min-quicker
thermal response. With a quicker thermal response, the solar
heating system could be initiated earlier in the daytime heat supply
which helps extend the operating time of the solar heating system.
10
Applied Thermal Engineering 165 (2020) 114617
Tank exergy leakage Tank exergy destruction Stored Useful
(kW∙h) (kW∙h) efficiency efficiency
0.070 0.013 0.055 0.035
0.070 0.035 0.054 0.041
0.090 0.029 0.069 0.069
0.090 0.064 0.068 0.068
This paper focuses on the short-term charging process of the new
tank. The long-term performance of the heating system considering
both the charging and discharging process is more important and is
currently being investigated.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declared that there is no conflict of interest.
Acknowledgement
This work was supported by the National Key R&D Program of
China [Grant No. 2016YFC0700400]; the 111 Project [Grant No.
B13041] and the scholarship from the China Scholarship Council [CSC
Student ID: 201706050011].
References
[1] W. Weiss, M. Spörk-Dür, Solar Heat Worldwide, IEA SHC Programme, Austria,
2018.
[2] K. Çomaklı, U. Çakır, M. Kaya, K. Bakirci, The relation of collector and storage tank
size in solar heating systems, Energy Convers. Manage. 63 (2012) 112–117.
[3] M.C. Rodríguez-Hidalgo, P.A. Rodríguez-Aumente, A. Lecuona, M. Legrand,
R. Ventas, Domestic hot water consumption vs. solar thermal energy storage: the
optimum size of the storage tank, Appl. Energy 97 (2012) 897–906.
[4] F. Guo, J. Zhang, M. Shan, X. Yang, Analysis on the optimum matching of collector
and storage size of solar water heating systems in building space heating applica-
tions, Build. Simulat. 11 (2018) 549–560.
[5] A.M. Shariah, G.O.G. Löf, The optimization of tank-volume-to-collector-area ratio
for a thermosyphon solar water heater, Renew. Energy 7 (1996) 289–300.
[6] V. Badescu, Optimal control of flow in solar collector systems with fully mixed
water storage tanks, Energy Convers. Manage. 49 (2008) 169–184.
[7] S.A. Klein, W.A. Beckman, J.A. Duffie, A design procedure for solar heating systems,
Solar Energy 18 (1976) 113–127.
[8] M. Bojić, S. Kalogirou, K. Petronijević, Simulation of a solar domestic water heating
system using a time marching model, Renew. Energy 27 (2002) 441–452.
[9] A. Atienza Márquez, J.M. Cejudo López, F. Fernández Hernández, F. Domínguez
Muñoz, A. Carrillo, Andrés, A comparison of heating terminal units: fan-coil versus
radiant floor, and the combination of both, Energy Build. 138 (2017) 621–629.
[10] K. Sartor, P. Dewallef, Exergy analysis applied to performance of buildings in
Europe, Energy Build. 148 (2017) 348–354.
[11] Y.G. Yohanis, O. Popel, S.E. Frid, B. Norton, The annual number of days that solar
heated water satisfies a specified demand temperature, Solar Energy 80 (2006)
1021–1030.
[12] J.G. Rogers, M.C. McManus, S.J.G. Cooper, Potential for reliance on solar water
heating throughout the summer in northern cloudy climates, Energy Build. 66
(2013) 128–135.
[13] T. Li, Y. Liu, D. Wang, K. Shang, J. Liu, Optimization analysis on storage tank vo-
lume in solar heating system, Proc. Eng. 121 (2015) 1356–1364.
[14] G.O.G. Löf, R.A. Tybout, Cost of house heating with solar energy, Solar Energy 14
(1973) 253–278.
[15] D.W. Mather, K.G.T. Hollands, J.L. Wright, Single- and multi-tank energy storage
for solar heating systems: fundamentals, Solar Energy 73 (2002) 3–13.
[16] C.A. Cruickshank, S.J. Harrison, Thermal response of a series- and parallel-con-
nected solar energy storage to multi-day charge sequences, Solar Energy 85 (2011)
180–187.
[17] R.M. Dickinson, C.A. Cruickshank, S.J. Harrison, Thermal behaviour of a modular
storage system when subjected to variable charge and discharge sequences, Solar
Energy 104 (2014) 29–41.
[18] R.M. Dickinson, C.A. Cruickshank, S.J. Harrison, Charge and discharge strategies
for a multi-tank thermal energy storage, Appl. Energy 109 (2013) 366–373.
[19] L. Chen, S. Jin, G. Bu, Experimental investigation of a novel multi-tank thermal
energy storage system for solar-powered air conditioning, Appl. Therm. Eng. 123
(2017) 953–962.
[20] A. Buonomano, F. Calise, G. Ferruzzi, Thermoeconomic analysis of storage systems
for solar heating and cooling systems: a comparison between variable-volume and
fixed-volume tanks, Energy 59 (2013) 600–616.
J. Li, et al.
[21] C.T. Yucer, A. Hepbasli, Thermodynamic analysis of a building using exergy ana-
lysis method, Energy Build. 43 (2011) 536–542.
[22] O.B. Kazanci, M. Shukuya, B.W. Olesen, Exergy performance of different space
heating systems: a theoretical study, Build. Environ. 99 (2016) 119–129.
[23] E. Kacan, K. Ulgen, Energy and exergy analysis of solar combisystems, Int. J. Exergy
14 (2014) 364–387.
[24] A. Yildiz, A. Güngör, Energy and exergy analyses of space heating in buildings,
Appl. Energy 86 (2009) 1939–1948.
[25] M. Dovjak, M. Shukuya, B.W. Olesen, A. Krainer, Analysis on exergy consumption
patterns for space heating in Slovenian buildings, 2010.
[26] S. Li, Y. Zhang, K. Zhang, X. Li, Y. Li, X. Zhang, Study on performance of storage
tanks in solar water heater system in charge and discharge progress, Energy Proc.
48 (2014) 384–393.
[27] P. Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development, Technical code for solar
heating system, China Architecture & Building Press, Beijing, 2009.
[28] B. Baeten, T. Confrey, S. Pecceu, F. Rogiers, L. Helsen, A validated model for mixing
and buoyancy in stratified hot water storage tanks for use in building energy si-
mulations, Appl. Energy 172 (2016) 217–229.
[29] M.A. Gómez, J. Collazo, J. Porteiro, J.L. Míguez, Numerical study of an external
device for the improvement of the thermal stratification in hot water storage tanks,
Appl. Therm. Eng. 144 (2018) 996–1009.
[30] W. Yaïci, M. Ghorab, E. Entchev, S. Hayden, Three-dimensional unsteady CFD si-
mulations of a thermal storage tank performance for optimum design, Appl. Therm.
Eng. 60 (2013) 152–163.
[31] S. Ievers, W. Lin, Numerical simulation of three-dimensional flow dynamics in a hot
water storage tank, Appl. Energy 86 (2009) 2604–2614.
[32] Z. Yang, H. Chen, L. Wang, Y. Sheng, Y. Wang, Comparative study of the influences
of different water tank shapes on thermal energy storage capacity and thermal
stratification, Renew. Energy 85 (2016) 31–44.
[33] F. Viereckl, E. Schleicher, C. Schuster, W. Lippmann, A. Hurtado, Experimental and
theoretical investigation of the boiling heat transfer in a low-pressure natural
11
Applied Thermal Engineering 165 (2020) 114617
circulation system, Exp. Comput. Multiphase Flow 1 (2019) 286–299.
[34] B. Du, E. Hu, M. Kolhe, An experimental platform for heat pipe solar collector
testing, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 17 (2013) 119–125.
[35] R.D.C. Oliveski, A. Krenzinger, H.A. Vielmo, Cooling of cylindrical vertical tanks
submitted to natural internal convection, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 46 (2003)
2015–2026.
[36] R. Tang, Y. Cheng, M. Wu, Z. Li, Y. Yu, Experimental and modeling studies on
thermosiphon domestic solar water heaters with flat-plate collectors at clear nights,
Energy Convers. Manage. 51 (2010) 2548–2556.
[37] R. Tang, Z. Sun, Z. Li, Y. Yu, H. Zhong, C. Xia, Experimental investigation on
thermal performance of flat plate collectors at night, Energy Convers. Manage. 49
(2008) 2642–2646.
[38] J.D. Osorio, A. Rivera-Alvarez, M. Swain, J.C. Ordonez, Exergy analysis of dis-
charging multi-tank thermal energy storage systems with constant heat extraction,
Appl. Energy 154 (2015) 333–343.
[39] J. Fernández-Seara, F.J. Uhía, J. Sieres, Experimental analysis of a domestic electric
hot water storage tank. Part I: Static mode of operation, Appl. Therm. Eng. 27
(2007) 129–136.
[40] M. Maivel, J. Kurnitski, Radiator and floor heating operative temperature and
temperature variation corrections for EN 15316–2 heat emission standard, Energy
Build. 99 (2015) 204–213.
[41] D. Wang, Y. Liu, Y. Wang, J. Liu, Numerical and experimental analysis of floor heat
storage and release during an intermittent in-slab floor heating process, Appl.
Therm. Eng. 62 (2014) 398–406.
[42] B. Rezaie, B.V. Reddy, M.A. Rosen, Exergy analysis of thermal energy storage in a
district energy application, Renew. Energy 74 (2015) 848–854.
[43] F. Jafarkazemi, E. Ahmadifard, Energetic and exergetic evaluation of flat plate solar
collectors, Renew. Energy 56 (2013) 55–63.
[44] S. Farahat, F. Sarhaddi, H. Ajam, Exergetic optimization of flat plate solar collec-
tors, Renew. Energy 34 (2009) 1169–1174.